Skip to main content

Full text of "Na kurczącym się skrawku i inne zapiski z kwartalnym opoźnieniem"

See other formats 


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

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

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

Usage  guidelines 

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

We  also  ask  that  you: 

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

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

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

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

About  Google  Book  Search 

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


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


CYCLOP^DIA 


OF 


BIBLICAL, 


THEOLOGICAL,  AND  ECCLESIASHCAL 


LITERATURĘ. 


FBSPARBDBT 


THE  REY.JOHN  M'CLINT0CK,3.D., 

JLMD 

JAMES  STRONG.  S.T.D. 
VoL.  IV.— H,  I,  J. 


,^1  :.:.■•:. 


\   '-  ■-.  F       < 


% 


^'^ 


NEW    YORK: 
HARPER   &   BROTHERS,  PUBLISJRS, 

FBAHKŁIN   8QUABB. 
1883. 


MS.Sc^'. 


3  ^fs- 


^itered  according  to  Act  of  Congress,  in  the  year  187 1,  by 
'  HARPER  &  BROTHERS, 

In  \t  Office  of  the  Librarian  of  Congress,  at  Washington. 


3^mnriaL 


In  sending  out  this  volume,  it  becomes  my  sad  duty,  as  co-editor,  to  pay  a 
tribute  of  affection  and  respect  to  the  memory  of  the  late  editor-in-chief,  Dr. 
John  M'Clintock,  who  rested  from  his  earthly  labors  while  these  pages  were 
still  in  preparation  for  the  press.  As  an  accomplished  scholar,  an  eloąuent 
speaker,  a  elear  writer,  an  able  divine,  a  skilful  educator,  a  consummate  critic, 
an  ardent  patriot,  a  genial  friend,  and  a  devout  Christian,  his  loss  is  deeply  felt, 
not  only  in  private  associadon  and  ministerial  and  literary  circles,  but  in  the 
community  at  large. 

Dr.  M*Clintock's  life  was  one  of  extraordinary  activity  and  usefulness.  He 
graduated  at  the  University  of  Pennsylvania  in  1835,  at  the  age  of  twenty-one, 
and  entered  the  Methodist  ministry  as  a  member  of  the  New  Jersey  Conference. 
A  short  time  afterward  he  was  elected  Professor  of  Mathematics  in  Dickinson 
College,  at  Carlisle,  Pa.,  and  was  soon  transferred  to  the  chair  of  ancient  lan- 
guages,  which  he  filled  for  nearly  ten  years.  During  this  period  he  was  en- 
gaged,  with  Professor  Blumenthal,  in  the  translation  of  Neander^s  "  Life  of 
Christ ;"  and  commenced,  in  company  with  Professor  Crooks,  the  preparation 
of  a  series  of  elementary  Greek  and  Latin  class-books,  which  still  maintain  a 
deserved  popularity  in  our  schools  and  colleges. 

In  1848  he  was  chosen  editor  of  the  Methodist  Quarterly  RevieWy  and  held 
that  office  until  1856,  when  he  went  abroad  as  a  delegate  to  represent  the  Meth- 
odist Episcopal  Church  in  the  English,  Irish,  French,  and  German  Conferences. 
On  his  return  he  was  elected  President  of  the  Troy  University,  then  recently 
founded,  and,  pending  the  organization  of  the  college  classes,  assumed  the  pas- 
torał charge  of  St.  PauFs  Church,  in  New  York.  In  the  summer  of  1860  he  be- 
came  pastor  of  the  American  Chapel  established  at  Paris  under  the  auspices  of 
the  American  and  Foreign  Christian  Union.  In  1866  he  was  appointed  chair- 
man  of  the  generał  Centenary  Committee  of  the  Methodist  Episcopal  Church. 
In  1867  he  organized  the  Drew  Theological  Seminary,  as  president,  a  position 
which  he^retained  till  the  time  of  his  death,  March  4,  1870. 

The  closing  years  of  his  life  were  occupied  in  the  preparation  of  the  present 
"  Cyclopaedia  of  Biblical,  Theological,  and  Ecclesiastical  Literaturę,"  a  work  for 
which.  he  was  peculiarly  fitted  by  a  comprehensive  and  accurate  scholarship,  and 
a  catholicity  of  judgment  which  enabled  him  to  survey  religious  ąuestions  in  the 
broadeśt  light  of  Christian  liberality.  The  first  three  volumes  of  this  work  were 
prepared  and  published  under  his  immediate  supervision.  The  greater  part  of 
the  present  volume  also  received  the  benefit  of  his  labors  and  ad  vice ;  and  be- 
fore  his  decease,  he  had  collected  and  partly  arranged  a  large  amount  of  import- 
ant  matter  for  the  succeeding  volumes.  J.  S. 


PR  E  FACE  TO  VOL.  IV. 


Lr  coDseąnence  of  the  death  of  DivM'CLiNTOcK,whieh  oceurred  when  but  a  smali 
part  ofthe  present  Yolume  was  in  type,the  entu'e  editorial  respoDsibility  of  the  re- 
mainder  of  the  work  has  devolved  upon  Dr.  Strono.  In  this  task,  however,  he  has 
been  so  greatly  aided  by  the  preparations  and  memoranda  left  by  his  former  colleague, 
and  by  the  labors  ofthe  able  assistants  and  contributors  named  below,  that  it  Is  hoped 
the  reader  will  not  find  this  yolume  inferior  in  eompleteness  or  accuracy  to  its  pred- 
ecessors.  Professor  J.  H.  Worman,  whose  previous  connection  with  Dr.  M*Clintock 
in  this  work  peculiarly  fitted  him  to  take  a  part  in  its  completion,  has  deyoted  his 
time,  sińce  the  death  of  the  late  senior  editor,  to  assisting  in  the  department  which 
that  eyent  left  to  be  snpplemented.  Professor  A.  J.  Sohem  has  continued  to  funiish 
the  articles  on  the  ecclesiastical  history  and  statistics  of  all  the  countries,  and  has 
rendered  yaluable  assistance  in  other  respects.  The  same  plan  has  been  maintained 
in  this  as  in  the  preceding  yolumes,  and  is  to  be  carried  out  in  the  remainder  of  the 
worky  which  will  be  issued  as  rapidly  as  the  mechanical  part  can  be  well  executed. 
The  impatiencc  of  the  public  for  the  speedy  appearance  of  the  successiye  yolumes, 
while  it  is  gratifying  as  showing  an  appreciatiye  demand,  might  neyertheless,  if  un- 
duly  indulged,  injure  the  thoroughness  of  the  work,  which  reąnires  for  its  completion 
an  amonnt  of  labor  that  cau  be  properly  estimated  by  those  only  who  haye  been  en- 
gaged  in  some  like  undertaking. 

Throughout  this  work  it  has  been  the  aim  of  the  editors  to  inco]*porate  into  it  all 
the  suitable  matter  found  in  similar  works,  especially  in  the  great  recent  dictionaries 
edited  by  Aschbach,  Fairbairn,  Herzog,  Iloefer,  Kitto,  Smith,  Wetzer  und  Welte,  and 
Winer,  and  these  names  haye  been  prefixed  or  appended  to  portions  so  cited.  If  this 
has  in  any  case  been  omitted,  it  has  been  by  oyersight.  At  the  same  time,  it  is  due 
to  the  authors  of  those  works  to  state  that  the  matter  borrowed  from  them  has  rarely 
been  used  without  large  modifications  and  important  additions.  Fuli  one  half  ofthe 
matter  in  this  Cydopoedia  is  whoUy  new,  and  much  of  the  rest  is  entirely  remodeled 
in  form  and  expression,  while  many  aiticles  contained  in  it  are  not  represented  in  any 
similar  work  hitherto  published. 

This  work  is  in  no  sense  denominational,  either  in  its  scope  or  in  its  execution. 
While  the  editors  and  their  coUaborators  haye  not  sought  to  conceal  their  personal 
opinions  in  any  respect,  they  haye  neyer  obtruded  them  in  their  articles,  nor  allowed 
their  own  ecclesiastical  relations  or  dogmatic  yiews  to  interfere  with  the  catholicity 
of  the  work.  This  Cyclopcedia  has  not  been  undertaken,  written,  or  published  in  the 
interest  of  any  sect  or  party.  Hence  the  contributora  haye  been  selected  from  all 
branches  of  the  Church,  and  their  statementa  haye  been  left  untrammeled  by  sectarian 
dictation.  Their  names  thus  far,  which  are  subjoined  in  fuli,  are  a  sufficient  guaranty 
in  this  regard.  Scarcely  morę  than  one  third  of  the  entire  number  belong  to  the  same 
communion  with  the  editors  themselyes. 


vi  PREFACE  TO  VOL.  IV. 

^V.  J.  A-— William  J.  Allisson,  editor  of  the  Friend^  Jieview,  Burlington,  N.  J. 

W.  W.  -A The  Rev.  W.  W.  Akdrews,  Wethersfield,  Conn. 

J.  K.  R—The  Rev.  J.  K.  Burr,  A.M.,  Morristown,  N.  J. 

D.  C— The  Rev.  Daniel  Curry,  D.D.,  editor  of  the  Christian  A  dvoeate,  New  York. 

G.  F.  C— Professor  George  F.  Comfort,  A.M.,  Syracnae  Uniyereity,  N.  Y. 

T.  J.  C—The  Rev.  Thomas  J.  Conaht,  D.D.,  Brooklyn,  N.  Y. 

M.  J.  C. — ^The  Kev.  M.  J.  Cramer,  U.  S.  minister  to  Denmark. 

G.  R.  C—The  Kev.  Georoe  R.  Crooks,  D.D.,  editor  of  the  Methoditt,  N«w  York. 

D.  D.— The  Kev.  Daniel  Deyikne,  Morrisania,  New  York. 
K.  D.— The  Rev.  Robert  Dayidson,  D.D.,  Huntington,  Ł.  I. 

(;.  B.  D Profeasor  G.  B.  Docuarty,  LL.D.,  of  the  College  of  the  City  of  New  York. 

W.  G.  E.— The  Rev.  W.  G.  E aston,  of  the  British  and  Foreiffn  Etongdical  Reuiew,  London. 

F.  W.  F.— The  Rev.  F.  W.  Flocken,  mLsaionary  to  Bułgaria. 

E.  Y.  G.— Professor  E.  Y.  GERiiART,  D.D^  of  the  Mercersburgh  Theological  Seminaiy. 
J.  T.  G.— The  Rev.  J.  T.  Gracey,  A.M.,  lato  miasionary  to  India. 

H.  G.—The  Rev.  Henry  Graham,  B.D.,  Lansingburgh,  N.  Y. 

H.  H.— The  late  President  H.  Harbaugh,  D.D.,  of  the  Mercersburgh  Theological  Seminary. 

W.  E.  H.— W.  E.  Hatilvway,  editor  of  the  Herald  ofPeace,  Chicago,  IlL 

\Y.  P.  H.— The  Rev.  W.  P.  Hayden,  Portland,  Me. 

R.  D.  H.— Profeasor  R.  D.  HrTCHcxx:K,  D.D.,  of  the  Union  Theological  Seminaiy. 

C.  H.— Profesaor  Cilvrle8  Hodge,  D.D.,  of  the  Princeton  Theological  Seminaiy. 
J.  II.— The  Rev,  Joseph  Holdicii,  D.D.,  Secretary  of  the  American  Bibie  Society. 

G.  F.  H.— Professor  George  F.  Holmes,  LL.D.,  of  the  Unirersity  of  Yirginia. 

J.  F.  H.— Professor  John  F.  Hurst,  D.D.,  late  of  the  Martin  Mission  Institute,  Frankfort,  Germany. 

R.  H.— The  Rev.  R.  Hutcheson,  Fairbank,  Iowa. 

»r.  S.  I.— The  Rev.  M.  S.  Isaacs,  editor  of  The  Jewiah  Mestenger,  N.  Y.  aty. 

J.  K.  J.— The  Rey.  J.  K.  Johnston,  of  Canada. 

O.  J.— Mr.  Gliyer  Johnson,  late  of  The  Itidepmdenf,  New  York. 

S.  M.  J.— Mr.  S^uiUEL  M.  Janney,  Loudon  County,  Va. 

D.  P.  K.— Professor  D.  P.  Kiddkr,  D.D.,  lato  of  the  Garrett  Biblical  Instituto,  Eranston,  IlL 
J.  B.  L.— The  Rev.  J.  B.  Logan,  editor  of  the  Western  Cumberland  Presbjfterian^  Alton,  DL 
J.  W.  M.— Profeasor  J.  W.  M.uishall,  A.M.,  late  of  Dickinson  College. 

T.  V.  M.— The  Rev.  T.  V.  Moore,  D.D.,  Nashyille,  Tcnn. 

B.  H.  N.— The  late  Professor  B.  H.  Nadal,  D.D.,  of  the  Drew  Theological  Seminary. 

E.  A.  P.— Professor  E.  A.  Park,  D.D.,  of  the  Andover  Theological  Seminary. 
J.  N.  P,— Mr.  JuLES  N.  Proeschel,  Paris,  France. 

S.  H.  P.— The  Rev.  S.  H.  Platt,  Brooklyn,  N.  Y. 

W.  E.  P.— The  Re%'.  W.  E.  Park,  D.D.,  Ławrence,  Mass. 

W.  K.  P.— The  Rev.  W.  K.  Pendleton,  D.D.,  President  of  the  Bethany  College,  Yirgiuia. 

W.  R,  P.— The  Rev.  W.  R.  Powers,  Norfolk,  N.  Y. 

E.  de  P.— The  Rev.  E.  de  Puy,  Madison,  N.  J. 

A.  łl.  Q.— The  Rev.  A.  H.  Quint,  D.D.,  editor  of  the  Congregational  Quarł€rh/,  Boston. 

H.  B.  R.— The  Rev.  H.  a  Ridgaway,  D.D.,  New  York. 

A.  S The  Rev.  Abel  Steyens,  LL.D.,  Brooklyn,  N.  Y. 

A.  J.  8.— Professor  Alexander  J.  Sciiem,  late  of  Dickinson  College. 

E.  de  S The  Rev.  E.  de  Schweinitz,  editor  of  The  Morańan^  Bethlehem,  Pa. 

L.  E.  8.— Professor  L.  E.  Smith,  of  the  £xaminer  and  Chronicie,  New  York. 
^I.  L.  8.— The  late  Professor  M.  L.  Stoeyer,  D.D.,  of  Pennsylyania  College. 
P.  S.— Professor  Philip  Schaff,  D.D.,  of  the  Union  Theological  Seminary. 

C.  C.  T.— The  Rey.  C,  C.  Tiffany,  A.M.,  Fordham,  N.  Y. 

G.  L.  T.— The  Rey.  George  L.  Taylor,  A.M.,  Hcmpstead,  L.  I. 

W.  J.  R.  T.— The  Rey.  W.  J.  R.  Taylor,  D.D.,  late  Secretary  of  the  American  Bibie  Society. 

N.  V.— The  liey.  N.  Yansant,  Newton,  N.  J. 

C.  P.  W.— The  Rev.  C.  P.  Wino,  D.D.,  Carlisle,  Pa, 

H.  C.^V,— The  Rey.  II.  C.  Wkstwood.  D.D.,  Princeton,  N.  J. 

L  M.  W The  Rey.  Isaac  M.  Wisi-:,  D.D.,  editor  of  The  Israeliłe,  Cincinnati,  Ohio. 

J.  H.  W.— I^rofessor  James  H.  Worman,  A.M.,  Librarian  of  the  Drew  Theological  Seminar}'. 

J.  P.  W The  Rey.  J.  P.  WESTEinELT,  Paterson,  N.  J. 

M.  J.  W The  Rey.  M.  J.  Wylii-:,  Cincinnati,  Ohio. 

T.  D.  W,— President  Theodore  D.  Woolsey,  D.D.,  of  Yale  College. 

W.  F.  W.— Professor  W.  F.  Warren,  D.D.,  of  the  Boston  Theological  Seminary. 

R.  Y.— The  Rey.  R.  Yeakel,  Secretary  of  the  Sabbath-school  and  Tract  Association,  Geyeland,  Ohio. 


LIST  OF  WOOD-CUTS  IN  VOL  IV. 


Andent  SSTP^  linen  Coralet,  Page 
~    pUan  Manner  oT  wearlng  tne 


iir., 


Andent  EgrpL  Pemale  Head-dreas 
AoTrian  Maimer  of  weartng  the 

Hilr 

Gredaa  Manner  of  wearing  the 

Hair SS 

Andent  Ęgyptian  Ładies  wilh  Fil- 

let8...Tr.. 26 

Map  of  the  Yldnlty  of  Hamath ....    46 

Andent  BgypŁian  Carpenters 

Tools  of  aa  fisyptlau  Carpenter. .    60 

Andent  lEgTptuuaMasonB 60 

Andent  Jterptlan  HandmaidB. .... 
Priaonen  mpaled  bj  the  Aasyrlans    68 

Haie  oTMoant  Sinai 72 

Hare  of  Moont  I^banon 79 

Andent  BgTpUan  carrying  Harea.    73 

Modern  SgTptlan  Lnte. 86 

Andent  Bgyptlfui  I^rea. 86 

TarloosEgjptian  Harpe 86 

Tariooi  Bgyptijui  LTrea 86 

£g7pdan  Grand  Haróa 86 

AaąTilaa  Łatę  and  Harp 87 

Andent  Aseyrian  Łm. 87 

Modern  Egrptiau  Khonfud 90 

Cenmi  BaroamtM 90 

EgTpŁian  Hairest  Scenę 93 

Per^^e  Falcon 101 

FaleaSaeer 108 

itmtmdolitt  Cbntmttnie. 106 

SkalliiordUrerentRacee 110 

AnbłanandTarklahHead-dresaes  119 
Modem  Egyptlan  Head-dreas. 
Yarions  Forma  of  the  Tarbaa. 

Bedooin  Head-dreaa 

Egrptian  regal  Head-dre«ee8. . 
Andent  Perslan  Head-drossee. 
Andent  Aaayrian  Head-dreaaea. 


Monk  of  St.  Hlppoly  tns Pago 

Chase  of  the  HippoDot-amas 

HippoĘotamua  Aniphibius 


The"TombofHlram" 

Andent  HlUltes 

"Holy  Coat"  of  Treves. 

Canon  of  Order  of  the  Holy  Ghoat. 
Nnn  of  the  Order  of  the  Holy  Ghost 

HolT  Water  Stone. 

Anclent  Aaeyrlan  Hook 

Hleroglyph  of  Hophra 

View  of  Mount  Hor 

Halr  of  Soath  Africans 

Heada  of  modem  Aalatica. 

Assyrian  Homed  Capa 

Head  of  A1exander  the  Great 

OrienŁal  Horned  Ładlea 

Andent  Sgyptlan  Horee 

Anclent  Asayrian  Horse 

Ancient  Peraian  Horee 

Charlot-horse  of  Rameaea  III 

Ancient  Asarrian  Suble 

Aaayrian  Rlaing-borae 

Montb  of  the  Leech 

Bgyptian  Prluce,  with  Charloteer. 

Ancient  Aaayrian  Horaeman 

Bgyptian  Piincea  in  thelr  Charlot. 

Anti<)ae  Fignre  of  Homa. 

Hour-glasa^tand 

OrionUl  Hnt 

Model  of  andent  Ęgyptian  Honse. 

Hnt  of  Greek  Peaaant 

Modem  Nestorian  Hoose 

Ordinary  Hoaae  at  Beiront 

112  Front  of  Bgyutian  Hoiiee 

1 19  Entrance  to  Houae  in  Cairo 

119  Conrt  of  Hoaae  at  Antioch 

113  Coart  of  Honae  at  Cairo 

113  Interior  of  Hoąae  at  Damaacna. . . . 
113  Ka*ah  of  House  at  Cairo. 


Thelbntura 113  Latticed  Windowa  at  Cairo. 


Hcr«e. lU 

Modem  Ęgyptian  Aasea 118 

Andent  ^Imeta 176,177 

Andent  Egrptlan  Axe8 178 

Defonned  Ęgyptian  Oz-herd 196 

Andent  Egyptina  Herdamen. 197 

Cotn  of  Herod  the  Great 213 

Coin  of  Herod  Agrippa  II 216 

ŁittleGoldenBgret 217 

GoldenPloTer 218 

CoinofHierąpolia 283 

The  Roaetu  Stone 236, Cancaaian  ibez. 

Hieroglyphlc  Alphabet. 237  Sacred  łbie. 

Aaaymui  Pictore  of  a  Tempie 941  Coin  of  Iconiam 

Representation  of  a  " High-place**  241  'Rayine  in  Idamsea 

Prłeafa  **  Linen  Breechea^' 243  Interior  of  Tempie  at  Medinet-Aba 

PrleafB  *«Broidered  Coat" 248'         ^  ^ " 

Priears  Linen  Girdle 243 

HiglH>rie8t*aRobe 244 


Flat-roofed  Hoaaea  at  Gaza. . . , 

Ancient  Battleraenta , 

Modem  Bgyptian  Hoaee-tops. 
Ancient  Bgyptian  Fiat  Roof. . 
Ancient  Aaayrian  Fiat  Roof. . . . 
Andent  Aaayrian  Hantsman. . 

Aaayrian  Lion  Hant. 

Andent  Bgyptian  Hanter 

OraUmia  Stliąucu 

Hyena 

ayuopua  OMeinalis 


Impoat  at  Barton  Seaereve 
Modem  Oriental  Wrlting  Imple- 

menta 

Anclent  Bgyptian  Writing-tablet. . 


270lChri8tian  Inacnptlons. . .  .Page608, 610 

270: Ancient  Bgyptian  Inrigatton 661 

271  iModem  Bgyptian  Shadaf 661 

273  Gnostic  Gem  of  Isia 689 

2S0  Map  of  laaachar. 700 

805'Map  of  Anclent  Italy. 704 

310;Elephant8'  Tnsks  brunght  to 

310     Thothmealll n7 

312  Ivory  aa  Tribute  to  A^ayria 717 

Zi8  Hedera  Heliz 718 

332  Colnmu  of  Jachlu 726 

836  Eaatera  Jackal9 726 

840  Coin  with  Head  of  Janas. 778 

840  Valley  of  Jehoehaphat. 809 

340  General  View  of  Ancient  Jernsa- 
840     lem  restored 837 

341  Aaayrian  Delineaiion  perhapa  of 

346     Jernaalem 839 

846  Jew8'  "  Wailing  Place" &42 

345  Map  of  Andent  Jernaalem 844 

846  Probable  Contonr  of  Ophel 846 

846  Section  of  the  TyropoBoii 846 

346| Modem  "  Gate  of  Gennath" 847 

34S  Street  in  Modem  Jernaalem 850 

848  Remaina  of  Brldge  at  Jeni^alem..  850 
348|Pier  of  Arch  across  the  Tympceon.  851 
349{Pa88Rge  below  the  Mo9qne  el-Aksin  851 
350' Jernaalem  from  the  "  Weil  of  Jonb"  852 
867 [Map  of  the  Environe  of  Jeruzalem  854 

86S  Interior  of  "  Golden  Gate" 8B6 

869-The  "  Castle  of  Davld" 857 

370|QaarrieB  ander  Jernaalem 857 

870  Map  of  Modem  Jernaalem S58 

870jChri8t'8  Jonmeys  daring  hlalntro- 

370l    dactory  Year 888 

371  Chriafa  Joameya  daring  hia  Firat 

87ll    morę  pnblic  Year 889 

872!Rain8  of  "Synagogue"  at  Tell- 

872  Hum 889 

373  Chriafa  Joameya  dnring  hia  Sec- 

873  oiid  morę  pabllc  Year 890 

374'RainB  of  "  Synagoffae"  at  Kerazeh  891 
874iChri8t*8  Joameya  daring  hia  Thlrd 

S75|    morę  pnblic  Year 899 

376,Chri8t'8  Joameya  daring  Paasion 

376'    Week 935,897 

411  Map  of  the  Yalley  of  Jeareel 913 

411  ,Tomb  of  the  Prophet  Jonah  at  Mo- 

412)    aaL 9S9 

418  Terracea  of  the  Jordan 1007 

429 
451 
454 
465 
463 
489 
602 


Higfa-prieat*aBreaat-plate »44 „.^ 

Jewlah  Prieatly  Tarban 246,  »46i  Plan  of  Khan  at  Idalia 

Coatome  of  High-priest 246  Bgyptian  Hierogjypblca. 

FemaleDeer. 260  F!gnrative  andSymboiic  Hiero- 

Andent  Bgyptian  Hingea 266       •     -• 

aipRool7v.r.....7rf?: 267 


glyphica 
Engrayed  Bockain  Wady  Mokatteb 


Upper  Ford  of  the  Jordan,  near 

BethBhan 1007 

Lower  Ford  of  the  Jordan  at  Wa- 
dy Nawalmeh 1008 

Jo8eph'e  Tomb 1017 

Map  of  the  Tribe  of  Jndah 1051 

Tomba  of  Seid  Yehadah 1064 

Roman  Jndgmenc-aeat 1082 

Julian  the  Apoatate 1090 

Coin  of  Jaliaa. 1092 

Jallna  Csesar 1093 

Juniperus  Phomida 1096 

Oenista  Mononperma 1096 

Head  of  Japiter  Oly mpias 1099 

Medal  of  Jaatinian 1111 


.....       •.•\ 


CTCLOP^DI A 


OP 


fimUCAŁ,  THE0Ł06IGAŁ,  AND  ECGŁESIASTIGAŁ  ŁITEBATUBK 


Haag  (Haoue)  Apologetioal  Sooiety,  a  sci- 
fBtific  lociety  in  Holland,  founded  in  178d  for  the  purpoee 
of  calling  Ibfth  wdentific  worka  in  defence  of  the  Chria- 
tian  religion.  It  annually  offen  a  prize  of  400  floiina 
fiir  the  beat  work  on  a  topie  propoaed.    (A.  J.  S.) 

Haaiiash'teil  (Heb.  with  the  art  [which  the  A. 
T.  haa  miataken  for  part  of  the  name]  ha^Achaiktanf, 
*nn^pnMl,  te.  fA«  AdkeutarUe,  prób.  of  foreign  [? Per- 
aian]'origin;  aocording  to  FUrst,  an  adj.  from  the  word 
aduutar,  L  e.  eourier  [compaie  D^^p^^rtórti^y  "camels,'' 
Esth.  viii,  10, 14] ;  aocording  to  Cleseniua,  mule-driver; 
SepL  6  'AaShfipd  v.  r.  'Aacr^^p,  etc,  Yulg.  A  hastkari)^ 
the  last  mentioned  of  the  four  sons  of  Naarah,  aecond  of 
the  two  wiTea  of  Ashnr,  the  founder  of  Tekoa,  of  the 
tnbe  of  judah  (1  Chroń,  iv,  6).    KC  post  1618. 

Ha-ammonaL    See  Cuephar-haammonai. 

Haan,  Cabolus  de,  was  bom  at  Amheim-Aag.  16, 
1530.  Beooming  acgwainted  with  the  Reformation,  he 
raolved  to  leave  the  Roman  Catholic  Church  and  his 
kgal  itudiea,  and  repaiied  to  Geneva,  where  he  studied 
theok>g7  iinder  Calvin  and  Beza.  In  15G0  he  became  a 
minister  <^  the  Befonned  Church  at  Derenter.  Driven 
fiam  thence  by  persecution,  he  was  invited  to  Ham  by 
William,  duke  of  Cleves,  and  eserdsed  his  ministry 
there  for  aijcteen  years,  until  persecution  again  oompel- 
led  him  to  depart  Coiint  Jan  of  Nassau,  stadtholder  of 
GoeUcrland,  and  his  son,  Lodewijk  Willem,  stadtholder 
of  Friealand,  then  secored  his  senrices  to  effoct  a  refor^ 
mation  of  the  Church  in  their  reBpective  proyinces.  He 
afterwards  retumed  to  Deventer,  but  was  again  oom- 
peDed  to  leave  it  in  1587,  when  it  fell  into  the  hands  of 
the  Spaniarda.  He  repaired  the  same  year  to  Łeyden, 
where  he  waa  temporarily  appointed  professor  extraor- 
«y  naiy  of  theology.  This  position  he  held  for  four  years. 
He  waa  then  called  to  Oldenbroek,  where  he  exerci9ed 
his  ministry  till  he  had  passed  the  age  of  eighty.  He 
died  at  Leyden  Jan.  28, 1616.  He  wrote  an  espodtion 
of  the  Reve]ation  of  St.  John  in  Latin,  and  a  work  in 
Dntch  against  the  Anabaptista.  See  Glasiu^  Godge- 
lord  Nedarland,  I     (J.  P.  W.) 

Ha-aralotfa.    See  Gibeah-haaraloth. 

Haas,  Gksabdus  dk,  D.D.,  waa  bom  in  1786.  Af- 
ter  oompleting  hia  theolpgical  studies  at  Utrecht,  and 
Roeiving  the  doctorate  in  theology  in  1761,  he  was  set^ 
tled  8acoeaBively  at  Amersfoort,  Middelburg,  and  Am- 
sterdam. Hia  worka  are  chiefly  exegetical  and  dog- 
matic  Themostimportantof  themaie,i4ofnNerlaip»90i 
omr  het  tecende  Boek  der  Godtpraaken  van  Jeeaia  (Utr. 
1773)  :—//«<  fńjfdt  en  drie  tfolgende  hoo/dftukken  uii  Pau- 
bu  brie/  aan  de  Romeinen  rerklaard  (AmsL  1789-98,  8 
paita)  '.^Yerkemdeiuig  owr  de  ioekomende  werdd  (Amst. 
1796)  i-^Oter  de  Opeibarwg  van  Johatmet  (Amst  1807, 
8  parts).  He  alao  completed  the  coihmentary  of  Prof. 
Nahnia  on  the  Epiatle  to  the  Philippians.  It  was  pub- 
Usbed  at  Amsterdam  in  1788  in  3  yols.  See  Glasiua, 
God^kerdNederltmdfU  (J.P.W.) 
IVr-A 


Haba'iah  (Heb.  Chabayah%  njąn  or  rmn,pro-> 
teeted  by  Jektwahf  Sept  '0/3aia  and  'Efiaia),  a  prieat 
whose  descendants  retumed  firom  the  captivity  with  Ze- 
mbbabel,  but  were  degraded  from  the  priestly  office  on 
accoont  of  not  being  able  to  tracę  their  genealogy  (Ezra 
ii,  6 ;  Neh.  vu,  68).    BwC.  antę  459. 

Hab^akkuk  [many  JIabak'htk]  (Heb.  Chabah- 
kuk',  p^t^^rit  embrace;  Sept.  'A/A/3aKovA<,Vulg.  Ildba" 
cuc ;  Jerume,  Praf,  t»  Hab,  tranalates  mpiKin^ic,  and 
Sttidas  TcarĄp  lykpotuę ;  other  Gnecized  and  Latinized 
forms  are  *Aj3ffaKovfi,  *Afjifi€ucovKf  Ambacum,  AbacuCf 
etc),  the  eighth  in  order  of  the  twelve  minor  propheta 
(q.  V.)  of  the  Old  Testament 

1.  As  to  the  name,  besides  the  above  forms,  the 
Greeks,  not  oniy  the  Sept  translators,  but  the  fathers 
of  the  Church,  probably  to  make  it  morę  sonoroos,  cor- 
mpt  it  into  'Apa/3aKovir,  * KpafiaKovpu>,  or,  as  Jerome 
writes,  'A/3acovpoi,  and  only  one  Greek  copy,  found  in 
the  library  of  Alcalś,  in  Spain,  has  'A/3/3aKovc,  which 
seems  to  be  a  recent  correction  madę  to  suit  the  Hebrew 
text  The  Heb.  word  may  denote,  as  obeenred  by  Je- 
rome, as  well  a  ^^farorite"  aa  a  **  struggler.**  Abarbanel 
thinks  that  in  the  latter  sense  it  has  allusron  to  the  pa- 
triotic  zeal  of  the  prophet  fenrently  contending  for  the 
welfare  of  his  country :  but  other  prophets  did  the  same ; 
and  in  the  former  and  less  distant  signification,  the  name 
would  be  one  like  Theophilus,  ^  a  friend  of  God,"  which 
his  parents  may  have  given  him  for  a  good  omen.  Lu- 
ther  took  the  name  in  the  active  sense,  and  applied  it 
to  the  laboiB  and  writings  of  the  man,  thua :  *'  Habak- 
kuk  had  a  proper  name  for  hia  office;  for  it  signifies  a 
man  of  heart,  one  who  is  hearty  towaida  another  and 
takes  him  into  his  arms.  This  is  what  he  does  in  hia 
prophecy;  he  comforts  his  people  and  lifts  them  up,  aa 
one  would  do  with  a  weeping  child  or  man,  bidding  him 
be  quiet  and  content,  because,  please  God,  it  would  yet 
be  better  with  hira.**  But  all  this  is  speculation.  See 
Keil  and  Delitzsch,  CommenL  ad  cąp.  i,  1. 

2.  Of  the  facta  of  this  prophefs  birth-place,  parent- 
age,  and  life  we  have  only  apocryphal  and  conflicting 
aoconnts  (see  Delitzsch,  De  Habacuci  vita  et  cełaie,  lipa. 
1842, 1844).  The  Rabbinical  tradition  that  Habakkuk 
was  the  son  of  the  Shunanunite  woman  whom  Elisha 
restored  to  life  is  repeated  by  Abarbanel  in  Ms  commen- 
tary,  and  has  no  other  foundation  than  a  fanciful  ety- 
mology  of  the  prophefs  name,  based  on.  the  expreaBion 
in  2  Kinga  iv,  16.  £qually  unfounded  is  the  tradition 
that  he  was  the  sentinel  set  by  Isaiah  to  watch  for  the 
destroction  of  Babylon  (comp.  Isa.  xxi,  16  with  Hab.  ii, 
1).  In  the  title  of  the  history  of  Bel  and  the  Dragon, 
as  found  in  the  Sept  rerśon  in  Origen's  Tetrapla,  the 
author  is  called  ^*  Habakkuk,  the  son  of  Joshua,  of  the 
tzibe  of  Leri."  Some  have  supposed  this  apocryphal 
writer  to  be  identical  with  the  prophet  (Jerome,  Procem, 
m  Dcm,),  The  psalm  in  eh.  iii  and  its  title  are  thought 
to  fayor  the  opinion  that  Habakkuk  waa  a  Levite  (De- 


HABAKKUK 


HABAKKUK 


litzschi  Nabdkuh,  p.  iii).  Pseudo-Epiphanios  (ii,  240,  De 
YUia  Prophetarum)  and  Dorotheus  {Chroń,  Pasch.  p. 
150)  say  that  be  was  of  BriB^OKtip  or  Btj9iT0\Jxóp  (v.  r. 
B}}^^oKr/p,  BtSZtx^p)  {Bethacaty  Md.  HispaL  c  47),  of 
the  tribe  of  Simeon.  ThiB  may  faave  been  the  same  aa 
Bethzachańaa,  where  Judas  Maccabeeua  was  defeated  by 
Antiocbus  Eupator  (1  Mace  vi,  32,  33).  The  same  au- 
thors  relate  tbat  when  Jerusalem  was  sacked  by  Nebu- 
cbadiiezzar,  Habakkuk  fled  to  Ostracine,  and  renuined 
there  tiU  ailer  the  Chaldieans  had  left  the  city,  when  he 
retumed  to  his  own  coantry,  and  died  at  his  farm  two 
years  before  the  return  from  Babylon,  RC.  538.  It  was 
durtng  his  residence  in  Judsa  that  he  is  said  to  have 
canied  food  to  Daniel  in  the  den  of  lions  at  Babylon. 
This  legend  is  given  id  the  histoiy  of  Bel  and  the  Drag- 
on, and  is  repeated  by  Euaebiiis,  Bar  Hebneus,  and  Eu- 
tychius.  It  is  quoted  from  Joseph  ben-Gorion  {B,  J, 
xi,  3)  by  Abarbanel  {Conrnu  on  Hub.),  and  seriously  re- 
fute<l  by  him  on  chronological  grounda.  The  scenę  of 
the  event  was  shown  to  mediieval  trayellers  on  the  road 
iirom  Jerusalem  to  Bethlehem  {Early  Tratels  m  Paks- 
tme,  p.  29).  Habakkuk  is  said  to  have  been  buried  at 
Ceila,  in  the  tribe  of  Judah,  eight  miles  easŁ  of  Eleu- 
theropolis  (Euaebius,  Onomasiicon,  s.  v.) ;  where,  in  the 
days  of  Zebenua,  btsbop  of  Eleutheropolis,  acoording  to 
Nicephorus  (ff,  E.  xli,  48)  and  Sozomeii  (//.  E,  vii,  28), 
the  rcmains  of  the  prophets  Habakkuk  and  Micah  were 
both  discovered.  See  Keilah.  Babbinical  tradition, 
however,  places  his  tomb  at  Chukkok,  of  the  tribe  of 
Naphthali,  now  called  Jakuk.    See  Hukkok. 

BooK  OF  Habakkuk.— A  fuli  and  trustworthy  ac- 
count  of  the  life  of  this  prophet  would  explain  his  ira- 
ligery,  and  many  of  the  erents  to  which  he  alludes ;  but 
ńnce  we  have  no  Information  on  which  we  can  depend, 
nothing  rcmains  but  to  determine  from  the  book  itself 
its  historical  basis  and  its  age. 

1.  The  Rabbinical  traditions  agree  in  placing  Habak- 
kuk with  Joel  and  Nahura  in  the  reign  of  Manasseh 
(corap.  Seder  Olom  Rabbit  and  Żuła,  and  Tremach  Da- 
tid).  This  datę  is  adopted  by  Kimchi  and  Abarbanel 
śmong  the  Kabbis,  and  by  Witaius  and  othen  among 
modem  writers.  The  generał  corruption  and  lawless- 
neas  which  preyailed  in  the  reign  of  Manasseh  are 
supposed  to  be  referred  to  in  Hab.  i,  2-4.  Kalinsky 
conjectures  that  Habakkuk  may  have  been  one  of  the 
prophets  mentioncd  in  2  Rings  xxi,  10.  Carpzoy  (/n- 
trod,  ad  libr.  canon.  V,  T.  p.  79,  410)  and  Jahn  (fntrod. 
in  libros  sacros  V,  T.  ii,  §  120)  refer  our  prophet  to  the 
reign  of  Manasseh,  thus  placing  him  thirty  odd  years 
earlier;  but  at  that  time  the  Chaldsums  had  not  as  yet 
giyen  just  ground  for  apprehension,  and  it  would  have 
been  injudicious  in  Habakkuk  prematurely  to  fili  the 
minds  of  the  people  with  fear  of  them.  Some  addition- 
al  support  to  our  statement  of  the  age  of  this  book  is 
deriyed  from  the  tradition,  reportcd  in  the  apocr^^phal 
appendix  to  Daniel  and  by  the  Pseudo-Epiphanius,  that 
Habakkuk  lived  to  see  the  Babylonian  exile.  Syncel- 
lus  {Chronographia,  p.  214,  230,  240)  makes  him  con- 
temporary  with  Ezekiel,  and  extends  the  period  of  his 
prophecy  from  the  time  of  Manasseh  to  that  of  Daniel 
tod  Joshua,  the  son  of  Josedech.  The  Chronicon  Pas- 
chale  places  him  later,  firsŁ  meutioning  him  in  the  be- 
ginning  of  the  reign  of  Josiah  (Olymp.  32),  as  oontem- 
porary  with  Zephaniah  and  Nahum ;  and  again  in  the 
beginning  of  the  reign  of  Cyrus  (Olymp.  42),  as  oon- 
temporary  with  Daniel  and  Ezekiel  in  Persia,  with 
Haggai  and  Zechariah  in  Judsea,  and  with  Baruch  in 
Egypt,  Dayidson  (Home's  Inłrod.  ii,  968),  following 
Keil,  decides  in  favor  of  the  early  part  of  the  reign  of 
Josiah.  Calmet,  JSger,  Ewald,  RosenmUller,  Maurer, 
and  Hitzig  agree  in  assigning  the  commenoement  of 
Habakkuk's  prophecy  to  the  reign  of  Jehoiakim,  though 
they  are  divided  as  to  the  exact  period  to  which  it  is  to 
be  referred.  Ranitz  {ItUroductio  in  Hab,  Vaiic.  p.  24, 
69);  Stirkel  {Prolog,  ad  interpr.  teriii  cap.  Hab,  p.  22, 
27),  and  De  Wette  {TAhrbuch  der  HistoruchkrUitchcn 
Emkit.  Berlin,  1840,  p.  338)  Justly  place  the  age  of  Hab- 


akkuk before  the  inyasion  of  Judsoa  by  the  ChaldsanSb 
Knobel  {Der  Prcphetism.  de  Hdn-.)  and  Meicr  {Gesch.  d, 
poet,  nat  Liter.  </,  Hebr.)  are  in  favor  of  the  ooromence- 
ment  of  the  Chaldsean  tera,  after  the  battle  of  Carcfae- 
mish  (B.C.  606),  when  Judeea  ¥ras  fint  threatened  by 
the  yictors.  Some  interpreters  are  of  opinion  that  eh. 
ii  was  written  in  the  reign  of  Jehoiachin,  the  son  of  Je- 
hoiakim (2  Kings  xxiv,  6),  afler  Jerusalem  had  been 
besieged  and  conąuered  by  Nebuchadnezzar,  the  king 
madę  a  prisoner,  and,  with  many  thousands  of  his  sul^ 
jects,  carried  away  to  Babylon ;  nonę  remaining  in  Je- 
rusalem save  the  poorest  class  of  the  people  (2  Kinga 
xxiv,  14).  But  of  all  this  nothing  is  said  of  the  book 
of  Habakkuk,  nor  even  so  much  as  hinted  at ;  and  what 
is  stated  of  the  violence  and  injust^:^  of  the  Ohaldseans 
does  not  imply  that  the  Jews  had  ahready  experienced 
it.  It  is  also  a  supposition  eąually  gratuitous,  acconl- 
ing  to  which  some  interpreten  refer  eh.  iii  to  the  period 
of  the  last  siege  of  Jerusalem,  when  Zedekiah  was  taken, 
his  sons  slaiu,  his  eyes  put  out,  the  walls  of  the  city 
broken  down,  and  the  Tempie  burńed  (2  Rings  xxv,  1- 
10).  There  is  not  the  slightest  alluaon  to  any  of  theae 
Incidents  in  the  third  chapter  of  Habakkuk. 

But  the  question  of  the  datę  of  Habakkuk^s  prophecy 
has  been  discussed  in  the  most  exhaustive  manner  by 
Delitzsch  {Der  Prophet  Habakuk,  EinL  §  3),  and,  though 
his  aiguments  are  rather  ingenious  than  convincing, 
they  are  well  deaer\'ing  of  consideration  as  based  upon 
intemal  evidence.  The  conclusiou  at  which  he  arrivea 
is  that  Habakkuk  delivered  his  prophecy  about  the 
twelilh  or  thirteenth  year  of  Josiah  (B.C.  630  or  629), 
for  reasons  of  which  the  following  is  a  summary.  In 
Hab.  i,  5  the  expression  *'  in  your  Any^  shows  that  the 
falfilmcnt  of  the  prophecy  would  take  place  in  the  life- 
tiroe  of  those  to  whom  it  was  addrcśed.  The  same 
phrase  in  Jer.  xW,  9  embraces  a  period  of  at  most  twen- 
ty  years,  while  in  Ezek.  xii,  25  it  denotes  about  8ix 
3'ears,  aiid  thcrefore,  reckoning  backwards  from  the 
Chaldieau  inrasion,  the  datę  above  assigned  would  in- 
volve  no  ^nolation  of  probability,  though  the  argument 
does  not  amount  to  a  proof.  From  the  similarity  of 
Hab.  ii,  10  and  Zcph.  i,  7,  Delitzsch  infcrs  that  the  lat- 
ter  is  an  imitation,  the  former  being  the  originaL  He 
supports  this  conclusion  by  many  coUateral  aigumenta. 
Now  Zephaniah,  according  to  the  superscription  of  hia 
prophecy,  lired  in  the  time  of  Josiah,  and  from  iii,  5  he 
is  supposed  to  have  prophcsied  after  the  worship  of  Je- 
hovah  was  restored,  that  is,  afler  the  twelfth  year  of 
that  king's  reign.  It  is  thought  that  he  i^Tote  about 
B.C.  624.  Between  this  period,  thercfore,  and  the  twelfth 
year  of  Josiah  (RC.  630),  Delitzsch  places  Habakkuk. 
But  Jeremiah  began  to  prophesy  in  the  thirteenth  year 
of  Josiah,  and  many  passages  are  borrowed  by  him  from 
Habakkuk  (compare  Hab.  ii,  13  with  Jer.  U,  58,  etc). 
The  latter,  thercfore,  must  have  written  about  B.C  630 
or  629.  This  view  receives  some  confirmation  from  the 
position  of  his  prophecy  in  the  O.-T.  Canoiu 

On  the  other  hand,  while  it  is  evident,  from  the  con- 
stant  use  of  the  futurę  tcnse  in  speaking  of  the  Chal- 
d«ean  desolations  (i,  5,  6,  12),  that  the  prophet  must 
have  written  before  the  inrasion  of  Nebuchadnezzar, 
which  rendered  Jehoiakim  tributary  to  the  king  of  Bab- 
ylon (2  Kings  xxiv,  i),  B.C.  606,  yet  it  is  equaUy  dear 
from  eh.  ii,  3  that  the  prophecy  did  not  long  precede  the 
fulfilment ;  and  as  there  seem  to  be  no  references  to  the 
reigns  of  Josiah  or  Jehoahaz  (RC.  609),  and  as  the  no- 
tices  of  the  corruption  of  the  period  agree  with  the  be- 
ginning of  the  reign  of  Jehoiakim,  we  cannot  be  far 
astray  in  assigning  RC.  608  as  the  approximate  datę  of 
this  book. 

2.  Instead  of  looking  upon  the  prophecy  as  an  organie 
whole,  RosenmUller  divided  it  into  three  parts  oorre- 
sponding  to  the  chafiters,  and  assigned  the  firet  chapter 
to  the  reign  of  Jehoiakim,  the  second  to  that  of  Jehoia- 
chin, and  the  third  to  that  of  Zedekiah,  when  Jerusalem 
was  besieged  for  the  third  time  by  Nebuchadnezzar. 
Kalinsky  (  Vatic.  Chabac,  et  Nah.)  makes  four  diYisioną 


i 


HABAKKUK 


HABAZANIAH 


md  refen  the  propbecy  not  to  Nebuchadnezzar,  bnt  to 
Esarhaddon.  But  in  mich  an  arbitraiy  arrangement 
Che  tiue  cbanctcr  of  the  composition  as  a  perfectiy  de- 
vdoped  poem  is  entirely  lont  sight  of. 

The  prophct  oommences  by  aimouncing  his  oiiice  and 
important  mission  (i,  1).  He  bewails  the  corruption 
and  aodal  disorganization  by  which  he  is  surrounded, 
and  cries  to  Jehovah  for  help  (i,  2-A).  Next  fuUowd 
the  leply  of  the  Deity,  threatentng  swid  yengeance  (i, 
5-11).  The  piophet,  transfermig  himsetf  to  the  near 
fumre  foreshadowed  in  the  dirine  threatemngs,  sees  the 
rapadty  and  boastful  impiety  of  the  Chaldsan  hosts, 
bot,  ooniident  that  God  has  only  eroployed  them  as  the 
insitniments  of  correction,  anHimes  (ii|  1)  an  attitude  of 
hopeful  expectancy,  and  waits  to  see  the  iasue.  He  re- 
ceires  the  di\-ine  command  to  wiite  in  an  endiuing  furm 
the  vision  of  (^rs  retribiitive  justice  aa  rerealed  to  his 
prophetic  eye  (ii,  2,  3).  The  doom  of  the  Chaldsans  is 
liist  foreti^d  in  generał  terms  (ii.  4-6),  and  the  announoe- 
ment  is  followed  by  a  senes  of  denanciations  pronounced 
upon  theno  by  the  nations  who  had  suffercd  from  their 
oppression  (ii,  6-20).  The  strophical  arrangement  of 
these  "  woes"  is  a  remarkable  feature  of  the  propbecy. 
They  are  distribnted  in  stmphes  of  three  yerses  each, 
characteiized  by  a  certain  regularity  of  structuie.  The 
fiist  four  oommenoe  with  a  *'Woe!"  and  close  with  a 
rerse  t>e^nning  with  "^9  (for).  The  fhst  rerse  of  each 
of  these  oontains  the  character  of  the  sin,  the  second  the 
derelopment  of  the  woe,  while  the  third  is  confirmator}' 
of  the  woe  denounced.  The  fifth  strophe  differs  firom 
the  othos  in  form  in  having  a  rerse  introductory  to  the 
woe.  The  prominent  rices  of  the  Chaldieans'  character, 
as  delineated  in  i,  &-11,  are  madę  the  subjects  of  sępa- 
ratę  denunctaUons :  their  iitaatiable  ambitiun  (ii,  6-^), 
their  coretoinness  (ii,  9-11),  cnielty  ii,  12-14),  dnmk- 
ennesB  (ii,  15-17),  and  idolatry  (ii,  18-20).  The  whole 
concludes  with  the  msgniticent  psalm  in  chap.  iii,  ^*  Hab- 
akkiik*s  Plndaiic  ode"  (Ewald),  a  composition  unrival- 
led  for  boldness  of  conception,  siiblimity  of  thought,  and 
majesty  of  diction.  This  constitutes,  in  Delitzsch*8 
opittion,  **  the  second  grand  diiision  of  the  entire  proph- 
ecr,  as  the  8ubjective  reflex  of  the  two  subdiyisions  of 
the  fiist,  and  the  lyrical  recapitulation  of  the  whole." 
It  is  the  echo  of  the  feelings  aroused  in  the  prophefs 
mind  by  the  dirine  answers  to  his  appeals ;  fear  in  an- 
ticipation  of  the  threatened  judgments,  and  thankful- 
nesB  and  joy  at  the  promised  retribution.  But,  thongh 
Intimately  oonnected  with  the  former  part  of  the  proph- 
tey,  it  is  in  itaelf  a  perfect  whole,  as  is  sufficiently  evi- 
dent  firom  its  lyrical  character.  and  the  musical  arrange- 
ment by  which  it  was  adapted  for  use  in  the  Tempie 
sen-ice. 

3.  The  style  of  this  prophet  has  always  been  much  ad- 
roiied.  Lo%rth  (De  Poeń  Ilebrcgor.  p.  287)  says :  **  Po- 
eticus  est  Habaccuci  stylus;  sed  maxime  in  oda,  ąuse 
inter  abeolatissimas  in  eo  genere  merito  numerari  po- 
test.'*  Eichhom,  De  Wette,  and  RosenmUUer  are  loud 
in  their  praise  of  Habakkuk's  style;  the  first  giring  a 
detailed  and  animated  analysis  of  the  construction  of 
his  prophecies  (Emleitung  indos  A,  Test.  iii,  383).  He 
eqaa]s  the  most  eminent  prophets  of  the  Old  Testament 
— ^oel,  Amos,  Nahum,  Isaiah ;  and  the  ode  in  eh.  iii 
may  be  placed  in  competition  with  Psa.  xviii  and  lxviii 
for  originality  and  sublimity.  His  tigures  are  all  great, 
happily  chosen,  and  properly  drawn  out.  His  denund- 
ations  are  terrible,  his  derision  bttter,  his  consolation 
cbeeiing.  Instances  occur  of  borrowed  ideas  (iii,  19 ; 
comp.  Psa.  xviii,  34 :  ii,  6 ;  comp.  Isa.  xiv,  7 :  ii,  14 ;  comp. 
laa.  xi,  9) ;  but  he  makes  them  his  own  in  drawing  them 
out  m  his  pecoliar  manner.  With  all  the  boldness  and 
fierror  of  Ids  imagination,  his  language  is  pure  and  his 
Terae  melodiou&  Eichhom,  indeed,  give8  a  considera- 
Ue  number  of  words  which  he  oonsiders  to  be  peculiar 
to  this  prophet,  and  suppoees  him  to  have  formed  new 
words  or  altered  existing  ones,  to  sound  morę  energetic 
or  feeble,  as  the  sentiments  to  be  expressed  might  re- 
ąiiire;  bot  his  list  needs  sifting,  as  De  Wette  obser\*es 


{Emleitung,  p.  889) ;  and  *)ib{^'^p,  ii,  16,  is  the  only  un« 
exceptionable  insunce. 

4.  The  ancient  catalogues  of  canonical  books  of  the 
Old  Testament  do  not,  indeed,  mentton  Habakkuk  by 
name;  but  they  must  have  counted  him  m  the  twelve 
minor  prophets,  whose  numbers  would  otherwise  not  be 
f'ulL  In  the  New  Testament  some  expresBions  of  his 
are  iutroduceil,  but  his  name  is  not  added  (Rom.  i,  17 ; 
GaL  iii,  11 ;  Heb.  x,  38 ;  comp.  Hab.  ii,  4 :  Acts  xiii,  40, 
41 ;  comp.  Hab.  i,  5).— Kitto,  s.  v. ;  Smith,  s.  v. 

5.  Express  commentaries  on  the  whole  of  this  book 
separately  are  the  following,  of  which  the  most  impor- 
tant are  designated  by  an  asterisk  [*  ]  pretixed :  Theo- 
phylact,  CommaUarius  (in  Opp,  iv) ;  Bede,  ErposiHo  (m 
Works^  ix,  404) :  Tanchum  of  Jerusalem,  Commentaire 
(ed.  Munk,  Paris,  1843,  8vo) :  Abarfoanel,  Commentarius 
(etl.  Sprecher,  Traj.  1722,  Helmst.  1790,  8vo) :  Luther, 
Auslegung  (Yitemb.  1526,  4to;  Erf.  eod.  8vo;  in  Latiu, 
Argent.  1528, 8 vo);  Capito,  Aftarro/iow^  (Argent,  1526, 
8vo) ;  Chytneus,  Leciinnes  (in  Opp.  p.  364) ;  GniTieus, 
Hypomnmwta  (BasiL  1582, 8vo) ;  De  Guevara,  Commm^ 
^<intt«[  Rom.  Cath.]  (Madrid,1585,4to;  1593.  foL;  Aug. 
Yind.  1603;  Antw.  1009,  4to) ;  Agellius,  Commentarius 
(.\ntw.  1597.  8vo) ;  Toesan,  Paraphrasis  (Francf.  1599, 
8vo) ;  Garthius,  Commentarius  (Yitemb.  1605, 8vc) :  Tar- 
novius,  Commentarius  (Rost.  1628, 8vo) ;  Cocceius,  A  nafy- 
sis  (in  Opp.  xi,  657) ;  Marbmy,  Commentarie  (Lond.  1650^ 
4tr.) ,  •De  Padilla,  Commentaria  [Rom.  Cath.]  (Madrid, 

1  1657,  2  vol8.  4to;  Sulzb.  1674,  4to,  Romę,  1702,  fol.) ; 

I  HafenrefTer,  Commentarius  [including  Nahum]  (Stuttg. 

I  1663,  8vo) ;  •Yan  Til,  Commaiłanus  (L.  B.  1700,  4to) ; 

i  Biermann,  De  Prophezie  ran  ff.  (Utr.  1713, 4to) ;  Esch, 

!  ErUdrunp  (>Ye8el,1714,4to);  Abicht,  i4  ciSBo/a^iofie*  (Yi- 
temb. 1732, 4to) ;  Jansen,  AnaUcia  (in  Penłateuch.  etc.) ; 
♦Schehinga,  CoinfM«i/anH#  (L.  B.l747,4to)j  *Kalinsky, 
TUłistrałio  [including  Nahum]  (A^nti8lav,  1748,  4to) ; 
Chrysander,  Anmerk,  (Rint.  and  Lpz.  1752,  4to)  ;  Mon-  . 
radt  A  nmej-k.  (from  the  Danish,  Giittingen,  1759,  8 vo); 
Anon.  Traduction  (Paris,  1776, 12mo) :  Perschke,  l^ersio, 
etc.  (Francf.  et.  Lips.  1777,  8vo) ;  Ludwig,  Erłduterung 
(Frkfl.  1779,  8vo) ;  Faber,  Commentatio  ((hiold.  1779,  2 
vols,  4to)  i  Wahl,  A  nmetkung.  etc.  (Hanover,  1790, 8vo) , 
Kofod,  Commentarius  (Hafn.  1792, 8vo) ;  Tingstad,  Ani- 
madtersiones  (Upsal.  1795, 8 vo);  Hanlein, /n/«77>refa/iV> 
(Erlang.  1795, 8vo)  i  Bather,  AfpUcation  (in  Sermons,  i, 
188) ;  Plum,  Obsertationes  [including  Obad.]  (Gotting. 
1796, 8vo) ;  Conz,  Erłduterung  (in  StAudlen*s  Beitrdge)  ;. 
Horst,  A  nmerkungen  (Got  ha,  1798, 8vo) ;  Dahl,  Obserra- 
iiones  (Neustr.  1798,  8vo)  ;  Wolfssohn,  Anmerk.  (Brt»]. 
1806, 8vo);  Euchel,  »/;afu/.  (Copenh.  1815,  8vo):  Justi, 
Erfdttt.  (Lpz.  1820,  8vo) ;  Wolff,  Commentar  (Dannst. 
1822,  8vo) ;  Schroder,  Arnnerk,  [including  Joel,  Nahum, 
etc]  (Hildesh.l827,8vo);  Deutsch,  D«ia'in,  etc.  (BresL 
1837, 8vo) ,  *BHumlein,  Commentarius  (Heilbroim,  1840, 
8vo) ;  ♦Delitzsch,  A  uslegung  (Lpz.  1843, 8vo) ;  Yon  Gum- 
pach,  Erkldrung  (Munch.  1860,  8vo) ;  Robinson,  Homi- 
lies  (Lond.  1865, 8vo).     See  Phophkts,  Mimob. 

The  following  are  on  chap.  iii  exclusively :  Barhnip 
De  eguUatume.  J)ei  [ver.  15]  (Lips.  1749,  4to) ;  Feder, 
Canticum  Ifub.  CWWnh.  1774, 8vo) ;  Perschke,  Commen- 
tarius (Francf.  1777,  4  to) ;  Busing,  De  fulgoribus  Dei 
[ver.  3,  4]  (Bremcn,  1778,  4to) ;  Nachtigal,  Erkldr.  (in 
Hcnke*s  Magazine,  iv,  180-190) ;  Schrćkier,  Disserfatio 
(Groningen,  1781,  iw) ;  Schnurrer,  Dissertatio  (TUbing. 
1786, 4to) ;  Momer,  Iłymnus  //ab.  (Ups.  1794, 4to) ;  Hei- 
denheim,  DSia^^Pl,  etc.  (Rodelh.  1800, 1826, 8vo) ;  Anton, 
Expositio  (Gorl.  1810,  4to) ;  Steiger,  Anmerkungen  (in 
Schwarz,  Jahrb.  1824,  p.  136) ;  Stickel,  Prolusio  (Neust, 
1827,  8vo) ;  Reissmann,  De  Cant.  //ab.  (Krauth.  1831, 
8vo) ;  Strong,  Prager  of //ab.  (in  the  Mdk.  Quar,/iev, 
Jan.  1861,  p.  73).     See  Comm£NTARY. 

Habazani^ah  (Hebrew  ChabatstsingaJi\rv;^}ŁZn, 
perh.  lamp  o/Jehovah ;  according  to  Fttrst,  coUection  of 
Jekovah ;  Sept,  Xaj3rt(Ti  v),  the  father  of  one  Jeremiah 
and  grandfather  of  the  chief  Rechabite  Jaazaniah,  which 
last  the  prophet  Jeremiah  tested  with  the  offer  of  winę 


HABBACUC 


in  the  Tempie  (Jer.  xxxv,  8). 

689. 


B.C  oonsiderably  antę 


Hab^bacuo  (AfipaKoifi ;  Yulg.  Habacuc),  the  form 
in  which  the  name  of  the  prophet  Habakkuk  (q.  v.)  U 
given  in  the  Apocrypha  (Bel,  83, 84, 86, 87, 89). 

Habergeon,  an  old  English  word  for  hrtastplatej 
appears  in  the  Auth.yera.  as  the  rendering  of  two  Ileb. 
terms :  fT^^ip,  thiryah'  (Job  xli,  26,  where  it  is  named 
by  zeuffma  with  offensire  wcapons),  or  ''p'^'^^,  ikiryon' 
(2  Chroń.  xxW,  14 ;  Neh.  iv,  16),  a  cocU  o/ mail  (as  ren- 
dered  in  1  Sam.  xvii,  6, 38) ;  and  K'jnR,  tachara'  (£xod. 
xxviii,  82 ;  xxxix,  23),  a  military  garment,  properly  of 
linen  strongly  and  thickly  woven,  and  fumished  around 
the  neck  and  breast  with  a  mailed  covering  (sec  Herod, 
ii,  182 ;  iii,  47 ;  and  oomp.  the  \ivodtitpTil  of  Homer,  //. 
ii,  629,  880).  (See  Smith'8  Diet.  of  CUm.  Anfig,  8.  v. 
LcHica.)     See  Akmor. 


Ancient  Egjptian  Linen  Cor^let  (from  the  tomb  of 
Rameses  111  at  Thebes). 

Haberkom,  Petkr,  a  German  divine,  bom  at 
Butzbach  m  1604.  After  filling  various  other  posta,  he 
was  madę  professor  of  theology  at  Giessen,  and  died 
there,  April,  1676.  He  was  distinguished  as  a  polemic, 
eopecially  against  the  Romanists  and  S}nicreti8ts  (q.  v.). 
He  wrote  (1)  Yindicatio  Luth,fidei: — (2)  Heptas  digpu- 
tationum  Anti-WaUemburgicantm  (1650,  1652,  2  vol8. 
8vo) Tholuck,  in  Herzog,  JReal-Encykhp,  v,  438,  489. 

Habert,  Isaac,  doctor  of  the  Sorbonne,  the  first 
Parisian  theologian  who  wrote  against  Janseniua.  He 
was  a  native  of  Paris,  studied  at  the  Sori^onnc,  was  ap- 
pointed  canon  of  the  cathedra!  of  Paris,  and  ui  1645 
bi^hop  of  Yabres.  He  filled  this  post  for  twenty-throe 
years,  was  reputetl  a  ver>''  pious  man,  and  died  at  Pont 
de  Salars,  near  Kodez,  in  1668.  In  1641  he  accused 
Janscnius  of  holding  heretical  doctrincs  on  forty  pointa, 
and  thereby  provoked  Antoine  Amauld  to  answer  him 
in  his  Apologie,  in  which  he  sought  to  prove  the  iden- 
tity  of  the  doctrines  of  Janseniiis  and  St.  Augnstine. 
Habert  neverthele8s  remained  a  declared  enemy  of  Jan- 
senius,  and  to  him  is  ascribed  the  authorship  of  the  let- 
ter  sent  to  pope  Innocent  X  in  1661,  and  signed  by 
eighty-five  bishops,  pra}*ing  him  to  dccide  the  quc8tion 
finally.  The  most  uoteworlhy  of  his  works  are :  Dt 
ffratia  expartibus  gracU  (1646) :— Z/e  coruamL  hierar* 


HABOR 

dna  et  tnonarchim  (Paris,  1640) :— jDs  catksdra  teu  pri* 
matu  S,  Petti  (Paris,  1646).  He  transUted  also  into 
Latin  the  ceremoniał  of  the  Eastem  Church,  under  the 
title  Liber  ponłiJtccUisj  Grace  et  Lałine  c  not,  (Paria,  1643, 
foL).— Herzog,  Real-EncyMopadie^y^  489 ;  Hoefer,  ATwtr. 
Biog,  GeniraUy  xxiii,  18. 

Habesh.    See  Abysseniam  Church. 

HabiŁ    See  Dbess. 

Habit,  **  a  power  and  ability  of  doing  anything,  ac- 
quired  by  frequent  repetition  of  the  same  action.  *  Man/ 
says  Dr.  Paley,  *■  is  a  bundle  of  habits.  There  are  hab- 
its  of  industry,  attention,  vigilancc,  advertenc\' ;  of  a 
prompt  obedience  to  the  judgment  occurring,  or  of 
j-ielding  to  Uie  first  impulse  of  passion ;  of  extending 
our  view8  to  the  fature,  or  of  resting  upon  the  present ; 
of  apprehendlng,  methodizing,  reasoning;  of  indolenco 
and  dihitoriness ;  of  vanity,  self-conceit,  melancholy, 
partiality ;  of  fretfulness,  suspidon,  captiousnesa,  censo- 
riousness;  of  pride,  ambition,  covetousness;  of  over- 
reaching,  intriguing,  projecting ;  in  a  word,  there  is  not 
a  quality  or  function,  cither  of  body  or  mind,  which 
does  not  feel  the  influence  of  this  grcat  law  of  animated 
naturę.'"  "If  the  term  ałtachment  seems  too  good  to 
be  applied  to  habits,  let  us,  if  you  please,  cali  them  ties. 
Habits,  in  fact,  are  ties,  chaiiis.  We  contract  them  un- 
awares,  often  without  fceling  any  pleasure  in  them ;  but 
we  cannot  break  them  witliout  pain.  It  costs  us  some- 
thing  to  cease  to  be  what  we  have  always  been,  to  oeaat 
doing  what. we  have  alwa}*8  done.  Life  itself,  in  ita 
least  attractive  form,  the  life  least  dcser\4ng  of  the 
name,  is  dear  to  us  from  the  merę  habit  of  living.  The 
most  intimate  attachments,  and,  still  roore,  the  most 
incontcstablc  duties,  have  often  given  way  before  the 
power  of  habit.  To  have  the  loins  girt  about,  then,  ia 
not  merely  to  distrust  our  attachments;  it  is  to  preveiit 
our  habits  from  striking  their  roots  too  deep  within. 
Nothing,  therefore,  which  is  habitual  shpuld  be  regard* 
ed  as  trivial.  The  most  invisiblc  ties  are  not  the  weak- 
est,  and,  at  all  event8,  their  number  rendcrs  them  inde- 
siructible.  We  must  remember  that  a  cable  is  com- 
posed  of  threads.  It  is  impossible  to  disiiense  with 
habits;  a  life  without  habits  is  a  life  without  a  rule. 
But  in  regard  to  thesc,  as  in  regard  to  ever>ahing  else, 
it  is  necessar}'  to  say  with  the  apostle,  *  All  things  are 
lawful  unto  me,  but  I  will  not  be  brought  under  the 
power  of  any'"  (\'inet,  Gottpel  StudieSj  p.  810).  See 
Fellowes,  Body  of  Theology,  i,  68 ;  Paley,  Morał  PhUo^ 
opfty,  i,  48 ;  Kames,  Kłem,  of  Criticism,  eh.  xiv ;  Jortin, 
Sermongf  voL  iii;  Reid,  Actire  Powert  ofMan;  MUller, 
On  the  Chrittian  Boctrine  oj  Sin  (see  Index). 

Habitation  (represcnted  by  8everal  Heb.  and  Gr. 
words).  God  is  metaphorically  called  the  habitation  of 
his  people  (Psa.  lxxi,  8) ,  in  him  thej'  find  the  most  dc- 
lightful  rest,  safcty,  and  comfort  (Psa.  xci,  9).  Justice 
and  judgment  are  the  habitation  of  God's  throne  (Psa. 
lxxxix,  14),  all  his  acta  being  founded  on  justice  and 
judgment  (P&a.  cxvii,  2).  Tlie  land  of  Canaan,  the  city 
of  Jerusalem,  the  tabemacle  and  Tempie,  are  spoken  of 
as  the  habitation  of  God ;  there  he  does  or  did  signally 
show  himself  present  (Psa.  cxxxii,  6,  18 ;  Eph.  ii,  22). 
Eternity  is  rcpresented  as  his  habitation  (Isa.  lvii,  15). 
He  "  inhabited  the  praises  of  Israel,"  a  bold  metaphor, 
imphńng  that  Jehovah  is  the  object  of,  and  kindly  ac- 
ceptś  the  praises  of  his  people  (Psa.  xxii,  8).    See 

DWELLINO. 

Habits.    See  Testments. 

Hant>or  (Heb.  Chahor',  *lian,  if  of  Shemitic  origin, 
from  *^2n,  to  Jotn,  meaning  the  united  stream ;  if  of  Per- 
sie derivation, from  khubpar—iVKprifivoc,yńtYi  beauHful 
banka  [FUrst,  Ijex,  s.  v.] ;  Sept.  'A/3wp  and  Xa/3<wp),  a 
ńver,  and  apparently  also  a  district  of  Assyria,  to  which 
considerable  interest  is  attached  in  connection  with  the 
first  captivity.  We  read  in  1  Chroń.  v,  26,  that  Tilgath- 
pilneser  carried  away ''  the  Keubenites,  and  the  Gadites, 
and  the  half-tribe  of  Manasaeh,  and  brought  them  unto 


HABOR  i 

Halah,  and  ffesbor,  and  Hara,  and  to  the  rivcr  Gtozan." 
Abottt  lerenteen  yeai«  later,  Shalmaneser,  the  succeseor 
of  the  former  mooarch, « took  Samaria,  and  carried  Is- 
nel  away  into  Aasyria,  and  placed  them  in  Halah,  aod 
in  Jłabor,  the  river  of  Gosan"  (A.V.,  «*6y  the  river  Go- 
zan,"  2  Kinga  xvii,  6 ;  xviii,  1 1).  There  aie  two  river8 
still  bearing  this  name,  and  geographers  are  not  agreed 
as  to  irhleh  ts  here  referred  to.     See  CAprmTY. 

1.  A  rxver  called  Kkatur  riaes  in  the  central  high- 
lands  of  Kiudistan,  flowa  in  a  aouth-weaterly  direction, 
aod  faDs  into  the  llgria  abont  8eventy  miles  above  Mo- 
aol  (Layaid,  Niaewh  and  BabyUm,  p.  66 ;  SchiUtens,  In- 
dac  Gtogr.  in  riiam  Saladmi,  &  v.).  Many  mippoee  thia 
to  be  the  Habor  of  Scripture  for  the  following  reaaons : 
1.  It  is  within  Aasyiia  proper,  which  Ptolemy  8av8  waa 
bounded  on  the  west  by  the  Tigris  (vi,  1).  2.  It  Ib  af- 
finned  that  the  AaB3rrian  monarch  would  place  his  cap- 
tŚTCs  in  a  central  part  of  hia  klngdom,  such  as  this  is, 
and  not  in  the  ontaldita  (Keil  on  2  Kings  xvii,  4-6).  3. 
Habor  ia  termed  "  a  river  of  Gozan"  CjTia  nna  lian) ; 
and  Gozan  is  sopposed  to  signify  "paśturc,"  and  to 'be 
identical  with  the  word  Zozan^  now  applied  by  the  Nes- 
torians  to  the  pasture-lands  in  the  highlaiids  of  Assyria, 
whąe  the  Khabftr  takes  its  rise  (Grant,  The  Nestorian 
CkriiHanB,  p.  124).  4.  Ptolemy  mentions  a  mountain 
called  Ckabor  (Kaptapac)  which  dirides  Assyria  from 
Media  (vi,  1) ;  and  Bochart  aays  the  river  Chabor  has 
its  soorce  in  that  mountain  {Opera,  i,  194,  242,  862). 
Some  havc  sapposed  that  the  modem  Nestorians  are  the 
deacendants  of  the  capti\'e  Jews  (Grant,  L  c)'.    See  Go- 

2.  The  other  and  much  morę  celebrated  riv€r,  Kha- 
Wr,  13  that  faroous  affluent  of  the  Euphrates,  which  is 
caUed  Abarrkas  {'Afióppac)  by  Strabo  (xvi,  1, 27)  and 
Ptocopius  (BelL Pers,  ii,  5) ;  Abura*  (A^oipac)  by  Isi- 
dore  of  Charax  (p.  4) ;  A  hora  (Aftwpa)  bv  Zosimus  (iu, 
12) :  and  Chaborat  by  Ptolemy  (Xo/3toipic,  v,  18)  and 
Pliny  {H.  N,  xxx,  3).  « It  rises  about  laL  86^  40',  long. 
40^;  flows  only  a  little  south  of  east  to  its  junction  near 
Kaukab  with  the  Jerujer  or  river  of  Nisibis,  which 
comes  down  from  Mons  Masius.  Both  of  these  brancb- 
«  are  ibrmed  by  the  union  of  a  number  of  stieams. 
Keither  of  them  is  fordable  for  some  dłstance  above 
their  junction ;  and  below  it  they  constitute  a  river  of 
soch  magnitude  as  to  be  navigable  for  a  considerable 
diatance  by  steamers.  The  couree  of  the  Khabńr  below 
Kankabia  tortuous  [through  rich  meads  coveied  with 
ibwera,  having  a  generał  direction  about  S.S.W.  to  its 
junction  with  the  Euphrates  at  Karkesia,  the  ancient 
Ciicesium].  The  entire  length  of  the  stream  is  not  less 
than  200  mites"  (Rawlinson,  Ancient  ManarchieSy  i, 286; 
eee  Ainsworth,  Trapels  m  the  Track  ofłhe  Teti  Thou- 
«wl,p.79;  Laytad,NinevehandBabf/hn,p,dOi),  Rit- 
ter  {Ęrdkunde,  x,  248),  Gesenius  (fhesaunu),  Layard, 
Rawlinson,  and  others,  maintain  that  this  ia  the  ancient 
NaAor,  There  can  be  no  doubt  that  Assyria  proper  was 
confined  to  the  country  lying  along  the  banks  of  the 
Upper  Tigris,  and  stietching  eastwaid  to  Media.  But 
Its  cemtoiy  gradually  expanded  so  as  to  include  Baby- 
kmia  (Henntotus,  iu,  92),  MesopotamU  (Plinv,  //.  i\r.  vi, 
»),  and  evcn  the  country  westward  to  the  ćonfines  of 
Oho*  and  Phoenicia  (Strabo,  xvi).  At  the  tirae  of  the 
apUnty  the  power  of  Assyria  was  at  its  height.  The 
Jewłsh  captivc8  were  tts  secure  on  the  banks  of  the 
weatem  aa  of  the  eastem  Habor.  The  ruins  of  Aasyrian 
towna  are  scattered  over  the  whole  of  northem  Meso- 
potamia.  «  On  the  banks  of  the  lower  KhabOr  are  the 
lonains  of  a  royal  palące,  bosides  many  other  traces  of 
the  tract  through  which  it  runs  having  been  perma- 
nmtly  occupied  by  the  Assyrian  people.  Even  near 
Semj,  in  the  country  between  Haran  and  the  Euphra- 
tea,  some  evidenoe  has  been  fonnd  not  only  of  conąuest, 
bot  of  occapatłon"  (Rawlinson,  Ancient  Afmarchiejf,  i, 
Mi ;  see  Cheaney,  EuphnUea  ErpedUion,  i,  1 14 :  Layard, 
^ond  Bah.  p.  275,  279^800,  312).  There  can  be  no 
°°^  **»*  the  Khab(^r  was  in  Assyria,  and  near  the 
centrę  of  the  kingdom,  at  the  time  of  the  captivity. 


1  HACKET 

Further,  Ptolemy  mentions  a  prov!nce  in  Mesopotamia 
caUed  Gauzamiis  (v,  18).  It  lay  around  the  Khabftr, 
and  was  doubtless  identical  with  6'ozaii,  henee  the  phrase 
"  Habor,  the  river  of  Gozan"  (2  Kings  xvii,  6).  Chalci- 
tis,  which  appears  to  be  identical  with  Halah,  mention- 
ed  in  the  same  passage,  ailjoined  Gauzanitis.  It  is  a 
remarkable  fact  that  down  as  late  as  the  12th  century 
there  were  large  Jewish  communities  on  the  banks  of 
the  Khabftr  (Benjamin  of  Tudela,  in  Earfy  TrautU  tn 
Pal  p.  92  sq.).  The  district  along  the  banks  probably 
took  its  name  from  the  river,  as  would  seem  from  a  com- 
parison  with  1  Chn>n.  v,  26.  Ptolemy  mentions  a  town 
called  Chabor  (v,  18).  The  Khabftr  occura  under  that 
name  in  an  Assyrian  inscription  of  the  9th  century  be* 
fore  our  lera  (Layard,  Nin.  and  Bah,  p.  354).     See  Cu- 

KEIPORM  InSCRIPTIONS. 

U  seems  doubtfid  whether  Habor  was  identical  with 
the  river  Chebar  ("i^?)*  on  which  Ezekiel  saw  his  >ts- 
ions.  The  latter  was  perhape  farther  south  m  Babylo- 
nia  (Ezek.  i,  3,  etc.).— Kitto,  s.  v.    See  Chebak. 

Haccerem.    See  Beth-haocerbm. 

HachaU^ah  (Heb.  Chahalyah',  n^bari;  according 
to  Gesenius,  whose  eyes  Jehocah  enłicensi  according  to 
FUrst,  ornament  of  Jehorah  ,•  Sept.  'Axa\ia  v.  r.  X«X- 
Kia)y  the  father  of  Nehemiah,  the  govemor  after  the 
captivity  (Neh.  i,  1 ;  x,  2).     RC.  antę  447. 

Hach'ilah  (Heb.  ChahUah',  t^Y'^'^^  *  according  to 
Gesenius,  darhome;  according  to  F\lT8ty'drought ;  Sept 
'Ex«Xa  V.  r.  X<Xfiad),  the  descriptive  name  of  a  well- 
wooded  hill  (H^ią)  near  ("on  the  south  of,'*  "before," 
"by  the  way  of")  the  wildemess  (" Jeshimon*")  of  Ziph, 
where  Dav-id  lay  hid,  and  where  Saul  pitched  his  tent 
at  the  inforroation  of  the  Ziphites  (1  Sam.  xxiii,  19 ; 
xx>'i,  1,  8).  This  is  doubtless  the  Tell  Z\f  reported 
by  Dr.  Robinson  {ResearcłieSj  ii,  190, 191)  as  "  a  round 
eminence  situated  in  the  plain,  a  hundred  feet  or  more 
in  height,"  with  a  lovel  plot  on  the  top,  apparendy  once 
indosed  by  a  wali,  and  containing  8everal  dstems ;  ly- 
ing a  short  distance  west  of  the  site  of  the  town  of  Ziph. 
See  Ziph.  The  Identification  propoeed  by  Schwarz 
{Paleti.  p.  113)  with  "  the  yillage  Beth-Chachal,  2ł  mUes 
west  of  Hebron,"  is  unsupported  and  out  of  place. 

Haoh^moni  (Heb.  Chahnoni^  *^3ń3n,  wise;  Sept. 
'AxafŁavi  v.  r.  'Axa/łł,Vulg.  Ifachamom),  a  man  only 
known  as  the  father  (or  ancestor;  comp.  1  Chroń,  xxvii, 
2)  of  Jashobeam,  the  chief  of  David's  warriors  (1  Chroń. 
xi,  11,  where  $on  of  Hachmoni  \s  rendered  "Hachmo- 
NiTK,"  for  which  the  parallel  passage,  2  Sam.  xxiii,  8, 
has  "Taciłmontte")  ;  and  also  of  Jehiel,the  companion 
of  the  princes  in  the  royal  household  (I  Chroń,  xxvii, 
32).  B.C.  considerably  antę  1046.  Hachmon  or  Hach- 
moni was  no  doubt  the  founder  of  a  family  to  which 
these  men  belonged:  the  actual  father  of  Jashobeam 
was  Zabdiel  (1  Chroń,  xxvii,  2),  and  he  b  also  said  to 
have  belonged  to  the  Korhites  (1  Chroń,  xii,  6)^  possi- 
bly  the  Levites  descended  from  Korah.  But  the  name 
Hachmon  nowhere  appears  in  the  genealogies  of  the 
LeWtea.  See  Kennicott,  Diaa.  p.  72,  82,  who  calls  at- 
tention  to  the  fact  that  names  given  in  Chronicles  vrith 
Ben  are  in  Samuel  given  without  the  Beti,  but  with  the 
definite  article.  A  less  probable  view  is  that  which 
makes  this  term  a  title  of  office,  q.  d.  oounteUor.  See 
Jashobbam. 

Hach^monite  (1  Chroń,  xi,  16).    See  Haciimoni. 

Hacket,  John,  ab  Engllsh  prelate,  distinguished 
tor  his  talents  in  controveray,  was  bom  at  London  in 
1592.  He  studied  at  Westminstcr  School,  and  entercd 
Trinity  College,  Cambridge,  in  1608.  He  took  orders 
in  1618,  and  aoon  after  became  chaplaiji  of  the  bishop 
of  Lincoln.  At  the  beginniug  of  the  Civil  War  he  was 
one  of  the  divines  chosen  to  prepare  a  report,  on  Church 
reforms,  to  be  present^  by  a  committee  of  the  House 
of  Lords.  This  plan  failed  from  the  opposition  of  the 
bishops.    Hacket  was  & sealouś  partli&a ^Charles,  an«l 


I 


HACKET 


HADAD 


his  house  became  the  head-quarten  of  the  Royahsts  in  | 
his  neighborhood.  Thia  broughc  hitn  into  trouble,  and  I 
he  was  eveii  impńsoned  for  a  short  time.  After  the  | 
Restoration  he  was  madę  bishop  of  Lichfield  and  C<)ven> 
tr}'^,  and  he  caused  the  cathedral  oł  Lichlield,  which  had 
been  much  injured  during  the  war,  to  be  repaired,  most^ 
]y  at  his  own  €xpense.  He  died  at  Lichfield  in  1670. 
Hacket  was  a  Calrinist ;  yet  his  writings  abound,  says 
Coleridge,  *Mn  fantastic  rags  and  lappets  of  Popish 
monkery/'  He  wrote  also  A  Sermon  prectched  b^ore 
the  King  March  22,  1660:—^  Century  of  Sermona  upon 
teeeral  rtmarkable  Subjeełi  (publishetl  by  Thos.  Plume, 
with  a  life  of  the  author,  1675,  foL):— 7%«  Life  of 
Arckbishop  Willianu  (1698,  fol).  See  Biogr,  Britan- 
nica  :  Wood,  Athena  Oxonknaea,  voL  ii ;  GentlenuuCs 
Meufozine,  voL  lxvi;  Hook,  Eode»,  Biograpky^  v,  471 ; 
AlUbone,  Diet.  ofA  uthor$t  i,  752;  Coleridge,  Workt  (Sew 
York  edition),  v,  128. 

Hacket,  William,  an  English  enthusiast  and  fa- 
natic  of  the  16th  oentur>'.  He  was  at  first  the  8er\'ant 
of  a  gentleman  naroed  Ilussey,  but  married  a  rich  wid- 
ów, whose  fortunę  he  soon  spent  in  dissipation.  He 
next  appears  at  York  and  in  Lincolnshire,  giving  him- 
fielf  out  as  a  prophet,  and  announcing  the  downfall  of 
the  papacy;  that  England  would  suffer  from  famine, 
pestilence,  and  war  unless  the  consistorial  disciplinc 
were  established.  He  was  whipped  and  driven  out  of 
the  county,  but  continued  his  prophecies  elsewhere. 
Ąccording  to  Bayle,  he  was  a  very  ready  and  grandilo- 
qaent  speaker,  so  that  many  among  the  people  thought 
he  had  received  a  special  gift  of  the  Holy  Ghoet.  He 
affected  to  place  great  reliance  on  his  prayers,  and  as- 
serted  that  if  all  £ngland  were  to  pray  for  rain  there 
should  fali  nonę  if  he  prayed  for  dry  weathcr.  Edmund 
Coppinger  and  Henry  Arthington  became  aasociated 
yrith  him,  the  former  under  the  name  of  Prophet  of 
Merct/y  the  latter  Prophet  of  Judffmenł.  They  pro- 
claimed  Hacket  the  true  king  of  the  world,  and  next  in 
power  to  Jesus  Christ.  On  Jan.  16,  1591,  he  sent  his 
disciples  Łhrough  the  streets  of  London  cr^ńng  that  Je- 
sus had  arrived,  was  stopping  at  a  certain  hotel  in  the 
town,  and  that  this  time  noue  should  undertake  any- 
thing  against  him.  They  ended  with  the  crj-,  Repent^ 
Englandj  reperU  !  T^jpy  were  finally  arrested  and  put 
in  prison.  Coppinger  let  himself  die  of  star\'atlon ;  Ar- 
thington published  a  recantation  and  was  forgivcii.  As 
for  Hacket,  he  persisted  to  the  iast,  and  was  condemned 
to  dcath  as  guilty  of  impiety  and  rebeUion,  and  hung  in 
London  in  July,  1591.  Even  on  the  scafibld  he  prayed 
God  for  a  miracle  to  confoimd  his  enemies.  See  Henry 
iFitz-Simon,  Britatmomachia  MbiUtrorum,  lib.  ii,  cap.  vi, 
p.  202,  206;  Camden,  AwtaleSj  an.  1591,  pars  iv,  p.  618- 
623 ;  Bayle,  DicL  hut,  et  crif.;  Hoefer,  A'o«r.  Biog.  Ge- 
nerakt  xxiii,  31. 

Hackley,  Charles  W.,  D.D.,  a  clerg;>nnan  of  the 
Protestant  Episooiud  Church^  and  late  professor  of  math- 
ematics  and  astronomy  in  Columbia  College,  New  York, 
was  bom  March  9, 18Ó8,  in  Herklmer  Comity,  N.  York, 
and  died  in  the  city  of  New  York  Jan.  10, 1861.  Prof. 
Hackley  graduated  at  the  Military  Aotdemy,  West 
Point,  in  1829,  and  was  assistant  professor  of  mathemat- 
ics  there  untU  1832,  when  he  engaged  in  the  study  of 
law,  but  subseąuently  abandoned  it  for  theology,  and 
was  ordained  in  1835.  He  was  professor  of  mathemat-  i 
in  the  Univer8ity  of  New  York  until  1838,  then  became  ' 
president  of  Jefferson  College,  Mississippi,  and  subse- 
ąuently rector  of  St.  Peters  Protestant  Episcopal  Church, 
Aubum,  N.  Y.  He  was  elected  professor  in  Columbia 
College  in  1843,  and  continued  in  that  post  mitil  his  ' 
death.  He  was  the  author  of  Beveral  cxcel]cnt  mathe- 
matical  works,  and  a  contributor  to  scientiflc  periodicals 
and  weekly  and  daily  joumals. — A  merican  A  rmual  Cy- 
dopadia,  1861,  p.  862 ;  Allibone,  Diet,  ofA  utAors,  i,  753. 
(J.W.M.) 

Hackspan,  Theodor,  an  eminent  Luthcran  theo- 
k)gian  and  Ońentalist.  was  bom  in  1607  at  Weimar,  and 


died  at  Altorf  Jan.  19, 1659.  He  was  educated  at  Jena, 
where  he  studied  philosophy,  and  then  went  to  Altoif^ 
to  profit  by  the  instructions  of  the  able  Orientalist 
Schwentcr,  and  thence  to  Helmstadt,  where  he  atudied 
theology  under  the  famous  Calixtus.  In  1686  be  re- 
tumed  to  Altorf,  and  for  many  years  filled  the  chair 
of  Hebrew  iu  its  univerńty,  where  he  was  the  nrst 
to  publidy  teach  the  Oriental  languages.  In  1654  ho 
was  appointed  professor  of  theolog>'  in  that  institu- 
tion,  retaining  at  the  same  time  the  chair  of  Oriental 
languages.  His  dose  application  to  study  and  to  the 
duties  of  his  professorships  so  impaire<l  his  health  that 
he  died  in  the  fifty-second  year  of  his  age.  Hackspan 
is  said  to  have  been  the  best  scholar  of  his  day  in  He- 
brew, Chaldee,  Syriac,  and  Arabie.  The  liberality  of 
Jodocus  Schmidmaier,  an  advocate  of  Nurembeig,  who 
established  in  his  own  house  a  press,  with  snpplies  of 
types  in  the  different  languages,  enabled  him  to  publish 
most  of  his  leamcd  works.  Among  these  we  name  Trać- 
tatuś  de  ««u  Librorum  BaŁbi$tieorvm : — Sylloge  JHspu- 
tationum  theologicarum  et  philologicarum:  —  Inferpre* 
Errabundus : — Disputaiumes  de  locutiombut  sacris  (Al- 
torf, 1648)  ',—Ob»ervati(me$  Arabico-SytHacte  in  ąuasdam 
loca  Yeterit  et  Xori  Te$tamenti  (ibid  1639) :^I)e  Ange- 
lorum  damonumgue  nonnnibut  (ibid.  1641): — Fidea  et  Le^ 
ges  Mohhammeduj  etc.  (ibid.  1646)  i^MieceUaneorum  Sa- 
crorum  Libri  duo  (ibid.  1660) ; — Erercitatio  de  Cabbala 
Judaica  (ibid.  1660): — Nota  philologioo-theologicoe  i» 
raria  et  difficilia  Scrij)tttrm  loca  (ibid.  1664,  3  vols.). — 
Rosę,  New  Gen.  Biog,  Diet.  vLii,  169 ;  Hoefer,  A  our.  Bio^ 
Generale,  xxiii,  34.     (J.  W.  M.) 

Ha'dad,  a  name  which  occio^  with  considcrable 
confusion  of  form  in  the  Heb.  The  proper  orthography 
seems  to  be  T^rtf  Ifadad*  (acconling  to  Geseuius  from 
an  Arab.  root  signif^dng  to  break  forth  into  shoutft ;  but 
FUrst  makes  it ='^"|TC,  A  Imighty),  which  appears  in  Gen. 
xxxvi,  35,  36;  1  Chroń,  i,  46,  47,  50,  51  (in  all  which 
passages  it  is  rendered  by  the  SepL  'A^a^,  and  Vulg. 
Adad),  and  in  1  Kings  xi,  14-25  (where  the  Sept.  has 
'A^ap,Vulg.  Adad).  Tlie  other  forms  are  *Tnrr^  Cha-- 
dad'  (1  Chroń,  i,  30;  Sept.  Xo^a^,Vulg.  nadad)l^yi^ 
Iladar'  (Gen.  xxvi,  39;  Sept.  'Apa^,Vulg.  Adar,  EngL 
"Hadar"),  ^i^^n,  Chadar'  (Gen.  xxv,  15;  Sept  XoUv, 
Vulg.  and  EngL  Jfadar),  and  Tlij|,  Adad'  (1  Kings  xi, 
17;  Sept.  'A^ap,  Yulg.  Adad).  It  was  the  name  of  a 
Synan  idol,  and  was  thence  transferred  to  the  king,  as 
the  highest  of  earthly  authorities,  in  the  forms  Hadad, 
Bcn-hadad  ("  worahipper  of  Hadad"),  and  Hadad-ezer 
("  assisted  by  Hadad,"  Gesenius,  Thesaur.  p.  218).  The 
title  appears  to  have  been  an  official  one,  like  Pharaoh; 
and  perhaps  it  is  so  used  by  Nicolaus  Damascenus,  as 
quoted  by  Joscphus  (Ant.  vii, .5,  2),  in  reference  to  the 
S>Tiaii  king  who  aided  Hadadezer  (2  Sam.  viii,  5).  Jo- 
scphus appears  to  have  used  the  name  in  the  same  scnse^ 
where  hc  substitutes  it  for  Benhadad  (^1  nt.  ix,  8, 7,  com- 
pared  with  2  Kings  xiii,  24).     See  also  Hadai>-Rim- 

MON. 

1.  Adad  (q.  v.)  is  the  indigcnous  name  of  the  chief 
deity  of  the  S^Tians,  the  «u«,  ąccording  to  Macrobius 
{Satumal.  i,  23).  Moreover,  Pliny  {łJist.  Not.  xxxvii, 
11, 71),  speaking  of  remarkable  Stones  named  after  parta 
of  the  body,  mentions  some  called  "  Adadunephros,  ejus- 
dem  oculus  ac  digitus  dei;*"  and  adds,  "et  hic  colitur  a 
Syris."  He  is  aJso  called  'ASutSoc  i^aoi\ivc  Gtiijv  by 
Philo  Byblius  (in  Eusebii  Prttpar.  Etan.  i,  10).  The 
passage  of  He^ychius  which  Harduin  adduces  in  his 
notę  to  Pliny  conceming  the  worship  of  this  god  by  the 
Phr}'gian8,  Jabłoński  dedares  to  be  inadmissible  {De 
Ling.  Lycoomca,  \>.  64). 

This  Syrian  deity  claims  some  notice  here,  because 
his  name  is  most  probably  an  element  in  the  names  of 
the  Syrian  kings  Benhadad  and  Hadadezer.  More- 
ovcr,  several  of  the  older  commentators  have  endearorod 
to  find  this  deity  in  Isa.  Lwi,  17 ;  either  by  altering  the 
text  there  to  suit  the  name  given  by  Macrobius,  or  by 


HADAD  ! 

atlapdng  the  name  he  gires  to  his  interpretaHon  and  to 
the  reading  of  the  Hebrew,  fio  as  to  make  that  extract 
bear  testimony  to  a  god  Ackad  (q.  v.).  Michaelis  ha.H 
aigoed  at  eome  length  against  both  these  news :  and 
the  modem  commentaŁon,  such  as  Gesenius,  Hiuig, 
Bottcher  (in  Probm  AUegł.  Sdkrifterklar,),  and  Ewald, 
do  not  admit  the  nazne  of  any  deity  in  that  passage. — 
Kitto. 

2.  Hadar  (q.  ▼.)»  <^nc  of  ^^®  ^^  ^f  Ishmael  (Gen. 
xxv,  15;  1  Chion.  i,  80).  His  descendants  probably 
occupied  the  western  coast  of  the  Fenian  Gulf,  wherc 
the  names  AłUei  (Ptol.  vi,  7,  §  Id),  Ałtene,  and  Chatefd 
(PlijL  vi,  32)  bear  affinit}'  to  the  original  name. — Smith. 
See  Arabi.1. 

3.  H ADAD,  king  of  Edom,  the  son  of  Bedad,  and  suo 
eeasor  of  Iliuham:  he  establiahed  his  court  at  Avith, 
and  defeated  the  Midianites  in  the  inter\'ening  territory 
of  Moab  (Gen.  xxxvi,  35 ;  1  Chroń,  i,  46).  This  is  the 
only  one  of  the  ancient  kings  of  Edom  whoee  exploits 
are  recorded  by  Moees.     RC.  anto  1618.     See  AviTir. 

4.  Hadad,  another  king  of  Edom,  suocessor  of  Baal- 
Hanon :  he  established  his  palące  at  Pai,  and  his  wife'8 
name  was  Mehetebel  (1  Chroń,  i,  50).  He  is  called 
Hadar  in  Gen.  xxxvi,  39.  From  the  fact  that  with 
him  the  list  of  these  Edomitish  kings  closes,  it  may  be 
ooajectured  (Tumer^s  Compamon  to  Geneńsy  p.  326)  that 
he  lived  about  the  time  of  the  £xode,  and  in  that  case 
he  may  be  the  identical  king  of  Edom  who  refused  a 
passage  to  the  Israelites  (Numb.  xx,  U).  RC.  prób. 
1619 ;  certainly  antę  1093.     See  Pai. 

5.  Adad,  a  king  of  Syria,  who  reigned  in  Damasctis 
at  the  time  that  David  attacked  and  defeated  Hadad- 
ezer,  king  of  Zobah,  whom  he  marched  to  assist,  and  in 
wbase  defeat  he  shared.  RC.cir.l040.  This  fact  is  rc- 
cocded  in  2  Sam.  viii,  5,  but  the  name  of  the  king  is  not 
given.  It  is  supplied,  however,  by  Josephus  {Ant.  vii, 
5,  2),  who  repoTts,  after  Nicolas  of  Damascus,  that  he 
carried  saccors  to  Hadadezer  as  far  as  the  Euphrates, 
wliere  David  defeated  them  both ;  and  adds  other  par- 
tictdars  respecting  his  famę. — Kitto. 

6.  Hadad,  a  yoong  prince  of  the  royal  race  of  Edom, 
who,  when  his  oountiy  was  conquered  by  David,  con- 
trived,  in  the  heat  of  the  massacre  committed  by  Joab, 
to  tacape  with  some  of  his  father'8  8ervant.s,  or,  rather, 
was  carried  ofT  by  them  into  the  land  of  Midian.  RC. 
cir.  ICMO.  Thence  Hadad  went  into  the  deaert  of  Pa- 
lan  ("Midian,"  ver.  18),  and  eventuafly  procecded  to 
Egypt  (1  Kings  xi,  14  są. ;  in  ver.  17  the  name  is  given 
in  the  mutilated  form  n^H).  He  was  there  most  favor- 
ably  received  by  the  king,  who  assigned  him  an  estato 
and  establbhment  suited  to  his  rank,  and  even  gave 
him  in  marriage  the  sistor  of  his  own  oonsort,  by  whom 
he  had  a  son,  who  was  bmught  up  in  the  palące  with 
ihe  sons  of  Pharaoh.  Hadad  remained  in  Egypt  till 
aller  the  death  of  David  and  Joab,  when,  although  dis- 
snaded  by  Pharaoh,  he  retumed  to  his  own  country  in 
the  bope  of  recovcring  his  fathcr*s  throne  (1  Kings  xi, 
21,  22).  RC.  cir.  1012.  The  Scripture  docs  not  recortl 
the  resolŁ  of  this  attempt  further  than  by  mentioning 
him  as  one  of  the  troublers  of  Solomon*8  reign,  which 
implies  aome  measure  of  succeas  (see  Kitto's  Dailt/  Bibie 
fUmsł.  ad  loc.).  After  relating  these  facts  the  text  goes 
oo  to  mention  another  enemy  of  Solomon,  named  Rezin, 
and  then  adds  (ver.  25)  that  this  was  «  besides  the  mis- 
chief  that  Hadad  did;  and  he  abhorred  Israel,  and 
rdgned  over  Syria.'*  Our  ver8ion  seems  to  make  this 
apply  to  Rczin ;  but  the  Sept  refers  it  to  Hadad,  read- 
iiKg  Dn»,  Edom,  instead  of  DIK,  Aram  or  Spia^  and 
tbe  sense  wonld  certainly  be  impioved  by  this  rcading, 
inaamoch  as  it  supplies  an  apparent  omission ;  for  with- 
oot  łt  we  only  know  that  Hadad  left  Egypt  for  Edom, 
and  not  how  he  sucoeeded  there,  or  how  he  was  able  to 
troable  Solomon.  The  history  of  Hadad  is  certainly 
TCfy  obscore.  Adopting  the  Sept  reading,  some  con- 
dude  that  Pharaoh  used  his  interest  with  Solomon  to 
aOow  Hadad  to  reign  as  a  tiibutaiy  prince,  and  that  he 


HADAD-EZER 

nUimately  assertecl  his  independence.  Josephus,  how- 
ever,  seems  to  have  read  the  Hebrew  as  our  version 
does,  "Syria,"  not  "Edom."  He  says  {Ant,  viii,  7,  6) 
that  Hadad,  on  his  arrival  iu  Edom,  found  the  ter- 
ritory too  strongly  garrisoned  by  Soloroon's  troops  to 
aflbrd  any  hope  of  success.  He  therefore  pmceeded 
with  a  party  of  adherents  to  Syria,  where  he  was  well 
received  by  Rezin,  then  at  the  head  of  a  band  of  rob- 
bers,  and  with  his  assistance  seized  upon  a  part  of 
Syria  and  reigned  there.  If  this  be  correct,  it  musi 
hate  been  a  different  part  of  S\^a  from  that  in  which 
Rezin  himself  reigned,  for  it  is  certain,  from  ver.  24^ 
that  he  (Rczin)  did  reign  in  Damascus.  Carricres  sup- 
poses  that  Hadad  reigned  in  Syria  after  the  death  of 
Rezin ;  and  it  might  reconcUe  apparent  discrepancies 
to  suppose  that  two  kingdoms  were  established  (there 
were  morę  previou8ly),  both  of  which,  aflcr  the  death 
of  Rezin,  were  Consolidated  under  Hadad.  That  Hadad 
was  really  king  of  Syria  seems  to  be  rather  corroborated 
by  the  fact  that  every  subseąuent  king  of  S^Tia  Lb,  in 
the  Scripture,  called  Ben-Hadad,  "son  of  Hadad,"  and 
in  Josephus  simply  Hadad,  which  seems  to  denoto  that 
the  fbunder  of  the  dynasty  was  called  by  this  name. 
We  may  obsenre  that,  whether  we  read  Aram  or  Edom, 
it  must  be  nndezstood  as  applying  to  Hadad,  not  to  Re- 
zin (Pidorial  Bibie,  on  2  Kings  xi,  14) Kitto.    The 

identity  of  name  su^ests  a  common  origin  between 
the  Edomitish  and  Syrian  dj-nasties.-  Josephus,  in  the 
outset  of  his  account,  appears  to  cali  this  Hadad  by  the 
name  of  Ader.  In  any  case,  however,  the  preceding 
must  be  reganled  as  dutuict  persons  from  each  other 
(see  Hengstenberg,  Pentaiench,  ii,  288),  the  Ust  prob- 
ably being  the  son,  or,  rather,  grandson  of  No.  5.  See 
Syria. 

Hadad-e^zer  (Heb.  idL.  ^T^7?n>  ^dadis  his  help 
[see  Hadad,  No.  1] ;  Sept.  A^paś^rp  in  2  Sam.  viii,  but 
'A^api^ep  v.  r.  'ASaSiZfp  in  1  Kings  xi,  23 ;  Vulg.  A  dar- 
ezer  in  both  passages),  less  correctly  Hadare'zer  (Heb. 
!</.,  "^.JSli^n  [see  under  Hadad;  yet  some  MSS.  have 
Jfadadtzer  throughout] ,  2  Sara.  x,  16,  19  ^  1  ChrooL 
xviii,  8-10 ;  xix,  10, 19 ;  Sept  'Adpa^ap  v.  r.  'A^paa^dp, 
Vulg.  still  .1  darezer)j  king  of  the  Aramitish  state  Zobah, 
a  powerful  opponent  of  David.  He  was  defeated  by  the 
Israelites  in  his  first  campaign,  while  on  his  way  to  "  es- 
tabUsh  his  dominion"  (RC  cir.  1035)  iu  the  neighbor- 
hood  of  the  Euphrates,  with  a  great  loss  of  men,  war- 
chariots,  and  horses,  and  was  des|)oiled  of  many  of  his 
towns  (2  Sam.  viii,  3 ;  1  Chroń.  xviit,  3),  and  driven  with 
the  remnant  of  his  force  to  the  other  side  of  the  river 
(xix,  16).  The  golden  weapons  {'^\v.,  A.V.  "shidds 
of  gold")  captured  on  this  occasion,  a  thousand  in  num- 
ber,  were  taken  by  David  to  Jerusalem  (xviii,  7),  and 
dedicated  to  Jehovah.  The  foreign  arms  were  preserved 
in  the  Tempie,  and  were  long  known  as  king  David*s 
(1  Chroń,  xxiii,  9 ;  Cant.  iv,  4).  A  diver8ion  highiy 
senriceable  to  him  was  madę  by  a  king  of  Damascene^ 
Syria  [see  H.u>ad,  5],  who  compelled  David  to  tum 
his  arms  against  him  (2  Sam.  x,  6-14 ;  1  Chroń,  xix, 
6-14).  The  breathing-time  thus  afibrded  Hadadezer 
was  tumed  by  him  to  such  good  account  that  he  was 
ablc  to  accepŁ  the  subsidies  of  Hanun,  king  of  the  Am- 
monitcs,  and  to  take  a  Icading  part  in  the  confederacy 
forroed  by  that  monarch  against  David.  RC.  cir.  1034. 
The  first  army  brought  into  the  field  was  beaten  and  * 
put  to  flight  by  Abishai  and  Joab ;  but  Hadadezer,  not 
yet  discouraged,  went  into  the  countries  esBt  of  the  Eu- 
phrates, and  got  together  the  forccs  of  all  his  allies  and 
tributaries,  which  he  placed  under  the  command  of  Sho- 
bach,  his  generał.  The  army  was  a  large  one,  as  is  evi- 
dcnt  from  the  numbers  of  the  slain ;  and  it  was  espe- 
cially  strong  in  horse-soldiers  (I  Chroń,  xix,  18).  They 
cn)88cd  the  Euphrates,  joined  the  other  Syrians,  anden- 
camped  at  a  place  called  Helam  (q.  v.).  To  confront  so 
formidable  an  array,  David  took  the  field  in  person,  and 
in  one  great  victory  so  completely  broke  the  power  of 


HADADuRIMMON 


8 


HADDOCK 


Hadadezer,  that  aU  the  smali  tiibatary  princes  seized 
the  opportanity  of  throwing  off  hia  yoke,  of  abandoning 
the  Ammonitea  to  their  fate,  and  of  submitting  ąuietly 
to  David,  whoae  power  was  thus  extendecl  to  the  £u- 
phrates  (2  Sam.  x,  15-19;  2  Chroń,  xix,  1&-19). 

But  one  of  Hadarezer'8  mom  immediate  retainen, 
Rezon  be&-K1iadah,  niade  his  escape  from  the  army, 
and,  gathering  round  him  some  ftigidres  like  himself, 
formed  them  into  one  of  those  marauding,  laraging 
"banda**  C^V^^)  which  found  a  oongenial  refuge  in  the 
thinly  peopled  districta  between  the  Jordan  and  the 
Euphrates  (2  Kings  v, 2:  1  Chroń.  v,  18-22).  Making 
Łheii  way  to  Damascus,  they  poswssed  themselres  of 
the  city.  RC  dr.  960.  Rezon  became  king,  and  at 
once  began  to  avenge  the  loas  of  his  coontiymen  by  the 
oourse  of  *^  mischief*  to  Israel  which  he  parsued  down 
to  the  end  of  Sokmion*s  reign,  and  which  is  summed  up 
in  the  emphatic  words,  *^  He  was  an  adrersary  (a  *  Sa- 
tan*)  to  Israel''  .  .  .  .  "he  abhorred  larad**  (1  Kings  xi, 
28-25).— Kitto;  Smith. 

Ha^dad-rlm^mon  (Heb.  Hódad''Rimmon%  inn 
^ia*^,  the  names  of  two  Syrian  idola ;  Scpt  Konirdę 
pota»voc,Vii]g.  Adadremmon),  the  name  of  a  place  in  the 
▼alley  of  Megiddo,  alluded  to  in  Zech.  xii,  11  as  a  type 
of  the  futurę  penitence  of  the  Jews;  probably  by  a  pro- 
yerbial  expre8Bion  from  the  lamentation  for  Josiah,  who 
was  mortally  wounded  not  far  from  this  spot  (2  Chroń. 
xxxv,  22-25).  (There  is  a  treatise  by  Wichmanshau- 
aen,  DepUmctu  Hadadr.  in  the  Nov,  Thet.  TheoL-phiL  i, 
llOi;  exegetical  remarks  on  the  same  text  have  also 
been  written  in  Dutch  byYeimast  [Gonda,  1792, 1794], 
in  German  by  Mauritii  [Rost  1764, 1772],  and  in  Latin 
by  Froriep  [Erf.  1776].)  According  to  Jerome  {Cam- 
ment,  on  Ze^.  L  c.  and  Hos,  i),  it  was  aflerwaids  callcd 
Mcmmicmcpolia  (see  Reland,  Paltest,  p.  891),  which,  ac- 
cording to  the  Jerui,  liitu,  lay  17  Rom.  miles  from  CĆsa- 
rea,  and  10  from  Esdraelon ;  being  situated,  according 
to  Dr.  Robinson  (new  ed.  o{  Raeardusi,  iii,  118),  a  little 
aouth  of  Megiddo  (now  Lejjun)  (see  Bibliotkeca  Sacra^ 
1844,  p.  220).  The  name  has  been  thought  to  be  de- 
rived  from  xhe  woiship  of  the  idol  Hadad-rimmon  (Hit- 
zig  on  laa.  xvii,  9 ;  Morers,  PkOn,  p.  297) ;  but,  accord- 
ing to  the  Targum  of  Jonathan  (foUowcd  by  Jarchi),  it 
is  an  ellipsis  for  Hadad,  son  of  Tab-rtmnion,  the  alleged 
opponent  of  Ahab  at  Ramoth-Gilead.  As  it  contains 
the  names  of  two  principal  S>nńan  deities,  it  may  have 
been  an  old  Syrian  stronghold,  and  hence  Josiah  may 
here  hBve  madę  his  last  stand  in  defence  of  the  plain  of 
Esdraelon.  Such  a  site,  therefore,  does  not  ill  agree 
with  the  position  of  the  modem  Rurmnaneh,  a  rillage 
''at  the  foot  of  the  Megiddo  hills,  in  a  notch  or  vaUey 
about  1|  hour  S.  of  tell  Metzellim'*  (Yan  de  Yelde,  Me- 
moiTf  p.  338 ;  oomp.  Narratire,  i,  355 ;  De  Saulcy,  Dead 
Sea,  ii,81 1).  Schwaiz^s  attempt  (Palest.  p.  159)  to  iden- 
tify  Hadad-Rimmon  with  Gath-Rimmon  of  Josh.  xxi, 
25,  as  the  Kefar  Uthni  of  the  Talmud  (Gitimj  fol.  76, 
a),  and  a  present  Kafer  Guth,  said  by  htm  to  be  located 
idwuŁ  24  miles  from  Lejjun,  beyond  Sepphoris,  is  with- 
out  foundation. 

Ha'dar,  a  various  reading  of  two  Heb.  names.  See 
abo  Ets-Hadar. 

1.  Ciiadar'  (^^H,  perhaps  charnber ;  Sept.  Xo^Sav ; 
Tulg.  lladar),  a  son  of  Ishmad  (Gen.  xxv,  15) ;  yrrit- 
ten  in  1  Chroń,  i,  80,  Chadad'  (nnn,  XovŁavj  Hadad) ; 
but  Gesenius  supposes  the  former  to  be  the  true  reading 
of  the  name.  It  has  not  been  identiiied,  in  a  satisfac- 
tory  way,  with  the  appellation  of  any  tribe  or  place  in 
Arabia,  or  on  the  Syrian  frontier ;  but  names  identical 
with,  or  vciy  closely  resembling  it,  are  not  uiicommon 
in  those  parts,  and  may  contaiu  traces  of  the  Ishmael- 
itish  tribe  spning  from  Hadar.  The  mountain  Iladad^ 
belonging  to  Teymk  [see  Tema],  on  the  borders  of  the 
Syrian  desert,  north  of  el-Medlneh,  is  perhaps  the  most 
likely  to  be  correctly  identiiied  with  the  ancient  dwell- 
ings  of  this  tribe;  it  stands  among  a  group  of  names 


of  the  sons  of  Ishmael,  containing  Domah,  Kedar,  ani 
TenuL— Smith,  s.  v.    See  Hadad,  2. 

2.  Hadar'  {^^^1,  perh.  ornament ;  Sept  'Apdi  v.  £ 
'Apo^;  Vulg.  Adar\  one  of  the  Edomidsh  kings,  suc- 
oessorofBaal-Hananben-Achbor  (Gen.  xxxvi,  89);  and, 
if  we  may  so  understand  the  statement  of  ver.  81,  about 
contemporary  with  SauL  The  name  of  his  city,  and 
the  name  and  genealog)'  of  his  wife,  are  given.  In  the 
paiallel  list  in  1  Chroń,  i,  he  appears  as  Hadad.  We 
know  from  another  source  (1  Kings  xi,  14,  etc.)  that 
Hadad  was  one  of  the  names  of  the  royal  famUy  of 
Edom.  Indeed,  it  occurs  in  Uiis  ver>''  list  (Gen.  xxxvi, 
85).— Smith,  s.  v.    See  Hadad,  4. 

Hadare^ser,  the  form  of  the  name  of  the  town 
mentioned  in  the  account  of  David*6  S^nian  campaign, 
as  given  in  2  Sam.  x,  and  in  all  its  occurrences  in  the 
Heb.  text  (as  well  as  in  both  MSS.  of  the  Sq)t.  and  in 
Josephus),  except  2  Sam.  Wii,  8-12 ;  1  Kings  xi,  28, 
where  it  is  morę  correctly  callcd  Hadadezeu  (q.  v.). 

Hadas.    See  Myetfle. 

Had^aahah  (Heb.  Chada*kah\  myi,new;  Sept. 
'Aiatrd  v.  r.  *Ada9av),  a  city  in  the  valley  of  Judah, 
mentioned  in  the  sccond  group  between  Zenan  and  Mig- 
dal-gad  (Josh.  xv,  87).  It  has  generally  been  thought 
(Winer,  Realw,  &  v.)  to  be  the  same  with  the  Adeua 
(A^aod)  of  Josephus  (Ant.  xii,  10, 5)  and  the  Apocry- 
pha  (1  Mace  vii,  40, 45),  and  likewise  of  the  Onoma^ti" 
oon  (s.  V.),  which,  however,  must  have  lain  rather  in  the 
momitains  of  Ephraim,  apparently  near  the  modem  vil- 
lage  Surda.  See  Adasa.  Schwarz  (Phys.  Detcript,  of 
PaL  p.  108)  inclines  to  identify  it  with  a  little  village 
ei-Ckadcu,  stated  by  him  to  lie  between  Migdal  and 
Aahkelon,  the  el-Jora  of  Yaii  de  Velde's  Afap.  Accord- 
ing to  the  Mishna  (£rub.  v,  6),  it  anciently  contained 
50  houses  only  (Reland,  Pcdatt.  p.  701).    See  Judah, 

TSIBE  OF. 

Hada8''aah  (Heb.//arfa«aA',r\C'l8TI,»iyr<&;  comp. 
the  Gr.  names  3/yrfo,  etc. ;  Sept.  omits,  Vulg.  Edusa)^ 
the  earlier  Jewish  name  of  Estiikr  (Esth.  ii,  7).  Ge- 
senius (TheMur,  p.  866)  suggests  that  it  is  identical 
with  'Arootra,  the  name  of  the  daughter  of  Cyrus  (He- 
rocL  iii,  188, 184). 

Hadat^tah  (Heb.  Chadattah',  hP)*?)?,,  a  Chaldaizing 
form=fMw;  Sept.  omits,  Tulg.  nota)j  according  to  the 
A.V.  one  of  the  towns  of  Judah  in  the  extremc  south — 
"Hazor,  Hadattah,  and  Kerioth,  and  Hezron,"  etc.  (Josh. 
XV,  25) ;  but  tbe  Masoretic  accents  of  the  Hebrew  con- 
nect  the  word  with  that  preceding  it,  as  if  it  were  Ha- 
zor-chadattah,  L  e.  New  Hazor,  in  distinction  ftom  the 
place  of  the  same  name  in  ver.  23.  This  reading  is  ex- 
pressly  sanctioned  by  Eusebius  and  Jerome,  who  speak 
(Onomasi,  s.  v.  Asor)  of  "  New  Hazor**  as  lying  in  their 
day  to  the  east  of  and  near  Ascalon.  (See  also  Reland, 
Palast,  p.  708.)  But  Ascalon,  as  Robinson  has  pointed 
out  {Researches,  new  ed.  ii,  84,  notę),  is  in  the  Shefelah, 
and  not  in  the  south,  and  would,  if  uamed  in  Joshua  at 
all,  be  included  in  the  second  division  of  the  list,  begiu- 
ning  at  ver.  88,  instead  of  where  it  is,  not  far  from  Ke- 
desh.— Smith,  s.  v.  Still  the  total  (29)  in  ver.  32  re- 
ąuires  as  much  abbreviation  in  the  enumerateil  list  of 
cities  in  this  group  as  possible.    See  I1azor-Hadattau« 

Haddah.    See  En-haddah. 

Haddock,  Ciias.  B.,  D.D.,  a  Congregational  min- 
ister, was  bom  in  SaUsbui>',  N.  H.,  in  the  summcr  of 
1796.  He  graduated  at  Dartmouth  College  in  1816. 
Immediately  aiter  graduating,  he  entered  Andovcr  The- 
ological  Seminary,  where  he  remained  two  years.  He 
was  then  compelled  to  desist  from  his  studies,  and  madę 
a  joumey  to  the  South.  H5  retumed  in  1819  invigora- 
ted  in  hcalth,  and  was  at  once  chosen  the  first  professor 
of  rhetoric  in  Dartmouth  CoUege,  which  position  he 
held  tiU  1838,  when  he  was  chosen  professor  of  intel- 
lectual  philosophy.  In  1850  he  receivcd  the  appoint- 
ment  of  charge  d^affaires  at  the  court  of  Portugal,  which 


HADES  i 

he  Ikdd  tin  185S.  He  spent  the  remainder  of  his  life  at 
West  LebttDoo.  For  about  twelve  yeais  he  preached  at 
White  River  Yillage,  Yt,  and  for  seyeral  yean  he  sup- 
plied  the  pulpit  at  the  upper  and  lower  churches  oT 
Konrich,  Yt.  For  a  year  or  two  he  preached  at  West 
Lebanon,  and  for  the  last  two  jean  and  a  half  of  his  life 
be  preached  at  Queecby  village,  Yt  He  died  at  West 
Lebanon,  N.  H^  Jan.  Id,  1861.  As  a  preacher  he  was 
always  aooeptable,  and  never  morę  so  than  during  the 
last  year  of  his  Me^—CangregaHonal  Ouarterijff  1861,  p. 

2ia. 

Had^  a  Greek  word  (jf^ifc*  deriyed,  according  to 
the  beat  established  and  most  generally  received  ety- 
nwlogr,  ttom  privative  a  and  iOfXVf  hence  often  written 
dtitię),  means  sdrietly  tchai  i»  out  o/sight,  or  posńbly,  if 
applied  to  a  person,  whatputt  out  o/sight,  In  earłier 
Greek  this  last  was,  if  not  its  only,  at  least  its  prerailing 
application;  in  Homer  it  occurs  only  as  the  perBonal 
designation  of  Flutc,  the  lord  of  the  inrisible  world,  and 
wbo  was  probably  so  designated — ^not  from  being  him- 
sdf  inTisible,  for  that  belonged  to  him  in  common  with 
tlie  heatben  gods  generally— bat  Irom  his  power  to  ren- 
der  moTtals  invisible — the  inrisible-making  deity  (see 
Cmsins,  Uomnic  Lexie(m,  s.  y.).  The  Greeks,  however, 
in  piocess  of  time  abandoned  this  use  of  hadesj  and  wheii 
the  Greek  Scnptures  were  written  the  word  was  scarce- 
ly  ever  applied  ezoept  to  the  place  of  the  departed.  In 
the  rlassical  writers,  therefore,  it  is  used  to  denote  Or- 
auj  or  the  infemal  regiona.  In  the  Greek  yersion  of 
the  Old  Testament  it  is  the  common  rendering  for  the 
Heb.  ^ist^,  sA«d/,  thotigh  in  the  form  there  often  ap- 
pean  a  remnant  of  the  original  personified  application ; 
lor  example,  in  Gen.  xxxyii,  35,  **^  will  go  down  to  my 
son,"  cic  fcov,  i.  e.  into  the  abodes  or  house  of  hadcs 
{86/iovc  or  Oijrov  being  undeistood).  This  elliptical 
form  was  common  both  in  the  classics  and  in  Scripture, 
eyen  after  kades  was  neyer  thought  of  but  as  a  region 
or  place  of  abode. 

1.  The  appropriation  of  hades  by  the  Greek  interpret^ 
ecs  aa  an  equiyalent  for  skeol  may  undoubtedly  be  taken 
as  eyidence  that  there  was  a  close  agieement  in  the 
ideas  conreyed  by  the  t¥ro  terms  as  currently  under- 
Btood  by  the  Greeks  and  Hebrews  respectiyely — a  sub- 
standal,  but  not  an  entiie  agreement ;  for  in  tliis,  as  well 
as  in  other  terms  which  related  to  subjects  bearing  on 
things  spiritual  and  divine,  the  different  religions  of 
Jew  and  Gentile  necessarily  exercised  a  modifying  in- 
fluence ;  ^  that  eyen  when  the  same  term  was  employ- 
ed,  and  with  referenoe  generally  to  the  samo  thiiig, 
shJMles  of  difference  could  not  but  exist  in  respect  to 
the  ideas  undentood  to  be  indicated  by  them.  Two  or 
thiee  points  stand  prorainently  out  in  the  yiews  enter- 
tained  by  the  ancients  respecting  hades:  furst,  that  it 
was  the  common  receptade  of  departed  spirits,  of  good 
as  wdl  as  bad ;  second,  that  it  was  diyided  into  two 
oompartments,  the  one  containing  an  Elysium  of  bliss 
for  the  good,  the  other  a  Tartarus  of  sorrow  and  punish- 
ment  for  the  wicked;  and,thirdly,  that  in  respect  to  its 
locality,  it  lay  uuder  ground,  in  the  mid-regions  of  the 
eaith.  So  far  as  these  points  are  co^cemed,  theie  is  no 
materiał  difference  between  the  Greek  hades  and  the 
H^rew  sheoL  This,  too,  was  yiewed  as  the  common 
noeptade  of  the  departed:  patriarchs  and  righteoiis 
men  spoke  of  going  into  it  at  their  deoease,  and  the 
most  ungodly  and  worthless  characters  are  represented 
aa  finding  in  it  their  proper  home  (Gen.  xlii,  88;  Psa. 
cxxxix,8;  Hos.xiii,U;  Isa.  xly,  9,  etc).  Atwofolddi- 
yision  also  in  the  state  of  the  departed,  corresponding 
to  the  different  poaitions  they  occupied,  and  the  courses 
they  pursued  on  earth,  Is  clearly  implied  in  the  reyela- 
tions  of  Scripture  on  the  subject,  though  with  the  He- 
brews less  prominently  exhibited,  and  without  any  of 
tłie  fantastic  and  pueiile  inyentions  of  heathen  my thol- 
ogy.  Yet  the  lact  of  a  real  distinction  in  the  state  of 
the  departed,  correq)onding  to  their  spiritual  oonditions 
0Q  earth,  is  in  yarious  passages  not  obscurely  indicated. 


'  HADES 

Diyine  retribution  is  represented  as  punuing  the  wioked 
after  they  haye  lefl  this  world — pursuing  them  eyen 
into  the  lowest  realms  of  theol  (Deut  xxxii,  22 ;  Amos 
ix,  2) ;  and  the  bitterest  shame  and  humiliation  are  de- 
scribed  as  awaiting  there  the  most  prosperous  of  this 
world's  inhabitants,  if  they  haye  abused  their  prosper^ 
ity  to  the  dishonor  of  God  and  the  injury  of  their  fel- 
low-men  (I^Sa.  xlix,  14 «  Isa.  xiy).  On  the  other  hand, 
the  righteous  had  hope  in  his  death ;  he  could  rest  as- 
sured  that,  in  the  yiewless  regions  of  gheol,  as  well  as 
amid  the  changing  yicissitudes  of  earth,  the  right  hand 
of  God  would  sustain  him  \  eyen  there  he  would  enter 
into  peace,  walking  still,  as  it  were,  in  his  uprigbtness 
(Proy.  xiv,  32 ;  Psa.  cxxxix,  8 ;  Isa.  lyii, 2).  That  sheoi, 
Uke  hades,  was  conoeiyed  of  as  a  lower  region  in  oom- 
parison  with  the  present  world,  is  ao  manifest  from  the 
whole  language  of  Scripture  on  the  subject,  that  it  is 
uunecessary  to  point  to  particular  example8;  in  respect 
to  the  good  as  well  as  the  bad,  the  passagc  into  sheol 
was  contempUted  as  a  dcscent ;  and  the  name  was  some- 
times  used  as  a  synonym  for  the  yery  lowest  depths 
(I>eut.  xxxii,  22;  Job  xi,  7-9).  This  is  not,  howeyer, 
to  be  understood  as  affirming  anything  of  the  actual  lo- 
cality of  diaembodied  spirits;  for  there  caii  be  no  doubt 
that  the  language  here,  as  in  other  cases,  was  deriyed 
from  the  merę  appearances  of  things ;  and  a»  the  body  at 
death  was  committed  to  the  lower  parts  of  the  earth,  so 
the  soul  was  conceired  of  as  also  going  downwards.  But 
that  this  was  not  designed  to  mark  the  local  boundaries 
of  the  region  of  departed  spirits  may  certainly  be  in- 
ferred  from  other  expre88ions  used  regarding  them— aa 
that  God  took  them  to  himself ;  or  that  he  would  giye 
them  to  see  the  path  of  life ;  that  he  would  make  them 
dweU  in  his  house  foreyer;  or,  morę  generally  still,  that 
the  spirit  of  a  man  goeth  upwards  (Gen.  v,  24 ;  Psa.  xyi, 
1 1 ;  xxiii,  6 ;  Eccles.  iii,  21 ;  xii,  7).  During  the  old  dis- 
pensations  there  was  still  no  expre8s  rcvelation  from 
heayen  respecting  the  precise  condition  or  extenud  re» 
lationships  of  departed  spirits ;  the  time  had  not  yet 
come  for  such  specific  intimations;  and  the  language 
employed  was  oonsequently  of  a  somewhat  vague  and 
yaciUating  naturę,  such  as  spontancously  arose  from 
oommon  feelings  and  impressions.  For  the  same  rea- 
son,  the  ideas  entertaiued  even  by  God*s  people  upon  the 
subject  were  predominantly  aombre  and  gloomy.  Sheol 
wore  no  uiyiting  aspect  to  their  view,  no  morę  than 
hades  to  the  superstitious  heathen ;  the  very  men  who 
belieyed  that  God  would  accompany  them  thithcr  and 
keep  them  from  evil,  contemplated  the  state  as  one  of 
darkneas  and  silence,  and  shrunk  from  it  with  instinctiye 
horror,  or  gave  hearty  thanks  when  they  found  them- 
selves  for  a  time  deliyered  from  it  (Psa.  vi,  5 ;  xxx,  8, 
9;  Job  iii,  18  sq.;  Isa.  xxxyiii,  18).  The  reason  was 
that  they  had  only  generał  assurances,  but  no  specifio 
light  on  the  subject;  and  their  comfort  rather  lay  in 
oyerleapmg  the  gulf  of  sheol,  and  rixiiig  their  tlioughts 
on  the  better  resurrection  some  time  to  come,  than  in 
anything  they  could  definitely  promise  themselyes  be- 
tween death  and  the  resurrection-mom. 

In  this  lay  one  important  point  of  difference  between 
the  Jewish  and  the  heathen  hades,  originated  by  the 
diyeisc  spirit  of  the  two  religions,  that  to  the  believing 
Hebrew  alone  the  sojoum  in  sheol  appeared  that  only 
of  a  temporary  and  iutcrmediate  existence.  The  hea- 
then hail  no  prospect  beyond  its  shailowy  realms;  its 
bars  for  him  were  etenial;  and  the  idea  of  a  resurrec- 
tion was  utterly  strange  alike  to  his  religion  and  his 
philoeophy.  But  it  was  in  conuection  with  the  pros- 
pect of  a  resurrection  from  the  dead  that  all  hope  form- 
ed  itself  in  the  breasts  of  the  truć  ])c<>|)le  of  (iod.  As 
this  alone  could  effect  the  reyersion  of  tlie  evil  brouglit 
in  by  sin,  and  really  destroy  the  destniyer,  so  nothing 
less  was  announced  in  that  tirat  ])romisc  which  gavc  as- 
surance  of  the  crushing  of  the  temptcr ;  and  thougli  as  to 
its  naturę  but  dimly  apprehendcd  by  the  eye  of  faith,  it 
still  necessarily  formed,  as  to  the  rcality,  the  grcat  ob- 
ject  of  desire  and  expectatiou.    Hence  it  is  said  of  the 


HADES 


10 


HADES 


patriarcha  Łhat  Łhey  looked  for  a  better  country,  which  is 
a  heayenly  one ;  and  of  thoae  who  in  later  times  resbted 
unio  blood  for  the  truth  of  God,  that  they  did  it  to  ob- 
tain  a  better  resurrection  (Heb.  xi,  16, 85).  Hence,  too, 
the  spirit  of  prophecy  conAdently  proclaimed  the  anival 
of  a  time  wheu  the  dead  should  ariae  and  ńng,  when 
sheol  itaelf  should  be  destmyed,  and  many  of  its  mmates 
be  brought  forth  to  the  poeaewion  of  everUsting  life 
(Isa.  xxvi,  19;  Hos.  xiii,  14;  Dan.  xii,  2).  Yet  again, 
in  apostoHc  times,  Paul  represcnta  this  aa  emphatically 
the  pTomise  madę  by  God  to  the  fathers,  to  the  realiza- 
tion  of  which  his  countrymen  as  with  one  heart  were 
hoping  to  come  (Acta  xxvi,  7) ;  and  Josephus,  in  like 
manner,  testilies  of  aU  but  the  smali  Sadducaean  faction 
of  them,  that  they  believed  in  a  resurrection  to  honor 
and  blcBsing  for  thoae  who  had  lived  righteously  in  this 
life  (Atit.  xviii,  1,  8).  This  hopo  necessarily  cast  a 
gleara  of  light  across  the  darkncss  of  hades  for  the  Is- 
raelite,  which  was  altogether  miknown  to  the  Greek. 
Closely  connected  with  it  was  another  difference  also 
of  con&iderable  moment,  viz.,  that  Łhe  Hebrew  sheol  was 
not,  like  the  (ientilc  hadesj  riewed  as  an  altogether  sep- 
arate  and  independent  region,  withdrawn  from  the  pri- 
mal  fountain  of  life,  and  subject  to  another  dominion 
than  the  world  of  sense  and  time.  Pluto  was  ever  re- 
ganled  by  the  heathen  as  the  rival  of  the  king  of  earth 
and  hcaven ;  the  two  domains  were  essentially  antago- 
nistic  But  to  the  morę  enlightened  Hebrew  there  was 
but  one  Lord  of  the  living  and  the  dead ;  the  chambers 
of  sheol  were  as  much  open  to  his  eye  and  subject  to  his 
control  as  the  bodies  and  habitations  of  men  on  earth ; 
BO  that  to  go  into  the  rcalms  of  the  deceased  was  but  to 
pass  from  one  department  to  another  of  the  same  all- 
embracing  sway  of  Jebovah.     See  Sheou 

2.  Such  was  the  generał  state  of  belief  and  expecta- 
tłon  rogarding  h(ides  or  sheol  in  Old-Testament  times. 
With  the  iutrodiiction  of  the  Gospel  a  new  light  breaks 
in,  which  shoots  its  rays  also  through  the  realms  of  the 
departed,  and  relieves  the  gloom  in  which  they  had  still 
appeared  shrouded  to  the  view  of  the  faithfuL  The 
term  hades^  however,  is  of  comparatiyely  rare  occurrence 
in  New-Testament  scripture;  in  our  Lord's  own  dis- 
couTses  it  is  fouiid  only  thrice,  and  on  two  of  the  occa- 
sions  it  Ls  used  in  a  somewhat  rhetorical  manner,  by 
way  of  contrast  with  the  region  of  life  and  blessing.  He 
said  of  Cai^emaum,  that  from  bcing  exalted  unto  hearen 
it  should  be  brought  down  to  ha(^s  (Matt  xi,  23)— that 
is,  plainly,  from  the  highest  point  of  fancied  or  of  real 
clevation  to  the  lowest  abasemcnt.  Of  that  spiritual 
kingdom,  also,  or  chiurch,  which  he  was  going  to  estab- 
lish  on  earth,  he  affirmed  that "  the  gates  ot  hades  should 
not  prevail  against  it'*  (Matt,  xvi,  18),  which  is  all  one 
with  saying  that  it  should  be  i)erpctuai  Hades  is  eon- 
templatcd  as  a  kind  of  realm  or  kingdom,  accustomed, 
like  earthly  kingdoms  in  the  Kast,  to  hołd  its  council- 
chamber  at  the  gates;  and  whatever  mcasurcs  might 
there  be  taken,  whatever  plota  devised,  they  should  nev- 
er  succeed  in  overtumiug  the  foimdatious  of  Christ*s 
kingdom,  or  effcctually  marring  its  intcrcsts.  In  both 
these  passages  hades  is  placed  by  our  Lord  in  an  antag- 
onisiic  relation  to  his  cauae  among  men,  although,  from 
the  manner  in  which  the  woni  is  employed,  no  very 
defiiiite  couclusions  could  be  drawn  from  them  as  to  the 
naturc  and  position  of  hades  itsclf.  But  in  another  pas- 
sagc — the  only  one  in  which  any  indication  is  given  by 
our  Lord  of  the  state  of  its  inhabitant»— it  is  most  dis- 
tinctly  and  closely  associated  with  the  doom  and  misery 
of  the  lost :  "  In  hades^"  it  is  said  of  the  rich  man  in  the 
parable,  ••  he  lifted  up  his  eyes,  being  in  torments"  (Lukę 
xvi,  23).  The  soiU  of  Lazarus  is,  no  doubt,  also  repre- 
lentcd  as  being  so  far  within  the  bounds  of  the  same 
region  that  he  could  be  descried  and  spoken  with  by 
the  sufTerer.  Still,  he  was  representcd  as  sharing  no 
comraon  fate  with  the  other,  but  as  occupying  a  region 
ahut  offfrom  all  intercommunion  with  that  assigned  to 
the  wicked,  and,  so  far  from  being  held  in  a  sort  of  dun- 
geon-coniinemeut,  as  reposing  in  Abraham's  bosom,  in 


an  abode  where  angels  risit  With  this  alao  agrees  wh«t 
our  Lord  said  of  his  own  temporary  sojoum  among  the 
dead,  when  on  the  eve  of  his  departing  thither— "  To- 
day," said  he,  in  his  reply  to  the  prayer  of  the  penitent 
male&ctor,  **  shalt  thou  be  with  me  in  paradise"  (Lukę 
xxiii,  43).  But  paradise  was  the  proper  region  of  life 
and  blessing,  not  of  gloom  and  forgetfulness ;  originaHy 
it  was  the  home  and  heritage  of  man  as  created  in  the 
image  of  God ;  and  when  Christ  now  named  the  place 
whither  he  was  going  with  a  redeemed  sinner  paradisą 
it  bespoke  that  already  there  was  an  undoing  of  the 
evil  of  sin,  that  for  all  who  are  Christ^s  there  b  an  actual 
recoyery  immediately  after  death,  and  as  regards  the 
better  part  of  their  natures,  of  what  was  lost  by  the  dia- 
obedience  and  nun  of  the  faU.    See  Paradise. 

But  was  not  Christ  himself  in  hades?  Did  not  the 
apostle  Peter  on  the  day  of  Pentecost  apply  to  him  the 
words  of  David  in  Psa.  xvi,  in  which  it  was  said, "  Thou 
w^ilt  not  leave  my  soul  in  hades^  ncither  wilt  thou  suffer 
thiue  Holy  One  to  see  corruption,**  and  argue  apparent- 
ly  that  the  soul  of  Christ  must  have  indeed  gone  to 
hades,  but  only  could  not  be  allowcd  to  continue  there 
(Acta  ii,  27-81)?  £ven  ao,  however,  it  would  but  eon- 
oem  the  application  of  a  name ;  for  if  the  language  of 
the  apostle  must  be  undeistood  as  implying  that  our 
Lofd's  soul  was  in  hades  between  death  and  the  resur- 
rection, it  still  was  hades  as  having  a  paradise  within 
4ts  bosom ;  so  that,  knowing  from  his  own  lips  what  sort 
of  a  receptacle  it  afforded  to  the  disembodied  spirit  of 
Jesus,  we  need  care  little  about  the  mcre  name  by  which, 
in  a  generał  way,  it  might  be  designated.  But  th« 
apostle  Peter,  it  must  be  rcmembered,  docs  not  cali  it 
hades ;  he  merely  qugtes  an  Old-Testamcnt  p&ssage,  in 
which  hades  is  mentioned,  as  a  passage  that  had  its  ver- 
ification  in  Christ ;  and  the  language  of  course  in  thia, 
as  in  other  prophetical  passages,  was  spoken  from  an 
Old-Testamcnt  point  of  view,  and  must  be  rcad  in  the 
light  which  the  revclations  of  the  Gospel  have  cast  over 
the  state  and  prospects  of  the  souL  We  may  even, 
however,  go  farther ;  for  the  Psalmist  himself  docs  not 
strictly  affirm  the  soul  of  the  Holy  One  to  have  gone  to 
hades ;  his  words  precisely  rendered  are,  **  Thou  wilt  not 
leave  (or  abandon)  my  soul  to  A/jrfw"— that  is,  give  it 
up  as  a  prey  to  the  power  or  domain  of  the  ncther  world. 
It  is  rather  a  negative  than  a  positire  assertion  regard- 
ing  our  Lord^s  connection  with  hades  that  is  contained 
in  the  passage,  and  nothing  can  fairly  be  argued  from 
it  as  to  the  local  habitation  or  actual  state  of  his  disem- 
bodied spirit.     See  Inti^irmediate  State. 

The  only  other  passages  in  the  New  Testament  in 
which  mention  is  madę  of  hades  are  in  Revelation — eh. 
i,  18,  where  the  glorified  Kedeemer  dcciarcs  that  he  haa 
the  keys  of  death  and  of  hades;  eh.  vi,  8,  where  death 
is  symbolized  as  a  rider,  smiting  all  around  him  with 
weapons  of  destniction,  and  hades  following  to  rcceive 
the  eouls  of  the  slain;  eh.  xx,  18, 14,  where  death  and 
hades  are  both  represented  as  givłng  up  the  dead  that 
were  in  them,  and  aAeni'ard8  as  bcing  themselves  cast 
into  the  lakę  of  fire,  which  is  the  sccond  death.  In  ev- 
cry  one  of  these  passages  hades  stands  in  a  dark  and  for- 
bidding  connection  with  death— vcr)'  unlike  that  asso- 
ciation  with  ])aradise  and  Abraham'8  bofom  in  which 
our  Lord  exhibited  the  receptacle  of  his  o\iii  and  hia 
l)eople*8  souls  to  the  eye  of  faith ;  and  not  only  fo,  but 
in  one  of  them  it  is  expressly  as  an  ally  of  death  in  the 
execution  of  judgment  that  hades  is  represented,  while 
in  another  it  appears  as  an  accursed  thing,  consigncd  to 
the  lakę  of  fire.  In  short,  it  seems  as  if  in  the  j^rogrcas 
of  (iod*8  dispensations  a  separation  had  c<«me  to  be  madę 
between  elements  that  originally  were  mingiod  tngether 
— as  if,  from  the  time  that  Christ  brought  life  and  im- 
mortality  to  light,  the  distinction  in  the  next  world  as 
well  as  this  was  broadened  between  the  8avcd  and  the 
lost;  so  that  hades  was  henceforth  appropriated,  both  in 
the  name  and  in  the  reality,  to  those  who  were  to  be  re- 
senred  in  darkness  and  misery  to  the  judgment  of  the 
great  day,  and  other  names,  with  other  and  brighter 


HADES 


11 


HADORAM 


ideaaiy  were  employed  to  desigiiate  the  intermediate  rest- 
ing-place  of  the  redeemed.  It  was  meet  that  it  shoiild 
be  ao ;  for  by  the  penonal  work  and  mediation  of  Christ 
the  wbole  Church  of  God  rosę  to  a  higher  condition ; 
old  things  jiaaaed  away,  all  things  became  new;  and  it 
is  but  leasonable  to  suppose  that  the  change  in  some 
degree  extended  to  the  occupaiits  of  the  intermediate 
ttate— the  saved  becoming  morę  enlarged  in  the  posses- 
ńon  of  Uis  and  gloiy,  the  loBt  morę  stmk  in  anguish 
and  de^Mir.     See  Dilvtii. 

3.  Such  being  the  naturę  of  the  scriptural  representa- 
tioo  on  the  subject,  one  most  not  only  condemn  the  fa- 
bks  that  sprung  up  amid  the  dark  ages  about  the  lim- 
bus  or  antechambei  of  heli,  and  the  pi^gatorial  Hres, 
throii^h  which  it  w)is  supposed  even  redeemed  sools  had 
to  oomplete  thetr  ripeniiig  for  glor}%  but  alao  reject  the 
form  in  which  the  Church  has  embodied  ita  beliei  re- 
specting  the  personal  histoiy  of  Christ,  when  it  said 
**desoended  tnto  helL"  This,  it  is  welJ  known,  was  a 
later  addition  to  what  has  been  called  the  Apostles' 
Creed,niade  when  the  Church  was  iai  on  ite  way  to  the 
gloom  and  superstition  of  the  Dark  Agea.  Though  the 
woida  are  capahle  of  a  rational  and  scriptiual  exp]ana- 
tłoa,  yet  they  do  not  present  the  place  and  chanictei  of 
OUT  Lord*s  exi9tence  in  the  intermediate  state  as  these 
aie  exhibited  by  himseli ;  they  suggest  something  pain- 
ful,  rather  than,  as  it  should  be,  blessed  and  triumphant ; 
and,  if  takcn  in  their  natural  sense,  they  would  rob  be- 
lierers  of  that  surę  hope  of  an  immediate  transition  into 
mansions  of  gloiy,  which,  as  his  foUowers  and  partici- 
pants  of  his  risen  life,  it  is  their  pririlege  to  entertain. 
— Fairbaim,  s.  v.     See  Hell. 

4.  There  are  two  other  terma  so  often  associated  in 
Scripture  with  hodes  as  to  render  their  signification  in 
some  measure  synonymous. 

(1.)  A  hfss  (d^uffffoc = di3v9oc,  wUkout  bołtom),  The 
Sept.  uaea  this  word  to  represent  three  difterent  Uebrew 
words:  1.  ilbis^,  a  depth  or  deep  place  (Job  xli,  23); 
or  nW^,  the  deep,  the  sea  (Isa.  xliv,  27).  2.  nn-, 
breadtk,  a  broad  place  (Job  xxxvi,  16).  3.  Oii^r,  a  nuus 
of  waters,  the  sea  (<ren.  viii,  2,  etc.),  the  chaotic  mass  of 
waters  (Gen.  i,  2;  Paa.  civ,  6),  the  snbterraneous  waters, 
''the  daep  that  lieth  undcr*'  {Oan.  xlix,  25),  "the  deep 
that  coucheth  beneath"  (Deut.  xxxiii,  13).  In  the  N. 
T.  it  is  used  always  with  the  article,  to  designate  the 
abodc  of  the  dead,  hades,  especially  that  part  of  it  which 
is  alao  the  abode  of  devilB  and  the  place  oi  woe  (Rom. 
X,  7;  Loke  viii,  31;  Rev.  ix,  1,  2,  11;  xi,  7;  xvii,  8; 
XX,  1,  3).  In  the  Revelation  the  word  is  always  trans- 
Jatcd  in  the  A.Vera.  "bottomless  pit,"  by  Luther  «Ab- 
grund."  In  uc,  1,  mention  is  madę  of  "  the  key  of  the 
boUomless  pit"  (»/  kKuc  tov  ^piaroc  r»/c  «/3.,  the  key 
of  the  pU  of  the  cAyst)j  where  hade»  is  represented  as  a 
bountUeas  depth,  which  is  entered  by  means  of  a  shaft 
ooYered  by  a  door,  and  secured  by  a  lock  (Alford,  Stuart, 
Ewald,  De  Wette,  Diisterdicck).  In  ver.  11  mention  is 
madę  of  ^  the  angel  of  the  abyss,"  by  whom  some  stippose 
is  intended  Satan  or  one  of  his  angeU.~Kitto,  s.  v.    See 

ABY8S. 

(2.)  Ahaddon  {afiaiiw,  from  the  Keb.  li''^^  *- 
śtruetion,  the  place  of  the  dead,  Job  xxvi,  6 ;  l^v.  xv, 
11),  the  name  given  in  Kev.  ix,  11  to  "the  angel  of  the 
abysa,^  and  explained  by  the  writer  as  eqiuvalent  to 
the  (yteek  dvo\XvutVt  destroyer,  The  term  may  be  uii- 
derstood  either  as  a  peraonification  of  the  idea  of  de- 
rtruction,  or  as  denoting  the  being  supposed  to  preside 
orer  tlie  regions  of  the  dead,  the  angel  of  death.  The 
Rabbins  frequently  use  this  term  to  denote  the  lowest 
ng^ooA  of  $heol  or  kadet  (Erubm,  fol.  xix,  1 ;  Sohar 
A^ajn.  foL  74;  Sohar  Chada»hy  fol.  22;  oomp.  Eisenmen- 
ger,  EtUdedetea  Jud,  ii,  324  8q.) ;  and  the  addition,  "  an- 
gel of  the  abyw,"  seems  to  favor  the  supposition  that 
the  president  or  king  of  this  place  is  alluded  to  here. 
Bot  it  may  be  doubtod  whether  the  angelology  of  the 
Rabbins  &ids  any  sanction  from  the  N.  T.,  and  it  ac- 
eoids  better  with  the  generał  chanu;ter  of  the  passage 


to  suppose  a  personification  here  of  the  idea  of  destmo- 
tion,  BO  that  the  symbol  may  find  many  realizations  in 
the  history  of  the  Chiu-ch :  as  there  are  many  Anti- 
christs,  so  doubtless  are  there  many  ApoUyons.  The 
identitication  of  Abaddon  with  the  Asmodsus  of  the 
Apocr>'pha  and  the  Talmud  rests  upon  no  solid  baais.— 
Kitto,  s.  V.     See  Abaddon. 

6.  A  fuli  view  of  the  extensive  literaturę  of  this  sub- 
ject  morę  appropńately  belongs  to  other  heads;  we 
here  notice  only  a  few  treatises  specially  bearing  upon 
the  opposite  states  of  the  dead :  Jour.  Sac.  Lit,  October, 
1862,  p.  35  sq.  i  April,  18ó3,  p.  56  8q. ;  July,  18Ó3,  p.  418 
sq. ;  Bickersteth,  Hades  ańd  Heaven  (Lond.  186d).  See 
HiciyKN. 

Ha'did  (Heb.  Ckadid\  'T^nn,  jjoitded,  [jerh.  from  its 
sitiiation  on  some  craggy  eminence,  Gesenius,  Thesaur, 
p.  446 ;  Sept.  'Aiwd  in  Neh.  xi,  31,  elsewhere  unites  with 
preced.  woni,  AoSadiS ;  Yulgate  Jladid),  a  place  in  the 
tribe  of  Benjamin,  in  the  vicinity  of  Lo<l  and  Ono,  whose 
inhabitants  retunicd  from  the  captivity  to  their  old  seat 
under  Zenibbabel  (Ezra  ii,  33,  where  some  copies  read 
^''in,  Harid  i  Neh.  vii,  37 ;  xi,  34).  It  is  probably  the 
same  with  one  of  the  cities  called  Adida  (q.  v.)  by  Jo- 
sephus  ( Warj  iv,  9,  1),  but  not  that  of  the  Apocrypha 
(1  Mace.  xii,  38;  comp.  Josephus,  Ant.  xiii,  15, 2).  In 
the  time  of  Eusebius  and  Jerome  {Onomasł,  s.  v.  Adi* 
thaim),  a  town  called  Aditha  (ASa^a)  exlsted  to  the 
east  of  Diospolis  (Lydda).  Acoording  to  Schwarz  (Phyt, 
Description  o/Palesłine,  p.  134),  it  was  identical  with  the 
present  "  villagc  el-Ckadida^  situated  5  £ng.  railes  east 
of  Lud,  on  the  summit  of  a  round  mountain  ;"*  probably 
the  same  with  that  seen  by  Dr.  Robinson,  and  called  by 
him  *^  el-IJadUheht  a  large  village  just  at  the  mouth  of 
a  wady,  as  it  issues  from  the  hills  east  of  Ludd  into  the 
plain**  (new  cdit.  of  Eeaearches,  iii,  143,  notę).  This  di»r 
trict,  although  within  the  territory  of  Dan,  belonged  to 
Benjamin.  The  same  place  is  descńbed  by  the  old 
Jewish  travcller  ha-Parchi  as  being  "  on  the  summit  of 
a  round  hill,"  and  identified  by  him,  no  doubt  oorrectly, 
with  liadid  (Zuiiz,  in  Asher^s  Benj,  of  Tudela,  ii,  439). 

Hadj  (ffadffi,  I/aj\  Arab.),  pUgrimage,  especially  to 
Mecca.  The  name  kmlj  is  also  given  to  the  body  of 
pilgrims  to  Mecca;  and  the  word  is  defined  to  mean 
"  aspiration."  Evcry  Mohammedan,  małe  or  female,  is 
bouud,  once  at  least  in  his  lifetime,  to  make  the  hadj  to 
Mecca.  Some  Mohammedan  authorities,  however,  hołd 
that  a  substitute  may  be  employed;  while  luiiatics, 
8lave8.  and  minors  are  free  from  the  obligation.  The 
solemnities  at  Mecca  are  held  in  the  twelifth  month  of 
the  Mohammedan  year;  and  the  małe  pilgrims,  arriv- 
iug  at  certain  ix>ints  near  Mecca,  put  on  the  sacred  hab- 
its  and  prei)ai'e  their  minds  for  the  ceremonies.  Arriv- 
ing  at  Mecca,  each  pilgrim  walks  seven  times  around 
the  Kaabah ;  next  he  yisits  Mount  Arafat,  twelve  mUes 
from  Mecca,  for  prayer  and  iustruction.  The  next  night 
is  spent  in  devolion  at  Mogdalipha,  and  the  next  day 
the  pilgrim  yisits  a  sacred  monument  at  the  spot  where 
Mohammed  went  to  pray.  The  ceremonies  end  with 
sacrifices.  £very  retuniing  pilgrim  is  styled  Iladgi 
(Haji)  thereafter. 

Had'lai  (Heb.  Chadkuf',  ^inn,  restmg;  Sept,  'A^^i 
V.  r.  'FASatf  Vulg.  Adalt),  the  father  of  Amasa,  which 
latter  was  one  of  the  Ephraimites  who  oppoaed  the  en- 
slayement  of  the  captives  of  Judah  in  the  civil  war  be- 
tween  Pekah  and  Ahaz  (2  Chroń,  xxviii,  12).  B.C 
antę  738. 

Hado^ram  (Heb. //adornm',  Bniirt,  "defectively" 
Djlll  in  Chroń.;  Fllrst  suggests  llleb.  Lex.  s,  v.]  = 
D^  'lilii, Hador  [Le.A dor, the  fire-god ;  see  Hadram- 
mblech]  is  exaUed;  the  Sam.  at  (łen.  x,  27  has  Ado- 
ram;  Sept  in  (Jen.  x,  27,  'O^o^a,  Vulg.  Aduram;  in  I 
Chroń,  i,  21,  Kf Sovpav ;  in  1  Chroń,  xviii,  10,  *Adovpap ; 
in  2  Chroń,  z,  18,  'A5u»pdp ;  Vulg.  in  all  these  last,  AdfH 
ram)f  the  name  of  three  men. 


HADRACH 


12 


HADRIANUS 


1.  Ai>ORAX,  the  fifth  son  ot  Joktan,  and  progenitor 
ef  8  tribe  of  the  same  name  in  Arabia  Felix  (Gen.  x,  27 ; 
1  Chroń,  i,  21).  B.C.  post  2414.  Bochart  {PhaUg,  ii, 
20)  oompares  the  DirmcUi  or  Drimaii  <m  the  PerńaB 
Golf  (Plin.  vi,  82),  and  the  promontoiy  KopóSafiov  (Ras 
el-Had)  of  PtoL  vi,  7, 11.  Michaelis  (Spialeg.  ii,  162) 
despaire  of  all  Identification  of  the  tńbe  in  que8tion. 
Schulthess  {Parad.  p.  88)  and  Geaenius  (Thea,  ł/eb.  8. 
V.)  think  that  the  Adrctmita  are  meant,  whom  Ptolemy 
(AdftafŁŁTat,  Geog.  vi,  7)  plaees  on  the  southeni  shores 
of  Arabia,  between  the  Homeritn  (Hamyaritea)  and  the 
Sochaliue,  au  aocoont  with  which  Pliny  ('M/raim^ce," 
HiiL  Nai,  vi,  28, 32 ;  xii,  14, 80)  subatantially  agieea.— 
Winer,  i,  4ó3.  Fresnel  cites  an  Arab  author  who  iden- 
tifies  Hadoram  with  Jurhum  (4^  IjcUrt^  Joum,  Asia- 
tique,  iii  serie,  vi,  220) ;  but  this  is  highly  improbable ; 
nor  is  the  suggestion  of  Hadhura,  by  Caussin  (Essai  i, 
80),  morę  likely,  the  latter  being  one  of  the  aboriginal 
tiibes  of  Arabia,  such  as  'Ad,  Thamiid,  etc — Smith,  s.  v. 
See  Arabia. 

2.  Haooram,  son  of  Toi,  king  of  Hamath,  sent  by 
his  father  (with  valaable  presents  in  the  form  of  artides 
of  antique  manufacture  [  Josephos],  in  gold,  6ilver,  and 
brass)  to  congratulate  David  on  his  victor>''  ovcr  their 
common  enemy  Hadarezer,  king  of  SjTia  (1  Chrou.  xviii, 
10).  Kadr.  1084.  In  the  panaiernarnitive  of  2  Sam. 
viii,  the  name  is  given  as  Jor\m  ;  but  this  beiiig  a  eon- 
traction  ofJehoram,  which  contains  the  name  of  Jeho- 
▼ah,  is  pecidiarly  an  Israelitish  appellation.  By  Jose- 
phus  (Anł.  vii,  5, 4)  he  is  called  'Aiwpafioc. — Smith,  s.  v. 

3.  Adoniram  (q.  v.),  as  he  is  elsewhere  morę  fully 
called  (1  Kings  iv,  6 ;  v,  14 ;  Josephus  constantly  'A^w- 
pafioc)  the  son  of  Abda,  the  treasurer  of  taxes  under 
Solomon,  and  who  was  stoned  to  death  by  the  people  of 
the  northem  tribes  when  sent  by  Rehoboam  to  exact 
the  usual  dues  (2  Chion.  x,  18). 

Ha^draoh  (Heb.  Chadraik\  T^p^^j  signif.  miknown, 
but  possibly  connected  with  Ifadar—Eee  Hadorau; 
Sept.  £f^pax,Vu]g.  HadracK),  apparently  the  name  of 
a  countr^',  and  (as  we  may  gather  from  the  paralld 
member  of  the  sole  and  obscure  passage  whcre  it  oc- 
curs)  near  or  identical  with  Damascus  (Zech.  ix,  1). 
The  meaning  seems  to  be,  "The  utterance  of  the  word 
of  Jehovah  respecting  the  land  of  Kadrach ;  and  Da- 
mascus is  the  place  upon  which  it  rosts."*  On  the  loćal- 
ity  in  ąucstion,  great  diviBion  of  opinion  exists.  Adri- 
chomius  says,  "Adrach,  or  Hadrach,  alias  Adra  .  .  .  is 
a  citj-  of  Ccdesyria,  about  twenty-five  miles  from  Bos- 
tra,  and  from  it  the  adjacent  region  takes  the  name  of 
Land  of  Iladrach.  This  was  the  land  which  forroed 
the  subjcct  of  Zcchariah'8  prophccy*'  {Theatrum  TerrcB 
Sonda,  p.  75).  Rabbi  Jose,  a  Damascene,  according  to 
Jarchi,  declared  he  knew  a  place  of  this  name  east  of 
Damascus;  and  Michaelis  sa}'s  {Suppknu  ]).  677),  "To 
this  I  may  add  what  I  Icarned,  in  the  ycar  1768,  from 
Joseph  Abbassi,  a  noble  Arab  of  the  countr>'  beyond 
Jordan.  I  inąuired  whether  he  knew  a  dty  caUed  Ha- 
drakh  ...  Ile  replied  that  there  was  a  city  of  that 
name,  which,  though  now  smali,  hadbeen  the  capital  of 
a  large  region  called  the  land  of  HadrakJt,^  etc.  The 
two  namcs,  however,  are  entirely  different  (""^"IH,  Ha- 
drach;  Arab.  Edhj^a)^  and  there  is  no  historical  evi- 
dence  that  Edhr^a  ever  was  the  capital  of  a  large  terri- 
tory.  See  Edrei.  Yet  corroborative  of  the  existenoe 
of  the  place  in  ąuestion  are  the  explicit  statements  of 
Cyril  and  Theodoret  in  commenting  on  the  above  pas- 
sage. But  to  these  it  is  objected  that  no  modem  trav- 
eller  has  heard  of  such  a  place  in  this  region ;  (lesenius 
espedally  (Thesaur.  Heb,  p.  449)  wges  that  the  name 
could  not  have  become  extinct.  Yct  no  other  explana- 
tion  of  the  word  Hadrach  hitherto  offered  b  at  all  sat- 
isfactory  (see  Winer*s  Reahc,  s.  v.).  MoverB  suggests 
that  Hadrach  may  be  the  name  of  one  of  the  old  deities 
(compare  A  dores,  Justin,  xxxvi,  2,  and  Ateroatis)  of 
Damascus  (Die  Pkonizier^  i,  478) ;  and  Bleek  conjectures 
that  reference  is  madę  to  a  king  of  that  dty  (^mdien  ic. 


KriOoen,  1852,  ii,  258).  Henderson  {Cotnmmt,  ad  loc) 
supposes  it  to  be  only  a  comiption  of  *n!f\  the  com- 
mon names  of  the  kings  of  Syria.  See  Hadar.  Jarchi 
and  Kimchi  say,  ^  Rabbi  Juda  interpreted  it  as  an  al- 
legorical  cxpres8ion  relating  to  the  Messiah,  Who  is 
harsh  (*in)  to  the  heathen,  and  gentie  ("^"l)  to  Israel.'' 
Jerome*8  interpretation  is  somewhat  similar:  "Et  est 
ordo  verborum ;  assumptio  verbi  Domini,  acuii  in  pec- 
catores,  moUia  in  justoe.  Adrach  quippe  hoc  rcisonat  ex 
duobus  integris  nomen  compositum :  Ad  ('in)  acufum, 
RACH  (^*1)  moUe,  tenerumcue  significans"*  (Comment.  tu 
Zach.  ad  loc).  Hengstenbei^  (Chrisiol.  iii,  872)  adopts 
the  same  etymology  and  meaning,  but  regards  the  word 
as  a  symbolical  appellation  of  the  Persian  empire,  whose 
overthrow  by  Alexander  Zechariah  here  foretells.  He 
says  the  prophet  does  not  mention  the  real  name,  be- 
cause,  as  he  lived  during  the  supremacy  of  Persia,  soch 
a  reference  would  have  exposed  him  to  danger.  See 
Zechariah,  Book  of. 

Looking  at  the  passage  in  what  appears  to  be  ita 
plain  and  lutural  meaning,  no  scholar  can  deny  that, 
according  to  the  usual  construction,  the  proper  name 
foUowing  Y^t^  is  the  name  of  the  "land"  itself,  or  of 
the  nation  inhabiting  the  land,  and  the  ana]og>'  pre- 
sented  by  all  the  other  names  in  the  section  is  sulilcient 
proof  that  this  must  be  the  case  here  (Hengstenbeig, 
iii,  875).  All  the  other  names  mentioned  are  wcll 
known— Damascus,  Hamath,  TjTe,  Zidon,  Gaza,  etc. ;  it 
b  natural  to  infer  that  Hadrach  b  also  the  name  of  a 
place  known  to  the  prophet.  Its  position  is  not  accu- 
rately  defined.  The  words  of  the  passage  do  not  con- 
nect  it  morę  dosdy  with  Damascus  than  with  Hamath. 
It  b  remarkable  that  no  such  name  Ts  elsewhere  found 
in  ancient  writers.  The  translatora  of  the  Sq)t.  were 
ignorant  of  it.  So  was  Jerome.  No  such  place  b  now 
known.  Yet  thb  does  not  prove  that  there  never  was 
such  a  name.  Many  ancient  names  have  disappeared, 
as  it  seems  to  be  the  case  with  thb  (see  Alphens,  JJist. 
de  terra  Ckadrachy  Tr.  ad  Rhen.  1728 ;  also  in  Ugolino, 
vii).— Kittto,  s.  V.    See  Damascus. 

Hadzlan,  Pors.    See  Adrian. 

HadrianuB,  P.  iEsnurs,  the  14th  Roman  empe- 
por  (from  A.D.  117-188),  was  a  rehitive  and  the  ward  of 
Trajan,  and  married  Julia  Sabina,  the  granddaughter 
of  Marciana,  sbter  of  that  emperor.  In  regard  to  the 
place  of  hb  birth,  the  statcment  of  Spartianus  {Dtrita 
Hadriani,  i)  that  he  was  bom  at  Romę  Jan.  24,  A.D. 
76,  is  gcnerally  reganlcd  as  the  morę  leliable,  though 
others  name  Italica  in  Spain,  where  his  ancestors  łiad 
settlcd  in  the  time  of  Scipio  (see  Eutropius,  >dii,  6,  and 
Eusebius,  Chromcon,  No.  2165,  p.  166,  ed.  Scaliger).  Aid- 
ed  by  the  preference  of  Trajan*s  wife,  Plotina,  and  show- 
ing  himself  capable  in  the  positions  intrustcd  to  him,  he 
rosę  rapidly,  and  on  the  death  of  Trajan  succeeded  to 
the  empire,  ba%ńng  been  either  really  adoptcd  as  hb  suo- 
cessor  by  that  emperor,  or  pairoed  oiT  as  such  by  Plotina 
and  her  party.  For  a  statement  of  the  conflicting  opin- 
ions  on  this  point,  see  Spartianus  {De  vita  Hadriani^  iv) 
and  Dion  Cassius  (lxix,  1).  "^lien  Hadrian  assiuned  the 
reins  of  govemment  (AD.  117),  he  found  the  quiet  of 
the  empire  threatened  ai  sevenQ  points,  but,  adopting  a 
generał  policy  of  i^eace,  he  succeeded  in  preventuig  out- 
breaks  and  invasion8  in  nearly  eveTy  instance.  In  fui^ 
therance  of  thb  peacefid  polic}',  he  withdrew  the  legions 
from  the  conquests  of  his  predecessor  be}'ond  the  Tigris 
and  Enphrates,  and  would  have  also  abandoiied  Dacia 
had  not  populous  Roman  colonies  exbted  there. 

Impelled  by  curiodty,  or,  morę  probably,  by  a  desire 
to  see  for  himself  the  oondition  of  the  empire,  he  joup- 
neyed  exten8ivdy  through  it,  lea^ńng  everywhere  mon- 
uments  of  hb  munilioenoe  in  temples,  aqueduct8,  and 
other  useful  or  oniamental  works.  He  madę  many 
improvement8  in  the  laws,  and  the  Edichati  perpetuum 
Hadriam  (a  codification  of  pnetorial  edicta  madę  by  hb 
orders)  maiked  an  nrn  in  the  historical  devdopmeńt  of 


HiBMORRHAGE 


13 


HAEMSTEDE 


tbe  Ronmi  Inr.  Hadruui,  thongh  a  yoluptnary  in  pri- 
Tite  life,  was  a  patron  of  the  arts  and  or  leaming ;  was 
ibnd  of  the  society  of  artiata,  poeTa,  acholan,  philoao- 
pben^  etc,  and  even  aapired  to  rank  among  them;  but 
hi3  iiifenor  taste,  his  jealoosy,  his  overweening  vanity, 
and  his  impadence  of  ńvaliy  and  oontradiction  led  him 
oftffl  to  acts  of  croel  injuatioe  towaida  the  loarned  men 
he  gntheml  abouŁ  him. 

Hu  conduct  towards  the  Chrtadana  was  marked  by  a 

tense  of  justioe.    The  prooonsul  of  Asia  Minor  ha\ńng 

oomplained  lo  Hadrian  that  the  people  at  their  festiralś 

demanded  the  cxecution  of  Christiana,  he  iasued  a  rc- 

aeripc  forbidiUng  such  executiona,  and  iequiring  that  all 

compiaints  against  the  Christiana  ahould  be  roade  in 

I^  fonn.    Though  thia  edict  faiied  to  secure  immu- 

mty  to  Christiana  from  persecution,  sinoe  the  fourth 

peńecution  occuned  duiing  hia  leign,  Hadriau  was  not 

dassed  by  Melito,  Tertollian,  or  Eusebius  among  their 

penecfitorB,  and  hia  leign  ia  regaided  aa  'm  generał  favor- 

aUe  to  the  progreas  of  Chiiatianity*     JEJiua  Lamprid 

ie  {Aiezmder  SeceruM,  43),  indeed,  roentiona  a  report 

Out  Hadrian  porpoaed  to  erect  templea  to  Christ,  as 

one  of  the  goda,  but  was  deterred  by  the  priesta,  who 

dcrUred  that  all  woold  become  Christiana  if  he  did  so. 

Thx3  story  ia,  however,  generally  reganled  as  unworthy 

of  credit.  The  tolerant  ^irit  or  indifference  of  Hadrian 

towaids  religioiis  opiniotis  and  practices  disapprored  of 

aad  eren  ridicided  by  him  is  ahown  by  his  letter  to  Ser- 

rianua.  preseryed  in  Yopiscus  (derenia,  8),  and  by  the 

iact  that  though  a  zealous  worshipper  of  the  Sacra  of 

hu  nitire  country,  he  alao  adopted  the  Egyptian  Cultus. 

The  peace  of  his  reign  waa  broken  by  one  aerious 

va?.    Among  the  Jewa  a  apirit  of  diacontent  had  been 

kcpt  alive  ever  ńnce  the  capturc  of  Jeruaalero  by  Titus. 

^"uhinfc  to  eradicate  this  spirit  by  the  destruction  of 

the  Jgwiah  nationality,  Hadrian  iasued  an  edict  forbid- 

dinji;  the  practioe  of  drcumcision,  and  determined  to 

enct  on  the  ruins  of  Jeruaalem  a  new  Koraan  city,  to 

be  eafle<l  after  himself,  jElia  Capitolina.    Consequent- 

Ir  a  fuńoiia  re^filt  of  the  Jews  broke  out  under  the 

kail  of  Bar  Cochba,  a  pretended  measiah,  and  it  was 

ook  after  haring  aufTered  great  loaaes,  and  having  al- 

iBOrt  esterminatetl  the  Jewbh  nation  (500,000  Jewa  are 

ni>l  to  have  perishcd),  that  the  imperial  armiea  snc- 

oeded  in  crushing  the  rerołt,  although  the  able  gen- 

Mil,  Jolius  Sererus,  had  been  called  from  the  distant 

•fiww  of  Britain  to  lead  them.    iElia  Capitolina  rosę 

WTff  the  ruins  of  the  Holy  City,  but  the  Jew  was  forbid- 

dn,  on  the  pain  of  death,  to  enter  it,  and  from  that  time 

ihe  race  was  diapersed  through  the  worki    Antoninua 

fias  annnikd  the  prohibition  of  circuracision.    Hadrian 

died  at  Baic  July  10,  138;  but  hia  laat  daya  had  been 

■wited  by  soch  outrageous  cnielties  that  Antoninua, 

*i»  Micceaaor,  with  difficulty  aecured  the  customary  hon- 

•o  to  his  mcnior>'.— Spartianua,  I>e  vUa  Ifndriani  (in 

Saipiorr*  J/istorits  Augusta,  Teiibner's  edit.);  Smith, 

IHcf,  ó/Grtgi  and  Haman  Bwff.  and  Mythol.  ii,  819  8q. ; 

Hoefer.  A  oirr.  Bioff,  Ghu  i,  301  8q. ;  Herzog,  Real-Ency- 

y»pddie,  V,  446 ;  Sharpe,  History  of  Eg^,  xv,  14-31. 

BaBmoirluice.    See  Issue. 

Haem'oxT]ioidi  (Q^'^iTO,  ttdurrim',  prób.  iumort» 
««,  i.  e.  I*e  pśZtf,  ao  caUed  as  protruded  [the  root  is 
7??.  to  stretcK]  from  the  fundament,  or  from  the  stratna 
^  or  tenesmuB  with  flow  of  blood,  which  the  Maso- 
nus  have  ereiywheie  inserted  in  the  margin  for  the 
testaal  [bat  apparently  morc  \nilgaf  and  less  propor] 
«rinl  S'*^B7,  cpJkaUm',  liL  kUlt,  spoken  also  in  the  Arab. 
rfa  ^t9w»r  in  ano  viroiimi  vel  in  pudendis  mulierum** 
,'«e  Schroeder,  Orig.  Jfeb.  iv,  64;  Scholtens,  ad  Meida- 
«B  Pnr.  p^  231 ;  Sept.  and  Yulg.  understand  a  tore  in 
f^mmt  parts)y  a  painful  diaeaae  with  which  the  Phi- 
^"Cinea  were  affiicted  by  God  aa  a  puniahment  for  de- 
Uamof:  the  aacred  ark  at  Ashdod  after  they  had  cap- 
tBied  it  in  battle  (2  Sam.  v,  6).  The  word  also  occun 
ittog  the  phjPHcal  cnnea  denounoed  upon  the  Iwael- 


itea  by  Moaea  in  caae  of  apoataay  (Dent.  xxviit,  27). 
Interpretera  are  not  agreed  on  the  exact  signilication  ot 
the  original  terma,  nor  on  the  naturę  of  the  diseaae,  al- 
though most  think  that  thoso  painful  tumora  in  the  fun- 
dament are  meant  which  aometimes  tum  into  ulcers,  i. 
e.  the  pUe$  (Fta.  lxxviii,  66).  Otheis  regard  it  as  the 
name  of  the  fundament  itaelf,  j9oc(ex  (Bochart,  Ilieroz,  i, 
382;  aee  Fuller  in3ftice/l<9a&v, 3;  Kanne, Z>ie  GoMms 
Aeneder  PhUist.  Nnrimb.  1820).  The  Sept.  and  Yulg. 
add  to  ver.  9  that  the  Philiatinea  madę  seata  of  skins, 
upon  which  to  sit  with  morę  eaae,  by  reason  of  their  in- 
dispoeition.  Ilerodotua  aeema  to  have  had  anrae  knowl- 
edge  of  thia  histori',  but  haa  aasigned  another  causc  (i, 
105).  Ile  saya  the  Sc>*thiana,  having  plundercd  the 
tempie  of  Yenua  at  Askalon,  a  celebrated  city  of  the 
Philiatinea,  the  goddesa,  who  waa  worshipped  therc,  af- 
fiicted them  with  a  peculiar  diaeaae  (3/;X£ia  vóooc). 
The  Philiatinea,  perhapa,  thus  related  the  stor}*;  but  it 
evidently  paased  for  truth  that  thia  diaeaae  was  ancient, 
and  had  been  sent  among  them  by  some  avenging  deity. 
To  remedy  this  anffering,  and  to  remove  the  ravages 
oommitted  by  rata,  which  waated  their  cowitr\%  the 
Philiatinea  were  adviaed  by  their  priesta  and  soothsay- 
en  to  return  the  ark  of  God  with  the  foUowing  oiferinga 
(1  Sam.  vi,  1-18) :  flve  figurea  of  a  golden  emerod,  that 
ia,  of  the  part  aAUcted,  and  five  golden  rats;  hereby  ac- 
knowledging  that  thia  plague  was  the  effect  of  divinc 
justice.  This  ad>'ice  was  foUowcd ;  and  Joeephus  (Ant, 
vi,  1,  1,  iuffiPTtpia ;  Aquila,  rd  rtię  ^yfdaivTfC  thcoc) 
and  others  believed  that  the  five  citiea  of  the  Philistinea 
madę  each  a  statuę,  which  they  consecrated  to  God  as 
votive  offerings  for  their  deliverance.  Thia,  however, 
aeems  to  have  originated  from  the  iigurea  of  the  rata. 
The  heathen  frequently  ofTered  to  their  gods  figures  rep- 
resenting  thoee  parta  of  the  body  which  had  been  dia- 
eased  (see  Frey,  De  morę  simulacra  membrorum  conse- 
crandi,  Altd.  1746) ;  and  such  kinds  of  ex  voti»  are  still 
frequent  in  Catholic  countries,  belng  consecrated  in 
honor  of  some  saint  who  is  supposed  to  have  wrought 
the  cure :  the}'  are  imagca  of  wax  or  of  metal,  exhibit- 
ing  those  parta  of  the  body  in  which  the  disease  was 
seatecL  The  Scholiast  on  Aristophanes  (^cAar».  231) 
mentions  a  similar  plague  (followed  by  a  similar  subse- 
quent  propitiation  to  that  mentioned  in  Scripture),  as 
sent  upon  the  Atheniana  by  Bacchus.  The  opinion 
mentioned  by  Winer  (s.  v.  I^hilister),  as  advanced  by 
lichtenstein  (in  £ichhom*8  JiiUioth,  vi,  405-467),  that 
the  plague  of  emerods  and  that  of  mice  are  one  and  the 
same.  the  former  being  caused  by  an  insect  (solpuga)  as 
large  as  a  lield-mouse,  is  hardly  worth  serious  attention. 
Kitto  thinks  that  they  were  rather  taUsmant  apecially 
formed  under  aatrological  calculationa  for  the  purpoae 
of  obviating  the  effecta  of  the  diaeaae  {Daily  Bibie  lUusf. 
atl  loc.).  The  worda  of  1  Sam.  v,  12,  '*The  men  that 
died  not  were  amitten  with  emeroda,"  show  that  the  dis- 
ease was  not  necessarily  fataL  It  is  elear  from  its  par- 
allelism  ^ńth  **  botch"  and  other  diseases  in  Deut.  xxviii, 
27,  that  D'^^&9  is  a  disease,  not  a  part  of  the  body  (see 
Beyer,  De  hemorrhoidibus  ex  legę  MosaicOf  Lips.  1792). 
Now  1  Sam.  v,  11  speaks  of  the  imagea  of  the  emeroda 
after  they  were  actually  macie  and  placed  in  the  ark. 
It  thua  appears  probable  that  the  former  word  means 
the  disease  and  the  latter  the  part  affected,  which  must 
necessarily  have  been  includeil  in  the  actually  exi8ting 
image,  and  have  struck  the  eye  as  the  easential  thing 
represented,  to  which  the  disease  was  an  iucident  As 
some  morbid  swelling,  then,  scems  the  most  probable 
naturę  of  the  disease,  so  no  morę  probable  conjecture 
has  been  advanced  than  that  hmnorrhoidal  tumors  or 
bleeding  piles,  known  to  the  Romans  as  mariscat  (Juv. 
ii,  13),  are  intended.  These  are  verj'  common  in  Syria 
at  present,  Orienul  habits  of  want  of  cxercise  and  im- 
proper  food,  producing  derangement  of  the  liver,  consti- 
pation,  etc,  being  such  as  to  cause  them. — Gesenius,  s. 
V. ;  Calmet,  s.  v. ;  Smith,  s.  v.     See  Diseask. 

Haemstede,  Adbiaan  vax,  ona  of  the  first  preach- 


HAENDEL 


14 


HAFFNER 


en  of  the  Refonneil  faith  in  the  Netherlands,  was  pmb- 
ably  boni  abouŁ  the  year  1625  in  Schouwen.  The  iiar- 
ents  of  Aclriaan  seem  to  have  bcen  among  the  earlietit 
in  Zealand  to  embrace  the  Reformeil  faith.  He  umler- 
fltood  8everal  modem  languages,  and  wrote  in  b<ith  Lat- 
in  and  Dutch.  Hin  Dntch  style  is  remarkable  for  per- 
spicuity  and  streiigth.  Adriaan  waa  in  1557  miniMor- 
ing  to  the  Beformed  church  in  Antwerp,  and  his  labora 
there  were  eminently  successfui  Deeply  sympathizing 
with  the  persecuted  Protestanta  in  Ftince,  he  wrote  in 
Latin  a  letter  to  Henry  the  Second  of  France,  in  which 
he  remonstrates  with  him  and  pleads  with  him  to  ex- 
ercise  clemency.  This  letter  is  dated  Dec  1, 1557,  and 
is  thus  in  advance  of  the  measures  set  on  foot  by  Calvin 
and  Beza  in  behalf  of  those  persecuted  foUowers  of 
Christ.  Yan  Haemstedc  in  this  letter  suggests  a  con- 
ference  such  as  was  held  at  Poissy  in  1562.  Yan  der 
Heiden,  sent  at  his  reqticst  by  the  church  at  £mden  to 
assist  him  at  Antwerp,  having  arrived,  he  took  occańon 
to  leaye  for  a  time  (Feb.  1558).  Daring  his  absenoe  dark 
cloudsgathered,and  soon  afterhis  return  the  storm  burst. 
Yan  der  Heiden,whose  place  of  preaching  had  been  be- 
trayed  by  a  woman,  escaped.  Yan  Haemstcde  rcmun- 
e<l,  Łhough  a  price  was  set  upon  his  hcad,  and  certain 
death  awaitcd  him  if  capttircd.  His  two  faithful  help- 
ers,  Gillis  and  Antoine  Yerdikt,  were  both  bunied  at  Brus- 
sels.  He  left  Antwerp  probably  in  March,  1550,  and 
sought  refuge  in  Ost  Fnesland.  Subseąuently  he  la- 
bored  for  a  short  time  at  Groningen,  and  was  thenoe 
sent  to  Englaiid  to  take  charge  of  a  Reformed  church  ui 
London.  He  espoused  the  cause  of  the  better  class  of 
Anabaptists,  so  far  as  to  maintain  that  they  should  not 
be  punisheii  for  their  doctńnal  error  respccting  the  hu- 
manity  of  Christ,  sińce  they  acknowledged  his  dirinity, 
and  depcnded  on  him  for  salration.  This  view  was  in 
direct  oonflict  with  the  yiews  and  practioe  of  Cranmer 
and  RidJey,  who  had  in  1551  condemned  to  the  flamcs 
Joria  ran  Parre,  a  Netherlander  of  irreproachable  mor- 
als,  simply  on  account  of  his  doctńnal  belief.  As  the 
chutph  which  Haemstede  serreil  was  at  this  time  under 
the  supenrision  of  Edmund  Grimlal,  bishop  of  London, 
he  was  called  to  acoomit  for  his  yiews,  and,  adhering  to 
them,wa8  banished  from  the  kingdom.  On  his  return 
to  Holland  he  was  depriyed  of  all  his  property.  £ro- 
den,  too,  refused  to  receiye  him.  He  borę  his  trials  and 
priyations  in  a  truły  Christian  manner.  At  the  eaniest 
xequest  of  many  of  the  London  oongregation,  he  finally 
went  thither  again.  The  bishop  of  London  demanded 
a  recantation.  He  refusecL  Again  he  was  banished. 
With  a  heavy  heart  he  retumed  to  Friesland,  where  he 
soon  after  died.  His  death  occurred  in  1562.  In  his 
riews  of  religious  libertj'  he  was  far  in  adyance  of  his 
age,  and  fell  a  yictim  to  the  reigiiing  sptrit  of  intoler- 
anoe.  He  was  the  author  of  the  first  Book  of  Martyrs 
pubUshed  in  the  Netherlands.  It  is  conjcctured  that  it 
was  <irst  published  at  Antwerp  during  the  persecution, 
and  Lssue<l  in  sheets  as  it  was  prepared.  The  origiiud 
edition,  which  is  extremely  rare,  is  in  smali  quarto, 
bearing  the  author^s  name,  but  not  the  place  of  its  pub- 
lication.  It  met  with  great  faror,  and  for  two  centuries 
it  was  the  manuał  of  thousaiuls,  haying  passed  through 
many  successire  editions.  See  an  able  and  interesting 
monograph  of  Rey.  Joh.  ab  Utrecht  Dresselhuis  in  the 
yith  vol.  of  Kist  and  Rayaard*s  Archiff  voor  KerkeUjke 
GetckiedenUf  inzond^rheid  van  \ederland  (Leyd.  1885) ; 
Glasius,  GodgeUerd  NederUmd,  D.  ii.     (J.  P.  W.) 

HaendeL    See  Hakdel. 

Hseretici.    See  HenisTic. 

Hseretico  comborendo,  a  writ  which,  in  Eng- 
lond,"  ancien tly  lay  against  a  heretic,  who,  haying  once 
been  conyicted  of  heresy  by  his  bishop,  and  haying  ab- 
jured  it,  after^-ards  falling  into  it  again,  or  into  some 
other,  is  thereupon  committed  to  the  secular  power. 
This  writ  is  thought  by  some  to  1)€  as  ancient  as  the 
common  law  itself ;  howeyer,  the  conyiction  of  heresy 
by  the  common  law  was  not  in  any  petty  ecdeuastical 


oourt,  but  before  the  archbishop  himself,  in  a  prorincisl 
sjniotl,  and  the  delinquent  was  deliyered  up  to  the  kmg, 
to  do  with  him  as  he  pleaaed;  so  that  the  crown  had  a 
control  ovcr  the  spiritual  power;  but  by  2  Henn-  IV, 
cap.  15,  the  diooesan  alone,  without  the  uiteryention  of 
a  s^nod,  might  conyict  of  heretical  tenets;  and  unless 
the  Gonyict  abjured  his  opinions,  or  if,  after  abjuration, 
he  relapsed,  the  sheriff  was  bound,  ex  officin,  if  require<i 
by  the  biithop,  to  commit  the  unhappy  \ictim  to  the 
fiames,  without  waiting  for  the  conseut  of  the  crown. 
This  writ  remaine<l  in  force,  and  was  actually  cxccuted  • 
on  two  AnabatHists  in  the  seyenth  of  £lizalx>th,  and  on 
two  Arians  in  the  ninth  of  James  I.  Sir  Edward  Coke 
was  of  opinion  that  this  writ  did  not  lie  in  his  time; 
but  it  is  now  formally  taken  away  by  statute  29  Car.  II, 
cap.  9.  But  this  statute  does  not  extend  to  take  away 
or  abridge  the  jurisdiction  of  Protestant  archbishops,  or 
bishops,  or  any  other  judges  of  any  ecclesiastical  courts, 
in  cases  of  atheism,  blasphemy,  heres}',  or  schism ;  but 
they  may  proye  and  punish  the  same,  according  to  his 
majesty's  ecclesiastical  laws,  by  excommunication,  dcp- 
riyation,  degradation,  and  other  ecclesiastical  censutes, 
not  extending  to  death,  ui  such  sort,  and  no  other,  aa 
they  might  haye  done  before  the  making  of  this  act." — 
Buck,  Theoloffical  DicUanary,  s.  y. 

Haevemick.    See  HAyioiMiCK. 

Hafenreffer,  Matthias  (also  Uaffmrtjftr)^  a  Lu- 
theran  tlieologian,  was  bom  Jime  24, 1561,  at  Lorch,  in 
WUrtemberg,  and  died  Oct.  22, 1619,  at  Tnbingen.  He 
studied  philosophy  and  thcolog>'  at  the  last-named  place, 
and  in  1590  was  madę  court-preaeher  and  counscllor  of 
the  Consistory  at  Stuttgart;  in  1592  became  profcssor 
of  thcologĄ',  and  in  1617  chancellor  and  pniyost  at  Tu- 
bingen.  To  a  profouiul  and  comprehonsiye  leaming, 
he  united  a  sweet  and  peace-loying  disposit  ton,  which 
led  him  to  keep  aloof  for  the  most  part  frora  ihe  theo- 
logical  strifes  of  his  age,  and  to  fuid  his  plcasures  in  di- 
recting  an<l  rtimulattng  the  studies  of  his  pupils,  to 
whope  affectionate  appreciation  of  him  YaL  AntlreH  and 
othcrs  bcar  teetimony.  His  chief  work,  /^off  (heoloffici 
cerfn  mełhodo  ac  ratione  m  łres  tibros  tribuH  (Ttlbingen, 
1600;  an  improyetl  and  enlarged  ed.  1603).  publi»he<l  at 
the  request  of  Fretlerick,  duke  of  WUrteraberg,  for  the 
use  of  prince  John  Frederick,  was  regarde<l  as  a  model 
not  only  of  Lutheran  orthodoxy,  but  also  of  cleamcss 
and  definiteness  in  conoeption,  and  exprc8sion  and  sim- 
plicity  in  style.  It  was  the  text-book  of  theology  at 
Tubińgen  up  to  the  end  of  the  17th  centurj',  siipplant- 
ing  Heerbrand's  Compendium^  which  had  long  been  of 
almost  s3'mbolical  aulhority  there.  By  royal  decree  it 
was,  in  i612,  madę  the  oflicial  text-b(M)k  of  dogmatica 
in  the  Uniyersity  of  Upsala  and  other  Swedish  institu- 
tions  of  learniiig.  Charles  XH  is  sald  to  haye  almost 
known  it  by  heart.  Hafenreffer  wrote  also  some  con- 
troyersial  works  against  the  Romanists  and  Calyinists, 
and  a  work  entitled  Ten^ilum  Ezechielis  (Tubingen.  1013, 
fol).— Herzog,  Real-Eficyllopadie,  v,  469.     (.1.  W.  M.) 

Ha£Eher,  Isaac,  a  French  I^rotcstant  muiister  and 
distinguishcd  humanist,  was  bom  at  Strasburg  in  1751. 
After  studying  at  Paris  and  yisiting  seyeral  of  the  (ver- 
man  uniyersities,  he  was  ordahted,  and  soon  acquircd 
great  reputation  as  a  preacher  in  Strasburg.  He  be- 
came subsequently  dean  of  the  theological  faculty  of 
that  city,  and  died  there  May  27,  1831.  He  had  been 
instmmental  in  restoring  in  part  the  old  uniyersity  of 
Strasburg  under  the  title  oi  Protestant  Theoloffical  A  cad- 
emtfy  which  was  aflerwards  changed  to  Protestant  Smit' 
nary.  At  the  inauguration  he  deliyered  an  address, 
printed  under  the  title  Des  Secours  cue  tetude  des  icoh- 
ffuesy  de  Thistoire,  de  laphilosophie  etckla  Uttirature  nf" 
fre  a  la  theoloffie  (Strasb.  1803, 8yo) ;  he  wmte  also  De 
rEducation  lUieraire,  ou  essai  sur  rorganisatton  cftin 
e/abUssemeni  povr  les  kautes  sciences  (Strasb.  1792,  8yo). 
Discourses  deliyered  on  the  aimiyersar}'  of  his  60th  year 
in  the  ministry  were  pubUshed  under  the  title  JubiU 
dkHajfntr  (French  and  German,  Strasb.  1831, 8yo).    See 


HAFT 


16 


HAGAR 


Oberiin,  Abiumach  d* A  Itace;  M.  Heimoni  Atmales  bio- 
ffrapkicues  (1831, 1854),  yoL  ii;  Hoefer,  Aow. Bioff,  Gen. 
xxiii,  80. 

Hait  (-S3,  fułsłsah'yjirm),  the  handle  of  a  weapon, 
e.  g.  of  a  dagger  (Jwlg.  iii,  22).     See  Knife. 

Haitorah  (also  Ifąffaroih)  Is  the  name  applied  to 
fiAy-folir  portions  or  aections  of  the  Pentateuch  selected 
by  the  Jews  for  Sabbath  reading  in  the  synagogue,  iin- 
der  Antiochus  Epiphanes,  who  forbid  them  reading  the 
law.  Preyioiis  to  his  time  the  Penuteuch  was  dirided 
into  ńdras,  In  Palestine  the  nomber  of  sections  re- 
qiiired  three  yeais  for  the  public  reading  of  the  whole 
Pentatench,  but  in  Babylonia,  the  reading,  arranged  as 
abore  reforred  to,  was  done  in  one  year. — ^FUrst,  Kułiur- 
ffetckkMie,  i,  60;  Etheridge,  IniroducHon  to  Ilebr,  Lit,  p. 
201.    See  Haphtaraii.     (J.H.W.) 

Ha^gab  (Heb.  Chagah\  njn,  a  locust ;  Sept.  'Ayil^), 
one  of  the  Nethinim  whose  deacendants  retumed  from 
BtbybnundcrZerubbabel(Ezraii,46).  B.C.  antę  686. 
SeeHAGABA. 

Hag^aba  (Heb.  Chagaha'^  Hnjn,  a  hcust,  a  Chal- 
daizmg  form ;  Sept.  'Ayafid  f,  r.  'Ay7a/3a,Vulg.  Ilagaba, 
Neh.Tii,4«)  or  HAG'ABAH  (Heb.  CAa^ftoA',  TOjn, 
id. ;  Sept.  'Aya/3a,yulg.  Ifagaba,  Ezra  ii,  45),  one  of  the 
Nethinim  whose  descendants  retumed  ftom  the  captir- 
ity  with  Zeiubbabel.  B.C.  antę  536.  See  Agabus  ; 
Uagab. 

Hagany,  John  B.,  D.D.,  an  emincnt  minister  of 
the  MeihoiUst  Episoopal  Church,  was  bom  in  the  cit\' 
of  Wilmin^on,  Delaware,  August  26,  1808,  of  Methó- 
dist  parentage,  and  entered  the  itinerant  mini-stry  in 
1831.  His  ministry  was  from  the  tirst  very  success- 
fiiL  During  his  long  career  of  tMrty-*our  ycars  he 
fiUed  many  of  the  mo8t  important  stAtions  of  his  Church 
in  the  MidiUe  States,  araong  them  Pottsrille,  Pa. ;  St, 
George's,  Ebenezer,  and  Trinity  churches,  Philadelphia ; 
the  Yestry  Street,  Mulberry  Street,  St.  Paul's,  and  Bed- 
ford Street  churches,  New  York  City;  Sands  Street, 
Brooklyn,  ami  Thirtieth  Street,  New'  York,  where  he 
doeed  his  labors  with  his  life,  Jime  28, 1865. 

Dr.  Hamany  was  an  eloąuent  preacher.  He  had  a 
Bweet-toned  voice,  a  calm  rather  than  a  ferrid  temper- 
ament, a  quick,  tender  sympathy,  by  which  he  was 
readily  affected  himself,  and  could  readily  aflfect  others 
to  tearsL  His  memory  was  retentire,  and  enable<l  him 
to  oomman^ł  instantly  all  his  resources.  In  the  early 
HethodisŁ  literaturę,  and  the  English  chissics  of  the 
IJth  century,  he  was  unusually  well  read,  and  his  cita- 
tions  from  his  farorite  authors  pleasantly  spiced  his 
conrersation.  Withal  there  was  a  vein  of  humor  run- 
ning  throiigh  his  speaking  and  writing  which  gave  a 
flavor  to  both.  His  literary  remains  consist  chiefly  of 
es8a%*8  contribnted  to  rellgious  and  other  periodicals. 
One  of  these,  on  John  Wesley,  fumished  to  Harper^s 
Magazme^  is  one  of  the  most  striking  characterizations 
of  the  great  reformer  extant.  On  the  last  Sunday  of 
his  life,  June  25th,  he  preached  to  his  congregation  from 
the  t€xt, "  Lei  me  die  the  death  of  the  righteous,  and 
Irt  my  last  end  be  like  his."  Not  liaving  finished  his 
discourse,  he  annoimced  that  he  wouUl  conclude  it  the 
ncxt  time  be  preached.  On  the  evening  of  that  dar  he 
was  too  unwell  to  go  into  the  pulpit.  On  Wedneśday 
aftemoon  he  was  sitting  tn  his  chair,  reading  from  the 
sermons  of  Rev.  Jonathan  Seed,  an  old  favorite  of  John 
Wealey.  Meeting  in  Seed  with  a  passage  which  greatly 
I^ased  him,  he  called  his  wife,  and  began  reading  it 
aknid  to  her.  While  reading  he  was  seized  with  a 
^Mam  of  pain  in  the  chest;  the  book  was  dropped,  he 
leaned  his  head  upon  his  hand,  his  arm  upon  the  table 
before  him,  and  in  a  few  minutes  if  was  all  over.  He 
had  nearly  oompleted  his  fifty-seyenth  year,  and  the 
(hirty-fourth  of  his  ministry.     (G.  R.  C.) 

Ha'gar  (Heb.  Hagar\  'ian,/^A/,  apparently  from 
ter  afaandonment  of  her  mistress;  but  aooording  to  oth- 


ers, a  airangeTy  ftom  her  foreign  birth  [comp.  Hagah- 
enk]  ;  Sept.  and  N.  T.  *Ayap),  a  native  of  Egj-pt,  and 
9er>'ant  of  Abraham  (Gen.  xxi,  9, 10),  perhaps  one  of 
the  female  slayes  presented  to  Abraham  by  Pharaoh 
during  his  risit  to  Egypt  (Gen.  xii,  16),  although  she 
properly  belonged  to  Sarah  (Gen.  xvi,  1).  The  long- 
continued  sterility  of  Sarah  suggested  to  her  the  idea 
(not  uncommon  in  the  East)  of  becoming  a  mother  by 
proxy  through  her  handmaid,  whom,  with  that  yiew, 
she  gave  to  Abraham  as  a  secondary  wife  (Gen.  xv). 
B.C.  2078.  See  Abraham;  Adoption:  Concubine. 
This  honor  was  too  great  and  unexpected  for  the  weak 
and  iil-regulated  mind  of  Hagar;  and  no  soouer  did  she 
tind  herself  likely  to  become  the  mother  of  her  master'8 
heir  than  she  openly  indnlgcd  in  triumph  over  her  less 
favored  mistress.  The  feelings  of  Sarah  were  severely 
wowided,  and  she  broke  out  to  her  husband  in  loud 
complaints  of  the  ser\'ant's  petulancc.  Abraham,  whose 
meek  and  pmdent  behavior  is  strikingly  contrasted  with 
the  violence  of  his  wife,left  her  with  uMettered  power,  as 
mistress  of  his  household,  to  take  what  steps  she  pleased 
to  obtain  the  required  redress.  (See  Kittos  Daily  Bi- 
bU  JUust.  ad  loc.)  In  all  Oriental  states  where  eon- 
cubinage  is  legalized,  the  principal  wife  has  authority 
ovcr  the  rest;  the  secondary  one,  if  a  slare,  retains  her 
former  condition  unchanged,  and  society  thiis  presents 
the  strange  anomaly  of  a  woman  being  at  once  the  me- 
nial  of  her  master  and  the  partner  of  his  bed.  This  per- 
mission,  however,  was  neoessary  in  an  Eastem  house- 
hold, but  it  is  worthy  of  remark  that  it  is  now  very 
rarely  givcn ;  nor  can  we  think,  from  the  imchangeable- 
ness  of  Eastem  customs,  and  the  strongly-marked  na- 
tional  character  of  those  peoplcs,  that  it  was  usual  an- 
ciently  to  aJlow  a  wife  to  deal  hardly  with  a  slare  in 
IIagar*s  position.  Lefl  w^ith  this  authority  over  her 
dotal  maid-^seryant,  Sarah  was  ueither  reluctant  nor 
sparing  in  making  the  minlon  reap  the  fruits  of  her  in- 
solence;  but  whether  she  actiially  iniiicted  blows  (Au- 
gustine^  Epitt.  xlviii),  or  merely  threw  out  menaces  to 
that  effect,  cannot  be  determined  from  the  rerb  n?C  (to 
"o^fri").  there  employed.  Sensible,  at  length,  of  the 
hopelessness  of  getting  the  better  of  her  mistress,  Hagar 
determined  on  fltght ;  and  haring  seemingly  formed  the 
purpoee  of  retuming  to  her  relations  in  Egypt,  she  took 
the  direction  of  that  comitr}',  which  led  her  to  what 
was  afterwards  called  Shur,' through  a  long  tract  of 
sandy  uninhabited  country,  lying  on  the  west  of  Arabia 
Petnea,  to  the  extent  of  150  miles  between  Palestine 
and  £g}i)t.  Ilere  she  was  sitting  by  a  fountain  to  re- 
plenish  her  skin-bottle  or  recruit  her  wearied  limbs, 
when  the  angel  of  the  Lord  appeared,  and  in  the  kind- 
liest  manner  remonstiated  with  her  on  the  course  she 
was  pursuing,  and  encouraged  her  to  return  by  the 
promise  that  she  would  ere  long  have  a  son,  whom  Pror- 
idence  destined  to  become  a  great  man,  and  whose  wild 
and  in-egular  features  of  character  would  be  indelibly 
impressed  on  the  mighty  nation  that  should  spring  from 
him.  Obedient  to  the  hearenhr  risitor,  and  haring 
distinguished  the  place  by  the  name  of  Beer-lahai-roi 
(q.v.),  "the  well  of  the  risible  God,"  Hagar  retraced 
her  steps  to  the  tent  of  Abraham,  where  in  due  time  she 
had  a  son ;  and,  haring  probably  narratetl  this  remark- 
able  interriew  to  Abraham,  that  patriarch,  as  directed 
by  the  angel,  called  the  name  oi  fhe  child  Islimael, 
« God  hath  heard"  (Gen.  xvi).  RC.  2078.  Fourteen 
years  afler  the  birth  of  Ishmael  the  appearance  of  the 
long-promised  heir  entirely  changed  the  relations  of  the 
family,  though  nothing  materially  affecting  Ishmael 
took  place  tiU  the  weaning  of  Isasc,  which,  as  is  genep- 
ally  thoiight,  was  at  the  end  of  his  tbird  year.  B.C. 
2061.  Ishmael  was  then  fully  capable  of  understanding 
his  altered  relations  to  the  inheritance ;  and  when  the 
newly-weaned  child,  clad,  according  to  custom,  with 
the  sacred  symbolic  robę,  which  was  the  badge  of  the 
birthright,  was  formally  installed  heir  of  the  tribe  (see 
BibUotk.  BiU,  roL  i ;  Yicasi,  A  rmot,  p.  32 ;  Bush  on  Gen. 
xxvii,  15),  he  inconsiderately  gare  rent  to  his  disap- 


HA6ARENE 


16 


HAGARENE 


jioiiited  feelings  by  an  acŁ  of  mockery  (Geiu  xzi,  9— 
the  Hebrew  word  pns,  thoagh  properly  atgntfying  "  to 
langh,**  w  frequently  nsed  to  expre8S  strong  derińon,  as 
in  Gen.  xix,  14 ;  Neh.  ii,  19 ;  iv,  1 ;  Erek.  xxiii,  82 ;  ac- 
companied,  ta  is  probable  on  some  of  the  oocańons  re- 
fened  to  in  those  |>afl8agc8,  with  yiolent  gestnres,  which 
might  yeiy  juatly  be  interpreted  aa  pcnecution,  GaL 
iv,  29).  The  procedurę  of  Abraham  in  awanling  the 
inheritance  to  laaac  was  guided  by  the  special  com- 
mand  of  Goii,  and,  moreorer,  was  in  harmony  with  the 
immemorial  practice  of  the  East,  where  the  son  of  a 
slare  or  secondary  wife  is  alwaj^s  supplanted  by  that  of 
a  free  woman,  eyen  if  bom  long  after.  This  msulting 
condact  of  Ishmael  gave  offence  to  Sarah,  such  that  she 
insisted  upon  his  expulsion  from  the  family.  together 
with  his  mother  as  oonni\'ing  at  it.  So  harsh  a  meas- 
ure  was  extrcmely  painfiil  to  Abraham ;  but  his  scruples 
were  removed  by  the  divine  direction  to  follow  Sarah'8 
advice  (sce  Kitto's  DaUy  Bibie  JUust.  ad  loc),  <'for," 
adds  the  Taigum  of  Jonathan,  ^she  is  a  prophetess" 
(compare  GaL  iv,  30).  Aooordingly,  ^Abraham  rosę  up 
early  in  the  moming,  and  took  bread,  and  a  bottle  of 
water  (and  gave  it  unto  Hagar,  putting  it  on  faer  shoul- 
der),  and  the  child,  and  sent  her  away"  (Gen.  xxi,  14). 
B.C.  2061.  In  spite  of  instnictions,  the  two  exiIeB  miss- 
ed  their  way.  Overcome  by  fatigue  and  thirst,  the 
strength  of  the  young  Ishmael  first  gave  way,  and  his 
mother  laid  him  down  in  complete  exhaustion  under 
one  of  the  stunted  shrubs  of  this  arid  region,  in  the  hope 
of  his  obtaining  some  momentary  relief  from  sroelling 
the  damp  in  the  shade,  while  she  withdrew  to  a  little 
distance,  onable  to  witness  his  lingering  sufferings,  and 
there  "  she  hfted  up  her  roice  and  wepL"  In  this  dis- 
tress,  the  angel  of  the  Lord  appeared  with  a  comforting 
promise  of  her  son^s  futurę  greatness,  and  directed  her 
to  a  fountain,  which,  concealed  by  the  brushwood,  had 
cscaped  her  notice,  and  from  which  she  now  rcWved  the 
almost  lifeless  Ishmael  This  well,  according  to  the  tra- 
dition  of  the  Arabs  (who  pay  great  honor  to  the  memo- 
ry  of  Hagar,  and  maintain  that  she  was  Abraham's 
lawful  wife),  is  Zemzem,  near  Mecca.  (See  WeiPs  BtbL 
Legendsj  p.  82.)  Of  the  subseąuent  history  of  Hagar 
we  have  no  account  beyond  what  is  involved  in  that  of 
Ishmael,  who  established  himseU  in  the  wildemess  of 
Paran,  in  the  netghborhood  of  Sinai,  was  married  by  his 
mother  to  a  countrywoman  of  her  own,  and  maintained 
both  himself  and  his  family  by  the  produce  of  his  bow 
(Gen.  xxi,  20, 21).— Kitto,  a.  v.  See  Ishmael.  In  Gal. 
iv,  24,  the  apostle  Paul,  in  an  allegory,  makes  Hagar 
(ró  'Ayap)  represent  the  Jewish  Church,  which  was  in 
bondage  to  the  ceremoniał  law,  as  Sarah  represents  the 
true  Church  of  Christ,  which  is  free  from  this  bondage. 
(See  Bloomfield's  Notę,  ad  loc.)  Some  commentators, 
however,  have  disoovered  an  alliteration  in  the  name 
here  vrith  the  Arab.  word  for  ttone  (hajar\  Aocording 
to  Mohammedan  tradition,  Hagar  {Hajir)  was  buried 
at  Mecca!  (D'Herbelot,  Bib,  Or,  a.  v.  Hagiar).  Mr. 
Rowlanils,  in  travelling  through  the  desert  of  Beershe- 
ba,  discovered  some  wells  and  a  stone  mansion,  which 
he  dedares  the  Arabs  still  designate  as  those  of  Hagar! 
(Williams,  iloly  Ciły,  i,  465  są.).    See  Abraham. 

Hagarćne  or  Hag^aiite  [conmnonly  JIa'garite] 
(Heb.  Uagri\  '^^it^,/uffitive  [compare  Hagar^  from  the 
same  loot  as  the  Arab.  Hegirah^  i.  t,JUghi] ;  but,  aocord- 
ing to  FUTBt,  s.  V.,  a  patrial  from  some  ancestor  Hagar, 
otherwise  unknown;  1  CJhron.  xi,  88,  Sept.  'Arapat, 
Vulg.  Agami,  A.  V.  "Haggerij"  xxvii,  31,  'Ayopinyc, 
AgaruiSj  "  Haggerite ;"  in  the  plur,  Hagrim\  O'**??!^, 
Psa.  Lxxxiii,  6,  'Ayacnjyoif  Agarem,  *<  Hagarenes ;"  fuUy 
Hagriim\  t3'^5<'n:n,  1  Chroń.  v,  10, 19,  20,  SepU  in  ver. 
10  n-apocjcoi,  in  ver.  19,  20  'Ayapalot,  Yulg.  Aagarei, 
A.  Y.  M  Hagarites ;"  Baruch  iii,  23,  vioi  'AyapyJUU  Agar, 
^^Agarenes"),  occurs  apparently  as  the  national  or  local 
designation  of  two  in(tividua]s,  and  also  of  a  tribe  or  re- 
gion»  probahly  the  same  Arab  pecipLe  who  appear  at  dif- 


ferent  periods  of  the  aecred  histoiy  as  foreignen  to  the 
HebrewSb    See  Arabia. 

I.  Of  indinduaia  it  is  twioe  used  in  connecdon  with 
the  royal  staff  in  the  time  of  David  (q.  v.). 

1.  In  1  Chroń,  xi,  88  of  Mibhab  (q.  v.),  one  of  David'8 
mighty  men,  who  is  described  as  '<'iaij"*|5»''«6c*Ayapi, 
JiUus  Agandj  **  the  son  of  HaggcriJ**  or,  better  (as  the 
margin  has  it),  **  the  Ilaggerite,^'  whose  iather^s  name  is 
not  given.  This  hero  differs  from  some  of  his  col- 
leagues,  '<  Zelek  the  Ammonite**  (ver.  89),  for  instance; 
or  "  Ithmah  the  Moabite"  (rer.  46),  in  that,  while  they 
were  foreigners,  he  was  only  the  son  of  a  foreiguer— a 
domiciled  settler  perhaps.    See  IIaogeiu. 

2.  In  1  CJhron.  xxvii,  81  of  Jaziz  (q.  v.),  another  of 
David's  retaineis,  who  was  "over  his  flocks."  This 
man  was  himself  a  "Hagaritc,"  6  'AyCTpinfc,  Agartu$, 
A  comparison  of  the  next  paragraph  (H)  will  show  how 
well  qualified  for  his  office  this  man  was  likely  to  be 
from  his  extraction  from  a  pastorał  race.  (''A  Hagarite 
had  charge  of  David*s  flocks,  and  an  Ishmaelite  of  his 
herds,  because  the  aiiimals  were  pastured  in  districta 
where  theso  nomadic  people  were  aocustomed  to  feod 
their  cattle"  [or,  rather,  because  their  experience  madę 
them  skilful  in  such  emplojnnents],  Bertheau  on  Chran- 
icUs  [Clarke's  ed.],  ii,  820.)  One  of  the  effects  of  the 
great  ^ictoiy  over  the  Hagarites  of  Gilead  and  the 
East  was  probably  that  individua]s  of  their  nation  en- 
tered  the  senrice  of  the  victorious  Israelites,  either  vol- 
untarily  or  by  coercion,  as  freemen  or  as  Blave8.  Jazia 
was  no  doubt  among  the  former,  a  man  of  emineuce  and 
intelligenoe  among  his  countr>'men,  on  which  account 
he  attracted  the  attention  of  his  royal  master,  who 
seems  to  have  liberally  employed  distinguiahed  and 
meritorious  foreigners  in  his  8ervice.     See  Haggeritk. 

II.  Of  A  people  thiee  timcs  who  appear  in  hostilc  r&- 
lation  to  the  Hebrew  nation. 

1.  Our  first  passagc  treats  of  a  great  war,  which  in 
the  reign  of  king  Saul  was  waged  between  the  trans-Jor- 
danie  tribes  of  Reuben,  Gad,  and  half  Manasseh  on  the 
one  sidd,  and  their  formidable  neighbors,  the  Hagarites, 
aided  by  the  kindred  tribes  of  "  Jetur,  and  Nephish,  and 
Nodab,"  on  the  other.  {Kindred  tribes,  we  say,  on  the 
evidence  of  Gen.  xxv,  15.  The  Arab  tribes  derived 
from  Hagar  and  Ishmael,  likc  the  earlier  stocks  descend* 
ed  from  Cush  and  Joktaii,  were  at  the  some  time  gener- 
ally  known  by  the  oommon  patronalnie  of  Ishmaelites 
or  Hagarenes.  Some  regard  the  three  specific  namea 
of  Jetur,  Nephish,  and  Nodab,  not  as  distinct  from,  but 
in  apposition  with  Hagarites ;  as  if  the  Hagarites  with 
whom  the  two  tribes  and  a  half  successfully  fought  were 
the  dans  of  Jetur,  Nephish,  and  Nodab.  See  Forsterze 
Geog,  o/ Arabia,  i,  186-189.)  The  result  of  this  war 
was  extremely  favorable  to  the  eastem  Israelitcs :  many 
of  the  enemy  were  taken  and  many  slain  in  the  conflict 
(ver.  21,  22) ;  the  victoQous  two  tribes  and  a  half  took 
possession  of  the  country,  and  retained  it  until  the  cap- 
tivity  (ver.  22).  The  booty  captured  on  this  occasion 
was  enormous:  *'of  camels  dO,000,  and  of  sheep  250,000, 
and  of  asses  2000**  (ver.  21).  RosenmUller  (BibL  Geogr. 
[tr.  by  Morren],  iii,  140),  following  the  Sept  and  Ln- 
ther,  unnecessarily  redticcs  the  number  of  camels  to 
5000.  Whea  it  is  remembered  that  the  wealth  of  a 
Bedouin  chief,  both  in  those  and  these  times,  consisted 
of  cattle,  the  amount  of  the  booty  taken  in  the  Hagarite 
war,  though  great,  was  not  exce88ive.  Job*s  stock  ia 
described  as  "  7000  sheep,  3000  camels,  600  yoke  of  oxen, 
and  500  she-asses"  (i,  3).  Mesha,  king  of  Moab,  paid 
to  the  king  of  Israel  a  tribute  of  100,000  lambe  and 
100,000  rams  (2  Kings  iii,  4).  In  further  iUustration  of 
this  wealth  of  cattle,  we  may  quote  a  passage  from  Stan- 
ley's  Jetińsh  Church,  i,  215,  216 :  "  Still  the  coundesa 
flocks  and  herds  may  be  seen  [in  this  vcry  region  con- 
quered  from  the  Hagarites],  droves  of  cattle  nk>ving  on 
like  troope  of  soldiens  descending  at  aunset  to  drink  of 
the  springs — literally,  in  the  language  of  the  prophet, 
<  rams  and  lambs,  and  goats  and  buUocks,  all  of  them 
iatlings  of  Biahan.' ''    ^y  this  conąuest^  which  was  stiU 


HAGAKENES 


17 


HA6ARENES 


I  fiimly  ntified  in  the  sul)0eqaent  leign  of  Darid, 
the  promisey  which  was  given  as  early  aa  AbrabaxD'8 
time  (Gen.  xv,  18)  and  renewed  to  Moaes  (Deut.  i,  7) 
and  to  Joahna  (i,  4),  began  to  leceire  that  accomplish- 
ment  whkh  was  oonaummated  by  the  glorioua  Solomon 
(1  Kinga  ir,  21).  The  Jarge  tract  of  country  which 
thus  accnied  to  Israel  stietched  from  the  iiidefinite 
frontier  of  the  ]>a8toral  tńbes,  to  whom  were  fonnerly 
aasigned  the  kii^gdams  of  Sihon  and  Og,  to  the  Euphra* 
tes.  A  compariaon  of  1  Chroń.  v,  9-20  with  Gen.  xxv, 
12-18,  fieema  to  show  that  this  linę  of  countr>%  which 
(as  the  history  informs  us)  cxtended  eastward  of  Gilead 
and  Baahan  in  the  direction  of  the  Euphrates,  was  sub- 
stanttally  the  same  as  that  which  Moees  descnbes  as 
peopled  by  the  sons  of  Ishmael,  whom  Hagar  borę  to 
Atodiam.  ''They  dwelt,"  says  Moses,  *'from  Havilah 
mito  Shur,  that  is  before  Egypt  as  thou  goest  towards 
AsaTTia"* — in  otlier  words,  across  the  country  from  the 
junćtłon  of  the  Euphrates  with  the  Tigris  to  the  isth- 
mos  of  Suez ;  and  this  is  the  spacious  tract  which  we 
aasign  to  the  Ilagarites  or  Hagarenes.  The  booty  taken 
firom  the  Ilagarites  and  their  allies  prove8  that  much 
of  this  territory  waa  well  adapted  to  pasturage,  and 
tbeiefore  raluable  to  the  nomadic  habits  of  the  conquer- 
ofs  (Numb.  xxxii,  1).  The  brilliancy  of  the  conąuest, 
raoreover,  cxhibits  the  militaty  prowess  of  these  shep- 
benis.  Living  amid  raoes  whose  love  of  phmder  is  still 
iUnstrated  in  the  predatoiy  Bcdouins  of  Eastem  Pales- 
Une,  they  were  oliliged  to  erect  fortresses  for  the  protec- 
tion  of  their  pastures  (Michaelis,  Iaiws  of  Motetf  art. 
xxiii),  a  precaution  which  seems  to  have  been  resorted 
to  finom  the  first.  The  sons  of  Ishmael  are  enumerated, 
Gen.  xxv,  16,  "by  their  towns  and  by  their  casiles;" 
and  9ome  such  defeiisive  erections  were  no  duubt  meant 
by  the  children  of  Reubcu  and  Gad  in  Numb.  xxxii,  16, 
17.     See  laiiMAEUTES. 

2.  Thongh  these  eastem  Israelites  becaroe  lords  par- 
amooDt  of  this  vast  tract  of  countr}',  it  b  not  necessary 
to  siippoee  that  they  exclustvely  oocupied  the  entire  re- 
gion, nor  that  the  Ilagarites  and  their  kindred,  though 
ttdMkied,  were  driven  out;  for  it  was  probably  in  the 
same  neighborhood  that "  the  Hagarenes"^  of  our  second 
paaaage  were  Iiving  when  thej'  joined  in  the  great  con- 
federacy  against  Israel  with,  among  others,  £dom,  and 
Moab,  and  Ammon,  and  Amalek  (Psa.  lxxxiii,  6  [lleb. 
7;  Sept.  lxxii,  6]).  When  this  combination  took  place 
k  of  little  importance  herc ;  Mr.  Thnipp  (PsalmSf  ii,  60, 
61)  give8  reasona  for  aasigning  it  to  the  reigns  of  Jeho- 
ash  andofhisson  Jeroboamll.  The  psalm  was  prob- 
ably written  on  the  triumph  of  Jehoshaphat  over  the 
tiana-Joidanic  Bedouins  (2  Chroń.  xx).  See  Psalms. 
The  nations,  hawever,  which  constituted  the  confeder- 
acy  with  the  Hagarenes,  seem  to  confirm  our  opinion 
that  ikeae  were  still  residiiig  in  the  district,  where  in  the 
reign  of  Saul  they  had  been  subjugated  by  tlieir  Israel- 
iUah  neighbors.  BoeenmUUer  {BibL  Geogr,  [trans.]  iii, 
141)  and  Gesenius  {JkeMOur,  p.  365)  suggcst  that  the 
Hagarenes  when  vanquished  migrated  to  the  south-east., 
because  on  the  Peisian  Gulf  there  was  the  pro%'inoe  of 
Hagar  or  Uajar.  This  is  the  district  which  the  Ara- 
btan  geographers  have  carefully  and  prominently  de- 
acribed  (comparc  De  Sacy'8  Chretiomathie  A  rabę,  ii,  128 ; 
Abulfeda  [by  Keinaud],  ii,  1, 137,  who  qnotes  Jakut 's 
Mosktarek  for  some  of  his  Information;  and  KommeFs 
Commentaiy  on  Abulfeda,  De  Prov,  Hagiar,  tire  Bokh- 
ram^  p.  87,  88,  89;  D'Herbek>^  s.  v.  Hagr).  We  wiU 
not  deny  that  this  proriuce  probably  derlred  its  name 
and  eaily  inhabitants  from  Jłoffar  and  her  son  Ishmael 
(or,  as  Kabbi  D.  Kimchi  would  prefer,  from  Uagar, 
thioagh  some  son  by  another  iather  than  Abraham) : 
but  we  aie  not  of  opinion  that  these  Hagarenes  of  the 
Peniaii  Golf,  whoee  pursuits  were  so  different,  were 
identical  with  the  Hagarenes  of  the  Psahn  before  us,  or 
with  the  Hagaritea  of  1  Chroń.,  whom  we  have  identi- 
fied  with  them.  Nothing  pastorcU  is  related  of  this 
mariŁune  tribe;  Rommel  quoteB  from  two  Arabian  ge- 
agCBphenyTaiiaahi  and  Bakiu,  who  both  deacńbe  these 
IV.— B 


Hagarenes  of  the  coast  as  much  employed  in  pearl-fłsh 
ing  and  such  piursuits.  Niebuhr  {Tratfels  in  Arabia 
[Engl.  tr.],  ii,  151, 152)  contirms  their  statement.  Ge* 
senius  is  also  inexact  in  identifying  these  tnariHme 
Hagarenes  with  the  'Aypaioc  of  Ptolemy,  v,  19,  2,  and 
Eratosthenes,  in  Strabo,  xvi,  767,  and  Pliny,  vi,  28.  If 
the  tribes  indicated  in  these  classical  authors  be  the 
same  (which  is  doubtftd),  they  are  much  more  correctly 
identi^ed  by  an  older  writer.  Dr.  T.  Jackson  ( Worka 
[ed.  Oxon.],  i,  220),  who  says:  *<The  seat  of  such  as 
the  Scripture  calls  Haganau  was  in  the  desert  Arabia, 
betwixt  Gilead  and  Euphrates  (1  Chroń.  v,  9, 10).  Tliis 
people  were  called  by  the  heatheii  'AypaToi,  Agnei, 
rightly  placed  by  Ptolemy  in  the  desert  Arabia,  and  by 
Strabo  in  that  very  place  which  the  Scripture  makea 
the  eastem  bonnds  of  IshmaeFs  postcrity,  to  wit,  next 
unto  the  inhabitants  of  Havilah."  Amid  the  difficulty 
of  Identification,  some  modem  geographers  have  distriln 
uted  the  classical  Agnei  in  variou8  localities.  Thus,  in 
Forster^s  maiis  of  Arabia,  they  occupy  both  the  district 
between  Gilead  and  the  Euphrates  in  the  north,  and 
also  the  western  shores  of  the  Pcrsian  Gulf.  The  fact 
seems  to  be  that  many  districts  in  Arabia  were  called 
by  the  generic  appellation  of  Hagarite  or  Hagai-etie,  no 
doubt  aflter  Hagar;  as  Keturah,  another  of  Abraham  s 
concubines,  occasioned  the  rathcr  vaguely-uscd  name  of 
Kctureans  for  other  tribes  of  the  Arabian  peninsula 
(Forster,  Geog,  of  A  rabia,  ii,  7).  In  the  veiy  section  of 
Abulfeda  which  we  havc  above  quoted,  that  geographer 
(after  the  author  of  the  Mo$ktarek)  reminds  us  that  the 
name  Ilajar  (Hagar)  is  as  extensive  in  meaning  in 
Arabia  as  Sham  (Sj-ria)  and  Irak  elseirhere;  m  liko 
manner  Kommel,  within  a  page  or  two,  describes  a  Ha- 
gar in  the  remote  province  of  Yemen ;  this,  althoiigh 
an  unquestionabIy  different  place  (Reinaud,  ii,  1-187, 
notę),  is  yet  confounde<l  with  the  maritime  Hajar.  In 
proof  of  the  uncertainty  of  the  situation  of  places  in 
Arabia  of  like  name,  we  may  mention  that,  while  Abul- 
feda, Edrisi,  Giauhaii,  and  Golius  dislinguish  between 
ihe  Hagarenes  of  the  north-cast  coast  and  those  of  tho 
remote  sonth-west  district  «which  we  have  just  men- 
tioned,  Nassir  Edin,  Olugbeig,  and  Bllsching  confound 
them  as  identical  Winer,  Reaho.  s.  v.  Hagariter,  men- 
tions  yet  another  Chajar,  which,  though  slightly  differ- 
ent in  form,  might  be  written  much  like  uur  word  in 
Ilebrew  K12in,  and  is  actually  identical  with  it  in  the 
Syriac  (Assemanni,  BUMołh,  Orient.  III,  ii,  753).  This 
place  was  in  the  province  of  Hejaz,  on  the  Red  Sea,  on 
tho  main  route  lietween  Damascus  and  Mecca.  Such 
being  the  uncertainty  connected  with  the  sites  of  theae 
Arab  tribes,  we  the  less  hesitate  to  place  the  Hagarenes 
of  the  Psalm  in  the  neighborhood  of  Edom,  Moab,  and 
Ammon,  in  the  situation  which  was  in  Saul*s  time  occu- 
pied  by  the  Hagarites,  **near  the  main  road  which  led" 
[or,  more  correctly,  in  the  bclt  of  country  which  stretch- 
ed]  "from  the  head  of  the  Red  Sea  to  the  Euplirates** 
(Smith'8  IHct.  of  Geog.  s.  v.  Agnei ;  see  also  Bochart, 
Pkaleg  [edit.  YiBemandy],  IV,  ii,  225).  The  mention 
both  of  Ishmaelites  itnd  Hagarenes  in  this  Psalm  has  led 
to  the  opinion  that  they  are  separate  nations  here  meant. 
The  ver8e,  however,  is  in  the  midst  of  a  poetic  jwzra/fc^ 
ism,  in  which  the  clauses  are  synanymoua  and  not  anti- 
thetic  (corap.  ver.  5-11),  so  that  if  "  Edom  and  the  Ish- 
maelites"' is  not  absolutely  identical  in  geograplucal  sig- 
uification  with  "Moab  and  the  Hagarenes,"  there  is  at 
Icast  a  poetical  identity  between  these  two  groups  which 
forbids  our  separating  them  widely  from  each  other  in 
any  sense  (for  the  ditpersed  condition  of  the  Hagarenes, 
see  also  Fuller,  Misc  Sacr.  ii,  12). 

Combinations  roarked  the  mirelenting  hostility  of 
their  neighbors  towards  the  Jews  to  a  very  late  period. 
One  of  these  is  mentioned  in  1  Mace,  v,  as  dispersed  by 
Judas  Maocabeeus.  "The  children  of  Bsean"  {viol  Bai- 
av)  of  ver.  4  have  been  by  Hitzig  conjectured  to  be  the 
same  as  our  Hagarenes;  there  is,  however,  no  other 
gromid  for  this  opinion  than  their  vicinity  to  Edom  and 
Ammon,  and  the  difficulty  of  making  them  fit  in  wHb 


HAGENAU,  CONFERENCE  OF  18 


HAGGAI 


any  other  tiibe  as  conyeniently  aa  with  that  which  is 
the  subjecfc  of  this  artide  (aee  J.  Olshaiuen,  die  PtcUmen, 
p.345). 

8.  In  the  paasage  fiom  Barach  iii,  23  there  are  attrib- 
uted  to  "  the  Agarenes"  qualities  of  wiadom  for  which 
the  Arabian  nation  has  long  been  celebrated,  skill  in 
proverbial  philoflophy  (comp.  Frey  tag,  A  rab,  Prot.  tom. 
iii,  pnef.) ;  in  this  acoomplishment  they  have  aseociated 
with  them  "  the  merchants  of  Meran  and  of  Themau." 
This  is  not  the  place  to  disciue  the  site  of  Meran,  which 
sonie  have  placed  on  the  Persian  Gulf,  and  othere  on  the 
Red  Sea;  it  is  enough  to  obeerye  that  their  mercantile 
habits  gave  them  a  shrewdneas  in  practical  knowledge 
which  rendered  them  worthy  of  comparison  with  "  the 
merchants  of  Theman"  or  Edom.  Forster  roakes  these 
Themanese  to  be  inhabitants  of  Lhe  maritime  Bahrain, 
and  therefore  Hagarenea  (i,  303)  \  but  in  this  he  is  tła- 
grantly  inconsistent  with  his  o^vn  good  canon  (if  291) : 
'*  The  n  imc  of  the  son  of  Eliphaz  and  of  his  descendants 
[the  Edoroites]  b  uniformly  written  Tema»  in  the  orig- 
inal  Hebrew,  and  that  of  the  son  of  Ishmael  and  his  fam- 
tly  [the  Ilagarenes  or  Ishmaelites]  as  uniformly  Tema 
[without  the  n]."  The  wisdom  of  these  Themanese 
merchants  is  expres8ly  mentioned  in  Jer.  xUx,  7,  and 
Obadiah,  ver.  8.  The  Ilagarenes  of  this  passage  we 
would  place  among  the  inhabitants  of  the  shores  of  the 
Pendaii  Gulf,  where  (see  1)  Gesenius  and  others  placed 
"the  Hagarites"  after  their  conquest  by  the  trans-Jor- 
danic  Israelites.  The  clause,  ''That  seek  wisdom  on 
earth^'  [that  is,  *'  who  acquire  experience  and  intelli- 
gence  from  interoourse  with  mankind"]  (the  Sept.  oi 
ixi^rjrovvrec  r/;v  <rvviffiv  oi  Ini  r^c  yiyts  is  surely  cor- 
rupt,  because  mcaningless :  by  the  help  of  the  Y ulgate 
and  the  S>Tiac  it  has  been  conjectumi  by  some  [by 
Hilvernick  and  Fritzsche,  ad  loc.,  for  instancej  that  in- 
Btead  of  oi  ini  we  should  read  tĄu  irri,  q.  d.  "  the  wis- 
dom [or  common  sense]  which  is  cognizantof  the  earth 
— its  men  and  manners;"  an  attainment  which  mercan- 
tile persons  acquire  better  than  all  clse),  seems  to  best 
fali  in  mth  the  habits  of  a  seafaring  and  mercantile 
race  (see  Fritzsche,  dat  Bueh  Boruch,  p.  192;  and  Hav- 
emick,  whose  words  he  ąuotes :  "  Hagarcni  terram  quasi 
perlustrantes  dicuntur,  quippe  mercatores  longe  celeber- 
rimi  autiquis8imis  jamjam  temporlbus'').— Kitto,  s.  v. 

Hagenau,  Conference  oC  a  theological  confer- 
ence  called  by  the  (rerman  emperor  in  1539  in  order  to 
bring  about  a  reunion  between  Protestanta  and  Roman 
Gatholics.  IlaNńng  originally  been  oonroked  to  Worms, 
it  was  transferred  to  Ilagenau  in  con8equence  of  an 
epidemie  preyailing  in  the  former  city.  It  lasted  from 
June  12  to  July  16,  1540.  As  it  was  not  deemed  aafe 
to  send  Luther  without  a  special  protection,  and  as  Me- 
lancthon  fell  sick  during  the  journey,  the  Protestanta 
were  represented  by  Brenz,  Osiandcr,  Capito,  Cruciger, 
and  Myconius;  and  the  Roman  Gatholics  by  £ck,  Fa- 
ber, and  Oochlffius.  The  conference  led  to  no  definite 
resulta.  It  was  agreed  that  an  equal  number  of  repre- 
aentatircs,  chosen  by  the  two  paities,  should  meet  at 
Worms,  and  resume  the  negotiations  for  a  imion. — ^Her- 
zog, xix,  689.     (A.  J.  S.) 

Hag^erite  [or  l/a'gerite]  (Heb.  with  the  art.  ha- 
Tlagri',  *^*!' ?•!?•!?»  ''*«  Uagjiłe;  Sept.  ó  'Ayapiriyc,  Vulg. 
Agareus),  a  designation  of  Jaziz  (q.v.),  one  of  David'8 
agricultural  officers  (1  Chroń,  xxvii,  31).     See  Hagak- 

ITE. 

Haggadah  (Heb.  anecdote,  legend),  in  the  Talmud 
and  with  the  Rabbis  the  name  for  traditional  storiea,  le- 
genda, etc.  used  in  the  interpretation  and  elucidation  of 
the  law  and  the  prophets.  Many  of  the  haggadoth  \\\ 
the  Talmud  are  absurd  and  preposterous,  and  they  are 
not  held  by  the  best  Rabbins  aa  authoritative.  Mai- 
monides  says  of  them :  ^  Beware  that  you  take  not  these 
words  of  the  hachimim  (wise)  literally,  for  this  would  be 
degrading  to  the  sacred  doctńue,  and  sometimes  to  con- 
tradict  it.  Seek  raŁher  the  hidden  sense ;  and  if  you 
camiot  find  the  kernel,  }et  the  shell  alone,  and  confeas '  1 


cannot  understand  this'"  {Penuh  Jfctmmishnayołh).-^ 
FtUst,  Kulfurgeackichte  d,  Juden.  i,  74 ;  Etheridge,  Jnłro^ 
ducHon  ło  Ilebn  Lił.  p.  182 ;  Jost,  Ge^L  d,  Juden.  i,  178 ; 
ii,  313.  The  Haggadah  frequently  refers  to  the  Hala- 
chah  {rule,  norm),  the  orał  law  of  tradition,  brief  sen- 
tences  established  by  the  authority  of  the  Sanhedrim,  in 
which  the  law  was  interpreted  and  applied  to  individual 
cases,  and  which  were  designated  as  the  ''sencences  of 
the  elders."    See  Młdrash.     (J.  H.  W.) 

Hag^^gai  (Heb.  Chaggay',  ^tn,festwe;  Sept.  and 
Joseph. ' Ayy aioc  \  Jerome  and  Yulg.  Aggaus  or  //<^ 
gaus),  the  tenth  in  order  of  the  twelve  minor  prophets, 
and  the  first  of  the  three  who,  after  the  return  of  the 
Jews  from  the  Babylonian  exile,  prophesied  in  Pales- 
tine.  Of  the  place  and  year  of  his  birth,  his  descent, 
and  the  leading  incidenta  of  hia  life,  nothing  is  known 
which  can  be  relied  on  (see  Oehler,  in  Herzog's  KncyhL 
V,  471  8q.).  The  morę  fabulous  traditions  of  Jewish 
writers,  who  pass  hira  for  an  assessor  of  the  Synagoga 
Magna,  and  enlaige  on  his  literary  avocatiuna,  have 
been  collected  by  Carpzov  {fntroducłio  in  V\  T.  iii,  426). 
Somc  interpreters,  indeed,  taking  in  its  lit^^ral  sense  the 
expre9sion  niii^  TjKlbp  {malak  YehóuaA)  in  i,13,have 
imagined  that  he  was  an  angel  in  human  shape  (Je- 
rome, Comnu  ad  loc).  Some  ancient  writers  assert  that 
he  was  bom  in  Babylon,  and  whilc  yet  a  young  man 
came  to  Jerusalem,  when  Cyrus,  in  the  year  RC  536, 
allowed  the  Jews  to  return  to  their  comitry  (2  Chroń. 
xxxiv,  23 ;  Ezra  i,  1) ;  the  new  colony  consisting  chief- 
ly  of  people  belonging  to  the  tribes  of  Judah,  Benjamin, 
and  Le\i,  with  a  few  from  other  tribes.  Acoording  to 
the  same  tradition,  he  was  buried  H-ith  honor  near  the 
sepulchres  of  the  priests  (Isidor.  HispaL  c  49 ;  Pseudo- 
Dorotheus,  in  Chroń.  Pasch.  151,  d).  It  has  hence  been 
conjectured  that  he  was  of  priestly  rank.  Haggai, 
Zechariah,  and  Malachi,  according  to  the  Jewish  writ- 
ers, were  the  men  who  were  with  Daniel  when  he  saw 
the  vision  related  in  Dan.  x,  7,  and  were  after  the  cap- 
tivity  members  of  the  Great  Synagogue,  wliich  conaist- 
ed  of  120  elders  {Cozri,  iii,  65).  The  Seder  Olam  Żuta 
places  their  death  in  the  52d  year  of  the  Medes  and 
Persians,  while  the  extravagance  of  another  tradition 
makes  Haggai  8urvive  till  the  entry  of  Alexander  the 
Great  into  Jerusalem,  and  eveR  till  the  time  of  our 
Saviour  (Carpzov,  Inżrod.).  In  the  Roman  martyrology 
Hosea  and  Haggai  are  joined  in  the  catalogue  of  saints 
{A  eta  Sandor,  4  Julii).     See  £ziłc\. 

This  much  appears  from  Haggai'8  prophecies  (eh.  i, 
1,  etc),  that  he  dourished  during  the  reign  of  the  Per- 
sian monarch  Darius  Hystaspis,  who  asoended  the  ihrone 
B.C.  521.  It  is  probabie  that  he  was  one  of  the  exiles 
who  retumed  with  Zerubbabel  and  Jeshua ;  and  Ewald 
{die  Proph.  d.Alł,  B.)  is  even  tempted  to  infer  from  ii, 
3,  that  he  may  have  been  one  of  the  few  8ur\'ivors  who 
had  seen  the  first  Tempie  in  ito  s()lendor  (Bleek,  Einkił. 
p.  549).  The  rebuilding  of  the  Tempie,  which  was  com- 
menced  in  the  reign  of  Cyrus  (BwC  535),  was  suspended 
during  the  reigns  of  his  sucoessors,  Cambyses  and  Pseu- 
do-Sraerdis,  in  coti8equence  of  the  determined  hostility 
of  the  Samaritans.  On  the  accession  of  Darius  Hystas- 
pis (B.C.  521),  the  prophets  Haggai  and  Zechariah  uiged 
the  renewal  of  the  mideruking,  and  obtained  the  per- 
mission  and  assistancc  of  the  king  (Ezra  v,  1 ;  vi,  14; 
Jose\)hua,Anł.  xi,  4).  Animated  by  the  high  courage 
(magni  gpiriłus,  Jerome)  of  these  devoted  men,  the  peo- 
ple prosecuted  the  work  with  vigor,  and  the  Tempie 
was  complcted  and  de<iicated  in  the  &ixth  year  of  Da- 
rius (RC.  516).     See  Tkmplk. 

The  names  of  Haggai  and  Zechariah  are  aasociated 
in  the  Sept.  in  the  titles  of  Psa.  cxxxvii,  cxlv-cxlviii ; 
in  the  Yulgate  in  those  of  Psa.  cxi,  cxlv;  and  in  the 
Peshito  S>Tiac  in  those  of  Psa.  cxxv,  cxxvi,  cxlv,  cxlvi, 
cxlvii,  cxlviii.  It  may  be  that  tradition  aasigned  to 
these  prophets  the  arrangement  of  the  above-mentioned 
paalma  for  use  in  the  Tempie  8er\-ice,  just  as  Psa.  lxiv  is 
iu  the  Yulgate  attńbuted  to  Jeremiah  and  Ezekiel,  and 


k 


HAGGAI 


19 


HAGGIAH 


the  name  of  the  former  is  inacribed  at  the  head  of  Psa. 
ckkkW  in  the  Sept.  According  to  I^Mudo-Epiphanius 
{I)e  Vitiś  I*roph,),  Haggai  was  the  first  who  chantcd 
the  Hallelujah  in  the  accond  Tempie:  *' wherefore,"  he 
adds,  **  we  eay  *  Hallelujah,  which  is  the  hymn  of  Hag- 
gai  and  Zechariah.'  **  Haggai  is  mentioned  in  the  Apoc- 
TTpha  as  Aggeus,  in  1  Esdr.  vi,  1 ;  vii,  3 :  2  Eadr.  i,  40 ; 
aod  is  alladed  to  in  Ecclus.  xlix,  U  (comp.  Hag.  ii,  23), 
and  Heh.  xii,  26  (Hag*  ii,  6). — Smith,  s.  v.;  Kitto,  s.  v. 
See  Zbchakiaii. 

HAGGAI,  pROPiiECY  OF.  These  vaticination8  are 
oompiised  in  a  book  of  two  chaptera,  and  consist  of  dis- 
coiuR^es  so  bńef  and  summary  as  to  have  led  some  Ger- 
man theologians  to  suspect  that  they  have  not  come 
down  to  UB  in  their  original  complete  form,  but  are  only 
an  ppitome  (Richhom,  EwUitung  in  das  A,  T,  iii,  §  598 ; 
Jahn,  fntroducłio  in  Hbro$  sacroa  Vet,  Fotd,  edit.  2,yien- 
me,  1814,  §  156). 

Their  object  generally  is  to  nrge  the  rebuilding  of  the 
Tempie,  which  had,  indeed,  been  commenced  as  early  as 
RC.  535  (Ezra  iii,  10),  but  was  aiterwards  discontinued, 
the  Samaritans  having  obtained  an  edict  from  the  Per- 
sian  king  (Ezra  iv,  7)  which  forbade  further  procedurę, 
and  iiifluential  Jews  pretending  that  the  time  for  re- 
bttilding  the  Tempie  had  not  arrived,  sińce  the  Hcventy 
years  predicted  by  Jeremiah  applied  to  the  Tempie  also 
(Zech.  i,  2).  As  on  the  death  of  Pseudo-Smerdis  (the 
•*  Aktaxerxks"  of  Ezra  iv,  see  ver.  24),  and  the  conse- 
qucnt  termination  of  his  interdict,  the  Jews  still  contin- 
lied  to  wait  for  the  end  of  the  8eventy  years,  and  were 
otdy  engagcd  in  building  splendid  houses  for  them- 
selveft,  Haggai  began  to  prophesy  in  the  second  year  of 
Dariuss  aC.  520. 

His  lirst  didcoursc  (eh.  i),  delivered  on  the  first  day 
of  the  sixth  month  of  the  year  mentioned,  denounced 
the  listlessness  of  the  Jews,  who  dwelt  in  their  "  pancl- 
led  hoiises,"  while  the  tempie  of  the  Lord  was  rooflcss 
and  de»>late.  The  displeasure  of  (jod  was  manifest  in 
the  fallure  of  all  their  etTorts  for  their  own  gratification. 
The  heavens  were  **sta>^  from  dew,"  and  the  earth 
was  "  9tayed  from  her  fruiL**  They  had  neglected  that 
which  should  have  been  their  first  care,  and  reaped  the 
dae  wages  of  their  selfishness  (i,  4-1 1).  The  words  of  the 
prophet  sank  deep  into  the  hearts  of  the  people  and  their 
leadera  They  acknowledged  the  voice  of  God  speak- 
ing  by  his  8er\'ant,  and  obeyed  the  command.  Their 
obedience  was  rewanle<l  with  the  assunince  of  God's 
pre^ience  (i,  13),  and  twenty-four  days  afterwards  the 
buiidtng  was  resumed.  The  second  discourse  (ii,  1-9), 
deUvered  on  the  twenty-fint  day  of  the  8eventh  month, 
shows  that  a  month  had  scarcely  elapsed  when  the  work 
seemA  to  have  slackened,  and  the  enthusiasm  of  the  peo- 
pfe  abated.  The  prophet,  ever  ready  to  rekindle  their 
xeal,  encouiaged  the  flagging  spirits  of  the  chiefs  with 
the  renewed  assorance  of  GocUs  presence,  and  the  fresh 
promise  that,  stateły  and  magnificent  aa  was  the  Tempie 
of  their  wisest  king,  the  glory  of  the  latter  house  should 
be  greater  than  the  glor>'  of  the  former  (ii,  3-9).  The 
third  discourae  (ii,  10-19),  delivered  on  the  twenty- 
Iburth  da}'  of  the  ninth  month,  refers  to  a  period  when 
building  materials  had  been  coUected,  and  the  workmen 
had  begun  to  put  them  together.  Yet  the  people  were 
stiU  comparatively  uiactive,  and  afler  two  months  we 
thus  tind  him  again  censuring  their  sluggishness,  which 
rendered  worthless  all  their  ceremoniał  ob6ervanceB. 
Bat  the  rebuke  was  aocompanied  by  a  repetition  of  the 
proinise  (ii,  19).  The  fourth  and  last  disooursie  (ii,  20- 
23),  delivcred  also  on  the  twenty-fourth  day  of  the  ninth 
month,  is  exclusively  addressed  to  Zerubbabel,  the  po- 
litical  chief  of  the  new  Jcwish  colony,  who,  it  appears, 
had  asked  for  an  explanation  regarding  the  great  polit- 
ical  revDlutions  which  Haggai  had  predicted  in  his  sec- 
ond diacoune:  it  comforts  the  govemor  by  assunng 
him  they  would  not  take  place  very  soon,  and  not  in  his 
fifetiroe.  As  Zerubbabel  was  prince  of  Judah,  the  rep- 
re8entative  of  the  royal  family  of  David,  and,  as  such. 
tlie  lincal  anoestor  of  the  Messiah,  this  closing  predic-  I 


tion  foreshadows  the  establishment  of  the  Messianic 
kiiigdom  (see  Hengstenberg,  Ckristology,  iii,  248  są.) 
upon  the  overthrow  of  the  thronee  of  the  nations  (ii,  23). 

The  style  of  the  discourses  of  Haggai  is  suiuble  to 
their  contents :  it  is  pathetic  when  he  exhorts,  it  is  ve- 
hement  when  he  reproves,  it  is  somewhat  elevated 
when  he  treats  of  futurę  events,  and  it  is  not  altogether 
destitute  of  a  poetical  coloring,  though  a  prophet  of  a 
higher  order  would  have  depicted  the  splendor  of  the 
second  Tempie  in  brighter  hues.  The  language  labors 
under  a  poverty  of  terms,  as  may  be  obser\'ed  in  the 
constant  repetition  of  the  same  expres6ions,  which  Eich- 
hom  {Emleitung^  §  699)  attributes  to  an  attempt  at  or- 
nament, renderi]ig  the  writer  disposed  to  recur  freąuent- 
ly  to  a  favorite  expre88ion. 

The  prophetical  discourses  of  Haggai  are  referred  to 
in  the  Old  and  New  Testament  (Ezra  v,  1;  vi,  14; 
Heb.  xii,  20 ;  comp.  Hagg.  ii,  7,  8,  22).  In  most  of  the 
ancient  catalugues  of  the  canonical  books  of  the  Old 
Testament  Haggai  is  not,  indeed,  mentioned  by  name; 
but,  as  they  spccify  the  twelve  minor  prophets,  he  must 
have  been  inchided  among  them,  as  otherwise  their 
numbcr  woidd  not  be  fuIL  Josephus,  mentioning  Hag- 
gai and  Zechariah  {A  nt.  xi,  4,  5),  calls  them  ^vo  irpotpij' 
rat,  (See  generally  Bertholdt,  Eudeituntf,  iv,  169 ;  Da- 
vidson,  in  Home's  Introduc,  new  ed.  ii,  972  8q. ;  Hassę, 
Getrh.  der  A .  B.  p.  203  sq. ;  Smith,  Scripture  Te$timony, 
i,  283  sq.)— Kitto,  s.  v. ;  Smith,  s.  v. 

Special  commentaries  on  the  whole  of  this  prophecy 
exclusivcly  have  been  written  by  Rupertus  Titiensis, 
In  Aggaum  (in  Opp,\)\  Melanchthon,  ^  r^m^n/f/m  (in 
Opp,  ii) ;  Ecke,  Omanentariua  (Saling.  1538,  8vo) ;  Wi- 
celius,  Enarratio  (^fog.  1541);  Yarenius,  Aa-f rrtVafto«« 
(Rost.  1548, 1550, 4to) ;  Draconis,  Erplicatio  (Lub.  1549, 
fol.) ;  Mercer,  Schołia  (Paris,  1557, 4to) ;  Pilkington,  Eay 
podium  (London,  15C0,  8vo) ;  Brocardus,  Jnierpretatio 
[includ.  some  ot  her  books]  (L.  D.  1580,  8vo) ;  (irynnus, 
Commmłarius  ((>eii.  1581,  8vo;  translated  into  English, 
Lond.  1586,  12mo) ;  Reinbeck,  Exerci/n(iones  (Brunsw. 
1592,  4to) ;  Bal  win,  Commentarius  (including  Zech.  and 
MaL]  (Yitemb.  1610,  8vo) ;  Tamoviu8,  Ctuntnentarius 
(Rostock,  1624,  4to) ;  Willius,  Conanenfatius  [including 
Zech.  and  Mai]  (Brem.  1038, 8vo) ;  Raynolds,  Inteipre- 
fation  (Lond.  1649, 4 to) ;  Pfeftinger,  AWa  (Argent.  1708, 
4to)  ;  Woken,  Adnoł(ttione»  (Lips.  1719,  4to) ;  Kall,  Dis- 
gerłalitmes  (s.L  1771-3,  4to);  Ilessler,  JUustratio  (Lund. 
1799,  4to)  :  Scheibel,  Obserrationes  (ymisl  1822,  4to) ; 
Moore,  yofes,  etc  [including  Zech.  and  Mai.]  (N.  Y. 
1856,  8vo) ;  Kohler,  Erldantng  (Erlangcn,  1860,  8vo) ; 
Aben-Ezra*8  annotations  on  Haggai  havc  been  transla- 
ted by  Abicht  (in  his  SeUcta  Rabb.  Lips.  1705),  Lund 
(Upsal.  1706),  and  Chytneus  (ib.  eod.) ;  AbarbaneUs  by 
Scherzer  (Lpz.  1633,  1705)  and  Mundin  (Jena,  1719); 
Kimchi*s  by  Nol  (Par.  1557).  Expositions  of  particular 
passages  are  those  of  Stiiudlin  [on  ii,  1-9]  (Tlłb.  1784), 
Benzel  [on  ii,  9]  (in  his  Syntagm.  Dissertf,  ii,  116  sq.), 
Sartorius  [on  ii,  7J  (T«b.  1756),Ve8schuir  [on  ii,  6-9] 
(in  his  Diss.  PhU,  No.  6),  Essen  [on  ii,  23]  (Yitemb. 
1759).    See  Prophkts,  Minor. 

Hag'geri  (Heb.  Ffagri^  '^^?»^,  a  Ifagarite ;  Sept. 
'krapat  v.  r.^'Ayp/,Yulg.  yl//r/iY/i).  "Mibhar,  son  of 
Haggeri,*'  was  one  of  the  raighty  men  of  Davi(r.s  guard, 
according  to  the  catalogue  of  1  Chroń,  xi,  38.  The  ])ar- 
allel  passage— 2  Sam.  xxiii,  36 — has  "  Bani  the  Gadite" 
(*^*lAil).  This  Kennicott  thinks  was  the  original,  from 
which  "Haggeri"  has  been  comipted  {LHsserL  p.  214). 
The  Targum  has  Bar  Gedd  (K^»  ną).--Smith,  s.  v. 
See  Haoarene. 

Haggerty,  John,  a  minister  of  the  Methodist  Epis- 
copal  Church,  was  bom  in  Prince  George  County,  Md., 
in  1747.  He  was  converted  under  the  ministr}'  of  John 
King  about  1771.  He  began  to  preach  among  his 
neighboTs  the  same  year,  and  continued  to  labor  dili- 
gently  for  the  Church,  under  the  direction  of  Straw- 
bridge,  Rankin,  and  King,  till  he  entered  the  regular 
itinerancy  in  the  "year  1779.".    He  preached  both  in 


HAGGI 


20 


HAGIOGRAPHA 


English  and  German.  He  was  inatitimental  in  the  oon- 
yenion  of  not  a  few  men  of  ability^  who  became  oma- 
ments  of  the  ministiy.  He  located,  owing  to  the  sick- 
mas  of  his  wife,  in  1792,  and  settled  in  Baltimore,  where 
he  cołitinued  to  preach  with  great  acceptance.  He  was 
one  of  the  original  elders  of  the  Church,  and  died  in  the 
faith  in  18'28,  aged  8eventy-«ix  yeara.— Stevens,  History 
o/ the  M,  E,  Church,  ii,  66, 496;  iii,  144, 146. 

Hag'gl  (Heb.  Chagf;i','^^n,ft8Hct;  Sept.  •A77«c), 
the  second  of  the  aeven  sens  of  the  patriarch  (ład  (Gen. 
xlvi,  16),  and  progenitor  of  the  family  of  Haggites 
(Numb.  xxvi,  15;  Sept,  Ayyi).     B.C.  prób.  antę  1784. 

Haggi^ah  (Heb.  Chaggiyah'^  nnriy/e^wał  o/Je- 
hovah ;  Sept  'Ayyia),  a  Levite  of  the  family  of  Merań, 
apparently  the  sou  of  Shimea  and  father  of  Asaiah, 
which  last  seems  to  have  bcen  contemporary  with  Da- 
A-id  (1  Chroń,  vi,  80  [Heb.  15]).     B.C.  antc  1043. 

Hag'gite  (Heb.  only  as  a  collect.  with  the  art.  ha- 
Chaggi'j  "^ann  [for  ''^'ann] ;  Sept.  ó  'Ayyt,  Vulg.  Agi- 
ta,  A.  V.  "  the  Haggites"),  the  family  title  of  the  de- 
sccndants  of  the  sou  ofGadofthe  same  [Heb.]  name 
(Numb.  xxvi,  15).     See  Haooi. 

Hag'gith  (Heb.  Chaggith',  n^^an;  Sept  'Ayyć^  v. 
r.  4>£y7i^,but  'Ayyii^  in  1  Chroń,  ii,  3;  Josephus  'Ay- 
yi^i},  A  nł,  vii,  14, 4),  a  wife  of  David,  only  known  as  the 
raothcrofAdonijah(-2Sam.iii,4;  IKings  1,5,11;  ii,  13; 
1  Chroń,  iii,  2) ;  but  apparently  married  to  David  after 
his  accession  to  the  throne.  B.G.  1053.  See  Dayid. 
"  Her  son  was,  like  Abudom,  renowned  for  his  hand- 
some  presencc.  In  the  first  and  last  of  the  above  pas- 
sages  Haggith  is  fourth  in  order  of  mention  among  the 
wive8,  Adonijah  being  also  fourth  among  the  sons.  His 
birth  happened  at  Hebron  (2  Sam.  iii,  2, 5)  shortly  af- 
ter that  of  Absalom  (1  Kings  i,  6,  where  it  will  be  ob- 
seryed  that  the  wonU  *  his  mother*  are  inserted  by  the 
translators)"  (Smith,  s.  v.).  The  Heb.  name  is  merely 
the  fem.  of  the  adj.  that  appears  in  the  names  Haggi, 
etc,  and  seems  to  be  indicative  of festińty  in  the  relig- 
ious  sonse  [see  Festival];  FUrst  renders  it  "bom  at 
the  Feast  of  Tabemacles"  {Heb.  Ux,  s.  v.),  and  Mr. 
Grove  (in  Smith,  uŁ  sup.)  regards  it  as  ="  a  dancer," 
from  the  primitive  sense  of  the  roofc  aąn. 

Ha^gia  ('Ayia  or  *Ayia,  Vulg.  Affyui)^  given  in  the 
Apocrypha  (1  Esd.  v,  34)  as  the  name  of  one  of  the 
*'8ervants  of  Solomon"  whośc  "sons"  retunied  to  Jcru- 
salcm  after  the  exile;  instcad  of  Hattil  (q,  v.)  of  the 
Heb.  text  (Ezra  ii,  57 ;  Neh.  vii,  59). 

Hagidgad.    See  Hor-ha-oidoad. 

Hagiogr&pha,  *Ayióypa^a  (//o/y  Writntffs),  a  term 
first  found  in  Epiphanius  (Panariujn,  p.  58),  who  used 
it,  as  well  as  ypafptia,  to  denote  the  thinl  di\ision  of 
the  Scriptures,  called  by  the  Jews  D'^ąin3,  or  the 
WriimffSj  consUting  ofjiee  books  [see  Meoilloth],  viz. 
the  threcpoema  (ncK),  Job,Ph)vcrbB,  and  the  Fsalms, 
and  the  two  books  of  Chronicles. 

These  divisions  are  found  in  the  Talmud  (Baba  Bałh- 
rOf  foL  1,  cd.  Amsterdam),  where  the  sacrcd  books  are 
cUissified  under  the  Law,  the  ProphtU,  4nd  the  Writ- 
injs  (Ketubim),  Tlie  last  are  thus  enuracrated  (/.  r.): 
Ruth,  the  book  (fppher)  of  Fsalms,  Job,  Froverbs,  Eccle- 
siastes  (Koheleih),  the  Song  of  Songs,  Lamentations, 
Daniel,  and  the  books  (meffUloth)  of  Esther,  Ezra,  and 
Chronicles.  The  .Jewish  writers,  howevcr,  do  not  uni- 
formly  foUow  this  arrangcment,  as  thcy  sometimes  place 
the  Fsalms  or  the  book  of  Job  lirst  among  the  hagio- 
grapha.  Jorome  gives  the  arrangement  followed  by  the 
Jews  in  his  time.  He  observes  that  they  divided  the 
Scriptures  into  five  books  of  Moses,  eight  prophetical 
books  (viz.  1.  Joshua;  2.  Judges  and  Kuth;  3.  Samuel; 
4.  Kings;  5.  Isaiah;  6.  Jeremiah;  7.  Ezekiel;  8.  The 
twelve  prophets),  and  nine  Hagiograpka,,  viz.  1.  Job; 
2,  David,  five  parts;  8.  Solomon,  three  parts;  4.  Kohe- 
leth;  5.  Caaticles;  6.  Daniel,  7.  Chronicles;  8.  Esdias, 


two  books  [viz.  Ezra  and  Nehemiah] ;  9.  Esther.  ''Some, 
however,"  he  adda, "  place  Ruth  and  Lamentations  among 
the  Hagiographa  rather  than  among  the  prophetical 
books."  We  tind  a  different  arrangement  in  Josephus, 
who  reckons  thirteen  prophetical  books,  and  four  con- 
taining  hymns  and  morał  precepts  {Apion^  i,  8);  from 
which  it  would  appear  that  after  the  time  of  Josephus 
the  Jews  comprised  many  books  among  the  prophets 
which  had  previously  belonged  to  the  Hagiographa.  It 
has.  howerer.  been  considered  as  morę  probable  that  Jo- 
sephus had  no  authority  from  manuscripts  for  his  dassi- 
fication. 

The  earliest  notice  which  we  find  of  these  diHsions 
is  that  contained  in  the  prologue  to  the  book  of  Eccle- 
siasticus,  written  B.C.  cir.  140,  the  author  of  which  re- 
fers  to  the  Law,  the  Prophets,  and  the  oiher  books ;  by 
which  last  were  most  probably  meant  the  Hagiographa. 
Philo  also  speaks  of  the  Laii-s,  the  Prophets,  the  Hymns, 
and  the  other  books,  but  without  classifying  them.  In 
the  New  Testament  we  find  three  corresponding  diris- 
ions  mentioned,  viz.  the  Law,  the  l^phets,  and  the 
Fsalms;  which  last  book  has  been  supposed  to  have 
given  its  name  to  the  third  division,  from  the  circum- 
sunce  of  its  then  being  the  first  in  the  catalogue  (Lukę 
xxiv,  44).  Havenuck,  however  (Ifandbuchj  p.  78),  sup- 
poses  that  Lukę  calls  the  Hagiographa  by  the  name  of 
Fsalms,  rather  on  acoount  of  the  poetical  character  of 
8everal  of  its  parts.  The  *'  book  of  the  Prophets"  is  re- 
ferred  to  in  the  New  Testament  as  a  distinct  rolume 
( Acts  vii,  42,  where  the  passage  indicated  is  Amos  v,  25, 
26).  It  is  well  known  that  the  second  dass  was  divided 
by  the  Jews  into  the  early  Prophets,  \'iz.  Joshua,  Judgcs, 
Samuel,  and  Kings ;  and  the  later  Prophets,  viz.  Isaiah, 
Jeremiah,  Ezekiel  (called  the  major  prophets),  and  the 
book  of  the  twelve  (minor)  prophets. 

When  this  di\ńsion  of  books  was  first  introduced  it  is 
now  impoBsible  to  ascertiun.  Probably  it  commenced 
after  the  return  from  the  exile,  with  the  first  formation 
of  the  canon.  Still  morę  difficult  is  it  (o  ascertain  the 
principle  on  which  the  classification  was  formed.  The 
rabbinical  iivTiters  maintain  that  the  authors  of  the  Ke^ 
tubim.  enjoyed  only  the  lowest  degree  of  inspiration,  as 
they  received  no  immediate  commmiication  from  the 
deity,  like  that  madę  to  Moses,  to  whom  God  spoke  face 
to  face ;  and  that  they  did  not  receive  their  knowledge 
through  the  medium  of  visions  and  dreams,  as  was  the 
case  with  the  prophets  or  the  writers  of  the  second  clase; 
but  still  that  they  felt  the  Divine  Spirit  resting  on  them 
and  inspińng  them  with  suggestions.  This  is  the  view 
maintained  by  Abarbanel  {Prtąf.  in  Proph.  priores,  foL 
20,  1),  Kimchi  {Prąf.  in  Psałin,\  Maimonides  {Morę 
Nebochim,  ii,  45,  p.  317),  and  Elias  Levita  (Tirin) ;  which 
last  >vriter  defines  the  word  ISins  to  mean  a  work  writ- 
ten by  dipine  intpiration,  The  placing  of  Ruth  among 
the  Hagiographa,  and  especially  the  separation  of  Lam- 
entations from  Jeremiah,  seems,  however,  to  be  irrecon- 
dlable  with  this  hypothesis;  nor  is  it  easy  to  assign  a 
satisfactory  reason  why  the  historical  books  of  Joshua, 
Judges,  Samuel,  and  Kings  should  be  placed  among  the 
Prophets,  and  the  book  of  Chronicles  among  the  Hagio- 
grapha, The  reasons  generaUy  assigned  for  this,  as 
well  as  for  placing  in  the  third  class  the  books  of  Fsalms, 
Daniel,  and  Job,  are  so  fanciful  and  unaatisfactory  as  to 
have  led  Christian  writers  to  form  other  and  morę  defi- 
nite  classifications.  It  will  suffice  to  mention  the  reason 
assigned  by  Rabbi  Kimchi  for  excluding  Daniel  from 
the  book  of  I^phets,  viz.  that  he  has  not  equalled  the 
other  prophets  in  his  Yisions  and  dreams.  Others  as- 
sign the  latc  datę  of  the  book  of  Daniel  as  the  reason  for 
the  insertion  of  it,  as  well  as  of  some  historical  books, 
in  the  Hagiographa,  inasmuch  as  the  coUection  of  the 
prophets  was  closed  at  the  datę  of  the  composition  of 
this  book  (De  Wette,  §  255).  Bertholdt,  who  is  of  this 
opinion  {Einleifung^  i,  70  sq.),  thinks  that  the  word  Ke- 
tubim  means  ^*  books  newly  introduced  into  the  canon" 
(p.  81).  Hengstenberg  {Authenłie  des  Daniel,  etc,  p. 
25  8q.)  foUows  the  andent  opinions  of  the  Rabbina,  and 


HAfflROTH 


21 


HAHN 


mainUins  that  the  book  of  Daniel  was  placed  in  the 
Hagiogtapha  in  consequenoe  of  the  lower  degree  of  in- 
fpiration  attached  to  it;  but  herein  he  ia  oppoBed  by 
Harcmick  {łlcmdimch,  p.  62).  I>e  Wette  (§  13)  sup- 
poaea  that  the  first  two  diyiaiona  (the  iMto  and  the 
Propkett)  wen  closed  a  little  aiter  the  time  of  NehemL- 
ah  (compare  2  Mace.  ii,  13, 14),  and  that  perhaps  at  the 
end  of  the  Peraiau  period  the  Jews  commenced  the 
(bnnation  of  the  Ifaffiograpka,  which  long  remained 
''changeable  and  open."  The  coUection  of  the  Ftalms 
was  not  yet  oompleted  when  the  two  fint  parts  were 
fanncd.     See  Kkthubim. 

It  has  been  concladed  froro  Matt.  xxiii,  85,  and  Lukę 
xi,  51,  compared  with  Lukę  xxiv,  14,  that  as  the  P&alms 
were  the  first,  so  were  Chroniclea  the  last  book  in  the 
Hagioigrapha  (Carpzoy,  ItUrodL  ir,  25).  If,  when  Jesus 
spoke  of  the  righteous  blood  shed  from  the  blood  of 
Abel  (Gen.  iv,  8)  to  that  of  Zechariah,  he  referred,  as 
most  commentators  suppose,  to  Zechariah,  the  son  of 
Jehoiada  (2  Chroń,  xxiv,  20, 21),  there  appears  a  pecul- 
iar  apiwsitenesB  in  the  appeal  to  the  first  and  the  last 
books  in  the  canon.  The  book  of  Chroniclcs  still  holds 
the  last  place  in  the  Hebrew  Bibles,  which  are  all  ar- 
ranged  according  to  the  threefold  division.  The  late 
datę  of  Chronicles  may  in  some  measure  account  for  its 
separation  from  the  book  of  Kings;  and  this  ground 
holds  good  whether  we  fix  the  era  of  the  chronider, 
with  Ziinz,  at  about  B.C.  260,  or,  with  Moyers,  we  con- 
ceive  him  to  have  been  a  younger  contemporary  of  Ne- 
hemiah,  and  to  have  written  about  B.C.  400  (Ki-iłwAe 
Untamukung  ither  de  BibUache  Chromk,  Bonn,  1834). 
The  circumstance  of  the  exŁstence  of  a  few  acknowl- 
edged  laier  additions,  soch  as  1  Chroń,  iii,  19-24,  does 
not  militate  against  this  hypothesis,  as  these  may  have 
been  supplied  by  the  last  editor.  See  Chronicles, 
Books  of.  De  Wette  conceive8  that  the  genealogy  in 
this  paasage  comes  down  only  to  the  third  gcuenition 
after  Nehemiah.    See  Canon  of  Scripture. 

The  word  llagioffrapha  is  once  uscd  by  Jerome  in  a 
peculiar  sense.  Speaking  of  Tobit,  he  asserts  that  the 
Jewa.  cutting  off  this  book  from  the  catalogue  of  the  di- 
Tine  Scriptures,  place  it  among  those  books  which  they 
cali  Hagiographa,  Again,  of  Judith  he  says,  **  By  the 
Jews  it  is  read  among  the  Hagiographa,  whose  author- 
ity  18  not  sufiicient  to  confirm  debated  pouits;"  but,  as 
ID  the  latter  instance,  the  greater  nnmber  of  MSS.  read 
Apocrypka,  which  is  doubtless  the  tnie  reading,  it  is 
highly  probable  that  the  word  Ilagiographa,  used  in 
reference  to  the  book  of  Tobit,  has  arisen  from  the  mis- 
take  of  a  transcriber.  The  two  words  were  in  the  Mid- 
dle  Ages  freąuently  used  as  synonymous.  See  Deute- 
RO-CANONiCAL.  *^  Uagiographa"*  has  also  been  used  by 
Christian  writers  as  syiionĄ^mous  with  Iloly  Scripture. 

The  Alexandrian  translatora  have  not  been  guided 
by  the  threefold  division  in  their  arrangement  of  the 
books  of  Scripture.  The  different  MSS.  of  the  Sept. 
akso  vary  in  this  respect.  In  the  Yalican  Codex  (which 
the  printed  editions  chiefly  follow)  Tobit  and  Judith  are 
placed  between  Keheroiah  and  Esther.  Wisdom  and 
Ecclesiasticus  follow  Canticles.  Baruch  and  Lamenta- 
tions  foUow  Jeremiah,  and  the  Old  Testament  concludes 
with  the  four  books  of  Maccabees.  Luther  (who  intro- 
duoed  into  the  Bibie  a  peculiar  arrangement,  which  in 
the  Old  Testament  has  been  foUowed  in  the  English 
Authorized  Yeraion)  was  the  first  who  separated  the  ca- 
nonical  (rom  the  other  books.  Not  only  do  the  Alex- 
andrian  translators,  the  fathers,  and  Luther  differ  from 
the  Jews  in  the  onler  of  succession  of  the  sacred  books, 
bat  among  the  Jews  themselyes  the  Talmudists  and 
Masorites,  and  the  German  and  Spanlsh  MSS.  follow 
each  a  diflerent  arrangement.— Kitto,  s.  v.    See  Bible. 

Hagiolatzy.    SeeSAiNTs,WoRSHip  of. 

Hahlroth.    See  Ft-ha-hirotii. 

Hahn,  Augnst,  a  distingoished  German  Protestant 
theologian,  Orientalist,  and  opponent  of  rationalism,  was 
bora  at  Gnasosterhausen,  near  Querfurt,  in  Pruasian 


Saxony,  March  27,  1792.  His  father  died  before  he 
was  nine  years  old,  but  his  pastor,  Stossen,  generoush* 
instructed  the  orphan  with  his  own  son,  and  securcd  his 
admission  to  the  gymnasium  at  Eisleben.  In  1810 
Hahu  entcred  the  University  of  Leipsic,  where,  he  tclls 
us  (Preface  to  Lehrbuck  det  chriatUchJen  Glaubtfu^  2d 
ed.),  he  lost  his  early  faith  and  peace,  the  fruits  of  a  pi- 
ous  mother's  tcachings,  and  became  imbued  with  the 
prevailing  rationalism.  Afler  a  three-years*  course,  in 
which,  b^des  adding  to  his  stock  of  classic  and  theo- 
logical  leaming,  he  had  studied  Oriental  languages  and 
literaturę,  especially  Syriac  and  Arabie,  he  engaged  in 
teaching.  In  1817  he  entered  the  newly-established 
theological  school  at  Wittenberg,  where,  under  happier 
religious  influenccs  and  inspirations,  he  regained  his 
lost  faith  and  peace,  and  was  henceforth  active  in  seek- 
ing  to  impart  them  to  other  minds  and  hearts.  In  1819 
he  was  iq>pointed  professor  extraordinary,  and  in  1821 
ordinary  profeasor  of  theology  in  the  Univer8ity  of 
Konigsberg,  and  during  his  occupancy  of  that  post  pub- 
lishcd  BiirdeśimeSj  Gnosttcus,  Syrorum  primus  hymnolo* 
gu»  (Leipsic,  1819),  a  work  which  eanied  for  him  the 
doctorate  of  theology.  This  was  followed  by  8everal 
other  publications  in  patristic  literaturę,  viz.  De  gnoH 
Marcioms  (1820)  -.—Antifheses  Mardonis,  etc.  (1823)  :— 
Das  Etangeliuni  Marcions,  etc.  (1823) :  —  Be  Canane 
Afarcionis  (1824)  '.—Chrtstomathia  SyrUtctty  s.  *<?.  J':phra' 
mi^  etc  (in  conjunction  with  Seifii:rt)  (1825) ;  bćsides 
treatises  in  several  pcriodicals.  Being  called  in  1826  to 
the  profcssorship  of  theology'  in  the  TJniveniity  of  Leip- 
sic, Hahn  was  thrown  into  the  midst  of  theological  con- 
troversy,  and  gave  expression  to  his  antagonism  to  the 
Rationalists  in  his  treatise  Be  Rationalitmiy  qui  dicitnr, 
Vera  Indole  et  qua  cum  Naturaliamo  corUmeałur  ratione 
(Leipsic,  1827),  in  which  he  asserts  the  neccssity  of 
supranatural  revelation,  and  the  inability  of  man  by 
naturę  to  attaui  "certain  and  complcte  knowledge  of 
religious  truths,"  and  aims  to  show  historically  that 
rationalism  had  always  been  regardcd  by  the  Church  as 
hostile  to  Christ ianity,  and  that  it  was  the  offspring  of 
naturalism  and  deism.  He  developed  this  antagonism 
still  further  in  his  Offine  Erkldrung  an  die  erangeliscke 
Kirche  zundchst  in  JSachsen  und  Preusstn  (1827),  where- 
in  he  maintains  that  Kationalists  cannot  be  considered 
as  Christian  teachers,  and  ought  in  conscieuce  to  with- 
draw  from  the  evangelical  Church.  His  efforts  in  favor 
of  e%'angelical  orthocioxy  were  oontinued  in  his  Lekr^ 
buch  des  ckrisłlichen  Glaubtns  (1828;  2d  ed.  1857),  and 
Sendsckreiben  an  Bretschneider  uber  die  Lagę  des  Chris* 
tenthums  in  unserer  ZtU  und  das  Yerhdlhniss  chrisiłicher 
Theologie  zur  Wissenschaft  Uberhaupt  (1882).  The  last 
work  topecially  led  to  his  cali  to  Breslau  in  1833  as  pro- 
fessor,  and  his  appouitment  as  consistorial  counseUor,  a 
position  of  great  importance  in  the  direction  of  ecclcsi- 
astical  atfairs.  In  1844  he  was  madę  generał  supcrin- 
tendent  for  Silesia,  which  post  he  fiUed  until  his  death, 
May  13,  1863,  and  in  which  he  was  able  to  excrt  con- 
siderable  influence  in  behalf  of  the  evangelical  party 
among  the  clerg>%  The  most  important  of  his  ^(Titings 
not  already  mentioned  are,  Biblioihek  der  Symbole  und 
Glaub&isregeln  der  aposłol.-catholischfn  Kirche  (1842) : 
—Theohgisch-lirchliche  Amalen  (Breslau,  18-12-44)  :— 
Bas  Behenntniss  der  erangelischen  Kirche  und  die  ordi' 
naiorische  Yerpjłichtung  ihrer  Biener  (1847)  :—Bas  Be- 
henntniss der  etangelischen  Kirche  in  seinem  Yerhaltniste 
zu  dem  der  rOmischen  und  griechischen  (1863) : — Predigten 
und  Reden  unter  den  Bewegungen  in  Kirche  und  Staat 
seit  dem  J,  1830  (1852).  Ścc  obituaiy  noticc  of  Hahn 
in  the  AUgemeine  Kirchen-Zeitung  for  1863,  No.  75-77, 
and  an  autobiographical  sketch  of  his  life  up  to  1830  in 
Dietzsch*s  Bomiiet,  Joumałj  1830,  vol.  ii,  pt.  i ;  Herzog, 
Beal-Encyklop.  xix,  593  8q. ;  Hoefcr,  Nouc,  Bu>g.  Gene* 
role,  xxiii,  164  ^  New  A  mer,  Cyclop,  viii,  634.  (J.  W.  M.) 

Hahn,  Heinrich  August,  eldest  son  of  Augu!<t 
Hahn,  was  bom  at  Konigsberg  Jnne  19, 1821,  and  died 
Dec.  1,  1861,  at  (ireifswald.  After  having  studied  at 
Breslau  and  Berlin,  he  devoted  himself  to  Old-Testa- 


HAHN 


22 


HAIME 


ment  exęge8is  and  theology.  He  was  tutor  {pHeat- 
docent)  at  Brealau  in  1H45,  went  thence  in  1^46  to  Ko- 
nigsberg  as  professor  ad  interim  on  the  dealh  of  Ha- 
vemick,  and  in  18dl  becarac  professor  extraordinaiy, 
and  in  1860  ordinary  professor  at  Grei&wald,  suoceed- 
ing  Kosegarten.  He  edited  Hftvemick*8  Vorluunt;m 
iiber  die  Theoiogie  dea  A.  Testaments  (1848).  His  chief 
works  are,  a  dissertation  De  Spe  inunorłalUaiia  mb  Vef, 
Teifanu  etc. ;  Vełeris  iestam,  tententui  de  Natura  hominia 
(184(5)  i^Commentar  Ober  das  Buch  Hiob  (1850)  i—Uber- 
tetzung  und  ErHarung  des  Hohen  Liedes  (1852) : —  A'r- 
kldrung  von  Jesaia  Kapitel  40-46  (forming  voL  iii  of 
Drechsler'8  comnientary  on  laaiah,  1857) : — Commeniar 
iiber  daa  Predigerbuch  JSaiomo^s  (1860).  His  works  evince 
the  care  and  lidelity  which  characterized  the  man,  but 
his  criticisms  are  sometimes  marked  by  great  boldness. 
He  was  a  man  of  mild  temper  and  great  purity  of  char- 
acter.  Sec  A  Ugemeine  Kirchen-Zeitung  for  1862,  No.  26 ; 
Herzog,  Beal-Encgklop,  xix,  597.     (J.  W.  M.) 

Hahn,  Michael,  a  German  theosophist,  was  bom 
Feb.  2,  1758,  at  AlUlorf,  near  Bdblingeu,  WUrtemberg. 
The  son  of  a  peasant,  he  was  ftom  early  youth  under 
the  influence  of  profound  religious  conrictions,  and  de- 
Yotcd  himself,  in  retirement,  to  the  study  of  the  Bibie, 
and  of  the  works  of  prominent  theosophists,  as  Behmen 
and  Oetinger.  He  claimed  to  receire  from  God  special 
rerehitions,  and  wrote  down  their  contents.  As  a  speak- 
er in  the  meetings  of  the  Pietlsts  he  attracted  large 
crowds,  was  several  times  summoned  before  the  consis- 
tory  to  defend  himself  against  the  charge  of  heresy,  but 
was  linally  allowed  to  spend  the  last  twenty-four  years 
of  his  life  without  further  annoyance  upon  an  estate  of 
the  duchess  Francisca  of  WUrtemberg.  There  he  died 
in  great  peace  in  1819.  The  followers  of  Hahn,  callcd 
the  AfidteUanSf  constitutc  an  organized  conimunion 
which  has  never  separatcd  from  the  State  Church,  but 
the  members  of  which  annually  meet  for  considtation, 
and,  in  particular,  for  making  prorision  for  the  poor. 
The  celebrated  colony  of  Kortiihid  (q.  v.),  near  Stutt- 
gard,  was  organized  under  the  direct  influence  of  Hahn. 
The  works  of  Hahn,  which  oontain  a  complete  specula- 
tive  thcosophy,  have  been  published  at  Tubingen  in  12 
Yols.  (1819  sq.).  Several  of  his  hymns  were  received 
by  Albert  Knapp  into  the  hymn-book  which  he  prepared 
for  the  use  of  the  Sute  Church.  Like  many  of  the  WUr- 
temberg Pietists,  Hahn  beliered  in  the  luial  restoration 
of  all  things.— Haug,  Die  Sekłe  der  Michelianer^  in  Stu- 
dien  der  evang,  GeiatlichkeU  WiłrtenUtergs,  vol.  xi ;  lU- 
gcn,  I/ist.  theolog,  ZeitschriJ),  1841 ;  Romer,  Kirchl  Ge- 
schichte  WUrłembergs ;  Herzog,  Real-EncykL  v,  472.  (A. 
J.S.) 

Hal'  (Gen.  xii,  8 ;  xiii,  3).    See  Ai. 

Hall.    See  Ben-iiaiu 

Hail !  (xa*p<,  rejoice^  as  often  rcndered;  "farewell" 
also),  a  salutation,  importing  a  wish  for  the  welfare  of 
the  person  addressed  (Lukę  i,  28 ;  in  mockery,  Matt. 
xx\'ii,  29,  etc).  It  is  now  seldom  used  among  us,  but 
was  customary  among  our  Saxon  ancestors,  and  import- 
ed  as  much  as  "Joy  to  you,"  or  "Health  to  you;"  in- 
cluding  in  the  term  health  all  kinds  of  prosperity. — Cal- 
met,  B.  V.     See  Grbetino. 

Hail  C^^St  barad\  x^^Za)i  or  congealed  rain,  is 
the  symbol  of  the  divinc  vengeance  upon  kingdoms  and 
nations,  the  enemies  of  God  and  of  his  i^eople.  As  a 
hail-suirm  is  generally  accompanied  by  lightning,  and 
seems  to  be  protluced  by  a  certain  electrical  sUte  of  the 
atmosphere,  so  we  find  in  Scripture  hail  andjire,  i.  e. 
lightning,  mentioned  together  (Exod.  ix,  23 ;  compare 
Job  xxxviii,  22,  23;  Psa.  cv,  82;  lxxviii,  48;  cxlviii, 
8;  xviii,  13),  See  Plagues  of  Egyit.  That  hail, 
though  uncomroon,  is  not  absolutely  tmkno^-n  in  £g>i>t, 
we  have  the  testimony  of  Mansleben  and  Manconys, 
who  had  heard  it  thunder  during  their  stay  at  AlexAn- 
dria,  the  former  on  the  Ist  of  Januar}',  and  the  latter  on 
the  17th  and  18th  of  the  same  month;  on  the  same  day 


it  also  hailed  there.  Peny  also  remarks  that  it  haila, 
though  seldom,  in  Jannary  and  Februar>'  at  Cairo.  Po- 
cocke  even  saw  hail  muigled  with  rain  fali  at  Fium  in 
Febniary  (compare  £xo(L  ix,  34).  Korte  also  saw  hail 
fali.  Jomanl  says, "  I  have  8evcral  times  seen  cven  hail 
at  Alexandria.**  Yolney  mentions  a  hail-stoim  which 
he  saw  crossing  over  Momit  Stnai  into  that  country, 
Bome  of  whose  frozen  Stones  he  gathcred;  "and  so,"  he 
says,  "  I  drank  iced  water  in  Egypt"  Hail  M-^as  also 
the  means  madę  use  of  by  God  for  defeating  an  army 
of  the  kings  of  Canaan  (Josh.  x.  U).  In  this  i^assage 
it  is  said, "  The  Lord  cast  down  great  Stones  from  heav- 
en  upon  them** — L  e.  hail-stones  of  an  extraordinar>' 
size,  and  capable  of  doing  dreadful  execution  hi  their 
fali  from  heaven.  Some  commentators  are  of  opiuion 
that  the  miracle  consist^d  of  real  stones,  from  the  cir- 
cumstance  that  stones  only  are  mentioned  in  the  pre- 
ceding  clause;  but  this  is  eridently  erroneous,  for  there 
are  many  instances  on  record  of  hail-stones  of  enormous 
size  and  weight  falling  in  different  countries,  so  as  to 
do  immonse  injury,  and  to  destroy  the  Iives  of  aiiimals 
and  men.  In  Palestiue  and  the  neighboring  regions, 
hail-stones  are  frequent  and  serere  in  the  mountainous 
districts  and  along  the  coasts;  but  in  the  plains  and 
deserts  hail  scarcely  ev£r  falls.  In  the  eleyated  region 
of  Northern  Persia  the  hail-stones  are  frequently  so  vi- 
olent  as  to  destroy  the  cattle  in  the  fields ;  and  in  Com. 
Porter^s  Leitersfrmn.  Constantinople  and  itt  Enrirons  (i, 
44)  there  is  an  interesting  aocount  of  a  tcrrific  hail- 
storm  that  oocurred  on  the  Bosphorus  in  the  summer 
of  1831,  which  fully  bears  out  the  above  and  other  Scrip- 
ture representations.  Many  of  the  lumps  picked  up  af- 
ter  the  storm  weighed  thrce  ąuarters  of  a  pound.  In 
Isa.  xx\-iii,  2,  which  denounces  the  approaching  dc- 
struction  by  Shalmaneser,  the  same  images  are  employ- 
ed.  Hail  is  mentioned  as  a  dirine  judgment  by  the 
prophet  Haggai  (ii,  17).  The  destruction  of  the  Ass>t- 
ian  army  is  pointed  out  in  Isa.  xxx,  30.  Ezekiel  (xiii, 
1 1)  represents  the  wali  daubed  with  untempered  mortar 
as  being  destroyed  by  great  hail-stones.  Also  in  his 
prophecy  against  Gog  (xxxWii,  22)  he  emplo\-8  the 
same  s^nnbol  (compare  Rev.  xx,  9).  The  hail  and  fire 
mingled  with  blood,  mentioned  in  Rev.  viii,  7,  are  su|>- 
posed  to  denote  the  commotions  of  nations.  The  great 
hail,  in  Rev.  xi,  19,  denotes  great  and  he&vy  judgmeuts 
on  the  enemies  of  tnie  religion ;  and  the  grievous  storm, 
in  xvi,  21,  represents  something  similar,  and  far  morę 
serere.  So  Horace  {Odes,  i,  2) ;  comp.  Virgil  {.En,  iv, 
120,  161 ;  Lx,  669)  and  Liry  (ii,  62,  and  xx\%  U). 

Hail-stone  C^^S  *i5fiC,  e'ben  barad',  a  stone  o/łiaif), 
See  abore. 

Haime,  Joux,  a  soktier  in  the  English  army,  and 
one  of  ^Ir.  Wesley's  preachers.  He  was  bom  at  Shafles- 
burĄ%  Dorsetshirc,  in  1710,  and  was  bred  a  gardener,  and 
afterwards  a  button-maker.  From  early  life  he  lired 
in  great  wickedness,  and  in  constant  agony  of  conric- 
tion.  In  1739  he  enlisted  in  a  regiment  of  dragoons, 
and  some  time  afker  he  was  conrerteil ;  but,  being  reiy 
ignoranta  he  alteniately  lost  and  rcgained  his  hoi^e,  but 
constantly  labored  to  sare  others.  At  last  hc  heard 
and  conrersed  with  Mr.  Weslcy,  much  to  his  comfort. 
The  regiment  was  sent  to  Flanders  in  1748,  from  which 
time  till  Feb.  1745,  he  was  in  despair  and  great  agony. 
At  that  time,  while  marching  into  Germany,  hw  e\-i- 
dence  of  pardon  retumed,  and,  encouraged  by  Mr.  Wes- 
ley*s  letters,  hc  began  to  preach  in  the  army.  At  the 
battle  of  Dettingen  he  shoił-ed  great  gallantr\'.  In  May, 
1744,  the  army  went  to  Brussels,  and  here  his  bibors 
were  the  means  of  a  great  and  remarkable  reriral  in 
the  army  and  city.  Part  of  the  time  Hume  had  8ix 
preachers  under  him,  although  the  regular  cliaplains 
opposed  him.  But  the  duke  of  Cumb^and  and  gen- 
erał Ponsonby  were  his  friends  and  iiatrons,  and  his 
piety  of  life,  and  the  ralor  of  his  "  Methodists*"  in  every 
battle,  commandcd  unirersal  admiration  and  reapect. 
On  the  OŁli  of  April,  1746,  he  fell  into  despair,  and  from 


HAIR 


23 


HAIR 


that  <Ute  he  lived  for  twenty  yeare  "  in  agony  of  soul ;" 
yet  all  the  tiine,  in  Germany,  Knglatid,  Ireland,  he 
oeased  not  with  all  the  energj-  uf  despair  to  labor, 
preaching  often  20  or  30  limes  a  week,  and  seeing  thou- 
Miids  of  tMmls  converted  under  liis  efforts,  while  his  own 
soul  Mas  tilled  with  anguish  and  darkness.  At  the  end 
of  this  time  he  once  morę  obtained  the  evidence  of  ac- 
ceptance  with  God.  He  died  Aug.  18,  1784,  at  Whit- 
church,  in  Hampshirc — Jackson,  Lires  of  Karli/  Meth- 
oditł  I*frachen,  i,  147  j  Sterens,  Hi»tory  of  Methodism^ 
voL  ii. 

Hair  (properly  *i?il3,  tedr'^  ^piK)  ia  frequently  men- 
tioned  in  Scripture,  chiefly  with  reference  to  the  head. 
In  scarcely  anything  haa  the  caprice  of  fashion  been 
morę  strikingly  displayed  than  in  the  rańous  forms 
which  the  taste  of  diflfereut  countries  and  ages  has  pre- 
Bcribed  for  disposing  of  this  natural  covering  of  the 
heacL     See  Head. 

1.  Of  the  morc  ancient  nations,  the  EgypŁians  appear 
to  łuire  been  the  most  uniform  in  their  habits  regarding 
it,  and,  in  some  rrapects  alao,  the  most  peculiar.  We 
leam  from  Herodotue  (ii,  86 ;  iii,  12)  that  they  let  the 
hair  of  their  head  and  beard  grow  only  when  they  were 
in  mouming,  and  that  they  shaved  it  at  other  times. 
Ereu  in  the  case  of  young  childrcn  they  were  wont  to 
share  the  head,  leaving  only  a  few  locks  on  the  front, 
ńdcs,  and  back,  as  an  emblem  of  youth.  In  the  case  of 
royal  children,  those  on  the  sides  were  covered  and  iii- 
dosed  in  a  bag,  which  hung  down  conspicuously  as  a 
hadge  of  princely  rank  (Wilkinson,  ii,  327,  328).     "  So 


BgTptian  Manner  of  wearing  the  Hair.  (From  stataes  of 
an  officer  of  rank  aud  his  wifc  or  sister,  19th  dynasty. 
Briiish  Mneeum.) 

particular  were  ther,**  says  Wilkinson,  "  on  this  point, 
that  to  have  neglected  it  was  a  subject  of  reproach  and 
ridicole;  and  whenever  they  intended  to  convey  the 
idea  of  a  man  of  Iow  condition,  or  a  slovenly  ])er8on,  the 
artists  represented  him  with  a  beard"  (Ancient  Effjf2>- 
tkaUf  iii,  957).  Slares  also,  when  brought  frum  foreigii 
countries, haring  beards  on  them  at  their  arrival,  "were 
obliged  to  conform  to  the  deanly  habita  of  their  mas- 
teis;  their  beards  and  hcails  were  shared,  and  they 
aido])ted  a  close  cap.'*  This  unirersal  practice  among 
the  Eg^-ptians  explains  the  incidental  notice  in  the  life 
of  Joseph,  that  before  going  in  to  Pharaoh  he  shared 
himaelf  (Gen.  xli,  14) ;  in  most  other  places  he  would 
have  combed  his  hair  and  trimmed  his  beard,  but  on  no 
■ccount  hare  shaved  iL  The  practice  was  carried  there 
tosuch  alength  prob- 
ably  from  the  tendcn- 
cy  of  the  climatc  to 
gcnerate  the  fieas  and 
otlier  vermiu  which 
iiestlc  in  the  liair ; 
and  hcncc  al?o  the 
priests,  who  were  to 
be  the  highest  cm- 
bodiments  of  clcanli- 
ness,  were  wont  to 
s  h  a  V  e  their  whole 
bodies  every   third 

day  (Herod,  ii,  37). 

Head-dressofan  ancien  tEgyptian  It  is  singular,  how- 
Ladj.    (From  a  mommy-case.)     evcr,  and  seems  to  in- 


dicate  that  notions  of  cleanliness  did  not  alone  regulate 
the  practice,  that  the  women  still  wore  tht  ir  natural 
hair,  long  and  plaited,  oflen  reaching  down  in  the  form 
of  struigs  to  the  bottom  of  the  shoulder-blades.  Many 
of  the  female  mummies  have  been  found  with  their  hair 
thus  plaited,  and  in  good  presenration.  The  modem 
ladies  of  Egj-pt  come  but  liltle  behind  their  sisters  of 
olden  time  in  this  respect  (see  Lane'8  Modem  Kgyjh- 
łiangf  i,  60).  Yet  what  was  remarkable  in  the  inhab- 
itants  of  a  hot  climate,  while  they  remored  their  nat- 
ural hair,  they  were  accustomed  to  wear  wig*,  which 
were  so  constructed  that  "they  far  surpasscd."  gays 
Wilkinson, "  the  comfort  and  coolnees  of  the  modem 
turban,  the  reticulated  texture  of  the  ground-work  on 
which  the  hair  was  fastened  aUowing  the  hcat  of  the 
head  to  escape,  while  the  iiair  eifectually  protected  it 
from  the  sun"  {Am.  Effi/})K  iii,  354).  JÓsephus  (Li/e, 
§  11)  notices  an  instance  of  false  hair  {7r{pi9ir7)  KÓfiij) 
l)eing  used  for  the  purpose  of  dipguise.  Among  the 
Medes  the  wig  was  wom  by  the  upper  classcs  (Xenoph, 
Cyrop.  i,  3,  2).     Sec  Heai>-dress. 

2.  The  precisely  opposite  practice,  as  reganls  men, 
would  seem  to  have  prevailed  among  the  ancient  As- 
sĄTians,  and,  indeed,  among  the  Asiatics  generally.  In 
the  Assyrian  sculptures  the  hair 

always  ap|)eais  long,  combed  close- 

ly  down  upon  the  head,  and  shed- 

ding  itself  in  a  masa  of  curls  on  the 

shouldcfB.     "The  l>eard  also  was 

allowed  to  grow  to  its  fuli  length, 

and,  descending  Iow  on  the  breast, 

was  divide<l  into  two  or  three  rows  I 

of  curls.     The  miistache  was  also  I 

carefully  trimmed  and  curled  at^ 

the   ends"    (Layard's  Ninereh,  ii,  Assyrian  Manner  of 

327).    Herodotns  likewise  testlfies     wearing  the  Hair. 

that  the  Babylonians  wore  their     g;^  M°u?eSS.)" 

hair  long  (i,  196).     The  very  long 

hair,  howerer,  that  appears  in  the  figurcs  on  the  monu- 

ments  is  supposed  to  havp  bren  partly  false,  a  sort  of 

head-dress  to  add  to  the  effect  of  the  natural  hair.    The 

exceasive  pains  bestowed  by  the  ancient  nations  in  ar- 

ranging  the  hair  and  beard  appears  almoRt  foppish  in 

contrast  with  their  stcm,  martial  character  (Layanrs 

Ninecehj  ii,  254).     See  Bkard.     The  practice  of  the 

modem  Arabs  in  regard  to  the  length  of  their  hair  va- 

ries;  generally  the  men  allow  it  to  grow  its  naturiil 

length,  the  tresses  hanging  down  to  the  breast,  and 

sometimes  to  the  waist,  affording  substantial  protection 

to  the  head  and  neck  against  the  violence  of  the  8un'8 

ny9  (Burckhardfs  A  oife*,  i,  49 ;  Wellsted's  Trartls,  i, 

33,  53,  73). 

3.  Among  the  ancient  Greeks,  the  generał  admiration 
of  long  hair,  whether  in  men  or  women,  is  e^'idence<l  by 
the  expre8sion  KaprjK0fi6u)VTic  'Axatoi  ("  well-combed 
Greeks"),  so  often  occurring  in  Homer;  and  by  the 
saying,  which  passed  current  among  the  people,  that 
hair  was  the  cheapcst  of  omaments ;  and  in  the  rcpre- 
sentations  of  their  di^ńnities,  especially  Dacchus  and 
Apollo,  whose  long  locks  were  a  SĄTubol  of  pcrpetual 
youth.     But  the  practice  raried.     While  the  SppJtans 


Grecian  Manner  of  wearing  the  Hair.    (Hope^s  Costumes.) 

in  earlier  times  wore  the  hair  long,  and  men  as  well  as 
women  were  wont  to  have  it  tied  in  a  knot  orer  the 
crown  of  the  head,  at  a  later  period  they  were  accus- 
tomed to  wear  it  short,  Among  the  Athenians,  also,  it 
is  understood  the  later  practice  varied  somewhat  from 


HAIR 


24 


HAm 


the  earlier,  though  the  infonnation  is  lesB  specific.  The 
Bomans  pasaed  through  nmilar  changes:  in  morę  an- 
cient  timcfl  the  hair  of  the  head  and  beaid  was  allowed 
to  grow;  but  aboat  three  centunes  before  the  Christian 
lera  barbers  began  to  be  introduced,  and  men  luually 
wore  the  haii  short.  Shaving  was  also  costomary,  and 
a  long  beard  was  regarded  as  a  mark  of  sloyenliness. 
An  instanoe  ey^en  occuzs  of  a  man,  M.  Lirius,  who  had 
been  banished  for  a  time,  bemg  ordered  by  the  censors 
to  have  his  beard  shared  before  he  entered  the  senate 
(Li>7',  xxTii,  34).    See  Diadksł 

This  later  practice  must  have  been  qmte  generał  in 
the  Gospel  age,  so  far  aa  the  head  is  concem«l|  among 
the  countries  which  witnessed  the  labon  of  the  apostle 
Paul,  sińce,  in  his  first  epistlc  to  the  Goriuthians,  he  re- 
fers  to  it  as  an  acknowledged  and  nearly  unircrśal  fact. 
'^Doth  not  even  naturę  itself  teach  you,"  he  aaked, 
''that  if  a  man  have  long  hair,  it  b  a  shame  to  him? 
But  if  a  womau  have  long  hair,  it  is  a  glory  to  ber;  for 
ber  hair  is  giyen  her  for  a  covering"  (1  Ck)r,  xi,  14, 15). 
The  only  person  among  the  morę  ancient  Israclites  who 
is  expreŚ8ly  mentioned  as  havlng  done  in  ordinary  life 
what  Ls  here  designated  a  shame,  is  Absalom ;  but  the 
manner  in  which  the  sacred  historian  notices  the  ex- 
travagant  regaid  he  paid  to  the  cultiyatlon  of  his  hair 
not  obflcurely  indmates  that  it  was  esteemed  a  piece  of 
foppish  effeminacy  (2  Sam.  xiy,  26).  To  the  Corinthi- 
ans  the  letter  of  Paul  was  intended  to  administer  a  Ume- 
ly  reproof  for  allowing  thcmsdyes  to  fali  in  with  a  style 
of  manneis  which,  by  confounding  the  distinctions  of 
the  sexcs,  threatened  a  banefid  influence  on  good  mor- 
als;  and  that  not  only  the  Christian  conyerts  in  that 
city,  but  the  primitiye  Church  generally,  were  led  by 
this  admonition  to  adopt  simpler  habits,  is  eyident  from 
the  remarkable  fact  that  a  criminal,  who  came  to  trial 
under  the  assumed  character  of  a.  Christian,  was  proyed 
to  the  satisfaction  of  the  judge  to  be  an  impoetor  by  the 
liucuriant  and  frizzled  appearance  of  his  hair  (Tertul- 
lian,  ApoLf  Fleury,  Les  Mmurs  det  Chritiennet),  See 
SHAyiNo.  With  regard  to  women,  the  possession  of 
long  and  Iuxuriant  hair  is  allowed  by  Paul  to  be  an  es- 
aential  attribute  of  the  8ex — a  graceful  and  modest  coy- 
ering  proyided  by  naturę;  and  yet  the  same  apostle 
elsewhere  (1  Tim.  ii,  9)  concun  with  Peter  (1  Pet.  iii,  9) 
in  launching  seyere  inyectiycs  against  the  ladics  of  his 
day  for  the  pride  and  passionate  fondness  they  displayed 
in  the  elaborate  decorations  of  their  head-dress.  See 
Plaitino  tiie  Hair.  As  the  hair  was  pre-eminentiy 
the  "  instrument  of  their  pride"  (Ezek.  xyi,  89,  margin), 
all  the  resources  of  ingeiiuity  and  art  were  exbausted  to 
set  it  oflT  to  adyantagc  and  load  it  with  the  most  daz- 
zUng  finery ;  and  many,  whcn  they  died,  caused  their 
longest  locks  to  be  cut  off,  and  placed  separately  in  an 
urn,  to  be  deposited  in  their  tomb  aa  the  most  precious 
and  yalued  lełics.  In  the  daily  use  of  oosmetics,  they 
bestowed  the  most  astonishing  pains  in  arranging  their 
long  hair,  sometimes  twisting  it  round  on  the  crown  of 
the  head,  where,  and  at  the  temples,  by  the  aid  of  gum, 
which  they  knew  as  well  as  the  modem  belles,  they 
WTought  it  into  a  y ariety  of  elegant  and  fanciful  deyices 
— flgtires  of  coronetA,  harps,  wreaths,  diadems,  emblems 
of  public  temples  and  conquered  cities,  bcing  formed  by 
the  mimie  skill  of  the  ancient  friseur ;  or  else  pliuting  it 
into  an  iucredible  number  of  tresses,  which  bimg  down 
the  back,  and  which,  when  necessary,  were  lengtliened 
by  ribbous  so  as  to  reach  to  the  ground,  and  were  kept 
at  fuli  stretch  by  the  weight  of  yarious  wreaths  of 
pearU  and  gold  fastened  at  interyals  down  to  the  ex- 
tremity.  From  some  Syrian  coiiis  in  his  possession 
Hartmann  {Die  flebraeritm  am  Putztische)  has  giycn  this 
description  of  the  style  of  the  Ilebrew  colflTure;  and 
many  ancient  busts  and  portraits  which  haye  been  dis- 
ooyered  exhibit  so  close  a  resemblancc  to  those  of  East- 
em  ladies  in  the  present  day  as  to  show  that  the  same 
elaborate  and  gorgcous  disposition  of  their  hair  has  been 
the  pride  of  Oriental  females  in  eyery  age.  (See  below.) 
From  the  great  yaluc  attached  to  a  profuse  head  of  hair 


aiose  a  yariety  of  snperstitions  and  emblematic  obserr- 
ances,  auch  as  shaying  parts  of  the  head,  or  croppuig  it 
in  a  particular  form ;  parents  dedicating  the  hair  of  in- 
fants  (Teitullian,  De  Amma)  to  the  gods;  young  wom- 
en theirs  at  their  mairiage^  warriocs  after  a  succeasful 
campaign;  sailois  after  deliyerance  from  a  storm :  hang* 
ing  it  up  on  consecrated  trees,  or  depositing  it  in  tem- 
ples; bur}ńng  it  in  the  tomb  of  fhends,  as  Achilles  did 
at  the  funeral  of  Patroclus;  besides  shaying,  cutting  off, 
or  plucking  it  out,  as  some  people  did;  or  allowing  it  to 
grow  in  sordid  negligence,  aa  was  the  practicc  with  oth- 
ers,  according  as  the  calamity  that  befell  them  was  oom- 
mon  or  extraordinar>'',  and  their  grief  was  mild  or  vio- 
lent.    See  Cuttinos  ix  the  Flesh. 

4.  The  Hebrews  were  fully  aliye  to  the  importanoe 
of  the  hair  as  an  element  of  peiaonal  beauty,  whether 
as  seen  in  the  "•  curled  locks,  black  as  a  rayen,**  of  youth 
(Cant.  y,  1 1),  or  ui  the  "  crown  of  glory"  that  encircled 
the  head  of  old  age  (Proy.  xyi,  81).  Vet,  while  they 
encouraged  the  growth  of  hair,  they  obscn-ed  the  nat- 
ural  distinction  between  the  8exes  by  allowing  the  wom- 
en to  wear  it  long  (Lukę  yii,  38 ;  John  xi,  2 ;  1  Cor.  xi, 
6  Bq.),  while  the  men  restrained  theirs  by  frcquent  clip- 
pings  to  a  moderate  length.  This  difference  between 
the  Hebrews  and  the  surrounding  nations,  especially  the 
Egyptians,  arose,  no  doubt,  partly  from  natund  taste,  bat 
partly  also  from  legał  enactments,  and  to  some  exteQt 
from  certain  national  usages  of  wide  extent. 

(a.)  Clipping  the  hair  in  a  certain  manner,  and  offer- 
ing  the  locks,  was  in  early  times  connected  with  reiig- 
ious  worship :  many  of  the  Aiabians  practiscd  a  i)ecul- 
iar  tonsure  in  honor  of  their  god  Orotal  (Herod,  iii,  8), 
and  hence  the  Hebrews  were  forbidden  to  ^  round  the 
comers  (n»D,  lit.  the  ertremity)  of  thdr  heads"  (Lev. 
xix,  27),  meaning  the  locks  along  the  forehead  and  tem- 
ples, and  behind  the  ears.  (See  Alteneck,  Coma  •Ile' 
&r(Borum,yiteb.  1C95.)  This  tonsure  is  described  in  the 
Sept.  by  a  pecidiar  expres8ion,  auróti  (=the  classical 
<raca^cov),  probably  deriyed  from  the  Hebrew  tT^S^^SC 
(comp.  Bochart,  Canaan,  i,  6,  p.  879).  That  the  prac- 
tice  of  the  Arabians  was  well  known  to  the  Hebrews 
appears  from  the  expression  rtKB  *^2C!|X|^,  rounded  om 
to  the  lockty  by  which  they  are  described  (Jer.  ix,  26; 
xxy,  23 ;  xUx,  32 ;  see  marginal  translation  of  the  A. 
y.).  The  prohibition  against  cutting  off  the  hair  on 
the  death  of  a  relatiye  (DeuL  xiy,  1)  was  probably 
groundcd  on  a  similar  reason.     See  Cokner. 

(&)  In  addition  to  these  reguUtions,  the  Hebrews 
dreaded  baldness,  as  it  was  freąuently  the  result  of  lep- 
rosy  (Ley.  xiii,  40  sc].),  and  hence  formed  one  of  the  dis- 
qualifications  for  the  priesthood  (Ley.  xxi,  20,  Sopt.). 
See  Baldnkss.  The  nde  impoeed  upon  the  priesta, 
and  probably  followed  by  the  rest  of  the  community, 
was  that  the  hair  should  be  poUed  (DD3,  Ezek.  xUy, 
20),  neither  being  shayed,  nor  allowed  to  grow  too  long 
(Ley.  xxi,  5 ;  Ezek.  1.  c).  What  was  the  precise  length 
usually  wom  we  haye  no  means  of  ascertaining;  but 
from  yarious  eKpressions,  such  as  DK"i  9^0,  lit.  to  2e< 
loom  the  head  or  the  hair  (j=aoletn  crw«»,  Yirgil,  jEn, 
iii,  66 ;  xi,  85 ;  demiggos  lugentU  morę  capiUos,  Oyid,  Ep, 
X,  137)  by  unbinding  the  head-band  and  letting  it  go  di- 
sheyelled  (Ley.  x,  6,  A- V. "  uncover  your  hcads"),  which 
was  done  in  mouming  (compare  Ezek.  xxiy,  17) ;  and 
again  Iti^  H^A,  to  uncorer  the  ear  preyious  to  making 
any  communication  of  importance  (1  Sam.  xx,  2,  12 ; 
xxii,  8 ;  A.  V.,  margin),  as  though  the  hair  feU  over  the 
ear,  we  may  conclude  that  men  wore  their  hair  some- 
what  longer  than  is  usual  with  us.  The  word  3?'^0, 
used  as = hair  (Numb.  yi,  6;  Ezek.  xliy,  20),  is  espe- 
cially indicatiye  of  its  /r««  gnwth  (see  Knobel,  Conun, 
on  Ley. xxi,  10).  In  2  Kings  i, 8, "a  hairy  man;*'  lit^ 
erally, "  a  lord  of  hair,"  seems  rather  to  refer  to  the  flow- 
ing  locks  of  Elijah  (q.  \X  This  might  be  doubtfu], 
eyen  'with  the  support  of  the  Sept  and  Joaephua — bm- 


HAIR 


25 


HAIR 


Optawov  ^atrw — and  of  the  Targum  Jonathan — ^^k 
■^Tp — the  same  word  used  for  Esau  iii  Gen.  xxvii,  11. 
But  its  application  to  the  hair  of  the  head  is  corrobora- 
ted  by  the  irord  used  by  the  chiklren  of  Bethel  when 
mocking  Eliaha  (q.  v.).  "  Bald-head"  is  a  peculiar  term 
(n^j^),  applied  only  to  want  of  hair  at  the  back  of  the 
head;  and  the  taunt  was  called  forth  by  the  difference 
beiween  the  bare  shoulders  of  the  new  prophet  and  the 
ahaggy  locks  of  the  old  one.  Long  hair  was  admired 
in  the  case  of  young  men;  it  is  especially  noticed  in 
the  description  of  Absalom^s  person  (2  Sam.  xiv,  26), 
the  inconceivable  weight  of  whose  hair,  as  given  in  the 
text  (200  shekels),  has  led  to  a  rariety  of  explanations 
(oomp.  Hanner'8  Obatrcaiiom,  iv,  821),  the  morę  prób- 
able  being  that  the  numeral  3  (20)  has.  been  tumed 
into  "1  (200) :  Josephus  {Ant.  vii, 8, 5)  adcls  that  it  was 
«uŁ  every  eighth  day.  The  hair  was  also  wom  long  by 
the  body-guard  of  Solomon,  according  to  the  same  au- 
thority  {Ani,  Wii,  7,3,  fitiKiffrac  KaBufiiyoi  xoirac). 
The  care  reąuisite  to  keep  the  hair  in  order  in  such 
cases  must  have  been  very  great,  and  hencc  the  prac- 
tioe  of  wearing  long  hair  was  unuśual,  and  only  resorted 
to  as  an  act  of  religious  observance,  in  which  case  it  was 
a  **  sign  of  humiliation  and  self-denial,  and  of  a  certain 
religious  8lovenlinea6"  (Lightfoot,  ExercU,  on  1  Cor.  xi, 
14),  and  was  practised  by  the  Nazarites  (Numb.  vi,  5 ; 
Jadg.  xiii,  5;  xvi,  17;  1  Sam.  i,  U),  and  occasionally 
by  others  in  token  of  special  mercies  (Acts  xviii,  18) ;  it 
was  not  miusoal  among  the  Egyptians  when  on  a  jour- 
ney  (Diod.  i,  18).    See  Nazarite. 

(r.)  In  times  of  affliction  the  hair  was  altogether  cut 
off  (laa.  iii,  17,24;  xv,  2;  xxii,  12;  Jer.  vii,  29;  xlviii, 
87;  Amos  viii,  10;  Josephus,  War,  ii,  15, 1),  the  prac- 
lice  of  the  Hcbrews  being  in  this  respcct  the  rever8e  of 
that  of  the  Egyptians,  who  let  their  hair  grow  long  in 
ticne  of  mouming  (Herod,  ii,  86),  8having  their  heads 
when  the  term  was  over  (Gen.  xli,  14) ;  but  reserabling 
th&t  of  the  Greeks,  as  freqaently  noticed  by  classical 
wńters  (e.  g.  Soph.  Aj.  1174;  Eurip.  Ekcłr.  148,  241). 
Tearing  the  hair  (Ezra  ix,  3),  and  letting  it  go  dishev- 
elled,  as  already  noticed,  were  similar  tokens  of  grief. 
Job  is  eveu  represented  as  having  8haved  his  head,  to 
make  himself  bald,  in  the  day  of  his  calamity  (i,  20) ; 
probably  morę,  however,  as  a  s^nnbol  of  desolation  than 
as  an  ordinaiy  badge  of  mouming;  for  it  is  in  that  re- 
apect  that  baldneas  is  oommonly  spoken  of  in  Scripture 
(Isa.  iii,  24 ;  xv,  2,  etc.).  The  cali  in  Jer.  vii,  29  to  cut 
off  the  hair — "  Cut  off  thine  hair,  O  Jerusalem,  and  cast 
it  away ;  and  take  up  a  lamentation  on  high  places" — 
is  addresaed  to  Jerusalem  underthe  sjnnbol  of  a  woman, 
and  indicates  nothing  as  to  the  umial  practice  of  men  in 
times  of  trouble  and  distress.  In  their  case,  we  roay 
rather  supposc,  the  custom  would  be  to  let  the  hair  grow 
in  the  season  of  mouming,  and  to  neglcct  the  person. 
But  the  practice  would  naturally  differ  with  the  ooca- 
sioii  and  with  the  feeUngs  of  the  indinduaL     See 

MOUB3C1NG. 

The  usual  and  favorite  color  of  the  hair  was  black 
(Cant.  V,  11),  as  is  indicated  in  the  compańaons  to  a 
*^  flock  of  goats''  and  the  ''  tents  of  Kcdar"  (Cant.  iv,  1 ; 
i,  5) :  a  similar  hue  is  probably  intended  by  the  purple 
of  Cant.  vii,  5,  the  term  being  broadly  used  (as  the 
Greek  jrop^Cpioc  in  a  similar  application =/iEAaCt  Ana- 
creon,  28).  A  fictitious  hue  was  occasionally  obtained 
by  sprinkling  gold-dust  on  the  hair  (Josephus,  A  uf.  yiii, 
7,  3).  It  does  not  appear  that  dyes  were  ordinarUy 
used;  the  **caTmcr  of  Cant.  vii,  5  has  been  undcrstood 
as  =^•^^•^3  (A.V.  "crimson,"  margin)  without  good 
reason,  though  the  similarity  of  the  words  may  have 
auggested  the  subsequent  reference  to  purple.  Herod 
is  said  to  have  dyed  his  gray  hair  for  the  purpose  of 
ooncealing  his  age  (Ani.  xvi,  8, 1) ;  but  the  practice  may 
have  been  borrowed  from  the  Greeks  or  Romans,  among 
wbom  it  was  common  (ArLstoph.  JCccłes.  736 ;  Martial, 
^  iii,  43 ;  Propert.  ii,  18, 24, 26) :  from  Matt.  v,  36,  we 


may  infer  that  it  was  not  usoal  among  the  Hebrewa. 
The  approach  of  age  was  marked  by  a  sprńikling  (p'?J, 
Hos.  ^•ii,  9 ;  comp.  a  similar  use  oi  spargere,  Propert  iii, 
4,  24)  of  gray  hairs,  which  soon  over8pread  the  whole 
head  (Gen.  xlii,  38;  xliv,  29;  1  Kijigs  ii,  6,  9;  Prov. 
xvi,  81 ;  XX,  29).  The  reference  to  the  almcmd  in  EccL 
xii,  5,  has  been  explained  of  the  white  blossoms  of  that 
tnie,  as  emblematic  of  old  age :  it  may  be  observed,  how- 
ever,  that  the  color  of  the  flower  is  pink  rather  than 
white,  and  that  the  verb  in  that  passage,  according  to 
high  authorities  (Gesen.  and  Hitzig),  does  not  bear  the 
sense  of  blossoming  at  alL  See  Almond.  Pure  white 
hair  was  deemed  characteństic  of  the  divine  majesty 
(Dan.  Wi,  9 ;  Rev.  i,  14).    See  Gilw. 

The  chief  beauty  of  the  hair  consisted  in  curls,  wheth- 
er  of  a  natural  or  artificial  character.  The  Ilebrew 
terms  are  highly  expres8ive :  to  omit  the  word  iia^— 
rendered  **  locks"  in  Cant,  iv,  1, 8 ;  vi,  7 ;  and  Isa.  xlvii, 
2;  but  morę  probably  meaning  a  ret^we  have  D'^icbFI 
(Cant  V,  11),  properly  pendulous  flexible  boughs  (ac- 
cording to  the  Sept,  Aarac,  the  shoots  of  the  palm- 
tree)  which  supplied  an  image  of  the  coma  pendula ; 
PiS*']^  (Ezek.viii,8),  a  similar  image  borrowed  from  the 
curve  of  a  blossom ;  pjr  (Cant  iv,  9),  a  lock  falUng 
over  the  shoulders  like  a  chain  of  ear-pondaut  (m  uno 
crine  coUi  ft/i,  Yulgate  better,  perhaps,  than  the  A.V., 
"with  one  chain  of  thy  neck");  D''!?!^'^  (Cant  vłi,  6, 
A."V.  "galleries"),  properly  the  channels  by  which  wa- 
ter  was  brought  to  the  flocks,  which  supplied  an  image 
either  of  the  comajłuetu,  or  of  the  regularity  in  which 
the  locks  were  arranged ;  hŁ^  (Cant.  vii,  5),  again  an 
expres8ion  for  comapetidula,  borrowed  from  the  threads 
hanging  down  from  an  unfinished  woof ;  and,  lastly, 
nĆ|D^  n'^r ^  (isa.  iii,  24,  A.  V.  "  weU  set  hair"),  prop- 
erly plaited  icork,  i,  e.  graoefully  curved  locks.  With 
regard  to  the  modę  of  dressing  the  hair  we  have  no 
very  precise  Information ;  the  terms  used  are  of  a  gen- 
erał character,  as  of  Jezebel  (2  Kings  ix,  80),  ^^"^P,  i. 
e.  she  adomed  her  head;  of  Judith  (x,  8),  ^lira^fj  i.  e. 
arranged  (the  A.  V.  has  "  braided,"  and  the  Vulg.  rfi»- 
criminarify  here  used  in  a  technical  sense  in  the  refer- 
ence to  the  discriminale  or  hair-pin) ;  of  Herod  (Joseph. 
Ant,  xiv,  9,  4),  K(KO(fnrifiivoc  tc  awBkoH  riję  KÓfttjc, 
and  of  those  who  adopted  fcminine  fashions  (  War,  iv, 
9,  10),  KÓfiac  <rvv9tritófiivoi.  The  terms  used  in  the 
N.  Test,  (iryiyfiaffw,  l'Tim,  ii,  9;  lfi'7r\oKjjc  Tpix^Vi  1 
Pet  iii,  8)  are  also  of  a  generał  character ;  Schleusner 
{Lex.  8.  V.)  understands  them  of  curling  rather  than 
plaiting.  The  arrangement  of  Sam6on'8  hair  into  8cven 
locks,  or  morę  properly  hraids  (HlfiblTC,  from  C]^H,  to 
inierchange;  Sept  oupai;  Judg.  xvi,  13,  19),  involve8 
the  practice  of  plaiting,  which  was  also  familiar  to  the 
Egyptians  (Wilkinson,  ii,  335)  and  Greeks  (Homer,  IL 
xiv,  176).  The  locks  were  probably  kept  in  their  place 
by  a  fiUet,  as  in  Egypt  (Wilkinson,  L  c). 


Andent  Egyptian  Ładles  with  thclr  hair  bonnd  by  flUeta. 


HAKEWILL 


26 


HALAH 


Omaments  weie  wórked  into  the  hair,  «s  practised 
by  the  modem  Egyptians,  who  *'  add  to  each  braid  three 
black  silk  cords  with  little  omaments  of  gold"  (Lane,  i, 
71) :  the  Sept.  raideretands  the  terai  0*^0^^©  (Isa.  iii, 
18,  A.  V.  "caula")  aa  applying  to  such  omaments  (t/i- 
irKÓKia) ;  Schrbder  (Vegt,  MuL  Heb,  cap.  2)  approve«  of 
this,  and  conjectures  that  they  were  ntn^hapedy  I  e. 
ciicular,  aa  diatinct  from  the  **  round  tires  like  the  moon," 
i.  e.  the  crescent-shaped  omaments  uaed  for  necklaces. 
The  Arabian  women  attach  smali  beUs  to  the  tresses  of 
their  hair  (Niebuhr,  Trav,  i,  133).  Other  ternw,  some- 
times  understood  as  applying  to  the  hair,  are  of  doubt- 
ful  signification,  e.  g.  D''a'^^n  (Isa.  iii,  22 ;  octu ;  "crisp- 
ing-pins"),  raore  probably  puraes,  as  in  2  Kings  v,  28 ; 
t3'^'i^^p  (Isa.  iii,  20,  «  head-bands"),  bridai  ffirdles,  ac- 
cording  to  Schroder  and  other  authorities;  D'''^K9  (Isa. 
iii,  20,  Viilg.  discriminalkif  i.  e.  pins  used  for  kceping  the 
hair  parted ;  oomp.  Jerome  in  Rtijin,  iii,  cap.  ult.),  morę 
probably  turbam.  Combs  and  hair-pins  are  mentioned 
in  the  Talmud ;  the  Egyptian  combs  were  madę  of  wood 
and  double,  one  side  having  large,  and  the  other  smali 
teeth  (Wilkinson,  ii,  348);  from  the  omamental  deyices 
worked  on  them  we  may  infer  that  they  were  wom  in 
the  hair.  See  each  of  the  above  t«rms  in  its  place.  In 
the  Talmud  freąuent  rcfereiices  are  madę  to  women  who 
were  professional  hair-dreasers  for  their  gwo.  sex,  and 
the  name  applied  to  whom  was  PPII^  (probably  from 
^^A,  to  ttoine  or  plait), "  femina  gnara  alere  crines"  (Mai- 
mon.  in  Tr.  ShaJbbath,  x,  6 ;  comp.  also  Wagenseil,  Sota^ 
p.  137 ;  Jahn,  ArchaoL  pt,  i,  voL  ii,  p.  114). 

The  Hebrews,  like  other  nations  of  antiquity,  anoint- 
ed  the  hair  profuscly  with  ointments,  whlch  were  gen- 
ally  compouuded  of  rarious  aromatic  ingredients  (Ruth 
iii,  3 ;  2  Sam.  xiv,  2 ;  Tsa.  xxiii,  5 ;  xIy,  7 ;  xcii,  10 ; 
EccL  ix,  8 ;  Isa.  iii,  24) ;  morę  especially  on  occasion  of 
festiyities  or  hospitality  (Matt.  vi,  17 ;  xxvi,  7 ;  Lukę 
yii,  46 ;  comp.  Joseph.  A  nt,  xix,  4, 1,  xpnjdfiivoc  piupoic 
rrju  Ke^a\ijVy  cię  itTro  <jvvovffiac),  It  is,  porhaps,  in 
reference  to  the  glossy  appearance  so  imparted  to  it 
that  the  hair  is  described  as  purple  (Cant  vii,  5).    See 

OlNTMENT. 

It  appears  to  have  been  the  custom  of  the  Jews  in 
our  Saviour's  time  to  swear  by  the  hair  (Matt.  v,  36), 
much  as  the  Egyptian  women  stiU  swear  by  the  side- 
lock,  and  the  men  by  their  beards  (Lane,  i,  52, 71,  notes). 
See  Oatii. 

Hair  was  employed  by  the  Hebrews  as  an  image  of 
what  was  least  rcUuable  in  man's  person  (1  Sam.  xiv, 
45;  2  Sam.  xiv,  11 ;  1  Kings  i,  52;  Matt  x,  80;  Lukę 
xii,  7 ;  xxi,  18 ;  Acts  xxvii,  34) ;  as  well  as  of  what  was 
innumerable  (Psa.  xl,  12 ;  lxix,  4),  or  particularly  fine 
(Judg.  xx,  16).  In  Isa.  vii,  20,  it  represents  the  yańous 
productions  of  the  field,  trees,  crops,  etc ;  like  opoc  kłko- 
fttf/uyou  v\y  of  Callim.  IHan,  41,  or  the  humus  comatu 
of  SUit.  Tkeb.  V,  502.  White  hair,  or  the  hoarj'  head,  Lb 
the  symbol  of  the  respect  due  to  age  (Lev.  xix,  22 ; 
Prov.  xvi,  31).  Hence  we  find  in  Dan.  ru^  9,  God  takes 
upon  him  the  titlc  of  "  Ancient  of  Da}V  (comp.  Rev.  i, 
14),  the  gray  locks  there  rcpresentcd  being  the  symbol 
of  authority  and  honor.  The  sharing  of  the  head,  on 
the  contrary,  sigiiifies  affliction,  poverty,  and  disgrace. 
Thus  "cutting  oflf  the  hair"  is  a  iigurc  uscd  to  denote 
the  entire  destmction  of  a  peoplc  by  the  righteous  ret- 
^ributions  of  Providence  (Isa.  vii,  20).  "  (Jray  hairs  here 
and  there  on  Ephraim"  portendcd  ihe  decUne  and  fali 
of  the  kingdom  of  Israel  (łlos.  vii,  9).  "  Hair  like  wom- 
en'8"  forms  part  of  the  deacription  of  the  Apocalyptic  lo- 
custs  (Rev.  ix,  8),  and  is  added  to  complete  the  idea  of 
fierceness  of  the  anti-ChrisŁian  truop  of  cavalr}',bristllng 
with  shaggy  hair  (comp. "  ruugh  caterpillars,"  L  e.  hairj- 
locusts,  Jer.  li,  27) ;  long  and  undressed  hair  in  later 
times  being  regarded  as  an  image  of  barbarie  mdeness 
(Hengstenbcrg,  ad  loc.  Kev.).—  Kitto,  s.  v. ;  Smith,  s. 
V. ;  Fairbaim,  s.  v. 

Hakewlll,  Gboboe,  an  English  theologian  and 


philoaopher,  rras  bom  at  £xeter  in  .1579.  He  atodiefl 
at  £xeter  and  at  Alban  Hall,  Oxford,  where  he  gnuin- 
ated,  and  entered  the  Church  in  161 1.  He  became  suo- 
ce8sively  chaplain  of  prince  Oiarles  (afterwards  Charles 
I)  and  archdeacon  of  Surrey.  His  opposition  to  the 
prince's  plan  of  marriage  with  the  Infanta  of  Spain 
caused  him  to  lose  his  chaplaincy.  During  the  Ciril 
War  he  kept  aloof  from  parties,  and  in  1648  he  was  one 
of  the  first  in  accepting  the  rule  requiring  all  members 
of  the  Uniyersity  of  Oxford  to  sign  a  promise  of  obedi- 
ence  to  Parliament  He  died  in  1649.  Besides  a  lai^ 
number  of  sermons  and  occasional  pamphlets,  he  wrote 
An  Apoloff^j or  Dtdaration  ofihe  Power  and  Proridenoe 
ofGod  in  the  Goremmenł  ofthe,  World  (in  four  books, 
1627,  fol.;  augmented  edit.  1636),  a  work  writtOT  with 
great  strength  and  dearaess,  if  not  always  in  good  taste. 
See  Wood,  Atkena  OzofdemeSy  voL  ii;  Prince,  Worłhiet 
of  Deton ;  Gorton,  General  Biog,  Dicf, ;  Bose,  X€w  Gen. 
Biogr,  Diet,;  Hoefer,  Nouv.  Bioffr,  Generale,  xxiii,  123; 
Allibone,  Dicf.  ofA  tUhors,  s.  v. 

Hakim  Ben-Allah  orBen-Hashem,8umamcd 
MoKANNA  (the  reHed)  and  Sagendk  Naii  (tnoon-maker), 
the  founder  of  an  Arabian  sect,  fłourtshed  hi  the  latter 
half  of  the  8th  centiiry.  He  began  his  career  as  a  oom- 
mon  soldier,  rosę  to  a  captaincy,  bnt  subseąuently  be- 
came the  leader  of  a  band  of  his  own.  Having  lost  one 
of  his  eyes  by  the  shot  of  an  arrow,  he  constantly  wore 
a  veil  to  conceal  his  ugliness,  aa  unbelievei9  assert,  but, 
acoording  to  the  belief  of  his  disciples,' to  prevent  the 
dazzling  brightness  of  his  divinely  illuminated  counte- 
nance  from  overpoweTing  the  beholder.  Hakim  is  said 
to  have  been  an  adept  in  legerdemain  and  natural  mag- 
ie, 80  as  to  be  able  to  produce  grand  and  startling  effects 
of  light  and  oolor,  in  virtue  of  which  he  laid  cUum  to 
miraciilous  powers,  and  asserted  that  he  was  a  god  in 
human  form,  having  been  incamated  in  the  bodiea  of 
Adam,  Noah,  and  other  celebrated  men,  and,  last  of  all, 
in  that  of  Abu  Moslem,  prince  of  Rhorassan.  On  one 
occasion,  to  the  "delight  and  bewilderment  of  his  sol- 
diers,"  he  is  said  for  a  whole  week  to  have  caused  to  ia- 
sue  from  a  deep  well  a  moon  or*moons  of  such  surpass- 
ing  biilliancy  as  to  obscure  the  real  moon.  Many 
fłocked  to  his  standard,  and  he  seized  8everal  strong 
plaoes  near  Nekshib  and  Kish.  The  sułtan  Mahadi 
marched  against  him,  and  iinally  captured  his  last 
stronghold;  but  Hakim,  **having  fiist  poisoned  his  sol- 
diers  with  the  winc  of  a  banquet,'*  had  destroyed  his 
body  by  means  of  a  buming  acid,  so  that  only  a  few 
hairs  remained,  in  order  that  his  disciples  might  beliere 
that  he  had  **  ascended  to  heaven  a]ive.''  Remnants  of 
the  sect  still  exist  on  the  9hores  of  the  Oxus,  having  for 
outward  badge  a  white  garb  in  memory  of  that  wom  by 
their  founder,  and  in  contrast  to  the  black  color  adopted 
by  the  caliphs  of  the  housc  of  Abbas.  The  life  of  Ha- 
kim has  been  the  subject  of  many  romances,  of  which 
*Hhe  best  known  and  most  brilliant*'  is  the  story  ot 
"The  Yeiled  Prophet  of  Khoraasan"  in  Moore^s  LaUa 
Roohh,  —  Chambcrs,  Cydopcedia,  s.  v. ;  Hoefer,  Nouv, 
Biog.  Generale,  i,  82;  D*HerbeIot,  BibUoih.  Orientale,  s. 
y.Mocanna.    (J.W.M.) 

Hak^katan,  or  rather  Katan  (Heb.  Katan',  '|CC, 
with  the  artide  'lOlJil,  the  little  or  junior;  Sept,  'Akko- 
rdy,  Vulg.  Eccefan),  a  descendant  (or  native)  of  Azgad 
and  father  of  Johanan,  which  last  retumed  with  110 
małe  retainers  from  Babylon  with  Ezra  (Ezra  viii,  12). 
B.C.  antę  459. 

Hakkore.    See  En-hak-kore, 

Hak^koz  (1  Chroń,  xxiv,  10).    See  Koz. 

Haku^^pha  {Chakupha',  Kfi^łpn.crooifccif;  but,  ac- 
oording to  Furst,  incitement,  a  Chaldaizing  form ;  Sept. 
'Ajcov0d  and  'A^i^a)*  o"®  of  the  Nethinim  whose  de- 
acendants  retumed  flrom  Babylon  with  Zerubbabel  (Ezra 
ii,  51 ;  Neh.  vii,  58).     B.C.  antę  536. 

Ha^lah  (Hebrew  Chałach',  nbn,  signif.  unknown; 
Sept.  'EXak  and  'AXać,yulg.  ^aid:'but  in  1  Chroń.  v, 


HAŁACHA 


27 


HALDAira: 


26,  Sept  XaXa,Tulg.  LaAeld),  a  city  or  district  of  Me- 
dii,  upon  the  river  Gozan,  to  which,  among  other  placen, 
the  capdyes  of  brael  were  transplanted  by  the  ABsyrian 
king8(2Kingsxvii,6;  xviii,  11;  1  Chroń.  v,  26).  Many, 
after  £ochart  {Geoff.  Sacni,  iii,  14,  p.  220),  have  eon- 
oeived  this  HaUh  or  Chałach  to  be  the  same  with  the 
Cal^ui  or  Kelach  of  Gen.  x,  11,  the  Calacme  (KaXa- 
Kivii)  which  Ptolemy  places  to  the  north  of  Aasyria  (vi, 
1),  the  Caiachem  (KaAaxi7i^)  of  Strabo  (xi,  580),  in  the 
piain  of  the  Tigria  aiound  Nineveh.  But  this  is  proba- 
bly  a  different  place,  the  modem  Kalah-Shergat.  Ma- 
jor Remwll,  identifying  the  Gozan  with  the  Kizzil-Ozan, 
indicates  as  łying  along  its  banks  a  district  of  some  ex- 
ient,  and  of  great  beauty  and  fertility,  called  Chalchalf 
haring  within  it  a  remarkably  strong  poaition  of  the 
aame  name,  situated  on  one  of  the  hills  adjoining  to  the 
mountains  which  separate  it  from  the  province  of  Ghi- 
lan  (Geog,  o/Jłerod,  p.  896).  The  Talmud  undeistands 
Ckolwan,  (ive  days*  joumey  from  Bagdad  (FUnt,  Lex.  s. 
V.).  Ptolemy,  however,  mentions  (v,  18)  another  piov- 
ince  in  Meaopotamia  of  a  aimilar  name,  namely,  Chalci- 
tis  (XaXKiric\  which  he  places  between  Anthemusia 
(oompare  Strabo,  xvi,  1,  §  27)  and  Gauzonitis  (Gozan) ; 
and  this  appears  to  be  the  true  Ualah  of  the  Bibie.  It 
lay  aking  the  banks  of  the  Upx)er  Khab(ir,  extending 
from  its  source  at  Ras  el-Ain  to  its  junctioir  with  the 
Jerujer,  as  the  name  is  thought  to  remain  in  the  modem 
Ght,  a  laige  roound  on  this  river,  above  its  Junction 
n-iih  the  Jemjer  (Layard,  Nw,  and  Bab,  p.  312,  notę). 
Halah,  Habor,  and  Gozan  were  situated  close  together 
on  the  lefl  bank  of  the  Euphrates  (Rawlinson,  Anciaii 
MoMrddes,  i,  246).— Kitto,  s.  v. 

Halacha.    See  Haogadah  ;  Midrash. 

Ha^ak  (Heb.  Chalak',  p^n,  mootk;  Sept.  'koKuK 
and  \t\xa),  the  name  (or,  rather,  epithet)  of  a  hill 
(pjnrt  *''»J«7,  both  with  the  sxL—th€  bare  moutif)  near 
the  territofy  of  Scir,  at  the  southem  cxtrcniity  of  Ca- 
naan,  among  the  conąuests  of  Joshua  (Josh.  xi,  17 ;  xii, 
7);  00  calleil,  doubtless,  from  its  bald  appearance,  making 
it  a  iawhnurk  in  that  direction.  Hence  it  is  used  by 
Joshua,  as  Beersheba  was  used  by  latcr  writers,  to  mark 
the  southem  limit  of  the  country — "  So  Joshua  took  all 
that  huid  .  .  .  from  the  Mouni  UnUOc^  that  goeth  up 
to  Seir,  eren  unto  Baal-gad,  in  the  val1ey  of  Lebanon, 
ander  Moant  Hermon."  The  situation  of  the  mountain 
is  thus  pretty  definitely  indicated.  It  adjoins  Edom, 
aml  lay  on  the  southem  border  of  Palestine^  it  must, 
consequently,  have  been  in,  or  very  near,  the  great  val- 
ky  of  the  Arabah.  The  expressión,  *'that  goeth  np  to 
Seir"  Cl^rto  ł^^ŚPri),  is  worthy  of  notę.  Scir  is  the 
monntainous  province  of  Edom  [see  SeirJ  ;  and  Mount 
Halak  would  seem  to  have  been  conneoted  ^ńth  it,  as 
if  running  up  towards  it,  or  joining  it  to  a  lower  dis- 
trict. About  ten  miles  south  of  the  Dead  Sea  a  linę  of 
nakfd  white  cliflk,  rarying  in  height  from  50  to  150 
feer,  runs  completely  across  the  Arabah.  As  seen  from 
the  north,  the  clilTs  rescroble  a  ridge  of  hills  (and  in  this 
aspect  the  word  ^%^  might  perhaps  be  applicd  to  them), 
shutting  in  the  deep  valley,  and  connecting  the  moim- 
tain  chain  on  the  west  with  the  mountains  of  Seir  on 
the  east.  It  is  possibly  this  ridge  which  is  referred  to 
in  Numb.  xxiv,  8, 4,  and  Josh.  xv,  2,  8,  under  the  name 
"Aseent  of  Akrabbim,"  and  as  marking  the  south-east- 
em  border  of  Judah ;  and  it  might  well  be  called  ihe 
hałd  mountain,  which  aacends  to  Seir,  It  was  also  a  liat- 
ural  landmark  for  the  southem  boundaiy  of  Palestine, 
as  it  is  near  Kedesh-bamea  on  the  one  side,  and  the 
northem  ridge  of  Edom  on  the  other.  To  this  ridge, 
bounding  the  land  in  the  valley  on  the  south,  is  appro- 
priately  opposed  on  the  north, "  Baal-gad,  in  ihe  vattey 
of  Jjebatwnr  (Keil  on  Joshua  xi,  17).  The  cliffs,  and 
the  scenery  of  the  surrounding  region,  are  minntely  dc- 
icribed  by  Robinson  (J9t£.  Res,  ii,  118,  116, 120).— Rit- 
to,  a.  ▼.  Still,  the  peculiar  term,  **  the  bald  mountain," 
teema  to  requiie  some  morę  distinctive  eminence,  i)er- 


hapfl  in  this  generał  rangę.  Schwarz  thinks  it  may  be 
identilied  with  Jebel  Madura,  on  the  south  frontier  of 
Judah,  between  the  south  end  of  the  Dead  Sea  and 
wady  Gaian  {PaległutCy  p.  29);  marked  on  Bobinson*8 
map  a  littlo  south  of  the  famous  pass  Nukb  es-Sufah. 

Haldane,  James  Alezander,  brother  of  the 
foUowing,  was  bom  at  Dundee  July  14, 1768.  Having 
imbibed  the  family  passion  for  the  sea,  he  was  appoint- 
ed  captain  of  the  Melville  Castle  in  1793.  The  vessel, 
however,  did  not  sail  for  four  months,  and  during  that 
iuter>'al  a  great  chaiige  took  place  in  captain  IIaldane'8 
character.  He  became  seńous  and  thoughtful  on  the 
subject  of  religion,  and,  having  determincd  to  foUow  the 
example  of  hb  brother,  who  had  already  relinquished 
the  seafaring  life,  he  disposed  of  his  command  for  £9000, 
and  his  share  in  the  property  of  the  ship  and  stores  for 
£6000  morę.  With  this  fortime  of  £15,000  he  retired 
with  his  wife  to  Scotland  in  1794,  and  gave  himself  up 
to  those  religious  inquiries  which  now  engrossed  his 
chief  concem.  Severśd  years  elapeed  before  his  views 
were  established ;  but  at  length  he  attained  to  a  knowl- 
edge  of  the  tmth  as  well  as  peace  in  believing.  Mr. 
James  Haldane,  having  plenty  of  time  at  command,  oc- 
cuDied  himself  with  many  plans  of  Christian  usefulness; 
among  which  the  opening  of  Sabbath-schools,  and  itin- 
erant  preaching,  at  first  in  the  vlllages  around  Edin- 
burgh,  and  afterwards  in  the  other  large  towns  of  Scot- 
land, were  the  chief.  His  principal  coadjutor  in  these 
labors  of  love  was  John  Campbell,  the  Afńcan  traveller. 
In  company  with  that  zealuus  Christian,  Mr.  Haldane 
madę  8uccessive  tours  throughout  all  Scotland  as  far  as 
Orkney,  and  those  who  were  awakened  by  their  preach- 
ing were,  through  the  iiberality  of  Mr.  Robert  Haldane, 
accommodated  with  suitable  places  of  worship.  Mr. 
James  eventually  accepted  the  office  of  stated  pastor  in 
the  Tabemacle,  Leith  Walk,  Edinburgh,  and  in  that 
capacity  he  exerci8ed,  without  any  emolument,  all  the 
public  and  private  duties  of  a  minister  with  unbroken 
fidelity  and  zeal  for  a  period  of  fifty  years.  Although 
he  racillated  on  some  pointa  of  Church  goveniment,  ho 
and  his  brother  remained  steadfast  in  their  adherence  to 
the  generał  princtples  of  the  Scotch  Baptists.  He  died 
in  Edinbuigh  Feb.  8,  1851.  Besides  a  number  of  con- 
trover8ial  tracts,  he  published  A  Yieto  of.łhe  social  Wor^ 
ship  of  the  first  Chnstians  (Ebinb.  1805, 12mo)  \—Man^s 
ResponaibUity  and  the  ExtefU  of  (he  A  ionemerU  (Edinb. 
1842,  12mo) :  —  Kstposition  of  Galaiians  (Edinb.  1848, 
12mu):  —  Inspiration  of  the  Scriptures  (Edinb.  1845, 
12mo).  —  Jamieson,  Religious  Biography,  p.  242 ;  Rich, 
Bioff, Diet.  s,y,  Haldane;  Lives  ofłhe  Brothers  Jlaldane 
(1852,  8vo);  Belcher,  Memoir  of  Robert  atui  James  Air 
ezandn-  Haldane,  etc  (Amer.  Tract  Soc.) ;  New  England- 
er,  April,  1861,  p.  269.    See  Independents,  III. 

Haldane,  Robert,  an  eminent  Christian  philan- 
thropist,  was  bom  in  London  (of  Scotch  parents)  Feb. 
28,  1764,  and  inherited  a  large  property.  His  early 
manhood  was  spent  in  the  navy ;  he  was  afterwards  an 
cnthusiastic  Democrat  in  politics,  and  w^elconied  the 
French  Revolution.  After  this  excitement  subsided  he 
was  converted,  and  re8olved  on  dedicatiiig  his  life  to 
mi8sionar>'  labors.  India  was  the  chosen  field,  and, 
having  secured  the  promised  co-operation  of  Messrs. 
Innes,  Ewing,  and  Bogue,  of  Gosport,  to  whom  he  guar- 
anteed  adequate  stipends,  he  applied  to  the  Indian  gov- 
erament  to  sanction  his  enterprise.  The  East  India 
Company  directors,  after  much  deliberation,  re8olved 
that  the  superstitions  of  Hindostan  should  not  be  dis- 
turl.)ed.  Mr.  Haldane  now  detcrmined  to  cmploy  his 
resources  in  spreading  the  Gospel  at  home,  and,  in  con- 
junction  with  Rowland  Hill  and  other  eminent  evan- 
gelists,  he  was  instramental  in  awakening  an  cxtensive 
revivid  of  religion  throughout  Scotland.  The  (icncral 
Asserably  (1800)  forbade  field-preaching,  and  discour- 
aged  the  revival.  Mr.  Haldane  therefore  seceded  from 
the  Established  Church,  and  at  his  oi\ii  expense  erected 
places  of  wofshipi  under  the  uam^  5>f  Tabemadesi  iu  all 


HALDE,  DU 


28 


HALHUL 


the  large  towns  of  Scotland,  and  educated  800  yonng 
men  under  Dr.  Bogue  at  Gosport,  Mr.  Ewing  at  6Ia»- 
goW|  and  Mr.  Innes  at  Dundee.  He  alao  organized  a 
theological  school  at  Paris.  His  attention  vma  subse* 
quentły  directed  to  the  evangelization  of  Afirica.  To 
coramence  this  undertaking,  he  procured  thirty  young 
children  from  Sierra  Leone  to  receirc  a  Christian  edu- 
cation  at  his  expense,  and  gave  a  bond  for  £7000  for 
their  board  and  education,  which,  howevcr,  the  friends 
of  emancipation  in  London  undertook  to  defray.  This 
is  only  one  specimen  of  his  monificence.  His  persona! 
labors  in  awakeniiig  a  reiigious  spirit  in  the  south  of 
France  wcre  successful  beyond  his  own  most  sanguine 
expectations;  and  both  at  Geneva  and  Montauban  he 
sowed  the  seeds  of  truth,  which  are  bearing  good  fruit 
to  this  day  in  the  Protestant  churches  of  France.  Mr. 
Haldane  took  a  prominent  part  in  the  management  of 
the  Continental  Society  and  the  Bibie  Society  of  £din- 
burgh;  and  in  the  painful  controrersy  relative  to  the 
drculation  of  the  Apocrypha  by  the  British  and  Foreign 
Bibie  Society,  which  led  to  the  establishment  of  the  lat^ 
ter.  He  was  the  author  of  The  Erńdence  and  A  ttihority 
óf  dwine  Rerelation  (8d  ed.  1839,  2  yols.  12mo):— .4n 
EiposUion  of  the  Episth  to  the  RomoM  (Lond.  1839,  2 
ToK  12mo)  :—Fcr6a/  Inspiration  (6th  ed,  1863,  12mo); 
and  yarioas  controvcrsial  pamphlets.  He  died  Dec  12, 
1842 — Jamieson,  Reiigious  Biography^  p.  240 ;  Kich,  Bi- 
ógr.  Dictionary ;  Darling,  Lives  ofthe  Brothers  Haldane 
(Lond.  1852, 8vo) ;  Belcher,  Memoir  of  Robert  and  James 
Akzander  Haldane  (Amer.  Tract.  Soc.). 

Halde,  Du.     See  Du  Halde. 

Hale,  John,  a  Congregational  minister,  was  bom 
Jnne  3, 1636,  in  Charlestown,  Mass.  He  giaduated  at 
Harvard  College  in  1657,  and  was  ordained  first  pastor 
of  the  newly-formed  Church  at  Beverley,  Sept.  20, 1667, 
where  he  remained  nntil  his  death,  May  15, 1700.  He 
published  an  Electum  Sermon  (1684),  and  A  modest  In- 
cuiry  inio  the  Naturę  of  WU^crąft,  and  how  Persons 
ffuilły  of  that  Crime  may  be  conridedy  and  the  Means 
used  for  their  Di»oovery  discussed,  both  negaHtfely  and 
ctjfirmałiuely,  aocording  to  Scripture  and  Experience 
(18mo,  1697).— Sprague,  Annals,  i,  168. 

Hale,  Sir  Matthe'W,  was  bom  at  Alderiey, 
Gloucestershire,  Nov.  1,  1609,  admitted  at  Magdalen 
Hall,  Oxford,  in  1626,  and  at  lincohi^s  Inn  in  1629.  In 
1653  (under  the  C!ommonwealth)  he  was  madę  one  of 
the  judgcs  of  the  (}ommon  Bench,  and  in  1671  he  was 
elected  to  be  chief  justice  of  the  King's  Bench.  He  died 
Dec.  25,  1676.  He  was  a  leamed  lawyer,  an  upright 
judge,  a  pious  Christian.  The  only  spot  upon  his  mem- 
ory  as  a  criminal  judge  is  the  notorious  fact  of  his  hav- 
ing  condemned  two  wretched  women  for  witchcraft,  at 
the  assizcs  at  Bury  St.  £dmund*8,  in  the  year  1665. 
Hale,  in  the  course  ofthe  trial,  avowed  himself  a  belierer 
in  witchcraft,  and  the  jury  found  the  prisoners  guUty, 
notwithstanding  many  impartial  by-standers  declared 
that  they  disbcUeved  the  charge.  No  reprieve  was  grant- 
ed,  and  the  prisoners  were  executed.  Hale  was  a  yolu- 
minous  wńter.  Of  his  legał  publications  we  make  no 
mention  here ;  besides  them  he  wrote  An  Abstract  ofthe 
Christian  Rdigion: — A  DiscourseofReligion: — Contem- 
pUttionSf  Morał  and  Divine: — The  Knowkdge  of  Christ 
crucijied  (new  ed.  Glasg.  1828, 12mo).  These  and  other 
minor  pieces  are  gathered  in  his  WorhSj  Morał  and  Re- 
Ugious,  edited  by  the  Rev.  T.  Thirlwall,  M.A.  (London, 
1805,  2  Yols.  8vo).  See  Bumet,  Life  of  Sir  M.  Hak 
(London,  1682, 12rao;  also  preflxed  to  his  Works^  above 
named) ;  Baxter,  Notes  on  the  Life  and  Deaih  ofSir  M. 
Hale  (Lond.  1682, 12mo ;  reprinted,  with  Hale'a  Thoughis 
on  Rełigiony  Lond.  1805, 12mo);  Campbell,  Lives  of  the 
Chief  Justices  f  English  Cyclopadia;  Allibone,  Diet.  of 
AuthorSy  s.  V. 

Hales,  John,  of  Eton,  usually  called  the  "ever- 
memorable,"  an  eminent  English  scholar  and  divine, 
was  bom  in  Bath,  1584,  and  educated  at  Corpus  Christi 
College,  Oxford.    In  1606  he  was  elected  fellow  of  Mer- 1 


ton  CoUege,  and  was  employcd  by  Sir  H.  Sanie  in  the 
preparation  of  hisfine  edition  of  Chi^^sostom,  published 
in  1613.  His  attainments  in  Greek  gained  him  the  pro- 
fessorship  of  that  language  at  Oxford  iu  1612,  and  in 
1613  he  was  ordained  and  become  fellow  of  Eton.  In 
1618  he  aocompanied  Sir  D.  Carleton  to  the  Hague  as 
his  chaplain,  and  attended  him  to  the  Synod  of  Dort  (q. 
V.).  He  went  to  that  celebrated  body  a  Calyinist,  and 
left  it  an  Arminian,  as  is  shown  by  a  letter  of  Farindon 
(q.  y.),  prefixed  to  Haks^s  Golden  Remains,  in  which  he 
says*  ^  At  the  well-pressing  of  John  iii,  16  by  Episco- 
pius  there,  /  bid  John  Calrin  goodrmghty  aa  he  has  ofien 
łold  mi*  (see  Jackson,  Life  ofFarhdon^  p.  xlix).  la 
1636  he  wrote  for  Chillingworth  a  tract  on  Schism,  ia 
wbich  he  rebuked  the  daims  of  high  Episcopacy.  Laud 
sought  to  gain  over  the  great  Gredc  scholar,  and  offered 
him  any  preferment  he  pleaaed.  In  1639  he  was  mado 
canon  of  Windsor,  but  was  depńred  in  1642.  Refusing 
to  subecribe  to  the  '*  corenant,**  he  was  compelled  to 
wander  from  place  to  place,  and  at  last  he  had  to  sell 
his  library  for  bread.  He  died  May  19, 1656.  No  man 
of  his  time  had  greater  reputation  for  scholarship  and 
piety.  Bishop  Pearson  speaks  of  him  as  a  **  man  of  aa 
great  a  sharpness,  ąnickness,  and  subtilty  of  wit  as  ever 
this  or  perhaps  any  nation  bred  ....  a  man  of  vast 
and  iUimited  knowledge,  of  a  severe  and  profound  judg- 
ment.**  He  wrote  unwillingly,  and  published  but  a  few 
tracts  in  his  lifetime;  but  after  his  death  a  number  of 
his  sermons  and  miscellaneoas  pieces  were  coUected  un- 
der the  title  of  Golden  Remains  ofthe  Ecer-memorable 
John  Hales  (London,  1659, 8vo;  best  ed.  1673, 4to) ;  his 
Letters  cono&nwng  the  Synod  of  Dort  are  published  in 
the  edition  of  1673.  An  edition  of  his  Whole  Worla 
(with  the  language  modemized)  was  published  by  loni 
Haiks  in  1765  (3  rols.  12mo).  See  Des  Maizeaux,  L^fe 
of  Hales  (Lond.  1719,  8vo) ;  General  Biog.  Dictionary  ; 
Jackson,  Life  of  Farindon  (prefixed  to  Fiirindon*3  Ser- 
mons, voL  i) ;  Wood,  A  thence  Ozomensis,  ii,  124 ;  Herzog, 
Real-Encyklóp,  v,  476-7 ;  Allibone,  DicL  of  A  utkors,  s.  v. 

Haliburton.    See  Halyburtox. 

Half-commanion,  the  withholding  the  cup  from 
the  laity  in  the  Lord's  Supper.  "  This  practice  of  the 
Church  of  Romę  was  first  authorized  by  Innocent  III, 
and  then  madę  obligatory  by  the  Council  of  Constance ; 
and  one  motire  for  the  innoration  appears  to  ha\'e  been 
to  exalt  the  priesthood  by  giving  them  some  exclusiv8 
privilege  even  in  communion  at  the  Lord's  table.  Tran- 
substantiation  and  half-oommunion,  or  communion  in 
one  kind  only,  are  ingeniously  linked  together.  Ro- 
manists  beliere  that  Christ,  whole  and  entire,  his  soul, 
body,  and  divinity,  is  contained  in  either  species,  and 
in  the  smallest  particie  of  each.  Hence  they  infer  that, 
whether  the  communicant  receive  the  bread  or  the  ^-ine, 
he  enjo3rs  the  fuli  benefit  of  the  sacrament.  Therefore, 
to  support  the  monstious  dogma,  the  sacrament  is  di- 
yided  in  two :  transubstantiation  justifies  communion  in 
one  kind,  and  communion  in  one  kind  prores  the  tmth 
of  transubstantiation.  In  thus  denying  the  cup  to  the 
laity,  the  insdtudon  of  Christ  is  mutilated,  the  expre6S 
law  of  the  Gospel  penrerted,  and  the  practice  of  the 
apostles  abandoned.  The  withholding  the  cup  was  one 
of  the  grievanoes  which  induced  the  Hussites  to  resist 
the  usurpations  of  the  Church  of  Romę"  (Fairar,  Ecde»* 
Diet,  B.  V.).     See  Lord'8  Supper. 

Half-'wa7  Covenant,  a  scheme  adopted  by  the 
C!ongregational  churches  of  New  England  in  order  to 
cxtend  the  privileges  of  church  membership  and  infant 
baptism  beyond  the  pale  of  actual  communicants  at  the 
Lord'8  table.  Stoddard,  of  Northampton,  \óndicated  it, 
and  Jonathan  Edwards  opposed  it  This  struggle  caused 
Edwards's  removal  from  Northampton.  It  is  now  aban- 
doned by  the  orthodox  Congregationalists. — Hurst,  72a- 
tionalism,  p.  538 ;  Upham,  Ratio  DiscipUna,  xxL     See 

CONGREOATIONALISTS;  EDWARDS,  JoNATHAN. 

Hal'hul  (Heb.  Ckalchul',  bw^n,  etymoL  doubtful, 
but,  acoording  to  FUrst,  fuli  of  hoUows;  Sept  'AXovX  v. 


HALI 


29 


HALL 


r.AJXoiia)f  a  town  in  thehighIandB  orJiidah,mentionecl 
in  the  fourth  group  of  sbc  north  of  Hebron  (Keil,  Jb«A.p. 
S87),  aiDong  them  Betb-zur  and  Gedor  (Josh,  xy,  58). 
Jerome  {Onomast,  s.  v.  Elul)  says  it  exi6ted  in  bis  time 
mar  Hebron  as  a  smali  yiUage  ("  yilula"')  by  Łhe  name 
ofAluła,  Dr.  Robinson  found  it  in  the  modem  Ifulhul, 
a  <ibort  distance  nortb  of  Hebron,  consisting  of  a  niined 
mosąue  (called  Neby  Yunas  or  **  Prophet  Jonah")  upon 
a  \mff,  hilU  surrounded  by  the  reraains  of  ancient  walls 
anił  foundations  (Retearches^  i,  819).  During  his  last 
li^it  to  Palcstine  he  yisited  itagain,  and  describes  it  as 
Bituated  high  on  the  eostem  brow  of  the  ridge,  the  head 
luwn  of  the  district,  inhabited  by  an  incivil  people ; 
the  enrirons  are  thrifly  and  well  cidtiyated.  The  old 
mceąue  is  a  poor  structure,  but  bas  a  minaret  (new  ed. 
ot  Retearckefy  iii,  281).  Schwarz  also  identifies  it  with 
thb  village  on  a  mount,  5  Eng.  miles  north-east  of  He- 
bron" (Paległine,  p.  107).  Sc  likewise  De  Saulcy  (Dead 
Stiu  i,  451).  The  hill  is  quite  a  conspicuous  one,  half 
a  mile  to  the  left  of  the  road  from  Jerusalera  to  Hebron, 
the  rillage  somewhat  at  its  eastem  foot ;  while  opposite 
it,  on  the  other  side  of  the  road,  is  BeitHsftr,  the  modem 
Rprcsentatiye  of  Beth-zur,  and  a  little  further  to  the 
north  M  Jediir,  the  ancient  Gedor.  In  a  Jewish  tradi- 
tion  qi]atcd  by  Hottinger  (Cippi  I/ebrcHci,  p.  88),  and  re- 
ported  by  an  old  Hebrew  trayeller  (Jo.  Chel,  1834 ;  see 
Carmody,  7/m.  Jlebrete,  p.  242),  it  is  said  to  be  the  burial- 
place  of  Gad,  Dayid*a  seer  (2  Sam.  xxiy,  11).  Hence  it 
was  for  a  tinae  a  place  of  Jewish  pilgrimage  (Wilson, 
Jjinds  of  BiUe,  i,  884).  See  also  the  dtations  of  Zunz 
io  Ashei^s  Bettj.  o/Tuckia  (ii,  487,  notę).    See  Chellus. 

Ha'U  (Heb.  Ckalt'.  ^hn,  mckUice ;  Sept.  'AXi  v.  r. 
'AXJ^  and  *Oo\ft).  a  town  on  the  border  of  the  tribe  of 
Asher.  mentioned  between  Helkath  and  Beten  (Josh. 
xix.  25).  Schwarz  thinks  it  may  be  the  ChaUm  (Cy- 
aroon)  of  Judith  yii,  8,  opposite  Escbraelon,  and  there- 
fore  near  the  rangę  of  Carmel  {PalesU  p.  191);  but  the 
reathng  of  that  passage  is  doubtful  (see  Amald,  Com- 
nnent,  ad  loc.),  and  such  an  Identification  would  place 
Hali  far  remote  from  the  associated  localities,  which 
Kem  to  indicate  a  position  on  the  eastem  bouiidar}',  at 
(Dme  distance  from  its  northem  extremity.  Accord- 
ingly  Tan  de  Velde  suggests  {Memoir,  p.  318)  that 
"  perhapa  the  site  of  this  city  may  be  recognised  in  that 
oi  Alia,  a  place  where  the  rock-hcwn  foundations  of  a 
large  city  are  seen,  on  the  south-east  side  of  the  yillagc 
of  Malia,  rather  morę  than  fiye  hours  north-east  of 
Akka;  the  tell  of  l^raUa  would  seem  to  haye  formed  the 
aaopolis  of  the  ancient  city.** 

HaUcamas^mu  (AXtKapvainroc),  in  Caria  of  Ańa 
Minor,  a  city  of  great  renown,  as  being  the  birthplace 
of  Herodotiis  and  of  the  later  hiatorian  Dionysius,  and 
as  embellished  by  the  mausoleum  erected  by  Artemisia, 
bat  of  no  Biblical  interest  except  aa  the  residence  of  a 
Jewish  populatłon  in  the  perioda  between  the  Old  and 
Kew  Testament  histońea.  In  1  Mace.  xy,  23,  this  city 
is  spccified  aa  containing  auch  a  popolation.  The  de- 
cree  in  Josephus  {AnL  xiy,  10, 28),  where  the  Romans 
direct  that  the  Jews  of  Halicamaasos  shall  be  allowed 
thcir  national  naage  of  proseuchae,  or  prayer-chapels  by 
the  sea-sidc  (rac  irpomuxAc  frointrOat  npdc  ry  9a\da- 
f/y  Kard  to  vdrpiov  i0oc)j  is  interesting  wlien'  com- 
pared  with  Acts  xyi,  13.  This  city  was  celebrated  for 
its  harbor  and  for  the  strength  of  its  fortitications;  but, 
haying  madę  a  ^■igorou8  and  protracted  defense  against 
Alexander  the  Great,  he  was  so  much  enniged  that, 
npon  gaining  at  length  poasession  of  it,  he  destroyed  it 
by  fiort— a  calamity  firom  which  it  neyer  recoreied.  A 
|dan  of  the  ńte  is  given  in  Ross,  Reiaen  au/den  Griech. 
Iiudn^  i,  30  (copied  in  Smith^s  Did.o/Ciau,  Geog.  8.y.). 
The  BGulptuiea  of  the  mausoleom  are  the  subject  of  a 
paper  by  Mr.  Newton  in  the  Ckuncal  Museum,  and 
many  of  them  are  now  in  the  British  Museum  (see  also 
his  fuli  work,  DUooreriet  at  ffaHcamatms,  etc.,  Lond. 
1862^).  The  modem  name  of  the  place  ia  Budrum, — 
Smith,  a.  T. 


Hall  ocean  in  the  A.Y.  of  the  N.T.  three  timea; 
twice  (Matt.  xxyii,  27 ;  Mark  xv,  16)  in  reference  to 
the  7rpaiTb»ptoVrpr€Bioriumf  or  residence  of  the  Roman 
goyemor  at  Jerusidem,  which  was  either  the  palące  built 
by  the  eł<ler  Herod,  or  the  tower  of  Antonia;  his  iisual 
abode  was  at  CeBsarea  (Acts  xxiii,  28).  Mark  adds  to 
tł^o  word  av\  ^ ,  as  he  is  wont  in  other  cases,  an  explana- 
toiy  plirase,  8  iort  jrpatTiópioy  (Vulg.  atrium  prcetorii), 
In  Lukę  xxii,  55,  aukii  means  tiie  open  court  or  quad- 
rangle  belonging  to  the  high-priesfs  house,  such  as  was 
common  to  Oriental  dwellmgs.  It  bas  the  same  mean- 
ing  in  Matt.  xxyl,  69,  and  Mark  xiy,  66,  and  in  both 
paasages  is  incorrectly  rendered  "  palące**  in  the  A.  Y., 
as  the  adyerbs  tKi»»  and  Karta  plainly  distinguish  the 
av\ii  from  the  ó!koc  to  which  it  was  attached  (Lukę 
xxii,  54).  So  in  Lukę  xi,  21.  In  John  x,  1 ,  16,  it  means 
a  "sheep-fold,**  and  m  Rey.  xi,  2,  the  outer  "  wwW"  of 
the  Tempie.  The  avX^  was  entered  from  the  street  b}' 
a  vpoavAtoi/  or  resŁibuU  (Mark  xiy,  68),  through  a  irv- 
X«v  OT  portal  (MatL  xxvi,  71),  in  which  was  a  ^vpa  or 
tńcket  (John  xviii,  16 ;  Acts  xii,  13).— Kitto,  s.  v.  Ai-A^ 
is  the  eąuiyalent  for  "isn,  an  indosed  or  fortified  space 
(Gesenius,  Thesaur,  p.  512),  in  many  pbccs  in  the  O.  T. 
where  the  Vulg.  and  A.  Yers.  have  rcspcctiyely  rilia  or 
ricw/w*, "  village,*'  or  atrium^  "court,**  chiefly  of  the  tab- 
emacle  or  Tempie.  See  Court.  The  hall  or  court  of 
a  house  or  palące  would  probably  be  an  indosed  but  im- 
coycred  siiace,  implui-ium^  on  a  lower  level  than  the 
apartments  of  the  lowcst  tioor  which  lookcd  into  it. — 
Smith,  8.  V.    See  Housk. 

HaU,  Charles,  D.D.,  a  Presbyterian  minister,  was 
bom  at  Williamsport,  Pa.,  June  23, 1799,  and  graduated 
at  Hamilton  College  in  1824  with  great  distinction. 
He  passcd  his  theological  studies  at  Princeton,  was  li- 
censed  in  1827,  and  appointed  soon  after  assistant  scc- 
retary  to  the  Home  Missionarj'  Society.  In  1852  he 
went  to  Europę  for  his  health,  yisitetl  most  of  that  con- 
tinent,  and  retumed  after  a  short  absence  to  his  accus- 
tomed  duties.  He  dicd  Oct.  31,  1863.  He  cdit^d  for 
seyeral  years  The  Ilome  Missiatun-y ;  and  publiśhcd  .4 
Tracł.  on  Plam  and  Motirea  for  the  Eitension  of  Suh- 
hath  Schooh  (1828)  i—The  Daily  Yerse  Expositor  (1832) : 
— A  Plan  for  teystematic  Benerolence ;  and  A  Sennon  on 
the  WorUTs  Conrertion  (1841). — Sprague,  A  rmals,  iv,  730. 

Hall,  Gordon,  a  Congregational  minister  and 
missionary  to  India.  He  was  bom  in  GranyUle  (now 
Tolland),  Mass.,  April  8, 1781,  and  graduated  from  Wil- 
liams College  in  1808  with  the  lirst  honors  of  his  class. 
At  college  he  had  formed  the  acquaintance  of  Samuel 
J.  Mills  and  James  Richards,  aften\'ards  missionaries. 
He  commenced  the  study  of  theology  under  Ebenezer 
Porter,  aiterwards  president  of  Andover  Theological 
Seminary,  was  licensed  to  preach  in  1809,  and  supplied 
for  a  time  a  church  at  Woodbury.  But  from  the  time 
of  his  acquałntance  with  Mills  it  seems  he  had  purposed 
to  become  a  missionary.  In  1810  he  went  to  Andoycr, 
was  ordained  at  Salem  Fcb.  6,  1812,  and  sailcd  on  the 
18th  from  Philadelphia  with  Nott  and  Rice,  arriving  in 
Calcutta  on  the  17th  of  June.  The  East  India  Cum- 
pan}'  refused  them  the  privilege  of  laboring  or  rcmain- 
ing  in  its  territory,  and  Messrs.  Hall  and  Nott  embarked 
for  Bombay,  where  they  arrived  Feb.  11, 1813.  Orders 
from  the  goyemor  generał  followed,  commanding  them 
to  be  sent  to  England ;  but  by  the  courage  and  wisdom 
of  Mr.  Hairs  memorials,  the  goyemor  was  influenced  to 
repeal  his  order,  and  Mr.  Hall  remained.  He  labored 
zealously  and  with  great  success  luitil  March  20,  1826, 
when  he  was  suddenly  cut  off  by  cholera.  Mr.  Hall 
possessed  fine  abilities,  ardcnt  piety,  great  courage  and 
self-sacrifice.  His  indomitable  spirit,  and  the  ability 
of  his  appeals  to  the  goyemor  generał,  did  much  to  open 
the  way  for  the  success  of  Christianity  in  India. — Amer^ 
ican  Missionary  Memoriał,  p.  41.     (G.  L.  T.) 

HaU,  Joseph,  D.D.,  bishop  of  Nom-ich,  was  bom 
at  Ashby-de-la-Zouch  July  1,  1674,  and  cducated  at 
Emanuel  College,  Cambridge.    While  rector  of  Halstcd, 


HALL 


30 


HALL 


In  Suffolk,he  composed  his  "  ComłempUitioM,^  which  pro- 
cured  him  the  patronage  of  prince  Henn*  and  the  re<s 
tory  of  Waltharo.  In  1616  he  went  to  Paris  an  chap- 
lain  to  the  Enghah  ambassatior.  On  his  return  he  was 
appointed  by  king  James  to  the  deanery  of  Worcester 
(1617),  and  in  the  following  year  he  accompanied  his 
royal  master  into  Scotland,  when  that  roonarch  madę  a 
progress  into  the  northem  part  of  his  kingdom  to  prose- 
cute  his  iroprudent  scheme  of  erecting  Episcopacy  on 
the  ruins  of  Presbyterianism.  Nonę  of  the  unpopular- 
ity,  howeycr,  of  that  measiure  fell  upon  Hall,  whose  chai^ 
acter  and  principles  secured  him  the  esteem  and  rospect 
of  the  most  eminent  Scotchmen  of  the  day.  He  was 
commanded  to  go  over  into  Holland  to  attend  the  Synod 
of  Dort  in  1618;  but  the  protracted  meetings  of  that 
convocation  madę  sad  inroads  on  his  health,  and  after 
two  months  he  retumed  with  an  impaired  constitution 
to  England.  In  1627  he  was  raised  to  the  see  of  Exe- 
ter,  and  afterwards,  without  any  solicitation,  to  that  of 
Norwich  in  1641.  Amid  all  the  ecclcsiastical  tyranny 
of  Laud,  bishop  Hall  pre8er\'ed  his  moderation.  The 
bishop,  however,  had  his  season  of  trial  When  the 
popular  outcry  **  No  bishops"  was  raised,  and  an  armed 
mob  marched  against  the  House  of  Lords,  Hall,  with 
cleyen  of  the  lord.«i  8piritual,joined  in  protesting  against 
the  measures  which  were  passed  in  their  absence ;  and 
this  document  ha\'ing  been  madę  a  ground  of  impeach- 
ment,  he,  with  his  protesting  brethren,  were  consigned 
to  the  Tower.  He  was  released  in  June  following  on 
giving  bail  for  £5000.  He  continued  for  a  year  to  ex- 
ercise  his  episcopal  functions  in  Norwich ;  but  the  pop- 
ular tide  again  set  in,  his  house  was  attacked,  his  prop- 
erty  scquestratcd,  himself  insulted,  and  in  meek  resigna- 
tion  he  retired  into  a  smali  place  called  Higham,  in 
Norfolk,  where  he  spent  the  remainder  of  his  <lays  in 
acts  of  piety  and  charity,  and  at  length  died  Sept.  8, 
1656,  in  the  eighty-second  year  of  his  age.  Bishop 
Hall  was  a  "  man  of  very  dcYotional  habits,  to  fortify 
which  he  madę  a  most  rigid  distribution  of  his  time, 
haying  sot  hours  for  prayer,  for  reading  divinity,  for 
generał  literaturę  and  composition ;  and  so  intense  was 
his  ardor  ;n  the  pursuit  of  intellectual  and  spiritiuil  im- 
provement,  that  for  a  time  he  obscr\'ed  the  strictest  ab- 
Btemiousness,  taking  for  a  while  only  one  meal  a  day." 
For  his  depth  of  thought  and  elegance  of  language  he 
has  been  ódled  "  the  Christian  Seneca."  His  writings 
consist,  besides  the  '^  Contemplations,"  of  sermons,  po- 
lemical  and  practical  thcolog>%  and  correspondence ;  the 
best  edition  is  Works,  laith  sonie  accounł  of  his  life  and 
writings  (edited  by  Peter  Hall,  Oxford,  1837, 12  vols.8vo). 
Many  editions  of  the  Coniemplaiions  have  appeared. 
See  Hughes,  Li/e  o/ Bishop  I  fali;  Hook,  Eccles,  Biog- 
raphg,  v,  514 ;  Kich,  Cydop,  of  Biography,  s.  v. ;  Jamie- 
son,  Betiffious  Biography^  p.  245 ;  Wordsworth,  Eccles, 
Biography,  iv,  255. 

Hall,  Peter,  an  English  diWne  and  theological 
writer,  was  bom  in  1803.  He  studied  first  at  Winches- 
ter College,  and  entered  Brazenose  College,  Oxford,  in 
1820.  He  was  ordained  in  1828,  and  became  siiccesaiye- 
ly  curate  of  St.  Edmund's,  Salisbury ;  rector  of  Millston, 
Wilts,  in  1834 ;  minister  of  Tavistock  chapel,  Drury 
Lane,  London,  in  1836 ;  and  of  Long  Acre  chapel  in  1841. 
In  1843  he  removed  to  Bath,  and  became  minister  of  St. 
Thoma8's  chapel,  Walcot.  He  died  in  1849.  Hall  wrote 
Reliąnia  liturgiae :  Documents  cormecłed  icifh  the.  Liturgy 
ofthe  Church  of  England  (Bath,  1847,  5  rola.  18rao):— 
Fragmenła  liturgica :  Documents  illusłrałite  of  the  Lit- 
urgy  ofthe  Church  of  England  (Bath,  1848, 7  yoIs*  18mo) ; 
and  a  number  of  Sermons,  Mr.  Hall  published  a  new 
English  edition  of  that  raluable  work,  The  Harmcny  of 
the  Protestant  Confessions  (1841, 8vo),  the  two  previous 
English  editions  of  which  (Camb.  1586, 12mo ;  London, 
1643,  4to)  had  become  very  scarce.  He  also  edited  the 
best  edition  of  the  works  of  his  anccstor,  bishop  Hall 
(Oxfonl,  1837, 12  vols.) ;  and  wrote  Congregalumal  Re- 
form, four  Sermons  with  notes  (I>ondon,  1835, 12mo). — 
Darling,  Cydopadia  Bibltog,  i,  1373 ;  Allibone,  Dictitm- 


ary  of  A  uthora,  i,  764 ;  Genileman'$  Ufagazine,  Noveni- 
ber,  1849. 

Hall,  Richard,  an  English  Roroanist  writer,  was 
bom  about  1540.  He  studied  at  fint  at  Christ  College, 
Cambridge,  but  was  obligcd  to  learc  it  in  1572  on  ac- 
count  of  being  a  Koman  Cathohc.  He  then  went  to 
Douay,  and  aDerwards  to  Italy-  Haying  retumed  to 
Douay,  he  became  profcssor  of  theolog}'  in  the  English 
college  of  that  city.  He  became  successiyely  cjmon  of 
St.  Gery  of  Cambray,  then  of  the  cathcdral  of  St,  Omer, 
and  tinally  official  of  tlie  diocese.  He  died  in  1604.  * 
He  published  seyeral  works  of  controyersy,  siich  as  De 
pritnariis  Causis  Tumultuum  Belgioorum  (Douay,  1581): 
— />e  guingue  partita  Conscieutia  (Doiwy,  1598,  4to). 
But  he  is  especially  kno^vn  for  his  Life  of  Bishop  Fisk- 
er,  the  original  MŚS.  of  which  was  kept  \xy  the  English 
Bene<lictines  in  their  convent  of  Deeuward.  in  Lorraine. 
A  copy  of  it  fell  into  the  hands  of  Thomas  Bailey,  son 
of  Bailey  or  Baily,  bishop  of  Bangor,  who  sold  it  to  a 
publisher :  the  work  appeared  under  the  name  of  Bailey 
(London,  1655, 8yo ;  Lond.  1789. 12mo).  See  Chalmers, 
General  Biog,  Diet. ;  Hoefer,  Nouv.  Biog,  Genirale,  xxiii, 
149. 

Hall,  Robert,  one  of  the  most  eloquent  of  modem 
preachers,  was  bom  at  Amsby,  Leicestershire,  May  2, 
1764.  His  father,  who  was  also  a  Baptist  minister  of 
good  repute,  early  remarked  his  talent,  and  gaye  him 
eyery  opportunity  for  its  deyelopment.  It  is  said  that 
"Edwartls  On  the  Will  and  Butler'8  Analogy  were  the 
chosen  companions  of  his  childhood,  being  perused  and 
reperused  with  intense  interest  before  he  was  nine  yeara 
oki.  At  eleyen  his  master,  Mr.  Simmons,  declared  him- 
self unable  any  longer  to  keep  pace  with  his  pupil !" 
In  1773  he  was  place<l  under  the  instruction  of  the 
leamed  and  pious  John  Kyiand,  of  Northampton.  At 
fifteen  he  became  a  student  in  the  Baptist  College  at 
Bristol,  and  at  cighteen  he  entere«l  King's  College,  Ab- 
erdeen,  Wii^re  he  took  the  degree  of  M.A.  Herę  he 
"enjoyed  the  instmction  of  Drs.  Gerard,  Ogilrie,  Beat- 
tie,  and  Camnbell,  and  also  formed  that  intimate  friend- 
ship  with  Sir  James  Mackintosh  which  continued 
through  life.  Mr.  Hall  was  the  first  scholar  in  his  clasa 
through  his  coUegiate  course."  In  1785  he  was  chosen 
as  colleague  with  Dr.  Caleb  Eyans  in  the  ministrj'  at 
Broadmead  Chapel,  Bristol,  and  adjunct  professor  in  the 
Baptist  Academy  there.  Herę  he  attained  great  popu- 
larity.  His  father  died  in  1791 ;  and  the  same  year  a 
difference  with  Dr.  Eyans  led  to  his  remoying  from 
Bristol,  and  accepting  an  inyitation  to  become  pastor  of 
the  Baptist  congregation  at  Cambridge  on  the  departure 
of  the  Rev.  Robert  Robinson,  who  had  adopted  Unita- 
rian  yiews,  to  be  successor  to  Dr.  Priestley  at  Birming- 
ham. Hall  had  already  acquired  considerable  celebrity 
as  a  preacher,  but  it  was  not  till  now  that  he  appeared 
as  an  author;  and  the  impulse  that  sent  him  to  the 
press  was  rather  political  than  theological.  His  fiest 
publication  (unless  we  are  to  reckon  some  anonymous 
contributions  to  a  Bristol  new^spaper  in  1786-87)  was  a 
pamphlet  entitled  ChristianUy  consistent  with  a  Aow  of 
Ereedonh  being  an  A  nsteer  to  a  Sermon  hy  the  Ber,  Jokn 
Clayton  (Svo,  1791).  Like  most  of  the  ardent  and  gen- 
erous  minds  of  that  day,  he  was  strongly  excit«d  and 
carried  away  by  the  hopes  and  promises  of  the  French 
Reyolution.  In  1793  he  published  another  libera! 
pamphlet,  entitled  An  Apology  for  the  Freedom  of  the 
Press,  and  for  generał  Liberfy,wh\ch  brought  him  much 
reputation.  The  impression  that  had  been  madę  upon 
him,  howeyer,  by  the  irreligious  character  of  the  French 
reyolutionary  mo^^roent  was  indicated  in  his  next  pub- 
lication, Modem  fnfidelity  considered  with  respect  to  its 
Influence  on  Society,  a  Sermon  (8vo,  1800).  It  was  the 
publication  of  this  able  and  eloquent  sermon  which  first 
brought  HaU  into  generał  notice.  From  this  time  what- 
eyer  he  produced  attracted  immediate  attention.  "  In 
1802  appeared  his  Befiecłions  on  War.  The  threatened 
'  inyasion  of  Bonaparte  in  1803  brought  him  agaui  befora 


HALL 


31 


HALŁEŁ 


Uie  public  in  the  dijMOtirse  entitleil  Sentimenis  miłabk  to 
tkepraeni  Crittt,  which  raised  Mr.  HalFa  Teputation  for 
hirie  yierwn  and  powerful  eloąuence  to  the  highest  pitch. 
In  Xo\*exnber,  1804,  owing  chiefly  to  a  disease  of  the 
sptne,  attended  by  want  of  sufficient  exeTci9e  and  rest, 
the  exquisitely  toned  mind  of  Mr.  Hall  lost  its  balance, 
and  he  who  had  00  long  becn  the  theme  of  unircrsal 
admiration  became  the  subject  of  as  extensive  a  sympa- 
thy.  He  was  placcd  iinder  the  care  of  Dr.  Aniold,  of 
Ldcester.  where,  by  the  divine  blessing,  his  health  was 
restored  in  about  two  inonths.  But  similar  causes  pro- 
duced  a  lelapse  about  twelve  inonths  aflerwards,  from 
which  he  was  soon  restoted,  though  it  was  deemed  es- 
sential  to  the  pennanent  establishment  of  his  health 
that  he  should  resign  his  pastorał  charge  and  rcmoye 
from  Cambridge.  Two  shocks  of  so  humiliating  a  ca- 
hmity  within  the  com|)ass  of  a  year  deeply  impressed 
Mr.  Hairs  mind.  His  own  dedded  persuasion  was  that 
he  neyer  before  expcrienced  a  thorongh  transformation 
of  character;  and  there  can  be  no  ąuestion  that  from 
this  period  hb  spirit  was  habitually  morę  humble,  de- 
pendent, and  truły  derotional.  It  became  his  custom 
to  lenew  erery  birthday,  by  a  solemn  act,  the  dedica- 
tion  of  himself  to  God,  on  erangelical  principles,  and  in 
the  most  eamest  sincerity  of  heart,  In  1807  he  became 
paMor  of  the  Baptist  church  in  Leicester,  where  he  soon 
after  married,  and  where  he  labored  most  successfully 
for  nearly  twcnty  years.  At  no  period  was  he  morę 
b«ppy,  active,  and  usefuL  The  church,  when  he  left  it, 
was  larger  than  the  whole  congregation  when  he  took 
the  charge  of  it.  But  his  influence  was  not  conflned  to 
the  limitd  of  his  parish.  He  took  an  active  )iart  in  all 
the  noble  charities  of  the  age,  and  by  his  sermons, 
speechea,  and  writings  eserted  a  wide  influence  on  soci- 
ety,  not  only  in  England,  but  on  the  contlnent  of  Eu- 
ropę, in  America,  and  in  India.  His  xeview  of  Zeal 
wHkoui  IrmovałUMy  his  tracts  on  the  Terms  of  Commu- 
inon,  and  his  sermons  on  the  Adranłages  of  KnowUdge 
to  the  łotrer  CUuaeSy  on  the  Diacouragemenia  and  Sup- 
ports  ofthe  Chritłian  Mimttryj  on  the  Character  of  a 
CArittian  Mistiamiry,  on  the  Death  ofthe  Princess  Char- 
lotte  and  of  Rer.  Dr.  RyUwd,  with  seveTal  otheni,  were 
given  to  the  public  while  residing  here.  Herę  also,  in 
1823,  he  delirered  his  admirablc  course  of  lectures  on  the 
Socuuan  Cordrortrty,  partially  preserred  in  his  Works, 
At  last,  in  1826,  he  remored  to  the  pastorał  care  of  his 
old  congregation  at  Broadmead,  Bristol,  and  here  he  rc- 
mained  till  his  death,  which  took  place  at  Bristol  on  the 
2lst  of  Feb.,  1831.  Besides  occasional  contributions  to 
Tarious  diseenting  peiiodical  publications,  Hall  published 
rarious  tracts  and  sermons  in  the  last  twenty  years  of 
his  life,  which,  along  with  those  already  mentioned,  hare 
sińce  his  death  been  collected  undcr  the  title  of  The 
Worka  of  Robert  Hali,  MA^^tcUh  a  brief  Memoir  ofhia 
Ląfe  bff  Dr.  Gregory,  and  Obaerraiiona  on  hia  Character 
aa  a  Freacker  bjf  John  Foater^  published  undcr  the  su- 
perintendence  of  Olinthus  Gregory,  LL.D.,  professor  of 
matbematics  in  the  Koyal  Militar>'  Academy  (London, 
1831-32,  6  rola.  8vo;  llth  ed.  1853).  It  was  intended 
that  the  Life  should  have  been  written  by  Sir  James 
Macfcintosh,  but  he  died  (in  May,  1832)  before  begin- 
ning  it.  Dr.  Gregory^s  Memoir,  from  which  we  have 
abatracted  the  materials  of  this  artide,  was  afterwards 
published  in  a  separate  form.  See  Gkeksory,  Olinth us. 
The  fint  volume  of  Hall*s  Worka  contains  sermons, 
chaiges,  and  circular  letters  (or  addresses  in  the  name 
of  the  goreming  body  of  the  Baptist  Church) ;  the  sec- 
ood,  a  tiact  entitled  On  Terma  ofCommunUm  (1816,  in  2 
parta),  and  another  entitled  The  eaaential  Difference  he- 
tween  Chriatian  Baptiam  and  the  Baptiam  ofjohn  (a  dc- 
feoce  of  what  is  called  the  practice  of  free  commwiion, 
which  produced  a  powerful  efTect  in  Uberalizing  the 
practioe  of  the  Baptist  oommunity)  (1816  and  1818,  in 
2  parta) ;  the  Łhird,  poUtical  and  roisoellaneous  tracts, 
exłending  from  1791  to  1826,  and  also  the  Bristol  news- 
paper  contributions  of  ]786>87;  the  fourth,  reviews  and 
nófloellaneoiispieoes;  the  fifth,  notes  of  sermons  aod  let- 


ters. The  sixth,  besides  Dr.  Gregory^s  niemoir,  contains 
Mr.  Fosters  obsers-ations,  and  notes  takeu  down  by 
friends  of  twcnty-one  sermons.  The  American  reprint 
(New  York,  Harper  and  Brothers,  4  voIb*  8vo)  contains, 
besides  what  is  given  in  the  English  edition,  a  number 
of  additional  sermons,  with  anecdotes,  etc,  by  Rev.  Jo- 
seph Belcher. 

Kobert  Hall  was  one  of  the  greatest  preachcrs  of  his 
age.  His  "excellence  did  not  so  much  consist  in  the 
predominancc  of  one  of  his  ]iowers  as  in  the  exquiBite 
proportion  and  harmony  of  them  alL  The  richness,  va- 
riety,  and  ex  tent  of  his  knowle<lge  were  not  so  rcraark- 
able  as  his  absolute  mastera-  over  it.  There  is  not  the 
least  appearanoe  of  straining  afler  greatness  in  his  most 
magniflcent  excursions,  but  he  rises  to  the  loftiest 
heights  with  the  most  chiUUike  ease.  His  style  as  a 
writer  is  one  of  the  clearest  and  simplest — the  least  en- 
cumbered  with  its  own  beauty — of  aiiy  which  ever  has 
been  written.  His  noblest  passages  do  but  make  truth 
visible  in  the  form  of  beauty,  and  '  clothe  upon'  abstract 
ideas  tilł  they  become  palpable  in  exqui8ite  shapes. 
*Whoever  wishes  to  see  the  English  language  in  its 
perfection,*  says  Dugald  Stewart,  'must  reacl  the  writ- 
ings of  Kev.  Robert  Hall.  He  combines  the  beautics  of 
Johnson,  Addison,  and  Burkę,  without  thcir  impcrfcc- 
tions.' "  He  is  distiuguished,  however,  rathcr  for  ex- 
pression  and  expositioh  than  for  invention ;  he  was  an 
orator  rather  than  a  great  thinkcr.  But  aa  an  orator 
he  will  rank  in  literaturę  with  Bossuet  and  Massillon. 
For  critical  estimates  of  him  by  Mackintosh  and  other 
eminent  men,  see  Life  of  Ifalł^  by  Gregorj',  prcfixed  to 
his  Worka;  also  Ectedic  Magazinef  v'i'ij  1 ;  Korth  Brii- 
Uh  lierietc,  iv,  454;  AlorM  American  Reriew^  lxiv,  884; 
Methodtał  Quarterly  Reriew,  iv,  616;  Quarterły  Retiew 
(Lond.),  xlvii,  100;  English  Cydopadia;  Jamieson,  i?e- 
ligioua  Biography,  p.  24iS. 

Hallel  (^^}?f  Gr.  viivoc),  the  dcsignation  of  a  par- 
ticular  part.  of  the  hymnal  8er\'ice,  chanted  in  the  Tem- 
pie and  in  the  family  on  certain  festivals. 

1.  Oriffin  ofthe  name,  contenta  ofthe  aervux,  etc.  The 
name  halU:l\  Vsiy^,  which  signifies  praiae^  is  kut  kKoxóv, 
given  to  this  distinct  portion  of  the  h^innal  ser\-ice  be- 
cause  it  consists  of  Psidms  cxiii-cxviii,  which  are  Psalms 
ofpraiae,  and  because  this  group  of  Psalms  begins  with 
Ilalleiujah,  Jn^Jlbbh.  It  is  also  called  '^'?xąn  b^n,  the 
EgypŁian  Ifallel,  because  it  was  chanted  in  the  Tempie 
wbiipt  the  Passovcr  lambs,  which  were  first  enjoined  in 
Eg3'pt,  were  bcing  slain.  There  is  another  Ifallel  called 
^•iljn  bkn,  t?te  Great  Ifallel  (so  called  because  of  the 
reiterated  response  after  every  verse,  "  For  thy  mercy 
endureth  forever,"  in  Psa.  cxxx\'i,  which  is  part  of  this 
IlaUet)^  which,  according  to  H.  Jehudah  (Peaachim,  118) 
and  Maimonides,  comprises  Psalms  cxviii-cxxxvi  (Jod 
Ila-Chezaka,  ffilchołh  Chamez  v.  Moza,  \\\\,  10).  Oth- 
ers,  however,  though  agreeing  that  this  Hallel  ends  wth 
E^lm  cxxxvi,  maintain  that  it  begins  with  Psalm  cxx 
or  Psalm  ex  xxv,  4  (Peaachim,  1 18). 

2.  Thne  and  manner  in  trhich  ił  was  chanted.— ThiB 
h\'mnal  sen-ice,  or  Eg5'ptiau  Hallel,  wa»  chanted  at  the 
sacrifice  of  the  first  and  second  Pesach,  after  the  daily 
sacriflce  on  the  first  day  of  Passover  (Mishna,  Peaachim, 
V,  7),  after  the  moming  sacrifice  on  the  Feast  of  Pente- 
cost,  the  eight  days  of  the  Feast  of  Tabernacles  (Mishna, 
Succa,  iv,  8),  and  the  eight  days  of  the  Feast  of  Dedica- 
tion  (Mishna,  Taaniłh,  v,  ó),  making  in  all  twenty  days 
in  the  year.  "  On  twelve  days  out  of  the  twenty,  viz., 
at  the  sacrifice  of  the  first  and  second  Pesach,  of  the  first 
day  of  Pesach,  of  the  Feast  of  Pentecost,  and  ofthe  eight 
days  of  the  Feast  of  Tabernacles,  the  flute  was  played 
before  the  altar  when  the  Hallel  was  chanted"  (1^1  ishna, 
/'esocAim,  ii,  3),  whilst  after  the  moming  sacrifice  during 
the  eight  days  of  the  Feast  of  Dedication  the  Ifallel  was 
chanted  without  this  accompaitiment  of  the  flute.  The 
mainier  in  which  these  hymns  of  praise  were  offered 
must  have  been  yery  impoaing  and  impressivc    The 


HALLEL 


32 


HALLELUJAH 


ŁeyiŁes  who  coiild  be  spaied  from  aasisting  at  the  sUy- 
ing  of  the  sacriiices  took  their  stand  befoie  the  altar, 
and  chanted  tJ^  JJaUd  vene  by  vene ;  the  people  re- 
sponsiyely  repeated  evexy  yene,  or  bunt  foith  in  sol- 
emn  and  intoned  HaUdujaJu  at  every  jMuse,  whilst  the 
slave8  of  the  priests,  the  Leyites,  and  the  lespectaUe  lay 
people  assisted  in  playing  the  flute  (comp.  Peaadwm^^ 
a;  /Crackim,  10,  a,  b;  and  Tosipha  on  Gap.  i;  Sota,  27, 
b ;  Taonitk,  28,  a,  b).  No  repie8eutative8  of  the  people 
(^lasa  "^'rSK)  were  ieqniied  to  be  present  at  the  Tem- 
pie at  the  moming  aacriflces  on  the  days  when  the  Hal- 
le! waa  chanted  (llułhna,  TaatM,  iv,  4).    See  Sacri- 

FICK. 

The  Egyptian  ffaUdyrna  alao  chanted  in  pri\'ate  fam- 
ilies  at  the  celebration  of  the  Pa9sover  on  the  fint  even- 
ing  of  this  feast.  On  this  occasion  the  UaUd  was  di- 
yided  iuto  two  parts ;  the  part  comprising  Psa.  cxiii  and 
cxiv  was  chant«d  daring  the  partaking  of  the  second 
cup,  whUst  the  second  part,  comprising  P^  cxy  and 
cxvi,  was  chanted  over  the  fourth  and  finishing  cup 
(Wnn  nn  n-^b?  "lOia  ''5ia^Mishna,Pe8acAtni,x,7); 
and  it  is  gencrally  suppoaed  that  the  singing  of  the 
hymn  by  our  Saviour  and  his  disciples  at  the  condusion 
of  the  Passoyer  supper  (Matt.  xxyi,30;  Mark  xiy,  26) 
refers  to  the  last  part  of  this  Hallel.  (Dean  Alford 
[Greek  Testamenty  ad  loc.]  strangely  confounds  this  Hal- 
lel with  the  Great  ffaUet)  In  Babylon  there  was  an 
ancient  custom,  which  can  be  traced  as  far  back  as  the 
2d  century  of  the  Christian  sera,  to  recite  this  Hallel  on 
eyery  festiyal  of  the  new  moon  {TcumUh,  28,  a),  omitr 
ting,  howeyer,  Psa.  cxy,  1-11,  and  cxyi,  1-11. 

The  great  Hallel  (bl^^in  bbil)  was  recited  on  the 
first  eyening  at  the  Passoyer  supper  by  those  who  wish- 
ed  to  haye  ajifih  cup,  L  e.  one  aboye  the  enjoined  num- 
ber  (Maimonides,  Jod  Ifa-Chezaka,  Hilehath  Chcanez  u, 
Moza,  yiii,  10).  It  was  also  recited  on  occasions  of 
grreat  joy,  as  an  expression  of  thanksgiying  to  God  for 
special  mercies  (Mishna,  Taamth,  iii,  9). 

3.  Present  use  of  the  Hymnal  Sertnce. — ^The  Jews  to 
the  present  day  recite  the  Egyptian  HaUel  at  the  mom- 
ing prayer  immediately  after  the  Eightem  Benedktioru 
(jn*^mv  naiQ«)  on  all  the  festiyala  of  the  year  except 
Netę  Year  and  the  Day  ofA  tonemeiit,  omitting  Psa.  cxy, 
1-11,  and  cxyi,  1-11,  on  the  last  8ix  days  of  the  Feast  of 
Passoyer,  and  on  the  new  moon.  Before  the  Hallel  is  re- 
cited they  pronounce  the  following  benediction :  "  Bless- 
ed  art  thou,  Lord  our  God,  King  of  the  world,  who  hast 
aanctified  us  with  thy  commandments,  and  enjoined  upon 
us  to  recite  the  Hallel!*'  At  the  Passoyer  supper,  on 
the  first  two  eyenings  of  the  festiyal,  both  the  Egyptian 
Hallel  and  the  Great  Hallel  are  now  recited ;  the  former 
is  still  diyided  in  the  same  manner  os  it  was  in  the  days 
of  our  Sayiour. 

4.  InstiiutioH  ofthis  Hymaal  Senńce. — It  is  now  im- 
possible  to  asoertain  preciaely  when  this  seryice  was  first 
instituted.  Some  of  the  Talmudists  afiirm  that  it  was 
instituted  by  Moses,  others  say  that  Joshna  introduced 
it,  others  deriye  it  from  Deborah,  Dayid,  Hezekiah,  or 
Hananiah,  Mishael  and  Azariah  (Pe^orAtm,  117,  a). 
From  2  Chroń.  xxxy,  15,  we  see  that  the  practlce  of  the 
Levites  chanting  the  Hallel  while  the  Paschal  lambs 
were  in  the  act  of  being  slain  was  already  in  yogue  in 
the  days  of  Jusiah,  and  it  is  not  at  all  improbable  tliat  it 
was  ciŁstemar}'-  to  do  so  at  a  much  earlier  period. 

5.  Zi^ero/urf.— Maimonides,  Jod  HorCkezaka,  HUchoth 
Chama  u.  Moza,  sections  yii  and  yiii,  yoL  i,  p.  263-265 ; 
Buxtorf,  Lexicon  Chaldaicum  TaJmudicum  et  Jłabbitd- 
cum,  s.  y.  V?r\j  col  613-616 ;  and  Bartoloccii,  Btbliotheca 
Magna  Rabbinica,  ii,  227-243,  haye  important  treatises 
upon  this  subject,  but  their  information  is  most  uncriti- 
ćally  put  together,  and  no  distinction  is  madę  between 
earlier  and  later  practioes.  A  thoroughly  masterly  and 
critical  inyestigation  is  that  of  Krochmal,  Morę  Neboche 
Jla-Seman  (LeopoU,  1851),  p.  135  sq. ;  comp.  also  Edel- 
mann's  edition  of  the  Siddur  with  Lanclshuth'8  Critioal 


AtmołaHoM  (KSnigsbeig,  1846),  p.  423  8q.;  Herzfeki, 
Geschkhte  des  Volkes  Itrael  (Nordhaiuen,  1867),  ii,  169 
8q. — ^Kitto,  8.  y. 

HaUela'jah  (Heb.  haSelu'ffah%  PiJ-sibbn,  Pratic 
ye  Jahj  L  e.  Jehovah  !)  or  (in  its  Greek  form)  Allelu'- 
lAH  ('AXXi7XovVa),  a  word  which  stands  at  the  begin- 
ning  of  many  of  the  Pbalms.  See  Muller,  De  notione 
JlaUeluJah  (Cygn.  1690);  Wemsdorf, /)« /ormafa  Ifal- 
Ulujah  (Yiteb.  1763).  From  its  freqaent  occurrenoe  in 
this  poflition  it  grew  into  a  tprmula  of  praiae,  and  was 
chanted  as  such  on  solemn  days  of  rejoicing.  ^See  Crii-^ 
ica  BiblicOf  ii,  448.)  This  is  intimated  by  the  apocry- 
phal  book  of  Tobit  (xiii,  18)  when  speaking  of  the  re- 
building  of  Jerusalem,  *<  And  all  her  (Jeru8alem*s)  streets 
shall  sing  Alleluia"  (comp.  Bey.  xix,  1,3,4,  0).  This 
cxpres^on  of  joy  and  praise  was  tnuiafeńed  from  the 
synagogue  to  the  church,  and  is  still  occasionally  heard 
in  deyoUonal  psalmody. — Kltto.  The  Hebrew  terms  are 
frequently  rendered  *^  Praise  ye  the  Lord;"  and  so  in  the 
marginofP8a.ciy,35;  cy,45;  cyi;  cxi,l;  cxii,l;  cxiii, 
1  (comp.  Psa.  cxiii,  9 ;  cxy,  18 ;  cx>'i,  19 ;  cxyii,  2).  The 
Psialms  from  cxiii  to  cxyiii  were  called  by  the  Jews  the 
Hallel,  and  were  sung.  on  the  first  of  the  month,  at  the 
Feast  of  Dedication,  and  the  Feast  of  Tabemacles,  the 
Feast  of  Weeks,  and  the  Feast  of  the  Passoyer.  See  Ho- 
sanna. On  the  last  occasion  Psa.  cxiii  and  cxiy,  ac- 
cording  to  the  school  of  Hillel  (the  former  only  accord- 
ing  to  the  schocl  of  Shammai),  were  sung  tefore  the 
feast,  and  the  remainder  at  its  termination,  aftcr  drink- 
ing  the  last  cup.  The  hymn  (Matt.  xxyi,  30)  sung  by 
Gfańst  and  his  disciples  after  the  last  supper  is  supposed 
to  haye  been  a  part  of  this  Hallel,  which  seems  to 
haye  yaried  according  to  the  feast.  See  Hałleu  Tlie 
literał  meaning  of  <*  hallelujah*"  sufiiciently  indicatcs  the 
character  of  the  Paalms  in  which  it  occurs,  as  hymns  of 
praise  and  thanksgiying.  They  are  all  found  in  the 
last  book  of  the  collection,  and  bear  marks  of  being  in^ 
tended  for  use  in  the  Tempie  serrice,  the  words  "  praiae 
ye  Jehoyah"  being  takcn  up  by  the  fuli  chorus  of  Le- 
yites.  See  Psaui s.  In  the  great  hjTnn  of  triumph  in 
heayen  oyer  the  destruction  of  Babylon,  the  apostle  in 
yision  heard  the  multitude  in  chorus  like  the  yoice  of 
mighty  thunderings  burst  forth  "  Allduia,  for  the  Lord 
Grod  omnipotcnt  reigneth,"  responding  to  the  >^ic8 
which  came  out  of  the  throne,  sajńng, "  Praise  our  God, 
all  ye  his  seryants,  and  ye  that  fear  him,  both  smali  and 
grei^"  (Rey.  xix,  1-6).  In  this,  as  in  the  offering  of  in- 
cense  (Rey.  yiii),  there  is  c^ddent  alliision  to  the  Ber\'icc 
of  the  Tempie,  as  the  apostle  had  often  witnessed  it  in 
its  fading  graudeur.— Smith,  s.  y.  Allelouia.  Sec  Rey- 
ełation,  Book  of. 

HALLELUJAH,  a  doxołogy  naed  fireąuently  in  the 
ancient  Church,  and  deiiyed  from  the  Old  Testament. 
The  singing  HaUelujah  sometimes  means  the  repetition 
of  the  word,  in  imitation  of  the  heavenly  host  (see  Rey. 
xix) ;  at  other  times  it  has  referenoe  to  one  of  the  psalms 
beginning  with  Hallelujah.  In  the  early  Christian  Church 
^  the  morę  common  acceptation  of '  hallelujah*  is  for  the 
singing  of  the  word  itself  in  special  parts  of  di\'ine  ser- 
yice, as  a  sort  of  mutnal  caU  to  each  other  to  praise  the 
Lord."  In  some  churches  the  Hallelujah  was  stmg  only 
on  Easter  day  and  the  fifty  days  of  Penteoost;  in  others 
it  was  used  morę  generally.  Augustine  says  it  was  not 
used  in  time  of  Lent  (Augustine,  Episł*  119, 178).  In  tho 
fourth  Council  of  Toledo  it  is  mentioned  under  the  name 
Laudesy  and  appointed  to  be  sung  ailer  the  reacUng  of  the 
Go^  {ConciL  Toki,  iy,  can.  10, 11).  It  was  occasioii- 
ally  sung  at  funerals:  St.  Jerome  speaks  of  it  aa  being 
sung  at  the  funeral  of  Fabiola,  and  says  the  people  madę 
the  golden  roof  of  the  church  shake  with  echoing  foith 
the  HaUelujah  {Contra  Yigilant,  cap.  1,  and  J^jpiff.  xxx, 
cap.  4).  The  ancient  Church  retained  the  Hebrew  word, 
as  alao  did  the  Church  of  England  in  its  fizst  lituigy ; 
though  now  it  is  translated  **  Ftaise  ye  the  Lord,"  to 
which  the  iieople  reply, "  The  Lord*s  name  be  praiaed." 
See  Bingham,  Orig,  JEodes,  bk.  xiy,  eh.  ii,  §  4 ;  Procter, 


k 


HALLER 


33 


HALLÓW 


OmCommomPn^fer,^2l2;  OAenuanf AnciaU Chriatian- 
ify^  eh.  XT,  §  9. 

Haller,  Albrecht  Ton,  one  of  the  greatest  of 
modern  phyńologistB^  was  bora  in  Beme  Oct.  16, 1708, 
and  diaplaycd,  even  in  childhood,  the  most  eKtraonłi- 
nary  talentA.  He  studied  medidne  fint  at  Tttbingen, 
and  aAerwarda  at  Leyden,  under  Boerhaare.  After  ex- 
tcnaye  trarelfl  he  became  profeeaor  of  anatomy,  surgery, 
and  botany  at  Gottingen  in  1736,  and  lemaiiied  there 
imdl  1753,  when  he  retnzned  to  Beme.  Theie  he  re- 
■ded,  honored  by  his  feliow-citizens,  for  neariy  a  quar- 
ter  of  a  century ;  oontinued  to  benefit  science  by  his  Ht- 
eruy  labora ;  filled  semeni  important  offices  in  the  state, 
and  adomed  the  Gospel  by  his  life.  He  died  in  Ojto- 
ber,  1777.  A  great  part  of  the  modem  science  of  physi- 
ołogy  ia  due  to  the  labors  and  gmiius  of  Haller.  But 
his  place  in  our  pages  is  due  to  his  steady  religious  life, 
to  his  canstant  lecognition,  in  his  works,  of  the  gieat 
tmths  of  Christianity,  and  especially  to  his  religious 
WTitings,  viŁ  Brie/e  iiber  die  wichti^m  Wahrheitm  der 
Ofephttrung  (Beme,  1772) ;  Brirfe  zur  Verikeidiffung  der 
Ofembanmff  (Beme,  1776-77,  8  parta),  conaisting  of  let- 
ten  to  bis  daughter  on  the  trath  and  exce]lence  uf  Chris- 
tianity.  See  Zimmermann,  Leben  HaUers  (Zurich,  1765, 
»To) ;  Biographie  de  HaUer  (Paris,  IW6, 2d  ediL). 

Haller,  Berthold,  one  of  the  Reformeis  of  Beme, 
was  bom  at  Aldingen,  WUrtcmberg,  in  1492.  At  Pforz- 
bdm  he  had  Melancthon  for  a  fellow-student,  and  grad- 
aated  bachelor  at  Cologne  in  1512.  After  teaching 
sotne  time  at  Rottweil  he  went  to  Beme,  invitcd  by  Ru- 
bellus  in  1513  (1518?).  He  became  assistant  to  Dr. 
Wyttenbach  in  St-Yincenfa  church,  and  in  his  sodety, 
his  knowledge  of  the  Scriptures  and  his  religious  char- 
acter  were  greatly  cultlvated.  About  1620  he  madę  the 
aoquaintance  of  Zwingle,  who  was  always  afterwards  his 
fiuthful  friend  and  counsellor.  Shortly  after  he  succeed- 
cd  Wyttenbach  as  cathedial  preacher,  and  soon  began 
to  expound  MaUhew,  instead  of  foUo^inng  the  usual 
Church  lessons  only.  His  eloąuence  and  zeal  madę  him 
extremely  popular.  When  the  strife  began  in  1522 
HaUer  was  a  member  of  the  oommission,  and  distin- 
guiabed  himself  in  the  oonference  by  his  opposition  to 
tlie  bishop  of  Lansanne.  His  hołd  uix>n  the  popular 
mind  was  so  gieat  that  in  the  sabsequent  yeais  of  strife 
he  faeld  hia  place  as  preacher  in  spite  of  aU  opposition, 
and  contributed  greatly,  not  so  much  by  hu  leaming  as 
by  hia  personal  foroe  of  character,  to  the  establishment 
of  the  Kefonnation  in  Beme.  Eren  with  the  Anabap- 
tiatM,  on  their  appearance  in  Beme,  he  obtained  great 
influence.  In  1625  he  courageonsly  abandoned  the 
UaasL  In  the  Grand  Cooncil  he  defended  himself  eo 
▼igaroaaly  that  he  was  still  kept  in  office  as  preacher, 
thoogh  be  lost  his  canonship.  In  1627  a  number  of  Re- 
finneis  were  elected  to  the  <<  Grand  CouuciL"  The 
▼nenble  Franda  Kolb,  fuli  of  fire  and  energy,  was  now 
in  Beme,  ready  to  aid  and  stimulate  the  morę  pradent 
Haller.  The  "  Mindatea"  of  1623  and  1526,  the  formcr 
for,  the  latter  against  the  Reformation,  were  submitted 
to  the  people,  and  they  dedded  for  the  first.  In  the 
■"Conference"  of  1528,  at  Beme,  HaUer  took  the  leading 
part,  aided  by  Zwingle,  (Eoolampadius,  and  Bucer.  It 
was  finally  decreed  by  the  Conference  that  the  Mass 
shookl  be  aboUshed.  In  1529  he  married.  His  labors 
far  the  Refcmnation  extended  to  Solothum,  and  to  other 
paita  of  Switzerland ;  but  his  chief  activity  lay  in  Beme, 
where  he  held  his  pre*eminence  as  preacher  and  Re- 
Anner  until  his  death,  Feb.  26, 1536.  He  left  no  writ- 
ingfc  See  Kirchhofer,  HalUr  oder  die  Reform,  r.  Bem 
(ZOrich,  1828);  Kńtm,  Die  Reformaioren  Betju  (Beme, 
1828);  ETAobigne,  Hittory  of  Reformation,  ii,  849;  iii, 
886;  iv,  296,  808;  Henog,  Real-FruyUop.  v,  479. 

Haller,  Karl  Ludwig  voii,  was  bom  at  Beme 
Aag.  1, 1768.  In  1795  he  became  secretary  of  the  city 
coimdl,  and  in  1800  emigrated  to  Germany.  In  1806 
he  retumed,  and  became  professor  of  history  and  statis- 
tira  at  Beme.  Li  1814  he  became  member  of  the  dty 
IV.-C 


coundl,  and  in  1818  madę  a  joumey  through  Italy  and 
to  Romę.  Having  secretly  become  a  member  of  the 
Romish  Church  in  1820,  he  joined  it  openly  in  1821, 
and  was  dischaiged  finom  his  ofiioe.  He  then  went  to 
Paris  in  1824,  and  was  employed  in  the  ministry  of  for- 
eign  afiairs.  Haying  lost  that  situation  in  conseąuence 
of  the  Reyolution  of  July,  1830,  he  finally  went  to  Solo- 
thum, where  he  was  in  1834  appoiuted  member  of  the 
lesser  counciL  Herę  he  was  at  the  head  of  the  Ultia- 
montane  party,  and  died  May  20, 1854.  Haller  was  an 
ultra-conservative  in  politics,  and  was  drawn  into  Ihe 
Church  of  Romę  by  his  fanatical  hatred  of  all  liberał  re- 
forms.  His  chief  work,  eutitled  Reatauratim  der  Sfaata^ 
maacMchafUn  (Winterthnr,  1816-1834, 6  vols.),  was  writ- 
ten  with  the  design  to  annihilate  all  reyolutionary  prin- 
ciples  in  politics.  Even  many  Roman  Catholic  writers 
expre88ed  a  dedded  diasent  from  the  antiliberal  doctrines 
of  this  work.  The  most  important  among  his  other 
works  are,  lAUre  a  $a  famiUe  pour  lui  dedarer  ton  re- 
fów a  ttglise  cathoUąue  (Par.  1821 ;  in  German  by  Pau- 
lus, Stuttgard,  1821 ;  by  Studer,  Beme,  1821)^-7'A«)W« 
der  ffeisti  Slaaten  v,  GeselUchą/ien  ( Winterthur,  1822)  :-— 
Die  Frtimaurerei  u.  ikr  Einjłuu  aufd,  Schweiz  (Schaff- 
hausen,  1840) :— G^ic*.  der  HrchL  Retołut.  des  Cantow 
BetJŁ  (Luceme,  1839, 4th  ed.)..  See  Tzschimcr,  der  Uther^ 
triu  des  J/erm  von  H, «.  kathoUtchen  Kirche  (Lpz.  1821) ; 
Kmg,  Apoloffie  der  prołettan/ischen  Kirche  (Lpz.  1821); 
Escher,  Ueber  die  Philosophie  des  Staatirechtt  mit  be$, 
Beziek.  avf  d.  HaUer^tche  Rettauration  (Zurich,  1825); 
Scherer  (ultramontane),  Die  Rettauration  der  Siaat^-^ 
tcissenack,  (Luceme,  1845). 

Hallet,  Joseph,  an  English  Nonconformist,  was 
bom  at  £xeter  in  1692,  ordained  in  1718,  and  succeedcd 
his  father  as  co-pastor  yrith  Mr.  Pierce  over  the  Inde- 
pendent congiegation  at  £xeter  in  1722.  Herę  he  dia- 
chaiged  his  pastorał  dulies  faithfully  until  his  death  in 
1744.  As  a  writer,  he  waa  marked  by  industry,  leam- 
ing, and  critical  sagacity.  He  wrote  a  number  of  con- 
tioverstal  tracts  on  the  Eridences  of  Christianity  in  reply 
to  Tindal  and  Chubb,  and  on  the  Trinity.  Besides 
these,  he  published  A  free  and  impartial  Study  of  the 
Holy  Scripturet  recommended^  being  notes  on  pecnliar 
texts  of  Scripture  (Lond.  1729^^,  3  rols.  8vo)  i—A  Par^ 
aphrase  and  Notes  on  the  three  last  Chapters  oftke  Epis- 
lU  to  Ihe  Il^ewt  (London,  1733,  4to).  In  tbcology  he 
was  a  semi-Ariao.  See  Bogue  and  Bennett,  Hisiory  of 
Ditseniers,  ii,  179, 222 ;  Jones,  Christian  Biography, 

HaUifax,  Samuel,  bishop  of  St.  Asaph,  was  bom 
at  Mansfield,  Derfoyshire,  in  1783.  He  st^idied  at  Jesus 
College,  Cambridge,  and  at  Trinity  Hall,  and  became 
successiyely  rector  of  Chaddington,  Buckinghamshire, 
in  1765 ;  professor  of  Arabie  at  Cambridge  in  1768 ;  pxo- 
fessor  of  jurispmdence  in  1770;  chaplain  of  George  III 
in  1774;  master  of  Doctors'  Commons  in  1775;  rector 
of  Warsop,  NotUnghamshire,  in  1778,  and  bishop  of 
Gloucester  in  1781.  He  was  transferrcd  to  the  see  of 
SL  Asaph  in  1787,  and  died  in  17£0.  He  wrote  An 
Analysis  of  the  Roman  Civil  Lato  compared  tcith  ihe 
Imws  of  Englund  (1774,  8vo)  -.r—Twehe  Sermons  on  ihe 
Prophecies  conceming  the  Christian  Religiony  and  itipar' 
tiatlar  conceming  ihe  Church  of  Papai  Rome^  preadted 
in  LincoMs  Inn  Chapel  (U  Bishop  Warhurton's  Lecture 
(1776,  8vo): — An  Analysis  ofButler's  Anahgy: — />«- 
courses  on  Justification  (Camb.  1762,  8vo).  See  Kosę, 
New  General  Biog.  Diet. ;  Hoefer,  Aoi/r.  Biog.  Generale^ 
xxiii,  197 ;  British  CriiiCf  yoL  xxvii. 

HallO^heah  or,  ratber,  Lochesh  (Heb.  Lochesh\ 
dnft,  with  the  article  tóniii^,  hal-lochesh\  the  ichis-^ 
perer;  Sept.  AAAoi^c  and  'AAw^c,  Vulg.  Alohes),  the 
father  of  Shallum,  wbich  latter  assisted  Nehemiah  in 
repairing  the  walla  of  Jerusalem  (Neh.  iii,  12,  where  the 
name  is  Anglicized  '^  Halohesh").  He  was  one  of  the 
popular  chiefa  that  subscribed  the  sacred  coyenant  with 
Nehemiah  (Neh.  x,  24).     B.C.  cir.  410. 

Hallów  (©!?U,  in  Piel ;  aywflf^w),  to  render  sacred, 
set  apart,  consecrate  (£xod.  ^Kyiii,  88 ;  xxix,  1 ;  Ley. 


HALOHESH 


34 


HAM 


zxii,  2;  Numb.  t,  10).  The  Engliah  word  is  fiom  the 
Saxon|  and  is  properly  to  mahe  koljf;  henoe  hallowed 
penonsy  thinga,  pUces,  rites,  etc ;  henoe  also  the  name, 
power,  dignity  of  God  u  hallowed,  that  ia,  rererenoed 
aa  holy  (Matt.  vi,  9>— Galmet,  a.  v.    See  Holy. 

Halo^liesh  (Neh.  iii,  12).    See  Halu>hesh. 

Halt  (?^3Ęt  X"^^c))  ^^''^  on  the  feet  or  legs  (Gen. 
xxxii,  31;  Psa.  xxxviii,  17;  Jer.  xx,  10;  3Iic.  iv,  6; 
vii,  1;  Zeph.  iii,  19).  Many  peraons  who  were  halt 
were  cured  by  our  Lord.  See  Lamk.  To  halt  between 
two  opinions  (HDB,  1  Kinga  xviii,  21),  ahoold,  perhaps, 
be  to  Btagger  fiom  one  to  the  other  lepeatedly;  but 
aome  aay  it  ia  an  alluaion  to  biida,  who  hop  ftom  spray 
to  spray,  forwarda  and  backwarda,  aa  the  oontrary  in- 
fluence of  auppoeed  oonvictiona  vibrated  the  niind  in 
altemate  affinnation  and  doubtfulneaa.— Cahnet,  a.  v. 

Halybarton,  Thomas,  profeaaor  of  divinity  in  the 
Univer8ity  of  Sl  Andiew'8,  was  boni  at  Duplin,  near 
Perth,  Dec.  25, 1764.  He  was  in  early  youth  the  sub- 
Ject  of  frequent  but  inefTectual  lełigious  couviction8. 
In  1689  he  began  to  be  perplexed  respecting  the  evi- 
dences  of  revealed  religion,  till,  afler  having  experienced 
aome  relief  from  Robert  Ikuce'a  FtilfiUing  oftht  Scrip- 
tureif  he  received  further  aid  from  Mr.  Donaldaon,  an 
excellent  old  minister  who  came  to  preach  at  Perth, 
and  paid  a  viait  to  hip  mother.  He  inąoired  of  hia 
3roung  friend  if  he  aought  a  bieasing  from  God  on  hb 
leaming,  remarking  at  the  aame  time,  with  an  austere 
look,  '*  Strrah,  unaanctified  leaming  has  donc  much  mia- 
chiei  to  the  Kirk  of  Grod."  Thb  led  him  to  aeek  divine 
direction  in  extraordinary  difficultiea;  but  this  exercise, 
he  acknowledgea,  left  him  atill  afar  off  from  God.  He 
sUidied  at  SL  Andrewsa,  and  became  domeatic  chaplain 
in  a  nobleman*s  family  in  1696.  His  mind,  long  diaqui- 
eted  about  the  evideuoea  of  Christianity,  waa  fuially  aet- 
tled,  and  he  wrote  an  Incuńy  inło  the  Principlet  o/mod- 
em Deigt^f  which  ia  atill  A-alued.  In  1698  he  waa  thor- 
ooghly  converted ;  in  1700  he  became  minister  of  Ceres 
pariah.  In  1711  he  waa  madę  profeaaor  of  dLvinity  at 
8t.  Andrew'8,  and  died  in  1712.  He  waa  an  excellent 
scholar,  and  a  veiy  pious  man.  A  aketch  of  hia  life  ia 
given  in  hia  Warkt,  edited  by  Robert  Burns,  D.D.  (Lon- 
don, 1835,  8vo),  which  volume  containa  the  foUowing, 
among  other  writinga,  viz,  The  greał  Concem  ofSaha- 
Hon: — Natural  Belupon  ńmtficieiU:-^£ś8ay  on  the  Na- 
turę of  Faith: — Inquiry  on  Justificatiorij  and  Sermona. 
Halybiirton'8  Memoirs^  with  an  introductoiy  Easay  by 
ihe  Iiev.  Dr.  Young  (Glasg.  1824, 12mo),  has  been  oflói 
wprinted,  both  in  Great  Biitain  and  America. 

Ham  (Heb.  Charn^  DH,  hot  [see  below] :  Scpt  Xa/i 
[Josephus  Xdfiac,  Ant,  i,  4,  l],Vulg.  Cham),  the  name 
of  a  man  and  aiao  of  two  regions. 

1.  The  youngest  son  of  Noah  (Gen.  v,  82;  comp.  ix, 
24>  RC.  |X)st  2613.  Having  provoked  the  wrath  of 
his  father  by  an  act  of  iudecency  towards  him,  the  lat- 
ter  curaed  him  and  his  deacendants  to  be  alavea  to  hia 
brothers  and  their  deacendanta  (ix,  25).  B.C  ar,  2514. 
To  judge,  however,  from  the  narrative,  Noah  directed 
hia  curac  only  againat  Canaaii  (the  foiuth  aon  of  Ham) 
and  hia  race,  thua  excluding  from  it  the  deacendanta  of 
Ham's  three  other  aona,  Cuah,  Mizrairo,  and  Phut  (Gen. 
X,  6).  How  that  curae  waa  accompliahed  ia  taught  by 
the  history  of  the  Jewa,  by  whom  the  Canaanitea  were 
8ub8equently  exterminated.  The  generał  opinion  ia 
that  all  the  aouthem  nations  derive  their  origin  from 
Ham  (to  which  the  Hebrew  root  DąH,  to  be  hot,  not 
unlike  the  Greek  AiOioirtCy  lenda  aome  force).  Thia 
meauing  aeema  to  be  confirraed  by  that  of  the  Egyptian 
word  Kem  (Egypt),  which  ia  beiieved  to  be  the  Egyp- 
tian equivalent  of  Ham,  and  which,  as  an  adjective, 
aignifiea  "black,"  probably  implying  warmth  aa  well  aa 
Uackneae.  See  Egypt.  If  the  Hebrew  and  Egyptian 
worda  be  the  aame,  Ham  must  mean  the  awarthy  or 
son-bumt.  like  AiOioif^,  which  haa  been  derived  from  the 
Coptic  name  of  Etbiopia,  ethopt,  but  which  we  ehould 


be  indined  to  ince  to  łkopSy  *<a  boundary,*'  nnleas  tBe 
Sahidic  esops  may  be  derived  from  Klah  (Cush).  It  ia 
obaervable  that  the  names  of  Noah  and  hia  sona  appear 
to  have  had  prophetic  siguificationa.  Thia  is  atated  m 
the  caae  of  Noah  (Gen.  v,  29),  and  implied  in  that  of 
Japheth  (ix,  27),  and  it  can  scaitely  be  doubted  that 
the  aame  muat  be  conduded  as  to  Shem.  Ham  may 
therefore  have  been  ao  named  aa  progenitor  of  the  son- 
bunit  Egyptians  and  Guahites.  Cuik  ia  supposed  to 
have  been  the  progenitor  of  the  nations  of  East  aad 
South  Asia,  morę  especially  of  South  Arabia,  and  also 
of  Ethiopia;  Mizraim,  of  the  African  nations,  incloding 
the  Philistinea  and  aome  other  tribes.inrhich  Greek  fab|e 
and  tradition  oonnect  with  £gM)t;  Pi^i/,  likewiae  of 
aome  African  nationa;  and  Canaan,  of  the  inhabitants 
of  Paleatine  and  Phcenicia.  On  the  Arabian  traditiona 
oonoeming  Ham,  aee  D*Herbelot  {BibL  Orient,  a.  v.> 
See  Noah. 

A.  Jfam^s  Place  tw  hit  Famify,  Idolatry  cotmeded 
with  hit  A7imf.~Like  hia  brothera,  he  was  marńed  at 
the  time  of  the  Deluge,  and  with  his  wife  waa  aayed 
from  the  generał  deatruction  in  the  ark  which  hia  father 
had  prepared  at  God'a  command.  He  waa  thua,  with 
hia  family,  a  connecting  link  between  the  antediluvi«ii 
|M)pulaŁion  and  thoee  who  survired  the  łlood.  The  aal- 
ient  fact  of  his  impiety  and  dishonor  to  his  father  had 
alao  cauaed  him  to  be  regardcd  as  the  tranamitter  and 
repre8entative  in  the  renovated  world  of  the  worat  feat^ 
urea  of  idolatry  and  profanencss,  which  had  grown  to 
ao  fatal  a  conaummation  among  the  antecliluriana.  Lac- 
tantiua  mentiona  thia  ancient  tradition  of  Ham*a  idola- 
trous  degeneracy:  "Ule  [Charo"!  profugua  in  ejus  term 
parte  consedit,  qu«)  nunc  Arabia  nomiimtur;  eaque  ter- 
ra  de  nomine  suo  Chanaan  dicta  est,  et  poeteri  ejus  Cha- 
nanaei.  Hiec  fuit  prima  gena  qiue  Deum  ignoravit, 
quoniam  princepa  ejua  [Cham  J  et  conditor  cultum  Dei  a 
patre  non  accepit,  maledictut  ab  eo ;  itague  ignoratUietm 
diffinitaiis  minoribut  suit  relicuiT  (De  orig,  erroria,  ii, 
13 ;  J)e  faUd  Reliff.  23).  See  other  authora  quoted  in 
Beyer^ń  A  ddif.  ad  Seldeni  Syntag,  de  Diit  Syrit  (Ugoli- 
no,'  Thet,  xxiii,  288).  Thia  tradition  waa  rifc  also  among 
the  Jewa.  R.  Manaaae  aaya,  **  Moreover  Ham,  the  aon 
of  Noah,  was  the  tirat  to  inirent  idola,**  etc.  The  Tyrian 
idola  called  D^^S^H,  Chamanim,  are  aupposed  by  Kircher 
to  have  their  deaignation  from  the  degenerate  aon  of 
Noah  (aee  Spencer,  J)e  legg.  Ilthr.  [M.  Pfaff  ]  p.  470- 
482).  The  old  commentatora,  fuli  of  claaaical  asaodap 
tiona,  aaw  in  Noah  and  hia  aona  the  counterpart  of  Kpó- 
voc»  or  Saturn,  and  hia  three  divine  aona,  of  whom  they 
identifled  Jupiter  or  Ztvc  with  Ham,  especially,  as  the 
name  suggested,  the  African  Jupiter  Ammon  (Appow 
[or,  morę  oorrecUy,  'A/iovv,  ao  Gabford  and  Btthr]  ydp 
AiywiTTio*  KoKiown  rby  ^ia,  Herod.  Euttrp.  42 ;  Fiur 
tarch  explains  'AfŁovv  by  the  better  known  foim  ^A^ 
/iwy,  It,  et  Otir.  ix.  In  Jer.  xlvi,  25,  "  the  multitude 
of  No"  is  Kip  "ińCK,  Amon  of  No ;  ao  in  Nahum  iii,  8, 
"  Populous  No"  is  No-A  mon,  y^-Otf  KI  For  the  Identi- 
fication of  Jupiter  Ammon  with  Ham,  see  J.  Conr.  Dann- 
hauer^a  Poliłiai  Biblica,  ii,  I ;  la.  Yosaius,  De  fdoL  lib.  ii, 
cap.  7).  Thia  identification  ia,  however,  extreme1y 
doubtful ;  cminent  critics  of  modem  timea  reject  it; 
among  them  Ewald  (Geachichte  det  VoUxt  Itrael,  i,  875 
[notę]),  who  aaya,  "Mit  dem  ł1gj'ptiachen  Gotte  Amon 
oder  H  ammon  ihn  zuaammenzubringen  hat  man  keinen 
Grundy"  u.  a.  w.).  One  of  the  reasona  which  leada  Bo- 
chart  (Phaleg,  ł,  1,  ed.\llleraand,  p.  7)  to  identify  Ham 
with  Jupiter  or  Zeua  is  derived  from  the  meaning  of  the 
namea.  DH  (from  the  root  OCH,  to  be  hot)  combines 
the  ideaa  hot  and  awarii^  (comp.  AiBio^) ;  acoordingiy, 
St.  Jerome,  who  rendera  our  word  by  caUdut,  and  Simon 
(Ononiasf.  p.  108)  by  niger,  are  not  incompatible.  In 
like  manner,Zii''c  ia  derived  nfervendo,  according  to  the 
author  of  the  EtymoL  Magn.,  irapd  r^y  2^ćfftv,  dippora- 
roc  yóp  b  ahp,  ^  TrapA  ró  2^tw,  to  teethe,  or  boilffervere, 
Cyril  of  Alexandiia  uaes  ^ipfuioiav  as  synon3rmous  (L 
ii,'  Glaphgr,  in  Genet,),    Another  reason  of.  identiftuH 


HAM 


36 


HAM 


tnOf  aooofding  to  Bochart,  U  the  fanciful  one  of  oom- 
jMiBtive  age.  Zeus  wan  the  yoiuigest  of  three  brothen, 
and  to  tcuM  Ifam  in  the  opinion  of  Łhis  author.  He  is 
not  alone  in  thia  view  of  the  Btibject.  Joaephus  (/la/, 
i,  6, 3)  expresa]y  calla  Ham  the  youngegt  of  Noah'8  aona, 
ó  ytwaroc  tUp  iraidwr,  Geflenius  {Thes,  p.  489)  calls 
him  **lilius  natu  tertius  et  minimus;*'  aimilarly  FUnt 
(//f*r.  WOrterb.  i,  408),  Knobel  (dU  Gen,  erkL  p.  101), 
Delitzsch  (Commeni.  uber  die  Geru  p.  280),  and  Kaliach 
(C/fR.  p.  229),  which  last  lays  down  the  nile  in  explana- 
tkm  of  the  "i^l^n  'l3a  applietl  to  Ham  in  Gen.  ix,  24, "  If 
there  are  more  than  two  aona,  bl^:i  "p  Ib  the  eldest, 
yop  "p  the  yoiuigest  son,**  and  he  apŁly  compares  1 
Sam.  xvii,  13;  14.  The  Sepu,  it  is  tnie,  like  the  A-V., 
rniden  by  the  comparatire— ó  vŁump€kc,  "his  younger 
wa.'  But,  thioughout,  Skem  is  the  tenn  of  compari- 
ton,  the  central  point  of  blessing  ftom  whom  all  else  di- 
veTC^.  Hencc  not  only  is  Ham  *i^i^ri)  ó  ^tutripoc,  in 
compańson  with  Shem,  but  Japhet  is  relatively  to  the 
ame  bil^n,  o  fiti^uv  (see  Gen.  x,  21).  That  this  is 
the  proper  raeaning  of  this  latter  passage,  which  treats 
of  the  age  of  Japhet,  the  eldest  son  of  Noah,  we  are  oon- 
rincird  by  the  consideration  just  adduced,  and  our  eon- 
viction  is  suppoited  by  the  Sept.  translaton,  Symma- 
chos,  Kashi  (w  ho  says^  "  From  the  words  of  the'  text  I 
do  not  cłcarly  know  whether  (he  elder  applies  to  Shem 
or  to  Japhet.     But,  as  we  are  aiterwards  iiif4inned  that 


R  DetcendatUś  ofllam,  and  their  2ocatt^^— The  loosb 
distribution  which  assigns  umcient  Asia  to  Shem,  and 
ancient  Africu  to  Ham,  requires  much  modification;  for 
although  the  Shemites  had  but  little  connectlon  with 
Africa,  the  descendants  of  Ham  had,  on  the  oontraiy, 
wide  settlements  in  Asia,  not  only  on  the  shores  of  Syi^ 
ia,  the  Mediterranean,  and  in  the  Arabian  peninsula, 
but  (as  we  leam  from  linguistic  discoTeries,  which  mi- 
nutely  conroborate  the  letter  of  the  Mosaic  stafcemeuta, 
and  refute  the  assenions  of  modem  Rationaliam)  in  the 
plains  of  Mesopotamia.  One  of  the  most  prominent 
facts  alleged  in  Gen.  x  is  the  foundation  of  the  earliest 
monarchy  by  the  grandson  of  Ham  m  BabyUmku  "  Cush 
[the  eldest  son  of  Ham]  begat  Nimrod  ...  the  begin- 
niug  of  whose  kingdom  was  Babel  [Babylon],  and  Erech, 
and  Accad,  and  Calneh,  in  the  land  of  Shinar^  (ven.  6, 
8,  10).  Herę  we  have  a  primitive  Babylonian  empire 
distinctly  dedarcd  to  have  been  Hamitic  through  Cush. 
For  the  complete  rindication  of  this  statement  of  Gene- 
sis from  the  opposite  statements  of  Bunsen,  Niebuhr, 
Heeren,  and  others,  we  must  refer  the  reader  to  Kaw- 
lin8on*B  łtve  ffreai  ^foniirckieSf  voL  i.  chap.  iii,  compaied 
with  his  /łistoriail  Kridenoes^  etc.  (Bampton  Lectures), 
p.  18, 68, 355-357.  The  idea  of  an  "^  siatic  Cush""  was 
declared  by  Bunsen  to  be  "  an  imagination  of  interpret- 
era, the  child  of  despair"  {PhiL  of  Umv.  Historyk  i,  191). 
But  in  1858,  Sir  H.  Rawlinson,  haring  obtained  a  num- 
ber  of  Babylonian  documents  morę  ancient  than  any 


Shem  was  100  yeais  old,  and  beeat  Arphaxad  two  ycars  '  prcviously  discovcred,  was  aUe  to  declare  authoritative- 


lAer  the  Deluge  [xi,  10],  it  follows  that  Japhet  was  the 
ddn^  for  Noah  was  500  ycars  old  when  he  began  to 
hare  chiklren,  and  the  Deluge  took  place  in  his  GOOth 
jrear.  His  eldest  son  must  conseąuently  have  been  100 
yttn  oU  at  the  time  of  the  Flood,  whereaa  we  are  ex- 
lanely  iufonned  that  8htm  did  not  arrire  at  that  age 
iintil  two  3'eanł  after  the  Deluge"),  Aben-Ezra,  Luther, 
Junius,  and  Tremellius,  Piacator,  Mercerus,  Aiius,  Mon- 
tanufi,  Clericua,  Dathius,  J.  D.  Michaelis,  and  Mendels- 
Mhtt  (who  givc9  a  powerful  reason  for  his  opinion: 
''The  tonie  aooents  make  it  elear  that  the  word  bl^AM, 
Ae  f /Ar,  applies  to  Yaphefh ;  wherever  the  words  of  the 
text  are  obscure  and  equivocal,  great  res|)ect  and  atten- 
tion  raust  be  paid  to  the  tonie  acoents,  as  their  author 
imdcrstood  the  tnie  meaning  of  the  text  better  than  we 
do^  De  Sohi,  Lindenthal,  and  Raphall^s  Trans,  of  Gene^ 
Ctf,  pw  43).  In  consistency  with  thia  seniority  of  Ja- 
pheth,  his  narae  and  genealogy  are  flrst  giren  in  the  To- 
Math  Bem  Koah  of  Gen.  x.  Shem*s  name  stands  jirst 
wben  the  three  brothers  are  mentioned  together,  proba- 
bly  bccause  the  special  blessing  (aiterwards  to  be  morę 
fhlly  dereloped  in  his  gpreat  descendant  Abraham)  was 
besiowed  on  him  by  God.  But  this  prerogatire  by  no 
tneans  aflbrds  nny  proof  that  Shem  was  the  eldest  of 
KQah*s  sona.  The  obrious  instances  of  Seth,  Abraham, 
Isaac,  Jaoob,  Judah,  Joseph,  Ephraim,  Moees,  Davtd, 
and  Soknnon  (besides  this  of  Shem),  give  sufficient 
l^mond  for  obaerring  that  primogeniture  was  far  from 
«hra)'»  lecuring  the  privileges  of  birthright  and  bleaswff, 
and  other  distinctions  (comp.  Gen.  xxr,  28 ;  xlviii,  14, 


ly  that  the  early  inhabitants  of  South  Babylonia  were 
of  a  cognate  race  with  the  primitive  colonists  both  of 
Arabia  and  of  the  African  Ethiopia  (Kawlinson^s //•roci^ 
ottu,  i,  442).  He  found  their  yocabulary  to  be  undoubt- 
edly  Cushite  or  Ethiopian,  belonging  to  that  stock  of 
tongues  which  in  the  seąuel  wcra  everywhere  morę  or 
less  roixed  up  with  the  Shemitic  languages,  but  of  which 
we  have  the  purest  modem  spccimens  in  the  Mahra  of 
southem  Arabia  and  the  Galla  of  Abyssinia  (ibid,,  notę 
9).  He  found,  also,  that  the  traditions  both  of  Babylon 
and  Assyria  pointed  to  a  connectlon  in  very  early  times 
between  Ethiopia,  Southern  Arabia,  and  the  cidcs  on 
the  lower  Euphrates.  We  have  here  evidencc  both  of 
the  widely-epread  settlements  of  the  children  of  Ham 
in  Atia  as  well  as  Africa,  and  (what  is  now  especially 
valuable)  of  the  truth  of  the  lOth  chapter  of  Genesis  as 
an  ethnographical  document  of  the  highest  importance. 
Some  itTiten  push  the  settlements  of  Ham  still  morę 
towards  the  east ;  FeldhofT  {Die  Yólkertafel  der  Genesis, 
p.  69),  speaking  generałly  of  them,  makes  them  spread, 
not  simply  to  the  south  and  Bouth-wesŁ  of  the  plains  of 
Shinar,  but  east  and  south-east  also;  he  accordingly  lo- 
cates  some  of  the  faroily  of  Cush  in  the  neighborhood 
of  the  Paropamisus  chain  [the  Hindii  Kdsh],  which  he 
goes  so  far  as  to  cali  the  centro  whence  the  Cushittf 
emanated,  and  he  peoples  the  greater  part  of  Hmdiistan, 
Birmah,  and  China  with  the  posterity  of  the  children  of 
Cush  (see  under  their  names  in  this  art).  Dr.  Prichard 
{Analjfsis  ofthe  Egyptian  Afythologg)  compares  the  phi- 
losophy  and  the  superstitions  of  the  ancient  Egyptians 
with  those  o^the  HintH^s,  and  finds  ^  ao  many  phenom- 


18, 19,  and  i  Sam.  XTi,  6-12> 

"These  aie  the  sons  of  HAM, 

after  their  familiea  (ttrhoócb,  or  dant),  after  their  tongues  (DCbia^b), 

in  their  countzies  (fin':c^KŚ),  [and]  in  their  nations"  (dn;^i:ią),  Gen.  z,  20. 


HAM. 


LCUSH. 


I 
II.  MIZRAIM. 


IILPHUT. 


IV.  CANAAN. 


1. 8eba;  fiL  HaWlah ;  3.  Sabtah : 
4. Rsamah;  O. Sabtechah;  «.  Nuuton. 


1.  Ładim;  S.  Anamłm ;  3.  Lehablm; 
Ł,  Nspbtahim ;  &  Patbrnslm ; 
A.  Caslnhlm ;  7.  Caphtorim. 


1.  Sidon ;  2.  Heth ;  3.  Jebii« 

aite :  4.  Amorite ;  0.  Oir- 

gasite ;  6.  Hirlte ;  7. 

Arkite ;  8.  Sinite ; 

».  Anradite:  10. 

Zeroarite ;  11. 

Haroathita. 


6heba;  Dedan. 


Phillstim. 


HAM 


36 


HAM 


ena  of  striking  oongruity"  between  these  nations  that 
he  U  inducetl  to  conclude  that  they  were  descended  from 
a  commoit  origtn.  Nor  ought  we  here  to  omit  that  the 
Arrainian  histoiian  Abuiroragius  amon^  the  countńes 
assigned  to  the  aoiu  of  Ham  expre88ly  includes  both 
Scindia  and  Indiaj  by  which  he  means  such  parts  of 
Hinddstan  as  lie  west  and  eaat  of  the  river  Indus  (Greg. 
Abul-Pharagii,  I/isf,  Dynatt,  [ecL  Pocock,  Oxoil  1673], 
Dyn.  i,  p.  17). 

The  sona  of  Ham  are  8tat«d  to  havc  been  "  Cush,"  and 
Mizraun,  and  Phiit,  and  Caanan*'  ((«en.  x,  6 ;  comp.  1 
Chroń,  i,  8).  It  b  remarkable  that  a  dual  form  (Miz- 
raim)  shouid  occtir  in  the  Hrst  gcneration,  indicattng  a 
country,  and  not  a  person  or  a  tribe,  and  we  are  there- 
forc  inclined  to  suppose  that  the  gentile  noun  in  the  plu- 
ral  0*^*^2^^,  diffcring  alonc  in  the  pointing  from  D^'^:{p, 
originally  stood  here,  which  would  be  ąuite  consistent 
witii  the  plural  forms  of  the  names  of  the  Mizraite  tribes 
which  follow,  and  analogous  to  the  singular  forms  of  the 
names  of  the  Canaanite  tribes,  except  tlie  Sidonians, 
who  are  mcntione<l,  not  as  a  nation,  but  imder  the  name 
of  their  forefather  Sidon. 

Tlie  name  of  Ham  alone,  of  the  three  sons  of  Noah, 
if  our  Identification  be  correct,  is  known  to  1iave  been 
givcn  to  a  country.  Eg^-pt  is  recogniaed  as  the  *^  land 
of  Ham"  in  the  Bibie  (Psa.  lxxviii,  51 ;  cv,  23 ;  cvi,  22), 
and  thia,  though  it  does  not  prove  the  identity  of  the 
Egyptian  name  i»-ith  that  of  the  patriarch,  certainly  fa- 
vors  it,  and  cstabUshes  the  historical  fact  that  Egypt, 
settlcd  by  the  descendants  of  Ham,  was  peculiarly  his 
territor}*.  The  name  Mizraim  we  bclieve  to  conńrm 
thia.  The  restriction  of  Ham  to  Egypt,  unlike  the  casc, 
if  we  may  reason  inferentiaUy,  of  his  brcthren,  may  be 
accounted  for  by  the  veiy  early  civiIization  of  this  part 
of  the  Hamitic  territory,  while  much  of  the  rest  was 
comparatively  barbarous.  Egypt  may  also  have  been 
the  first  settlement  of  the  Hamitcs  whcnce  colonies 
went  forth,  as  we  know  was  the  case  with  the  Philis- 
tines.     See  Capiitor. 

I.  Cusii  (Josephus  \ovooc)  "reigned  ovcr  the  Ethi- 
opians"  [^African  Ciishites] ;  Jerome  (in  (luatt.  Ilebr,  in 
Genea,)j  "Both  the  Arabum  Ełkwput,  which  was  the 
parcnt  countrj',  and  the  African,  \U  colony"  [ Abyssinia = 
Cush  in  the  Yulg.  and  Syr.] ;  but  these  gradations  (con- 
fining  Cush  first  to  the  western  shore  of  the  Red  Sea, 
and  then  extcnding  the  nation  to  the  Arabian  Peninsii- 
la)  require  further  extension;  modem  iUscoveries  tally 
with  this  most  ancient  ethnographical  reconl  in  phicing 
Cush  on  the  Euphrates  and  the  Persian  Gulf.  When 
RosenmUllcT  {Scholia  in  Ges.  ad  lor.)  claims  Josephus 
for  an  Asiaiic  Cush  as  well  as  an  A/iicfin  one,  he  ex- 
ceeds  the  testimon}'  of  the  historian,  who  9&ys  no  morę 
than  that  "  the  Etkiopians  of  his  day  calletl  themselres 
Cushites,  and  not  only  they,  but  all  the  Asiatics  also, 
gave  them  that  name"  {A  ni.  i,  6, 2).  But  Josephus  does 
not  specify  what  Ethiopians  he  means :  the  form  of  his 
atatement  Ifeads  to  the  oppońtc  conclusion  rather,  that 
the  Ethiopians  yftx& Africana  merely,  excluded  from  all 
the  Asiatics  [yirh  iavTUfV  rt  icai  rCjy  iv  rg  'Amc.  vav' 
rwy],  the  iavTiav  referring  to  the  Aidiowic  just  men- 
tioned.  (For  a  better  interpretation  of  Josephus  here, 
aee  Volney,  Syathme  Geogr.  dc*  Hihreux,  in  (Kutnrea^  v, 
224.)  The  earlist  empire,  that  of  Nimrod,  was  Cushite, 
literally  and  properly,  not  per  catachrtain^  as  Heeren, 
Bunsen,  and  others  would  have  it  Sir  W.  Jones  {On 
the  Oriffin  and  FaimUet  ofNałions^  in  Works^  iii,  202) 
showB  an  appreciation  of  the  wide  extent  of  the  Cuahiie 
race  in  prinueyal  tim^.which.  is  much  morę  conslstent 
with  the  disco veries  of  recent  times  than  the  specula- 
tions  of  the  neocritical  school  prove  to  be :  "  The  chil- 
dren  of  Ham,"  he  says, "  founded  in  Iran  (the  country 
of  the  lower  Euphrates)  the  monarchy  of  the  first  Chal- 
ckeans,  invented  letters,  etc"  (oompare  KosenmUller,  as 
alx)ve  quoted).  According  to  Yolney..  the  term  Ethio- 
piany  ooexten8ive  with  Cush^  included  Gven  the  Hin- 
dCis ;  he  seems,  however,  to  mean  the  southem  Arabians, 
who  wereii  it  is  certain,  sometimea  called  Indiana  (in 


I  Afenoloffio  Graco,  part  ii,  p.  197,  "  Felix  Arabia  Tndln 
Tocatur  .  .  .  ubi  fdix  vocatur  India  Arabica,  ut  ab 
iEthiopica  et  Gangetica  distinguatur,"  Asscmani,  RitL 
Orient.  HI,  ii,  569),  especially  the  Yemenese;  Jones,  in- 
deed,  on  the  ground  of  Sanscrit  afiinities  (**  Caa  or  Cuah 
being  among  the  sons  of  Brahma,  i.  e.  among  the  pro- 
genitors  of  the  Hindiis,  and  at  the  hcad  of  an  ancient 
pedigree  preserved  ui  the  RamayarT),  goes  so  far  as  to 
say,  '*  We  can  harrlly  doubt  that  the  Cush  of  Moscs  and 
Yalmic  was  an  anccstor  of  the  Indian  race."  Jones, 
however,  might  have  relied  too  strongly  on  the  forged 
Purana  of  Wilfonl  {AatiUic  liesearchea,  iii, 432) :  still,  it 
!  is  certain  that  Oriental  tradition  largely  (though  in  its 
usual  exaggerated  tonc)  contirms  the  Moaaic  stateroents 
about  the  sons  of  Noah  and  their  settlements.  "  In  the 
Rozit  ul'SuJ/ah  it  is  written  that  Gotl  bestoweil  on  Ham 
nine  sons,"  the  two  whicli  are  mentioned  at  the  head  of 
the  list  (łlindfSind,  yiilh  whicli  comp.  Abulfaragius  as 
quoted  in  one  of  our  notices  ab«ve),  expressly  coniiected 
the  Hindua  with  Ham,  aithough  not  thnnigh  Cuah,  who 
occuTs  as  the  8ixth  among  the  Hamite  brełhreiu  See 
the  entire  extract  from  the  KheUtaaut  ttl-AUtbar  of 
Khondemlr  in  IlosenmllUer  {BibL  Geogr,  AppemL  to  eh. 
iii,  vol.  i,  p.  1 09  [Bibl.  ĆV/6.]).  Bohlen  {Geneaia,  ad  locO, 
who  has  a  long  but  indistinct  notice  of  Cush,  witli  hu 
Sanscrit  predilections,  is  for  extendiiig  Cush  "  as  far  as 
the  ilark  India,"  claiming  for  his  view  the  sanction  of 
Rosenm.,  Winer,  and  Schumann.  When  Job  (xxviii, 
19)  speaks  of  "M«  topuz  of  EthiopiiC*  (ri3"r^ąB), 
Bohlen  finds  a  SanacriŁ  word  in  r.^IdD,  and  conseąueiit- 
ly  a  link  between  India  and  Cuah  (U^S,  Ethiopia).  He 
refera  to  the  Syriac,  Chaldiean,  and  Saadias  yersions  as 
!  having  fndia  for  Cush,  and  (afler  Braun,  De  Veaf.  Sa- 
cerd.  i,  115)  assigns  Rabbinical  authority  for  it.  Aase- 
mani,  who  is  by  Bohlen  referred  to  in  a  futile  hope  of 
cxtracting  evidcnce  for  the  identification  of  Cush  and 
India  (of  the  HindOs),  has  an  admirable  dissertation  on 
the  people  of  Arabia  {Bihl.  Or.  III,  ii,  552  8q.) ;  one  cle- 
ement  of  the  Arab  population  he  derives  from  Cush  (see 
below).  We  thtis  conclude  that  the  children  of  Ham, 
in  the  linę  of  Cush,  had  very  exten8ive  settlements  th 
Asiuy  as  far  as  the  Euphrates  and  Persian  Gulf  at  least, 
and  probably  including  the  distńct  of  the  Indus ;  while 
m  Africa  they  both  spread  widely  in  Ab^^ssiiiia,  and 
liad  settlements  apparently  among  their  kinsmcn,  the 
Egyptians :  this  we  feel  warranted  in  aasuming  on  the 
testimony  of  the  Arabian  geographers;  c.  g.  Abulfeda 
(in  his  aection  on  Egypt,  tables,  p.  110  in  the  original,  p^ 
151  trans,  by  Reinaud)  mentions  a  Cuah,  or  rather  Kvg, 
as  the  most  important  city  in  Egj^pt  afler  the  capital 
Fosthaht :  its  port  on  the  Red  Sea  was  Cosseyr,  and  it 
was  a  place  of  great  resort  by  the  Mohammedana  of  the 
west  on  pilgrimage.  "The  sons  of  Cush,  where  they 
once  got  possession,  werc  never  totally  ejected.  If  they 
were  at  any  time  driven  uway,  they  retumed  after  a 
timc  and  recovered  their  ground,  for  which  reason  I 
make  n^  doubt  but  many  of  them  in  proceas  of  time  rc- 
ttimcd  to  Chaldiea,  and  mixed  with  those  of  their  fam- 
ily  who  re8ide<l  thcre.  Hence  arose  the  tradition  that 
the  Babylonians  not  only  conquered  Eg}*pt,  but  that  the 
Icaming  of  the  Eg}'ptians  came  originally  from  Chal- 
diea; and  the  like  account  from  the  Eg^-ptians,  that 
people  from  their  country  had  conąuered  Babylon,  and 
that  the  'wisdom  of  the  Chalcbeans  was  derived  from 
them"  (BryantjOn  Ancient  Egypt,  in  Worka,  vi,  250). 
See  Cush. 

1.  Seba  (Josephus  'S.a^a^  is  "  universally  admitted 
by  critics  to  be  the  ancient  name  for  the  Egj-ptian  [Nu- 
bian]  Meroe'  (Bohlen).  This  is  too  laiigc  a  stateroent ; 
Bochart  denics  that  it  could  be  Meroe,  on  the  assump- 
tion  that  this  city  did  not  exist  before  Cambyses,  rely- 
ing  on  the  statemcnt  of  Diodorus  and  LuciusAmpelius. 
Josephus  {Ani,  ii,  10),  however,  morę  aocurately  saj-a 
that  Saba  '•  was  a  royal  city  of  Ethiopia  [NubiaJ^irAw-A 
Cambysea  (tfierwarda  named  Aferoi,  after  the  name  of 
his  sister."    Bochart  would  have  Seba  to  be  Saba^Ma^ 


HAM 


37 


HAM 


rth  in  Arabia,  oonfoonding  cmr  Seba  (M^O)  with  Sheba 
(iC^).  Mero^f  with  the  district  aroańd  it,  was  no 
«Soiil)t  settled  by  oar  Seba.  (S<!e  Gesep.  &  v.,  who  quotes 
Burckhardt,  Ktippell,  and  Iloskins;  so  Coni.  a  Lap.,  Ro- 
•PiiRi^  and  KalUch ;  Patrick  a^rrees  with  Bochart  i  Vol- 
ney  [  who  diffen  from  Bochart]  yet  identifies  Seba  with 
the  modem  Arabian  Sabbea ;  Heeren  throwa  hia  aa- 
thońty  into  the  ncale  for  the  Ethiopian  Merue ;  so  Kno- 
beL)  It  auppoits  this  opinion  that  Seba  is  mentioned 
in  conjunction  with  the  other  Nile  landa  (Ethiopia  and 
Ef^-pt)  in  Isa.  xliii,  3,  and  xlr,  14.  (The  Shtba  of 
Arabia,  and  otir  Ethiopian  Seba^  as  representing  oppo- 
fiite  shoies  of  the  Ked  Sea,  are  coiitrasted  in  Psa.  lxxii, 
10.)  See  Feldhoif  {VdUxrtafeL,  p.  71),  who,  howerer, 
(Iłitooren  mtaof  Stbas  both  in  Afiica  (e^^en  to  the  south- 
w€8t  coast  of  that  continent)  and  in  Asia  (on  the  Per^ 
lian  GulO,  a  circumstance  ftom  which  he  deńyes  the 
idea  that,  in  this  gnndaon  of  their  patriarch,  the  Ham- 
itcs  displayed  the  energy  of  their  race  by  widely-ex- 
teoded  settlementa.    See  Seba. 

2.  Uarilak  (Joeephus  E«nXac),  not  to  be  confoimded 
(as  he  is  by  Koeenm.,  and  apparently  by  Patrick,  after 
Bochart)  with  the  son  of  Joktan,  who  is  mentioned  in 
vcr.  29.  Joseph,  and  Jecome,  as  ąuoted  by  Com.  a  Lap., 
were  not  far  wrong  in  roaking  the  GcBtulutns  (the  peo- 
ple  in  the  central  part  of  North  Africa,  between  the  mod- 
em Niger  and  the  Ked  Sea)  to  be  descended  Arom  the 
C4i»hite  Harilah.  Kiepert  (Bibel- Atłas,  foL  I)  rightly 
pats  our  Harilah  in  KaU  Abysńma,  by  the  Straits  of 
Bab  el-Mandeb.  Gesen.,  who  takes  this  view,  refen  to 
Hiny,  vi,  28,  and  Ptolemy,  iv,  7,  for  the  A  raliftr,  now 
Zeilah,  and  adds  that  Saadias  repeatedly  renden  nb^^in 
by  Zeilah.  Bohlen  at  firet  identifies  the  two  Havilahs, 
but  afterwards  so  far  corrects  himself  as  to  admit,  very 
pcoperiy,  that  there  was  probably  on  the  west  coast  of 
the  Red  Sea  a  Ha^ńlah  as  well  as  on  the  east  of  it — 
'*ju9t  in  the  same  way  as  there  was  one  Seba  on  the 
coist  of  Arabia,  and  another  oppoeite  to  it  in  Ethiopia.** 
There  is  no  soch  difficulty  as  Kalisch  {fienesity  Pref.  p. 
93)  Ripposes  in  believing'that  occasionally  hindred  peo- 
pte  ikould  kace  Hke  names.  It  is  not  morę  incredible 
that  there  should  be  a  Havilah  both  in  the  family  of 
Hani  and  in  that  of  Shem  (Gen.  x,  ver.  7,  comp.  with 
Ter.  29)  than  that  there  were  Enochs  and  Lamechs 
imoog  the  posterities  of  both  Cain  and  Seth  (compare 
Cień.  iv,  17,  18,  with  rer.  18,  26).  Kali8ch'8  cumbrous 
theory  of  a  va«t  extent  of  countrj'  from  the  Persian 
Gulf  running  to  the  south-west  and  crossing  the  Red 
Sea.  of  the  generał  name  of  Ha\-ilah  (possessed  at  one 
end  by  the  son  of  Joktan,  and  at  the  other  by  the  son 
of  Cash),  reroorcs  no  difficulty,  and,  indeed,  is  unneces- 
Miy.  There  is  no  "apparent  discrepancy**  (of  which  he 
rpóUu,  p.249)  in  the  Mosaic  statement  of  two  HavUah8 
of  dUtiuct  racea,  nor  any  violatłon  of  consistency  when 
fairiy  judged  by  the  naturę  of  the  case.  Michaelis  and 
Feldhoff  strangely  flounder  about  in  their  oppoeite  cnn- 
jectures :  the  former  suppoees  our  IlaWlah  to  be  the  land 
of  the  Chraliści,  on  the  Caspian,  the  latter  places  it  in 
China  Ptoper,  abotit  Pekin  (!).     See  Hayiłah. 

3.  SabtaM  (Joseph.  TaftaOa,  TapaOac)  is  by  Josephus, 
vith  great  probability,  located  immediately  north  of  the 
preceding,  in  the  district  east  of  Merotf,  between  the  As- 
tabaras  (Tacazze),  a  tńbutary  of  the  Nile,  and  the  Red 
^  the  country  of  the  Attabarif  as  the  Greeks  called 
tbem  (Sa/3adipH>«  bvofidi^ovrai  dk  'A^ra/Sapot  vap 
"EUifffiy,  Ant,  i,  6,  2).  Kalisch  quite  agreee  in  this 
ofńnion,  and  Gesenius  subetantiaUy,  when  he  places  Sab- 
tah  on  the  south-west  ooast  of  the  Red  Sea,  where  was 
the  Ethiopian  city  ^fidr.  (See  Strabo,  xvi,  p.  770 
[ed.Caaauh.J,  and  Ptolemy,  iv,  10.)  Rosenm.,  Bohlen, 
sad  Knobel,  with  less  propriety,  plAoe  it  in  Arabia,  with 
whom  agree  Delitsch  and  Keil,  while  Feldhoff,  with  his 
mai  extraragance,  identifies  it  with  ThibeU     See  Sah- 

TAH. 

4.  Raamak  (Joaephus  'Piyfia,  'Piyftoc)  and  his  two 
ma  Sbeba  (Sa/3ac)  and  Dedau  (lov6diac)  are  separ- 


ated  by  Joaephus  and  Jerome,  who  place  the  laat-men« 
tionedin  West  ACthiopia  {\i^ioviK6v  ć^voc  Tt!tv  'E<nr<- 
p(«tfv,  which  J^ome  translates  Genś  jKthiopia  in  ocet- 
dentaU  plaga).  Ezekiel,  however,  in  xxvii,  20, 22,  men- 
tiona  these  three  namcs  together  in  connection  with 
A  rabia»  Acoortling  ta  Niebuhr,  who,  in  his  map  of  Ye- 
men,  has  a  province  called  SabU,  and  the  town  o{  Sab- 
bea (in  long.  43*^  30',  lat.  18^),  the  country  south  of  ^^a- 
bU  abounds  with  traces  of  the  name  and  family  of  Cush. 
Without  doubt,  we  have  here  yeritable  Cushite  settlers 
in  Arabia  (Assemani,  BibL  Oriental  III,  ii,  5M).  Ali 
the  commentators  whom  wo  have  named  (with  the  ex- 
oeption  of  Feldhoff)  agree  in  the  Arabian  locality  of 
these  grandsons  and  son  of  Cush.  A  belt  of  country 
stretching  from  the  Red  Sea,  oppoaite  the  Ethiopian 
Havilah,  to  the  south  of  the  Persian  Gulf,  across  Arabia, 
comprises  the  settlements  of  Raamah  and  his  two  sons. 
l"Tie  city  called  'P«y/ia,  or  'P^y^a,  by  Ptolemy  (vi,  7), 
within  this  tract,  cloeely  resembles  Raamah^  as  it  is 
written  in  the  original  (M^2p^) ;  so  does  the  island  Dd- 
den,  in  the  Pendaii  Gulf,  reserable  the  name  of  one  of 
the  sons,  Dedmi.     Sec  Dedan. 

5.  Sabtechah  (Joseph.  TafiaKuOd,  Sa/3drira0ac)  is  by 
Kalisch  thought  to  have  settled  in  Ethiopia^  and  the 
form  of  the  word  favora  the  opinion,  the  other  com- 
pounds  of  Sab  being  apparently  of  Ethiopic  or  Cushite 
origin.  **It8  obviou8  resemblance  to  the  Ethiopian 
name  Subatoky  discovered  on  Egyptian  monumenta 
(comp.  the  king  K*'.D,  in  2  Kings  xvii,  4,  and  the  Sebe- 
chus  of  Manetho),  renders  its  position  in  Arabia,  or  at 
the  Persian  Gulf,  iuprobable;  but  Samydace,  in  Gedro- 
sia  (as  Bochart  supposes),  or  Tubochotta,  in  Pereia  (as 
Bohlen  suggests),  or  Satakos,  are  out  of  the  ąuestion. 
The  Targum  of  Jonathan  renden  it  here  *^i(2;aT  (Zingt), 
which  b  the  Arabie  name  for  the  African  district  Zan- 
ffuebaTf  and  which  ia  not  inappropriate  here"  (Kalisch). 
See  Sabtisciiah. 

6.  Nimrod  (Joseph.  "StfipióiTię),  the  mighty  founder 
of  the  earliest  imperial  power,  b  the  grandeat  name,  not 
only  among  the  children  of  Ham,  but  in  primseval  his- 
ton\  He  seems  to  have  been  deiiied  under  the  title  of 
BUu-Nipru,  or  Bel-Nimrod,  which  may  be  translated 
« the  god  of  the  chase,"  or  "  the  great  hunter."  (The 
Greek  forms  Ne/3pfa;^  and  'St/ipwB  ser\'e  to  connect  Ni- 
pru  with  ^"^Cd.  The  native  root  is  thought  to  be  tia- 
par^ "  to  pursiie,"  or  "  cause  to  flee,"  Rawlinson,  p.  196.) 
He  ia  noticed  here  in  his  place,  in  passiug,  because 
around  his  name  and  exploits  has  gatliered  a  mass  of 
Eaatcm  tradition  from  all  sources,  which  entirely  corrob- 
orates  the  statement  of  Moses,  that  the  primitiyc  em- 
pire of  the  Cłialdffians  was  Cuakite,  and  that  its  i)eopIe 
were  closely  connocted  with  Egj-pt,  and  Canaan,  and 
Ethio|)ia.  Rawlinson  {Fire  Great  Mim,y  chap.  iii)  has 
collected  much  of  this  tradition,  and  shwyn  that  the 
hints  of  Herodotus  as  to  tlie  existence  of  an  Asiatic 
Ethiopia  as  well  as  an  A/riran  one  (iii,  M;  vii,  70), 
and  that  the  traditional  belief  which  Moses  of  Chorene, 
the  Armenian  historian,  has,  for  instancc,  that  Nimrod 
is  in  fact  BeluSy  and  grandson  of  Cush  by  Mizraim  (a 
statement  subetantiaUy  agreeing  with  that  of  the  Bi- 
bie), havc  been  too  strongly  confirmed  by  all  receiit  re- 
searchcs  (among  the  cuneiform  inscriptions)  in  compar- 
atiye  philology  to  be  set  asidc  by  criticism  based  on  the 
merę  conjectures  of  ingenious  men.  It  would  appear 
that  Nunrod  not  only  built  cities,  and  conquered  exten- 
8ive  territories, "  subduing  or  expelling  the  yarious  tribes 
by  which  the  conntrj'  was  previouely  occupied"  (Raw- 
Unson,  p.  195 ;  comp.  Gen.  x,  10-12  [marginal  V€rsion]), 
but  cstablished  a  dynasty  of  some  eleven  or  twelve  mon- 
archa. By-and-by  (about  1500  B.C. ;  see  Rawlinson,  p. 
228)  the  aincient  Ćhaldieans,  the  stock  of  Cush  and  ł)eu- 
ple  of  Nimrod,  sank  into  obscurity,  crushed  by  a  foreigu 
Shemitic  stock,  destined  after  some  8even  or  cight  cen- 
turies  of  submission  to  revive  to  a  second  tenure  of  im- 
perial |)owcr,  which  cidminated  in  grandeur  under  the 
magniflcent  Nebuchadnezzar.    See  Nimrod^ 


HAM 


38 


HAM 


n.  MiZRAnc  (Joseph.  Mc^paty,  Mtarpedfioc),  that  iSy 
the  father  of  £^fpt,  is  the  second  son  of  Cash.  Of  this 
duai  fonn  of  a  man*8  name  we  have  other  instanoeB  in 
Hpkraim  and  SkaharaUm  (1  Chroń,  viii,  8).  We  um- 
ply  cali  the  readei^s  attention  to  the  fact,  voached  for  in 
this  genealogy  ^  the  HamiteSi  of  fke  neamesg  ofkindred 
hetween  Nimrod  and  Uizraim.  This  point  ia  of  great 
ralue  in  the  sŁudy  of  andent  Eaatem  histoiy,  and  will 
reconcile  many  difficnltiee  which  woold  otherwiae  be 
insoluble.  ^  For  the  laat  3000  years  it  ia  to  the  Shemi- 
tic  and  Indo-European  noes  that  the  world  has  been 
mainly  indebted  for  its  adrancement ;  but  it  was  other- 
wise  in  the  fiist  age&  Egypt  and  Babilon,  Mizralm 
and  Nimrod,  both  descendants  of  Ham,  ied  the  way  and 
acted  as  the  pioneers  of  mankind  in  the  Yarions  untrod- 
den  fielda  of  art,  literaturę,  and  science.  Alphabetic 
writing,  astronomy,  histoiy,  chionology,  architecture, 
plastic  art,  sculptuie,  oarigation,  agriculture,  and  tex- 
tile  industry,  seem,  all  of  them,  to  hare  had  their  origin 
in  one  or  other  of  these  two  countries"  (Rawlinson,p.75). 

If,  as  8ome'8uppo8e,  Mizraim  in  the  lists  of  Gen.  x, 
and  1  Chroń,  i,  stands  for  Mizrim,  we  should  take  the 
alngular  Maseor  to  be  the  name  of  the  progenitor  of  the 
Egyptian  tribes.  It  is  remarkable  that  Mazor  appears 
to  be  identical  in  signification  with  Ilam,  so  that  it  may 
be  but  another  name  of  the  patriarch.  8ee  Eoypt.  In 
this  case  the  mention  of  Mizraim  (or  Mizrim)  would  be 
geographical,  and  not  indicative  of  a  Mazor,  son  of  UanL 

The  Mizraites,  like  the  descendanls  of  Uam,  occupy 
a  territory  wider  than  that  bearing  the  name  of  Miz- 
raim. We  may,  howeyer,  suppose  that  Mizraim  in- 
duded  all  the  first  settlements,  and  that  in  remote  times 
other  tribes  besides  the  Philistines  migrated,  or  extcnd- 
ed  their  territories.  This  we  may  infer  to  havc  been 
the  case  with  the  Lehabim  (Lubim)  or  libyans,  for 
Manetho  speaks  of  them  as  in  the  remotest  period  of 
£gyptian  history  subject  to  the  Pharaohs.  He  tells  us 
that  under  the  first  king  of  the  third  dynasty,  of  Mem- 
phites,  Necherophes,  or  Necherochis,  "  the  Libyans  re- 
rolted  from  the  Egyptians,  but,  on  account  of  a  wonder- 
ful  increase  of  the  moon,  submitted  through  fear"  (Cory*s 
Anr.  Frag.  2d  edit.  p.  100, 101).  It  is  unlikely  tbat'at 
this  very  early  time  the  Memphite  kingdom  ruled  far, 
if  at  all,  beyond  the  western  boundaiy  of  Eg^^pU  Sce 
Mizraim. 

•  LandofHam, — "By  this  and  similar  poetic  terms  the 
Psalmist  designatea  Egypt  in  Psa.  cv,  23  ("  Jacob  ao- 
joumed  in  the  land  ofUam^  DH  }'!?Mą,  here  parallel 
and  synonymous  with  D7'12Cp,  with  which  compare  ver. 
27,  and  cvi,  22, 23),  and  in  Psa.  lxxviii,  61  (where  "/A« 
tabemades  of  Ham,'*  Off^bnę,  is  again  parallel  with 
D^^:Cp).  Wliat  in  these  passages  is  the  poetical  name 
of  Egypt  in  Ilebrew,  was  among  the  Egyptians  them- 
8elve8  probably  the  domestic  and  usual  dcsignation  of 
their  country  (Gesenius).  According  to  Gescnius,  this 
yuune  of  Ham  ("  Coptic  Chemi,''  for  which  Lepsius,  how- 
eyer, substitutes  another  word,  Uem  [Memph.]  or  Hhfni 
[Thebaic])  is  derived  Crom  the  swarthy  complexion  of 
the  people  (what  Gesenius  calls  Coptic  Lepaius  desig- 
nates  by  the  now  morę  usual  term  AfemphUic :  Gesenius 
adds  the  Sahidic  [Lep8ius's  Thebaic]  form  of  '*our  word 
Keme  [from  keni,  black] ;  but  Lepsius  denies  that  the 
name  of  Egypt,  Uam  [on  ],  has  "  any  direct  oonnection" 
with  this  word;  he  substitutes  the  root  him,  or  Adm 
[Memphitic],  which  is  softened  into  hhemf  or  AA^m,  iu 
the  sister  dialect  of  Thebes ;  the  meaning  of  which  is  (o 
be  hot  [Tattam,  Lex,  jEgtfpt.  IjuL  p.  658, 671  ].  Chemi, 
however,  and  Khan,  are,  no  doubt,  the  constantly  used 
terms  for  the  name  of  the  country  [see  Tattam,  p.  155, 
MO,  and  Uhlemann,  Copt^  Gr,  et  Jax,  p.  154]),  while 
Lepsius  says,  ^'not  from  the  oolor  of  its  inhabitants, 
which  was  red,  but  from  that  of  its  soil,  which  formed  a 
strong  contrast  with  the  adjacent  countries."  (Comp. 
Herodotus^s  /icXayya(ov,  ii,  12,  and  Plutarch's  Aiyt;?r- 
Tov  iv  Toic  fŁoktara  fiiKayyitov  ov<rcrv  .  .  .  Xijftia 
Kdkowtf  De  Itid,  et  Odr.  [  Reiake]  vii,  487.)    In  the  hie- 


roglyphic  langnage  the  name  oocuts  9b  KM.  The  faw 
scription  of  it,  as  it  frequently  oocutb  on  the  Koseua 
stoue,  is  pronounccd  by  ChampoUion,  Akerblad,  and 
Spohn,  Chmi  (Gesen.  The»,  p.  489).  The  name  by  which 
Egypt  is  commonly  called  in  Hebrew,  0^*^21^  C^^^TO 
should  probably  be  translated  Egypt  in  2  Kings  xix,  24 ; 
Isa.  xix,  6;  xxxvii,  25;  and  Micah  vii,  12;  Gesen.  and 
FUrst,  a.  v.),  was  not  used  by  the  Egjrptians  (Biihr,  He- 
rodot,  notę,  ad  L  c),  but  6y  Atiaiict  it  appears  to  have 
been  much  used  of  the  land  of  the  Nile,  as  is  evident 
from  the  cuneiform  inscriptions.  The  Median  form  of 
the  name  was  Mitzariga;  the  Babylonian,  Jfutr ;  the 
Assyrian,  MvxrL  The  Arabie  name  of  the  preaent  c«|h 
ital  of  £g>'pt  is  £1  Mazr,  and  the  country  also  is  Migr 
(Sir  H.  RawUnson,  Jour,  R,  A  $.  Soc  voL  xiv,  pt.  i,  p.  18 ; 
Lepsius,  in  łleraog,  s.  v.  Egypt).  Joeephus  {A  nt,  i,  6, 
2)  renders  the  Hebrew  name  of  Egypt  bv  Micrprfy  and 
of  the  people  by  Miorpalot.  Whether,  however,  we  re- 
gard  the  native  name  from  the  father,  or  the  Asiatie 
?Vom  the  son,  they  both  vouch  for  the  JlamiHc  character 
of  Egypt,  which  probably  differed  from  aU  the  other  set- 
tlements of  this  race  in  haviiig  Ham  himself  as  the  act^ 
ual  apx'iy^  of  the  nation,  among  whom  also  he  pcp- 
haps  liyed  and  died.  This  circumstance  would  aiford 
suffident  reason  both  why  the  nation  itself  should  re- 
gard  the  father  ąs  their  fpoagnuis  rather  than  the  son, 
who  only  snoceeded  him  in  the  work  of  settlement,  aiid 
why,  moreo\*er,  foreigners  with  no  other  interest  than 
simply  to  distinguish  one  Hamitic  colona'  from  another 
should  have  preferred  for  that  purpoee  the  name  of  the 
son,  which  would  both  designate  this  particular  nation, 
and  at  the  same  time  distinguish  it  from  such  as  weie 
kuidred  to  it. 

On  the  Bons  of  Mizraim  we  roust  lic  brief ,  Joaephus 
noticed  the  different  fortunę  which  had  attendcd  the 
names  of  the  sons  from  that  of  the  grandsons  of  Ham,  es- 
pecially  in  the  family  of  Mizraim ;  for  while  ^*  time  had 
not  hurt*'  the  former,  of  the  hitter  he  says  (Ant,  i,  6, 2X 
"tre  hnow  nothing  hut  their  nameś."*  Jerome  (who  in 
these  points  mostly  givc8  us  only  the  echo  of  Josefilius) 
says  similarly :  '*  Caetene  sex  gentes  ignotie  sunt  nobij 
.  .  .  quia  usque  ad  oblivionem  pnetcritorum  nominum 
pen'enere.**  They  both,  indeed,  except  two  names  from 
the  obscurity  which  had  opptessed  the  other  8ix,  Labim 
and  Philistinij  and  give  them  ^  a  local  habitation  with 
their  name.*'  What  this  is  we  shall  notice  soon ;  mean- 
while  we  briefly  state  such  identificatious  of  the  others 
as  have  occurred  to  commentators.  Josephus,  it  will  be 
obser\'ed,  renders  all  these  jo/ura/  Hebrew  names  by  sin^ 
yular  forms.  These  plurals  seem  to  iiidicate  clmiś  tpeah- 
ing  their  own  languagea  (comp.  ver.  20,  which  surmounta 
our  table),  centered  around  their  patriarch,  from  whom, 
of  course,  they  derived  their  geniile  name :  thus,  lAidim 
from  Lud;  Pathruaim  from  Pathros,  etc  (FeldhoflT,  p. 
94).  Lenormant  notices  the  fact  of  so  many  nations 
cmcrging  from  EgjT)t,  and  spreading  over  Africa  {/.'A  sie 
Occidentale,  p.  244),  for  he  uuderstands  these  names  to  be 
of  peoples,  not  indi\'idual8 ;  so  Iktichaelis,  SpicUeg.  p,  254, 
who  quotes  Aben-Ezra  for  the  same  opinion.  Aben* 
Ezra,  howeyer,  docs  not  herein  represcnt  the  generał 
opinion  of  the  Jewish  doctors.  The  rclative  DCS  .  .  • 
*ltt;K  misled  him;  he  thought  it  necessarily  implied  h' 
caiityf  and  not  a  pertontd  anteoedent  MendeŁasohn  de- 
clares  him  wrong  in  this  view,  and  refers  to  Gen.  xlix, 
24.  *'  It  is  probable,"  he  adds, "  that  lAuHm  and  the  oth« 
er  names  were  those  of  iwn,  who  gave  their  names  to 
their  desoendanta.  Such  was  the  opinion  of  Rashi,  etc,** 
who  takes  the  same  view  as  the  old  Jewish  historiau. 

1.  Ludim  (Joaephus  Aoviuipoc)  is  not  to  be  con- 
founded  with  Shem's  son  Lud  (ver.  22),  the  progenitor 
of  the  Lydians.  The  Ludim  are  often  mentioned  in 
Scripture  (Isa.  lxvi,  19;  Jer.  xl\'i,  9;  Ezek.  xx\'ii,  10; 
xxx,  5)  as  a  warlike  nation,  śkilled  in  the  use  of  spear 
and  bow,  and  seem  to  have  been  employed  (much  as  the 
SynM  have  been)  as  mercenary  troope  (Geseiu  Jesaiat, 
iii,  311).  Bochart  (who  placed  Cush  in  Arabia)  neenred 


HAM 


39 


HAH 


Ethiojna  fot  these  Łndim ;  one  of  his  reasoiiB  being  baaed 
on  their  use  of  tbc  bow,  as  he  leams  of  Herodotun,  Stra- 
bo,  Ileliodonis,  «nd  Diodorus  Siculus.  But  the  people 
of  North  Africa  were  equaUy  dexten>us  with  this  implo- 
ment  of  war ;  we  have  thereforo  no  difficulty  in  connect- 
ing  the  Ludim  with  the  country  through  which  the 
Tiver  iMd  or  Iaiuó  ran  (Fliny,  v,  2),  in  the  prorinoe  of 
Tmgiiama  (^Tangier) ;  so  Bohlen,  Delitzscb,  and  Feld- 
hoff,  which  last  yrńter  finds  other  names  of  cognate  or- 
igin  in  Noith  Aihca,  e.  g.  the  tribe  callcd  Ludaya^  in- 
habiting  oae  of  the  oases,  and  the  district  of  Ludamarf 
in  Nigritia.  Kaliach  suggests  the  £g>'ptian  Letopolis  or 
Lelus,  and  Ciarkę  the  Marwłu  of  Kgypt;  whUe  Keil 
auppoees  the  Berber  tribe  Lewatah;  and  Lenormant 
{L\Ańe  Occid.  p.  244)  the  Nubkau;  they  think  a  prox- 
imtty  to  Egypt  wouid  be  most  compatible  with  the  fact 
ihai  the  iMiHm  were  Eg^^ptian  aaxiliaiie8  (Jer.  xlvi,  9). 
See  LuDiai. 

2.  Amamim  (Josephns  *Eyevifioc)  aie,  with  unusual 
wnanimity,  placed  by  the  commentatorB  in  Egypt.  Cal- 
mci  repiesents  the  older  opinion,  ąuoting  Jonathanie 
Targ.  for  the  MartoHa,  Knobel  (with  whom  agree  De- 
litzscb, Keil,  and  Feldhoflr)  pUu^  them  in  the  Delta,  the 
Sept.  rendering  'Evc;Mnci/i  suggesting  to  him  Santmkit, 
the  Eg^-ptian  woid  for  north  country,  The  word  occurs 
jwwhere  else  in  the  Old  Testament    See  Amamim. 

8.  Ltkabim  (Josephus  AafiteifAf  Aafiifioc)  is,  with  ab- 
aolnte  itnanimity,  indoding  even  Jerome  and  Josephus 
(who  aays,  A.  rov  KaTouaiaayToc  iv  Ac/3vi;  rac  tĄv 
Xi»pav  d^'  aifTov  KakioapTOc},  identitied  witli  the 
■boiter  word  D*^3^b,  Lubim,  in  2  Chroń,  xii,  8 ;  xvt,  8 ; 
and  again  in  Nahum  iii,  9  -,  Dan.  xi,  43.  They  are  there 
the  Libyans ;  Bochart  limits  the  word  to  the  Liby-agyp- 
tU,  on  the  west  frontier  of  Egypt ;  so  KnobeL  The  łle- 
brew  woni  has  becn  connected  (by  Bochart)  vrith  ^^O -» 
and  the  plur.  of  Silb,  which  means^amf  ,•  Bashi  sup- 
poang  that  they  are  so  called  '^because  their  faces  were 
inflamed  with  tho  suną  heat"  (Isa.  xiii,  8),  from  their 
icndence  so  near  the  torrid  zonę.  Hltzig*8  idea  that 
the  Lehabim  may  be  Nubkuu  is  also  held  by  Lenor- 
mant (/.Msie  Occid,  p.  244).  The  opinion  of  the  latter 
is  b«ed  upon  the  generał  principle  entertained  by  him, 
that,  as  Cush  peopled  Ethiopia,  and  Phut  Libyti,  and 
Canaan  Pkamcia,  so  to  Mizraim  must  be  appropriated 
Egypt,  or  (at  least)  the  yidnity  of  that  country.  There 
is  some  force  in  this  idew,  al|hough  the  application  of 
it  in  the  case  of  Lehabim  need  not  conflne  his  choice  to 
Nubia.  Libyay  with  which  the  name  is  associated  by 
most  wriien  sińce  Josephus,  is  contiguous  to  Egypt,  on 
iu  western  fioniier,  and  would  answer  the  conditiona  9a 
wcU  as  Nubia.    See  Lehabim. 

4.  Napkttthim  (Josephus  Nl^c/ioc),  acoording  to  Bo- 
ehmrt  and  BosenmUller,  should  be  identified  with  Neph- 
IjFS,  in  the  north  of  Egypt ;  Bohlen  suggests  the  Nobc^a, 
in  Libya;  Com.  a  Lap.  the  NurmóUin*;  Patrick  (after 
Gfodus)  NepatOj  in  Ethiopia;  but  nonę  of  these  opin- 
ioiM  appear  to  us  so  probabie  as  that  of  Knobel,  who 
Unia  Tindicates  for  the  Memphitic,  or  Middle  EgypUans, 
th«  daim  to  be  the  Naphtuhim,  Memphis  was  the 
chief  seat  of  the  wonhip  of  PhihtUi,  an  Egyptian  deity. 
If  the /»/iira/  possessiTe  particie  na=cl  tov  (Uhleroann, 
sec.  14,  1)  be  prefixed,  we  get  the  word  na-Ptakh,  the 
people  ofPkthahy  oi  rov  <Mdr,  just  as  the  Moabites  are 
designated  ihe  people  ofChemosh  (NumU  xxi,  29;  Jer. 
zlriii,  46),  and  the  Hebrews  the  people  ofJehovah  (Ezek. 
xxxYi,  20).     See  NAPirruHiM. 

5.  Paikrusim  (Josephus  ^^cwtipoc)  are  nndoubtedly 
the  people  of  Upper  Kgypij  ot  the  Thebaid,  of  which 
Uie  capital,  Thet>e»,  is  mentioned,  under  the  name  of  Ao 
and  AVi4  mony  in  Nahum  iii,  8 ;  Ezek.  xxx,  14-10 ;  and 
Jec  xlTi,  2Ó.  Pafhrot  is  an  Egyptian  name,  signifying 
the  Souik  country  {pe(~reg),  which  may  possibly  indude 
Nubia  also;  in  Isa.  xi,  11,  and  probably  Jer.  xlłv,  15, 
Plithros  ia  mentioned  as  distinct  from,  though  in  close 
connection  with,  Egypt.  By  Greek  and  Roman  writ- 
cn  the  Thebaid  is  called  Nomut  Phaturitet  (Pliny,  JSisL 


Kał,  V,  9;  PtoL  iv,  6,  C9).  So  Bochart,  Bohlen,  De- 
litzsch,  Kallsch,  Keil,  Knobel  Brugsch*s  suggestion 
that  our  word  comes  from  Pa-IIathor,  that  is,  the  Nome 
of  Ifałhor,  an  Egyptian  deity  of  the  nether  world,  is 
an  improbable  one.    See  Pathrusim. 

6.  CoMluhini  (Josephus  Xco-Xo(/<oc).  In  addition  to 
what  is  said  under  the  article  Casluhim,  it  may  be  ob- 
8er^'ed  that  the  Coptic  (Basmuric)  name  of  the  district 
callcd  Casiotis,  which  Rosenmtlller  writes  ChadsaiehUuij 
is  compounded  of  ces,  a  "mount,"  and  lokh,  "to  bum,** 
and  well  indicates  a  rugged  and  arid  country,  out  of 
which  a  cotony  may  be  supposed  to  have  cmigrated  to 
a  land  called  so  neariy  after  thdr  own  home.  (Comp. 
niboą,  and  CheslokJi,  and  KoA^ic,  with  the  roetathesis 
which  Gesenius  suggests.)  This  proximity  to  South- 
west Palestine  of  their  original  abode  also  exact]y  oor- 
responds  to  the  relation  between  these  Casluhim  and 
the  next  mentioned  people,  expre8sed  in  the  parcntbet* 
ical  clause,  **  Out  of  whom  came  Philistim"  (Gen.  x, 
14) ;  L  e.  the  Philistines  were  a  colony,  of  the  Casluhim, 
probably  drailed  ofT  into  the  neighboring  province  in 
consequence  of  the  poverty  of  their  parcntal  home,  the 
very  cause  which  we  may  suppose  impdled  some  of  the 
Casluhim  theraselrcs  to  seek  a  morę  favorable  settle- 
ment  on  the  south-east  shore  of  the  Black  Sea,  in  Col- 
chis. 

Philiaim  (Josephus  ^i/Aurriyóc),  who,  according  to 
Josephus,  suggested  to  the  Greeks  the  name  of  Pafet- 
tine.  We  here  advert  to  the  rarious  reatlings  of  the 
Hebrew  text  suggested  by  Michaelis  {Spiciley,  p.  278), 
who,  after  Bashi  and  Masius,  would  transpose  the  sen- 
tence  thus:  'bo  DlKia  ĄJtS''  TiJK  BSTSI  bs-n^-ł, 
that  IS,  *<And  Casluhim,  and  Capthorim  (out  of  whom 
came  Philistim").  This  transposition  makcs  Caphforim 
the  origin  of  the  Philistines,  according  to  Amos  ix,  7, 
and  perhaps  Deut  ii,  28;  Jer.  xlvii,  4.  RosenmUUcr, 
Geaenius,  and  Bohlen  assent  to  this  changc,  but  there  is 
no  authority  for  it  dther  in  MSS.,  Targums,  or  Ver- 
sions;  and  another  rendering  of  the  passage,  "Out  of 
whom  came  Philistim  and  Caphtorim,"  is  eąually  with^ 
out  fotmdation.  In  the  Hebrew  text,  as  well  as  the 
Targums  and  the  Sept.,  Philułim  alone  rppoars  as  a  sub- 
ject,  all  the  other  proper  names  (including  the  last, 
Caphtorm)  have  the  objective  sign  HSt,  T^,  and  rot^f. 
This  is  decisive.    See  Philistines. 

7.  Cujiłhorim  (Josephus  X«^ópi/ioc  by  Onkelos  is 
rendcretl  '^fiCIjąsilIp,  ^^  Cappadociana  ^  in  the  Peshito 
also  "  Cappadocian$.**  So  the  other  Targums,  and  (ae- 
cording  to  Calroet)  "  vetereB  omnes  ac  recentiores  stant 
pro  Cappadodbus."  SeeCAPHTHOiL  In  support  of  the 
opinion  advanced  oonceming  the  Caphthorim  in  this 
article,  it  may  be  obsenred  that  in  the  Mishna  {Cethu- 
both  [Surenh.],  iii,  103),  the  very  word  of  the  Targum, 
K'^pId1Dp,  Cappadocia,  repeatedly  ocĆurs;  and  (what 
escaped  the  notice  of  Bochart)  Maimonides,  an  excellent 
authority  in  Egyptian  topography,  and  Bartenora,  both 
in  their  notes  explain  this  Caphutkaja  to  be  Caphtor, 
and  identify  it  with  Damiełta,  in  the  north  of  Eg^-pt,  in 
the  immediate  >4dnity  of  that  Casiotie  whcre  we  placed 
the  primitive  Casluhim.  It  may  be  added,  as  some 
support  to  our  own  opinion,  that  Benjamin  of  Tudela 
says  (Asher,  p.  158;  ed.  Bohn,  p.  121, 128),  "Damietta 
is  Caphtor  in  Scripture.*" 

III.  PiiUT  (Josephus  ^ovTTic),  the  thinl  son  of  Haro, 
is  thus  noticed  by  Josephus  {A  nł.  i,  6,  2) :  "  Phut  was 
the  founder  of  LU>ya  ,*  he  called  the  inhahitauts  Phut- 
ites,  after  himself ;  there  \a  a  river  in  the  country  of  the 
Moors  which  bears  that  name;  whence  it  is  that  we 
may  see  the  greatest  part  nf  the  Grecian  hi^toriograph- 
ers  mention  that  river  and  the  adjoining  country  by  the 
appellation  of  Phut ;  but  its  present  name  has  l>eeii  given 
it  from  one  of  the  sons  of  Mizraim,  who  was  called  IJbys 
[the  progenitor  of  the  J^hahhny*  Jerome  of  coursc 
adopts  this  view,  which  has  also  been  endorsed  by  Bo- 
chart, Michaelis,  KosenmUller,  Gesenius,  Bohlen,  De* 


HAM 


40 


HAM 


litsKb,  Keil,  and  Kalisch.  Tbe  Tenioiis  conobonte  it 
aiso,  for  in  Jer.  xlvi,  9  [Sept  xxvi,  9],  13^0  {Pkut)  łb 
rendered  "Libyans"  in  the  A.V.,  Libyes  in  the  Vulg., 
and  Aipvec  in  the  Sept.  Similarly  the  W1^  of  £zek. 
xxx,  5,  u  "  Libya"  in  the  A.y.,  Libjfes  in  the  Yulg.,  and 
Ai/3vec  in  the  Sept  (ao  xxxviii,  5).  Like  some  of  their 
kindred  races,  the  childien  of  Phut  are  celebrated  in  the 
Scriptures  "  as  a  warlike,  well-armed  tribe,  sought  aa 
allies,  and  dreaded  as  euemies"  (Kaliach).  Phut  means 
a  bow  f  and  the  nation  seems  to  have  been  akilled  in 
archery,  accordlng  to  the  statements  of  the  Bibie.  We 
may  add,  in  confirmation  of  the  preoeding  view  of  the 
locality  of  Phut,  that  the  Coptic  name  of  Libya,  neaieat 
to  Egypt,  was  PhaiaU  The  suppońtion  of  Hitzig  that 
Phut  was  nourca,  west  of  Libya,  on  the  north  coast  of 
Aiiica,  and  of  Kalisch  that  it  might  have  be«n  Buto, 
the  capital  of  the  Delta,  on  the  south  shore  of  the  Butic 
lakę,  are  unlikely  to  find  much  acceptance  by  the  side 
of  the  unirerstd  choice  of  all  the  chief  writers,  which 
we  have  indicated  above.  (Pliny,  Ilist,  Nat.  v,  1,  has 
mentioned  the  river,  referred  to  by  Josephus,  as  the  Fut 
[or  Phuik]f  and  Ptolemy,  in  like  manner,  as  the  ^^ov^, 
iv,  1,  8 ;  comp.  MichaeUs,  Spicileg,  i,  160.)  It  must  be 
admitteid  that  Josephus  and  those  who  havo  followed 
him  are  vague  in  their  identification.  Libya  was  of 
vast  extent ;  as,  however,  it  extended  to  the  Eg^^ptian 
frontier,  it  will,  perhaps,  best  fulfil  all  the  conditions  of 
the  case,  kceping  in  view  the  military  connection  which 
aeems  to  have  exi9ted  between  Phut  and  Egypt,  if  we 
deposit  the  posterity  of  Phut  in  Eastem  Libya  oontigu- 
ous  to  Eg^^pti  not  pressing  too  exactly  the  statcmeut  of 
Joacphus,  who  probably  meant  no  morę,  by  his  refcrence 
to  the  countr}'  of  the  Moors  and  the  river  Phut,  than 
the  readily  allowed  fact  that  in  the  vast  and  unexploTcd 
legions  of  Africa  might  be  found  traces,  in  ccrtain  local 
names,  of  thls  ancient  son  of  Ham.  The  oniy  objection 
to  this  extGnt  of  Ubya  is  that  thts  part  of  the  country 
has  already  been  assigned  to  the  Lehałńm  (sce  abovc). 
To  us,  however,  it  seems  sufficient  to  obviate  this  diffi- 
colty  to  hołd  that  while  the  Lehabim  impinged  on  the 
border  of  Upper  £g3rpt,  the  childrcn  of  Phut  were  eon- 
tiguous  to  Lower  Egypt,  and  extended  westward  along 
the  north  coast  of  Africa,  and  into  the  very  interior  of 
the  condnent  Phut  was  no  doubt  of  much  greater  ex> 
tent  than  the  Lehabim,  who  were  only  a  branch  of  Miz> 
raim ;  for  it  will  be  olŃer\''ed  tliat  in  the  case  of  Phut, 
unlike  his  brothers,  he  is  mentioned  cdone  wilhout  chil- 
dren.  Their  settlements  are  included  in  the  generał 
name  of  their  father  Phut,  without  the  subdivisions  into 
which  the  districts  colonized  by  his  brothers'  children 
were  arranged.  The  designation,  therefore,  of  PhtU  is 
gcneric ;  of^LwUm,  Lehabin,  etc.,  specific,  and  in  terri- 
tory  limited. 

lY.  Canaan  (Josephus  Xavdavoc)  was  the  youngest 
of  the  sons  of  Ham,  and  there  is  less  obscurity  concem- 
ing  his  descendants.  **  Canaan,  the  fourth  son  of  Ham," 
■ays  Josephus  (.4  irf.  i,  6, 2), "  inhabited  the  country  now 
called  Judaea  (rijv  vvv  Ka\ovfttvriv  'lovSaiav.  In  the 
time  of  Josephus,  it  must  be  recoUected,  this  included 
the  entire  country  which  we  loosely  cali  the  Holy  Land\ 
and  called  it  after  his  own  name,  Canaan."  This  coun- 
try is  morę  distinctly  described  than  any  other  in  Hoły 
Scripture,  and  in  the  record  of  Ham's  family  in  (ren.  x, 
its  boundary  is  sketched  (see  ver.  19),  excluding  the  dis- 
trict  east  of  the  Jordan,  llie  luune  Citnaati,  however, 
is  sometimes  used  in  a  morę  limited  sense  than  is  indi- 
cated here  and  clsewhere.  Thus,  in  Numb.  xiii,  29,  **  the 
Canaanites*'  are  said  to  "  dwell  by  the  sea  and*by  the 
coast  of  the  Jordan"'  (L  e.  obviously  in  the  lowlands,  both 
maritime  and  inland ),  in  opposition  to  the  Hittites  and 
others  who  occupy  the  highlands.  This  limitation  prob- 
ably indicatcs  the  settlements  of  Canaan  oniy — as  a  sep- 
arate  tribe,  apart  from  those  of  his  sons — afterwards  to  be 
enumeratcd  (compare,  for  a  similar  limitation  of  a  morę 
exten8ive  name,  Ceesar,  De  Bell.  GaU.  i,  1,  where  Gallia 
haa  both  a  specific  and  a  geueric  sense ;  oomp.  also  the 


^eific  as  well  as  generic  meaning  of  Angle  or  EngU  m 
the  Saxon  Chronicie  [Gibson,  p.  13;  Thorpe,  i, 21]  "of 
Angle  oomon  .  .  .  East  Engla,  Middel  Angla").  On 
the  much-vexed  ąucstions  of  the  curse  of  Noah  (who 
was  the  object  of  it,  and  what  was  the  ext«nt)  we  can 
here  only  touch.  Sec  Noah.  What  we  have  ahcady 
di8Covered,  however,  of  the  powcr,  energ)',  and  widely- 
spread  dominion  of  the  sons  of  Ham,  whom  we  h*ve 
hitherto  mentioned,  offera  some  guidance  to  tbe  solution 
of  at  least  the  latter  ąuestion.  The  remarkable  enter- 
prise  of  the  Cushite  hero,  Nimrod  {  his  establishment  of 
imperial  power,  as  an  advanoe  on  patriarchal  govem- 
ment;  the  strcngth  of  the  Egypt  of  Mizraim,  and  ita 
long  dooiination  over  the  house  of  Isniel ;  and  the  evi- 
dence  which  now  and  then  appears  that  even  Phut  (who 
is  the  most  obscure  in  his  fortmies  of  all  the  Hamittc 
race)  maintained  a  relation  to  the  descendants  of  Shcm 
which  was  far  from  servile  or  subject— all  clearly  tend  to 
limit  the  application  of  Noah^s  maledictory  prophecy  to 
the  precise  terms  in  which  it  was  indited :  "  Cursed  be 
Canaan ;  a  scnrant  of  seryants  shall  he  [not  Cush,  not 
Mizraim,  not  Phttt ;  but  A^  J  be  to  his  brethren"  (Gen. 
ix,  25) ;  "  that  is,"  says  Aben-Ezra,  '*  to  Cush,  Mizraim, 
and  Phut>  his  father*s  sons"— with  remarkable  inatten- 
tion  to  the  context :  **  Blessed  be  the  Lord  (^od  of  Shem, 
and  Canaan  shall  be  his  seryant.  God  shall  enlaige  Ja^ 
phet  ...  and  Canaan  shall  he  his  senrant"  (ver.  26, 27> 
If  we,  then,  oonfine  the  imprecation  to  Canaan,  we  can 
without  difficulty  traoe  its  aooomplishment  in  the  nib- 
jugation  of  the  ttibes  which  tssued  from  Atm,  to  the  chil- 
dren of  Israel  from  the  time  of  Joshua  to  that  of  David. 
Here  would  be  verified  Canaan^s  8er\ńle  relation  to  Shem; 
and  when  imperial  Romę  finally  wrested  "  the  aceptre 
from  Judah,"  and  ("  dwelling  in  the  tenta  of  Shem")  oo- 
cupied  the  East  and  whaterer  remuants  of  Canaan  were 
left  in  it,  would  not  this  accomplish  that  further  pre- 
diction  that  Japhet,  too,  should  be  k)rd  of  Canaan,  and 
that  (aa  it  would  seem  to  be  tacitly  impKed)  mediately, 
through  his  occupancy  of  "  the  tents  of  Shem  ?" 

1.  Sidon  (Josephus  ItButy  S'  if^'  'EXX^i/wv  Kai  tfvv 
KaXtiTat,  Ant»  i,  6, 2)  founded  the  ancient  metropolia  of 
Phonucia,  the  renowned  city  called  ailer  his  own  name, 
and  the  mother-city  of  the  still  morę  celebrated  T3nne : 
on  the  commercial  entcrprise  of  these  cities,  which  reach- 
ed  evcn  to  the  south  of  Britain,  sec  Sidon;  Tykę. 

2.  Ileth  (Josephus  X(rraioc)  was  the  father  of  the 
well-known  Hittites,  who  iived  in  the  south  of  Palestine 
around  Hebron  and  Beeraheba ;  in  the  former  of  which 
places  the  family  sepulchre  of  Abraham  was  purchaaed 
of  them  (Gen.  xxiii,  3).  Esau  married  **  two  daughters 
of  Heth,"  who  gave  great  soirow  to' their  husband'8 
mother  (Gen.  xxvii,  46). 

3.  The  Jebusite  (Josephus  *UpovoaŁoc)  had  his  chief 
resideuce  in  and  around  Jerusalem,  which  borę  the  name 
of  the  patriarch  of  the  tribe,  the  son  of  Canaan,  Jełnu. 
The  Jebusites  loet  their  stronghold  only  in  the  time  of 
David. 

4.  The  Amorite  (Josephus * kfiofipaloc)  aeems  to  hare 
been  the  largcst  and  most  powerful  of  the  tribes  of  Cft- 
naan.  (The  name  **Amorite8"  freąuently  denotea  the 
inhabitants  of  the  entire  country.)  This  tribe  occupied 
portions  of  territor^'  on  both  sides  of  the  Jonlan,  but  ita 
strongest  hołd  was  in  "the  hill  country"  of  Judah,  aa  it 
was  afterwards  called. 

6.  The  GirgaaUe  (Josephus  Tepytrraioc)  cannot  be  for 
certain  identified.  (Origen  conjectured  that  the  Gir- 
gasites  might  be  the  Gergeames  of  Matt.  viii,  18.) 

6.  The  Hivite  (Josephus  Eiź/iioc?)  lived  partly  in  the 
neighborhood  of  Shechcm,  and  partly  at  the  foot  of  Her-> 
mon  and  Lcbanoiu 

7.  The  A  rlate  (Josephus  adds  for  once  a  locality — 
'Apotwaloc  ^k  [ł^yy*''!  'Apaiy  r»/v  iv  rtf  A^fiatUft^  Amt, 
i, 6,  2)  liv€d  in  the  Phoenician  city  of  Arei^  north  of 
Tripolis.  Under  the  emperors  of  Komę  it  borę  the  name 
of  Ctesarea  (Libani).  It  was  long  celebrated  in  the 
time  of  the  Crusades.  Its  ruina  are  still  extant  at  TcU 
Arka  (Burckhardt,  Sgria^  p.  162). 


HAM 


41 


HAM 


&  The  Smite  (Josephns  £civa7oc)  probably  dwelt  near 
hifl  brother,  the  Arkite,  on  the  moiintain  fortreas  of  £ii/- 
ydc,  mentioned  by  Stnbo  (xv,  755)  aiid  by  Jerome. 

9.  The  A  rradite  (Joeephus  'Apovdaioc)  u  mentioned 
by  Joeephas  as  occupyiug  an  island  which  was  very  cel* 
efanted  in  Fhcenician  histor}'.  (Strabo  describea  it  in 
xvi,  768.)  "  The  men  of  A  rratT  are  celebiated  by  Ezek. 
xxvii,  8, 1 1.     See  Arvad. 

10.  The  Zemarite  (Joeephus  '2afmpaioc)  inhabited 
the  town  of  Simgra  {'£iftvpa^  mentioned  by  Strabo), 
near  the  ńver  Ekatherua,  at  the  western  extremity  of 
the  mountains  of  Lebanon ;  exten8ive  ruina  of  this  city 
aie  found  at  the  present  day  bearing  the  name  of  Sum- 

11.  ITie  ffamaikite  (Joaephua  'Afiti^ioc),  "  The  en- 
teńng  in  of  Ihimath"*  iiidicatea  the  extreme  northem 
frootter  of  the  Holy  Land,  aa  "^  the  river  of  Egypt"  doee 
its  eoothemniost  limit  (1  Kinga  yiii,  65  aq.). 

lo  the  verae  foUowing  the  enumeration  of  these  names, 
the  ncred  wrriter  aaya,  **  Afterwarda  were  the  familiea  of 
the  Canaanites  apiead  abioad."  This  seems  to  indicate 
siil)eeqiient  conquests  madę  by  them  previoiia  to  their 
own  subjngation  by  the  Israetitea.  **  To  show  the  gieat 
goodneas  of  God  towards  Israel,*'  says  the  Jewiah  com- 
mentator  Mendelaeohu,  **  Moees  recorda  in  Gen.  x  the 
origiiud  narrow  limits  of  the  land  iKMsesaed  by  the  Ca- 
naanites, which  they  were  permittcd  to  exteiid  by  oon- 
ąittst  from  the  neighboring  nationa,  and  that  (aa  in  the 
case  of  ibe  Amorite  Sihou,  Numb.  xxi,  26)  up  to  the 
reiy  time  when  larael  was  ready  to  take  iiosaeasion  of 
the  whole.  To  prepare  his  readen  for  the  great  increaae 
of  the  Canaanitish  dominiona,  the  sacred  histoiian  (in 
this  early  chapter,  where  be  mentions  their  original 
boundaries)  takes  care  to  state  that  sub8equently  to 
their  primitive  occupation  of  the  land,  *  the  fiunilies  of 
the  Canaanites  apread  abroad,*  iintil  their  boundaries  be- 
caroe  soch  as  are  deacribed  in  Numbers  xxxiv.**  The 
Uamathitea  alone  of  thoee  ideutiiied  were  settled  in  ear- 
ly times  whoUy  beyond  the  land  of  Canaan.  Perhaps 
there  was  a  primeyal  exten8ion  of  the  Canaanitish  tribes 
after  their  first  establishment  in  the  land  callcd  after 
their  anoeator.  One  of  their  most  important  exten»ions 
wu  to  the  north-eaat,  where  was  a  great  branch  of  the 
Hittite  nation  in  the  val]ey  of  the  Orontes,  oonstantly 
mentioned  in  the  wara  of  the  Pharaohs,  and  in  thoee  of 
the  kings  of  Aasyria.  Two  paasages  which  haye  occa- 
sioned  much  controversy  may  here  be  noticcd.  In  the 
aeooont  of  Alyraharo*8  entrance  into  Palestine  it  is  said, 
'*And  the  Canaanite  [was  J  then  in  the  land'*  (Gen.  xii, 
6);  and  as  to  a  somewhat  later  time,  that  of  the  aepara- 
tion  of  Abraham  and  Lot,  we  read  that  "the  Canaanite 
and  the  Perizaute  dwelt  then  in  the  land*'  (xiii,  7).  Thcsc 
paasages  have  been  auppoeed  eiŁher  to  be  late  glosses, 
or  to  indicate  that  the  Pentateuch  was  written  at  a  late 
period.  A  coroi^arison  of  all  the  paasages  referring  to 
the  primitive  history  of  Palestine  and  Iduma^a  shows 
that  there  was  an  earlier  population  expeUed  by  the 
Hanńtic  and  Abrahamite  settlers.  This  population  was 
important  in  the  time  of  the  war  of  Chedorlaomer ;  but 
at  the  Exoda8,  morę  than  four  hundred  years  after- 
warda,  there  was  but  a  remnant  of  it  It  is  most  nat- 
iml,therefoTe,  to  infer  that  the  twb  pass^ges  under  con- 
ńderation  roean  that  the  Canaanitish  aettlers  were  al- 
nady  in  the  land,  not  that  they  were  still  there. 

C  Gmeral  Characłeruiic8,—Such  were  Ham  and  his 
fonily,  notwithatanding  the  stigma  which  adhered  to 
that  section  of  thero  which  came  into  the  neareet  rela- 
tion  to  the  Israelitea  afterwards;  they  were  the  most  en- 
eigetic  uf  the  deaoendants  of  Noah  in  the  early  ages  of 
the  po8tdiluvian  world— at  kast  we  have  a  fulier  de- 
Bcription  of  their  enterpriae  than  of  their  brethren'8  m 
displayed  in  the  primitire  agea,  The  derelopment  of 
empire  among  the  Euphratean  Cushites  was  a  step 
much  in  advanoe  of  the  rest  of  mankind  in  political  or- 
ganization ;  nor  waa  the  grandaon  of  Ham  leas  conapicu- 
oos  as  a  amcueror,  The  only  ooherent  interpretaUon 
of  the  important  paaaage  which  is  contained  in  Gen.  x, 


10-12, 18  that  whićh  is  adopted  in  the  maigin  of  the  K 
V.  After  Nimrod  had  laid  the  foimdation  of  his  empire 
("the  heginmng  of  his  kingdom,"  IPlS^^-ą  n'^CJK^,  the 
territory  of  which  it  was  at  first  composed — comp.  Hos. 
ix,  10, "  as  the  first  ripe  in  the  fig-tree  rtPi^^ttJKlja  at 
her  first  time,"  that  is,  w  hen  the  tree  first  begins  to  bear 
— Gesen.)  in  his  native  Shinar,  not  satisfied  with  the  . 
splendid  acąuisitions.  which  he  took  at  first,  no  doubt, 
from  his  own  kinsmen,  he  inyaded  the  north-eastem 
countriea,  where  the  cłuldren  of  Shem  were  for  the  first 
time  disturbed  in  their  patriarchal  simplicity :  "  Out  of 
that  land  [even  Shinar,  Nimrod]  went  forth  to  Asshnr 
[or  Assyria],  and  bnilded  Nineveh,  and  the  city  Reho- 
both,  and  Calah,  and  Kesen,  between  Nineveh  and  Car 
lah;  the  same  is  a  great  city,"  L  e.  the  combination  of 
the  forementioned  four  formed,  with  their  interjacent 
spaces,  the  "great  city.*'  (The  objection  to  this  ren- 
dering is  based  by  RosenmuUer  liśckoL  ad  loc),  after 
other  commentators,  on  the  absence  of  the  H  "local"  ap- 
pended  to  'nsi^SK  [which  they  say  ought  to  be  rTjV,5*X 
to  produce  the  meaniug  to  Assyria],  The  t\ " local"  is, 
however,  fer  from  iudispensable  for  the  sense  we  re- 
ąuire,  which  has  been  advocated  by  authorities  of  great 
value  well  yersed  in  Ilebrew  construction ;  Knobel  [who 
himself  hoids  our  view]  mentions  Onkelo^,  Targ.  Jonath., 
Bochart,  Oericus,  De  Wette,  Tuch,  Baumgarten,  De^ 
litach,  as  supporting  iL  He  might  have  added  Joae^ 
phus,  who  makes  Nimrod  the  bullder  of  Babylon  [Ant. 
i,  4  ],  and  Kalisch,  and  KeiL  To  make  the  passage  Gen. 
X,  10-12  deecriptive  of  the  Sheroitic  Asshur,  is  to  do  vio- 
lenoe  to  the  passage  itself  and  its  context.  Asshur, 
morever,  is  mentioned  in  his  proper  place  in  ver.  22, 
without,  however,  the  least  indication  of  an  intention 
of  describing  him  as  the  founder  of  a  riyal  empire  to 
that  of  Nimrod.  Gesenius  admits  the  probability  of  our 
view,  without  any  objection  of  grammatical  structure. 
[  See,  for  inatances  of  the  accua.  noun  (without  the  8uffix 
of  "local"  h)  after  yerba  of  motion,  Numb.  xxxiv,  4; 
Gen.  xxxiii,  18 ;  2  Chroń,  xx,  36.  Compare  Geaenins, 
Gram,  p.  130, 172,  and  Nordheimer's  Gram,  sec  841  ].) 
This  is  the  opinion  of  Knobel,  answering  to  the  theory 
which  has  connected  the  ruins  of  Khorsabad,  Koyunjik, 
Nironid,  and  Keremlis  together  as  the  rcmains  of  a  vast 
quadrilateral  city,  popularly  called  Nineveh.  (For  a  dif- 
ferent  view  of  the  whole  subject  the  reader  is  referred 
to  Mr.  I{awlin8on'8  receut  voIume  on  The  Five  Great 
Afonarehies,  i,  81 1-315.)  But  the  genius  which  moidd- 
cd  imperial  power  at  first,  did  not  avail  to  retain  it  long ; 
the  sceptre,  before  many  ages,  passed  to  the  race  of 
Shem  (for  the  Skemitic  character  of  the  Arabian  tribes 
who  crushed  the  primitive  Cushitc  power  of  Babylon, 
see  Rawlinson,  Great  Empires^  i,  222, 228.  The  Arabian 
Hamitea  of  Yemen  seem  also  to  havc  merged,  probably 
by  conque8t,  into  a  Joktanite  population  of  Shemitic  dc- 
scent  [see  for  these  Gen.  x,  25-29,  and  Assemani,  Btbl, 
Orient.  III,  ii,  653,  544]),  except  in  Africa,  where  Miz- 
raim's  dcscendants  had  a  longcr  tenure  of  the  Egyptian 
monarchy.  It  b  well  to  bear  in  mind  (and  the  morę  so, 
inasrouch  as  a  diiferent  theor}'  has  here  greatly  obscured 
plain  historie  truth)  that  in  the  primeval  Cushite  em- 
pire of  Babylon  considcrable  progress  was  madę  in  the 
arta  of  civilized  society  (an  early  allusion  to  which  ia 
madę  in  Josh.  ^ói,  21 ;  and  a  later  in  Dan.  i,  4 :  see  Kaw- 
linson,  First  Monarchy^  chap.  v). 

In  the  genealogical  record  of  the  race  of  Ham  (Gen. 
x)  reference  is  madę  to  the  "fongues"^  (or  dialects) 
which  they  spoke  (ver.  20).  Comparative  philology, 
which  is  80  rich  in  illustrations  of  the  unity  of  the  Indo- 
Germanic  langnages,  has  done  next  to  nothing  to  eluci- 
date  the  linguistic  relations  of  the  families  of  Ham. 
Philologers  are  not  agreed  as  to  a  Hamitic  class  of  hm- 
guages,  Recently  Bunsen  has  applied  the  term  "  Ham- 
itism,"  or,  as  he  writes  it,  Chamitism,  to  the  Egyptian 
language,  or,  rather,  family.  He  places  it  at  the  head 
of  the  "  Shemitic  stock,"  to  which  he  considers  it  as  but 


HAJIC 


42 


MAM: 


pirtiaOy  belonging,  and  thus  desaribes  it :  "  Chamitisni, 
or  ante-hifftońcal  Shemitiam :  Łhe  Chaoiitic  deposit  iu 
Egypt;  it8  daughter,  the  Demotic  Egyptian;  and  iU 
end  Łhe  Coptic"  {OuHwes,  i,  183).  Sir  H.  Kawlinaon  has 
applied  the  term  Ctiahite  to  the  pńmitiye  language  of 
Babylonia,  and  the  same  term  has  bcen  lued  fur  the  an- 
cient  language  of  the  Bouthem  coast  of  Arabia.  This 
terminology  depends  in  eycry  insunoe  upon  the  race  of 
the  nationspeaking  the  language,  and  not  upon  any 
theoiy  of  a  Uamitic  class.  There  is  eridence  which,  at 
the  fłn»t  \'iew,  lyould  incline  us  to  oonsider  that  the  term 
Shemitic,  m  applied  to  the  Syro-Arabic  daas,  should  be 
changed  to  Ilamittc;  bat,  on  a  morę  careful  examina- 
tion^  it  becomea  evident  that  any  abaolute  claasilieatiou 
of  languages  into  groupa  oorreaponding  to  the  three 
great  Noachian  families  ia  not  tenable.  The  Bibhcal 
evidence  aeems,  at  fint  sight,  in  faror  of  Hebrew  being 
claaaed  as  a  Hamitic  rather  than  a  Shemitic  form  of 
speech.  It  is  called  in  the  Bibie  **  the  language  of  Ca- 
naan,"  "i^SS  r&b  (fsa.  xix,  18),  although  those  speak- 
ing  it  are  elscwhere  said  to  speak  r^''*lJtn'',  Judaice  (2 
Kings  x\aii,  26,  28;  Isa.  xxx^n,  11, 18;  Neh.  xiii,  24). 
But  the  one  term,  as  Geseniua  remarlcs  (JJramm.  Introd.), 
indicates  the  country  where  the  language  was  spoken ; 
the  other  as  evidently  indicates  a  people  by  whom  it 
was  spoken  t  thus  the  ąuestion  of  its  being  a  Hamitic 
or  a  Shemitic  language  is  not  touched ;  for  the  circum- 
Stańce  that  it  was  the  language  of  Canaaii  is  agreeable 
with  its  being  either  indigenous  (and  therefore  either 
Canaanite  or  Rephaite),  or  adopted  (and  therefore  per- 
haps  Shemitic).  The  names  of  Canaanitish  persons  and 
places,  as  Gesenius  has  observed  {L  r.),  conclusirely 
show  that  the  Canaanites  spoke  what  we  cali  Hebrew. 
Elsewhere  we  might  find  evidence  of  the  use  of  a  so- 
called  Shemitic  language  by  nations  either  partly  or 
whoUy  of  Hamitic  ońgin.  This  erldence  would  favor 
the  theor}'  that  Hebrew  was  Hamitic;  but,  on  the  other 
hand,  we  should  be  unable  to  dissociate  Shemitic  lan- 
guages from  Shemitic  peoplcs.  The  EgĄi)tian  language 
wotdd  aiso  offer  great  difliculties,  unless  it  were  held  to 
be  but  partly  of  Hamitic  origin,  sińce  it  b  mainly  of  an 
eiitirely  difierent  class  from  the  Shemitic.  It  b  mainly 
Nigritian,  but  it  also  coutains  Shemitic  elementa.  It  is 
the  opinion  of  the  latcst  philologers  that  the  ground- 
work  Ul  Nigritian,  and  that  the  Shemitic  part  is  a  layer 
added  to  a  completc  Nigritian  language.  The  two  ele- 
ments  are  mLxed,  but  not  fused.  Some  Iranian  schol- 
ara hołd  that  the  two  elements  are  mixed,  and  that  the 
ancient  Egyptian  rcpresents  the  transition  from  Tura- 
nian  to  Shemitic  The  ouly  soluUou  of  the  difficulty 
aeems  to  be  that  what  we  cali  Shemitic  is  early  Noachi- 
an. (See  Rawlinson,  Fice.  Great  Afofiarchie$y  First  Mon. 
eh.  iv;  Lenormant,  Introducłion  a  Thistoire  dePAsieoc- 
cidenlćde,  1"  Appendice;  Meier,  Ileb,  WurzeL  w.  b.  8** 
Anhang;  Gesenius,  Skeich  o/ łhe  Ilebr,  TMttg,  (prefixed 
to  his  Grammar) ;  Bunsen,  Egypt's  Place-,  etc,  voL  i, 
Append.  1 ;  Wiscman,  I^ecłures  on  Science  and  lietealed 
Religion,  p.  445,  2d  ed. ;  Max  Muller,  Science  of  Lan- 
ffuage,  p.  2G9.)    See  Shemitic  Languages. 

Theories  morę  or  less  specious  have  been  formed  to 
ACCount  for  these  affinitics  to  the  Hebrew  from  so  many 
points  of  the  Hamitic  nations.  Nonę  of  these  theories 
riae  aboyc  the  degree  of  precarious  hypothesis,  nor  could 
it  be  expected  that  they  should  in  the  imperfection  of 
our  prcscnt  kuowledge.  It  is,  indeed,  satisfactory  t4> 
obserye  that  the  tendency  of  Unguistic  inąuiries  is  to 
cstablish  the  fact  avouched  in  the  PentAteuch  of  the 
origiłial  unity  of  human  speech.  The  most  conspicu- 
ous  achievement  of  comparative  philology  hitherto  has 
been  to  provc  the  afiinity  of  the  members  of  that  large 
class  of  laiigiu^i^  whieh  extend  from  the  Eastem  San- 
acrit  to  the  Western  Welsh ;  parallel  with  this  is  the 
compańson  among  themselyes  of  the  yarious  membeis  of 
the  Shemitic  class  of  languages,  which  has  deroonstra- 
ted  their  essential  identity ;  but  greater  still  will  be  the 
work  of  establishing^  on  certain  principles,  the  natural 


relationship  of  tonguea  oCdiJereni  claasea.  Among  thmef 
dirergences  miist  n^s  be  wider;  but  when  oocasioiiat 
affiniiiea  crop  out  they  will  be  proportionately  valuabla 
as  eyidenoes  of  a  morę  ancient  and  profound  agreement, 
It  aeems  to  us  that  the  facts,  which  haye  thus  far  trans* 
pired,  mdicatiye  of  afiinity  between  the  languages  of 
the  Hamitic  and  Shemitic  racea,  go  some  way  to  show 
the  probability  of  the  historical  aud  genealogical  record 
of  which  we  have  bcen  treatuig,  that  the  tribes  to  whom 
the  said  languages  were  yemacular  were  really  of  near 
kindred  and  oflŁen  assoctated  in  abode,  either  by  ooii- 
queBt  or  amicable  aettleroent,  with  one  another. 

An  inąuiry  into  the  history  of  the  Hamitic  nations 
presents  considerable  (Ufficultiea,  smce  it  caiuiot  be  de- 
termined  in  the  cases  of  the  most  importaiit  of  those 
commonly  held  to  be  Hamite  that  they  were  purely  of 
that  stock.  U  is  oertain  that  the  three  most  lUustrious 
Hamitic  nations— the  Cushites,  the  l^hcenicians,  and  the 
£g>'ptian8— were  greatly  mixed  with  foreign  peoples. 
In  JBabylonia  the  Hamitic  element  seems  to  have  been 
absorbed  by  the  Shemitic,  but  not  in  the  earliest  timea. 
There  are  some  common  characteristics,  howeyer,  which 
appear  to  oonnect  the  different  braiiches  of  the  Hamitic 
family,  and  to  distinguish  them  from  the  childreii  of 
Japheth  and  Shem.  Their  architecture  has  a  solid 
grandeur  that  we  look  for  in  vain  elsewhere.  Eg)!)!, 
Babykmia,  and  Southern  Arabia  alike  afford  proofs  of 
this,  and  the  few  lemaining  monuments  of  the  Phoeni- 
dans  are  of  the  same  class.  What  is  yery  impoitant  as 
indicating  the  purely  Hamitic  character  of  the  monu- 
ments to  which  we  refer  is  that  the  earliest  in  Egypt 
are  the  most  characteristic,  while  the  earlier  in  Babylo- 
nia  do  not  >ield  in  this  reapect  to  the  later.  The  na- 
tional  mind  seems  in  all  thesecases  to  have  marked  these 
materiał  foima.  The  early  history  of  each  of  the  chief 
Hamitic  nations  shows  great  power  of  organizing  an  ex- 
tensiye  kingdom,  of  acquiring  materiał  greatness,  and 
checking  the  inroads  of  iieighboring  nomadic  peoplea. 
The  Philistines  afford  a  remarkable  insunce  of  these 
quaUties.  In  eyery  case,  howeyer,  the  morę  eneigetic 
sons  of  Shem  or  Japheth  haye  at  last  fallen  upon  the 
rich  Hamitic  territories  and  despoiled  them.  Egypt,  fa- 
yored  by  a  position  fenoed  round  with  neariy  impaasable 
barriers— on  the  north  an  almost  hayenless  coast,  on  the 
east  and  wesŁ  sterile  deserts — held  its  freedom  far  longer 
than  the  rest ;  yet  eyen  in  the  days  of  Solomon  tbe 
throne  was  filled  by  foreigners,  who,  if  Hamites,  were 
Shemitic  enough  in  their  belief  to  leyolutiouize  the  re- 
ligion  of  the  country.  In  Babylonia  the  Mcdes  had 
aheady  captured  Nimn>d's  city  roore  than  2000  years 
before  the  Christian  era.  The  Hamites  of  Southern 
Arabia  were  so  early  oyerthrown  by  the  Joktanitcs  that 
the  scanty  remains  of  their  history  are  alone  known  to 
us  through  tradition.  Yet  the  story  of  the  maguiticence 
of  the  ancient  kings  of  Yemen  is  so  perfectly  in  acoord- 
aiice  with  all  we  know  of  the  Hamites  that  it  is  almost 
enough  of  itself  to  proye  what  other  eyidence  has  ao 
well  established.  The  history  of  the  Canaanites  is  sim- 
ilar;  and  if  that  of  the  Phisnicians  be  an  exceptioii,  it 
must  be  recoUected  that  they  became  a  merchant  claaS) 
as  Ezekiers  famous  description  of  Tyre  shows  (chap. 
xxyii).  In  speakiiig  of  Hamitic  characteristics  we  do 
not  intend  it  to  be  infenred  that  they  were  necossarily 
altogether  of  Hamitic  origin,  aud  not  at  least  partly  bor- 
rowed. 

Among  other  points  of  generał  interest,  the  reader 
will  not  fali  to  obaerye  the  relations  in  which  the  differ- 
ent sections  of  the  Hamitic  race  stand  to  each  other;  e. 
g.  it  is  important  to  bear  in  mind  that  the  PhUi9tine$ 
were  not  Canaamłes^  as  is  oflen  aasumed  through  au 
oyersight  of  the  fact  that  tbe  former  were  descended 
from  the  second  and  the  latter  from  the  fourth  son  of 
Ham.  The  Toledoth  Beni  Noah  of  Genesis  is  a  preciouj 
document  in  many  respects,  as  has  often  been  acknowl- 
edged  (see  KawUnson,  Bampton  Lectures,  p.  68) ;  bat  in 
no  respect  does  it  bear  a  higher  Yalue  than  m  an  intro- 
ductiou,  proyided  by  the  sacred  wńter  himself,  to  th« 


HAM 


43 


HAMAKER 


wtwqwBt  hiatorr  ^f  tłie  Hebrew  luttion  in  its  rektions 
t*  tKe  Rst  of  oMUikiiid.  The  inteUigent  reader  of  Scrip- 
tuR  will  experieoce  much  help  io  hu  study  or  that  hio- 
toiT,  aod  indeed  of  piophecy  alao^  by  a  oonsUuit  reciu^ 
Rnce  to  the  paiticulan  of  this  authoritatire  ethnolog^ 
iealRcord. 

Wecoodude  with  an  extnct  fiom  Mr.  Rawliiuon^s 

Fire  Gnat  Mimardda,  whtch  deacrtbes,  in  a  favorable 

thoagh  haidlr  exaggenitefl  light,  some  of  the  obliga- 

tMNis  under  which  the  primitire  raoe  of  Ham  han  laid 

the  worid :  **  Kot  posaeflaed  of  many  natural  anK-antagea, 

the  Chaktean  people  yet  exhibited  a  fertility  of  inven- 

tiao,  a  geniua,  and  an  energy  which  place  them  high  in 

the  flcaie  of  nationa,  and  morę  eapecially  in  the  Ust  of 

thoM  deiceiided  from  the  llamitic  stock.    For  the  last 

9000  rears  the  worki  has  been  mainly  indebted  for  its 

•dTaneement  to  the  Shemitic  and  Indo-European  races ; 

kr/  U  tnu  otkerwise  m  tkejirtt  aget.    Egypt  and  Baby- 

loiu  Mizrann  and  Nimrod— both  descendants  of  Ham-- 

kd  the  way  and  acted  as  pioneers  of  mankind  iu  the 

Ytnotit  untrodden  fields  of  art,  literaturę,  and  science. 

Alpbabetic  writing,  astnmomy,  histoiy,  chronology,  ar^ 

chitecttire,  pb»tic  art,  scolptare,  navigation,  agriculture, 

textUe  industiT— seem,  aU  of  them,  to  have  had  their 

origin  in  one  or  other  of  these  two  coimtries.    The  be- 

ginnings  may  often  have  been  humUe  enongh.    We 

may  laogh  at  the  mde  pictore-writing,  the  uncouth 

bricfc  pynmidy  the  oottrse  fabric,  the  homely  and  ill- 

ihapen  mstraments,  as  they  present  themselves  to  our 

notiee  in  the  lemaina  of  these  ancient  nations,  but  they 

an  really  worthier  of  our  admiration  than  of  our  ridi- 

cule.    The  fint  inrentors  of  any  art  are  among  the 

gmteit  benefactofs  of  their  race  .  .  .  and  mankiml  at 

tiie  present  day  lies  under  infinite  obligatbns  to  the  ge- 

niiB  and  indu^iry  of  theae  early  agea**  (p.  75^  76)^-Kit- 

tOjŁY.;  Smith,  Łv. 

2.  "They  op  Ham"  [or  Chain]  (fin"l«;  Sept  *E« 
rwy  viwv  Xa/i ;  Vulg.  de  $tirpt  Cham)  are  mcntioned  in 
1  CbroiL  iv,  40— in  one  of  those  historical  fragments  for 
which  the  early  chapten  or  these  Chroniclcs  are  so  va]- 
mUe,  as  illustiating  the  private  enterprise  and  va]or  of 
oenain  sectimia  of  the  Hebrew  nation.  .  On  the  present 
occańm  a  coiiaiderable  portion  of  the  tribe  of  Simeon, 
oonaiiting  of  thirteen  piinces  and  their  dansmen,  in  the 
leisn  of  Hezekiah,  sought  to  extend  their  territories 
(«  hich  finom  the  begionuig  eeem  to  have  been  too  narrow 
fi«  their  numben)  by  migrating  '^to  the  entranoe  of  Ge- 
dor.erm  unio  the  east  ade  of  the  valley,  to  seek  pasture 
lor  their  flocks."  Finding  here  a  quiet,  and,  as  it  would 
Kem,  a  aecure  and  defenceleas  population  of  Hamites 
(the  meaning  of  1  Chroń,  iv,  40  receive&  illustration  from 
Jtttlp:.  xviii,  7, 28),  the  Simeouites  attacked  them  with  a 
Tipir  that  leminds  us  of  the  times  of  Joshua,  and  took 
pemuuient  powession  of  the  district,  which  was  well 
adapted  for  pastora!  purposea.  The  Gedor  here  men- 
tioued  cauDot  be  the  Gedor  (q.  v.)  of  Josh,  xv,  58. 
There  is  ^trong  ground,  however,  for  supposing  that  it 
may  oe  the  Gederah  (q.  v.)  of  A'er.  36;  or,  if  we  follow 
the  Sept.  rendeiing,  Tipapa^  and  read  n*15  for  *l*ia,  it 
«aakl  be  the  weli-knAwn  Geiar.  This  lasŁ  would,  of 
coone,  if  the  name  coukl  be  lelied  on,  fit  extremely 
vell;  in  ita  Ticinity  the  patriarchs  of  old  had  sojoumed 
and  fed  their  floeka  and  herda  (aee  Gen.  xx,  1, 14, 15 ; 
szTi,  1, 6,  li,  and  espedally  Ter.  17-.20>  Bertheau  (die 
B.  der  Ckromk)  on  this  paasage,  and  Ewald  {Gtack,  de» 
VDike»  Jsrad  [ed.  2],  i,  322),  aocept  the  reading  of  the 
Sepc  and  place  the  Simeonite  conąuesŁ  in  the  valley  of 
Getar  (in  WiMiams,  Hol^  CUy  [2d  ed.],  i,  463^168,  there 
ia  a  noce,  oontribated  1^  the  Rev.  J.  Rowlands,  on  t^ 
Setifkeru  Border  ofPakś&nt^  and  containing  an  acoount 
«f  hia  aappoaed  disotnreiy  of  the  andent  Gerar  [called 
Kkithd  tt-Ctrar^  the  mina  of  Gerar] ;  see  also  Tan  de 
Tfkk,  Memoir^  p.  814).  In  the  detennination  of  the 
akimate  qiae9laoQ  with  which  thia  artide  ia  ooncemed, 
tt  nattcn  bot  little  which  of  thcae  two  localitiea  we  ac- 
«pc  aa  tba  jeatdence  of  thoae  childien  of  Ham  whom 


the  Simeonites  dispoancascd.  Both  are  within  the  pre* 
ciiicts  of  the  land  of  the  Philistines :  the  latter,  perhape, 
may  be  ręgarded  as  on  the  border  of  the  distńct  which 
we  aaaigned  in  the  pieceding  article  to  the  Cuełuhim; 
in  either  case  *^they  or  Ham,"  of  whom  we  are  writing, 
m  1  Chroń,  iv,  40,  must  be  regarded  aa  descended  from 
Ham  throogh  hia  seoond  son  Mizraim. — ^Kitto,  s.  y. 

3.  Ham  (Heh.  id,  DH,  with  hS,  prób.  meaning  a  mul- 
(itude;  FUrst  [Ler,  s.  v.]  compares  the  Lat.  Turha  and 
Copia  as  names  of  places ;  the  Sept  and  Vulg.  translate 
[afia]  ahróicy  \cum\  eis),  in  Gen.  xiv,  5,  if  a  proper 
naroe  at  all,  was  probably  the  prindpal  town  of  a  people 
whose  name  occurs  but  ouce  in  the  O.  T.,  "  the  Zuzimi* 
(as  rendered  in  the  A-  V.).  If  these  were  "  the  Zamzum- 
mitns^  o(  Deut.  li,  20  (as  has  been  conjectured  by  Rashi, 
C!almet,  Patrick,  etc,  among  the  older  writers,  and  Ge- 
senius,  RosenmUller,  Ewald  [  VoIkes  Israei,  i,  308],  De- 
litzsch,  Knobel,  and  Keil  among  the  modems),  we  have 
Bome  dew  to  the  site;  for  it  appears  from  the  entire 
paasage  in  Deut.  that  the  Zamzuromim  were  the  odg- 
inał occupants  of  the  country  of  the  Ammonites.  Tuch 
and  others  hare  acoordingly  aupposed  that  our  Ham, 
where  the  Zuzim  were  defeated  by  Chedorlaomer  on  hia 
second  invasioii,  was  the  primitive  name  of  Rabbath 
Ammmmi,  afterwazds  Phiładelphia  (Jerome  and  Euaebiua, 
OnamoMt,  a.  v.  Amman),  the  capital  of  the  Ammonitiah 
territoiy.  It  is  atill  called  [the  ruins  of]  ^Ammdn,  ao- 
cording  to  Kobinaon  {Reśearchei,  iii,  168).  There  is 
some  ^ubt,  however,  whether  the  word  in  Gen.  xiv,  5 
be  anything  morę  than  a  pronouiu  The  Masoretic  read- 
ing of  the  eUoae,  indeed,  is  Dha  D*^mn*rK%  the  last 
word  of  which  is  pointed,  OJia  (A.  V. "  In  Ham"),  as  if 
there  were  three  battles.  and  one  of  them  had  been 
fought  at  a  place  so  called;  and  it  perhaps  makes  for 
this  reading  that,  according  to  Kennicott,  8even  Samar' 
itan  MSS.  read  Dna  (with  //eM),  which  can  produce  no 
other  meaning  than  ia  Hanif  or  Cham  with  the  aspirate. 
Yet  the  other  (that  is,  the  pronominal)  reading  must 
have  been  recognised  in  andent  Nebrew  MSS.  even  aa 
early  as  the  time  of  the  Sept.  translatora,  who  render 
the  phrase  "  together  with  them ;"  as  ir  there  were  but 
two  contiicta,  in  the  former  of  which  the  great  Eastem 
invader  ''amote  the  Kephaim  in  Ashteroth-Kamaim, 
and  the  Zuzim  [which  the  Sept.  makes  an  appellAtive — 
t^vri  itrxvpdt  ^ttrwtg  nations"  J  along  with  them,"!  as  their 
allies.  Jerome's  Quast.  Hebr.  Opera  (ed.  Bcned.,  Yen. 
17G7,  III,  ii,  827)  proves  that  the  Hebrew  MSS.  extant 
iu  his  day  vańed  in  their  readings  of  this  passage.  This 
reading  he  seems  to  have  preferred,  DhC,  for  in  his  own 
yeraion  [Yulgate]  he  rendera  the  word  like  the  Sept 
Onkdos,  howeyer,  regarded  the  reading  evideutly  as  a 
proper  name,  for  he  haa  tianslated  it  by  Kncną,  '*  in 
ffemia,^'  and  so  has  the  Pseudo-Jonathan^s  Targum; 
while  the  Jerusalem  has  "jina,  "  triVA  them."  Saaclias, 
again,  has  the  proper  name,  "m  IfamaJ"  Hillerus, 
whom  Kosenmuller  ąuotes,  identifles  this  Ham  with  the 
famous  Amroonitish  capital  RaJtbah  (2  Sam.  xi,  1 ;  1 
Chroń,  xx,  1) ;  "the  two  names,"  he  says,  "are  sjTion- 
ymous — Rabbah  meaning  populousj  as  in  Lament  i,  1, 
where  Jerusalem  is  D?"'^ra^,  *M«  city  [that  was]  fuU 
of  people,'  while  the  morę  andent  name  of  the  same 
city,  cn,  has  the  same  signification  as  the  coUective 
word  y^W,  that  ia,  a  multitude/^—Kltto,  s.  v.    See  GiL- 

BAD,  1. 

Hamaker,  Hec«rich  Arens,  a  Dutch  Ońentalist, 
was  bom  at  Amsterdam  Feb.  25,  1789 ;  became  profeas- 
or  of  Griental  languages  in  the  Academy  of  Franeker 
in  1815,  assistant  professor  in  1817,  and  in  1822  profess- 
or  ordinarius  of  the  same  in  the  Univer8ity  of  Lcyden, 
where  he  died  Gct  10, 1835.  He  was  a  mau  of  great 
erudition,  and  was  regarded  as  one  of  the  first  Oriental 
scholaiB  of  Holland.  His  works  are  not  free  from  marks 
of  negligeuoey  due  probably  to  hasty  composition  and 


HAMAN 


44 


HAMANN 


the  great  yariety  of  mibjects  treated.  Among  them 
may  be  named  Oratio  de  rtligione  Mukeanmedieaf  magno 
rirtutis  heUicm  apud  orientalis  mcitamento  (Leyd.  1817- 
18,  4tó)  i—Specimen  CaUdogi  Codicum  MSS,  Orienta- 
Uum  BUdiathectB  AcademicB  Lugduno^BaiavcB  (Leyden, 
1820,  4to;  with  yaluable  notes  fW>m  Oriental  MSS.— 4i 
new  ©d.  by  Dozy  [Leyd.  1848-52,  2  vola.  8vo]  contains 
Ubliographical  notes  left  in  MS.  by  Hamaker) : — Incerti 
Auctoris  Liber  de  EzpugnatUme  Afen^hidis  et  AUran- 
dricB,  etc.  (Leyden,  1825,  4to): — MisceUanea  Phamda 
(Leyden,  \9fi»y.—Commentatio  in  libro  de  VUa  et  Aforte 
Prophetarum,  etc.  (AmsL  1888,  4to)  i—Migcellanea  Sa- 
marUana^  a  posthumous  work  edited  by  Weyen.  He 
published  also  various  i>aperB  in  Annalen  of  the  univer- 
uties  of  Gottingen  (1816-17)  and  Leyden  (1828-24) ;  in 
the  Bibliotheca  Sova  of  Leyden,  Magazin  voor  Weten- 
schappen  of  Yan  der  Kampen,  and  in  the  Journal  Asia- 
łique  of  Paris.  Othera  hare  been  posthuniously  pub- 
lished in  the  Orientaliti  (Leyden),  vol.  i  and  iL— Pierer, 
8.  V. ;  Uoefer,  Nouv,  Biog,  Generale,  xxiii,  209 ;  Dc  Sacy, 
in  Jour,  des  Savanie,  1820, 1827, 1829, 1834.    (J.  W.  M.) 

Ha^man  (Heb.  Haman' ,  "|^n,  perh.  irom  the  Pen. 
komam,  magmficentj  or  the  Sanacr.  heman,  the  planet 
Mercurt/ ;  Sept  'Afuxv),  a  favorite  and  chief  minister  or 
vizier  of  the  king  of  Persia,  whose  history  is  involved  in 
that  of  Esther  and  Mordecai  (Esther  iii,  1  flq.),  B.C.  478. 
8ee  Ahasuerus.  HeiscalledanAgagite;  andasAgag 
was  a  kind  of  title  of  the  kings  of  the  Amalekites  [see 
Agao],  it  is  supposcd  that  Haman  was  deecended  from 
the  royal  family  of  that  nation  (see  Gesenius,  Thes.  Hd>, 
p.  20).  He  or  his  parents  probably  found  their  way  to 
Pensia  as  captires  or  hostages;  and  that  the  foreign  or- 
igin  of  Haman  was  no  bar  to  his  advancement  at  court 
is  a  circumstance  quite  in  union  with  the  most  ancicnt 
and  still  subsbting  usages  of  the  East  Joseph,  Daniel, 
and  Mordecai  affonl  other  example8  of  the  same  kind. 
After  the  failure  of  his  atterapt  to  cut  off  all  the  Jews 
Ul  the  Persian  empire,  hc  was  hanged  on  the  galłows 
which  he  had  erected  for  MordecaL  Most  probably  he 
is  the  same  Aman  who  is  mentioned  as  the  oppreasor  of 
Achiacharus  (Tobit  xiv,  10).  The  Targum  and  Jose- 
phus  (/in/.  xi,  6,  5)  interpret  the  description  of  him— 
the  Agagite— as  signifying  that  he  was  of  Amalekitish 
descent ;  but  he  is  called  a  Macedonian  by  the  .Sept,  in 
Esth.  ix,  24  (eomp.  iii,  1),  and  a  Persian  by  Sulpicius 
Severu9.  Pridcaux  (Coimearwm,  anno  458)  computes  the 
sum  which  he  offered  to  pay  into  the  royal  treasury  at 
morę  than  £2,000,000  sterling.  Modem  Jews  are  said 
to  be  in  the  habit  of  designating  any  Christian  enemy 
by  his  name  (Eisenmenger,  Eni,  Jud.  i,  721).  The  cir- 
cumstantial  details  of  the  height  which  he  attained,  and 
of  his  sudden  downfall,  affonl,  like  all  the  rest  of  the 
book  of  Esther,  a  most  fiuthful  picture  of  the  customs 
of  an  Oriental  court  and  goremment,  and  fumish  invalu- 
able  materials  for  a  comparison  between  the  regal  usages 
of  ancient  and  modem  times.  (See  Kitto*8  Daily  Bibie 
Illust,  ad  loc)— Kitto,  s.  v. ;  Smith,  s.  v.  See  Esther, 
Book  of. 

Hamann,  Joiiann  Georg,  an  eminent  German 
writer  and  poet,  was  bom  at  Kdnigsberg,  in  Pmssia,  on 
the  27th  of  August,  1780.  His  early  education  was  mis- 
cellaneous,  and  to  it  he  attributed  the  want  of  taste  and 
clegance  of  hb  style.  At  last,  when  about  sixteen  years 
old,  his  father  decided  on  sending  him  to  the  high- 
school.  He  there  acąuired  a  knowledge  of  Latin  and 
of  ancient  literaturę.  For  a  while  he  fclt  inclined  to 
study  theology,  but  an  impediment  in  hb  speech,  and 
want  of  memory  incident  upon  a  sickncss  he  had  while 
at  school,  madę  him  gire  it  up.  Law,  for  which  hb 
parents  destined  him,  was  distasteiiil  to  him,  and  hc  ap- 
plied  himself  diligently  to  the  study  of  antiquity,  the 
fine  arts,  and  modem  literaturę.  In  1751  hc  clo8e<l  his 
course  of  study  at  Ktinigsberg  with  a  philosophical  dis- 
sertation  entitlcd  De  eonmo  et  »ommi$,  and  tumed  his  at- 
tention  to  tcaching.  Afler  tcaching  for  about  cighteen 
months  in  Courland  he  retumcd  to  Riga,  whcre  hc  be- 


came  a  Mend  of  John  Cfaristopher,  son  of  a  lich  me^- 
chant  named  Berens,  at  whoee  house  he  met  all  the  ce- 
lebrities  of  the  day,  and  for  whoro,  Bome  years  after- 
waids,  he  madę  a  joumey  through  Hamburg,  Bremen, 
and  .^sterdam,  going  so  far  as  London  to  tzansact  busi- 
ness. Before  he  set  out  on  thb  joumey,  howeyer,  he 
loet  hu  mother,  which  event  deeply  afISacted  him.  While 
in  London  he  oonsulted  a  distinguiahed  physician,  hop- 
ing  to  haye  the  obstmction  in  hu  speech  remoyed ;  di»- 
appointed  in  that  hope,  he  spent  some  months  in  dissi- 
pation;  and  then,  deep  in  debt,  and  duheartened,  he 
retired  to  an  obscure  part  of  London,  procured  a  Bibie, 
and  applied  himself  diligently  to  its  study.  His  eyes 
were  opened,  and  he  beheld  hb  past  life  in  ita  trae  cd- 
ora,  of  which  he  giyes  .evidence  in  hb  Gedanken  Uber 
tneinen  LAemdauf  (Thoughts  on  my  Life).  He  then 
retumed  to  Riga,  wherc  he  resided  with  hb  friend  Be- 
rens until  family  drcumstanoes  led  to  an  estrangement 
between  them,  and  in  1759  he  retumed  to  his  parents* 
house.  There  he  wrote  hb  SókraiMcke  DenhHtrdtgkei' 
ten,  which  were  seyerely  criticised  at  their  first  appear- 
ance  by  the  majority  of  the  literati  of  the  day,  but  which 
gained  him  the  esteem  and  respect  of  such  men  as  Clau- 
dius,  Herder,  and  Moser,  to  which  we  must  afterwards 
add  Layater,  Jacobi,  and  Goethe.  Hb  writings  did  not 
suiBce  for  his  support,  and  he  had  to  take  other  employ- 
ment,  first  as  cop3dst,  afterwards  as  clerk  in  a  public  oflke. 
On  the  slender  inoome  derived  from  these  two  sources 
Hamann  married  m  1768 ;  but^  unfortunately,  thb  mar- 
riage  cost  him  many  of  hb  friends,  and  shortly  afterwards 
he  lost  hb  situation.  In  1754  he  took  a  joumey  to  Switx- 
erland  in  the  hope  of  meettng  hu  friend  Moser,  who  waa 
to  obtain  him  employment;  but,  not  meeting  with  him, 
we  next  find  him  again  filling  a  smail  subaltcm  posi- 
tion.  In  1767,  hb  father  haying  died,  he  inherited  some 
property ;  but  havuig  at  the  same  time  to  assume  the 
charge  of  an  infirm  brother,  hb  woildly  position  was  not 
much  improyed  thereby,  Shortly  afterwanls,  however, 
he  obtained  another  situation,  and  in  1777  was  appoint- 
ed  to  a  good  position  in  the  custom-house.  From  that 
period  datę  hb  finest  epistolary  and  miscellaneous  writ- 
ings, among  which  M*e  Hnd  hb  admirable  Golgotha  and 
Sdiebliminir—^^  Seat  thee  at  my  right,"  Hb  prospects 
now  brightened;  one  of  hb  admircrs,  Francb  Buchholz, 
offered  him  a  handsomc  fortunę,  with  ^1000  towaids  the 
education  of  each  of  hb  four  children,  on  the  condition 
of  hb  adopting  him.  The  well-known  princess  Galit- 
zin  haying  in  1784  become  acąuainted  M-ith  his  writ- 
ings, was  brought  ovcr  by  them  to  a  positiye  Christian 
belief.  In  1787  he  came  to  Munster  with  his  adopted 
son  Buchholz,  and  became  acąuainted  with  the  princess ; 
from  thence  hc  went  to  Pcmpelfort  to  the  phUosopher 
Jacobi,  with  whom  he  remaincd  a  short  tirae.  Hc  in- 
tended  to  retum  there  once  morę,  but  was  preyented  by 
hb  death,  which  occurrcd  on  the  20th  of  June,  1788.  He 
was,  by  order  of  the  princess  (lalitzin,  interred  in  hcr 
garden,  from  whencc,  in  1851,  hb  remains  wjcre  trans- 
ferred  to  the  cathedral  at  MUnster. 

Among  the  great  men  of  his  country,  Hamann  b  wor- 
thy  of  a  place  alongsidc  of  Copemicus,  Kant,  Herder, 
and  kindrcd  intellects.  Although  he  cannot  be  called 
a  classical  German  writer— hb  weird,  irreguiar  style  for- 
bids  it — yct  can  he  be  clai^scd  among  the  patriarchs  of 
the  modern  school,  the  uniting  link  between  the  old  and 
the  new  (Terman  literatuies.  **  Hamann  b  one  of  those 
men  of  whom  it  b  diflicult  to  giye  an  estimate  correct 
and  satbfactory  in  all  respects.  Our  estimation  of  his 
character  cannot  be  blended  with  our  generał  opinion 
of  the  age,  as  may  be  done  with  many  other  men,  be- 
cause  hc  stood  mgged  and  alone,  like  a  rock}'  island  in 
the  midst  of  the  waves  of  the  surrounding  ocean.  As 
we  cannot  whoUy  praise  or  blame  that  age,  we  shall  not 
admire,  much  less  censure,  all  in  Hamann"  (Hagenbach, 
German  Rationalitmj  tr.  by  Gage,  p.<268).  Herder  aa>*8 : 
'  *'  The  kemel  of  Hamann'8  writings  contains  many  gerros 
of  great  tmths.  as  well  as  new  obseryations,  and  an  cyi- 
I  dence  of  remarkable  cmditaon ;  the  shell  thcreof  b  a 


HAMATH 


45 


HA&IATH 


kborioody  woren  web  of  pitliy  expre»ioiis,  of  hints, 
and  dowen  of  rhetwic"*  "  His  understandiiig/*  tays  F. 
H.  Jaoobi,  ^  wu  penetnting  like  lightning,  and  his  soul 
was  of  mon  than  natund  grcatueaa."  Most  of  his  writ- 
ingstre  collected  in  Koth's  cdition  of  his  works  (Berlin, 
11^1-43,  8  Yoh.).  See  A.  W.  Mttller^s  worlc,  entitled 
J.  (r.  Haraann,  CJkrutUche  Jieketmłniate  und  Ztugniate 
(Mmwter,  ld2G).  — Herzog,  Real-Encykhpadie,  v,  4«6; 
Bioffnijikie  p.  JoL  Geo.  Jłanunm,  by  Charles  Car>-acchi 
(Milnster,  18a5);  Hegel,  Werke,  xvii,  88;  Yilmar,  Ge- 
ickickte  der  datticken  LUeraiur ;  Gildemeister,  JIatnatm'ś 
Ifłkn  wd  Sdtriften  (1864-6, 4  vols.);  Saintes,  Nutory 
ofMałioiutlitm,  eh.  riii. 

Ha'math  (Heb.  Chamałh',  t^iin,  foriress ;  Sept. 
TftaO,  kifio^,  and  'H/ia3),  a  large  and  important  city, 
capital  of  one  of  the  smaller  kingdoms  of  S^nria,  of  the 
laine  name,  on  the  OronCcs,  at  the  northem  boundar}'  of 
the  Holy  Land.  Thus  it  is  sald  (Numlx  xiii,  21)  that  the 
tpies  "  went  up  and  aearched  the  land,  from  the  wilder- 
1M98  of  Zin  finto  Rehob,  as  men  come  to  Hamath."  Ge- 
ffniitt  b  probably  right  in  deriWng  the  woid  from  the 
AnUc  root  Ckamoy  "  to  defend ;"  with  thls  agrecs  the 
nuMlem  name  of  the  city  łlamah,  The  city  was  at  the 
f(>ot  of  Hermon  (Josh.  xiii,  5 ;  Judg.  iii,  8),  towards  Da- 
nuucus  (Zech.  ix,  2;  Jer.  xlix,  20;  £zek.  xlvii,  16). 
The  kingdom  of  Hamath,  or,  at  least,  the  southem  or 
crntnl  parts  of  it,  appear  to  have  nearly  correspoudcd 
with  what  was  afterwanls  denominate<l  Cale^Syria  (q. 
T.).  It  is  morę  fUly  called  Jłamath  the  Great  in  .\mo8 
ri  %  or  H.iMATii-ZoBAii  in  2  Cliron.  riii,  3.  The  coun- 
tiT  or  dtstrict  around  is  called  "  the  land  of  Hamath"  (2 
Eings  xxiii,  33 ;  xxv,  21). 

Hamath  is  one  of  the  oldcst  cities  in  the  world.  We 
Rad  in  Gen.  x,  18  that  the  youngesŁ  or  last  son  of  Ca- 
naan  was  the  ^*  Hamathite**  (q.  v.)— apparently  so  called 
because  he  and  his  family  founded  and  colonized  Ha- 
math. It  was  a  place  of  notę,  and  the  capital  of  a  prin- 
cipality,  wheu  the  laraelites  conquered  Palestine ;  and 
iu  name  is  mentioned  in  almost  every  passage  in  which 
the  Dotthcm  bocder  of  Canaan  is  deAned  (Numb.  xiii, 
22;  xxxir,  8;  1  Kinga  viii,  65;  2  Kings  xiv,  25,  etc). 
Toi  was  kiniic  of  Hamath  at  the  time  when  David  con- 
ctuered  the  Syrians  of  Zobah,  and  it  appears  that  he 
had  reaaon  to  rejoice  in  the  humiliation  of  a  dangerous 
neighbor,  as  he  sent  his  own  son  Joram  to  congratidate 
the  \-ictofr  (2  Sam.  \'iii,  9, 10),  and  (api)arently)  to  put 
Hamath  under  his  protection.  Hamath  was  conquered 
bv  Solomon  (2  Chroń,  viii,  8),  and  ite  whole  territory 
a|ipeai8  to  have  remained  subject  to  the  Israelites  dur- 
in«  his  piospeious  reign  (ver.  4-6).  The  "  store-cities" 
which  Solomon  **  built  in  Hamath"  (2  Chroń,  viii,  4) 
wen  pcrhape  for  staplea  of  trade,  the  importance  of  the 
Onmies  ralley  as  a  line  of  traific  always  being  great. 
On  the  death  of  Stdomon  and  the  separation  of  the  two 
Idngduma,  Hamath  seema  to  have  regained  its  indepen- 
deooe.  In  }be  Asayrian  inscriptiona  of  the  time  of  Ahab 
(BwC.  900)  it  appears  as  a  separate  power,  in  alliance 
with  the  Syrians  of  Damascus,  the  Hittites,  and  the 
PbaeniciaiiaL  AboaŁ  three  ąuarters  of  a  century  later 
Jtfoboam  the  aecond  **recoverod  Hamath"  (2  Kings 
xir,2K) ;  he  aeems  to  have  dismantled  the  place,  whence 
(ile  prophet  Amoo,  who  wrrote  in  his  reign  (Amos  i,  1), 
eeapłes  **  Hamath  the  Great"  with  Gath,  as  an  instanoe 
of  deaoUtion  (ib.  vi,  2).  At  thts  period  the  kingdom  of 
Hamath  inchided  the  yalley  of  the  Orontes,  from  the 
somoe  c€  that  rirer  to  near  Antioch  (2  Kings  xxiii,  33 ; 
xxT,  21).  It  bordered  Damasctis  on  the  south,  Zobah 
oa  the  east  and  north,  and  Phoenicia  on  the  west  (1 
Chran.  XTiii,  3;  Esek.  xlvii,  17 ;  xlviii,  1 ;  Zech.  ix,  2). 
In  the  time  of  Uezekiah,  the  town,  along  with  its  teni- 
tffT,  waa  comfiiered  by  the  Aasyrians  (2  Kings  xvii,  24 ; 
x\m,  34 ;  nlsi,  13 ;  laa.  Xf  9 ;  xi.  U),  and  afterwards  by 
the  Chakfaeana  (Jer.  xxxix,  2,  5).  It  is  mentioned  on 
the  cuneiliMin  inscriptiona  (q.  v.).  It  most  have  been 
Łhm  a  lai|ce  and  infloential  kingdom,  for  Amos  speaks 
'  of ''Hamath  the  Great"  (vi,  2) ;  and  when 


Rabshakeh,  the  Assyrian  generał,  endeavored  to  terrify 
king  Hezekiah  into  unconditional  surrender,  he  said, 
"  Have  the  gods  of  the  nations  delivered  them  which 
my-  fathers  have  destroyed,  as  Gozan,  and  llaran,  and 
Kezeph  ?  Where  is  the  king  of  Hamath,  and  the  king 
of  Arphad,  and  the  king  of  the  city  of  Sephan-aim,  He- 
na,  and  Ivah?"  (Isa.  xxx\'ii,  12-14;  2  Kings  xviii,  84 
8q.).  See  Ashima.  The  finequent  use  of  the  phraae, 
"  the  entering  in  of  Hamath,"  also  sliows  that  this  king- 
dom was  the  most  important  m  Northem  Syria  (Judg. 
iii,  8).  Hamath  remained  under  the  Assyrian  rule  till 
the  time  of  Alexander  the  Great,  when  it  fell  into  the 
hands  of  the  Greeks.  The  Greeks  introduced  their  no- 
ble language  as  well  as  their  govemment  into  8}iia, 
and  they  even  gave  Greek  luunes  to  some  of  the  old 
cities ;  among  these  was  Hamath,  which  was  called  Ajn- 
phcmia  (E7ft<pdvtia)f  in  honor  of  Antiochus  Epiphanes 
(Cyril,  CommisKl,  ad  A  mott), 

This  change  of  luune  gave  rise  to  considerable  doubts 
and  diflIicuUies  among  geographers  regarduig  the  iden- 
tity  of  Hamath.  Jerome  afiirms  that  thers  were  two 
cities  of  that  YMme^Great  Namaihj  identical  with  An- 
tioch, and  another  Hamath  called  Epiphania  {Comment, 
ad  A  mas,  vi),  The  Tai^uns  in  Numb.  xiii,  22  render 
Hamath  AntuHa  (ReUnd,  Ptdatt,  p.  120).  Eusebius 
caUs  it  "a  city  of  Damascus,"  and  affirms  that  it  is  not 
the  same  as  Epiphania;  but  Jerome  states,  aftcr  a  care- 
ful  inve8tigation,  '^reperi  iEmath  urbem  Ccelcs  Syris 
appellari,  qu»  nunc  GrsBCO  sermone  Epiphania  dicitur" 
(Onomiuł.  a,  v.  ^math  and  Emath).  Theodoret  says 
that  Great  Hamath  was  Emesa,  and  the  other  Hamath 
Epiphania  {Comntent,  ad  Jerem,  iv).  Josephus  is  morę 
aocurate  when  he  tells  us  that  Hamath  *'  was  still  called 
in  his  day  by  the  inhabitanta  'A/iad*!/,  although  the 
Macedonians  called  it  Epiphania"  {A  nt.  i,  6,  2).  lliere 
is  reason  to  believe  that  the  ancient  name  Hamath  was 
always  retained  and  uscd  by  the  Aramaio^peaking  pop- 
ulation ;  and,  therefore,  when  (ireek  power  declined,  and 
the  Greek  language  was  forgotten,  the  ancient  name  in 
its  Arabie  form  HamaJi  became  univer8al  (so  JTcn  in 
Ezek.  xlvii,  16,  first  occurrence).  There  is  no  ground 
whatever  for  Reland's  theory  {Palast,  p.  121)  that  the 
Hamath  spoken  of  in  connection  with  the  nortłieni  bor- 
der  of  Palestine  was  not  Epiphania,  but  some  other  city 
much  further  south.  The  identification  of  Kiblah  and 
Zedad  places  the  tme  site  of  Hamath  beyond  the  possi- 
bility  of  doubt  (Porter,  Damascus,  ii,  865,  854). 

Epiphania  remaine<l  a  ilourishing  city  during  the 
Roman  rule  in  Syria  (Ptolemy,  v,  15;  Pliiiy,  Hisł.  Nał, 
V,  19).  It  early  became,  and  still  continues,  the  seat  of 
a  bishop  of  the  Eastero  Church  (CaroU  a  san.  Paulo, 
Geogr.  Sac,  p.  288).  It  was  taken  by  the  Mohamme- 
dans  soon  after  Damascus.  On  the  death  of  the  great 
Saladin,  Hamath  was  ruled  for  a  long  period  by  his  de- 
scendants,  the  Eiyubites.  Abulfe<ta,  the  celebrated  Arab 
historian  and  geographer  of  the  14th  centurt^was  a  mcm- 
ber  of  this  family  and  ruler  of  Hamah  (Bohadin,  Vita 
Saladim;  Schulten^s  Index  Geographicus,  s.  v.  Hamata). 
He  correctly  states  {Tah,  Syria,  p.  108)  that  this  city  is 
mentioned  in  the  books  of  the  Israelites.  He  adds :  "  It 
is  reckoned  one  of  the  most  pleasant  towns  of  SjTia. 
The  Orontes  flows  round  the  great  er  part  of  the  city  on 
the  east  and  north.  It  boasts  a  lofty  and  well-built  cit- 
adeL  Within  the  town  are  many  dams  and  water-ma- 
chines,  by  means  of  which  the  water  is  led  off  by  canals 
to  irrigate  the  gardens  and  supply  private  houses.  It 
is  remarked  of  this  city  and  of  Śchiazar  that  they 
abound  morę  in  water-machines  than  any  other  cities 
in  Syria." 

This  description  still,  in  a  great  degree,  applies.  Ha- 
math is  a  picture8que  town,  of  considerable  circumfer- 
ence,  and  with  wide  and  convenient  streets.  In  Burck- 
haidt*s  time  the  attached  district  contained  120  inhab- 
ited  villages,  and  70  or  80  that  lay  waste.  It  is  now  a 
town  of  80,000  inhabitants,  of  whom  about  2500  are 
Greek  Christians,  a  few  Syrians,  some  Jewsy  and  the 


HAMATH 


46 


HAMATH 


Map  of  Łhe  Yiclnłty  of  Hamath. 

rest  Moslems.  It  is  beautifully  situated  in  the  nanow 
and  rich  valley  of  the  Orontes,  thirty-two  miles  iiorth 
of  Emesa,  and  Łhirty-8ix  eouth  of  the  niioB  of  A^samea 
(Atitottini  liinerarium,  edit.  Weraeling,  p.  188).  Four 
bridges  span  the  rapid  ńver,  and  a  number  of  huge 
wheeL}  tumed  by  the  current,  like  those  at  Yerona,  raise 
the  water  into  rude  aquedacte,  which  convey  it  to  the 
houses  and  mosąues.  There  arc  no  remains  of  antiquity 
now  Yiiiible.  The  mound  on  which  the  castle  stood  is 
in  the  centrę  of  the  city,  but  every  tracę  of  the  castle 
itaelf  has  dlsappeared.  The  houses  are  built  of  sun-dried 
bricks  and  tiinber.  Though  plain  and  poor  ext3nially, 
some  of  them  have  splendid  inteńors.  They  are  built 
on  the  riaing  banks  of  the  Orontes,  and  on  both  sides  of 
it,  the  bottom  level  being  planted  with  fruit-trees,  which 
flouńsh  in  the  utmost  luxuriance.  The  western  part  of 
the  district  forms  the  grauary  of  Northern  Syria,  though 
the  han-est  nerer  jńelds  moro  than  a  tcńfold  retuni, 
chiefly  on  account  of  the  immcnse  numbeiB  of  mice, 
which  sometiracs  completely  destroy  the  crops.  The 
inhabitants  carry  on  a  conaiderable  trade  in  silks  and 
woollen  and  cotton  stufls  with  the  Bedawin.  A  num- 
ber of  noble  but  decayed  Moslem  families  reside  in  Ha- 
mah,  attracted  thither  by  its  beauty,  salubrity,  and 


cheapness  (Pocockcy  Trtgoeb,  ii,  pL  i,  p.  14d  8q.;  BkutiE* 
hardt,  Tranels  w  Stfria^  p.  146  8q. ;  handbook  for  Stfria 
and PaUsłuie,UfG20]  Richter,  WaUfahrttnjp,2Sl;  compL 
Ro8enmUller'8  Bib.  Geogr.  ii,  24a-246;  BihUoth,  Sacra, 
1848,  p.  680  8q. ;  Kobiiuon'8  Res,  new  ed.  iii,  551,  Ó6S), 

**  The  E!rrRANCB  of  Hamatm,"  or  **eiatruig  uUo  Zfo- 
fnath**  (n^n  Mia ;  Sept.  ti9irof>tvofUviav  tic  Ai/iod, 
Vulg.  introitittn  Emath),  is  a  phrase  often  used  in  the 
O.  T.  as  a  geographical  iiame.  It  is  of  considerabie  im- 
portance  to  identify  it,  as  it  is  one  of  the  chief  land* 
marks  on  the  northem  border  of  the  land  of  IsneL 
There  can  be  no  doubt  that  the  sacred  writem  apply  the 
phrase  to  some  well-known  "pass"  or  "opening"  into 
the  kingdom  of  Hamath  (Numb.  xxxiv,  8;  Josh.  xiii, 
5).  The  kingdom  of  Hamath  embraced  the  g^reat  plain 
lying  along  both  banks  of  the  Orontes,  from  the  foun- 
tain  near  Kiblah  on  the  south  to  Apamea  on  the  north, 
and  from  Lebanon  on  the  west  to  the  desert  on  the  east. 
To  this  plain  there  are  two  remarkable  "entrances** — 
one  from  the  south,  through  the  valley  of  Coele-8yria, 
between  the  paralld  ranges  of  Lebanon  and  Anti-Leba- 
non ;  the  other  from  the  west,  between  the  northem  end 
of  Lebanon  and  the  Nusairlyeh  Mountains.  The  former 
is  the  natural  "entranoe"  from  Central  Palestine,  the 
latter  from  the  sea-coast.  The  former  is  on  the  extrGme 
south  of  the  kingdom  of  Hamath,  the  latter  on  its  west^ 
eni  border. 

Until  within  the  last  few  yean  sacred  geogiaphers 
have  almost  tmirersally  maintained  that  the  southem 
opening  is  the  "  entranoe  of  Hamath/'  Reland  supposed 
that  the  entrance  described  in  Numb.  xxxiv,  8, 10,  did 
not  extend  further  north  than  the  parallel  of  SidoiŁ 
Conseąuently,  he  holds  that  the  southem  extremlty  of 
I  the  yalley  of  Coele-Syria,  at  the  base  of  Hermon,  is  the 
"entrance"  of  Hamath  {Palasłinaj  p.  118  są.).  Kitto 
set  forth  this  >*iew  in  greater  detali  (Pictorial  BiUe) ; 
and  he  would  identify  the  "entrance  of  Hamath"  with 
the  expressiou  used  in  Numb.  xiii,  21, "  as  men  come  to 
Hamath."  Of  late,  however,  some  writers  regard  the 
latter  as  only  intended  to  define  the  position  of  Beth-re- 
hob,  which  wis  sltuated  on  the  road  leading  from  Cen- 
tral Palestine  to  Hamath — "  as  men  come  to  Hamath ;" 
that  w,  in  the  great  vaUey  of  Coele-Syria.  Van  de  Yelde 
appears  to  locate  the  "entrance  of  Hamath"  at  the  north- 
em end  of  the  vaUey  of  Coele-Sytia  {Trarels^  ii,  470); 
and  Stanley  adopts  the  same  yiew  {Smai  and  Ptilert,  pw 
899).  Dr.  Keith  would  place  the  "  entrance  of  Hamath" 
at  that  sublime  gorge  through  which  the  Orontes  flows 
from  Antioch  to  the  sea  (fjcmd  of  Israel,p.  112  są.).  A 
careful  survey  of  the  whole  region,  and  a  study  of  the 
passages  of  Scripture  on  the  spot,  however,  leads  Porter 
to  conclude  that  the  "  entrance  of  Hamath"  must  be  the 
opening  towards  the  west,  between  Lebanon  and  the 
Nusairlyeh  Mountaius.  The  reasons  are  as  follow:  1. 
That  opening  forms  a  distinct  and  natural  northem 
boundary  for  the  land  of  Israel,  such  as  is  e\idently  re- 
ąuired  by  the  following  passages :  1  Kings  riii,  65 ;  2 
Kings  xiv,  25;  1  Chroń,  xiii,  5;  Amos  vi,  14.  2.  The 
"entrance  of  Hamath"  is  spoken  of  as  being  from  the 
western  border  or  sea-board ;  for  Moees  says,  afber  de- 
scribing  the  westem  border, "  This  shall  be'  your  nofth 
border,  from  the  grtat  sea  ye  shall  point  out  for  you 
Mount  Hor;  from  Mount  Hor  ye  shall  point  out  unto 
the  entrance  of  Hamath"  (Numb.  xxxiv,  7,  8).  Com- 
pare  this  with  Ezek.  xlvii,  20,  "  the  west  side  shall  be 
the  great  sea  from  the  (southem)  border,  itli  a  num  come 
over  agamMt  Hamath ;"  and  ver.  16,  where  the  "  way  <rf 
Hethlon  as  men  go  to  Zedad"  is  mentioned,  and  is  man- 
ifestly  identical  with  the  "entrance  of  Hamath,"  and 
can  be  nonę  other  than  the  opening  here  alluded  to.  8. 
The  "entrance  of  Hamath"  must  have  been  to  the  north 
of  the  entire  ridges  of  Lebanon  and  Anti-Lebanon  (Joeh. 
xiii,  5;  Judg.  iii,  3);  but  the  opening  from  Coele-Syria 
into  the  plain  of  Hamath  is  not  so.  4.  The  tenritoiy 
of  Hamath  was  included  in  the  "Plromised  Land,"  as 
described  both  by  Moses  and  Esekiel  (Narob.  xxxiv,  8- 
11;  Ezek.  xlvii,  15-20;  xlviii,  1).    The  "entimoe  of 


HAMATHITE 


47 


HAMILTON 


Bamath"  is  one  of  the  marlcs  of  its  northem  border;  but 
tbe  openiiifę  from  Gcele-Syna  is  on  the  extieine  wuih 
of  the  territory  of  Hamath,  and  oould  not,  therefoie,  be 
idenucal  with  the  *<  enŁnmoe  of  Hamath."  &,  The  **  en- 
trance  to  Hamath**  was  on  the  eastem  border  of  Pales- 
tine,  bot  narłk  o/Riblah  (Numb.  xxxir,  10, 11),  which 
19  udu  extant  between  Hums  and  the  northem  point  of 
Anti-Lebanon.  Sce  Kiblak.  6.  This  poaition  agrees 
wilh  tłiose  of  the  other  nanaes  associated  on  the  noith- 
eriy  and  easterly  boundariea,  e.  g.  Mount  Hor,  Hazai^ 
Enan,  etc  (aee  Porter^s  Danuueus,  fi,  864  8q. ;  also  I^ob- 
iiBon,  BibHcal  Res.  iii,  668).— Kitto,  &  v.  These  argu- 
ments,  however,will  be  found,  on  a  doser  inspection,  to 
be  inoorrect  (see  Keil  and  Delitzsch,  C&mmeat,  on  Pm- 
łaL.  iii,  255  8q.).  The  only  real  foroe  in  any  of  them 
is  that  deńred  from  the  supposed  identity  of  Zedad  (q. 
V.)  and  Sphnm  (q.  ▼.)»  ■"<*  ***»  ^  counterbalanced  by 
the  facts  (1)  that  this  district  never  was  actually  occu- 
pied  by  the  Israelites,  and  (2)  that  the  morę  definite 
description  of  the  boundary  of  Asher  and  Naphtali  in 
Josh.  xix,  24-39  does  not  extend  so  far  to  the  north. 
Hence  we  indine  to  the  older  riews  on  this  ąuestion. 
SeeTiuBE. 

Ha^mathite  (Hebrew  ChamałM^  with  th^  article 
^^ns^ ;  Sept.  o  'A/io^Oi  A  deńgnation  (Cren.  x,  18 ;  1 
ChnHk  i,  16)  of  the  last  named  of  the  families  descended 
from  Canaan  (q.  v.) ;  doubtless  as  haviiig  settled  (found- 
ed)  the  city  Hamath  (q.  v.).  The  Uamathites  were 
thns  a  Hamitic  race,  but  there  is  no  reason  to  suppose 
with  Keiirick  (^Pkcaacia,  p.  60)  that  they  were  ever  in 
any  aenae  Phcenicians.  We  must  regard  them  as  close- 
]y  akin  to  the  Hittites  (q.  y.),  on  whom  they  bordered, 
and  with  whom  they  were  generally  in  ailiance.  See 
Caicaahit£. 

Ha^math-Zo^bah  (Heb.  Oumaih'  Ttobah^  tn^n 
rońs,  i.  e.  Ifamaih  ofZdbak ;  Sept  Aifid&  ILafid  v.  r. 
B<u9w/3a ,  Vu]g.  Emath  Suba),  a  place  on  the  borders  of 
Paleetine,  said  to  have  been  attacked  and  oonquered  by 
Sokimon  (2  Chroń,  viii,  3).  It  has  been  conjectured  to 
be  the  same  as  Hamath  (q.  y.),  here  regarded  as  in- 
duded  in  Aram-Zobah — a  geogrsphieal  expre88ion  which 
h«  usually  a  narrower  meaning.  The  conjunction  of 
the  two  names  here  probably  indicates  nothing  morę 
than  that  the  whole  coun^  round  Hamath  was  brought 
by  Solomon  under  the  power  of  Judah.  The  poasesaons 
of  DaTid  extended  to  Hamath,  and  induded  Zobah  (1 
Chroń,  xviii,  8),  and  Solomon  probably  added  Hamath 
alm  to  his  empire ;  oertain  it  is  that  he  had  posaewions 
tn  that  district,  and  that  part  of  it,  at  least,  was  included 
in  his  docninion  (1  Kings  ix,  19).    See  Zobah. 

Hambroeck,  AirroN,  a  Protestant  missionar}",  snr- 
named  the  *^  Dutch  Regulus,"  was  bom  in  the  early  part 
of  the  17th  century.  He  went  as  missionary  to  the 
EasŁ  Indiea,  and  settled  in  the  island  of  Formosa,  then 
the  most  important  establishment  of  the  Dutch  in  the 
China  Sea.  He  oonyerted  a  large  number  of  natiyes, 
and  the  misńon  was  prospering,  when  the  cclebrated 
Chineee  pirate  Coxinga,  cłriren  away  by  the  Tartars, 
landed  in  Formosa,  and  set  siege  to  Tal-Ouan  with  an 
aimy  of  25,000  men,  April  80, 1661.  Hambroeck,  his 
wife,  and  two  of  his  children,  were  madę  prisoners,  and 
tbe  iormer  was  sent  by  Coxinga  as  envoy  to  the  com- 
mander  of  the  town,  Frederick  Coyet,  to  adAńse  hira  to 
sonender.  Instead  of  this,  he  advised  him  to  defend 
the  dty  to  the  last,  and  then  retumed  to  the  camp  of 
Coxinga,  notwithsUnding  the  remonstranoes  of  Coyet, 
and  the  prayers  of  his  two  daughters,  still  in  Tal-Ouan, 
taying  that  he  ''wouM  not  ])ermit  heatheii  to  say  that 
the  fear  of  death  had  induced  a  Christian  to  riolate  his 
oath.**  Coxinga,  enraged  at  his  oourage,  caused  him  to 
be  beheaded  on  his  return  (in  1661),  together  with  the 
other  Dutch  prisoners,  some  500  in  number.  Coyet  was 
neyerthekss  obliged  to  capitidate  in  Jan.  1662.  See  Du 
Bois,  Vif*  de$  Gourtmeun  HoUandau  (La  Haye,  1768, 
4to),  p.  210 ;  Recueil  des  Yoyagea  gui  otU  aerni  a  Nta- 
t  et  aMxproffrez  de  la  Compagme  det  Indes  ort- 


eniales  (Rouen,  1725, 10  yols.  8vo),  yol.  x ;  Kaynal,  ITiaU 
philosophi^ue  det  deux  Indea  (Lond.  1792, 17  yols.  8yo), 
ii,  26, 27 ;  Hoefer,  Nouv.  Biog,  Genłrale^  xxiii,  217. 

Hamelmann,  Hermann,  a  German  Protestant  the- 
ologian  and  historian,  was  bom  at  Osnabrtk:k  in  1525^ 
He  was  brought  up  in  the  Roman  Catholic  Church,  and 
became  curate  of  Camcm.  Haying  subsequent]y  em- 
braced  the  doctrines  of  the  Rcforraation,  he  lost  his  posi- 
tion,  and  went  to  Wittemberg,  wherc  he  liyed  some  time 
in  intimacy  with  Melancthon.  He  afterwards  preached 
the  Protestant  doctrines  at  Bielefdd  and  Lemgo,  and  in 
the  counties  of  Waldeck,  Lippe,  Spiegelberg,  and  Pyr- 
mont,  and  in  Holland.  He  acquired  great  reiiown  as  a 
preacher,  and  prince  William  of  Orange  called  him  to 
Antwerp,  to  participate  in  the  preparation  of  a  new  eo- 
clesiastical  diadpline.  In  1569  duke  Julius  of  Bruns- 
wick appointed  him  first  superintendent  of  Gandereheim, 
and  his  aid  was  requested  by  the  counts  John  and  Otho 
of  Oldenburg,  to  introduce  the  Reformation  in  their 
States.  He  spent  the  last  years  of  his  life  in  this  occu- 
pation,  acting  as  generał  superintendent  of  the  Protes- 
tant churehes  of  Oldenburg,  Elmenhorst,  and  Jerer.  He 
died  at  Oldenburg  June  26, 1595.  His  theological  and 
historical  works  are  yaluable  for  the  histoiy  of  the  Refor- 
mation. Among  them  are  De  TraditiotUbus  teria  faU 
aisgue  (Frankfort,  1556)  :—De  Eucharistia  et  conirottr^ 
m»  mter  Pontificos  et  Lufkercmot  hoc  de  articulo  agitatia 
(Frankf.  1656) : — De  conjugio  aacerdot,  brevis  inłerlocuto- 
riua  a  auffraganeo  et  diacono  (Dortmund,  2d  ed.  1582) ' — 
Historia  eccieaiaatica  renati  Erangtl  (Altenburg,  1586). 
See  Historische  Nachricht  iiher  d.  f^bm,  Bedienungen  u, 
Schriften  Barn.  (Quedlinburg,  1720) ;  Burmaiin,  SyUog, 
Epist,  i,  480;  Rotermund,  Gelehrtea  Hatmorer,  yoL  ii,  p. 
xliv ;  J6cher,  A  Ug,  Gelehrien  Lerikorij  ii,  1340. 

HamltaL    See  HAMirrAu 

Hamilton,  James,  D.D.,  an  eminent  PreBb3rterian 
minbter,  wda  bom  in  Strathblane,  Scotland,  in  1814. 
He  commenced  his  ministry  at  Abemyte,  Scotland,  and 
aft«r  a  short  time  was  called  to  Edinburgh.  In  1841  he 
was  called  to  be  pastor  of  the  National  Kootch  Church, 
Regent's  Square,  London,  and  was  soon  known  as  one 
of  the  most  eloquent  and  powerful  ministers  of  the  me- 
tropolis.  He  died  in  London  November  24, 1867.  Dr. 
Hamilton*s  labors  as  a  minister  were  very  Buccefisful,  and 
he  was  equally  eminent  in  the  field  of  anthorship,  espe- 
dally  in  the  field  of  experimental  and  practical  religion. 
Of  his  Li/e  in  Eamesł,  scores  of  editions  ha^^e  appeared 
in  England  (8ixty-iifth  thousaiid,  Lond.  1852)  and  Amer- 
ica; and  his  Mount  o/OUres  (sixty-fifth  thousand,  Lon- 
don, 1858)  has  been  almost  as  widely  circulated.  *'He 
was  not  only  one  of  the  most  popular  religious  writers 
of  the  day,  and  master  of  one  of  the  most  fascinating 
styles  in  which  Christian  truth  and  feeling  were  eyer 
clothed,  but  he  was  also  no  ordinar}'  theologian  in  the 
proper  scientific  sense  of  that  term,"  though  he  neyer 
wrote  any  theological  work  in  scientific  form.  A  comr 
plete  edition  of  his  works  in  six  yolumes  is  now  (1869) 
publishing  in  London,  as  follows :  yoL  i,  L^/e  in  Ear^ 
nest;  Mount  o/OHres;  A  Moming  beside  the  Lakę  of 
Galilee;  Happy  Home: — vol.  ii,  Lighi  for  the  Path; 
EnMemsfrom  Eden;  The  Parahle  ofthe  Prodigal  Son; 
The  Church  in  the  House;  Dew  ofHermon;  T/ianlful- 
n«M ;— yoL  iii,  The  Royal  Preacher;  J^saona  from  the 
Great  Biography ;— vol.  iv,  Notea  on  Job  and  Proverba  ; 
Retiewaj  Eaaaya,  and  Fugitire  Pieces : — yols.  v  and  vi, 
JSelectiona  from  unpubliahed  Senncna  and  MSS,  See 
Brił,  and  Por.  Evang,  Review,  Jan.  18C9,  art.  v. 

Hamilton,  Patrick,  the  first  Scotch  reformer, 
nephew  to  James,  earl  of  Arran,  was  bom  in  1503,  and 
was  educated  at  St.  Andrew's,  afler  which  he  went  to 
Germany,  where  he  imbibcd  the  opinions  of  Luther,  and 
became  professor  at  Marburg.  On  his  return  home  he  n-as 
madę  abbot  of  Feme,  in  the  shire  of  Ross,  where  hc  pro- 
mulgated  the  doctrines  ofthe  Kełbrroation  with  so  much 
zeal  as  to  excite  the  wrath  of  the  clerg}%  who  caused 
him  to  be  apprehended  and  sent  to  Beatón,  archbishop 


HAMILTON 


48 


HAMILTON 


of  St  Andrew'8.  After  a  long  examiiiation  he  was  burnt 
at  the  stake,  oppoaite  St  Salrador^s  College,  Mar.  1, 1527, 
in  his  24th  year.  At  the  place  of  execution  he  gave 
his  Bervaiit  his  garmenta,  saying,  '^These  arc  the  last 
things  yoa  can  receive  of  me,  nor  have  I  any thing  now 
to  lea\'e  you  but  the  examplc  of  my  death,  which  I  pray 
you  to  bear  in  mind ;  for  though  it  be  bitter  to  the  flesh, 
and  fearful  before  men,  yet  it  is  the  entrancc  into  eter- 
nal  life,  which  nonę  shalJ  inherit  who  deny  Jesus  Christ 
before  this  wickcd  generation."  The  fire  burning  slow- 
ly,  his  suffcrings  were  long  and  dreadfu],bat  his  patience 
and  piety  were  only  morę  fully  displayed  thereby,  in- 
somiich  that  many  were  led  to  inquire  into  his  princi- 
ples,  and  to  abjiirc  the  errors  of  popery.  "The  smoke 
of  Mr.  Patrick  Hamilton,"  said  a  papist,  "  infected  as 
many  as  it  blew  upon."  His  writings  callcd  Patrick'8 
Places  may  be  found  in  Richmond's  FcUkers  ofthe  Eng- 
lisk  Church,  i,  475.  See  Robertson,  Hisiory  o/Scotlandj 
bk.  ii;  Fox,  ISook  ofMarłyrSj  bk.  viii ;  Bamet,  IlUtory 
ofthe  Refonnatiorij  i,  490  są. ;  Hetherington,  IJistory  of 
the  Church  ofScotkmd,  i,  36  są. 

Hamilton,  Richard  "Winter,  D.D.,  an  Engllsh 
Indq>endent  minister,  was  bom  in  London  July  G,  1794, 
and  diod  in  1848.  His  mother  had  beeu  a  member  of 
one  of  John  Wesley's  societies,  and  is  mentioned  (as 
Miss  Hesketh)  in  Wesley'8  Journal,  At  siKteen  he  cn- 
tereil  the  theological  college  at  Hoxton,  and  evcn  whlle 
hc  was  a  stuctent  his  talent  for  preaching  and  the  re- 
markable  exuberance  of  his  style  attracted  great  atten- 
tion.  Soon  after  leiving  the  college  (1812  or  1813)  he 
was  called  to  the  charge  of  an  Independent  congrega- 
tion  at  Leeds,  and  he  held  this  position  during  the  re> 
mainder  of  his  lifc.  He  attained  great  cminence  as  a 
prcacher,  and  still  greater  as  a  platform  speaker.  With 
great  exceUence8  he  combined  grave  defects:  he  was 
deficient  in  tasto,  and  his  style  was  often  extravagant 
and  pompous ;  but  therc  was  a  wide  sweep  in  his 
thoiights,  and  he  was  sometimes  eloąuent  even  to  sub- 
limity.  During  his  life  he  was  a  diligent  student.  He 
was  presidcnt'  of  the  Literarj'  and  Philosophical  Society 
of  Leeds,  and  contributed  for  it  many  raluable  papers, 
flome  of  which  were  published  in  his  Nuffce  LUeraria 
(1841,  sm.  8vo).  His  other  writings  are,  The  litlle  Sanc- 
łuary  (domestic  prayere  and  offices;  Lond.  1838,  8vo) : 
Sermons,  first  8erie8\l837,  8vo;  republished  by  Carlton 
and  Lanahan,  N.  York,  1869) ;  second  serie?,  1846,  8vo : 
— 7%«  InstUułions  of  popular  Education  (2d  ed- 1846, 
post  8vo)  :—Tke  rerealed  Doctrine  ofRewards  andPun- 
ishmetit4  (Lond.  1847,  8vo ;  N.  Y.,  Carlton  and  Lanahan, 
1869, 12mo)  -.—Hora  et  Vindicias  SabbaJticm  (1848, 12mo) : 
Miisions,  their  A  utkority,  Scope,  and  Encouragemeniy  a 
prize  essay,  second  after  Harris's  Mammon  (2d  ed.  1846, 
post  8vo) : — Pastorał  Appeałs  on  Personal^  Domestic^ 
and  Social  DeroHon  (2d  ed.  1848 ;  also  Carlton  and  Lan- 
ahan, N.  York,  1869,  12mo) ;  besides  occasional  sermons, 
etc.  There  is  a  poor  biography  of  him  by  Stowcll 
(1850,  8vo).    (J.B.L.) 

Hamilton,  Samuel,  a  Methodist  Episcopal  min- 
ister, was  bom  in  Mouongahela  Co.,  Va^  Dec.  17, 1791, 
and  removed  to  Oliio  in  1806;  was  conrerted  in  1812; 
entered  the  Ohio  Conference  in  1815;  and  died  May  4, 
1853.  He  was  a  pioneer  of  Western  Methodism,  and  a 
widely  known  and  excellent  minister.  As  a  preacher, 
presiding  cldcr,  and  delegate  to  General  Conference,  he 
was  in  all  respects  "  a  workman  that  needed  not  to  be 
ashamed."  He  was  "  shrewd,  sarcastic,  and  eloąuent," 
and  his  labors  were  abundantly  successful  among  all 
classes  of  society.— 3f»n.  of  Conferencet,  v,  268;  Wake- 
ley,  Heroea  of  Methodism,  p.  837.     (G.  L.  T.) 

Hamilton,  Sir  William,  a  recent  Scotch  philos- 
opher,  who  will  probably  be  regarded  as  the  most  subtle 
logician  and  the  most  acute  metaph^^sician  produced  in 
Britain  suicc  Duns  Scotus  and  William  of  Ockham.  (He 
must  not  be  confounded  with  his  scarcely  less  dlstin- 
giushed  contemporarj".  Sir  William  Rowan  Hamilton, 
the  Irish  mathematician.)    He  is  induded,  and  included 


himself,  among  the  adherenta  of  the  Sootch  whcol  of 
psychology,  but  he  ia  not  of  them,  having  remodelled, 
interpreted,  expanded,  and  tzansmuted  their  docUines 
in  Buch  a  manncr  as  to  elevafce  their  chaiacter  and  en- 
tirely  change  their  naturę.  His  potent  influence  ia  man- 
ifested  in  nearly  all  the  current  speculation  of  the  Brit- 
ish  Isles.  After  ha^ing  created  by  the  labors  of  his  life 
and  by  the  fascination  of  his  example  a  new  class  of  in- 
ąuirers,  hb  mind  still  dominates  over  those  who  reject, 
as  well  as  over  those  who  accept  his  principles. 

Life, — Sir  WUliittn  Hamilton  was  bom  at  Glasgow 
March  8, 1780,  eight  yeais  before  the  dccease  of  Reid ; 
he  died  at  Edinburgh  on  May  6, 1856.  He  thus  lived 
through  the  whole  of  the  re\iolution  which  oonyulsed 
the  goyemments,  Bocieties,  industńes,  and  opinions  of 
modem  Europę,  and  prepared  the  new  eartli  which  is 
yet  to  be  revealed.  He  was  the  son  of  Dr.  William 
Hamilton,  professor  of  anatomy  at  Glasgow;  but  he  came 
of  a  long-descended  linę.  He  claimed  a  hereditary  bar- 
onetcy,  and  deduced  his  lineage  from  the  ducal  and  al- 
most  royal  house  of  Hamilton  and  Chastelherault.  The 
iilustiation  of  his  birth  was  obscured  by  the  splendor  of 
his  intellectual  career.  He  receired  his  early  education 
in  his  natire  city.  From  the  Unirersity  of  Glaagow 
he  passed  to  Baliol  College,  Oxford,  and  distinguished 
himself  by  liis  attainments  in  both  classics  and  mathe- 
matics.  Herę  he  gained  his  acąualntance  with  the 
writings  of  Aristotle,  wliich  have  never  been  disrcgard- 
ed  in  this  ancient  seat  of  leaming.  In  the  competition 
for  graduating  honors,  he  profcssed  his  readiness  to  be 
examined  on  most  of  the  recognised  Greek  and  Latin 
classics,  including  many  of  the  works  of  Plato  and  Aris- 
totle, and  of  the  writings  of  the  Neo-Platonists  and  the 
peripatetic  scholiasts.  He  had,  moreover,  already  ob- 
tained  some  knowledge  of  Arerroes  and  Aricenna;  of 
the  Latin  fathers  and  the  great  schoolmen ;  of  Cardan, 
Agricola,  Laurentius  Yalla,  and  the  Sealigers;  and  had 
formed  a  less  ąuestionable  intimacy  with  Des  Cartes, 
Leibnitz,  and  other  luminaries  of  the  Cartesian  schooL 

The  emdition  of  Hamilton  commenced  early,  and  was 
extended  throughout  his  life.  It  was  vast,  curioua,  and 
recondite.  It  produces  amazement  by  the  continua!  ar- 
ray  of  forgotten  names  and  miexplored  authors— omns 
iffnotum  pro  mirabiii.  But  it  ia  needleasl}'  ostentatioua 
and  fiaeąuently  deceptive.  It  ia  received  yrithout  chal- 
lenge, fh>m  the  inacoesńbility  of  the  authorities  allęged, 
and  the  diaindination  to  verify  citations  from  unfamiliar 
works.  Hare  haa  shown  thał  the  imputations  against 
Luther  rest  on  invalid  ąuotations  takeu  at  second-haiid. 
It  is  alleged  that,  in  his  attack  on  mathematical  studies, 
he  has  empbyed  mangled  extract8  writhout  r^^arding 
the  oontexL  His  references  to  Aristotle,  and  his  repre- 
sentations  of  the  doctrines  of  the  Stagyrite,  are  unrelia- 
ble,  being  fragmentary,  distorted,  or  misapprehended, 
from  ignorance  of  the  tenor  of  his  writings.  There  is 
too  much  reason  for  believing  that  Hamilton^s  familiai^ 
ity  with  "  many  a  ąuaint  and  curious  Yolume  of  forgot- 
ten lore*^  was  derived  from  the  diligent  consultation  of 
indexe8,  and  the  hast}'  appreciation  of  passages  thus  in- 
dicated. 

The  young  philosopher  had  been  designed  for  the  legał 
profession.  He  remored  to  Edinburgh  in  1812  to  pros- 
ecute  his  juridical  studies,  and  was  called  to  the  Scotch 
bar  in  1813.  In  1820,  on  the  death  of  Dr.  Thomas 
Brown,  he  was  a  candidate  for  the  chair  of  morał  phi- 
losophy  in  the  Unirersity  of  Edinburgh.  John  Wilson, 
the  poet,  and  editor  of  Blackwoodt  Magazine^  was  a 
Tory,  and,  as  such,  was  prefeired  by  the  Tory  town 
council,  which  constituŁed  the  electoral  body.  In  the 
cotuse  of  the  ensuing  year,  the  defeated  candidate,  rich 
in  brains  and  yarious  accompli8hments,but  poor  in  purse, 
was  appointed  by  the  Faculty  of  Adyocates  to  the  chair 
of  history.  His  lectures  on  this  great  branch  of  knowl- 
edge, which  is  philoeophy  in  its  concrete  and  dynamical 
aspects,  are  reported  to  haye  been  yigorous,  original, 
leamed,  and  acute.  This  period  of  Sir  William's  life 
exemplified  his  indefatigable  industiy,  patient  reseaicb, 


HAMILTON 


49 


HAMILTON 


^osatilitj  of  taknty  and  sealooB  solicitiide  for  tnith. 
Geoige  Combę  had  attncted  much  attention  in  Edin- 
boigh  to  Phienology—a  nii^icioiłs  |)rovinoe  of  specula- 
tk»  lying  aloog  tbe  indiatiiict  boundaiy  between  intel- 
lecŁiul  and  phyaical  fldence.  The  profe§6ion  of  Hamil- 
ton*s  fatber,  aiiid  his  own  yoathful  aasociations,  may  hare 
cherished  in  him  sonie  aptitudea  for  anatomical  and 
physiokiigical  inąuiiiefl.  He  now  engaged  in  snch  pui- 
aidts  with  the  eamest  pertinacity  that  had  been  display- 
ed  by  Des  Cartes  when  tndng  the  mechanism  of  rision 
and  endeftvoring  to  discoyer  in  the  pineal  gland  the 
domidte  of  the  mind.  With  saw  and  scalpel,  and  tape 
and  balanoe,  he  divided  skuUs,  diaeected,  measuied,  and 
weighed  their  contenta.  The  condnaionB  thns  reached 
vere  coamnmicated  to  the  Koyal  Society  of  Ediuburgh 
in  1826  and  1827,  and  dissipated  the  protensiona  of 
Fhrenology  by  demonatniting  the  falail^  of  the  lacta 
allcged  aa  ita  foiindation.  Theae  reaeaiches  also  recti- 
fied  aome  physiological  miaapprehensionay  and  enabled 
Sir  WłUiam  to  make  those  dehcate  obaerrationa  on  the 
oomposicion  and  action  of  the  nerrea  which  aie  intro' 
dnoed  into  his  notes  on  Beid. 

In  1829,  his  Iriend,  professor  Napier,  Tequested  firom 
him  a  philosophical  artide  to  inaugurate  hu  literary 
icign  as  editor  of  the  IkUoburgh  Jieneto,  The  paper 
fumiahed  in  oomplianoe  with  Wa  request  waa  the  fiist, 
and  alłll  remains  the  most  satisfactoiy  expońtion  of 
Ham]lton*8  roetaphjraical  view8.  It  pnrported  to  be  a 
notice  of  Yictor  Couan*s  edectidsm,  but  it  presented 
in  bioken  oatlines  **  the  Philosophy  of  the  Oonditioned." 
No  soch  tractate  had  appeared  in  Britain  for  centories. 
It  Rcalled  the  andent  glories  of  the  18th  and  14th  cen- 
tmiea.  It  mtited  the  specidatire  subtlety  of  Bericdey 
with  the  dialectical  skill  of  the  sdioohnen.  It  attract-^ 
ed  muT-eiaal  admiration  at  home  and  abroad,  and  was 
pnimpciy  translaled  into  foreign  langoages.  It  placed 
ita  author  at  once  among  the  soyereigns  of  thought,  and 
restored  the  British  Idea  to  their  place  among  the  com- 
betanta  in  the  shadowy  arena  of  abstract  disputation. 
This  remaricable  production  was  followed  by  others 
acsicely  less  remarkable,  and  similarly  distinguidied  by 
eompcehenaire  emdition,  logical  perspicadty,  anaiytic- 
al  prectaioD,  bieadth  of  reasoning,  and  profundity  of 
thooght.  Thna  his  daims  were  immeasumbly  superior 
to  thfoee  of  any  other  aspirant  when  the  professordiip 
of  logie  and  metaphysica  in  the  umyersity  became  va- 
cant  in  1836.  He  waa  not  dected,  however,  to  this  po- 
sitioa  withoat  hesitaney,  and  the  hesitancy  was  removed 
chieAy  by  the  eamest  testimooials  of  Yictor  Gousin,  and 
pnfeaeor  firandia,  of  Bonn. 

In  his  new  domain  Sir  William  oommenced  the  re- 
habilitation  of  logical  stndieS)  and  the  restoration  of  the 
prinoe  of  philoaophers  to  the  throne  from  which  he  had 
been  lemoTed  by  more  than  two  oentoiies  of  ignorant 
and  miinqoizing  damor.  So  far,  indeed,  as  originality 
apftertaina  to  his  own  logical  and  metaphysical  specular- 
tama,  it  ia  obtained  by  recunence  to  the  instructions  or 
to  the  hints  of  ''the  master  of  the  wise."  He  held  his 
chaix  Air  twenty  yeara,  till  his  death.  To  the  discharge 
of  hia  academical  dnties  aie  dne  the  tectiues  on  logie  and 
on  metaphysica.  Theyaflb!rdayeryimperfectexhibition 
of  etther  his  abilitiee  or  his  philosophy.  They  were  the 
ftnt-lhiita  of  his  serrice,  huniedly  prepared  to  satisfy 
immfdiate  reąoirements,  and  precaiiously  modified  at 
inegidar  timeau  They  nerer  recdred  finał  ehdx>ration 
or  systematic  reriaioo,  and  were  pobliahed  posthumoos- 
ly  fiom  soch  dsetches  and  loose  notes  as  had  been  pre- 
aerred.  Throoghont  the  period  of  their  recurrent  de- 
liYciy,  their  dcvelopment  waa  reatrained  and  distorted 
by  the  tiaditiona,  assodataons^  and  ezpectations  of  the 
sdiooL  He  coold  not  renoonce  aUegiance  to  Bdd,  or 
pndaim  an  independent  anthority,  or  render  liege-hom- 
age  to  Aristotle.  Hence  there  is  thronghout  his  cazeer 
a  oontinaal  efTort  to  reoondle  by  iogenions  lottr*-die- 
Jbroe  his  own  more  piolbond  and  compcehendye  iriews 
with  the  narrowy  shallow,  and  timid  uttenincea  of  the 
farotherhood.  There  ia  nothing  in  the 
IV.-D 


histoiy  of  philosophy  more  grotesąae,  more  incondu- 
ńye,  and  better  caleulated  to  mislead,  than  the  array  of 
the  hundred  and  8ix  witnesses  to  the  nniyersality  of 
the  philosophy  of  common  sense.  What  these  depo- 
nenta unanimottdy  attest  is  not  the  truth  of  Rdd*B  char- 
acteristic  dogmas,  but  the  neceasity  of  admitting  inde- 
monstrable  piindpleB — a  thesis  which  may  be,  and  lias 
been  assodated  with  many  dimimilar  systeros.  Sir  Wil* 
liam  would  have  been  swift  to  expose  this  fallacy  had 
auch  an  ignoratio  dmdii  been  detected  in  any  yictim  of 
hia  critical  lash. 

Though  the  lectores  of  Sir  William  Hamilton  gi^ 
an  imperfect  idea  of  his  serrices  and  teaching,  he  effi* 
dently  promoted  the  caoae  of  genuine  philosophy  by 
the  spiiit  and  breadth  of  his  instructions,  by  his  wonder- 
ful  display  of  leaming,  by  the  penetration  and  precision 
of  hia  diatinctiona,  by  attracting  eamest  attention  to 
the  highest  walka  of  speciilation,  and  by  training  up  a 
generation  of  enthusiastic  inąuirprs  in  abranch  of  knowl- 
edge  which  had  been  misconcdyed  and  degraded  by 
diaregard  of  its  loftiest  deydopments.  He  was  untiring 
in  encooiaguig  and  guiding  the  studies  of  his  pupila; 
he  waa  exacting  in  his  demands  upon  their  powers;  but 
he  was  remarkably  successful  in  securing  their  confi- 
denoe  and  their  affection ;  and  he  deepened  his  influ- 
ence by  the  affability  of  his  demeanor  and  by  his  im- 
pressiye  bearing.  "  Sir  William,"  says  one  of  his  re- 
yiewers,  ''enjoyed  physical  adyantages  almost  as  un- 
common  as  his  inteUectual  attainments.  .  .  .  His  frame 
waa  laige  and  commanding;  his  head  was  cast  in  a 
ciasne  mould;  his  face  was  handsome  and  expreadye; 
his  yoice  possessed  great  oompass  and  mellifluous  sweet- 
ness."  With  such  a  fortunate  oombination  of  natural 
endowments  and  cultiyated  acquirement8,  he  was  well 
adapted  to  become  the  ^magmu  Apollo^  of  a  new  sect 
of  adorers.  System,  howeyer,  was  foreign  to  his  naturę : 
the  pursuit  of  tmth  was  more  than  trath.  He  neyer 
eyinced  any  desire  to  be  the  founder  of  a  school :  he 
may  haye  been  consdous  that  snch  a  desire  would  haye 
been  fudle,  dnce  he  built  on  the  substractions  of  Aris- 
totle, or  repainted  with  his  own  ook>rB  and  deyices  the 
ruinous  walls  of  the  peripatetic  tempie. 

The  years  of  Sir  William's  scholastic  duty  were  illns- 
trated  by  other  and  more  important  productions  than  his 
lectores — ^productions  which  reyeal  more  decisiyely  the 
depth  of  hia  genius,  and  snpply  the  best  means  for  ascei^ 
taining  the  Gomplexion  and  constitution  of  his  philoso- 
phy. It  seems  to  be  expected  of  a  Scotch  professor  that 
he  ahould  prodoce  a  book  dther  as  a  title  to  office  or  in 
yindication  of  hia  appointment,  In  accordance  with  thia 
coatom,  if  not  in  oompliance  with  it,  Sir  WUliam  dgnal- 
ized  his  induction  into  his  chair  by  an  editlon  of  Reid*s 
works,  accompanied  with  obsenrations  and  illustratiye 
discusńons.  The  manner  in  which  this  task  was  ex- 
ecuted  is  characteristic  of  his  habits.  The  notes  weie 
written  as  the  text  passed  through  the  press ;  the  supple- 
mentary  disputationa  were  added  some  years  afterwards: 
they  were  neyer  completed ;  the  last  that  he  published 
<«breaks  offin  the  middle,"  like  the  celebrated  canto  of 
Hodibraa;  and  the  ''copious  indices  subjoined,"  which 
had  been  announced  in  the  title-page,  remains  an  an- 
noonoement— to  eternity.  Sir  William  has  nowhere 
giyen  any  systematic  yiew  of  his  doctrine,  either  in  de- 
tail  ixc  in  summary.  He  has  left  behind  him  elaborate 
essays  on  a  few  cardinal  topics;  many  fragmentaiy  no- 
ticea  of  others;  and  numerous  suggestiyc,  but  undeyel- 
oped  hints.  His  relics  are  like  the  fossil  remains  of  the 
mighty  monsters  of  remote  geological  periods :  here  a 
tibia,  there  a  maxilla ;  here  a  huge  yertebra,  there  a 
ponderoua  scapula;  here  a  tusk,  there  a  claw;  but  no- 
where is  fonnd  the  complete  form,  or  even  the  entire 
skeleton.  Still,  ftom  the  fragments  preseryed,  the  phi- 
losophy of  Hamilton  may  be  reconstructed.  The  in- 
oompleteness  of  his  labors  may  be  ascribed  in  part  to 
the  polemical  character  of  his  procedurę ;  in  part  to  the 
absenoe  of  distinct  originality ;  in  part  to  the  yast  and 
unmanageable  extent  of  his  information,  to  the  yariety 


HAMILTON 


60 


HAMILTON 


of  his  meditatioDB,  and  to  the  faatidioumess  of  hiB  Judg- 
mentywhich  aought  unattainahle  fulness  and  peifection 
In  all  the  detaik;  but  much  mtist  be  attribated  to  a 
morę  moornful  cauae — to  the  paralysis  which  cnuhed 
hia  atiength  and  deprired  him  of  the  use  of  his  right 
hand  for  the  last  ten  y^ean  of  his  life,  compelling  him 
to  avail  himself  of  the  assistance  of  his  wife  and  fkmily 
for  his  correspondence  and  liteniy  labora. 

During  his  hiter  yeais  Sir  William  was  chiefly  oocu- 
pied  with  the  extension  and  application  of  his  logical  in- 
no\'ation8.  Theae  were  expounded  to  his  dass  as  early 
as  1840,  and  announced  to  the  world  in  1846.  They 
proYoked  a  bitter  controrersy  with  profeasor  De  Mor^ 
gan.  It  is  unnecessaiy  to  enter  into  the  examiiiacion 
of  a  dispute  in  which  the  parties  are  satisfied  neither 
with  themselTes  nor  with  each  other,  and  in  which  the 
language  is  so  tortuous,  rugged,  and  peculiar  as  to  be  al- 
moet  eąually  unintelligible  in  both. 

Some  critics  have  commended  the  style  of  Sir  Wil- 
liam Hamilton  as  **  unequalled  for  conciseness,  predsion, 
and  force" — as  **  a  model  of  philosophical  deamess,  oon- 
daeness,  and  energy"  (non  cuKumgue  datum  est  habere 
muum),  Mr.  De  Morgan  characterized  the  Hamiltonian 
style  as  hombmang,  whatever  that  may  mean ;  and  pf 
one  expres8ion  he  says  that  it  is  '*  hard  to  make  sense  or 
EngUsh  of  it'*  The  censure  may  be  applied  to  both  the 
combatants  in  this  unseemly  oontroyersy.  Sir  William'8 
diidoct  may  be  elear,  precise,  significant,  when  it  has  been 
mastered ;  but  it  is  not  English.  It  is  a  concreto  of  his 
own  compounding,  requiring  spedal  study  j  ust  as  much 
as  any  ąrchaic  pałois.  Berkeley  and  Hume,  Stewart 
and  Spencer,  have  shown  that  it  is  possiblc  to  write 
philosophically,  and  yet  maintain  a  pure,  transparent, 
natural  English  idiom.     This  Sir  William  rardy  does. 

Writinffs, — ^The  published  works  of  Hamilton  embrace 
the  lectures  on  logie  and  on  metaphysics ;  an  edition  of 
Reid,never  completed;  an  edition  of  the  works  of  Du- 
gald  Stewart ;  and  a  yolume  of  Ditausiona  on  PhUowphy 
and  IMerature,  Education  and  Umpersky  Be/orm  (1852 ; 
2d  edit.  enlaiged,  1858 ;  reprinted  by  Harper  and  Broth- 
ers, X.  York).  There  is  little  evidence  of  any  taste  for 
literaturę,  properly  so  called,  in  the  yolume.  '  The  only 
essay  oonnected  eyen  remotdy  with  police  letters  is  that 
on  the  authoTship  of  the  EpCtłoUn  Obacurorum  Yirorumf 
which  is,  in  some  respects,  his  most  curious  contiibu- 
.  tbn  to  periodical  literaturę.  A  wide  chasm  separates 
this  from  the  instructiye  and  entertaining  papers  On  the 
Beuolationa  o/Medkine,  and  on  Mathematia  not  Philoe- 
ophjf.  Both  of  these  readily  consort  with  the  laborioos 
and  leamcd  inycstigation  of  the  history,  condition,  ob- 
jects^  and  possible  ameliorations  of  uniyersity  educa- 
tion. The  rematnder  of  the  "  Discussions'*  is  deyoted 
to  logie  and  metaphysics.  The  former  science  is  illus> 
trated  by  the  essay  on  Logic  oontributed  to  the  Edm- 
htrgk  Review  in  April,  1833 ;  and  that  on  SyUogism,  ita 
Hndśf  canon$,  notatwM,  etc,  oontained  in  the  appendix. 
The  peculiar  yiews  of  the  author  are  further  expounded 
in  the  Protpectus  qfan  Essay  on  the  New  Anaiytic  of 
Logic(d  Furms,  and  in  the  Prize  Essay  of  Thomas  Spen- 
cer Baynes  on  the  same  subject,  to  which  should  be  add- 
ed  the  appendix  to  the  lectures  on  logie. 

The  prindpal  metaphysical  papers  in  the  Discussions 
are  those  on  The  PhUosophy  ofthe  CondUionedf  on  The 
PhUoaophy  o/PeroepHon,  and  On  IdeaUsmy  with  the  ap- 
pendix  On  the  CondiOons  ofthe  ThinkabU.  In  the  edi- 
torial  labors  on  Reid,  besides  many  important  notes  elu- 
ddating,  rectifying,  derdoping,  or  altering  the  state- 
ments  in  the  text,  which  merit  careful  consideration, 
ihould  be  specially  studied  Noto  A,  On  the  PhUosophy 
of  Common  Sense ;  Note  B,  On  Presentałite  and  Repre- 
mntafive  Knowledge ;  and  Note  D,  DUtinatUm  ofthe  Prp- 
mary  and  Secondary  Oiualities  ofBody,  which.  has  an 
intimate  relation  to  the  thoory  of  immediate  or  present- 
atiye  perception. 

PhUosophy,— lAigiCy  metaphysics,  and  ethics  are  com- 
prised  under  the  generał  designation  of  philoaophy. 
The  last  of  these  diyisions  is  uutooched  by  Sir  William 


Hamilton.  In  the  other  two  he  has  poshed  his  inqul- 
ries  far  beyond  any  of  his  British  oontomporaries,  and 
with  much  morę  brilliant  sucoess.  In  both  he  eyinced 
signal  acuteness ;  in  both  he  rendered  good  seryice :  and 
in  both  he  deemed  himself  an  inventor  and  reformer, 
and  not  merdy  an  innoyator. 

The  character  of  his  metaphysical  doctrine  is  mani- 
fested  by  the  designation  which  he  bestowed  upon  it — 
The  PhiloBophy  of  the  Gonditioned.  It  is  critical  m  itt 
procedurę ;  it  is  mainły  negatiye  in  its  results.  In  these 
respecu  it  resembles  the  phUosophy  of  Kant,  to  which 
it  approximates  in  many  of  its  deydopments.  It  is  a 
crusade  against  all  theories  reposing  on  the  absolute  and 
the  unconditioned.  It  sets  out  with  affirming  the  e»- 
sential  rdatiyity  of  all  knowledge;  it  oondudcs  with 
the  restriction  of  philoeophy  to  the  determination  of  the 
oonditions  of  thought  In  this  there  is  nothing  new 
but  the  modę  of  expo8ition.  It  was  a  familiar  aphoriam 
of  the  schoohnen,  founded  upon  the  teachings  of  Aristo- 
tle,  that  all  thought  was  bounded  by  the  limits  of  the 
thinking  mind— ^ojwk  peroeptum  esi  seamdum  modttm 
percipienłis" — ^^onme  scUum  est  in  sdente  secundum  mo- 
dum  scientia"—^  apecka  oogmti  eat  tln  eognosoenleJ*  From 
this  position  Hamilton  deduces  the  inyalidity  of  all  eon- 
ceptions  pretending  to  be  absolute,  and  henoe  denies  the 
poesibility  of  any  positiye  conception  of  the  infintte. 
Herdn  he  merdy  repeats  Aristotle,  but  with  less  mod- 
eraUon  in  his  doctrine.  This  thesis  has  been  riolently 
opposed,  and  usnally  misapprehended.  It  was  aasailed 
by  Calderwood,  PhUosophy  ofthe  If^finUe,  who  oonfounds 
the  negation  of  the  Infinite  in  thought  yrith  the  nęga- 
tion  of  the  indnity  of  God.  It  has  been  aooepted  and 
applied  by  Mansd  to  theology  in  his  Limits  ofReUgiov* 
Thoughi,  The  next  step  is  to  a  purely  negatiye  expo- 
sition  of  causality,  as  resulting  from  "mental  impotence** 
to  conodye  an  absolute  oommencemenL  Sir  William 
recognises  that  this  inteipretation  conflicts  with  the  idea 
of  a  great  First  Cause,  and  he  proponnils  a  yery  ingeni- 
ous  apology  for  his  doctrine.  He  similarly  follows  out 
his  fuudamental  tenet  to  other  applications^  and  arriyea 
unifurmly  at  negatiye  condusions. 

The  tenet,  howeyer,  is  not  prescnted  as  an  axiom,  but 
receiyes  intorpretation,  if  not  demonstratton.  It  is  the 
ineritable  oonsequence  ofthe  dualism  of  our  knowledge 
— a  thesis  contained  in  Aristotle.-  £yeiy  act  of  oon« 
sciousnesB  "  giyes  a  knowledge  ofthe  ego  in  relation  and 
contrast  to  the  non-ego,  and  a  knowledge  of  the  non- 
ego  in  relation  and  contrast  to  the  ego.  The  ego  and 
non-ego  are  thus  giyen,  in  an  original  synthesis,  as  eon- 
joined  in  the  unity  of  knowledge,  and  in  an  original 
antithesis,  as  opposed  in  the  contrariety  of  existence." 
This  *' natural  dualism^'  is  acoepted  by  professor  Ferrier 
as  the  beginnfhg  of  an  antagonistic  scheme  of  philoso- 
phy.  With  Hamilton  it  is  madę  to  reet  upon  the  baais 
of  immediate  perception,  and  thus  he  is  led  to  the  affir- 
mation  of  direct  or  prcsentatiye  perception  in  oppońtioo 
to  the  older  theory  of  indirect  or  repreaentatiye  percep- 
tion. This  brings  him  into  aocordance  with  the  school 
of  Reid — though  Reid  and  his  school  would  scaroely 
haye  understood,  and  certainly  could  not  haye  appred- 
ated  his  ddicate  distinctioiis;  and  it  must  be  acknowl- 
edged  that  it  is  a  coaise  and  materialistic  conception  of 
species,  images,  and  impressions  which  reąuires  any 
deadly  opposition  between  presentatiye  and  repreaenta- 
tiye (leiception.  To  one  cultiyating  such  diyisions  and 
differenoes,  the  treatise  of  Roger  Bacon,  De  Muli^Mca^ 
tione  Spederwn — the  most  maryellous  result  of  medis- 
yal  sdence — would  be  utterly  unintelligiUe. 

On  Sir  William  Hamilton's  prindples,  the  only  object 
of  philoeophy  is  the  determination  of  the  limits  and  re- 
quirement8  of  thought,  or,  as  he  phrases  it,**the  Gondi- 
tions  of  the  Thinkablc."  On  this  subject  he  has  left  an 
admirable  and  most  suggestiye  paper;  but  his  whole 
scheme  of  specolation  is  without  any  basis  for  ceitainty, 
without  any  witness  of  "  the  Spirit  beaiing  witness  to 
ourspirit."  Itis  thus  built  upon  the  yoid;  and,likethe 
eclectidam  of  Cousin,  and  the  traDsoendentalism  of  H^- 


HAMILTON 


51 


HAMILTON 


gd  and  ScheUing,  which  it  was  speciafly  designed  to 
<yppcMe,  it  tenda,  however  uncoiuciotisly,  to  practical  scep- 
tkasm.  "Such  (<piavavTa  (rwiToi<riv)"  says  Sir  Wil- 
lijm,  **  are  the  hints  of  an  undevek>ped  philosophy,  which, 
I  am  oonfident,  is  founded  upon  truth."  Doubtless  this 
philoeophy  is  tmdeyeloped,  and  doubtless  it  is  founded 
upoo  truth ;  but  the  foundatiou  may  not  be  homogene- 
ous  OT  sufficient,  and  the  superstructure  may  not  be 
compoeed  of  the  same  materials  as  the  substruction. 
The  most  dangerous  error  is  that  which  proceeds  from 
matilated,  distorted,  or  alloyed  truth. 

''The  Tiews  of  Sir  William  Hamilton  are  before  us, 
in  ceitain  paits,  in  his  0¥m  expoBition  ;**  they  invite 
and  require  rigorous  examination.  **  That  they  have 
abeady  been  much  discussed,  and  have  exerfced  a  pow- 
crfttl  influence  on  ^leculation,  is  a  good  omen  for  phi- 
losophy.  We  haye,  especially,  his  treatment  of  three 
great  problems  in  phiksophy.  First,  there  is  the  the- 
ory  of  the  two  kinds  of  Jiuman  knowledge,  Immediate 
and  Mediate.  Secondly,  there  is  a  special  application 
of  thia  theory  to  the  ooiistructioii  of  a  theory  of  £xter- 
nal  Perception.  Thirdly,  there  is  an  exhaustive  system 
of  Metaphysics  Proper,  or  Ontology,  in  his  *  Philosophy 
of  the  (>>nditioned'  and  'Gonditions  of  the  Thinkable*— 
a  vast  and  noble  idea,  traced  out  for  us  in  nothing  but  a 
tantalizing  fragment.  His  Logical  system  is  to  be  gath- 
ered  firom  the  sooroes  already  mentioned.  They  will 
pirobably  conrey  no  distinct  notion  of  the  system,  unless 
to  readen  who  are  fiuniliar  with  the  German  methoda  of 
logical  analysis  sInce  Kant.  The  leading  points  may  be 
aakl  to  be  four;  and  it  is  perhaps  possible  to  make  these 
intelligible  very  briefly  to  persona  acqaainted  with  the 
outlines  of  the  science  in  its  receiyed  forms.  1.  Hamil- 
um  insista  on  having,  in  all  propositions  through  com- 
mon  terms  which  are  set  forth  for  logical  scrutiny,  a 
sign  of  ąuantity  prefixed  to  predicate  aa  well  as  to  sub- 
ject.  The  point,  though  merely  one  of  form,  is  curi- 
<insiy  suggestiye  of  difficulties,  and  hence  of  solutions. 
2.  lititfead  of  recognising  only  four  forms  of  propositions, 
the  A,  £,  I,  O  of  the  old  logicians,  he  insists  on  admit- 
ting  all  the  eight  forms  which  are  possible.  (See 
Thomson  aud  SoUy.)  3.  He  widens  the  rangę  of  the 
srUogism  by  admitting  all  moods  which  can  ralidly  be 
eonatrueted  by  any  combination  of  any  of  his  eight  kinds 
of  propositions.  4.  The  Port-Royal  doctrine  of  the  in- 
Terae  nuio  of  the  extension  and  comprehension  of  terms 
ia  worked  out  by  him  in  referenoe  to  the  syllogism. 
This  application  of  the  doctrine  has  certainly  not  been 
anticipated  by  any  logidan;  and,  when  elaborated  to 
ita  lesnlts,  it  throws  many  new  lights  on  the  characters 
and  motual  relationa  of  the  8}'l]ogistic  figures."  The 
▼alne  of  these  innorations  has  not  been  deiinitely  set- 
tled,  nor  haa  it  been  ascertained  whether  they  were 
oyerlooked  by  Aristotle,  misapprehended  by  him,  or  de- 
libeiately  rejected  from  his  Analytics. 

AuthoriHe».-^An  eamest  dlscussion  of  Hamilton*s 
doctiinea  may  be  found  in  the  Afethodist  Ctuarterly  He- 
nno for  1857 ;  a  sketch  of  his  metaphysical  yiews  is 
given  in  the  Princeton  Reńew  for  1855.  One  of  the 
moat  unfortunate  featuree  in  the  literary  history  of  Sir 
Wmiam  was  his  attack  on  the  reputation  of  Luther, 
which  was  fully  answered  by  Hare  in  his  Yindication  of 
Ijuther,  Hare  convicts  Hamilton  of  using  second-hand 
knowledge  as  if  he  had  studied  the  original  sources. 
See  N.  Brii.  Ber.  Nov.  184«,  Feb.  1863,  July,  1859 ;  Be- 
tne  des  Deux  Mondes,  April,  1856;  Gentieman"s  Maga- 
tmej  Jane,  1856 ;  Nortk  A  menean  Reńewy  OcU  1845,  p. 
485-9 ;  Jan.  1853,  art.  iii ;  British  Ouatieriy  ReoieWy  xyi, 
479;  Wight,  Pkilotophy  of  Sir  WiUiam  HamUon  (N. 
T.  1855) ;  MUl,  ErcanmaUnm  of  Sir  WiUiam  J[amUt<m'» 
Pkilotophjf  (Lond.  1865)— reyiewed  in  the  Wettminster 
Reńew,  Jan.  1866,  and  elaborately  answered  by  H.  Lb 
Mansel,  l%b  Pkiioeopktf  ofthe  CondUioned  (Lond.  1866) ; 
De  Morgan,  PormcU  Logic  (London,  1847) ;  Bowen,  A 
Treatiae  on  Logk  (Cambridge,  1864).  The  TĄfe  of  Sir 
William  NamOton,  by  J.  Ydtch  (1869),  which  had  been 
kog  expected,  haa  been  reoently  pubUshed.     (G.  F.  H.) 


Hamllne,  Leonidas  Lkxt,  a  bishop  of  the  Meth- 
o<Ust  Episcopal  Church,  was  bom  in  BurUngton,  Conn., 
May  10, 1797.  His  early  education  was  obtained  with 
some  view  to  the  Christian  ministry ;  but,  arriying  at 
manhood,  he  studied  law,  and  was  admltted  to  the  bar 
in  Lancaster,  Ohio.  He  married  in  ZanesyiUe,  Ohio,  and 
settled  there  to  practice  his  profeseion.  The  death  of  a 
little  daughter  in  1828  led  him  to  serioosly  consider  his 
own  morał  state,  and  he  joined  the  Methodist  Episcopal 
Church  in  the  autumn  of  1828.  Soon  aller  he  was  li- 
censed  to  exhort,  then  (1829)  to  preach.  In  1882  he 
was  receiyed  on  trial  in  the  Ohio  Conference,  and  ap- 
pointed  to  Granyille  Circuit.  In  1883  he  trayelled  Ath- 
ens  Circuit,  and  in  1884  and  1835  he  was  stationed  at 
Wesley  Chapel,  CindnnatL  In  1886  he  was  elected  aa- 
sistant  editor  of  the  Western  Christian  Advoca1e,  with 
the  Rey.  Dr.  Charles  Elliott.  When  the  Ladiet'  Repos- 
iiory  was  established  in  January,  1841,  Hamline  was  aa- 
signed  t4>  the  work  of  editing  that  joumaL  He  remain- 
ed  in  this  position  until,  in  1844,  łie  was  elected  one  of 
the  bishops  of  the  Methodist  Episcopal  Chuich.  This 
Office  he  filled  with  great  usefulness  for  eight  jrears,  when 
Ul  health  compelled  him  to  resign  it  to  the  General  Con- 
ference of  1852.  His  name  was  reattached  to  the  list 
of  members  of  the  Ohio  Conference,  and  he  was  granted 
a  superanniuted  relation.  In  1857  he  removed  to  Mount 
Pleasant,  Iowa,  his  former  confidential  friendship  with 
Dr.  EUiott,  who  resided  in  that  place,  leading  to  this 
change.  In  an  account  of  his  life  which  bishop  Ham- 
line wrote  for  his  family,  he  thus  refers  to  the  years  from 
1852  to  1860 :  *<For  eight  years  I  haye  been  superannu- 
ated,  and  God  has  <tried  me  as  sUver  is  tried;*  but  he 
has  often  sweetened  those  trials  by  his  presenoe  in  a 
mar\'ellous  manner.  And  now  day  by  day  my  feUow- 
ship  is  with  the  Father,  and  with  his  son  Jesus  C!hrist. 
Though  alraost  helpless,  and  dependent  on  my  deyoted, 
afiectionate  wife  for  pcrsonal  atteutions,  which  her  ex- 
emplaiy  patience  rever  wearics  in  bestowing  on  me 
(thanks  be  to  thy  name,  O  God,  for  siich  a  gifb!),  yet  I 
am  far  morę  oontented  and  cheerfol  than  in  the  best 
days  of  my  youth."  He  was  taken  seyerely  ill  Jan.  25, 
1867.  On  the  lOth  of  Februaiy,  haying  cailed  his  fam- 
ily in  to  p»y  with  them  once  morę, "  he  uttered  remark- 
able  expres9ions  of  adoration  ofthe  Sayiouron  the  throne 
in  special  reference  to  his  humiliation,  crucifixion,  res- 
urrection,  ascension,  exaltation,  etc.  He  prayed  for  his 
family,  the  Church,  for  his  own  Conference  (the  Ohio), 
the  missions,  the  countr}',  the  world.  All  the  forenoon 
he  expres8ed  much  thankfulness  for  eyerything.  He 
then  had  occasion  to  drink,  and  his  painful  thirst  re- 
minded  him  of  the  exclamation  on  the  cross  when  the 
Sa^^iour  said,  *  I  thirst.*  He  then  burst  into  tears,  and 
broke  out  again  in  praise.  He  then  spokc  of  his  pres- 
ent  State  as  a  fresh  baptism  into  Christ,  into  his  glorious 
name,  and  exclaimed,  *  O  rcondrout,  tcondrous,  wondrouB 
lov€P  When  Mrs.  Hamline  raised  the  window-shade 
at  sunset  he  exclaimed,  'O  beautifid  eky!  bcautiful 
heayen !' "  He  died  on  the  22d  of  Februar}'.  Of  the 
character  and  attainments  of  bishop  Hamline,  Dr.  El- 
liott sajra,  "My  pen  is  wholly  incompetent  to  draw  out 
in  its  fuli  extent  an  adequate  portrait  of  his  high  and 
holy  character,  whether  it  regards  his  natural  talents 
or  his  extenaiye  attainments  \  but  especially  the  sanc- 
tity  and  purity  of  his  religious  life.  As  a  preacher, 
he  was  in  the  first  rank  in  all  respects  that  regard  the 
finished  pulpit  orator.  His  style  as  a  writer  would  com- 
pare  favorably  with  the  best  writers  in  the  English 
language.  He  had  no  superior  for  logie,  argument,  or 
oratory.  He  was  the  subject  of  much  bodily  aifliction, 
and  yet,  amid  excruciating  pains,  he  retained  the  fuli 
exercise  of  his  intellectual  powers  to  the  yeiy  last  hour 
of  his  life.  The  leading  charscteristic  of  him  in  hia 
sulTerings  was  his  complete  patience  andresignation  to 
the  will  of  (lod."  His  principal  writings  (chiefly  ser- 
mons)  are  given  in  the  Works  of  L,  L»  Jfcaniiney  DJ>^ 
edited  by  the  Rey.  F.  G.  Hibbard,  D.D.  (N.York,  1869, 
8yo).— See  Minuiee  of  Corferences,  1866 ;  Meth,  Ouart. 


HAMMAHLEKOTH 


52 


HAMMERLDf 


Hep.  October,  1866;  Palmer,  Life  and  Letiera  o/Leotu- 
das  L,  HamUney  D,D,  (N.  Y.  1866,  l2mo). 

HammahlekotlL    See  Sela-iiam-Maiilkkoth. 

Hamman,  or  nther  Chamman  (lan,  only  in  the 
plur.  hammamm')f  signifies  imageSf  ulols  of  aome  kind 
for  idulatioiu  wońhip  (and  so  the  Sept.  and  Yulg.  un- 
denUnd  it).  It  ia  rendered  '4mage8*'  in  Lev.  xx\% 
80;  2  Chroń*  xiV)  6;  xxxiV|  7;  Isa^  xvii,  8;  xxvii,  9; 
Ezek.  vi,  4y  6;  but  in  the  maigin  almoat  invaiiably 
*^nm  tmagcM,"  In  theae  paasages  Hammamm  is  8everal 
times  joined  with  Asherim — atatues  of  Aatarte;  nfhile 
from  2  Chroń,  xxxiv,  4,  it  appeais  furthcr  that  the  Ha>»- 
manim  atood  upon  the  altaia  of  Baal.  See  Aaiikrah; 
Baal.  Kimchi,  and  the  Arabie  of  Erpenius,  long  ago 
ex(dained  the  word  by  suną,  imagea  qfthe  aun ;  and  both 
thia  interpretation  and  the  tliing  itaelf  are  now  clearly 
iUustrated  by  ten  Punic  dppi  with  inacriptiona,  oonae- 
crated  to  Baal  Uamman,  L  e.  to  Baal  the  aoiarj  Baal 
tke  tufu  (See  the  whole  subject  diaciuBed  in  Gescniua^a 
Thes.  Neb,  p.  489^91.)  The  form  chamman,  $olar,  ia 
from  nttn,  ckam'mah,  the  sun ;  and  the  plural  Hamma- 
nimy  in  the  Oki  Testament,  is  pat  elliptically  for  Baalim 
Hammamm^  and  is  found  in  the  same  context  as  else- 
where  Baalim^  images  of  BaaL— Bastow,  s.  r. 

Ham^matfa  (Heb.  Chammafh%  rSH,  warm  springs; 
Sept.  'Afia^  V.  r.  [by  inoorporation  of  the  following 
name]  'OfioBadcucS^Yulg,  Emath)^  one  of  the  <*fenced 
cities"  of  Naphtali,  mentioned  between  Zer  and  Rak- 
kath  (Josh.  xix,  85) ;  generally  thought  to  be  the  hot 
spring  rcferrcd  to  by  Joscphus  (  War,  iv,  1, 8)  uiider  the 
name  A  mmaus  (Afifiaoya).,  near  Tiberiaa  {A  nł,  xviii,  2, 
8) ;  which  laŁter  is,  no  doubt,  the  same  with  the  faraous 
warm  baths  still  fowid  on  the  shore  a  little  south  of  Ti- 
berias,  and  called  Hummam  Tubariyeh  ("  Bath  of  Tibe- 
rias") ;  properly  Hammuih-rakkaih  (?  the  Yamim  of 
Gen.  xxxvi,  24),  See  Emmaus.  They  have  been  fully 
described  by  Robinson  {ResearcheSt  iii,  258  8q. ;  see  also 
Hackett*8  Script.  lUust,  p.  815).  Pilny,  speaking  of  the 
Sea  of  Galilee,  says, "  Ab  occi<lente  Tiberiade,  aquis  ca- 
lidis  salubń**  {Hlsł,  Not.  v,  15).  Spacious  baths  were 
built  ovcr  the  principal  spring  by  Ibrahim  Pasha;  but, 
like  every  thing  else  in  Palcstine,  they  are  falling  to  ruin. 
Ancient  ruins  are  strewn  around  it,  and  can  be  traced 
along  the  shore  for  a  considerable  distance;  these  were 
recognised  by  Irby  and  Maiigles  (p..89,6)  aa  the  remains 
of  Ve8pa8ian's  camp  (Joscphus,  War^  i,  4, 3).  There  are 
also  three  amaller  warm  springs  at  this  plaoe.  The  war 
ter  has  a  temperaturę  of  144'^  Fahr.;  the  taste  is  ex- 
tremely  salt  and  bitter,  and  a  strong  smell  of  sulphui  is 
emittcd.  The  whole  surrounding  district  has  a  volcanic 
Bspect.  The  warm  fountains,  the  rocks  of  trap  and 
lava,  and  the  frequent  carthquakea,  prove  that  the  ele- 
ments  of  destruction  are  stili  at  work  beneath  the  sur- 
face.  It  is  said  that  at  the  time  of  the  great  earthąuake 
of  1837  the  ąuantity  of  water  issuing  from  the  springs 
was  greatly  increased,  and  the  temperaturę  much  higher 
than  ordinarily  (Porter,  Ifandbookjbr  S.  and  P.  ii,  428; 
Thomson,  Land  and  Booky  ii,  66 ;  Wilson,  lMnd$  of  the 
Bibie,  ii,  897 ;  Reland,  Pidast.  p.  302, 703).  This  spot  is 
also  mentioned  in  the  Talmud  (Schwarz,  Paletł,  p.  182) 
as  being  situated  one  mile  from  Tiberiaa  (Lightfoot, 
Opp,  ii,  224).  The  Hammoth-dor  of  Josh.  xxi,  32  is' 
probably  the  same  place.    See  Hbmath;  Hammon. 

The  llamath  o/Oadara,  however,  located  by  the  Tal- 
mudists  (see  Lightfoot,  f6.)  at  the  mouth  of  the  Jordan, 
is  a  dilTerent  place  (see  alao  Zunz,  Appendix  to  Benj.  of 
Tudela,  ii,  403) ;  doubtless  the  Amatha  (q.  v.)  of  Jose- 
phus  {Ant.  X,  6,  2),  and  the  modern  Amateh  on  the 
Yarmuk  (Yan  de  Yelde,  Map). 

Haimned^atha  (Heb.  Hammedaiha\  Kn^aH; 
Sept  'A/!ia^a9oc,  Vulg.  Amadaf Atu,  but  both  sometimea 
omit),  father  of  the  infamous  Haman  (q.  v.),  and  com- 
monly  designated  as  "the  Agagite"  (Esth.  iii,  1,  10; 
▼iii,  5;  ix,  24),  though  also  without  that  title  (ix,  10). 
By  Geaeniua  {Lex.  186d,  p.  689)  the  name  ia  taken  to  be 


Afedatha,  preceded  by  the  definite  articlc;  but  Fnrst 
(Lex.  a.  V.),  with  morę  probability,  identifies  it  yrith  the 
Zendic  haómódataj  i.  e.  "given  by  Horn,**  one  of  the 
Izeds.  For  other  explanations,  see  Simonis  {Onomasti' 
conj  p.  586),  who  derives  it  from  a  Peisian  word  mean- 
ing  **  double."  For  the  termination,  compare  Akida- 
THA.    B.C.  antę  474. 

Ham^melech  (Heb.  ham'Me'lek^  "H^^^'  which 
ia  meiely  l^^p,  me'leky  kinff,  with  the  aiticle  pre<ixed; 
Sept.  translates  6  PaaiXfvCfYuig,  Ameleek),  the  father 
oi  Jerahmeel,  which  latter  was  one  of  thoae  commanded 
by  Jehoiakim  to  anreat  Jeremiah  and  Barach  (Jer. 
xxxvi,  26).  RC  antę  605.  It  is  doubtful  whether  thia 
was  the  same  with  the  Hamroelech,  father  of  Makhiah, 
into  whose  dungeon  Jeremiah  was  afterwards  cast  (Jer. 
xxxviii,  6).  KC.  antę  589.  Others,  however,  regard 
the  word  in  both  cases  as  an  appellative,  referring  in  the 
first  pasaage  to  Jehoiakim,  and  in  the  latter  to  Zedekialu 
Compare  Hammolkketh. 

Ham-menachoth.    See  Manahrthite. 

Hammer,  au  indispensable  tool  designated  by  8ev- 
eral  Heb.  terms :  1.  PaUiah'  (01306,  oonnected  etymo- 
logically  with  iraraatf^^  to  atrike),  which  was  used  by 
the  gold-beater  (Isa.  xli,  7,  Sept,  a^vpa)  to  overlay  with 
silver  and  "  smooth"  the  surfaoe  of  the  image,  as  well 
as  by  the  ąuanyman  (Jer.  xxiii,  29,  SepL  irćXi;0 ;  met- 
aphorically  of  Babylon  as  a  deBtructive  agent  (Jer.  1, 23, 
Sept.  a^Dpa).  This  seems  to  have  been  the  heavieat 
instrument  of  the  kind  for  hard  blows.  2.  MaUeabah' 
(Hinisp),  propedy  a  tool  for  koUowmgy  hence  a  stone- 
ctitter  8  mallet  (1  Kings  v],  7),  and  generally  any  work- 
roan'B  hammer  (Judg.  iv,  21  [where  the  form  b  raj^p, 
makhe^heih];  Isa.  xliv,  12;  Jer.  x,  4).  In  Isaiah  the 
Sept.  uses  repiTpov,Bffimktf  in  all  the  rest  o^itpa ;  Yulg. 
malleua.  See  MACCABiBUS.  8.  Halmuth'  (H^iabn), 
used  only  in  Judg.  v,  26;  Sept.  <r^i;pa,  Yulg.  maUd  [q. 
d.  tnicbn] ;  and  then  with  the  addition  of  the  word 
"  workmen's"  by  way  of  explanation,  as  this  is  a  poet- 
ickl  word,  used  insteadof  the  preceding  morę  prosaic 
term.  The  pins  of  the  tent  of  the  Bedouin  are  gener- 
ally of  wood,  and  are  driven  into  the  ground  by  a  mal- 
let, which  is  probably  the  '^hammer"  referred  to  in  thia 
passage  (Thomson,  Land  and  Book,  ii,  149).  Dr.  Hack- 
ett  obeen-es  (Amer.  ed.  of  Smith's  Dke.  s.  v.)  that  ^  it  is 
spoken  of  as  *  the  hammer,*  being  the  one  kept  for  that 
purpoee;"  but  the  Hebrew  term  used  in  Judg.  v,  26  (to 
which  he  refers)  is  without  the  art,  which  is  employcd, 
however,  with  that  found  in  Judg.  iv,  21.  See  Naiu 
4.  A  kind  of  hammer,  named  mappeta'  (yW),  Jer.  li, 
20  (A. Y. "  battle-axe"),  or  mephiu*  (^'■'B?),  Prov.  xxv, 
18  (A.  Y.  *'maul"),  was  used  as  a  weapon  of  war.  h, 
Only  in  the  plur.  {Thxfy^':^yieylappoth'y  ScpLXa(vn^uz, 
Yulg.  a»cia)y  a  poetic  term  equivalent  to  the  preceding 
(Psa.  lxxiv,  6).    See  Hakdickaft.  . 

H&mmerlin  or  Hammerlein,  Felix  (Lat.  MaH" 
koUta),  a  Swiss  theologian,  was  bom  at  Zurich  in  1389. 
He  studied  canon  law  at  Erfurt,  was  in  1421  appointed 
canon  of  Zofingen,  and  In  1422  provo6t  of  Solothum. 
With  the  inoome  of  these  offices  he  bought  a  large  li- 
braiy,  and  applied  himself  eaniestly  to  study.  He  sub- 
sequently  took  part  in  the  Council  of  Basie,  where  he 
showed  great  zeal  for  the  restoration  of  ecclesiastical 
discipline,  and  thus  madę  himself  a  number  of  enemies. 
An  attcmpt  was  madę  to  aasassinate  him  in  1439,  but  he 
escaped,  though  not  without  being  dangerously  wound- 
ed.  The  xxxth  chapter  of  his  De  NMlUate^m  which 
he  abused  the  confederate  cantons  which  had  waged 
war  on  Zurich  in  1443,  madę  him  an  object  of  hatred  to 
a  laige  party  of  his  countiymen.  A  number  of  these, 
having  gone  to  Zurich  on  the  occasion  of  the  Camival 
of  1454,  seized  Hiimroerlin,  dragged  him  to  Constance, 
and  had  him  thrown  into  prison.  As  he  refnsed  to  re^ 
tract  anything  he  had  aaid  or  written,  he  waa  oondeini^ 


HAMMER-PURGSTALL 


53 


HAMMOND 


e4  to  imprisonment  for  life  in  a  conrent.  He  was  ac- 
ooidingly  placed  in  a  convent  of  barefooted  monks  at 
l4icecne,  where  he  died  aome  time  aiUr  1457,  a  yictim 
to  his  zeal  for  justice  aiid  truŁh.  Ue  wrote  Varia  Ob- 
bdatuMUś  Ojntścula  et  Tractatus  (Basie,  1497,  fol),  con- 
raining  a  number  of  treatiaes  on  eKorcism,  on  moiikish 
4i9cipiine,  against  the  Begharda,  etc  He  is  ven*  se- 
^^ere  in  these  writings  against  the  prerailing  comiptions 
of  the  dergr  and  the  conyents.  He  also  left  some  MSS., 
which  are  presenrcd  in  the  collegiate  librao*  o*"  Zurich. 
See  Bodmer  a.  Breitinger,  Hełveii8che  Bibliothek  (Zurich, 
1735) :  Hottlnger,  Schola  Tiffurma,  p.  24 ;  Niceron,  Mi- 
OTotrM,  voL  xxviu ;  Hoefer,  Ńoup,  Biog.  Generale,  xxiii, 
268 :  Reber,  Fełix  Hemmerłin  (Zurich,  1846). 

Hammer-Ptirgstall,  Joseph  von,  a  German  Ori- 

cntaliflt  of  greaŁ  celebrity,  was  bom  July  9,  1774,  at 

Gratz,  in  Styria,  and  died  in  Yienna  Nov.  24, 1856.    Hb 

family  name  was  Hammer,  and  he  is  frequently  referred 

to  rnider  that  name, or  as  Yon  Hammer;  bat  łiaying  in- 

berited  in  1837  the  estates  of  the  coimts  of  Puigstall, 

he  added  that  name  to  his  own,  and  was  madę  a  baron. 

He  entered  at  an  early  age  the  Oriental  Academy  at 

Yieima,  and  aoąuired  a  knowledge  of  Arabie,  Persian, 

and  Turkish.    Ęeing  subeeąuently  employed  in  varioiis 

diplomatic  posts  in  the  East,  he  greatly  extended  his 

acqiiaintaiice  with  Oriental  languages  and  literaturę. 

He  wTote  and  spoke  ten  foreign  languages,  viz.  the  three 

above  namcd.  Greek,  Latin,  Italian,  Spanish,  French, 

Eiiglish,and  Russian ;  but  his  worka  show  rather  vaited 

and  exten8ive  research  and  leaming  than  profound  mas- 

teiy  of  his  subjects.    They  are  by  no  means  free  from 

enofa,  thoogh  his  careful  reference  to  authonties  makes 

ooRtpction  of  mistakes  comparatiyely  easy.     His  writ^ 

iogs,  łnduding  contributions  to  joumals  and  scientiflc 

aasodations,  would  make  morę  than  100  octaro  yolumcs, 

and,  on  the  whole,  are  regarded  as  among  the  most  valu- 

able  contributions  of  the  present  century  to  OrienUl  hi»- 

toiy  and  Uterature.     They  are  noticed  heró  because  of 

the  Information  they  give  as  to  the  religious  history  and 

oondition  of  Oriental  nations.    The  most  importaiit  of 

bis  works  in  this  respect  are  Encydopaditche  Ueber- 

sieht  der  WissenMchftften  dea  Orients  (Lpz,  1804,  2  yols. 

in  l,8vo),  a  work  baaed  on  seven  Oriental  works,  espe- 

cially  the  bibliographtcal  dictionary  of  Hadgi  Khalfa  ^- 

A  waaA  A  IphabeU  and  Ilieroglyphic  Characfert  ezplaht- 

ed;  tpdk  an  A  oeount  ofthe  E^ian  PriesłSy  their  Claue*, 

ImiuEficn,  and  Sacnfiees  (translated  fh>m  the  Arabie  of 

Ahwad  bin-Abuhakr  bin-Wahshih,  London,  1806,  sraall 

4to):  —  Fundgruben  dtM  Orienft,  etc,  ou  Minea  de  POii- 

tnt  erploiłets  (Yienna,  1809-18, 6  yoIh.  in  3,  fol.,  of  which 

Hammer-PurgstaU  was  the  chief  editor)  i—Morffenldnd- 

iśckeM  KMblutt  (Persian  and  Arab  h>'mns,  etc ;  Yienna, 

1818,  4to) : — Gachichte  der  schónen  Redekunste  Persietu 

(yienoM,  1818, 4to) : — Mysterium  Baphomeiis  revelałum 

(yieasm,  1818,  foL ;  also  in  voL  vi  of  Afine*  de  r Orient : 

the  author  herein  seeks  to  prore  from  emblems  on  mon- 

nments  onoe  bek>nging  to  the  Templan  that  their  order 

was  guilty  ofthe  crimescharged  to  it.  Raynouanl  [Joiir- 

Mo/  de*  Savania,  1819]  refuted  this  opiuioń,  but  Hammer- 

Puigatall  defended  it  with  new  aiguments  in  a  paper  in 

the  J/flnotrt  o/  the  Academy  of  Vietma,  1865)  -.—Ge- 

•ekiekie  der  As$atrinen  (Pfcris,  1888, 8vo,  and  an  English 

ed.  by  Wood,  Ilittory  ofthe  Atgcueńu,  Lond.  1835, 8vo. 

The  author  makes  curious  oomparisons  between  the  As- 

laBins,  the  TempUus,  the  Freemasons,  and  the  JesuiŁs) : 

— Ge$ekichfe  des  Onnamsdken  Reicha  (bcst  ed.  Pesth, 

1827-35, 10  Yola.  8ro;  French  tnmslations  by  Dochez, 

Paris,  1844, 8  vols.  8vo,  and  by  Hellert,  with  notes  and 

an  AthM,  Hiatoire  de  V Empire  Ottoman,  Paris,  1835-43, 

18  rok.  8vo)  :—Geackichte  der  Oamaniachen  Dichtkunat 

(Pcflth,  1886-4S8, 10  rola.  8ro— a  oompleter  history  of 

Turkish  poetiy  than  any  extsŁing,  even  in  Turkey  it- 

aelO :— the  celebrated  treatiae  on  morak  by  Ghazali,  un- 

dcr  the  tiUe  of  O  Kmd!  die  berUhmte  ethiache.  Abhand- 

hng  GkasaUa  (sienna,  1838,^  12mo) :  —  Zeiłwarie  dea 

Gebetea,  a  pnyer-book  in  Arabie  and  German  (Yienna, 

1844, 8vo) :  —  lAteratur-Geachichle  der  Araber  (Yienna, 


1856,  7  Yols.  4to:  this  work,  as  fint  published,  enda 
with  the  Bagdad  caliphate,  and  contains  about  10,000 
biographical  and  bibliographical  notioes) :— />as  ArO" 
biache  hohe  Lied  der  Liebe,  etc,  with  commentaiy,  and 
an  introduction  relative  to  mjrsticinn  among  the  Araba 
(Yienna,  1854,  8vo).  Hammer  left  an  autobiography 
{DenkwurdigheUen  aua  meinemLeben)  and  other  writings 
in  MS.,  which  have  been  published,  or  tae  publishing, 
under  the  direction  of  Auer,  director  of  the  imperial 
printing-press  of  Yienna. — New  American  Cychpadia^ 
viii,  690;  Hoefer,  Nouv,  Biog.  Generale,  xxiii,  259  są.; 
Pierer,  sl  v. ;  K.  Schlottman,  Joaeph  von  Il.-PurgataU,  ein 
krUtBcher  Beitrag  zur  Geachichte  neuerer  deuiacher  Wia- 
aenaehaft  (Zurich,  1857,  [78  p.]  8vo).     (J.  W.  M.) 

Hammoreketh  (Heb.  ham-MoWheth,  rs^isn, 
which  is  the  art.  prefixed  to  r2^^,  moWketh,  fem.  part. 
="the  Queen;"  Sept.  i}  MaXf;^iO,Yulg.  translates  re- 
duta), a  woman  introduced  in  the  genealogies  of  Mana»- 
seh  as  daughter  of  Machir  and  sister  of  Gilead  (1  Chroń. 
vii,  17,  18),  and  as  having  among  her  three  children 
Abi-€zcr,  from  whose  family  sprang  the  great  judge 
Gideon.  B.C.  prób.  between  1874  and  1658.  The  Tar- 
gum  translates  the  name  by  rąbu  *!\,  toho  reigned.  The 
Jewish  tradttion,  as  preserred  by  Kimchi  in  hiB  com- 
mentar>'  on  the  passage,  is  that  '^she  used  to  reign  over 
a  i)ortion  of  the  land  which  belonged  to  (lilead,"  and 
that  for  that  reason  her  lineage  has  been  presenred. — 
Smith,  8.  V.    See  Hammelech. 

Ham'mon  (Hebi  Chammon',  "lisH,  warm;  Sept. 
*Aputv  and  Xafib)v\  the  name  of  two  places. 

1.  A  town  in  the  tribe  of  Asher,  mentioucd  between 
Rehob  and  Kanah  (Josh.  xłx,  28).  Dr.  Robinson  quotes 
the  suggcstion  of  Schultz  as  i^oRsible,  that  it  may  be  the 
ruined  town  I/amul,  at  the  head  of  a  wady  of  the  same 
name  which  comes  doni  to  the  Mediterranean  jiist 
north  of  £n-Nakurah,  somewhat  south  of  T}Te  (new  ed. 
of  Beaearchea,  iii,  66).  Schwarz  thinks  it  ią  ideutical 
with  a  yiUage  Jlamani,  ńtuated,  aocording  to  him,  two 
miles  Bouth  by  east  of  Tyre  {Paleat,  p.  192) ;  probably 
the  place  marked  on  Zimmerman'8  and  Yan  de  Yelde^ 
Mapa  aa  Hunnaweh.  The  scriptural  text,  howerer, 
would  seem  to  indicate  a  position  on  the  northem  botm- 
dary,  about  midway  between  Naphtali  (at  Rehob)  and 
Sidon.  Hence  Knobel  {ErU&r.  ad  loc.)  connects  it  with 
the  Tillage  ffamnuma,  ou  a  wady  of  the  same  name  eaat 
of  Beyrftt,  where  there  ia  now  a  Maronite  monastery 
(Seetzen,  i,  260);  but  this,  again,  is  too  far  north  (Keil, 
in  Keil  and  Delitzsch,  ad  loc).  Yan  de  Yelde  (Afemoir 
and  Map)  adopts  the  first  of  the  above  sites,  which,  al* 
though  neither  the  name  nor  the  situation  exactly 
agreea,  is  perhaps  the  best  hitherto  suggested. 

2.  A  LeWtical  city  of  Naphtali,  assigned,  with  ita 
suburbs,  to  the  descendants  of  Gerahom  (1  Chroń,  vi,  76). 
Schwarz  {PcdeaU  p.  183)  not  improbably  conjecturet 
that  it  is  the  same  with  Hakmath  (Josh.  xix,  35). 
Compare  Hammoth-dob  (Josh.  xxi,  32). 

Hammond,  Hekry,  D.D.,  a  leamed  divine  of  the 
English  Church,  was  bom  Aug.  18,  1605,  at  Chcrtsey, 
Surrey.  He  was  sent  at  an  early  age  to  Eton,  whenco 
he  remoYed  to  Magdalen  College,  Oxfonl,  and  became 
a  fellow  of  that  society  in  1625.  In  1633  the  earl  of 
Leicester  presented  him  to  the  rectory  of  Pcnshurst, 
Rent,  where  he  resided  till  1643,  when  he  was  madę 
archdeacon  of  Chichester.  ^  By  birth  and  education  a 
confirmed  Royalist,  he  retired  to  Oxford  soon  after  the 
ciYil  war  broke  out,  continued  to  reside  there  while  that 
city  was  held  by  the  king,  and  attended  the  king's  com^ 
missioners  to  Uxbridge,  where  he  disputed  with  Yines, 
a  Presbyterian  minister.  He  was  appointed  canon  of 
Christchurch  and  public  orator  in  1645,  and  attended 
Charies  I  as  his  chaplain  from  the  time  when  he  fell 
into  the  hands  of  the  arroy  until  the  end  of  1647,  when 
the  king's  attendants  were  eent  away  from  him.  Ham- 
mond then  retumed  to  ()xford,  and  was  chosen  sub- 
dean  of  Christchurch,  from  which  situation  he  was  ex- 


HAMMOTH-DOR 


54 


HAMPDEN 


pelled  in  March,  1648,  by  the  parluunentary  yińton, 
and  plaoed  for  some  time  in  oonfinement  On  his  re- 
lease  he  repaired  to  Westwood^Worcestenhire,  the  seat 
of  Sir  John  Packwood,  where  the  remainder  of  bis  life 
was  spent  in  litenuy  labor,  ^doing  much  good  to  the 
day  of  bis  deatb,  in  which  time  he  had  the  disposal  of 
great  charities  repoeed  in  his  hands,  as  being  the  most 
zealous  promoter  of  almsgiying  that  lired  in  England 
sińce  the  change  of  religion.*  ...  He  died  after  long 
suffering  from  a  compUcation  of  disorders,  April  25, 1660. 
It  is  said  that  Charles  II  intended  for  him  the  bishopric 
of  Worcester.  Hammond  was  a  man  of  great  leaming, 
as  well  in  the  classics  and  generał  philology  as  in  doc- 
trinal  and  school  divinity,  and  posśessed  great  natural 
ability"  (Jones,  ChrisL  Biogr,  p.  210).  Of  his  wiitings 
the  foUowing  are  some  of  the  most  important :  Prac- 
Uccd  Catechifm  (1644): — Paraphrage  and  Armotaiions 
on  the  New  Testament  (Lond.  1653, 8vo;  oflen  reprinted; 
last  edition  1845,  4  toIs.  8vo).  It  was  translated  into 
Latin  by  Leclerc  TAmster.  1698),  with  obsenrations  and 
criticisms.  Dr.  Johnson  wajs  very  fond  of  Hammond*8 
AmtotatianSf  and  recommended  thero  strongly.  The 
theology  of  the  work  is  Arminian.  Parapkrase  and 
Annotationg  upon  the  Psalma  (1659,  fol. ;  new  ed.  1850, 2 
▼ols.  8yo  ) :  —  DiKOurses  on  God'8  Grace  and  Decrees 
(1660,  8vo),  taking  the  Arminian  view: — Annotatiana 
on  the  Proverh»  (1688,  foL) :  —  ^Serwwiw  (1644,  foL). 
These,  with  many  yaluable  writings  on  the  Romish 
oonŁrorersy,  may  be  fomid  in  Fiilman's  CoUected  Workt 
of  Dr,  Hammond  (8d  ed.,  London,  1774,  4  vols.  foL),  of 
which  the  Ist  voL  contains  his  Life  by  Dr.  Feli.  The 
Lift  was  repiinted  in  1849,  and  may  be  found  in  Words- 
worth,  Eccles.  Biography,  iv,  318.  See  also  Hook,  Ecd. 
Biography,  v,  534.  Hammond*8  miscellaneous  theologic- 
al  writings  are  reprłnted  in  the  Library  of  Angh-Catk- 
olic  Theology  (Oxford  1847-51,  4  vols.  8vo). 

Ham'moth-dor  (Heb.  Chammoth^-Dorj^^m  nan, 
prób.  for  ^I^Tiąrt,  HamnuUh  ofDor^  but  the  reason  of 
the  latter  part  of  the  name  is  not  dear ;  Sept.  *Afia^' 
(9ctfp,  Vulg.  Ifamoih  Dor\  a  Leritical  and  refuge  city  of 
Naphtali  (Josh.  xxi,  82) ;  piobably  the  same  elsewhere 
called  simply  Hammath  (Josh.  xix,  85). 

Hamon.    See  B^vai/-h.\mox  ;  Hamon-goo. 

Hamon,  Jean,  a  distingulshed  French  moralist, 
was  bom  at  Cherbourg  in  1618.  He  was  a  graduate 
physician  of  the  Uniyersity  of  Faris.  He  had  already 
/astablished  a  great  reputation,  and  was  offered  a  good 
charge  by  his  pupil,  M.  de  Harlay  (afterwards  president 
of  the  Parliament) ;  but,  by  the  adyice  of  his  spiritaal 
director,  Singlin,  he  sold  all  his  goods,  gave  the  pro- 
ceeds  to  the  poor,  and  became  a  hermit  of  Port  Royal 
in  1651.  He  nerertheless  continued  practicing  medi- 
icine,  yisiting  the  poor  in  the  neighborhood  of  Port  Roy- 
al, and  administering  to  them  both  spiritual  advice  and 
remedies.  The  Necrologe  de  Port  Royal  saj^s:  "After 
a  life  as  carefully  guarded  as  thongh  each  day  was  to 
be  the  last,  he  ended  it  joyfully  by  a  pcaceful  death,  as 
he  had  wished,  and  entered  into  etemal  life,"  Feb.  22, 
1687.  He  wrote  Dwers  Traites  de  PUti  (Paris,  1675, 2 
▼ols,  12mo)  '.—Sur  la  Prure  et  les  Deroire  des  Pasteurs 
(Par.  1689, 2  yols.  12mo) :— La  Praticue  de  la  Priere  eon- 
tinuelle  (Parb,  1702,  Vlino)'.—Explication  du  Caniigue 
des  Cantiguesj  with  an  introduction  by  Nicole  (Paris, 
1708,  4  rols.  12mo)  :—Instructions  pour  ks  Beligieusea 
de  Port  Boyal  (1727  and  1730, 2  vohi.)  :—In»tructions  sur 
ks  SacramentSj  sur  le  Juhiley  etc.  (Paris,  1734, 12mo)  :— 
EiplicaHon  de  FOraison  Dommicak  (Par.  1735),  besides 
other  practical  and  contro^ersial  writings.  See  Necro- 
loge de  Port  Royal  (Amst,  1723,  4to);  Thomas  Dufossd, 
Histoire  de  Port  Royal;  Mhnoires  de  Fontaine;  Dupin, 
Ilisł.  Eccles,  du  17"«  sieckf  Hoefer,  Nouc.  Biog,  Generale, 
xxiii,  272. 

Hamo'nah  (Heb.  ffamonah\  rid'i^rt,  multitude; 
Sept.  translates  noXt;av(^pfov,  Yulg.  yl  mon),  a  name  fig- 
iiratively  asńgned  to  the  sepulchral  '*  city"  of  the  ▼alley 


in  which  the  slaughter  and  borial  of  the  forcei  of  Gog 
are  prophetically  announced  to  take  place  (Esek.  xxxix, 
16),  emblematiód  of  the  multitude  of  grares  (oompare 
Joel  iii,  14).     See  Hamon-gog. 

Ha^mon-gog  (Heb.  flamón^-GSgj  aia  litjn,  mul:i' 
łude  ofGog;  fully  with  »''»,  raUey^  prefixcd;  Sept.  to 
Ta\  TO  vo\vdvSpiov  tov  r<ay,Yulg.  VaUis  mukiłudims 
Gog),  the  name  prophetically  ascribed  to  the  ▼alley  in 
which  the  corpses  of  the  slaughtered  army  of  Gog  ara 
described  as  to  be  buried  (£zek.  xxxix,  11, 15) ;  repre- 
sented  as  situated  to  the  east  of  the  Dead  Sea,  on  the 
thoroughfare  of  oommeroe  with  Arabia  (comp.  the  roat<. 
of  the  Ishmaelites  to  whom  Joseph  was  sold,  Gen.  xyii, 
25),  probably  the  present  Haj  road  between  Damascus 
and  Mecca,  but  scarcely  referring  to  any  particular  spot. 
(See  HilYemick,  Commentar,  ad  loc ;  Stuart'8  Com- 
ment,  on  the  Apo<xdypse,  ii,  367.)     See  Goc. 

Ha^^mor  (Heb.  Chamor",  "^iiWj  a  he-<us ;  Sept  '£/«• 
fi^j  N.  T.  *EfifŁÓp)j  a  Hiyito,  from  whom  (or  his  sons) 
Jacob  purchased  the  plot  of  ground  in  which  Joseph 
was  afterwards  buried  (Gen.  xxxiii,  19;  Josh.  xxiy,d2; 
Acta  ▼ii,  15;  in  which  last  paasage  the  name  b  Angli- 
cized  Emmor),  and  whose  son  Shechem  seduoed  Dinah 
(Greń.  xxxiy,  2).  B*C.  cir.  1905.  As  the  latter  appean 
to  have  founded  the  city  of  Shechem  (q.  ▼.),  Hamor  ia 
also  named  as  the  representatiye  of  its  inhabitants 
(Judg.  ix,  28)  in  the  time  of  Abimelech  (q.  ▼.).  H is  char- 
acter  and  influence  are  indicated  by  his  title  (^*prince** 
of  the  Hiyite  tribe  in  that  Yicinity),  and  his  judicious 
behayior  in  the  case  of  his  son;  but  neilher  of  these 
saved  hun  from  the  indiscriminate  massacre  by  Dinah^s 
brothers.    See  Jacob. 

Hampden,  Renn  Dickson,  D.D.,  bishop  of  Herę- 
ford,  England,  a  descendant  of  John  Hampden,  was  bom 
A.D.  1792,  in  the  island  of  Barbadoea,  where  his  family 
had  settled  in  1670.  He  entered  Oriel  College,  Oxford, 
as  a  commoner,  in  1810,  and  subsequently  was  admitted 
a  fellow,  appointed  a  tutor,  and,  in  1829  and  1831,  was 
public  examiner  in  classics.  He  delirered  the  Bamp- 
ton  lecture  in  1832,  choośng  for  his  subject  The  Scho- 
lastic  PhUosophy  considered  in  it*  relaiion  to  Christian 
Theology  (dd  edit.  liond.  1848, 8vo),  and  in  1833  was  ap- 
pointed principal  of  St.  Mary's  HalL  In  1834  he  was 
elected  White'8  professor  of  morał  philosophy  (Oxford), 
and  published  a  pamphlet  entitled  Obsenrations  on  Re- 
ligious  Dissent.  The  opinions  expre8sed  in  thb  work 
and  in  his  Bampton  lecture  were  madę  the  grounds  of 
opposition  to  his  confirmation  in  1836  as  regius  professor 
of  divinity  (Oxford),  to  which  Lord  Melbourne,  then 
premier,  had  appointed  him.  The  controrersy  over  this 
appointment,  which  assumeci  the  character  of  a  yiolent 
struggle,  and  is  known  as  the  First  Hampden  Case,  ap- 
pears  to  ha^e  been  based  on  political  feelings  aa  well  as 
theoli^ical  grounds.  His  principal  opponents  were  To- 
ries  and  High-Churchmen,  among  whom  were  Dr.  Pu- 
sey  and  J.  H.  Newman,  now  a  Roman  Catholic.  A  re- 
monstrance  against  the  appointment  was  aent  to  the 
archbishop  of  Canterbury,  to  be  presented  to  the  crown. 
A  declaration,  condemning  Hampden*s  "  modę  of  view- 
ing  the  doctrincs  of  the  Bibie  and  the  Articles  of  the 
Church"  was  numcrously  signed  by  residents  of  the  uni- 
▼ersity,  and  an  effort  was  madę  in  the  House  of  Conyo- 
cation  to  pass  a  statute  expre8aing  want  of  confidence 
in  his  view8,  which  was  only  frustrateil  by  the  interpo- 
sition  of  the  proctors.  The  struggle  was  renewed  iii  the 
Second  Hampden  Case,  oocasioned  by  Hampden's  ap- 
pointment to  the  see  of  Hereford  by  lord  John  Russell 
in  1847.  Thirteen  of  the  bishops  remonstrated  against 
the  appointment,  "appealing  to  the  former  oontroYeny, 
and  urging  the  inexpediency  of  placing  over  the  deigy 
one  whose  opinions  were  rcndered  suspicious  by  the  de- 
cision  of  a  body  llke  the  Uniyersity  of  Oxford."  Hamp- 
den's  friends  replied  that  a  change  had  taken  place  in 
the  minds  of  the  members  of  the  Con^ocation  of  the  Uni- 
▼er^ity,  rcducing  the  proportions  of  474  to  94  in  1836^ 
to  330  to  219  in  1842,  on  the  proposition  to  repeal  Um 


HAMPDEN  CASES 


66 


HANANI 


czprenon  of  oensure ;  and  further,  that  many  who  cen- 
sored  Hampden  *'objected  to  the  univenity  as  an  arbi- 
ter of  doctrinc  in  the  caae  of  Tract  xc,  and  of  Mr.  Ward'8 
Jdeal  o/the  Churdu^  The  opposition,  as  in  the  former 
caM,  arose  mainly  fnnn  political  opponents  and  from 
TractariansL  The  govemiiient  refused  to  yield,  and  Dr. 
Hampden  was  installed  as  bishop  of  Hereford,  and  thence- 
Ibrth  devoted  himself  to  his  eptsoopai  duties,  the  attacks 
aponhimgraduallyceasing.  HediedApril28,1866.  His 
poaition  was  that  of  a  moderate  churchman,  and  the  ex- 
piesBion  of  his  \iew8  at  this  day  cotUd  hardly  provoke 
so  fierce  an  opposition  as  in  1836.  A  list  of  the  most 
important  pamphlets  relating.  to  the  Hampden  cases  is 
given  by  Allibone,  s.  v.  łlantpdm,  Besides  the  works 
mentioned  abore,  Dr.  Hampdcn'8  most  important  writ- 
ings  aie,  PkUosophieał  Evidaux  ofChristianity,  etc.  (1 827, 
8vo) : — LecturtB  on  Aforal  PkUoiopky  (8vo)  i^Parochial 
Sermom  (1836, 8vo)  i^Ledure  on  TraditUm  (1841, 8vo) : 
Sermon$  befort  the  Umcersky  ofOr/ord  (1886-1847) : 
—a  Reriew  of  the  writinf^s  of  Thomas  Aąoinas  in  the 
JSneycL  MetropoHtana,  whieh  led  Hallam  to  character- 
iae  Hampden  ''as  the  only  En^hman  who,  sińce  the 
reri^^al  of  letters,  has  penetrated  into  the  wildeniess  of 
acholastidam  ;**  and  the  artides  on  SocrateSy  Plaio,  and 
A  rittotlf.  Ul  the  EncycL  Briianmca,  See  English  RevieWy 
Tiii,  430 ;  ix,  229 ;  Blackw.  Mag.  No.  246  (AprU,  1886) ; 
Brit.  amd  For,  Rev.  xv,  169;  K  Brił,  Rańew,  viii,  286 ; 
EduL,  Ret.  lxiii,  225 ;  FroMer^a  Mag,  xxxvii,  105 ;  Edec, 
Ra,  4th  scries,  xxiii,  221 ;  ADibone,  Did.  of  A  uihort^  i, 
780;  Chamben'8  Cgdop.  of  Englith  Literatura,  ii,  738 
(Philada.  1867) ;  Bose,  in  Chur<A  Hist.fram  ThirteentA 
CemUtry  to  Preaent  Tme,  in  crown  8vo  edition  of  Encyd, 
Mełropołitana,p,3So,    (J.W.M.) 

Hampden  Cases.    See  Hampdbn,  R.  D. 

Hampton-CotiTt  Conference.    See  Confer- 


Ramran     See  Hebidaic. 

Bbunn'el  (Heb.  Chammud\  ^i<!ian,  heai  [?ai^er 
othffkt]  ofGod;  SepL  'AfiovqX,yu]g.^amiitf/)f  the  son 
of  If  ishma  and  (apparently)  fathcr  of  Zacchur,  of  the 
tiibe  of  Simeon  (1  Chroń,  iv,  26>    B.a  antę  1046. 

Ha^mnl  (Heb.  Chamul',  i^«n,  tpared;  Sept.  Tj- 
fcovi|X),  the  second  of  the  two  sons  of  Fharez,  son  of  Ju- 
dah  (1  (^ron.  ii,  5).  He  could  not  have  been  bom, 
bowever,  before  the  migration  of  Jacob  into  Eg^^pt  (as 
appears  to  be  stated  in  Gen.  xlvi,  12),  sińce  Pharcz  was 
not  at  that  time  grown  up  (Gen.  xxxviii,  1).  His  de- 
soendants  were  caDed  Hamulites  (Numb.  xxvi,  21). 
&C.  between  1870  and  1856. 

Ha'mnlite  (Heb.  ChamuU%  '^i^m,  Sept.  'If/łow- 
ipu),  M.  descendant  of  Hamuł  (q.  v.),  the  grandson  of 
Jndah  (Numb.  xxvi,  21). 

Hasnu'tal  (Heb.  Ckaimttał%  h^^m,  kmtman  o/the 
dett;  Sept.  'AfurdK,  bat  in  Jer.  lii,  1  'A/iiraaX,yalgate 
Amiial;  bat  the  Heb.  text  has  h^^^W,  ChamUaV  [of 
tbe  same  import],  in  2  Kings  xxiv,  18 ;  Jer.  lii,  1),  the 
daugbter  of  Jercmiah  of  libnah,  wife  of  king  Josiah 
and  mother  of  king  Jehoahaz  (2  Kings  xxiii,  81),  also 
of  king  Zedekiah  (2  Kings  xxiv,  18 ;  Jer.  lii,  1).  B.C. 
€32-619. 

Hanam^eei  (Heb.  Chanamel',  ^Kpąn,  perh.  i.  q. 
Hananeilf  SepL  'A  vafutj\  ,Vu]g.  J/anamed\  son  of  Shal- 
liim  and  cotisin  of  Jeremiah,  to  whoro,  before  the  siege 
of  Jemsalem,  he  sold  a  field  which  he  possesscd  in  Ana- 
thoth,  a  town  of  the  Levites  (Jer.  xxxii,  6-12).  If  this 
fieki  belonged  to  Hanameel  as  a  Levite,  the  sale  of  it 
wouki  imply  that  an  ancient  law  had  fallen  into  disuse 
(Lev.  xxv,  34) ;  but  it  is  possible  that  it  may  have  been 
the  property  of  Hanameel  in  right  of  his  mother.  0>m- 
pare  the  case  of  Bamabas,  who  was  also  a  Levite ;  and 
the  notę  of  Grotius  on  Acts  iv,  87.  Henderson  (on  Jer. 
xxxii,  7)  Bopposes  that  a  portion  of  the  Levitical  estates 
nught  be  sold  within  the  tribe.  Fairbaim  (s.  v.)  sug- 
gista  that  as  this  was  a  typical  act,  the  ordinaiy  civil 


rulea  do  not  apply  to  it.  The  transaction,  however,  was 
conducted  with  all  the  forms  of  legał  transfer,  at  the 
special  instance  of  Jehovah,  and  was  intended  to  eviiioe 
the  certainty  of  restoration  from  the  approaching  exile 
by  showing  that  poesessions  which  could  be  established 
by  docnments  would  yet  be  of  futurę  value  to  the  po»> 
sesBor  (Jer.  xxxu,  13-15).     KC  589.— Kitto,  s.  v. 

Qa'nan  (Heb.  Ckanan%  •jjn,  merdful,  or  perh.  rather 
an  abbreviation  of  •jnil,  later  John  [see  Ananias  ;  Ha- 
NANi,  etc] ;  Sept.  'AvaV,  but  in  Jer.  xxxv,  4  *\vaviaQ), 
the  name  of  at  Icast  seven  men.  See  also  Baał-Ha- 
NAN;  Ben-Hanan;  Elon-beth-Hanan. 

1.  One  of  the  sons  (or  desoendants)  of  Shashak,  a 
chief  of  the  tribe  of  Benjamin  resident  at  Jemsalem  (1 
Chroń,  viii,  23).   RC.  apparently  between  1612  and  109a 

2.  Son  of  Maachah,  and  one  of  David'B  heroes  (1 
C^hron.  xi,  43).     RC.  1 046. 

3.  Father  of  Igdaliah, "  a  man  of  Giod;''  in  the  cham- 
ber  of  his  sons  Jeremiah  tested  the  iidelity  of  the  Rech- 
abites  (Jer.  xxxv,  4).    B.C.  antę  606. 

4.  The  last  named  of  the  six  sons  of  Azd  the  Benja- 
mite  (1  Chroń.  viu,  38 ;  ix,  44>     RC.  cir.  688. 

5.  One  of  the  Nethinim  whose  family  retumed  from 
the  captivity  with  Zerubbabel  (Ezra  ii,  46;  Neh.  vii, 
49>    RC.ante58& 

6.  One  of  the  Levites  who  assisted  Ezra  in  expound- 
ing  the  law  to  the  people  (Neh.  viii,  7 ;  comp.  ix,  4, 5> 
He  also  subscribed  the  sacred  oovenant  with  Nehemiah 
(Neh.  X,  10).  From  Neh.  xiii,  18,  it  appears  that  he 
was  the  son  of  Zaccur,  and,  on  account  of  his  integrity, 
he  was  one  of  those  appointed  to  distribute  the  Leviti- 
cal  rerenues  among  his  brethren.     RC.  ai,  410. 

7.  One  of  the  chiefs  of  the  people  who  subscribed  the 
solemn  covenant  drawn  up  by  Nehemiah  (Neh.  x,  22). 
In  ver.  26  his  name  appears  to  be  repeated  in  the  same 
list.     RC.  cir.  410. 

Hanan'ełśl  (Heb.  CAafun«>r,^K»n,  which  God  hat 
graciously  ^'mi;  SepL  'Ava^fi7X,Vulgate  Hananeel),  a 
tower  (7^|l^)  of  Jemsalem,  situated  on  the  exterior  wali 
beyond  the  tower  of  Meah  in  going  from  the  Sheep- 
gate  towards  the  Fish-gate  (Neh.  iii,  1 ;  xii,  39).  It  is 
also  mentioned  iu  Jer.  xxxi,  88 ;  Zech.  xiv,  10.  Its  po- 
sition  appears  to  havc  been  at  the  north-eastem  comer 
of  the  present  moeque  uidosure  (see  Strong'8  Ilarmonjf 
and  Expo$.,  Append.  ii,  p.  19).  Schwarz  {Polesi,  p.  251) 
also  locates  it  in  this  vicinity,  but  absurdly  identiiies  it 
with  the  tower  of  Hippicus.  See  Jerusalem.  Gese- 
niuB  {Thes.  Hd>.  s.  v.)  suggests  that  it  may  have  been 
80  called  from  the  name  of  its  fouuder  or  builder. 

Hana''ni  (Heb  Chanatd',  "^ąsn,  God  hot  gratified  me, 
or  an  abbieviation  of  the  name  Jlanamah ;  SepL  'Avavi, 
but  'Avavia  in  Ezra  x,  10,  and  *Avaviac  in  Neh.vii,_2; 
Vulg.  Ifanam),  the  name  of  at  least  three  men. 

1.  One  of  the  sons  of  Heman,  who  (with  his  e]cven 
kinsmen)  had  charge  of  the  eighteenth  divusion  of  Le- 
Wtical  musicians  in  the  appointments  of  David  (1  Chroń. 
xxv,  4, 25).     RC.  1014. 

2.  A  prophet  who  wai  sent  to  rebuke  king  Asa  for 
his  want  of  faith  in  subsidizing  the  king  of  Syria  against 
the  rival  king  Baasha,  whereas  he  should  rather  have 
seizcd  the  occasion  to  triumph  ovcr  both  (2  Chroń,  xvi, 
1-10).  In  punishment  for  this  defection  from  the  trae 
God,  he  was  threatene<l  with  a  troublous  residue  to  his 
reign.  Sec  Asa.  Enraged  at  the  prophet*s  boldncas, 
(hc  king  seized  and  thrust  him  into  priaon,  from  which, 
however,  ho  appears  to  have  been  soon  released.  RC. 
928.  This  Hanani  is  probably  the  same  with  the  father 
of  the  prophet  Jehu,  who  denounced  king  Baasha  (t 
Kings  xvi,  7),  also  king  Jehoshaphat  (2  Chroń,  xix,  2; 
comp.  xx,  34). 

3.  Apparently  a  brother  of  Nehemiah,  who  went  from 
Jemsalem  to  Shushan,being  sent  most  probably  by  Ezra, 
and  brought  that  Information  respecting  the  miBerablfi 
condition  of  the  retumed  Jews  which  led  to  the  missiim 
of  Nehemiah  (Neh.  i,  2).    Hauani  came  back  to  Judea, 


HANANIAH 


66 


HANBT 


probftbly  abng  with  hU  brotheri  and,  together  with  one 
Hananiabi  was  appointed  to  take  charge  of  the  gates  of 
Jenualem,  and  aee  that  they  were  opened  in  tbe  mora- 
ing  and  cloaed  in  tbe  evening  at  the  appointed  time 
(Neh.  vti,  2).  The  circumstanceB  of  tbe  time  and  place 
rendered  thia  an  important  and  reeponaible  duty,  not 
unattended  with  danger.    B.G.  446. — Kitto,  a.  v. 

Hanani^ah  (HeK  [and  Chald.]  Chananjfah^n^^m, 
alflo  [1  Chroń.  zxyy  23 ;  2  Chroń,  xxvi,  11;  Jer.  xxxvi, 
12]  in  the  prolonged  form  Chananya'hUf  ilh^ąąn,  whom 
Jehovah  kas  graciooaly  gweny  comp.  A  nanias,  etc ;  Sept. 
'Avavia  or  'AvaviaCf  Yulg.  llanama),  the  name  of  a 
nnmber  of  men.    See  also  Akaniah  ;  Ankas,  etc 

1.  A  '*8on"  of  Sbashak,  and  chief  of  tbe  tribe  of  Ben- 
jamin  (1  Chroń,  viii,  24).  B.C  apparently  between 
1612  and  1093. 

2.  One  of  the  sona  of  Heman,  who  (with  eleven  of 
his  kinsmen)  was  appointed  by  David  to  saperintend 
the  8Lxteenth  diyision  (blowers  on  horas)  of  Levitical 
mosidans  ( 1  Chroń,  xxv,  4, 28).    Ra  1014 

3.  One  of  king  Uzziah'8  chief  military  officers  (2 
Chroń,  xxvi,  11).     Ra  808. 

4.  The  father  of  Shelemiah  and  grandfather  of  Irijab, 
wbich  last  was  the  guard  of  the  gate  of  Benjamin  who 
arrested  Jeremiah  (Jer.  xxxvłi,  18).  RC.  considerably 
antę  589. 

5.  Father  of  Zedekiab,  wbich  latter  was  one  of  the 
''princes"  to  whom  Michaiah  reported  Barach  *8  reading 
of  Jeremiah's  roU  (Jer.  xxxvi,  12).    Ra  antę  605. 

6.  Son  of  Ażur,  a  false  prophet  of  Gibeon,  who,  by 
opposing  his  prophecies  to  those  of  Jeremiah,  broaght 
upon  himself  the  terrible  sentence,  *'  Thou  shalt  die  thU 
pear,  because  thou  hast  tanght  rel)eUion  against  the 
Lord."  He  died  accordingly  (Jer.  xxviii,  1  sq.).  Ra 
595. — ^Kitto,  8.  V.  Hananlah  publicly  prophesied  in  tbe 
Tempie  that  withm  two  yean  Jeconiah  and  all  his  fel- 
low-captives,  with  the  yessels  of  the  Lord^s  house  which 
Nebuchadnezzar  had  taken  away  to  Babylon,  sbould  be 
brought  back  to  Jerusalem  (Jer.  xxviii) :  an  indication 
that  treacherous  negotiations  were  already  secretly 
opened  with  Pharaoh-Hophra  (who  hml  just  succeeded 
Plsammis  on  the  Egyptian  throne),  and  that  strong 
hopes  were  entertained  of  the  destruction  of  the  Baby- 
lonian  power  by  him,  The  preceding  chapter  (xxvii, 
8)  shows  further  that  a  league  was  already  in  progress 
between  Judah  and  the  neighboiing  nations  of  Edom, 
Ammon,  Moab,  Tyre,  and  Zidon,  for  the  purpofle  of  or- 
ganizing  rcsistance  to  Nebuchadnezzar,  in  combination, 
no  doubt,  Mrith  the  projected  movement8  of  Pharaoh- 
Hophra.  Ilananiah  corroborated  his  prophecy  by  tak- 
ing  off  from  the  neck  of  Jeremiah  the  yoke  which  he 
wore  by  divine  oommand  (Jer.  xxvii)  in  token  of  the 
Bubjection  of  Judaea  and  the  neighboring  countries  to 
the  Babylonian  empire),  and  breaking  it,  adding,  ^'Thus 
saith  Jehovah,  £ven  so  will  I  break  the  yoke  of  Nebu- 
chadnezzar, king  of  Babylon,  from  tbe  neck  of  all  na- 
tions within  the  space  of  two  fuli  years."  But  Jeremi- 
ah was  bid  to  go  and  tell  Uananiah  that  for  the  wooden 
yokes  which  he  had  broken  he  sbould  make  yokes  of 
iron,  80  firm  was  the  dominion  of  Babylon  destined  to 
be  for  8eventy  years.  The  prophet  Jeremiah  added 
this  rebuke  and  prediction  of  Hananiah's  death,  the  ful- 
filment  of  which  closes  the  history  of  this  false  prophet. 
The  history  of  Hananiah  is  of  great  interest,  as  throw- 
ing  much  light  upon  the  Jewish  politics  of  that  event^ 
ful  time,  divided  as  parties  were  into  the  partisans  of 
Babylon  on  one  hand,  and  Egypt  on  the  other.  It  also 
exhibits  the  machinery  of  false  prophecies,  by  which 
the  irreligious  party  sought  to  promote  their  own  poli- 
cy,  in  a  very  ilisLinct  form.  At  the  same  time,  too,  that 
it  explain8  in  generał  the  sort  of  political  calculation  on 
which  Buch  false  prophecies  were  hazardeil,  it  supplies 
an  important  elew  in  particular  by  which  to  judge  of 
the  datę  of  Phariioh-Hophra^s  (or  Aprie9'8)  accession  to 
tbe  £g>'ptian  throne,  and  the  commencement  of  his  in- 
effectual  elfort  to  restore  the  power  of  EgjT)t  (which 


bid  been  prostrate  sińce  Necho's  overtbrow,  Jer.  xlvi, 
2)  upon  the  ruins  of  the  Babylonian  empire.  The  lean- 
ing  to  Egypt  indicated  by  Hananiah*s  prophecy  as  har- 
ing  begun  m  tbe  fourth  of  Zedekiah,  had  in  tbe  8ixth 
of  his  reign  iseued  in  open  defection  from  Nebuchadnez- 
zar, and  in  the  guilt  of  perjury,  which  coet  Zedekiah  his 
crown  and  his  life,  as  we  leam  from  Ezek.  xvii,  12-20; 
tbe  datę  being  fixed  by  a  comparison  of  Ezek.  viii,  1 
with  XX,  1.  The  temporary  success  of  the  łntrigue^ 
which  is  described  in  Jer.  xxxvii,  was  speedily  foUowed 
by  the  return  of  the  Chaldseans  and  the  destruction  of 
the  city,  according  to  the  prediction  of  Jeremiah.  This 
history  of  Hananlah  also  illustrates  the  manner  in  which 
the  false  prophets  hindered  the  mission,  and  obstructed 
tbe  benefloent  effects  of  the  ministry  of  the  tnie  proph- 
ets, and  affords  a  remarkable  exampie  of  the  way  in 
which  they  prophesied  smooth  things,  and  sald  peaoe 
when  there  was  no  peace  (compare  1  Kings  xxii,  U,  24> 
25). — Smith,  s.  v.    See  Jeremiah. 

7.  The  original  name  of  one  of  Daniers  ronthful 
companions  and  one  of  the  "three  Hebrew  children;** 
better  known  by  his  Babykmian  name  Siiadkach  (Dan. 
i;  vi,  7). 

8.  Son  of  Zenibbabel,  and  father  of  Rephaiah;  one 
of  the  patemal  ancestors  of  Christ  (1  Chroń,  ui,  19,  21). 
(See  Stiong's  Ilamu  and  ExpoB.  ofthe  GoipeU,  p.  16, 17.) 
RC.  post  636.  He  is  posńbly  the  same  with  No  10. 
See  Gbnealooy  of  Christ. 

9.  One  of  the  "sons"  of  Bebai,  an  Israelite  who  re- 
nounced  his  Gentile  wife  after  the  return  from  Babylon 
(Ezrax,28).     RC.459. 

10.  The  «  ruler  of  the  palące*'  (n^''an  *łb),  and  the 
person  who  was  associatcd  with  Nehemiah*s  brother 
Hanani  in  the  chaige  of  the  gates  of  Jerusalem.  See 
Hanani.  The  high  eulogy  is  bestowed  upon  him  that 
*'  he  was  a  faithful  man,  and  feared  God  above  many" 
(Neh.  vii,  2).  His  office  seems  to  have  been  one  of  au- 
thority  and  trust,  and  perhaps  the  same  as  that  of  Elia- 
kim,who  was  "over  the  house"  in  the  reign  of  Heze- 
kiah.  See  Euakim.  The  arrangements  for  guarding 
the  gates  of  Jerusalem  were  intrusted  to  him  with  Ha- 
nani, the  Tirshatha^s  brother.  I'rideaux  thinka  that 
the  appointment  of  Hanani  and  Hananiah  indicates  that 
at  this  time  Nehemiah  retumed  to  Persia,  but  without 
suffident  ground  Nehemiah  seems  to  have  been  con- 
tinuously  at  Jerusalem  for  some  time  after  the  comple* 
tion  of  the  wali  (vii,  5,  65 ;  viii,  9 ;  x,  1).  If,  too,  the 
term  M'^'^^}^  means,  as  Gesenius  supposes,  and  as  the 
use  of  it  in  Neh.  ii,  8,  roakes  not  improbable,  not  the 
palące,  but  the  fortress  of  the  Tempie,  callcd  by  Josephus 
fidpic,  there  is  sdll  less  reason  to  imagine  Nehcmiah*8 
absence.  In  this  case  Hananiah  would  be  a  priest,  per- 
haps of  the  same  family  as  the  preceding.  The  render- 
ing, moreover,  of  Neh.  vii,  2,  8,  sbould  probably  be,' 
*<And  I  enjoined  (or  gave  orders  to)  Hanani  .  .  .  and 
Hananiah,  the  captains  of  the  fortress  .  .  .  conceminff 
Jerusalem,  and  said,  Let  not  the  gates,"  etc  There  is 
no  authority  for  rendering  b?  by  "  orer" — •*  He  gave 
such  an  one  charge  over  Jerusalem."  The  passages 
quoted  by  Gesenius  are  not  one  of  them  to  the  poinu — 
Smith,  8.  V. 

11.  The  son  of  *<one  of  the  apothecaries"'(or  makera 
of  the  Bacred  ointments  and  incense,  Exod.  xxx,  22-38), 
who  repaired  part  of  the  walls  of  Jerusalem  (Neh.  iii, 
8) ;  possibly  the  same  with  No.  9.     RC.  446. 

12.  A  son  of  Shelemiah,  and  one  of  the  priests  who 
repaired  those  parts  of  the  wali  of  Jerusalem  opposito 
their  houses  (Neh.  iii,  30).     B.C.  446. 

13.  A  priest,  apparently  son  of  Jeremiah,  aflcr  tho 
captivity  (Neh,  xii,  12) ;  probably  the  same  with  one  of 
those  who  celebrated  the  completion  ofthe  walls  of  Je- 
rusalem (ver.  41).     Ra  446. 

Hańby,  Thomas,  an  English  Wesleyan  preacber, 
was  bom  at  Carlisle  Dec  16, 1738 ;  was  left  an  orphan 
at  8even,  and  bound  to  a  trade  at  twelve.  He  had  little 
education,  but  had  serious  thoughts  from  infancy,  and 
was  confirmed  at  thirteen.    Some  time  after,  throogfa 


HANCOCK 


57 


HAND 


MctbodSatiaiooioe,  he  was  oonrerted.  In  1754  he  be- 
gan  to  pnacfaf  and,  during  his  fint  year  of  work,  was 
oftn  in  danger  of  riolenŁ  death  fiom  moba.  In  17&5 
ht  WM  admitted  into  the  itinerancy.  He  afierwardB 
pRtehed  in  moit  of  the  dties  of  the  kingdom.  He  died 
at  Noctingham  Dec.  29, 1796.  Mr.  Hanby'8  labors  tend- 
ed  greatly  to  the  sprńd  of  yital  religion  among  aome 
of  the  iDost  abandoned  and  yiolent  districts  of  England. 
See  Jackson,  LMWt  o/£ar^  Melkodist  Preacken,  i,  274. 
(G.LT.) 

Hancock,  Thoxas,  a  ]>ation  of  Haryard  College. 
He  left  most  of  his  property  to  his  nephew,  govemor 
Hanoock,  bot  yet  beqaeathed  £1000  lor  the  foundation 
of  a  prafeaaonhip  of  the  Hehrew  and  other  Oriental  lan- 
goagea  at  Hanrard ;  £1000  to  the  Society  for  propaga- 
tiiig  the  Gospel  among  the  Indiana,  and  £600  to  the 
town  of  Boaton  for  the  establishment  of  a  hospital  for 
the  insane.  He  died  at  Boston  August  1, 1764.— ^  mi. 
Stsitler,  1764. 

MaDdC^,9Ód,theqpen^ahn\  S)5, itopA, the Ao^Zcno 
ofthe  pirtly^doeed  hand;  Greek  x<(p;  l"*?^*  y*'^**'? 
the  rigkt  hand,  it^ ;  ^isiS,  aenUil',  the  left  hand,  aptff- 
rff>a,cv«ń/v;iov),the  princi]>al  organ  of  feeling,  rightly 
denominated  by  Galen  the  instrument  of  Instruments, 
ŚDce  this  member  is  wondeifully  adapted  to  the  purposes 
for  which  it  was  deeigned,  and  senres  to  illustrate  the 
visdom  and  proYidenoe  of  the  great  Creator  QThe  Hani, 
its  MeckoMUm  tmd  vUai  Endowments,  <u  erincmg  Degigriy 
Łj  Sir  Charies  Bell).  Considering  the  multiplex  effica- 
cjr  of  the  human  hand,  the  contiol  which  it  has  giyen 
man,the  oonąueet  OYer  the  extemal  world  which  it  has 
enabM  him  to  achiere,  and  the  pleasing  and  useful  rer- 
olotions  and  iniprovenienta  which  it  has  brought  about, 
we  SR  not  sorprised  to  read  the  glowing  eulogy  in 
which  Cicero  {De  NaL  Deor,  ii,  60)  has  indulged  on  the 
iobject,  nor  to  find  how  important  is  the  part  which  the 
hand  periorms  in  the  reoords  of  divine  reyelation.  The 
band  itself  serrea  to  distinguish  man  firom  other  terres- 
trial  beinga.  Of  the  two  hands,  the  right  has  a  prefer- 
ence  deriTed  from  natura!  endowment.    See  Lsirr- 

Haods  are  Łbe  symbols  of  human  action ;  pure  hands 
fle  porę  actiona;  mijust  hands  are  deeds  of  injustioe; 
hańb  fuD  of  blood,  acUons  stained  with  cnielty,  and  the 
Eke  (Pto.  xc,  17;  Job  ix,  80;  1  Tim.  ii,  8;  laa.  i,  15). 
Waafaing  of  the  hands  was  the  symbol  of  innooence  (Pisa. 
zxn,  6;  lxxiii,  18).  Of  this  Pilate  fumishes  an  exam- 
ple  (Ifatt.  xxyii,  24).  It  was  the  custom  of  the  Jews  to 
washtheir  handa  before  andafter  meat  (see  MarkTii,8; 
Hstt  ri,  2;  Lukę  xi,  88).  Waahing  of  hands  was  a 
ijnnboł  of  erpiałumj  as  might  be  shown  by  numerous 
■tferenoes;  and  of  soiic/(/S(xtfKm, as  appears  fimm  aevend 
pttiBges(lCor.vi,ll;  Isa.1,16;  PBa.xxiv,8,4).  See 
Washcso  op  H A2IDS.  Paul,  in  1  Tim.  ii,  8,  saya,  ** I  will 
thoefoce  that  men  pray  eyerywhere,  lifHng  vp  hofy 
htadś^  etc.  (aee  Job  xi,  18, 14).  The  elevation  or  ex- 
towm  of  the  right  hand  was  also  the  andent  method 
of  Toting  in  po^pułar  aasemblies,  as  indicated  by  the 
Oreek  term  y^po^*^**  (Acts  xiv,  23;  2  Cor.  viii,  19). 
Ib  IVa.  lxxvu,  2,  for  **aan,"  the  maigin  of  our  version 
litB''hand;"  and  the  correct  sense  is,  ^ My  handa  in  the 
■ight  were  apread  out,  and  oeased  not" 

Toaoutc  the  hands  togetherover  the  head  wąsa  ges- 
tare  of  despairing  giief  (2  Sam.  xiii,  19 ;  Jer.  ii, 87).  The 
czpreaaioD  in  Jer.  ii,  87,  "Thy  hands  upon  thy  head," 
BST  be  expilained  1^  the  act  of  Tamar  in  laying  her 
bsnd  on  her  hemd  as  a  sign  of  her  degradation  and  sor- 
»w  (2  Sam.  xiii,  19).  The  expression  <<Though  hand 
ym  in  hand"  in  Piov.  xi,  21,  is  simply  ^  hand  to  hand," 
«>d  aignifies  Łhrough  aU  ages  and  generations,  eter: 
"Łhroagh  aU  generations  the  wicked  shaU  not  go  un- 


To  the  ri^  band  signified  to  the  mmtĄ^  the  southem 
qattter,  n  the  l^Jt  hand  signified  the  norih  (Job  xxiii, 
^:  1  Sam.  xxiii,  19;  2  Sam.  xxiv,  5).  The  term  A<ziui 
I  uaed  ibr  a  monument,  a  tiophy  of  v]ctory 


(1  Sam.  XV,  12);  a  sepulchral  monument,  <<Abealom*8 
Place,"  Uterally  Absalom's  Hand  (2  Sam.  xviii,  18 ;  see 
Erdmann,  MofUimentum  A  btalomij  Helmst.  1740).  Śo  in 
Isa.  lvi,  5,  **  to  them  will  I  give  a  place  yrithin  my  walls 
—a  monument  (or  portion)  and  a  name"  (Gesenius,  The- 
8aur.Neb.p.66S), 

To  g^ve  the  right  hand  was  a  pledge  of  fidelity,  and 
was  considered  as  oonfirming  a  promise  or  bargain  (2 
Kings  X,  15 ;  Ezra  x,  19) ;  spoken  of  the  vanqui8hed 
giving  their  hands  as  a  pledge  of  submission  and  fidel- 
ity to  the  victor8  (Ezek.  xvii,  18 ;  Jer.  1, 15 ;  Lam.  v,  6) ; 
80  to  strike  hands  as  a  pledge  of  suretiship  (Prov.  xvii, 
18 ;  xxii, 26 ;  2  Chroń,  xxx,  8,  margin).  The  right  hand 
was  lifted  up  in  swearing  or  taking  an  oath  (Gen.  xiv, 
22 :  Deut.  xxxii,  40 ;  Ezek.  xx,  28 ;  Psa.  cxUv,  U ;  Isa. 
lxif,  8) ;  similar  is  the  Arabie  oath, "  By  the  right  hand 
of  AUah."     (See  Tayk)r's  FragmetOs,  No.  278.) 

Hand  in  generał  is  the  8}'mbol  of  power  and  strength, 
and  the  right  hand  morę  particularly  so.  To  hołd  by 
the  right  hand  is  the  symbol  of  protection  and  favor 
(Psa.  xviii,  85).  To  stand  or  be  at  one'8  right  hand  is 
to  aid  or  assbt  any  one  (Psa.  xvi,  8 ;  cix,  91 ;  ex,  5; 
cxxi,  5) ;  so  also  **  man  of  thy  right  hand,"  L  e.  whom 
thou  snstainest,  aidest  (Psa.  lxxx,  17);  **my  hand  is 
with  any  one,"  i.  e.  I  aid  him,  am  on  liis  side  (1  Sam. 
xxii,  17;  2  Sanu  xxiii,  12;  2  Kings  xxiii,  19);  and  to 
take  or  hołd  the  right  hand,  i.  e.  to  sustain,  to  aid  (Psa. 
lxxiii,  28;  Isa.  xli,  18;  xlv,  1).  So  the  right  hand  of 
feUowship  (Gal.  ii,  9)  signifies  a  commuuication  of  the 
same  power  and  authority.  To  lean  upon  the  hand  of 
another  is  a  mark  of  iamiUarity  and  superiority  (2  Kinga 
V,  18 ;  vii,  17).  To  givc  the  hand,  as  to  a  mastei,  is 
the  token  of  submission  and  futurę  obedienoe.  Thus,  in 
2  Chroń,  xxx,  8,  the  words  in  the  original,  ^  Give  the 
hand  unto  the  Lord,"  signify,  Yield  yourseh-es  unto  the 
Lord.  The  like  phrase  is  used  in  Paa.  lxvUi,  81 ;  Lam. 
V,  6.  **  Behold,  as  the  eyes  of  8ervant8  look  unto  the 
hand  of  their  mastera,  and  as  the  eyes  of  a  maiden  unto 
the  hand  of  her  mistress,  so  our  eyes  wait  upon  the 
Lord  our  God"  (Psa.  cxxiii,  2),  which  refers  to  the 
watchful  readiness  of  a  8ervant  to  obey  the  least  sign  of 
oommand  (Kitto's  Daily  Bibie  lUust.  ad  loc.).  To  kiss 
the  hand  is  an  act  of  homage  (1  Kings  xix,  18 ;  Job 
xxxi,  27).  To  pour  water  on  any  one's  hands  signifies 
to  serve  him  (2  Kings  iii,  U).  To  "seal  up  the  hand" 
(Job  xxxvii,  7)  is  to  place  one  in  chaige  of  any  special 
business,  for  which  he  will  be  held  aocoontable.  Marks 
in  the  handa  or  wrists  were  the  tokens  of  senńtude,  the 
heathens  being  wont  to  imprint  marlcs  upon  the  handa 
of  BervantB,  and  on  such  as  devoted  themselves  to  some 
false  deity.  Thus  in  Zech.  xiii,  6,  the  man,  when  chal- 
lenged  for  the  scars  vłBible  on  his  hands,  would  deny 
that  they  had  proceeded  from  an  idolatrous  cause,  and 
pretend  that  they  were  the  effccts  of  the  wounds  he  had 
g^ven  hiroself  for  the  loss  of  his  friends.  The  right ' 
hand  stretched  out  is  the  s^inbol  of  immediate  exertion 
of  power  (Exod.  xv,  12);  sometimes  the  exercise  of 
mercy  (Isa.  lxv,  2 ;  Prov.  i,  24). 

The  hand  of  God  is  spoken  of  as  the  instrument  of 
power,  and  to  it  u  ascribed  that  which  strictly  belongs 
to  Grod  himself  (Job  xxvii,  11 ;  Psa.  xxxi,  16;  xcv,  4; 
Isa.  lxii,  8 ;  Prov.  xxi,  1 ;  Acta  iv,  28 ;  1  Pet.  v,  6).  So 
the  hand  of  the  Lord  being  upon  or  with  any  one  de- 
notes  divine  aid  or  favor  (Ezra  vii,  6,  28 ;  viii,  18,  22, 
18 ;  Neh.  ił,  8 ;  Isa.  i,  25 ;  Lukę  i,  66 ;  Acts  xi,  21) ;  fur- 
ther,  the  hand  of  the  Lord  is  upon  or  against  thee,  de- 
notes  puiushment  (£xod.  ix,  8 ;  Deut  ii,  15 ;  Judg.  ii, 
15 ;  1  Sam.  vii,  13 ;  xii,  15 ;  Ezek.  xiii,  9 ;  Amos  i,  8 ; 
Acta  xiii,  11).  In  Job  xxxiii,  7,  ^'  my  hand  shall  not  ht 
heavy  upon  thee,"  the  original  term  is  C]?&<,  elceph ;  and 
the  passage  signifies  ''  my  dignity  shall  not  weigh  heavy 
upon  thee"  (G^esenius,  s.  v.).  The  hand  of  Gr<xl  upon  a 
prophet  signifies  the  immediate  operation  of  his  Holy 
Spirit  on  the  soul  or  hody  of  the  prophet,  as  in  1  Kings 
xviii,  46 ;  2  Kings  iii,  15 ;  Ezek.  i,  8 ;  iii,  22 ;  viii,  1.  Aa 
the  hand,  so  also  the^i^er  of  God  denotes  his  power  or 
Spirit  (see  Lukę  xi,  20,  and  comp.  Matt.  xii,  28).    Thna 


HAND 


58 


HANDFUL 


oiir  Sftyionr  cast  out  derils  or  domons  hy  his  bare  ooin- 
oiandf  whereas  the  Jews  cast  them  out  only  by  the  in- 
Tocation  of  the  name  of  God.  So  in  £xod.  yiii,  19,  the 
Jiiiffer  o/God  U  a  work  which  nonę  but  God  oould  per- 
form.    See  Arm. 

The  haiids  of  the  high-priest  were  laid  on  the  head 
of  the  Bcape-goat  when  the  sins  of  the  people  were  pub- 
lidy  confessed  (Lev.  xvi,  21).  Witnesses  laid  their 
hands  on  the  head  of  the  accused  penon,  as  it  were  to 
signify  that  they  chaiged  upon  him  the  guilt  of  his 
blood,  and  freed  themselres  firom  it  (Deut.  xiii,  9 ;  xvii, 
7).  The  HebrewB,  when  presenting  their  sin-offerings 
at  the  tabemacle,  confessed  their  sins  while  they  laid 
their  hands  upon  the  victim  (Lev.  i,  4).  To  ''fili  one*s 
hands,"  is  to  take  possession  of  the  priesthood,  to  perform 
the  functions  of  that  office;  beicause  in  this  ccremóny 
those  parts  of  the  victim  which  were  to  be  offefed  were 
put  into  the  hand  of  the  new-made  priest  (Judg.  xvii,  5, 
12 ;  Lev.  jcv\,  82 ;  1  Kings  xiii,  33).  Jacob  laid  his  hands 
on  Ephraim  and  Manasseh  when  he  gave  them  his  last 
blessing  (Gen.  xlviii,  14).  The  high-priest  stretched 
out  his  hands  to  the  people  as  oflen  as  he  recited  the 
solemn  form  of  blessing  (Lev.  ix,  22).  Our  Sa\'iour  laid 
his  hands  upon  the  children  that  were  presented  to  him 
and  blessed  them  CSlmk  x,  16).  (See  Tiemeroth,  De 
Xeipode<r(^  et  xc(poXoyic,  Erford.  1754.) 

Imposition  of  hands  formed  at  an  early  period  a  part 
of  the  ceremoniał  obsenred  on  the  appointment  and  eon- 
secration  of  persons  to  high  and  holy  undertakings.  In 
Numb.  xxvii,  19,  Jehoyah  is  represented  as  thus  speak- 
ing  to  Moses,  "  Take  thee  Joshua,  the  son  of  Nun,  a 
man  in  whom  is  the  spirit,  and  lay  thine  hand  upon 
him,  and  set  him  before  Eleazar  the  priest,  and  before 
all  the  congrcgation,  and  give  him  a  chaige  in  their 
sight,"  etc :  where  it  is  obvious  that  the  laying  on  of 
hands  did  neither  originate  nor  communicate  divine 
gifts;  for  Joshiui  had  "the  spirit"  before  he  received 
imposition  of  hands;  but  it  was  mcrely  an  instrumental 
sign  fur  marking  him  out  individuaUy,  and  setting 
him  apart,  in  sight  uf  the  congregation,  to  his  arduous 
work.  Similar  appcars  to  be  the  import  of  the  obsenr- 
ance  in  the  primitive  Church  of  Christ  (Acts  viii,  15- 
17 ;  1  Tim.  iv,  14 ;  2  Tim.  i,  6).  A  comiption  of  this 
doctrinc  was  that  the  laying  on  of  hands  gave  of  itself 
divine  powers,  and  on  this  account  Simon,  the  magician 
(Acts  viii,  18),  ofTcred  money,  saying,  **Give  me  also 
this  power,  that  on  whomsoever  I  lay  hands  he  may  re- 
ceive  the  Holy  Ghost,"  intending  probably  to  carry  on 
a  gainful  tracie  by  communicating  the  ^St  to  others. 
See  Imposition  of  Hands. 

The  phrase  "sitting  at  the  right  hand  of  God,"  as 
applicd  to  the  Sa\dour,  is  derired  from  the  fact  that 
with  earthly  princcs  a  position  on  the  right  liand  of  the 
throne  was  accounted  the  chief  place  of  honor,  dignity, 
and  power :  "  upon  thy  right  hand  did  stand  the  queen" 
(Psa.,  xlv,  9 :  comp.  1  Khigs  ii,  19 ;  Psa.  lxxx,  17).  The 
immcdiate  passage  out  of  which  sprang  the  phraseobgy 
employed  by  Jesus  may  be  found  in  Psa.  ex,  1 :  "  Jeho- 
yah said  unto  my  Lord,  sit  thou  at  my  right  hand  until 
I  make  thine  enemies  thy  footstooL'*  Accordingly  the 
Saviour  dcclares  before  Caiaphas  (Matt  xxvi,  64 ;  Mark 
xiv,  62),  "  Ye  shall  aec  the  Son  of  man  sitting  on  the 
right  hand  of  power,  and  coming  in  the  douds  of  heav- 
en ;"  where  the  meaning  obviously  is  that  the  Jews  of 
that  day  should  havc  manifest  proof  that  Jesus  held  the 
most  emincnt  place  in  the  divine  favor,  and  that  his 
prescnt  humiliation  would  be  sucoeeded  by  glon',  maj- 
esty,  and  power  (Lukę  xxiv,  26 ;  1  Tim.  iii,  16).  So 
when  it  is  said  (Mark  xvi,  19 ;  Rom.  viii,  34 ;  CoL  iii,  1 ; 
1  Pet.  iii,  22;  Heb.  i,  3;  viii,  1)  that  Jesus  "sits  at  the 
right  hand  of  God,"  ''at  the  right  hand  of  the  Mąjesty 
on  high,"  we  are  obviou8ly  to  understand  the  assertion 
to  be  that,  as  his  Father,  so  he  worketh  always  (John 
V,  17)  for  the  advancement  of  the  kingdom  of  heaven, 
and  the  8alvation  of  the  world. 

In  CoL  ii,  13,  14,  "the  law  of  commandments  con- 
tained  in  oidinances"  (Ephes.  ii,  15)  is  designated  "  the 


hamduoriting  of  ordinanoes  that  was  againat  ua,"  which 
Jesus  bloŁted  out,  and  took  away,  nailing  it  to  his  croaa; 
phraseology  which  indicates  the  abolition,  on  the  part 
of  the  Saviour,  of  the  Moeaic  law  (Wolfiua,  Curm  PhUo- 
log.  in  N.  T.  iii,  16). 

Hand-breadth  (Heb.  nfi:^,  Wpha^hy  or  ntb,  to'- 
phackyt  the  palmy  used  as  a  measure  of  four  fingers, 
equal  to  about  four  inches  (Exod.  xxv,  25;  xxxvii,  12; 
1  Kings  vii,  26 ;  2  Chroń,  iv,  5 ;  Ezek.  x],  5, 43 ;  Jer.  lii, 
21 ).  In  Psa.  xxxix,  5,  the  expres8ion  "  Thou  hast  madę 
my  days  palm-breadths,"  significs  Ttry  skorł, 

H&ndel,  Georg  Friedrich,  one  of  the  greatest  of 
musical  composers  and  musicians,  was  bom  at  Halle,'  in 
the  Pnissian  province  of  Saxony,  Feb.  24, 1684.  He 
manifested  in  early  ^'outh  an  extraordinary  passion  for 
musie,  and  at  the  age  of  8even  waa  a  good  player  on  the 
piano  and  the  oigan.  At  the  age  of  nine  he  began  to 
compose  for  the  Church  8ervioe,  and  continued  doing  lo 
every  week  until  he  was  thirtcen.  In  1698  he  was  sent 
to  Berlin, where  he  enjoyed  the  instruction  of  Attilio.  An 
olTer  by  the  elector  of  Brandenburg  was  declined  by  his 
father.  On  the  dcath  of  the  latter  in  1703,  he  went  to 
Hambuig,  where  he  played  a  violin  in  the  orchestra  of 
the  opera,  and  composed  his  first  opera,  Aimira.  He 
next  visiŁed  Italy,  where  he  wrote  operas  for  Florence, 
Yenice,  and  Bome.  On  his  return  from  Romę  he  waa, 
in  1709,  appointed  chapel-master  by  the  elector  of  Han- 
over.  In  1710  he  paid  a  short  visit  to  England,  and  in 
1712  he  took  up  his  permanent  abode  in  that  countiy. 
He  composed,  in  honor  of  the  peace  of  Utrecht,  his  cele- 
brated  Te  Deum  and  Jubilate,  and  numerous  opera& 
A  Royal  Academy  was  established  (1720)  and  placed 
under  his  management,  but  his  violent  temper  invQl\'ed 
him  in  many  troubles;  an  opposition  house  was  started, 
and  floon  both  faUed,  with  a  loss  to  Hilndel  of  £10,00a 
Soon  aAer  he  ąuitted  the  stage  altpgether,  in  order  to  de- 
vote  himself  whoUy  to  the  oomposition  of  oratorios.  His 
oratorio  EtłMr  had  appeared  as  early  as  1720;  in  1782 
it  was  produoed  at  the  Haymarket  Theatre  ten  nighfcs 
in  auccession.  In  1733  he  produced  at  Oxfoid  the  ora- 
torio Athalia;  in  1736,  Alexander'i  Feast;  in  1788,  /*- 
rael  in  Egypł  and  UaUegro  td  ilpenaeroto.  On  the  12th 
of  April,  1741,  the  Messiakj  the  most  sublime  of  hia 
compositions,  was  produced  for  the  fint  time  in  London, 
where  it  met,  however,  with  no  favor;  while  in  Dublin, 
on  the  other  hand,  it  was  received  with  the  greatest 
applauae.  Hflndel  remained  in  Dublin  for  nine  months, 
and  met  there  with  a  generous  support.  On  his  return 
to  London  he  composed  his  Sanuan,  and  for  the  benefit 
of  the  Foundling  Hospital  again  produced  the  Meuiakt 
which  now  secured  to  him  a  generał  admiration ;  and, 
being  repeated  annuallv,  brought  to  the  Foundling  Hos- 
pital, from  1749  to  1777,  £10,300.  In  1751  Handel  be- 
came  blind,  but  he  stiU  continued  to  compose  and  to 
play  on  the  piana  He  died,  as  he  wished,  on  Good 
Friday,  April  13, 1759, "in  hopes,"  he  said,  "of  meeting 
his  good  God,  his  sweet  Lord  and  Sa\aour,  on  the  day 
of  his  resurrection."  Among  his  works,  which  are  in 
the  queen'fi  library,  are  50  operas--8  Gennan,  26  Itał- 
ian,  16  English ;  20  oratorios,  a  great  quantity  of  Church 
musie,  cantatas,  songa,  and  instrumental  pieces.  He 
was  a  wonderful  musician,  and  his  compositions  are 
oflen  fuli  of  grandeur  and  sublimity.  His  operaa  are 
seldom  performed,  but  his  oratorios  hołd  the  same  |daoe 
in  musie  that  in  the  English  drama  is  accorded  to  the 
plays  of  .Shakspeare;  and  the  H&ndel  festiva]s,  lasting 
several  days,  in  which  they  are  performed  by  thousanda 
of  singen  and  musicians,  are  the  grandest  musical  ex- 
hibitions  of  our  times.  See  Y.  Scholchcr,  The  Life  of 
Ilandtl  (London,  1857) ;  Chrysander,  G,  F.  Handel  (Lpa. 
1858) ;  Gervinus,  Handel  und  ShaJoKpeare  (Lpz.  1868) ; 
Conlemporary  RecieWy  April,  1869,  p.  503.     (A.  J.  S.) 

Handful,  a  representative  in  the  A.yer8.  of  sereral 
Heb.  terms  and  phrases:  prop.  Tj^  yfhro,  the  ^tf  o/*  the 
hand  (1  Kings  zvii,  12),  or  S|a  K^C,  to  jStf  the  hami 


HANDICRAFT 


69 


HANDICRAPT 


(«takc  a  handfal,"  I^-.  ix,  17);  also  yięp,  a  ><-fuU 
(Lcv.  xi,  2;  v,  12;  vi,  15;  but  sheafia  Geiu  xli,  47),  or 
yiZ^,  to  preś9,  flc  the  fiat  fuli  ("  take  a  handfol,"  Numb. 
T,26);  and  ^TU,  the  hoUow  palm  itself  (Isa.  x],  12), 
hcDce  its  fili  (1  KingB  xx,  10;  Ezek.  xiii,  19) ;  less  prop. 
D^aan  (Exod.  ix,  8),  the  two  JUłt  (as  reiidered  Prov. 
xxxi  *;  elaewhere  "bands")  improp.  *^'^'0^  (Jer.  ix, 
22),  and  rns  (Rath  ii,  16),  which  denotes  a  aheąf  (as 
tbe  foimer  is  elaewhere  lendered),  the  one  as  ałandmg 
uDcat,  and  the  other  as  cut  and  houted;  faLsely  HDB, 
abitndance  (Psa.  lxxij,  16). 

Handicralt,  a  generał  term  (not  occnrring,  how- 
ever,  in  the  Hble)  for  anj  manufactnre.  See  Artifi- 
CER.  Ałthottgh  the  extent  cannot  be  ascertained  to 
which  thooe  aits  were  carried  whoee  inyention  is  asr 
cribed  to  Tubal-Cain  (Gen.  iv,  22),  it  is  probable  that 
this  was  proportionate  to  the  nomadic  or  settled  habits 
of  the  antedilavian  lacea.  Amoog  nomad  races,  as  the 
Bedouin  Araba,  or  the  tribes  of  Northern  and  Central 
Asia  and  of  America,  the  wants  of  life,  as  well  as  the 
arts  which  supply  them,  are  few;  and  it  ia  only  among 
the  city  dweUers  that  both  of  them  are  multiplied  and 
make  progress.  The  foUowing  particulars  may  be  gath- 
cred  respecting  the  varioii8  handicrafts  mentioned  in 
the  ScriptureSb     See  Craftsmak. 

1.  The  preparation  of  iron  for  use  either  in  war,  in 
agiiculture,  or  for  domestic  purposes,  was  doubtless  one 
of  the  earliest  appiicatious  of  labor ;  and,  together  with 
iron,  working  in  brase,  or,  rather,  copper  alloyed  with 
tin,  bronze  (r^np,  CkseniuB,  Thea,  Heb,  p.  875),  is  men- 
tioned in  the  same  passage  as  practiced  in  antediluvian 
times  (Gen.  iv,  22).  The  use  of  this  last  is  usually  con- 
sidered  aa  an  art  of  higher  antiqtuty  even  than  that  of 
iron  (Hesiod,  Works  mtd  Daya,  p.  150 ;  Wilkinson,  Anc, 
Eg.  ii,  152,  abridgment),  and  there  can  be  no  doubt  that 
metal,  whether  iron  or  bronze,  must  have  been  largely 
iised,  either  in  materiał  or  in  tools,  for  the  construction 
of  the  ark  (Gen.  vi,  14, 16).  Whether  the  weapons  for 
war  or  ctaaae  uaed  by  the  early  warriors  of  Syria  and 
Aasyiia,  or  the  arrow-heada  of  the  archer  Ishmael,  were 
of  bronze  or  iron,  cannot  be  asrrrtained;  but  we  know 
that  iron  was  uscd  for  warlike  puri)Oflcs  fa^'  the  Assyrians 
(Layaid,  Nin.andBab,  p.  194);  and,  on  the  other  hand, 
that  stoiie-tipped  arrows,  as  was  the  case  also  m  Mexi- 
co,  were  uaed  in  the  earlier  times  by  the  Egyptians,  as 
wen  as  the  Persians  and  Greeks,  and  that  stune  or  fiint 
kntves  continued  to  be  nsed  by  them,  and  by  the  inhab- 
itants  of  the  dcsert,  and  also  by  the  Jews, 
for  religious  purposes,  ailer  the  introduction 
of  iron  into  generał  use  (Wilkinson,  Anc. 
Eg,  i,  353,  354;  ii,  168;  Prescott,  Mexico,  i, 
118;  £xod.  iv,  25;  Josh.  v,  2;  Ist  Egypt. 
room,  Brit.  Mua.  case  36, 37).  In  the  con- 
struction of  the  tabemacle,  copper,  but  no 
iion,  appears  to  have  been  oaed,  though.the 
ntility  of  iron  was  at  the  same  period  well 
known  to  the  Jews,  both  from  their  own  use 
of  it  and  from  their  Egyptian  education, 
while  the  Canaanitish  inhabitants  of  Palea- 
tine  and  Sjrria  were  in  fuli  possession  of 
its  nse  both  for  warlike  and  domestic  purposes  (Exod. 
XX,  25;  xxv,  8;  xxvii,  19;  Numb.  xxxv,  16;  Deut.  iii, 
11 ;  iv,  20;  vŁii,  9;  Josh.  viił,  81 ;  xvii,  16, 18).  After 
tlie  establishment  of  the  Jews  in  Canaan,  the  occupar 
tion  of  a  smith  (1^*^11)  became  recognised  as  a  distinct 
employment  (1  Sam.  xiii,  19>  The  designer  of  a  higher 
ofder  appears  to  have  been  caUed  specially  !3Ón  (Ge- 
senius,  pi  531 ;  Exod.  xxxv,  30, 35;  2  Chroń,  xxvi,  15 ; 
SaalschUtz,  A  rch.  Htbr,  c.  14,  §  16).  The  smith^s  work 
(including  workeis  in  the  precious  metals)  and  its  re- 
snlts  are  ofben  mentioned  in  Scripture  (2  Sam.  xii,  31 ; 
1  Kinga  vi,  7 ;  2  Chnm.  xxvi,  14 ;  Isa.  xliv,  12 ;  liv,  16). 
Among  the  captives  taken  to  Babykm  by  Nebuchad- 
nesKar  were  1000  ^  craftsmen'*  and  smiths,  who  were 


probably  of  the  superior  kind  (2  Kings  xxiv,  16 ;  Jeft 
xxix,  2).     See  Charashim. 

The  worker  in  gold  and  siher  (^'\'S ;  dpyvpoK6woc ; 
XufVfVTTiCf  argentariusy  axir\fex)  must  have  found  em- 
ployment both  among  the  Hebrews  and  the  neighboring 
nations  in  very  early  times,  as  appears  from  the  oma- 
ments  sent  by  Abraham  to  Kebekah  (Gen.  xxiv,  22, 58 ; 
xxxv,  4;  xxxviii,  18;  Deut.  vii,  25).  But,  whatever 
skill  the  Hebrews  possessed,  it  is  quite  elear  that  they 
must  have  leamed  much  from  Egypt  and  its  "iron-fur^ 
naces,"  both  in  metal-work  and  in  the  arts  of  setting 
and  polishiiig  precious  Stones;  arts  which  were  tumed 
to  account  both  in  the  construction  of  the  Tabemacle 
and  the  making  of  the  pricsts'  onuunents,  and  also  in 
the  casting  of  the  goldcn  calf  as  well  as  its  destruction 
by  Moses,  probably,  as  suggested  by  Goguet,  by  a  meth- 
odwhibh  he  had  leamt  in  Egypt  (Gen.  xli,  42;  £xod. 
iii,  22;  xii,  85;  xxxi,  4, 5;  xxxii,  2,  4,  20,  24;  xxxvii, 
17, 24 ;  xxxviii,  4, 8,  24, 24, 25 ;  xxxix,  6,  89 ;  Neh.  iii, 
8;  Isa.  xliv,  12).  Yarious  processes  of  the  goldsmiths' 
work,  including  operations  in  the  raw  materiid,  are  illus- 
trated  by  Egyptian  monuments  (Wilkinson,  w4nc.ii]7.  ii, 
136, 152, 162).    See  Goldsmith,  etc 

Ailer  the  conque8t,frequent  notices  are  found  both  of 
moulded  and  wrought  metal,  incjuding  soldering,  which 
last  had  long  been  known  in  Egj-pt;  but  the  Phoeni- 
cians  appear  to  have  possessed  greater  skill  than  the 
Jews  in  these  arts,  atleast  in  Solomon'8  time  (Judg.viii, 
24,27;  xvii,4;  1  Kings  vii,  13, 45, 46;  Isa.  xli,  7;  Wisd. 
XV,  4 ;  Ecclus.  xxxviii,  28 ;  Bar.  vi,  50, 65,  57 ;  Wilkin- 
son, ii,  162).  See  Zarefhath.  £ven  in  the  desert, 
mention  is  madę  of  beatiug  gold  into  plates,  cutting  it 
into  wire,  and  also  of  setting  precious  stones  in  gold 
(£xod.  xxxix,  3, 6,  etc. ;  Beckmann,  liist,  ofino,  ii,  414 ; 
Gesenius,  p.  1229).    See  Metau 

Among  the  tools  of  the  smith  are  mentioned  tongs 
(tt^Hj?^^,  \apiCf/orceptf  Gesenius,  p.  761 ;  Isa.  vi,  6), 
hammer  (Ó'^b9B,  c<pvpdy  iTui^iSeuj,  Gcsen.  p.  1101),  anvil 
(DC&,  Gesenius,  p.  1 118),  bellows  (HDO,  (j/utrrjTtipj  ntffla- 
torium,  Gesenius,  p.  896 ;  Isa.  xli,  7 ;  Jer.  vi,  29 ;  Ecclus. 
xxxviii,  'iS ;  Wilkinson,  ii,  316).     See  each  word. 

In  the  N.  T.,  Alexander  "  the  coppersmith"  (o  x'^' 
KŁvc)  of  Ephesus  is  mentioned,  where  also  was  carried 
on  that  trade  in  "  Bilver  shrines"  {vaoi  dpyvpoT)  which 
was  represented  by  Dcmetrius  the  8ilvcrsmith  {apyypo' 
k6voc)  as  being  in  danger  from  the  spread  of  Chiistian- 
ity  (Acta  xix,  24, 28 ;  2  Tim.  iv,  14).    See  Coppebsmitił 

2.  The  work  of  the  carpenter  (n'»ąC  tt5'nr!,  riiCTup, 


r,driUt»boI« 


Carpenters.    (Wilkinson.) 

In  the  Mftt  of  •  cbalr,  • ;  t,t.  ]eg»  ot  chulr :  u,  u,  adiw  ;  9,  m  tąuŁn ;  *,  nuB 
plmUng  or  polka  ing  4h«  Jeg  of  a  ehalr. 

artifex  lignarius)  is  often  mentioned  in  Scripture  (e.  g. 
Gen.  vi,  14;  £xod.  xxxvii;  Isa.  xliv,  13).  In  the  pal- 
ące built  by  David  for  himself,  the  workmen  employed 
were  chiefly  Phoenicians  sent  by  Hiram  (2  Sam.  v,  11 ; 
1  Chroń,  xiv,  1),  as  most  probably  were  those,  or  at  least 
the  principal  of  Łhose  who  were  employed  by  Solomon 
in  his  works  (1  Kings  v,  6).  But  in  the  rei)airs  of  the 
Tempie,  executed  under  Joash,  king  of  Judah,  and  also 
in  the  rebuilding  under  Zerubbabel,  no  mention  is  mado 
of  foreign  workmen,  though  in  the  latter  case  the  Łim- 
ber  is  expre88ly  said  to  have  been  brought  by  sea  to 
Joppa  by  Zidonians  (2  Kings  xi,  1 1 ;  2  Chroń,  xxiv,  12; 
Ezra  iii,  7).  That  the  Jewish  carpenters  must  havo 
been  able  to  carve  with  some  skill  is  evident  from  Isa. 
xli,  7 ;  xliv,  13,  in  which  last  passage  some  of  the  im- 


HAiroiCRAFT 


60 


HANDICRAFT 


Tools  of  an  Egyptian  Carpenter.    (Wllkinson.) 

FlKk  1, 9, 8, 4.  ChlMla  ud  drill> ;  5.  Part  of  drill ;  6.  Not  of  wood  b«lon|di«  to  drtll  t 

7,  8.  8aw«;  9.  Horn  of  oil;  10.  Mallot;  U.  Bukot  of  naUt;  19.  fittket  which  h«ld 
theiooU. 

I 

plementa  osed  in  the  trade  are  mentioned :  the 
role  O*!?^)  fdrpoy,  normoy  poflsibly  a  chalk 
pendl,  Gescnius,  p.  1837),  measuring-line  (1j5, 
Gesenius,  p.  1201),  compaas  (na''»ną,  Tcapa- 
ypat^ięt  circinus,  GeseniuB,  p.  450),  piane,  or 
smoothing  instrument  <n]?!i:i{:dp,  cóXXa,  ruf»- 
dna  (Gesen.  p.  1223, 1338),  axe  ("(.nsi,  Gesen. 
p.  802,  or  01*^5,  Gesen.  p.  1236,  Hirtij  secu- 
fis),    See  eacli  of  these  worda. 

The  process  of  the  work,  and  the  tools  used 
by  Egyptian  carpenters,  and  also  coopers  and 
wheelwrights,  are  displayed  in  Egyptian  mon- 
umentu and  relics ;  the  former,  including  doyetailing, 
veneering,  drilling,  glueing,  yamishing,  and  inlaying, 
may  be  seen  in  Wilkinson,  Anc.  Eg.  ii,  111-119.     Of  the 
latter,  many  specimens,  including  saws,  hatcheta,  knives, 
awls,  nails,  a  hone,  and  a  drill,  also  tumed  objects  in 
bonę,  eidst  in  the  British  Museum,  Ist  Eg3rpt,  room,  case 
42-43,  Noa.  6046-6188.     See  also  Wilkinson,  ii,  p.  113, 
fig.  396.     See  Carpenter. 

In  the  N.  T.  the  occupation  of  a  carpenter  (rc«ra>v) 
is  mentioned  in  connection  with  Joseph,  the  husband  of 
the  Virgin  Mary,  and  ascribed  to  our  Lord  himself  by 
way  of  reproach  (Mark  vi,  3 ;  Matt  xiii,  55 ;  and  Just 
Mart  dUd,  TrypK  c.  88). 

8.  The  masons  (^'''^'la,  2  Kings  xii,  12  [18],  waU- 
huilderSf  Gesenius,  p.  269)  employed  by  Da^-id  and  Solo- 
mon,  at  least  the  chief  of  them,  were  Phcenicians,  as  is 
implied  also  in  the  word  fi'^bnĄ,  men  of  Gebal,  Jebail, 
Byblns  (Gesen.  p.  258;  1  Kiiigs  v,  18;  Ezek.  xxvii,  9; 
Burckhardt,  Syriaj  p.  179).  CHher  terms  employed  are 
-lip  -jnc  ''Ta"nn,«porifc«r*o/t«2/^«tofM!(2Sam.v,ll;  1 
Chroń,  xxii,  15);  d^^SacH,  głone-cutters  or  hetoers  (1 
Chroń,  xxii,  2, 16, "  workers  of  stone ;"  Ezra  iii,  7,  etc). 


The  b^^Sa  (2  Kings  xii,  12)  were  probably 
incufer-masons  ("  builders,'*  ver.  11).  Among 
their  implementa  are  mentioned  the  saw 
(TV^yQfirpiwv),the  plumb-line  (^3it, Gesen. 
p.  216),  the  measuiing-reed  (i^S)^,  KdXafju>Cy 
calamusy  Gresen.  p.  1221).  As  they  also  pre- 
pared  the  Stones  by  hewwg  (1  Chroń,  xxii, 
2),  they  must  have  used  the  chisel  and  the 
mallet  (Miap^,  1  Kings  vi,  7),  though  no 
mention  of  the  former  occurs  in  Scripture. 
Thej'  used  also  the  measuring-line  ("łl?,  Job 
xxxviii,  5 ;  Zech.  i,  16)  and  the  axe  (11*^1, 
1  Kings  vi,  7).  See  each  word.  Some  of 
these,  and  also  the  chisel  and  mallet,  are  rep- 
resented  on  Egyptian  monuments  (Wilkin- 
son, Anc  Egypłiana,  818,  314),  or  preseryed 
in  the  British  Museum  (Ist  Egypt.  room.  Na 
6114, 6038).  The  large  Stones  used  in  Solo- 
mon*8  Tempie  are  said  by  Josephus  to  haye 
been  fitted  together  exaictly  without  either 
mortar  or  cramps,  but  the  foundation  Stones 
to  have  been  fastened  with  lead  (Joeephua, 
Ani,  viii, 3, 2 ;  xv,  11,3).  For  ordinary  build- 
ing,  mortar,  T^b  (Gesen.  p.  1328),  was  used ; 
sometimes,  perhaps,  bitumet.  as  was  the  case 
at  Babylon  (Gen.  xi,  3).  Th«  limc,  chiy,  and 
straw  of  which  mortar  is  generally  compoeed 
in  the  East  reąuires  to  be  very  carefully  mix- 
ed  and  united  so  as  to  resist  wet  (Lane,  Mod, 
Eg,  i,  27 ;  Shaw,  TnwdSy  p.  206).  The  wali 
**  daubed  with  untempered  mortar"  of  Ezekiel 
(xiii,  10)  was  perhaps  a  sort  of  cob-wall  of 
mud  or  clay  without  limc  (^Cri,  Gesenius,  p. 
1516),  which  would  give  way  under  heavy 
rain.  The  use  of  whitewash  on  tombs  is  re- 
marked  by  our  Lord  (Matt.  xxiii,  27 ;  see  also 
Mishn.  Maaser  Skeniy  v,  1).    Houses  infected 


Masons.    (Wilkinson.) 

1,  leroUIng,  and  9,  tąiiarinK  •  atoiM. 


HAOT)ICRAPr 


61 


HANDKERCHIEP 


yńfh  Icpnwy  wen  reąuiredby  the  law  to  be  x«p]astered 
(Lev.  xir,  40-45).  For  kindred  worka  in  earth  and  day, 
see  Brick,  Potter;  Głass,  etc 

4.  Akin  to  tho  craft  of  the  carpenter  is  that  of  ship 
■nd  boat  building,  which  must  have  been  exercised  to 
Bome  extent  for  the  tishing-Yessels  on  the  Uke  of  Gen- 
nesaret  (Matt.  Tiii,  23 ;  ix,  1 ;  John  xxif  8, 8).  Solomon 
tmilt  at  Ezion-Geber  ships  for  his  foreign  trade,  which 
were  manned  by  Fhoenidan  crews,  an  exi)eriment  which 
Jeboshaphat  endeayored  in  yain  to  renew  (1  Kings  ix, 
26,  27;  xxii,  48;  2  Chzon.  xx,  86, 87).  The  shipmen 
were  binn,  a  sailor  (Jonah  i,  6 ;  Ezek.  xxvii,  8, 27-29 ; 
yavn|C>  Acta  xxyii,  80;  Rev.  xviii,  17)  -,  iątlJ!  a"n, 
Aipmuuitr  (Jonah  i,  6;  i/avKXffpoc,  Acta  xxvii,  11); 
n^p,  marmar  (Ezek.  xzTii,  9,  etc ;  Jonah  i,  6).  See 
Suir. 

5.  The  peifomes  used  in  the  religiooa  aerncea,  and  in 
later  timea  in  the  funeral  ritea  of  monarcha,  imply  knowl- 
€dge  and  practice  in  the  art  of  the  **  apothecariea" 
(^*^r^T*»  fvpf^oi,  pigmeHtaru),  who  appear  to  have 
fonned  a  guild  or  aaaociation  (Exod.  xxx,  25,35;  Neh. 
iii, 8;  2  Chroń,  xvi,  14;  Ecciea.  vii,  Ij  x,  1;  Ecdua. 
xxxviii,  8).    See  Perfuke. 

6.  The  arU  of  spinning  and  wea\'ing  both  wool  and 
linen  were  carried  on  in  early  times,  aa  they  still  are 
usually  among  the  Bedouins,  by  women.  The  women 
apcm  and  wove  goat^s  hair  and  flax  for  the  Tabemacle, 
as  in  later  times  their  akill  was  employed  in  like  man- 
ner  for  idohitrous  porposes.  One  of  the  exceUences  at- 
tiibutcd  to  the  good  housewife  is  her  skill  and  industry 
ja  thcse  arts  (Exod.  xxxv,  26, 26 ;  Lev.  xix,  19 ;  Deut. 
xxii,  11 ;  2  Kinga  xxiii, 7;  Ezek.  xvi,  16;  Piov.  xxxi, 
la,  24 ;  Barckhardt,  Notes  on  Bed,  i,  65 ;  oomp.  Homer, 
JLi^  123;  OdL  i,  356 ;  ii,  104).  The  loom,  with  its  beam 
p^.3'a,  fuodvnoVf  Udaioriumj  1  Sam.  xvii,  7 ;  Geaen.  p. 
883),  pin  (^n^,iraff9<iXoc,c2aru4,  Jadg.x\'i,14;  Geaen. 
p.  643),  and  ahattle  {^y^  ipofutiCy  Job  \'ii,  6 ;  G^sen.  p. 
146)  was,  perhapS)  mtroduced  later,  but  as  early  as  Da- 
Tids  time  (I  Sam.  xvii,  7),  and  worked  by  men,  as  was 
the  case  in  Egypt,  contrary  to  the  practice  of  other  na- 
tions.  This  trade  also  appeara  to  have  been  practised 
hereditarily  (1  Chroń,  iv,  21;  Herod,  ii,  85;  Sophoclea, 
<Ed,  CoL  839).    See  WEAvnco. 

Tofpether  ¥rith  weaving  we  read  also  of  embnńdery, 
in  wbich  gold  and  silver  threads  were  interwoven  with 
the  body  of  the  stoff,  sometimes  in  fignre  pattema,  or 
with  predous  Stones  set  in  the  needlework  (£xoct  xxvi, 
1 ;  xxviii,  4  ;•  xxxix,  &-13).    See  Embroidbry. 

7.  Besides  these  arts,  thoee  of  dyeing  and  of  dreseing 
doth  were  practiced  in  Palestine  [see  Fuller,  etc],  and 
those  alao  of  tanning  and  dressing  leather  (Josh.  ii,  15- 
18;  2King8i,8;  MatLiii,4;  Actsix,43;  Mishna,i/e- 
ffilL  iii,  2).  Shoemakers,  barbers,  and  taUors  aie  men- 
tianed  in  the  Mtshna  (Petach^  iv,  6) :  the  barber  (!a^^, 
Kovptvc,  Gesenius,  p.  283),  or  his  occiipation,  by  Ezekiel 
(v,  1 ;  Lev.  xiv,  8 ;  Numh.  vi,  5 ;  Josephus,  Ani,  xvi,  11, 
5;  War,  i,  27, 5;  Mishna,  Shabb,  i,  2) ;  and  the  tailor  (i, 
3),  plastereia,  glaziers,  and  glass  yessela,  paintera  and 
goUworkera,  are  mentioned  in  Mishna  {CheL  viii,  9; 
xxix,  3,4;  xxx,  1). 

The  art  of  setting  and  engraving  predous  Stones  was 
known  to  the  Israelites  from  a  very  early  period  (Exod. 
xxviii,  9  8q.>  See  Gem.  Works  in  alabaster  were  also 
oommon  among  them  (IDfidll  *^Ca,  8melling-boxes,  or 
boxes  of  perfome ;  oomp.  Mattjcxvi,  7,  etc).  See  Ala- 
baster. They  alao  adorned  their  houses  and  yesaela 
withivory  (1  Kings  xxii,  39 ;  Amoe  iii,  15;  vi,  4;  Cant. 
T»  14).    See  IvoRT. 

Tent-makeis  (ffnfyoircMoO  aie  noticed  in  the  Acta 
(xviii,  8),  and  freąuent  aBusion  ia  madę  to  the  tiade  of 
tbe  potten.    See  each  word. 

&  Bakers  (O^^BK,  Gesen.  p.  186)  are  noticed  in  Scrip- 
tnre  as  carrying  on  their  trade  (Jer.  xxxvii,  21 ;  Hoa. 
Ti],  4 ;  Mishna,  ChA  xv,  2) ;  and  the  well-known  ralley 


Tyropceon  probably  dezived  its  name  ftom  the  oocnp* 
tion  of  the  cheese-makera,  its  łohabitants  (Joeephuą 
Warf  V,  4, 1).  BuŁchen,  not  Jewish,  are  apoken  of  in  1 
Cor.  X,  25. 

Trade  in  all  its  branches  was  much  devek>ped  after 
the  Captivity ;  and  for  a  father  to  teach  his  son  a  trade 
was  reckoned  not  only  honoraUe,  but  indispensaUe 
(Miahna,  Pirhe  ^  5.  ii,  2 ;  Kiddush,  iv,  14).  Some  trades, 
however,  were  legarded  as  less  honorable  (Jahn,  BibL 
ilrcA.§84). 

Some,  if  not  all,  trades  had  spedal  localities,  as  was 
the  case  formerly  in  European  and  is  now  in  Eastem 
dties  (Jer.  xxxvii,  21 ;  1  Cor.  x,  25;  Joaephus,  War,  v, 
4,  1,  and  8,  1 ;  Mishna,  Becor,  v,  1 ;  Russell,  Aleppo,  i, 
20;  Chardin,  YotfogcM,  vii,  274,  894;  Lane,  Mod.  Eg,  ii, 
145).     See  B^izaar. 

One  feature,  diatinguishing  Jewish  from  other  work- 
men,  deseryes  peculiar  notice,  viz.  that  they  were  not 
slayes,  nor  were  their  trades  neceasaiily  hereditary,  as 
was  and  is  so  often  the  case  among  other,  espccially 
heathen  nations  (Jahn,  Bibl,Arch,  c  v,  §  81-84;  Saal* 
schUtz,//f6r.^ncA.cl4).— Smith,8.y.;kitto,s.v.  See 
Mechanic. 

Handkerchief  or  kapkin  (<rovBdpiov ;  Yulg.  nt- 
darium)  occura  in  Lukę  xix,  20;  John  xl,  44;  xx,  7; 
Acta  xix,  12.  The  Greek  word  is  adopted  from  the 
Latin,  and  properiy  aignifiea  a  neeat-doth,  or  pocket- 
handkerchief,  but  in  the  Greek  and  Syriac  languages  it 
denotes  ckiejly  napkin,  wnipper,  etc  In  the  first  of  the 
above  paaaages  (Lukę  xix,  20)  it  means  a  icrapper,  in 
which  the  "  wicked  acnrant"  had  hud  up  the  pound  in- 
trusted  to  him  by  his  master.  For  referencee  to  the 
custom  of  laying  up  money,  etc,  in  aovddpta,  both  in 
classical  and  rabbinical  wńters,  see  Wet8tein's  X,  T.  on 
Lukę  xix,  20.  lu  the  second  instance  (John  xi,  44)  it 
appears  as  a  herchief,  or  doth  attached  to  the  head  of  a 
corpse.  It  was  perhaps  brought  rouud  the  forehead 
and  under  the  chin.  In  many  Egyptian  mummies  it 
does  not  coter  the  face,  In  ancieut  times,  among  the 
Grecks,  it  did  (Nicolaus,  De  Gnecor.  Ludu,  c  iii,  §  6, 
Thiel.  1697).  Maimonides,  in  his  coraparatiydy  recent 
times,  describes  the  whok  face  as  being  covered,  and 
giyes  a  reason  for  the  custom  (Tract  J^el,  c  4).  The 
next  instance  is  that  of  the  covSapiov  which  had  been 
^  about  the  head"  of  our  Lord,  but  which,  ailer  his  rcs- 
urrection,  was  found  rolled  up,  as  if  delibcretdy,  and  put 
in  a  place  sepantely  from  the  linen  clothes.  The  last 
instance  of  the  Biblical  use  of  the  word  (and  the  only 
one  in  which  it  is  rendered  "  handkerchief^)  occurs  in 
the  account  of  "  the  special  miracW  wrought  by  the 
hands  of  Paul  (Acts  xix,  11) ;  "  so  that  aovidpia  (hand- 
kerchiefa,  napkins,  wrappers,  shawls,  etc.)  were  brought 
from  his  body  to  the  sick;  and  the  diseases  departed 
from  them,  and  the  eWI  spirits  went  out  of  them.**  The 
Ephesians  had  not  unnaturaUy  infeired  that  the  apos- 
tle's  miraculous  power  could  be  communicated  by  such 
a  modę  of  contact;  and  certainly  cures  thus  received  by 
parties  at  a  distance,  among  a  people  famed  for  their 
addictedness  to  "curious  arts,"  L  e.  magical  skill,  etc, 
would  serye  to  conyince  them  of  the  truth  of  the  Gos- 
pel by  a  modę  well  suited  to  interesŁ  their  minds.  The 
apostle  is  not  recorded  to  haye  expre8sed  any  opinion 
respectmg  the  realiły  of  this  iniermedicUe  means  of  those 
miiacles.  He  had  doubtless  sufficiently  explaiiicd  that 
these  and  all  the  other  miracles  ^  wrought  by  his  hands,** 
i.  c  by  his  means,  were  really  wrought  by  God  (ver.  11) 
in  attestation  of  the  miraion  of  Jesus.  If  he  hiroself 
did  not  entertain  exactly  the  same  idcas  upon  the  sub- 
ject  as  they  did,  he  may  be  considered  as  conceding  to, 
or,  rather,  not  disturbing  unnecessarily,  popular  noŁions, 
rendered  harmless  by  hia  preyious  explanation,  and  af- 
foiding  a  very  convenient  medium  for  achieying  much 
higher  purposes.  If  the  connection  between  the  second- 
ary  cause  and  the  effect  was  real,  it  reminds  us  of  our 
Sayiour^s  expTe88ion, "  I  percdve  that  yirtue  has  gone  • 
out  of  me"  (Mark  v,  80) ;  which  is,  howeyer,  regarded 
by  many  critics  as  a  popular  modę  of  saying  that  he 


HANDLE 


62 


HANES 


ollr  rendered),  a  >pear  mjandrn  (Ezek.  xxxix,  9).   Set 

AUMOR. 

Handfl,  Impositioii  o£    See  Impositioit  of 
Hanus;  OitDiifATioN. 

Handscliiilif  John  Fredrrick,w&s  the  fifth  of  the 
earlier  ministers  sent  from  Halle  to  America  to  labor 
among  the  German  population,  and  to  build  up  the  Re- 
deemer'8  kingdom  in  this  Western  hemisphere,  He 
waB  bom  of  honorable  and  pious  parentage  in  Halle  Jan. 
14, 1714.  He  was  educated  at  the  imirersity,  and  set 
apart  to  the  work  of  the  ministiy  in  1744.  He  oom- 
menced  his  duties  in  the  large  and  laborious  pansh  of 
Graba,  and  labored  with  great  suocess.  But  when  be 
heard  of  the  spiritual  destitution  of  his  brethren  in  Amer- 
ica, and  read  their  eamest  appeals,  his  sympathies  were 
strongly  awakened,  and  he  eamestly  desired  to  go  to 
their  relief.  He  landed  in  Philadelphia  April  5, 174S, 
and  was  welcomed  at  the  Trappe  by  Dr.  Muhlenbetg 
with  the  salutation, "  They  that  sow  in  tears  shall  reap 
in  joy.*"  He  was  placed  at  Lancaster,  Pa.,  where  he  la* 
bored  for  seyeral  yeare  with  great  success.  The  con- 
gregation  increased,  and  onder  his  direction  a  flourish- 
ing  school  was  established  and  sustained.  **  Our  school," 
he  says,  "  consists  of  Englbh,  Irish,  and  Germans,  Lu- 
therans  and  Reformed ;  and  so  anxioQs  are  the  people  to 
have  their  children  instructed,  that  it  is  impossible  to 
reoeire  all  who  apply  for  admission."  He  aubseąuently 
took  charge  of  the  churches  at  New  Providence  and 
Hanorer,  and  thence  was  transferred  to  Germantown, 
Pa.,  and  subseąuently  to  Philadelphia,  where  he  died 
Oct9,1764.    (M.L.S.) 

Ha^nds  (Hebrew  Chdtt£t%  Oan,  doubdess  of 
Kgyptian  etymolog}^),  a  place  in  Egypt  only 
mentioncd  in  Isa.  xxx,  4 :  "  For  his  priuces  were 
at  Zoan,  and  his  messengers  came  to  lianem" 
The  Septuagint  rcnders  the  latter  clause  icai 
dyy£\oi  avTov  Trowjpoi,"And  his  ambassadon 
tcorthlcss,"*  The  copy  from  which  this  tranda- 
tion  was  madę  may  have  read  '^53'^"^  DSH  in- 
Btead  of  15'^a'^  OSri;  and  it  is  worthy  of  notę 
that  the  reading  DSn  is  still  found  in  a  number 
of  ancient  MSS.  (De  Roasi,  Karias  LectiontM  Vef. 
Test.  iii,  29),  and  is  appnn^ed  by  Lowth  and  J. 
D.  Michaeli^  The  old  Latin  yersion  foUows  the 
Sepu,  "Nuncii  pessimi;"  but  Jerome  translates 
'  from  a  text  similar  to  oor  own,  rendering  the 
A  wbite  and  a  black  fcmale^SlaYe  waUlng  npon  an  ancient  Egyp-  clause  as  follows :  *^  Et  nuncii  tui  usque  ad  //ituief 


knew  that  a  mirade  had  becn  wrought  by  his  power 
and  efficacy — a  modę  of  speaking  in  umson  at  least  with 
the  belief  of  the  woman  that  she  should  be  healed  if  she 
could  but  touch  the  hem  of  his  garment  unperceired  by 
him,  and  perhaps  eren  conoeded  to,  in  aocordance  with 
the  mirades  wrought  through  the  medium  of  contact 
related  in  the  Old  Testament  (1  Kings  xvii,  21 ;  2.King8 
iv,  29,  etc),  and  in  order,  by  a  superior  display,  in  re- 
gard  both  to  speed  and  extensiveneBs,  to  demonstrate 
his  supremacy  by  a  modę  through  which  the  Jews  were 
best  prepared  to  peTceive  it  (Lukę  vi,  19;  see  Schwarz, 
ad  Olear.  de  Stylo  N.  T,  p.  129;  Soler.  De  PiUo,  p.  17; 
Pierson,  ad  Mar.  p.  848 ;  Lydii  Flor,  Spora,  ad  Pass.  J. 
C  p.  6;  Drusius,  Qtia»tt.  Heb.  c.  2;  RosenmUller  and 
Kuinol  on  the  passage8)^-Kitto,  s.  v.  See  Kebchief  ; 
Nafkin;  Holy  Hanukerchief. 

Handle  (as  a  noun)  occurs  but  once  (Cant  v,  5)  in 
the  plural  (niB?,  happóth',  lit  hands),  for  the  tkumb- 
pieces  or  knobs  of  the  bolt  or  latch  to  a  door  (compaie 
tyn\  arms  of  a  throne,  etc,  1  Kings  x,  19).    See  Lock. 

Handmaid  or  handmaiden  (linBlC,  shiphchah', 
or  rr^K,  amah'j  Gen.  xvi,  1,  etc ;  Ruth  iii,  9,  etc ;  oov\tj. 
Lukę  i,  48),  a  fnaid-servant  (as  both  Heb.  terms  are  oilen 
tranalated ;  the  latter  being  rendered  "•  handmaid**  only 
in  a  metaphorical  or  self-deprecatory  sense).  We  iind 
on  the  paintings  in  the  tombs  of  Egypt  various  repre- 
aentations  of  female  domestics  employed  in  waiting  on 
their  mistresses,  sometimes  at  the  bath,  at  others  at  the 
toilette,  and  likewiae  in  bringing  in  refreahments  and 


tian  Lady  at  a  party. 

handing  them  ronnd  to  viaitor8.  An  upper  senrant  or 
slave  had  the  office  of  handing  the  winę,  and  a  black 
woman  sometimes  followed,  in  an  inferior  capacity,  to 
receive  an  empty  cup  when  the  winę  had  been  pouired 
into  the  goblet  The  same  black  slave  also  carried  the 
fruits  and  other  refreshments ;  and  the  peculiar  modę 
of  holding  a  plate  with  the  hand  reversed,  so  generally 
adopted  by  women  from  Africa,  is  characteristically 
shown  in  the  Thcban  paintings  (Wilkinson,  ^4  nc.  Eg.  i, 
142  sq.,  abridgm.).  See  Banquet.  It  appeara  most 
probable  that  Hagar  was  given  to  Sarai  as  her  personal 
attendant  while  she  was  in  the  house  of  Pharaoh,  and 
that  she  was  pcrmitted  to  rctain  her  when  she  departed. 
Jewish  tradition  reports  that  Hagar  was  a  daughter  (by 
a  concubine,  as  some  say)  of  Pharaoh,  who,  seeing  the 
wonders  wrought  on  account  of  Sarai,  said, "  It  is  better 
that  my  daughter  should  be  a  handmaid  in  this  house- 
hold  thitn  a  raistress  in  another,"  and  therefore  gave  her 
to  Sarai.  She  was,  no  doubt,  a  female  8lave,  and  one  of 
those  maid-senrants  whom  Abram  had  brought  from 
£g}l>t  These  females  among  the  Jews,  as  they  still 
are  in  the  East,  are  entirely  under  the  control  of  the 
mistreas  of  the  family.     See  Sla vk  ;  Uao ar. 

Hand-milL    See  Milu 

Hand-Btaif  (^S?>  makhd\  a.  rod  ot  Staff  aa  usu- 


penrenerunt"  (Sabbatier,  Biblior,  Sacrorttm  Latm. 

Yerss.,  ad  loc).  Jerome  adds,  in  his  commen- 
tary  on  the  verBe,"Intelligimus  ultimam  juxta  Ethi- 
opas  et  Blemmyas  esse  iEgypti  civitatem."  Yitringa 
would  identify  Hanes  with  the  Anusis  ('Ai/v<ric)  of 
Herodotus  (ii,  137 ;  compare  Champollion,  UEgypte,  i, 
309;  Quatremere,  Memoirts,  i,  500),  which  he,  with 
Gesenius  and  others,  supposcs  to  be  the  same  as  //«« 
rackopoUs  {Cify  o/Ifercules)  of  Strabo  (xvii,  812),  the 
ruins  of  which  are  now  called  Andsieh  (£dri»,  A/rie. 
p.  512),  The  Coptic  name  was  Ifnes  or  Eknes,  and  it 
was  one  of  the  ancient  royal  dties  of  Egypt.  An&- 
sieh  Btands  on  a  high  roound  some  distance  west  of 
the  Nile,  near  the  parallel  of  Benisu^f.  The  great  ob- 
jection  to  this  theory  is  the  distance  of  Anńsieh  from 
Zoan,  which  stood  in  the  eastem  part  of  the  Delta,  near 
the  sea.  (resenius  remarks,  as  a  kind  of  apolop^y  for  the 
Identification  of  Hanes  with  Heradeopolis  Magna,  that 
the  latter  was  formerly  a  royal  city.  It  is  true  that  in 
Manetho's  list  the  9th  andlOth  dynasties  are  said  to 
have  been  of  Heradeopolite  kings ;  but  it  has  lately  been 
Buggested,  on  strong  grounds,  by  Sir  Gardner  Wilkin- 
son,  that  this  is  a  mistake  in  the  case  of  the  9th  d3maBty 
for  Hermonthites  (Rawlinson,  Herod,  ii,  848).  If  this 
suppofiiUon  be  correct  as  to  the  9th  dynasty,  it  muat 
also  be  so  as  to  the  lOth ;  but  the  circomstance  of  Heim- 
cleopolis  being  a  royal  city  or  not,  a  thousand  yeaia 
before  Isaiab^s  time,  is  obWously  of  no  conseąuenoo  here. 


HANGING 


63 


HANNAH 


Th*  prophecT  is  a  reproof  of  the  Jews  for  tnisting  in 
Egypt ;  and,  according  to  the  Masoretic  text,  mention 
is  nudę  of  aii  embassy,  perhaps  from  Hoshea,  or  else 
from  Ahaz,  or  poflńbly  Hezekiah,  to  a  Pharaoh.  Aa  the 
king  whose  awistance  is  asked  is  called  Fharaoh,  he  is 
probaUy  not  an  Ethiopian  of  the  25th  dynasty,  for  the 
kings  of  that  linę  are  mentioned  by  name— -So,  Tirhakah 
—bot  a  sovereign  of  the  28d  dynasty,  which,  according 
to  Msnetho,  was  of  Tanite  kings.  It  is  suppoeed  that 
the  last  king  of  the  latter  dynasty,  Manetho*8  Zet,  is  the 
Sethos  of  Herodotus,  the  king  in  whose  time  Sennache- 
rib'8  anny  perished,  and  who  appears  to  have  been  men- 
tKMied  onder  the  title  of  Pharaoh  by  Rabshakeh  (Isa. 
xxxvi,  6;  2  Kings  xviii,  21),  thoogh  it  is  just  possible 
that  Tirhakah  raay  have  beeh  intended.  If  the  refer- 
ence  be  to  an  embassy  to  Zet,  Zoan  was  piobably  his 
cspital,  and  in  any  case  then  the  most  important  city 
of  the  eastem  part  of  Lower  Egypt.  Hanes  was  most 
probabiy  in  its  neighborhood ;  and  we  afe  dispoaed  to 
think  that  the  Chald.  Paraphr.  is  right  in  identifying  it 
with  TahpcmAea  (DfT9Bnpl,  or  ^nSfitirt,  once  written, 
if  the  KethSb  be  correct,  in  the  form  D3Bnri,  DaphncB)^ 
a  fortified  town  on  the  eastem  frontier.  Grotius  con- 
fliders  Hanes  a  oontraction  of  this  name  (Commeniar.  ad 
loc).  With  this  may  be  connected  the  remark  of  De 
Roflsi— ''CodeK  meus  380  noUt  ad  Marg.  esse  Dn3Bnn, 
Jer.  ii,  16"  (  Var.  Lecł^  L  c).  On  the  whole,  this  seems 
to  be  the  most  probable  theoiy,  as  Tahpanhes  was  situ- 
ated  in  the  eastem  port  of  the  Delta,  and  was  one  of 
the  royal  citiea  about  the  time  of  Isaiah. — Kitto,  s.  v. ; 
Smith,  8.  V.     See  Taupanhe8. 

Hanging  (as  a  pimishment,  C*^pSh,  to  in^pak  with 
dislocation  of  the  limbs,  Numh.  xxv,  4 ;  2  Sam.  xxi,  6, 
9 :  M^ri,  to  suspendj  as  among  the  Hebrews,  Deut.  xxi, 
22 ;  the  Egyptiana,  Gen.  xl,  19 ;  and  the  Persians,  Esth. 
vłi,  10 ;  V,  14 ;  K(>tfxdvyvfŁi),  See  Crucifixion.  Hang- 
ing  on  a  tree  or  gibbet  ap- 
pears to  have  been  a  mark 
of  infamy,  inflicted  on  the 
dead  bodies  of  oriminals, 
rather  than  a  punishment, 
as  modem  nations  employ 
I  sj         r  k  i//|  iL     The  person  suspended 

!l         tl  M  ^^  considered  as  a  curse, 

^i  Tl  ^T  an  ahomination  in  the  sight 

of  God,  and  as  receiving 
this  tokeii  of  infamy  at  his 
hand.     The  body,  never- 
larptiement  ofPrisonersbe-thelesB,  was  to  be  taken 

AHif*^*""^    From  the  down  and  buried  on  the 
A»yrlanMonomcnts.         ^^   ^^^      ^^  ^^^^^ 

nentioned  in  2  Sam.  xxi,  6,  was  the  work  of  the  Glb- 
eonites,  and  not  of  the  Hebrews.  Posthumous  suspen- 
Hon  of  this  kind,  for  the  purpose  of  conferring  ignominy, 
diffiers  materiaUy  from  the  crucifixion  that  was  prac- 
ticed  by  the  Romans,  although  the  Jews  gave  such  an 
extait  to  the  law  in  Deut  xxi,  22,  23,  as  to  iuclude  the 
Uttt-named  punishment  (John  xix,  31 ;  Acts  v,  30 ;  Gal. 
iii,  13 ;  1  Pet.  ii,  24).  The  morę  recent  Jews  attributed 
the  origin  of  the  punishment  of  strangulation  to  Moses, 
and  suppoeed  it  to  have  been  meant  l^  the  phrase,  "He 
■han  die  the  death,**  but  without  cause.     See  Punisii- 

MKKT. 

HANGING  (as  a  curtain)  is  the  rendering  of  three 
Heb.  terma,  two  of  them  having  reference  to  the  fumi- 
tore  of  the  tabemacle  and  Tempie. 

1.  The  "hanging^  (I??*  moBah' ;  Sept.  imoirao' 
rpov,Vulg.  tentorium)  was  a  curtain  or  cwermg  (as  the 
Word  radicaDy  means,  and  as  it  is  sometimes  rendered) 
to  cloM  an  entrance.  It  was  madę  of  yariegated  stuff 
wnmght  Mrith  needlework  (comparc  Esth.  i,  6),  and  (in 
one  instff nce,  at  least)  was  hung  on  tire  i>illarB  of  acacia 
wood.  The  term  is  applied  to  a  series  óf  curtains  8u»- 
pouied  before  the  successire  openings  of  entrance  into 
the  tahenuKle  and  its  parta.    Of  theae,  the  first  hnng 


before  the  entrance  to  the  court  of  the  tabemacle  (Exod 
xxvii,  16 ;  xxxviii,  18 ;  Numb.  iv,  26) ;  the  second  be- 
fore the  door  of  the  tabemacle  (£xod.  xxvi,  36,  37 ; 
xxxix,  38) ;  and  the  third  before  the  entrance  to  the 
Most  Holy  Place,  called  morę  fully  T^Otih  ^?Hd  ("vail 
of  the  covering,"  Exod.  xxxv,  12;  3uucix,  2^ ;  *xl,  21). 
See  Curtain. 

2.  The  "hangings"  (D*^?^??,  kelaim' ;  Sept.  ierna, 
Vulg.  łenforia)  were  used  for  oovering  the  walls  of  the 
tabemacle,  just  as  tapestry  was  in  modem  times  (Exod. 
xxvii,  9;  xxxv,  17;  xxxviii,  9;  Numb.  iii,  26;  iv,  26). 
The  rendering  in  the  Sept,  implles  that  they  were  madę 
of  the  same  subetance  as  the  sails  of  a  ship,  L  e.  as  ex- 
plained  by  Kashi)  "  meshy,  not  woven :"  this  opiiiion  is, 
however,  incorrect,  as  the  materiał  of  which  they  were 
constmcted  was  "fine  twined  liiien."  The  hangings 
were  carried  only  five  cubite  high,  or  half  the  height  of 
the  walls  of  the  court  (Exod.  xxvii,  18;  compare  xxvi, 
16).  They  were  fastened  to  pillars  which  ran  along  the 
sides  of  the  court  (xxvii,  18).     See  Tabernacle. 

8.  The  "hangings"  (D'^ri2,  botiim\  2  Kings  xxiii,  7, 
margin  houses,  which  is  the  literał  rendering)  are  of 
doubtful  import,  Ewald  coujectures  that  the  reading 
should  be  D*^7?3,  dotheSf  and  supposes  the  reference  to 
be  to  dresses  for  the  images  of  Astarte ;  but  this  is  both 
gratuitous  and  superfluous.  The  botiim  which  these 
women  wove  were  probabiy  cloths  for  tents  used  as 
portable  sanctuaries.— Kitto ;  Smith.     See  Idolatry. 

Han^ij^l  (1  Chroń,  vii,  89).     See  Hanniel. 

Hanmer,  Mereditii,  an  English  Church  historian, 
was  bom  at  Porkington,  Shropshire,  in  1543.  He  be- 
came  chaplain  of  Conius  Christi  College,  Oxford,  and 
arterwards  rector  of  St  Leonard,  nt  Shoreditch.  Herę 
he  sold  the  brass  omaments  which  dccoratcd  the  grave8 
of  the  church,  which  so  displeased  hb  parishioners  that 
he  was  obliged  to  resign  about  1G93.  He  then  went  to 
Ireland,  where  he  was  finalJy  madę  treasurer  of  the 
Church  of  the  Holy  Trinity,  Dublin.  He  died  in  1604, 
not  without  suspicion  of  suicide.  He  was  a  skilful 
Greek  scholar,  and  well  acąuainted  with  Church  hbto- 
ry.  He  wrote  Trarulation  of  the  ancienł  eccłesiasiical 
Histcriea  of  the  first  six  kundi-ed  Years  afer  Christa  oriff- 
inally  written  hy  Eusebim,  SocrateSj  and  Eragriua  (1576 ; 
reprinted  in  1585  with  the  addition  of  The  Lires  ofthe 
Propliets  and  Apostles  by  Doroiheus^  bishop  of  Tyre) : — 
The  Ephemeris  ofthe  Saints  of  Ireland;  and  the  Chron- 
icie of  Jreland  (Dublin,  1633,  foL):  —  A  Chronograpky 
(Lond.  1585,  fol.).  See  Fuller,  Worthies;  Wood,  Athe- 
noR  Ozon,  voL  u 

Han^nah  (Heb.  Channah\  SlSn,  yradoumess;  Sept. 
'Awa ;  comp.  Anna,  a  name  known  to  the  Phcenicians 
[Gesen.  Mon,  Phaen,  p.^OO],  and  attributed  by  Virgil  to 
Dido's  sister),  wife  of  a  Levite  naroed  Elkanah,  and 
mothcr  of  Samuel  (1  Sam.  i,  ii).  She  was  veTy  dear  to 
her  husband,  but,  bcing  childless,  was  much  aggrieved 
by  the  insultd  of  Elkanah's  other  wife,  Pcninnah,  who 
was  blessed  with  children.  The  family  lived  at  Rama- 
thaim-zophim,  and,  as  the  law  reąuired,  there  was  a 
yearly  jouraey  to  ofTer  sacrifices  at  the  sole  altar  of  Je- 
hovah,  which  was  then  at  Shiloh.  Women  were  not 
lx)und  to  attend ;  but  pious  females  free  from  the  cares 
of  a  family  often  did  so,  especially  when  the  husband 
was  a  Levite.  £very  time  that  Hannah  went  there 
childless  she  declined  to  take  part  in  the  festivitie8 
which  followed  the  sacrifices,  being  then,  as  it  seemą 
peculiarly  expo8ed  to  the  taunts  of  her  rival.  At  length, 
on  one  of  these  viBits  to  Shiloh,  while  she  prayed  before 
retyming  home,  she  vowed  to  devote  to  the  Almighty 
the  son  which  she  so  eamestly  desired  (Numb.  xxx,  1 
sq.).  It  seems  to  have  been  the  castom  to  pronounce 
aU  vows  at  the  holy  place  in  a  loud  voice,  under  the 
immediate  notice  of  the  priest  (Deut,  xxiii,  28 ;  Psa. 
xxvi,  14);  but  Hannah  praj-^ed  in  a  Iow  tonę,  so  that 
her  lips  only  were  seen  to  move.  This  attracted  the 
attention  of  the  high-priest,  Eli,  who  suspected  that  she 


HANNAH 


64 


HANTN 


had  taken  too  mach  winę  at  the  leoent  feasL  From 
this  suspicion  Hannah  eaatly  vindicated  herself,  and  re- 
tumed  home  Mrith  a  lightencd  heart,  Before  the  end 
of  that  year  Hannah  became  the  rejoicing  mother  of  a 
son,  to  whom  the  iiame  of  Samuel  was  given,  and  who 
was  from  his  birth  placed  undcr  the  obligations  of  that 
condition  of  Nazariteship  to  which  his  mother  had 
devotedhim.  B.C.1142.  Haraiah  went  no  raore  to  Shi- 
loh  tiU  her  child  was  old  eiiough  to  dispense  with  her 
matcmal  sen^iccs,  when  she  took  him  up  with  her  to 
leave  him  thcre,  as  it  appears  was  the  custom  when  one 
already  a  Levite  was  placed  under  the  additional  obli- 
gations of  NazariteHhip.  When  he  was  presented  in 
iue  form  to  the  high-priest,  the  mother  took  occasion 
to  remind  him  of  the  forroer  transaction:  ''For  this 
child,"  she  said, "  I  prayed,  and  the  Lord  hath  gircn  me 
my  petition  which  I  asked  of  him"  (1  Sam.  i,  27).  Han- 
nah's  gladness  afterwaids  found  vent  in  an  exulting 
chant,  which  fumiahes  a  remarkable  specimen  of  the 
early  lyric  poetry  of  the  Hebrews  (see  Schloeser,  Canti- 
cum  IfamuFy  Erlangen,  1801),  and  of  which  many  of  the 
ideaa  and  images  wcre  in  after  timcs  repeated  by  the 
Yirgin  Mary  on  a  somewhat  similar  occasion  (Lukę  i, 
46  8q. ;  comp.  also  Psa.  cxiii).  It  is  specially  remarka- 
ble as  containing  the  fint  designation  of  the  Messiah 
under  that  name.  In  the  Targum  it  has  been  subjected 
to  a  process  of  magniloquent  dilution,  for  which  it  would 
be  difficult  to  find  a  parallel  even  in  the  pompous  vaga- 
ries  of  that  paraphrase  (Eichhom,  EuiL  ii,  68).  Ailer 
this  Hannah  failed  not  to  visit  Shiloh  eyery  year,  bring- 
ing  a  new  dress  for  her  son,  who  rcmained  imder  the  eye 
and  near  the  perlon  of  the  high-priest  8ee  Sauukl. 
That  great  pcrsonage  took  kind  notice  of  Hannah  on 
thcse  occasions,  and  bestowed  his  blessing  upon  her  and 
her  husband.  The  Lord  repaid  her  abundantly  for  that 
which  she  had,  to  use  her  own  esprcssion,  ^lent  to 
him  ;*'  for  she  had  three  sons  and  two  daughters  after 
Samuel  (see  Kitto's  Daily  Bibie  ///mj/.).— Kitto,  s.  v. 

Hannah,  John,  D.D.,  an  eminent  Wesleyan  minister, 
was  bom  at  Lincoln,  Eng.,  Nov.  3, 1792,  After  receiring 
a  Christian  education,  he  entered  the  Wesleyan  ministry 
in  1814  at  Bruton,  Somersetshire.  From  1815  to  1817, 
inclusirc,  he  was  on  the  Gainsborough  Circuit;  1818  to 
1820, Lincoln;  1821  to  1823, Nottingham;  1824  to  1826, 
Leeds;  1827  to  1829,  third  Manchester  Circuit;  1830  to 
1832,Huddersfield;  1838,  Liverpool ;  and  in  1834  he  be- 
came theological  tutor  at  the  Wesleyan  Training  Insti- 
tution  at  Hoxton.  In  1842  he  was  removed  to  the 
college  at  Didabur\%  where  he  remained  as  theological 
tutor  till  he  became  a  supemumerary  at  the  Conference 
of  1867.  In  the  year  that  he  was  rcmoved  to  Didsbury 
he  was  elected  president  of  the  Conference  (London), 
and  he  was  again  president  in  1851,  when  the  Confer- 
ence>met  at  Newcastle  upon  Tyne.  He  was  Conference 
Bccretary  in  the  years  1840, 1841, 1849, 1850,  and  1854 
to  1858.  On  two  occasions  he  represented  the  Wesley- 
an Conference,  once  with  the  Kev.  R.  Reece,  and  the 
aecond  time  with  Dr.  J.  F.  Jobeon,  at  the  General  Con- 
ference of  the  Methodist  Episcopal  Church  in  the  United 
States.  His  fuli  term  of  senrice  as  a  Methodist  minis- 
ter extended  without  interruption  from  1814  to  1867— 
Jifły-łkree  years.  Afler  becoming  supemumerary  in 
1867  he  continued  to  reside  at  Didsbury,  under  an  ax- 
rangement  liberally  derised  by  Mr.  Heald  and  other 
prominent  Wesleyan  laymen.  He  died  in  Didsbury 
ftom  oongestion  of  the  lungs,  afler  a  brief  illness,  Dec. 
29,  1867.  *<For  about  thirty- three  years  he  was  a 
chief  instractor  of  the  young  Wesleyan  ministry,  send- 
ing  out  such  men  as  Arthur,  Hunt,  Calvert,  etc ;  men 
who  have  attested  his  salutary  power  throughout  the 
United  Kingdom,  and  in  the  hardest  mission  fields  of 
the  Church.  Nearly  three  hundred  preachers  were 
trained  by  him.  His  influence  oyer  the  connection 
through  these  men  has  been  beyond  ail  estimation.  As 
a  preacher  he  was  exceedingly  interesting  and  effective 
— ^not  remarkably  *  fanciful,*  seldom  rising  into  dedama- 
Uon»  but  fuli  of  entertaining  and  impreasiYe  tbought,  | 


and  a  certein  sweet  grace,  or,  rather,  gncioameas  and 
unction,  which  charmed  aU  derout  listenen.  He  was 
singularly  pertinent,  and  often  surpiisingly  beautiful  in 
Scripture  ciution;  his  discouises  weie  moeaics  of  the 
finest  gems  of  the  sacred  wiitings.  He  was  a  fond  stu- 
dent of  the  sterling  old  Anglican  divines ;  he  delighted, 
in  his  yacation  escursions,  to  make  pilgrimages  to  their 
old  churches  and  grayes,  and  his  sermons  abounded  ia 
the  goklen  thoughts  of  Hooker,  South,  and  like  think- 
ers.  He  was  constitutionally  a  modest  man,  in  early 
life  nen^ously  timid  of  responsibility,  but,  whether  in 
the  pulpit  or  on  the  platform,  always  aoquitted  himaelf 
with  ability ;  and  often  his  sensitive  spiiit  kindled  into 
a  diyine  glow  that  rapt  himself  and  his  audience  with 
holy  enthusiasnL  For  fifty-three  years  his  labom  for 
Methodism  had  no  interruption;  they  were  unobtiu- 
siye,  steady,  quietly  energetic,  and  immeasurably  nae- 
fuL  With  Thomas  Jackson,  he  was  one  of  the  last  of 
that  aecond  and  mighty  rank  of  Wesleyan  preachen^ 
headed  by  Bundng,  Watson,  and  Newtoi^  who,  when 
Wealey*s  immediate  companions  weie  rapidly  disappear- 
ing,  caught  the  Methodistic  standard  from  their  trem- 
bling  hands,  and  borę  it  forward  abreast  of  the  adyano- 
ing  times,  and  planted  it,  especially  by  the  missionaiy 
enterprise,  in  the  ends  of  the  earth.  He  was,  withal,  a 
model  of  Christian  manners— a  perfect  Christian  gentle- 
man ;  not  in  the  sense  deprecated  by  Wesley  in  his  old 
Minutes,  but  in  the  sense  that  Wesley  himself  so  com- 
pletely  exemplified.  His  amiability  and  modesty  di^ 
armed  enyy.  No  prominent  man  passed  through  the 
seyere  intemal  controrersies  of  Wesleyan  Methodian 
with  less  crimination  from  antagonists.  The  whole 
connection  spontaneously  recogmsed  him  as  unimpeach- 
able,  amid  whateyer  rumors  or  damorB.  Ali  instinc- 
tiycly  tumed  towards  him  as  an  example  of  serenity, 
purtty,  and  assurance,  in  whateyer  doubtful  exigenqr. 
The  influence  of  Dr.  Hannah^s  character,  aside  fh>m  his 
talcnts,  on  the  large  ministry  which  he  educated,  has 
been  one  of  the  greatest  blessings  Wesleyan  Methodism 
has  enjoyed  in  this  generation." — MethodiH  (newapa- 
per),  Jan.  25,  1868;  Atumal  American  Cydopcedia  for 
1867,  p.  601 ;  Wedeycai  Mimttes,  1868,  p.  14. 

Han^nathon  (Heb.  Chcamatk<m%  firin,  gradous- 
ly  regarded;  Sept.  *Awa^wv^  y.  'Ewa^w^  and  'Afiw^), 
a  place  on  the  northem  boundary  of  Zebulon,  apparent- 
ly  about  midway  between  the  Sea  of  Galilee  and  the 
yallęy  of  Jiphthah-El  (Josh.  xix,  14) ;  probaUy  among 
the  rangę  of  Jebel  Jermik,  not  far  from  d-Mughar. 

Han'ni»l  (Heb.  Chcmmd\  ix'^Sn.  ffrace  of  God; 
Sept  'AvtJ^X,  Yulg.  Hanmd  and  Hcudel),  the  name  of 
two  men. 

1.  Son  of  Ephod  and  phylarch  of  the  tribe  of  Manas- 
seh,  appointed  hy  Moses  at  the  diyine  nomination  as 
one  of  the  commissioners  to  diWde  the  promised  land 
(Numb.  xxxiy,  28).    B.C.  1618. 

2.  One  of  the  sons  of  Ulla  and  chief  of  the  tribe  of 
Asher  (1  Chroń,  yii,  89,  where  the  name  is  less  ooirect- 
ly  Anglicized  "  Hanid">    RC  antę  720. 

Ha^noch  (Gen.  xxy,  4 ;  xlyi,  9 ;  Exod.  yi,  14 ;  Namhi 
xxvi,  5 ;  1  Chroń,  y,  8).    See  Enoch  8, 4. 

Ha^noohite  (Heh.  CAonołi',  *^3'3n;  Sept.  'Em0x» 
Yulg.  HenockiUty  Eng.Yers.  '*  Hanochites"),  a  desoend- 
ant  of  Ekocu  or  Hanoch,  the  son  of  Reuben  (NumU 
xxyi,  5). 

Hana  Saoha.    See  Sachs. 

Ha^nnn  (Heb.  Chanun',  ^^3n,/am>re(f),  the  name 
of  three  men. 

1.  (Sept  'Avvwv  and  *Avav.)  The  son  and  su^ 
ceasor  of  Nahash,  king  of  the  Ammonites  (2  Sam.  x,  1- 
4 ;  1  Chroń,  xix,  2-6).  David,  who  had  in  his  tzoufales 
been  befriended  by  Nahash,  sent,  with  the  kindest  inten* 
tions,  an  embassy  to  condole  with  Hanun  on  the  death 
of  his  father,  and  to  congratulate  him  on  his  own  acoes* 
sion.  B»C  cir.  1035.  The  rash  young  king,  howeyer, 
was  led  to  misi^rehend  the  motiyes  of  this  embasąyt 


HANWAY 


65 


HAPHTARAH 


oid  to  treat  with  grofls  and  inexpiable  indignity  the 
honoimble  penoniges  whom  David  had  chainged  with 
thifl  wii— tnn-  Their  beaids  were  kal/thayen,  and  their 
robes  cot  short  by  the  middle,  and  they  were  diamiased 
in  this  shameftil  trim,  which  can  be  appreciated  only 
bgr  thoae  wbo  consider  how  reyerently  the  beard  has  al- 
ways  becn  icgaided  by  the  OrientaU.  See  Beajkd. 
When  the  news  of  this  ailront  was  brought  to  Dayid, 
be  sent  word  to  the  ambassadon  to  remain  at  Jericho 
tin  the  gniwth  of  their  beards  enabled  them  to  appear 
with  deoency  in  the  metropolia.  He  yowed  yengeance 
npoo  Hanim  for  the  insolt;  and  the  yehemence  with 
wfaich  the  matter  was  taken  up  forms  an  instaiioe,  in- 
tocsting  fifom  its  antiqnity,  of  the  respect  expected  to 
be  paid  to  the  pezson  and  character  of  ambassadon. 
Hannn  himaelf  lof^ed  for  nothing  less  than  war  as  the 
coi]seqiicnce  of  his  condnct;  and  he  subsidized  Hadare- 
aer  and  other  Syrian  princes  to  assist  him  with  their 
arades.  The  power  of  the  Syrians  was  broken  in  two 
campaigna,  and  the  Ammonites  were  left  to  their  fate, 
which  waa  seyere  eyen  beyond  the  usual  seyerities  of 
war  in  that  remote  age.  B.CL  dr.  1034.— Kitto,  s.  y. 
Sec  Aamourrc;  DAyiD. 

2.  (Scpt.  'Avovv.)  A  person  who  lepaired  (in  eon- 
mction  with  the  inhabitanta  of  Zanoah)  the  YaDey- 
gate  of  Jerusalem  aiter  the  Ci4>tiyity  (Neh.  iii,  18).  KG. 
446u 

3.  (Sept  'Avw/i.)  A  son  (<<the  sixth")  of  Zalaph, 
who  likeinse  repaired  part  of  the  waUs  of  Jerusalem 
CNeh.iii,80>    KG.  446. 

Mtaxw9Lj,  JoJUAS,  an  English.  philanthropist,  was 
ben  at  Fórtamoath  in  1712.  He  established  himself  as 
a  merchant  at  St.  Peteiaboig,  and  became  connected, 
throngfa  hia  Ruanan  dealings,  with  the  trade  into  Persia. 
Bońicss  haring  led  him  into  that  conntry)  he  published 
ia  1758  A  kutarieal  Acemmt  of  tke  Britisk  Trade  oter 
the  CaMpkm  Sea,  tnUA  a  Jcumal  of  Tmrdafrom  London 
tkrtwffk  Rtuiia  uUo  Patia  (4  yols.  4to),  **a  work  of  no 
pietenaioD  to  literaiy  deganoe,  bat  containing  much 
information  on  the  oommerdal  subjects  of  which  he 
apeaks,  and  on  the  histoiy  and  manners  of  Persia. 
The  laiter  part  of  his  life  was  employed  in  supporting, 
by  his  pen  and  peisonal  exertions,  a  great  rariety  of 
diaritafaie  and  philanthropic  schemes ;  and  he  gained  so 
high  and  honorable  a  name  that  a  deputation  of  the 
chief  merchants  of  London  madę  it  .their  reque8t  to  goy- 
cfmnent  that  some  substantial  mark  of  poUic  fayor 
ahonki  be  oonferred  on  hiuL  He  was,  in  conseqaenoe, 
madę  a  comminioner  of  the  nayy.  The  Maiine  Sodety 
and  the  Magdalen  Charit}',  both  still  in  ezistenoe,  owe 
their  establishment  mainly  to  him;  he  was  also  one  of 
the  great  pnnnoters  of  Smiday-schools.  He  died  in 
1786."  He  published  also  TU  Jn^portanoe  ofihe  LonTs 
Sttpper  (London,  1782, 12mo)  i—ReJlectionM  on  Life  and 
BMpom  (Lond.  1761),  2  yols.  8yo).  See  Pugh,  Remarh- 
atu  Oecurreneee  m  tke  L{fe  ofJonoM  HamDay  (London, 
1787,  8yo);  Ens^iih  Cydopadia;  Ambonę,  Dktknary 
^Authore,  1^782, 

Mmphnflak  (Hebrew  Ciąp^am^tm,  D^^&H,  two 
pUa;  Scpt.  'A^paffi,  Yulg.  Hapkaraim)^  a  place  near 
the  bonkt  of  Issachar,  mentioned  between  Shunem  and 
Shihon  (Josh.  xiz,  19).  Eusebins  {Onomasf,  s.  y.  A/^a- 
paaift)  appears  to  place  it  8ix  Boman  miles  north  of  Le- 
gk>;  the  Apociypha  also  poasibly  speaks  of  the  same 
place  as  Apii^shkiia  (Afaiptua,  1  Maoc  xi,  84;  oom- 
paie  z,  80, 88).  Schwarz  {Paiettinef  p.  166)  was  unable 
tofiodiL  JiLMipeit{}VaHdkartewmPaUbHna,lSb7)lO' 
catca  it  near  the  riyer  Kishon,  apparently  at  Tett  eth- 
noniA  (Robinsan*s  Reaeardusy  new  ed.  iii,  115).  Dr. 
Thomson  {Land  and  Book,  i,  502)  imagines  it  may  be 
the  noodem  Skefa  Amer  (the  8kefa  Omar  of  Robinson, 
Alsaeeiraftef^  new  ed.  iii  lOSj^^onaridgeoyerlookingthe 
pfaun"  of  Megiddo),  which,  he  says,*'in  oki  Arabie  an- 
thon  is  written  Bhepkr-itnC*    See  Issachar. 

Haphtarah,  pL  HAPHTABdrH  (l^^lpn,  ditmie- 
fkm^  ni^lOf  n).  Thia  ezpreaaioD,  which  is  foand  in 
IV^E 


foot-notes  and  at  the  end  of  many  editions  of  the  He- 
brew  Bibie,  denotes  the  diiferent  lessons  irom  the  proph- 
ets  read  in  the  synagogue  eyery  Sabbath  and  festiyal 
of  the  year.  As  these  l«nons  haye  been  read  ftom  time 
immemorial  in  conjunction  with  sections  ftom  the  law, 
and  as  it  is  to  both  *Hhe  readwg  of  the  law  and  the 
prophets*'  that  reference  is  madę  in  the  N.  T.  (Acts  xiii, 
15,  etc),  we  propoee  to  discuss  both  together  in  the  pres- 
entarticle. 

1.  CUutifieation  ofihe  Leseone,  their  TitUs,  Siffinfica- 
tion,  etc—There  are  two  dasses  of  lessons  indicated  in 
the  Hebrew  Bibie :  the  one  oonsists  of fjfy-four  secdons, 
into  which  the  entire  law  or  Pentateuch  (rT^*in)  is  di- 
yided,  and  is  called  Parehioth  (^1*^0*11),  płur.  of  htt^ns, 
from  yff^tt  to  teparaie) ;  and  the  other  consists  of  a  cor- 
responding  number  of  sections  selected  from  different 
parts  of  the  prophets,  to  be  read  in  oonjunction  with 
the  fonner,  and  denominated  Haphtarotk,  As  the  sig- 
nification  of  this  term  is  much  disputed,  and  is  intimate- 
ly  Gonnected  with  the  yiew  about  the  origin  of  these 
prophetic  lessons,  we  must  defer  the  discussion  of  it  to 
section  4.  The  diyision  of  the  PenUteuch  into  Jfjf^ 
ybttr  sections  is  to  proyide  a  leeson  for  each  Sabbath  of 
those  years  which,  according  to  Jewish  chronology, 
haye  filly-four  Sabbaths  (see  sec  2),  and  to  read  through 
the  uihoie  Pentateuch,  with  large  portions  of  the  differ- 
ent prophets,  in  the  course  of  eyery  year.  It  mus*^^  be 
obeeryed,  howeyer,  that  this  annual  cyde  was  not  uni- 
yersally  adopted  by  the  andent  Jews.  There  were 
some  who  had  a  triennial  cyde  (comp.  Megilla^  29,  b). 
These  diyided  the  PenUteuch  into  one  hundred  and 
fifty^hree  or  Jifty-fice  sections^  so  as  to  read  through 
the  law  in  Sabbatic  lessons  once  ui  three  years.  This 
was  stin  done  by  some  Jews  in  the  days  of  Maimonides 
(Somi^as^JadHa^^JfhazaiaHilckoih  TepktUajia.n,  1),  and 
Benjamin  of  Tudela  tells  us  that  he  found  the  Syrian 
Jews  foUowed  this  practice  in  Memphis  (ed.  Asher,  i, 
148).  The  sections  of  the  triennial  diyisbn  are  called 
by  the  Masorites  Sedarim  at  Sedarołh  (D'^'inD,  hl^lID), 
as  may  be  seen  in  the  Masoretic  notę  at  the  end  of  Ex- 
odus: *'Here  endeth  the  book  of  Exodus  .  .  .  it  hath 
eleyen  PartMoth  {n^^^S^^t,  L  e.  according  to  the  an- 
nual diyision),  twenty-nine  Sedaroth  (HI^^^D,  L  e.  ac- 
cording to  the  triennial  diyision),  and  forty  chapters 
(D'^p'^&)."  Besides  the  Sabbatic  lessons,  spedal  por- 
tions of  the  law  and  prophets  are  also  read  on  eyery 
festiyal  and  fast  of  the  year.  It  must  be  notioed,  mor&- 
oyer,  that  the  Jews,  who  haye  for  some  centurics  almost 
uniyersally  foUowed  the  annual  diyision  of  the  law,  de- 
nominate  the  Sabbatic  section  Sidra  (K^'7*iC),  the 
name  which  the  Masorites  giye  to  each  portion  o(  the 
triennial  diyision,  and  that  eyery  one  of  the  fifty-four 
sections  has  a  q)edal  title,  which  it  deriyes  from  the 
flrst  or  second  word  with  which  it  oommenoes,  and  by 
which  it  is  quoted  in  the  Jewish  writings.  To  render 
the  following  description  morę  intelligible,  as  well  as  t% 
enable  the  student  of  Hebrew  exegesis  to  identify  the 
ąuotations  from  the  Pentateuch,  we  subjoin  on  the  two 
following  pages  chronological  tables  of  the  Sabbatical 
Festiyal  ańd  Fast  Lessons  ftom  the  Law  and  Prophets, 
and  their  titles.  (See  Clarke*8  Commentary^  s.  f.  Deu- 
teronomy.) 

2.  ^  The  Beading  ofthe  Lato  and  Prophets  at  indioar 
ted  in  the  Hebrew  Bibie,  andpracticed  £y  t^e  Jews  at  the 
pretent  day, — ^As  has  already  been  remarked,  this  diyi- 
sion into^^fty-four  sections  is  to  proyide  a  special  lesson 
for  eyeiy  Sabbath  of  those  years  which  haye  fiity-four 
Sabbaths.  Thus  the  intercalary  year,  in  which  New  Year 
falls  on  a  Thursday,  and  the  months  Marcheshyan  and 
Kidey  haye  twenty-nine  dajrs,  has  fifty-four  Sabbaths 
which  require  special  lessons.  But  as  ordinary  years 
haye  not  so  many  Sabbaths,  and  those  years  in  which 
New  Year  falls  on  a  Monday,  and  the  months  Marche»- 
yan  and  Kisley  haye  thirty  days,  or  New  Year  laUs  on 


HAPHTARAH 


66 


HAPHTARAH 


I.  Tabu  of  Sabbatio  Lbssoks. 


ir«. 

ll«».1l«Tl(b 

orUl«L6«MO. 

rtorii4»orth«uw. 

TłM  Prapfaata. 

crrora 

Ge]Ll,l-vi,8. 

IBO.  Xlii,  6-xUll,  10,  or*  to  Isa.  xlU,  21. 

na 

vi,9-xl,89. 

Isa.  llv,  1— lv,  6,  or  to  llv,  10. 

i^-p 

xli,l-xvii,9T. 

Ifia.xl,27-xll,16. 

vm 

xviii,  l—xzii,  94. 

9  Eiugs  iv,  1-87,  or  to  ver.  98. 

rno  yn 

xxUi,  1— xxv,  la 

1  Kinga  i,  1-81. 

XXT,  19— xxviii,  9. 

Malachli,l-ii,T. 

vcar\ 

xxviii,  10-.xxxii,  8L 

Hofl.  xi,  7— xli,  19,  or  to  ver.  18. 

TfyV^ 

xxxii,  4— xxxvi,  4S. 

Hofl.  xy,  lB-xiv,  10,  or  Obad.  I-O. 

^tf*\ 

xxxvii,  1— xl,  9& 

Amos  ii,  6-111,8. 

Ypa 

xli,l-xUv,17. 

lKlng8Ul,16-lv,l. 

WT«1 

xliv,18-xlvił,97. 

Bzek.  xxxvii,  16-98. 

Tn 

xlvii,  98-1, 96b 

1  Kinga  11, 1-19. 

tfOS9 

Bxod.i,l-vl.l. 

laa.  xxvii,  6-xxviIl,  18:  xxix,  89, 28,  or  Jer.  i,  l-il,  8. 

jnan 

vl,2-lx,86. 

Ezek.  xxviii,  26-xxlx,  21. 

K2 

x,l-xiU,m 

Jer.  xlvi,  lfr-28. 

n^5 

xUi,17-xvll,16. 

Jttdg.  iv,  4— V,  31,  or  V,  1-81. 

•nm 

xviii,  l-xx.  98. 

Isa.  vi,  l-vii,  6 ;  lx.  6, 6,  or  vi,  1-18. 

D^fiVK3 

xxi,l-xxiv,18L 

Jer.  xxxiv,  8-22 ;  xxxUi,  26-26. 

19 

ritt*ni  \ 

xxv,  1— xxvti,  19. 

lKlug8v,26-vI,18. 

M 

Tntn 

xxvU,90-xxx,10. 

Baek.  xliii,  10-27. 

«1 

K©n  ^ 

xxx,  11— xxxiv,  8& 

1  Kinga  xviii,  1-89,  or  xviii,  20-89. 

» 

>npfif^ 

xxxv,  1— xxxviii,  20. 

1  Kinga  vii,  40-60.  or  rU,  18-96. 

28 

•^V*5 

XTZvill,81— x],88. 

1  Kinga  vii,  61-vili,  21,  or  vii,  40-60. 

84 

anp^-ł 

Levlt  l,l-v,26. 

l88.xUU,91— xUv,28. 

86 

nx 

vi,l--vili,86. 

Jer.  vii,  21-vlU,  8 ;  lx,  22, 28. 

86 

'WSTJ 

lx,  1— xl,  47. 

2  Sam.  vi,  1— vii,  17,  or  vi,  1-19. 

8T 

y^n 

xli,l-xiii,eO. 

2KlngBiv,49-v,19. 

88 

xlv.l-xv,88. 

2  Kinga  vii,  3-2a 

99 

nm  "nnjc 

xvi,l-xvili,80. 

Szek.  xxii,  1-19. 

80 

ffVlTp 

xix,  1— XX,  27." 

Amoa  ix,  7-16,  or  Ezek.  xz,  9-40. 

81 

nnoK 

xxi,  1— xxiv,  28. 

Ezek.  xliv,  16-31. 

88 

•VTa 

xxv,  1— xxvi,  2. 

Jer.  xxxii,  6-97. 

88 

xxvi.9-xxvil,84. 

Jer.  xvi,  19— xvU,  14. 

84 

"onna 

N!imb.ł,l-iv,20. 

Hoa.  11, 1-82. 

86 

KW 

lv,  21— vU,  80. 

Jadg.  xlii,  9-26. 

86 

viii,l-xli,16. 

Zech.il,14-lv,7. 

37 

TJ^-^td 

xiii,l-xv,41. 

JoBh.il,  1-94. 

88 

tnp 

xvi,l-xvlll,89. 

2Sam.xi.l4-xil,29. 

89 

xlx,l-xxil,l. 

Jndg.  xi,  1-38. 

40 

xxlł,2-xxv.9. 

Mlcahv,6-vi,8. 

41 

xxv,  10— xxx,  1. 

1  Kinga  xviii,  46-x{x,  21  if  it  ia  before  Tammu  17,  afker 

thia  datę  Jer.  1,1-11, 8. 

49 

nnea 

TrT,^xxxil,48. 

Jer.  i.  1-11, 8. 

48 

•'^a 

xxxUi,l— xxxvi,  18. 

Jer.  U,  4-26. 

44 

D^an 

DcuL  i,  1-111,29. 

laa.  i,  1-27. 

46 

•pHtlKl 

ill,28-vil,ll. 

laa.  X],  1-96. 

46 

apj' 

vll.l2-xl,26. 

laa.  xlix,  14— U,  8L 

47 

nJn 

xi,26-xvl,lT. 

laa.  Uv,  U— lv.  6. 

48 

D-CBir 

xvi,  18-xxi,  9l 

laa.  11. 19-111,19. 

48 

wn-o 

xxi,  10— xxv,  19. 

laa.  liv,  ł-10- 

60 

Ki^n-o 

xxvi,  1— xxix,  8. 

laa.  lx,  1-28. 

61 

D'*SS3 

xxix,  9— xxx,  90. 

laa.  1x1, 10-1x111, 9. 

69 

t'^ 

xxxi,  1-80. 

Iaa.lv,ft-lvi,8. 

68 

ITTKn 

xxxii,  1-69. 

64 

xxxiii,  l-xxxiv,  19. 

*  Tbe  llrat  reference  always  abowa  the  Haphtarah  acoording  to  tbe  Oennan  and  Polish  Jewa  (OnstDK) ;  tbe  aecond, 
introdooed  by  the  dl^onctlYe  particie  oa,  ia  accordlng  to  the  Portngaeae  Jewa  (jamrooh 


«  Satorday,  and  the  aaid  montha  are  rągnlar,  L  e.  Mar- 
cheayan  having  twenty-nine  daya  and  Kialer  thirty, 
liave  only  foiŁy-fleveii  Sabbatha-^urtoai  of  the  fifly- 
four  aectiona,  viz.  22  and  23,  27  and  28,  29  and  80,  32 
and  33, 39  and  40, 42  and  43,  60  and  61,  hare  been  ap- 
pointed  to  be  lead  in  paiia  either  wholly  or  in  part,  ac- 
coiding  to  the  rarying  nomber  of  Sabbatha  in  the  cui^ 
rent  year.  Thoa  the  whole  Pentateach  ia  read  through 
erery  year.  The  first  of  theae  weekly  aectiona  ia  read 
on  the  first  Sabbath  after  the  Feaat  of  Tabemaclea, 
which  b  in  the  month  of  Tiari,  and  begina  the  civil 
year,  and  the  laat  ia  read  on  the  concluding  day  of  thia 
featiral,  Tiari  23,  which  ia  called  The  Rejoiang  of  tke 
Law  (n*lin  nn^attS),  a  day  of  rejoidng,  becaiue  on  it 
the  law  ia  read  through.  See  Taberi* acles,  Fkast 
OF.  Aooording  to  the  triennial  diriaiou,  the  reading  of 
the  law  aeema  to  haye  been  aa  foliowa :  Gen.  i,  l-£xod. 
xiii,  16,  oompńaing  hUtory  fiom  the  creation  of  the 


world  to  the  £xodua,  waa  lead  in  the  firat  year;  Exod. 
xiii,  17-Niim.  vi,  27,  embradng  the  lawt  of  both  Sinai 
and  the  tabemade,  formed  the  lesaona  for  the  Sabbatha 
of  the  aecond  year;  and  Numb.  vii,  l-Deut.  xxxiv,  12, 
containing  both  kittory  (L  e.  the  hiatory  of  thirty-nina 
yeaia'  wanderinga  in  the  wildemeea)  and  law  (i.  e.  the 
repetiUon  of  the  Moeaic  law),  conatituted  the  Sabbatic 
leasona  for  the  third  year  (oompare  MegiBot  29,  b,  and 
Yolkslehrer,  ii,  209). 

3.  The  mcumer  o/readk^  the  Law  ani  the  PrcpktU, 
—Erery  Sabbatic  leaaon  from  the  law  (ITlinn  n«'^'ip) 
ia  divided  into  aeren  aectiona  (evidently  deaigned  to 
correapond  to  the  aeren  daya  of  the  week),  which,  in  tbe 
daya  of  our  Sariour  and  afterwarda,  were  read  by  aeven 
different  penona  (D*^N*1'^p  HS^aD),  who  were  called 
upon  for  thia  purpoee  by  the  congregatign  or  ita  chief 
Miahna,  UeffUla,  iv,  2;  Maimonidea,  Jad /fa-CAnzoia) 
SiichotkTephiOaf  jai,7).    Great  cara  ia  taken  that  the 


HAPHTARAH  67  HAPHTARAH 

« 

n.  TiLBŁB  OF  FmTITAŁ  AlTD  FaST  ŁttSOKB. 


TUB  PBOPHBia. 


Nbw  Moom. 

iriŁ  Iklls  on  a  Sabbath  is  read 

On  a  Sanday 

Fkast  or  DBDiCATioir.    Day  i. 
Daj  11. 
Day  1IL 
Day  lv. 
DayT. 
Day  tŁ 
Day  vlL 
DayvliL 
Sabbath  L 
Sabbath  iL 
Fbast  or  Puauc. 
Sabbath  PABsiiBrn  SAonoa. 
Sabbath  Pabmicth  Paka. 
Sabbath  Pabsukth  Ha-Cbodbbh 


Sabbath  Ha-Qaik>u 
Fbabt  op  Pasbotcb. 


DayL 
Day  U. 


Chol  Moedt  Day  L 

DayiL 
<If  U  fails  on  a  Sonday  the 
precedinff  leason  la  read.) 
Day  111. 
(If  on  a  Monday,  the  preoed- 
faijzlesBon.) 

a  wedneaday  or  Thnnday. 
Day  lv. 
SnbbathChollIoed. 


Ona 


Day  yll. 

DayTlli. 

•I 

DayL 
Day  U. 


If  Sabbath, 
Weekday, 
Fbast  of  PaimoosT. 

U  Sabbath, 
Week  day, 


Fabt  of  m*  Niifra  of  Ab. 

Mornlng. 

Koott. 
Naw  Tsab.  Day  I. 

Day  ii. 
Dat  of  Atdksmbit.      Morning. 

Nooo. 
FsAar  OF  Tabbbk  Aoua. 

DayL 

DaylL 


CholHoed, 


Sabbath  Chol  Hoed. 


Day  i. 
Day  11. 
Day  ML 
Day  iv. 


Anreth,  If  Sabbath. 
Weekday. 

Simehath  Tora. 

Sabbath  Sbuba. 
Fact  Datb  generally. 
MoimATa  and  TuusanATB  al]  the 
year  ronnd. 


Nnmb.  xxviii,  9-16  {MaphHr). 

Nnrab.  xxviii,  8-16. 

Nnmb.  vii,  1-17. 

Namb.  vii,  18-28. 

Nnmb.  vii,  24-2». 

Namb.  vii,  80-8&. 

Nnmb.  vii,  MMI. 

Numb.  vii,  42-47. 

Namb.  vii,  48-63. 

Namb.vii,e4-vill,4» 


£xod.  xvii,  8-16. 
Deat  xxv,  17-19  (Maphtir), 
Nnmb.  xix,  1-29  (MaphHr), 
Exod.  xli,  1-90. 


Bxod.  xii,  91-4S1 ;  Nnmb.  zxvlU,  16.26  (JTopA- 

Ctr). 
Łevlt.  xxii,  96-xxiU,  44 ;  Nnmb.  xxviU,  16-26 

(Maphtir). 
Bxod.  xiii,  1-16 :  Namb.  xxviii,  19-26. 
Bród.  xxii.zziłl,  19 ;  Nnmb.  xxviii,  19>9BL 


Exod.  xxiv,  1-96;  Nnmb.  xxviii,  19-9(L 
Nnmb.  lx,  1-14 ;  xxvlit,  19-26. 
Exod.  xxxiii,  12— xxxiv,  96;  Nnmbw  xxviii, 
19-9& 

Exod.  xiii,  17— XV,  96;  Nnmb.  xxviii,  19-96 

(Haphtir). 
Dent  xiv,  9^-xvl,  17;  Nomb.  xxviii,  19-96 

{Mapktir). 
Dent.  XV,  19— xvi,  17;  Nnmb.  xxviii,  19-25 

{Maphtir). 
Exod.  xix,  1— XX,  96;  Nnmb.  xxvlU,  96-81 

(Maphtir). 
Dent  xiv,  29— xvi,  17. 

Dent  XV,  19— xvi,  17;  Nnmb.  zxvfii,  96<81 
(Maphtir). 

Dent.  iv,  26-401 

Gen.  xxi.  1-84 ;  Nnmb.  xxix,  1-6  (Maphtir). 
Gen.  xxii.  1-24 ;  Namb.  xxix,  1-6  (Maphtir). 
Levit.  xvi,  1-84 ;  Namb.  xxix,  7-11  (ifapAWr). 
Łevit.  xviii,  1-30. 

Łevlt  xxii,  26-xxill,  44;  Nnmb.  xxix,  19-16 

(Maphtir). 
ŁeviL  xxiL  26-xxlii,  44;  Nnmb.  xxix,  19-16 

(MaphH?). 
Nnmb.  xxix,  17-96 ;  17-99  la  repeated. 
Nnmb.  xxix,  90-28 ;  20-26  la  repeated. 
Nnmb.  xxix,  93-81 ;  98-98  la  repeated. 
Nnmb.  xxix,  26-84;  96-81  łs  repeated. 
Bxod.  xxxiii,  19-xxxlv,  26;  Nnmb.  xxix,  17 

-22,  if  Ił  is  the  fłrst  dav  of  Chol  Moed ; 

Nnmb.  xxix,  28-28.  if  the  tfalrd ;  Nnmb. 

xxix,  26-81,  if  the  fourth  day  (MaphUr). 
Dent  xlv,  29— xvi,  17. 
Dent  XV,  19— xvi,  17 ;  Nnmb.  xxix,  86— xxx, 

1  (MaphHr). 
Dent  xxxiii,  1— xxxiv,  12;  Gen.  i,  1— ii,  8; 

Nnmb.  xxix,  86— xxx,  1  (Maphtir), 

Kxod.  xxxH,  11-14 :  xxxiv,  1-10. 
The  fłrst  section  of  the  Sabbatic  leaaon  from 
the  law. 


lea.  lxvi,  1-94 
1  Sam.  XX,  18-49. 


Zech.il,14-iv,T. 

1  Kinga  vii,  40-60. 

TbeKwkofBather. 

1  Sano.  XV,  9-84,  or  xv,  1-84 

Ewsk.  xzxvl,  16-88,  or  to  ver.  86. 

Bxek.  xlv,  l<^xlvl,  18,  or  xlv,  18 

-xlvł,l& 
Mai.  UL  4-94. 
Joah.  111,  6-7;  v,  2-16;  vt,  97,  or 

V,  2-16. 
9  EJngs  xxiU,  1^;  21-96. 


{Exck.  xxxvi,  8T— zxzvli,  17,  or 
xxxvił,l-14 
The  Song  ofSonga. 
2  Sam.  xxii,  1-61. 

laa.  X,  89— xU,  6w 

laa.  X,  89— xłl,  6. 

Exek.i,l-98;  111,19. 

Habak.  U,  20-111, 19,  or  iii,  1-19 ; 

Eether. 
Habak.  11, 90-111, 19,  or  Ul,  1-19. 


Jer.  viii,  18— lx,  98;  Łamenta- 

tlona. 
laa.  lv,  6-lvl,  a 
l8am.Ll— II.IOl 
Jer.  xzxL  9-20. 
lea.  lvii,  14-lvUl,  14 
Jonah. 

Zech.  xiv,  1-21. 

1  Kinga  ▼111,9-91. 


Eaek.  xxxvlłl,  18— zzzlz,  16; 
Bodealaatea. 


1  Kinga  vUi,  64-66;  Eccleelafitea. 

Joeh.  1, 1-18. 

Hos.  xiv,  2-9 :  Joel  11, 16-97. 

Iaa.lv,6-lvU,8. 


wbok  nation  ahould  be  represented  at  thia  reading  of 
the  law  and  piopheta.  Heuc6  a  Cohen  0^3)  or  prieat 
k  called  to  the  readmg  of  the  firat  portion,  a  Leri  (^^h) 
to  the  second,  and  au  Jgrad  (bK^lC'^)  to  the  third ;  and 
after  the  three  great  diriaiona  of  the  nation  have  thua 
been  dnly  repreaented,  the  remaining  four  portiona  are 
anigned  to  four  others  with  leaa  caie.  *'£very  one 
thna  called  to  the  reading  of  the  law  muat  unroll  the 
acnill,  and,  haring  fonnd  the  place  where  he  is  to  begin 
to  md,  prononnoea  the  following  benediction— '  Bleas 
ye  the  lord,  who  ia  ev€r  blessed ;'  to  which  the  conjcre- 
gation  ngpifoA,  *  Bleased  be  the  Lord,  who  is  blessed  for 


eyermore.*  Whereupon  he  again  prononncea  the  fol- 
lowing benediction — ^  Bleased  art  thou,  O  Lord  our  God, 
King  of  the  unirerse,  who  hast  choeen  us  from  among 
all  nations,  and  hast  giyen  ua  thy  law.  Bleased  art 
thou,  O  Lordfgiyer  of  the  law  ;^  to  which  all  the  congre- 
g^tion  respond  *  Amen.'  He  then  reads  the  aeyenth  poi^ 
tion  of  the  lesson,  and  when  he  haa  finished,  loUa  up  the 
scroll,  and  pronounoes  again  the  following  benediction — 
*  Blessed.art  thou,  O  Lord  our  God,  King  of  the  umyerse, 
who  hast  giyen  us  thy  law,  the  law  of  truth,  and  hast 
planted  among  us  eyerlasting  life.  Bleaaed  art  thou,  O 
Lord,  giver  of  the  law' "  (I^Iairoonidea,  ibid.  xii,  5).  The 
other  six,  who  are  caUed  in  rotation  to  the  reading  of 


HAPHTARAH 


68 


HAPHTARAH 


the  other  Bix  portioiu,  hare  to  go  thiough  the  same  foi^ 
mulańes.  llien  the  maphtir  (l^ZSt)^),  o^  the  one  who 
finiahea  up  by  the  reading  of  the  Ilaphtarah,  or  the  lea- 
son  fiom  the  propheta,  ia  called.  Having  lead  the  few 
concluding  yenea  of  the  lemon  from  the  Uw,  and  paased 
throogh  the  aame  fónnuhuies  as  the  other  aeren,  he 
reada  the  appointed  section  ftom  the  propheta.  ^  Before 
reading  it,  he  pronoancea  the  foUowing  benediction — 
'  Bleaaed  art  thou,  O  Lord  our  God,  King  of  the  uni- 
▼eiae,  who  haat  chosen  good  propheta,  and  deUghted 
in  their  worda,  which  were  apoken  in  truth.  Blesaed 
art  thou,  O  Lord,  who  haat  choaen  the  law,  thy  senr- 
ant  Moeea,  thy  people  larael,  and  thy  true  and  right- 
eous  propheta;*  and  after  reading,  *  Bleased  art  thou,  O 
Lord  our  God,  King  of  the  nnirerse,  Rock  of  all  ages, 
righteous  in  all  generationa,  the  faithful  God  who  prom- 
isea  and  perform8,who  decreea  and  accomplishes,  for  all 
thy  worda  are  faithful  and  juat.  Faithful  art  thou.  Lord 
our  God,  and  fiidthful  are  thy  worda,  and  not  one  of  thy 
worda  ahall  return  in  vain,  for  thou  art  a  faithful  King. 
Blesaed  art  thou,  O  Lord,  the  God  who  art  faithful  in  all 
thy  worda.*  *  Ilave  mercy  upon  Zioń,  for  it  ia  the  dwell- 
ing  of  mir  life,  and  saye  speedily  in  our  days  the  aiflict- 
ed  aoula.  Bleased  art  thou,  O  Lord,  who  wilt  make  Zioń 
rejoice  in  her  children.  Cauae  ua  to  rejoice,  O  Lord  our 
God,  m  Elijah  thy  seryant,  and  in  the  kingdom  of  the 
houae  of  David  tbine  anointed.  May  he  apeedil^'  coroe 
and  gladden  mur  hearts.  Let  no  stranger  aiton  his 
throne,  and  let  othera  no  longer  inherit  hia  glor^',  for 
thou  haat  swom  unto  him  by  thy  holy  name  that  his 
light  ahall  not  be  extinguiahed  forerer  and  ever.  Bless- 
ed  art  thou,  O  Lord,  the  ahield  of  Da\ńd.*  *  For  the  law, 
the  divine  senrice,  the  propheta,  and  for  ^  this  day  of 
reat**  [or  of  memoriał],  this  goodly  day  of  holy  convoca- 
tion  which  thou  haat  given  to  us,  O  Lord,  for  sanctifica- 
tion  and  rest  [on  the  Śabbath],  for  honor  and  glor^' ;  for 
all  this,  O  Lord  our  King,  we  thank  and  praiae  thee. 
Let  thy  name  be  praiaed  in  the  mouth  6f  every  U\'ing 
creature  fcrever  and  ever.  Thy  word,  O  our  Ring,  is 
true,  and  will  abide  forerer.  Blesaed  art  thou,  King  of 
the  whole  earth,  who  haat  sanctified  the  Sabbath,  and 
Israel,  and  the  day  of  memoriał'  **  (Malmonides,  ibid). 
After  the  Babylonian  captivity,  when  the  Hebrew  lan- 
guage  became  an  unknown  tongue  to  the  commou  peo- 
ple, an  interpreter  (l^aaitniD,  'jtta-nn)  stood  at  the 
deak  by  the  side  of  thoae  who  read  the  lesson^  and  par- 
aphrased  the  section  from  the  law  into  Chaldec  rerae 
by  yerse,  the  reader  pauaing  at  erery  yersc,  whilst  the 
leason  from  the  propheta  he  paraphrased  three  yeraea  at 
a  time  (Mishna,  MegiUa^  iv,  4) ;  and  Lightfoot  ia  of 
opinion  that  St.  Paul,  in  1  Cor.  xiv,  22,  refers  to  this  cir- 
cumstanoe  {Hora  Hebraica  in  loco).  The  leason  from  the 
law  waa  on  these  oocaaions  rendered  into  Chaldee  ąuite 
literally,  owing  to  the  fear  which  both  the  interpretera 
and  the  congregation  had  lest  a  free  explanation  of  it 
might  misrepresent  ita  eenae,  whilst  greater  freedom  waa 
exerci8ed  with  the  lesaon  from  the  propheta.  Hence 
loose  paraphraaes  and  lengthy  expo8itions  were  tolera- 
ted  and  looked  for  both  from  the  profesaional  interpreter 
and  those  of  the  congregation  who  were  called  up  to 
read,  and  who  felt  that  they  could  do  it  with  edilication 
Co  the  audience.  The  Sabbatic  leason  from  the  law  was, 
as  we  have  seen,divided  into  seyen  sections  or  chapters, 
each  of  which  had  at  least  three  rerses,  according  to 
the  yerses  of  those  days,  so  that  the  whole  consisted  of 
at  least  twenty-one  such  rcrses.  The  leason  from  the 
propheta  was  not  portioned  out  to  seven  different  indi- 
riduals,  but  bas  also  at  least  twenty-one  rerses  (Mishna, 
MegUlą,  iv,  4 ;  Maimonidea,  Jod  Ha-Chezaka  Hikhoth 
Tephilia,  xii,  13).  The  leason  from  the  law  for  the  Day 
of  Atonement  ia  diyided  into  six  chapters,  for  festirala 
into  five,  for  new  moon  into  four,  and  for  Mondays  and 
Thnrsdays  into  three  chapters  or  sections.  The  num- 
ber  of  persons  caUed  up  to  the  reading  of  the  law  alwaya 
corresponda  to  the  iramber  of  aections.  For  MondarB 
and  Thundays^  new  moon,  and  the  week  days  of  the 


festirala  p9*1ia  9in),  there  are  no  coneaponding  lea- 
sons  from  the  propheta  (ftliahna,  MfgiUa,  iv,  1-8). 

4.  The  Origin  of  thiś  JntiiluHon.— The  origin  of  thia 
cttstom  may  eaaily  be  traced.  The  Bibie  emphatically 
and  repeatedly  enjoina  upon  every  laraekte  to  study  ita 
contents  (Deut  iv,  9 ;  xxxii,  46) ;  Moeea  htmaelf  ordered 
that  the  whole  law  should  be  read  publidy  at  the  end 
of  every  Sabbatic  year  (xxxi,  10-12),  whilst  Joshua  uig- 
es  that  it  ahould  be  studied  day  and  night  (i,  8;  oomp. 
also  Psa.  i,  2  są.).  Now  the  desire  to  carry  out  this  in- 
junction  literally,  and  yet  the  uUer  impoańbility  of  doing 
it  on  the  part  of  those  who  had  to  work  for  daily  bread 
all  the  week,  and  who  could  not  afford  to  buy  the  nece»- 
saiily  expen6ive  scroUs,  gave  riae  to  thia  institution. 
On  the  Sabbath  and  festivals  all  were  reliered  from 
their  labor,  and  oould  attend  plaoea  of  worship  where 
the  inspired  writinga  were  depoeited,  and  where  care 
could  be  taken  that  no  private  interpretation  should  be 
palmed  upon  the  Word  of  God.  Honce  both  Jamea 
(Acts  XV,  21)  and  Josephus  (Contra  Apion,  ii,  17)  apeak 
of  it  as  a  veiy  ancient  custom,  and  the  Talmud  tells  ua 
that  the  division  of  each  Sabbatic  leason  mto  8even  sec- 
tions yraa  introduced  in  honor  of  the  Perńan  king  {Me- 
ffilkt,  23),  which  shows  that  thia  custom  obtained  ante- 
rior  to  the  Persian  rule.  Indeed  Maimonidea  po9ative- 
ly  asserts  that  Mosea  himself  ordained  the  hebdomal 
reading  of  the  law  (HiltAoth  TepMOa,  xii,  1).  £quaUy 
natural  is  the  diyision  of  the  law  into  Sabbatic  sectiona, 
as  the  whole  of  it  could  not  be  read  at  onoe.  The  only 
difficulty  is  to  ascertain  positirely  whether  the  annual 
or  the  triennial  diyision  was  the  morę  ancient  one.  A 
triennial  division  ia  mentioned  in  MegiUa  29,  b,  aa  cnr- 
rent  in  Palcstine ;  with  thb  agree  the  referenoe  to  155 
sections  of  the  law  in  the  Midrcuk,  Esther  116,  b,  and 
the  Maaoretic  diyision  of  the  Pentateuch  into  154  S^ 
darim.  But,  on  the  other  hand,  R.  Sim<ion  b.  Eleazai^ 
a  I^odestinian,  declared  that  Moees  instituted  the  reading 
of  Lev.  xxvi  before  the  Feast  of  Penteoost,  and  Deut. 
xxviii  before  New  Year,  which  most  unquestionably  pre- 
suppose  the  amuud  dimaum  of  the  Pentateuch  mto  54 
Parthioth,  This  is,  moreoyer,  oonfirmed  by  the  atate- 
ment  {Ibid  81,  a)  that  the  section  n^STOn  nKT*l  (Deut. 
xxxiii,  l-xxxiy,  12)  was  read  on  ihe  tdnth  day  of  the 
Feast  of  Tabemacles,  thua  terminating  the  amiual  cyde, 
aa  well  as  by  the  fact  that  the  annual  featiyal  of  the  re- 
joidng  of  the  law  (JTlIH  nn^aO)  which  oommemorates 
the  annual  finishing  of  the  perusal  of  the  Pentateuch 
[see  Tabernacues,  Fkast  of]  waa  an  ancient  mstitu- 
tion.  We  must  therefore  oondude  that  the  annual  cy- 
de which  is  now  prevalent  among  the  Jews  waa  the 
generally  adopted  one,  at  least  sińce  the  Maccabaum 
times,  whilst  the  trienidal,though  the  older.waa  the  ex- 
ception.  Usage,  however,  probaUy  yaried,  for  we  find 
that  our  Sayiour  (Lukę  iv,  16-21),  in  aooordance  with 
this  custom.  on  invitation  read  and  expounded,  appar- 
ently  on  a  Sabbath  in  Januar}*,  a  paasage  (Isa.  lxi,  1, 2), 
not  contained  at  all  in  the  present  scheme  of  HophiaroiK 

It  is  far  morę  difficult  to  tracę  the  origm  of  tkt 
Hapktarahj  or  the  leason  from  the  propheta,  and  ita  ńg- 
nification.  A  yery  ancient  tradition  tells  ua  that  the 
Syrians  had  intenticted  the  reading  of  the  law,  and  car- 
ried  away  the  scrolls  containing  it,  and  that  appropriate 
sections  from  the  propheta  were  therefore  choaen  to  re- 
place  the  Pentateuch  (Zunz,  GotteidietułHt^Yor,  p.  5), 
whilst  Elias  Levita  traoes  the  origin  of  the  Haphtarah 
to  pcrsecutions  of  Antiochus  Kpiphanea.  In  hia  Lex,  (a. 
V.  *^h3t))  he  aays,  ** The  wicked  Antiochus, king  of  Greeoe, 
prohibited  the  Jewa  to  lead  the  law  publidy.  They 
therefore  adected  aectioua  from  the  propheta  of  the 
same  import  aa  the  Sabbatic  lesaona  .  .  .  and  though 
this  prohibition  haa  now  ceased,  this  cuatom  haa  not 
been  left  oif,  and  to  this  day  we  read  a  section  from  the 
prophets  ailer  the  reading  of  the  law ;"  and  we  aee  no 
ceason  to  reject  this  aocounu  The  objection  of  Yitrin- 
ga,  Fraukd,  Heizfeld,  etc,  that  Antiochua,  who  wanted 
to  exterminate  Judaismj  would  not  wagę  war  againat 


HARA 


60 


HARAN 


the  PentAtench  eapo&uu^,  but  would  eąually  destroy 
the  prophetk  booka,  and  th&t  tbis  impbes  a  knowledge 
oa  the  part  of  the  soldien  of  the  distinction  between 
the  Pentateuch  and  the  other  inspired  wrilings,  is  obvi» 
atcd  by  the  lact  Łhat  there  was  an  extenud  difference 
between  the  loUa  of  the  Pentateuch  and  the  other  sar 
cretl  booka,  that  the  Jews  daimed  the  Pentateuch  as  their 
law  and  nile  of  Cuth,  and  that  this  was  the  reason  why 
u  eapedally  was  destroyed.  (The  law  has  two  rollera, 
L  e.  has  a  roller  attacbed  to  each  ot  the  two  ends  of  the 
rdlum  oa  which  it  ia  written,  and  eveiy  weekly  portion 
wben  nad  on  the  Sabbath  vs  unrplled  from  the  right 
roUer  and  rolled  on  the  left;  so  that  when  the  law  is 
opcned  on  the  next  Sabbath  the  portion  appointed  for 
that  day  is  at  onoe  foond.  Whereas  the  prophetic  books 
hare  only  one  raller.  and  the  lesson  from  the  prophets 
has  to  be  eougbt  out  on  eveiy  occasion  [compare  Baha 
Batkta,  14  a].)  This  is  conoborated  by  1  Mace.  i,  66, 
where  tke  laao  only  is  said  to  have  been  buroed.  Ac- 
eoidmgly  SnoBM,  from  *1h3S,  fo  Uberatff  to  /ref,  signi- 
fies  the  libertitwff  letaon,  the  portion  firom  the  prophets 
which  is  read  instead  of  the  poniou  from  the  law  that 
eoukl  not  be  read,  and  which  liberates  from  the  injunc^ 
tioo  of  reading  the  Pentateuch.  For  the  other  opuiions 
about  the  signification  of  J/aphłaraAf  we  refer  to  the  lit- 
efature  qiioted  below. 

&  Liłeraiuir,^MtamomdeB,Jodffa»Chezala  Hiichoth 
TepktUa ,-  Bartolooci,  BiUiothłca  Magna  Rabbimca,  ii, 
608  sq.  i  Zmiz,  Die  Gotłe^dienstlichen  Vortrage  dei'  Ju- 
dnt,  capu  i,  Frankel,  Yontudien  zu  der  Septuagmła  (Leip- 
ń^  1841),  p. 48  sq.;  Rapaport, Erech  MiUm,  p.  66  8q.; 
ManalMehriftfur  Gesckichte  und  Wis$enschaft  des  Juden- 
tA«aM.i,8a2;  xi,  222,  Herz{e\d,Getchichie  deaVolkeiIS' 
raeij  u,  209;  Der  IsraelHische  yolkslehrer,  ii,  205;  Ben 
Ckamcaya,  v,  12&— Kitto.  s.  v. 

Ha^ra  (Heh.  Hara\  K*7n)f  a  proyince  of  Assyria. 
We  read  that  Tiglath-pilneser  ^brought  the  Reuben- 
itea,  Gaditee,  and  the  half  tribe  of  Manasseh  tmto  Ha- 
lah,  and  Habor,  and  7/ara,  and  to  the  river  Gozan**  (1 
Chioo.  T,  26).  The  parallel  paasage  in  2  Kingn  xviii, 
11,  omits  Hara,  and  adds  *^in  the  cities  of  the  Medes.** 
Bochart  oonsequently  supposes  that  Hara  was  either  a 
part  of  Media,  or  another  name  for  that  country'.  He 
sbows  that  H^odotus  (vii,  62)  and  other  ancient  writers 
esU  the  Medes  Ariom.,  and  their  country  Aria,  Ile 
fiBther  supposes  that  the  name  Hara,  which  signifies 
awMtfaÓM>ii«,  may  have  been  giren  to  that  northeni  sec- 
tion  of  Media  Bubsequently  csJled  by  the  Arabs  El-gebal 
(*-  the  mountains  ;**  see  Bcićhart,  Opp,  i,  194).  The  words 
Aria  and  //drti,  however,  are  totally  dliferent  both  in 
meaning  and  origin.  The  Medes  were  a  branch  of  the 
great  Arian  family  who  came  originally  firom  India,  and 
who  took  their  name,  aocordmg  to  Muller  (Science  of 
Lamgnage, p.  237 sq.,  2d  cd.), from  the  Sanscrit  word  A  rya, 
which  means  noble, "  of  a  good  family."  lis  etymolog- 
ical  meaning  seems  to  be  "one  who  tills  the  ground \* 
and  it  is  thus  allied  to  the  Latin  arare  (see  also  Raw- 
finaon*8  Uerodotut,  i,  401). 

Han  is  joined  wtth  Hala,  Habor,  and  the  rivcr  Go- 
zan.  These  were  all  situated  in  Western  Assyria,  be- 
tween the  Tigris  and  Euphtates,  and  along  the  banks 
oT  the  Khabdr.  We  may  safely  conclude,  therefore, 
that  Han  could  not  have  been  far  distant  from  that  re- 
gion. It  is  somewhat  remarkable  that  the  name  is  not 
giren  in  either  the  SepL  or  Peshito  vcT8ion.  Some 
have  hence  imagined  that  the  word  was  interpolated 
after  these  reraions  weie  madę.  This,  howerer,  is  a 
fash  criticiam,  as  it  exists  in  all  Hebrew  MSS.,  and  also 
in  Jeroaae*s  Tersion  (see  Bobinson*s  Calmet,  s.  v.  Gozan ; 
Gfant*8  Segtorian  Chrigtians,  p.  120).  The  conjecture 
that  Han  and  Hanm  aie  identical  cannot  be  sustained, 
thoogh  the  situation  of  the  latter  might  suit  the  re- 
ąaŚRments  of  the  Biblical  namtive,  and  its  Greek  clas- 
sical  name  Carrkm  reaembles  Hara.  See  Haran.  The 
HefaRw  words  K*)n  and  'pn  are  radically  different. 
Han  nuty  perfaapa  haye  been  a  local  name  applied  to 


the  monntainoos  region  north  of  Gozan,  catted  by  Stra- 
bo  and  Ptolemy  Monę  Masius,  and  now  Karja  Baghlar 
(Strobo,  XVI,  23 ;  Ptolemy,  v,  18,  2).— Kitto,  s.  t. 

Har^adah  (Heb.  with  the  artide  ha-Charadah', 
^7'?TO  thefriffhif  Sept  Xapa^a5),  the  twenty-fifth 
station  of  the  IsraeUtes  in  the  desert  (NumK  xxxiii, 
24) ;  perhaps  at  the  head  of  the  wadys  north-east  of  Je- 
bel  AJraif  en-Nakah,  on  the  western  brow  of  the  high 
plateau  east  of  Ain  el-Mazen.     See  Exode. 

Haram.    See  House. 

Hawrań  appears  in  the  £ng.  BiUe  as  the  name  of  a 
place  and  also  of  thiee  men,  which,  however,  are  repre- 
sented  by  two  essentially  different  Hebrew  words.  See 
also  Beth-Harak. 

1.  Haran  (HeK  Haran\  "J^h,  mountaineer;  Sept. 
'Appav)f  probably  the  eldest  son  of  Terah,  brother  of 
Abraham  and  Nahor,  and  father  of  Lot,  Milcah,  and  Is- 
cah.  He  died  in  his  native  place  before  his  father  Te- 
rah (an  erent  that  may  in  some  degree  have  prepared 
the  family  to  leave  Ur),  which,  from  the  manner  in 
which  it  is  mentioned,  appears  to  have  been  a  much 
rarer  case  in  those  days  than  at  the  present  (Gen.  xi, 
27  sq.).  RC.  2223-antc  2088.— Kitto.  His  sepulchro 
was  still  shown  there  when  Josephus  wroto  his  hbtory 
{A  nt,  i,  6, 5).  The  ancient  Jewish  tradition  is  that  Ha- 
ran was  bumt  in  the  fumace  of  Nimrod  fur  his  wavering 
conduct  during  the  fiery  trial  of  Abraham.  (See  the' 
Targum  p8.-Jonathan ;  Jerome's  Quast,  in  Genetim,  and 
the  notes  thereto  in  the  edit  of  Mignę.)  This  tradition 
seems  to  have  originated  in  a  translation  of  the  word 
Ur,  which  in  Hebrew  signifies  **  fire."— Smith.  See 
Abraham. 

2.  Charam  (Hebw  Charan%  "i^nn,  probably  from  the 
Arabie,  parehed;  Sept  Xappav,  also  Josephus,  ^n^  i, 
16 ,  N.  T.,  Acts  \\\y  2,  where  it  is  Anglidzed  *'  Charran**), 
the  name  of  the  place  where  Abraham,  after  he  had 
been  called  from  Ur  of  the  Chaldees,taRied  till  his  father 
Tenh  died,  when  he  proceeded  to  the  land  of  Canaan 
(Gen.  xi,  31, 38  •,  Acts  vii,  4).  The  elder  branch  of  the 
family  stiU  remained  at  Hann,  which  led  to  the  inter- 
estmg  Joumeys  thither  described  in  the  patriarchal  his- 
tory  (see  Hauck,  De  profectionSms  Abrahand  e  Charris 
[Lipa.  1754, 1776])-^^-firBt,  that  of  Abraham*s  ser^^ant  to 
obtaui  a  wife  for  Isaac  (Gen.  xxiv) ;  and,  next,  that  of 
Jacob  when  he  fled  to  evade  the  wnth  of  Esau  (Gen« 
xxi-iii,  10^.  It  is  said  to  be  in  Mesopotamia  (Gen.  xxiv, 
10),  or,  morę  definitely,  in  Padan-Aram  xxv,  20),  which 
is  the  **  cultivated  dlstrict  at  the  foot  of  the  hills*"  (Stan- 
ley, Syr,  and  Pal,  p.  129,  notę),  a  name  well  applying  to 
the  beantiful  stretch  of  country  which  lies  below  Mount 
Masius,  between  the  Khab<^r  and  the  Euphrates.  See 
Padan-Aram.  Haran  is  enumerated  among  the  towns 
which  had  been  taken  by  the  predecessors  of  Seiwach- 
erib,  king  of  AsB}Tia  (1  Kings  xix,  12;  Isa.  xxxvii,  12), 
and  it  is  also  mentioned  by  Ezekiel  (xxvii,  23)  among 
the  places  which  traded  Mrith  Tyre.  It  is  alluded  to  in 
the  cuneiform  inscriptions  (q.  v.).  Jerome  thus  de- 
scribes  Haran :  *'  Charran,  a  city  of  Mewpotamia  be- 
yond  Edessa,  which  to  this  day  is  called  charra,  where 
the  Roman  army  was  cut  off,  and  Crassus,  its  leader, 
taken"*  (Onomatt.  s.  v.  Charran).  Guided  by  these  de- 
scriptipns  and  statements,  which  certainly  appear  suffi- 
ciently  elear  and  fuli,  sacred  geographcrs  have  almost 
univer8a]ly  identified  Haran  with  the  Carrte  (Kaftpai) 
of  classicai  writers  (Herodian.  iv,  13,  7;  PtoL  v,  18,  12; 
Strabo,  xvi,  747),  and  the  ffarran  of  the  Anbs  (Schul- 
tens,  Indez  Geogr,  tn  Yilam  SakuUni,  s.  v.).  The  plain 
bordering  on  this  town  (Ammian.  Marc  xxiii,  3)  is  cel- 
ebrated  in  history  as  the  scenę  of  a  battle  in  which  the 
Roman  army  was  defeated  by  the  Parthians,  and  the 
triumvir  Crassus  killed  (Plin.  v,  21 ;  Dio  Cass.  xl,  25; 
Lncan.  i,  104).  Abulfeda  (Tab,  Syrite,  p.  164)  speaks  of 
Haran  as  formerly  a  great  city,  which  lay  in  an  arid 
and  barren  tract  of  country  in  the  provinoe  of  Diar 
Modhar.    About  the  time  of  the  Christian  len  it  ap- 


HARARITE 


70 


HARBAU6H 


pean  to  hare  been  induded  in  the  kingdom  of  Euessa 
(Moi.  Chor;  ii,  82),  which  was  ruled  by  Agbanu.  Af- 
terwards  it  paned  with  that  kingdom  under  the  domin- 
ion  of  the  Romans,  and  appeara  as  a  Roman  city  in  the 
wan  of  Caracalla  (Moe.  Chor.  ii,  72)  and  Julian  (Jo.  Ma- 
laL  p.  829).  It  is  remarkable  that  the  people  of  Har- 
r^  retained  to  a  late  time  the  Chald«an  language  and 
the  wonhip  of  ChakUean  deities  (Assemani,  BibL  Ot,  i, 

\    827 ;  Chvrolaon's  Saabier  ttnd  der  Saabimms,  ii,  39). 

!  About  midway  in  the  district  aboye  designated  is  a 
town  Btill  called  Harran^  which  really  seems  never  to 

'  have  changed  its  appellation,  and  beyond  any  reasona^ 
ble  doubt  ia  the  Haran  or  Charran  of  Scriptnre  (Bo- 
chart'8  Phakgy  i,  14 ;  Ewald'8  GtKkkktey  i,  884),  It  ia 
only  peopled  by  a  few  families  of  wandering  Aiabs,  who 
are  led  thither  by  a  plentiful  supply  of  water  from  8ev- 
enU  smali  streams.  Its  situation  is  fixed  by  major  Ren- 
nell  as  being  twenty-nine  miles  from  Orfah,  and  occu- 
pying  a  flat  and  sandy  plain.  It  lies  (according  to 
D'Anville)  in  86^  40'  N.  Ut,,  and  89°  2'  45"  E.  long. 
(See  Niebuhr,  Trareb,  ii,  410;  Ritter,  ErdŁ  x,  244;  xi, 
291 ;  Cdlar.  \ottt,  ii,  726 ;  Mannert,  v,  2,  280 ;  Michae- 
lis,  SuppL  930.)  Harr&n  stands  on  the  banks  of  a  smali 
river  called  Belik,  which  flows  into  the  Euphrates  about 
fifly  miles  south  of  the  town.  From  it  a  number  of 
leading  roads  radiate  to  the  great  fords  of  tho  Tigris 
and  Euphrates ;  and  it  thus  formed  an  important  station 
on  the  linę  of  commerce  bctween  Central  and  Western 
Asia.  This  may  explain  why  Terah  came  to  it,  and 
why  it  was  mentioned  among  the  places  which  supplied 
the  marts  of  Tyre  (Ezek.  xxvii,  28).  Crassus  was  prób- 
ably  marching  along  this  great  route  when  he  was  at- 
tacked  by  the  Parthians.  Dr.  Bekę,  in  his  Origines 
Biblica  (p.  122  8q.),  madę  the  somewhat  startling  state- 
ment  that  Haran  must  have  been  near  Damascus,  and 
that  Aram-Naharaim  is  the  country  between  the  Abana 
and  Pharpar.  After  ]>ńng  dormant  for  a  quarter  of  a 
century,  this  theory  was  again  revived  in  1860.  The 
Rev.  J.  L.  Porter  yisited  and  deacribed  a  smali  riUage 
in  the  plain,  four  houn  east  of  Damascus,  called  Harran 
cl-Awamld  ("  Harran  of  the  oolamns*^.  The  descrip- 
tion  having  met  the  eyc  of  Dr.  Bekę  (in  Fw€  Years  in 
Damascut,  i,  876),  he  at  once  concluded  that  this  %'illage 
was  the  site  of  the  real  **  city  of  Nahor."  He  has  sińce 
Yiaited  Harran  el-Awamld,  and  trayelled  from  it  to  Gil- 
ead, and  is  morę  oonfirmed  in  his  view,  though  he  ap- 
peara to  stand  alone.  His  arguments  hare  not  been 
Bufficient  to  set  aaide  the  powerful  evidence  in  faror  of 
Harran  in  Mesopotamia.  The  student  may  see  the 
whole  subject  diacussed  in  the  Athenaum  for  Nor.  28, 
80;  Dec  7, 1861 ;  Feb.  1, 15;  March  1,  22,  29;  April  6, 
19 ;  and  May  24, 1862 ;  also  in  Stanley's  Lecfuret  an  the 
Jeuńsh  Church,  i,  447  są.— Kitto,  a.  t.  ;  Smith,  a.  y. 

3.  CiiA&AN  (Heb.  same  as  last,  meaning  here  nohle, 
according  to  FUrst ;  Sept.  'Appdr  y.  r. ' Apa/i).  The  son 
of  Caleb  of  Judah  by  his  concubme  Ephah,  and  father 
of  Gasez  (1  Chroń,  ii,  46).    RC.  between  1618  and  1083. 

4.  Harak  (Heb.  same  as  No.  1 ;  Sept.  'Apav  y.  r. 
Aav).  One  of  the  three  sons  of  Shimei,  a  Leyite  of  the 
family  of  Gershon,  appointed  by  Dayid  to  superintend 
the  offices  at  the  tabemade  (1  Chroń,  xxiii,  9).  B.C. 
1014. 

Ha^rarite,  the  (Heb.  always  [except  in  2  Sam. 
xxiii,  U]  with  the  art  ha-ffarari,*  '^•l^JnJn),  a  distinc- 
tive  epithet  of  three  members  of  Dayid'ś  body-gtiard; 
probably  as  natiyes  of  the  mouniams  (*^in,  plur.  constr. 
'^'77^)  of  Judah  or  Ephraim ;  but  according  to  Furst 
'    from  Bome  town  of  the  name  of  Har  pn).   See  David. 

1.  "  Shabcmah  [q.y.],  the  son  of  Agee**  (2  Sam.  xxiii, 
11  [Sept  ó  'Apapj  y.  r.  'ApovxaToc,  Vulg.  de  Arari,  A. 
V.  *'  the  Hararite"],  83  [6  'Ap^upinyc  v.  r.  'Apca^inyc, 
Aroritea]^  which  latter  yerse  shows  that  it  was  a  desig- 
nation  of  the  son  and  not  of  the  father),  a  different  per- 
son from  <^Shammoth  the  Harorite"  [q.  y.]  (1  Chroń. 
xi,  27),  or  "Shammah  the  Harodite"  [q.  y.]  (2  Sam. 
xxiii«  25).    See  Aobe. 


2.  *<  JoMATHAM  [q.  y.],  the  son  of  Shage"  (1  Chran. 
xi,  84,  Sept.  b  'Apap(,yidg.  A  rariteM)^  mentioned  in  the 
paiallel  paasage  (2  Sam.  xxiii,  82)  without  any  auch  di»- 
tinction.     See  Shagr. 

8.  **  Ahiam  [q.  y. ],  the  son  of  Saear^  (L  Chroń.  xi,85, 
Sept.  ó  'Apcrpć  y.  r.  'A^apiYulg.  Ararite*),  or,  in  the  par- 
allel  paasage  (2  Sam.  xxiii, 38), less  aocnntely,'' Ahiam, 
[the]  son  of  Sharar  [q.  y.]  the  Arariie**  (Heb.  with  the 
art.  ha-Arari',  *^^*^S<h,  SepL  ó  'Apalirtię  y.  r.  'Apat, 
etc., Vulg.  A rorUetlUy,  " the  Hararite").    See  Sacab. 

HaraBeth.    See  Kib-Harabbth. 

Harbangh,  Hen^ry,  a  prominent  minister  and  writer 
of  the  German  Reformed  Church  in  the  United  Statea, 
wa8bomOct28,1817,nearWaynesborough,Pa.  He  was 
descended  from  a  German  family,  whose  name  waa  Her- 
bach, and  which  had  come  to  thia  country  in  1786  from 
Switzerland.  His  father  waa  an  elder  in  the  German 
Reformed  Church  at  Waynesborough.  In  early  youth 
he  manifested  a  deóre  to  atudy  for  the  ministry,  but  hia 
father  waa  unwilling  to  allow  him  to  do  ao.  He  there- 
fore  found  emplo>anent  iirst  with  a  carpenter,  and  sub- 
aequently  with  a  mill-owner.  Aller  a  time  he  became 
teacher  in  a  primary  achooL  The  money  aaycd  in  these 
poeitions  enabled  him  to  cnter  in  1840  Marshall  College, 
Meroersburg,  which  was  at  that  time  under  the  direo- 
tion  of  Dr.  Nerin.  Both  the  studenta*  societies  of  Mer- 
oersburg College  deeired  to  haye  him  a  membcr.  **  We 
haye  many  praying  membera,**  the  Goetheans  represent- 
ed  to  him ;  *'  the  others  haye  no  religion."  For  Har- 
baugh  this  was  a  reaaon  to  join  the  other  aociety,  that 
they  might  haye  one  to  do  the  pra3ring  for  them.  Hia 
financial  meana  did  not  allow  him  to  finiah  his  courae  in 
the  college  and  the  Theological  Seminary.  He  spent 
two  years  in  the  former  and  one  in  the  latter,  and,  hay- 
ing  paased  bis  examination,  became  in  1848  pastor  of 
the  congregation  in  Lewisburg.  In  1850  he  accepted  a 
cali  from  the  congregation  in  Lancaster,  which  he  left 
again  in  1860  for  Lebanon.  In  1863  he  was  elected  by 
the  Synod  profesaor  of  theology  in  the  Seminary  of  Mer- 
ceraburg,  in  the  pbce  of  Prof.  B.  C.  Wolff.  In  thia  posi- 
tion  he  remained  until  his  death,  which  occurred  Dec 
28, 18G7.  Harbaugh  waa  an  indefatigable  worker,  and 
it  waa  oyerexertion  that  brought  on  the  diaeaae  of  the 
brain  by  which  he  was  carried  off.  The  loes  of  his  wife 
and  a  child  in  1847  directed  łus  thoughts  to  a  spedal 
oonsideration  of  the  state  after  death,  and  thus  called 
for  his  works  on  Heawn^  or  the  Sainted  Dead:^The 
lleareiUy  Home: — The  Heacenly  JUcoffmtion: — Futurę 
L\fe  (3  yols.).  Besides  these,  he  wrote  The  Golden  Cen" 
»er,  a  collection  of  "  hymns  and  chants"  for  Sabbath- 
schools*.— ^  ChUdt  Caifchigmi—The  Glory  ofWoman: 
— a  yolume  of  Poenu : — Umon  with  the  Church : — Youth 
m  Eamut-^Hfc  of  Th,  D.  Fiłcher, ---^aid  a  Li/e  of  Afi- 
chael  SchiaUer,  one  of  the  foundera  of  the  German  Re- 
formed Church  in  America  in  the  last  centur}%  His 
most  important  work  ia  the  one  on  The  Faihere  oj  the 
German  Reformed  Church  ta  A  merica  (2  yola.).  At  the 
time  of  hia  death  he  waa  editor  of  the  MercenAurg  Re- 
view,  and  alao  a  regular  contributor  to  the  oolumna  of 
the  Reformed  Church  Mettenger,  which  latter  relation 
he  auatained  during  the  laat  Bix  years.  He  was  like- 
wise  the  origuiator  of  the  Guardian^  and  its  editor  for 
aeyenteen  years,  to  the  doae  of  1866,  during  four  of 
which  it  waa  published  under  the  direction  of  the  Board 
of  Publication  of  the  German  Reformed  Church.  In 
addition  to  this,  he  fumiaheil  the  reading  matter  for  the 
aeyeral  almanaca  publiahecl  by  thia  board,  and  edited 
the  Child'*  Treasury  for  the  fint  year  and  a  half  after 
it  came  under  the  direct  control  of  the  Church  Board. 
Dr.  Harbaugh  alao  contributed  a  number  of  biograpb- 
ical  artidea  to  this  Cydopiedia.  While,  for  the  works 
thua  far  mentioned,  he  uaed  the  Engliah  language,  he 
ia  alao  the  author  of  aeyeral  excellent  poema  in  the  Ger^ 
man-Pennsylyanian  dialect.  In  fact^  the  pocms  of  Har- 
baugh belong  among  the  beat  that  haye  eyer  been  writ- 
ten  in  this  dialect.    In  hia  theological  yiewa  Haibaug^h 


HARBONA 


71 


HARDWICK 


was  one  of  the  foremoet  repr»entativeB  of  the  school 
which  empluiazes  the  efficiency  of  the  sscraments,  and 
the  prieBdy  chanu:ter  of  the  ministr}'.  In  the  Order  of 
Wank^  of  the  Crerman  Keformed  Church,  which  was 
poblished  in  1866,  the  burial  senrice  was  from  the  pen 
ofHarbnigh.     (A.J.S.) 

Harbo^na  (lleb.  Ckar^ona',  Kdinnn,  prób.  Per& 
fyr  OMi-driter ;  SepL  'Oapiputa  v.  r.  Oappd)f  one  of  the 
eeren  eunuchs  of  king  Ahasaenis  or  Xerxe8,  command- 
ed  by  him  to  exhibit  the  beauty  of  Yashti  (Esth.  i,  10). 
Ue  was  probably  the  same  with  the  one  called  Habbo- 
HAH  (Heh.  CkarUmah,'  MSin^n,  tdl ;  Sept.  changes  to 
Bovya3ay),  who  suggested  to  the  king  the  idea  of  hang- 
ing  Haman  on  his  own  gallows  (chap.  vii,  9).  RC.  483- 
473. 

Harbo'nali  (Esth.  vii,  9).    See  Harbotta. 

Hardenberg,  Albrecht,  an  eminent  divine,  was 
bora  at  Hardenberg,  in  Oveiya8e],  1510.  While  study- 
ing  tbeok)gy  at  Loavain,  he  imbibed  the  reformed  the- 
ołogy,  and  became  a  friend  and  follower  of  Melancthon, 
who  sent  him  to  Cok)gne.  The  disturbances  there  drore 
him  Ło  Oldenburg,  where,  and  in  Kn^^phausen,  he  U- 
bored  until  his  death  in  1574.  He  is  noted  in  Church 
Histocy  for  his  attempt,in  1556,  to  introduce  into  the  re- 
public  of  Bremen  Calvin*8  doctrine  respecting  the  Lord's 
Snpptf.  For  the  controyersy  to  which  this  gave  rise, 
aee  Herzog,  R«U-£netfkicp&Ue,  s.  v. ;  aiso  Mosheim,  Ch, 
Bia.  cent.  xvi,  sec.  iii,  pt.  ii,  ch.  ii ;  Phmck,  Hist,  Prot. 
TheoL  voL  v. 

Hardenberg,  Jacobua  R.,  D.D.,an  eminent  min- 
ister of  the  Reformed  (Dutch)  Church  in  America,  was 
bom  at  Rosendale,  N.  Y.,  in  1787.  His  early  opportu- 
oities  of  edncation  were  limited,  but  by  perBevering  in- 
dnstry  he  became  a  very  creditable  scholar.  He  was 
oidained  by  the  **Coetus'*  in  1757,  and  in  the  long  stńfe 
between  that  party  and  the  ^  Conferenties*^  in  the  Dutch 
Church,  he  sided  with  the  former.  His  talents  and  rep- 
utadoo  gave  him  great  influence  in  the  finał  settlement 
of  tbese  dioputes.  In  1768  he  became  pastor  of  the 
ehmch  at  Raritan,  N.  J.  Queen's  College  (now  Rut- 
gers*)  obtained  its  charter  in  1770.  It  languished  during 
the  Revoluttai,  but  was  re8nscttated,with  Dr.  Harden- 
berg at  its  head  as  preaident,  in  1786.  He  died  Oct 
80,  1790.  — Sprague,  Annals,  ix,  28.  See  Reformed 
(Drrcu)  Church. 

Harding,  Stephen,  a  religious  reformer  of  the 
12th  century,  was  of  a  noble  English  family.  After 
"**^'"g  A  pilgrimage  to  Romę,  he  eutered  the  Benedic- 
tine  convent  of  Si,  Claude  de  Joux.  He  subeequent]y 
was  choaen  abbot  of  the  monastery  of  B^ze,  with  a  view 
to  the  leformation  of  its  discipline.  From  Beze  he  was 
tnusfened  to  Citeaux,  of  which  monaster}'  he  was  elect- 
ed  abbot  in  1 109,  on  the  death  of  Alberic.  In  11 19  he 
drew  up,  conjointly  with  St  Bernard  (of  Clairvaux)  and 
other  members  of  the  brotherhood,  the  constitution  of 
the  Cistercian  order,  entitled  Carta  Caritafu,  He  re- 
nained  at  the  head  of  the  order  until  his  death  in  1134. 
See  CisTBRciANS.    (A.  J.  S.) 

Harding,  Thomas,  JcfHiit,  was  bom  at  Comb-Mar- 
tin,  in  I>evonshire,  in  1512,  ''and  was  educated  at  Bam- 
staple  and  Winchester,  whence  he  was  removed  to  New 
College^  Oxford,  of  which  he  became  fellow  in  1536.  In 
1542  he  was  choeen  Hebrew  profeaeor  of  the  unirersity 
by  Henry  TUI ;  but  ńo  sooner  had  Edward  TI  ascend- 
ed  Ibe  throne,  than  Harding  became  a  zealous  Prr>tes- 
tant.  He  seemed,  indced,  merely  to  be  restrained  by 
prudence  from  proceeding  to  great  extremes.  In  the 
country  zealous  Protestanta  were  edified  by  his  instruc- 
tiom.  At  Oxford,  he  himself  Teceived  instniction  ftom 
Peter  Martyr.  From  St.  Mary's  pulpit  he  deńded  the 
Tridentine  fathers  as  iUUeraU^  paUry  papittg,  and  in- 
reighed  against  Romish  pecuEarities."  On  the  acoes- 
ńoD  of  qaeen  Mary  he  became  again  a  papist,  and  was 
nade  chaplain  and  confessor  to  Gardiner,  bishop  of 
In  1556  he  was  madę  treasurer  of  the  ca- 


thedral  of  Salisbury.  <<When  Elizabeth  came  to  the 
crown  he  oould  not  muster  face  for  a  new  recantation, 
and  being  deprived  of  his  preferment,  fled  to  Louvain, 
and  became,  says  Wood,  '*the  target  of  Popeiy"  in  a 
warm  controver8y  with  bishop  Jewel,  against  whom,  be- 
tween 1554  and  1567,  he  wrote  seven  pieces."  He  died 
in  1572.  See  Life  of  Jewel;  Zurich  Letttn;  Bumet, 
Reformation,  i,  271;  Wood,  Athenm  OTonieruegj  vol.  i; 
Dodd,  Church  Hist.;  Prince,  Worthks  o/Deron;  Chal- 
mers,  General  Biog,  DicL ;  Hook,  Eode$,  Bioc.  voL  v. 

Hardouin  (Harduinus),  Jean,  a  Jesuit,  one  of  the 
most  leamed,  but  most  eccentric  members  of  his  order, 
wa3  bom  A.D.  1646,  at  Quimper,  in  Brittany.  His  par- 
adoxes  on  ancient  history  are  well  known,  and  had  their 
ońgin  chiefly  in  the  vanity  which  prompted  him  to  ob- 
tain  celebrity  at  any  cost  He  endeavored  to  prove 
that  the  iEneid  ascribed  to  Yirgil,  and  the  odcs  attrib- 
uted  to  Horace,  were  really  compoeed  by  some  monks 
during  the  Middle  Ages !  He  edited  an  edition  of  the 
Comicils  to  the  year  1714  (12  vol8.  foL),  which  is  much 
esteemed.  See  Concilia.  This  may  appear  singular, 
considering  that  Hardouin  looked  upon  all  coundls  pre- 
ceding  that  of  Trent  as  supposititious.  Father  Brun, 
of  the  Oratory,  knowing  the  opinions  of  the  Jesuit  on 
that  point,  asked  him  one  day,  **  How  did  it  happen  that 
you  published  an  edition  of  the  Councils?"  Hardouin 
answered,  "  Only  God  and  I  know  that."  He  died  at 
the  College  of  St.  Louis,  Paris,  Sept.  8, 1729.  His  most 
noted  work  is  his  Chronologia  ex  Nummu  AnticfutB  ret' 
tUut<E  Prolułio  de  Nymmis  Herodiadum  (Paris,  1698, 
4to),  in  which  he  labors  to  show  that,  with  few  excep- 
tious,  the  writings  ascribed  to  the  ancients  are  wholly 
spurious.  He  wrote  also  Chronologia  Vet.  Tettamenti 
(Paris,  1697, 4to)  i—Commenłarius  in  Nov,  Test,  (Amst 
1741,  foL) :— 7>«  titu  Paradin  Terregtris  Discuisitio  (in 
his  edit.  of  Pliny)  :— P/irm  Historia  NaturaUs  (in  the 
Delphin  classice)  i— Opera  telecta  (1709,  foL).  His  Op- 
era Omma  (Amsterdam,  1788,  fol.)  contains  some  curious 
pieces,  among  which  are  his  Pteudo-Yirgiliw,  Pseudo- 
HorafiuSf  and  especially  his  Ałhei  detecti,  against  Janse- 
nius,  Amauld,  Nicole,  Pascal,  Quesnel,  Des  Cartes,  etc. 
A  posthumous  work  of  his,  Prolegomena  ad  Cenntram 
Scriptorum  Yeterum  (1766, 8vo),  contains  his  fuli  theory 
of  the  production  of  the  classics  by  the  monks  of  the 
Middle  Ages.  See  P.  Oudin,  Etoget  de  quelquea  aułeura 
francai» ;  Moreri,  Grand  Diet,  hittor, ;  Dupin,  BibL  det 
auteura  eccU*.  xix,  109;  Joum,  des  Sarants^  June,  1726, 
p.226;  March,  1727,  p.  828;  January-April,  1728,  p.  579; 
La  Croze,  Ditsert.  hist,  aur  direra  tujeta,  p.  281 ;  Hoefer, 
Nouv,  Biog,  GSneralef  xxiii,  857. 

Hardt,  Hermakn  von  der.    See  Hermakn. 

Hardwick,  Charles,  a  minister  of  the  Church  of 
England,  was  bom  at  Slingsb}',  Yorkshire,  September  22, 
1821.  At  fifteen  years  of  age  he  became  pupil  assistant 
teacher  m.  Thomton  Grammar-school,  and  in  1888  he 
was  madę  assistant  tutor  in  the  academy  at  MaJton.  In 
1840  he  entered  the  UmveT8ity  of  Cambridge  (Cath»- 
rine*s  Hall),  graduating  in  1844  as  first  senior  optime. 
In  1845  he  obtained  a  fellowship  in Catharine's  Hall;  in 
1851  he  was  appointed  Cambridge  preacher  at  the  Chap- 
el  Royal,  Whitehall;  and  in  1858,  professor  of  divinity 
in  Queen*s  CoUege,  Birmingham,  which  office  he  held 
only  for  a  few  months.  In  1855  he  was  madę  lecturer 
in  divinity  in  King'8  College,  Cambridge,  and  "  Chris- 
tian Advocate.**  In  fulfilling  the  lat  ter  oflSce,  he  pre- 
pared  a"  work  (incomplete,  but  yet  of  great  value  to  the 
new  science  of  Comparative  Tbeolog>'),  undcr  the  title 
Chriat  and  other  Maatera;  an  Nistorical  Inguiry  into 
aome  o/the  chief ParaUelitma  and  Contrasta  between  Chria- 
tianity  and  the  Beligioua  Syatema  offhe  Ancient  World 
(London  and  Cambridge,  2d  edit  1858, 2  vo1b.  fcp.  8vo). 
During  a  summer  tour  he  was  killed  by  a  fali  in  the 
Pyrenees,  Aug.  18, 1859.  His  literary  activity  was  very 
great.,  and  it  was  accompanied  by  thorough  scholarship 
and  accuracy.  Besides  editing  a  number  of  works  for 
the  Univer8ity  press  and  for  the  Percy  Society,  he  pub- 


HARDY 


72 


HARE 


lished  the  following,  which  aie  likely  to  hołd  a  donble 
place  in  theologicalliterature,viz.,il  HisŁory  ofthe  Thir- 
ty-fdne  A  rticlea  (Cambridge,  1851 ;  2d  ed.  reyised,  1859 ; 
reprinted  in  Philadelphia,  12mo)  *. — Ttomty  Sermonafor 
Town  Congregationa  (1853,  er.  8vo) :— -4  History  of  the 
Christian  Churchy  Middie  Affe  (Cambridge,  1858,  fq>. 
8vo) : — A  Hittory  of  the  Christian  Church  durmg  the 
Beformation  (Cambridge,  1856,  fcp.8vo).— ^fetofc  prefiz- 
ed  to  eecond  edition  of  Christ  and  other  Mastera  (1868). 

Hardy,  Nathaniel,  D.D.,  an  English  divine,  was 
bom  in  London  in  1618;  was  educated  at  Magdalen  Hall, 
Oxford,  and  became  rector  of  StDionis  Back,  London. 
He  was  a  decided  Royalist,  and  yet  remained  a  popular 
preacher  during  the  Commonwealth.  In  1660  he  be- 
came archdeacon  of  Lewes  and  dean  of  Rochester.  He 
died  in  1670.  His  publications  are,  Thefirst  Epiatle  of 
John  unfoUed  and  applied  (Lond.  1666, 4to)  i—Sermons 
on  aokmn  Oocasioru  (London,  1658, 4to) : — Semum  on  the 
Fire  of  London  (Lond.  1666, 4to).— Darling,  Cydop,  Bib- 
Uoffraphicaf  i,  1394. 

Hardy,  Robert  Spence,  an  English  Methodist 
missionary,  was  bom  at  Preston,  Lancashire,  July  1, 1803, 
and  was  trained  in  the  house  of  his  grandfather,  a  print- 
er  and  bookseller  in  York.  Łi  1825  he  was  admitted  to 
the  British  Confeience,  and  appointed  missionary  to  Cey- 
lon,  in  which  field  he  labored  with  great  zeal  for  twen- 
ty-three  years.  In  1862  he  was  appointed  superintend- 
ent  of  the  South  Ceylon  Mission.  To  the  ordinary  la- 
hors  of  a  missionary  Mr.  Hardy  added  an  amount  of  lit- 
erary  activity  sufficient  to  have  occupied  the  whole  life 
of  an  ordinary  man.  It  is  not  too  much  to  say  that  he 
and  his  coUeague  Gogerly  (q.  v.)  have  thrown  morę 
light  upon  the  Buddhism  of  Ceylon,  and  upon  Pali  lit- 
eraturę, than  all  other  English  writers.  His  culture, 
in  the  course  of  his  studies,  became  yery  wide ;  he  read 
Łatin,  Greek,  Hebrew,  French,  Portuguese,  and  Sin- 
ghalese;  and  his  acquaintance  with  the  Pali  and  Sans- 
crit  was  not  only  large,  but  accurate.  Towards  the  end 
of  his  life  he  retumed  to  England,  and  seryed  as  minis- 
ter on  seyeral  important  circuits.  He  died  at  Heading- 
ley,  Yorkshire,  ^ril  16, 1868.  At  the  time  of  his  mor- 
tal  seizure  he  was  engaged  upon  a  work  entitled  Chris' 
tianify  and  Buddhism  compared.  His  most  important 
publications  are  Eastem  Monachism,  an  Accouni  of  the 
Origin,  LawSy  Disciplinef  Sacred  Writings^  etc.  ofłhe  Or- 
der of  Mendicantsfounded  by  Gotama  Buddha  (London, 
1850, 8vo)  \—A  Manuał  of  Buddhism  m  Us  Modem  De- 
reiopmenłf  transkUedfrom  Singhalese  MSS,  (Lond.  1853, 
8vo) : — The  Legenda  and  Theories  ofthe  Buddhisłs  com- 
pared wUh  Bisiory  and  Science  (1867,  er.  8vo).— ITwfcy- 
an  Minuies,  1868,  p.  25. 

Hardy,  Samuel,  an  English  divine,  was  bom  in 
1720,  and  educated  at  Emanuel  College,  Cambridge, 
where  he  became  fellow.  He  was  for  many  years  rec- 
tor of  Blakenham,  Suffolk,  and  died  in  1793.  He  pub- 
lished  Naturę  and  Ends  ofthe  Eucharist  (London,  1784, 
8vo) :— Principal  Prophecies  ofthe  O,  and  N,  Test,  com^ 
pared  and  explained  (London,  1770, 8vo) : — Novum  Test, 
GrcBcum  cum  acholiia  theologicis,  etc.  (3d  ed.  Lond.  1820, 
2  Yols.  8vo),  the  annotatlons  in  which  are  chiefly  taken 
from  Poole*s  Synopsis.— Darling,  Cydop,  BibUographicUj 
1,1395. 

Hare  (HSa^lK,  ame'heth;  according  to  Bochart 
[Hieroz,  i,  994J,*  from  ITIC,  to  crop,  and  S*^?,  fruiŁ ; 
Arab.  ame6  and  Syr.  ameboy  a  hare ;  Sept  xoipoypvX- 
\ioc  and  ŁaavirovCy  Yulg.  Upus  and  chetrogryUtts,  both 
yersions  interchanging  it  with  **  ooney")  occurs  in  Lev. 
xi,  6,  and  Deut.  xiv,  7,  and  in  both  instances  it  Ls  pro- 
hibited  from  being  used  as  food  because  it  chews  the 
cod,  although  it  bas  not  the  hoof  diyided.  But  the 
hare  belongs  to  an  order  of  mammals  totally  distinct 
from  the  ruminantia,  which  are  all,  without  exception, 
bisulca,  the  camel's  hoof  alone  offering  a  partial  modifi- 
cation  (Ehrenberg,  MammctUuj  pt.  ii).  The  stomach  of 
Todents  is  single,  and  the  motion  of  the  mouth,  except- 
ing  when  they  masticate  some  smali  portion  of  food  re- 


senred  in  the  hoUow  of  the  cheek,  is  morę  that  of  the 
lipę,  when  in  a  state  of  repose  the  animals  are  engaged 
in  working  the  incisor  teeth  upon  each  other.  Thia 
practice  is  a  necessaiy  condition  of  exi8tence,  for  the 
friction  keeps  them  fit  for  the  purpose  of  nibbling,  and 
preyents  their  growing  beyond  a  proper  length.  As 
haies  do  not  subsist  on  hard  substances,  Uke  most  of  the 
gencra  of  the  order,  but  on  tender  shoots  and  grasses, 
they  haye  morę  cause,  and  therefore  a  mOre  constant 
craying,  to  abrade  their  teeth;  and  this  they  do  in  a 
manner  which,  combined  with  the  slight  trituirndon  of 
the  occasional  contents  ofthe  cheeks,  even  modem  writ- 
ers, not  zoologists,  haye  mistaken  for  real  rumination. 


Hare  of  Mount  SlnaL 


Phjrsiological  inyestigation  haying  fully  determinea 
these  questions,  it  foUows  that,  both  with  regard  to  the 
shaphan  ("coney")  and  the  hare,  we  should  under- 
stand  the  original  in  the  aboye  passages,  rendered 
**chewing  the  cud,'*  as  merely  implying  a  seoond  mas- 
tication,  morę  or  less  complete,  and  not  necessarily  that 
faculty  of  trae  ruminants  which  deriyes  its  name  from 
a  power  to  draw  up  aliment  after  deglutition,  whea 
worked  into  a  bali,  from  the  first  stomach  into  the 
month,  and  there  to  submit  it  to  a  second  grinding  pro- 
cess.  The  act  of "  chewing  the  cud"  and  "  re-chewing" 
being  oonsidered  identical  by  the  Hebrews,  the  sacred 
lawgiyer,  not  being  occupied  with  the  doctrines  of  sci- 
ence, no  doubt  used  the  expression  in  the  sense  in  which 
it  was  then  understood  (compare  Michaelis,  ^rniurJL  ad 
loc.).    It  may  be  added  that  a  similar  opinion,  and  cod- 


Hare  of  Mount  Lebanon. 
8equent  rejection  of  the  hare  as  food,  penraded  many 
nations  of  antiąuity,  who  deriyed  their  origin,  or  their 
doctrines,  from  a  Shemitic  source;  and  that,  among 
others,  it  existed  among  the  British  Celts,  probably 
eyen  before  they  had  any  interoourse  with  Phcenician 
merchants.  Thus  the  Turks  and  Armenians  abstain 
from  its  fiesh  (Tayeraier,  TraveiSf  iii,  154),  also  the  Ara- 
bians  (Ru8sell*s  Aleppo f  ii,  20),  and  eyen  the  Greeka  and 


HARE 


73 


HARE 


RoauDis  aToided  it  (Hemumn,  ad  Lucian,  contcrib,  kuL  p. 
185 ;  P.  Castellan.  De  cantu  era,  iii,  5,  in  Gronov.  Thetaur, 
ix)  on  aaniUiy  grounds  (Aństotle,  Hist,  A  liim,  i\%  5 ; 
Pliny,  H.  X,  xxviii,  79) ;  but  the  BedaMrln,  who  liave  a 
pf*^!!*!'  modę  of  dreesing  it,  are  fond  of  its  iiesh. 

Therc  are  two  distinct  species  of  hare  in  Syria:  one, 
LepHS  SyriaaUf  or  Syrian  hare,  neariy  equal  in  ńze  to 
the  common  European,  having  the  fur  ochr)'  buff;  and 
LepMs  SinaiticiUj  or  hare  of  the  dofiert,  smaller  and 
browniah.  They  reside  in  the  localitiea  indicated  by 
their  triTial  names,  and  are  distinguished  from  the  oom- 
mon  hare  by  a  greater  length  of  ears,  and  a  black  taił 
with  white  fiinge.  There  is  found  in  £g3q>t,  and  high- 
er  op  the  Nile,  a  third  spedes,  represented  in  the  out- 
linę  paintings  on  ancieut  monuments,  but  not  colored 
with  that  delicacy  of  tint  required  for  distinguishing  it 
from  the  othera,  excepting  that  it  appears  to  be  marked 
with  the  bhu:k  speckles  which  characterize  the  exi8ting 
ipedes. — Kitto.  The  ancient  Egyptians  coursed  it  with 
greyhoonds  as  we  do,  and  sometimes  captured  it  alive 
and  kept  it  in  cages.    **  Hares  are  so  identiful  in  the 


Ancient E^jpt' Mi  ":o''rviTi^if-itiVi  >>,,«,,  m."  Mi'*T!iirri.MitB. 
enrlreoa  of  Aleppo,"  iaya  Dr.  Russell  (ii,  158),  *Hhat  it 
was  no  unoommon  thing  to  see  the  gentlemen  who  went 
out  a  Eporting  twice  a  week  letnni  with  four  or  five 
bnux  hung  in  tiiumph  at  the  girths  of  the  senrants' 
hones."*  Hares  are  hunted  in  Syria  Mrith  greyhound 
andlUoon. 

Hare,  Angnatiui  T^illiam  (brother  of  Julius 
CSiaries,  see  below),  was  bom  in  1794,  graduated  at  Ox- 
loid,  became  feUow  of  New  College,  and  in  1829  rector 
of  Altoo  Bamea,  Wiltshire.  In  conjunction  with  his 
brother,  he  wiote  Gueiśes  ał  Truih  (3d  ed.  Lond.  1847,  2 
rola.  18mo).  Ue  also  published  Sermont  to  a  Coufdry 
Ccmgrtgation  (London,  4th  ed.  1839,  7th  ed.  1851 ;  New 
York,  1889,  8vo),  which  are  modela  of  dear  and  practi- 
cal  dłsoooise  from  the  pulpit.    He  died  in  1834  at  Roroe. 

Hare,  Bdward,  an  English  Bfethodist  minister, 
was  bom  at  Hull  SepL  19, 1774,  and  received  his  early 
edncatioa  imder  Milner,  author  of  the  Church  Hi$tory, 
Haring  a  tom  for  the  sea,  he  became  a  sailor,  and  in 
1798,  while  a  ship-boy,  was  conrerted,  and  began  to  hokl 
idigioas  senrices  among  the  sailors.  During  the  French 
war  he  was  twice  taken  prisoner;  and  after  his  second 
Uberation,  in  1796,  he  abandoned  the  sea.  He  was 
admitted  into  the  itinerant  ministiy  of  the  Wealeyan 
Chureh  in  1796,  and  for  tMrenty  yeais  was  an  acceptable 
and  faithM  minister  of  the  GospeL  His  last  station 
was  Leeds.  He  died  of  consumption  at  Exeter  in  the 
spring  of  1818.  Hare  was  a  dear  and  fordble  writer, 
sind  produfoed  several  valnable  apologetical  and  contro- 
Tsnial  worka  on  Methodist  doctrine.  Perhape  the  most 
iatiportant  of  theee  are  A  TreaUse  om  the  Scr^Hural  Doc- 
irme  of  Jusl^feaiion  (2d  ed.,  with  Prefkoe  by  T.  Jack- 
son, London,  1889, 12mo;  also  reprinted  in  New  York, 
ISmo).  See  also  Sermont  published  from  hit  Manu- 
taiptMj  with  a  Memohr  ofHare  by  Joteph  Benton  (Lon- 
don, l82l)^W€tle9€m  MimUety  1818;  lĄfe  o/Dr.  Jabez 
Btudwg,  eh.  xit. 


Hare,  Franoia,  bishop  of  Chichester,  was  bom  at 
London  about  1665.  He  studied  at  Eton  and  at  King'a 
College,  Cambridge;  and, having  been  employed  as  tu- 
tor to  lord  Blandford,  son  of  the  duke  of  Marlborough, 
the  latter  caused  him  to  be  appointed  generał  chapUin 
of  the  army.  In  consequence  of  seryices  rendered  to 
the  Whig  party,  he  was  sucoessiydy  madę  dean  of 
Worcester  in  1708,  of  St.  Paul'8  in  1726,  bishop  of  St. 
Asaph  in  1781,  and  transferred  in  the  same  year  to  the 
see  of  Chichester.  He  died  in  1740.  He  wrote  a  work 
on  The  DifficulHet  and  Ditcouragementt  attending  ihe 
Słudy  ofthe  Scripturet  in  the  Way  ofprieaie  Judffmenfj 
which  was  condemned  for  its  tendency  to  scepticism. 
He  is  chiefly  famous  for  his  Book  o/Ptalmt,  in  the  H^ 
breWf  put  into  the  original  poetical  Metre  (Psalmorum 
Liber  in  Yersiculos  metrice  Dirisus,  Lond.  1736, 8^-0),  an 
attempt.,  now  deemed  hopeless,  to  reduce  Hebrew  poetry 
to  metre,  in  which  he  was  defended  by  Dr.  Edwards, 
and  assailed  by  Dr.  Lowth.  His  Workt  were  published 
in  4  vols.  8vo  (Lond.  1746),  containiug,  besides  the  writ- 
ings  above  named,  a  number  of  Sermont,  See  Chal- 
mers,  General  Biog, Diet, ;  Allibone,  Dictionary  of  AU" 
thort,  i,  785. 

Hare,  Julius  Charles,  one  of  the  brightest  oma- 
ments  ofthe  Church  of  England  in  the  present  cen  tury, 
was  bom  Sept  13,  1795,  at  Hurstmonceux,  Su8sex,  bis 
father  being  lord  of  the  manor.  After  a  brilliant  prep- 
aration  at  the  Charter  House,  hc  went  to  Cambridge  in 
1812,where  he  graduated  RA.  1816,  M.A.  1819,  and  be- 
came fellow  of  Trinity.  He  was  instituted  to  the  rec- 
tory  of  Hur8tmonceux  (the  advo¥rson  of  which  was  in 
his  own  family)  in  1882 ;  was  collated  to  a  prebend  at 
Chichester  in  1851 ;  was  appointed  archdeacon  of  Lewes 
by  bishop  Otter  in  1840 ;  and  nominated  one  of  ber  maj- 
ettfB  chaplains  in  1853.  He  died  at  the  rectonr,  Jan. 
28, 1855. 

In  1827  he  published  the  first  edition  of  Gueitet  at 
Truth,  but  his  name  was  first  distiuguished  in  the  liter- 
ały world  as  one  of  the  transUtors  of  Niebuhr*8  Ifittory 
ofRome,  in  conjunction  with-Mr.  Connop  Thirlwall,  the 
present  bishop  of  St  Darid^s.  Their  yersion  was  madę 
from  the  second  German  ecUtion,  which  materially  dif- 
fered  from  the  first,  and  it  was  first  published  in  the 
year  1828.  It  extends  to  the  first  and  second  rolumes 
only  of  the  standard  English  edition ;  the  third  and 
fourth  were  translated  by  Dr.  William  Smith  and  Dr. 
Leonard  Schmitz.  In  1829  Mr.  Hare  published,  at  Cam- 
bridge, yi  Vindication  ofNidmhr^t  Hittory  of  Romę  from 
ihe  Charget  ofthe  Ouarterły  Review,  Archdeacon  Hare's 
pubUshed  works  extend  over  a  period  of  neariy  thirty 
years.  The  most  important  of  them  are,  The  Children 
ofLight :  a  Sermon  for  Advent  (Cambridge,  1828, 8vo) : 
— Sermont  preached  before  the  Univertity  of  Cambridge 
(Feb.  1889)  -^The  Yictory  ofFaith,  and  other  Sermont 
(Cambridge,  1840,  8vo)  ',r—The  BeOer  Protpectt  of  the 
Church:  a  Charge  (1840) : — Sermont  preached  at  U  urtt- 
monceux  Church  (1841, 8 vo;  2d  voL  1849)  i—The  Unity 
ofthe  Church:  a  Semum  preached  before  the  Chichester 
Diocetan  AtsodaHon  (1845,  8vo) : — The  Mitaion  ofthe 
Comforter,  and  other  Sermont,  with  Notes  (1846, 2  yoIs, 
8vo;  Amer.  edit.  Boston,  1854, 12mo)  i^The  Meant  of 
Unity :  a  Charge,  with  Notes,  etpecialfy  on  tlie  Institution 
ofthe  Anglican  Bishopric  at  Jerusałem  (1847,  8vo) : — 
A  Letter  on  the  Agitation  ercited  by  the  Appointment  of 
Dr,  Hampden  to  the  See  of  Hertford  (1848, 8vo)  \—Life 
and  Writings  ofJohn  Sterling  (1848,  2  vols.  12mo)  :— 
Guestei  at  Truth,  by  two  Brothers  (dd  edit,  1848, 2  vols. 
18mo) : — The  Contett  with  Borne,  etpeciaUy  in  reply  to 
Dr,  Newman  (Lond.  1852, 8vo) : — Vindication  ofLuther 
(Lond.  1854, 8vo).  This  last  is  a  book  of  yigorous  con- 
troYers}',  and  refutes,  both  on  critical  and  morał  grounds, ' 
the  charges  brought  agaiiist  the  memory  of  Luther  by 
Hallam,  Newman,  Ward,  and  Sir  William  Hamilton. 
These  writcrs  are  handled  by  Hare  with  great,  but  not 
unjust  sererity.  There  are  two  admirable  articles  on 
Hare,  giWng  a  candid  and  judicious  criticLsm  of  his  ca- 
reer  as  philosopher,  controyendalist,  and  theologian,  in 


HABEŁ 


U 


HARLAY^HANYALLON 


the  Mtthodut  Ouarteriff  Renew,  April  and  July,  1856; 
reproduced  by  the  author,  Rev.  J.  H.  Rigg,  in  hu  Mod- 
em Anglican  Theoiogy  (London,  1858, 12mo).  See  also 
Cfendeman'8  Magazme^  Apiil,  1855;  Ouarterly  Remew 
(London),  July,  1855 ;  BlackwoocFs  Magazme^  xliii,  287 ; 
Allibone,  DicHonary  o/AvthorSf  i,  785. 

Harel  (Heb.  with  the  art  ha-Harel',  i«7»^J^,  Me 
mount  ofGod;  SepU  to  <ipi^X,yulg.  ^rie/,  EngLYem 
"the  altar,"  maig.  *^ Harel"),  a  figuratlye  name  foi  the 
altar  of  bumtK>irering  (Ezek.  xliii,  15,  first  dause),  called 
(in  the  last  dause  and  in  ver.  16)  Ariel  (EngLYenion 
alao  *' altar").  ^'Junius  explains  it  of  the  ivxópa  or 
hearth  of  the  altar  of  bumtroffering,  covered  by  the  net- 
irork  on  which  the  aacrifices  were  placed  over  the  bum- 
ing  wooci  Thia  explanation  Gesenius  adopts,  and  brings 
forward  as  a  parallel  the  AraK  ireA,  'a  hearth  or  fii^ 
place,'  akin  to  the  Heb.  "ini^,  ićr,  'light,  flame.'  Furst 
{llcmda.  8.  V.)  derives  it  from  an  unused  root  M^n,  hord, 
'■  to  glow,  bum,'  with  the  termination  -el;  but  the  only 
authority  for  the  root  is  its  presumed  exiatence  in  the 
word  HareL  Ewald  {Die  Prophelen  de*  A.B.u^  373) 
identilies  Harel  and  Ariel,  and  rcfers  them  both  to  a  root 
nnc,  drdh,  akui  to  *|!|«,  tir"  (Smith,  8.  v.). 

Harem.    SeeHousE;  Polygamt. 

Haren,  Je.\n  de,  a  Belgian  theologian,  was  bom  at 
Talendennes  about  1540.  While  yet  a  youth  he  went 
to  Geneya,  where  he  was  well  receired  by  Calvin.  He 
was  present  at  the  death-bed  of  the  reformer  (1564),  and 
was  for  eighteen  years  a  Protestant  minister  in  seyeral 
dties.  He  finally  joined  the  Roman  Catholic  Church 
at  Antwerp,  March  3, 1586,  and  preached  at  Yenloo,  Co- 
logne,  Aix-la-Chapdle,  Nancy,  etc.  He  retumed  to  Cal- 
yinism  in  1610,  and  died  about  1620.  He  wrote  Brief 
Discours  des  causes  jusłes  et  iguitabUt  qui  oni  meues  M, 
Jean  Ifaren^jadis  ministre^  de  cuitłer  la  reUgion  prełen- 
due  reformie^  pour  ae  ranger  au  giron  de  FEglise  całho- 
lique,  etc  (Anyers,  1587, 12mo) :— thirteen  Caiecketea  con- 
trę Calcin  et  les  caltńmst^s^CŚancyj  1599, 12mo)  i—Pro- 
/eśsion  catholigue  de  Jean  Haren  (Nancy,  1599, 12mo) : 
— Epitre  et  Demande  ckrestienm  de  Jean  Haren  a  An^ 
broise  Wille,  mmistre  des  estrangers  walons  retirez  en  la 
vme  d^Aias-la-Chapdle  (Nancy,  1699, 12mo).  See  Oal- 
met,  BibL  de  lA>rraine,  p.  479 ;  Hoefer,  Nouv»  Biog,  Gen- 
^ro/e,  xxiii,  380. 

Ha^reph  (Heb.  Chareph',  S)^n,  pludang  oif ;  Sept. 
'Ap«'  V.  r.  'Apifi),  the  "  father"  \)f  Beth-Gader,  and 
**8on"  of  Caleb  of  Judah  by  one  of  his  legitimate  wiyes 
(1  Chroń,  ii,  51).  RC  cir.  1612.  The  patronymic 
**Haruphite"  (q.  v.)  seems  to  oonnect  this  with  Habipu. 

Hareseth.    See  Kir-Haresetu. 

Hareoh.    See  Kib-Habesh. 

Haresha.    See  TeltHaresha. 

Ha^reth  (Heb.  Che'reth,  nnn,  the  form  nnn,  ChA'- 
retk,  is  on  account  of  the  pauae-aćcent ;  prób.  i.  q.  IZJ^h 
a  thicket;  Sept.  Xap^  v.  r.  [tv]  v6\ei  [appareiitly 
reading  "^^5 ;  ao  Josephus,  A  ta,  vi,  12, 4],  Vulg.  Haret)^ 
a  wood  O^^)  in  '^e  mountauis  of  Judah,  where  Da\dd 
hid  hiroself  ftcm  Saul,  at  the  instance  of  the  prophet 
Gad  (1  Sam.  xx:i,  5) ;  probably  situated  among  the 
hills  west  of  Socho.    See  Forest. 

Harhai^all  (Heb.  Charhagah\  ri';ry)ny  zeal  ofJe- 
hovah;  Sept.  'Apa^mc),  the  father  of  Uzziel  "of  the 
goldsmiths,"  which  latter  repaired  part  of  the  waUs  of 
Jerusalem  after  the  Gaptiyity  (Neh.  iii,  8).  B.C  antę 
446. 

Har^lias  (2  Kings  xxii,  14).    See  Hasrak. 

Har^^liur  (Heb.  Charchur',  nn^in,/^?^*,  an  in  Deut 
xxviii,  22 ;  Sept.  'Apot^p),  one  of  the  Nethinim  whose 
postcrity  retumed  from  Babylon  with  2ierabbabd  (Ezra 
u,  61 ;  Neh.  vii,  53).     RC.  686. 

Harid.    See  Hadid. 


Ha^rim  (Heb.  Chanm',  tm,  for  ti-^^in,  i.  q.  W^n^ 
Jlat-ooaed ;  Sept.  'Bpdfi,  but  with  many  y.  nr.  eapecial- 
ly  Xapfifi  in  1  Chroń,  xxiv,  8,  'Hpifc  in  Ezra  ii,  89, 
'IpdfŁ  in  Neh.  x,  5,  and  'Apt  in  Neh.  xii,  15),  the  name 
of  seyeral  men,  mostly  about  the  time  of  the  Captiyity. 

1.  The  head  of  the  second  "oourse^  of  priesta  as  ar- 
ranged  by  David  (1  Chroń.  xxiy,  8).     RC  1014. 

2.  Apparently  an  Israelite,  whose  descendants,  to  the 
number  of  820  males,  or  1017  in  all,  retumed  from  Bab- 
ylon with  Zerabbabd  (Ezra  ii,  32,  39 ;  Neh.  vii,  85, 42. 
But  as  among  these  some  are  enumerated  (Ezra  x,  21) 
as  priests  in  the  corresponding  lists  of  thoae  who  re- 
nounced  theur  Gentile  wiyes,  and  others  (Ezra  x,  31)  aa 
ordinary  Israelites,  it  may  be  doubted  whether  Harim 
was  not  rather  a  place  whose  inhabitants  are  here  spo- 
ken  of,  like  others  in  the  same  list  Accordingly, 
Schwarz  identifies  it  with  a  yillage  Charim,  situated, 
according  to  him,  on  a  bay  of  the  sea  eight  Eng.  milea 
north-east  of  Jaffa  {Palesf,  p.  142).  He  probably  meana 
eZ-Z/arom-Ali-Ibn-Aleim  (Robinson,  ResearcheSy  iii,  46), 
but  his  explanation  of  the  oompouiid  name  is  not  at  sJl 
satisfactory.  A  better  supposition,  perhaps,  is  that  Ha- 
rim in  these  latter  passages  stands  patrouymicaUy  as  a 
representation  of  the  family,  q.  d.  Bene-Harim,  See 
Elam. 

3.  The  father  of  Malchijah,  which  latter  repaired 
part  of  the  walls  of  Jerusalem  (Neh.  iii,  U).  RC.  antę 
446.    Perhaps  identical  with  No.  2. 

4.  One  of  the  priests  that  retumed  from  Babykm 
with  Zembbabel  (Neh.  xii,  3,  where  the  name  ia  giyen 
as  Rbhum  ;  but  compare  yer.  15,  where  his  son  Adna  ia 
named).    RC  536.    Perhaps  the  same  as  No.  8. 

5.  One  of  those  named  fint  among  the  signers  of  the 
sacred  coyenant  of  Nehemiah  (Neh.  x,  5).  RC  cir. 
410.     Perhaps  i.  q.  No.  3. 

6.  Another,  a  chief  of  the  people,  in  the  aame  list 
(yer.  27).  RC  cir.  410.  Perhaps  to  be  explained  like 
No.  2. 

Har^iph  (Heb.  Chariph',  V\'^y^,  autumnal  rain; 
Sept.  'Apfifi,  'Api0),  the  name  apparently  of  two  men. 

1.  Au  Israelite  whose  descendants  (or  poasibly  a  place 
whose  inhabitants),  to  the  number  of  112,  retumed  from 
Babylon  with  Zerabbabd  (Neh.  yii,  24).  In  Ezra  ii, 
18,  the  name  is  written  in  the  8}'nonymou8  foim  Jorah. 
RC.  antę  586.  Perhaps  identical  with  the  Harei*h  of 
1  Chroń,  ii,  51.     See  Haruphite. 

2.  One  of  the  chief  of  the  people  who  subecribed  the 
coyenant  of  ftdelity  to  Jehoyah  with  Nehemiah  (Neh. 
X,  19).  RC  dr.  410.  Perhape  the  name  is  here  only 
a  patronymic  contraction  for  Ben-Har^lu    See  Haribi. 

Harlay-Chan^allon,  Francis  ue,  archbishop 
of  Rouen  and  afterwards  of  Paris,  was  bom  in  the  latter 
dty  Aug.  14, 1625.  He  studied  at  the  College  of  Na- 
yaire,  and  was  immediately  appointed  abbot  of  Jumi^gea 
by  his  uncle,  the  archbishop  of  Rouen,  whom  he  suc- 
ceeded  in  office,  Dec.  28,  1651.  The  looseneas  of  his 
morals  ill  fitted  him  for  such  a  pońtion ;  yet,  connecting 
himself  with  cardinal  Mazarin,  he  mana^^  to  indolge 
his  eyil  pmpensities  without  loeing  his  credit.  He  rep- 
resented  the  deigy  at  the  coronation  of  Louis  XrV  in 
1654,  and  is  said  to  haye  offidated  at  the  marriage  of 
this  king  with  madame  de  Maintenon.  His  name,  his 
fortunę,  and  the  flatteries  he  showered  upon  the  kuig 
caused  him  to  be  madę  archbishop  of  Paris  Jan.  8, 1671, 
and  he  receiyed  numerous  other  marka  of  the  royal  fa- 
\'or.  He  died  at  Conflana,  where  he  poasessed  a  fine  ea- 
tate,  Aug.  6, 1695.  A  ready  e1oquence  was  joined  in 
him  to  great  ambitioii,  the  utmoet  want  of  prindplea, 
and  great  intolerance.  At  Dieppe,  where  he  was  maa- 
ter  as  temporal  lord,  he  obliged  the  Protestanta  to  oome 
to  the  cathedral  and  linten  to  the  sermons  he  ddiyeied 
as  spiritual  lord.  He  was  one  of  the  prime  moyers  of 
the  reyocation  of  the  edict  of  Nantes.  Although  a 
member  of  the  French  Academy,  and  yery  fond  of  mak- 
ing  speeches,  noue  of  his  discourses  were  published.  He 
publiahed,  howeyer,  the  Sgnodioon  Parisieiise,  an  ao- 


HARLOT 


75 


HARLOT 


eoont  of  all  tbe  synoda  held  by  his  predeceflMn.  See 
I.«^ndre,  Vie  de  Harlay  (Par.  1720, 4to) ;  Sevign^,  Ia^ 
trtsB  (1818),  X,  121, 128);  Baiisact,  Bisł.  de  Fenelan  (2d 
ecL),  i,  51,  55;  Hoefer,  Xouv,  Biog.  Gmertde,  xxiii,  408. 

Harlot,  WHOBE,  etc,  are  terma  used  Bomewhat  pro- 
miacnoualy  in  the  Aath.  Yera.  for  8everal  HeK  worda  of 
widely  different  import. 

1.  Ptoperly  HJiT  (zoroA',  participle  from  rtJt,topfay 
tke  kariot,  Sept.  irópyiffyalg.  meretrixj  both  theae  latter 
terma  referring  to  prostitation  for  mercenafy  motirea), 
which  occuiB  frequently,  and  b  often  rendered  in  our 
▼^eraion  by  the  fint  of  the  aboye  English  worda,  aa  in 
Gen.  xxxiv,  81,  etc,  and  eometimea,  without  apparent 
reaaon  for  the  change,  by  the  aecoml,  aa  in  Prov.  xxiii, 
27,Midelaewhere.  In  Gen.  xxxviii,  15,  the  wordiatldiT, 
'^  harlot,**  which,  however,becomea  changed  to  HO^p, 
**  haiiot,**  in  yera.  21, 22,  which  meana,  literally,  a  cofwe- 
eraied  woman,  a  female  (perhapa  prieateaa)  devoted  to 
pnstitution  in  honor  of  aome  keałhen  idoL  The  diatinc- 
tion  showa  that  Judah  auppoaed  Tamar  to  be  a  heathen  : 
the  facta,  therefore,  do  not  prove  that  prostitution  was 
then  practised  between  Iłebrews, 

That  thia  condition  of  peraona  exiated  in  the  earlieat 
atatea  of  aodety  ia  elear  from  Gen.  xxxviii,  15.  From 
that  account  it  would  appear  that  the  *'  veil''  was  at  that 
time  peculiar  to  harlota.  Judah  thought  Tamar  to  be 
such  **becav»e  she  had  covered  her  face.**  Mr.  Bucking- 
ham remarka,  in  reference  to  thia  pasaage,  that  **  the 
Turcoman  women  go  unreiled  to  thia  day"  (Trarels  in 
Mezopotamia,  i,  77).  It  ia  contended  by  Jahn  and  oth- 
era  that  in  ancient  times  all  femalea  wore  the  veil  (Bibl. 
ArchfEoL  p.  127).  Poaubly  aome  peculiariiy  in  the  aize 
of  the  vei],  or  the  modę  of  wearing  it,  may  have  been 
(Prov.  vii,  10)  the  distinctive  dreaa  of  the  harlot  at  that 
period  (aee  New  Tranalation,  by  the  B€v.  A.  De  Sola, 
etCy  p.  116,  248-9).  The  priests  and  the  high-prieat 
were  forlńdden  to  take  a  >vife  that  waa  {had  been,  Lev. 
xxi,  14)  a  harlot.  Joeephua  ex  Lenda  the  law  to  all  the 
Hebrewa,  and  aeema  to  ground  it  on  the  prohibition 
againat  oblationa  ariaing  from  proetitution,  Deut,  xxiii,  18 
{A  mi.  iv,  8, 23).  The  celebrated  caae  of  Rahab  haa  been 
mnch  debated.  She  ia,  indeed,  called  by  the  word  osu- 
ally  ognifying  harlot  (Joah.  ii,  1 :  vi,  17 ;  Sept.  irófnni ; 
Yulg.  meretrii;  and  in  Heb.  xi,  31 ;  James  ii,  25) ;  but 
it  haa  been  attempted  to  ahow  that  the  word  may  mean 
an  innkeeper.  See  Rahab.  If,  howeyer,  there  were 
■och  persona,  considering  what  we  know  of  CanaaniUah 
monda  (Ley.  xviii,  27),  we  may  condude  that  they 
would,  if  women,  haye  been  of  thia  claaa.  The  next  in- 
•tance  introducea  the  epithet  of  '*atrange  woman."  It 
ia  the  caae  of  Jephthah^a  mother  (Judg.  xi,  2),  who  is 
oko  called  a  harlot  {irópytj ;  meretrix) ;  but  the  epithet 
r^nst  iTTK  {acheretK)y  ^$trange  woman,**  merely  de- 
wśj»foirtigiR  exfraelwn,  Joeephua  aaya  |ćvoc  irtpi  n}v 
lUfrica^  "a  atnuiger  by  the  motheT*a  aide.**  The  maa- 
teriy  deacriptłon  in  Proy.  vii,  6,  etc.  may  poeaibly  be  that 
of  an  abandoned  married  woman  (ver.  19, 20),  or  of  the 
■didtatiooa  of  a  courteaan,  *^  fair  speech,"  under  auch  a 
pretenńoii.  The  mixture  of  religioua  obBer\'ancea  (ver. 
14)  aeema  illuatrated  by  the  fact  that ''  the  goda  are  ac^ 
tually  worahipped  in  many  Oriental  brothela,  and  (rag- 
menta  of  the  oiferinga  diatributed  aoiong  the  frequent- 
era**  (Dr.  A.  Clarke*a  Comment^  ad  loc).  The  repreaen- 
tation  giyen  b>'  Si^omon  ia  no  doubtyóitmfeci  upon  facta, 
and  therefore  ahowa  that  in  hia  time  proatitutea  plied 
their  tnde  in  the  <<atreeta**  (Proy.\ńi,  12;  ix,  14,  etc.; 
Jer.  iii,  2 ;  Ezek.  xvi,  24, 25, 81).  Aa  regarda  the  faah- 
ioiia  involved  in  the  practice,  aimilar  outward  marka 
aeem  to  have  attended  ita  eaiłiest  forma  to  thoee  which 
we  tiace  in  the  claaaical  vnitera,  e.  g.  a  diatinctiye  dreaa 
and  a  aeat  by  the  way-aide  (Gen.  xxxyiii,  14 ;  compare 
Ezek.  xvi,  16,  25;  Bar.  vi,  43;  Petron.  Arb.  Sał,  xvi; 
Juy.  yi,  118  foli;  Doogtaei  AnaktA*  8acr,  £xc  xxiv). 
Public  ainging  in  the  atreeta  occura  also  (laa.  xxiti,  16; 
Eodfiii  iX|  4).    Tboae  who  thna  pubUahed  their  infamy 


were  of  the  wont  lepute;  othera  had  housea  of  resorty 
and  both  claaaea  aeem  to  have  been  known  among  the 
Jewa  (Proy.  vii,  8-12;  xxiii,  28;  Ecdua.  ix,  7,  8);  the 
two  women,  1  Kinga  tii,16,Iiyed  aa  Greek  hetseras  eome- 
timea did,  in  a  house  together  (Smith,  i>icf.  Gr,  and  Ro- 
man Ant,  a.  y.  Hettera).  The  boneful  faacuiation  aa- 
cribed  to  them  in  Proy.  vii,  21-28,  may  be  compared 
with  what  Chardin  aays  of  similar  effecta  among  the 
young  nobility  of  Perda  (Yayages  en  Perse^  i,  168,  ed. 
1711),  aa  also  may  Lukę  xy,  80,  for  the  auma  layiahed  on 
them  (ib.  162).  In  earlier  timea  the  price  of  a  kid  ia 
mentioned  (Gen.  xxxyiii),  and  gieat  wealth  doubtlew 
aometimea  aocrued  to  them  (Ezek.  xvi, 83, 89 ;  xxiii,  26). 
But  luat,  aa  diatinct  from  gain,  appeara  as  the  induoe- 
ment  in  Prov.  yii,  14, 15  (aee  Dougtaei  AnaL  Sacr,  ad 
loc),  where  the  yictim  is  further  allured  by  a  promised 
sacrificial  banquet  (comp.  Ter.  Eun,  iii,  8).  The  ^*har- 
k>t8'*  are  classed  with  ^'  publicaus,**  as  those  who  lay  un- 
der the  ban  of  society  in  the  N.  T.  (llatt.  xxi,  82).  No 
doubt  they  mnltiplied  with  the  increase  of  polygamy, 
and  consequently  lowered  the  estimate  of  marriage. 
The  corrupt  practices  imported  by  Gentile  conyerta  into 
the  Church  occaaion  most  of  the  other  passages  in  which 
allusions  to  the  subject  there  occur,  1  Ck>r.  y,  1, 9, 11 ;  2 
Cor.  xii,  21 ;  1  Thess.  iv,  8 ;  1  Tim.  i,  10.  The  decree, 
Acts  XV,  29,  has  occasioned  doubts  as  to  the  meaning  of 
vopviia  there,  chiefly  from  ita  context,  which  may  be 
seen  dlscussed  at  lei^y^h  in  Deyling'8  Ob§erv.  Sacr,  ii, 
470,  sq. ;  Schottgen,  Hor,  Hfhr,  i,  468 ;  Spencer  and 
Hammond,  ad  loc.  The  aimpleat  sense,  howeyer,  seema 
the  most  probable.  The  children  of  such  persons  were 
held  in  contempt,  and  could  not  exerci80  privileges  nor 
inherit  (John  yiii,  41 ;  Deut.  xxiii,  2 ;  Judg.  xi,  1,  2). 
The  term  ^  bastard'*  Ib  not,  however,  applied  to  any  ille- 
gitimate  oifspring  bom  out  of  wedlock,  but  is  restricted 
by  the  Kabbins  to  the  iasue  of  any  connection  within 
the  degrees  prohibited  by  the  law.  A  mamzerj  accord- 
ing  to  the  Mishna  (y<'iafno/A,iy,  18),is  one,  says  R.  Aki- 
ba,  who  ia  bom  of  relations  between  whom  marriage  ia 
forbidden.  Simeon  the  Temanite  says  it  is  eyery  one 
whose  parents  are  liable  to  the  punishment  of  ^cutting 
oflT*  by  Łhe  hands  of  Heaven ;  R  Joshua,  eyery  one 
whoee  parents  are  liable  to  death  by  the  house  of  jud^ 
ment,  as,  for  inatance,  the  ofTspring  of  adulcery.  Chi  the 
generał  subject,  Michaelis*s  lAnce  of  Mokb,  bk.  y,  art, 
268;  Selden,  De  Ux,  I/ebr.  i,  16;  iii.  12;  and  Be  Jur, 
Natur,  V,  4,  together  with  Schottgen,  and  the  authori- 
ties  there  quoted,  may  be  consulteiL 

The  words  Sł^n^J  niwhj,  A.V.  "and  they  washed 
his  amior**  (1  Kings  xxii,88),should  be, "and  the  har- 
lots  washed,*'  which  is  not  only  the  natural  rendering, 
but  in  aocordance  with  the  Sept.  and  Joeephns. 

Since  the  Hebrewa  regarded  Jehoyah  aa  the  husband 
of  his  people,  by  yirtue  of  the  coyenant  he  had  madę 
with  them  (Jer.  iii,  1),  therefore  to  commit  Jormcation 
b  a  very  common  meUpbor  in  the  Scripturea  to  de- 
note  defection  on  their  part  ftom  that  coyenant,  and 
especially  by  the  practice  of  idolatry.  See  Fornica- 
TioN.  Hcnce  the  degeneracy  of  Jerusalem  is  illustra^ 
ted  by  the  sjrmbol  of  a  harlot  (Isa.  i,  21),  and  eyen  that 
of  heathen  cities,  as  of  Nineyeh  (Nah.  iii,  4).  Under 
this  figurę  the  prophet  Ezekiel  deliveT8  the  tremen- 
doua  inyectiyea  contained  in  chaps.  xvi,  xxiii.  In  the 
prophecy  of  Hosea  the  iUustration  ia  carried  to  a  atart- 
ling  extent.  The  prophet  seema  commanded  by  the 
Loid  to  take  "a  wife  of  whoredoms  and  children  of 
whoretknna**  (i,  2),  and  "  to  loye  an  adulteress**  (iii,  1). 
It  has,  indeed,  been  much  diaputed  whether  these  trana- 
actiona  were  real, or  passed  in  yision  only;  but  the  idea 
itself,  and  the  diyersified  applications  of  it  throughout 
the  prophecy,  render  it  one  of  the  most  effectiye  por- 
tions  of  Scńpture.    See  Hosea. 

2.  rtttJ^JD  (kedeshah%  from  ttJ^IJ,  to  conaecratt,  occura 
Gen.  xxxviii,  16,  21,  22 ;  Deut,  xxiii,  17 ;  Hoe.  iv,  14). 
It  has  already  been  obseryed  that  the  proper  meaning 
of  the  word  ia  congecrated  proitUute,    The  yeiy  early 


HARLOT 


łe 


HARMONY 


aUosion  to  sach  penoius  in  the  firtA  of  theae  pasMgeB, 
agrees  with  the  accounts  of  Łhem  in  ancient  heathen 
writera.  Herodotns  refen  to  the  ^  abominable  costom 
of  the  BabylonianByWho  compelled  eveiy  native  female 
to  attend  the  tempie  of  Yenus  onoe  in  her  life,  and  to 
,  proBtitute  henelf  in  honor  of  the  goddess"  (i,  199;  Ba- 
ruch|  vi,  48).  Stiabo  calls  prostitutes,  who,  it  is  well 
knowU)  were  at  Athena  dedicated  to  Yenus,  \ipoŁov\oi 
ywauuCf  ^'oonaecrated  seiranta,"  "yotaries"  ((7eoy.  viii, 
878;  Grotiua,  Armotat.  on  Boruch;  Beloe's  IlerodotuSf 
Kotes,  i,  272,  Lond.  1806).  The  tranaaction  related  in 
Numb.  XV,  1-15  (compaie  Psa.  cvi,  28)  seems  oonnected 
with  idolatiy.  The  prohibition  in  Deut.  xxiii,  17, "  there 
shall  be  no  rftś^p, '  whore,'  of  the  daughten  of  Israel," 
ia  intended  to  exclade  such  devotees  from  the  worship 
of  Jchovah  (see  other  aUusions,  Job  xxxvi,  14 ;  1  Kings 
xiv,  24;  XV,  12).  The  law  forbida  (Lev.  xix,  29)  the 
father^a  compelling  hia  daughter  to  sin,  but  does  not 
mention  it  as  a  voluntaiy  modę  of  life  on  her  part  with- 
out  his  oomplicity.  It  eould,  indeed,  hardly  be  so.  The 
provision  of  Lev.  xxi,  9,  regarding  the  piiest^s  daughter, 
may  have  arisen  from  the  fact  of  his  home  being  less 
guarded,  owing  to  his  absence  when  ministering,  as  weU 
as  from  the  scandal  to  sanctity  so  involved.  Perhaps 
such  abominations  might,  if  not  thus  8everely  marked, 
lead  the  way  to  the  exoes8es  of  Gentile  ritualistic  fonii- 
cation,  to  which,  indeed,  when  ao  near  the  sanctuary, 
they  might  be  >'iewed  as  approximating  (Michaelis, 
Laws  o/AfoteSf  art  268).  Yet  it  seems  to  be  assumed 
that  the  harlot  class  would  exist,  and  the  prohibition  of 
Deut.  xxiii,  18,  forbidding  offerings  from  the  wages  of 
Buch  sin,  is  perhaps  due  to  the  contagion  of  heathen  ex- 
ample,  in  whoee  worship  practices  abounded  which  the 
Isiaelites  were  taught  to  abhor.  The  term  there  espe- 
dally  refers  to  the  impure  worship  of  the  Syrian  Astarte 
(Numb.  xxv,  1;  comp.  Herod,  i,  199;  Justin,  xviii,  5; 
Strabo,  viii,  878;  xii,  659;  YaL  Max.  ii,  6, 15;  August. 
De  Cio,  Deiy  iv,  4),  whoae  votaries,  as  idolatry  progress- 
ed,  would  be  recniited  ftom  the  daughters  of  Israel ; 
.  hence  the  oommon  mention  of  both  these  ains  in  the 
I  Prophets,  the  one,  indeed,  being  a  metaphor  of  the  oth- 
er (Isa.  i,  21 ;  lvii,  8 ;  Jer.  ii,  20 ;  comp.  Exod.  xxxiv,  16, 
16 ;  Jer.  iii,  1,  2, 6 ;  Ezek.  xvi,  xxiii ;  Hoe.  i,  2 ;  ii,  4,  5 ; 
iv,  1 1, 18, 14, 15 ;  v,  8).  The  latter  class  would  grow  up 
with  the  growth  of  great  cities  and  of  foreign  inter- 
course,  and  hardly  could  enter  into  the  view  of  the  Mo- 
aaic  institutes. 

8.  rtj*ią3  (nokr^fah'y  from  "ISJ,  to  ignore)^ « the  strange 
woman"  (1  Kings  xi,  1;  Prov.v,'20;  vi,  24;  vii,  5;  xxiii, 
27;  Sept.  ayXoTpia ;  Yulg.  alienaf  exłranea),  It  seems 
probable  that  some  of  the  Hebrews  in  later  times  inter- 
preted  the  prohibition  against  fomication  (Deut.  xxii, 
41)  as  limited  to  females  of  their  own  nation,  and  that 
the  "strange  women"  in  ąuestion  were  Ganaanites  and 
other  OentUes  (Josh.  xxiii,  18).  In  the  case  of  Solo- 
mon  they  are  q>ecified  aa  Moabites,  Ammonites,  Edom- 
ites,  Zidonians,  and  Hittites.  The  passages  referred  to 
discover  the  character  of  these  femalea.  To  the  same 
dass  belongs  łTJT  (zaroA',  from  *1S|t,to  tum  in  as  a  visit- 
or),  "the  i^rofi^  woman"  (Prov.  v,  3,  20;  xxii,  14; 
xxiii,  83 ;  yvvri  v6pvfjf  aXXoTpia ;  meretrix,  aliena,  er- 
tranea) :  it  b  sometimes  found  in  fuli,  JTJt  flUJK  (Prov. 
ii,  16 ;  vii,  5).  To  the  same  class  of  females  Ukewise 
belongs  n!|i*»pC  ntÓC  {hisUuth',foUy),  '*the/ooiish 
woman,"  L  e.  by  a  common  association  of  ideas  in  the 
Shemitic  dialects,  tmful  (Psa.  xiv,  1).  The  description 
in  Prov.  ix,  14,  etc  iUostrates  the  character  of  the  fe- 
male so  designated.  To  this  may  be  added  5^  nCK 
(ra,  wronff), "  the  m/  woman"  (Prov.  v,  24). 

In  the  New  Testament  vópvTi  oocurs  in  Matt  xxi,  81, 
82;  Lukę  xv,  80;  1  00^1-1,15,16;  Heb.  xi,  31;  James 
ii,  25.  In  nonę  of  these  passages  does  it  neofssarily  im- 
ply  ppostitution  for  gain.  The  Ukeliest  U  Lukę  xv,  80. 
It  is  used  symbolically  for  a  city  in  Rev.  xvii,  1, 5, 15, 
16 ;  xix,  2,  where  the  term  and  all  the  attendźuit  imageiy 


aze  deiived  from  the  Old  Testament  It  may  be  ob* 
8erved  iii  regard  to  Tyre,  which  (Isa.  xxiii,  15. 17)  is  rep- 
resented  as  "  committing  fomication  with  all  the  king- 
doms  of  the  world  upon  the  face  of  the  carth,"  that  these 
words,  as  indeed  seems  likely  from  thoee  which  foUow, 
may  relate  to  the  varion8  arts  which  she  had  employed 
to  induce  merchants  to  trade  with  her  (Patrick,  ad  loc). 
So  the  Sept  understood  it,  lorai  l/iwóptov  ^doaic  raic 
liatriKticuc  riję  olKovfuvtjc  iiri  irp6<rwirov  rrię  yiic, 
Schleusner  obśerves  that  Uie  same  words  in  Rev.  xviii, 
8  may  also  relate  to  oommercial  deaUngi,  (Fesselii  Ad' 
versar,  Sacr,  ii,  27, 1, 2  [Witteb.  1660] ;  Frisch,/^  mii- 
liere  peregrma  ap,  łłebr.  [Lipę.  1744]). — ^Kitto,  a.  v.; 
Smith,  6.  V.    Compare  Prostitute. 

Harmer,  Thoscas,  a  leamed  diasenting  divine  of 
Englan<l,  was  bom  in  Norwich  in  1716,  and  became 
minister  of  a  diaaenting  cougregation  at  Watteafield, 
Suffolk.  He  was  much  esteemed  in  the  literaiy  world 
for  his  attainments  in  Oriental  literaturę  and  for  his 
skill  in  antiquitie8.  Availing  himself  of  some  MSS.  of 
the  celebrated  Sir  John  Chardin,  who  had  travelled  into 
Persia  and  other  Eastem  countries,  Harmer  seized  the 
idea  of  applying  the  Information  thus  obtalned  to  the 
iUustration  of  many  portions  of  the  prophetical  writings, 
and  of  the  evangeli8t8  also.  The  fint  volume  of  the 
Obserratioru  on  rarious  Passages  ofScripture  appeared 
in  1764;  in  1776  the  work  again  madę  its  appearaiice  in 
two  volumes  octavo,  and  in  1787  were  published  two 
additional  volumes;  a  fourth  edition,  in  four  volume8, 
was  called  for  in  a  short  time  afterwards,  and  a  fiflh 
eiUŁion  was  edited  by  Adam  Ciarkę  (Lond.  1816,  4  vola. 
8vo),  with  considerable  additions  and  correctiona,  to 
which  is  prefixed  a  life  of  the  author.  3Ir.  Harmer  also 
published  Outlines  of  a  new  Commeniary  on  SoUmotCs 
Song  (LoncL  1768,  8vo) ;  and  a  posthumous  volume  haa 
appeared,  entitled  The  Miscellantous  Works  ofthe  Ber. 
Thomas  Harmer^  with  an  introductory  memoir  by  Wil- 
liam Youngman  (Lond.  1823, 8vo).  Mr.  Haimer  died  in 
1788.— Jones,  Christian  Biography  ;  Darling,  Cydopcedia 
BtbUographica,  i,  400. 

Harmonists  or  Harmonites.    See  Rafpists. 

Harmony,  as  a  technical  name  of  a  Biblical  work, 
is  applied  to  books  the  object  of  which  is  to  arrange  the 
Scriptures  in  chronological  order,  so  that  the  motual 
agreement  of  the  sevenil  parta  may  be  rendered  appar- 
ent,  and  the  tnie  succession  of  event8  dearly  under- 
stood. With  this  view  various  scholara  bave  compiled 
harmonies  of  the  Old  Testament,  of  the  New,  and  of 
particular  portions  of  botK  Harmonies  of  the  Old  Tes- 
tament exhibit  the  books  disposed  in  chronological  or^ 
der,  as  is  done  by  Lightfoot  in  his  Chronicie  ofthe  Times, 
and  the  Order  ofthe  Texts  ofthe  Old  Testament,  and  by 
Townsend  in  his  Old  Testament  arrcmged  in  historical 
and  chronological  Order,  Harmonies  of  the  New  Tes- 
tament present  the  gospek  and  epistles  distributed  in 
like  order,  the  latter  being  interspórsed  among  the  Acta 
of  the  Apostlea.  In  this  way  Townsend  has  prooeeded 
in  his  valuable  work  entilled  The  New  Testament  ar- 
ranged  in  chronological  and  historical  Order.  Booka^ 
however,  of  this  kind  are  so  few  in  number  that  the 
term  harnumy  is  almost  appropiiated  by  uaage  to  the 
gospels,  It  is  this  part  of  the  New  Testament  which 
has  chiefly  occupied  the  attention  of  those  inquirei8 
whose  object  is  to  arrange  the  Scriptures  in  their  true 
order.  The  memoirs  of  our  Lord  written  by  the  foor 
cvangeIistB  have  chiefly  occupied  the  thoughts  of  thoee 
who  wish  to  show  that  they  all  agree,  and  mutually  au- 
thenticate  one  another.  Accordingly,  such  compositiona 
are  exceedingly  numerous.  The  four  gospels  narrate 
the  principal  events  oonnected  with  our  Lord'8  abode  on 
earth,fromhisbirthtohisascen8ion.  There  must  ther&- 
fore  be  a  generał  resemblance  between  them,  though 
that  of  John  contains  little  in  oommon  with  the  otherB» 
being  apparently  supplementary  to  them.  Yet  there 
are  considerable  diverBitie8,  both  in  the  order  in  which 
facta  are  iiamted,  and  in  the  facta  them8elve8.    Henoe 


HARMONY 


77 


HARMONY 


the  diiBcolty  of  weariiig  the  aooonnts  of  thę  fonr  into  a 
eontinuoitt  and  chnmological  biatory.  Thóee  portiona 
of  the  goapeb  that  relate  to  the  ruurreeHon  of  the  Sav- 
ioar  hare  always  presented  the  greatest  obstacles  to  the 
oomptlen  of  hłomoniefl,  and  it  must  be  candidly  admit- 
ted  that  the  aocoiinta  of  thia  remarkable  event  are  not 
easUy  reconcikd.  Yet  the  labon  of  West  and  Town- 
aon,  espedally  the  latter,  have  seryed  to  lemore  the 
apparent  contiadictiona.  In  addition  to  them  maj  be 
mentioned  Cranfleld  and  Hales,  who  haye  endeayored 
to  impiore  npon  the  attempta  of  their  piedeoesBoia. 
SeeGosPKŁa. 

In  oomiection  with  hannonies  the  tenn  diatetaartm 
fnąueoilj  oocun.  It  denotes  a  oontinaed  nanatiye  se- 
lected  out  of  the  four  goepela,  in  which  all  repetitions 
of  the  aame  or  simUar  woids  aie  ayoided.  It  is  thuB 
the  roniA  of  a  hannonir,  sinoe  the  latter,  properiy  upeak- 
ing^  exhibitB  the  entire  text8  of  the  four  eyangelists  ar- 
nmged  in  oonesponding  columm.  In  popidar  language 
the  two  aie  ofken  uaed  synonymoculy.    See  Diatessa- 

B03C 

Tlie  f<dlowing  ąoeationB  relatiye  to  harmoniea  de- 
mand  attention;  and  in  treating  them,  we  ayail  our- 
sdyes  chiefly  of  the  art.  on  the  subject  in  Kitto*B  Cydo- 
petdioy  &y. 

1.  Hare  off  or  amf  of  the  eyangeliBta  obaenred  chro- 
nological  arruigement  in  theur  narratiyes?  It  was  the 
opinkm  of  Osiander  and  his  foUowers  that  all  the  eyan- 
gelists record  the  lacts  of  the  Sayioar's  history  in  their 
tnie  oider.  When,  therefore,  the  same  tnmsactions  are 
plaeed  in  a  diiTerent  order  by  the  writers,  they  were 
suppueed  to  haye  happened  morę  than  onoe.  It  was  as- 
suned  that  they  took  place  as  often  as  they  were  dif- 
fcmtly  arranged.  This  prindple  is  too  improbable  to 
reqaire  refntation.  Instead  of  endeayoring  to  solye  dif- 
ficuldesy  it  boldly  meets  them  with  a  dumsy  expedient. 
Improbable,  howeyer,  as  the  hypothesis  is,  it  has  been 
adopted  by  llacknight  It  is  our  decided  conyiction 
that  aU  the  eyangelists  haye  not  adhered  to  chronolog- 
ical  anangement. 

The  ąoestion  then  arises,  haye  aU  negUeled  the  order 
of  time  ?  Newoome  and  many  othen  esponse  this  yiew. 
** Chnmological  oider,**  saj^s  this  writer,  ''is  not  precise- 
]y  obaeryed  by  any  of  the  eyangelists;  John  and  Mark 
obscrre  it  most,  and  Hatthew  ne^ects  it  most."  Bish* 
op  Manh  supposes  that  Matthew  probably  adhered  to 
the  order  of  thne,  becanse  be  was  for  the  most  part  an 
cye-witness  of  the  ftcts.  The  others,  he  thinks,  neg- 
leeted  the  snocession  of  eyents.  The  reason  assigned 
by  the  kamed  prdate  in  fayor  of  Matthew*8  order  is  of 
no  weight  as  long  as  the  uupiraHon  of  Mark,  Lukę,  and 
John  is  maintained.  If  they  were  infallibly  directed  in 
their  oompositions,  they  were  in  a  condition  equally  fa- 
Tonble  to  ckromoiogical  narration. 

A  dose  inspeciion  of  Matthew'B  Gospel  will  show  that 
be  did  not  intend  to  mark  the  tnie  succession  of  eyents. 
He  giyes  ns  no  definite  eKpressions  to  assist  in  ammg- 
ing  his  matfrialw  in  their  proper  order.  Yeiy  fireąuent- 
ly  be  passes  from  one  occunenoe  to  another  without  any 
notę  of  time;  sometimes  he  emplo3rs  a  rt$rc,  sometimes  iv 
raic  rffupatc  ŁKityaic,  iv  intynt  rtf  rai^,  or  ip  iicdry 
rf&p^.  Rardyishesominnteastouse/icO^ij/upacel 
(xyii,  1).  In  short,  time  and  place  seem  to  haye  been 
mbonlinated  to  the  giand  object  which  he  had  in  yiew, 
Tiz.  the  Uyely  exhibition  of  Jesus  in  his  person,  works, 
and  di8ooiirBe&  In  pursoing  this  design,  he  has  often 
bfougbttogethersimilariactsandaddresBes.  Although, 
therefbre,  Kaiser  founds  opon  the  phnses  we  haye  ad< 
dooed  a  oonclusion  the  yery  reyene  of  ours,  yet  we 
belieye  that  Matthew  did  not  propose  to  follow  chrono- 
kgical  order.    The  oontrary  is  obyioualy  implied. 

Mark,  again,  is  stiU  morę  indeflnite  than  Matthew. 
£yen  the  gmeral  ezpressions  found  in  the  first  gospel 
are  wanting  in  hi&  The  facts  themselyes,  not  their 
tnie  snocession,  were  the  object  of  his  attention.  Chro- 
BologiGal  order  is  not  obaeryed  in  his  gospel,  exoept  in 
»  te  as  that  gospel  agrees  with  Lake'8.    Yet  Gatt- 


wiight,  in  his  /Tarmony,  pabUshed  abont  1680,  makea 
the  arrsngement  of  Mark  his  nile  for  method. 

With  regard  to  Lukę,  it  is  probable  that  he  intended 
to  arrange  eyerything  in  its  tnie  place,  becauae  at  the 
begtnning  of  his  work  he  employs  the  term  KaBiiric. 
This  word  is  often  referred  to  Bwxe89wn  ofeveni9^  with- 
out inyolying  time;  but  it  seems  dearly  to  imply  chro^ 
nohgical  succession  (compare  Acts  xi,  4).  Although, 
therefore,  Grotius  and  many  others  oppoee  the  latter 
yiew,  we  cannot  but  coindde  with  Beza  when  he  says : 
*^  In  harmonia  £yangelii$tarum  scribenda,  rectiorem  or- 
dinem  senrari  putem  si  in  its  qun  habent  communia, 
reliqui  ad  Lucam  potius  acoommodentur,  quam  Lucas 
ad  caeteros"  (oomp.  also  Olshausen,  Die  Echikeit  der  vier 
Canon.  Etang,  etc.,  i,  82-8, 8d  ed.).  We  may  therefore 
conclode  that  this  eyangdist  usually  follows  the  chro- 
nological  order,  espedally  when  such  passages  aa  iii,  1 
and  iii,  28  are  ooiisidered,  where  exact  notices  of  time 
oocur.  But  as  the  gospel  adyances,  those  expre8ńons 
which  relate  to  time  are  aa  iiidetenninate  as  Matthew*s 
and  Mark'8.  Frequently  does  he  pass  fh>m  one  tnmsac- 
tion  to  another  without  any  noto  of  time ;  and  again,  he 
has  lurdt  rwóray  iv  fii^  Tiav  »//<epćDv.  In  conseąuence 
of  this  yagueness,  it  is  yery  difflcult,  if  not  impossible, 
to  make  out  a  complete  harmony  of  the  goepeb  accord- 
ing  to  the  order  of  Lukę,  because  we  have  no  precise 
data  to  guide  us  in  inserting  the  particuiars  related  by 
Matthew  and  Mark  in  their  proper  places  in  the  third 
gospd.  All  that  can  be  detormined  with  any  degree  of 
probability  is  that  Luke'8  order  seems  to  haye  been 
adopted  as  the  tnie,  chronological  one.  Whether  the 
writer  has  deyiated  fh>m  it  in  any  case  may  admit  of 
donbt  We  are  indined  to  bdieye  that  in  aU  mhnde 
paiHeutan  chronological  arrangement  is  not  obser^-ed. 
The  ffeneral  body  of  facts  and  eyents  seems  to  partake 
of  this  character,  not  etery  ępecial  drcumstance  noticed 
by  the  eyangelist.  But  we  are  reminded  that  the  om- 
ngmnenU  o/dałea  is  disŁinct  ftom  chi-onólogical  arrange- 
ment, A  writer  may  narrate  all  his  facts  in  the  order 
in  which  they  occurred,  without  specifying  the  particu- 
lar  time  at  which  they  happened ;  or,  on  the  other  hand, 
he  may  mark  the  dates  without  arranging  his  narratiye 
in  chrondogical  order.  But  attention  to  one  of  these 
will  naturdly  giye  ńse  to  a  certain  opinion  with  regaid 
to  the  other.  The  morę  indeterminate  the  notification 
of  time,  the  less  probable  is  it  that  time  was  an  dement 
kept  before  the  mind  of  the  writer.  If  there  be  a  few 
dates  assigned  with  exactnesB,  it  is  tk  prenimjjłion  that 
the  trae  anangement  is  obsenred  in  other  parts  where 
no  dates  occur.  In  the  succession  of  eyents  Lukę  and 
Mark  generally  agree. 

With  regard  to  John'6  Gospel,  it  has  little  in  common 
with  the  rest  except  the  last  two  chapters.  It  is  obyi- 
ous,  howeyer,  that  his  arrsngement  is  chronological. 
He  carefiUIy  marks,  in  generał,  whether  one,  two,  or 
three  days  happened  between  certain  eyents.  His  gos- 
pd is  therefore  of  great  use  in  compiling  a  synopsis. 

It  thus  appears  that  no  one  gospd  taken  singly  is 
suiBdent  to  form  a  guide  for  the  Gospel  harmonist ;  nor 
is  he  justified  in  selecting  anj'  one  eyangdist  as  a  gen- 
erał guide,  modifying  that  single  nanatiye  only  as  ab- 
solutely  demanded  by  the  statements  of  the  other  three. 
He  must  place  them  all  together,  and  sdect  from  among 
them  as  the  exigencie8  in  each  particular  case  may  re- 
ąuire.  Of  course  he  will  take  definite  notes  of  time  as  a 
peremptory  direction  whereyer  they  occur,  and  in  the 
absence  of  these  he  will  naturslly  follow  the  order  of 
the  majority  of  the  Gospel  narratiyes.  Nor  in  this 
matter  is  he  at  liberty,  as  Stier  has  too  often  done 
{Worde  o/Jetuty  Am.  ed.,  i,  81),  to  prefer  one  eyange- 
Ust*s  authority  to  another,  e.  g.  Matthew  or  John  to 
Mark  or  Lukę,  on  the  ground  that  the  former  were 
aposłlet  and  the  latter  not,  for  they  are  all  eąually  in- 
spired.  Again,  the  same  liberty  or  discretion  that  is 
called  for  in  arranging  the  order  and  datę  of  the  acts 
and  joumeys  of  our  Lord  must  be  exercised  in  adjusting 
his  wordi  and  teachings ;  that  is,  the  simple  juxtaposi- 


HARMONY 


78 


HARMONY 


tion  of  pasnages  is  not  absolute  eridenoe  of  ooinddence 
in  time  and  immediate  connection  in  uttenmce  without 
some  exprea8  intimation  to  that  effect;  ao  that  incohe- 
rence,  where  palpable,  or  want  of  unanimity  in  thia  par- 
ticular  among  the  Gospel  reporta  or  aummarlea  them- 
aelrea,  reąuirea  the  harmonizer  to  exerciae  the  aaine 
judgmeut  in  the  adjustment  as  in  other  particulara. 
(See  the  Meth,  Qu.art.  Revtew,  Jan.  1854,  P-  79.)  With 
these  pointa  piemiaed  and  duły  obseired,  thero  is  no 
greater  difficulty  in  adjusting  the  four  acoounts  of  our 
Lord*8  life  and  labora  with  a  reaaonable  degiee  of  cer- 
tainty  than  there  would  be  in  hannonizing  into  one 
conaiatent  account  the  sepaiate  and  independent  depoei- 
tiona  of  as  many  honeat  witnessea  in  any  caae  of  law. 
The  only  real  que8tion8  of  seriooa  dispute  in  fact,  aside 
from  the  main  one  piesently  to  be  mentioned,  are  those 
of  a  piirely  cbionological  chanuiter  aflfecting  the  geneial 
datę  of  Chiist*8  ministiy  om  a  wkole,  and  the  particular 
sp<4  where  oertain  incidenta  or  disooiirsea  tranapiied; 
the  rdaJtioe  order  and  poaition  of  neariy  eyerything  la 
but  little  disturfoed  by  the  variou8  theories  or  yiews  as 
to  even  these  points.  Hence  is  evident  the  rashneas  of 
those  who  aasert,  like  Stier  (Pref.  to  Matt  and  Mark,  in 
Wordt  of  Jesus),  that  the  conatniction  of  a  Hannony  of 
the  Gospels  is  impracticable ;  for  in  the  very  aame  work 
he  forthwith  prooeeds  to  oonstruct  and  publiah  one  him- 
adf! 

"ź,  What  was  the  duiation  of  oor  Lord's  ministiy? 
Thia  ia  a  question  upon  which  the  opioions  of  the  leara- 
ed  have  been  much  divided,  and  which  cannot  be  aettled 
with  concluaive  certainty.  In  order  to  re8oIve  it,  it  ia 
neceasary  to  mark  the  different  Paasorera  which  Christ 
attended.  Looking  to  the  gospela  by  Matthew,  Mark, 
and  Lukę,  we  should  infer  that  he  waa  preaent  at  no 
morę  than  two :  the  flrst  at  the  time  of  hia  bq>tiam,  the 
aecond  immediately  before  hia  cnicifizion.  But  in  John*s 
gospel  thrw  Pa8sovers  ajt  kast  are  named  during  the  pe- 
riod of  our  Lord*s  ministry  ^ii,  13;  vi,  4;  xi,  65).  It  is 
tnie  that  some  writers  hare  endeavored  t(»  adapt  the 
gospel  of  John  to  the  other  three  by  tedudng  the  Pass- 
overs  mentioned  in  the  former  to  two,  So  Priestley, 
Yossios,  and  Mann.  In  order  to  accompliah  this,  it  waa 
conjectured  that  7rd(rxa,  in  eh.  vi,  4,ia  an  mterpolation, 
and  then  that  iopT/i  denotea  aome  other  Jewish  fe8tivaL 
Bishop  Pearoe  went  so  far  as  to  conjecture  that  the  «n- 
tire  ver8e  has  been  interpolated.  For  these  rash  apecu- 
lations  there  is  no  authority.  The  reoeived  reading 
must  here  be  foUowed  (LUcke*a  Commentar  uber  Johaoh- 
ne»y  8d  ed.  ii,  104).  In  addition  to  these  paasages,  it  has 
been  thought  by  many  that  another  Passover  is  leferred 
to  in  V,  1,  where,  although  Tea<rxa  doea  not  occur,  i)  iop- 
Tti  is  Nippooed  to  denote  the  same  feast.  But  this  is  a 
subject  of  dispute.  Irenieus  is  the  oldest  authority  for 
explaining  it  of  the  Pa88over.  Cyril  and  Chrysostom, 
howeyer,  refened  it  to  the  Feast  of  Pentecost,  an  opin- 
ion  approved  of  by  Erasmus,  Calyin,  and  Beza;  but  Lu- 
ther,  Chemnitz,  CaloWua,  Scaliger,  Grotiua,  and  Light- 
foot  returned  to  tlie  ancient  view  of  Irenseua.  Keppler 
aeems  to  have  been  the  first  who  conjectured  that  it 
meant  the  Feast  of  Purim  immediately  preceding  the 
second  Pasaoyer.  He  waa  foUoweil  by  Petau,  Lamy, 
D^Outrein,  etc  Cocceiua,  foUowed  by  Kaiser,  refeired 
li  to  the  Feast  ofTabemades;  while  Keppler  and  Pe- 
Uu  intimated  that  it  may  possiUy  have  been  the  Featt 
of  Dedicatioiu  Bengel  defended  the  opinion  of  Chry- 
sostom; while  Hug,  with  much  plausibllity,  endeavQr8 
to  show  that  it  alludes  to  the  feast  of  Purim  immedi- 
ately before  the  Paaaover.  The  latter  view  ia  adopted 
by  Tholuck,  Olshausen,  and  Clausen,  though  Greswell 
maintains  that  the  Pa8sover  is  meant.  It  would  occu- 
py  too  much  space  to  adduce  the  vaiioua  conaideradons 
that  have  been  urged  for  and  against  the  two  leading 
opinions,  viz.  the  Passov€r  and  the  Feast  ofPurifiu  The 
true  meaning  of  iopri}  (for  Łachmanu  has  lightly  omit- 
ted  the  article  from  before  it;  see  Tiachendorf,  A^ir^r. 
Test,  7th  ed.  ad  loc.)  is  still  indeterminate  (see  especial- 
ly  Alford,  Gr,  Test,  ad  loc).   To  ua  it  appeaia  most  piob- 


abk  that  the  moet  andent  hypothesia  is  correct,  al* 
though  the  circumstances  urged  against  it  are  ndthef 
few  nor  feeble.  The  following  aiguments,  however,  seem 
to  determine  the  ąuestion  in  favor  of  the  Passorer:  1, 
Had  any  less  noted  fe8tival  been  meant,  it  would,  aa  in 
other  cases  (see  chap.  vii,  2 ;  z,  22),  have  been  specified; 
but  in  the  present  caae  not  even  the  article  waa  leąmzed 
to  distinguiah  it;  whereaa  John  in  one  instance  only 
(vi,  4)  uses  iFd<fxa  to  ąualify  a  following  koprii,  whoi 
the  latter  is  thus  defined  by  tHóp  *ioviak*av,  2.  The  en- 
suing  Sabbath  {BttrrtcóirpmToc  of  Lukę  vi,  1)  can  only 
be  that  which  was  second  after  the  olfering  of  the  wave- 
sheaf,  and  first  aller  the  PaaBover-week,  and,  however 
interpreted,  showa  that  a  Fa8Sover  had  just  preceded, 
for  the  harvest  waa  j  uat  ripe.    See  Pa880Vkii. 

Sir  laaac  Newton  and  Macknight  suppose  that  jSm 
Pas80vers  intervened  between  our  Lord's  baptism  and 
Gnicifixion.  This  aaaumption  reats  on  no  foundation. 
Perhaps  the  tenn  iopriy  in  John  vii,  2  may  have  givea 
rise  to  it,  although  koprii  ia  explained  in  that  passage 
by  tnairomiyia. 

During  the  first  three  oenturiea  it  waa  commonly  be- 
lieved  that  Chriat'a  miniatry  laated  but  one  year,  or  one 
year  and  a  few  montha  (Routh,  lMiq,  Sacr.  iv,  218). 
Such  waa  the  opinion  of  Clemena  Alexandńnua  {8tro- 
mata,  i,  21;  vi,  11)  and  Origen  (de  PrmdpiiSj  iv,  5). 
Eusebiua  thought  that  it  oontinued  for  above  three 
years,  which  hypotheais  became  generaL  The  andent 
hypotheaiB,  which  confined  the  time  to  one  year,  waa  re- 
vived  by  Mann  and  Priestley;  but  Newcome,  with  more 
judgment,  defended  the  common  view,  and  refutęd 
Priestley's  arguments.  The  one-year  view  haa  found 
few  Ute  advocates  except  Janris  (Introd,  to  IłiśUny  of 
Church)  and  Browne  (Ordo  Sadorum),  It  has  been 
well  remarked  by  biahop  Marsh  that  the  Goapd  of  John 
presents  almost  iusuperable  obatades  to  the  opinion  of 
those  who  oonfine  Christ's  ministiy  to  one  year.  If 
John  mentions  but  three  Pas80vera,  its  duration  muat 
have  exccec1ed  two  years;  but  if  he  mentions ybtrr,  it 
must  have  been  longer  than  three  years.  In  interweav- 
ing  the  gospels  of  Matthew,  Mark,  and  Lnke  with  Ihat 
of  John,  the  uitenrals  between  the  PaasoverB  are  fiUed 
up  by  various  tiansactions.  Weie  the  number  of  these 
feaata  determinate  and  preciae,  there  would  be  a  generał 
agieement  in  the  fiUing  up  of  the  timea  between  them ; 
but  in  consequence  of  the  unoertainty  attachuig  to  the 
subject,  Haimoniea  aie  found  materially  to  difl^er  in  their 
modes  of  arrangement.  One  thing  ia  evident,  that  the 
modems,  in  their  endeavors  afler  a  chronological  dispo- 
sition  of  the  gospels,  adopt  a  far  more  rational  oourae 
than  the  ancienta.  The  latter  strangely  snppoaed  that 
the  first  dx  chapters  of  John's  Gospd  lelate  to  a  period 
of  Chri8t*s  ministry  prior  to  that  with  which  the  other 
three  evangeU8t8  begin  their  accounts  of  the  miradea. 
Thua  John  alow  was  supposed  to  nairate  the  events  be- 
longing  to  the  earlier  part  of  hia  ministry,  while  Mat- 
thew, Mark,  and  Lukę  lelated  the  tranaactiona  of  the  laat 
year. 

The  most  ancient  Hannony  oi  the  Gospels  of  which 
we  have  any  account  waa  oomposed  by  Tatian  of  Syria 
hi  the  2d  century,  but  it  is  now  lost  (see  H.  A.  Danid*s 
TaHanus  der  Apolo^,  Halle,  1887,  8vo).  In  the  3d 
century,  Ammonius  was  the  author  of  a  Harmony  sup- 
posed to  be  still  extant  Eusebius  of  Caesarea  alao  cmn- 
posed  a  Harmony  of  the  Gospels  about  A.D.  81  a.  In  it 
he  divided  the  Gospd  history  into  ten  canons  or  tables, 
aocording  as  different  facta  are  rdated  by  one  or  more 
of  the  evangeliBts.  These  ancient  Harmonies,  however, 
differ  in  character  from  such  as  bdong  to  modem  times. 
Thęy  are  tummariet  of  the  life  of  Chriat,  or  wdeaecf  to 
the  four  gospels,  rather  than  a  chronological  arrange- 
ment of  d^erent  facta,  accompanied  by  a  recondliation 
of  apparent  contradictions.  (See  Scrivener,  Jntrod*  to 
K  T.  p.  50.)  In  modem  timea,  Andreaa  Odander  pub- 
lished  his  Harmony  ofthe  Gospels  in  1587.  He  adopted 
the  principle  that  the  evangeUat8  oonstantly^  wnte  in 
chronological  order.    Comdius  T 


HARMONY 


łO 


HARMONT 


COMPARATITB  TABLB  OF  BIFFERENT  HARM0NIB8. 
NoTS.— Thls  Table  comprises  only  a  few  of  thoee  adUnstments  of  the  Gospels  (wbether  tabniar  or  In  flill).  wbleh 
bftTC  become  beat  known  In  America.  The  Jigures  refer  to  the  sections  as  they  are  unmbered  in  Strong'8  Hor- 
mony,  and  thetr  order  In  each  colnmn  showa  ihe  reUUHfe  position  aaslf^ied  by  the  seTeral  aathors  to  the  correspond- 
ine  eTents.  An  asteriak  [*]  poinu  out  a  marked  dlfference  ft-om  the  arrangement  of  that  work  in  the  partieulara 
ol  tny  event  or  paseage ;  an  obelisk  [t]  indlcatea  a  elear  repetition  of  some  of  the  prominent  incidents  in  another 
place:  a  donble  dagger  rt]  is  preflzed  to  tbose  sectlons  in  the  arrangement  of  whłch  the  majority  of  barmonizers 
•^indde ;  and  paranela  [I]  are  set  to  tbose  conceming  the  position  of  whłcb  there  is  little  or  no  dlspnte. 


Probdib 
Onhr. 

KVKNT. 
(nr  m  ranaPAL  PSAnrsn.) 

-? 

t 

ii 

£3 

-i 

0 

1 

"-? 

5^ 

P 

11 

2 

v« 

14 
15 

Te 

IB 

• 
110 
111 

i'is 

113 
lU 
115 
11< 
IIT 

1*18 
119 
120 

Itt 
122 
123 
124 
125 
120 
127 
t28 
129 

1*30 
131 

lis 

138 

1*34 
135 

130 

lis 

130 

140 

t4\ 

;; 

iii 

t4i 
144 
45 
140 
147 
148 
14» 
150 

iii 

60 

i» 
164 
(65 

t60 
57 

f.nVe*a  Pre&ce  

"i 
s 

20 

21 
92 

28 
24 
26 
20 
27 
28 

^ 
80 
81 

'82 
88 

M 
86 
86 
•46t 
87 

88 
89 

40 
41 

42 
48 
44 

46 
47 

48 
49 
60 

61 

'58 
54 
55 
66 
67 

1 
S 

"8 

4 
5 

"o 

to 

7 
'*8 

'io 

11 

18 
14 

15 
10 
17 

18 
19 
20 

■« 
22 
28 
24 
25 
20 

9ir 

29 

•28 

80 

81 

t82 
88 
86 
t45 
t87 
84 
85 

66 
66 

88 
89 

67 
58 
09 

44 

t46 
47 
48 
49 
50 
40 
41 
42 

t61 

68 
54 

"l 
2 

"8 

4 
5 

"o 

"7 

"8 
9 
10 
11 

12 
18 
14 
16 
10 
17 

18 
19 
90 

21 
22 
28 
24 
25 
26 
27 
28 
29 

80 
81 

82 
88 

84 
85 
86 

'87 

'88 
89 

'40 

41 

'42 

48 

44 

•45 

46 
47 
48 
49 
50 

'61 
•52 
53 
54 
65 
•66 
67 

19 
20 

'21 
22 

28 
24 
25 
90 
27 
28 
29 

'80 
81 

'82 
88 

'84 
85 
86 

'87 

'88 
89 

'40 
41 

'42 
48 
44 

•45 
46 

47 
48 
49 
60 

'Ól 

'68 
54 
66 
66 
67 

'1 

"8 

4 
5 

"7 
0 

*8 

*10 
11 
9 
12 

13 
14 
15 
10 

'1 

.. 
18 
19 
20 

21 
22 

28 
24 
25 
26 

27 

■» 

•28 
80 
•81 

'82 

t88 

'84 
85 
86 

•45t 
87 

'88 
89 
t67 
40 
41 

'42 
48 
44 

'46 
47 
48 
49 
60 

t'61 

*6B 

•64 

66 

66 

2 
1 

"o 

4 
5 

"0 

"7 

"s 

9 
10 
11 

'12 
18 
U 
15 
16 
17 

18 
19 
20 

'21 
22 
23 
24 
25 
26 
27 
2S 
29 

'80 
81 

'32 
88 

'84 
86 
80 

"87 

'88 
89 
67 
40 
41 

42 
48 
44 

t46 
46 
47 
48 
49 
60 

'61 

'm 

64 
65 

66 

"1 

"o 

4 
5 

"0 
"7 

"s 

'io 
11 

'io 

18 
14 
15 
10 
17 

"9 
18 
19 
20 
2 
21 
22 
28 
24 
25 
20 
27 
28 
29 

*80 
81 

'82 
88 

'84 
85 
80 

'37 

'88 
89 

*40 
41 

'42 
44 
44 

•46 
46 
47 
48 
49 
60 

'Ól 
•62 
68 
54 
65 
66 
67 

2 

1 

"9 
8 

4 
5 

"0 
"7 
"8 

io 

11 

'12 
13 
14 
15 
10 
17 

io 

19 
90 

'21 
9S 

28 
24 
95 
20 
27 
28 
29 

"ŚO 
81 
40 
82 
88 

84 
85 

80 

'Ś7 

*88 
89 
57 

'41 

'49 
48 
44 
46 
46 
47 
48 
49 
60 

t61 

'68 
54 
65 
66 

J<Au*8  Introdaction 

John*s  blrth  predicted 

8 

4 
5 

to 

7 
0 

"8 

*10 
11 

12 
18 
U 
15 
10 
17 

Annnnciatłon  to  M arr 

Marr  riaita  Elizabeth 

Blrth  of  John 

ióeeph*a  yHaÓu  '. .  *.  *. , '. '.  *. '. '. '.  *. .  *.  *.  *.!'.*."*.!!! . '. 

'ŃatiV{ty  of  Jesńa! !!.!...'!!!!!!'..'!.!!!!!!! 

Genealogies 

Circnmcision  of  Jeens 

Presentation  in  the  Temole. 

Vi«it  of  the  M  agi 

Flisrht  into  Bfirrot 

Bethlebemite  maasacre 

Retnm  from  Egjrpt 

BoThood  of  Jesns 

Mlsslonof  John ^ 

Baotlsm  of  Jesns 

is 

19 
20 

21 
22 
28 
24 
26 
20 
27 
28 
29 

'sb 

81 

82 
■88 

Temptation  of  Christ 

Jobn*8  testlmony 

Cbri8t*s  flrat  dlscinles. 

Water  cbanged  to  winę. 

Ylsit  at  Canemanm 

Traders  expelled 

Yiiiłt  of  Nicodemus 

Fnrther  testlmony  of  John 

John  imorisoned 

8amarit^n  woman , . , . ,  t  r  ^  r  -  -  - 1  r  r «  t  -  - . .  r . . 

TĆachlng  in  GaUleiBl  .*..!.!!.!!!!'.!.!!!!!!! 

Nobteman*B  son ,.,.,..  ^  •,  t  ^ » r , 

Drfltiffht  of  flshes. ......  T r ......... . 

Demoniac  cnred 

84 

86 

t80 

87 

88 
89 

40 
41 

Peter's  motber-ln>1aw ^ 

Firat  tour  in  Galilee 

Leper  cored 

Paralytlc  cnred 

Cali  of  Mattbew 

Impotent  man  cured. ". 

Bars  of  com  plncked 

!!!!'!!!!"!'.!'.!*.!'.*.?"""! 

42 
48 
44 

•45 
46 
47 
48 
49 
60 

Mai  titudes  cnred 

Apostlea  choeen 

Sermon  on  the  Monnt 

Wldow'8  son  raised 

Jobn*8  me^sage 

Kind  offices  of  a  woman. 

Second  tonr  of  Galilee 

Dasmonlac  cnred 

tBl 
•62 
63 
54 
66 
60 
67 

Dlaeonrse  on  nioTidence 

The  sowcr,  tarea, etc 

Parabłea  eznlained 

Croosing  the  lakę 

Dffinon laca  enred 

M attbeiv*8  feast 

HARMONY 


80 


HAKMONT 


COMPASATIVB  TABLB  OF  DIFFEREKT  HAKB(ONIES.-<am<{ntfe(Ł) 


FrobAble 
Ontor. 


KVENT. 

(n  n>  ntMCITAL  rBATCBSS.) 


is 


li 
H 


i«o 

161 
168 
168 
164 
166 

iw 

t6T 
168 
169 
t70 
I  Tl 
172 
173 
174 
175 
176 
I7T 

ra 

T9 

iio 

t81 
t88 


t84 
.t85 


87 
8S 
89 
90 
91 
92 
93 


t94 


95 


96 

1*97 


198 
199 

1100 


1101 


1102 
1103 


Jaini8*s  daaghter  raiaed 

Bllnd  men,  etc,  cared 

Second  rąjectłon  at  NazareŁh. 

Misaion  of  the  aposUea 

John  beheaded 

Five  tbonaand  fed 

Walking  on  the  water 

Discnsaion  in  the  aynagogne.. 


Third  paflBover 

Pharieeea  conftited 

Syro-Phsniciau  womau  . . . 

Fonr  thonaand  fed. 

A  sł{m  demanded 

Blina  man  cared 

Paaaion  predlcted 

TranafignratloD 

Dsmomac  cared 

Pasałon  agaln  predicted . . . 

Tai-money  provlded 

BiJiortattona  to  kindncaa.. 


Mlaalon  of  the  seyenty. . 
Departoro  firom  Galilee. 


Festiwal  of  tabernacles  — 

Adalteresa  pardoned 

Yioleuce  olfared  to  Chriat . 


Return  of  the  eewnty . . 
Love  to  on«*8  neighbor. , 

Yisit  at  Bethany 

The  Łord*8  Prayer 


88 

84 

86 

t86 


60 
60 
•61 
62 
08 
64 
66 
67 
66 

68 
69 
t70 
Tl 
72 
78 
74 
76 
76 
77 

•78 


t86 


Blind  man  cared 

Inve8tigation  by  the  Sanhedrim. 

FeatiTal  of  dedlcatlon 

Teaching  at  the  Jordan 

Lasarns  raiaed 

Resolation  of  the  Sanhedrim 

Teaching  at  Bphraim,  etc 


Inflrm  woman  cared. 


Seta  oot  for  Jenualem.. 


Warning  againat  Herod . 


DiaoourBe  at  a  Phariaee^a . 


The  tower  bailt,  war  madę,  etc.. 

The  prodigal  aon,  etc 

The  ikithleaa  ateward. 


98 
99 
100 


Direa  &nd  Łazaraa . 


101 


94 


95 


98 
99 
100 


101 
79 


Meaaiah  already  oome . . 
Uąjaat  Jadge,  pablican. . 


102 
108 


90 


102 
108 


90 


00 

teif 

62 
68 
64 
66 

t68 
67 
08 
69 
70 
71 
79 
78 
74 
76 
76 
77 


90 


t86 
62 
94 


95 


■98 
99 

100 


101 


102 
106 


87 


t86 


88 

84 

86 

t86 


67 
68 
09 
70 
71 
T2 
78 
74 
75 
76 
t77 


09 
00 
•61 
02 
68 
64 
66 

M 
67 
68 
69 
t70 
71 
72 
78 
74 
76 
76 
77 

•78 


84 
85 

t86 


98 
99 

100 


101 
79 


97 


98 
99 

100 
104 
106 
101 


87 


•96t 
•78 
88 
84 
86 
86 


t97 
•62 
94 
96 
98 
99 
100 


101 
t79 


60 
60 
•61 
62 
68 
64 
66 

'66 
67 
68 
09 

t70 
Tl 
72 
78 
74 
T6 
T6 
T7 

•78 
79 

80 
81 


84 

86 

t86 

*88 
87 
88 
89 
90 
91 
92 
98 


60 
61 
02 
08 
64 
66 


67 
68 
69 
70 
71 
72 
78 
74 
76 
76 
t77 


t79 


80 
81 


87 


78 
88 
84 


86 
6» 


102 
103 


96 
96 
102 
108 


102 

108 


68 


96 


96 
99 

100 


101 
•79 
80 
81 
82 
87 
88 


102 
108 


96 

'97 


98 
99 
100 


101 


102 
108 


02 
94 


90 
96 


96 
*97 


96 
99 

100 


101 


91 
92 

98 


MOS 
106 


HARMONY 


81 


HARMONY 


COMPARATIYE  TABŁE  OP  DIFFERENT  HARM017ISS.-^Ckmtihiied.) 


iioi 

1106 


IW 
1108 
1109 
1110 


111 
1118 


lis 

tU4 
1115 
1116 
1117 

I  lis 

1119 
I  ISO 

im 

i« 

na 

ittt 

1125 
I1S6 

im 

i» 

41S» 

1190 

ll» 
ll» 
133 
1134 
I19S 


1136 
tlST 
1138 


189 


140 

tui 

14S 
1148 
1144 
1145 
1146 
:i4T 
1148 
1140 


EYENT. 
(ni  m  TuamjkL  iSAirsaa.) 


DoctriDe  of  divorce. 
Children  recehred . . 
BIch  yoDDg  man. . . . 


Pawlon  again  predictod 

Ambition  of  James  and  John.. 

Bartimfens  cnred 

VJsitwltb:r 


Feast  at  Bethany 

Entrance  Into  Jenualem . 


Traden  agałn  ezpelled., 


Tbe  barren  flg-tree  cnrsed 

His  anthorlty  demanded 

Tbe  tribuŁe  ąnestion 

The  resorrection  gnestłon 

Tbe  sreatest  commandroent. . . 

Mesnah^s  paternlty 

Hierarchy  denonnced 

The  tddow*s  eift 

Interrlew  wiut  tbe  Greeks 

I>08tniction  of  Jenualem,  etc. . 
Flota  agalnst  Jesns 


Preparation  for  Faesorer 

Incidentsofthemeal 

A|;ony,  etc,  In  Oetbeemnne. 

Examination  l>efore  Annas 

Arralgnment  before  tbe  banhedrim . 


Accneation  before  Fllate.. 


Taken  before  Herod. . 
Sentence  ftom  Pilate . 

Saidde  of  Jndao 

Cmdfljdon  inddents. 
Barlalof  Jesns 


Sepnlcbre  gnarded , 

Preparation  for  embalming. , 
Release  from  the  tomb , 


Appearance  to  the  women . 


Report  ofthe  watch 

Peter  and  John  at  the  sepnlcbre. . . 

Appearance  to  Mary 

Appearance  at  Emmans 

Seen  by  ten  apostles 

Seen  by  eleven  apostles 

Seen  by  seren  apostles 

Appearance  to  all  the  diedples 

Ascenslon 

Condnslon 


I 


1^ 


104 
106 
106 


107 
106 
109 
110 


•91 
99 

tlll 
113 

in 

114 
118 


115 

lic 

117 
118 
119 
120 
121 

'123 
124 

125 
'126 
127 
•128 
129 
188 
130 


131 
132 


184 

185 


186 
187 
138 

142 
141 

189 


140 


104 

104 

106 

105 

106 

106 

91 

92 

93 

1*07 

107 

108 

108 

109 

109 

110 

110 

111 

tlll 

lis 

112 

114 

118 

118 

129 

122 

114 

116 

115 

116 

116 

117 

117 

118 

118 

119 

119 

120 

120 

121 

121 

•128 

•123 

124 

124 

126 

195 

126 

126 

127 

127 

•129 

•129 

ISO 

130 

188 

131 

131 

132 

132 

134 

184 

185 

135 

138 

, . 

137 

130 

186 

137 

138 

188 

tl41 

•142 

149 

141 

m 

189 

140 

140 

143 

143 

144 

144 

146 

146 

146 

146 

147 

147 

148 

148 

149 

149 

91 
92 
98 

104 
105 
106 


107 
108 
109 
110 


112 
122 
114 
113 


116 
116 
117 
118 
119 
120 
121 

123 
124 
111 
125 
126 
127 
128 
129 

180 

181 
132 
188 
184 
135 


186 
137 
188 
141 
142 


139 


140 


143 
144 
145 
146 
147 
148 
149 


li 


1^ 


106 


107 
108 
109 
110 


01 
92 

rs 

111 
112 


113 
122 
114 
115 
116 
117 
118 
119 
120 
121 

'123 
124 

126 
120 
127 

•129 
133 
180 

181 
132 

184 
135 


136 
137 
138 
141 
142 

140 
'189 


143 

144 
146 
146 
147 
148 
149 


104 
105 
106 


107 
108 
109 
110 


111 
112 
M22 
114 
118 


115 
116 
117 
118 
119 
■120t 
121 

*123 
124 

125 
126 

127 
128 
129 
183 
130 

181 
132 

134 
136 


1^ 
137 
138 

142 


'189t 


140 
141 

143 
144 
146 
146 
tl47 
148 
149 


104 
105 
lOC 


96 
1U7 
108 
109 
110 
89 
90 
91 
93 
98 
Ult 
118 
122 

1 118 

114 
115 
116 
117 
118 
119 
190 
181 

•123 
124 

125 
126 
127 
128 
129 

180 

181 
188 
183 
134 
136 


136 
137 
188 
141 
148 


'189 


140 


143 
144 
145 
146 
147 
148 
149 


104 
105 
106 


107 
106 
109 
110 


118 


114 
118 


116 
116 
117 
118 
119 
190 
121 
192 

•198 
124 

•111 
126 
126 
127 

•128 

•189 

180 

131 
189 
188 
184 
185 


186 
187 
188 


189 
141 
148 
140 


148 
144 
146 
146 
147 
148 
149 


104 
106 

106 


107 
108 
109 
110 


111 
118 


114 
113 


115 
116 
IIT 
118 
119 
190 
181 
188 
188 
124 

186 
196 
187 
■128 
129 
188 
180 

181 
188 

184 
185 


186 
187 
188 
141 
148 


189 


140 


143 

144 
146 
146 
147 
148 
149 


KetngeHca  wae  publbhed  in  1549.  Martin  Chemnitz^s 
liarmomf  was  fint  pnUished  in  1598,  and  afterwards, 
with  the  oontinoatioiis  of  Leyser  and  Gerhaid,  in  1628. 
Chemnita  stands  at  the  head  of  that  class  of  bannonists 
wfao  maintain  that  in  one  or  morę  of  the  four  gospels 
cbioDok^cal  order  bas  been  oeę^ted,  while  Osiander 
it  at  the  head  of  those  harmonists  who  maintain  that 
aU  tbe  gospdsaieanBngedmchionological  order.  Oth- 
er  harmoiłies  were  pnbUslied  by  Stephens  <1553),  Calvin 
(1568),Gidizt  (ie24),Gartwright  (1627),  Clnster  (1628), 
ligh^nt  (1664),  Cndock  (1668),  Cah>v  (1680),  Sand- 
bąŚn  (1684),  Bmiting  (1689),  Lamy  (1689),  Łe  Gero 
IV^F 


(1699),Toinard  (1707),Whi8ton  (1702),  Bormann  (1712), 
Rus  (1727-8-30),  Bengel  (1786),  Hauber  (1737),  BUach- 
ing  (1766),  Doddridge  (1739  and  40),  Pilkington  (1747), 
Macknight  (1756),  BertHng  (1767),  Griesbach  (1776,97, 
1809,22),Newcome  (1778),Prie8tley  (1777  in  Greek,  and 
1780  in  English),  Michaelia  (1788,*  in  his  IfiŁroduction), 
Wbite  (1799),KeU€r  (1802),  Mutschelle  (1806),  Sebaa- 
Łiani  (1806),  Planck  (1809),  De  Wette  and  Lttcke  (1818), 
Heaa  (1822),  Matthaei  (1826),  Kaiser  (1828),  Rddiger 
(1829),CUusen  (1829),Giesweli  (1880),  Chapman  (1836), 
Caipenter  (1888),  Reichel  (1 840),  Gehringer  (1842),  Over- 
beck  (1848),  Robinson   (Gzeek,  1846;  English,  1846), 


HARMS 


82 


HARMS 


Anger  (1851),TłBchendorf  (l851),Strong  (English,  1&52; 
Greek,  1854),  Strouil  (1858),  Douglas  (18Ó9).  Other  sim- 
ilar  worku  are  mentioned  in  Fabricitu,  liibłiotheca  Gra- 
ca, voL  iv,  ed.  Harles ;  Walch,  BibUotheca  Theołoffictij 
ToL  iv;  Michaelis,  Introd.  voL  iii,  cd.  Marsh ;  Hasc,  />«- 
ben  Jesu,  §  27;  Danz,  Wórterb,  d.  TheoL  Lii,  s.  v. ;  Dar- 
ling, Cycbpcsd.  BiUioffraph.  col.  1 19, 136, 761.  Sce  Bri/, 
and  For.  RerieWy  Oct  1856 ;  Jour,  Sac.  Liter.  1852,  p.  60 
są. ;  Wieseler,  Chron.  Synopsis  of  Gospds  (Łr.  by  Vena- 
bles,  Lond.  1864, 8vo).    See  Jusus  Christ. 

Harmfl,  Clatw,  a  German  revivali5t,  was  bom  at  i 
Fahrstedt,  in  HolsŁein,  May  25, 1778.  ile  showed  at  aii  J 
early  age  signs  of  a  deep  and  devotional  piety.  He 
madę  rapid  progress  at  scłiool,  and  at  eighteen  entered 
the  University  of  KieL  Young  and  ardcnt,  the  skepti- 
cal  spirit  of  the  tirae  could  not  but  bave  eome  effect 
on  him ;  its  influence,  however,  was  counteracted  by 
Schleiermachefs  I^den  ub.  d.  Reliffinn,  which  brought 
him  back  to  the  simpłe  faith  of  childhood,  from  whence 
he  never  afterwards  strayed.  In  1802  he  passed  his  ex- 
aroination  in  thcolog}-,  and  in  1806  was  appointed  dea- 
con  in  Lundcn.  The  famę  of  his  talent  as  a  preacher, 
and  of  his  devotion  to  pastorał  labor,  soon  spread  abroad. 
His  first  publication  was  Winter-PostiUe  (Kieł,  1808), 
which  was  foUowed  by  Summer  -  PostUU  (Kieł,  1809). 
Two  CatechitnUj  published  by  Ilarms  soon  afterwards, 
ran  through  many  editions.  In  181 G  he  was  appointed 
archdeacon  of  St,  Nicholas  at  KieL  In  t his  position  he 
was  at  first  highly  esteemed,  and  afterwards  bitterl}'  o}>- 
posed  on  account  of  his  so-called  pietism.  The  opposi- 
tion  against  him  culminated  at  the  occasion  of  the  ju- 
bilee  of  the  Reformation  held  in  1817.  It  became  daily 
morę  apparent  to  him  that  the  Church  in  Germany  was 
steadily  receding  from  the  principles  of  the  Keforma* 
tion  and  of  the  Holy  Scriptures.  He  therefore  gave 
out  that  he  was  prepared  at  any  time  to  Mistain,  deroon- 
strate,  and  defcnd  Luther's  95  thcses,  with  95  additional 
ones  of  his  own,  against  any  one  who  chos?  to  dispute 
with  him.  His  fir*t  point, "  When  our  Lord  Jesus  Christ 
aays  'repent,'  he  means  that  we  shall  conform  to  his 
precepts,  not  that  his  precepts  shall  be  conformed  to  us, 
as  is  dono  in  our  da^^s  to  suit  the  public  mind,"  was 
Btriking  at  the  very  root  of  the  then  wide-spread  relig- 
ious  indifference.  The  discussions  which  ensued  gave 
rise  to  a  vast  number  of  publications,  many  of  which 
were  very  bitter.  The  effect,  on  the  whole,  was  a  deep 
awakcning  in  the  Churcł).  The  theological  faculty  of 
Kieł,  which,  with  the  exception  of  the  celebratcd  Kłeu- 
ker  and  Twesten,  had  bitterly  opposed  Harms.  was  in 
alter  years  almost  exclusively  brought  over  to  his  side. 
His  publications  after  this  (showing  his  theological 
yiews  morę  fuUy)  include  the  folłowing,  viz:,  Predif/ten 
(1820, 1822, 1824, 1827, 1838,  1852)  i-Beliffionshandiun- 
gen  der  Lutheriichen  Kirche  (1839)  -.—Christliche  Glaube 
(1830-1834) :—  Vałenłnser  (1838) :— </.  Bergrtde  d.  Herm 
ilS\\):—d.  OJenbarunff  Johannis  {18U) :  —  Reden  an 
Theologie-studirende  (3  rola. :  i,  d.  Prediger ;  ii,  d,  Priesł- 
er;  iii,  d.  Pastor,  Kieł,  1830-34).  Many  beautiful  hymns 
by  Harms  may  be  found  in  the  Gesibige  f.  d.  gemein- 
schafiliche  u.f.  d.  einsatne  A  ndacht  (1828).  In  1841,  on 
the  2oth  anniversary  of  his  entering  on  his  pastorał  du- 
ties  at  Kieł,  a  great  jubilee  was  held  there,  and  a  fund 
having  been  formed  to  defray  his  trftvelling  expenses, 
he  was  named  "  Oberconsistorialrath."  His  eyesigth 
failed  him  a  few  years  after,  but  he  still  continue<l  writ- 
ing,  and  published  a  revised  edition  of  his  works  (1851). 
He  died  peacefuUy  Feb.  1, 1855.  See  Hanns'8  Selbst-bi- 
offraphie  {Jena,  1818);  Reuter's  Repertorutm  (1849); 
Baumgarten,  Eta  Denkmalf.  C.  Harms  (1855) ;  Her/og, 
Real-Enajklopadity  v,  567. 

HarnuB,  Louis,  usualły  known  as  Pastor  Ilarms, 
one  of  the  most  eminent  among  the  Lutheran  pastora  in 
Germany.  He  was  bom  in  Herrmansburg,  in  the  king- 
dom  of  Hanoyer,  about  the  year  1809.  His  father  was 
pastor  of  the  church  in  Herrmansburg  before  him,  and 
w«8  remarkaUe  for  the  stiict  disdpłkie  of  his  family.  I 


As  a  boy,  Louis  eToelled  all  his  comrades  in  wre8tlin|c, 
boxing,*and  other  athletic  sporta.  He  prepared  for  tlie 
university  at  the  gymnasium  of  Cełle,  completiiig  the 
course  in  two  years.  From  1827  tiłl  1830  he  studied  at 
the  Uni\'erBity  of  Gottingen  with  signal  ardor  and  suc- 
cess.  He  was  repelle<l  from  theology  at  this  time  partły 
on  aoeount  of  the  state  of  the  science,  partły  owing  to 
difliculties  in  his  own  mind,  deroting  himscif  to  mathe- 
matłcsy  astronomy,  pliilosopUy,  and  the  languages,  in- 
cłuding  tłie  Spanish,  Sanscrit,  and  Chaldee.  To  the  last 
he  was  an  enthusiastic  student  of  Tacitus.  His  conver- 
sion,  which  probabły  occurred  soon  after  learing  the 
univeTsity,  was  of  a  very  thorough  eharacter.  ^  I  have 
never  in  my  life,**  said  he,''knoM-n  włiat  fear  was;  but 
when  I  came  to  the  knowłedge  of  my  sins,  then  I  quakecl 
before  the  wrath  of  God,  so  tłuit  my  hmbs  trembled.*^ 
A  Christian  hope  soon  took  com}>lete  and  ever-increasin|c 
poBsession  of  his  mind,  and  in  1844  we  lind  him  engaged 
in  preaching  at  Herrmansburg,  begiiming  his  łabors  as 
an  assistant  to  his  father. 

With  the  settłcment  of  this  young  minister,  a  mighty 
influence  begau  to  go  fortli  from  the  lirtle  German  vii- 
lagę,  which  soon  changed  the  aspect  of  the  countni* 
around  him,  and  before  his  own  ileath  it  was  fełt  all 
over  the  worłd.  The  miuds  of  the  people  had  been  t)e- 
numbed  by  Kalionalism  or  by  a  dead  orthodoxy,  whicli 
vanished  like  a  cJoud  before  the  apostolic  ardor  of  Harms. 
All  in  the  neighborhood  became  at  once  regidar  attend- 
ants  at  church,  devout  obsei^^rs  of  the  Sabliaih.  and 
st rict  in  maintaining  family  prayer.  Young  H arms  hochi 
found  himsełf  to  be  virtuidly  the  pastor  of  a  region  ten 
miles  square,  containing  seven  vilłagc8,  which  in  an  in- 
credibly  short  time  he  brought  into  a  stale  of  working 
religious  activity. 

And  now,  having  regulated  affairs  immediateły  aroiiiKl 
him,  this  extraordinary  maii  began  to  fceł  the  care  of 
the  whole  worłd  upon  his  mind.  He  fełt  responsiblc 
even  for  Africa  and  the  East  Indies.  But  how  to  briag 
rhe  morał  force  of  łiis  lit  tle  German  \illage  to  bear  upon 
the  continent  of  Africa  was  the  problem.  The  result 
formed  one  of  the  most  remarkable  feats  of  spihtual  en- 
terprlse  ever  recordeiL  Harms  first  worked  ttirough  the 
North  German  Missionarj'  Society.  But  he  soon  be- 
came dissatisfied,  and  resolred  to  have  a  mitsiou  which 
shoułd  carry  out  his  own  ideas  and  l>e  under  his  owii 
controL  He  propoeed  to  select  pious  and  intelligent 
young  men  from  the  peasantry  around  him,  who  were 
ałready  masters  of  some  trade,  give  thcm  a  theok>gical 
training  of  four  yearą  in  łength,  and  then  send  them 
forth,  ordained  as  missionaries,  to  the  heal  hen.  Twelre 
young  men  presented  themsełves  at  once,  but  Harms 
had  not  the  means  of  educating  them.  His  best  friends 
łunted  to  him  that  he  was  a  lit  tle  out  of  his  scnses.  He 
then,  to  use  his  own  expression, ''  knocked  on  the  dear 
Lonl  in  prayer."  His  mind  had  been  powerfuUy  im- 
pressed  by  the  words  of  a  courtier,  spoketi  to  duke  George 
of  Saxony,  who  tiad  latn  on  his  death-łied  hesitating 
whcther  to  flee  for  salvation  to  the  Saviour  or  to  the 
pope.  "  Your  grace,"  said  the  oourtier, "  Straightforward 
is  the  best  mnuer.*"  In  a  few  moments  the  purpoee  of 
Harms  was  formed  so  completeły  that  no  doubt  ever 
again  occurred  to  him.  His  plan  of  action  was  struck 
out  at  once.  Without  ever  asking  a  single  man.  he 
praye<l  to  God  for  money.  Funds  poured  in  upou  him. 
He  built  a  łarge  ediflce  for  his  missionaiy  college.  Morę 
studenta  came  than  he  could  aocommodate.  He  prayed 
for  morę  money.  It  came  to  him  from  (iermany,  Rus- 
sia,  England,  America,  and  Australia.  He  erected  an- 
other  building.  The  fact  of  his  not  asking  any  money 
at  all  became  the  most  efficient  adrertisement  of  hia 
cause  which  could  be  madę.  He  caUe<l  hu  miasioii 
school  ^  Swimming  Iron."  Soon  the  first  dass  of  mis* 
sionary  candidates  graduated  and  were  ready  for  Af- 
rica, but  the  pastor  had  no  means  of  sending  them  there. 
^  Straightforward  is  the  best  mnner,"  said  Harms ;  again 
he  prayed  to  Ctod  for  counsel,  and  decided  to  build  a 
ship.    The  project  was  lather  original,  as  Henmanabaig 


HARMS 


83 


HARMS 


was  Ructy  miles  from  the  sea,  and  most  of  the  people  had 
Aerer  seen  a  ship.  Again  Hanna  prared  for  the  neces- 
aaiy  money.  Funds  came  as  asual,  and  the  ship  was 
built  and  launched.  As  the  day  of  sailing  apprciachcd, 
the  ńmple  łleirmansbui^ers  brought  to  the  ressel  fniits 
and  flowen,  grain  and  nieats,  ploughs,  harrows,  hoes,  and 
a  Christmas-tree,  that  the  missionaries  might  have  the 
means  of  celebrating  that  festiral  npon  the  seas.  The 
day  of  sailing,  Oct.  18, 18a3,  was  held  as  a  gala  by  the 
simple  people ;  bot  soon  news  came  that  the  ship  was 
lost.  ''What  shall  we  do?**  said  the  people.  ''Ham- 
ble  cMinelresy  and  build  a  new  ship/'  said  the  minister. 
The  report  proTed  untrue,  and  that  ressel  is  stili  pljing 
her  mianonaT^'  voyages  between  Hambuig  and  Africa. 
łlamibs  preacheis  have  alao  penetrated  to  Australia, 
the  £ast  Indieas  and  our  Western  Sutes. 

In  1854  Harms  f(?k  the  need  of  diffusing  missionar^' 
intelligence  among  his  own  countiymen,  and  aronsing  a 
morę  unirerral  interest  in  the  cause.  He  desired  to  es- 
Ublłsh  a  joumal  de\'oted  to  missions,but  his  friends  did 
not  see  how  h  could  be  published.  "Let  us  have  a 
printing-presB  upon  the  heath,'*  said  Harms.  At  once 
be  asketl  God  for  the  money,  and  it  reached  him  as 
iBiiaL  The  missionaiy  joumal  was  soon  established, 
and  in  a  few  years  it  attained  a  circulation  of  fonrteen 
thouaaiMl  copies,  oniy  two  periodicals  in  all  Germany 
haviiig  a  burger  edition.  It  stili  abounds  with  racy  let- 
ters  from  the  missionaries,  and  the  stirring  essays  of 
Hanna  formed  its  chief  aitracdon  until  his  death.'  He 
ako  established  a  missionary  festiyal,  held  annually  in 
June  in  the  open  air  on  LUneberger  Heath.  On  somc 
yean  ihis  festival  was  attended  by  8ix  thousand  people, 
iociudin^  strangera  from  all  parts  of  Euiope.  "  How 
enchanting,''  said  he, "  are  such  Christian  popular  festi- 
val8,  under  the  open  sky,  with  God'8  dear  Word,  and  ac- 
ooants  of  his  kingdom  and  prayer,  and  loud-«ounding 
hymns  and  tones  of  the  trumpet!"* 

The  peculiar  character  and  enormous  aroount  of  Pas- 
tor Harms^s  work  can  be  better  underetood  from  the  ac- 
coant  of  a  tnreller  from  our  own  country  who  spent  a 
Sabbath  with  him  in  the  autumn  of  1868.  The  de- 
acńption  which  foDows  roay  be  considered  a  specimen 
of  bis  nsual  Sabbath-day V  work.  After  speaking  of 
his  diurch  edifioe,  which  was  nine  hundred  and  serenty- 
ńve  yean*  old,  and  which  Harms  refused  to  have  pulled 
down,  oonsidering  its  antiąuity  a  means  of  influence,  the 
writer  prooeeds :  *^  Strangers  were  obliged  to  take  seats 
at  half  past  nine  on  Sabbath  moming,  in  order  to  secure 
thcm ;  scrrice  commenced  at  half  past  ten.  When  the 
pastor  entered,  the  rast  audienoe  rosę  wilh  as  much  awe 
aa  if  he  were  an  apostle.  His  form  was  henr,  his  face 
pale  antl  indescribably  solemn.  He  appeared  utterly  ex- 
hausted,  and  leaned  against  the  altar  for  support.  In  a 
Iow,  t remulous  tonę,  he  chaiitetl  a  prayer.  Without  look- 
ing  at  the  Bibte,  he  then  lecited  a  psalm,  commenting 
upon  e^*ety  rerse.  He  then  read  the  same  psalm  from 
the  Bibie,  by  the  inflections  of  his  voice  gathering  up 
and  impressing  his  previous  comments.  He  next  ad- 
ministered  the  ordiiuuice  of  baptism  to  those  infanta 
wbo  had  been  bom  aince  the  previous  Sabbath,  an<l  ad- 
dreased  the  sponsors.  AAer  announcing  his  texU  he 
gare  a  rich  expo8ition  of  it ;  a  prayer  followe<l,  and  he 
preached  his  sermon,  which  was  very  impressire  and  di- 
rect,  ihoogh  the  voice  of  the  preacher  was  often  shrill. 
After  anoŁher  prayer,  he  administered  the  Lord's  Supper 
to  aboot  two  hundred  persons,  one  tenth  of  his  church 
partAking  of  the  ordiiiance  eyerj'  Sabbath  day.  The 
female  coramunicants  were  dressed  appropriately  for  the 
occasion.  The  people  were  dismissed  after  a  8er\'ice  of 
tfaice  houn  and  forty  minutes  in  length.  After  an 
koui^s  interauasion  the  audience  assembled  again.  The 
pastor  redted  a  chapter  from  the  New  Testamenty  com- 
menting opon  each  vene,  and  then  read  from  the  book 
as  before.  After  singing  by  the  congregation,  he  cate- 
chise<l  the  audienoe,  waUcing  up  and  down  the  aisle, 
questioning  children  and  adults.  The  audience  seemed 
traosfoiroed  into  a  vast  Bible-dass.    This  senice  of 


three  hours'  length  doeed  with  singing  and  prayer.  At 
seven  in  the  evening  two  hundred  yiUagers  assembled 
in  the  hall  of  the  parsonage,  and  he  preached  to  them 
in  Low  German,  after  which  he  held  a  missionary  con- 
cert,  reading  letters  from  his  miseionaries,  dated  from 
Africa,  Australia,  and  the  United  States.  He  seemed  to 
have  his  band  upon  all  parts  of  the  earth.  Eridently 
the  congregation  felt  responsible  for  the  whole  world. 
At  the  close  of  the  senrice  he  shook  hands  with  each 
one  of  the  people  in  tum,  saying,  ^  May  the  Kedcemer 
bless  you."  At  ten  in  the  eyening  the  neighbors  ss- 
sembled  at  the  parsonage  to  join  with  the  pastor  in 
family  prayer.  He  reciled  from  the  Bibie,  commenting 
as  before,  and  offered  a  prayer  which  was  rich  in  devo- 
tion,  but  distressing  to  listen  to,  so  great  was  his  fatigue.'* 
Besides  these  enoimous  labors  on  each  Sabbath,  Pas- 
tor Harms  wrote  incessantly  for  his  mifaionaty  maga- 
zine,  published  a  large  number  of  books,  and  sent  about 
three  thousaml  letters  a  year,  mostly  to  his  missioiuuries. 
His  method  of  keeping  his  missionary  accounts  was  to 
take  what  money  he  got  and  pay  what  he  owed;  nor 
was  he  ever  troubled,  though  the  expense  of  his  mis- 
sions  was  about  forty  thousand  dollars  a  year.  He  ra- 
oords  a  hundred  instances  of  the  exact  amount  of  money 
reaching  him  at  just  the  time  he  wanted  it.  For  four 
hours  erery  day  he  held  a  leree  for  his  parishionen, 
who  consu1te<l  him  freely,  not  only  about  religious  sub- 
jects,  but  upon  even'thing  which  interested  them — the 
State  of  thcir  health  or  the  tillage  of  their  land.  So 
crowded  were  thcse  lerees,  that  often  a  stranger  waited 
four  days  for  his  tum  to  see  the  pastor.  The  indcpend- 
cnce  of  Pastor  Harms  was  singularly  maiiifested.  The 
king  of  Hanorer,  at  one  time,  knowing  that  his  eminent 
subject  was  in  the  city,  sent  a  high  oflicer  of  gorcm- 
ment,  with  ono  of  the  state  carriages,  to  inrite  him  to 
the  palące.  "  G ive  my  regards  to  the  king,"  said  Harms ; 
"  I  would  obey  his  order,  if  duty  allowed ;  but  I  must  go 
home  and  attend  to  my  parish."  The  oflicer  was  indig^ 
nant  as  he  delirered  the  message ;  but  the  king  said, 
^  Harms  is  the  man  for  me."  Though  a  rigid  monarch- 
ist,  the  pastor  often  preached  against  the  goremment, 
and  prepared  his  people  to  resist  it.  He  often  entered 
into  sharp  conflict  with  the  goremment  oflicers,  espc- 
cially  in  reganl  to  the  ob8er\'ance  of  the  Sabbath,  and 
was  reportcd  by  them  Bixty-flve  times,  but  escaped  un- 
hurt.  With  characteristic  boldness,  he  wamed  the 
churches  not  to  endure  unbclieving  ministcrs  in  the  pul- 
pit, although  the  ministers  held  their  placcs  from  the 
king.  He  defled  the  dcmocracy  as  well  as  the  court, 
and  publicly  adrised  them,  if  they  were  discontented, 
to  go  to  Africa  in  a  bodj'.  ile  was  veheraently  opposcd 
to  the  popular  amusements,  declaring  that  men  ^^acted 
themselres  into  heU  from  the  theatre,  and  danced  thcm- 
selres  int o  heli  from  t he  ballroom."  The  Calrinistic  doc- 
trines  and  the  Congregational  polity  were  objects  of  his 
marked  arereion.  He  declared  that  the  Baptists  who 
postponed  the  baptism  of  their  children  were  robbers 
and  munlercTs  of  those  children's  souls.  Nor  would  he 
ever  insure  his  seminary  buildings,  thinking  that  God 
would  protect  them,  and  he  had  an  idea  that  insurance 
against  accident  inrolred  a  ccrtain  defiance  of  Jehovah. 
When  he  catechlsed  the  congregation,  and  children  fail- 
c<l  in  the  exerci8e,  he  would  sometimes  punish  them  in 
public.  He  required  his  missionary  students  to  pcrform 
a  daily  task  of  manuał  labor,  not  only  for  economical 
reasons,  but  also  "  that  they  might  be  kept  humble,  and 
not  be  ashamed  of  their  work,  any  morę  than  Paul  was 
of  his  tent-making.*'  As  he  never  asked  from  any  one 
but  God,  he  had  a  riolent  antipalhy  to  beggars,  and 
nonę  were  ever  found  in  his  parish.  Almost  adored  by 
his  people  as  a  species  of  rural  pope,  he  maintained  the 
utmofit  care  and  watchfuhiess  to  preserye  his  own  hu- 
mility  while  breathing  the  atmosphere  of  their  homage. 
He  yielded  not  a  particie  of  his  activity  to  the  yery  last, 
When  he  could  no  longer  ascend  his  pulpit,  he  preached 
standing  at  the  altar;  when  he  could  not  praach  stand- 
ing,  he  preached  sitting;  when  he  could  no  longer  sit,' 


HAKNEPHER 


84 


HAROD 


he  prayed  that  God  would  take  him  away  as  a  buiden. 
He  (lied  on  the  14th  of  Noveniber,  1866,  at  the  age  of 
fifty-seven,  aiicl  waa  buried  amid  the  teara  of  his  people 
on  his  beloved  LUneberger  Heath. 

It  is  difficulŁ  to  fonn  aj  ust  estimate  of  this  remarka- 
ble  man.  The.  keynote  of  HannsV  character  was  his 
union  with  God.  Yet  so  rare  is  any  high  degree  of  this 
ąoality,  that  its  poesession  makes  the  inan's  character 
stand  original  and  alone,  and  it  seems  as  though  *'  one  of 
the  prophets  had  risen  again.'*  Another  worki  had  laid 
huld  with  a  stroog  grasp  upon  his  mind,  so  real  was  it  to 
him  that  he  appeared  to  walk  not  by  faith,  but  by  sight. 
He  Iived  among  us  Uke  a  being  of  another  raoe  detained 
here  in  the  body,  aod  acted  with  a  morał  insight  and 
directness  which  no  human  standard  can  comprehend. 
Yet  this  wonderful  spirituality  was  ofleii  marred  by  big- 
otry;  sometimes  it  boniered  upon  the  superstitious;  at 
times  his  apostolic  fervor  was  tinged  with  self-will,  and 
we  are  astonished  at  the  altemate  breadth  and  narrow- 
ncfls  of  his  mind.  He  madę  his  most  opposite  powen 
assist  each  other ;  to  carry  out  the  morał  intention  of  an 
aiigel,  he  brotąght  a  worldly  wisdom  which  no  one  could 
surpass ;  in  comprehension  of  detail  and  fertility  of  expe- 
dieuts  he  coukl  have  taught  the  ablest  men  of  business. 
His  spirituality  acted  upon  the  world  through  an  all- 
consuming,  ahiaost  morbid  actirity.  He  saw  nothing 
before  him  but  a  succession  of  duties,  yet  his  mind  found 
an  unconscious  delight  in  the  extent  and  yariety  of  its 
own  eflforts,  and  his  zeal  was  doubtless  enhancedby  the 
continual  joy  of  attempt  and  sucoess.  It  is  hanl  to  ac- 
quit  him  of  a  species  of  suicide;  in  spite  of  eyery  wam- 
ing  of  naturę,  he  overworked  himself  incessantly,  and 
pressed  on  to  the  heavens  whither  he  was  tending  long 
before  he  could  be  spared  by  the  world  below.  His 
amazing  spirituality,  the  closeness  to  another  sphere 
with  which  he  lived,  would  have  elevated  him  beyoml 
our  sight;  but  the  eccentricities  which  alightly  marred 
80  grand  a  character  showed  that  he  was  human,  and 
lowereil  him  to  a  point  nearer  the  sympathy  of  man- 
kind.  To  the  last,  the  world  must  stand  astonished  at 
the  morał  power  of  a  man  who  could  make  a  little  coun- 
try church  in  a  remote  part  of  Germany  ginUe  the  earth 
with  its  influence,  and  Harms  alone  isan  answer  to  the 
Saviour*s  ąuestion, "  When  the  Son  of  man  cometh,  shall 
he  find  faith  on  the  earth?**  At  interrals  God  giv<e« 
such  a  one  to  the  Church,  to  show  to  the  world  the 
spiritual  power  of  one  soul  włiich  is  really  in  eamest, 
Harms  has  Uved,  and  Germany,  Africa,  and  the  East  In- 
dies  have  felt  the  conseąuenće.  He  was  one  of  those 
blocks  from  whora,  in  earlier  ages,  the  Catholic  Church 
would  have  hewn  her  sainta  and  her  martyn;  he  was  a 
Protestant  Loyola;  had  he  left  the  world  a  few  centu- 
ries  before,  he  would  assuredly  have  been  canonized  as 
a  Domnic  or  St,  Francis ;  his  remains  would  have  per- 
formed  miracles  without  end ;  romantic  tradition  would 
have  sprung  from  and  twined  around  his  memory;  or- 
ders  of  priests  and  stately  cathedrals  would  have  bome 
his  name ;  and  thousands  of  devotees  migfat  to-day  be 
worshipping  at  his  shriue.     (W.  E.  P.) 

Harne^pher  (Heh.  Charne'pher,  ^tr^n,  perhaps 
snortr;  Sept,  'Api/a^,  Vulg.  Hamapher)]  one  of  the 
sons  of  Zophah,  a  chief  of  the  tribe  of  Asher  (1  Chroń. 
vii,  86).     B.C.  between  1612  and  1053. 

Harness  occurs  in  serenil  senses  in  the  Eng.  Tera. 
as  the  rendering  of  different  Heb.  words. 

1.  "IDC  ((Mor',  prop.  to  hmd,  as  it  is  generally  ren- 
dered)  b  sometimes  applied  to  the  act  of  fastening  ani- 
mals  to  a  cart  or  yehicle,  e.  g.  yoking  kine  (1  Sam.  vi,  7, 
10,  «tie")  or  hoiaes  (Jer.  xlvi,  4,  "hamess"),  ffearing  a 
chariot  (CJen.  xlvi,  29;  Exod.  xiv,  6;  2  Kings  ix,  21, 
"  make  ready"),  or  absolutely  (1  Kings  x\'iii,  44 ;  2  Kings 
ix,  21,  "prepare").  From  the  monuments  we  see  that 
the  hamess  of  the  Egyptian  war-chariots  was  composed 
of  leather,  and  the  trappings  were  richly  decorated,  be- 
ing stained  with  a  great  yariety  of  colors,  and  studded 
"with  gold  and  ailyer.    See  Chabiot.  | 


2.  In  the  old  English  sense  for  armor  (ptią  or  pT^3, 
m'9hek\  warlike  accoutrements,  elsewhere  "  armor^" 
"  weapons,"  etc),  2  Chroń,  ix,  24.    See  Aiaion. 

3.  In  a  like  sense  for  ')J'nd  (shifyan',  1  Kings  xxii, 
84;  2  Chroń,  xviii,  33),  a^ćoat  of  mail  ("  breastplate,** 
Isa.  lix,  17).     See  AitMoit. 

4.  "  Hamessed**  (D^^CCH,  chamuMhim',  from  »pn, 
in  the  sense  of  being  ./Serce  for  battle)  is  the  expression 
used  to  reprpsent  the  equipped  condition  of  the  Israel- 
ites  as  they  paa8e<l  out  of  £g>'pt  (Exod.  xiii,  18;  *<arm- 
ed,"  Josh.  i,  14;  iv,  12,  Judg.\-ii,  11),  and  seems  to  de- 
notę  their  onleriy  and  tntrepid  disposal  as  if  to  meet  a 
foe  (the  ancient  yereions  interpret  genenlly /it^^rmed). 
(See  Gcsenius,  /«ex.  s.  v.) 

Ha'rod  (Heb.  Ckarod%  ni^H:  Sept.  'Apdd  v.  r. 
'Apa(3),  a  brook  or  place  Cj^?,  a  spring  or  foutUain^ 
"  well,"  ScpU  irtiyi))  not  far  from  Jczreel  and  Mount 
GilUła  ("Gaead,''Judg.vii,3),  by  (b?)  which  Gideon 
and  his  great  army  encamped  on  the  moming  of  the 
day  which  ended  in  the  rout  of  the  Midianites  (Judg. 
vii,  1),  and  where  the  trial  of  the  people  by  their  moSit 
of  drinking  apparently  took  place.  See  Gideon.  The 
name  means  ^^  palpUaiwn,''  and  it  has  been  suggested 
that  it  originated  in  oonseąuencc  of  the  alarm  and  ter- 
ror of  most  of  the  men  who  were  here  tested  by  Gideoa 
(vcr.  3,  5) ;  but  this  supposition  seems  yery  far-fetched, 
and  the  name  morę  probably  arose  from  some  peculiar* 
ity  in  the  outflow  of  the  stream,  or  from  some  person  or 
circumstance  otherwise  unknown.  The  woni,  slightly  al- 
tered,  recurs  in  the  proclamation  to  the  host—**  Whoeo- 
ever  is  fearful  and  trembling  C^^H,  chared'),  let  him  re- 
turn" (ver.  3) ;  but  it  does  not  foUow  that  the  name  Cha- 
rod  was,  as  Prof.  Stanley  proposes,  bestowed  on  account 
of  the  trembling,  for  the  mention  of  the  trembling  may 
have  been  suggested  by  the  previously  exi8ting  name  of 
the  fountain :  either  would  suit  the  paronomastic  vein  in 
which  these  ancient  records  so  delight  llie  word  cha- 
red  (A.V.  "was  afraid")  recuTS  in  the  description  of  an- 
other event  which  took  place  in  this  neighborhood,  pos- 
sibly  at  this  very  spot— Saul's  last  encounter  with  the 
Philistines— when  he  "was  afraid,  and  his  heart  tiem- 
bled  greatly"  at  the  sight  of  their  fierce  hosts  (1  Sam. 
xxyiii,  5).  It  wm  sitnated  south  of  the  hill  Moreh, 
where  the  Midianites  were  encamped  in  the  valley  of 
Jezreel  (ver.  1),  and  on  the  brow  of  the  hills  oyerlook- 
ing  that  plain  on  the  south  (ver.  8).  As  the  camps  were 
not  far  distant  from  each  other  (compare  ver.  10-15),  it 
must  have  been  in  a  narrow  part  of  the  valley,  and  prob- 
ably near  its  head  (for  the  iuyaders  came  from  the  east, 
chap.  vi,  8,  and  fled  down  the  eastem  defiles,  chap.  vii, 
22).  Hence  the  position  of  the  present  Ain  Jalud, 
south  of  Jezreel,  is  very  probably  that  of  the  fountun  in 
question  (Stanley's  Smcń  <tnd  Palesf.  p.  884-^86).  This 
spring,  which  giyes  rise  to  a  smali  stream  tlowing  east- 
waid  down  the  wady  of  the  same  name,  is  evidently  the 
reprcsentatiyc  of  the  ancient  name  Gilead  applied  to 
this  spot  [see  Gilead,  2],  and  has  thus  supplanted  the 
other  name  Harod.  Indeed  it  is  probable  that  the  lat- 
ter  was  rather  the  name  of  a  town  in  the  neighborhood, 
sińce  we  find  mention  of  its  inhabitants  (2  Sam.  xxiii, 
25).  See  IlAitoDrns.  "  The  yalley  of  Jezreel"  referred 
to  is  an  eastem  aim  of  the  great  plain  of  Esdraelon, 
boonded  on  the  south  by  Gilboa,  and  on  the  north  by  a 
parallel  ridge  called  the  "hill  of  Moreh"  (q. v.).  It  is 
about  three  miles  widc.  See  Jezreel.  The  Midianites 
were  encamped  along  the  base  of  Moreh,  and  probably 
near  the  town  of  Shunem.  On  the  south  side  of  the 
yalley,  at  the  base  of  Gilboa,  and  nearly  opposite  Shu- 
nem, is  the  fountain  of  Ain  Jalud.  It  is  about  a  mile 
east  of  Jezreel,  and  hence  it  was  also  called  the  "foon- 
tain  of  JezreeL"  The  water  bursts  out  fn>m  a  rude 
gmtto  in  a  wali  of  conglomerate  rock,  which  here  forma 
the  base  of  Gilboa.  It  first  flows  into  a  large  but  shal- 
low  pond,  and  then  w^inds  away  through  the  rich  green 
vale  past  the  ruius  of  JBethsheaii  to  the  Jordan.    The 


HARODITE 


86 


HARP 


side  of  GOboa  ńses  over  the  fountain  uteep  and  nt^^d. 
Some  Yuive  thought  it  strange  that  the  Midianitei  should 
not  have  seized  on  this  fountain :  but,  as  many  of  the 
Israelites  probably  lurked  in  the  mountain,  the  Midian- 
ites  may  have  deemed  it  roore  pnident  to  encamp  in  the 
open  plam  to  the  north,  where  there  are  aLso  Tountains. 
The  Jerusalem  Itinefan'  aeems  to  indicate  that  the  name 
A  im  Jahid  (q.  d.  "Fountain  of  GoUath")  arose  from  an 
ancient  tndition  that  the  adjoining  raUey  was  the  site 
of  Da^id^B  rictory  orer  the  giant  (eii.  Wesseling,  p.  586). 
The  fountain  waa  a  noted  camping-ground  for  both 
Christiana  and  Saiacens  dnńng  the  Crusades.  William 
of  Tyre  calls  it  TubanUi  {Getta  DH  per  Francos,  p.  1087 ; 
Bohadin,  Vita  Saladini,  p.  68).  The  vaUey  of  JezTeel 
still  foniw  a  (arońte  haunt  of  the  wild  Bedawin,  who 
pefłodically  erom  from  the  east  side  of  the  Jordan,  as  in 
Jiidg.Ti,5:  "They  came  up  with  their  cattle  and  their 
tenta,  and  they  came  as  grasshoppers  for  multitude; 
both  they  and  their  camels  were  witłioul  number*'  (Por- 
ter, Htmdbookjor  Syr,  and  PaL  ii,  355 :  Robinson,  BUk 
Ra.  ii,  324)^— Kitto,  a.  v, ;  Smith,  s.  v. 

Ha'rodite  (Hcb.  Ckarodi\  "^n^n,  Scpt  'Apo^O,  an 
epithet  of  Shammah  and  Elika,  two  of  Davi(VH  heroeft 
i^  Sam.  xxiii,  25),  probably  from  their  being  natires  of 
Uarod,  a  place  near  the  fountain  of  the  same  name 
(Judg.  rii,  1).    See  Harorite. 

Haro'8h  (I  Chroń,  ii,  52).    See  Rkaiah. 

Ha'rorlte  (Heb.  CharoH\  ^"i^^T^,  prob.  by  errone- 
oos  tzanacription  for  '*7''^r!»  Ifarodile;  Sopthas  OaBi^ 
Tolg.  A  rorifea),  an  epithet  of  Shammoth,  one  of  Darid^s 
herocs  (1  Chroń,  xi,  27) ;  for  which  the  parallel  passage 
(2  Sam.  xxiii,  25)  morc  correctly  reads  Haroditk  (q.  v). 

ECar^OSheth  (Heb.  Ckaro'$heth)  of  tiie  Gentiles 
(S^ISn  riÓ*nn*  ^^rhnangkip  of  (he  ruUiom,  t  e.  city 
of  handicrafta-ZSept.  *Apt9ii*9  rwv  k9vwv,Yu\g.  J/aro- 
9tih  gewHum\  a  city  supposed  to  have  bcen  situated 
near  Hazor,  in  the  northem  parts  of  Canaan,  afterwards 
called  Upper  Galilee,  or  Galilee  of  the  Gentiles,  from 
the  mixed  races  inhabiting  it.  See  Gali  lek.  llaro- 
abeth  ia  aaid  \o  hare  been  the  residence  of  Sisera,  the 
genesal  of  the  armies  of  Jabin,'king  of  Canaan,  who 
Rigned  in  Hazor  (Jodg.  iv,  2).  Herę  the  army  and 
chariots  of  Jabin  were  marshalled  under  the  grcat  cap- 
tńn  before  they  inMided  Israel,  aiid  defiled  from  the 
northem  mountains  into  the  broad  batilc-ficld  of  Esdra- 
eloo  (ver.  13).  After  the  terrible  defcat  and  slaughter 
on  the  banks  of  the  Kishon,  to  this  place  the  fugttires 
of  the  army  retumed,  a  shattered  and  |)anic-Btrickcn 
remnant.  Barak  and  hia  rictorious  troo|XH  followed  thcm 
into  the  faatnesses  of  their  own  mountainis  to  the  ver}' 
gates  of  Haroeheth  (ver.  16).  The  ciry  is  not  again 
mentioned  in  the  Bibie,  nor  is  it  refcrrcd  to  by  Jose- 
pbtti^  Jerome,  or  any  ancient  writer.  It  y{»&  at  the  ex- 
tmne  of  Jabin^s  tenitoty,  oppoeite  the  Kinhon  (ver.  13), 
and  ałso  at  a  good  distaiice  from  Tabor  (ver.  14).  It  is 
aapposed  to  have  stood  on  the  west  coast  of  the  lakę 
Merom  (el-Huleh),  from  which  the  JonUn  isKues  forth 
in  one  unbroken  stream,  and  in  the  portion  of  the  tribe 
of  Naphtali.  Jabin^a  capital,  Hazor,  one  of  tho  fenced 
cśtiea  assigned  to  the  children  of  Naphtali  (Josb.  xix, 
86),  lay  to  the  north-west  of  it.  Probably  from  inter- 
mairiage  with  the  oonquered  Canaanites,  the  name  of 
Sisera  afterwards  became  a  family  name  (Ezra  ii,  53). 
Neiiher  ia  it  lirderant  to  allude  to  this  coinddence  in 
conncciion  with  the  morał  effccts  of  this  dpcisire  victo- 
ly;  for  Hazor,  once  "the  head  of  all  those  kingdoms" 
(Joah.  xi,  6, 10),  had  been  taken  and  bunit  by  Joshua; 
its  king,  Jabin  I,  put  to  the  sword ;  and  the  whole  con- 
federatłon  of  the  Canaanites  of  the  north  broken  and 
•łanghtered  in  the  celebrated  battle  of  the  waters  of 
Herom  (Josh.  xi,  5-14)— the  first  time  that  '*chariots 
and  honiea"  appear  iu  array  against  the  inrading  host, 
and  are  so  summarily  disposed  of,  according  to  divine 
comroand,  onder  Joahua,  but  which  8ub«equei]tly  the 
children  iA  Jtmeph  feared  to  iaoe  in  the  valley  of  Jez- 


reel  (Josh.  xvii,  16-18),  and  before  which  Judah  acttud- 
ly  failed  in  the  Philistine  plain  (Judg.  i,  19).  Herein 
was  the  great  difficulty  of  subduing  plains,  similar  to 
that  of  the  JonUn,  beside  which  Harosheth  stood.  It 
was  not  till  the  Israelites  had  asked  for  and  obtained  a 
king  that  they  began  "  to  multiply  chaiiots  and  horses"' 
to  themsclves,  contrary  to  the  expre8S  words  of  the  law 
(Deut.  xvii,  16),  as  it  were  to  fight  the  enemy  with  his 
own  weapons.  (The  flrst  instance  occurs  2  Sam.  viii,  4 : 
comp.  1  Chroń,  xviii,  4 ;  next  in  the  histories  of  Absa- 
lom,  2  Sam.  xv,  1,  and  of  Adonijah,  1  Kings  i,  5;  while 
the  climax  was  reache<1  undor  Solomon,  1  Kings  iv,  26.) 
Then  it  was  that  the  Hebrews*  dccadcncc  set  in !  They 
were  strong  in  faith  when  they  hamstrung  the  horses 
and  bunied  with  fire  the  charióts  of  the  kings  of  Ha- 
zor, of  Madon,  of  Shimron,  and  of  Achshaph  (.loeh.  xi,  1 ). 
Yct  so  rapidly  did  they  decline  when  their  illustrious 
leader  waa  no  morę  that  the  city  of  Hazor  ha<l  riscn 
from  its  ruins;  and,iu  contrast  with  the  kings  of  Meso- 
potamia  and  Moab  (Judg.  iii),  who  were  both  foreign  po« 
tentates,  another  Jabin,  the  territory  of  whose  ancestors 
had  been  assigneci  to  the  tribe  of  Naphtali,  claimed  the 
distinction  of  being  the  first  to  revoIt  against  and  shake 
ofT  the  dominion  of  Israel  in  his  newly  acquired  inherit- 
ance.  But  the  victor)'  won  by  Deborah  and  Barak  waa 
wcll  worthy  of  the  song  of  triumph  which  it  inspirod 
(Judg.  v),  and  of  the  proverbial  celcbrity  which  ever 
aftcrwards  attached  to  it  (Psa.  lxxxiii,  9,  10;  a  {uissage 
which  shows  that  the  fugitives  were  ovcrtaken  as  far  aa 
Endor).  The  whole  territor}*  was  gradually  won  back, 
to  be  held  iiermancntly,  as  ii  would  sccm  (Judg.  iv,  24); 
at  all  events,  we  hear  nothing  morę  of  Hazor,  Haro- 
sheth, or  the  Canaanites  of  the  north  in  the  succecding 
wars.  The  etymology  of  the  name  J/arothdh,  q.  d. 
"  wood-rułtwffjt,**  joined  with  the  above  facts,  may  jus- 
lify  us  in  locnting  the  city  on  the  upland  plains  of  Naph- 
tali, probably  on  one  of  those  ruin-crowned  cminences 
still  cxi8ting,  from  which  the  mother  of  Sisera,  looking 
out  from  hcr  lattice<l  window,  could  see  far  along  that 
road  by  which  she  expect«d  to  see  hcr  Fon  return  in  tri- 
umph (Judg.  V,  28).  Deborah,  in  her  beautiful  ode, 
doubtlcss  dcpicted  the  true  features  of  the  fcene.  Rcm- 
nants  of  the  old  foreata  of  oak  and  terebuith  still  wave 
here  over  the  mins  of  the  ancient  citiea,  and  traveller8 
may  see  the  black  tents  of  the  Araba^fit  rcprescnta- 
tives  of  the  Kcnites  (iv,  17) — pitched  beneath  their 
shadc  (Porter,  UaiuJbookfor  Syr,  and  Palesł.  ii,  442  sq. ; 
Stanley,  Jeicish  Church^  i,  859).— Kitto,  a.  v. ;  Smith,  s. 
V.  Schwarz  {PaUstine,  \\  184)  thinks  it  identical  with 
the  village  Girth,  sitiuitcd  on  a  high  mount  one  £ng- 
lish  mile  west  (on  Zimmerman's  Afap  north-west)  of 
Jacob'8  bridge  across  the  Jordan,  and  nearly  destroy- 
ed  by  an  earthquake  in  1837.  Dr.  Thomson,  howevcr, 
who  gives  a  vivid  description  of  the  geographical  feat- 
ures of  Barak^s  victory  {Land  and  Book,  ii,  142  sq.),  re- 
gards  the  site  as  that  of  the  present  village  Ilaroihith 
(a  name,  according  to  him,  giving  the  exact  Arabie 
form  of  ihe  Hebrew),  an  enormous  double  mound  or  teU 
along  the  Kishon,  about  eight  miles  from  Alcgiddo,  cov- 
ered  with  the  remains  of  old  walls  and  buildings. 

Haip  is  the  rendering  in  the  Auth.y€r8.  of  the  fól- 
lowing  terros  in  the  original :  usually  *^'iS3,  hinnor* 
(whence  the  (Jreek  lawpa),  the  lyre  or  cylhara  (inva- 
riably  rendere<l  "  harp"),  N.  Test,  KAdpa  (1  Cor.  xiv,  7; 
Rev.  V,  8;  xiv,  2;  xv,  2),  whaice  the  verb  ri^apt^ui  (1 
Cor.  xiv,  7 ;  Rev.  xiv,  2),  and  the  compound  noun  jri^a- 
p</#(^óc  ('*harper,"Rev.xiv,2;  xviii,  22);  elscwhcre  only 
of  the  Chal<L  OHn-^p,  htharot'  (tcxt  of  Dan.  iii,  5, 7, 10, 
15),  or  Oi^^T^pjkafhros'  (margin),from  the  lat  ter  Greek 
term.     See  Musie. 

The  "  harp'*  was  Da>ńd*s  favorite  instrument,  on  which 
he  was  a  proficient  (see  Drcschler,  J)e  cilhara  Datid^ 
Lips.  1712 ;  bIm)  in  Ugolino,  xxxii).  It  probably  did  nut 
cssentially  dilTer  from  the  modem  Arabie  cifhere  (Nie- 
buhr,  Trav,  i,  177,  pi.  26 ;  DfJtcripf,  de  tEgyptef  xvii,  365, 
pL  BB,  fig.  12, 13).— Winer,  ii,  124.     See  Davii>. 


HABP 


86 


HARP 


Modem  Egyptian  nerrormer  oa  Łbe  Oud  or  Lale. 
(From  Lane.) 

Geseniiis  iiiclines  to  the  oplnion  that  ^iSS  is  derived 
from  *\}2,  kanar' ,  **  tui  unused  onomatopoetic  root  which 
roeans  to  give  foith  a  tremnlous  and  stridulous  soutid, 
likc  that  of  a  string  when  touche<l."  The  kirmor  was 
the  iiational  instrument  of  the  Hebrews,  and  was  well 
known  throughout  Asia.  There  can  be  little  doubt  that 
it  was  the  earliest  instnimcnt  with  which  maii  was  ac- 


Ancient  ^yptian  Lyres.    ^,  Id  the  Leyden  CollectioD ;  8, 
In  the  Berlin  Collectiou. 

quaintcd,  as  the  writer  of  the  Pentatench  assigns  its  in- 
yention,  together  with  that  of  the  SJ^ł^,  vyab*j  incor- 
rcctly  translated  "organ"  in  the  A.V,,  to  the  antedilu- 
vian  period  (Gen.  iv,  21).  Kalisch  {llisł,  and  Crit.  Com, 
on  the  Old  Test.)  considers  kiimor  to  stand  for  the  whole 
class  of  stringcd  iustrumcnts  {neginotk),  as  itgab-,  says  hc, 
"is  the  type  of  all  wind  instruments."  Writers  who 
connect  the  Kivvpa  with  Kiwpóc  (waUinff)^  Kirupoftai 
(to  lament)  j  conjecturc  that  this  instrument  was  only  em- 
ployed  by  the  Oreeks  on  occasions  of  sorrow  and  distress. 
If  this  were  the  case  with  the  Greeks,  it  was  far  differ- 
cnt  with  the  Hebrews,  amongst  whom  the  kinnor  seryed 
os  an  accompaniment  to  songs  of  checrfulness  and  mirth, 
as  well  as  of  praise  and  thanksgiring  to  the  supremę 
licing  (Gen.  xxxi,  27 ;  1  Sam.  x%'i,  23 ;  2  Chroń,  xx,  28 ; 
l*j»a.  xxxiii, 2),  and  was  very  rarely  uscd,  if  cver,  in  times 
of  prirate  or  natioiial  affliction.  The  Jcwish  bard  linds 
no  employment  for  the  kinnor  during  the  Babylonian 
captivity,  but  describes  it  as  put  aside  or  suspeiided  on 


OŁhcr  Forms  of  Aucient  Egyptian  Harps. 


the  willows  (Psa.  cxxxvii,  2) ;  and  in  like  manner  Job*a 
harp  '*  is  chaiiged  into  mounung"  (xxx,  31)  while  the 
hand  of  grief  pressed  heavily  upon  liim.  The  passage 
*'  my  bowels  shall  sound  like  a  liarp  for  Moab"  (Isa.  XYiy 
11)  has  im  pressed  some  liiblical  critics  with  the  idea 
that  the  kinnor  had  a  lugubrious  sound;  but  this  is  an 
error,  sińce  "HSfr^  "llSSa  refers  to  the  ribration  of  tke 
chordsj  and  not  to  the  sound  of  the  instrument  (Gesen. 
and  Hitzig,  in  Commmt.). 

Touching  the  shapc  of  the  kinnor^  a  great  difference 
of  opiniou  prerails.  The  author  o{  ShiUe  Haggibhorim 
(c.  6)  describes  it  as  resembling  the  modem  harp ;  Pfeir> 
fer  gives  it  the  form  of  a  guitar ;  and  SL  Jerome  declan» 
that  it  resembled  in  shape  the  Greek  lettcrdle//tf  (quoted 
by  Joel  Brill  in  the  ])rcface  to  MendeI.ssohn*8  Psalmt\ 
Josephus  records  {Ant,  vii,  12,  3)  that  the  Hmor  hacf 
ten  striiigs  (compare  Theotlorct,  Qucest,  34  on  1  Kings), 
and  that  it  was  piayed  on  with  the  plectarum ;  others 
assłgn  to  it  twenty-four;  and  in  the  Shilte  Haggtbborbn 
it  is  sald  to  have  had  forty-«even.  Jo8ephu8'8  state- 
ment,  howev€r,  ought  not  to  be  received  as  conclu«ive, 
as  it  is  in  open  contradictton  to  what  is  set  forth  in  the 
Ist  book  of  Samuel  (xvi,  23 ;  xviii,  10),  that  David  piay- 
ed on  the  kinnor  with  his  hand,  As  it  is  reasonable  to 
suppose  that  there  was  a  smaller  and  a  larger  Aimio;-,  iii- 
asmuch  as  it  was  soraetimes  piayed  by  the  IsracUtes 
whilst  walking  (1  Sam.  x,  5),  the  opinion  of  Munk— "On. 
jouait  peut-^tre  des  deux  maniercp,  suivant  les  dimcn- 
sions  de  rinstrumcnt"— is  well  entitled  to  consideration. 
The  Talmułl  {Berachoth)  has  preserved  a  curious  tradi- 
tion,  to  the  efTect  that  ovcr  the  bed  of  DaWd,  facing  the 
north,  a  kinnor  was  suspended,  and  that  when  at  mid- 
night  the  north  wind  touched  the  chords  they  yibrated, 
and  produccd  musical  sounds. 


Yariona  Ancieiit  Egyption  flpures  of  Lyrcs.  1,  2,  piayed 
withont,  und  3,  4,  with  the  plectrum;  4  is  eupposed  Ło 
be  the  Hebrew  lyre. 

The  r'^r:3»n  ir  ^13D— "harpon  the  Sheminith* 
(1  Chroń,  xv,  21) — was  so  called  from  its  eight  stringn. 
Many  leamed  writers,  including  the  author  of  SkUtm 
Ilaggibborim^  identify  the  word  "sheminith"'  with  the 
octave ;  but  it  would  indeed  be  rash  to  conclude  that  the 


Ancient  grand  Egyptian  Harps. 


HARP 


61 


HARPHIUS 


aodent  Hefarews  iinderstood  the  octave  in  preciselj  the 
senee  in  which  it  is  employed  in  modem  times.  See- 
SiiBMiNiTH.  The  Bkill  of  the  Jewa  on  the  kirmor  ap- 
peazs  to  have  reached  its  highest  point  of  perfection  in 
the  age  of  David,  the  eifect  of  who«e  performances,  as 
well  as  of  thoee  hy  the  members  of  the  "  schools  of  the 
prophets,**  are  desciibed  as  truły  maryellous  (compare  1 
Sam.  X,  5 ;  xvi,  23 ;  and  xix,  20).— Smith,  s.  v. 

Two  tnstrwnents  of  the  lyre  spedes  are  delineated  on 
a  baas>relief  of  the  Assyrian  monuments,  representing 
the  return  of  a  monarch  celebrated  by  a  procession  of 
mostclana  (Layard,  Nmeveh  and  Bab,  p.  888  eą.).    The 


Ancienc  Assyrian 
Lyre. 


Ancient  Assyrian  Late  and  Harp. 
ancient  Babylonian  instrument  b  probably  that  repre- 
sented  in  a  single  instancc  on  the  Ass^nrian  monuments 
at  Khorsabad,  depicting  three  short-bearded  performera 
on  the  lyre  ushered  into  the  great  chamber  by  twd  eu- 
nuchs.  The  musicians  are  clod  in  a  short  tunic  held 
last  by  a  girdle,  and  their  hair  is  drawn  back,  and  termi- 
nates  abore  the  shoulders  in  a  eingie  row  of  curls.  They 
proceed  Mrith  measured  i^tep,  singing  and  twanging  their 
Ijrres,  which  are  suspended  by  a  broad  band  passing  over 
the  right  nhoulder.  The  instrument  itself  somewhat  re- 
scmblcs  the  Greek  lyre:  it  has  a 
8quare  body  and  upiight  sides,  the 
latter  being  connected  by  a  cross- 
bar,  to  which  are  fixed  stńngs  that 
seem  to  have  been  rather  numer- 
ouSffor  we  can  count  eight  at  least, 
and  in  the  part  that  is  corroded 
away  there  is  room  for  three  or  four 
morę.  £xactly  similar  instniments 
are  now  seen  in  Nubia  and  Dongo- 
la ;  and  the  modę  of  playing  is  that 
the  right  hand  holds  a  short  plectrum  to  strike  the  in- 
tenrala,  while  the  left  is  used  to  stop  and  twang  the 
cords  (Bonomi's  Nmtvth,  p.  187). 

Harps  or  guitars  are  constantly,  in  the  Holy  Scrip- 
tures,  Instruments  of  joy.  They  are  mentioned  in  very 
sncient  times  as  musical  Instruments,  used  both  by  Jcws 
and  Gentiles,  and  their  employmeiit  in  the  Tempie  wor- 
ałiip  freąuently  occurs.  Moses  has  named  their  original 
inreotor  in  Gen.  iv,  21,  viz.  Jubal;  and  in  Gen.  xxxi, 
27,  Laban  says  to  Jacob, "  Why  did  you  not  tell  me,  that 
I  might  hav<».  seut  you  away  with  mirth  and  songs,  with 
tabret  and  with  karpf^  Eren  in  that  very  ancient 
writing,  the  book  of  Job  (xxi,  12),  that  patriarch,  speak- 
ing  of  the  prosperity  of  the  wicked,  aays,  "They  Uke 
the  timbrel  and  harp,  and  rejoice  at  the  sound  of  the 
ofgan.'*  So,  when  complaining  of  his  own  contUtion 
(xxx,31),he  says,  "My  harp  alao  is  tumed  into  moium- 
ing,  and  my  organ  to  the  roice  of  Ihem  that  weep." 
Isai&h  speaks  of  the  harp  under  the  same  character,  as 
an  instrument  of  joy  (xxiv,  8).  Divine  subjects  used 
to  be  brought  forward  with  the  aocompaniments  of  the 
harp  (Psa.  xlix,  5),  and  the  high  praises  of  God  were  so 
celebrated  (Psa.  xxxiii,  2 ;  lxiii,  4 ;  lvii,  8 ;  see  also  Psa. 
lxxi,  22,  23;  xcii,  4,  5,  6;  xcviii,  6;  cxh-ii,  7;  cl,  3). 
That  harps  are  used  to  celebrate  the  praises  of  heroes  is 
well  known.  Harps,  in  Solomon*s  day,  were  madę  of 
the  almug-tree,  as  our  translators  have  it  (1  Kings  x, 
1 1, 12).  They  were  oflen  gilded,  and  hence  called  gold- 
en  harps  (Rev.  v,  8).  A  harp  of  eight  stringa  is  men- 
tkmed  (1  Chroń,  xv,  21),  called  in  our  ver8ion  "harp 
OD  the  Sheminith."  But  amongst  the  Greeks  it  had,  for 
Łhe  most  part,  8evea  strings.    Joeephus  {Ant,  vii,  12) 


describes  a  harp  of  ten  strings.  The  distinct  sounds  ut- 
tered  by  tliese  strings  or  chords  are  alluded  to  by  Paul 
in  1  Cor,  xiv,  7.  Its  soothing  effect  was  exemplified  in 
calming  down  the  furious  spirit  of  Saul  (1  Sam.  xyi,  17, 
24;  xviii,  9;  xix,  9).  The  spirit  of  prophecy  appears 
to  have  been  excited  by  instrumental  musie  of  this  kind 
(2  Kings  iii,  15).  Harpers  held  the  instrument  in  the 
hand,  or  placed  it  on  a  piUar,  or  sal  down  by  a  river 
side  (Ovid,  Fasti,  ii,  115).  Sometimes  they  suspended 
them  from  trees,  to  which  there  is  an  allusion  in  Psa. 
cxxxvii,  1,  2.  The  harp  was  usetl  in  processions  and 
public  tńumphs,  in  worship  and  the  ofRces  of  religion, 
and  was  sometimes  accompanicd  with  dancing  (Psa. 
cxlix,  8).  They  were  alao  used  after  successfid  battles 
(see  2  Chroń,  xx,  28 ;  1  Mace.  xiii,  51).  Isaiah  alludes 
to  this  custom  (xxx,  32).  So  in  the  victory  of  the  Lamb 
(Rev.  xiv,  1,2):  "I  heanl  the  voice  of  harpers  harping 
with  their  harps;"  the  Church  in  heaven  being  repre- 
sented  as  compoeing  a  grand  chorus,  in  celebration  of 
the  triumphs  of  the  Redeemer.  At  solemn  feasts,  and 
especially  of  the  nuptial  kind,  harps  were  employed. 
To  this  the  prophet  Isaiah  alludes  (v,  11, 12).  The  use 
of  harps  in  worship  has  alrcady  been  adverted  to,  and 
that  the  heathcn  employed  them  on  such  occasions  ap- 
pears from  Dan.  iii,  5,  7,  15.  "  Harps  of  God"  (Rev. 
xv,  2)  are  either  a  Hebraism  to  show  their  excellence, 
as  the  addition  o/  God  often  signifies  (the  most  excel- 
lent  things  in  their  kind  being  in  the  Scriptiires  said  to 
be  of  God),  as  a  prince  of  (lOd  (Gen.  xxiii,  6,  in  the 
original),  the  mountains  of  God  (Psa.  xxxvi,  6,  in  the 
original),  cedars  of  God  (Psa.  lxxx,  11,  in  the  original), 
and  the  like;  or  else  they  roean  harps  given  as  from 
God ;  or  harps  of  God  may  be  harps  used  in  the  serA^ice 
of  God,  in  opposition  to  harps  coromon  and  profane  (i 
Chroń,  xvi,  42;  2  Chroń,  vii,  6).— Wemyss,  s.  v. 

Harphius,  IIenri,  a  Flemish  mystic,  was  bom  at 
Erp  (whence  hc  is  sometimes  called  also  Erpius  or  Er- 
pen),  in  Brabant,  towards  the  beginning  of  the  15th 
centurj'.  Ho  cntered  the  order  of  St.  Francis,  in  which 
he  soou  bccame  distingiiislied  lor  hb  leaming,  particu- 
larly  in  mystical  iheology.  He  attained  the  highest 
dignities  of  the  order,  and  succeeded  in  restoring  the  dis- 
cipline  in  8everal  convcnts  of  gray  frir.rs  where  it  had 
been  relaxed.  Hc  died  at  wiechlin  Feb.  22, 1478.  The 
Franciscans  couni  him  among  the  bleased,  yct  Bossuet 
seeras  to  havc  considcred  him  only  as  an  euthusiast  and 
visionar}-.  He  wrote  Le  Direcfoiie  des  Confemplałifs 
(first  published  in  Low  Dutch,  then  in  Latin  by  Blome- 
ven,  under  the  title  Diredorium  attreum  Coniempiałiv<h- 
rum  (Ologne,  1513, 8vo,  Antw.  1513, 12mo) ;  there  are 
generally  three  othcr  works  of  Harphius  published  with 
it:  Tractalus  de  Ejfusione  Cordiś:— Modus  leffendi  rosa- 
rium  Virginis  Maria :— Remedia  contra  Disłractiones, 
The  Diredorium  aureum  was  republished  with  commen- 
taries  and  corrections  (Paris,  without  datę,  12mo;  Co- 
logne,1527,12mo;  1611, 16mo;  1045, fol.;  Antwcrp,  1536, 
12mQ;  Cologne,  1555, fol. ♦  Romę,  1 585, 4to;  Brescia,  1601, 
4to ;  translated  inttf  Freuch  by  Mrae.  E.  B.,  Parias  1552, 
16mo)  i—SermoneSy  etc.,»with  Trois  Parties  de  la  Phd- 
tence  and  Trijde  A  venement  de  Jesus  Christ  (these  works, 
written  at  first  in  Flemish,  were  translated  into  Latin, 
Nuremberg,  1481, 4to;  Spire,  1484, 4to)  i—Speculum  au- 
reum decem  Prcecepłorum  Deij  etc.  (Mayence,  1474, 4to) : 
—Speculum  Per/ectionis  (Venice,  1524, 12mo ;  transL  into 
Italian,  1546, 12mo)  :—Explicaiio  succincta  et  perspicua 
Notem  Rupium  (of  Suso),  written  flrst  in  Low  Dutcl^ 
then  transL  into  Latin  by  Surius,  and  inserted  in  the 
Opera  omnia  of  Heiuy  Suso  (Ck)logne,  1533, 1555, 1588, 
and  1615, 12rao;  Naples,  1658,  12mo)  :—/)e  Mortifica- 
tione  pravorum  Affectuum  (Ologne,  1604, 16mo)  :—Can- 
tid  Canticorum  mystica  Explicaiio  (Ologne,  1564,  foL), 
See  Trithemius,  De  Scriptoribus  ecdeńasticis  (coL  817) ; 
Bellarmin,  De  Scriptoribus  ecdesiaaticis^  p.  415;  Wad- 
ding,  Script.  Ordinis  Minorum^  p.  164 ;  Fleury,  Iłigt.  Eo 
ciesiastigue,  vol.  xvi,  lib.  lxxix,  p.  5 ;  Quetif  and  Echard, 
Script.  Oritinia  Prmdicatorum^  ii,  558 ;  Hoefer,  Nouv,  Bu 
ogr,  Genirale,  xxiii,  439 ;  Dupin,  Ecdes,  Writers,  cent.  xy« 


HARPSFELD 


88 


HARRIS 


Harpafeld  or  Haipsfield,  John,  was  bom  about 
1510,  and  died  in  London  io  1578.  He  was  educated  at 
Winchester  School  and  New  CoUege,  Oxford,  whereof  he 
was  admitted  feUow  in  1584.  He  became  chaplain  to 
bishop  Bonner,  whose  bitter  persecuting  spirit  he  shared, 
and  was  ooUated  to  St.Martin'8,  Ludgate,  in  1554,  but 
resigned  in  1558,  on  being  presented  to  tbe  living  of 
Layndon  in  £aBex.  Shordy  before  the  death  of  queen 
Maiy  he  was  madę  dean  of  Norwich,  but  on  the  aooes- 
fdon  of  Elizabeth  was  depriyed  of  that  post,  and  com- 
mitted  to  the  Fleet  Pńson  until  he  gave  security  for  his 
good  beharior.  His  published  works  are  Coneio  ad  Cle- 
rum  (London,  1558, 8vo)  i—HomiUet  (London,  1554-56; 
he  wrole  9  of  Bonner*s  Homilies) : — Suppuiaiio  tempo- 
rum  a  dUurio  adcuD,  1559  (London,  1560).  He  wrote 
also  some  Disputationt  and  Epistlea  to  be  found  in  Fox'8 
Acłt  and  MofmmenU, — Kosę,  New  Gen.  Biog.  Dicf,  viii, 
212;  UoefcTjNoue.Bioff.  Generale j  xxiii,  442;  AUiboife, 
Dictionary  o/Authors^ i, 788 ;  Wood,  A then,  Oxon, L  (J. 
W.M.) 

Harpsfield,  Nicholas,  an  EngUsh  Roman  Catho- 
lic  historian,  and  brother  of  the  preceding,  was  also  edu- 
cated at  Winchester  School  and  New  College,  Oxford, 
where  he  was  admitted  fellow  in  1536,  and  bachelor  of 
lA¥rs  in  1543.  He  was  madę  principal  of  Whitehall  in 
1544,  regius  professor  of  Greek  in  1546,  archdeacon  of 
Ganterbury  and  prebendary  of  St.  Paulus  in  1554.  He 
also  receiyed  the  U^ing  of  Layndon,  but  resigned  it  to 
his  brother  John  in  1558.  He  was  a  irery  zealous  Ro- 
man Cathohc,  and,  on  the  accession  of  Elizabeth,  refus- 
ing  to  acknowledge  ber  supremacy,  he  was  deprived  of 
his  prefennents  and  imprisoncd,  or  at  least  kept  under 
restraint  until  his  death  in  1583.  During  his  imprison 
ment  (receiving  every  needed  help  from  his  custodian. 
bishop  Parker)  he  composed  his  Historia  Anglicana  Ec- 
desiastica  (Douay,  1622,  foL).  To  thb  there  is  append 
ed,  according  to  Nutt's  catalpgue  (1887),  a  treatiee  en- 
titled  Brevi»  Narraiio  de  Dicortio  Henrid  VIII  .... 
ah  E.  CampianOf  which  may  be  the  "  Treaiise  conceming 
Marriiige'*  mentioned  by  Wood  (see  Appendix  to  But- 
ler^s  Ht8t,  o/  Be/ormaiion).  His  other  works  are  Hia- 
łoria  karesis  Widdiffianm  (pubUshed  with  Hist.  A  ng.)  \ — 
Chromcon  a  Dilurio  Noe  ad  annum  1559 ;  and  a  ver>-  bit- 
ter attack  upon  the  Protestant  ecclesiastical  historians, 
Fox  in  particular,  which  was  conreyed  secretly  to  the 
Netherlands,  and  published  by  his  friend  Alan  Cope  un- 
der his  own  name,  to  screen  the  real  aut  hor  from  pun- 
ishment  at  the  hands  of  Elizabeth— the  title  in  fuU  is 
Akmi  Copi  Dialogi  vi  contra  Surnmi  PoniificatuSf  Mo~ 
naatic(e  Viia  Sanctorum,  S.  Imagumm  oppugnatores  et 
pseudo- Martgres:  in  guibue  Centurionum  Magdebur- 
gensium,  AucŁorum  Apohgia  Anglicana,  Pseudo-Mar' 
tyrologicorum  nostri  temporit,  maxime  vero  Joh.  Foxi 
et  aliorum,  taria  fraudea,  puiidm  calumnite  et  tnsignia 
mendacia,  deteguntur  (Antwerp,  Plautin,  1 556, 4 to).  He 
left  also  many  MSS. — Rosę,  New  Gen.  Biog.  Diet.  viii, 
212 ;  Hoefer,  Nouv.  Biog.  Generale,  xxiii,  442 ;  Allibone, 
Diet.  o/  A  utkors,  i,  788.     (J.  \^.  M). 

Harris,  Howell,  an  eminent  Welsh  eyangelist,  was 
bom  at  Trevecca  in  1714.  In  1785  he  went  to  Oxford 
to  study  for  the  Church,  but  disgust  at  the  infidelity  and 
immorality  which  prevailed  there  drove  him  away.  Re- 
tuniing toWales, he began  to  exhort  the  neglected  poor 
in  their  cottages,  and  was  so  successful  that  in  a  few 
months  he  formed  8everal  societies  among  them,  thus 
affording  another  of  those  providential  coinddences 
which  mark  the  religious  history  of  the  times.  Thirty 
of  these  organizations  were  sustained  by  him  at  the  time 
of  Whitefield'8  arrival  in  Wales  in  1739,  and  in  three 
years  morę  they  numbered  three  hundred.  He  lived 
and  died  a  Churchman,  but  received  little  sympathy 
from  the  established  dergy,  and,  until  the  viMts  of  the 
Methodist  founders,  pursued  his  evangeHcal  labors  al- 
most  alone,  apparently  without  anticipating  that  they 
would  result  in  a  wide-spread  eYangelical  difwent,  In 
1715  there  were  only  thirty  Dissenting  chai^els  in  the 


prindpality,  and  in  1786  only  8ix  in  all  north  Wales;  in 
1860  there  were  2000.  Harris  was  a  lay  preacher ;  he 
applied  repeatedly  for  ordination,  but  was  denied  it  by 
the  bishops  on  account  of  his  inegular  modes  of  Ubfw. 
Whitefield  passed  Trom  Kingswood  to  Catdiif,  and  there 
saw  him  for  the  first  time.  Their  souls  met  and  blend- 
ed  like  two  flames,  and  ^  set  the  whole  principality  in  a 
blaze."  For  years  the  laborious  layman  tnivcUed,  and 
preached  twioe  or  three  times  eveiy  day.  *^  He  is  fuU 
of  the  Holy  Ghost,"  wrote  Whitcfiekl ;  "  blessed  be  God, 
there  seems  a  noble  spirit  gone  out  into  Wales."  Wes- 
ley  speaks  of  him  as  "a  powerful  orator"  (Journal,  1756). 
He  was  repeatedly  assaulted  by  mobs,  and  suficrcd  many 
forms  of  peisecution  from  the  magistrates,  clcrgy,  and 
people,  but  his  courage  and  zeal  never  failed.  At  last 
his  health  declined,  and  he  rctumed  to  Trevecca,  whcre 
he  organized  a  Christian  household,  built  a  chapel,  and 
airanged  his  grounds  with  great  taste.  Wesley  calls  it 
'*one  of  the  most  beautiful  places  in  Wales"  {Journal^ 
1763,  p.  156).  In  the  French  war,  when  England  was 
threatened  with  invasion,  he  thought  it  his  duty  to  take 
a  commission  in  the  army,  which  he  held  for  three  years, 
preaching  wherever  he  went  with  hb  regiment  He 
died  in  great  peace,  July  21, 1778.  See  Jackson,  Chris' 
łian  Biography,  xii,  168 ;  Stevens,  Hittorg  <^  Methoditin, 
i,  118;  ii,  86. 

HarrlB,  John,  D.D.,  F.R.S.,  an  English  di>'ine,  was 
bom  about  1667.  He  studied  at  St  John's  College,  Cam- 
bridge, and  became  succe88ively  rector  of  St.  Mildrcd^s, 
London ;  perpetual  curate  of  Stroud,  prebendaiy  of  Roch- 
ester, and  fellow,  secretary,  and  vice-pre8ident  of  the 
Royal  Society.  He  died  in  1719.  Dr.  Harris  was  the 
first  compiler  of  a  dictionary  of  arts  and  sciences  in  Eng- 
land (1708, 2  vols.  foL),  and  was  a  carcful  and  able  edi- 
tor;  but  he  was  improvident,  and  died  completely  des- 
titute.  He  wrote  A  Refutation  o/ the  athtisiical  Ohfee^ 
tions  against  the  Being  and  A  ttributea  of  God  (London, 
lQiiS,4tó):r-Sermon,John  xvi,2i—The  Wickedneu  oftke 
Pretence  of  Treason  and  Btbełlionfor  God's  take  (Nov. 
5th)  (London,  1715, 8vo) ;  and  compiled  a  Collection  of 
Voyagea  and  TrateU  (liond.  1702 ;  revised  by  Campbell, 
1744, 2  vols.  foL). — Darling,  Cydoptedia  Bibliographicay 
i,  1403 }  Allibone,  Dictionary  ofAuthors,  i, 790. 

Harris,  John,  D.D.,  an  eminent  Independent  miiw 
ister  and  scholar,  was  bom  at  Ugborough,  in  I>evonf  hire, 
March  8, 1802,  and  was  admitted  a  student  at  the  Hox- 
ton  Academy  for  the  education  of  ministcrs  belongin^ 
to  the  Independent  denomination  in  1821.  In  1827  ho 
settled  at  Epsom  as  a  minister  amongst  the  Independ- 
enta. His  first  literary  work,  entitlcd  The  Great  Teack" 
er,  was  favorably  received ;  but  he  became  most  widely 
known  as  the  successful  corapetitor  for  a  prize  of  one 
himdied  guineas,  ollered  by  Dr.  Conąnest  for  the  best 
essay  on  the  subject  of  "  Covctousness.''  Mr.  Harris*8 
essay  was  entitled  Mammon,  and  had  a  large  sale,  up- 
wards  of  thirty  thousand  copies  having  been  sold  in  a 
few  yeais.  He  sub8equently  obtained  two  other  prizes 
for  essays — one  entitled  "  Eritannia  on  the  Condition  and 
Claims  of  Sailors;"  the  other  on  Missions,  with  the  title 
The  Great  Commission.  "  On  account  of  the  reputation 
brought  by  these  works,  be  received  the  degree  of  D.D. 
from  Amherst  College,  and  was  olso  invited  to  fiU  the 
post  of  president  in  lady  Huntingdon^s  Theologicel  Col- 
lege at  Cheshunt.  Herę  he  remained  till  the  union  of 
the  three  Independent  colleges  of  Highbur^',  Homerlon, 
and  Coward  in  New  College,  when  he  accepted  the  offlce 
of  principal,  and  conducted  sevenil  of  the  theological 
courses  in  that  institution.  He  iilled  this  position  with 
efficiency,  and  by  his  industry  and  amiable  character 
contributed  to  the  suocess  which  has  attended  this  es- 
tablishment. Whilst  at  Cheshunt,  Dr.  Harris  published 
the  first  of  a  series  of  works,  in  which  his  object  was  to 
illustrate  the  history  of  man  from  a  theological  point  of 
view.  The  first  volume  was  entitled  The  Pre-Adamite 
Earth  (1847).  In  it  he  displayed  a  great  amount  of 
learning,  and  espedally  an  acąuaintance  with  the  naU 


HARRIS 


89 


HARROW 


mai  idencesy  whieh  he  brought  to  bear  cm  his  theolog- 
ical  Tiew&  The  second  volame  of  the  seńea  was  enti- 
tfed  Mm  Primofol  (1849),  in  which  the  intdlectual, 
mocBi,  and  religioaa  chaiaćter  of  man  is  discusaed.  A 
thiid  yohimey  entided  Patriarchy,  or  the  Fctmily,  appear- 
ed  in  1854.  Two  oUier  yolumes  were  to  have  oomidetecl 
the  seriea,  and  to  have  been  devoted  to  the  *  State,'  or 
the  poUtical  conditkm  of  man,  and  the  '  Church,*  or  his 
leligiotts  relations;  but  the  plan  was  cut  ahort  by  the 
death  of  Dr.  Hania,  Dec  21,  1856."  These  writings 
erinoe  cazefol  atudy  and  a  broad  nuige  of  thought.  Dr. 
Hanusa  practical  writings  have  had  an  immenae  circula- 
tionbotbinEnghmd  and  America.  See  Fish,  Pu(pi^  1,7- 
oęHtmz  (1857) ;  GilfiUan,  Modem  Mcuierpiecet  of  Pulpit 
Oratory  ;  Hoefer,  No/uv,  Biog,  Generale,  xxiii,  455 ;  Brit- 
i$h  OfŁortarfy  RÓńew^  v,  887;  y.  American  JUrieWj  lxx, 
391;  A]liboDe,Z>K:<»o}Kiry  o/Authon,  i,  791. 

Hania,  Robert,  D.D.,  a  pious  and  leanied  Poritan 
divine,  was  bom  in  Gloncesterahire,  1578,  and  was  edu- 
caCed  at  Magdalen  Hall,  Oxford.  He  aflerwards  took 
oidera,  and  obtained  the  ]iving  of  HanweU,  near  Ban- 
bmy,  0xford8hire,  where  he  was  extremely  useful  in 
ooofiiming  the  people's  minds  in  the  Protestant  faith. 
On  the  commencement  of  the  (^vil  War  he  remored  to 
London,  and  became  a  member  of  the  Aasembly  of  Di- 
yioea,  but  appears  to  have  taken  no  active  part  in  their 
proceedinga.  He  officiated  at  the  chorch  of  St.  Botolph, 
Biabopflgate  Stieet,  imtil  1648,  when  he  was  appointed 
peadent  of  Trinity  Oollege,  which  offic^  he  retained 
nntil  his  death  in  1658.  His  works  include  The  Way 
to  True  Ilappmess,  in  twenty-four  aermons  on  the  Be- 
atitudes;  and  A  Treutiee  on  the  New  Covenant,  which, 
with  other  writings,  were  pablishe<l  in  his  Worh,  re- 
tited  and  coUeded  (Lond.  1654,  foL).— Hook,  Kcd,  Biog, 
▼,546. 

Harris,  Samnel,  D.D.,  '<was  bom  in  the  coonty 
of  Middlesex  aboat  the  year  1683.  He  was  educated  in 
Iferehant  Taylofs  school,  of  which  he  was  head  boy  in 
1697,  and  was  admitted  a  penstoner  of  Peter  House, 
Cambridge,  May  15, 1700.  Upon  the  foondation  of  the 
ehair  of  Modem  History  in  the  Unirersity  of  Cambridge 
by  George  I  in  1724,  Harris  was  appointed  the  fiist  pro- 
femm,  He  died  Dec.  21, 1733.  He  was  the  author  of, 
1.  Seripfure  knowledge  promoted  by  caledtizing  (London, 
1712, 8v-o)  ^— 2.  A  CommeiUary  on  the  F^ftythitd  chapter 
o/Isaiahj  with  an  appendix  ofOueries  amceming  Divera 
Anaent  ReUgUma  Tradiiumt  and  Praetices,  and  ihe  aenee 
tumany  teaeU  ofSeripłure  tohich  teem  to  allude  to  or  er- 
preu  them  (Lond.  1735  [not  1739,  as  frequently  stated], 
4fco).  In  aome  copies  this  work  has  a  different  title- 
page,  nam€ly,  Obterralunu,  CrUical  and  Miscellaneous, 
on  tóerai  remcurkable  Texts  o/łhe  Old  Testament ,  to  which 
ii  added  a  Commentary,  etc  Prefixed  are  three  disser- 
tationa,  1.  On  a  Gnozer  or  Advocate ;  2.  On  a  Dour  or 
Generation ;  and,  3.  On  the  ancient  method  of  propound- 
ing  important  points  by  way  of  qaestion.  This  work 
was  published  shortly  afler  the  death  of  the  author  by 
bis  widów.  It  exhibits  mach  curious  leaniing,  aiid  is 
Beveral  times  lefeired  to  by  Doddridge  in  his  tectures." 
— Kitto,  Cydopeedia,  ii,  236. 

Harris,  Thaddeos  Mason,  D.D.,  a  Unitarian  di- 
Tine,  was  bom  in  Charlestown,  Mass.,  in  1768,  graduated 
AB.  at  Haryaid  in  1787,  and  became  pastor  at  Dorches- 
ler  in  1793.  He  was  librarian  of  HaiYard  College  from 
1791  to  1793,  and  afterwards  librarian  of  the  Massachu- 
aetts  Historical  Society  till  bu  death  in  1842.  His  most 
important  publication  is  a  Naturai  History  ofthe  Bibie 
(1798,  l2mo;  again  in  Boston,  1821, 8vo;  also  published 
in  London,  with  additions,  under  the  title  Dictionary  of 
the  Naturai  Bisiory  ofthe  Bibie,  1824;  new  ed.  by  Ćon- 
der,  1838,  12dio).  This  work  received  great  praise  for 
its  accntacy  and  ntility  (see  Home,  BibUoyraphieal  Ap- 
pendsac).  Dr.  Harris  alao  pubUshed  Menwrials  of  the 
fast  Church  in  Dorchester  (Boston,  1830,  8vo)  .—Dis- 
eonrses  on  Freemasonry  (Charlestown,  6801  [  1801 J,  8vo). 
Sce  AUibone,  Dictionary  ofAuthon,  i,  792. 


Harris,  Walter,  D.D.,  a  Congregational  minister, 
was  bom  in  Lebanon,  Conn.,  in  1761.  He  graduated  at 
Dartmouth  College  in  1787,  was  ordained  pastor  at  Dun- 
barton  Aug.  26, 1789,  and  died  Dec.  25, 1843.  Dr.  Har- 
ris published  An  Address  before  the  Pastorał  Concention 
of  New  Ilampshire  (1834),  and  a  nomber  of  occasional 
sermons. — Sprague,  Annals,  ii,  277. 

Harris,  'WiUiam,  D.D.,  an  eminent  English  dis- 
sentiug  divine,  is  suppoaed  to  have  been  bom  at  London 
about  1675.  He  became  pastor  of  a  church  at  Cmtched 
Frian,  London,  in  1698.  He  was  also  for  some  thirty 
years  one  of  the  preachers  of  a  Friday  evenlng  lecture 
at  the  Weigh-house,  and  succeeded  Mr.Tong  as  lecturer 
at  Salter^s  Hall.  He  died  in  1740.  "  He  was  a  eon- 
cisę,  elear,  and  nervous  yrriter;  his  works  evince  a 
strong  sense  joined  to  a  ]ively  imagination,  and  regu- 
lated  with  judgment."  He  was  one  of  the  continuators 
of  Matthew  Henry*s  Commentary  (those  on  Philtppiaus 
and  Colossians).  Besidcs  a  number  of  occasional  ser- 
mons, he  wrote  Funeral  Discourus,  m  two  Parts:  (/) 
Consolations  on  ihe  Death  ofour  Fri"^;  {II)  Prepa- 
raiionsfor  our  own  Death  (Lond.  1736, 8vo) : — The  Li/e 
and  Character  of  Dr.  Thomas  Manton  (London,  1725, 
8vo) : — A  practical  lUustrafion  of  the  Book  of  Esther 
(London,  1787,  8vo),  etc  —  Darling,  Cydopeedia  Biblio-- 
yraphica,  i,  1406;  Bogoe  and  Bennett,  History  ofDis* 
tentert,  ii,  372. 

Harris,  "William,  D.D.,  a  Protestant  £ptscopal 
minister,  was  bom  at  Springtield,  Mass.,  and  passed  ABb 
at  Harvard  College  in  1786.  He  was  Hrst  licensed  as  a 
minister  in  the  (jongregational  Church,  but,  on  i)erusing 
a  compend  of  Hooker's  Fcdesiastical  Polity,  his  mind 
and  feelings  were  drawn  to  the  Protestant  Episcopal 
Church,  in  which  he  was  shortly  after  ordained.  He 
then  took  charge  of  St  Michael's  Church,  Marblehead, 
and  in  1802  became  rector  of  St.  Markus,  New  York.  In 
1811  he  was  chosen  president  of  Columbia  College.  In 
1816  he  resigned  his  rectorship,  and  attendcd  thereafter 
exclu8ivcly  to  the  presidency  of  the  college  He  died 
Oct.  18, 1829.  He  published  scYeial  occasional  sermons. 
— Sprague,  Annals,  v,  383. 

Harrison,  William  Henry,  D.D.,  was  bom  Jan. 
12,  1819,  in  Frederick  County,  Md-  He  entered  the 
preparatory  department  of  Pennsylvania  College  in  1838, 
and  was  graduated  in  1843  with  the  raledictory  of  his 
claas.  He  early  developed  a  taste  for  literały  research ; 
and,  while  othera  were  often  engaged  in  recreation  and 
amusement,  he  was  in  his  room  bitsily  engaged  in  the 
inyestigation  of  some  ąuestion  of  interest,  and  in  the 
acąuisition  of  knowledge.  The  one  thing  in  which, 
perhaps,  he  excelled  all  others  was  the  mond  influence 
which  he  exercised  over  his  companions.  His  yery 
prescnce,  even  when  he  kept  silent,  was  felt.  Immedi- 
ately  after  his  graduation  in  college  he  commenced  his 
theological  studies  in  the  Theological  Seminary  at  Get- 
tysbuig.  On  their  completion  in  1845  he  was  licensed 
to  preach  the  Gospel  by  the  Synod  of  Maryland.  He 
was  elected  assistant  professor  of  ancient  languages  in 
Pennsylrania  College,  and  serred  for  a  season  as  generał 
agent  of  the  Parent  Education  Society.  The  following 
year  he  aocepted  a  cali  to  the  English  Lutheran  Church 
of  Cincinnati,  as  he  felt  that  he  could  be  morę  useful 
and  efficient  in  the  pastorał  work.  Herę  he  labored 
with  great  success  till  his  death.  His  labors  were  mi- 
M'^eańed'and  abundant.  His  life  was  regarded  as  a  sac- 
rifice  to  the  cause  of  humanity  and  religion.  He  died 
of  Asiatic  cholera  duńng  the  preralence  ofthe  epidemie 
in  Cincinnati,  Nor.  8, 1866,  and,  although  comparative- 
ly  a  young  man,  be  was  at  the  time  of  his  death  the  se- 
nior pastor  of  the  city.  He  was  a  good  scholar,  a  sound 
theologian,  and  a  elear,  practical,  and  instructirc  preach- 
er.  He  received  the  doctorate  from  Wittenberg  Col- 
lege in  1861.     (M.  L.  S.) 

Harrow  is  the  rendering  in  the  £ng.  Yers.  of  the 
following  Hebrew  wonls :  ^^'^'^H,  charits'  (liL  a  cuttiny, 
hence  a  sUce  of  curdled  milk, "  cheese^"  1  Sam*  zvii,  18}, 


HARSA 


90 


HART 


a  frtbuhtm  or  threshing  (q.  y.)  sUdge  (2  Sam.  xii,  81 ;  1 
Chion.  XX,  3) ;  claewhere  only  the  verb  Tlb,  sadad' 
(lit.  to  UtelotT) i  to  karrow  a  field  (Job  xxxix,  10;  "break 
the  clods,"  Isa.  xxviii,  4 ;  Hos.  x,  11).  See  Kitto,  Daily 
BibU  lUusU  iii,  39,  vi,  397.     The  form  of  the  ancient 


Romę;'  their  religion  dyed  in  blood;  their  jnggling  and 
feigned  miracles,  of  which  he  wrote  a  book  against 
them,  and  their  eqiiivocation8,"  He  conclitded  by  pit)- 
claiming  that  in  his  view  the  C^hurch  of  England  came 
nearest  to  the  primitiye  diurch,  and  that  its  principles 
were  not  derived  from 
Wickliff,  IIuss,  or  Lu- 
^r:-—  --r^  i\\&r,  but  from  the  four 

firet  centuricB   after 
Christ.     This  defense 
was   considered  valid, 
and  in  1G28  Dr.  Harsnet 
-m*-.—      -      '^'**  translated  to  the 
archbishopric  of  York. 
He  died  in  May,  1631. 
Among  his  worka  we 
notice  A  Digcorery  of 
Ihefraudulent  Pradicn 
o/John  Darrelly  Bach-' 
ehr  o/A  rtSf  etc.  (Lond. 
1599,  4to):— />«;tera- 
(ion  ofegrfgwus  Popish 
Imposturesj  etc.  (Lond. 
1603,  4to),  against  an 
exorci8t  named  Edmonds,  alias  Weston,  a  Jesuit.     See 
Collier,  Jiccłes.  Biaiory ;  Strj*pe,  MemoriaU;  Biog.Brit.  / 
Hook,  Eccles,  Biography,  v,  546  są. 

Hart  (^""K,  ayaVy  always  masc.,  but  in  Psa.  xlii,  1, 
joincd  with  a  fem.  noun  to  denote  a  hhvd)y  a  gtag  or  małe 
dcer,  but  used  by  the  Hebrews  also  to  denote  all  the  va- 
rious  Bpecies  of  dccr  and  antelopes,  which  rescroble  large 
rams.  See  Deek.  The  hart  is  reckoned  among  the 
clean  animals  (Deut.  xii,  15;  xiv,  5;  xv,  22),  and  secma, 
from  the  passages  quotcd,  as  well  as  from  1  Kings  ivy 
23,  to  have  been  commonly  killcd  for  food.  Its  activity 
fumishes  an  apt  comparison  in  Isa.  xxxv,  6,  though  in 
this  respect  the  hind  was  morę  commonly  selected  by  the 
sacred  writers.  The  propcr  name  Ajalon  is  derived  from 
ayaly  and  implies  that  harts  were  numerous  in  the  neigh- 
borhood.  Sec  Goat.  The  Heb.  masc.  noun  ayalj  which 
is  always  rendered  fKa^oc  by  the  Sept.,  denotes,  there 
can  be  no  doubt,  some  species  of  Cenńda  (dcer  tribe), 
either  the  Dama  rufgaria,  fallow-deer,  or  the  Cerws 
Barbartts,  the  Barbar>'  deer,  the  southem  reprcscntative 
of  the  European  stag  (C.  elaphuti),  which  occurs  in  Tu- 
nis and  the  coast  of  Barbar^'.  We  have,  howerer,  no 
evidence  that  the  Barbary  deer  ever  inhabited  Pales- 
tinc,  though  it  may  have  done  so  in  primitive  timea. 


Hoderu  Egyptian  Khmt/udt  or  clod-cmshlng  machinę  after  plonghlng. 
Hebrew  harrow,  if  any  instrument  properly  correspond- 
ing  to  this  term  existed,  is  unknown.  Probably  it  was, 
as  still  in  Egypt  (Niebuhr,  Trav,  i,  151),  merely  a  board, 
which  was  dragged  over  the  fields  to  level  the  lumps. 
Among  the  Komans  it  conństed  of  a  hurtle  (crates)  of 
rotls  with  teeth  (Pliny,  xviii,  43 ;  comp.  Virg.  Georff.  i, 
94).  See  generally  Ugolini,  Comm.  de  re  rustica  rett. 
Uthr.  V,  21  (in  his  Thesaur,  xxix,  p.  832  8q.) ;  Paulsen, 
Ackei'h,  p.  96.— Winer,  ii,  296.  "In  modem  Palestine, 
oxen  are  sometimes  tumed  in  to  trampie  the  clods,  and 
in  some  parts  of  Asia  a  bush  of  thoms  is  dragged  ovcr 
the  surface ;  but  all  thesc  processes,  if  used,  occur  (not 
after,  but)  before  the  seetl  is  committed  to  the  soil" 
(Smith,  8.  V.).     See  Agricultuke. 

Harsa.    See  Tei^Harsa. 

Har'sha  (Heb.  Charsha',  XĆ"in,  a  dlialdaizing  form, 
tcorlrr  or  enchanier;  S€fpt.  'Apca  and  'Aca<Tav)f  one  of 
the  Nethinim  whose  descendants  (or  rathcr,  perhaps,  a 
place  whose  inhabitants)  rctumed  from  Babylon  with 
Zcrubbabcl  (Ezra  ii,  52 ;  Nch.  vii,  64).  B.  C.  antę  536. 
Schwarz  (Paksf.  p.  1 16)  thinks  it  may  be  identical  with 
the  ruins  called  by  the  Arabs  Charaha  (on  Zimmerman'8 
mapy  Khuras),  situated  south  of  wady  Siu-,  about  half 
way  between  licit-Jibrin  (Eleuthcropolis)  on  the  W., 
and  Jedur  (^Getlor)  on  the  E. 

Harsnet,  Samuei^  archbishop  of  York,  was  bom  al 
Colchester  in  1561 ;  was  educatcd  as  a  bizcr  at  King'8 
College,  Cambridge ;  and  was  subseąuently  elected  fcl- 
low  of  Pembrokc  HalL  In  1580  he  took  the  degree  of 
B.A.,  and  iu  1584  that  of  M.A.  lic  then  applied  him- 
ae If  to  theology,  in  which  he  soon  madę  his  mark  by  a 
sermon  preached  in  1584  at  St.Paurs  Cross  (first  printed 
at  the  end  of  three  of  Dr.  Stewart 's  sermons  in  1658), 
iu  which  he  boldly  attacked  the  doctrine  of  uncondi- 
tional  prodcstination,  then  to  some  extent  prevailing  in 
the  Church  of  England.  He  became  successiyely  proc- 
tor  of  the  university  in  1592,  vicar  of  Chigwcll,  in  Es- 
Bcx,  in  1595,  and  archdeacon  of  £8sex  in  1602,  but  re- 
signcd  ail  these  offices  on  being  appointed  rector  of 
Shcnficld,  in  Essex,  and  of  St,  Margaret's,  New  Fish 
Street,  London,  in  1604.  He  became  master  of  Pem- 
broke  College  in  1605,  and  bishop  of  Chichester  in  1609. 
He  was  transkteil  to  Norwich  in  1619.  While  in  the 
lat  ter  see,  the  Dissentcrs  prevailing  in  the  House  of 
Commons,  he  was  accuscd  before  the  last  Parliamcnt  of 
James  I  of  severa]  misdemeauors,  and  of  Romanist  ten- 
dencies.  He  madc  a  defense,  in  which,  umong  other 
points,  lic  says  "  that  poper^'  is  a  fire  that  never  will  be 
quiet ;  hc  had  preached  a  thousand  sermons,  and  noth- 
ing  of  popcrj'  can  be  imputed  to  him  out  of  any  of  them. 
That  there  were  diyers  obstacles  to  keep  him  from 
popery :  among  them,  the  usurpation  of  the  pope  of  C^nus  Barbanu. 


HART 


91 


HARTLEY 


HasBeląttist  (Trar,  pw  211)  obsenred  the  fallow-deer  on 
Mount  Tabor.  Sir  G.  Wilkinaon  aays  (Anc,  Egypt.  i, 
227,  abridgm.),  ^  The  sUg  wUh  bnuiching  homs  ligured 
at  Beni  Uaasui  is  also  unknown  in  the  yalley  of  the 
Nile,  but  it  is  atill  aeen  in  the  vicinity  of  the  natron 
lakea,  as  about  Tunia,  though  not  in  the  desert  between 
the  river  and  the  Sed  Sea."  This  is  doubtleas  the  Cer- 
ruM  BarbaruA.     See  Stag. 

Most  of  the  deer  tribe  are  careful  to  conceal  their 
calres  aflcr  birth  for  a  time.  May  there  not  be  some 
allusion  to  Łhis  cimunstance  in  Job  xxxixy  l,"Canst 
thou  mark  when  the  hinds  do  calre?*'  etc.  Ferhaps, 
as  the  SepL  uniformly  renders  aydl  by  t\ai^c,  we  may 
incline  to  the  belief  that  the  Cenms  Barbarus  is  the 
deer  denoted.  The  feminine  noun  >n^JX,  ayaldh,  oc- 
cuis  frcąuently  in  the  O.  T.— Smith,  s.  v.     See  Hind. 

Hart,  Levl  D.D.,  a  Congregational  minister,  was 
bom  April  10,  1T38,  at  Southingion,  Conn.  He  gradu- 
ated  at  Yale  CoUege  in  1760,  studied  under  Dr.  Bellamy, 
was  licensed  June  2, 1761,  and  was  ordained  pastor  M 
(.iriswold,  Conn.,  Nov.  4, 1762,  wherc  he  Ubored  until  his 
deaih,  Oct.  27,  1808.  During  his  long  career  as  pastor 
he  trained  many  young  men  for  the  ministry.  In  1784 
he  was  madę  a  niember  of  Dartmouth  Ccllege  Corpora- 
tion, and  of  Yale  in  1791.  Ile  pubiished  several  occa- 
aonal  sermonSb— Sprague,  ^nfioZf,  i,  590. 

Hart,  OliTer,  a  Baptist  minister,  was  bom  in  War- 
minster.  Pa.,  July  5, 17^,joined  the  Baptist  Church  in 
1741.  was  licensed  to  preach  in  1746,  and  was  ordained 
in  1749.  In  that  year  he  became  pastor  of  the  Baptist 
ehorrh  in  Charleston,  S.  C,  and  remained  in  that  ofliice 
thirty  yeais,  with  eminent  success  both  as  preacher  and 
pastor.  In  the  Kevolation  he  espoused  the  Whig  cause 
with  great  ardor,  and  had  to  flee  from  Charleston  in  1780 
to  avoid  falliug  into  the  hands  of  the  British.  He  set- 
tkd  as  pastor  of  the  Baptist  Church  at  Hopewell,  N.  J., 
where  he  died  Dec.  31, 1795.  He  publishe<1  a  Diścourse 
<w  tke  Death  of  W,  Tennent .—Dancmff  Exploded:—Tke 
Christian  Tempie : — A  Gotpel  Church  porłrayed,—Jiene- 
diet,  łliti,  of  tke  Bapliats,  yoL  ii ;  Sprague,  A  rmalsj  vi,  47. 

Hartley,  D.win,  an  English  practitioner  of  medi- 
anę, and  a  philosopher  of  coiL.4(brable,  but  transitory 
reputation.  The  ScoŁch  school  of  metaphysics  borrow- 
ed  miurh  from  his  concluńons;  and  the  long-prevaIent 
tbeory  of  Beauty,  whlch  was  claborated  in  Alisou^s 
Priiteiplfs  of  Tagte,  derired  from  them  its  cardinal  dnc- 
trines.  Dr.  Hartley  occtipies  a  notable  position  in  the 
hi^ory  of  speculation  on  other  grounds.  He  presented 
a  cnrioos  example  of  the  partial  conciliation  of  Des 
Cartes,  Newtun,  and  Locke;  he  inaugurated  the  impulse 
whieh  transmuted  the  system  of  the  last  of  these  great 
men  into  the  materialism  of  the  French  Kncydopadia ; 
he  preceded  Bonnet,  of  Genera,  in  applying  phA^siolog- 
ical  obserration  to  psychological  discussion,  and  thus 
bccame  the  precuraor  of  Cabanis  and  Broussais,  of  Mole- 
achott  and  Huxley.  He  was  contcmporary  with  Col- 
lier,  and  Berkeley,  and  Humc,  and  Reid.  While  the 
two  fint  were  undermining  the  philosophy  of  Ix>cke  by 
qaestioning  the  credibility  of  the  senses,  and  Hume  was 
achieving  a  similar  result  by  impugning  the  evidences 
«f  consciousness,  to  be  imperfectiy  refute<l  by  Reid's 
exafq^ation  of  the  reliability  of  extemal  pcrception, 
Hartley  was  still  further  invalidating  the  autliority  of 
Locke  by  proposing  a  purely  mechanical  explanation  of 
the  processes  of  thought  He  is  thus  even  morę  notę- 
winthy  for  his  relations  to  the  revolutions  of  opinion  In 
the  18th  century  than  for  the  poeitive  additions  he  is 
snpposed  to  have  madę  to  the  science  of  the  human 
mind.  Ile  was  ona  of  the  dominant  spirits  of  that  agi- 
tation  of  4he  intellectoal  waters  which  heralded  and 
pfoduoed  the  political  conTuIsions  of  the  last  oentury. 
At  the  same  time,  he  is  the  link  between  widely  sepa- 
iBied  dogmas:  fumishing  a  bond  between  Des  Cartes 
and  Stewart;  connecting  Locke  with  Condillac  and 
Fkoicb  seosationalism ;  re\iving  neglected  positions  of 


Aristotle,  and  prefiguring  many  of  the  latest  manifesU- 
tions  of  scientitic  materialism. 

JAfe. — ^The  biography  of  Dr.  Hartley  is  singularly 
devoid  of  salient  iticidents  and  of  generał  interest,  He 
belonged  to  that  numerous  class  of  very  worthy  men 
who  run  their  eminently  useful  career  without  experi- 
encing  or  occasioning  violent  excitement  of  any  kincL 
But  for  his  phikMophical  productions,  his  epitaph  might 
have  been  \'iven»  morietugue  fefellU,  He  was  the  son 
of  a  respectable  clergyman,  and  was  bom  Aug.  80, 1705, 
at  Armley,  Yorkshire,  of  which  parish  his  lather  was 
vicar.  He  completed  his  educatiou  at  Jesus  College, 
Cambridge,  and  was  designed  for  the  patemal  rocation. 
But  he  was  induced  to  divert  his  attention  to  medicine, 
in  conseąuence  of  scniples  about  subscribing  the  XXXIX 
Articles,  for  religious  opinion  ¥rlthin  the  bosom  of  the 
Anglican  Church  was  much  divided  at  the  time  by  the 
recent  issues  of  the  "Bangorian  Controrersy."  His 
experience  was  frequently  repeated  in  other  cascs  in  the 
ensuing  years.  He  retainetl,  howerer,  the  fervent  but 
simple  piety  appropriate  to  his  meditated  profession, 
and  never  withdrew  his  interest  from  the  subjects  which 
attract  the  intelligent  theologian.  He  informs  us  that 
the  seeds  of  his  own  doctrine  began  to  germinate  when 
he  was  twenty-five  years  of  age,  though  their  elabora- 
tion  was  not  completed  till  he  was  morę  than  forty. 
His  riews  were  given  to  the  worid  in  1749,  in  a  work 
entitled  Obserrations  on  Man,  his  Franie^  his  Duties,  his 
Erpedatioru,  He  survived  its  publication  about  eight 
years,  and  died  at  Bath  Aug.  28,  1757,  when  within  a 
fortnight  of  complcting  his  fifty-third  year.  His  life 
had  been  expended  in  the  diligeut  and  kindly  pursuit  of 
his  calling  at  Newark,  Bury  St.Edmund'8,  London,  and 
Bath. 

Mackintosh  and  Coleridge,  while  presenting  diyerse 
views  of  Hartley*s  doctrine,  are  larish  of  encomiums 
upon  his  Ańrtues  and  purity  of  character.  A  yery  brief 
and  yery  dry  biography  was  composed  by  his  son,  with 
tilial  reganl  and  quaint  delineation.  A  few  fragments 
from  this  recondite  production  will  present  the  philoso- 
pher 'Mn  the  habit  and  manner  as  he  liyed."  ^His 
person  was  of  middle  size,  and  well  proportioned.  His 
complexion  fair,  his  features  regular  and  handsome. 
His  countenance  open,  ingenuous,  and  animated.  He 
was  peculiarly  neat  in  person  and  attire.  He  liyed  in 
personal  intimacy  with  the  learoed  men  of  his  age," 
among  whom  are  enumeratcd  Law,  bishop  of  Carliale; 
Butler,  bishop  of  Durham ;  Warburton,bbhop  of  Glouces- 
ter; Hoadley,  succeasirely  bishop  of  Baiigor,  Hereford, 
and  Winch<»ter;  Pope  and  Young;  Dr.  Jortin  and  Dr. 
Byrom;  Hawkins,  Browne,  and  Hooke,  the  forgotten 
historian  of  Komę.  The  list  is  sufficiently  heterogene- 
ous.  "  His  mind  was  formed  to  beneyolence  and  uni- 
yersal  philanthropy.  His  genius  was  penetrating  and 
actiye,  his  industry  indefatigablc,  his  philosophical  ob- 
seryations  and  attentions  unremitting.  His  natural 
temper  was  gay,  cheerful,  and  sociable.  He  was  ad- 
dicted  to  no  yice  in  any  part  of  his  life,  neither  to  pride, 
nor  to  sensuality,  nor  intemperance,  nor  ostentation,  nor 
enyy,  nor  to  any  sordid  self-interest ;  but  his  heart  was 
replete  with  every  contrary  rłrtue." 

Philosophy,  —  Hartley  neither  proclaimed  nor  pro- 
(luced  any  scheme  of  specidation,  nor  did  hc  pretend 
that  his  yiews  were  characterized  by  any  marked  de- 
gree  of  originality.  He  investigated  and  endeavored 
to  explain  certain  phenomena  of  the  human  mind,  and 
to  dłscoyer  the  machinery  of  thought.  He  has  be- 
ąucathed  a  doctrine  which  has  been  in  part  generally 
adopted,  and  which  has  been  frequcntly  exaggeraŁod 
by  admirers  who  have  repudiated,  ignored,  or  been  ig- 
norant of  the  characteristic  giound-work  on  which  it 
tiad  been  erected.  The  source  and  iiliation  of  his  tenets 
have  been  indicatcd  by  him  with  what  Sir  James  Mack- 
intosh conceiyes  to  haye  been  extrayagant  generosity. 
Hartley*s  acknowledgroeuts  are,  howeyer,  madę  in  igno- 
rance  of  his  much  burger,  but  morę  remote  obligations 
to  Azistotle.    ^  About  eighteen  years  ago,"  says  he,  in 


HARTLEY 


92 


HARTWIG 


Łhe  preface  of  his  work,  **  I  was  infomied  that  the  Rev. 
Mr.  Gay,  then  ltving,  aaserted  the  poasibility  of  deduc- 
ing  all  our  intellectual  pleasures  and  {uiins  from  aasoda- 
tioiL  This  puŁ  me  upon  consideńng  the  power  of  aaso- 
ciation.  By  degrees  many  diaąuisitions  foreigii  to  the 
doctrine  of  association,  or,  at  least,  not  immediately 
connected  with  it,  intermixed  themaelyes."  **  I  think, 
however,  that  I  cannot  be  called  a  8>'8tem  maker,  sińce 
I  did  not  fint  form  a  system,  and  then  suit  the  facta  to 
it^  but  was  carried  on  by  a  train  of  thoughts  from  one 
thing  to  another,  firequently  without  any  expie8s  de- 
sign, or  eren  any  preWous  suspicion  of  the  conseąuences 
t)ut  might  arise."  Assuredly  this  is  neither  a  syste- 
matic  nor  a  philosophical  method  of  procedurę.  But 
this  easy  disagation  of  thought  explains  thd  instability, 
want  of  oonsistency,  and  paitial  incoherenoe  of  Hart- 
ley*s  speculations.  It  also  expbuns  the  facility  and  un- 
Buspected  inconsequence  with  which  a  portion  of  the 
doctrine  has  been  separated  ttom  its  acoompauiments  for 
special  acceptance  and  development. 

The  chazacteristic  tenets  of  Hartley  have  been  very 
clearly  and  oondsely  stated  by  MorelL  **The  objects 
of  the  extemal  world  aifect  in  some  manner  the  extreme 
ends  of  the  neryes,  which  spread  ttom  the  brain  as  a 
centrę  to  every  part  of  the  body.  This  afifection  pro- 
duces  a  yibration,  which  is  continued  along  the  nenre 
by  the  agency  of  an  elastic  ether  until  it  reaches  the 
brain,  where  it  produces  the  phenomenon  we  term  sen- 
sation.  When  a  sensation  has  been  ex|)erienced  several 
times,  the  ribratory  movement  from  which  it  arises  ac- 
quires  the  tendency  to  repeat  itself  spontaneously,  even 
when  the  extemal  object  is  not  present.  These  repeti- 
tions,  or  relics  of  sensation,  are  idmSf  which  in  their 
tum  possess  the  property  of  recalling  each  other  by  vir- 
tue  of  mutual  association  among  themselyes.  .... 
The  subordinate  effects  of  these  principles  are  easy  to 
be  imagined.  If  all  our  ideas  are  but  relics  of  scnsa- 
tłons,  and  all  excited  spontancously  by  the  laws  of  asso- 
ciation, it  is  abundantly  evident  that  the  power  of  the 
will  miist  be  a  nonentity,  that  man  can  rcAlly  have  no 
\control  of  his  own  mind,  that  he  is  the  creature  of  irre- 
sistible  necessity.  Hartley  was  accordingly  a  firm  nec- 
essarian.  Another  natural  eiSect  of  the  theory  of  vibra- 
tions  is  materialism."  The  pemicious  conseąueiices  of 
thcir  dogmas  are  perspicaciously  displayed  by  Coleridge, 
who  had  at  one  time  been  so  deroted  to  their  teachings 
that  he  bestowed  the  name  of  their  author  upon  his  son, 
Hartley  Coleridge. 

In  this  speculation  there  are  three  distinct  but  inti- 
mately  connected  doctrines.  1.  The  theory  of  the  asso- 
ciation of  ideas.  2.  The  ph>*8iological  and  physical 
modę  of  accounting  for  this  association  and  for  percep- 
tion  by  the  yibrations  of  an  elastic  ether  through  the 
medullaiy  substance  of  the  ner\'e8.  8.  The  aasertion  of 
the  necessity  of  human  actions.  The  last  of  these  con- 
nects  itself  with  the  optimism  of  Leibnitz  and  the  fatal- 
ism  of  Spinoza,  through  King*s  Origin  of  £mf,  The 
second  dogma  was  early  abandoned,  at  least  in  the  form 
in  which  it  was  presentcd  by  this  author.  It  was  not 
entircly  noycl,  but  it  was  the  most  original  portion  of 
Hartley*s  labors,  and  through  it  he  mainly  influenced 
the  deyelopment  of  the  French  philosophy.  It  was 
suggested  by  one  of  the  ąueries  in  Newton'8  Optics^  and 
may  be  traced  through  the  animal  spirits  of  I^cke  and 
Des  Cartes,  and  the  yortices  and  ehistic  ether  of  Des 
Cartes  to  the  earlicr  philosophers,  and  up  to  Epicurus 
and  Leueippus.  It  may  meiit  renewed  considcration  if 
the  physiological  psychology  now  in  prospect  should 
gain  acceptance.  The  doctrine  of  Association  is  re- 
garded  as  being  peculiarly  Hartley'8  owi.  It  was  not 
altogether  noyel :  he  himself  ascribcs  its  first  suggestion 
to  Gay.  It  is  presupposed  in  many  suggostions  of 
Locke,  and  is  descended  from  a  more  remote  and  illus- 
trious  ancestrj',  which  runs  back  to  the  Stagyrite— the 
reputod  fountain  of  so  much  error,  the  father  of  so  much 
wisdom.  It  receiycd,  howeyer,  such  an  ingenious  and 
extensiye  deyelopment  from  Hartley  that  Sir  James 


Mackintosh  rigfatly  disregards  the  claims  of  Gay,  bot 
wrongly  neglects  earlicr  obligations.  It  is  laigely  in- 
corporated  into  recent  schemes  of  metaphysics,  ethic8» 
and  sesthetics,  but  seyered  from  the  mechanical  hypoth- 
esis  which  gaye  it  its  chief  originality  and  its  distinc- 
tiye  complexion.  In  tłiis  mutilated  form  it  possesscs 
unque8tionable  truth ;  but  still  it  is  only  an  imperfect 
explaiuition  of  a  limited  class  of  mental  and  mora!  phe- 
nomena,  and  is  easily  pressed,  as  it  has  often  been  push* 
ed,  to  absurd  and  hazardous  conclusions.  Coleridge  has 
forcibly  signalized  its  dangers,  and  has  declared  that, 
whereyer  it  deyiates  from  the  simpler  expo8itton  of  Aris- 
totle,  it  declines  into  error  and  immoral  coureca. 

/,tV«*ari/>-p.— Hartley,  Obterrationa  on  Mcm,  his  Framej 
his  Duiyy  hu  Eipedatiom,  with  Notes  and  Additions  bjr 
Herman  Andrew  Pistorius  (Lond.  1791 , 3  yois.  8yo).  An 
abridgment  of  the  original  edition  had  been  publbhcd  by 
Dr.  Priestley  (Lond.  1775),  with  the  omiasion  of  the  doc- 
trine of  yibrations  and  yibratiuncules.  It  is  from  this 
mutilated  presentment  that  the  theory  of  Association 
has  been  principally  deriyed.  Hume,  Inguiry  concem- 
mg  the  Jlumctn  Unientanding,  sec.  ii-yii ;  Reid,  On  łhe 
InieUfctual  Powent,  Essay  ii,  eh.  iii,  ed.  Hamilton—un- 
fortunately,  Sir  William  neyer  supplied  the  notes  to 
Reid,  which  he  indicates  by  numbers:  Mackintosh,  On 
the  ProgreM  of  Ethical  Philosophy ;  Dugald  Stewart, 
On  the  Progress  of  Afetaphyskal,  Kihical,  and  Poiiłical 
Phiiosophy  (Pkilosophical  JCssays,  Workt,  edit.  Sir  W. 
Hamilton) ;  Coleridge,  Biographia  LUerctria,  eh.  y~yii ; 
Moreli,  HtMiory  of  Modem  Phiiosophy.     (G.  F.  H.) 

Hartlib,  Samukl,  an  Engllsh  unriter  of  the  I7th 
century,  was  bom  of  Polish  Protestant  parents.  He 
came  to  EngUnd  about  1640,  took  an  actiye  part  in  the 
theological  ąuestions  of  the  day,  and  endeayored  to 
bring  about  a  union  of  the  diflferent  churches.  He  af- 
terwaids  deyoted  himself  to  the  improyement  of  agri- 
culture,  etc  Haying  spent  all  his  fortunę  in  these  at- 
tempts,  he  receiyed  from  Cromwell  a  i^ension  of  £300, 
which  was  suppressed  at  the  Restoration.  He  Fpent  the 
latter  part  of  his  life  in  retirement,  and  perhaps  in  want. 
The  exact  time  of  his  dcath  is  unknown.  He  wrote  A 
Relation  ofthat  rrhich  halh  been  latdy  attempłed  to  pro^ 
cure  Ecdesiastical  Peace  among  Prottstants  (Lond.  1641) : 
— Considerations  conceming  KngUnwts  Peformation  ós 
Church  and  Stałe  (1647,  4to) : — Ticisse's  douhłing  con~ 
science  resolred  (1652, 8vo) ;  some  works  on  Husbandr}', 
etc  Milton  addressed  his  Essay  on  Education  to  Hart/- 
lib.  See  Gentleman" s  Magazine,  lxxii ;  Centura  litera" 
na,  yoL  iii ;  Chalmeis,  General  Hiographical  Dictum- 
ary, 

Hartmann,  Anton  Theodor,  a  German  Protestant 
theologian  and  Orientahst,  was  bom  at  Dusseldorf  June 
25, 1774.  He  studicd  at  Osnabrack,  Dortmund,  and  Got- 
tingen.  Afler  being  successiyely  co-rector  of  the  gymnar- 
sium  of  Soest  in  1797,  rector  of  the  gymnasium  of  Her- 
ford  in  1799,  and  professor  in  that  of  Oldenburg  in  1804y 
he  was  appointed  professor  of  theolog}*  in  the  Uniyersi- 
ty  of  Rostock  in  1811.  He  died  at'Rostock  April  21, 
1838.  He  is  especially  known  for  his  works  on  antiqui- 
tiea,  and  on  Hebrew  and  Arabie  literature,  the  principal 
of  which  aro  A  ufUdrung  fi.  Aaien  f.  Bibefforscher  (Ol- 
denburg, 1806-7, 2  yols.  8yo)  :— ZWc  Jlebrderin  am  Putz- 
łische  tu  ais  Braut  (Amst.  1809-1810, 8  yols.  8yo)  z—Sup- 
plementa  ad  J.  BuxtorJii  et  W.  GesenU  Lezie,  (Rostock, 
1813,  4to) : — Thesauri  Lingua  JJebraioce  e  Michna  au-^ 
gendi  (Rostock,  1825-1826, 3  parts,  4to)  i—Linguistiscke 
Einleitung  in  d.  StU€Uum  der  Bucher  des  A,T,  (Rostock, 
1818, 8yo) :— /7m/.  Krit,  Forschungen  aber  die  Bildung,  cf. 
ZeitaUer  v.  Plan  Łfunf  Bucher  Moses  (Rostock  et  Gu»- 
trow,  1831,  8yo)  i^Die  enge  Yerbmdumg  d.A,T,mUd, 
N,  (Hamb.  1831,  8yo)  .^Blidce  m  d,  GeisŁ  d.  Urchristen-^ 
thunu  (Dusseldorf,  1802,  8yo).  See  Haag,  La  France 
Prołesłanie ;  Hoefer,  Nouv,  Biog,  Generale,  xxiii,  474. 

EUuirwig,  Joi»  Christopher,  came  to  America  aa 
chaplain  to  a  (rerman  regiment  in  the  8er\'ice  of  Eng- 
land  during  the  first  French  war,  as  it  is  called.    He 


HARUM 


93 


HARYEST 


vas  a  member  of  the  fint  Lntheian  synod  held  in  this 
oountiy  in  1 748.    His  fint  regular  charge  combineil  8ev- 
enl  congregations  in  Huntcrdou  Co.^  N.  J.     He  labored 
fur  i  brief  period  in  Pennsyh-ania,  but  the  larger  portion 
uf  his  ministiy  waa  spent  in  the  state  of  New  York. 
He  died  in  1796.     The  manner  of  his  death  fumishes  a 
remarkable  inatance  of  the  power  of  the  imagination.  I 
Furty  yean  before,  the  impression  from  a  drearo  on  his ' 
birthday,  that  he  would  live  just  forty  years  longer,  had  ; 
become  m>  strong  that  he  felt  permaded  the  dream  would 
be  fulńlled,  and  his  life  protracted  to  the  close  of  his ' 
eightieth  year.    On  the  day  preceding  its  completion  j 
be  came  to  the  lesidence  of  the  Hon.  J.  K.  LiWngston,  | 
tnd  aninwnced  that  he  had  come  to  his  house  to  die, 
In  the  erening  he  conducted  the  family  deyotions,  and 
ihe  next  moming  arose  in  apparent  bealth.     Ile  break- 
Dttted  with  the  family,  and  entered  freely  into  conrer- 
latiun  ontil  the  approach  of  the  hour,  as  he  supposed, 
for  his  departure,  1 1  o*clock  A.M.    A  few  minutes  before 
the  tiioe,  he  reąuested  permiasion  to  rctire.    Mr.  Liv- 
iiig:!4oo,  unobserred  by  him,  foUowed,  and  noticed  that 
he  was  undreasing.    Just  as  the  dock  tolled  the  hour, 
he  was  in  the  act  of  remo\'iDg  the  stock  frum  the  neck ; 
at  that  moment  he  fell  back  and  expirecL     Notwith-  ' 
stindiog  his  eccentricitics,  he  posscsseil  many  noble  qual- 
ities,  and  his  name  will  evcr  be  associated  with  the  in- 
ititution  in  Otsego  Co.,N.  Y.,which  bears  his  name,  and 
of  which  he  may  be  said  to  be  the  founder.    The  tract 
of  lind  he  rcceired  for  his  eenrices  aa  chaplain  he  be- 
queathed  principally  for  the  establishment  of  a  theolog- 
ical  and  misaionary  institution  for  the  instruction  of  pi- 
009  young  men  for  the  Lutheran  ministry,  and  for  the 
edncation  of  Indians  in  the  Christian  religion  as  mis- 
aonańes  among  their  own  tribea.     (M.  L.  8.) 

Ha'nim  Glel**  Sarum\  Din,  elevated;  Sept.  'la- 
piifi),  the  iather  of  AharhcI,  the  *'  familiea"  of  which  lat- 
ter  are  enumerated  among  the  posterity  of  Coz,  of  the 
tiibe  of  Jadah  (1  Chroń,  iv,  8).     B.C.  post  1612. 

Hani'maph  (Heb.  Charumaph%  ti^i\^n,snub-no9edi 
Sept.  'E^fia^  V.  r.  'Ep«/ia3), "  father"  of  Jedaiah,  which 
Istter  was  one  of  the  {mests  who  repaired  part  of  the 
walls  of  Jemaalena  (Neh.  iu,  10).     B.C.  antę  446. 

Ha'nipllite  (Heb.  Charuphi',  "^Bnn,  with  the  art.; 
fur  which  the  Ma^retic  maigin  morę  correctiy  reads 
'^^'^^  Hariphite ;  Sept  'Apov^i  v.  r.  Xapf0i^\,  Vulg. 
lIantphHet)f  an  epithet  of  Shephatiah,  one  of  the  bnive 
adrenturers  who  joined  David  at  Ziklag  (1  Chroń,  xii, 
5) :  BO  called,  probably,  as  being  a  native  of  Hariph. 
'  Josabad  the  Gederathite,*^  of  the  preceding  yerse,  was 
probably  Irom  the  same  place ;  and  as  he  was  so  called 


from  being  a  resident  of  Gedor  (q.  v.),  it  would  aeeni 
that  the  epithet  **  Haruphite*'  was  an  equivalent  one,  aa 
a  descendant  from  Hareph  (q.  v.),  the  founder  of  Geder 
(1  Chroń,  ii,  51). 

Ha'niz  (Heb.  Charułs%  }'1in,  eager,  as  in  Prov.  xii, 
27,  etc. ;  Sept  'Apoi;^),  a  citizen  of  Jotbah,  and  father 
of  Meshullemeth,  who  became  the  wife  of  king  Manas- 
seh,  and  mother  of  king  Amon  (2  Kings  xxi,  19).  KC 
antę  664. 

Harvard,  Joiin,  foimder  of  Harvard  College,  Cam- 
bridge, Mass.,  was  bom  in  England,  studied  at  Emanuel 
College,  Cambridge,  where  he  became  A.M.  in  1635,  and 
entered  into  the  ministry  among  the  Dissenters.  Emi- 
grating  to  America,  he  became  pastor  of  a  Congrega- 
tional  society  at  Chariestown,  Mass.,  where  he  preached 
but  a  short  timc,  and  died  Sept  14, 1638.  In  his  will 
he  left  a  legacy  of  nearly  £800  to  the  high-school  of 
Cambridge.  This  beąuest  laid  the  foundation  of  the 
college,  to  which  the  trustees  gave  the  name  of  its  bene- 
factor. 

HarveBt  (^"^SJjJ,  hatsir%  L  e.  reaping;  ^tpurfióc), 
the  season  of  gathering  grain  or  iruits.  In  generał,  thia 
fell,  as  now  in  Palestine,  in  the  middle  of  April  or  Abib 
(John  iv,  85),  although  in  many  parta,  e.  g.  at  Jericho 
(whose  inhabitanta  were  the  iirst  to  preaent  the  tirst- 
fruits,  Mishna,  Pesachj  iv,  8),  it  began  as  early  as  March 
(Shaw,  Trar,  p.  291).  (Sec  Gerdes,  De  łen^re  meuii 
JlebrtBorum,  Utrecht,  1720.)  Dr.  Robinson  says:  "On 
the  4th  and  5th  of  June,  the  people  of  Hebron  were  just 
beginning  to  gather  their  wheat;  on  the  11  th  and  12th, 
the  threshing^floore  on  the  Mount  of  01ives  were  in  fuU 
operation.  We  had  ahready  seen  the  hanrest  in  the 
same  state  of  progress  on  the  pUins  of  Gaza  on  the  19th 
of  May ;  while  at  Jericho,  on  the  12th  of  May,  the  thresh- 
ing-floors  had  nearly  completed  their  work"  (Bib,  Ret,  ii, 
99, 100).  On  the  sixteenth  day  of  the  first  month,  Abib 
or  Nisan  (Josephus,  A  nt.  iii,  10, 5),  a  handful  of  ripe  eara 
was  oflered  before  the  Lord  as  the  first-fruits;  afler 
which  it  was  lawful  to  put  the  sickle  to  the  coni  (Lev. 
xxiii,  9-14).  (See  Schramm,  De  manipulo  hordeaceo, 
Frckft.  a.  0. 1706.)  The  harvest  is  described  as  begin- 
ning with  the  harley,  and  with  the  festival  of  the  Pass- 
over  (Lev.  xxiii,  9-14;  2  Sam.  xxi,  9, 10;  Buth  ii,  23), 
and  ending  with  the  wheat  (Gen.  xxx,  14 ;  £xod.  xxxiv, 
22),  and  with  the  festival  of  Pentecost  (Exod.  xxiii,  16). 
(See  Ot  ho,  /^x.  Rahb,  p.  684.)  In  the  most  ancient 
times  the  com  was  plucked  up  by  the  roots.  \Mien  the 
sickle  was  used,  the  wheat  was  either  cropped  off  uuder 
the  ear,  or  cut  cluse  to  the  ground ;  in  the  former  case, 
the  straw  was  aften«'ards  plucked  up  for  use ;  m  the  lat- 
ter,  the  stubble  was  left  and  bunit  on  the  ground  for 


14  13  19 

lV.I.Th«Btoward.   ff,S.B«v««.    i.  A 


11  lU  «  «  T 

Andent  Egyptian  Harrest  scenę.    (From  Wilkinson.) 

'  gly?"'    *'  <?"y.'."g  t^*  ^^•".1  '•>  **••  ""fi  fOM  ut.    7.  Th*  (nfKra.    I.  Winaowcł^    U.  The 


mibt.    IS,  U,  carrylog  th«  grain  to  the  gnury  ia  ■ 


HARWOOD 


94 


HASENUAH 


manure  (laa.  xvii,  6 ;  Job  xxiv,  24).  The  8heaves  were 
collected  into  a  heap,  or  Temoved  to  the  threehing-floor 
(Gen.  xxxvii,  7;  Lev,  xxiii,  10-15;  Ruth  ii,  7-15;  Job 
xxiv,  10  j  Jer.  ix,  22 ;  Mic  iv,  12 ;  Amos  ii,  13).  In 
Palestine  at  the  present  day,  the  grain  is  not  bound  into 
Bheaves,.but  is  gathered  into  two  large  bundles,  which 
are  canied  home  on  either  side  of  the  backs  of  animals 
(Thomson,  Land  cmd  Book,  ii,  323).  The  reaiiere  were 
the  owners  and  their  children,  and  men  and  womon 
Bervants  (Ruth  ii,  4, 8, 21, 23 ;  John  iv,  36 ;  James  v,  4). 
Refreshmcnts  were  provided  for  them,  especially  drink, 
of  which  the  gleaners  were  oflen  allowed  to  {>artake 
(Ruth  ii,  9) ;  so  in  the  Eg}T)tian  Bceiies  we  see  reapers 
drinking,and  the  gleaners  applying  to  share  the  draught. 
The  time  of  harvest  was  a  season  of  ver>'  great  enjoy- 
ment,  especially  when  the  crops  had  been  plentiful  (Psa. 
cxxvi,  1  -6 ;  IsL  ix,  3).  The  han^est  in  Scripture  is  like- 
wise  put  for  a  time  ofdestrudion  (Hos.  vi.  U),  according 
to  Newcome ;  but,  according  to  Horsley,  for  a  time  of 
merof,  Of  the  former  sense  there  is  an  exarople  in  Jer. 
Ii,  83,  plainly  refening  to  the  judgments  of  God  upon 
Babylon.  So  in  the  oracie  conceming  Damascus  (Isa. 
xvii,  5),  as  Lowth  observea,  the  king  of  Assyria  shali 
sweep  away  the  whole  body  of  the  people,  as  the  reap- 
er  strips  off  the  whole  crop  of  com,  and  the  remuant 
ahall  be  no  morę  in  proportion  than  the  acattered  ears 
left  to  the  gleaner.  In  Joel  iii,  18,  the  last  words  ex- 
plain  the  figurative  language  which  preoedes :  they  are 
ńpe  for  exci8ion.  The  same  comparison  is  uaed  in  Rev. 
xiv,  14;  XV,  18,where  the  person  refeired  to  as  execu- 
Łing  vengeance  is  Jesus  Christ  himself,  though  angels 
assist  in  the  execution.  But  harrest  is  alao  used  in  a 
good  sense,  as  in  Matt  ix,  87 ;  Lukę  x,  2;  John  iv,  85. 
So  in  Jer.  viii,  20,  *^  The  han''e8t  is  past,  the  sammrr  is 
ended,  and  we  are  not  savcd;*'  L  c.  the  time  in  which 
we  expected  to  be  saved  is  past.  The  hairesłj  in  agri- 
cu]t4u:al  reckoning,  is  considered  to  be  the  end  of  the 
season,  being  the  time  appointed  for  gathering  in  the 
fruits  of  the  earth,  and  finishing  the  labors  of  the  ycar. 
So,  in  Matt.  xiii,  39,  our  Lord  says,  **The  harvest  is  the 
end  of  the  world,  and  the  reapers  are  the  angels."*  In 
Matt.  ix,  36,  our  Lord,  seeing  multitudes  coming  to  hear 
him,  reroarks,  "The  han-est  truły  is  plenteous;'*  i.  e. 
many  are  wilHng  to  receive  instruction.    See  Agricul- 

TURK. 

Harwood,  Edward,  a  leamed  LTnitańan  minister, 
was  bom  in  1729  in  Lancashire.  In  1754  he  became 
master  of  a  school  at  Congleton,  in  C^eshirc,  from  whcncc 
he  removed  in  1765  to  Bristol,  where  he  was  ordained 
over  a  Presbyterian  congregation.  In  1768  he  obtained 
his  degrce  of  D.D.  from  Edinburgh,  through  the  inter- 
cst  of  Dr.  Chandler,  whose  daughter  he  marric<L  His 
character,  however,  was  so  immoral  that  his  congrega- 
tion dismissed  him;  on  which  hc  came  to  London, 
where  he  supported  himself  by  teaching  the  classics 
and  correcting  the  press.  He  died  poor  in  1794.  His 
principal  works  are,  1.  A  View  ofthe  variov8  edifions  of 
the  Greek  and  Roman  Classics  (London,  4th  edit.,  1791, 
12rao) : — %An  Inirodudion  to  the  New  Testament  (I^nd. 
1773-81, 2  vol8.8vo) :— 8.  An  edition  ofthe  Greek  Testa- 
ment (2  vols.  8vo) :— 4.  A  Liberał  Translation  ofthe  New 
Tesiument  into  polite  English  (or,  in  other  words,  a  bur- 
lesąue  of  the  sacred  Scriptures)  (Lond.  1768, 2  vol8, 8vo) : 
— 5.  The  Neto  Testament,  coUated  tnith  the  most  approred 
MSS,j  with  select  Notes  (1776, 2  vol8. 12mo).  See  Gen- 
Ueman's  Mag,  \o\a,  lxii-lxiv ;  Watt,  BibL  Briianmca, 

Hascall,  Daniec  a  Baptist  minister,  was  bom  at 
Benuington,  Vt.,  Feb.  24, 1782,  graduated  at  Middlebury 
G)llege  ń)  1806,  and  afterwards  studied  theolog^'  while 
engaged  as  a  teacher  in  Pittsfield,  Mass.  In  1808  he 
became  pastor  of  the  Baptist  church  in  Elizabeth  town, 
£68ex  Co.,  N.  Y.,  where  he  was  ordained  Sept.  7th,  and 
in  1813  he  accepted  a  cali  from  the  Baptist  Church  of 
Hamilton,  N.  Y.  In  1815  he  began  to  receive  pupils  in 
theology,  and  after  cstablishing  the  Baptist  Education 
Society  of  New  York  in  1817,  his  little  school  waa  in 


1820  transformed  into  the  '*  Hamilton  Literary  and  The- 
ological  Institution**  (now  Madison  University),  which 
was  opened  uiider  his  chaiige,  and  to  which  he  after- 
wards  excluslvely  devoted  himself,  dis6olving  his  pas- 
torał connection  in  1828.  He  however  left  it  in  1835, 
and  gave  his  attention  to  an  academy  which,  two  years 
before,  had  been  started  mainly  through  his  agency  in 
Florence,  Oneida  Co.,  N.  Y.  In  1848  he  resumed  his 
ministerial  labors  as  pastor  of  the  Baptist  Church  in 
Lebanon,  N.  Y.  He  died  June  28, 1852.  Mr.  HascalFa 
publications  were,  Ełements  of  Theology^  debigned  for 
family  reading  and  Bible-dasses ;  a  smaUer  work  ofthe 
same  kind  for  Sabbath-echools;  Caution  affoinst  False 
Philosophtf,  a  sermon  (1817) ;  and  a  pamphlet  entitled 
DefimUions  of  the  Greek  Bapto,  Bapfizoj  etc.  (1818)-— 
Sprague,  A  mials,  vi,  547. 

Ha8adl''ah  {Ueh,  Chasadjfah',  r\^*^W,faroredhy 
Jehorah ;  Sept.  'AtsaŁia),  one  ofthe  five  sons  of  Pedaiah 
(not  of  Zembbabel,  who  was  a  sixth),  of  the  descendants 
of  David  (1  Chroń,  iii,  20) ;  probably  the  same  otherwise 
called  Jubiiab-Heskd  in  the  same  ver8e  (see  Strong^s 
Harm,  and  Kxpos,  ofthe  Gospels,  p.  17).    B.C.  cir.  53G. 

Hasenkamp,  the  family  name  of  8everal  German 
theologians. 

JoHAMN  Gerhard  w^as  bom  in  Wechte,  Pkiissia,  June 
12, 1736.  Having  become  a  student  at  the  Academy  of 
Lingen,  1753-55,  he  distinguished  himself  by  an  eager 
thirst  for  knowledge,  and  by  great  eamestness  of  relig- 
ious  activity.  For  preaching  without  license  he  was 
8everal  times  arrestcd.  After  elcvcn  years'  suspension 
he  was  madę  rcctor  of  Ihc  Gymnasium  in  Dui&lurg  in 
1766,  and  soon  aJler  manricd,  and  settlcd  down  eamestly 
to  his  work  of  restoring  the  fallen  fortuncs  of  Ibe  gym- 
nasium. His  reUp^Tous  tcndencies  always  uiclined  him 
to  favor  pietisro,  and  to  urge  the  necessity  of  deep  Chris- 
tian experience.  He  therefore  sj-mpathizcd  fully  with 
CoUenbusch  (q.  v.)  and  Oetinger  (q.  v.).  He  was  again 
8iu)pende<l  as  a  *'  myslic"  and  disturbcr,  but  was  m)oii  re- 
storcd  by  the  higher  Church  authoritics  at  Berlin.  He 
died  Juiy  10,  1771.  His  autobiography,  cxtcn(Iing  to 
1766,  and  co:  tinucd  by  his  son,  was  publi^hcfl  in  the 
joumal  Wahrheit  z.  Gottseligktit  (vol.  ii,  5, 6, 1836).  He 
aiso  published  Predifften  m.  </.  Gesthmack  dtr  drd  ersten 
Jahrktoiderie  (Frankfort,  1772).  His  other  writi ngs  are 
of  litUe  importance. 

Friedrich  Arkou),  liis  half-brother,  bom  Jan.  11, 
1747,  succeedcd  Johann  as  rector  of  Duisburg,  and  mar- 
ricd  his  widów.  FoUowing  in  the  footsteps  of  his  broth- 
er,  he  shared  his  religious  opinions  and  feclings,  and 
wrote  seyeral  pamplilets  in  expo8ition  of  the  vicw8  of 
the  so-called  **  mystical"  school  of  Stilling  and  Lavatcr. 
He  also  wrotc  against  Seroler  and  other  rationalists,  who 
fared  baiUy  under  his  fiery  attacks.  See  his  U.die  rer^ 
dunkelnde.Atflddrung  (Duisb.  1789)  i—Briefe  uber  P?-©- 
pheten  (Duisb.  1791),  etc     He  died  in  1795. 

Johann  Heinrich,  another  brother,  was  bom  Sept. 
19, 1750.  After  helping  his  parents  until  he  was  sixteen 
years  old,  he  began  his  studies,  was  from  1776  to  1779 
rector  at  Eromerich,  and,  having  been  appointed  pastor 
of  a  smali  congregation  near  Altona,  remained  there 
during  the  last  thirty-five  years  of  his  lifo.  The  loneli- 
ness  of  his  life  in  the  solitude  of  his  rcmote  parish  influ- 
enced  his  character,  yet  he  is  the  most  genial  of  ihe 
three  brothers,  as  is  seen  in  his  Christliche  Schriften 
(Munster,  1816-19,  2  vols.).  He  died  July  17, 1814.— 
Herzog,  Real-Encykiop, ;  Pierer,  Umrersal-Leiikon,  s.  v. 
(J.N.P.) 

Hasenu^ah,  or  rather  Senuaii  (HMil^b,  a  &rwf- 
ling  [Gesen.]  or  hated  [FUrst],  with  the  art.  riC«l5Cn, 
hair-Seimak'),  the  name  of  two  Benjamitea  (but  the 
name  has  the  fem.  temiination). 

1.  (Sept.  *Avavovay  Eng.  Yers.  "Hasenuah,'^  Fa^- 
ther  of  Hodaviah  and  ancestor  of  Sallu,  which  last  was 
a  chief  resident  of  Jemsalem,  apparently  after  the  Cep- 
tivity  (1  Chroń,  ix,  7).     B.C.  antę  686. 

2*  (Sept.  'Affavó,  Eng.  Yers.  " Senuah.**)    Father  of 


HASHABIAH 


95 


HASPEYA 


Jndah,  which  Utter  was  ''aeoond  over  the  dty,"  after 
tłw  return  from  Babylon  (Neh.  xi,  9).     B.C.  cir.  440. 

Haahabrah  (Heb.  Chashabyah^  H^S^n  [and  in 
1  Cliion.  xxv,  3 ;  xxvi,  20 ;  2  Chroń,  xxxv,  9,  the  pro- 
loDged  form  Cka*hal^a'hu,  ^n*^3I?n],  rtyarded  by  Je- 
koĘMih ;  Scpti  'Aoi^i,  'A<rbtfi,  'Aatjiiac,  'A(ra/3ia,  etc.), 
the  name  of  at  kast  nine  descendanta  of  LerL 

1.  Son  of  Amaziah  and  father  of  Malluch,  of  the  fam- 
ily  of  Herari  (1  Chroń,  vi,  45).     B.C.  long  antę  1014. 

2.  A  son  of  Jeduthun,  appointed  by  David  aver  the 
twelfth  couTK  of  Levitical  singera  (1  Chrou.  xxv,  8, 19). 
RC.  1014. 

3.  Son  of  Kemuel,  of  Hebron,  appointed  by  David  at 
the  head  of  the  oflScen  to  take  charge  of  the  sacred  rev- 
enue  west  of  the  Jordan  (1  Chroń,  xxvi,  80;  xxvii,  17). 
RC  1014. 

4.  One  of  the  chief  Levitefl  who  madę  voluntary  of- 
ferings  of  victims  for  the  renewal  of  the  Tempie  8crvice6 
imder  Josiah  (2  Chroń,  xxxv,  9).     RC.  623. 

5.  Son  of  Bunni  and  father  of  Azrikam,  of  the  family 
of  Merari  (i  Chroń,  ix,  14 ;  Neh.  xi,  15).  RC.  consid- 
erably  antę  440. 

6.  Son  of  liAttaniah  and  father  of  Bani,  Levitefl 
(Neh.  xi,  22).     RC.  antę  440. 

7.  One  of  the  chief  priests  intnuted  by  Ezra  with 
the  bullion  and  other  vajuables  for  the  sacred  vcs8e]8  at 
Jeniaalem  (Ezra  viii,  24).  He  is  probably  the  same 
whoee  father  Ililkiah  is  mentioned  in  Neh.  xii,  21.  RC. 
536. 

8.  A  deacendant  of  Merari,  who  compUed  with  Ezn*8 
anmmons  for  persons  to  perform  the  proper  Levitical 
fimctioDS  at  Jenisalem  (Ezra  viii,  19).     RC.  536. 

9.  A  chief  of  the  Levites  (Neh.  xii,  24),  ^  nder  of  the 
halł  part  of  Keilah,"  who  repaired  part  of  the  walls  of 
Jemsalem  (iii,  17),  and  subscribed  the  oovenant  of  fidel- 
ity  to  Jehovah  (x,  U).     B.C.  446-410. 

Hashab^nah  (Heb.  Chaahalmah',  n33Cn,  prob. 
for  n^ąrn,  Hashdbiah;  Sept.  'E<ro/3ava,Vuig.^//<M«fr- 
na),  one  of  the  chief  of  the  people  who  subscribed  Ne- 
hemiah'8  covenant  (Neh.  x,  25).     RC.  cir.  410. 

Hashabni^ah  (Heb.  ChMhabngyah',  n^33un,  L  q. 
•lO^^n,  Hcuhabnah ;  SepL  'Aaparia,  £ł/3aj/i),  the  name 
of  two  men  about  the  time  of  Che  return  from  Babylon. 

1.  Father  of  Hattush,  which  lattei  repaired  part  of 
the  walls  of  Jemsalem  (Neh.  iii,  10).     RC.  antę  446. 

2.  One  of  the  Levites  appointed  by  Ezra  to  inteipret 
Łbe  law  to  the  people  (Neh.  łx,  5).    RC  cir.  410. 

Haahbad^ana  (Heb.  Chashbaddanah',  n9^ąon,for 
tm^  3TŚn,  contideraiion  injudgmg,  perh.  q.  d.  amsid- 
erute  putge;  Sept  'AtrafiaSfAÓ,  Yulg.  UoBbadctna),  one 
of  thcsc  who  stood  at  £Źra's  left  hand  while  he  read  the 
law  to  the  people  (Neh.  viii,  4).     RC.  cir.  410. 

Haah-Baz.    See  Maiieb-Shalal-Ha9h-B.\z. 

Ha^shem  (Heb.  Jlaahem',  fion,  perh.  L  q.  CIŚH, 
Jiti;  Sept  'A<ra/i,yulg.  Aatem),  a  native  of  Gtzoh,  and 
aooestor  of  two  of  David's  heroes  (1  Cliron.  xi,  34;  the 
JasHEN  (q.  V.)  of  2  Sam.  xxiii,  32).     RC  antę  1014. 

Haahlabiin.    See  Assassins. 

Haahmannlm  (Hebrew  Ckathmanmm',^'^t^VT\', 
Sept.  irp«<r/3ftCi  Vulg.  leffait)^  a  plur.  form  oocurring  only 
in  the  Heb.  of  Psa.  lxviii,  31 :  "'Hcukmcamim  [  A.  Vers. 
"princes"]  shall  come  out  of  Egypt,  Cush  shall  make 
her  hands  to  hasten  to  God.**  The  word  has  usually 
been  derived  from  the  Arabie  Mashmm,  rich^  hence  in- 
flaential  or  noble;  but  a  derivation  from  the  civil  name 
of  Hermopolis  Magna  in  the  Heptanomis,  presenrcd  in 
the  modem  Arabie  Ashmumfen,  <Hhe  two  AshmAns,"* 
secma  morę  reasonable.  The  ancient  Eg^^ptian  name  is 
Ba-thmen  or  /fa«&jniifr,  ''tho  abode  of  eight ;"  the  sound 
of  the  aigna  for  eight,  however,  we  take  alone  from  the 
Coptic,  and  Bnigsch  reada  them  Seseanu  {Geog.  Iruckr, 
i,  219, 220),  but  hardly  on  conclusive  grounds.  If  we 
nppoae  that  Hashmannim  is  a  proper  name  and  signi- 


fies  IlermopoUłeSj  the  mention  might  be  ezplained  by 
the  circumstance  that  Hermopolis  Magna  was  the  great 
dty  of  the  Egyptian  Hermes,  Thoth,  the  god  of  wisdom ; 
and  the  meaning  might  therefore  be  that  even  the  yńtett 
Egyptians  should  come  to  the  Tempie,  as  well  as  the 
distant  Cushites.>-Smith,  s.  v.  We  may  add  that  the 
name  Ilasnumeany  which  was  givcn  to  the  Maccabees  or 
Jewish  prinoes  in  the  interval  between  the  O.  and  N.T., 
was,  it  is  supposed,  derived  from  Hashmannim  (Heng- 
stenberg,  Psalms,  ii,  869).— Kitto,  s.  v. 

Hashino^nah  (Heb.  Ch(uhmonah'j  nsi^ĆHi/a^ 
ness;  Sept  'A<7M/iafva,  v.  r.  'A<Tt\fŁU)vd  and  ScX|/u>va), 
the  thirtieth  station  of  the  Israelites'during  their  wan- 
dering,  situated  not  far  from  Mount  Hor  (Moseroth),  in 
the  direction  of  the  desert  (Nurab.  xxxiii,  29,  30) ;  ap- 
parently  near  the  intersection  of  wady  el-Jerafeh  with 
wady  el-Jeib,  in  the  Arabah.     See  £xoi>i£. 

Ha'«hub  (Heb.  Chashskub',  n«ltrn,  inteUigent;  Sept 
'A(Tov/3,  in  Neh.  xi,  1 5  'AaaoCpy  in  1  Chroń,  ix,  14 ' Aró/3 ; 
Yulg.  Ilasubj  in  1  Chroń,  ix,  14  Ilassub)^  the  name  of 
two  or  three  mcu  about  the  time  of  tłie  return  from 
Babylon. 

1.  A  Levite  of  the  family  of  Merari,  son  of  Azrikam 
and  father  of  Shemaiah,  which  last  was  one  of  those 
resident  in  the  "villagc8  of  the  Netophathites,"  and 
having  generał  over8ight  over  the  Tempie  (Neh.  xi,  15; 
1  Chroń,  ix,  14,  in  wliich  latter  passage  the  name  is 
morę  accurately  Anglicized  "  Hassłuib").    B.C.  antc  440. 

2.  A  person  who  repaired  part  of  the  walls  of  Jenisa- 
lem oppositc  his  housc  (Neh.  iii,  21) ;  perhaps  the  same 
with  the  forcgoing.    RC.  446. 

3.  *•  Son"  of  Pahath-Moab,  and  one  of  thosc  who  re- 
paired part  of  the  walls  of  Jenisalem  (Neh.  iii,  1 1 ) .  RC. 
446.  He  is  probably  the  same  with  one  of  tho  chief 
laraelites  who  joined  in  the  sacred  covcnant  of  Nehemi- 
ah  (Neh.  x,  23)     B.C.  cir.  410. 

Hashu^bah  (Heb.  Chashubah^  nnrn,  esteemed,  a 
Chaldaizłng  form  for  atOT;  Sept  'Affe/3a,Vulg.//ata- 
ban)t  one  oł  the  five  sons  (exclu8ive  of  Zcrubbabel)  of 
Pedalah,  the  descendant  of  David  (1  Chroń,  iii,  20) ; 
not  of  Zerubbabel,  as  at  first  appears  (see  Strong'8  Har- 
mony  and  Kxpo8,  ofthe  GottpeU,  p.  17).     RC.  cir.  536. 

Ha''Bhum  (Heb.  Chashum',  Ddn,  opuleni;  Sept 
Affoi/^,  'Afffffi,  'H<Ta/ii,  'Q<Tuftf  'Hto/i),  the  name  ap- 
parently  of  two  or  three  men  about  the  time  of  the  Cap- 
tivity. 

1.  An  Israelite  whosc  posterity  (or  rather,  perhapa,  a 
place  whose  inhabitants),  to  the  number  of  223  males, 
or  328  in  all,  retumed  from  Babylon  with  Zerubbabel 
(Ezra  ii,  19;  Neh.  vii,  22);  some  of  whom  afterwarda 
divorced  their  Gentile  wive8  (Ezra  x,  33).  The  asso- 
ciated  names  seem  to  indicate  a  locality  in  the  north- 
westem  part  of  the  territory  of  Benjamin.  RC.  antę 
536. 

2.  One  of  those  who  stood  at  Eznfs  left  hand  while 
he  was  reading  the  law  to  the  people  (Neh.  viii,  4); 
probably  the  same  with  one  of  the  chief  of  the  people 
who  subscribed  Nehemiah's  covenant  (Neh.  x,  18).  RC 
cir.  410. 

Haahu^pha  (Neh.  vii,  46).    See  Hasupiia. 

HaskeU,  Daniel,  a  Congregational  minister,  waa 
bom  at  Preston,  Conn.,  June,  1784.  He  graduated  at 
Yale  College,  1802 ;  was  installed  pastor  in  Burlington, 
Vt,,  April  10, 1810,  where  he  remained  until  1821,  when 
he  was  madę  president  of  the  Univer8ity  of  Yermont, 
He  resigned  this  office  in  1824,  and  dicd  Aitg.  9,  1848. 
Mr.HaskcU  published  an  ordination  scrmon  (1814) ;  ^ińth 
the  assŁstance  of  J.  C.  Smith,  A  Gazetteer  of  the  United 
SłaUs  (1843,  8vo) ;  Chronological  Vieio  of  the  World 
(1845, 12mo) ;  and  a  few  occasional  dLscourses.  He  also 
edited  McCulloch'8  Geographical  Dictionar>',  published 
by  the  Har[>ers  (1843^44)  .--Sprague,  vi  rimi/^,  ii,  526. 

Hasmoiueans.    See  Asmon^kan. 

Haspeya  (d<*i&On),  a  river  and  town  of  Paleatin^ 


HASRAH 


96 


HATTEMTST8 


near  Lebanon,  mentioncd  in  the  Talmud  (Demay^  ii) ; 
acoording  to  Schwarz  {Pakst.  p.  65),  identical  with  the 
modem  Arabie  Koronie  near  the  source  of  the  Jordan; 
evidenUy  the  modem  Haśbeia,  an  important  place  in 
that  region  (Robinson,  Reaearche»,  new  ed.  iii,  880). 

Has'rah  (Heb.  Chasrah\  ITntpn,  poverty;  Sept.  'Ed^ 
9ipŁ  y.  r.  'Apac,  Yiilg.  Jlcura),  the  father  (or  mother)  of 
Tikbath,  and  grandfather  of  Shallum,  which  last  was 
husband  of  liuldah  the  prophetess  (2  Chroń.  xxxiy,  22). 
The  parallel  passage  (2  Kinga  xxii,  14)  gires  the  name, 
prób.  by  transposition,  in  the  form  Haruas  (Dn*in^ 
Sept.  'Apac,  Vu]g.  A  racu).  Hasrah  is  said  to  have  heen 
"  keeper  of  the  wardrobe,"  perhaps  the  sacerdotal  yest- 
ments ;  if,  indeed,  that  epithet  does  not  rather  refer  to 
Shallum.    B.C.  considerably  antę  623. 

Haaaan.    See  Assassins. 

Hassę,  Friedrich  Rudolf,  a  German  theologian, 
was  bom  at  Dresden  June  29, 1808.  After  studying  at 
Leipzic  and  Berlin,  he  established  himaelf,  in  1834,  at 
the  miirerrity  of  the  latter  city  as  privatdocent ;  in  1836 
he  became  extraordinary  profeseor  of  Church  History  at 
the  UnLversity  of  Greifswald,  and  in  1841  ordinary  pro- 
fessor  at  the  University  of  Bonn.  Subeeąuentl}'  he  was 
also  appointed  consistorial  councillor.  He  died  m  1862. 
His  principal  work  is  the  excellent  monograph  Anselm 
von  Canłerburif  (Leips.  1843-62, 2  Yols.),  one  of  the  best 
works  of  this  class,  and  which  had  the  merit  of  causing 
a  morę  scientific  treatment  of  the  history  of  scholasti- 
cism.  His  Geschichte  des  alten  Bundes  (Leips.  1863)  is 
a  course  of  lectures,  and,  as  such,  is  meritorious.  Hu 
Kirchengeschicfite  was  published  after  his  death  by  Koh- 
ler (Leips.  1864, 3  rola.).  See  Kratft,  F,  R,  Hassę  (Bonn, 
1865) ;  Studien  u.  KrUJden,  1867,  p.  823. 

Hassena^ah  (Neh.  iii,  3).    See  Sbnaaił 

Has^shnb  (1  Chroń,  ix,  14).    See  Hashub. 

Hasu^plia  (Heb.  Chasupha%  K&nisn,  uncocertd; 
Sept.  'Affou^a,  *AoH^a ;  Yulg.  Jlampha),  one  of  the 
Nethinim  whose  descendants  retumed  from  Babylon 
with  Zembbabel  (Ezra  ii,  43 ;  Neh.  vii,  46,  in  which  lat- 
ter passage  the  name  is  less  oorrectly  Anglicized  ^Hash- 
vpha").    RC.  antę  536. 

Hat  is  the  rendering  of  the  Eng.  Bibie  for  the  Chald. 
K^a^iS  {karbela'f  aooording  to  Gesenius  from  ^^^^S,  to 
ffird  OT  dothe,  as  in  1  Chroń,  xv,  27),  a  manile  or  paU 
lium  (Dan.  iii,  21 ;  marg. ''  turbana").    See  Dress. 

Hartach  (Heb.  Haihak',  "^nri,  perhaps  from  Persie, 
rerify ;  Sept.  'Apxn^aioc,  Vulg.  A  tkaeh)^  one  of  the  eu- 
nucha in  the  palące  of  Xerxe8,  appointed  to  wait  on  £s- 
ther,  whom  she  employed  in  her  Communications  with 
Mordecai  (Esth.  iv,  5, 6, 9, 10).     RC.  474. 

Hatchment,  a  word  corrapted  from  achteoemad, 
and  signifying,  in  heraldry,  the  armońal  beaiings  of  any 
person  fully  emblazoned  with  shield,  crest,  supporters, 
eto.  The  word  is  used  in  England  for  the  escutcheon 
hung  up  ovcr  a  door  after  a  funeral,  and  often  in  the 
church.  Heraldry  is  thus  supposed  to  have  been  for- 
merly  connected  with  religion.  The  coat  was  said  to  be 
asBumed  with  religious  feeling,  and  at  length  restored  to 
the  sanctuary,  in  token  of  thankful  acknowledgment  to 
Ahnighty  GÓd.-— Farrar,  Ecdts,  Dktionary,  &  v. 

Hate  (properly  KSiS, /iifflin),  to  regard  with  a  pas- 
sion  contrary  to  love  (Jer.  xliv,  4).  God^s  hatied  is  to- 
wards  all  sinful  thoughts  and  ways.  It  is  a  feeling  of 
which  all  holy  beings  aze  oonscious  in  view  of  sin,  and 
b  whoUy  unlike  the  hatred  which  is  mentioned  in  the 
Scriptures  among  the  works  of  the  flesh  (GaL  v,  20). 
See  Akger.  When  the  Hebrews  compared  a  stronger 
affection  with  a  weaker  one,  they  called  the  first  hce^ 
and  the  other  hatred,  meaning  to  love  in  a  less  degree 
— "  Jacob  havc  I  loved,  and  Esau  have  I  hated"  (Rom. 
ix,  13) ;  L  e.  on  Jacob  have  I  bestowed  privileges  and 
blessings  such  as  are  the  proofs  of  affection ;  I  have 
tzeated  him  as  one  treats  a  friend  whom  he  love8;  but 


from  Esau  hare  I  withheld  theae  priTileges  and  ble»* 
ings,  and  therefore  treated  him  aa  one  is  wont  to  treat 
those  whom  he  dblikes.  That  this  refers  to  the  bestow- 
roent  of  temporal  blessings,  and  the  withholding  of  them, 
is  elear,  not  only  from  this  passage,  but  from  comparin^ 
Mai  i,  2, 3;  Gen.  xxv,  23;  xxvii,  27-29, 87-40.  Indeed, 
aa  to  katedj  ita  meaning  here  is  rather  prwatwe  thaa 
posUwe,  So,  *'  If  a  man  have  two  wi veB,  one  bełoved 
and  another  hated"  (Deut.  xxi,  15) ;  L  e.  less  be]oved. 
When  our  Saviour  says  that  he  who  would  foUow  him 
must  haie  father  and  mother,  he  means  that  even  these 
dearest  earthly  frienda  must  be  ]oved  in  a  subordinate 
degree ;  so,  in  the  same  sense,  the  foUower  of  Christ  is 
to  hate  his  own  life,  or  be  wilUng  to  sacrifice  it  for  the 
love  and  senrice  of  the  Redeemer  (Gen.  xxix,  30 ;  DenU 
xxi,  16;  Prov.  xiii,  24;  Matt  vi,  24;  x,  37;  Lukę  xiv, 
26 ;  xvi,  13 ;  John  xii,  25) Bastow.     See  Love. 

Ha'tliath  (Heb.  Chathaih',  nrn,  terror,  as  in  Job 
vi,  21 ;  Sept  'A^a3),  son  of  Othniel  aąd  grandson  of 
Kenaz,  of  the  tribe  of  Judah  (1  Chroń,  iv,  13),  conse- 
ąuently  also  grand-nephew  and  grandaon  of  Caleb,  son 
of  Jephunneh  (see  ver.  15,  and  comp.  Judg.  i,  13).  RC 
post  1612. 

Hafipba  [many  HaH'pha]  (Hebrew  Chatipha\ 
Kfc*^I3r[,  capturedf  Sept.  'An^a,  'Arufa),  one  of  the 
Nethinim  whose  posterity  retumed  from  Babylon  with 
Zembbabel  (Ezra  ii,  54 ;  Neh.  vii,  56).    RC.  antę  686. 

Hatlta  [some  HaH^ta]  (Heb.  Chatita%  K^^^cn, 
earploraiion;  Sept.  'Ariró),  one  of  the  "porters"  (i.  e. 
Levitical  Tempie -jamfora)  whose  posterity  retumed 
from  Babylon  with  Zenibbabel  (Ezza  ii,  42;  Neh.  vii| 
45).    RC.  anto  536. 

Hatsi  ham-Mennohdtfa  (nńnaisn  *isr|.  Chat" 
si%  eto.,  midst  of  the  resting^laces ;  SepL  *E<wi  'Afifia- 
vi5,  Vulg.  dimidwm  regutettonunij  Eng.  Yers,  **half  of 
the  Manahethites,"  marg.  <<  half  of  the  Menuchites,"  or 
**Hatsiham-Menuchoth"),  one  of  the  two  sons  of  Sho- 
bal,  the  "father"  of  Kirjath-Jearim  (I  Chroń,  ii,  52) ; 
whence  the  patronymic  for  his  descendants,  Hatsi-hax- 
Manachthites  (''Finsart  *^^n,  Sept,  ilfumt  n/c  Ma* 
va^,Yińg,dimiduim  recuiełioms,  Eng,Yen,  "half  of  the 
Manahethites,"  or  "  hidf  of  the  Menuchites*^,  in  rerse 
54.    Ra  between  1612  and  1098.    See  MENCrcuiTS. 

Hat-Temarim.    See  Ir-hat-Temarik, 

Hat-TaavalL    See  Kibroth-hat-Taayah. 

Hat-Ticon.    See  Ha;:ar-hat-Tioo27. 

ISattem,  Poktiak  van.    See  Hattemists. 

Hattemists,  a  Dutch  sect,  named  from  Pontianns 
van  Hattem,  a  minister  in  Zealand  towaids  the  dose  of 
the  18th  century,  who  imbibed  the  sentimenta  of  Spino- 
za, and  was  degraded  from  the  pastorał  offioe.  He  wrota 
a  treatise  on  the  Heidelberg  Catechism.  The  Yerscho- 
rists  (q.  v.)  and  Hattemists  resemble  cach  other,  though 
Yan  Hattem  tried  in  vain  to  unitę  the  Yerschorists 
with  his  own  followers.  '*The  founders  of  these  secta 
foUowed  the  doctrine  of  absolnto  decrees  into  its  fartheat 
logical  results ;  they  denied  the  difference  between  morał 
good  and  evil,  and  the  comiption  ofhuman  naturę ;  from 
whenoe  they  further  conduded  that  the  whole  of  idigion 
consisted,  not  in  acting,  but  in  suffcring;  and  that  all  the 
precepts  of  Jesus  Christ  are  redudble  to  this  one — ^tbat 
we  bear  with  cheerfulness  and  patience  the  events  that 
happen  to  us  through  the  divine  will,  and  make  it  our 
constant  and  only  study  to  maintain  a  perfect  tnnąuil- 
lity  of  mind.  Thus  far  they  agreed ;  but  the  Hattem- 
ists further  affirmed  that  Christ  madę  no  expiation  for 
the  sins  of  men  by  his  death,  but  had  only  suggested  to 
us,  by  his  mediation,  that  there  was  nothing  in  us  that 
could  offend  the  Ddty :  this,  they  say,  waa  Christ'B  man* 
ner  of  justifying  hi8seiTanta,aiid  presenting  tbem  blame- 
less  before  the  tribunal  of  God.  It  was  one  of  t^ir  dia- 
tinguishing  tenets  that  God  does  not  punidi  mea  Jbr 
their  sina,  but  hjf  their  sina."— See  MoaheiiiH  Ch,  History 


HATTIL 


«ł 


HAURAN 


cent  xTii,  sec.  ii,  pL  ii,  eh.  ii ;  Buck,  Theologioal  Dictum" 
ary,  &  V.;  Paquot,  Mimoirts  pour  sermr  a  tkiiłoire  des 
PagB-BaSy  iz,  96-98;  Uoefer,  Nourelie  Biog.  Generale, 
sxiii,539. 

Hat^tU  (Heb.  Ckaua%  b^^ąn,  waring ;  Sept.  'ArTł\, 
'BrrifX),  one  of  the  descendants  of  "  Solomon'8  sen-ants" 
|Le.pcrh.GibeoniŁLsh  Tempie  sUres),  whose  posteńty 
feturned  from  Babylon  with  Zembbabel  (Ezra  ii,  57 ; 
Neh.  vii,  59.)     RC  antę  536. 

Hatto,  bishop  of  Basel,  was  bom  763,  madę  bishop  in 
805,  and  abbot  of  Keicheaau  in  806^  He  waa  employed 
hf  Cfaariemagne  in  an  embassy  to  the  Greek  emperor 
IHcephonis,  to  aettle  the  boundańes  of  both  empirea 
Uaving,  in  823,  Uid  aside  his  titles  and  dignities,  he  died 
in  836  as  a  stmple  raonk  at  Reichenau.  Two  of  his 
works  have  descended  to  us :  Z^e  vmont  WtUini  (Y isioiis 
of  iw  di$ciple  Wettin  on  those  suffering  in  Purgatory 
and  on  the  Glory  of  Saints,  done  into  ve»es  by  Walafrid 
Strabo,  and  printed  in  Mabillon,  Acta  S,  Bmed,  iv,  1, 

273);  25capUa  (/>Uc*en,  i,584) Heizog,Jieal-Enaf- 

UopSdie,  8.  T. ;  Ciarkę,  Succession  of  Sac,  Liter,  ii,  471. 
(J.N.P.) 

Hatto  or  Otho  I,  tenth  archbishop  of  Mentz. 
The  time  and  place  of  his  birth  are  unknomi.  In  888 
he  saeceeded  Budolf  os  abbot  of  Reichenau,  then  one  of 
the  richest  monasteries  in  Germany.  He  was  in  such 
laror  with  king  Amulf— thanks  to  his  skill  and  utter 
want  of  piinciple — that  he  is  sald  to  have  held  at  the 
iune  time  eleren  other  abbeys.  In  891  he  was  elected 
aichbishop  of  Mentz:  here  he  built  a  church  to  St. 
Geoige,  haring  obtained  the  head  and  another  part  of 
the  body  of  the  saint  from  pope  Formosus !  In  Augusta 
895,  he  preńded  at  the  GouncU  of  Tiibor,  where  the  em- 
peior  and  22  bishops  were  present  They  voted  58  can- 
oos,  mostly  for  the  repression  of  crimc.  The  8ih  canon 
gires  an  idea  of  the  power  Romę  held  even  at  that  pe- 
riod over  the  German  churches :  Jłonoremus  tanctam  to- 
miBkfim  ei  upottoUccun  tedem,  ut  gua  ndbia  tacerdotalit 
mater  eti  ^mUatit,  debeai  etse  tnagistra  ecdeaiasticce  ra- 

tims  ąnartm Ucei  viz  ferendum  ab  ilUi  sancta 

tede  imponatur  jugum,conferamus  et  pia  (UvoHone  toUr' 
auts,  After  Louis*s  death,  in  October,  911,  Hatto  was 
leUuned  in  the  council  of  his  snccessor,  Conrad.  Hav- 
ing  departed  on  a  joumey  to  Romę,  March  13,  913,  he 
died  a  few  dsys  ader  of  fever,  according  to  one  account ; 
but,  aooording  to  others,  he  was  killed  at  the  battle  of 
Ueresburg  in  January,  918. — Hoefer,  Nour,  Biog.  Geni- 
rak,  xxiii,  539  8q. ;  Mabillon,  Acta  Sonet,  Ord,  Bened, 
vu,118.     (J.N.P.) 

Hatto  or  Otho  U,  sumamed  Bonoge,  15th  arch- 
Ińshop  of  Mentz.  He  was  abbot  of  Fulda,  and,  at  the 
death  of  archbishop  William  of  Saxony,  March  2, 968, 
was  appointed  his  successor  by  Emperor  Otho  I.  Hatto 
died  in  969.  The  Magdeburg  Cenłuries  state  that  he 
was  esten  alive  by  rats  as  a  punishment  for  his  avarioe, 
and  becauae  he  had,  durin^  a  famine,  compared  the  poor 
to  theae  animals ;  and  he  is  the  subject  of  the  well-known 
legend  of  the  Rat  Tower  on  the  Rhine. — See  GaUia 
Chriiiieouif  v,  coL  456;  Hoefer,  Nouv,  Biog.  Generaley 
xxiii,  541.     (J.  N.  P.) 

]3at't1lBh  (Heb.  Chaitush\  ti^Iisn,  prób.  ataenMed 
[FURst,  comtatderJi-y  Sept.  'Arrot/c*  but  X(rrovc  in  1 
Chroń,  iii,  22,  and  v.  r.  Aarroirę  in  £zra  viii,  2),  the 
name  of  8everal  men  about  or  after  the  time  of  the  re- 
tem from  Babylon. 

1.  A  priest  who  retumed  to  Jerusalem  with  Zemb- 
babel (Nch.  xii,  2).    B.C.536. 

2.  A  descendant  of  Darid  who  accompanied  Ezra  to 
JeraBalem  (Ezrm  riii,  2).    RC.  459.     See  No.  5. 

3.  Son  of  Hashabniah,  and  one  of  those  who  rebuilt 
the  walla  of  Jerusalem  (Neh.  iii,  10).  B.C.  446.  He 
was  posBibly  the  same  with  No.  2. 

4.  One  of  the  priests  who  united  in  the  sacred  oove- 
DBiit  with  Nehemiah  (Neh.  x,  4).     B.C.  cir.  410. 

5.  Ooe  of  the  sous  of  Shemalah,  among  the  posterity 


of  Zembbabel  (1  Chroń,  iii,  22),  and  oontemponury  with 
the  Nagge  of  Lukę  iii,  25  (see  Strong's  Hann.  and  Ax- 
poe,  of  the  Gospełs,  p.  17).  B.C  somewhat  post  406. 
By  some  he  is  identified  with  No.  2  above,  reading  Ezra 
viii,  2  (after  the  (Sept)  thus:  "of  the  sous  of  Da\ńd: 
Hattush.  of  the  sons  of  Shechaniah."  This,  however, 
is  not  only  forbidden  by  other  chronologtcal  notices  [see 
Darius  ;  Zerl'bbabbl],  but  rests  on  the  too  slender 
support  for  the  genuineness  of  the  tcxt  itself  in  quea- 
tion ;  where,  as  in  ver.  5,  we  may  suppose  that  a  name 
is  missing,  or  that  the  name  Shechaniah  itself  has  crept 
in  from  the  latter  verse,  sińce  it  appears  nowhere  else 
as  that  of  a  family  heaiL    See  Shkghanlih. 

Hatigeans  (Hangeanere).  Hans  Nielsen  Hauge 
was  bom  in  Norway  April  3, 1771.  He  had  strong  relig- 
ioiis  imprcssions  in  youth,  which  produced  a  gloomy  state 
of  mind.  But  in  1795  he  passed  Łhrough  a  change  which 
fiUed  him  with  joy.  Evcr  after,  amid  all  vicis8itudes, 
hc  was  a  cheerful  Christian.  He  soon  began  to  preach, 
and  madę  a  powerful  impression  on  the  public  mind.  He 
t»velled  cxten8ively  in  Norway  and  Deumark,  wrote 
many  tracts,  and  in  1804  esublished  a  priuting-office  in 
Christiansand  to  diaseminate  his  sentiments.  He  ob- 
tained many  followers,  but  finally,  through  the  influence 
of  the  clcrgy,  was  punished  with  a  heavy  fine  and  im- 
pridonment.  After  this  he  lived  in  rcttrement  till  his 
death  in  1824.  In  doctrine,  Hauge  differed  from  eran- 
gelical  Protestanta  in  generał  in  but  few  pouits:  e.  g.  he 
held  that  the  ministry  is  a  common  duty,  and  that  spe- 
cially  ordained  and  scparatcd  ministers  are  unnecessar}' ; 
alsothat  Church  creeds  and  Confessions  are  of  no  great 
account.  He  properly  placed  great  stress  upon  faith  and 
its  effects,  but  it  was  in  a  one-sided  way.  Nevertheless, 
his  laljore  contributed  largely  to  the  revival  of  evangel- 
ical  rellgion.  The  party  called  Haugeans  is  still  numer- 
ous  in  Norway:  they  contend  against  the  laxness  of 
Church  discipline  and  against  Rationalism,  and  have 
much  influence  with  the  pcople.  See  Hase,  Church  Bisf, 
p.  547 ;  Grcgoire,  Ifist.  des  Sedes  Relig.  t.  v. ;  Stfiudlin 
and  Tschimcr,  A  rchir.f.  Kirchengeschichte,  ii,  854;  Ha- 
genbach,  Ilisi.  ofłhe  Church  in  ISth  and  I9lh  CenfurieSf 
transl.  by  Hurst,  ii,  389 ;  Stud.  w.  Kritiken,  1849,  p.  749  sq. 

Han'ran  (Heb.  Chavran%  Tjjn ;  Sept.  Avpavinc 
and  'QpavXnc,  the  AuranUis  of  Josephus  and  others, 
the  llauran  of  the  Arabs,  so  called  prób.  from  the  mul- 
titude  of  caces,  "lin,  found  there,  which  even  at  the 
present  day  serre  as  dwellings  for  the  inhabitants),  a 
tract  or  region  of  Syria,  south  of  Damascus,  east  of 
Gaulonitis  (Golan)  and  Bashan,  and  west  of  Trachoni- 
tis,  extending  from  the  Jabbok  to  the  territory  of  Da- 
mascene-Syria;  mentioned  only  in  Ezek.  xlvii,  16, 18, 
in  defiuing  the  north-eastem  border  of  the  Promised 
Land.  It  was  probably  of  smali  extent  originally,  but 
received  exten8ive  additions  from  the  Romans  imder 
the  name  o{  Auranitis.  Josephus  frequcntly  mentions 
Auranitis  in  connection  with  Trachonitis,  Batamea,  and 
Gaulonitis,  which  with  it  constituted  the  ancient  king- 
dom  of  Bashan  {War,  i,  20,  4;  ii,  17,  4).  It  formed 
part  of  that  Tpaxii*viTtooc  x***9^  referred  to  by  Lukę 
(iii,  1)  as  subject  to  Philip  the  tetrarch  (comp.  Joseph. 
Ant.  xvii,  11,4).  It  is  bounded  on  the  west  by  Gaulo- 
nitis, on  the  north  by  the  wild  and  rocky  districŁ  of 
Trachonitis,  on  the  east  by  the  mountainous  region  of 
Batamea,  and  on  the  south  by  the  great  plain  of  Moab 
(Jer.  xlviił,  21).  Some  Arab  geographcrs  have  de- 
scribed  the  Haurdn  as  much  morę  extensive  than  here 
stated  (Bohaed.  Vif.  Sal  ed.  Schtdt.  p.  70 ;  Abulfed.  Tab. 
Syr.  s.  V.) ;  and  at  the  present  day  the  name  is  applied 
by  those  at  a  distance  to  the  whole  country  east  of  Jau* 
lan;  but  the  inhabitants  themselves  detinc  it  as  above. 
It  is  reprcsented  by  Burckhardt  {Trnvels  in  Syria,  p. 
51,  211,  285,  291)  as  a  volcanic  region,  cotnposcd  of  po- 
lous  tufa,  pumice,  and  basalt,  with  the  remains  of  a  cra- 
ter  on  the  tell  Shoba,  which  is  on  its  eastem  border.  It 
produoes,  however,  crope  of  com,  and  has  many  patches 
of  luxuriant  herbage,  which  are  iiequented  in  summei 


HAURANNE 


98 


HAVEN 


hy  the  Arab  tribes  for  pasturage.  The  surface  is  psr- 
fectly  flat|  and  not  a  stone  is  to  be  aeen  saye  on  the 
few  Iow  Yolcanic  teils  that  rise  iip  here  and  there  like 
ialands  in  a  sea.  It  contains  upwarda  of  a  hundred 
towns  and  ylllages,  most  of  tbem  now  deserted,  though 
not  ruined.  The  buildings  in  many  of  thesc  arc  re- 
markable,  the  walls  are  of  great  thickness,  and  the  roofs 
and  doors  are  of  stone,  evidently  of  reroote  antiquity 
(aee  Porter*8  Five  Ytara  m  DamataUf  voL  ii).  Aecord- 
iug  to  K  Smith  (Ln  Kobinson^s  Reaearchesy  iii,  Append. 
p.  150-157),  the  modern  pro\ince  of  Hauran  is  regardod 
by  the  natires  as  consistlng  of  three  parts,  callcd  en- 
Nukrah^  el-Lejah^  and  ei-Jebei  The  first  of  these  terma 
designates  the  pUńn  of  Hauran  as  aboye  defined,  ex- 
tending  through  its  whole  length,  from  wady  el-Ajam 
on  the  north  to  the  dcsert  on  the  south.  On  the  west 
of  it  is  Jeidur,  Jaulan,  and  Jebcl  Ajlun ;  and  on  the  east 
the  Lejah  and  Jebel  Hauran.  It  has  a  gentle  unduUt- 
ing  surface,  is  arabie  throughout,  and,  in  generał,  very 
fertile.  With  the  rcst  of  Hauran,  it  is  the  granary  of 
Damascus.  The  soil  belongs  to  the  goremmcnt,  and 
nothing  but  grain  is  cultirated.  Hardly  a  trce  appears 
anywhere.  The  region  stiU  abounds  in  cavcs,  which 
the  old  inhabitants  excavated  partly  to  senre  as  cistems 
for  the  collection  of  water,  and  partly  for  granaries  in 
which  to  secure  their  grain  from  plunderers.  Eshmis- 
kin  is  considered  the  capital  of  the  whole  Hauran,  being 
the  residence  of  the  chief  of  all  its  shciks.  The  inhab- 
itants of  this  district  are  chiefly  Muslcms,  who  in  man- 
ners  and  dress  reseroble  the  Beilawln,  but  thcre  is  a 
sprinkling  also  of  professed  Christians,  and  latterly  of 
the  Druses  (Murray's  Handbook,  p.  499).  The  second 
diyision,  or  el-Lejah,  lying  east  of  the  Nukrah  and 
north  of  the  mountaius,  has  an  eleyation  about  the  same 
as  that  of  the  Nukrah,  but  it  is  said  to  be  almost  a  com- 
plete  labyrinth  of  ])assages  among  roeks.  The  Lejah  is 
the  resort  of  several  smali  tribes  of  Bedawln,  who  make 
it  their  home,  and  who  continually  issue  forth  from 
their  rocky  fastnesses  on  predatory  excuisions,  and  at- 
tack,  plunder,  or  destroy,  as  suits  their  purpose.  They 
have  had  the  same  character  from  a  very  remote  pe- 
riod. The  thinl  iliybion  is  the  mountam  of  Hauran, 
and  appears  from  the  north-west,  as  an  isolated  rangę, 
with  the  conical  peak  called  Kelb  and  Kuleib  Hauran 
{the  doff)f  which  is  probably  an  extinct  rolcano,  ncar 
Its  southem  extremity.  But  from  the  neighborhood  of 
Busrah  it  is  discorered  that  a  lowcr  continuation  ex- 
tends  southward  as  far  as  the  eye  can  see.  On  this 
lower  rangę  stands  the  castle  of  Sulkhad,  distinctly  seen 
from  Busrah.  This  mountain  is  perhape  the  Alsada- 
mus  of  Ptolemy.  (See  Lightfoot,  Op.  i,  316;  ii,  474; 
Eeland,  Palatt.  p.  190;  Joum,  of  Sac  IM,  July,  1854; 
Graham,  in  Joum,  Roy,  Geol,  Soc,  1858,  p.  254;  Porter, 
Handbooky  ii,  507 ;  Stanley,  Jewish  Church,  i,  213.) 

Hanrazme.    See  Dia^ergier. 

Hanamaim,  Nicolaus,  an  intimate  friend  of  Lu- 
ther,  and  the  reformer  of  the  city  of  Zwickau  and  the 
duchy  of  AnhalŁ,  was  boni  in  1479  at  Freiberg.  He  be- 
came  at  first  preachcr  at  Schneeberg,  subseąuently  at 
Zwickau,  where  he  had  man}*-  and  seyere  controyersies 
with  the  adherenta  of  Thomas  Munzer.  In  1532  he  was 
appointed  pastor  of  Dessau,  haying  been  warmly  recom- 
mcnded  by  Luther.  In  1538  he  accepted  a  cali  as  su- 
l^erintendent  to  his  natiye  town  Freiberg,  but  while 
preaching  his  first  sermon  (Noy.  G)  he  was  struck  with 
apoplexy,  which  caused  his  immediate  death.  Luther 
deeply  bemoaned  his  death,  and  praised  him  as  a  man 
of  profound  piety.  Two  opinions  of  Hausmann  on  the 
rcforroation  in  Zwickau  haye  been  published  by  Prellcr 
iZńłschip  fur  die  hisłorische  TheohgU,  1852).*  See  O. 
O.  Schmidt,  Nic,  llausmamij  der  Freuiid  Lutkers  (Lpz. 
1860).     (A.J.S.) 

Hantefage,  Jean,  a  French  Roman  Catholic  theo- 
logian,  was  bom  at  Puy  Morin,  near  Toulouse,  in  1735. 
He  was  educated  by  the  Jesuits,  but  lefl  them,  and  be- 
came  a  Jaoseciat.    Haring  been  ordained  priest,  he  be- 


came  vicar  in  a  country  church  of  the  diocese  of  Toa« 
louse,  but  his  opinions  being  suspected,  he  was  suspend- 
ed.  In  1766  he  became  subrector  of  the  college  of  Aux- 
erre,  and  canon  of  that  city,  but  his  Jansenistic  yiewa 
caused  him  to  be  again  pcraecutcd,  and  in  1773  he  was 
condemned  to  be  whipped,  brandcd,  and  sent  to  bard 
labor  for  life.  He  fled,  and  was  declared  Innocent  by 
Parliament  Jan.  25, 1776.  During  his  exile  Hautcfage 
had  trayelled  through  Southern  Europę  in  company  iiitli 
another  abbot,  Duparc  de  Bellegarde,  preaching  his  doc- 
trines  everywhere^  ^^'bile  at  Lausanne  in  1776  and  the 
followmg  years,  they  published  (Euvre»  d^Aniotne  Ar- 
nauld  (42  vols.  4to).  Ailer  his  return  to  Paris,  HauŁe* 
fage  pnblbhcd  an  abridgment  of  the  Instifutton  et  Ift- 
strudion  chrefiermes  (1785, 12mo),  and  the  8d  part  of  the 
Noutelles  eccletiastiąujes^  1761-1790  (1791, 4to).  During 
the  Reyolution,  and  mitil  his  death,  Fcb.  18, 1816,  he  de- 
YOted  himself  to  teaching.  See  Sihy,  Kloffe  de  M.  PabM 
Ifautefaffe  (Paris,  1816, 8yo) ;  Darbier,  IHcf,  des  Anony* 
mes ;  Hoefer,  Nouv,  Biog,  Generale^  xxiii,  574. 

Havelock,  Henry,  an  eminent  EnglLsh  soldier  and 
Christian,  was  bom  at  Bishop  Wearmouth  in  1795.  He 
was  educated  undcr  the  Kev.  J.  Bradley,  curate  of  Dart- 
ford.  Kent,  until  1804,  when  he  was  sent  to  the  Charter- 
house.  In  1814  he  became  a  pupil  of  Chitty,  the  great 
special  pleader  of  the  day,  to  study  law ;  but  in  the  fol- 
lo^ńng  year  he  followed'  his  brother  William  into  the 
army,  and  was  appointed  to  the  Riiie  Brigade,  then  the 
95th.  After  serying  in^ngland,  Ireland,  and  Scotland, 
Harclock  embarked  for  India  in  1828.  To  eerye  in  that 
part  of  the  world  was  his  own  choice,  for  which  he  had 
ąualified  himself  by  study  i  ng  Hindostanee  and  Persian 
bcfore  leaying  England.  During  the  yoj^age  a  great 
change  passed  on  his  religions  yiews,  and  on  arTi\-ing 
with  his  regiment  in  India,  ho  determincd  to  devote  his 
attention  to  the  spiritual  wcifare  of  bis  men,  and  to  as* 
semble  them  together,  as  opportunity  afTorded,  for  read- 
ing  the  Scriptures  and  dcyotional  exerclses,  which  he 
continued  to  do  throughout  the  whole  of  his  afler  ca« 
rcer.  In  1841  he  was  appointed  Persian  interpreter  to 
generał  Elphinstone,  and  took  part  in  the  memorable 
defence  of  Jellalabad.  On  the  completion  of  the  worksy 
Harelock  suggested  to  generał  Sale  to  asaemble  the  gar- 
rison  and  giye  thanks  to  Almighty  God,who  had  ena- 
bled  them  to  complete  the  fortifications  necessary  for 
their  proteetion.  **  The  suggcstion  was  approyed,  and 
the  command  given.  *  Let  us  pray,*  said  a  well-known 
Yoice.  It  was  Hayelock^s.  '  Let  us  pray !'  and  down  be- 
fore  the  presence  of  the  great  God  those  soldiers  rercr- 
ently  bowed,  one  and  all  of  them,  whilst  at  the  impulse 
of  a  deyout  and  grateful  heart  he  poured  forth  supplica- 
tion  and  praisc  in  the  name  of  the  Great  High-Priest.** 
This  incident  is  an  illustration  of  Hayelock^s  religioua 
life  during  the  whole  of  his  military  career.  In  the 
great  Indian  rebcllion  of  1857  he  distinguishod  himself 
by  a  serics  of  the  most  brilliant  achieyements  in  the  an- 
nals  of  warfare ;  but  stiU  he  was  distinguished  most  by 
his  personal  piety,  which  shone  resplendently  amid  the 
hoiTors  of  war.  He  died  of  d^^sentery  at  Alumbagh, 
Noy.  25, 1857,  one  day  bcfore  the  aimouncement  of  his 
eleyation  to  the  baronetcy  under  the  title  "  Harelock  of 
Lucknow,"  which  was  inherited  by  his  eldest  son,  Heniy 
Marshman  Hayelock  (bom  1830).  He  wrote,  Histortf 
ofthe  Ara  Campaiffns  (London,  1827) : — Memoir  oflhe 
Afghan  Campniffn  (I/>nd.  1841).  See  Brock,  Bioffr€ipk^ 
ical  Skefch  of  Harelock  (Lond.  1858, 12mo) ;  Marshman, 
Memoirs  ofSir  łfenry  Harelock  (Lond.  1868). 

Have2i  (r|in,  chóph^  Gen.  xliy,  13,  a  searside  or 
"coa^t,"  as  elsewhcre  rendered;  Tinę,  niachóz',  a  ref- 
Ufffj  hence  a  harbor,  Psa.  cyii,  30 ;  \ifiriv,  Acts  xxvii,  12), 
The  Phcenician  part  of  the  coast  of  Palestine  had  sev- 
eral  fine  harbors  [see  Phcenicia],  and  some  such  wefe 
also  in  possession  of  the  Hebrews:  such  were  Csssarea 
and  Joppa  (i\.  y.  seyerally),  which  were  eapecially  madę 
use  of  for  coastwise  communication  (1  Mace.  xlv,  5,34( 
Josephus,  A  ni.  xv,  9, 6).     The  port  (DJ  KiS^)  of  Ty« 


HAYENS 


99 


HAYILAH 


(q.T.)  was  the  moet  famons  on  the  whole  Mediterranean 
ihore  (Ezck.  xxy'ii,  3).  A  harbor  is  called  K'npi<  in 
Chaldee,  abo  in  SamariŁan.^-Winer,  i,  454.    See  Navi- 

0ATIOX. 

The  OeCan  harbor  called  Fair  Harens  (q.  y.),  KaXoc 
Aifiimc,  is  inddentally  mentioned  in  the  N.  T.  (Acta 
xsTii,8).    SeeCRETE. 

HaTOns,  Jamies,  a  minister  of  the  Methodist  £pis- 
oopal  Church,  was  bom  in  Mason  Go.,  Ky.,  December  26, 
1793.  At  eighteen  he  reoeiyed  license  to  preach,  and  in 
1820  be  entered  the  travelling  ministry  in  the  Ohio  Con- 
ferenee.  He  seryed  twelve  yean  in  circuits,  and  twen- 
ty-four  as  presiding  elder.  PosBessing  a  strong  consti- 
tution  and  yigorous  intellect,  he  taxed  them  both  to  the 
atmost  in  remedying  the  defects  of  his  early  education, 
and  in  making  **■  fuli  proof  of  his  ministry."  He  became 
one  of  the  most  powerful  preachers  of  his  time,  and  oon- 
tributed  perhaps  as  much  as  any  other  man  to  build  up 
the  Church  in  the  West,  espedally  in  Indiana,  where 
the  Ust  forty  years  of  his  life  were  spent.  He  died  in 
Noyember,  1864.— J/tnu/e*  of  Coąferences,  1865,  p.  190. 

HIveniick,  Heinrich  Andreas  Christopii,  a 
German  theologian,  was  bom  at  Kroplin,  in  Mecklen- 
burg,  in  1805.  He  studied  at  Halle,  and  was  one  of 
the  two  stadents  whose  notes  on  the  theological  lec- 
tnres  of  Wegscheider  and  Gesenius  were  used  to  insti- 
tnte  a  trial  against  those  prominent  championa  of 
Rationalism.  At  the  Uniyigsity  of  Berlin  he  closely 
attached  himaelf  to  Hengstenberg.  In  1834  he  estab- 
lished  himself  as  pritfcUdocent  at  Rostock,  and  in  1841 
he  became  ordinary  piofessor  of  theology  at  Kdnigs- 
beig.  He  died  in  1845  at  New  Strelitz.  The  cxegetical 
works  of  Hfiyemick  are  counted  among  the  most  leam- 
cd  of  the  Qrthodox  school.  The  most  important  of 
them  are  CommaOar,  Uber  dat  Buch  Daniel  (Hamburg, 
1832)  i—3reUmge»  de  theologie  reformie  (Geneya,  1883 
«q.) i—Iicamdbuck  der  hist.-krii,  Einleitung  in  das  A,T, 
(Eriangen,  1836-39, 2  yols. ;  2d  ed.  by  Keil,  1849-54)  :— 
Neue  Krit^  Unłersuchungen  u,  das  Buch  Daniel  (Hamb. 
1838)  '.^Commentar  tum  Buche  Ezekiel;  Vorlesungm  v. 
drA«o^o^dM^.r.(ed.byHahn,Frankf.l848;  2ded. 
by  Schultz,  Frankf.  1863).  Tranalations :  Gen,  Introd,  to 
O.  T.  (Edinb.  1852) ;  Introd.  to  the  Pentateuch  (Edmb. 
1850). 

HaT^Uah  (Heb.  Chamlah%  rib^^^^n,  signif.  unknown; 
Sept.  EvtXa,  but  Eifitka  in  Greń.  x,  29,  E^cAcir  in  Gen. 
ii,  11,  and  Evi  in  1  Chroń,  i,  29 ;  Vulg.  Heuila^  but  //«/*- 
lath  in  Gen.  ii,  11),  the  name  of  two  or  three  regions; 
perhaps  ałso  of  two  men  (RC.  cir.  2400). 

1.  A  Jand  rich  in  gold,  bdellium,  and  shoham,  men- 
tioned in  Gen.  ii,  11,  as  flowed  around  (or  through)  by 
the  riyer  Pishon,  in  the  geographical  description  of  Par- 
adiie.  Some  identify  this  Hayihdi  with  one  of  those 
foUowing;  but  others  take  it  to  be  the  Chwalą^  on  the 
Caspian  Sea,  whence  that  sea  itself  is  said  to  haye  de- 
liyed  the  Ruasian  name  of  ChwaUnskoy  morę  (Sea  of 
Chwalą) ;  and  others  suppoee  it  a  generał  name  for  In- 
dia, in  which  case  the  riyer  Pison,  mentioned  as  sur- 
lounding  it,  would  be  identified  with  the  Ganges,  or 
eyen  the  Indus.  Others  again,  who  regard  the  Pishon 
as  the  PhasLs,  make  Hayilah  to  be  Cofcftw,  for  which 
some  think  there  b  the  distinctiye  name  in  Scripture 
of  the  "Caaluhim''  (q.  y.).  In  Gen.  ii,  11, 12,  it  is  fur- 
ther  described  as  the  land  where  the  best  gold  was 
fcMmd,  and  which  was,  besides,  rich  in  the  treasures  of 
th^bedokteh  and  the  stone  thoham.  That  the  name  is 
deńyed  from  some  natural  peculiarity  is  eyident  from 
the  presence  of  the  article  with  all  the  terma.  AVhat- 
ever  may  be  the  trae  meaning  of  bedolach^he  it  carbun- 
cle,  cry^  bdellium,  ebony,  pepper,  cloyes,  ber>'l,  pearl, 
diamond,  or  emerald,  all  critics  detect  its  presence,  un- 
der  one  or  othcr  of  thcse  forms,  in  the  country  which 
they  select  as  the  Hayilah  most  appropriate  to  their 
own  theary,  As  little  diflficulty  is  presented  by  the 
tbokfm :  cali  it  onyx,  8ardonyx,  emerald,  sapphire, 
keiyl,  or  sardius,  it  wouM  be  hard  indeed  if  some  of 


these  precious  stones  could  not  be  fonnd  in  any  conceiy- 
able  locality  to  support  eyen  the  most  far-fetched  and 
improbable  conjecture.  That  Hayilah  is  that  part  of 
India  through  which  the  Ganges  flows,  and,  more  gen- 
erally,  the  eastem  region  of  the  earth ;  that  it  is  t/.>  be 
found  in  Susiana  (Ilopkinson),  in  Aya  (Buttmann),  or 
in  the  Ural  region  (Kaumer),  are  conclusions  necessarily 
foUowing  upon  the  assumptions  with  regard  to  the  Pi- 
son.  Hartmann,  Keland,  and  Rosenmtiller  are  in  fayor 
of  Colchis,  the  scenę  of  the  legend  of  the  Golden  Fleece. 
The  Phasis  was  said  to  flow  over  golden  saiids,  and  gold 
was  canied  down  by  the  mountain-torrents  (Strabo.  xi, 
2,  §  19),  The  cr>'stal  (bedolacA)  of  Scythia  was  re- 
nowned  (Solinus,  c.  xx),  and  the  emeralds  (shoham)  of 
this  country  were  as  for  superior  to  other  emeralds  as 
the  latter  were  to  other  precious  Stones  (Pliny,  Ifist, 
Not,  xxxyil,  17),  all  which  seems  to  proye  that  Hayilah 
was  Colchis.  RosenmUller  argucs,  with  much  force,  if 
the  Phasis  be  the  Pison,  the  land  of  Hayilah  must  be 
Colchis,  supposing  that  by  this  country  the  Hebrews 
had  the  idea  of  a  Pontic  or  Northern  India.  In  like 
manner  Leclerc,  having  preyiously  determined  that  the 
Pison  must  be  the  Chr>'sorrhoa8,  finds  Hayilah  not  far 
from  Ccele-Syria.  Hassę  {Kntdeck.  p.  49,  50,  quoted  by 
Rosenmllller)  compares  Hayilah  with  the  *T\aia  of 
Hcrodotus  (iy,  9),  in  the  neighborhood  of  the  Arimas- 
pians,  and  the  dragon  which  guardcd  the  land  of  gold. 
Discussions  about  the  site  of  Ilayilah  will  be  found  in 
all  the  chief  Biblical  commentators  ancient  and  mod- 
em, as  well  as  in  Hottinger  {/Cimeas  IHssert.)^  Huct 
{De  LU,  Parad,),  Bochart  (Phaier/y  ii,  28),  Michaelis 
\Spicilegium,  p.  202 ;  Supplenu  p.  685),  Schulteas  {Par- 
adiesj  p.  105),  Niebuhr  and  many  other  writers.  The 
clcarest  and  best  account  of  any  may  be  deriyed  from 
Kalisch  (Genesis,  p.  93,  249,  287,  etc!),  who  also  giyes 
a  lóng  list  of  those  who  haye  examined  the  subject  (p, 
109-102).  —  Smith,  s.  y. ;  Kitto,  s.  v.  The  Paradisaic 
Hayilah  cannot  well  be  identified  with  cither  bf  those 
mentioned  below,  sińce  they  were  eyidently  in  or  near 
Arabia;  and  the  associated  regions  in  the  Edenie  ac- 
count are  all  in  the  neighborhood  of  Armenia  or  Ara- 
rat, neor  the  sources  of  the  Tigris  and  Euphratcs.  The 
most  consisteiit  conclusion,  therefore,  ij  that  which  lo- 
cates  the  Hayilah  in  qucstion  at  the  north-eastcm  cor^ 
ner  of  Asia  Minor,  i.  e.  substantially  Colchis,  See  Pisosr. 
2.  A  district  in  Arabia  Felix,  deriving  its  name  from 
the  second  son  of  Cush  (Gen.  x,  7) ;  or,  according  to 
others,  from  the  second  son  of  Joktan  (Gen.  x,  29 ;  com- 
pare  xxy,  18).  Siiice  in  the  other  places  where  the 
word  occurs  it  is  always  use<l  to  designate  a  countiy, 
some  doubt  whether  ;>cr«oM  of  this  name  eyer  existed; 
the  more  so  as  other  names  of  countries  (Ophir,  Miz- 
raim,Canaan,  Sidon),  and  the  coUectiye  names  of  tribes 
(Kittim,  Dodanim),  are  freely  introduced  into  the  gen- 
ealogy,  which  is  undoubtedly  arranged  with  partial 
refcrence  to  geographical  distribution,  as  well  as  direct 
descent  [see  Sheba;  Dedan,  etc.]  (see  Kalisch,  Cenc- 
sis,  p.  287).  On  this  supposition  it  is  not  difficult  to 
account  for  the  fact  that  the  people  of  Hayilah  appear 
as  descendants  both  of  the  Hamites  and  of  the  Shemites. 
If  they  were  originally  of  Shemitic  extractiou  (and  on 
this  point  we  haye  no  data  which  could  enable  us  to 
decide),  we  must  suppose  that  by  peaceful  emigration 
or  hostile  inyasion  they  oyerflowed  into  the  tenitory 
occupied  by  Hamites,  or  adopted  the  name  and  habits 
of  their  neighbors  in  conseąuence  of  commerce  or  inter- 
marriage,  and  are  therefore  mentioned  twicc  oyer  by 
reason  of  their  local  position  in  two  distinct  regions. 
It  would  depend  on  circumstances  whether  an  inyading 
or  encroaching  tribe  gare  i  te  name  to  or  dertued  its  name 
from  the  tribe  it  dlspossessed,  so  that  whether  Hayilah 
was  originally  Cushite  or  Joktanite  must  be  a  matter 
of  merę  conjecture;  but  by  admitting  some  such  princi- 
ple  as  the  one  mentioned  we  remoye  from  the  book  of 
Genesis  a  number  of  apparent  perplexities  (Kalisch, 
Gen.  p.  454).  See  Ur.  To  regard  the  repetition  of  the 
name  as  due  to  carelessness  or  error  is  a  method  of  ex- 


HAVOTH.JAIR 


100 


HAWES 


planation  which  does  notde9pn'e  the  name  of  criticism. 
SeeHAM. 

AMuming,  then,  that  the  distiicts  indicated  in  Gen. 
X,  7,  29,  were  contenninouB,  if  not  in  reality  identical, 
we  have  to  fix  on  their  geographical  poaition.  Yarious 
deriyattons  of  the  word  have  been  suggested,  but  the 
most  probable  one,  firom  bin,  sond  (Bochart,  Phaleg^  ii, 
29),  is  too  vague  to  give  us  any  assistance.  Looking 
for  preciaer  indications,  we  flnd  in  Gen.  xxy,  18  that  the 
descendants  of  Ishmad  ^  dwelt yrom  Ifarilah  unio  Shur 
that  ifl  before  Egypt  aa  thou  goeat  towazda  Aasyria;** 
and  in  1  Sam.  xv,  7  we  read  that  Saul "  smote  the  Amal- 
ekitefl  from  Hamlah  until  thou  comest  to  Shur  that  u 
orer  agalnat  Egypt."  Without  entering  into  the  ąaes- 
tion  why  the  Amalekites  are  repreaent^  as  poesesaing 
the  country  which  fonnerly  belonged  to  the  Ishmael- 
itea,  it  is  elear  that  these  rcraes  fix  the  generał  poeition 
of  Uayilah  as  a  country  lying  somewhere  to  the  south- 
ward  and  eastward  of  Palestine.  Further  than  this, 
the  Cushite  Havilah  in  Gen.  x,  7  is  mentioned  in  con- 
nection  with  Seba,  Sabtah,  and  Baamah ;  and  the  Jok- 
tanite  Hayilah  (Gen.  x,  29)  in  connection  with  Ophir, 
Jobab,  etc  Now,  as  aU  these  places  lay  on  or  between 
the  Arabian  and  Penian  gulfs,  we  may  infer,  with  tol- 
erable  certainty,  that  Hayilah  *<  in  both  instances  des- 
ignates  the  same  country,  extending  at  least  from  the 
Fenńan  to  the  Arabian  Gulf,  and  on  account  of  its  vast 
extent  easily  diyided  into  two  distinct  parts"  (Kaliach, 
Gen,  p.  93).    See  Shur. 

The  only  method  of  fixing  morę  nearly  the  centres 
of  these  two  diyisions  of  Hayilah  is  to  look  for  some 
tracę  of  the  name  yet  exi8ting.  But,  although  Oriental 
names  linger  with  great  yltality  in  the  regions  where 
they  haye  arisen,  yet  the  freąuent  transference  of  names, 
caused  by  trade  or  by  political  reyolutions,  renderB  such 
indication  yery  uncertain  (Von  Bohlen,  on  Gen,  x,  7). 
We  shall  therefore  content  ourselyes  with  mentioning 
that  Strabo,  quoting  Eratosthenes,  places  the  Xai'Xo- 
racoi  near  the  Nabathoń,  north  of  the  Arabian  Gulf 
(Strabo,  xyi,  4),  and  that  Ptolemy  ^y,  7)  mentions  the 
AvaXcrat,  on  the  AMcan  coast,  near  Bab-el-Mandeb,  the 
modem  Zeylah  (comp.  Plin.  yi,  28 ;  Gesen.  Thes.  i,  452). 
Niebuhr  also  fUids  two  Khawlans  in  Yemen,  one  a  town 
between  Sanaa  and  Mecca,  the  other  a  district  some 
miles  to  the  south-east  of  Sanaa  {Betchr,  Arab.  p.  270, 
280;  see  further,  Bllschung,  Erdbeachr.Y,  i,  601;  Hi- 
chaelis,  SpicUcg,  i,  189;  ii,  202;  Forster,  Gtog,  of  Arab, 
i,  40,  41,  etc).  These  names  may  veiy  possibly  "be 
tiaoes  of  the  great  Biblical  country  of  Ha^-ilah.— Kitto, 
8.  y.    See  Etiinology. 

The  district  of  Kh&wlan  lics  between  the  city  of  Sa- 
na and  the  Hijaz,  i.  e.  in  the  north-westem  portion  of 
the  Yemen.  It  took  its  name,  according  to  the  Arabs, 
from  Khawlan,  a  descendant  of  Kahtan  [see  Joktan] 
(Afardńd,  s.  y.),  or,  as  some  say,  of  Kahlan,  brother  of 
Himyer  (Caussin,  Esgai,  i,  113,  and  Tab.  ii).  This  gen- 
ealogy  says  littłe  morę  than  that  the  name  was  Joktan- 
ite;  and  the  difference  between  Kahtan  and  Kahlan 
may  be  neglected,  both  bcing  descendants  of  the  flrst 
Joktanite  settler,  and  the  whole  of  these  early  tradi- 
tions  pointing  to  a  Joktanite  settlemcnt,  without  per- 
haps  a  distinct  presenration  of  Joktan's  name,  and  cer- 
tainly  nonę  of  a  correct  genealogy  from  him  downwards. 

Khawlan  is  a  fertile  territory,  embracing  a  large  part 
of  myrrhiferous  Arabia,  mountainous,  with  plenty  of 
water,  and  supporting  a  large  population.  It  is  a  tract 
of  Arabia  better  known  to  both  ancients  and  modenis 
than  the  rest  of  the  Yemen,  and  the  eastem  and  central 
proWnces.  It  adjoins  Nejran  (the  district  and  town  of 
that  name),  mentioned  in  the  account  of  the  expcdition 
of  iElius  (lallus,  and  the  scenę  of  great  persecutions  of 
the  Christians  by  Dhu-Nuwas,  the  last  of  the  Tubbaas 
before  the  Abyssinian  conąuest  of  Arabia,  in  the  year 
523  of  our  mra  (compare  Caussin,  £*sai,  i,  121  sq.). — 
Smith,  s.  y. 

Ha'TOth-Jalr  (Heb.  Chctwotk'  Tafr',  I^^KJ  nśin, 


hamlets  o/Jair  [L  e.  the  enliffhtmer];  Scpt.  ivav\tŁt 
and  KiofiaŁ  'latp,  Oat/u^,  etc ;  Yułg.  ricusy  or  mcubOf 
or  Hatoth  Jair,  etc),  the  name  of  a  settlemeut  or  dia^ 
trict  east  of  the  Jordan.  The  word  Chawah,  which  oo- 
curs  in  the  Bibie  in  this  connection  only,  is  perhaps  bcst 
explaincd  by  the  similar  term  in  modem  Arabie,  which 
denotes  a  smali  coUection  of  huts  or  hoyels  in  a  country 
place  (see  the  citations  in  Gesenius,  Thesaur.  p.451 ;  and 
Stanley,  Sinai  and  PaL  App.  §  84),  such  as  constitutes 
an  Arab  yillage  or  smali  towiu  See  Topograpuical 
Terms. 

(1.)  The  earliest  notice  of  the  Hayoth-jair  is  in  Numb. 
xxxii,  41,  in  the  account  of  the  settlemeut  of  the  trans- 
Jordanic  country,  where  Jair,  son  of  Manasseh,  is  stated 
to  haye  taken  some  yillages  (A.  Y.  *^the  smali  towns;** 
but  there  is  no  article  in  the  Hebrew)  of  Gilead,  which 
was  allotted  to  his  tribe,  and  to  haye  named  them  after 
himself,  Hayyoth-jair.  (2.)  In  Deut.  iii,  14  it  is  said 
that  Jair  '*took  all  the  tract  of  Aigob  unto  the  boundaiy 
of  the  Geshurite  and  the  Maacathite,  and  called  them 
[i.  e,  the  places  of  that  region]  after  his  own  name,  Ba- 
shan-hayoth-jair."  (3.)  In  the  records  of  Manasseh  in 
Josh.  xiii,  30,  and  1  Chroń,  ii,  23  (A.  Y.,  in  both  "towna 
of  Jair"),  the  Hayyoth-jair  are  reckoned  with  other  difr- 
tricts  as  making  up  sixty  "  cities**  (0*^*^^).  In  1  Kinga 
iy,  18  they  are  named  as  part  of  the  commissariat  dia- 
trict  of  Ben-geber,  next  in  order  to  the  "  sixty  great  cit- 
ies"  of  Argob,  as  the  Eng.JYcrs.  has  it ;  but  probably  the 
latter  de«gnation  is  only  added  for  definitencss,  and  re- 
fers  to  the  same  region.  (4.)  No  less  doubtful  is  the 
number  of  the  Hayyoth-jair.  In  1  Chroń,  ii,  22 1  hey  are 
specified  as  twenty-three,  but  in  Jndg.  x,  4,  as  thirty< — 
Smith,  B.  y.    See  Jair. 

From  these  statements  some  haye  inferred  that  there 
were  two  scparate  districts  called  Chay^^oth-Yur  (see 
Reland,  Palcett.  p.  488),  one  in  Gilead,  and  the  other  in 
Bashan  (Porter,  Damatcusy  ii,  270) .  But  in  order  to  rec- 
oncile  the  different  passages  where  they  are  spoken  of, 
it  is  only  necessary  to  suppose  that  haying  iirst  been 
captured  by  the  original  Jair  when  they  were  mere  no- 
madę hamlets,  and  but  23  in  number,  they  were  after- 
wards  occupied  and  increaaed  to  30  by  the  judge  Jair, 
and  that  they  were  usually  rpgarded  wi  part  of  the  sixty 
conuderable  places  compńsed  within  the  generał  tract 
of  Bashan,  induding  Gilead.    See  Argob. 

Haweifl,  Thomas,  an  English  theologian,  was  bom 
at  Tnuo  (Comwall)  in  1734.  He  was  iirst  apprenticed 
to  a  draggist,  but  afterwards  studied  at  Christ  College, 
Cambridge,  and  took  the  degree  of  RL.  He  soon  aller 
entered  the  Church,  and  bccame  assistant  of  Madan, 
chaplain  of  Lock  Hospital.  The  latter  afterwards  gaye 
him  the  rectorship  of  All  Saints  (Northamptoiishire) ; 
and  the  countcss  of  Huntingdon  gaye  him  ako  the  di- 
rection  of  seyeral  chapels  she  had  erected,  and  of  hcr 
seminary  for  theological  studenta.  He  becamc  director 
of  the  London  Missionaiy  Society  at  its  foundation,  and 
died  in  1820.  He  published  seyeral  books  of  practical, 
but  not  of  ecientific  yalue ;  among  them  are  JJisłory  of 
the  Church  (Lond.  1800,  8  yols.  8yo)  i—Li/e  ofthe  Rev, 
William  Romaine  (Lond.  1798,8yo)  -^State  ofthe  Erarh- 
geUcal Religion  throuf^hout  the  World  (8yo)  i^The  Kran^ 
gdical  Erpotiior,  a  Comment  on  the  Bibie  (Lond.  1765, 2 
yols.  foL :  of  little  yalue) : — New  TrantUition  ofthe  New 
Tettament  (Lond.  1795, 8yo)  z^Connmtmcants  Compamom 
(Lond.  1763, 12mo;  often  reprinted)  ^— / Y^e  en  Sermon9 
(new  ed.  Oxford,  1885, 12mo).  See  Bose,  New  Gen.  Bioff, 
Diet. ;  Hoefer,  Abur.  Bioff.  Ginirak^  xxiii,  624. 

Hawes,  Joet^  D.D..  a  Congregational  minister,  was 
bom  in  Medway,  Mass.,  Dec.  22, 1789.  His  parents  were 
poor,  and  his  early  opportunities  of  edncation  were  there- 
fore limited.  After  his  conyersion  in  1807,  he  gaye  all  the 
time  he  could  spare  from  his  trade  to  study,  and  in  1809 
he  entered  Broim  Uniyerftity.  During  his"  college  course 
he  supported  himself  chiefly  by  work  during  term  time, 
and  by  teaching  school  in  yacation.  He  gradnatied  A.6L 
with  honor  in  1813.    AJter  completing  the  theolon^cii 


HAWK 


101 


HAWK 


ecNine  at  Andorer  (1818),  he  was  settled  as  pastor  of  the 
First  Congregational  Church  of  Hartrord,  iii  which  he 
remained  imtil  1862,  when  the  Rev.  G.  H.  Grould  was  in- 
stalled  as  pastor.  Dr.  Hawes,  howe  ver,  remained  as  /ku- 
lor  emaituty  preaching  freąuently,  as  his  strength  would 
admit.  He  died  at  Gileaid,  Coiin.,  June  5, 1867.  His 
long  pastorale  at  Hartford  was  eminently  successful: 
znore  than  1500  pezsons  jolned  the  Church  under  his 
ministrĄ'.  The  great  Christian  enterprises,  such  as  the 
Forei^  Miaaion  cause,  Home  Missions,  Bibie  and  Tract 
Distribution,  the  Christian  Press,  Education  for  the  Min- 
istn%  lay  near  his  heart,  and  occupied  a  yery  lar|^  share 
of  his  time  and  labors.  His  writings  were  chiefly  prac- 
tical,  and  indude  Jjectures  to  Young  Men  (1828,  which 
hsd  an  immense  ciiculation  both  in  America  and  in  Great 
Britain)  .—Tribute  to  the  Pilffrimś  (1830)  i—Memoir  qf 
NorauŁnd  Smith  (1839)  '.^Letttrs  on  UnirertaUsm  (18mo) : 
Charoiier  ererythmg/or  the  Young  (1843) :— JAe  JRelig- 
ion  ofihe  East  (1845) : — A  n  Offermgfor  Home  Mwion- 
aria  (a  Tolnme  of  sermons,  of  which  he  gave  800  oopies 
to  the  Home  Missionary  Society  for  distribution). — /»- 
d^poufen/,  June  13, 18G7 ;  Congregationalist,  Jime,  1867. 

Ha^«7k  (y^f  nefs,  firom  its  swift  Jlu/ht;  Sept,  UpaĘ; 
Yulg.  acc%pUer)f  an  English  name  in  an  altered  form  of 
the  old  wordyaw^  ot/alk,  and  in  natural  history  repre- 
senting  seyeral  genera  of  raptorial  birds;  as  docs  the 
Arabie  naz,  and  no  doubt,  also,  the  Hebrcw  nett,  a  torm 
expre9sive  of  strong  and  rapid  flight,  and  therefore  high- 
ly  appiopriate  to  the  hawk :  the  similarity  of  the  Latin 
name  nisut  is  worthy  of  noticc.  The  hawk  is  noticed 
as  an  unclean  bird  (Lcv.  xi,  16;  Deut.  xiv,  15),  and  as 
"rtietching  her  wings  toward  the  south"  (Job  xxxix, 
26) — an  expre88ion  which  has  been  variously  understood 
as  referring  either  to  the  migratory  habits  of  the  bird, 
one  species  alone  being  an  exceptiou  to  the  generał  nile 
in  thw  respect  (Pliny,  x,  9) ;  or  to  its  moidting,  and  seek- 
ing  the  warmth  of  the  sun*s  rays  in  conseąuence  (Bo- 
chart,  Iłieroz.  iii,  9) ;  or,  lastly,  to  the  opinion  preralent 
in  andent  times,  that  it  was  the  only  bird  whose  keen 
e}-e  could  bear  the  direct  rays  of  the  sun  (iElian,  H.  A . 
X,  14).  The  hawk,  though  not  migratory  in  all  coun- 
triea,  is  so  in  the  south  of  Europę  and  in  parts  of  Asia. 
It  was  common  in  Syria  and  the  surrounding  countries. 
In  Egypt  one  species  was  regardcd  as  sacrcd,  and  frc- 
ąuently  appears  on  the  andent  monuments. — Smith,  s. 
T.  Western  Asia  and  Lower  Eg\'pt,  and  con8equently 
the  intcrmediate  tcrritory  of  Syria  and  Palestine,  are 
the  habitation  or  transitory  residence  of  a  considerable 
mmiber  of  species  of  the  order  j?aptore9,  which,  even  in- 
dnding  the  shortest-winged,  have  great  powers  of  flight, 
are  remarkably  enterprising,live  to  a  great  age,  are  mi- 
gratory, or  followers  upon  birds  of  passage,  or  remain  in 
a  region  so  abmidantly  stocked  with  pigeon  and  turtle- 
dove  as  Palestine,  and  affording  sach  a  yariety  of  groimd 
to  hont  thdr  puticular  prey,  abounding  as  it  does  in 
moantain  and  forest,  plain,  dcsert,  marsh,  river,  and  sea- 
coast. — Kltto,  s.  V.    See  Nioirr-iiAWK. 

Fakxn]s,  or  the  "  noble"  birds  of  prey  used  for  hawk- 
mg.haTe  for  many  ages  been  objects  of  great  interest, 


Perogrine  FaleoD. 


and  still  continue  to  be  imported  from  distant  countriea 
The  Fałco  commums,  or  pcregrine  faloon,  is  so  generally 
diffused  as  to  occur  even  in  New  Holland  and  South 
America.  As  a  type  of  the  genus,  we  may  add  that  it  has 
the  two  foremost  quill-feather8  of  almost  equal  length, 
and  that  when  tho  wings  are  closcd  they  nearly  reach 
the  end  of  the  taiL  On  each  side  of  the  crooked  point  of 
the  bill  there  is  an  angle  or  prominent  tooth,  and  from 
the  nostrils  backwards  a  black  streak  passes  beneath  the 
eye  and  forms  a  patoh  on  each  side  of  the  throat,  gł^'ing 
the  bird  and  its  congeners  a  whiskered  and  menacing  j 
aspect.  Next  we  may  place  Falco  Aroerist  the  sacred 
hawk  of  Egypt,  in  reality  the  same  as,  or  a  merę  yariety 
of  the  peregrine.  Innumerable  representations  of  it  oc- 
cur in  Egyptian  monuments,  in  the  charactor  of  ffor^ 
haft  or  birtl  of  yictory;  also  an  emblem  of  Re,  the  Sun, 
and  numerous  other  divinities  (Sir  J.  G.  Wilkin8on*e 
Mannert  and  Customs  of  the  Andent  EgyptianSf  2d  se- 
ries).  The  hobby,  Falco  tubbuteo,  \a  no  doubt  a  second 
or  third  species  of  sacred  hawk,  ha\'ing  similar  whiskers. 
Both  this  bird  and  the  tractable  merlin,  Falco  asahn, 
are  used  in  the  falconry  of  the  inferior  Moslem  land-own- 
ers  of  Asiatic  Turkey.  Besides  these,  the  kestril,  Falco 
tumunculuSf  occurs  in  S}Tia,  and  Falco  tinnunculoides,  or 
lesser  kestril,  in  Egypt ;  and  it  is  probable  that  both 
species  yisit  these  two  territories  according  to  the  sea- 
sons.  To  these  we  may  add  the  gerfalcon,  Falco  gyt^ 
falco,  which  is  one  thinl  laiger  than  the  peregrine :  it 
is  imported  from  Tartary,  and  sold  at  Constantinople, 
Aleppo,  and  Damascus.  The  great  birds  ily  at  antę* 
lopes,  bustards,  cranes,  etc;  and  of  the  genus  Astur^ 
with  shorter  wings  than  truć  falcons,  the  goshawk,  Fako 
palumbariut,  and  the  faloon  gentil,  F(dco  gentUiSy  are 
dther  imported,  or  taken  in  their  nests,  and  used  to  fly 
at  lower  and  aquatic  gamę.  It  is  among  the  aboye  that 
the  seyen  spedes  of  hunting  hawks  enumerated  by  Dr. 
Russell  must  be  sought;  though,  from  the  circumstance 
that  the  Arabie  names  of  the  birds  alone  were  known  to 
him,  it  is  diflScult  to  assign  their  sdentific  denominar 
tions.  The  smaller  and  less  powerful  hawks  of  the  ge- 
nus Nisua  are  mostly  in  use  on  account  of  the  sport  they 
afford,  being  less  fatiguing,  as  they  are  employed  to  fly 
at  pigeons,  partridges,  qudls,  pterodes,  katta,  and  other 
spedes  of  ganga.  There  are  yarious  other  raptorial 
birds,  not  here  enumerated,  found  in  Syria,  Arabia,  and 
£g>'pt^Kitto,  s.  V.  SeeEAGLE;  Glede;  Kttk;  Os- 
prey;  Yulture. 

The  generic  character  of  the  Heb.  word  neta  appears 
from  the  expre88ion  in  Deut  and  Ley.  "after  his  klnd,'' 
as  induding  yarious  spedes  of  the  Falcomda,  with  morę 
especial  allusion,  perhaps,  to  the  smali  diumal  bird^ 
such  as  the  kestrel  (FcUco  łinnincuku),  the  hobby  (fftf^ 
połriorchis  subbułeó),  the  gregarious  lesser  kestril  {Tin^ 
nunculue  cenchru)^  common  about  the  ruins  in  the  plain 
districts  of  Palestine,  all  of  which  were  probably  known 
to  the  andent  Hebrews.  With  respect  to  the  passage 
in  Job  (1.  c),  which  appears  to  allude  to  the  migratory 
habits  of  hawks,  it  is  curious  to  ob8er%'e  that  of  the  ten 
or  twdye  lesser  raptors  of  Palestine,  nearly  all  are  sum- 
mer  migranta.  The  kestrd  remains  all  the  year,  but  T. 
cenchrisy  Micronisus  gabar^  Hyp.  eleonorcsj  and  F,  rndo" 
nopteruSf  are  all  migrants  from  the  south.  Besides  the 
aboye-named  smaller  hawks,  the  two  magnificent  spe- 
cies, F,  sacer  and  F.  lanarius,  are  summer  yisitors  to  Pal- 
estine. These  two  spedes  of  falcons,  and  perhaps  the 
hobby  and  goshawk  {Asiur  palumbarius)^  are  employed 
by  the  Arabs  in  Syria  and  Palestine  for  the  purpose  of 
taking  partridges,  sand-grouse,  quails,  heroiifi,  gazelles, 
hares,  etc.  Dr.  Russdl  {Xat.  liist,  of  A  leppo,  ii,  196, 2d 
ed.)  has  giyen  the  Arabie  names  of  seyeral  falcons,  but  it 
is  probable  that  some  at  least  of  these  names  apply  rath- 
er  to  the  different  8exes  than  to  distinct  species.  See  a 
graphic  description  of  the  sport  of  falconry,  as  pursued 
by  the  Arabs  of  N.  Africa,  m  the  /6i*,  i,  284.  No  rep- 
resentation  of  such  a  sport  occurs  on  the  monuments  of 
andent  Egypt  (see*  Wilkinson,  i4nr.  Eg.  i,  221),  neither 
is  there  any  definito  allusiou  to  fak^onry  in  th^  Bibie, 


HAWKER 


102 


HAWKS 


Falco  Sacer, 

Witb  regaTd,however,  to  the  negatire  eridence  supplied 
by  the  monuments  of  Egjrpt,  we  must  be  careful  ere  we 
4lraw  a  conclosion,  for  the  caroel  is  not  represented, 
though  we  have  Biblical  evidence  to  gbow  that  this  ani- 
mal  was  used  by  the  Egyptians  as  early  as  the  time  of 
Abraham ;  still,  as  instances  of  various  modes  of  cap- 
turing  lish,  gamę,  and  wild  aniroals  are  not  unfrcquent 
on  the  monuments,  it  seems  probable  that  the  art  was 
not  knowii  to  the  Eg^^ptians.  Nothing  definito  can  be 
leamt  from  the  passage  in  1  Sam.  xxvi,  20,  which  speaks 
of  '*  a  partridge  hunted  on  the  mountatns,"  as  this  may 
aUude  to  the  method  of  taking  these  birds  by  "  throw- 
sticks,''  etc  See  Partridge.  The  bind  or  hart  "  pant- 
ing  after  the  water-brooks"  (Psa.  xlii,  1)  may  api)ear  at 
first  sight  to  refer  to  the  modę  at  present  adopted  in 
the  East  of  taking  gazelles,  deer,  and  bustards  with  the 
united  aid  of  falcon  and  greyhound;  but.,  as  Hengsten- 
berg  {Commeni,  on  Pm.  1.  c)  has  argued,  it  scems  pretty 
elear  that  the  exhaustion  spoken  of  is  to  be  understood 
as  arising,  not  from  pursuit,  but  from  some  pre^'ailing 
drought,  as  in  Psa.  lxiii,  l,"My  soul  thirsteth  for  thee 
inadry  land,'*  (See  also  Joel  i,  20.)  The  poetical  ver- 
sion  of  Brady  and  Tatę, 

*' As  pants  the  hart  for  cooltng  streams 
When  heated  in  the  chase,** 
has  therefore  somewhat  prejudged  the  matter.    For  the 
question  as  to  whether  falconry  was  known  to  the  on- 
cient  (yroeks,  see  Beckmann,  History  of  Irwentiona  (i, 
198-205,  Bohn'8  ed.).— Smith,  s.  v.     See  Falcon, 

Hawker,  Robert,  D.D.,  an  English  diWne,  was 
bom  at  Exeter,  England,  in  1753,  and  educated  at  Mag- 
dalen College,  Oxford.  He  obtained  the  vicarage  of 
Charles,  Plymouth,  which  be  held  until  his  death  in 
1827,  with  the  respect  and  love  of  his  people.  In  doc- 
trine  he  was  a  Calvinist,  with  a  strong  Antinomian  ten- 
dency.  His  writings  are,  The  Poor  MaiCs  Commentary 
<m  0\  and  N.  T,  (Ust  edit.  Lond.  3  rols.  4to)  i^SermorUj 
Mediłutionsj  I^edureSy  etc,  included  in  his  Works,  with  a 
Memoir  ofhia  Life,  by  the  Rev.  J,  Williams,  D.D.  (Lond. 
1831, 10  vols.  8vo).  See  Burt,  Obserr,  on  Dr,  Hawker^s 
Theoloffy ;  Bennett,  Hisł.  ofDisstnters  (Lond.  1839),  p.  344. 

Hawkins,  William,  an  English  clerg3anan,  was 
bom  in  1722,  and  was  educated  at  Pembroke  College, 
Oxford,  where  he  became  fellow,  and  was  madę  profess- 
or  of  poetry  in  1751.  He  was  afterwards  successirely 
prebendary  of  WeUs,  rector  of  Casterton,  and  vicar  of 
Whitchurch,  Dorsetshire.  He  died  in  IflŚOl.  He  pub- 
lished  DUcottrses  on  Scripłure  Mystertes,  Bampton  Lec- 
tures  for  1787  (Oxford,  1787,  8vo);  and  a  number  of 
occasional  scrmons. — Darling,  Cydtyp.  Bibliographica,  i, 
1422 ;  Allibono,  Dictionary  ofAuihorę^  i,  804. 


Hawks,  Cicero  Stephen,  D.D.,  a  bishop  of  the 
Protestant  Episcopal  Church,  was  bom  at  Newbem,  N. 
C.,  in  1812.  He  passed  A.B.  at  the  Unirersity  of  North 
Carolina  in  1830,  and  studied  law,  but  ncver  practiscd. 
In  1834  he  was  ordained  deacon,  and  in  1835  priest,  in 
the  Protestant  Episcopal  Church.  His  first  parish  was 
Trinity  Chiurch,  Saugerties,  N.  Y.  (1836) ;  in  1837  he  rc- 
moved  to  Buffalo,  N.  Y.,  and  shortly  aft^m-ards  to  Christ 
Church,  St.  Louis,  Mo.  In  1844  he  was  consecrated 
bishop  of  the  diocese  of  Missouri,  in  which  office  he  la- 
bored  diligently  and  successfully  until  his  health  gave 
way.     He  died  at  St.  Louis  April  19, 1868. 

Hawks,  Francis  Lister,  D.D.,  an  eminent  min* 
ister  of  the  Protestant  Episcopal  Church,  was  bom  at 
Newbem,  N.  C,  June  10, 1798.  He  passed  A.B.  at  the 
Unirersity  of  North  Carolina  in  1816 ;  afterwards  studied 
law,  and  was  admitted  to  the  bar  in  1819.  In  1823  he 
was  elected  to  the  Legislatiire  of  N.C.,  and  soon  became 
distinguished  for  eloquencc.  After  a  few  years  of  veiy 
successful  practice  as  a  lawyer,  he  determined  to  enter 
the  ministry,  and  became  a  student  mider  Dr.  Green,  of 
Hillsboro'  (afterwards  bishop  Green).  In  1827  he  was 
ordained  deacon ;  and  ui  1829  became  assistant  to  Dr. 
Croswell,  rector  of  Trinity  Church,  New  Haven,  Conn. 
In  the  same  year  he  was  called  to  be  assistant  to  bishop 
Whitc,  then  rector  of  St.  James^s  Church,  Philadclphia. 
In  1830  he  was  elected  professor  of  divinity  in  Wash- 
ington College  (now  Trinity),  Hartfonl,  Comi.;  in  1831 
he  became  rector  of  St,  Stephen'?,  New  York,  and  at  once 
was  recognised  as  among  the  chief  pulpit  orators  of  the 
city.  In  the  same  year  he  was  called  to  the  rectorehip 
of  St.  Thomas'8  Church,  N.  Y.  In  1835  he  was  elected 
missionary  bishop  of  the  South-west,  but  dediued  the 
appointment.  In  the  same  year  the  General  Conven- 
tion  appointed  him  to  collect  documcnts  on  the  history 
of  the  Church,  and  to  act  as  consen-ator  of  the  same. 
He  spent  sereral  months  in  England  in  1836,  and  re- 
tumed  with  eighteen  folio  volumes  of  maniiscript,  Ulua- 
trative  of  tho  planting  and  carly  history  of  the  Protes- 
tant Episcopal  Church.  From  these  matcrials  he  prc- 
pared  his  Contributions  to  the  Kcclesiaslical  Ilistory  of 
the  United  States  (voL  i,  Tirginia,  1836 ;  vol.  ii,  Mary- 
land, 1839).  It  is  grcatly  to  be  regretted  that  Dr.  Hawks 
did  not  continue  this  yaluable  work.  In  1837,  in  con- 
nection  with  the  Bev.  C.  S.  Henr}*,  he  established  the 
New  York  Reriewj  a  ąuartcrly  jouraal  of  very  high  char- 
acter,  of  which  ten  roluraes  were  published.  In  1839 
he  founded  a  school  called  St.  Thomas's  Hall,  at  Flush- 
ing,  L.  I.,  and  madę  heavy  outlays  upon  the  buildings, 
grounds,  etc,  which  involved  him  in  serious  finanaal 
embarrassments,  ending  in  the  min  of  the  school  in  1843. 
He  was  charged  with  extravagance,  if  not  with  dishon- 
esty ;  but  no  one  now  belicves  the  lat  ter  charge.  How- 
ever,  he  resigned  his  charge  of  St.  Tliomas^s  Church, 
and  remored  to  Mississippi,  where  he  established  a  school 
at  Holly  Springs.  In  1844  he  was  elected  bishop  of 
Mississippi;  objections  were  madę  on  account  of  his 
troubles  in  connection  with  St.  Thomas's  Hall,  but  his 
vindication  was  so  complete  that  the  Conrention  adopt^ 
ed  a  resolution  declaring  his  innocence.  Nererthcless, 
he  declined  the  bishopric,  and  accepted  the  rectorship 
of  Christ  Church,  New  Orleans,  where  he  remained  for 
five  years,  during  part  of  which  time  he  served  as  pres- 
ident  of  the  Uniyersity  of  Louisiana.  In  1849  he  ac- 
cepted the  rectorship  of  the  Church  of  the  Mediator. 
New  York,  which  was  afterwards  mcrged  in  Calvary 
parish,  of  which  he  remained  rector  until  1862.  His 
friends  raised  $80,000  to  elear  his  church  of  debt,  and 
adjust  certain  old  claims  from  St.Thomas*s  Hall;  they 
also  settled  upon  him  a  liberał  salary.  Herę  he  regain- 
ed  his  old  pre-eminence  as  a  preacher,  and  at  the  same 
time  deroted  himself  to  active  literarj'  labors.  In  1852 
he  was  elected  bbhop  of  Khode  Island,  but  declined  the 
office.  In  1862,  owing  to  differences  of  opinion  between 
him  and  his  parish  conceming  the  Ci\-ii  \Var,  he  resign- 
ed the  rectorship  of  Calvary ;  and,  after  a  short  stay  in 
Baltimore,  he  was  called  to  tako  charge  of  the  new  par> 


HAWLEY 


103 


HATMO 


iah  of  Our  Sariour  in  Xew  York.  His  last  publtc  labor 
waa  a  senrice  at  the  layiag  of  the  oomer-stone  of  Łhe 
neir  chiucfa,  Sept.  4, 1866;  on  the  26th  of  that  month 
be  djed.  Dr.  Uawks's  writinga  indude,  beaides  Imw  Ber- 
porU,  Łhe  fullowing :  ContrźtUuma  to  the  Ecdetiattical 
JiUtory  of  the  United  States  (1886-39,  2  vola.  8vo)  :— 
CommentoTif  on  tJke  CanHitution  and  Canon*  ofihe  Prot- 
estant Epimpal  CAurch  in  the  UniŁed  States  ( 1841, 8vo) : 
—Eggpt  and  its  Momtmeats  (N.  Y.  1849, 8vo)  :^A  uricu- 
lar  Coafession  (1849, 12mo)  i—Docamentary  History  of 
the  Prot.  E,  Ckurch,  ootUaiaing  JJocuments  wuctrning  the 
Cknrch  tn  Connecticut  (edited  in  connection  with  W.  S. 
Perry,  N.  Y.  1869-4, 2  vol&  8vo) ;  besides  aeyeral  histor- 
ical  and  javenile  books.  He  also  contributed  largely  to 
the  Xew  York  Repiew,  Łhe  Church  Reoord,  and  other  pc- 
ńoćicak.—Amer.  Ofiorterfy  Churdi  RemeWy  1867,  art.  1 ; 
iilibone,  Diet,  of  A  uthors^  i,  804. 

Ha^ey,  Gidbon,  a  Congregational  miniflter,  was 
bom  Nov.  5,  1727  (O.  S.),  in  Bridgeport,  Conn.  He 
gndaated  at  Yale  College  in  1749,  and,  having  entered 
Łhe  ministry,  went  to  Stockbridgc  in  1752  as  missionary 
to  the  Indiana.  In  May,  1753,  in  company  with  Timo- 
thy  Woodbridge,  he  started  throagh  the  wildemess,  and 
reached  the  Suaąuebanna  at  Onohoghgwage,  where  he 
plantcd  a  mission,  but  was  oompelled  to  leave  it  by  the 
French  War,  May,  1756.  Haying  retumed  to  Boston, 
he  went  as  chaplaln  under  colonel  Gridley  to  Crown 
Point ;  and  ApriI  10, 1758,  was  installed  pastor  over  the 
Indians  at  Marshpee,  where  he  remaincd  until  his  death, 
Oct.  3, 1807.— Sprague,  Annalsj  i,  495. 

Hay  (T^SłJ,  ckatsir^j  grass,  Job  viii,  12;  xl,  15; 
Pn.  ciy,  14;  leeks,  Numb.  xi,  15;  also  a  courł-yardj 
l3&  xxxiv,  13;  xxxv,  7;  Greek  X'^P^oc,  foddery  i.  e. 
ffrass  or  herbage,  Matt  vi,  30,  etc.,  or  growing  ffrain, 
Matt.  xiit,  26,  etc).  We  are  not  to  suppose  that  this 
word,  as  used  in  the  Bibie,  denotes  dried  grass,  as  it 
does  with  us.  The  management  of  grass  by  the  He- 
bfewa,  as  food  for  cattle,  was  entirely  different  from 
onra.  Indeed,  hay  was  not  in  use,  straw  being  used  as 
prorender.  The  grass  was  cut  green,  as  it  was  wanted ; 
and  the  phrase  mown-grass  (Psa.  lxxii,  6)  would  be 
roore  properly  rendered  grass  that  hasjust  hemfed  off, 
So  in  Prov.  xxvii,  25,  the  word  translated  hny  means 
the  first  shoots  of  the  grass;  and  the  whole  passage 
might  better  be  rendered,  '^The  grass  appeareth,  and 
the  green  herb  showeth  ifcself,  and  the  plants  of  the 
nuKintains  are  gathered.*'  In  Isa.  xy,  6,  hay  is  put  for 
iprau,  In  snmmer,  when  the  plains  are  parched  with 
drooght,  and  every  green  herb  is  dried  up,  the  nomades 
prooeed  northwards,  or  into  the  mountains,  or  to  the 
banks  of  riven;  and  in  winter  and  spring,  when  the 
runs  haye  recbthed  the  plains  with  yerdure,  and  fiUed 
the  water-coarses,  they  return. — Bastow.  See  Grass  ; 
Luek:  FuKŁ.;  Mowino. 

Ebydn,  Joseph,  one  of  the  greatest  oomposers  of 
Chorch  musie  in  modem  times,  was  bom  March  31, 1732, 
at  Rohran,  in  Austria.  The  son  of  parents  who  were 
yery  fond  of  musie,  he  showed  from  his  earliest  youth  a 
remarkable  talent  for  the  art.  He  studied  first  with  a 
relaiire  ui  Haimburg;  and,  from  his  eighth  to  his  8ix- 
teenth  year,  he  was  in  the  choir  of  St.  Stephen's  Cathe- 
dra! at  Yienna.  Ailer  this,  for  a  time,  he  supported 
himaelf  by  giying  private  instruction.  The  ftret  six 
piaiio-^onatas  of  £m«  Bach  fell  into  his  hands  by  acci- 
dent,  and  filled  him  with  enthusiasm.  The  celebrated 
Italjan  singer  Porpora,  whom  he  acoompanied  on  the 
piano  in  musical  circles,  mtroduced  him  into  the  high- 
est  classes  of  society.  Encouraged  from  all  sides,  he 
wrote  several  ąuartettes  (which,  however,  did  not  es- 
eape  censore)  and  tricjs,  and  his  first  opera.  Der  hin- 
hade  Teufd,  for  which  he  r8ceived  24  ducats.  In  1759 
be  received  from  count  Morzin  an  appointment  as  mu- 
sical director,  and  soon  after  contracted  a  marriage, 
which,  boweyer,  remained  without  children,  and  was,  in 
genend,  not  a  happy  one.    In  1760  he  was  appointed  by 


prinee  Esterhazy  as  chapel-master,  which  position  al- 
lowed  him  for  thirty  years  to  give  free  play  to  his  music- 
al genlus.  During  this  time,  which  was  mostly  spent  at 
Eisenstadt,  Hungary,  or  (during  winter  months)  in  Yi- 
enna, he  composed  most  of  his  symphonies,  many  quar- 
tettes,  trios,  etc,  163  compositions  for  the  baryton  (the 
fayorite  instrument  of  the  prinee),  eighteen  operas,  the 
oratorio  //  /Htomo  di  Tobia  (1774),  tifleen  maases  and 
other  eoclesiastical  works,  musie  for  Gdethe*s  *'Gdtz 
yon  Berlichingen,"  and  the  compońtion  of  the  **  Seven 
Words,"  which  in  1795  was  ordered  from  Cadiz  as  an  in- 
strumental  composition  to  be  played  between  the  lessons 
of  the  Seven  Worda.  Dlsmissed  from  his  position  aiter 
the  death  of  prinee  Esterhazy  (1790),  but  retaining  his 
title  and  his  salary,  he  went  as  concert  direcŁor  to  Lon- 
don, where  he  attained  the  zenith  of  his  artistic  career. 
During  his  two  stays  in  London  (1790-92  and  1794-95) 
he  wrote  the  operas  Orfeo  and  Eurydice,  his  12  so-called 
English  symphonies,  quartettes,  and  other  wortcs.  He 
was  constantly  employed  as  leader  in  concerts  and  socie- 
ties,  and  was  overwhelmed  with  marks  of  love  and  af- 
fection.  After  retuming  to  Yienna,  he  composed, in  1797, 
his  great  oratorio  The  Creation,  which  was  finished  in 
April,  1798,  and  produced  for  the  first  time  on  March  19, 
1799,  in  Yienna,  and  soon  after  in  all  the  large  cities  of 
Europę,  with  immense  applause.  It  remains  to  this  day 
the  greatest  of  sacred  oratorios,  except  H£lndel*s  Me^ 
siah,  In  the  mean  while  he  finished  his  last  oratorio, 
Thefour  Seasons  (text  by  Yan  Swieten  after  Thomson), 
which  was  produced  for  the  first  time  April  24, 1801. 
He  died  May  31, 1809.  Aocording  to  a  list  of  his  worka, 
prepared  by  Haydn  himself,  they  compiise  118  sympho- 
nies, 83  quartettes,  24  trios,  19  operas,  5  oratorios,  168 
compositions  for  the  baryton,  24  concerts  for  different 
instmments,  15  masses,  44  piano  sonatas,  42  German  and 
Italian  hymns,  39  canoiis,  10  Church  compositions,  18 
songs  in  three  or  four  parts,  tlic  harmony  and  Łhe  ao- 
companiment  for  365  old  Scotch  airs,  and  seyeral  smaller 
pieces.  In  the  library  of  Łhe  Esterhazy  family  aŁ  Eisen- 
stadt, many  unpublished  manuscripts  are  said  to  be  still 
extant.  See  Framery,  Nołice  sur  J,  H,  (Paris,  1810); 
Pohl,  Mozart  und  Haydn  in  London  (Vienna,  1867,  2 
vols.).     (A.J.S.) 

Haymo,  Haimoii«  Haimo,  or  Almo,  a  theolo- 
gian  of  the  9th  century,  the  place  of  whose  birth  (about 
A.D.  778)  is  uncertain.  In  his  youth  he  embraced  the 
rule  of  St  Benedict  in  the  abbey  of  Fulda ;  afterwards 
he  studied  under  Alcuin,  at  St.  Martin  of  Tours,  with 
Rabanus  Maurus.  Ho  then  appears  successiyely  aa 
teacher  at  Fulda,  as  abbot  of  Hirschfeld,  in  the  diocese 
of  Mentz,  and  finally  bishop  of  Halberstadt  (Saxony) 
in  841.  He  was  prcsent  at  the  Council  of  Mentz  in 
847,  and  died  March  28  (or  26),  858.  His  writings, 
which  are  chiefly  compilations  from  the  fathers,  enjoy- 
ed  great  reputation;  they  consist  of,  Glossce  conłinucs 
super  PsaUerium  (Colon.  *1528,  8vo;  1561,  8vo):  — /n 
Cantica  Cantieorum  (Colon.  1519,  foL;  Worms,  1631, 
8vo,  etc)  i—Glossa  tn  Isaiam  (Colon,  and  Paris,  1531, 
8vo) : — Głossce  in  Jerendam,  Ezechielem,  et  Danielem  (so 
scarce  that  sorae  doubt  their  having  been  printed  at 
all) :  —  In  duodedm  Prophetas  minores  (Colon.  1519,  et 
al.) : — HondUm  super  Erangelia  fotius  anni  (Colon.  1531 ; 
Paris,  1683;  Antw.  1559) :— /n  Epistolas  S.  Pauli  (now 
generally  supposed,  however,  to  be  by  St  Remy  of  Au- 
xerre):  —  Super  Apocalypsim  Ezplanatio  (Colon,  and 
Paris,  1531,  8yo):  —  De  Corpore  et  Sanguine  Christi 
(D*Achery,  Spicilegium,  i,  42) : — De  varietaie  librorum 
tres  Ubri  (Paris  and  Colon.  1531, 8vo) : — Bremarium  His- 
toria ecdesiastica  (Colon.  1531,  8vo;  often  reprinted). 
Other  works  have  been  ascribed  to  him  by  Johannes 
Trithemius,  but  it  is  not  certain  tliat  they  were  by  him ; 
and,  at  any  ratę,  they  are  now  lost  His  writings  are  col- 
lected  in  Mignę,  Patrol  Latina,  rols.  cxvi,  cxvii,  cxviii 
See  Lelong,  BibL  Sacra ;  Trithemius,  De  ecdes,  Scripł. ; 
Ilist.  Utter.  de  la  France,  v,  1 11-126 ;  Hoefer,  Nouv,  Biog. 
Gśnir,  xxiii,  121 ;  Ciarkę,  Succession  of  Sac.  Literaturę, 
ii,  506;  Moaheim,  Ch.  History,  cent  ix,  pt  ii,  eh.  ii,  n.  50.  • 


HATNES 


104 


HAZAEŁ 


Baynes,  Lehubł,  &  Congregational  minister  of 
New  EngUnd,  a  mulatto.  He  was  bom  at  West  Hart- 
ford, Conn^  July  18, 176B,  and  was  educated  in  tlie  fam- 
ily  of  Mr.  Kosę,  of  Granville,  Mass.  In  1774  he  eiiUsted 
in  the  Continental  army,  aud  in  1775  was  in  the  expe- 
dition  against  Ticonderoga.  Soon  after  thi:»  he  com- 
menoed  study  with  the  Ker.  Daniel  Ferrand,  and  on 
Nov.  7, 1780,  his  credentials  as  a  minister  were  granted. 
Soon  afterwards  be  received  a  cali  to  take  charge  of 
the  Granville  cburch.  Herę  he  labored  five  years  with 
great  acoeptability.  Łi  1788  he  married  Miss  Elizabeth 
Uabbit,  a  white  lady  of  good  intellect  and  sinoere  piety. 
Soon  after  this  he  was  ordained,  and  went  to  Farming- 
ton,  Conn.,  and  thence  to  Yermont,  and  spent  thirty 
years  as  pastor  of  a  Congregational  church  at  Rutland, 
whenoe  he  remored  to  Manchester,  where  he  was  in- 
Tolved  in  a  yery  singular  and  noted  tiial  for  murder,  not 
as  accomplice,  but  as  a  defender  of  the  aocused.  In  1 822 
he  was  called  to  the  charge  of  the  church  in  GranyiUe, 
N.  Y.,  an  offshoot  of  the  former  in  Massachusetts.  Herę 
he  remained  till  hb  death  in  September,  1834.  Mr. 
Haynes  was  characterized  from  early  life  by  a  swiil  and 
subtle  intellect,  and  a  restless  thirst  for  knowledge.  He 
read  Greek  and  Latin  with  critical  accurac>'.  His  wit 
was  proyerbial  and  refined.  lu  Yermont  he  was  very 
sucoessful  in  opposing  infidelity.  Many  anecdotes  of 
his  shrewd  and  sensible  wit  are  on  reoord.  —  Sher- 
man,  New  Engkmd  JHvines,  p.  267 ;  Sprague,  AnnaU,  ii, 
176. 

Hayti,  a  name  sometimes  given  to  the  seoond  lar- 
gest  isiand  in  the  West  Indies.  The  morę  usual  name 
is  San  Domingo,  under  which  head  all  that  is  common 
to  the  whole  isiand  will  be  treated.  Hayti  proper  is  the 
western  and  French-speakiiig  part  of  the  isiand,  which 
in  1808  was  organized  as  a  separate  commonwealth 
under  president  Christophe,  who  in  1811  had  himself 
crowned  as  hereditary  emperor  under  the  name  of  Henry 
I.  In  1822  the  French  and  the  Spanish  portions  of  the 
isiand  were  again  united  into  one  republic  under  gen- 
erał Boyer.  This  union  lasted  until  1844,  when  not 
only  the  Spanish  portion  became  again  an  independent 
State,  but  the  French  part  split  into  two,  which  were 
harassed  by  almost  uninterrupted  conflicts  between  the 
blacks  and  the  mulattoes.  The  brief  and  beneficent  ad- 
ministiation  of  generał  Richer  (1846-47)  was  followed 
by  that  of  generał  Faustin  Soulouque,  who  undertook  au 
unfortunate  campaign  against  the  Dominicans,  and  in 
August,  1849,  proclaimed  himself  emperor,  mider  the 
name  of  Faustin  I.  He  was  in  1858  oyertłirown  I  y 
genend  Geffirard,  who,  as  president,  introduced  many 
reforma,  and  was,  in  tum,  overthrown  in  Febraaiy,  1867, 
by  Salnare,  under  whose  administration  the  country 
was  disturbed  by  unintcnrupted  civil  warB,  nntii  his 
oyerthrow  ańd  execution,  January,  1870. 

The  area  of  the  republic  is  estimated  at  10,205  8quare 
miłes,  the  population  at  about  570,000.  Nominally  near- 
ly  the  entire  population  belongs  to  the  Roman  Catholic 
Church;  but,  eyen  according  to  Roman  Catholic  writers, 
many  of  the  population  are  even  to-day  morę  pagan 
than  Christian.  The  frightful  religious  and  morał  con- 
dition  of  the  people  is  attribnted  by  Roman  Catholic 
writers  to  the  habit  of  the  French  govemment  of  not  e»- 
tabhshing  rcgułar  bishoprics,  but  of  leaving  the  adminis- 
tration of  eccłesiastical  afTairs  in  the  łiands  of  apostolical 
prefects,  who  had  neither  the  influence  nor  the  power  of 
bishops,  were  morę  dependent  upon  the  colonial  govem- 
ment,  and  oould  not  defend  the  interests  of  the  Church 
and  of  rełigion  against  the  secular  power  and  the  płant- 
ers,  who  were  cliiefly  intent  on  making  the  most  out  of 
slaye  labor.  The  care  of  the  parishes  was,  before  the 
beginning  of  the  French  nile,  almost  exclusiyeły  in  the 
liands  of  the  Capuchius  and  Dominicans.  In  1708  the 
CapuctuDS  left  their  parishes,  and  were  succeeded  by  the 
Jesuits,  who  took  charge  of  the  districts  from  Samana  to 
the  Atrabonite,  while  the  Dominicans  assumed  the  ad- 
ministration of  those  from  the  Atrabonite  to  Cape  Tibu- 
lOD.    Secular  priests  were  left  only  in  the  churches  of 


Yache  Isiand.  When  the  Jesuits  were  ezpelled  in  1768^ 
they  were  again  followed  by  the  Capuchuis.  During  the 
war  of  inlopendence  nearly  all  the  chmches  were  dosed, 
and  the  cełebration  of  diyine  seryice  was  almost  whdl- 
ly  suspended ;  but,  the  war  being  ended,  the  Conatitii- 
tion  of  1807  declared  the  Catholic  Church  the  only  fom 
of  rełigion  recognised  by  the  goyemment,  and  Chris- 
tophe, by  a  decroe  issued  in  1811,  announoed  the  es- 
tablishment of  one  archbishopric  and  thiee  bishoprica. 
The  pope  was  asked  to  sanction  this  anrangemen^  but, 
owing  to  the  death  of  Christophe,  which  occurred  sooo 
aiter,  and  to  other  causes,  the  plan  was  neyer  carried 
out  In  1822,  when  the  whole  isiand  was  under  one 
goyemment,  the  archbishop  of  San  Domingo  appoint- 
ed  for  the  western  part  two  ricars  generał,  of  whom  the 
one  resided  at  Cape  Hayti,  and  the  other  at  Port-au- 
Rrince.  In  1827  Pope  Leo  XII  again  oonferred  upon 
the  archbiahop  of  San  Domingo  the  juńsdiction  oyer  the 
whole  bland;  but  the  religious  oondition  of  the  people 
grew  worse  and  worse.  There  was  an  almost  absoluie 
want  of  priests,  and  the  few  who  were  to  be  found  were 
mostly  worthless  characters,  wlio  had  for  immoral  con- 
ducŁ  bcen  expełled  from  other  dioceses.  In  1842,  bishop 
Rosati,  of  Sr.  Louis,  was  commissioned  by  pope  Gregory 
XYI  to  viidt  Hayti,  and,  as  apostolical  delegate,  to  eon- 
dudę  a  Concordat  with  president  Boyer;  but  this  st^ 
also  was  thwarted  by  the  oyerthrow  of  his  admuiiBtra- 
tion  (1843).  The  emperor  Soulouque  protectcd  and  en- 
dowed  the  Roman  Catholic  Church,  but  at  the  same 
time  introduced  religious  toleration,  and  thus  enabled 
Protestant  missionaries  to  organize  a  few  missions.  In 
1852  pope  Pius  IX  sent  bishop  Spaocapietra  to  Hayti  to 
make  another  efibrt  to  coucludc  a  Concordat.  The  mia- 
sion  was  agabi  unsuccessf u) ;  and  in  an  alłocution  of 
Dec  19,  1853,  the  pope  complaincd  that  the  emperor 
and  his  goyemment  had  a  false  idea  conceming  the 
Church,  and  that,  as  a  great  portion  of  the  derg>'  were 
unwilling  to  adopt  a  strict  rule  of  life,  the  bishop  waa 
compełled  to  leaye  the  country.  Ncgotiations  with 
president  Gefirard  were  morę  successful,  and  on  Sepk 
16, 1861,  a  Concordat  was  promulgated.  According  to 
it,  one  archbishopric  (Port-au-Prince)  and  four  bishop- 
rics (Les  Cayes,  Cape  Hayti,  Gonaiyes,  and  Port  de  Paix) 
were  established  in  1862;  the  archbishop  (a  French- 
man,  Testard  du  Coequer)  was  af  pointed  in  1868,  buk 
nonę  of  the  four  episcopal  sees  had  been  filled  up  to  Jan- 
uary, 1870.  The  number  of  parishes  is  49.  For  pub- 
lic  education  yery  littłe  has  as  yct  becn  done.  There 
were  in  1868  about  150  public  scho<  li,  with  about  13,000 
pupiłs. 

The  Protestant  Episcopal  Church  of  the  United  States 
sustained  in  Deccmber,  1869,  missionaries  at  Port-an- 
Prince,  Cabaret  Quatre,  and  at  Cape  Haytien.  In  Port^ 
au-Prince  a  church  and  a  rectory  were  erected  in  1868; 
the  missions  of  this  place  and  of  Cabaret  Quatre  liad  to- 
gether,  in  May,  1869, 102  communicants. 

The  English  Wealeyans,  who  were  the  flrst  Protes* 
tant  body  to  establish  a  Protestant  mission  in  Hayti, 
had  in  1868  6  circuits,  6  chapels,  4  other  preaching- 
places,  210  members,  and  about  890  regular  attendants 
on  public  worship.— Neher,  Kirchl.  Geogr,  und  StatistUc^ 
yoL  iii,  1869.     (AJ.S.) 

Ha^załll  (Heb.  ChazaH%  ifittn,  also  bKmn,  whom 
God  heholds,  i.  e.  cares  for ;  SepL  'iCo^A,  Yulg.  Ilazael^ 
but  Azael  in  Amos  i,  4 ;  hence  Latin  A  zeluś,  Justin. 
xxxyi,  2),  an  oflicer  of  Benhadad,  king  of  Syria,  whnee 
eyentuał  accession  to  the  throne  of  that  kingdom  was 
reyealed  to  Elijah  (1  Kings  xix,  15),B.C.  cir.  907;  and 
who,  when  Elisha  was  at  Damascus,  was  sent  by  his 
master,  who  was  then  iłł,  to  consult  the  prophet  reqpect- 
ing  his  recoyeiy  (2  Kings  yiii,  8).  RC.  dr.  884.  He 
was  followed  by  forty  camels  bearing  presents  from  the 
king.  The  answer  was,  that  he  miffhł  certainly  recoyer. 
"  Howbdt,"  added  the  prophet,  **  the  Lord  hath  showed 
me  that  he  shall  surely  die."  He  then  looked  steadfast- 
ly  at  Hazael  till  he  became  confused,  on  which  tlie  man 


HAZATATT 


105 


HAZARMAYETH 


of  God  wept ;  aiid  wbeii  Hazael  respectfoUy  inqiiiied 

the  caue  of  this  outboist,  Elisha  replied  by  deacribing 

the  mid  pictnre  then  present  to  his  mind  of  all  the 

cvik  which  the  man  now  before  him  would  inflict  upon 

I^raeL    Hazael  exclaimed,  "  But  what  is  thy  serrant, 

the  [not  a]  dog,  that  be  ahould  do  thia  great  thiug?" 

The  prophet  exp]atiied  that  it  was  as  king  of  Syria  be 

sbould  óo  ii.    Haaad  then  letumed,  and  delivered  to 

his  master  that  poition  of  the  prophetic  lesponse  which 

wts  iotended  for  him.    But  the  very  ncxt  day  this  man, 

caol  and  mU'TfftJ"g  in  his  cruel  ambition,  took  a  thick 

doib,  and,  haying  dipped  it  in  water,  spread  it  over  the 

face  of  the  king,  who,  in  his  feeUeneas,  and  probably  in 

hi»  deep,  was  snwthcred  by  its  weight,  and  died  what 

scemed  to  his  people  a  natural  death  (2  Kings  viii,  16). 

We  Sie  not  to  imagine  that  such  a  project  as  this  was 

conceiTed  and  executed  in  a  day,  or  that  it  was  soggest; 

ed  by  the  woids  of  Elisha.    His  disoomposure  at  the 

eaniest  gazę  of  the  prophet,  and  other  circumstances, 

show  that  Hazael  at  that  moment  regaided  Elisha  as 

one  to  whom  his  secret  porposes  were  known.     (See 

Kitto'8  Dail^  BibU  lUusL  ad  loc.)^-Kitto,  s.  v.    He  was 

soon  engaged  in  bostilities  with  Ahaziah,  king  of  Jadah, 

and  Jehoram,  king  of  Israel,  for  the  poaseasion  of  the 

oij  of  Ramotb-gilead  (2  Kinga  viii,  28).    The  Assyrian 

inacriptions  show  that  about  this  time  a  bloody  and 

de9tnictive  "wai  was  wagcd  between  the  Aseyrians  on 

the  one  aide,  and  the  Syriana,  Hittites,  Hamathites,  and 

Phcenidans  on  the  other.     Seo  Cuneiform  Inscrip- 

TioYa.    Benhadad  (q.  v.)  had  recently  snflfered  several 

lerere  defeata  at  the  hands  of  the  Assyrian  king,  and 

upon  the  acceasiofi  of  Hazael  the  war  was  speedily  re- 

newed.    Hazael  took  up  a  poettion  in  the  fastneases  of 

the  Anti-Ubanns,  but  was  there  attacked  by  the  Assyr- 

ians,  who  defeated  him  with  great  loss,  killing  16,000  of 

his  wamora,  and  captnring  morę  than  1100  chaiiots. 

Three  3reanł  later  the  Aasyriana  once  morę  entered  Syria 

in  foice;  but  on  this  occasion  Hazael  submitted,  and 

hdped  to  fumiah  the  inraden  with  supplies.    After 

this,  interna!  troubles  appear  to  have  oocupied  the  at- 

tention  of  the  Aasyrians,  who  madę  no  morę  expeditions 

into  these  parts  for  about  a  centuiy.    The  Syrians  rap- 

idly  reoovered  their  loasefs  and  towards  the  cloae  of  the 

lei^  of  Jeho,  Uazael  led  them  against  the  Israelites 

(EC.  eir.  860),  whom  he  "<  smote  in  all  their  coasts"  (2 

Kings  X,  82),  thus  accomplishing  the  prophecy  of  Elisha 

(2  Kings  viii,  12).     His  main  attack  fell  upon  the  east- 

em  provincea,  where  he  ravaged  ^  all  the  land  of  Gilead, 

the  Gadites,  and  the  Reubenites,  and  the  Manassites, 

from  Aroer,  which  is  by  the  river  Amon,  even  Gilead 

and  Bashan"  (2  Kinga  x,  83).    After  this  he  seems  to 

hare  held  the  kingdom  of  Israel  in  a  species  of  subjec- 

tion  (2  Kings  xiii,  8-7,  and  22),  and  towards  the  close 

of  his  life  he  even  threatened  the  kingdom  of  Jndah. 

Haring  taken  Gath  (2  Kings  xii,  17 ;  comp.  Amoe  vi, 

2),  he  prooeeded  to  attack  Jemsalem,  defeated  the  Jews 

in  an  engagement  (2  Chroń,  xxiv,  24),  and  was  about  to 

aasaolt  the  dty,  when  Joash  induced  him  to  retire  by 

presenting  him  with  "  all  the  gold  that  was  found  in  the 

treasures  of  the  house  of  the  Lord,  and  in  the  king^s 

hoHse"  (2  Kinga  xii,  18).— Smith,  a.  v.     This  able  and 

mooeaBful,  bva  unprindpded  usurper  left  the  throne  at  his 

deith  to  his  Bon  Benhadad  (2  Kings  xiii,  24).     B.a  cir. 

88Ó.   Such  was  the  prosperity  and  influence  of  his  reign 

that  the  phrase  ''house  of  Hazael"  occurs  in  prophet- 

ical  denunciation  (Amoe  i,  4)  as  a  designation  of  the 

kingdom  of  Damaaoene  Syria.    See  Damascus. 

HasaSi^ah  (Heb.  Chazoj^',  n;tn,  whom  jrekovah 
hekoldtf  Sept.  'O^ia),  eon  of  Adaiah^and  father  of  Gol- 
hozeh,  a  deaoendant  of  Pharez  (Neh.  xi,  5).  B.Cb  con- 
■derably  antę  586. 

Hasar-  (alao  Hazor-)  is  freqnently  prefixed  to  ge- 
ograpbical  nameą  in  order  to  indicate  their  dependence 
as  nllages  O^Ji  chatter^y  a  hamlet ;  see  Yillage)  upon 
eome  town  or  other  noted  spot,  or  in  order  to  diatinguish 
them  from  it;  e.g.  tbose  foUowing.    ** The  word i/azar, 


whcn  joincd  to  plsces  sitoated  in  the  desert  or  on  the 
outskirts  of  the  inhabited  country,  as  it  frequently  is, 
probably  denoted  a  piece  of  ground  surrounded  by  a 
rude  but  strong  fence,  where  tents  could  be  pitched,  and 
cattle  kept  in  safety  from  marauders.  Such  places  are 
very  common  at  the  present  day  in  the  outlying  dis- 
tricts  of  Palestine.  In  other  cases  Hazar  may  denote  a 
'  castle'  or  *  fortified  town' "  (Kitto).     Comp.  Hazer. 

Haz'ar-ad'dar  (Heb.  ChaUar^-Addar',  -)Xn 
•^1X,  vUlage  of  Addar;  Sept.  tvav\ic  'Apa^,  v.  r.  'AJ- 
Ba^d  and  Y^pa^a),  a  place  on  the  aouthem  bounda- 
ry  of  Palestine,  between  Kadesh-Bamea  and  Azmon 
(Numb.  xxxiv,  4)  ;  elaewhere  called  simply  Adab 
(Josh.  XV,  8).  See  Hazbrim.  It  probably  lay  in  the 
desert  west  of  Kadesh-Bamea  (q.  v.),  perhaps  at  the 
junction  of  wadys  £I-Fukreh  and  £1-Madurah,  east  of 
Jebel  Madurah.  SccTribe.  Rev.  J.  Kowlands  thought 
he  discovered  both  this  locality  and  that  of  the  adjoin- 
ing  Azmon  in  the  fountains  which  he  calls  Addrat  and 
Ateimef,  west  of  wady  el-Arish  (Williams,  Hofy  City, 
i,  467) ;  but  the  names  are  morc  correctly  Kudeirat  and 
Kusaimet,  and  the  locality  is  too  far  west. 

Ha'»ar-e'nan  CAeh,Chatsar''Eynan','\y^t  ^^n, 
riUage  offounlams,  also  [in  Ezek.  xlvii,  17]  HA'jSA]i- 
E'NON,  Chataar^-Eywm',  "jiS"^?  "i^n,  id.;  Sept 'Aot(h 
vatv  or  r)  auKii  tov  A(vav),  a  place  on  the  boundary 
of  Palestine,  appaiently  at  the  north-eastem  comer, 
between  Ziphron  and  Shepham  (Numb.  xxxiv,  9, 10), 
not  far  from  the  district  of  Hamath,  in  Damasoene 
Syria  (Ezek.  xlvii,  17;  xlviii,  1).  Schwarz  {Palestine, 
p.  20,  notę)  thinks  it  identical  with  the  village  Deir^ 
łlamm,  m  the  valley  of  the  Fijeh  or  Amana,  near  Da-, 
mascus;  but  there  is  no  probability  that  this  was  in- 
cluded  within  the  limits  of  Canaan.  '^  Porter  would 
identify  Hazar-enan  ¥nth  Kuryetein=^iYie  two  cities,' 
a  village  morę  than  Bixty  miles  ^ast-north-east  of  Da- 
mascus, the  chief  ground  for  the  identification  appai- 
ently being  the  preeence  at  Kuryetein  of  *large  foun- 
tains,' the  only  ones  in  that  *  vast  region,'  a  circumstance 
with  which  the  name  of  Hazar-enan  well  agrees  (Z>a- 
nuucuSf  i,  252;  ii,  858).  The  great  distance  from  Da- 
mascus and  the  body  of  Palestine  is  the  main  impedi- 
ment  to  the  leception  of  this  identification"  (Smith). 
We  must  therefore  seek  for  Hazar-enan  somewhere  in 
the  well-watered  tract  at  the  north-westem  foot  of  Mount 
Hermon,  perhaps  the  present  Heuheya,  near  which  are 
foor  springs  (Ain  Kunieb,  A.  Tinta,  A.  Ata,  and  A.  Her^ 
sha).    See  Haspeya. 

Ha^zar-gad^dah  (Heb.  Chat»ar'-Gadddk\  'nxn 
JTjł,  mUage  of  fortunę;  Sept.  *AffŁpyadia  v.  r.  Sipcifi), 
a  city  on  the  southem  border  of  Judah,  mentioned  be- 
tween Moladah  and  Heshmon  (Josh.  xv,  27).  Modem 
writers  (see  Reland,  PaleuL  p.  707),  following  the  sug^ 
gestion  of  Jerome  (Onomatt.  s.  v. ;  who,  as  suggested  by 
Schwarz,  Palestine^  p.  100,  bas  probably  confounded  this 
place  with  En-Gedi),  have  sought  for  it  near  the  Dead 
Sea ;  but  the  associated  names  appear  to  locate  it  neaier 
midway  towards  the  Mediterranean.  See  Hazerim. 
Mr.  Grove  suggests  (Smith,  Diet,  s.  v.)  that  it  ia  posably 
the  modem  ruined  site  marked  as  Jurrah  on  Yau  de 
yekle'sifap,westofel-Mclh  (Mobidah),<'by  thechange 
so  frequent  in  the  East  (?)  of  D.  to  K.**  See  Judau, 
Tridb  of. 

Ha^sar-haftdcon  (Hebrew  Chattar'  hai-Tik&n', 
*(\Z^t\T\  "^^n,  hamlet  ofthe  midway,  q.  d.  nnddle  rillaye; 
Sept.  oonfusedly  Evactv  Kai  tov  Evvav  v.  r.  aif\t)  tov 
l^wayf  Tulg.  domus  Tichoń),  a  place  on  the  northem 
boundary  of  Palestine,  near  Hamath,  and  in  the  confinea 
of  Hauran  (Ezek.  xlvii,  16) ;  apparently,  therefore,  on 
the  northem  brow  of  Mount  Hermon,  which  may  have 
given  origin  to  the  name  as  a  point  of  divi8ion  between 
Coele-Syria  and  Damaacenc  Syria.  It  is  possibly  only 
an  epithet  of  the  Hazor  (q.  v.)  of  NaphtaU. 

Haaanna'Teth    (Hebiew  Cbatsas-ma^yei:^ 


HAZAR^HUAL 


106 


HAZEL 


nj^^^Sn,  court  ofdeatk;  Sept,  2ap/iw^  and  'Apaii&^y 
Vulig.  Asarmoth),  the  name  of  the  third  son  of  Joktan, 
or,  rather,  of  a  distńct  of  Arabia  Felix  settled  by  him 
(Gen.  X,  26 ;  1  Chroń,  i,  20) ;  supposed  to  be  presen'ed 
in  the  modern  province  of  Hadramauij  situated  on  the 
Indian  Ocean,  and  abouuding  in  frankincense,  myrrh, 
and  aloe;  but  (as  intimated  in  the  ominous  name)  noted 
for  the  insalubrity  of  the  climate  (Abulfeda,  Arabia^  p. 
45 ;  Niebuhr,  Beschrieb.  der  ^  ra*.  p.  283 ;  Kitter,  ErdL 
XI,  iii,  609).  It  was  known  also  to  the  classical  Mrriters 
(Xarpa/iu;rcrrac,  xvi,  768 ;  Karpa/ifitrai  or  Karpafiui- 
pirat,  PtoL  vi,  7,  25 :  Ałramiice^  Dion.  Perieg,  9b7 ;  Xa- 
TpafKaTiTTię,  Steph.  Byz.  p.  755). — Winer;  Gesenius. 
This  identiiication  of  the  locality  rests  not  oniy  on  the 
occurrence  of  the  name,  but  is  supported  by  the  proved 
foct  that  Joktan  settled  in  the  Yemen,  along  the  south 
ooast  of  Arabia,  by  the  physical  characteristics  of  the 
inhabitants  of  this  region,  and  by  the  idcntification  of 
the  names  of  8everal  others  of  the  sons  of  Joktan.  The 
province  of  Hadramaut  is  situated  cast  of  the  modem 
Yemen  (anciently,  as  shown  in  the  article  Arabia,  the 
limits  of  the  lat  ter  province  embraced  almost  the  w  hole 
of  the  south  of  the  peninsula),  extcnding  to  the  districts 
of  Shihr  and  Mahreh.  Its  capital  is  Śhibam,  a  very 
ancient  city,  of  which  the  niitive  writers  give  curious 
aooounts,  and  its  chief  ports  are  Mirbat,  Zafari  [see  Se- 
phar],  and  Kishlm,  whence  a  great  trade  was  carried 
on  in  ancient  times  with  India  and  Africa.  Hadramaut 
itself  is  generally  ctdtivated,  in  contrast  with  the  contig- 
11008  sandy  deaerts  (called  El-Ahkaf,  where  lived  the 
gigantic  race  of  Ad),  is  partly  mountainous,  with  wa- 
tered  valley8,  and  is  still  celebrated  for  its  frankincense 
(£l-ldrlsl,  ed.  Jomard,  i,  54;  Niebuhr,  Descrip,  p  245), 
exporting  also  gum-arabic,  myrrh,  dragon^s  blood,  and 
aloes,  the  latter,  however,  being  chiefly  from  Socotra, 
which  is  under  the  rule  of  the  sheik  of  Keshlm  (Nie- 
buhr, L  c.  sq.).  The  early  kings  of  Hadramaut  were 
Joktanites,  distinct  Irom  the  descendants  of  Yaarub,  the 
piogenitor  of  the  Joktanite  Arabs  generally ;  and  it  is 
hence  to  be  inferred  that  they  were  separatdy  desccnd- 
ed  from  Hazarmaveth.  They  maintained  their  inde- 
pendence  against  the  powerful  kings  of  Himyer  mitil 
the  latter  were  subdued  at  the  Abyssinian  invasion 
•  (Ibn-Khald(in,  ap.  Caussin,  Et»ai,  i,  135  Bq.).  The  mod- 
em people,  although  mixed  with  other  races,  are  strong- 
ly  characterized  by  fierce,  fanatlcal,  and  restless  dispo- 
ńtiona.  They  are  enterprising  merchants,  well  known 
for  their  trading  and  travelling  propensities.^ — Smith, 
s,v. 

Ha^^zar-shn^al  (Hebrew  Chaisar'-Shu€U%  "n^n 
55^^,  nUlage  of  the  jackal;  Sept.  *Aaap<Tov\df  'Ewp- 
ffova\  and  'Actpaułok),  a  city  on  the  southem  border 
of  Judah  (Josh.  xv,  28 ;  Neh.  xi,  26,  where  it  is  men- 
tioncd  between  Beth-palet  and  Beer-sheba),  afterwards 
induded  in  the  tcrritory  of  Simeon  (Josh.  xix,  8;  1 
Chroń,  iv,  28,  where  it  is  mentioned  between  Moladah 
and  Balah) ;  hence  probably  midway  between  the  Dead 
Sea  and  the  Mcditerranean.  See  Hazeribi.  Tan  de 
Yelde,  on  his  J/op,  conjectures  the  site  to  be  that  of 
the  ruins  Saweh,  which  he  locates  nearly  half  way  be- 
tween Beer-sheba  and  Moladah.    But  see  Shema. 

Ha''zar-BU''Bah  (Hebrew  ChaUar''Susah',  nsn 
nbib,  viJlage  of  the  horse^  Josh.  xix,  5 ;  Sept.  *Xaip- 
<Toif(n>,  Vulg.  Haaersusa),  or  HA'ZAR-SU'SIM  (Chat- 
sar'Susim'y  D'^b1D  "^sn,  viUage  ofhorses,  1  Chroń,  iv, 
31 ;  Sept  Tipu<Tv  £a)(ri/4,yulg.  Hasersusim),  a  city  of  the 
tribe  of  Simeon,  mentioned  between  Bcth-marcaboth 
and  Beth-lebaoth  or  Beth-birei ;  doubtless,  as  thought 
by  Schwarz  {Pałest.  p.  124),  the  same  as  Sansannah, 
in  the  south  border  of  Judah  (Josh.  xv,  31),  one  of  Sol- 
omon's  "  chariot-cities"  (2  Chroń,  i,  14).  See  Haze- 
RiM.  It  is  tnie  that  "neither  it  nor  its  oompanion, 
Beth-marcaboth,  the  *  house  of  chariots,'  is  named  in 
the  list  of  the  towns  of  Judah  in  chap.  xv,  but  they  are 
•induded  in  thoae  of  Simeon  in  .1  Chroń,  iv,  81,  with  the 


expre8s  statement  that  they  esisled  before  and  np  to 
the  time  of  David*'  (Smith).  Stanley  snggests,  <<In 
Befhmarkabothy  *  the  house  of  chariots,'  and  ffazar-m- 
simy  '■  the  village  of  horses,'  we  recognise  the  d^póts  and 
stations  for  the  horses  and  chariots,  such  as  those  which 
in  Solomon's  time  went  to  and  fro  between  Egypt  and 
Palestine"  {Sm,  andPaL  p.  160>  "  It  is  doubtful  wheth- 
er  there  was  any  such  communication  between  tho«e 
countries  as  early  as  the  time  of  Joshua ;  but  may  not 
the  rich  grassy  pUdns  around  Beersheba  (Robinson,  Bib. 
Res,  i,  203)  have  becn  used  at  certain  seasons  by  the 
ancient  tribes  of  Southem  Palestine  for  pasturing' their 
war  and  chariot  horses,  just  as  the  grany  plains  of  Jau- 
lan  are  used  at  the  present  day  by  the  bnise  chiefs  of 
Lebanon,  and  the  Turkish  cava]ry  and  artilleiy  at  Da- 
mascus?"  (Kitto).  "Still  it  is  somewhat  difficult  to 
ascribe  to  so  early  a  datę  the  names  of  places  situated, 
as  these  were,  in  the  Bedouin  country,  where  a  chariot 
must  have  been  unknown,  and  where  even  horses  seem 
carefuUy  exduded  from  the  poasessbns  of  the  inhabit- 
ants—* camels,  sheep,  oxen,  and  asses'  (1  Sam.  xxvii,  9)" 
(Smith). 
Haz'ason-ta'mar  (2  Chion.  xx,  2).    See  Hazb- 

ZON-TAMAR. 

Hazel  (t!|!3,  luZy  of  doubtM  etymology  [see  Luz] ; 
Sept.  KapvU'r}yYiilgate  amtfgdalwua) y  appArently  a  uut- 
bearing  tree,  which  occnrs  in  Gen.  xxx,  37,  where  it  in- 
dicates  one  of  the  kinda  of  rod  from  which  Jacob  peeled 
the  bark,  and  which  he  placed  in  the  water-troughs  of 
the  cattle.  Authorities  are  divided  between  the  hasH 
or  walnut  and  the  a/moiK/-tree,  as  representing  the  luz ; 
in  favor  of  the  former  we  have  Kimchi,  Jarchi,  Luthcr, 
and  others ;  while  the  Tulgate,  Saadias,  and  Gesenius 
adopt  the  latter  view.  The  rendering  in  the  Sepu  is 
equally  applicallc  to  cither.  On  the  one  hand  is  ad- 
duced  the  fact  that  in  the  Arabie  we  have  louz,  which 
is  indeed  the  same  word,  and  denotes  the  almond.  Thus 
Abul-Fa(*li,  as  quoted  by  Celsius  (I/ierobot  i,  254),  saya, 
"  Louz  eet  arbor  nota,  et  magna,  foliis  moUibus.  Śpecies 
duie,  hortensis  et  silYestris.  Hortensis  quoquc  diue  sunt 
species,  dulcis  et  amara;"  where  reference  is  evidently 
madę  to  the  si^-eet  and  bitter  almond.  Other  Arab  au- 
thors  also  describe  the  almond  midcrUhe  name  of  louz. 
But  this  name  was  well  known  to  the  Hebrews  as  indi- 
cating  the  almond;  for  R.  Saadias,  in  Ab.  £sra'8  Com^ 
menł.,  as  quoted  by  Celsius  (p.  253),  remarks:  "Lus  est 
amygdalus,  quia  ita  eam  appdlant  Arabes ;  nam  has  dusd 
linguse,  et  Syriaca,  ejusdem  sunt  familiae."  It  is  also  al- 
leged  that  there  is  another  word  in  the  Hebrew  lan- 
guage,  egóz  (f^AK),  which  is  applicable  to  the  hazel  02 


AmyffdtUiU  Communiś. 


HAZELELPONI 


107 


HAZEROTH 


wałnot.  SeeNirr.  The  strongest  argnment  on  the  oth- 
er  aide  ańaes  from  the  circumstance  of  anotber  word, 
9kdk£d  n^^)'  hA^'uig  reference  to  the  almond;  it  is 
snppoMcI,  howerer,  that  the  latter  applies  to  the  fruU 
excluavely,  and  the  word  under  discussion  to  the  tree ; 
BoeenmUUer  identifies  the  shaked  with  the  ciiltivated, 
and /ib  with  the  wild  almond  trec—Kitto;  Smith.  See 
Fruit, 

The  almond  is  diffused  by^  caltm%  ftom  China  to  Spain, 
and  is  found  to  bear  fruit  well  on  both  sides  of  the  Med- 
itetranean ;  but  there  is  no  region  where  it  thriyes  bet- 
ier  than  Syria,  or  where  it  is  bo  truły  at  home.  Accord- 
ingly,  when  Jacob  was  sendiiig  a  present  of  those  pro- 
ductions  of  Canaan  which  were  likely  to  be  accepuble 
to  an  Egyptian  grandee, "the  best  fruits  of  the  land," 
besides  balm,  and  mjnrrh,  and  honey,  he  bade  his  sons 
take  "nuts  and  almonds**  (Gen.  xliii,  11) ;  and  the  orig- 
inal  name  of  that  place  so  endeared  to  his  memory  as 
Bethd,  originally  catted  Luz,  was  probably  derived  from 
some  well-knowń  tree  of  this  species.  To  this  day  "  Jor- 
dan almoods**  is  the  recognised  market^name  for  the 
best  samplea  of  this  fruit,  in  oommon  with  Tafilat  dates, 
Eleme  figs,  etc  The  name,  boweyer,  is  little  morę  than 
a  tradition.  The  best "  Jordan  almonds"  come  from  Mal- 
aga.—FaiiiMim.    See  Almond. 

Haselelpo^^ni,  or  rather  Zelklpoki  ("^pin^bs, 
siode  looking  upon  me  [ot  protection  o/*  the  pretenoe^  sc 
God;  Fttiat],  with  the  arUde,  ^^aiD^Sin,  hats-TseUl- 
ptmi\  strictly,  perbaps,  rather  an  epithet,  the  ZeUlpomłe^ 
q.  d.  OKertkadofctd;  Sept.  '£<r}yXcX^oiv,yu]g.  Aselelpku- 
m),  the  sister  of  Jezrecl  and  others,  of  the  descendants 
of  Hezitm,  son  of  Judah  (1  Chroń,  iv,  3).  KC.  cir.  1612. 
HazeliUB,  Ernbst  Lewis,  D.D.,  was  bom  in  Neu- 
salŁPrussia,  Sept  6, 1777.  He  was  descended  from  a 
k»ig  linę  of  Lutheran  ministers.  His  theological  stud- 
ies  were  pursued  at  Niesky,  a  Morarian  institution  un- 
der the  supeńntendence  of  bishop  Anders.  In  1800  he 
was  appointed  teacher  of  the  classics  in  the  Moravian 
Scminary  at  Nazareth,  Pa.  The  position  he  accepted  in 
oppoeition  to  the  wiahes  of  his  friends,  and  at  once  em- 
barked  for  America.'  In  this  institution  he  laborcd  with 
efficienc}'  for  eight  years,  and  was  adyanced  to  be  head- 
teacher  and  professor  of  theology.  DifTering  from  his 
fanthren  in  tbeir  views  of  church  goremment  and  disci- 
pline,  he  concluded  to  change  his  ecclesiastical  relations, 
«iid  to  unitę  with  the  Lutheran  Church,  in  whose  sery- 
iee  his  iathers  had  so  long  liyed  and  labored.  In  1809 
h«  lemoycd  to  Philadelphia,  and  for  a  time  had  charge 
of  a  priyate  classical  schooL  For  seyeral  years  he  la- 
bored as  a  pastor  in  New  Jersey,  and  in  1815  was  elected 
professor  of  theology  in  Hartwick  Seminary,  and  princi- 
pal  of  the  classical  department  In  1890  he  was  chosen 
professor  of  Biblical  and  Oriental  literaturę,  and  of  the 
German  language,  in  the  seminary  at  Gettysburg,  Pa. ; 
and  in  1834  he  accepted  the  appointment  of  professor  in 
the  theological  seminary  of  the  Synod  of  South  Caro- 
Una.  Ali  these  positions  he  filled  with  ability  and  great 
satisraction  to  the  Church.  He  died  Feb.  20, 18&8.  As 
a  scholar  he  occupied  a  high  rank.  The  doctorate  he 
reccived  simultaneously  firom  Union  and  Columbia  Col- 
kfcea,  K.  Y.  His  attainments  in  literaturę  were  yaried 
auł  extensive.  He  pnblished  lĄfe  ^Luther  (1818)  •.— 
MaUriaUfor  CaUdiUcOion  (1828)  %-^Augtburg  Con/es- 
Mwm,  with  A  rmotationg  :—Uutory  ofthe  Christian  Church 
(1842)  :—//£»/.  ofthe  A  merican  Lutheran  Church  (1842) : 
— LiTe  o/J,  H.  Stmig  (1881).     (M.  L.  a) 

Ha^^zer  p3Cn,  Ckatter',  from  isn,  to  surround  or 
inckMe),  a  word  which  is  of  not  unfrequent  occurrence 
in  the  Bibie  in  the  sense  of  a  *'court"  or  quadrangle  to 
a  palące  or  other  building,  but  which  topographically 
aeems  geiierally  employed  for  the ''  yillages'"  of  people  in 
a  Toyinji^  and  unsettled  life,  the  semi-permanent  collec- 
tioDs  of  dwellings  described  by  trayellers  amoiig  the 
modem  Araba  as  consisting  of  rough  stone  walls  coyer- 
ed  with  the  tent-doths,  and  thus  holding  a  middle  po- 


sition between  the  tent  of  the  wanderer— so  tranmtory 
as  to  fumish  an  image  of  the  sudden  termination  of  life 
(Isa.  xxxyiii,  12)— and  the  settled,  permanent  town.   See 

TOPOORxVPHICAL  TeRMS. 

As  a  proper  name  it  appears  in  the  A.V.:  1.  In  the 
plural,  Hazkrim,  and  Hazeroth,  for  which  see  below. 
2.  In  the  slightly  diflTcrent  form  of  Hazor.  3.  In  com- 
position  with  other  words,  giying  a  śpecial  designation 
to  the  particular  "yillage"  intended.  When  thus  in 
union  with  another  word  the  name  is  H  azar  (q.  v.).  It 
should  not  be  oyerlooked  that  the  places  so  named  are 
all  in  the  wildemess  itself,  or  else  ąuite  on  the  oonfines 
of  ciyilized  country.— Smith,  s.  v. 

Has^erim  [many  Haze^rini]  (Hebrew  Chatserim', 
D*^'nsn,  tńUaget;  Sept.  'A^njpw^,  Vulg.  Haserim),  the 
name  of  a  place,  or  perh.  rather  a  generał  designation  of 
the  temporary  yillages  in  which  the  nomadę  Avites  re- 
sided,  especially  between  Gaza  and  "  the  river  of  Egypt" 
or  el-Arish  (Deut  ii,  23).  Schwarz  suggests  {Palestine, 
p.  93)  that  these  "  Hazerim"  may  be  a  generał  designa- 
tion of  the  many  towns  by  the  name  of  Hazor  and  Ha^ 
ZAR  found  in  this  region ;  if  so,  these  probably  all  lay 
ncar  each  other;  and  it  is  a  singular  fact  that  the  sites 
of  at  least  two  of  them,  Hazar-gaddah  and  Hazar-snsah, 
seem  to  haye  been  immediately  adjoining  one  another. 

Haz^erotb  [many  I[aze'roth']  (Heb.  Chatseroth', 
ni^sn,  viUages;  Sept  'Aotjoi^,  but  XvXiav  in  Deut.  i, 
1),  the  8ixteenth  station  of  the  Israelites,  tbeir  third  af- 
ter  leaying  Sinai,  and  either  four  or  five  days*  maroh 
from  that  mountain  towards  Canaan  (Numb.  xi,  35 ;  xii, 
16 ;  xxxiii,  17, 18 ;  Deut  i,  1 ;  comp.  Numb.  x,  33).  U 
w^as  also  the  first  place  after  Sinai  where  the  camp  re- 
mained  for  a  number  of  da^^s.  Herę  Aaron  and  I^Iiriam 
attempted  to  excite  a  rebeUion  against  Moses ;  and  here 
the  gtdlty  Miriam  was  smitten  with  leprosy  (Numb.  xii). 
Burckhardt  suggested  {TrareUy  p.  495)  that  it  is  to  be 
found  in  Aia  el-J/udhera^  near  the  usual  route  from  Si- 
nai to  the  eastem  arm  ofthe  Red  Sea;  an  Identification 
that  bas  generally  been  acąuiesced  in  by  sub8equent 
trayellers.  It  is  described  by  Dr.  Robinson  as  a  foun- 
tain  of  tolcrably  good  water,  the  only  perennial  one  in 
that  region,  with  seyeral  Iow  palm-trees  aromid  it;  he 
nlso  remarks  that  the  Identification  of  this  spot  with 
Hazeroth  is  importaiiŁ  as  showing  the  route  of  the  Is- 
raelites from  Sinai  to  the  Arabah,  which,  if  it  passed 
through  this  place,  must  haye  continued  down  the  yal- 
ley  to  the  Red  Sea,  and  could  not  haye  diyergcd  through 
the  high  westem  plateau  of  the  wildemess  {Researc/ies, 
i,  223).  See  £xode.  "  Its  distance  from  Sinai  accords 
with  the  Scripturo  narratiye,  and  would  seem  to  war- 
rant  us  in  identifying  it  with  Hazeroth.  There  is  some 
diificulty,  boweyer,  in  the  position.  The  country  around 
the  fouńtain  is  exceedingly  rugged,  and  the  approaches 
to  it  difiicult  It  does  not  seem  a  suitable  place  for  a 
large  camp.  Dr.  Wilson  mentions  an  undulating  plain 
about  fifteen  miles  north  of  Sinai,  and  mnning  *  a  long 
way  to  the  eastward,'  called  el-IIadherah ;  and  here  he 
would  locate  Hazeroth  {Landg  ofthe  BiUe,  i,  256).  Stan- 
ley thinks  that  the  fouńtain  called  el-Airij  some  distance 
north  of  the  fouńtain  of  Hudhcrah,  ought  rather  to  be 
regarded  as  the  site  of  Hazeroth,  because  'Ain  is  the 
most  important  spring  in  this  region,  ^and  must  there- 
fore  haye  attracted  around  it  any  nomadic  settlements, 
such  as  are  implied  in  the  name  Hazeroth,  and  such  as 
that  of  Israel  might  have  been'  {Sinai  and  Pal  p.  82). 
ITie  approach  to  'Ain  b  easy ;  the  glens  around  it  po»- 
sess  some  good  pastures;  and  the  road  from  it  to  the 
i£lanitic  Gulf,  along  whose  shore  the  Israelites  appear 
to  haye  marched,  is  open  through  the  subliroe  rayine  of 
Wetlr.  Still,  those  familiar  with  the  East  know  with 
w^hat  tenacity  old  names  cling  to  oki  sites;  and  it  seems 
in  the  highest  degree  probable  that  the  old  name  Haz- 
eroth is  retained  in  Hudherah.  But  probably  the  name 
may  haye  been  given  to  a  wide  district  (Porter,  Hand- 
bookforS.  and  Pal  i,  37  Bq.)"  (Kitto,  s.  v.).  Schwarz, 
boweyer  {PaleM*  p.  212),  regards  the. site  as  that.of  ilm 


HAZEZON-TAMAR 


108 


HAZOR 


d-Kudeirahf  a  large  fountain  of  sweet  runiung  water  at 
sonie  (listance  beyond  the  ridge  which  bounds  the  west- 
ern edge  of  the  interior  pl«teaa  of  the  desert  et-Tih 
(Robinson^s  Ruearchetf  i,  280) ;  a  position  far  too  oorth- 
ward. 

Haz''ezon-ta'mar  (Hebrew  ChcOsaUon^-Tamca^j 
■n^ri  y^^,  Gen.  xiv,  7;  SepL  'A<raoov^afŁap),  or 
HAi'AZON-TA'MAR  (Heb.  [precisely  theconrerse  of 
the  rendering  in  the  A^Y.]  ChaUetton' -Tamar',  y^T£n 
^W,  2  Chroń,  xx,  2 ;  SepL  'Acaoav  Oa/iap),  the  name 
under  which,  at  a  veiy  early  period  in  the  history  of 
Palestine,  and  in  a  document  believed  by  many  to  be 
the  oldest  of  all  these  early  records,  we  fint  hear  of  the 
place  which  aflerwards  became  £n-gedi  (q.  v.).  The 
Amorites  were  dwelling  at  Hazazon-Tamar  when  the 
four  kings  madę  their  incorsion,  and  fought  their  suc- 
cessful  battle  with  the  five  (Gen.  xiv,  7).  The  name 
oocurs  only  once  again— in  the  records  of  the  reign  of 
Hezekiah  (2  Chroń,  xx,  2) — ^when  he  b  wamed  of  the 
approach  of  the  hordę  of  Ammonites,  Moabites,  Mehu- 
nim,  and  men  of  Mount  Seir,  whom  he  afterwards  so 
completely  destroyed,  and  who  were  no  doubt  pursuing 
tliuB  far  exactly  the  same  route  as  the  Assjnrians  had 
done  a  thousand  years  before  them.  Herę  the  expla- 
nation, "  which  is  En-gedi,"  is  added.  The  exbteuce  of 
the  earlier  appellation,  after  £n-gedi  had  been  so  long 
in  use,  ia  a  remarkable  instance  of  the  tenadty  of  these 
old  Oriental  namefs  of  which  morę  modem  instances 
arefreąuent.  See  Accho;  BETHSAiDA,etc  Schwarz, 
howe%'cr,  unnecessarily  supposes  {PaUat,  p.  21)  the  two 
passages  to  refer  to  different  localities,  the  earlier  of 
which  he  assigns  (on  Talmudicai  evLdence)  to  Zoar  (q. 

V.). 

Hazazon-tamar  is  interpreted  in  Hebrew  to  mean  the 
^pmtmiff  or  felling  o/*  the  pcUm"  (Gesen.  Tke».  p.  512), 
or  perhaps  better, "'  a  roto  o/pabn^trcoT  (FUrst,  Lex,  s. 
V.).  Jeiome  {Qu€BSt,  in  Gen,)  renders  it  urbt palmarum, 
This  interpretation  of  the  namo  is  borne  out  by  the  an- 
cient  reputation  of  the  palms  of  £n-gedi  (Ecdus.  xxiv, 
14,  and  the  citations  from  Pliny,  given  under  that  name). 
The  Samaritan  Yerńon  has  "^ns  rbB=the  Valley  of 
Cadi,  possibly  a  comiption  of  En-gedL  The  Targums 
have  Efirgedu  Perhaps  this  was  the  '^dty  of  palm- 
trecs^  (/r  hat-łemarim)  out  of  which  the  Kenites,  the 
tribe  of  Mo8e8's  father-in-law,  went  up  into  the  wilder- 
ness  of  Judah,  after  the  conque8t  of  the  country  (Judg. 
i,  16).  If  this  were  so,  the  allusion  of  Balaam  to  the 
Kenite  (Numb.  xxiv,  21)  is  at  once  explained.  Stand- 
ing  as  he  was  on  one  of  the  lofty  points  of  the  highlands 
opposite  Jericho,  the  western  shore  of  the  Dead  Sea  as 
far  as  £n-geiU  would  be  before  hiro,  and  the  cliff,  in  the 
defls  of  which  the  Kenites  had  fixed  their  secure 
^  nest,^'  would  be  a  prominent  object  in  the  view.  This 
has  been  aliuded  to  by  Ftof.  Stanley  {S,  andP.p,  225, 
n.  4).— Smith,  s.  v.  De  Saulcy  (Aarra<we,  i,  149)  and 
Schwarz  {PaUstine,  p.  109)  thuik  that  a  traoe  of  the 
ancient  name  is  pre8erved  in  the  tract  and  wady  el-ffu- 
tasak  (Robinson^s  Rueardtety  ii,  243,  244),  a  little  north 
of  Ain-Jidy. 

Ha^ziel  (Heb.  Chazid',  ^K*«Tn,  vidon  of  God;  Sept 
'AZfńk  V.  r.  'Unik),  a  "son"  of  the  Gershonite  Shimei, 
and  chief  of  tlie  family  of  Laadan  (1  Chroń,  xxiii,  9). 
B.a  1014. 

Ha^^zo  (Heb.  Chazo'j  ItH,  perhaps  for  rfłn,  tńńon; 
Sept.  'AZav,Yvlg,  Azau)y  one  of  the  sons  of  Nahor  by 
Milcah  (Gen.  xxii,  22>  K(X  cir.  2040.  The  only  dew 
to  the  locality  scttled  by  him  is  to  be  found  in  the  iden- 
tiJication  of  Chesed,  and  the  other  sons  of  Nahor;  and 
hence  he  must,  in  idl  likelihood,  be  placed  in  Ur  of  the 
Chaldecs,  or  the  adjacent  oountries.  Bunsen  (Bibd- 
v€rkj  I,  ii,  49)  suggests  Chazene  by  the  Euphrates  (Ste- 
phan.  Byzaiit.),  in  Mesopotamia,  or  the  Chazene  (Xa- 
ifivti)  in  Ass^Tia  (Strabo,  xvi,  p.  736)r— Smith. 

Ha^zor  (Heb.  ChaUor',  "nisn,  vilia^  [see  Ha- 


ZER-] ;  Sept  'Aróp,  but »/  aikii  in  Jer.  xlix,  28, 80, 88), 
the  name  of8everalplaoes.  Seealso£N-HAZOB;BAALf- 
Hazor;  Hazor-Hadattah;  Hazerim. 

1.  A  dty  near  the  wateis  of  lakę  Merom  (Huleh), 
the  seat  of  Jabin,  a  powerful  Canaanitish  king,  as  ap- 
pean  from  the  summons  sent  by  him  to  all  the  neighbor- 
ing  kings  to  assist  him  against  the  Israelites  (Josh.  xi,  1 
-5).  He  and  his  confederates  were,  howerer,  defeated 
and  slain  by  Joshua,  and  the  dty  bumed  to  the  ground 
(Josh.  xi,  10-18 ;  Josephus,  iln/.  v,  5, 1) :  being  the  only 
one  of  those  northem  cities  which  was  bumed  by  Joshua, 
doubtless  because  it  was  too  strong  and  important  to 
leave  standing  in  his  rear.  It  was  the  prindpal  dty  of 
the  whole  of  North  Palestine,  "  the  head  of  all  those 
kingdoms"  (Josh.  x,  10;  see  Jeromc,  Onomatł,  s.  v.  Asor). 
Like  the  other  strong  places  of  that  part,  it  steod  on  an 
eminence  (bpI,  Josh.  xi,  13,  A.T.  "stiength**);  but  the 
district  aiouud  must  have  been  on  the  whde  flat,  and 
suitable  for  the  manaeuyres  of  the  "  Teiy  many"  chariots 
and  horses  which  formed  part  of  the  foioes  of  the  king 
of  Hazor  and  his  confederates  (Josh.  xi,  4, 6,  9;  Judg. 
iv,  8).  But  by  the  time  of  Deborah  and  Barak  the 
Canaanites  had  reoovered  part  of  the  territory  theo 
lost,  had  rebuilt  Hazor,  and  were  mled  by  a  king  with 
the  andent  royal  name  of  Jabin,  under  whose  power 
the  Israelites  were,  in  punishment  for  their  sins,  xe» 
duced.  From  this  yoke  thęy  were  delivered  by  Debo- 
rah and  Barak,  after  which  Hazor  remained  in  qniet 
possession  of  the  Israelites,  and  belonged  to  the  tribe  of 
Naphtali  (Josh.  xix,  86;  Judg.  iv,  2;  1  Sam.  zii,  9). 
Solomon  did  not  overlook  so  important  a  post,  and  the 
fortification  of  Hazor,  Megiddo,  and  Gezer,  the  pointa 
of  defenoe  for  the  entrance  from  Syria  and  Assyria,  the 
plain  of  Esdradon,  and  the  great  maritime  lowland  re- 
spectivdy,  was  one  of  the  chief  pretexts  for  his  levy  of 
taxes  (1  Kings  ix,  15).  Later  still  it  is  mentioned  in 
the  list  of  the  towns  and  districts  whose  inhabitauta 
were  carried  ofT  to  Assyria  by  Tiglath-Pileser  (2  Kings 
xv,  29 ;  Josephus,  A  nł,  ix,  U,  1).  We  encoonter  it  once 
morę  in  1  Mace.  xi,  67,  where  Jonathan,  ailer  encamp- 
ing  for  the  lught  at  the  "  water  of  Gennesar,"  advance8 
to  the  "plain  of  Asor^  (Josephus,  Anł^  xiii,  5, 7 ;  the 
Greek  tezt  of  the  Maocabees  has  prefixed  an  n  ih>m  the 
preceding  word  iridiov ;  A.  Y.  *<  Nasor")  to  meet  Dcme- 
trius,  who  was  in  possession  of  Kadesh  (xi,  68;  Jose- 
phus as  above).  See  Nasor.  Rauroer  queries  wheth- 
er  it  may  not  have  been  the  andent  town  of  Naamm, 
which  king  Baldwin  lY  passed  on  his  way  from  Tibe- 
rias  to  Saphet  (WilL  Tyr.  p.  1014) ;  and  his  reasoo  for 
this  conjecture  is  that  the  Yulgate  gives  Naason  for  th« 
A9or  (Aautp)  of  Tobit  i,  1  (Raumer,  FalatHna,  p.  114,  n.). 
SeeAfiOR. 

The  name  Hazor  still  lingers  in  se veral  plaoes  aronnd 
the  upper  valley  of  the  Jordan  (Robinson,  J9.  J?.  iii,  68^ 
81,  401).  There  is  one  Uazury  on  a  commanding  sile 
above  Ciesarea  Philippi,  and  dose  to  the  great  castle  of 
Subdbeh.  Hcre  Kdth  {Lani  of  Israd^  p.  874)  and 
Stanley  {Sku  and  Pal  p.  889)  would  place  the  ancient 
capital  of  Canaan.  But  the  territory  of  Ni^htali  hsrd- 
ly  extended  so  far  eastward.  Another  HaMur  is  in  the 
pUin,  a  few  miles  west  of  the  site  of  Dan;  but  ndther 
does  this  site  quite  aocord  with  the  Scripture  notioea 
(Porter'8  DamasctUy  i,  304;  Yan  de  Yelcte,  Manoir,  p, 
318).  Schwarz  {Pakst,  p.  91)  thinks  a  viUage  which 
he  calls  Ażur,  between  Banias  and  Meshdel  (d-Mejel), 
may  be  the  ancient  Hazor;  he  probably  refers  to  the 
Am  d-Uazury  marked  on  Zimmerman*s  Map  a  little 
north-east  of  Banias,  which,  however,  is  too  far  east. 
There  is  a  place  marked  as  Ażur  on  Zimmerman's  Mcq^ 
a  little  north-east  of  Kedes  (Kadesh),  which  nnques- 
tionably  lay  in  Naphtali ;  but  M.  De  Saulcy  {NarraL 
ii,  406)  denies  that  this  can  have  been  the  Hazor  of  Ja- 
bin (which  he  distinguishes  from  the  Hazor  of  Solo- 
mon), and  in  a  long  aigument  (p.  400-405)  he  contenda 
that  it  was  sttuated  on  the  site  of  some  extensive  mina, 
which  he  reports  at  a  place  called  indefinitely  tl-Khcm, 
on  the  hiUa  skirting  the  north-easteriy  shoie  of  the  lakę 


k 


HAZOR 


109 


HEAD 


d-HoIeh,  in  the  direction  of  Banias.  V«n  de  Ydde 
{Memoh-f  p.  818)  likewue  thinks  the  Hazor  of  Joshua 
diflerent  fiom  that  of  Judges  (alŁhougb  both  were  ruled 
by  a  Jabin,  evidently  a  hereditary  tide),  and  indines 
to  i^gard  £n-Hazor  (Josb.  xix,  87)  as  identical  witb 
tbe  latter,  and  witb  a  ruined  Hazur  in  tbe  middle  of 
Galilee  (about  two  houn  from  Bint  Jebeil) ;  while  he 
seemt  to  aoąoiesce  in  tbe  identilication  of  tbe  eastem 
Hazor  witb  a  Hazur  (Porter,  Damaacua,  i,  804)  or  Kcur 
Autor  (Seetzen),  or,  as  be  himself  calls  it,  Teil  Haze, 
oovered  witb  remains,  and  jatting  out  from  Merj  A3run 
towards  tbe  Huleb  plain.  Tbe  Hazor  of  Josb.  xix,  86, 
be  beiieves  to  be  TeU  Ilazur,  soutb-east  of  Ramab.  AU 
tbia,  bowever,  is  vague  and  oonfuaed.  Mr.  Tbomaon, 
wbo  TiaiŁed  this  regbn  in  1843,  belieyed  Hazor  may  be 
identified  with  tbe  present  castle  of  /Tuntn,  nortb  of  tbe 
Htdeb  {BibUołK  Sacra,  1816,  p.  202).  Tbe  editor  (Dr. 
Bobinson),  bowever,  tbinks  the  argumenta  adduced  morę 
plaosible  tban  aomid  {ib.  p.  212),  and  adrocates  tbe  opin- 
km  of  Rev.  £.  Smitb,  tbat  TeU  KhurtSbeh,  at  tbe  soutb 
end  of  tbe  plain  of  Kedes,  is  better  entitled  to  be  re- 
garded  as  tbe  site  of  Hazor  (BtbUołAeca  Sacra,  1847,  p. 
409).  Aocordingly,  in  tbe  new  ed.  of  bis  Researcket, 
after  noticing  and  rejecting  seyeral  otber  sites  proposed 
(iii,  63,  81,  402),  ho  at  lengtb  fixe8  upon  tbis  as  best 
agroeing  with  the  andent  notices  of  tbis  city  (ib.  p. 
365).  Tbere  are,  as  tbe  name  Khureibeh,  ^  ruins,"  im- 
pHes,  some  ancient  roins  on  tbe  tell,  but  tbey  are  tbose 
of  a  TiUage.  There  are  still  otber  ruins  of  an  ancient 
town  wbich  occupy  a  oommanding  site  on  tbe  soutb 
bank  of  wady  Hendaj,  oyerlooking  tbe  yaUey  and  lakę 
of  Merom,  and  about  8ix  miles  soutb  of  Kedesb,  whicb 
B  a  not  improbable  site  for  tbe  ancient  Hazor  (Robin- 
son, BibL  Jies.  iii,  863,  365) ;  and  the  plain  beneatb  it, 
stretcbing  to  the  sbore  of  tbe  lakę,  migbt  take  the  name 
of  tbe  city  A  tur,  as  Josepbus  seems  to  indicate  (Ł  c). 
Bitter  (ErdŁ,  xy,  260)  accepts  tbe  Hazury  proposed  by 
Borckbardt  {Trav.  p.  44) ;  apparently  the  inconsidera- 
Ue  ruin  on  the  rocky  declivity  above  Banias  (Robinson, 
Ra,  new  ed.  iii,  402).  Captain  Wilson  prefers  tbe  iso- 
lated  TdL  Uarah,  covered  with  ruins,  about  two  miles 
sottŁh-east  of  Kedesb  {Jour,  Sac  Lit,  1866,  p.  245).  But 
nonę  of  tbese  last  cited  places  retain  tbe  ancient  name. 
Fmally,  Dr.  Thomson  is  oonfident  (Land  and  Book,  i, 
439)  tbat  the  tnie  spot  is  Hazere  (tbe  above  Hazur  of 
Tan  de  Telde,  east  of  a  morę  nortbem  Ramab),  in  the 
oentre  of  the  mountainous  region  overbanging  lakę 
Hokb  on  the  nortb-west,  containing  numerous  ancient 
remains,  and  locally  connected  by  teadition  witb  the  Is- 
raditiah  yictory;  altbougb  Dr.  Robinson  (incorrectly) 
objects  to  this  site  {Bib,  Res,  new  ed.  iii,  63)  that  it  is 
too  far  from  the  lakę,  and  witbin  tbe  territory  of  Asber. 

2.  A  dty  in  tbe  south  of  Judab  (but  probably  not 
one  of  those  aasigned  to  Simeon,  sińce  it  is  not  named  in 
tbe  list,  Josh.  xix,  1-9),  mentioned  between  Kedesb  (Ka- 
dcdi-Bamea)  and  Itbnan  (Josh.  xv,  23,  wbere  tbe  Yat 
MSk  of  the  SepL  nnites  witb  tbe  foUowing  name,  'A(rop- 
tttva»,  Alex.  "MS.  omits,  Yulg.  A  tor).  We  may  reason- 
ably  coDjectore  tbat  this  was  tbe  central  town  of  tbat 
name,  the  other  Hazors  of  the  same  connection  (Hazor- 
Uadattah,  and  Keriotb-Hezron  or  Hazor-Amam)  being 
probably  ao  called  for  distinction'  sake ;  and  in  that  case 
we  may  perhaps  locate  it  at  a  ruined  site  marked  on 
Yan  de  Velde's  JTop  as  Tc^ibeh  (the  etrTaiyib  of  Rob- 
inson, Ret,  iii,  Appendix,  p.  114),  on  a  tell  around  the 
south-west  base  of  whicb  mns  tbe  wady  ed-Dbeib, 
emptying  into  the  Dead  Sea.    See  Nos.  8  and  4. 

3.  Hazob-Hadattah  (for  so  tbe  Heb.  nunn  "lisn. 
\,t,New  Uazor,  should  be  understood;  sińce  there  is  no 
copula  between  the  words,  and  the  sense  in  yerse  32  re- 
ąnires  this  condensation ;  Sept  omits,  Yulg.  A  tor  nova), 
a  dty  in  the  soutb  of  Judab  (but  not  tbe  extreme  Sim- 
eonite  portion),  mentioned  between  Bealoth  and  Keri- 
oth  (Josh.  XV,  25) ;  probably,  as  suggested  in  Keil  and 
Dditz8ch*8  Commentary,  ad  loc  (Edinb.  ed.  p.  160),  the 
nńned  site  el-ffudhairah  of  Robinson's  Retearchet  (iii, 
Appeod.  p.  114),  soath  of  Hebron,  in  tbe  immediate  vi- 


dnity  of  el-Beyudh  (the  Bdyudh  of  Yan  de  Yelde*a 
Map,  about  half  way  between  Kerioth  and  Arad).  See 
Noe.  2.  and  4. 

4.  Hazor-Amam  (to  be  so  joined  for  the  same  re»- 
sons  as  in  No.  2).  probably  identified  witb  Keńotb-Her- 
zon  (in  the  Heb.  the  four  names  stand  li^^^H  m'*^C 
D^K  nisn  ^'^n,viUaffet  o/Ckettran  lohich  isCkałtor- 
Amam;  Sept  ai  iroKnę  'Amptau  [v.  r.  'A(rep4a/iJ,  aX)rą 
hri  *Aawp,  rai  'Afiófi  [v.  r.  'AoepiMffidfi] ;  Yulg.  Cariołh, 
Hetron,  hcec  ett  A$or,  AmaitC)^  a  town  in  tbe  soutb  of 
Judab  (but  apparently  not  in  the  Simeonite  tenitor>')} 
mentioned  between  Bealoth  and  Shema  (Josh.  xv,  24- 
26) ;  no  doubt  (if  tbus  combined)  the  modem  el-Kku- 
reyetein,  as  suggested  by  Robinson  {Retearchet,  iii,  Ap- 
pend.  p.  114).    See  Kerioth. 

5.  (Yat.  MS.  of  Sept  omits;  Yulg.  Ator.^  A  dty 
inhabited  by  the  Benjamites  ailer  the  Captivity,  men- 
tioned between  Ananiah  and  Ramab  (Neh.  xi,  33) ;  pos- 
sibly  tbe  modem  Gazur,  a  short  distance  east  of  Jalfa 
(for  otbers  of  the  associated  names,  altbougb  likewise 
within  the  ancient  territor}'^  of  Dan,  are  also  asaigned  to 
Benjamin),  sińce  Eusebius  and  Jerome  {Onomatf.  s.  v. 
Aaor)  mention  a  Hazor  in  the  vicinity  of  Ascalon,  al- 
tbougb tbey  assign  it  to  Judab,  and  confound  it  witb 
those  Ul  tbe  south  of  that  tribe-  (Robuison's  Retearchet, 
ii,  370,  notę).  From  tbe  places  mentioned  with  it,  as 
Anathotb,  Nob,  Ramab,  etc.,  it  would  seem  to  have  lain 
north  of  Jerusalem,  and  at  no  great  distance  therefrom. 
Schwarz  thinks  it  is  called  Chator  ("iDn)  in  the  Tal- 
mudical  writers  {Palett.  p.  162).  Robinson  suggests  tbe 
identity  of  Hazor  and  tbe  modem  TeU  A  tur,  a  ruin  on  a 
little  bill  about  8ix  miles  north  of  Betbel  {Bib,  Ret,  ii, 
264,  notę).  This,  bowever,  appears  to  be  too  far  from 
Ramab.  Tobler  mentions  a  ruin  called  Khurbet  A  rtur, 
near  Ramab,  a  little  to  the  west,  the  sitiuition  of  whicb 
would  answer  better  to  Hazor  {Topogr,  ii,  400;  Yan  de 
Yelde,  Memoir,  p.  319).  Tbe  place  in  ąuestion  is  prob- 
ably the  same  with  tbe  Baal-hazor  (q.  v.)  of  2  Sam. 
xiii,  23. 

6.  A  region  of  Arabia,  spoken  of  as  an  important 
place,  in  tbe  vidnity  of  Kedar,  in  the  prophetic  denuu- 
ciations  of  desolation  upon  both  by  Nebuchadnezzar 
(Jer.  xlix,  28-33).  It  can  bardly  be  Petra,  as  suppoeed 
by  Yitringa  {on  Ita,,  i,  p.  624),  nor  the  Aaor  placed  by 
Eusebius  8  miles  west  of  Pbiladdphia  ( Hitzig, /effaia^ 
p.  196),  but  probably  is  a  designation  of  the  confines  of 
Arabia  witb  soutb-eastem  Palestine,  inhabited  by  no- 
madę tribes  dwelling  in  merę  encampmenta.     See  Ha- 

ZAR. 

HazBurlm.    See  Hblkath-hazzurim. 

Head  (properly  D5<'1,  roth,  Ki^\ri),  tbe  topmost 
part  of  tbe  human  body. 

I.  AnaiomicaUy  considered,  the  generał  cbaracter  of 
tbe  human  head  is  such  as  to  esUblish  the  identity  of 
tbe  human  race,  and  to  distinguish  man  from  every  oth- 
er animaL  At  the  same  time,  diflTerent  families  of  man- 
kind  are  marked  by  peculiarities  of  constraction  in  the 
head,  wbich,  tbough  in  individual  cases,  and  wben  ex- 
tremes  are  compared  togetber,  tbey  run  one  into  the 
other,  to  the  entire  loss  of  distinctiye  linee,  yet  are  in  the 
generał  broadly  contrasted  one  with  the  other.  Tbese 
peculiarities  in  the  structure  of  the  skuli  give  rise  to  and 
are  connected  with  otber  peculiarities  of  feature  and 
generał  contour  of  face.  In  the  union  of  craniał  pecul- 
iarities with  tbose  of  the  face,  certain  elear  marks  are 
presented,  by  whicb  pbysiologists  bave  been  able  to 
rangę  the  individuals  of  our  race  into  a  few  great  class- 
es,  and  in  so  doing  to  afford  an  unmtentional  corroborar 
tion  of  the  Information  wbich  the  Scriptures  afford  re- 
garding  the  origin  and  dispersion  of  mankind.  Cam- 
per,  one  of  tbe  most  leamed  and  clear-minded  phj^- 
cians  of  the  18th  century,  bas  the  credit  of  being  tbe 
first  wbo  drew  attention  to  the  clasdflcation  of  the  hu- 
man features,  and  endeavored,  by  means  of  what  he 
termed  the  facial  angle,  to  funiish  a  metbod  for  distin- 
giushing  different  nations  and  races  of  men,  wbicbi  be> 


HEAD 


110 


HEAD 


ing  himaelf  an  eminent  limner,  he  deńgned  for  applica- 
tion  chiefly  in  tbe  ait  of  drawing,  and  whicb,  though 
far  fnm  producing  strictly  detinite  and  8ci^ntific  results, 
yet  afTords  yiews  that  are  not  withouŁ  interest,  aod  ap- 
prosimations  that  at  least  prepared  the  way  for  some- 
thing  better  (see  a  ooUecŁion  of  Campef  8  pieces  endtled 
(Eurreś  cui  ontpour  ObjH  tHistoirt  NatureUe,  la  Phffsi' 
oloffie,  et  PA  natomie  comparee^  Paru,  1803).  It  is,  how- 
ever,  to  the  celebrated  J.  F.  Blumcnbaeh,  wbose  merita 
in  the  entire  spbere  of  nalural  history  are  so  transcend- 
ent,  that  we  are  mainly  indebted  for  the  acciirat«  and 
aatisfactory  classifications  in  regard  to  cranial  stmctore 
which  now  preyaij.  Camper  had  obeeryed  that  the 
breadtb  of  the  hcad  differs  in  dilTerent  nations;  that 
the  heads  of  Asiatics  (tbe  Kalmucs)  have  the  greatest 
breadth ;  that  those  of  Eoropeans  have  a  middlc  degree 
of  breadth ;  and  that  the  skulls  of  the  African  negroes 
are  the  narrowest  of  alL  Thia  circumstance  was  by  Blu- 
menbach  madc  the  foundation  of  his  arrangement  and 
deucription  of  skulls.  By  comparing  different  forms  of 
the  human  cranium  together,  that  eminent  physiologist 
was  led  to  recognise  thrce  grcat  t^^pes,  to  which  all  oth- 
ers  could  be  referred — the  Caucasian,  Mongolian,  and 
Ethiopic  These  three  dlfter  morę  widely  from  each 
other  than  any  other  that  can  be  found;  but  to  these 
three^  Blumenbach,  in  his  dassification  of  skulls,  and  of 
the  races  of  men  to  which  they  belong,  added  two  oth- 
ers,  in  many  respects  intcrmediate  between  the  three 
forms  alrcady  mentioned.  In  this  way  five  dasses  are 
c^tablished,  corresponding  with  five  great  familiee.     1. 


Forma  oi  ^$knIls  of  difTerent  races:  1,Etblni>1an  :  8, Mon- 
golian ;  3,  Caucasian ;  4,  Malay ;  6,  American  8avage. 

The  Caucasian  family,  comprising  the  nationa  of  Europę, 
Bome  of  the  Western  Aaiatics,  etc,  have  the  head  of  the 
most  symmetrical  shape,  almost  round,  the  forehead  of 
moderate  extent,  the  cheek-bones  rather  narrow,  with- 
out  any  projection,  but  a  direction  downwards  from  the 
molar  proccss  of  the  fh)ntal  bonę ;  the'  alreolar  edge 
well  lounded;  the  front  teeth  of  each  jaw  placed  per- 
pendicuUrly ;  the  face  of  orał  shape,  straight,  features 
moderately  prominent;  forehead  arched;  nose  narrow, 
slightly  arched;  mouth  smali;  chin  fuli  and  round.  2. 
The  second  Ls  the  Mongolian  rariety.  8.  Ethiopian.  4. 
Malay  and  South  Sea  Islanders.  6.  American.  The  de- 
Bcription  of  their  peculiarities  may  be  found  in  Prich- 
ard'8  Researcke*  wUo  the  Phytical lUstory  ofMan,2d  ed. 
i,  167  8q.  The  reader  may  also  consult  Lawrencc^s  />(- 
turet  on  the  Natural  Hiitory  ^Mim;  J.  Muller's  Uw^ 


buch  der  Phydologie.  But  the  moat  recent,  if  not  the 
best  work  on  the  subject  before  us  is  Prichard*8  Natnral 
Iliaioty  of  Mon  (1843),  a  woik  which  compriaea  and  re- 
view8,  in  the  spirit  of  a  soond  philoaophy,  aU  that  has 
hitherto  been  wiitten  and  discoYCied  on  the  arigin,phy8- 
ical  stiucture,  and  propagation  over  the  earth  of  the  race 
of  man.  In  this  inyaluable  work  fuli  details  may  be 
found  of  the  methoda  of  studying  the  human  head  of 
which  we  have  spoken,  and  of  some  others,  not  leas  in- 
teresting  in  them8elves,nor  less  yaloable  in  their  resulta 
(see  particularly  p.  116  8q.)«— Kltto,  a.  v. 

II.  Scripfural  References^—Thia  part  of  the  human 
body  has  generally  been  considercd  aa  the  abode  of  in- 
telligence,  while  the  heart,  or  the  parta  placed  near  it, 
have  been  accounted  the  place  wheie  the  affectiona  Ile 
(Gen.  iii,  15;  Psa.  iii,  3 ;  Eccles.  ii,  14).  The  head  and 
the  heart  are  sometimes  taken  for  the  entire  person  (Isa. 
i,  5).  £yen  the  head  alone,  as  being  the  chief  member, 
freąuently  stands  for  the  man  (Prov.  x,  6).  The  head 
also  denotes  sorereignty  (1  Cor.  xi,  3).  Covering  the 
head,  and  cutting  olT  the  hair,  wcre  signs  of  mouruing 
and  tokens  of  distrcss,  which  werc  cnhanced  by  throw- 
ing  ashes  on  the  head,  togcthcr  with  packcioth  (Aroos 
viii,  10;  Job  i,  20 ;  Lev.  xxi,  5 ;  Deut.  xiv,  1 ;  2  Sam.  xiii, 
10;  Esth.iv,  1);  while  anointing  the  head  was  practised 
on  festive  occasions,  and  considcred  an  emblem  of  fe- 
lidty  (Eccle&  Lx,  8 ;  Psa.  xxiii,  5 ;  Lnke  %'ii,  46).  See 
ANoiirr.  It  was  not  unusual  to  swear  by  the  head 
(Matt.  V,  86).— Kitto,  s.  v.  The  phrase  (o  lift  vp  (ke  head 
iit  any  one,  is  to  exalt  him  (Psa.  iii,  3 ;  ex,  7) ;  and  to 
return  or  ffire  baek  upon  one*8  head,  is  to  be  rcąuited,  rcc- 
ompensed  (Psa.  vii,  16 ;  Jod  iii,  4 ;  Ezek.  ix,  10 ;  xi,  21 ; 
xW,  43 ;  x>'ii,  19 ;  xxii,  31).  So,  your  blood  be  on  your 
otm  heads  (Acts  xvłii,  6) ;  the  guilt  of  your  destruction 
rests  upon  yourselves  (2  Sam.  i,  16;  1  Kings  ii,  83, 87). 
The  term  head  la  used  to  sigiiify  the  chief  one  to  w^hom 
others  are  subordinate;  the^^mce  of  a  pcople  or  stato 
(Judg.  X,  18;  xi,  8;  1  Sam.  xv,  17;  Psa.  xviii,  43;  Isa. 
>'ii,  8, 9) ;  of  a  family,  the  head,  chief,  patriarch  (Exod. 
\'i,  14;  Numb.  vii,  2;  1  Chroń.  v,  24) ;  of  a  husband  in 
relation  to  a  wife  (Gen.  iii,  16 ;  1  Cor.  xi,  3 ;  Eph.  v,  23). 
So  of  Christ  the  head  in  relation  to  his  Church,  which  is 
his  body,  and  its  members  his  mcmbers  (1  Cor.  xii,  27 ; 
xi,3;  Eph. i, 22;  iv,16;  v,28;  CoLi,I8;  ii,10,19);  of 
God  in  relation  to  Christ  (1  Cor.  xł,  3).  Head  ia  also 
used  for  what  is  highest^  yppermost ;  the  top^  summit  of  a 
mountain  (Gen.  "liii,  6 ;  Exod.  xvii, 9, 10 ;  xix,  20).  The 
mountain  of  the  Lord's  house  shall  be  cstablished  at  the 
head  of  the  mountains,  and  shall  be  highcr  than  the 
hills,  Le.it  shall  be  a  prince  among  the  mountains  (Isa. 
ii,  2).  Four  heads  of  riyers,  i.  e.  four  riyers  into  which 
the  waters  di\ńde  themsclyes  (Gen.  ii,  10).  Ilead  stone 
of  the  comer  (Psa.  cxviii,  22),  either  the  highest,  form- 
ing the  top  or  coping  of  the  comer;  or  lowcst,  which 
forms  the  foundation  of  the  buDding. — Bastow,     See 

COKNER. 

IIL  Hair  ofthe  Head  (r-^B)  was  by  the  Hebrcws 
wom  thick  and  fuli  as  an  ornament  of  the  person  (comp. 
Ezek.  viii,  3 ;  Jer.  vii,  29) ;  a  bald  head,  besidcs  expo8ing 
one  to  the  suspicion  of  leprosy  (Lev.  xiii,  43  sq.),  was  al- 
ways  a  cause  of  mortification  (2  Kings  ii.  23 ;  Isa.  iii,  17, 
24;  cnmp.  Sueton.  (7(M.  45;  Domif.  18;  Homer, //ifac/,  ii, 
219;  Hariri,  10,  p.  99,  ed.  Sac>') ;  among  the  priestly  or- 
der it  therefore  amounted  to  a  positive  disąualification 
(Ley.  xxi,  20 ;  Mishna,  Bechoroih,  vii,  2) ;  among  the 
Egyptians,  on  the  oontrary,  the  hair  was  rcgnlariy 
shom  (Gen.  xli,  14),  and  only  allowcd  to  go  imcut  in 
seasons  of  moumiug  (Herod,  ii,  36).  Hair  so  long  as  to 
dcsccnd  to  the  shoulders,  however,  seems  only  in  carly 
times  to  have  been  the  habit,  in  the  małe  8cx,  with 
youth  (2  Sam.  xiv,  16;  Joseph.  Ant.  viii, 7, 3;  Horace, 
Od,  ii,  5, 21 ;  iii,  20, 14).  Men  cropped  it  from  time  to 
time  with  shears  (1?P),  fl^"!^;  comp.  Ezek.  xliv,  20, 
and  the  KÓfiri  fiiKpa  ofthe  Babylonians,  Strabo  xvi,  746). 
See,  however,  Nazarite.  Among  the  late  Jews  long 
hair  in  men  was  estcemed  a  weakness  (1  Cor.  xi,  14; 


HE  AD 


111 


HEAD-DRESS 


comp.  FlntATch,  Qucuł,  Rom,  xiv;  Ciem.  Alex.  PcBd,  iii, 
106 ;  Epiphui.  H(gr.  lxvtii,  6 ;  Jerome  ad  Kzecfu  xliv) ; 
but  \t  waa  otherwise  in  SparU  {kńaXoi.  Rhet,  i,  9;  He- 
rod, i,  82 ;  Xenoph.  Lac.  xi,  3 ;  comp.  Ari«toph.  A  n.  1287 
sq.) ;  and  to  the  priests  any  ctutailment  of  it  waa  for- 
bidden  (Otho,  Lex.  Rabb.  p.  118;  for  the  long  hair  on 
the  Petsepolitan  remaina,  sec  Niebuhr,  7Var.  iu  128 ;  and 
for  that  of  the  Asiatic  priests  in  generał,  see  Movers, 
Pkómc  i,  682 :  on  the  Anyrian  monuments  it  ia  always, 
in  the  case  of  natives  at  least,  represented  as  long  and 
elaboratel j  curled ;  see  LAyard,  passim).  Only  in  cases 
of  religious  rows  did  males  sufler  it  to  grow  uncut  (Acts 
xviii,  18;  see  Kuinol,  ad  loc.).  Females,  on  the  contra- 
ry,  set  great  value  upon  the  hair  (1  Cor.  L  c. ;  compare- 
Cant.  iv,  1 ;  Łukę  vii,  88;  John  xi, 2  [Rev.  ix,  8] ;  Phi- 
k»tr.  Ep.  26 ;  Plutareh,  De  vit.  mre  oL  iii ;  Harmer,  iii, 
319;  Rosenmttller,  MorgenL  vi,  108;  Kype,  Obserw,  ii, 
220).  There  were  variou8  modes  of  putting  up  the  hair 
(Ezek.  xliv,  20 ;  comp.  HciDd.  iv,  175, 191) ;  and  it  was  a 
statate  that  men  shduld  not  cut  off  the  earlocks  (riXB 
"iljjn,  Lev.  xix,  27 ;  A.  V.  "  round  the  comers  of  the 
head*^).  Women,  eapecially,  were  wont  to  curl  the  hair 
(Fas.  iii,  24;  see  (.aesen.  ad  loc ;  comp.  Serv.  ad  ^n.  xii, 
98),  and  to  biaid  it  (2  Kings  ix,  30 ;  Judith  x,  3 ;  1  Pet, 
iii,  3 ;  1  Hm.  ii,  9 ;  comp.  Joseph.  War,  iv,  9, 10 ;  Homer, 
I L  1,330;  xiv,  175;  Harmer, ii, 881 :  to  go  with  dŁ8hev- 
elled  hair  Ipassis  erimbus]  was  a  mark  of  grief,  8  Mace.  i, 
9:  comp.  Lukę  vii,  38;  Lightfoot,t>/>p.p.  1081;  but  rus- 
tic  maidens  often  let  the  hair  fali  in  loose  tresses  [K^?, 
Cjnt.  vii,  6 ;  comp.  Anacr.  xxix,  7  ],  merely  bound  Ydih  a 
ribbon),  or  even  to  interweave  it  with  gems  or  other 
finery  (//iod;  xvii,  52),  and  in  later  times  to  ornament  it 
mQ3Ł  claborately  (see  Lightfoot,0/7/7.p.498;  Hartmaun, 
ł/*Ar.  ii,  208  6q.).  See  Head-dress.  £ven  men  some- 
times  appeared  with  curla  (Joseph.  A  nt,  xiv,  9, 4 ;  comp. 
ir-ffr,iv,9,10;  Philo,t>/!p.  11,479;  Plutareh, /,yciir^.  22), 
which,however,  was  generally  di8approvcd  (Philo,  Opp, 
ii,306,479;  Cicen),^«f.8;  Artemid.ii,6;  Martial,ii,36; 
Phoc3*L  Senieał.  194  sq.;  Clement  Alexand.  Pad,  iii,  p. 
101 ).  Comht  are  nowhere  mentioned  in  the  O.  T.  (other 
nailons  kncw  them,Ovicl,  Fast,  i,  405 ;  Petron.  Sat,  126 ; 
ApuL.45Uł.  ii,  p.  213;  comp.  Iliami,  xiv,  176),  although 
they,  aa  wcU  as  hair-pins,  are  refer:?fl  to  in  the  Talmud 
(llartoiann,  p.  224  sq.).  Hair-powil?r  was  unknown  to 
the  ancienta.  O.i  the  other  hand,  they  used  to  anoint 
the  hair  with  costly  oils  (Psa.  xxiii,  6 ;  ćxxxiii,  2 :  Matt 
vi,  17 ;  Lukę  vii,  46;  Joseph.  ArU,  xix,  4, 1 ;  as  alao  non- 
Jewbh  nations,  Plutareh,  Praop/>^a  conjug,  29;  Horace, 
OJL  ii,  11, 16;  iii,  29,  2;  Ońd,  Ars  Am.  i,  505;  Tibul.  i, 
751 ;  Saetonius,  Ctts.  67 ;  ApuL  Metam,  ii,  30,  Bip.),  and 
^ave  it  a  brilliant  lustre  by  a  mixture  of  gold-dust  in 
these  unguents  (Joseph.  A  nt,  viii,  7, 3 ;  comp.  Lamprid. 
Conunod,  17),  as  the  hiair  of  Orientals  is  generally  black 
(Cant.  iv,  1 ;  v,  U :  David'8  rufous  hair  is  named  as  pe- 
culiar,  1  Sam.  xvi,  12).  A  common  method  of  dressing 
the  hair  among  many  ancient  luitions  (Pliny,  xv,  24 ; 
xxiii,  32, 46 ;  xxvi,  93 ;  xxviii,  51 ;  Athen.  xii,  542 ;  VaL 
ftlax.  ii,  1, 5 ;  Diod.  Sic  v,  28 ;  but  not  among  the  ( Jreeka, 
noiarch,  ApojfOU,  reg,  p.  19,  Tauchn.),  and  one  highly 
esteemed  by  modern  Orientals,  namely,  to  stain  it  red- 
ciifih-ireliow  by  meana  of  heima  [see  Camphiru],  al- 
though perhaps  not  unknown  to  the  Hebiewesses  (see 
Cant.  vii,  5),  as  an  imitation  of  the  generally  prized 
gulden-hued  locks  {,fiaci  crmet)  of  antiquitv  (fliad,  i, 
i97;  ij,642;  Viig.y*;«.iv,549;  Ov'i(l,Fa$t,'uJ6S;  Stat. 
AchiL  i,  162 ;  Petron.  Sat,  105 ;  Apul  Afetam.  ii,  25,  Bip. ; 
aee  Bjoockhua.  ad  TtbuU,  i,  6, 8),  waa  a  practice  that 
does  not  appear  to  have  anciently  prevailed  in  the  £ast ; 
and  modem  Araba  are  only  aocustomed  to  dye  the  hair 
when  gray  (Niebuhr,  7Var,  i,  803).  False  hair  has  been 
inoorrectly  inferred  from  the  Mishna  {Shabb,  vi,  5),  al- 
though used  among  the  Mediana  (comp.  Xenoph.  Cyr.  i, 
3,  2;  có/iai  rpóa^trot),  and  oocasionally  by  old  men 
(Ovid,  vi  r«^ jn.  iii,  16), or  for  some  special  purpoee  (Polyb. 
iii,  78;  Petron.  SaŁ.  110;  Juven.  Sat,  vi,  120:  Josephus 
I  its  oae^  mpt^trĄ  KÓpij,  U/e,  11) ;  but  wigs^ 


although  common  in  ancient  Egypt  (see  Wilkinaon,  iffia 
JCff,  ii,  325, 326, 329),  are  unknown  in  the  modem  £a8t 
(see  Nikolai,  CA,  d,/al8chen  J/aare  u.  Perucken  in  aU, 
u,  n.  Zeił,  Beri  1801 ;  Heindorf,  on  Horat  Satir.  p.  183; 
Beroald,  on  ApuL  MeL  p.  244;  Fabric.  BibUogr,  Antią, p. 
847).  See  generally  Schwebel,  De  vett,  in  capiilis  or- 
nandis  studio  (Onold.  1768).  On  the  treatment  of  the 
hair  in  mouming,  see  Grief.  See  Junius,  De  ooma,  c 
animad.Gmteri  (Amst  1708) ;  Salmasius,  De  casarie  tri- 
ror.  et  coma  mulier,  (L.  R  1644) ;  Henning,  De  capiUis 
vett,  (Magdeb.  1678).— Winer,  i,  449.     Compare  Hair. 

Head-band  (only  in  pL  D'^'^ll'p,  kishshurim',  from 
"^^i^f  to  9*^1  rather  a  girdU  or  belt,  probably  for  the 
waist,  as  a  female  ornament  (Isa.  iii,  20;  **attire,"  Jer. 
ii,  32).    See  Head-dress. 

Headdi.    See  He:ddx 

Head-dreBB.  The  Hebrews  do  not  appear  to  have 
rcgarded  a  covering  for  the  head  as  an  esscntial  artide 
of  CYer^^-day  dreaa.  See  H  ead-band.  The  earliest  no> 
tice  we  have  of  such  a  thing  is  in  connection  with  the 
sacerdotal  ve8tment8,  and  in  this  case  it  is  described  aa 
an  omamental  appendage  *'for  glor>'  and  for  beauty" 
(Exod.  xxviii,  40).  See  Mitrę.  The  absence  of  any 
alluaion  to  a  head-dress  in  passages  where  we  should 
ex|)ect  to  meet  with  it,  as  in  the  trial  of  jealoosy  (Numb. 
V,  18),  and  the  regulations  regarding  the  leper  (Lev. 
xiii,  45),  in  both  of  which  the  "  uncovering  of  the  head" 
refers  undoubtedly  to  the  hair,  leads  to  the  iuference 
that  it  was  not  ordinarlly  wom  in  the  Mosaic  age ;  and 
this  is  confirmed  by  the  practice,  frcąuently  alluded  to, 
of  covering  the  head  with  the  mantle.  £ven  in  ailer 
times  it  seems  to  have  been  resen^cd  eapecially  for  pur- 
poses  of  ornament :  thus  the  tsaniph'  (^*^3^)  is  notioed 
as  being  wom  by  the  nobles  (Job  xxix,  14),  ladies  (laa. 
iii,  23),  and  kings  (Isa.  lxii,  3),  while  the  peir'  pM9) 
waa  an  artide  of  holiday  dress  (Isa.  lxi,  3,  Auth.yerB.  ■ 
**beauty;"  Ezek.  xxiv,  17,  23),  and  was  wom  at  wed- 
dings  (Isa.  lxi,  10) :  the  use  of  the  pirpa  was  restricted 
to  similar  oocasions  (Judith  xvi,  8;  Bar.  v,  2).  The 
former  of  these  terms  undoubtedly  describes  a  kind  of 
turban ;  its  primary  sense  (7|93C,  ^  to  roli  around")  ex-> 
presses  the  folds  of  linen  wound  round  the  head,  and  its 
form  probably  resembled  that  of  the  high-priest^s  mits- 
ne'pheth  (a  word  derived  from  the  same  root,  and  iden- 
tical  in  meaning,  for  in  Zech.  iii,  5,  tsaniph— mUsne- 
pheth),  as  described  by  Josephus  {Ant,  iii,  7, 3).  The 
renderings  of  the  termin  the  A.  V., "  hood"  (Isa.  iii,  23), 
"diadem"  (Job  xxix,  14;  Isa.  lxii,  3),  "mitrę**  (Zech. 
iii,  5),  do  not  convey  the  right  idea  of  its  meaning.  The 
other  term,peer,  primarily  means  an  ornament,  and  is 
so  rendered  in  the  A.  V.  (Isa.  lxi,  10;  see  also  verae  3, 
"  beauty"),  and  is  speciflcally  applled  to  the  head-dress 
from  its  omamental  character.  See  Diadem.  ■  It  is 
uncertain  what  the  term  properly  describes :  the  mod- 
em turban  consists  of  two  paris,  the  kduk,  a  stiff,  round 
cap  occasionally  rising  to  a  considerable  height,  and  the 
shash,  a  long  piece  of  muślin  wound  about  it  (Russell, 
Aleppo,  i,  104) :  Josephu8'8  account  of  the  high-priest's 
headHiress  implies  a  similar  constmcŁion,  for  he  says 
that  it  was  madę  of  tłiick  bands  of  linen  doubled  round 
many  times.  and  sewn  together,  the  whole  covered  by 
a  piece  of  Hne  linen  to  conceal  the  seams.  SaalschUtz 
{Archaol,  i,  27,  notę)  suggests  that  the  łsamph  and  the 
pełr  represent  the  shash  and  the  hduk,  the  latter  rising 
high  above  the  other,  and  so  the  most  prominent  and 
striking  feature.  In  favor  of  this  explanation  it  may  be 
remarked  that  the  peir  is  morę  particularly  connected 
with  the  migbaah,  the  high  cap  of  the  ordinary  priests, 
in  £xod.  xxxix,  28,  while  the  tsaniph,  as  we  have  seen, 
resembled  the  high-prie8t's  mitrę,  in  which  the  cap  was 
concealed  by  the  linen  folds.  The  objection,  however, 
to  this  explanation  is  that  the  et^onological  fbrce  of 
peir  is  not  brought  out :  may  not  that  term  have  ap- 
plied  to  the  Jewels  and  other  omaments  with  which  the 
turban  is  freąueutly  deconted  (Russell,  i,  106).    The 


HEAD-DRESS 


112 


HEAD-DRESS 


Hcad-dresses  of  Arabian  aud  Tnrklsh  Fcmales. 


term  used  for  putting  on  either  Łhe  Uaniph  or  the  peer 
is  ^?H,  "  to  bind  rouncr  (Exod.  xxix,  9 ;  Lev.  viii,  13) : 
hence  the  words  in  Ezek.  xvi,  10,  "I  girded  thee  about 
with  tinc  linen,"  are  to  be  understood  of  the  turban; 
and  by  the  use  of  the  same  term  Jonah  (ii,  5)  representa 
the  weeds  wrapped  as  a  turban  rowid  his  head.    The 
turban,  as  now  'n^om  in  the  East,  varies  very  much  in 
shape  (Russeirs  A  leppo,  i,  102).     It  appears  that  fre- 
quently  the  robes  supplied  the  place  of  a  head-dress,  be- 
ing  80  ample  that  they  might  be  thrown  over  the  hcad 
at  plcasure :  the  radid  and  the  tsdiph,  at  all  events,  wcre 
80  used  [see  Dkess],  and  the  veil  servcd  a  similar  pur- 
pose.  S^Ykil.  The  ordinarj' head-dress  of  the  Bcdouin 
consists  of  the  Iceffiyeh,  a  8quare  handkerchief,  geueraUy 
of  red  and  yellow  cotton,  or  cotton  and  silk,  fulded  so 
that  three  of  the  comers  hang  down  over  the  back  and 
shoulders,  leaving  the  face  exposcd,  and  bound  roimd 
the  head  by  a  cord  (Burckhardt,  Notes,  i,  48).    It  is  not 
improbable  that  a  similar  covering  was  used  by  the  He- 
brews  on  certain  occasions:  the  "kerchief"  in  Ezek. 
xiii,  18  has  been  so  understood  by  some  writera  (Har- 
mer,  Obserrations,  ii,  398),  though  the  word  naore  prob- 
ably  refers  to  a  species  of  veil;  and  the  <r(/i(Kiv6ioy 


Yarioos  Forma  of  tbc  modem  Turban. 


Bedouin  Head-dress,  or  KeJHyeh, 
(Acta  xix,  12,  A-Yers.  ^apron")i  as  explained  by  Suidas 


(rb  Tijc  «^X^c  ^óptifio),  was  applicable  to  the  pur- 
poscs  of  a  head-dress.     See  Handkerchief.      Keithcr 
of  these  cases,  however,  supplies  positive  evidence  on 
the  point,  and  the  generał  absence  of  allusions  leads  to 
the  inference  that  the  head  was  usually  uncovered,  as  ia 
still  the  case  in  many  parts  of  Arabia  (Wellstetl,  Trar- 
elSf  i,  73).    The  introduction  of  the  Greek  hat  (triraao^') 
by  Jason,  as  an  artide  of  dress  adapted  to  the  rtymna- 
sium,  was  regarded  as  a  national  dishonor  Q2  Mace  iv, 
12) :  in  shape  and  materiał  the  petams  very  much  re- 
sembled  the  common  felt  hats  of  this  coimtry  (Smith, 
Dicł,  o/Ant,  8.  V.  Pileus).— Smith,  s.  v.     See  Bo?5kkt. 

The  monuments  and  paintings  in  the  tombs  of  Egypt 
supply  us  with  numerous  forms  of  head-dressee  ;  aiitl 
there  is  no  doubt  that  many  of  these  were  tbe  prevail- 
ing  costłime  at  the  period  when  the  Israelites  sojouTne^ 
there.  Among  the  niins  of  Persepolis  are  fcnind  nu 
merous  sculptures  which  give  the  shape  of  \'anous  cov 


HEAD-DRESS 


113 


HEAL 


AadcDt  EgrptiaD  ręsal  Hemd-dreeses:  1,  with  the  slmple 
aUet:  i.  amagcd  ux  panOlel  braida ;  3,  reticalated,  with 
the  diadem. 

erings  for  the  head  used  by  men.    The  care  bestowed 


Andent  Peraian  Head-dresses. 

opon  tbls  part  of  the  toikt  ainong  the  Assyiians  and 
Babrkmiaiifl  is  abundantly  iUostrated  in  the  rolumes  of 
Bottł  and  Layard.     "The  Aasyrian  head-dress  is  de- 


Aadent  Aasyiten  Head-dresees :  1, 2.  Foref srn  Captires ; 
^Royal ;  4,  PenepoliUD.  on  the  Head  the  symbolic 

imbed  in  Ezek.  xxiii,  16,  under  the  tenns  ^n!|'1D 
^aa,  *  esceedinj;  in  dyed  attire ;'  it  is  doubtful,  how- 
^nr,  irbetber  tebmUm  describes  the  colored  materiał  of 
i5»  head-dress  (tiara  a  coloribus  qmbus  HncttB  sint) ; 
i  hm»  been  aangned  to  it  morę  appropiiate 
IV.-H 


to  the  description  of  a  turban  (JcucUs  obvolmł,  GesenioB, 
Thesaurus,  p.  542).  The  asBociated  term  seruchey  ex- 
presws  the  flowing  character  of  the  Eastem  head-dress, 
as  it  falls  down  over  the  back  (Layard,  Nin&eehj  ii,  808). 
The  word  rendered '  hats'  in  Dan.  iii,  21  (fi<ba'^?)  prop- 
erly  applies  to  a  dodl^*  (Smith). 

The  D'^D'^3d,  shebisim'  (Isa.  iii,  18),  rendered  in  our 
version  "  cauls,"  or,  as  in  the  margin,  "  networks,"  were 
most  probably  some  kind  of  reticulated  head-drcsses,  and 
80  the  word  is  widerstood  in  the  Talmud.     See  Caul. 

A  yery  peculiar  kind  of  head-dress  wom  in  some 
parts  of  Palestine,  especially  by  the  Druses  of  Mount 
Lebanon,  and  thought  to  be  referred  to  by  the  "{^'Ęf  ke'- 
ren,  or  "hom"  of  1  Sam.  ii,  1,  is  the  tantura,  It  is 
madę  of  gold  or  silver,  frequently  of  other  metal  either 
gilt  or  silver-plated,  and  sometimes  of  merę  wood.  The 
morę  costly  ones  are  highly  omamented,  and  oocaaion- 


The  Tantwra, 
ally  set  with  jewels;  but  the  length  and  poeition  of 
Łhem  is  that  upon  which  the  trareller  looks  with  the 
g^reatest  interest,  as  iUustrating  and  explaining  a  famil- 
iar  expre88ion  of  Scripture.  The  young,  the  rich,  and 
the  yain  wear  the  łaniura  of  great  length,  standing 
straight  up  from  the  top  of  the  forehead;  whereas  the 
humble,  the  poor,  and  the  agcd  place  it  upon  the  side 
of  the  head,  much  shorter,  and  spreading  at  the  end  like 
a  trumpeL    See  Horn. 

For  other  forms  of  royal  head-dresses,  sec  Crowk. 
For  military  ones,  see  Helmet. 

Head  of  the  Church,  a  title  which  properly  be- 
longs  only  to  Christ  (Ephes.  v,  23),  as  the  Supremę  Got- 
emor  of  the  whole  body  of  the  faithfuL  It  is  applied  to 
the  soyereign  of  Great  Britain  as  the  ruler  of  the  tem- 
poralities  of  the  Church.  "  Some  have  imagined  (the 
members  of  the  Romish  Church,  for  iustance)  that  the 
Christian  world  is  *  permanfently,*  and  from  generation 
to  generation,  subjcct  to  some  one  spiritual  ruler  (wheth- 
er  an  indi\idual  man  or  a  Church),  the  delegate,  repre- 
sentatire,  and  ricegerent  of  Christ,  whose  authority 
should  be  binding  on  the  conscience  of  all,  and  dedsire 
on  every  point  of  faith.*'  But,  had  such  been  our  Lord*8 
design,  he  could  not  poasibly  have  failed,  when  promis- 
ing  his  disciples  "another  Comforter,  who  should  abidc 
with  them  forever,"  to  refer  them  to  the  man  or  body 
of  men  who  should,  in  perpetual  sucoession,  be  the  de- 
pository  of  this  dirine  consolatiou  and  supremacy.  It 
is  also  incredible,  had  such  been  our  Lord*8  purpose,  that 
ne  himself  should  be  perpetually  spoken  of  and  alluded 
to  as  the  Head  of  his  Church,  without  any  reference  to 
any  supremę  head  on  earth  as  fully  representing  him, 
and  bearing  uniyersal  nile  in  his  name.  It  is  elear, 
therefore,  that  the  Christian  Church  uniyersal  has  no 
spiritual  head  on  earth  (Eden,  Churchman^a  Dictumary^ 
8,v.).     SeePoPE;  Papacy;  Piumact. 

Heal  (properly  KB'n,  ^ipainvia)  is  used  in  Scripture 
in  the  wider  sense  of  curing  in  generał,  as  applied  to 
diseases,  and  even  to  inanimate  objects.  It  occurs  also 
in  the  special  sense  of  restoring  from  apostasy.  See 
Disease;  Cure. 


HEAP 


114 


HEART 


Heap.  Th6  Hebrew  word  lŚ^7Ji,  ffadith',  rendered 
<(  tomb"  in  Job  xxi,  32,  and  **  heap*'  in  the  margin,  prop- 
erly  ugnifies  a  ttack,  a  heap,  henoe  a  tomby  tumulu»y  a 
•epulchral  moand  that  was  madę  by  a  pUe  of  earth  or 
Stones.  The  anóent  tunutU  weie  heaps  of  earth  or 
stone,  and  probably  sach  a  pile  was  usuaUy  madę  over 
a  graye  as  a  monument.  Trayelieis  in  the  East  have 
often  seen  heapn  of  Stones  ooyering  oyer  or  marking  the 
place  of  giayea.  The  Hebrew  phiase  bnj  D^32K  b|i, 
gal  abcmim'  gadoV,  rendered  '^  a  great  heap  of  Stones," 
refers  to  the  heaps  or  tumuli  which  were  raised  over 
those  whose  death  was  either  infamous  or  attended  with 
some  yery  remarkable  circumstances.  Such  was  the 
monument  raised  oyer  the  graye  of  Achan  (Josh.  yii, 
26) ;  and  Oyer  that  of  the  king  of  Ai  (Josh.  yiii,  29). 
The  burying  of  Absalom  was  distinguished  by  a  similar 
erection,  as  a  monument  of  his  disgrace  to  futurę  ages 
(2  Sam.  xyiii,  17).  The  same  word  b|i,  gal,  is  com- 
monly  used  in  reference  to  the  heaps  or  ruws  of  walls 
and  dties  (Job  yiii,  17 ;  Isa.  xxy,  2 ;  li,  87;  Jer.  lx,  10). 
Modem  trayellers  abundantly  tcstify  to  the  accurate 
fulfilment  of  Scripture  prophecy  in  relation  to  the  sites 
of  numeroos  andent  cities,  particularly  of  such  as  were 
doomed  to  become  desolate  heapa  (Bastow).  See  PiŁr 
łar;  Stone.  Other  Heb.  terms  translated  heap  are: 
nphy  cho^merj  a  pik  (Exod.  yiii,  14,  elsewhere  a  Ho- 
mer, as  a  measure) ;  "^I^IS,  md\  a  heap  of  rubbish  (Isa. 
xyii,  1) ;  *73,  ned,  a  moiaid  (Isa.  xyii,  11 ;  poet.  of  wayes, 
£xod.  xy,  8;  Josh.  iii,  18,  16;  Psa.  xxxiii,  7;  lxxyiii, 
18) ;  n^l^?,  aremah',  a  pile  (e.  g.  of  rubbish,  Neh.  iii, 
84 ;  of  graiń,  Cant  yii,  8 ;  of  sheayes,  Ruth  iii,  7 ;  Nch. 
xiii,  15;  Hag.  ii,  16,  etc) ;  bc,  lel^  a  hiU  (Josh.  xi,  13 ; 
espec.  a  mound  of  rubbish,  DeuL  xii,  17;  Josh.  yiii,  28 
Jer.  xlix,  2,  etc) ;  with  others  of  a  morę  misceUaneous 
ugnification.    Soe  Moumd. 

HeareiB  (audientes\  a  name  ^rcn  to  a  dass  of 
catechomens  in  the  early  Church  who  were  admitted 
to  hear  sermons  and  scriptures  read  in  the  church,  but 
were  not  allowed  to  share  in  the  prayers.  The  Apos- 
tolical  C!on8titutions  (lib.  yiii,  c  5)  orders  the  deacon  to 
diamisB  them  with  the  words  Ne  guis  audientium,  ne 
cuis  injidelium  ("  I^et  nonę  of  the  hearers,  let  nonę  of  the 
mibelieyers,  be  present"),  before  the  proper  Uturgy  be- 
gan.  See  Bingham,  Orig,  Eedet,  bk.  yiii,  cL.  4 ;  bk.  x, 
dl.  2 ;  bk.  xviii,  eh.  1. 

Heane  or  Hene  (from  Lat  herpir^  Low  Łat  her^ 
da,  French  herze,  a  harrow),  The  Low  Latin  hercia  also 
signified  a  candelabrum,  shaped  like  a  harrow,  which  was 
placed  at  the  head  of  a  grave,  a  coffin,  or  a  cenotaph.  In 
the  Middle  Ages  the  name  herse  was  applied  to  a  cano- 
py  (in  Italian,  cata/alco)^  which  was  placed  oyer  the  cof- 
fins  of  the  distingiushed  dead,  while  they  were  kept  in 
the  church  preyious  to  interment  Herses  were  also 
frequently  prepared  to  receiye  the  bodies  of  the  dead  in 
churches,  at  stations  along  the  route^  where  they  were 
being  borne  to  a  distance  for  finał  interment  Herses 
were  often  madę  with  great  magnificence.  They  were 
freąuently  adomed  with  illustrations  of  the  last  judg- 
ment,  and  other  subjects  taken  from  the  Scriptures. 
Candles  were  set  in  sockets  in  great  numbers,  and  were 
kept  buniing  as  long  as  the  corpse  remained  in  the 
herae.  The  name  har»e  was  also  applied  to  a  frame  of 
wood  or  of  metal  that  was  placed  oyer  some  of  the  re- 
clining  statues  which  were  so  freąuently  put  oyer  the 
tombs  of  distinguished  penons.  Over  this  herse  a  pall 
was  freąuently  hung.  The  modem  use  of  the  word 
hearse  is  confined  to  a  frame-work  or  a  wagon  to  bear 


the  dead  to  the  graye.  The  hearse  yaries  greatly  in 
form  and  omamentation  in  different  countries. — Diez, 
E(ymologi§ches  Wdrterbuch  (Bonn,  1861) ;  Parker,  IHd. 
o/ Architecture  (Oxford,  1850) ;  Mignę, IHctiannaire  da 
Ońgines  (Paris,  1864).     (G.  F.  C) 

Heart,  in  the  Biblical  sense  (Kapiia ;  ^h  or  ^'A^ 
often  exchanged  for  2^J?,  in  a  morę  extended  sense,  as 
in  Psa.  xxxix,  3, 4;  cii,  22;  1  Sam.  xxy,37,  the  whole 
region  of  the  chest,  with  its  contents ;  see  Delitzsch, 
System  of  Biblical  Psychologg,  §  12, 13.  Aocording  to 
Hupfdd,  2^n,  in  Pda.  xyii,  10,  and  lxxiii,  7,  means  sim- 
ply  ihe  heart-,  which  is  not  yeiy  likdy). 

1.  In  the  Biblical  point  of  view,  human  life,  in  all  ita 
operations,  is  ccntred  in  the  heart.  The  heart  is  the 
central  oigan  of  the  phydcal  drculation ;  hence  the  ne- 
cessity  for  strengthening  the  body  as  a  support  for  the 
heart  (ni  1SD,  Gen.  xyiii,  6;  Judges  xix,  6;  Pisa.  dy, 
15) ;  and  the  exhaustion  of  physical  powcr  is  called  a 
drying  up  of  the  heart  (Psa.  cii,  5;  xxii,  15,  etc).  So, 
also,  is  the  heait  the  centrę  of  spiritual  actiyity ;  for 
all  spiritual  aims,  whether  bdonging  to  the  intellectu- 
al,  morał,  or  pathological  sphcres,  are  elaboratcd  in  the 
heart,  and  again  carried  out  by  the  heart  In  fact,  the 
whole  life  of  the  soul,  in  the  lowcr  and  scnsual,  as  well 
as  in  the  higher  spheres,  has  its  origin  in  the  heait 
(Proy.  iy,  23, "  For  out  of  it  are  the  issues  of  life").  In 
order  to  follow  this  train  of  thought,  and  to  establish  in 
a  dearer  light  the  Biblical  view  of  the  heart,  it  will  be 
best  to  consider  the  relation  the  heart  bean  to  the  aoul 
(^XV9  ^9.?)*  "^^^  ^  o°<^  ^^  ^^c  difficult  questions  in 
Biblical  psychology;  Olshausen  (in  the  Ahh.de  naturm 
humana  irichotomia,  opusc,  theol.  p.  159)  saj^s, "  Omnium 
longe  difiicillimum  est  accurate  definirc  qtudnam  discri- 
men  in  N.  T.  inter  yl/vxń'^  et  Kopdiap  intcrccdat"  Ne\'- 
ertheless,  the  task  is  facilitated  by  the  fact  that  therc  is 
essential  agrecment  on  this  point  in  the  antliropologies 
of  the  Old  and  New  Testament 

(1)  We  first  notę  that,  while,  as  before  said,  the  heart 
is  the  centrę  of  all  the  functions  of  the  soul*s  life,  the 
terms  "  heart"  and  "  fouI"  are  often  used  interchangea- 
bly  in  Scripture.  Thus,  in  Deut  yi,  5  (compare  Matt 
xxii,  87;  Mark  xii,  80, 88;  Lukę  x,  27),  and  xxyi,  16, 
we  are  commanded  to  love  God  and  obey  his  com- 
mandments  with  all  our  heart  and  all  our  soul  (com- 
pare 1  Chroń.  xxylii,  9) ;  the  union  of  the  faithful, 
in  Acts  iy,  12,  is  designated  as  ^  7/  Kapcia  gal  tj 
tl/vxĄ  fiia.  (In  these  passages,  as  in  otbcrs,  for  in- 
Stańce,  Deut.  xi,  18 ;  xxx,  2 ;  Jer.  xxxii,  41,  thero 
is,  moreoyer,  to  be  noticed  that  the  heart  is  always 
named  first)  Thus  the  indecision  and  diWsion  of  the 
inner  life  can  be  designated  dthcr  by  mftrxoc  (Jtmes  i, 
8)  or  by  Kapcia  ctaai}.  It  is  said  of  both  ayviiuv  map' 
diac  (Jamcs  iy,  8)  and  ayviZuv  ^x^C  (1  ^^^'  h  22) ; 
also  tręj  T\t^  (Paa-  xlii,  5;  comp.  Job  xxx,  16)  and 
iab  T\tV  (Lam.  ii,  10;  Psa.  lxii,  9),  the  self-mipdling 
to  the  loye  of  God  applies  as  well  to  the  soul  (Pisa. 
ciii)  as  to  the  D*^!:)?,  of  which  the  heart  is  the  centrę, 
etc  But  in  the  majority  of  passages,  where  either  the 
heart  or  the  soul  are  separately  spoken  of,  the  term 
"  heart"  can  either  not  be  exchanged  at  all  for  the  terai 
"  soul,"  or  else  only  with  some  modification  in  the  mean- 
ing. 

(2)  Notę  also  the  following  fundamenta!  distinction: 
The  soul  is  the  bearer  of  the  personality  (L  e.  of  the  egOf 
the  proper  sclf)  of  man,  in  \-irtue  of  the  indwdling  jptrie 
(Prov.  XX,  27 ;  1  Cor.  ii,  11),  but  yet  is  not  itself  tbe/>er- 
son  of  man ;  the  heart,  on  the  contrary  (the  'jOS  '*^*Trt, 
Proy.  XX,  27),  is  the  jłlace  where  the  proceas  of  self-con- 
soiousness  is  doveloped,  in  which  the  soul  finds  itself, 
and  thus  becomes  conscious  of  its  actions  and  impre»> 
sions  as  its  own  (*'  in  corde  actiones  animsB  humanss  ad 
ipsam  redeunt,"  as  is  concisely  and  correctly  said  by 
Roos  in  his  Fundom,  psychoL  ea*  s,  scr^  1769,  p.  99).  Ao« 
oordingly  the  soul,  not  the  heart,  is  spoken  of  when  the 


HEABT 


116 


HEART 


irhole  human  being  as  soch,  and  his  pbyńcal  or  spiritu- 
al  welfare  or  perdition  are  meant.  This  is  seen  on  córo- 
paiing  auch  passages  aa  Job  xxxiiif  18, 22, 28 ;  Psa.  xciy, 
17 ;  and  the  espreasioiis  of  the  N.  T.  irfpuroiriinc  ^x'7f 
(ileh.x,39) ;  airo>datu  rtjv  V^x^v  (Mark  yiil,35 ;  comp. 
MaCt.  X,  39 ;  James  i,  21) ;  etaTfjpia  \hx*^*'  (^  1*^^  '^  ^)  ^ 
avairav9(v  Łvpi<jKŁiv  raic  \l/vxaic  (Matt.  xi,  29).  The 
aool  being  the  eubject  of  salration  (Matt«  xvi,  26),  it  is 
aaid,  in  regaid  to  the  camal  desires,  which  endanger  ita 
aalYatłon,  that  they  war  agamst  tfte  soul,  arparii/opTai 
Kard  rnc  >f^9C  (1  Pet.  ii,  U ;  comp,  Prov.  vi,  26).  In 
all  these  pasaages  it  were  impoesible  to  substitute  ^b 
or  KapSia,  for  tŚBS  or  ^/vx4 »  nor  can  we  make  the  trri- 
cKoroc  Tiou  ^vxuv  (1  Pet  ii,  25)  equivalent  to  the 
KapSwyywmjc  (Acta  i,  24) ;  nor  could  we  substitute 
''heart'*  for  ''bouI''  with  regard  to  the  oath  in  2  Gor. 
i,  23) ;  neUher  can  iab  be  sald  of  the  'Tni'*  '^65  (Psa. 
xxii,  30),  instead  of  n^H  fiib  1*1:583,  for  ^^^  łT^H 
(Paa.  xxii,  27 ;  lxix,  33)  bas  an  essentially  different 
meaning  from  1ŚS3  *^^^^  (comp.  Jer.  xxxyiii,  17, 20). 
When  Nabal  lost  conaciouaness  in  oonaeąuence  of  fear, 
his  floni  still  dwelt  in  him  (see  Acts  xx,  10) ;  but  yet,  ac- 
cording  to  1  Sam.  xxv,  37,  his  heart  died  within  hun. 
When  fear  auspends  consciousness  the  heart  fails  (Gen. 
xlii, 26).  On  the  other  band,  *^;ŚC3  n^^^  (Cant  v,  6), 
which  conimentators  combine  with  2?  K2C^,  bas  an  en- 
Urely  difTerent  meaning,  namely,  that  the  yeiy  self  of 
the  lover  draws  the  b^ved  afler  it  Moreoyer,  when 
expreaai]]g  inw^ard  contemplation,  some  feeling  or  acUon 
taking  place  within  man,  the  elaboration  of  a  plan  or 
nsoiotion,  we  find  almoat  invariably  the  heart  named, 
and  not  the  soul  (Booe,  Fundom,  psychoL :  "  Dum  ipsa 
[anima]  aibi  aliquid  ostendit  ac  proponit,  ad  cor  suum 
loqtu  dicitur;  dum  suarum  actionum  sibi  conscia  est  et 
illanmi  innooentiam  rei  turpitudinem  ipsa  scntit,  id  ad 
cor  refertur.  Anima  humana  ut  i/a;xv  8uavia  appetit, 
ut  spiritus  samtatur,  etc,  sed  quatenus  cor  habet,  ipsa 
norit,  88  hoc  agere  et  ideaa  reflexas  habet").  To  this 
head  belong  the  expre8Bions  3?^^  Dsb  D9  (Deut  viii, 
6);  "iab-bc  n-^lśn  (Isa.  xUv,  19,  etc.);  *i2Vbx  nęK 
(this  is  even  applied  to  God,  Gen.  yiii,  21) ;  *^a^3  Pr*7i 

■^a^  05,  '^snba,  ab  b?  e-^b,  anb  ni^^stoi  (PbL 

lxxiii,  7) ;  ib  ''Sn?^  (Prov.  xvi,  1)  (for  the  particu- 
lars  of  these,  see  a  lexicon) ;  among  the  expre88ions  of 
<he  N.T.  diodoi  iv  rS  KapSi^  (Lukę  1,66) ;  iv^vfui9^aŁ 
ky  ratę  Kapciatę  (Matt  ix,  4) ;  SioKoyi^ŁaSai  iv  Kap- 
iiaic  (Lukę  iii,  15;  Mark  ii,  8;  comp.  Lukę  xxiv,  28) ; 
fioukai  Tuv  KapoiS»v  (1  Cor.  iv,  5,  etc). 

(3)  But  the  heart  is  not  merely  the  organ  of  pure  inwaid 
self-coDsciousnesa,  but  also  of  all  the  functions  of  percep- 
tion  in  generał,  so  that  ^b,  in  a  restricted  sense,  acąuires 
th«  ngniUcation  of  mind  or  understanding ;  for  instance, 
nab  "łWpK,  wt  eordoH  (Job  xxxiv,  10) ;  sb  'j'^^  =^59 
(Jer.  ii,  21 ;  comp.  Prov.  xvii,  16) ;  also  of  Gotl  ns  ^l^^ą? 
ab  (Job  xxxvi,  5) ;  sb  an'l  (1  Kings  v,9).  The  passage 
Psa.  cxix,  32,  and  the  very  varioualy  interpreted  passagc 
2  Kings  V,  26,  are  also  to  be  undersŁood  in  that  mamier. 
The  Sept,  therefore,  often  Łranslates  ab  simply  by  vovc 
(£xDd.  Tii,  23 ;  Isa.  x,  7,  etc).  On  the  cloae  connection 
between  theae  two  \*iew8,  see  Beck,  Chrisd  Ijekruńsam- 
aekaji  (i,  233).  There  are,  of  course,  exeeptions.  The 
soul  is  also  presented  as  the  subject  of  perception  (Prov. 
xix,  2 ;  P8a.  cxxxix,  14) ;  the  thoughts  which  influence 
man  are  also  called  the  lang^uage  and  thoughts  of  the 
soul  (Lam.  iii,  20,  24;  1  Sam.  xx,  4).  The  soul  is  the 
seat  of  imagination  (Esth.  iv,  13),  the  place  where  coun- 
sd  is  taken  (Psa.  xiii,  2  8q.).  Yet  such  pasaages  are 
oomparatively  few  (comp.  DeliŁKSch,  §  xii),  and  even  in 
them  the  soul  aometimes  appears  to  be  mentioned,  as  in 
the  laat^Hiamed  passage,  only  in  cooaeąuence  of  the  ne- 
oesBity  of  a  seeond  expresBion  in  the  parallelisms. 

(4)  On  the  other  hand,  the  diaposition  of  mind  and  pa»- 


sion  are  as  often  attributed  to  the  soul  as  to  the  heait, 
aooording  as  they  are  conaidered  either  as  pervaaing 
the  whole  personality  of  man,  or  a  disposition  goveming 
the  whole  inner  naturę  of  man.  It  is  said  in  Matt  xxvi, 
38,  irłpi\vir6c  himv  rj  tfo/^i?  fiov ;  John  xii,  27, 17  i^x9 
fŁov  rtrapoKrai ;  wbile  in  John  xvi,  6,  it  says  7;  Xvin| 
7r<irXi7piifjccv  vfAwv  rąy  KapSiav  (comp.  Kom.  ix,  2) ;  xvi, 
1,  fiĄ  rapaaoMia  ifiuw  t)  KapSia ;  2  Cor.  ii,  4,  ^Xtif/cc 
Kai  awox'i  KapŁiac,  etc  We  find  also  grief  and  care, 
fear  and  terror,  joy  and  confidence,  etc,  attributed  in- 
differently  to  the  heart  or  to  the  soul  in  the  O,  T.  (see 
Deut.  xxviii,  65;  Prov.  xii,  25;  Eccles.  xi,  10;  Jer.  xv, 
16 ;  1  Sam.  ii,  1 ;  Psa.  xxviii,  7 ;  £xod.  xxiii,  9  (whero 
Luther  translates  ^CJ  by  hearf) ;  Psa.  vi,  4;  xlii,  6,  7 ; 
Isa.  lxi,  10;  Psa.  lxii,  2;  cxxxi,  2;  cxvi,  7).  Gustom 
has  here  established  arbitrary  distinctions  between  the 
different  expres8ions:  thua  ^^V  and  its  derivatives  are 
generally  connected  with  UC3,  and  Il^t?  and  its  deriv- 
atives  with  ab.  The  passage  Prov.  xiv,  10  is  of  espe- 
cial  interest  in  this  respect  On  the  contrary,  we  find 
dB3  instead  of  ab  when  speaking  of  those  functions  in 
which  the  subject  is  apprehended  as  acting  on  an  object 
A  remarkable  passage  in  this  sense  is  found  in  Jer.  It, 
19 :  the  soul  hears  tiie  noise  of  war,  and  the  heart  ia 
pained  and  grieved  by  it  (in  an  entirely  different  sense 
we  find  CpilJ  ab,  1  Kings  iii,  9).  Here  we  must,  how- 
evcr,  notice  that,  as  Delitzsch  (p.  162)  very  correctly 
rcmarks,  in  the  conception  of  ĆB.3,  }pvxrii  the  idea  of  de- 
sire  is  evidently  prevalent  over  all  others.  AU  the  im- 
pulses  by  which  human  actions  are  govemed  (see  £xod. 
xxxv,  5,22, 29),  the  disposition  of  mind  which  regulates 
them,  the  wLshes,  desires,  etc,  originate  in  the  heart 
(comp.  Ezek.  xi,  21;  xx,  16;  xxxiłi,  31;  Deut  xi,  16; 
Job  xxxi,  7,  9, 27 ;  Psa.  lxvi,  18 ;  Prov.  vi,  25 ;  Matt  v, 
28) ;  but  as  soon  as  the  disposition  of  the  will  tums  to 
an  outward  manifestation  of  the  desires,  the  \:3&3,  ^xht 
comes  into  plav.    Yet  the  root  n*iX  and  its  dcrivatives 

'         *  TT. 

are  almost  exclustvely  connected  with  CG.3  (only  in  Psa. 
xxi,  3  do  we  find  ab  r^S<ri ;  comp.  lirt^fiiai  tć5v  Kap- 
Stu/v,  Rom.  i,  24 ;  see  other  passages,  likc  Psa.  lxxxiv,  3 ; 
cxix,  20,  81 ;  Isa.  xxvi,  8,  9 ;  Jer.  xxii,  7).  We  even 
find  CB3  used  sometimes  to  siguify  the  desire  itself,  as 
particuiarly  in  EccL  vi,  7,  9.  Thus  we  can  explain 
ttJCJ  a-^n-nn  (laa.  v,  U;  Hab.  ii,  5;  Prov.  xiu,2)  and 
tiS3  an*!  (Pft>v.  xxviii,  25) ;  the  latter  is  distinct  ftom 
ab  atri  (psa.  ci,  5),  which  Ewald  erroneously  trans- 
lates by  "covetou8  heart,"  while  in  Prov.  xxi,  4  it  sig- 
nifies  the  advancing  certainty. 

2.  From  the  foregoing  explanation8  we  can  deduce 
the  ethical  and  religious  signification  of  the  word  heart, 
(1)  As  the  heart  is  the  home  of  the  personal  life,  the 
worksbop  where  aU  personal  appropriation  and  elabora- 
tion of  spiritual  things  have  their  seat,  it  follows  that 
the  morał  and  religious  development  of  man— in  fact,  his 
whole  mora]  personality,  is  also  centred  in  it  Only  that 
which  bas  entered  the  heart  oonstitutes  a  poasession,  hav- 
ing  a  morał  worth,  while  only  that  which  comes  from  the 
heart  is  a  morał  product  From  the  naturę  and  contents 
of  the  heart,  by  a  law  of  natural  connection — similar  to 
that  which  exł9ts  between  the  tree  and  its  fruits  (l^Iatt 
xii,  33  sq.)— resnlto  the  individual's  course  of  life  as  a 
whole;  and  from  them  all  his  personal  acts  derive  their 
character  and  morał  signification.  Hencc  Łk  Kapciac  is 
applied  to  whatever  is  of  a  real  morał  naturę  in  contra- 
distinction  from  merę  outward  appearance  (Rom.  vi,  17; 
comp.  Matt  xv,  8 ;  1  Tim.  i,  5).  Even  in  speaking  of  God 
we  find  i  t  said,  in  order  to  expTess  the  distinction  between 
what  is  esscntial  to  his  naturę  and  the  appearance  as 
perceived  by  man, "He  doth  not  'iSlb^  tstUingly  afflict" 
(Lam.  iii,  83).  That  the  di vine  j  udgment  on  man  will  be 
directed  by  what  he  is,  not  by  what  he  may  appear  to  be, 
is  described  as  a  łooking  upon  his  heart  (1  Sam.  xvi,  7; 
Jer.  XX,  12) ;  a  knowing;  or  trying  of  the  heart  (1  KingS 


HEART 


116 


HEART 


yiu,89;  Lnke  xvi,  16;  Prov.  xvii,  8;  P&a.  vii,  10;  xvii, 
8;  Jer.  xi,  20).  Therefore  also  man  is  deńgnated  ac- 
cording  to  his  heart  in  all  that  rdatea  to  babittud  morał 
qualitieB;  thus  we  read  of  a  wise  beart  (1  Kings  v,  12 ; 
Ftov.  X,  8,  etc),  a  pure  beart  (Pba.  xli,  12 ;  Matt  v,  8 ; 
1  Tim.  i,  6;  2  Tim.  ii,  22),  an  uprigbt  and  rigbteoos 
heart  (Gen. XX, 5, 6;  PBa.xi,2;  lxxviii,72;  ci,2),a8in- 
gle  beart  (Eph.  v,  5;  CoL  iii,  22),  a  pions  and  good  heart 
(Lukę  viii,  15),  a  lowly  beart  (Matt  xi,  29),  etc.  In  all 
these  places  it  would  be  difficulŁ  to  introduce  tiB.9  or 

(2)  We  must  also  ob8erve  that  the  original  divine  nile 
of  oondnct  for  man  waa  implanted  in  his  heart,  and  there- 
fore the  heart  is  the  seat  of  the  ffvv€i$fi<jiCf  or  cofuciencf, 
which  bas  a  mission  to  proclatm  that  nile  (Rom.  ii,  15). 
AU  subseąuent  divine  Tevelatlons  were  also  directed  to 
the  heart  (Deut.  >a,  6) ;  so  the  law  demands  that  God 
abould  be  loved  with  the  wbole  heart,  and  then,  as  though 
by  radiation  from  this  centrę,  witb  the  wbole  soul  (oomp. 
Deut.  xi,  18 ;  Psa.  cxix,  11,  etc).  The  teaching  of  wis- 
dom  also  enters  the  beart,  and  from  thence  spreads  its 
healingand  vivifying  influence  through  the  wbole  organ- 
ism  (Pn>v.  iv,  21-23).  The  prophetic  oonsolations  must 
speak  to  the  heart  (Isa.  xl,  2),  in  contradistinction  from 
8uch  consolations  as  do  not  reach  the  bottom  of  human 
naturę ;  thus  also,  in  Matt.  xiii,  9 ;  Lukę  viii,  15,  we  flnd 
the  heart  described  as  the  gromid  on  which  the  seed  of 
the  divine  Word  is  to  be  sowed.  That  which  beoomes 
assimilated  to  the  heart  constitutes  the  ^<javpbc  rr/c 
KopSiac  (Matt  xii,  35).  This,  bowever,  may  not  only 
be  dyaBóc,  but  also  voinipóc ;  for  the  human  beart  is 
not  only  a  recipient  of  divine  principles  of  life,  but  also 
of€viL 

(8)  In  opposition  to  the  superficial  doctrine  which 
makes  man  in  regard  to  morals  anindifferentbeing,  Scrip- 
turę  presents  to  us  the  doctrine  of  the  natural  wicked- 
uesB  of  the  human  heart,  the  D^  ^.2C7  (GeiL  viii,  21),  or, 
morę  completcly,  '^^'2  sb  mSOTC  (vi,  5;  oompare  1 
Chroń,  xxviii,  9),  and  considers  sin  as  ha\*ing  penetrated 
the  centrę  of  life,  from  whence  it  contaminates  its  wbole 
oouiBc  *'  How  can  ye,  being  evi],  speak  good  things  ? 
for  out  of  the  abundance  of  the  beart  the  moutb  speak- 
eth"  (MatL  xii,  84;  comp.  Eocles.  viii,  11 ;  Psa.  lxxiii, 
7);  and  those  tbings  which  come  out  of  the  heart  defilc 
the  man  (Matt.  xv,  18).  The  beart  is  described  as  "  dc- 
ceitful  (or,  morę  properly,  ńp3?,  croobedj  the  opposite  of 
"^ttŚ^,  straigkł)  above  all  tbings,  and  desperately  w^ick- 
ed"'(\23!|3M)  (Jer.  xvii,  9);  so  that  God  alonc  can  thoi^ 
oughly  sound  the  depths  of  its  wickedness  (comparc  1 
John  iii,  20).  Hence  the  prayer  in  Psa.  cxxxix,  23.  In 
this  natural  state  of  tuisusceptibility  for  good  the  heart 
is  caUed  uncircumcised,  ^1)5  (Numb.  xx\'i,  41 ;  comparc 
Deut  X,  16;  Ezek.  xliv,  9).  Man,  frightened  at  the 
manifestation  of  divinc  holiness,  may  take  within  bim- 
self  the  resolution  of  fuUilling  the  divine  commands 
(Deut.  V,  24) ;  yet  the  divine  voice  complains  (v,  29), 
"Oh  that  there  were  such  a  heart  in  them  that  they 
would  fear  me !"  etc  Therefore  the  wbole  Revclation  bas 
for  its  object  to  change  the  beart  of  man ;  and  its  wbole 
aim  is  to  destroy,  by  virtue  of  its  divine  eflScacy,  the  un- 
susceptibility  (**  stupiditas,  qua  centrum  animte  laborat," 
as  Roos  expres8es  it,  p.  153)  and  the  antagonisim  of  the 
heart,  and  to  substitute  for  them  the  fear  of  God  in  the 
heart  (Jer.  xxxii,  40),  so  that  the  law  may  be  admitted 
(Jer.  xxxi,  33).  This  is  the  effect  of  the  operations  of 
the  Holy  Spiritjwhose  workings,  as  shown  in  the  O.T., 
point  to  the  regeneration  of  the  beart  in  redemption 
(E2sek.  xxxvi,  26  sq. ;  xi,  19),  transforraing  the  prophets 
into  new  creatures  by  means  of  a  change  of  beart  (1 
Sam.  X,  6, 9),  and  implanting  a  willingness  to  obey  God*8 
law  in  the  pious  (Psa.  li,  12-14). 

(4)  On  the  part  of  man,  the  process  of  8alvation  begins 
in  the  heart  by  the  faith  awakened  by  the  testimony  of 
revelatiou ;  which,  as  giving  a  new  direction  to  the  inner 
life,  belongs  eutirely  to  the  sphere  of  the  beart,  and  is  de- 


scribed as  a  (aatening  (aooording  to  the  original  mean* 
ing  of  '■'ącłl),  a  strengchening  (^'''ASKn,  Psa.  xxvii, 
14;  xxxi,  24),  a  supporting  of  tbe  beart  (comp.  partie- 
ularly  Psa.  cxii,  7)  on  the  grcuud  which  is  God  him- 
self,  the  Xh  lqs  (Psa.  lxxiii,  26).  The  N.  T.  says  in 
tbe  same  manner :  Kapdi^  TTKmmrai  (Rom.  x,  9, 10), 
irujr(vuv  iK  o\tic  rńc  Kapdiac\  faith  is  a  ^17  itagpi' 
ve<rda(  lv  KapSi^  (Mark  xxi,  28).  God  purifies  tbe 
beart  by  faith  in  Christ  (Acts  xv,  9),  for  by  the  spriiik- 
ling  of  the  blood  of  atonement  the  beart  is  rid  of  the 
bad  oonscience  (Heb.  x,  22;  comparc  1  John  iii,  19-21), 
and  the  love  of  God  is  shed  in  it  by  the  Holy  Gbost 
(Rom.  V,  5).  The  same  spirit  also  seałs  in  the  heart 
the  assurance  of  being  a  cbild  of  God  (2  Cor.  i,  22) ;  the 
beart  beoomes  the  abode  of  Christ  (Eph.  iii,  16),  is  pre- 
8er%'^ed  in  Christ  (CoL  iii,  15;  PhiL  iv,  7),  and  strength- 
ened  in  sanctification  (1  Thes.  lii,  18,  etc). 

When,  on  the  contrary,  mar.  rejccts  the  testimony  of 
revelation,  tbe  heart  becomes  hardened,  tums  to  stone 
(ilDpil,  Psa.  xc\'i,  8 ;  ftov.  xxviii,  14 ;  "j^SK,  2  Chroń. 
xxxvi,  18 ;  pjri,  Exod.  iv,  21 ;  *7Są,  1  Sam.  vi,  6),  for 
which  we  find  it  also  said  that  the  heart  is  shut  (Isa. 
xliv,  18),  madę  fat  (Isa.  vi,  10 ;  compare  Psa.  cxix,  70). 
In  the  N.  Test  we  find  watpuMTię  Kap^iac  (Mark  iii,  5 ; 
Eph.  iv,  18) ;  <rcXłjporap^m  (3Iatt.  xix,  8,  etc).  The 
most  important  passage  in  this  respcct  is  Isa.  ri,  10, 
where  we  find  it  particiUarly  stated  how  the  unsuscepti- 
ble  heart  renders  one  unable  to  see  tbe  work  of  God,  to 
bear  his  Word,  and  how  thb  inability  reacts  on  the 
heart,  and  renders  its  state  incurable. 

8.  Finally,  the  que8tion  of  the  position  the  heart,  aa 
centrę  of  the  spiritual  life  of  tbe  soul,  bolds  in  regard  to 
the  beart,  considered  as  the  ceutrc  of  the  oiganic  (phys- 
ical)  life,  cannot  be  fully  treatcd  cxccpt  in  a  thorough  in- 
ve8tigation  of  the  rclations  betwecu  the  body  and  soul  in 
generaL  We  will  only  rcmark  berę  that  the  Scriptures 
not  only  draw  a  parallel  betM^een  tbe  body  and  the  soul, 
by  virtue  of  which  the  bodily  actions  are  considered  as 
s>nnbols  of  the  spiiitual,  but  also  esUblish  the  position 
that  the  soul,  which  is  tbe  bearer  of  tbe  pereonality,  is 
the  same  which  durects  also  the  life  and  actions;  and 
thus  the  bodily  oi^gans,  in  their  highcr  functious,  becomc 
its  adjuncts.  Now,  in  view  of  the  wcll-known  fact  that 
emotions  and  sufferings  alfect  the  pbysical  economy^ — 
for  example,  that  tbe  pulsations  of  the  heart  are  alfected 
by  them— no  one  will  consider  it  a  mcre  figurę  of  speech 
wbeił  the  Peolmist  says,  "My  heart  was  hot  witliin  me" 
(Psa.  xxxix,  8),  or  Jeremiah  spcaks  of  "a  buniing  fire 
shut  up  in  his  boiics"  (Jer,  xx,  9 ;  comp.  iv.  19 ;  xxiii,  9). 

But  tbcre  is  one  point  worthy  of  special  attention  in 
J  Biblical  anthropology,  naraely,  the  specific  rektion  the 
Bibie  cstablishes  between  certain  parts  of  the  bodily  or- 
ganism  and  particular  actions  (see  what  Delitzsch,*£t5- 
liccU  Psychohgy,  §  12, 18,deduces  from  tbe  Biblical  sig^ 
nification  of  the  D^^cn*?,  the  lirer,  the  Wneyi),  and  then 
the  part  attributed  to  the  heart  in  knowledge  and  will, 
considered  aside  from  the  bead  and  brain.  It  is  well 
known  that  all  antiquity  agreed  with  the  Biblical  view8 
in  these  respects.  In  regard  to  Homer's  doctrine,  see 
Niigelsbacb^s  Homer.  Theolo^,  p.  332  6q.  We  may  also 
on  this  point  recall  the  exprpssions  cordatua^  recordari, 
vecorSy  esccors,  etc.  (see  especiaUy  Cicero,  T^mc,  i,  9,  18, 
and  Plato,  Phad.  c,  45,  and  tbe  commentators  on  these 
passages).  As  Delitzsch  correctly  observes,  the  spiritu- 
al signification  of  the  heart  cannot  be  traced  back  to  it 
from  the  merę  fact  of  its  being  the  central  organ  of  the 
circulation.  The  manner  in  which  that  writer  bas  madę 
use  of  tbe  pbenomena  of  somnambulism  to  cxplain  this 
is  deser\-ing  of  due  notice,  yet  physiology  has  thus  faz 
been  unable  to  throw  any  light  on  the  subject.~Oehler, 
in  Herzog,  Real^EncyHnp,  vi,  15  8q. 

4.  The  heart  exprewie8  the  middle  of  anything :  "Tyro 
is  in  the  heart,"  in  the  midst,  "of  the  sea"  (Ezek.  xxrii, 
4).  "  We  will  not  fear,  though  tbe  mountains  be  car- 
ried  into  the  beart  of  the  sea"  (Psa.  xlvi,  2).  "As  Jo- 
nah  was  three  days  and  three  nights  in  tbe  whale^a 


HEARTH 


117 


HE-ASS 


bellf,  00  shaD  the  Son  of  man  be  three  ćbjb  tnd  thr«e 
nights  in  the  heart  of  Łhe  earth"  (Matt  xii,  40).  Mo- 
tes,  speaking  to  the  Israelites,  aays,  "And  the  moontain 
bumt  with  fiie,  anto  the  heart  of  heaven  f  the  flame 
row  aa  high  aa  the  douda  (Cahnet,  b.  t.). 

To  "say  in  one*8  heart**  is  a  Hebiew  expre8BŁon  for 
tkuikrny  (Pm.  x,  6 ;  xiv,  1).    See  Souu 

&.  Of  spedal  religious  importance  are  the  foUowing 
practical  usea  of  the  woid : 

łiardmsM  of  heart  is  **  that  state  in  which  a  stnner  is 
inclined  to  and  actoally  goes  on  in  rebellion  against 
God.  This  State  eyidences  itself  by  light  views  of  the 
eril  of  sin;  partial  acknowledgment  and  confeasion  of 
ic;  frequent  commiasion  of  it;  pride  and  conceit;  in- 
gńtitiide;  unconcem  about  the  Word  and  ordinanoes 
of  God;  inattention  to  divine  proridences;  stiiiing  con- 
rictions  of  consdence ;  sbunning  reproof;  presumption, 
and  generał  ignorance  of  di^'ine  things." 

iCecws^  iht  heart  is  *<a  duty  enjoined  in  the  sacred 
Scriptnrea.  It  conabts,  says  Flayel,  in  the  diligent 
and  oonstant  nse  and  impnn-ement  of  all  holy  means 
and  dnties  to  presenre  the  soul  from  fdn,  and  maintain 
communion  with  God ;  and  this,  he  properly  obser^-es, 
Bapposea  a  prerioiis  work  of  sanctification,  which  hath 
Kt  tlM  heait  right  by  giving  it  a  new  bent  and  incli- 
oatton.  1.  It  indudes  frequent  obsenration  of  the  frame 
Df  the  heart  (Psa.  lxxvii,  6).  2.  Deep  humiliation  for 
heart  erils  and  disorders  (2  diron.  xxxii,  26).  8.  Ear- 
neat  supplication  for  heart  purifying  and  rectifying 
giace  (Faa.  xix,  12).  4.  A  oonstant  holy  Jealousy  over 
oor  hearta  (Prov.  xxrii,  14).  5.  It  indudes  the  realiz- 
ing  of  God'a  presenoe  with  ns,  and  setting  him  before 
us  (Fte.  xvi,  8 ;  Gen.  xvii,  1).  This  is,  1.  The  hardest 
iFwk;  heart  work  is  hard  work  indeed.  2.  Constant 
irork  (£xod.  xvii,  12).  8.  The  most  important  work 
(PpoT.  xxiii,  28).  Tkis  is  a  dutff  which  ihould  he  at- 
łe»ihd  toifwe  anuider  it  in  cotmecHon  with,  1.  The  honor 
of  God  (Isa.  lxvi,  3).  2.  The  sincerity  of  our  profession 
(2  Kings  X,  81 ;  Ezek.  xxxii,  81,  82).  8.  The  beauty 
of  oor  converBation  (Prov.  xii,  26 ;  Psa.  xlv,  1).  4.  The 
cjmfort  of  oor  sools  (2  Gor.  xiii,  5).  5.  The  iniprove- 
mssal  of  our  gnooa  (Paa.  lxiii,  5, 6).  6.  The  stability  of 
oor  aoula  in  the  hour  of  temptation  (1  Gor.  xvi,  13). 
The  seoBomt  ń  which  we  thould  morę  parłicularly  heep 
our  kearts  are,  1.  The  time  of  our  prosperity  (Deut.  vi, 
10,  12).  2.  Under  afflictions  (Heb.  vii,  5,  6).  8.  The 
time  of  Sion*s  troubles  (Psa.  xlvi,  1,  4).  4.  In  the  time 
of  great  and  threatening  danger  (Isa.  xxvi,  20,  21).  6. 
Under  great  wanta  (PhiL  iv,  6,  7).  6.  In  the  time  of 
daty  (Lev.  x,  8).  7.  Under  injuries  received  (Rom.  xii, 
17,  etc),  d.  In  the  critical  hour  of  temptation  (Matt. 
xxvi,  41).  9.  Under  dark  and  doubting  seasona  (Heb. 
xii,  8;  Isa.  1, 10).  10.  In  time  of  opposition  and  sufTer- 
ing  (1  Pet.  iv,  12, 13).  11.  The  time  of  sickness  and 
death  (Jer.  xlix,  11).  The  meaat  to  be  madę  tue  ąfto 
heep  OUT  hearU  are,  1.  Watdifulness  (Mark  xiit,  37).  2. 
£xamination  (Prov.  iv,  26).  8.  Praycr  (Lukę  xviii,  1). 
4.  Reading  God*s  Word  (John  v,  89).  5.  Dependence 
on  divine  giace  (Psa.  lxxxvi,  11).  See  Flavel,  On 
Keepittg  tke  Heart;  Jamieson,  Sermone  on  the  Ueartr 
—Buck,  ThtoL  Dictionary,  s.  v. 

Heaith  i»  the  repre8entative  in  the  Eng.  Yersion  of 
sereral  Heb.  worda.  HC,  ach  (Sept  i«Txapo,  Vulg.  aru- 
2ci),  a  large  jiof,  like  a  brazier  (Geseniua,  Thes,  p.  69),  a 
portable  fumace  in  which  fire  was  kept  in  the  king^s 
Winter  apartment  (Jer.  xxxvi,  22,  28).  At  the  present 
dar  the  Orientals  sometimes  make  uae  of  such  8toves  in- 
stead  of  fireplaoea  for  warming  rooms;  they  are  called 
in  Pecaian  and  Turkish  tatmur,  They  have  the  form  of 
a  large  pitcher,  and  are  placed  in  a  cavity  sunk  in  the 
midiUe  of  the  apartment  When  the  fire  has  done 
boming,  a  fnune  like  a  table  is  placed  over  the  pot,  and 
the  wbole  is  then  oovered  with  a  carpet ;  and  those  who 
wiah  to  warm  themselrea  sit  opon  the  floor,  and  thrust 
tbetr  feet  and  lega,  and  even  the  lower  part  of  their 
-  the  caipet.    "li^S,  hijfór',  a  fire-pan  or 


smali  hann  for  holding  fire  (Zech.  xii,  6 ;  elsewhere  fot 
roasting  in,  1  Sam.  ii,  14;  or  generally  for  washing, 
«laver,"  Exod.  xxx,  18,  etc),  "łci^,  mokćd%  a  bum- 
ing  (as  rendered  in  Isa.  xxiii,  14),  hence  a  fagot  aa 
fuel  ("hearth,"  Psa.  cii,  4);  and  from  the  same  root 
l!|p^,  yakud'  (literally  Undkd),  a  btuming  mass  upon  a 
hearth  (Isa.  xxx,  14).  The  Heb.  word  T\MS,  uggoth'; 
Sept  iyrpu^iai,  refers  to  cakes  baked  in  the  aahea 
(Gen.  xviii,  6).  These  cakea  senre  in  the  East  at  the 
preaent  day  for  ordinary  food,  especially  upon  joumeys 
and  in  hastc  By  the  hearth  we  are  to  understand, 
according  to  the  present  usage  in  the  East,  that  a  fire  is 
madę  in  the  middle  of  the  room,  and,  when  the  bread  \b 
ready  for  baking,  a  comer  of  the  hearth  is  swept,  the 
bread  is  laid  upon  it,  and  coveTed  with  ashes  and  em- 
bers;  in  a  quarter  of  an  hour  they  tum  it.  Sometimes 
they  use  oonvex  plates  of  iron  (Arabie  tujen,  whence  the 
Gr.  Tnyavov)i  which  are  most  common  in  Persia  and 
among  the  nomadic  tribes,  as  being  the  easiest  way  of 
baking  and  done  with  the  Icast  expense,  for  the  bread 
is  extremely  thin  and  soon  prepared.  See  Bread. 
This  iron  plate  is  either  laid  on,  or  supported  on  lega 
above  the  ve88el  sunk  in  the  ground,  which  forms  the 
oven.  See  Oven.  (Burckhardt,  Notee  on  Bed,  i,  58; 
P.  delia  Yalle,  Yiaggi,  i,  436;  Harmer,  Obt.  i,  477,  and 
notc;  Rauwolff,  TraveU,  ap.  Ray,  ii,  163;  Shaw,  7Vap-  • 
eU,  p.  281 ;  Nlcbuhr,  Deser,  de  VA  rabie,  p.  45 ;  Schleua- 
ner,  Lex.  Vet,  Test.  s.  v.  Tfiyavov  j  (jeaenius,  s.  v.  flliJ, 
p.  997).    See  Fire. 

He- Asa,  ^I^Hi  chamór'  (Gen.  xii,  16;  elsewhere 
simply  ''ass"),  the  genend  designation  of  the  donkey 
(Exod.  xiii,  18,  etc)  for  carrying  burdens  (Exod.  xlii, 
26)  and  ploughing  (Isa.  xxx,  24),  being  regarded  as  a 
patient  ((iien.  xlix,  14)  and  contented  animal  for  riding 
in  time  of  peace  (2  Sam.  xix,  27 ;  Zech.  ix,  9) ;  diflferent 
from  the  proud  (Eccles.  x,  9)  and  warlike  horse  (Isa.  xx, 
16).  As  a  beast  of  burden,  it  was  eaten  only  in  timea 
of  famme  (2  Kings  vi,  25).    See  A8S*8  Head. 

The  piohibition  of  the  use  of  horaes  to  Israel  caused 
the  ass  to  be  hdd  in  higher  estimation  than  it  holds  in 
our  times.  It  was,  at  least  down  to  the  days  of  Scdo- 
mon,  the  principal  beast  of  burden.  But  we  must  not 
attribute  this  dection  wholly  to  the  absence  or  scarcity 
of  the  horse,  for  in  Western  Asia  the  ass  is  still  largely 
used  for  the  saddle.  Though  inferior  in  dignity  to  the 
horse.  he  is  still,  in  his  native  regions,  a  vcry  superior 
animal  to  thepoor,weather-beaten,8tunted,ha]f-star\'ed 
beast  of  our  oommons.  Ghardin  and  others  deacribe  the 
Anbian  ass  as  a  really  elegant  creature.  The  coat  ia 
smooth  and  dean,  the  carriage  is  erect  and  proud;  the 
limba  are  dean,  well-formed,  and  muscular,  and  are  well 
thrown  out  in  walking  or  galloping.  Asses  of  this  Arab 
breed  are  used  exclu8ively  for  the  saddle,  and  are  im- 
ported  into  Syria  and  Persia,  where  they  are  highly 
valued,  espedally  by  the  mollahs  or  lawyers,  the  sheika 
or  rdi^ous  teachers,  and  elderly  persons  of  the  opulent 
claases.  They  are  fed  and  dressed  with  the  same  care 
as  horaes,  the  head-gear  is  highly  omamented,  and  the 
saddle  is  covered  with  a  fine  carpet  They  are  active, 
spirited,  and  yet  aufficiently  docile.  Other  breeds  are 
eąually  uśeful  in  the  morę  humble  labors  of  ploughing 
and  canying  burdens.  White  aaaes,  distinguished  not 
only  by  their  color,  but  by  their  stature  and  symmetry, 
are  frequently  aeen  in  Western  Asia,  and  are  always 
morę  highly  esteemed  than  those  of  morę  ordinary  huc 
The  editor  of  the  Pictorial  Bibie  says  that  thesc  "are 
usually  in  every  respect  the  finest  of  their  species,  and 
their  owners  certainly  take  morę  pride  in  them  than  in 
any  other  of  their  asses.  They  sell  at  a  much  higher 
prioe ;  and  those  hackney  ass-men  who  make  a  liveli- 
hood  by  hiring  out  their  asses  to  persons  who  want  a 
ńde,  always  expect  better  pay  for  the  white  ass  than 
for  any  of  the  others.*'  After  describing  their  morę 
highly  omamented  trappinge,  he  obserN^es, "  But,  above 
all,  their  white  hidea  are  fantasticaUy  streaked  and  spot- 


HEAT 


118 


HEATH 


Modern  EgyptianB  monnted  on  Asses. 

.  ted  with  the  red  stains  of  the  henna  plant,  a  barbaroiis 
kind  of  ornament  which  the  Western  Asiatics  are  fond 
of  applying  to  thcir  own  beards,  and  to  the  manes  and 
tails  of  their  whLte  horses."     See  Horse. 

The  constitution  of  the  ass  is  formed-for  a  dry,rugged 
region,  a  rocky  wUdemess.  Ita  hoofs  are  long,  hoUow 
beneath,  with  very  Bharp  edges,  a  peculiarity  which 
makes  it  sure-footed  in  ascending  and  descending  steep 
mountain  pameis  where  the  fiat  hoof  of  the  horse  would 
be  inaecure.  It  prefers  aromatic,  dry,  prickly  herbs  to 
the  most  succułent  and  tender  grass ;  is  fond  of  rolling 
in  the  dry  dust;  suffers  but  little  from  thirst  or  heat; 
drinka  seldom  and  little ;  and  seems  to  have  no  sensible 
perspiration,  its  skin  being  hard,  tough,  and  insensitire. 
Ali  these  characters  suit  the  arid,  rocky  wildemesses  of 
Peisia  and  Western  Asia,  the  native  country  of  this  val- 
nable  animaL— Fairbaim.    See  Ass. 

Heat  (usually  Dh,  chómj  Mfin,  ch(xmmah'y  or  H^n, 
chemcJi')j  besides  its  ordinary  roeaning,  has  sereral  pe- 
culiar  uses  in  Scripture.  In  Isa.  xlix,  10,  and  Rev.  vii, 
16,  there  is  a  reference  to  the  buming  wind  of  the  des- 
ert,  the  simoom  or  samiel^  described  by  trayellers  as  ex- 
ceeduigly  pestilential  and  fataL  It  is  highly  probable 
that  this  was  the  instrument  with  which  God  destroyed 
the  army  of  Sennacherib  (2  Kings  xix,  7,  35).  Its  ef- 
fects  are  evidently  alluded  to  in  Psa.  ciii,  15, 16,  and  in 
Jer.  iv,  11,  Thevenot  mentions  such  a  wind,  which  in 
1658  suflbcated  20,000  men  in  one  night,  and  another 
which  in  1655  suffocated  4000  persona.  It  sometimes 
bums  up  the  com  when  near  its  maturity,  and  hence 
the  image  of  "  com  blasted  before  it  be  grown  up,"  used 
in  2  Kings  xix,  26.  Its  effect  is  not  oniy  to  render  the 
air  extremcly  hot  and  scbrching,  but  to  till  it  with  poi> 
sonous  and  suflbcating  vapors.  The  most  violent  storms 
that  Judsea  was  subject  to  came  from  the  deserts  of 
Arabia.  ^  Out  of  the  soufh  cometh  the  whirlwind,"  says 
Job  (xxxvii,  9) ;  "And  there  came  a  great  wind  from 
the  tcilderwss''  (Job  i,  19).  Zech.  ix,  14:  "And  Jeho- 
vah  shall  appear  over  them,  and  his  arrow  shall  go  forth 
as  the  lightiiing ;  and  the  Lord  Jehovah  shall  sound  the 
trumpet,  and  shall  march  in  the  whirlwinds  ofłhe  soufh" 
The  91st  Psalm,  which  speaks  of  divine  protection,  de- 
scribes  the  plague  as  arrows,  and  in  those  winds  there 
are  ob8erved  flashes  of  fire.  In  Numb.  xiii,  8,  the  place 
in  which  the  plague  was  inflicted  upon  the  Israelitcs  is 
for  that  reason  called  Taberah,  i  e.  a  buming.  A  plague 
is  called  ^Zl*^,  deber',  as  a  desert  is  called  "121*7^,  nud- 
bar%  because  those  winds  came  from  the  desert,  and  are 
real  plagues.  This  hot  wmdj  when  used  as  a  symbol, 
signiiies  the  fire  of  persecution,  or  else  some  prodigious 
wan  which  destroy  men.    For  wind  signifies  war  ;  and 


scorching  heat  signińes  persecution  and  destructioru  So 
in  Matt.  xiii,  6, 21,  and  Lukę  viii,  6-18,  heat  is  tribula- 
tion,  temptation,  or  persecution ;  and  in  1  Pet.  iv,  12, 
buming  tends  to  temptation.  A  gentle  heat  of  the  sun, 
according  to  the  Oriental  interpreters,  signifies  the  tavor 
and  bounty  of  the  prinoe ;  but  great  heat  denotes  pun- 
ishment.  Hence  the  buming  of  the  heavens  is  a  por- 
tent  explained  in  Livy  (iii,  5)  of  slaughter.  Thus  in 
Psa.  cxxi,  6 :  **  The  sun  shall  not  smite  thee  by  day,  nor 
the  moon  by  night,"  is  in  the  ncxt  place  explaincd  thus : 
"  Jehovah  shall  presen'e  theo  from  all  evil ;  he  shall  pr&- 
ser\'e  thy  soul." — Wemyss.    See  Fire. 

Heath  OC*^?,  arar\  Jer.  xvii,  6 ;  Sept.  dypioftvpl' 
ie^,Vulg.myncK/  or  "^Ci"!?,  aro^r'.  Jer.  xlviii,  6;  SepU 
óvoc  dyptoc,  perh.by  reading  ^"i"^?,  a  wild  ass;  Yulg. 
rnyrica)  has  been  variously  translated,  as  myrica^  tama- 
risk;  tamariny  which  is  an  Indian  trec,  the  tamarind; 
retanuiy  that  is,  the  broom;  and  also,  as  in  the  Ifrench 
and  English  vcrsion8,  bruierey  heath,  which  is,  perhapa, 
the  most  incorrect  of  all,  though  Ilasseląuist  mentiona 
finding  heath  near  Jericho,  in  Syria.  Gesenius,  how- 
cver,  renders  it  ruw»  in  the  latter  of  the  above  paa- 
sages  (as  in  Isa.  x\'ii,  2),  and  needy  in  the  former  (as  in 
Psa.  cii,  18).  As  far  as  the  context  is  concemed,  some 
of  the  plants  namcd,  as  the  retam  and  iamarigl',  would 
answer  very  well  [see  Tamarisk  ] ;  but  the  Arabie 
name,  arar,  is  applied  to  a  totally  dilTercnt  plant,  a  spe- 
cies  of  juniper,  as  has  been  clearly  sliown  by  Cclsiua 
{Ilierobot,  ii,  195),  who  states  that  Arias  Montanua  is 
the  only  one  who  has  so  translated  the  Hebrew  in  the 
first  of  the  passages  in  ąuestion  (Jer.  xvii,  6) :  "  For  he 
shall  be  like  the  heath  in  the  desert,  and  shall  not  see 
when  good  cometh,  but  shall  inhabit  the  parched  placea 
in  the  wildemess,  in  a  salt  land,  and  not  inhabited." 
Both  the  Heb.  words  are  from  the  root  1^?,  "  to  be 
nakedy^  in  allusion  to  the  hare  naturę  of  the  rocks  on 
which  the  Juniper  often  grows  (comp.  Psa.  cii,  17,  rŁtFI 
"i5-łr n, "  the  prayer  of  the  destitute,"  or  ill-clad).  Śev- 
eral  spccics  of  juniper  are  no  doubt  found  in  Syria  and 
Palcstine.  See  Cedar  ;  Juniper.  Dr.  Robinson  met 
with  some  in  proceeding  from  Hebron  to  wady  3Iufia, 
near  the  romantic  pass  of  Nemela :  "  On  the  rocks  above 
we  found  the  junipcr-tree,  Arabie  ar^ar  ;  its  berrics  have 
the  appearance  and  taste  of  the  comroon  juniper,  except 
that  there  is  morę  of  the  aroma  of  the  pine.  These 
trees  wcre  ten  or  fiflteen  fcct  in  height,  and  hung  upon 
the  rocks  even  to  the  summits  of  the  cliffs  and  needles" 
{BibL  Researchesy  ii,  506).  In  proceeding  S.E.  he  states : 
"  Large  trees  of  the  juniper  become  quite  common  in 
the  wadys  and  on  the  rocks."  It  is  mentioncd  in  the 
same  situations  by  other  travellerB,  and  is  no  doubt  com- 
mon enough,  particularly  in  wild,  uncultivatcd,  and  of- 
ten inaccesaible  situations,  and  is  thus  suitable  to  Jer. 
xlviii,  6 :  "  Flee,  8ave  your  lives,  and  be  like  the  heafh 
in  the  wildemess."— Kitto.  This  appears  to  be  the  Ju- 
niperus  Sabina,  or  8avin,  with  smali  scale-like  leave8, 
which  are  pressed  close  to  the  stem,  and  which  is  de- 
scribed as  being  a  gloomy-looking  biish  inhabiting  the 
most  sterile  soil  (sec  English  Cyclop,  N.  Jlisł,  iii,  31 1) ;  a 
character  which  is  obviou8ly  well  suited  to  the  naked  or 
destitute  tree  spoken  of  by  the  prophet.  RosemnUller^s 
explanation  of  the  Hebrew  word,  which  is  also  adopted 
by  Maurer,  "qui  destitutus  versatur"  (JSchoL  ad  Jer.  x\-ii, 
6),  is  very  unsatisfactory.  Not  to  mention  the  iamenesg 
of  the  comparison,  it  is  evidently  contradicted  by  the  an- 
tithesis  in  ver.  8 :  "  Cursed  is  he  that  trusteth  in  man 
.  .  .  he  shall  be  like  the  juniper  that  grows  on  the  bare 
rocks  of  the  desert :  Blessed  is  the  man  that  truateth  in 
the  Lord  .  .  .  he  shall  be  as  a  tree  pknted  by  the  wa- 
ters."  The  contrast  between  the  shrub  of  the  arid  des- 
ert and  the  tree  growing  by  the  waters  is  very  striking; 
but  KosenmUller*s  intcrpretation  appears  to  us  to  spoil 
the  whole.  £ven  morę  unsatisfactory  is  Michaelia 
{Supp.  LeT,  Heb,  p.  1971),  who  thinks  "  Guinea-lMma" 
(Numida  meleagris)  are  intended !  Gesenius  (T^&et.  p. 
107S-4)  understands  these  two  Heb.  terms  to  denote 


HEATH 


119 


HEATHEN 


''ptrietiiiB,  sdificU  erem"  (ruina);  bat  it  is  moie  in 
aoooidaiice  with  the  acriptonl  passsges  to  suppose  that 
tonę  tne  is  inteiKled,  which  explanaŁion,  moreover,  has 
the  sinctioa  of  the  Sept.  and  Yulgate,  and  of  the  mod- 
em me  of  a  kindred  Arabie  word. — Smith.  Modem 
mrelleiB  do  not  mention  the  species ;  but  thoee  which 
hare  been  named  aa  growing  in  Palestine  are  the  PhcB- 
nidan  juniper,  the  oominon  sarin,  and  the  brown-ber- 
lied  juniper.  The  fint  of  these  is  a  tree  of  about  Łwen- 
tr  feet  high,  growing  with  its  branchea  in  a  pynunidal 
fonn.  fiMenmUller  statea  that  **FoT8kal  found  it  fre- 
ąuently  in  the  sandy  heatha  about  Suez.  The  carayana 
me  it  for  fueL"  The  specieit  beat  known  in  Ameńca  are 
the  common  red  cedar  (Jun,  Yirgimana)  and  the  Ber- 
muda  cedar,  from  which  the  wood  of  lead-pendis  ia  man- 
o/actured.  They  all  have  long,  nairow,  pcickly  leayea, 
and  bear  a  soft,  pulpy  ben>',  from  which  a  carminatiTe 
(dl  is  estiacted.  The  wood  is  light,  highly  odoiDuą  and 
ren-  duimble.    See  Jusipes. 

Heath,  Asa,  a  Methodiat  Epiaoipal  minister,  was 
ban  at  HiUadale,  N.  Y.,  July  81, 1776.   His  parents  were 
Cbq:r^ationalist&    At  thirteen  he  was  conrerted,  un- 
der  the  ministiy  of  the  Rer.  F.  Gairettson  (q.  y.).     He 
began  to  preach  in  1797  on  Cambridge  Circuit,  N.  York, 
imder  the  directaon  of  the  Rey.  Sylyester  Hutchinson. 
h  1798  he  was  stationed  at  PomAet,  Conn.,  with  Dan- 
iel Oatrander.    In  1799  he  was  eent  to  the  proyince  of 
Kaine.  and  stationed  on  the  Kennebec  Circuit,  embra- 
einic  all  the  territoiy  from  Wateryille  to  the  Canada  linę, 
maJdng  morę  tham  Łwo  hundred  milea  trayel  to  reach 
all  the  appointment&    In  1800  Portland  was  his  field  of 
hbor:  laoi,  Readfield;  1802,  Faknouth ;  1804>ó,  Scar- 
boio*:  in  1806  he  located  in  conseąuence  of  bodily  in- 
frmitiea.    In  1818  he  re-entered  the  trayeling  connec- 
lioo,  and  was  appointed  presiding  elder  of  Portland  dis- 
tiict.  which  poaition  he  occupied  for  three  years;  1821, 
tScarboio*;  1822,  Kennebec;  in  1823  he  again  located, 
aodremoyed  to  Monmouth,  Me. ;  in  1827  he  re-entered 
the  tayeUuig  ministry  again,  and  held  an  eflectiye  re- 
lation  to  the  Conference  fifteen  yeara.    In  1842  he  be- 
came  aaperanntiate,  and  this  relation  continued  until 
Stfi.  1, 1860,  when  he  died  in  peace.    As  a  preacher, 
he  was  aoiftid  in  doctrine,  elear  in  expoeition,  simple  yet 
focdble  in  iUnstnitioii,  and  impreaaiye  in  deUyery.^ — Z»- 
«i  Hfraldj  Oct.  6, 1860. 

Heathcote,  Ralph,  D.D.,  an  English  diyine,  was 
bom  in  1721 ,  and  dicd  May  28, 1795.  He  was  educated 
at  Jesus  College,  Cambridge;  ^k  orders,  and  in  1748 
waa  madę  yicar  of  Barkby,  near  Leicester;  assistant 
preacher  of  Lincc^*8  Inn  in  17Ó8;  aucceeded  his  father 
as  yicar  ofSileby  in  1765;  became  rector  of  Sawtry-all- 
Sainta,  Huntingdonshire,  in  1766 ;  a  prebend  in  the  col- 
feieiate  chorch  in  South well  in  1768;  and  in  1788  vicar- 
goiend  of  Southwell  Chorch.  Besides  works  on  other 
mbjecta,  he  wrote  Cunory  Ammadcersiont  upon  the  Mid- 
dlóomcm  ConŁraversy  m  generał  (1752)  i—Remarks  ttpon 
Dr.CkapmatCM  Charge  (1752)  i^Letier  to  Rw,  T,  Fother- 
W  (1768):— iStocA  of  Lord  Bolmgbroke's  Philotophy 
(17Jł5, 8yo) : — The  Um  ofReamm  auerted  in  Matten  of 
BfUgkm  (1756, 8vo;  and  a  defence  of  the  same,  in  1766, 
dTO)  '^DUamrte  on  the  BeUig  of  God,  agamst  A  theitig, 
» łwo  SenmomM.  (bang  the  only  onea  of  his  twenty-four 
Borłe  sermons  which  he  published,  1763,  4to).  Dr. 
Heathcote  wiote  aeyeral  articles  for  the  firat  edition  of 
the  Gateral  Bioffraphioal  DicHonarg,  and  assisted  Nich- 
ds  in  editio^  a  new  edition  of  the  same,  published  in 
17*4. 12  yolsL  8ya— Allibone,  Dkt,  of  Avthor»,  i,  814; 
iioB^  Stw  GeMu  Biog.  Diet,  viii,  241 ;  Gendeman^a  Maga- 
Jie,  bty,  btyi,  lx3U.     ( J.  W.  M.) 

Heathen.  The  Hebrew  word  *^iA,  gog  (plur.  D^hA, 
9%MiO»  tof^ether  with  ita  Greek  eąuiyaJent  iBuoc 
(Wyij),  haa  been  aomewhat  arbitnurily  rendered  **  na- 
tioos''  «  gentiles,**  and  **  heathen"  in  the  A.  V.  It  will 
be  intercstin^  to  tracę  the  nuuiner  in  which  a  term,  pri- 
■arihr  and  eaeentially  generał  in  iu  signification,  ac- 
:  restiicted  aeose  which  was  afterwards 


attached  to  it.  Its  deyelopment  is  paiiUel  with  that 
of  the  Hebrew  people,  and  its  meaning  at  any  period 
may  be  taken  as  significant  of  their  relatiye  poeition 
with  regard  to  the  surrounding  nations. 

1.  While  as  yet  the  Jewish  nation  had  no  political 
esistence,  gCiyim  denoted  generally  the  nations  of  the 
world,  especially  induding  the  immediate  descendants 
of  Abraham  (Gen.  xviii,  18 ;  compare  GaL  iii,  16).  The 
latter,  as  they  grew  in  numbers  and  importance,  were 
dłBtinguished  in  a  most  marked  manner  from  the  na- 
tions by  whom  they  were  surrounded,  and  were  pro- 
yided  with  a  codę  of  laws  and  a  religious  ritoal  which 
madę  the  distinction  atill  morę  peculiar.  They  were 
esaentially  a  aeparate  people  (Ley.  xx,  23) ;  aeparate  in 
habits,  morals,  and  religion,  and  bound  to  mamtain  their 
aeparate  character  by  denunciations  of  the  most  terrible 
judgments  (Lev.  xxvi,  14-88 ;  Deut,  xxviii).  On  their 
march  through  the  deaert  they  encounteied  the  moet 
obstinate  resistance  from  Amalek,  **  chief  of  the  g6gim^ 
(Numb.  xxiv,  20),  in  whoee  aight  the  deliverance  from 
Egypt  was  achieyed  (Lev.  xxvi,  45).  During  the  con- 
queflt  of  Canaan,  and  the  subseąuent  wars  of  extenniiiA- 
tion  which  the  Israelites  for  seyeral  generations  carried 
on  againat  their  enemiea,  the  aeyen  nations  of  the  Ca- 
naanitea,  Amoritea,  Hittites,  Hiyitea,  Jebuaitea,  Penz- 
zites,  and  Girgaahitea  (£xod.  xxxiy,  24),  together  with 
the  remnanta  of  them  who  were  leil  to  proye  larael 
(Joah.  xxiii,  13 ;  Judg.  iii,  1 ;  Paa,  lxxyiii,  55),  and  teach 
them  war  (Judg.  iii,  2),  received  the  especial  appella- 
tion  ofgógim,  With  theae  the  laraelitea  were  forbidden 
to  asaociate  (Joeh.  xxiii,  7) ;  intermarriages  were  pro- 
hibited  (Josh.  xxiii,  12 ;  1  Kinga  xi,  2) ;  and,  as  a  wam- 
ing  againat  diaobedience,  the  fate  of  the  nationa  of  Ca- 
naan was  conaUntly  kept  before  their  eyea  (Ley.  xviii, 
24,25;  Deut.  xviii,  12).  They  are  ever  asaociated  ¥rith 
the  worahip  of  falae  goda  and  the  foul  practices  of  idol- 
atera  (Lev,  xviii,  xx),  and  thcae  conatituted  their  chief 
diatinctiona,  aa  gogim<,  from  the  worahippera  of  the  one 
God,  the  people  of  Jehovah  (Numb.  xy,  41 ;  Deut,  xxviii, 
10).  Thia  distinction  was  maintained  in  ita  fuli  force 
during  the  early  timea  of  the  monarchy  (2  Sam.  vii,  28; 
1  Kinga  xi,  4-8;  xiv,  24;  Paa.  c\-i,  35).  It  waa  from 
among  the  gógim,  the  degraded  tribea  who  aubmitted  to 
their  arma,  that  the  laraelitea  were  permitted  to  pur- 
chaae  their  bond-aer^^anta  (Ley.  xxy,  44,  45),  and  this 
apecial  enactment  aeema  to  haye  had  the  effect  of  giv- 
ing  to  a  national  tradition  the  force  and  aancdon  of  a 
law  (comp.  Gen.  xxi,  15).  In  later  timea  this  regulation 
waa  atrictiy  adhere<l  to.  To  the  worda  of  Ecdes.  ii,  7, . 
^  I  bought  men-fler\'ant8  and  maid-aenranta,"  the  Tar- 
gum  adda,  "ot  the  childrcn  of  Ham,  and  the  reat  of  the 
foreign  nationa."  Not  only  were  the  laraelites  forbid- 
den to  intermarry  with  theae  góyinif  but  the  latter  were 
virtuaUy  excluded  from  the  poaaibility  of  becoming  nat- 
uralized.  An  Ammonite  or  Moabite  was  shut  out  from 
the  congregation  of  Jehoyah  eyen  to  the  tenth  generar 
tion  (Deut.  xxiii, 3),  while  an  Edomite  or  Egyptian  was 
admitted  in  the  third  (yerses  7,  8).  The  necessity  of 
maintaining  a  aeparation  ao  broadly  marked  ia  eyer  morę 
and  morę  manifeat  aa  we  follow  the  laraelitea  through 
their  hiaton',  and  obaen-e  their  conatantly  recurring 
tendency  to  idolatry.  Offence  and  puniahment  followcd 
each  other  with  ii  the  rcgularity  of  cause  and  effect 
(Judg.  ii,  12;  iii,  6-8,  etc). 

2.  But^  even  in  early  Jew^bh  timea,  the  tenn  gógkn 
receiyed  by  anticipation  a  aignificance  of  wider  ranga 
than  the  national  experience  (Lev.  xx^'i,  83, 88;  Deut. 
xxx,  1),  and,  aa  the  latter  waa  gradually  deyeloped  dur- 
ing the  prosperoua  timea  of  the  monarchy,  the  gogim 
were  the  surrounding  nationa  generally,  with  whom  the 
laraelitea  were  brought  into  contact  by  the  extenaion 
of  their  coromerce,  and  whoae  idolatroua  ptacticea  they 
readily  adopted  (Ezek.  xxiii,  30;  Amoa  y,  26).  Later 
stiU,  it  ia  applied  to  the  Babyloniana  who  took  Jeruaa- 
lem  (Neh.  y,  8;  Pm.  lxxix,  1,  6, 10),  to  the  destroyera 
of  Moab  (laa.  xyi,  8),  and  to  the  aeveral  luitiona  among 
whom  the  Jews  were  acattered  during  the  Captivity 


HEATHEN 


120 


HEATHEN 


(Psa.  evi,  47 ;  Jer.  xlyi,  28 ;  Lem.  i,  3,  etc),  the  practioe 
of  idolatr}'  still  being  their  characteristic  distinction 
(Isa.  xxxvi,  18 ;  Jer.  x,  2,  8 ;  xiv,  22).  This  signitica- 
tion  it  retained  after  the  return  from  Babylon,  thougb 
it  was  uaed  in  a  morę  liraited  eense  as  denoting  the 
mixed  race  of  coloiiists  who  settled  in  Palestine  during 
the  Captivity  (Neh.  v,  17),  and  who  are  described  as 
feanng  Jehovah  while  ser\'ing  their  own  gods  (2  Kings 
xWi,  29-33 ;  Ezra  \t,  21). 

Traclng  the  synonymous  term  t9vfi  through  the 
apocryphal  writings,  we  find  that  it  is  applied  to  the 
nations  around  Palestine  (1  Maoc.  i,  11),  induding  the 
S\Tians  and  Philistines  of  the  army  of  Gorgias  (1  Maoc. 
iii,  41 ,  iv,  7, 11, 14),  as  weli  as  the  people  of  Ptolemais, 
TjTe,  and  Sidon  (1  Maoc  %',  9, 10, 15).  Thcy  were  im- 
age-worshippers  (1  Mace.  iii,  48 ;  Wisd.  xv,  15),  whose 
customs  and  fashions  the  Jews  seem  still  to  have  had 
an  unconqucrable  propensity  to  imitate,  but  on  whom 
they  were  bound  by  national  tradition  to  take  vcn- 
geance  (1  Mace.  ii,  68 ;  1  Esdr.  viii,  85),  FoUowing  the 
customs  of  the  ffóyim  at  this  period  denoterl  the  neglect 
or  concealment  of  circumcision  (1  Mace.  i,  15),  disregard 
of  sacritices,  profanation  of  the  Sabbath,  eating  of  swinc's 
flesh  and  mcat  offered  to  idols  (2  Mace.  vi,  6-9,  18 ;  xv, 
1, 2),  and  adoption  of  the  Greek  national  games  (2  Mace 
iv,  12, 14).  In  all  points  Judaism  and  heathenism  are 
strongly  contrasted.  The  "  barbarous  multitude"  in  2 
Mace.  ii,  21  are  opposed  to  those  who  played  the  man 
for  Judaism,  and  the  distinction  now  becomes  an  eccle- 
siastical  one  (comp.  Matt.  xviii,  17).  In  2  Esdr.  iii,  38, 
34,  the  "gentes**  are  defined  as  those  "qui  habitant  in 
SBBCulo'*  (comp.  Matt.  vi,  32 ;  Lukę  xii,  30). 

As  the  Greek  influence  became  morę  cxten8ively  felt 
in  Asia  Minor,  and  the  Greek  language  was  generally 
used,  Hellenism  and  heathenism  became  convertible 
terms,  and  a  Greek  was  synonymous  with  a  foreigner 
of  any  nation.  This  is  singularly  e\ndent  in  the  Syriac 
of  2  Mace  V,  9, 10, 13 ;  comp.  John  vii,  35 ;  1  Cor.  x,  82 ; 
2  Mace  xi,  2. 

In  the  N.  T.,  again,  we  iind  variou8  shades  of  mcan- 
ing  attached  to  lOin/j.  In  its  narrowest  sense  it  is  op- 
posed to  "  those  of  the  circumcision"  (Acts  x,  45 ;  comp. 
Esth.  xiv,  15,  where  aWórpioc^airŁpirfAtiToc),  and  is 
contrasted  with  Israel,  the  people  of  Jehovah  (Lukę  ii, 
82),  thus  lepresenting  the  Hebrew  D^iSi  at  one  stage  of 
its  history.  But,  Uke  ffdyiiny  it  also  denotes  the  people 
of  the  earth  generally  (Acts  xxii,  26;  Gal.  iii,  14).  In 
Matt  vi,  7,  lOrtKÓc  is  applied  to  an  idolater. 

But,  in  addition  to  its  significance  as  an  ethnograph- 
ical  term,  gó^im  had  a  morał  sense  which  must  not  be 
overlooked.  In  Psa.  ix,  5,  15, 17  (comp.  Ezek.  ^di,  21) 
the  word  stands  in  parallelism  with  3?a^,  rdshd',  the 
wicked,  as  distinguished  by  his  morał  obliąuity  (see 
Hupfeld  on  Psa.  i,  1) ;  and  in  yerse  17  the  people  thus 
designated  are  described  as  "forgetters  of  God,"  that 
know  not  Jehovah  (Jer.  x,  25).  Again,  in  Psa.  lix,  5, 
it  is  to  some  extent  commensiurate  in  meaning  ^vith 
13?  *^t??''*>  *'iniquitous  transgressors;"  and  in  these  pas- 
sages,  as  well  as  in  Psa.  x,  15,  it  has  a  deeper  signifi- 
cance than  that  of  a  merely  national  distinction,  al- 
though  the  ktter  idea  is  never  entirely  kwt  sight  of. 

In  later  Jewish  literaturę  a  tcchnical  definition  of  the 
word  is  laid  down  which  is  certainly  not  of  uniyersal 
application.  Elias  Levita  (quoted  by  Eisenmenger, 
Kntdecktea  Judentkum^  i,  665)  explains  the  sing.  gdy  as 
denoting  one  who  is  not  of  Israelitish  birth,  This  can 
only  have  reference  to  its  after  eignification ;  in  the  O. 
T.  the  singular  is  never  used  of  an  individual,  but  is  a 
collective  term,  applied  equally  to  the  Israelitcs  (Josh. 
iii,  17)  as  to  the  nations  of  Canaan  (Lev.  xx,  23),  and 
denotes  simply  a  body  politic  Another  distinction, 
cqually  unsupported,  b  madę  betwecn  a^ift,  ffóyinij  and 
C^tiK,  ummirriy  the  former  being  defined  as  the  nations 
who  had  served  Israel,  while  the  latter  were  those  who 
had  not  (Jalkul  ChadasA,  foL  20,  notę  20 ;  Eisenmenger, 
i,  667),    Abarbanel,  on  Jod  iii,  2,  applies  the  former  to 


both  C^ristians  and  Turks,  or  Ishmaelites,  while  in  Se* 
pher  Juchasin  (foL  148,  coL  2)  the  Christians  alone  are 
distinguished  by  this  appellation.  Eisenmenger  gives 
some  curtous  cxamples  of  the  disabilities  under  which  a 
ffóg  labored.  One  who  kept  Sabbaths  was  Judged  de- 
ser\'ing  of  death  (ii,  206),  and  the  study  of  the  law  was 
prohibited  to  him  under  the  same  penalty ,  but  on  the 
latter  point  the  doctors  are  at  issue  (ii,  2019). — Smith,  s. 
V.    Sec  Gentile. 

3.  In  modem  use,  the  word  heathen  (probably  a  cor- 
niptłon  of  iOyiKÓc,  etkmcus,  of  which  it  is  a  tnutslation ; 
or  derived  from  heathj  that  is,  people  who  live  in  the 
wildemess,  as  pagan  from  pagus,  a  rillage)  is  applied 
to  aU  imtions  that  are  strangcrs  to  re^'^ealed  religion, 
that  is  to  say,  to  all  exccpt  Christiałus  Jews,  and  Mo- 
hammcdaus.  It  is  ucarly  s\iion}nnous  with  Genłilea  (q. 
V.)  and  Pagans  (q.  v.).  At  the  time  of  the  Crusades 
the  Moslems  were  also  called  heathen ;  but  as  they  rc- 
ceive  the  doctrine  of  the  one  God  from  the  O.  T.,  thcy 
are  not  proijerly  »  called.  On  the  relatłon  of  the  hca- 
then  to  Judaism,  see  above,  and  also  the  articHe  Gbk- 
TiLES.  See  also  the  same  aniele  (vol.  iii,  p.  789)  for 
their  relation  to  Christiauity  at  its  origin.  We  add  the 
foUowing  statcments : 

"The  old  Oricntal  forma  of  heathenism,  the  leligion 
of  the  Chinese  (Confuciua,  about  550  B.C.),  the  Brah- 
minism,  and  the  later  Buddhism  of  the  Hindoos  (per- 
haps  1000  B.C.),  the  rdigion  of  the  Persians  (Zoroaster, 
700  B.C.),  and  the  Egj-ptians  (*  the  rdigion  of  enig- 
ma'), have  only  a  remote  and  indirect  concem  with  the 
introduction  of  Christianity.  But  they  form  to  some 
extent  the  historical  basis  of  the  Westeni  rdigions ;  and 
the  Persian  dualism,  especially,  was  not  without  influ- 
ence on  the  earlter  sccts  (the  Gnostic  and  the  Manichs- 
an)  of  the  Christian  Church.  The  flower  of  paganism 
appears  in  the  two  great  nations  of  classic  antiqiut\% 
Greece  and  Bome.  With  the  hmguage,  morality,  liter- 
aturę, and  religion  of  these  nations  the  apoatl^  came 
directly  into  contact,  and  through  the  whole  first  age 
the  Church  moves  on  the  basis  of  these  nationalitiea. 
These,  together  with  the  Jews,  were  the  choscn  nations 
of  the  ancient  world,  and  shared  the  earth  among  thcm. 
The  Jeyrs  were  choscn  for  things  etemal,  to  keep  the 
sanctuary  of  the  true  rdigion.  The  Grecka  prepared 
the  dements  of  natural  cultiuti,  of  sdence  and  art,  for 
the  use  of  the  Church.  The  Romans  devdoped  the  idea 
of  law,  and  organized  the  civilizcd  world  in  a  universal 
empire,  ready  to  ser\e  the  spiritual  uniyeraality  of  the 
GospeL  Both  Greeks  Ibid  Romans  were  unconacious 
ser\'ant8  of  Jesus  Christ,  *the  unknown  God.*  Theeo 
three  nations,  by  naturę  at  bitter  enmity  among  them- 
selve8,  jouied  hands  in  the  superscription  on  the  croM, 
where  the  holy  name  and  the  royal  title  of  the  Redeem- 
er  stood  written,  by  the  command  of  the  heathen  Pilatc, 
'in  Hebrew,  and  Greek,  and  Latin' "  (Schaff, i/»to7v  of 
tle  Christian  Church,  i,  44). 

4.  As  to  the  religion  of  heathenism,  it  is  «a  wild 
growth  on  the  soil  of  fallen  human  naturę,  a  darkening 
of  the  origiiial  consciousness  of  God,  a  dciłication  of  the 
rational  and  irrational  creature,  and  a  corresponding 
comiption  of  the  morał  sense,  giving  the  sanction  of  re- 
ligion to  natural  and  unnatural  viceB.  £ven  the  relig- 
ion of  Greece,  which,  as  an  artistic  product  of  the  imag- 
ination,  has  been  justly  styled  the  rdigion  of  beauty,  ia 
deformed  by  this  morał  distortion.  It  utterly  lacks  the 
true  conception  of  sin,  and  consequently  the  true  eon- 
ception  of  hoUncss.  It  regards  sui  not  as  a  perrerae- 
ness  of  will  and  an  offence  against  the  gods,  but  as  a 
folly  of  the  understanding,  and  an  offence  against  men. 
oftcn  even  proceeding  from  the  gods  them8dve8;  for 
*infatuation  is  a  daughter  of  Jove.'  Then  these  goda 
them8dves  are  merę  men,  in  whom  Homer  and  the  pop- 
ular faith  saw  and  worshipped  the  weaknesses  and  vice8 
of  the  Grecian  character,  as  well  aa  iu  Wrtues,  in  im- 
menscly  magnified  forms.  They  have  bodies  and  senseą 
like  moruls,  only  in  colossal  próportions.  They  eat  and 
drink,  though  only  nectar  and  ambroaia.    They  are  lim- 


HEATHEN 


121 


HEATHEN 


ited,  Uke  men,  to  time  and  space.  Thoagh  BomeŁimes 
iKMiored  with  the  ftŁUibuŁes  of  omnipotence  and  omni- 
acienoe,  yet  th«y  are  subject  to  an  iron  fate,  fali  iinder 
dcluaion,  and  repioach  each  other  with  foUy.  Their 
hearenly  liappiness  in  diaturbed  by  all  the  troubles  of 
caitbly  life.  Jupiter  threatenę  his  fellows  with  blows 
asid  death,  and  makes  Olympus  tremble  when  be  shakes 
liis  dark  locks  iii  anger.  The  geutle  Yenus  bleeds  from 
a  spear-wouiid  on  her  finger.  Ma»  is  felled  with  a 
stone  by  Diomede&  Neptune  and  Apollo  have  to  senre 
for  hire,  and  are  cheated.  The  gods  are  invo]ved  by 
tbeir  maiiiagea  in  perpetual  jealousies  and  ącuurrels. 
Though  called  holy  and  Just,  they  are  fuli  of  euyy  and 
wiatl^  hatzed  and  lust,  and  proyoke  each  other  to  lying 
and  crudty,  perjury  and  adultery.  Notwithstanding 
ihis  casential  apostasy  from  tnith  and  holiness,  heathen- 
łsm  was  religion,  a  groping  after  *  the  ouknown  God.^ 
By  its  soperstition  it  betrayed  the  need  of  faith.  Its 
puiytheism  rcsted  on  a  dim  monotbeistic  background ; 
it  Bubjected  all  the  gods  to  Jupiter,  and  Jupiter  himself 
to  a  mysterioua  fate.  It  had  at  bottom  the  feeling  of 
dependenoe  on  higher  powers,  and  reverenoe  for  divine 
things.  It  preserred  the  memory  of  a  golden  age  and 
of  a  falL  It  had  the  voice  of  conscience  and  a  sense, 
obscore  though  it  was,  of  guilt.  It  felt  the  need  of  rec- 
onciliatiou  with  deity,  and  sought  that  reoonciliation  by 
pnyer,  penimce,  and  sacrifice.  Many  of  its  religipus 
traditions  and  usages  were  faint  echoes  of  the  primal  re- 
ligion ;  and  its  my  thological  dreams  of  the  mingling  of 
the  gods  with  men,  of  demigods,  of  Prometheus  deliv- 
ered  by  Hercules  from  his  helpleas  sufferings,  were  un- 
coDflcious  prophecies  and  fleshy  anticipations  of  Chris- 
tian tnitha.  This  alone  erplains  the  great  readiness 
with  which  heathens  embraced  the  Gospd,  to  the  shame 
of  the  Jews.  These  elements  of  truth,  moiality,  and 
piety  in  heathenism  may  be  ascribed  to  Łhree  sources. 
In  the  first  place,  man,  even  in  his  fallen  state,  retains 
•orne  traces  of  the  divine  image,  a  consciousness  of  God, 
bowever  weak,  conscience,  and  a  deep  longing  for  union 
with  the  Godhcad,  for  truth  and  for  ńghtcousncss.  In 
this  Tiew  we  may,  with  Tertullian,  cali  the  beautiful  and 
tme  sentences  of  the  classics,  of  a  Socrates,  a  Plato,  an 
Ariatotle,  of  Pindar,  Sophocles,  Plutarch,  Cicero,  Yirgil, 
Sencca,  *  the  testimonies  of  a  soul  oonstitutionally  Chris- 
tian," of  a  naturę  predesŁined  to  Christianily.  Second- 
ly,  Bome  account  must  be  madę  of  traditions  and  recol- 
lections,  howercr  faint,  coming  down  from  the  generał 
pranal  rerelations  to  Adam  and  Noah.  But  the  third 
and  most  important  source  of  the  heathen  anticipations 
of  trath  is  the  alł-ruling  providence  of  God,  who  bas 
neycT  left  himself  without  a  witness.  Particularly  must 
we  consider  the  influence  of  the  dirine  Logos  before  his 
incamation,  the  tutor  of  mankind,  the  original  light  of 
rea8on,shining  in  the  darkness  and  lighting  every  man, 
the  iower  scattering  in  the  soil  of  heathendom  the  seeds 
of  truth,  beauty,  and  virtue"  (Schaff,  Uisłory  ofthe  Ckria- 
HanChurch,^  12). 

The  question  of  the  »€dvatum  ofthe  heathen  has  becn 
a  subject  of  much  discussion.  '*The  great  body  of 
the  Jews,  from  the  earliest  ages,  denied  salration  to  the 
heathen  on  the  principle  extra  ecdesiam  non  dari  salu- 
tem. But  this  is  entirely  oppoeed  both  to  the  Old  Tes- 
tament and  to  the  spirit  of  Chrislianity.  £ven  Mo- 
hammed  did  not  go  to  this  degree  of  exclusivenesB. 
Nor  did  the  morę  ancient  Grecian  fathers  deny  salvation 
to  the  heathen,  although  they  philosophized  about  it 
after  their  manner.  £.  g.  Justin  Martyr  and  Clement 
of  Alexandria  heM  that  the  Aóyoc  exeited  an  agency 
apoa  the  heathen  by  means  of  reason,  and  that  the 
heathen  phik>6opher8  were  called,  justified,  and  saved 
by  philoeophy.  But  aflerwards,  especially  after  the  8d 
ceotuTT,  when  the  false  Jewish  notious  respecting  the 
Chorch  were  introduced  into  the  West,  and  the  maxim 
was  adopted,  Extra  ecdesiam  non  dari  salutem  (which 
wai  the  case  after  the  age  of  Augustine),  they  then  be- 
gan  to  deny  the  salration  ofthe  heathen,  though  there 
were  always  some  who  judgcd  morę  favorably.    Thus 


Zwingle,  Curio,  and  others  believed  that  God  woold 
pardon  the  heathen  on  aocount  of  Christ,  although  in 
this  life  they  had  no  knowledge  of  his  merits.  See  the 
historical  account  in  Beykert*8  Diss.  J)e  salute  genUum 
(Strasburg,  1777),  and  a  short  statoment  of  the  opinions 
of  others  in  Morus,  p,  128, 129,  where  he  justly  rocom- 
mends  to  our  imitation  the  exemplary  modesty  of  the 
apostles  when  speaking  on  this  point.  The  whole  sub- 
ject was  inrestigated  anew  on  occasion  of  the  violent 
attack  which  Uofstede,  a  preacher  in  Holland,  madę 
upon  the  BeHsaire  of  MarmontoL  This  gave  rise  to 
£berhanl's  Apologie  de  SocriUes.  Compare  also  ToUner, 
Beweis  dass  Gott  die  Menschen  auch  durch  setne  Offen- 
barung  in  der  Natur zur  SeUffkeitJuhre^  (Knapp,  Chris- 
iian  Tkeologjfy  §  121).  "The  truth  seeras  to  be  this, 
that  nonę  of  the  heathens  will  be  condemned  for  not 
belieying  the  Gospel,  but  they  are  liable  to  condemna* 
tion  for  the  breach  of  God's  natural  law ;  nerertheless, 
if  there  be  any  of  them  in  whom  there  is  a  prerailing 
love  to  the  I>ivine  Being,  there  seems  reason  to  beliere 
that,  for  the  sake  of  Christ,  though  to  them  unknown, 
they  may  be  accepted  by  God;  and  so  much  the  rather, 
as  the  ancient  Jews,  and  even  the  apostles,  during  the 
time  of  our  Saviour's  abode  on  earth,  seem  to  have  had 
but  little  notion  of  those  doctriues  which  those  who 
deny  the  salvability  of  the  heathen  are  most  apt  to  im- 
agine  to  be  fundamentaL  Comp.  Kom.  ii,  10, 26 ;  Acta 
X,  34,  86;  Matt  viii,  11,  12;  1  John  ii,  2"  (Doddridge, 
Lectures  on  Lioiniiy,  lect.  172),  The  ąuestion  is  very 
ably  treated  in  an  article  on  "  The  tnie  Theoiy  of  Mia- 
sions"  in  the  Bibłiotheca  Sacra,  July,  1858.  The  writer 
sutes  that  the  extxeme  erangelical  theory,  which  a»- 
sumes  the  certain  damnation  of  all  who  have  not  leamed 
the  name  and  faith  of  Christ,  is  "the  accepted  theory 
of  the  Romish  Church,  and  of  a  part  of  the  Protestant 
Church,  perhape  of  the  majority  of  the  latter."  He 
adds  in  a  noto  the  foUowing:  "  The  Presbyterian  Con- 
fession  of  Faith  (chap.  x,  §  4)  uses  language  of  remark- 
able  boldness  on  this  point,  saying,  *  Others  not  elect- 
ed,  although  they  may  be  called  by  the  ministiy  of 
the  Word,  and  may  have  some  common  operations  of 
the  Spirit,  yet  they  never  truły  como  to  Christ,  and 
therefore  cannot  be  saved;  much  less  can  men  not 
professing  the  Christian  religion  be  sayed  in  any  other 
way  whaterer,  be  they  never  so  diUffent  to  f ramę  their 
lices  aocordmg  to  the  light  of  naturę  and  the  law  of  that 
religion  they  do  profess;  and  to  asscrt  and  maintain 
that  they  may  is  very  pemidous  and  to  be  detested.* 
This  is  sufliciently  positiye,  especially  as  it  contradicto 
both  our  Sayiour'and  the  apostle  Paul.  It  represents 
heathen  who  liye  according  to  their  light  as  ^much  lesi 
able  to  be  sayed  than  men  who  hear  the  Gospel  and  re- 
ject  it,  thus  directly  contiadictuig  our  Saviour,  who  de- 
clared  that  those  who  rejected  his  words  would  receive 
a  heayier  condemnation  than  even  the  deprayed,  unre- 
pentant  inhabitants  of  Sodom  and  Gomorrah,  or  Tyre 
and  Sidon  (Matt,  xi,  20-24).  The  *  Confeasion  of  Faith' 
dedares  the  salyation  of  conscientious  heathen  to  be 
<  much  less'  possible  than  that  of  unbelieying  hearers  of 
the  Gospel;  while  Christ  asserts  that  even  the  most 
ilagrant  sinners  of  the  heathen  shall  find  it  *more  toler- 
able'  in  the  day  of  judgment  than  such  unbclieyers. 
£qually  at  yariance  with  the  *  Confession  of  Faith'  is 
the  declaiation  of  Paul  in  Rom.  ii,  14,  26,  27,  in  which 
he  shows  how  those '  haying  not  the  law  may  be  a  law 
unto  themselyes,'  and  how  their  ^  uncircumcision  shall 
be  counted  for  circumcision. "  .  .  .  "  The  facta  of  human 
history  and  the  declarations  of  the  Bibie  alike  declare 
that  mercy  is  a  prominent  attribute  of  the  divine  char- 
actor,  and  that  this  world  is  for  some  reason,  known  or 
unknown,  imder  its  care.  We  cannot,  therefore,  resist 
the  conyiction — it  is  an  afSrmation  of  the  morał  senae 
of  all  men— that,  guilty  though  the  human  race  may 
be,  and  deaerving  of  destruction,  yet  eyeiy  man  liyes 
under  a  dispensation  of  mercy,  and  has  an  opportunity 
for  salration.  To  assert  gravely,  then,  that  the  hea- 
then who  have  neyer  heard  of  Christ  are  shut  out  from 


HEATHEN 


122 


HEAYEKT 


all  posBtble  hope  of  pardon,  and  are  not  in  a  aalrable  po- 
Bition  in  their  present  circumstances,  is  to  oifend  the 
morał  sense  of  the  thoughtful  men  as  well  as  that  of  the 
common  multitude.  It  is  worse  than  denying  that  an 
atonement  has  been  madę  for  all  mankind,  and  restrict- 
ing  it  to  the  elect  alone;  for  that  doctiine,  however  thco- 
retically  untrue,  is  sared  ftom  much  of  its  practical  evil 
by  OUT  inability  to  point  out  the  elect  in  adrance,  so 
that  our  hopes  are  not  cut  off  for  any  particular  roan. 
But  this  theory  points  to  actual  masses  of  men,  to  the 
entire  population  of  whole  countries,  and  dooms  them 
to  a  necessary  perdition  with  no  present  hope  of  pardon; 
and  it  extend8  this  judgment  backwards  to  generadons 
in  the  past  who  are  represented  as  havlng  had  no  share 
in  that  merey  which  we  have  such  reason  to  beliere  to 
be  uniYersal  in  its  offers.  Such  a  theory  practically 
denies  the  dirine  grace  by  suspending  its  esercise,  so 
&r  as  the  heathen  (the  majority  of  the  huroan  race)  are 
ooncemed,  upon  the  action  of  those  already  enlightened. 
It  declares  that  there  is  no  possible  mercy  for  the  hea- 
then unless  Christians  choose  to  carry  the  Gospel  to 
them.  Does  it  seem  rational,  or  in  harmony  with  the 
uniyersality  and  freedom  of  God's  grace,  that  the  only 
poesibility  of  salration  for  the  mass  of  mankind  should 
be  suspended,  not  on  anything  within  their  control,  but 
on  the  conduct  of  men  on  the  opposite  side  of  the  globe? 
By  such  representations  the  minds  of  men  are  shocked, 
and  a  reaction  tekcs  place,  which  is  unfavonble  not  only 
to  the  cause  of  missions,  but  to  e^'angelical  religion  as 
well.  They  are  led  to  think  of  eA^angelical  reUgion  as 
a  seyere,  gloomy,  remorseless  system,  which  represents 
God  as  without  mercy,  or  which  confines  that  mercy 
within  an  exceedingly  narrow  compass.  By  describing 
the  salration  of  pagans  as  absolutely  impossible,  an  in- 
fluence is  cxerted  in  faror  of  uniyersalism  and  infidcli- 
ty."  The  writer  further  asserts  that  no  passage  in  the 
Bibie  asserts  this  theoiy,  nor  does  any  doctrine  of  the 
Bibie  imply  it.  John  Wcsley^s  yiews  on  this  subject 
are  giyen  in  his  sermon  on  Lirwff  without  God^  from 
which  we  extract  the  folloyring :  "  I  have  no  authority 
ftom  the  Word  of  God  to  *  judge  thoee  that  are  without,' 
nor  do  I  conceive  that  any  man  has  a  right  to  scntence 
an  the  heathen  and  Mohammedan  world  to  damnation" 
(  Worla,  N.  Y.  cd.  ii,  485).  Again,  the  Minuies  of  Aug. 
8, 1770,  dedare  that  <<  he  that  feareth  God  and  worketh 
righteousness,  acoording  to  the  light  he  has,  is  accepted 
of  GodL"  For  this  Wedey  was  attacked  by  Shirley  and 
others,  and  defended  by  Fletcher,  in  his  First  Check  to 
A  ntinomianism  (New  York  edit),  i,  41 .  See,  besides  the 
Works  abore  cited,  Watson,  Theolog,  TnsfiiuteSf  ii,  446 ; 
Whately,  Futurę  Słatey  p.  207 ;  Constant,  De  la  Religion 
(BruxeUe8, 1824) ;  Rougemont,  Le  Peuple  PrimUif^wt- 
is,  1855-57, 8  vols.  8vo) ;  Pressens^,  //wf.  des  Trois  Pre- 
miers  Sieclfs  de  Teglise,  voL  i ;  translated  under  the  title 
The  Rełiffions  hefore  Christ  (Edinb.  1862,  8yo) ;  Sepp, 
Das  Heidenthum  (Regensb.  1853, 8  yols.) ;  Maurico,  Relig- 
ions  ofthe  World  (Boston,  1854, 18mo);  Trench,  I/ulsean 
Lectures  for  1846  (PhiUdel.  1850, 12mo);  Wuttke,  Gesch. 
des  ffeidmthums,  etc.  (Bresl.  1858, 8vo) ;  Hardwick,  Christ 
and  other  Masters  (1855,  2  yols.  8yo) ;  Schaff,  Apostoł, 
Churchj  p.  139  są. ;  Scholten,  Gesch.  d.  Religion  w.  Philoso- 
phie  (Ęlberf.  1868, 8yo) ;  Pfleidcrer,  Die  Religion,  ihr  We- 
sen  nndihre  Geschichte  (Lcipsic,  1869, 2  vols.  8vo) ;  Dol- 
linger,  The  Geniile  and  the  Jero  in  the  Courts  ofthe  Tem- 
pie of  Christa  trans,  by  Damell  (Lond.  1862, 2  yols.  8yo) ; 
N,  British  Retiew,  Deccmber,  1867,  art  i ;  Baring-Gould, 
Origin  and  Developmeat  ofReligious  Belief  (Lond.  1869- 
70, 2  yols.  8vo). 

Heathenlam.    See  Pagantsm. 

Heaven.  There  is,  says  Daubuz,  a  threefold  world, 
and  therefore  a  threefold  heayen — the  inrisible,  the  rw- 
tble,  and  the  political  among  men,  which  last  may  be 
either  ciril  or  ecclesiasticaL  We  shall  consider  these  in 
the  inyerse  order. 

A.  Terrestrially  and  Figuratirelg  regarded, — Whereyer 
the  scenę  of  a  prophetic  vision  is  laid,  heaten  signifies 
symbolically  the  riding  power  or  goyemment;  that  is. 


tl.  e  ▼.  hole  aasembly  of  the  luling  powers,  which,  iu  r&* 
spect  to  the  subfects  on  eartk,  are  a  political  heayeo,  be- 
ing  oyer  and  ruling  the  subjects,  as  the  natural  hearen 
stands  oyer  and  rules  the  earth.  Thua,  acconling  to  the 
subject,  is  the  term  to  be  limited ;  and  therefore  Artem- 
idorus,  writing  in  the  times  of  the  Roman  eroperora, 
makes  Italy  to  be  the  heayen:  ''As  heayen,"  says  he, 
*'  is  the  abode  of  gods,  so  is  Italy  of  kings."  The  Chi- 
nese  cali  their  monarch  Tiencu,  the  son  of  heayen,  meaii- 
ing  thereby  the  most  powerful  monarch.  And  thua,  in 
Matt,  xxiy,  30,  heaneh  is  synonymous  to  potctrs  andglo- 
ry;  and  when  Jesus  says,  **The  powen  of  the  hcaven 
shall  be  shaken,"  it  is  easy  to  conceiye  that  he  meant 
that  the  kingdoms  of  the  world  should  be  oyerthrown 
to  submit  to  his  kingdom.  Any  goyemment  is  a  world ; 
and  therefore,  in  Isa.  li,  15, 16,  heayen  and  earth  signify 
a  political  umverse,  a  kingdom  or  polity.  In  Isa.  lxy,  17, 
a  new  heayen  and  a  new  earth  signify  a  new  goyemment, 
new  kingdom,  new  i)eople.— Wemyss,  s.  v.  See  Heav- 
EN  AND  EAirrn. 

R  PhysicaUy  treated, — ^I.  Defniiions  and  Distinetions, 
— The  ancient  Hebrews,  for  want  of  a  single  term  like 
the  KÓopoc  and  the  nutndus  of  the  Greeks  and  the  Lat- 
ins,  used  the  phrase  hearen  and  earth  (as  in  Gen.  i,  1 ; 
Jer.  xxiii,  24 ;  and  Acts  x\ii,  24,  where  "//.  and  KP  = 
*'  the  world  and  all  things  therein")  to  indicate  the  wm- 
rerse,  or  (as  Barrow,  Sermons  on  the  Creed,  Works  [Ox- 
ford ed.],  iy,  556,  expresses  it) ''  those  two  regions,  supe- 
rior and  inferior,  into  which  the  whole  system  of  things 
is  diyided,  togethor  with  all  the  beings  that  do  reside 
in  them,  or  do  belong  unto  them,  or  are  comprehended 
by  them"  (compare  Pearson,  On  the  Creed,  who,  on  art.  i 
[**  Maker  of  U.  and  £."],  adduces  the  Rabbiuical  names 
of  a  triple  diyision  of  the  uniyerse,  making  the  sea,  C^, 
distinct  from  the  2*U^,  i}  olKoypimj.  Compare  also  the 
Nicene  Creed,  wherc  another  diyision  occurs  of  the  uni- 
yerse into  **  things  risibłe  and  inrisible"),  Deducting 
from  this  aggregate  the  idea  expre88ed  by  "earth"  [see 
Earth  ;  Gecmjraphy],  we  get  a  residue  of  signilication 
which  exactly  embraces  "  heayen."  Barrow  (L  c)  well 
defines  it  as  *'  all  the  superior  region  encompassiug  the 
globe  of  the  earth,  and  from  it  on  all  sides  ext«nded  to 
a  distance  inconceiyaUy  yast  and  spacious,  with  all  its 
parts,  and  fumiture,  and  iiihabitants — not  only  such 
things  in  it  as  are  yisible  and  materiał,  but  also  those 
which  are  immaterial  and  inyisible  (Col.  i,  16)." 

1.  Wetstein  (in  a  leamed  notę  on  2  Cor.  xii,  2)  and 
Eisenmcnger  (Entdecktes  Judenihum^  i,  4C0)  state  the 
Rabbinical  opinion  as  asserting  seven  heavens.  For  the 
substance  of  Wetstein's  notę,  see  Stanley,  Corinthiun^ 
1.  c.  This  number  arises  confessedly  from  the  mystic 
yalue  ofthe  numcral  seven;  "omnis  septenarius  dilectus 
est  in  S8!culum — in  superis."  According  to  Rabbi  Abia, 
there  were  Bix  antechambers,  as  it  were,  or  steps  to  the 
seyenth  heayen,  which  was  the  "  TafitXov  in  quo  Rex 
habitat" — the  yery  presence-chamber  ofthe  diyine  King 
himself.  Compare  Origen,  Contra  Cekum^  vi,  289,  and 
Clemens  Alex.  Stromala,  iv,  636 ;  v,  692.  In  t he  laat  of 
these  passagcs  the  prophet  Zeplianiah  is  mentioned,  af- 
ter  some  apocrj^hal  tradition,  to  haye  been  caught  up 
into  "  the^A  heaven,  the  dwelling-place  of  the  angels, 
in  a  glory  sevenfold  greater  than  the  bńghtness  of  the 
sun."  In  the  Rabbinical  point  of  view,  the  superb  thron« 
of  king  Solomon,  with  the  six  steps  leading  up  to  it,  waa 
a  symbol  of  the  highest  heaven  with  the  throne  of  the 
Etemal,  above  the  8ix  inferior  heayens  (1  Kings  x,  18- 
20).  These  gradations  of  the  celestial  regions  are  prób- 
ably  meant  in  Amos  ix,  6,  where,  however,  the  entire 
creation  is  beautifully  described  by  "  the  stories  [or  stępa  J 
of  the  heayen,"  for  the  empyreal  heayen ;  "  the  troop  [or 
globular  aggregate,  the  terra  frma ;  see  A.  Lapide,  ad 
loc.]  of  the  earth,"  and  "  the  waters  of  the  sea"  [indud- 
ing  the  atmosphere,  whence  the  waters  are  "  poured  out 
upon  the  face  of  the  earth"].  As  for  the  threefold  di- 
\ńsion  of  the  celestial  regions  mentioned  in  the  text, 
Meyer  thuiks  it  to  be  a  fiction  of  the  leamed  Grotiua, 
on  the  ground  of  the  Rabbinical  secen  heayens.    Bot 


HEAYEN 


123 


HEAYEN 


tliii  oensore  is  premature;  for  (1)  it  is  rery  doubtful 
whether  this  kMomadal  diyision  is  as  old  as  Paiil'8 
time;  (2,)  it  is  certain  that  the  Rabbinical  docton  aro 
not  młanimoas  about  the  number  seren.  Rabbi  Judah 
{Ckagigaj  foL  xii,  2,  and  Ahołh  NcUhan^  87)  says  there 
are  **  Łwo  hcayensy**  after  Deut.  x,  14.  This  agrees  with 
Grodns^s  8tatemeiit,if  we  oombine  his  nuhiferum  (Jl^^p^) 
and  oMtHfirum  (D*^Qd)  into  one  region  oiphyncal  heat- 
en$  (as  indeed  Moses  does  himself  in  Gen.  i,  14, 15, 17, 
20),  and  resenre  his  cmgeU/erum  for  the  D'^Q1!7n  ">13Vj 
**Łhe  hearen  of  hearens,"  the  supemal  region  of  spirit- 
nal  beings,  Milton*s  **  £nip>Tean"  (P.  L,  vii,  mb  fin,).  See 
bishop  Peai8on*8  notę,  On  the  Crted  (ed.  ChevaUier),  p^ 
91.  The  leamed  notę  of  De  Wette  on  2  Gor.  xii,  2  is 
also  worth  consulting.  (8)  The  Taigum  on  2  Chroń, 
^ń,  18  (as  ąnoted  by  Dr.  Gili,  Camment,  2  Corinth.  L  c.), 
ex|ire8BlF  mcntions  the  triple  distinction  of  tuprtmej  mid- 
dltj  and  lower  heavena.  Indeed,  there  is  an  accnmnla- 
tion  of  the  threefuld  classification.  Thus,  in  Tseror 
HammoTy  foL  i,  4,  and  iii,  2, 3,  and  Uxxii,  2,  three  worlds 
are  mentioned.  The  doctors  of  the  Cabbala  also  hokl 
the  opinion  of  tkrte  worlds,  Zohar,  Numb.  foL  lxvi,  8. 
And  of  the  highest  world  there  is  further  a  łripariite 
diriaion,  of  tm^elt,  Q'^3Mban  tsbS?;  of  aouU,  nilŚBp; 
and  of  spiritg,  WTlA^n  tś^i^.  See  BuKtorfs  Lex,  Rab- 
Ufc,  ecŁ  1620,  who  refers  to  D.  Kimchi  on  Psa.  xix,  9. 
Fsnl,  besides  the  well-known  2  Cor.  xii,  2,  refers  again, 
only  less  pointedly,  to  a  pluraliły  of  heavens,  as  in  £ph. 
ir,  IOl    See  Olshausen  (cd.  Clark)  on  the  former  paasage. 

2.  AccoTdingly,  Barrow  (p.  558,  with  whom  compare 
Giotius  and  Drusius  on  2  Cor.  xii,  2)  ascribes  to  the  Jews 
the  noclon  that  there  are  łhree  hećafena:  Ccelum  nubi/e" 
mm,  or  the  firmament;  Cabtm  attr\fenunj  the  stany 
heavens ;  Ccelum  cmgeliferum,  or  "  the  heaven  of  heav- 
ens,"  where  the  angels  reside,  "  the  third  heaven'*  of 
PauL  This  same  notion  prevai]s  in  the  fathers.  Thus 
SLGregory  of  Nyssa  (^exaem.  i,  42)  describcs  the  flrsŁ 
of  these  heavens  as  the  UmUed  spaoe  ofthe  dmser  air 
(roy  opop  rov  jret^jfffupłmpou  Akpoc),  tńthin  tehich 
rtatffe  the  chuds,  the  wmdt,  and  the  birda;  the  second  is 
the  region  w  which  toander  thepUmete  and  the  etan  {iv 
f  Si  ir\avrirai  rwy  airripuy  dŁafropŁvovrai)f  hence  apt- 
ly  called  by  Hesychius  Karriffrpt(rfuvov  TÓirov,  locum 
ieUiferum ;  while  the  third  is  the  very  tummit  ofthe  vi9- 
Me  ertaiion  (to  ovv  OKpórarou  rov  ahdriTod  KÓvpov), 
PamTs  tkird  heatmL,  higher  than  the  aerial  and  etellar 
worldtCOffnizable  [not  by  the  eye,  but]  5y  the  mind  alone 
{iv  wampift  Kai  vottrg  ^vcłi  yiv6pevoc),  which  Dam- 
■eeene  calls  the  heaven  ofheaćengf  the  prime  heaven  be- 
yond  aU  othen  (pupavbc  rov  ovfiavov,  b  irpwroc  oOpa- 
vóc,  Orłhod,  Fid.  lib.  ii,  c  vi,  p.  83) ;  or,  acoording  to  St. 
Basil  {In  Jeeaiam,  vmone  ii,  tom.  i,  813),  the  throne  of 
Gcd  {^póyoc  Ocot)),  and  to  Justin  Martyr  {QutBet.  et 
Retp,  ad  Gneeoe,  ad  ulł,  Qu€uL  p.  236),  the  house  and 
(krom  o/God  {oUoc  Kai  Sfpópoc  rou  Btov), 

n.  Scripłure  Panagee  arrangedaocordmg  to  these  Dia- 
łinćtitme, — This  latter  divińon  of  the  oelestial  regions  is 
Teiy  oonvenieiit  and  qaite  BtblicaL  (I.)  Under  the  first 
head,  eotlum  nubi/erum,  the  foUowing  phrases  naturally 
lUl-(a)  **  Fowl,"  or  «  fowls  of  the  heaven,  of  the  air," 
see  Gen.  ii,  19;  vii,  8,  23;  ix,  2;  Deut.  iv,  17;  xxviii, 
26;  1  Kings  xxi, 24;  Jobxii,7;  xxviii, 21;  xxxv.  U; 
Pki.  viii,  8;  lxxix,  2;  civ,  12;  Jer.  vii,  38  et  passim; 
EMek.  xxix,  5  et  passim;  Dan.  ii,  38;  Hoa.  ii,  18;  iv,  8 ; 
vii,  12;  Zeph.  i,  3;  Mark  iv,  8  {ra  vtTitvd  tov  obpa- 
yov);  Lakę  viii,  5;  ix,  58;  xiii,  19;  Act8x,12;  xi,6— 
in  ali  which  paasages  the  same  original  words  in  the 
Hebrew,  Chaldee,  and  Greek  Scriptuies  (O^^^,  1??^, 
ovpavoi)  are  ¥rith  equal  propriety  rendered  indifferently 
"flw"  and  " Aeawn"— similariy  we  rcad  of  "  the  path  of 
the  eaii^e  tn  the  au^  (PK>v.  xxx,  19) ;  of  **■  the  eagles  of 
htatem"  (Lun.  iv,  19) ;  of  "  the  stork  of  the  hearen^  (Jer. 
viii,  7) ;  and  of  *^  birds  of  heaeerP  iii  generał  (EccL  x,  20 ; 
Jer.  iv,  26).  In  addition  to  these  zoological  terms,  we 
hare  meteorological  £Kt8  induded  under  the  same  orig- 


inal words;  e.  g.  (&)  ^The  dew  ofheaveiC*  (Gen.  xxvii, 
28,  39 ;  Deut  xxxiii,  28 ;  Dan.  iv,  15  et  passim ;  Hag.  i, 
10;  Zech.  viii,  12) :  (c)  "  The  douds  o/heatfen"*  (1  Kings 
xviii,  45;  Psa.  cxlvii,  8;  Dan.  vii,  18;  Matt.  xxiv,  30; 
xxvi,  64;  Mark  xiv,  62) :  {d)  Thefroet  ofhearen  (Job 
xxxviii,  29):  («)  The  windę  o/heaven  (1  Kings  xviii, 
55 ;  Psa-  lxxviii,  26 ;  Dan.  viii,  8 ;  xi,  4 ;  Zech.  ii,  6 ;  vi, 
5  [see  maiginj ;  Matt.  xxiv,  31 ;  Mark  xiii,  27) :  (/) 
The  rain  ofheaeen  (Gen.  viii,  2;  Deut  xi,  11;  xxviii, 
12;  Jer.  xiv,  22;  Acts  xiv,  17  [oupavódiv  wrowc] ;  Jas, 
V,  18;  Rev.  xviii,  6):  {g)  Liyhtning,  with  thunder  (Job 
xxxvii,  8,  4;  Lukę  xvii,  24).  (II.)  Calum  aMrtferum, 
The  vast  spaces  of  which  astronomy  takes  cogiiizanoe 
are  freąuently  referred  to:  e.  g.  {a)  in  the  phrase  ^'■hoet 
ofheaoen,"*  in  Deut.  xvii,  8 ;  Jer.  viii,  2 ;  Matt  xxiv,  29 
[dwdptię  Tiiy  ovpavCiv'\ ;  a  sense  which  is  obviously 
not  to  be  confounded  with  another  signiflcation  of  the 
same  phrase,  as  in  Lukę  ii,  13  [see  Angels  ] :  (6)  Lighte 
o/heaten  (Gen.  i,  14, 15, 16 ;  Ezek.  xxxii,  8) :  (c)  Steare 
of  heaven  (Gen.  xxii,  17;  xxvi,  4;  £xod.  xxxii,  18; 
Deut  i,  10;  x,22;  xxviii,  62;  Judg.v,20;  Neh.ix,28; 
Isa.  xiii,  10;  Nah.  iii,  16;  Heb.  xi,  12).  (III.)  Calum 
cmgeltferum,  It  would  exceed  our  limiu  if  we  were  to 
ooilect  the  de8criptive  phrases  which  revelation  has 
given  us  of  heaven  in  its  sublimest  sense;  we  content 
oui8elves  with  indicating  one  or  two  of  the  most  obvi- 
ous:  (a)  The  heaten  of  hearena  (Deut  x,  14;  1  Kings 
viŁi,  27;  2  Chroń,  ii,  6,  18;  Neh.  ix,  6;  Psa.  cxv,  16; 
cxlviii,  4 :  (6)  The  third  heaveM  (2  Cor.  xii,  2) :  (c)  The 
high  mul  lofiy  [płace-  (Isa.  xlvu,  15) :  {d)  The  highett 
(^latt  xxi,  9;  Mark  xi,  10;  Lukę  ii,  14,  compared  with 
Psa.  clxviii,  1).  This  heavenly  sublimity  was  gracious- 
ly  brought  down  to  Jewish  apprehension  in  the  sacred 
symbol  of  their  Tabemacle  and  Tempie,  which  they  rev- 
erenced  (especially  in  the  adytum  of  "  the  Holy  of  Ho- 
lies'')  as  "  the  pUce  where  God'8  honor  dwelt"  (Psa.  xxvi, 
8),  and  amidst  the  scnlptured  types  of  his  celesŁial  reti- 
nue,  in  the  cherubim  of  the  mercy-eeat  (2  Kings  xix, 
15;  Pda.  lxxx,  1 :  Isa.  xxxvii,  16). 

IIL  Meaning  ofthe  Terma  wed  in  the  OriginaL—h  By 
far  the  most  frequent  dcsignation  of  hear^  in  the  He- 
brew Scriptures  is  ta^^ld*  śhama'gimf  which  the  older 
lexicographer8  f  see  Cocceius,  7>ar.  a.  v.]  regarded  as  the 
dual,  but  which  Geseuius  and  Flłret  have  restored  to  the 
dignity,  which  St  Jerome  gave  it,  of  the  plural  of  an 
obsolete  noun,  *^pd  as  (D7'lA/>^ur.  of  "^ift  and  D^P  from 
"^p).  Acoording  to  these  recent  scholars,  the  idea  ex- 
prńsed  by  the  word  is  hei^łt  elecation  (Gesenius,  Thea, 
p.  1453 ;  FUrst,  Hebr.  Wdrt.  ii,  467).  In  this  respect  of 
its  essential  meaning  it  resembles  the  Greek  ovpavóc 
[from  the  radical  óp,  denoting  heighi]  (Pott,  EtymoL 
Forach,  i,  123,  ed.  1).  Pott's  rendering  of  this  root  óp, 
by  "sich  erAe&»i,'*reminds  us  of  our  own  beauŁiful  word 
heacen,  which  thus  enters  into  brotherhood  of  significa- 
tion  with  the  grand  idea  of  the  Hebrew,  Chaldee,  and 
Greek.  Professor  Bosworth,  in  his  Anglo-Sax.  Diet, 
under  the  verb  hebban,  to  raise  or  elevate,  gives  the  kin- 
dred  words  of  the  whole  Tcutonic  family,  and  deduces 
theiefrom  the  noun  heofon  or  heofen,  in  the  sense  of 
heaeen.  And  although  the  primary  notion  of  the  Latin 
cctlum  (akin  to  KÓi\oc  and  our  hoUow)  is  the  less  siib- 
lime  one  of  a  covered  or  vaulted  space,  yet  the  loftier 
sense  of  elecalion  has  prevailed,  both  in  the  original  (see 
White  and  Riddle,  s.  v.  Ccelum)  and  in  the  derived  lan- 
guages  (comp.  French  cielj  and  the  Engliah  word  001* 

2.  Closely  allied  in  meaning,  though  unconnected  in 
origin  with  fi^pid,  is  the  od-recumng  fiiltt,  marom', 
This  word  is  never  Englished  heaven,  but  "  heighta,'*  or 
"  A^A  płace-  or  "  Ai^A  placea.^  There  can,  however,  be 
no  doubt  of  its  celestial  significatiou  (and  that  in  the 
grandest  degree)  in  such  passages  as  Psa.  lxviii,  18 
[Hebr.  19] ;  xciii,  4;  cii,  19  [or  in  the  Hebr.  Bib.  20, 
where  1^7^  Binąą  is  equal  to  the  D';»ątjp  of  the 
parallel  clause];  similarly,  Job  xxxi,  2;  Isa.  lvii,  15; 
Jer.  xxv,  30.    Dr.  Kaliach  {Geneaiay  Introd.  p.  21)  says. 


HEAYEN 


124 


HEAYEIf 


^  It  was  a  oommon  belief  among  all  ancient  nationa  that 
at  the  summit  of  the  shadow  of  the  eaith,  or  on  the  top 
of  the  highest  moiintain  of  the  earth,  whicli  reaches 
with  i  ta  crest  into  heaven  .  .  .  the  gods  have  their  pal- 
ące or  hall  of  anembly,**  and  he  inatancea  "the  Babylo- 
niań  AWordah,  the  chief  abode  of  Ormuzd,  among  the 
heighta  of  the  Caucaaua;  and  the  Uindoo  Meru;  and 
the  Chineae  Kulkun  (or  Kaen-luu) ;  and  the  Greek  Olym- 
pus (and  Atlas) ;  and  the  Arabian  Caf;  and  the  Paraee 
Tireh.*'  He,  however,  while  atrongly  and  indeed  moet 
properly  censuring  the  Identification  of  Mount  Meru 
wiih  Mount  Moriah  (which  had  hastily  been  conjec- 
tured  from  "  the  accidental  resemblance  of  the  names**), 
deems  it  improbaUe  that  the  Israelites  should  have  en- 
tertainedfUke  other  ancient  nations^the  notion  oilocal 
heiffht  for  the  abode  of  him  whoee  **  glory  the  bearen 
and  the  heaven  of  heayens  cannot  contain ;"  and  this 
he  Eupposes  on  the  ground  that  such  a  notion  "  retit  et' 
tentialiy  on  pofytheistic  ideaa.^  Surely  the  leamed  com- 
mentAtor  is  premature  in  both  these  statements.  (1.) 
No  such  improbability,  in/act,  unhappily,  caii  be  predi- 
cated  of  the  Israelites,  who  in  ancient  times  (notwith- 
atanding  the  divine  prohibitions)  cxhibited  a  constant 
tendency  to  the  ritual  of  their  nisę,  or  **  high  placesJ* 
Gesenius  makes  a  morę  correct  statement  when  he  says 
IHebr.  Lex.  by  Robinson,  p.  138],  "The  Hebrews,  like 
most  other  ancient  nations,  supposed  that  sacred  rites 
performed  on  high  placet  were  pnticularly  acoeptable  to 
the  Deity.  Hence  they  were  accustomed  to  offer  sacri- 
fices  upon  mountains  and  hiUs,  both  to  idols  and  to  God 
himself  (i  Sam.  ix,  12  sq.;  1  Chroń,  xiii,  29  sq.;  1  Kings 
iii,  4;  2  Kings  xii,  2,.8;  Isa.  xlv,  7);  and  also  to  build 
there  chaptU,fane8,  iahemades  (PliiDSrt  "^riS,  1  Kings 
xiii,  32;  2  Kings  xvii,  29),  with  their  priestś  and  other 
ministers  of  the  sacred  rites  (ni^:a}l  ^3il!8, 1  Kings  xii, 
82;  2  Kings  xvii,  82).  So  tenacious  of  this  ancient  cus- 
tom  were  not  only  the  ten  tribes,  but  also  all  the  Jews, 
that,  even  afler  the  building  of  Solomon's  Tempie,  in 
spite  of  the  expre8s  law  of  Deut  xii,  they  continued  to 
erect  such  chapels  on  the  mountains  around  Jeruaalem." 
(2.)  Neither  from  the  character  of  Jehovah,  as  the  God 
of  Isracl,  can  the  improbability  be  maintained,  as  if  it 
were  of  the  essence  otpolytkeism  only  to  localize  Deity 
on  mountain  heights.  "  The  high  and  lofty  One  that 
inhabiteth  eternity,  whoee  name  is  Uoly,"  in  the  proda- 
mation  which  he  is  pleased  to  make  of  his  own  style, 
does  not  limit  his  abode  to  celestial  sublimities;  in  one 
of  the  finest  passages  of  even  Isaiah*8  poetiy,  God  daims 
as  one  of  the  stations  of  his  glory  the  shrine  of  "  a  oon- 
trite  and  humble  spirit"  (Isa.  hói,  15).  His  loftiest  at- 
tributes,  thercfore,  are  not  compromised,  nor  is  the  am- 
plitudę of  his  omnipresence  compressed  by  an  earthly 
residence.  Accordingly,  the  same  Jehovah  who  "  walk- 
eth  on  the  high  placety  ni^oa,  of  the  earth"  (Amos  iv,  18) ; 
who  "  Łreadeth  on  thefastnes$es^  r>1^C,  of  the  sea*"  (Job 
ix,  8) ;  and  "  who  ascendeth  above  the  heighU,  Hf  753,  of 
the  clouds,*"  was  pleased  to  consecrate  Zioń  as  his  dwell- 
ing-pkce  (Psa.  lxxxvii,  2),  and  his  rest  (Psa.  cxxxii,  18, 
14).  Hence  we  find  the  same  word,  Dl'^^,  which  is  of- 
ten  descriptiye  of  the  sublimesŁ  heaven,  used  of  Zioń, 
which  Kzekiel  calls  "the  mountain  of  the  height  ef  Is- 
rael,"bKniS^  sn«  'in  (xvii,  23;  xx,  40;  xxxiv,  14). 
8.  b&^Ą,  galgal',  This  word,  which  litcrally  mean- 
ing  a  tćheel,  admirably  expresses  rotafory  morementy  is 
actually  rendered  "Acaren"  in  the  A.V.  of  Psa.  lxxvii, 
18 :  "  The  voice  of  thy  thunder  was  in  the  heaven,*' 
^f^l^?  [Sept,  kv  Ttf  rpoxfp;  Vulg.  mi  roid^],  Luther*s 
▼ersłon  agrees  with  the  A.  Yers.  in  Himmel;  and  Dathe 
lenders  per  orberuj  which  is  ambiguous,  being  as  expre8- 
8ive,  to  say  the  IcASt,  of  the  globe  of  the  carth  as  of  the 
dzde  of  heaycn.  The  Targum  (in  Walton,  vol.  iii)  on 
the  passage  gives  K^Ilb^Sl  (in  roła)^  which  is  as  inde- 
terminate  aa  the  original,  as  the  Syriac  also  seems  to  be. 
De  Wette  (and  afier  him  Justus  Olshausen,  Die  Pt,  er- 


USrtf  i.  c.)  renden  the  phrase  "in  the  whiihrind.* 
Maurer,  who  disapproyes  of  this  rendering,  eiphuna  the 
phrase  "roUted."  But,  amidat  the  uncertainty  of  the 
yersions,  we  are  disposed  to  think  that  it  was  not  with- 
out  good  reaaon  that  our  tnnsIatorB,  in  departing  ftom 
the  preyious  yersion  (see  Psalter,  ad  łoc,  which  haa, 
"  the  yuice  of  thy  thunder  was  heaid  round  abouf*),  de- 
liberately  rendered  the  passage  in  the.  heacen,  aa  if  the 
^A^  were  the  oorrelative  of  ^^H,  both  being  -poetic 
words,  and  both  together  equaUed  the  hearen  cmd  the 
earth,  In  Jas.  iii,  6,  the  remarkable  phrase,  tqv  rpo- 
XOV  riję  yewwitfc,  tite  coursey  ciratiłf  or  wheei  of  naturę, 
is  akin  to  our  'hAx  (The  Syriac  renders  the  Tpoxóv 
by  the  same  word,  which  occurs  in  the  pealm  aa  the 
equiva]ent  of  bĄft,  Schaafs  Lec.  8yr. ;  and  of  the  aame 
indefinitenesB  of  signification.)  That  the  generał  senae 
"A«avffi**  best  expreaBe8  the  force  of  Psa.  lxxvii,  18,  is 
rendered  probable,  moreoyer,  by  the  description  which 
Josephus  giveB  (A  ni,  ii,  16, 8)  of  the  destruction  of  Pha- 
raoh^s  host  in  the  Red  Sea,  the  subject  of  that  part  of 
the  psalm, "  Showers  of  rain  descendcdyrom  heattn,  At 
oifpavov,  with  dreadful  thunders  and  lightning,  and 
flashes  of  fire;  thunderbolts  were  darted  upon  thcm, 
nor  were  there  any  indications  of  God*s  wrath  upon 
men  wanting  on  that  dark  and  diamal  night." 

4.  As  the  worda  we  have  reviewed  indicate  the  heighi 
and  rołaiion  of  the  heavens,  so  the  two  we  have  yet  to 
examine  exhibic  another  characteristic  of  equal  promi- 
nenoe,  the  hreadih  and  ezpanae  of  the  celestial  icgiona 
These  are  pnę,  thach^ak  (geneially  used  in  the  plural) 
and  ?''p^  They  occur  togeiher  in  Job  xxxvii,  18: 
"  Hast  thou  with  him  ^read  out  (S^^PI^C)  tke  śky  or 
expanse  of  heavcn?**— (D^pHlśb,  where  b  is  the  ńgn 
of  the  objectiye).  We  must  examine  them  separately. 
The  root  pn«3  is  explained  by  Gesenius  to  grind  to 
powder,  and  then  to  expand  by  rubbing  or  beating.  Meier 
(//eir.  Wurzel-^.-b,  p.  446)  compares  it  with  the  Arabie 
shachaka,  to  make  fne,  to  attenuate  (whcuce  the  noun 
thachim,  a  thin  chud).  With  him  agrees  FUrst  {Ilebr,- 
ir.-5.  ii,  438).  The  Heb.  subat  is  therefore  well  adapted 
to  designate  the  skyey  region  of  heaven  with  its  doud- 
dust,  whether  flne  or  dense.  Accordin^y,  the  meaning 
of  the  word  ui  its  variou8  passages  curiously  oarillatfa 
between  eky  and  doud,  When  Moses,  in  Deut.  xxxii], 
26,lauds  Jehoyah*s  "riding  in  his  exoe]lence  on  the  tl^  ;" 
and  when,  in  2  Sam.  xxii,  12,  and  repeated  in  Psa.  xviii, 
1 1  (12),  David  speaks  of  "  the  thick  douds  of  the  skiet  ,•** 
when  Job  (xxxvii,  18)  asks, "  Hast  thou  with  him  spiead 
out  the  slyf"  when  the  Psalmist  (Pta.  lxxvii,  17  [18  J) 
apeaks  of  "  the  skies  sending  out  a  sound,"  and  the  propb- 
et  (Isa.  xlv,  8),  figuratively,  of  their  "pouring  down 
righteousness;*'  when,  finally,  Jeremiah  (li,  9),  by  a  fre- 
quently  occuning  simile  [comp.  Rev.  xviii,  5,  iiroXov- 
^il(rav  abriic  ai  afiapriai  dxpi  tov  o&pavot)],  deacribea 
the  judgment  of  Babyk>n  as  '*  liiled  up  even  to  the  atin,** 
in  eveTy  instance  our  word  D*^pril^  in  the  pbiral  ia 
employed.  The  same  word  in  the  same  form  is  txan»- 
lated  ^^chudiT  in  Job  xxxv,  6;  xxxvi,  28;  xxxvii,  21 ; 
xxxviii,  87;  in  Psa.  xxxvi,  5  (6);  lvii,  10  (U);  lxviii, 
84  (36)  [margin,  "Aearfu*"];  lxxviii,  28;  in  l*iov.  iii, 
20 ;  %*iii,  28.  The  prevalcnt  sense  of  this  word,  we  thua 
see,  is  a  mełeorclogical  one,  and  falls  under  oiur  fint  head 
of  cadum  nubi/erum :  its  connection  with  the  other  two 
heads  is  much  slighter.  It  bears  probably  an  atfromon^ 
ical  serue  in  Pta.  lxxxix,  87  (88),  where  "the  faithful 
witness  in  heaven"  seems  to  be  in  apposition  to  the  ann 
and  the  moon  (Bellarmine,  ad  loc.) ,  ait>hough  some  sup- 
poee  the  expre8Bion  to  mean  the  rambotOf "  the  witnesa" 
of  God'8  covenant  with  Noah ;  Gen.  ix,  13  sq.  (see  J.  Ols- 
hausen, ad  loc).  This  is  perhaps  the  only  inatance  of 
iu  falling  under  the  dass  ccdum  atłr\ferum ;  nor  haye 
we  a  much  morę  frequent  reference  to  the  higher  sense 
of  the  ooelum  angeUferum  (Pisa.  lxxxix,  6  containing  tbe 
on]y  ezplidt  allusion  to  this  sense)  \  unless,  with  Gea»- 


HEAYEN 


125 


HEAVEN 


nłoa,  TAtif.  s.  v.,  we  refer  Faa.  lxviii,  85  tHao  to  it.  Morę 
probsbly  in  Deat.  xxxiii,  26  (where  it  is  parallel  with 
C^^Ó,  ind  in  the  highly  poetical  passages  of  Isa.  xlv, 
8,  and  Jer.  li,  9,  our  word  D^^pnd  may  be  best  regarded 
as  deaignating  tbe  empyical  heaven8. 

&  We  bave  already  noticed  the  oonnection  between 
D**pra  and  onr  only  remaining  word  ^'^p'^}  raki^Oj 
fmn  their  being  anodated  by  the  sacred  vmter  in  the 
nme  sentence  (Job  xxxvii,  18) ;  it  tends  to  corroborate 
this  connection  that,  on  compańng  Gen.  i,  6  (and  8even 
oiber  paaaages  in  the  same  chapter)  with  Deut.  xxxiii, 
26,  we  find  ?*^p*l  of  the  fonner  sentence,  and  D*^pnÓ 
of  the  latter,  both  rendered  by  the  SepŁ  arepkufta  and 
frmamatum  in  the  Vu!g.,  whence  the  word  ^Jirmamad^ 
paased  into  onr  A.y.  This  word  is  now  a  well-under- 
stood  tenn  in  astronomy,  synonymons  with  sky  or  else 
the  generał  heavens,  imdive8ted  by  the  discoverie8  of 
science  of  the  special  ńgnification  which  it  borę  in  the 
aodent  astronomy.  See  Firmament.  For  a  dear  ex- 
poation  of  all  the  Scripture  passages  which  bear  on  the 
sobject,  we  may  refer  the  reader  to  professor  Dawson'8 
Arckmttf  espedally  chap.  viii,  and  to  Dr.  M*Cau]  on  The 
Motak  lUcord  ofCrtatwn  (or,  what  is  substantially  the 
lame  tieatise  in  a  morę  accesńble  form,  his  Note$  on  the 
Fint  dkapier  of  GenesUy  sec  ix,  p.  82-44).  We  must 
be  content  here,  in  reference  to  our  term  C*^^'^^  to  ob- 
lerre  that,  whcn  we  regard  its  origin  (from  the  root 
7p"l,  to  sprtad  out  or  expcmd  by  beating ;  Gesen.  s.  v. ; 
Fiillsr,  Misę,  8acr,  i,  6 ;  FUrst,  Hdfr.-w^-^t,  a.  v.),  and  its 
oonnection  with,  and  illustration  by,  such  wonls  as 
^'*??^)  cfoifdf,  and  the  verbfl  Hfia  (Isa.  xlviii,  13, 
"My  rigfat  hand  haih  spread  out  the  heaven8")  and 
rD3  (ba.  xl,  22,  '*  Who  tirttcheth  out  the  heavens  like  a 
caitain"  pitcrally,  like  Jmenesa']^  "and  spreadeik  tkem 
on/  as  a  tent"),  we  are  astonished  at  certain  rationalistic 
attempta  to  control  the  meaning  of  an  inteUigible  term, 
which  fitą  in  eamly  and  consistently  with  the  naturę 
of  things,  by  a  few  poetical  metaphors,  that  are  them- 
sełres  capable  of  a  consistent  sense  when  held  subordi- 
nate  to  the  plainer  passages  of  proee^Kitto.  The  full- 
er  expre98ion  is  Qt*?^0  2P!?P7  (Gen.  i,  U  są.).  That 
Moees  nnderstood  it  to  mean  a  aoUd  expan8e  is  elear 
fiom  his  representing  it  as  the  barrier  between  the  up- 
per  and  lower  waters  (Gen.  i,  6  są.),  i  e.  as  separating 
the  reserroir  of  the  celestial  ocean  (F&a.  dv,  8 ;  xxix,  8) 
from  tbe  waters  of  the  earth,  or  those  on  which  the 
caith  was  soppoeed  to  float  (Psa.  cxxxvi,  6).  Through 
its  open  lattices  (ria^^K,  Gen.  vii,  11 ;  2  Kings  vii,  2, 
19;  compore  ró<nnvov,  Anstophanes,  Nub.  873)  or  doors 
(b^nb^,  Pta.  lxxviii,  28)  the  dew,  and  snów,  and  hail 
are  poured  upon  the  earth  (Job  xxxviii,  22, 87,  where 
we  have  the  curioos  expre88ion  '^bottles  of  heaven," 
''ntres  ooeli").  This  firm  vault,  which  Job  describes  as 
being  ''stiong  as  a  molten  looking-glass"  (xxxvii,  18), 
is  tnnspaient,  like  pellucid  sapphire,  and  splendid  as 
oystal  (Dan.  xii,  8;  Exod.  xxiv,  10;  Ezek.  i,  22;  Rev. 
iv,  6),  over  which  rests  the  thione  of  God  (Isa.  lxvi,  1 ; 
Ezek.  i,  26),  and  which  is  opened  for  the  descent  of  an- 
gełs,  or  for  piophctic  vi9ions  (Gen.  xxviii,  17 ;  Ezek.  i, 
1;  Acta  Tii,  56;  X,  11).  In  it,  like  gems  or  golden 
lampą  the  stan  are  fixed  to  give  light  to  the  earth,  and 
legulate  the  scasons  (Gen.  i,  14-19);  and  the  whole 
mą^nificent,  immeasurable  structure  (Jer.  xxxi,  87)  is 
npported  ly  the  mountains  as  its  pillars,  or  strong 
foondaiions  (Psa.  xviii,  7 ;  2  Sam.  xxii,  8 ;  Job  xxiv, 
11X  Similarly  the  Greeks  believed  in  an  ovpavóc  ^oX> 
ifXaXxoc  (Uom.  //.  v,  504),  or  miriptoc  (Hom.  Od,  xv, 
828)^  or  dcafuuTTOC  (Orph.  Hymn.  ad  Cceium),  which  the 
philoaopheis  called  ffTipfftviov  or  tcpytrraWondię  (Em- 
pedodesy  ap,  Plut,  de  PkiL  plac  ii,  11 ;  Artemid,  ap.  Sen. 
AoT.  OmL  vii,  13;  quoted  by  Gesenius^  s.  v.).  It  is 
dear  that  veiy  many  of  the  above  notions  were  meta- 
pboia  resolting  from  the  simple  primitive  conception, 
and  Łbat  hcer  writeis  among  the  Hebrews  had  azrived  I 


at  morę  sdentific  view8,  although,  of  course,  they  re^ 
tained  much  of  the  old  phraseology,  and  are  fiuctuating 
and  undedded  in  their  terma.  Elsewhere,  for  instanoe, 
the  heavens  are  likened  to  a  curtain  (Pba.  dv,  2 ;  Isa. 
xl,  22).— Smith.    See  Cosmogony. 

IV.  Metapkorical  Application  ofthe  YiaSble  JTtarens, 
— ^A  door  opened  in  heaven  is  the  beginning  of  a  new 
re^-elation.  To  ascend  up  into  heaven  signifies  to  be  in 
fuli  power.  Thus  is  the  symbol  to  be  understood  in  Isa. 
xiv,  18, 14,  where  the  king  of  Babylon  says, "  I  will  as- 
cend into  heaven;  I  will  exalt  my  throne  above  the 
stars  of  God."  To  descend  from  heaven  signifies,  sym- 
bolically,  to  act  by  a  commission  from  heaven.  Thus 
OUT  Saviour  uses  the  word  "  descending"  (John  i,  61)  in 
speaking  of  the  angels  acting  by  divine  commission,  at 
the  command  of  the  Son  of  man.  To  fali  from  heaven 
signifies  to  lose  power  and  authority,  to  be  deprived  of 
the  power  to  govem,  to  revolt  or  apostatize. 

The  kearen  opened,  The  natural  heaven,  being  the 
symbol  of  the  goveming  part  of  the  political  world,  a 
new  face  in  the  natural,  represents  a  new  face  in  the 
politicaL  Or  the  heaven  may  be  said  to  be  opened  when 
the  day  appears,  and  conseąuently  ahut  when  iiight 
comes  on,  as  appears  from  Yirgil  (ACn,  x,  1), "  The  gates 
of  heaven  unfold,*'  etc.  Thus  the  Scripture,  in  a  poet- 
ical manner,  speaks  of  the  doon  of  heaven  (Psa.  lxxviii, 
28) ;  of  the  heaven  being  thuł  (1  Kings  viii,  85) ;  and  in 
Ezek.  i,  1,  the  heaven  is  said  to  be  opened. 

Midst.  of  keaven  may  be  the  air,  or  the  region  be- 
tween heaven  and  earth ;  or  the  middle  station  between 
the  comipted  earth  and  the  throne  of  God  in  heaven. 
In  this  sense,  the  air  is  the  proper  place  where  God^s 
threatenings  and  judgments  should  be  denounced.  Thus^ 
in  1  Chroń,  xxi,  16,  it  is  said  that  David  saw  the  angd 
of  the  Lord  stand  between  the  earth  and  the  heaven  as 
he  was  just  going  to  destroy  Jerusalem  with  the  pesti- 
lence.  The  angel'8  hoveńng  there  was  to  show  that 
there  was  room  to  pray  for  mercy,  just  as  God  was  go- 
ing to  inflict  the  punishment :  it  had  not  as  yet  done 
any  execution.— Wemyss. 

C.  Spiritual  and  Ererlcuting  Sense^  i.  e.  the  state  and 
place  of  blessedness  in  the  life  to  come.  Of  the  naturę 
of  this  blessedness  it  is  not  poosible  that  we  should  form 
any  adequate  conception,  and,  conseąuently,  that  any 
predse  Information  respecting  it  should  be  given  to  us. 
Man,  indeed,  usually  conceives  the  joys  of  heaven  to  be 
the  same  as,  or  at  least  to  resemble,  the  pleasiires  of  this 
world ;  and  each  one  hopes  to  obtain  with  certainty,  and 
to  enjoy  in  fuli  measure  beyond  the  grave,  that  which 
he  holds  most  dear  upon  earth — those  favorite  employ- 
ments  or  particular  ddights  which  he  ardently  longs 
for  here,  but  which  he  can  sddom  or  never  enjoy  in  this 
world,  or  in  the  enjoyment  of  which  he  is  never  fully 
satbfied.  But  one  who  reflects  soberly  on  the  subject 
will  readily  see  that  the  happiness  of  heaven  must  be  a 
very  different  thing  from  earthly  happiness.  In  this 
world  the  highest  pleasures  of  which  our  naturę  is  ca- 
pable satiate  by  their  continuance,  and  soon  lose  the 
power  of  giving  positive  enjoyment.  This  alone  is  suf- 
ficicnt  to  show  that  the  bliss  of  the  futurę  world  must 
be  of  an  entirely  different  kind  from  what  is  called 
earthly  joy  and  happiness,  if  we  are  to  be  there  łruly 
happy,  and  happy  ybrwer.  But  sińce  we  can  have  no 
distinct  conception  of  those  joys  which  never  have  beeii 
and  never  will  be  experienced  by  us  here  in  their  fuU 
extent,  we  have,  of  course,  no  words  in  human  language 
to  expre8s  them,  and  cannot  therefore  expect  any  dear 
description  of  them  even  in  the  holy  Scriptures.  Hence 
the  Bibie  describes  this  happiness  sometimes  in  generał 
terms,  designating  its  greatness  (as  in  Kom.  viii.  18-22; 
2  Gor.  iv,  17, 18),  and  sometimes  by  variou8  figurative 
images  and  modes  of  speech,  borrowcd  from  everything 
which  we  know  to  be  attnictive  and  desirable. 

The  greater  part  of  these  images  were  already  com- 
mon  among  the  Jewish  contemporaries  of  Christ ;  but 
Christ  and  his  apostles  employed  them  in  a  purer  sense 
than  the  great  multitude  of  the  Jews.    The  Orientals 


HEAYEN 


126 


HEAYEN 


ai«  rich  in  flach  figiures.  They  urere  employed  by  Mo-  i 
hammed,  who  carried  them,  as  hU  inanner  was,  to  an 
extrayagant  exoesa,  but  who  at  tbe  same  time  said  ex- 
preealy  that  they  were  merę  figures,  alŁhough  many  of 
his  fóllowera  afterwards  undentood  them  literally,  as  has 
been  often  done  in  a  simihir  way  by  many  Christiana. 

The  following  are  the  principal  terms,  both  litend 
and  figuiatiYe,  which  are  applied  in  Scriptuie  to  the 
condition  of  futurę  happineas. 

a,  Among  the  literał  appellations  we  find  ^w^,  ^w) 
aiWioc,  which,  according  to  Hebrew  usage,  signify  '^a 
happy  Ufe,"  or  *<etemal  well-being,"  and  are  the  words 
rendered  **life,"  "etemal  life,"  and  <<Ufe  eyerlasting"  in 
the  A.  Yera.  (e.  g.  Matt,  vii,  U ;  xix,  16,  29 ;  xxv,  46) : 
dó^a,  ^óKa  Tov  Geoi), "  glory,"  "  the  glory  of  God"  (Rom. 
ii,  7, 10 ;  V,  2) ;  and  Łipńyrjy "  peace'*  (Kom.  ii,  10).  Also 
ai(avtov  papoc  ^rJ^i/c,  "  an  etemal  weight  of  glory"  (2 
Cor.  iv,  17);  and  atarrigia,  ffwrrjcia  aiwpioc,  '*Balva- 
tion,"  "  etemal  salyation"  (Heb.  v,  9),  etc 

b.  Among  the  Jiffurałice  representations  we  may  place 
the  word  "  heaven"  itself.  The  abode  of  departed  spir- 
its,  to  us  who  live  upou  the  earth,  and  while  we  lemain 
here,  is  invisible  and  ituuK^ssible,  beyond  the  bounds  of 
the  yisible  world,  and  entirely  sepaiated  fiom  it.  There 
they  live  in  the  highest  well-being,  and  in  a  nearer 
connection  with  God  and  Christ  than  here  below.  This 
plaoe  and  state  camiot  be  designated  by  any  morę  fit 
and  brief  expres8ion  than  that  which  is  found  in  almost 
eTeiy  language,  namely,  *'  heaven" — a  word  in  its  pń- 
mary  and  materiał  signiiicalion  denoting  the  region  of 
the  skies,  or  the  yisible  heayena.  This  word,  in  Heb. 
dl^pd,  in  Gr.  ovpavóc,  is  therefore  frequently  employ- 
ed  by  the  sacred  writers,  as  above  exemplifled.  It  is 
there  that  the  highest  sanctuary  or  tempie  of  God  is 
situated,  i.  e.  it  is  there  that  the  omnipresent  God  most 
glońously  reyeals  himsdf.  This,  too,  is  the  abode  of 
God's  highest  spiritual  creation.  Thithcr  Christ  was 
transported :  he  caUs  it  the  houso  of  his  Father,  and 
says  that  he  has  therein  prepared  an  abode  for  his  fol- 
lowers  (John  xiv,  2). 

This  place,  this  "  heaven,"  was  neyer  conceived  of  in 
ancient  times,  as  it  has  been  by  some  modern  writers, 
as  a  particular  planet  or  world,  but  as  the  wide  expai]se 
of  heayen,  high  abovc  the  atmosphere  or  starry  heav- 
ens;  hcnce  it  is  sometimes  called  the  łhird  heayen,  as 
being  neither  the  atmosphere  nor  the  starry  heayens. 

Auother  figiiratiye  name  is  **  Paiadise,"  taken  from 
the  abode  of  our  first  parents  in  thcir  state  of  innocence, 
and  transferred  to  the  abode  of  the  blessed  (Łukę  xxiii, 
48 ;  2  Cor.  xii,  4 ;  Key.  ii,  7 ;  xxii,  2). 

Again,  this  place  is  calle<l  "  the  heayenly  Jerusalem' 
(GaL  iy,  26 ;  Heb.  xii,  22 ;  Kev.  iii,  12),  because  the 
earthly  Jemsalem  was  the  capital  city  of  the  Jews,  the 
royal  residenoe,  and  the  seat  of  divine  worship;  the 
*'  kingdom  of  hcavcn"  (Matt.  xxv,  1 ;  Jas.  ii,  6) ;  the 
"  heayenly  kingdom"  (2  Tim.  iv,  18) ;  the  "  etemal  king- 
dom" (2  Pet.  i,  11).  It  is  also  called  an  ^  etemal  iuher- 
itance"  (1  Pet.  i,  4 ;  Heb.  ix,  15),  mcaning  the  posses- 
sion  and  fuli  cnjoyment  of  happiness,  typified  by  the 
residence-  of  the  ancient  Hebrews  in  PalesŁinc.  The 
blessed  are  said  '^  to  sit  down  at  table  with  Abraham, 
Isaac,  and  Jaoob,"  that  is,  to  be  a  sharcr  with  the  saints 
of  old  in  the  jo3rs  of  salyation ;  "  to  be  in  Abraham's  bo- 
som"  (Lukę  xvi,  22;  Matt.  yiii,  11),  that  is,  to  sit  near 
or  next  to  Abraham  [see  Bosom]  ;  ^to  reign  with 
Christ"  (2  Tim.  ii,  11),  i.  e.  to  be  distinguished,  honored, 
and  happy  as  he  is — ^to  enjoy  regal  felicities ;  to  enjoy 
"a  Sabbath,"  or  "rest"  (Heb. iv,  10, 11),  indicating  the 
happiness  of  pious  Christians  both  in  this  life  and  in  the 
life  to  come. 

Ali  that  we  can  with  certainty  know  or  infer  from 
Scripture  or  reason  respecting  the  blessednees  of  the  life 
to  come  may  be  arranged  under  the  foUowing  particu- 
lars :  I.  We  shall  hereafter  be  entirely  freed  from  the 
BufTerings  and  adyersitics  of  this  life.  II.  Our  futurę 
blessedness  will  involve  a  continuance  of  the  real  happi- 
ness of  this  life.  • 


Ł  The  entire  exemption  from  sufleiing,  and  all  that 
causes  suffering  here,  is  expre8sed  in  Scripture  by  words 
which  denote  rest,  repose,  refreshment,  aiter  performing 
labor  and  enduring  affliction.  But  all  the  terms  which 
are  employe'd  to  express  this  condition  definc  (in  the 
original)  the  promised  "  rest"  as  rest  after  labor,  and  ex- 
emption  from  toil  and  grief,  and  not  the  absence  of  em- 
plo3rment,  not  inactiyity  or  indolence  (2  Thess.  i,  7 ;  Hebw 
iv,  9, 1 1 ;  Rey.  xiv,  13 ;  compare  vii,  17).  This  delirer- 
ance  from  the  eyils  of  oiur  present  life  indudes, 

1.  Deliyerance  from  this  earthly  body,  the  seat  of  the 
lower  principles  of  oio*  naturę  and  of  our  sinful  corrup- 
tion,  and  the  souroe  of  so  many  eyils  and  sufferings  (2 
Cor.  vi,  1, 2 ;  1  Cor.  xv,  42-^). " 

2.  Entire  sepaiation  from  the  society  of  wicked  and 
eyil-disposed  persons,  who  in  yarious  ways  injurc  the 
righteous  man  and  embitter  his  Ufe  on  earth  (2  Tim.  iy, 
18).  It  is  hence  accounted  a  part  of  the  feUcity  even 
of  Christ  himself  in  heaven  to  be  ^'separate  from  sin- 
ners"  (Heb.  vii,  26). 

8.  Upon  this  earth  everything  b  inconstant  and  sub- 
ject  to  perpetual  chauge,  and  nothing  is  capable  of 
completcly  satisfying  our  expectations  and  desires.  But 
in  the  world  to  come  it  will  be  different.  The  bliss  of 
the  saints  will  continue  without  interruption  or  change^ 
without  fear  of  termination,  and  without  satiety  (Lukę 
xx,S6;  2  Cor.  iv,  16, 18;  lPet.i,4;  y,10;  ljóhniii,2 
sq.). 

II.  Besides  being  exempt  from  all  earthly  trials,  and 
ha^dng  a  continuance  of  that  happiness  which  we  had 
begun  to  enjoy  cven  here,  we  have  good  reason  to  ex- 
pect  hereafter  other  rewards  and  joys,  which  stand  in 
no  natural  or  nccessary  connection  with  the  present  life ; 
for  our  entire  felicity  would  be  extremdy  defective  and 
scanty  were  it  to  be  confined  roerely  to  that  which  we 
carry  with  us  from  the  present  world,  to  that  peace  and 
joy  of  soul  which  result  from  rcfiecting  on  what  we  may 
have  done  which  is  good  and  pleasing  in  the  sight  of 
God,  sińce  even  the  best  men  will  always  discoyer  great 
imperfections  in  all  that  they  have  done.  Our  felidty 
would  also  be  inoomplete  were  we  compelled  to  stop  short 
with  that  meagre  and  elementary  knowledgc  which  we 
take  with  us  from  this  world — that  knowledge  so  broken. 
up  into  fragmcnts,  and  yielding  so  little  fmit,  and  which, 
poor  as  it  is,  many  good  men,  from  lack  of  opportunity, 
and  without  any  fault  on  thcir  part,  never  here  Bcqnire. 
Besides  the  natural  rewards  of  goodness,  there  must 
therefore  be  others  which  are  pasitiee,  and  dependent 
on  the  will  of  the  supremę  Legislator. 

On  this  point  almost  all  philosophers  are,  for  the 
aboye  reasons,  agreed — even  thosc  who  will  adroit  of  no 
posiHv€ptmuhnumł£  in  the  world  to  come.  But,  for  want 
of  accurate  knowledge  of  the  state  of  things  in  the  fu- 
turę world,  we  can  say  nothing  dcfinite  and  certain  aa 
to  the  naturę  of  the  positive  rewards  In  the  doctrine 
of  the  New  Testament,  howeyer,  poeitive  rewards  are 
considered  most  obyiously  as  bclonging  to  our  futurę  fe- 
lidty, and  as  constituting  a  prindpal  part  of  it;  for  it 
always  represents  the  joys  of  heayen  as  resulting  strict- 
ly  from  thefaror  o/God^  and  as  being  undeserred  by 
those  on  whom  they  are  bestowed.  Hence  there  musŁ 
be  something  morę  added  to  the  natural  good  conse- 
quenoes  of  our  actions  here  performed.  But  on  this 
subject  we  know  nothing  morę  in  generał  than  thia, 
that  God  will  so  appoint  and  order  our  circumatances, 
and  make  such  arrangements,  that  the  principal  facul- 
ties  of  our  souls,  reason  and  affection,  will  be  hdghtened 
and  deyeloped,  so  that  we  shall  continually  obtain  morc 
pure  and  distinct  knowledge  of  the  truth,  and  nutkę  oon- 
tiniud  adyances  in  holiness. 

We  may  remark  that  in  this  life  God  has  very 
wisely  allotted  yarious  capacities,  powers,  and  tałents^ 
in  different  ways  and  degrees,  to  different  men,  accord- 
ing to  the  yarious  ends  for  which  he  designs  them,  and 
the  business  on  which  he  employs  them.  Now  there  is 
not  the  least  reason  to  suppose  that  God  will  abolish 
this  yariety  in  the  futurę  world ;  it  will  rather  continua 


HEAYEN 


127 


HEAYE-OFFERING 


there  in  all  ito  exteiłL  We  must  nippose,  then,  that 
there  will  be,  even  in  the  heavenly  world,  a  direnity 
of  taatesy  of  labon,  and  of  employments,  and  that  to  one 
penoa  thb,  to  anoŁher  that  field,  in  the  boandless  king- 
dom  of  truth  and  of  uaeful  occupation,  will  be  assigned 
for  his  cultiration,  acoording  to  hiB  peculiar  powen, 
qualification8y  and  taatea.  A  presentiment  of  this  truth 
is  contained  in  the  idea,  which  was  widely  diffused 
througfaout  the  andent  world,  riz.  that  the  nurnks  will 
coatanue  to  proMcate  in  the  futurę  life  the  employments 
to  wfaich  they  had  been  here  aocustomed.  At  least 
auch  amngements  will  doubtleaa  be  madę  by  God  in 
the  futurę  life  that  each  individual  will  there  develop 
morę  and  morę  the  germa  implanted  within  him  by  the 
hand  of  the  Greator;  and  will  be  able,  morę  fully  than 
he  erer  conld  do  here,  to  aatisfy  the  wants  of  his  intel- 
lectual  naturę,  and  thus  to  make  continual  progreas  in 
the  knowledge  of  ererything  worthy  of  being  known, 
of  whicb  he  could  only  leara  the  simplest  elements  in 
thja  world ;  and  he  will  be  aUe  to  do  this  in  sach  a  way 
that  the  Inoease  of  knowledge  will  not  be  detrimental 
to  piety,  aa  ii  oflen  prorea  on  earth,  but  nither  promo- 
tive  of  it.  To  the  aincere  and  ardent  searcher  alter 
truth  it  ia  a  rejoicing  and  conaoling  thought  that  he 
will  be  able  hereafler  to  perfect  that  knowledge  which 
here  has  ao  many  defidencies  (1  Cor.  xiii,  9). 

But  there  is  danger  of  going  too  far  on  this  point, 
and  of  falUng  into  strange  miaconceptiona.  Yarious  as 
the  tastca  and  wants  of  men  in  the  futurę  world  will 
doubtleas  be,  they  will  still  be  in  many  respects  dlffer- 
ent  ffom  what  thęy  are  here,  because  the  whołe  sphere 
of  action,  and  the  objects  by  which  we  shall  there  be 
sonounded,  will  be  diiferent.  We  shall  there  ha%'e  a 
changed  and  morę  perfect  body,  and  by  this  single  cir- 
camstance  shall  be  freed  at  once  from  many  of  the  wants 
and  inclinations  which  hare  their  seat  in  the  earthly 
body.  This  will  also  oontńbute  much  to  rectify,  en- 
large,  and  perfect  onr  knowledge.  Many  things  which 
seem  to  us  very  important  and  essential  during  this  our 
suie  of  infancy  upon  earth  will  hcreafter  doubtless  ap- 
pear  in  a  diflerent  light :  we  shall  look  upon  them  as 
tritles  and  chUdren'8  play,  and  employ  ourselyes  in  morę 
important  oocitpations,  the  utiliry  and  interest  of  which 
we  hare  nerer  before  imagined. 

Some  theologians  have  supposed  that  the  saints  in 
heaven  may  be  taught  by  imaudiate  dicine  rerelałums 
(himen  glonie),  especially  thoee  who  may  enter  the 
abodes  of  the  bleased  without  knowledge,  or  with  only 
a  smali  measure  of  it;  e.  g.  children  and  others  who 
hare  died  in  ignorance,  for  which  they  themselres  were 
not  to  bUmc.  On  this  subject  nothing  b  deiinitely 
taught  in  the  Scriptuiea,  but  both  Scripture  and  rcason 
warrant  us  in  believing  that  prorision  will  be  madę  for 
all  sich  persons  in  the  world  to  come.  A  principal  part 
of  our  futurę  happineas  ¥rill  consist,  aocording  to  the 
Christian  doctrine,  in  the  enlaiging  and  cOrrecting  of 
our  knowledge  respecting  God,  his  naturę,  attributes, 
and  worka,  and  in  the  salutaiy  application  of  this  knowl- 
edge to  our  own  morał  benefit,  to  the  increase  of  our 
faith,  knre,  and  obedience.  There  has  been  some  con- 
irorerey  among  theologians  with  regard  to  the  tńsion 
o/ God  (risio  Dci  intiiitira,  sensitiya,  beatifica,  compre- 
henaira).  The  question  is  whether  the  saints  will  hcre- 
after behold  God  with  the  eyes  of  the  mind,  L  e.  merely 
know  him  with  the  understanding. 

But  in  the  Scriptures  God  is  always  repreaented  as  a 
being  invisible  by  the  bodily  eye  (aóparoc),  as,  indeed, 
erenr  spirit  i&  The  texta  of  Scripture  which  spcak  of 
tffiag  Godlmye  been miaundeistood:  they  signify, some- 
timea,  tke  morę  dułmct  knowledge  of  God,  as  we  speak 
of  knowing  by  seeing,  of  s^Ing  with  the  eyea  of  the 
mind  (John  i,  18;  1  John  iii,  2;  iv,  12;  oomp.  v,  20;  1 
TmL  vi,  16);  and  Paul  uses  pKiicwf  and  yu/MirKciy  aa 
crnonymous  (1  Cor.  xiii,  12, 18;  comp.  v,  10).  Again, 
they  expn!8s  the  idea  of felicitjf,  the  enjoymcnt  of  God'8 
fevor,  the  being  thought  worthy  of  his  friendship,  etc 
SliU  morę  fretiuently  are  both  of  theae  meanings  oom- 


prehended  under  the  phraae  to  mc  God,  The  image  ii 
taken  Arom  Oriental  princes,  to  see  whoee  &oe  and  to 
be  in  whoae  preaence  was  esteemed  a  great  favor  (Matt. 
V,  8 ;  Heb.  vii,  14).  "  Without  holiuess,  oifotię  ó^irai 
róv  Kvp(ov."  The  oppoaite  of  this  is  to  be  removed 
frinn  God  and  from  his  face.  But  Christ  is  always  rep- 
reaented as  one  who  will  beperaonatUf  risible  to  us,  and 
whose  personal,  familiar  intercourse  and  guidance  we 
shall  enjoy.  Herein  Christ  himself  places  a  chief  part 
of  the  joy  of  the  saints  (John  xiv,  xvii,  etc) ;  and  the 
apostles  oflen  describe  the  blessedness  of  tlie  pious  by 
the  phrase  being  with  Christ,  To  his  guidance  has  God 
intrustcd  the  human  race,  in  heaven  and  on  earth.  And 
Paul  says  (2  Cor.  iv,  6),  we  see  "  the  brightness  of  the 
divine  glory  in  the  face  of  Christ ;"  he  is  "  the  viBibl0 
representatire  of  the  lnvisible  God"  (Col.  i,  15). 

According  to  the  representations  contained  in  the  holy 
Scriptures,  the  saints  will  dwell  together  in  the  futurę 
world,  and  form,  as  it  were,  a  kingdom  or  state  of  God 
(Lukę  xvi ;  xx,  88 ;  Rom.  viii,  10 ;  Kev.  vii,  9 ;  Ileh.  xii, 
22).  They  wUl  there  partake  of  a  common  felidty. 
Their  enjoyment  will  doubtleas  be  very  much  height- 
ened  by  friendship,  and  by  their  confiding  intercourse 
with  each  other.  We  must^  however,  separate  all  earth- 
ly imperfections  from  our  conceptions  of  this  heavenly 
society.  But  that  we  sliaU  there  recognise  our  forroer 
friends,  and  shall  be  again  associated  with  them,  was 
uniformly  belicred  by  all  antiquity.  And  whcn  we  cali 
to  mind  the  affectionate  maiiner  in  which  Christ  sooth- 
ed  his  disciples  by  the  assurancc  that  they  should  hcre- 
after see  him  again,  shoidd  be  with  him,  and  enjoy 
personal  intercourse  and  friendship  with  him  in  that 
place  to  which  he  was  froing  (John  xiv,  3 ;  comp.  1  Pet. 
i,  8),  we  may  gather  just  grounds  for  this  bellef.  PaiJ, 
indeed,  sa}'8  exprc88ly  that  we  shall  be  with  Christ,  in 
company  with  our  friends  who  died  before  us  (ufia  vi>v 
aifrolCf  1  Thess.  iv,  17) ;  and  this  presupposes  that  we 
shall  recognise  them,  and  have  intercourse  with  them,  aa 
with  Christ  himself.— Kitto,  s.  r.    See  Eternal  Life. 

HEAYEN  AND  EARTH  is  an  expre88ion  for  the 
whole  creation  (Gen.  i,  1).  In  prophetic  language  the 
phase  often  signifies  the  political  state  or  condition  of 
persons  of  different  ranks  in  this  world.  The  heaven 
of  the  political  world  is  the  sovereignty  thereof,  whose 
host  and  stars  are  the  powers  that  rule,  namciy,  kings, 
princes,  counseDors,  and  magistrates.  The  earth  is  the 
peasantry,  plebeians,  or  common  race  of  men,  who  pos- 
sesa  no  power,  but  are  ruled  by  superiors.  Of  such  a 
heaven  and  earth  we  may  understand  mention  to  Im 
madę  in  Hagg.  ii,  6;  vii,  21,  22,  and  referred  to  in  Heb. 
xii,  26.  Such  modes  of  speaking  were  uaed  in  Ori- 
ental poetry  and  philosophy,  which  madę  a  heaven  and 
earth  in  everything,  that  is,  a  superior  and  inferior  in 
ever>'  part  of  naturę ;  and  we  leam  frum  Maimonidea, 
quoted  by  Mede,  that  the  Arabians  in  his  time,  when 
they  woidd  expre88  that  a  man  was  fallen  into  some 
great  calamity,  said,  **His  heaven  has  fallen  to  the 
earth,"  meaning  his  superiority  or  prosperity  is  much 
diminished.  **To  look  for  new  heavens  and  a  new 
earth"*  (2  Pet.  iii,  18)  may  mean  to  look  for  a  new  order 
of  the  present  world. — ^Wemyss. 

Heave-ofreriiig  (nrsł'nri,  terumah\  from  fisi^l,  to 
be  lijh ;  Sept.  usually  d(l>aipifia),  a  term  including  all 
that  the  Israclites  voluntariIy  (Exod.  xxv,  2  są. ;  xxxv, 
24;  xxxvi,  8)  or  according  to  a  precept  (Exod.  xxx,  15 ; 
Lev.  \i\,  14;  Numb.  xv,  19  są.;  xviii,  27  stj.;  xxi,  29 
sq. ;  comp.  Ezek.  xlv,  18)  contributed  of  their  own  prop- 
crty  to  Jehovah  (not  as  an  ofTering  in  the  usual  sense^ 
but)  as  a  present  (Isa.  xl,  20),  to  be  applled  to  the  regu- 
lar  cultua,  L  e.  for  the  establishment  and  maintenance 
of  the  sanctuary  and  ita  aocessories  (Exod.  xxv'^,  2  sq.; 
xxx,  13  sq. ;  xxv,  6  są.,  21, 24 ;  xxvi,  8, 6 ;  Ezra  viii,  25, 
etc),  or  for  the  aupport  of  the  priests  (Exod.  xxix,  28 ; 
Numb. xviii, 8  są.;  v,9).  Prescribed contributions  were, 
in  addition  to  the  annual  temple-tax  [see  Tbmple], 
chiefly  that  share  of  the  booty  taken  in  war  which  b»* 


HEAYE-SHOULDER 


128 


SEIBCR 


longed  to  the  prieste  (Niunb.  xxi,  29  aą.),  the  yearly 
fiiBt-fmits  (Numb.  xv,  19  8q. ;  comp.  2  Sara.  i,  21),  and 
the  tenths  which  the  Levites  were  reąuiied  to  make 
OTer  to  the  priests  out  of  the  natural  tithes  paid  to  them 
(Numb. xviii, 26  są.;  what  the  Levites  retained  for  their 
own  use  not  being  thus  styled).  llie  term  M^ilin 
seems  to  stand  in  a  narrower  sense  in  Neh.  x,  37 ;  xii, 
44;  xiii,  8  [see  Firstlino],  and  the  Talmudists  ao  cali 
only  the  agńcultural  first^lhiits  appropńate  to  human 
use,  together  with  the  Levitical  tenths  (see  the  tract 
Terumoth  in  the  Mishna,  i,  6).  Heave-offering8  are  coap- 
led  with  first-fruits  in  Ezek.  xx,  40,  and  with  tithes  in 
MaL  iii,  8.  In  Ezek.  xlv,  1 ;  xlviii,  8  8q.,  12, 20  8q.,  the 
same  word  Is  applied  to  that  portion  of  the  Uoly  Land 
which  is  represented  as  set  a[)art  for  the  maintenance 
of  the  sanctuary  and  the  priests.  For  the  care  of  ail 
Buch  contributions,  as  well  as  for  voluntaTy  oflRerings  and 
tithes  in  generał,  a  special  dass  of  officers  was  (from 
the  time  of  king  Hezekiah)  detailed,  of  whom  a  higher 
priest  had  the  superintendence  (2  Chroń,  xxi,  11,  12, 
14;  Neh.  xii,  44;  xiii,  5).  Heave-offering8  could  be 
used  or  consumed  only  by  the  priests  and  their  chil- 
dren  (Numb.  xviii,  19;  Lev.  xxii,  10).  Later  reguła- 
tions  are  detailed  in  the  Talmudical  tract  Terumoth, — 
Winer,  i,  470.    Compare  WAVB-OFFERi3łO. 

Heave-8houIder  (n^!|"iri  pić,  Sept.  ppaxiwv 
d^atplfiaroc)  is  the  name  applied  to  the  (right)  shoul- 
der  that  fell  to  the  priests  in  the  presentation  of  animals 
as  a  thank-offering  (Lev.  vii,  84 ;  Numb.  vi,  20 ;  xviii, 
18),  which  could  be  eaten  only  by  such  of  their  families 
as  were  in  a  ceremonially  clean  state  (Lev.  x,  14).  See 
Offering. 

Hebard,  Elijah,  a  Methodist  Episoopal  minister. 
He  was  bom  at  Cox8ackie,  N.  Y.,  Sept,  8, 1788 ;  was  con- 
verted  at  thirteen;  eutered  the  New  York  Conference  in 
May,  1811 ;  in  1819  was  appointed  to  New  Haven;  in 
1820  and  21  to  New  York;  in  1884  was  transferrcd  to 
Gencsee  Conference,  and  stationed  at  Rochester;  was 
presidiug  elder  on  Ontario  District  in  1837-40;  in  1846 
he  superannuated ;  and  died  at  Geneva,  N.  Y.,  Jan.  25, 
1858.  He  was  a  diligent  student,  a  sound  theologian, 
and  a  good  scholar  in  Greek  and  Hebrew. — MinuUa  of 
ConferenceSy  vii,  205. 

He'ber,  the  name  of  seven  men,  with  a  differcnce 
of  orthography  in  the  originaL    See  also  Ebcr. 

1.  Eber  (Heb.  E'her,  ^IIC,  one  of  the  other  tidej  i.  e. 
of  the  river,  q.  d.  immigrant;  Sept''E/3fp  and  'Efifp, 
Vulg.  Htber),  son  of  Salah,  who  became  the  father  of 
Peleg  at  the  age  of  34  years,  and  died  at  the  age  of  464 
(Gen.  X,  24;  xi,  14;  1  Chroń,  i,  25).  His  name  occurs 
in  the  genealogj'  of  Christ  (Lukę  iii,  85,  'E/3ip,  "He- 
ber").  B.C.  2448-1984.  There  is  a  degree  of  interest 
connected  with  him  from  the  notion,  which  the  Jews 
them8elves  entertain,  that  the  name  of  Hebrews,  applied 
to  them,  was  derived  from  this  alleged  ancestor  of  Abra- 
ham. No  historical  gromid  appears  why  this  name 
should  be  deńved  from  him  rather  than  from  any  other 
personage  that  occurs  in  the  catalogue  of  Shem's  de- 
acendants;  but  there  are  so  much  stronger  objections  to 
every  other  hypothesis,  that  this,  perhaps,  is  still  the 
most  probable  of  any  which  have  yet  been  started.  (See 
Gesenius,  Geschichte  der  Heb,Spracke  undSchrift^^,  11.) 
Hence  ""the  chUdrm  of  JCber"  (IS?  •'Są,  Gen.  x,  21), 
and  umply  in  poetr*'  Kber  (*i5?»Niimb.  xxiv,  24;  Sept, 
'E/3poiot,  Vulg.  Jlebrat),  L q.  Hkbrews  (B'^'n35).  S€V- 
eral  other  persons  of  this  (Heb.)  name  occur,  but  no 
others  are  anywhere  Anglicized  "  Heber." 

2.  *'  Eber"  (same  Heb.  word  as  above;  Sept  'Iai/3^^, 
Tulg.  IJeber\  the  last-named  of  the  scven  chiefs  of  the 
Gadites  in  Bashan  (1  Chroń.  v,  13,  where  the  name  is 
Anglicized  «  Heber").     RC.  between  1612  and  1093. 

3.  Ebek  (same  Hebrew  word  as  above;  Sept  'OfiriS^ 
Vulg.  Heber)^  apparently  one  of  the  sons  of  Shashak,  and 
a  chief  of  the  tribe  of  Benjamin  (1  Chroń,  viii,  22,  where 
the  name  is  Anglicized  **  Heber").    B.C.  antę  598. 


4.  "  Heber"  (Che'her^  'nan,  communHy,  as  in  Hoa.  vi, 
9;  Prov.  xxi,  9;  or  a  tipeli,  aa  in  Deut  xviii,  11;  Isa. 
xhTi,  9, 12 ;  Sept  Xófiop,  Xofikp,  Xafi(p),  son  of  Beriah, 
and  grandson  of  Asher  (Gen.  xlvi,  17 ;  1  Chroń,  vii,  81, 
82).  KC  apparently  antę  1873.  His  descendanta  are 
called  Heberites  (Heb.  Chebti',  '^*nSn,  Sept  Kofiepi, 
Numb.  xxvi,  45,  where  the  name  of  the  progenitor  ia 
written  ^Zri), 

5.  ''Heber"  (same  Heb.  word  as  last,  Sept  Xa/3cp, 
Vulg.  Haber)y "  a  descendant  of  Hobab,  which  latter  waa 
son  of  Jethro,  and  brother  of  the  wife  of  Moses.  Hia 
wife  was  the  Jael  who  siew  Sisera  (B.C.  1409),  and  he  is 
called  Heber  the  Keiiite  (Judg.  iv,  1 1, 17 ;  v,  24),  which 
seems  to  have  been  a  name  for  the  whole  family  (Judg. 
i,  16).  Heber  appears  to  have  lived  separate  from  the 
rest  of  the  Kenites,  leading  a  patriarchal  life  amid  his 
tenta  and  flocks.  He  must  have  been  a  person  of  some 
con8equeiice,  from  iu  being  stated  that  there  was  peaoe 
between  the  house  of  Heber  and  the  powerful  king  Ja- 
bin.  At  the  time  the  history  brings  him  under  our  no- 
tice,  his  camp  was  in  the  plain  of  Zaanaim,  near  Kedesh, 
iu  Naphtali"  (Kitto).     See  jAigL;  KENrrE. 

6.  '*  Heber"  (same  Heb.  word  as  last,  Sept  'A/3ap), 
apparently  a  son  of  Mered  (of  Judah)  by  Jehudijah,  and 
"father"  of  Socho  (1  Chroń,  iv,  18).  B.G  post  1612. 
See  Mered. 

7.  *' Heber"  (same  Heb.  word  as  last,  Sept.  *Afiep\ 
one  of  the  "sona"  of  Elpaal,  and  a  chief  of  the  tribe  of 
Benjamin  (1  Chroń,  viii,  17).    RC  apparently  cir.  598L 

Heber,  Keoinald,  bishop  of  Calcutta,  was  bom  at 
Malpas,  (}heshire,  April  21, 1783.  He  gave  early  indi- 
cations  of  poetical  talent  At  thirteen  he  was  placed  in 
the  school  of  a  clerg}'man  near  London ;  in  Novcmber, 
1800,  he  was  entered  at  Brasenose  College,  OxfoPd,  and 
in  the  same  year  he  gained  the  piize  for  Latin  ver9e.  In 
the  spring  of  1803  he  wrote  his  prize  poem,  PaleHine, 
which  has  obtained  a  permanent  place  in  English  liter- 
aturę. In  1804  he  became  a  fellow  of  AU  Soula.  About 
the  middle  of  1805,  in  company  with  Mr.  John  Thomton, 
he  set  out  on  a  Contmental  tour,  and  spent  a  year  tiav- 
elling  through  Russia,  the  Crimea,  Hungar^',  Austria, 
and  Prussia.  In  1807  he  took  ordere,  and  was*  inslituted 
by  his  brother  Kichard  to  the  family  living  at  Hodnet 
Herę,  as  he  himself  described,  he  was  in  a  **  halF-way 
situation  between  a  parson  and  a  8quire."  ^  While  dia- 
charging  the  duties  of  his  parish  with  great  iidelity,  he 
was  ardently  devoted  to  the  pursuits  of  literaturę.  He 
was  a  frequent  contributor  to  the  Quarierly  Reńew  from 
its  commenoement.  In  1812  he  oommenced  the  prepa- 
ration  of  a  Didumary  ofthe  Bible^  on  which  he  labored 
with  much  delight;  but  other  duties  compelled  him  to 
suspend  this  work,  and  no  part  of  it  was  ever  published. 
In  the  same  year  he  published  a  smali  volimie  of  Ilynms 
adapted  to  the  Weehiy  Church  Serrice  (new  cd.  London, 
1838,  12mo).  The  composidon  of  his  Hyvm$j  with  a 
view  of  improving  the  psalmody  and  devotional  poetry 
used  in  churches,  was  also  a  favorite  recreation.  He 
'tvas  an  elegant  versifier,  and  continued  to  indulge  his 
|X)etical  talents  even  while  engaged  in  visiting  his  dio- 
cese  in  India.  He  had  a  great  distaste  for  controver^ 
sial  theology,  and  only  once  was  engaged  in  a  discns- 
sion  of  thia  kind,  in  reply  to  what  he  concei^^ed  were 
the  imwarrantable  imputations  of  a  writer  in  the  Brii- 
ish  Critic,  His  political  views  were  those  of  the  High- 
Church  and  Tory  party,  but  quite  devoid  of  bittemess. 
In  1815  he  was  appointed  Bampton  lecturer,  and  the 
Bubject  he  selected  was  The  Personality  and  Office  ofthe 
Chrittian  Comforter  (2d  ed.  Lond.  1818,  8vo).  In  1817, 
Dr.  LuxmoTe,  the  bishop  of  St  Asaph,  appointed  Heber 
to  a  stall  in  that  cathedra!,  at  the  request  of  his  father- 
in-law  the  dean.  In  18 1 9  he  edited  the  works  of  bishop 
Jeremy  Taylor  (15  vols.  8vo,  with  Life  of  Taylor),  In 
April,  1822,  he  was  elected  preacher  of  lincoln^s  Inn,  for 
which  he  had  formerly  been  an  unsuccessful  candidftte." 
In  December  of  that  year,  the  see  of  Calcutta,  vacated 
by  the  death  of  bishop  Middleton,  was  offered  to  him. 


yłKrtH^ry 


129 


HEBREW 


'^  Twice  the  offer  was  dedined  on  aecount  of  hb  wife  and 
child,  but  immediately  aller  ibe  second  refusal  he  wrote 
(Jan.  12, 1823)  stating  his  willingness  to  go  to  India. 
He  congratalated  himself  upon  the  fact  that  no  worldly 
motiyes  led  him  to  this  decision.  The  prospects  of  use- 
folnesB  in  so  gnmd  a  field  as  India  orerbore  all  pecuni- 
ary  considerations,  aod  they  had  no  influence  in  deter- 
mining  his  conduct  when  the  proposition  of  going  to 
that  country  was  fint  madę  to  him.  Besides,  he  had 
oflen  expre«ed  his  liking  for  such  a  sphere  of  action, 
and  he  had  "a  Inrking  fondness  for  all  which  belongs 
to  India  ot  Asta."  On  the  22d  of  April  he  saw  Hodnet 
for  the  last  time,  and,  after  having  been  oonsecrated,  he 
embarked  for  his  diocese  on  the  16th  of  June,  1823. 
The  diocese  of  Calcutta  extended  at  this  time  over  the 
whde  of  India,  and  embraced  Ceylon,  the  Mauritius, 
and  Anstralasia.  In  India  the  field  of  the  bi8hop*8  la- 
bora  was  three  times  laiger  than  Great  Britain  and  Ire- 
land.  The  number  of  chaplains  who  eonstituted  his 
Staff  at  Bengal  was  fixed  at  twenty-^ght,  but  this 
nnmber  was  nerer  completed,  and  of  the  number  who 
were  appointed  seyeral  were  on  furlough.  The  bishop 
had  no  oouncil  to  assist  him,  was  required  to  act  on  his 
own  responsibility,  and  to  write  almost  every  official 
document  with  his  o¥m  hand.  On  the  15th  of  June, 
1824,  bishop  Heber  began  the  yisitation  of  his  vast  dio- 
cese. He  Tisited  nearly  eyery  station  of  importance  in 
the  upper  proyinces  of  Ben^  and  north  of  Bombay, 
and  after  an  absence  from  Calcutta  of  abouŁ  eleyen 
nonths,  dujing  which  he  had  seldom  slept  out  of  his 
cabin  or  tent,  he  amyed  at  Bombay.  The  joumal 
which  he  kept  during  his  yisitation  (published  under 
the  title  XcaTaHvt  ofa  Joumey  m  Upper  India,  Lond. 
1829,  S  yols.  8yo,  sińce  reprinted  in  MurTay'8  Home  and 
Colcnial  Library)  shows  the  extent  of  his  obeenrations 
on  generał  subjects,  and  the  gfraphic  power  which  he 
powcaocd  of  describing  the  noyel  scenes  in  which  he 
was  plaoed.  From  April  to  August  he  remained  at 
Bombay  to  inyestigate  and  superintend  the  interests  of 
the  western  portion  of  his  diocese.  On  the  15th  of  Au- 
gust he  sailed  for  Ceylon,  and  after  remaining  there 
some  time  he  proceeded  to  Calcutta,  which  he  rcached 
on  the  21st  of  October.  If  it  had  been  possible  to  haye 
cdocated  his  children  in  India,  he  was  now  prepared,  he 
States,  to  end  his  days  among  the  objects  of  his  solid* 
tude.  In  Februaiy,  1826,  he  left  Calcutta  for  Madras 
to  Tisit  the  Bouthem  proyinces.  On  the  Ist  of  April 
he  arriyed  at  Trichinopoli,  and  on  the  3d,  after  inyesti- 
gating  the  state  of  the  mission  and  confirmiiig  fifleen 
natiyes,  on  whom  he  bestowed  the  episcopal  benedic- 
tion  in  the  Tamul  language,  he  retired  to  use  a  cold 
bath,  in  which  he  was  found  dead  about  half  an  hour 
afterwards.  Within  less  than  three  weeks  he  would 
haye  completed  his  forty-third  year.  The  candor,  mod- 
esty,  and  simplicity  of  bishop  Heber's  manners,  his  un- 
wearied  eam^tness,  and  his  mild  and  stcady  zeal,  com- 
bined  with  his  talents  and  attainments,  had  inspired 
Tenention  and  respect  not  only  among  the  Europeim, 
bot  the  natiye  populaUon  of  India"  {Englitk  Cychpcsdia, 
&  y.).  In  theology  he  was  an  Arminian.  His  whole 
life,  after  his  eleyation  to  the  episcopate,  was  deyoted 
to  its  great  duties.  He  had  a  profound  laith  in  the  fun- 
damentid  doctrines  of  the  Gospel,  and  of  their  adaptation 
10  the  heathen.  His  heart  daily  breathed  the  most  ear- 
nestwishesforthediflnsionofitspreciousblessings.  His 
tastes  and  puisoits  were  all  subordinated  to  that  grand 
object,  and,  had  he  been  spared  to  the  usual  term  of  life, 
there  is  no  donbt  that  a  career,  begun  in  the  spirit  and 
pnjsecnted  on  the  system  of  itinerancy  he  had  adopted, 
would  have  yielded  a  rich  hanrest  of  spiritual  fruit  to 
the  Ix>Td  of  his  yineyard.  Besides  the  works  aboye  men- 
tioned,  he  published  Par%$h  Sermom  (Lond.  1844, 5th  ed. 
2  yols.  8vo).  His  Poetka!  Works  are  printed  in  yarious 
editiona.  See  Life  o/ Heber,  by  his  Widów  (Lond.  1830, 
2  yola.  4to) ;  Robinson,  Last  Days  of  Heber  (1830, 8yo) ; 
Manoir  of  Hdter,  abridged  from  the  large  ed.  (Boston, 
W36, 12nio) ;  Krohn,  H:s  LAen  u,  Nachrichten  uber  In- 
IV.-I 


diea  (Berlin,  1881, 2  yols.) ;  Q»arłerfy  Jietfiew  (London), 
xliii,  366 ;  Edinburgh  Reriew,  lii,  431 ;  YiJlemain,  Hemte 
des  deux  MondeSf  Dec.  15, 1857 ;  Herzog,  Real-Encyldop. 
xix,  606. 

He^berite  (Numb.  xxyi,  46).    See  Heber,  4. 

Hebrew(Heb./6n',i'ną5,plur.l3'i'?S5orQ'^J'ną?, 
Exod.  iii,  18 ;  fem.  nj-iąs, «  Hebrewess,"  plur.  ni^^DS, 
Greek  *EI3paioc),  a  designation  of  the  people  of  Israel, 
used  first  of  their  progenitor  Abraham  (Gen.  xiy,  13 ; 
Sept.  Ttf  iTipdr^).  This  name  is  neyer  in  Scripture  ap- 
plied  to  the  Isradites  except  when  the  speaker  is  a  for- 
eig^er  (Gen.  xxxix, J4, 17 ;  xli,  12 ;  £xod.  i,  16 ;  ii,  6 ;  1 
Sam.  iy,  6,  9,  etc.),  or  when  Israelites  speak  of  them- 
selyes  to  one  of  another  nation  (Gen.  xl,  15 ;  Exod.  i,  19 ; 
Jonah  i,  9,  etc),  or  when  they  are  contrasted  with  other 
peoples  (Gen.  xliii,  82;  £xod.  i,  3, 7, 15 ;  Deut.  xy,  12; 
1  Sam.  xiii,  3, 7).  See  Gesenius,  Tkes,  Heb.  s.  v.  (The 
only  apparcnt  exception  is  Jer.  xxxiv,  9 ;  but  here  there 
is  probably  such  an  implied  oontrast  between  the  Jews 
and  other  peoples  as  would  bring  the  usage  under  the 
last  case.)  By  the  Greek  and  Latin  wńters  this  is  the 
name  by  which  the  descendants  of  Jacob  are  designated 
when  they  are  not  called  Jews  (Pausan.  y.  5, 2 ;  yi,  24, 
6;  Plut.  Sympos,  iy,  6, 1 ;  Tacit,  Hisf,  y,  1);  and  Jose- 
phus,  who  aifects  claasical  peculiarities,  constantly  uses 
it  In  the  N.  T.  we  find  the  same  contrast  between  He- 
brews  and  foreigners  (Acts  yi,  1 ;  FhiL  iii,  5) :  the  He- 
brew  language  is  distinguished  from  all  others  (Lukę 
xxiii,  38;  John  y,  2;  xix,  13;  Acts  xxi,  40;  xxyi,  14; 
Rey.  ix.  U) ;  while  in  2  Cor.  xi,  22  the  word  is  used  as 
only  second  to  IsraefUe  in  the  expree8ion  of  national  pe- 
culiarity. ,  On  these  facts  two  opposing  hypotheses  haye 
been  raised ;  the  one  that  Israelite  or  Jew  was  the  name 
by  which  the  nation  designated  itself  (just  as  the  Welsh 
cali  themselyes  Cymry,  though  in  speaklng  of  themselyes 
to  a  Saxon  they  would  probably  use  the  name  Welsh) ; 
the  other  is  that  "  Hebrew"  is  a  national  name,  merely 
indicatiye  of  the  people  as  a  people,  while  Isreelite  is  a 
sacred  or  religious  name  appropriate  to  them  as  the 
choeen  people  of  God.  This  Utter  opinion  Gesenius  dis- 
misses  as  **without  foundation"  (Lexicon  by  Robinson, 
8.  y.),  but  it  has  receiyed  the  deliberate  sanction  of 
Ewald  {Awtftihrl  Lekrb,  der  Heb,  Spr,  p.  18, 5th  ed.). 

DerwaHon  ofthe  Name, — I.  From  Abram,  A  brat,  and 
by  euphony  Hebrcsi  (August.,  Ambrose).  Displaying,  as 
it  does,  the  utmost  ignorance  of  the  language,  this  deri- 
yation  was  neyer  extensiyely  adopted,  and  was  eyen  re- 
tracted  by  Augustine  (Rełract.  16).  The  euphony  al- 
leged  by  Ambrose  is  qulte  imperceptible,  and  Uiere  is  no 
parallel  in  the  Lat.  meridie=medidie. 

II.  Acoording  to  the  sacred  writer,  ^^^39,  Hebrew,  is 
a  deriyatiye  from  ^13^,  Eber,  the  ancestor  of  Abraham; 
at  least  the  same  persona  who  are  called  Hebrews  are 
called  "nar  ^^:i,sons  ofEber  (Gen.  x,  21);  and  'll^, 
Eber  (Numb.  xxiy,  24) ;  and  this  is  tantamount  to  a  der- 
iyation  of  the  name  Hebrew  from  Eber.  In  support  of 
this,  it  may  be  urged  that  *^^19  is  the  proper  form 
which  a  patronymic  from  ^1!?  would  assume;  aocoid- 
ing  to  the  analogy  of  "^aMIC,  a  Moabite,  *^V\,  a  DanUe, 
•^abs,  a  CaMfite,  etc  (Hiller,  OnomoMł,  Sac,  c  xiy,  p.  281 
sq.).  What  adds  much  force  to  this  argument  is  the  ey- 
ident  antithesis  in  Gen.  xiy,  13,  between  *^^a9n  D^IK 
and  ■i'n^:xn  K*łś« ;  the  former  of  these  is  as  eyidently 
a  patronymic  as  the  latter.  This  yiew  is  supported 
by  Josephus,  Suidas,  Bochart,yatablus,  DruńuSyYoesius, 
Buxtorf,  Hottinger,  Leusden,Whiston,  and  Bauer.  The- 
odoret  (OuasŁ.  in  Geru  61)  urges  against  it  that  the  He- 
brews were  not  the  only  descendants  of  Eber,  and,  there- 
fore,  could  not  appropriate  his  name ;  and  the  objection 
has  often  been  repeated.  To  meet  it,  recourse  has  been 
had  to  the  suggestion,  first  adduced,  we  belieye,  by  Ibn 
Ezra  (Comment,  ad  Jon,  i,  9),  that  the  descendants  of 
Abraham  retained  the  name  Hebrew  from  Eber,  becaun 


HEBREW 


130 


HEBREW 


they  alone  of  his  descendants  retained  the  faith  vrhich 
he  held.  This  may  be,  but  we  are  hardly  entitled  to 
asmme  it  in  order  to  account  for  the  fact  before  us.  It 
IB  better  to  throw  the  ontu  probandi  on  the  objector,  and 
to  demand'  of  him,  in  our  ignorance  of  what  determined 
the  use  of  such  patronymics  in  one  linę  of  descent  and 
not  in  others,  that  he  should  show  cauBe  why  it  ia  in- 
oonceiyable  that  Abraham  might  have  a  good  and  suffi- 
cient  reafion  for  wishing  to  perpetuate  the  memoiy  of 
his  descent  from  Eber^which  did  not  apply  to  the  other 
descendants  of  that  patriarch.  Why  might  not  one  race 
of  the  descendants  of  Eber  cali  themselves  by  pre-emi- 
nence  sons  of  Eber  J  ust  aa  one  race  of  the  descendants 
of  Abraham  caUed  themselves  by  pre-eminence  sons  of 
Abraham.  But  Eber,  it  is  objccted,  is  a  name  of  no 
notę  in  the  history ;  we  know  nothing  of  him  to  entitle 
him  to  be  selected  as  the  person  after  whom  a  pcople 
should  cali  themselres*  But  is  our  ignorance  to  be  the 
measure  of  the  knowledge  of  Abraham  and  his  descend- 
ants on  such  a  point?  Because  we  know  nothing  to 
distinguish  Eber,  does  it  follow  that  they  knew  nothing? 
Certain  it  is  that  he  was  of  sufficient  importance  to  re- 
flect  a  glory  on  his  fatber  Shem,  whoee  highest  desig- 
nation  is  "  the  father  of  all  the  children  of  Eber"  (Gen. 
x,21);  and  oertain  it  iś  that  his  name  lingered  for  many 
generations  in  the  region  where  he  resided,  for  it  was  as  ! 
''Eber"  that  the  Mesopotamian  prophet  knew  the  de-  | 
soendants  of  Jacob,  and  spoke  of  them  whcn  they  first 
madę  their  appcarance  in  warlike  force  on  the  borders 
of  the  promised  land  (Numb.  xxiv,  24). 

On  the  other  hand,  it  is  contended  that  the  passage 
Gen.  X,  21  \ń  not  so  much  genealogical  as  cthnograph- 
ical;  and  in  this  riew  it  seems  that  the  words  are  in- 
tended  to  contrast  Shem  with  Ham  and  Japhet,  and 
especially  with  the  former.  Now  Babel  is  plainly  fixed 
as  the  extreme  east  limit  of  the  posterity  of  Ham  (ver. 
10),  from  whoee  land  Kimrod  went  out  into  Assyria 
(ver.  11,  maigin  of  A.  Yer*.):  in  the  next  place,  EgjT^ 
(ver.  13)  is  mentioned  as  the  western  limit  of  the  same 
great  race ;  and  these  two  cxtTemes  having  bccn  ascer- 
tained,  the  historian  proceeds  (ver.  15-19)  to  fili  up  his 
ethnographic  sketch  with  the  intermediate  tribes  of  the 
Canaanites.  In  short,  in  ver.  &-20  we  hare  indications 
of  three  geographical  pointa  which  distinguish  the  pos- 
terity of  Ham,  yiz.  Egypt,  Palestinc,  and  Babylon.  At 
the  last-mentioned  city,  at  the  ri^er  Euphrates,  their 
proper  occupancy,  unaffected  by  the  exceptional  move- 
ment  of  Asshur,  terminated,  and  at  the  same  point  that 
of  the  descendants  of  Shem  began.  Accordingly,  the 
sharpcst  contrast  that  could  be  derised  is  obtained  by 
generally  classing  these  latter  nations  as  those  heyond 
the  river  Euphrates;  and  the  words  "father  of  all  the 
children  of  Eber,"  L  e.  father  of  the  nations  to  the  east  of 
the  Euphrates,  find  an  intelligible  place  in  the  context. 
It  must  also  be  confessed  that  in  the  genealogical 
scheme  in  Gen.  xi,  10-26,  it  does  not  appear  that  the 
Jcws  thought  of  Eber  as  a  source  primary,  or  even  sec- 
ondary  of  the  national  descent  The  genealogy  neither 
starta  from  him,  nor  in  its  uniform  seąuence  does  it  rest 
upon  him  yrith  any  emphasis.  There  is  nothing  to  dis- 
tu!;];uish  Eber  above  Arphaxad,  Peleg,  or  Serug.  Like 
them,  he  is  but  a  link  in  the  chain  by  which  Shem  is 
connected  with  Abraham.  Indeed,  the  tendency  of  the 
Iraelitish  retrospect  is  to  stop  at  Jacob.  It  is  with  Ja- 
cob that  their  history  as  a  nation  begins:  beyond  Jacob 
they  held  their  ancestry  in  common  with  the  Edomites ; 
beyond  Isaac  they  were  in  danger  of  being  confounded 
with  the  Ishmaelites.  The  predominant  figurę  of  the 
emphatically  Htbrew  Abraham  might  tempt  them  be- 
yond those  pointa  of  aifinity  with  other  races,  so  distaste- 
lul,  80  anti-national;  but  it  is  almost  inconceirable  that 
they  would  voluntarily  originate  and  perpetuate  an  ap- 
pellation  of  themselres  which  landed  them  on  a  plat- 
form of  ancestry  where  thcy  met  the  whole  population 
of  Arabia  ((ien.  x,  25,  30). 

III.  Hence  others  (as  Jerome,  Theodorct,  Origen, 
ChiyBoat.,  Ariaa  Montanus,  R.  Bechai,  Paul  Buig.,  Mun- 


ster, Grotius,  Scaliger,  Selden,  Rosenm.,  Gesenius,  and 
Eichhom)  prefer  tradng  ^'^1'S  to  the  rerb  *^^^ł  to  pas» 
over^  or  the  noun  "^STł  tht  region  or  country  heymi. 
By  those  who  favor  the  former  etymology,  **  Hebrew"  is 
regarded  as  equivalent  to  "  the  man  who  passed  over  ;** 
by  those  who  favor  the  latter,  it  is  taken  to  mean  "  the 
man  from  the  region  beyond;**  uid  under  both  suppo- 
sitions  it  is  held  to  be  applied  by  the  Canaanites  to 
Abraham  as  haring  crossed  the  Euphrates,  or  come 
from  the  region  beyond  the  Euphrates  to  Canaan.  Of 
these  etymologies  the  former  is  now  generally  aban- 
doned;  it  is  felt  that  the  supposition  that  the  croasiiig 
of  the  Euphrates  was  such  an  unparallelcd  achierement 
as  to  fix  on  him  who  accomplished  it  a  name  that  should 
descend  to  his  posterity,  and  become  a  national  appel- 
lation,  is  somewhat  too  yiolent  to  be  maintained ;  and, 
besides,  as  the  verb  ^.39  signifies  to  pass  from  tku  s&de 
to  tkat^  not  from  thai  side  to  /Aw,  it  would  not  be  the 
term  applied  by  the  people  of  Canaan  to  desigiiate  the 
act  of  one  who  had  oome  from  the  other  side  of  the  Eu- 
phrates to  them.  The  other  etNinology  has  roore  in  its 
favor.  It  is  that  sanctioned  by  the  (rreek  translatora 
(Sept.  ó  iriparrię^  Aq.  flrfpatnjc);  it  is  in  accoidancc 
with  the  usage  of  the  phrase  '^•JJH  *^??»  which  was 
employed  to  designate  the  region  beyond  the  Euphra- 
tes (Josh.  xxiv,  2,  3;  2  Sam.  x,  16;  1  Chroń,  xix,  16); 
and  it  is  not  improbable  that  Abraham,  coming  among 
the  Canaanites  from  beyond  the  Euphrates,  might  be 
designated  by  them  "  the  man  from  the  region  beyond," 
juBt  as  Europeans  might  cali  an  American  "a  trans- 
atlantic."  But,  though  Bleek  vcry  confidently  pro- 
nounces  this  view  **  without  doubt  the  right  one"  ( AV»- 
leitung  ins  A.  T.  p.  72),  it  \b  open  to  scrious,  if  not  fiital 
objections. 

1,  There  is  no  instanoe  of  139  by  itself  denoting  the 
region  beyond  the  Euphrates,  or  any  other  river;  the 
phrase  iuvariably  ufed  is  "^instl  11T.  RoscnmUller, 
foUowing  Hyde  (Histor.  Relig,  Yet,  Pen,  p.  51),  sceks  to 
supply  this  desiderated  instance  by  taking  127  as  cp- 
esegetical  of  irrK  in  Numb.  xxiv,  24="afiiigant  A»- 
sjrriam  et  totam  transflm-ialem  regionem."  But  the 
leamed  writer  has  in  his  zeal  overlooked  the  second 
"^39,  which  quite  precludes  his  excge8is.  Knobel  avoida 
this  error  by  simply  taking  11T2;S=A88}Tria,  and  131? 
=Mesopotamia;  but  in  this  case  it  is  the  proper  name 
*137,  Kberj  and  not  the  preposition  13?,  traw,  which 
is  in  questioiL  2.  If  "^127  was  the  proper  dcsignatton 
of  those  who  lived  on  the  other  side  of  the  Euphrates, 
we  should  find  that  name  applied  to  such  as  coniimitd 
to  dwell  there,  not  to  a  race  descended  from  one  who 
had  lefl  that  region  never  to  return.  8.  lliough  Abra- 
ham, as  having  been  originally  a  transfluvian,  might  be 
so  called  by  the  Canaanites,  it  is  improbable  that  they 
should  have  extended  this  name  to  his  posterity,  to 
whom  it  in  no  sense  applied.  No  one  would  thlnk  of 
continuing  the  term  "  transatlantic"  to  peisons  bom  in 
Britain  on  the  ground  that  a  remote  ancestor  had  come 
from  acroes  the  Atlantic  to  settle  in  that  country!  Aa 
to  the  sanction  which  this  etymology  derives  from  the 
Sept^  no  great  weight  can  be  attacbed  to  that  when  we 
remember  how  oflen  these  translatora  hare  erred  in  this 
way ;  and  also  that  they  have  givcn  iftpaiopę  as  the 
rendering  of  IS?  *^33  in  Numb.  xxiv,  24 ;  "  Plus  Tice 
simplici  hallucinati  sunt  interpretes  Gneci  eorum  ut  no- 
bis  standum  cadendumve  non  sit  autoritate**  (Carpzor, 
Crił.  Sac.  V,  T,  p.  171).  We  may  add  that  the  author- 
ity  of  the  Sept.  and  Aquila  on  such  a  point  is  urged 
with  a  had  grace  by  those  who  treat  with  contempt  the 
et\nnologie8  of  the  Hcbrew  text  as  resting  on  merę 
Jewish  tradition ;  if  a  Jewish  tradition  of  the  time  of 
Moses  is  subject  to  suspicion,  afortiori  is  one  of  the  age 
of  Ptolemy  Lagi  and  of  Alexandrian  origin.  Ewakl 
pronounces  this  derivation  "  quite  uncertain."    4.  This 


HEBREW  OF  THE  HEBREWS  131 


HEBREW  LANGUAGE 


dfriTBtion  IB  open  to  the  strong  objection  that  Hebrew 
ooans  ending  in  *^  are  either  patronymics  or  gentilic 
nooDS  (BiixŁorf,  Leoaden).  This  u  a  technical  objec- 
tion which — though  fatal  to  the  TrfparttCt  or  appellatire 
derivation  as  traced  back  to  the  verb--<loe8  not  apply 
to  the  same  as  referred  to  the  noun  ^37.  The  analogy 
of  Galii,  Angii,  Hispani,  deńved  from  Gallia,  Anglia, 
Ilispania  (Leoaden),  is  a  complete  blunder  in  ethnogra- 
pby ;  and,  at  any  ratę,  it  would  confirm  rather  than  de- 
atroy  the  derivation  from  the  noun. 

lY.  Farkhont,  whoee  works  oocasionally  present  sug- 
gestions  worth  cousideration,  has  advanced  the  opinion 
that  "^ns?  is  a  deriTation  from  the  rerb  "^S:^  in  the 
aense  ofpaumg  througk  ot  from  place  to  place  (oompare 
GeD.xTiii,5;  £xod.  xxxii, 27 ;  £zek.xxxv,7;  2  Chroń. 
xxx,  10,  etc);  so  that  its  meaning  would  be  a  tojoumr 
er  or  pamtr  througk^  aa  distinct  from  a  Mftier  in  the 
land.  Thia  undoabtedly  exactly  describes  the  condition 
of  Abraham  and  his  immediate  descendanta,  and  might 
▼cTf  naturaUy  be  asaumed  by  them  as  a  designation ; 
for,  as  the  apostle  says,  *'they  confeased  they  were 
atzangen  and  pilgrims  on  the  earth**  (Heb.  xi,  13).  In 
this  caae  the  statement  in  Cren.  x,  21 ;  Kumb.  xxiv,  24, 
most  be  ondeiBtood  as  refening  to  the  poeterity  of  Eber 
generally,  and  not  to  the  Hebrews  specially  or  exclu- 
aively.  The  most  serious  objection  to  Parkhunfs  sug- 
geation  ariaes  from  the  form  of  the  word  *^129.  A 
woid  from  135,  to  convey  the  meaning  of  traruilorj  or 
<me  poMoig  throughj  we  should  expect  to  find  in  the 
form  "lańr  or  '^ZS. 

On  the  whole.  the  derivation  of  lini  (Hebrew)  from 
Ebar  seems  to  have  most  in  its  favor  and  least  against 
it.  (See  on  this  side  Augustine,  De  Cicił.  7>et,vi,  U; 
Baxtorf,  BtM,  iii,  27 ;  Bochart,  Phaleg,  ii,  14 ;  Hottinger, 
The$,  PhiL  p.  4 ;  Leuaden,  Pkił.  Iłeb.  Disa.  xxi ;  Morinus, 
De  Ung.  Primeer.  p.  64;  Pfeiffer,  DiJ.  Script.  Ijkc^ 
Opp.  p.  49 ;  Carpzor,  Cril.  Sac.  p.  165;  Ilezel,  Gesch.  cL 
Jłdr.  Spr.  sec.  4;  'ŻyrtiiA^AnafuhrULehrhuch  der  Hth, 
Gram.  p.  19,  5Łh  cdit.;  Gtsckichte  des  V,  Israel,  i,  334; 
Haremick,  /ntrod,  to  the  O,  Test.  p.  125;  Baumgarten, 
Thet^  Comment.  zum  Pent.  ad  loc  On  the  other  side, 
aee  Theodoret,  (2<fa^.  in  Gen,  16;  Chrysoet.,  Uom.  85  m 
Gol;  SeMen,  De  Diis  iS>rw,  p.  13;  Walton, Pro/^.  p. 
15  tą^  in  Dathe*s  edit  p.  68 ;  Gussetius,  Comment.  Ling, 
Htb,  DisBw  Proenu  p.  7 ;  Michaelis,  SpicHeg.  Geogr,  HA, 
EjU  ii,  66 ;  Gesenius,  Gesch.  der  Heb,  Spr,  p.  11 ;  Gram- 
mar,  sec.  2.) — Kitto ;  Smith.     See  Jew. 

HEBREW  OF  THE  HEBREWS  CEA^icoc  ii 
'^3paiMv,  emphatically  a  Hebrew,  one  who  was  so  by 
both  paients,  and  that  by  a  long  series  of  ancestorB, 
withoiit  admixtuie  of  Gentile  or  even  proselyte  blood. 
In  this  way  the  Hebrews  fonned  a  superUtiye  of  inten- 
Ńty— as  **  holy  of  holies,"*  L  e.  the  most  holy  place ; 
"Tanity  of  ranities,"  L  e.  exceedingly  vain;  "heaven 
of  hcayens,**  L  e.  the  highcst  hearen.  Uence  Paul, 
when  speaking  of  the  ground  of  precedence  which  he 
might  claim  above  the  false  teachers  at  Philippi,  says 
that  "^A^  it  a  Hebrew  ofthe  Hetfrews''  (PhiL  iii,  5),  L^e. 
one  of  fuli  Hebrew  descent,  and  acquainted  with  the 
Hebrew  language.  Although  he  was  bom  at  Tarsus, 
be  was  brought  up  at  the  feet  of  Garoaliel  in  Jenualem 
(Acts  xxii,  3).  To  this  same  fact  he  seems  to  appeal 
again  in  a  similar  case,  ^Are  they  Hebretcsf  so  am  7'* 
(2  Cor.  xi,  22).  He  was  a  genuine  Hebrew  man  in  every 
important  respect  (Acts  xxi,  39, 40). 

Hebrews,  The  (Acts  vi,  1),  L  e.  Hebrew-speaking 
Jewsy  in  oontrast  with  those  speaking  the  Greek  lan- 
gnage.    See  Hellenist. 

Hebrew  Łangnage,  the  language  of  the  Hebrew 
peopk,  and  of  the  Okl-Testament  Scriptures,  with  the 
esception  of  the  few  chapters  written  in  Chaldee.  See 
Chaldee  Language.  In  treating  this  subject  we  shall 
mainly  avail  ounelyes  of  the  artides  in  Fairbaim^s  Dic- 
UtKKury  and  Kitto*s  Cffciop<edia,  s.  v.  (See  £wald'8  He- 
ł«nw  Grammar,  §  1-18, 186-160.) 


In  the  Bibie  this  language  is  nowhere  designated  by 
the  name  Hebrew^  but  this  is  not  surprising  when  we 
consider  how  rarely  that  name  is  employed  to  designate 
the  nation.  See  Hebrew.  If  we  except  the  terms 
«  Kp  of  Canaan"  (-,553  TBb)  in  Isa.  xix,  18— where  the 
diction  is  of  an  elevated  character,  and  is  so  far  no  evi- 
dence  that  this  designation  was  the  one  oommonly  em- 
ployed— the  only  name  by  which  the  Hebrew  language 
is  mentioned  in  the  Old  Testament  is  "  Jewish"  (r.^^nin*^, 
used  advert>ially,  Judaict,  m  Jewish,  2  Kings  xviii,  26, 
28 ;  Isa.  xxxvi,  11, 13 ;  2  Chroń,  xxxii,  18  [in  Neh.  xiii, 
24,  perhaps  the  A  ramaic  is  meant]),  where  the  feminine 
may  be  explained  as  an  abstract  of  the  last  formation, 
according  to  £wald's  Hebr.  Gram.  §  344, 457,  or  as  refei^ 
ring  to  the  usual  gender  of  "jllśb  understood.  In  a  stzict 
sense,  however, "  Jewish"  denotes  the  idiom  of  the  king- 
dom  of  Judah,  which  became  the  predominant  one  after 
the  deportation  of  the  ten  tńbea.  It  is  in  the  Greek 
writings  of  the  later  Jews  that  ^Hebrew" is  first  applied 
to  the  language,  as  in  the  ifipaiori  of  the  prologne  to 
Eoclesiasticus,  and  in  the  y\u9aa  riliv  *E(5paif»w  of  Jo- 
sephufi.  (The  i^patę  ^toAcitrot*  of  the  New  Testament 
is  used  in  contradistinction  to  the  idiom  of  the  Hellenist 
Jews,  and  does  not  mean  the  aneient  Hebrew  language, 
but  the  then  yemacular  Aramaic  dialect  of  Palestine.) 
Our  title  to  use  the  designation  Hebrew  language  is 
therefore  founded  on  the  fact  that  the  nation  which 
spoke  this  idiom  was  properly  distiuguished  by  the  eth- 
nographical  name  of  Hebrews, 

The  Hebrew  language  belongs  to  the  dass  of  Un- 
guages  called  Shemitic — 00  called  because  spoken  chief- 
ly  by  nations  enumerated  in  Soripture  among  the  de- 
scendants  of  Shem.  The  Sanscrit,  Persian,  Greek,  lAtr 
in,  with  the  Germanie  and  Celtic  languages,  are  the 
principal  members  of  anothcr  large  class  or  group  of 
languages,  to  which  havc  been  affixed  the  yarious  names 
of  Japhetic,  Indo-European,  Indo-(jermanic,  and  Aryan. 
This  latter  class  embraoes  most  of  the  languages  of  Eu- 
ropę, iiicluding  of  course  our  own.  The  student,  there- 
fore, who,  besides  mastering  his  own  language,  has  pass- 
ed  through  a  oourse  of  Greek,  Latin,  French,  and  Ger- 
man (and  few  of  our  students,  exoept  with  a  professional 
view,  extend  their  linguistic  studies  farther),  has  not,  af- 
ter all  his  labor,  got  beyond  the  limits  of  the  same  class 
of  languages  to  which  his  mother  tongue  belongs,  and 
of  which  it  forms  one  of  the  most  important  membem 
But  when  he  passes  to  the  study  of  the  Hebrew  lan- 
guage he  entera  a  new  6eld,  he  obsen-es  new  phenome- 
na,  he  traoes  the  operation  of  new  lawa. 

I.  Characteristics  of  the  Shemitic  Languages^  and  in 
partiatlar  of  the  Hebrew. — 1.  With  respect  to  sounds, 
the  chief  peculiarities  are  the  four  following : 

(1.)  The  predominance  ofguttural  sounds.  The  He- 
brew has  four  or  (we  may  say)  five  guttural  sounds, 
dcscending  from  the  alender  and  scarcely  perceptible 
throat-breathing  rcpresented  by  the  first  letter  of  the 
alphabet  (K)  through  the  decided  aspiiate  n,  to  the 
strong  n  and  gurgling  T,  To  these  we  must  add  '^^ 
which  partakes  largely  of  the  guttural  characte^.  Nor 
were  these  sounds  sparingly  employed;  on  the  contrary, 
they  were  in  morę  frequent  use  than  any  other  class  of 
letters.  In  the  Hebrew  dictionary  the  four  gutturals 
occupy  consideiably  morę  than  a  fourth  part  of  the 
whole  volume,  the  remaining  eighteen  letters  occupy- 
ing  considerably  less  than  three  fourths.  This  predom- 
inance of  guttural  sounds  must  have  given  a  very  mark- 
ed  character  to  the  ancieńt  Hebiew,  as  it  does  still  to 
the  modem  Arabie 

(2.)  The  use  of  the  very  stiwg  letters  »,  S,  p,  which 
may  be  represented  by  tł  or  ts^  7,  in  pronouncing  which 
the  organ  is  morę  compressed  and  the  sound  given  forth 
with  greater  vehemence.  These  letters,  especially  the 
last  two,  are  also  in  frequent  uw. 

When  the  (ireeks  borrowed  their  alphabet  from  the 
Phoenidans,  they  softened  or  dropped  these  strong  let- 


HEBREW  LANGITAGE 


132 


HEBREW  LAN6UAGE 


ters  (79  being  softened  into  0,  and  2Sf  p  being  drojiped 
exccpt  as  marks  of  nnmber),  and  changed  the  guttuial 
lettcrs  into  the  vowel8  a,  f ,  i;,  o. 

(3.)  The  Shemidc  langiiages  do  not  adrait,  like  the 
Indo-£uropean,  of  an  accumulation  or  grouping  of  oon- 
Bonanta  around  a  single  vowel  sound.  In  such  words  as 
er  a/i,  crush,  ffrmd,  ttrong,  głretch,  we  And  foiur,  five,  and 
8ix  conaonants  dustering  around  a  single  rowel.  The 
Shemitic  languilges  reject  such  groapings,  usually  inter- 
posing  a  vowel  sound  morę  or  less  distinct  after  each 
consonant  It  is  only  at  the  end  of  a  word  that  two 
consonants  may  stand  together  without  any  intennedi- 
atc  Yowel  sound;  and  even  in  that  case  various  expedi- 
ents  are  employed  to  dispense  with  a  combination  which 
is  evidently  not  in  accordance  with  the  genius  of  the 
languagc. 

(4.)  The  yowels,  although  thus  copiously  introduced, 
are  neyertheless  kept  in  strict  subordination  to  the  con- 
sonants; 80  much  80  that  it  is  only  in  rare  and  excep- 
tional  cases  that  any  word  or  syllable  begins  with  a 
yowel  In  Hebrew  we  have  no  such  syllables  as  ab,  ag, 
ad,  in  which  the  initial  sound  is  a  pure  yowel ;  but  only 
ba,  ga,  da,  If  Sir  H.  Rawlinson  is  correct,  it  would  ap- 
pear  that  the  Assyrian  language  differed  firom  the  other 
Shemitic  languages  in  this  particular.  In  his  syllabic 
alphabet  a  considerable  number  of  the  syllables  begin 
with  a  yowel. 

If  we  endeayoT  to  calculate  the  elfect  of  the  foregoing 
peculiarities  on  the  character  of  the  language,  we  can- 
not  avoid  the  conclusion  that  the  Shemitic  languages 
are  of  a  morę  primitiye  type  than  the  European— much 
less  matured^polished,  compacted— the  natural  utteranoe 
of  a  mind  yehement  and  passionatc,  impulsiye  rather 
than  calmly  deliberatiye. 

2.  With  respect  to  roots  and  teords,  the  Shemitic  lan- 
guages are  distinguished  in  a  yery  marked  manner: 
(1.)  Bg  the  three-letłer  root,  This  is  one  of  the  most 
stiiking  characteristics  of  these  languages,  as  it  does  not 
appear  that  there  is  any  language  not  belonging  to  this 
class  in  the  formation  of  whoee  roots  the  same  law  has 
been  at  work.  It  is  yery  difficult  to  ascertain  the  ori- 
gin  of  this  singular  phenomenon.  It  may  possibly  be 
regarded  as  a  kind  of  eąuiyalent  for  the  compound  roots 
of  other  languages  (which  are  altogether  wanting  in 
the  Shemitic) ;  an  original  iwo4etter  root  being  enlarged 
and  expanded  into  a  greater  or  less  number  of  thrte^eŁ- 
ter  roots,  for  the  purpose  of  giying  expres8ion  to  the  va- 
rious  modifications  and  shades  of  the  primitiye  root 
idea.  The  attcmpt  has  indeed  been  madę,  and  with  no 
smali  measure  of  success,  to  point  out  and  specify  the 
two-letter  roots  from  which  the  exxsting  three-letter 
roots  have  been  deriyed ;  but  it  has  been  properly  re- 
marked  that  such  an  inyestigation  carries  us  quite  away 
from  the  Shemitic  proyince.  \\lien  we  reach  the  two- 
letter  root  we  have  lefl  behiud  us  the  Shemitic  lan- 
guages altogether,  and  drawn  forth  a  new  language, 
which  roight  be  regarded,  did  we  not  know  that  the 
most  ancient  is  not  always  the  most  simple,  as  the  one 
primeyal  language  of  mankind.  By  "•  three-letter  roots" 
We  mean  thoee  ha\ńng  three  consonants  forming  a  dis^ 
syllabic;  and  we  must  cxcept  from  our  remarks  those 
containing  the  so-called  weak  letterB,  which  assimilate 
themselyes  yery  strongly  to  the  monosyllabic  roots  of 
primitiye  yerbs  in  the  Indo-European  group  of  lan- 
guageSb    See  Philolooy,  Comparatiye. 

(2.)  The  consideration  of  the  Hebrew  three-letter  root, 
and  its  possible  growth  out  of  a  morę  original  two-letter 
ZDOt,  leads  on  to  the  notice  of  another  prominent  feature 
of  the  Shemitic  languages,  yiz.  the  further  growth  and 
erpansion  ofthe  three-Utter  root  ittel/iato  a  varifig  of 
whiU  are  caiied  cot^ugcUionaiJbmu,  expressing  mtensiłg, 
refiexiveiws9,  cauaation,  etc  A  similar  formation  may 
be  traced  in  all  languages;  in  some  non-Shemitic  lan- 
guage-s  AA  the  TurkUh,  it  is  yery  largely  and  regularly 
deyeloped  (Max  Muller,  T^cturea  on  Science  of  Language, 
p.  318,  etc).  In  English  we  haye  example8  in  such 
Teifos  as  sU  and  #e^  Ue  and  lay,  tet  being  the  causatiye 


of  sit,  lay  of  lie ;  or  we  may  say  tU  is  the  rcflexiye  of  ad; 
and  lie  of  lay,  So  in  Lathi  aedo  and  sedeo,Jacio  and  ja- 
ceo,  etc,  in  which  latter  root  the  conjugational  forma- 
tion is  still  farther  deyeloped  into  jocto  and  Jactiio,  But 
what  in  these  languages  is  fragmentary  and  occasional, 
in  Hebrew  and  the  cognate  languages  is  carried  out  and 
expanded  with  fulness  and  regularity,  and  conaeąuently 
occupies  a  laige  space  in  the  Shemitic  grammar.  The 
oonjugations  are  of  threc  sorts :  (a)  Thoee  expres8ing  tn- 
tensity,  repetition,  etc,  which  aie  usuaUy  distinguidied 
by  some  change  within  the  root;  (6)  those  expressing 
rtjlexivene8$,  causation,  etc,  which  are  usually  distin- 
guished by  some  addiHon  to  the  root ;  (o)  the  pasńreg, 
distinguished  by  the  presence  of  the  u  or  o  sound  in  the 
first  syllabic 

(3.)  Another  prominent  distinction  of  the  Shemitic 
languages  is  the  extent  to  which  modiJicałionM  ofthe  root 
idea  are  indicated,  not  by  additions  to  the  root,  hut  by 
changea  tciihin  the  root,  '^The  Shemitic  roots,"  says 
Bopp  (Cotnparałire  Grammar  ofthe  Indo^Europeau 
Tongues,  i,  99),  ^on  account  of  their  constmctioo,  po»- 
sess  the  most  surprising  capacity  for  indicating  the  sec- 
ondary  ideas  of  grammar  by  the  merę  intemal  moulding 
of  the  root,  while  the  Sanscrit  roots  at  the  lirst  gnm- 
matical  moyement  are  compelled  to  assume  extemal  ad- 
ditions." These  intemal  changcs  are  prindpally  of  two 
sorts: 

(a)  Vowel  changes,  Nothing  is  morę  remarkable  in 
the  Shemitic  languages  than  the  significanoe  of  thcir 
yowel  sounds ;  the  sharp  a  sound,  formed  by  opening  the 
mouth  wide,  being  associated  as  a  symbol  with  the  idea 
of  actiWty,  while  the  e  and  o  sounds  are  the  symbols  of 
rest  and  passiyeness.  In  the  Arabie  yerb  this  chano- 
teristic  is  yery  marked,  many  of  the  roots  appearing  nn- 
der  three  forms,  each  haying  a  different  yowel,  and  the 
signifłcation  being  modified  in  accordance  with  the  na- 
turę of  that  yowel  The  same  law  appeais  in  the  for- 
mation of  the  passiyes.     Thus  ło/ofa— pass.  kutda, 

(b)  DoulUng  of  consonants,  usually  of  the  middle  let- 
ter  of  the  root.  By  means  of  this  most  simple  and  nat^ 
ural  deyice,  the  Shemitic  languages  express  iniensify  or 
repełition  of  action,  and  also  such  ąualities  as  prompt  to 
repeated  action,  as  righteous,  merciful,  etc  By  oompar- 
ing  this  usage  with  the  expression  of  the  corresponding 
ideas  in  our  own  language,  we  obsenre  at  once  the  dif- 
ference  in  the  genius  of  the  two  languages.  We  say 
merciful,  sin  ful,  i.  c  fuli  of  mercy,  fuli  of  sin.  Not  ao 
the  Shemitic  What  we  express  formally  by  means  of 
an  added  root,  the  Shemitic  indicates  by  a  sign,  by  sim- 
ply  laying  additional  stress  on  one  of  the  root  letters. 
And  thus  again  the  ob8er\'ation  madę  under  the  head 
sound  recurs,  yiz.  that  in  the  formation  ofthe  Shemitic 
languages  the  dominant  influence  was  that  of  instinctiyo 
feeling,  passion,  imagination — the  hand  of  naturę  ap- 
pearing e%-erywhere,  the  yoice  of  naturę  heaid  in  eyery 
utterance :  in  this,  how  widely  separated  from  the  arti- 
ficial  and  highly  organized  languages  of  the  Indo-Euio- 
pean  family  (Adelung,  Miihridates,  i,  361). 

(4.)  The  influence  of  the  imagination  on  the  struo- 
ture  of  the  Shemitic  languages  is  further  disclosed  in  the 
view  which  they  present  of  naturę  tmd  oftime.  To  these 
languages  a  neuter  gender  is  uiknown.  All  natuie 
yiewed  by  the  Shemitic  eye  appears  instinct  with  life. 
The  heavens  dedare  God^s  glory ;  the  earth  skoweth  his 
handkeorL  The  trees  of  the  feld  dap  their  hands  and 
singfor  joy.  This,  though  the  impassioned  utterance 
of  the  Hebrew  poet,  expres8es  a  common  national  feel- 
ing, which  flnds  embodiment  eyen  in  the  structure  of 
the  national  hmguage.  Of  inanimate  naturę  the  He- 
brew knows  nothing :  he  sees  life  eyerywhere.  His  lan- 
guage therefore  rejects  the  neuter  gender,  and  daases 
all  objects,  eyen  those  which  we  regard  aa  inanimate,  aa 
masculine  or  feminlne,  accoiding  as  they  appear  to  his 
imagination  to  be  endowed  with  roale  or  female  attri- 
butes.  As  his  imagination  thus  endowed  the  lower 
forms  of  naturę  with  liWng  properties,  bo,  od  the  other 
hand,  under  the  same  influence,  he  dothed  with  i 


HEBREW  LANGUAGE 


133 


HEBREW  LANGUAGE 


lial  and  sensible  fonn  Łhe  abstract,  the  spiiitual,  eren 
the  diyine.  In  Hebrew  tbe  abBtract  is  oonstantly  ex- 
pressed  by  the  concrete — the  mental  ąoality  by  the  bod- 
ily  member  which  was  regarded  aa  its  fittest  representa- 
tivc.  Thus  hond  or  arm  etanós  for  strengih;  qX,  nos- 
trUj  means  also  hmger;  the  shining  of  the  face  staiuls  for 
fazor  and  cuneptance,  the/attmff  o/tkeface  for  displecu- 
ure,  So  also  to  4ay  otten  means  to  think ;  to  speak  mth 
one  nmttk  stands  for  to  be  qf  the,  same  tentiment,  The 
veib  to  ^  is  employed  to  describe  mentol  aa  well  as  bod- 
ily  progreas,  One'8  course  of  life  is  his  twiy,  the  path  of 
kitfeet.  Nor  only  in  its  description  of  naturę,  but  also 
in  its  modę  ofmdicatwg  timgj  do  we  obfler>'e  the  same 
piedominant  influence  The  Shemitic  tense  s^-^stem,  es- 
pedally  as  iC  appears  in  Hebrew,  is  extremely  simple 
and  piimitivei.  IŁ  is  not  threefold  like  oura,  distributing 
time  into  past,  present,  and  futurę,  but  twofold.  The 
two  so-caOed  tenae*  or  rather  state*  of  the  verb  corre- 
spond  to  the  division  of  nouns  into  abstract  and  con- 
crete. The  verbal  Idea  is  conceired  of  either  in  its  re- 
alization  or  in  its  non-realizatiou,  whether  actual  or 
ideaL  TtiaŁ  which  lios  befure  the  mind  as  realized, 
whether  in  the  actual  past,  present,  or  futurę,  the  ile- 
brew  describes  by  means  of  the  so-called  pretcrite  tense ; 
that  which  he  conceiyes  of  as  yet  to  be  realized  or  in 
process  of  realization,  whether  in  the  actual  past,  present, 
or  futurę,  he  describes  by  means  of  the  so-called  futurę 
tense.  Hence  the  use  of  the  futurę  in  certain  combina- 
tions  as  a  Iłistorical  tense,  and  of  the  so-called  pretcrite 
in  oeitain  combinations  as  a  prophetic  tense.  Into  the 
details  of  the  tense  usages  which  branch  out  from  this 
primitiTe  idea  we  cannot  now  enter.  It  is  in  the  struc- 
tonl  lawa  of  the  Hebrew  language  that  its  influence  is 
most  strongly  marked :  in  the  Aranuean  it  is  almost  lost. 
(See  Ewald,  LehrbucA,  §  134  a ;  Journal  of  Sucred  Lii- 
eraiure  for  Oct.  1849.) 

(5.)  The  influence  of  the  imagination  upon  the  struc- 
tore  of  the  Shemitic  languages  may  also  be  traced  in 
tbe  o&cnioe  ofnot  afewgrammaiicalfonns  tchick  wejind 
»  oiher  langnages.  Much  that  is  definitely  expre8sed  in 
morę  highly  deyeloped  languages  is  left  in  the  Shemit- 
ic languages,  and  e^>ecially  in  the  Ilebrcw,  to  bo  caught 
iq)  by  the  hearer  or  reader.  In  this  respect  there  is  an 
analogy  between  the  language  itsclf  and  the  modę  in 
which  it  was  originally  represented  in  writing.  Of  the 
language  as  writteu,  the  row^el  sounds  formed  no  part 
The  reader  must  supply  these  mentally  as  he  goes  along. 
So  with  the  language  itself.  It  has  not  a  separate  and 
distinct  expTesuon  for  every  shade  and  tum  of  thought. 
Much  is  left  to  be  fiUed  in  by  the  hearer  or  the  reader, 
and  this  usually  without  occasioning  any  serious  inoon- 
Tenience  or  dilHculty.  The  Shemitic  langiuiges,  how- 
erer,  do  not  all  stand  on  the  same  lerel  in  this  respect. 
In  tbe  Syriac,  and  still  morę  in  the  Arabie,  the  expre8- 
Hon  of  thought  is  usually  morę  complete  and  precise 
than  in  Hebrew,  though  oflen  for  that  very  reason  less 
animated  and  impressive.  A  prlncipal  defcct  in  these 
langoagea,  and  especially  iu  the  Hebrew,  is  the  fe^yness 
of  the  paztides.  The  extrcme  simplicity  of  the  yerbal 
fonnation  also  occasions  to  the  European  student  difli- 
culties  which  caii  be  surmounted  only  by  a  rery  careful 
ttudy  of  the  prindplcs  by  which  the  verb-usages  are 
go\'emed. 

In  this  respect  the  Hebrew  occupies  a  middle  position 
between  those  languages  which  consisŁ  almost  entirely 
of  nx>ts  with  a  very  scanty  grammatical  derelopment, 
and  the  Indo-European  cUas  of  languages  in  which  the 
ittanpt  is  madę  to  give  definite  expression  even  to  the 
moat  delicate  shades  of  thought.  The  Gieek,  says  Paul, 
seeks  after  wisdom:  he  reasons,  compares,  analyzes. 
Tbe  Jcw  reąuiies  a  ńgn— something  to  strike  the  imag- 
ination and  carry  conriction  to  the  heart  at  once  with- 
out any  formal  and  lengthened  argument.  The  Greek 
Isngoage,  tberefore,  in  its  most  perfect  form,  was  the  off- 
ipring  of  reason  and  taste ;  the  Hebrew,  of  imagination 
1  intttition.  The  Shemites  have  been  the  quarrier8 
e  great  nmgh  blocks  the  Japhethites  have  cut,  and 


polished,  and  fitted  one  to  another.  The  former,  tbere- 
fore, are  the  teacbers  of  the  world  in  reUgion,  the  ktter 
in  philosophy.  This  peculiar  character  of  the  Shemitic 
mind  is  ver\'  strongly  impressed  upon  the  language. 

A  national  language  being  an  embodiment  and  pic- 
ture  of  the  national  mind,  there  is  thus  thrown  aromid 
the  otherwise  laborious  and  uninteresting  study  of  gram- 
mar,  even  in  its  earliest  stages,  an  attraetire  power  and 
yaluc  which  would  not  otherwise  belong  to  it,  It  was 
the  same  mind  that  found  expres8ion  in  the  Hebrew 
language,  which  gave  birth,  under  the  influence  of  di- 
yine inspiration,  to  the  sublime  reyelations  of  the  Old- 
Testament  Scriptures.  And  it  would  be  easy  to  tracę  an 
analogy  between  these  reyelations  and  the  language  in 
which  they  haye  been  conyeyed  to  us.  It  Łs  curious  to 
flnd  that  eyen  the  diyinesŁ  thoughts  and  names  of  the 
Old  Testament  connect  themselyes  with  ąuestions  in 
Hebrew  grammar.  Thus,  when  we  inyestigate  the  na- 
turę and  use  of  the  Hebrew  plural,  and  discoyer  from  a 
multitude  of  examples  that  it  is  eroployed  not  only  to 
denote  plu7'alifi/f  but  likewise  «r/«i«on,  whether  in  space 
or  time,  as  in  the  Hebrew  words  for  l^fe^yontk^  old  age, 
etc,  and  also  whateyer  seems  bulky  before  the  mind, 
we  are  unwittingly  led  on  to  one  of  the  most  important 
que8tions  in  the  criticism  of  the  Old  Testament,  yiz.  the 
origin  of  the  plural  form  of  the  diyine  name  Q*^n7X 
(JUlohim),  in  our  yersion  renderod  God,  Or,again,  when 
we  study  the  difiicult  ąuestion  of  the  tenaes,  and  endeay- 
or  to  determine  the  exact  import  and  force  of  each,  we 
speedily  discoyer  that  the  grammatical  inyestigation  we 
are  pursuing  is  one  of  unspeakable  moment,  for  it  in- 
yolves  the  right  apprehension  of  that  most  sacred  name 
of  Goil  which  the  Jew  still  refuses  to  take  upon  his  lips, 
the  four-letter  name  JTin'',  Jehouah  (q.  v.). 

3.  In  the  ggntax  and  generał  strueture  of  the  Shemitic 
languages  and  writings  we  tracę  the  operation  of  the 
same  principles,  the  same  tendencies  of  mind  which 
manifest  themselyes  in  the  strueture  of  tcordt,  In  this 
respect  the  Hebrew  language  exhibits  a  morę  simple 
and  primitiye  type  than  any  of  the  sister  tong^ues.  The 
simplicity  of  the  Hebrew  compoeitton  is  yery  obWous 
eyen  to  the  reader  of  the  English  Bibie,  or  to  the  schol- 
ar who  compares  the  Greek  Testament,  the  style  of 
which  is  formed  on  the  model  of  the  Old  Testament, 
with  the  classical  Greek  writers.  We  obsenre  at  once 
that  there  is  no  such  thing  as  the  building  up  of  a 
lengthened  period,  consisting  of  seyeral  propositions 
duły  subordinated  and  compacted  so  as  to  form  a  har- 
monious  and  impressiye  whole.  Hebiew  oomposition 
consists  rather  of  a  succession  of  co-ordinate  proposi- 
tions, each  of  which  is  for  the  moment  uppermost  in 
the  view  of  the  speaker  or  writcr,  until  it  is  superseded 
by  that  which  follows.  This  results  at  once  from  the 
character  of  the  Shemitic  mind,  which  was  morę  re- 
maricable  for  rapid  moyements  and  yiyid  gUmces  than 
for  large  and  comprehensiye  grasp.  Such  a  mind  wonld 
giye  forth  its  thoughts  in  a  rapid  succession  of  inde- 
pendent utterances  rather  than  in  sustained  and  elabo- 
rated  composition.  It  is  a  consequence  of  the  same 
mental  pecuUarity  that  the  highest  poetry  of  the  She- 
mitic nations  is  lyricaL 

The  Hebrew  composition  is  also  extremely  pictorial 
in  its  character— not  the  poetry  only,  but  also  the  prose. 
In  the  history  the  past  is  not  described,  it  is  painted. 
It  is  not  the  ear  that  hears,  it  is  rather  the  eye  that 
sees.  The  course  of  eyents  is  madę  to  pass  before  the 
eye;  the  transactions  are  all  acted  oyer  again.  The 
past  is  not  a  fixed  landscape,  but  a  moying  panorama. 
The  reader  of  the  English  Bibie  must  haye  remarked 
the  constant  use  of  the  word  behold,  which  indicatcs 
that  the  writer  is  himself,  and  wishes  to  make  his  read- 
er also,  a  spectator  of  the  transactions  he  describes. 
The  use  of  the  tenses  in  the  Hebrew  historical  writings 
is  speciaUy  remarkable.  To  the  young  student  of  He- 
brew the  constant  use  of  the  futurę  tense  in  the  descrip- 
tion of  the  past  appears  perhaps  the  most  striking  pe- 


HEBREW  LANGUAGE 


134 


HEBREW  LANGUAGE 


culiarity  of  the  langnage.  But  the  singulAr  phenome- 
non  admits  of  an  easy  explAnaŁion.  It  was  becaiise  the 
Hebrew  viewed  and  described  the  transactions  of  the 
past,  not  as  all  past  and  done,  but  as  in  actoal  process 
and  progresB  of  evoIvement,  that  he  makes  such  fre- 
quent  use  of  the  so-called  futurę.  In  imagination  he 
quits  his  own  pomt  of  time,  and  liyes  over  the  pasL 
With  his  reader  he  sails  down  the  stream  of  time,  and 
traces  with  open  eye  the  winding  course  of  histoiy.  It 
is  impossible  always  to  reproduce  exactly  in  English 
this  peculiaiity  of  the  Hebrew  Bibie. 

Further,  in  wńting  even  of  the  commonesŁ  actions, 
as  that  one  werU,  9poke,  saw,  etc,  the  Hebrew  is  not 
usually  satisfied  with  the  simple  statement  that  the 
thing  was  done,  he  must  describe  also  the  process  of  do- 
ing.  We  are  so  familiar  with  the  style  of  our  English 
Bibles  that  we  do  not  at  once  perceive  the  pictorial 
character  of  such  expres8ions  as  these,  recurring  in  ev- 
ery  page:  he  aroae  and  tcent;  he  opened  his  Upt  and 
apake;  hepułforth  his  hond  and  iook;  he  l\fted  vp  his 
eyes  and  saw';  he  lifted  up  his  taice  and  toepU  But  what 
we  do  not  consciously  perceive  we  oflen  unconsciously 
feel ;  and  dcubtless  it  is  this  painting  of  erents  which  is 
the  source  of  part  at  least  of  the  chajrm  with  which  the 
Scripture  nairatiye  is  iiiyested  to  ail  pure  and  simple 
minds. 

The  same  effect  is  also  produced  by  the  symboUcal 
way  of  represenihig  mental  states  atid  processes  which 
distinguishes  the  Hebrew  imters.  Such  expres6ions  as 
to  bend  or  indine  the  ear  for  "  to  hear  attentively,'^  to 
sHffen  the  neck  for  *<to  be  stubbom  and  rebellious,"  to 
uncoeer  the  ear  for  "to  rereal,"  are  in  frequent  use. 
£yen  the  acts  of  the  Divine  Mind  are  depicted  in  a 
similar  way.  In  the  study  especially  of  the  Old  Testa- 
ment we  must  keep  this  point  carefully  in  view,  lest  we 
should  errby  giying  to  a  s^^mbolical  expre8sion  a  literał 
iuterpretation.  Thus,  when  we  read  (£xod.  xxxiii,  U) 
that  *^  the  Lord  spake  unto  Moses  face  to  face  as  a  man 
speaketh  unto  his  friend,"  we  must  remember  that  it 
was  a  Hebrew  who  wrote  these  words,  one  who  was  ac- 
custoraed  to  depict  to  himself  and  others  the  spiritual 
mider  materiał  symbols,  and  thus  we  shall  be  guarded 
against  irreyerently  attaching  to  them  a  meaiiing  which 
they  were  neyer  intended  to  bear.  But,  though  such 
modes  of  expre88ion  are  open  to  misapprehension  by  us 
whose  minds  are  formed  in  so  yery  different  a  mould, 
neyertheless,  when  rightiy  understood,  they  haye  the 
effect  of  giying  us  a  morę  elear  and  \i\\A.  impression  of 
the  spiritual  ideas  which  they  embody  than  could  be 
conveyed  to  us  by  any  other  modę  of  representation  or 
expre8sion. 

The  simplicity  and  naturalness  of  the  language  fur- 
ther  appears  in  tho  prominence  which  is  constantly 
giyen  to  the  word  or  words  embod3ring  the  leading  idea 
in  a  sentence  or  period.  Thus  the  noun  stands  before 
the  adjectiye,  the  prcdicate  stands  before  the  subjoct^ 
milesB  the  latter  be  specially  emphatic,  in  which  case  it 
is  not  only  put  first,  but  may  stand  by  itself  as  a  nomi- 
natiye  abeolute  without  any  syiitactical  connection  with 
the  rest  of  the  sentence. 

The  constant  use  of  the  oratio  directa  is  also  to  be 
specially  noted,  as  an  indication  of  the  primitire  char- 
acter of  the  language.  The  Hebrew  historian  does  not 
usually  inform  us  that  such  and  such  a  person  said  such 
and  such  things;  he  aciually,  as  it  were,  produces  the 
parties  and  makes  them  speak  for  themselyes.  To  this 
derice  (if  it  may  be  so  cialled)  the  Bibie  histoiy  owes 
much  of  its  freshness  and  power  of  Gxciting  and  sustain- 
ing  the  interest  of  its  readera.  No  other  history  could 
be  80  oflen  read  without  losing  its  powei  to  interest  and 
charm. 

Lastly,  in  a  primitiye  language,  formed  under  the 
predominating  iniluenoe  of  imagination  and  emotion, 
we  may  expect  to  meet  with  many  elliptical  expres- 
sions,  and  also  with  many  redundancies.  Not  a  little 
which  we  think  it  neoessary  formally  to  express  in 
words,  the  Hebrew  allowed  to  be  gathered  from  the  con- 


text;  and,  conyersely,  the  Hebrew  gaye  expre8aon  ia 
not  a  little  which  we  omit.  For  example,  nothing  if 
morę  ccmmon  in  Hebrew  than  the  omission  of  the  yeih 
to  be  in  its  yarious  forms ;  and,  on  the  other  hand,  a  yery 
strikmg  characteristic  of  the  Hebrew  style  is  the  coiw 
stant  use  of  the  forms  '^n'^^,  f^J^J/ł  ond  it  came  to  pass-^ 
and  it  shall  come  to  pass,  which,  in  tnmslating  into  Eng" 
lish,  may  be  altogether  omitted  without  auy  scrious 
loss.  In  the  Hebrew  prose,  also,  we  ofteu  meet  with 
traces  of  that  echoing  of  thought  and  expres8lon  which 
forms  one  of  the  principal  characteristics  of  the  poetic 
style;  as  in  Gen.  >'i,22,''And  Noah  did  according  to  aU 
that  God  commanded  him — so  did  lie;"  and  similar  pas- 
sages,  in  which  we  seem  to  haye  two  different  forms  of 
recording  the  same  fact  combined  into  one,  thus:  *'And 
Noah  did  according  to  all  that  God  commanded  him ;" 
"According  to  all  that  the  Lord  commanded  him,  so 
did  he." 

II.  Histoiy  ofthe  Hebrew  Lanffuaffe. — 1.  Its  Origin, — 
The  extant  historical  notices  on  this  point  carry  us  back 
to  the  age  of  Abraham,  but  no  further.    The  best  eyi- 
dences  which  we  posscss  as  to  the  form  of  the  Hebrew 
language  prior  to  its  first  historical  period  tend  to  show 
that  Abraham,  on  his  cntrance  into  Canaan,  found  the 
language  then  preyailing  among  almost  all  the  dificrent 
tribes  inhabiting  that  country  to  be  in  at  least.  dlalec- 
tual  aiiinity  with  his  own.    This  is  gathered  from  the 
following  facts :  that  nearly  all  the  names  of  places  and 
persons  relatiiig  to  those  tribes  admit  of  Hebrew  ety- 
mologics;  that,  amid  all  the  accomits  ofthe  intercourse 
of  the  Hebrews  with  the  nations  of  Canaan,  we  find  no 
hint  of  a  divcrsity  of  idiom;  and  that  eyen  the  com- 
paratiyely  recent  remains  of  the  Fhoenician  and  Panic 
languages  bear  a  manifest  affinity  to  the  Hebrew.    But 
Vhether  the  Hebrew  language,  as  scen  in  the  earlicKt 
books  of  the  Old  Test,  is  the  rcry  dialcct  which  Abra- 
ham brought  wiih  htm  into  Canaan,  or  whether  it  was 
the  common  tongue  of  the  Canaanitish  nationa,  which 
Abraham  only  adojńed  from  them,  and  which  was  aftcr- 
wards  deyelopod  to  greatcr  fuhiess  under  the  peculiar 
morał  and  political  influcnccs  to  which  his  posterity  Mrcre 
cxpo8€d,  are  questions  which,  in  the  abocnce  of  conclu- 
siye  arguments,  are  genc rally  discusscd  with  some  dog:- 
matical  prepossessions.    Almo«t  all  those  who  support 
the  first  yiew  contend  ako  that  Hebrew  was  the  primi- 
tiye language  of  mankind.    S.  Morinus  (Z-w^.  iVi»ia?r-) 
and  Lcischer  {De  Cattsis  Livg.  Ihbr.^  are  among  the  bcst 
championa  of  this  opinion;  but  HHyeniick  has  morc 
recently  adyocated  it  with  such  moditications  as  m&ke 
it  morc  acccptable  (łJinleit.  in  das  A  Ue  Test.  I,  i,  148  sqO- 
The  principal  argument  on  which  they  dcpend  is  that. 
Ba  the  most  important  proper  names  in  the  fint  part  of 
Genesis  (as  Cain,  Scth,  and  othere)  are  eyidently  found- 
ed  on  Hebrew  etymologies,  the  essential  coimection  of 
these  names  with  their  etymological  origins  involvcs 
the  historical  credibility  of  the  records  themselyes^  and 
leayes  no  room  for  any  other  conclusion  than  that.  tYie 
Hebrew  language  is  coeval  with  the  earlicst  histor^r  of 
man.    The  eyidence  on  the  other  side  ia  scanty,  but  not 
without  weight,     (1.)  In  Dcut.  xxyi,  6,  Abraham   is 
called  a  Sj-rian  or  Aramtean  (•^tt'HK),  from  whicli   >re 
naturally  conclude  that  Syriac  was  his  mothcr  toii|jii<?, 
especially  when  we  find,  (2.)  from  Gen.  xxxi,  47,  iliai 
Syriac  or  Chaldee  was  the  knguage  spoken  by  lJaV»ai), 
the  grandson  of  Nahor,  Abraham*8  brother.    Moneo^cr, 
it  has  been  remarked  (3.)  that  in  Isa.  xix,  18,  ttio   He- 
brew is  actufllly  called  the  language  of  Canaa»%  ;    and 
(4.)  that  the  language  itself  fumishes  intemal  evdcle:i\c« 
of  its  Palestinian  origin  in  the  word  Q^,  aea,  '^rlilc-li 
means  also  the  trest,  and  has  this  meaning  in  the   ^^017 
earliest  documents.  (5.)  Finally,  Jewish  tradition,  ^w^H^t^ 
eyer  weight  may  be  attached  to  it,  pointa  to  the    sazne 
conclusion  (Gesenius,  Geschichfe,  sect.  yi,  4). 

If  we  inąuire  further  how  it  was  that  the  Canaa^mi^^,^ 
of  the  race  of  Ham,  spoke  a  language  so  closely  **11ic-ri 
to  the  languages  spoken  by  the  principal  menil)^^^.^   ^^ 


HEBREW  LAN6UAGE 


135 


HEBREW  LAN6UAGE 


the  Shemitic  family^  of  nationfl,  we  shall  soon  diacorer 

that  the  solution  ofthis  dilBculty  is  impoesible  with  our 

present  meins  of  information ;  it  lies  beyond  the  hls- 

toric  period.    It  may  be  that  long  before  the  migration 

of  Abnhun  a  Shemitic  race  occupied  Palestine ;  and 

(nity  as  Abraham  adopted  the  language  of  the  Canaan- 

itei,  80  the  Canaanites  themseh-es  had  in  like  manner 

adopted  the  language  of  that  earlier  race  whom  they 

gradoally  dispossessed,  and  eventually  extirpated  or  ab- 

sorbed.    IIoweTer  this  may  be,  leaving  speculation  for 

(act,  u  it  not  possible  to  ducover  a  wiae  purpose  iu  the 

Kłection  of  the  language  of  Tyre  and  Sidon— the  great 

conunenrial  dties  of  antiqiiity — as  the  language  in 

whkh  was  to  be  embodied  the  most  wonderful  revela- 

tion  of  himself  and  of  his  Uw  which  God  madę  to  the 

ancient  irorid?     'WHien  we  remember  the  constant  iu- 

tercoinse  which  was  maintained  by  the  Phoenicians 

with  the  most  distant  regions  both  of  the  East  and  of 

the  West,  it  ia  impossible  to  doubt  that  the  sacred  books 

of  the  Hebrcwd,  written  in  a  Unguage  ahnost  identical 

with  the  Phcenician,  must  have  exercised  a  morę  im- 

porumt  influence  on  the  Gentile  world  than  is  usually 

acknowledged. 

Of  coune  the  Canaanitish  knguage,  when  adopted 
by  the  Hebrews,  did  not  remain  unchanged.  Ilaring 
tpecome  the  instrument  of  the  Hebrew  mind,  and  being 
einpłoyed  in  the  expre98ion  of  new  and  v'ery  peculiar 
ideaą  it  must  have  been  modified  considerably  thereby. 
Hnw  far  may  poeńbly  be  yet  ascertained,  should  acd- 
dent  or  the  successfuł  zeal  of  aome  explorer  bring  to 
iight  the  morę  ancient  noonuments  of  the  Phoenician 
aation,  which  may  still  have  sun'ived  the  entombment 
ofccntaries. 

Z  fnjbunces  modifywg  the  Form  ofthe  Ilebreto  Lcmr 

gwgf,  and  the  Style  ofthe  Ilehrew  WriiiH{ji8.—{l,}  Tinie. 

—The  history  of  the  Hebrew  bmguage,  as  far  as  we  can 

tcace  its  courae  by  the  changes  in  the  diction  of  the 

dociiments  in  which  it  is  preseryed,  may  herc  be  eon- 

^-aiiefltly  diyided  into  that  of  the  period  preceding  and 

tbit  of  the  period  succeeding  the  £xile.     If  it  be  a 

Duttcr  of  sorprise  that  the  thousand  yeara  which  inter- 

rened  between  Moses  and  the  Captivity  should  not  have 

pn>duced  sufficient  change  in  the  language  to  warrant 

it^  hisŁoiy  during  that  time  being  distributed  into  sub- 

onlinaie  diTińona,  the  foUowing  conaiderations  may  ex- 

cuae  this  arrangement.     It  is  one  of  the  signal  charac- 

t«Ti«iic8  of  the  Hebrew  language,  as  secn  in  all  the 

bouka  prior  to  the  £xile,  that,  notwithstanding  the  ex- 

istenoe  of  some  ieolated  but  important  archaisms,  such 

ask  in  the  form  of  the  pronoun,  etc.  (the  best  collection 

vf  which  may  be  seen  in  H&vemick,  /.  c.  p.  183  Bq.),  it 

prp:^erves  an  unpazalleled  generał  uniformity  of  struc- 

tuie.    The  cxtent  to  which  this  uniformity  prevails 

nur  be  e9tiniat(»d  either  by  the  fact  that  it  has  fur- 

hhhtd  many  modem  scholars,  wbo  reason  from  the 

analo^ies  diśoovered  in  the  changes  in  other  languages 

in  a  f^ren  period,  with  an  argument  to  show  that  the 

Pentatcuch  couid  not  hare  been  written  at  so  remote  a 

daie  as  ]a  generally  believed  (Gesenius,  Gesch.  der  Jłebr, 

Sprache,  §  8),  or  by  the  condusion,  a  fortiori,  which 

Hiaremick,  whose  exprea8  object  is  to  rindicate  its  re- 

c^r\-ed  antiąuity,  candidly  concedes,  that  *Hhe  books 

o.' (Tinmicles,  KŹm,  and  Nehemiah  are  the  earliest  in 

whirh  the  buiguage  diflTers  sensibly  from  that  in  the 

hUtońcal  portions  of  the  Pentateuch**  {Einleit,  i,  180). 

£ren  thoac  critlcs  who  endearor  to  bring  down  the 

Pt-ntateoch  as  a  whole  to  a  compBrativ'cIy  late  datę  al- 

W  that  a  portion  at  least  of  its  contents  is  to  be  assign- 

1 1  to  the  age  of  Moses  (Ewald,  Lehrbuch,  sec.  2,  c) : 

irul  thoa,  nnless  it  can  be  shown  that  this  most  ancient 

)»inion  bears  in  its  language  and  style  the  stamp  of 

hi^h  antiquity,  and  is  djstinguished  in  a  veT>'  marked 

auiner  from  the  other  portions  ofthe  Pentateuch  (which 

hL*  Dot  been  ahown),  the  phenomenon  still  remains  un- 

^[•lained.    But,  indeed,  the  phenomenon  is  by  no  means 

c^xanipled.     It  does  not  stand  alone.     It  is  said,  for 

exaiDple,  that  the  Chinese  language  disphiys  the  same 


tenacity  and  arersion  to  change  still  morę  decidedly, 
the  books  of  the  great  teacher  Confucius  being  written 
in  language  not  essentially  different  from  that  of  his 
commentators  iiileen  hundred  years  Uter.  So  we  are 
informed  by  a  writer  ofthe  15th  century  that  the  Greeks, 
at  least  the  morę  cultivated  dass,  even  in  his  day  spoko 
the  language  of  Aristophanes  and  £uripides,  maintaining 
the  ancient  standard  of  elegance  and  purity  (Gibbon, 
viii,  106).  Or,  to  take  another  example  morę  cloeely 
related  to  the  Hebrew,  it  is  well  knowm  that  the  written 
Arabie  of  the  present  day  does  not  differ  greatly  from 
that  of  the  first  centuries  after  Mohammed.  In  each 
of  the  cases  just  mentioned,  it  is  probable  that  the  lan- 
guage was  as  it  were  stereotyped  by  becoming  the  lan- 
guage of  books  held  in  highest  esteem  and  reyerenoe, 
diligently  studied  by  the  leamed,  frequently  committed 
to  meroory,  and  adopted  as  a  model  of  style  by  succeed- 
ing writcrs.  Now,  may  not  the  sacred  writings  of  the 
Mosaic  age  have  had  a  similar  influence  on  the  written 
Hebrew  of  the  foUowing  ages,  which  continued  undis- 
turbed  till  the  Captivity,  or  eveu  later?  We  know 
how  greatly  the  translations  of  the  Bibie  into  En^iah 
and  German  have  affected  the  language  and  literaturę 
of  England  and  Germany  ever  sińce  they  were  given  to 
the  world.  But  aroong  a  people  like  the  ancient  He- 
brews,  living  to  a  oertain  extent  apart  from  other  na- 
tioiiB,  with  a  literaturę  of  no  great  extent,  and  a  leamed 
class  specially  engaged  in  the  study  and  transcription 
of  the  sacred  writings,  we  may  well  suppoee  that  the 
influence  of  these  writings  upon  the  form  of  the  nation- 
al  language  must  haye  been  much  morę  decided  and 
permanent.  The  leamed  men  would  naturaUy  adopt 
in  their  compoaitions  the  Unguage  of  the  books  which 
had  been  their  study  from  youth,  and  laige  portions  of 
which  they  were  probably  able  to  repeat  from  memory. 
Thus  the  language  of  these  old  books,  though  it  might 
difler  iu  some  respects  from  that  spoken  by  the  common 
people,  would  naturally  become  the  language  of  the 
leamed  and  of  books,  especially  of  those  books  on  sacred 
subjects,  such  as  hare  alone  come  down  to  us  from  an- 
cient IsraeL  In  explanation  of  the  fact  under  diacus- 
sion,  appeal  has  also  been  madę  (a)  to  the  permanence 
of  Eastem  customs,  and  (fr)  to  the  simi^lc  stracture  of 
the  Hebrew  language,  which  rendered  it  less  liable  to 
change  than  other  morę  Urgely  developed  Unguages 
(see  Ewald,  Heb,  Gram.  §  7).  It  has  also  been  remarked 
that  some  of  the  peculiarities  of  the  eariy  writings  may 
be  concealed  from  yiew  by  the  uniformity  of  the  sys- 
tem of  punctuation  adopted  and«applied  to  the  Scrip- 
tures  by  the  Hebrew  grammarians. 

In  the  canonical  books  belonging  to  the  first  period 
the  Hebrew  language  thus  appeara  in  a  state  of  maturę 
deyelopment.  Although  it  still  presenres  the  charms 
of  freshness  and  siroplicity,  yet  it  has  attained  great 
regularity  of  formation,  and  such  a  preciaion  of  s>'ntac- 
tical  arrangement  as  insures  both  eneigy  and  distinct^ 
ness.  Some  common  notions  of  its  laxity  and  indefi- 
niteness  have  no  other  foundation  than  the  very  inade- 
ąuate  scholarship  of  the  persons  who  form  them.  A 
clcarcr  insight  into  the  oiganism  of  language  abeoluŁely, 
joined  to  such  a  study  of  the  cognate  Śyro-Arabian 
idioms  as  would  reveal  the  secret,  but  no  less  certaui, 
laws  of  its  syntactical  coherence,  would  show  them  to 
what  degree  the  simplicity  of  Hebrew  iS  compatible 
with  gramraatical  precision.  One  of  the  most  remark- 
able  featurcs  in  the  language  of  this  period  is  the  differ- 
ence  which  distinguishes  the  diction  of  poetry  from 
that  of  prose.  This  diiference  consists  in  the  use  of  mi- 
usiuil  worUs  and  flexions  (numy  of  which  are  considered 
to  be  Aramaisms  or  archaisms,  although  in  this  case 
these  terms  are  nearly  identical),  and  in  a  harmonie  arw 
rangement  of  though  ts,  as  seen  both  in  the  parallelism 
of  merobers  in  a  single  yerse,  and  in  the  strophic  order 
of  larger  portions,  the  delicate  art  of  which  Ewald  has 
traced  with  pre-eminent  success  in  his  Poetiscke  BOcher 
des  A  Ite  Bundes,  yol.  i. 

The  Babylonian  Captivity  is  assigned  as.  the  eona* 


HEBREW  LANGUAGE 


134 


HEBREW  LANGFAGE 


culiaiity  of  the  langimge.  But  the  singular  phenome- 
non  admits  of  an  easy  explaiiation.  IŁ  was  because  the 
Hebrew  yiewed  and  described  the  transactionii  of  the 
past,  not  as  all  past  and  done,  but  as  in  actual  process 
and  progress  of  eyolrement,  that  he  makes  such  fre- 
quent  use  of  the  so-called  futu:re.  In  imagination  he 
ąuits  his  o¥m  point  of  time,  and  lires  over  the  past. 
With  his  reader  he  sails  down  the  stream  of  time,  and 
traces  with  open  eye  the  winding  couise  of  history.  It 
b  impossible  always  to  reproduce  exactly  in  English 
chis  peculiaiity  of  the  Hebrew  Bibie. 

Further,  in  writing  even  of  the  commonest  actions, 
as  that  one  tren/,  tpoke,  »aWf  etc.,  the  Hebrew  is  not 
usoally  aatisfied  with  the  simple  statement  that  the 
thing  was  done,  he  must  descńbe  alao  the  process  of  do- 
ing.  We  aze  so  familiar  with  the  style  of  our  English 
Biblea  that  we  do  not  at  once  peiceiye  the  pictorial 
character  of  such  eKpressions  as  these,  recurring  in  ev- 
ery  page:  he  arose  and  wetd;  he  opened  hia  lips  and 
tpahe;  heputforth  his  hond  and  iook;  he  l\fted  vp  his 
eyet  and  eaw';  he  łi/łed up  his  roice  and  tcept.  Hut  what 
we  do  not  consciously  perueive  we  often  unconscioiisly 
feel ;  and  donbtless  it  is  this  painting  of  events  which  is 
the  BouTce  of  part  at  ieast  of  the  charm  with  which  the 
Scńpture  narrative  is  iuyested  to  all  pure  and  simple 
minda. 

The  same  effect  is  also  produced  by  the  gywJbolical 
way  of  repruenling  menłał  stałeś  and  processes  which 
distinguishes  the  Hebrew  writers.  Such  cKpressions  as 
to  bend  or  thc/tne  the  ear  for  *'  to  hear  attentively,"  to 
słiffen  the  neck  for  *^to  be  stubbom  and  rebellious,"  to 
uncoter  the  ear  for  "to  reveal,"  are  in  frequent  use. 
£ven  the  acts  of  the  Divine  Mind  are  depicted  in  a 
similar  way.  In  the  study  especially  of  the  Old  Testa- 
ment we  must  kecp  this  point  carefully  in  view,  lest  we 
should  err  by  giving  to  a  8}'mbolical  expre8sion  a  literał 
iuterpretation.  Thus,  when  we  read  (£xod.  xxxiii,  11) 
that ''  the  Lord  spake  unto  Moses  face  to  face  as  a  man 
speaketh  unto  his  friend,"  we  must  remembcr  that  it 
was  a  Hebrew  who  wrote  these  words,  one  who  was  ac- 
customed  to  depict  to  himself  and  othen  the  spińtual 
mider  materiał  symbols,  and  thus  we  shall  be  guarded 
against  irreverently  attaching  to  them  a  meaning  which 
they  were  never  intended  to  bear.  But,  though  such 
modes  of  expre8aion  are  open  to  misapprehension  by  us 
whose  minds  are  formed  in  so  very  differcnt  a  mould, 
ncyertheless,  when  rightly  undersŁood,  they  have  the 
effect  of  giving  us  a  morę  elear  and  viyid  impression  of 
the  spiritual  ideas  which  they  embody  than  oould  be 
conyeyed  to  us  by  any  other  modę  of  representation  or 
expre88ion. 

The  simplicity  and  naturalness  of  the  language  fur- 
ther  appears  in  the  promiuence  which  is  constantly 
giyen  to  the  word  or  words  embodying  the  leading  idea 
in  a  sentence  or  period.  Thus  the  noun  stands  before 
the  adjectiye,  the  predicate  stands  before  the  subject, 
unless  the  latter  be  specially  emphatic,  in  which  case  it 
is  not  only  put  first,  but  may  stand  by  itself  as  a  noroi- 
natiye  abeolute  without  any  syutactical  conncction  with 
the  rest  of  the  sentence. 

The  constant  use  of  the  orałio  directa  is  also  to  be 
specially  noted,  as  an  indication  of  the  primitiye  char- 
acter of  the  language.  The  Hebrew  historian  does  not 
usually  inform  us  that  such  and  such  a  person  said  such 
and  such  things;  he  actually,  as  it  were,  produces  the 
parties  and  makes  them  speak  for  themselyes.  To  this 
deyice  (if  it  may  be  so  called)  the  Bibie  historj'  owes 
much  of  its  freshness  and  power  of  cxciting  and  sustain- 
ing  the  interest  of  its  readerSb  No  other  histoiy  could 
be  so  often  read  without  losing  its  power  to  interest  and 
charm. 

Lastly,  in  a  primitiye  language,  formed  under  the 
predominating  influence  of  imagination  and  erootion, 
w^e  may  expect  to  meet  w^ith  many  elliptical  expres- 
sions,  and  also  with  many  redundancies.  Not  a  little 
which  we  think  it  necessary  formally  to  expre8S  in 
words,  the  Hebrew  allowed  to  be  gathered  from  the  eon- 


text;  and,  conyersely,  the  Hebrew  gaye  erpression  ta 
not  a  little  which  we  omit.  For  example,  nothing  is 
morę  ccmmon  in  Hebrew  than  the  omission  of  the  yeiti 
to  &e  in  its  yarious  forms ;  and,  on  the  other  hand,  a  very 
striking  characteristic  of  the  Hebrew  style  is  the  eon** 
stant  use  of  the  forms  '^T}*^jt  *^^^'^i  o^  ii  came  to  pass-^ 
and  it  shall  come  to  pass,  which,  in  tnmslating  into  Eng' 
lish,  may  be  altogether  omitted  without  any  scrions 
loss.  In  the  Hebrew  proee,  also,  we  often  meet  with 
traces  of  that  echoing  of  thought  and  expre8sion  which 
forms  one  of  the  principal  characteristics  of  the  poetic 
style;  as  in  Gen.  yi,22,*'And  Noah  did  according  to  all 
that  God  commanded  him — so  did  hef*  and  similar  pas- 
sages,  in  which  we  seem  to  haye  two  different  forms  of 
recording  the  same  fact  corobined  into  one,  thus:  "And 
Noah  did  according  to  aU  that  God  commanded  him ;" 
"According  to  all  that  the  Lord  conmianded  him,  so 
did  he." 

II.  Uisłory  ofihe  Ilthrew  Language, — 1.  Its  Origin, — 
The  extant  historical  notices  on  this  point  cairy  us  back 
to  the  age  of  Abraham,  but  no  further.  The  beat  eyi- 
dences  which  we  possess  as  to  the  form  of  the  Hebrew 
language  prior  to  its  first  historical  period  tend  to  show 
that  Abraham,  on  his  entrance  into  Canaan,  found  the 
language  then  prcyailing  among  almost  all  the  dilTerent 
tribes  inhabiting  that  country  to  be  in  at  Ieast  dialec- 
t4ial  afHnity  with  his  own.  This  is  gathered  from  the 
following  facts :  that  ncarly  all  the  names  of  places  and 
persons  relatiug  to  those  tribes  admit  of  Hebrew  ety- 
mologics;  that,  amid  all  the  accounts  of  the  intercourse 
of  the  Hebrews  with  the  nations  of  Canaan,  we  find  no 
hint  of  a  direndty  of  idiom ;  and  that  eyen  the  com- 
paratively  rccent  remains  of  the  Phoenician  and  Punic 
languagcs  bear  a  manifest  aflinity  to  the  Hebrew.  But 
'whether  the  Hebrew  language,  as  secn  in  the  earliest 
books  of  the  Old  Tost.,  is  tlie  ycry  dialect  which  Abra- 
ham brought  with  him  into  Canaan,  or  whether  it  was 
the  common  tongue  of  the  Canaanitish  nations,  which 
Abraham  only  adopted  from  them,  and  which  was  after- 
wards  deyelopod  to  greatcr  fulness  under  the  peculiar 
morał  and  polirical  influenccs  to  which  his  poetcrity  were 
expo8cd,  are  questiona  which,  in  the  absence  of  conclu- 
siye  arguments,  are  geucrally  discusscd  with  some  dog- 
matical  preposscssions.  Almost  all  those  who  support 
the  first  yiew  eon  tend  also  that  Hobrew  was  the  primi- 
tiye language  of  mankind.  S.  Morinus  {Ling.  PrimetrS) 
and  Loscher  {De  Causis  Ling.  Ilebr.')  are  among  the  bcst 
championa  of  this  opinion;  but  Hilyemick  has  morę 
recently  adyocatcd  it  with  such  modifications  as  make 
it  morę  acccptable  {Einldł.  in  das  A  Ite  Test.  I,  i,  148  aą.). 
The  principal  argument  on  w^hich  they  depend  is  that, 
as  the  most  important  proper  names  in  the  first  part  of 
Genesis  (as  Cain,  Seth,  and  others)  are  eyidently  found- 
ed  on  Hebrew  etymologies,  the  essential  connection  of 
these  names  with  their  etymological  origins  inyoiycs 
the  historical  credibility  of  the  rccords  themselres,  and 
leayes  no  room  for  any  other  conclusion  than  that  the 
Hebrew  language  is  coeyal  with  the  earliest  history  of 
man.  The  eyidcnce  on  the  other  side  is  scanty,  but  not 
without  weight.  (1.)  In  Deut.  xxyi,  5,  Abraham  is 
calletl  a  Sj-rian  or  Aramamn  (^B*r^»  ^ro""  which  we 
naturally  conclude  that  SjTiac  was  his  mother  tongue, 
e8[>ecialiy  when  we  find,  "(2.)  from  Gen.  xxxi,  47,  that 
Syriac  or  Chaldee  was  the  language  spoken  by  Laban, 
the  grandson  of  Nahor,  Abraham's  brother.  Moreorer, 
it  has  been  remarked  (3.)  that  in  Isa.  xix,  18,  the  He- 
brew is  actually  called  the  language  of  Canaan ;  and 
(4.)  that  the  language  itself  fumishes  intenud  eyidence 
of  its  Palestuiian  origin  in  the  word  &^,  aea,  which 
means  also  łhe  wesf^  and  has  this  meaning  in  the  \ery 
earliest  docimients.  (ó.)  Finally,  Jewish  tiadition,  wbat^ 
eyer  weight  may  be  attached  to  it,  pointa  to  the  samą 
conclusion  (Gesenius,  Geschichłe^  sect,  vi,  4). 

If  we  inąuirc  further  how  it  was  that  the  Canaanttcą 
of  the  race  of  Ham,  spoke  a  language  so  doeely  allied 
to  the  languages  spoken  by  the  principal  memben  of 


HEBREW  LANGUAGE 


135 


HEBREW  LANGUAGE 


the  Shemitic  family  of  nations,  we  shall  toon  di8cover 
Łhat  the  soludon  of  Łhiii  difficulŁy  Ib  impoesible  with  our 
preKnt  ineans  of  information ;  it  lies  beyond  the  his- 
torie period,  IŁ  may  be  that  long  before  the  migration 
of  Abraham  a  Shemitic  raoe  occupied  Palestine ;  and 
that,  as  Abraham  adopted  the  langtiage  of  the  Canaan- 
ites,  80  the  Canaanites  themaelres  had  in  Uke  manuer 
adopted  the  language  of  that  earlier  race  whom  Łhey 
gradually  dispo^essed,  and  erentually  extirpated  or  ab- 
sorbed.  '  lIowever  this  may  be,  leaving  speculation  for 
fact,  is  it  not  possible  to  diBcoyer  a  wiae  purpose  in  the 
sekction  of  the  language  of  Tyre  and  Sidon— the  great 
oommeicial  citiea  of  antiąuity — aa  the  language  in 
which  was  to  be  embodicd  the  most  wonderful  rerela- 
tion  of  himself  and  of  his  law  which  God  madę  to  the 
aucienŁ  world?  A\lien  we  remember  the  constant  in- 
tercoune  which  was  maintained  by  the  Phcenicians 
with  the  most  distant  regions  both  of  the  East  and  of 
the  West,  it  is  impossible  to  doubt  that  the  sacred  books 
of  the  Hcbrewa,  writteii  in  a  language  almost  identical 
with  the  Phcenician,  must  have  exercised  a  morę  im- 
portant  influence  on  the  GentUe  world  than  is  usoally 
acknowlcdged. 

Of  course  the  Canaanitish  language,  when  adopted 
by  the  Ilebrews,  did  not  remain  unchanged«  IIaving 
become  the  instrument  of  the  Hebrew  mind,  and  being 
empk»yed  in  the  expression  of  new  and  reiy  peculiar 
ideaa,'it  must  hare  been  modified  constderably  thcreby. 
How  far  may  poembly  be  yet  asoertained,  should  acci- 
dcnt  or  the  suoceasful  zeal  of  aome  explorer  bring  to 
li^t  the  morę  ancient  monuments  of  the  Fhoenician 
nation,  which  may  still  have  suiriyed  the  entombmeut 
ofcentories. 

2.  InJUunoee  raodifying  the  Form  ofthe  Jlebrew  Lan- 
ffuagfy  and  the  Style  ofthe  Uebreto  Writiryjs,—(\,)  Time. 
—The  hiatory  of  the  Hebrew  language,  as  far  as  we  can 
tnce  it8  course  by  the  changes  in  the  diction  of  the 
documents  in  which  it  is  preserred,  may  here  be  con- 
reniently  diyided  into  that  of  the  period  preceding  and 
that  of  Vhe  period  succeeding  the  £xl]c.  If  it  be  a 
mattcr  of  surprisc  that  the  thousand  years  which  inter- 
vened  between  Moses  and  the  Captirity  should  not  havc 
produced  sufficient  change  in  the  language  to  warrant 
its  history  during  that  time  being  dlstributed  into  su1>- 
ordinate  dirisions,  the  foUowing  considerations  may  ex- 
cuse  this  arrangeroent.  It  is  one  of  the  signal  charac- 
teristics  of  the  Hebrew  language,  as  secn  in  all  the 
books  prior  to  the  £xile,  that,  notwithstanding  the  ex- 
istence  of  some  isolated  but  important  archaisms,  such 
as  in  the  form  of  the  pronomi,  etc.  (the  best  coUection 
of  which  may  be  seen  in  Havemick,  /.  c.  p.  183  sq.),  it 
prc9erves  an  uiiparalleled  generał  uniformity  of  struo- 
ture.  The  cxtent  to  which  this  uniformity  prevails 
may  be  estimated  either  by  the  fact  that  it  has  fur- 
nished  many  modem  scholara,  who  reason  from  the 
analogles  discorered  in  the  changes  in  other  langiuiges 
in  a  gi%-en  period,  with  an  argument  to  show  that  the 
Pentatcuch  oould  not  have  been  wTltten  at  so  remote  a 
datę  as  is  generally  beliered  ((iesenius,  Gesch,  der  JJebr. 
Spracke,  §  8),  or  by  the  conclusion,  a  fortiori^  which 
HUremick,  whoae  expre88  object  is  to  yindicate  its  re- 
ceiyed  antiquity,  candidly  concedes,  that  "  the  books 
of  Chronidcs,  Ezra,  and  Nehemiah  are  the  earliest  in 
which  the  language  differs  sensibly  from  that  in  the 
hitftorical  ponions  of  the  Pentateuch"  {Einleił,  i,  180). 
£yen  those  critics  who  endeayor  to  bring  down  the 
Pentateuch  as  a  whole  to  a  comparatiyely  late  datę  al- 
low  that  a  portion  at  least  of  its  contents  is  to  be  assign- 
ed  to  the  age  of  Moses  (Ewald,  Lehrhuch,  sec.  2,  c) : 
and  thus,  unless  it  can  be  shown  that  thb  most  ancient 
portion  bears  in  its  language  and  style  the  stamp  of 
high  antiąuity,  and  is  distinguished  in  a  yer>'  marked 
manner  from  the  other  portions  ofthe  Pentateuch  (which 
has  not  been  shown),  the  phenomenon  still  remauis  un- 
exidained.  But,  indeed,  the  phenomenon  is  by  no  means 
anexampłed.  It  doea  not  stand  alone.  It  is  said,  for 
esample,  that  the  Chinese  language  displays  the  same 


tenacity  and  ayersion  to  change  still  morę  decidedly, 
the  books  of  the  great  teacher  Confucius  being  ¥rritten 
in  language  not  esssntially  diffeient  from  that  of  his 
commentators  Hfteen  hundied  years  later.  So  we  are 
informed  by  a  writer  ofthe  15th  centuiy  that  the  Greeks, 
at  least  the  morę  cultiyated  class,  eyen  in  his  day  spoke 
the  language  of  Aristophanes  and  Euripides,  maintaining 
the  ancient  standard  of  elegance  and  purity  (Gibbon, 
yiii,  106).  Or,  to  take  another  example  morę  doeely 
related  to  the  Hebrew,  it  is  well  known  that  the  written 
Arabie  of  the  present  day  does  not  differ  greatly  from 
that  of  the  fint  centuriea  after  Mohammed.  In  each 
of  the  cases  just  mentioned,  it  is  probaUe  that  the  lan- 
guage was  as  it  were  stereotyped  by  becoming  the  lan- 
guage of  books  held  in  highest  esteem  and  reyerenoe, 
(iiligently  studied  by  the  leamed,  frequently  committed 
to  memory,  and  adopted  as  a  model  of  style  by  succeed- 
ing writcrs.  Now,  may  not  the  sacred  writings  of  the 
Mosaic  age  have  had  a  similar  influence  on  the  written 
Hebrew  of  the  foUowing  ages,  which  oontinued  undia- 
turbed  till  the  Captiyity,  or  eyen  later?  We  know 
how  greatly  the  translations  of  the  Bibie  into  English 
and  German  haye  affectcd  the  language  and  literaturę 
of  England  and  Germany  eyer  sińce  they  were  giyen  to 
the  world.  But  among  a  people  like  the  ancient  He- 
brews,  liying  to  a  certain  extent  apart  from  other  na- 
tions,  with  a  literaturę  of  no  great  extent,  and  a  leamed 
class  specially  engaged  in  the  study  and  transcription 
of  the  sacred  writings,  we  may  well  suppose  that  the 
influence  of  these  writings  upon  the  form  of  the  nation- 
al  language  must  haye  been  much  morę  decided  and 
permanent.  The  leamed  men  would  naturally  adopt 
in  their  compoaitions  the  language  of  the  books  which 
had  been  their  study  from  youth,  and  large  portions  of 
which  Ihey  were  probably  able  to  repeat  from  memory. 
Thus  the  language  of  these  old  books,  though  it  might 
dlfTcr  in  some  respects  from  that  spoken  by  the  common 
people,  would  naturally  become  the  language  of  the 
leamed  and  of  books,  especially  of  those  books  on  sacred 
subjects,  such  as  haye  alone  coroe  down  to  us  from  an- 
cient IsraeL  In  explanation  of  the  fact  under  duBcuiH 
sion,  appeal  has  also  been  madę  (a)  to  the  permanence 
of  Eastern  customs,  and  (i)  to  the  simple  stmcture  of 
the  Hebrew  language,  which  rendered  it  less  liable  to 
change  than  other  roore  largely  deyeloped  languages 
(see  Ewald,  Ileh.  Gram,  §  7).  It  has  also  been  remarked 
that  some  of  the  peculiarities  of  the  early  writings  may 
be  ooncealed  from  yiew  by  the  uniformity  of  the  sys- 
tem of  punctuation  adopted  and«applied  to  the  Scrip- 
turcs  by  the  Hebrew  grammarians. 

In  the  canonical  books  belonging  to  the  first  period 
the  Hebrew  language  thus  appears  in  a  state  of  maturę 
deyelopment.  Although  it  still  preseryes  the  charms 
of  freshness  and  siroplicity,  yet  it  has  attained  great 
regularity  of  formation,  and  such  a  precińon  of  syntao- 
tical  anrangement  as  insures  both  eneigy  and  distinct^ 
ness.  Some  common  notions  of  its  laxity  and  indefi- 
niteness  haye  no  other  foundation  than  the  yery  inade- 
quate  scholarship  of  the  persona  who  form  them.  A 
clcarcr  insight  into  the  organism  of  language  absolutely, 
joined  to  such  a  study  of  the  cognate  Syro-Arabian 
idioms  as  would  reveal  the  secret,  but  no  less  certain, 
laws  of  its  s^nitactical  ooherence,  would  show  them  to 
what  degree  the  simplicity  of  Hebrew  i&  oompatible 
with  grammatical  precision.  One  of  the  most  remark- 
able  featurcs  in  the  language  of  this  period  is  the  dilTer- 
ence  which  distinguishes  the  diction  of  poetry  from 
that  of  prose.  This  difference  consńits  in  the  use  of  un- 
usual  words  and  flexions  (many  of  which  are  considered 
to  be  Aramaisms  or  archaisms,  although  in  this  case 
these  terms  are  nearly  identical),  and  in  a  harmonie  ar- 
rangement  of  thoughts,  as  secn  both  in  the  parallelism 
of  members  in  a  single  yerse,  and  in  the  strophic  order 
of  larger  portions,  the  delicate  art  of  which  Ewald  haa 
traced  with  prc-eminent  success  in  his  Poetiiche  BOcher 
de»  Alte  Bundee,  yoL  i. 

The  Babylonian  Captivity  is  assigned  aa  the  oom* 


HEBREW  LANGUAGE 


136 


HEBREW  LANGUAGE 


menoement  of  that  decline  and  comiption  which  mark 
the  second  period  in  the  hUtory  of  the  Hebrew  lan- 
guage ;  but  the  Anyrian  deportation  of  the  ten  tribes,  in 
the  year  KC.  720,  was  probably  the  fint  meana  of  bring- 
ing  the  Aramaic  idiom  into  injinioua  proximity  with 
iL  The  £xile,  howeyer,  fonns  the  epoch  at  which  the 
language  shows  evident  ńgns  of  that  encroachment  of 
the  Anunaic  on  ita  integrity,  which  afterwards  ended  in 
ita  complete  extinctłon.  The  diction  of  the  different 
booka  of  thia  period  diacoyers  yarioua  giadea  of  thia  Ar- 
amaic influence,  and  in  some  eaaea  approachea  bo  neariy 
to  the  type  of  the  fint  period  that  it  haa  been  aacribed 
to  merę  imitation. 

The  ¥rriting8  which  belong  to  the  second  age — ^that 
aabeequent  to  the  Babylonian  Captivity— accordingly 
differ  very  conaiderably  from  those  which  belong  to  the 
fint;  the  influence  of  the  Chaldee  language,  acquired 
by  the  Jewiah  exile8  in  the  land  of  their  capŁivity, 
haying  gradually  oorrupted  the  national  tongue.  The 
historical  booka  bdonging  to  thia  age  are  the  booka  of 
Chronidea,  Ezra,  Nehemiah,  and  Eather.  In  the  proph- 
eta  who  propheaied  during  and  afler  the  Captivity,  with 
the  exception  of  Daniel,  the  Chaldee  impreas  ia  by  no 
meana  ao  atrong  aa  we  might  anticipate,  they  haring 
eyidently  formed  their  atyle  on  that  of  the  older  proph- 
eta.  It  is  important,  howerer,  to  obaerye  that  the  pres- 
ence  of  what  appean  to  be  a  Chaldaism  ia  not  always 
the  indicatton  of  a  later  age.  Chaldee  worda  and  forma 
occaaionally  appear  even  in  the  most  ancient  Hebrew 
compoaitions,  especially  the  poetical,  the  poet  delight- 
ing  in  archaic  and  rare  worda,  and  substituting  theae  for 
the  morę  usual  and  commonplace.  But  between  the 
Chaldaic  archaisma  and  the  Chaldeisms  of  the  later 
Scripturca  there  ia  thia  marked  distinction,  that  the  for^ 
mer  are  only  oocaaional,  and  lie  scattered  on  the  surfaoe ; 
the  latter  are  freąuent^  and  give  a  peculiar  color  and 
character  to  the  whole  language. 

A  still  morę  corrupt  form  of  the  language  appean  in 
the  Mishna  and  other  later  Jcwish  writings,  in  which 
the  foreign  element  ia  much  morę  dectded  and  promi- 
nent 

(2.)  P/ooc.— Under  thia  head  ia  embraccd  the  qucs- 
tion  aa  to  the  existence  of  different  dialects  of  the  an- 
cient Hebrew.  Waa  the  Hebrew  language,  as  spokcn 
by  the  aeyeral  tribes  of  Israel,  of  uniform  mould  and 
character?  or  did  it  branch  out  into  yarious  dialects 
corresponding  to  the  leading  diyisions  of  the  nation? 
In  attempting  to  answer  this  que8tion,  there  is  no  direct 
historical  testimony  of  which  we  can  arail  ounelres. 
From  Neh.  xiii,  23, 24,  we  leam  nothing  morę  than  that 
the  language  of  Ashdod  dlffered  from  that  of  the  Jews 
after  their  return  from  captirity,  which  is  only  what  we 
might  haye  anticipated.  The  notices  in  Judg.  xli,  6 
and  xyiii,3,  which  are  morę  to  the  puri)08e,  refer  nther 
to  a  difference  in  pronunciation  than  in  the  form  of  the 
language.  Notwithstanding  it  Beema  prima  Jacie  prob- 
able  (a)  that  the  language  of  the  Lrans-Jordanic  tribes 
was  in  course  of  time  modificd  to  a  grcater  or  less  €x- 
tent  by  the  close  contact  of  theae  tribes  with  the  Syr- 
ians  of  the  north  and  the  Arab  tribes  of  the  great  east- 
em  descrt;  and  (6)  that  a  similar  dialectic  difference 
would  gradually  be  dereloped  in  the  language  of  Ephra- 
im  and  the  other  northem  tribes  to  the  wcst  of  the 
Jordan,  especially  aAer  the  poUtical  separation  of  thcsc 
tribes  from  the  tribe  of  .Tudah  and  the  family  of  David. 
Possibly  in  the  JetrUh  language  of  2  Kings  xviii,  28  we 
may  discoyer  the  tracę  of  some  such  difference  of  dia- 
lect;  for  we  can  scarcely  suppose  the  name  Jettish  to 
have  been  introduced  in  the  vcry  brief  period  which  in- 
tenrened  between  the  taking  of  Samaria  and  the  traiis- 
action  in  the  record  of  which  it  occun;  and,  if  in  use 
before  the  taking  of  Samaria  and  the  captivity  of  the 
ten  tribes,  it  must  have  been  restricted  to  the  form  of 
the  Hebrew  language  prerailing  in  Judiea,  which,  being 
thus  distinguished  in  name  from  the  language  of  the 
northem  tribes,  was  pn>bably  distinguished  in  other  re- 
apects  also.     It  is  not  improbable  that  some  of  the  lin- 


guistic  peculiarities  of  the  separate  books  of  Scriptore 
are  to  be  acoounted  for  on  this  hypothesia. 

8.  Wken  the  Hebrew  Language  eeaud  io  be  a  Iłring 
Language^— The  Jewiah  tradition,  credited  by  Kimchi, 
ia  to  the  effect  that  the  Hebrew  language  ceased  to  be 
spoken  by  the  body  of  the  people  during  their  captirity 
in  Babylon ;  and  thia  is  the  opinion  of  many  Christian 
scholara  also,  among  whom  are  Buxtorf  and  Walton. 
Others,  as  Pfeiffer  and  Loecher,  arguc  that  it  is  quite 
unreasonable,  considering  the  duration  and  other  cir- 
cnmstances  of  the  £xile,  to  suppose  that  the  Jews  did 
not  retain  the  partial  use  of  their  native  tongue  for 
some  time  aiter  their  retuni  to  Palestine,  and  losc  it  by 
slow  degrees  at  laat.    There  can  be  no  doubt  that  the 
Hebrew  was  never  spoken  m  its  purifg  after  the  return 
from  captivity ;  but  that  it  ceased  altogethcr  to  be  the 
language  of  the  people  after  that  period,  and  was  re- 
tained  only  as  the  language  of  books  and  of  the  Icamed, 
haa  not  been  established.    The  principal  cvidciicc  re- 
lied  on  by  those  who  hołd  thia  opinion  Ls  dcrired  from 
Neh.  yiii,  8 :  "  So  they  read  in  the  book,  in  the  law  of 
God,  digtindlgy  and  ga^'e  the  sensc,  and  causcd  them  to 
undentand  the  reading."*    Diśtinctly,  C'^bp,  L  e.  saya 
Hengstenberg,  *^with  the  additlon  of  a  translation** 
{Genuinenesś  of  Daniel,  eh.  iii,  aec  5).    But,  though  thia 
gloss  haa  some  aupport  in  Jewish  tradition,  it  ia  at  va- 
riance  both  with  Hebrew  and  with  Chaldee  usage. 
triB^  meana  madę  dear  or  distinet,  aa  is  evident  from 
Numb.  xy,  34  (the  meaning  of  U^I^C^,  in  Ezn  iv,  18,  ia 
disputed);  andr?^'B73  IW^p^^  can  scarcely  be  otha^ 
wiae  rendered  than  "  they  read  diatinctlg"  (sec  the  Lexi- 
eona  of  Cocceiua,  Gesenius,  and  FUnt;  Buxtorf  and 
Gusaetius  render  by  explanatf,  erplicałe).    This,  indced, 
is  eyident  from  the  context ;  for  if  we  should  render 
with  Hengstenberg, "  Theg  read  it  tcifh  the  addifion  of 
a  translation^  to  what  purpose  the  clause  which  foliowa, 
**andgare  the  sense"  etc?    At  the  same  time,  though 
this  passagc  does  not  fiunish  suflicicnt  cvidencc  to  prove 
tliat  in  the  time  of  Nehcmiah  Hebrew  had  ceased  to  be 
the  language  of  every-day  life,  it  does  seem  to  point  to 
the  conclusion  that  at  that  time  it  had  considerabl}'  de- 
generated  from  its  ancient  purity,  so  that  the  common 
people  had  some  diffiailty  in  undcntanding  the  lan- 
guage of  their  ancient  sacrcd  books.     Still  we  bcliere 
tliat  the  Hebrew  element  predomiiuted,  and,  instead  of 
describiiig,  with  Walton  (l*rolegonu  iii,  sec.  24),  the  lan- 
guage of  the  Jews  on  their  retuni  from  cxile  as  '*  CAo/- 
dee  tcith  a  certain  admixture  of  HehreWy*  we  should 
rather  describe  it  aa  Hebrew  tcifh  a  large  admizture  of 
Chaldee,     Only  on  this  hypothesis  does  it  ap])car  ytoB&i- 
ble  satisfactorily  to  account  for  the  fact  that  Hebrew 
continued  evcn  after  this  period  to  be  the  language  of 
prophets  and  prcachers,  historians  and  }K)cts,  whilc  there 
is  no  tracę  of  any  similar  use  of  the  Chaldee  among  the 
Jews  of  Palestine  (compare  also  Neh.  xiii,  24). 

At  what  time  Chaldee  became  the  dominant  element 
in  the  national  language  it  is  imi)08sible  to  dctermine. 
Ali  i)olitical  infiuenccs  favored  its  ascendcncy,  and  with 
thcsc  concurred  the  influence  of  that  large  portion  of 
the  nation  still  resident  in  llic  East,  and  maintaining 
constant  intercoursc  with  a  Chaldec-speaking  popula- 
tion.  To  thesc  influences  we  caimot  wonder  that  the 
Hebrew,  notwithstanding  the  sacreil  associations  con- 
nected  with  it,  by-and-by  succumbed.  On  the  coins  of 
the  Maccabees,  indeed,  the  ancient  language  still  ap- 
pean; but  we  cannot  conclude  from  this  circumstancc 
that  it  maintained  its  position  aa  a  living  language 
down  to  the  Maccabian  period  (Kenan,  lAmgties  Semi- 
tiguefif  p.  137).  The  fragments  of  the  popular  language 
which  we  find  in  the  New  Testament  are  all  Aramcan, 
and  ever  sińce  the  Hebrew  haa  been  preser\'ed  and  cul- 
tivated  as  the  language  of  the  leamed  and  of  books,  and 
not  of  common  life.  On  the  hiatory  of  tht  post-Biblical 
Hebretr  we  do  not  now  enter. 

HI.  Ofłhe  Wri/łen  Hebrew ^The  Shemttic  nationa 

I  have  been  the  teachen  of  the  world  in  religion ;  by  tkś 


HEBREW  LANGIJAGE 


137 


HEBREW  LANGIJAGE 


I  ofthe  alphabet  they  may  likewise  Uy  claim  to 
the  honor  of  hariiig  lud  the  foundation  of  the  world*s 
UtcnŁure.  The  Shemitic  alphabet,  aa  is  well  known, 
has  no  agns  for  the  pure  vowel  sounds.  AU  the  letters 
aie  oonsonants ;  some,  howeYer,  are  so  weak  as  easily  to 
pasa  into  Yowela,  and  these  letters  we  accordingly  iind 
in  iiae,  especially  in  the  later  Scriptures,  as  yowel  marks. 
Two  interesting  ąuestions  here  present  themselyes :  1. 
As  to  the  age  and  origin  of  the  chaiacters  or  letters 
which  appear  in  all  extant  Hebrew  MSS.  and  in  onr 
printed  Hebrew  Bibles ;  and,  2.  As  to  the  origin  and  au- 
thority  of  the  punctuation  by  which  the  yowel  sounds 
are  indicatcd. 

1.  On  the  former  of  these  ąuestions  there  are  two  con- 
dusions  which  may  be  relied  on  as  oertain :  (1.)  That 
the  present  aąuare  characters  were  not  in  use  among  the 
Jews  preyioos  to  the  Babylonian  Captiyity.  The  Jew- 
ish  tradition  la  that  they  were  introduced  or  reintro- 
daced  by  Ezra  (Geaenius,  Getchichtt,  p.  150;  Lightfoot, 
Hora  HdfrtńoBRj  Matt.  v,  18).  (2.)  That  the  sąuare  char- 
acteis  haye  been  in  use  sińce  the  beginning  of  our  »ra 
(Hopfeki  in  Siud,  und  KriL  for  1830,  p.  288).  But  be- 
tween  these  two  limits  seyend  centuries  interA^ene ;  is  it 
not  poasible  to  approzimate  morę  clooely  to  the  datę  of 
their  introduction  ?  The  only  fact  to  which  appeal  can 
be  madę  with  this  yiew  is  this,  that  on  the  coins  of  the 
Maccabees  the  square  characters  do  not  appear;  but 
whether  we  are  entitled  to  conclude  from  this  that  these 
characten  had  not  then  come  into  use  in  Judiea  is  yeiy 
doubtfol  (Gesenius,  Geschichte,  sect.  xliii,  3).  The  prob- 
ability  b  that  the  introduction  of  these  characters,  called 
by  the  Jewbh  doctors  AsB3rrian,  and  generally  admitted 
to  be  of  Aramsan  origin,  had  some  connection  with  the 
introduction  of  the  Aranuean  language,  and  that  the 
cfaange  firom  the  ancient  written  characters,  like  that 
from  the  ancient  language,  was  not  accomplished  at 
once,  bot  gradually.  It  is  poasible  that  in  the  intensity 
of  nationid  feeling  awakened  during  the  Maccabosan 
fitniggle,  there  was  a  reaction  in  fayor  of  the  ancient 
linguage  and  writing. 

The  earlieat  monuments  of  Hebrew  writing  which  we 
possesB  are  these  ffenuine  coins  of  the  Maccabees,  which 
datę  from  the  ycar  RC.  148.  The  character  in  which 
their  inacriptions  are  expres8ed  bears  a  yery  near  resem- 
Uance  to  the  Saraaritan  alphabet,  and  both  are  eyident- 
lyderiyed  from  the  Phoenidan  alphabet.  The  Talmud 
also,  and  Origen  and  Jerome,  both  attest  the  fact  that 
an  ancient  Hebrew  character  had  fallen  into  disuse; 
and  by  stating  that  the  Samaritans  employed  it,  and  by 
giying  some  descriptions  of  its  form,  they  distinctly 
prove  that  the  ancient  character  spoken  of  was  essen- 
tiaUy  the  same  as  that  on  the  Asmomean  coins.  It  is 
theiefore  considered  to  be  established  beyond  a  doubt 
that,  before  the  exile,  the  Hebrews  used  this  ancient 
character  (the  Talmud  eyen  calls  it  the  "Hebrew"). 
The  Talmud,  and  Origen,  and  Jerome  aseribe  the  change 
to  Ezra;  and  those  who,like  Gesenius,  admit  this  tra- 
dition to  be  tnie  in  a  limited  sense,  reconcile  it  with  the 
late  lae  of  the  ancient  letters  on  the  coins,  by  appealing 
to  the  parallel  use  of  the  Kufie  characters  on  the  Mo- 
hammedan  coins,  for  seyeral  centuries  aflcr  the  Nishi 
was  employed  for  writing,  or  by  supposing  that  the 
Maccabees  had  a  mercantUe  interest  in  imitating  the 
coinage  of  the  Phoenicians.  The  other  opinion  is  that, 
as  the  square  Hebrew  character  has  not,  to  all  appear- 
ance,  been  deyeloped  directly  out  of  the  ancient  stiff 
Phcenidan  type,  but  out  of  an  alphabet  bearing  near  af- 
finity  to  that  found  in  the  Palmyrene  inscriptions,  a 
oombtnation  of  this  paheographical  fact  with  the  inter- 
c«ine  which  took  place  between  the  Jews  and  the  S\t- 
ians  under  the  Seleucidie,  renders  it  probable  that  the 
sąuue  character  was  first  adopted  at  some  inoonsider- 
*ble  but  undetinable  tlme  before  the  Christian  aera. 
Ęither  of  these  theories  is  compatible  with  the  supposi- 
tum  that  the  sąuare  character  underwent  many  succcs- 
siye  modifications  in  the  next  centuries,  before  it  at- 
taiaed  its  fuU  calligTaphical  perfection.    The  passage  in 


Matt  y,  18  is  considered  to  proye  that  the  copies  ofthe 
law  were  already  written  in  the  sąuare  character,  as  the 
yod  of  the  ancient  alphabet  is  as  large  a  letter  as  the 
aleph ;  and  the  Talmud  and  Jerome  speak  as  if  the  He- 
brew MSS.  of  the  Old  Testament  were,  in  their  time, 
already  proyided  with  the  finał  letters,  the  Taffffut,  the 
point  on  the  broken  horizontal  stroke  of  n,  and  other 
calligraphical  roinutiie. 

The  characters  in  use  before  the  Babylonian  exile 
haye  been  prc8er\'ed  by  the  Samaritans  eren  to  the 
present  day  without  materiał  change  (Gesenius,  Monum, 
Pham.  sect.  li,  1 ;  comp.  on  this  subject  also  Kopp,  Bilder 
und  Schri/teiif  ii,  sect.  165-167;  Ewald,  Lehrbuchf  sect. 
bcxvii ;  Gesenius,  Gesckichte  der  Jhhrdischtn  Sprache  w. 
Schrifl,  sect.  41-43). 

2.  As  to  the  oriffin  and  authority  ofthe  punctuation, 
the  controyersy  which  raged  so  fiercely  in  the  17th  cen- 
tuiy  may  be  said  now  to  haye  ceased ;  and  the  yiews 
of  Ludoyicus  Cappellus,  from  the  adoption  of  which  the 
Buxtorfs  anticipated  the  most  dangerous  conseąuences, 
now  mcet  with  almost  uniyersal  acquiescence.  'fhe  two 
following  conclusions  may  now  be  regarded  as  estab- 
lished :  (1.)  That  the  present  punctuation  did  not  form 
an  originaJ  part  of  the  inspired  record,  but  was  intro- 
duced by  the  Jewish  doctors  long  aflcr  that  record  had 
been  closed,  for  the  purpose  of  pre8er\'ing,  as  far  as  pos- 
sible,  the  tnie  pronunciation  of  the  language ;  and  (2.) 
That  the  present  pointed  tcxt,  notwithstanding  its  com- 
paratiye  recency,  presenta  us  with  the  closest  possible 
approximation  to  the  language  which  the  sacred  writers 
actually  used.  It  would  be  tedious  to  go  over  the  eyi- 
dence  by  which  these  positions  are  established.  Those 
who  wish  to  do  so  will  find  the  fullest  information  in 
the  great  work  of  Ludoyicus  Cappellus,  entitled  Arca- 
num  Punctationis  Rerelatum,  with  the  rcply  of  the  youn- 
ger  Buxtorf.  Keeping  these  conclusions  in  yiew  in  in- 
terpreting  the  Hebrew  Scripturcs,  we  shall  be  careful 
neither,on  the  one  hand,  to  neglect  the  traditional  text, 
nor,  on  the  other  hand,  seryilely  to  adhcre  to  it  when  a 
change  of  the  pointa  would  giye  a  bctter  sense  to  any 
passage. 

The  origin  of  the  yowcl-points  is  to  be  ascribed  to 
the  effort  which  the  Jewish  leamed  men  madc  to  pre- 
sen^e  the  pronunciation  of  their  sacred  language  at  a 
time  when  its  extinction  as  a  li\'ing  tongue  cndangered 
the  loss  of  the  traditional  mcmory  of  its  soimd.  Every 
kind  of  cyidence  renders  it  probable  that  these  signs  for 
the  pronunciation  were  first  introduced  about  the  7th 
century  of  the  Christian  sra,  that  is,  aftcr  the  comple- 
tion  of  the  Talmud,  and  that  the  minutę  and  complex 
system  which  we  possess  was  gradually  develop?d  from 
a  few  indispcnsable  signs  to  its  present  elaborateness. 
The  exist€nce  of  the  present  complete  system  can,  how- 
eyer,be  traced  back  to  the  llth  century.  The  skilful 
investigation  of  Hupfeld  (in  the  Studien  und  KrUihen 
for  1830,  p.  549  sq.)  has  proved  that  the  yowel-points 
were  unknown  to  Jerome  and  the  Talmud ;  but,  as  far 
as  rcgards  the  former,  we  are  able  to  make  a  high  esti- 
mate  of  the  degree  to  which  the  traditionary  proniuici- 
ation,  prior  to  the  use  of  the  points,  accorded  with  our 
Masoretic  signs;  for  Jerome  describes  a  pronimciation 
which  agrees  wonderfully  well  with  our  own  yocaliza- 
tion.  We  are  thus  called  on  to  avail  ourselyes  thank- 
fuUy  of  the  Masoretic  punctuation,  on  the  double  ground 
that  it  reprcsents  the  Jewish  traditional  pronunciation, 
and  that  the  Hebrew  language,  unless  when  read  accord- 
ing  to  its  laws,  does  not  enter  into  its  fuli  dialectual  har- 
mony  with  its  Syro-Arabian  sistcrs.     Sec  Massorah. 

Although  it  may  be  superfiuous  to  enforce  the  gener- 
ał adyantages,  not  to  say  indispensablc  necessity,  of  a 
sound  scholarlike  study  of  the  Hebrew  language  to  the 
theological  student,  yet  it  may  be  allowable  to  enumcr^ 
ate  some  of  those  particular  reasons,  incident  to  the 
present  time,  which  urgently  demand  an  increased  at- 
tention  to  this  study.  First,  the  English-speaking  race 
haye  an  ancient  honorable  name  to  rctain.  Selden, 
Castell,  Ldghtfoot,  Pocock,Walton,  Spencer,  and  Hyde, 


HEBREW  LANGUA6E 


138 


HEBREW  LAN6UAGE 


weie  once  contemponury  omaments  of  its  Utermture.  We 
daily  see  their  names  mentioned  with  deference  in  the 
writings  of  Gennan  scholan;  but  we  are  forcibly  struck 
with  the  fact  that,  sińce  that  period,  Great  Britain  has 
hanlly,  with  the  exception  of  Lowth  and  Kennicott,  pro- 
duced  a  single  Syro-Arabian  scholar  whoae  labois  have 
signally  advanced  Biblical  philology ;  while  America,  al- 
thoogh  possessinfc  some  well-qttaliiieid  teachers,  has  pxx)- 
duced  but  little  that  is  original  in  this  direction.  Sec- 
ondly,  the  bold  inquiries  of  the  Gennan  theologians  will 
forcc  themselyes  on  our  notioe.  It  is  impossible  for  us 
to  ignore  their  existence,  for  the  works  containing  them 
are  now  speedily  circulated  among  us  in  an  Engllsh  dreas, 
These  inrestigations  are  conducted  in  a  spirit  of  philo- 
logical  and  historical  criticism  which  has  never  yet  been 
brought  to  bear,  with  such  foroe,  on  the  moet  iniportant 
Biblical  questions.  The  wounds  which  they  deal  to  the 
aucient  traditions  caiinot  be  healed  by  refercnce  to  com- 
mentators  whose  gencration  knew  nothing  of  our  doubts 
and  difEculties.  The  cure  must  be  synipathetic ;  it 
must  be  elTected  by  the  same  weapon  that  caused  the 
wound.  If  the  monstrous  disproportion  which  books 
relating  to  ecclesiastical  antiquity  bear,  in  almost  every 
theological  bookscller*8  catalogue,  over  those  relating  to 
Biblical  philology,  be  an  cvidence  of  the  degree  to  which 
these  studies  havc  fallen  into  neglect,  and  if  the  few 
books  in  which  an  acąuaintance  with  Hebrew  is  neces- 
sary,  which  do  appear,  are  a  fair  proof  of  our  present 
abUity  to  meet  the  Germans  with  their  own  weapons, 
then  there  is  indced  an  urgent  necessity  that  theological 
(ttudents  should  prepare  for  the  incrcased  demands  of 
the  futurę. 

Ul.  UUtory  of  Il^brtw  Leaminff.r—U  is  not  till  the 
dosing  part  of  the  9th  century  that  we  find,  eren  among 
the  Jcws  themselyes,  any  attempts  at  the  fomial  study 
of  their  ancient  tongue.  In  the  Talmudic  writings,  in- 
dccd,grammatical  remarks  frequently  occur,  and  of  these 
somc  indicate  an  acute  and  accurate  perception  of  the 
usages  of  the  laiiguage ;  but  they  are  introduced  inci- 
denudly,  and  are  to  be  traoed  rather  to  a  sort  of  living 
sensc  of  the  language  than  to  any  scientific  study  of  its 
Btructure  or  lawa.  What  the  Jews  of  the  Talmudic  pe- 
riod knew  themselyes  of  the  Hebrew  they  communicated 
to  Origcn  and  Jerome,  both  of  whom  deyoted  themselyes 
with  much  zeal  to  the  study  of  that  language,  and  the 
lat  ter  of  whom  espccially  became  proficient  in  all  that 
his  mastcrs  could  tcach  him  conceming  both  its  yocab- 
ulary  and  its  grammar  (Eusebius,  Uisi,  Ecdes, ;  Jerome, 
A  dr.  Riijin.  i,  5363 ;  KpUt,  ad  Damcui. ;  Prcef.  ad  Jobum, 
ad  Paralipom.  etc ;  Carpzoy,  Crił.  Sac.  yi,  §  2).  As  rep- 
reaented  by  Jerome,  the  Church  was  ąuite  on  a  par  with 
the  8}'nagogue  in  acąuaintance  with  the  language  of  the 
ancient  Scriptures;  but  how  imperfect  that  was  in  many 
Tespects  may  be  seen  from  the  strange  etjTnologies, 
which  even  Jerome  adduces  as  explanatory  of  words, 
and  from  his  statement  that  from  the  want  of  yowels  in 
Hebrew  "  the  Jews  pronounce  the  same  words  with  dif- 
ferent  sounds  and  accents,/7ro  rolunłate  lectorum  ac  rw 
rietaie  reffionum"  {Ep,  ad  Krangelum), 

Stimulatcd  by  the  example  of  the  Arabians,  the  Jews 
began,  towards  the  eiid  of  the  9th  centur>-,  to  bestow 
careful  study  on  the  grammar  of  thoir  ancient  tongue; 
and  with  tłiis  adyantage  oyer  the  Arabian  grammarians, 
that  tłiey  did  not,  like  them,  coniine  their  attention  to 
one  language,  but  took  into  account  the  whole  of  the 
Shemitic  tongues.  An  African  Jew,  Jehuda  ben-Karish, 
who  liyed  about  A.D.  880,  led  the  way  in  this  direction ; 
but  it  was  reseryed  for  Saadia  ben-Joseph  of  Fayum, 
gaon  (or  8f)iritual  head)  of  the  Jews  at  Sora  in  Baby- 
lonia,  and  who  died  A.D,  942,  to  compose  the  first  for- 
mal  treatiae  on  )x)ints  of  Hebrew  grammar  and  philolo- 
gy. To  him  we  are  indebted  for  tlie  Arabie  yersion  of 
the  O.  T.,  of  which  portions  are  still  extant  [see  Arabic 
VEitsioxsj ;  and  though  his  other  works,  his  commen- 
taries  on  the  O.  T.,  and  his  grammatical  works,  haye 
not  come  down  to  ua,  we  know  of  their  exiKtence  from, 
and  haye  still  some  of  their  contents  in,  the  citations  of 


I  Uter  writers.  He  was  foUowed  by  S.  Jehuda  beii-IH« 
,  yid  Chajug,  a  natiye  of  Fez,  who  Hourished  in  the  llth 
centur>%  whose  seryices  haye  procured  for  him  the  boo- 
orable  designatioii  of  "  chief  of  grammarians.**  From 
him  the  suoceasion  of  Jewish  grammarians  embraces  the 
foUowing  namea  [for  details,  aee  separate  artidesj.  K. 
Salomo  Isaaki  (^U"^,  Rashi),  a  natiye  of  Tro3re8  in 
France,  d.  ab.  1105 ;  Abul  Walid  Meryan  ibn-Ganach,  a 
physician  at  Cordoya,  d.  1 1 20 ;  Moses  Gikatilla,  ab.  1 100 ; 
lbn-£sra,  d.  1194;  the  Kimchis,  especially  Moaea  and 
Dayid,who  flourished  in  the  18th  century;  Isaak  ben- 
Mose  (Ephodaeus,  so  called  from  the  title  of  his  work 
^ifiit  ^^?.?);  Solomon  Jarchi  wrote  a  grammar,  in 
which  he  sets  forth  the  seyen  conjugations  of  yerba  as 
now  usually  giyen ;  Abraham  de  Balmez  of  Lecd;  and 
Elias  LeyiU  (1472-1549).  The  earliest  efforts  in  He- 
brew lexicography  with  which  we  are  aoątiainted  ta  the 
little  work  of  Saadia  Gaon,  in  which  he  explains  seyen- 
ty  Hebrew  words;  a  codex  containing  this  is  in  the 
Bodleian  librar}'  at  Oxford,  from  which  it  has  been  print- 
ed  by  Dukes  in  the  ZeiłschriJ}  Jur  die  Kunde  des  Mor- 
ffenlandesj  V,  i,  115  sq.  In  the  same  codex  is  anoth- 
er  smali  lexicographi<»l  work  by  Jehuda  ben-Karish,  in 
which  Hebrew  words  are  explained  from  the  Talmud, 
the  Arabic,  and  other  languagcs;  cxccrpts  from  this  are 
giyen  in  Eichhom's  Bibliotk,  der  KibL  Lift,  iii,  961-98a 
Morę  oopious  works  are  those  of  Ben-Ganach,  where  the 
Hebrew  words  are  explained  in  Arabic ;  of  R.  Menahem 
ibn-Saruk,  whose  work  has  been  printed  with  an  £ng- 
lish  translation  by  Herschell  Phllipowski  (Lond.  1854); 
of  R.  Salomo  Parchon  (about  1160),  spedmens  of  whose 
work  haye  been  giyen  by  De  Rossi  in  his  collection  of 
Yarious  Readings,  and  in  a  separate  work  entitled  LeT- 
icon  Iłeb.  aelecł,  quo  ex  anłiguo  ei  inedito  IL  Parchonis 
I^rico  noras  et  dirersas  rariorum  eł  diJSciliorum  rocttm 
siffnijicationes  natił,J.  K  De  Rossi  (Parm.  1805);  of  Da- 
yid  Kimchi,  in  the  second  part  of  his  Michlci,  entitled 
Q''d'Jt^n  *1ŁC  (oflen  printed ;  best  edition  by  Biesen- 
thal  and  Leberecht,  2  vols.  Beri.  1838^7) ;  and  of  Elias 
Leyita  (rt«A6t,Ba8.  1527*,  and  with  a  Latin  translation 
by  Fagius,  4to,  1541).  The  Concordance  of  Isaac  Na- 
than  (1437)  also  belongs  to  this  period. 

The  study  of  the  Hebrew  language  among  Christiana, 
which  had  only  casually  and  at  in  tery  ais  occupied  the 
attention  of  ecdesiastics  during  the  Middle  Ages,  re- 
ceiyed  an  impulse  from  the  reyiyed  iuterest  in  Biblical 
exege8i8  produced  by  the  Rcformation.  Something  had 
been  done  to  facilitate  the  study  of  Oriental  literaturę 
and  to  cali  attention  to  it  by  the  MSS.,  Hebrew  and 
Arabic,  which  the  cmperor  Frederick  11  brought  into 
Europę  aftcr  the  fourth  crusade  in  1228  (Cus|iiiuan,  De 
Casaribus^  p.  419;  Boxhom,  //u^  Unit,  p.  779) ;  and  a 
few  men— such  as  Raymund  Martini,  a  natiye  of  Cata- 
lonia  (bom  1236),  Paulus  Bugensis,  Libertas  Cominetua, 
who  is  said  to  haye  known  and  used  fourtcen  laiiguagea, 
etc. — appearcd  as  lights  in  the  othcrwisc  bedouded  fir- 
mament of  Biblical  leaming.  But  it  was  not  uutil  the 
beginning  of  the  16th  centur}-  that  any  generał  intercat 
was  awakened  in  the  Christian  Church  for  the  study  of 
Hebrew  literaturę.  In  1506  appeared  the  grammar  and 
lexicon  of  Reuchlin,  which  may  be  regardcd  as  the  first 
succcssful  attcmpt  to  open  the  gate  of  Hebrew  leaming 
to  the  Christian  world;  for  though  the  work  of  Conrad 
Pellican,  De  Modo  legendi  ei  intelligendi  I/cbreea  (^Basel, 
1503),  had  the  precedence  in  point  of  time,  it  was  too 
imperfect  to  exert  much  influence  in  fayor  of  Hebrew 
studies.  A  few  years  later,  Santes  Pagnini,  a  Domini- 
can  of  Lucca,  issued  his  Institutionum  IJebraicarum  IJbb, 
iv  (Lyons,  1526),  and  his  Thetauruś  Ling.  Sand.  (ibid. 
1529);  but  the  lormer  of  these  works  is  iuferior  to  the 
(irammar  of  Reuchlin,  and  the  latter  is  a  mcre  collec- 
tion of  exccrpts  from  Dayid  Kimchrs  Book  oj"  Roołs^ 
oflen  erróneously  understood.  No  name  of  any  impar^ 
tance  occurs  in  the  history  of  Hebrew  philology  ailer 
this  till  we  come  to  those  of  Sebastian  Munster  and  the 
Buxtorfs.  The  former  tianslated  the  grammatical  worlu 


HEBREW  LANGUAGE 


139 


HEBREW  LANGUAGE 


of  Eliafl  Levita,  and  finom  these  chiefly  he  constructed 
Iib  own  Dictionarum  łlebr.^  adj.  Ckald,  vocabulis  (Basel, 
15*23),  and  his  Opus  Grammaiicum  ex  variis  Elictnu  ii- 
hris  concUtnalum  (Bas.  1542)^  The  latter  rendered  most 
important  seri^ice  to  the  cauae  of  Uebrew  leaming.  See 
BrxTORF.  The  grammazs  and  lexicon8  of  the  older 
Buxtorf  were  for  many  years  the  piincipal  helpa  to  the 
study  of  Hebrew  in  the  Christian  Church,  and  one  of 
ihem,  his  Latiocm  Chaid.  Talmud,  et  JRabbiniaim  (Basel, 
I&IO),  is  stiU  indiapenaable  to  the  student  who  would 
thoroughly  explore  the  Hebrew  language  and  litera- 
turę. The  names  also  of  Forster  and  Schindler  may  be 
mentioned  as  marking  an  epoch  in  the  history  of  these 
studiem  Preyious  to  them  scholars  had  foUowed  almost 
8la\ishl y  in  the  track  of  rabbinical  teachiiig.  By  them, 
howerer,  an  attempt  was  madę  to  gather  nuiterials  from 
a  nider  field.  Forster,  in  his  Dicł,  Jłebr,  Aor.  (Basel, 
1057),  sooght  to  determine  the  meaning  of  the  words 
from  the  compariaon  of  the  difierent  passagcs  of  Scrip- 
ture  in  which  they  occur,  and  of  aUied  words,  words 
hsring  two  conaonants  in  common,  or  two  consonants 
of  the  same  organ.  Schindler  added  to  this  the  com- 
parison  of  dififerent  Shemitlc  dialects  for  the  illustration 
of  the  Hebrew  in  his  /.«r.  Pentaglotton  (Han.  1612). 
Tbc  esample  tbus  set  was  carried  forward  by  Sam. 
Bobie,  a  liostock  professor  (Dissertt,  pro  formali  Signif, 
S.  S,  eruenda,  1637),  though  by  his  fondness  for  meta- 
ph\'Bical  methoda  and  conccits  he  was  oftcn  betrayed 
into  merę  trifllng ;  by  Christian  Nolde,  professor  at  Co- 
penhagen  {Concordant.  partieularum  Ebrteo,  Ckald,  V, 
T,  Hamb.  1679) ;  by  Joh.  Cocceius  (Coch),  professor  at 
Leyden  (Lear.  et  Comment,  serm.  //«ir.  Lond.  1669) ;  by 
CMtell  {l.ex,  Ileptafflot.  Lond.  1669) ;  by  De  Dieu  in  his 
ccmmentaries  on  the  O.  Test. ;  and  by  Hottinger  in  his 
Ktymohgicum  Orient,  gire  Lex  harmtmicum  Heptaglot, 
(Frankf.  1661).  Sol  Glass  also,  in  his  PhUologia  Sacra, 
1636,  rendered  important  serrice  to  Hebrew  leaniing 
and  O.-T.  exegesis. 

Meanwhile  a  new  school  of  Hebrew  philology  had 
arben  under  the  leading  of  Jakob  Alting  and  Johann 
Andr.  Danz.  The  formcr  in  his  Fundamenta  puncta- 
How  Ungum  scmctm  ńee  Grammat,  Hebr.  (Gron.  1654), 
and  the  latter  in  his  Nucifrangibulum  (Jena,  1686),  and 
other  works,  endearored  to  shOf^  that  the  phenomena 
which  the  Hebrew  exhibited  in  a  grammatical  respect, 
the  flexions,  etc,  had  their  basis  in  essential  properties 
of  the  language,  and  could  be  rationally  evolved  from 
principles.  Peculiar  to  them  is  the  "systema  mora- 
rum,'*  a  highly  artlficial  method  of  determining  the 
plscing  of  long  or  short  rowels,  according  to  the  number 
of  mora  appertuning  to  each  or  to  the  consonant  fol- 
lowing,  a  method  which  led  to  endless  niceties,  and  no 
smali  amount  of  leamed  trifiing.  The  fiuidamental 
principle,  however,  which  Alting  and  Danz  aaserted  is 
a  true  oue,  and  their  assertion  of  it  was  not  without 
fniita.  Nearly  contemporary  with  them  was  Jacques 
Gousset,  professor  at  Gruningen,  who  deroted  much 
time  and  labor  to  the  preparation  of  a  work  entitled 
Commentarii  lAag,  Heb.  (Amst.  1702),  in  which  he  fol- 
lows  strictly  the  method  of  deducing  the  meanings  of 
the  Hebrew  words  from  the  Hebrew  itself,  rejecting  all 
ud  from  rabbins,  ver»ions,  or  dialects.  The  chief  merit 
of  Gouiset  and  his  foUowers,  of  whom  the  principal  is 
Chr.  Stock  {Ciams  Ling,  Sancł.  V,  el  X.  Tu  Lips.  1725), 
consists  in  the  dose  attention  they  paid  to  the  usus  h- 
qwndi  of  Scripture,  and  Hiivemick  thinks  that  adequate 
jostice  bas  not  been  done  to  Gousset^s  serrices  in  this 
respect  {InŁrod,  to  O,  T,  p.  221.  Eng.  trans.). 

Hitherto  not  much  attention  had  been  paid  to  ety- 
mology  as  a  source  for  determining  the  meaning  of 
Hebrew  words.  This  defect  was  in  pait  remedied  by 
Caspar  Keumann  and  Yalentin  Loscher,  the  former  of 
whom  in  differcnt  treatises,  the  latter  in  his  treatise  De 
Cautit  Ling,  Heb,  (Frankf.  and  Leipeic,  1706),  set  forth 
the  principle  that  the  Hebrew  roots  are  bililera,  that 
these  are  the  *'  characteres  significationis,"  as  Neumann 
caDed  them,  or  the  "scmina  yocom,*'  as  they  were  des- 


ignated  by  Loscher,  and  that  from  them  the  triliteralą 
of  which  the  Hebrew  is  chiefły  composed,  were  formed. 
They  coutended  also  that  the  fundamental  meaning  of 
the  biliterals  is  to  be  ascertained  from  the  meaning  of 
the  letters  composing  each,  and  for  this  purpose  they 
assigned  to  each  letter  what  the  former  called  *'  signifi- 
catio  hieroglyphica,"  and  the  latter  "valor  logicus.** 
This  last  is  the  most  dubioua  part  of  their  system ;  but, 
as  a  whole,  their  riews  are  worthy  of  respect  and  con- 
sideration  (see  Hupfeld,  De  emendcmda  hscioog,  Semit,  ra- 
Hone,  p.  3). 

A  great  adrance  was  roade  in  the  beginning  of  the 
18th  century  by  the  rise  almost  simultaneously  of  two 
rival  schools  of  Hebrew  philology — the  Dutch  school, 
headed  by  Albert  Schultens,  and  the  school  of  Halle, 
founded  by  the  Michaelis  family.  In  the  former  the 
predominating  tendency  was  towaids  the  almost  exclu- 
sire  use  of  the  Arabie  for  the  illustration  of  Hebrew 
grammar  and  lexicography.  Schultens  himaelf  was  a 
thorough  Arabie  scholajr,  and  he  carried  hb  principle 
of  appealing  to  that  source  for  the  elucidation  of  the 
Hebrew  to  an  estent  which  betrayed  him  into  many 
mistakes  and  extravagance8;  ncrertheless,  to  his  labors 
.Hebrew  philology  owes  an  iroperishable  debt  of  obliga- 
tion.  Besides  his  commentaries  on  Job  and  ProYerbs, 
which  are  fuli  of  grammatical  and  lexicographical  dia- 
quisition,  he  wrote  Ongines  Ihhraa  aeu  lith,  JJsng,  anti' 
cttissima  natura  et  indołes  ex  A  rabia  penetralibu»  revo- 
caia  (Frankfort,  1723),  and  IfutUutiones  ad/uTidamenta 
Ling,  Ileb,  (Leyd.  1737).  To  this  school  belongs  Schro- 
der,  professor  at  Groningen,  who  published  in  1776  a 
Hebrew  grammar  of  great  excelk»ice,  and  which  haa 
passed  through  many  editions,  under  the  same  title  aa 
the  second  of  the  works  of  Schultens  above  noted;  and 
Robertson,  professor  at  Edinburgh  {Grammaiica  IlAr, 
Edinb.  1783,  2d  ed.).  Both  these  works  excel  that  of 
Schultens  in  clcamess  and  simplicity,  and  in  neither  is 
the  Arabie  theory  so  exclusively  adhered  to.  Yenema, 
as  a  commentator,  was  also  one  of  the  luminariea  of  thia 
schooL 

The  school  of  Halle  was  founded  by  Johann  Heinrich 
and  Chrii^iian  Benedikt  Michaelis,  but  its  principal  orna- 
ment in  its  earlier  stage  was  the  son  of  the  latter,  John 
Dayid,  professor  at  Gottingen.  See  Michaelis.  The 
principle  of  this  school  was  to  combine  the  use  of  all  the 
sources  of  elucidation  for  the  Hebrew — the  cognate  dia- 
lects, especially  the  Aramaic,  the  rersions,  the  rabbin- 
ical writings,  etymology,  and  the  Hebrew  itself  as  ex- 
hibited  in  the  sacred  writings.  The  valuable  edition  of 
the  Hebrew  Bibie,  with  exegetical  notes,  the  oonjoint 
work  of  J.  H.  and  Christ  R  Michaelis,  some  grammat- 
ical essays  by  the  latter,  and  the  Jleln-diache  Granwui' 
tik  (Halle,  1744),  the  Supplementa  ad  lexica  HAraica  (6 
parts,  Gótt.  1785-92),  and  several  smaller  essays  of  John 
David,  comprise  the  principal  contńbutions  of  this  illus- 
trious  family  to  Hebrew  leaming.  To  their  school  be- 
long  the  majority  of  morę  recent  German  Hebraists — 
Moser  (/.«r.  Mari  Heb,  et  Chald,  I  Jim,  1795),  Vater  {Ileb, 
Sprachlekre,  Lpz.  1797),  Hartmann  {Anfangtgrunde  der 
Heb.  Sprachej  Marburg,  1798),  Jahn  {Grammatica  Ling, 
Heb,  1809),  and  the  yizcife  princeps  of  the  whole,  Gese- 
nius  (Jtebr,  Deutsches  Handwdrterbuckf  Lpz.  1810-12,  and 
later;  Heb,  Grammałik,  Halle,  1813,  and oflcn  sińce;  &e- 
schiclUe  der  Heb,  Spr,  und  Schrifi,  1816,  and  sińce ;  A  us- 
fuhrliches  Gram.-Krit^  Lekrg^dude  der  Heb,  Spr,  1817 ; 
'ljexicon  Manuale,  1833,  and  hiter ;  Thesaurus  PhU,  Crit, 
Ling,  Iłebr,  et  Ckald,  Lpz.  1835-1858).  See  Gesenius. 
Gesenius  has  been  foUowed  closely  by  Moses  Stuart  in 
his  Grammar  o/łke  Hebrew  Languoge,  of  which  many 
editions  have  appeared.  Under  the  Halle  school  may 
also  be  ranked  Joh.  Simonis  {Onomast.  Vet,  Test,  Halle, 
1741;  Lericon  Man,  Heb.  et  Ckald.  1756;  re-edited  by 
Eichhom  in  1793,  and  with  valuable  improrements  by 
Winer  in  1828) ;  but,  though  a  pupil  of  Michaelis,  Si- 
monis shows  a  strong  leaning  towards  the  school  of 
Schultens. 

AmoDg  recent  Hebraists  the  name  of  Lee  {Grammar 


HEBREWS,  EPBTLE  TO         140         HEBREWS,  EPBTLE  TO 


efiht  Hdi,  Lang,  in  a  Series  o/Lectures,  Lond.  3d  edit 
1844;  Lexicon  JIeb,C7ialcLand£nffLlM0),Evrald  (Krił, 
Grctmm.  der  Heb.  8pr,  A  usfuhrlich  bearbeiłet,  Lpz.  1827 ; 
7th  ed.  1868,  under  the  title  of  Augfuhrlicheg  Lehrb.  der 
Hdt,  Spr,  des  A.B.)t  and  Hupfeld  {Ezercitationes uEthi- 
opictBy  1826 ;  De  emend,  Lericogr,  Sem.  raiione  Comment, 
1827;  Ueber  Tkeorie  der  Heb,  Gr,  in  the  Tkeol  Siudien 
und  Kritiken  for  1828 ;  Ausf,  Hebr,  Gram,  1841),  are  the 
mo6t  prominent.  Each  of  these  pursues  an  independent 
coune,  but  all  of  them  indine  morę  or  less  to  the  school 
of  Altiug  and  Danz.  Lee  avowB  that  the  aim  of  his 
grammatical  inrestigations  is  to  '^  study  the  language 
as  if  iff,  that  is,  as  its  own  cmalogy  collected  from  itself 
and  its  cognate  dialects  exhibits  it'*  {Grammary  Pref.  p. 
iv,  new  ed.  1844).  Ewald  has  oombined  with  his  phU- 
Oflophical  analysis  of  the  language,  as  it  exists  in  its ! 
own  documents,  a  morę  extended  use  of  the  cognate  di-  | 
alects;  he  contends  that,  to  do  justice  to  the  Hebrew, 
one  must  first  be  at  home  in  all  the  branches  of  Shemit^ 
ic  literaturę,  and  that  it  is  by  combining  these  with  the 
old  Hebrew  that  the  Litter  is  to  be  called  from  the  dead, 
and  piece  by  piece  endowed  with  life  (Grammaiik,  Pref. 
p.  ix).  Hupfeld'8  method  is  eclectic,  and  does  not  dif- 
fer  from  that  of  Gesenius,  except  that  it  assigns  a  larger 
influence  to  the  philosophic  element,  and  aims  morę  at 
basing  the  grammar  of  the  language  on  first  principles 
analytically  determined ;  by  him  also  the  Japhetic  lan- 
goages  have  been  called  in  to  cast  light  on  the  Shemitic, 
a  course  to  which  Gesenius  t«o,  aiter  formally  repudia- 
ting  it,  came  in  his  later  works  to  indine. 

Among  the  Jews,  the  study  of  Hebrew  literaturę  has 
been  much  fettcrcd  by  rabbinical  and  traditional  preju- 
dices.  Many  able  grammarians,  however,  of  this  school 
havc  appeared  sińce  the  beginning  of  the  16th  ccntury, 
among  whom  the  names  of  the  brothers  David  and  Mo- 
scs  ProYcnęale,  Lonzano  Norzi,  Ben-Melech,  SUsskind, 
and  Lombroso  are  especially  to  be  mentioned.  A  morę 
liberał  impnlse  was  communicated  by  Solomon  Cohen 
.  (1709-62),  but  Mendelssohn  was  the  first  to  introduce 
the  results  and  methods  of  Christian  research  among  his 
nation.  FUrst  (Jjehrffeh,  d,  A  ram,  Idiome  mii  Bezug  auf 
die  fndo-Germ,  Spr.  L  Chald,  Gram,  1886;  Charuze  Pe- 
mam,  1836;  Concordantias  Libr,  Vet,  Test.  1840;  TTebr, 
und  Chald,  Handtcórterbuch  uber  der  A.  T,  2  vols.  1857) 
seeks  to  combine  the  historical  with  the  analyticfd 
method,  taking  notę  of  all  the  phenomena  of  the  He- 
brew itself,  illustrating  these  ftom  the  cognate  tongues, 
and  those  of  the  Indo-Gcrmanic  class,  and  at  the  same 
time  endeavoring  on  philosophic  grounds  to  separate  the 
accidental  from  the  necessary,  the  radical  from  the  ram- 
Ified,  the  germ  from  the  stcm,  the  stem  from  the  branch- 
es, so  as  to  arriye  at  the  laws  which  actftially  nile  the 
language.  All  his  works  are  of  the  highest  value.  Mr. 
Horwitz  has  also  published  an  excellent  Heb.  Grammar 
(Lond.  1835).  We  especially  notice  the  philosophical 
method  pursucd  by  Nordheimer  (Heb.  Grammar,  N.  Y. 
1838-42,  2  vols.  8vo).  The  latest  Jewish  production  in 
English  is  Kali8ch's  Hebrew  Gramm,  (Lond.  1863,  8vo). 

See  generally  Wolf,  Biblioth.  Hebr.  (1715-53) ;  Lo- 
Bcher,  I)e  Causis  Ling,  Ebr.  (1706) ;  Hczel,  Gesch,  der 
Hdr.  Spr.  und  Litter.  (1776) ;  Gesenius,  Gesch.  d,  Hebr, 
Spr.  (1815) ;  Delitzsch,  Jeshurun,  Jsagogt  in  Gramm,  et 
Lericogr,  lingum  Hebr,  (1838) ;  Fllrst,  Biblioth.  Judaica, 
passim;  also  his  appendix  on  Jewish  Lexicography  to 
his  Lex,  Hebr. ;  Steinschncider,  Jewish  Literaturę,  per. 
ii,  §  16 ;  per.  iii,  §  27 ;  Bibliograph.  Handbuchjur  Hebr, 
Sprachk,  (Lpz.  1859, 8vo).    See  Shemitic  Lanouages. 

Hebrews,  The  EPISTLE  TO  the,  the  last  of  the 
Pauline  Epistles,  according  to  the  anangement  of  the 
Received  Text  of  the  New  Testament, 

L  Its  Canonicitg. — The  unirersal  Church,  by  allowing 
it  a  place  among  the  holy  Scriptures,  acknowledges  that 
there  is  nothing  in  its  contents  inconsuttcnt  with  the 
rest  of  the  Bibie.  But  the  peculiar  position  which  is 
assigned  to  it  among  the  epistles  shows  a  tracę  of  doubts 
as  to  its  authorship  or  canonical  authority,  two  points 
which  were  blended  together  in  primitivc  times.    Has 


it,  then,  a  just  claim  to  be  receired  by  us  as  a  portion  of 
that  Kble  which  contains  the  rule  of  our  faith  and  the 
rule  of  our  practice,  laid  down  by  Christ  and  his  apoa- 
tles  ?  Was  it  regarded  as  such  by  the  primitiye  Church, 
to  whose  clearly  expressed  judgment  in  this  mattcr  all 
later  generations  of  Christiaus  agree  to  defer?  Of 
course,  if  we  possessed  a  doclaration  by  an  inspired  apos- 
tle  that  this  epistle  is  canonical,  all  diiscussion  would  be 
superfluous.  But  the  inteipretation  (by  F.  Spanheim 
and  later  writers)  of  2  Pet  iii,  16  as  a  distinct  reference 
to  Paul'8  Epistle  to  the  Hebrews  seems  scarcely  tenable. 
For,  if  the  "you"  whom  Peter  addresses  be  all  Chri»- 
tians  (see  2  Pet.  L  1),  the  reference  must  not  be  limited 
to  the  Epistle  to  the  Hebreivs;  or  if  it  indude  only 
(sec  2  Pet.  iii,  1)  the  Jews  named  in  1  Pet.  i,  1,  there 
may  be  special  reference  to  the  Galatians  (vi,  7-9)  and 
Ephesians  (ii,  8-5),  but  not  to  the  Hebrews.  Was  it, 
then,  receired  and  transmitted  as  canonical  by  the  im- 
mediate  snccessors  of  the  apostlcs? 

In  the  Western  Church  this  book  ruiderwent  a  somc- 
what  singular  treatment.  The  most  important  witness 
here,  Gement  of  Romę  (A-D.  70  or  96)  rcfers  to  this 
epistle  in  the  same  way  as,  and  morę  firequently  than, 
to  any  other  canonical  book.  It  seems  to  have  been 
"  whoUy  transfused,"  says  Mr.  Wcstcott  {On  the  Canony 
p.  82),  into  Clement's  mind.  Aiter  his  time  it  seems  to 
have  come  under  some  doubt  or  suspicion  in  the  West. 
It  is  not  cited  or  referred  to  by  any  of  the  earlier  Latin 
fathers  except  Tertullian,  who  ascribes  it  to  Bamabaa, 
and  sa}^  it  was  "  receptior  apud  ecclesias  illo  apociypho 
pastore  moschorum,"  that  is,  the  pastor  of  Hermas  (De 
Pudicit,  c.  20).  Irensus  is  sald  by  Eusebius  to  have 
madę  ąuotations  firom  it  in  a  work  now  lost  {Hisf.  Eod, 
V,  26),  but  he  did  not  rcccive  it  as  of  Pauline  author* 
ship  (Phot.  Biblioth,  Cod.  262,  p.  904,  cited  by  Laidner, 
ii,  165) ;  and  as  Eusebius  connects  the  Wisdoro  of  Solo- 
mon with  the  Epistle  to  the  Hebrews,  as  cited  by  Ire- 
naeus,  it  is  probat3le  the  latter  viewed  the  two  as  on  the 
same  footing.  It  is  omitted  by  Caius,  who  only  rock- 
ons  thirteen  Pauline  epistles  (Euseb.  Hist,  Eccl.  vi,  26 ; 
Jerome,  De  Vir.  ilhtst.  c.  59) ;  Hippoh-tus  expressly  de- 
clares  it  not  to  be  Paid*s  (Phot.  p.  801) ;  it  is  omitted  in 
the  Muratori  fragment ;  and  by  the  Roman  Chureh  gen- 
erally it  seems  to  have  been  suspected  (Euseb.  //.  E.  iii, 
3 ;  vi,  20).  Yictorinus  has  one  or  two  passages  which 
look  like  quotations  from  it,  but  he  does  not  mention  it, 
and  certainly  did  not  receive  it  as  the  work  of  Paul 
(Lardner,  iii,  800).  In  the  4Łh  century  it  began  to  be 
morę  generaJly  receired.  Lactantius,  in  the  begiiming 
of  the  century,  apparently  borrows  from  it :  Hilary  of 
Poictiers,  Lucifer  of  Cagliari,  Faustinus,  and  Marcellinua 
(who  cites  it  as  dirina  Scriptura) ;  Yictorinus  of  Romc, 
Ambrose,  Philaster  (though  admitting  that  some  reject- 
ed  the  epistle) ;  Gaudentius,  Jerome,  and  Auguftine,  in 
the  latter  half  and  the  end  of  the  ccntur>',  attest  its  can- 
onidty,  and  generally  its  Pauline  origin. 

In  the  Eastcni  churches  it  was  much  morę  generally, 
and  from  an  earlier  datę,  received.  It  is  doubtful  wheth- 
er  any  citation  from  it  is  madę  by  Justin  Martyr,  though 
in  one  or  two  passages  of  his  writings  he  seems  to  have 
had  it  in  his  eye.  Cleroent  of  Alexandria  held  i t  to  be 
Paul's,  originaily  written  by  him  in  Hebrew,  and  trans- 
lated  by  Lukę  (Eusebius,  //.  E.  vi,  14).  Origen  wrote 
homilies  on  this  epistle ;  he  frequent1y  refers  to  it  as  ca- 
nonical, and  as  the  work  of  Paul,  and  he  tclls  us  he  had 
intended  to  write  a  tieatise  to  prove  this  (Lardner,  ii, 
472  8q.).  Origen  further  attests  that  the  ancients  hand- 
ed  it  dovm  as  Paul*s  (Euseb.  H.  E,  vi,  26),  by  which, 
though  he  cannot  be  understood  as  intending  to  say  that 
it  had  never  been  ąuestioned  by  any  of  those  who  had 
Hved  before  him,  we  must  understand  him  at  Icast  to 
affirm  that  in  the  Church  of  Alexandria  it  had  from  the 
earliest  period  been  received.  Dionysius  of  Alexandria 
acknowledged  it  as  part  of  sacred  Scriptiure,  and  as 
written  bj'  PauL  By  Basil,  the  Gregories,  Theodore  of 
Mopsuestia,  Chrj-sostom,  and  all  the  Greeks,  as  Jerome 
attests,  it  was  received.    Eusebius,  though  he  ranka  it 


HEBREWS,  EPISTLE  TO         141         HEBREWS,  EPISTLE  TO 


in  one  place  among  the  ayriktyófiipa,  in  deference  to 
thc  doubta  enterUined  Teą>ecting  it  in  the  Roman 
Church,  neyeithdesa  asserts  its  apostolic  authority,  and 
inciudes  it  among  the  books  generally  rcceired  by  the 
chuichesL  In  public  documents  of  the  Eastem  Church 
aijo,  such  as  the  Epistle  of  the  Synod  at  Antioch,  the 
Aposcolical  GoDatitutions,  the  Gatalogue  of  the  Council, 
iis  claims  are  reoognised.  In  the  Syrian  chorches  it 
was  receired ;  it  is  found  in  the  Peshito  version ;  it  is 
qaoied  by  Ephrem  as  Paul*s;  and  it  is  included  among 
the  canonical  Scriptuzes  in  the  catalogae  of  Kbedjesu 
(Lardner,  iv,  430, 440).  To  this  uniform  testimony  there 
\s  nothing  to  oppose,  unless  we  accept  the  somewhat  du- 
biona  aasertion  of  Jerome  that  it  was  rejected  by  the 
heretical  Ł«acher  Basilides  (JProeau  in  £p,  ad  TU,;  but 
oompare  Lardner,  ix,  305). 

At  the  end  of  the  4th  centuiy,  Jerome,  the  most 
leamed  and  critical  of  thc  Latin  fathers^  reviewed  thc 
conflicting  opiniona  as  to  the  authority  of  this  epistle. 
He  considered  that  the  preyailing,  though  not  uiiiyer- 
sal  Tiew  of  the  Latin  churches  was  of  less  weight  than 
the  view  not  only  of  ancient  ^yritera,  but  aiso  of  all  the 
Greek  and  all  the  Eastern  churclies,  where  the  epistle 
was  receired  as  canonical  and  read  daily ;  and  he  pro- 
Dooneed  a  decided  opinion  in  favor  of  its  authority. 
The  great  contemporary  light  of  North  Africa,  St.  Au- 
gustine,  held  a  similar  opinion.  And  after  the  dechirar 
tion  of  Łhese  two  eminent  men,  the  Latin  churches 
onited  with  the  East  in  receiving  the  epistle.  The  third 
CoDncil  of  Carthage,  A.D.  897,  and  a  decretal  of  popo 
Innocent,  A.D.  416,  gave  a  finał  confirmation  to  their 
decision. 

Soch  was  the  course  and  the  end  of  the  only  consid- 
enble  opposition  which  has  been  madę  to  the  canonical 
authority  of  the  Epistle  to  the  Hebrews.    Its  origin  has 
not  been  ascertained.     Some  critics  have  oonjectured 
that  the  Montanist  or  the  Noyatian  controreisy  insti- 
gited,  and  that  the  Arian  controversy  dissipated  so 
much  opposition  as  procecded  from  orthodox  Chris- 
tians.    The  references  to  Paul  in  the  Clementine  Hom- 
ilies  htve  led  other  critics  to  the  startling  theory  that 
OTtkodoT  Christiana  at  Romę,  in  the  middle  of  the  2d 
centuiy,  commonly  regarded  and  desciibed  Paul  as  an 
enemy  of  the  faith — a  theory  which,  if  it  were  estab- 
łiahed,  would  be  a  much  stranger  fact  than  the  rejec- 
tion  of  the  Icast  accredited  of  the  epiatles  that  bear  the 
apo8tk's  name.    But  perhaps  it  is  morę  probaUe  that 
that  jealous  care  with  which  the  Church  ererywhere, 
in  the  2d  centuiy,  had  leamed  to  scrutinize  all  books 
rt liming  canonical  authority,  misled,  in  this  instance, 
the  churches  of  North  Africa  and  Romę.     For  to  them 
this  epistle  was  an  anonymous  writing,  unlike  an  epifr- 
tle  in  its  opening,  unlike  a  treatise  in  its  end,  differing 
in  its  style  from  eyery  apostoUc  epiatle,  abounding  in 
ar«;nments  and  appealing  to  sentimcnts  which  were  al- 
wajs  foreign  to  the  Gentile,  and  growing  less  familiar 
to  the  Jewish  mind.     So  they  went  a  step  beyond  the 
church  of  Alexandria,  which,  while  doubtlng  the  au- 
thonhip  of  this  epistle,  always  acknowledged  its  author- 
ity.   The  church  of  Jerusalem,  as  the  original  receiyer 
of  the  epistle,  was  the  depositor}'  of  that  orał  testimony 
on  which  both  its  authorship  and  canonical  authority 
loted,  and  was  the  fountain  head  of  Information  which 
■tiaded  the  Eastem  and  Greek  churches.     But  thc 
church  of  Jerusalem  was  early  hidden  in  exile  and  ob- 
scurity.    And  Palestine,  after  the  destmction  of  Jeru- 
Batem,  became  unknown  ground  to  that  class  of  "  dwell- 
en  in  Libya  about  Cyrene,  and  strangers  of  Romę," 
vho  once  nuintained  dose  religioua  intercourse  with  it 
An  these  considerations  may  help  to  account  for  the  fact 
tkst  the  Latin  churches  hesitated  to  receiye  an  epistle, 
the  oedentials  of  which,  from  peculiar  circumstances, 
veye  originally  imperfect,  and  had  become  inacoessible 
to  them  when  their  yersion  of  Scripture  was  in  process 
of  formation,  until  reli^ous  intercourse  between  East 
md  West  again  grew  frequent  and  intimate  in  the  4th 
oeotuiy. 


Cardinal  Cajetan,  the  opponent  of  Luther,  was  the 
first  to  disturb  the  tradition  of  a  thousand  yeais,  and  to 
deny  the  authority  of  this  epistle.  Erasmus,  Calyin, 
and  Beza  questioned  only  its  authorship.  The  bolder 
spirit  of  Luther,  unable  to  perceiye  its  agreement  with 
Paul's  doctriue,  pronounced  it  to  be  the  work  of  some 
diaciple  of  the  apostle,  who  had  built  not  only  gold,  sil- 
yer,  and  precious  Stones,  but  also  wood,  liay,  and  stubble 
upon  his  master*s  fuundation.  And  whereas  the  Greek 
Church  in  thc  4th  century  gave  it  stnoetimes  the  tenth 
place,  or  at  other  times,  as  it  now  does,  and  as  thc  Syr- 
ian,  Roman,  and  English  churches  do,  the  fourteenth 
place  among  the  episUes  of  Paul,  Luther,  when  ho  print- 
ed  his  yersion  of  the  Bibie,  separated  this  book  from 
Paul's  epLstles,  and  placed  it  with  thc  epistles  of  James 
and  Jude,  next  bcfore  the  Reyelation;  indicating  by 
this  change  of  order  his  opinion  that  thc  four  relegated 
books  are  of  less  importanoe  and  less  authority  than  the 
rest  of  the  New  Testament.  His  opinion  found  some 
promoters,  but  it  has  not  been  adopted  in  any  coufessioa 
of  thc  Lutherau  Church. 

The  canonical  authority  of  the  Epistle  to  the  Hebrews 
is,  then,  sccure,  so  far  as  it  caii  be  established  by  the 
tradition  of  Christian  churches.  The  doubts  which  af- 
fected  it  were  admitted  in  remote  plaoes,  or  in  the  fail- 
ure  of  knowledge,  or  under  tho  ptessure  of  times  of  in- 
tellectual  cxcitement;  and  they  haye  disappeared  before 
fuli  Information  and  cahn  judgment. 

II.  Aułhorsh{p.^Vv)m  the  aboyc  tesdmonies  it  will 
be  perceiyed  that  the  assertion  of  the  canonicity  of  this 
book  is  mostly  identiiied  with  the  assertion  of  its  Paul- 
ine  authorship.  The  foimer  of  these  positions  does  not, 
it  is  true,  necessarily  depend  upon  the  latter,  for  a  book 
may  be  canonical,  yet  not  be  the  production  of  any  indi- 
yidual  whose  name  we  know ;  but,  as  the  case  stands, 
the  extemal  eyidence  for  thc  canonicity  of  the  book  is 
so  nearly  commensurate  with  that  for  the  Pauline  au- 
thorship of  the  book  that  we  cannot  make  use  of  thc 
one  mUess  we  admit  the  other.  This  giyes  immenoe 
importance  to  thc  question  on  which  we  now  enter;  for 
if  it  could  be  shown  that  this  epistle  is  not  Paulus,  the 
entiie  historical  eyidence  for  its  canonicity  must  be  laid 
aside  as  incrcdible. 

1.  Histoiy  o/ Opinion  on  this  Subjed^-ln  this  epistle 
the  supcrscription,  thc  ordinary  source  of  Information,  is 
wantiug.  Its  omission  has  been  accounted  for,  sinoe 
the  days  of  Clement  of  Akxandria  {ąpud  Euseb.  //.  iv. 
yi,  14)  and  Chrysostom  by  supposing  that  Paul  with- 
held  his  name  lest  the  sight  of  it  sbould  repel  any  Jew« 
ish  Christiana  who  might  still  regard  him  rather  as  on 
enemy  of  the  law  (Acts  xxi,  21)  than  as  a  benefactor  ta 
their  nation  (Acts  xxiy,  17).  Pantsenus^  or  some  other 
predeoeseor  of  Clement,  adds  that  Paul  would  not  ivrite 
to  the  Jews  as  on  apostle  becauso  he  regarded  thc  Lord 
himself  as  their  apostle  (see  the  remarkable  CKpression, 
Hcb.  iii,  1,  twice  ąuoted  by  Justin  Mart>T,  ApoL  i,  12, 
63). 

It  was  the  custom  of  the  earlicst  fathers  to  quote  pas» 
sages  of  Scripture  without  namiiig  the  writcr  or  the 
book  which  supplied  them.  But  there  is  no  reason  to 
doubt  that  at  first,  eyerywhere,  except  in  North  Africa, 
Paul  was  regarded  as  the  author.  "Among  the  Greek 
fathers,"  says  Olshansen  {Opuacula,  p.  95),  "no  one  is 
named  either  in  Egypt,  or  in  Sjrria,  Palestine,  Asia,  or 
Greece,  who  is  oppoeed  to  the  opinion  that  this  epistle 
proceeds  from  PauL"  The  Alexandrian  fathers,  wheth- 
er  g^ided  by  tradition  or  by  critical  discemment,  are 
the  earliest  to  notę  the  disctepancy  of  style  between 
this  epistle  and  the  other  thirteen.  They  receiyed  it  in 
the  same  sense  that  the  speech  in  Acts  xxii,  1-21  is  re- 
ceiyed as  Paurs.  Clement  ascribed  to  Lukę  the  trans- 
lation  of  the  epistle  into  Greek  from  a  Hebrew  original 
of  PauL  Origen,  embracing  the  opinion  of  those  who» 
he  says,  preceded  him,  belieyed  that  the  thoughts  were 
Paulus,  the  language  and  composition  Luke^s  or  Clem- 
ent*s  of  Romc.  Tertullian,  knowing  nothing  of  any 
connection  of  Paul  with  the  epistle,  names  Bamabas  as 


HEBREWS,  EPISTLE  TO         142         HEBREWS,  EPISTLE  TO 


the  reputed  author  aocording  to  the  North  African  tra- 
dition,  which  in  the  time  of  Augiutine  had  taken  the 
less  definite  shape  of  a  deuial  by  some  that  the  epistle 
was  Paulus,  and  in  the  time  of  Isidore  of  Seville  appears 
as  a  Latm  opinion  (founded  on  the  dissonance  of  style) 
that  it  was  written  by  Barnabas  or  Clement.  At  Ronie 
element  was  silent  as  to  the  author  of  this  as  of  the 
other  epistles  which  he  quoted;  and  the  ^Titers  who 
follow  him,  down  to  the  middle  of  the  4th  century,  oiily 
touch  on  the  point  to  deny  that  the  epistle  is  Paul*8. 

The  view  of  the  Ale^andrian  fathers,  a  middle  point 
between  the  Eastem  and  Western  traditions,  won  its 
way  in  the  Church.  It  was  adopted  as  the  most  prob- 
able  opinion  by  Eusebius  (Blwit,  On  the  right  Use  o/ the 
early  Fatkers^  p.  439-^444);  and  its  gradual  reception 
may  have  led  to  the  silent  transfer,  which  was  madę 
about  his  time,  of  this  epistle  from  the  tenth  place  in 
the  Greek  Canon  to  the  fonrteenth,  at  the  end  of  Paul*s 
epistles,  and  before  those  of  other  apostles.  This  place 
it  held  everywhere  till  the  time  of  Luther ;  as  if  to  in- 
dicate  the  deliberate  and  finał  acquiescence  of  the  uni- 
Yersal  Church  in  the  opinion  that  it  is  one  of  the  works 
Qf  Paul,  but  not  in  the  same  fuli  scnse  as  the  other  ten 
epistles,  addressed  to  particular  churches. 

In  the  last  three  centuries  every  word  and  phrase  in 
the  epistle  have  been  scrutinized  with  the  most  exact 
care  for  historical  and  grammatical  eridence  as  to  the 
authorship.  The  conclusions  of  individual  inquirers  aie 
very  direrse,  but  the  result  has  not  been  any  considera- 
ble  disturbance  of  the  ancicnt  tradition.  No  new  kind 
of  difficulty  has  been  discoyered ;  no  hypothesis  open  to 
fewer  objections  than  the  tradition  has  been  derised. 
The  laborious  work  of  the  Rev.  C.  Forster  {The  Apostoł- 
icat  Authority  ofthe  Epistle  to  the  Hebretcs)^  which  is  a 
storehouse  of  grammatical  cvidence,  advocates  the  opin- 
ion that  Paul  was  the  author  of  the  language  as  well  as 
the  thoughts  of  the  epistle.  Professor  Stuart,  in  the 
Introduction  to  his  Conimentary  on  the  Epistle  to  the  Tfe- 
brewsj  discusses  the  intemal  cridence  at  great  length, 
and  agrees  in  opinion  with  Mr.  Forster.  Dr.  C.  Words- 
worth  (On  the  Canon  ofthe  Scriptures,  Lect.  ix)  leans  to 
the  same  oonclusion.  Dr.  S.  Davidson,  in  his  Introduc- 
tion to  the  New  Testament,  give8  a  very  carcful  and  mi- 
nutę summaiy  of  the  arguments  of  all  the  principal 
modem  critics  who  reason  upon  the  intemal  evidence, 
and  concludcs,  in  substantial  agreement  with  the  Alex- 
andrian  tradition,  that  Paul  was  the  author  of  the  epis- 
tle, and  that,  as  regards  its  phraseology  and  style,  Lukc 
co-operated  with  him  in  making  it  what  it  now  appears. 
The  tendency  of  opinion  in  Germany  has  been  to  as- 
cribe  the  epistle  to  some  other  author  than  Paid.  Lu- 
ther's  conjccture  that  Apollos  was  the  author  has  been 
widely  adopted  by  Le  Clerc,  Bleek,  De  Wette,  Tholuck, 
Bunsen,  Alford,  and  others.  Barnabas  has  been  naroed 
by  Wieseler,  Thiersch,  and  others.  Lukę  by  Grotius. 
Silas  by  others.  Neander  attributes  it  to  "  some  apos- 
tolic  man"  of  the  Pauline  school,  whose  training  and 
method  of  stating  doctrinal  tnith  differed  from  Paul's. 
The  distinguished  name  of  H.  Ewald  has  been  given 
recently  to  the  hypothesis  (partly  anticipated  by  Wet- 
Btein)  that  it  was  written  neither  by  Paul  nor  to  the 
Hebrews,  but  by  some  Jewish  teacher  residing  at  Jeru- 
salem  to  a  church  in  some  important  Italian  town,  which 
is  supposed  to  have  scnt  a  deputation  to  Palestine. 

2.  A  rgumenis  for  and  against  the  different  A  itthors 
proposed,  other  than  the  Aposłle  Paul.— Most  of  these 
guesses  are  ąuite  destitute  of  historical  eridencc,  and  re- 
ąuire  the  support  of  imaginary  facts  to  place  them  on  a 
seeming  eąuality  with  the  traditionary  account.  Thoy 
cannot  be  said  to  rise  out  of  the  region  of  possibility 
into  that  of  probability,  but  they  are  such  as  any  man 
of  lelsure  and  leaming  might  multiply  till  they  include 
every  name  in  the  limited  Ust  that  we  possess  of  Paulus 
contemporaries. 

(1.)  Silas. — The  claims  of  this  companion  of  Paul  to 
the  authorship  of  one  epistle  find  no  support  from  the 
testimony  of  antiąuity.     The  snggestion  of  them  is  en- 


tirely  modem,  having  been  first  adranced  by  BćHime  in 
the  introduction  to  his  commentary  on  this  epistle  (Lips. 
1825),  and  by  Mjiister  in  the  Studien  und  Kritihen,  ii, 
344 ;  but  they  have  adduced  nothing  in  support  of  these 
claims  which  might  not  with  equal  plausibility  have 
been  urged  on  behalf  of  any  other  of  the  apostle*s  oom- 
panions. 

(2.)  element  of  JRome.-^Ońgea  tells  us  that  the  tra- 
dition which  had  reached  him  was  that  some  hdd  this 
epistle  to  have  been  written  by  Clement,  bishop  of 
Korne,  while  others  said  it  was  written  by  Lukę  the 
eyangelist  (ap.  Euseb.  //tsf.  Ecd,  vi,  25).  Erasmus  es- 
poused  the  claims  of  Clement,  and  Calrin  inclined  to 
the  same  view.  Some  evidence  in  favor  of  this  h^-poth- 
esis  has  been  thought  to  be  supplied  by  the  resemblance 
of  some  passages  in  Clemenfs  first  epistle  to  the  Corin- 
thians  to  passages  in  one  epistle ;  but  these  have  much 
morę  the  appearance  of  ąuotations  from  the  former,  or 
reminiscences  of  it  on  the  part  of  the  author  of  the  lat^ 
ter,  than  such  similarities  of  thought  and  expression  as 
would  indicate  a  oommunity  of  authorship  for  the  two. 
A  close  comparison  of  the  one  with  the  other  leares  the 
impression  very  stiongly  that  they  are  the  productions 
of  different  miuds;  neither  in  style  nor  in  the  generał 
cast  of  thought  is  there  any  preyaUing  affinity  between 
them.  Clement  also  was  in  all  probability  a  convert 
from  hcathenism,  whereas  the  author  of  the  Epistle  to 
the  Hebrews  was  undoubtedly  by  birth  and  eiiucation 
a  Jew.  Perhaps  what  Origen  records  means  nothing 
morę  than  that  Clement  or  Lukę  acted  as  the  party  who 
reduced  the  epistle  to  writing,  leaving  the  ąuestion  of 
tłie  authorsliip,  properly  so  callcd,  untouched.  His 
whole  statement  is — "  not  heedlessly  (ovk  HKy)  had  the 
ancients  handed  it  do^^  as  PauFs ;  but  who  ^Tote  the 
epistle  God  tndy  knows.  But  the  story  which  has 
come  do\Mi  to  us  from  some  is,  that  Clement,  who  was 
bishop  of  Romę,  wrote  the  epistle ;  from  others,  that  it 
was  Lnke  who  wrote  the  Gospel  and  the  Acts."  Je- 
romc  also,  in  rcferńng  to  the  tradition,  explaiiis  it  thus 
— '^ąuem  [Clementem]  aiunt  ipsi  adjunctum  sententiaa 
Pauli  proprio  ordinasse  et  omasse  scimone"  {De  Vtris 
iUusł.  c  5). 

(3.)  Lukę. — The  claims  of  Lukc  apparently  rise  a  de- 
gree  higher  from  the  circumstance  that,  besidcs  being 
named  by  Origen  and  Jeromc  as  diridiug  with  Clement 
the  honors  which,  as  these  writers  testify,  werc  in  ccr- 
tain  quarters  assigned  to  the  latter,  there  is  a  character 
of  similarity  with  respect  to  language  and  style  between 
this  epistle  and  the  acknowledged  productions  of  the 
eyangelist.  This  has  led  seyeral  eminent  scholara  to 
adopt  the  hypothesis  that,  while  the  thoughts  may  be 
Paulus,  the  composition  is  Luke's.  But  against  this  con- 
clnsion  the  following  considerations  may  be  urged.  1. 
Where  there  is  no  other  eyidence,  or  at  least  nonę  of 
any  weight,  in  fayor  of  identity  of  authorship,  merę 
generał  similarity  of  style  cannot  be  allowed  to  possess 
much  force.  Lukę,  howe\'er,  is  knowu  to  have  been  in 
such  a  conncction  with  Paul  as  to  justify  in  some  sort 
the  assumption  of  his  ha^ing  written  on  the  apo6tle*8 
behalf.  2.  Assuming  the  epistle  to  be  the  production 
of  Paul,  it  is  easy  to  account  for  the  resemblance  of  ils 
style  to  that  of  Lukę,  from  the  fact  that  Lukę  was  for 
so  many  years  the  companion  and  disciple  of  Paul ;  for 
it  is  weU  known  that  when  pcrsons  for  a  long  time  as- 
sociate  closely  with  each  other,  and  espccially  when  one 
of  the  parties  is  an  individual  of  powerful  intcUect  whose 
forms  of  thought  and  modes  of  speech  impercęptibly  im- 
press  themselyes  on  those  with  whom  he  i-ssociates,  they 
fali  insensibly  into  a  similarity  of  tonę  and  style  both  of 
speaking  and  writing  (so  Chr}'so6tom,  Horn,  iv  m  Matł^ 
ąuoted  by  Forster,  Apostolical  Authority  of  the  Epistle 
to  the  H^ews,  p.  648).  The  lesemblanccs,  however,  in 
this  case  (see  them  pointed  out  by  Alford,  vol.  iii,  pas- 
sim) are  too  striking  and  minutę  to  be  fully  explained  in 
this  generał  manner.  8.  It  is  not  in  the  Epistle  to  the 
Hebrews  alone  that  a  resemblance  to  the  style  of  Lukę 
may  be  detected :  the  same  feature  penrades  all  Paul*8 


HEBREWS,  EPKTLE  TO         143         HEBREWS,  EPISTLE  TO 


epistlei^  especially  tbofle  of  a  later  datę,  as  has  frequeiit- 
ly  been  obseired  by  critics.  In  iine,  while  there  are 
guch  resemblances  of  style,  etc^  as  have  been  refemd  to 
between  this  epistle  and  the  writings  of  Lukę,  there  are 
differmcea  of  a  natore  90  weighty  as  oompletely  to  over- 
balance  theee  reflemblances,  and  authorize  the  condu- 
aioo  that  the  author  of  the  latter  could  not  alao  be  the 
anthor  of  the  former.  Both  Stuart  {Comment,  i,  883, 
London,  18*28)  and  Eichhom  {EinUit,  iii,  465)  Justly  lay 
atreiB  on  the  greater  predominance  of  Jewish  feelings  in 
the  Epistle  to  the  Hebrews  than  in  any  of  Luke*s  writ- 
higa,  and  «till  morę  on  the  marked  familiarity  with  the 
pecnliarities  of  the  Jewish  sehools  displayed  by  the 
writer  of  the  epistle,  bnt  of  which  no  traces  are  apparent 
in  any  of  the  writings  of  the  erangelist  Both  writings 
diaplay  the  oonibined  influence  of  the  Palestinian  and 
the  Hellenistic  character  on  the  part  of  their  anthor; 
but  tn  the  Eptsde  to  the  Hebrews  the  former  so  dęci- 
dedly  predominates  over  the  latter,  while  the  reyerse  is 
the  cue  with  the  writings  of  Lukę,  that  it  seems  to  the 
last  degree  improbable  that  the  same  person  could  have 
written  both.  Lukę,  moreoyer,  was  a  conrert  fiom 
heathenisn,  whereas  the  author  of  the  Epistle  to  the 
Hebrews  was  eridently  a  Jew.  It  appears,  therefore, 
that  for  the  theory  which  ascribes  the  composition  of 
this  epóstle  to  Lukę  as  of  his  own  dictation,  there  is  no 
evidenoe  of  any  kind  which  will  bear  examination,  but, 
on  the  oontraiy,  not  a  little  against  it.  4.  Neverthc- 
lesB,  the  association  of  Lukę  with  Paul,  and  the  many 
marked  coincidences  between  Luke's  phraseology  and 
that  of  this  epistle,  give  a  strong  color  of  probability  to 
the  aupposition  that  the  erangelist  had  something  to 
do  with  its  authorship,  doubtless  as  assistant  or  under 
aiiother's  authońty ;  for  it  cannot  be  presumed  that  he 
wouki  have  personaUy  assumed  the  responsibility  of  a 
work  like  this,  eridently  conceived,  written,  and  sent 
out  aa  of  apostolical  authority,  and  with  the  personal 
aUusions  to  the  history  apparently  of  Paid  which  we 
find  in  the  finał  salutations.  But  if  Lukę  were  joint 
author  with  Paul,  what  shaie  in  the  composition  is  to 
be  aasigned  to  him  ?  This  question  has  been  asked  by 
thoee  who  r^ard  joint  authorship  as  an  impossibility, 
aod  aseńbe  the  epistle  to  some  other  writer  than  Paul. 
P^rhape  it  is  not  easy,  certainly  it  is  not  necessary,  to 
iind  an  answer  which  would  sattsfy  or  silence  persons 
who  ponue  a  historical  inquiiy  into  the  region  of  con- 
jectme.  \V1io  shall  define  the  exact  responsibility  of 
Tnnothy,  or  Silvanus,  or  Sosthenea,  in  those  seven  epis- 
tks  which  Paul  inscribes  with  some  of  their  names  con- 
jointly  with  hb  own?  To  what  extent  does  Mark's 
language  dothe  the  inspued  recollections  of  Peter, 
which,  accoiding  to  andent  tradition,  are  recorded  in 
the  aecond  gospel?  Or,  to  take  the  acknowledged 
writings  of  Lukę  himsdf— what  is  the  sliare  of  the 
''cye-witnesses  and  ministers  of  the  word"  (Lukę  i,  2), 
ar  what  is  the  share  of  Paul  himself  in  that  gospel 
which  some  persons,  not  without  oountenance  from  tra- 
diŁkm,  conjecture  that  Lukę  wrote  under  his  master'8 
eye  in  the  prisun  at  Csesarea ;  or  who  shall  assign  to  the 
foUower  and  the  master  their  portions  respectirely  in 
thoae  seren  chaFacterisric  speeches  at  Antioch,  Lystra, 
AthcBs,  Miletua,  Jerusalem,  and  Cnsarea?  If  Lukę 
WTote  down  Paul*s  Gospel,  and  oondensed  his  missionary 
speeehes,  may  he  not  haye  afterwaids  taken  a  morę  im- 
pottant  share  in  the  composition  of  this  epistle? 

(i.)  Bamabas.— The  hypothesis  which  claims  the  au- 
thonhip  of  this  epistle  for  Bamabas  has  in  its  support 
the  testimony  of  Tertullian  {De  PudicUia,  c  20),  with 
whom,  as  we  leam  firom  Jerome  (A>w/.  129,  ad  Darda- 
■iw),  seyend  (^pleriąue)  among  the  Latins  concurred. 
For  this  opinion  Tertullian,  in  the  passage  referred  to, 
Migns  no  reasons,  and  Jeiome  appears  to  haye  treated 
it  as  a  merę  conjecture  resting  upon  Tertu]lian*s  author- 
ity akme;  for,  in  his  catalogue  of  ecclesiastical  writers 
(e.  5),  he  refers  to  this  opinion  as  one  '* Juxta  Tertullia- 
MiB,"  whilst  he  says  that  the  opinion  that  Lukę  was 
Um  anthor  was  one  *' jaxta  .qaoedam.''    Hug  is  of  opin- 


ion (JntroŁ  p.  596,Fofldick*8  tnmsL)  that  in  this  passage 
we  haye  not  Tertullian^s  own  yiew  so  much  as  a  conces- 
sion  on  his  part  to  those  whom  he  was  opposing,  and 
who,  because  of  the  yery  passage  he  is  about  to  quote 
from  the  Epistle  to  the  Hebrews  (yi,  4-8),  were  inclined 
to  reject  the  claims  of  that  epistle  to  be  esteemed  the 
production  of  PauL  This  conjecture  is  of  use,  as  it  tends 
to  show  that  Tertullian  might  haye  another  reason  for 
ascribing  this  epistle  to  Barnabas  than  his  total  igno- 
rance  that  it  had  eyer  been  imputed  to  Paul,  as  has  been 
confidently  inferred  by  seyeral  writers  from  the  fact  that 
it  was  obyiously  to  the  interest  of  his  argument  to  up- 
hołd  the  Pauline  origin  of  this  epistle  had  he  been  awaie 
of  it.  In  recent  times  the  ablest  defender  of  this  hy- 
pothesis is  Ullmann,  who  has  deyoted  to  it  an  article  in 
the  flrst  yolume  of  his  joumal,  the  Studun  und  Kritihm; 
but  the  eyidence  he  adduoes  in  fayor  of  it  is  yery  feeble. 
Afker  enlatging  on  the  testimony  of  TertulUan,  he  pro- 
oeeds  to  the  intemal  eyidence  in  fayor  of  Bamabas;  but 
of  the  nr  reasons  he  assigns  for  ascribing  the  epistle  to 
him,  nonę  possesses  any  force.  The^r^,  \vu  the  traces 
in  the  epistle  of  an  Alexandrian  education  on  the  part 
of  the  author,  supposing  it  granted,  would  not  apply  par- 
ticularly  to  Bamabas,  who  was  a  natiye  of  C3rprus,  and 
who,  though  Ullmann  says  *^  he  had  perhaps  beien  in  Al- 
exandria,*'  for  aught  we  know  had  neyer  seerf  that  seat 
of  allegorical  leaming.  The  «eoom/,  yiz.  that  Bamabas, 
being  a  Leyite,  was  morę  likely,  on  that  account,  to  un- 
derstand  the  Jewish  ritual,  as  we  see  the  author  of  this 
epistle  did,  is  of  no  weight,  for  there  is  nothing  stated  in 
the  epistle  on  that  head  which  any  intelligent  Jew 
might  not  haye  known,  whether  a  Leyite  or  not,  The 
łhird,  vu,  that  what  the  author  of  this  epistle  says  cun- 
ceming  the  law,  diyine  reyelation,  faith,  etc,  is  yery 
Pauline,  and  such  as  we  might  expect  from  a  companion 
of  Paul,  such  as  Bamabas  was ;  the/ourth,  yiz.  that  the 
tenor  of  the  epistle  is  worthy  such  a  man  as  Bamabas ; 
thefi/fhy  viz.  that  the  writer  of  this  epistle  speaks  of  the 
Sayiour  yery  frequently  by  the  appellation  6  'lrf<rovc, 
which  Dr.  Ullmann  thinks  indicates  that  the  writer  must 
haye  known  our  Lord  during  his  personal  ministry, 
which  was  probabfy  the  case  with  Bamabas ;  and  the 
sirthy  yiz.  that  the  names  of  persons  mentioned  in  this 
epistle  are  names  which  Barnabas  tniffhi  haye  referred 
to  had  he  written  it — are  reasons  such  as  it  would  bo 
idle  to  refute,  and  such  as  fili  us  with  surprise  that  a 
man  of  Ullmaim's  leaming  and  yigor  should  haye  graye- 
ly  adduced  them.  With  regard  to  the^A  also,  Olshau- 
sen  has  justly  obseryed  {Opusc  TheolofficOf  p.  115)  that 
if  it  were  certain  that  Bamabas  had  enjoyed  the  adyan- 
tage  of  our  Lord's  personal  ministry,  it  would  deariy 
proye  that  he  was  not  the  author  of  this  epistle,  for  the 
latter  distinctly  classes  himsdf  with  those  by  whom  this 
adyantage  had  not  been  enjoyed  (cłu  ii,  8).  Stuart  and 
some  others  haye  laid  great  stress  on  the  contrast  af- 
forded  by  this  epistle  to  the  extant  epistle  which  passes 
under  the  name  of  Bamabas,  with  respect  to  style,  tonę, 
and  generał  character,  as  supplying  indubitable  eyidence 
that  the  former  is  the  production  of  a  different  and  a  far 
superior  mind.  Of  this  there  can  be  no  qne8tion,  and, 
were  we  quite  certain  that  the  epistle  ascribed  to  Bar- 
nabas was  really  his  production,  the  argument  would  be 
condusiye.  But,  though  some  yery  distinguished  names 
may  be  cited  in  support  of  its  authentidty,  the  greater 
weight,  both  of  authority  and  eyidence,  is  against  it, 
See  Barnabas,  Epistle  of.  The  total  absence  of  any 
reason  in  fayor  of  imputing  the  authorship  of  the  Epis- 
tle to  the  Hebrews  to  Bamabas  affords  sufficient  ground 
for  rejecting  this  hypothesis  without  our  attempting  to 
adduce  dubious  and  uncertain  reasons  against  it 

(6.)  Some  Aiexandrian  Christian,— This  hypothesis 
rests  on  certain  features  of  the  epistle  which  are  said  to 
betray  Alexandrian  culture,  habits,  and  modes  of  thought 
on  the  part  of  the  writer.  Thcse  haye  been  much  in- 
sisted  upon  by  Eichhom,  Schulz,  Bleek,  and  others:  but 
they  are  not  such,  we  think,  as  carry  with  them  the 
weight  which  t'hese  writers  haye  allowed  to  them*   The 


HEBREWS,  EPISTLE  TO         144         HEBREWS,  EPISTLE  TO 


Standard  of  comparison  by  which  the  supposed  Alexan- 
diian  tonę  of  thls  epiBtle  is  evinced  is  suppUed  by  the 
writings  of  Philo,  between  which  and  this  epistle  it  U 
affirmed  that  there  is  so  dose  a  resemblance  that  it  can 
be  accooiited  for  only  on  the  supposition  that  the  author 
of  the  Utter  was,  like  Philo,  an  Alexandrian  Jew.  Now, 
before  this  reasoning  can  be  so  much  as  looked  at,  it  be- 
hooyes  those  who  use  it  to  point  out  dearly  how  much 
of  Philo*8  peculiar  style  and  sentiment  was  owing  to  his 
Jewish,  and  how  much  to  his  Alexandrian  education  or 
habits  of  thought;  because,  unless  this  caii  be  done,  it 
will  be  impoflsible  to  show  that  any  alleged  peculiarity 
necessarilff  bespeaks  an  Alexandrian  origin,  and  could 
not  possibly  have  appeared  in  the  writings  of  a  pure  Jew 
of  Palestine.  No  attempt,  howeyer,  of  this  sort  has  been 
madę;  on  the  contran^  it  has  been  assumed  that  what^ 
ever  is  Philonian  is  therefore  Alexaiidrian,  and  hence 
all  resemblances  between  the  ii-ritings  of  Philo  and  the 
Epistle  to  the  Hebrews  have  been  urged  as  oertaiu  proofs 
that  the  latter  must  have  been  written  by  a  oonyerted 
Jew  of  Alexandria.  Such  au  aasuroption,  howeyer,  we 
would  by  no  means  conoede;  and  we  feel  confirmed  in 
this  by  an  examiiuition  of  the  eyidence  adduced  in  sup- 
port  of  the  aUeged  Alesandrian  character  of  this  epistle. 
As  Stuart  has,  we  think,  clearly  shown  (i,  321),  and  as 
eyen  Tholtick,  though  obyiously  inclining  the  other  way, 
has  candidly  admitted  {Comment^  <m  the  Hdfretcs,  i,  68, 
§  7),  there  is  nothing  in  this  evidence  to  show  that  this 
epistle  might  not  haye  been  written  by  a  Jew  who  had 
fi<evet  left  the  bounds  of  Palestine.  It  is  worthy  of  no- 
tioe  that  seyeral  of  the  points  on  which  Eichhom  chiefly 
insists  as  fayońng  his  yiew,  such  as  the  preyalcnce  of 
typical  exposttions  of  the  Mosaic  ritual  in  this  epistle, 
and  the  greater  elegance  of  its  lańguage  and  style  (^Ein- 
leił.  iii,  443  sq.),  are  giyen  up  by  Bleek,  and  that  of  the 
two  chiefly  insisted  upon  by  the  latter,  yiz.  tlie  close  af- 
finlty  between  this  epistle  and  the  writings  of  Philo,  and 
the  alleged  mistake  in  regard  to  the  fumiture  of  the  tab- 
emacle  which  Bleek  chaiges  upon  the  author  of  this 
epistle  in  chap.  ix,  3, 4,  and  which  he  thinks  no  Jew  of 
Palestme  could  haye  committed,  both  are  zelinquished 
by  Tholuck  as  untcnable  (comp.  the  yaluable  remarks 
of  Hug,  Introd.  p.  584,  notę,  Fo8dick'8  transl.).  With  rc- 
gaid  to  the  latter,  it  may  be  remarked  that,  eyen  sup- 
posing  it  proyed  that  the  writer  of  this  epistle  had  errcd 
in  asserting  that  the  pot  contalning  the  manna  and 
Aaron^s  rod  were  placed  in  the  ark  of  the  testimony,  and 
that,  supposuig  9vfuarTiptov  to  denotc  the  aitar  ofm-- 
cense^  and  not  the  censei-f  he  had  fallen  into  the  mistake 
of  placuig  this  within  instead  of  without  the  yail,  noth- 
ing could  be  thence  deduced  in  fayor  of  the  Alexandrian 
origin  of  the  author.  For,  with  regard  to  the  former  of 
these,  it  was  a  matter  on  which  the  Je^^s  of  Palestine 
had  no  better  means  of  Information  than  those  of  any 
other  place,  sinoe,  in  the  Tempie  as  then  standing,  nonę 
of  the  fumiture  of  the  Holy  of  łlolies  had  been  pre- 
seryetl;  and  with  regard  to  the  latter,  as  it  could  not  be 
the  result  of  ignorance  either  in  a  Jew  of  Palestine  or  in 
a  Jew  of  Alexandria,  but  must  haye  been  a  piece  of 
merę  tnadcerteiice  on  the  part  of  either,  it  seems  rather 
too  much  to  conclude  that  it  was  such  as  the  latter  alone 
was  capable  of  committing.  That,  howeyer,  there  is  no 
blunder  in  the  case,  has,  we  think,  been  yeiy  satisfacto- 
rily  shown  by  Deyling  {Oba,  Sac,  tom.  ii,  No.  47)  and 
others  (comp.  Stuart,  Tholuck,  and  Delitzsch,  ad  loc.). 

(6.)  Apoilos, — The  first  to  suggest  ApoUos  as  the  prob- 
able  author  of  this  epistle  was  Luther  (  Werke,  ed.  Walch, 
xii,  204, 1996,  etc).  He  has  been  followed  by  the  ma- 
jority  of  recent  German  scholars,  many  of  whom  have 
supported  his  conjecture  with  much  ingenuity.  It  has 
undoubtedl}'  been  shown  by  them  that  ApoUos  may  haye 
been  the  writer;  and  they  haye,  we  think,  proyed  that 
of  all  Paulus  companions  this  is  the  one  who  was  most  • 
iitted  by  education,  lire-circumstances,  modes  of  thought,  I 
and  religious  stand-point,  to  haye  accomplished  such  a 
task  had  it  fallen  to  his  lot.  Beyond  this,  howeyer, 
tiieir  aigumentfl  seem  to  us  signally  to  faiL    What 


weight  thęy  haye  is  deriyed  almost  entirely  fiom  Hw 
assumed  Alexandrian  tonę  of  the  epbtle ;  so  that  in  set* 
ting  aside  this  we  of  neoessity  inyalidate  what  bas  been 
built  on  iu  But  it  may  be  permitted  us  to  remark  that, 
eyen  supposing  the  former  established,  the  latter  would 
by  no  means  foUow,  any  morę  than  because  a  work  pro- 
duced  in  Germany  in  the  present  day  was  deeply  tinc- 
tuied  with  Hegelianism,  it  would  foUow  from  that  alone 
that  it  must  be  the  production  of  some  oertain  indiyid- 
ual  rather  than  of  any  other  disdple  of  Hegd's  school. 
The  adoption  of  this  theoiy  by  Tholuck,  after  his  ex- 
posure  of  the  unsoundncss  of  Bleek*s  reasoninga,  is  mat- 
ter of  surprise.  "  Still,"  saj^s  he  (i,  69), "  could  it  be  ren- 
dered  probable  that  any  disting^uished  person  haying  in- 
tercourse  with  Paul  were  an  Alexandrian,  and  of  Alex- 
andrian  culture,  we  might,  with  the  greatest  appearanoe 
of  truth,  regard  him  as  the  author  of  the  epistle.  Now 
such  a  one  is  found  in  the  person  of  Apolioa."  What  is 
this  but  to  say,  "  The  argumenta  for  the  Alexandrian 
origin  of  this  epistle,  I  must  confess,  proye  nothing;  but 
show  me  an  end  to  be  gained  by  it,  and  I  will  admit 
them  to  be  most  conclusiye !"  Such  a  statemeiit  affoida, 
we  think,  yery  elear  eyidence  tliat  the  disposition  to  as- 
cńbe  this  epbtle  to  ApoUos  is  to  be  traced  not  to  any 
constraining  force  of  eyidence,  but  exclu8iye]y  to  what 
Olshausen,  in  his  strictures  on  Bleek  {Opusc  p.  92),  justly 
denounces  as  the  main  source  of  that  able  writer^s  emm 
on  this  question — "Quod  non  ab  omni  partium  studio 
alienum  animum  seryare  ipsi  contigiL"  It  may  be  add- 
ed  that  if  this  epistle  was  the  product  of  ApoUos  or  any 
other  Alexandrian  conycrt.,  it  is  yeiy  strange  that  no 
tradition  to  this  effect  should  ha^'e  been  preaeryed  in 
the  church  at  Alexandria,  but,  on  the  oontraiy,  that  it 
should  be  there  we  fiud  the  tradition  that  Paul  was  the 
author  most  firmly  and  from  the  earliest  period  eatab- 
lUhed. 

3.  We  now  pass  on  to  the  queation  of  the  PouZtsie  or- 
igin of  this  epistle.  Heferring  our  readers  for  particu- 
lars  to  the  able  and  copious  discussion  of  this  ąuesticm 
furoished  by  the  works  of  Stuart  (jCommeniary^  Introd.), 
Forster  {The.  Apostoł  Authoriiy  ofthe  Epistle  to  the  He- 
bretcs,  etc.),  and  Hug,  we  shall  attempt  at  pfesent  a  oon- 
densed  outline  of  the  eyidence  both  for  and  against  the 
Pauline  authorship  of  this  epistle. 

a,  Jnienuil  eyidence,  i.  In  fayor  of  the  Pauline  origin 
of  the  epistle.  (1.)  A  person  familiar  with  the  doctrines 
on  which  Paul  is  foud  of  insisting  in  his  acknowledged 
epistles  will  readUy  perceiye  that  there  is  such  a  cor- 
respondence  in  this  respect  between  these  and  the  Epis- 
tle to  the  Hebrews  as  suppUes  good  ground  for  presum- 
iiig  that  the  latter  proceeded  also  from  his  pen.  That 
Christianity  as  a  system  is  superior  to  Judaism  with  re- 
spect to  cleaniess,  simpUcity,  and  morał  efBciency ;  that 
the  former  is  the  substance  and  reaUty  of  what  the  lat- 
ter had  presented  only  the  typical  adumbration;  and 
that  the  latter  was  to  be  abolished  to  make  way  for  the 
former,  are  points  which,  if  morę  fuUy  handled  in  the 
Epistle  to  the  Hebrews,  are  iamUiar  to  aU  readers  of  the. 
epistles  of  Paul  (comp.  2  Cor.  iii,  6-18;  GaL  iii,  22;  iy, 
1-9, 21-31 ;  Gol.  u,  16, 17,  etc).  The  same  \Hiew  is  giyen 
in  this  epistle  as  in  those  of  Paul  of  the  diyine  glory  of 
the  Mediator,  specifically  as  the  reflection  or  manifesta- 
tion  of  Deity  to  man  (compare  CoL  i,  15-20 ;  PhiL  ii,  6  ; 
Heb.  i,  8,  etc).  His  condescension  is  describcd  as  hay- 
ing consisted  in  an  impoyerishuig,  and  lesscning,  and 
lowering  of  himself  for  man^s  behaJf  (2  Cor.  yiii,9 ;  PhiL 
ii,  7, 8 ;  Heb.  ii,  9) ;  and  his  exaltation  is  set  forth  aa  a 
condition  of  royal  dignity,  which  shaU  be  consummated 
by  aU  his  enemies  being  put  under  his  footstool  (1  Cor. 
xV,  25-27 ;  Heb.  ii,  8 :  x,  13 ;  xii,  2).  He  is  represented 
as  discharging  the  ofiice  of  a  ''  mediator,*'  a  word  which 
is  never  used  except  by  Paul  and  the  writer  of  this  epis- 
tle (GaL  iii,  19, 20 ;  Heb.  yiu,  6) ;  his  death  is  represented 
as  a  sacrifice  for  the  sins  of  man;  and  the  peculiar  idea 
is  announced  in  conncction  with  this,  that  he  was  pr&- 
figured  by  the  sacrifioes  of  the  Mosaic  dispensation  (Rom. 
iii,22-26;  lCor.v,7;  Eph.i,7;  v,2;  HeUvu-x}.    Fe- 


HEBREWS,  EPKTLE  TO         146         HEBREWS,  EPISTLE  TO 

^aliar  to  Pani  and  the  aathor  of  this  episUe  ia  the  plirase 
"the  God  of  peace"  (Rom.  xv,  83,  etc ;  Heb.  xiii,  20) ; 
and  both  seem  to  have  the  same  conception  of  the  spir- 
itual «  gUU"  (I  Cot.  xii,  4 ;  Heb.  ii,  4).  It  is  worthy  of 
remai^  abo,  that  the  momentous  que8tion  of  a  man^s 
penooal  aoceptanoe  with  6rod  is  anawered  in  thia  epia- 
Ue  in  the  same  peculiar  wtty  as  in  the  acknowledged 
epistles  of  PanL  AU  is  madę  to  depend  upon  the  indi- 
vłdiiai's  exerdsiiig  what  both  Paul  and  the  author  of 
this  epistle  caU  **  faith,"  and  which  they  both  zepresent 
as  a  reałizing  apprehenaion  of  the  facts,  and  truths,  and 
pnnmses  of  revelatioii.  (Bleek  and  Tholuck  have  both 
endeaTored  to  show  that  the  iriortę  of  the  Epistle  to 
the  Hebrews  is  not  the  same  as  the  iritmę  of  Paul's 
acknowledged  wńtings,  bot,  in  oor  view,  with  singu- 
lar  want  of  anoceas.  Tholack's  chief  argument,  which 
he  uiges  as  of  morę  weight  than  any  Bleek  has  ad- 
yanced,  ia,  that  the  writer  has  not  here  contrasted  v6fioc 
and  a-i^rtę,  the  ipya  yóftw  and  the  Łpya  witrrnac^  as 
Paul  woold  luTe  done.  But  how  can  this  be  said  when 
the  gnat  leaaon  of  the  epistle  is,  that  always,  even  under 
the  la»  iUeijl  nianc  was  the  medium  of  acceptance  and 
the  channel  of  divine  blessing  to  men?  When  Paul 
aays, «  We  walk  by  faith,  not  ty  sight"  [2  Cor.  v,  7],  and 
tbe  wiiter  to  the  Hehrews  says  that  faith,  by  which  the 
juat  live,  is  the  eridenoe  of  things  not  seen  [x,  28 ;  xi, 
1],  what  eaaential  diiference  in  their  notion  of  faith  and 
its  woridog  can  be  discemed  ?)  By  both,  also,  the  power 
of  this  gracions  prindple  is  frequcntly  referred  to  and 
łllnatiated  by  the  example  of  those  who  had  distin- 
guished  themseires  in  the  annals  of  the  Jewish  race 
(oomp.  Rom.  iii,  4 ;  v,  2 ;  Heb.  iii,  6 ;  Gal.  iii,  5-14 ;  Heb. 
X,  38;  xi,  40).  (2.)  Some  of  the  figures  and  aUusions 
eoiployed  in  thia  epistle  are  stricŁly  Paaline.  Thus  the 
wwd  of  God  is  oompared  to  a  tword  (Eph.  vi,  17 ;  Heb. 
ir,  12) ;  inezperienced  Christiana  are  chUdren  who  need 
nttt,  and  must  be  instructed  in  the  efematff,  whiist  those 
of  naterer  attainments  are /ttU-groum  mm  who  Tequire 
strfmg  meat  (I  Cor.  iii,  1, 2;  xiv,  20;  GaL  iv,  9;  CoL  iii, 
14;  Heb.  V,  12, 13 ;  vi,  1);  rcdemption  through  Christ  is 
an  iMłrodactUm  and  an  emtrtmce  with  oonfidence  unto  €rod 
(Bom.  V,  2;  Eph.  u,  18;  ui,  12;  Heb.  x,  19) ;  afflictions 
antLcoDteti  or  stii/'e,dyuv  (Phil.  i, 80;  CoL  u,  1 ;  Heb. 
x,32);  tbe  Christian  life  is  a  race  (1  Cor.  ix,  24;  PhiL 
iii,  14;  Heb.  xii,  1) ;  the  JcYrish  ritual  is  a  \arpiia  (Rom. 
ix,  4;  Heb.  ix,  1, 6) ;  a  person  under  the  oonstraint  of 
some  nnworthy  feeling  or  prindple  is  **  subject  to  bond- 
•gtr  (GsL  V,  1 ;  Heb.  ii,  16),  etc  (8.)  Certain  marked 
characteristica  of  Paiil'8  style  are  found  in  this  epistle. 
This  departmcnt  of  the  intemal  evidenoe  has  morę,  per- 
hapa,  than  any  other  been  canvas8ed  by  recent  critics, 
and  in  some  cases  opposite  condusions  have  been  drawn 
&om  the  same  phenoraena.  Thus  the  oocurronce  of 
Ural  Xtyófuva  in  this  epistle  has  been  adduced  by  the 
Gennan  acbohua  offokut  the  Paulina  origin  of  it,  whilst 
Smart  and  Forster  have  both  rested  on  this  fact  as 
atrongiy  m/avor  of  that  oonclosion;  and  as  it  appears 
to  os  with  justice,  for  if  it  be  madę  out  from  Paul's  ac- 
knowledged writings  that  the  use  of  nnnsual  words  is  a 
chaiacteristic  of  his  style  (and  this  has  been  p\aced  by 
tbeae  wiiten  beyond  all  guesUon),  it  is  obvious  that  the 
occanence  of  the  same  characteristic  in  this  epistle,  so 
ftar  from  bdng  an  argument  offomst,  is,  as  far  as  it  goes, 
an  aigument  /or  our  ascribing  it  to  PauL  On  aigu- 
mtnts,  however,  based  on  nich  minutę  phenomena,  we 
tta  not  di^Mised  to  rest  much  weight  on  either  side. 
Erery  perwn  must  be  aware  that  an  author*8  use  of 
words  ts  greatly  modified  by  the  circumstances  under 
which  he  writea,  or  the  design  he  has  in  writing;  and 
the  literaturę  of  evcry  country  presents  us  with  numer- 
<m  cases  of  authors  whose  worka,  written  at  different 
poiods,  and  with  diflferent  designs,  present  far  greater 
<fiyeniti€«  of  expression  than  any  which  have  been 
pointed  out  between  the  Epistle  to  the  Hebrews  and 
the  acknowleged  epistles  of  PauL  Hence  cautious  crit- 
la  hatre  dedined  to  rest  much  in  questions  of  literaTv 
!  upon  what  Bentky  calla  (DisterU  an  Phala- 


rw,  p.  19,  London,  1699)  ''oensures  that  are  madę  ftom 
stile  and  langiuge  alone,"  and  which,  he  adds,  '<  are  com- 
monly  nioe  and  unoertain,  and  depend  upon  slender  no- 
tices."  Apart,  however,  from  such  minutę  niceties,  there 
are  certain  marked  peculiarities  of  style  which  attach  to 
particular  writers,  and  flow  so  directly  from  the  charac- 
ter  of  their  genius  or  edncation  that  they  can  hardly 
expre8B  themselves  in  discourse  without  introdudng 
them.  Kow  such  peculiarities  the  writings  of  Paul  pre- 
sent, and  the  oocurrence  of  them  has  always  been  felt  to 
aiford  no  smali  evidence  of  the  authenticity  of  any  pro- 
duction  cłaiming  to  be  his  in  which  they  are  found. 
Paley,  in  enumerating  these  {Uorm  Paulwa,  eh.  vi,  No. 
2, 8),  has  laid  stress  chiefly  on  the  foUowing :  A  disposi- 
tion  to  the  frequent  use  of  a  word,  which  deaves,  as  it 
were,  to  the  memory  of  the  writer,  so  as  to  become  a  sort 
of  cant  word  in  his  writings ;  a  propensity  *'  to  go  off  at 
a  word,"  and  enter  upon  a  parenthetic  series  of  remarks 
suggested  by  that  word ;  and  a  fondness  for  the  parono- 
maaia,  or  play  upon  words.  (4.)  There  is  a  striking 
analogy  between  Paul'8  use  of  the  O.  T.  and  that  madę 
by  the  writer  of  this  epistle.  Both  make  freąuent  ap- 
peals  to  the  O.  T. ;  both  are  in  the  halńt  of  accumula- 
ting  passages  from  different  parta  of  the  O.  T.,  and  mak- 
ing  them  bear  on  the  point  under  discussion  (comp.  Rom. 
iii,  10-18;  ix, 7-83, etc.;  Heb.  1,6-14;  iii;  x,6-17);  both 
are  fond  of  linking  quotations  together  by  means  of  the 
expres8ion  ^  and  again"  (compare  Rom.  xv,  9-12 ;  1  Cor. 
iii,  19, 20;  Heb.  i,  5 ;  ii,  12, 18 ;  iv,  4 ;  x,  80) ;  both  make 
use  of  the  same  passages,  and  that  oocasionally  in  a  seuse 
not  naturally  suggested  by  the  oontext  whence  they  are 
ąuoted  (1  Cor.  xv,  27 ;  Eph.  i,  22 ;  Heb.  ii,  8 ;  Rom.  i,  17 ; 
GaL  iii,  11 ;  Heb.  x,  38) ;  and  both,  in  one  instance,  quote 
a  passage  in  a  peculiar  way  (comp.  Rom.  xii,  19;  Heb. 
X,  80).  On  the  other  hand,  great  stress  has  been  laid 
by  the  opponents  of  the  Pauline  origin  of  this  ejństle  on 
the  fact  that  whikt  Paul,  in  his  acknowledged  writings, 
ąuotes  from  the  Hebrew  original  in  preference  to  the 
3ept.,  where  the  latter  differs  from  the  former,  the  au- 
thor of  this  epistle  ąuotes  exduBively  from  the  Sept., 
evcn  when  it  departs  very  widely  from  the  Hebrew.  To 
this  it  may  be  replied,  Ist,  That  both  Paul  and  the  au- 
thor of  this  epistle  ąuote  generaUy  from  the  Sept. ;  2dly, 
That  where  the  Sept.  differs  from  the  Hebrew,  Paul  does 
not  cdways  follow  the  Hebrew  in  preference  to  the  Sept. 
(comp.  Rom.  ii,  24 ;  x,  1 1-18 ;  xi,  27 ;  xv,  12 ;  1  Cor.  i,  19, 
etc) ;  and,8dly,  That  the  writer  of  this  epistle  does  not 
always  follow  the  Sept  where  it  differs  from  the  He- 
brew, but  occasionally  deserts  the  former  for  the  latter 
(e.  g.  X,  80;  xiii,  5) ;  (comp.  David8on,  Introd,  iii,  281). 
There  is  no  ground,  therefore,  for  this  objection  to  the 
Pauline  origin  of  this  epistle.  (6.)  The  Epistle  to  the 
Hebrews  contttns  some  personal  alludons  on  the  part  of 
the -writer  which  strongly  iavor  the  suppońtion  that  he 
waa  PauL  These  are  the  mention  of  his  intention  to 
pay  those  to  whom  he  was  writing  a  visit  speedily,  in 
company  with  Timothy,  whom  he  affectionately  styles 
**our  brother,"  and  whom  he  describes  as  having  been 
set  at  liberty,  and  expected  soon  to  join  the  writer  (Heb. 
xiu,  28) ;  the  alludon  to  his  bdng  in  a  state  of  impris- 
onrnent  at  the  time  of  writing,  as  well  as  of  his  having 
partaken  of  their  sympathy  while  formerly  in  a  sUte  of 
bondage  among  them  (Heb.  xiii,  19 ;  x,  84) ;  and  the 
transmission  to  them  of  a  salutation  from  the  believers 
in  Italy  (Heb.  xiii,  24),  all  of  which  agree  well  with  the 
supposition  that  Paul  wrote  this  epistle  while  a  prisoner 
at  Romę. 

ii.  Let  us  now  glance  at  the  main  objections  which 
from  variou8  sources  have  been  urged  against  its  Pauline 
origin.  (1.)  It  is  unaccountable  that  Paul,  had  he  writ- 
ten this  epistle,  should  have  withheld  his  name.  But  is 
it  less  unaccountable  that  Clement,  or  ApoUos,  or  Lukę, 
had  any  of  them  been  the  author,  should  have  withhdd 
his  name?  (2.)  "This  epistle  \a  morę  calmly  and  log- 
ically  written  than  it  was  possible  for  the  enei^getic  Paul 
to  have  ¥rritten ;  all  the  analogies  between  Judaism  and 
Christianity  are  cahnly  investigated  and  calmly  ad- 


HEBREWS,  EPISTLE  TO         146         HEBREWS,  EPBTLE  TO 


dnoed ;  the  materials  are  arranged  in  the  strictest  order, 
and  carefully  wrougbt  out  according  to  this  dispońUoii, 
and  ooncluaion  foliowa  oonclusion  with  the  greatest  r«g- 
ularity ;  the  language  alao  is  rotund  and  choioe,  and  the 
repreaentation  onusually  dear.  Ali  thia  ia  unlike  Paul" 
(Eichhom,  Einleit,  iii,  459).  This  ia  a  singular  asaertion 
tu  make  respecting  the  author  of  the  Epiatle  to  the  Ro- 
mana, a  production  characterized  most  eminently  by 
these  traita,  exoepting,  perhapa,  a  lesa  degree  of  calm- 
nesa,  which  the  special  object  of  the  preeent  epistle  may 
have  morę  peculiarly  called  for.  (3.)  "  Whilst  we  occa- 
sionally  meet  Pauline  termwUf  we  find  precisely  in  the 
lecuUng  ideas  of  the  epistle  a  terminology  diiferent  from 
that  of  Paul"  (Tholuck,  i,  89,  English  transL).  The  in- 
stancea  spedfied  by  Tholuck  are  the  uae  of  \tpŁvc,  noi- 
ftfiv,  and  airutn-oAoc,  aa  designations  of  Christ;  of  ó^o- 
Xo7ia,  which  he  says  is  confined  to  this  epistle ;  of  iyyi' 
Ztiv  T<(i  QŁ4f ;  and  of  TtXiiovv,  with  ita  derivative8  in 
the  aense  in  which  it  is  used,  Ueb.  vii,  19.  Now,  with 
regard  to  this  objection,  it  may  be  obaenred,  lat,  That 
aupposiug  all  the  instancea  adduoed  by  Tholuck  to  be 
unimpeachable,  and  auppoeing  no  reaaon  could  be  a»- 
aigned  why  Paul  ahould  uae  such  in  writing  to  Hebrews, 
when  he  ćid  not  uae  them  in  writing  to  otheiB,  still  the 
objection  cannot  have  much  weight  with  any  person  ac- 
cuatomed  to  weigh  evidence,  because  not  only  is  the 
number  of  Pauline  łermim  found  in  this  epistle  far  great- 
er  than  the  number  of  termin!  which,  according  to  Tho- 
luck, are  ''foreign  to  the  apostle  to  the  Gentilesf  but 
it  is  always  less  likely  that  the  peculiar  phrases  of  a 
writer  should  be  borrowed  by  another,  than  that  a  writ- 
er  noted  for  the  use  of  peculiar  words  and  phrases  should, 
in  a  compoaition  of  a  character  somewhat  different  firom 
his  other  productions,  uae  terms  not  found  elsewhere  in 
his  imtings.  But,  2dly,  let  us  examine  the  instanoes 
adduoed  by  Tholuck,  and  aee  whether  they  bear  out  his 
reasoning.  "  Paul  nowhere  caUa  Christ  prie^J*  True ; 
but  though  Paul,  in  Yrriting  to  churches  oompoeed  morę 
or  less  of  Gentile  convert«,  whoee  preylous  ideas  of 
priests  and  priestly  rites  were  anything  but  farorable  to 
their  receiving  under  sacerdotal  terms  right  notions  of 
Christ  and  his  work,  never  caDs  Christ  a  priest,  is  that 
ąny  reason  for  our  conduding  that  in  writing  to  Jews, 
wbo  had  amongst  them  a  priesthood  of  divine  organiza- 
tion,  and  writing  for  the  expre88  purpoae  of  showing 
that  that  priesthood  was  typical  of  Christ,  it  is  inoon- 
ceiyable  that  the  apostle  should  have  applied  the  term 
prittt  to  Christ?  To  us  the  difficulty  would  rather 
seem  to  be  to  conceive  how,  in  handling  such  a  topie,  he 
oould  awńd  calling  Christ  a  priest.  "  Paul  nowhere  caUs 
Christ  a  skepherd  and  an  apostle^  as  the  writer  of  this 
epistle  does."  But  the  whole  weight  of  this  objection 
to  the  Pauline  origin  of  this  epistle  must  rest  on  the  as- 
sumption  that  Paul  never  usea  flgurative  appellations  of 
Christ  in  his  writings;  for  if  he  does,  why  not  here  as 
well  as  elsewhere?  Now  it  could  only  be  the  groasest 
nnacguaintedneas  with  the  apostle'8  writings  that  could 
lead  any  to  affirm  this.  The  very  opposite  tendency  is 
characteristic  of  them.  Thus  we  find  Christ  termed  rk- 
\oc  vófiov  (Rom.  X,  4),  SiaKovov  iripiTOfirię  (xv,  8),  to 
ira9xa  rifi&v  (1  Cor.  v,  7),  ^  irirpa  ^x,  4),  d7rapxh  (xv, 
23),  ilc  avi)p  (2  Cor.  xi,  2),  aKfioyiaviaXoc  (Eph.  ii,  20), 
etc.  With  these  instanoes  before  us,  why  should  it  be 
deemed  so  utterly  incredihle  that  Paul  could  have  called 
Christ  airóoroAoc  and  votfirjv,  that  the  occurrence  of 
such  terms  in  the  epistle  before  us  is  to  be  hdd  as  a  rea- 
aon for  adjudging  it  not  to  have  been  written  by  him  ? 
With  regard  to  the  use  of  ófioKoyia  in  the  sense  of  re- 
liffious  pro/ession,  the  reader  may  compare  the  passages 
in  which  it  occuis  in  this  epistle  with  Rom.  x,  9 ;  2  Cor. 
ix,  13 ;  1  Tim.  vi,  12,  and  judge  for  himself  how  far  such 
a  usage  is  foreign  to  the  apostle.  The  phrase  iyyi}^tŁv 
Ttf  SŁ<(t  occurs  once  in  this  epistle  (vii,  19),  and  once  in 
Jas.  iv,  8 ;  Paul  also  once  usea  the  verb  activdy  (PhiL 
ii,  30)  ;  and,  on  the  other  hand,  the  author  of  this  epistle 
once  uses  it  intxan8itivdy  (x,  25).  Aa  there  is  thus  a 
peifect  analogy  in  the  usajce  of  ihe  verb  between  the 


two,  why  it  ahould  be  auppoaed  improbable  that  Pani 
should  use  it  in  referenoe  to  God,  or  why  a  phraae  naed 
by  Jamea  should  be  deemed  too  Alexandrian  to  be  ueed 
by  Paul,  we  fed  oursdvea  utteriy  at  a  loas  to  oonodye. 
With  regaid  to  the  uae  of  rtkiŁow,  Tholuck  himadf 
oontends  (Appendix,  ii,  297)  that  it  everywhere  in  thia 
epistle  retainb  the  idea  of  complelmg;  but  he  cansot  on- 
derstand  how  Paul  could  have  contemplatcd  the  work 
of  redemption  under  this  term  in  this  epistle,  sińce  in 
no  other  of  his  epistles  is  it  so  used.  lliis  difficulty  of 
the  leamed  profeasor  may,  we  think,  be  very  easily  le- 
moved  by  remarking  that  it  doea  not  appear  to  have 
been  Paul's  design  elsewhere,  ao  ftilly  at  least  aa  here, 
to  represent  the  superiority  of  Christianity  over  Juda- 
ism,  aa  that  aiisea  from  the  former  being  suffidenfc,  whilst 
the  latter  waa  not  sufficient  to  compLste  men  in  a  relig- 
ious  point  of  view,  L  e.  to  supply  to  them  all  they  need, 
and  advanoe  them  to  all  of  which  they  are  capaUe. 
That  this  is  the  theme  of  the  writer,  the  paaaagea  in 
which  the  word  in  ąuestion  occuis  show ;  and  we  aee  no 
reason  why  such  an  idea  might  not  have  occuired  to 
Paul  as  well  as  to  any  other  man.  Aigumenta  dnwn 
from  such  apecial  terma,  moreover,  must  alwaya  be  pre- 
carious  when  u^ed  as  objections,  because  they  are  not 
only  indefinite,  but  are  mostly  negatiee  in  their  charac- 
ter. A  minutę  examination  shows  that  they  aie  not  of 
much  force  in  the  present  caae ;  for  if  the  expreB8ioo8  its 
feired  to  do  not  oocur  in  the  same  form  in  Paul^a  other 
epistlea,  yet  wmiiar  phraaea  undoubtedly  prevail,  and 
the  variation  here  is  suffidently  accounted  for  by  the 
different  character  and  object  of  this  epistle.  See  this 
and  all  the  other  ąuestions  connected  with  this  epistle 
amply  reriewed  by  Dr.  Davidson  {Introd.  to  the  N,  T, 
iii,  168-295),  who,  however,  indines  to  the  o]umoii  that 
these  peculiarities  indicate  the  oo-operation  of  aome  oth- 
er hand  with  Paul  in  the  oomposition  of  the  efństle. 

b.  It  yet  remaina  that  we  should  look  at  the  ^artemal 
eyidence  bearing  on  this  question.  Passing  by,  aa  some- 
what imcertain,  the  alleged  teatimony  of  Peter,  who  ia 
auppoaed  (2  Pet  iii,  15, 16)  to  refer  to  the  Epistle  to  the 
Hebrews  aa  the  compoaition  of  Paul,  and  pasaing  by  alao 
the  testimonies  of  the  apostolic  fathera,  which,  though 
very  dedsiye  as  to  the  antiquity  and  canonical  authar- 
ity  of  this  epistle  (see  ForBter*s  Inguiry.  sec  13),  yet  say 
nothing  to  guide  us  to  the  author,  we  ccme  to  oondder 
the  testimony  of  the  Eaatem  and  Western  chuicfaea 
upon  this  subject.  As  respects  the  former,  there  are 
two  facts  of  much  importance.  The  one  is,  that  of  the 
Greek  fathers  not  one  po8itivdy  aacribca  tlus  epistle  to 
any  but  Paul;  the  other  ia,  that  it  does  not  appear  tbat 
in  any  part  of  the  Eaatem  Church  the  Pauline  origin  of 
thia  epistle  was  ever  doubted  or  su£pected  (compare  Ola- 
hausen,  Opusc.  Theolog,  p.  95). 

In  the  Weatem  Church  thia  epistle  did  not,  as  we 
have  aeen,  meet  with  the  same  early  and  universal  r&- 
ception.  But  of  what  value  is  the  state  of  opinion  in 
the  early  churches  of  the  West  in  the  que8tion  of  evi- 
dence  now  before  us?  To  judge  of  this,  we  muat  bear 
in  mind  that  the  sole  amount  of  evidenoe  ariaing  from 
the  teatimony  of  the  Latin  churches  is  wgatwe;  all  we 
can  condude  from  it,  at  the  most,  is  that  they  had  no 
suffident  evidenoe  in  favor  of  this  epistle  being  Panl*a; 
they  do  not  aeem  to  have  had  a  ahadow  of  historical  ev- 
idence  againat  its  being  hia.  The  claims  of  B«Timt>tff^ 
element,  and  Lukę  rest  upon  merę  iiidividual  oonjec- 
ture,  and  have  no  historical  support,  Suppodng,  then, 
that  the  rejection  of  this  epistle  by  the  Latins  cannot 
be  accounted  for  by  drcumstanoes  peculiar  to  them,  still 
this  fact  cannot  diminish  the  weight  of  eyidence  aocm- 
ing  from  the  unanimity  of  the  Greeks  and  Aaiatica. 
Had  the  Latins  been  aa  unanimous  in  favor  of  Apolkn 
or  element  as  the  Eastem  churches  were  in  favor  of 
Paul,  the  case  would  have  been  difTeient.  The  yaloe 
of  Paul'8  claima  would  iii  that  caae  have  been  eąoal  to 
the  diiferenoe  between  the  value  of  the  Eastem  tiadi- 
tion  and  the  value  of  the  Weatem.  Thia  would  hare 
fumiahed  a  somewhat  puzzUng  problem ;  thou|^  evec 


HEBREWS,  EPISTLE  TO         147         HEBREWS,  EPISTLE  TO 


in  thtt  CBse  tbe  8up6ri<»it7  of  the  Eastem  witnesses  to 
Łhe  Western  would  havo  materially  advanced  the  claims 
of  tbe  apo0tle.  Ab  the  caae  stands,  <iU  the  posŁtive  ex- 
temal  eyidenoe  extant  Lb  in  favor  of  the  Pauline  author- 
ship  of  Łhis  epiatle;  and  the  only  thing  agamst  it  is  that 
in  the  Latin  chuiches  tbere  appean  to  have  been  no 
coaunonly  recttved  tradition  on  the  subject.  Under 
sach  dicnmatanceS}  the  daims  of  the  apostle  aie  entitled 
10  be  regarded  as  foUy  nibstantiated  by  the  extenial 
evidence. 

The  leanlt  of  the  previou8  inąuiiy  may  be  thoB  atated. 
1.  There  is  no  subitantial  evideiioe,  exterual  or  intemal, 
in  iavor  of  any  dainumt  to  the  authorahip  of  this  epi»- 
Ue  exoept  PauL  2.  There  is  nothing  incompatible  with 
the  fupposttion  that  Paul  was  the  author  of  iL  3.  The 
prepondenuioe  of  the  intemal,  and  all  the  direct  exter- 
nal  eridenoe  goea  to  show  that  it  was  written  by  Paul. 
(See  the  BibUotkeca  Sacra,  Oct.  1867.)  4.  The  appar- 
ent  ooincidenoes  wath  Luke'8  phraseology  meiely  go  to 
thaWf  if  they  indeed  be  any  thing  more  than  casual,  that 
be  exeicł8ed  more  than  uńial  liberty  aa  an  amanuensis 
«r  reporter  of  PauL 

UL  Time  a»d  PIoob  of  (TriTu^.— Assaming  the  Paul- 
ine authorahip  of  the  epistle,  it  is  not  diificult  to  deter- 
niae  wken  and  wktre  it  was  written.    The  allusions  in 
xiii,  19, 21,  point  to  the  dosing  period  of  the  apostle's 
two  yesn*  imprisonmeut  at  Romę  as  the  seaaon  during 
*'the  seraie  houn**  of  which,  as  Hug  describes  them 
{Jwirod,  p.  G03),  he  oompoaed  this  noblest  production  of 
his  pen.     Modem  criticism  has  not  destroyed,  though 
it  has  weakened  this  conclusion,  by  substituting  the 
leading  roic  Biefiiotę,  '^the  priaoners,"  for  rolę  hofuTtę 
;iov  (A.V.  *'me  in  my  bonds"),  x,  84;  by  propoeing  to 
interpret  awoktkuiuyoy,  xiii,  23,  sb  *'  sent  away"  rather 
than  ''set  at  liberty;"  and  by  urging  that  the  conditaon 
of  the  writer,  as  portnyed  in  xiii,  18, 19,  23,  is  not  nec- 
eaarily  that  of  a  prisoner,  and  thac  there  may  poasibly 
be  no  allusion  to  it  in  xiii,  8.    In  this  datę,  howercr, 
abnoat  all  who  rec8ive  the  epistle  as  Paul'8  ooncur ;  and 
even  by  thoae  who  do  not  ao  reoeive  it  nearly  the  aame 
time  is  fixed  upon,  in  oonaequence  of  the  evidenoe  fur- 
niahed  by  the  epistle  itaelf  of  its  having  been  written 
a  good  while  after  thoae  to  whom  it  is  addresaed  had 
beoiMne  Christians.    The  references  to  former  teachers 
(xiii,  7)  and  earlier  instruction  (v,  12  and  x,  82)  might 
mai  tBj  time  after  Łhe  first  years  of  the  Church;  but 
the  epistle  was  eyidently  written  before  the  destruction 
of  Jeruaalemin  A.D.70.    The  whole  argument,  and  es- 
pedUly  the  pasaagea  viii,  4  8q.,  ix,  6  sq.  (where  the 
pnaeDt  tenaes  of  the  Greek  are  unaccountably  changed 
into  past  in  the  English  Tenion),  and  xiii,  10  8q.,  imply 
ihat  the  Temf^  was  standing,  and  that  its  usual  oourae 
of  dirine  aenrice  was  canied  on  without  interruption. 
A  Chńsdan  reader,  keenly  watching  in  the  doomed  dty 
for  the  fulfihnent  of  his  Lord's  prediction,  would  at  onoe 
loderatand  the  ominous  references  to  "  that  which  bear- 
eth  thocns  and  briers,  and  is  rejected,  and  is  nigh  unto 
oining,  whoae  end  is  to  be  bunied ;"  "  that  which  de- 
cayeth  and  waxeth  old,  and  is  ready  to  yanish  away;'* 
aad  the  eoming  of  the  expected  "  Day,**  and  the  remov- 
ii^  of  thoae  thinga  that  are  ahaken  (yi,  8;  viii,  18;  x, 
'^37;  xii,  27).     Yet  these  forebodings  seem  leas  dis- 
tioct  and  circumstantial  than  they  might  have  been  if 
Bttoed  immedUUdjf  before  the  cataatrophe.    From  the 
espresaon  "<  they  of  (asró)  Italy"  (xiii,  24),  it  has  been 
ioferred  that  the  writer  could  not  have  been  in  Italy; 
Imt  Winer  (Grammatik,  §  66,  6)  denies  that  the  prepo- 
iłUon  neceasarily  has  that  force.    Alford  {Commmt^  iv, 
Phdeg.  p.  68  aq.),  after  Holzmann  {Słud,  tu  KriL  1859, 
0,297  8q.),  oontends  that  it  was  addreased  to  the  Judai- 
co-Chriataan  Church  at  Komę;  but  in  that  caae,  how 
coukl  it  have  been  needful  to  inform  tkem  of  Timoth/s 
lefeaae  (aa  the  author  doea  in  the  same  connection.  xiii, 
S)? 

IV.  To  whom  adtirvaaedL— That  the  paities  to  whom 
Uiis  epistle  was  addreBaed  were  ocmyerted  Jewa  the  epis- 
Ue  itMif  plainly  shows.    Andent  tradition  points  out 


the  church  at  Jerusalem,  or  the  Christians  in  Palestine 
generally,  as  the  redpients.  Stuart  contends  for  the 
church  at  Caesarea,  not  without  some  show  of  reason ; 
but  the  preponderance  of  evidence  is  in  favor  of  the 
andent  tradition.  lVo  things  make  this  dear,  saya 
Lange :  the  one  is,  that  only  the  Christians  in  Jerusa^ 
lem,  or  those  in  Palestine  generally,  formed  a  great 
Jewish-Chrisdan  Church  in  the  proper  aense ;  the  other 
is,  that  for  the  looaening  of  theae  from  their  religious 
aense  ot  the  Temple-worship  there  was  an  immediate 
and  preasing  neceańty  {Apostoł  ZHtaUer,  i,  176).  We 
know  of  no  purely  Jewish-Christian  community,  auch 
as  that  addreaaed  m  this  epistle,  out  of  Palestine,  while 
the  whole  tonę  of  the  epistle  indicates  that  those  for 
whom  it  was  intended  were  in  the  vidmty  of  the  Tem- 
pie. The  inscription  of  the  epistle,  irpóc  'Eppaiouc, 
which  is  of  great  antiquity,  fayora  the  same  concluaion 
(Roberta,  DUcusaioru  on  the  Gotpels,  p.  215  sq.).  Ebrard 
Umits  the  primary  circle  of  readers  eyen  to  a  section  of 
the  Church  at  Jerusalem.  Conńdering  auch  passages 
as  Y,  12;  vi,  10;  x,  82,  aa  probably  inapplicable  to  the 
whole  of  that  church,  he  conjectures  that  Paul  wrote  to 
some  neophytes  whoae  conyersion,  though  not  mention- 
ed  in  the  AJcts,  may  have  been  partly  due  to  the  apos- 
tle'8  influence  in  the  time  of  his  last  reoorded  sojoum  in 
Jerusalem  (Acts  xxi,  22).  This,  however,  is  unneoe»- 
aaiy. 

V.  In  tohai  Lai^uage  wat  it  writtenf—Uke  Mat-- 
thew's  Grospel,  the  Epistle  to  the  Hebrews  has  afforded 
ground  for  much  unimportant  controYersy  reapecting 
the  Unguage  in  which  it  was  originally  written.  The 
earlieet  statement  is  that  of  Clement  of  Alexandria  (pre- 
8erved  in  Euseh.  //.  E.  vi,  14),  to  the  effect  that  it  was 
written  by  Paul  in  Hebrew,  and  tianslated  by  Lukę 
into  Greek;  and  hence,  as  Clement  obeenres,  arises  the 
identity  of  the  style  of  the  epistle  and  that  of  the  Acts. 
This  statement  is  repeated,  after  a  long  intenral,  by  Eu- 
sebius,  Theodoret,  Jerome,  and  several  later  fathera;  but 
it^is  not  notioed  by  the  majority.  Nothing  ia  aaid  to 
lead  ua  to  regard  it  as  a  tradition,  rather  than  a  conjeo- 
ture  suggested  by  the  style  of  the  epistle.  No  person  is 
said  to  have  used  or  aeen  a  Hebrew  originaL  The  Ar- 
amaic  oopy,  included  ui  the  Peshito,  has  never  been  re- 
garded otherwlse  than  aa  a  tranalation.  Among  the 
few  modern  aupporters  of  an  Aramaic  original,  the  most 
distinguished  are  Joseph  Hallet,  an  English  writer  in 
1727  (whoae  able  essay  is  most  easily  accesńble  in  a 
Latin  tranalation  in  Wolfa  Cura  PhHologica,  iv,  806- 
887).  The  aame  opinion  has  found  in  MichaelLs  a  stren- 
uous  defender  {IrUrod.  iv,  221).  The  azguments  he  ad- 
duoes,  however,  are  more  spedous  than  sound;  and  it 
has  been  abundantly  shown  by  Lardner,  Hug,  Eichhom, 
and  others,  that  this  opinion  b  untenable.  Bleek  (i,  6- 
23)  argues  in  support  of  a  Greek  original  on  the  grounds 
of  (1)  the  purity  and  easy  flow  of  the  Greek ;  (2)  the 
use  of  Greek  words,  which  oould  not  be  adeąuatdy  ex- 
presaed  in  Hebrew  without  long  periphrase;  (3)  the  uae 
of  paronomasia — under  which  head  he  disallows  the  in- 
ference  against  an  Aramaic  orifrinal  which  has  been 
drawn  from  the  double  sense  given  to  ftaOfiiai  (ix,  15) ; 
and  (4)  the  use  of  the  Sept.  in  quotations  and  references 
which  do  not  correspond  with  the  Hebrew  text.  Why 
Paul  should  have  written  in  Greek  to  persons  residing 
in  Judiea  is  best  answered  by  the  reasona  which  Hug 
{ItUrod,  p.  826  aą.)  and  Diodati  {De  Christa  Grace  lo- 
cuente  exercitcUio,  etc.,  edited  by  O.  T.  Dobbin,  LL.R, 
London,  1843,  and  republiahed  in  the  BiNieal  BepoHlory 
for  Jan.  1844)  have  adduced  to  show  that  Greek  was  at 
that  time  wdl  known  to  the  mass  of  the  Jews  (compare 
Tholuck,  i,  78). 

YI.  Some  have  doubted  whether  this  compocition  be 
justly  termed  an  epistle,  and  have  propoeed  to  regard  it 
rather  as  a  treatise.  The  salutations,  however,  at  the 
close  seem  rather  to  favor  the  common  opinion,  though 
it  is  of  little  moment  which  view  we  espouse. 

VU.  Condition  o/ the  Hebrews  and  Scope  o/ the  Epis- 
tle,— ^The  numerous  Christian  churcheaacatteredthrough- 


HEBREWS,  EPKTLE  TO         148         HEBREWS,  EPISTLE  TO 


oat  Judsa  (Acta  ix,  81 ;  GaL  i,  22)  were  continuaUy  ex- 
posed  to  penecution  from  the  Jews  (1  Theas.  ii,  14)| 
which  would  become  morę  searcbing  and  extensive  as 
churches  multiplied,  and  as  the  growing  torbulence  of 
the  nation  ripened  into  the  insurrection  of  A.D.  66. 
Peisonal  violenoe,  spoliation  of  pioperty,  exclusion  from 
the  synagogue,  and  domestic  strife  were  the  unirersal 
forms  of  penecution.  But  in  Jeruaalem  there  was  one 
additional  weapou  in  the  hands  of  the  predominant  op- 
preseors  of  the  Christiana.  Their  magnifioent  national 
Tempie,  hallowed  to  eyery  Jew  by  ancient  hutorical 
and  by  gentler  personal  recollections,  with  ita  irreaisti- 
Ue  attractions,  its  soothing  straina,  and  myaterioua  cer- 
emonies,  might  be  ahut  against  the  Hebrew  Christian. 
And  even  if,  amid  the  fierce  factions  and  frequent  oecil- 
lations  of  authority  in  Jerusalem,  this  affliction  were  not 
often  biid  upon  him,  yet  there  was  a  aecret  burden  which 
evexy  Hebrew  Christian  bore  within  him — the  knowl- 
edge  that  the  cnd  of  all  the  beauty  and  awfuhieas  of 
Ziou  was  rapidly  approaching.  Paralyzed,  perhaps,  by 
this  consciousneas,  and  enfeebled  by  their  attachment  to 
a  lower  form  of  Christianity,  they  became  stationary  in 
knowledge,  weak  in  faith,  void  pf  energy,  and  even  in 
danger  of  apostasy  from  Christ.  For,  as  afflictions  mul- 
tiplied romid  them,  and  madę  them  feel  morę  keenly 
their  dependence  on  God,  and  their  need  of  near,  and 
frequeut,  and  associated  approach  to  him,  they  seemed, 
in  oonseąuence  of  their  Chnstianity,  to  be  receding  from 
the  God  of  their  fathera,  and  loaing  that  means  of  com- 
munion  with  him  which  they  used  to  enjoy.  Angels, 
Moees,  and  the  high-oriest — ^their  interceaeora  in  heav- 
en,  in  the  grave,  and  on  earth — became  of  leas  impor- 
tance  in  the  creed  of  the  Jewish  Christian ;  their  glory 
waned  as  he  grew  in  Christian  experience.  Already  he 
felt  that  the  Lord*s  day  was  superseding  the  Sabbath, 
the  New  Covenant  the  Old.  What  could  take  the  place 
of  the  Tempie,  and  that  which  waa  behind  the  yeil,  and 
the  Leyitical  sacrifices,  and  the  boly  city,  when  they 
ahonld  cease  to  exist  ?  What  compensation  cocdd  Chris- 
tianity  olTer  him  for  the  loes  which  was  preaaing  the 
Hebrew  Christian  morę  and  more  ? 

James,  the  tnahop  of  Jeruaalem,  had  Jost  leil  his  place 
Tacant  by  a  martyr'8  death.  Ńeither  to  Cepbas  at 
Babylon,  nor  to  John  at  Epheaua,  the  third  pillar  of  the 
Apoatolic  Church,  waa  it  given  to  undcratand  all  the 
greatneaa  of  thia  want,  and  to  apeak  the  word  in  aear 
son.  But  there  came  from  Romę  the  voice  of  one 
who  had  been  the  foremoat  in  aounding  the  depth  and 
breadth  of  that  love  of  Chriat  which  waa  all  but  in- 
comprehensible  to  the  Jew— one  who,  feeling  more  than 
any  other  apostle  the  weight  of  the  care  of  all  the 
churches,  yet  dung  to  his  own  people  with  a  love  eyer 
ready  to  break  out  in  impasaioned  worda,  and  unaought 
and  ill-reqnited  deeda  of  kindneas.  He  whom  Jeruaa- 
lem had  aent  away  in  chaina  to  Borne  again  lifted  up 
hia  Yoice  in  the  hallowed  city  among  hia  countrymen; 
but  with  worda  and  argumenta  auited  to  their  capacity, 
with  a  strange,  borrowed  aocent,  and  a  tonę  in  which 
leigned  no  apoatolic  authority,  and  a  face  veiled  in  very 
love  from  wayward  children  who  might  refuae  to  hear 
divine  and  aairing  truth  when  it  fell  from  the  lipa  of 
Paul 

He  meeta  the  Hebrew  Christiana  on  their  own  ground. 
Hia  anawer  is,  ^  Yuur  new  faith  gives  you  Christ,  and 
in  Christ  all  )'ou  seek,  all  your  fathers  soughU  In 
Christ,  the  Son  of  God,  you  have  an  all-sufficient  Medi- 
ator, nearer  than  angels  to  the  Father,  eminent  above 
Moaes  as  a  benefactor,  more  sympathizing  and  more 
preyailing  than  the  high-prieat  as  an  interceaeor:  hia 
Sabbath  awaits  you  in  heaycn ;  to  his  coyenant  the  old 
was  intended  to  be  subseryient;  his  atouement  is  the 
etemal  reality  of  which  sacrifices  are  but  the  paańng 
ahadow ;  his  city  heayenly,  not  madę  with  hands.  Hay- 
ing  him,  belieye  in  him  with  all  your  heart^with  a  faith 
in  the  unseen  futurę  strong  as  that  of  the  saints  of  old, 
patient  under  present  and  prepared  for  ooming  woe,  fuli 
of  energy,  and  hope,  and  holińeas,  and  loye." 


Soch  waa  the  t4wnhing  of  the  Epistle  to  the  Hebrew& 
We  do  not  poaseas  the  meana  of  tradng  out  atep  by  atep 
ita  effect  upon  them,  but  we  know  that  the  ranilt  at 
which  it  aimed  was  achieyed.  The  Church  at  Jeni8»> 
lem  did  not  apostatize.  It  migrated  to  Pella  (Euaebiną 
ff.  EceL  iii,  6) ;  and  there,  no  hmger  dwarfed  onder  the 
cold  ahadow  of  oyerhanging  Judaiam,  it  foUowed  the 
Hebrew  Christiana  of  the  Diapeiaon  in  graduaUy  cntsi^ 
ing  on  the  poeaeaaion  of  the  fhU  liberty  which  the  law 
of  Chriat  allowa  to  all. 

The  primazy  design  of  thia  epiatle,  therefore,  waa  to 
diaauade  thoae  to  whom  it  is  written  from  relapaing  into 
Judaiam,  and  to  exhort  them  to  hołd  faat  the  tiutha  of 
Chriatianity  which  they  had  reoeiyed.  For  this  -pm- 
poae  the  apostle  ahowa  the  auperiority  of  the  latter  dia- 
penaation  oyer  the  former,  in  that  it  waa  intiodaoed  by 
one  far  greater  than  angela,  or  than  Moaea,  from  whom 
the  Jewa  receiyed  their  eoonomy  (i-iii),  and  in  that  it 
afforda  a  more  eecure  and  complete  aalyation  to  the  sin- 
ner  than  the  former  (iy-ix).  In  demonatrating  the  lat- 
ter position,  the  apostle  shows  that  in  point  of  dignit^', 
perpetuity,  aufficienc^',  and  auitableneaa,  the  Jewish 
prieathood  and  aacrificea  were  &r  inferior  to  thoee  of 
Christ,  who  was  the  substance  and  reality,  while  these 
were  but  the  t>'pe  and  shadow.  He  showa,  also,  that  by 
the  appearance  of  the  antitype  the  type  ia  nececsarily 
nboliahed ;  and  adduoea  the  important  truth  that  now, 
through  Chriat,  the  priyilege  of  peraonal  acoeas  to  God 
ia  free  to  alL  On  all  thia  he  founda  an  exhortation  to 
a  life  of  faith  and  obedienoe,  and  ahowa  that  it  has  erer 
been  only  by  a  apiritual  recognition  and  worahip  of  God 
that  good  men  haye  participated  in  hia  fayor  (xi).  The 
epiatle  oondudea,  aa  ia  uaual  with  Paul,  with  a  aeriea  of 
practical  exhortation8  and  piona  wiahea  (xii-xiii). 

But  this  great  epistle  remaina  to  aftcr  timea  a  key- 
Btone  binding  together  that  aucceauon  of  inapired  men 
which  apans  oyer  the  agea  between  Moaes  and  John. 
It  teachea  the  Christian  atudent  the  aubstantial  identity 
of  the  reyelation  of  God,  whether  giyen  through  the 
propheta  or  through  the  Son ;  for  it  ahows  that  God*8 
porpoaea  are  unchangeable,  howeyer  diyeraely  in  diiTer- 
ent  agea  they  haye  been  "reflected  in  broken  and  fitftd 
myty  glancing  back  from  the  troubled  watera  of  the  hu- 
man  aouL"  It  ia  a  aouroe  of  inexhauatible  comfort  to 
eyery  Chriatian  aufferer  in  inward  pcrplexity,  or  amid 
'^reproachea  and  afflictions."  It  is  a  pattem  to  e\'efy 
Christian  teacher  of  the  method  in  which  larger  yiewa 
should  be  imparted,  gently,  reyerently,  and  aeasonably, 
to  feeble  apirita  prone  to  cling  to  ancient  forma,  and  to 
reat  in  accustomed  feelinga. — Kitto,  a.  y. ;  Smith,  a.  y. 

YIII.  Literałure.^1.  Of  generał  introductory  treatiflea, 
beaidea  the  fonnal  Inlroductions  of  Michaelia,  Eichhoni, 
De  Wette,  Dayidaon,  Bleek,  Home,  etc,  and  the  prole- 
gomena in  the  regular  commentariea  of  Stuart,  Alford, 
etc,  the  following  expreaa  treattaea  in  Volnme  form  may 
be  eapecially  named :  Ziegler,  Eitdeit,  (Gett.  1791, 8yo) ; 
Bratt,  De  arfjum.  et  auct,  etc  (Gryph.  1806, 4to);  Sey- 
farth,  I)e  Indolem  etc  (Lipa.  1821, 8yo) ;  Winaer,  De  Sen 
cerdotii  officio^  etc  (lipa.  1825,  4to) ;  De  Groot,  Compa- 
ratio,  etc  (Tr.  ad  Rh.  1826,  8vo) ;  Bleek,  Eńtieit.  (BeiL 
1828, 8yo) ;  Baumgarten-Cruaiua,  Cot^ecturm,  etc.  (Jcnae, 
1829, 4to) ;  Gelpe,  Vindieia,  etc  (L.  B.  1832, 8yo) ;  Groes- 
mann.  De  philoś.  Jud,  etc  (Lipa.  1884,  4to) ;  Stengiin, 
Zeugnitsef  etc  (Bamb.  1885,  8yo);  Forster,  Apottolical 
Authoriiy,  etc  (Lond.  1888,  8yo) ;  Thielach,  De  £jk  ad 
Iłebr,  (Marbui^:,  1848, 8yo) ;  Mole,  De  Chriśtologia,  etc. 
(HaUe,  1854) ;  Wieaeler,  Untenudamgy  etc  (Kieł,  1861, 
8yo) ;  Riehm,  Lehrhfgr.  etc  (1867,  8yo). 

2.  The  foUowing  are  apecial  eommentariei  od  the 
whole  of  the  epiatle  alone,  the  moat  important  of  which 
are  here  designated  by  an  asteriak  (*)  prefixed :  Ath«- 
naaiuB,  Commentaria  (in  Opp»  I,  ii) ;  Chiyaoatom,  Homii' 
icB  (in  Opp,  xii,  1) ;  Cyril,  Commeutaria  (in  Mai,  ScripL 
Veł,  VIII,  ii,  147) ;  Alcuui,  Erpianatio  (in  Opp.  I,  ii) ; 
Aquinaa,  EaćpoaUio  (in  Opp.  yii) ;  *Calyin,  Commmltiri^ 
us  (in  Opp, ;  alao  in  Engliah,  by  Cotton,  Lood.  1605, 4to ; 
by  a  deigynian,  London,  1841, 12mo;  by  Owen,  Edinbb 


HEBREWS,  EPISTLE  TO         149 


HEBRON 


1868,  8to);  Zuin^,  AmuftaHowi  (in  Opp.  iv,  564); 
CEoolampMiiitt,  E^ikmatume$  (Ai^ent.  1534,  Basil,  1536, 
8vo>;  Mcguder,  AdnoiaiUMes  (Tig.  1539,  8vo);  Gran- 
dis,  CmnmemUiriut  (Paria,  1546, 8vo) ;  Bochmeister  [ed. 
StieueiBeej,  DiąptOatio  (BoeL  1569, 8vo;  also  in  Genn. 
HaL  1755, 8vo) ;  Brente,  CommaOarius  (Tub.  1571, 4to) ; 
HTperittS,  CommaUarii  (Tig.  1585,  foL) ;  Gryneus,  Kx- 
pkmatio  (BasiL  1587, 8vo) ;  Bnccafoci,  Commmtarius  [in- 
dodiag  John]  (Kom.  1587,  4Ło)  ;  Hunn,  £xegesis  (F.  ad 
3£  1589,  8to)  ;  De  Ribera  [ooncluded  by  othen],  Com- 
mmtariu  (Salm.  1598,  Cologne,  1600,  Turin,  1605, 8vo) ; 
Galenus,  Commeniaritu  (Duac.  1578,  Lov.  1599,  8vo) ; 
Deriflg,  Lectures  [on  chap.  i-vi]  (In  Workt) ;  Cameron, 
BeęponriomBs  (in  Opp.  p.  366) ;  Crell,  Commentarius  (in 
Opp.  ii,  61) ;  Song,  Analgsis  (YlU  1600,  8vo) ;  Nahum, 
Commmiaruu  [inclading  GaL  and  Ephes.]  (Han.  1602, 
8vo);  KoOock^  Cotnmentarius  (Gen.  1605,  1610,  l'2mo; 
also  Anafytis,  Edinbnigh,  1605, 8yo) ;  Junius,  Enarratio 
(Heidelbeig,  1610, 8ro;  alao  in  Opp.  i,  1868) ;  De  Tena, 
CoaMMNterutf  (Toledo^  1611, 1617,  foL;  with  additions 
by  othefB,  LoDdon,  1661,  foL ;  alao  in  the  Critici  Saeri) ; 
JLjser,  CommoUariuM  (YiU  1616,  4to) ;  CapeUiu,  Otfser- 
raiiome*  (Sed.  1634,  8yo);  Gooceioa,  /n.  Jip,  ad  II,  (in 
Opp,  xii,  815) ;  Aliiiig,  Prałectiones  [on  chap.  i-x]  (in 
(^W);  ScuUetua, Idea  (Fracof.  1634, 8vo) ;  SlichŁing, 
CimmtmtariuM  (Rac  1634, 8vo) ;  Jones,  Commeniary  [in- 
dnd.  Philem.]  (Lond.  1635,  foL) ;  Dickaon,  Kxplanation 
(Abecd.  1635, 1649;  Glaag.  1654 ;  Lond.  1839, 8vo) ;  Ra- 
piiie,  £xponiio  (Far.  1686, 8vo) ;  Guillebert,  Paraphraae 
[in  Frenchj  (Paiia,  1638, 8vo) ;  Gerhard,  Commentarius 
(Jena,  1641,  1661,  4to) ;  Yincent,  Commattaria  (Parią 
1644,  foL) ;  Dooname,  CommaUary  (London,  1646,  fol) ; 
Lnshington,  Commeutafy  [chiefly  a  tranalation  of  Crell 
and  Slichting]  (Lond.  1646,  foL) ;  Godean,  Paraphraae 
[in  Fieoch]  (Pana,  1651, 12mo;  in  Engliah,  Lond.  1715, 
12aio) ;  Gonge,  Commemiartf  (London,  1655,  foL) ;  Home, 
ExponHo  (Bnin&  1655,  4to) ;  Major,  Commentctria  (Jen. 
1655, 1668,  4to);  Wandalin,  Parapkrasia  (Havn.  1656, 
4io) ;  Caapar  Streao,  CommaOariui  (Hague,  1661, 4to) ; 
Łamson,  i:j7X>ji^«m  (Lond.  1662,  foL) ;  Orresij  ExpoBUion 
f  Rabbłmcal  iUiistradona]  (London,  1668-74,  4  voIa.  fol. ; 
Edtnbi  1812-14,  7  rola.  8vo;  London,  1840,  4  rola.  8vo; 
EdinK  1854, 7  Yola.  8vo ;  abridged,  London,  1790, 1815, 4 
voli.8vo);  "^Seb.  Schmid,  Commentarius  (Aigent.  1680, 
Lipai  1698, 4to) ;  Maiua,  Parapkrans  (Gieas.  1687, 1700, 
4io);  Wittich,  InteMtigaiio  (Amaterd.  1691,  4to);  *Van 
Hoeke,  Coimmaśaruu  (Lugd.  &  1693, 4to ;  in  German, 
Flanki  1707,  4to) ;  Groenwegen,  Yytkggknge  (Leyden, 
1693, 1702, 4U>) ;  Nemeth,  Eacpłicałio  (Fnnec.  1695, 1702, 
4to);  De  starek,  CommaUariu*  [ineluding  min.  proph.] 
(FiibL  1696,  5  mb.  4to;  1784,  2  voIa.  foL);  Ackersloót, 
TfUleS^M^  (Hag.  1697, 4to;  in  German,  Bremen,  1714, 
^):  Creyghton,  Yerkharing  (Amat  1699,  4to);  Hei- 
degger, luDęifetica  [inclnding  aome  other  booka  oT  Scrip> 
Cwe]  CTig.  1700,  1706,  1710,  4to) ;  Schomer,  Exege$i$ 
[ineliuL  part  of  1  Peter]  (Roat  1701, 4to) ;  Bnun,  Comn 
mmtarita  (AmaL  1705,  4to) ;  Oleariua,  Anahfsis  (Lipa. 
1706y  4to) ;  Brochmand,  CommentariuM  (Havn.  1706, 4to) ; 
SlaiGk,Aote  (Lipa.  1710, 4to);  *D'Outiein,  FeriUczartii^ 
(Amat.  1711, 4to;  in  German,  Frankf.  1713^  1718, 2  voIa. 
4to);  Limborch,  CommenŁariui  [indud.  Acta  and  Rom.] 
(RDtteRL1711,  foL);  Clcmcnt  Streao,  MedUaHen  (Amat 
1714, 4to) ;  DÓrache,  Commentarius  (Frankfort  et  Lipa. 
1717,  4co);  Yermaten,  Ontkeding  (AmatenL  1722,  4to); 
Hidse,  Yertiaaring  (Rotterd.  1725,  2  vola.  4to) ;  Peirce 
[eoBtimied  by  Hallet],  ParapkroBe  (London,  1727,  4to; 
alao  [with  CoL  and  Pbil.  J  ib.  1733, 4to;  in  Latin,  with 
addi^ona,  by  J.  D.  Michaelia,  HaL  1747,  4to);  Duncan, 
Eiposkim  (Edinbw  1781,  %yo\  1844,  12mo);  Cellariua, 
Anakgmig  (Ulm,  1731, 4to) ;  *Rambach,  ErkUlrung  [ed. 
Ncobaaer]  (Frankf.  1742, 4to);  CaipzoT,  Ezercitationes 
[eonpariaoa  with  Phik>]  (Hefanat.  1750, 8vo;  in  Germ. 
ib.  1795,  8to);  Anon.  Paraphrase  (Lond.  1750,  8iro;  in 
Ulm,  by  Semkr,  Halle.  1779, 8vo) ;  Sykea,  Paraphrase 
[hńn]  (Lond.  1756, 4to) ;  *Cramer,  ErklSruMf  (Copenh. 
1757, 4to);  Kichaelia,  Efidanmg  (FrankC  1762^,  1780- 
€^2  ▼ak8TD);  Stima>eot,Erkl&rm^  (FlenO}.  1768,4to) ; 


Baomgarten,  ErUSrung  (HaL  1768, 4to) ;  C  F.  Schmid, 
Obsertationes  (Lipaiae,  1766,  8vo) ;  ZachariM,  Eriddrung 
(Gott.  1771 ;  ed.  by  RoaenmUller,  ib.  1793,  8vo) ;  Monia. 
Uebersetzung  (Leipz.  1776, 1786, 8vo) ;  Blaache,  Commat- 
tar  (Leipzig,  1761,  8vo);  Abreach,  Aimatationes  (L.  B. 
1786-7,  3  rola.  8vo) ;  Delphinua,  Commentarws  [indud* 
John]  (Rom.  1787, 8vo) ;  Storr,  Erlduterung  (Tub.  1789, 
1809,  8vo);  ♦Emeati,  Lectiones  [ediL  Dindorf]  (Up-^ 
1795,  8vo);  Hezel,  Yersuch  (Leipzig,  1795,  8vo);  Val- 
necker,  Schola  (in  hia  aelectiona,  AmatenL  1815,  ii,  345- 
600);  Schulz,  AnmerL  (Brealau,  1818,  8vo);  Maclean, 
Commentary  (London,  1819,  8vo);  W.  Jonea,  Lectures 
(Lond.  1821,  8vo) ;  Boehme,  Commentarius  (Lipa.  1825, 
8vo) ;  ^Stuart,  Commentary  (Andover,  1827, 1833, 1851, 
1860;  Lond.  1837,  8vo);  G.Y.  Sampaon.  Notes  (Lond. 
1828, 8vo);  ♦Bleek,  Comm^rfar  (Berlin,  1828-41 ;  Elberf. 
1838, 1868,  8vo) ;  *Kvmo\,  Commentarius  (LdpaiA,  1831, 
8vo);  Paulua,  Erlduterung  (Heidelh.  1833,  8vo);  Klee, 
Commentar  (Mainz,  1888, 8vo) ;  Knox,  Sermons  (Lond. 
1834, 8vo) ;  Biahop  Parry,  £xposition  (Lond.  1834, 8vo) ; 
Conder,  Notes  (Lond.  1834, 8vo) ;  Duke  of  Mancheater, 
Argument  [of  chap.  i-iv.  U]  (Lond.  1885, 8 vo);  *Tho. 
łuck,  Commentar  (Hambuig,  1836, 1840, 8vo ;  tranalated, 
London,  1842,  2  vola.  12roo) ;  *Stier,  Auslegung  (Halle^ 
1842, 8vo;  Brunawick,  1862, 2  vola.  8vo) ;  Maurice, /^<w- 
tures  (London,  1846,  8vo) ;  Stengel,  Erldarung  (Karb- 
ruhe,  1849,  8vo) ;  *Delitzsch,  Commentar  (Leipz.  1850, 
8vo;  tran8lated,Edinburgh,  1868-70,2  vols.8vo);  Miller, 
Notes  (Lond.  1851, 12mo) ;  ♦Turner,  CoOTi»«i/ary'(N.  Y. 
1852, 8vo) ;  Ellard,  Commentary  (Edinbuigh,  1854, 8vo) ; 
LUneman,  ErUdrung  (Gotting.  1855, 8vo) ;  Tait,  JEa^po- 
sition  (LoniL  1855,2  rols.  12mo);  Patteraon,  ComuKn/a- 
ry  (Edinb.  1856, 8vo) ;  F.  S.  Sampaon,  Commentary  [ed. 
by  Dabney]  (New  York,  1856, 8vo) ;  Boultbee, /.«crure« 
(London,  1856, 12mo) ;  Anon.  Comparison  with  Oid  Test, 
(Lond.  1857,  Timo) ;  Am.  Bib.  Union,  Trans,  with  Notes 
(K.  Y.  1858,  4to) ;  Haldane,  Notes  (Lood.  1860, 12mo); 
Knowlea,  Notes  (Lond.  1862, 8vo) ;  John  Brown,  Earpo^ 
sition  (Lond.  1862, 2  vola.  8vo) ;  Kluge,  ErkUlrung  (Neu 
Rup.  1863, 8vo) ;  Dale,  Discourses  (London,  1865, 8vo) ; 
Blech,iVec^/m  (Danz.  1865,  in  pta.  8vo) ;  Hartmann, 
Ausleg,  (Beri.  1866, 8ro);  Longking,  Notes  (N.  Y.  1867, 
12mo) ;  Lindaay,  lectures  (Edinb.  1867,  5  rola.  8vo) ; 
Kurtz,  Erktdr,  (Mitau,  1869,8vo) ;  Ewald,  AYWr.  (Gott. 
1870, 8vo).     SeeEpiSTLB. 

He''bron  (Heb.  Chebron^  "fTi^n,  a  community;  Sept. 
Xe)3p<tfv),  the  name  of  an  iroportant  city  and  of  aevenil 
men,  alao  (in  a  dilTerent  Heb.  form)  of  a  amaller  town. 

1.  A  place  in  the  aouth  of  Paleatine,  aituated  20  Ro- 
man milea  aouth  of  Jeruaalem,  and  the  aame  diatance 
north  of  Beeraheba  (Euaebiua,  Onom,  a.  v.  'ApKta) ;  and 
atill  extant,  18  milea  aouth  from  Jeruaalem,  in  81<^  32' 
30''  N.  UL,  85<3  8'  20''  E.  long.,  at  the  height  of  2664 
Paria  feet  above  the  level  of  the  aea  (Schubert).  It  ia 
one  of  the  moat  ancient  dtiea  exiBting,  having  been 
built  *'aeven  yeara  before  Zoan  in  Egypt,"  and  bdng 
mentioned  even  prior  to  Damaacua  (Numb.  xiii,  22 ;  Greń. 
xiii,  18 ;  comp.  xv,  2).  Ita  earlier  name  waa  Kiujath- 
ABBA,  that  ia,  the  city  o/ Arba,  from  Arba,  the  father  of 
Anak  and  of  the  Anakim  who  dwdt  in  and  around  He- 
bron (Gen.  xxiii,  2 ;  Joah.  xiv,  15 ;  xv,  3 ;  xxi,  1 1 ;  Judg. 
i,  10).  It  appeara  atill  earlier  to  have  been  called  Mam- 
RB,  probably  from  the  name  of  Abiaham^s  Amoritiah 
aUy  (Gen.  xxiii,  19;  xxxv,  27;  comp.  xiv,  13, 28);  but 
the  **  oak  of  Mamre,"  where  the  patriarch  ao  often  pitch- 
ed  hia  tent,  appeara  to  have  been  not  in,  but  near  He- 
bron. (See  bdow.)  The  chief  intereat  of  thia  dty 
ariaea  from  ita  having  been  the  acene  of  aome  of  the 
moet  remarkable  eventa  in  the  livea  of  the  patriarchSi 
Sarah  died  at  Hebron,  and  Abraham  then  boughi  from 
Ephron  the  Hittite  the  field  and  cave  of  Machpelah,  to 
aerve  aa  a  family  tomb  (Gen.  xxiii,  2-20).  The  cave  ia 
atill  there,  and  the  maaaive  walla  of  the  Haram  or 
moeque,  within  which  it  liea,  form  the  moet  remarkable 
object  in  the  whole  dty.  The  andent  city  Uy  in  a  val- 
ley,  and  the  two  remaining  poola,  one  of  which  at  leaat 


HEBRON 


150 


HEBRON 


existed  in  the  time  of  David,  serre,  with  other  circnm- 
stances,  to  identify  the  modern  with  the  ancient  site 
(Gen.  xxxvii,  14;  2  Sam.  iv,  12).  Much  of  the  life- 
time  of  Abraham,  laaac,  and  Jacob  was  spent  in  this 
neighborhood,  where  they  were  all  entombed,  and  it  was 
ftom  hence  that  the  patriarchal  family  departed  for 
Egypt  by  the  way  of  Beersheba  (Gen.  xxxvii,  14 ;  xlvi, 
1).  Afler  the  return  of  the  laraelitea,  the  city  was  taken 
by  JoBhua  and  given  over  to  Calebś  who  expelled  the 
Anakim  from  its  territories  (Josh.  x,  86, 87;  xiv,  6-15; 
XV,  13-14  -,  Judg.  i,  20).  It  was  aflerwaids  madę  one  of 
the  cities  of  refuge,  and  asaigned  to  the  priests  and  Le- 
▼ites  (Joeh.  xx,  7;  xxi,  11,  13).  Da\ńd,  on  becoming 
king  of  Judah,  madę  Hebron  his  royal  residence.  Herę 
he  reigned  8even  years  and  a  half,  here  most  of  his  sons 
were  bom,  and  here  he  was  anointed  king  over  all  Israel 
(1  Sam.  ii,  1-4, 11 ;  1  Kings  ii,  11;  2  Sam.y,  1,8).  On 
this  extenuon  of  his  kingdom  Hebron  oeased  to  be  suffi- 
dently  central,  and  Jerusalem  then  became  the  metrop- 
olia It  is  possible  that  this  step  excited  a  degree  of 
discontent  in  Hebron  which  afterwards  encouraged  Ab- 
aalom  to  raise  in  that  dty  the  standard  of  rebeUion 
against  his  father  (2  Kings  xv,  9, 10).  Hebron  was  one 
of  the  places  fortified  by  Rehoboam  (2  Chroń,  xi,  10) ; 
and  after  the  exile,  the  Jews  who  retumed  to  Palestine 
oocupied  Hebron  and  the  surrounding  village8  (Neh.  xi, 
15).  Hebron  is  not  named  by  the  prophet«,  nor  in  the 
New  Testament ;  but  we  leam  from  the  Apocrypha,  and 
from  Josephus,  that  it  came  into  the  power  of  the  £dom- 
ites,  who  had  taken  possession  of  the  south  of  Judah, 
and  was  recoverod  from  them  by  Judas  Maccabteus  (1 
Haoc  V,  65 ;  Josephus,  A  nt,  xii,  8, 6).  During  the  great 
war,  Hebron  was  seized  by  the  rebel  Simon  Giorides,  but 
was  recaptured  and  bumt  by  Oerealis,  an  ofiicer  of  Ve»- 
pasian  (Joseph.  War,  iv,  9;  vii,  9).  Josephus  describes 
the  tombs  of  the  patriarchs  as  exi8ting  in  his  day;  and 
both  Eusebius  and  Jerome,  and  all  8ubsequent  writers 
who  mention  Hebron  down  to  the  time  of  the  Crusades, 
speak  of  the  place  chiefly  as  oontaining  these  sepulchres. 
In  the  course  of  time,  the  remarkable  structure  endońng 
the  tombs  of  Abraham  and  the  other  patriarohs  was 
called  the  **  Castle  of  Abraham ;"  and  by  an  easy  transi- 
tion,  thb  name  came  to  be  applied  to  the  dty  itsdf,  till 
in  the  time  of  the  Crusades  the  names  of  Hebron  and 
Castle  of  Abraham  were  used  interchangeably.  Hence, 
as  Abraham  is  also  distinguished  among  the  Moslems  by 
the  appellation  of  eUKhuUl,  « the  Friend"  (of  God),  this 
latter  epithet  became,  among  them,  the  name  of  the 
city;  and  they  now  know  Hebron  only  as  el-Khulil 
(Robin9on*s  Besearches,  ii,  456).  Soon  after  the  Crusa- 
den  had  taken  Jerusalem,  Hebron  also  appears  to  have 
passed  into  their  hands,  and  in  1100  was  bestowed  as  a 
fief  upon  Gerhard  of  Avennes;  but  two  years  after  it  is 
described  as  being  in  ruins  (Wilken,  Gesch,  der  Kreta,  ii, 
44;  Saewulf,  Peregrin,  p.  269).  In  1167  Hebron  was 
raised  to  the  rank  of  a  bishopric  (VVilL  Tyr.  xx,  8),  and 
the  title  of  bishop  of  Hebron  long  remained  in  the  Rom- 
ish  Church,  for  it  occurs  so  late  as  A.D.  1865.  But  it 
was  merely  nominał;  for  after  the  capture  of  Jerusalem 
by  Saladin  in  1 187,  Hebron  also  reverted  to  the  Moslems, 
and  has  ever  dnce  remained  in  their  possession.  In  the 
I  modem  histoiy  of  Hebron,  the  most  remarkable  circum- 
stance  is  the  part  which  the  inhabitants  of  the  town  and 
district  took  in  the  rebeDion  of  1834,  and  the  heavy  ret- 
ribution  which  it  brought  down  upon  them.  They  held 
out  to  the  last,  and  gave  battle  to  Ibrahim  Pasha  near 
Solomon's  Pools.  They  were  defeated,  but  retired  and 
intrenched  themselves  in  Hebron,  which  Ibrahim  car- 
ried  by  storm,  and  gave  over  to  sack  and  piUage.  The 
town  has  not  yet  recovered  from  the  blow  it  then  sus- 
tained.  In  the  14th  century  pilgrims  passed  from  Sinai 
to  Jerusalem  direct  through  the  dcsert  by  Beersheba 
and  Hebron.  In  the  following  century  this  route  seems 
to  have  been  abandoned  for  that  by  Gaza ;  yet  the  pil- 
grims sometimes  took  Hebron  in  their  way,  or  visited  it 
from  Gaza.  The  tnvellerB  of  that  period  describe  as 
existing  here  an  immense  chaiitable  establishment,  or 


hospitali  where  1200  loayes  of  bread,  beddes  oil  and  oth- 
er condiments,  were  daily  distributed  to  all  omdctb,  wiih- 
out  distinction  of  age  or  rdigion,  at  the  annoal  expeDie 
of  20,000  ducata  Hebron  continued  to  be  oocasiooaDj 
yisited  by  European  trayellers  down  to  the  latter  psrt 
of  the  I7th  century,  but  ftom  that  time  till  the  praent 
century  it  appears  to  have  been  little  frequented  by 
them.  The  prindpal  tnveUen  who  have  been  morę  to- 
cently  thero  are  Seetzen,  Ali  Bey,  Iiby  and  Manglet, 
Poujonlat,  Monro,  Stephens,  Paxton,  Lord  Lindsay,  Rus- 
segger,  Schubert,  Dr.  Robinson,  Dr.  Olin,  De  Stuky, 
Stanley,  etc 

The  town  of  Hebron  lies  k>w  on  tbe  eloping  sides  of  t 
narrow  ralley  (of  Mamre),  surrounded  by  rocky  hiOi 
lliis  is  thought  to  be  the  **  va]ley  of  Eshcol,"  whence 
the  Jewish  spies  got  the  great  bunch  of  grapes  (Nurob. 
xiii,  28).  Its  sides  are  stUl  clothed  with  lttxuriant  vine- 
yards,  and  its  grapes  ąre  conddered  the  finest  in  South- 
ern Palestine.  Groves  of  gray  olive8,  and  some  other 
firuit-trees,  give  rariety  to  the  scenę.  The  vaUcy  niiu 
from  north  to  south ;  and  the  main  quarter  of  the  town, 
surmounted  by  the  lofty  walls  of  the  venerable  Hąran^ 
lies  pkrtly  on  the  eastem  slope  (Gen.  xxx'\'ii,  14;  comp. 
xxiii,  19).  The  bouses  are  all  of  atone,  solidly  bnilt, Hat- 
roofed,  each  having  one  or  two  smali  cupolas.  The  town 
has  no  walls.  The  streets  are  narrow,  seldom  morę  thsn 
two  or  three  yards  in  width ;  the  pavement,  where  one 
exists,  is  rough  and  diflScult.  The  shopa  are  well  fu- 
nished,  better  indeed  than  those  of  towns  of  the  same 
class  in  Egypt,  and  the  commodities  are  of  a  very  simi- 
lar  description.  The  only  display  of  local  manufactores 
is  the  produce  of  the  glass-works,  for  which  the  place 
has  long  been  celebrated  in  these  parta.  GatM  tre 
placed  not  only  at  the  entranoe  of  the  dty,  but  in  diller- 
ent  parts  of  the  interior,  and  are  closed  at  night  for  the 
better  ])reservation  of  order,  as  well  as  to  prevent  com- 
munication  between  the  different  ąuarters. 

Thero  are  nine  mosąues  in  Hebron,  nonę  of  which 
possess  any  arehitectural  or  other  interest,  with  the  ex- 
ception  of  the  mas6ive  structure  which  b  built  over  the 
tombs  of  the  patriarchs.  This  is  esteemed  by  the  Mos- 
lems one  of  their  holiest  places,  and  Chriatians  are  rig- 
orously  exduded  from  it.  The  only  Europeans  who^ 
until  a  late  period,  have  found  their  way  to  the  interior, 
were  Ali  Bey  andGiovanni  Finati,  the  Italian  servant  of 
Mr.  Bankes.  The  best  account  of  it  is  that  furabhed 
by  the  Rev.  Y.  Monro,  who  states  that  '*  the  mosque, 
which  covers  the  cave  of  Machpelah,  and  contains  the 
patriarchal  tombs,  is  a  sąuare  building,  with  little  exter- 
nal  decoration,  at  the  south  end  of  the  town.  Behind  it 
is  ^  smali  cupola,  with  eight  or  ten  windows,  beneath 
which  is  the  tomb  of  Esau,  exGluded  ftom  the  pńvi]ege 
of  lying  among  the  patriarcha.  Ascending  from  tbe 
Street,  at  the  coraer  of  the  mosąue,  you  pass  through  an 
archcd  way  by  a  flight  of  steps  to  a  wide  platform,  it 
the  end  of  which  is  another  short  ascent;  to  the  left  u 
the  court,  out  of  which,  to  the  left  again,  you  enter  the 
mosąue.  The  dimensions  within  are  about  forty  paces 
by  twenty-five.  Immediatdy  on  the  light  of  the  door 
is  the  tomb  of  Sarah,  and  beyond  it  that  of  Abraham, 
ha^ńng  a  passage  between  them  into  the  oourt.  Cone- 
sponding  with  these,  on  the  oppońte  side  of  the  moeque« 
are  those  of  Isaac  and  Rebekah,  and  behind  them  is  a 
recess  fur  prayer,  and  a  pulpit.  These  tombs  resemble 
smali  huta,  'with  a  window  on  each  side  and  folding- 
doors  in  front,  the  lower  parta  of  which  are  of  wood, 
and  the  upper  of  iron  or  bronze  bare  plated.  Within 
each  of  these  is  an  imitation  of  the  sarcophagns  that 
lies  in  the  caye  below  the  mosąue,  which  no  one  is  al- 
lowed  to  enter.  Those  seen  above  resemble  cofflns  with 
P3rramidal  tope,  and  are  covered  with  green  dlk,  lettered 
¥rith  ver8es  ftom  the  Koran.  The  doors  of  these  tombs 
are  left  constantly  open ;  but  no  one  enters  thoee  of  the 
women — at  least  men  do  not.  In  the  noosąne  is  a  balda- 
kin,  Bupported  by  four  colurons,  over  an  octagonal  figurę 
of  black  and  white  marble  inlaid,  around  a  smali  hole  in 
the  pavement,  through  which  a  chain  paaaes  from  the 


HEBRON 


161 


HEBRON 


top<rf  tbeeuMpY  to  a  lamp  oonttoually  buming  to  giye 
dghi  łu  lUe  cave  of  Machpelah,  where  the  actual  ux- 
ooph^gi  Rit   At  the  npper  end  of  the  oouit  is  the 
chief  ptoe  of  pimyer;  and  cm  the  oppońte  side  of  the 
iDoaqiie  iR  two  laiger  tomba,  where  are  depoaited  the 
bodisj  uf  Jaoob  and  Leah>*  {Summer^s  BanMe,  i,  246). 
The  ciTeitsdf  he  does  not  describe,  nor  does  it  appear 
thit  eveii  Moełems  are  admitted  to  it;  for  Ali  Bey  (a 
Sptniani  tnTeUing  as  a  Modem)  does  not  eyen  mention 
the  esre  below  while  describing  the  shrines  of  the 
SMMqn&   John  Sanderson  (A.D.  1601)  ezpressly  says 
that  Dooe  might  cnter,  but  that  persona  might  Tiew  it, 
« ikr  as  the  lamp  allowed,  through  the  hole  at  the  top, 
Mofliems  bdng  fumished  with  moro  light  for  the  pur- 
poK  than  JewB.    At  an  earłier  period,  however,  when 
the  Holy  Land  was  in  the  power  of  the  Chrijtians,  ac- 
cen  wu  not  denied ;  and  Benjamin  of  TudeU  says  that 
the  auoophagi  above  gnnind  were  shown  to  the  gener^ 
ality  ofpilgrims  aa  what  they  desired  to  see;  but  if  a 
ricfa Jer  offeredaii  additional fee,  "an  iron  door  is  open- 
ed,  which  dates  from  the  time  of  our  forefathers  who 
r»t  m  peice,  and,  with  a  buming  taper  in  his  hands, 
the  Tiator  desoends  into  a  first  cave,  which  l8  empty, 
tnrersea  a  second  in  the  same  state,  and  at  last  reaches 
a  thiid,  which  conŁains  six  sepulchres,  thoee  of  Abra- 
ham, Isaac^  and  Jacob,  and  of  Sarah,  Kebekah,  and 
Łeah,  one  oppoate  the  other.    Ali  these  sepulchres  bear 
insaipłioDa,  the  letters  being  engreved ;  thus,  upon  that 
of  Abiaham:  *Thb  is  the  sepulchre  of  our  father  Abmr 
ham,  opon  whom  be  peace ;'  even  so  upon  that  of  Isaac 
aad  an  the  other  sepulchres    A  hunp  bums  in  the  cave 
aad  opon  che  sepakhres  continually,  both  night  and 
day;  md  you  there  see  tubs  (illed  with  the  bones  of  Is- 
adites;  for  it  is  a  custom  of  the  house  of  Israel  to  bring 
hither  the  bones  and  relics  of  their  forefathers,  and  leave 
tbem  tbere,  unto  this  day**  {ftinerary,  i,  77 ;  ed.  Asherj 
Beilin,  ISiO).    The  identity  of  this  place  ¥rith  the  care 
of  Machpelah  is  one  of  the  few  local  traditions  in  Pales- 
tioe  which  even  Dr.  Robinson  suifers  to  pass  without 
dispote,  and  may  therefore  be  taken  for  granted.    M. 
Pterotti,  an  engineer  to  the  pisha  of  Jerusalem,  has 
iately  had  an  opportonity  of  leiaurely  examining  the 
hmUing;  and  in  the  spring  of  the  year  1862  the  prince 
of  Waks  and  his  suitę  were  allowed  to  yisit  the  inte- 
ńn;  of  which  a  description  is  given  in  App.  ii  t4>  Stan- 
yefsLeełure$onłkeJewi*hChttn^liLi:  ''Wereached 
the  aouth-eastem  oomer  of  the  massi  ve  wali  of  inclosure. 
'.  ,Vp  the  steep  flight  of  the  extorior  staircase,  gazing 
c^  at  band  on  the  polished  surface  of  the  wali,  amply 
jostifying  Joaephus*8  acoount  of  the  marble-Uke  appear- 
snoe  of  the  hnge  Stones  which  compoee  it,  we  rapidly 
Knated.    At  the  head  of  the  staircase,  which  by  its 
loofę  aaoent  showed  that  the  platform  of  the  mo8que  was 
<3i  tlie  oppermoet  slope  of  the  bill,  and  therefore  above 
the  level  where,  if  anywhere,  the  sacred  cave  would  be 
finnd,  a  sharp  tum  at  once  bronght  us  within  the  pre- 
cmecB^and  revealed  to  us  for  the  fint  time  the  wali  iVom 
the  inside.  .  .  .  We  passed  at  once  through  an  open 
coort  into  the  moaque.    With  regard  to  the  building 
itadtC,  two  points  at  once  became  apparent.    Firat,  it 
vas  dear  that  it  had  been  originally  a  Byzantine  church. 
To  any  one  acąuainted  with  the  cathedral  of  St  Sophia 
•t  Cooatantinople,  and  with  the  monastic  churches  of 
Mnmt  Athoe,  this  is  erident  from  the  double  narthex, 
or  poctieo,  aad  from  the  four  pillars  of  the  nave.    Sec- 
«adiy,  it  was  dear  that  it  had  been  conyerted  at  a  much 
latcr  period  into  a  nioeque.  ...  I  now  prooeed  to  de- 
sciibe  the  Łombs  of  the  patriarchs,  premising  always 
that  these  tofmbe,  like  all  those  in  Mussulman  moeąues, 
aad,  ind<^,  like  moet  tombs  in  Christian  churches,  do 
aot  pnfess  to  be  the  actnal  plaoes  of  aepulture,  but  are 
■erdj  naonaments  or  cenotaphs  in  honor  of  the  dead 
vbo  lae  beneath.    Eaeh  is  incloeed  with  a  separate 
«hq>d  or  ahrine,  ckned  with  gates  or  railings  similar  to 
tfaoae  wbich  aamround  or  endose  the  special  chapeb  or 
lOTil  tOTube  in  Westminster  Abbcy.    The  flrst  two  of 
thoe  ahńiiea  or  chapels  are  ooDtained  in  the  inner  por- 


tico,  or  narthex,  before  the  entranoe  into  the  actual 
building  of  the  mosąue.  In  the  recess  on  the  right  is 
the  shrine  of  Abraham,  in  the  recess  on  the  lefl  that  of 
Sarah,  each  guaided  by  silrer  gates.  The  shrine  of 
Sarah  we  were  requested  not  to  enter,  as  being  that  of  a 
woman.  A  pall  lay  over  it  The  shrine  of  Abraham, 
after  a  momentaiy  heńtation,  was  thrown  open.  The 
chamber  is  cased  in  marble.  The  so-called  tomb  oon- 
sists  of  a  ooffin-like  structure,  about  six  feet  high,  built 
up  of  plastered  stone  or  marble,  and  hung  with  three 
carpets  —  green  embroidered  with  gokL  Within  the 
area  of  the  church  or  moaque  were  shown  the  tombs  of 
Isaac  and  Kebekah.  They  are  placed  linder  separate 
chapels,  in  the  walls  of  which  are  windowe,  and  of  which 
the  gates  are  grated,  not  with  silver,  but  iron  bais. 
Their  aitnation,  planted  as  they  are  in  the  body  of  the 
mosque,  may  indicate  their  Christian  ońgin.  In  almost 
all  Mussulman  sanctuaries,  the  tombs  of  distinguished 
persons  are  placed,  not  in  the  centrę  of  the  building,  but 
in  the  oomers.  To  Rebekah*8  tomb  the  same  decorous 
nile  of  the  exclu8ion  of  małe  ^isitors  iiaturally  applied 
as  in  the  case  of  Sarah*s.  But  on  reąuesting  to  see  the 
tomb  of  Isaac,  we  were  entreated  not  to  enter.  .  .  .  The 
chapel,  in  fact,  oontains  nothing  of  interest;  but  I  men- 
tion this  story  both  for  the  sake  of  the  singular  senti- 
ment  which  it  exprcsocs,  and  also  because  it  well  iUus- 
trates  the  peculiar  feeling  which  has  tended  to  preserve 
the  sanctity  of  the  place— an  awe,  amounting  to  terror, 
of  the  great  peraonages  who  lay  beneath,  and  who 
would,  it  was  supposed,  be  sensitire  to  any  diarespect 
shown  to  their  grares.  and  revenge  it  accordingly.  The 
shrines  of  Jacob  and  Leah  were  shown  in  recesaes,  cor- 
responding  to  those  of  Abndiam  and  Sarah,  but  in  a 
separate  clotater  opposite  the  entnmce  of  the  mosąue. 
.  .  .  It  will  be  seen  that  up  to  this  point  no  mention 
has  been  madę  of  the  Bubject  of  the  greatest  interest, 
namely,  the  sacred  care  itself,  iit  which  one  at  least  of 
the  patriarchal  family  may  poasibly  still  repose  intacŁ — 
the  embalmed  body  of  Jaoob.  It  may  well  be  supposed 
that  to  this  object  our  inquiries  throughout  were  direct- 
ed.  One  indication  alone  of  the  cavem  beneath  was 
yisible.  In  the  interior  of  the  mosąue,  at  the  comer  of 
the  shrine  of  Abraham,  was  a  smali  circular  hole,  about 
eight  inches  acroes,  of  which  one  foot  above  the  pave- 
ment  was  built  of  strong  masoniy,  but  of  which  the 
lower  part,  as  far  as  we  could  see  and  feel,  was  of  the 
liring  rock.  This  cavity  appeared  to  open  into  a  dark 
space  beneath,  and  that  spaoe  (which  the  guardians  of 
the  mosąue  bdieved  to  extend  under  the  whole  plat- 
form) can  hardly  be  any  thing  else  than  the  ancient  cav- 
enr  of  Machpelah.  This  was  the  only  aperture  which 
the  guardians  recogniaed.  Once,  they  sald,  2600  years 
ago,  a  8ervant  of  a  great  king  had  penetrated  through 
aome  other  entrance.  He  desoendcd  in  fuli  poseession 
of  his  laculties  and  of  remaricable  corpiUence ;  he  retum- 
ed  blind,  deaf,  withered,  and  crippled.  Since  then  the 
entrance  was  cloeed,  and  this  aperture  alone  was  left, 
partly  for  the  sake  of  suflering  the  holy  air  of  the  care 
to  escape  into  the  moaąue,  and  be  soented  by  the  faith- 
ful;  partly  for  the  sake  of  allowing  a  lamp  to  be  let 
down  by  a  chain,  which  we  saw  suspended  at  the  mouth, 
to  bum  upon  the  sacred  cave.  We  asked  whether  it 
could  not  be  lighted  now.  *  No,'  they  said ;  *  the  saint 
likes  to  have  a  lamp  at  night,  but  not  in  the  fuli  day- 
light.'  With  that  glimpae  into  the  dark  votd  we  and 
the  worid  without  must  for  the  present  be  satisfied. 
Whether  any  other  entrance  is  known  to  the  Muwid- 
mans  themselves  must  be  a  matter  of  doubt  The  orig- 
inal  entrance  to  the  cave  if  it  is  now  to  be  found  at  all, 
must  probably  be  on  the  southem  face  of  the  hiU,  be- 
tween  the  mosąue  and  the  gallery  containing  the  shrine 
of  Joseph,  and  entirely  obstructed  by  the  ancient  Jew- 
ish  waU,  probably  built  acroas  it  for  this  yery  purpoee.** 
This  account  is  somewhat  at  variance  with  the  results 
of  the  researches  of  M.  Pierotti,  who  states,  in  a  letter  to 
the  London  Times,  April  80, 1862,  ^  The  tnie  entrance  to 
the  patriarchs'  tomb  is  to  be  seen  doae  to  the  western 


HEBRON 


162 


HECKEWELDER 


wali  of  the  encloeiire,  and  near  the  north-west  corner;  it 
is  guarded  by  a  veiy  thick  iron  railing,  and  I  was  not 
allowed  to  go  near  it.  I  obsen^ed  that  the  Muasulmana 
themaelyes  did  not  go  vexy  near  it.  In  the  court  oppo- 
site  the  entranoe-gate  of  the  mosque  there  ia  an  open- 
ing,  throogh  which  I  was  allowed  to  go  down  for  three 
sleps,  and  I  was  aUe  to  ascertain  by  sight  and  touch 
that  the  rock  exists  there,  and  to  condude  it  to  be  about 
iive  feet  thick.  From  the  short  obsenrations  I  coiild 
make  during  my  brief  descent,  as  also  from  the  consid- 
eration  of  the  east  wali  of  the  mosąue,  and  the  little  in- 
fonnation  I  extracted  from  the  chief  santon,  who  jeal- 
ously  guards  the  sanctuary,  I  consider  that  a  part  of  the 
grotto  exist8  onder  the  mosque,  and  that  the  other  part 
ia  wider  the  court,  but  at  a  lower  level  than  that  lying 
under  the  mosque."     See  Machpelah. 

The  court  in  which  the  moeque  stands  is  surroonded 
by  an  extensive  and  lofty  wali,  formed  of  laige  Stones, 
and  strengthened  by  square  buttreases.  This  wali  is  the 
gieatest  antiquity  in  Hebron,  and  eyen  Dr.  Robinson 
suppoees  that  it  may  be  substantially  the  same  which  is 
mentioned  by  Josephus  (Ant,  i,  14 ;  H^ar,  iv,  9,  7),  and 
by  £usebius  and  Jerome  {OnomasL  s.  v.  Arboch),  as  the 
sepulchre  of  Abraham.  A  common  Moalem  tomb  in  the 
neighborhood  of  Hebron  passes  as  the  tomb  of  Abner. 
He  was  oertainly  interred  in  this  city  (2  Sam.  iii,  82); 
and  the  head  of  Ishbosheth,  afler  his  assassination,  was 
deposited  in  the  same  sepulchre  (2  Sam.  iv,  12);  but 
there  is  slight  evidence  in  iavor  of  the  tradition  which 
professes  to  point  out  this  locality  to  the  modem  travel- 
ler.  Besides  this  yenerable  wsJl,  there  is  nothing  at 
Hebron  bearing  the  stamp  of  antiąuity  saye  two  reser- 
yoirs  for  lain-water  outside  the  towiu  One  of  these  is 
just  without  the  southeni  gate,  in  the  bottom  of  the  val- 
ley.  It  is  a  krge  basin  133  feet  square,  and  21  feet  8 
inches  deep.  It  is  built  of  hewn  limestone  of  yery  solid 
workmanship,  and  obvioualy  of  andent  datę.  The  depth 
of  watcr  of  courae  yaries  at  diflerent  times  of  the  year : 
in  l^Iay  it  is  14  feeL  The  descent  is  by  flights  of  steps 
at  the  four  comers,  by  which  the  water  is  brought  up  in 
yessels  and  skins,  and  poored  out  into  troughs  for  the 
ilocks,  or  carried  away  for  domestic  uses.  Just  at  the 
north  end  of  the  main  part  of  the  town  is  another  and 
smaller  pool,  also  oocupying  the  bed  of  the  valley,  and 
measuring  85  feet  by  55,  with  a  depth  of  18|  feet,  con- 
taining  (in  Maj)  7  feet  of  water.  These  dstems,  which 
are  oonnected  with  no  perennial  springs,  and  which  are 
iUled  only  by  the  rains,  seem  (at  least  in  summer)  to  be 
the  main  dependenoe  of  the  inhabitants  for  water,  al- 
though  that  of  the  laiger  pool  is  neither  elear  nor  dean. 
As  t^ese  pools  are  doubtless  of  high  antiquity,  one  of 
them  is  in  all  likelihood  the  "pool  of  Hebron**  over 
which  DtLYid  hanged  up  the  assassins  of  Ishbosheth  (2 
Sam.  iv,  12). 

The  present  population  of  Hebron  bas  not  been  elear- 
ly  ascertained,  but  is  probably  about  5000.  Most  of  the 
inhabitants  are  Moslems,  of  nerce  and  intolerant  char- 
acter.  There  are  no  resident  Christiana.  The  Jews 
amount  to  about  50  families,  mostly  natives  of  diiferent 
countries  of  Europę,  who  have  emigrated  to  this  place 
for  the  purpose  of  ha>ńng  their  bones  laid  near  the  sep- 
ulchres  of  their  iUustrious  ancestors.  They  have  two 
s^nuigogues  and  8everal  schools.  As  usual,  they  have  a 
quarter  of  the  city  to  themselve8,  where  the  streets  are 
narrow  and  filthy,  and  the  houses  mean.  In  a  f^w  in- 
stances,  however,  they  are  in  tolerable  repair,  and  white- 
washcd. 

The  environs  of  Hebron  are  vcry  fertile.  ■  Yineyards 
and  plantations  of  fruit-trees,  chiefly  olire-trees,  cover 
the  valle3r8  and  arabie  grounds ;  while  the  tops  and  sides 
of  the  hilU,  although  stony,  are  covered  with  rich  pas- 
tures,  which  support  a  great  nomber  of  cattle,  sheep, 
and  goats,  constitutuig  an  important  branch  of  the  in- 
dustry  and  wealth  of  Hebron.  The  hill-countiy  of  Ju- 
dah,  of  which  it  is  the  capital,  is  indeed  highly  produc- 
tive,  and  under  a  patcmal  govemment  would  be  capa- 
ble  of  sustaining  a  large  population.    That  it  did  so 


once  is  manifest  ftom  the  great  number  and  extent  of 
ruined  teiraoes  and  dilapidated  towns.  It  is  at  present 
abandoned,  and  cultiyation  ceases  at  the  disCaDoe  of  two 
miles  north  of  the  town.  The  hiUs  then  beoome  oov^ 
ered  with  prickly  and  other  stunted  trees,  which  fumish 
Bethlehem  and  other  villages  with  wood.  About  a  mik 
from  the  town,  up  the  valley,  is  one  of  the  largest  oak- 
trees  in  Palestine.  It  stands  ąuite  alone  in  the  midat 
of  the  yineyards.  It  is  23  feet  in  girth,  and  ita  bnnchea 
coyer  a  space  90  feet  in  diameter.  This,  say  same,  is 
the  yery  tree  beneath  which  Abraham  pitched  his  tent; 
but,  howeyer  tUs  may  be,  it  stiU  bears  the  name  of  the 
patriarch  (Porter'8  Hcuu^ook,  p.  67  sq.)«— Kitto ;  Smith ; 
Fairbaim. 

2.  The  third  son  of  Kohath  the  Leyite,  and  hence 
the  unclc  of  Moses  (Exod.  vi,  18 ;  1  Chroń,  vi,  2, 18;  xv, 
9 ;  xxiii,  12, 19).  B.C.  antę  173a  His  descendants  aic 
called  Hebronites  (Numb.  iii,  27,  etc). 

3.  A  son  of  Afareshah,  and  apparentlr  grandson  of 
Caleb  of  Judah  (1  Chroń,  ii,  42, 43).     B.Ć.  post  1612. 

4.  (Heb.  Ebr<m%  lliąy,  prob.  for  "jl^rsy,  Abdon,  aa 
many  MSS.  read ;  Sept  '^f>(^,  Yulg.  A  bron.)  A  town 
on  the  northeni  border  of  Asher  (Josh.  xix,  28) ;  poa- 
eibly  the  same  (Keil,  CommerU,  in  loc.)  elsewhere  (Josh. 
xxi,  30)  called  Addon  (q.  v.). 

Helnronite  (Heb.  CAefrrom^^^ainnn,  Sept.  Xc/3pi^ 
and  Xc/3paiv/,  Yulg.  Iłebroniia)^  a  designation  of  the  de- 
scendants of  Hebron,  the  third  son  of  Kohath,  who  was 
the  second  son  of  Levi,  the  younger  brother  of  Amiain, 
father  of  Moses  and  Aaron  (£xod.  vi,  18;  Numb.  iii,  19; 
1  Chroń,  ^ń,  2, 18 ;  xxiii,  12).  The  immediate  children 
of  Hebron  are  not  mentioned  by  name  (comp.  £xod.  vi, 
21, 22),  but  he  was  the  founder  of  a  ^'family*'  (nnsApa- 
cAoA)  of  Hebronites  (Numb.  iii,  27;  xxvi,  58;  1  Chroń. 
xxvi,  23, 30, 81)  or  Bene-Hebron  (1  Chroń,  xv,  9;  xxiij, 
19),  who  are  often  mentioned  in  the  enumerations  of  the 
Leyites  In  the  passages  above  cited.  Jeriah  was  the 
head  of  the  family  in  the  time  of  David  (1  Chroń,  xxiii, 
19;  xxvi,  81;  xxiy,  23:  in  the  last  of  these  paasagca 
the  name  of  Hebron  does  not  now  exist  in  the  Hebrew, 
but  bas  been  supplied  in  the  A.y.  from  the  other  lista). 
In  the  last  year  of  David'8  reign  we  ibtd  them  settled  at 
Jazer,  in  Gilead  (a  plaoe  not  elsewhere  named  as  a  Le- 
yitical  dty),  "mighty  men  of  valor"  (b^H  ■•!2),2700  in 
number,  who  were  superintendents  for  the  king  over  the 
two  and  a  half  tribes  in  regard  to  all  matters  sacred  and 
secular  (1  Chroń,  xxvi,  31, 82).  At  the  same  time  1700 
of  the  family  under  Hashabiah  held  the  same  office  fm 
the  west  of  Jordan  (ver.  80). — Smith. 

Hecke'welder,  John  Gottlieb  Erkestcb,  a  dia- 
tinguished  Morayian  missionary  among  the  Indiana  of 
North  America,  born  at  Bedford,  England,  Mar.  12, 1743, 
whare  his  father,  who  had  fled  from  Moravia  for  thfi 
sake  of  religious  liberty,  was  engaged  in  the  seryice  of 
the  Church.  On  the  2d  of  April,  1754, 3*oung  Hecke- 
welder  came  to  America  with  his  parents.  At  the  age 
of  nineteen  years  (1762)  he  accompanied  Christian  Fred> 
erick  Post,  an  Indian  teacher  and  colonial  agent,  to 
the  Tuscarawas  Yalley,  in  Ohio,  where  they  attempted 
to  establish  a  mission  among  the  natives.  This  enter^ 
prise  proying  a  failure,  Heckewdder  labored  for  some 
time  as  the  assistant  of  David  Zeisberger,  on  the  Sos- 
quehanna.  In  the  spring  of  1771  he  joined  this  iUus- 
trious eyangdist  at  Friedenstadt,  on  the  Beayer  C^eck, 
Pa.,  and  for  the  next  fifleen  yeare  shared  all  the  haid- 
ships,  sufferings,  and  triumphs  of  the  Indian  mission,  at 
iu  various  stations  in  Ohio  and  Michigan.  See  Zsta- 
BERGER,  DA\aD.  In  the  course  of  this  period  he  mai^ 
ried  Miss  Sarah  Ohneberg  (July  4, 1780),  at  Salem,  Ohio, 
which  was  probably  the  fint  wedding  ever  ademnised 
in  that  state.  Haying  seyered  his  connection  with  the 
mission  (October,  1786)  on  account  of  his  wife*s  feeUe 
health,  he  was  appointed  (1788)  agent  of  the  **  Sodety 
of  the  United  Brethren  for  propagating  the  Goq)d 
among  the  Heathen"  [see  Kttweiii,  Joum],  and  i 


HEDDING 


153 


HED6E 


repttted  bat  unmeeenful  attempts,  in  ooiifleqiieiioe  of 
the  Indiui  War,  to  8urvey  a  tract  of  land  in  the  Tiuca- 
rama  Yalley,  granted  to  the  Christian  Indiana  by  Con- 
greas  m  an  indemniflcation  for  their  lofleea  in  the  Revo- 
lotioo.  In  1792  and  1798  he  was  twice  iq>pointed  as- 
aistant  peace  commiasioner  by  the  United  States  gov- 
cnunent,  and  was  active  in  aiding  the  other  oommiasion- 
eiB  to  bring  about  a  padfication.  These  humane  efforts, 
howev«r,  proved  abortive,  and  the  war  continued,  end- 
ing  in  the  total  defeat  of  the  Western  tribes.  In  1801 
he  sOtled  at  GnadenhUtten,  Ohio,  and  deroted  himself 
to  the  duties  of  his  agency  until  1810,  when  he  resigned. 
The  rest  of  his  life  he  spent  at  Bethlehem  in  literary  lar 
boią  produdng  two  works^  namely,  An  Account  of  the 
liitloryy  Jftamen,  and  Cutionu  of  tke  Indian  Nations 
wko  om*  mkabiied  Pemtąfleama  and  tMe  neighboring 
SUUa  (Philadelphia,  1818;  UanaL  into  French  by  Du- 
poooeaii,  Paria,  1822, 8vo) ;  and  A  Narradoe  ofthe  Mit- 
ńom  oftke  UnUed  Brtthrm  among  tke  Delaware  and  Mo- 
i«9«m  Indiana  (Philadelphia,  1820).  He  died  January 
31, 1823.  General  Caas  critidsed  his  writings  in  Ihe 
NortA  Amer,  Review,  voL  xxvL  See  also  RondŁhaler, 
Life  o/I/ecbewelder  (Phila.  1847, 12mo).     (E.  de  S.) 

Heddioi;,  Eluaii,  D.D.,  a  bishop  of  the  Methodist 
Epłsoopal  Chorch,  was  bom  at  Pine  Plains,  N.  Y^  June 
7, 1780.     Trained  religiously  by  a  pious  mother,  he  was 
eooTerted  on  the  Yeigennes  Circuit,  Yermont,  in  1798, 
and  in  1800  was  licensed  to  preach.    Ilia  early  labors 
in  the  itinerant  ministry  were  fuli  of  toil  and  privation, 
aad  he  often  met  with  fierce  persecution ;  but  powerful 
rmvals  foUawed.  łus  ministiy,  especially  in  Yermont  and 
New  Hampdiire.    On  the  16th  of  June,  1801,  he  was 
admitted  oo  trial  in  the  New  Yorlc  Annual  Conferenoe, 
and  appointed  to  PUttsbuig  Circuit ;  in  1802  to  Fletcher ; 
in  1803  to  Bridgewater  Circuit,  New  Hampshire ;  after 
which  his  work  as  a  preacher  lay  wholly  in  New  Eng- 
land.    In  1807  he  was  madę  presiding  dder  of  the  New 
Hampshire  District.    The  country  was  mountaiiious, 
newly  settled,  and  poor ;  and  Mr.  Hedding'8  wholo  re- 
oeipu  for  the  first  year  were  $4  25,  besides  his  tnreUing 
ezpensesL    In  1808  he  was  dected  a  delegata  to  the 
Gaiecd  Conference  held  at  Baltimore.     A  plan  for  a 
"dpłegatcd"  General  Conferenoe  was  discussed  by  thts 
body,  and  at  fint  rejected;  a  mpture  seemed  immi- 
nenty  but  a  reconsideration  was  brought  about,  laigely 
throogh  Hedding's  influence,  and  the  plan  was  finally 
adopted.    In  1809  he  was  appointed  to  the  New  Lon- 
don District,  and  in  1810  he  married.     In  the   ten 
yean  before  łus  marriage  he  trayelled  8000  miles  a  year, 
and  preached  nearly  evexy  day.    His  pay  for  this  time 
areraged  $45  per  annum.     ''The  circuits  were  large, 
o(ten  reąuiring  three  to  five  hundred  miles  to  complete 
one  roand,  and  this  round  was  completed  in  from  two  to 
iix  weeks,  dmring  which  a  sermon  was  to  be  preached 
and  a  class  met  daily;  and  often  three  sermons  and 
three  dasses  to  be  attended  on  the  Sabbath.    The  jour^ 
neyi,  too,  were  performed  ...  on  horseback,  through 
raogh  and  miry  ways,  and  through  wildemesses  where 
no  nad  as  yet  had  been  cast  up.    Riyen  and  swamps 
were  to  be  forded.    Nor  eould  the  joumey  be  delayed. 
On,  on,  must  the  itinerant  preas  his  way,  through  the 
dreoching  rains  of  aummer,  the  chilling  sleet  of  spring 
or  automn,  and  the  driving  Uasts  or  piercing  coki  of 
Winter;  and  often  amid  perils,  weatinesB,  hunger,  and  al- 
noit  nakednesa,  carrying  the  Bread  of  Life  to  the  lost 
ind  perishing.   And  then,  when  the  day  of  toil  was  end- 
cd,  in  the  ereviced  hut  of  the  frontier  settler,  the  weaiy 
ilineraat,  among  thoae  of  kindred  hearts  and  sympathies, 
fcmd  a  oonfial  thoogh  humble  place  of  repose.**  .... 
*^f«  twenty-four  years  before  his  election  to  the  epis- 
n^Mcy  he  reoeiyed  hia  annual  appointmenta  at  Confer- 
cwe,  and  pmeecated  the  duties  anigned  him  on  circiuts, 
ud  itationsy  and  piesiding  eUlers*  districts.    The  fields 
«f  Ids  Ubor  lay,  after  the  first  few  years,  whoUy  in  the 
Hew-England  States;  and  when  the  New-England  Con- 
fcRoee  was  separated  fiom  New  York,  he  be^me  iden- 
tiied  with  ibat  wwk.    In  the  introductioa  and  estab- 


lishment of  Methodism  in  New  England— itself  one  of 
the  most  romantic,  as  it  is  perhaps  the  best  recorded 
portion  of  Methodist  history— he  was  an  active  and  most 
efBcient  agent,  and  in  its  stirring  scenes  and  forlom  but 
heroic  labors  he  spent  the  flower  of  his  manhood ;  and 
upon  it,  no  doubt,  he  left  the  impress  of  his  own  great 
spirit,  which  remains  his  noblest  and  most  enduring 
monument."  From  1808  to  1824  he  was  a  delegate  to 
ereiy  Genersl  Conference,  and  was  alwaj-s  emiiient  in 
influence  and  power  at  the  scssions  of  that  body.  In 
the  "  Presiding  Elder  Que8tion"  at  the  Confcrences  of 
1820  and  1824,  he  stood  with  those  who  fayored  the 
election  of  presiding  elders  by  the  Conferences;  but  his 
zeal  in  the  cause  never  degenerated  into  rashness,  or  be- 
came  liable  to  the  charge  of  disloyalty.  In  1824  he  was 
elected  lushop.  He  aocepted  the  oflice  with  great  reluo- 
tance,  and  fiUed  it  with  the  most  distiuguished  ability 
and  aooeptance  for  26  years.  *'  In  the  exercŁBe  ofthe  epis- 
copal  functions  he  developed  rare  qualiflcations  as  a  pre- 
siding oflioer,  and  especially  as  an  expounder  of  ecclesi- 
astical  law.  The  soundness  of  his  yiews  upon  the  doc- 
trines  and  disdpline  of  the  Church  was  so  fuUy  and  so 
unireraally  oonoeded,  that  in  the  end  he  became  almost 
an  oracie  in  these  respects,and  his  opinions  are  regaided 
with  profound  reneration.  As  a  theologian  and  dirine, 
his  y\ew8  were  comprehensire,  logical,  and  well  mattired. 
Not  only  had  they  been  elaborated  with  great  care,  but 
the  analysis  was  very  distinct;  and  the  succcssiye  steps 
were  not  only  clearly  deflried  in  the  original  analysis, 
but  distinct  even  in  the  minutiie  of  their  detail.  His 
discourses  were  after  the  same  pattem — ^an  examplc  of 
neatness,  order,  perspicuity,  and  completeness.  From 
the  year  1844,  age  and  increasing  inflrmities  compelled 
him  to  seek  relief  from  the  lvetLvy  burden  of  labor  he 
had  previously  preformed,  and  his  visits  to  the  Annual 
Conferences  became  less  freąuent.  Yet  his  labors  and 
responsibilities  were  still  rery  great.  He  was  almoet 
inceaeantly  sought  unto  by  ministers  in  almost  every 
part  of  the  United  States  for  counsel  and  assistance,  and 
ibr  information  upon  points  of  ecclesiastical  law  and  in  the 
administration  of  discipline."  In  1860  he  had  a  neren 
attack  of  acute  disease,  but  he  partially  recovered,  and 
lingered,  after  suffering  severe]y,  until  the  9th  of  April, 
1852,  when  he  died  in  peace  and  triumph  at  his  home  in 
Ponghkeepńe.  His  intellect  siiflered  ndther  weakness 
nor  obscuration  to  the  last.  *' About  three  o'clock  in  the 
morning,  a  change  took  place  betokening  the  near  ap- 
proach  of  death.  Early  in  the  moming  his  sufierings 
were  great ;  his  extremities  were  cold,  and  his  death  ag- 
ony  was  upon  him;  but  his  intellectual  powers — con- 
sdousnesB,  perception,  memoiy,  reason,  were  unaflected. 
Several  Christian  friends  witnessed  his  dying  struggles, 
and  the  glorious  triumph  of  his  abiding  faith.  The  Rey. 
M.  Richardson  came  in,  and  inquired  whether  his  pros- 
pect  was  elear ;  he  replied  with  great  emphasis,  *  Oh 
yes,  ife$t  ybsI  I  haye  been  wonderfully  sustained  of 
late,  beyond  the  usual  degree.*  After  a  pause,  he  add- 
edj*Itrust  m  Christ j  and  he  doee  not  disappoint  me,  I 
fid  Ańn,  /  enjoy  him,  and  I  look/orward  to  <m  inherU- 
ance  m  hu  Idn^dom^ ''  A  fiUl  acoount  of  the  labors  of 
this  great  and  good  man  will  be  found  in  the  Life  and 
Times  ofthe  Her,  E,  Hedding,  D.D^  by  D.  W.  Clark,  D.D. 
(New  York,  1855,  8vo ;  reviewed  by  Dr.  Curry  in  the 
Methodist  Ouarterly,  Oct.  1856) ;  see  also  Steyens,  His- 
tory ofthe  Methodist  Episcopcd  Church;  Sprague,  An- 
nalSf  yii,  354 ;  North  A  merican  iSertetc,  lxxxii,  349. 

Hedge,  the  rendering  in  the  A.  Y.  (besides  deriya- 
tiyes  ftom  TjlD  or  TjrCł  rendered  as  a  rerb)^  1,  of  three 
words  from  the  same  root  p^J),  which,  as  well  as  their 
Greek  eąuiyalent  (^pay/ió^),  denotes  dmply  that  which 
surrounds  or  encloses,  whether  it  be  a  stone  wali  (*^l7&j 
ffe'dery  Proy.  xxiy,  31 ;  Ezek.  xlii,  10)  or  a  fence  of  other 
materials.  ^'it,  gader',  and  ^^^f*  gederah^  are  used 
of  the  hedge  of  a  yineyard  (Numb.  xxii,  24 ;  Psa.  lxxxix, 
40;  1  Chroń,  iy,  23) ;  and  the  latter  is  employed  to  de- 
sciibe  the  wide  waUs  of  stone,  or  fenoea  of  thon,  whidi 


HED6E 


164 


HEERMANN 


ierred  as  a  shdter  for  sheep  in  winter  and  summer 
(Namh  xxxii,  16).  The  stone  walla  which  Borround 
the  sheepfoldfl  of  modem  Palestine  are  fceguently  crown- 
ed  witb  sharp  thoms  (Thomson,  Lcmd  and  Book,  i,  299), 
a  custom  at  least  as  ancient  as  the  time  of  Homer  {Od, 
xlv,  10),  when  a  kind  of  prickly  pear  (_axipSoc)  was 
used  for  Łhat  purpose,  as  well  as  for  the  fences  of  com- 
fields  at  a  later  i)eriod  (Arist  EccL  855).  In  order  to 
protect  the  yineyards  from  the  rarages  of  wild  beasts 
(Psa.  lxxx,  12),  it  was  customary  to  surround  them  with 
a  wali  of  loose  stones  or  mud  (Matt.  xxi,  88;  Mark  xii, 
1),  which  was  a  favorito  haunt  of  serpents  (Ecdes.  x,  8), 
and  a  retreat  for  locusts  finom  the  cold  (Nah.  iii,  17). 
Such  walls  are  described  by  Maundrell  as  surrounding 
the  gardens  of  Damaacus.  '^They  are  built  of  great 
{ueces  of  earth,  madę  in  the  fashion  of  brick  and  hard- 
ened  in  the  sun.  In  thetr  dimensions  they  are  each 
two  yards  long  and  somewhat  morę  than  one  broad,  and 
half  a  yard  thick.  Two  rows  of  these,  placed  one  upon 
another,  make  a  cheap,  expedttioii8,  and,  in  this  dry 
comitry,  a  durablc  wali"  (Karljf  Travtla  in  Pal  p.  487). 
A  wali  or  fence  of  this  kind  is  clearly  distinguished  in 
Isa.  V,  5  from  the  tangled  hedge,  2,  ns^lisp,  mesukah' 
(MS^Cp,  Mic.  vii,  4),  which  wrj  planted  as  an  addition- 
al  safeguard  to  the  rineyard  (comp.  Ecclus.  xxviii,  24), 
and  was  composed  of  the  thomy  shrubs  with  which 
Palestine  abounds.  The  prickly  pear,  a  species  of  cac- 
tus,  so  frequently  employed  for  this  purpose  in  the  East 
at  present,  is  believcd  to  be  of  comparatively  modem  in- 
troduction.  The  aptness  of  the  comparison  of  a  tangled 
hedge  of  thora  to  the  difficulties  which  a  slothful  man 
oonjures  up  as  an  excuse  for  his  inactivity  will  at  once 
be  recognised  (Prov.  xv,  19 ;  comp.  łlos.  ii,  6).  The 
narrow  paths  between  the  hedges  of  the  vineyards  and 
gardens,  '*  with  a  fence  on  this  side  aud  a  fcnce  on  that 
aide*'  (Ńumb.  xxii,  24),  are  distinguished  from  the 
'*  highways,"  or  morę  frequented  tracks,  in  Lukę  xiv,  23 
(Hackett,  lUustra,  of  Scripture,  p.  166;  Trench,  On  the 
ParcMes,  p.  193).— Smith,  s.  v. 

Hedge,  ŁeTi,  LL.D.,  a  professor  in  Harvard  Uni- 
versity,  was  bom  in  1777  at  Hardwick,  Mass.  Ho  grad- 
uated  at  Harvard  UntverBity  in  1792.  **  His  whole  life, 
from  his  childhood,  may  be  said  to  have  been  connected 
with  the  UntverBity.  In  1795  he  was  appointed  tutor, 
and  Bubseąuently  recetved  the  appointment  of  perma- 
nent  tutor;  in  1810  he  was  madę  college  professor  of 
logie  and  metaphysics;  and  in  1827  he  was  transferred 
to  the  Alford  professorship  of  natural  religion,  morał 
philosophy,  and  civil  polity.  In  1830  he  was  compelled 
by  an  attack  of  paraljrsia  to  resign  his  position.  He 
died  Jan.  3, 1844.  He  is  remembered  by  many  pupils 
as  a  faithful  instractor  and  kind  friend.**  He  publishcd 
a  *<  System  of  Logic"  (1818, 18mo),  which  passed  through 
8everal  editions,  and  bas  been  translated  into  German. 
He  was  the  father  of  Dr.  F.  H.  Hedge,  an  eminent  Uni- 
tarian  minister.— CA  rufton  £xammer,  xxxvi,  299. 

Hedlo,  Gaspar  or  Caspar,  one  of  the  early  Ger- 
man Reformers,  was  l)oro  at  Ettlingen,  Badcn,  in  1494. 
He  studied  theology  at  Freiburg  and  Basie,  where  in 
1519  he  sustaincd,  in  presence  of  Capito,  the  theses  af- 
terwards  printed  under  the  title  Condusiones  ex  Ecan- 
ffelica  Scripfura  et  reieri  ufritugue  lingua  theologia  mu- 
łuatcu  disp.  Cttspar  Ifedio  (1519,  foL).  They  are  24  in 
number,  treatmg  on  the  attributes  of  God  and  predesti- 
nation,  and  evince  a  decided  tendency  towards  the  Ref- 
ormation.  In  1520  he  began  to  conespond  with  Lu- 
ther  and  Zwingle ;  in  the  same  year  he  was  called  to 
Mentz  on  the  rocommendation  of  Capito,  and  was  madę 
court  preacher  and  vicar  to  the  archbbhop.  He  resign- 
ed  his  officcs  in  1523,  and  retired  to  Strasburg.  The 
chapter  of  that  city  offered  him  the  pulpit  of  the  cathe- 
dral,  but  the  bishop  refused  to  confirm  the  offer  until 
Hedio  had  promised  to  confine  himself  to  preaching  the 
Word  of  God.  His  preaching  was  veiy  popular,  because 
it  was  eimple  and  BiblicaL  He  was  naturally  timid, 
and  incapable  of  taking  a  leadlng  part  in  the  religious 


movement  then  going  on;  but  his  sendoes  as  ooadjntor 
to  Bucer  and  Capito  in  consolidating  the  Beformation  in 
Strasbuig  were  very  great.  In  1551  he  was  sent,  with 
Lenglin  and  SdU,to  confer  with  the  Gemum  theokgiaos 
on  the  snbject  of  the  Confession  of  Faith.  He  died  at 
Strasburg  Oct.  17, 1552.  Among  his  writings  are  Chroń' 
ioon  Gertnamcum^  oder  Beachr,  aller  altem  chriślL  Kirchtu 
bit  cmfi  Jahr  1545  (Strasb.  1530, 8  vols.  fuL)  i—8marag- 
di  abbaHa  CommentarU  in  EramgeUa  et  EpistolaSf  which 
he  translated  himself  into  German : — Ckromcon  aUKUit 
Urspergenńs  correctutn,  et  Paraiipomena  addita  ab  tamo 
1280  ad  ann.  1587,  translated  alao  into  Geraian  by  him- 
self :—5fflr«nf»aB  Ph,  ifelanckthams,  Mart,  Bueeri,  Gom/k 
Hedumis  et  aliorum  de  pace  EcdesuB,  ann,  1534  (1607, 
8^*0).  Melchior  Adam  considers  him  alao  as  the  trans- 
lator of  the  histories  of  Eusebius,  Hegeaippus,  and  Joe^ 
phus,  and  other  worka.  See  Melchior  Adam,  ViŁa  Cer- 
manorttm  Philoeopkorum  (Heidelberg,  1615-1620, 4  yoIs. 
8vo),  i,  1 16 ;  Haag,  La  France  Protettanłef  Hoefer,  S<mv, 
Biog.  Generale,  xxiii,  718.     (J.  N.  P.) 

HedBchra  or  Hedjra.    See  Hbgira. 

Heduosmon.    See  Mint. 

Hedwig,  St.,  was  the  daughter  of  Agnes  and  Ber- 
thold,  duke  of  Carinthia.  She  marńed  Herjy,  dnke  of 
Poland  and  Silesia,  by  whom  she  had  three  sona  and 
three  daughters.  They  afterwards  madę  a  vow  of  cha»- 
tity.  Henry  becoming  priest  and  subseąuently  bishop, 
while  Hedwig  entered  a  Cisterdan  convenŁ  near  Treb- 
nitz,  without,  however,  taking  the  veiL  She  died  there 
Gctober  15, 1248,  and  was  buried  in  the  convent  She 
was  canonizcd  by  pope  Clement  lY  in  1267  (or  1268). 
She  b  commemorated  on  the  17th  of  October.  See  Ar* 
naud  d'AndiUy,  Vie  dea  Sainie  iUtutree;  Hoefer,  lYotcr. 
Biog,  Generale,  xxiii,  728. 

Heerbrand,  Jakob,  a  Lutheran  theologian,  was 
bom  at  Giengeu  Aug.  12, 1521.  Alter  studying  at  Ulm 
and  Wittenberg,  he  was  ordained  at  Tubingen,  from 
whence  he  was  banished  for  objecting  to  the  Interim; 
but  he  was  soon  recalled,  and  madę  pastor  of  Herren- 
beig.  In  1551,  duke  Christopher  sent  him  as  one  of  ihe 
theological  delegates  to  the  Council  of  Trent  Charles, 
prince  of  Baden,  employed  him  in  refomaing  the  church- 
es  in  his  dominions,  and  in  1560  he  was  chosen  professor 
of  diviłuty  at  Tubingen,  where  he  died  May  22, 1600. 
Of  his  works,  which  are  numeroua  both  in  German  and 
Latin,  the  prindpal  is  Compendium  Theologiee  (Tubin- 
gen, 1578,  foL,  oilen  reprinted),  a  work  which  long  held 
its  place  as  a  text-book.  The  negoUations  between  the 
Tubingen  theologians  of  that  time  and  the  patriarch  of 
Constautinople  caused  this  compend  to  be  translated 
into  Greek  (by  M.  Crusius),  and  to  be  sent  to  Constanti- 
nople.  The  Greek  traslation  was  publishcd,  together 
with  the  original,  at  Wittenberg  in  1782.  His  oppo- 
nents  used  to  cali  him,  on  acoount  of  his  polcmical  zeal, 
Hollbiand  ("heU-fire").  .  See  Melchior  Adam,  Vii,  The- 
ologorum,\,ld7 1  Hook, EccLBiogrc^jf,vo\.Y,;  Heccog, 
Real-Encykhp,  v,  627. 

Heermann,  Joiiann,  a  Sileaian  Protestant  pastor 
and  hymn  writer,  was  bom  at  Rauten,  Silesia,  OcL  U, 
1585.  At  school  he  displayed  early  talent  In  1611  he 
became  pastor  at  Koben.  During  the  Thirty  Years* 
War  Silesia  was  the  seat  of  war  and  plunder,  and  Heei^ 
mann  was  oflen  obliged  to  conceal  himself  to  saTe  his 
life.  He  gave  up  his  pastorał  charge  at  Koben  in  1638, 
and  died  Fcb.  17, 1647.  In  the  height  of  his  tronbles 
in  1680,  he  published  a  volume  of  hynms  under  the  title 
Deroti  Mueiea  Cordis,  and  his  producUons  afterwards 
were  v«*ry  numerous.  HeenDann's  hymns  are  **  distin- 
guished by  great  depth  and  tendemeas  of  feeling,  by  an 
intense  love  of  the  Saviour,  and  by  humility,  while  in 
form  they  are  sweet  and  muaicaL"  Many  of  them  aro 
still  in  use  in  Germany,  and  some  have  been  tianslatod 
into  EngUsh.  Two  of  them— ''A  Song  of  Teara"  and 
^*A  Song  of  Comfort"  —  together  with  8everal  hymns 
written  during  his  last  illneas,  are  given  in  Winkwoith, 
ChrieHan  8iinger$  of  Germany,  p.  197  •q,.  with  a  i 


HE6AI 


155 


HE6EL 


of  thc  life  of  Heermaim.  Othen  are  giv«n  in  Mi« 
Winkworth,  Lyra  Germaniea,  and  in  Schaff,  Ckrist  in 
Song  (N.  York,  1969).  A  selection  fiom  hia  hymns,  in 
German,  raay  be  foimd  in  Wackemagel,  HeermamCs 
geittUeke  Lieder  (Stattgaidt,  1856).  Of  his  other  works 
we  meation  Iłeptaloffm  ChritH  (on  the  8even  words  on 
tbe  croes),  Brealaii,  1619 ;  new  ediu  Berlin,  1856. 

He'e^  (Heh.  Hegtt^,  ^yn^  perh.  eunuchy  Esth.  ii,  8, 
15;  Sept.  rat^Yulg.  Egau)ot  He^gd  (Heb.  id.  K^n, 
idem,  Eath.  ii,  3;  Sept.  omitSjYuIg.  Egeut),  the  eunuch 
ha\'ing  charge  of  the  harem  of  Xerxc8,  and  the  prepa- 
ration  of  the  females  aought  as  concubinea  fur  him. 
aa  479.  Winer  (  Wdrterb,  a.  v.)  thinks  he  may  be  the 
same  with  llegicu  ('HymiO,  who  is  mentioned  by  Cte- 
siaa  {PereeuMy  24)  as  present  at  the  check  of  the  Persian 
anny  at  Thermopyls. 

Hegel,  Gboro  Wilhelm  Fricdbich,  the  greatest 
of  Dsodem  German  metaphysidans.  The  following 
sketch  of  his  life  is  modified  from  the  Engłish  Cydopa- 
dUju  He  was  born  at  Stuttgardt  Aug.  27, 1770,  and  was 
edncated  at  the  gymnasium  of  his  native  city.  From 
1788  to  1798  he  studied  at  Tubingen,  where  he  had  for 
hia  dass-feUow  the  illustrious  Schelling;  and  where  he 
acąnired  not  only  a  knowledge  of  the  history  of  philoso- 
phy,  but  also  a  thorough  acąiiaintance  with  the  natu- 
nil  and  poUtical  sdencea.  Upon  being  admitted  doctor 
in  pbUasophy,  he  accepted  an  engagement  as  priyate 
tator,  in  which  capadty  he  lived  for  aome  years,  first  in 
SwiŁzeiland,  and  aflerwards  at  Frankfort-on-the-Main, 
ontil,  OD  the  death  of  his  fiather  in  1800,  he  was  enabled, 
by  the  inheritanoe  of  a  smali  patńmony,  to  devote  him- 
self  to  tbe  stody  of  philoeophy.  He  aocordiiigly  pro- 
ceeded  to  Jena,  where  ScheUing  was  teaching  his  sys- 
tem of  "  Abaolute  Identity,"  of  which  Hegel  was  at  this 
period  one  of  the  warmest  partiaans.  **HeTe  he  com- 
posed  his  first  philosophiod  work,  entitled  Utber  die 
Differenz  der  Fickte^tchen  und  SckeUing^schen  I  fiilotophie 
(On  the  Difference  of  the  Systems  of  Fichte  and  Schel- 
ling);  which  treatiae,  notwithstanding  the  sincerity 
with  which  Hegel  then  advocated  the  yiews  of  the  lat^ 
ter,  oontained  the  germ  of  that  disscut  which  was  afler- 
waida  expanded  into  a  peculisr  theoT}'.  He  was  also 
auodated  with  ScheUing  in  conducting  the  KritiscKe 
Jcmmal  der  PkiloBophie  (Critical  Journal  of  Science) ; 
and  among  the  most  important  of  the  artides  contribu- 
ted  by  him  is  that  ^  On  Faith  and  Science,"  which  con- 
tains  a  luminoos  review  of  the  doctrincs  of  Kant,  Jacobi, 
and  Fichte,  whose  several  systems  are  represented  aa 
nothing  morę  than  so  many  forms  of  a  purely  subjectiye 
phiksophy.  In  1806,  when  ScheUing  went  to  WUrz- 
bufg,  Hegel  was  appointed  to  supply  his  plaoe  as  lectu- 
icr.  Now  for  the  first  time  Hegel  openly  avowed  his 
diasatisfaction  with  the  system  of  ScheUing.  The  dif- 
fereooe  between  the  ideas  of  the  master  and  disciple  was 
marked  stiU  morę  strongly  in  the  Pheenamenoloffie  des 
Gtittet  (Phenomenology  of  Mind),  which  was  published 
at  BambeiiCt  whither  Hegel  had  retired  after  the  battle 
of  Jena.  This  work  he  used  to  caU  his  *  Yoyage  of 
Dtsoorery,'  as  indicating  the  reseaiches  he  had  passed 
thnugh  in  order  to  arńve  at  a  elear  knowledge  of  the 
tnith.  It  contains  an  aooount  of  the  sevend  grades 
of  development  through  which  the  'self,'  or  'ego,'  pro- 
eeeds:  fiist  of  aU  ftom  conaciousness  into  self-oonscious- 
neas;  next  mto  reflectire  and  active  reason,  from  which 
it  beoomes  philosophical  reason,  self-cognizant  and  self- 
analyzuig,  until  at  last,  rising  to  the  notion  of  God,  it 
raaoifests  itself  in  a  reUgious  form.  The  Łitle  *Phe- 
Domenokigy'  points  out  the  Umits  of  the  work,  which  is 
eonfined  to  the  phenomena  of  mind  as  displayed  in  the 
ekmenta  of  its  immedlate  eziitence,  that  is,  in  experi- 
cnoe.  It  traoes  the  course  of  mind  up  to  the  point 
where  it  recognises  the  identity  of  thought  and  sub- 
ttaace,  of  reason  and  jeality,  and  where  the  opposition 
of  science  and  reaUty  oeases.  Henceforward  mind  de- 
▼dops  itself  as  pure  thought  or  simple  science,  and  the 
KYtnl  Ibrma  it  socoesaiyely  aflsumes»  which  differ  only 


in  their  subject-matter  or  contents,  are  the  objects  of 
logie,  or  '  dialectic'  In  1808  he  was  caUed  to  preside 
over  the  gymnasium  of  NUmbeig.  In  1812  he  pub- 
Hshed  his  Logic  ( WiMenschaft  der  Logik),  which  w^as 
designed,  with  the  *  Phenomenology,'  to  complete  the 
whole  body  of  science.  Hegel  employs  the  term  logie 
in  a  very  extended  sense.  He  does  not  confine  it,  as  is 
usuaUy  the  case,  to  the  account  of  the  abstract  forms  of 
thought  and  the  laws  of  connection  of  ideas,  but  under- 
Btands  by  it  the  science  of  the  self-sufBcient  and  self- 
determining  idea— the  science  of  truth  and  of  reality. 
From  his  fundamental  principle  that  thought  and  sub- 
stance  are  one  and  identical,  it  foUowed  that  whatever 
is  true  of  the  former  is  tnie  also  of  the  latter,  and  oon- 
sequently  the  laws  of  logie  beoome  ontologicaL  From 
this  point  of  view  Hegel  describes  in  this  work  the  prog- 
ress  of  reason ;  how,  by  virtue  of  a  peculiar  and  inher^ 
ent  impulse,  it  passes  conatantly  onwards,  untU  at  last 
it  retums  into  itself.  Thc  generał  merita  of  this  work 
were  at  once  admitted,  and  the  high  powers  of  philo- 
sophical reflection  which  it  evinced  were  acknowledged 
by  the  offer  of  a  professoiBhip  at  Heidelberg  in  1817. 
His  first  course  of  lectures  was  attendcd  by  a  numerous 
and  distinguished  class,  attracted  by  the  profoundneas 
and  origmality  of  his  yiews,  notwithstanding  the  great 
obscurity  of  ha  style.  By  the  pubUcation  of  the  Ency^ 
khpadie  der  philos.  Wisteruckąften  (Encydopiedia  of 
Philosophical  Sciences)  in  1817,  his  reputation  as  a  phi- 
loaopher  was  estabfished,  and  Hegel  was  inyited  by  the 
Prussian  goyemment  to  fiU  the  chair  at  Berlin,  which 
had  remained  yacant  sińce  the  death  of  Fichte  in  1814. 
Tbis  work,  beuig  designed  as  a  manuał  for  his  class, 
takes  a  generał  yiew  of  his  whole  system,  and  exhibit8 
in  the  dearest  manner  the  ultimate  tendency  of  hia 
yiews.  Consideriog  logie  as  the  base  of  aU  ontok>gy, 
and  starting  from  the  idea  in  itself  or  potentiaUy,  he 
considers  it  as  the  essenoe  and  primary  substanoe.  He 
then  examines  thought  as  at  first  esisting  in  itself,  then 
M  other  or  in  naturę ;  next  in  thc  mind  of  the  indiyid- 
ual,  in  a  purely  subjectiye  point  of  yiew ;  and  then  ob- 
jectiyely,  in  its  outward  reaUzation ;  and,  lastly,  as  he 
terms  it,  abeolutely,  that  is,  as  manifesting  itself  in  art, 
religion,  and  płulosophy.  From  1817  untU  death  ter- 
minated  his  career  there  is  nothing  to  relate  in  the  life 
of  Hegel  beyoud  the  constantly  increasing  celebrity  of 
his  lectures  and  the  pubUcation  of  seyeral  works.  *  He 
successiyely  published  the  PhUotophg  of  Jurisprudmoe, 
two  new  editions  of  the  Encydopętdia,  the  first  yolume 
of  the  seoond  edition  of  his  Logic,  and  seyeral  artides  in 
the  AnnaU  ofScieatiJie  CrUicism,  which  he  had  estab- 
lished  as  an  organ  of  his  system,  and  of  its  appUcation 
to  eyery  branch  of  art  and  science"  {£ng,  Cydop.),  He 
died  Noy.  14, 1831,  of  cholera. 

Hegd's  influence  upon  the  philoeophy  and  theology 
of  Germany  has  been  yery  great.  It  is  impossible,  iu 
brief  space,  to  giye  a  fuU  idea  of  the  Hcgelian  system. 
^  The  transcendental  ideaUsm  of  Kant  formed  the  tran- 
sition  from  the  empiricism  of  the  18th  century,  and  ef- 
fected,  as  it  were,  a  oompromise  between  the  andent 
reaUsra  and  the  sceptidsm  of  Hume.  To  the  system  of 
Kant  succeeded  the  pure  and  absolute  idealism  of  Fichte, 
destined  to  be  displaced  in  its  tum  by  ScheUing's  sys- 
tem of  absolute  identity  and  inteUectual  intuition,  which 
was  itself  to  be  further  modified  and  deydoped  by  the 
diałectical  momentum  of  Hegd.  EssentiaUy  the  systems 
of  Hegd  and  ScheUing  are  both  founded  on  the  same 
pruidple,  namdy,  the  absolute  ideaUty  of  thought  and 
bdng;  for  there  is  eyidently  but  UtUe  difference  be- 
tween the  doctrine  of  ScheUing,  which  snpposed  that 
the  human  mind  contained  within  it  the  fulness  of  real- 
ity and  truth,  the  consciousness  of  which  it  may  attain 
to  simply  by  contemplating  its  own  naturę,  and  that  of 
Hegel,  acoording  to  whom  the  ccncrete  notion,  or  the 
reason,  oomprises  within  itself  aU  yerity,  and  that,  in  or- 
der to  arriye  at  the  sdence  thereof,  it  is  only  necessazy 
to  employ  logical  thought,  or  dialectic.  The  difference 
is  purely  a  difference  of  method.    For  the  ńgorous  for^ 


HE6EL 


156 


HEGEL 


malism  of  Fichte,  Schelling  had  mibetitated  a  sort  of 
poedcal  enthuaiasm,  and,  banishing  from  philosophy  the 
scientiiic  fonn  it  had  received  from  Wolff,  had  intro- 
duced  into  it  the  rapturons  mysticism  of  the  intellectual 
intuition.  Hegel,  however,  inaisting  that  the  scientific 
system  is  the  oiily  form  imder  which  truth  can  exiftt, 
re-established  the  rights  and  utility  of  method  by  his 
doctrine  of  the  dialectical  momentom,  or  development 
of  the  idea.  Indeed,  with  Hegel  the  method  of  philos- 
ophy  \s  philosophy  itaelf.  This  he  deflnes  to  be  the 
knowledge  of  the  evoluiion  oftke  conerete.  The  concrete 
Łs  the  idea,  which,  as  a  unity,  is  diveisely  determined, 
and  has  in  itself  the  prmciple  of  its  activity.  The  or^ 
igin  of  the  activity,  the  action  itself,  and  the  result  are 
one,  and  constitute  the  concrete.  Its  movement  is  the 
development  by  which  that  which  esists  merely  poten- 
tially  is  realized.  The  concrete  in  itself,  or  viituaUy, 
must  become  actoal;  it  is  simple,  yet  different.  This 
inherent  contradiction  of  the  concrete  is  the  spring  of 
its  deyelopment.  Hence  arise  differences,  which,  how- 
ever,  ultimately  vanish  into  unity.  There  is  both  move- 
ment,  and  repose  in  the  movement.  The  difference 
scarcely  becomes  apparent  before  it  disappears,  where- 
upon  there  issues  from  it  a  fuli  and  concrete  unity.  Of 
this  he  giyes  the  following  illustration:  the  flower,  not- 
withstanding  its  many  qualities,  is  one;  no  single  qual- 
ity  that  belongs  to  it  is  wanting  in  the  smallest  of  ita 
leares,  and  every  portion  of  the  leaf  possesses  the  same 
properties  as  the  entire  leaf.  He  then  obsenres  that 
although  this  union  of  qualities  in  sensible  objects  is 
leadily  admitted,  it  is  denied  in  immaterial  objects,  and 
held  to  be  irreconcilable.  Thus  it  is  said  that  man  pos- 
sesses liberty,  but  that  freedom  and  necessity  are  mu- 
tually  opposed ;  that  the  one  exc]uding  the  other,  they 
can  never  be  united  so  as  to  become  concrete.  But,  ac- 
oording  to  Hegel,  the  mind  is  in  reality  concrete,  and 
its  qualities  are  liberty  and  necessity.  It  is  by  neoes- 
aity  that  man  is  free,  and  it  u  only  in  necessity  that  he 
experience8  liberty.  The  objects  of  naturę  are,  it  is 
true,  subject  exduBively  to  necesuty ;  but  liberty  with- 
out  necessity  is  an  arbitrary  abstraction,  a  purely  formal 
liberty"  {EnglUh  CtfdopcBtHoy  a.  y.). 

Hegel  "rejccted  the  intellectual  intuition  of  the  phi- 
losophy of  naturę,  and  studied  to  make  philosophy  an 
intelligible  science  and  kńowledge  by  means  of  dialec- 
tics.  He  called  philosophy  the  Science  of  Reason,  be- 
cause  it  is  the  idea  and  consciousness  of  all  esse  in  its 
necessary  deyelopment.  It  is  his  principle  to  include 
all  particular  principles  in  it  Now  as  the  Idea  is  rea- 
son identical  with  itself,  and  as,  in  order  to  be  cognizant 
of  itself,  or,  in  other  words,  as,  in  order  to  be  Belf-exłBt- 
ing  (Jur  sich  «eyn),  it  places  itself  in  oppoeition  to  it- 
self, so  as  to  appear  something  else,  without,  howeyer, 
oeasing  to  be  one  and  the  same  thing;  in  this  case  phi- 
losophy becomes  diyided :  1.  Into  logie  oonsidered  as  the 
science  of  the  Idea  in  and  for  itself.  2.  Into  the  philos- 
ophy of  naturę  considered  as  the  science  of  the  Idea 
representing  itself  extemally  (reason  thrown  out  in  na- 
turę). 5.  Its  third  diyision  is  that  of  the  philosophy  of 
mind,  expre8sing  the  return  of  the  Idea  within  itself, 
after  haying  thrown  itself  without  extemally.  All  log- 
ie, according  to  Hegel,  presenta  three  momentums:  1. 
The  abstract  or  intelligible  momentum,  which  seizes  the 
object  in  its  most  distinct  and  determinate  features,  and 
distinguishes  it  with  precision.  2.  The  dialectic  or 
negatiye  rational  momentum  consists  in  the  annihila- 
tion  of  the  determinations  of  objects,  and  their  transi- 
tion  to  the  opposite  determinations.  8.  The  speculatiye 
momentum  perceiyes  the  unity  of  the  determinations  in 
their  oppoaition.  Such  is  the  method  which  philosophy 
ought  to  follow,  and  which  is  frequently  styled  by  He- 
gel the  immanent  moyement,  the  spontaneous  deyelop- 
ment of  the  conception.  Logic  is  essentially  specula- 
tiye philosophy  becauae  it  considers  the  determinations 
of  thought  in  and  for  itself,  oonsequently  of  concrete 
and  pure  thoughts,  or,  in  other  words,  the  oonceptions, 
with  the  signiiications  of  the  self-subeisting  foundation 


of  an.  The  primaiy  element  of  logie  consists  in  the 
oneness  of  the  subjectiye  and  objective;  this  oneness  is 
the  absolute  science  to  which  the  mind  riaes  as  to  its 
abeolute  truth,  and  is  found  in  the  truth,  that  j^ure  £m« 
is  pure  ootiception  in  iUdf,  and  that  pure  conceptim 
cUÓne  w  iru«  Esse,  The  absolute  idealiam  of  Hegel  haa 
considerable  affinity  with  Scbelling*8  doctrine  of  Iden- 
tity  on  this  point,  but  it  shows  a  elear  depaiture  from  it 
in  the  method.  With  Hegel,  logie  usorps  the  plaoe  of 
what  had  been  preyioualy  styled  Metaphysics  and  Cri- 
tique  of  pure  Reason.  The  first,  and  perhaps  the  most 
suggestiye,  of  Hegel*s  works,  his  Phenomenology  of  the 
Mind,  contains  a  history  of  the  progressiye  deyelopment 
of  the  consciousness.  Instinctiye  or  common  kńowledge 
only  ręgards  the  object,  without  considering  itself.  But 
the  consciousness  contains,  besides  the  former,  also  a 
perception  of  itself,  and  embraces,  according  to  Hegel, 
three  stages  in  its  progress  —  oonscioosneas,  self-oon- 
sciousness,  and  reason.  The  first  represents  the  object 
standing  in  opposition  to  the  Egoj  the  second  the  £!go 
itself,  and  the  third  aocidents  attaching  to  the  Epo,  L  e. 
thoughts.  This  phenomenology  oonstituted  at  fint  a 
sort  of  introduction  to  pure  science,  whereas  later  it 
came  to  form  a  part  of  his  doctrine  of  the  mind.  Pure 
science  or  logie  is  diyided,  Ist,  into  the  log^c  ofEsse  or 
being  (das  Sepi) ;  2d,  intb  the  logie  of  qualified  naturę 
(dcu  Wesen) ;  8d,  into  logie  of  the  ccmoeption  or  of  the 
idea.  The  two  first  constitute  the  objectiye  logie,  and 
the  last  diybion  the  subjectiye  logie,  oontuning  the 
subetance  of  yulgar  logie.  Hęgel  treated  as  fully  of  the 
philosophy  of  right  and  of  art  as  of  the  metaphysical 
part  of  his  system.  According  to  his  yiew,  the  essaOial 
in  man  is  thought;  but  thought  is  not  a  generał  ab- 
straction, opposed  to  the  particular  abstraction ;  on  the 
contraiy,  it  embraces  the  particular  within  itself  (con- 
crete generality).  Thought  does  not  remain  merely 
intemal  and  subjectiye,  but  it  determines  and  renden 
itself  objectiye  through  the  medium  of  the  will  (practi- 
cal  mind).  To  will  and  to  know  are  two  insepatable 
things;  and  the  free-will  of  man  consists  in  the  faculty 
of  appropriating  and  of  rendering  the  objectiye  worid 
his  own,  and  also  in  obeyiug  the  innate  lawa  of  the  uoi- 
yerse,  because  he  wiUs  it.  Hegel  places  the  esistence 
of  right  in  the  fact  that  eyery  exi8tence  in  generał  ia 
the  existence  of  a  free-wilL  Right  is  usually  confound- 
ed  with  morality,  or  with  duty  plaoed  in  oppositum  to 
indination.  There  exiBts,  howeyer,  a  higher  monlity 
raised  aboye  this,  which  bida  us  act  according  to  truły 
rational  ends,  and  which  ought  to  constitute  the  true 
naturę  of  man.  We  find  the  objectiye  deyelopment  of 
this  higher  morality  in  the  State  and  in  history"  (Ten- 
nemann,  Manuał  o/ the  Hittory  of  Philosophy  f  §  424). 

Hegel'8  yiew  of  the  philosophy  of  reli^on  is  thoa 
stated  by  Schwegler :  "All  religions  seek  a  union  of  the 
diyine  and  human.  This  was  done  in  the  crudest  form 
by  (o.)  the  natural  religions  of  the  Oriental  world.  God 
ia,  with  them,  but  a  power  of  naturę,  a  subatanoe  of  na- 
turę, in  comparison  with  which  the  finite  and  the  indi- 
yidual  disappear  as  nothing.  (6.)  A  higher  idea  of  God 
is  attained  by  the  religions  of  spiritual  indiyiduality,  in 
which  the  diyine  is  looked  upon  as  subject — as  an  ex- 
alted  subjectiyity,fu]l  of  power  and  wisdom  in  Judaism, 
the  religion  of  sublimity ;  as  a  drde  of  plastic  diWne 
forms  in  the  Grecian  religion,  the  religion  of  beauty ;  aa 
an  absolute  end  of  the  State  in  the  Roman  religion,  the 
religion  of  the  understanding  or  of  design,  (c.)  The  re- 
yealed  or  Christian  religion  fint  establishes  a  positiye 
reconciliation  between  God  and  the  world  by  beholding 
the  actual  union  of  the  diyine  and  the  human  in  the 
person  of  Christ,  the  God-man,  and  apprehending  God 
as  triune,  L  e.  as  himsdf,  as  incamate,  and  sb  retuming 
from  this  incamation  to  himsdf.  The  intellectual  oon- 
tent  of  reyealed  rdigion,  or  of  Christianity,  is  thus  the 
same  as  that  of  speculatiye  philosophy ;  the  only  differ- 
ence being  that  in  the  one  case  the  content  is  repre- 
sented  in  the  form  of  the  representation,  in  the  form  of 
a  histoiy,  while  in  the  other  it  appean  in  the  focm  of 


HEGEL 


157 


HE6EŁ 


ftlie  coBception"  (Schwegkr,  HisL  ofPkUoMophf,  trenfiL 
hj  Seelje,  ^.  Y.  1864,  i>.  364). 

1^  DOW,  aftor  hmving  acquiied  a  genenl  idea  of  He- 
gers  philcMophical  sjrstem,  we  ask  wbat  solntkrn  that 
•jnton  girea  to  the  ąuestions  which  moet  interest  hu- 
manity ;  what  becomes  in  it  of  a  just  and  merdful  God, 
of  the  indiYidaaUty  and  penonality  of  man,  the  free 
agency  and  moiality  of  his  acta,  hia  hopea  of  another 
Hfe,  of  a  bńghter  fuŁnie,  we  ahall  find  no  aadafactory  ao- 
Bwer.  The  ayatem  daima  to  agiee  eompletely  with  trae 
Cbńatianity/yet  ita  tendcncies  aeem  to  be  pantbeistie 
and  anti-Chriatian.  Hegel  himaelf  oonstantly  aaaerta 
that  hia  philoeophical  syMem  ia  in  no  way  contiadictory 
to  the  Chtiatian  religion,  and  only  differs  fiom  it  in  ita 
ibnna  and  eatpreaaiona.  Yet  in  his  syatem  the  abeolute 
idea,  whoae  eTolntion  conatitutea  both  the  apiritual  and 
the  materiał  worid,  becomes,  in  ita  last  deyelopinent,  the 
mwermii  amd^  the  abaolute  and  infinite  subject;  and 
thia  abaolute  aabject  ia  put  in  the  place  of  God,  who 
thecefore  can  have  no  adf-oonacioua  exiatence  except  in 
finite  and  IndiTidnal  sabjectB.  And  smce  thia  system 
bas  no  subatance  but  the  idea,  no  leality  but  the  dcyel- 
opment  of  the  idea,  and  no  idieolnte  reality  exoept  the 
miad,  which  ia  ita  end,  it  foUowa  that  flnite  and  indi^id- 
nal  anbjecta  tbemaelYes  aie  but  fleeting  fonna  of  the  uni- 
Tenal  mind,  which  ia  their  aubatance.  Wbat  beoomes, 
thcn,  of  the  immortality  of  the  aoul,  which  preauppoeea 
in  it  an  independent  aubatantiality,  a  tnie  penonality, 
aa  undying  indiridnality  ?  And  if  the  univei8al  mind 
be  bot  the  logical  sum  of  finite  minda,  withont  other 
eonacioaaneaB  than  what  it  finda  in  indiriduala,  it  foliowa 
that  pantbeiam  can  only  be  aroided  by  falling  into  athe- 
ism ;  our  penonality  can  only  be  aayed  at  the  expenae 
«f  that  of  God  himaelf.  Hegers  morał  system  seema  to 
iloat  between  two  extreme8,  each  aa  dangerooa  aa  the 
other.  In  either  caae  free  agency  and  morality  appear 
eąnally  endangered.  While  actually  deatroying  all  dia- 
Unctiona— which,  it  ia  tnie,  he  considera  aa  continually 
reproduced  by  uiirenal  modoii,  the  aingle  euating  ac- 
tnality— doea  not  H^gel  at  the  aame  time  obliterate  all 
distinctioo  between  good  and  evł1,  and  destzoy  one  of 
the  surest  pledgea  of  a  futurę  life  ?  If  all  is  but  erolu- 
tion,  the  erolntion  of  a  given  content,  then  all  ia  riitual- 
ly  determined ;  and  fieedom,  though  proclaimed  by  the 
Tery  essence  of  the  mind,  beoomes  necessity,  in  finite  be- 
tngs:  all  that  thęy  oonsider  as  their  own  worlc,  the  ef- 
fKt  of  their  individnal  action,  beoomea  really  but  a  part 
of  the  unirenal  work,  an  eifect  of  the  etemal  acti^ity 
of  the  generał  and  abeolute  mind. 

The  ceaence  of  Hegel*8  religioua  philoeophy  ia  found 
in  the  doctrine  that  the  woild,  indnding  naturę  and  bu- 
manity,  ia  only  the  aelf«manifeatation  of  God.  Such  a 
mtcm,  presented  with  the  wonderful  dialectical  skiU 
that  Hegd  poBscsBed,coold  not  fail  to  exert  a  great  ef- 
iect  opon  the  theology  of  his  age.  Soon  after  be  ooro- 
Bieiiecd  the  pnUication  of  The  Joumal  for  SdenHJic 
Cntiamn  (1817),  the  Hegdian  philoeophy  began  to  show 
iu  power.  Thia  magazine  waa  at  fint  exclnsively  de- 
▼otcd  to  the  exteinal  propagation  of  Hegelianism,  and 
it  added  greatly,  during  He^'s  lifetime,  to  the  mtmber 
of  pioselyteB.  Immediately  after  the  death  of  Hegel 
his  orthodox  foDowen  eflTected  the  pnblication  of  all  his 
woriu  (G.  W.  F.  Hegel'8  Werka,  durdi  einen  Verem  wm 
Fmmdm  du  Verewigłen,  etc,  Berlin,  1834-46, 18  toIs. 
3ii>).  Diapntes  aoon  aroae  in  the  Hegelian  school  con- 
eening  the  Penon  of  God,  the  Immortality  of  the  Soul, 
■od  the  Person  of  Chriat,  which  terminated  in  the  divi- 
■ioa  of  the  school  into  two  camps.  Danmer,  Weisse, 
G<Miel,  Bosenlcranz,  Schaller,  and  othen  (called  the 
rigk  wing),  attempt^  to  connect  the  theistic  idea  of 
God  with  the  common  notion  of  the  divinity  contained 
in  the  Megehan  philoeophy,  and  to  prore  the  former 
fna  the  latter;  whilst  Michelet,  Stianss,  and  othen 
(tbe  left  wing),  maintained  that  the  pantbeistie  idea  of 
God  was  the  only  trae  reault  of  the  Hegelian  prindple, 
iod  npresented  God  aa  the  universal  substance  or  the 
'  nniyene^  whioh  beoomea  fiist  absolutely  eon- 


scious  of  itself  in  humanity.  Goschel,  Heinricha,  Roeen- 
kranz,  Marhcinecke,  and  others,  attempted,  besides,  to 
justify  the  ecdesiastical  idea  of  Christ,  aa  speciflcally  the 
only  God-man,  on  philosophical  grounda,  whereas  Bau- 
er, Gonradi,  Michelet,  Strauss,  and  others,  maintained 
that  the  unity  of  the  diyinity  and  of  humanity  was  not 
reelized  in  one  individual,  but  in  the  whole  of  human- 
ity, 80  that  the  latter  in  reality  is  the  God-man.  Fi- 
nally,  Strauss  and  Feuerbach  (the  extreme  łejt)  derel- 
oped  HegeUanism  into  fuU-blown  atheism  and  infidel- 
ity.  *<  The  Hegelian  school  pretendcd  to  find  an  equiv- 
alent  for  the  objects  of  Christian  faith  and  the  proposi- 
tions  of  Christian  theology  in  the  dogmas  of  their  sys- 
tem. Tbe  latter  wcre  said  to  be  the  pure  and  finał  ren- 
dering of  that  włiich  Christianity  presents  in  a  popular 
foim.  The  subetantial  contents  of  both  were  arened  to 
be  identicaL  The  Trinity,  the  Atonement,  and  the  oth- 
er doctrines  of  the  orthodox  creed  had  now — so  it  was 
claimed— received  a  philosophical  rindication,  and  the 
rulgar  rationalism  which  had  flippantly  impugned  these 
high  m3r8teries  waa  at  length  łaid  Iow.  These  sound- 
ing  pretensions  could  only  mislead  the  undisceming.  A 
phiłosophy  which  denies  the  distinct  personality  of  God, 
and  con8equently  must  regaid  prayer  as  an  absurdity, 
can  by  no  legerdemain  be  identiSed  with  Christian  doc- 
trine. The  appearance  of  the  Li/e  of  Chritt  by  Strauss, 
and  the  subsequent  productions  of  Baur  and  his  school, 
through  the  appKcations  which  they  madę  of  the  He- 
gelian tenets  to  the  New-Testament  history  and  the 
teaching  of  the  apoetles,placedthis  conclusiou  beyond  a 
doubt**  (Faher,  £ttays  on  the  Supematuralj  p.  587). 

It  is  not  to  be  understood  that  Hegers  system  is  now 
umeenaUy  held  to  be  pantbeistie  or  even  anti-Christian 
in  tendency.  An  analysis  and  translation  of  HegeFs 
Phenomenology,  also  Outlmes  of  his  Logic^  are  given  in 
the  Jounk  ofSpec.  Philos.  rob.  i,  ii,  iii  (St.  Liouis,  1868-9), 
by  the  editor,  W.  T.  Harris,  which  joumal  demands  the 
carefuł  study  of  all  who  profess  to  jndge  of  Hegelianism. 
The  points  madę  in  the  Joumal  are  also  summcd  up  by 
a  writer  in  the  Amer,  Ouar,  Ckttrch  Rerine^  Oct  1869, 
who  maintains  not  only  that  HegePs  system  is  not  pan- 
tbeistie, but  that  it  is  the  widest  and  deepest  system  of 
tbought  yet  offered  to  mankind,  and  that,  too,  in  fuli 
harmony  with  Christianity.  We  cite  from  this  article 
the  following  passagcs :  "  To  help  us  to  the  highest  edu- 
cation  of  our  reason  is  the  aim  of  Hegel,  and  this  help 
Lb  the  inestimable  gift  he  offen  to  all  who  will  under- 
stand  liim.  To  him  phiłosophy  is  not  phiłosophy  unless 
it  'stands  np  for  all  those  great  religious  interesta  to 
which  alone  we  riitually  live.'  £very  step  of  his  sys- 
tem is  towards  the  deep  truths  of  the  faith ;  but  these 
things  are  not  merę  dogmas  with  Hegel;  they  appear  aa 
the  k>gicał  resułts  of  the  most  logical  of  systems"  ( Jbtirw 
nal  ofSpeculałire  Phihsophyj  i,  266).  "  In  the  Christian 
reUgion,"^  says  Hegel,  **  God  haa  revealed  himself,  that  is, 
he  bas  given  us  to  undentand  what  he  is;  and  the  po»- 
sibility  of  knowing  him  thus  afforded  us  renden  such 
knowledge  a  duty.  God  wishes  no  narrow-hearted  souls 
or  empty  heads  for  his  children,  but  those  whose  spirit  is 
of  itself,  indeed,poor,  but  rich  in  the  knowledge  of  him, 
and  who  regard  tliis  knowledge  as  their  only  yaluable 
possession"  (Amer,  Ch.  /?«?.  Oct,  1869,  p.  415).  "  They 
who  regard  God  as  negative  unity,  and  the  crcature  not 
aa  self-determining,  these  are  pantheists.  AYith  such  a 
God  we  sbould  only  seem  to  be;  we  should  only  be 
*  modea'  of  that  *  substance.*  But  man,  being  a  self-de* 
termining  creature,  is  bis  own  negatire  unity,  and  hence 
his  immortality.  *  He  cannot  be  a  merę  phase  of  a  high< 
er  being,  for  he  is  essentially  a  reflection  of  that.'  Wt 
are  madę  in  God'8  image,  and  in  him  spiritually  we  seo 
ourselYes:  who  does  not  see,  then,  that  the  highest 
tbought  in  HegeFs  philoeophy  is  only  an  eluddation  of 
the  central  dogma  of  the  Christian  faith.  God  b  thia 
ideał  unity,  and  each  person  of  the  Holy  Trinity  is  that 
one  God  in  his  entirety.  To  sum  up  briefly  the  points 
of  this  comparison :  We  haye  found  that  Hegers  doc- 
trine of  Being  ia  the  direct  conyene  of  the  pantbeistie 


HEGESEPPUS 


158 


HE6IRA 


theory ;  fot  whereas  the  latter  considen  porę  Bdng  iden- 
tical  with  the  Ali,  Hegel  regards  it  as  eqiuvaleiit  to  non- 
entity  Secondly,  pantheiam  has  alwaya  held  fast  to 
the  abstractions  of  the  undentanding,  and  heoce  it  has 
attacked  all  forma  of  Becoming;  bat  Hegel*fl  invincible 
dialeetic  has  demolished  this  strong  position,  and  led  us 
up  to  the  higher  groiind  of  the  concrete  notion.  Thiid- 
ly,  the  pantheistic  view  of  the  Negative  is  abstzact. 
*  Being  alone  is,  and  non-being  is  noL'  But  with  He- 
gel the  ultimate  form  of  the  negatire  is  immanent  con- 
tradiction ;  the  negatire  is  not  a/or  ittelf,  but  out  of  it 
is  oonstituted  the  trae  positive.  (This  leads  to  the  view 
of  the  Uniyersal  as  the  ouly  real,  independent  individ- 
ual,  the  I  Am  that  I  Am.)  Fourthly,  the  true  panthe- 
ists  held  Distinction  to  be  impossible,  while  the  theory 
of  the  materialistic  pantheiats  waa  Atomism,  the  ab- 
stzact and  separate  yalidity  of  Identity  and  Distinction ; 
but  Hegel  leayes  both  theories  far  behind  him  when  he 
penetrates  to  the  inmost  depths  of  the  subject,  and  ar- 
riyes  at  Self-detezmination  as  the  origin  and  prindple 
of  all  distinction  whatever.  (This,  again,  leads  to  the 
self-determination  of  the  Absolute^the  spirituality  of 
Go(L)  Fifthly,  the  unity  of  pantheism  is  a  '  negative 
unity,'  which  annuls  the  independence  of  moltiple  fac- 
tors ;  but  with  Hegel  the  true  unity,  the  unity  of  the 
Absolute,  is  purdy  affirmatire,  subaisting  through  the 
very  independence  of  its  members.  (And  here  we  reach 
a  development  of  the  great  Christian  idea  of  the  Trin- 
ity.)  Here  is  not  pantheism  taking  a  new  dress,  but 
pantheism  receiring  a  flat  contradictioa  upon  its  cardi- 
nal  prindples''  (ibid.  p.  403-4> 

LiteraŁure,— Fot  an  able  artide  on  Hegel's  philoeo- 
phy,  and  its  influence  on  religion  and  theology  in  Ger- 
many, see  Uhrici,  in  Herzog,  Real-Encytlopadie,  v,  629- 
646.  See  also,  besides  the  works  cited  aboye,  Kahnis, 
Ilistory  of  German  Protestantiśm,  p.  196,  244;  Saintes, 
Uistory  of  Rationaiism,  chap.  xiii,  xyiii;  Schaff,  Apos- 
toUc  Chureh,  §  84;  PrinceUm  Reriew,  Oct.  1848,  art.  iy ; 
Moreli,  Hittory  of  Modem  PhUoaopky,  chap.  y. ;  BSh 
liothtca  Sacroy  yiii,  503 ;  Yera,  frUrocUtcHon  a  la  Phih' 
Sophie  de  Hegel  (Paria,  18dd) ;  Haym,  Hegd  und  teiae  Zeii 
(Berlin,  1856);  Chały beus, //utory  of  Phiio$opky  frwn 
KoęU  to  Hegel;  Sibree,  translation  of  Hegd's  Philoaopky 
ofHistory  (London,  Bohn) ;  Sloman  and  Wallon,  trans- 
lation of  HegeUs  Subjectioe  Logic  (Lond.  1855);  Lewes, 
History  of  PkUowphy  (4th  edit.  Lond.  1871, 2  yols.  8vo), 
ii,  581  8q. ;  Stirluig,  Secret  ofHegd,  giying  a  translation 
of  portions  of  IIegd*s  Ijogic  (London,  1865, 2  yols.  8yo) ; 
Saisset,  Modern  Pantheiam^  ii,  11  8q. ;  Rosencranz,  Hegel 
ais  deułscher  Naturalphilosopk  (Leipz.  1870). 

HegesippUB,  one  of  the  earliest  writers  on  Church 
History  (between  A.D.  150  and  180),  was  originally  a 
Jew,  bom  ncar  the  beginning  of  the  2d  oentury.  He 
was  conyerted  to  the  Christian  faith,  and  came  to  Romę 
about  A.D.  168,  where  he  died,  according  to  the  Alexan- 
drine  Chronide,  in  the  reign  of  Commodus,  about  A.D. 
180.  He  wrote  a  collection  of  'Ynofiprjfiara,  or  Memo- 
riaU  of  the  History  of  the  Church,  in  fiye  books,  from 
the  birth  of  our  Lord  to  the  time  of  Eleutherua,  blshop 
of  Korne,  who  suoceeded  Anicetus  in  A.D.  170.  lliis 
work  is  all  lost  except  a  few  fragments  preseryed  by 
Eusebius,  and  one  in  the  Bibliotheca  of  Photius.  Sev- 
eral  extracts  may  be  found  translated  by  Lardner  {Cred- 
ibility,  yoL  ii).  All  that  remains  of  Hegesippus  b  giyen 
by  Kouth  (Beliguite  SacrcSy  2d  edit.  i,  205  są.),  and  also 
by  Grabę  (Spietlegium,  ii,  203  są.)  and  by  Galland  (BiU. 
Patr,  ii,  59).  "  The  reports  of  Hegesippus  on  the  char- 
acter  and  martyrdom  of  St.  James  the  Just,  Simeon  of 
Jerusalem,  the  rise  of  heresies,  the  episcopal  succession, 
and  the  preseryation  of  the  orthodox  doctrine  in  Cor- 
inth  and  Romę,  as  embodied  in  the  history  of  Eusebius, 
command  attention  for  their  antiąuity;  but,  as  they 
show  that  his  object  was  apologetic  and  polemical  rath- 
er  than  historiciU,  and  as  they  bcar  a  somewhat  Juda- 
izing  (though  by  no  means  Ebionistic)  coloring,  they 
must  be  receiyed  with  critical  attention"  (Schaff,  Church 
History,  voL  i,  §  123>     The  Sodnians  of  the  17th  cen- 


tury  use  his  brief  statementa  as  proof  of  the  i 
spiead  of  Judaizing  tendencies  in  the  Ist  and  2d  oento- 
ńes,  and  Baur,  of  Tubingen,  and  his  school,  haye  reoent> 
ly  reproduoed  this  yiew.  Bishop  Buli  answered  the 
former,  and  Doroer,  in  his  Lehre  r.  d.  Person  Ckrisii,  i, 
219  (Edinbuigh  trans,  i,  189  są.),  has  lefuted  the  latter. 
"  The  evidence  tends  to  proye  that  he  waa  not  eyen  a 
Hebrew  Christian  in  the  senae  of  obaerving  the  law,  and 
there  is  the  most  oomplete  proof  that  he  did  not  regard 
the  obseryance  of  the  law  as  essential  to  salyation. 
With  the  destruction  of  this  premiae,  the  keysUme  of 
the  two  theories  of  the  early  Unitarians  and  of  Baur 
is  utterly  destroyed.  The  Unitarians  maintained  that 
Hegesippus  was  an  Ebionite  or  Nazarene,  and  that  eon- 
seąuently  the  whole  Church  was  in  hia  day  Ebioaitic^ 
though,  unfortunatdy,  the  few  PlaUmiaing  wńten,  who 
formed  a  miseraUe  exoeption  to  the  masa,  haye  beói  the 
only  writers  that  a  subseąuent  conupt  age  haa  preaerred 
to  us.  Baur  finds  in  Hegesippus  a  most  determined  an- 
tagonist  of  Paul,  and  his  testimimy  is  appealed  to  aa 
proof  that  the  Petrine  faction  had  gained  the  predomi- 
nance  not  only  in  the  churches  of  the  East,  but  evea  in 
thoee  of  the  West  Both  theories  run  direćtly  contiaiy 
to  the  repeated  testimony  of  Eusebius,  and  to  all  the 
Information  which  we  ha\'e  in  r^fard  lo  the  Westem 
churches,  and  they  both  fali  to  pieces  unleas  it  be  proyed 
that  Hegesippus  inaisted  upon  the  obseryance  of  the 
law  as  essential  to  salyation"  (Donaldson,  History  of 
Christian  Literaturę^  iii,  188  są.).  See  alao  CHarke,  Buc 
cession  ofSacred  Literaturę;  Neander,  CAurcA  History, 
i,  675,  676;  Lardner,  Works,  yoL  ii;  Caye,  Hist.  Lit,  i, 
265;  Fabricius,  BibL  Graca,  yii,  156;  Dupin,  Eedes, 
Writers,  cent.  ii ;  Illgen,  Zeitschtift,  1865,  pL  iii. 

Hegira,  an  Arabie  word  signifying^Al  {Hedskra), 
now  used  to  designate  the  epoch  from  which  the  Mo- 
hammedans  compute  time.  ■  The  flight  of  Mohammed 
from  Mecca  to  Medina  is  fixed  by  the  Mohammedana  oa 
July  15,  A.D.  622.  The  proceas  of  conyerting  the  years 
of  the  Hegira  into  the  datę  after  the  birth  of  Christ  is 
aa  foliowa.  Diyide  the  given  number  by  thirty  (the 
ąuotient  expres8es  the  intercalary  cydes  elapaed  ainoe 
the  Hegira,  the  remainder  repreaents  the  number  of 
years  elapsed  in  the  current  intercalary  cyde) ;  multiply 
the  ąuotient  by  10,631  (the  number  of  days  contained 
in  an  intercalary  cyde),  adding  to  the  product  the  aum 
of  the  days  contained  in  the  elapaed  years  of  the  cuirent 
cycle,  the  days  of  the  elapsed  current  months  of  the 
cuzrcnt  year  up  to  the  time  of  reckoning,  and  to  the  le- 
sult  add  again  227,015  (the  number  of  da3r8  dapaed  be- 
tween Jan.  1  of  the  year  1,  and  July  15, 622,  the  datę 
of  the  Hegira).  The  aum  of  days  thus  obtained  is  most 
readily  conyerted  into  Julian  years  by  diyiding  it  by 
1461  (the  number  of  days  in  a  Julian  intercalary  period), 
then  multiplying  the  ąuotient  by  four,  and  adding  to  the 
product  the  number  of  whole  years  contained  in  the  re- 
mainder of  the  diyision,  which  is  obtained  by  diyidinfc 
this  remainder  by  365.  The  number  of  days  atill  re- 
maining  shows  the  day  of  the  month  in  the  current  Ju- 
lian year.  Or  clse  the  following  proportion  may  be 
madę  use  of  (T  representing  any  datę  in  the  Toikiah 
calendar,  and  C  the  corresponding  datę  in  the  Julian  cal- 
endar):  C=0.970203 T +621.567785, and T=l. 030712 C 
— 64.65745.  If  the  datę  is  subseąuent  to  the  Gregoriao 
reform  in  the  calendar,  which  can  only  bo  the  caae  for 
modem  timcs,  then  the  Turldsh  datę  must  first  be  con- 
yerted into  the  Julian,  which  is  then  altered  to  the  Gre- 
gorian  by  adding  ten  days  to  it  for  the  period  extending 
from  Oct  5, 1582,  to  the  end  of  February,  1700;  eleyen 
days  after  the  latter  until  the  end  of  February,  1800,  and 
twdye  days  for  all  subseąuent  datea.  In  making  this 
reduction,  the  difference  between  the  time  at  which  the 
day  bcgins  in  the  Turkish  and  in  the  Christian  calen- 
dar must  be  taken  into  consideration  wheneyer  the  time 
of  day  of  the  eyent  calculated  ia  knowu,  as  it  may  make 
a  difference  in  the  datę  of  one  day  morę  or  lesa.  The 
Turkish  year  begins  at  the  end  of  July.  The  year  18&9 
A.C  is  in  their  calendar  1275-76.    A  simpkr  modę  of 


HEGIUS 


169       HEroELBERG  CATECHISM 


RdoctMO,  bot  not  strictly  aocurate,  is  as  foUotrs:  The 
Mohttnraedan  yew=a  lanar  year  of  364  dUiys,  and  there- 
fore  83  Mohammedaii  yean=32  Chrutian.  To  reduce 
yean  of  the  Uegira,  therefore,  to  years  of  the  Christian 
aera,  sabtract  one  from  every  thirty*three  years,  and  add 
622.  Thns  A.D.  1861  =  1277  ofthe  Uegira.-— Pierer, 
Umpenal  Lexikom,  viii,  721. 

Hegłiu,  AucxAMDER  (the  name,  aoooitUng  to  some 
aooonnta,  being  Latinized  from  the  name  of  his  native 
viUa|^  Ueck),  a  German  humanist  of  the  loŁh  century, 
was  biMtn  within  the  diooese  of  Mttnster  aboat  1438  or 
14Ó5  (the  exact  datę  is  undetennined),  and  died  at  De- 
Tenter,  UoUand,  in  the  latter  part  of  1498.  He  daims 
notioe  here  becanse  of  his  influence  in  revtving  classical 
leaming,  especially  by  means  of  the  celebrated  college 
which  he  established  at  Deyenter.  This  school  is  named 
by  HaUam  (Ut,  of  Europę,  i,  109,  Harpers'  ed.)  as  one 
of  the  thiee  schools  thus  early  established  in  Western 
Europę,  ouŁside  of  ltaly,for  instniction  in  the  classic  lan- 
gnagea,  **  from  which  issued  the  most  conspicuous  oma- 
ments  of  the  next  generation."  Uegius  is  said  to  have 
been  a  friend  of  Rudolph  Agricola,  and  to  have  himaelf 
receired  intruction  in  daasical  literaturę  from  Thomas  k 
Kempia.  Among  his  papils  may  be  named  Erasmus, 
Hermann  Ton  dem  Buache,  Murmellius,  and  others, 
whose  labora  and  sueceas  in  literaturę  add  lustie  to  their 
tcacho^s  famę.  Hegius's  writings  were  but  few,  and 
thoee  mainly  in  the  form  of  poetry  and  brief  grammat- 
ical  and  philosophical  treatises;  one  of  a  theological 
type  18  found  in  a  miscellaneous  oolleetion  of  writings  by 
him,  published  at  Derenter,  1530, 4to,  and  entitled  De 
Iitatmaiioms  Mysterio  Dialogi  duo,  cuHma  additutn  de 
PaaduB  ei  Celebrałione  et  ifwenłione.  Hallam  (L  c.  notę) 
attiibutes  to  him  *'a  smali  4to  tract  entitled  Conjuga" 
fiomet  Yerborum  Gracte,  Daoeidria  Noriter  exłremo  la-' 
han  eoliedm  et  impreua^^  withont  datę  or  printer's  name, 
and  which  he  regarda  as  the  first  book  printed  this  side 
of  the  Alps  in  Greek.— Herzog,  Real- Ettcy klop.  xix,  616 ; 
Uoefer,  Abw.  Biog,  Gemirale,  xxiii,  768.     (J.  W.  31.) 

He-Ck)at  (prop.  ^r^rię,  attad',  so  called  as  being 
ocbft;  also  "^*^BS,  tsaphir',  so  called  from  leaping,  2 
Chroń,  xxix,  21 ;  Ezra  viii,  35 ;  Dan.  viii,  5, 8  [Ezra  vi, 
17];  Ó^ri,  ta'gi*hj  a  buck,  Gen.  xxx,  35;  xxxii,  14;  2 
Chnm.  xvii,  1 1 ;  Prov.  xxx,  31),    See  Goat. 

Heidanns,  Abraham,  professor  of  theology  at  Ley- 
den,  was  bom  at  Frankenthal,  in  the  Palatinate,  Aug. 
10, 1597.  He  was  educated  at  Amsterdam  and  Leyden, 
and  in  1627  was  appointed  to  a  pastorał  charge  in  the 
latter  city.  In  1647  he  became  professor  in  the  Uni- 
Tcni^  of  Leyden.  Heidanus  held  a  mild  view  of  the 
doetiine  of  predestination,  and  adopted  the  Cartesian 
philosophy,  of  which  he  became  a  strong  advocate.  This 
inTQlved  him  in  yarious  controrersies,  in  which  he  borę 
himaelf  admirably.  Yet,  when  nearly  eighty  years  old, 
he  was  dismiesed  liom  his  professorship  by  the  curators 
of  the  Univer8ity.  He  died  at  Leyden  Oct.  15, 1678, 
His  Corpus  ThwiogitB  Christicmm  was  posthumoualy 
piłblished  (1686, 2  vol8. 4to)«— Bayle,  Dietionary,  s.  v. 

Heidegger,  Johanm  Hjsinrich,  D.D.,  a  Swiss  Prot- 
estant theologian,  was  bom  near  Zurich  July  1, 1638. 
He  atodied  at  Marburg  and  Heidelberg,  where  he  gradu- 
sted,  and  soon  aiter  became  extraordinary  professor  of 
Hcłńew,  and  then  professor  of  theology.  In  1659  he 
went  to  Steinfurt  as  profenor  of  tł.«ology  and  ecclesias- 
ticsl  history.  War  having  dispersed  the  students  of 
Steinfurt,  Heidegger  retunied  to  Zurich  in  1665,  and  was 
ffokmat  of  moimi  philosophy  in  the  University  of  the 
city  ontil  1667.  He  died  at  Zurich  Jan.  18, 1698.  He 
VM  the  oompiler  of  the  famous  Formufa  Coiueruue, 
adopted  by  the  Synod  of  Zurich  in  1675.  See  Helybt- 
ic  CoNFEsaioiia.  His  writings  are  chiefly  polemical; 
the  moit  important  are  DispuUUio  theologica  de  fint 
■sali  (Steinfurt,  1660, 4to)  i—Defide  decretomm  ConciUi 
TTiiaaitdQfia8tume$  theoiogicm  (Steinfurt  1 662, 8vo)  :-> 
He  A  rHcuUt/undamerOalibus  Judaica  Beligionis  (Stein- 
tet,1664, 4to)  i-^De  Hist,  ttMcra  PaŁriarcharum  (Amst. 


1667-1671,2  Yols. 4to;  Zurich,  1729, 2  vols.  4to)  i^Ana* 
tome  ConcUii  Tridenfuti  (Zurich,  1672,  2  vola.  8vo)*.-^ 
Diesertationee  seUctcR  tacram  tkeologiam  dogmaticam, 
etc  illuM,  (Zur.  1675-1690, 4  vols.  4to)  i-^Enchirid,  Bib- 
licum  Mccinctiue  (Zurich,  1681,  8vo;  Amst.  1688,  8vo; 
Jena,  1723,  8vo) : — JJistor,  Papatus,  norisaimo  Historia 
Lutherofdsmi  et  Calvmismi  Fabro  oppośita  (Amst.  1684, 
4to ;  2d  ed.  1698, 4to ;  French,  Amst.  1685, 2  vols.  12mo) : 
— Myaterium  BabyUmia,  seu  in  Divi  Johannia  theohgi 
Apocalypaeoa  prophetiam  de  Babylone  magna  diałriba 
(Leyden,  1687, 2  vols.  4to) : — In  viam  Concordia  eccleai' 
aatica  Proieatantium  Manuductio  (Amst.  1687. 8vo) : — 
Tumulua  ConcUii  Trideniini,  etc.  (Zurich,  169Ó,  2  vols. 
4to)  i^Laborea  exegetici  in  Joauam,  Mattkaum,  Roma" 
noa,  Corintkioa  et  Uebraoa  (Zurich,  1700, 4to)  i—Corpua 
Theologia  chriaf.  (Zurich,  1700,  fol)  i—Afedulla  MeduU- 
la  Theoł,  chriat,  in  gratiam  et  usvm  tgronum,  etc.  His 
autobiography  was  published  by  Hofmeister  under  the 
title  Uiat,Viia  J.U,  Ueideggeri,  cui  nonpauca  kiaioriam 
Ecdeaia  temporia  ejuadem,  nec  non  litteraa  concemantia, 
inaerunlur  (Zurich,  1698, 4to).— Niceron,  Memoirea  pour 
aeroir,  xvii,  143 ;  Hoefer,  A'otf r.  Biog.  Ginerale,  xxiii,  766 
8q.;  Schweizer,  in  Heizfyg,  Beal-Encgkłopadie,  v,  652. 

Heidelberg  CatecfalBm,  one  of  the  symbolical 
books  of  the  Reformed  Church.  Its  name  is  derived 
from  the  city  in  which  it  was  compiled  and  ńrst  printed. 
It  is  also  Bometimes  styled  the  Palatinate  Catechism, 
from  the  territory  (the  Palatinate)  of  the  prince  (Fred- 
erick  III)  under  whose  auspices  it  was  prepared.  The 
original  German  title  (of  the  editio  princepa)  is  CatC' 
chiamua,  oder  Chriatiicher  Underricht,  tcie  der  in  Kirchen 
wfkd  Sehulen  der  Chur/urailicMen  Pfalz  getrieben  virdf. 
Gedruckt  in  der  ChurJUratlichen  Stad  Heydelherg,  durch 
Johamtem  Mayer,  1568  (Catechism,  or  Christian  In- 
stniction, accordmg  to  the  Usagcs  of  the  Churches  and 
Schools  of  the  Electoral  Paktiiiate). 

I.  Hiatory.  —  Soon  ailer  the  introduction  of  Protes- 
tantism  into  the  Palatinate  in  1546,  the  controverBy  be- 
tween  Lutheraiis  and  Calvinis(s  brokc  ont,  cnd  for  years, 
especially  under  the  elector  Oito  Hcimich  (1556-59),  it 
raged  with  great  violence  in  Heidelberg.  Frederick 
III,  who  came  into  power  in  1559,  adopted  the  Calrinie^ 
tic  view  on  the  Lord's  Suppcr,  and  favored  that  side 
with  all  his  prinoely  power.  He  reorganizcd  the  Sa- 
pienz  College  (founded  by  his  predecessor)  as  a  theo- 
logical school,  and  put  at  its  head  (1562)  Zacharias  Urw 
sinus,  a  pupil  and  friend  of  Melancthon,  who  had  adopted 
the  Reformed  opinions.  See  Ursinus.  In  order  to  put 
an  end  to  religious  disputes  in  his  dominions,  he  dcter- 
mined  to  put  forth  a  Catechism,  or  Confession  of  Faith, 
and  laid  the  duty  of  prtparing  it  upon  Zacharias  Ur- 
sinus (just  named)  and  Caspar  01evianus,  for  a  time 
profefsor  in  the  Univenity  of  Heidelberg,  thcn  court- 
preacher  to  Frederick  III.  They  madę  use,  of  course, 
of  the  exi8ting  catechetical  literaturę,  especially  of  the 
catechisrcs  of  Calvin  £nd  of  John  h  Laeco.  Each  pre- 
pared sketchcs  or  drafts,  and  "  the  finał  preperation  was 
the  work  of  both  thcologiaiis,  with  the  constant  co-op- 
eration  of  Frederick  III.  Ursinus  has  always  been  re- 
garded  as  the  principal  aut  hor,  as  he  was  afterwards  the 
chief  defender  and  interpreter  of  the  Catechism ;  still,  it 
would  appear  that  the  nervous  German  style,  the  divi- 
sion  into  three  parts  (as  distingubhed  from  the  five 
parts  in  the  Catechism  of  Calvin  and  the  previous  draA 
oS  Ursinus),  and  the  genial  warmth  and  unction  of  the 
whole  woric,  are  chiefly  due  to  0l€vianu8"  (Schaff,  in 
Anu  Preab.  Ber.  July,  1868,  p.  379). 

When  the  Catechism  was  completed,  Frederick  laid 
it  before  a  eynod  cf  the  Euperintendents  of  the  Palati- 
nate (December,  1562).  After  careful  examination  it 
was  approved.  The  first  edition,  whose  fuli  title  is 
given  above,  appeared  in  1563.  The  prefacc  is  dated 
January  19  of  that  year,  and  runs  in  the  name  of  the 
elector  Frederick,  who  probably  wrote  it.  A  Latin  ver- 
sion  appeared  in  the  same  year,  translated  by  Johannes 
Lagus  and  Lambertus  Pithopfeus.  The  German  version 
ia  the  authentic  standard.    Two  other  editions  of  the 


HEffiELBERG  CATECHISM       160      HEIDELBERG  CATECHISM 


German  yenion  appeared  in  1663.  What  is  now  the 
eightieth  quesŁioii  (  What  differmce  is  there  between  tke 
LortTs  Supper  and  Uie  Roman  Most  f )  is  not  to  be  foiind 
m  the  iirst  edition ;  part  of  it  appears  in  the  second  edi- 
tion;  and  in  the  third,  of  1563,  it  is  given  in  fuU  as  fol- 
lows:  *^\Vtiat  difTerence  is  there  between  the  Lord^s 
Supper  and  the  Popish  Mass?  The  Loid'B  Supper  tes- 
titics  to  us  that  we  have  fuU  forgi^eneas  of  all  our  sins 
by  the  one  sacrifice  of  Jesus  Christ,  which  he  himself 
has  onco  accomplished  on  the  cross;  and  that  by  the 
Holy  Ghost  we  are  ingrafted  into  Christ,  who  with  his 
true  body  is  now  in  heavon  at  the  right  hand  of  the  Fa- 
ther,  and  is  to  be  there  worshipped.  But  the  Mass 
teach^  that  the  living  and  the  dead  have  not  foi^ve- 
ness  of  sins  through  the  sufferings  of  Christ,  unleas 
Christ  is  still  daily  offered  for  them  by  the  priest;  and 
that  Christ  is  bodily  uuder  the  form  of  bread  and  winę, 
and  is  therefore  to  be  worshipped  in  them.  (And  thus 
the  Mass  at  bottom  is  nothing  else  than  a  denial  of  the 
one  sacrifice  and  passion  of  Christ,  and  an  accursed  idol- 
atiy.)*'  The  oocasion  for  the  introduction  of  this  eigh- 
tieth question  appeais  to  have  been  the  decree  of  the 
Council  of  Trent  "  touching  the  sacriiice  of  the  Mass,*' 
Sept.  17,  1562.  This  declaration,  and  the  anathemas 
pronounced  at  Trent  against  the  Protestant  doctrine  of 
the  sacraments,  had  not  time  to  produce  their  effect  be- 
fore  the  issue  of  the  iirst  edition  of  the  Catechism.  But 
the  elector  soon  saw  the  necessity  for  a  strong  and  elear 
declaration  on  the  Protestant  side,  and  such  a  declara- 
tion is  fumished  in  this  eightieth  question,  which  was 
added  to  the  Catechism  in  1563.  The  first  edition  of 
1563  was  for  a  long  time  lost ;  that  given  by  Niemeyer 
(jCoUecłio  Con/essionum,  p.890)  is  the  third  of  that  year. 
But  in  1864  pastor  Wolters  found  a  copy  and  reprinted 
it,  with  a  history  of  the  text  (Der  Neidełb.  KaiechUmut 
in  seiner  ursprdnglichen  Gestalf,  Bonn,  1864,  sm.  8vo), 
which  deared  up  all  doubt  as  to  the  rarious  editions  of 
1563.  In  1866  professor  Schaff  published  a  very  valna- 
ble  edition,  rerised  after  the  first  edition  of  1563,  with 
an  excellent  history  of  the  Catechism  (Der  Ileideib,  Kat. 
nach  d.  ersten  Auagahe  von  1563  rwidirt,  Philad.  18mo). 
Other  editions  appeared  in  1571  and  1573,  and  in  this 
last  the  ąuestions  are  divided,  as  now,  Lnto  lessons  for 
fifty-two  Sundaj^s,  and  the  ąuestions  are  numbered.  An 
abstract  of  the  Catechism  appeared  in  1585.  The  laiger 
Catechism  has  sińce  been  republished  by  millions;  no 
book,  perhaps,  has  gone  through  morę  editions,  except 
the  Bibie,  Bunyan's  Pitgrim,  and  Kempis.  It  has  been 
translated  into  nearl}'  erery  spoken  language.  It  was, 
of  course,  at  once  used  throughout  the  Palatinate  by 
command  of  the  elector.  But  it  soon  spread  alnoad 
wherever  the  Reformed  Church  had  found  footing,  es- 
pecially  in  North  Germany  and  parta  of  Switzerland. 
It  was  early  received  in  the  Netherlands,  and  formally 
adopted  at  the  Synod  of  Dort,  1618.  Long  and  bitter 
controversies  with  Roman  Catholics  and  Lutherans  on 
the  Catechism  only  endeared  it  the  morę  to  the  Reform- 
ed. It  is  to  this  day  an  authoritative  confession  for  the 
Reformed  churches  (German  and  Dutch).  The  (Dutch) 
Reformed  Church  directs  all  her  ministera  to  explain 
the  Catechism  regularly  before  the  congregations  on  the 
Sabbath  day. 

II.  Conłenłs. — The  Catechism,  in  its  piesent  form, 
consŁsts  of  129  questions  and  answers.  It  is  divided 
into  three  parts :  1.  Of  the  misery  of  man.  2.  Of  the 
redemption  of  man.  8.  Of  the  gratitude  due  from  man 
(duties,  etc.).  The  arrangement  of  the  matxer  is  ad- 
mirable,  looking  not  simply  to  logical  order,  but  also  to 
practical  edification.  The  book  is  not  simply  dogmatic, 
but  devotionaL  It  assumes  that  all  who  use  it  are 
Christians,  and  is  thus  not  adapted  for  missionary  work. 
As  to  the  theology  taught  by  the  book,  it  is,  in  the 
main,  that  of  pure  evangelical  Protestantism.  On  the 
doctrine  of  prcdestination  it  is  so  reticent  that  it  was 
opposed,  on  the  one  hand,  by  the  Synod  of  Dort,  the 
most  extreme  Calvinistic  body  perhaps  ever  assembled, 
and,  on  the  other  (though  not  without  qualification),  by 


James  Arminina,  the  greateat  of  all  the  opponeńta  of 
Calrinism.  On  the  naturę  of  the  sacraments  the  Cato- 
chism  is  Calyiniatic,  aa  oppoeed  to  the  Lutheran  doc- 
trine. Dr.  Heppe  (detOscher  ProtestantiamtUt  h  ^^3  8q.) 
goea  too  far  in  aaaerting  that  the  Catechism  is  thor- 
oughly  Melancthonian,  and  in  no  aenae  Calvinistic. 
Sudhoff  answers  this  in  hia  artide  in  Heizog^s  Beal^Eih- 
cjfldopadiej  v,  658  8q. ;  but  he  himaelf  goea  tżoo  far,  on 
the  other  side,  in  fiuding  that  the  Calyinistic  theoiy  of 
predeatination,  though  not  eipready  atated,  is  impUed 
and  involved  in  the  view  of  sin  and  graoe  set  fyrth  in 
the  Catechism  (aee  Gerhart^a  aitide  in  the  Tereaitenarjf 
Monument,  p.  887  są.,  and  also  hia  atatement  in  thia 
Cydopedia,  iii,  827).  01evianua,  it  will  be  lemember^ 
ed,  waa  educated  under  the  influence  of  Calnn ;  Uisinaa 
under  that  of  Melancihon.  Dr.  Schaff  remartca  jndi- 
ciously  that  **  the  Catechism  is  a  tnie  espression  of  the 
conyictions  of  its  authors;  but  it  communicates  only  ao 
much  of  these  as  is  in  haimony  with  the  pubłic  faith  of 
the  Church,  and  obaerrea  a  certain  reticence  or  leaenm- 
tion  and  moderation  on  anch  doctrines  (aa  the  twofotd 
predeatination),  which  bdong  rather  to  scientific  theolo- 
gy and  prirate  conyiction  than  to  a  public  Church  con- 
feaaion  and  the  inatruction  of  youth"  (American  Pretb* 
Remew,  July,  1868,  p.  871). 

Litemłure. — ^The  SOOth  annirersaiy  of  the  fonnation 
and  adoption  of  the  Heidelberg  Catechism  was  odebra- 
ted  in  1863  both  in  Euiope  and  America.  One  of  the 
permanent  fruita  of  thia  cśdebration  was  the  publication 
of  The  Heidelberg  Catechism,  Tercentmary  EdUion  (New 
York,  1868,  sm.  4to).  This  noble  yolume  gires  a  com- 
prehenaive  Introduction  (by  Dr.  Neiin),  and  a  critical 
edition  of  the  Catechism  in  four  texta— Old  German, 
Latin,  Modem  German,  and  Engliah — ^printed  in  poi^ 
alld  columns.  The  Introduction  giyes  an  admirable  ac- 
count  of  the  literaturę  and  histoiy  of  the  Catechism. 
The  text  used  is  that  given  by  Niemeyer,  and  not  that 
of  the  first  edition  of  1568,  which,  as  has  been  atated 
above,  was  reprinted  in  1864.  See  alao  Dr.  Schaff*8  edi- 
tion dted  above,  and  an  article  by  him  in  the  A  meriean 
Presbyterian  Reneto  for  1863.  The  Latin  text  (writh 
the  German  of  the  3d  ed.  of  1563)  Is  given  in  Niemeyer, 
Cołleciio  Con/essionum,  p.  390  8q. ;  also  in  an  edition  by 
Dr.  Steiner,  Caiechesis  Religionis  Christiana  sen  Całe- 
chismus  ffeidelbergensis  (Baltimore,  1862).  Another  val- 
uable  ihdt  of  the  anniyersary  is  The  Tereenlenary  Man^ 
ument  (Chambersburg,  1863,  8vo),  containing  twenty 
essays  by  eminent  Iteformed  theologians  of  Germany, 
Holland,'  and  America,  on  the  Catechism,  its  origiń, 
history,  its  spedal  relations  to  the  German  Reformed 
Church,  and  cognate  subjects.  For  the  older  liteniy 
histoiy,  see  Alting,  Historia  Ecdesias  Palatwa  (Flanldl 
1701);  Struye,  PJalzische  Kirehenhistorie  (Frankfort, 
1721) ;  Mundt,  Grundriss  der  pjalzischen  Kirchewfe^ 
schichte  bu  1742  (Heiddb.  1798);  Kocher,  Kaiechetische 
Geschiehte  dej-  Re/ormirten  Kirche  (Jena,  1756) ;  Plandc, 
Geschichte  d,proł,  Theoloffie,  ii,  2, 475^91 ;  Van  Ałpen, 
Geschiehte  u,  Litteraiur  d.  Heidelb,  Katechismus  (Frankf. 
1800) ;  Augusti,  łJinleitung  in  die  beiden  Ha^pt^Kaie- 
chismen  d,  Eeang.  Kirche  (Elberf.  1824) ;  Erach  und  Gm- 
ber's  A  Ug.  EncykL  ii,  4, 386  sq. ;  Nevin,  Hi^,  and  Gemue 
o/ the  Heidelberff  Catechism  (Chamberaburg,  1847) ;  Sud- 
hoff, Theohgisches  Handbuch  zur  Atuiegung  d,  Heiddb. 
Kat,  (Frankf.  1862).  An  eUborate  artide  on  the  liter- 
aturę of  the  Catechism,  by  Dr.  Harbaugh,  is  given  in 
the  Mercersburg  Reoiew,  October,  1860.  A  copioos  list 
of  writeiB  on  the  Catechism  (oo^^ring  twdve  pagee)  is 
given  at  the  end  of  Bethune,  Expository  Leetures  on  the 
Heidelberg  Catechism  (N.  York,  Shddon  and  Co.,  2  Tola. 
12mo),  an  admirable  practical  oommentaiy,  with  a  val- 
uable  historical  introduction.  Among  the  older  oom- 
mentators  are  Ursinus,  ErpUeationes  Caiechesis  PalaH'- 
na  (Opera,  1612,  voL  i);  llrsinus,  Apotogia  Catechismi 
PakUini  (Opera,  voL  ii).  Translationa— Uisinus,  The 
Swmme  of  Christian  Religion,  leetures  on  the  Catechism, 
transl.  by  H.  Parrie  (Lond.  1617  4to).  The  beat  transL 
of  Ux8inua'8  Commentaiy  ia  that  of  the  Bev.  G.  W.  WU- 


HEIDENHEIM 


161 


HEINICKE 


Ilnd  (Ooliimbiu^  1852, 8vo,  2d  ecL),  with  Introdaction  by 
Dr.  J.  W.  Ne\'m.  See  also  CoocduSi  Heid.  Cat  eayUicata 
et  iUuMrata  (Li^  Bat  1671,  Amst.  1673) ;  Dńeesen,  A  d 
CaU  łłeid.  Mcmmbiełio  (Gion.  1724, 4to);  Kemp,  Fifiy- 
tkrte  iSemtms  on  łhe  HeideJberg  CcUeckisTn^  trans,  by  Yan 
Hartingen  (New  Brunsirick,  N.  J.,  1810, 8vo).  For  the 
viewB  of  Łhe  early  Dntch  Arminiana  on  the  Catechism, 
see  Contiderafumeś  JUnumstrcattium  in  CaU  IleidełlK  (in 
.4c/.«I^CTt>^.^yfK>dHazderwyk,1620).  See  also  Wol- 
tem, Zur  Urgackickte  </.  Heidelb,  Kat^  in  Stttd.  u.  Krit. 
]8e7,  Heft  1 ;  Trechsel,  in  Stud.  u.  Krit.  1867,  Heft  3 ; 
Plitt,  SiwL  te  Krit,  1863,  Heft  1 ;  Mercerdmrg  BeneWf 
October,  1860. 

Heidenheim  {Htydenheimy,  Wolf,  or  Benjamin 
BEN-Sixso>',  a  Hebiew  scholar  and  typographer,  la  dis- 
tingińahed  in  Hebrew  literaturę  by  his  ezertions  to  pro- 
i-ide  editions  of  the  Pentatench  free  from  the  errors 
trhich  maried  preceding  oopiea.  Indeed,  the  city  in 
which  he  Uved,  Kodelheim,  near  Fnuikrort  on  the  Maine, 
became  in  his  day  the  centrę  of  attraction  for  He- 
brew typogiaphy.  But  he  has  also  left  us  works  of 
his  own  which  betoken  a  thorough  aoquaintance  with 
Hebccw  phik>]ogy.  Jost  even  assigns  him  a  pUu;e  by 
the  side  of  Mendelssohn.  Heidenheim  died  in  1882,  at 
a  Tery  old  age.  His  most  important  works  are  *^S3S31Cp 
C^cran,  a  tnct  on  the  Hebrew  aocents  (Rodelheim, 
1808,^2mo)  :->';'iti^n  K*inr,  a  treatise  on  different  parta 
of  Hebrew  grammar  (Rodelheim,  1806, 12mo) :— Q^^*^K 
*)'*S(ia  D^^n,  the  Pentateuch,  with  a  Hebrew  commen- 
tary,'etc.(Rbdelh.  1818-1821, 8vo).  We  have  also  fix>m 
him  a  catalogoe  of  his  works,  containing  800  in  namber, 
onder  the  tiUe  a'^'?B©n  na'«©'n  (Roddh.  1888, 8ro)^ 
FlUatfBibL  Judaica,  i,  369;  Etlieridge,  Mrod.  to  ffebr, 
IM.  p.  422;  Steinschneider,  BiUiog.  Udbch.  p.  60;  Jost, 
Gadt.  d,  Jttden.  p.  361 ;  Kitto,  ii,  267.     ( J.  H.  W.) 

Heifer  (nbj5,^/aA',fcm.of  ij?,«catf;"  n^^^t^pa- 

raA%  fem.  of  *1fi,  ''bollock;"  Sept  and  N.  T.  SafutKic ; 

Yulg.  racca).    The  Hebrew  language  has  no  e^pression 

that  exactly  corresponds  to  our  *^  heifer,''  for  both  eglah 

UBdparak  are  appUed  to  oows  that  have  calyed  (1  Sam. 

▼i,  7-12 ;  Job  xxi,  10 ;  Ise.  vii,  21) ;  indeed,  eglah  means 

a  yoong  aninaal  of  any  species,  the  foli  expression  being 

•iCa  r^ar, "  heifer  of  kine"  (Deut  xxi,  8 ;  1  Sam.  xvi, 

2 ;  Isa.  vii,  21).    The  heifer  or  young  cow  was  not  com- 

nonly  used  for  ploughing,  but  only  for  treading  out  the 

cocn  (Hos.  X,  11 ;  but  see  Judg.  xiv,  18),  when  it  ran 

aboat  without  any  headstall  (Deut.  xxv,  4);  hence  the 

espmsion  an  "unbroken  heifer**  (Hos.  iv,  16;  Auth.  Y. 

*"  backdiding*'),  to  which  Israel  is  compared.    A  mmilar 

sen^  has  been  attached  to  the  expres8ion  **  calf  of  three 

yesni  oW,**  rt»tj''id  rta5, 1  e.  untubdued.  in  Isa.  xv,  6 ; 

Jer.  xlviii,  34 ;  but  it  has  by  some  been  taken  as  a  prop- 

er  name,  Kglath  ShelUkiyah,  such  names  being  not  rery 

racoromon.    The  sense  of  "  dissolute"  is  conveyed  un- 

doabtedly  in  Amos  iv,  1.    The  comparison  of  Egypt  to 

a  '^iair  heifer"  (Jer.  xlvi,  20)  may  be  an  allusion  to  the 

weU-known  form  under  which  Apis  was  worshipped  (to 

which  we  may  also  refer  the  woids  in  ver.  15,  as  under^ 

•tood  in  ihe  Sept, "  Why  is  the  bullock  [jA6axoc  kKktK- 

rńc]  swcpt  away  ?"),  the  "destruction**  threatened  being 

the  bite  of  the  gad-fly,  to  which  the  word  keretz  would 

fitly  apply.    **  To  plough  with  another  man's  heifer" 

(Judg.  xlv,  18)  implies  that  an  advantage  has  been 

gained  by  unfair  means.    llie  pioper  names  Eglah,  £n- 

c^aim,  and  Parah  are  derived  from  the  Hebrew  terms 

It  the  head  of  this  article.— Smith,  s.  v.    See  Red  Hei- 

na. 

Hellmann,  Johank  Dayid,  a  leamed  German  the- 
olsKian,  was  bom  at  OsnabrUck  Jan.  13, 1727.  He  stud- 
iem at  HaOe,  became  rector  of  Hameln  in  1764,  and  pro- 
f«aBv  of  theology  at  Gottingen  in  1754,  where  he  died 
F^  22, 1764.  Hia  principal  writings  are  Specimen  ob- 
«rr.  ad  iOtutrat.  N.  T.  (Halle^  1743, 4to)  i^ParaUele  en- 
tre  tuprit  dirriUgion  daujourdhui  tt  Us  anciens  adrer-' 


gaires  de  ia  rdigion  Chretieane  (Halle,  1750, 8vo) : — Ctom- 
pendium  tkeolc^  dogmaiica  (Gottingen,  1761  and  1774, 
Svó):—'0pU9cula  iheoLArgumenii  (ed.  DanoWus,  Jena, 
1774-77,  2  vol8. 8vo).— G.  G.  Heyne,  HeUmanni  Memo- 
ria  (Gottingen,  1764);  Jócher,  AUgem.  gtkhrt.  LexikoR, 
continued  by  Adelung,  ii,  1868. 

Heilprin,  Jbchiel,  a  distinguished  Jewish  philol- 
og^st  and  historian,  flourished  in  the  first  part  of  the 
18th  centttiy.  He  is  said  to  have  been  bom  at  Mińsk 
in  1728,  but  the  time  of  his  death  is  unknown.  He 
wrote  (nńinn  "l^O)  a  History  of  the  Jews,  diWded  into 
three  parts :  Chronicles  of  Historie  Events,  from  the  Cre- 
ation  to  his  own  Time.  2.  Alphabetical  Catalogue  of  the 
Mishnaic  and  Talmudic  Doctors.  3.  Alphabetical  In- 
dex  of  Jewish  Literat!  (Karlsr.  1769,  and  Zolkien,  1808, 
foUo).  Also  (O^^^JtSSn  '^?'n5  b)  a  Hebrew  Rabbinic 
Dictionary  adapted  to  the  Rabboth,  Sifra,  Mekiltha,  Yol- 
kut,  and  the  works  of  the  Cabalists  (Dyrchenfurt,  1806, 
fol.).  FUrst  commends  the  exoellency  of  thesc  works, 
and  believes  that  the  first  part  of  Heilprin^s  histoiy  is 
an  able  contribution  to  Hebrew  literaturę.— Furst,  BibL 
Judaica,  i,  372 ;  Etheridge,  Introdudum  to  Ilebr.  Liter^ 
flrf«r«,p.449.     (J.H.W.) 

Heineocius,  Johann  Michaeł,  a  Lutheran  dl* 
vine,  was  bom  at  Eisenberg  Dec.  12, 1674,  and  was  edu« 
cated  at  Jena,  Frankfort,  and  Giessen.  Ailer  a  vi8it  to 
HoUand  and  Hambiurg,  he  settled  for  a  time  in  Helm^ 
stfidt  as  tutor  (Docent),  but  in  1699  became  deacon  at 
Goslar.  In  1709  he  rcmoved  to  Halle  as  pastor,  and  in 
1720  was  appointed  consistorial  oounselbr  and  ecdesias^ 
tical  inspector  of  the  circle  of  the  Saal  (SaalkreW). 
He  died  Sept  11, 1722.  His  chief  work,  Eigmtliche  und 
wahrhąftige  Albildung  der  alien  tmd  neuen  griechischen 
Kirche  nach  ihrer  Historie,  GlaubensUhren  und  Kirchen- 
gebrSucken  (Leipsic,  1711),  presents  historically  the  doo- 
trines,  govemment,  liturgy,  and  morals  of  the  Greek 
Church,  ancient  and  modem.  It  is^till  a  work  of  great 
value.  Besides  works  in  the  departments  of  antiąuitiea 
and  history,  Heineccins  wrote  PrUfrmg  der  sogenannten 
neuen  Propketen  und  ihres  ausserordenilichen  Ayfstandes 
(Halle,  1716),  against  the  French  prophets  (q.  v.) : — 
Sendschreibm  an  Thomas  Ittig  wegen  des  Termini  Gra- 
tiee,  on  the  Tcrroinist  controver8y :  —  De  JurisconsuUiś 
Ckristianis  priorum  saculorum  eorumgue  in  ecclesiam 
meriłis  (HaUe,  \l\d^)  i  —  CoUoquia  religiosa  publice  et 
pritatim  inier  bina  htec  sacula  kobita  (Halle  and  Mag-> 
deburg,  1719,  4to). — Herzog,  Real-Encyldop.  xix,  624; 
Hoefer,  Nouv.  Biog.  Generale,  xxiii,  782 ;  Sax,  Onotnas- 
ticon  lUtrarium,  pt  Ti,  p.  45.     (J.  W.  M.) 

Heinicke,  Samuel,  a  German  philanthropist,  ^the 
most  distinguished  of  the  early  teachers  of  the  deaf  and 
dumb  in  Germany,"  was  bom  April  10, 1729,  at  Nautz- 
schUtz,  near  Weissenfels,  in  Prussia,  and  died  at  Leipsic 
April  80, 1790.  He  passed  his  early  life  as  a  farmer 
and  soldier,  then  pursued  a  course  of  study  in  the  Uni- 
versity  of  Jena,  was  sub8eqnently  for  ten  years  a  tutor 
of  the  children  of  count  Schimmelroann  at  Hamburg, 
and  then  removed  to  Eppendorf.  In  this  latter  place, 
as  early  as  1754,  he  became  much  interested  in  a  deaf 
and  dumb  child,  and  devised  a  system  of  instmction  for 
it,  which  proved  so  successful  as  to  attract  other  deaf 
mntes  to  him  for  instmction,  and  led  to  the  establish- 
ment by  the  elector  of  Saxony  in  1772  of  a  school  at 
Leipsic  for  the  education  of  deaf  mutes.  This  school, 
"the  first  ever  established  or  supported  by  the  civil 
govemment,"  was  placed  under  Heinicke*s  charge,  waa 
continued  after  his  death  under  the  chaige  of  his  wid* 
ow,  and  is  still  existing  and  prosperous.  The  "  method 
of  instruction  was  by  articulation  and  reading  on  the 
lip,"  and  is  said  to  have  been  superior  in  some  respects 
to  that  of  the  abbe  de  FEpeei  Heinicke*s  labors  and 
noble  character  gained  for  him  deservedly  the  affection 
of  the  German  people,  though  his  method  of  treatment 
of  his  pupils  was  probably  too  harsh,  and  some  of  hia 
writings  were  marred  by  coarse  and  ill-natured  criticisma 
of  opinions  differing  from  his  own.    He  wrote  upon  th» 


HEINSIUS 


162 


HEIR 


education  of  deaf  mutes  snd  Łheological  subjects,  viz. : 
J3HUitche  Gtsckichie  des  Aiien  Tesłament»  zum  Ufder- 
richie  taubttummer  Personm  (Hamburg,  1776, 8vo;  only 
first  part  given) : — Beobachiungen  iiber  Stumme  und  Uber 
die  metuckliche  Sprache  in  Brie/en  (Hamb.  1778,  8vo) : 
—Ueber  die  Denkart  der  Taubttummen  und  die  Mis*' 
handlungen,  denen  sie  durch  unsinnige  Kureń  und  Lehr- 
arien  ausgissetzi  sind  (Leipsic,  1780,  8vo): —  U^r  aite 
und  neue  Lehrarten  (Leipsic,  1783)  i^WidUise  Entdeck- 
unffen  und  BeUrdge  zur  Seelenlehre  und  zur  menschlichen 
JSpracke  (Leipsic,  1784,  8vo): — Metapkysik  fur  Schul- 
mHster  und  Plusmacher  (Halle,  1785) :  —  U^)er  graue 
Yorurtheile  und  ihre  SchaedlickJoeit  (Copenhagen  and 
Leipsic,  1787):  —  ScheingóUerei  der  Naturedisten,  Deis- 
ien  und  Atheisten  (Koetheii,  1788)  :—Neues  ABC,  Syl^ 
ben-und  Lesebuch  nebst  einer  Anweisung,  das  Lesen  in 
kurzer  ZeiŁ  aufdie  leichfeste  A  rł  und  okne  Buchstabiren 
zu  lemen  (many  edidons,  laat  Lńpsic,  1790).  Schlich- 
tegroU  assignfl  to  Heinicke  aiso  a  work  on  Kant'8  philo> 
flophical  worka,  printed  in  German  (Presburg,  1789, 8vo), 
but  Meusel  only  the  prefaoe  to  it.  Heinicke  alao  wrote 
articles  in  the  Teutscker  Merkur  and  Teutsckes  Museum, 
in  which  he  maintained,  against  the  view8  of  the  abbe 
de  FEpee,  that  deaf  mutes  should  be  taught  not  only  to 
write, but  also  to  speak. — New  American  Cyclopcedia, yi, 
801;  ix,  59;  Hoefer,  Nouv,  Biogr,  Generale,  xxiii,  786 
8q.;  Petschke,  Historische  Nachricht  von  dem  Unter- 
richie  der  Taubttummen  und  Blinden  (Leipsic,  1793); 
SchUchtegroU,  Nekrolog  (1790),  p.  813-^15;  Meuael, 
Lexikon  der  v(m  1750  bis  1800  verstorbenen  deutschen 
SchriftsUUer  (Leipsic,  1802-16).    (J.W.  M.) 

HeinsiUB,  Dakiel,  an  eminent  scholar,  was  bom 
in  1580  at  Ghent  He  studied  law  for  some  months  at 
Franeker,  but,  determining  to  derote  himself  to  letters, 
he  went  to  Leyden,  where  hs  studied  under  Joseph  Scal- 
iger.  In  1599  he  began  to  teach  Latin  in  the  uniyer- 
sity,  and  on  the  death  of  Scaliger  (1609)  he  was  madę 
professor  of  history,  He  was  aflerwards  madę  librarian 
to  the  University,  and  historiographer  to  the  States  of 
Holland.  He  was  secretary  to  the  Sjrnod  of  Dort,  1618. 
See  Dort.  He  died  Feb.  23,  1655.  Besides  editing 
many  Latin  and  Greek  dassics,  he  published  Sacrarum 
exercitatianum  ad  N,  T.  libri  xx  (Lugd.  Bat.  1639,  foL) : 
— Aristarchus  sacer,  sive  Exercitaiiones  ad  NontU  Par^ 
aphrasin  in  Johannem  (Lugd.  Bat  1627,  sm.  8vo).  Hein- 
sius  was  a  strong  advocate  of  a  spedal  HellenisŁic  dia- 
lect. 

•  Heir  (some  form  of  the  rerb  t?^^,  to  possess;  Gr. 
K\ricMvofioc,  a  receiver  by  lot).  The  Hebrew  institu- 
tions  relatiye  to  inheńtance  were  of  a  very  simple  char- 
acter.  Under  the  patriarchal  system  the  property  was 
dlyided  among  the  sons  of  the  legitimate  wiyes  (Gen. 
xxi,  10;  xxiv,  36;  xxy,  5),  a  larger  portion  being  as- 
signed  to  one,  generaUy  the  eldest,  on  whom  devolved 
the  duty  of  maintaining  the  females  of  the  family.  See 
BiRTHRioiiT.  The  sons  of  ooncubines  were  portioned 
ofT  with  prcsents  (Gen.  xlix,  1  sq.),  but  this  may  have 
been  restricted  to  cases  where  the  children  had  been 
adópted  by  the  legidmate  wife  (Gen.  xxx,  3).  But  Ja- 
oob  madę  the  sons  whom  he  had  by  his  concnbines  heirs, 
as  well  as  the  others  (Gen.  xlix,  12<-27).  Moses  Uid  no 
restrictions  upon  the  choice  of  fathers  in  this  lespect ; 
and  we  may  infer  that  the  sons  of  concubines,  for  the 
most  part,  receiyed  an  equal  share  with  the  other  sons, 
from  the  fact  that  Jephthah,  the  son  of  a  concubine,  oom- 
plained  that  he  was  excluded  from  his  father'8  house 
without  any  portion  (Judg.  xi,  1-7).  Daughters  had 
no  share  in  the  patrimony  (Gen.  xxxi,  14),  but  leceiyed 
a  maniage  portion,  consisting  of  a  maid-senrant  (Gen. 
xxix,  24,  29)  or  some  other  property.  As  a  matter  of 
special  fayor  they  sometimes  took  part  with  the  sons 
(Job  xlii,  15).  The  Mosaic  law  regulated  the  succession 
to  real  property  thus :  it  was  to  be  diyided  among  the 
aons,  the  eldest  receiving  a  double  portion  (Deut.  xxi, 
17),  the  others  equal  shares:  if  there  were  no  sons,  it 
irent  to  the  daughters  (Numb.  zxyii,8),  on  the  ooqdi- 


tion  that  they  did  not  many  out  of  their  own  tribo 
(Numb.  xxxyi,6  8q. ;  Tobi  yi,  12 ;  yii,  13),  otherwise  the 
patrimony  was  forfeited  (Josephos,  Ant,  iv,  7,  by,  If 
there  were  no  -danghters,  it  went  to  the  brother  of  the 
deoeased ;  if  no  brother,  to  the  patemal  onde ;  and,  fiul- 
ing  these,  to  the  next  of  kin  (NumK  xxyii,  9-11).  In 
the  case  of  a  widów  being  left  ¥rithaat  children,  the 
nearest  of  kin  on  her  husbilind*s  ade  had  the  right  of 
marrying  her,  and,  in  the  eyent  of  his  refusal,  the  next 
of  kin  (Kuth  iii,  12, 13) :  with  him  lested  the  obłigatioa 
of  redeeming  the  property  of  the  widów  (Ruth  iy,  1  flq.), 
if  it  had  been  either  sold  or  mortgaged :  this  obligatioin 
was  termed  nbK&n  hSDIŚp  ("the  right  of  inheńtance^, 
and  was  exerci8ed  in  other  cases  besides  that  of  mar- 
riage  (Jer.  xxxii,  7  sq.).  If  nonę  stepped  farward  to 
marr}'  the  widów,  the  inheritance  remained  with  ber 
until  her  death,  and  then  reyerted  to  the  next  of  kin. 
See  WiDOW.  The  object  of  these  regulations  eyidently 
was  to  preyent  the  alienaUon  of  the  land,  and  to  recain 
it  in  the  same  family :  the  Mosaic  law  enforced,  in  short, 
a  strict  entaiL  £ven  the  assignment  of  the  double  poi^ 
tion,  which  under  the  patriarchal  regime  had  been  at  the 
disposal  of  the  father  (Gen.  xlyiii,  22),  was  by  the  Mo- 
saic law  limitod  to  the  eldest  son  (lieut.  xxi,  15-17). 
The  case  of  Achsah,  to  whom  Caleb  presented  a  field 
(Josh.  xy,  18, 19 ;  Judg.  i,  15),  is  an  exoeption ;  but  per- 
haps  eyen  in  that  instanoe  the  land  reyerted  to  Caleb*a 
descendants  cithcr  at  the  death  of  Achsah  or  in  the  year 
of  Jubilce.  The  land  being  thus  so  strictly  tied  up,  the 
notion  ofkeirship,  as  we  understand  it,  was  hardly  known 
to  the  Jews:  succession  was  a  matter  of  right,  and  not 
of  fayor— a  state  of  things  which  is  embodied  in  the  He- 
brew language  itself,  for  the  word  Ó^ J  (A.  V. "  to  inher- 
it")  irapUes  possessum,  and  yery  cften/ordbk  possession 
(Deut.  ii,  12 ;  Judg.  i,  29 ;  xi,  24),  and  a  simihur  idea  liea 
at  the  root  of  the  words  riTTlK  and  t^^H??  generaUy 
translated  "  inheritance."  Testamentary  dispositioos 
were,  of  coutse,  generaUy  superfluous :  the  nearest  ap- 
proach  to  the  idea  is  the  Uesńngy  which  in  early  times 
conyeyed  temporal  as  weU  as  spiriUial  benefits  (Gen. 
xxyii,  19, 87 ;  Josh.  xy,  19).  It  appears,  howeyer,  that 
eyentuaUy  the  father  had  at  least  the  right  of  expm»- 
ing  his  laist  wishes  or  will  in  the  presence  of  witnesses, 
and  probaUy  in  the  presence  of  the  heirs  (2  Kings  xx, 
1).  The  references  to  wiUs  in  the  aposde  PauFs  ^mt* 
ings  are  borrowed  from  the  usages  of  Greece  and  Romę 
(Heb.  ix,  17),  whence  the  custom  was  intioduced  into 
Judiea :  several  wills  are  nodced  by  Josephus  in  oonneo- 
don  with  the  Heroda  {Ant,  xiii,  16, 1 ;  xyii,  3,  2 ;  War, 
ii,2,3> 

AVith  regard  to  personal  property,  it  may  be  presumed 
that  the  owner  had  some  authority  over  it,  at  aU  eyenta 
during  his  life-time.  The  admission  of  a  slaye  to  a  por- 
tion of  the  inheritance  with  the  sons  (Proy.  xyii,2)  {oob- 
ably  appUes  only  to  the  perBonalt>%  A  presentation  of 
half  the  personalty  formed  the  marriage  portion  of  To- 
bit's  wife  (1'ob.  yiii,  21).  A  distribution  of  goods  during 
the  father'8  Ufe-dme  is  implied  in  Lukę  xy,  11-18:  a 
distinction  may  be  noted  between  ohtsia,  a  generał  term 
appUcable  to  personalty,  and  K\fipovofila,  the  Utnded 
property,  which  could  only  be  divided  after  the  father^s 
death  (Lukę  xii,  13). 

There  is  a  striking  resemblance  between  the  Hebrew 
and  Athenian  customs  of  heirship,pardcularly  as  regaids 
heiresses  (iiriKkripoi),  who  were,  in  both  nattona,  boond 
to  marry  their  nearest  reładon :  the  property  did  not 
yest  in  the  husband  eyen  for  his  life-time,  butdeyolyed 
upon  the  son  of  the  heiress  as  soon  as  he  was  of  age, 
who  also  borę  the  name,  not  of  his  father,  but  of  his  ma* 
temal  grandfather.  The  object  in  both  oountries  was 
the  same,  yiz.  to  preserye  the  name  and  property  of  ey- 
ery  family  (Smith,  DieL  of  Class,  Ant.a,y.  Epidenia).— 
Smith,  8.  V.     See  iNHsiUTANCis. 

In  CoL  i,  15,  Christ  is  caUed  *'  the  first-bom  of  eveiy 
creature,"  i.  ^^  the  heir  of  the  whole  creation,"  aa  in 
Heb.  1,2  heiscaUed  the  "AeirofaU  things."    Belieyen 


HEŁAH 


163 


HELEKITE 


m  ctDed  "hurt  ofthe  promise,"  "  of  TighteausnesB,"*  *'  of 

the  kń^dwD,"  «of  the  worid,"  «of  God,"  "joint  heire" 

withChiHtiiiianniich  as  they  are  partakers  of  the  bleas- 

inga  which  God  beatowa  npon  his  children,  tinpl3riiig  ad- 

miBsian  to  tlie  kingdom  of  heaven  and  its  piirileges 

(Gd. iii, 29;  Heb.vi,17;  xif7;  Ja8.ii,5;  Rom.  iy,  18; 

Tiii,  17)^  and  finiUy  poswasion  of  the  heaTenly  inheiit- 

aii«(JohBXTii,  22-24;  Rer.  iii,22).     SeeADOPriON. 

Helah  (H«b.  ChdaA%  ^Kbn,  nut,  as  in  Ezek.  xxiv, 

6;  SepŁ  'AXaa  t,  r.  'Aw^a),  one  of  the  two  wiyes  of 

Aahnr  (a  deaoendant  of  Jadah),  by  whom  ahe  had  three 

wiB(iaiPMLłv,6,7).     RC.  ppob.  cir.  1612. 

Helall  Codex  of  thk  O.  T.    See  Manuscripts. 

Helam  (Heb.  Cherlam',  ch^^n,  place  ofabundance^ 

3  Sam. z,  16;  bat  in  yer.  17,  Ćhdami\  C^MH  [with  hi 

'^direcdye,"  rrabitn,  Joaephus  XaAa/i<i]ffor  which  the 

margin  piefcn  DK^H;  Sept  AiXa/i,  Y idgate  Helam),  a 

piace  "beyDod  the  ńver^  (L  e.  either  east  of  the  Jordan 

or  ve9t  ofthe  Eophimtes,  although  Joeephus,  A nł,  vii,  6, 

3,  nndeiEUiidB  it  to  mean  east  of  the  Euphrates),  where 

Darid  gained  a  victory  over  the  oombined  foroea  of  the 

SjriaoB  nnder  Hadadezer,  appai^ntly  between  Damaa- 

cos  and  the  comitry  of  the  Anrnionites.     Ewald  (/«r. 

Ge$tLu,e20)  eomparea  the  Alamatha  ('AXó/ia&a)  of 

Pudeny  (v,  15, 25),  on  the  west  bank  of  the  Enphiates, 

Bear  Nioephorium.     See  David, 

Hellmh  (Heb.  Che&ah%  rJTf^nj/ainess ;  Sept  'EX. 

fia  T.  r.  Xf/3^a  and  2x^^<«)'  *  ^^^  ^^  ^^^  ^^^  ^ 
Asber,  bom  which  the  Canaanites  were  not  expelled, 
mattioned  between  Achzib  and  Aphik  (Judg.  i,  81); 
tet  not  (as  G€senius  suggeste)  identical  with  Ahlab, 
wiueh  ia  aiao  mentioned  in  the  same  rerse.  Perhaps  it 
wai  ńtuated  in  oome  fertile  tract  (as  the  names  impły) 
in  the  Talley  of  the  Kishon,  possibly  at  Ha\fa, 

Hel^bon  CLl^b,  Chelbon%  li^^*?) /<<')  '^  ^  fertile; 

Sept  Xt\fii!tv  V.  r.  XtfBpwv)j  a  name  which  occun  only 

in  £iek.  xxvii,  18,  where  "  the  winę  of  Helbon"  is  named 

among  the  commodities  brought  from  Damascns  to  the 

gnat  maiket  of  Tyre.    The  Syriac,  S^^mmachus,  the 

CIttUee,  and  Tulgate,  all  regard  the  word  as  an  appel- 

latire  descripdye  of  the  ąuality  of  the  winę  as  pwffue 

(tUM  or  ruwm  dulce  cocłunu    But  it  is  better  to  aocept 

the  indicatJott  of  the  Sept^  which,  by  giving  the  proper 

name  X»\fiuv^  must  be  supposed  to  have  had  in  view  a 

płace,  which  haa  heuce  generally  been  inferred  to  be  the 

aate  with  that  old  city  of  Syria  that  appears  under  the 

fonn  of  Ckafybon  {XaXvPt:fv)  in  Ptolemy  {Geog.  v,  15) 

and  Stmbo  (xv,  605>    The  Utter  author  menttons  this 

Cbalybon  as  a  pUoe  famous  for  w^ine ;  and  in  describing 

the  hixary  of  the  kings  of  Persia,  he  aays  they  would 

hs^  wheat  brought  from  Asaos  in  iEolia,  Chalybonian 

vźoe  out  of  Syria,  and  water  from  the  Eulcus  (tho  river 

llai  of  Dan*  viii,  2),  which  was  the  lightest  of  any. 

Both  Hesychiua  and  Flatarch  {Vit,  Aler.  ii)  speak  of 

fiut  iSuDoua  winę.     It  has  generally  been  thought  that 

the  name  was  derived  from  Cbalybon,  where  it  was  sup- 

poeed  the  winę  was  produced.     But  is  it  not  strange 

that  Damaacua  shoold  be  rq)resented  as  supplying  the 

^rine  of  UelbcHi  to  the  marts  of  Tyre  ?    Why  would  not 

tbe  native  nMirchants  themselves  carry  it  thither?     A 

paaaage  which  Bochart  quotes  Irom  Athenseus  (i,  51) 

ihrows  ligbt  on  thb  point:  "The  king  of  the  Persians 

diank  Chalybonian  winę  alone;  which,  says  Poseidoni- 

K.  KOS  aUo  produced  m  DamaMcui*  (Bochart,  Opp.  ii, 

4M;\    We  aie  thus  led,  both  by  the  statement  of  Eze- 

kid  and  by  that  of  Poseidonius,  who  was  himself  a  na- 

tire  of  Syria,  to  look  for  a  Helbon  or  Cbalybon  at  or 

Bear  Damascua.     Seleucus  Kicator  is  said  to  have 

ckanged  the  name  to  Beraa  (Niceph.  Callist  xiv,  89) ; 

hit  tbe  old  name,  as  we  see  from  Ptolemy,  was  not  for- 

P<ten,  and  on  the  captore  of  the  city  by  the  Arabe  in 

tW  7th  century  it  was  agaiii  resumed  (Schultens,  Index 

'i*ogr,  ta  ritam  Saladim,  s.  v.  Hakbum).— Ritto.     The 

óty  neferred  to  haa  usually  been  identified  with  the 

i  Aieppą  a  hurge  city  of  Syria,  called  //aM  by 


the  Arabs;  but  Rnssel  states  (Natural  ffStt.  of  Aleppo, 
Lond.  1794,  i,  80)  that  but  little  winę  is  madę  there,  and 
that  the  wbite  wines  especially  are  poor  and  thin,  and 
difficult  to  keep ;  nor  has  this  place  ever  obtained  any 
celebrity  for  its  yintagcs.  Hence  Prof.  Hackett  is  in- 
dined  to  adopt  the  suggestiou  madę  to  him  while  yisit- 
ing  this  region  in  1852  by  Dr.  Paulding,  one  of  the 
American  missionaries  there,  that  the  Biblical  Helbon 
shoold  rather  be  sought  in  one  ofthe  principal  yillagea 
of  the  same  name  lying  in  the  wady  IfeAon,  on  the 
eastem  slope  of  Anti-Lebanon,  n^prth  of  the  Barrada. 
He  was  uiformed  by  those  who  had  visited  the  place 
that  the  grapes  produced  there  are  remarkable  for  their 
fine  qoality,  and  that  the  winę  obtained  from  them  is 
regarded  as  the  choioe  winę  of  that  part  of  Syiia  {/Uu9- 
^fYitibiuo/iScrt/iftiiY, N.York,  1855, p. 214).  Dr. Robin- 
son, to  whom  he  mentioned  this  suggestion,  visited  the 
place  in  his  last  Joumey  to  Palestine,  and  f ully  accords 
with  the  Identification.  He  thus  describes  the  valley 
and  town:  "Wady  Helbon  is  a  valley  an  honr  or  morę 
in  length,  shut  in  by  high  and  mgged  sides.  The  bot- 
tom  is  a  strip  of  level  ground,  eyeiywhere  well  culti- 
vated.  Throughout  the  whołe  extent  of  the  valley 
there  are  well>kept  vineyards.  £ven  placea  so  steep 
that  the  yine-drpaaer  can  approach  them  with  diiiiculty 
are  madę  to  produce  an  abundanoe  of  grapea.  In  Da- 
mascus  the  grapes  are  chiefly  esteemed  for  their  fine  fla- 
vor,  and  from  them  is  madę  the  best  and  most  highiy- 
prized  winę  of  the  country.  The  village  of  Helbon  is 
nearly  midway  up  the  vdley.  There  are  many  ruins 
in  and  around  ir,  but  mostly  dilapidated;  and  hewn 
Stones,  capitals,  friezes,  and  broken  columns  are  built 
into  the  walls  of  the  modem  dwellings.  On  the  west 
of  the  yillage  is  an  extenstve  min,  supposed  to  have 
onoe  been  a  tempie.  On  some  of  the  blocks  are  frag- 
ments  of  Greek  inscriptions  no  longer  legible"  (new  ed. 
of  Retearchet,  iii,  471,  472> 

Helchl^ah  (Xi\Klac,  1  Esd.  viii,  1)  or  Helchi^as 
(^Helcia*,  2  Ead.  i,  1),  the  Greek  and  Latin  forms  of  the 
name  of  the  high-priest  Hilkiah  (q.  v.). 

Her  dal  (Heb.  Chelday\  *''nbn,  wrldfy ;  Sept,  XoX. 
iat,  but  oi  apxovrtc  in  Zech.  vi,  10;  Vulg.  Holdai),  the 
name  of  two  men. 

1.  A  Netpphathite  and  descendant  of  Othniel,  chief  of 
the  tweiah  diyision  (24,000)  of  David*s  forces  (1  Chroń. 
xxviL  15).  B.C.  1014.  In  1  Chroń,  xi,  80  (whera  he 
13  called  Heled)  hisiather^s  name  is  said  to  be  Baanah ; 
and  in  the  parallel  passage  (2  Sam.  xxiii,  29)  he  is  call- 
ed Helkb. 

2.  One  of  those  lately  retumed  from  the  Captivity 
whom  the  prophet  Zechariah  was  directed  to  take  with 
him  when  he  wenti  to  crown  the  high-priest  Joehna,  as 
a  sjrmbol  of  the  futurę  Me88iah's  advent  (Zech.  vi,  10). 
B.C.  520.     In  ver.  14  the  name  is  written  Helem. 

Heldna,  the  first  station  mentioned  in  the  Jeruaa- 
lem  Itinerary  south  of  Berytns  and  north  of  Porphyreon ; 
now  probably  khan  eUKhulda  (Robinson,  Bib,  Re$,  ii, 
4d5)^yan  de  Yelde,  Afemoir,  p.  820. 

Haaab  (Heb.  Che^leb,  ^hnyfaimu,  as  often;  Sept 
'EXd^,  Yulg.  Heled),  son  of  Baanah  the  Ketophathite, 
and  one  of  David'8  warriors  (2  Sam.  xxiii,  29) ;  else- 
where  morę  correctly  called  Heled  (1  Chroń,  xi,  80), 
or,  still  better,  Hełdai  (1  Chroń,  xxvi,  15). 

Heled  (Heb.  Che'Ud,  *1^n,  this  tcorU,  as  transito- 
ry ;  SepU  '£Xa^,  Yulg.  Heled),  son  of  Baanah,  a  Ketoph- 
athite, and  one  of  David*B  warriors  (1  Chroń,  xi,  80) ; 
called  in  the  parallel  passage  (2  Sam.  xxiii,  29)  Hkleb, 
but  morę  accurately  H£U)ai  in  1  Chroń,  xxvii,  15. 

Helek  (Heb.  Che'lek,  pbn,  a  poriion,  as  often; 
Sept.  Xi\%x  >iid  XAcx«Vulg.  Hekc\  the  second  son  of 
Gilead  of  the  tribe  of  Manasseh  (Josh.  xvii,  2),  whose 
desoendants  were  called  Helekites  (Hebrew  Chelki*, 
*^pbn,  NumK  xxvi,  30 ;  Sept.  XfX£ci').     B.C.  cir.  1612. 

He^lekita  (Numb.  xxvi,  80).    See  Helek. 


TTTCT.TCM 


164 


HELFFERICH 


Heblem,  the  namo  of  one  or  Łwo  men,  rarioualy 
writtoi  in  the  Hebrew. 

1.  He'lex  (Obn,  a  ttrohe;  Sept  *EXa/i,  Vulg.  He- 
km),  a  brother  of  Shamer  (or  Shomer)  and  great-grand- 
8on  of  Asher,  Beveral  of  Mrhose  8onB  are  enumerated  in  1 
Chroń,  vii,  35 ;  perhaps  the  aame  with  Hotha3i,  yer.  32. 
Ra  probw  cir.  1658. 

2.  Che'ł£M  (fi^n,  in  Chaldee  a  dream,  as  often  in 
Dan.;  or  robust;  Sept.  oi  vvofiivovT(c  airróv,  Yulg. 
Ifeleni),  one  of  thoee  aasociated  with  Zechariah  in  the 
typical  crowning  orthe  high-priest,  or,  aa  it  appears, 
hinwelf  also  crowned  (Zech.  vi,  14,  "  Heled,"  prób.  by 
erroneous  tzaiiscription  for  Heled  or  Heldai,  ver.  10). 

Helena,  Sr.,  mother  of  Oonstantine  the  Great  She 
was  bom  about  274;  Gloucester,  Triers,  and  Bithynia  di*- 
pute  the  honor  of  being  her  birthplace.  Some  consider 
her  os  of  noble  family,  while  the  older  authorities  state 
that  she  was  daughter  of  a  shepherd  or  iimkeeper. 
Constantius  Chiorus  is  said  to  have  married  her  for  her 
beauty.  She  is  also  said  to  have  at  fiist  been  only  his 
concubine,  but  this,  perhaps,  is  a  nustake,  arising  from 
the  fact  that  the  Roman  law  applied  to  women  mairying 
above  their  station  a  name  which  had  also  this  meaii- 
ing.  When  Constantius  beeame  eraperor  he  rcpudiated 
her,  and  she  resided,  perhaps,  in  the  neighborhood  of 
Triers  mitil  her  son  Constantine  called  her  back  with 
the  title  of  Augusta.  She  did  much  towaids  softening 
the  naturally  tyiannical  disposition  of  her  son..  She  un- 
dertook  a  pilgrimage  to  the  Uoly  Land  about  825,  where, 
by  80-called  miracubus  agendes,  she  is  said  to  have  dis- 
covered,  under  the  mins  of  a  heathen  tempie,  the  sepul- 
chre  and  cross  of  Christ,  the  latter  of  which  was  *^  proved 
genuine  by  the  miracles  it  ¥rrought!'*  She  bnilt  a 
church  on  the  site,  which  remains  to  this  day  in  part. 
Ali  this  gave  a  great  impulse  to  pilgrimages  to  the  Uoly 
Land,  and  indirectly  to  the  Crusades.  She  lefb  Palc&- 
tine  in  S27,  returned  to  her  son,  and  died  probably  aoon 
after.  The  Komans  claim  to  have  her  nmains  in  the 
church  of  Ara  Coeli.  The  monks  of  Hautvilliei3,  near 
Rheims  (France),  claim,  on  the  other  hand,  that  one  of 
their  order,  as  early  as  in  the  9th  century,  brought  the 
body  of  the  saint  from  thence  to  their  ćonrent,  Un- 
fortunately,  the  Yenetians  state,  on  the  other  side,  that 
ehe  saint  was  buried  at  Constantinople,  and  that  her  re- 
mains were  thence  transferred  to  their  city.  So  devotee8 
kneel  in  three  different  places,  on  the  18th  of  August, 
before  the  remains  of  the  daughter  of  a  shepherd  or  inn- 
keeper,  who  sub6equently  beeame  a  sainted  empress. 
Monographs  on  St.  Helena  and  her  histoiy  are  enumer- 
ated in  Yolbeding,  rndex  Programmatum,  p.  125.  See 
Eusebius,  Life  of  Conttcmtme  ;  Herzog,  Real-Encyldop. ; 
and  the  articlea  Cboss;  Jrrusalem. 

He'leph  (Heb.  Che'Uph,  ^n,  an  erchcmpe,  as  in 
Numb.  xviii,  21,  31 ;  Sept.  joins*  with  prefixed  preposi- 
tion  M€i\e^ ;  Vulg.  Hdeph),  a  city  mentioned  apparent- 
ly  as  the  starting-point  of  the  northem  border  of  Naph- 
tali,beginuuig  at  the  west  (Josb.  xix,33).  Van  de  Yelde 
thinks  it  may  be  the  same  with  BeitMf  a  village  with 
andent  remains  (comp.  Robinson,  LcUer  Reuarchet,  p. 
61,  62),  nearly  due  east  of  the  Ras  Abyad,  and  west  of 
Kades,  on  the  S.  edge  of  a  veiy  marked  ravine  (wady 
el-Ayun),  which  probably  formed  part  of  the  boundary 
between  Naphtali  and  Asher  fS^an  de  Yelde,  Syria,  i, 
233) ;  nor  is  the  objection  of  Keil  (^Comment.  ad  loc),  that 
the  position  is  represented  as  being  at  the  intersection 
of  the  northem  border  of  Palestine  with  the  eastem  linę 
of  Asher,  altogether  correct,  sińce  several  of  the  assod- 
ated  names  are  likewise  somewhat  interior. 

Helez  (Heb.  che'l€t^,  ybn  or  yhn,  m  pause  i^in, 

Cka'leis,  perh.  /ot»  or  strong;  Sept  XaXXic  or  X£X\^c 
V.  r.  Y.t\\r\c  \  Vulg.  Heks,  Helies),  the  name  of  two  men. 

1.  Son  of  Azariah  and  father  of  Eleasah,  of  the  tribe 
of  Judah  (1  Chroń,  ii,  39).     B.C.  apparently  ant€  1017. 

2.  An  Ephraimite  of  Pelon,  and  one  of  bavid*s  war- 
liors,  and  afterwards  captain  of  his  aeventh  regiment  (2 


Sam.  xxiii,  26 ;  1  Chion.  xi,  27 ;  xxviii,  10>  Sia  lOU 
et  antę. 

Helfenstain,  Charles,  a  minister  of  the  German 
Reformed  Church,  and  son  of  Rev.  J.  C  A.  Helfenstein, 
was  bom  March  29,  1781.  He  spent  his  youth  as  a 
printer,  and  afterwaids  studied  theology  with  Rev.  Dr. 
Becker,  of  Baltimore,  Md.  He  was  licenaed  and  cr- 
dained  by  the  Synod  of  the  German  Reformed  Church 
in  May,  1801,  and  was  pastor  8uooeBaively  at  Alleman- 
gel,  Berks  County,  Pa.;  Goshenhoppen,  Montgomeiy 
County,  Pa. ;  Ephrata,  Lancaster  County,  Pa. ;  Hanovar 
and  Berlin,  York  County,  Pa.;  Rockingham  County, 
Ya. ;  and  Mechanicsburg,  Cumberland  County,  Pa.  Ue 
died  Dec.  19, 1842.  With  many  imiocent  ecóentricities, 
he  was  actuated  by  deep  eamestncss,  a  chiidlike  piety, 
and  a  tundly  spiriL  Ue  pieached  in  both  the  GÓman 
and  English  languagea.    (H.  H.) 

Helfenstein,  John  Conrad  Albert,  one  of  the 
iathers  of  the  German  Reformed  Church  in  the  United 
States,  was  bom  at  Moszbach,  Palatinate,  Feb.  16, 1748. 
He  studied  theolog\'  at  the  UniverBity  of  Heidelberg, 
and  was  sent  by  the  Synod  of  Holland,  in  company  with 
Rev.  J.  H.  Helfferich  and  Rev.  J.  G.  Gebhaid,  aa  mission- 
aries  to  America.  He  arrivcd  in  New  York  Jan.  14, 
1772,  and  soon  after  took  charge  of  the  congregation  at 
Germautown,  Pa.  Towards  the  dose  of  1775  he  aocept- 
ed  a  cali  from  Lancaster,  but  in  1779  retumed  to  his 
Germautown  congregation,  and  labored  there  until  his 
death,  May  17, 1790.  He  was  an  doąuent  and  suocess- 
ful  preacher,  and  his  ministry,  both  at  Lancaster  and 
Germautown,  provGd  a  great  bleasing.  Several  smoli 
volumes  of  his  sermons  have  been  publishcd. — Harbaugh, 
Fatkers  ofthe  Reformed  Church^  ii,  222  sq. 

Helfenstein,  Jonathan,  a  German  Reforaied 
minister,  third  son  of  Rev.  J.  C  A.  Helfenstein,  was  bom 
in  Germantown,  Pa.,  Jan.  19, 1784.  He  studied  theol- 
ogy with  Rev.  Dr.  Becker,  of  Baltimore,  Md.  He  was 
licensed  in  1805,  and  ordained  in  1807 ;  pastor  of  the 
German  Reformed  congregation  in  CarlLsle  tiU  1811, 
when  he  was  caUed  to  Frederick,  Md.,  where  he  labored 
with  great  success  to  the  time  of  his  death,  Sept.  29, 
1829.  He  was  a  zealous  pastor,  and  an  impre8!ńve 
preacher  in  both  the  German  and  English  languages. 
(H.H.) 

Helfferich,  John  Henry,  a  minister  of  the  Ger* 
man  Reformed  Church  in  the  United  States,  was  bom 
at  Moszbach,  Paktiimte,  Oct  22, 1739.  After  studying 
theology,  he  was  licensed  Sept.  22, 1761,  and  labored  for 
a  time  in  his  own  countr}'.  In  January,  1772,  he  ar- 
rived  in  New  York  as  a  missionary,  together  with  Rev. 
J.  C.  A.  Helfenstein  and  Rev.  J.  G.  GebhanL  He  soon 
after  settled  at  AYeissenberg,  Lehigh  County,  Pa.,  where 
his  chaige  comprehended  as  many  as  seven  congrega- 
tions  at  one  time.  Herę  he  remained,  declining  aU  calls 
from  other  churches,  and  labored  faithfully  until  his 
death,  Dec  5, 1 810.  ^  During  his  ministi^'  Mr.  Helferich 
baptized  5830,  and  confirmed  4000  souls.  He  may  be 
regarded  as  the  father  of  the  German  Reformed  Church 
in  the  field  over  which  hb  labors  extended.  Though 
that  part  of  the  Church  did  not  escape  the  generał  stag- 
nation  of  a  later  period  through  German  ratiooaliam 
and  indilference,  yet  the  vautage-ground  upon  which  it 
was  placed,  by  means  of  his  labors,  bas  been  a  blessing 
to  it  down  to  our  day.''— Harbaugh,  Fatkers  ofthe  R^ 
formed  Church,  ii,  241  są. 

Helfferich,  John,  a  son  of  Rev.  John  Henry  Helf- 
ferich, was  bom  in  Weissenberg,  Lehigh  Count^',  Pa., 
Jan.  17,  1795.  He  completed  his  theological  studies 
with  Rev.  Dr.  Samuel  Helfenstein  in  Philadelphia,  was 
licensed  in  1816,  and  ordained  in  1819.  He  beótme  pas- 
tor of  the  same  congregations  in  Lehigh  County,  Pa., 
which  his  father  had  8er\'ed  for  many  years,  in  which 
field  he  oontinued  to  labor  with  much  zeal  and  success 
to  the  end  of  his  life.  He  died  suddenly,  April  8, 1852. 
During  his  ministry  he  baptized  4591,  and  rec^ved  into 
fuli  communiou  with  the  Church,  by  ooDfirmatioOi  be- 


HELI 


165 


HELL 


tWeen  two  and  three  thoiisand  persona.    Ile  preached 
only  in  the  German  language.     (H.  H.) 

Heli,  or  rather  £u  ('HAt,  in  some  ed.  *HXć  or  'MAfi, 
Heb.  'iy,  Eli),  a  name  that  oocurs  once  in  the  N.  T. 
and  once  in  Łhe  Apociypha. 

1.  The  third  of  three  nanieś  inserted  between  Achitob 
and  Amarias  in  the  genealogy  of  £zxa,  in  2  Esd.  i,  2,  for 
which  theie  is  no  oorresponding  name  In  the  Heb.  Ust 
(£zmvii,2,3). 

2.  The  father-in-Iaw  of  Joseph,  and  matemal  grand- 
father  of  Christ  (Lukę  iii,  23).  B.aante22.  SeeGjsN- 
]EAu>GY  OF  Jesus  Christ. 

Heli^as,  the  Latin  form  (2  £8d.Yii,89)  of  the  name 
of  the  prophet  Eujah. 

Heliodoms  ('HcAió^wpoc,  i.  e.  ffijl  of  the  nm,  a 
not  nnireąiient  Greek  name),  the  treasurer  (ó  iiri  rGtv 
wpajiiarmy)  of  Seleocus  Philopator,  who  was  commis- 
aioDed  by  the  king,  at  the  instigation  of  Apollonius  (q. 
V.),  to  cany  away  the  private  treasures  deposited  in  the 
Tempie  at  Jeruaalem.  Aocoiding  to  the  nanative  in  2 
Maoc.  iii,  9  sq^  he  was  stayed  from  the  execution  of  his 
design  by  a  "great  apparition^'  (jirŁ^av»a),  in  conse- 
ąnence  of  which  he  feU  down  "compassed  with  great 
darkness^"  and  speechleas.  He  was  afterwards  restored 
at  the  intercession  of  the  high-priest  Onias,  and  borę 
wttness  to  the  king  of  the  inviohibIe  majesty  of  the 
Tempie  (2  Mace.  iii).  The  fuU  details  of  the  ńarratire 
are  not  supported  by  any  other  evidence.  Josephus, 
who  was  unaoquainted  with  2  Maoc.,  takes  no  notioe  of 
it  {AnL  xix,  3, 3);  and  the  author  of  the  so-called  iv 
Maoc  attributes  tbe  attempt  to  plunder  the  Tempie  to 
Apolloniufl,  and  differs  in  his  acoount  of  the  miraculoos 
interpocdtion,  though  he  distinctly  recognises  it  {De 
Mace  4  oppóyóOcy  i^wtroi  Trpov^avii9av  ayyiKoi  .  .  . 
KoramtTuty  di  rtfuSatnjc  6  'ATCoKku/pioc  .  .  .).  Heli- 
odoms allerwards  murdered  Seleucus,  and  madę  an  un- 
successful  attempt  to  seize  Łhe  Syrian  crown  (App.  Syr, 
45).  IŁC.  175.  Comp.  Wemsdorf,  De  fide  Libr.  Mace. 
§  lir.  Raffiielle*s  grand  picture  of  "Heliodoms"*  bas 
often  becn  oopied  and  engrared.— Smith,  s.  v. 

HeliodoroB  of  Emesa,  in  Syria,  flourishcd  in  the 
latter  part  of  the  4th  century  after  Christ.  He  was  the 
author  of  the  celebrated  romance  enlitled  ^Jthiopica, 
or  account  of  the  love  and  adrentures  of  Thcogcnes  and 
Charidea,  the  oldest  and  best  of  the  Greek  roroances,  and 
the  model  of  many  subsequcnt  ones.  This  was  written 
in  eaily  life,  and  afterwards  Heliodoms  became  a  Chris- 
tian, and  was  madę  bishop  of  Tricca,  in  Sicily,  where 
he  introdoocd  the  regulation  that  every  married  priest 
aboold,  iipon  his  ordination,  separate  from  his  wife  or  be 
deposed  (Socrates,  Higt,  Eakes.  v,  22).  Nicephoras  states 
{Hitt.  Eedet.  xii,  84)  that  a  prorincial  synod,  because  of 
tbe  injnrious  tendency  of  the  A^iMopica  upon  the  minds 
of  the  yoang,  decreed  that  Heliodoms  should  dther  con- 
denm  and  disown  it,  or  resign  his  bishopric.  This  state- 
ment  is  genenUy  rejected  as  improbable,  sińce  it  is  madę 
by  no  other  author,  and  the  jEilUopica  contains  nothing 
of  a  oorruptiye  tendency.  The  best  edition  of  the  Greek 
text  is  that  by  Coraes  (Paris,  1804, 2  yols.  8vo).— Smith, 
Dkt  Grk,  and  Rom,  Biog.  and  Mytkolocy,  ii,  878 ;  Dun- 
bp,  BiML  ofFiaion  (London,  1845, 1  voL  8vo),  p.  18-24 ; 
iniotius,Co(2.73;Heizog,ieea/-£iić^l2Dp&2«f,v,699.  (J. 
W.M.) 

HeUogabftluB  (Ełagabalus),  emperor  of  Romę, 
was  bom  at  Emcaa  about  AD.  205.  His  name  was  Ya- 
ms  Aritus  Basmanos,  but  he  was  madę  priest  of  Elaga- 
balns  (£1-Gabal),  the  Syro-Phoenician  Sun-god,  about 
A.D.  217,  and  took  that  name.  In  May,  218,  through 
tbe  intrigues  of  his  mother,  Julia  McBsa,  with  the  sol- 
dieiy,  he  was  prodaimed  emperor ;  and,  soon  after.  Mar 
CEinos,  who  was  marehing  to  pat  down  this  usurpation, 
waa  defeatedi  His  reign,  which  lasted  not  quite  four 
ycan^  was  chaiacterized  by  supeirstitlou,  lioentiousness, 
and  craelty  to  a  degree  hardly  rivalled  by  the  worst 
Boman  empenirs.  He  introduced  the  worship  of  the 
Sim-god  into  Korne,  and  even  paseed  a  decree  that  no 


other  celestial  power  should  be  wonhipped.  The  pr»- 
torians  siew  him  in  camp,  AD.  222.  As  he  himself  in- 
troduced a  new  religion  into  Korne,  it  was  not  his  policy 
to  persecute,  and  so,  during  that  time,  the  Christians 
had  "  rest." 

Herkai  (Heb.  Chełkay%  '^^in.toT  njjsin,  JeAopaA 
is  his  portion  /  Sept  'EXraf),  son  of  Meraioth,  and  one 
of  the  chief  priests  in  the  time  of  the  high-priest  Joia- 
kim  (Nch.  xii,  15).     KC.  post  536. 

Hel'kath  (Heb.  Chelkatk',  tnpin,  Josh.  xix,  25,  but 
ncbn,  even  without  pau8e-accent,'jo8h.  xxi,  31 ;  "con- 
struct"  of  n]?^n,  włoofA/wM,  as  in  Gen.  xxvii,  16,  or  jwr- 
tion,  as  in  Gen.' xxxiii,  19,  etc;  Sept.  XfX«a^),  a  town 
of  Asher,  on  the  castem  border,  mentioned  as  the  start- 
ing-point  in  the  direction  (apparently  southward)  to 
Achshaph  (Josh.  xix,  25) ;  assigned  as  one  of  the  Le- 
vitical  cities  (Josh.  xxi,  31).  In  1  Chroń,  vi,  75,  it  ap- 
pears  to  be  erroneously  written  Hukok.  See  Hukkok. 
In  the  Onomattioon  it  is  simply  mentioned  by  Eusebius 
as  '£0af|,  by  Jerome  as  ElcaŁh;  but  neither  seems  to 
have  knowu  it.  De  Saulcy  indines  to  identify  it  with 
a  village  called  Kirkehf  which  he  reports  not  far  south- 
east  of  Akka  (Narrałite,  i,  68) ;  and  Schwarz  (PaUsiine, 
p.  191)  thinks  it  is  the  modem  Yerka^  about  seven  miles 
north-east  of  Akka;  but  neither  of  these  positions  is  in 
the  neighborhood  indicated  by  the  tcxt,  which  rather 
reąuires  a  locality  nearer  the  north-eastem  angle  of  the 
tribe,  not  unlikely  at  the  ruined  >iUage  Ukrith,  about 
twelve  miles  S.E.  of  Tyre,  as  proposed  by  Van  de  Velde 
{Memoir,  p.  820).  See  Heucath-iiazzurim. 
Hel^kath-haz^Burim  (Heb.  Ckelkaźh' haU-Tsurim', 
n'^'nsn"rgbn,j0fo«  o/tke  rocks)^  a  designation  of  the 
plain  just  below  the  pool  of  Gibeon,  on  the  east,  acquired 
from  the  deadly  combat  between  twelre  of  l8hbo8heth's 
men  and  as  many  of  David*s,  which  formed  a  prelude  to 
the  generał  engagement  (2  Sam.  ii,  16).  See  Gibeon. 
As  to  the  name,  **  Ewald  approves  the  readiug  which  the 
Sept.  seem  to  have  followed  (ftipic  tuv  ivipo{f\iaVf  ap- 
parently from  their  reading  0*^*^X21),  as  that  which  ak>ne 
gives  a  suitable  meaning  to  the  name  {Gesch.  Isr,  ii,  575, 
notę  1).  Gesenius  renders  by  *  the  field  of  swords,'  which 
can  hardly  be  admitted;  for,  though  ^^:i  is  oaed  in  the 
sense  of  an  '  edge,'  it  is  never  used  simply  for  ^sword.* 
FUrst  gives  Felsenkahlheił,  'rock-smoothness,'  as  the 
meaning,  the  place  being  smooth  and  level  as  a  surface 
of  rock.  Aquila  gives  Kkrjpoc  ruty  (rrc/>c(iSv,  and  the 
Vulg.  Affer  robtutorumy  taking  *niX  in  a  flgurative  sense, 
of  which,  however,  there  is  no  other  instanoe"  (Kitto). 

Helki^as  (XcXciac),  a  still  different  Greek  form  (1 
Esd.  i,  8)  of  the  name  of  the  high-priest  Hilkiah. 

HeU,  a  term  which  originaUy  oorresponded  morę  ex- 
actly  to  Hades,  being  derived  from  the  Saxon  helan,  to 
cover,  and  signifying  merely  the  coeered,  or  invi8ible 
place— the  habitation  of  those  who  have  gone  from  this 
visible  terrestrial  region  to  the  world  of  spirits.  But  it 
bas  been  so  long  appropriated  in  common  nsage  to  the 
place  of  futurę  punishment  for  the  wicked,  that  its  ear- 
lier  meaning  bas  been  loet  sight  of.  In  the  English  Bi- 
bie it  is  used  in  the  wider  sense. 

I.  Utbrew  and  Greek  Temu* — The  three  words,  which 
all  but  monopolisse  the  subject,  are  biK^,  She6l%  in  the 
O.  T. ;  and  "AiBrię,  Hades,  and  Fitwa,  Gehenna,  in  tbe 
N.  T.  bS^'^  oocurs  65  times ;  in  6 1  of  these  it  is  rendered 
in  the  Sept  by  "A^i^c ;  twice  by  Odyaroc  (2  Sam.  xxii, 
G,  and  Prov.  xxiii,  14) ;  and  twice  omitted  in  the  com- 
mon text  (Job  xxiv,  1 9 ;  £zek.  xxxu,  21).  In  the  Yulg. 
hhwÓ  is  trandated  48  times  by  Itfemus,  and  17  times 
by  Inferus  [mostly /n/ert  (plnr.)].  In  our  A.V.  it  is 
represented  31  times  hy  Grave,  81  times  by  HeU,  and  8 
times  by  Pif,  In  the  N.  Test.  our  word  HeU  occurs  23 
times;  12  times  it  stands  for  Fitwa,  and  11  times  [per' 
hapg  the  twelfth  should  be  added,  see  Tischendorf  and 
Bmder  (.Concord.)  on  Rev.  iii,  7]  for  "Adfic,    The  Yulg. 


HEŁŁ 


166 


HEŁŁ 


closely  fdlows  the  ońginal  in  its  N.-T.  renderings;  in 
all  the  twelve  paasages  Pitwa  U  simjily  copied  into  Ge- 
hennOf  while  Infenuu  stands  for  eveiy  occurrence  of 
"AdriCf  exoept  once  CSlatt.  xvi|  18),  where  tho  phrase 
iruAai  ^dou  ("gałes  o/ helT)  becomes  "porto  inferi," 
Since,  therafore,  b'lX)Ś,"A^J7c,  and  Fccwa,  aie  employ- 
ed  in  the  sacred  original  to  designate  the  mysteries  of 
Hell,  we  proceed  to  give  fint  their  probable  deriration, 
and  then  their  meaning,  so  far  as  Holy  Scripture  aasists 
in  its  discovery. 

(L)  Tkeir  Derwation,—!.  iiXO  (or,  as  it  is  occasion- 
ally  written,  Vi!(^),  Sheól\  \s  by  inost  of  the  old  writcrs 
(see  Cocceius,  Lei.  p.  840, 841 ;  Schindler,  Lex,  Peta,  1782 ; 
Robinson,  Key  to  Jlebrew  Bibie,  ii,  217 ;  and  Leigh,  Crit, 
Sacra,  i,  238 ;  ii,  6)  referred  for  its  origin  to  ^2<^,  to  de- 
numd,  seek,  or  ask,  They  are  not  agreed  as  to  the  modę 
of  connecting  the  deńratire  with  this  root;  Cocceius 
Buggests  an  absurd  reason,  "bi^lś  notat  eum  locum  in 
quo  qui  est  tn  gueutUme  ea^*  (!)  A  morę  respectable  so- 
lution  is  suggested  by  thoee  who  see  in  the  insoHable' 
ness  of  bixiÓ  (Prov.  xxx,  15, 16)  a  good  ground  for  con- 
necting it  with  the  root  in  ąuestion.  Thus  Fagius  on 
Gen.  xxxvii;  Buxtorf,  Lexiconj  s.  v.,  referring  to  Isa.  v, 
14;  Habak.  ii,  5;  Prov.  xxvii,  20.  (Ernst  Meier,  IId>r, 
ir-T0-&,  p.  187,  alao  adopts  this  root,  but  hc  is  far-fetched 
and  obscure  in  his  view  of  its  relation  to  the  derived 
word).  (A  good  defence  [by  a  modem  scholar]  of  this 
derivation  of  Sheol  ftom  the  verb  b^^  is  given  by  Gll- 
der,  ZeArc  v.  d,  Erschein,  Jesu  Christi  unter  den  Todten 
[Beme,  1853],  and  morę  briefly  in  his  art  Hades  [Her- 
zog, v„441,  Clark's  trans,  ii,  468].  His  defence  is  based 
on  the  many  passages  which  uige  the  insatiable  demand 
of  Sheol  for  all  men,  such  as  those  we  have  mentioned 
in  the  text,  and  Gea.  xxxvii,  85 ;  1  Sam.  xxviii ;  Psa. 
ri,  6,  and  lxxxix,  49.  See  also  Yenema  [on  Psa.  xvi, 
10] ;  J.  A.Quensted,  Tract.de  SepuUura  YeUrum,  ix,  1.) 
Bdttchcr  (Dc  Infarit,  p.  76,  §  159)  finds  in  the  root  i?^, 
to  be  hoUaw,  a  better  origin  for  our  word.  Gesenius 
{Tkes.  p.  1847),  who  adopts  the  same  derivation,  sup- 
poses  that  i:9iD  means  to  dig  out,  and  80  oontrive8  to 
unitę  ^919  and  bi<^.  by  making  the  primary  idea  of 
digging  lead  to  the  derived  one  of  seeking  (see  Job  iii,  21). 
Bottcher  goes  on  to  connect  the  German  words  Hohl 
(hoUow)  and  Hdhk  (cavity)  with  the  idea  indicated  by 
^2^ti,  and  timidly  suggests  the  possibility  oflloUe  (Hell) 
coming  from  HóhJe.  ^Vllilst  decidedly  rejecting  this 
derivation,  we  do  not  object  to  his  derivation  of  the  He- 
brew  noun ;  amidst  the  avowed  uncertainty  of  the  case, 
it  seems  to  be  the  least  objectionable  of  the  suggestions 
which  have  been  offered,  and,  to  piovide  an  intelligible 
sense  for  the  word  Sheól,  most  in  harmony  with  many 
BibUcal  passages.  Bottcher  deiuies  the  term  to  mean 
"  vastus  hau  subterraneus'^  (p.  72,  §  153).  This  agiees 
veiy  well  with  the  rendering  of  our  A.y.  in  so  far  as  it 
has  used  the  oomprehensive  word  JJell,  which  properly 
signifies  "  a  covered  or  concealed  place." 

2.  Hades. —  The  univerBally  allowed  sŁatement  that 
the  N.  T.  has  shed  a  light  on  the  mysteries  of  life  and 
immortality  which  is  only  in  an  inferior  degree  discov- 
ered  in  the  O.  T.,  is  seidom  morę  distinctly  verified  than 
in  the  uncertainty  which  attaches  to  Skeol  (the  difficul- 
ty  of  distuiguishing  its  various  degrees  of  meaning, 
which  it  is  generally  felt  exist,  and  which  our  A.  V.  has 
endeavored  to  expres8  by  an  eąual  balance  between  Hell 
and  Grave),  in  contrast  with  the  distinction  which  is 
implied  in  the  about  eąually  freąuent  terms  of  Hades 
and  Geherma,  now  to  be  described.  The  "ASrię  of  the 
N.  T.  was  suggested,  no  doubt,  by  its  freąuent  occurrence 
in  the  Sept.  The  word  was  originally  unaspirated,  as 
in  Homer's  'At^ao  vif\ai  {II  v,  646;  ix,  312),  and  He- 
8iod'8  'At^cw  Kvva  xaXKt6^iitvov  {Theog.  311),  and  Pin- 
dar'8  'Ai^av  \axtiv  {Pyth.  v,  130).  This  form  of  the 
word  give8  greater  credibility  to  the  generally  received 
derivation  of  it  from  a  privat,  and  i?ć« v,  to  see.    (The 


leamed  authors  of  liddell  and  Scotfs  GreA  Lex.  [s.  t^ 
"Klriż\  throw  some  doubt  on  this  view  of  the  ori^n  of 
the  word,  because  of  its  aspirated  beginning,  in  Attia 
Greek.  But  surely  this  is  precaiious  ground.  Is  H 
certain  that  even  Ksa  Attic  writers  it  was  invariably  as- 
pirated? iEachylus  {Sept.  c  Thdf.  (Paley)  310]  haa 
'Atdf  Trpoldyj/ai  [with  the  fenw],  according  to  the  best 
editing.  It  is  true  that  tlus  is  in  a  chorus,  but  in  the 
Agam.  1505,  also  a  chorał  linę,  we  read  fujiiv  kv''At8ov 
fuya\avxiiTift  [with  the  aspirate],  as  if  the  usage  were 
unoertain.  Possibly  in  the  elliptical  phrase  tv  "Aidov 
[scil  oiKifi]  the  aspirate  occuis  because  the  genitive  is 
really  the  name  of  the  God  [not  of  the  region,  which 
might,  for  distinction,  have  been  then  unaspirated]). 
Plutarch  accordingly  explains  it  by  iitSic  Kai  aóparoy 
(De  Isid.  et  Osir.  p.  382),  and  in  the  EtymoL  Magn.  fStfc 
is  deiined  as  x^piov  d^tyykę,  aKÓT0vc  aiittviov  Kai  Zó- 
0ov  irŁir\tipofjiivov  .  .  .  «v  a»  oifiłv  jikiirofiw.  Hadet 
is  thus  *'M«  mrisible  place  or  region  f^  ^Locua  viaSbu9 
nostris  subtractus,'*  as  Giotius  defines  it. 

8.  Gehenna  {Vifwa)  is  composed  of  the  two  Heh.  words 
K*^}  (vaUey)  and  Disri  {Himum,  the  name  of  the  pro- 
prietor  of  the  yalley).  In  the  Sept.  Taiiwa  b  used  in 
Josh.  xviii,  16  to  designate  ^^thc  vaUeg  ofthe  son  ofHin- 
norn^^  the  fuli  oxpre88ion  of  which  is  DŚiT*ja  ■»*.  The 
shorter  appeUation  DSfl  ^*  occurs  in  the  same  yerse. 
The  Kabbinicał  writers  deriye  DŚH  from  DilJ,  **  rugirt^ 
[to  groan  or  moum,  in  Ezek.  xxiv,  23],  as  if  indicative 
of  the  cries  of  the  children  in  the  horrid  rites  of  tłie  Mo> 
loch-worship  (see  Buxtorf,  Lex.  Rab.  p.  108;  Glaasius 
[ed.  Dathii  J,  PhUohg.  Sacr.  i,  806).  The  etymological 
remarks  have  paved  our  way  to  the  next  section  of  our 
subject. 

(II.)  BibUcal  Meaning  ofthese  three  Ternu,—! .  Jiea»- 
ings  o/bixiC,  SheóL—(l.)  The  «  Grapę."*  Much  contro- 
Ycrsy  has  arisen  whether  within  the  meaning  of  Sheol 
should  be  included  "the  grare;^  indecd  this  is  the  only 
ąuestion  of  difficulty.  The  fact,  which  we  have  already 
Btated,  that  our  A.y.  translates  V\^'Ć  ąuite  as  often  by 
*i  grave"  as  by  the  generał  term  "  hell,"  suppUes  a  prima 
fade  reason  for  induding  it.  Without,  however,  in- 
sisting  on  the  probability  that  polemical  theology,  rath- 
er  than  Biblical  sdence,  influenced  our  tranalators,  at 
least  occasionally,  in  their  rendering  of  the  word,  we 
may  here  adduce  on  the  other  side  the  telling  fact  that 
of  all  the  ancient  yersions  not  one  translates  in  any  pas- 
sage  the  Hebrew  Sheol  by  the  equivalcnt  ofgrtwe.  The 
other  Greek  transLators,  likc  the  renerable  Sept.,  so  far 
as  their  fragments  show  (see  Origen,  Hexapki,  passim), 
evexy where  giye^At^^c  for  V\^'Ć  (aometimes  they  uae 
for  the  locative  case  the  older  and  better  phrase  cćc,  lv 
"A(^ov,  sometimes  the  morę  recent  and  yulgar  cię  rw 
"AiStip,  iv  Ttf  "A(^y).  The  Samaritan  text  in  the  seren 
passages  of  the  Pentateuch  has  either  bl^C  (Siol)  or 
b^^(^^.  Onkelos  and  Jonathan  eyeiywhere,  exoept  in 
five  passages,  retain  bSxÓ.  The  Peshito  eveiywhere 
in  both  Testaments  renders  the  Hebrew  Sheol  and  the 
Greek  Hades  by  [b^^^]  Shiul;  and,  as  we  have  ał- 
ready  seen,  the  Yulg.  translates  the  same  words  in  both 
the  O.  T.  and  the  N.  T.  by  inferus  (plur.  Inferi  mostly), 
and,  above  all,  Infemus  (see  above  for  particulars).  It 
is  to  the  later  Targumists  (the  pseudo^onathan  and  the 
Jenisalem  Targum),  and  afterwards  to  the  Rabbinical 
doctors  of  the  Middle  Ages,  that  we  tracę  the  yerńon 
of  the  "sepulchrc"  and  *Hhe  grave"  (thus  in  Gen. 
xxxvii,  35 ;  xlii,  38 ;  xliv,  29, 31,  these  Targumists  ren- 
derediS'Aeo;  by  Kn^stn^p  "^a  [the  house  o/burial];  sim- 
ilarly  did  they  render  Psa.  cxli,  7;  Job  vii,  9;  xiv,  18; 
xvii,  13, 16 ;  xxi,  18 ;  Eccles.  ix,  10,  and  other  passages, 
in  which  it  is  observable  how  often  they  have  been  M- 
lowed  by  our  translators).  See,  for  morę  information  on 
this  point,  archbishop  Usher,  Works  [by  Elrington],  iii, 
319-821 ;  and,  morę  fully,  Bottcher  (p.  68-70,  sec  146- 
149),  who  ąuotes  Kashi  and  Aben  Ezia  [on  G^  xxzvii, 


HELŁ 


16ł 


HELL 


80];  B.  Kimchi  (Lib.  Radie.  a.  r.  V1^('^);  «nd  other 
ftabbis  who  expreaBly  admit  the  grare  within  the  soope 
of  the  meaning  of  8hdoŁ;  B(>tt4:her  also  ąuotes  a  Tery 
bnj  aiTB/  of  oommentaton  and  lexicographen  [Rabbi 
Mardochai  Nathan,  with  extnvagant  one-ńdedness,  in 
his  iJ.łfT.  Comeord,  gires  no  other  sense  to  Sheol  but 
^yp,  the  ^rore],  who  follow  the  Babbinical  doctors 
herein ;  and  be  adds  the  names  of  sach  writera  as  deny 
the  meaning  of  the  gratfe  to  the  Hebrew  Sheol:  amęng 
these  occur  the  leamed  Datch  dirines  Yitringa  and  Ve- 
nema.  The  latter  of  these  expre8Bly  affinns,  "bi^lś 
millo  modo  ad  tepulchrum  pertmebit"  (Commenł,  ad  Ps, 
i,  504).  To  the  authoritiea  he  mentions  we  would  add, 
as  maintaining  the  same  view,  the  leamed  Henry  Ains- 
irorth  (on  Gen.  xxxvii,  85,  ]VorkSj  p.  13ó),  who  draws 
an  important  distinction;  **biMtŚ,  the  tfrant^  the  woid 
meaaeth  not  the  graye  digged  or  madę  with  hands, 
which  ia  named  in  Hebrew  "^3^,  but  it  meaneth  the 
cominon  place  or  state  of  death"  (a  simiUr  distinction 
is  drawn  by  Luther  \Enarr,  m  Gmtt,  xlii,  38] ;  "^^p  is 
only  the  graye  in  which  an  actual  interment  takes 
plsce ;  nonę  thaŁ  die  wAuried  can  haye  this  word  used 
of  them ;  iknr  reostacie  is  blK10,  *'  commune  quoddam 
receptacnlum  non  oorporum  tantum  sed  et  animamm, 
ula  cKunea  mortui  oongregantur."  Ann.  Seneca  \lib,  yiii, 
eotthnorert,  4]  obeenres  between  natural  burial  and  ard- 
jKial — ^^  Omnibus  natura  sepulturam  dedit,"  etc.  So 
Locan,  vii,  818,  says— **  Capit  omnia  teUus  Quie  genuit ; 
oado  tegitur,  qui  non  habet  umam."  Pliny  [Uist,  Not, 
yii,54J  diatinguishes  between  natural  bunal  by  apply- 
iog  to  it  the  word  iepelire,  and  burial  by  ceremony  by 
using  of  it  the  synonyme  humare) ;  Nicolaus  {De  Stpul' 
ckria  Ilebr.  i,  8-14),  who  shows  that  ^IMÓ  is  neyer  used 
of  faneral  pomp,  nar  of  the  burial  of  the  body  in  the 
ground ;  Eberhaid  Buamann,  who  [in  1682]  wrote  Dis- 
teruaio  philoL  de  8cheol  łlebr^  makes  a  statement  to 
the  effect  that  he  had  examined  all  the  passagcs  in  the 
O.  T.,  and  pronouncea  of  them  thus — "NuUum  eorum 
(exoepCo  forsan  uno  vel  altero,  de  quo  tamen  adhuc  du- 
bitari  potest)  de  eepukhro  neeessario  est  inUlUgendum . . . 
Buita  tamen  contra  ita  sunt  comparata  ut  de  sepulchro 
Dullo  modo  inteOigi  poesint,  nec  debeant'*  Some  mod- 
em writen,  who  have  spedally  examined  the  subject, 
abo  deny  that  biMV  ecer  means  ''the  graye."  Thus 
Breecber,  On  the  Tmmortałity  o/ the  Soul  as  held  hy  the 
Jętce  (and  Parean,  Comment,  de  Immort.  ac  rUaftO,  no- 
Hi.  1W7). 

These  reasons  haye  led  leamed  men,  who  haye  espe- 
cially  examined  the  subject,  to  exclude  the  tprare  (spe- 
cifically  nnderstood  as  a  madę  or  art}ficial  one)  from  the 
proper  meaning  of  SheoL  We  cannot  but  accept  their 
yiew  M  erUieal  ezactnest.  But  there  is  an  inexact  and 
generic  seoae  of  Sheol  in  which  the  word  tprate  well  ex- 
preaaes  the  meaning  of  the  Sciiptnre  passages  just  men- 
tioned,  and  (in  justice  to  the  A.y.  it  may  be  admitted) 
of  OKMt  of  the  others,  which  our  translatora  rendered  by 
thia  word.  (The  passages  in  which  the  A.y.  renden 
iiaiÓ  by  ffrare  un  these^-Gen.  xxxyii,  85;  xlii,  38 ; 
xliv,  29,  31 ;  1  Sam.  ii,  6 ;  1  Klngs  ii,  6,  9 ;  Job  vii,  9 ; 
xiv,  13;  xvii,  13;  xxi,  13;  xxiv,  19;  Psa.  vi,  5  [Hebr. 
6];  xxx,  3  [4];  xxxł,  17  [18];  xlix,  14  [15],  twice; 
xlix,  15  [16];  lxxxvuł,  3  [4];  lxxxbc,  48  [49];  cxli, 
7;  Prov.  i,  12;  xxx,  16;  Eccles.  ix,  10;  Cant.  viii,  6; 
Isa.  xiv,  U  [marg.  of  v,  9  bas  ffrave1]  xxxviii,  10,  18; 
Ezek.  xxxi,  15;  Ho&  xiii,  14,  twice;  and  in  Jonah  ii,  2 
[  3]  the  margm  has  "  graye.")  Of  this  morę  v8gne  sense 
Uaher  {Worht,  iii,  824)  says— << When  Sheol  is  said  to 
signily  the  grtnej  the  term  grave  mnst  be  takcn  in  as 
large  a  scnse  as  it  is  in  our  Saviour's  speech  (John  v, 
28),  and  in  Isa.  xxvi,  19,  according  to  the  Sept.  read- 
ing;  upon  which  passage  writes  Origen  thus— 'Hcre 
and  in  many  other  places  the  graves  of  the  dead  are  to 
be  understood,  not  such  only  as  we  see  are  builded  for 
tlie  reoeiying  of  me&*s  bodiea-^either  cut  out  in  stones, 


or  digged  down  in  the  earth ;  but  etery  place  ftherem  a 
man^s  body  lieth  either  entire  or  mpart  .  .  .  otherwise 
they  which  are  not  committed  to  burial,  nor  laid  in 
grayes,  but  haye  ended  their  life  in  shipwiecka,  deserts, 
and  such  like  ways,  should  not  secm  to  be  rcckoned 
among  those  which  are  said  to  be  raised  from  the  graye' 
(/n  ilsai.  lib,  28  cUatus  a  PamphilOj  m  ApoLy  We 
haye  here,  then,  the/?:«f  meaning  of  the  Hebrew  blKIŚ, 
largely  applied,  as  vre  have  seen,  in  our  A.  V.  to  **  the 
graye,"  considered  in  a  universal  sense  (see  the  pasragcs 
in  the  last  notę),  commensurate  with  deaih  itsclf  as  to 
the  extent  of  its  signiAcation.  (Comp.  ^  the  grare  and 
ffote  o/death""  of  the  English  Liturg}%  Collect  for  Eas- 
ter  Eyen.)  Though  we  carefully  exclude  the  artificial 
graye,  or  "^^l^,  from  this  category,  there  is  no  doubt,  as 
bishop  Lowth  has  well  shown  (De  Sacra  Poesi  Ilebr, 
Pł»L  yii  [ed.  Oxon.  with  notes  of  Michaelis  and  Koeen- 
milller,  1821],  p.  65-69),  that  the  Hebrew  poeta  drew  all 
the  imagery  with  which  they  describe  the  state  and 
condition  of  the  dead  from  the  funeral  rites  and  pomp, 
and  from  the  vaulted  septilchres  of  their  great  men. 
The  bishop's  whole  treatment  of  the  Eubject  is  quite 
worth  perusal.  We  can  only  quoto  his  finał  remarks : 
*'You  will  see  this  transcendcnt  imagery  bettcr  and 
morę  complctely  displayed  in  that  noble  triumphal  song 
which  was  composed  by  Isaiah  (xiv,  4-27)  .  .  .  prc- 
yious  to  the  death  of  the  king  of  Bal^'l(.n.  Ezekiil  has 
also  grandly  illustrated  the  same  scenę,  with  similar 
machiner>',  in  the  last  prophecy  conccming  the  fali  of 
Pharaoh  (xxxii,  18-32)."  For  an  excellent  yindication 
of  the  A.y.  in  many  of  its  translations  of  the  grare,  we 
refer  the  reader  to  the  treatise  of  archbishop  Ushcr 
{A  nswer  to  the  JesuWs  ChaUenge^  Workt  [ed.  Elrington], 
iii,  319-324  and  832-340).  We  doubt  not  that,  ifgrate 
ia  an  adminible  sense  of  biKV,  our  translators  haye,  on 
the  whole,  madę  a  judicious  selection  of  the  passages 
that  will  beat  bear  the  sense:  their  purpose  was  a 
popular  one,  and  they  acoompE  hed  it,  in  the  instance 
of  uncertain  worda  and  phrases,  by  giying  them  the  moet 
intelligible  tum  they  would  bear,  as  in  the  case  before  usi 
We  undertake  not  to  decide  whether  it  would  be  better 
to  leaye  the  broad  and  generic  word  Sheol,  as  the  great 
yersions  of  antiquity  did,  eyeiywhere ;  whether,  e.  g., 
Jacob's  lament  ((icn.  xxxvii,  35;  xlii,  88)  and  like  pas- 
sages would  be  morę  suitably,  if  not  correctly,  rendered 
by  the  simple  retcntion  of  the  oiiginal  word,  or  the 
equally  indeiinito  hadet.  There  is  some  force  in  tho 
obseryatiou  oiten  madę  (see  Córa.  a  Lapide,  on  Gen. 
xxxvii,  35 ;  Bellarmine  and  others,  adduced  by  Leigh, 
Crit.  Sacra f  i,  239)  that  ^  it  was  not  the  grare  of  Joseph 
which  Jacob  meant,  for  he  thought  indeed  that  his  son 
was  deyoured  of  wild  beasts,  and  not  buried."  See  morę 
on  this  passage  in  Pearson,  Creed  [ed.  Cheyallicr],  p. 
437;  Fulke,  TranshtiorUf  etc,  p.  314;  both  which  writ- 
ers  defend  the  yersion  of  grare,  Ains^-orth  ad  loc 
(among  the  older  commentatois)  and  Knebel  (among 
the  modems)  contend  for  the  generał  word  heli  [Knobel, 
Schattenreich ].  RosenmUller leamedly  states  both  yiews, 
and  leans  in  favor  of  '^  locum,  ubi  moitui  umbrarum  in- 
star  degunt"  (Scholia,  i,  576). 

(2.)  The  other  meaning  of  iixi^,  "ZTe//,"  so  rendered 
in  thirty-one  passages  of  A.  Y.,  according  to  the  morę 
ancient  and,  as  it  seems  to  us,  preferable  opinion,  makcs 
it  local,  i.  e.  the  place  of  disembodied  gpiriłs,  (Atirjc  ŁŁ 
rÓTTOC  tifny  audrjc,  iiyow  a^ayrjc  rai  dyywOTOCt  6  rac 
ylnjxac  i)fiuiv  ivTŁvSfiv  lK£r}/iovaac  li\óinvoc,  Aiidr. 
Oesaricus  in  ApocaL  c.  68.)  A  latcr  opinion  supposcs 
the  word  to  indicate  "not  the  place  whtre  souls  dcpart^ 
ed  are,  but  the  state  and  condition  of  the  dead^  or  their 
permansion  in  death,"  as  bishop  Pearson  callu  it  {Creed 
[ed,  Cheyallier],  p.  439).  On  this  opinion,  which  that 
great  divine  "  cannot  admit  as  a  fuli  or  proper  cxpo8i- 
tion,"  we  shall  say  nothing  morę  than  that  it  is  at  best 
only  a  deduction  from  the  foregoing  locąl  deilnition. 
That  dcflniUon  we  have  stated  in  the  broadeat  tcrms, 
becausc,  in  reference  to  Dr.  BaiTow*s  enumeration  {Semu 


HEŁŁ 


168 


HEŁL 


on  łhe  Creed  [Art  "  He  descended  into  Heli"],  Works 
[Oxforcl,  1830],  v,  416, 417)  of  the  ąuestions  which  have 
arisen  on  the  Bubject  before  ua,  we  belieye  that  Holy 
Scripture  wairants  the  most  ample  of  all  the  pońtions 
suggested  by  that  eminent  wńter,  to  the  effect  that  the 
sEeóŁ  or  ffeU  of  which  we  tieat  is  not  merely  "the 
place  of  good  and  happy  soiiłB^*'  or  "  that  of  bad  and  mb- 
erable  onea,"  but  ^  indifferently  and  in  common  of  both 
those."  We  propoee  to  azrange  the  Blblical  passagea  so 
as  to  describe,  first,  ihe  słate  ofthe  occupanU  o/Sheol, 
and,  secondly,  the  localUy  ofU,  in  some  of  its  prominent 
featurea.  Ab  to  the  iirst  point^  She6l  is  (a)  the  reoeptar 
de  of  the  spirita  of  aU  that  depart  this  li/e,  (Among  the 
scriptnral  designations  of  the  inhabitants  of  Sheol  is 
0*^X8^  [S  bnc  (in  Plrov.xxi,  16)  is  rendered  "congre- 
gation'  of  the  dea^^  (or  departed)  in  the  A.  V.  This  is 
better  than  the  Sept.  rendering  awayioyr^  yiyavrufVf 
and  Yulg.  '^  coetus  gigantum,**  There  is  force  in  the  woid 
bnp  thos  applied,  derived  from  the  use  of  the  word  to 
designate  the  gieat  ^^congreffotionT  of  the  Jewish  nation ; 
see  Conoreoation].  For  the  use  of  the  word  C^Kfil, 
as  applicable  to  the  deady  see  especiaUy  Bottcher,  De  In- 
fer,  p.  94-10,  §  193-204.  The  word  occurs  in  this  sense 
also  in  the  grand  paaaage  of  Isa.  xiv.  [In  ver.  9  **  Sheol 
sdrs  up  its  Rephain^^  on  the  entrance  of  the  spirit  of 
the  king  of  Bab^don.]  C^^MB^n  is  met  with  in  Bix  other 
places  in  the  same  sense  of  departed  ępiriis.  It  is  oon- 
nected  with  łlB^,  "weak,"  which  occurs  in  Numb.  xiii, 
18,  and  other  passages  [see  FUrst,  H(^.  W.-b,  ii,  888]. 
The  grentile  noun  [mentioned  in  Gen.  xiv,  5  and  else- 
where,  and  rendered  Repkaim  and  GiarUs]  is  of  the  saitae 
form,  but  probably  of  a  difTerent  origin  [see  Gesenius, 
Thes.  p.  1302  ].)  This  generał  signification  appears  from 
Psa.  lxxxix,  47,  48,  and  Isa.  xxxviii,  18,  19  (in  which 
lattet  verae  the  opposition  in  its  nniveraal  sense  between 
theol  and  the  state  of  life  in  this  world  is  to  be  obaenred). 
We  do  not  hesitate,  with  archbishop  Usher  ( (Torłf,  iii, 
818),  to  translate  blMlŚ  in  these  passages  **heir  or  *^8he- 
olj"  instead  of  **ffrave,"  as  in  the  A- V.  Sheol,  therefore, 
is  (6)  the  abode  ofthe  tńckedj  Numb.  xvi,  33 ;  Job  xxiv, 
19 ;  Psa.  ix,  17  (Hebr.  18) ;  xxxi,  17  (18) :  Prov.  v,  6 ;  ix, 
18 ;  Isa.  lvii,  9 ;  and  (g)  ofthe  good  [both  in  their  "  dis- 
embodied"  condltion],  Psa.  xvi,  10,  comp.  with  Acts  ii, 
27,  31 ;  Psa.  xxx,  8  (4) ;  xUx,  15  (16)  ;  lxxxvi,  13 ;  Isa. 
xxxviLi,  10,  compared  with  Job  iii,  17-19 ;  Hos.  xiii,  14, 
comp.  with  1  Cor.  xv,  65.  With  regard  to  the  second 
point,  touching  some  local  features  of  Sheol^  we  find  it 
described  as  vertf  deep  (Job  xi,  8) ;  dark  (Job  x,  21, 22) ; 
(yet  conffM  and  open  to  the  eye  of  God,  Job  xxvi,  6) ; 
with*'valleg8**  (Gesenius,  7%e*.'p.  1348)  or  depth»  of  va- 
rious  gradations  (Psa.  lxxxvi,  13  [compared  with  Deut. 
xxxii,  22] ;  Prov.  ix,  18) ;  with  bars  (Job  xvii,  16,  comp. 
with  Jon.  ii,  6)  and  gates  (Isa.  xxxviił,  10) ;  ńtuałed  be- 
necUh  tu;  hence  the  dead  are  said  "to  go  down"  (*T^'') 
to  Sheol,  Numb.  xvi,  30, 33 ;  Ezek.  xxxi,  15, 16, 17  (com- 
pared with  Job  vii,  9;  Gen.  xlii,  38),  Comp.  Josephus 
(Ant.  xvii,  1, 3),  who,  when  dcscribing  the  tenets  of  the 
Jewish  secte,  attributes  to  the  Pharisees  the  belief  of  a 
futurę  State,  in  which  "  rewards  and  punishments"  will 
be  dcalt  out  "to  men  in  their  disembodied  state"  (raic 
\l/vxaŁc)*'}xnder  the  earth"  (wttó  x^ovbc  SuutiiMrnę  re 
Kai  TifŁac,  K.  T,  X.).  On  the  phrase  of  the  creed  "  de- 
scended into  heli,"  and  sundry  uses  of  Tl'^  and  KaraK^Łly 
as  not  necessarily  implying  local  tfcaccn/,  but  rather  "rf- 
movalfrom  one  place  to  another,"  see  Usher  ( Works^  iii, 
392,  893).  We  have  seen  how  some  have  derived  the 
name  of  Sheol  from  its  insatiability ;  such  a  ąuality  is 
often  attńbuted  to  It:  it  is  aU-devounng  (Prov.  i,  12) ; 
Hever  satisfied  (Prov.  xzx,  16 ;  Isa.  v,  14),  and  inerorable 
(CanL  vui,  7). 

2.  There  is  in  the  Hades  f 'Ai^iyc)  ofthe  K.  T.  an  equal- 
ly  oTf^le  signification  with  the  Sheol  of  the  O.  T.,  as  the 
abode  of  both  happy  and  miserable  beings.  Ita  charac- 
teristics  are  not  dissimilar;  it  is  repiesented  as  **apris' 


otC*  (comp.  1  Pet  iii,  19,  where  inhabitants  of  hades  ata 
called  ra  iv  ^v\aKc  irpfófiaTa) ;  with  gates  and  ban 
(irvXa(  ^Sov,  ^latL  x\%  18 ;  comp.  with  the  phrase  £tc 
"A^ov  of  Acts  ii,  27, 31,  with  the  ellipsis  of  Swfia  or  ot- 
Kov) ;  and  lodss  (the  "keys"  of  Hades,  m  cXcic  rov"Ai* 
dov,  being  in  the  hands  of  Christ,  Rey.  i,  18) ;  its  8łtu*> 
tlon  is  also  dowmoards  (see  the  'iu>c  ^ov  KaTafiifioa- 
^fjtry  of  Matt  xi,  23,  and  Lukę  x,  15).  As  might  be  ex- 
pected,  there  is  morę  plainly  indicated  in  the  N.  T.  the 
separaie  conditaon  of  the  righteous  and  the  wicked ;  to 
indicate  this  separation  other  terms  are  used;  thus,  in 
Lukę  xxiii,  43,  Paradise  (irapóhuroc — no  doubt  differ- 
ent  from  that  of  Paul,  2  Cor.  xii,  4,  which  is  deśgnated, 
in  Rev.  ii,  7,  as  6  vapddttooc  tov  ©eow,  the  supemal 
Paradise;  see  Rob'mson,£«ri0Off,N.T.,p.l8,547;  Wahl, 
daris,  N.  T.,  p.  376;  Kuinol  [ed.  London]  on  N.  T.  ii, 
237;  and  especiaUy  Meyer,  Kommentar  u,  d,  Neue  Test, 
[ed.  4]  vi,  292,  and' the  authorities  there  ąuoted  by  him) 
is  used  to  describe  that  part  of  Hades  which  the  bleseed 
dead  inhabitr— a  figuratiye  expreaBion,  so  well  adapt^ni 
for  the  description  of  a  locality  of  happiness  that  the 
inspired  writers  employ  it  to  describe  the  three  happiest 
places,  the  Eden  of  Iimocence,  the  Hades  of  departed 
saints,  and  the  heaven  of  their  glorious  rest  The  dia- 
tinction  between  the  upper  and  the  lower  Paradise  waa 
familiar  to  the  Jews.  In  Eisenmenger^s  Entdedelta  Ju^^ 
denlhum,  ii,  295-822,  much  of  their  curions  opinlooa  on 
the  subject  is  collected.  In  p.  298  are  given  ihe  seyen 
names  of  the  hearenlg  Paradise,  while  in  the  next  three 
are  contained  the  seven  names  of  the  lotoer  Paradise  of 
Hades,    See  Paradisis. 

Another  figurative  eKpression  used  to  designate  the 
happg  paft  of  Hades  is  "  Abraham*s  bosom,"  6  koKicoc 
'AfipaófA,  Lukę  xvi,  22.  (St.  Augustine,  who  says  [QiuBsf« 
Evang,  ii,  38  ]  "  Sinus  Abrahse  reąuies  est  beatorum  pai*- 
perum  .  .  .  .  in  quo  post  hanc  yitam  recipiuntur,"  yet 
doubts  whether  hades  is  used  at  all  in  N.  T.  in  a  good 
sense.  He  says  [Ep, clxxxyii,  Works, ii, 689],  "Wheth- 
er the  bosom  of  Abraham,  where  the  wicked  Dives  was, 
when  in  his  torment  he  beheld  the  poor  man  at  lest, 
were  either  to  be  deemed  the  same  as  Paradise,  or  to  be 
thought  to  pertain  to  heli  or  hades,  /  cannoł  defiste  [pum. 
facile  dixerim] ;"  so  also  he  writes  on  Psa,  lxxxv  [  Works^ 
iv,  912]).  For  an  explanation  of  the  phrase,  see  Abra- 
HAM^s  Bosom. 

3.  We  need  not  linger  over  the  Biblical  sense  of  oni 
last  word  rici/va.  Gehenna,  We  refer  the  leader  to  a 
"  Discourse"  by  the  Icamed  Joseph  Mede  ( FToribt,  p.31- 
33)  on  Gehenna,  which  he  shows  was  not  used  to  desig- 
nate "  heU"  before  the  captivity.  He,  in  the  same  trea- 
tise,  dwells  on  oertain  Hebrew  words  and  phrases,  which 
were  in  use  pre%ńous  to  that  epoch  for  deńgnating  Hades 
and  its  inhabitants — among  these  he  especiaUy  notes 
D1X&")  and  S  ^T^^,  on  which  we  have  obseryed  aboTe. 
As  Uapaciuroc  is  not  limited  to  the  finite  happiness  of 
Hades,  but  embraces  in  oertain  passages  the  tdtimate 
blessedness  of  heaven,  so  there  is  no  violence  in  sap- 
posing  that  Tiiwa  (from  the  JistUe  signification  which 
it  possibly  bears  in  Matt  v,  29, 80 ;  xxiii,  15,  equiTalent 
to  the  Tdprapoc  referred  to  by  Peter,  2  Epist.  ii,  4,  aa 
the  place  where  the  faUen  angels  are  reserred  untojudg- 
ment,  or  "  untU  sentence,"  comp.  Jude  v,  6)  goes  on  to 
mean,  in  perhaps  most  of  its  oocurrenoes  in  the  N.  T.,  the 
finał  condition  of  the  lost,  as  in  Matt  xxiii,  88,  wheie 
the  expre8sion  r)  Kpicic  riję  ytiwrię  probably  means  (he 
condemnałion  [or  sentence]  to  Gehenna  aa  the  ultimate 
doom.    See  Gehenna. 

lY.  Sgnongnwus  Words  and  Phrases^—CiloBt  of  these 
are  given  by  Eisenmenger,  Entdeck,Jud,  ii,  324,  and  Gal- 
atinus.  De  Arcams,  vi,  7,  p.  845.)  1.  t^Wt,  Dumók,  in 
Psa. cxv,  17,  where  the  phrase  ^^ł  'i'n'j''-is,  "all  that  go 
down  into  silence,"  is  m  the  Sept  teayrtę  ol  Karafiat^ 
vovTŁc  Łtc  ci^ov,  whUe  the  Yulg.  has  **omnes  gui  dlńcoi* 
dunt  in  inferum"  (comp.  Psa.  xciv,  17).  2.  ^H^Si^  A  bad" 
dón,  in  Job  xzyi,  6,  is  in  poetical  appositicm  with  ^ifil^ 


HEŁŁ 


160 


TTETiT4 


(ooiiip.PlPOT.  xzvii,  20  [Kethib],  where  V|  is  in  conjuno- 
tion  witb  XŚ,  Ibmiing  an  hendiadys  for  desłructwe  heli; 
SepfAc^jfc  KOŁ  ainaktia ;  Vulg.  infemus  et  perdUio;  A. 
V.  ''Hefl  and  deatruction").  8.  nnó  ^KS,  Be^r  Sha- 
fkaik,  Pisa.  lv,  24 ;  A.  V. ''  pit  of  deatruction ;"  Sept  4»^- 
ap  cta^opac ;  Yulg.  Puteu*  interitus  (see  alao  paaeages 
in  which  "tisi  and  TTO  occur  aeparately).  4.  Tl^bs, 
Taaimaetth,  with  ot  witbont  ^'Ón,  in  Psa.  cvu,  10,  and 
othcr  paaaagea ;  Sept.  Zeta  ^avaTov ;  Valg.  Umbra  mor- 
tis;  A.V."8hadow  of  deatK"  6.  T^^CTil^Finn,  Tach- 
ti^ótk  EreUf  in  Isa.  xliv,  23;  A-Y.  "lower  parta  of  the 
eaith*"  \_Sheol  or  Hades,  Gesen.]  ;  Sept.  Td  ^€fjU\ta  rfic 
7»K  i  Vu]g*  £xirema  teme  (comp.  Ezek.  xxvi,  20,  etc, 
wliere  tlie  phiase  is  inverted,  nT^mPi^j^lfcC) ;  of  simi- 
lar  mesning  is  pS^tnnr)  lia,  Psa.  lxxxviii,  6  (7).  6. 
nri&ri,  Topkteh,  in  Ifla.  xxx,  38  [aooording  to  Eisen- 
meoger] ;  for  another  application  of  this  word,  see  Ge- 
aeniita,  Thet,  a.  v. ;  and  RoeenmUller,  ad  loc  7.  The 
phrase  firrt  nsed  of  Abraham,  Gen.  xxv,  8  (where  it  oc- 
cniSy  in  tlie  lolenin  description  of  the  holy  patriarch's 
end,  midttcnf  hehoeen  deałh  and  buriaC),  *'He  was  gath- 
ered  to  his  fathen,"  is  best  interpreted  of  the  departure 
of  tbe  aonl  ta  Ifadeś  to  the  company  of  those  who  pr^ 
ceded  him  thither  (see  Cajetan,  ad  loc.,  and  Gesen.  Thea^ 
a.  V.  r|OC  [Niphal],  p.  181,  coL  1).  8.  Tb  okótoc  to  i^- 
iurtpov^  *'  the  onter  darkness**  of  Matt.  viii,  12,  et  pas- 
sim, refeiB  probably  to  what  Josephus  ( War,  iii,  25)  calls 
ĘZąc  oKoriwrtpoc,  **  the  darker  IfadeśJ* 

Y.  BtUkal  Staiements  as  to  the  Condkion  ofihose  in 
*"  HMT^The  dieadful  naturę  of  the  abode  of  the  wick- 
ed  is  implied  in  varioiiB  figurative  expre8sions,  such  as 
**  onter  darkness,"  ^  I  am  tormented  in  this  flame,"  "  fiu^ 
naoe  of  fire,"  *'unqnenchable  fire,'*  *' where  the  worro 
dieth  not,"  "  the  blacknesa  of  darkness,"  ^  torment  in  fire 
and  tarimfltone,"  "  the  asoending  amoke  of  their  torment," 
"the  lakę  of  fire  that  bometh  with  brimstone"  (Matt 
Tiii,12;  ziii,42;  xxii,  13;  xxv, 80;  Lukę  xvi,  24;  comp. 
Matt.  xxv,  41;  Mark  ix,  48^48;  Jude  18;  comp.  Rev. 
xiv,  10,  11;  xix,  20;  xx,  14;  xxi,  8).  The  figurę  by 
wfaich  heli  is  repreaented  as  buming  with  fire  and  biim- 
Btooe  18  probably  derived  from  the  fate  of  Sodom  and 
GomoRah,  aB  well  as  that  which  describes  the  smoke  as 
ascending  from  it  (comp.  Kev.  xiv,  10, 1 1,  with  Gen.  xix, 
24, 28).  To  this  ooinddence  of  description  Peter  also 
most  probably  alludea  in  2  Pet  ii,  6.    See  Fire. 

The  names  which  in  many  of  the  other  instanoes  aie' 
giren  to  the  ponishments  of  heli  are  doubtless  in  part  fig^ 
imtive,  and  many  of  the  terms  which  were  oommonly  ap- 
plied  to  the  aobject  by  the  Jews  are  retained  in  the  New 
Testament.  The  images,  it  will  be  seen,  are  generally 
taken  fiom  death,  capital  pumshments,  tortures,  prisons, 
etc.  And  it  is  the  obviou8  design  of  the  sacred  writers, 
in  uaiDg  soch  figures^  to  awaken  the  idea  of  something 
tembk  and  feaifoL  They  mean  to  teach  that  the  pun- 
iahmcnts  bcyond  the  gTBve  will  excite  the  same  feelings 
of  distrasa  as  are  produoed  on  earth  by  the  objects  em- 
ployed  to  repreaeot  them.  We  are  so  Uttle  acquainted 
with  tbe  Btate  in  which  we  shall  be  hereafter,  and  with 
the  naturę  of  our  futurę  body,  Uiat  no  strictly  literał 
repreflentation  of  such  punishments  eould  be  madę  intel- 
Ugible  to  na.  Many  of  the  Jews,  indeed,  and  many  of 
the  Chriatian  fathers,  took  the  terma  employed  in  Scrip- 
tore  in  an  entirely  literał  sense,  and  suppoeed  thfoe 
woold  be  actual  fire,  etc,  in  helL  But  from  the  words 
of  Christ  and  his  apoatles  nothing  morę  can  with  cer- 
tainty  be  inferred  than  that  they  meant  to  denote  great 


Tbe  punishments  of  sin  may  be  distinguished  into 
two  dasMa:  1.  Natural  punishments,  or  such  as  neces- 
aarily  follow  a  Ufe  of  senritude  to  sin.  2.  Powtke  pun- 
iahmcnts,  or  soch  as  God  shall  see  fit,  by  his  80vereign 
wiD,  toinflict 

1.  Among  the  natnral  ponishmeiits  we  may  rank  the 
frlviiou  of  etemal  happineas  (Matt vii,  21, 28;  xxii. 


18 ;  xxv,  41 ;  compaie  2  Thess.  1, 9) ;  the  paihful  c 
tions  which  are  the  natural  oonsequence  of  committing 
sin,  and  of  an  impenitent  heart;  the  propensities  to  sin, 
the  evil  passions  and  deaires  which  in  this  world  fili  the 
human  heart,  and  which  are  doubtless  carried  into  the 
world  to  come.  The  company  offellow-sinners  and  of 
evil  spirits,  as  inevitably  resulting  from  the  other  oon- 
ditions,  may  be  acoounted  amoug  the  natural  punish* 
ments,  and  mnst  prove  not  the  letet  grievous  of  them. 

2.  The  positive  punishments  have  already  been  iiidi- 
cated.  It  is  to  these  chiefly  that  the  Scripturc  directs 
our  attention.  ^  There  are  but  fcw  men  in  such  a  state 
that  the  merely  natural  punishments  of  sin  will  ap[)ear 
to  them  terrible  enough  to  deter  them  from  the  com- 
miBsion  of  it  £xperience  also  shows  that  to  threaten 
po6itive  punishment  has  ftr  morę  efiect,  as  well  upon 
the  cu]tivated  as  the  uncultivated,  in  detening  them 
from  crime,  than  to  announce,  and  lead  men  to  expect, 
the  merely  natural  oonsequences  of  sin,  be  they  ever  so 
terrible.  Henoe  we  may  see  why  it  is  that  the  New 
Testament  says  so  little  of  natural  punishments  (al- 
though  these,  beyond  ąuestion,  await  the  wicked),  and 
makes  mention  of  them  in  particular  far  less  frequent]y 
than  of  po8itive  punishments ;  and  why,  in  those  pas- 
sages  which  treat  of  the  punishments  of  heli,  such  ideas 
and  images  are  constantly  employed  as  suggest  and  eon- 
firm  the  idea  of  po6itive  punishments"  (Knapp^s  Chria^ 
Han  Theology,  §  166). 

As  the  sins  which  shut  out  from  heaven  vary  so 
greatly  in  ąnality  and  degree,  we  should  expect  from 
the  justice  of  God  a  corresponding  variety  both  in  the 
natural  and  the  positive  punishments.  This  is  accord- 
ingly  the  uniform  doctrine  of  Christ  and  his  apostles. 
The  morę  knowledge  of  the  divine  law  a  man  posseases, 
the  morę  his  opportunities  and  induccments  to  avoid 
sin,  the  stronger  the  incentives  to  faith  and  holiness  set 
before  him,  the  greater  will  be  his  punishment  if  he 
fails  to  make  a  faithful  use  of  these  advantage8.  <*  The 
senrant  who  knows  his  lord's  will  and  does  it  not,  de- 
serves  to  be  beaten  with  many  stripes:"  *<To  whom 
much  is  given,  of  him  much  will  be  reąuired"  (Matt.  x, 
15;  xi,  22,  24;  xxiii,  15;  Lukę  xu,  48),  Ilence  Paul 
says  that  the  heathcn  who  acted  against  the  law  of  na- 
turę would  indeed  be  punished ;  but  that  the  Jews  would 
be  punished  morę  than  they,  because  they  had  morę 
knowledge  (Rom.  ii,  9-29).  In  this  conviction  that  God 
will,  even  in  heli,  justly  proportion  punishment  to  sin, 
we  must  rest  satisfied.  We  cannot  now  know  morę; 
the  precise  degrees,  as  well  as  the  precise  naturę  of  such 
punishments,  are  things  belonging  to  another  state  of 
being,  which  in  the  present  we  are  unable  to  understand. 
— ^Kitto,  s.  "(r.  For  a  naturalistic  view  of  the  subject, 
with  a  copious  review  of  the  literaturę,  see  Alger,  jDoc- 
trine  ofa  Futurę  Life  (Bost  1860).  For  the  theological 
treatment  of  this  topie,  see  Hell  Punishments. 

H£LL,  Christ*8  descent  into  (descensus  ad  info- 
ro8 ;  Karapactc  tic  fi^ow),  a  phrase  used  to  denote  the 
doctrine  taught,  or  supposed  to  be  taught,  in  the  fifth 
article  of  the  Apostles'  Creed. 

1.  Hisłory  o/ the  Clause, — ^The  dauac  is  not  found  in 
the  NicaBno-Constantinopolitan  Creed  (A.D.  881),  nor  in 
any  creed  before  that  datę.  Pearson  states  that  it  was 
not  **80  anciently  used  in  the  Church"  as  the  rcst  of  the 
Apostles'  Creed ;  and  that  it  first  appeara  in  the  Creed 
of  Aquileia,  4th  century,  in  the  words  degcendit  in  tn- 
fema.  King,  in  his  Hisłor,  SymhoL  Apost.  c  iv,  asserts 
that  it  was  inserted  as  a  testimony  against  Apolliiia- 
rism;  but  this  view  is  contToverted  by  Waage  in  his 
Commentatio  on  this  article  of  the  Creed  (1836).  It  is 
certain,  however,  that  the  clause  was  aftcrwards  used 
by  the  orthodox  as  an  argument  against  the  ApoUina- 
rłan  heresy  which  denied  to  Christ  a  rational  human 
soul  (see  Neander,  Church  Historyy  Torrey's  ed.,  ii,  488). 
Rufinus  (t  410),  while  stating  that  it  is  found  in  the 
Creed  of  Aqttileia,  denies  that  it  existed  before  that 
time  in  the  Creed  as  used  in  the  Soman  or  Eastem 
churcheSi    Rufinus  adds  that  ^'though  the  Roman  and 


HEŁŁ 


170 


HEŁŁ 


Oriental  cbnrches  faad  not  tbe  worda,  jet  tb^  had  the 
aense  of  them  in  the  word  buriedt^  implying  tbat  the 
words  "  he  deaoended  into  Hades"  are  eqaivaleiit  to  ^  he 
desoended  into  the  gnve."  Socrates,  Nitt.  Ecd,  ii,  87, 
41,  gives  it  as  stated  in  the  Arian  Oeed  adopted  at  Sir- 
mtum  A.D.  850,  and  at  Rimini  in  860.  It  is  giren  in  the 
Athanasian  Creed  (5th  century).  It  fails  to  be  found, 
except  in  the  Athanasian  Creed  and  in  a  few  MSS., 
before  the  6th  oentuiy,  but  became  quite  oommon  in 
tbe  7th,  anil  is  univeraal  after  the  8th  centuiy  (Peaz^ 
son,  On  the  Creed,  art.  v,  notes).  It  remains  in  the  Apo&- 
des'  Creed  as  used  in  the  Greek  and  Roman  churches, 
the  Lutheran  Church,  and  the  Chiirch  of  England.  It 
is  alflo  retained  in  the  Creed  as  used  by  the  Protestant 
Episcopal  Charch,  with  a  notę  in  the  mbric  that  *<any 
churches  may  omit  the  words  He  desoended  into  heli,  or 
may,  insteal'  of  them,  use  the  words  He  vent  into  the 
place  ofdeparted  spiritSj  which  are  considered  as  words 
of  tbe  same  meaning  in  the  Creed.'*  The  dause  was 
omitted  by  tbe  Convention  of  1785,  but,  the  English 
bishops  objecting,  it  was  replaced,  with  the  qualification 
named,  ailer  a  great  deal  of  discuasion  in  1786, 1789,  and 
1792  (see  White,  His*,  of  the  Prot,  EpUoopal  Church; 
Muenscher,  in  Bib,  Sac  April,  1859).  It  is  omiUed  in 
the  Creed  as  used  by  the  Methodist  Episcopal  Church. 
.  II.  The  Doctrine, — 1.  Scripture,—T)xet^  is  no  passage 
in  which  it  is  expressly  stated  that  Christ  deacended 
into  heli,  but  there  are  seyeral  which  exproa8  or  im- 
ply  that  his  soul  went,  after  his  death,  into  the  *<  place 
of  departed  spirits."  (1.)  Thus  David  says  (Psa.  xvi,  9, 
10) :  "  Therefore  my  heart  it  glad,  and  mg  fflorg  rejoic- 
eth :  my  fieah  aUo  shall  rest  in  hope.  For  łhou  uńU  not 
leave  my  soul  in  heli,  neither  wilŁ  ihou  sujer  thine  Holy 
One  to  see  corrupticnC  And  Peter  applies  this  passage 
to  Christ  (Acts  ii,  25-27) :  "  For  Daoid  gpeaketh  eon- 
cerning  htm,  Jforesato  the  Lord  always  be/ore  my  face; 
for  heis  onmy  right  hond,  that  I  should  not  be  moved: 
thenfore  did  my  heart  rtjoice,  and  my  tongue  was  glad; 
moreoper  also  my^/lesh  shaU  rest  in  hope:  heeause  ihou 
wUt  not  leaee  my  soul  in  heli,  neither  wilt  thou  sujfer  thine 
Holy  One  to  see  corrupUoiL"  (2.)  The  passage  in  Ephes. 
iv,  8-10  ("  Now  that  he  ascended,"  etc.),  is  supposed  by 
Bome  writers  to  imply  the  descent  into  Hades,  but  the 
best  interpretera  apply  it  to  the  Incamation.  (3.)  Paul, 
in  Rom.  x,  7  (**  Who  shall  desoend  into  the  deep,"  etc— 
Ttc  KaTapńuiTai  tlę  tĄv  dfiuatrou),  seeros  to  imply  a 
descent  of  Christ  "  into  the  abysŁ"  (4.)  1  Pet.  iii,  18- 
20 :  "  For  Christ  also  hath  once  sujeredfor  sine,  thejust 
for  fhe  unjusł^  that  he  might  hring  us  to  God,  beingput  to 
death  in  the  flesh,  bul  cuickened  by  the  SpiriŁ :  by  which 
also  he  went  atid  preached  unio  the  spirits  in  prison ; 
which  sometime  were  disobedienfj  when  once  the  long-suf- 
fering  of  God  waUed  in  the  days  of  Noah,  whUe  the  ark 
was  a  preparing,  wherein  feWj  that  1%  eight  soult  were 
satei  by  water"  This  passage  is  reUed  on  by  many, 
not  only  as  sŁrongly  asserting  that  Christ  desccnded 
into  Hades,  but  lUŚo  as  explaining  the  object  of  that 
descent.  But  the  weight  of  interpretation,  from  Au- 
gustine  downwarda,  seems  to  be  agaiust  this  view.  Dr. 
A.  Schweitzer,  in  a  recent  monograph  {Hinabgefahren 
z.  Hulle  ais  Mythus,  etc,  Zurich,  1868,  p.  40),  interprets 
the  passage  to  mean  that  the  preaching  spoken  of  was 
"  addreased  to  *  the  spirits  in  prison'  in  the  days  of  Noah, 
while  they  were  yet  in  the  flesh;  and  this  preaching 
consisted,  to  a  great  extent,  in  the  building  of  the  ark. 
B/  this  work,  undertaken  at  the  command  of  the  Spirit 
of  Christ,  and  prosecuted,  through  many  years,  to  coro- 
pletion  in  the  sight  of  the  people,  they  were  wamed  to 
repcnt;  but  the  people  persisteid  in  disobedience,  and  at 
li3Ł  the  flood  swept  them  away"  {Baptist  Quarłerly  Re- 
view^  July,  1869,  p.  384).  This  view  accords  with  that 
held  by  Augustine,  Aąulnas,  Scaliger,  Beza,  Grerhard, 
Hammond,  Leighton,  and  others,  and  which  bas  of  late 
been  readopted  by  Dr.  Hofmann  {SchrifUmcds,  II,  i, 
835),  of  the  influence  of  the  pre-exlstent  Spirit  of  Christ 
at  the  time  of  the  Deluge.  It  is  also  the  interpretation 
of  the  passage  given  by  Dr.  A.  Ciarkę  (Comnu  on  1  Pt- 


ter).  So  also  Dr.  Bethone:  "Chiist,  in  Noah,  by  hh 
Spirit,  preached  to  them  beforo  the  Flood,  just  as  in  his 
ministers  he  preaches  to  us  by  lus  Spirit  now"  {Lectures 
on  the  Heidelberg  Catechism,  1,  406).  Alford  iCommaa, 
ad  Inc)  giyes  a  copioas  accowit  (chiefly  trandated  fiom 
Meyer)  of  the  views  of  yarious  commentaton,  ancient 
and  modem,  on  the  passage,  and  subjoins  his  own  vicw, 
as  foliowa:  **I  understand  these  words  to  say  that  oor 
Lord,  in  his  oisembodied  state,  did  go  to  the  plaoe  of 
detention  of  departed  spirits,  and  did  there  announce  his  « 
work  of  redemption,  preach  saiyation,  in  fact,  to  the  dis- 
embodied  spirits  of  thoee  who  refused  to  obey  the  roice 
of  God  when  the  judgment  of  the  Flood  was  hanging 
over  them.  Why  these  rather  than  othera  are  men- 
tioned— whether  merely  as  a  sample  of  the  like  gradoua 
work  on  others,  or  for  some  special  reason  unimaginable 
by  uft— we  cannot  say.  It  is  ours  to  deal  with  the  plain 
words  of  Scripture,  and  to  aocept  its  reveUuionfl  to  far 
as  voach8afed  to  us.  And  they  are  yonchsafed  to  us  to 
the  utmost  limit  of  legitimate  inference  from  rerealed 
facts.  That  inference  every  intelligent  readcr  will  draw 
from  the  fact  here  announccd;  it  is  not  purgatory,  it  is 
not  univerBal  restitution,  but  it  is  one  which  throws 
bleased  light  on  one  of  the  darkest  enigmas  of  tbe  diyine 
justioe— the  caaes  where  the  finał  doom  seems  infinitely 
out  of  proportion  to  the  lapse  which  bas  incurred  it; 
and  as  we  cannot  say  to  what  other  cases  this  Ką^ypa 
may  have  applied,  so  it  would  be  presumption  in  us  to 
limit  its  occurrenoe  or  its  efficacy.  The  reason  of  men- 
tioning  here  these  sinners  above  other  smners  appears 
to  be  their  connection  with  the  type  of  baptism  which 
foUows.  If  80,  who  shall  say  that  the  blessed  act  was 
confined  to  them  ?"  CComm.  on  N.  T.  voL  iv,  pt  i,  p.  368). 
2.  The  Fathers,— In  sereral  of  the  Ante-Nicene  fa- 
thers  we  find  the  doctrine  that  "  Christ  descended  into 
Hades  to  announce  to  the  souls  of  the  patriarchs  and 
others  there  the  aoeompUshment  of  the  work  of  redemp- 
tion, and  to  conduct  them  to  his  łdngdom  of  glory.'* 
So  Justin  Mart\-r  (t  167?),  Dtal  cum  Tryph  §  72,  dtea 
a  passage  from  Jercmiah  (cut  out,  he  says,  by  the  Jews) 
as  foUows:  *^The  Lord  God  remembered  his  dead  peo- 
ple of  Israel  who  lay  in  the  graves;  and  he  descended 
to  preach  to  them  his  own  8alvation."  Irenseus  (t200?), 
AdcHeer.  iv,  27,  2:  *'The  Lord  descended  into  the  re- 
gions  beneath  the  earth,  preaching  his  advent  there 
also,  and  declaring  the  remission  of  sins  received  by 
those  who  believe  on  him"  (see  also  v,  81, 2).  Oement 
of  Alexandria  (f  220)  deyotes  chap.  vi  of  book  vi  of  the 
Stromata  to  the  ^  preaching  of  the  Gospel  to  Jews  and 
Gentiles  in  Hades."  See  also  Tertullian,  De  Amma,  vii, 
lv ;  Origen,  Cont,  Cels,  ii,  48.  The  Gnosdcs  generaUy 
denied  the  descensus  ad  inferos ;  but  Marcion  (2d  cen- 
tury)  regaided  it  as  intended  to  benefit  the  heathen  who 
were  in  need  of  redemption.  The  later  fathers  were 
still  morę  distinct  ui  their  utterances;  see  Cyril,  Cateek. 
iv,  11 ;  xiv,  19 ;  Ambroee,  De  Jncam,  87, 42 ;  AugusHne, 
Epiat.  clxiv  et  aL;  Jerome,  Kpist.  xxii  et  aL  "The 
later  fathers  generally  adopted  the  notion  that,  till 
Christ*s  death,  the  patriarchs  and  prophets  were  tn  Ha- 
des, but  afterwards  (ftx>m  the  time  that  Christ  said  to 
the  thief  on  the  cross  that  he  should  be  with  him  in 
Paradise)  they  passed  into  Paiadise,  whicłi,  therefore, 
they  distinguished  from  Hades.  Hades,  indeed,  they 
looked  on  as  a  place  of  rest  to  the  just,  but  Paradise  as 
far  better.  Here,  of  course,  we  bc^n  to  perceive  the 
germ  of  the  doctrine  of  the  Limbus  Patmm.  Yet  tbe 
notion  entertained  by  the  ikthers  was  vastly  different 
fh>m  that  of  the  medifleval  Church.  Another  opinion, 
however,  grew  np  also  in  the  early  ages,  namely,  that 
Christ  not  only  translated  the  pions  from  Hades  to  moie 
joyous  abodes,  but  that  even  some  of  those  who  in  old 
times  had  been  disobedient,  yet,  on  hearing  Christ^S 
preaching,  believed,  and  so  were  sayed  and  deUrered 
from  torment  and  heD.  This  appears  to  have  been  tfae 
opinion  of  Augustine.  He  was  evidently  pnzzled  as  to 
the  meaning  of  the  word  Hades,  and  doubted  whether 
it  over  meant  a  plaoe  of  rest  and  happiness  (althoogh  wH 


HEŁŁ 


171 


HEŁŁ 


tisaalit' tppim  to  have  admifcted  that'  it  did);-  and, 
tbinkiiig  it  s  place  of  torment,  he  thonght  Christ  went 
thithcr  to  mn  some  aonla,  which  were  in  tonnent,  firom 
tbencft   Sonę,  indeed,  went  so  far  as  to  think  that  heU 
was  deared  of  all  nuls  that  were  there  in  torment,  and 
tbat  all  were  taken  up  with  Christ  when  he  roee  from 
the  dead  and  asoended  into  hearen;  but  thia  was  reck- 
oned  as  a  haesjr.  • . .  One  pindpal  leason  why  the  fa- 
thers  laid  gicat  ttnm  on  the  lidief  in  Chriat^s  deacent 
to  Hades  was  thia.     The  Ariana  and  Apolltnarians  de* 
nied  the  ezistenoe  of  a  natoral  human  aool  in  Jeaua 
Christ.    Now  the  true  doctrine  of  our  Lord'8  hnmanity, 
nameiy,  that  'he  waa  perfect  man,  of  a  reasonaUe  aoul 
and  httoan  fleah  sobidsting,'  was  mcs^t  strongly  main- 
tained  by  asserting  the  artide  of  his  desoent  to  Hades. 
For  wheress  hia  body  was  laid  in  the  gnve,  and  his 
sod  went  down  to  Hades,  he  most  have  had  both  body 
and  aooL    Aocordingly,  the  fathers  with  one  consent 
fflaintaui  the  desoent  of  Christ'8  aoul  to  heli**  (Browne, 
(h  the  TkirtifmM  A  rHcUSf  p.  96).    Neyertheless,  it  was 
sof  oppśtion  to  ApoUinazism  that  originally  led  to  the 
adoptioR  of  the  danae  into  the  Creed ;  the  Gnoetics,  kmg 
before,  had  denied  the  de$eeH$iu  tui  inferog,  but  Apolli- 
Miisdidmot  dai^  it  (Neander,  Ck.  Hiał,,  Torrey,  ii,  488> 
Li  what  may  be  called  the  mythology  of  Christen- 
dom,  the  **  desoent  into  heli"  has  ałways  played  an  im- 
portant  fMrt.  The  apocryphał  Gospel  of  Nioodemus  oon- 
taiiu  a  nrid  description  of  it,  very  highly  coloied.    A 
Twe  like  thundcr  U  heard  crying,  **  llSt  up  your  gates, 
and  be  ye  lift  up,"  etc.     But  the  gates  were  madę  fast, 
int  on  aiepetition  of  the  cali  were  opened, "  and  the  King 
of  glory  entered,  in  fonn  as  a  man,  and  ail  tho  dark 
places  of  Hades  were  lighted  up."     "  And  stnughtway 
Hades  aied  out  (cK  xxii),  *  We  are  conquered.    Woe 
vtu>  u!    But  who  art  thou,  that  hast  such  powcr  and 
pńiiłege?  And  what  art  tłum,  that  comest  hither  with- 
oot  ńn,  smali  in  seeming  but  exceUent  in  power,  the 
homUe  and  the  great,  slave  at  onoe  and  mart^r,  soldier 
tnd  king,wie]ding  power  over  the  dead  and  the  hring, 
oailed  to  the  crosB,  and  the  destroyer  of  oni  power? 
Trały  thou  art  the  Jesus  of  whom  the  archsatrap  Satan 
apafce  to  na^  that  by  thy  cross  and  r'rnth  thou  shouldest 
poirhaBe  the  uniTerse  V    Then  th';  King  of  Glory,  hold- 
inft  Satan  by  the  head,  deliyere<l  him  to  the  angels,  and 
sud.  'Bind  his  hands  and  feet,  and  neck  and  mouth, 
«ith  ironSb*  *  And  giring  him  o\*er  to  Hades,  he  said, 
'Rcccive  and  h<^  him  surely  until  my  second  adyent' 
(A,  xxir).    Then  the  King  of  Glory  stretched  out  hia 
ń^ht  band,  and  took  the  forefather  Adam,  and  raised 
him  up,  and  tarmnic  to  the  rest  also,  he  said,  *  Come  with 
me.  afl  of  you,  as  many  as  hare  died  by  the  wood  which 
this  man  ate  of ;  for  lo !  I  upraise  ye  all  by  the  wood  of 
the  oosar    After  these  things  he  farought  them  all 
^<th.    And  the  focefather  Adam,  filled  with  exceeding 
jfiy.  asid, '  I  reoder  thee  thanks,  O  Lord,  that  thou  hast 
bnogiit  me  up  ftmn  the  depths  of  Hades.'    Thus,  too, 
saal  ail  the  piopheU  and  aaints:  ^We  thank  thee,  O 
Christ,  Sarionr  of  the  world,  that  thou  hast  redeemed 
««r  life  from  oocruption.*    And  while  they  were  saying 
ihese  things,  the  Sariour  blessed  Adam  in  the  forehead 
*ith  the  sign  of  Łhe  cross,  and  did  the  like  to  the  patri- 
>Rhs  and  the  pniphets,  and  the  martyrs  and  forefathers, 
■id  taking  them  with  him,  he  roee  up  out  of  Hades. 
And  afl  he  jonmeyed,  the  holy  fathers,  accompan^ńng 
kim.  nang,  *  Pnised  be  he  who  hath  come  in  the  name 
«f  the  Lord.    Halldujah  V  "  (Thik>,  Cod,  Apocryph.  i,  667 
sq.:  Forbea, On  ihe  Thirttf^mne  A rfidiea,  i, 52  sq.)   A dra- 
nańc  rcpresentation  of  the  **  desoent  into  heli,"  in  imi- 
taónn  of  the  sdwe  picture  in  Nioodemus,  is  given  in  the 
^inriane  De  Adretitu  eł  amutnciatione  Joanms  BapL  ap. 
ląfirog,  comęDomly  ascribed  to  Eiisebius  of  Emesa  (te 
^i:  sce  Aufnisti'8  edition  of  Eusebtus  of  Emesa,  p.  1 
»f  (Ha^senbach,  Nuf.  o/Doctrinea,  §  134). 

^  Middie  Aye, — ^These  images  took  possesńon  of  the 
y^HAmr  miód,  suid  were  even  hdd  as  true  plctuies  by 
naiy  of  tbe  cleigy.  In  the  medi»val  mysteries,  the 
'hanrowiii^  of  hdU"  was  one  of  the  most  popular  repie- 


sentationil.  Death  and  heli  were  pictoied  as  dismayed 
at  the  loss  of  their  yictims,  as  Christ  was  to  set  all  the 
captives  free.  So  the  Vi$ion  tfPien  Plowman  dedares 
that  Christ 

'*Wonld  come  as  a  Kynge, 
Crouned  yrlth  aunsels, 
Aud  haTO  out  of  hdle 
Alle  mennes  sonles." 

The  subject  was  also  a  fayorite  one  in  the  religions  art 
of  the  Hth  and  15th  centuries. 

The  scholastic  diyines  diWded  Heli  into  three  diifer- 
ent  apartments :  **  1.  HeU,  properly  so  called,  where  the 
deyils  and  Łhe  damned  are  confined ;  2.  Thoee  subterra- 
nean  regions  which  may  be  regarded  as  the  intermedi- 
ate  States  between  heayen  and  heli,  and  be  again  subdi- 
yided  into  (a,)  Puigatory,  which  lies  nearest  to  heli; 
(6.)  The  Hmbtu  in/mtum  (puerorum)f  where  all  thoee 
children  remaio  who  die  unbaptized;  (c.)  The  Hmbu* 
patrumy  the  abode  of  the  Old  Testament  saints,  the  place 
to  which  Christ  went  to  preach  redemption  to  Łhe  souls 
in  prison.  The  limbus  last  mentioned  was  also  called 
Abraham's  bonom ;  dilTerent  opinions  obtained  oonoeni- 
iiig  its  rdation  to  heayen  and  heli**  (Hagenbach,  Hisł. 
of  DoełrineM,  §  208).  Aquinas  taught  that  Christ  re«- 
cued  tbe  souls  of  the  pious  of  the  old  dispensation  ftom 
the  Hmbus  pairum  (Summa  SuppL  qu.  69,  att.  6). 

4.  Jfo</<rR.— <1.)  The  Grtek  Ckurck  holds  that  the  (fe* 
aoengus  was  a  yoluntary  going  down  into  Hades  of  the 
human  soul  of  Christ  united  to  his  diyinity ;  that  he  re- 
mained  there  during  the  period  between  his  death  and 
his  resurrection,  and  deyoted  himself  to  the  woric  he  had 
perfonned  on  earth :  i.  e.  that  he  offered  redemption  and 
preached  the  Gospd  to  those  who  were  subject  to  Sa- 
tan*s  power  in  consequence  of  original  sin,  rdeasing  all 
belieyers,  and  all  who  died  in  piety  undcr  the  O.  T.  di»- 
pensation,  from  Hades  (Conf.  Orihod,  i,  49,  ed.  Kimmel, 
1840,  p.  118). 

(2.)  The  Homan  Churck  lests  its  doctrine  in  tradition 
alone.  IŁ  teachcs  that  Christ,  in  his  entire  personality^ 
induding  his  divine  and  human  natures,  descended  yol- 
untarily,  for  the  sake  of  the  sauits  of  Israel,  into  the  fón- 
biupatrum,  or  into  the  igmys  purgaiotius  (fire  of  purga- 
tory),  and  there  demonstrated  liimself  Son  of  God  by 
conquering  the  dsemons,  and  by  granting  to  the  souls  of 
the  andents  who  dwdt  in  Hades  their  freedom  from  tho 
limbtttf  and  admisńon  to  felidty  in  heayen.  "  His  soul 
also  really  and  subetantially  descended  into  heli,  accord- 
ing  to  Dayid*k  testimony :  *  Thou  mU  not  Uave  my  soul 
in  heW .  .  .  (Psa.  xy,  10).  He  descended  in  order  that, 
dothed  with  the  spoils  of  the  arch-enemy,  he  might  con- 
ducb  into  heayen  thoee  holy  fathers  and  tho  other  just 
souls  whoae  liberation  from  prison  he  had  purchased," 
etc  (C<Mt.  ConciL  Trid,  art.v> 

(3.)  Lutkeram. — ^Luther  himself  did  not  speak  pod- 
tiydy  on  this  topie.  He  agreed  at  first  with  Jcrome 
and  GregoTy  in  eupposing  a  limbus  pairum  whither 
Christ  went.  But  whenerer  he  mentioned  the  subject 
after  1583,  he  was  accnstomed  to  remark  that  Christ  de- 
stroyed  the  power  of  the  deyil  and  of  heli,  whither  he 
went  with  soul  and  body.  The  later  Luthcran  theology 
rec(^niaed  the  descent  as  a  real  descent  into  heli.  Christ, 
the  God-man,  after  the  resurrection  and  the  reunion  of 
his  soul  with  his  body,  immediatdy  before  his  reappear- 
anoe  on  eartta,  u  e.  early  on  Easter  moming,  went,  body 
and  soul,  to  the  heli  of  the  damned,  the  time  which 
elapsed  between  his  death  on  the  cross  and  the  resurrec- 
don  haying  been  spent  in  Paradise.  The  *'  descent  into 
hdl"  was  the  first  act  accomplished  by  the  God-man  af- 
ter his  entrance  into  his  diyine  unlimited  power,  and  is 
therefore  oonadered  as  Łhe  fhmt  degree  of  the  state  of 
exalteUioH,  It  thus  constitutes  also  his  first  entering 
into  possession  of  the  kingdom  of  his  power,  and  in  the 
reyeUtion  of  his  yictory  oyer  the  deyil,  and  the  conse- 
qnent  inability  of  the  latter  to  preyail  against  belieyers, 
whence  the  "  descent"  is  also  designated  as  *'  the  triumph 
oyer  the  deyil  and  his  angels."  His  preaching  in  heli 
is  designated  as  oondemnatoiy  (UgaUs  and  damnatoria, 


HELŁ 


172 


HELL 


formuła  Coneordkef  art  9).  The  Lnthenn  diylneB  haye 
generaUy  maintained  the  doctrine  as  thus  puŁ  forth, 
thoiigh  not  withont  controYorsy  among  themaeiyei^ 
iEpintu  (Johannes  Hoch,  f  1533)  Uught  Łbat  Chrisfs 
descent  into  heli  belonged,  not  to  his  state  ofercUtaiumf 
but  to  that  of  humiliation,  his  soul  suffering  the  punish- 
ments  of  heli  while  his  body  remained  in  the  grave. 
He  denied  that  1  Pet.  iii,  18  refers  to  the  ''descent  into 
heli"  at  alL 

(4)  Reformed,— In  the  Reformed  theology  in  generał, 
the  "descent  into  heli"  has  been  interpreted  meUphor- 
ically,  or  as  meaning  simply  either  the  burial  of  Christ 
or  his  sufferings.  So  Calvin :  '^  It  was  necessary  for 
Christ  to  contend  with  the  powers  of  heli  and  the  hor- 
ror of  etemal  death/'  ...  He  was  treated  as  a  crimi- 
nal  himseU;  to  sustain  all  the  punishments  which  would 
hare  been  inflicted  on  transgressors;  only  with  this  ex- 
ception,  that  it  was  not  possible  that  he  should  be  hold> 
en  of  the  pains  of  death.  Thereforo  it  is  no  wonder  if 
he  be  S2ud  to  have  descended  into  heli,  sińce  he  suffered 
that  death  which  the  wrath  of  God  inflicts  on  tnms- 
gressoTs"  {InatUuteSf  bk.  ii,  eh.  xvi,  §  10). 

The  Heidelberg  Catechism  sabstantialły  foUows  Cal- 
Tin:  **Que8t.  44.  Why  is  there  added  <he  descended 
into  heli?'  That  in  my  greatest  temptations  I  may  be 
assured,  and  wholly  comfort  myself  in  this,  that  my 
Lord  Jesos  Christ,  by  his  inexpre8ńble  anguish,  pains, 
terrors,  and  hellish  agonies,  in  which  he  was  plunged 
during  all  his  sufferings,  but  especially  on  the  cross, 
hath  delivered  me  from  the  anguish  and  torments  of 
helL"  Dr.  Nevin  remarks  on  this  answer  that  it  gires 
the  words  of  the  Creed  *'  a  signification  which  is  good  in 
its  own  naturę,  but,  at  the  same  time,  notoriously  at  war 
with  the  historical  sense  of  the  clause  itself."  The  doc- 
trine is  stated  in  the  Westminster  Catechism  (Laiger), 
answer  to  question  50,  as  follows :  "  Chrisfs  humiliation 
after  death  consisted  in  his  being  buried  and  continuing 
in  the  State  of  the  dead,  and  under  the  power  of  death, 
imtil  the  third  day,  which  has  been  otherwise  espreesed 
in  the  words  'he  descended  into  heli.'"  Beza  main- 
tained that  the  descent  into  Hades  simply  meant  the 
burial  of  Christ ;  and  in  tJiis  opinion  he  was  foUowed  by 
Drusius^  by  Dr.  Barrow,  and  other  English  divines ;  and 
BO  Piscator,  and  several  of  the  Bemonstrants  (Arminiiis, 
CurceUaeus,  limborch),  refer  it  to  the  state  of  death 
(stałiu  ignomifdotus)  as  part  of  the  humiliation  to  which 
the  Prince  of  life  was  subjected. 

Churck  o/  England.— 'The  third  artide  of  rellgion 
Tons  aB  follows :  *' As  Christ  died  for  us,  and  was  boried, 
80  also  is  it  to  be  beliered  that  he  went  down  into  heli." 
In  the  first  book  of  Edward  VI  it  iiras  morę  fiiliy  stated 
as  foUows:  ''The  body  of  Christ  lay  in  the  sepulchre  un- 
til  his  resurrection ;  but  his  ghost  departing  from  him, 
was  with  the  ghoets  which  were  in  prison,  or  iu  heli, 
and  did  preach  to  the  same,  as  the  place  of  St.  Peter 
doth  testify."  And  in  the  Creed  in  Metre,  given  at  the 
end  of  the  old  yersion  of  the  Psalms  in  the  Prayer-book, 
it  is  stated  as  follows : 

"  His  body  then  was  bnried 
As  is  our  ase  and  rigbt ; 
His  eplrit  arier  this  descent 
Into  the  lower  parts, 
or  them  thRt  lon?  In  darknese  were, 
The  trae  li  ght  of  their  hearts. » 
Peanon,  after  an  daborate  but  not  always  lominoos 
exaroination  of  the  dause,  sums  up  his  own  yiew  of  the 
doctrine  as  follows:  "I  give  a  fuli  and  undoubting  as- 
sent  unto  this  as  to  a  certain  tnith,  that  when  all  the 
sufferings  of  Christ  were  finished  on  the  cross,  and  his 
soul  was  separated  from  his  body,  though  his  body  were 
dead,  yet  his  soul  died  not;  an<l  though  it  died  not,  yet 
it  undcrwent  the  oondition  of  the  souls  of  such  as  die; 
and  being  he  died  in  the  aimilitude  of  a  sinner,  his  soul 
went  to  the  place  where  the  souls  of  men  ai«  kept  who 
died  for  their  sins,  and  so  did  wholly  undergo  the  law 
of  death :  but  because  there  was  no  sin  in  him,  and  he 
had  fully  satisfied  for  the  sms  of  others  which  he  took 
upon  him,  therefore,  as  God  auffered  not  his  Holy  One 


to  see  oorniptlon,  so  he  left  not  his  sonl  In  heOl,  wad 
thereby  gaye  suffident  security  to  all  thoee  who  bdong 
to  Christ  of  neyer  coming  under  the  power  of  Satan,  or 
suffering  in  the  flames  prepared  for  the  deril  and  his 
angels.    And  thus,  and  for  these  purposes,  may  eyeiy 
Christian  say,  I  belieye  that  Christ  descended  into  helT 
(Ea^.  o/the  Creed,  Oxfoid,  1820,  p.  876).    Some  of  the 
diyines  of  the  Church  of  En^^^and  hdd  the  Calyinistic 
yiew  of  this  subject;  others  hdd  the  old  theory  of  the 
descent  of  Christ  into  heli  that  he  might  triumph  oyer 
Satan,  as  he  had  before  trinmphed  oyer  death  and  sin 
(Heylyn,  IJisł.  Presb.  p.  849;  Jffiison,  Surrfff  of  Ckritfs 
Sufferingg,  1604).     Hugh  Broughton  (f  1612)  Uught 
oonclusiyely  that  Hade$  is  simply  the  place  of  departed 
souls,  and  that  the  lational  soul  of  Christ,  iu  his  inter> 
mediate  state,  went  into  this  locality.    This  has  sinoe 
been  the  generally  receiyed  opinion  in  the  Church  of 
England ;  so  Horsley,  "Christ  descended  to  the  inyisible 
mandon  of  departed  spirits,  and  to  that  part  of  it  wheie 
the  souls  of  the  faithful,  when  deliyered  from  the  burden 
of  the  flesh,  are  in  joy  and  felidty.  ...  In  that  place  he 
could  nbt  but  find  the  souls  that  are  in  it  in  aafe  keep- 
ing;  and,  in  some  way  or  other,  it  cannot  but  be  snp- 
posed  he  would  hołd  conference  with  them;  and  a  par- 
ticular  conference  with  one  class  might  be  the  meaiis, 
and  certainly  could  be  no  obstructton,  to  a  generał  com- 
munication  with  all"  {SermonSj  voL  i,  serm.  xx).     Dr. 
Joseph  Muenscher  disciiases  the  whole  subject,  histor- 
ically  and  critically,  in  an  able  article  in  the  BiUiotkeea 
Sacra,  April,  1859,  and  condudes,  as  to  the  Protestant 
Episcopal  Church,  that  her  doctrine,  as  gi%'en  in  the 
litnrgy  and  Homilies,  "can  only  be  reoonciled  with 
that  of  the  Creed  and  Artides  by  ą  liberał  construcUon 
of  the  Creeds.    And  this  has  been  done  by  the  American 
Church  herself  in  the  rubric  preiixed  to  the  Creed,  in 
which  she  snbstitutes  the  words  'he  went  into  the 
place  of  departed  spiiits'  as  of  eąuiyalent  import.    The 
terms  in  which  this  substitute  is  couched  are  quite  gen- 
erał and  iudefinite.    By  employing  the  yerb  tren/  in  the 
place  of  detcended,  she  yirtually  repudiates  the  hypothe- 
sis  of  a  subterranean  cayity  as  the  receptade  of  disem- 
bodied  souls.    And  the  phrase  "płace  of  departed  apir- 
its"  detenamet  nothmg  as  to  an  immediate  locality,  sep- 
aiate  and  distinct  from  both  heaven  and  lieU,    It  merdy 
affinna  that  the  soul  of  Jesus  at  his  death  went  to  ita 
appropriate  phMse  in  the  inyisible,  spiritual  world.    Thna 
understood,  the  dogma  of  Christ's  deaoent  into  heli  is 
freed  from  all  difficulty  and  mysteiy,  and  madę  plain  to 
tlie  comprehenaion  of  eyery  mind,  as  well  as  coiisonant 
with  the  generał  tenor  of  Scripture.    The  resuhs  to 
wliich  we  are  bronght  by  the  preceding  remarks  are :  1. 
That  the  soul  of  man  does  not  die  or  deep  with  the 
body,  but,  immediatdy  after  the  dissołution  of  the  lat- 
ter,  passes  into  a  separate,  disembodied,  oonsdons  state, 
and  into  its  appropriate  place  (so  far  as  spirits  may  be 
supposed  to  occupy  place),  dther  of  enjoyment  or  suf- 
fering— its  heayen  or  its  heli — aocording  to  the  morał 
character  which  it  may  possess.    2.  That  there  ia  no 
third  intermediate  place  of  spiritual  existence;  no  sub- 
terranean habitation  of  disembodied  souls,  either  of  pro- 
bation  or  of  purgation ;  no  imaginary  paradise  in  the 
under  world  where  the  souls  of  the  pious  are  presenred 
in  safe-keeping ;  no  limbus  patrum,  no  Nmbus  iitfamtam, 
no  purgatory.    8.  That  our  Sayiour,  aocording  to  the 
Creed,  was  perfect  man  aj  well  as  perfect  God,  haying  a 
human  soul  no  less  than  a  human  body.    4.  That  when 
cruciiied  he  died  in  reałity,  and  not  merdy  in  appeai^ 
ance  (syncope),  sinoe  there  took  |dace  an  actual  sepaia- 
tion  of  his  soul  and  body.    5l  That  the  idle  and  unprof- 
itable  que8tion  as  to  the  object  of  Cłirist's  descent  into 
Hades  is  precluded ;  a  ąuestion  which  grea^ly  perplexed 
the  fathers,  the  schoolmen,  and  the  Reformers,  and  led  to 
the  inyention  of  many  absurd  and  unacriptuial  theoriea" 
See  Petayitts,  De  TheoL  Dogmatu  (Antw.  1700),  tom. 
ii,  pL  ii,  p.  196;  Knapp,  Theohgg,  §  97;  Dietdmayr, 
Hitt,  dogmaies  de  detceneu  ChritH  ad  w/eroe  (2d  ed.  Al- 
torf,  1762, 8yo);  Hacker,  Diatert,  de  desomm  Cknati  ad 


HEŁŁ 


173 


HELL 


If^en*  (JhfgćoE^  1802) ;  Pearaon,  On  the  Creed,  art.  v; 
Edwaidfl,  Biśtory  of  Jiedemption,  notes,  p.  351, 377 ;  Sto- 
artj  £xeffdieal  JCtta^  on  Futurę  Pumshment;  Plump- 
tie,  CAHśt  amd  Chritteftdom,  p.  842;  Bumet,  Uardwick, 
Browne,  On  the  Tkiriy^nme  A  rticla,  ait.  iii ;  Neale,  IJi$t. 
ofthe  I^urHam  (Uaipen'  ed.),  i,  210;  Konig,  dis  Lehre 
V4M  Chritti  HoUenfakri  (Frankf.  1842) ;  Bottchcr,  de  /n- 
/trU  rdm»qu€poat  morUm/uiuru,  etc.  (Dreaden,  1846, 2 
voI&);  Gttder,  Lehre  r.  d.  Krtchehamg  Ckrisii  u,  d,  Tod- 
tm  (Berlin,  1858) ;  GUder,  in  Herzog,  Real^Ewyidop,  vi, 
178;  Zeiisckriftfir  dk  Lutheri$che.  Theologie,  1868,  Na 
4;  BibUcal  Repusiiory,  April,  1843,  p.  470;  BibUfftheca 
Sacra,  Nov.  1847,  p.  708;  Huidekoper,  Ckrisi^e  Misnon 
to  the  Umkr  WoHd  (Boston,  1854) ;  Bp.  Uobart,  On  the 
State  o/ the  Departed;  Bethune,  Ucturet  on  the  Heidel- 
berg Caieekum,  lect.  xłx  ;  Christian  £xami»er,  1,  401 ; 
Martwwen,  Chrittian  Doffmatics,  §  171 ;  Domer,  Pereon 
of  Christ  (Ind€x,  &  v.  HeU) ;  Church  JUviete,  July,  1857 ; 
Huenacher,  in  BibUoiheca  Sacra^  AprU,  1859.  For  old 
monegra]^  on  the  aubject,  aee  Yolbeding,  Index  Pro- 
^rammatumj  p.  67.     See  Imtermediate  State. 

HELL  PUNISHMENTS,  Naturę  of.  — The  term 
Heu.  (łłoUe),  as  stated  above,  originally  denoted  the 
'^necber  woild,"  the  **  place  of  departed  spirita."  It 
came  to  be  aknoat  excliiaively  applied  at  a  later  period 
to  the  **  place  of  tonnent"  for  the  wicked.  The  scholas- 
tic  diyines  diatinguiahed  between  the  Lkmbusy  or  place 
of  the  8oul8  of  departed  apirita,  and  łieUy  pioperly  so 
caUed,  where  the  damned  auffer  their  pimisbment  (Aqui- 
nas,  Swmmm  SuppUm.  qu.  69). 

The  naturę  cMfthe  piinishmenta  of  heli  haa  been  very 
varioaaly  nndentood  in  different  times;  In  the  early 
Chnich  the  fire  of  heli  was  genenlly  conadered  as  a  real, 
mateiial  fire.  So  Jostin  Martyr,  Clement  of  Akzandria, 
TertttUiao,  and  Cyprian.  Origen,  however, ''  believed 
the  miseiy  of  Łhe  wicked  to  conaist  in  separation  from 
God,  the  renunrae  of  conscience,  etc.  {De  Princ.  ii,  10. 
Opp.  i,  102>  The  etemal  Aib  is  neither  materiał  nor 
kindled  by  another  person,  but  the  combustibks  are  our 
sina  Łhemselrea^  of  which  conscience  remipds  us:  thus 
the  fire  of  heli  resembles  the  fire  of  passions  in  this 
worid.  Tbe  separation  between  the  soul  and  God  may 
be  compaied  with  the  pain  which  we  sufler  when  all  the 
members  of  the  body  are  tom  out  of  their  jointsu  By 
'ottter  dazkness^  Origen  does  not  so  much  understand  a 
place  deroid  of  light  as  a  state  of  oomplete  ignorance ; 
he  thtts  appeara  to  adopt  the  idea  of  Óack  bodies  only 
by  vay  of  accommodation  to  popular  notions.  It  should 
ako  be  bonie  in  mind  that  Origen  imagined  that  the 
dengn  of  all  theae  punishments  was  to  heal  or  to  cor- 
rect, and  thus  finally  to  restore  the  sinner  to  the  favQr 
of  God"*  (Hagenbach,  Uistoty  of  Doctrines,  §  78). 

Fiom  the  latter  part  of  the  8d  oentuiy  onward  to  the 

rise  of  seholasticism,  the  pnnishments  of  heli  were  gen- 

efaOy  desaibed  by  materiał  images,  aud,  iiideed,  were 

cooaadeied,  to  a  large  extent,  as  materiał  punishments. 

Gicgory  of  Nazianzus.  (t  889?)  suppoeed  the  punish- 

meut  of  the  damned  to  consist  essentially  in  their  sępa- 

ntłon  from  God,  and  in  the  consciousness  of  their  own 

mond  debasement  (Orat»  xvi,  9,  p.  806 :  Toic  ^^  h^rd 

riv  aXAitfy  ^aavoc,  fiaXAov  Śi  vpo  rS>v  aXkiitv  tŁ 

artppi^aŁ  ^f  ov,  Kai  tf  iv  Ttf  trwuSóri  aioxvvri  iripac 

oMc  txoijaa).   Basil,  on  the  oontouy,  gires  a  morę  vivid 

desctiption  of  that  punishment  (JIondL  in  Psa.  xxiii, 

Opp,  i,  151,  and  elsewhere).    Chrysostom  represents  the 

tonaenu  of  the  damned  in  a  variety  of  horrid  pictures 

Cm  Theod.  laptum^  i,  c.  6,  Opp,  iy,  560, 561).    Nererthe- 

kas,  m  oiher  places  (e.  g.,  in  his  Ep,  ad  Rom,  hom,  xxxi, 

Opp,  X,  396)  he  justly  obsenres  that  it  is  of  morę  impor- 

^•aee  to  know  how  to  escape  heli  than  to  know  where  it 

M  and  what  is  its  natore.    Gregory  of  Nyssa  (Orat.  Ca- 

tftk  40)  endeavors  to  diyest  the  idea  of  heli  of  all  that 

■  tensuous  (the  fire  of  heli  is  not  to  be  looked  npon  as  a 

BMcrialfire,  nor  is  Łhe  worm  which  never  dies  an  i^ri- 

ll*»v  hipiop),  Augustine  imagines  that  separation  from 

God  is  in  the  fint  instance  to  be  regarded  as  the  death 

md  punishment  of  the  damned  (JM  morib.  ecdeę,  caih. 


a  11) ;  but  he  leares  it  to  his  readers  to  choose  between 
the  morę  sensuous  or  the  morę  spiritual  modę  of  percep- 
tion.  It  is,  he  says,  at  all  events,  better  to  think  of 
both  (2>6  dńt,  Beiy  xxi,  9, 10). 

From  the  8th  to  the  16th  centuries  the  tendency  was 
to  regard  the  punishments  of  heli  morę  as  physical  and 
materiał  than  bb  morał  and  spiritual ;  in  the  doctrine  of 
the  Church  the  two  sorts  of  punishment  were  combined. 
Aąuinas  treats  of  the  punisłmients  of  heli  under  the  titłe 
Poma  Danmatorum  (Sumnue  SuppL  qu.  97),  and  teach- 
es,  1.  that  the  damned  will  sufler  other  punishments  be- 
sides  that  of  fire;  2.  that  the  ^^undying  worm"  is  re- 
morse  of  conscience;  8.  tliat  the  ^^darkness"  of  heli  ia 
physical  darkness,  only  so  much  light  being  admitted  as 
will  allow  the  lost  to  see  and  apprehend  the  punislmienta 
of  Łhe  płace ;  that,  as  both  body  and  soul  are  to  be  pun- 
ished,  the  fire  of  heli  will  be  a  materiał  fire.  Augua- 
tine*8  view,  he  says,  is  to  be  considered  rather  as  a  pa8&- 
ing  opinion  tłum  as  a  decision  {loquitur  opinando  et  non 
determmandó),  The  fire,  acoording  to  Aquinas,  is  of  the 
same  naturę  as  our  ordinary  fire,  though  "  with  different 
propertioB ;''  and  the  place  of  punislmient,  though  not 
certainly  luiown,  is  probabły  under  the  earth.  Othera 
of  the  schoolmen,  howeyer  (especially  the  Mystics),  madę 
the  sufieiing  of  heli  to  conaist  rather  in  separation  from 
God,  and  in  the  conBequent  consciousness  of  sin,  and  of 
unayailing  repentance,  than  in  materiał  penalties. 

The  Reformation  madę  łittłe  change  in  the  doctrine 
as  to  the  naturę  of  futurę  punislunent.  The  substance 
of  the  Reformed  doctrine  is  giyen  in  the  Wesłminster 
Confession^  chap.  xxxiii,  as  folłows :  *'  The  wicked,  who 
luiow  not  God,  and  oliey  not  the  Gospel  of  Jesus  Clirist, 
sliałł  he  cast  into  etemal  tormeuts,  and  be  punished  witłi 
eyerlasting  destruction  from  the  presence  of  the  Lord, 
and  from  the  glory  of  liis  power;"  and  in  the  Larger 
Cttteckiem,  quest.  29,  "  What  are  the  punishments  of  sm. 
intheteoridtocomef  ^.  The  punisłmients  of  sin  in  the 
worłd  to  come  are  eyerlasting  separation  from  the  com- 
fortable  presenoe  of  God,  and  most  grieyous  tormcnts  in 
soul  and  body,  without  intermission,  in  hell-fire  forercr.** 
In  generał,  both  Protestant  and  Roman  Cathołic  theo- 
logians  agree  in  making  tłiat  punislunent  to  consist  (1) 
of  the  pana  damni,  penałty  of  loss  or  depriyation,  sep- 
aration from  God,  and  hence  loss  of  all  poBsible  sourcea 
of  enjoyment  (Matt.  yi,21;  xxii,  18;  xxy,41;  compare 
Wesley,  Sermons,  ii,  148),  of  which  loss  the  damned  will 
be  fuUy  conscious ;  (2)  of  the  pana  senmSf  penałty  of 
sense  or  feeling,  as  the  natura!  conseąuence  of  sin. 
"These  punishments  are  ineWtable,  and  connected  aa 
cloeeły  and  inseparabły  with  sin  as  any  efiect  with  ita 
cause.  From  the  consciousness  of  being  guiłty  of  sin 
ariae  regret,  sorrow,  and  remorse  of  conscience,  and  it  ia 
tłiese  inward  pangs  wliich  are  the  most  grieyous  and 
tormenting.  The  conscience  of  man  is  a  stem  accuser^ 
wlkich  cannot  be  refuted  or  bribed,  and  the  morę  its  yoice 
is  disregarded  or  suppressed  here  npon  earth,  the  morę 
łoudły  will  it  speak  hereafter.  Add  to  tliis  that  the 
propensity  to  sin,  the  passions  and  eyił  desires  which  in 
this  worłd  occupy  the  human  lieart,  are  carried  along 
into  the  next.  For  it  cannot  he  supposed  tłiat  they  will 
be  suddenly  eradicated  as  by  a  miracle,  and  this  is  not 
promised.  But  these  desires  and  propensities  can  no 
longer  find  satisfaction  in  the  futurę  worłd,  where  man 
will  he  płaced  in  an  entirely  different  situation,  and  sur- 
rounded  by  a  circle  of  objects  entirely  new,  hencc  they 
will  beoome  the  morę  infiaroed.  From  the  yery  naturę 
of  the  case,  it  is  plain,  thereforo,  that  the  state  of  such  a 
man  hereailer  must  necessariły  he  miscrable.  Shame, 
regret,  remorse,  hopelessness,  and  absolutc  despair,  are 
the  naturał,  ineyitabłe,  and  extreme]y  dreadful  consc- 
ąuences  of  the  sins  oommitted  in  this  łife."  (8)  Be- 
sidea  these  natund  penałties  of  sin,  there  will  ałso  be 
posiiiffe  penałties  inflicted  by  divine  justice.  The  New 
Testament  spealcs  far  morę  distinctiy  and  fineąuentły  of 
these  positiye  punislunents  tłum  of  the  naturał  ones,  and 
especially  of  the  "  undying  worm,"  and  of  "  the  etemal 
fire.'*    The  generał  tendency  of  modem  thęology  is  to 


HELŁ 


174 


HEŁŁENIST 


regttd  these  eipreańoiiB  as  flgantiye  representations  of 
the  po9itive  penalties  of  heU.  Doddńdge  remarks  that, 
*^0n  the  whole,  it  is  of  yery  little  importanoe  whether 
we  say  Łbere  U  an  extenial  fire,  or  only  an  idea  of  auch 
pain  as  arisea  from  tiariiing;  and  should  we  think  both 
doubtful,  it  is  certain  God  can  give  the  miiid  a  seiue  of 
agony  and  distresa  which  should  answer  and  even  ex- 
ceed  the  terrors  of  those  descriptions;  and  care  should 
certainly  be  taken  so  to  explain  Scripture  metaphon  as 
that  heil  may  be  oonsidered  as  consisdng  morę  of  mental 
agony  than  of  bodily  toitures"  {Led.  <m  Dwin,  ccxxiii). 

Of  simiiar  tenor  are  the  foUowing  remarks  by  Dr. 
Wardlaw :  ^  What  the  naturę  of  that  suffering  shall  be 
it  is  yain  for  us  to  attempt  to  oonjecture.  It  has  been 
oonoeiyed  that  if  we  suppose  dear  apprehensions  of  God 
and  sin  in  the  understanding;  an  unslumbering  oon- 
science ;  an  unceasing  oonflict  between  fuli,  irrepressible 
conrictions  of  all  that  is  awful  in  tnith,  and  an  enmity 
of  heart  romaining  in  all  its  virulence ;  passions  raging 
in  their  unmitigated  yiolence ;  regrets  as  unayailing  as 
they  are  torturing;  oonsdons  desert  and  unaUeyiated 
hopdessness;  with  the  entire  lemoyal  of  all,  in  what- 
eyer  form,  that  on  earth  enabled  the  sinner  to  banish 
thought  and  exclttde  anticipation,  we  haye  materials  for 
a  sufiicient  helL  I  wiU  not  deny  it  .  .  .  I  cannot  but 
think,  therefore,  that  there  must  be  something  morę 
than  oonscience,  something  of  the  naturę  of  positiye 
punitiye  infliction:  oonscience  attesdng  its  justice,  cer- 
tifying  its  being  all  desenred.  What  shall  be  the  pr^ 
dse  naturę  of  that  infliction  is  another  ąuestion.  There 
may  surely  be  something  of  the  naturę  of  punitiye  in- 
fliction without  adopting  the  theory  of  literał  Are,  of  a 
lakę  of  fire,  a  lakę  buming  with  brimstoue.  I  haye  no 
morę  belief,  as  I  haye  just  said,  in  a  literał  fire  than  in 
a  literał  worm ;  and  no  roore  belief  in  either  than  in  the 
exi8tence,  for  the  heayen  of  the  Bibie,  of  a  literał  para- 
dise,  in  the  centrę  of  which  grows  the  tree  of  łlfe,  or  of 
a  literał  city,  of  which  the  lengtli,  and  breadtbi,  and 
height  are  equal,  of  which  the  foundations  are  precious 
Stones,  the  gates  of  pearl,  and  the  streets  of  gołd,  with  a 
pure  riyer  of  liying  water  flowing  through  the  midst  of 
it  But  the  mind  of  fałlen  man  is  in  loye  with  sin,  and 
in  selfish  hatred  of  €rod  and  holiness.  In  a  mind  of  this 
character  the  difficulty  may  amount  to  impoasibiiity  of 
awakening  any  adequate  sense  of  futurę  suffering,  or 
any  sałutary  alarm  in  the  anticipation  of  it,  by  any  rep- 
resentation  of  it  morę  directly  spiritual,  or  eyen  mental. 
In  these  circumstances,  then,  if  an  impression  of  ex- 
treme  suffering  is  to  be  madę,  it  seems  as  if  figurę,  taken 
from  what  is  stili  in  the  midst  of  all  the  per\'erBions  of 
depravlty  fełt  to  be  fearfuł,  were  almost,  if  not  ałtogeth- 
er,  indispenaable  for  the  purposo.  The  figures  of  Snip- 
ture  on  this  subject  are  fełt,  and  fełt  powerfully,  by  ey- 
ery  mind.  The  very  mention  of  the  "  worm  that  dicth 
not"  awakens  a  morę  thrilłing  emotion,  undefined  as  it 
is  (perhaps,  indced,  the  morę  thriłling  that  it  is  unde- 
fined), than  anytłiing  you  can  say  to  an  unregenerate 
man  about  the  operations  of  conscienoe,  and  the  "fire 
that  never  shall  be  ąuenched**  than  any  representation 
you  can  cyer  make  to  hlm  of  sin,  and  the  absence  of 
God,  and  the  sway  of  eyil  passions,  and  the  pangs  of 
remorsc,  and  horribleness  of  sin-łoying  and  God-hating 
company.  Such  images  haye  the  fuli  effect  intended 
by  them.  They  giye  the  impression,  the  yiyid  and  in- 
tense  impression,  of  extreme  suffering;  aithough  what 
proportion  of  that  suffering  shall  be  the  natiye  and  neo- 
easary  result  of  the  constitution  of  human  naturę  when 
płaced  in  certain  circumstances,  and  what  proportion  of 
morę  direct  penal  infliction,  the  Scriptures  do  not  tell 
us,  entcring  into  no  such  discussions.  And  it  would  be 
nseless  for  us  to  conjecture,  or  to  attempt  the  adjustment 
of  such  proportions"  {Systematic  Th^oloffy,  Edinburgh, 
1857,  iii,  700).  For  a  oopious  list  of  books  on  the  sub- 
ject, see  Abbot's  bibliographicał  appendix  to  Alger,  Hii^ 
tory  ofthe  Doctrtns  o/a  Futurę  Life^  §  iii,  F,  8. 

On  the  Duration  of  the  punishment  of  heli,  see  Un- 

▼EBSAUSII. 


Hellenist  CE^^Hn^>  A.  T.  *"  Gredan  ;** 
'  EXXi;i/t(T;ióc,  2  Maoc.  iy,  18).  In  one  of  the  earlieat  i 
tioes  of  the  first  Christian  Chuzch  at  Jeruaalem  (Acta  yi, 
1),  two  distinct  parties  are  recogniaed  among  its  mem- 
bors,  ^^Hebrtwi*  and  IfeUemetgf  who  appear  to  stand  to> 
wards  one  another  in  some  degree  in  a  reUtion  of  J«al- 
ous  riyalry.  So,  again,  when  Paul  first  yisited  Jemsa- 
lem  aller  his  oonyersion,  he  spoke  and  diapnted  with  the 
ffetlenisft  (Acta  ix,  29),  as  if  expecting  to  find  mcnre  sym- 
pathy  among  them  than  with  the  rulen  of  the  Jewi. 
The  term  Uellenist  occurs  once  again  in  the  N.  T.  ao- 
oording  to  the  oommon  text,  in  the  aocount  of  the  foun- 
dation  of  the  Chnrch  at  Antioch  (Acts  xi,  20),  but  there 
tlie  context,  as  welł  as  the  form  of  the  sentence  (mi 
vpoc  Tovc  *£.,  though  the  Kai  is  doubtfiil),  aeems  to  r^ 
quire  the  other  reading  "Greeks"  (^£\X|fvcc),  which  ia 
suppoited  by  great  extemal  eyidence  as  the  tnie  antł> 
thesis  to  ^  Jews"  CloviaioiCj  not  'Efipaiotę,  y,  19).  See 
Hkbrews. 

The  name,  aocording  to  ita  deriyation,  whether  the 
original  yeib  ('EWiryiCw)  be  taken,  aocording  to  the 
oommon  aaalogy  of  similar  forma  (fur^iC^w,  órnci^M,  ^t- 
AunriCw)}  in  the  generał  sense  of  adoptwg  the  apirit  and 
character  of  Greeka,  or,  in  the  morę  limited  senae,  of 
unng  the  Greek  kmguoffe  (Xenophon,  Anab,  yii,  8,  25), 
marks  a  dass  distinguished  by  peculiar  habits,  and  not 
by  desoent  Thus  the  Hełllenists  as  a  body  indnded 
not  only  the  prosdytea  of  Greek  (or  foreign)  parentage 
(oc  otfi6/uvoŁ  *'£XX|fMC,  Acts  xyii,  4  (?);  ol  oef^furoi 
irpo(T{i\vToi,  ActB  xiii,  43;  oi  tf(/3ó^CM)c,  Acta  xyiiyl7X 
but  also  thoee  Jews  who,  by  settling  in  foreign  oountries, 
had  adopted  the  preyalent  form  of  the  current  Greek 
dyilization,  and  with  it  the  use  of  the  oommon  Greek 
dialect,  to  the  excłu8ion  of  the  Aramaic,  whidł  waa  the 
nationał  representatiye  of  the  andent  Uebrew.  llelle- 
nism  was  thus  a  type  of  life,  and  not  an  indication  of  or- 
igiii.  Hdlenists  might  be  Greeks,  but  when  the  latter 
term  is  used  ("EWi^yf  Ct  John  xii,  20),  the  point  of  nce 
and  not  of  cieed  is  that  which  is  foremost  in  the  mind 
of  the  writer.  (See  Jour.  Sac  LU.  Jan.  and  April,  1867.> 
—Smith,  a.  y.    See  Grecian. 

1.  As  to  the  particolar  dass  in  ąneation,  refened  to  in 
the  Acts,  the  fołlowing  are  the  diflfeient  opinions  that 
haye  been  hdd :  1.  That  the  distinctiye  difference  be- 
tween them  was  simply  one  of  laaiguage^  the  Uebrewa 
speaking  the  Aramaic  of  Palestine,  the  Hellenista  the 
Greek.  This  is  the  most  andent  opinloo,  being  that 
expressed  in  the  Peshito,  and  giyen  by  ChryBoatom, 
Theophylact,  etc. ;  and  it  is  the  one  which  has  receired 
the  largest  number  of  suffrages  in  morę  recent  timea. 
Among  its  adyocates  are  Joseph  Scaliger,  Hemsius,  Dni- 
sius,  Grotius,  Sdden,  Hottinger,  Hug,  etc 

2.  That  the  distinction  was  partly  of  cototfry,  putlj 
ofkmgwj^.:  the  Hebrew  bdng  a  natiye  of  Judea,  and 
using  the  Aramaic  language ;  the  HeUcnist  boni  among 
the  Gentiles,  and  using  the  speech  of  the  country  cf 
which  he  was  a  natiye.  So  Erasmua,  Ughtfoot,  Bengel, 
Wahl,  De  Wette,  Dayidson,  Alford,  Baumgarten,  etc. 

8.  That  the  d&fference  was  one  of  reUgious  hitiory, 
the  Hebrew  being  a  bom  child  of  the  ooyenant,  the  Hd- 
lenist  a  prosdyte  from  heatheniam.  So  Beza,  Salmadus, 
Pearson,  Basnage,  Pfannkuche,  etc. 

4.  That  the  clifference  was  one  o(pnncq)le:  the  He- 
brew adhering  to  one  set  of  bdiefs  or  modes  of  thooght, 
the  Helłenist  adopting  another.  Aocording  to  aome, 
this  difference  had  the  effect  of  constituting  the  Helle- 
nists  into  a  distinct  sect  among  the  Jews,  such  as  the  £»• 
senes;  whilst  otheis,  without  going  this  length,  rągaid 
the  two  classes  as  standing  to  each  other  yeiy  much  in 
the  relation  in  which  parties  in  the  state  hdcUng  dilfer- 
ent  politicał  yiews,  or  parties  in  the  same  Church  haying 
different  aims  and  modea  of  regarding  rdigioos  truth  in 
modem  times,  may  stand  to  each  other;  the  Hebcews 
being  like  the  Conseryatiye  or  High-Ohurch  party,  while 
the  Hellenista  adyocated  a  roore  progreasiye,  unlettered, 
and  comprehensiye  scheme  of  thinking  and  acting.  This 
latter  yiew,  in  its  subetance^  haa  recently  foond  an  able 


HELLENIST 


116 


HELŁENKT 


ilvocmte  in  Mr.  Roberts  CDUcusnont  oh  the  Gospetśy  p. 
148  K).).  Accarding  to  bim,  **  the  HdUnuU  were  thoM 
Jewi,  wkether  bdonging  to  Palestine  or  not,  who  will- 
ingiy  jielded  to  the  influence  of  Gentile  civiUzation  and 
habitą  and  were  thos  diatingoiahed  by  their  free  and 
liberał  ipińt;  the  Htbrews,  again,  were  the  rigid  adhe- 
renta to  Jodatsm,  wh'o,  in  sękU  of  the  proyidential  agen- 
óea  which  had  been  long  at  work,  endeayorad  to  keep 
np  thoae  pecnliar  and  excluaive  uaages  by  which  the 
JewB  bad  for  bo  manjr  oentuzice  been  preaeired  distinct 
fnin  all  other  nationa." 

We  are  not  diapoeed  to  leject  entirely  any  of  these 
oplniona.  Each  of  them  aeema  to  have  an  dement  of 
tnith  in  it,  though  the  contributiona  they  make  to  the 
whole  tmth  on  this  aubject  aro  by  no  meana  of  equal 
impoitance.  The  laat  alone  pointa  to  what  must  be  re- 
garded  aa  the  fundamental  and  fonnatire  characteriatic 
of  Helkniam  among  the  Jewa.  Thera  can  be  no  doubt 
hiatorically  that  aome  auch  distinction  aa  that  to  which 
it  refeiB  did  aobńat  in  the  Jewiah  nation  (aee  Joet,  Getch. 
det  JudmtkMmB^  i,  99  8q^  845  8q.))  and  had  come  to  a 
heighi  at  the  oommencement  of  the  Chriatian  sra ;  and 
notliing  can  be  może  probable  than  that  the  exi8tence 
of  anch  a  diatinctaon  ahoiild  manifeat  itaelf  in  the  veyy 
way  in  which  the  diatinction  between  the  Hebrewa  and 
the  HeUeniata  ia  aaaerted  to  haye  ahown  itaelf  in  Acta 
vi,  1  aq.  It  ia  in  agreement  with  thia,  also,  that  Paul 
dBOttld  h«ve  entered  into  diicuaaion  chiefly  with  the 
HeUeniadc  Jewa  at  Jemsalem ;  for  it  ia  probable  that  as 
hia  early  Hellenie  culture  pointed  him  out  aa  the  person 
moet  fitted  to  meet  them  on  their  o¥m  ground,  he  may 
haye  been  apedally  aet  upon  thia  work  by  the  other 
apoatlea. — Kitto,  8.y.  StiU  thia  diiference  of  yiews 
ooold  hardly  of  itaelf  haye  conatituted  bo  marked  and 
ofayiouB  a  diatinction  aa  ia  impUed  in  the  yariona  texta 
aboye  cited,  mileaa  it  had  been  exhibited  in  aoroe  out- 
wanI  cbaracteiialic;  and  no  extemal  aign  oould  haye 
been  moie  certain,  natural^  and  pałpable  than  that  ia- 
nńliar  nae  of  the  Greek  language  which  at  once  betray- 
ed  a  foreign  Jew,  to  whom  it  waa  yemacular,  in  contraat 
with  the  Paleatinian  Jew,  by  whom  Greek,  although  too 
preyaknt  in  that  age  e^-erywhere  to  haye  been  unknown 
to  any,  wąa  neyeithełeaa  alwaya  apoken  with  a  Hebrew 
cobruig  aiid  aooent.    See  Dxsper8io!i. 

II.  U  remaina  to  characterize  briefly  the  elementa 
which  the  HelleniaU  contributed  to  the  language  of  the 
K.  T.,  and  the  immediate  effecta  which  they  produoed 
opon  the  apoatolic  teaching: 

1.  The  flexibility  of  the  Greek  langnage  gained  for  it 
in^Dcient  timea  a  generał  currency  atmilar  to  that  which 
French  enjoya  in  modem  Europę;  but  with  this  impor- 
tant  diflerence,  that  Greek  waa  not  only  the  language 
of  edocated  men,  but  alao  the  language  of  the  maaaca  in 
the  great  oentiea  of  commerce.  The  coloniea  of  Alex- 
andcr  and  bla  aaoceaaora  originally  eatablished  what  haa 
been  caOed  the  Macedonian  dialect  thronghout  the  East; 
bat  eren  in  thia  the  preyailing  power  of  Attic  literaturę 
nade  itaelf  diattnctly  felt.  Peculiar  worda  and  forma 
adopted  at  Alexandria  were  undoubtedly  of  Macedonian 
origin,  but  the  later  Attic  may  be  Justly  regarded  as  the 
reafbaBa  of  Oriental  Greek.  Thia  firat  type  waa,  how- 
eyeiv  w>on  modified,  at  leaat  in  common  nae,  by  contact 
with  other  languagea.  The  yocabulaiy  waa  enriched 
by  the  addition  of  foreign  worda,  and  the  ayntax  waa 
modiified  by  new  conatructionk  In  this  way  a  yariety 
of  local  diałecta  muat  haye  aiiaen,  the  apecific  characters 
of  which  were  determined  in  the  firat  instance  by  the 
conditaone  under  which  they  were  formed,  and  which 
aftcTwarda  paaaed  away  with  the  cinnimatancea  that 
had  prodttced  them.  But  one  of  theae  diałecta  haa  been 
pnaenred  aftcr  the  min  of  the  people  among  whom  it 
anse,  by  bemg  conaecrated  to  the  nobleat  senrice  which 
language  haa  yet  fulfUled.  In  other  caaea  the  diałecta 
poiahed  together  with  the  communitioa  who^uaed  them 
in  the  common  intcicourse  of  life,  but  in  that  of  the 
Jewa  the  Al«xandrine  yeraion  of  the  O.  Test.,  acting  in 
thia  rapect  lUa  the  great  yemacolar  yeruona  of  £ng- 


land  and  Germany,  gaye  a  definiteness  and  fixity  to  the 
popular  language  which  oould  not  haye  been  gained 
without  the  exiatence  of  aome  recogniaed  standard.  The 
style  of  the  Sept.  itaelf  ia,  indeed,  different  in  diiferent 
parta,  but  the  aame  generał  character  runa  through  the 
whole,  and  the  yariationa  which  it  preaenta  are  not  greater 
than  thoee  which  exist  in  the  diflerent  books  of  the  N.  T. 

The  functions  which  thiB  Jewish-Greek  had  to  dia- 
chaige  were  of  the  wideat  application,  and  the  language 
itaelf  combined  the  most  oppoaite  featurea.  It  was  ea- 
aentially  a  fnaion  of  Eastero  and  Western  thought;  for, 
diaregarding  peculiaritiea  of  inflection  and  noyel  worda, 
the  characteriatic  of  the  Hellenistic  dialect  is  the  com- 
bination  of  a  Hebrew  spirit  with  a  Greek  body,  of  a 
Hebrew  form  with  Greek  worda.  The  conception  be- 
k>ng8  to  one  race,  and  the  expreB8ion  to  another.  Nor 
is  it  too  much  to  say  that  this  oombination  was  one  of 
the  most  important  preparations  for  the  reception  of 
Chriatianity,  and  one  of  the  most  important  aids  for  the 
adequate  expreaBion  of  its  teaching.  On  the  one  hand, 
by  the  apread  of  the  Helłenistic  Greek,  the  deep,  theo- 
cratic  aapect  of  the  worid  and  life,  which  distinguiahea 
Jewish  thought,  waa  placed  before  men  at  large;  and, 
on  the  other,  the  aubtle  tratha  which  philosophy  had 
gained  from  the  anałysis  of  mind  and  action,  and  en- 
ahrined  in  worda,  were  tranafeired  to  the  seryice  of  rer- 
elation.  In  the  fulness  of  time,  when  the  great  me»» 
sagę  came,  a  langnage  waa  prepared  to  convey  it;  and 
thua  the  yery  dialect  of  the  N.  T.  forma  a  great  leaaon 
in  the  tnie  phikwophy  of  history,  and  becomea  in  itaelf  a 
monument  of  the  providentiał  goyemment  of  mankind, 

This  yiew  of  the  Helłenistic  dialect  will  at  once  r&- 
moye  one  of  the  commonest  misconceptions  relating  to 
it.  For  it  will  folłow  that  its  deviations  from  the  ordi- 
nary  Uiws  of  claasic  Greek  are  themselres  bound  by 
aome  common  law,  and  that  irregułaritiea  of  oonstruc- 
tion  and  altered  uaagea  of  worda  are  to  be  traced  to  their 
fiiat  aouroe,  and  interpreted  strictly  according  to  the 
originał  conception  out  of  which  they  pprang.  A  pop- 
ular, and  eyen  a  cormpt  dialect  is  not  less  f  recise,  or, 
in  other  woids,  is  not  less  human  than  a  polished  one, 
though  its  interpretation  may  often  be  more  didicult 
from  the  want  of  materiale  for  anałysis.  But  in  the 
case  of  the  N.  T.,  the  books  themselyes  fumish  an  ample 
store  for  the  critic,  and  the  Sept,,  when  coropared  with 
the  Hebrew  text,  provides  him  with  the  histoiy  of  the 
language  which  he  haa  to  atudy. 

2.  The  adoption  of  a  strange  language  waa  easentiaDy 
characteriatic  of  the  tme  naturo  of  Hcllenism.  The 
purely  outward  elementa  of  the  national  life  wero  laid 
ańde  with  a  faciłity  of  which  history  offers  few  exam- 
plea,  whiłe  the  inner  character  of  the  people  rcmained 
unchanged.  In  eyery  respect,  the  thought,  so  to  speak, 
waa  cłothed  in  a  new  dresa.  Hellenism  was,  as  it  were, 
a  fresh  incorporation  of  Judaism  aecording  to  altered 
lawa  of  life  and  worship.  But,  as  the  Hebrew  spirit 
madę  itaelf  diatinctły  yisible  in  the  new  dialect,  so  it  re- 
mained  undestmyed  by  the  new  conditions  which  rogu- 
lated  its  action.  Whiłe  the  Helłenistic  Jews  foUowed 
their  naturał  inatinct  for  trade,  which  was  originally 
curbed  by  the  Mosaic  law,  and  gained  a  deeper  insight 
into  foreign  character,  and  with  this  a  traer  sympathy, 
or  at  łeast  a  wider  tołerance  towards  foreign  opinions, 
they  found  meana  at  the  same  time  to  extend  the 
knowledge  of  the  principłes  of  their  divine  faith,  and  to 
gain  respect  and  attention  eyen  from  those  who  did  not 
openly  embrace  their  rełigion.  HeUenism  accomplishcd 
for  the  outer  worłd  wliat  the  Return  accomplished  for 
the  Paleatinian  Jews :  it  was  the  necessary  step  between 
a  rełigion  of  form  and  a  rełigion  of  spirit :  it  witnessed 
against  Judaism  as  finał  and  miivcrsa],  and  it  witnessed 
for  it  as  the  foundation  of  a  spiritual  rełigion  which 
should  be  Iwund  by  no  locał  restrictions.  Under  the 
influence  of  this  wider  instruction,  a  Greek  body  grew 
up  arouiid  the  synagogue— not  admitted  into  the  Jew- 
ish Church,  and  yet  holding  a  recognised  posiŁion  with 
.rcgaid  to  tt^which  waa  able  to  apprehend  the  apoatolic 


rf  H^X^T.iTCT\. 


1Y6 


HELMET 


teaching,  and  ready  to  receire  it.  The  Helknists  them- 
selyes  were  at  ouce  munonaiies  to  the  heathen  and 
prophetfl  to  their  own  coimtiymen.  Their  lives  were 
an  abiding  protest  agaiuAt  polytheism  and  pantheism, 
and  they  retained  with  unahaken  zeal  the  sum  of  their 
ancient  creed,  when  the  preacher  had  popularly  ocen- 
pied  the  place  of  the  priest,  and  a  aeryioe  of  prayer,  and 
praise,  and  exhortation  had  socoeeded  in  daily  life  to 
the  elaborate  ritual  of  the  Tempie.  Yet  thia  new  de- 
velopmeut  of  JudaUm  was  obtamed  without  the  sacri- 
fice  of  uatlonal  ties.  The  oonnection  of  the  Hellenista 
with  the  Tempie  was  not  broken,  except  in  the  case  of 
some  of  the  Egyptian  Jews.  Unity  coexi8ted  with  dis- 
persion ;  and  the  organization  of  the  Church  was  fore- 
shadowcd,  not  only  in  the  widening  breadth  of  doctrine, 
but  cvcii  extcmally  in  the  scattered  communities  which 
looked  to  Jcrusalem  as  their  common  centrę. 

In  another  aspect  łlcllenism  seryed  as  the  prepara- 
tion  for  a  catholic  creed.  As  it  fumished  the  language 
of  Christianity,  it  supplied  aiso  that  literary  instinct 
which  counteracted  the  traditional  resenre  of  the  Pale»- 
thiian  Jews.  The  wńtings  of  the  N.  TesL,  and  all  the 
writings  of  the  apostolic  age,  with  the  exception  of  the 
original  Gospel  of  Matthew,  were,  as  fir  as  we  know, 
Greek ;  and  Greek  scems  to  have  remained  the  sole  ye- 
hicie  of  Christian  literaturę,  and  the  principal  medium 
of  Christian  worship,  till  the  Church  of  North  Afińca 
rosę  into  importance  in  the  time  of  Tertullian.  The 
Canon  of  the  Christian  Scriptures,  the  early  creeds,  and 
the  liturgies,  are  the  memorials  of  this  Hellenistic  pre- 
dominance  in  the  Church,  and  the  types  of  its  working ; 
and  if  in  later  times  the  Greek  spirit  descended  to  the 
inyestigation  of  paiuful  subtlcties,  it  may  be  questioned 
whether  the  fuluess  of  Christian  truth  could  have  been 
deyelopcd  without  the  powcr  of  Greek  thought  temper- 
ed  by  Hebrew  discipline. 

The  generał  relations  of  Hellenism  to  Judaism  are 
well  treated  in  the  histories  of  Ewald  and  Jost;  but  the 
HellQ(U8tic  language  is  as  yet,  critically  speaking,  al- 
most  unexplore(l  Winer's  Grammar  {Gramm.  d,  Ń,  T» 
Sprachidioms,  7th  ed.  1868)  has  done  great  senrice  in 
establishing  the  idea  of  law  in  N.-T.  language,  which 
was  obliterated  by  earlier  interpretera,  but  eyen  Winer 
does  not  inyestigate  the  origin  of  the  peculiarities  of 
the  Hellenistic  dlalcct.  The  idioms  of  the  N.  T.  cannot 
be  discussed  apart  from  thoee  of  the  Sept^  and  no  ex- 
planation  can  be  considered  perfect  which  does  not  take 
into  account  the  origin  of  the  oorresponding  Hebrew 
idioms.  For  this  work  eyen  the  materials  are  as  yet 
deficient.  The  text  of  the  Sept.  is  still  in  a  most  un- 
aatisfactor>'  condition ;  and  while  Bruder's  Concordanoe 
leayes  nothing  to  be  desired  for  the  yocabulary  of  the 
N.  T.,  Trommius*s  Concordance  to  the  SepL,  howeyer 
useful,  is  quite  untrustworthy  for  critical  purposes. — 
Smith,  8.  y.     See  Grekk.  Language. 

HeUer,  Yomtov  Lipman  b.-Nathan,  a  distlnguish- 
ed  Rabbi  of  the  Pollsh  school,  bom  at  Wallerstein,  duchy 
of  Anspach,  Germany,  in  1579.  He  fiUed  the  appoint- 
ment  of  Rabbi  to  the  great  synagogues  at  Yienna, 
Prague,  and  Krakau.  While  at  Prj^c  (1629)  he  was 
prosecuteil  by  the  goyemment  upon  a  charge  that  he 
had  written  in  praise  of  the  Talmud  to  the  injury  of  the 
Christian  religion,  was  imprisoned,  and  fined  10,000  flor- 
ins.  After  his  releasc  he  went  to  Poland,  where,  in 
1644,  he  became  Rabbi  of  the  synagogue  at  Krakau. 
Herc  he  dietl  in  1654.  Heller  wrote  his  autobiography 
(na-^^  ni'^ai3),  pnnted  in  1836,  which  oontains  a  com- 
plete  list  of  all  his  works.  Among  the  most  important 
of  them  are  his  glossaries  to  the  Mishna  {i^  n'łBD'^r). 
Thcsc  are  coiisiderecl  by  Oriental  scholara  as  yery  yalu- 
ablc— Jost,  GeM'h,  d,  Juden.  iii,  243 ;  Etheridge,  IiUrod, 
to  /febr.  Literaturę,  p.  448.     (J.  H.  W.) 

Heim,  Trrjca\iov,  the  rudder  of  a  ship  (Jas.  iii,  4). 
See  RrDDKii. 

Helmet  (rni3  or  raip,  tefta',  TiCiKiipaKala),  a 
military  cap  for  the  defcnce  of  the  head  in  battle  (1  Sam. 


HELMONT 


111. 


HELP 


AndeDt  Hdmeta :  a-«,  BgyptiaD ;  /,  ff,  Pewian ;  fc-A,  Sjr- 
lun ;  I-o,  PhrygUn ;  p,  q,  Daciau ;  r-iA,  Aasyrian. 

xvii, 5, 38,  etc;  Eph.  vi,  17;  1  Thcaa.  v,  8).     See  Ab- 

HOB. 

Helmont,  Francois  Mebcdre,  baron  van,  was 
bora  at  Yilroide  in  1618.  Ih  his  youtb  he  atudied  med- 
ianę, and  applied  himself  especiiiBy  to  alchemy.  He 
then  join«d  a  band  of  gypaies,  with  wbom  be  travelled 
throngh  part  of  Eorope,  but  was  anrested  in  Italy  in 

1662,  and  cast  into  tbe  dungeons  of  the  Inąuiaition.    In 

1663,  being  liberated,  be  went  to  Sulzbach,  wbere  be 
worked  witb  Knarr  of  Roeenrotb  at  tbe  KMala  dam- 
dolcu  He  published,  about  tbe  same  time,  a  work  on 
the  alphabet  of  the  primitiye  tongue,  L  e.  Hebrew  (Sok- 
bach,  1667, 12mo),  wbicb,  according  to  bim,  ia  so  natuial 
that  eveiy  letter  expiea8e8  merely  tbe  poaition  of  tbe 
lipa  while  proinoimdng  it:  be  pretended  to  teach  tbe 
deaf  and  dmnb  to  articulate  all  tbe  aounds  of  bis  alpba- 
bet  at  fint  sighL  He  believed  in  the  transmigration  of 
80fi]s,the  uniyeTBal  remedy,  and  tbe  pbiloaopber'ś  stoue. 
He  trayelled  ailerwards  tbroagb  England,  and  returned 
thiotigh  Hanover  to  Berlin,  in  a  suburb  of  whicb  city  be 
died  in  1699  (Moreii  says  be  died  at  Oologne;  Toppens, 
in  Switzerland;  Wacbter,  at  Emmerich,  in  Dec  1698). 
Ldbnitz  wiote  on  bim  the  following  epitaph : 

"NU  patre  inferlor,  jacet  hic  Helmontins  alter, 
Qal  jQnxit  yarlas  mentle  et  artis  opes : 
Per  ąjMm  Pythagoraa  et  cabbala  sacra  reyizit 
£lceiiaqae,  parat  qnl  sua  cnncta  sibL'* 

Bnidcs  tbe  alphabet  aboTo  mentioned,  he  wrote  Opu*- 
oda  PkUotophiea,  cttibus  conHnentur  principia  pkUoao- 
pkim  oK/^ąiduima  H  recentiuimiBf  etc  (Amsterd.  1690, 
limo)  i— Olittulam  pramedkattB  et  oondderata  Coffita- 
Htma  mtpn  guatuar  priora  oapita  libri  prim  MoiaiSj 
Gmetii  mminałi  (Amst.  1697,  8yo)  :—De  Attributis  di- 
mit,  etc  See  Adelong,  Hiat,  de  la  FóUe  humainej  iy, 
29i423:  Mor^  Grcmd  diet,  hitt. ;  Hoefer,  Nouv,  Biog, 
Gmerale,  xxiii,  864. 

Helmnth,  Justus  Christian  Henry,  P.D.,  a  Lu- 
tberan  minister,  was  bom  at  Helmstadt,  in  tbe  duchy 
of  Bnmswick,  in  1745.  His  father  dying  wben  he  was 
yet  a  boy,  be  kft  borne  witbout  tbe  knowledge  of  tbe 
ftmily,  and  was  oyertaken  on  the  bighway  by  a  noble- 
man  in  his  carriage,  who  entered  into  a  conyeisation 
with  him,  and  inquired  wbither  be  was  going.  Tbe 
lad  infonned  bim  that  he  had  left  bonoe  because  be  was 
angry  with  God,  haying  prayed  eamestly  to  bim  during 
his  father^s  illncss  for  bis  restoiation  to  bealth,  but  God 
bad  not  answered  his  petition.  Interested  in  tbe  artless 
repły  of  tbe  Innocent  boy,  the  nobleman  took  bim  into 
his  carriage,  and  afterwards  sent  bim  to  Halle  at  his  ex- 
pense,  to  be  educated  at  tbe  Orphan  House,  and  affcer- 
wards  at  the  Uiiiycrsity.  His  first  sermon  was  preached 
in  the  chapd  of  tbe  Orphan  House,  and  among  bis  hear- 
ers  was  Bogatzky,  tbe  autbor  of  the  Schałz-Kasłkin 
(Oolden  Treasury),  who  predicted  the  futurę  greatness 
of  the  young  preacher.  He  was  ordalned  by  the  Con- 
nftorium  at  Wemigerode,  and  was  sent  by  tbe  theolog- 
ical  faculty  at  Halle  as  a  missionary  to  America  in  1769. 
Tbe  fint  ten  years  of  his  ministiy  he  labored  in  Lancas- 
ter, Fi^  with  great  acceptance.  In  1779  he  accepted  a 
ananimous  cali  to  Philadelphia,  wheie  he  continued  the 
pastorał  work  as  k>ng  as  bis  physical  strengtb  admitted. 
For  eighteen  yeais  be  was  profeasor  of  German  and  Ori- 
ental  languages  in  the  Uniyersity  of  Pennsylyania,  from 
which  institution  he  receiyed  in  1785  the  degree  of  D.D. 
In  connection  witb  bis  colleague,  Dr.  Schmidt,  he  organ- 
ued  a  private  seminaiy  for  candidates  for  the  Lutheran 
ninistry,  wbich  was  in  operation  twenty  years.  In  the 
pal{Bt  he  had  morę  than  ordinary  power.  His  preach- 
IV^M 


ing  was  characterized  by  great  unctum  and  overwhelm- 
ing  pathoe,  and  often  produced  wonderful  results.  Dur- 
ing tbe  prevalenoe  of  the  yellow  feyer  he  yisited  the 
sick  and  dying  witbout  fear.  He  buried  625  of  bis  mem- 
bera.  He  died  in  the  80th  year  of  his  age,  Feb.  5, 1824. 
He  was  the  autbor  of  a  work  on  J^optimi  cmd  ihe  Sacred 
Ser^tturetf  published  in  1793*;  also  of  a  practical  treatise 
on  Communiontpith  God;  numerous  deyotional  books for 
children,  and  a  yolume  of  Hjnouia.  He  edited  likewise 
the  EnangeUcal  Ma^aane,  published  for  some  years  in 
Philadelphia  in  the  German  language.    QL  L.  S.) 

Helo^Lse.    See  Abelabd. 

Heaon  (Heb.  Chdon',  -|bn,  9trong;  Sept.  XaiXwv), 
the  father  of  Eliab,  whicb  latter  was  phylaich  of  the 
tribe  of  Zebulon  at  tbe  £xode  (Numbl  i,  9 ;  ii,  7 ;  vii, 
24,  29;  X,  16).    RG.  antę  165& 

Help,  besides  its  ordinaiy  signification  of  asnsfance 
in  generał,  bas  in  two  passages  of  the  N.  T.  a  technical 
application. 

1.  Heips  (fiofi^ttai)y  nautical  apparatu$  for  securing 
a  yessel,  wben  leaking,  by  means  of  lopes,  chains,  etc, 
passed  around  in  the  process  of  "  undergirding"  (q.  v.), 
in  the  emergency  of  a  storm  (Acts  xxyii,  17).   See  Ship. 

2.  Helps  (avTikrf\łtic  \  Yulg.  opitulatumts ;  1  Cor. 
xii,  28).  This  Greek  woid,  si^oifying  aida  or  assist- 
ances,  bas  also  a  meaning,  among  otbers,  corresponding 
to  that  in  this  passage,  in  the  damical  writeis  (e.  g. 
Diod.  Sic  i,  87).  In  the  Sept.  it  answezs  to  nntC  (Psa. 
xxii,  19),  to  "jiso  (Psa.  criii,  12),  and  to  ji^t  (Psa. 
lxxxiii,  8).  It  is  fonnd  in  the  same  sense,  Ecdus.  xl 
12;  2  Mace  xi,  26;  and  in  Josephus  {War,  iy,  5,  1). 
In  the  N.  T.  it  oocurs  once,  yiz.  in  tbe  enumeration  of 
the  seyeral  ordera  or  classes  of  persons  possessing  mirac- 
ulous  gifts  among  the  primitiye  Christians  {ut  guprd), 
wbere  it  seems  to  be  used  by  metonymy,  the  abetract 
for  tbe  concrete,  and  to  mean  hdpera;  like  the  words 
^wdfUŁę,  '^miracles,**  L  e.  workers  of  mirades;  rrjScp- 
yfieuc,  **goyemment8,"  i  c  govemor»,  etc,  in  tbe  same 
enumeration.  Many  persons  in  this  country,  by  a  sim- 
ibir  idiom,  cali  their  serrants  ^'help.'*  Great  difficulty 
attends  the  attempt  to  ascertain  the  naturę  of  the  oiBce 
so  destgnated  among  Christians.  Theophylact  explain8 
avTlkr|y^/H^  by  apri^^aOat  rwv  &oBivCiv,  helpin^  or  wp- 
porting  the  infirm,  So  also  Gennadius,  in  (Ecumcnius. 
But  this  seems  like  an  inference  from  tbe  etymology 
(see  the  Greek  of  Acts  xx,  85).  It  bas  been  cusumed  hy 
some  eminent  modem  writers  that  the  seyeral  ''ordcrs'* 
mentioned  in  ver.  28  coirespond  respectiydy  to  the  sey- 
eral *'gifls"  of  the  Spirit  enumerated  in  yer.  8,  9.  In 
order,  boweyer,  to  mcdce  tbe  two  enumerations  tally,  it 
is  neoessaiy  to  make  "  diyers  kinds  of  tongues"  and  "  tn- 
terpretaiion  of  tongues"  in  the  one  answer  to  "  dirersiłiet 
oftongues"  in  the  o/Acr,  whicb,  t«  tkepresent  stale  ofthe 
received  tert,  does  not  seem  to  be  a  complete  oorrespond- 
ence.  Tbe  resuU  of  the  collation  is  that  avTiKfj\l/fic  an- 
swers  to  "prophecy;"  whence  it  bas  bcen  inferred  that 
these  persons  were  such  as  were  ąualified  with  the  gift 
of  "lower  ppophecy,"  to  kelp  the  Christians  in  the  pub- 
lic  deyotions  (Barrington*8  Miscellanea  Sacra,  i,  166; 
Macknigbt  on  1  Cor.  xii,  10-28).  Anothcr  result  is  that 
"goyemments"  answers  to  "dłsceining  of  spirits,"  To 
both  these  Dr.  Hales  yeiy  rea^nably  objects  as  unlike- 
ly,  and  pronounces  this  tabular  yicw  to  be  *'pcTpIexed 
and  embarrassing"  (New  A  nalysis,  etc,  Lond.  1830,  iii^ 
289).  Bishop  Horsiey  bas  adopted  this  dasńfication 
of  tbe  gifts  and  office-bearers,  and  pointa  out  as  "  helps," 
i.  e.  persons  gifted  with  ^'prophecies  or  prediction^" 
such  persons  as  Mark,  Tychicus,  Onesimus.  Yitringa, 
£rom  a  comparison  of  ver.  28,  29,  80,  infers  that  tbe  dv- 
riXii\l/fŁc  denote  those  who  had  the  gift  of  interpretittg 
/oreign  Umguages  {De  Synag,  Yet,  ii,  505,  Franqttc  1696) ; 
whicb,  though  certaiiilyj>omUp,  aa  an  arbitrarg  use  of 
a  yery  significant  word,  stands  in  need  of  confiimation 
by  actual  instances.  Dr.  Ligbtfoot  also,  according  to 
his  biographer,  adopted  tbe  same  plan  and  airiyed  at 


HELP-MEET 


178        HELYETIC  CONFESSIONS 


the  Bsme  conclańon  (Strype'8  lĄft  ofLightfoot,  prefixed 
to  his  Work$,  p.  4,  Lond.  1684).  But  lightfoot  himself 
explain8  the  woid  "  persons  who  accompanied  the  apofr- 
tles,  baptized  thoee  who  were  oonverted  by  them,  and 
were  sent  to  pUcee  to  which  they,  being  employed  in 
other  things,  could  not  oome,  as  Mark,  Timothy,  Tittia.** 
He  obsenres  (ii,  781)  that  the  Talmodista  aometimes 
cali  Uie  Leyitea  D-^Srob  "^^T^D^  "the  helpen  of  the 
priesta.''  Similar  catalogoea  of  miraculous  gifU  and  of- 
ficera  occur  Rom.  xii,  6-8,  and  Eph.  iv,  11, 12 ;  but  they 
neither  cuiespond  in  tmmber  nor  in  the  order  of  enu- 
meratiotL  In  the/ormer,  "prophecy"  standa  first,  and 
in  the  latier  second;  and  in  the  former  many  of  the 
terma  are  of  wide  import,  as  *'  ministering,*'  while  mmułe 
distincłions  are  madę  between  others,  as  between  **teach- 
ing"  and  "  exhortation,"  "giving"  and  ''showing  mer* 
cy."  Other  writers  pursue  different  methods,  and  ar- 
rive  at  different  oondusions.  For  instancc,  Hammond, 
arguing  from  the  etymology  of  the  word,  and  finom  pas- 
sages  in  the  early  writers,  which  describe  the  office  of 
relieving  the  poor  as  pectiliarly  connected  wiŁh  that  of 
the  apostles  and  bishops  by  the  deacons,  infers  that  dv 
riX.  **  denotes  a  special  part  of  the  office  of  thoee  men 
which  are  set  down  at  the  beginning  of  the  yerse.**  He 
also  explains  KujSipińitnic  as  another  part  of  their  office 
(Hammond,  Comment,  ad  loc).  Schleusner  understands 
*^deacoru  who  had  the  care  of  the  sick.**  Rosenmtlller, 
''Diaconi  qai  pauperibus,  peregrinis,  segrotis,  mortuis, 
procurandis  pneerant.''  Bishop  Pearce  thinks  that  both 
these  words  may  have  been  originally  put  in  the  marffin 
to  explain  Swdfitię,  "mirades  or  powers,'*  and  urges 
that  dvTiX.  is  nowhere  mentioned  as  a  gift  of  the  Spirit, 
and  that  it  is  not  recapitukUed  in  ver.  29, 30.  Certainly 
the  omissian  of  these  two  words  would  neaily  produce 
exactitude  in  the  recapitulałion.  Bowyer  adopta  the 
same  oonjectore,  but  it  is  without  support  from  MSS.  or 
▼erńons.  He  also  obsenres  that  to  the  end  of  Ter.  28 
aome  copies  of  the  Yulgate  add  "  interpretationes  sermo- 
nom,"  ip/juivŁiac  y\wrffAv;  as  also  the  later  Syriac, 
Hilary,  and  Ambrose.  This  aeUiition  would  make  the 
recapitulatum  per/ect,  Chrysostom  and  all  the  Greek 
interpretera  consider  the  dvnX.  and  Kvfifpv.  as  import- 
ing  ihe  same  thing,  nameiyf/unctionarieś  so  called  with 
leference  to  the  two  different  parta  of  their  <^ice:  the 
dvriK.  superintending  the  care  of  the  poor,  sick,  and 
atrangers;  the  icv0tpv.  the  borial  of  the  dead  and  the 
executorahip  of  their  effects,  induding  the  care  of  their 
widows  and  orphans,  rather  managera  than  govemoi8 
(Blomfield*8  Recenńo  SynopL),  After  all,  it  must  be  coo- 
fessed,  with  Doddridge,  that  «  we  can  only  guess  at  the 
meaning  of  the  words  in  ąuestion,  having  no  prindples 
on  -which  to  proceed  in  fixing  it  absolutdy"*  {Fctmibf 
Expo9%U)r,  on  1  Cor.  xii,  28).  (See  Alberti,  Gloasar.  p. 
128;  Suicer,  Thetaurus^  in  voc;  Salmasius,  De  Fmwre 
Trapeziticoj  p.  409,  Wolfii  Cura  Phiiolog,  BasiL  1741.) 
— Kitto,  s.  V.  SUnley  remarks  (Comment,  ad  loc.)  that 
the  word  *<  <ivriXi}«(/ic,  as  used  in  the  Sept,  is  not  (like 
dioKOPia)  hdp  ministered  by  an  inferior  to  a  superior,  but 
by  a  superior  to  an  inferior  (comp.  Psa.  lxxxix,  18 ;  Ec- 
dus.  xi,  12 ;  li,  7),  and  thus  is  inapplicable  to  the  mini»- 
trations  of  the  deacon  to  the  presbyter."  Probably  it 
is  a  generał  term  (hence  the  plur.)  toindude  thoee  occar 
aional  Ubors  of  eoangelitU  and  q>ecial  laborens,  such  as 
Apolloe  in  andent  times  and  eminent  reiriralists  in  mod- 
em days,  who  have  from  time  to  time  been  raised  up  as 
powerful  but  independent  promoten  of  the  GospeL  See 
GiFTS,  Spiritual. 

Help-meet  (or  rather,  as  the  best  editions  of  the 
Bibie  now  punctuate  it,  help  mket/ot  kkn,  i^MS  ^V$^ 
e'tery  kennegdo^  a  hdp  as  his  counterpart,  i.  e.  an  iud  suit- 
able  and  supplementary  to  him),  a  delicate  and  beauti- 
ful  designation  of  a  wife  (Gen.  ii,  18-20),  which  exactly 
expres8es  her  relation.    See  Marriage. 

Helve  (y^,  els,  woody  as  often  elsewhere),  the  hco^ 

<2feorwoodenpartofan  axe  (I>eat.xix,5).    SeeAxE: 
Tbsb. 


Ancient  Bgyptian  Axe8  and  Hatcbeta. 
H6lvetio  ConfessionB,  the  later  Confeasiona  of 
faith  of  the  Beformed  churchea  of  Switzerland.    See 
Basle,  Confbssioms  of. 

I.  The  Confessio  Heltetica  prior  (the  aecond  Confes- 
sion  of  Basie)  was  framed  by  a  oonvention  of  delegatea 
from  Basie,  ZUrich,  Beme,  Schaffhausen,  Mulhauseo,  St. 
Gall,  and  Biel,  which  bcgan  its  sessions  at  Basle  Jan.  30, 
1536.  Among  the  eminent  theologians  who  took  part 
in  it  were  Megander  of  Beme,  Grynaeus  and  Mycooius 
of  Basie,  Leo  Judas  and  Bullinger  of  Ztlrich.  During 
their  sessions,  Buoer  and  Gapito,  who  were  8triving  earo- 
estly  to  unitę  the  Lutheran  and  Beformed  churchea,  ar- 
rived  in  Basie,  and  seem  to  have  exercised  a  dedded  in. 
fluence  in  the  formation  of  the  Confession,  though  they 
had  no  vote  in  the  Conventlon.  The  Confession  wm 
drawn  up  by  Bullinger,  Myconius,  and  Grynsus,  in  Lat* 
in,  and  translated  into  German  by  Leo  Judje  (Augostl, 
Lib,8ymb, Reform,  p.Q2e).  In  March,  1536,  it  was  Adopt- 
ed  as  the  standard  of  doctrine.  It  consLsts  of  twenty- 
8even  short  artides :  i-Y,ofScriptureandTraditioD;  vi, 
of  God ;  vii,  viii,  of  Man,  the  Fali,  and  Original  Sin ;  ix, 
of  Free  Will ;  x-xiii,  the  Person  and  Work  of  Christ  aa 
Saviour;  xiv-xix,  the  Chuich  and  Ministry;  xx-xxiv, 
the  Sacraments;  xxvi,  Civil  Go>-cmment;  xxvii,  Mar- 
riage. The  Ladn  title  of  the  Confession  is  Ecdeśiantm 
per  Helreiiam  Confessio  Jidei  summcuia  et  generalis,  con- 
posita  BasHetBy  A.D.  1536.  It  is  Calvinistic  and  (mod- 
eratdy)  Zwinglian  in  doctrine.  The  Confession,  in  boCh 
German  and  Latin,  is  given  in  Niemeyer,  CoUedio  Coi^ 
fessionumy  p.  105-122. 

II.  Confessio  Helretica  Posterior,  the  second  Helvetic 
Confession,  A.D.  1566.  The  first  Confession  above  men- 
tioned, though  generally  received,  did  not  give  univerBal 
satisfaction  in  Switzerland,  especially  as  it  was  believed 
that  the  Lutheran  influence  had  been  allowed  to  operate 
in  its  formation.  Bullinger  undertook  to  revise  it,  and, 
at  the  reque8t  of  the  dector  Palatine,  Frederick  III,  he 
finished  the  work,  with  the  aid  of  Beza  and  Gualter,  and 
handed  over  the  Confession,  thus  prepared,  to  the  dec- 
tor, who  printed  it  in  German,  and  adopted  it  (A.D. 
1565)  as  the  Beformed  standard  in  his  territory.  The 
dector  also  madę  use  of  it  to  vindicate  the  Beformed 
doctrines  against  the  Lutherans  at  the  Diet  of  Augsburg, 
January,  1566.    The  attention  of  the  Swiss  churches 


HELYETIC  CONSENSUS 


179 


HELYETIUS 


was  caDed  to  tbis  rerised  Gonfenion  as  a  standard  onder 
whidi  they  coold  all  agree.  By  the  year  1578  the  Om- 
fesBkm  had  Teoeived  the  ssnctioa  of  the  Swus  cantoos, 
and  had  abo  been  approyed  by  the  Reformed  churches 
of  Poland,  Hangary,  Scotland,  and  France  (the  latter  re- 
ceiying  it  in  Beza^s  translation).  It  adopts  Galvm'B  doo- 
Uioe  on  the  Loid*s  Sun;>er,  but  *'  presents  the  Angustin- 
lan  doctrine  of  election  in  a  mild  form,  far  behind  Cal- 
Tin"  (Giesekr,  Ckwrck  Hittory,  ed.  H.  B.  Smith,  iy,  422). 
No  Kefocmed  Confeasion  has  been  m<»e  widely  difinsed. 
The  titie  of  the  Confesńon  is  Cmfitaw  eŁ  EacpoaUio  Brt- 
vis  ei  Sia^Jez  Mcera  ReUffioma  Chrittiana,  It  oonsists 
of  thiity  chapteiB :  chape.  i  and  ii  tieat  of  the  ^rip- 
tiues,  Traditkn,  etc. ;  iii,  of  God  and  the  Trinity ;  iv 
and  V,  of  Idols  or  Images  of  God,  Christ,  and  the  Saints, 
and  of  the  Worship  of  God  through  Christ,  the  sole  Me- 
diator ;  Tl,  of  Proyidenoe ;  yii,  of  the  Creation  of  all 
Things,  of  Angels,  Derils,  Man ;  viii,  of  %n  and  the  Fali 
of  BCan ;  ix,  of  Free  WilL  The  condition  of  man  after 
the  fim  is  thtis  stated :  iVbft  $uUatus  esŁ  cuidem  komim 
mtetteetuMf  mm  ertpta  ei  vo&<itfa»,  ei  prorsus  m  ktpidem 
rei  łnoiemn  egt  oommuiatu*  (The  intellect  of  man  was  not 
taken  away  by  the  fali,  nor  was  he  robbed  of  will,  and 
changed  into  a  stock  or  stone).  Art.  x  treats  of  Predes- 
tination  and  Election.  Thesecondparagraphronsthus; 
Ergo  non  sine  medio,  lioei  non  propter  uUwm  meritum  no*- 
trum,  wed  m  Ckristo  ei  propter  Ckristumf  noe  elegii  Deus, 
ut  pdjam  in  Ckrido  intiti  per  Jidem,  iUi  ipeiełiam  sini 
eleelij  repraii  cero,  qui  anMi  eacłra  ChariMtum,  tecundum  U- 
lud  ApattoU,  2  Car.  xiii,  6  (Therefore,  not  without  a  me- 
dimn,  tlioiigh  not  on  acooont  of  auy  merit  of  oors,  but 
in  C^rut,  and  on  scconnt  of  Christ,  God  elected  ns;  so 
tfaat  they  who  are  ingrafted  in  Christ  by  faith  are  the 
elect,  while  the  reprobate  are  thoee  who  are  out  of  Christ, 
aooordiiig  to  the  apostle,  in  2  Cor.  xiii,  5).  This  chap- 
ter  has  been  the  subject  of  mnch  oontroTersy,  both  Od- 
Tinists  and  Arminians  finding  their  own  doctrine  in  it 
Chapw  xi  tareats  of  Christ  as  God-man,  the  only  Savionr ; 
xii  and  xiii,  of  the  Ław  and  the  Gospel;  xiv-xvi,  of 
Bepentance  and  of  Justification  by  Faith ;  xTii-xxii,  of 
the  Chnrcb,  the  Ministiy,  the  Sacraments;  xxłii  and 
xxiT,  of  Aaoemblies,  Worship,  Feasts,  and  Fasts;  xxv- 
xxix,  Catechism,  Bites,  Ceremonies,  etc ;  xxx,  of  the 
Ciril  Magistracy.  This  Confession  Ib  given  in  Latin  in 
the  Sglhge  ConfetaUmum  (Oxon.  1827,  8yo);  by  Nie- 
meyer,  CcUectio  Cotrfemomim,  p.  402  sq.;  by  Augusti, 
OfrpuM  lAbrorum  SgmboHoorum,  p.  1-102.  A  tercen- 
tenaiy  editkm,  edited  by  Dr.  £.  Bobl,  was  puUished  at 
Tienin,  1866  (120  pp.  8vo>  See  Gieseler,  Church  Hia- 
*M7, 1.  e. ;  Shedd,  Hiitorg  ofDocbinet,  ii,  469 ;  Hagen- 
baeh,  HiMory  of  Doetrimea,  §  221 ;  Fritzache,  Conf,  Heh, 
Potiarior,  Zttrich,  1839 ;  Ai^^isti,  AUg,  chritiL  SymJboWe, 
1861,p.l6a. 

Hehretio  CooseoniB  {Fonmila  Cantentua  Hel- 
Mtuo),  a  ocnfeaiion  of  fiuth  dmwn  up  in  1075  by  J.  G. 
Heid^ger  at  the  request  of  the  CalTinistic  divineii  of 
Switscfkmd.  It  was  chiefly  designed  to  restrain  the 
progreas  of  the  mitigated  CalTinism  of  Amyraldus  and 
the  sehool  of  Samnnr  generalły,  which  was  spreading  in 
Switaerland.  See  Aictrau>v&  Tunretin,  Zwinger, 
Wctenlela,  HoCtinger,  and  other  Swiss  theologians  aided 
in  its  prapantion,  but  its  fonn  is  chiefly  due  to  Heideg^ 

It  eonaiata  of  a  prefaoe  and  twenty-six  canons.  Can- 
ODS 1-3  treat  of  the  Scriptures;  and  the  seoond  (against 
Cq)pel)  maintaina  that  the  Hebrew  text  is  to  be  re- 
eeived  as  divineły  ins|Mred,  not  only  as  to  the  substance, 
bot  aa  to  the  very  words,  consonants,  yowels,  and  yowel* 
pointa  {tam  quoad  conaonaa,  tum  quoad  rocaUa,  aive 
pmmtta  ipaa,  aite  punctorum  aaUem  poteatatem,  ei  tum 
quoad  rea,  tum  guoad  perba  Btówyfwrroc),  The  remain- 
iog  canons  are  chiefly  ooeopied  with  deflnitions  of  the 
Cslvini8tic  Tiew  of  predestination,  sin,  grace,  the  ex- 
tent  of  the  atonement,  etc,  all  which  are  set  forth  in 
langoage  as  dedded  as  that  dted  above  with  regard  to 
the  Scriptures.  The  Formuła  is  given  in  fuli  by  Au- 
i  {Corpua  Libr,  Symbol,  Srform,  p.  448  aq.)  and  by 


Niemeyer  (CoUedio  Coi^eaa,  p.  729).  Within  a  year  lirom 
its  promnlgation  it  was  adopted  by  the  magistiatea 
of  Bssle,  Zorich,  Beme,  etc,  but  it  was  not  receired 
at  Geneva  until  1679.  It  was  finally  madę  authorita- 
tive  throughout  Switzerland:  all  ministerB,  teachers, 
and  profesBors  were  bonnd  to  subscribe  to  it;  and  it  was 
ordained  that  no  candidato  for  the  ministiy  shoold  be 
admitted  exoept  upon  dedaration  that  he  reoeived  it  ex 
ammo  (Augusti,  Lep.  646).  But  these  stiong  mea^- 
ures,  together  with  the  influence  of  the  French  clergy, 
and  efl|HBcially  the  interoeseion  of  Frederick  William  of 
Biandenburgh,  produoed  a  reaction;  and  in  1686  the 
magiBtratee  of  Bssle  aUowed  the  admission  of  candidates 
without  subscription  to  the  Fomniku  By  1706  its  strict 
obligation  had  fallen  into  disuse  at  Genera.  In  the 
other  cantons  it  was  still  retained,  but  gave  rise  to  long 
confllcts.  In  1722  the  kings  of  Prussia  and  England 
sent  letters  to  the  Swiss  Cantons,  for  the  sake  of  the 
unity  and  peace  of  Protestantism,  to  drop  the  use  of  the 
Formuła  as  a  binding  creed.  In  1728  they  renewed 
these  letters  to  the  same  purpose.  By  1740  the  For- 
muła had  fallen  entirely  into  disuse.  ^It  never  ao- 
quired  authońty  outside  of  Switzerland.  Within  about 
fifty  yearB  it  was  abrogated.  One  of  the  strongest  ad- 
Tocates  of  this  last  measure  was  Tuiretin^s  own  son, 
Alphonso  Tuiretin,  who  was  as  zealoos  in  oppoeing  as 
his  father  had  been  in  advocating  it.  If  there  was  ever 
a  creed  which  deserves  to  be  caUed  the  manifesto  of  a 
theological  party  rather  than  a  confession  of  faith  oa 
the  part  of  the  Church,  the  Formuła  Conaenaua  is  that 
one**  (Fisher,  in  New  Englander,  July,  1868,  p.  502).  See 
Hottinger,  Formuła  Conaenaua  Iliatoria  (1728,  4to),  in 
favor  of  the  Consensus ;  Ffaff,  Schediaama  łkeoL  de  Form, 
Conaena.  Ifelvet.  (Tubingen,  1723,  4to),  on  the  Lutheran 
side;  Schrockh,  Kircheng,  aeii  der  He/ormation,  viii,  659 
8q. ;  Bamaud,  MSmoireapour  aeroir  a  Ihiatoire  dea  trou- 
hlea  a  toccasUm  du  Conaenaua  (Amst  1726,  8vo) ;  Mos- 
heim,  Ch.  Hiatory,  cent  xvii,  pt  ii,  eh.  iii ;  Trechsel,  in 
Herzog,  Real-Encgkiop.  v,  719  eą. ;  Shedd,  ffiaf,  o/Doo- 
trinesy  ii,  472;  Augusti,  AUg,  chriatl.  Symbolik,  1861,  p. 
160 ;  Schweizer,  in  Zeitachrifljur  d  hist,  TheoL  1860,  p. 
122 ;  Hagenbach,  Hiatory  ofDoctrinea,  ed.  H.  B.  Smith, 
§  222,  and  references  there. 

Helvetiu8,  Claude  Adrien,  a  French  infidel,  was 
bom  in  Paris  in  January,  1715,  and  was  educated  by  the 
Jesuits  at  the  College  of  Louis-le-Grand.  He  after- 
wards  studled  law  and  finance,  and,  through  the  influ- 
ence of  queen  Maria  Leczinska,  became  a  farmer-gener- 
aL  His  life  was  disorderiy  up  to  the  time  of  his  mari- 
riage  in  1751.  In  1758  he  published  his  De  TEaprit, 
which  was  a  summaiy  of  the  doctrines  of  the  Encycla- 
pMie,  The  book  was  bitterly  denounced;  and,  *'  to  re- 
gain  the  favor  of  the  oourt,  Helvetius  successiyely  pub- 
lished three  letters  offtpology  which  gradually  advanced 
in  humility  and  subroission.  Notwithstanding  the  con- 
fession which  they  oontained  of  a  Christian  faith,  and 
his  disclalmer  of  sil  opinions  inoonsistent  with  its  spirit, 
the  doctois  of  the  Sorbonne  drew  up  a  formal  condem- 
nation  of  the  work,  which  they  declared  to  be  a  com- 
pendinm  of  all  the  evil  contained  in  all  the  bad  books 
that  had  yet  appeared.  It  was  publicly  bumed,  accord- 
ing  to  a  decree  of  the  Parlisment  of  Paris."  The  style 
of  the  book  is  vicious  and  declamatory.  Helvetius  died 
at  Paris  Dec  26, 1771,  leaving  a  work  behind  him  enti- 
tled  De  tHomme,  de  aea  FacuUea,  et  de  aon  Education, 
which  was  published  the  same  year  at  London  and  Am- 
sterdam by  prince  Gallitzin,  2  vols.  8vo.  "  By  eaprU 
Helvetius  understood  as  well  the  mental  faculties  as  the 
ideas  acquired  by  them.  Both  faculties  and  ideas  he 
reduoed  to  simple  sensation,  and  he  accomits  for  man*s 
saperiority  oveT  the  brutes  by  the  finer  organism  of  his 
senses  and  the  structure  of  his  hands.  Man,  he  consid- 
ers,  is  the  work  of  naturę,  but  his  intelligence  and  yirtue 
are  the  fhiit  of  education.  The  end  of  yirtue  is  happi- 
ness,  and  utility  determines  the  yalue  of  all  actións,  of 
which  those  are  yirtuous  which  are  genendly  usefuL 
Utility  and  inutility  are,  however,  menly  lelatiye,  and 


HELYICUS 


180 


HEMDAN 


there  ia  oonaeąuently  nothing  which  is  dther  absolutely 
good,  or  absolutely  eviL  The  happineas  and  enlight- 
enment  of  tbe  people  he  makes  to  be  the  tnie  end  of  all 
human  goyemment;  and,  denying  a  diyine  Proridenoe 
in  the  goveniment  of  the  world,  he  declares  all  religion 
to  be  a  cheat  and  a  prejadice'^  {JSngL  Cydopadia^  8.  v.). 
HŁa  system  is  simply  the  lowest  materialism.  There 
have  been  seyeral  editions  of  hiB  complete  works  (Lond. 
1777,  2  Tols.  4to;  1794,  6  voU.  8vo ;  Paris,  1795, 14  yols. 
18mo,  ed.  by  Łefebrie;  Paris,  1818,  3  voU.  8vo).  See 
St.  Lambert,  Essai  tur  laVieetk$  Ouvraget  ^ł/ehetiuM ; 
Engluh  Cydopadui,  s.  v. ;  Hoefer,  youv,  Biog,  Generale, 
xxiii,  885 ;  Moreli,  Hietory  of  Modem  Pkiloeophy,  p.  1 10, 
837;  Remusat,  in  Betnte  d,  deux  Mondee,  Aug.  15, 1858; 
Farrar,  Criłical  Hietory  ofFrte  Thought^  lect  v. 

Helvicms  (Helwio),  Chbistoph,  was  bom  Dec. 
26, 1581,  at  Sprendlingen,  Darmstadt,  where  hiB  father 
was  minister.  He  studied  at  Marbuig,  and  was  able  to 
teach  Hebrew  at  twenty.  It  is  said  tbat  he  spoke  He- 
brew  as  freely  as  his  mother  tongue.  In  1605  he  was 
madę  professor  of  Greek  and  Hebrew  at  the  School  of 
Giessen,  which  in  1606  was  erected  into  a  unirersity  by 
the  landgraye.  In  1610  he  was  madę  professor  of  di- 
%'inity.  He  died  Sept  10, 1617.  His  most  important 
work  is  Theatrum  Hietoricum  et  Chronologicum  eive 
Chronoloffioi  Sysfema  norum  (1610,  often  reprinted,  and 
translated  into  English) ;  also  a  Chronologia  UnicereaJUe 
(1612).— Bayle,  DictUmaryy  s.  v. 

Helvldiaft,  a  so-called  heresiarch  of  the  4th  centu- 
ry,  a  layman  who  opposed  the  growing  superstitions  of 
the  Church,  and  especially  the  nascent  worship  of  the 
Yirgin  Mary.  He  w^as  a  pupil  of  Aaxentiu8,  bishop  of 
Milan,  and  the  precuraor  of  Jorinian  (q.  v.).  Jerome 
was  at  the  time  preaching  the  "gospel  of  celibacy,"  and 
Hehńdius  opposed  this  tendency  also.  He  maintained 
that  Mar>'  had  other  children  besides  Jesus,  and  sup- 
ported  his  o]union  by  the  N.  Test.,  and  by  the  authority 
of  Tertullian  and  Yictorinua.  "  He  affirmed  also  that 
by  this  opinion  he  in  nowise  infringed  on  the  honor  of 
Mary.  He  attacked  also  the  exaggerated  underyalua- 
tion  of  married  life.  He  quoted  the  example8  of  the 
patriarchs,  who  had  mainUuned  a  pious  life  in  wedlock ; 
while,  on  the  other  hand,  he  referred  to  the  examples 
of  such  virgins  as  had  by  no  means  lired  up  to  their 
calling.  These  opinions  of  HeMdius  might  lead  us  to 
conclude  that  the  oombating  of  a  one-sided  ascetic  spirit 
was  a  matter  of  still  morę  weight  with  him  than  the 
defence  of  his  yiews  with  regard  to  Maiy.  Perhaps, 
also,  he  may  have  been  led  into  these  yiews  simply  by 
exegetical  inquiries  and  obseryations,  and  so  had  been 
drawn  into  this  opposition  to  the  overvaluation  of  celi- 
bacy merely  for  the  purpose  of  dcfending  his  opinion 
against  an  objection  on  the  scorę  of  propriety"  (Nean- 
der,  Cłu^Ilist^  Torrey's,  ii,  340).  Augustine  {De  I/ceres. 
c.  84)  calls  hb  followcrs  HehidianL  Jerome  wrote  a 
treatise  against  him  (adv,  Heluidium),  in  which  we  find 
some  poiisages  of  Helvidius*s  writings.  See  Epiphanius, 
ffasres.  c.  70,  78 ;  Augustine,  Hceree,  c  56, 84 ;  Ńeander, 
1.  c. 

Helyot,  PiBRRE,  a  Franciscan  monk  of  great  leam- 
ing  (known  also  as  father  Hippolytuh),  was  bom  at 
Paris  in  1660,  and  died  in  1716.  He  went  twice  to 
Komę  on  business  of  the  order,  and  traycUed  through 
the  whole  of  France.  He  is  chiefly  distinguished  as 
the  author  of  the  llisioire  des  ordres  monasticues  reU- 
gkuz  et  mUUairts  (Paris,  1714-21,  8  yols.  4to),  of  which 
he  gatbered  the  materials  during  his  traycls,  and  which 
is  to  this  day  the  most  complete  work  of  the  kind, 
though  seyeral  of  the  orders  aro  not  treated  in  iL  He 
died  during  the  publication  of  the  fifth  yolume,  and  the 
work  was  (iuished  by  BulloŁ.  A  new  edition  by  Mignę 
appeared  at  Paris  in  1847-50  (4  yols.  royal  8vo).  See 
Lelong,  BU)L  Metor,  de  la  France;  Querard,  La  France 
litter, ;  Hoefer,  Nouv.  Biog,  Gener.  xxiii,  898. 

Hem  OF  ▲  Garmekt  (b^^Ś,  ehul,  £xod.  xxyiii,  83, 
34}  xxxix.  M-26;  elaewherethe^^skirt^ofarobe;  tcpa- 


(rir<^ov,BCattix,20;  xiy,30;  clsewhere  "border^.  The 
importance  which  the  later  Jews,  especially  the  Fhari- 
sees  (Matt  xxiii,  5),  attached  to  the  hem  or  firinge  of 
their  garments  was  fouoded  npon  the  regulation  in 
Numb.  xy,  88, 39,  which  ascribed  a  symbolical  meaning 
to  it.  We  must  not,  howeyer,  coDchide  that  the  fińnge 
owed  its  origin  to  that  paasage;  it  was  in  the  fiist  in- 
Stańce  the  ordinaiy  modę  of  finidiing  the  lobe,  the  enda 
of  the  threads  composing  the  ¥roof  being  ieft  in  order 
to  preyent  the  doth  from  unrayelling,  juat  as  in  tlie 
Egyptian  eakuiris  (Herod,  ii,  81 ;  see  Wilkin80D'a  Anc 
EgypOanSf  ii,  90),  and  in  the  Aasyrian  lobea  as  repire- 
sented  in  the  baa-reliefs  of  Nineyeh,  the  Uae  ribbon  be- 
ing added  to  strengthen  the  boider.  The  Hebrew  word 
ns-^S,  łeksitk^  "fringe"  (Numb.  xy,  88, 89),  is  expre»- 
iye  of  the/retterf  edge:  the  Greek  Kpćunrida  (the  ety- 
mology  of  which  is  uncertain,  being  \'ariouBly  traoed  to 
Kpwjcóc,  wcpoc  iriSoPf  and  Kptiirię)  applies  to  the  e^ 
of  a  riyer  or  mountain  (Xenoph.  Hist,  (rr.  iii,  2,  §  16 ; 
iy,  6,  §  8),  and  is  6xplained  by  Hesychius  u  rd  lv  nf 
aKQi^  Tov  ifUŁriov  K(k\wrfuva  pófAftara  Kai  rb  ÓKpoy 
avTov.  The  beged  or  outer  robę  was  a  simple  quadnn- 
gular  piece  of  doth,  and  generally  so  wom  that  two  of 
the  comcrs  hung  down  in  front:  these  oomers  were  or- 
namented  with  a  "  ribbon  of  blue,"  or,  rather,  dark  mo- 
letf  the  ribbon  itself  being,  as  we  may  conclude  irom  the 
word  used,  ^*^nD,  as  nairow  as  a  thread  or  piece  of 
string.  The  Jews  attached  great  sanctity  to  this  fiinge 
(Matt.  ix,  20 ;  xiy,  86 ;  Lukę  yiii,  44),  and  the  Phaziseea 
madę  it  moro  prominent  than  it  was  originally  deaigned 
to  be,  enlarging  both  the  fringe  and  the  ribbon  to  an 
undue  width  (Matt,  xxiii,  5).  Directions  were  giyen 
as  to  the  number  of  threads  of  which  it  ougbt  to  be 
oomposed,  and  other  particnlars,  to  each  of  which  n 
sjrmbolical  meaning  was  attached  (Caipzoy,  ApparaL  p. 
198).  It  was  appended  in  later  times  to  the  talith  mora 
especially,  as  being  the  robę  nsually  wom  at  deyotłons, 
whence  the  proyerbial  saying  quoted  by  Lightfoot  (£x- 
ercit,  on  Matt.  y,  40),  **  He  tbat  takea  caie  of  hia  fnngea 
deseryes  a  good  ooat"  (see  Hilder,  De  Hekrmor.  rtstib, 
frimbriatis,  Tuhingen,  1701)^-^mith.    See  Fbimgk. 

He^mam  (Gen.  xxxyi,  22).    See  Hoscaji. 

Heman  (Heh,  JIąfman%  "i^^^n,  L  q.  '{^'^m,  CbaUL 
/aithful;  Sept  Aiftdv  or  Alfidy,  y.  r.  'A/iav, 'Ayóy,  Ai- 
fiovdfŁ,  etc.),  the  name  of  two  men. 

1.  A  person  named  with  three  othen  cdebrated  for 
their  wisdom,  to  which  that  of  Solomon  is  oompared  (1 
Kings  iy,  31),  probably  the  same  as  the  son  of  Zerah 
and  grandson  of  Judah  (1  Chroń,  ii,  6).  KC  poat  1856L 
See  Ćthan. 

2.  Son  of  Joel,  and  grandson  of  Samuel,  a  Kobatbite 
of  the  tribe  of  Leyi,  and  one  of  the  leadera  of  the  Tem- 
pie musie  as  organJzed  by  Dayid  (1  Chroń,  yi,  83 ;  xy, 
17 ;  xyi,  41, 42).  KC 1014.  This,  ^bably,  ia  the  He- 
man to  whom  the  88th  Paalm  is  ascnbed.  Hehadfour- 
teen  sona  and  three  daughters  (1  Chroń.  xxy,  5),  aome 
of  whom  are  ennmerated  in  yer.  4.  Asaph,  Heman,  and 
Jeduthun  are  termed  ''seers"  in  2  Chion.  xxix,  1^  80; 
xxxy,  15,  which  refers  rather  to  their  genius  as  aacred 
muaicians  than  to  their  poasessing  the  spirit  of  paopb- 
ecy  (1  Chroń.  xy,  19 ;  xxy,  1 ;  2  Chroń,  y,  12),  although 
there  is  not  wanting  eyidóioe  of  their  ocrasJimal  inapi- 
ration.    See  Asaph. 

He'math  (Heb.  ChamnuOk^  T\W,  the  same  name 
as  Hammath;  Sept  Al/io^;  Yulg.  translates  calor),  a 
Kenite,  ancestor  of  the  Rechabites  (1  Chroń,  ii,  55).  KCl 
prob.  cir.  1612.  "  Hemath,"  in  Amos  yi,  14,  is  an  incor- 
rect  Anglicized  form  of  T\'QT\  {Cham€tth\  Sept  At/io^  y. 
r.  '£fta^,  Yulg.  Emath),  the  city  Hamatu,  q.  y. 

Hem^dan  (Heb.  Chemdan%  yn-^n^pUoMad;  Sept. 
'AfiaSa,  Yulgate  Hemdam)^  the  first  named  of  the  fbur 
"  children*'  of  Dishon,  which  latter  was  a  son  of  Seir  and 
one  of  the  Horite  "  dukes"  antecedent  to  the  supremacy 
of  the  Edomites  in  Mt  Seir  (Gen.  xxxyi,  26),    B.CL  dft 


HEMEROBAPnSTjE 


181 


HEMMERLIN 


1964.  In  1  Chnn.  i,  41,  the  nune  ii^  by  an  enor  of 
tnucribo^  mitten  Hamran  (Heh.  Ckamran',  1'??'?) 
Scpt  ooirectłf  'ifuz^ć,  Vi]]g.  Hamram^  Eng.  Yen.  **  Am- 
nm").  "The  name  Hemdan  is  by  Knobel  ((7«m«w,  p. 
256)  ooopimi  with  those  of  /Tttmeiiljr  and  Hamadjfy  two 
of  the  fire  ftmilies  of  the  tribe  of  Omran  or  Amnui,  who 
m  Jodted  to  the  £.  and  S.E.  of  Akaba  (Robinson,  Be- 
matkef,  i,  268);  abo  with  the  Bmt-Hamifde^  who  are 
foand  a  sbort  distanoe  S.  of  Kerek  (S.E.  comer  of  the 
Deid  Set);  and  from  thenoe  to  El-Busaireh,  probably 
the  ucient  Booab,  on  the  road  to  Fetia.  (See  Buick- 
haidt,  Syria,  etc.,  pw  695, 407.)**— Smith. 

Hamarobaptistee  {rffupoPaimirra!}.  Eosebios 
{Bitt.Ecda,  ir,  22)  cites  from  Hegeaippna  a  liat  of  her- 
eses  preralent  among  the  Jewa,  and  namea,  aa  one  of 
^  heietical  lecta,  the  HemerobaptitieB,  Epiphaniua 
{Baru.  xm)  abo  namea  thia  aect,  and  deńyea  their 
umie  fioiB  the  fiKt  that  they  hołd  daily  aUntions  to  be 
eomtitl  to  aihration  (aee  alao  Aport,  Coiui,  lib.  vi,  cap. 
Ti).  Modieim  (ComtmeHlaries,  Introd.  chap.  ii,  §  9,  en- 
deanra  to  ahow  that  the  ao-called  ''Chriatiana  of  St 
j€bn''ue  (fanoendert  from  theae  andent  Hemerobaptiata. 
SeeSiueer,7AeMiinu(Am8t.l728),i,1881;  and  the  ar- 
tiefas  CoBsmAsa  of  St.  John  ;  Mkmdbass. 
EBmiage.  See  Hemmimo. 
Hemlock  appean  in  the  Auth.  Yera.  as  the  render- 
tDg  of  two  Heb.  wcnda  in  aome  of  the  paasagea  wheie 
thejoocnr. 

1  BósH  CĆVO  and  Ó*)*^)  is  thought  oiiginally  to  sig- 

afy  "poisoD,"  and  is  therefore  auppoaed  to  indicate  a 

pouoDoiB,  OT,  at  least,  a  bitter  plant    Thia  we  may  infer 

from  iu  bdng  freqaently  mentioned  akmg  with  laanah 

or^^wwoiwood,"  aa  in  DeuL  xxix,  18,  **  Lest  there  ahonld 

be  amoog  yoa  a  loot  that  beareth  gaU  (rosK)  and  trorm* 

wod {Uumak) ;"  ao  alao  in  Jer.  ix,  15;  xxiii,  15;  and  in 

luL  iii,  19,  *^Remembeiing  minę  aflSiction  and  my  mia- 

OT,  the  wwmtood  and  the  gaUJ*    That  it  was  a  bcrry- 

l^óuing  plant  haa  been  infenred  from  Deat.  xxxii,  82, 

''For  thdr  irine  ia  of  the  vine  of  Sodom,  and  their  grapea 

■re  giapes  of  ^off  (roah) ;  their  doateia  are  bitter."    In 

J«.Tiii,14;  ix,  15;  xxia,  16,  "water  of  ^atf"  (rwA)  ia 

tKDtłooed,  which  n&ay  be  either  the  expre8sed  Juice  of 

the  fnuŁ  or  of  the  plwt,  or  a  bitter  infoaion  madę  from 

it.  That  it  was  a  plant  is  veiy  eyident  from  Hoeea  x,  4, 

vhere  it  is  said  ^  tbeir  judgment  springeth  up  as  hem- 

^  ( rotk)  in  the  fuirows  of  the  field ;"  alao  in  Amos  vi, 

U,  "For  ye  haye  tiimed  judgment  into  ffoU  (laanah, 

'wmnwoodO,  and  the  fruit  of  righteousness  into  htm- 

iod  Irrmky*    The  only  other  paasagea  where  it  occm:s 

■e  in  Fpeaking  of  tbe  **  poison**  (Job  xx,  16)  or  **  venom" 

«f  a^  (DeaC  xxii,  38),  or  ^^gaU**  in  a  figuntire  sense 

f'>rioiniw(Łani.iii,5>,orasfood(Fta.lxix,21).    See 

G.4LL;  PoiSON. 

Thongh  ro$k  ia  generally  acknowledged  to  indicate 
*ne  itet,  yet  a  ▼ariety  of  opinions  have  becii  enter- 
tBsed  reapećtiiig  ita  identiikiation :  some,  as  the  Auth. 
^CRL  m  Hoeea  x,  4,  and  Amoe  vi,  12,  consider  cieuta  or 
^<^M  to  be  the  plant  intended.  Tremellius  adopts 
t2A  as  the  meaning  of  ro0h  in  all  the  paasages,  and  is 
fcflowed  by  Gelńus  {HieroboL  ii,  49).  The  cieuta  of  the 
^Maans.  the  cwt  iov  of  the  Greeks,  is  generally  acknowl- 
^^Ctd  to  have  been  what  we  now  cali  hemlodc,  the  coinv- 
^  aoni/atem  of  botanists.  There  can  be  no  donbt  of 
>t*  roiaowMia  natore  (Pliny,  HuL  NaJL  xxv,  18).  Celsius 
^aotM  the  description  of  linmens  in  sopport  of  its 
fcn«ing  in  tbe  funows  of  fields,  but  it  does  not  appear 
tA  be  so  eommoa  in  Syria.  Cehitta,  howerer,  adduces 
Bai-lfefech,  the  mostleamed  of  Rabbina,  as  being  of 
^aoa  that  roah  waa  eotdum  or  hemhdc.  But  there 
^  DoC  appear  any  neoeasity  for  our  conaideiing  roth 
^  bare  been  morę  poiaonona  thanriaanah  or  warmwood, 
*ith  which  it  ia  aseodated  ao  freqnently  as  to  appear 
Eke  a  prareriiial  escpreMion  (Deut. X3ux,  18;  Jer. ix,  15 ; 
xna,  15;  Łam.  iii,  19;  Araoa  vi,  12).  The  Sept.  trans- 
kB«jn  render  it  offrmlis,  intending  some  speciea  of  graas. 
Hcace  aome  ba;7e  coDdiided  that  it  mnat  be  £o/ticm  remu- 


lentum,  or  damd,  the  zizanium  of  the  ancients;  while 
others  have  thought  that  some  of  the  toUmem  or  luridm 
of  Linna^iB,  as  the  heUadomut  or  the  tolanun  niffntm, 
oommon  nightohade,  or  still,  again,  the  henbane,  is  in- 
tended. But  no  proof  appears  in  favor  of  any  of  this 
tribe,  and  their  sensible  properties  are  not  so  remarkably 
dieagreeable  aa  to  have  led  to  their  being  employed  in 
what  appears  to  be  a  proverbial  expreS8Lon.  Uiller,  in 
his  Uifaropktfticon  (ii,  54),  adduoes  the  centaury  as  a  bit- 
ter plant,  which,  like  others  of  the  tribe  of  gentians, 
might  answer  all  the  paasagea  in  which  rwh  is  mention- 
ed, with  the  exception  of  that  (Deut  xxxii,  82)  whero 
it  is  supposed  to  have  a  benied  fruiL  Dr.  Hairis,  quot- 
ing  Blayney  on  Jer.  viii,  14,  says, "  In  Psa.  lxix,  21,  which 
is  justly  oonsidered  as  a  prophecy  of  our  Sarioui^s  suf- 
ferings,  it  is  said,  *  They  gave  me  rwh  to  eat,'  which 
the  Sept.  have  rendered  ^o^^^i  9^^^  Accordingly,  it  is 
recorded  in  the  historj',  Matt.  xxvii,  84,  *  They  gave  him 
yinegar  to  drink,  mingled  with  gaU,'  óioc  fAird  xoX^c. 
But  in  the  parallel  passage  (Mark  xv,  23)  it  is  said  to 
be  *  wilie  mingled  with  myrrh,'  a  vei5'  bitter  ingredi- 
ent.  From  whence  I  am  induced  to  think  that  xo^^9 
and  perhaps  rosh,  may  be  used  as  a  generał  name  for 
whatever  is  exceedingly  bitter;  and,  consequently,  when 
the  sense  requires,  it  may  be  put  specially  for  any  bitter 
herb  or  plant,  the  infusion  of  which  may  be  called  '  wa- 
ters  of  rosh' "— Kitto.    See  Myrrii. 

2.  Laakau'  (t^dC^  occurs  in  the  passages  above 
clfced  and  in  a  few  others,  where  it  ia  translated  **  wonn- 
wood"  (DeuL  xxix,  18;  Prov.  v,  4;  Jer.  ix,  15;  xxUi, 
15;  Lam.  iii,  15, 19;  Amos  v,  7);  and  only  in  a  aingle 
passage  is  it  rendered  "  hemlock"  (Amos  vi,  12).    See 

WORMWOOD. 

Hemmen^Rray,  Moses,  D.D.,  a  Congregational 
minister,  was  bom  in  1785  at  Fiamingham,  Masa.  He 
graduated  at  Harvard  College  in  1755,  and  was  ordained 
pastor  in  WeUs,  Mass.,  Aug.  8, 1759,  where  he  labored 
until  his  death,  April  5, 1811.  He  published  Seven  Ser^ 
mona  on  the  Obiigation  ani  Ewsouragement  ofthe  Unre^ 
cenerate  to  labor/or  the  Meat  which  endureth  to  nerlast" 
wg  Life  (1767)*. — Yindication  ąfthe  Power,  Obiigatwn, 
etc,  of  ihe  Unregemrate  to  att&nd  the  Meana  of  Grace, 
against  the  £zcq)tions  of  Samuel  Hopkins  in  hia  Replg 
to  MHU  (1772) '^Remarke  on  Rev,  Mr.  ffopkinś^s  An^ 
swer  to  a  Tract  entUled  'M  Yindication,"  etc  (1774) :~ 
A  Discourse  on  the  dicine  Institution  of  Water  Baptisnt 
as  a  standmg  Ordńumoe  of  ihe  Gospel  (1781)  i—A  Dis^ 
course  on  the  Naturę  and  Subjects  ąT  Christian  Baptism 
(1781) : — Diseourse  conoeming  the  Chureh,  m  which  the 
several  Acceptations  of  the  Word  are  erplained,  etc 
(1792) : — Remarks  on  the  Ret.  Dr.  Emmons^s  Disserłation 
on  the  scriptural  Qual\ficaiionsfor  A  dmission  and  A  ccess 
to  the  Christian  Sacraments,  and  on  his  Stricłures  on  a 
Diseourse  conceming  the  Chureh  (1794) ;  and  8everal  oc- 
caabnal  sennons. — Sprague,  AnsuHs,  i,  541. 

Hemmerlin  or  Himmerlein,  Felix  (AfaUeo- 
lus\  a  Swiss  theologian,  was  bom  at  Zurich  in  1389. 
Afler  studying  the  canon  law  at  the  Univer8ity  of  Er- 
fhrt  he  went  to  Romc.  On  his  return  to  Switzeriand  in 
1421  he  was  appointed  canon  at  Zoffingen,  and  the  year 
after  he  was  madę  provost  of  St.  Ursus,  in  Soleure.  With 
the  revenues  of  these  li\dng8  he  collected  a  large  libra- 
ry.  He  took  part  in  the  Council  of  Basie  (1441-3),  and 
was  oonspicuous  there  for  his  zeal  in  reforming  ecclcsi- 
astical  disciplinc  He  madę  many  bitter  cnemies,  and 
in  1489  they  madę  an  attempt  on  his  łife,  and  wounded 
him  aeriously.  Thia  did  not,  however,  deter  him  from 
continuing  hia  reproofs  of  the  loose  lives  of  the  clergy, 
and  the  generał  lack  of  disciplinc  Afler  long-continue<l 
disputes  with  his  ooUeagues  at  Zurich,  he  was  stripped, 
throngh  their  influence,  of  all  his  emoluments.  He  also 
drew  upon  himself  the  hatred  of  a  party  of  his  country- 
men  by  the  thirtieth  chapter  of  his  treatise  De  NobOi- 
tatę,  in  which  he  oondemned  the  Swiss  confederetes, 
who  in  1444  madę  war  on  his  native  city.  Some  mcm- 
ben  of  thia  party,  who  attended  the  Carnival  at  Zurich 


HEMMING 


182 


HENDERSON 


in  1664,  seized  Hemmcrlin  and  canried  him  to  Omstanoe, 
where  he  was  thrown  into  priaon,  and  tieated  with  great 
craelty.  He  was  unwilling  to  retract  any  of  bis  writ- 
ings,  and  was  condemned  to  perpetoal  imprisonnient 
in  a  conyent  Ile  was  taken  to  a  monasteiy  of  bare- 
footed  monks  at  Luoerae,  and  lUed  there  in  1467,  a  mar- 
tyr  to  his  deyotion,  not,  indeed,  to  erangelical,  bat  to 
ecdesiastical  disdpline.  BCany  of  his  writings  are  ool- 
lected  in  Yarica  OhUctaHoma  OpuKukt  et  Tractatus  (Ba- 
sie, 1497,  foL).--Hoefer,  Noiw,  Biog,  GhUraU^  xxiii,  268 ; 
Beber,  Fdix  HemmerUn  (Zurich,  1746);  Herzog,  Real- 
£wyklopddie,v,7d2. 

Hemming  (Hemminoius),  Nicolas,  an  eminent 
theologian  of  Denmark,  was  bom  in  the  isle  of  Laland 
in  1613.  He  studied  four  years  at  Wittenberg  under 
Melancthon,  and  imbibed  his  mild  spirit.  Retuming  to 
Denmark,  he  became  preacher,  and  afterwaids  professor 
of  Hebrew  and  theology  at  Copenhagen.  In  1667  he 
became  professor  of  theology  and  vice-chanceIlor.  He 
was  a  Toluminous  wiiter  in  exegetical,  dogmatical,  and 
practical  theology,  and  his  Latin  style  is  highiy  praised. 
Opposing  the  laitheran  doctrine  of  ubiquity,  he  was 
greatly  reproached  by  the  Lutherans  as  a  Crypto-Cal- 
TinisL  In  his  Syntagma  Ttutitł,  Christ,  (1574)  he  cx- 
pressed  himself  on  the  Eucharist  in  a  oonciliatory  way ; 
but  this  so-called  recantation  has  been  interpreted  in 
acoordance  with  the  Calyinistic  doctrine,  as  well  as  with 
the  Lutheran.  In  1579  he  was  madę  canon  of  Roes- 
kilde,  where  he  died  in  peace  in  1600.  His  Oputada 
TheologietM,  induding  his  shorter  treatises,  were  edited 
by  Goidart  (Geneva,  1686,  foL).— Bayle,  Dictionary^  s.  v. 

Hemsen,  Joh^inn  Tychsen,  a  German  theologian, 
was  bom  at  Boldixum  (Schleswig)  Oct.  15, 1792.  He 
studied  at  Gopenhagen  and  Gottingen,  where  he  gradu- 
ated  in  1821.  In  1823  he  became  extraordinary  profess- 
or of  theology  in  the  Uniyersity  of  GSttingen,  and  died 
there  May  14, 1830.  He  wrote  Anax<itfora»  Klazome- 
nam»j  »eu  de  mta  ejus  etphilogophia  (Gdtt  1821, 8yo)  :— 
Die  A  tttheftticitaet  d,  Sdrif^en  d,  Etangelitten  Johcnmet 
(Schleswig,  1828 ;  against  Bret8chneider's  Próbabilien) : 
^  ^De  Christologia  Joatmis  Bapiuła  (Gott.  1824)  :—Der 
Apo8tel  Pauius,  tern  LebeOf  Wirken^  und  seine  Schriften, 
posthumous  (Gott,  1830, 8vo),  etc  He  also  wrote  in  the 
Gdehrte  A  nzeigen  of  Gottingen,  and  the  Neue  KriL  Bib- 
Uothek  of  Seebold;  and  edited  SteUdlin's  Gesdu  u,  LU- 
€raturd.Kirchenge9ch,  (Hanoyer,  1827),  and  Berengarii 
Turonensia  Liber  de  eacra  Ccena,  cuherttu  Lctn/raneum 
(Lpz.  1830).  See  Neuer  Nehr(^  d,  Deutachen  (1830),  i, 
422-424;  Hoefer,  Nouv.  Biog.  Gen.  xxiii,  901.    (J.  N.  P.) 

Hen  (Heb.  Chea,  "{n,  gracet  as  often ;  Sept.  translates 
^opicYulg.  ffem)f  the  son  of  Zephaniah,  to  whom  the 
prophet  was  sent  with  a  symbolical  crown  (Zech.  vi,  14) ; 
probably  a  figurative  name  for  JoaiAu  (ver.  10). 

Hen  (5pvcc,  a  bird,  especially  the  domestic  fowl, 
ICatt,  xxiii,  87 ;  Lukę  xiii,  84).  We  have  no  eyideDce 
that  the  ancient  Hebrews  were  accustomed  to  the  breed- 
ing  of  poultiy,  but  that  the  later  Jews  were  acąuainted 
with  it  (Chald.  Knb^aS^n)  is  eyident  from  2  Esdras  i, 
80 ;  MatL  xxiU,  37 ;  Lukę  xiii,  84 ;  xxii,  60, 61.  Michar 
elis  is  uf  opinion  that  the  incubation  of  the  common  hen 
is  refenred  to  in  Jer.  xvii,  11.  The  original  country  of 
the  common  poultiy  fowl  is  India,  where  it  is  called  the 
jungle  bird.  See  Cocł  The  metaphor  used  in  the 
passages  of  the  Gospels  where  the  term  "hen"  occurs 
has  always  been  admired  for  its  beauty.  IT^lien  the  hen 
sees  a  bird  of  prey  coming,  she  makes  a  noise  to  assem- 
ble  her  chickens,  that  she  may  cover  them  with  her 
wings  from  the  danger.  The  Roman  army,  as  an  eagle, 
was  about  to  fali  upon  the  Jews ;  our  Lord  expre9ses  a 
ilesire  to  guard  them  from  threatened  calamities,  but 
they  disregaided  his  inyitations  and  wamings,  and  fell 
a  prey  to  their  adyersaries.— Bastow.  The  word  there 
cmployed  is  used  in  the  same  specific  sense  in  classical 
Greek  (Aristoph.  A  v,  102,  Vesp,  81 1).  That  a  bird  so  in- 
timately  connected  with  the  household,  and  so  oommon 


in  Palestine,  as  we  knowirom  Babbbical  sonroea  (Otho, 
Lex.  Rabb.  p.  266),  should  receiye  auch  slight  noCioe,  is 
certainly  singular  (see  Reland,  De  gaUi  cantu  Hier.  oa- 
dito,  Rotterd.  1709 ;  Detharding,  id.  Rost.  1752) ;  it  ia  al- 
most  equally  singolar  that  it  is  nowhere  represented  in 
the  paintings  of  ancient  Egypt  (Wilkioson,  i,  2S4).~ 
Smith.    See  FowŁ. 

He'na  (Heb.  //ena',  93!^,  signif.  unknown ;  Sept. 
'Ava,  but  in  Isa.  xxxyii,  18  blends  with  the  folkuwtng 
name  into  *Avatyyovyavdy  q.d.  **Ana-ncap-Ava ;"  Vnlg. 
Ano),  a  city  (apparently  of  Mesopotamia)  mentioned  in 
connection  with  Sepharyaim  and  lyah  as  one  of  those 
oyerthrown  by  Sennacherib  before  his  inyasioa  of  Ja- 
dfea  (2  Kings  xyiii,84;  xix,  13;  Isa.  xxxyii,  18).  Ao- 
cording  to  the  conjecture  of  Busching  {Erdbetdtr.  xi, 
263, 767),  it  is  the  town  which  is  still  called  hj  the 
Arabs  Anah.  It  lies  on  the  Eaphrates,  amid  gaiden% 
which  are  rich  in  dates,  dtrons,  onmges,  pomęgramtei^ 
and  other  fruits.  The  modem  site  is  on  the  ligfat  bank 
of  the  stream,  while  the  name  also  attaches  to  aome 
ndns  a  little  lower  down  upon  the  left  bank;  bat  be- 
tween  them  is  <*a  stiing  of  islands"  (Cheeney^s  Euphnn 
tea  Expediiiott,  i,  63),  upon  one  of  which  stands  a  castle. 
Perhaps,  in  ancient  times,  the  city  lay,  for  the  most 
part,  or  entirely,  upon  this  island,  for  Abnlfeda  aaya  that 
''Anah  is  a  smali  town  on  an  island  in  the  middle  of  the 
Euphrates"  (see  Assemani,  BibL  OrienL  IH,  ii,  717 ;  Mi- 
chaelis,  Supplem.  p.  662).  The  inhabitants  are  chiefly 
Arabs  and  Jews.  Conjecture  further  identifies  A  na  with 
a  town  called  Anat  (H  is  merdy  the  feminine  termina- 
tion),  which  is  mentioned  in  the  Assyrian  inscriptions 
as  situated  on  an  island  in  the  Euphrates  (Fox  Talbofs 
Assyrian  TextSy  p.  21 ;  Layard's  Ninevek  and  Babyhn, 
p.356),  at  some  distanoe  below  its  junction  with  the  Cha- 
bour,  and  which  appeacs  as  Anatho  CXva!9ui)  in  Ińdoie 
of  Charax  (Mans.  Partk.  p.  4).  HiUig,  howeyer  (Com- 
ment.  on  Isa.  L  c),  thinks  the  name  an  appeUation,  equiv- 
alent  to  ''the  Lowland,'^  and  in  this  signification  FUrst 
{ffeb.  Lexikony  s.  y.)  ooncurs  (q.  d.  S^SS;  see  Canaas). 
Comp.  Sbpiiarvaim. 

Hen'adad  (Heb.  Chenadai^,  l^n,  probably  for  ^n 
T^n,,/bFor  oflTadad;  Sept.  'Hva^a^),  a  Leyite  whoae 
sons  were  actiye  in  the  enterprises  of  the  restoration  af- 
ter  the  captiyity  (Ezra  iii,  9) ;  two  of  the  latter,  Bayai 
and  Blnnui,  are  uamed  (Ńeh.  iii,  18,  24;  x,  9).  B.G 
ante635. 

Hendel,  William,  D.D.,  one  of  the  pioneers  of  the 
German  Reformed  Church  in  the  United  Statea,  was  bom 
in  the  Palatinate  in  the  first  half  of  the  18th  oeiituiy. 
Haying  completed  his  theok>gical  studies,  he  came  to 
America  in  1764,  and  in  Jan.  1766  became  pastor  of  the 
German  Reformed  oongregation  at  Lancaster,  Pa.  Dur- 
ing  the  years  1769-1782  he  had  chaige  of  the  congre- 
gation  at  Tulpehocken  and  neighboring  oongręgmtiona. 
Indeed,  he  seryed  as  many  as  nine  at  a  time,  beaides 
making  frequent  missionary  excui8ions.  In  Sept.  17^ 
he  aocepted  a  cali  to  return  to  his  T^mcaster  oongrega- 
tion. He  was  madę  D.D.  by  the  College  of  New  Jersey 
inl788.  In  February,  1794,  he  remoyed  to  Philadriphia, 
which  was  his  last  station.  Shortly  after  his  arriyid  the 
yellow  feyer  broke  out  the  seoond  time,  and  while  faith- 
fuUy  ministering  to  the  sick  and  dying,  he  died  of  the 
feyer  Sept,  29, 1798.  Dr.  Hendel  was  a  good  scholar, 
and  a  man  of  great  pulpit  talents.—Harbaugh,  Faiken 
o/Łhe  Reformed  Church^  ii,  120  sq. 

Henderson,  Alexander,  a  minister  of  the  Church 
of  Scotland,  was  bom  in  Fifeshire  about  1688.  He  stud* 
ied  at  St  Andrew*s,  where  he  passed  A.M.  in  1608,  and 
where,  about  1610,  he  was  professor  of  philoaophy. 
About  1616  (acoording  to  AfCrie)  he  was  preaented  to 
the  parish  of  Leuchars  by  archbishop  Gladstanea.  Aa 
the  epiBcopal  goyemment  was  yery  nnpopular  with  the 
people,  they  resisted  Mr.  HeDdersQn's  settlement,  even 
to  the  extent  of  closing  the  churdi  doors  against  him. 
In  a  few  years,  howeyer,  Henderson  became  conyinoed 


HENDERSON 


183 


HENGSTENBERG 


tiiaŁ  "cpiseopacy  was  munlhorized  by  the  Word  of 

God,  sni  in»ittiiCeat  with  the  reformed  Conatitution 

afthe  Chareh  of  Scotland,"    He  entered  into  the  strife 

a«riiiutpRlM7  with  gieat  vigor.    In  1619  he  was  caU- 

€d  beton  cbe  High  Comniiasion  at  St.  Andrews,  bat  de- 

fendeti  iuBuelf saGoeaBfulfy.   When  the  epifloopal  lituigy 

WM  oideicd  to  be  oaed  in  Scotland  in  1687  he  joined  in 

tht  reajstanee  madę  to  it.    He  was  one  of  the  writen 

of  the  renewed  "Łeagne  and  Govenant,"  sworn  to  by 

tłwiMiMb  at  Gnyfriara*  Church,  Edinbuigh,  March  1, 

1438L    He  was  modentor  of  the  famous  General  As- 

sanbly  of  tbat  year,  and  he  executed  the  functions  of 

his  ofiiee  with  singular  akill,  finuness,  and  pradence. 

At  the  nineteenth  sesaion  Henderson  preached  a  power- 

M  sennoD,  and  at  ita  doee  pronounced  the  sentence  of 

óepoańoa  (tgamst  the  biahopa)  which  had  been  adopt- 

ed  by  the  AsKmUy.     He  was  iemoved,  much  against 

faia  wil],m  1688, firom  the  chinch  at  Leochars  to  Edin- 

bmgh.    In  1640  he  was  madę  rector  of  the  Univeraity 

of  Edinbuigh.    During  1642  he  was  employed  in  man- 

•ging  the  conespondeiice  with  England  regaiding  ref- 

<iniłitian  and  lennion  of  the  churches.    In  1648  he  was 

i^alD  modcacator  of  the  General  Aasembly ;  and  in  that 

}'ear  he,  with  othera,  leprcsented  Scotland  at  the  West- 

JDiDster  Anembly,  and  he  reeided  in  London  for  three 

jtas%    In  1645  he  was  appdnted  to  assist  the  commis- 

aonen  of  Pariiament  to  treat  with  the  king  at  Ux- 

bndge,  and  aiso  at  Newcastle  in  1686.    In  the  papers 

on  episoopacy  delirered  by  him  in  these  conferences  he 

<fis|dajed  great  leaming  and  ability.    His  constitntion 

na  faroken  by  long  and  eKcessiTe  labors.    In  the  sum- 

ner  of  1816  he  retuzned  to  Edinboigh,  and  on  the  19th 

of  Ai^ust  in  that  year  he  died  of  the  stone.    The  Gon- 

siimion  of  the  Scottiah  Church  was  framed  chiefly  by 

Hcndeison.    "  Ile  was  eridently  of  that  sort  of  men  of 

which  maityrs  are  madę,  and  needed  only  a  change  of 

cżmuDstances  to  liave  given  his  name  a  high  place 

amoDg  those  who  liave  sealed  a  good  confession  with 

their  blood.    Neariy  eyeiy  considerable  production  of 

that  menwrable  period  beiuns  his  impress.    The  Solemn 

I^agne  and  Goyenant  was  his  own  composition.    The 

IMrectofy  was  formed  under  his  eye.    He  wrote  the 

principal  part  of  the  Confession  of  Faith  with  his  own 

hand.    And  the  form  of  Church  goremment  which  the 

Aasembly  attempted  in  Tsin  to  give  to  the  Church  of 

£ogiand  was  little  morę  than  a  transcript  of  that  which 

^  had  a  little  before  diawn  up  for  the  Church  of  Scot- 

hoćT  (Curry,  in  Mefhoditt  Ouarterfy,  1848,  p.  600).    '<  So 

kog  as  the  puiity  of  onr  Presby terian  establishment  re- 

■aina^"  aaya  DrI  Aiton,  ^as  often  as  the  General  As- 

KSłldy  of  OUT  Chareh  is  permitted  to  oonrene—while 

the  Confession  of  Faith  and  Catechisms  Larger  and 

Sborter  hokl  n  place  in  our  estimation  second  to  the 

Seriptung  akme — ^and  till  the  histoiy  of  the  rerolution 

dnriiig  the  reign  of  Charles  I  is  forgotten— the  memory 

cf  Akxander  Henderson  will  be  respected,  and  crery 

I^esbyterian  patriot  in  Scotland  will  continne  grateful 

hi  the  Seoond  Reformation  of  our  Church,  which  Hen- 

Aenon  was  ao  instmroentai  in  efTecting."    His  life  was 

^eot  in  active  labors,  allowing  little  time  for  wiiting, 

escepc  the  docoments  and  pamphlets  necessary  to  the 

gnat  coatioveny  in  which  he  took  so  large  a  part    Two 

of  his  semKnu — ^preached  sererally  before  the  two  honses 

of  PiniiaiiieDt  (1644)  and  the  House  of  Lords  (1645>- 

■e  givcn  at  the  end  of  HK)rie's  L^e  o/A  lexander  Hm- 

dirma  (Edmbargh,  1846).    See  also  Howie,  Scoiłf  Wor- 

AUm,  pw  349;  GoUier,  Ecdea,  NitL  of  EngUmd,  viii,  298- 

)23:  Hctberiogtoii,  Ckur^  o/Scotitmd,  voL  i;  Cunning- 

^am.  CJkttnA  rrmeipUsB  (Edinburgh,  1868),  p.  884  są. 

Handezaon*  ZSbeneser,  D.D.,  an  eminent  Scotch 
Snne,  was  bom  at  Dunfermline  Nov.  17, 1784.  At  an 
earfr  ag«  he  deteimined  to  derote  his  life  to  foreign 
aańans,  and  urent  to  Denmark,  in  order  to  sail  thence 
&r  India.  Bul  he  found  work  in  the  north  of  Europę  in 
the  dirabuioa  of  the  Bibie,  which  occupied  him  for 
twcaty  ycara.  Alter  serend  years  spent  in  this  way  in 
DoBMik,  Sweden,  and  Norway,  he  was  deputed  by  the 


British  and  Foreign  Bibie  Society  in  1814  to  prooeed  to 
loeland  on  a  similar  mission ;  and  in  1819  he  was  sent 
through  Russia  on  the  same  errand.  In  1826  he  was 
q)pointed  president  of  the  Missionary  College  at  Hox- 
ton ;  and  in  1880  he  was  madę  professor  of  theology  and 
Biblical  literaturę  at  the  Highbury  College.  His  stud- 
ies  In  the  language  and  literaturę  of  the  Bibie  had  been 
carried  on  yigorously  during  his  previous  long  career  in 
the  senrice  of  the  Bibie  Society,  and  he  distinguished 
himself,  both  as  professor  and  as  author,  by  tborough 
and  scholarly  work.  In  1850  he  was  compelled  by  de- 
dine  of  health  to  relinquish  his  literary  labors,  and  after 
a  short  senrice  as  pastor  at  East  Sheer  he  gave  up  all 
public  work.  He  died  at  Mortlake,  Snrrey,  May  16, 
1858.  Dr.  Henderson^s  reputation  as  a  Biblical  critic 
was  eąual  to  that  of  any  man  of  his  time  in  England, 
and  he  was  widely  known  and  respected  in  other  coun- 
triea.  He  received  the  degree  of  D.D.  from  Amherst 
CoUege,  Mass.,  and  from  the  Uniyersity  of  Copenhagen 
at  the  same  time.  His  knowledge  of  the  languages  of 
the  Bibie  was  accurate,  and  he  used  freely  most  of  the 
important  ]iving  languages.  He  was  orthodox  in  his 
theology,  and  nerer  handled  the  text  of  the  Bibie  in  the 
reckleas  and  arbitraiy  manner  which  was  common  in 
Germany  in  his  time.  He  wcs  not  an  elegant  writer, 
and  his  transłations  of  Scripture  are  not  always  in  good 
taste ;  but  most  persons  competent  to  jndge  will  agree 
to  Dr.  W.  L.  Alexander'B  judgmcnt  that  "  his  contri- 
butions  to  Kblical  literaturę  are  among  the  most  val- 
uable  the  age  has  produced,  espccially  his  lectures  on 
Inspiration,  and  his  commentaries  on  Isaiah  and  the  Mi- 
nor Frophets."  His  writings  include  Icelandf  Journal 
o/a  Residence  in  that  Itktnd  (Edinb.  1818,  2  rols.  8vo)  : 
— Biblieal  Retearches  and  TrareU  in  Rusaia^  tcUh  Ohter' 
vafu»u  on  the  Rabbinical  and  Caraib  Jetcs  (Lond.  1826, 
8yo)  :— translatłon  of  M.  F.  Roos,  Earpontion  of  Danifl 
(1811, 8vo)  \—The  Mystery  of  GodlineM,  on  1  Tim.  iii, 
16  (Lond.  1880)'.— ZWrme  /nfpiration  (Lond.  1836,  often 
reprinted,  8vo): — Commeniaiy  on  Isaiah,  with  a  neto 
translation  (London,  1840,  8vo)  :—Comm.  on  the  Minor 
Prophets,  with  a  new  transfation  (London,  1845,  8vo)  :— 
Comm,  on  Jenmiahj  \cHh  translation  (Lrnd.  1861,  8vo) : 
— Comm,  on  Ezekiel  (Lond.  1855, 8yo).  He  edited,  with 
additions,  Stuart's  translation  oi 'Rms&ń,  Elementa  ofjn- 
terpretation  (1827, 12mo),  iEgid.  Gutbiiii  Lezicon  Sjpr^ 
iacum  (1836, 24mo),  and  a  i  ew  edition  of  Buck,  Theolog^ 
tcal  Dictionary  (Lond.  1838,  and  often).  A  Life  of  Dr. 
Henderaon  has  recently  been  issued  (1869). 

Henderson,  John,  a  Scotch  merchant  and  philan- 
thropist,  was  bom  in  1782  at  Borrowstancs;  was  bred 
to  business,  and  was  cminently  successful  in  trade.  His 
religious  life  was  even  morę  eamesŁ  than  his  mercantUe 
zeal,  and  he  deroted  a  large  part  of  his  income  to  bener- 
olence.  He  took  especial  interest  in  the  obseryance  of 
the  Lord^s  Day,  and  oflTered  prizes  to  working-meu  for 
essays  on  Sabbath  Obeeirance.  Sce  Sabbath.  He 
was  one  of  the  most  actiye  promoters  of  the  £vangel- 
ical  Alliance  (q.  v.),  and  contributcd  large  ly  to  its  funds. 
The  Waldensian  churches,  as  wcll  as  Foreign  Missions, 
receired  large  benefactions  from  him ;  while  et  home, 
he  was  a  comttant  contributor  to  the  erection  of  church- 
es, and  for  all  works  of  beneyolence.  It  is  sald  that 
for  years  his  charitable  outlays  amounted  to  morę  than 
£80,000  a  year.  He  died  at  his  residence,  The  Park, 
near  Glasgow,  May  1, 1867, ^Etangeiical  Christendom, 
June,  1867. 

HengBtenberg,  Ernst  Wilhelm,  a  German  theo- 
logian  was  bom  Oct  20, 1802,  at  Frtindenberg,  in  West- 
phalia,  and  was  prepared  for  the  ministry  under  the  in- 
stmction  of  his  father,  who  was  pastor  at  Frondenberg. 
Entering  the  Uniyersity  of  Bonn,  he  gave  himself  eamest- 
ly  to  Oriental  and  philosophical  studies,  an  early  ihiit 
of  which  appeared  in  his  translation  of  Ari6totle's  Meta" 
phygics  (Bonn,  1824),  and  in  an  edition  of  the  MoaUakah 
of  Amralkais  (Bonn,  1823).  In  1828  he  went  to  Basie, 
where,  under  the  influence  of  the  Missionaiy  Institute, 


HENHOFER 


184 


HENEEE 


he  became  eamestly  interested  in  religion  and  theology. 
In  1824  he  became  priucUdocent  in  theology  at  Berlin ; 
in  1826,  profeseor  extraordinaiy ;  in  1828,  ordinaiy  pro- 
fessor ;  and  in  1829,  doctor  of  theobgy.  For  many  yean 
his  organ  was  the  Ev(xngduche  Kirchenzeitung,  begun  in 
1827,  an  orthodox  jouinal,  which,  doring  ita  active  and 
oiten  stormy  career,  has  rendered  great  seryice  againat 
Rationalism,  but  has  also  been  noted  for  its  yiolent  po- 
lemical  spirit  In  favor  of  Lutheranism,  and,  of  late,  even 
of  RituaUsm,  as  well  as  of  absolutism  in  Church  and 
State.  He  was,  after  1848,  a  bitter  opponent  of  the  mi- 
ion  of  the  Lutheran  and  Befonned  churches  in  Prusśa, 
ao  much  deaired  by  Fredericic  William  III,  and  by  Nean- 
der  and  other  leading  theologians,  against  whom  Heng' 
8tenberg's  seyerity  of  language  was  often  inescuaable. 
His  oontributions  to  the  Kirchatzeitunfff  during  his  for- 
ty-two  years*  connection  with  it,  were  enough  to  make 
many  Yolumes;  but  he  was,  besides,  a  laborious  writer, 
especially  in  esegetical  theology.  He  died  June  8, 1869. 
His  principal  works  are  ChrittologU  da  atien  TetłamaUs 
(Berlin,  2d  edit.  8  yols.  8vo,  1854-^7 ;  tianalated  by  Reuel 
Keith  from  Ist  edit,  N.  York,  1836-<39, 8  vols.  8yo;  also 
transL  by  Theo.  Meyer  from  2d  edit  Edinburgh,  4  yols. 
8yo,  1863)  i-^B&trSige  zur  Eia/deitmg  ina  alte  Tetł,  (Ber- 
lin, 1831^9,8  yols.8vo) :— ZWe  Bucher  Moset  u.E^fpten 
(Berlin,  1841, 8yo)  i—ConmaUar  aber  dU  P$almen  (Ber- 
lin, 2d  edit  1849-52, 4  yols.  8yo ;  translated  by  Fairbaim 
and  Thompson,  Edinbuigb,  1857, 8  yols.  8yo)  i-^Erlau- 
tarungen  iL  d.  PenUUeuchf  yoL  L  (Die  Gesckickte  Bileanu, 
etc),  transL  by  Ryhmd,  Edinb.  1858  i—OJenbarunff  Jo- 
hcawM  (2d  edit  Berlin,  1861-^2,  2  yoU  8vo;  transL  by 
Fairbaim  from  Ist  edit,  Edinb.  1851, 2  yols.  8yo)  ir^Das 
Epcmgelium  d  Johannes  erlduUrt  (Berlin,  1861-2, 2  yols.; 
transkted,  Edinb.  1865, 2  yols.  8yo)  ^-EzechielerkldH  :^ 
Ecdesicutes : — Dos  Hohdied  SalomonU  auageUgt  (Berlin, 
1853,  8yo).  There  are  also  the  following  additional 
translations  from  the  EuUeitung:  Diatertations  on  the 
GenuineneM  o/ the  Pentateuch^  t^  Ryland  (Edinb.  1847, 
2  yols.  8yo) ;  Egypt  cmd  the  Books  o/MoseSf  by  Bobbins 
(Edinbuigh,  8yo ;  Andoyer,  1843) ;  On  the  Genuinenesa  of 
Daniel  and  Zechariah,  bound  with  Ryland's  translation 
of  the  Uistory  o/Balaam  (Edinb.  1858, 8yo) ;  Comm,  on 
EcdesicuteSf  with  Treatise  on  the  Song  ofSoUmon,  Job, 
laaiah,  etc.  (Philadelphia,  1860). 

Henhdfer,  Ałoys,  a  German  diyine,  was  bom  at 
YdlkerBbach,near  Ettlingen,  of  Roman  Catholic  parents, 
July  1 1, 1789.  His  mother  destined  him  for  the  Roman 
Catholic  pńesthood,  and  hoped  that  he  would  become  a 
nussionaiy.  He  studied  at  the  Uniyersity  of  Freibuig, 
and  at  the  Roman  Catholic  Seminaiy  of  Meersbuig.  Af- 
ter  his  ordination  as  priest,  he  was  tutor  foi  some  years 
in  a  noble  family,  and  in  1818  became  pastor  at  Muhl- 
hauaen.  Hcre  he  soon  found  the  need  of  a  deeper  per- 
sonal  religion,  and  was  greatly  edified  by  the  conyersa- 
tion  of  Fink,  one  of  Sailer's  disciples,  and  by  reading  the 
Life  of  Martin  Booa,  His  preaching  became  eamestly 
eyangelical,  and  crowds  flocked  to  hear  him.  His  or- 
thodoxy  was  soon  questioned,  and,  on  examination,  he 
ayowed  his  doubts  as  to  the  Romanist  doctrine  of  the 
Mass.  His  excommunication  followed  (Oct  16, 1822), 
and  gaye  occasion  to  his  book  ChrittHches  Glaubenabe- 
hemOniu  d  P/arrer^s  Uenhofar,  A  flock  of  his  conyerts 
speedily  ^hered  around  him,  and  in  1823  he  was  in- 
stalled  as  its  Eyangelical  Protestant  pastor.  In  1827  he 
was  called  to  Spock,  near  Carlsrahe,  where  he  labored 
as  pastor  for  thirty-five  yeara.  His  influence  was  felt 
widely  in  the  revival  of  eyangelical  religion  throughout 
Baden.  He  died  December  5, 1862.  Besides  numerous 
pampblets  on  the  Roman  Catholic  controyersy,  and  on 
practical  ąuestions,  he  pubUshed  Der  Kampf  de*  Un- 
glaubent  mii  Aberglauben  tu  Glauben,  ein  Zeichen  uruerer 
Zeit  (Heidelberg,  1861)  :—Predigten  (posthumous,  Hei- 
delberg, 1863).  See  also  Frommel,  Atu  dem  Leben  des 
Dr.  Ahys  Henhófer  (Carlsrahe,  1865, 8yo). 

Henke,  Heutbigh  Pmupp  Konrad,  a  Gemian 
theologian,  was  bom  at  Hehlen,  in  Brunswick,  July  8, 


1752.  His  eaily  proficŁency  was  so  gieat  that  before  be 
went  to  the  uniyeisity  he  was  employed  as  a  gymnaaial 
teacher  (1771-72).  Alter  studying  philotogy  and  the- 
ology at  Helmstadt,  he  was  madę  profeesor  of  philoao- 
phy  there  in  1777,  and  in  1780  profeesor  of  theology, 
In  1803  he  became  principal  of  the  Carolinom,  Bruna- 
wiek.  After  a  yeiy  auocessful  career,  both  as  teacher 
and  writer,  he  died  May  2, 1809.  In  theokigy  he  be- 
longed  to  the  rationaUstic  school  of  Semler,  and  his 
Church  Histoiy  is  written  in  a  spirit  of  bitter  hatsred  of 
eoclesiastical  anthority.  His  Ltfe  by  BoUmann  appen^ 
ed  at  Helmstadt  in  1816.  As  a  critic  he  certainly  had 
great  merits,  but  his  rationaUstic  yiews  haye  madę  his 
writings  shortliyed.  His  reputation  chiefly  rests  on  his 
AUgemeine  Geschichie  der  Chriatlidten  Kirche  (Brunsw. 
1799-1808, 6  yols.  8yo;  finished  by  Yater,  1813-20,  yols. 
yli  and  yiii).  It  is  a  '^deycr  and  8{urited  work;  but 
the  Church  appears  in  it,  not  as  the  tempie  of  God  on 
earth,  but  as  a  great  infirmaiy  or  bedlam"  (Schaff,  Ch, 
Hittorg,  i,  22;  see  also  Kahnis,  German  Protestantism, 
p.  177).  He  wrote  also,  Lineamenta  tnstittUioHwn  fidti 
christiancB  historico-criHcarum  (Hehnstadt,  1788;  2d  ed 
1795 ;  German,  1803)  v—Magasuif.  d,  ReUgions-fthiloao- 
phiey  Exegese  und  Kirchengesch.  (Helmst  1793-1804,  12 
yols.) : — Archiv,Jur  die  neueste  Kircbengeadi,  (Weimar, 
1794-99,  6  yoiB,) '^Religionsannalen  (Brunsw.  1800-05, 
12  numbers)  r — Kirchengesch,  des  19*^  Jahrh,  (Bnmsw. 
1802)  i^Hist.  UnUrauckungen  m  d  ChrisL  Glaubensiehre 
(Hehnst  1802)  i^BtUrSge  z.  neuesten  Gesch,  d  Religion, 
etc  (Berlin,  1806,  2  yols.).  See  F.  A.  I^dewig,  Abriss 
einer  Lebensgesch,  Uenhes;  Hoefer,  Now,  Biog,  CMraU, 
zziii,983. 

Henkel,  Charles,  was  desoended  from  a  long  Hne 
of  ministerial  ancestors  in  the  Lutheran  Church.  He 
was  bom  May  18, 1798,  in  New  Market,  Ta.  He  stud- 
ied theology  under  the  direction  of  his  father,  the  Rer. 
Paul  Henkel,  and  was  licetised  to  preach  the  Gospel  in 
1818,  and  immediately  commenced  his  ministry  in  Ma- 
son County,ya.  In  1820  he  remoyed  to  Columbus,  Ohio, 
and  in  this  field  ountinued,  amid  many  depriyations  and 
toils,  tin  1827,  when  he  took  charge  of  the  Somerset  paa- 
torata  His  health,  howeyer,  ^radually  failed,  and  he 
died  Fcb.  2, 1841,  He  was  a  man  of  yigorous  mind,  and 
a  diligcnt  student.  Seyeral  of  his  sermons  were  pub- 
Ushed. On  one  occasion  he  was  engaged  in  a  pnblio 
controyersy  with  a  Roman  Catholic  priest,  and  was  yery 
successf ul  in  expoBing  the  absurdities  of  that  falae  sya- 
tem.     CSl.  L,  S.) 

Henkel,  Paul,  a  diyine  of  the  American  Lntheimn 
Church,  was  bom  in  Rowan  County,  N.  C,  Dec  15, 175Ł 
In  1776  he  was  awakened  under  the  preaching  of  White- 
field,  who  at  that  time  was  exciŁing  deep  interest 
throughout  the  country.  He  commenoed  a  course  of 
stttdy  under  the  direction  of  pastor  Kriłch,  of  Frededck. 
Md.,  with  a  yiew  to  the  Lutheran  ministry.  He  was 
licensed  to  preach  by  the  Synod  of  Pennsylyania,  and 
in  1792  became  pastor  at  New  Market,  Ya.  His  labon 
estended  to  Augusta,  Madison,  Pendleton,  and  Wythe 
counties.  His  position  was  yery  much  that  of  an  itin- 
erant  imssioiiary,yisiting  destitnte  portions  of  the  Church, 
gathering  together  the  scattered  members,  instmcting 
and  confirming  the  3ronth,  and  administering  the  8Mr»- 
ments.  In  1800  he  aocepted  a  cali  to  Rowan,  his  native 
county,  N.  C ;  but,  the  location  being  nniayomble  to  the 
health  of  his  £muly,  he  remoyed  in  1805  to  New  Mar- 
ket, and  labored  as  an  independent  miieionary,  preach- 
ing whereyer  lus  senrices  were  reąuired,  and  dependlng 
for  his  support  soldy  upon  the  good-will  of  the  people. 
He  madę  repeated  tours  tbrough  Westem  TiiKiniar 
Tennessee,  Kentucky,  Indiana,  and  Ohio.  In  1809  he 
wrote  a  work  on  Christian  Baptism  m  the  German  lan- 
guage, which  he  subsequently  translated  into  English. 
In  1810  he  publiahed  a  German  ffgmn-bookf  and  in  1816 
one  in  EngUsh,  many  of  the  h3rmns  being*  his  own  com- 
position.  In  1811  he  pubUshed  his  German,  and,  somi 
after,  his  English  Catediism.    He  also  puUiahed  a  Gcv« 


HENNEPIN 


185 


HENRY 


.  iratk  in  rimne,  entitled  ZeU^erireibf  designed  to 
■atijriae  the  lanaticism,  the  folly,  and  vice8  of  the  day. 
Hr.  Henkel  adhered  with  great  tenacity  to  the  stand- 
arda  and  naages  of  his  Church.  In  the  earlier  part  of 
hia  ministiy  he  apprDved  of  eome  of  the  alterations 
madę  hy  Melancthou  in  the  Augsburg  Gonfession,  but 
at  a  later  period  his  doctrinal  position  was  the  unaltered 
Com/htsion,  As  a  preacher  he  had  morę  than  ordinaiy 
powen  He  edocated  a  laige  number  of  candidates  for 
the  miniatry,  who  have  occupied  responsible  poeitions 
in  the  Lutheran  Chuich.  His  habits  of  life  were  płain 
and  aimple,  and,  althongh  oppoaed  to  everything  that 
lookfid  Uke  ostentation  in  the  discharge  of  his  officlal 
datifi8,heinvariably  worehiBclericalrobeSb  In  person 
he  waa  laige  and  well  formed,  meaauring  nearly  ńx  feet 
in  height.  fiye  of  his  aonsbecame  ministers  in  the  Lu- 
theran Church.  Towaida  the  dooe  of  his  life  he  was 
aWacked  with  paralysis,  and  died  Kovember  17,  182d. 
(1ŁŁ.&) 

Hennepln,  Louis,  a  Recollect  missionary  and  trav- 
eflcT,  was  bom  in  Flanders  about  1640.  In  1675  he  was 
sent  to  Gmada,  and  in  1678  started  to  aceompany  the 
traTeDer  Lasalle.  He  founded  a  oonrent  at  Fort  Gatar- 
acooy,  and  with  two  other  monks  folłowed  Lasalle  in  his 
tCNir  among  the  Canadian  lakes  in  1679.  Lasalle  sent 
him,  in  1680,  with  auother  penon  named  Dacan,  to  find 
the  aources  of  the  Missiasippi  They  foUowed  the  etream 
iq>  to  the  4S9  lat.  north,  but  were  stopped  by  a  fali 
whieh  Hemiepin  called  Sault  de  St.  Antoine  de  Pftdoue. 
He  was  then  ibr  eight  months  a  prisoner  among  the 
Sioaz,  but  was  Uberated  by  the  French,  and  retumed  to 
Ouebec  April  5, 1682.  Aiter  his  return  to  Europę  he 
was  lisr  a  while  keeper  of  the  convent  of  Renty,  in  Ar- 
toiB,  and  finally  retired  to  Holland.  The  dato  of  his 
death  ń  not  asoertained.  Hemiepin  disparaged  the 
Jesnits  as  miasionaries,  and  was,  in  tum,  disparaged 
by  the  Jesoit  Charlevoix.  He  wrote  Di$eription  de  la 
L<mui(me,ete^(wec  la  carte  dupags,  le$  mamrs  et  la  ma" 
mirę  de  rwre  dea  Bouragee  (Paris,  1688  and  1688, 12nio; 
1688,  4to):— JYbtRwOe  DScowerte  dHra  trh  grand  pay$ 
mtni  damę  rAmerigue,  enłre  le  Nouffeau  Mixique  et  la 
mar  GUuiale,  aceccartee,  etc,  H  le»  aoantagee  gue  Pon  en 
fmi  tirerpar  PetabUttemeHt  de$  cokmieM  (Utrecht,  1697, 
Ifaao ;  and  in  the  RecueU  det  Yogagea  au  Nord,  yoL  ix, 
et&) : — Noureau  Yagage  dane  un  pays^  etc^  depuit  1679 
jiug*^a  1682,  avec  ka  rłflerione  aur  lee  entriprieea  du 
eSeatr  LaaaUe  (Utrecht,  1698, 12mo;  BecueU  dee  Yoyagea 
OK  Nordj  ToL  v,  1784).  See  Charleyoix,  Hiai,  ginirale 
de  la  NóweOe  France  ;  Dinaust,  A  rehwea  hiaL  du  Nord  ; 
Hoefear,  Nouv,  Biog.  Gen^rak^  xxiii,  940  8q.     (J.  N.  P.) 

Henning^er,  Johx,  a  Methodist  Episcopal  minister, 
was  bom  in  Washington  Cc^Ya.;  was  converted  whilje 
yoong;  cntered  the  Western  Conference  in  1807;  was 
nade  preading  eldcr  in  1816  on  French-Broad  District; 
kcated  in  1818,  and  yet  labored  with  zeal  until  he  re-en- 
tered  the  itinerancy  in  Holston  Conference  in  1825,  and 
80  lab(ned  until  his  death,  Dec  8, 1829.  Mr.  Henninger 
was  a  faithful,  popular,  and  successful  minister,  and  a 
ooiuistent  and  devout  Christian.  Dnring  the  latter  part 
of  his  life  he  was  yery  efficient  as  presiding  elder,  and  as 
agent  for  Holston  CoWs^—Minutea  of  ConferenceSf  iii, 
56 ;  Radford,  Meihodiam  in  Kentucky,  ii,  57. 

He^noch  (1  Chroń,  i,  8, 83).    See  Enoch. 

Henotfoon  (Greek,  iinarutóy^  wnimg  into  one),  the 
name  giren  to  a  **  Decree  of  Union'*  issued  by  the  Greek 
empeiiM  Zeno,  AJ).  482,  by  the  advioe  of  Acacins,  bish- 
op  of  Constantinople,  with  a  riew  to  reeoncile  the  Mono- 
phyiitea  and  the  orthodox  to  the  professlon  of  one  foith. 
It  iBoogmsed  the  Nicene  and  Constantinopolitan  creeds, 
bot  did  not  name  the  deareeaof  Chalcedon.  Itthusr^ 
ąmd  a  sacnfioe  of  opinion  on  the  part  of  the  Mono- 
physites;  bot,  at  the  same  time,  it  deprired  the  ortho- 
doK  of  the  adrantages  they  had  gained  at  the  Council 
of  ChaloedoD.  The  Roman  patriaich,  Felix  H,  eon- 
I  it  in  488,  and  in  518  it  was  suppressed. — ^Mos- 
yC9teraliirutoent.y,pt.il,Gh.y,§  19.    Theife-J 


no^jcon  is  giren,  in  Greek,  m  Giesekr,  Ch.  Hiat,  i,  §  108b 
See  MoNOPHYSiTES. 

Henrlciaiu.    See  Hembt  of  Lausakub. 

Henry  of  Ghent  {Henricua  de  Gandavo:  proper 
name  Goethala),  a  thcologian  of  the  18th  century.  He 
was  bom  at  Ghent  in  1217,  studied  at  the  Uniyeraity  of 
Paris,  and  was  a  pupil  of  Albertns  Magnus.  Admitted 
to  kcture  at  the  Soitonne,  be  acquired  gpreat  distincUon 
as  a  teacher  of  philoeophy  and  theology,  and  obtained 
the  sumame  of  Doctor  Solemma,  "He  was  endowed 
with  great  sagacity  of  understanding,  attached  to  the 
system  of  the  Realists,  and  blended  the  ideas  of  Plato 
with  the  formularies  of  Aristotle :  attributing  to  the 
flrst  a  real  exi8tence  independent  of  the  divine  Intelli- 
gence.  He  suggested  some  new  opinions  in  psycholo- 
gy,  and  detected  many  8pecuUitive  errors,  without,  how- 
cver,  suggesting  coirections  for  them,  owing  to  the 
faultiness  of  the  method  of  the  philosophy  of  his  time" 
(Tennemann).  Henry  became  canon,  and  afterwards 
archdeacon  of  Toumay,  and  died  thcre  A.D.  1293.  His 
writings  are,  Qitodlibeła  in  iv  LUtb.  Sententiarum  (Paris, 
1618,  foL  reprinted,  with  commentary  by  Zuccoli,  1618, 
2  Yols.  fols.):— /S^Włiwna  Theologite  (Paris,  1520,  fol.):  — 
DeScnptor.Ecde8iaaiici8(}n¥ahńciMB,BibLEccł,).  See 
Dupih,  Ecdea.  Writeraj  cent  xiii ;  Kitter,  Gtach,  d.  Phi- 
haophie,  viii,  855 ;  Tennemann,  Manuał  hiat  PhiL  §  267. 

Henry  of  Gorcum  (Henricua  Gorcomiua)^  so  named 
from  his  birthplace,  Gorcum,  in  Holland,  a  philosopher 
and  theologian  of  the  15th  century,  vice-chanceIlor  of 
the  Academy  of  Cologne.  He  wrote  commentaries  on 
Aristotle,  Aąuinas,  and  Peter  Lombard;  also  Tract.  de 
caremonUa  EccUaiaaticia : — De  Celdfritaie  Featorum:  — 
Contra  Ifuaaitaa, 

Henry  of  Huktingdon,  an  early  English  histori- 
an,was  bom  about  the  end  of  the  llth  centur^'.  He 
became  archdeacon  of  Himtingdon  before  1123.  At  the 
reque8t  of  Alexander,  bishop  of  Lincoln,  he  wrote  a  gen- 
erał histozy  of  England,  from  the  landing  of  Julius  Cae- 
sar  to  the  death  of  Stephen  (1154),  in  eight  books.  It 
is  to  be  found  in  Sayile's  Scr^orea  poat  Bedam  prąci- 
pui  (Lond.  1596,  foL;  Francof.  1601);  also  in  English, 
The  Ckronide  of  Henry  of  Buntingdon,  etc,  editcd  by  T. 
Forester  (Lond.  1858,  sm.  8vo),  Warton  (A  ngUa  Sacra^ 
ii,  694)  giyes  a  letter  of  Henry  of  Huntingdon  to  the 
abbot  of  Ramsey,  Epiatola  ad  Wakerum  de  Mundi  Con^ 
temptu,  which  oontains  many  curious  anecdotes  of  the 
kiugs,  nobles,  prelates,  and  other  great  men  who  were 
his  contemporaries.  It  is  given  ako  in  D^Achery,  Spi- 
cilegiumf  iii,  503. — Engliali  Cyclopcedia ;  Darlhig,  Cyclop, 
Bibliographica,  i,  1439 ;  Wright,  Biog,  Brit,  LU,  iA  ngUn 
Norman  Period), 

Henry  of  Lausanus  (frequently  called  Hesiby  of 
Cluony),  founder  of  the  aect  of  Ilenrieiana  in  the  12th 
century.  He  is  represented  by  Papai  writers  as  a  her- 
etic  and  fanatic,  but  the  tmth  seems  to  be  that  he  was 
one  of  the  ^reformtrs  before  the  Reformation."  He  is 
said  to  haye  been  en  Italian  ly  birth,  and  a  monk  of 
Gugny.  Dlfgusted  with  the  corrupticns  of  the  times, 
he  left  his  order,  and  became  "  a  preacher  of  repeiit- 
ance.**  At  first  he  was  held  in  high  honor  eyen  by  the 
clergy.  The  field  of  his  labor  was  the  South  of  France ; 
the  time  between  A.D.  1116  and  1148.  His  first  efibrts 
were  madę  at  Lausanne  and  its  neighborhood  (hence 
his  sumame).  His  piety,  modesty,  and  eloquence  soon 
gained  him  a  wide  reputation.  He  prcached  yigoroualy 
against  that  "sham  Christianity  which  did  not  proye 
its  genuineneas  by  the  fmits  of  good  living,  and  wam- 
ing  against  the  preyalent  yices.  This  led  him  next  to 
wam  men  against  their  false  guides,  the  worthless  cler- 
gy, whose  example  and  teaching  did  morę  to  promoto 
wickedness  than  to  put  a  stop  to  it  He  contrasted  the 
clergy  as  they  actually  were  with  what  they  ought  to 
be ;  he  attacked  their  yices,  particularly  their  unchas- 
tity.  He  was  a  zealot  for  the  obsenrance  of  the  laws  of 
ceUbacy,  and  appeared  in  this  respect,  Uke  other  monks, 
a  promoter  of  the  HikLebrandian  reformation.    It  was 


HENRY 


186 


HENRY 


probably  his  practical,  restleas  activity,  and  the  oppo- 
siŁion  that  he  met  with  on  Łhe  part  of  the  higher  der- 
gy,  which  led  him  to  proceed  further,  and,  as  he  tiaced 
the  cause  of  the  corruption  to  a  deviation  from  the  pńm- 
itive  apostolical  teachlng,  to  attack  enors  in  doctrine. 
He  must  have  poesessed  eKtraordinary  power  as  a 
speaker,  and  this  power  was  enhanced  by  his  strict  modę 
of  ^ying.  Many  men  and  women  were  awakened  by 
him  to  repentance,  brought  to  confess  their  sins,  and 
to  renounce  them.  It  was  said  a  heart  of  stone  most 
have  melted  under  his  preaching.  The  people  were 
Btnick  under  such  conyiction  by  his  seimons,  which 
aeemed  to  lay  open  to  them  their  inmost  hearts,  that 
they  attributed  to  him  a  sort  of  prophetic  gift,  by  vir- 
tue  of  which  he  could  look  into  the  yeiy  bouIs  of  men** 
(Neander,  Church  Historyk  Torrey^s,  iv,  698).  He  was 
inyited  to  Mans,  where  HUdebert,  the  bishop,  fayored 
him  at  first;  but  his  preaching  soon  excited  the  people 
against  the  priests  to  such  a  degree  that  even  the  mon- 
asteries  were  threatened  with  yiolence.  Hilbebert  drove 
him  from  Mans ;  and,  after  yarious  wanderings,  he  join- 
ed  the  disciples  of  Peter  of  Bruys,  in  Proyence.  The 
archbishop  of  Arles  arrested  him,  and  at  the  seoond 
Council  of  Pisa,  1134,  he  was  dedared  a  heretic,  and 
confined  in  a  celL  "-  Subseąuently,  howeyer,  he  was 
set  at  liberty,  when  he  betook  himself  again  to  South 
France,  to  the  districts  of  Toulouse  and  Alby,  a  prind- 
pal  seat  of  anti-churchly  tendencies,  where  also  the  great 
loids,  who  were  striying  to  make  themsdyea  indepen- 
dent, fayored  these  tendencies  from  hatred  to  the  do- 
minion  of  the  clergy.  Among  the  lower  classes  and  the 
nobles  Henry  found  great  acceptance ;  and,  after  he  had 
labored  for  ten  years  in  those  regions.  Bernard  of  Clair- 
yaux,  in  writing  to  a  nobleman  and  inyiting  him  to  put 
down  the  heretics,  coidd  say,  *  The  churches  are  without 
flocks,  the  flocks  without  priests,  the  priests  are  no- 
where  treated  with  due  reyerence,  the  churches  are  ley- 
elled  down  to  synagogues,  the  sacraments  are  not  es- 
teemed  holy,  the  fcstiyals  are  no  longer  cdebrated.* 
When  Bernard  saya,  in  the  words  just  ąuoted,  that  the 
communities  are  without  priests,  he  means  the  priests 
had  gone  oyer  to  the  Henricians,  for  so  he  complains  in 
a  sermon,  in  which  he  speaks  of  the  rapid  spread  of  thb 
sect:  *  Women  forsake  their  husbands,  and  husbands 
their  wiyes,  and  run  oyer  to  this  sect  Clergymen  and 
priests  desert  their  communities  and  churches;  and 
they  luiye  bcen  found  sitting  with  long  beards  (to  mark 
the  kabitus  aposłolicus)  among  weayers'"  (Neander,  /. 
c.)>  Bernard  of  Clairyaux  opposed  him  eamestly.  Pope 
Eugene  III  sent  Bernard,  with  the  cardinal  of  Ostia, 
into  the  infected  district.  Henry  was  arrested,  and  con- 
demned  at  the  Council  of  Rheims,  A.D.  1148,  to  impris- 
onment  for  life.  ^  He  died  in  prison  A.D.  1 149.  See  Bas- 
nage,  Hisf,  des  Eglises  RefomUea,  iv,  eh.  yi,  p.  146;  Ne- 
ander, Ch,  HisL  iv,  601  są. ;  Neander,  HeUige  Bernard, 
p.  294  sq. ;  Hahn,  Gesckichte  der  Kełzer,  cent.  xii ;  Giese- 
ler,  Church  Uistory,  period  iii,  §  84. 

Henry  op  St.  Ignatius,  a  Flemish  theologian,  was 
bom  at  Ath  in  the  17th  century.  He  joined  the  Car- 
melites  of  his  natiye  city,  and  for  many  years  taught 
theology  in  their  schools.  During  a  joumey  he  madę 
to  Korne  in  1701-1709,  he  acąuired  great  influence  with 
pope  element  XI.  On  his  return  he  wrote  a  number  of 
books  of  Jansenist  tendency,  and  in  which  he  showed 
himself  especially  seyere  on  the  Jesuit  casuists.  He 
died  about  1720.  The  most  important  of  his  writings 
are,  Theologia  vetutt/undamerUa2is  (Liege,  1677,  foL)  :— 
MolinisrmuprofligaJtUB  (Liege,  1716, 2  yols.  8yo)  \—A  rtes 
JesuUica  (Strasb.  8d  ed.  1710;  4th  ed.  1717, 12mo):— 
Tuba  maffna  mirum  clangeru  sonuniy  ad  SS.  Z>.  N.papam 
elementem  XI,  etc,  .  .  ,  dc  necessitcUe  reformandi  Soc. 
Jem  (Strasb.  [Utrecht]  1717,  2  yols.  12mo).  See  Du- 
pin, Bibl,  des  Auieura  Eccles,  pt.  i;  Richard  et  Giraud, 
BibL  Sacree;  Hoefer,  Nouv.  Biog,  Generale^  xxiy,  164. 

Henry  of  Zutphen.    See  Moller. 

Hemy  IV,  king  of  Fnmoe  and  Nayazre,  aon  of 


Antoine  de  Bourbon  and  Jeanne  d*Albret,  was  bom  at 
Pau,inBćam,I>ec.l6,1668.  He  was  carefully  educated 
in  Protestant  principles  by  his  excellent  mother,  who 
recalled  him  to  her  home  at  Pan  from  the  French  couit 
in  1666.  In  1669  he  joined  the  Hnguenot  army  at  La 
Rochelle,  and  was  acknowledged  as  their  leader,  tbe 
actnal  command,  ho¥rever,  being  left  with  Coligni  (q. 
y.).  The  peace  of  St  Germain  (1570)  aUowed  him  to 
return  to  oourt,  and  in  1572  he  mairied  Maigaiet,  aister 
of  Charles  IX.  The  massacre  of  St  Barthobmew  Ibl- 
lowed  soon  after,  and  Heniy*s  life  was  only  spared  on 
that  awful  night  on  bis  promise  to  become  a  Roman 
Catholic.  During  the  next  three  years  he  was  watdied 
as  a  prisoner,  though  not  in  oonfinement  In  1576  he 
again  took  the  field  as  the  head  of  the  Huguenots;  and, 
after  years  of  altemate  yictoiy  and  defeat,  he  madę 
peace  with  Hemy  III,  whose  death  in  1589  madę  him, 
in  right  of  the  Salic  law,  king  of  France.  A  laige  part 
of  the  nation,  howeyer,  was  too  strongly  Boman  Catho- 
lic to  allow  his  accession  to  the  throne  in  peaoe.  The 
"  League"  madę  the  duke  of  Maine  lieutenant  generał 
of  the  kingdom ;  but  in  1690  the  battle  of  lyry,  between 
the  duke  and  Henry,  ended  in  a  grand  yictoiy  foor  the 
latter.  In  1698  Henry  agreed  to  become  a  Roman  Cath- 
olic, and  publidy  recanted  at  St  Denis.  By  the  year 
1598  all  France  was  peaoeably  subject  to  him.  **  Hemy 
was  censured  for  his  change  of  rdigion,  and  by  ncme 
morę  eamestly  than  by  his  faithful  friend  and  coimsei- 
lor,  Duplessis  Momay.  On  the  other  hand,  many  of 
the  Roinan  Catholics  neyer  bdieyed  his  conyersion  to 
be  sincere.  But  the  truth  piobably  was,  that  Hemy, 
accustomed  from  his  infancy  to  the  life  of  campa  aml 
the  hurry  of  disaipation,  was  not  capable  of  seriona  le- 
ligious  meditation,  and  that  he  knew  as  little  of  the  le- 
ligion  which  he  forsook  as  of  that  which  he  embnced. 
In  his  long  conferenoe  at  Chartres  in  September,  1598, 
with  Duplessis  Momay,  which  took  place  after  hia  abju- 
ration,  he  told  his  friend  that  the  atcp  he  had  taken  was 
one  not  only  of  pradence,  but  of  absolute  neceasity; 
that  hu  affections  remained  the  same  towards  his  friends 
and  subjects  of  the  Refomied  communion;  and  he  ex- 
preaaed  a  hope  that  he  should  one  day  be  able  to  bring 
about  a  union  between  the  two  religions,  which,  he  ob- 
seryed,  differed  less  in  essentials  than  was  suppoaed. 
To  this  Duplessis  repUed  that  no  such  union  oould  ever 
be  effected  in  France  unless  the  pope^s  power  was  fint 
entirdy  abolished  {Mhn^  et  Corre^Mmdance  de  DupUstU 
Morwy  d^puU  tan  lb7ijusqu'en  ie28,Pari8, 1824-M)" 
{Englith  C^dopadia,  s.  v.). 

His  rdgn  was  a  yeiy  successful  one,  but  we  are  oon- 
cemed  here  only  with  its  relations  to  the  Church.  On 
the  16th  of  April,  1598,  Henry  signed  the  Edict  of 
Nantes  (q.  y.)  to  secuie  justice  to  his  Protestant  aab- 
jects,  and  liberty  of  consdence.  During  Henxy*s  life 
no  public  persecution  of  Protestants  was  posdbie,  but 
the  ignorant  intolerance  of  the  mral  functionaries  and 
priests  often  frustrated  his  good  wishes  and  commandsL 
On  the  14th  of  May,  1610,  he  was  assassinated  in  his 
carriage  by  one  Rayaillac,  suppoeed  to  have  been  a  tool 
of  the  Jesuita. 

Hemy  VIII,  king  of  Kngland,  was  bom  in  Green- 
wich  June  28, 1491.  He  was  second  son  of  Henry  VII 
and  ąueen  Elizabeth  (of  York).  His  dder  brother  Ar- 
thur, prince  of  Wales,  dying  in  1502,  Henry  became  heir- 
apparent  In  1508  a  dispensation  was  obtained  fiom 
Julius  II  (pope)  to  allow  Henry  to  mazry  his  broth- 
er Arthur's  widów  (Catharine  of  Aragon)  —  a  raalch 
which  turaed  out  sadly  enough.  Henry  came  to  the 
throne  April  22,  1609.  The  early  years  of  hia  rdgn 
were  oomparativdy  uneyentfuL  Wolaey  became  prime 
minister  about  1518,  and  goyemed,  for  about  fifteen  yean, 
with  a  yiew  to  his  own  ambition  as  well  as  to  the  pa»- 
dons  of  his  master;  bat,  on  the  whole,  England  proe- 
pered  under  his  administradon.  See  Wolsby.  Henzy 
was  at  this  time  an  ardent  advocate  of  Roman  viewB; 
in  1521  he  published  his  A  dsertio  aeptem  SacramaUorwm 
adoenut  MarUnum  Luthentm  (4fco),  for  which  aerviM 


HENRY 


187 


HENRY 


the  pope  confeired  oa  him  the  title  of  Drfenaor  Fideij 
which  the  soYereigns  of  England  still  retain.  (See,  for 
detailfl  of  the  couttoreny  between  Henry  and  Luther, 
WaddingtoD,  History  ofihe  HrfartncUion,  eh.  xxL)  In 
•  few  yean  Henry  began  to  grow  weary  of  hia  ąuecn. 
His  małe  childnńi  died,  and  he  fanded  that  Pn>vi- 
dcDce  poniahed  him  in  thta  way  for  haTing  contracted 
an  imlawful  maniage  with  his  brother'8  widów.  The 
qiiestion  of  the  łegitimacy  of  this  marriage  had  never 
been  fuliy  aettled,  eren  by  the  pope'8  aathorization. 
At  all  eyents,  it  was  easy  for  a  prince  of  Henry'8  tem- 
perament to  belieye  that  the  marriage  was  unlawful, 
when  soch  a  belief  was  neoessary  to  the  gratification 
of  his  paasionsL.  Moreorer,  the  Spanish  queen  was  un- 
popular  in  England.  Henry  had  reconrse  to  an  expe- 
dient  snggeated  by  Cranmer,  **  namdy,  to  consult  all 
the  miiTerńties  of  Europę  on  the  que8tion  *  whether 
the  papai  dispenaadon  for  such  a  marriage  was  valid,' 
and  to  act  on  their  deciaion  without  further  appeal  to 
the  pope.  The  ąuestion  was  accordingly  put,  and  de- 
cided  in  the  negative  by  the  wilyersities  of  Oxford, 
Cambridge,  Paris,  Bologna,  Padua,  Orleans,  Angiers, 
fioaigea,  Toulonse,  etc,  and  by  a  moltitude  of  theologi- 
ans  and  canonists"  (Palmer,  Ch.  Hittory,  p.  159).  Hen- 
ry had  deariy  mada  up  his  mind  to  marry  Annę  Boleyn 
aa  soon  aa  the  divoroe  from  Catharine  oould  be  acoom- 
plishcd.  **  Annę  was  undcrstood  to  be  farorably  dis- 
poeed  towards  those  new  views  on  the  subject  of  religi 
ion  and  eodesiastical  affairs  which  had  been  agitating 
all  Europę  erer  sińce  Lnther  had  begun  his  intrepid  ca- 
reer  by  publicly  opposing  indulgences  at  Wittenberg  ten 
ycan  before.  Queen  Catharine,  on  the  other  hand,  was 
a  good  Catholic ;  and,  besides,  the  circumstances  in  which 
she  was  plaoed  madę  it  her  interest  to  take  her  stand  by 
the  Church,  aa,  on  the  other  hand,  her  adyeraaries  were 
driyen  in  like  manner  by  their  interests  and  the  course 
of  eyenta  into  dissent  and  opposttion.  Thin  one  oon- 
sideradoo  auiBciently  explains  all  that  foIloY.-rd.  The 
Menda  of  the  old  rdigion  genendly  considered  Catha- 
rine*9  caoae  as  their  own ;  the  Refonners  aB  naturally  ar- 
rayed  themaelyes  on  the  aide  of  her  riyaL  Henry  him- 
lelf  again,  though  he  had  been  till  dow  resolutdy  op- 
posed  to  the  new  opinions,  was  carried  oycr  by  his  pas- 
■on  toward  the  same  side;  the  coiisequence  of  which 
was  the  loas  of  the  royal  fayor  by  those  who  had  hith- 
erto  monopollzed  it,  and  its  transference  in  great  part  to 
other  men,  to  be  employed  by  them  in  the  promotion  of 
entirely  oppoaite  purposes  and  politics.  The  proceed- 
ings  for  the  diyorce  were  commenced  by  an  application 
to  the  oourt  of  Romę  in  August,  1527.  For  two  years 
the  affair  lingered  on  thiough  a  succession  of  legał  pro- 
eeedingK,  but  without  any  decisiye  result.  From  the 
automn  of  1529  are  to  be  dated  both  the  fali  of  Wolsey 
andtheriseofCranmer.  See  Cranmer,  Thomas.  The 
death  of  the  great  cardinal  took  place  on  the  29th  of 
Koyember,  1580.  In  January  foUowing  the  first  blow 
was  strock  at  the  Church  by  an  indictment  being 
brought  into  the  King*s  Bench  against  all  the  dergy  of 
the  kingdom  for  supporting  Wolsey  in  the  exercise  of 
his  legatine  powers  without  the  royal  Ucense,  as  reqnired 
by  the  ołd  statutes  o(pron3or$  and  premunire ;  and  it 
was  in  aa  act  paased  immediately  after  by  the  Conyoca- 
tkn  of  tbe  proyince  of  Canterbniy,  for  granting  to  the 
king  a  sum  of  money  to  exempt  them  from  the  penal- 
tiea  of  their  conyiction  on  this  indictment,  that  the  first 
morement  waa  madę  toward  a  revolt  against  the  see  of 
Komę,  by  the  titles  giyen  to  Henry  of  *  the  one  protect- 
or  of  the  English  Church,  its  only  and  supremę  lord,  and, 
as  fiff  aa  might  be  by  the  law  of  Christ,  its  supremę 
head.*  Shortly  after,  the  conrocation  declared  the  king*s 
marriage  with  Catharine  to  be  oontrary  to  the  law  of 
God.  The  same  yeu  Henry  went  the  length  of  openly 
eoontenandng  Protestantism  abroad  by  remitting  a  sub- 
iUy  to  the  confederacy  of  the  dector  of  Brandenburg 
and  ocher  German  princes,  called  the  League  of  Smd- 
cakŁ  In  Aognat,  1682,Cranmer  was  appointed  to  the 
aidibiafaopric  of  Canterbnry.    In  the  beginning  of  the 


year  1588  Henry  was  priyatdy  married  to  Annę  Bokyn ; 
and  on  the  28d  of  May  following  archbishop  Cranmer 
pronounced  the  former  marriage  with  Catharine  yoid. 
In  the  mean  time  the  Parliament  had  passed  an  act  for- 
bidding  all  appeals  to  the  See  of  Romę.  Pope  Clement 
y  II  met  this  by  annulling  the  sentence  of  Cranmer  in 
the  matter  of  the  marriage,  on  which  the  separation 
ftom  Bome  became  complete.  Acts  were  passed  by  the 
Parliament  the  next  year  declaring  that  the  dergy 
should  in  ftiŁure  be  assembled  in  oonyocation  only  by 
the  king'8  writ,  that  no  constitutions  enacted  by  them 
should  be  of  force  without  the  kiog^s  assent,  and  that  no 
first-fruits,  or  Peter^s  pence,  or  money  for  diepensations, 
should  be  any  longer  paid  to  the  pope.  The  dergy  of 
the  proyince  of  York  themsdyes  in  conyocation  dedared 
that  the  pope  had  no  morę  power  in  England  than  any 
other  bishop.  A  new  and  most  efficient  supporter  of  the 
Reformation  now  also  becomes  conspicuous  on  the  ecene, 
Thomas  Cromwell  (afterwards  lord  Cromwell  and  earl 
of  £s8ex),  who  was  this  year  madę  first  secretary  of 
State,  and  then  master  of  the  rolls.  See  Cromwell, 
Thomas.  In  the  next  session,  the  Parliament,  which 
reassembled  in  the  end  of  this  same  year,  passed  acts 
dedaring  the  king'8  highness  to  be  supremę  head  of  the 
Church  of  England,  and  to  haye  authority  to  redress  all 
enors,  heresies,  and  abuses  in  the  Church ;  and  order- 
ing  first-fruits  and  tenths  of  all  spiritual  benefices  to  be 
paid  to  the  king.  After  this,  yarious  persons  were  exe- 
cuted  for  refusing  to  acknowledge  the  king's  sopremacy ; 
among  others,  two  illustrious  yictims,  the  learned  Fish- 
er,  bishop  of  Rochester,  and  the  admirable  Sir  Thomas 
Morę.  See  Fisrer,  Johv  ;  Morę,  Thomas.  In  1585 
began  the  dissolution  of  the  monasteries,  under  the  zeal- 
ous  superintendence  of  Cromwell,  constituted  for  that 
purpose  yisitor  generał  of  these  establishments.  Lati- 
mer  and  other  friends  of  Cranmer  and  the  Reformation 
were  now  also  promoted  to  bishoprics ;  so  that  not  only 
in  matters  of  disdpline  and  polity,  but  eyen  of  doctrine, 
the  Church  might  be  said  to  haye  separated  itsdf  from 
Romę.  One  of  the  last  acts  of  the  Parliament  under 
which  all  these  great  innoyations  had  been  madę  was  to 
petition  the  king  that  a  new  translation  of  the  Scrip- 
tures  might  be  madę  by  authority  and  set  up  in  church- 
es.  It  was  dissolyed  on  the  18th  of  July,  1536,  after 
haying  sat  for  the  then  unprecedented  period  of  8ix 
years.  The  month  of  May  of  this  year  witnessed  the 
trial  and  execution  of  ąueen  Annę — in  less  than  8ix 
months  after  the  death  ćfha  predecessor,  Catharine  of 
Aragon^and  the  marriage  of  the  brutal  king,  the  yeiy 
next  moming,  to  Jane  Seymour,  the  new  beauty,  his 
pasńon  for  whom  must  be  regarded  as  the  true  motiye 
that  had  impelled  him  to  the  deed  of  blood.  Queen 
Jane  dying  on  the  14th  of  October,  1587,  a  few  days  af- 
ter giying  birth  to  a  son,  was  succeeded  by  Annę,  sister 
of  the  duke  of  Cleyes,  whom  Henry  married  in  January, 
1540,  and  put  away  in  Bix  months  after — ^the  subseryient 
Parliament.,  and  tbe  not  less  8ubser\'ient  conyocation  of 
tbe  dergy,  on  his  merę  reąuest,  pronoundng  the  mar- 
riage to  be  nuli,  and  the  former  body  making  it  high 
treason  '  by  word  or  deed  to  accept,  take,  judge,  or  be- 
lieye the  said  marriage  to  be  good.*  MeanwhUe  the  ec- 
cledastical  changes  continued  to  proceed  at  as  rapid  a 
ratę  as  eyer.  In  1586  Cromwell  was  constituted  a  sort 
of  lord  lieutenant  oyer  the  Church,  by  the  title  of  yicar 
generał,  which  was  held  to  inyest  him  with  all  the  king'8 
authority  oyer  the  spirituality.  The  dissolution  of  t^e 
monasteries  in  this  and  the  following  year,  as  carried 
forward  under  the  direction  of  this  energetic  minister, 
produced  a  sucoession  of  popular  insurrections  in  difier- 
ent  parts  of  the  kingdom,  which  were  not  put  down 
without  great  destruction  of  life,  both  in  the  fidd  and 
afterwards  by  the  executioner.  In  1588  all  incumbenta 
were  ordered  to  set  up  in  their  churches  copies  of  tbe 
newly-published  English  translation  of  the  Bibie,  and 
to  teach  the  people  the  Creed,  the  Lord's  Prayer,  and 
the  Ten  Commandments,  in  English ;  the  famous  image 
of  oor  Lady  at  Walaingham,  and  other  similar  objecta 


HENRY 


188 


HENRY 


of  the  popular  veneration,  were  ako.  onder  CromweU'8 
order,  remoyed  from  their  shrines  and  bumt**  {Englisk 
Cydopcedia,  a.  v.)> 

But  Henry  never  abandoned  the  apedal  Bomaniat 
opinions  to  which  he  had  committed  himself  perspnally 
by  contro^ersy.  "  When,  in  1588,  tbe  princes  of  the 
League  of  Smalcald  offered  to  place  him  at  ita  head, 
and  even  to  alter,  if  possible,  the  Augsburg  Cktnfesaion 
80  as  to  make  it  a  common  basis  of  union  for  all  the 
elements  of  opposition  to  Romę,  Heniy  was  well  incUned 
to  obtain  the  political  adyantagea  of  the  poaition  tender- 
ed  him,  but  hositated  to  accept  it  until  aU  doctrinal 
ąuestions  should  be  settled.  The  three  points  on  which 
the  Germans  insisted  were  the  communiou  in  both  ele- 
meuts,  the  worship  in  the  vulgar  tongue,  and  the  mar- 
rlage  of  the  clcrgy.  Henry  was  finn,  and  the  ambassa- 
dors  of  the  League  spent  two  months  in  conferenoea 
with  the  EngUsh  bishops  and  doctors  without  result. 
On  their  departure  (Aug.  5, 1538)  they  addreased  him 
a  letter  arguing  the  subjects  in  debatę— the  refuaal  of 
the  cup,  private  masses,  and  sacerdotal  celibaoy — to 
which  Henry  replied  at  some  length,  defending  his  po- 
aition on  these  topics  with  no  litde  skill  and  dexterity, 
and  refuaing  his  assent  finally.  The  Reformers,  how- 
ever,  did  not  yet  despair,  and  the  royal  preachers  even 
yenturcd  occasionally  to  debatę  the  propriety  of  clerical 
marriage  frecly  before  him  in  their  sermons,  but  in  vain. 
An  epistle  which  Melancthon  addressed  him  in  April, 

1539,  arguing  the  same  questions  again,  had  no  better 
e£fect.  Notwithstanding  any  seeming  hesitation,  Hen- 
ryka mind  was  fuUy  madę  up,  and  the  conseąuences  of 
endeavoring  to  peisuade  him  against  his  prcjudices  soon 
became  appareuL  Confirmed  in  his  opinions,  he  pro- 
oeeded  to  enforce  them  upon  his  subjects  in  the  most 
arbitrary  manner;  <for,  though  on  aJl  other  pointa  he 
had  set  up  the  doctrines  of  the  Augsburg  Confeasion,' 
yet  on  these  he  bad  committed  himself  as  a  controyer- 
sialist,  and  the  worst  passions  of  polemical  authorship — 
the  true  *  odium  theologicum* — acting  through  his  irr&> 
q[M>nsibIe  disposition,  rendered  him  the  cruellest  of  per- 
aecntors.  But  a  few  weeks  after  receiving  the  letter  of 
Melancthon,  he  anawered  it  in  his  own  savage  fashion" 
(Lea,  Sacerdotal  Cdibacy,  p.  481).  In  1589,  under  the 
ascendency  of  bishop  Gardner  (q.  v.),  the  ^  Six  Articles" 
were  eiuicted,  in  faror  of  transnbstantiation,  communiou 
in  one  kind,  celibacy,  priyate  masses,  and  auricular  oon- 
fession.  See  Articles,  Six,  vo1.  i,  p.  442.  Cromwell 
endeayored  to  mitigate  the  seyerifcy  of  the  govemment 
in  its  cruel  persecutions  of  all  who  wonld  not  aooept 
these  articles,  and  lost  his  own  head  for  his  temerity  in 

1540,  In  the  same  year  Henry  was  divorced  from  Annę 
of  Cleres  and  married  to  Catharine  Howard,  who,  in 

1541,  was  hcrsclf  repudiated  and  executed  for  adultery. 
He  then  mairied  his  sixth  wife,  Catharine  Parr,  who 
suryiyed  him.  The  licentious  monarch  died  Jan.  28, 
1647, 

Much  has  been  madę  by  Roman  Catholic  controyert- 
bta  of  the  bad  life  of  Henry  YIII  as  an  argument 
against  tbe  Reformation.  On  thu  point  we  cite  Pal- 
mer,  as  follows:  ^*The  character  of  Henry  YHI,  or  of 
any  other  temporal  or  spiritual  promoters  of  reforma- 
tion in  the  Church,  affords  (eyen  if  it  were  not  exag- 
gerated)  no  proof  that  the  Reformation  was  in  itsdf 
wrong.  Admitting,  then,  that  Henry  and  others  were 
justly  accused  of  crimes,  the  Reformation  which  they 
promoted  may  in  itself  haye  been  a  just  and  necessary 
work ;  and  it  would  have  been  irrational  and  wrong  in 
the  Church  of  England  to  haye  refuscd  all  considera- 
tion  of  subjects  proposed  to  her  examination  or  appro- 
bation  by  the  royal  authority,  and  to  refuse  her  sanction 
to  refoims  in  themselyes  laudable,  merely  because  the 
character  of  the  king  or  his  ministers  were  unsaintly, 
and  his  or  their  priyate  motiyes  suspected  to  be  wrong. 
Such  conduct  on  the  part  of  the  Church  would  haye 
been  needleasly  offensiye  to  temporal  nilers,  while  it 
would  (in  the  supposed  case)  haye  been  actually  injuri- 
oufl  to  the  canse  of  religion,  and  an  uncharitable  jiidg- 


ment  of  priyate  motiyes.  It  most  be  remembered  tłwt 
although  Henry  and  the  protector  Somenet  may  łuiye 
been  secretly  influenoed  by  ayarice,  reyenge,  or  other 
cyil  passions,  they  haye  neyer  madę  them  pubtic  They 
ayowed  as  their  reasons  for  supporting  refonnation  the 
deaire  of  remoying  usurpationa,  establiahing  the  oncient 
rights  of  the  Church  and  the  crown,  conecting  yarioua 
aboses  prejudicial  to  true  religion,  and  therefore  the 
Church  could  not  refuse  to  take  into  oonsideration  the 
spediic  object  of  reformation  proposed  by  them  to  her 
eicamination  or  sanction.  Nor  doea  the  juatification  of 
the  Church  <i€  England  in  any  degree  depend  on  the 
ąuestion  of  the  lawfulnesa  of  Heniy'8  marriage  urith 
Catharine  of  Aragon  or  with  Annę  Boleyn;  such  mat- 
ters,  as  Boesuet  obsenres,  "are  often  regulated  by  merę 
probabilities,"  and  there  were  at  leaat  abundant  proba- 
bilities  that  the  marriage  with  Catharine  was  nuli  ab 
initio;  but  this  whoie  ąuestion  only  affects  the  dmrac- 
ter  of  Henry  YIII  and  of  those  immediately  engaged  ia 
it;  it  doea  not  affect  the  refonnati<m  of  the  Oiurch  of 
England**  (Palmer,  On  the  Church,  part  ii,  chap.  i).  See 
Enolaud,  Church  op. 

Henry,  Matthew,  a  celebrated  English  npncon- 
fonmist  divine  and  commentator,  was  bom  at  the  farm- 
house  of  Broad  Oak,  Flintshire,  the  dwelling  of  his  mater- 
nal  grandfather,  OcL  18, 1662.  His  parenta  had  retired 
to  that  place  because  his  father,  Rey.  Philip  Henry  (q.y.)* 
had  heea  ejected  from  his  parish  by  the  Act  of  Unifoim- 
ity  in  1662.  His  early  education  waa  obtained  in  the 
school  of  "Mr,  Doolittle  at  lelington.  In  1685  he  entered 
Gray*8  Inn  as  a  student  of  law ;  but  his  religious  life  had 
been  settled  at  an  early  age,  and  his  bent  of  mind  was 
towards  the  ministry.  While  at  Gray*s  Inn  be  devoted 
much  of  his  time  to  theological  studies.  In  1686  he  re- 
tumed  to  Broad  Oak,  and  soon  began  to  preach,  by  the 
inyitation  of  his  friend,  ^Ir.  Blidge,  at  Kantwich.  The 
famę  of  his  discourses  having  spread,  he  was  inyited  to 
Chester,  where  he  preached  in  the  house  of  a  Mr.  Hen- 
thome,  a  sugar-baker,  to  a  smali  audience  which  formed 
the  nudeus  of  his  futurę  congregation.  But  in  1687 
king  James  granted  license  to  dissenters  to  preach.  Mr. 
Henry  aocepted  a  cali  to  a  dissenting  congregation  in 
Chester,  where  he  remained  twenty-fiye  yearsi  During 
tłus  peńod  he  went  through  the  Bibie  morę  than  once 
in  expoBitoTy  lectures.  In  1712  he  accepted  the  charge 
of  a  chapel  in  Hackne}*,  London.  "At  the  commence- 
ment  of  his  ministry,  tiicrefore,  he  began  with  the  fint 
chapter  of  Genesis  in  the  forenoon,  and  the  first  chapter 
of  Matthew  in  the  aftemoon.  Thus  gradually  and 
ateadily  grew  his  <  Esposition'  of  the  BiUe.  A  large 
portion  of  it  oonsiats  of  his  public  lectures,  while  many 
of  the  quaint  sayings  and  pithy  remarks  with  which  it 
abounds,  and  which  give  so  great  a  charm  of  raciness 
to  its  pages,  were  the  familiar  extempore  ob8cn''ations 
of  his  father  at  family  worship,  and  noted  down  by 
Matthew  in  his  boyhood."  He  suflered  much  from  the 
stone  in  his  later  years,  but  his  labors  oontinued  una- 
bated.  It  was  hu  habit  to  make  a  yisit  to  Chester  onoe 
a  year.  In  1714  he  aet  out  on  this  joumey,  May  31. 
On  his  return  he  was  taken  iU  vrith  paralysis  at  Nant- 
wich,  where  he  sald  to  his  friend,  Mr.  Illidge,  **You  hatm 
been  used  to  take  notioe  ofthe  eayiugt  i^fdjfwg  men  ;  thia 
ismine:  that  a  life  epeni  m  the  sertioe  of  God,  and coot- 
munion  with  him,  it  the  moet  pleasa$U  l{fe  that  any  one 
can  Iwe  in  thia  workW*  He  died  June  22, 1714.  Mr. 
Henry  was  a  faithful  pastor,  a  discriminating  preacher, 
and  a  laborious,  yersatiic,  and  original  author.  **  Al- 
though his  publications  fumish  much  less  to  afford  grat^ 
ification,  in  a  literary  point  of  yiew,  than  do  the  worka 
of  many  who  aro  justly  designated  *fine  writen,"  they 
posaeas  a  vigor  which,  without  the  least  endeayor  to  at- 
tract,  awakena  and  sustains  the  attention  in  an  uncom- 
mon  degree.  In  a  single  sentence  he  often  ponia  npoa 
Scripture  a  flood  of  light ;  and  the  palpableness  he  giyes 
to  the  wonders  oontained  in  God^s  law  oocaaiona  excite- 
ment  not  unlike  that  which  is  produced  by  looUng 
throogh  a  microscope.    The  fedinga^  too^  which  h^ 


HENRY 


189 


HENSHAW 


nbject  had  ciDed  forth  in  himBelf  he  oonnminicates  ad- 

ininblj  to  otben    In  his  whole  manner— the  Bame  at 

nine  yem  oU  is  at  fifty — there  is  a  freshneflB  and  vi- 

radtf  whjdi  iastintiy  pat  tbe  spirits  into  free  and  agile 

modoB-^in  eflect  somewhat  atmilai  to  that  play  of  in- 

teUectuIsprightlineflB  which  »ome  minda  (ob\rioaflly  the 

gmtast  oity)  hare  the  indeacribable  faculty  of  creating. 

Bot  tbe  doiroiiig  ezoeUency  remaina;  nothing  ia  intio- 

dnced  in  the  ahape  of  oounteraction.     There  aie  no 

ipeeches  wbieh  make  hia  amcerity  qiieationable;  no  ab- 

aurdłiks  to  foice  enapidon  aa  to  aocoiacy  in  theological 

knowledge,  or  inattention  to  the  analogy  of  faith;  no 

stMggcńagf  and  nntoward,  and  nnmanageaMe  inconsiat- 

encics;  nothing  by  which  '  the  moet  lacred  cause  can 

be  injmed;'  or  the  highest  intereeta  of  men  placed  in 

jeopudy;  or  which  can  lender  it  imperative,  exact]y  in 

proportiflo  as  the  nnderatanding  ia  infloenced,  to  repreas 

or  estingnish  the  sentiments,  *  in  order  to  liaten  with 

coapbemoy  to  the  Lord  Jeaua  and  hia  apoetles' "  (Fos- 

ter.  ł^ifojfi,  p.  440).     Hia  moet  important  woric  ia  i4n 

ErpomtiM  o/ the  Old  and  New  Testament  (many  edi* 

tioas;  bot,  London,  1849, 6  yoIs.  4to ;  New  York,  6  yol& 

impi  8vt>).   It  waa  oompleted  by  Henry  up  to  Acta ;  the 

lest  vis  fruned  on  hia  MS&  by  a  number  of  ministera. 

U  is  M  pofmlar  isther  than  a  adentiiic  commentary, 

aboanding  in  practical  wiadom;  and  it  haa  been  moie 

videly  ciicnhited  than  any  work  of  the  kind,  except, 

perbap^  darke^s  Commentary.     He  alao  published  a 

Ufi  of  PkiUp  Henry,  and  a  number  of  aermona  and 

pnctical  writings,  which  may  be  found  in  hia  MitceUa- 

mm  Workt,  edited  bv  J.  &  Williams  (Lond.  1830,  imp. 

8to:  N.Y.  1850,  2  YÓla.  8vo).     See  WiUiams,  Life  and 

Wriw^  ofM, Hmry  (prelixed  to  his  MieeeL  Worke)-, 

Taog,  U/eo/M,  Henry  (1716,  8vo;  alao  reprinted  with 

the  Explmiion) ;  Allibone,  Dietionary  of  A  uthort,  i,  824; 

liternry  and  Theological  Retnew,  i,  281 ;  Kitto^s  Journal 

o/Sarnd  LU.  ii,  222;  Bogae  and  Bennett,  Bisiory  of 

tA«Z;u«eflfov,i,493. 

Hemy,  Paul  Emile,  a  Protestant  writer,  was  bom 

al  Put&lam  March  22,  1792.     He  was  of  French  ex- 

traction,  and  studied  at  the  French  College  in  Berlin. 

Hf  aftawards  deroted  himaclf  to  the  study  of  Hebrew. 

He  va»  consecrated  mimster  at  Neufchatel  in  1813,  via- 

iłćti  Paris  in  1814,  duiing  the  oocupation  of  the  dty  by 

thf.Ulies.    Ha ving  retumed  to  Berlin,  he  waa  appoint- 

ol  catechist  of  tbe  Orphan  Asylum,  pastor  of  the  church 

of  Fr^ierickstadt  in  1826,  and  director  of  the  French 

SfBujmr.    He  died  at  Berlin  Nov.  24, 1853.    He  wrote 

Iku  Lfhen  Johann  Cairin'8  (Berlin,  1844;  Hamb.  183^ 

«.  3  rola.  8to  ;  1S46, 8vo ;  transL  by  Stebbing,  Life  and 

Tines  ofCalrhi,  Lond.  1849,  2  vola.  8vo).     He  publish- 

«-l  aisu  a  German  tranalation  of  the  Confesaion  of  Faith 

of  rhe  French  Reformed  Church  (Berlin,  1845).    He  in- 

imled  poblishżnic  a  collection  of  Calvin*s  letters  aa  a 

ft^tinoation  of  the  Life  of  that  reformer,  but  died  be- 

f'7e  it  was  oompleted.     See  Haag,  La  France  Protes- 

'«'>';  Hoefer,  JVb«r.  Bioy,  GhŁerale,  xxłv,  225. 

Henry,  Pfallip,  an  English  diasenting  dirine,  waa 
ttm  .Ang;  24, 1631,  at  the  pałace  of  Whitehall,  where 
iu»  Cuher  waa  pa^  to  Jamea,  doke  of  York.  He  waa 
eddcated  at  Weatminster  School,  and  at  Christ  Church, 
OsfjTd,  wbere  he  obtained  a  studentahip  in  1648.  He 
9x*  ordained  an  a  Presbyterian  miniater  in  1657,  and 
•ćitled  at  Worth€nbaiy,  Flintahire.  He  married  Miaa 
yUtbewa,  a  Jady  of  fortunę,  and  became  poaseased  of 
'Jkt  cstaie  of  Brottd  Oak,  Shropahire.  He  was  driven 
■Mt  i4  hia  chtncb  by  the  Act  of  Uniformity  in  1662. 
''Jar  aita,^  he  aaid,  ''have  madę  Barthokmiew-day,  in 
i^:  jear  1662,  tlie  saddeat  day  for  England  aince  the 
'^h  of  Edwaard  the  Sixth,  but  eren  thia  for  good." 
^  tbe  CSooFentide  and  Fire-mile  acta  he  waa  driven 
fr«a  hia  hoaae,  auid  oompelled  to  seek  safety  in  oonceal- 
e*JiK.  In  1687,  when  king  Jamea  prodaimed  Uberty 
(/coaaaencet  Mr.  Henry  immediatdy  fitted  up  part  of 
^  ovn  boose  for  worship.  Hia  labors  were  not  oon- 
śaed  to  Broad  Oak,  but  it  waa  his  habit  to  preach  daily 


at  diiferent  placea  in  the  neighborhood.  But  hia  laboiB 
hastened  hia  rest ;  for,  when  writing  to  a  friend  who 
anxiously  inquired  after  his  health,  he  says,  ^  I  am  al- 
waya  habitually  weary,  and  expect  no  other  till  I  lie 
down  in  the  bed  of  spioes."  He  died  June  24, 1696,  ex- 
daiming,  "O  death,  where  is  thy  sting?"  An  aocount 
of  hia  Life  and  Death  was  wrltten  by  his  son  Matthew, 
and  has  often  been  reprinted  (see  Henry,  Miscelkmeous 
Works,  vol.  i ;  N.  York,  Cartera,  1855,  2  rols.  8vo).  A 
Yolume  of  his  SermonSf  with  notes  by  Williams,  was 
first  published  in  1816  (London,  8vo),  and  has  sińce  been 
reprinted  in  the  Miscellaneous  Works  of  Mr.  Heni^', 
aboYC  cited.  See Lffe byMatt. Henry :  Jones, Christian 
Bioyraphy;  Bogue  and  Bennett,  Uistory  ofthe  Dissent" 
ers,  i,  433. 

Henry,  Thomas  Charlton,  a  Presbyterian  min- 
ister, was  bom  in  Philadelphia  Sept.  22, 1790,  and  waa 
educated  at  Middlebuiy  College,  Yt,  where  he  gradua- 
ted  in  1814.  Afler  studying  thcology  at  Princeton,  he 
was  ordained  in  1816;  became  pastor  of  a  Presbyterian 
church  in  Columbia,  S.  C,  1818 ;  and  removed  to  the 
Second  Church,  Charleston,  in  1824.  In  1826  his  health 
failed,  and  he  spent  sereral  months  trarclling  in  Eu- 
ropę. He  died  in  Charleston  of  yellow  fever,  Oct.  5, 
1827.  He  published  A  Pleafor  the  West  (1824)  :^An 
Inguiry  into  the  Consistency  of  Popular  Amusements  with 
Christianity  (Charleston,  1825,  12roo)  : — Etchings  from 
the  Reliffious  World  (Charleston,  1828, 8vo)  .—Letters  to 
cm  Awcious  Inquirer  (1828,  12mo;  also  London,  1829, 
with  a  memoir  ofthe  author). — Allibone, /Kcftbnary  of 
AuthorSf  i,  826 ;  Sprague,  A  nnals,  iv,  538. 

HenacheniuB,  Godfrey,  a  Dutch  Jesuit  and  eo- 
deałastical  hiatorian,  waa  bom  at  Yeniai,  Flanders,  Jan. 
21, 1601.  In  1635  he  was  appointed  aasistaut  to  Boi- 
landus  in  oompiling  the  ilc^a  JSaiu:torum  (q.  v.).  Aiter 
the  death  of  Bollandus  in  1665)  when  only  iiye  volumea 
of  that  work  had  madę  their  iq>pearance,  father  Daniel 
Papebroch  was  associated  with  Henschenius  in  the  task 
of  completiug  it.  Henschenius  oontinued  the  work  un- 
til  hia  death  in  1681.— Alegambe,  iScript,  Soc  Jesu,  s.  v. ; 
Hoefer,  Nouv.  Bioy,  Geniralt,  xxiv,  231. 

Heiudia'vr,  John  K.,  D.D,  a  bishop  of  the  Protes- 
tant Episoopal  Church,  waa  born  in  Middletown,  Conn., 
Jnne  18, 1792,  and  paased  A.&  in  Middlebory  College 
in  1808.  He  waa  bred  a  Congregationalist,  but,  under 
the  influence  of  Kev.  Dr.  Kewley,  then  of  Middletown, 
he  became  religioua,  and  entered  the  Proteatant  Epia- 
copal  Church.  Biahop  Griswold  appointed  him  a  lay 
reader,  and  by  his  zealoua  labors  seyeral  congregations 
were  eatabliahed  in  diflerent  parta  of  Yermont  On  hia 
twenty-flrst  birthday  he  waa  ordained  deaoon,  and  soon 
aiter  he  waa  called  to  SL  Ann'8  Church,  Brooklyn,  N« 
Y.,  where,  on  his  twenty-fourth  birth-day  (June  13, 
1816),  he  waa  ordained  priest.  In  1817  he  waa  called  to 
St.  Peter'8,  Baltimore,  where  he  senred  aa  pastor  with 
uninterrapted  suoceas  for  twenty-six  years.  In  1830 
the  degree  of  D.D.  waa  conferred  upon  him  by  Middle- 
bury  (^llege.  In  1848  he  waa  ele<^  bishop  of  Rhode 
Ishind,  and  madę  rector  of  Grace  Church,  Proyidence. 
He  waa  alike  energetic  and  successful  in  his  parish  and 
in  hia  diocese,  and  during  his  admini£tration  the  Church 
grew  not  only  in  numbers,  but  in  power.  lu  1852  he 
waa  called  to  perform  episoopal  functions  in  the  diocese 
of  Maiyhuid  during  bishop  Whittingham's  absence ;  and 
on  the  19th  of  July,  1852,  he  died  of  apoplexy,  near 
Fredeńck,  Maryland.  Bishop  Henshaw  was  a  man  of 
elear,  sound,  and  yigoroua  inteUect:  he  was  trained  to 
patient  labor,  and  his  morał  power  waa  very  great  in- 
deed.  Theae  qnalitie8  fitted  him  eminently  for  hia 
work,  and  both  within  and  without  the  Church  he  waa 
reoo^^iised  as  in  every  way  worthy  to  exerci8e  the  high 
functions  of  a  Christian  bishop.  He  published  seyeral 
8ermonSj  Charyes,  and  JDiscourses :—An  Oration  delioet' 
ed  hefore  the  Assodaied  Alumni  of  Middlebury  College 
(1827) :— A  volurae  of  Hymns  (1832)  :—The  Usefulness 
ofSunday  Sdu>oU:^Henshaw's  Sheridan  (1884)  i^Thć* 


HEPHA 


100 


HERACLmrS 


ólogyfwr  the  Peoph  of  Baltimore  (1840,  8to)  v—MmuAr 
of  Rigkt  Rev,  Richard  Chanmff  Moore,  DJ).  (1842)  :— 
An  Inguiry  concermmg  ike  Searnd  AdteiU  (1842).  See 
Sprague,  AmaUj  v,  545 ;  Ckurch  Beview,  v,  897. 

He'pha  (Heb.  Chtyphah\  TXff^r\  in  the  Talmud, 
Schwarz,  Pakst,  p.  197 ;  mentioned  by  8evenl  andent 
¥rriter8  [Rdand,  Palcut,  p.  699]  as  lying  on  the  Fhceni- 
daii  coast  of  Pidestine;  the  Syoammot  of  the  Onomast^ 
the  Jerusalem  Itin.,  and  Josephus  [Ant,  xiii,  12, 8]),  the 
modem  Nai/Of  a  plaoe  of  oonsideiBble  trade  at  the  ibot 
of  Carmel,  on  the  bay  of  Acre  (Robinson,  Reaearches,  iii, 
194),  with  the  ruins  of  Sycaminos  l\  mile  north-west  of 
the  present  town  (Van  de  Yelde,  Memoir,  p.  820). 

He^pher  (Heb.  Che^pher,  ^CH,  a  well,  or  tkame; 
Sept  'O^ćp  or  'O0tp,'£0cp  and  'A^,  but  'H^aX  in  1 
Chion.  i,  6),  the  name  of  a  city  and  of  three  men.  See 
also  Gath-hbpuer. 

1.  A  royal  city  of  the  Canaanites  captnied  by  Joshua 
(Joeh.  xii,  17) ;  probably  the  same  district  as  "  the  land 
of  Hepher,"  in  the  Tidnity  of  Sochoh  and  Aruboth,  as- 
Bigned  to  Ben-Hesed,  one  of  Solomon's  Uble-pur^eyois 
(1  Kiogs  iy,  10).  The  locality  thus  indicated  would 
aeem  to  be  in  the  yicinity  of  Um-Butjj  sonth  of  Suwei- 
cheh. 

2.  The  jroongest  son  of  Gilead,  and  gieat-grandson 
of  Manasseh  (Numb.  xxvi,  82).  He  was  the  father  of 
Zelophehad  (Numb.  xxvii,  1 ;  Josh.  xvii,  2, 8),  and  his 
desoendants  are  called  Hepueiutbs  (Numb.  xxvi,  82). 
RG.  antę  16ia 

3.  The  seoond  son  of  Ashur  (a  descendant  of  Judah) 
by  one  of  his  wives,  Naarah  (1  Chion.  iv,  6).  B.C  dr. 
1612. 

4.  A  Mecherathite,  one  of  I>avid*8  heroes,  acoording 
to  1  Chroń,  xi,  86 ;  but  the  text  is  apparenUy  corrupt, 
80  that  this  name  is  either  an  interpolation,  or  identical 
with  the  EuPHALBT  of  2  Sam.  xxiii,  84.    See  Ur. 

He^pherite  (Heb.  Ckephri\  T^W,  Sept  O^pOf  a 
descendant  of  Hefher  2  (Numb.  xxvi,  82). 

Heph'si-bah  (Heb.  Ch^phuiMJi',  M-^SCn,  fi^ 
ddighi  is  m  her),  a  (fem.)  real  and  also  symbolical  name. 

1.  (SepL  '£4f/c^a,yulg.  HapktOfa.)  The  mother  of 
king  Bfanasseh,  and  coiiseqaently  ąneen  dowager  of 
king  Hezekiah  (2  Kings  xxi,  1).  Notwithstanding  the 
piety  of  her  husband,  and  her  own  amiable  name,  her 
iireUgion  may  be  inferred  from  the  chancter  of  her  son. 
Ra  709-696. 

2.  (Sept.  OtKtfiM  Łft6v,Yulig,  Vobtntat  mea  tu  eo.)  A 
figuratiye  Łitle  ascribed  to  Zioń  in  token  of  Jehovah's 
iavor  (in  the  return  from  the  Captiyity,  and  espedaUy 
in  the  Messiah^s  advent),  in  contrast  with  her  predicted 
desolation  (Isa.  lxii,  4). 

Heraclas,  Saint,  patriarch  of  Alexandria,  was  a 
brother  of  Plutarch,  who  was  martyred  about  A.D.  204, 
mider  Septimius  Seyerus.  They  had  both  been  heathen, 
but  were  converted  by  Origen,  who  was  then  teaching 
at  Alexandria.  After  escoping  firom  the  penecution  to 
which  his  brother  fell  yictim,  Heraclas  became  an  as- 
cetic,  but  still  continued  to  study  Greek  philosophy  un- 
der  Ammonius  Saccas.  He  was  next  aseociated  with 
Origen  as  a  catechist,  and  when  the  latter  was  com- 
pelled  to  leave  Egypt  on  acoount  of  his  difficulty  with 
Demetrius  of  Alexandria,  Heraclas  remained  alone  in 
charge  of  the  theological  school  of  that  dty.  He  re- 
tained  this  position  until  he  became  himself  patriarch. 
He  died  in  246.  The  Roman  martyrology  oorameroo- 
rates  him  on  the  14th  of  July.  See  Eusebius,  Hist,  Ec- 
ofes.vi,15;  Tillemont,  ^ćmotre*  iSocief.  voL  iii ;  BaiUet, 
Vies  des  Saints,  July  14th. 

Heracleon.    See  Heracleonites. 

Heraoleonites,  a  Gnoetic  sect  of  the  2d  century, 
80  named  from  Heradeon  (a  disciple  of  Yalentinus),  who 
was  distinguished  for  his  sdentitic  bent  of  mind.  "  He 
wrote  a  commentary  on  the  Gospel  of  SL  John,consider- 
aUe  fsagments  of  which  have  bcen  presenred  by  Origen ; 


perhaps  also  a  oommentaiy  on  the  Gospd  accocding  to 
Lukę.  Of  the  latter,  a  single  fragment  only,  the  expo- 
sition  of  Lukę  xii,  8,  has  been  presetred  by  Clement  of 
Alexandiia  (i9<nMn.  iv,  5C8).  It  may  easily  be  oonoeived 
that  the  spiiitual  depth  and  fulness  of  John  most  huTe 
been  pre-eminently  attnctiye  to  the  Gnoetios.  To  the 
expo8ition  of  this  gospel  Heradeon  bronght  a  profoand 
religions  sense,  which  penetnted  to  the  inward  mean- 
ing,  together  with  an  underatanding  invariably  dear 
when  not  led  astzmy  by  theoeophic  speculatioii.  Bot 
what  he  chiefly  lacked  was  a  fiiculty  to  appredate  the  4 
simplidty  of  John,  and  eamest  iq[>plication  to  thoee  neo- 
easary  means  for  evoiving  the  spiiit  out  of  the  letter, 
the  defidency  in  which  among  the  Gnostics  gencnlly 
has  ah^ady  been  madę  a  sabject  of  remark.  Heradeon 
honestly  intended,  indeed,  so  far  as  we  can  see,  to  deiive 
his  thedogy  from  John.  But  he  was  entirely  waiped 
by  his  system;  and  with  all  his  habits  of  thought  and 
contemplation,  so  entangled  in  irs  mesh-work  that  he 
could  not  move  out  of  it  with  freedom,  but,  spite  of  him- 
self, implied  its  views  and  ite  ideas  in  the  Seripturea, 
which  he  regarded  as  the  fountain  of  diyine  wisdom** 
(Neander).  His  fragments  are  gathered  in  Grsbe,  8pi- 
dlę^iumj  ii,  88.  See  Neander,  Ch,Hi$tory,  i,  484;  Moa- 
heim, Camm,  i,  472 ;  Lardner, łFbrb,  ii,  256;  and  the  av- 
tide  GNoenca. 

Heraclte.    See  Hercules. 

HeraoUtiUi  CHpaKXuroc))  a  phikwopher  of  Ephe- 
Bus,  iloarished  about  R  C.  500.  He  bdonged  to  the  loni- 
an  schooL  **  He  was  a  profonnd  thinker,  of  an  inqui8i- 
tive  spirit,  and  the  founder  of  a  sect  called  after  him, 
which  had  considerable  reputation  and  influence.  His 
humor  was  mdancholy  and  aarcastic,  which  he  indolged 
at  the  expense  of  the  democracy  established  in  his  na- 
tive  town,  and  with  which  he  was  disgusted.  Tb« 
knowledge  he  had  acąuired  of  the  systems  of  precedin^ 
philosophers  (v}'ing  with  one  another  in  boldness),  of 
Thales,  Pj^hsgoras,  and  Xenophanes,  created  in  him  a 
habit  of  scepticism  of  which  he  afcerwards  cured  him- 
sdf.  The  result  of  his  meditations  was  committed  to  a 
volume  (Hcpt  f^^fiuc),  the  obscurity  of  which  procored 
for  him  the  appellation  of  <rKorttv6c,  He  alao  madę  it 
his  object  to  discoyer  an  demental  prindple ;  but  dther 
becanse  his  ^ńews  were  different,  or  from  a  desire  to  op- 
pose  himself  to  the  Eleatae,  he  assumed  it  to  be  j&r,  be- 
cause  the  most  subtle  and  active  of  the  elements"  (Ten- 
nemann,  Mamual  Hittory  ofPhihtophy,  §  102). 

*'  According  to  Heraditus,  the  end  of  wisdom  is  to 
discoyer  the  ground  and  prindple  of  aU  things.  Thia 
prindple,  which  is  an  etemal,  ever-liying  unity,  and  per- 
yades  and  is  in  all  phenomena,  he  called  j(ir.  Bty  thia 
term  Heraclitus  understood,  not  the  demental  fire  or 
flame,  which  he  held  to  be  the  exoess  of  fire,  but  a  warm 
and  dry  yapor;  which  therefore,  as  air,  is  not  distinct 
from  the  soul  or  vital  energy,  and  which,  as  guiding 
and  directing  the  mundane  deydopment,  is  endued  with 
wisdom  and  intelligence.  This  supremę  and  perfect 
force  of  life  is  obviously  without  limit  to  its  activity; 
oonseąuently,  nothing  that  it  fonns  can  remain  fixcMl ; 
all  is  constantly  in  a  process  of  formation.  This  he  has 
thus  figuratiydy  expreS8ed:  'No  one  has  ever  been 
twice  on  the  same  stream.'  Nay,  the  passenger  him- 
self is  without  identity :  <  On  the  same  stream  we  do 
and  we  do  not  embark ;  for  we  aze  and  we  are  not.'  The 
yitality  of  the  rational  fire  has  in  it  a  tendency  to  con- 
traries,  whereby  it  is  madę  to  pass  from  gratification  to 
want,  and  from  want  to  gpratiflication,  and  in  fixed  peri- 
ods  it  altemates  between  a  swifter  and  a  skmer  flax. 
Now  these  opposite  tendendes  meet  together  in  deter> 
minate  order,  and  by  the  inequality  or  equa]ity  of  the 
forces  occasion  the  phenomena  of  life  and  death.  The 
ąuietude  of  death,  howeyer,  is  a  merę  semUanoe  which 
cxists  only  for  the  senses  of  man.  For  man  in  his  foDy 
forms  a  truth  of  his  own,  whereas  it  is  only  the  imiver- 
sal  reason  that  is  rcally  cognizant  of  the  truth.  LasUy, 
the  rational  principle  which  goyens  the  whdle  mońl 


HERALD 


191 


HERB 


and  phyaical  iraild  is  ako  the  law  of  the  indiyidoal; 
whaterer,  tberefore,  is,  ia  the  wiaest  and  the  best ;  and 
'it  ia  not  for  man'8  welfare  that  his  wishes  should  be 
IblfiUed;  sidmesBmakeshealthpIeasantyashiuigerdoes 
gntificatłOD,  and  labor  lest.*  The  ph^sical  doctrines  of 
Henuditus  formed  no  inoonsidenble  portion  of  the  ec- 
lectical  system  of  the  later  Stoics,  and  in  times  stillmore 
reoent  there  is  much  in  the  theories  of  Schelling  and 
Hegel  that  preaenu  a  striking  though  generał  lesem- 
blance  thcreto."  HęgeŁ  dedared  that  the  doctrine  of 
HeiacUtusy  that  all  things  are  "peipetual  flax  and  re- 
fituc,**  wss  an  anticipation  of  his  own  dogma,  ^  Being  is 
the  same  with  non-being."  **  The  fragments  of  Herac- 
litns  haye  been  collected  firom  Plntazchi  Stobmis,  Cle- 
mens  of  Alexandzia,  and  Sestus  Empirictts,  and  ezplain- 
ed  brr  Schleiermacher  in  Wolf  and  Buttmann's  J/tiMum 
der  AttkaikumtwisMOUchąft,  voL  i"*  (Enffłiah  Cpctopt^ 
dia).  łYofeasor  Bemays,  of  Bonn,  gathered  from  Uip- 
pooBtes  a  series  of  quotatłODS  from  Heraclitus,  and  pnb- 
lishea  thcm  under  the  tiUe  Heraditea  (1848).  The 
EpMa  which  bear  the  name  of  Heraditus  are  spuri- 
ona;  they  are  given,  with  rahiable  notes  and  disserta- 
tioos^  in  Die  fferaeUtitcken  Briefi,  em  Beitrag  x,  pkUot* 
m.  ni^lJL  (BerL  1869).  See  Smith,  Diet,  ofClau. Biog, 
widMytMoLt.Y.1  LeweB,ais(.o/PhUoM.i867,i,eóaą,i 
LassaUe,  IHe  PkUowopkie  d,  HeraJdałoi  (Berlin,  1868). 

HaraclliM.    See  Mo^iothslitb. 

Hendd  only  oocois  in  Dan.ui,4;  the  term  theie  nsed 
(Ti^9,  birÓM)  is  connected  etjrmologicsllj  (Gesenios, 
TkatBtr,  p.  713)  with  the  Greek  mpówu  and  cpa^oi, 
and  with  our  **  ery."  There  is  an  evident  allusion  to  the 
offioe  of  the  herald  in  the  espressions  mfpwcwj  r^pt/C, 
and  Kącmyiiaj  which  are  lieąuent  in  the  N.T.,  and  which 
are  bat  inadeąnatelj  rendered  by  "preach,"  etc  The 
term  *^  herald**  might  be  substituted  in  1  Tim.  ii,  7 ;  2 
Tlm.  i,  11 ;  2  Pet  ii,  5,  as  there  is  eridently  in  these 
passagea  an  aUosion  to  the  Grecian  games  (q.  v.). 

Herb  is  the  rendering  of  the  following  terms  in  tbe 
ikoth.  Yers.  of  the  Bibie :  usually  30^,  e'«e6,  any  grem 
pkad  or  kerbage  coIlectively,  often  rendeied  ''grass;" 
applied  generally  to  annual  plants  without  woody  stems, 
gnming  in  the  fields  (Gen.  ii,  5;  iii,  18;  £xod.  ix,  22; 
X,  12, 15)  and  on  mountains  (Isa.  xJii,  15 ;  Prov.  xxvii, 
25),  growing  up  and  setting  seed  (Gen.  i,  11, 12, 29),  and 
senring  aa  food  for  man  (Gen.  i, 80;  iii,  18;  Paa. civ.  U) 
and  for  beast  (Deat.  xi,  15;  Paa.  cvi,  20;  Jer.  xiv,  6; 
I>an.  iv,  15, 23, 32, 38 ;  v,  21) ;  comprehending,  therefore, 
tegetaUaj  greem,  and  sometimes  all  grten  heńiafft  (Amos 
yii,  1,  2).  Men  are  said  to  "  flourish  as  a  grtm  keriT 
(Psa.  bLsii,  16;  xGii, 7;  Job  v, 25);  also  to  wUker  (Psa. 
cti,4^11>  Henoe,  too,  those  seized  with  fear  and  tnm- 
iog  pale  (Gr.  'x>MpoŁ)  are  oompared  to  the  herb  qftke 
JUd  which  giows yellow  and  withers  (2 Kings  xix, 26; 
Isa.  xxxvii,  27).  p*^!^,  yarak^,  properly  signifies  ^reen, 
and  is  applied  to  any  green  thing,  verdure,  foliage  of 
fields  and  treea  (2  Kings  xix,  26;  Isa.  xxxvii,  27;  xv, 
6,  £xod.  X,  15;  Nomb.  xxii,4;  Psa.  xxxvu,2;  Gen.  i, 
aO;  ix,8);  specially  apUmL,kerb  (Dentxi,10;  1  Kings 
XXI,  8) ;  a  portion  of  Aer&f,  vegetables  (ńov.  xv,  17). 
IKd^,  difahkj  and  ■^'^sn,  ehaUir%  properly  designate 
groMij  tbe  first  when  yomig  and  tender,  the  latter  when 
gnwn  and  fit  for  mowing.    See  Botany. 

-ńst,  &r  (Ut  Ught),  in  the  fem.  n^i«,  6r6k%  phiral 
niniat,  or6(h',  ''occurs  in  two  psasages  of  Scriptore, 
where  it  is  translated  kerb  in  the  AntlLYers. :  it  is  gen- 
cfally  anpposed  to  indicate  soch  plants  as  are  employed 
for  food.  The  most  andent  tianslatoiB  seem,  however, 
to  liave  been  at  a  kiss  for  its  mesning.  Thus  the  Sept 
in  one  passage  (2  Kings  iv,  89)  bas  only  the  H^  word 
in  Gnek  chaiacters,  dfHtiO^  and  in  the  other  (Isa.  xxvi, 
19)  utfŁo^  heaUHff.  The  Yulg.,  and  the  ChaUee  and 
Syriac  verBions,  trsnslate  oroih  in  the  latter  passage  by 
%fti;  in  conseqnence  of  oonfounding  one  Heb.  word  with 
anotber,  acoording  to  Celsins  (Hierobot,  i,  459).  Bosen- 
■mller  says  that  aroth  occuis  in  its  original  and  generic 


HJgniflcaHon  in  ba.  xxvi,  19,  viz.  green  herbt.  The  fu- 
turę restoration  of  the  Hebrew  pec^  is  there  annooneed 
under  the  type  and  figurę  of  a  revival  of  the  dead. 
*  Tkg  dew  it  a  dew  of  green  herbt,*  says  the  prophet,  i  e. 
as  by  the  dew  green  herbs  are  revived,  so  shalt  thon, 
being  revived  by  God's  strengthening  power,  flouiish 
again.  The  other  passage,  however.  appears  an  obscure 
one  with  respect  to  the  meamng  of  orotA,  Celsius  has, 
with  his  usoal  leaming,  shown  that  mallows  were  much 
employed  as  food  in  ancient  times.  Of  this  there  can 
be  no  dottbt,  but  there  is  no  proof  adduoed  that  orałh 
means  mallnws;  there  are  many  other  plants  which 
were  and  still  are  employed  as  articles  of  diet  in  the 
East,  as  purslane,  goosefoot,  chenpodiums,  lettuoe,  en- 
dive,  etc.  But  oroth  should  be  oonsidered  in  conjuno- 
tion  with  pakgothf  for  we  find  in  2  Kings  iv,  89,  that 
when  Elidia  came  again  to  Gilgal,  and  there  was  a 
dearth  in  the  land,  he  said  anto  his  servant, '  Set  on  the 
great  pot,  and  seethe  pottage  for  the  sons  of  the  proph- 
ets;  and  one  went  out  into  the  field  to  gather  herbe 
(protk),  and  found  a  wild  vine,  and  gathered  thereof 
tnid  gourdt  (pcd^sgoth)  his  lap  fuli,  and  came  and  shred 
them  into  the  pot  of  pottage,  for  they  knew  them  not! 
As  pakyotk  is  univerBaUy  acknowledged  to  be  the /ruA 
of  one  of  the  gourd  tribe,  so  it  is  not  nnreasonable  to 
oonclade  that  oroth  also  was  the  fruit  of  some  plant,  for 
which  the  pakgoth  had  been  mistaken.  This  may  ba 
admitted,  tui  nothing  better  than  conjecture  has  been 
adduced  in  support  of  other  interpretations,  and  ai  there 
are  fruits,  such  as  that  of  the  egg-plant,  which  are  used 
as  articles  of  diet,  and  for  which  the  fruit  of  the  pakgoth, 
or  wild  gourd,  might  have  been  mistaken  by  an  igno- 
rant person"  (Kitto).  But  perhaps,  as  this  was  a  time 
of  great  famine,  the  ser\<'ant  went  out  to  gather  any 
g;reen  vęgetable  likely  to  contribute  towards  the  sayoii- 
ness  and  nutritiousness  of  the  broth,  and  his  mistake 
may  have  arisen  not  so  much  from  any  rescroblance  be- 
tween  the  pakgoth  and  any  particular  kind  of  oroth  of 
which  he  was  in  ąuest,  but  rather  frora  indiacriminately 
seizing  whatever  vegetable  he  met  with,  without  know- 
ing  its  noxious  properties.  Thus  we  may  regard  oroth 
in  both  passages  as  a  generał  designation  of  eaculent 
plants,  in  this  case  wild  ones.    See  Gourd. 

The  "bitter  herbs"  (D'^nHtt,  merorun')  with  which 
the  Israelites  were  oommanded  to  eat  the  Pas80vcr 
bread  (£xod.  ii,  8;  Numb.  ix,  11 :  the  same  Heb.  word 
oocuiB  also  in  Lam.  iii,  15,  ^  He  hath  filled  me  with  bit* 
temesB,  he  hath  raade  me  drunken  with  wormwood") 
doubtless  in  generał  ''included  the  varioQs  edible  kinds 
of  bitter  plants,  whether  cultivated  or  wild,  which  the 
Israelites  oould  with  fadlity  obtain  in  sufficient  abnn- 
dance  to  supply  their  number  either  in  Egypt,  where 
the  first  PlasBover  was  eaten,  or  in  the  deserts  of  the  pe- 
ninsula  of  Sinai,  or  in  Palestine.  The  Mishna  (Pera- 
cAtm.  a  2,  §  6)  enumetates  five  kinds  of  bitter  herba— 
ckazereihf  'tdMtn,  tkamcah,  charchabina,  and  maror — 
which  it  was  lawful  to  eat  either  green  or  dried.  There 
is  great  difficulty  in  identifying  the  plants  which  these 
words  re8pectively  denote,  but  the  reader  may  see  tbe 
subject  discussed  by  Bochart  {Hieroz,  i,  691,  ed.  Roeen- 
mtUler)  and  by  Garpzovius  (Apparat,  Hitt.  Crit,  p.  402). 
Acoording  to  the  testimony  of  Foiskal,  in  Niebuhr*s 
Preface  to  the  DeecripHon  de  F Arabie  (p.  xliv),  the 
modem  Jews  of  Arabia  and  Egypt  eat  lettuce,  or,  if  this 
is  not  at  band,  buglosa,  with  the  Paschal  lamb.  The 
Greek  word  wicpic  is  identified  by  Sprengel  {Hiet,  Rei 
Herb,  i,  100)  with  the  Jffebninthia  echioides,  Lin.,  bristly 
helminthia  (ox-tongue),  a  plant  belonging  to  the  chio- 
ory  group.  The  Picrie  of  botanists  is  a  genus  doeely 
allied  to  the  UdmitUhieu  Aben  Esra,  in  Celsius  (tfte- 
rob,  ii,  227),  remarks  that,  according  to  the  ob6ervationa 
of  a  oertain  leamed  Spaniard,  the  ancient  Egyptians  al- 
vrays  used  to  phu»  difTerent  kinds  of  herbs  upon  the 
table,  with  mustard,  and  that  they  dipped  morsels  of 
bread  into  this  salad.  That  the  Jews  derived  this  cua- 
tom  of  eating  hertis  with  their  meat  from  the  Eg3rptians 
ia  extremely  probaUe,  for  it  is  easy  to  see  how,  on  the 


HERBART 


192 


HERBELOT 


one  htfid,  the  bitter-herb  ealad  ahoold  remind  the  JewB 
of  the  bittemesB  of  Łheir  bondage  (£xod.  i,  14),  and,  on 
the  oŁher  hand,  how  it  ahoold  alao  bring  to  their  remem- 
brance  their  merciful  deliTcranoe  from  it.  It  is  cuiioufl 
to  obscnre,  in  oonnection  with  the  remarks  of  Aben  £s- 
la,  the  ciutom,  for  such  it  appean  to  have  been,  of  dip- 
ping  a  monel  of  bread  into  tke  diah  (ró  Tipv/3Xiov)  which 
prevaUed  in  our  Lord'8  time.  May  not  ró  Tpvp\Łov  be 
the  salad-dish  of  bitter  herbs,  and  ró  ^Im/uoy  the  mor- 
sel  of  bread  of  which  Aben  Esra  speaks  ?  The  merMm 
may  well  be  cnderstood  to  denote  yartoua  aorta  of  bitter 
planta,  such  particubuiy  as  belong  to  the  crue{fertB,  as 
aome  of  the  bitter  cieases^  or  to  the  chioory  group  of  the 
eompotko!,  the  hawkweeds,  and  sow-thistles,  and  wild 
kttuceSf  which  grow  abmidantly  in  the  peninsula  of  Si- 
nai,  iu  Palestine,  and  in  Egypt  (DecaiBne,  Floruia  8p- 
maioa,  in  AnnaL  de»  Sdenc  NaU  1884;  Strand,  Flor, 
PaieuL  No.  446^  etc)"  (Smith).    See  Bitter  Hisrbs. 

Herbart,  Johann  Friedrich,  an  eminent  German 
philosopher,  was  bom  at  Oldenboig  May  4, 1776.  He 
became  professor  of  philosophy  in  the  Uniyerńty  of 
Gottingen  in  1805,  afterwards  at  Kdnigsberg  in  1809, 
and  finally  retunied  to  Gottingen  in  1833.  He  died 
theie,  Aug.  14, 1841.  His  most  important  worka  are 
Kurze  Darttdlung  eine»  Plcmes  z,phUosoph.  Yorluungen 
{G'6tJL  1804)  :—Deplatottici  ssfstemaHsJundamaUo  (Gott. 
1806)  '^AUff.prakHsdie  Philosophie  (Gotting.  1808)  :— 
Hauptpunkte  <L  Mełaphymk  (Gott.  1808)  .—Lehrbuch  z, 
Emkitung  m  d,  Philos,  (Konigsb.  1815 ;  4th  ed.  1841)  :— 
Lehrhuch  d.  Psychologie  (Konigsb.  1816 ;  3d  ed.  1834)  :— 
Psychologie  ais  Wissenschąfi  (Konigsb.  1824, 2  parts)  :— 
AUg,  Metaphysik  (Konigsb.  1828,  2  parts;  2d  ed.  Halle, 
1841)  :—GesprSche  tf.  d  Bose  (Konigsb.  1817)  i^Encyh 
tL  Philosophie  (Konigsb.  1881;  2d  ed.  1841) :  — i4  na/y- 
tische  Beleuchłung  d.  Naturrechies  «.  <Ł  Morał  (Gotting. 
1886)  :—Zur  Lehre  von  der  FreiheU  d.  menschl.  Willens 
(CJott.  1836)  i—Psychólogitche  Untersuchungen  (GStting. 
1889, 2  Tols.).  Herbarfs  philosophical  essays  and  pam- 
phlets  were  published  by  Hartenstein  (Lpz.  1841-43,  3 
Tols.),  who  also  published  a  complete  collection  of  his 
works  (SamnUliche  Werhe,  Lpz.  1850-52, 12  vola.> 

Heibart  was  at  flrst  a  Kantian,  but  afterwards,  influ- 
encedby  the  study  of  ancient  Greek  philosophy,  he  cre- 
ated  a  philosophical  system  of  his  own,  which  is  distin- 
guished  by  ingenuity  above  all  the  other  post-Kantian 
Systems.  "Although  Herbert  occasionally  professes  to 
be  a  follower  of  Kant,  stiU  he  is  of  opinion  that  Kanfs 
CriUcism  o/Pure  Reason  is  almost  without  any  objec- 
tive  yalue,  and  that  its  method  must  be  entirely  aban- 
doned  if  metaphysics  are  to  be  founded  on  a  secure  and 
permanent  basis.  Herbart*8  realistic  tendency  forther 
reminds  us  of  the  monades  of  Leibnitz.  Philosophy, 
aooording  to  Herbert,  has  not,  like  ordinary  sciences, 
any  particular  set  of  subjects  which  are  its  province,  bnt 
it  consiscs  in  the  manner  and  method  in  which  any  sub- 
ject  whatsoeyer  is  treated.  The  subjects  themselyes 
are  supposed  to  be  known,  and  are  called  by  him  *  no- 
tions'  (BegrilTe),  so  that  philosophy  is  the  methodical 
tieatment  and  working  out  of  those '  notions.'  The  dif- 
ferent  methods  of  treatment  constitute  the  main  depart- 
ments  of  philosophy.  The  first  of  them  is  logie,  which 
considers  the  naturę  and  cleamess  of  notions  and  their 
combinations.  But  the  contemplation  of  the  world  and 
of  ouiselyes  bńngs  befoie  us  notions  which  cause  a  dis- 
oord  in  our  thoughts.  This  drcuinstance  renders  it  neo- 
easary  for  us  to  modify  or  change  those  notions  aocord- 
ing  to  the  particular  naturę  of  each.  By  the  process  of 
modificatlon  or  change  something  new  is  added,  which 
Herbert  calls  the  supplement  or  oomplement  (Ergftn- 
zung).  Now  the  seoond  main  department  of  philosophy 
18  metaphysics,  which  Herbert  deOnes  to  be  the  sdenoe 
of  the  supplementary  notions.  The  method  of  discoy- 
eiing  the  supplementary  notions  which  are  necessary  in 
order  to  render  giyen  facts  which  contain  contradictory 
notions  intelligible,  is,  accoiding  to  him,  the  method  of 
lelations,  and  it  u  by  this  method  alone  that  the  other 
notioDs  of  the  world  and  of  onrselyes  can  be  properly 


defined.  Henee  arises  what  he  calls  practical  meta- 
physics, which  is  subdiyided  into  peychology,  the  phi- 
losophy of  naturę,  and  natural  theology.  A  third  dasc 
of  notions,  lastly,  add  something  to  our  conceptions, 
which  produces  either  pleasure  or  displeasnre,  and  the 
science  of  these  notions  is  SBSthetics,  which,  when  ap- 
plied  to  giyen  things,  forms  a  aeries  of  theoriea  of  art, 
which  may  be  termed  practical  sciences.  They  are 
fonnded  upon  oertain  model  notions,  such  as  the  ideas 
of  perfection,  beneyolence,  maleyolence.  justice,  oompen- 
sation,  equxty,  and  the  like.  In  his  metaphysics  Hei^ 
bait  points  out  three  problems  containing  contradictionfl^ 
yiz.  things  with  seyeral  attributes,  change,  and  our  own 
subjectiyity  (das  Ich).  In  order  to  solye  these  oontra- 
dictions,  and  to  make  the  extemal  and  intemal  woiłd 
agree  and  harmonize  so  as  to  become  oonoeiyable,  he 
assumes  that  the  quantity  of  eyerything  exi8ting  (des 
Seienden)  is  absolutely  simple,  Things  therefore  whica 
exi8t  haye  no  attributes  referring  to  spaoe  and  time,  bot 
they  stand  in  relation  to  a  something,  which  ia  the  es- 
senoe  of  things.  Whereyer  tlus  essenoe  consists  of  a 
plnrality  of  attributes  there  must  also  be  a  plurality  ot 
things  or  beings,  and  these  many  simple  things  or  be- 
ings  are  the  principles  of  all  thuigs  in  naturę,  and  the 
latter,  consequently,  are  nothing  but  aggregatea  of  sim- 
ple things.  They  exist  by  themselyes  in  spaoe  bo  far 
as  it  Lb  conceiyed  by  our  intellect,  but  not  in  physical 
space,  which  oontains  only  bodies.  We  do  not  know 
the  real  simple  essenoe  of  things,  bnt  we  may  aoąuire  a 
certain  amount  of  knowledge  conoeming  intemal  and 
extenial  relations.  When  they  acddentally  meet  in 
space  they  disŁurb  one  another,  but  at  the  same  time 
striye  to  preserye  themselyes;  and  in  this  manner  they 
manifest  themselres  as  powers,  although  they  neither 
are  powers  nor  haye  powezs.  By  means  of  these  prin- 
ciples Herbert  endeayors  to  reform  the  whole  system  of 
psychobgy  which  he  found  established  by  his  piedeces^ 
sors ;  for,  according  to  him,  the  soul,  too,  is  a  simple  be- 
ing,  and  as  such  it  is  and  remains  unknown  to  us;  and 
it  is  neither  a  subject  for  speculation  nor  for  experi- 
mental  psychology.  It  neyer  and  nowherc  has  any  pln- 
rality of  attributes,  nor  has  it  any  power  or  faculty  of 
receiying  or  produdng  anything;  and  the  yarious  fac- 
ulties  usually  mentioned  by  psychologists,  such  as  im- 
agination,  reason,  etc,  which  sometimes  are  at  war  and 
sometimes  in  concord  with  each  other,  are,  according  to 
Herbert,  merę  fictions  of  philosophers.  In  like  manner 
he  denies  that  it  possesscs  oertain  forms  of  thought  or 
laws  regulating  our  desires  and  actions.  The  soul  as  a 
simple  being,  and  in  its  accidental  aasodation  with  oth- 
ers,  is  like  the  latter  subject  to  distuibance,  and  exerts 
itself  for  its  own  preseryation.  The  latter  point  ia  the 
prindpal  ąuestion  in  Herfoart*s  psychology,  and  he  en- 
deayors to  deduoe  and  calculate  the  whole  life  of  the 
soul,  with  the  aid  of  mathematics,  from  those  mutual 
distiirbances,  checks,  and  ftom  its  reactions  against 
them.  Henoe  he  is  obliged  to  deny  man*s  morał  or 
transcendental  freedom,  although  he  allows  him  a  cer- 
tain free  chazacter.  He  maintains  the  immortality  of 
the  soul,  because  the  simple  principles  of  all  things  are 
etemal;  but  he  denies  the  possilńlity  of  acquiring  any 
knowledge  whateyer  of  the  Deity"  (^En^ish  Cyciopadiaj 
8.  y.).  On  the  whole,  it  may  be  sald  that  Hertiart  was 
a  careful  obseryer  of  psychological  phenomena ;  but  that 
speculation,  in  the  proper  sense,  was  not  congenial  to 
him.  See  also  Thilo,  Die  Wissenschtr/tlichkeit  der  mod. 
speeul,  Theołogiej  etc  (Leipsic,  1851, 8yo) ;  Tennemann, 
MammU  HitL  qf  PhOosophy,  p.  462;  Moreli,  Hietory  of 
Modem  PkUosophy,  p.  482-489;  Scfawegler,  EpiL  Hitt, 
PkiLf  tzansLby  Sedye,  p.  804  sq.;  HoUenbóg,  in  Hei^ 
zog,  Reai-Encyklopiidiey  xix,  680  są. 

Herbelot,  Bartholo^iew  D*  (or  D^iisrbelot),  a 
distinguished  French  Orientalist,  was  bom  at  Paris  I>ec 
4, 1625.  He  studied  at  the  Uniyersity  of  his  natiye 
dty,  where  he  acąuired  a  good  knowledge  of  Hebrew, 
Cluddee,  Syriac,  Arabie,  Persian,  and  Turkish.  He  then 
yiaitedltaly,  in  order  to  establish  relations  with  the  peo* 


HERBERT 


193 


HERBERT 


ple  of  the  OtieaUd  countries,  of  which  Łhere  were  a  lai^ 
nnmber  at  Genoa,  Leghorn,  and  Yenice.  At  Borne  he 
became  aoąaainted  with  Lucas  Holstenius  and  Leo  Al- 
ladiu,  and  was  highly  esteemed  by  the  cardinals  Bar- 
beńni  and  Grimaldi,  as  well  as  by  qoeen  Christina  of 
Sweden.  On  his  return  to  France  he  received  a  pen- 
cion  of  1500  franca  frooi  FouąueŁ,  and  was  afterwards  ap- 
pointed  royal  aecretary  and  interpreter  of  Oriental  lan- 
^uages  at  Paris.  On  a  aecond  joumey  to  Italy  in  1666, 
Łbe  grand  duke  of  Tuscany,  Ferdinand  II,  endeavored  to 
persuade  him  to  remaiii,  and  presented  him  with  a  nom- 
b»  of  Eastem  MS&,  but  in  yain.  He  returned  to  Par- 
ia,  whcre  Golbert  granted  him  again  a  pension  of  1600 
fiancs,  and  Louis  XIV  appointed  him  professor  of  Syriac 
at  the  CoUege  of  France,  after  the  death  of  James  d'Aa- 
veigne  in  1692.  Herbeiot  died  Dec  8, 169&.  He  wrote 
BibUothigue  Oriemialej  ou  dicłUmnaire  unicerteŁ  contenant 
toul  ce  qvijaii  eormaitre  Ut  peuples  de  V Orient,  It  was 
pablished  after  bis  death  by  Ant  GaUand  (Paris,  1697, 
foL;  Iklaestricht,  1776,  foL ;  supplement,  1781,  etc. ;  best 
ed.  Par.  1782, 8ro).  The  title  of  this  work  gtves  a  good 
idea  of  its  character :  it  is  a  storehouse  of  whaterer 
belongs  to  Oriental  literaturę.  The  book,  however,  b 
meiely  a  translation  of  passages,  alphabetically  arrangied, 
from  Hadji  Khalfah'8  bibltographical  dictbnary,  and  of 
some  handred  and  fifty  MSS.  Herbeiot  did  not  take 
the  trouble  to  compare  their  statements  with  those  of 
other  writersy  ao  that  it  contains  only  the  view8  of  the 
M obammedans  ou  themselves  and  their  neighbors.  Yet 
it  is  a  very  useful  work  for  studenta,  and  being  the  only 
one  of  its  kind,  is  still  highly  considered.  Desessarts 
bas  given  a  popular  abridgmeut  of  it  (Paris,  1782, 6 
Tols.  8ro) ;  it  was  translated  into  German  by  ficholtz 
(HaUe,  178^1790, 4  yoIs.  roy.  8vo).  Herbeiot  wrote  also 
a  cataiogue  of  part  of  the  MSS.  oontained  in  the  Pala- 
tine  Libiary  at  Florence,  which  was  translated  from  Ital- 
ian  inio  Latin,  and  is  to  be  found  in  Schellhorn's  Ama^ 
nUates  Htterarim.  See  Cousin,  Źlopt  de  D^ Herbeiot  (in 
the  Jourfml  des  iSaran/«,  Jan.  3d,  1696) ;  Perrault,  Ilomr- 
me*  iibutret,  ii,  154-158;  Goujet,  Afem.  mr  le  ColUge  de 
Frcatoej  iii,  155-158 ;  Hoefer,  Nouv,  Biog,  Genh-ale,  xxv, 
288.     (J.N.P.) 

Herbert.  Bdward  (Lord  Herbert  of  Cher- 
bcry),  a  distinguished  English  Deist,  was  bom  at  Eyton, 
Sbiewsbory,  in  1581  or  1582.  He  was  educated  at  Ox- 
ford, senred  with  great  credit  in  the  war  in  the  Nether- 
Unda,  and  on  his  return  became  one  of  the  most  accom- 
plished  gentlemen  at  the  ooart  of  James  I,  who  madę 
him  a  knigbt  of  the  Bath,  and  sent  him  minister  to 
France  ia  1618.  On  a  seoond  mission  to  France  he  pub- 
llihed  a  work  embodjring  the  principles  of  deism,  enti- 
tled  TractaźuM  de  YeritaUf  protU  dutinguitur  a  Remeitt- 
tioney  etc  (Paris,  1624, 4to).  In  1681  he  was  madę  a  peer. 
In  1645  he  pubUshed  a  new  edition  of  the  TrattatiUy 
adding  to  it  his  i>e  Beligione  Gentilium  (also  publlshed 
separately  at  Amsterdam,  1663, 4to;  and  in  an  English 
Uaoslation,  by  Lewis,  The  Andent  Rełigion  o/ the  Gen- 
tilet,  London,  1705, 8vo).  He  died  at  London  Aug.  20, 
1&18.  Ilia  Li/cy  toritUn  by  hinuel/,  and  eontinued  to  kis 
deatky  was  published  by  Horace  Walpole  (London,  1764 ; 
new  edition,  with  additions,  London,  1826, 8vo). 

^  Herbert  of  Cherbury  was  the  contemporary  of  Hobbes 
of  MalmcMinry,  to  whose  principles  of  philoeopluzing  he 
was  directly  opposed,  notwithstanding  the  striking  coin- 
ddence  of  many  of  the  results  at  which  they  respectire- 
]y  amved.  He  maintained  the  theory  of  innate  ideas, 
and  madę  a  certain  instinct  of  the  reason  (rationalis  in- 
stincttts)  to  be  the  primary  souroe  of  all  human  knowl- 
edge.  Accoidingly  he  did  not,  with  Anstotle  and  the 
Stoics,  compare  the  mind  to  a  pure  tablet,  or  to  the  tab- 
ak rasa  of  the  schoolmen,  but  to  a  closed  volume  which 
opens  itself  at  the  solacitation  of  outward  naturę  aeting 
npoo  the  senses.  Thus  acted  upon,  the  mind  produces 
out  of  itself  oertain  generał  or  oniyersal  principles  (oom- 
mcaef  no<Kme»),  by  reference  to  which  all  debatable 
ąncstions  in  theology  and  philosophy  may  be  deter- 
nuned,  sińce  upon  these  principles,  at  least,  all  men  are 
IV.-N 


nnanimoas.  Gonsistently  with  these  Tiewa,  he  does  hot, 
with  Hobbes,  make  religion  to  be  fomided  on  rerelation 
or  historical  tradition,  but  upon  an  immediate  conscious- 
ness  of  God  and  of  diyine  thuigs,  The  religion  of  rea- 
son, therefore,resting  on  such  grounds,  is,he  argues,the 
criterion  of  every  p06itive  religion  which  daims  a  foan- 
dation  in  revelation.  No  man  can  appeal  to  rcTelation 
as  an  immediate  evidence  of  the  reasonableness  of  his 
faith,  except  those  to  whom  that  reyelation  bas  been 
directly  given ;  for  all  others,  the  fact  of  reyelation  is  a 
matter  of  merę  tradition  or  testimony.  Even  the  re- 
cipient  of  a  revelation  may  himself  be  easily  deoeived, 
sińce  he  posocasco  no  means  of  oonyincing  himself  of  the 
reality  or  authenticity  of  his  admitted  reyelation.  Her- 
bert madę  his  own  religion  of  reason  to  rest  upon  the 
foUowing  grounds:  There  is  a  God  whom  man  oaght  to 
honor  and  reverenoe;  a  life  of  hoUness  is  the  most  ao- 
ceptable  worship  that  can  be  effered  him;  sinners  most 
repent  of  their  sins,  and  strive  to  become  better;  and 
after  death  every  one  must  expect  the  rewards  or  pen- 
alties  befitdng  the  acts  of  this  life.  Lord  Herbert  ia  one 
of  the  numerous  instances  on  reoord  of  the  little  influ- 
ence which  speculative  opinions  exercise  upon  the  con- 
duct  of  life.  Maintaining  that  no  revelation  is  credible 
which  is  imparted  to  a  portion  only  of  mankind,  he  ney- 
ertheless  daims  the  belief  of  his  hearers  when  he  tells 
them  that  his  dou|)ts  as  to  the  publication  of  his  work 
were  removed  by  a  direct  manifestation  of  the  diyine 
wili"*  (EngUah  Cychpadia).  He  states  the  phenomena 
of  this  reyelation  as  foUows:  "  Thus  filled  with  doubts,  I 
was,  on  a  bright  summer  day,  sitting  in  my  room ;  my 
window  to  the  south  was  open ;  the  son  shone  biightly ; 
not  a  breeze  was  stirring.  I  took  my  book  On  Truth 
into  my  hand,  threw  myself  on  my  knees,  and  prayed  de- 
youtly  in  these  words:  *0  thou  one  God,  thou  anthor 
of  this  light  which  now  shines  upon  me,  thou  giyer  of  aU 
inward  light  which  now  shines  upon  me,  thou  giyer  of 
all  inward  light,  I  impk>re  thee,  acooiding  to  thine  infi- 
nite  mercy,  to  pardon  my  reąuest,  which  is  greater  than 
a  siimer  should  make.  I  am  not  sufficiently  convinced 
whether  I  may  publish  this  book  or  not.  If  ito  publicsr 
tion  ahall  be  for  thy  glory,  I  beseech  thee  to  give  me  a 
sign  finom  heayen ;  if  not,  I  ¥rili  suppress  it.'  I  had 
scarcely  fimshed  these  words  when  a  k>ud,  and  yet,  at 
the  same  time,  a  gentle  sound  came  from  heayen,  not 
like  any  sound  on  earth.  This  oomforted  me  in  such  a 
manner,  and  gaye  me  such  satisfaction,  that  I  consid- 
ered my  prayer  as  haying  been  heard."  His  style  is 
yery  obscure,  and  his  writings  haye  been  but  little  read, 
ih  spite  of  the  talent  and  subtlety  of  thought  which 
they  eyince.  He  is  properly  regarded  as  the  founder 
of  the  school  of  English  Deists,  although  he  was  him- 
self a  sceptic  of  a  yery  high  and  pure  sort  rather  than 
an  infideL  Herbert  did  not  profess,  in  his  writings,  to 
oppose  Christianity,  but  held  that  his  "  flye  artides"  em- 
braced  the  snbstanoe  of  what  is  taught  in  the  Scrip- 
tures.  **  The  ideas  which  his  writings  contiibuted  to  De- 
istical  speculation  are  two,  yiz.  the  examination  of  the 
imiyersal  principles  of  religion,  and  the  appeal  to  an  in- 
temal  illominating  influence  superior  to  reyelation,  *  the 
inward  light,'  as  the  test  of  rdigious  truth.  This  was 
a  phrase  not  uncommon  in  the  17th  century.  It  was 
osed  by  the  Poritans  to  mark  the  appeal  to  the  spiritual 
instincts,  the  heayen-taught  feelings ;  and,  later,  by  mys- 
tics,  Uke  the  founder  of  the  Quakers,  to  imply  an  appeal 
to  an  intemal  sense.  But  in  Herbert  it  differs  from 
these  in  bdng  uniyersal,  not  restricted  to  a  few  persona, 
and  in  being  intellectual  rather  than  emotional  or  spirit- 
ual" (Farrar,  Criłieal  History^  p.  120).  For  an  examina- 
tion  and  refutation  of  his  theory  of  religion,  see  Ldand, 
Deittical  Wriiert,  letter  i,  and  Halyburton,  AV.  ReHiff- 
ion  (Works,  1836,  8yo,  p.  263).  See  also  Kortholt,  De 
Tribus  impostoribus  (Herbert,  Hobbes,  Spinoza ;  Hamb. 
1701, 4to) ;  Van  Mildert,5oyfe  Lectures,  1888 ;  Remusat, 
Beme  des  deux  Mondes^  1854,  p.  692;  Farrar,  CrUical 
Hist.  of  Free  Thought,  lect  iy ;  Shedd,  Hist,  ofDoctrinesi 
bk.  ii,  eh.  iy,  §  2  i  Conten^rary  RevieWf  July^  1869. 


HERBERT 


194 


HERD 


Herbert,  G-eorge,  brother  of  Loid  Herbert  of 
Cherbuiy,  was  bom  at  Montgomery  Castle  April  S,  1598. 
Ue  was  edacated  at  Cambridge,  where  he  became  a  fel- 
low  in  1615.  In  the  year  1619  he  was  madę  umyersity 
orator,  and  a  letter  of  thanks  whicb  be  wrote  in  that 
capadty  to  James  I  excited  the  monarch*B  attention, 
who  deciaied  him  to  be  the  jewel  of  that  muyersity, 
and  gave  him  a  sinecure  of  £120  per  annom.  He  be- 
came intimate  with  Bacon  and  Wotton,  and  had  pros- 
pects  of  great  saooeas  in  public  life,  but  the  death  of  his 
fiiends,  the  duke  of  Richmond  and  the  marąuis  of  Ham- 
ilton, followed  by  that  of  king  James,  frustrated  these 
eicpectations,  and  Herbert  determined  to  deyote  him- 
self  to  the  ministiy.  He  was  accordingly  ordained,  and 
in  1626  was  madę  prebendary  of  Layton,  in  the  diocese 
of  Lincoln.  In  1630  he  became  rector  of  Bemerton, 
near  Saiisbuiy.  A  quotidian  ague  soon  destroyed  his 
heaith,  and  he  died  in  1688.  George  Herbert's  piety 
was  humble  and  profound.  He  was  zealous  in  his  pas- 
torał duties ;  an  undue  rererence  for  ceremonies,  as  such, 
was  his  chief  failing.  A  beautiful  sketch  of  him  is  giyeu 
in  Walton'8  Lioea  (often  reprinted).  **  Men  like  Geoiige 
Herbert  are  rare.  It  is  not  his  wide  leaming,  nor  his 
lefined  taste ;  not  his  high  spirit,  nor  his  amiability,  nor 
his  strictuess  of  life;  but  the  zare  combination  in  one 
person  of  qualities  so  diveEsely  beautifuL  He  was  mas- 
ter of  all  leaming,  haman  and  divine  \  yet  his  leaming 
is  not  what  strikes  the  reader  most,  it  is  ao  thoroughly 
oontrolled  and  subordinated  by  his  ]ively  wit  and  prac- 
tical  wiadom.  He  was  a  man  of  extraordinary  endow- 
ments,  both  personal  and  snch  as  belonged  to  his  rank, 
not  loet  in  indolence,  nor  wasted  in  triyialities,  but  all 
combined  and  cultivated  to  the  utmost,  and  then  de- 
▼oted  to  the  highest  purpoees"  {ChriitianRememhrancer, 
1862,  p.  187).  His  writings  include  The  Tempie:  «a- 
cred  Poems  andprwaU  EjacukUums  (Lond.  1683, 12mo ; 
and  many  editions  sińce,  in  yarious  forais) : — Tke  Coun- 
try Parsorif  kit  Ckaracter  and  JRule  ofholy  lAfe  (many 
editions).  There  are  serend  editions  of  his  complete 
work8,,such  as,  łTorJb,  Proie  and  Yerae,  tuUh  WaUoris 
LĄfe  cmd  Cokridge^s  Notes  (London,  1846, 2  toIs.  12mo) ; 
Work8,  with  Shetch  o/ kit  Life  by  Jerdan  (1853,  smali 
8yo;  not  including  all  of  Herbert's  woiks);  Worka, 
Prote  and  Verte,  edited  by  WiUmott  (1854,  8yo);  Life 
and  Writinga  o/G.  Herbert  (Boston,  1851, 12mo).  The 
best  edition  of  his  Workt  is  Pickering^s  (Lond.  1850,  2 
yoU.).  See  Allibone,  Diet.  of  A  utkort,  i,  829 ;  Middle- 
ton,  EranffelicaŁ  Biograpky,  iii,  48 ;  Christian  Examiner, 
yol.  U ;  Brit^  Ouarłerfy  Retiew,  April,  1854,  art.  iL 

Her^oulds  (HfKucKiję)  is  roentioned  in  2  Mace.  iy, 
19  as  the  Tyrian  god  to  whom  the  Jewish  high-priest 
Jason  sent  a  religious  embassy  (9tutpoi)y  with  the  offer- 
ing  of  300  drachma  of  silyer.  That  this  Tyrian  Her* 
cules  (Herod,  ii,  44)  is  the  same  as  the  Tyrian  Baal  is 
eyident  from  a  bilingual  Phoenician  inscription  found  at 
Malta  (described  by  Gesenius,  Monum.  Ling,  Pkcen.  i,  96), 
in  which  the  Phoenician  words,  "To  our  Lord,  to  Mel- 
karth,  the  Baal  of  Tyre,"  are  rcpresented  by  the  Greek 
'HpaKkii  'Ap^iiyćrcc.  Moreoyer,  Herakles  and  Astarte 
are  mentioned  together  by  Josephus  (Aitf.yiii,  6, 3),  just 
in  the  same  manner  as  Baal  and  Ashtoreth  are  in  the 
Old  Testament  The  forther  identity  of  this  Tyrian 
Baal  with  the  Baal  whom  the  idolatroua  Israelites  wor- 
shipped  is  eyinced  by  the  following  argnments,  ns  stated 
chiefly  by  Moyers  {Die  Pkmieier,  i,  178).  The  worship 
of  Baal,  which  preyailed  in  the  time  of  the  Judges,  was 
pttt  down  by  Samuel  (1  Sam.  yii,  4),  and  the  effects  of 
that  suppression  appear  to  haye  U»ted  through  the  next 
few  centuries,  as  Baal  is  not  enumerated  among  the 
idols  of  Solomon  (1  Kings  xi,  5-8 ;  2  Rings  xxiii,  13), 
nor  among  those  worshipped  in  Judah  (2  Kings  xxiii, 
12),  or  in  Samaria,  where  we  only  read  of  the  golden 
calyes  of  Jeroboam  (1  Kings  xii,  28;  xy,  26).  That 
worship  of  Baal  which  preyailed  in  the  reign  of  Ahab 
cannot,  therefore,  be  regarded  as  a  merę  continuation  or 
reyiyal  of  the  oki  Canaanitish  idolatry  (although  there  is 
no  reaaon  to  doubt  the  essential  identity  of  both  Baals), 


but  was  introduced  directiy  from  Pboeoida  by  Ahab^ 
marriage  with  the  Sidonian  princess  Jezebel  (1  Kingi 
xyi,  31).  In  like  manner,  the  establishment  of  tlii«» 
idolatiy  in  Judah  is  ascribed  to  the  marriage  of  the 
king  with  a  daughter  of  Jezebel  (comp.  Josephns^  Ant, 
yiii,  13, 1 ;  ix,  6,  6). 

The  power  of  naturę,  which  was  worshipped  nnder 
the  form  of  the  Tyrian  Hercules,  Melkarth,  Baal,  Ado- 
nis, Moloch,  and  whateyer  his  other  names  are,  was  that 
which  originates,  sostains,  and  destroys  life.  These 
functłons  of  the  Deity,  according  to  the  PboBninana, 
were  represented,  although  not  exdnsiyely,  by  the  mm, 
the  influence  of  which  both  animates  yegetation  by  ita 
genial  warmth,  and  soorches  it  up  by  its  ienror  (see  Da- 
yis,  Carthage,  p.  276-9). 

Almost  all  that  we  know  of  the  worship  of  the  Tyrian 
Hercules  is  preeeryed  by  the  dassical  writeis,  and  re- 
lates  chiefly  to  the  Phoenician  colonies,  and  not  to  the 
mother  state.  The  eagle,  the  lion,  and  the  thunny-flsh 
were  sacred  to  him,  and  are  oflen  found  on  Phoenician 
coins.  Pliny  expre88ly  testifies  that  human  aacrifioea 
were  offered  up  eyery  year  to  the  Carthaginian  Hercules 
(Hist.  Nał.  TOLJicyij  y,  12),  which  ooinddes  with  what  is 
stated  of  Baal  in  Jer.  xlx,  5,  and  with  the  acknowledged 
worship  of  Moloch.  Mention  is  madę  of  public  embas- 
sies  sent  from  the  colonies  to  the  mother  state  to  honor 
the  national  god  (Arrian,  Akx,  ii,  24;  Q.  Curt.  iy,  2; 
Polyb.  xxxi,  20),  and  this  fact  places  in  a  dearer  light 
the  ofTence  of  Jason  in  sending  enyoys  to  his  festiyal 
(2  3Iacc.  iy,  19). 

Moyers  endeayors  to  show  that  Herakles  and  Her* 
cules  are  not  merely  Greek  and  Latin  synonymes  for 
this  god,  but  that  they  are  actually  deriyed  from  hia 
trae  Phoenician  name.  This  original  name  he  supposee 
to  haye  consisted  of  the  syllables  "^K  (as  found  in  *^*lfe(, 
lion,  and  in  other  words),  meaning  tłrong,  and  ^3,  from 
h^\  to  concuer;  so  that  the  compound  means  Ar  cor'- 
guert.  Thb  harmonizes  with  what  he  conceiyes  to  be 
the  idea  represented  by  Hercules  as  the  destioyer  of 
Typhonic  mousters  (L  c.  p.  480).  Melkarth,  the  McX(- 
KopOoc  of  Sanchoniathon,  occurs  on  coins  only  in  the 
form  n^pbs.  We  must  in  this  case  aasume  that  a 
kapk  has  been  abeorbed,  and  resolye  the  word  into  ^"D 
KH^Ip,  king  of  tke  city,  7ro\iovxoc,  The  bilingual  in- 
scription renders  it  by  'Ap^^y/njc ;  and  it  is  a  title  of 
the  god  as  the  patron  of  the  city. — Kitto,  s.  y.  See  Baai« 

Herd  (prop.  ^^2,  of  neat  cattle;  ''.^r,  a  flock  of 
smaller  animals;  nsppa,  as  property;  aytkti,  a  droye). 
The  herd  was  greatly  regarded  both  in  the  patriarchal 
and  Mosaic  period.  Its  multiplying  was  considered  tm  a 
Uessing,  and  its  decrease  as  a  curse  (Gen.  xiii,  2 ;  Dent. 
yii,  14;  xxviii,  4;  PSa.  cyii,  38;  cxliy,  14;  Jer.  li,  28). 
The  ox  was  the  most  predous  stock  next  to  hone  and 
mule,  and  (sińce  those  were  rare)  the  thing  of  greatest 
yaluc  which  was  commonly  poesessed  (1  Kings  xyiiiy 
5).  Hence  we  see  the  force  of  Saul^s  threat  (1  Sam.  xi,  7). 
The  herd  yielded  the  most  esteemed  sacrifice  (Numh. 
yii,  3 ;  Psa.  bux,  81 ;  Isa.  lxyi,  8) ;  also  flesh-meat  and 
milk,  chiefly  conyerted,  probably,  into  butter  and  cheeae 
(DeuL  xxxii,  14;  2  Sun.  xyii,  29),  which  snch  milk 
yields  morę  copionsly  than  that  of  smali  cattle  (Arist. 
Hist.  Anim.  iii,  20).  The  full-grown  ox  is  hardiy  eyer 
slaughtered  in  Syria;  but,  both  for  aacrifidal  and  eon- 
yiyial  purposes,  the  young  animal  was  preferred  (£xod. 
xxix,  l)'perhap8  three  years  might  be  the  age  up  to 
which  it  was  so  regarded  (Gen.  xy,  9) — and  is  spoken 
of  as  a  spedal  dainty  (Gen.  xyiii,  8 ;  Amos  yi,  4;  Łnke 
xy,  23).  The  case  of  Gideon's  sacrifice  was  one  of  exi- 
gency  (Judg.  yi,  25),  and  exceptionaL  So  that  of  the 
people  (1  Sam.  xiy,  32)  was  an  act  of  wanton  exceBB. 
The  agricultural  and  generał  usefulness  of  the  ox  in 
ploughing,  threshing,  and  as  a  beast  of  buiden  (1  Chronu 
xii,  40 ;  Isa.  xlyi,  1),  madę  snch  a  daughtering  seem 
wasteful ;  nor,  owing  to  difficulties  of  grazing,  fattening, 
etc,  is  beef  the  product  of  an  Eastem  d^iate.-    The 


HERD 


195 


HERDER 


miimai  was  broken  to  serrice  probably  m  his  third  year 
(luu  xr,  5;  Jer.  zlyiii,  34 ;  oomp.  Pliny,  if.  N,  yiii,  70, 
ed.  Plu-.).  In  tbe  moist  Beason,  when  graas  abounded  in 
the  wwte  Imdsi  especudly  in  the  ^  soath*'  region,  heards 
gnaed  there;  e.  g.  in  Carmel,  on  the  west  ńde  of  the 
I>ead  Ses  (1  Sam.  xxv,  2;  2  Chroń,  xxvi,  10).  Dothan 
alao^  Mishor,  and  Sharon  (Gen.  xxxvii,  17 ;  oomp.  Rob- 
inson, iii,  122;  Stanley,  S.  a»d  Pal  p.  247,  260,  484;  1 
Cbioo.  xxvii,  29;  Im.  lxv,  10)  were  favorite  pasturesL 
For  snch  pmpoaea  Uzziah  huilt  towers  in  the  wildemees 
(2  Cfaron.  xxvi,  19).  Not  only  grass,  bat  foliage,  is  ac- 
ceptaUe  to  tbe  ox,  and  the  woods  and  hilla  of  Bashan 
and  Gilead  afibrded  both  abondantly;  on  soch  upland 
(Psa.!,  10;  bcv,  12)  pastorea  cattle  might  graze,  as  also, 
of  ooime,  bj  river  ńdes,  when  driven  by  the  heat  from 
the  icgions  crf*  the  ^^wildemesa."  Espedally  was  the 
eastem  table-land  (Ezek.  xxxix,  18;  Numb.  xxxii,  4) 
"  a  plaoe  for  cattle,"  and  the  pastorał  tribes  of  Keuben, 
Gad,  and  half  Manaaseh,  who  settled  there,  retained 
aomething  of  the  nomadic  character  and  handed  down 
Bome  image  of  the  patriarchal  Ufe  (Stanley,  8,  and  Pal 
p.  824, 325).  HercLsnien  in  Egypt  were  a  Iow,  perhaps 
the  Jowest,  caate;  henoe,  aa  Joaeph^s  kindied,  tłuough 
hia  poaition,  were  brooght  into  oontact  with  the  highest 


^^  IJKrptian  defonned  Oxherd,  eo  repreeented  on  the  Monu- 
menta  to  mark  contempt.    (WUkinaon.) 

castea,  they  are  described  as  ''an  abomination  ;**  bat  of 
the  abmidance  of  cattle  in  Egypt,  and  of  the  care  there 
beatowed  on  them,  there  is  no  doubt  (Gen.  xlvii,  6, 17 ; 
£xod.  ix,  4j  20).  Brands  were  ased  to  diaringwiah  the 
owneis'  herds  (WDkinson,  iii,  8, 195 ;  iv,  12»-131).  So 
the  plague  of  hall  was  sent  to  smite  especially  the  cattle 
(Pja.  lxxviii,  48),  the  firstbom  of  which  also  were  smitr 
ten  (Exod.  xii,  29).  The  Israelites  departing  stipuUted 
for  (£xod.  X,  26)  and  took  *'much  cattle"  with  them 
(xii,  38).  Seo  £xode.  Cattle  formed  thos  one  of  the 
tnditions  of  the  Inaelitish  nation  in  its  greatest  period, 
and  became  almoet  a  part  of  that  greatness.  They  are 
the  sobject  of  providential  care  and  legifllative  ordinance 
(E:Eod.  XX,  10;  xxi,  28;  xxxiv,  19;  Lev.  xix,  19;  xxv, 
7;  Deat.xi,15;  xxii,  1,4,10;  xxv, 4;  Psa. civ,  14;  Isa. 
xxx,  23 ;  Jon.  iv,  11),  and  even  the  LeWtes,  though  not 
holding  land,  were  idlowed  cattle  (Numb.  xxxv,  2, 3). 
When  pastuie  fiuled,  a  mixtare  of  varioas  grains  (called, 
Job  vi,  5,  i''^a,  rendered  "fodder"  in  the  A.  V.,  and,  Isa. 
xxx,  24,  ''provender;"  oompare  the  Roman /arr ago  and 
ocyimm,  Pliny,  xviii,  10  and  42)  was  used,  as  also  ^W, 
''chopped  straw"  (Gen.  xxiv,  25;  Isa.  xi,  7;  lxv,  26), 
which  was  tom  in  pieces  by  the  threshlng-machine,  and 
oscd  probably  for  feeding  in  stalls.  These  last  formed 
an  important  adjanct  to  catde-keeping,  being  indispen- 
sable  for  shelter  at  certain  seasons  (Exod.  ix,  6,  19). 
The  heid,  after  its  hanrest  daty  was  done,  which  prob- 
ably caused  it  to  be  in  high  condiUon,  was  especially 
worth  caring  for;  at  the  same  time,  most  open  pas- 
tnres  wonld  have  failed  becanae  of  the  heat  It  was 
then  probably  stalled,  and  wonld  oontinae  so  until  vegę- 
tation  retnmed.  Henoe  the  tailure  of  ^  the  herd"  from 
''the  stalls"  is  mentioned  as  a  featare  of  scarcity  (Hab. 
ni,  17).  **  Calvefl  of  the  stall"  (MaL  iv,  2 ;  Pn)v.  xv,  17) 
«a  the  ol^ects  of  watchfol  care.  The  Reubenites,  etc., 
beatowed  their  cattle  **in  cities"  when  they  passed  the 


Jordan  to  share  the  toib  of  conqaest  (Dent  iii,  19),  i.  e, 
probably  in  some  pastures  dosely  adjoiuing,  like  the 
**  snbnrbs"  appointed  for  the  cattle  of  the  Levites  (Numb. 
xxxv,  2,  3 ;  Josh.  xxi,  2),  Cattle  were  ordinarily  al- 
lowed  as  a  prey  in  war  to  the  captor  (Deut.  xx,  14; 
Josh.  viii,  2),  and  the  case  of  Amalek  is  exceptiona], 
probably  to  mark  the  extreme  curse  to  which  that  peo- 
ple  was  devoted  (£xod.  xvii,  14;  1  Sam.  xv,  3).  The 
occupation  of  herdsman  was  honorable  in  early  timea 
(Gen.  xlvii,  6 ;  1  Sam.  xi,  6 ;  1  Chroń,  xxvii,  29 ;  xxviii, 
1).  Saul  himself  resomed  it  in  the  interval  of  his  caies 
as  king;  also  Doeg  was  certainly  high  m  his  confłdence 
(1  Sam.  xxi,  7).  Pharaoh  madę  some  of  Jo8eph's  breth- 
ren  **  rukrs  over  his  cattle."  David*8  herd-masters  were 
among  his  chief  offioers  of  state.  In  Solomon's  time  the 
relative  importance  of  the  pursuit  dedined  as  commeroe 
grew,  but  it  was  still  extensive  (Eocles.  ii,  7 ;  1  Kings  iv, 
23).  It  most  have  greatly  suffered  from  the  inroads  of 
the  enemies  to  which  the  country  under  the  later  kings 
of  Judah  and  Israel  was  expoeed.  Uzziah,  however  (2 
Chroń,  xxvi,  10),  and  Hezekiah  (xxxii,  28,  29),  resum- 
ing  command  of  the  open  country,  revived  it.  Josiah 
alBo  seems  to  have  been  rich  in  herds  (xxxv,  7-9).  The 
prophet  AmoB  at  fiist  followed  this  occupation  (Amos  i, 
1 ;  vii,  14).  A  goad  was  used  (Judg.  iii,  31 ;  1  Sarn. 
xiii,  21,  "ł^^ą,  "ff^^^  l>cing>  •»  mostly,  a  staff 
armed  with  a  spike.  For  the  word  Herd  as  ap» 
plied  to  swine,  see  Swinb.  On  the  generał  subject, 
Ugolini,  xxxix.  De  Re  Rugi,  vełU  H^.  c.  ii,  will  be 
found  nearly  exhaustive. — Smith.    See  Cattle. 

Herder,  Jouann  Gottfrisd  von,  one  of  the 
most  variously  gifted  of  German  writers,  was  bom 
August  25, 1744,  at  Mohrungen,  in  East  Prussia, 
where  his  father  kept  a  little  girls^-school,  His 
early  training  was  strict  and  religious.  A  preach- 
er  named  Trescho  taught  him  Greek  and  Latin ; 
and  the  pastor's  books  of  theology  were  devoaied 
by  the  young  student  A  complaint  in  the  eyea 
brought  him  under  the  notice  of  a  Bussian  sur* 
geon,  who  offered  to  instruct  him  in  suigery  gra- 
tis^ Herder  aooepted  the  offer,  but  at  Konigsbeig 
fainted  at  the  first  dissection  which  he  attended,  and 
thereupon  re8olved  to  study  theology.  He  gained  the 
acquaintance  of  persons  who  appreciated  him,  and  pro- 
cured  him  a  place  as  instructor  in  the  Frederick's  Col- 
lege at  Konigsbeig.  Herę  he  became  intimate  with 
Kant  and  Hamann,  who  greatly  influenced  the  develop« 
ment  of  his  mind.  With  the  most  indefatigable  indos- 
tiy  he  studied  philosophy,  natural  science,  histoiy,  and 
languages,  and  in  1764  became  assistant  at  the  cathe* 
dral  school  at  Biga,  to  which  office  that  also  of  preacher 
was  attached.  Herę  he  laid  the  foundations  of  his  great 
celebrity  as  a  pulpit  orator,  Some  literary  disputes  dis< 
gusted  him,  and  he  went  to  France,  and  was  there  cho^ 
sen  by  the  prinoe  of  Holstein-Oldenburg  as  his  travel- 
ling  companion.  He  would  have  gone  from  France  to 
Italy  had  he  not  been  arrested  by  the  complaint  in  hia 
eyes  at  Strasbourg,  where  he  first  became  acquainted 
with  Gothe.  In  1776  he  was  called  to  Weimar  as  court 
preacher,  and  in  that  little  capital,  then  celebratcd  aa 
the  Athens  of  Germany,  he  spent  the  remainder  of  his 
life,  respected  as  a  preacher  and  as  an  active  promoter 
of  education  and  other  public  improvement8,  and  labor« 
ing  unweariedly  in  his  multifarious  litcraiy  pursuits. 
He  died  Dec  18, 1803.  Herder'8  literary  activity  waa 
enormous.  There  is  hardly  a  field  of  literaturę  which 
he  lefl  uncxp1ored.  His  coUected  writings  amount  to 
8ixty  volume8  (Sdmmilicke  Werke^  Stuttgardt,  1827-30, 
60  vols.  18mo;  also  46  vol8.  8vo,  edited  by  Heyne  and 
Muller,  Tubingen,  1805-1820).  They  may  be  divided 
into  four  classes — History,  Belles-Lettres,  Philosophy, 
and  Theology.  In  philosophy,  Herder  was  rather  an 
obeenrer  than  a  metaphysician.  His  reputation  in  that 
field  rests  chiefiy  on  his  Ideen  zur  Geschickte  der  Mensch" 
heit  (4th  ed.  Lcips.  1841, 2  vols.),  translated  into  English 
by  Churchill,  under  the  title  Oułłines  ofa  Philosophy  of 
the  Histoty  o/Man  (2d  edit.  London,  1808,  2  vola,  8vo> 


HERDER 


196 


HEKDMAN 


Ab  a  theologian,  Herder  is  noted  not  for  science  or  sys- 
tem BO  much  as  for  his  freedom  of  Łhought  and  his  ge- 
nial  spirit.  In  some  lespecta  he  was  the  precursor  of 
Schleiermacher,  and  his  rationalism,  thotigh  Iow  enough, 
was  of  a  totally  different  school  from  that  of  Semler, 
Paulus,  and  the  neologists  generally.  He  sought  e»- 
pecially  to  render  BiUkcU  słudies  morę  profitable  by 
making  them  morę  fiee,  and  by  inresting  them  with  a 
buman  and  scieutific  interest.  In  his  work  on  the  Geitt 
der  ebrditdien  PoesU  (1782 ;  translated  by  Dr.  Marsh,  of 
Yermont,  under  the  title  SpirU  ofH^niw  Paetry,  1888, 
2  vols,  12mo),  he  dwelt  espedally  on  the  aesthetical  and 
human  side  of  the  Bibie,  which,  in  his  view,  instead 
of  weakening  its  daims  to  diyine  authority,  greatly 
stiengthens  them.  He  was  the  first  to  show  critically 
the  poetical  beanties  of  the  Bibie,  which  he  did  not  eon- 
sider  as  merę  omaments,  but  rather  as  being  grounded 
in  the  inner  naturę  of  the  revelation,  and  not  to  be  sep- 
aiated  from  a  correct  view  of  the  inspiration  of  the  con- 
tents  of  the  O.  T.  Though  others,  Lowth  for  instance, 
had  ahready  treated  this  subject  of  the  poetry  of  the  He- 
brews,  nonę  had  seen  so  deeply  into  its  naturę,  or  shown 
00  plainly  the  tnie  spirit  which  pervaded  it.  By  this 
poetical  oonsideration  of  the  O.  T.  history,  and  of  the  se- 
nes of  religious  precepts  based  on  this  history,  he  rid 
the  Bibie  from  the  mistakes  of  such  interpreters  as  Mi- 
chaeUs  and  others.  His  dUeste  Urhunde  d,  Menschenge- 
scMechit,  eine  nach  JahrhunderUn  eatkullte  heiUge  Schrift^ 
which  appeared  in  1774»  revolutionized  the  system  of  O.- 
T.  CKegesis  by  attempting  to  treat  the  history  of  crea- 
tion  (Gen.  i)  from  a  different  stand-point  from  the  one 
which  generaUy  prevailed.  In  his  ErlcaUerungen  z,  N. 
T,  au8  einer  neu  erdjfneten  tnorffenUmdudien  Ouełfe  (the 
Zend  Aresta),  which  he  published  in  1775,  he  also  en- 
deayored  to  render  the  exege8is  of  the  N.  T.  morę  ac- 
curate  and  profound,  by  showing  the  influence  of  Par- 
aeeism  on  the  Hebrew  and,  incidentally,  on  the  Chris- 
tian modo  of  thought.  He  worked  especially  on  the 
books  of  James  and  Jude,  under  the  title  ofBriefe  ztteier 
BrUder  Jau  tn  unserm  Kanon  (1775),  and  on  the  Apoca- 
lypse  in  Dos  Buch  r.  der  Zuhinft  des  Herm  (Riga,  1779). 
In  the  former  work  he  considers  James  and  Jude  as  the 
leal  brothers  of  the  Lord  according  to  the  flesh,  while 
in  the  seoond  he  maintains  that  the  predictions  of  the 
Apocalypse  were  fulfilled  at  the  destruction  of  Jeru- 
saiem.  Herder  also  wrote  on  yarious  pointa  of  the  his- 
tory of  the  New -Testament  revelation  and  of  Bibli- 
cal  dogmatics,  especially  iń  his  Ckristficke  Schr^en, 
In  these  he  treats  of  the  gift  of  tongucs  ou  the  first 
Christian  PentecosŁ ;  of  tbe  resurrection  as  a  point  of 
faith,  history,  and  dogma;  of  the  Kedeemer  as  pre- 
sented  in  the  three  gospels;  of  the  Son  of  God,  the 
SayiouT  of  the  world;  of  the  spirit  of  Chriatianity ;  of 
religion,  doctrinal  meanings,  usages,  etc  **One  of  the 
chief  senrices  of  Herder  to  Christianity  was  his  persist- 
ent  labor  to  elevate  the  pastorał  office  to  its  original  and 
proper  dignity.  He  held  that  the  pastor  of  the  church 
should  not  be  solely  a  leomed  critie,  but  the  minister  of 
the  common  people.  In  his  day  the  pastor  was  consid- 
ered  the  merę  instrument  of  the  state,  a  sort  of  theolog- 
ical  policeman — a  degradation  which  Herder  could  haid- 
ly  permit  himself  to  think  of  without  riolent  indigna- 
tion.  In  his  Letters  on  the  Słvdt/  of  Theology^  published 
in  1780,  and  in  subaequent  smaller  works,  he  sought  to 
eroke  a  generation  of  theologians,  who,  being  imbued 
with  bis  own  ideas  of  humanity,  would  betake  them- 
9elve8  to  the  edification  of  the  humble  mind.  He  would 
eject  scholasticism  from  the  study  of  the  Bibie,  and  show 
to  his  readere  that  simplicity  of  inquiry  is  the  safest 
way  to  happy  results.  He  would  place  the  modem  pas- 
tor, both  in  his  relations  to  the  cause  of  humanity  and 
in  the  respect  awarded  him  by  the  world,  doae  beside 
the  patrlorch  and  prophet  of  other  days ;  and  that  man, 
in  his  opinion,  was  not  worthy  the  name  of  pastor  who 
could  neglect  the  individual  requirements  of  the  soul. 
According  to  Herder,  the  theologian  should  be  trained 
from  childhood  in  the  knowled^  of  the  Bibie  and  of 


practical  religion.  Yooth  should  have  ever  befot«  them 
the  example  of  pious  parents,  who  were  bringing  them 
up  with  a  profound  conriction  of  the  doctrines  of  divine 
truth.  To  chooee  theology  for  a  profeasion  from  mei^ 
cenary  aims  would  precluide  all  possibility  of  paatonl 
usefuhiesB.  *  Let  prayer  and  reading  the  Bibie  be  yoar 
moming  and  evening  food,'  was  his  advice  to  a  young 
preacher.  Some  of  the  most  eloquent  words  from  his 
pen  were  written  against  the  cistomaiy  morał  preacfa- 
ing  which  so  much  afSicted  him.  '  Why  don't  you  come 
down  from  your  pulpits,*  he  asks, '  for  they  cannot  be  of 
any  adrantage  to  you  in  preaching  such  things  ?  What 
is  the  use  of  all  these  Gothic  churches,  altars,  and  soch 
matters  ?  No,  indeed !  Bełigion,  true  religion,  mast  re- 
turn to  the  exercise  of  its  original  functions,  or  a  preach- 
er will  beoome  the  most  indefinite,  idk,  and  indliffearent 
thing  on  earth.  Teachers  of  religion,  true  aervanta  of 
God's  word,  what  have  you  to  do  in  our  century  ?  The 
hanrest  is  plenteous,  but  the  laborers  are  few;  pray  the 
Lord  of  the  hanrest  that  he  will  send  out  laborers  who 
will  be  something  more  than  bare  teachers  of  wiadom 
and  Yirtue.  More  than  this,  help  yoursel^^es !'  The 
counsel  given  by  Herder  to  others  was  practised  fiist  by 
himself.  He  lived  among  eriUcal  minds,  who  fpumed 
humble  pastorał  work,  but  he  felt  it  his  duty,  and  there- 
fore  discharged  \t  to  the  best  of  his  ability.  His  preach- 
ing was  richly  lucid,  and  not  directed  to  the  moet  intel- 
ligent  portion  of  his  auditom.  He  took  up  a  plain  truth 
and  stroje  to  make  it  plainer.  Tet,  while  the  masses 
were  most  benefited  by  his  simplicity  of  pulpit  con^er- 
sation,  those  gifted  men  who  thought  with  him  arose 
from  their  seata  profoundly  impressed  with  the  dignity 
and  value  of  the  GoepeL  A  witty  ¥rriter  of  the  time, 
Stun,  g^vc8  an  aacount  of  Herder^s  preaching  tMt 
throws  some  light  upon  the  manner  in  which  the  plain, 
eamest  exp08ition  of  God's  word  always  affected  the  in- 
different  auditor.  '  You  should  have  seen,'  says  this  man, 
'  how  eveiy  rustling  sound  was  hushed  and  each  cuiioua 
glance  was  chained  upon  him  in  a  very  few  rainutes. 
We  were  as  still  as  a  Morarian  congregation.  AU  hearts 
opened  themselyes  spontaneously ;  erery  eye  hung  upon 
him  and  wept  unwonted  tears ;  deep  sighs  escaped  firom 
every  breast.  My  dear  friend,  nobody  preaches  like 
him* "  (Hurst,  History  of  RatUmtdismj  eh.  yii).  See  Her- 
zog, ReaJrEncyklop,  t,  747 ;  Erinnerungen  aus  d,  Leben 
Herder' s  (TUbingen,  1820,  8vo);  Quinet,  Ideen  z,  GesdL 
(Par.  1884) ;  E.  G.  Hcitler,  Herdef^s  CharacterbOd  (Er- 
lang.  1846,  6  vols.) ;  artide  by  Bancroft,  North  Amer'- 
ican  Reoiew^  July,  1836,  p.  216 ;  Menzd,  German  Liter- 
aturę (American  translation,  ii,  419) ;  review  ofMarsh^s 
translation,  Christian  Eraminer,  xvii],  167 ;  Hagenbach, 
History  of  the  Church  tn  the  I8ih  and  I9ih  Ctnturies, 
translated  by  Hurst,  voL  ii,  lectures  i-v. 

Herdman  (prop.  '^i^ia,  a  tender  of  oxen ;  in  dia- 
tinction  from  n?"!"!,  a  feedcr  of  sheep ;  but  practically 
the  two  occupations  were  generaUy  united).  From  the 
earUest  times  the  Hebrews  were  a  pastorał  people. 
Abraham  and  his  sons  were  masters  of  herds  and  flocks, 
and  were  regulated  in  their  morements  vcr>'  much  by  a 
regard  to  the  nccessities  of  their  cattle,  in  which  their 
wealth  almost  entirely  oonsisted.  In  Kgypt  the  Israel- 
ites  were  known  as  keepers  of  cattle.  \Vhen  they  Icft 
Egjrpt,  they,  notwithstanding  the  oppressions  to  which 
they  had  been  subjected,  took  with  them  "  flocks  and 
herds"  (Exod.  xii,  88) ;  and  though  during  their  wan- 
derings  in  the  wUdemess  their  stock  was  in  aU  probabil* 
ity  greatly  reduced,  before  they  entered  Canaau  they 
had  so  replenished  it  by  their  conąuests  in  the  pastorał 
regions  beyond  Jordan  that  they  took  with  them  a 
goodly  number  of  animals  wherewith  to  begin  their  new 
Ufe  in  the  land  that  had  been  promised  them.  Of  tliat 
land  laige  tracts  were  suited  for  pasturage;  certain  of 
the  tribes  were  almost  exclusively  deroted  to  pastorał 
occupations;  and  traces  of  a  nomadic  life  among  other 
tribcś  than  those  settled  on  the  east  of  the  Jordan  are 
found  even  as  late  as  the  time  of  the  monarchy  (compare 
1  Chion.  iv,  88-43). 


HERDMAN 


197 


HERDMAN 


The  pasŁonl  life  łuu  alwajs  had  a  chann  for  the 
Shemitic  peoples^  and  among  them,  as  well  as  among 
other  nations,  it  has  always  been  held  in  honor.  In  the 
onen  and  apaciotu  fields  bordering  on  the  Jordan  and  in 
Łhe  hlll  country  of  Palestine  it  U  a  life  of  oomparatiye 
ea»e  a  :  1  of  great  independence  even  in  the  present  day ; 
men  posaeased  of  flocks  and  herda  become  ąuietly  and 
gradually  rich  without  any  seyere  exertion  or  anxicty ; 
and  but  for  feuds  among  themselyes,  the  oppression  of 
soperiors,  and  the  predatory  tendency  of  their  less  re- 
spectable  ncighbors,  their  life  might  flow  on  in  an  al- 
most  unbroken  tranquil]ity.  The  wealth  of  sheiks  and 
emira  ia  meaaured  chietiy  by  the  number  of  their  flocks 
and  herds;  and  men  who  would  count  it  an  intolerablc 
indignity  to  be  constrained  to  engage  in  any  handicraft 
occupation,  or  even  in  mercantile  adrenture,  fulfil  with 
pride  and  satisfaction  the  duties  which  their  pastorał 
life  impoeea  upon  them.  It  was  the  same  in  andent 
timea.  Job*s  substance  consisted  chiefly  of  cattle,  his 
wealth  in  which  madę  him  the  greatest  of  all  the  men 
of  the  East  (i,  3).  The  firet  two  kings  of  Israel,  Saul 
and  David,  came  from  "  following  the  heni**  to  ascend 
the  throne  (1  Sam.  ix;  xi,  5;  Psa.  lxxviii,  70).  Men 
"  very  great,"  like  Nabal,  derived  their  riches  from  their 
flocks,  and  themselves  superintended  the  operations  eon- 
nected  with  the  care  of  them  (1  Sam.  xxv,  2  sq.).  Ab- 
aalom,  the  princc  of  Israel,  had  a  shecp-farm,  and  per- 
aonally  occupied  himself  łvith  ite  duties  (2  Sam.  xiii,  28). 
Hesha,  king  of  Moab,  was  "  a  sheepmaster"  (^p13,  2 
Kings  iii,  4).  The  daughters  of  chiefs  and  wealthy  pro- 
prietors  did  not  think  it  beneath  them  to  tend  the  flocks 
and  herda  of  their  family  (Gen.  xxix,  9  [comp.  xxiv,  15, 
19] ;  £xod.  ii,  16;  oomp.  Homer,  IL  \i,  423;  Ody$,  xii, 
121 ;  xiii,  221 ;  Varro,  De  Rt  Rutt.  ii,  1).  The  proudest 
tiile  of  the  kings  of  Israel  was  that  of  shepherds  of  the 
people  (Jer.  xxiii,  4 ;  Ezek.  xxxiv,  2,  etc ;  comp.  toc/u- 
vf  c  Xcwv  in  Homer  and  Hesiod,  pastim^  and  Plato,  De 
Rep.  iv,  15,  p.  440,  D.),  and  God  himself  condescended 
to  be  aildressed  as  the  Shepherd  of  Israel  (Psa.  lxxx,  1), 
and  was  trusted  in  by  his  pious  scnrants  as  their  shep- 
herd (Psa.  xxiii,  1).  In  later  times  the  title  of  shep- 
herd was  given  to  the  teachers  and  leadera  of  the  syna- 
gogue^  who  wcre  called  0*^0 J^B  (Lightfoot,  Hor.  Ileb. 
M  .]fatf.  iv,  23) ;  bat  this  was  unknown  to  the  times  be- 
(bre  Christ. 

By  the  wealthier  proprietors  their  flocks  and  herds 
were  placed  under  the  charge  of  servants,  who  borę  the 
designation  of  napią  "łc':!,  iksj  -łC-i,  •^?*-|,  1«b,  or 


D''*łC3.  These  were  sometimes  armed  with  weaponi, 
to  protect  themselycs  and  their  charge  from  robbers  or 
wiki  beasts;  though,  if  we  may  judge  from  the  case  of 
David,  their  fumiture  in  this  respect  was  of  the  simplest 
description.  Usually  they  carried  with  them  a  staff 
(b|9C  X^yÓ)  fumished  with  a  crook,  which  might  be 
used  for  catching  an  animal  by  the  foot ;  thoae  who  had 
the  charge  of  oxen  carrieil  with  them  a  sharper  instru- 
ment (Judg.  iii,  81 ;  1  Sam.  xiii,  21).  See  Goad.  They 
had  also  a  wallet  or  smali  bag  (Za^tp^l^,  Ttjpa)  in  whicK 
to  carry  proyisions,  amraunition,  or  any  easily  portablc 
aniele  (1  Sam.  x\ńi,  40, 43 ;  Psa.  xxiii,  4 ;  Micah  vii,  14 ; 
Matt.  X,  10;  Lukę  ix,  3,  10).  Their  dress  consisted 
principally  of  a  cloak  or  roantle  (the  burnus  of  the 
modem  Arabs)  in  which  they  coidd  wrap  the  entire 
body  (Jer.  xliii,  12).  For  food  they  were  obligcd  to  be 
contented  with  the  plainest  farę,  and  often  were  reduced 
to  the  last  cxtremities  (Amos  vii,  14;  Lukę  xv,  15). 
Their  wages  consisted  of  a  portion  of  the  produce,  espe- 
cially  of  the  milk  of  the  flock  (Greń.  xxx,  32  są. ;  1  Cor. 
ix,  7).  That  they  cultivated  musie  is  not  unlikely, 
though  it  hardly  folio ws  from  1  Sam.  xvi,  18,  for  Da- 
vid*s  case  may  have  been  cxceptional;  in  all  countries 
and  times,  however,  musie  has  been  associated  with  the 
pastorał  life.  When  the  sery-ants  belonging  to  one  mas- 
ter cxisted  in  any  number,  they  wcre  placed  under  a 
chief  (n3pT3  ^iC,  Gen.  xlvii,  6 ;  ópj^tirot^^y,  1  Pet.  v, 
4) ;  and  under  the  monarchy  there  was  a  royal  ofiicer 
who  borę  the  title  of  D"^"!!!  ^"^S^, "  diief  of  the  herds- 
men"  (1  Sam.  xxi,  7 ;  comparc  1  Chroń,  xxvii,  29,  and 
"  magister  regii  pecoris,*'  Livy,  i,  4). 

The  animals  placed  under  the  care  of  these  herdsmen 
were  cliicfly  sheep  and  goats;  but  besides  these  there 
were  also  neat  cattle,  asses,  camels,  and  in  latcr  times 
swine.  It  would  seem  that  the  keeping  of  the  animals 
last  named  was  the  lowest  grade  in  the  pastorał  life 
(Lukę  xv,  15) ;  and  probably  the  keeping  of  sheep  and 
goats  was  held  to  be  the  highcst  aS  that  of  horses  is 
among  the  Arabs  in  the  present  day  (Niebuhr,  A  rabtfy 
i,  226).  The  herdsman  led  his  charge  into  the  opcn 
pastuie-land,  where  they  could  freely  roam  and  find 
abundant  supply  of  food ;  the  neat  cattle  were  conducted 
to  the  richer  pastures.  such  as  those  of  Bashan,  while 
the  sheep,  goats,  and  camels  found  sufficient  sustenanoe 
from  the  scantier  herbage  of  the  morę  rocky  and  arid 
parts  of  Palestine,  provided  there  was  a  supply  of  wa^ 
ter.    While  in  the  flelds  the  herdsmen  lived  in  tenta 


T  « 

Andent  Bgyptlan  Herdsmen  giviug  an  Account  of  the  Catile.    (Willdnson.) 

F^  l.lIcHHica  ictv1aff  •"•««<»■(  to  th«wr<b«,S.    f.  Anothw  doioc  obeiaiuiM  totha  mMt«r  of  tb««UU,  ortothe  KrltM.    4.  Olhcr  bardiBMii.    S.Tht 
.  4iiręt  vi  ih»  cattU,  cairytog  •  rop*  in  hia  hud.    i.  Bowing  sad  glrlng  hi«  report  to  tb«  Krlbc,  7,  over  whom  U  the  lunal  Mtchel,  And  two  hosm. 


HERES 


id8 


HERESY 


(niaąi^ą,  Song  of  SoL  i,  8 ;  Isa.  xxxviii,  12 ;  Jer.  vi,  8), 
and  Łhero  were  folds  (ri'l")^ą,  Namb.  xxxii,  16;  2  Sam. 
vii,  8 ;  Zeph.  ii,  6),  and  apparently  in  eome  cases  tents 
(D-łbnS,  2  CbioD.  xiv,  15)  for  the  cattle.  Watch-tow- 
en  were  alao  erected,  whence  the  shepheid  could  desery 
any  coming  danger  to  his  charge;  and  vigUance  in  this 
respect  was  one  of  the  8hepherd's  chief  virtue8  (Mic  iv, 
8 ;  Nah.  iii,  18 ;  Lakę  ii,  8).  If  any  of  the  cattle  wan- 
dered  he  was  bound  to  foUow  them,  and  leave  no  means 
nntried  to  recover  them  (Ezek.  xxxiv,  12;  lAke  xv,  5) ; 
and  harsh  mastera  were  apt  to  reąuire  at  their  senrants' 
hands  any  loss  they  might  have  sustained,  either  by  the 
wandering  of  the  cattle  or  the  ravage8  of  wild  beasts 
(Gen.  xxxi,  88  są.),  a  tendency  on  which  a  partial  check 
was  placed  by  the  law,  that  if  it  was  tom  by  beasts,  and 
the  pieces  could  be  produced,  the  person  in  whose  charge 
it  was  should  not  be  reąuired  to  make  restitution  (£xod. 
xxii,  18 ;  comp.  Amos  iii,  12).  To  assist  them  in  both 
watching  and  defending  the  flocks,  and  in  recovering 
any  that  had  strayed,  shepherds  had  doga  (Job  xxx,  1), 
as  have  the  modem  Arabs;  not,  however,  *<]ike  those 
in  other  lands,  fine,  faithful  feliows,  the  friend  and  oom- 
panion  of  their  masters  .  .  .  but  a  mean,  siniater,  ill- 
conditioned  geiveration,  kept  at  a  diatance,  kicked  about, 
and  half  stanred,  with  nothing  noble  or  attractive  about 
them"  (Thomson,  Land  and  Book,  i,  801),  a  description 
which  fully  suits  Job'8  diaparaging  oomparison.  The 
flocks  and  herds  were  regularly  oounted  (Lev.  xxvii,  82 ; 
Jer.  xxxiii,  18),  as  in  Egypt  (Wilkinson,  ii,  177). 

The  pastores  to  which  the  hcrdsmen  conducted  their 
flocks  were  called  HlS^n,  the  placu  toitAoułj  the  country ^ 
the  deseri  (Job  v,  10 ;  xviii,  17 ;  Prov.  viii,  26 ;  oompare 
ć^w  iv  ipijfŁotCf  Mark  i,  45) ;  alao  r\iX3  (Jer.  xxv,  37 ; 
Amos  i,  2),  "na*!!?  "a  (PŚa.  lxv,  18;  Jer.*  ix,  9,  etc),  nij 
(1  Sam.  vu,  8VHoa.  ix,  13,  etc.),  la^C  (Psa.  lxv,  is'; 
Isa.  xlii,  11 ;  Jer.  xxiii,  10;  Joel  ii,  22,  etc). ,  In  simi- 
mer  the  modem  nomades  seek  the  northem  and  morę 
hilly  regions,  in  winter  they  betake  themBelve8  to  the 
aouth  and  to  the  plain  country  (D'Arvieux,  iii,  815;  v, 
428) ;  and  probabiy  the  same  uaage  prevailed  among 
the  HebrewsL  In  leading  out  the  flocks  the  shepherd 
went  before  them,  and  they  followed  him  obedient  to 
hia  caU;  a  practioe  ftom  which  our  Savioar  draws  a 
touching  iUuatration  of  the  intimate  relation  between 
him  and  Ma  people  (John  x,  4).  The  yoong  and  the 
aickly  of  the  flock  the  shepherd  would  take  in  his  arma 
and  carry,  and  he  waa  careful  to  adapt  the  ratę  of  ad- 
vance  to  the  oondition  and  capacity  of  the  feebler  or 
burdened  portion  of  hia  charge,  a  practice  which  again 
gives  occasion  for  a  beautifid  illustration  of  6od*a  care 
for  his  people  (Isa.  xl,  1 1 ;  comp.  Gen.  xxxiii,  18).  These 
uaages  atill  prevail  in  Paleatine,  and  have  often  been 
descnbed  by  traveller8;  one  of  the  most  graphic  de- 
srcipdons  ia  that  given  by  Mr.  Thomson  (Land  and 
Book,  i,  801  aą. ;  compare  Wilaon,  Land»  o/ the  Bibie,  ii, 
822).  Aa  the  Jews  advanoed  in  commercial  wealth  the 
Office  of  shepherd  diminished  in  importance  and  dignity. 
Among  the  later  Jews  the  shepherd  of  a  smali  flock  waa 
preduded  from  bearing  witness,  on  the  ground  that,  aa 
such  fed  their  flocks  on  the  paaturea  of  others,  they  were 
infected  with  dishonesty  (Maimon.  wi  Demai,  ii,  8). — 
Kitto,  s.  V.    See  Shephebd. 

He'res,  part  of  the  name  of  two  places,  difTerent  in 
the  Hebrew.    See  alao  Kir-Heres;  Timnath-Heres. 

1.  Har-Chi£bbs  (O*!?!— ijl,  mountam  of  the  «m/ 
Sept.  rh  opoc  to  6cpaxw^tjCjYulg,  mona  JTares,  quod  in- 
UrpTftatur  tettatecetie,  L  e.  of  tilea ;  AutłuTers.  *<  mount 
Herea"),  a  city  (in  the  valley,  according  to  the  text, 
but  in  a  part  of  Mt.  Ephraim,  according  to  the  name) 
of  Dan,  ncar  Aijalon,  of  which  the  Amońtea  retained  pos- 
session  (Judg.  i,  85).  It  waa-probably  situated  on  aome 
eminence  bordering  the  present  Meij  Ibn-Omeir  on  the 
eaat,  posaibly  near  the  aite  of  Emmaua  or  Nicopolis. 
We  may  even  hazard  the  conjecture  that  it  waa  iden- 


tical  with  Mt.  Jearim  (q.  d.  Ir-Shemesh,  i.  e.  «an-dcy)y 
L  e.  Cheaalon  (q.  v.). 

2.  Ir  ha-Hźres  (p^^^m  W,  dty  of  deatmotkmi 
Sept.  iróXcc  &(r€B'tK  v.  r.  a^rpćc ;  Vu]g.  cMŁom  aofif,  evi- 
dently  reading  Dl>nn  *^'^9,  cUy  ofthe  «im),  a  name  that 
occurs  only  in  the  diaputed  paasage  Isa.  xix,  18,  where 
most  MSS.  and  editions,  as  aiso  the  verBions  of  Aąnila, 
Theodotion,  the  Syriac,  and  the  Engliah,  read,  one  (of 
theae  five  cities)  shaU  he  called  The  dty  ofdettrucUon,  i. 
e.  in  the  idiom  of  Isaiah,  one  of  these  citie»  shaU  he  der 
sŁroyed,  a  signiflcation  (from  D^n,  to  tear  down)  for 
which  Iken  {DuserL  phiL  crit,  16)  contcnda.  The  Jews 
of  Paleatine,  who  approved  thia  reading,  leferred  it  to 
Leontopolia  and  its  tempie,  which  they  abhorred,  and 
the  deatmction  of  which  they  aupposed  to  be  here  prc- 
dicted.  But  instead  of  D^n,  Aeres,  the  morę  pzobable 
reading  ia  O^^n,  cft€r»,  which  ia  read  in  aixteen  MSS» 
and  aome  editiona,  and  ia  expreased  by  the  Sept.  (Gom- 
plut,),  SymmachuSjYulgate,  Saadiaa,  and  the  margin  of 
the  English  verBion,  and  haa  also  the  teatimony  of  the 
Tahnudiata  {Menachotk,  foL  110,  A.).  If  we  foUow  the 
certain  and  aacertained  uaua  loquendi,  thia  Utter  denotea 
city  ofthe  sun,  L  e.  Heliopolis  in  Egypt,  ełaewhere  call- 
ed BeUtrShemeth,  and  On.  The  Arabie  meaning  of  the 
term  is  to  drfend,  to  preserte,  and  the  passage  may  be 
rendered,  one  shciU  he  called  A  city  preserred,  i.  e.  one 
of  those  five  cities  shall  be  preaerred.  (See  Gesenios, 
Comment,  ad  loc)  Whichever  interpretation  may  be 
choaen,  this  reading  ia  to  be  prefeireid  to  the  other. — 
Geaeniua.    See  iR-^iA-HEBica. 

He^resh  (Heb.  Che' resk,  ^"^l^sOeneef  Sept.  'A(mc)> 
one  of  the  Levite8  that  dwelt  in  the  **  village8  of  the 
Netophathites"  near  Jemsalem,  on  the  return  fhim  Baby- 
lon  (1  Chroń,  ix,  15).    B.C.  586. 

Heresiarch,  a  leader  in  heresy,  founder  of  a  aect 
of  heretics.    See  Heresy. 

Heresy,  in  theology,  is  any  doctrine  containing 
Christian  elements,  but  aioug  widi  them  otheca  8ubver-> 
sive  of  Christian  tmth. 

I.  Oriffin  and  early  Use  ofthe  TTorA— The  word  ai- 
/E>ea<c  (hoBresis)  originally  meant  simply  choioe  (e.  g.  of 
a  aet  of  opiniona) ;  later,  it  waa  applied  to  the  opiftwm 
themselves;  last  of  aU,  to  the  sect  maintaining  them. 
"  Philosophy  was  in  Greeoe  the  great  object  which  di- 
vided  the  opiniona  and  jndgmenta  of  men ;  and  hence 
the  term  heresy,  being  most  frequently  applied  to  the 
adoption  of  thia  or  that  particular  dogma,  came  by  an 
eaay  tranaition  to  aignify  the  aect  or  school  in  which 
that  dog^a  waa  maintained ;"  e.  g.  the  heresy  of  the  Sto- 
ics,  of  the  Peripatetica,  and  Epicurcans.  Josephua  also 
speaks  ofthe  three  hereties  (aipiaaCf  seets,  AnL  xii,  5, 9 
=^cXo(ro0(a(,  xviii,  1,  2)  of  the  Fhariaees,  Sadducees, 
and  Esaenea.  In  the  historical  part  of  the  New  Testa- 
ment, the  word  denotes  a  sect  or  party,  whether  good  or 
bad  (Acts  v,  17;  xv,  5;  xxiv,  6;  xxvi,  5;  xxviii,  22). 
In  Acta  xxvi,  4, 5,  St.  Paul,  in  defending  himself  before 
king  Agrippa,  uses  the  same  term,  when  it  was  mani- 
festly  his  design  to  exalt  the  party  to  which  he  had  be- 
longed,  and  to  give  their  system  the  preference  over  ev- 
ery  other  system  of  Judaism,  both  with  regard  to  sound- 
neas  of  doctrine  and  purity  of  morala.  In  the  Epiatlea 
the  word  occurs  in  a  somewhat  diffierent  senae.  Paul, 
in  GaL  v,  20,  puts  ajpkanc,  keresies,  in  the  list  of  crimes 
with  uncleanneas,  aeditions  (iSixooTaai£u\  etc  In  1  Cor. 
xi,  19  (there  must  also  be  heresies  among  yon),  he  naes 
it  apparently  to  denote  schisma  or  divi8iona  in  the 
Church.  In  Tit  iii,  10  he  comea  near  to  the  later  sense ; 
the  ^  heretical  person^'  appears  to  be  one  given  over  to 
a  self-chosen  and  divergent  form  of  belief  and  practice. 
John  Wesley  says :  "  Heresy  is  not  in  all  the  Bibie  taken 
for  ^an  error  in  fundamentals*  or  m  any  thing  else,  nor 
Bchism  for  any  scparation  madę  from  the  outward  com- 
munion  of  others.  Both  heresy  and  sdiism,  in  the  mod- 
em sense  of  the  words,  are  sins  that  the  Scripture  knowa 
nothing  oP  ( Works,  N.  Y.  edit.  vii,  286).    In  the  eaily 


HEKESY 


199 


HEKESY 


posUapoBtolic  Chnreh,  if  <'  a  man  admiUed  a  part,  or 
even  the  whole  of  Chiisdaiuty,  and  added  to  it  some- 
thiąg  of  his  own,  or  if  he  lejected  the  whole  of  it,  he 
was  eąualfy  dealgnated  as  a  heretic    Thos,  by  degrees, 
it  came  to  be  restricted  to  those  who  profeased  Chris- 
tianity,  but  profeased  it  erroneonsly ;  and  In  later  times, 
the  doetrine  of  the  Trinity,  aa  defined  by  the  Gouncil 
of  Nioe,  was  ahnoet  the  only  test  which  dedded  the  or- 
thodoxy  or  the  heiesy  of  a  Christian.    Diiferences  opon 
minor  pointa  were  then  described  by  the  milder  term  of 
joUm;  and  the  distincdon  seems  to  have  been^made, 
that  oni^  of  faith  might  be  maintained,  though  sehism 
exiatod:  but  if  the  unity  of  iaith  waa  yiohited,  the  vio- 
iaUa  tsi  it  waa  a  heretic."    In  generał,  in  the  eariy 
Chmcfa,  all  who  did  not  hoM  what  was  calied  the  Cath- 
olic  fiuth  (the  orikodox)  were  calied  her^ikg.    At  a  rery 
early  period  the  notion  of  wilfiil  and  immonl  perreińty 
began  to  be  attached  to  heresy,  and  thua  we  may  aooount 
for  the  seyere  and  violent  langnage  used  against  here- 
ticsu    ^  Oiarges^  indeed,  or  insinaati<)nB  of  the  giossest 
impurities  ars  sometimes  thrown  out  by  the  orthodox 
writets  against  the  early  heretics;  but  we  are  boond  to 
reeeire  them  with  great  caution,  because  the  answers 
which  may  have  been  giren  to  them  are  loet,  and  be> 
canae  they  are  not  genersHy  justifled  by  any  authentic 
recoids  which  we  poosess  respecting  the  liyes  of  those 
heretica.    The  trath  appears  to  be  this,  that  some  fla- 
grant  immoralities  were  notoriously  perpetrated  by  some 
of  the  wildest  among  their  sects,  and  that  these  have 
give&  coloriiig  to  the  chaiges  which  have  been  thrown 
opon  them  too  indiscriminately.    But,  whatsoerer  un- 
ootainty  may  rest  on  this  inąuiry,  it  cannot  be  disputed, 
Jint,  that  the  apostoUcal  fathers,  foUowing  the  footstepe 
ci  the  apoatles  themselyes,  regarded  with  great  jealoosy 
the  bńth  and  growŁh  of  erroneoos  opinions;  and  nezt, 
that  they  did  not  authorize,  either  by  instruction  or  ex- 
ample,  any  seyeńty  on  the  pertons  of  those  in  error. 
They  opposed  it  by  their  reasoning  and  their  ełoqnenoe, 
sod  thi^  avoided  ita  contagion  by  removing  firom  their 
commimion  those  who  persisted  in  it;  but  they  were 
also  mindfiil  that  within  these  Umits  was  oonfined  the 
power  which  the  Church  reoeived  firom  the  apostles  who 
foonded  it  over  the  s^ńritual  disobedience  of  its  mem> 
ben^  (Waddington,  Hiatory  o/łhe  ChurrA,  eh.  y,  p.  59). 
IL  Jitkaions  of  Berety  to  tke  Church  and  to  Doetrine. 
— **  Hcieaiea,  Uke  sin,  all  spring  from  the  natural  man ; 
bot  they  fiiśt  make  their  appearance  in  opposition  to 
the  rerealed  truth,  and  thus  presuppose  its  existenoe,  as 
the  €dl  of  Adam  implies  a  preyious  state  of  innooence. 
There  are  reiigions  errors,  indeed,  to  any  extent  out  of 
Chiistianity,  bot  no  heiesies  in  the  theological  sense. 
These  enoiB  become  hereńes  only  when  they  oome  into 
eootact,  at  leaat  ontwardly,  with  reyealed  trath  and  with 
the  life  of  the  Church.    They  oonsist  essentiaUy  in  the 
oooadoos  or  anconsdous  reaction  of  unsubdued  Juda- 
ism  or  heathenósm  agiiost  the  new  creation  of  the  Gos- 
pel.   Heresy  ia  the  distortion  or  cuicature  of  the  orig- 
inal  Christian  tmth.    But  as  God  in  his  wonderful  wis- 
dom  ean  faring  good  out  of  all  eyil,  and  has  more  than 
compensated  for  the  loss  of  the  first  Adam  by  the  lesur- 
Rctioa  of  the  seoond,  so  mnst  all  heresies  in  the  end 
oaly  oondemn  themselyes,  and  serye  the  more  folly  to 
citifaljsh  the  tmth.     The  New-Testament  Scriptures 
thanseiyes  are  in  a  great  measore  the  result  of  a  firm 
wiiitance  to  the  distortions  and  oarruptions  to  which 
dieChiistian  religion  was  esposed Irom  the  first    Nay, 
we  may  say  that  eyery  dogma  of  the  Church,  eyery  doe- 
trine fixed  by  her  symbda,  is  a  yictory  oyer  a  oorre- 
ipooding  emr,  and  in  a  certain  sense  owes  to  the  error, 
not,  indeed,  its  sobstanoe,  which  oomes  finom  God,  but 
saaredly  its  logical  oompleteness  and  sdentific  form. 
Henńea,  therafore,  beloog  to  the  pcooess  by  which  the 
Cfamtian  tmth,  leceiyed  in  sfanple  fiiith,  beioomes  dear- 
)f  defioed  as  an  object  of  knowledge.    They  are  the 
Bcgatiye  occańona,  the  chaUenges,  for  the  Chureh  to  de- 
fead  ber  yiews  of  trath,  and  to  set  them  forth  in  com- 
phta  scioitiiie  ferm"  (Schaą  ApoKoUe  Charth,  §  1«5). 


Heresy  and  Sckianu-^**  Near  akin  to  heresy  is  the  idea 
of  echiem  or  Church  diyision,  which,  howeyer,  primarily 
means  a  separation  from  the  goyeimnent  and  discipline 
of  the  Church,  and  does  not  necessarily  include  depart- 
ure  from  her  orthodoxy.  .  .  Thus  the  Kbionites,  Gnos- 
tics,  and  Arians  were  heretics;  the  Montanists,  Koya- 
Łians,  and  Donatists,  schismatics.  By  llie  standard  of 
the  Koman  Chureh,  the  Greek  Church  is  only  schismat- 
ic,  the  Protestant  both  heretical  and  schismatic.  Of 
conrse,  in  diiTerent  branches  of  the  Church  .  .  there  are 
different  yiews  of  heresy  and  trath,  heten>doxy  and  or- 
thodosy,  and  likewise  of  sehism  and  sect"  (Schaff,  Apoet, 
Church,  §  165).  *'  Heresy,  as  distinguished  from  sehism, 
oonsists  in  the  adoption  of  opinions  and  practices  eon* 
trary  to  the  artides  and  practices  of  any  particnlar 
chureh,  whereas  sehism  is  seoession  from  that  church, 
the  renouncing  allegiance  to  its  goyerament,  or  forming 
parties  within  it;  for  snrely  Paul  (in  1  Cor.  and  else- 
where)  oensures  men  as  cansing  diyisions  who  did  not 
openly  renounce  allegiance.  Neither  sehism  nor  her- 
esy, then,  is  properly  an  ofi^ence  against  the  Chureh  uni- 
yersal,  but  against  some  particuhir  Chureh,  and  by  its 
own  members.  On  the  same  principle,  no  Church  can  be 
properly  calied  either  heretic  or  schismatic;  for  church- 
es,  being  independent  eetablishments,  may  indeed  eon-* 
suit  each  other,  but  if  they  cannot  agree,  the  guilt  of 
that  Church  which  is  in  error  is  neither  sehism  nor  her- 
esy, but  conropt  faith  or  bigoted  narrownesa  Accord- 
ingly,  OUT  Reformers,  whilst  they  chaiacterize  the  Rom- 
ish  Chureh  as  one  that  has  erred,  haye  yeiy  properly 
ayoided  the  misapplication  of  the  terms  *  schismatic' 
and '  heretic'  to  it.  Neyertheless,  if  a  Chureh  has  been 
formed  by  the  seoession  of  members  from  another  Chureh, 
on  disagreement  of  principles,  each  seoeder  is  both  a 
schismatic  and  a  heretic  because  of  his  former  conneo* 
tion;  but  the  crime  does  not  attach  to  the  Chureh  so 
formed,  and  accordingly  is  not  entailed  on  suooeeding 
membón  who  naturally  spring  up  in  it  If  the  sehism 
was  founded  in  error,  the  guilt  of  error  would  always 
attach  to  it  and  its  membere,  bot  not  that  of  sehism  or 
heresy.  He  who  is  conyinoed  that  his  Church  is  essen- 
tiaUy in  error  is  bonnd  to  secede;  bot,  like  the  drcum- 
stanoes  which  may  be  supposed  to  justify  the  subject  of 
any  realm  in  renouncing  his  oountiy  and  withdrawing 
his  allegiance,  the  plea  should  be  long,  and  eerioualy,  and 
conacientiously  weighed;  but  with  respect  to  distinct 
churehes,  as  they  can  form  aJliances,  so  they  can  secede 
firam  this  alliance  without  l>eing  guilty  of  any  crime. 
So  far  firom  the  separation  between  the  Romish  and 
Pretestant  churehes  haying  anything  of  the  character 
of  sehism  or  heresy  in  it,  the  Chureh  of  England  (sup- 
posing  the  Chureh  of  Romę  not  to  haye  needed  any  re- 
form) would  haye  been  justified  in  renouncing  its  asso- 
dation  with  it  simply  on  the  ground  of  expediency" 
(Hinds,  Eariy  Christian  Church). 

m.  List  of  the  prindpal  Earfy  Heresies.— Th^  fol- 
lowing  list  indudes  the  chief  heieńes  of  the  fiist  six 
centuries ;  each  will  be  found  in  its  alphabetical  place  in 
this  CydopsBdia:  Century  I.  Nazarenes,  who  adyocated 
the  obseryance  of  the  Jewish  law  by  the  worshippers 
of  Christ  Simonians,  followers  of  Simon  Magus,  who 
prided  themsdyes  in  a  superior  degree  of  knowledge, 
and  mainfained  that  the  world  was  created  by  angels, 
denied  the  resurrection,  etc  Kicolaitanes,  followers  of 
Nicolaus  of  Antioch.  Cerinthians  and  Ebionites,  follow- 
ere  of  Cerinthus  and  £bion,who  denied  the  diyinity  of 
Christ,  and  adopted  the  prindples  of  Gnosticism.  Many 
of  them  were  Millenariana.  Century  TL  Elcesaites,  the 
followers  of  £lxai  or  £loesai,who  only  partially  admit- 
ted  the  Christian  reUgion,  and  whoee  tenets  were  most- 
ly  of  philosophic  origin.  Gnostics,  so  calied  from  thdr 
pretences  to  yi/uMrcCr  superior  knowledge :  this  seems  to 
haye  been  the  geneńl  name  of  all  heretic&  (1.)  Among 
Syrian  Gnostics  were  the  followers  of  Saturainus,  who 
adopted  the  notion  of  two  prindpks  rdgning  oyer  the 
worki,  assomed  the  eyil  nature  of  matter,  denied  the  re- 
ality  of  Chńsfs  human  body,  etc.    Baidesaniaiis :  their 


HERESY 


200 


HERESY 


prindpks  rMembled  those  of  Satominiu.  Tatianists 
aiid  £ucratit8ey  who  boASted  of  an  extniordina]y  oonti- 
nence,  condemned  marriagie,  etc  Apotactlci,  who,  in 
addition  to  Łhe  opinions  of  the  Tatianists,  renounoed 
property,  etc.,  and  aaserted  that  any  who  lired  in  the 
marriage  state  were  incapaUe  of  8alvaŁion.  (2.)  Gnoe^ 
tics  of  Ańa  Minor,  Ceidonians,  who  held  two  contra- 
ry  principles,  denied  the  reuurrection,  despiaed  the  au- 
thority  of  the  Old  Testament,  and  rejected  the  GospeLs. 
Marcionites,  who  reaembled  the  Cerdonians,  and  in  ad- 
dition admittcd  two  Gods,  asserted  that  the  Saviour's 
body  was  a  phantaam,  etc.  The  followen  of  Ladan  and 
Apelles  may  be  claased  among  the  Maicionite8.  (3.) 
Among  Egyptian  Gnostics  were  the  Basilidians,  follow- 
ers  of  Basilides,  who  espouaed  the  heresies  of  Simon  Ma- 
gus,  and  admitted  the  fundamental  point  on  which  the 
whole  of  the  hypotheses  then  preyalent  may  be  said  to 
hinge,  namely,  that  the  world  had  been  created,  not  by 
the  immediate  operation  of  the  dirine  being,  but  by  the 
agency  of  eona.  Carpocratians,  Antitactas,  Adamitea, 
Prodicians,  the  followen  of  Secundus,  Ptolemy,  Marcua, 
Colobanus,  and  Heradeon.  (4.)  Inferior  sects  of  Gnoe- 
ties — Sethiana,  Cainitea,  Ophites. 

Hereaies  not  of  Oriental  origin :  Patripaaaians,  whoae 
principal  leader  was  Praxeaa;  Melchizedechians,  nnder 
Theodotus  and  Artemon;  Hermogenians,  Montaniats, 
Cliiliasta  or  Millenariana.  Century  III,  The  Manich«e- 
ana,  the  Hieradtes,  the  Patripassians,  under  Nofitos  and 
Sabeliiua;  hereay  of  Beryllua;  Paulianiats,  under  Paul 
of  Samosata  \  Noyatians,  under  Noratus  and  Noyatian ; 
the  Monarchie!,  the  Arabici,  the  Aąuarians,  the  Origen- 
ista.  Century  IV,  The  Arians,  GoUuthiana,  Macedoni- 
ana,  Agno^tse,  Apollinariana,  GoUyridiana,  Sdeucians, 
Anthropomorphites,  Joyinianista,  Mesealians,  Timothe 
ans,  Priscillianista,  Photinians,  Donatists,  Messalians, 
Bouosians.  Century  V,  The  Pdagians.  Nestorians,  Eu- 
tychians,  Theopaschites.  Century  VL  The  Aphtharto- 
docetfie,  Seveiiani,  Comipticobe,  Monothelites. 

ly.  Punishment  of  Hereay, — Soon  after  the  triumph 
of  Christianity  OTer  paganism,  and  its  establishment  by 
the  State,  the  lawa  became  very  seyere  against  heretica. 
Those  of  the  State^  madę  by  the  Christian  emperors 
from  the  time  of  Constantine,  are  compriaed  under  one 
title.  De  IlareUcis^  in  the  Theodosian  oode.  (See  be- 
Iow.)  The  prindpal  are  the  notę  of  infamy  affixed  to 
all  heretics  in  common ;  commerce  forbidden  to  be  hdd 
with  them ;  pńyation  of  all  offices  of  dignity  and  profit; 
disqualification  to  dispose  of  their  property  by  will,  or 
to  recdye  property;  pecuniary  mulcts;  proscription  and 
baniflhment;  corpord  punishment,  such  as  soourging. 
Heretics  were  forbidden  to  hołd  public  disputations ;  to 
propagate  their  opinions;  their  children  could  not  in- 
herit  patrimony,  unless  they  retumed  to  the  Church, 
etc.  The  laws  of  the  Church  consisted  in  pronouncing 
formd  anaihema,  or  excommunication,  against  them; 
forbidding  them  to  enter  the  church,  so  much  as  to  hear 
sermons  or  the  reading  of  the  Scriptures  (this  was  but 
partiaily  obsenred) ;  the  prohibition  of  all  persons,  un- 
der pain  of  excommunication,  to  join  with  them  in  any 
reUgious  exercise8;  the  enjoining  that  nonę  should  eat 
or  conyerse  familiarly  with  them,  or  contract  affinity 
with  them ;  their  names  were  to  be  struck  out  of  the 
diptychs ;  and  their  testimony  was  not  to  be  recdyed  in 
any  ecclesiasticd  cause  (Bingham,  Orip,  Eccles.  voL  ii). 
Augu8tine's  view  of  heresy  is  deserying  of  specid  no- 
tice,  as  it  forms  the  basis  of  the  doctrine  and  piactice  of 
the  Middle  Ages.  In  De  Civit,  Deiy  xyiii,  51,  he  says; 
"Qui  ergo  in  ecdesia  morbidum  aliquid  prayumąue  sa- 
piunt,  ń  correpii,  ut  sanum  rectumque  sapiant,  reais- 
tunt  conłumaciier,  suaąue  pestifera  et  mortifera  dogmata 
emendare  nolunt,  sed  de/ensare  pernstun/y  hareticijiunfy 
et  foras  cxeuntea  habenłur  in  exercentibus  inimicis."  The 
earlier  fathers  of  the  Church  had  steadily  refused  using 
force  in  opposing  heresy  (Hilarius,  Piotav,  ad  Constant, 
i,  2  and  7;  contr,  Auxent,  Mb,  init;  Athanasius,  Ilist, 
A  rian,  §  33),  and  at  most  permitted  the  secular  powers 
to  interfere  to  preyent  the  organization  of  heretical  com- 


munities  (Chiysost  HonuL  29, 46,  «n  Matth,),  and  evea 
this  was  offcen  censured  (see  Socrates,  Hist,  JCodea,  ri,  19, 
where  it  is  sdd  that  the  misfortunes  whidi  befd  C^iy- 
sostom  were  by  many  considered  as  a  punishment  for 
his  haying  caused  churches  belonging  to  the  Qttartn- 
dedmani  and  Noyatians  of  Asia  to  be  taken  away  from 
them  and  dosed).    Angustine,  on  the  contrary  {Retreu^ 
iat,'ńfCb\  ep.  93, ad  V uMsen^tuin,  §  17 ;  ep.  18Ó,  ad Bo- 
mfac  §  21 ;  Opus,  imperf,  2,  2),  basing  himaelf  on  the 
passage  Lukę  xiy,  23  {cogUe  intrart,  etc),  oompłetdy 
reyeraed  his  former  opinion  that  heretics  and  schismat^ 
I  ics  were  not  to  be  brought  back  by  the  aid  of  secular 
'  power,  and  stated  explidtly,  as  a  fundamental  prind- 
ple,  that  ^damnata  hareeis  ab  epitcopit  non  adkuc  eav 
aminandaj  ted  ooercenda  ett  poieetatibus  ChristiarnsJ* 
He  only  rejects  the  infiiction  of  capital  punishment,  yet 
morę  on  accountof  the  generał  oppodtion  of  the  andent 
Church  to  this  modę  of  pmiishment  than  from  leniency 
towards  heresy.    It  is,  oon8equently,  not  strange  if  eren 
this  protest  agains(  the  execntion  of  heretics  came  sub- 
sequently  to  be  diaregarded,  and  the  punishment  even 
approyed  (see  Leo  M.  <77. 15,  ad  Turribium ;  Hieronymusy 
ep,  37,  ad  Bipar,),    In  the  Middle  Ages  we  find  the 
Koman  Church,  on  the  one  hand,  oondemning  ca|iital 
punishment  by  its  canon  law,  and  at  the  same  time  de- 
manding  the  application  of  this  punishment  to  heretica 
from  the  secular  law.    Julian  the  Apostatę  had  long  be- 
fore  reproached  the  Christiana  of  his  time  for  perBecuting 
heretics  by  force  {ęp,  52,  and  ap,  CyrUL  c  Juliama»  Viy. 
As  to  the  prindples  which  guided  the  conduet  of  the 
secular  powers  towards  heretics,  we  find  that  it  warored 
long  between  an  entire  liberty  in  establishing  sects,  aub- 
raitting  them  to  merę  police  regulations,  restńcting 
them  in  the  carrying  out  of  their  B3r8tem  of  worship, 
depriying  them  of  some  political  rights  and  priyileiges, 
formally  prohibiting  them,  and  finaHy  puzdshing  them  aa 
criminals.    Through  all  thesc  yariations  the  fundament- 
al principle  was  adhered  to  that  the  secular  power  pos- 
sesses  in  generał  the  right  to  punish,  repress,  or  extir- 
pate  heresy.     Hesitation  is  shown  only  in  the  modę  of 
applying  this  prindple,  not  in  the  prindple  itself.    Moire- 
oyer,  the  exercise  of  this  right  was  in  no  way  subject  to 
the  decision  of  the  Church,  and.  the  secular  power  could 
by  itsdf  dedde  whether  and  how  far  a  certain  heresy 
should  be  tolerated — a  right  which  the  states  retained 
without  oppositlon  until  the  Middle  Ages.    The  namer- 
ous  laws  oontained  in  the  Codex  Theodostamu,  xyi,  tit. 
y,  De  HcBreUciSj  to  which  we  may  add  xvi,  tiL  i,  2,  8, 
are  the  prindpid  sources  for  the  history  of  the  Uwa  con- 
ceming>  sects  in  antiquity.     History  shows  ua  that  in 
the  use  of  compuldon  and  punishments  against  heretics 
the  secular  power  antidpated  the  wishes  of  the  Chorcfa, 
doing  morę  than  the  latter  was  at  first  diaposed  to  ap- 
proye.    Julian  the  Apostatę  granted  fuli  fireedom  to  her- 
etics with  a  view  to  injiure  the  Church.    Augustine  firat 
succecded,  in  the  5th  century,  in  establishing  an  a^^ree- 
ment  between  Church  and  State  on  this  quesdon,  yet 
without  contesting  the  right  of  the  State  to  uae  ita  in- 
dependent authority.    This  is  proyed  by  Justinian^a  Jn- 
afituiea  (compare  cod.  i,  tiL  6),  which  interfere  directly 
with  the  priyate  rights  of  heretics ;  and  in  case  of  inixed 
maniages,  they  order,  regardless  of  the  patria  potesł^is, 
that  the  children  shall  be  brought  up  in  the  orthodDX. 
faith  (cod.  i,  tit.  5;  i,  18). 

In  the  Middle  Ages  the  notion  of  heresy  and  of  tts 
rdations  to  the  Church  and  the  State  aoquired  a  fnrther 
deydopment.  At  one  time,  in  yiew  of  the  authority  of 
the  pope  in  matters  of  faith  and  of  the  doctrine  of  Jideg 
implicita  et  erplidtOy  the  notion  of  heresy  was  9o  modi- 
fied  that  the  act  of  disobcdience  to  the  pope  in  lefiisini;^ 
to  acccpt  or  reject  some  distinction  acoording  to  hia 
command,  was  considered  almost  as  its  woist  and  most 
iroportant  feature.  The  Scholastics  treated  the  doctrine 
conceming  heresy  scientiflcally.  Finally  the  Church 
came  to  deny  to  the  State  the  right  to  tolerate  aay  her- 
esy it  had  condemned.  It  eyen  compeUed  the  secular 
powers  to  repress  and  extirpate  heresy  acoording  to  its. 


HERESY 


201 


HERESY 


dictates  by  tlmits  of  eodefiasticBl  censore,  by  iimtiiig 
inTańon  and  reyolation  in  caae  of  resistance,  and  by 
oommanding  the  application  of  Becular  punishments, 
ftuch  as  the  seąueatratioin  of  property,  and  the  depriTa- 
Uon  of  all  dvii  and  political  rights,  as  was  espedaUy 
done  by  Innocent  IIL  Neyertheless,  the  Chnrch  con- 
tinued  in  the  piactice,  whenever  it  handed  over  eon* 
demned  beiedcs  to  the  secular  powen  for  punishment, 
of  reąoesting  that  no  penalty  should  be  iniłicŁed  on  them 
which  might  endanger  their  liyes;  but  this  was  a  meie 
fonnality,  and  so  far  from  being  madę  in  earnest  that 
the  Chioch  itself  madę  the  allowableness  of  such  pun- 
ishment  oue  of  ita  dogmas.  Thtis  Leo  X,  in  his  buli 
against  Luther,  in  1520,  oondenms,  among  other  piopo- 
aidons,  that  which  says  that  Hareticot  oomburere  esŁ  ctmr 
tra  rohoUatem  Spiritus  (art.  83)|  and  lecommended  the 
nse  of  such  ponishment  himself.  About  the  same  time, 
a  spedal  fonu  of  prooeedings  was  adopted  against  her- 
etica,  and  their  persecution  was  rendered  regular  and 
systematic  by  the  establishment  of  the  Inguintion  (q. 
V.).  Tbns,  in  ooune  of  time,  a  nomber  of  secular  penal- 
tJes  canoe  to  be  considered  as  ineiritably  connected  with 
eodesiaatical  oondemnation,  and  were  eTen  pronounced 
against  heretics  by  the  Chuich  itaelf  without  further 
formalitiea.  The  Church,  whenever  any  individual  sus- 
pected  of  heresy  recanted,  or  madę  his  peace  with  the 
Chuich,  dedaied  him  (in  fuU  court,  aiter  a  public  abju- 
nttion)  released  either  partially  or  fully  from  the  ecde- 
Hjyti^l  and  secular  punishment  he  had  %pm>  facto  in- 
cnired.  This  implied  the  right  of  stiU  intUcting  these 
ponishments  after  the  reoonciliation  (which  was  eq>e- 
cialiy  done  in  the  caaes  of  seąueatration  of  property, 
depiivation  of  ciril  or  eodesiastical  offices,  and  degrada- 
tkn,  while  a  return  to  heresy  afler  recantation  was  to 
be  puniflhed  by  death).  See  the  prorisions  of  the  Can- 
on Law  as  found  in  X,  de  haretic,  v,  tit.  7;  c  49 ;  X.  de 
tenient.  excommvn.  v,  39;  tit.de  Hmr,  in  VI«,  v,  2;  De 
karet,  in  Clement.  v,  8 ;  Z)e  haret.  in  Extniv''.cr.  comnu 
T,  3 ;  and  comp.  the  Liber  aepłimusy  r,  8,  4.  and  the  laws 
against  heretics  of  the  emperor  Frederick  II,  which  are 
connected  with  the  ecdesiastical  Uiws  (in  Pertz,  Monum. 
ii,  244,  287,  288, 327, 828) ;  and  the  rcgulations  concem- 
ing  mixed  marriages  and  the  marriage  of  heretics  All 
these  are  yet  considered  by  the  Roman  CathoUc  Chnrch 
as  haYing  the  force  of  laWf  though^  under  present  cir- 
eiuttstancefl,they  are  not  enforoed  (comp.  Benedict  Xiy, 
I>e  mpnod.  ŻHocc.  \\,  5;  ix,  14, 8;  xiii,  24,  21). 

Even  in  the  18th  century  Muratoii  defended  the  as- 
seftion  that  the  secular  power  is  bound  to  enforce  the 
most  aerere  secular  penalties  against  heretics  {De  inge- 
morum  moderatume  in  rełigiones  negotio,  ii,  7  sq.).  In 
the  beginning  of  the  19th  century,  pending  the  nego- 
tiations  for  the  crowning  of  Napoleon  I,  pope  Hos  YII 
dedared  that  he  could  not  set  foot  in  a  country  in  which 
the  law  reeotpMtd  thefreedom  ofworship  offhe  different 
Tfliffium,  The  same  pope  wrote  in  1805  to  his  nuncio 
at  Menna,  **  The  Church  has  not  only  sought  to  pre- 
Tent  heretics  from  using  the  {iroperties  of  the  Church, 
but  has  also  established,  as  the  punishment  for  the  sin 
of  heresy,  the  seciuestration  of  priyate  property,  in  c.  10, 
A',  d.  karet.  (v,  7),  of  principalities,  and  of  feudal  tenures, 
in  c  16,  eod. ;  the  latter  law  oontains  the  canonical  nile 
that  the  subjects  of  a  heretical  prince  are  free  from  all 
eaths  of  fealty  as  well  as  from  all  fidelity  and  obedience 
to  him ;  and  there  is  nonę  at  all  acquainted  with  history 
but  knows  the  decrees  of  deposttion  issued  by  popes  and 
cooncils  against  obstinately  heretical  princes.  Yet  we 
find  ouiselTes  now  in  times  of  such  misfortune  and  hu> 
Riiliation  for  the  bride  of  Christ  that  (ke  Ckurck  i»  not 
emhf  uncMe  to  enforce  tkete^  ite  koUest  masciiM,  against 
tke  rebdlious  enemiee  oftkefaitkj  with  the  firmness  with 
which  they  sfaookl  be,  but  it  even  cannot  proclaim  them 
openly  without  danger.  Yet,  if  it  cannot  exert  its  right 
in  depriving  heretics  of  their  estates,  it  may,"  etc.  With 
thk  may  be  oompared  the  permission  granted  in  an- 
tieipation,  in  1724  (BuUar.  Propaganda,  ii,  54,  66),  to 
the  Bathenes,  in  caae  of  coavenion,  to  take  pcssesaion 


of  the  properties  they  had  loet  by  their  apostasy ;  the 
satisfaction  manifested  by  the  Church  on  the  exptdsion 
of  the  Protestants  from  S^burg  (BulL  Propag.  ii,  246) ; 
and  many  things  happening  every  day  in  strictly  Bo- 
man  Catholic  countries,  under  the  eyes  of  the  Boman 
See.  Quite  reoently,  Philippi,  in  his  Canon  Law,  hon- 
estly  acknowledged  the  Talidity  of  the  dd  laws  against 
heretics,  and  asserted  their  conrectuess.  Eren  now,  in 
all  countries  where  the  secular  power  has  not  put  an 
end  to  this,  the  bishops  promise,  in  taking  the  oath  of 
obedience  to  the  pope,  keereticoe,  tckiematicoi,  et  reheUes 
eidemDotnino  nostro  vel  stŁccettoribuspradictis  pro  poste 
perseguar  et  impugnabo,  Yet  the  Boman  See  has  re- 
nounced,  sińce  Sept.  17, 1824,  the  use  of  the  expre8sion 
of  *'Pn>te8tant  heretics"  in  its  ofRcial  acts;  and  it  has 
eyen  admitted  that,  under  the  pressnre  of  existing  cir- 
cumstances,  the  civil  powen  may  be  forgiren  for  toler- 
ating  heretics  in  their  states !  Still,  as  soon  as  cireuniF- 
ttances  wiUpermU,  the  Boman  See  is  prepared  to  apply 
again  the  old  laws,  which  are  merely  temporarily  sus- 
pended  in  some  countries,  but  in  nowise  repealed. 

Goyemments,  however,  naturally  take  a  different  riew 
of  these  laws.  The  secular  power,  even  while  it  freed 
itself  from  its  absolute  subjection  to  the  Church,  still 
oontinued  to  persecute  in  variou8  ways  the  Protestants 
whom  the  Church  denounced  as  heretics.  We  eyen  see 
them  dq)riyed  under  Louis  XIV  of  the  right  of  emigra- 
tion ;  while,  in  refusing  to  recogmse  the  yalidity  of  their 
marriage,  the  ciyil  authorities  showed  theroselyes  eyen 
morę  seyere  than  the  Church.  But,  becoming  wiser  by 
experience,  and  taught  by  the  generał  reaction  which 
its  measures  proyoked  in  the  18th  century,  the  State 
has  confined  itself  to  interfering  with  heresy  so  far  only 
as  is  necessary  to  promote  public  order  and  the  materiał 
good  of  the  State ;  thus  claiming  only  the  right  to  re- 
press  or  expe]  those  whose  principles  are  opposed  to  the 
existence  of  goyemment,  or  jnight  create  disorder.  This 
right,  of  cotirse,  has  been  differently  underetood  in  dif- 
ferent countries  according  to  local  circumstances,  and 
has  eyen  become  a  pretence  for  persecutions  against  de- 
nominations  which  a  milder  construction  of  it  wonld 
not  have  depriyed  of  the  toleration  of  the  State,  as  in 
the  persecution  of  dissidents  in  Sweden,  etc. 

Let  us  now  compare  this  practiee  of  the  Bomish 
Church  and  of  Boman  Catholic  states  with  the  dogmat- 
ic  theoiy  of  the  Middle  Ages.  Thomas  Aquina8  treats 
heresy  as  the  opposite  of  faith,  connecting  it  with  tw/f- 
delitae  «a  communi  and  apoetatia  a  jide.  He  treats 
tekiem,  again.  as  opposed  to  charitat,  He  defines  heresy 
as  infdelitaiit  tpeciei  pertinent  ad  eot,  guifdem  Chritti 
profitentur,  ted  ejus  dogmata  corrumpunt  (1.  c,  qu.  ii,  art. 
i),  yet  (art  ii)  he  remarks  at  the  same  time  that  some 
holy  fathers  themselyes  erred  in  the  early  times  of  the 
Church  on  many  points  of  faith.  In  art.  iii  he  comes  to 
the  question  whether  heretics  are  to  be  tolcrated.  He 
asserts  that  they  also  haye  their  use  in  the  Church,  as 
serying  to  proye  its  faith,  and  inducing  it  diligcntly  to 
search  the  Scriptures,  yet  their  usefulness  in  these  rc- 
spects  is  inyoluntary.  Considered  for  themselyes  only, 
heretics  "are  not  only  deserying  of  being  cut  off  from 
communion  with  the  Church,  but  also  with  the  world, 
by  being  put  to  death.  But  the  Church  must,  in  her 
mercy,  tirst  use  all  means  of  conyerting  heretics,  and 
only  when  it  despairs  of  bringing  them  back  must  cut 
them  off  by  excommunication,  and  then  dcliycr  them 
up  to  secular  justice,  which  frees  the  world  of  them  by 
condemnation  to  death."  He  only  admits  of  toleration 
towards  heretics  when  persecution  against  them  would 
be  likely  to  injure  the  faithful.  In  this  case  he  adyises 
sparing  the  tares  for  the  sake  of  the  wheat«  He  further 
maintains  that  soch  heretics  as  repeut  may,  on  their 
first  offense,  be  entirely  parfioned,  and  all  ecdesiastical 
and  secular  pimishment  remitted,  but  asserts  that  those 
who  relapse,  though  they  may  be  reconciled  with  the 
Church,  must  not  be  released  firóm  the  sentence  of  death 
incurred,  lest  the  bad  example  of  their  inconstancy  might 
proye  injurious  to  others. 


HEREST 


202        HEREnCS,  BAPTISM  BY 


The  Reformation  protested  against  these  doctrmes. 
Łuther,  from  the  flist,  denounoed  all  attempta  to  over- 
come  heresy  by  sword  and  fire  insteatl  of  the  Word  of 
God,  and  held  that  the  ciril  power  should  leaye  her- 
etics  to  be  dealt  with  by  the  Church.  On  this  ground 
he  opposed  Carlstadt  Yet  it  was  a  fondamental  prin- 
ciple  with  all  the  Refonnen,  that  govenimenta  aie  bound 
to  pievent  blasphemy,  to  eee  that  the  people  receive 
ftom  the  Church  buUt  on  the  Word  of  God  the  puie 
teaching  of  that  word,  and  to  prevent  all  attemp(8  at 
creating  sects.  ThU  led  to  the  adoption  of  preventive 
measures  in  the  place  of  the  former  penalties  of  confis- 
catlon,  bodily  punishment,  and  death.  These  preventive 
measures  confined  the  heresy  to  the  indmdual,  and  ex- 
tended  as  far  as  baniahment,  when  no  other  means  would 
avaiL  Luther  admitted  the  use  of  aecular  punishment 
agamst  heretics  only  in  exceptional  cases,  and  then  not 
on  aocount  of  the  heresy,  but  of  the  residting  disorders. 
£ven  then  he  considered  banishment  sufficient,  except 
when  incitations  to  reyoluUon,  etc.,  required  morę  se- 
yeze  punishment,  as  was  the  case  with  the  Anabaptista; 
yet  he  often  declared  against  the  application  of  ca{ptal 
punishment  to  such  heretics.  Zwringle  took  nearly  the 
same  stand  as  Luther  on  this  point,  yet  was  Bomewhat 
morę  inclined  to  the  use  of  fordbie  means.  The  Ana- 
baptists  were  treated  in  a  summaiy  manner  in  Switz- 
erland.  Calvin  went  further,  and  with  his  theociatic 
ideas  considered  the  state  as  bound  to  treat  heresy  as 
blasphemy,  and  to  punish  it  in  the  seyerest  manner. 
His  approbation  and  eyen  instigation  of  the  execution 
of  Seryetus  gaye  rise  to  a  controyeray  on  the  qae8tłon 
whether  heresy  might  be  punished  with  the  sword  (oom- 
paie  Calyini  D^entis  orthodoza  Jidei,  etc).  Calyin*8 
yiews  were  attacked  not  only  by  Bolsec,  but  also  by  Gas- 
tellio,  who,  under  the  pseudonym  of  Martin  BelUus, 
wrote  on  this  oocasion  his  De  hareticit  (Magdeb.  1554), 
ąuoting  against  Calyin  the  opinions  of  Luther  and  of 
Brentiua.  LiŁlius  Socinus,  in  his  Diaiogtu  inter  Caiuinum 
et  Yaticcmum  (1554),  also  advocated  toleration.  Among 
all  the  German  theologians,  Melancthcm  alone  sided  with 
Galyin,  consistently  with  the  yiews  (Corp,  Ref,  ii,  18, 
an.  1530 ;  and  iii,  195,  an.  1536)  which  he  had  long  pre- 
yionsly  defended  against  the  morę  moderate  yiews  of 
Brentius  (see  Hartmann  and  Jiiger,  Johann  Brenzy  i,  299 
sq.). 

In  Englaud,  in  the  first  year  of  queen  Elizabeth,  an 
act  of  Parliament  was  passed  to  enable  persons  to  try 
heretics,  and  the  following  directioiis  were  giyen  for 
their  guidance :  ''And  such  persons  to  whom  the  queen 
shall  by  letters  patent  under  the  great  seal  giye  authoi^ 
ity  to  execute  any  jurisdiction  spiritual,  shall  not  in  any 
wise  haye  power  to  adjudge  any  matter  or  cause  to  be 
heresy,  but  only  such  as  heretofore  baye  been  adjudged 
to  be  heresy,  by  the  authority  of  the  canonical  Scriptures, 
or  by  some  of  the  first fourgenemU  counciU,  or  by  any  other 
generał  council  wherein  the  same  was  declared  heresy  by 
the  expre8s  and  plain  wordB  of  the  said  canonical  Scrip- 
tures, or  such  as  hereafter  shall  be  judged  or  determined 
to  be  heresy  by  the  high  court  of  Parliament,  with  the 
asseut  of  the  dergy  in  their  conyocation.*'  "This  stat* 
Ute  Gontinued  practically  in  force,  with  oertain  modifi- 
cations,  till  the  29  Charles  II,  c  9,  sińce  which  time  her- 
esy has  been  lea  enttrely  to  the  cognizance  of  the  ec- 
desiastical  courts ;  but,  as  therc  is  no  statute  defining  in 
what  heresy  consists,  and  as,  moreoyer,  much  of  the  ju- 
tisdiction  of  the  ecdesiastical  oourta  has  been  withdrawn 
by  the  yarioua  toleration  acta ;  and,  above  all,  as  the  ef- 
fect  of  yarious  recent  decisions  has  been  to  widen  almost 
indefinitdy  the  oonstruction  of  the  doctrinal  formularies 
of  the  English  Church,  it  may  now  be  said  that  the  ju- 
risdiction of  these  courts  in  matters  of  heresy  is  practi- 
cally limited  to  preyenting  ministers  of  the  EstabUshed 
Church  from  preaching  in  opposition  to  the  doctrine 
and  the  artides  of  the  establishment  firom  which  they 
derive  their  emoluments,  and  that,  eyen  in  determining 
what  is  to  be  considered  oontrary  to  the  artides,  a  laige 
toleration  has  been  juridically  estabłisbed.    See  the  re- 


cent trtal  of  Dr.  Rowland  Williams^  and  the  jadgmeDt 
giyen  by  Dr.  Lushington  in  the  Court  of  Arches''  (Cham- 
bers,  Cydopasdia,  s.  v.).  The  Plotestant  chozches  gen- 
erally,  in  the  19th  oentuiy,  deuy  the  power  of  the  State 
to  punish  heresy.  The  Roman  Church  retains  its  oki 
theories  upon  the  subject,  but  its  power  is  limited  by  the 
progress  of  dyilization.    See  Tou£Ratiox. 

The  history  of  the  yarious  heresies  is  giyen,  with 
morę  or  less  fulness,  in  the  Choich  histories.  Wakh^s 
Enho,  einer  rolUtSmL  Historie  eL  Ketzereien,  etc  (1762- 
1785, 1 1  yols.),  giyes  a  history  of  doctrines  and  heresies 
(so-óuied)  up  to  the  9th  oentui}'.  *'  As  a  Mstory  of  her- 
esies, diylsions,  and  religious  controyersies,  it  is  sttil  iii- 
dispensable.  Walch  is  fne  from  polemic  zeal,  and  beut 
upon  the  critical  and  pragmatic  tepresentation  of  his 
subject,  without  sympathy  or  antipathy"  (Schaff,  Apott, 
Higtoryy  §  81).  Śee  also^Lardner,  History  ofthe  Here- 
tics of  the  first  two  Centuries,  with  addSHums  hy  Hoyy 
(Lond.  1780,  4to ;  and  in  Lardner,  Works,  11  yola.  8yo) ; 
FUfisli,  Kirehen^u.'Ketzerhistoriend,mittlem  Zeit  (Freft. 
1770-1774, 8  yols.) ;  Baumgarten,  Gesdiiekte  d.  Retiyions- 
parłheien  (Halle,  1766,  4to).  Professor  Oehler  com- 
menced  in  1856  the  publication  of  a  Corpus  Hłeresioloj^ 
fcum,  designed  to  contain,  in  8  yols.,  all  the  piincipsl 
wortLS  on  heresies,  with  notes  and  prolegomena.  See 
also  Burtoii,  Enguiry  into  the  Heresies  ofthe  Apostolie 
Age  (Bampton  Lecturefor  1829,  8yo);  Campbell,  Prf- 
liminary  Diss,  to  Comnu  on  Four  Goapels ;  Herzog,  Reed' 
EncyJdopadie,  y,  468 ;  Elliott,  Delineation  of  Romamsm^ 
bk.  iii,  eh.  iii,  et  aL ;  Cramp,  Text-hook  ofPopery,  p.  2d2, 
480 ;  Domer,  Person  of  Christ  (Edinb.  traual.),  i,  344;  Ke- 
ander,  Histtńry  of  Dogmas  (Ryland'8  tnmsL),  i,  16.     See 

also  H4ERISTI€X>C0XBUBKMD0;  PERSKCUTION ;  TOUSS- 
ATIOX. 

Heretio.     See  Heresy. 

Heretics,  Baptiem  by.  When  the  linę  between 
the  orthodox  and  the  heretics  [see  HkrksyJ  was  elear* 
ly  drawn  in  the  early  Church,  the  que8tion  whether 
baptism  performed  by  heretics  should  be  regardcd  aa 
yalld  by  the  orthodox  began  to  be  mooted.  It  after- 
wards  became  of  great  moment,  especially  with  regard 
to  the  daims  of  the  Church  of  Romę. 

1.  As  early  as  the  dd  eentuiy  heretical  baptism  was 
pronounced  inyalid.  Clemens  A]exandrinus  calla  it  ialse 
and  foreign  (Stromat,  i,  875).  Tertullian  dedaied  that 
it  was  of  no  yalue  (De  Baptismo,  cap.  xy).  **  Cyprian, 
whose  epistles  afford  the  dearest  Information  on  this 
subject^  followed  Tertullian  in  rejecting  baptism  by  her> 
etłcs  as  an  inoperatiye  mock  baptism,  and  demanded 
that  all  heretics  ooming  oyer  to  the  Catholic  Church  be 
baptized  (he  would  not  say  re-baptized).  His  poaition 
here  was  due  to  his  Highk)hurch  exdusiyi8m  and  his 
horror  of  schism.  As  the  one  Catholic  Church  is  the 
sole  repoaitory  of  all  grace,  there  can  be  no  foigiyeneas 
of  sins,  no  regeneration  or  communication  of  the  Sptrit, 
no  salyation,  therefore  no  yalid  sacraments,  out  of  her 
bosom.  So  far  he  had  logical  consisteucy  on  his  ade. 
But,  on  the  other  band,  he  departed  fh>m  the  objectlye 
yiew  ofthe  Church,  as  the  Donatists  afterwards  did,  in 
making  the  efficiency  of  the  sacrament  depend  on  the 
subjectiye  holiness  of  the  prtest  *  How  can  one  conse- 
crate  water,'  he  asks,  *who  is  himself  wiholy,  and  has 
not  the  Holy  Ghost?  He  was  followed  by  the  Nwth 
African  Church,  which,  in  seyeral  councils  at  Canhage 
in  tlie  years  255-6,  rejected  heretical  baptism;  and  by 
the  Church  of  Asia  Minor,  which  had  already  acted  «a 
this  yiew,  and  now,  in  the  person  of  the  Cappadocian 
bishop  Firmilian,  a  disdple  and  yeneiator  of  the  great 
Origen,  ylgorously  defended  it  against  the  intderance 
of  Romę.  The  Roman  bishop  Stephen  (258-257)  ap- 
peared  for  the  opposite  doctiine*  on  the  grouid  ofthe  sn* 
dent  practioe  of  the  Churcb.  He  offered  no  argument, 
but  spoke  with  the  oonsdousness  of  antbority,  and  fol- 
lowed a  catholic  instinct.  He  laid  chief  stress  on  the 
objcctiye  naturę  of  the  sacnuneni,  che  yiftne  of  which 
depended  ndther  on  the  offidating  ptkat  Dor  on  tte 


HERITAGE 


20^ 


HERMANN 


teo^Ter,  but  lolely  on  the  iiutitation  of  Christ  Ilenoe 
he  conadered  heretical  baptunn  Talid,  provided  it  had 
been  administered  in  the  right  foim,  to  wit,  in  the  name 
of  the  THnity,  or  even  of  Chńst  alone ;  80  that  heTctics 
oomizig  into  the  Church  needed  only  confirmation,  or 
the  ratification  of  baptism  by  the  Holy  Ghost.  ^Uer- 
esy/  says  he,  *  produees  children  and  expo0e8  them ;  and 
the  Church  takea  up  the  expoeed  children,  and  nour- 
bhes  them  as  her  own,  though  ahe  herself  has  not 
broio^t  them  forth.'  The  doctrine  of  C3rprian  was  the 
moce  oooflistent  &om  the  churchly  point  of  yiew,  that 
of  Stephen  from  the  sacramentaL  The  one  preseryed 
the  prineiple  of  the  excIusivaieB8  of  the  Church,  the 
oUier  that  of  the  objecttve  foroe  of  the  sacraments,  eren 
to  the  borden  of  the  opos-operatum  theory.  Both  were 
ttnder  the  directioa  of  the  same  hierarchical  spirit,  and 
the  same  hatied  of  heretics ;  bat  the  Koman  doctrine  is, 
after  aD,  a  happy  inconastency  of  liberality,  an  inroad 
npoa  the  prineiple  of  abeolute  exchi8ivenes8,  an  invol- 
mitaiy  ooneesskm  that  baptism,  and,  with  ii,  the  remis- 
akm  of  BDS,  and  regeneration,  theiefore  salyation,  are 
ponible  outaide  of  Roman  Catholidsm.  The  contro- 
Teny  itaelf  waa  condocted  with  great  warmth.  Ste- 
phen, tboogh  adrocating  the  liberał  view,  showed  the 
genoine  papai  airoganoe  and  incolerance.  He  wonid  not 
eren  admit  to  his  piesence  the  deputies  of  Cyprian,  who 
bmighŁ  him  the  decree  of  the  African  Sjmod,  and  caUed 
thia  biabop,  who  in  every  respect  fu  esceUed  Stephen, 
and  wfaom  the  Roman  Church  now  yenerates  as  one  of 
her  gieatesfc  aaints,  a  <  pseudo -Christom,  pseudo-apos* 
Idmn,  et  dc^osum  operarium.'  He  broke  oif  all  intern 
couEK  with  the  African  Church,  as  he  had  already  done 
with  the  Awiatic.  But  Cyprian  and  Firmilian,  nothing 
darmted,  yindicated  with  great  boldness,  the  latter  also 
with  bittcr  yehemence,  their  different  yiew,  and  oon- 
tiniied  in  it  to  their  death.  The  Alexandrian  bishop 
DioDyaias  endeayoied  to  reconcile  the  two  parties,  but 
wilh  little  succesB.  The  Yalerian  persecution,  which 
80011  ensued,  and  the  martyrdom  of  Stephen  (257)  and 
of  Cyprian  (358),  suppressed  this  internal  discord.  In 
the  oouiae  of  the  4th  century,  howeyer,  the  Roman 
pnctłcte  gradnaUy  gained  on  the  other,  was  raised  to  a 
doctrine  of  the  Óiurch  by  the  Council  of  Nice  in  825^ 
and  was  afterwards  confirmed  by  the  Council  of  Trent, 
with  an  anathcma  on  the  oppoeite  yiew"  (Schail^  Huto- 
wy  o/tke  ChritUtm  Church,  eh.  yi,  §  104). 

2.  The  decree  of  the  Council  of  Trent  as  to  baptism  by 
hoetiea  is  aa  IbUows:  '^If  any  man  shall  say  that  the 
baptism  which  is  giyen  by  heretics  in  the  name  of  the 
Father,  and  of  the  Son,  and  of  the  Holy  Ghoet,  with  the 
intentioa  of  doing  what  the  Church  doth,  is  not  true 
baptisoi,  lethim  be  anathema"  (sess.  yii,  can.  iy).  This, 
at  first  yiew,  may  appear  liberał;  bat  the  indirect  in- 
tentioa ofit  is  to  daun  all  bapttzed  persona  as  under  the 
jariadiction  of  Romę.  Canon  yiii  affirms  that  the  bap- 
tized  are  boand  *'by  all  the  precepts  of  the  Church, 
whether  written  or  transmitted."  Canon  xiy  declares 
that  any  one  who  shall  say  **  that  those  who  haye  been 
baptized  when  infanta  are  to  be  left  to  their  own  will 
when  they  grow  np,  and  are  not  meanwhile  to  be  com- 
jftBed  to  a  Christian  life  by  any  other  penalty  saye  ex- 
dnaoo  from  the  Eucharist  and  the  other  seyen  sacra- 
Bwnts  tin  they  repent,"  is  u>  be  anathema. 

8^  Lother  admitted  the  yalidity  of  Romish  baptism, 
and  in  this  he  is  foEowed  by  Protestants  geuerally,  who 
do  not  rebaptiie  oonyerts  fiDm  Romę.  The  Protestant 
diorches  (except  the  Baptist)  admit  the  yalidity  of 
each  other^s  baptism.  See  Hersog,  RealrEncyldop,  yii, 
588;  Coleman,  Ane, ChrisUamtyj  p.  863;  Elliott,  Roman- 
MM,  bk.  ii,  eh.  ii ;  Gnericke,  ChridL  SymboUk,  §  59. 

Herlger.    See  Loobbs. 

Hdiltage,  denoted  by  seyenl  Heb.  words:  n*nM, 
oihaxak%  a  <*  possession  ;"*  rtn?,  michalah',  or  rtną, 
■odWbtA',  «  heritage,"  etc. ;'  also  M»'^;»,  yeruahdah'; 
9TD^73,  mora$hak\    Only  mms  (compare  (>en,  zxi,  10  $ 


xxxi,  14  sq.),  and,  indeed,  only  those  of  regular  wiyes 
(comp.  Gen.  xxi,  10  8q. ;  xxiv,  86 ;  xxy,  5  8q.  ,*  Jephthah 
is  no  exceptiofi,  Judg.  xi,  2, 7 ;  see  Bastard),  had  any 
legał  title  to  the  pateinal  inheritance,  acoonUng  to  an- 
cient  usage  among  the  Israelites ;  and  amongst  these 
the  first-bom,  who  might  be  of  the  fayorite  or  a  less  fa- 
yored  wife,  enjoyed  a  double  portion  (Deut.  xxi,  15  sq.). 
See  Pkimogeniture.  Daughten  became  heiiesses, 
when  sons  existed,  only  by  the  special  grant  of  the  fa^ 
ther  (Josh.  xy,  18  sq. ;  comp.  Job  xlii,  15),  but  regularly 
in  the  absence  of  małe  heirs  (NumK  xxyii,  8) ;  yet  heir^ 
esses  (fe7riicXi9poi — such,  according  to  many,  was  Mary, 
the  mother  of  Jesus)  were  not  allowed  to  many  a  man 
of  another  tribe  (Numb.  xxxyi,6  są. ;  comp.  Tobit  vi,  12 
są. ;  yii,  14 ;  Josephua,  A  nź.  iv,  7, 5 ;  see  Michaelis,  Mos, 
Recht,  ii,  81 ;  Buxtorf,  Sponsat  et  DicorU  p.  67  są.,  in 
Ugolini  Theaaur,  xxx ;  Selden,  De  successione  in  bona 
pcU.  c.  18),  so  as  not  to  iiiterrupt  the  regular  transmis- 
sion  of  the  estate  (see  Wachsmuth,  I/eUtiL  Alferłhumsk, 
iii,  206,  218 ;  Gans,  £rbrecht,  i,  387  są. ;  comp.  Rhode, 
Rei,  BUeL  d.  Hindu,  ii,  608).  On  the  heirship  of  distant 
kinsmen,  see  Numb.  xxA-ii,  9  sq.  (comp.  Philo,  Works, 
ii,  172;  see  Mishua,  Baba  Bathra,  iv,  8,  c  8,  9;  Gans, 
£rbrechł,  i,  152  są.).  Respecting  written  wills,  we  find 
nothing  Icgally  prescribed  (see  S.  Rau,  De  Testament^- 
catione  Ilebrańs  ret,  ignota,  pnes.  L.  Van  Wolde,  Traj.  ad 
Rhen.  1760;  also  in  Oelrich'8  Coliect.  Opusc.  i,  305  są.), 
and  as  the  heirship-at-law  had  undisputed  force  as  a  le- 
gał prineiple  (Numb.  xxi.  U),  it  must  have  operated  as 
a  testamentary  disposition  of  the  inheritance,  to  the  ex- 
clusion  of  any  morę  formal  method  of  beąuest  (Gans, 
Erbrecht,  i,  149  są.) ;  for  the  passage  in  Tobit  viii,  23 
does  not  refer  to  a  deyise  by  will,  and  Prov,  xvii,  2  only 
shows  that  slayes  might  become  heirs  by  a  special  ar- 
rangement  of  their  masters  (see  RosenrollUer  in  loc ; 
Gesenius,  Thea,  Heb.  i,  483),  while  Gen.  xy,  3  refers  to  an 
earlier  period.  But  in  later  times  regular  testamcnts 
must  have  obtained  among  the  Jews  (Gal.  iii,  15 ;  Heb. 
ix,  17 ;  comp.  Josephus,  i4n/.  xiii,  16, 1 ;  xvii,  3, 2 ;  War, 
ii,  2,  3),  in  imitation  of  the  Greeks  and  Romans  (see 
Smith^s  Diet.  ofClau,  A  tOig.  s.  y.  Heres,  Testamcntum) ; 
and  in  the  Talmudical  law  of  heritage  they  became  of 
eifect  (Gans,  Erbrethf^  i,  171),  although  not  in  the  ex- 
tenńye  sense  of  the  Roman  law.  Sometimes  the.parent 
diyided  the  inheritance  (i.  e.  a  portion  of  it)  among  his 
children  during  his  lifetime  (Lukę  xv,  12;  comp.  Tobit 
yiii,  28;  see  Rosenmllller,  Morgenl  y,  197).  (On  the 
subject  generally,  see  Michaelis,  Mob.  Rechtf  ii,  76  są. ; 
J.  Selden,  De  sucoesńone  in  bona  defitncti  ad  Uff,  Hiir, 
Lond.  1686 ;  also  in  his  Uxor,  Ebr.  and  in  his  Works,  ii, 
1  są.)— Winer,  i,  885.    See  iKmnrrAKCB. 

Hermann  of  Couksne  (prinoe  archbishop),  son  of 
Frederick  I,  count  of  Wied,  was  educated  for  the  priest- 
hood,  elected  archbishop  in  1515,  and  confirmed  by  pope 
Leo  X  as  Hermaim  Y.  Having  imbibed  the  principles 
of  the  Reformation,  he  first  attempted  a  Roman  Catholic 
reform  in  Cologne,but,  finding  this  impossible,  he  at  last 
assumed  a  Protestant  position,  and  invited  Buoer  and 
Melancthon,  in  1542,  to  assist  him.  Had  he  succeeded 
in  his  plans,  the  whole  Rhine  country  would  probably 
have  become  Protestant ;  but  he  was  excommumcated 
by  the  pope,  menaced  by  the  emperor,  and  abandoned 
by  his  estates.  He  finidly  resigned  his  office  in  1547, 
and  retired  to  his  estates  in  Wied,  where  he  died  Aug. 
15,  1552.  He  was  beloyed  by  his  people,  honored  by 
the  emperor  Charles  Y,  and  esteemed  by  the  great  lead- 
ers  of  the  Refonnation.  An  account  of  Hermann*s  re- 
lation  to  his  times  is  given  in  Deckers,  Hermann  von 
Wied  (Cologne,  1840).  His  Form  of  Sertice  was  madę 
use  of  in  the  Iraming  of  the  English  "  Book  of  Common 
Prayer."  See  Hase,  Church  History,  §  337-540 ;  Hard- 
wick,  Hisłory  ofthe  Reformation,  p.  65,  213.  See  Com- 
mon Pbayer. 

Hermann  of  Fritzłar,  a  mystic,  was  bom  at 
Fritzlar,  in  Hesse,  towards  the  middle  of  the  14th  cen- 
tniy.    Nothing  certain  is  known  of  his  position  or  so- 


HERMANlf 


204 


HERMAS 


óal  relations;  it  is  probable,  howerer,  that  he  was  a 
ńch  layman,  like  Nicholas  of  Basie,  who  retired  from 
the  world  to  devote  himaelf  to  reading  and  writing 
theological  works.  One  of  his  earlier  worka,  to  which 
he  refers  himself,  Die  BbttM  der  Sdiauung  (  doubtleas  of 
speculative  tendency),  appears  to  hare  been  lost.  We 
have,  howerer,  his  HeiUgenlebm  (printed  in  Pfeiffer^s 
J)etU8chm  Mystikem  des  14  Jahrh,  i,  1-258,  ftom  the 
Heidelberg  MS.  executed  under  his  supervision  in  184^- 
1849).  It  is  an  oxtensive  work,  oompiled  from  souroes 
now  mostly  lost,— Herzog,  ReaUEneyldop,     (J.  N.  P.) 

Hermann  of  Lehnin.    See  Lehxin. 

Heimann  of  Saijo.\.    Sce  Saloa. 

Hermann  of  Wied.    See  Wied. 

Hermann,  or  Hermannns,  Contractus,  so  cali- 
ed  from  disease  having  shrunk  up  his  limba,  was  a 
monk  of  Reicheiiau,  and  one  of  the  leamed  men  of  the 
llth  centurj',  l>eing  well  skiUed  in  LAtin,  Greek,  and 
Arabie  He  was  bora  in  1018,  and  was  the  son  of  the 
count  of  Weringen  in  Suevia.  He  wrote  a  Chronicie 
{De  Sex  atałibus  mundi)^  which  commences  at  the  Cre- 
ation  and  ends  A.D.  1052.  The  events  occnrring  before 
the  Christian  oera  are  yeiy  briefly  noticed,  but  after- 
wards  Ile  enters  into  morę  details,  and  amplifies  as  he 
approaches  nearer  to  his  own  times.  The  "  Chronicie" 
was  continued  by  Bcrthold  of  Constance  up  to  1065,  and 
published  at  Basie  in  1536,  and  again  at  St.  Blaise  in 
1790  (2  Yols.  4to).  It  may  be  found  also  in  BibL  Max. 
Patr,  YoL  xviii.  Trithemius  ascribes  the  hymns  Ahna 
Eedempłoris  mater  and  Salve  Regina  to  Hermann.  See 
Dupin,  Ecci»  Writers^  ix,  102. 

Hermann  or  Hermannua,  abbot  of  Tours,  A.D. 
1127,  rcsigned  his  office  in  conseąuence  of  long-continued 
illness.  He  wrote  Tractatus  de  IncarruUiane  Chritti 
(ed.  C.  Oudm,  Yet.  Sac.  Lugd.  Bat  1692) ;  ikree  books  of 
the  Mirades  of  Mary  of  Laon ;  and  a  Ilistory  ąf  the  Mon- 
astery  of  SU  Martin  in  Toiirs,  which  are  giveii  in 
D^Achery,  Spuńleg.  ii,  888.— Dupin,  Eccksiaslkal  Writ- 
erif  X,  181. 

Hermann  von  der  Hardt,  a  German  Phiteatant 
theologian  and  philologist,  was  born  at  Melle  (Westpha- 
lia)  Nov.  15, 1660.  He  studied  at  Osnabruck,  Jena,  and 
Hamburg.  In  1681  he  begau  to  lecture  privately  at 
Jena,  but,  not  succeeding  as  well  as  he  had  expccted,  he 
went  to  Leipzig  in  1686,  where  he  joined  the  cdebrated 
CoUęffium  phiiobiblicum.  In  1688  he  became  librarian 
And  secretary  of  duke  Rudolph  August  of  Brunswick, 
and  the  latter  caused  him  finally  to  be  appointed  pro- 
fessor  of  Ońental  languages  at  the  Uniyersity  of  Helm> 
stadŁ  Ul  1690.  He  aflerwards  became  senior  of  the  Uni- 
yersity  and  provost  of  the  conrent  of  Marienburg.  He 
died  Feb.  28, 1746.  Hennann  was  a  very  active  and  in- 
genious  scholar,  but  his  tendency  to  paradoxical  asser- 
tions  caused  him  to  fali  into  errors,  which,  however,  were 
perha|xs  too  sererely  condemned  by  łus  adyersaries.  He 
wrote  Autogntpha  Lutheri  aliorumgue  cekbrium  viro- 
nmj  etc.  (Bruiisw.  1690-1693,  3  vols.  Svo) -.—Ephemer- 
ides  Philologicce,  quibus  dijjiciliora  ąucedam  loca  Penia- 
teuchi  ad  llebraiconim  Jbniium  tenorem  explicata^  etc. 
(Ilelmstadt,  1693,  1696,  and  1703) :— //(weoj  illtutratus 
chahlaica  Jonałhams  rersione  et  philologicis  celebrium 
rabbinorum  Rmtchi,  Aben  łJsra  et  Kimchi  commentariiś 
(Helmst.  1702,  1775) : — Magnum  acumenicum  Constofi' 
tinense  ConcHium  de  unirersaH  Kcdesia  refonnatione^ 
unione  etfide^  etc  (Frankf.  and  Leipz.  1700, 1742,4  yols. 
foL)  '.—Historia  liłteraria  Reformationia  (Frankfort  and 
Leipz.  1717) : — Erangelicm  Rei  Integritaa  in  negotio  Jona 
cuatuor  Hbris  declarata  (Frankf.  1719, 4to)  i—yEnigmata 
pjHsci  orbis : '  Jonas  in  luce  in  historia  Manassis  et  Jo- 
sue ;  ^Enigmaia  Grcecortim  et  Latinorum  ex  caligine; 
Apocnlt/psis  ex  tenebris  (Helmst,  1723,  fol.).  This  work 
attractcd  great  attention  when  first  published : — Tomus 
primus  in  Jobutn,  historiom populi  Isradii  inAssytiaco 
eiilio,  Samaria  eversa  H  regno  ertincto^  etc  (Helmstadt, 
1 728.  ftiL).  See  J.  Fabridus,  Hiai,  Bibloth.  pt,  ii,  p.  342- 
847, 351-352 j  Xova  Acta  Eruditorum  (an.  1746,  p.  476- 


480) ;  Breithaupt,  Memoria  JJerm,  r.  d.  Bardt  (Hehnst 
1746) ;  Hoefer,  Nouv,  Biog.  Generale,  xxiii,  862. 

Hermann,  Nikolaus,  one  of  the  eailiest  eyan- 
gelical  hynmologists,  flouiished  about  the  middle  of  the 
16th  oentury.  His  intimate  relation  with  the  minister 
of  the  church  of  his  place  (which  he  seryed  as  oiganist), 
Mathesius,  the  biographer  of  Luther,  gaye  to  his  oom- 
poeitions  a  true  reform  spirit-and  the  child-like  simplic- 
ity  of  a  Christian  miud.  They  haye  been  prcsenred  la 
generał  use  eyen  to  our  own  day. — ^Brockhaus,  Conttr' 
saiions  Lex%con,  yii,  841 ;  Genrinus,  Gesch,  d,  poetitcktu 
NatumallU.  d.  Deutschen,  iii,  10, 32.     (J.  H.  W.) 

Hermaphrodite  Ordera..   See  Momasticusc. 

Her^maa  CEp/mc,  fram  '£pf^fc,  the  Greek  god  of 
gain,  or  Mereury\  the  name  of  a  penon  to  whom  Pkol 
scnds  greeting  in  his  Epistle  to  the  Romans  (xyi,  14), 
and  consequently  thea  resident  in  Roma  and  a  Chriatian 
(A.D.  55) ;  and  yet  the  ozigin  of  the  name,  like  that  of 
the  other  four  mentioned  in  the  aame  yene,  ia  Graek* 
Howeyer,  in  thoae  daya,  eyen  a  Jew,  Uke  Paul  hiwłsrif, 
might  acquire  Roman  cituenahip.  Iieiisas,  TertuUian, 
and  Origen  agree  in  making  him  identical  with  the  ait* 
thor  of  "^ths  ShątheHP*  of  the  foUowing  artide,  bat  this 
is  greatly  di8p^ted•  He  is  oelebrated  as  a  aaint  in  the 
Roman  calendar  on  May  9.— Smith,  s.  v. 

Hermaa,  one  of  the  so-caUed  apoatolical  fathecs  (q. 
y.),  the  soppcwed  anthor  of  a  tract  that  has  oome  down 
to  us  under  the  name  of  Hoffci/y,  The  Shepherd,  and  gen- 
erally  designated  by  the  title  Pastor  Hemue,  The  ao- 
thorship  of  the  tract  is  tmoertain,  bat  it  is  cleaiły  wo€ 
the  work  of  the  Hennas  (Epfictc)  mentioned  in  Bom. 
xyi,  14,  aa  Origen,  £usebias,  and  Jerome  believed,  and 
as  the  tract  itself  seems  to  pretend.  The  author  ap- 
pears to  haye  been  a  Uyman  of  the  2d  centory,  pioba^ 
bly  a  Roman  tndesman  *'who  had  loat  his  wealth 
through  his  own  sins  and  the  misdeeds  of  his  neglected 
Bons"  (Hilgenfeld;  Schaff,  Futory  ofthe  Church,  §  121). 
Gthers  ascribe  it  to  Hermas  or  Hermes,  brother  of  Pius, 
bishop  of  Romę  from  A.D.  142  to  157.  Of  the  Greek 
original  we  haye  nothtng  left  but  fragments,  which  are 
giyen  in  Fabńcius,  Cod,  Apocryph.  N,  Test.  iii,  978,  and 
in  Grabę,  SpicUeg,  i,  308.  M.  d^Abbadie  cUima  (1860) 
to  haye  discoyered  a  third  in  Ethiopia,  which  he  has 
transcribed  and  translated  into  Latin  (Lpz.  1860) ;  but 
whether  the  text  from  which  it  is  taken  is  correct  is  a 
matter  for  further  inyestigation.  The  Greek  text  waa 
at  an  early  period  translated  into  Latin,  and,  sińce  the 
beginning  of  the  15th  century,  oflen  pubtished  (Paris^ 
1518,  foL;  Strasb.  1522,  4to;  Basie,  1555  and  1669,  foL; 
Oxford,  1685, 12mo;  with  additions  by  Le  Clerc,  Amat. 
1698, 1724;  Paris,  1715, 12mo>  It  is  also  inaerted  in 
the  yarious  collections  of  the  fathers  in  Cotelier,  Patret 
€evi  apostolici  (Paris,  1672,  fol),  and  in  French  in  Dea- 
prez's  BiUe  (Paris,  1715,  foL  yoL  iy).  It  is  also  giyen  in 
the  yarious  editions  of  the  Apostolical  Fatheia  (q.  y.). 
Of  late  years  this  tract  has  been  the  subject  of  morę  ed- 
iting  and  literary  criticism  than  almost  any  relic  of  tlie 
early  Church.  In  1857  Dressel  published  at  Leipsig  a 
new  Latin  translation  of  the  Pastor  which  he  foond  in 
a  MS.  at  Romę,  and  which  differs  from  the  other.  The 
edition  oontains  also  a  Greek  text  of  the  Hoc^y,  re- 
yised  by  Tischendorf.  This  text,  it  is  daimed,  was 
found  in  a  conyent  of  Mount  Athos  by  Simonidea. 
Tischendorf  considers  it,  howeyer,  only  as  a  retransla- 
tiou  iix>m  the  Latin  into  Greek,  and  pLsces  its  origin  in 
the  Middle  Ages.  Tischendorf  himself  disooyer«d,  in 
the  Codex  Sinaiticus^  the  Greek  text  of  book  i  of  the 
Shepherd,  and  the  first  four  chapters  of  book  ii ;  thia  is 
giyen  in  the  recent  edition  of  Dressel,  Patres  AposL 
(Lipsi  1863) ;  also  by  Hilgenfeld,  who  has  carefully  ed- 
ited  the  Pastor  Herma  in  his  ATw.  Test,  erira  Camomem 
recepłum  (fasc.  iii,  lips.  1866).  The  Ante-Xieem  Ckru- 
tian  Librargy  yol  i  (Edinb.  1867),  contains  a  new  and 
good  translation  of  the  Shepherd,  foUowing  the  text  of 
Hilgenfeld,  who  makes  use  of  the  text  foand  in  the  Si« 
naitic  Codex. 


HERMAS 


205 


HERMENEUnCS 


Tlie  Ptulor  b  wiitten  in  the  fann  of  a  dial<^pie,  and 
is  dirided  into  thiee  parti:  1  Vmones;  2.  Mandola; 
8.  SimilHudma.  Hennaa,  in  bis  childhood,  had  been 
uroiight  up  with  a  young  «lave.  In  after  life,  and  when 
he  was  manied,  he  met  her  again,  and  experienced  for 
her  a  passion  which,  however  pure  in  itself,  was  yet  for- 
bidden  by  the  Chorch  under  the  circumstanoes.  Soon 
aftenrards  the  young  slare  died.  One  day,  as  Hennas 
was  wandering  in  the  countiy,  thinking  of  her,  he  sat 
down  and  fell  asleep.  "During  my  ^eep,"  says  he, 
^'my  mind  carried  me  away  to  a  steep  path,  which  I 
foond  gieat  difficulty  in  ascending  on  account  of  rocks 
and  stxeams.  ArTiving  on  a  piece  of  table-land,  I  knelt 
down  to  pray ;  and  as  I  was  praying  the  heavens  open- 
ed,  and  I  saw  the  young  maiden  I  was  wishing  for,  who 
salnted  me  fiom  the  sky,  saying,  *  Good  day,  Ueimas.' 
And  I,  looking  at  her,  answered,  *What  art  thou  doing 
tbere  ?*  *  I  have  been  caUed  here,*  she  answered, '  to  de- 
nonnce  thy  sins  before  the  Lord.'  *  What  !*  exclaimed  I, 
*andwiltthouaocnseme?'  'No;  butlistentome...,"' 
etc  The  oonyersation  goes  on  with  a  bknding  of  se- 
TEiity  and  tendemess.  **  Pray  to  the  Lord,"  says  the 
yooąg  gid,  as  she  disappears  from  his  sight ;  "  he  will 
heal  thy  sóul,  and  will  eflace  the  sins  of  all  thy  house, 
as  he  has  done  those  of  all  the  saints."  One  cannot 
help  noCicing  the  striking  simiiarity  which  exiBts  be> 
tween  thia  Visum  and  the  oelebrated  passage  in  the  Di- 
tima  Commedia  where  Beatrice  appears  to  Dante.  This 
▼iaon  ia  followed  by  three  others.  They  are  all  invita- 
tions  to  penitence,  and  though  in  the  first  it  appears  as 
if  the  invitation  was  especially  directed  to  Hermas,  it 
deady  applies  also  to  the  Church  in  generał.  This  be- 
oomes  morę  eińdent  in  the  foUowing  yisions. 

The  Mamiata  begin  also  with  a  yision.  An  angel 
appears  to  Hennas  under  t^e  form  of «  shepherd,  wear- 
ing  a  white  doak,  and  bearing  a  staffui  his  hand.  This 
shepherd  ia  the  angel  of  penitence,  and  giyes  Hermas 
iwelTe  piecepta,  which  embrace  the  rules  of  Christian 
Boorala.  They  are  given  under  the  different  headings : 
1.  DejSde  ia  utmm  Deum;  2.  Defugienda  oUrectaiione, 
<f  ełeemoejfna  fadenda  ta  ńmplkUaie;  8.  De  fugiendo 
memlacio;  4^ De  dimiiiaida  aduliera;  b,De  łrittiiia  cor^ 
di$  €i  paHemlia  ;  6.  De  agnosoemHt  umuscujiugue  hombus 
dtutbas  ffemis  H  utruugue  utępiraiumUms ;  7.  De  Deo  ii- 
mmio  €i  damonenontimendo;  S^Dedinandum  ett  a  molo 
Hfaciatda  homa;  9.  Poełuhndum  a  Deo  atsidue  et  mtm 
ktuitalume;  la  De  ammi  łristitia  et  non  contrwtando 
SpiriluM  Dei,  qui  in  nobiś  ett ;  U.  Spiritus  et  prophetas 
pnbari  ex  oparUms^  et  de  dt^Md  ępiritUf  12.  De  dupUci 
atpiOŁaie.  Dei  mandata  non  etae  impoesSbiUa  et  dkdK}- 
bum  mon  metuendum  credeniibus, 

The  SiauUtmdinet,  fiiudly,  are  a  series  of  parables  and 
aBegoriea.  The  vine,  with  its  rich  fruita  and  ilexible 
bongbsy  łs  uaed  to  symboUze  the  fruitfulness  of  the 
Chorch.  The  willow  is  madę  the  emblem  of  diyine 
law.  Thia  latter  image  is  madę  by  Hermas  the  ground 
of  a  most  graceful  allegory.  SimilHudinei  1  to  4  are 
aboct  and  simple  images  or  descriptions;  Simil,  5  to  9 
are  irisions  of  the  approaching  completion  of  the  Chorch, 
and  of  judgment,  as  well  as  invitations  to  penitence  on 
thafc  account;  SimiL  10,  fiually,  is  a  sort  of  conclusion 
ofthewbole. 

This  work  was  perhape  the  most  popular  book  in  the 
Dnistian  Chuich  of  the  2d  and  3d  centuries.  Yet,  while 
it  pleased  the  maaaes,  it  did  not  alwayi  satisfy  the 
teacheiSL  Irenasus  (adv.  /far,  iv,  3),  Clement  of  Alex- 
andiia  {Stronu  i,  29),  and  Origen  {Eaplan,  Episł,  ad  Horn. 
16)  held  it  in  high  estimation.  Eusebius  asserts  {Ilisł, 
EĆeiee.  iii,  3)  that  many  other  ecdesiastical  writers  con- 
tested  iu  authenticity.  Jerome,  after  praising  Hermas 
in  his  Chromam,  aocuses  him  of  foolishness  (rtukitia)  in 
hia  CommenL  in  Habacuc  (i,  1),  and  TertulUan  treaU 
bim  no  better,  deaignating  the  book  as  apocryphal  in 
De  FadicH.  (10).  The  leamed  Duguet,  in  his  Conjle- 
remca  eccUskutiguea  (i,  7),  even  claims  to  find  in  the 
Pastor  the  germ  of  all  heresies  which  tn)ubled  the 
Cbiach  in  the  2d  oentury.    Others  amoog  modem  the- 


ologians,  and  especially  Mosheim,  haye  yiolently  attacfe. 
ed  the  Pastor,  and  oonsidered  Hermas  as  an  impostoc 
The  book  **knows  little  of  the  Gospel,  and  less  of  justi- 
fying  faith;  on  the  contrary,  it  talks  much  of  the  law 
of  Christ  and  of  repentance,  enjoins  fasting  and  volun- 
taiy  poyerty,  and  teaches  the  merit,  eyen  the  superer- 
ogatory  merit,  of  good  works,  and  the  sin-atoning  yirtue 
of  martyrdom*"  (Schaff,  L  c).  See  Gratz,  ZHscuisiiio  in 
Pasł.  Derma  (Bonn,  1820) ;  Hefele,  Patr,  Aposł.  Prole- 
gomena; Hilgenfeld,  A  post,  Vaier  (Halle,  1853) ;  Cave, 
Hiet,  łił^aria ;  Fabricius,  Bibi.  Graca,  yii,  18 ;  Tille- 
mont,  Memoiree  eccles.  yoL  ii,  May  9th ;  Dom.  Ceillier, 
Ilitł.  des  A  uteurs  saaie  et  eccUs,  i,  582 ;  Mosheim, Com^ 
ment.  i,  208-9 ;  Neander,  CL  I/isł.  i,  660  i  Hase,  Ch,  f/isł, 
§  89  and  Appcndix ;  Hoorcr,  Kouc.Diog.  Generale^  xxiy, 
871 ;  Schaff,  Church  Distory^  §  121 ;  Bunsen,  Christian- 
ity  and  Mankind,  i,  182;  £.  Gaab,  Der  JJirt  d,  Ifermas 
(Basel,  1866, 8yo) ;  Zahn,  Der  Jlirt  d.  Ifermae  wiiersucht 
(Gotha,  1868, 8vo) ;  Alzog,  Patrologie,  §  19;  Lipeius,  in 
Zeitschrifl /,  WissenschąpUche  Theologie,  1866,  heft  3; 
Hilgenfeld,  Der  Jłirt  d  Ifermas  u,  sein  ntuesłer  Bearhei- 
(er,  t»  Zeitsch,/,  Wiss,  TheoL  1869,  heft  2;  Lipsius  (in 
same  Journal,  1869,  heft  3),  Die  Polemik  eines  Apologeten 
(a  seyere  review  of  Zahu*8  Hermas), 

Hermenenta  {ipfniytwaiy  interpreters\  officers  in 
the  ancient  Church,  whose  business  it  was  to  render 
one  language  into  another,  as  there  was  occasion,  both 
in  reading  the  Scriptures,  and  in  the  homilies  that  were 
madę  to  the  people;  an  office  chielly  used  in  those 
churches  where  the  people  spoke  different  Umguages,  as 
in  Palestine,  where  some  spoke  Syriac,  others  Greek; 
and  in  the  churches  of  Afiica,  where  some  spoke  Latin 
and  others  Punic  *'  So  far  was  the  primitiye  Church 
from  encouraging  ignorance,  by  locking  up  the  Scrip* 
tures  in  an  nnknown  tongue,  that  she  not  ohiy  trans* 
lated  them  into  all  languages,  but  also  appointed  a  stand- 
ing  Office  of  interpreters,  who  were  viva  roee  to  make 
men  understand  what  was  read,  and  not  suffer  them  to 
be  barbaiians  in  the  seryioe  of  God,  which  is  a  tyranny 
that  was  unknown  to  former  agcs." — Bingham,  Orig.Ec- 
des,  bk.  iii,  ch.  xiii,  §  4. 

HermeneatlCS  (from  lcprinfua^  to  eaplain)^  the 
techincal  or  scientific  name  of  that  branch  of  theology 
which  oonsists  in  erposiłion  in  generał,  as  distinguished 
from  exegeńs  (q.  y.)  in  particular.  Re8cr\'^ing  for  the 
morę  usoal  and  equiyalent  title  Intkrpretation  (ok 
Scripturk)  the  history  and  literaturę  of  the  subject,  we 
propose  to  giye  łn  the  present  article  only  a  brief  yiew 
of  those  principles  or  Canons  which  ahould  be  obsenred 
in  the  elucidation  of  the  meaning  of  the  sacred  text, 

L  The  first  and  most  essential  process  is  to  apply  the 
natural  and  obyious  principles  of  a  careful  and  consci- 
entious  exegesis  to  the  passage  and  all  its  terms.  This 
may  be  called  the  philołooico-historical  nile.  It 
embraces  the  foUowing  eicments : 

1.  The  diligeiit  and  discriminatiye  use  of  an  accurate 
and  judicious  Lerieon, 

2,  The  painstaking  and  oonstant  reference  to  the  best 
Grcantnars, 

A  well-grounded  knowledge  of  the  language  is  im- 
plied  in  these  prescriptions,  yet  the  interpreter  needs  to 
confirm  or  modify  his  judgment  by  these  independent 
aothorities. 

8.  An  intimate  aoquaintance  with  the  archaohgy  in- 
yolyed,  induding  geography,  chronology,  and  Oriental 
uaagea. 

4.  The  conłert  should  be  carefully  consultcd;  and  the 
generał  drift  of  the  argument,  as  well  as  the  author^s 
spedal  design  in  writing,  must  be  kept  in  mind. 

5.  Especially  is  a  cordial  egmpałhy  with  spiritual  truth 
a  prereąuisite  in  this  task.  A  deep  religious  experience 
has  enlightened  many  an  othen«-ise  ill-instructed  mind 
as  to  the  meaning  of  much  of  Ho]y  Writ. 

IL  Parallkl  and  illustratiye  PASSAGE8  from 
the  same  book  or  wiiter,  or  (if  these  are  not  to  be  had) 
from  other  parts  of  Scripture,  are  to  be  attentiyely  eon- 


HERMES 


206        HERMES  TRISMEGISTUS 


aidered,  on  the  piinciple  that  Scrysture  u  it$  own  Utt  tu- 
ierprtter.  This  is  pre-eminentlj  trae  of  t3rpefl,  meta- 
phon,  parables,  prophetical  symbols,  and  other  figuia- 
tive  representations.  For  thu  puipote  "reference  Bi- 
bies"  alone  are  not  snfficient :  the  exammation  should 
include  an  extenaive  oompańflon  of  doctrine,  theoiy,and 
topie,  as  well  as  of  ezamp^e,  fact,  and  expre88ion. 

III.  When  yarious  meanings  are  aańgnable  to  a  giyen 
paasagc  or  word,  that  should  be  selected  which  is  the 
hroadesł  in  its  import  and  appUcation ;  if  poasible,  one 
that  ifl  INCLUSIYE  of  all  or  most  of  the  others.  This 
tulę  should  cspecially  be  obeenred  in  expounding  the 
language  of  Christ,  of  God  directij,  or  the  moie  cardinal 
statemeuts  of  inspiration. 

In  prophetical  and  eschatological  passages  of  Scrip- 
Łure  espedally  must  the  fact  be  borne  in  mind  that  one 
event  or  circumstance  is  often  madę  the  type  or  image 
of  another;  the  two  being  generally  related  to  the  same 
essential  principle  as  proximate  and  remote,  or  as  per- 
sonal  and  national,  or  as  temporal  and  spiritual  manifes- 
tations  of  the  dU-ine  economy.  In  some  cases  this  oor- 
relation  runs  through  an  entire  piece  or  book,  e.  g.  the 
Canticles  and  many  of  the  Psalms.  See  Double  Sense 
(op  Scripture). 

lY.  The  ooN8B!C8U8  of  the  muyersal  Chuich  in  past 
and  present  time  should  hare  its  dae  influence ;  not  as 
being  of  absolute  authority^  but  as  an  ezponent  of  the 
aggregate  and  deliberate  judgment  of  good  and  unpreju- 
dioed  men.  This  will  guard  the  expoaitor  against  fan- 
ciful  subtleties  and  extravagant  or  dangerous  impres- 
sions.  To  this  end  creeds^  confessions,  and  artictes  of 
faith  are  useful,  as  well  as  the  study  of  exploded  or  liv- 
ing  heresies,  but  morę  particularly  a  collation  of  the 
views  of  pieoeding  commentators.  In  weighing  nonę 
of  these,  however,  is  any  snperstitious  reTereoce  to  be 
indulged,  for  the  word  of  God  itself  is  superior  to  them 
all,  and  it  is  not  only  possibk,  but  oertain,  that  in  some 
pointa  they  have  alike  erred,  as  in  many  they  have  fluc- 
toated  or  conflicted  with  each  other.  £ven  the  objeo- 
tions  and  cavils  of  infidels  aod  rationalista  should  not  be 
orerlooked,  for  "  fas  est  ab  hoste  dooeiL" 

y.  Where  different  interpretations  are  poasible,  that 
must  be  selected  which  is  most  conaistent  with  oommon 
tenae*  Especially  must  those  be  set  aside  which  lead 
to  a  psychological  or  theological  impoesibility  or  oon- 
tradiction.  Such  a  principle  we  always  feel  bound  to 
apply  to  the  communication  of  a  friend,  and  to  every 
obscure  passage  in  a  rational  writer.  Interpreters,  from 
overlooking  this  rule,  have  often  increased  rather  than 
explained  the  difficulties  of  the  sacred  text.  For  exam- 
ple,  to  understand  Paul  as  meaning  in  Kom.  ix,  8  that 
he  was  wUling  to  forfeit  his  title  to  etemal  bUsa,  is  to 
attribute  to  him  a  sentiment  incompatibie  with  mental 
and  morał  sanity;  and  to  refer  the  preference  in  1  Cor. 
yii,  21  to  a  sta  te  of  slavery,  is  to  outrage  the  spontane- 
ous  instincts  of  the  human  mind. 

YI.  It  will  sometimes  become  neceasary  io  modify  our 
oondusions  as  to  particular  paasages  in  conseąuence  of 
the  discoYeries  and  deductions  of  modern  science.  In- 
stances  in  point  are  the  theories  reapecting  the  creation 
and  deluge,  arising  from  the  progress  of  astronomical 
and  geological  knowledge.  All  truth  is  oonsistent  with 
itself;  and  although  the  Bibie  was  not  giyen  for  the  pur- 
pose  of  determiniiig  scientific  ąueations,  yet  it  must  not, 
and  need  not  be  so  interpreted  as  to  contradict  the  <^  eld- 
er  scripture  writ  by  God^s  own  hand"  in  the  volume  of 
naturę.  In  like  manner  history  is  often  the  best  expos- 
itor  of  prophecy. 

Her^^mds  CEp/*^,  i.  e,  the  Greek  Merairy  [q.  ▼.])» 
the  uame  of  a  man  mentioned  in  the  Rpiatle  to  the  Ro- 
mans as  a  diaciple  at  Romę  (Rom.  xTi,  14).  A.D.  65. 
'^  Aooording  to  the  Greeks,"  says  Calmet  {DieL  s.  r,),  *"  he 
waa  one  of  the  serenty  discipies,  and  afterwards  bishop 
of  Dalmatia."  His  festival  occurs  in  their  calendar  upon 
April  8  (Neale,  Kattem  Church,  ii,  774>— Smith,  s.  y. 

Hennes,  Oeorif,  a  distinguished  modem  Roman- 


istthedogianandphikMopher.  HewasbomatDreier- 
walde,  near  Munster,  April  22, 1775,  became  gymnaaal 
teacher  in  1798,  prieat  in  1799,  and  profeaaor  of  theol- 
ogy  at  Munster  in  1807.  The  bent  of  his  mind  waa 
towards  philoeophy,  and  his  theological  atudiea  were  aU 
through  his  life  oonducted  on  philosophical  methodau 
His  first  publication  of  this  daas  waa  the  Iimere  Wttkr* 
keU  des  CkritiaUhttnu  (MttnaL  1806, 8yo).  In  1819  he 
published  his  PhiloBophucke  Ewleśtung  m  die  Ckriat-' 
Kałhołiacke  Theoloffie^  which  paased  to  a  aeoond  edłtion 
in  1831.  In  1819  he  was  appoinied  profesaor  of  theoikn 
gy  in  the  new  Uniyersity  of  Bonn,  where  he  aoon  added 
greatly  to  hia  reputation,  and  his  ayatem,  before  bis 
death,  had  found  its  way  into  most  of  the  Roman  Catii- 
oUc  schools  of  Prusaia.  He  died  at  Bonn  May  26, 188L 
His  followers  haye  sinoe  been  called  HennesianB.  The 
writings  of  Hermes  published  in  hia  lifetime  haye  been 
mentioned  aboye.  After  his  death  appeared  hia  Chriat' 
Uche-KathoUtekt  DogmaHk  (Mtlnst.  1834-^,  8  yoK  8ro). 
In  1832  the  Hermesians  established  a  joumal  at  Cokgne 
as  their  organ.  During  the  lifetime  of  Hermes  there  had 
been  many  complaints  of  the  heretical  tendendes  of  hia 
system,  which,  in  fact,  demanded  philoaophy,  rather  than 
faith,  aa  the  basis  of  theology.  Hermea  admitted  aU  the 
dogmas  of  the  Church,  but  held  that  the  ground  of  be- 
lief  in  these  dogmaa  could  only  be  laid  in  a  phUoaophical 
proof,  first,  of  a  diyine  reyelation ;  and,  aeoondly,  that 
the  Roman  Church  la  the  medium  of  that  reyelation. 
At  Romę  the  ąueation  was  put  into  Penone*8  hands, 
whoee  report  stiongly  condemned  Hermes  and  hia  doc- 
trines.  On  the  26th  of  September,  1885,  a  papai  facief 
was  issned  against  them.  The  Hermesiana,  howeyer, 
maintained  that  the  doctrinea  censured  were  not  oon* 
tained  in  the  system  of  Hermes.  In  accordance  with 
their  request  to  be  allowed  to  present  in  Romę  a  Latin 
transUtion  of  the  works  of  Hermes,  and  to  plead  their 
orthodoxy,  in  1887  two  of  their  prominent  spokeamen, 
profeaaor  Braun,  of  Bonn,  and  professor  Elyenich,  of 
Breslau,  aniyed  in  Romę,  but,  finding  that  they  would 
not  get  an  impartial  hearing,  aoon  retumed.  In  ooo- 
scquenoe  of  the  pressure  brought  upon  the  Hermesi- 
ans by  the  bbhopa,  most  of  them  now  gradually  sub* 
mitted ;  two  profeasors  of  the  Uniyersity  of  Bonn  who 
refused  to  submit,  Braun  and  Achterfeld,  were  in  1846 
forbidden  by  the  archbishop  of  Gologne  to  oontinne 
their  theological  lectures.  In  1847,  Pius  IX  again  aano- 
tioned  the  condemnatory  brief  of  1836,  and  Hermesian- 
ism  gradually  died  out  A  sketch  of  the  coulroyeisy 
from  the  Hermesian  side  may  be  (bund  in  Elyenich,  Der 
ffermeńanumtu  vnd  aein  Rdmiscker  Gtgner  Perrame 
(Breslau,  1844, 8yo).  Perrone^s  refntation  of  Hermes  ia 
giyen  in  Migne's  Dimtnutraiiofu  ŹvanffiHquts,  ii,  945  są, 
See  also  Stupp,  Die  lełtten  Uermeńcmer  (Cologne,  1844^ 
6) ;  Hagenbach,  History  of  18tA  and  l^th  CetKturietj  U. 
by  Hurst,  ii,  444 ;  and  art  Gcntheb. 

Hermes  TrlsmegietaB,  or  MsBCintnjs  C^fuk* 
'BpfŁtjc  TfH(rfŁiyunoc\  the  puUtiye  author  of  a  laige 
number  of  Greek  works,  many  of  which  are  still  eactant. 
The  Greek  Hermes  was  in  the  time  of  Plato  identified 
•with  the  Egyptian  Thoł,  Thoth,  or  Theut  (as  it  waa  abo 
with  the  Alexandrian  Tkoyth),  a  mythical  personage 
regarded  as  the  discoyerer  of  all  sdences,  espedally  aa 
the  originator  of  language,  of  the  alphabet,  and  of  the 
art  of  writing;  of  geometry,  arithmetic,  astronomy,  etc 
In  Egypt,  all  works  reUting  to  religion  or  sdence  borę 
the  name  of  Thot  or  of  Hermes,  According  to  a  paasage 
in  element  of  Alexandiia  {Strom,  L  yi),  two  of  Herme8*a 
booka  contuned  the  hymns  of  the  gods  and  rules  of  con^ 
duet  for  the  kings,  four  related  to  astrology,  etc  The 
espnaaaona  uaed  by  Clement  of  Akxandria  impty  that 
there  waa  a  much  huger  nmnłnr  e€  ao  raBad  Menmatie 
books  than  he  mentions.  As  ibr  the  86,535  mentioned 
by  lamfaliditia  (D€  MytLjEggpL\  a  nmnber  which  oop- 
responds  to  the  great  sacred  period  of  Egypt*  Goenca 
suppoeea  it  to  refer  to  yerses,  not  to  books.  AU  thia 
leads  to  the  belief  that  Hermea  Tiiamegiatus  was  bot  a 
penonification  of  the  Egyptian  prieathood.    Acoordiiig 


HERMES  TRISMEGISTUS        207 


TTRRMTAa 


to  Cłumpollion  junior,  Hennes  TrismęgiBtos  was,  Uke 
Honis,  lepnoented  by  a  hawk'8  head.  The  suniaine  of 
Trismeyittus  (thrice  gnat)  appean  to  hare  been  given 
to  him  oa  acootint  of  Łhe  many  diMuveries  attributed  to 
him.  Looked  at  in  the  myatical  senae,  Thot,  or  the  £gyp- 
tian  Hennea,  waa  the  symbol  of  diTine  intelligence, 
tfaooght  incamate,  the  Vmng  word — the  primitWe  type 
of  Fliito*8  Logo*, 

It  appean  dear  that  a  oertain  nmnber  of  the  books 
bearing  the  name  of  Hennes  Trismegistus  were  trans- 
laied  into  Gredc  aboat  the  time  of  the  Ptolemiea.    The 
anthenticity  of  the  (lagmenta  of  theae  trandations  which 
hare  come  down  to  os  is  moro  donbtfuL     It  was  the 
time  when  so  many  suppoeititious  works  of  Orpheus,  Zo- 
loaster,  INrthagoraa,  etc^  were  compoeed.    I^earing  aside 
Aiignstine*s  testimony  (J)t  drUate  Deij  I  viii,  c.  26), 
ChampoUion  jmiior  oonaiders  the  books  of  Hermes  Tris- 
megistns  aa  containing  really  the  oM  Egyptian  doctrines, 
of  which  some  tiacea  can  be  found  in  the  hieroglyphics. 
Beńdea,  a  careful  examination  of  these  remaining  firag- 
roenta  diackMes  a  theological  sjrstem  somewhat  aimilar 
from  tbftt  of  Plato  in  his  Timtnu ;  a  doctrine  which  dif- 
fcra  entirdy  fiom  those  of  all  the  other  Greek  schools, 
and  which  thcrcfore  was  sopposed  to  hare  been  brought 
by  him  from  £gypt,where  hejiad  been  to  consult  with 
the  priesta  of  th«t  comitr>%  They  are  written  in  a  barbar- 
otts  Greek,  in  which  it  ia  eaay  to  perceire  the  effort  madę 
by  tranala^ofs  to  foHow  Kterally  the  text  of  the  original 
lather  than  the  aense.    Menard,  a  recent  translator  of 
Hennes,  riews  the  Hermetic  books  ^  as  representing  the 
finał  aspirations  of  the  higher  Greek  wisdom,  dimly  an- 
tidpadng  the  fidler  revelation  of  the  Christian  faith ;  as 
a  myatical  system,  hovering  between  the  negations  of 
Greek  thought  and  the  dogroas  of  the  Christian  faith" 
{Am,  Pm.  Ber,  January,  1869,  p.  195).    The  followłng 
worka,  attributed  to  Hermes,  have  been  published :  Au- 
70£  rśXcioc ;  the  Greek  original,  ąuoted  by  Lactantius 
(Dtr.  ImtU,  Tli,  18),  is  lost,  and  there  remahis  only  a  Lat^ 
in  translation  of  it,  attributed  to  Apuleius  of  Madaura, 
and  which  is  entitled  Atcifpuu,  or  Nermetis  Trismegitti 
A^depitu,  fiv€  de  natura  deorum  dialogus,    Thls  work 
appears  to  have  been  written  shortly  before  the  time  of 
Lactantiua,  and  in  Egypt,  probably  at  Alexandria.     It 
is  in  the  foim  of  a  dialogue  between  Heimes  and  Asde- 
pius,  his  fliaciple,  on  God,  the  oniYcrse,  naturę,  etc    The 
spiiit  of  tbis  woik  is  thoronghly  Ńeo- Platonie,  and 
though  the  writer  directs  it  against  Christianity,  be  evi- 
dently  bonowed  many  Christian  doctrines  to  senre  his 
end.   The  Asdtpiut  was  embodied  in  seyeral  editions  of 
Apaldofl,  and  in  those  of  the  Pamander  by  Ficinus  and 
Patridoa.    These  latter  editions,  and  the  Poemauder  of 
Adrian  Tomebua,  contain  Opo«  'AoK\Ti'7riov  Tpoc  'Aft' 
ftMgtftt  /3aoiXća,  i»obabIy  a  translation  by  the  author  of 
the  pńoeding  work,  and  treating  also  of  God,  matter, 
and  man.    'Epfiou  rov  Tpurfuyicrov  Ilocfiai^pf^c  is  an 
extensive  work.     The  title  JloŁfiaySprię,  or  Pmnander, 
from  votfufVypa»tor  or  Mhepherd^  seems  to  be  imitated 
from  the  Hoi/i^  or  Pastor  of  Hermas.     See  Hesuas. 
lodeed,  the  latter  has  sometimes  been  considered  as  the 
anthor  of  the  Pamander,     It  is  written  in  the  form 
of  a  dialogue,  and  oould  hardly  have  been  oomposed 
bcfbre  the  4th  century.     It  treats  of  naturę,  creation, 
and  God.    These  different  subjects  are  viewed  from  the 
Keo-Platanic  stand-point,  but  intermingled  with  Chris- 
tian, Jewish,  and  Eastem  notions.    The  Pismander  was 
at  fiirt  published  as  a  Latin  translation  by  Tidnus,  un- 
dcr  the  titlc  Mercurii  Triamegisti  Liber  de  Potutate  et 
Sapientia  Dei  (Treves,  1471,  foL ;  often  reprinted  at  Yen- 
icc).    The  Greek  text,  with  Ficinus*s  translation,  was 
fiist  published  by  Adr.  Tumebns  (Paris,  1654, 4to ;  latest 
c£t,  mth  a  commcntar}',  Cologne,  1^,  foL).     It  was 
tmulated  into  French  by  G.  du  Preau,  under  the  title 
Ikftz  Urres  de  Mercure  Trumegiate,  Pun  De  la  Puissanee 
etSapieneede  Dieu,  Pautre  De  la  Yolonte  de  Dieu  (Paris, 
lji67, 9vo);  and  by  othen: — 'larpofmBtjftitnKd  ^  irtpi 
caracXi9ictfc  vo<rovvnifv  irpoyywmKÓL  ic  rffc  fiaOtifia- 
T«W  IrtaHifaic  wpbc  'Afłfttaya  Aiy^Trioy ;  thia  trea- 


tise,  much  leas  important  than  the  preceding  one,  giyea 
the  means  of  foretelling  the  issue  of  a  aickness  by  means 
of  astrotogy :— />e  Reoohaiombue  naiwUatumy  another 
treatise  on  astrology  (Basie,  1559,  foL)  '.—-Aplwrismi^  ńet 
eentum  sententim  ttstrologiea,  called  also  CentUoguium, 
supposed  to  have  been  written  originally  in  Arabie,  but 
of  which  we  possess  but  the  Latin  tnnslation  (Yenioe, 
1492,  fol ;  latest  edit  Uhn,  1672, 12mo)  \--Liber  phyeieo- 
medkus  Kiranidum  Kiraidy  id  est  regis  Penarum,  vere 
aureus  gemmeus^  another  astrological  work,  which  is 
known  to  us  only  in  the  Latin  translation  published  by 
Andr.  PriyinuSf  though  the  Greek  text  is  yet  extant  in 
MS.  at  Madrid.  Some  of  the  books  bearing  the  name 
of  Hermes  TrismcgŁstus  were  evidently  productions  of 
the  Middle  Ages;  these  are  Tradatue  vere  aureus  de 
Lapidie  pkUoeophici  Decreto,  L  e.  on  the  phikisopher^s 
stone  (Latin,  by  D.Gnosius,  Leipz.  1610, 1618, 8vo;  and 
translated  into  French  by  G.  Joly  and  F.  Habert,  Paris^ 
1626,  8vo) ;  Tahula  smaragdina,  an  essay  on  the  art  of 
gold-making,  published  in  Latin  (Nuremburg,  1541, 4to; 
Strasb.  166C,  8vo) ;  Utpi  ^orarSty  xv\wcłwc,  published 
at  the  end  of  Rother's  edition  of  L.Lydus'8  De  Mensibutf 
with  notes  by  BUhr;  TlŁpl  otioiiHiy^  a  fragment  con- 
sisting  of  sixty-six  hexameteiB,  attributed  by  some  to 
Orpheus :  it  is  to  be  found  in  MaittAire^s  Miscellanea 
(London,  1722,  4to),  and  in  Brunck'8  Analecta,  iii,  127. 
All  the  extant  fragments  of  Hermes  are  given  in  French 
by  Menard,  Uermes  TriamigisU  (2d  ediL  Paris,  1868). 
See  J.  H.  Ursinus,  ExercUatio  de  Mercurio  Trismegisto, 
etc  (Nuremb.  1661,  8vo);  Roeeer,  De  Jlermete  Trisme^ 
gisło  liiierarum  inrentore  (Wittemb.  1686, 4to) ;  Colberg, 
De  libria  anticuitatem  menterUibuSf  nbyliarum,  Nermetis, 
Zoroastris  (Greifswald,  1694, 8vo) ;  G.  W.  Wedel,  Z)c  Ta- 
bulą  Ilermeiis  smaragdina  (Jena,  1704,4to) ;  Baumgarten* 
Cruslus,  De  Librorum  Hermeticorum  Origine,  etc  (Jena, 
1827,  4to);  Fabricius,  BibL  Graca,  i,  46,  94;  F.  Hoefer, 
Hist,  de  la  Chinńe,  i,  244;  Pauly,  ReaJrEncylclop, ;  Hoe- 
fer, Nouv,  Biog.  Genirale,  xxiv,  877 ;  Smith,  Dictionary 
ofMythology  and  Biographg,  vol.  ii ;  Warburton,  Dirine 
Legation,  i,  442;  Mosheim,  CommeniarieSy  i,  290;  Cud* 
worth,  True  Intelledual  System  o/ łhe  Umver$e, 
Hermesiana.  See  Hermes,  GEona 
Hermetio  Books.  See  Hkbmbs  TBiBi(EGi8Tt7& 
Hennianfl,  a  heretical  sect  of  the  2d  oentuiy, 
which,  acoording  to  Augustine,  denied  baptism  by  wa- 
ter  on  the  pretence  that  this  was  not  the  kind  of  bap- 
tism institnted  by  Christ;  for  John  the  Baptist,  com- 
paring  his  own  baptism  with  that  of  our  Lond,  says,  **  1 
baptize  you  with  water;  but  he  that  cometh  afler  me 
shaU  baptize  you  with  the  Holy  Ghost  and  with  fire" 
(Augustine,  De  Hcer,  c  59).  They  affiimed  that  the 
Bouls  of  men  consisted  of  fire  and  spirit,  and  therefore  a 
baptism  of  fire  was  morę  suitable  to  their  naturę.  Eariy 
eodesiastical  writers  are  not  agreed  as  to  what  waa 
meant  by  this  ezpression.  Clemens  Alexandrinus  men- 
tions  some  who,  when  they  had  baptiied  men  in  water, 
also  madę  a  mark  on  their  ears  with  flre,  so  joining  to- 
gether  baptism  by  water,  and,  as  they  imagined,  bap* 
tism  by  flre  (apud  Combefls,  Auctariumy  i,  202).  Oth* 
ers,  by  some  deceptiye  art  during  baptism,  madę  fire  to 
appear  on  the  suiface  of  the  water,  and  confirmed  thia 
by  a  reference  to  some  apocryphal  writing  of  their  own 
inrention  called  "  The  Preaching  of  Paul  or  Peter,"  in 
which  it  was  said  that,  when  Cborist  was  baptized,  fire 
appeared  on  the  water.  See  ^ngham,  Orig,  Ecdes,  bk. 
xi,  eh.  ii,  §  8. 

HenniaB,  a  writer,  supposed  by  some  to  datę  fronr 
the  2d  century.  Nothing  is  known  of  his  life,  but  wr 
possess  under  his  name  a  work  entitled  Aiawpfibę  rSn 
k^ta  ^\o<r6^iav,  "A  satirizing  of  the  Heathen  Philoflo^ 
phers."  It  is  written  in  the  form  of  a  dialogue  ad« 
dressed  to  the  attthor'8  friends.  Hermias  reviews  the 
opinions  of  the  philoeophers  on  naturę,  the  unirerse, 
God,  his  essence,  his  relations  to  the  world,  the  human 
soul,  etc  He  shows  their  diiferences  and  contradio- 
tions  on  all  these  points,  and  thus  pfOTea  the  innifficieii- 


HERMTT 


208 


HEBMON 


cj  and  ftiŁility  of  all  tbeir  theoiies.  Thu  liŁtle  woric, 
written  in  the  manner  and  somewhat  in  the  style  of 
Lucian,  is  an  interesting  document  for  the  hiatory  of 
andent  philoaophy,  but  has  no  otber  mcrit,  pbiloaoph- 
ical  or  tbeological  It  was  published,  with  a  Latin 
trandation  by  Seiler  (Ztnich,  1558,  8to;  1660,  foL),  and 
is  inserted  in  seyeral  collections  of  ecclesiastical  worka, 
namely,  in  Morel,  Tabula  cofmpaidiota  (Basie,  1580, 
8vo) ;  in  seyeral  editions  of  Jostin  Martyr;  in  WQrth's 
edition  of  Tatian  (Oxford,  1700,  8to)  ;  in  the  AutUniuM 
BibL  Patr.  (Paris,  1624,  foL),  and  in  Gallandu  BibUoth, 
Pair,  J.  G.  Dommerich  published  a  separate  edition, 
with  notes  by  H.  Wolf,  Gale,  and  Worth  (HaHe,  1764, 
8vo).  See  Hoefer,  Nouv.  Biogr.  Ginirale,  xxiv,  887; 
Dupin,  Ecclet,  Wrtiers,  2d  cent ;  Donaldaon,  HuUny  of 
Chrutim  Literaturę^  ii,  179. 

Hermit  (Gr.  ipriftóc,  deserf)^  one  devoted  to  religi 
ious  solitude ;  properly,  the  solitude  of  a  wUdemess.  It 
became,  at  a  later  period,  the  name  of  certain  dasses  of 
monks.     See  Monasticism  ;  Monk. 

Hermog^ends  (EpfŁoyivtic,  Mercury-hom)^  a  dis- 
dple  of  Asia  Minor,  and  probably  oompanion  in  labor 
of  the  apostle  Faul ;  mentioned,  along  with  Phygdlus, 
as  having  abandoned  him  during  his  second  imprison- 
ment  at  Romę,  doubtless  from  alarm  at  the  perils  of  the 
oonnection  (2  Tim.  i,  15).  A.D.  64.  In  the  Roman 
Breyiary  (*»  Fest.  S.  Jac,  Apost,  Pars,  a*tiva,  p.  485, 
Milan,  1851)  the  conversion  of  Hermogenes  is  attributed 
to  St  James  the  Great,  and  in  the  legendaiy  history  of 
Abdias,  the  so-called  bishop  of  Babyton  (Fabridus,  Cod, 
Apocryph,  N,  T.  p.  517  sq.),  Hermogenes  is  represented 
as  first  practising  magie,  and  conrerted,  with  Philetus, 
by  the  same  apostle.  Grotiua,  apparently  misled  hy 
the  drcumstance  that  the  historian  or  geographer  Her- 
mogenes, mentioned  by  the  scholiast  of  Apollonius  Rho- 
dius  (ii,  722,  Fraff.  Jlist.  Gnec,  Didot.  ed.,  iii,.523),  wrote 
on  primitiye  historj',  and  inddcntally  (?)  speaks  of  Nan- 
naais  or  Anacus — and  may  therefore  probably  be  the 
same  as  the  Hermogenes  whom  Joaephus  mentions  as 
baving  treated  on  Jewish  hbtory  (A pion,  i,  28)~«ug- 
gests  that  he  may  be  the  person  mentioned  by  the  apos- 
tle Paul.  This,  howevcr,  is  not  likely.  Nothing  morę 
is  known  of  the  Hermogenes  in  ąnestion,  and  he  cannot 
be  identiiied  either  with  Henui^enes  of  Tarsus,  a  histo- 
rian of  the  time  of  Domitian,  who  was  put  to  death  by 
that  emperor  (Sueton.  Domii,  10;  Hoffman,  Lex,  Univ, 
B.  V. ;  Alford  on  2  Tim.  i,  15),  nor  with  Hermogenes  the 
painter,  against  whom  Tertullian  wrote  (Smith's  Diet, 
of  Class.  Biograpktf,  s.  v.),  nor  with  the  saints  of  the 
Byzantine  Church,  commemorated  on  Jan.  24  and  Sept 
1  (Neale,  Eastem  Church,  ii,  770, 781).— Kitto,  s.  v. 

Hermogfines,  a  heretic  of  the  2d  oentury.  Our 
knowlcdge  of  him  is  chiefly  deiired  from  a  treatisc 
against  him  by  Tertullian  (fldv,  Hermogenem),  and  from 
an  account  in  the  newly-dlscoyered  MS.  of  Hippol3rtus. 
He  was  living,  probably  in  Africa,  when  Tertullian  wrote 
against  him,  and  was  a  painter  by  profession.  Tertul- 
lian charged  that  Hermogenes  was  a  bdiever  in  the 
doctrines  of  the  heathen  philosophera,  and  espedally  in 
those^  of  the  Stoics,  and  espedally  that  he  taught  the 
eternity  of  matter.  Hermogenes  argued  that  God  must 
have  madę  the  world  either  out  of  his  own  subetance,  or 
out  of  nothing,  or  out  of  pre-€xi8tent  matter.  The  firet, 
he  thought,  was  inconsistent  with  God'8  imrautability ; 
the  second  with  the  origin  of  evil;  and  therefore  the 
third  must  be  received  as  tnie.  "  He  rcjected  both  the 
Gnostic  Emanation  docbrine  and  the  Church  doctrine 
of  Creation :  the  former  contradicted  the  unchangeable 
naturę  of  God,  and  neoesdtated  attributing  to  him  the 
origin  of  evil ;  the  latter  was  contradicted  by  the  naturę 
of  this  world ;  for  if  the  creation  of  the  perfect  God  had 
been  conditioned  by  nothing,  a  perfect  world  must  have 
been  the  result.  Henoe  he  believed  that  creation  sup- 
posed  Bomething  oonditioning,  and  this  he  thought 
must  be  the  Hyle  which  he  receiyed  from  Platonism 
into  oonnection  nith  the  Christian  system.    He  did  not 


think  that  he  gaye  up  the  doetrine  of  the  fiova(^a  aa 
long  aa  he  admitted  a  mling,  aU-powerful  prindple,  and 
ascribed  to  God  such  a  supremacy  orer  the  Hyle.  He 
regaided  the  Hyle  as  altogether  andetermiued,  predi- 
catelesB,  in  whidi  all  the  contraiieties  that  afterwards 
appeared  in  the  woild  were  as  yet  unaeparated  and  on- 
devdoped;  ndtber  motion  nor  rest,  ndther  flovring  nor 
standing  still,  but  an  inorganic  confusion.  It  was  the 
receptiye,  God  alone  the  creatiye ;  his  foimatiye  agency 
called  forth  from  it  determinate  existenoe.  But  with 
this  organization  there  was  a  residuum  which  withstood 
the  diyine  fonnatiye  power.  Hence  the  defectiye  and 
the  offensiye  in  naturę;  henoe  also  eyiL  Had  he  been 
logical  he  must  haye  admitted  a  creation  without  a  be- 
ginning;  he  oould  not  have  lęgaided  it  as  a  single  and 
tranaitiye  act  of  God,  but  as  inmianent,  and  resulting 
immediately  from  the  relation  of  God  to  matter.  He 
said  God  was  always  a  ruler,  consequently  he  must  al* 
ways  haye  had  dominion  over  mattei^  (Neander,  Biti, 
of  Bogmasj  Ryland*s  transL,  i,  118).  The  account  in 
Hippdytus,  fiard  tracwp  aipinunf  (bk.  xxiy),  agieea» 
in  the  main,  with  that  given  aboye,  and  adds  that  Her- 
mogenes taught  that  Christ,  after  his  resurrection,  when 
he  ^  aaoended  to  heaven,  leaving  his  body  in  the  sun,  pro- 
ceeded  himself  to  his  Father."  See  Augustine,  JDe  J/ter, 
xli;  Tertullian,  ado.  Hermogenem,  passim;  Ritter,  Ge- 
schidUt  dL  Phiiotophie,  y,  178;  Neander,  Ch.  IJist.  (Tor- 
rey's),i,568;  Mosheim,Ćoimn.voLi;  Lanlner,'iror£«,  ii, 
208;  viii,  579;  Hagenbach,  Bisiory  qf  Doctrines,  \^  i« 
§47. 

Her^mon  (Heb.  Chermon',  *iveiyn,  according  to  Ge- 
senius,  from  the  Arabie  Charmun,  a  peal ;  Sept.  'Aep- 
fŁutv)f  a  mountain  which  formed  the  northemmost  boun- 
daiy  (Josh.  xii,  1)  of  the  country  beyond  the  Jordan 
(Josh.  xi,  17)  which  the  Hebrews  oonąuered  from  the 
Amorites  (Deut.  iii,  8),  and  which,  therefore,  must  haye 
belonged  to  Anti-Iibanus  (1  Chroń.  v,  23),  as  i»,  indeed, 
implied  or  expres8ed  in  most  of  the  other  passages  in 
which  it  is  named  (Deut  iv,  48;  Josh.  xi,  8,  17 ;  xii,  5; 
xiii,  5, 11 ;  Psa.  lxxxix,  12 ;  cxxxiii,  3 ;  Cant.  iv,  8).  It 
has  two  or  moro  summits,  and  is  therefore  spoken  of  in 
the  plur.  (fi^^Sbnn,  Psa.  xlii,  7;  Sept.  'Efuayuifi,  EngL 
Yen. "  Hermonites**)-  In  Deut.  iii,  9  it  b  said  to  have 
been  called  by  the  Sidonians  Sinon  {y)'^'}V),  and  by 
the  Amorites  Shenir  C^^W),  both  of  which  words  ń^ 
nify  **  a  coat  of  mail,"  as  glittering  in  the  sun.  In  DeoL 
iv,  48  it  is  called  Motmt  Sion  {*i^'^is\  meaning  *'an 
deyation,"  **a  high  mountain"— which  it  was  well  cnti- 
tled  to  be  designated  by  way  of  excellence,  being  (if  cor- 
rectly  identifi«l  with  Jebel  es-Sheik)  by  far  the  lUghest 
of  all  the  mountains  in  or  near  Palestine.  In  the  later 
books  of  the  Old  Testament,  however  (as  in  1  Chroń.  v, 
23 ;  SoL  Song,  iv,  8),  Shenir  is  distinguished  from  Her- 
mon  properly  so  called.  Probably  diiferent  summits  or 
parts  of  this  rangę  borę  different  namcs,  which  were  ap- 
plied  in  a  wider  or  narrower  acceptation  at  diflTemit 
times  (see  Schwarz,  Palestine,  p.  56).    See  HtvrrE. 

Hennon  was  a  natural  landmark.  It  could  be  seen 
from  the  **plains  of  Moab"  beside  the  Dead  Sea,  from 
the  heights  of  Nebo,  from  every  prominent  spot,  in  fact, 
in  Moalś  Gilead,  and  Bashan — a  pale  blue,  snow-capped 
peak,  terminating  the  view  on  the  northem  horiaon. 
When  the  people  came  to  know  the  country  better — 
when  not  meidy  its  great  physical  features,  but  ita 
towus  and  yillages  became  familiar  to  them,  then  Baal- 
Gad  and  Dan  took  the  place  of  Hennon,  both  of  them 
being  situated  just  at  the  southem  base  of  that  moun- 
tain. Hermon  itself  was  not  embraced  in  the  country 
conquered  by  Moees  and  Joshua;  thdr  conque8ts  ex- 
tended  only  to  it  (see  Josh.  xi,  17 ;  Deut  xxxiv,  1 ;  1 
Sam.  iii,  20).  Hermon  was  also  the  north-westem 
boundary  of  the  old  kingdom  of  Bashan,  as  Salcah  was 
the  south-eastero.  We  read  in  Josh.  xii,  5  that  0|c 
"rdgned  in  Mount  Hermon,  and  in  Salcah,  and  in  aU 
Bashan ;"  i  e.  in  all  Bashan,  from  Hennon  to  Salcah, 


HERMON 


200 


HEROD 


AnoŁher  notioe  of  Hermon  ehows  tho  minutę  aocnracy 
of  Łhe  Łopognphy  of  Joshiu.  He  makes  **  Łebanon  to- 
-wards  tłie  nm-riaiiig,"  that  is,  the  rangę  of  Anti-Leba- 
nrm,  exteod  from  Hermon  to  the  entering  into.Hamath 
(xiu,  5).  Eyery  Ońental  geographer  now  knows  that 
jlermuu  is  the  soathem  and  ctdminating  point  of  this 
zange.  The  beauty  and  grandeur  of  Hermon  did  not 
escape  the  attention  of  the  Hebrew  poeta.  Fiom  nearly 
evenr  prominent  point  in  Palestine  the  moontain  is  vł»- 
ible,  but  it  is  when  we  leave  the  hill-country  of  Samaria 
and  enter  the  plain  of  Esdraelon  that  Hennon  appears 
in  all  its  majesty,  shooting  up  on  the  difltant  horizon 
behind  the  graoeful  ronnded  top  of  Tabor.  It  was  prob- 
ably  this  yiew  that  suggested  to  the  Psahnist  the  worda 
**  Tlie  north  and  the  south  thou  hast  created  them :  Ta- 
bor and  Heimon  shall  rejoice  in  thy  name''  (lxxxix, 
12).  The  '^dew  of  Hermon"  is  once  refeired  to  in  a 
paseage  which  has  long  been  considered  a  geographical 
puzzle — "  Ae  the  dew  of  Hermon,  the  de  w  that  descend- 
ed  OD  Łhe  moontains  of  Zioń"  (Psa.  C2cxxiii,  8).  Some 
luive  thonght  that  Zioń  Cji^S)  is  used  here  for  Sion 
(jk'^iS),  one  of  the  old  names  of  Hennon  (Deut.  iy,  48), 
bot  this  identification  is  onnecessaiy.  The  snów  on  the 
anmmit  of  this  momitain  condenses  the  rapois  that  float 
dmńng  the  sommer  in  the  higher  regions  of  the  atmoe- 
phere,  causing  light  clouds  to  hover  around  it,  and 
mbondant  dew  to  desoend  on  it,  while  the  whole  country 
elsewhere  is  parched,  and  the  whole  heayen  elsewhere 
doudksB.  Chie  of  its  tops  ia  actually  called  Abu-Nedjf, 
1  e.  *'iather  of  dew"  (Porter,  Handb,  ii,  468). 

Since  modem  trayellers  haye  madę  us  acquainted 
with  the  country  beyond  the  Jordan,  no  doubt  has  been 
entcrtained  that  the  Mount  Hermon  of  those  text8  is  no 
other  than  the  present  Jebel  et-Sheik,  or  the  Sheik'8 
Moontain,  or,  which  is  equiya]ent,  Old  Man^s  Mountain, 
a  name  it  is  said  to  haye  obtained  from  its  fancied  re- 
semUance  (being  t<^ped  with  snów,  which  sometimes 
liea  in  tengthened  streidES  upon  its  sloping  ridges)  to  the 
boory  head  and  beard  of  a  yenerable  sheik  (Elliot,  i, 
817).  This  Jebel  e»-sheik  is  a  aouth-eastem,  and  in  that 
directłon  culminating,  bianch  of  Anti-Iibanus.  Its  top 
is  partially  corered  with  snów  throughout  the  summer, 
and  has  an  eleyation  of  9876  feet  (Van  de  Yelde,  Me- 
moir,  p.  170, 176).  Dr.  Ckrke,  who  saw  it  in  the  month 
of  July,  sayą  *Tbe  snmmit  is  so  lofty  that  the  snów  en- 
tizely  ooyered  the  npper  part  of  it,  not  lying  in  patches, 
bat  inyesting  aO  the  higher  part  with  that  perfectly 
white  and  smooth  yelyet-like  appearance  which  snów 
only  exhibitB  when  it  is  yery  deep."  Dr.  Bobinson  only 
diffeis  from  the  preceding  by  the  statement  that  the  snów 
is  perpetnal  only  in  the  rayines,  so  that  the  top  presents 
the  appearance  of  radiant  stripes  around  and  below  the 
Bommit  (BUk  Retearches,  iii,  844).  At  his  last  yisit  to 
Palestine,  he  obseryes,  under  datę  of  April  9  (new  ed.  of 
Remirekes,  iii,  48),  that  *<the  snów  extended  for  some 
distance  down  the  sides,  while  on  the  peaks  of  Lebanon 
oppofiite  tbere  was  nonę."  In  August,  1852,  Sey.  J.  L. 
Porter,  of  Damascus,  ascended  Jebel  e»-Sheik  from  Ra- 
ahey,  and  spent  a  night  near  its  summit.  He  describes 
the  h%faest  peak  as  oomposed  strictly  of  three  peaks,  so 
near  each  other  as  to  appear  one  fhnn  below.  On  the 
soutb-eastemmost  of  these  peaks  are  some  interesting 
lemains,  caUed  Kulał  Antar,  probably  relics  of  an  an- 
dent  Syio-Phoenician  tempie,  consisting  of  a  drcular 
waD  around  a  rock  about  15  feet  high,  which  has  a  rude 
czcayadon  upon  it,  and  heape  of  beyded  Stones  adjoin- 
ing  it.  The  snow-banks  esphun  the  supply  anciently 
rasde  for  cooling  drinks  in  Tyre  and  Sidon  (BibliotMeca 
Sae.  Jan.  1854).  The  summit  is  about  9000  feet  aboye 
the  Mediterranean  (Lient.Wairen,  in  the  Ouarierly  State- 
wKtd  of  the  **  Palestine  Espbration  Fund,"  No.  5,  p.  210, 
where  ateo  are  a  description  and  cut  of  the  ruined  tempie). 

In  two  passages  of  Scripture  this  mountain  is  called 
BaaUterman  (Titt"jn  b??,  Judg.  iii,  8 ;  1  Chroń.  v,  23), 
sod  the  <Mily  reason  that  can  be  assigned  for  it  is  that 
Baal  was  there  worahipped.    Jerome  says  of  it,  ^  Dici- 

iv.-o 


tuiąue  tłi  ver(ice  tjtu  inńgne  templum,  qupd  ab  ethnicis 
cultui  habetur  e  regione  Paneadis  et  Libani" — reference 
must  here  be  madę  to  the  building  whose  mins  are  still 
seen  {Omom.  s.  y.  Hennon).  •  -It  is,  remarkable  that  Her- 
mon was  anciently  encompassed  by  a  circle  of  temples, 
aUfacmg  the  summit  Can  it  be  that  this  mountain  was 
the  great  sanctuary  of  Baal,  and  that  it  was  to  the  old 
Syrians  what  Jerusalem  was  to  the  Jews,  and  what  Mec- 
ca  is  to  the  Moelems  ?  (See  Porter,  Hańdbookfor  Syria 
and  Pal  p.  454,  457 ;  Reland,  Palcut,  p.  823  sq.)  The 
aboye  described  ruins  seem  to  confirm  this  conjecture. 
See  Baal-hermon. 

There  can  be  no  doubt  that  one  of  the  southem  peaks 
of  Hermon  was  the  scenę  of  the  Transfiguration.  Our 
Lord  trayelled  from  Bethsaida,  on  the  northem  slope  of 
the  Sea  of  Galilee, "  to  the  coasts  of  Cseaarea-Philippi," 
where  he  led  his  disciples  "into  a  high  mountain  apart, 
and  was  transfigured  before  them ;"  and  aflerwards  he  re- 
tumed,  going  towards  Jerusalem  through  Galilee  (comp. 
Mark  yiii,  22-28;  Matt  xyi,  13;  Mark  ix,  2-13,80^88). 
No  other  mountain  in  Palestine  seems  so  appropriate  to 
tho  circumstances  of  that  glorious  scenę.  For  many 
centuries  a  monkish  tradition  assigned  this  honor  to  Ta- 
bor (Bobinson,  Bib,  Res,  ii,  858),  but  it  is  now  rcstored 
to  its  pioper  locaHty,  and  wUl  giye  additional  celebrity 
to  the  prince  of  Syrian  mountains  (Portefs  Danuucus, 
i,  806). 

The  mention  of  Hermon  along  with  Tabor  iz:  ^'*". 
ljcxxix,  12,  led  to  its  being  sought  near  the  latter  moun- 
tain, where,  aocordingly,  trayellers  and  maps  giye  us  a 
*^Little  Hermon."  But  that  passage,  as  well  as  Psa. 
cxxxiii,  8,  applies  better  to  the  great  mountain  already 
described;  and  in  the  former  it  seems  perfectly  natural 
for  the  Psahnist  to  cali  upon  these  mountains,  respect- 
iyely  the  most  conspicuous  in  the  western  and  eastem 
diyisions  of  the  Hebrew  territory,  to  rejoice  in  the  name 
of  the  Lord.  Besides,  we  are  to  consider  that  Jebel  en- 
sheikh  is  seen  from  Mount  Tabor,  and  that  both  togeth- 
er  are  yisible  from  the  plalii  of  Ksdraelon.  There  is  no 
reason  to  suppose  that  the  so-caUed  Little  Hermon  is  at 
all  mentioned  in  Scripture.  Its  actual  name  is  Jebel 
ed-Duhy ;  it  is  a  shapeless,  bairen,  and  uninteresting 
mass  of  hills,  in  the  north  of  the  yalley  of  Jezreel  and 
opposite  Mount  Gilboa  (Robinson,  Betearckes,  iii,  171). 
— Kitto,  8.  y. ;  Smith,  s.  v. 

Her'monite  (Psa.  xliii,  7).    See  Her^iosi. 

Hernandez.    See  Julian  the  Little. 

Her^od  (apió^ijCt  kero-iikej  a  name  that  appears 
likewise  among  the  Greeks,  Dio.  Cass.  lxxi,  85 ;  Philost. 
Soph.  u,  1,  etc),  the  name  of  seyeral  persons  of  the  royal 
family  of  Juda»a  in  the  time  of  Christ  and  the  apostles 
(see  NoldiuB,  De  Hta  et  gestis  Iferodumj  in  Hayercamp*s 
edit.  of  Josephus ;  Beland,  Palout.  p.  174  sq. ;  Jost,  GeicK 
d.  ItraelUen,  i,  160  są.  Other  monographs  are  named  by 
Yolbeding,  lńdex  Programmatum,  p.  16, 77  j  and  by  Fttrst, 
Bibliotheca  Judaica^  i,  886;  ii,  127-180.  See  also  De 
Saulcy,  Bitt,  dCHirode,  Par.  1867;  GUder,  Herodea^  Bem, 
1869),  whose  history  is  incidentally  inyolred  in  that  of 
the  N.  Testament,  but  is  copioualy  detailed  by  Josephus : 
notices  of  it  also  occur  in  the  clasBical  writers,  especially 
Strabo  (xyi,  c  ii,  16).  The  foUowing  account  is  chiefly 
taken  from  the  ŻHcłionaries  of  Kitto  and  Smith,  s.  y. 

The  history  of  the  Herodian  family  presents  one  side 
of  the  last  deyelopment  of  the  Jewish  nation.  The  eyils 
which  had  exi8ted  in  the  hierarchy  that  grew  up  afler 
the  Return,  found  an  unexpected  embodiment  in  the 
tyranny  of  a  foreign  usurper.  Beligion  was  adopted  as  a 
policy ;  and  the  hellenizing  designs  of  Antiochus  Epiph* 
anes  were  carried  out,  at  least  in  their  spirit,  by  men 
who  profeseed  to  obseiye  the  law.  Side  by  side  with 
the  spiritual "  kingdom  of  God"  proclaimed  by  John  the 
Baptist,  and  founded  by  the  Lord,  a  kingdom  of  the 
world  was  established,  which  in  its  extemal  splendor 
recalled  the  traditional  magnificence  of  Solomon.  The 
simultaneous  realization  of  the  two  principlcs,  nadonal 
and  spiritual,  which  had  long  yariously  influenced  the 
Jews,  in  the  establishment  of  a  dynasta'  and  a  church,  is 


HEROD 


210 


HEROD 


1 

:§ 


^1 
1? 


1 


•4 
8 


11 


HEROD 


211 


HEROD 


ft  fiut  pr^DUiŁ  with  mstracŁion.  In  the  fulness  of  time 
a  ćtaoeońant  of  Esaa  established  a  false  ooiinterpart  of 
the  praniaed  gkmes  of  the  Mesetah. 

YarioDS  acooimte  are  given  of  the  ancestry  of  the 
Heroda  Tbe  Jewish  partisans  of  Herod  (Nicolas  Dam- 
aaeenuy  ap^  JoBecthtOf  AnL  xiv,  1, 3)  sooght  to  raiae  him 
to  the  dignity  of  a  descent  from  one  of  the  noble  fami- 
lies  wfaich  retorned  from  Babylon ;  and,  on  the  otber 
hmd,  early  Christian  writera  lepresented  his  origin  as 
otterijr  mean  and  Beryił&  Africanus  has  preseired  a 
tndition  (Roath,  ReH  Saer,  ii,  285),  on  the  authority  of 
"  the  natnial  kinśmen  of  the  SaTioor,**  which  makes  An- 
tipatCTy  the  &ther  of  Herod,  the  son  of  one  Herod,  a 
dare  attached  to  the  semce  of  a  tempie  of  Apollo  at 
Ascalon,irfao  was  taken  prisoner  by  IdonuBan  lobbere, 
and  kef^  by  them,  as  his  father  ooold  not  pay  his  nm- 
som.  The  locality  ^mp.  Philo,  Leff.  ad  Caium,  §  80), 
no  kas  than  the  office,  was  calculated  to  iix  a  heavy  re- 
proich  opon  the  name  (comp.  Routh,  I  c.)>  This  story 
is  repeated  włth  great  inaccuracy  by  Epiphanius  (ffosr, 
xx).  Keglecting,  however,  these  exaggerated  state- 
ments  of  ftiends  and  enemies,  it  seems  certain  that  the 
family  was  of  Idmnsean  descent  (Josephus,  Ant,  xiv,  1, 
8),  a  iact  which  is  indicated  by  the  forms  of  some  of 
tbe  names  that  were  retained  in  it  (Ewald,  Getdiickte^ 
hr,  477,  note).  But,  though  aliens  by  race,  the  Herods 
were  Jews  in  faith.  The  Idumeans  had  beói  conąuered 
snd  bronght  over  to  Judaiam  by  John  Hyrcanos  (RO* 
180;  Josephns,  A  nL  xiii,  9, 1) ;  and  from  the  time  of  their 
caaverBioii  they  remained  constant  to  their  new  religion, 
koking  npon  Jemsalem  as  their  mother  city,  and  claim- 
ing  for  theii]selve8  the  name  of  Jews  (Josephus,  A  vi.  xx, 
7,7;  ITor,  i,  10,4;  iv, 4, 4). 

Tbe  generał  policy  of  the  whole  Heiodlan  family, 
thoogh  modified  by  the  persona!  characteristics  of  the 
succeflBTe  nilers,  was  the  same.  It  centred  in  the  en- 
deavor  to  finmd  a  great  and  independent  kingdom,  in 
which  the  power  of  Judaism  should  sabserve  the  con- 
aolidation  of  a  state.  The  piotectlon  of  Romę  was  in 
the  fiiBt  instanoe  a  necessity,  but  the  designs  of  Herod  I 
and  Agrippa  I  point  to  an  independent  Eastem  empire 
as  thor  cńtd,  and  not  to  a  merę  snbject  monarchy.  Such 
a  conaammation  of  the  Jewish  hopes  seems  to  have 
faand  aome  measare  of  acceptance  at  fiist  [see  Heho- 
iHAx] ;  and  by  a  natnral  reaction  the  temporal  domin- 
ido  of  the  Herods  opened  the  uray  for  the  destruction  of 
the  Jewish  nationality.  The  religion  which  was  de- 
giaded  into  the  instmment  of  nnscmpuloos  amtńtion 
lost  ita  power  to  quicken  a  nnited  people.  The  high- 
prieats  were  appointed  and  deposed  by  Herod  I  and  his 
sncceasoTs  with  sach  a  reckless  dtsregard  for  the  charac- 
ter  of  their  office  (Jost,  Geseh,  d,  Jwkmhunu,  i,  822, 825, 
421),  Chat  the  oiBLee  itself  was  deprived  of  its  sacred  dig- 
nity (compare  Acts  xxiii,  2  sq. ;  Jost,  i,  480,  etc.).  The 
natiofi  was  divided,  and  amid«b  the  conflict  of  sects  a 
amvet8al  faith  aiose,  which  morę  than  fulfilled  the  no- 
bler  hopes  that  found  no  satisfaction  in  the  tieacherous 
grandeor  of  a  coort.  See  the  name  of  each  member  of 
the  fimily  in  its  order  in  this  OtcijOP.iBDIa. 

1.  Hebod  thk  Great,  as  he  is  osually  somamed, 
BMntioned  in  MaŁL  ii,  1-22;  I^ke  i,  5;  Acts  xxiii,  85, 
waa  the  seoond  son  of  Antipater  and  Cyproe,  an  Arabi- 
an  lady  of  noble  descent  (Josephus,  AnL  xiv,  7, 8).  See 
AsTiPATKR.  In  B.G.  47  Jolius  ciesar  madę  Antipater 
proeoiator  of  Jndsa,  and  the  latter  divided  his  territo- 
liea  among  his  foor  sons,  aaaigning  the  district  of  Gali- 
lee to  Herod  (Josephus,  AnL  xiv,  9,  8;  War^  i,  10,  4). 
At  the  time  when  he  was  inveeted  with  the  govemment 
he  was  fifteen  yean  of  age,  according  to  Josephus  (A  nt, 
xxr,  9, 2) ;  bot  this  mnst  be  a  mistake.  Herod  died,  aged 
abcty-nine,  in  RO.  4,  conseqaently  he  must  have  been 
twaity-aix  or  twenty-five  in  the  year  B.C.  47,  when  he 
was  madę  govenior  of  Galilee  (irśvrt  Kai  ttKom,  given 
bgr  Bbdorf  in  the  ed.  Didot,  but  no  stated  authority). 
OoB  of  his  fint  acts  was  to  repress  the  brigands  who 
wcR  infesting  his  ptovinceB,  and  to  pnt  many  of  their 
>  to  death  upon  his  own  authority.    This  was 


madę  known  to  Hyrcanus,  and  Herod  was  summoned 
to  take  his  trial  before  the  Sanhedrim  for  his  deeds  of 
violence.  Herod,  instead  of  appeaiing  before  the  San- 
hedrim dothed  in  mouming,  came  in  purple,  attcnded 
by  armed  guards,  and  bearing  in  his  hands  a  letter  from 
the  Roman  commander  Sextus  CaBsar  for  his  acquittaL 
This  oveniwed  the  aasembly;  but  Sameas,  a  just  man 
(Josephus,  Ant,  xiv,  9,  4),  stepped  forward,  and,  boldly 
addressing  the  assembly,  predicted  that,  should  the  of- 
fender  escape  punishment,  he  would  live  to  kill  all  those 
who  were  his  judges,  and  would  not  grant  the  pardon 
which  the  assembly  seemed  inclined  to  extend  to  him. 
He,  howevcr,  escaped,  and  took  refuge  with  Sextus  Cae- 
sar,  who  soon  appointed  him  govemor  (ffTparriyóc)  of 
Goele-Syiia.  He  then  determined  to  march  against  Je- 
msalem, and  would  have  done  so  had  not  his  father 
AnUpater  and  his  family  restrained  him  from  commit- 
ting  any  fresh  acts  of  Wolence.  In  B.G.  44,  after  Cse- 
8ar's  death,  Cassius  took  the  govemment  of  Syria. 
Herod  and  his  father  Antipater  willingly  assisted  Cas- 
sius in  obtaining  the  taxe8  levied  upon  the  Jews  for  the 
support  of  the  troops.  For  this  Herod  was  confirmed 
in  the  govemment  of  Coele-Syria  (Josephus,  Wctr^  i,  11, 
4).  In  B.C  41  Antony  came  to  Syria,  and  Herod,  by 
making  him  valuable  presents,  soon  formed  with  him  a 
dose  personal  intimacy  (Josephus,  A  nt,  xiv,  12, 2).  Hyr^ 
canus,  to  whoee  beautlful  granddaughter  Mariamne 
Herod  was  betrothed,  induced  Antony  to  make  Herod 
and  his  brother  Phasael  tetrarchs  of  Jud«a  (Josephus, 
Ani.  xiv,  18,  1;  War,  i,  12,  6).  The  invasion  of  the 
Parthians,  who  sided  with  Antigonus  the  Asmonsean, 
compelled  Herod  to  give  up  Judsa  and  f!y  to  Romę. 
Antony  was  then  in  great  power,  and  took  Herod  under 
his  protection,  and,  seeing  that  he  might  prove  useful 
to  him,  obtained  a  decree  of  the  senate  appointing  him 
king  of  Jndiea,  to  the  extinction  of  all  the  living  Asmo- 
naean  princes  (Josephus,  Ant.  xiv,  9-14;  War,  i,  10-14; 
Dion  Cass.  xl\'iii).  These  event8  took  place  in  B.C.  40, 
and  Herod,  only  staying  seven  days  at  Romę,  retumed 
speedily  to  Jemsalem  within  three  months  from  the 
time  he  had  lirst  fled. 

It  was  not,  however,  so  easy  for  Herod  to  obtain  pos- 
session  of  Jemsalem,  or  to  establish  himself  as  king  of 
Judsea,  as  it  had  been  to  obtain  this  title  from  the  Ro- 
mans. The  Jews  still  held  firmly  to  Antigonus  as  the 
repre9entative  of  the  Asmoniean  llne,  and  it  was  not  for 
8everal  years  that  Herod  madę  any  materiał  advance 
whatever.  With  the  assistance  of  the  Romans  Herod 
madę  preparations  to  take  Jemsalem.  He  had  endeav- 
ored  to  conciliate  the  people  by  marrying  Mariamne, 
thinking  that  by  so  doing  the  attachment  of  the  Jews 
to  the  Asmonsean  family  would  be  extended  to  him. 
After  six  months'  siege  the  Romans  entered  the  city 
(RC.  87),  and,  to  revenge  the  obstinate  resistanoe  they 
had  reoeived,  began  to  ransack  and  plunder,  and  it  was 
no  easy  task  for  Herod  to  purchase  fh)m  the  conquerors 
the  fteedom  from  pillage  of  some  part  of  his  capitaL 
Antigonus  was  taken  and  conveyed  to  Antioch,  whcre, 
having  been  previou8ly  beaten,  he  was  ignominioiialy 
executed  with  the  axe  by  the  order  of  Antony,  a  modę 
of  treatment  which  the  Romans  had  never  before  used 
to  a  king  (Dion  Cass.  lxix,  22 ;  Josephus,  Ant,  xv,  1,  2). 
Thus  ended  the  govemment  of  the  Asmonaeans,  126 
years  after  it  was  first  set  up  (Josephus,  Ant,  xiv,  16, 4). 
Immediately  on  ascending  the  throne  Herod  put  to 
death  all  the  membcrs  of  the  Sanhedrim,  excepting 
PoUio  and  Sameas  (the  famous  Hillel  and  Shammai  of 
the  Rabbinical  writers),  who  had  predicted  this  result, 
and  aiso  all  the  adherenta  of  Antigonus  who  could  be 
fbund.  Having  oonfiscated  their  property,  he  sent  pres- 
ents to  Antony  to  repay  him  for  his  assistance  and  to 
further  securo  his  favor.  He  then  gave  the  office  of 
high-priest,  which  had  become  vacant  by  the  death  of 
Antigonus,  and  the  mutilation  of  Hyrcanus,  whose  ears' 
had  been  cut  offby  Antigonus  (comp.  Łev.  xxi,  16-24), 
to  an  obscure  priest  from  Babylon  named  Ananel  At 
this  insult  Alexandra,  the  mother  of  Mariamne  and  Ar- 


HEROD 


212 


HEROD 


btobulos,  to  whom  the  offioe  of  high-priesŁ  bdonged  by 
herediuuy  saccesaion,  appea]ed  to  Cleopatra  to  use  her 
powerful  influence  with  Antony,  and  Herod  was  thus 
conipelled  to  depose  Ananel,  and  to  elevate  Aristobulufl 
to  the  high-priesŁhood.  The  increasmg  populaiity  of 
Aristobukis,  added  to  the  further  intrigues  of  Alezan- 
dra,  80  excited  the  jealousy  of  Herod  that  he  caused 
him  to  be  drowned  while  bathing,  and  expre86ed  great 
sorrow  at  the  accident  See  Aristobulus.  Alexandra 
again  app^ied  to  Cleopatra,  who  at  last  persaaded  Anto- 
ny  to  summon  Herod  to  Laodioea  to  answer  for  his  eon- 
duet  Herod  was  obliged  to  obey,  but  was  dismiased 
with  the  highest  honors  (Josephus,  A  tiL  xv,  3, 1-8 ;  oomp. 
War,  i,  22,  2).  After  the  defeat  of  Antony  at  Actium, 
in  B.C.  31,  Herod  had  an  audience  at  Rhodes  with 
Octayius,  who  did  not  think  that  Antony  was  quite 
powerleas  while  Herod  continued  his  assbtanoe  to  him 
(Josephus,  War,  i,  20,  1).  Herod  so  conciliated  him 
that  he  obtained  security  in  his  kingdom  of  Judtea,  to 
which  Octavius  added  Gadara,  Samaria,  and  the  mari- 
time  cities  Gaza  and  Joppa.  Shortly  after  the  regions 
of  Trachonitis,  Batanea,  and  Auranitis  were  given  him 
(Josephus,  AnL  xv,  5, 6, 7 ;  10, 1 ;  War,  i,  20, 8, 4 ;  comp. 
Tacit  Hist,  v,  9).  Herod*s  domestic  life  was  troubled 
by  a  long  series  of  bloodshed.  Hyrcanus,  the  grand- 
father  of  his  wife  Mariamne,  was  put  to  death  before  his 
yisit  to  Octayius,  and  Mariamne,  to  whom  he  was  pas- 
sionately  attached,  fell  a  yictim  to  his  jealousy  soon 
after  his  return.  See  Hybcanus;  Mariamse.  His 
remorse  for  the  deed  is  well  described  by  Josephus,  who 
says  that  Herod  commanded  his  attendants  always  to 
speak  of  her  as  alive  {Ant,  xv,  7, 7 ;  War,  i,  22,  5).  In 
B.C.  20,  when  Augustus  yisited  Judiea  in  person,  another 
exten6ive  addition  was  madę  to  his  territories.  The 
district  of  Paneas  was  taken  away  from  its  ruler  Zeno- 
dorus  for  leaguing  himself  with  the  Arabs,  and  given  to 
Herod.  In  recum,  Herod  adomed  this  place  by  erecting 
a  tempie,  which  he  dedicated  to  Aug^tus  (Josephus, 
AnL  XV,  10,  3;  War,  i,  20,  4;  Dion  Cass.  liv,  9).  Not 
long  after  this,  the  death  of  his  wife  was  followed  by 
other  atTodties.  Alexander  and  Aristobulns,  the  sons 
of  Mariamne,  were  put  to  death ;  and  at  last,  in  B.C.  4, 
Herod  ordered  his  eldest  son,  Antipater,  to  be  killed. 
See  Alexandeb  ;  Aristobulus  ;  Antipater.  Herod'8 
painful  disease  no  doubt  maddened  him  in  his  later 
years,  and  in  anticipation  of  his  own  death  he  gave  or- 
ders  that  the  prindpal  Jews,  whom  he  had  shut  up  in 
the  Hippodrome  at  Jericho,  should  immediately  after 
his  decease  be  put  to  death,  that  moumers  might  not 
be  wanting  at  his  funeral  (Josephus,  Ani.  xvii,  6,  5). 
Near  his  death,  too,he  must  have  ordered  the  miuder  of 
the  infanta  at  Bethlehem,  as  recorded  by  Matthew  (ii, 
16-18).  The  number  of  children  in  a  yillage  must  have 
been  very  few,  and  Josephus  has  passed  this  stoiy  over 
unnoticed ;  yet  it  is  worthy  of  remark  that  he  has  given 
an  account  of  a  massacre  by  Herod  of  all  the  members 
of  his  family  who  had  consented  to  what  the  Pharisees 
foretold,  viz.  that  Herod*s  govemment  should  cease,  and 
hb  posteńty  be  deprived  of  the  kingdom  {Ani,  xvii,  2, 
4).  A  confused  account  of  the  massacre  of  the  children 
and  the  mnrder  of  Antipater  is  given  in  Macrobius : 
"Augustus  cum  audisset  Inter  pueros,  quoe  in  Syria 
Herodes,  Tex  JudsBorum,  intra  bimatum  Jussit  inteifici, 
filium  quoque  ejus  occisum,  ait :  Melius  est  Herodis/wr* 
cum  (?  {;v,  «tnhe)  esse  quam  JUium  (?  vióv,  sony  (Sat, 
ii,  4).  Macrobius  lived  in  the  6th  ccntuiy  (c  A.D.  420), 
and  the  words  intra  bmatum  (k  bimatn  et  iiifra,  Matt. 
ii,  16,Vulg.)  seem  to  be  borrowed;  the  story,  too,  is 
wrong,  as  Antipater  was  of  age  when  he  was  executed 
(Alford,  ad  loc.).  Macrobius  may  have  madę  some  mis- 
take  on  account  of  Herod*s  wish  to  destroy  the  heir  to 
the  throne  of  David«  The  lang^uage  of  the  evangelist 
leayes  in  complete  uncertainty  the  method  in  which  the 
deed  was  effected  (airo^ciAac  dvetXev). '  The  scenę  of 
open  and  undisguised  violence  which  has  been  conse- 
crated  by  Chństian  art  is  wholly  at  variance  with  what 
may  be  supposed  to  have  been  the  historie  reality. 


Herod  was  married  to  no  leas  than  ten  wiyes,  by  most 
of  whom  he  had  children.  He  died  a  few  daya  befbn 
the  Pas8over,  B.C.  4,  his  death-bed  being  the  soene  of 
the  most  awful  agonies  in  mind  and  body.  Aocording 
to  the  custom  of  the  times,  he  madę  his  sons  the  hein  to 
his  kingdom  by  a  formal  testament,  leaving  its  ratific»> 
tion  to  the  will  of  the  emperor.  Augustus  assenting  to 
its  main  provisions,  Aichelaus  became  tetruch  of  Ju- 
dea, Samaria,  and  Idumaea;  Philip,  of  Trachonitis  and 
Itunea ;  and  Herod  Antipas,  of  Galilee  and  Pennu  His 
body  was  conveyed  by  his  son  Archelauafrom  Jericho^ 
where  he  died,  to  Herodium,  a  city  and  fortress  200  ata- 
dia  distant,  and  he  was  there  buried  with  gieat  pamp 
(Josephus,  Ant.  xvu,  8,  2;  War,  i,  38,  9). 

On  the  extirpation  of  the  Annontean  famOy,  finding 
that  there  was  then  no  one  who  could  interfere  with 
him,  Herod  had  introduced  heathenish  customs^  such  as 
plays,  shows,  and  chariot^aces,  which  the  Jews  con- 
demned  as  contrazy  to  the  laws  of  Moses  (Josephus,  A  nt. 
XV,  8,  1);  and  on  the  oompletion  of  the  building  of 
Caśsarea  he  also  introduced  Olympic  gamea  and  conae- 
crated  thein  to  Gie8ar,ordcring  them  to  be  celebrated  ev- 
ery  fiflh  year  (Josephus,  Ani.  xv,  9, 6 ;  xvi,  5, 1).  Wiih 
regard  to  the  prejudices  of  the  Jews,  Herod  showed  as 
great  contempt  for  public  opinion  as  in  the  execatłon  of 
his  personal  vengeance.  He  signalized  his  elevation  to 
the  throne  by  offerings  to  the  Capitoline  Jupiter  (Jost, 
Gesch.  d,  Judenthwns,  i,  318),  and  surrounded  his  person 
by  foreign  meroenaries,  some  of  whom  had  formerly  been 
in  the  service  of  Cleopatra  (Josephus,  ^fBf.  xv, 7, 3;  xvił, 
1, 1 ;  8, 3).  His  coins  and  those  of  his  successon  borę 
only  Greek  legends;  and  he  introduced  heathen  gamea 
even  within  the  walls  of  Jerusalem  (Josephus,  Ani.  xv, 
8,  1).  He  displayed  oetentatiously  his  favor  towards 
foreigners  (Josephus,  Ant.  xvi,  5, 3),  and  oppressed  the 
old  Jewish  aristocracy  (Josephus,  Ant.  xv,  1, 1).  The 
later  Jewish  traditions  describe  him  as  Bucceasively  the 
servant  of  the  Asmonieans  and  the  Bomans,  and  relate 
that  one  Rabbin  only  survived  the  persecution  which  he 
directed  against  them,  purchasing  his  life  by  the  loas  of 
sight  (Jost,  i,  319,  eto.). 

Kotwithstanding  that  he  thus  alienated  his  snbjecta 
from  him,  he  greatly  improyed  his  country  by  the  num- 
ber of  fine  towns  and  magnificent  public  buildings  which 
he  had  erected.  He  built  a  tempie  at  Samaria,  and  oon- 
verted  it  into  a  Roman  city  under  the  name  of  Sebaste. 
He  also  built  Gaba  in  Galilee^  and  Heshbonitis  in  Penea 
(Joeephus,  Ani.  xv,  8,  6),  beńdes  several  other  towna, 
which  he  called  by  the  names  of  different  membeia  of 
his  famUy,  as  Antipatiis,  from  the  name  of  his  iather 
Antipater,  and  Phasaelis,  in  the  plains  of  Jeiicho,  aflcr 
his  brother  Phasael  (Josephus,  A  nt^  xvi,  6, 2).  On  many 
other  towns  in  Syria  and  Greece  he  bestowed  money, 
but  his  grandest  undertakuig  was  the  rebuilding  of  the 
Tempie  at  Jerusalem.  It  was  commenced  in  the  18th 
year  of  his  reign  (B.C.  21),  and  the  work  was  carried  on 
with  such  vigor  that  the  Tempie  itself  (vaóc),  L  e.  the 
Holy  House,  was  finished  in  a  year  and  a  half  ( Josephus, 
A  nt.  XV,  11, 1, 6).  The  doisters  and  other  buildings  were 
Onished  in  eight  years  (Josephus,  Ant.  xv,  11,  6).  Ad- 
ditions  and  repairs  were  continually  madę,  and  it  was 
not  till  the  reign  of  Herod  Agrippa  II  (c  A.D.  65)  that 
the  Tempie  (jó  Upóv)  was  compU  ted  (Josephus,  A  ni,  xx, 
9, 7).  Hence  the  Jews  said  to  onr  Lord,  *^  Forty  and  six 
years  was  this  Tempie  in  building  [^co^o/i^Oi^-and  is 
not  even  yet  completed],  and  wilt  thou  ndse  it  up  in 
three  days !"  (John  ii,  20).  This  took  place  in  A.D.  2G, 
not  long  after  our  Lord^s  baptism,  who  **  was  about  thirty 
years  of  age"  (Lukę  iii,  23),  and  who  was  bom  some  two 
years  before  the  death  of  Herod,  in  B.C.  4,  aocording  to 
the  tnie  chronology.  This  beautiful  Tempie,  though 
built  in  honor  of  the  God  of  Israel,  did  not  win  the 
hearts  of  the  people,  as  is  proyed  by  the  revolt  which 
took  place  shortly  before  Herod's  death,  when  the  Jews 
tore  down  the  golden  eagle  which  he  had  faatened  to 
the  Tempie,  and  broke  it  in  pieces  (JosephuS)  Amli^ 
xvii,  6,  2, 3). 


HEROD 


213 


HEROD 


The  diTenity  of  Herod*8  naturę  is  remarkable.  On 
T^faiding  his  magnificence,  and  the  benefits  he  bestow- 
cd  upon  his  people,  one  cannot  deny  thaŁ  he  had  a  veiy 
beneficent  dispońdon ;  but  when  we  read  of  his  cniel- 
tiefl^  not  only  to  his  subjects,  but  even  to  his  own  rela^ 
tionSy  one  is  ibiced  to  allow  that  he  was  brutish  and  a 
stnmger  to  homanity  (comp.  Josephus,  AnL  xvi,  5,  4). 
His  0ervility  to  Romę  is  amply  shown  by  the  manner  in 
which  he  transgiessed  the  customs  of  his  nation  and  set 
aade  many  of  their  Uws,  bailding  cities  and  erecting 
temples  in  foreign  coontries,  for  the  Jews  did  not  permit 
him  80  to  do  in  Jadsa,  eveii  though  they  were  under 
80  tfrannical  a  goremment  as  that  of  Herod.  His  eon- 
feaaed  apology  was  that  he  was  acting  to  please  Ceesar 
and  the  Romans,  and  so  through  all  his  reign  he  was  a 
Je«rish  prinoe  only  in  name,  with  a  Hellenistic  disposition 
(comp.  Josephos,  Ant.  xv,  9,  6 ;  xix,  7, 8).  It  has  even 
been  suppoeed  (Jost,  GestA,  d.  Judenth,  i,  328)  that  the 
rebmlding  of  the  Tempie  fumished  him  with  the  oppor- 
tonity  of  destioying  the  authentic  collection  of  geneal- 
ogies  which  was  of  the  highest  importance  to  the  priest- 
ly  fMnilwŁ  Herod,  as  appears  from  his  public  designs, 
affected  the  dignity  of  a  second  Solomon,  but  he  joined 
the  Jicense  of  that  monarch  to  his  magnificence ;  and  it 
was  aaid  that  the  monument  which  he  raised  over  the 
Foyal  tombs  was  due  to  the  fear  which  seized  him  after 
a  aacrilegious  atteropt  to  rob  them  of  seciet  treasures 
(Josephua,  A  nL  xvi,  7, 1 ) .  He  roaintained  peace  at  home 
dnring  a  long  reign  by  the  vigor  and  timely  generosity 
of  his  administration.  Abroad  he  conciliated  the  good- 
will  of  the  Romans  under  circumstances  of  unusual  diffi- 
colty.  His  oetentatious  display,  and  even  his  arbitrary 
tynumy,  was  calculated  to  inspire  Orientals  with  awe. 
Bold  and  yet  prudent,  oppre8sive  and  yet  profuse,  he 
had  many  of  the  characteristics  which  make  a  popular 
bero;  and  the  title  which  may  have  been  first  given  in 
admiration  of  snoceseful  despotism  now  senres  to  bring 
out  in  deansr  contiast  the  terrible  price  at  which  the 
succeas  was  purchased. 

Josephns  gives  Herod  I  the  sumame  of  Great  (*Hp«tf- 
^C  o  /uyac).  Ewald  suggests  that  the  title  =fider  is 
only  intended  to  distinguish  him  from  the  younger 
HÓod  (Antipas),  and  comparcs  the  cases  of  'EXKiac  6 
fttyac  (Ant,  xviii,  8,  4)  and  Agrippa  the  Great,  in  con- 
tiadistinction  to  Helcias,  the  keeper  of  the  sacred  treas- 
ure  (Ant.  xx,  11,  1),  and  to  Agrippa  H.  The  title 
**  Agrippa  the  Great"  is  confirmed  by  coins,  on  which  he 
is  stykd  MEFAS  (Eckhel,  Docł,  Num,  Yet.  iii,  492; 
Akerman,  Num.  Ckron.  ix,  28),  and.  so,  says  Ewald,  ^  it 
may  similarly  have  been  given  upon  the  coins  of  Her- 
od, and  from  this  the  origin  of  the  sumame  may  have 
been  derived''  {Geschichle,  iv,  478,  notę).  There  are, 
however,  no  coitu  of  Herod  I  with  the  title  ffreat  It  is 
beat  to  snppoee  that  the  title  in  Josephus  is  merely  a 
dirtinguishing  epithet,  and  not  meant  to  expreas  great- 
neas  o(  character  or  achievement8. 


Coin  of  Herod  the  Great. 


2.  Hkbod  Antipas  (UfMriCj  Matt,  Mark,  Lukę ; 
Avrixac,  Josephus)  was  the  son  of  Herod  the  Great, 
by  Halthace,  a  Samaritan  (Joseph.  A  ta.  xvii,  1,8;  War, 
i,  28, 4).  His  father  had  ahready  given  him  "  the  king^ 
dom"  in  his  first  wiŁ  but  in  the  finał  arrangement  left 
him  the  tetrarchy  of  Galilee  and  Persea  (Josephus,  Anf. 
XTii,8,l;  łFar,ii,9,l;  Matt.xiv,l;  Lukeiii,l;  ui,19; 
ix,  1 ;  Acta  xiii,  1),  which  brought  him  the  yearly  reve- 
nne  of  200  talents  (Josephus,  Ant.  x\ńii,  5, 1).  On  his 
^Mj  to  Borne  he  yiaited  lus  brother  Philip,  and  com- 


mencing  an  intrigne  with  his  wife  Herodias,  danghter 
of  Aristobulus,  the  son  of  Mariamne,  he  afterwards  in- 
cestuously  married  her.  He  had  preylously  been  mar- 
ried  to  a  daughter  of  Aretas,  king  of  Arabia  Petnea,  who 
avenged  this  insult  by  invading  his  dominions,  and  de- 
feated  him  with  great  loes  (Josephus,  AnL  xviii,  5, 1). 
An  appeal  to  the  Romans  afforded  the  only  hope  of  safe- 
ty.  Aretas  was  haughtily  ordered  by  the  emperor  to 
desist  firom  the  prosecution  of  the  war,  and  Herod  ac- 
cordingly  escaped  the  expected  overthrow.  Josephus 
says  that  the  opinion  of  the  Jews  was  that  the  defeat 
was  a  punishment  for  his  having  imprisoned  John  the 
Baptist  on  account  of  his  popularity,  and  afterwards  put 
him  to  deatb,  but  does  not  mention  the  repToval  that 
John  gave  him,  nor  that  it  was  at  the  instigation  of 
Herodias  that  he  was  killed,  as  reoorded  in  the  Gospels 
(Joseph.  Ant,  x\''iii,  5, 4;  Matt.  xiv,  1-11 ;  Mark  vi,  14- 
16;  Lukę  iii,  19;  lx,  7-9).  The  evangeli8ts  evidently 
give  the  tnie  reason,  and  Josephus  the  one  generally  re- 
ceived  by  the  people.  In  A.D.  88,  after  the  death  of  Ti- 
berius,  he  was  penuaded,  especially  at  the  ambitious  in- 
stigation of  Herodias,  to  go  to  Romę  to  procure  for  him- 
self  the  royal  title.  Agrippa,  who  was  high  in  the  favor 
of  Caligula,  and  had  already  received  this  title,  opposed 
this  with  such  sucoess  that  Antipas  was  condemned  to 
perpetual  banishment  at  Lyons,  a  city  of  Gaul  (Joseph. 
A  nL  xviii,  7,  2),  and  eventually  died  in  Spain,  whither 
his  wife  Herodias  had  voluntarily  followed  him  (  War, 
ii,  9,  6).  He  is  called  (by  courtesy)  hing  by  Matthew 
(xiv,  9)  and  by  Mark  (vi,  14).     See  No.  6. 

Herod  Antipas  was  in  high  favor  with  Tiberius; 
hence  he  gave  the  name  of  Tiberias  to  the  city  he  built 
on  the  kke  of  Gennesareth  (Josephus,  Ata,  xviii,  2, 8). 
He  enlarged  and  improved  several  cities  of  his  domin- 
ions, and  also  built  a  wali  about  Sepphoris,  and  round 
Betharamphtha,  which  latter  town  he  named  JuUas,  in 
honor  of  the  wife  of  the  emperor  (Josephus,  AnL  xviii, 
2, 1 ;  comp.  War,  ii,  9, 1). 

It  was  before  Herod  Antipas,  who  came  up  to  Jerusa^ 
lem  to  celebrate  the  Paseover  (comp.  Joseph.  AnL  xviii, 
6, 8),  that  our  Lord  was  sent  for  cxamination  when  Pi- 
late  heard  that  he  was  a  Galihean,  as  Pilate  had  already 
had  several  disputes  with  the  Galilseans,  and  was  not  at 
this  time  on  very  good  terms  with  Herod  (Lukę  xiii,  1 ; 
xxiii,  6-7),  and  "  on  the  same  day  Pilate  and  Herod 
were  madę  friends  together"  (Lukę  xxiii,  12;  comp.  Jo- 
sephus, A  ni.  xviii,  8, 2 ;  Psa.  lxxxiii,  5).  The  name  of 
Herod  Antipas  is  coupled  with  that  of  Pilate  in  the 
prayer  of  the  apostles  mentioned  in  the  Acts  (iv,  24-80). 
His  personal  character  is  little  touched  upon  1^  either 
Josephus  or  the  evangelists,  yet  from  his  consenting  to 
the  death  of  John  the  Baptist  to  gratify  the  malice  of  a 
wicked  woman,  though  for  a  time  he  had  ^  heard  him 
gladly"  (Mark  vi,  20),  we  perceive  his  cowardice,  his 
want  of  spirit,  and  his  fear  of  ridicrde.  His  wicked  oath 
was  not  binding  on  him,  for  Herod  was  bound  by  the 
law  of  God  not  to  commit  murder.  He  was  in  any  casc 
desirous  to  see  Jesus,  and  "  hoped  to  have  scen  a  roiraclc 
from  him"  (Lukę  xxiii,  8).  His  artifice  and  ctmning  are 
specially  alluded  to  by  our  Lord, "  Go  ye  and  tell  that 
/ox"  (ry  a\t»»'7rtKi  Tavrg,  Lukę  xiii,  82).  Coins  of  Her- 
od Antipas  bear  the  title  TETPAPXOr .    See  Antipas. 

3.  Herod  AitCłiELAUS  ('Ap^ćAaocMatt;  Josephus; 
'HpiMfSriCj  Dion  Cassius ;  coins),  son  of  Herod  the  Great 
and  Malthace,  uterine  and  younger  brother  of  Herod  An- 
tipas, and  called  by  Dion  Cassius  'Uf}tj8Tjc  na\ai(TTT}vóc 
(lv,  67).  He  was  brought  up  with  his  brother  at  Romę 
(Josephus,  A  nL  xvii,  1,8).  His  father  had  disinherited 
him  in  conseąuence  of  the  false  accusations  of  his  eldest 
brother  Antipater,  the  son  of  Doris ;  but  Herod,  on  mak- 
ing  a  new  will,  altered  his  mind,  and  gave  him  ^  the 
kingdom,"  which  had  before  been  lefl  to  Antipas  (Jose- 
phus, A  nt.  xvii,  8, 1).  It  was  this  onexpected  arrange- 
ment which  led  to  the  retreat  of  Joseph  to  Galilee  (Matt 
ii,  22).  He  was  saluted  as  "  king"  by  the  army,  but  re- 
fused  to  accept  that  titie  till  it  should  be  confirmed  hf 
Augustus  (Josepłu  Ant.  xvii,  8, 2, 4 ;  War,  i,  1).    Short- 


HEROD 


214 


HEROD 


ly  after  this  a  sedition  was  raised  against  him,  if  hich  he 
ąuelled  by  killing  8000  penons,  and  he  then  set  sail  with 
his  brother  Antipas  to  Borne  ( Josephus,  ^4  n/.  xyii,  9,  2, 
4 ;  War,  ii,  2, 8).  Upon  thia  the  Jews  sent  an  embassy 
to  Augustus,  to  reąuest  that  they  might  be  aUowed  to 
Uve  according  to  their  own  lawa  imder  a  Roman  gov- 
eraor.  Our  Lord  seems  to  allude  to  this  drcumstanoe 
in  the  parable  of  the  nobleman  goiog  into  a  far  coun- 
tiy  to  receive  for  himself  a  kingdom :  "  Bat  his  citizens 
hated  him,  and  sent  a  message  after  him,  saying,  We 
will  not  have  thia  man  to  reign  over  us"  (Lukę  xix,  12- 
27).  While  he  was  at  Romę,  Jerusalem  was  under  the 
care  of  Sabinus,  the  Roman  procnrator,  and  a  qnarrel 
ensued  in  conseąuence  of  the  manner  iu  which  the  Jews 
were  treated.  QuŁet  was  again  established  through  the 
intenrention  of  Yanis,  the  president  of  Syria,  and  the 
authora  of  the  sedition  were  punished  (Josephos,  AnL 
xyii,  10).  Augustus,  howerer,  nitifted  the  main  points 
of  Herod*8  will,  and  gave  Archelaus  Judiea,  Samaria,  and 
Idunuea,  with  the  cities  of  Gsesarea,  Sebaste,  Joppa,  and 
Jerusalem,  the  title  of  ethnarchf  and  a  promise  that  he 
sbould  have  the  royal  dignity  hereafter  if  he  govemed 
yirtuously  (Joseph.  AfiL  xvii,  11, 4 ;  War,  ii,  6, 8).  Ar- 
chelans  neyer  really  had  the  Utle  of  king  (J3aaiXtvc), 
tbough  at  first  called  so  by  the  people  (Josephua,  Ant, 
xvii,  8, 2),  yet  we  cannot  object  to  the  word  /3aacX<vcŁ 
iu  Matthew,  for  Archelaus  r^arded  himself  as  king  (Jo- 
sephos, WoTf  ii,  1, 1),  and  Josephns  speaks  of  the  proy- 
ince  of  Lysanias,  which  was  only  a  tetrarchy,  as  Pam- 
\tŁav  TTJy  Awraviov  (  War,  ii,  11, 6).  Herod  (Antipas) 
the  tetrarch  is  also  called  6  fiaaiKtyc  (MatL  xiv,  9 ; 
Marie  vi,  14).  When  Archelaus  retumed  to  Judaea  he 
rebuilt  the  royal  palące  at  Jericho,  and  established  a 
yillage,  naming  it  after  himself,  Archelab  (Joseph.  AnL 
xvii,  18, 1).  Shortly  after  Archelaus^s  return  he  vio- 
lated  the  Mosaic  law  by  marrying  Glaphyia,  the  daugh- 
ter  of  Archelaus,  king  of  Cappadocia,  and  the  Jews  com- 
plaining  again  loudly  of  his  tyranny,  Augustus  summon- 
ed  him  to  Romę,  and  finally,  A.D.  6,  sent  him  into  exile 
at  Yienna  in  Gaul,  where  he  probably  died,  and  his  do- 
minions  were  attached  to  the  Roman  empire  (Joeephus, 
Ani,  xvii,  18,  2;  War,  ii,  7 ;  compare  Strabo,  xvi,  765; 
Dion  Cassius,  lv,  25, 27).  Jerome,  however,  relates  that 
he  was  showii  the  tomb  of  Archelaus  near  Bethlehem 
{Onomastiam,  s.  v.).  Coins  with  the  title  CGN APXOY 
belong  to  Archelaus.    See  Abchelaus.  /^ 

4.  Herod  Philip  I  (*«X»łnroc,  Mark  vi,  17;  'Hp<tf- 
ific,  Joscphus)  was  the  son  of  Herod  the  Great  by  a 
second  Mariamne,  the  daughter  of  Simon  the  high-priest 
(Joeephus,  AnL.  xviii,  5,  4),  and  must  be  distinguished 
from  Philip  the  tetiarch,  No.  6.  He  was  the  husband 
of  Herodiaa,  by  whom  he  had  a  daughter,  Salome.  He- 
rodias,  however,  contrary  to  the  laws  of  her  country,  di- 
Yorced  herself  from  him,  and  married  her  uncle  Antipas 
[see  Noe.  2  and  5]  (Joeephus,  Ant,  xviii,  5, 4 ;  Matt  xiv, 
8;  Mark  vi,  17 ;  Lukę  iii,  19).  He  was  omitted  in  the 
will  of  Herod  in  conseąuence  of  the  discoyery  that  Mar 
riamne  was  conscious  of  the  plots  of  Antipater,  Herod 
the  Great's  son  by  Doris  (Josephus,  War,  i,  80, 7).  See 
Philip, 

5.  Herodias  CUputiiac,  MatL  xiv,  1-11;  Mark  vi, 
14-16 ;  Lukę  iii,  19)  was  the  daughter  of  Aristobulua, 
one  of  the  sons  of  Herod  I  by  the  first  Mariamne,  and  of 
Berenice,  the  daughter  of  Salome,  Hcrod*B  sister,  and 
waa  oonseąuently  sister  of  Herod  Agrippa  I  (Josephus, 
AnL  xviii,  5, 4 ;  War,  i,  28, 1).  She  was  first  married  to 
her  uncle,  Herod  Philip  I,  the  son  of  Herod  I  and  the 

.  second  Mariamne,  by  whom  she  had  a  daughter  Salome, 
probably  the  one  that  danced  and  pleased  Herod  Anti- 
pas, and  who  aflterwards  married  her  imcle  Philip  11. 
Herodias  soon  divorced  herself  from  him,  and  married 
Herod  Antipas,  who  was  also  her  uncle,  being  the  son  of 
Herod  I  and  Malthace,  and  who  agreed,  for  her  sake,  to 
put  away  his  own  wife,  the  daughter  of  Aretas,  king  of 
Arabia  (Josephus,  Ant.  xviii,  5, 1, 4).  John  the  Baptist 
reproved  her  for  her  crimes  in  thus  living  in  adultery 
aoid  incest,  and  she  took  the  fint  opportunity  to  cause 


him  to  be  put  to  death,  thoa  adding  thereto  the  ( 
of  murder.  Her  marriage  was  unlawful  for  three  le*- 
sons :  first,  her  foimer  husband,  Philip,  was  still  allTe 
(diaeraoa  Kwwoc,  Josephus,  AnL  xviii,  6, 4) ;  aeoondly, 
Antipas's  wife  was  still  alive;  and,  thirdly,  by  her  first 
marriage  with  Philip  she  became  the  sister-io-law  of 
Antipas,  who  was  consequently  forbidden  by  the  Jewiah 
law  to  marry  his  brother^s  wife  (Lev.  xviii,  16 ;  xi,  21 ; 
oomp.  Alford  on  Matt.  xiv,  4).  When  Antipas  yraa  ctm- 
demned  by  Gaius  to  perpetual  baniahment,  Herodiaa  was 
ofiered  a  pardon,  and  the  emperor  madę  her  a  present  of 
money,  telling  her  that  it  was  her  brother  A^ppa  (I) 
who  prevent^  her  being  involved  iu  the  same  calam- 
ity  as  her  husband.  The  best  trait  of  her  cbaracl^  ia 
shown  when,  in  true  Jewish  spirit,  she  refused  thia  oflbr, 
and  voluntarily  choee  to  share  the  exile  of  her  hosband 
[No.  2]  (Josephus,  A  nt.  xvii,  7, 2).    See  Herodias. 

6.  Herod  Phiup  U  ($iXtinroc,  Lukę  and  Josephos) 
waa  son  of  Herod  the  Great  and  Cleopatim  of  Jerusalem 
(UpoooXvfAŁTic),  and  was  with  hia  half  brothera  Arche> 
laus  and  Antipas  brought  up  at  Romę  (Josephus,  AnL 
xvii,  1, 8 ;  War,  i,  28, 4).  He  received  aa  his  share  of 
the  empire  the  tetrarchy  of  Batanea,  Trachonitia,  Aa- 
ranitis,  and  oertain  parts  about  Jamnia,  with  a  revenue 
of  100  talents  (Josephus,  ^fK.  xvii,  11, 4;  War,  11,6, 3). 
He  is  only  mentioned  onoe  in  the  N.  T.  (Loke  iii,  1,  ^- 
\iinrov  TtrpapxovvToc),  He  was  married  to  Salome, 
the  daughter  of  Herod  Philip  I  and  Herodias,  but  kit  no 
children  (Joseph.  A  ni,  xviii,  5, 4).  He  reigned  over  hia 
dominions  for  87  yeais  (B.C.  4-A.D.  84),  dnring  which 
time  he  showed  himself  to  be  a  person  of  moderalion 
and  quietness  in  the  conduct  of  his  life  and  goyemment 
(Josephus,  A  nt.  xviii,  4, 6).  He  built  the  dty  of  Paneas 
and  named  it  Gesarea,  morę  commonly  known  aa  Csaa- 
rea-Philippi  (Matt  xvi,  18 ;  Mark  viii,  27),  and  also  ad* 
yanced  to  the  dignity  of  a  city  the  yillage  Bethaaida, 
calling  it  by  the  name  of  Julias,  in  honor  of  the  daiig'h- 
ter  of  Augustus.  He  died  at  Julias,  and  was  buried  in 
the  monument  he  had  there  built  (Joeephus,  Ani,  xTiii, 
2, 1;  4, 6 ;  War,  ii,  9, 1).  Leaying  no  children,  hia  do- 
minions were  annexed  to  the  Roman  province  of  Syria 
(Josephus,  A  nL  xviii,  5, 6).  Coins  of  Philip  U  bear  the 
title  TETPAPXOT.    See  Phiup. 

7.  Herod  Aorippa  I  {'BpwStjc,  Acta;  'AypiiriraCf 
Josephus)  was  the  son  of  Airistobulus  and  Benoiioe,  and 
grandson  of  Herod  the  Gieat  (Josephus,  Ant,  xvii,  1, 2; 
War,  i,  28, 1).  He  is  called  "  Agrippa  the  Great"  by  Jo- 
sephus {Ant,  xvii,  2, 2).  A  short  time  before  the  death 
of  Herod  the  Great  he  waa  liyiog  at  Romę,  and  waa 
brought  up  with  Drusus,  the  son  of  fiberius,  and  with 
Antonia,  the  wife  of  Drusus  (Joeephus,  A  nt,  xyiii,  6, 1). 
He  was  only  one  year  older  than  Claudius,  who  waa 
bom  in  B.C.  10,  and  they  were  bred  up  together  in  the 
dosest  intimacy.  The  earlier  part  of  his  life  waa  apent 
at  Romę,  where  the  magnificence  and  Iuxury  in  which 
he  indulged  involved  liim  so  deeply  in  debt  that  he  waa 
compelled  to  fly  from  Romę,  and  betook  himsdf  to  a 
fortress  at  Malatha,  in  Idunuea.  Through  the  media- 
tion  of  his  wife  Cypros  and  his  sister  Herodias,  he  was 
allowed  to  take  up  his  abodc  at  Tibeiias,  and  receiyed 
the  rank  of  ledile  in  that  dty,  with  a  smali  annuity 
(Joseph  A  nt,  xyi,  6, 2).  But,  having  ąuarreUed  with  hia 
brother-in-law,  he  fled  to  Flaccus,  the  proconsul  of  Syria. 
Soou  afterwards  he  was  oonyicted,  through  the  infonna- 
tion  of  his  brother  Aristobulus^  of  having  received  a 
bribe  from  the  Damascenes,  who  wished  to  purchaae  hia 
influence  with  the  proconsul,  and  was  again  compelled 
to  fiy.  He  was  airested,  as  he  waa  about  to  sail  to  Ita- 
ly,  for  a  sum  of  money  which  he  owed  to  the  Roman 
treasury,  but  madę  his  escape  and  leached  Alexandria, 
where  his  wife  succeeded  in  procuring  a  supply  of  mon- 
ey from  Alexander  the  alabarch.  He  then  set  sail,  and 
landed  at  PuteolL  He  was  fayorably  receiyed  by  Ti- 
berius ;  but  he  one  day  incantiously  eKpreased  the  wish 
that  Caius  might  soon  succeed  to  the  thnme,  which 
being  reported  to  Tiberius,  he  waa  arrested  and  thrown 
into  prison,  where  he  remained  till  the  aooeasion  of  CSi^ 


HEROD 


215 


HEROD 


iss  tn  A.D.  37  (Josephna,  A  ud,  xvm,  6, 10).  Caias  short- 
ly^  after  gave  him  the  tetrarchy  of  Philip,  the  iron  chain 
with  which  he  had  beea  laatened  to  a  soldier  being  ex- 
changad  for  a  goid  one  (Joaephns,  A nt  xTiii,  6, 10).  He 
waa  alao  inTeatod  with  the  oonsular  dignity,  and  a  league 
was  pablidy  madę  with  him  by  ClandioB.  Hethenstart- 
ed  to  take  pooDcamon  of  his  kingdom,  and  at  A]exan- 
dria  was  immlted  by  the  people,  who  dresaed  up  an  idiot, 
and  borę  him  in  mock  triomph  thiough  the  streets  to 
deride  the  new  king  of  the  Jews  (Philo,  vi  Flaecumy  6). 
The  jeakmsy  of  Herod  Antipas  and  his  wife  Herodias 
was  excited  by  the  distincttons  oonferred  npon  Agrippa 
by  the  Romans,  and  they  sailed  to  Romę  in  the  hope  of 
i^n(|yŁmłing  him  Ul  the  empeiOT^s  favor.  Agrippa  was 
aware  of  their  design,  and  anticipated  it  by  a  coonter- 
chaige  against  Antipas  of  treasonoos  correspondence 
with  the  Parthiana.  Antipas  failed  to  answer  the  accu- 
saUonSy  and,  alter  his  exile,  Agrippa  reoeiyed  from  Gaius 
the  tetrarchy  of  Galilee  and  Perea  (Josephus,  Ant  xviii, 
7, 2);  and  in  A.D.  41,  for  having  greatly  assisted  Claa- 
dius,  he  reoeiyed  his  whole  pateraal  kingdom  (Jadsa 
and  Samaria),  and,  in  addition,  the  tetrarchy  of  Lysanias 
n  (comp.  Lukę  iii,  1).  Josephus  says  in  one  passage 
that  Gaina  gare  him  this  tetrarchy  {Ani.  xyiii,  6, 10), 
bat  afterwaida,  in  two  places,  that  Oaudius  gaye  it  to 
him  (AnL  xiz,  5, 1;  War,  ii,  11,  5).  Cains  probaUy 
promiaed  it,  and  Clandios  actually  conferred  it  Agrip- 
pa now  pooecBBcd  the  entire  kingdom  of  Herod  the  Great 
At  this  time  he  begged  of  CUndios  the  kingdom  of 
Chakts  for  his  brother  Herod  (Josephus,  Ani,  xix,  5, 1 ; 
irar,ii,ll,5> 

Agrippa  lored  to  live  at  Jerosalem,  and  was  a  strict 
•bsenrer  of  the  laws  of  his  country,  which  will  account 
for  his  persecnting  the  Christiana,  who  were  hated  by 
the  Jews  (Josephus,  A  ni,  xix,  7, 8).  Thus  inflnenced  by 
a  stnmg  desire  for  popularity,  rather  than  firom  innate 
cmełty,  **  he  stretched  forth  his  hands  to  vex  certain  of 
the  Chnrch."  He  put  to  death  James  the  elder,  son  of 
Zebedee,  and  cast  Peter  into  priaon,  no  doubt  with  the 
intcDtion  of  killLng  him  aiso.  This  was  frustrated  by 
his  miracnlous  delirerance  from  his  jailera  by  the  angcl 
of  the  Lord  (Acts  xii,  1-19).  Agrippa  I,  like  his  grand- 
fother,  displayed  great  taste  in  bnilding,  and  especially 
adonied  the  aty  of  Berytns  (Josephus,  Ani,  xix,  7, 5). 
The  snspiciona  of  Claudius  prevented  him  from  finishing 
the  impregnable  fortifications  with  which  he  had  begun 
to  soEioand  Jerusalem.  His  fricndship  was  courted  by 
many  of  the  ndghboring  kings  and  mlen.  In  A.D.  44 
Agrq>pa  celebrated  games  at  Gnsarea  in  honor  of  the 
empeior,  and  to  make  tows  for  his  safety.  At  this  fee- 
tiral  a  nomber  of  the  principal  persona,  and  such  aa 
were  of  dignity  in  the  proyince,  attended.  Josephus 
does  not  mention  thoee  of  Tyre  and  Sidon  as  recorded 
in  the  Acta  (xii,  20).  Though  Agrippa  was  *'  highly  dis- 
pieased,**  it  does  not  appear  that  any  rupture  worthy  of 
notice  had  taken  place.  On  the  aecond  day  Agrippa 
appeared  in  the  theatre  in  a  garment  interwoyen  with 
ailTer.  On  ckwing  his  address  to  the  people,  they  sa- 
Inted  him  as  a  god,  for  which  he  did  not  rebuke  tbem, 
and  he  was  immediately  seized  ¥rith  riolent  intemal 
palna,  and  died  fire  days  after  (Josephus,  A  nt  xix,  8, 2). 
This  fnUer  acoomit  of  Josephus  agrees  substantially  with 
that  in  the  Acta.  The  silyer  dren  (i|  dpyvpov  miroiri' 
/uvtfv  Twray, Joaephus;  laBfiTa  PatrikiKffv,  Acts) ;  and 
the  dlsease  (rtf  r^c  yaffrpóc  okyrifŁaTt  tov  piov  rare- 
erpulny,  Joseph.;  ynf6fuvoc  OKwXi7ffó/3/»wroc  iKiyl/vUv, 
Ada),  The  owi  (fiumfiShfa  Iw2  9xoiviov  Ttv6c),  which 
on  ^is  occasion  appeared  to  Agrippa  as  the  messengcr 
of  iO  tidingB  (ayyiAoc  kokw^,  Josephus,  A  nt,  xix,  8, 2), 
tfaoogh  on  a  former  one  it  had  appeńed  to  him  as  a  mes- 
aeoger  of  good  news  (Josephus,  Ant,  xviii,  6, 7),  is  con- 
v«ted  by  Eusebins  {ff,  E.  ii,  eh.  10),  who  profesaes  to 
qaote  Josephus,  into  the  angel  of  the  Acts  {iwaraiiy 
akrw  &YYtXcc  XvpioVfAx!ta  xii,  28.  For  an  explana- 
tioii  of  the  oonfusion,  oompare  Ensebius,  A  c,  ed.  Hd- 
oidieii,  Excun.  ii,  voL  iii,  p.  556;  Alford,  ad  loc.).  See 
Aaiippa. 


8.  Herod  Agrippa  U  f  Ayp/wirac,  Acts;  Josephus) 
was  the  son  of  Herod  Agrippa  I  and  Cypros  (WoTf  ii,  11, 
6).  At  the  time  of  his  father's  death  (AJ).  44)  he  was 
only  8eventeen  years  of  age,  and  the  emperor  Claudius, 
thinking  him  too  young  to  govem  the  kingdom,  sent 
Guspius  Fadus  as  procurator,  and  thus  madę  it  again  a 
Roman  province  (Josephus,  A  nt,  xix,  9, 2 ;  Tacit  llist,  v, 
9).  After  the  death  of  his  uncle  Herod  in  A.D.  48,  Clau- 
dius bestowed  npon  him  the  smali  kingdom  of  Chalda 
(Joeephus,  i4n^  xx,  5,  2 ;  War,  ii,  12, 1),  and  four  years 
after  took  it  away  £rom  him,  giving  him  instead  the 
tetrarchies  of  Philip  and  Lysanias  (Josephus,  ii  n/.  xx,  7, 
1;  War,  u,  12, 8)  with  the  titie  of  king  (Acts  xxv,  18; 
xxyi,  2, 7).  In  A.D.  55  Nero  gave  him  the  cities  of  Ti- 
berias  and  Tariche»  in  Galilee,  and  Julias,  a  city  of  Pe- 
nsa, with  fourteen  villages  near  it  (Josephus,  ii  nt.  xx,  8, 
4 ;  comp.  War^  ii,  18, 2). 

Agrippa  U  exhibited  the  Herodian  partiality  for  build- 
ing.  He  much  enlarged  the  dty  of  Csosarea  Philippi, 
and  in  honor  of  Nero  called  it  Neronias.  He  also  sup- 
plied  large  sums  of  money  towards  beautifying  Jerusa- 
lem (which  he  encircled  with  the  "  third  wali")  and  Beiy- 
tus,  transferring  almost  everything  that  was  omamental 
from  his  own  kingdom  to  this  latter  place.  These  acts 
rendered  him  most  unpopular  (Josephus,  AnL  xx,  9, 4). 
In  A.D.  60  king  Agrippa  and  Berenice  (q.  v.)  his  sister, 
oonceming  the  naturę  of  whose  equivocal  intercouise 
with  each  other  there  had  been  much  grave  converBa- 
tion  (Juvenal,  Sat,  vi,  155  8q.),  and  who,  in  consequenoe, 
persuaded  Polemo,  king  of  Cilicia,  to  marry  her  (Jose- 
phus, A  nt,  XX,  7, 8),  came  to  Ca»area  (Acts  xxv,  18).  It 
was  before  him  and  his  sister  that  the  i^)06tie  Paul  madę 
his  defenoe,  and  somewhat  {Łv  6\Łytft)  **  persuaded  hun 
to  be  a  Christian."  Agrippa  seems  to  have  been  inti- 
mate  with  Festus  (Josephus,  ii  ftf.  xx,  7, 11),  and  it  was 
natural  that  the  Roman  govemor  should  avail  himself 
of  his  judgment  on  a  question  of  what  seemed  to  be  Jew- 
iah  law  (Acts  xxv,  18  są.,  26 ;  comp.  Josephus,  Ant,xXt 
8, 7).  The  "pomp"  (xoXX^  ^watria)  with  which  the 
king  came  into  the  audience  chamber  (Acts  xxv,  28) 
was  accordant  with  his  generał  bearing. 

The  famous  speech  which  Agrippa  madę  to  the  Jews, 
to  dissuade  them  from  waging  war  with  the  Romans,  is 
recorded  by  Joeephus  {War,  ii,  16,  4).  At  the  com- 
mencement  of  the  war  he  sided  with  the  Romans,  and 
was  wounded  by  a  fOingHitone  at  the  sięge  of  Gamala 
(Josephus,  War,  iv,  1,8).  Afler  the  fali  of  Jerusalem  he 
retired  with  his  sister  Berenice  to  Romę,  and  there  died 
in  the  8eventieth  year  of  his  age,  and  in  the  third  year 
of  Trajan  (A.D.  100).  He  was  on  intimate  terms  with 
Josephus,  who  give8  two  of  his  letters  (Life,  65),  and 
he  was  the  last  Jewish  prince  of  the  Herodian  linę. 

As  regards  his  coins,  Eckhel  give8  two  with  the  head 
of  Nero,  one  with  the  legend  EHI  BASIAE  ArPIHHA 
NEPONIE,  coniinning  the  account  of  Josephus  as  re- 
gards the  city  of  Cnsinea-Philippi,  and  the  other  bear- 
ing the  pnanomen  of  Marau,  which  he  may  have  re- 
ceived  on  account  of  his  family  being  indebted  to  the 
triumvir  Antony,  or  elae,  as  Eckhel  thinks,  morę  likely 
irom  Marcus  Agrippa  (Eckhel,  Doct,  Nim,  Vet,  iii,  498, 
494;  comp.  Akerman,  Num,  Chroń,  ix,  42).  There  are 
other  coins  with  the  heads  of  yespa8ian,Titus,and  Do- 
mitian.    See  Monkt.    Compare  Agrippa. 


Coin  of  Herod  Agrippa  II,  with  the  Head  of  Tltoa,  and  a 
ngare  of  Yictozy. 

9.  Berenice  (q.  v.). 

10.  Drusiłła  (q.v.). 


HERODIAN 


216 


HERODIAS 


L 


.  He^rocUan  (only  in  the  plur.  *Hpb;^iiTvoi)ytbede&- 
ignation  of  a  class  of  Jews  that  existed  in  the  Łime  of 
Jesus  Christ,  eyidently,  as  tbe  name  imports,  partisans 
óf  Herod,  but  whether  of  a  polidcal  or  religious  descrip- 
tion  it  is  not  easy,  for  want  of  materials,  to  detennine. 
The  passages  of  the  New  Testament  which  refer  to  them 
are  the  following :  Mark  iii,  6 ;  xii,  13 ;  Matt.  xxii,  16 ; 
Lukę  XX,  20.  From  these  it  appeais  that  the  ecdesias- 
tical  authorities  of  Judiea  held  a  coundl  against  our 
Saviour,  and,  associating  with  themselres  the  Herodi- 
ans,  sent  an  embassy  to  him  with  the  expre88  but  covert 
design  of  ensnaring  him  in  his  speech,  that  thus  they 
might  compass  his  destruction,  by  embroiling  him.  But 
what  additional  difficulty  did  the  Uerodians  bring? 
Herod  Antipas  was  now  tetrarch  of  Galilee  and  Penea, 
which  was  the  only  inheritance  he  received  from  his 
father,  Herod  the  Great.  As  tetrarch  of  Galilee  he  was 
specially  the  ruler  of  Jesus,  whoae  home  was  in  that 
proYince.  The  Herodians,  then,  may  have  been  sub- 
Jects  of  Herod,  Galilsans,  whose  eridence  the  priests 
were  desirous  of  procuring,  because  theirs  would  be  the 
evidence  of  fellow-countrymen,  and  of  special  force  with 
Antipas  as  being  that  of  his  own  immediate  subjects 
(Lukę  xxiii,  7).  Herod's  relations  with  Komę  were  in 
an  unsafe  cohdition.  He  was  a  weak  prince,  given  to 
ease  and  luxury,  and  his  wife'8  ambition  oonspired  with 
his  o¥m  desires  to  make  him  strive  to  obtain  lirom  the 
emperor  Caligola  the  tide  of  king.  For  this  purpose  he 
took  a  joumey  to  Romę,  but  he  was  banished  to  Lyons, 
in  GauL  The  Herodians  may  have  been  fayorers  of  his 
pretensions;  if  so,  they  would  be  partial  hearers,  and 
eager  witnesses  against  Jesus  before  the  Roman  tribu- 
naL  It  would  be  a  great  senrice  to  the  Romans  to  be 
the  means  of  enabling  them  to  get  rid  of  one  who  as- 
pired  to  be  king  of  the  Jews.  It  would  equally  gratify 
their  own  lord  should  the  Herodians  give  eifectual  aid 
in  putting  a  period  to  the  mysterious  yet  formidable 
clauns  of  a  rival  daimant  of  the  crown.  If  the  Herodi- 
ans were  a  Galikean  politlcal  party  who  were  eager  to 
procure  from  Romę  the  honor  of  royalty  for  Herod 
(Mark  vi,  14,  the  name  of  king  is  merely  as  of  courtesy), 
they  were  chosen  as  associates  by  the  Sanhedrim  with 
espedal  propriety.  This  idea  is  confirmed  by  Jose- 
phus's  mendon  of  a  party  as  "the  partisans  of  Herod" 
(ol  TCL  'Epwcoy  ipavovvTic,  Ani,  xiv,  15, 10).  The  dep- 
utation  were  to  '*  feign  themselve8  just  men,*'  that  is, 
men  whose  sympathies  were  entirely  Jewish,  and,  wi 
Buch,  anti-heathen:  they  were  to  intimate  their  dislike 
of  paying  tribute,  as  being  an  acknowledgment  of  a  for- 
eign  yoke ;  and  by  flattering  Jesus,  as  one  who  loved 
truth,  feared  no  man,  and  would  say  what  he  thought, 
they  meant  to  inveigle  him  into  a  condemnation  of  the 
practice.  In  order  to  carry  these  base  and  hypocridcal 
designs  into  effect,  the  Herodians  were  appropriately 
associated  with  the  Fharisees;  for  as  the  latter  were 
the  recogniised  conservators  of  Judaism^  so  the  former 
were  friends  of  the  aggrandizement  of  a  nadve  as  against 
a  foreign  prince.  (Comp.  Fritzsche  and  Walch,  ad  loc. 
Other  hypotheses  may  be  found  in  Paulus  on  the  pas- 
sage  in  Matt ;  in  Wolff,  Cura  PhiL  i,  811  8q. ;  see  also 
Kocher,  Analećt.  in  loc.  MatL;  Zom,  UuLfiacL  Jud.  p. 
127 ;  Otho,  Lex.  Rabb.  p.  276.  Monographs  on  this  sub- 
ject  are  those  of  Steuch,  Diss.  de  Herod,  Lund.  1706; 
Floder,  Dits,  de  Herod.  Upsal,  1764 ;  Schmid,  Episł.  de 
Herod.  Lipńs,  1763;  Leuschner,  De  Secta  Herodianor. 
Hirschberg,  1751 ;  Stollberg,  De  Herodiams,T\Ub.  1666 ; 
Jensius,  id.  Jen.  1688.)— Kitto,     Sce  Sects,  Jewish. 

Hero'dia8  (HputdiaCj  a  female  patronymic  finom 
*HpuSTfCi  on  patronymics  and  gentilic  names  in  mc, 
see  Matthise,  Gk.  Gram.  §  101  and  108),  the  name  of  a 
woman  of  notoriety  in  the  N.  T.,  daughter  of  Aristobu- 
lus,  one  of  the  sons  of  Mariamne  and  Herod  the  Great, 
and  consequentiy  sister  of  Agrippa  I.  She  first  married 
Herod,  sumamed  Philip,  another  of  the  sons  of  Mari- 
amne and  the  first  Heiod  (Ant.  xviii,  5, 4;  comp.  War^ 
i,  29,  4),  and  therefore  her  fuli  unde;  then  she  eloped 
from  him,  during  his  lifetime  (ibid.),  to  many  Herod 


Andpas,  her  stepHmde,  who  had  long  been  mairied  to, 
and  was  still  living  with,  the  daughter  of  iEoeaa  or 
Aretas — ^his  assumed  name— king  of  Arabia  {Ant,  xvii, 
9,  4).  Thus  she  leli  her  husband,  who  was  still  alivc^ 
to  connect  herself  with  a  man  whose  wife  was  still  aUve, 
Her  paramour  was,  indeed,  less  of  a  blood  relation  than 
her  original  husband;  but,  being  likewise  tbe  half- 
brother  of  that  husband,  he  was  already  connected  with 
her  by  afiinity — so  dose  tliat  there  was  only  one  case 
contemplated  in  the  law  of  Moees  where  it  oould  be  set 
aside,  namely,  when  the  married  brother  had  died  chiki- 
less  (Lev.  xviii,  16,  and  xxii,  21,  and  for  the  cxception 
Deut  xxv,  5  sq.).  Now  Herodias  had  already  had  one 
child— Salome  (the  danghter  whose  dancing  is  men- 
tioned  in  the  Gospels)— by  Philip  {Auł.  xviii,  5, 4),  and, 
as  he  was  still  alive,  might  have  had  morę.  Weil  there- 
fore may  she  be  chaiged  by  Joeephus  with  the  intai- 
tion  of  confounding  her  couiitry^s  insdtutions  (^4  nt.  xviii, 
5, 4) ;  and  well  may  John  the  Baptist  have  remonsteated 
against  the  enormity  of  such  a  connecdon  with  the  te- 
trarch, whose  conscience  would  oertainly  seem  to  have 
been  a  less  hardened  one  (Matt  xiv,  9  says  he  **was 
sorry;"  Mark  vi,  20  that  he  " feared"  John,  and  « heud 
him  gladly").  A.D.  28.  The  conseąuences  both  of  tbe 
crime  and  of  the  reproof  which  it  incurred  are  well 
known.  Aretas  madę  war  npon  Herod  for  the  injuiy 
done  to  his  daughter,  and  roated  him  with  the  loes  cf 
his  whole  army  {Ant.  xviii,  5, 1).  The  head  of  John 
the  Baptist  was  granted  at  the  suggesdon  of  Herodias 
(Matt  xiv,  8-^11 ;  Marie  vi,  24-28).  Aoeording  to  Joee- 
phus, the  execudon  took  place  in  a  fortress  called  Ma^ 
chaenis,  on  the  fronder  betwoen  the  dominions  of  Aretas 
and  Herod;  according  to  Pliny  (v,  15),  looking  down 
upon  the  Dead  Sea  from  the  south  (compare  Robinson,  i, 
570,  notę).  It  was  to  the  iniquity  of  this  act,  rather 
than  to  the  immorality  of  that  illidt  connecdon,  that, 
the  historian  says,  some  of  the  Jews  attributed  the  de- 
feat  of  Herod.  In  the  dosing  scenę  of  her  career,  in- 
deed, Herodias  exhibited  considerable  magnanimity,  aa 
she  preferred  going  with  Antipas  to  Lugdunum,  and 
there  sharing  his  exile  and  rever8es,  dli  dcath  ended 
them,  to  the  remaining  with  her  brother  Agrippa  I,  and 
partaking  of  his  elevadon  {A  nt.  xviii,  7, 2).  This  town 
is  probably  Lugdunum  Convenarum,  a  town  of  Gani, 
situated  on  the  right  bank  of  the  Ganmne,  at  the  fooc 
of  the  Pyrenees,  now  Sf.  Bertrand  de  Comminge*  (Mm^ 
ray,  Handbook  o/ France,  p.  814) ;  Eusebius,  H.  E,  i,  11, 
says  Yletme,  confounding  Antipas  with  Archdausi  Bm^ 
ton  on  Matt  xiv,  8,  Alford,  and  modems  in  generał,  Z^ 
om,  In  Josephus  ( War,  ii,  9, 6),  Antipas  is  said  to  have 
died  in  Spain— apparentiy,  from  the  context,  the  land 
of  his  exile.  A  town  on  the  fronders,  therefore,  Uke  the 
above,  would  satisfy  both  parsages.    See  Herodw 

There  are  few  episodes  in  the  whole  rangę  of  the  New 
Testament  morę  suggesdve  to  the  commentator  than 
this  one  scenę  ui  the  life  of  Herodias. 

1.  It  exhibits  one  of  the  most  remarkable  of  the  on* 
designed  coincidences  betweeu  the  N.  T.  and  Josephus; 
that  there  are  some  discrepancies  in  the  two  aoooonts 
only  enhances  their  value.  Morę  than  this,  it  haa  kd 
the  historian  into  a  brief  digression  upon  the  life,  death, 
and  character  of  the  Baptist,  which  speaks  vo]ume8  in 
favor  of  the  genuineness  of  that  sdll  morę  oelebiatcd 
passage  in  which  he  speaks  of  *^  Jesus,"  that "  wise  man, 
if  man  he  may  be  called"  {Ant.  xviii,  3, 8 ;  comp.  xx,  9, 
1,  unhesitatingly  quoted  sb  genuine  by  Eusebius^  But, 
Ecd.  i,  1 1).    See  John  the  Baptist. 

2.  It  has  been  warmly  debated  whether  it  was  the 
adultery  or  the  inoestuous  connecdon  that  drew  down 
the  reproof  of  the  Baptist  It  has  already  been  abown 
that,  eithcr  way,  the  offeiice  meńted  condemnation  iqwn 
morę  grounds  than  one. 

8.  The  birthday  feast  is  another  nndesigned  coinci- 
dence  between  Scripture  and  profane  hi^ry.  Tbe 
Jews  abhorred  keeping  birthdays  as  a  pagan  cnstom 
(Bland  on  Matt.  xiv,  6).  On  the  other  band,  it  waa 
usual  with  the  Egyptians  (Gen.  xl,  20 ;  oomp.  Joeephn^ 


HERODION 


217 


HERON 


iin/.  3di,  i,  7),  with  the  PeiBians  (Herod,  i,  183),  with 
the  GreŃeks,  even  in  Łhe  caae  of  the  dead,  whence  the 
Chiudan  custoin  of  keeping  annirersaries  of  the  mar- 
tyTB  (Biiłir  ad  Herod,  iv,  26),  and  with  the  Romans 
(PeA  SaU  ii,  1-3).  Now  the  Heroda  may  be  said  to 
haye  gone  beyond  Korne  in  the  obsenrance  of  all  that 
was  Roman.  Herod  the  Great  kept  the  day  of  his  ac- 
oeBsion ;  Antipas — as  we  read  here— and  Agrippa  I,  as 
Josephustells  us  {AnU  xix,  7, 1),  their  birthday,  with 
soch  magnificence  ihat  the  ^  birthdays  of  Herod"  (He- 
ndia  dies)  had  paased  into  a  proverb  when  Persins  wrote 
{SaL  ▼,  180).    See  Birthday. 

4.  Yet  dancing,  on  these  festire  occańons,  was  oom- 
mon  to  both  Jew  and  Gentile,  and  was  practised  in  the 
same  way :  youths  and  yirgins,  singly,  or  separated  into 
two  banda,  bat  never  intermingled,  danced  to  do  honor 
to  their  deity,  their  hero,  or  to  the  day  of  their  solem- 
nity.  Miriam  (£xod.  xv,  20),  the  daughter  of  Jephthah 
(Judjp.  xi,  34),  and  David  (2  Sam.  vi,  14)  are  familiar  in- 
stanoea  in  Holy  Wiit :  the  "  Carmen  Seeculare"  of  Hor- 
ace,toqiłote  no  more,point8  to  the  same  cnstom  amongst 
Greeks  and  Romans.  It  is  phunly  owing  to  the  eleva- 
tion  (rf'woman  in  the  sodal  scalę  that  dancing  in  pairs 
(still  onknown  to  the  East)  has  oome  into  fashion.  See 
Dastce. 

5.  The  rash  oath  of  Herod,  Uke  that  of  Jephthah  in 
the  O.  T.,  has  afforded  ample  discussion  to  casuists.  It 
is  now  ruled  that  all  sach  oaths,  where  there  is  no  resei^ 
Tatian,  expTe88ed  or  implied,  in  favor  of  the  laws  of  God 
or  mdui,  are  illidt  and  without  force.  So  Solomon  had 
fcng  snce  decided  (1  Kings  ii,  20-24 ;  see  Sanderson,  De 
Jmrttm,  Obliff,  PraUct,  iii,  16). — Smith,  s.  v.    See  Oath. 

Hero^dion  C^pmiiutr,  a  deriv.  from  Herod),  a 
Christian  at  Romę  to  whom  Paul  sent  a  salutation  as 
his  kinsman  (Rom.  xvi,  11).  'A.D.  55.  According  to 
Hippolytos,  he  became  bishop  of  Tarsus,  but  according 
to  others,  of  Patra. 

Herodinm  (*Hp«tf^tov),  the  name  of  a  fortress  (Jo- 
sephns)  or  town  (Pliny),  built  on  a  conspicuous  spot  by 
Herod  the  Great  (Reland,  Palatt.  p.  820),  probably  the 
site  andently  occupied  by  Bbth-haccerem  (Jer.  vi,  1 ; 
Neh.  iii,  14),  which  the  authority  of  Jerome  has  led  some 
modem  travellers  to  identiiy  with  the  well-known  emi- 
nence  called  by  the  native8  Jebel  el-Fureidis,  and  by  Eu- 
ropeans  ^  the  Frank  Mountain."  If  this  identity  be  cor- 
rect, the  site  has  bcen  the  scenę  of  many  a  remarkable 
change.  Two  great  kings,  in  different  ages  and  diffeiv 
ent  ways,  probably  adomed  it  with  magnificent  works. 
From  their  lofty  dty  the  old  inhabitants  must  have 
seen  stretched  before  them,  up  the  green  vale  of  Urt^ 
the  beautiful  gardens  and  fountains  of  king  Solomon, 
which  snggested  to  the  royal  poet  some  of  the  exquiaite 
imagery  of  the  Cantides;  and  nearly  a  thonsand  years 
lata",  Herod  the  Great  erected,  probably  on  this  very 
luli  of  Beth-haccerem,  *'  a  fortress  with  its  round  tow- 
ers,  and  in  it  royal  apartments  of  great  strength  and 
splendor^  (Josephus,  Ant.  xv,  9,  4),  making  it  senre  as 
an  aoropolis  amidst  a  mass  of  other  buildings  and  pal- 
aces  at  the  foot  of  the  hill  (TTar,  i,  xxi,  20).  To  this 
dty,  called  afler  him  Herodium,  the  Idumiean  tyrant 
was  bronght  for  burial  from  Jericho,  where  he  died  (A  nt. 
xvii, 8, 8).  The  locality  still  yields  its  evidence  of  both 
these  eras.  Solomon^s  resenroirs  yet  remain  (Stanley, 
p.  165),  and  the  present  state  of  "  the  Frank  Mountain" 
wen  agrees  with  the  andent  description  of  Herodium 
(Robinson,  ResearcheSy  ii,  178;  Thomson,  Land  and  Book, 
ii,427).— Kitto. 

Herold,  Johann,  a  German  divine,  was  bom  at 
Hochstildt,  Soabia,  in  1511.  His  early  history  is  not 
known.  In  1539  he  raade  his  appearanoe  in  Basie  as  a 
defender  of  Protestantism.  He  was  pastor  of  a  parish 
near  Basie  for  some  years,  but  in  1546  retircd  from  it 
•nd  retumed  to  Basie  to  devote  his  time  entirely  to  lit- 
enry  labora.  The  datę  of  his  death  is  not  ascertained ; 
it  VIS  probably  abont  1570.  Among  his  numerous  writ- 
ings  are  the  foUowing :  Heidemoelt  und  ihrer  GOtter  an- 


fSn^icher  Ursprung  (Basel,  1544,  foL ;  also  under  the  t». 
tle,  in  a  2d  ed.,  Theatrum  Ditmm  Dearumque  (BasiL  1628, 
io\.)i  —  OHhodoxographi  Theohgia  Doctores  LXXVI, 
lumina  dariuima  (BasiL  1555,  fol.) : — Uareńologia,  ńve 
Syntagma  rełerum  łheologorum  per  quos  grasaata  in  £c- 
desia  hareaea  conjutantur,  etc  (BasiL  1556,  foL). 

Heron  C^fiJK,  anaphah',  Lev.  xi,  19 ;  Deut  xiv,  18), 
an  unclean  bird,  for  which  the  kitę,  woodcock,  curlew, 
peacock,  parrot,  crane,  lapwing,  and  several  others  have 
been  suggested.  But  most  of  these  are  not  found  in 
Palestine,  and  others  have  been  identified  with  differ- 
ent Hebrew  words.  The  root  r|3X,  anaph%  signifies  to 
breathe,  to  snort,  especially  from  angery  and  thencc,  fig- 
urati  vely,  to  be  angry  (Gesenius,  Thes,  Ileb.  p.  127).  Park- 
hurst  obeenres  that  '*  as  the  heron  is  remarkable  for  its 
ctngry  disposition,  especially  when  hurt  or  uHmuded,  this 
bird  seems  to  be  most  probably  iiitended."  But  this 
equally  applies  to  a  great  number  of  different  spedes  of 
birds,  and  would  be  especially  appropriate  to  the  goote, 
which  hisses  at  the  slightest  provocation.  The  heron, 
though  not  oonstantly  hissing,  can  utter  a  similar  sound 
of  displeasure  with  much  meaning,  and  the  common 
spedes,  Ardea  cmerea,  is  found  in  Egypt,  and  is  also 
abundant  in  the  Hauran  of  Palestine,  where  it  freqnent8 
the  maigins  of  lakes  and  pools,  and  the  reedy  water- 
conrses  in  the  deep  ravines,  striking  and  devouring  an 
immense  quantity  of  fish.  The  herons  are  wading-birds, 
peculiarly  irritable,  remarkable  for  their  voradty,  fre- 
quenting  nuurshes  and  oozy  rivers,  and  spread  over  the 
regions  of  the  East.  Most  of  the  spedes  enumerated  in 
English  omithology  have  been  recognised  in  the  vicin- 
ity  of  Palestine,  and  we  may  indude  all  these  under 
the  term  in  question  — "  the  anaphah  affer  his  kindJ" 
One  of  the  commonest  spedes  ia  Asia  U  Ardea  ruttata^ 


Łittle  Golden  Egret  {Ardea  Russata). 

which  is  beautifuUy  adomed  with  plumage  partly  white. 
and  partly  of  a  rich  orange-yellow,  while  the  beak,  legs, 
and  all  the  naked  parts  of  the  skin  are  yellow.  Its 
height  is  about  seventeen  inches.  This  is  the  caboga, 
or  cow-heron  so  abundant  in  India.  Several  kinds  of 
heron,  one  of  which,  from  its  form,  would  serve  well 
enough  to  represent  this  little  golden  egret,  are  com- 
monly  depicted  on  those  Egyptian  paintings  in  which 
the  subject — a  favorite  one — is  the  fowling  and  fishing 
among  the  paper-reeds  of  the  Nile. 

Bochart  supposes  that  anaphah  may  mean  the  numn^ 
tainfaloony  called  ai/oTrma  by  Homer  {Odgs.  i,d20),be- 
cause  of  the  similarity  of  the  Greek  word  to  the  He- 
brew. But  if  it  meant  any  kuid  of  eagle  or  hatoky  it 
would  probably  have  been  reckoned  with  one  or  other 
of  those  spedes  mentioned  in  the  prcceding  verBes.  Per- 
haps,  under  all  the  circumstances,  the  traditional  mean- 
ing is  most  likely  to  be  correct,  which  we  ¥rill  therefore 


HERON 


218 


HERRON 


tnce.  The  Talmadists  eridently  were  at  a  loes,  for 
they  describe  it  indefiluteły  as  a  "high-flying  bird  cf 
prey"  (CAu/in,  63  a). 

The  Septuagint  lenden  the  Hebrew  word  by  x^P^' 
ipióc,  Thia  rendering,  however,  has  been  thought  to 
loae  what  little  weight  it  might  otherwise  have  had 
from  the  probability  that  it  originated  in  a  ialse  read- 
ing,  yiz.  agaphah,  which  the  translators  connected  with 
agaph^ "  a  bank."  Jerome  adhered  to  the  same  word  in 
a  Latin  form,  caradrycn  and  caradHum,  The  Greek 
and  Koman  writers,  fiom  the  earliest  antiquity,  refer  to 
a  bird  which  they  cali  charadruu,  It  is  particularly 
described  by  Aristotle  {HisL  ii  n.  vii,  7),  and  by  JSlian 
{Higf,  Ark  XV,  26).  The  latter  derives  its  name  from 
XapaSpaf  a  holiaw  or  chasm,  especially  on&  which  con- 
tains  water,  becaose,  he  says,  the  bird  frequent8  sach 
places.  It  is,  moreover,  certain  that  by  the  Romans  the 
charadruu  was  also  called  ictenu,  which  signifies  the 
jaundice,  from  a  notion  that  patients  affected  with  that 
disease  were  cured  by  looking  at  this  bird,  which  was  of 
a  yellow  oolor  (Pliny,  xxxiv ;  Coel.  AtireL  iii,  6),  and  by 
the  Greeks,  xKioQiutv ;  and  in  allusion  to  the  same  fabu- 
lous  notion,  iKrepoc  (Aristotle,  IlitL  ^n.  ix,  13, 15,  and 
22;  iEiian,  Jlisł^An,  iv,  47).  These  writers  ooncur  in 
describing  a  bird,  somełimes  of  a  yellow  color^  remąrkable 
for  its  voracity  (from  which  drcumstance  arose  the 
phrase  xapa^pŁoi;  ^ćoc,  applied  to  a  glutton),  migratory, 
inhabiting  watery  places,  and  espedally  moimtain  toi^ 
rents  and  yalleys.  Now  it  b  certain  that  the  name 
ckamdrius  has  been  applied  by  omithologists  to  the 
same  species  of  birds  from  ancient  times  down  to  the 
present  age.  Linnasus,  under  Order  lY  (consisting  of 
waders  or  shorc  birds),  places  the  genus  Charadrius,  in 
which  he  includes  all  the  numerous  species  of  plorers. 
The  ancient  accounts  may  be  advantageoi]sly  compared 
with  the  foUowing  description  of  the  genus  from  Mr. 
Selby's  British  OmUhologyi  ii,  280:  *<The  members  of 
this  genus  are  numerous,  and  possess  a  wide  geograph- 
ical  distribution,  species  bcing  found  in  wery  ąuartcr  of 
the  globe.  They  ritit  the  Ea»t  about  ApriL  Some  of 
them,  during  the  grcater  part  of  the  year,  are  the  inhab- 
itants  of  open  districts  and  wide  wastes,  frequenting 
both  dry  and  moist  situations,  and  only  retire  toward 
the  coasts  during  the  8everity  of  winter.  Others  are 
continually  resident  npon  the  banka  and  about  the 
mouths  of  rivers  (particularly  where  the  shore  consists 
of  smali  gravel  or  shingle).  They  live  on  worms,  in- 
sects,  and  their  larvae.  The  flesh  of  many  that  Uve  on 
the  coasts  is  unpalatable."  The  same  writer  describes 
one  ^  species,  Charadrius  pluvialis,  called  the  golden  plov- 
er  from  its  color,"  and  mentions  the  well-known  fact 
that  this  species,  in  the  course  of  moulting,  tums  com- 
pletely  black.  Analogous  facts  respecting  the  charadrius 
have  been  established  by  obsenrations  in  every  part  of 
the  globe,  viz.  that  they  are  gregarious  and  migratory. 
The  habits  of  the  majority  are  littoraL  They  obtain 
their  food  along  the  banks  of  rivers  and  the  shores  of 
lakes;  "like  the  gulls,  they  beat  the  moist  soil  with 
their  pattering  feet,  to  terrify  the  incumbent  worms,  yet 
are  ofien  found  in  desertB,  in  green  and  sedgy  meadows, 


,  Golden  Plorer  (Cftarodritis  P(icvAi{<0)— winter  plmnage. 


or  on  ufiemd  moorsJ*  Their  food  eooiista  cbief^  of 
mice,  worms,  caterpillars,  insects,  toads^  and  iiogs,  which 
of  course  places  them  among  the  dass  of  birds  oeremo- 
nially  tenofeon.  On  the  whole,  the  evidence  seems  in 
favor  of  the  oondosion  that  the  Hebrew  woid  amgtkah 
designates  the  numerous  species  of  ihephver  (may  not 
this  be  the  genus  of  birds  allnded  to  na  the  fowb  of  the 
mountain,  I^  1, 11 ;  Isa.  xviii,  6?).  Yarioos  species  of 
the  genus  are  known  in  Syiia  and  Palestine  as  the  C. 
phtviaii$  (golden  plover),  C,  adicneima  (stone  cmiew), 
anda«ptRon»(lapwing).  CKitto^B  Phyneal  ffistory  of 
Palestine,  p.  106.)  In  oonnection  with  some  of  the  pi«- 
ceding  remarks,  it  is  important  to  obsenre  that  in  these 
species  a  yellow  color  is  morę  or  less  mmAt^^ — ^Kitto^  s. 
V.;  Fairbaim,s.v.;  Smith, s.v. 

Herring,  Thomas,  archbishop  of  Canteiboiy,  was 
bom  in  1693  at  Walsoken,  Norfolk,  of  which  hia  fiither 
was  rector.  He  studied  at  Jesus  and  Bennet  ooDeges, 
Cambridge,  and  was  madę  fellow  of  Corpus  Christi  in 
1716.  After  having  possessed  various  livings,  he  was 
raised  in  1737  to  the  see  of  Bangor,  whence  in  1743  he 
was  translated  to  York.  After  the  defeat  of  the  king^s 
troops  at  Preston  Pans  in  1745,  the  archbishop  exerted 
himself  in  his  diocese  with  so  much  patriotism  and  zeal 
that  he  repreased  the  disaffected,  inspinted  the  despond- 
ing,  and  procured  at  a  county  meeting  a  subecription  of 
£40,000  towards  the  defence  of  the  country.  His  zeal 
for  the  Hanoverian  cause  procured  him  the  facetions 
title  of  *'  the  red  Heiring."  In  1747  he  was  removed  to 
the  see  of  Canterbury,  and  he  died  at  Croydon  in  1756. 
Herring  was  a  man  of  great  cdebrity  as  a  preacher. 
Hb  Semumt  on  Public  Occasions  were  published  in  1763 
(Lond.  8vo),  with  a  memoir  of  Herring  by  Duncombe; 
followed  by  his  Letters  to  W.  DuneonAe  (1727,  ISmo). 
See  Biographica  Britatmica ;  Rich,  Cydop,  o/Bioff, 

Hermliut,  a  to¥m  of  Saxony,  in  Upper  Losatia,  in, 
the  drde  of  Dtesden,  at  the  foot  of  Hntberg  Mountain, 
and  about  fifty  miles  from  the  city  of  Dresden.  It  was 
built  by  Zinzendorf  in  1722  for  the  Monivian  Brethien, 
who,  from  this  town,  are  often  called  Henuhuttert.    See 

MORAVIAKS. 

Herron,  Frakcu,  D.D.,  a  lYesbyterian  miniatar, 
was  bom  near  Shippensburg,  Pa.,  Jnne  28, 1774.  Hia 
parents  were  Scotch-IriBhi  Their  high  regard  for  knowl- 
edge  induoed  them  to  send  him  to  Dickinson  CoDege, 
Carlide,  Pa.,  thcn  under  the  care  of  that  distinguished 
Presby terian,  the  Bcv.  Dr.  Nesbitt.  Herę  he  gradnated 
May  5, 1794.  He  studied  theology  with  Robert  Coop- 
er, D.D.,  and  was  lioensed  by  CarUsle  Presbytery  in  1797. 
He  commenced  his  work  as  a  missionary  in  the  then 
backwoods  of  Ohio.  In  1800  he  became  pastor  of  the 
Rocky  Spring  Church,  where  he  labored  for  ten  yeais 
with  great  success.  In  June,  1811,  he  was  installed  paa- 
tor  of  the  First  Presbyterian  Church,  Pittsburg,  Penn. 
He  found  his  new  churoh  embarrassed  with  debt,  and 
the  people  **  conformed  to  this  worid"  to  a  degree  almoet 
appalling.  But  his  eamestness  and  activity  relieved 
the  church  of  debt  within  a  few  yeais,  and  awoke  the 
members  to  a  sense  of  their  q>iritual  danger.  In  1825 
the  General  Assembly  resolved  to  establiah  a  theological 
seminary  in  the  West.  Dr.  Heiron,  with  his  natonUy 
quick  perception,  uiged  Alleghany  City,  Pa.,  as  the  beat 
location,  and  by  great  exertions  obtained  the  deciaion 
to  locate  it  there.  He  then  undertook  the  toils  and 
anxieties  of  its  sustenance ;  and  to  no  one  does  the  West- 
ern Theological  Seminary  owe  its  success  in  a  greater 
degree  than  to  Dr.  Herron.  In  1827  he  was  elected 
moderator  of  the  General  Assembly  held  in  Philadel- 
phia.  In  1828  and  1832  his  ministrations  were  blesscd 
by  gradous  revivalB  of  religion;  and  in  1835  another 
revival  occurred,  marked  by  great  excitement  In  1850 
he  resigned  his  charge,  to  the  great  regret  of  his  people. 
Being  then  in  his  8eventy-8ixth  year,  he  felt  that  hia 
work  was  ended.  He  lived  ten  years  longer;  though 
the  infirmities  of  age  grew  apace,  his  serenity  and  cbeer- 
folneas  nerer  fiuled.    He  <Ued  Dec  6, 1860.    Such  was 


HERULI 


219 


HESER 


thd  eatłmatioii  in  which  his  chuacter  and  talents  weie 
held  by  his  feDow-cidzeiis,  that  the  coorta  of  Pittaburg 
adjoonied  on  the  annoanoement  of  his  death,  an  honor 
never  before  paid  to  any  dergyman  in  that  city. — Wń- 
aan,PretLffitLAlm(maCtim2,p.9b, 

Hene.    See  Hkarsk, 

HeiUli  (Eruu,  ^rttli),  a  Gennan  tribe,  which 
fiist  appeared  with  the  Goths  on  the  shores  of  the  BUck 
Sea,  and  thence  took  an  active  part  in  all  the  incursions 
of  the  Gotha  in  the  eastem  proTinces  of  the  Roman 
empire.  We  alterwards  find  them  in  Attila'8  armies 
vith  the  Scythians  and  Gepidie.  After  the  death  of 
Altila  ther  establiahed  thenuelyes  as  a  powerful  nation 
on  the  ahotes  of  the  Danube,  and  levied  tribute  on  the 
Lombazda.  Acoording  to  Procopina,  they  were  thor- 
mighły  barbaroa&  After  the  Lombarda  and  other  neigh- 
boiing  nations  had  long  been  conrerted  to  Christianity, 
the  Hemli  stiU  preaerved  their  idolatrous  worship,  and 
continufid  to  sacrifice  haman  yictims  (see  Ptocopius,  De 
hfUo  Gołh.  ii,  c.  11).  Under  the  leadership  of  Odoacer, 
they  sooceeded,  in  ominection  with  the  Turones,  the 
Scythians,  and  the  Rngii,  in  taking  Romę,  and  from 
that  tiroe  datea  the  doiimfall  of  the  Western  empire. 
Aboot  495  they  weie  defeated  in  an  important  battle  by 
the  Lombarda.  Fteulus  Diacon.,  in  De  gett.  Longob.,  re- 
poits  a  popular  tradition,  according  to  which,  after  this 
battk,  Łhe  whole  army  of  the  Heruli  became  so  bewil- 
dered  in  conaeąoence  of  the  anger  of  the  gods  that  they 
took  the  green  flax-fields  for  water,  and,  haring  got  to 
them,  opened  their  arms  to  swim,  when  the  Lombarda 
csme  op  and  killed  them.  A  part  of  the  nation  then 
eataUished  themselyes  in  Rugiland,  at  the  moath  of  the 
Danube,  but  finally  decided  to  settle  in  the  eastem  Ro- 
man empire.  The  emperor  Anastasius  receiyed  them 
in  his  dominioDs,  and  aaaigned  them  a  territoiy  in  H- 
lyria,  bat  was  sabseąuently  obliged  to  send  an  army 
■gainsŁ  them  to  pat  an  end  to  their  depredations.  Those 
who  remained  now  subjected  themselyes  to  Romę,  and 
aided  greatly  in  oyerthrowing  the  power  of  the  Ostro- 
goths  in  Italy.  They  were  conyerted  to  Chiistianity 
onder  Juatinian  I,  joined  the  Roman  Catholic  Church, 
aod  were  gradually  ciyilized.  Their  histoiy  ceaaed  to 
present  any  characteristie  featares.  See  Morćre,  Grmtd 
Dktionaaire  (ed.  Drouet,  Paris,  1759),  vol.  y.;  Herzog, 
lUal-EneyUop.  vi,  16.     (J.  N.  P.) 

Her^aBOB,  Natałis  (French,  HKRyif  de  Nih>EŁr 
lec),  sonumed  Brito,  a  mediieval  French  theologian 
and  acbolaatic  philosopher,  was  a  natiye  of  Brittany, 
and  died  at  Narbonne  August,  1323.  He  became  a 
mcmber  of  the  Dominican  oonyent  at  Morlaix,  studied 
abo  at  Paria,  Łben  tanght  in  various  proyinoes  of *Franoe, 
and  ailerwarda  was  rector  and  professor  of  theology  in 
the  UniyeiBity  of  Paris,  where  he  lectured  from  1307  to 
1309  opon  the  SententieB  of  Peter  Lombard.  In  131S  he 
became  generał  of  his  order.  He  was  a  zealous  Thom- 
ist,  and  possed  for  one  of  the  first  theobgians  of  his 
time.  He  left  nameroua  wiitings,  of  which  only  the 
foDowing  haye  been  piinted:  fferwsi  Britomt  in  IV 
SeniatHartm  Yohamna  Scripta  tubUUsthna  (best  ed. 
Fenice,  1505,  foL)  \—QjttJodiSbeŁa  Magna  (Ven.  1486,  foL) : 
—De  Beatkudmey  De  Yerbo,  De  ^temiłate  Mwuk,  De 
MtOeria  CaU^  De  Rdaiiomlnu,  De  PhiralUate  Formo- 
ntm,  De  Virtitt3M»,  De  Motu  ^n^i— the  whole  pub- 
hdied  together  by  O.  Scot  (Yenioe,  1513,  in  1  yoL  foL) : 
—De  Secmdis  TtUenHotUbtu  (Pana,  1489  and  1544, 4to) : 
—De  Poietiaie  Ecdedas  et  Papa  (Paris,  1500  and  1647). 
A  liitt  of  his  MS.  writings  is  giyen  by  Qaćtif  and  Ćchard 
{ScripL  ord,  Pned.  i,  533).— Haureau,  De  la  Philosopkie 
Seoiasticue,  ii,  396  8q. ;  Tennemann,  Man.  Hitt  ofPhiL 
p.  241  (Bohn*s  ed.).     (J.  W.  M.) 

Henrey,  James,  an  English  diyine  and  popular 
wciter,  was  bom  at  Hardingstone,  near  Northampton, 
Feb.  26, 1713.  At  eighteen  he  was  sent  to  Ozford,  and 
there,  beooming  aoquainted  with  John  Wealey,  he  be- 
came aerioasly  impressed  with  the  importanoe  of  relig- 
ioB.    He  afterwarda  became  a  Calyinist,    At  twenty- 


two  he  became  cuiate  of  Weston  Fayel,  and  a  few  yeaia 
after  cnrate  of  Biddeford.  During  that  time  he  wrote 
his  celebrated  MedUationa  and  ConUn^kOiona  (1746, 
8yo),  which  obtained  immense  circuhition.  It  was  fol- 
lowed  by  Contemplaiiona  on  the  NighŁ  and  Starrg  IleoK^ 
otf,  and  i4  WmUr  Piece  (1747, 8yo).  In  1750,  on  the 
death  of  his  &ther,  he  socoeeded  to  the  liyings  of  Wes- 
ton and  C(dling^tree;  and  he  deyoted  himself  eamestly 
to  his  derical  duties.  In  1753  he  published  Remarka  on 
Lord  BoUngbroMa  Lettera  on  the  Studg  and  Ute  o/Iłia- 
tortfy  aofar  aa  they  relate  to  the  Hiatory  ofthe  Old  Tea- 
tament,  ete.,  in  a  Letter  to  a  Lady  ofQu,aliiy  (1753, 8vo). 
In  1755  he  published  Theron  cmd  Atpaaio,  or  a  JSeriea 
of  Dialoguea  and  Lettera  on  the  most  important  Suhjecta 
(1755,  3  yols.  8yo),  which  was  attacked  by  Robert  San- 
deman,  of  Edinburgh,  on  the  naturę  of  justifying  faith, 
and  other  pointa  oonnected  with  it,  in  a  work  entitled 
Letters  on  Theron  andAtpaaio,  See  Sandeman.  John 
Wesley  wrote  a  brief  reyiew  of  his  Theron  and  A  apatio, 
and  Hervey  wrote  in  reply  £leven  Lettert  to  John  Wes- 
ley, but  before  his  death  he  dlrected  that  the  MS.  of  this 
work  should  be  destroyed.  "His  brother,  howeyer, 
judged  that  it  would  be  a  desirable  pecuniary  specula- 
tion  to  publish  it,  and  placed  it  in  the  hands  of  Cud- 
worth,  an  erratic  dissenting  preacher,  to  be  finished, 
giying  him  liberty  *to  put  out  and  put  in'  whateyer  he 
judged  expedient  Cudworth*s  Antinomian  sentiments 
led  him  to  abhor  Wesley^s  opinions ;  he  caricatured  them 
relentlessly  by  his  interpolations  of  Hervey'B  pages,  and 
sent  forth  in  Hervey's  name  the  first  and  most  reckless 
and  odious  cayeat  agamst  Methodism  that  eyer  emana- 
ted  from  any  one  who  had  sustained  friendly  relations 
to  it  It  was  republished  in  Scotland,  and  tended  much 
to  forestall  the  spread  of  Methodism  there.  Wesley 
feLt  keenly  the  injustice  and  heartlessness  of  this  attack, 
but  his  sorrow  was  mitigated  by  the  knowledge  that 
the  most  of  the  abuse  in  the  publication  was  interpola- 
ted,  and  that  Henrey,  who  had  delighted  to  cali  him  his 
'friend  and  father,*  knew  him  too  well  to  haye  thus 
strack  at  him  from  the  graye.  He  answered  the  book ; 
but  time  bas  answered  it  morę  effectually — ^time,  the 
inyincible  guardian  of  the  characters  of  great  men." 
He  died  in  1758.  Mr.  Heryey^s  writings  are  yicioualy 
tuigid  and  extrayagant  in  style.  "He  was  eminently 
pious,  though  not  deeply  leamed ;  habitually  spiritual- 
ly-minded;  animated  with  ardent  loye  to  the  Sayiour; 
and  his  humility,  meekness,  submission  to  the  will  of 
God,  and  patience  under  his  afiiicting  band,  exemplified 
the  Christian  chaiacter,  and  adomed  his  profession.** 
His  writings  were  collected  and  published  after  his  death 
(London,  1797,  7  yols.).  His  correspondence  was  pub- 
lished separately  (1760, 2  yols.  8vo).  See  Ryland,  Li/e 
ofHeTTey;  Letłert  o/ Iferrey,  and  Life  prefixed;  Chal- 
mera,  General  Biog.  Diet. ;  Jones,  Chriatian  Biography; 
Steyens,  ffittory  o/Methodiam,  i,  372;  Wedey^s  Worka, 
yi,  103, 125;  Jackson,  Life  of  Charka  Wealey,  eh.  xxi; 
Coke  and  Moore,  Life  of  Wesley,  iii,  2. 

He^aed  (Heb.  Che'aed,  IDH,  hindneaa,  as  often ;  Sept 
'Effc^,  the  name  of  a  man  whose  son  (Ben-Hesed)  waa 
Solomon'8  puryeyor  in  the  district  of  Aruboth,  Socboh, 
and  Hepher  <1  Kings  iy,  10).  B.G.  dr.  995.  See  also 
Jushah-Hebbd. 

Heaer,  George,  a  Gennan  ecdesiasdcal  writer,  waa 
bom  at  Weyem,  near  Passau,  Austria,  in  1609.  He 
joined  the  Jesuits  in  1625,  and  taught  rhetoric,  dialec- 
tics,  and  controyersy  at  Munich  and  Ingolstadt.  In  1642 
he  became  preacher  at  St.Maurice's  Church,  Augsburg, 
and  in  1649  went  in  the  same  capadty  to  St  Mary*s 
Church,  Ingolstadt  In  1662  he  retired  to  Munich, 
where  he  was  still  liying  in  1676.  The  exact  time  of 
his  death  is  not  ascertained.  He  is  especially  noted 
for  his  eiforts  in  proying  Thomas  h,  Kempis  (q.  y.)  as 
the  author  of  De  imitatume  Chriafi,  In  his  Dioptra 
Kempenaia  he  bas  gathered  a  number  of  testimonies,  and 
describes  pretty  accurately  a  number  of  editions  and  of 
translationa  of  Kempis,  which  appeared  during  the  16th 


HESHBON 


220 


and  17th  centuriefi.  He  wrote  aiao  VUa  et  SyUcims  oa^ 
natm  Operum  Thoma  a  Kemfu  ab  audore  oMmymo,  ted 
eoavo,  non  longepott  obUttm  iUuu  oonacnpta  (Ingoktadt, 
1660, 12mo ;  Paiią  1651, 8vo)  '<-~FrcgnumUio  nova  ad  lec- 
torem  Thoma  a  KempU  (Ingolstadt,  1661, 18mo;  Paris, 
1661,  8vo)  i—LXX  Palma,  mu  panegyriau  «i  laudem 
Ubrorum  IV  Thoma  a  Kempis,  ex  homimtm piorum  elo- 
fftts  LXX  concmnatus  (Ingolstadt,  1651, 8vo),  etc  See 
Yeith,  Bibliołh.  Auguitana;  Ench  und  Graber,  ii  IZ^em. 
EneyUopadie;  Hoefer,  Nowo,  Biog,  Ginirah,  xxiv,  659. 

HeAhnbon  (Hebrew  ChesIibon%  *i*ISlcnf  wielUgence, 
as  in  £ccle8.vii,  25,  etc;  Sept.  'E(rr/3w;  Josephus),  a 
town  io  the  southem  district  of  the  Hebrew  territory 
beyond  the  Jordan,  on  the  western  border  of  the  high 
plain  {Mishor,  Jostu  xiii,  17).  It  oiiginally  belonged  to 
the  Moabites,  but  when  the  Israelites  amred  from 
Egypt  it  was  found  to  be  in  the  poesession  of  the  Arno- 
rites,  whose  king,  Sihon,  is  styled  both  king  of  the  Amo- 
rites  and  king  of  Heshbon,  and  is  expre8B]y  said  to  have 
"reigned  in  Heshbon'*  (Josh.  iii,  10;  comp.  Numb.  xxi, 
26 ;  Deut.  ii,  9).  It  was  taken  by  Moses  (Numb.  xxi, 
2d>26),  and  eventually  became  a  Levitical  city  (Josh. 
xxi,  39 ;  1  Chroń,  vi,  81)  in  the  tribe  of  Reuben  (Numb. 
xxxii,  37 ;  Josh.  xiii,  17) ;  but,  being  on  the  confines  of 
Gad,  is  Bometimcs  assigned  to  the  latter  tribe  (Josh. 
xxi,  39;  1  Chroń,  vi,  81).  Aftcr  the  Ten  Tribes  were 
sent  into  exile,  Heshbon  was  taken  possession  of  by  the 
Moabites,  and  hence  is  mentioned  by  the  prophets  in 
their  declarations  against  Moab  (Isa.  xv,  4 ;  Jer.  xlviii, 
2,  34,  45).  Under  king  Alexander  Janneus  we  find  it 
again  reckoned  as  a  Jewish  city  (Josephus,  AnU  xiii, 
15, 4).  Pliny  mentions  a  tribe  of  Arabe  called  Etbonka 
0I%8L  KaL  V,  11 ;  comp.  Abulfeda,  Tab.  Syr,  p.  11).  In 
the  time  of  Eusebius  and  Jerome  {Onomatt  s.  v.  *Effai- 
p<óv)  it  was  still  a  place  of  some  conseąuence  under  the 
name  otEsbtu  ('Eff/3ovc),  but  at  the  present  day  it  is 
known  by  its  ancient  name,  in  the  slightly  modified 
form  of  Uethan,  The  region  y!»b  first  visited  in  modem 
times  by  Seetzen.  The  site  is  twenty  miles  east  of  the 
Jordan,  on  the  paraliel  of  the  northem  end  of  the  Dead 
Sca-  The  ruins  of  a  considerable  town  still  exist,  cov- 
ering  the  sidcs  of  an  insulated  hill,  but  not  a  single  edi- 
fice  is  left  entire.  The  view  from  the  summit  is  vay 
extensive,  embradng  the  ruins  of  a  vast  number  of  cit- 
ies,  the  namcs  of  some  of  which  bear  a  strong  resem- 
blance  to  those  mentioned  in  Scripture.  These  envi- 
rons,  occupying  the  elevated  plain  between  the  moun- 
tains  of  Jazer  and  the  Jabbok,  seem  to  be  refened  to  in 
Josh.  xiii,  16.  There  are  reservoirB  connected  with  this 
and  the  other  to^ms  of  this  region.  These  have  been 
supposed  to  be  the  **fish-pools"  (nis^ia,  cufoiw)  of 
Heshbon  mentioned  by  Solomon  (Cant.  vii,  4)  [see 
Batu-rabbim]  ;  but,  say  Irby  and  Mangles,  ^  The  ruins 
are  uninteresting,  and  the  only  pool  we  saw  was  too  in- 
significant  to  be  one  of  those  mentioned  in  Scripture'* 
(p.  472).  In  two  of  the  dstems  among  the  ruins  tbey 
found  about  thrce  dozen  of  human  skulls  and  bones, 
which  they  Justly  regarded  as  an  illustration  of  Gen. 
xxxvii,  20  {TrawUy  p.  472;  see  also  George  Robinson, 
lord  Lindsay,  Schwarz,  Tristram,  etc). — Kitto.  Dr. 
Macmichael  and  his  party  went  to  look  for  these  pools, 
but  they  found  only  one,  which  was  extremely  insignif- 
icant.  This  is  probably  the  re8ervoir  mentioned  by 
Burckhardt  {Syria, p.  365).  Mr.  Buckingham,  however, 
says,  *^  The  largc  re8ervoir  to  the  soutb  of  the  town,  and 
about  half  a  mile  from  the  foot  of  the  hill  on  which  it 
stands,  is  constructed  with  good  masonr}',  and  not  un- 
like  the  cistems  of  Solomon,  near  Jerusalem,  to  which 
it  is  also  nearly  eąual  in  size."  Towards  the  western 
part  of  the  hiH  is  a  singular  structure,  whose  crumbling 
ruins  exhibit  the  workmanship  of  successiYe  ages — the 
mas8ive  stcne)  of  the  Jewish  period,  the  sculptured  oor- 
nice  of  the  Koman  sera,  and  the  light  Saraoenic  arch,  all 
grouped  together  (Porter,  HandL/or  Pakst,  p.  298). 

Hoah^mon  (Heb.  CheMhmon',  *(\WnJajbnu*;  Sept. 
'Aat/iMp),  a  city  om  tbe  southem  boider  of  Judah  (Sim- 


eon),  near  Idnmea,  mentioned  between  Hazop^Saddah 
and  Beth-Pklet  (Josh.  xv,  27);  hence  probably  some- 
where  between  the  Dead  Sea  and  tbe  MeditenaneaD. 
It  is  posaibly  the  same  as  the  Azmon  (q.  v.)  elaewhere 
(Josh.  XV,  4)  located  in  this  vicinity.    See  Mazar-ad^ 

DAR. 

Hess,  Johann,  one  of  the  German  Reformers,  was 
bom  in  Nurembeig  about  1490,  studied  at  Leipzig  from 
1506  to  1510,  and  at  Wittenberg  from  1510  to  1612.  In 
1513  he  became  secretary  to  the  bishop  of  Breslan.  Af- 
ter  traveUing  and  studying  in  Italy,  he  retumed  in  1529  * 
to  Wittenbe^,  and  there  became  connected  with  Luther 
and  Melancthon.  Retuming  to  Breslau  with  lefonnar 
tory  view8,  he  found  no  oppoeiUon  from  his  bishop,  wbo 
was  imbued  with  the  new  humanistic  leaming,  and  waa 
a  friend  of  Erasmus.  But  the  bishop  (Tuizo)  died  in 
1520,  and  his  suocessor  (Jacob  of  Salza)  was  a  strenaous 
Romanist.  He  left  Breślau  for  a  time,  but  the  seed  had 
taken  root,  and  the  magistrates  recaUed  Heas  as  pastor 
in  1528.  Thenoeforward  he  was  the  sonl  of  the  Reform 
mation  tn  Breslau.  In  1525  he  married,  and  continned 
his  labors  in  reforming  the  Church  and  the  schools*  and 
in  providing  institutions  for  the  relief  of  the  poor.  He 
died  in  1547.— Herzog,  Real-EncyhlopaMe,  xix,  642. 

Heas,  Johann  Jakob,  an  eminent  Swiss  divine, 
was  bora  at  Zurich  Oct.  21, 1741,  where  he  studied  the- 
ology  with  his  unde,  the  pastor  of  Neftenbach,  to  whom 
he  became  assistant  in  1760.  In  1777  he  was  called  to 
the  church  of  Notre  Damę  in  Zurich ;  and  in  1795  (con- 
traiy  to  his  own  wishes)  he  was  chosen,  in  preference  to 
Lavater,  antistes  or  president  of  the  dergy  of  the  can- 
ton.  He  died  May  29, 1828.  His  long  life  was  faith- 
fully  devoted  to  his  work  as  a  pastor,  and  to  literaiy  la- 
bor.  "  Hess  was  to  Switzerland  what  Reinhaid  was  to 
the  Saxon  Church,  and  Storr  to  that  of  WUrtembog. 
His  elear  and  mild,  yet  f)xed  and  safe  convictions,  aa 
expre8sed  in  his  writings  on  Biblical  histoiy,  and  espe- 
dally  on  the  life  of  our  Lord,  found  a  hearty  reception  in 
many  a  pious  domestic  cirde  in  Germany,  and  in  the 
soul  of  many  a  young  theologian"  (Hagenbach,  Hitł,  of 
the  Church  in  I8th  and  I9th  Centuriet,  transL  by  Hurst,  ii, 
409).  In  1767  he  published  a  Ge$chichłe  der  drei  lefz- 
ten  Lebensjahre  Jesu  (Zurich,  6  vola.).  This  work  was 
adapted  to  the  use  of  Roman  Catholics  hy  J.  A.  ron 
Krapf  (Munster,  1782, 2  vol8.).  Hess  continned  to  study 
the  subject,  and  wrote  JugendyeBchichie  Jesu  (Zniich, 
1773),  and  finally  his  Leben  Jetu  (1828, 8  vol8L>.  His 
other  works  are  Von  dem  Reiche  GotUi  (Zurich,  1774,  3 
vol8i;  5th  edit.  1826)  •.— Ćre«cA.  ti.  JSchriJłen  der  Apottel 
Jem  (Zurich,  1775,8  voIb.;  4thed.  1820-1822):  thisworic 
was  also  adapted  to  the  use  of  Roman  Catholics  (Mon- 
ster, 1794, 2  vols. ;  8d  ed.  Salzburg,  1801)  -.—Oetchid^e  d. 
Itraeliten  vor  d.  Zeiten  Jesu  (Zurich,  1776>1788, 12  vola.) : 
—Geach,  Joma  (Zurich,  1779,  2  voIb.)  i—Prediptem  fi.  dL 
ApoHelgeach.  (Zurich,  1781-1788),  a  oollection  of  50  ser- 
mons  '.^Ueber  die  Lekre,  Tkaten,  umi  Sehicktale  imaprrr 
Herm  (Zurich,  1782, 2  v6l8t ;  4th  ed.  1817) :— Gr jdL  /)a- 
ruf  «  u.  Salomo^t  (Zurich,  1785, 2  vo]s.)  :--BibL  d.  keilKffen 
Getdu  (Zurich,  1791-1792,  2  vols.)  i—Genh,  d.  Mentcbm 
(Zurich,  1791-1792,  2  yoIb.;  later  ed.  1829):— ir<4erdfe 
Fott»  tt.  Vaterland8lidfe  Jesu  (Winterthur,  1794)  t—Der 
Christ  bei  Gefahren  d,  Vaferlandetf  a  collection  of  ser- 
mons  (Zurich,  1799-1800, 3  vols.).  See  Ersch  u.  Gruber, 
Encyklopadie  i  Hoefer,  Ńouv.Biog,Genirale,  xjdy,57h, 

HoBBe,  a  country  in  central  Germany.  The  name 
is  for  the  first  time  mentioned  in  a  letter  of  St.  Boniface 
to  the  pope  (783),  and  the  pupils  of  Boniface  introdnced 
Christianity  into  the  country.  At  the  time  of  Charie- 
magne  it  bdonged  to  the  dominions  of  the  counts  of 
Franconia;  in  the  lOth  century,  a  number  of  Hessian 
nobles  established  their  independence :  in  the  following, 
all  of  them  recognised  the  sovereignty  of  Ludwig  I  of 
Thuringia,  who  had  married  the  danghter  of  one  of  tbe 
Hessian  princes.  This  linę  became  extinct  in  1247;  a 
long  dvii  war  ensued ;  the  result  was  the  conftrmatton 
of  the  rule  of  Heinrich  of  Brabant,  the  son-in-law  of  Ihe 


221 


HESSHUSElSr 


Ittfc  rnler  of  Łhe  extiiict  linę.  Hb  son  Heiniich  (**  the 
Cbild  of  Bnbtnt")  became  the  aneestor  of  all  the  branch- 
es  of  Heesian  prinoeB.  The  Heasian  landa,  Bometunea 
divided  among  aerenl  prinoea,  were  again  reunited  at 
the  beginning  of  the  16th  oeotory  nnder  Wilhelm  II, 
the  fiither  of  Philip  I  the  Magnanimoua,  who  played  8o 
prominent  a  part  in  the  hiatory  of  the  Befonnation  of 
the  I6th  oentoiy.  Philip  divided  his  dominiona  among 
his  four  sona,  two  of  whom  died  childless,  thua  leaving 
only  two  chief  linea  of  the  Heasian  dynastiea,  Hesse-Cat- 
$d  and  Heste-DarmiŁadU  The  landgnyea  of  Hease- 
Cassel  in  1803  received  the  title  of  elector;  but  in  1806, 
in  conaeąuence  of  the  German  war,  in  which  the  elector 
had  taken  udes  against  Pruasia,  the  country  was  con- 
qaered  by  the  Prussians,  and  annexed  to  Pruasia.  The 
landgraye  of  Hease-Darmstadt  in  1806  receiyed  the  title 
of  grand-duke.  From  both  main  lines  others  branched 
off  from  time  to  time,  but  at  the  establishment  of  the 
German  Confederation  in  1815,  only  one,  the  landgrar 
Tatę  of  Hegse-Hombarg^  a  branch  of  Hease-Darmstadt, 
became  a  member  of  the  Confederation.  IŁ  became  ex- 
tinct  in  Harch,  1866,  fell  to  Hease-Darmstadt,  but  in 
September,  1866,  was  ceded  by  Hesae-Darmstadt  to  Prus- 
aia.  Thua,  in  1870,  the  only  Hessian  linę  retaining  8ov- 
ereignty  was  the  grand-duchy  of  Hease-Darmstadt, 
which  was  a  part  of  the  new  North-German  Confedera- 
tion, not  for  the  whole  tenitory,  howerer,  but  only  for 
one  of  the  three  provincea. 

The  zeal  of  Philip  the  Blagnanimona  for  the  sucoeas 
of  the  Beformation  madę  the  Hessian  territory  one  of 
the  strongholds  of  German  Protestantism.  But  the  yao- 
illation  of  the  aucceeding  princes  between  the  Lutheran 
and  the  Beformed  Creeds  caused  considerable  trouble, 
espedally  in  Hease-Cassel,  the  State  Church  of  which 
was  often  left  in  the  dark  as  to  whether  it  was  Lutheran 
or  Beformed.  Theological  oontroyersiea  on  this  sub- 
Ject  haye  been  continued  up  to  the  present  day.  In  the 
grand-dachy  of  Hesae-Dannstadt,  the  mąjoiity  of  the 
Protestant  churches,  both  Lutheran  and  Beformed,  haye 
joined  (sińce  1822)  the  ^  Union**  or  United  Eyangelical 
Chmch.  Before  the  union  there  weie  in  the  grand- 
dachy  about  406,000  Lutherans  and  173,000  Beformed. 
Acoording  to  the  census  of  1867,  thcre  were  in  the  grand- 
dachy  in  that  year  564,657  Eyaji^li  jal  Christiana  (68.60 
per  oent.  of  the  total  population),  229,373  Boman  Cath- 
olics  (27 J^  per  cent),  3841  other  Christiana  (0.47  per 
cent.),  25,266  laraelites  (3.07  per  cent.).  In  the  dass  of 
**  other  Christiana"  were  included  2987  Grerman  Catho- 
fica,  626  Mennonitea,  119  Baptists,  81  Free  Beligious,  24 
Separatista,  22  Greek  Catholica,  20  United  Brethren  in 
Cł^ist,  6  Darbyitea,  4  Pietiata,  2  Orthodox  Catholica. 

The  National  Eyangelical  Church  comprises  the  mem- 
bers  of  the  United  Eyangelical  Church  aa  well  as  the 
non-onited  Latherana  and  Beformed.  The  Church  con- 
atitutioDy  introduced  at  the  time  ot  the  Beformation, 
mth  two  consłstoriea  and  four  auperintendenta,  was 
changed  in  1803;  The  office  of  auperintendenta  was 
aboli^ied;  the  two  consistoriea  were  supplanted  by 
Church  and  School  conncils  which  had  no  consistorial  ju- 
lisdiction.  The  new  councila  were  subordinate  to  the 
State  ministers  of  the  Interior  and  of  Justice,  who,  in  the 
cserdae  of  their  functions,  were  aided  by  inspectors.  Aa 
in  other  parta  of  Germany,  the  Church  loet  the  last  rem- 
nant  of  self-goyemment,  and  became  wholly  subject  to 
the  atate.  A  reoiganlzaŁion  of  the  constitution  took 
place  by  a  decree  of  Jnne  6, 1882.  The  admiuistiation 
of  all  the  affairs  of  the  National  Eyangelical  Church  was 
tranaferred  to  a  Supremę  Consistory  (Oberconaistorium) 
at  Darmstadt,  which  cons^  of  a  president  (a  layman), 
thiee  ministerial  counaeUors,  two  lay  counsellors,  and  of 
one  or  aeyeral  aasessora.  Only  in  rare  cases  the  Supremę 
Conśstory  haa  to  report  to  the  state  ministry  for  a  finał 
decision.  Each  of  the  three  proyinoes  of  the  giand- 
dnchy  haa  a  superintendent.  Tlie  superintendents  are 
the  ofgana  through  whom  the  Supremę  Conaiatory  exer- 
ciaea  ita  functions.  Subordinate  to  the  auperintendenta 
wn  the  deaną  thirty  in  number,  who  are  appointed  by 


the  Supremę  Conaiatory  for  the  term  of  fiye  years.  £▼• 
ery  congregation  haa  a  local  church  cooncil  to  aasiat  in 
the  management  of  the  eictemal  church  discipline  and 
of  the  local  church  property.  This  Church  council  haa 
two  official  membezB,  the  pastor  and  the  burgomaater 
(or  his  repreaentatiye),  and  from  three  to  fiye  extraor- 
diiiaiy  members,  who  are  chosen  by  the  former  in  union 
with  the  council  of  the  ciyil  oommunity.  Eyery  par- 
ish  ia  to  receiye  an  official  '*yisitation"  from  the  super- 
intendent or  a  dean  once  within  eyeiy  three  years.  The 
higheat  dignitary  of  the  Church  is  the  "ppclate"  (prftlat), 
who  ia  also,  by  yirtue  of  hia  office,  a  member  of  the  Firat 
Chamber.  A  theological  faculty  ia  connected  with  the 
Uniyersity  of  Gieasen ;  besides,  there  is  a  preachera* 
seminary  at  Friedeburg.  The  theological  faculty  cX 
Gieasen  haa  been  and  still  is  (Jan.  1870)  under  the  con- 
trol  of  the  BationalisUc  party;  among  its  best  known 
profesaors  were  Credner  (q.  y.)  and  Knobel  (q.  y.).  As 
may  therefore  be  expected,  a  conaiderable  portion  of  the 
dergy  belong  likewise  to  the  Bationahstic  party;  of 
late,  howeyer,  the  reaction  in  fayor  of  eyangelical  piiu- 
dples  haa  gained  ground. 

The  Boman  Catholics  bdong  to  the  andent  diooeae 
of  Mentz  (q.  y.),  which  ia  now  a  auffiragan  see  to  the 
archbiahop  of  Freibuig.  The  diocese,  which,  beaidea 
Hease-Darmstadt,  comprises  a  few  parishes  in  the  for- 
mer landgrayate  of  Heaae-Homburg,.had  (1865)  158  par- 
ishea  in  17  deanerica.  A  faculty  of  Boman  Catholic  the- 
ology  waa  formerly  connected  with  the  Uniyersity  of 
Gieasen;  but  in  1848  the  bishop  of  Mentz  forbade  all 
studenta  of  theology  to  attend  the  theological  lectures 
of  the  (prominently  Protestant)  Uniyersity,  and  estab- 
lished  a  new  theological  seminary  at  Mentz.  The  the- 
ological faculty,  deaerted  by  all  the  studenta,  had  soon  to 
be  suppresaed.  Of  monastic  inatitutions,  there  were  in 
1865  houaea  of  the  Jesuita,  Capuchins,  Brothers  of  the 
Christian  Schools,  Englische  Frttnlein,  Sisters  of  Chap- 
ity,and  other  female  congregations,with  244  membera. 
At  the  beginning  of  the  century,  the  most  liberał  aenti- 
menta  preyailed  among  the  majority  of  the  clergy,  in- 
dnding  eyen  the  canona  of  the  cathedral  church,  and 
the  profesBor  of  theological  facult}'  of  the  Uniyeraity; 
but  sińce  the  appointment  of  the  ultramontane  biahop 
of  Ketteler  (1850),  these  liberał  sentiments  haye  been  to 
a  yery  large  extent  weeded  out  or  repressed.  See  Her- 
zog, Real-EncyUopddief  yi,  29 ;  Wiggers,  KirchL  SteUit^ 
tik,  ii,  207;  Neher,  KirchL  Gtoffraphie  und  Stałistik,  ii, 
3U.     (AJ.S.) 

HeBse  von  Hessentein,  Johamn,  bom  at  Nv- 
remberg  SepL  21, 1487,  studied  theology  at  Ldpzig  and 
Wittenberg,  and  became  a  priest  during  a  stay  in  Italy. 
On  his  return  to  Germany  hia  relations  became  inti- 
mate  with  Luther,  to  wh98e  influence  is  attributed  the 
deep  Christian  experience  which  characterize  the  pro- 
ductions  of  hia  pen.  Hease  is  considered  one  of  the  first 
German  aacred  poets,  and  many  of  his  hymns  are  sung 
in  the  German  churches  of  to-day.— Wolfij  Encyklop.  d 
doŁtach.  NalwnailiL  iy,  83.     (J.  H.  W.) 

HesBhtuien  (Hesshusiu8),Tilexai«n,  a  Lutheran 
theologian,  was  bom  Noyember  8,  1527,  at  Wesel,  in 
Cleyea.  In  his  youth  he  trayelled  oyer  France,  England, 
Denmark,  and  Grermany ;  after  which  he  went  to  Wit- 
tenberg, where,  in  1550,  he  became  master  of  aria,  and 
soon  madę  his  mark  aa  a  preacher.  In  1552,  when  but 
twenty-flye  years  old,  he  was  appointed  pastor  of  Gos- 
lar,  and  in  1558  waa  madę  D.D.  But  his  peculiaritiea 
of  mind  and  temper  preyented  hia  remaining  long  in 
any  post.  Always  in  confiict  with  the  authoritiea,  hia 
Iriend  Melancthon  in  yain  procured  him  seyeral  adyan- 
tageous  situations,  aecuring  him,  when  but  thirty  years 
old,  the  nomination  aa  professor  of  theology  at  Hddd- 
berg,  superintendent  of  the  Palatinate,  and  president  of 
the  Church  Council,  which  he  loet  again  two  years  after, 
in  1559,  after  a  bitter  controyersy  with  Klebitz  (q.  v.) 
on  the  doctrine  of  the  Lord's  Supper.  He  fought  the 
same  battle  again  vrlth  A«  Haidenberg  at  Bremen.    See 


HESTCHASTS 


222 


H  K7|  ■/T<^P\.l  JtL 


CsYPTO-CAŁYDnaii.  Haying  finally  scugbt  a  refage 
in  hifl  Dative  city  of  Wesel,  be  was  drivea  from  it  in 
1564  for  wziting  hb  Untenchied  twischen  d.  woAren  ha- 
tholischen  Lehre  d,  Kirche  u»  t.  d.  IrrtkOmem  d.  Papisten 
u.  d.  rómitcken  Awtkhruts,  which  highly  displeased  the 
goyemment.  After  yaried  fortunes,  he  was  in  1678  ap- 
•pointed  bishop  of  Sameland ;  but,  baying  there  awaken- 
ed  great  opposition,  bis  doctiines  were  condenmed  by  a 
synod  in  1577,  and  be  bimself  was  afterwards  diiyen 
out  of  tbe  country.  Sbortly  after  be  ent«red  on  bis  but 
ńtuation  as  tbe  leading  professor  of  tbeology  of  tbeUni- 
yersity  of HehnstUdt,  wbere  b«  died,  Sept.  25, 1588.  Dur^ 
ing  bis  wbole  career  as  a  oontroyertist,  Hessbusen  was 
a  strong  adyocate  of  extieme  Lutberamsm,  against  tbe 
Heknctbonian  Synergists.  See  Synergistic  Contro- 
YEBSY.  After  tbe  promulgation  of  tbe  Formuła  of  Gon- 
oord  (q.  y.),  be  opposed  it  (baying  subsaibed  it  in  1578) 
on  tbe  ground  tbat  certain  cbanges  bad  been  madę  in  it 
before  publication.  Under  bis  influence,  tbe  Uniyerńty 
of  Helmst^t  witbdrew  its  sanction  from  tbe  Formuła. 
Among  bis  ¥rriting8y  tbe  moet  important  are  bis  Com- 
meniar  U.dPsahnen: — Dejustificationepeccatoris  coram 
Zko  (1587):— Gramol  Theolofficum  (Hebnstttdt,  1586). 
See  Jno.  Ge.  Leuckfeld,  HigL  Heskusiana  (QuedUnbnrg, 
1716) ;  Herzog,  Real-Encythp.  yi,  49 ;  Fbmck,  Ga(^.  d 
Prot,  TkeoL ;  Gass,  GeachichU  d.  Prot.  Theol.  yóL  iL 

Heflychasts  (Greek  ijmr^ącTai,  t)<nfxaZ(w,  to  be 
cuiet)j  a  party  of  Eastem  monks  of  tbe  14tb  oentuiy,  on 
Mount  Atbos.  Tbey  taugbt  a  refined  and  exaggerated 
mysticism,  or  quietism  (q.  y.),  seeking  '*  tTanquilliŁy  of 
mind  and  tbe  extinction  of  eyil  passions  by  oontempla- 
tion.-"  Tbey  belieyed  tbat  all  wbo  ariiye  at  tbe  btess- 
edness  of  seeing  God  may  also  azriye  at  a  tranqui]lity 
of  mind  entirely  free  from  perturbation,  and  tbat  all  ea- 
joying  sucb  a  state  may  baye  yisual  peroeption  of  di- 
yine  ligbt,  sucb  as  tbe  apostles  saw  wben  tbey  bebeld 
His  gloiy  sbimng  fortb  in  tbe  transfigoration.  Tbe 
monk  Barlaam  (q.  y.),  wbo  afterwards  became  bisbop 
of  Gerace,  during  a  yisit  to  tbe  East,  leamed  tbe  doc- 
trines  and  usages  of  tbese  qnietiBtic  monks,  and  at- 
tacked  tbem  yiolently.  Tbey  were  yigorously  defended 
by  Palamas,  afterwards  bisbop  of  Tbessalonica.  Tbe 
cbaiges  brougbt  against  tbem  were  not  mcrely  tbat 
tbey  professed  to  seek  and  obtain  a  diyine  and  snper- 
natural  ligbt  not  promised  in  Scripture,  but  also  tbat 
tbe  means  tbey  used  were  fanatical  and  absurd.  Tbese 
means  included  contemplation,  introyersion,  and  ascetie 
practices;  especially  it  was  said  tbat  tbey  were  accusr 
tomed  to  seat  tbemselyes  in  some  secret  comer,  and  fix 
tbeir  eyes  steadfastly  upon  tbe  nayel,  wbence  tbey  were 
called  6fŁi^{i\óylnfxoi.  As  tbe  fruit  of  sucb  contempla- 
tion, a  diyine  ligbt,  tbey  said,  sucb  as  tbat  whicb  sbone 
on  Tabor,  was  diffused  tbrougb  tbeir  souls.  Palamas 
defended  tbis  tbeoiy  by  making  a  distuiction  between 
tbe  essence  (ov(fia)  of  God  and  bis  actiyity  (tylpycta), 
asserting  tbat  tbe  latter,  tbougb  etemal  and  uncreated, 
18  yet  coramunicaUe.  To  tbe  cbarge  tbat  tbey  tbus 
daimed  direcUy  to  see  God,  inasmucb  as  tbis  uncreated 
ligbt  must  be  eitber  of  tbe  substance  or  of  tbe  attributes 
of  God,  tbey  replied  tbat  tbe  diyine  ligbt  radiated  from 
God  tbrougb  lyipyfUL^  but  was  not  God.  Tbe  wbole 
matter  was  brougbt  before  a  coundl  at  Constantinople 
in  1341,  and  tbe  deciaion  tending  fayorably  to  tbe  Hesy- 
cbasts,  Barlaam  retreated  to  Italy.  But  bis  cause  was 
taken  up  by  anotber  monk,  George  Acyndinns,  wbo  at- 
tacked  tbe  doctiine  of  Palamas  and  tbe  usages  of  tbe 
Hesycbasts.  He  also  lost  bis  case  before  a  synod  at  Con- 
stantinople. After  tbe  deatb  of  tbe  emperor  Androni- 
cus,  boweyer,  wbo  bad  fayored  Palamas  and  tbe  Hesy- 
cbasts, tbings  took  a  different  tum  for  a  wbile  in  iayor 
of  tbe  Barlaamites;  but  after  tbe  triumpb  of  tbe  em- 
peror Jobn  Cantacuzenus,  wbo  fayored  tbe  otber  side,  a 
synod  at  Constantinople,  in  1351,  approyed  tbe  doctrine 
cf  tbe  Hesycbasts,  especially  tbe  distinction  between 
ohaia  and  iykpyua,  and  excommunicated  Acyndinus 
and  Barlaam,  Tbe  souroes  of  information  on  tbese  pro- 
oeedings  are  tbe  Nitioria  of  Jobn  Cantacuzenus  (ii,  89; 


iy,  23,  etc),  wbicfa  is  on  tbe  side  of  tbe  Hesydunte ;  anH 
tbe  Historia  JByzanUna  of  Nioephonis  Gregoras,  which 
takes  tbe  otber  side.  See  Petayius,  De  Dogau  TkeoL 
lib.  i,  c.  12 ;  Scbrockb,  KirdungesdudUe,  xxzir,  481 ; 
Moeheim,  Ckurck  Uitt,  cent.  ziy,  pt  ii,  cb.  y ;  Gaa,  ia 
Herzog,  Jieal^£neyklop.  yi,  52  sq. ;  Engelbardr,  in  ZHl" 
t€hr\ft  d.  higt,  TkeoL  yiii,  48;  Gieseler,  Ckurdi  Hiśtortf, 
per.  iii,  §  127 ;  Bingbam,  Orig,  Eccks,  bk.  vii,  chap.  ii,  § 
14;  Domer,  Pertou  of  Christa  EdinU  tianslation,  dir.  i^ 
yoL  i,  p.  286.    See  Mtsticisu. 

HesychitiB,  an  Egyptian  bisbop  of  tbe  3d  century, 
wbo  is  mentioned  by  Eusebius  {Hist,  Ecdet.  viii,  13)  aa 
a  reyiser  of  tbe  text  of  tbe  Septuagint  (see  also  Jerome, 
De  vir.  iUust.  77).  He  also  publUbed  an  edition  of  tbe 
New  Testament,  of  wbich  Jerome  does  not  appear  to 
baye  formed  a  fayorable  opinion.  He  obtained  the 
crown  of  martyrdom  in  tbe  Diodesian  persecution  about 
A.D.  311.  Notbing  of  his  works  is  now  extanL  See 
Ciarkę,  Suce  of  8ac  Literaturę^  s.  y. ;  Lardner,  Work», 
iii,  206 ;  Hody,  De  BibL  t€xtibus  originaUbua  (Oxf.  1705). 

Heflyohiufl,  tbe  grammarian  or  Ałjocakdbia,  is 
of  uncertaui  datę,  but  probably  liyed  about  tbe  end  of 
tbe  4tb  century.  He  oompiled  a  Greek  Lexicon,  which 
bas  been  of  inesdmable  seryice  to  pbilology  and  litera- 
turę. Tbe  beat  edition  is  tbat  of  Alberti  and  Ruhnken 
(Leydęn,  174<>>66,  2  yols.),  with  additions  by  Scbow 
(Leipeic,  1792,  8yo) ;  newly  edited  by  Schmidt  (Jenai, 
1857-64, 4  yols.  4to).  See  Rankę,  De  Lerici  Ifesyciiani 
rera  origine  et  ffemiina  forma  CommaUaHo  (Leipasig  and 
Ouedlinburg,  1881, 8yo). 

Heflychiufl  of  Jerusalem,  a  Greek  eccleeiastical 
wnter  of  the  5th  century  (supposed  to  baye  died  about 
A.D.  434).  Consecrated  priest  by  tbe  patiiarcb  of  Con- 
stantinople against  his  wisbes,  be  spent  tbe  remainder 
of  bis  life  in  tbat  city.  Tbis  is  about  all  tbat  is  known 
with  any  certainty  conceming  bis  life.  He  appears  to 
baye  enjoyed  great  reputation,  and  wrote  a  number  of 
books,  tbe  principal  of  which  are,  In  Letiticum  Libri 
9epiem  (Latin  only,  Basie,  1527,  foloi;  Paria,  1581,  8vo; 
and  in  Biblioikeca  Pairum,  xli,  52 : — Srix>}pov  (or  Kc^- 
\aia)  Tiav  i€  vpo^Twv  Kai  'HaaioVf  SHcheron  (or  Ca- 
pita)  in  duodedmpropketas  minoret  et  Esaiam,  publisb- 
ed  by  Dayid  Hoeschcl  with  Adrianna  Itagoge  (Augsburg^ 
1602,  4to),  and  inserted  in  tbe  Crilici  Sacri  (Lcmdoo, 
1660),  yiii,  26:— *Avri(5pjjr(jcd  or  Eifruca,  puhlished  with 
Marcus  £remita's  Opuscula  (Paris,  1563,  8yo),  and  re- 
printed  in  tbe  Btbiiotheca  reterum  Patrum  of  Fronton 
Ducffius  (Paris,  1624,  fol.),  i,  985.  A  Latin  tianslation 
of  tbis  work  was  inserted  in  tbe  BibUotA,  Patrum,  xii, 
194,  under  the  title  Ad  Theodulum  Sermo  compendiows 
animcB  perutilis  de  Temperaniia  et  Virtutej  etc : — Homii-^ 
ia  de  Sonda  Maria  deiparoj  pubUshed  by  F.  du  Duc  in 
Biblioth.  reterum  Patrum,  ii,  417; — Tó  lic  róv  ayioy 
*AvdpŁav  lyx*i>Htov,  Oratio  demonstratita  m  S.Andrt^ 
am  Apostohtm :  a  Latin  translation  of  tbis  work  was  in- 
serted in  tbe  Bibliofh,  Patr,  xu,  188 : — De  Jłesurrectiane 
Domini  noałri  Ckristi,  and  De  Dora  tertia  et  sexta  quQmt 
Dominus  fuiue.  crucifixus  dicitur,  in  Combefis,  iN^or«isii 
Auctarium: — Eic  'lÓKutoy  tóv  dSŁ\pbp  rov  Kvpiav  Ktu 
Aa€id  t6v  OiOTTOTopa,  of  wbich  exŁract8  are  giyen  in 
Pbotius  (cod.  275) : — MaprvpiOV  rov  ayiov  Kai  Mó^ou 
fiapTvpoc  T0v  Xpt<TT0v  Aoyyivov  tov  lKaTovrapxov* 
in  Bollandus,  Acta  Sanct,  March,  yoL  ii,  Appenduc,  p. 
786 '.—'H  fvayyi\iKn  (nifi^pia^ia  Combefis,  i, 773 ;  an 
extract  of  it  was  inserted  in  Cotelier,  Ecdes.  GnBC  J/on- 
umenf,  iii,  1,  under  tbe  dtle  Uway^ayt^  anopiwy  nai 
iTTiKiotiay  iićKtydoa  iv  Imrofiy  U  riję  EvayyiXiKiic 
^vfji^uviac.  Part  of  tbe  extant  writings  of  Hesychius 
are  giyen  in  Migne^s  Patrologia  Gnecoj  voL  xciiL  See 
Pbotius,  Bibliotheca ;  Caye,  HitL  Liter,  i,  571 ;  Tillemont, 
Memoires  Eodesiasticues,  xiy,  227 ;  Hoefer,  Nouv,  Biog, 
Ginirale,  xxiy,  589. 

Hetaeriao  (eraipc/ ai),  oMsodaHont  ar  secret  societies 
of  the  Romans,  wbich  were  ibibidden  by  an  edict  of 
Trajan  soon  after  his  aooession,  A.D.  96.    Undar  th» 


HETERODOX 


223 


HETZEB 


ifFkiny  prooeeded  to  Bevere  meamres  against 
the  anemhUes  of  the  ChiistianB  aboat  A.D.  10& 

Heterodoa^  a  term  "pnctically  limited  to  belief 
in  aomeUking  that  is  contniy  to  the  decision  of  some 
charch  or  dmrchea;  thos,  when  a  RomaiiiBt  or  a  La- 
thienui,  etc,  apeaks  of  faeterodox7,  he  means  sometbing 
in  oppoeition  to  the  teadiing,  reapectiyely,  of  the  Rom- 
iah  or  Łathenn  Charch,  etc,  so  that  what  is,  or  at  least 
18  midentood  l^  keterodor,  at  one  time  or  place,  will 
be  oithodox  in  another*'  (Eden,  a.  ▼.).  See  ICartenaeo, 
Dogmatietf  §  28.    See  Hebesy  ;  Obthodok. 

HiBteioaBiails  (ofother  eattnce;  Hnpoc,  o^ff(a),a 
aect,  tbe  foUowerB  of  A^tins,  and  fiom  him  denominated 
Aetiana.    See  Abtiaiis;  ABiAinasc. 

Hath  (Heb.  Cheih,  nn,  dread;  Sept  ó  Ktrraioc,  and 
80  Joeephiu^  Ant.  i,  6, 2),  a  son  (descendant)  of  Canaan, 
andtbeanoestoroftheHimTES(Gen.Vy20;  Deutyii, 
1 ;  Joah.  i,  4),  who  dwdt  in  the  yidnity  of  Hebron  (Gen. 
xxiii,  3, 7;  xxt,  10).  The  "kings  of  the  Hittites''  u 
apoken  of  all  the  Canaanitiah  kings  (2  Kings  vii,  6).  In 
the  geneak>gical  tables  of  Gen.  x  and  1  c£ion.  i,  Heth 
is  named  aa  a  aon  of  Ganaan,  yonnger  than  Zidon  the 
fintbom,  but  preceding  the  Jebońte,  the  Amorite,  and 
the  oCber  Canaanidah  families.  The  Hittites  were  there- 
foie  a  Hamitic  race,  neither  of  the  "  comitiy"  nor  the 
**  kindred"*  of  Abraham  and  Isaac  (Gen.  xxiv,  8, 4;  xxviii, 
1, 2).  In  tbe  earliest  hiatorical  mention  of  the  nation — 
the  beantiful  narrative  of  Abraham^s  purchase  of  the 
cave  of  Machpelah— thęy  are  atyled,  not  Hittitea,  but 
Bene^Cheth  (A.y.  <*8on8  and  children  of  Heth,"  Gen. 
xxiii,  3,  b,  7, 10, 16, 18, 20 ;  xxv,  10 ;  xlix,  82).  Once  we 
hear  of  the  *<daaghterB  of  Heth"  (xxvii,  46),  the  '^daogh- 
tcrs  of  the  Umd,"  at  that  earijr  period  still  called,  after 
their  leaa  immediate  progeu|or,  *'  daughtera  of  Ganaan" 
(xxviii,  1, 8,  compared  with  xxvti,  46,  and  xxvi,  84, 85 ; 
see  also  1  Kinga  xi,  1 ;  Ezek.  xvi,  8).  In  the  EgypUan 
monumenta  the  name  CkcU  łb  said  to  atand  for  Palea- 
tine  (Bunaen,  JEgi/pUn,  ąuoted  by  Ewald,  Gt»elu  i,  817, 
note>— Smith.    See  Hittite. 

Hetherlngton,  William  ]£,  a  miniater  of  the 
Free  Chmcfa  of  Scotland,  waa  bom  June  4, 1808,  near 
Damfriea.  He  waa  edncated  at  the  Univeruty  of  Ed- 
ittburgh,  where  he  diatingniahed  himaelf  in  Greek  and 
in  nocal  philoaophy.  Hia  fiiat  senrice  in  the  miniatiy 
waa  at  Hamilton,  where  he  waa  aaaiatant  to  Dr.  Meek, 
wfaoae  daoghter  he  mairied.  In  1886  he  became  min- 
iiter  of  Torphicken,  and  in  1844  at  St.  Andrew'8.  At 
the  "  dianiption"  he  went  out  with  the  Free  Church.  In 
1848  he  waa  appointed  to  Free  St  Faul'8  Charch,  Edin- 
bor)^  and  in  1867  he  was  caUed  to  the  chair  of  Apol- 
ogetica  and  Systematic  Theology  in  the  Free-Church 
Odfege,  Glaagow,  where  hia  labors  aa  lecturer  were  ex- 
oeHive.  In  1862he  wa8  8truckbypaialy8iB,aiidon  the 
23dof  May,  1865^  hedied.  His  writinga,  besidea  the  ed- 
itorahip  of  the  Free-Church  Magazine  (1844-48),  and 
nnmeroua  contributions  to  the  PhstiyterMm  Beoiem  and 
the  Norik  BrUuk  Jieview,  indude  the  foUowing:  Dra- 
uatie8keteket(poeBaB,i8iB,Bvo)'^TheFubie$gofTime 
(1884),  characterized  by  Southey  as  a  vecy  original  and 
aUe  tzeatiae  i^JRoman  Uittory  (in  Ewą^dop.  BriL  ;  sep- 
aately  printed,  1862, 12mo):— TAe  Mmuter^s  Family 
(1847 ;  5th  edit.  1861, 12mo)  -^Hidory  o/ihe  Churt^  of 
Scotlamd  (1841, 8vo;  laat  edit  1868, 2  vol8. 8vo) :— J7i»- 
tory  o/łMe  Wegtmmtter  Auembfy  (1848, 12mo):— poa- 
thomoaa,  TJke  Apologetict  ofthe  Ckrittian  Faiih;  being 
a  eoane  of  Univei8ity  lectarea,  with  Introduction  in- 
dnding  a  brief  biogiaphical  aketch  of  the  anthor  by  Dr. 
Akxaader  Doff  (Edinboigh,  1867, 8  vo> 

HethOon  (Heb.  ChethloH%  "(^nn,  wrtgaped  ap,  I  e. 
a  hiding-phu»;  Yolg.  ffdhaUm),  a  plaoe  the  approach 
05^^,  **way")  to  which  lay  on  the  northem  border  of 
FideattDe,  between  the  Mediterranean  and  Zedad,  in  the 
directioa  of  Hamath  (Ezek.  xlvii,  16 ;  xlviii,  1).  In  all 
pnbability  the  ''way  of  Hethlon"  is  the  pasa  at  the 
CBf.or  S.)  endof  Łebanon,from  the  aeapcooat  of  the  Med- 


iteinmean  to  the  great  plain  of  Hamath,  and  la  thns 
identical  with  "  the  entranoe  of  Hamath"  (q.  d.)  in  Numb. 
xxxiv,  8,  etc  See  Porter,  Fwe  Yean  ta  Ikanaśau,  ii, 
866. 

Hetzel  or  Hesel,  Johann  Wilhelm  Friedrich, 
a  German  Orientaliat  and  theologian,  was  bom  at  Ko- 
nigsberg  May  16, 1764.  He  studied  at  the  univerBitie8 
of  Wittenbe^  and  Jena,  and  was  appointed  professor  of 
Oriental  kn^iagea  at  Giessen  in  1766.  In  1800  he  was 
madę  librarian  of  the  UniverBity  of  that  city,  and  in 
1801  was  called  to  the  professoiship  of  Oriental  litera- 
turę in  the  Univ«rBity  of  Dorpat,  which  office  he  held 
untill820.  He  dicdFeb.  1,1829.  Hetzel  wrote  a  num- 
ber  of  works  on  the  study  of  Oriental  lang^uages,  the 
principal  of  which  are  Attą/tihrlu^  hdfrdiKhe  Sprach- 
lehre  (Halle,  1777, 8vo)  i—N<mmalformenUhre  d.  kebrd- 
itehen  Sprache  (Halle,  1793, 8vo)  i—Inttitutio  PhiMogi 
Htbrvei  (Halle,  1798, 8vo)  i^Geach.  d,  hebraiachen  Ldera- 
tur  (HaUe,  1776)  i—Syritche  Sprachkhre  (Lemgo,  1788, 
Svo):^Ar€Ufucke  Grammatik  nebsł  einer  kunen  arof 
6ucA«it  Ckre$tcmathie  (Jena,  1776, 8vo).  Among  his  the- 
ological  works,  the  most  important  are  Die  Bibd^  AUet 
«•  iyistiet  TettamaU  tmi  roUkSndig  erUdrenden  Bemer^ 
hmffen  (Lemgo,  1780-1791, 10  volflt)  i—Neuer  Versuch  fl. 
d.Britfand.Hebrder(Lpz.l7db,8voy^Bibli8cheBBeai' 
fecftfa>n(Lps.  1788-1786, 8  vols.  roy.  8vo)  .-^-Geitt  dPId- 
hsophie  u.  Sprache  d.  aUen  Welt  (LUbeck,  1794,  8vo). 
See  Eichhom,  BibL  d,  bibUtckm  Literatur  (v,  1022  sq.); 
Pierer,  Unioeraal  Lex>  Tiii,  860 ;  Hoefer,  ATour.  Biograph, 
(?^ró^xxv,698. 

Hetser,  Ludwig,  was  bom  in  the  canton  Thuigau, 
Switzerland  (datę  unknown).  When  the  Reformation 
broke  out  in  Switzerland  he  was  in  the  vigor  of  youth, 
and  he  entered  into  the  movement  with  great  zeal  and 
energy.  He  was  chaplain  at  Wttdenschwyl,  on  Lakę 
Zurich,  in  1628,  and  in  September  of  that  year  he  pul^ 
lished  a  tiact  against  images,  under  the  title  UrłheU 
GotUs  toie  mon  dch  mit  aUen  Gótzen  und  Bildnissen  haU 
ten  idllf  etc,  which  ran  throngh  8everal  edltions,  and 
greatly  stiired  the  popular  mind.  In  October  of  the 
same  year,  when  the  seoond  conference  on  the  use  of 
images,  etc,  took  place  at  Zurich,  he  was  appointed  to 
keep  the  minutea,  and  to  publish  an  offidal  acoount  of 
them.  Zwingle  and  (Ecolampadius  appredated  his  tal- 
enta,  especially  his  Hebrew  leaming,  and,  in  spite  of  a 
certain  heat  and  rashness  which  marked  his  character, 
they  hoped  much  ftom  his  activity  in  the  Reformation. 
In  1624  he  went  to  Augsburg,  with  a  recommendation 
from  Zwingle,  and  there  his  leaming  and  eloąuence  soon 
madę  him  popular.  But  within  a  year,  owing  to  a  the- 
ological  dispute  with  Urbanus  Rhegius,  in  which  Hetzer 
maintained  Anabaptist  vicwB,he  was  compelled  to  quit 
Augsburg.  Retuming  to  Switzerland,  he  was  kindly 
reoeived  at  Basie  by  CEcolampadius,  and  was  employed 
early  in  1626  in  translating  Zwingle'8  reply  to  Bugen- 
hagen  into  German.  He  seems  to  have  satisfied  both 
Zwingle  and  (Ecolampadius  on  this  vi8it  that  he  waa 
not  an  Anabaptist;  but  before  the  middle  of  the  same 
year  he  was  expdled  ftom  Zurich  for  preaching  the 
new  doctrine.  At  Strasburg  he  agreed  with  Johann 
Denk  (q.  v.)  to  issue  a  transUtion  of  the  Prophets  of  the 
O.  T.  It  appeared  in  the  spring  of  1627,  and  passed  in 
four  years  throngh  thirteen  editions.  This  work  is  now 
very  scarce ;  two  oopies,  however,  belong  to  the  library 
of  the  Crozer  Theological  Seminary,  Upland,  Pa.  Het- 
zer seema  to  have  imbibed  the  theological  viewB  of 
Denk,  so  far,  at  leaat,  as  the  doctrine  of  the  Trinity  is 
ooncemed,  and  to  have  aided  him  in  spreading  his  doo- 
trines  in  Worma,  Landan,  and  other  places.  He  had 
previousIy  been  charged  with  looeeness  of  morals,  and 
in  1827  the  crime  of  adultery  waa  charged  upon  him. 
He  was  brought  to  tiial  and  beheaded  at  Constance, 
Feb.  8, 1629.  Such  is  the  common  acoount  of  Hetzer*8 
life,  founded  on  oontemporaiy  writings  and  letters  of 
Ambrose  Blaurer,  Zwingle,  and  others  of  the  Reformers. 
See  Moaheim,  CA*  HuU  cent.  xvi,  eh.  iii,  §  6;  Trechsel, 


HEUBNER 


224 


HEwrr 


AmUnmtarier,  i,  18;  Keim,  in  Herzog,  Real-Efk^Uop. 
vi,  61.  BapŁbt  wiiters,  however,  deny  the  chargeB  of 
Sodnianism  and  immorality,  and  aaaert  that  Hetzer  was 
not  only  a  man  of  great  leaming,  but  of  gentle  spińt 
and  deep  piety ;  and  that  he  died  a  martyr  to  his  Bap- 
tist  principles.  See  H.  Osgood,  in  Baptut  Ouarterly 
Benew,  July,  1869,  p.  833. 

Heubner,  Hkinbich  Lbo^ihard,  a  Gennan  theo- 
logian,  was  bom  at  Lauterbach,  Saxony,  June  2, 1780, 
and  was  educated  at  Wittenberg.  In  1811  he  was  madę 
professor  extraordinary  of  theology,  in  1817  thiid  di- 
rector  of  the  Theological  Seminaiy  at  Wittenbeig,  and 
in  1882  first  director.  In  this  office  he  senred  iaithfully 
and  laboiiously  until  his  death,  Febu  12, 1868.  His  pi- 
ety was  marieed,  and  saved  him  from  neology  and  false 
pbilosophy.  His  ^^litings  indude  the  following,  yiz. : 
Interprelatio  Miraculorum  Novi  Teatamenii  hittorioo- 
grammatica  (Wittenb.  \9ffr)i^Kirckenpo9tUU  (Halle, 
1864, 2  Yols.)  i^Prediffłen  (BerL  1847 ;  Magdeburg,  1861) : 
— PraJaitche  ErMarung  d.  K  Tut.  (Potadam,  1866) :  ~ 
Kateehitnma-Predigten  (Halle,  1866) ;  also  a  revised  and 
much  enlarged  edition  of  BUchner'8  BibU$che,  Ilandcon- 
cordata  (Halle,  1840-1863).  See  Hoefer,  Nouv,  Biocr. 
GMrraky  JULY,  699;  Tholuck,in  Herzog,  Seal-Eacyklop, 
vi,  64. 

Heugh,  HcGH,  D.D.,  a  Scotch  Fkesbyterian  divine, 
was  bom  at  Stirling  Aug.  12, 1782.  His  father  was  a 
minister  in  the  Anti-Bwgher  party  of  the  Secession 
Chorch.  The  son  was  educated  at  the  College  of  Edin- 
burgh,  and  licensed  to  preach  in  1804.  In  1806  he  was 
ordained  coUeague  to  his  renerable  father,  on  whoee 
death  in  1810  he  became  pastor  of  the  Stirling  Church. 
His  pastorał  duties  were  performed  with  great  fidelity : 
he  was  apreacher  of  uncommon  power,  and  he  aided  all 
benevolent  movements  both  by  tongue  and  pen.  In 
1821  he  became  minister  of  the  Rc^nt  Flaoe  Church  in 
Glasgow,  whcre  he  remained  until  his  death,  June  16, 
1846.  He  publi»hed  The  Impoticmoe  of  Early  Piety 
(Gksgow,  1826,  8vo)  i— State  of  Beligion  in  Geneva  and 
Bełgium  (Glasgow,  1844, 12mo).  Afler  his  death  Dr. 
Maipgill  published  his  Life  and  SelecŁ  Workt  (Glasgow, 

1862,  2d  ed.,  2  yols.  12mo) Jamieson,  ReUgious  Biog- 

raphy,  p.  262 ;  Kitto,  Journal  ofSacrtd  LU,  vi,  410, 

Heamann,  Christoph  August,  a  German  theo- 
logian,  was  bom  at  Altst&dt  (duchy  of  Weimar)  August 
8, 1681.  He  studied  theology  and  philoeophy  at  Jena, 
and  in  1705  travelled  through  Germany  and  Holland. 
After  his  retiun  he  bcoame  inspector  of  the  College  of 
Gottingen  in  1717,  and  in  1784  professor  of  theology  in 
the  Unirersity  of  that  city.  He  died  May  1, 1764.  His 
principal  works  are  Lntheru*  apocalypticus,  koc  esŁ  hii- 
toria  ecdenasłica  ex  Johatmea  Apocaiypti  truta  (Eise- 
nach,1714,8vo;  Hannover,1717,8vo):— 2>fiir«c*e  Ueber- 
setzung  d.  Neuen  Tegtaments  (Hann.  1748;  2d  edit.  1750, 
2  yols.  8vo)  '.^Erkldrung  de*  Neuen  Tettaments  (Hann. 
1760-1768, 12  parts,  8vo),  a  work  which  oontains  numer- 
ous  ingenious  explanations,  along  with  many  errors  and 
paradoxe8  :—Erweis  dasz  d.  Lehre  d,  refomdrten  Kircke 
von  d,  heUigen  Ahendmakl  die  wahre  tei  (Eisleben,  1764, 
8vo),  etc  Sec  Heyne,  Memoria  Ileumantd  (Gottingen, 
1764) ;  Ersch  und  Gmber,  Encyklopedie ;  Hoefer,  Nouv. 
Biog.  Generale f  xxvi,  600 ;  Herzog,  Real^EncykL  vi,  66. 
Heu8de,Voii.  See  Hofstkdb  de  Groot. 
Hewlng  (22cn)  of  wood,  a  laborious  senrice,  chief- 
ly  of  slayes  and  aliens,  to  which  the  Gibeonites  were 
condemned  for  the  supply  of  the  sanctuary  by  Joshua 
(Joeh.  ix,  28).  Some  of  the  Babbins  undeistood,  how- 
ever,  that  while  the  Hebrews  remained  in  camp,  and 
before  the  land  was  divided,  the  Gibeonites  perfonnetl 
this  seryice  for  the  whole  body  of  the  people ;  but  even 
they  admit  that  afterwards  their  senrice  were  limited  to 
the  sanctuaiy.  This  senrioe  must  have  been  sufficient- 
ly  laborious  at  the  great  festiyals,  but  not  generally  so, 
as  they  probably  undertook  the  duty  by  tuma  They 
were  not  rednced  to  a  condition  of  absolute  slayery,  but 
seem  to  have  been  rather  domeetic  tributańeB  than 


Blaves,  their  tribnte  being  the  required  penonal  i 
See  GiBEOKiTE.  In  1  Kinga  v,  15,  we  read  that  Sdo- 
mon  *'  had  fouracore  thousand  hewers  in  the  mountains.'* 
The  forests  of  Lebanon  only  weie  snffident  to  Bopply 
the  timber  required  for  building  the  Tempie.  Sueh  of 
these  forests  as  lay  nearest  the  sea  were  in  the  pn— 
sion  of  the  Phoenidans,  among  wbom  timber  wsa  in 
Buch  constant  demand  that  they  had  acąutred  grast 
skill  in  the  felling  and  transport  of  it  See  Lkbasok. 
It  was  therefore  of  much  importance  that  Hiram  eon- 
sented  to  employ  large  bodies  of  men  in  Lebanon  to  hew 
timber,  as  well  as  others  to  bring  it  down  to  the  ses-ńde^ 
whence  it  was  to  be  taken  along  the  coast  in  floats  to 
Joppa.  The  forests  of  Lebanon  have  now  in  a  grat 
measure  disappeared,  but  Akma  Dagh  and  Jawur  Dagh 
(the  ancient  Amanus  and  Rhosus),  in  the  north  of  Syria, 
Btill  fumish  an  abundance  of  yaluable  timber,  though 
vast  ąuantities  have  been  felled  of  late  yeazs  by  the 
Egyptian  goyemment    See  Axe;  Wood. 

He^wit,  Nathanieł,  D.D.,  a  Presbyterian  miniater. 
was  bom  in  New  London,  Conn.,  August  28, 1788.  He 
graduated  A.B.  at  Yale  College  in  1808.  He  commenced 
the  study  of  law,  but  soon  became  satisfied  of  his  caU  to 
the  ministry,  and  deyoted  himself  to  theology,  mider 
the  tuition  of  Dr.  Joel  Benedict,  of  Flainfield,  Conn.  In 
1811  he  was  licensed  to  preach  by  the  New-London  Coa- 
gregational  Association,  and,  after  preaching  for  a  while 
in  Yermont,  went  to  the  new  theological  scminary  at 
Andoyer  to  gain  still  further  preparation  for  his  work. 
In  1815  he  was  installed  as  pastor  of  the  Presbyterian 
Church  in  Plattsburg,  N.  Y.  After  some  years  of  rery 
successful  labor  there,  he  was  caUed  to  the  Congrega.- 
tional  Church  at  Fairfield,  Conn.  Hcre  he  became  known 
as  one  of  ^  the  most  eloquent  and  powerful  preachers  in 
the  country,  and  here  it  was  that  his  pulpit  from  Sab- 
bath  to  Sabbath  sounded  out  that  darion  bhut  of  God^a 
tmth  against  intemperance,  which,  with  a  similar  and 
eąuaUy  powerful  series  of  sermons  at  the  same  time  from 
Dr.Lyman  Beecher  at  litchfield,  soon  aioused  the  whole 
Church  and  ministry  of  the  land.**  He  and  Dr.  Beecher 
were  apostles  of  the  American  Temperance  Reformation. 
In  1828  he  resigned  his  charge  at  Fairfield  to  beoome 
agent  of  the  American  Temperance  Society,  then  newly 
formed.  '*  He  addressed  himself  to  this  work  with  the 
spirit  alike  of  a  hero  and  a  martyr,  and  proeecated  it 
with  amazing  ability  and  succeas.  Far  and  wide,  aa  he 
reasoned  of  righteousness,  temperance,  and  jndgment  to 
oome,  with  inyincible  logie,  with  boki  eamestneas,  with 
fearless  fidelity,  with  torrents — often  cataracta — of  bum- 
ing  eloquence,  he  moyed,  and  fired,  and  dectrified  the 
people.  The  reform  madę  rapid  h^way.  It  enlistcd 
the  great  majority  of  the  morał  and  Christian  poitioB 
of  society,  the  aged  and  the  young,  redaiming  many 
and  guarding  multitudes  against  intemperance.  Of  the 
astounding  doqnence  and  effects  of  these  discounea  I 
have  often  heard,  in  forms  and  from  quarten  so  varioaa 
as  to  leaye  little  doubt  that  wbat  Luther  waa  to  the 
Reformation,  Whitefield  to  the  Reviyal  of  1740,  Weslej 
to  primitiye  Methodism,  that  was  Nathanieł  Hewit  to 
the  early  Temperance  Reformation**  (Atwater,  Memoriał 
Diśoourse).  In  1880  he  became  pastor  of  the  Seoond 
Congregational  Church  in  Bridgeport,  Conn.  In  1881 
he  went  to  England  in  behalf  cf  the  cause  of  temper- 
ance, and  his  great  powers  of  eloąuenoe  were  never  morę 
signally  displayed  than  on  this  visit.  In  power  of  log- 
ical  argument  and  impassioned  deliyery  few  oraton  of 
the  time  exceedcd  Dr.  Hewit  Retuming  home,  he  r»- 
sumed  his  labors  at  Bridgeport,  where  he  senred  until 
1853,  when  he  resigned  this  charge,  and  assumed  that 
of  a  new  Presbyterian  Church  formed  by  mcmben  of  hia 
old  parish.  He  had  always  been  an  adherent  to  the 
doctrines  of  the  Westminster  Confession.  The  East 
Windsor  (now  Hartford)  Theoilągical  Seminaiy  owed  its 
existence  and  maintenanoe  largely  to  him.  In  1862  he 
waa  compelled  by  growing  infinnity  to  withdraw  fiom 
actiye  duty,  and  an  assodate  pastor  waa  appointed.  He 
died  at  Bridgeport  February  8, 1867. 


HET 


225 


HEZEEIAH 


Hey,  JiHBf,  D.D^  ft  lesnied  Englbh  diyine,  was  bom 
tn  17H  and  w«  educated  tt  Catharine  Hall,  Cambridge. 
After  holding  sereral  prefennents,  he  became  Norris  pro- 
feflsor  of  dirimty  at  Cambridge  in  1780,  then  pastor  of 
Paasenham  (Northamptonshire)  and  of  Calvertoii  (Buck- 
inghaouhjie),  and  died  at  London  in  1816.  His  writ^ 
inga,  whieh  aie  genefiUy  acute  and  jtidicioiis,  inclade 
£$stty  M  Reden^ftioH  (1768, 4to) : — lACtureB  in  DwmUy 
(Gamb.  1796, 4  Tds.  8vo;  8d  edit.  1841, 2  toIs.  8vo)  :— 
Dueouneś  om  łke  Maktolemi  Sentimmts  (Newport,  1801, 
6x0)1— TkougkU  om  the  Aihanatiam  Crttd  (1790,  8vo): 
—ObterratioHs  om  tke  WriHmfft  of  SU  Paul  (1811,  8vo). 
— Daiiing,  Cfdogu  BibUograpkica,  i,  1459. 

Hejdenreich,  Kawl  Heinrich,  a  German  pbilos- 
opher,  was  bom  February  19, 1764,  at  Stolpen,  in  Sax- 
onr.  He  embraced  first  the  pbilosophy  of  Spinoza,  later 
that  of  Kant,  and  tangbt  tbe  Kantian  pbilosophy  as  pro- 
fenor  at  the  UniveisiŁy  of  Leipzig  from  1789  to  1797. 
He  died  ApriI  29, 1801.  Among  his  writings  are  Natur 
md  Gotł  nach  Spmoza  (Leipzig,  1788) : — Phiłosophie  der 
matwrSdum  Rdigion  (Leipzig,  1791, 2  Tols)  i—EinUitung 
i.  d.  Stadim  dar  Pkilomjphie  (Leipzig,  1793)  i—Psycholo- 
gucke  EntKickehmg  des  Aherglanhema  (Leipzig,  1797), — 
Hoefer,  jVoKr.  Bioffr.  Generale^  xxiv,  621 ;  Kmg,  Hand" 
wHerbuch  d,  philM.  Wistenschąfty  ii,  422. 

Heylin  (or  Heylyn),  Peter,  was  bom  Kor.  29, 
1600,  at  Burford,  Oxfordshiie.  At  fourteen  he  entered 
Hut  HaD,  Oxford,  and  within  two  years  was  choeen 
demy  of  Magdalen  College.  Herę  he  devoted  himself 
to  science,  particularly  to  geography,  on  which  he  wrote 
a  tmtiae  entitled  Mtcrocotmus,  which  gained  him  great 
icpotation.  In  1623  he  was  ordained,  and  about  1625 
undertook  an  academical  exerci8e  at  Oxford,  where  he 
feil  into  a  dispate  with  Prideaux,  then  regius  professor 
of  diTinity.  He  maintained  the  yisibility  and  infalli- 
bility  of  the  cathoUc  Church  (not  the  Roman),  and  nused 
a  fltonn  which  lasted  for  a  long  time  in  the  Uniyeraity. 
His  doctrinca  reoommended  him  to  the  notice  of  Laud, 
then  biabop  of  Bath  and  WeDs.  In  1628  he  became 
chaplain  to  knrd  Danby ,  and,  some  time  after,  king^s  chap- 
lain.  He  obtained  variou8  lirings  and  cleri(^  offices 
thnwgh  the  patronage  of  Laud,  from  which  he  was  ex- 
pdled  by  the  Republicans ;  was  the  editor  of  the  Mercu- 
riM  AuUau,  the  Boyalist  paper;  recovered  his  prefer- 
nents  at  the  Beatontion ;  and  died  May  8, 1662.  Hey- 
Ib  was  a  fierce  contiorerualist,  and  a  bitter  opponent 
of  the  Puritana,  and  through  theae  qualiŁiea  he  obtained 
his  various  rapid  preferment&  He  eren  went  so  far  in 
hb  oppoaition  to  Pnritanism  as  to  write  a  HUtory  oftke 
Saibaik,  Tindicating  the  employment  of  the  leisure  hoiuB 
and  erenings  of  the  Loid*s  day  in  sports  and  recreations. 
In  theokigy  he  was  an  Anumian  of  the  latitudinarian 
lort  (lee  his  Historia  Ofting-A  rtieularis,  1659).  His  £z- 
amn  Historicam  contained  an  attack  on  Thomas  Fuller 
which  brought  on  a  bitter  controvei8y  with  that  emi- 
neot  writer.  He  wrote  The  Bisiory  of  SUGeorge  and 
ofthe  Order  ofthe  Carter  (2d  edit  Lond.  1638, 4to)  :— 
Lodaia  ReMtanrata:  the  Uistory  of  tke  EngUsh  Re  for- 
tMiiom  (1674,  foL ;  new  edit.  by  Robertson,  Lond.  1849, 2 
voU.8vo)  i—SermoHM  (London,  1659, 4to)  :—Life  ofA  bp, 
laud  (Lond.  1&47,  foL;  seyeral  editions)  z—^riu»  Re- 
diriau,  a  Bisiory  oftke  Preabyterians  (2d  edit.  London, 
1672,  foL)  i-^Tkeobgia  Veteru7n,  on  tłie  AposUes'  Creed 
(Lond.  1673,  foL) ;  with  many  controversial  tracts,  etc 
Hii  life  łs  prefixed  to  the  Ecdetia  Bestaurata  (edit  of 
1^49).  See  Hook,  Ecdes.  Biog.  yi,  13  są. ;  Allibone,  Dic- 
tionary  of  A  utkors,  i,  838. 

Heylyn,  Joim,  D.D.,  an  eminent  EngUsh  diyine  and 
prebeodaryofWestminster.  He  was  deeply  read  in  the 
Mystic  diyincs,  and  was  himself  called  **  the  Mystic  doc- 
tor." Ile  died  about  1760,  leaying  Theological  Leetures 
at  WeMŁmmster  Abbey  (Lond.  1749-61,  2  yols.  4to),  oon- 
tłining  an  « interpretation  of  the  New  Test.  :*'— fermów 
(l770,12mo):_/>uoot(rM«(1798,2yols.8vo).  SeeBlack- 
wood,  Magazime,  xzy,  88 ;  Allibone,  JHcCiomry  ofAu^ 
(&or«,  i,  888. 

IV.— P 


Hejrwood,  Outeb,  an  Engliah  Nonoonfomlist  di- 
yine, waa  bom  at  Bolton,  1629,  and  admitted  at  Trinity, 
Cambridge,  1647.  He  became  zector  at  Ha]ifax  in  1652, 
and  was  depriyed  at  the  Bestoration.  After  much  suf- 
fering  from  poyerty,  he  died  in  1702.  His  writings  on 
practical  religion  were  quite  numerons,  and  may  be 
found  in  his  Whole  Works  now  first  coUeOed  (Idle,  1827, 
5  yol&  8vo).  See  alao  Hunter,  Ltfe  ofHeywood  (Lond. 
1844, 8yo). 

Hes'eki  (Heb.  Chizki',  "łpytl,  strong;  Sept.  'ACa- 
ict),  one  ofthe  ^^sons"  of  Elpaal,  a  chief  Benjamite  resi- 
dent  at  Jerusalem  (1  (^hron.  yiii,  17).  B.C.  apparently 
cir.  598. 

Heselci^ah  (Heb.  Chizkiyah',  Sn^j^m,  whom  Jeho- 
rak  kas  sirengikemed,  2  Kings  xviii,  1, 10, 14, 15, 16;  1 
Chion.  iii,  28;  Neh.  vii,  21 ;  Proy.  xxy,  1;  "Hizkiah," 
Neb.  X,  17 ;  Zeph.  i,  1 ;  also  in  the  proethetic  form  Ye- 
ckiekiyak',  ^l^ptlT*,  Ezia  ii,  16;  Hos.  i,  1 ;  Micah  i,  1 ; 
elsewhere  in  the  prolonged  fomi  Ckizkiya'hu,  ilH^ptn 
[in  2  Kings  xx,  10;  1  Chroń,  iy,  41;  2  Chroń.  xxyiii, 
27;  xxix,  1,  20,  80,  81, 36;  xxx,  1, 18,  20,  22;  xxxi,  2, 
8,  9, 11, 18,  20;  xxxu,  2,  8,  9, 11, 12, 16, 17,  20,  22,  23, 
24,  25,  26,  27,  80,  82,  83;  xxxiii,  8 ;  Isa.  i,  1 ;  Jćr.  xy, 
4,  it  is  both  prosthetic  and  prolonged,  Yechizkiya'httf 
iinjf?  m;'] ;  Sept.,  Joeephus,  and  N.  Test  'E^«tat),  the 
name  of  four  men.    See  also  Jkhizkiah. 

1.  The  thirteenth  king  (reckoning  Athaliah)  of  the 
aeparate  kingdom  of  Judidi,  son  of  Ahaz  and  Abi  or  Abi- 
jah  (2  Kings  xyiii,  2 ;  2  Chroń,  xxix,  1),  bom  B.C.  751- 
750  (2  Kings  xviii,  2),  and  his  father's  succeaaor  on.  the 
throne  for  twenty-nine  years,  B.C.  726-697.  In  both 
the  above  text8  he  is  stated  to  haye  been  twenty-fiye 
years  old  at  his  accession ;  but  some,  oomputing  (from  a 
compariflon  with  2  Chroń,  xxviii,  1)  that  Ahaz  died  at 
the  age  of  thirty-six,  make  Hezekiah-only  twenty  years 
old  at  his  accession  (reading  D  for  tlS),  as  otherwise  he 
would  haye  been  bom  when  Ahaz  was  a  boy  deyen 
years  old.  This,  indeed,  is  not  impoeńble  (Hieron.  Ep, 
ad  YOalem,  132,  quoted  by  Bochart,  Geogr,  Baer,  p.  920; 
see  Keil  on  2  Kings  xyiii,  1 ;  Knobel,  Jes,  p.  22,  etc.) ; 
but  others  suppose  that  Akaz  was  twenty-fiye  and  not 
twenty  years  old  at  his  aocesaion  (Sept.,  Syr.,  Arab.,  2 
C^ron.  xxyiii,  1),  reading  HS  for  3  in  2  Kings  xyi,  2. 
Neither  of  these  suppositions,  however,  is  necessary,  for 
Ahaz  was  fifty  years  old  at  his  death,  and  the  datę  there 
giyen  of  the  accession  of  Ahaz  is  simply  that  of  his 
yiceroyship  or  association  with  his  father.    See  Ahaz. 

The  history  of  Hezekiah'8  reign  is  contained  in  2 
Kings  xviii,  20 ;  Isa.  xxxvi-xxxix,  and  2  CJhron.  xxix- 
xxxii,  illustrated  by  contemporaiy  prophecies  of  Isaiah 
and  Micah.  He  is  represented  as  a  great  and  good  king 
(2  Kings  xviii,  5,  6),  who  set  himself,  immediately  on 
his  accession,  to  abolish  idolatiy,  and  restore  the  worship 
ofJehovah,  which  had  been  neglected  doring  the  care- 
less  and  idolatrous  reign  of  his  father.  This  consecm- 
tion  was  accompanied  by  a  revival  of  the  theocratic 
spirit,  so  strict  as  not  even  to  spare  '^the  high  places," 
which,  though  tolerated  by  many  well-intentioned  kings, 
had  naturally  been  profaned  by  the  worship  of  images 
and  Asherahs  (2  Kings  xviii,  4).  On  the  extremc  im- 
portance  and  probable  cpn8equence8  of  this  measure,  see 
Hioii  Place.  A  still  morę  dccisiye  act  was  the  de- 
stroction  of  a  brazen  serpent,  sald  to  have  been  the  one 
used  by  Moses  in  the  miracolous  healing  ofthe  Ismelites 
(Nmnb.  xxi,  9),  which  had  been  remored  to  Jerusalem, 
and  had  become,  **  down  to  those  days,"  an  object  of  ad- 
oration,  partly  in  conseąuence  of  its  yenerable  character 
as  a  relic,  and  partly,  perhaps,  from  some  dim  tendcnciea 
to  the  ophiolatry  common  in  ancient  times  (Ewald,  Gesck, 
iii,  622).  To  break  up  a  figurę  so  curious  and  so  highly 
honored  showed  a  strong  mind  as  well  as  a  clear-sighted 
zeal,  and  Hezekiah  briefiy  justiiied  his  procedurę  by  call- 
ing  the  image  '}rtdna,"a  brazen  thing,"  possibly  with 
a  contemptuous  play  on  the  word  ĆHS,  **a  serpent." 


HEZEEIAH 


226 


HEZEEIAH 


How  neoenaiy  this  was  in  soch  times  may  be  infened 
from  the  fact  that  ^  Łhe  bnzen  serpent  is,  or  waa,  rever- 
enced  in  the  Chmch  of  St  AmbroM  at  Milan  (Prideaiuc, 
Comwef.  i,  19,  Oxf.  ed.).  The  histoiy  of  this  Reforma- 
tion,  of  which  2  Kinga  xviii,  4  8q.  givcs  ooly  a  conoBe 
fommai^T}  iB  copioiuly  related,  from  Łhe  Leritieal  point 
of  view,  in  2  Chroń.  xzix  8q.  It  commenced  with  the 
deanńng  of  the  Tempie  "in  the  fint  month"  of  Heae- 
kiah^s  fint  year,  L  e.  in  the  month  Nisan  next  ailer  his 
aocesńon,  and  was  foUowed  in  the  next  month  (because 
at  the  regtdar  season  neither  Leyites  nor  Tempie  were 
in  a  due  state  of  prepantion)  by  a  great  Passorer,  ex- 
tended  to  fourteen  days,  to  which  not  only  all  Judah  was 
summoned,  but  also  the  "  remnant"  of  the  Ten  Tribes, 
some  of  whom  aooepted  the  invitation.  Some  writen 
(as  Jahn,  Keil,  and  Caspari)  contend  that  this  passorer 
mnst  haye  been  aubseąuent  to  the  fafl  of  Samaria,  ałleg- 
ing  that  the  mention  of  the  "remnant"  (2  Chroń,  xxx, 
6)  is  unsuitable  to  an  earlier  period,  and  that,  while  the 
kingdom  of  Samaria  still  snbeisted.  HeBekiah'8  messen- 
gen  would  not  have  been  suffered  to  pass  throogh  the 
land,  much  less  would  the  destruction  of  the  high  places 
in  Ephraim  and  Manasseh  have  been  peimitted  (xxxi, 
1).  fiat  the  intention  of  the  chronicler  at  least  is  plain 
enoogh :  the  connection  of  xxix,  17, '^  the  fint  month," 
with  xxx,  2,  ^  the  seoond  month,"*  admits  of  but  one  eon- 
stinction— that  both  are  meant  to  belong  to  one  and  the 
same  year,  the  fint  of  the  reign.  Accordingly,  Thenius, 
in  the  Kgf.  exeff.  Hdb.  2  Kings,  p.  879,  uiges  this  as  an 
argument  against  the  historical  character  of  the  whole 
narrative  of  this  pasBorer,  which,  he  thinks, "  rendered 
antecedently  improbable  by  the  ^ence  of  the  Book  of 
Kinga,  is  perhaps  completely  refuted  by  2  Kings  xxiii, 
22.  The  author  of  the  story,  wishing  to  place  in  the 
strongest  light  IIezekiah*s  zeal  for  religion,  represents 
Atm,  not  Josiah,  as  the  restorer  of  the  Paasover  after  long 
desuetude,  and  this  in  the  very  beginning  of  his  reign, 
without,  perhaps,  caring  to  reflect  that  the  finał  depoita- 
tion  of  the  Ten  Tribes,  implied  in  xxx,  6,  had  not  then 
taken  place."  But  2  Kinga  xxiii,  22,  taken  in  connec- 
tion, as  it  onght  to  be,  with  the  preceding  yene,  is  per- 
fectly  compatible  with  the  acoount  in  the  Chronidee. 
It  aays:  **  Sardy  tuch  a  PasM)ver^— one  kept  in  all  re- 
apects  *<  as  it  is  written  in  the  Book  of  the  Coyenant'*^ 
''was  not  holden  iiom  the  time  of  the  Judge8,"etc: 
whereas  Hezekiah*s  Passoyer,  thoagh  kept  with  eyen 
greater  joy  and  fenror  than  Josiah^s,  was  hdd  neither  at 
the  appointed  season,  nor  in  strict  oonformity  with  the 
law.  Nor  is  it  neoessary  to  suppoee  that  by  **  the  rem- 
nant"  the  chronider  undentood  those  who  were  left  by 
Shahnaneser.  Bather,  his  yiew  is,  that  the  people  of  the 
Ten  Tribes,  untaught  by  the  judgments  brought  upon 
them  by  former  reyerses  and  pardal  deportations  (un- 
der  Tiglath-Pileser),  with  lespect  to  which  they  might 
weU  be  called  a  ''remnant'*  (comp.the  yery  similar  tenns 
in  which  eyen  Judah  is  spoken  of,  xxxix, 8, 9),  and  scora- 
fully  rejecting  the  last  cali  to  repentanoe,  brought  upon 
themsdyes  their  finał  judgment  and  complete  oyerthrow 
(Bertheau,  Kgf,  exeg.  Hdb,  2  Chroń.  p.  895  8q.).  Those, 
howei-er,  of  the  Ten  Tribes  who  had  taken  part  in  the 
solemnity  were  thereby  (such  is  eyidently  the  chroni- 
der^s  yiew  of  the  matter,  xxxi,  1)  inąured  with  a  zeal 
for  the  true  religion  which  enabled  them,  on  their  return 
home,  in  defiance  of  all  opposition  on  the  part  of  the 
soomen  or  of  Hoehea,  to  effect  a  destraction  of  the  high 
places  and  altan  in  Ephraim  and  Manasseh,  as  complete 
as  was  effected  in  Jenisalem  before,  and  in  Judah  after 
the  Passoyer. 

That  this  prudent  and  pious  king  was  not  defident  in 
military  ąualities  is  shown  by  his  successes  against  the 
Philistines,  seemingly  in  the  early  part  of  his  reign,  be- 
fore the  oyerthrow  of  Sennacheiib  (2  Kings  xyii],  8),  and 
by  the  cffident  measures  taken  by  him  for  the  defence 
of  Jenisalem  against  the  Assyrians.  Hezekiah  also  as- 
dduously  cultiyated  the  arts  of  peaoe,  and  by  wise  man- 
agement  of  finance,  and  the  attention  which,  after  the 
nple  of  Dayid  and  Uzziah,  he  paid  to  agriculture 


and  the  increase  of  fiocks  and  herds,  he  became  ] 
ed,  eyen  in  troubled  times,  of  an  ample  exdieqaer  and 
treasores  of  wealth  (2  Chroń,  xxxii,  27-29 ;  2  Kinga  xx, 
18;  l8a.xxxix,2).  Himaelf  a  sacred  poet,  and  pnb*- 
Uy  the  author  of  other  pealms  besides  that  in  lao. 
xxxyiii,  he  secms  to  haye  collectedthe  psalms  of  Dayid 
and  Asaph  for  the  Tempie  wocship,  and  cenainly  era- 
ployed  oompetent  scribes  to  complete  the  oallection  of 
Solonion's  Proyetbs  (Proy.  xxy,  1).  He  appean  also  to 
haye  taken  order  for  the  presenration  of  geneałogical 
reconis  (Browne,  Retiew  ofLepthu  on  Libie  Cknmole^f 
in  Amold's  Tkeologiccd  CriHe,  i,  69  8q.). 

By  a  rare  and  happy  proyidence,  this  most  pioos  of 
kings  was  confirmed  in  his  faithfulness  and  seoonded  in 
his  endeayon  by  the  powerful  assistance  of  the  nobleat 
and  most  doąoent  of  prophets.  The  influence  of  Isaiah 
was,  howeyer,  not  gained  without  a  strugglc  with  the 
"scomful**  remnant  of  the  former  royal  counselon  (laa. 
xxyiii,  14),  who  in  all  probability  recommended  to  the 
king  such  alliances  andcompromises  as  would  be  in  oni- 
son  ratber  with  the  dictates  of  political  expediency  than 
with  that  sole  unhesitating  tnist  in  the  arm  of  Jehoyah 
which  the  prophets  inculcated.  The  leading  man  of 
this  csbinet  was  Shebna,  who,  from  the  omission  of  his 
father's  name,  and  the  expre8sion  in  Isa.  xxii,  16  (see 
Blunt,  Cndes,  Coincidences),  was  probably  a  foreigner, 
perhaps  a  Syrian  (Hitzig).  At  the  instance  of  Isaiah, 
he  secms  to  haye  been  subseąuently  degraded  from  the 
high  post  of  prefect  of  the  palące  (which  office  was  giyen 
to  Eliakim,  Isa.  xxii,  21),  to  the  inferior,  though  stiU 
honorable  station  of  state  Becretary(*^Bb,2  Kings  xyiii, 
18) ;  the  further  ponisbment  of  exile  with  which  Isaiah 
had  threatened  him  (xxii,  18)  being  possibly  foiigiyen 
on  his  amendment,  of  which  we  haye  some  traoes  in 
Isa.  xxxyii,  sq.  (Ewald,  Gttck.  iii,  617). 

At  the  head  of  a  repentant  and  united  people,  Heae- 
Idah  yentured  to  assume  the  aggre8R\'e  against  łhe 
Philistines,  and  in  a  series  of  yictories  not  only  rewon 
the  cities  which  his  father  had  lost  (2  Chroń.  xxyiii, 
18),  but  eyen  disposMSsed  them  of  thdr  own  cities  ex- 
cept  Gaza  (2  Kings  xyiii,  8)  and  Gath  (Joeephos,  Ant. 
ix,  18, 8).  It  was  perhaps  to  the  purpoees  of  tbia  war 
that  he  applied  the  money  which  would  otherwise  haye 
been  osed  to  pay  the  tribute  exacted  by  Shalmaneser, 
according  to  the  agreement  of  Ahac  with  his  predeoes- 
sor,  Tiglath-Pileser.  When  the  king  of  Assyria  applied 
for  this  impost,  Hezekiah  refosed  it,  and  omitted  to  send 
eyen  the  usual  presents  (2  Kings  xyiii,  7),  a  linę  of 
conduct  to  which  he  does  not  appear  to  ha%*e  been  en- 
connged  by  any  exhortations  of  his  prophetic  guide. 

Instant  war  was  ayerted  by  the  heroic  and  long-con- 
tinued  resistance  of  the  Tyrians  under  their  king  Ehi- 
loeus  (Josephus,  A  nt,  ix,  14),  against  a  dege,  which  was 
abandoned  only  in  the  fifth  year  (Grotę,  ó^rmr,  iii,  859, 
4th  edit.),  when  it  was  found  to  be  impracticable.  This 
must  have  been  a  critical  and  intensdy  anxioas  period 
for  Jenisalem,  and  Hezekiah  used  eyeiy  ayallaUe  means 
to  strengthen  his  poeition,  and  rendcr  his  capital  im- 
pregnable  (2  Kinga  xx,  20 ;  2  Chnm.  xxxii,  8-6, 30;  Isa. 
xxii,  8-11 ;  xxxiii,  18;  and  to  these  eyents  Ewald  alro 
refers,  Psa.  xlyiii,  18).  But  while  all  Jndsa  tremUed 
¥rith  antidpation  of  Aseyrian  inyasion,  and  while  Sheb- 
na and  othen  were  rdying  "in  the  shadow  of  Egypt,** 
l8aiah's  braye  heart  did  not  fail,  and  hc  eyen  denounced 
the  wrath  of  God  against  the  proud  and  sinful  merchant- 
city  (Isa.  xxiii),  which  now  seemed  to  be  the  main  bol- 
wark  of  Judsa  against  immediate  attack. 

At  what  time  it  was  that  Hezekiah  **  rebelled  against 
the  king  of  Assyria,  and  seryed  him  not,"  we  do  not 
leam  from  the  direct  histoiy :  in  the  brief  summazy,  2 
Kinga  xyiii,  7, 8  (for  such  it  dearly  is),  of  the  successes 
with  which  the  Lord  prospered  him,  that  particular 
statement  only  introduces  what  is  niore  fully  detailed 
in  the  sequel  (xyiii,  18 ;  xix,  87).  That  it  preoedes  the 
notice  of  the  oyerthrow  of  Samaria  (yer.  9  8q.),  does  not 
warzant  the  inference  that  the  assertion  of  indq>endeDce 


HEZEEIAH 


227 


HEZEEIAH 


bdooi^  to  the  evlie8t  yean  of  HeKekiah*8  leign  (see  Wi- 
ner,  Reai-  WorUrb,  \,  497,  n.  2).  Ewald,  however,  thinks 
otherwue:  in  the  absenoe  of  direcŁ  evldenoe,  making 
hBtorj,  aa  hia  manner  ia,  out  of  his  oym  peremptozy  in- 
teipretatłon  of  certain  paasages  of  Isaiah  (eh.  i  and  xxii, 
1-14),  he  informs  us  that  Hezekiah,  holding  hia  kingdom 
absolred  by  the  death  of  Ahaz  fiom  the  obligationa  con- 
tractcd  with  Tighah-Pileser,  prepared  himadf  from  the 
fiisŁ  to  Rsiat  the  demanda  of  Aasyria,  and  pat  Jeniaalem 
in  a  atate  of  defenoe.  (It  matten  not  to  Ewald  that  the 
measurea  ooted  in  2  Kinga  xx,  20 ;  2  Chroń,  xxxii,  8-5, 
90,  aie  in  the  latter  paaaage  expre88l7  aasigned  to  the 
time  of  Sennacherib*8  adirance  upon  Jenualem.)  "  From 
Shalmaneaer^a  hoata  at  that  time  atationed  in  Fhoenicia 
and  elsewbere  in  the  neighborhood  of  Jadah,  forcea  were 
detached  which  laid  waste  the  land  in  aU  direcdons :  au 
aimy  aent  against  them  from  Jcmaalem,  aeized  with  panic 
at  tlie  aight  of  the  miwonted  enemy,  took  to  fiight,  and, 
Jeraaaiem  now  iying  helplessly  expo8ed,  a  peace  was 
ocmchided  in  all  hastę  upon  the  stipulation  of  a  yeariy 
tribate,  and  the  ignominioos  deliyenuice  was  celebrated 
with  feastings  in  Jerusalem"  (Gesch,  des  V,  Iwrady  iii,  330 
aq.) :  all  of  which  rests  upon  the  suppodtion  that  £w- 
ald'8  interpretation  of  Isa.  i,  22  is  the  only  possible  one : 
it  cannot  be  aaid  to  be  on  record  aa  histor}'. 

kA  gmthered  from  the  Scriptare*  onŁy^  the  couiae  of 
event8  appeais  to  liave  been  as  foliowa:  Ahaz  had  plaoed 
his  kingdom  as  tributary  under  the  protection  of  Tig- 
lath-Pileser  (2  Kinga  xvi,  7).  It  would  seem  from  laa. 
X,  27,  and  xxviii,  22,  that  in  the  time  of  Shalmaneser, 
to  which  the  latter  paasage  certainly,  and  the  former 
probably,  belonga,  Judah  was  atill  under  the  yoke  of  this 
dependence.  The  fact  that  Saigon  (whether  or  not  the 
aame  with  the  Shalmanefler  of  the  histoiy),  in  his  expe- 
dition  against  EgTpt,  lefl  Judah  ontouched  (laa.  xx), 
impLiea  that  Judah  had  not  yet  aaserted  its  indepen- 
dence.  A  powerful  party,  indeed,  was  acheming  for  le- 
▼ok  from  Aasyria  and  a  league  with  Egypt;  but  thero 
appears  no  rcaaon  to  believe  that  Hezekiah  all  along  fa- 
Tored  a  policy  which  Isaiah  in  the  name  of  the  Lord,  to 
the  last,  strenuously  oondemned.  It  was  not  till  after 
the  acoeasion  of  Sennacherib  that  Hezekiah  refused  the 
tribate,  and  at  the  inatigation  of  hia  nobles  madę  a 
leagttc  with  Egypt  by  ambasadora  aent  to  Zoan  (Tania) 
(laa.  xxx,  xxxi ;  compare  xxxvi,  6-9).  (Some,  indeed 
[as  Ewald  and  Caapari],  place  Isa.  xxix-xxxii  before 
the  fali  of  Samaria,  to  which  time  eh.  xxviii  muat  un- 
ąueationably  be  assigned.  Possibly  eh.  xxix  may  be- 
long  to  the  aame  time,  and  yer.  15  may  refer  to  plottings 
for  a  league  with  Egypt  already  carriod  on  in  aecret. 
Knobel,  Kgf.  exeg,  Ildb.  p.  215,  223,  decidea  too  peremp- 
torUy  that  auch  muMt  be  the  reference,  and  conseąuently 
that  eh.  xxix  ialls  only  a  little  earlier  than  the  follow- 
ing  chapters,  where  the  league  is  openly  denounced,  viz. 
in  the  early  part  of  the  reign  of  Sennacherib.) 

The  auba»iuent  history,  as  gathered  from  the  Scrip- 
tnrea,  compared  with  the  notices  on  the  ancient  monu- 
menta,  is  thought  to  be  aa  follo¥rH.  Sargon  was  suc- 
ceeded  by  hia  son  Sennacherib,  whose  two  invasions 
occopy  the  greater  part  of  the  Scripture  recorda  con- 
ceming  the  reign  of  Hezekiah.  The  flrat  of  theae  took 
place  in  the  third  year  of  Sennacherib,  and  occupies  only 
three  yersea  (2  Kinga  xviii,  13-16),  though  the  route  of 
tJie  advancing  Asa^riana  may  be  traoed  in  laa.  x,  5 ;  xL 
Tbe  rumor  of  the  invaaion  redoubled  Hezekiah'a  exer- 
tiona,  and  he  prepared  for  a  aiege  by  providing  offenaive 
and  defenńre  armor,  stopping  up  the  wells,  and  divert- 
ing  the  watercouraes,  conducting  the  water  of  Gihon 
inio  the  city  by  a  subtenranean  canal  (Ecdus.  xlviii,  17. 
For  a  similar  precauUon  taken  by  the  Mohammedana, 
aee  WilL  Tyr.  viii,  7,  Keil).  But  the  roain  hope  of  the 
political  faction  waa  the  alliance  yrith  Egypt,  and  they 
aeem  to  liave  aought  it  by  preaenta  and  private  entreat- 
iea  (Isa.  xxx,  6),  especially  with  a  view  to  obtaining 
diariota  and  caralry  (laa.  xxxi,  1-3),  which  was  the 
wcakest  arm  of  the  Jewish  aenuce,  aa  we  aee  from  the 
deiiaion  which  it  excited  (2  Kinga  xviii,  23).    Such 


oyertores  kindled  Iaaiah'a  indignation,  and  Shebna  may 
have  lost  hia  high  offioe  for  recommending  them.  The 
prophet  dearly  aaw  that  Egypt  waa  too  weak  and  faith- 
less  10  be  sernceable,  and  the  applications  to  Pharaoh 
(who  is  compared  by  Kabshakeh  to  one  of  the  weak 
reeds  of  his  own  river)  implied  a  want  of  trust  in  the 
help  of  God.  But  Isaiah  did  not  diaapprove  of  the  apon- 
taneously  proffered  aaałatanoe  of  the  tali  and  warlike 
Ethiopians  (laa.  xyiii,  2, 7,  acc  to  £wald'8  tranaL),  be- 
cauae  he  may  have  regaided  it  aa  a  providential  aid. 

The  account  given  of  thia  firat  inyaaion  in  the  cunei- 
form  '^  Annala  of  Sennacherib"  ia  that  he  attacked  Heze- 
kiah because  the  Ekronitea  had  aent  their  king  Padiya 
(or  "  Haddiya,"  acc  to  GoL  Rawlinson)  aa  a  priaoner  to 
Jeniaalem  (oomp.  2  Kinga  xyiii,  8) ;  that  he  took  forty- 
8ix  cities  (*^  aU  the  fenoed  cities"  in  2  Kinga  xviii,  18  is 
apparently  a  generał  expreasion ;  compare  xix,  8)  and 
200,000  prisonera;  that  he  besieged  Jerusalem  with 
mounds  (oomp.  2  Kinga  xix,  82) ;  and  although  Heze- 
kiah promiaed  to  pay  800  talents  of  silyer  (of  which  per- 
hapa  only  800  were  ever  paid)  and  30  of  gold  (2  Kinga 
xviii,  14;  but  aee  Layaid,  Nin,  and  Bab,  p.  148),  yet, 
not  coutent  with  thia,  he  mulcted  him  of  a  part  of  his 
dominiona,  and  gave  them  to  the  kings  of  Ekron,  Aab- 
dod,  and  Gaza  (Rawlinson,  Nerod,  i,  476  są.).  So  im- 
portant  was  thia  expedition  that  Demetrius,  the  Jewish 
historian,  even  attributes  to  Sennacherib  the  Gieat 
Gaptiyity  (aem.  Alexand.  Strom,  \x  147,  ed.  Sylb.).  In 
almost  every  particuUur  this  account  agrees  with  the 
notice  in  Scripture,  and  we  may  see  a  reason  for  ao  great 
a  aacriflce  on  the  part  of  Hezekiah  in  the  glimpee  which 
laaiah  give8  ua  of  hia  capital  city  driven  by  deaperation 
into  licentioua  and  impious  mirth  (xxii,  12-14).  This 
campaign  must  at  least  have  had  the  one  good  reault  of 
proving  the  worthleesness  of  the  £g3rptian  alliance;  for 
at  a  place  called  Altagii  (the  Eltekon  of  Josh.  xv,  59?) 
Sennacherib  infiicted  an  overwhelming  defeat  on  the 
combined  forces  of  Egypt  and  Ethiopia,  which  had  come 
to  the  assistance  of  Ekron.  But  laaiah  regarded  the 
purchased  treaty  aa  a  oowardly  defection,  and  the  sight 
of  his  feUow-citizens  gazing  peacefully  from  the  house- 
tops  on  the  bright  array  of  the  car-bome  and  quivered 
Aasyrians  fiUed  him  with  indignation  and  despiur  (Isa. 
xxii,  1-7,  if  the  latest  explanations  of  this  chapter  be 
correct). 

Hezekiah'8  bribe  (or  fine)  brought  a  temporaiy  re- 
lease,  for  the  Aaayriana  marohed  into  Egypt,  where,  if 
Herodotus  (ii,  14i)  and  Joaephus  (^AnLiiy  1-3)  aro  to  bo 
tnisted,  they  advanced  without  reaistanoe  to  Pelusium, 
owing  to  the  hatred  of  the  wairior-caste  agunst  Sethoa, 
the  king-priest  of  Pthah,  who  had,  in  his  priestly  predi- 
lectiona,  interfered  with  their  prerogative8.  In  spite  of 
this  advantage,  Sennacherib  was  forced  to  nuse  the 
aiege  of  Pelusium,  by  the  advance  of  Tirhakah  or  Tara- 
kos,  the  ally  of  Sethoa  and  Hezekiah,  who  afterwards 
united  the  crowns  of  Egypt  and  Ethiopia.  This  mag- 
nilicent  Ethiopian  hero,  who  had  extended  hia  oonquest8 
to  the  PSHars  of  Hercules  (Strabo,  xv,  472),  was  indeed 
a  formidable  antagoniat  Hia  deeda  are  recorded  in  a 
tempie  at  Medinet-Abu,  but  the  jealouay  of  the  Mem- 
phitea  (Wilkinson,  Anc,  EgypL  i,  141)  conoealed  his  as- 
sistance, and  attributed  the  deliveranoe  of  Sethos  to  the 
miraculous  interposition  of  an  army  of  mice  (Herod,  ii, 
141).  This  story  may  have  had  its  source,  liowever, 
not  in  jealouay,  but  in  the  uae  of  a  mouse  as  the  emblem 
of  deatruction  (Horapoll.  HierogL  i,  50;  Rawlinaon,  /fe- 
rod,  ad  loc),  and  of  some  aort  of  diaease  or  plague  (?  1 
Sam.  vi,  18;  Jahn,  Ardi,  BibL  §  185).  The  legend 
doubtless  gained  ground  from  the  extraordinary  circum- 
atance  which  ruined  the  army  of  Sennacherib. 

Ketuming  from  hia  fuŁile  expedition  (^atrpaKroc  ayt^ 
X(tfp>7<r«,  Joaephua,  Ant,  x,  1,  4),  Sennacherib  ''dealt 
treacheroualy"  with  Hezekiah  (laa.  xxxiii,  1)  by  attack- 
ing  the  atronghold  of  Lachiah.  Thia  waa  the  oommence- 
ment  of  that  teoond  invasion,  respecting  which  we  have 
such  fuli  detaila  m  2  Kinga  xviii,  17  aq. ;  2  Chroń,  xxxii, 
9  aq. ;  laa.  xxxvL    That  there  were  two  invasioiia  (eon* 


HEZEEIAH 


228 


H£Z£EIAH 


tnry  to  the  opuiion  of  Łayard,  BosanąuetfYance  Smith, 
etc)  is  clearly  prored  by  the  details  of  the  fint  giveii 
in  the  ABsyrum  annalB  (see  RawUnsoD,  Herod,  i,  477). 
Although  the  arnials  of  Sennacheiib  on  the  gieat  cylin- 
der in  the  Bńtish  Muflenm  reach  to  the  end  of  his  eighik 
year,  and  this  aeoond  inyasion  belonga  to  his  fiflh  year, 
yet  no  aUosion  to  it  has  been  found.  So  shamdiil  a 
disaster  was  naturally  concealed  by  national  yanity. 
From  TjiichiHh  he  sent  againsŁ  Jenualem  an  army  under 
two  offlceis  and  his  cup-bearer,  the  orator  Rabshakeh, 
with  a  blaophemoofl  and  inaulting  summons  to  surren- 
der,  deriding  Hezekiah'8  hopee  of  Egyptian  succor,  and 
apparently  endeayoiing  to  inspire  the  people  with  dis- 
trost  of  his  religious  innovations  (2  Kinga  xyiii|  22, 25, 
80).  The  reiteration  and  pecoliarity  of  the  latter  argu- 
ment, together  with  RabBhakeh'8  fluent  masteiy  of  He- 
brew  (which  he  used  to  tempt  the  people  from  their 
allegiance  by  a  glowing  promise,  ver.  81, 82),  giye  coun- 
tenanoe  to  the  supposition  that  he  was  an  apostatę  Jew. 
Hezekiah'8  ministers  were  thrown  into  anguish  and  dis- 
may;  but  the  undauuted  Isaiah  hurled  back  threaten- 
ing  for  thieateniug  with  unriyaDed  eloquence  and  foice. 
He  eyen  propheried  that  the  firea  of  Tophet  were  al- 
ready  buming  in  expectancy  of  the  Assyrian  corpses 
which  were  destined  to  feed  their  flame.  Meanwhile 
Sennacherib,  haying  taken  Lachish  (an  eyent  poaaibly 
depicted  on  a  series  of  slabs  at  Mosul,  Łayard,  NiMu  and 
Bab.  p.  148>152),  was  besieging  libnah,  when,  alarmed 
by  a  "rumor''  of  Tirhakah*8  advance  (to  ayenge  the  de- 
feat  at  Altagii?),  he  was  forced  to  relinąuish  once  morę 
his  immediate  designs,  and  content  himaelf  with  a  defi- 
ant  letter  to  Hezekiah.  Whether  on  the  occasion  he 
encountered  and  defeated  the  Ethiopians  (as  Frideaux 
precariously  infers  from  Isa.  xx,  Cotmect.  i,  26),  or  not, 
we  cannot  teU.  The  next  eyent  of  the  campaign  about 
which  we  aie  informed  is  that  the  Jewish  king,  with 
simple  piety,  prayed  to  God  with  Sennacherib'8  letter 
outspread  before  him  (comp.  1  Mace  iii,  48),  and  recelyed 
a  promise  of  immediate  deli yerance.  Accordingly  *^  that 
night  the  angel  of  the  Lord  went  out  and  smote  in  the 
camp  of  the  Assyrians  185.000  men." 

There  is  no  doubt  that  some  secondary  cause  was 
employed  in  the  aocomplishment  of  this  eyent.  We  are 
certainly  **ttot  to  suppoae,"  as  Dr.  Johnson  obseryed, 
"that  the  angel  went  about  with  a  sword  in  his  hand 
stabbiug  them  one  by  one,  but  that  some  powerful  natu- 
ral  agent  was  employed."  The  Babylonish  Talmud  and 
some  of  the  Targums  attribute  it  to  storma  of  lightning 
(Yitringa,  Yogel,  etc);  Prideaux,  Heine  {De  causd 
Strąg.  Asayr.  BerL  1761),  Harmer,  and  Faber  to  the  si- 
moom ;  R.  Jose  (in  Seder  Olom  Rabba),  Marsham,  Ush- 
er,  Preisa  {De  causd  ckuL  Auyr,  Gottingen,  1776),  to  a 
uoctumal  attack  by  Tirhakah;  Paulus  to  a  poisoning 
of  the  waters ;  and,  finally,  Josephus  (>4  n/.  x,  1, 4  and  5), 
foUowed  by  an  immense  majority  of  ancient  and  modem 
oommentators  (induding  Michaelis,  Doderlein,  Dathe, 
Heusler,  Bauer,  Ditmar,  Gesenius,  Maurer,  Knobel,  etc, 
and  eyen  Keil),  to  the  pestilenoe  (compare  2  Sam.  xxiy, 
15, 16).  This  would  be  a  cause  not  oiily  adequate  (Jus- 
tin,  xix,  11 ;  Diodor.  xix,  484;  see  the  other  instances 
ąnoted  by  RosenmUller,  Keil,  Jahn,  etc),  but  most  prob- 
able  in  itself,  from  the  crowded  and  terrifled  state  of  the 
camp.  There  is,  therefore,  no  necessity  to  adopt  the  in- 
genious  oonjectures  by  which  Doderlein,  Kopi^e,  and 
Wessler  eudeayor  to  get  rid  of  the  large  number  185,000. 
It  is  not  said  where  the  eyent  occurred:  the  prophe- 
cies  conceming  it,  Isa.  x~xxxyii,  seem  to  denote  the 
\  neighborhood  of  Jenisalem,  as  would  Psa.  lxx\4,  if  it 
was  written  at  that  time.  On  the  other  hand,  the  nar- 
latiye  would  probably  haye  been  fuUer  had  the  oyer- 
throw,  with  its  attendant  opportunities  of  beholding  the 
bodies  of  their  dreaded  enemies  and  of  gathering  great 
spoil,  befallen  near  Jenisalem,  or  eyen  within  the  imme- 
diate limits  of  Judah.  That  yerńon  of  the  story  which 
reached  Herodotus  (ii,  140) — for  few  after  Josephus  will 
hołd  with  Ewald  {Gesch.  iii,  836)  that  the  story  is  not 
aubstantially  the  same^indicates  the  fiontier  of  Egypt, 


near  Pclusium,  as  the  scenę  of  the  disaster.  The  Assyr- 
ian army  would  probably  break  np  irom  Libnah  on  the 
tidings  of  Tirhakah^s  approach,  and  adyance  to  meet 
him.  In  ascribing  it  to  a  yast  swarm  of  field-mioe, 
which,  deyouring  the  quiyers  and  bow-strings  of  the 
Egyptians,  compelled  them  to  flee  in  the  moming,  He- 
rodotus may  haye  misinterpreted  the  symbolical  lan- 
guage  of  the  Egyptians,  in  which  the  mouse  denotes  an- 
nihilation  (ti^a vur/K>c,  HorapolL  i,  50) :  though,  as  Kno- 
bel (u.  ».  p.  280)  has  shown  by  appoeite  instances,  an 
army  of  mice  is  capable  of  committing  such  rayages,  and 
also  of  leaying  pe»tilence  behind  it.  That  the  destinc- 
tion  was  eifected  in  the  course  of  one  night  is  clearly 
expre8Bed  in  2  Kings  xix,  85,  where  "  that  night"  is 
phdnly  that  which  followed  after  the  deliyeiy  of  Isaiah'8 
prophecy,  and  is  eyidently  implied  alike  inisa.  xxxvi, 
36  ("when  men  arose  early  in  the  moming"),  and  in 
the  sto^-  of  Herodotus. 

After  this  reyerse  Sennacherib  fled  predpitately  to 
Nineyeh,  where  he  reyenged  himself  on  as  many  Jews 
as  were  in  his  power  (Tob.  i,  18),  and,  after  many  years 
(not  fifly-fiye  days,  as  Tobit  says,  i,  21),  was  murdercd 
by  two  of  his  sons  as  he  drank  himself  drunk  in  the 
hodse  of  Nisroch  (Assanu;  ?)  his  god.  He  certainly  liyed 
till  B.C.  695,  for  his  22d  year  is  mentioned  on  a  day 
tablet  (Rawltnson,  /L  c) ;  he  must  therefore  haye  sur- 
yiyed  Hezekiah  by  at  least  one  year.  It  is  probable 
that  seyeral  of  the  Psalms  (e.  g.  xlri-xlviii,  lxxyi) 
allude  to  his  discomfiture. 

"  In  those  days  was  Hezekiah  sick  nnto  dearK"  So 
begins,  in  all  the  accounts,  and  immediately  after  the 
discomfiture  of  Sennacherib,  the  narratiye  of  Hezekiah*8 
ńckness  and  miraculous  recoyery  (2  Kings  xx,  1 ;  2 
Chroń,  xxxii,  24 ;  Isa.  xxxyiii,  1).  The  time  is  defincd, 
by  the  promise  of  fifleen  years  to  be  added  to  the  lifc  of 
Hezekiah,  to  the  fourteenth  year  complete,  or  fiftccnth 
current,  of  his  reign  of  twenty-nine  years.  But  it  b 
stated  to  haye  been  in  the  fourteenth  year  of  Hezekiah 
that  Sennacherib  took  the  fenccd  cities  of  Judah,  and 
thereafter  threatencd  Jenisalem  and  camc  to  liis  oycr- 
throw.  The  two  notes  of  time,  the  express  and  the  im- 
plied, fully  accord,  and  place  beyond  question,  at  least,  the 
\'iew  of  the  writer  or  last  redactor  in  2  Kings  x\'iii,  xix ; 
Isa.  xxxyi,  xxxyii,  that  the  Assyrian  invasion  began 
before  Herókiah^s  illness,  and  lies  in  the  middle  of  his 
reign.  In  the  receiyed  chronology,  as  the  first  year  of 
Hezekiah  precedes  the  fourth  of  Jehoiakim= first  of 
Nebuchadnezzar  (L  c  B.C.  604  in  the  Canon,  B.a  606 
in  the  Hebrew  rcckoning)  by  29, 55, 2, 81, 8  =  120  years, 
the  epoch  of  the  reign  ts  B.C  724  or  726,  and  its  14th 
year  B.C.  711  or  713.  But  it  is  contended  that  so  early 
a  year  is  irreooncilable  ^'ith  definite  and  unąuestionable 
data  of  contemporary  histoiy,  Egyptian,  Assyrian,  and 
Babylonian.  From  these  it  has  be<m  inferred  that  dur- 
ing  the  siege  of  Samaria  Shalmancser  dicd,  and  was  suc- 
oeeded  by  Śargon,who,  jealous  of  Egyptian  influence  in 
Judsea,  sent  an  army  under  a  Tartan  or  generał  (Isa.  xx, 
1),  which  penetrated  Egypt  (Nah.  iii,  8-10)  and  destroy- 
ed  No-Amon ;  although  it  is  elear  from  Hezekiah^s  re- 
bellion  (2  Kings  xyiii,  7)  that  it  can  haye  produced  but 
little  permanent  Impression.  Sargon,  in  the  tenth  year 
of  his  reign  (which  is  regarded  as  parallel  with  the  four- 
teenth year  of  the  reign  of  Hezekiah),  madę  an  expedi- 
tion  to  Palestine ;  but  his  annals  make  no  mention  of 
any  oonquests  from  Hezekiah  on  this  occasion,  and  he 
seems  to  haye  occupied  himself  in  the  siege  of  Ashdod 
(Isa.  XX,  1),  and  in  the  irspection  of  mines  (BosenmOl- 
ler,  BiibL  Gt&gr.  ix).  This  is  therefore  thought  to  be 
the  expedition  referred  to  in  2  Kings  xyiii,  13;  Isa. 
xxxvi,  1 ;  an  •expedition  which  is  mo^y  aliuded  to,  as 
it  led  to  no  result.  But  if  the  Scripture  narratiye  is  to 
be  reconciled  with  the  records  of  Assyrian  history,  it 
has  been  thought  necessaiy  to  make  a  transposition  in 
the  text  of  Isaiah  (and  therefore  of  the  book  of  Kings). 
That  some  such  expedient  must  be  resorted  to,  if  the 
Assyrian  history  is  tnistworthy,  is  maiutained  by  Dr. 
Hincks  in  a  paper  On  the  rectificałion  ofCknmolog^ 


229 


HEZEKIAH 


vkkk  the  9ewfy-ducov€r9d  Apu-iteks  render  neoesiary 
(in  Jour,  o/Sac  LiL  Oct,  1858).  «  The  text,"  he  says, 
**a&  it  originally  stood,  was  piobably  to  this  effect  (2 
Kinga  XTiii,  13) :  Now  in  the  fourfceenth  year  of  king 
Hezekiah  t&e  idnę  ofAwyria  cctme  up  [alluding  to  the 
attack  mentioned  in  Saigon^s  **AnnaLB"J,  xx,  1>-19.  In 
thofle  days  was  king  Hezekiah  sick  unto  death,  etc., 
xyiii,  13.  And  Sennacheńb,  king  of  Asąyria,  came  up 
■gainst  all  the  fenced  cities  of  Judah,  and  took  them, 
etc^  xviii,  13 ;  xix,  37.**  It  haa  been  conjectored  that 
8ome  iater  transcriber,  imaware  of  the  earlier  and  nnim- 
{wrtant  invaaion,  oonfuaed  the  alliuion  to  Saigon  in  2 
Kinga  xviii,  13  with  the  detailed  sŁoiy  of  Sennacheńb'8 
attack  (2  iUngs  xviii,  14  to  xix,  87),  and,  considering 
that  the  acooant  of  Hezekiah^s  iUnesa  broke  the  continu- 
ity  of  the  nanatiye,  removed  it  to  the  end.  According 
to'  this  scbeme^  Hezekiah*8  dangeroua  iUneas  (2  Kinga 
xx;  Isa.  xxxviii;  2  Chroń,  xxxii,  24)  nearly  synchro- 
nized  with  Sargon*8  futile  invaaion,  in  the  fouiteenth 
year  of  Hezekiah*B  reign,  eleven  yeais  before  Seunache- 
rSft  invauon.  That  it  must  Ytaivt  prtceded  the  attack 
of  Sennacheńb  haa  also  been  inferred  from  the  promise 
in  2  Kinga  xx,  6,  aa  well  aa  from  modem  diflcoverie8 
(Łajard,  Nvu  and  Bqb.  i,  146) ;  and  such  is  the  view 
adopted  by  the  Rabbis  (Seder  Olam,  cap.  xxiii),  Uaher, 
aod  by  moat  commentaton,  except  Yitńnga  and  Geae- 
nitts  (Keil,  ad  loc.;  Prideaux,  i,  22).  .  It  ahould  be  ob- 
aenred,  however,  that  the  difficulties  experienGed  in  lec- 
ondlii^  the  scńptural  datę  with  that  of  the  Ajafl3rTian 
monumenta  resta  on  the  ąjrnchioniam  of  the  fali  of  Sa- 
maria with  the  lat  or  2d  year  of  Saigon  (q.  v.).  CoL 
Rawlinaon  haa  lately  given  reaaona  himaelf  {LoncL  A  th»- 
nawn.  No.  1869,  Aug.  22,  1863,  p.  246)  for  doabting  thia 
datę ;  and  it  is  probable  that  fiurther  reseaichea  and  oom- 
potations  may  fiilly  vindicate  the  accujacy  of  the  Bib- 
licalnumben. 

Tirhakah  is  mentioned  (2  Kinga  xix,  9)  as  an  oppo- 
nent  of  Sennacherib  shortly  before  the  miraculooa  de- 
struction  of  his  anny  in  the  fourteenth  year  of  Heze- 
kiah, corresponding  to  RC.  713.    It  haa  lately  been 
pnMred  from  the  Apis  tableta  that  the  firat  year  of  Tir- 
hakah's  reign  over  Egypt  waa  the  vague  year  current 
in  &a  689  (Dr.  Hincka,  in  the  Jour.  8ac  LiL  October, 
1858,  p.  130).    There  i8»  therefore,  a  primd  fade  dia- 
crepancy  of  Beveral  yeaia.    Bonaen  {Bibdwerk,  i,  p. 
oocvi)  nnhesitatingly  rednoea  the  reign  of  Manasaeh 
fnm  filty-five  to  fi>rty-4ve  yeara.    Lepaius  {Kdntggbuch, 
pw  101)  morę  critically  takes  the  thirty-five  yeara  of  the 
Sept.  m  the  dne  duration.    Werę  an  idteiation  demand- 
ed,  it  woold  aeem  beat  to  make  Manaaeeh^a  oomputation 
of  hia  reign  commence  with  his  father'8  illness  in  pref- 
erence  to  taking  the  conjecturai  nnmber  forty-five,  or 
the  Yciy  short  one  Łhirty-five.    The  evidenoe  of  the 
chnmokigy  of  the  Aasyrian  and  Babylonian  kingą  is, 
howevcT,  we  think,  conclu8ive  in  favor  of  the  8am  of 
fifty-five.    In  the  Bibie  we  are  told  that  Shahnaneeer 
hud  aiege  to  Samaria  in  the  fonrth  year  of  Hezekiah, 
and  that  it  wm  taken  in  the  uxth  year  of  that  king  (2 
Kinga  xviii,  9, 10).    The  Asayrian  inscriptiona  indicate 
the  taking  of  the  city  by  Saigon  in  hia  first  or  aecond 
year,  whence  we  must  suppose  either  that  he  ooropleted 
the  enterpriae  of  Shalmaneser,  to  whom  the  capture  is 
not  expreariy  aacribed  in  the  Scńpturea^  or  that  he  took 
the  credit  of  an  event  which  happened  just  before  his 
acoeaóon.    The  firat  year  of  Sargon  ia  shown  by  the  in- 
•criptuMis  to  have  beien  exactly  or  nearly  equal  to  the 
fint  of  Kerodach-Baladan,  L  e.  Kardocempadus :  there- 
foee  it  was  cunent  B.C  721  or  720,  and  the  second  year, 
720  or  719.    Thia  would  place  Hezekiah*s  accesaion  B.C. 
726, 725,  or  724,  the  firat  of  them  being  the  very  datę 
the  Uebrew  nombers  give.    Again,  Merodach-Baladan 
Mot  measengers  to  Hezekiah  immediately  after  his  sick- 
ncai,  and  therefore  in  about  his  fifteenth  year,  B.C.  712. 
Aococding  to  Ptolemy's  Canon,  Mardocempadus  reigned 
721-710,  and,  according  to  Berosus,  seized  the  regal 
power  for  8lx  months  before  Elibus,  the  Belibus  of  the 
Canon,  and  therefore  in  about  703,  this  being,  no  doubt, 


a  second  reign.  See  Merodach-Baładak.  Hete  the 
prepondezanoe  of  evideiice  Ib  in  favor  of  the  eazlier  datea 
of  Hezekiah.  Thua  far  the  chronological  data  of  Egypt 
and  Assyria  appear  to  clash  in  a  manner  that  seems  at 
first  sight  to  present  a  hopeless  knot,  but  not  on  this  ac- 
ooant to  be  rashly  cut  Au  examinatLon  of  the  facta  of 
the  history  has  afforded  Dr.  Hincks  {Jour.  o/Sac,  Lit- 
eraiurey  Oct  1858)  what  he  believe8  to  be  the  tnie  ex- 
planation.  Tirhakah,  he  obsenres,  is  not  explicitly 
termed  Pharaoh  or  king  of  Egypt  in  the  Bibie,  but 
king  of  Cush  or  Ethiopia,  from  which  it  might  be  in- 
ferred that  at  the  time  of  Sennacherib's  disastrous  inva- 
aion  he  had  not  assumed  the  crown  of  Egypt.  The 
Assyrian  inacriptions  of  Sennacherib  mention  kingą  of 
Egypt,  and  a  oontemporary  king  of  Ethiopia  in  aUianoe 
with  them.  The  history  of  Egypt  at  the  time,  obtain- 
ed  by  a  comparison  of  the  evidence  of  Herodotns  and 
others  with  that  of  Manetho's  lists,  would  lead  to  the 
same  or  a  similar  conclusion,  which  appears  to  be  re- 
maikably  confizmed  by  the  prophecies  of  Isaiah.  He 
holds,  therefore,  as  most  probable,  that,  at  the  time  of 
Sennacherib's  disastrous  expedition,  Tirhakah  was  king 
of  Ethiopia  in  alliance  with  the  king  or  kings  of  Egypt 
In  fact,  in  order  to  recondle  the  discrepancy  between 
the  datę  of  the  fourteenth  year  of  Hezekiah  in  B.C.  713, 
and  its  contemporaneousness  with  the  reign  of  Tirha- 
kah, who  did  not  ascend  the  Egyptian  throne  till  B.C. 
689,  we  have  only  to  suppoee  that  the  latter  king  waa 
the  ruler  of  Ethiopia  some  years  before  his  accession' 
over  Egypt  itaelf.    See  Tirhakah. 

In  this  way,  however,  we  again  fali  into  the  other 
difficulty  as  to  the  coincidence  of  this  datę  with  that  of 
Sennacherib*s  invasion.  It  is  tme,  aa  above  seen,  that 
the  warlike  opeiations  of  Sennacherib  zecorded  in  the 
Bibie  have  been  conjectured  (Bawlinson,  IferodotWt  i, 
383)  to  be  those  of  two  expeditions.  See  SEMNAcaTEara. 
The  fine  paid  by  Hezekiah  is  recorded  in  the  inacrip- 
tions as  a  result  of  an  expedition  of  Sennacherib^s  third 
year,  which,  by  a  comparison  of  Ptolemy's  Canon  with 
Berosus,  must  be  dated  B.C.  700,  and  this  would  fali  so 
near  the  doae  of  the  reign  of  the  king  of  Judah  (&C. 
697)  that  the  suppoaed  seoond  expedition,  of  which 
there  would  naturally  be  no  record  in  the  Assyrian  an-> 
nala  on  aooount  of  its  calamitons  end,  oould  not  be  plaoed 
much  Iater.  The  Biblical  acoount  would,  hoi^ever,  be 
most  reasonably  exp]ained  by  the  aupposition  that  the 
two  expedition8  were  but  two  campaigns  of  the  same 
war,  a  war  but  temponurUy  interrupted  by  Hezektah'8 
subnussion.  Now  as  even  the  former  (if  there  were 
two)  of  these  expeditions  of  Sennacherib  fell  in  B.C. 
700,  it  would  be  thirteen  years  Iater  thaa  the  synchro- 
nism  of  Tirhakah  and  Hezekiah  aa  above  amved  att 
It  is  probable,  therefore,  that  there  is  some  miscalcular 
tion  in  these  dates  from  the  Egyptian  and  Asayrian. 
monumenta,  aa  indeed  seems  to  be  betrayed  by  the  dis^ 
crepancy  between  Sennacherib's  inva8ion  (RC.700)  and. 
Tirhakah'8  reign  (not  earlier  than  B.C  689),  as  thereby 
determined,  whereas  the  above  Biblical  passage  makea 
them  contemporaneous.  Dr.  Hincks  (uł  wp,),  however, 
proposes  to  8olve  this  difilculty  also  by  the  uncritical 
supposition  that  the  name  of  Sennacherib  haa  been  in- 
serted  in  the  Biblical  account  of  the  first  Assyrian  inv»- 
sion  of  Judah  (2  Kings  xviLi,  13 ;  Isa.  xxvi,  1 ;  2  Chion. 
xxxii)  by  some  copyist,  who  confounded  this  with  the 
Iater  invasion  by  that  monarch,  whereas  the  Assyrian 
king  referred  to  was  Saigon  (Isa.  xx,  1),  his  predecessor. 
A  less  violent  hypothesis  for  the  same  purpose  of  recon- 
cilement,  and  one  in  accordanoe  with  the  custom  of 
these  Oriental  kings,  e.  g.  in  the  case  of  Nebuchadnez- 
zar,  is  that  Sargon  sent  Sennacherib  aa  viceroy  to  exe- 
cute  this  campaign  in  Falestine,  and  that  the  ąnnals  of 
the  leign  of  the  latter  refer  to  different  and  Iater  expe- 
dittous  when  actually  king.    See  Chronołooy. 

Some  writers  have  thought  to  find  a  notę  of  time  in 
2  Kings  xix,  29 ;  Isa.  xxxvii,  30,  <' Ye  shall  eat  this  year 
such  as  groweth  of  itself,"  etc,  assuming  that  the  paa- 
sage  is  only  to  be  exp]ained  as  implying  the  interven« 


HEZEEIAH 


230 


HEZEEIAH 


tion  of  a  sablmth-year,  or  eren  of  t  sabbath-jear  fol- 
lowed  by  t  year  of  jaUlee.  AU  that  can  be  aaid  u  that 
the  paasag^  may  be  interpreted  in  that  sense;  and  it 
does  happen  that  according  to  that  view  of  the  order  of 
eabbatic  and  jabUiean  yeara  which  ia  the  best  attested,  a 
sabbath-year  would  begin  in  the  aatomn  of  RC  713 
(Browne,  Ordo  Sasdorum,  sec  272-280),  l  e.  on  the  per- 
haps  piecariooa  aasamption  that  the  cycle  peraisted  with- 
out  interruption.  At  moet,  however,  this  no  morę  fixe8 
the  fourteenth  of  Hezekiah  to  the  year  B.C  713,  than  it 
does-  to  706,  or  699,  or  any  other  year  of  the  series.  Bat, 
in  fact,  it  is  not  necessaiy  to  asBume  any  reference  to  a 
sabbath-year.  Suppoee  the  words  to  have  been  spoken 
in  the  autumn,  then,  the  prodace  of  the  preyious  hiunreat 
(April^  May)  having  been  deatroyed  or  carried  off  by 
the  inyadóa,  there  remained  only  that  which  apnng 
naturally  from  the  dropped  or  trodden-ont  seed  (H^^BD), 
and  as  the  eneniy*8  presence  in  the  land  hindered  the  au- 
tumnal  tillage,  there  could  be  no  regular  haryest  in  the 
following  spring  (only  the  19*^nD,  airrófiaray.  Hence 
there  ia  no  need  to  infer  with  Theniua,  ad  loc.  that  the 
enemy  must  hare  been  in  the  land  at  least  eighteen 
months,  or,  with  Ewald,  that  Isaiah,  speaking  in  the  au- 
tumn, antidpated  that  the  invasion  would  last  through 
the  fdlowing  year  (Die  Propheten  des  A.  B,  i,  801,  and 
aimilarly  Knobel,  u, ».  p.  278). 

There  seems  to  be  no  ground  whatever  for  the  ragne 
oonjecture  so  confidently  adranced  (Jahn,  Hebr.  Common, 
§  3di),that  the  king*8  iUnees  waa  the  same  plague  which 
had  destroyed  the  Assyrian  army.  The  word  y^TfĆ  b 
not  elsewhere  appUed  to  the  plague,  but  to  carbunćles 
and  inflammatoiy  uloers  (£xod.  ix,  9 ;  Job  ii,  1,  etc). 
Hezekiah,  whose  kingdom  was  still  in  a  dangerous  state 
from  the  fear  lest  the  Assyriana  might  return,  who  had 
at  that  time  no  heir  (for  Manasseh  was  not  bom  till 
long  afterwards,  2  Kings  xxi,  1),  and  who  regarded  death 
as  the  end  of  exi8tence  (Isa.  xxxviii), "  tumed  his  face 
to  the  waU  and  wept  sore"  at  the  threatened  approach 
of  dissolution.  God  had  compassion  on  his  anguish,  and 
heard  his  prayer.  Isaiah  had  hardly  leit  the  palące 
when  he  was  ordered  to  promise  the  king  immediate  re- 
covery,  and  a  fresh  lease  of  life,  ratifying  the  promise  by 
a  sign,  and  coring  the  boil  by  a  plaster  of  figs,  which 
were  often  osed  medicinally  in  similar  cases  (Gesenius, 
Thes.  i,  811;  Gelsius,  HieroboL  ii,  877;  Bartholinus,  De 
MoHds  BibUcitt  x,  47).  What  was  the  exact  naturę  of 
the  disease  we  cannot  say ;  according  to  Meade,  it  was 
feyer  terminating  in  abscess.  On  this  remarkabie  pas- 
sage  we  must  here  be  oontent  to  refer  the  reader  to  Carp- 
zov,  App,  Crit.  p.  851  sq.;  RawUnson,  Herod,  ii,  882  sq. ; 
the  elaborate  notes  of  Keil  on  2  Kings  xx ;  RośenmUller 
and  Gresenins  on  Isa.  xxxviii,  and  especially  Ewald,  Ge- 
schichte  iii,  688. 

The  sign  given  to  Hezekiah  in  the  going  back  of  the 
shadow  on  the  *^  sun-dial  of  Ahaz"  can  only  be  inter- 
preted as  a  miracle.  The  explanation  proposed  by  J. 
von  Gumpach  (AlL  Test. Studien^p.  ISl  sq.)  is  as  incoro- 
patiUe  with  the  terms  of  the  narratire  (Isa.  xxxviii,  8, 
especially  the  fuller  one,  2  Kings  xx,  8-11)  as  it  is  in- 
flulting  to  the  character  of  the  prophct,  who  is  repre- 
sented  to  have  managed  the  seeming  return  of  the  shad- 
ow by  the  trick  of  secretly  tuming  the  movable  dial 
from  its  proper  position  to  its  oppońte !  Thenius  (u. «. 
p.  408  Bq.)  would  natuiallze  the  miracle  so  as  to  obtain 
from  it  a  notę  of  time.  The  phenomenon  was  due,  he 
thinks,  to  a  solar  eclipee,  very  smali,  viz.  the  one  of  26th 
September,  B.C.  713.  Here,  also,  the  prophet  is  taxed 
with  a  deception,  to  be  justified  by  his  wish  to  inspire 
the  despairing  king  with  the  confidence  essential  to  his 
,  recovery.  The  prophet  employed  for  this  purpose  his 
astronomical  knowledge  of  the  fact  that  the  eclipse  was 
about  to  take  place,  and  of  the  further  fact  that  **  at  ^e 
beginning  of  an  eclipse  the  shadow  (e.  g.  of  a  gnomon) 
goes  back,  and  at  its  ending  goes  forward :"  an  effect, 
however,  so  minutę  that  the  diflerence  amounts  at  most 
to  8ixty  seoonds  of  time;  but  then  the  **  degrees"  would 


mark  extremely  smali  portions  of  time,  poasihiy  eyen 
1080  to  the  hour  (like  the  later  Hebiew  CtUaŁim%  and 
the  so-called  "  dial"  was  enormously  laige !  Kot  mora 
sncoesafully,  Mr.  Boflanquet  {Tran$,  ofIL  A  ńaL  8oe.  xt, 
277)  bas  reoourse  to  the  same  expedient  of  an  edipae  on 
Jan.  11,  689  RC,  which,  in  this  writer^s  scheme,  lies  in 
the  fourteenth  of  Hezekiah.  *<  Whoever  truły  belieyea 
in  the  Old  Testament,  as  Mr.  Boeanąuet  evident]y  dcea, 
must  also  be  prepared  to  believe  in  a  miracle,"  ia  the 
just  comment  madę  by  M.  v.  Niebuhr,  Getck.  A  sntr$  wul 
BabeUf  p.  49.  Mr.  Greswell's  elaborate  attempt  to  prore 
from  ancient  astronomical  records  that  the  day  of  thia 
miracle  was  pretematurally  lengthened  out  to  thirty-ais: 
hours  will  scarcely  Gonvince  any  ono  but  himself  (/Tijf s' 
Temporis  Catholici,  etc.,  and  Browne*s  **Remarka"  on  the 
same,  1852,  p.  28  są.).    See  Dial. 

Yarious  ambassadors  came  with  letters  and  gifta  to 
congratulate  Hezekiah  on  his  recovery  (2  Chroń.  xxxu, 
28),  and  among  them  an  embassy  from  Merodach-B»- 
ladan  (or  Berodach,2  Kings  xx,  12;  ó  BoKaiacj  Jose- 
phus,  L  c),  the  viceroy  of  Babylon,  the  Mardokempadoe 
of  Ptolemy'8  canon.  The  oatensifale  object  of  thia  mia- 
sion  was  to  compliment  Hezekiah  on  his  convalesoence 
(2  Kings  XX,  12 ;  Isa.  xxxix,  1),  and  **  to  inquire  of  the 
wonder  that  was  done  in  the  land"  (2  Chroń,  xxxii,  31), 
a  rumor  of  which  could  not  fail  to  interest  a  people  de- 
voted  to  astrology.  But  its  real  purpose  was  to  disoor- 
er  how  far  an  alliance  between  the  two  powen  waa  poe- 
siUe  or  desirable,  for  Mardokempadoa,  no  less  than  Hez- 
ekiah, was  in  apprehension  of  the  Assyrian&  In  fact, 
Sargon  expeUed  him  from  the  throne  of  Babylon  in  the 
foUowing  year  (the  16th  of  Hezekiah),  although  after  a 
time  he  seems  to  have  retumed  and  re-establi^ed  him- 
self  for  six  months,  at  the  end  of  which  he  was  mnrder- 
ed  by  Belibos  (Dr.  Hincks,  K  c. ;  RosenmtUler,  BibL  Ge- 
ograph.  eh.  viii;  Layard,  Nin,  and  Bab,  i,  141).  Com- 
munity  of  interest  madę  Hezekiah  Teceive  the  overturea 
of  Babylon  with  unconcealed  gratification ;  and,  perhapa, 
to  enhance  the  opinion  of  his  own  importance  as  an  ally, 
he  displayed  to  the  messengers  the  princely  treasures 
which  he  and  his  predecessors  had  accumulated.  Theee 
Stores  remained  even  aiter  the  laigesses  mentioned  in  2 
Kings  xviii,  14^  16.  If  ostentation  were  his  motive  it 
received  a  terrible  rebuke,  and  he  was  informed  by  Isa- 
iah that  from  the  then  tottering  and  aubordinate  pror- 
ince  of  Babylon,  and  not  from  the  mighty  Assyria,  would 
come  the  ruin  and  captivity  of  Judah  (Isa.  xxxix,  5). 
This  prophecy  and  the  one  of  Micah  (Mic  iv,  10)  are 
the  earliest  defhiition  of  the  locality  of  that  hostile  pow- 
er,  where  the  clouds  of  exile  so  long  threatened  (Ler. 
xxvi,  33 ;  Deut.  iv,  27 ;  xxx,  8)  were  beginning  to  gath- 
er.  It  is  an  impres8ive  and  fearful  circumstance  that 
the  moment  of  exultation  was  choeen  as  the  opportuni- 
ty  for  waming,  and  that  the  prophecies  of  the  Aasyrian 
deliverance  are  set  sidc  by  side  ¥rith  thoae  of  the  Baby- 
lonian  captivity  (DaWdson,  On  Prophety^  p.  256).  The 
weak  friend  was  to  accomplish  that  which  was  impoań- 
ble  to  the  powerful  foe.  But,  although  pride  was  the 
sin  thus  vehemently  checked  by  the  prophet,  Isaiah  waa 
certainly  not  blind  to  the  poiificai  motive8  (Joeeph.  A  mL 
X,  2, 2)  which  madę  Hezekiah  so  eomplaisant  to  the 
Babylonian  ambassadors.  Into  those  motives  he  had 
inquired  in  vain,  for  the  king  met  that  portion  of  bia 
ąuestion  ("What  said  these  men?")  by  emphatic  ai- 
lence.  Hezekiah's  meek  answer  to  the  stem  denuncia- 
tion  of  futurę  woe  bas  been  moet  unjustly  oensured  bs 
"a  fidse  resignation  which  combines  sellishnees  with 
silliness"  (Newman,  ffebr.  Mon.  p.  274).  On  the  contn- 
ry,  it  merely  implies  a  conviction  that  God*s  decree  could 
not  be  otherwise  than  just  and  right,  and  a  natoral 
thankfulness  for  even  a  temporaiy  suspenaion  of  ita  in- 
evitable  fulfilmcnt 

After  this  embassy  we  have  only  a  genend  aoconnt  of 
the  peace  and  prosperity  in  which  Hezekiah  ckMed  hia 
days.  No  man  before  or  sińce  ever  lived  under  the  cer- 
tain  knowledge  of  the  precise  length  of  the  apan  of  life 
before  him.    **  He  was  buried  in  the  going  up  (nb^B) 


TTEZETi 


231 


HEZRON 


to  tbe  Kpnkhrefl  of  the  sous  of  David,"  2  Chroń,  xxxii, 
33 :  6xm  thia,  and  the  fact  that  Łhe  Sttcceediog  kings 
^were  laid  in  sepulchres  of  Łheir  own,  it  nuiy  be  inferred 
that  after  Ahas,  thirteentb  from  Darid,  theie  was  no 
more  room  kft  in  the  ancestial  aepulchie  (Thenioa,  u,  s. 
p.  410).  In  later  Limes,  he  was  held  in  honor  as  the 
kin^  who  had  ''after  him  nonę  like  him  among  all  the 
kings  of  Jadah,  nor  any  that  were  before  him"  (2  Kinga 
xviii,  5) ;  in  Jer.  xxvi,  17  the  elders  of  the  land  cite  him 
aa  an  example  of  pious  sabmiasion  to  the  word  of  the 
Lord  spoken  by  Micah;  and  the  son  of  Sirach  closes  his 
redtal  of  the  kings  with  this  judgment — that  of  all  the 
kłcgs  of  Judah,  **  David,  Hezekiah,  and  Joeiah  alone 
tranagreased  not,  nor  forsook  the  law  of  the  Moet  High" 
(£cc]ns.x]ix,4). 

Beńdes  the  many  authors  and  commentators  who 
have  wńtten  on  this  period  of  Jewish  histoiy  (on  which 
moeh  ligbt  haa  been  recently  thrown  by  Ifr.  Layard, 
Sb  G.  Wilkinson,  Sir  H.  Kawlinson,  Dr.  Hincks,  and 
oiber  scholara  who  have  studied  the  Nineveh  remains), 
aee  for  oontinuous  lives  of  Hezekiah,  Joeephus  (Ani,  ix, 
13-x,  2),  Prideaiix  (Connect,  i,  16-30),  Jahn  {Hebr.  Com. 
§  xli),  Ewald  (Gesch.  ui,  614-644, 2d  ed.),  SUnley  (Jew- 
ish CA«n;A,ii,305-540),Nichol8on  {Lecturea  on  Hezekiah, 
Lood.  1839),  Rochah  {Meditaiions  on  Ilez,  tr.  by  Hare, 
Lond.  1^9),  Michaelis  (De  Ezechia,  HaL  1717),  Scheid 
(Caaticum  Ezechiat,  Leyd.  1769),  Nicolai  (De  terroribus 
Hittia,  Hehnst.  1749),  Taddel  (Precaiio  CkiskuB,Wit^ 
tenbi  1704).  For  sermona,  etc,  see  Darling,  Cytiopadia 
BibUoffraphica,  coL  330, 340, 341.— Kitto;  Smith. 

Hezekłaji^s  Fool,  the  modem  traditionary  name  of 
a  cistem  or  resenrob  in  the  western  part  of  the  dty  of 
Jemaakm,  refenred  by  Bobinson  (Laier  Besearches,  jt. 
112)  and  Bartlett  (  Walki  about  Jenualem,  p.  82)  to  the 
military  piepantions  of  that  king  (2  Chroń,  xxxii,  3 
8q.;  compare2  King8xx,20;  Ecdua. xlviii,  17  są. ;  Isa. 
xxii,  9-11 ;  Psa.  xlviii,  12,  13),  but  dispufced  by  Bitter 
(ErdŁ  xvii,  371  sq.).     See  Jerusalem. 

2.  The  great-great-grandfather  of  the  prophet  Zeph- 
aniah  (Zeph.  i,  1,  where  the  name  ia  Anglicized  ''Hiz- 
kiah"),  supposed  by  some  to  be  the  same  with  the  fore- 
going  (see  Huetius,  Demastr.  Etang,  Lips.  p.  512 ;  contra 
Boaemntiller,  ProUg.  ad  Zeph.),    B.C.  much  antę  635. 

3.  A  person  mentioned  in  connection  with  Ater  (but 
whether  as  father  or  otherwise  is  not  dear),  which  latter 
was  the  father  (or  former  residence)  of  ninety-eight  Is- 
raelites  who  retnmed  from  Babylon  with  Zerubbabel 
(Neh.  vii,  21).  In  Neh.  x,  17  his  name  (Anglicized 
'*Hizkijah")  appean  in  a  similar  connection  (but  with- 
out  the  coimective  ^^of*)  among  those  who  subscribed 
the  oovenant  of  Nehemiah.     RC.  antę  586. 

4.  The  second  of  the  three  sons  of  Neariah,  a  descend- 
ant  of  Salathiel  (1  Chroń,  iii,  23) ;  probably  a  brother 
of  the  Eali  of  Lnke  iii,  25,  and  also  of  the  Azor  of  Matt 
i,  13.  (See  Strong^s  Harm,  and  Expo$,  of  the  Goęp,  p. 
16.)     Ra  post  536. 

HeseL     See  Hetzeł. 

Heser.    See  Hetzeb. 

He^zion  (Heb.  Chezyon%  1*T»Tn,  ntion;  Scpt.  'ACi- 
i#v),  the  father  of  Tabrimon  and  grandfather  of  the 
Ben-hadad  I,  king  of  Damaacene-Syria,  to  whom  Asa 
aent  a  largesa  to  condliate  his  aid  against  Baasha  (1 
KiBgs  XV,  18).  B.C.  antę  928.  A  ąueation  haa  long 
been  raiaed  whether  this  name  (which  oniy  occnrs  in  the 
above  passage)  indicates  the  same  person  aa  the  Rezon 
of  1  Kings  xi,  23.  Thenius,  after  Ewald,  niggests  that 
the  aueceasful  adventnrer  who  became  Ling  of  Damas- 
caa,and  was  so  hostilc  a  neighbor  to  Solomon  through- 
out  his  reign,  was  really  called  ffezion,  and  that  the  des- 
ignation  Hezon  (■,iT'1,  "prince**)  was  either  assumed  by 
him,  or  bestowed  on  him  by  his  followers  after  he  was 
seated  on  his  new  throne.  There  is,  of  course,  no  chro- 
Dological  difficnlty  in  this  snpposition.  Less  than  forty 
years  intenrened  between  the  dcath  of  Solomon,  when 
Bezoa  waa  reigning  at  Damascus  (1  Kings  xi,  25),  and 


the  treaty  between  Asa  and  Ben-hadad  I  (1  Kings  xv, 
18,  19),  during  which  uiterval  there  is  no  violence  to 
probabiUty  in  assuming  the  occunence  of  the  death  of 
Rezon  or  Hezion,  the  acoession  and  entire  reign  of  Tab- 
rimon his  son,  who  was  unąuestionably  king  of  Syria 
and  oontemporary  with  Asa's  father  (1  Kings  xv,  19), 
and  tbe  succession  of  Tabrimon'8  son,  Ben-hadad  L 
This  identity  of  Hezion  with  Rezon  Łs  an  idea  appar- 
ently  as  old  as  the  Sept.  translators;  for  they  associated 
in  theb  ver8ion  with  Solomou's  adverBaxy  the  Edomite 
Hadad  [or,  as  they  called  him,  A  der,  Tuv'Adep],  ^E^- 
rom,  the  son  of  Eliadah"  (see  the  Sept  of  1  Kings  xi, 
14) ;  a  name  which  cloeely  resembles  our  Hezion,  though 
it  refcrs  to  Rezon,  as  the  patTon3rmic  proves  (1  Kings  xi, 
23).  The  Uter  ver8ions,  Feshito  (Hedron)  and  .£rabic 
(Hedron),  seem  to  approximatc  also  more  nearly  to  //e- 
zion  than  to  Rezon,  Cf  the  old  commentators,  Junius, 
Piscator,  Malvenda,  and  Menochius  have  been  cited  (see 
Poli  Synops,  ad  loc)  as  maintaining  the  identity.  Koh- 
ler also,  and  Marsham  {Can,  Chroń,  p.  346),  and  Dathe 
have  been  referred  to  by  Keil  as  in  favor  of  the  same 
view.  Keil  himself  is  uncertain.  According  to  another 
opinion,  Hezion  waa  not  identical  with  Rezon,  but  his 
successor ;  this  b  propounded  by  Winer  (B,  R,  W,  i,  245, 
and  ii,  322).  If  the  account  be  correct  which  b  com- 
municatcd  by  Joeephus  (A  ni,  vii,  5,  2)  from  the  fourth 
book  of  Nicoiaus  Damascenus,  to  the  effect  that  the 
name  of  the  king  of  Damascus  who  was  contemporary 
with  David  was  Hadad  {'Adadoc),  we  have  iu  it  proba- 
bly the  cfyncutic  name  which  Rezon  or  Hezion  adopted 
for  himsdf  and  hb  heirs,  who,  according  to  the  same 
statement,  occupied  the  throne  of  Syria  for  ten  g^nera- 
tions.  According  to  Macrobius  (Satumalia,  i,  23), 
A  dad  was  the  name  of  the  supremę  god  of  the  Syrians ; 
and  aa  it  was  a  constant  practice  with  the  kings  of 
Syria  and  Babylon  to  assume  names  which  connected 
them  with  thdr  gods  (comp.  Tabrimon  of  1  Kings  xv, 
18,  the  son  of  our  Hezion,  whose  name='j'Ha'^-|"^?ł 
"good  b  Rimroon,"  another  Syrian  deity,  probably  the 
same  with  Adad;  see  2  Kings*  v,  18,  and  Zech.  Kii,  U), 
we  may  not  unreasonably  conjecture  that  Hezion,  who 
in  his  poliłical  relation  cailed  himself  iSezon,  or  ^'  prince," 
adopted  the  name  Hadad  [or,  rather,  Ben-hadad, "  Son 
of  the  supremę  6od"J  in  relation  to  the  religion  of  his 
country  and  to  hb  own  ecclełtiagtioal  supremacy.  It  u 
remarkable  that  even  after  the  change  of  dynasty  in 
Hazael  thb  title  of  Benrhadad  seemed  to  survive  (see  2 
Kings  xiii,  8).  If  this  conjecture  be  true,  the  energetic 
marauder  who  passes  under  the  names  of  Rezon  and  He- 
zion in  the  paasages  which  we  quoted  at  the  commence- 
ment  of  thb  article  was  strong  enough  not  only  to  har- 
ass  the  great  Solomon,  but  to  found  a  dynasty  of  kings 
which  occupied  the  throne  of  Syria  to  the  tenth  descent, 
even  down  to  the  revolution  effected  by  Hazael,  *^near 
two  hundred  years,  according  to  the  eiactest  chronolo- 
gy  of  Jooephus"  (Whbton'8  notę  on  A  nL  vii,  5,  2). — 
Kitto,  8.  V.    See  Rezon. 

He^zir  (Heb.  Chezir',  ^*^tn,  a  atńne,  or,  according 
to  FUrst,  strong;  Sept  'le^eip  and  'H^cip  v.  r.  Xi7^(v), 
the  name  of  two  men. 

1.  The  head  of  the  8eventeenth  course  of  priests  aa 
establislied  by  David  (1  Chroń,  xxiv,  15).     RC.  1014. 

2.  A  chief  Israelite  who  subscribed  the  sacred  cove- 
nant  with  Nehembh  (Neh.  x,  20).    RC.  cir.  410. 

Hez^rai  (2  Sam.  xxiii,  35).    See  Hezro. 

Hez^ro  (Heb.  Chetsro%  i*^:tn,  L  q.  Hezron ;  Sept 
'AiTopai,  Vulg.  Hezro),  a  Carmelite,  one  of  David'8  dis- 
tinguished  warriors  (1  Chroń,  xi,  87).  He  is  called  in 
the  margin  and  in  2  Sam.  xxiii,  35,  Hezrai  (Chetsray^ 
*i'nxn,  Sept  'Affflrpł , Vulg.  Hearai),  RC.  1046.  Kenni- 
cott,  however  (Dissertation,  p.  207),  decides,  on  the  al- 
most  mianimous  authority  of  the  ancient  vei8ion,  that 
Hezrai  b  the  original  form  of  the  name. 

Hez^ron  (Heb.  Chetsron',  V'l'^ątn,  endosed  [(Jeaen.] 


HEZRONITE 


232 


HIDDEKEL 


or  bloonwig  [FOnt] ;  Sept.  'Affpwy,  *Afftciiv),  the  name 
of  two  men,  and  also  of  a  place. 

1.  The  Łhird  son  of  Keuben  (Gen.  xlvi,  9;  £xod.  yi, 
14;  1  Chroń,  iv,  1 ;  v,  8).  HŁb  desoendante  weie  called 
Hbzrokitbs  (CheUroni',  '^i'^^^,  Sept.  'Affc<avi,  Numb. 
xxvi,  6,  21).     Ra  1874. 

2.  The  oldest  of  the  two  aons  of  Fharez  and  grandson 
of  Judah  (Gen.  xlvi,  12;  Ruth  iv,  18, 19;  1  Chroń,  ii,  6, 
9, 18,  21,  24,  25) ;  caUed  Esbom  {'Eapwfi)  in  Matt  i,  8. 
B.ai866. 

3.  A  plaoe  on  the  southem  boundaiy  of  Judah,  weat 
of  Kadesh-Baniea,  and  between  that  and  Adar  (Joeh. 
XV,  8) ;  otherwiae  caUed  Hazor  (ver.  26).  The  pimc- 
tuation  and  enumeration,  however,  requiie  us  to  connect 
the  aaaociated  namea  thus:  Kerioth-hezron=:Hazor- 
anam.    See  Hazor. 

Hez^ronite  (Nomb.  xxvi,  6, 21).    See  Hezron  1. 

Hibbard,  Billy,  a  Methodist  Episoopal  minister, 
wa«  bom  at  Norwich,  Conn.,  Feb.  24, 1771,  united  with 
the  Methodist  Episoopal  Church  iii  1792,  entered  the 
New  York  Conference  in  1798,  in  1821-2-8  was  super- 
annuated,  became  effective  in  1824,  was  finaUy  superan- 
nuated  in  1828,  and  died  Aug.  17, 1844,  having  preached 
forty-six  years.  He  was  an  eccentiic  but  very  able 
man.  His  wit  and  humor,  and  his  long,  able,  and  abun- 
dantly  suocessful  labors  in  the  Church,  fumish  the  ma- 
teriał of  an  interesting  biography.  He  possessed  a  vig- 
orous  intellect,  and  acquired  a  sound  and  effective  storę 
of  theological  and  generał  knowledge.  His  piety  was 
deep  and  cheerfuL  See  Minutes  of  Confirences,  iii,  600 ; 
Steyens,  Hutory  of  tke  Methodist  EpUcopal  Church; 
Sherman'8  New-Engkmd  Dinnee^  p.  285;  Life  of  Billy 
Hibbard  (N.  Y.  12mo) ;  Sprague,  Atmals,  vii,  298. 

Hickes,  Gboroe,  D.D.,  a  nonjuring  divine  of  great 
leaniing,  was  bom  June  20, 1642,  at  Newsham,  in  York- 
shire; was  educated  at  St.John's  CoUege,  Oxford,  and 
in  1644  was  elected  fellow  of  Uucoln  College.  He  be- 
came chaplain  to  the  duke  of  Lauderdale  in  1676,  king'8 
chaplain  in  1682,  and  dean  of  Worcester  in  1683.  He 
was  disappointed  of  the  bishopric  of  Bristol  by  the  death 
of  Charles  II,  After  the  Revolution  of  1688,  refusing  to 
take  the  oaths  to  William  III,  he  was  deprived  in  1689, 
and  became  an  active  enemy  of  the  govemment  He 
was  consecrated  bishop  of  Thetford  by  the  Nonjurors  in 
1694,  and  died  in  1715.  His  scholarship  is  shown  in  his 
yaluable  Antigua  Litłeratura  Septentriunalis  Thetaurus 
(Oxford,  1706,  3  yols.  foL),  and  his  Inttifutiones  Gram- 
maticcB  A  n^ło-Scutomca  (Oxford,  1689, 4to).  Among  his 
theological  and  controver8ial  writings,  which  were  very 
numerous,  are  The  Christian  Priesthood,  and  the  Diffmty 
of  the  Epitcopal  Order  (new  ed.  Oxford,  1847,  3  rols. 
8vo)  :—Bibliofheca  Script,  EccUsub  Anglicana  (London, 
1709,  8vo)  '.—Sermons  (London,  1713,  2  vola.  8vo).  See 
Hook,  EccUs.  Biog.  vi,  32  są. ;  Lathbury,  History  ofihe 
Nonjurors, 

Hlcks,  EuAs,  a  member  of  the  Society  of  Friends, 
or  Quakers,  and  the  author  of  a  schism  in  that  body, 
was  bom  at  Jericho,  L.  L,  March  19,  1748,  and  in  eariy 
life  became  a  preacher  in  the  society.  Imbibing  So- 
cinian  opinions  as  to  the  Trinity  and  the  Atonement,  he 
began  to  preach  them,  cautiously  at  first,  and  with  little 
sympathy  from  his  brethren.  By  "degrees,  however, 
the  boldness  of  his  view8  and  the  vigor  with  which  he 
repelled  assailants  began  to  attract  attention,  and  to  win 
hearers  over  to  his  opinions,  which,  proclaimed  without 
faltering,  in  public  and  private  for  years,  at  length  found 
large  numbers  of  ąympathizers,  who,  with  Mr.  Hicks 
himself,  unable  to  impress  their  oonviction8  upon  the 
denomination  at  large,  in  1827  seceded  from  that  body, 
and  set  up  a  distinct  and  independent  association,  but 
still  holding  to  the  name  of  Friends.  In  this  secession 
were  morabers  from  the  Yearly  Meetings  of  New  York, 
PhiUdelphia,  Baltimore,  Ohio,  Indiana,  and  New  Eng- 
land."  He  was  a  man  of  great  acuteness  and  energy 
of  intellect,  and  of  elevated  personal  character.  He 
died  at  Jericho  Feb.  27, 1830.     He  pubUshed  Obeerra- 


iions  on  Skwery  (New  YoA,  1811, 12mo)  i^-Joumalof 
Life  and  Labors  (Philadelphta,  1828)  -.r^Sermong  (!««, 
8vo)  z—Letters  rekuing  to  Dactrines  (1824, 12mo).  See 
Christian  Ezammery  li,  321 ;  Senneff,  Amwer  to  EUom 
Hicks^s  Blasphemiet  (1837,  2d  ed.  12mo);  AUibone,  Dic- 
Honory  ofAuthors,  i,  842;  Janney,  Bist,  ofthe  Friends 
(4  vols.  12mo) ;  Gibbons,  Reńew  and  RtfutaHon  (Phila- 
delphia,  1847, 12mo) ;  and  the  artide  Friekds  <No.  2). 

Hickaites.    See  Hicks. 

Hld^dai  (Heb.  Hidday%  ^^T},  exuberant  or  migkty; 
Sept.  Alex.  MS.  'X99ai,\aX.  Ma  omits ;  Vulg.  Ifeddat), 
one  of  the  thirty-8even  heroes  of  David*8  guard  (2  Sam. 
xxiii,  30),  described  as  «  of  the  torrents  of  Gaash."  In 
the  parallel  list  of  1  Chroń,  (xi,  32)  the  name  is  given 
as  HuRAi  (q.  v.),  in  favor  of  which  reading  Kennioott 
{Dittert.  p.  194)  decides.— Smith, 

Hid'dekel  (Heb.  Chidde'kel,  bg^fl,  in  pause  CSUrf- 
<^'^»  ^ł?"!!^*  SepL  Ttypic,  to  which* in  Dan.  x,  4  it 
adda  'Ev^'<jciX  v.  r.  'E6SiKf\  j  Vulg.  Tigris),  the  name 
of  the  third  of  the  four  rivers  of  Paradise,  being  thac 
which  runs  on  the  border  (nąn;?)  of  Assyria  (Gen.  u, 
14),  and  "  the  great  river"  on  the  banks  of  which  Dan- 
iel received  his  remarkably  minutę  rision,  or,  ratber, 
angelic  prediction  of  the  mutual  history  of  Egypt  and 
Syria  (Dan.  ii,  4).  There  has  never  been  much  dispute 
of  the  traditional  interpretation  which  identifies  the 
Tigris  with  the  HiddekeL  According  to  Gesenius  (  The- 
saur.  p.  448),  this  river  in  Aramiean  is  called  ZHgta,  in 
Arabie  Diglat^inZend  Teger,  in  Pehlvi  7>^fm,«8tream  f 
whence  have  arisen  both  the  Aramaean  and  Ambic  forma, 
to  which  also  we  tracę  the  Hebrew  DehA  dirested  ofthe 
prefix  /y«f.  This  prefix  denotcs  activłty,  rapidity,  ve- 
hemence,  so  that  Hid-dekel  significs  "  the  rapid  Tigris." 
From  the  introduction  of  the  prefix,  it  would  appear 
that  the  Hebrews  were  not  entirely  aware  that  Teger^ 
represented  by  their  bp*l,  DeJcely  by  itself  signified  ve- 
locity ;  80  in  the  language  of  Media,  Tigris  meant  an 
arrow  (Strabo,  ii,  527 ;  Pliny,  Hist.  Kat,  vi,  27 ;  oompu 
Persie  teer,  "arrow;"  Sanscrit  tigra,  "sharp,"  ♦^swift"); 
hence  arose  such  pleonasms  as  "king  Pharaoh"  and 
"  the  Al-coran."  FUrst,  however  {Heb,  Lex,  &  v.),  le- 
gards  the  łasi  s^^IIable  as  a  merę  termination  to  an  orig- 
inal  form  p*^^  Hiddekj  from  p^^n,  to  le  sharp,  hence  to 
flow  swiftly.  "The  fomi  Biglath  oocurs  in  the  Tar- 
gums  of  Onkelos  and  Jonathan,  in  Josephus  (Ant,  i,  1), 
in  the  Armenian  Eusebius  (Chroń.  Caw.pt.  i,  c  2X  in 
Zonaras  (Ann.  i,  2),  and  in  the  Armenian  verBton  of  the 
Sciipturea.  It  is  hardened  to  Diglit  (Diglito)  by  Pliny 
(Hisł,  Nat,  vi,  27).  The  name  now  in  use  among  the 
inhabitiuits  of  Mesopotamia  is  Bijleh.  It  has  generally 
been  supposed  that  Bigła  is  a  merę  Shemitic  corraption 
of  Tigroy  and  that  this  lattcr  is  the  tnie  name  of  the 
stream ;  but  it  must  be  ob8erved  that  the  two  forma  az« 
found  side  by  side  in  the  Babylonian  transcript  of  the 
Behistiin  inscription,  and  that  the  ordinaiy  name  of  the 
stream  in  the  inscriptions  of  Assyria  is  Tiggar,  More- 
over,  if  we  allow  the  Delcel  of  Bid-dekeł  to  mean  the  Ti- 
gris, it  would  seem  probable  that  this  was  the  morę  an- 
cient  of  the  two  appeUations.  Perhaps,  therefore,  it  is 
best  to  suppoee  that  there  was  in  early  Babylonian  « 
root  diky  equivalent  in  meaning,  and  no  doubt  connected 
in  origin,  with  the  Arian  tig  or  tijy  and  that  from  these 
two  roots  were  formed  independently  the  two  namea, 
Dekely  Dikla,  or  BigUiy  and  Tiggar,  Tigra,  or  Tigris: 
The  stream  was  known  by  either  name  indiffcrently ; 
but,  on  the  whole,  the  Arian  appellation  predominatcd 
in  ancient  times,  and  was  that  most  commonly  used 
even  by  Shemitic  raoes.  The  Arabians,  however,  when 
they  conąuered  Mesopotamia,  revived  the  tme  Shemitic 
title,  and  this  (Bijleh)  oontinues  to  be  the  name  by 
which  the  river  is  known  to  the  native8  down  to  the 
present  day"  (Smith). 

The  Tigris  rises  in  the  monntains  of  Armenia,  abont 
fifteen  miles  south  ofthe  sources  ofthe  Euphratea,  and 
pursues  nearly  a  regular  coursc  south-east  till  its  junc- 


TTTTCL 


233 


HIERARCHY 


tloD  with  that  lirer  at  Koma,  filty  miles  abore  Baazah 

(Baaonh).    The  Tigris  ia  narigable  for  boata  of  twenty 

or  thirty  tona'  burden  as  far  aa  the  mouth  of  the  Odor^ 

nehf  bat  do  fiirtber ;  and  the  commerce  of  Moaul  ia  con- 

aeqiiently  carried  on  by  tafta  supported  on  inflated  sheep 

or  goata'  skina.     See  Float.    These  rafta  are  floated 

down  the  river,  and  when  they  arriye  at  Bagdad  the 

wood  ^  which  they  are  compoóed  is  sold  without  loss, 

and  ihe  akina  aie  oonreyed  back  to  Moaul  by  camels. 

The  Tigris,  between  Bagdad  and  Koma,  is,  on  an  avei^ 

age,  ibout  two  hondred  yards  Mride ;  at  Mosul  its  breadth 

does  not  excced  three  hundred  feet.     The  banka  are 

Bteep^  and  overgrown  for  the  most  part  with  brushwood, 

the  resort  of  liona  and  other  wild  animals.     The  middle 

psrt  of  the  river*s  coorse,  firom  Mosul  to  Koma,  once  the 

seat  of  high  cultore  and  the  reaidence  of  mighty  kings, 

is  now  deaolate,  covered  with  the  relics  of  ancient  great- 

ness  in  the  shape  of  fortresses,  mounds,  and  danis,  which 

had  been  ereeted  for  the  defence  and  irrigation  of  the 

country.     At  the  ruina  of  Nimriid,  eight  leagues  below 

Mosul,  is  a  stone  dam  quite  across  the  river,  which, 

when  the  stream  is  Iow,  stands  considerably  above  the 

surtaee,  and  forma  a  smaU  cataract ;  but  when  the  stream 

is  swoUen,  no  part  of  it  is  yiaible,  the  water  rushing 

OTer  it  like  a  rapid,  and  boiltng  up  with  great  impetu- 

oaity.     It  is  a  work  of  great  skill  and  labor,  and  now 

reneiable  for  its  antiquity.     The  inhabitants,  aa  usuat 

attribute  it  to  Nlmrod.    It  is  called  the  Zikr  ul-Aawaze. 

At  some  short  distance  below  there  ia  another  Zikr 

(dike),  but  not  so  high,  and  morę  rained  than  the  foi^ 

mer:     The  rirer  risea  twice  in  the  year:  the  first  and 

great  riae  is  in  April,  and  is  caused  by  the  melting  of 

the  snowa  in  the  mountains  of  Armenia ;  the  other  is  in 

NoTember,  and  ia  produced  by  the  periodical  rains.    (See 

Kinneir,  Geog,  Mem,  ofPersian  Empire^  p.  9,  10 ;  Rich*s 

KoortUstan;  Cheeney'^  Euphratet  EzpedUion  ;  SirR.K. 

Porter^s  TrareU;  etc.)— Kitto.     See  Tioris. 

Hi^gl  (Heb.  CkUV,  bs^^n,  l\fe  of,  i.  ii,from  God,  or 
perh.  for  ^X^n^,  Cod  $haU  Uvt;  Sept.  'Ax*ń^)i  t  iiative 
of  fiethel,  who'  rebuilt  Jericho  (KC.  post  915),  above 
700  years  after  ita  destraction  by  the  Isiaelites,  and 
who,  in  so  doing  (I  Kings  xyi,  84),  incurred,  in  the 
death  of  hia  eldest  son  Abiiam  and  his  youngest  son 
Segub,  the  effects  of  the  imprecation  pronounced  by 
Joahua  (Joah.  vi,  26) : 


slefatof  Jehorah. 

\  tnis  city,  even  Jericho ; 


"  Aecnraed  the  man  !n  the  sic 
Who  sball  arise  and  baild  this  city, 
WUh  Cihe  losa  of]  his  flrst-bora  shsll  he  fuund  it. 
And  with  [the  loss  of]  his  yoangesŁ  shall  he  Ax  Its  gates.*" 

— Kitto.  See  jERicna  Strabo  speaks  of  such  cursing 
of  a  destroyed  city  as  an  ancient  custóm,  and  instanoes 
the  cnrsea  imprecated  by  Agamemnon  and  Croesua  (Gro- 
tiua,  Annot.  ad  Joih,  ri,  26) ;  Jiaaius  comparea  the  curs- 
ing of  Carthage  by  the  Romans  (Poli  Sytu).  The  term 
Bethelite  (^^xn  n^S)  here  only  is  by  some  reodered 
famihf  of  cunmg  (Pet.  Martyr),  and  also  hou»e  at  place 
ofcurtmg  (Ar.,  Syr.,  and  Chald.  vcrw.),  qu.  nbx  n^^S ; 
but  there  seems  no  reason  for  ąuestioning  the  accuracy 
of  the  Sept.  o  Bat9ri\iTJjc,  which  is  approved  by  most 
commentatora,  and  sanctioned  by  Gesenius  (J>7.  s.  v.). 
The  rebuilding  of  Jericho  waa  an  intrusion  upon  the 
kingdom  of  Jehoshaphat,  unless,  with  Peter  Martyr,  we 
suppose  that  Jericho  had  already  been  detached  firom  it 
by  the  kings  of  Israel — Smith.     See  Accursed. 

Hieracas.    See  Hierax. 

Hii^zap^^olis  (Upa-wokiCy  sacnd  ciiy),  a  city  of 
Phiygia,  situated  above  the  junction  of  the  rivers  Ly- 
cus  and  Maeander,  not  far  from  Colosse  and  Laodicea, 
whcre  there  waa  a  Christian  church  under  the  charge 
of  Epaphras  aa  early  as  the  time  of  the  apostle  Paul, 
who  commenda  him  for  his  fidelity  and  zeal  (Colos.  iv, 
1^  13).  The  place  ia  viaible  from  the  theatre  at  Lao- 
dicea, fifom  which  it  is  (ive  miles  distant  northward. 
lu  aosociation  with  Laodicea  and  Colossie  is  just  what 
we  ahoold  expect,  for  the  three  towns  were  all  in  the 


basin  of  the  Mieander,  and  within  a  few  miles  of  one  an- 
other. It  is  probable  that  Hierapolis  was  one  of  the 
"iUustres  Asiie  urbea"  (Tacitus,  Anru  xiv,  27)  which, 
with  Laodicea,  were  simultaneously  desolated  by  an 
earthąuake  about  the  time  when  Christianity  was  estab- 
lished  in  this  district.  There  is  little  doubt  that  the 
church  of  Hierapolis  was  founded  at  the  same  time  with 
that  of  ColossK,  and  that  its  characteristics  in  the  apofr- 
tolic  period  were  the  same.  Smith,  in  his  jouraey  to 
the  Seven  Churches  (1671),  was  the  first  to  describe  the 
ancient  sites  in  this  neighborhood.  He  was  followed 
by  Pococke  and  Chandler;  and  morę  recently  by  Rich- 
ter, 0>ckerell,  Hartley,  Arundel,  etc,  The  place  now 
bears  the  name  of  Pambuk-Kalek  (Cotton-Castle),  from 
the  white  appearance  of  the  cliffs  of  the  roomitain  on 
the  lower  summit,  or,  rather,  an  extended  terrace,  on 
which  the  ruins  are  situated.  It  owed  its  celebrity,  and 
probably  the  sanctity  indicated  by  iu  ancient  namc,  to 
ita  very  remarkable  thennal  springs  of  minerał  water 
(Dio  Cas&  lxviii,  27;  Pliny,  Hitt,  Nat.  ii,  95),  the  sin- 
gular  effects  of  which,  in  the  formation  of  stalactitea 
and  incrustations  by  its  deposits,  are  shown  in  the  ao- 
counta  of  Pococke  (ii,  pt.  2,  c.  13)  and  Chandler  {Atia 
Minor,  c  68)  to  have  been  accurately  describeid  by 
Strabo  (xiii,  629).  A  great  number  and  variety  of  sep- 
ulchres  are  found  in  the  approaches  to  the  site,  which 
on  one  sidc  is  sufficiently  defended  by  the  precipices 
overlooking  the  valleys  of  the  Lycus  and  Mieander,  while 
on  the  other  sides  the  town  walls  are  still  obeer\'able. 
The  magnificent  ruina  clearly  attest  the  ancient  impor- 
tance  of  the  phu%.  The  main  street  can  still  be  traced 
in  ita  whole  extent,  and  is  boidered  by  the  remains  of 
three  Christian  churches,  one  of  which  is  upwards  of 
300  feet  long.  About  the  middle  of  this  street,  just 
above  the  minerał  springs,  Pococke,  in  1741,  thought 
that  he  distinguished  some  remains  of  the  Tempie  of 
Apollo,  which,  according  to  Damascius,  ąuoted  by  Pho- 
tius  (Biblioth,  p.  1054),  was  in  this  situatiou.  But  the 
principal  ruins  are  a  theatre  and  gymnasium,  both  in  a 
State  of  uncommon  presenration ;  the  former  846  feet  in 
diameter,  the  latter  nearly  filling  a  spacc  400  feet  sąuare. 
Strabo  (loc  dt)  and  Pliny  (//wf.  Nat.  v,  29)  mention  a 
cave  called  the  Plutonium,  filled  with  pestilential  vapor8, 
similar  to  the  celebrated  Grotto  del  Cane  in  Italy.  High 
up  the  mountain-side  is  a  deep  recess  far  into  the  moun- 
tain ;  and  Mr.  Arundell  says  that  he  should  havc  sup- 


Coinof  Hierapolis. 

posed  that  the  mephitic  cavem  lay  in  this  recess,  if  Mr. 
CockereU  had  not  found  it  near  the  theatre,  the  position 
anciently  msigned  to  it;  and  hc  conjectures  that  it  may 
be  the  same  in  which  Chandler  distinguished  the  arca 
of  a  stadium  (Arundell,  A  na  Minor ^  ii,  210).  The  same 
writer  give8,  from  the  Oriens  Chrisłianus,  a  list  of  the 
bishops  of  Hierapolis  down  to  the  time  of  the  emperor 
Isaac  Angelus.  (See  CoLLeake's  Gcogr,  of  Asia  Mi- 
nory  p.  252,  258;  Hamillon's  Re$,  in  Asia  Minor,  i,  514, 
517  sq. ;  Fellows,  Lycia,  p.  270 ;  A  sia  Minor,  p.  283  sq. ; 
Cramer'8  i4na  Minor,  ii,  37  sq.).— Kitto ;  Smith. 

HIERAPOLIS,  Cou.NCiL  of,  held  about  A.D.  197  by 
Apollinarius,  bishop  of  the  see,  and  26  other  bishops, 
who  excommunicated  Montanua,  Maximi]ian,  and  The- 
odctus.— Landon,  ifaii.  ofCounciU,  p.  265. 

Hierarchy  (tipapxia,  (tom  Upóc,  sacred,  and  ap- 
X^Vf  rulei),  a  term  used  to  denote,  in  churches  in  which 
the  whole  ruling  power  is  held  by  the  priesthood,  a  sa- 
cred  principality  instituted  by  our  Lord  Jesus  Christ  in 


HIERARCHT 


234 


HIERARCHT 


hiB  Chuich,  and  conBisting  of  orders  of  conflecnted  pei^ 
sona,  with  gradations  of  rank  and  power,  who  constitute 
exclu8ively  the  goyerning  and  ministeruig  body  in  the 
Church.  It  implies  the  tnuiBinission,  imder  what  ia 
called  the  Apostolical  Succeasion  [aee  Succession],  of 
the  authority  to  teach  and  govem  gi^en  by  Chriat  to 
hifi  apostles;  and  thua  the  hienirchyi  aa  a  coiporation, 
pezpetuates  itaelf.  The  hierarchy  on  earth  ia  auppoaed 
to  correspond  with  the  hierarchy  of  **  angela  and  arch- 
angels,  and  all  the  hoeta"  of  heayen,  with  the  Yirgin 
Maiy  at  their  head.  The  Christian  hierarchy,  again,  ia 
siippoeed  to  correspond  to  the  Jewish  gradationa  of  the 
priesthood.  See  Church.  The  nodon  of  a  "  oontinu- 
ity  of  plan  running  on  from  the  Jewish  hierarchical  sys- 
tem into  the  Christian,  i.  e.  the  Komish  spiritoal  monar- 
chy, is  an  ideał  analogy  which  bas  captivated"  many 
an  ardent  imagination,  from  Cyprian  down  to  Maimiiig 
and  Newman.  For  an  exposure  of  its  fallacy,  see  Tay- 
lor, Ancient  Chrisiiamty  (Lond.  1844, 2  yoIs.  8vo), ii,  403. 

I.  Roman  Caiholic. — According  to  the  Roman  Catho- 
lic  theory,  the  hierarchy  is  divinely  ordained,  and  waa 
established  in  the  Church  by  Christ,  who  gare  the  pri- 
macy  of  authority  to  Peter,  and  instituted,  in  subordina- 
tion  to  the  primacy,  the  three  orders  biahops,  priests, 
and  deacons.  The  primacy  of  Peter  is  perpetuated  in 
the  popes,  from  whom  bishops  hołd  their  authority  to 
goyem  their  dioceses,  and  to  ordain  priests  and  deacons. 
This  monarchico-hierarchical  system  grew  up  gradually 
in  the  Latin  Church  by  a  series  of  usurpations  of  power 
on  the  part  of  the  bishops  of  Romę  in  succeeding  centu- 
ries.  In  the  Greek  Church  the  hierarchy  is  oligarchical, 
not  mouarchical,  no  patriarch  haying  supremę  author- 
ity oyer  all  other  prelates  (see  Schaff,  in  Brit.  and  For- 
Hgn,  EtangeHccd  Review,  Oct,  1865  and  Jan.  1866).  The 
Roman  hierarchy  is  divided  into  the  hierarchy  of  orders 
and  the  hierarchy  of  Jurisdiction,  The  hierarchy  of  or- 
ders, again,  indudes  the  hierarchy  by  dirine  right  ( juris 
diyini)  and  the  hierarchy  by  ecdestagticał  right  (juris 
eodesiastici). 

(I.)  Hierarchy  of  Orders. — (1.)  The  hierarchy  jwm 
dimni  includes,  1.  Bishops  (sacerdotes  primi  ordinisj  epi- 
ce* etprincipes  oftmium),  who  are  successors  of  the  apos- 
tles, and  by  whom  alone,  through  ordination,  the  minis- 
try  of  Christ  is  preseryed  araong  men.  As  to  order,  the 
bishops  are  only  a  fuller  form  of  the  order  of  priests, 
with  goyerning  and  ordaining  power  superadded.  Some 
Roman  Catholtcs  hołd  that  bishops  haye  their  authority 
by  diyiue  right  immediaŁely^  others  (and  these  are  now 
the  majority)  that  they  haye  it  mediaiely  through  the 
pope.  See  Episoopacy.  2,  Priests  (presbyters),  who 
receiye  from  the  bbhop,  by  ordination,  the  power  to 
administer  the  sacraments,  to  change  the  bread  and 
winę  into  the  body  and  blood  of  Christ,  and  to  abeolye 
penitenta  from  their  sins.  The  place  in  which  they 
shall  exerciae  these  functions  is  not  optional  with  them- 
selyes,  but  depends  entirely  upon  the  will  of  the  bishop. 
8.  Deacons,  who  seryc  as  helpers  to  bishops  and  priests 
in  the  administration  of  the  sacraments,  and  in  the  pas- 
torał care  of  the  sick  and  poor. 

(2.)  The  hierarchy  o/ ecdesiastical  right  includes  the 
minor  orders  of  subdeaoons,  acolytes,  exorcists,  lictors, 
and  doorkecpcrs,  being  all  extenaions  of  the  diaconate 
downwards,  so  to  speak. 

(II.)  Hierarchy  of  Jurisdictioru — This  embraces  the 
roanifold  "  principałities  and  powers"  which  łuiye  been 
constituted  in  the  Church  in  the  course  of  her  progrcss 
towards  uniyersał  dominion.  It  includes  archdeacons, 
archpresbyters,  deans,  yicars,  inferior  prelates,  and  cardi- 
nals.  In  the  order  of  bishops,  again,  there  are  archbiah- 
opa,  metropolitans,  exarchs,  and  patriarcha.  The  pope 
is  at  the  head  of  all,  the  bearer  of  all  the  functions  of 
eyery  office,  and  the  source  of  authority  for  each.  See 
Pap  AL  System.  The  Roman  hierarchy  is  a  yast  polit- 
ico-ecclesiastical  Corporation,  with  the  pope  at  its  head, 
daimlng  uniyersał  dominion  oyer  all  men  and  oyer  all 
goyemmenta.  See  CuRi  A  Romana  ;  Popk.  Itisagreat 
power,  morę  important,  as  De  Maiatre,  one  of  the  great- 


eat  modem  Roman  writera  remaika,  than  aoiind  doctrinei 
inaamuch  aa  it  ia  ^  morę  indispensaUe  to  the  preserri- 
tion  of  the  faith"  (L«ttr«,  ii,  285>  Thia  idea  of  a  hie- 
rarchy with  a  uniyersał  dominion,  and  with  an  inikllibiie 
head,  oonstituting  a  yisilde  pzindpality  on  earth,  and 
therefore  neceasaiily  using  eecular  means  of  anpport,  and 
^  therefore  alao  unayoidably  offering  the  higfaest  paso- 
błe  excitementa  to  camal  amtation,"  ia  a  magnifieent 
one,  considered  merely  aa  a  human  oiganizatiun  scck- 
ing  power  oyer  men ;  bot  it  ia  utterly  out  of  hannany 
¥rith  Scriptiu^  and  with  the  character  and  Haim*  of 
Chriatiaiiity  aa  a  apiritual  religion. 

II.  After  the  Reformation,  the  churchea  on  the  Con- 
tinent  of  Europę  relinquished  the  hierarchy,  althongh  it 
might  haye  been  retained  with  eaae  in  Germany,  Swe- 
den,  and  Denmark,  aa  numeroua  bishops  became  Prot^ 
eatanta.     The  Church  of  England,  howeyer,  retained  it, 
and,  in  fact,  she  is  diatinguished  finom  all  other  Europe- 
an  Ph>teatant  churches  by  her  daim  to  a  regular  hiersz- 
chy,  in  fuli  apostolical  snocession.    The  High-Chnreh 
notion  of  the  hierarchy  ia  statcd  by  J.  H.  Blunt  (Z>ie- 
łionary  of  Hittorical  and  Doctrinal  Theologjfy  a.  v.)  as 
foliowa :  "'  Our  liord,  the  chief  bishop,  chose  out  twelye 
apostlea  and  seyenty  discipłea,  corresponding  to  the 
twelye  princes  of  tribes  and  che  aeyenty  eldera,  who,  with 
Moaes,  goyemed  God'a  ancient  people,  in  order  to  show 
that  łiis  Church  ia  the  tnie  spiritual  Israel  of  God.    St. 
Paul  gaye  authority  to  Timothy  and  Titns  to  consUtute 
bbhope  and  deacona;  St.  Paul  exercised  yiaitation  oyer 
the  priests  summoned  to  Ephcsus;  with  Bamabas  he 
ordained  priests  (Acts  xiy,  23).     St.  Peter  gaye  cbaiga 
to  priests  and  deacona  (1  Pet.  y,  1-5),  and  St.  John  re- 
ceiyed  diyinc  commiaaion  to  exercise  anthońty  oyer  the 
seyen  angełs  or  bishops  of  the  churches  of  Asia.     In  or- 
der to  presenre  the  unity  of  the  Church,  Christendom 
was  diyided  into  dioceses,  each  with  a  nnmber  of  priests 
and  deacona  under  one  head,  the  bishop,  to  regulate  the 
faith  and  manners  of  the  people,  and  to  minister  to  thcm 
in  God's  name.    The  hierarchy  cmbracea  the  power  of 
jurisdiction  and  of  order,  considered  as  a  principalUy, 
The  hierarchy  of  order  was  established  to  sanctify  the 
Body  of  Christ,  and  is  composed  of  all  persona  in  ordcTŁ 
The  hierarchy  of  jurisdiction  was  established  for  the 
goyeniment  of  the  faithful,  and  to  promote  their  etenial 
holiness,  and  is  composed  of  prelatcsL    The  hierarchy 
of  order  by  ministration  of  the  aacramenta  and  preacłi- 
ing  the  Gospel  aima  at  eleyating  and  hallowing  the  spi> 
itual  life ;  the  hierarchy  of  Juriadiction  is  for  the  promo- 
tion  of  cxterior  discipline.    The  hierarchy  of  order  con- 
fers  no  jurisdiction,  but  simply  power  to  perfoim  ecde- 
siastical functions  and  administer  sacramentSi,  whercas 
the  other  hierarchy  bestows  jurisdiction,  and  conse- 
ąuently  the  right  of  making  ordinancea  conceming  the 
faith  and  ecdesiastical  discipline,  and  to  correct  offend- 
ers.    The  prindpal  duty  of  minbters  of  the  Church  Ib  to 
lead  men  to  the  knowledge  and  worship  of  God,  and  the 
Church  therefore  requires  laws  and  ruka  for  the  guid- 
ance  of  her  ministera.     The  hierarchy  of  order,  that  of 
the  ministration  of  the  Word  and  sacraments,  appeitains 
to  all  clergy  according  to  the  measure  of  their  power; 
the  hierarchy  of  jurisdiction,  which  is,  in  fact,  the  hicrsi^ 
chy,  being  the  chief  power  of  the  Church,  pertains  to 
prelates  alone,  but  cannot  exist  without  the  other  hie- 
rarchy, although  the  latter  can  be  without  jurisdiction, 
which  it  presuppoees,  and  is  ita  foundation.     In  the  one 
the  cłerical  character  or  order,  L  e.  the  eccleńasticał  of- 
fice,  only  is  regarded;  in  the  other  the  dogrce,  the  rank 
in  jurisdiction  of  a  prelate,  is  alone  considered.     Both 
haye  one  origin  and  one  object,  and  both  flow  from  the 
cłerical  character;  but  order  is  of  diyine  right,  jurisdic- 
tion an  ecdesiastical  necessity,  with  its  diflTerrnces  of 
chief  bishops,  prełacies,  and  ranks  of  ministers."     The 
Protestant  Kpiscopai  Chttrch  retains  the  hierarchy  of  or- 
der, yiz.  bishops,  priests,  and  deacons,  together  with  the 
claim  of  apostolical  succession.     But  the  power  of  juris- 
diction is  diyided  with  the  laity,  who  are  repreaented  in 
the  highest  judicatory,  the  G^icral  CoDyention,  and  in 


HIERAX 


235 


HIEROGLYPHICS 


tłus  view  thftt  Cborch  is  not  bieraichicaL  The  Metho- 
ditt  EpUeopal  Ckurch  preseryes  the  order  of  bishope, 
presbyters  or  ełders,  aiid  deaoona,  but  does  not  ciaim 
thst  her  epiaoopocy  retains  the  >o>caUed  apoatoUcal  suc* 
cenon ;  and  ahe  admita  the  laity  to  many  of  her  of- 
fiees,  e^iedally  to  thoee  in  which  temporalities  are  oon- 
eemed.  The  Presbyterian  and  Congiegatioiial  church- 
es  <ji  America  are  not  hierarchical  in  goyernment.  See 
Dułiops;  Chubch;  Episoopacy;  Laity;  Orders; 
Pap  AL.  Systkm;  Protestant  £pi80Opal  Church; 
KoxAX  Cathouc  Church. 

Hieraz  or  EUeracas,  an  Egyptian  ascetic  philoe- 
opher,  native  of  Leontoa  or  Leontopolis,  claased  among 
the  heretica  of  the  dd  centory.  Epiphanius,  Photius, 
and  Peter  of  Sicily  conaidered  him  a  Manichaean.  "  He 
waa,  at  alł  events,  a  perfectly  original  phenomenon,  dis- 
tinguished  for  his  yaried  leaming,  allegorical  eKcgesis, 
poetical  talent,  and  still  morę  for  his  eccentric  ascetLsm. 
He  tanght  that,  as  the  business  of  Christ  on  earth  was 
to  piomulgate  a  new  law,  more  perfect  and  strict  than 
that  of  Moaes,  he  prohibited  the  use  of  winę,  flesh,  mat- 
rimony,  and  whateyer  was  pleasing  to  the  sensea.  Hi- 
eTax  denied  the  histońcal  reality  of  the  fali  and  the  res- 
urrection  of  the  body ;  exclude<l  children  dying  before 
years  of  discretion  from  the  kingdom  of  heayen ;  distin- 
guifthed  the  substance  of  the  Son  from  that  of  the  Fa- 
tber;  taught  that  Melchizedec  was  the  HolyGhost;  ob- 
iciired  Łhe  sacred  yolume  with  allegorical  interpreta- 
tions;  and  maintained  that  patadise  was  only  the  joy 
and  aatisfaction  of  the  mind.  His  followers  were  some- 
timea  called  Abstincnts,  because  of  their  scrupulously  ab- 
nttining  from  the  use  of  winę  and  certain  meats.  He 
wrote  some  oommentaries  on  Scripture,  and  hymns, 
which  aie  only  known  by  quotation8  in  Epiphanius. 
See  Lardner,  Works,  iii,  285 ;  Mosheim,  Comm.  ii,  404 ; 
Neander,  Church  Uittory,  i,  713 ;  Schaff,  History  o/ the 
Christian  Church,  p.  510 ;  Hoefer,  liouv.  Btot/.  GśMrak, 
xxiy,«47. 

Hier^eSl  (U^X),  gtyen  (1  Esdr.  ix,  21)  as  the 
name  of  one  of  the  '^sons  of  Emmer"  who  diyorced  their 
heathen  wiyea  after  the  Ci^)tłyity ;  cvidently  the  Jeui- 
Ki.  (q.  V.)  of  the  Heb.  text  (Ezra  x,  21;. 

Hier^emoth  (Ifpt/uiBi),  the  name  of  two  men  in 
the  Apocrypha. 

1.  A  **  son  of  Ela,"  who  diyorced  his  GentUe  wife  after 
the  Capdyity  (1  Esdr.  ix,  27) ;  the  Jerimoth  (q.  y.)  of 
the  Heb^  text  (Ezra  x,  26). 

2.  A  '^  son  of  Mani"  who  did  the  same  (1  Esdr.  x,  80) ; 
the  Ramoth  (q.  y.)  of  the  Heb.  text  (Ezra  x,  29). 

Hierie^lns  ('Icpii^Aoc  t.  r.  'UZpiri\oc),  another  of 
the  "aons  of  Ela"  who  in  like  manner  diyorced  his  wife 
(1  Eadr.  iz,  27) ;  the  Jehiel  (q.  y.)  of  Ezra  x,  26. 

Hier^mas  (Upfiac),  one  of  "  the  sons  of  Phoros" 
who  did  the  same  (1  Esdr.  x,  26) ;  the  Ramiah  (q.  y.) 
of  the  Heb.  text  (Ezra  x,  25). 

Hieiocles,  goyemor  of  Bithynia,  and  afterwards  of 
Alexandria  (A.D.  306),  is  said  by  Lactantius  (Itut,  IHmn, 
r,  2 ;  />e  Marie  Peraec.  c.  17)  to  haye  been  the  principal 
adriser  of  the  persecntion  of  the  Chrisdans  in  the  leign 
of  the  emperor  Diocledan  (A.D.  802).  He  also  wzote 
two  books  against  Christianity,  entitled  Aóyoc  0fXaXn- 
Ouc  Tfioc  rovc  Xpumavovc  (Truth-lomnff  Worda  to  the 
CkHstiaN$\  which,  like  Porphyry^s  (q.  v.)  work,  haye 
beea  destioyed  by  the  mistaken  zeal  of  the  later  empe- 
Ton^  and  they  are  known  to  us  only  by  the  repliea  of  £u- 
•ebius  of  Cnarea.  In  theae,  according  to  Lactantius, 
"  h«  endeayored  to  ahow  that  the  sacred  Scriptures  oyer- 
throw  themaelyes  by  the  contradictiooa  with  which  they 
abound;  he  particularly  inaisted  upon  aeyeral  texta  aa 
inoanńetent  with  each  other;  and  indeed  on  ao  many, 
and  ao  diatinctly,  that  one  might  auapect  he  had  aome 
Łtme  profeaaed  the  religion  which  he  now  attempted  to 
expoae.  He  chiefly  reyiled  Paul  and  Peter,  and  the 
otbfir  diaciplea,  a»  propagatora  of  falaehood.  He  aaid 
that  Christ  waa  baniahed  by  the  Jewa,  and  afler  that 


got  together  900  men,  and  oommitted  robbery.  He  en- 
deayored to  oyerthrow  Christ*s  mirades,  though  he  did 
not  deny  the  truth  of  them,  and  aimed  to  show  that 
like  things,  or  eyen  greater,  had  been  done  by  Apollo- 
nius  of  Tyana"  {Inst,  Dknn.  y,  2, 3).  Eusebius^s  tieatise 
aboye  referred  to  is  ^Againtt  Jłieroclei ;""  in  it  he  re- 
yiews  the  Li/e  of  ApoUamus  writteu  by  Philostratua 
(publłshed  by  Olearius,  with  Latin  yersion,  Leips.  1709). 
See  Fabricius,  BiUiotheca  Gnsca,  i,  792 ;  Caye,  HitL  Lit. 
annod06;  English  CgdopcBdiaf  Farrar, //istory  o/Free 
Thouffht,  p.  62, 64 ;  Neander,  Ch,  Hist,  i,  173 ;  Schaff,  Ch, 
Hittoryy  i,  194 ;  Brockhaua,  EncyUop,  yii,  916;  Lardner, 
Vyori»,  vii,  207, 474,  etc. 

Hierooles,  a  Neo-Platonist  of  the  5th  centuiy  at 
Alexandria.  He  is  aaid  to  be  the  author  of  a  Commen' 
tary  upon  the  Golden  Yertea  of  Pythagoras^  which  is  still 
extant ;  and  also  a  Discour$e  on  Foreknowledge  and  Faie, 
of  which  Photius  has  presenred  large  extract8.  Stobse- 
us  has  also  preseryed  the  fragments  of  aeyeral  other 
works  which  are  ascribed  to  Hierocles.  The  Greek  text 
of  the  Commentary  on  the  Golden  Yeraee  ofPythagorcu 
was  first  published  by  Curterius  (Paris,  1583 ;  reprinted 
at  London,  1654;  also  1742;  and  Padua,  1744).  The 
fragments  of  the  Discourge  on  Foreknowledge  and  Faie, 
in  which  Hierocles  attempts  to  recondle  the  free-willof 
man  with  the  foreknowledge  of  God,  have  been  edited 
by  Moreli  (Paris,  1598, 1597),  and  by  Pearson  (London, 
1655, 1673) ;  the  latter  edidon  contains  the  fragments 
of  the  other  works  of  Hierocles.  A  complete  edition  of 
his  works  was  published  by  Needham  (Cambridge,  1709). 
Both  Pearson  and  Needham  confound  this  Hierocles 
with  Hierocles,  the  prefect  of  Bithynia.  The  Diecourae 
on  Foreknotoledge  and  FcUe  was  translated  into  French 
by  Regnaud  (Lyons,  1560).  Grotius  translated  part  of 
this  work  into  Latin  in  his  SentenUa  Philosophorum  de 
Fato  (Paris,  1624;  Amst.  1648;  reprinted  in  the  third 
yolume  of  his  theological  works,  1679).  The  Commen- 
tary on  the  Golden  Yenes  has  been  translated  into  Eng- 
lish  by  HaU,  London,  1657 :  Norris,  London,  1682;  Ray- 
ner,  Norw.  1797 ;  and  into  French  (with  life)  by  Dacier, 
Paris,  1706.  See  Emlieh  Cydopcedia,  s.  y. ;  Smith,  Du>- 
łionary  of  Biography  and  Mythology^  ii,  453 ;  Augnsti, 
Dogmengesckichtej  i  and  ii ;  Lardner,  Worka,  yiii,  127. 

EUeroglyphios  (from  Up6c,  aacred,  and  y\v^ia,  to 
carte),  the  term  usually  applied  to  the  inscriptions  in 
the  ao-called  sacred  or  symbolical  characters  on  the 
Egyptian  monuments.  See  Eoypt.  ^  They  were  either 
engray ed  in  relief,  or  sonk  below  the  surface  on  the  pub- 
lic  monuments  and  hard  materials  suited  for  the  glyptic 
art,  or  else  traced  in  outline  with  a  reed  pen  on  papyri, 
wood,  slices  of  stone,  and  other  objects.  The  scribe,  in- 
deed, wrote  from  a  palette  or  canon  called  pea,  with  pens, 
kaah,  tirom  two  little  ink-holea  in  the  palette,  containing 
a  black  ink  of  animal  charcoal,  and  a  red  minerał  ink. 
The  hierogljTphica  on  the  monumenta  are  aometimea 
aculptured  and  plain ;  at  others,  decorated  with  colors, 
either  one  simple  tonę  for  all  the  hieroglyphs,  which  are 
then  called  monochrome,  or  else  omamented  with  a  ya- 
riety  of  colora,  and  then  called  polychrome ;  and  thoae 
painted  on  coifins  and  other  objects  are  often  first  traced 
out,  and  then  colored  in  detaiL  On  the  papyri  and 
some  few  inferior  materials  they  are  simply  sketched  in 
outline,  and  are  called  linear  hieroglyphs.  The  hiero- 
glyphs are  ananged  in  perpendicuhur  columns,  separa- 
ted  by  lines,  or  in  horizontal,  or  distributed  in  a  sporadic 
manner  in  the  area  of  the  picture  to  which  they  refer. 
Sometimes  all  theae  modea  of  arrangement  are  found  to- 
gether. One  peculiarity  is  at  once  discemible,  that  all 
the  animals  and  representations  face  in  the  same  direc- 
tion  when  they  are  oombined  into  a  text;  and  when 
mixed  up  with  reliefe  and  scenes,  they  usually  face  in 
the  direction  of  the  figures  to  which  they  are  attached. 
When  thus  arranged,  the  relieft  and  hieroglyphs  reaem- 
ble  a  MS.,  eyeiy  letter  of  which  ahould  also  be  an  illn- 
mination,  and  they  produce  a  gay  and  agreeable  im- 
preaaion  on  the  apectator.   They  are  written  yery  Bquaie^ 


HIER0GLYPHIC5S 


236 


HIEROGLTPHICS 


the  spaces  are  neatly  and  carefullj  packed,  80  aa  to  leaye 
no  naked  appearance  of  background. 

"  The  inYention  of  hieroglypha,  called  Neter  kharu, 
or  *  divine  wordfs*  was  attributed  to  the  god  Thoth,  the 
Egyptian  LogoB,  who  is  repeatedly  called  the  sciibe  of 
the  gods  and  lord  of  the  hieroglyphs.  Fliny  attńbutea 
their  inyention  to  Menon.  The  literaturę  of  the  Egyp- 
tians  was  in  fact  called  Hermaic  or  Hcrmetic,  on  ao- 
oount  of  its  supposed  dirine  origin,  and  the  knowledge 
of  hieroglyphs  was,  to  a  certain  extent,  a  myatery  to  the 
uninitiated,  although  uniyersally  employed  by  the  sao- 
erdotal  and  instructed  classes.  To  foreign  nations,  the 
hieroglyphs  always  remained  so,  although  Mosee  ia  aup- 
poeed  to  have  been  yersed  in  the  knowledge  of  them 
(Philo,  vtiu  Moysis) ;  but  Joseph  is  described  (Gen.  xlii, 
28)  as  conrersing  with  his  brethren  through  interpretersi 
and  does  not  appear  to  allude  to  hieroglyphic  writing. 
The  Greeks,  who  had  settled  on  the  coast  as  early  as 
the  Cth  century  B.C.,  do  not  appear  to  have  poss^sed 
morę  than  a  oolloąuial  knowledge  of  the  language  (Diod. 
Sic  lxxxi,  3,  4) ;  and  although  Solon,  B.C.  638,  is  said 
to  have  studied  Eg^^ptian  doctrines  at  Sebennytus  and 
Heliopolis,  and  the  doctrines  of  Pythagoras  are  said  to 
have  been  derived  from  Egypt,  these  sages  could  only 
have  acquired  their  knowledge  from  interpretations  of 
hieroglyphic  writings.  Hecatieus  (B.C.  521)  and  He- 
rodotus  (B.C.  456),  who  yisited  Egypt  in  their  .trayels, 
óbtaincd  from  similar  sources  the  Information  they  have 
afforded  of  the  language  or  monuments  of  the  country 
(Herod,  ii, 36).  Democritus  of  Abdera,  indeed,  about  the 
same  period  (B.C.  459),  had  described  both  the  Ethiopian 
hieroglyphs  and  the  Babylonian  cuneiform,  but  his  work 
has  disappcared.  Ailer  the  oonąuesŁ  of  Egypt  by  Alex- 
andcr,  the  Greek  rulers  began  to  pay  attention  to  the 
language  and  history  of  their  subjects,  and  Eratostbenes, 
the  keeper  of  the  museum  at  Alexandria,  and  Manetho, 
the  high-priest  of  Sebennytus,  had  drawn  up  accounta 
of  the  national  chronology  and  history  from  hieroglyphic 
sources.  Under  the  Roman  empire,  in  the  reigu  of  Au- 
gustus,  one  Cłueremon,  the  keeper  of  the  library  at  the 
Serapieum,  had  drawn  up  a  dictionary  of  the  hiero- 
glyphs ;  and  both  Diodorua  and  Strabo  mention  them, 
and  describe  their  naturę.  Tacitus,  later  under  the  em- 
pire, gires  the  account  of  the  monuments  of  Thebes 
translatcd  by  the  Egyptian  priests  to  Germanicus;  but 
after  his  time,  the  knowledge  of  them  beyond  Egypt  it^ 
self  was  exceedingly  limited,  and  does  not  reappear  till 
the  third  and  8ubsequent  centuries  A.D.,  when  they 
are  mentioned  by  Ammianus  Maroellinus,  who  dtes  the 
translation  of  one  of  the  obelisks  at  Komę  by  one  Her- 
mapion,  and  by  Julius  Yalerius,  the  author  of  the  apoc- 
ryphal  life  of  Alexander,  who  gives  that  of  another. 
Heliodorus,  a  noreUst  who  flourished  A.D.  400,de8cribes 
a  hieroglyphic  letter  written  by  queen  Candace  (iv,  8). 
The  first  positive  information  on  the  subject  is  hy  Cle- 
ment  of  Alexandria  (A.D.  211),  who  mentions  the  sym- 
bolical  and  phonetic,  or,  as  he  calls  it,  cyriologic  naturę 
of  hieroglyphics  (Stronu  v).  Porphyiy  (A.D.  804)  di- 
▼ides  them  also  into  coenologic  or  phonetic,  and  oeni^ 
matic  or  symbolic  HorapoUo  or  Horus-ApoUus,  who  is 
aupposed  to  have  flourished  about  A.D.  500,  wrote  two 
books  expIanatory  of  the  hieroglyphics,  a  rude,  ill-assort^ 
ed  confusion  of  truth  and  flction,  in  which  are  giyen  the 
interpretation  of  many  hieroglyphs,  and  their  esoteric 
meaning.  Afler  this  writer,  aJl  knowledge  of  them  di»- 
appeared  till  the  reyiyal  of  letters.  At  the  beginning  ol 
the  16th  century  these  symbols  first  attracted  attention, 
and,  soon  after,  Kircher,  a  leamed  Jesuit,  pretended  to 
interpret  them  by  vague  esoteric  notions  deriyed  from 
his  own  fancy,  on  the  supposition  that  the  hierogljrphs 
were  ideographic,  a  theory  which  barred  all  progress, 
and  was  held  in  its  fuli  extent  by  the  leamed,  till  Zoega, 
at  the  close  of  the  18th  century  (De  Origint  Obeliscorum, 
foL  Rom.  1797),  first  enunciated  that  the  duals  or  car- 
touches  contained  royal  names,  and  that  the  hieroglyphs, 
or  some  of  them,  were  used  to  ezpiess  sounds"  (Cham- 
bera,  Cyclopcedia), 


"  The  knowledge  of  hieroglyphics  which  we  at  pn»* 
ent  possess  owres  its  origin  to  the  Rosetta  etone,  whkh 
is  now  in  the  British  Museum.  This  stone  was  found 
by  the  French  aroong  the  ruina  of  Fort  St.  Julien,  whidi 
is  situated  near  the  mouth  of  the  Rosetta  branch  of  the 
Nile,  and  was  giyen  up  to  the  English  in  aocordance 
with  the  terma  of  the  treaty  of  Alexandria.    It  ia  sap- 


n^^try^ki-^^ 


«• 


BAFI1A£Y®1^ 


Tbe  Rosetta  Stoue.  with  Speclmens  of  the  three  Styles  of 
Characters  foimd  npon  IL  1, 1',  8acred  or  Hierogljph- 
ic ;  S.  8',  Eochorial  or  Demotie ;  8,  V,  Greek. 

posed  to  have  been  sctdptured  about  6.C  195,  and  eon- 
tains  a  decree  in  honor  of  Ptolemy  V  (Epiphanes)  writ- 
ten in  three  different  characters.  One  of  these  is  Greek, 
and  a  part  of  it  has  been  explained  to  state  that  the 
decree  was  ordered  to  be  written  in  Sacred,  Enchorial, 
and  Greek  writing.  Dr.  Young  (A  rdtaologia,  1817)  was 
the  first  that  attempted  to  dedpher  this  inscription,  in 
which  he  partiaUy  succeeded  by  counting  the  recoirenoe 
of  the  morę  maiked  characterB  in  the  hieroglyphice,  and 
oomparing  them  with  thoee  that  occurred  about  the 
same  number  of  times  in  the  Greek.  ChampoUion  and 
Wilkinson  haye  followed  up  Dr.  Toung^s  discoveriea 
with  great  ingenuity,  and  we  can  now  partially  read  in- 
scriptions  which  before  were  wholly  unintelligible  to  ua. 
Among  other  obstacles,  howeyer,  this  remains  in  the 
way,  yiz.  that  the  Rosetta  stone  was  sculptured  abont 
RC.  195,  and  in  Lower  Eg>'pt ;  while  the  major  part  of 
the  inscriptions  were  written  diiring  the  twelye  previoua 
centuries,  and  are  found  in  Upper  Egypt.  Hieroglyph- 
ics are  written  either  from  left  to  right  or  right  to  lelt, 
according  to  the  direction  in  which  they  face;  thon^^h 
sometimes  the  columns  are  so  narrow  that  they  may  be 
alroost  said  to  be  written  from  top  to  bottom.  They 
are  partly  pictorial;  thus  *  ox,'  *  goose,'  *  tempie'  are  rep- 
resented  by  pictures  or  pictorial  symbols  of  an  ox,  etc 
At  other  times  they  are  phonetic,  and  written  by  an  al* 
phabet  of  about  140  letters,  of  which  many  are  S3mony- 
mous;  some  being  adapted  for  writing,  others  for  scolp- 
turę:  some  in  use  at  an  eariier  period,  otheia  at  a  later. 
The  powers  of  these  letters  are  determined  by  the  namea 
of  the  kłngs  in  which  they  are  found ;  but,  as  thia  can- 
not  be  done  yery  exactly,  they  are  generally  arrang<pd 
under  about  twelye  of  our  primary  letters.  We  cannot, 
howeyer,  distinguish  accurately  between  the  yowels,  or 
p  and  PH,  and  other  cognate  letters.  The  names  of  got- 
ercigns  are  always  written  within  a  ring  or  caitouche: 
those  of  any  other  person  are  distinguished  by  a  8tttin£ 


IIIEROGLYPinCS 


237 


HIERONYMITES 


fignre  IbUowing  them :  bendes  these  there  is  nothing  to 
mirk  the  difference  betwieen  a  letter  and  a  pictorial 
symboL  In  some  woids  the  meaning  is  eipressed 
twice;  ooce  by  a  phonetic  oombination,  and  again  by  a 
pictorial  symbol;  in  othen  the  morę  important  part  is 
tymbołicai,  and  the  gmmmatical  termination  is  spelled. 
•Śometiam  also  we  find  a  species  of  abbreviation ;  thus 
the  woni  ox  would  be  espiessed  by  the  first  letter  of  the 
Coptic  word  aignifying  ox. 

"But  for  the  purpoee  of  writing,  strictly  so  called, 
tbere  was  a  less  onuunental  and  morę  rapid  way  of 
forming  the  chaiactes,  which  is  always  found  in  the 
HSS^  and  which  would  be  the  natural  conseąuence  of 
loing  the  pen  or  stylua.  This  is  called  by  Strabo  and 
Fliay  kierałic  writing,  the  hieroglyphics  being,  as  the 
zuune  imports,  peculiar  to  seulpŁure.  It  is  chiefly  by 
\  of  the  hierogl3rphic8  that  we  are  enabled  to  lead 

HIBROOLYPHIC  ALPHABET. 


J 


D' 


I 


r 
I 


P 

Pn 

P 


& 
8a 

PH 
V 

Co 
Kn 
Sn 

X 


Ba 
H 


J>  .-^-.-^r  .Tr.Tfi.  j.-^- 


—  .U.^.i.l^A^;Ml.*H.^ 


'—.-.-.'-. Ihr.ł.Y. 


..KA.^^.-y.  f».+ 


'•.Af.-^lJ./^.rflK. 


tiU. 


.'w*.! 


the  hieratic  writing,  the  latter  being,  for  the  most  part, 
an  abbreyiated  way  of  writing  the  former.  The  Rosetta 
stone  oontained  the  inscription  in  yet  another  set  of 
characters,  the  dema^  or  aichoriaL  It  is  to  Dr.  Young 
that  we  owe  the  greater  part  of  onr  knowledge  on  this 
subject.  He  was  greatly  assisted  by  the  discovery  of 
two  or  three  papyri  written  in  this  character  with  Greek 
translations,  the  earliest  of  which  dates  in  the  reign  of 
Psammeticus,  about  B.C  650.  An  alphabet  has  been 
formed  from  Greek  pioper  names,  from  which  it  appeam 
that  the  few  words  which  we  can  dedpher  are  Coptic 
In  this  writing  the  hieroglyphics  have  almost  wholly 
disappeared,  though  some  still  appear  scattered  here  and 
there."— Kitto. 

A  popolar  account  of  the  modę  in  which  the  Rosetta 
stone  was  used  as  a  key  for  deciphering  the  hieroglyph- 
ics may  be  found  in  l>r.  Hawks*s  £ffi/pt  and  its  Momt' 
ments  (N.  Y.  1860,  8to),  and  a  morę  critical  statement  in 
Osbum'8  Manumental  Higtory  ofEgypt  (London,  1854, 2 
yols.  8yo).  A  complete  set  of  the  cartouches  of  the 
kings  is  given  by  Poole  in  his  //ons  EgypHaca  (Lond, 
1851,  8vo).  Great  progress  has  of  late  been  madę  in 
the  decipherment  of  these  records,  another  stone  haring 
quite  recently  been  discorered  with  a  bilingual  inscrip- 
tion (Lepsios,  Dos  hiiinffue  Deeret  von  Kanopua,  texta 
and  interlineal  tnmslations,  etc,  BerL  1867  8q.,  4to),  and 
many  papyri  haring  been  brought  to  light  and  read  by 
European  Egyptologists,  among  whom  Wilkinson,  Lep- 
ńos,  DUmichen,  and  Bmgsch  may  be  especially  namcŃl 
The  annexed  view  of  the  hieroglyphical  alphabet  is 
taken  from  GIiddon*8  Lectures  on  Egyptian  Jlistory  (N. 
Y.  1843,  imp.  8to),  and  will  be  found  sufBcient  for  deci- 
phering most  of  the  royal  names.  A  brief  account  of 
the  language  which  these  characters  represcnt  may  be 
found  in  Bawlinson's  Ilerodotuty  vol.  iL  A  tolerably  com- 
plete view  of  the  subject  and  its  literaturę  is  oontained 
in  Appleton's  New  A  merićan  Ctfdopofdia,  s.  v.  The  fol- 
lo?ring  are  some  of  the  latesŁ  works  of  importance  on 
the  subject :  Sharpe,  Egtfptian  Hierogiyphica  (Lond.  1861, 
8vo) ;  Parrot,  Nouv€Ue  Traducłion  des  HUroglyphes  (Par. 
1857,  foL);  Tattam,  Grammar  o/ the  EgyptUm  Lcmguage 
(London,  1868, 8vo) ;  Brugsch,  ffierofflyphitchea-Demoti' 
eehet  Wdrterhuch  (of  an  extensive  character,  with  a  fuli 
hieroglyphical  gnunmar,  Leipe.  1867  są.).    See  Inscbip- 

TtOMS. 

Hieroiiiax,  a  river  of  Palestine  (Fliny,  Hist  Not, 
V,  16),  the  Jarmoch  of  the  Talmud;  now  Kahr  Yarmuk 
(Edrisi  and  Abulfeda),  or  Sheriat  el^Mandkur  (Ritter, 
XT,  872).  The  principal  souroes  are  near  Mezarib,  wfaere 
they  form  a  lakę  of  half  an  hour  in  circumference. — ^Yan 
de  Yekle,  Memoir,  p.  321. 

HieromnSmon  (Gr.  upofŁvłifŁav).  I.  The  title  in 
ancient  history  of  that  one  of  the  two  deputies  sent  by 
each  tribe  to  the  Amphictyonic  Gouncil  who  superin- 
tended  the  religious  rites.  II.  An  ofBcer  in  the  Greek 
Church,  who,  during  seryice,  stands  behind  the  bishop, 
and  pointa  out  to  him  in  order  the  pealms,  pnyers,  etc 
He  also  dresses  the  patriarchs,  and  shows  the  priests  to 
their  places.— Pierer,  viii,  368 ;  Brande,  ii,  124.  ( J.  W.  M.) 

Hieron,  Samuel,  a  clergyman  of  the  Church  of 
England,  somewhat  inclined  to  Puritanism,  was  bom  in 
1572,  was  educated  at  King's  College,  Cambridge,  and 
was  presented  to  the  living  of  Modbury,  Deyonshire, 
which  he  held  till  his  death  in  1617.  He  was  very  elo- 
quent  as  well  as  pious.  His  sermons,  in  two  yolumes, 
were  published  in  1685. — Darling,  Cydop,  Biog,  i,  1470. 

Hleronymites,  or  EremUes  o/ the  Order  o/Jerome, 
a  monkish  order  which  was  first  established  about  1370 
by  the  Portuguese  Vasco  and  the  Spaniard  Peter  Fred. 
Pecha,  and  was  accredited  by  Gregory  XI  in  1373. 
Their  dress  is  a  white  habit  and  a  black  scapulary.  In 
Spoin  and  the  Netherlands  this  order  became  yery  opu- 
lent,  being  possessed  of  many  conyents;  Charles  Y  be- 
longed  to  this  order  ailer  his  abdication.  They  spread 
also  into  the  West  Indies  and  Spanish  America.  At 
pieaent  they  esist  only  in  the  UUter  oouotiyt    Beades 


HIERONYMUS 


238 


HIGH-CHURCHMEN 


theae,  thera  esists  also  another  order  by  the  Bame  name, 
with,however,  but  few  membeis,  foanded  by  Peter  Gam- 
baoorti,  of  Pisa,  about  1380.— Helyot,  Or<L  Momut,  ed. 
Migne,iii,668;  BrockhauB,2:i«:yibfcp.viu,916.  (J.H.W.) 
Hieron^ymiis  (Upmnffioc,  $acred  in  nome,  Vulg. 
Hierottymu8)f  a  Syrian  generał  in  the  time  of  Antiochus 
V.  Eupator  (2  Mace.  xii,  2).  The  name  was  madę  dis- 
tinguished  among  the  Aidatic  Greeks  by  Hieronymus 
of  Caidia,  the  historian  of  A]exander'8  suoeesBors.— 
Smith. 
Hieronjh3tiii8.  See  Jerosie,  St. 
Hierophant  or  MystagfigUB  (Gr.  iepo^avri|c, 
fiwrrayiayóc),  I.  The  high-priest  of  Demeter  who  con- 
ducted  the  oelebration  of  the  Eleiuinian  Mysteries  and 
iuitiated  the  candidates,  bńng  always  one  of  the  Eumol- 
pids,  and  a  citizen  of  AUica.  The  office  was  for  life, 
and  regarded  of  high  religious  importance,  and  the  hi- 
erophant was  requked  to  be  of  maturę  age,  to  be  ¥rith- 
out  physical  defects,  to  possess  a  fine,  sonorous  yoice 
suited  to  the  character  and  dignity  of  the  office,  and 
was  forbidden  to  marry,  though  that  prohibition  may 
have  appUed  only  to  contracting  marriage  ailer  his  in- 
stallation.  He  was  distuiguished  by  a  peculiar  cut  of 
his  hair,  by  the  strophion,  a  sort  of  diadem,  and  by  a 
long  purple  robę.  In  the  Mysteries  he  represented  the 
Demiuige  or  World-creator,  was  the  only  authorized 
custodian  and  expositor  of  the  wiwritten  lawa  (hence 
also  styled  irpo0n^c)»  and  the  utterance  of  his  name  in 
the  presence  of  the  uninitiated  was  forbidden.  II.  The 
name  is  also  given  in  the  Greek  Church  to  the  prior  of 
a  monastery.— Chambers,  8.  V. ;  Pierer,  viii,  870 ;  Smith, 
IHcL  of  Grk,  and  Rom.  A  niiq.  a.  v.  Eomolpids ;  Biande. 
IHcł,  ii,  125.     See  aho  Hiero-hmemon.     (J.W.  M.) 

Hieater,  William,  a  minister  of  the  German  Re- 
formed  Church,  was  bom  in  Berks  County,  Pa.,  Oct.  11, 
1770.  In  youth  he  leamed  the  trade  of  carpenter.  He 
pursued  his  claasical  and  theobgical  studies  with  Rev. 
Daniel  Wagner,  of  York,  Pa.  He  was  licensed  and  «r- 
dained  in  1799.  For  a  short  time  he  senred  sereral 
eongregations  in  Lancaster  County,  Pa.,  when  he  was 
caBed  to  Lebanon,  Lebanon  County,  Pa.,  in  which  charge 
he  labored  tiU  his  death,  Feb.  8, 182a  He  is  remem- 
bered  in  the  German  Reformed  Church  for  his  eamest 
piety,  great  zeal  in  his  pastorał  work,  and  the  active  in- 
terest  he  took  in  the  establishment  of  ita  Theological 
Seminary.  He  preached  both  in  the  German  and  Eng- 
lish  languages.     (H.  H.) 

Higden,  R\nulph  or  R\lph,  an  English  writer 
of  the  14th  century,  was  a  Benedictine  monk  of  the 
monastery  of  St  Werbeig,  in  Cheshire,  who  died  at  a 
very  adranced  age  in  1367  according  to  Bale,  or  in 
1878  according  to  Pits.  His  Pofychronicon,  a  chronicie 
of  event8  from  the  Creation  to  A.D.  1857,  was  written 
originally  in  Latin,  and  trandated  into  English  in  1887 
by  John  of  Trerisa.  From  this  translation  Caxton  madę 
his  Yersion,  and,  continuing  in  an  eighth  book  the 
Chronicie  to  1460,  published  the  whole  under  the  title 
of  Tke  Polycronycon,  oonłtynyng  the  Barynges  and  Dedes 
ofmamf  Times,  m  eyght  Books,  etc.  (1482,  foL).  Trevi- 
sa's  translation  "  contains  many  rare  words  and  expre8- 
wons;  and  is  one  of  the  earliest  specimens  of  English 
prose."  The  first  volume  of  a  new  edition  (containing 
also  a  translation  by  an  unknown  writer  of  the  15th 
century),  edited  by  C.  Babington,  RD.,  appeared  in 
1865.  The  Polychronicon  is  freąuently  cited  by  Eng- 
lish historians.  Bale  published  the  part  relatlog  to  the 
Britons  and  Saxons  in  his  Scripiorts  Oftindtcwt,  etc. 
(Oxford,  1691).  Some  have  aasigned  the  authorship  of 
the  Chester  Mysteries  (1382)  to  Higden,  but  on  doubtful 
grounds.— Bale,  lUust.  Maj.  Brit,  Script.  Summ,;  Pits, 
De  Uiust.  Ang.  Script.;  Hoefer,  Nouv,  Biog,  Generale^ 
xxiv,  656;  Herzog,  ReaUEncyldop,  vi,  88;  Westmingter 
Retńew,  July,  1865,  p,  128.     (J.  W.  M.) 

Higgai'on  (Heb.  Awj^yon',  Vl''J»7)  occurs  in  Psa. 
xcii,  8,  where,  according  to  Geseniosy  it  signifies  the 


mu  rmuriH^  (FUrat,  2ov  or  solemn)  (one  of  the  harp,  Se|«. 
lUT  i^iic  kv  KtBapc.  In  Psa.  ix,  17,  Higgaion  Stlah  ia 
a  musical  sign,  prob.  for  a  pause  in  the  instiumental  in- 
berittde,  Sept.  ^^i^  Btó.  r^takiiaroc ;  and  so  Symn.  Aąo. 
and  Yulg.  See  Sblah.  In  Psa.  xix,  15  the  term  aig^ 
nifies  (and  is  rendered)  medUaUon,  in  Lam.  iii,  62  a  de- 
vice,  "Mendelssohn  tianalates  it  meditaźitm,  tkaugkt, 
idea,  Knapp  {Die  Ptabnen)  identifiea  it  in  P^  ix,  17 
with  the  Arabie  "^^M  and  fiCrt,  *  to  mock,'  and  henoe^bis 
rendering  *What  a  shout  of  laughter!'  (becanae  the 
wicked  are  entrapped  in  their  own  snares) ;  but  in  FIbi.  ^ 
xcii,  4  he  tianslates  it  by  'lieder'  {songt).  JR.  Darid 
Kimchi  iikewise  assigns  two  separate  meanings  to  the 
word;  on  Psa. ix,  17,  he  says, ' This  aid  is  for  us  (a  sub- 
Ject  of)  mediUtion  and  thankfulnees,*  while  in  his  córo- 
mentaiy  on  the  paasage.  Psa.  xcii,  4,  he  give8  to  the 
same  word  the  signification  of  mdody,  *  This  is  the  md- 
ody  of  the  hymn  when  it  is  recited  (played)  on  the 
haip.'  *  We  will  meditate  on  this  forcYer*  (Rashi,  Coai- 
meni,  on  Psa,  ix,  17).  In  Psa.  ix,  17,  Aben  £zra'B  com- 
ment  on  *Higgaion  Selah'  is,  *this  will  I  record  in 
truth:'  on  Psa.  xcii,  4  he  says,  *Higgaioii  means  the 
melody  of  the  hymn,  or  it  is  the  name  of  a  muaical  in- 
strument.' It  would  seem,  then,  that  Higgaion  bas  two 
meanings,  one  of  a  generał  character  implying  tkom^ 
reJUction,  from  n^H  (comp.  '•ab  "P^^iHl,  Psa.  ix,  17,  and 
Dl^n  bD  '^hy  CZy^iX\\  Lam.  iU,  62),  and  another  in 
Psa.  ix,  17,  and  Psa.  xcii,  4,  of  a  technical  naturę,  bear^ 
ing  on  the  import  of  musical  sounds  or  signs  well  known 
in  the  age  of  David,  but  the  preciae  meaning  of  which 
cannot  at  this  distance  of  time  be  determined**  (Smith). 
See  PsALMS. 

Higgizus,  SoLOMOM,  a  Methodist  Episcopal  minister, 
was  bom  in* Maryland  in  January,  1792.  In  his  twenty- 
second  year  he  began  to  preach,  but  failing  health  oom- 
pellcd  him  to  quit  the  ministry,  and  for  8everal  yeaia  he 
was  employed  as  a  clerk  in  Philadelphia.  In  1821  he 
resumed  his  pastorał  connections,  and  the  remainder  of 
his  life  was  spent  in  the  serrice  of  the  Church  aa  pas- 
tor and  as  Sunday-school  agent.  He  was  8eveial  ttmes 
stationed  in  Philadelphia,  and  was  a  member  of  the 
General  Conferenccs  of  1828, 1832, 1886,  and  1840.  He 
died  Febt  12, 1867.— Jf»M/e»  of  Conferenees,  1867,  pL  24. 
HiggiliBOii,  FrancUh  a  Congregational  minister 
and  flrst  pastor  of  Salem,  Mass.,  was  bom  in  England  in 
1587,  graduated  at  Emanuel  College,  Cambridge,  and 
was  appolnted  minister  of  a  church  in  Leicester.  After 
some  time  he  became  a  nonconformist,  and  was  exclttded 
from  the  parish  churoh.  In  1629  he  received  ktten 
firbm  the  goYeraor  and  company  of  Massachusetts  in- 
viting  him  to  proceed  with  them  to  New  England.  He 
accordingly  sailed,  and  on  his  arrival  at  Salem  he  was 
appointed  pastor  of  the  church.  He  died  of  hectic  lerer 
in  August,  1680.  He  wrote  Neto  England^s  PlantaHon,  or 
a  short  and  true  DescripHon  ofthe  Conmodities  and  Dis- 
commodUies  ofthai  Country  (Lond.  1680,  4to).  See  Al- 
len, Am,  Biog,  Dictionary;  Sprague,  Annals^  i,  6b 

HiggiiiBoń,  John,  son  of  the  preceding,  was  bom 
in  England  in  August,  1616,  and  came  to  Massachusetts 
with  his  parents  in  1629.  ■  In  1686  he  rcrooved  to  Con- 
necticut, engaging  in  teaching  and  in  theological  stud- 
ies. From  1659  untił  his  death  in  1708  he  waa  minister 
of  the  church  at  Salem,  Mass.  He  was  zealously  en- 
gaged  in  oontrover8y  with  the  Quaker8,  but  6ubBeqiient- 
ly  regretted  hk  ardor  in  peraecution.  He  puUished 
Beveral  sermons  and  pamphlets.  See  Sprague,  Atmattf 
i,  91. 

High-Churchmen,  a  name  firat  giveh  (circa  1700) 
to  the  nonjurors  in  England  who  refused  to  acknowl- 
edge  William  HI  as  their  Uiwful  king.  It  ia  now  us«»- 
ally  applied  to  those  in  the  ChOreh  of  England  and  in 
the  American  Protestant  Episcopal  Church  wbo  hoM 
exa]ted  notions  of  Church  prerogative8,  and  of  the  pow- 
ers  committed  to  the  clergy,  and  who  lay  much  streaa 
upon  ritual  obseryanoes  and  the  traditions  of  the  la- 


HIGH  COMMISSION 


239 


HIGH  PLACE 


thcn.  See  Wakott,  Saertd  Ardiaology,  p.  812 ;  Himt, 
HUt.Ratkmalum,^b\2H\,\  Kurts, CA. /^wtory, u, 889 ; 
Bucter,  CA.  //u<.u,  549;  Skeat8»  Hitt,  of  Free  Ckurckea, 
pu  289,  317, 318, 343;  Kom, //u<.  Ckr,  Ck.  p.870;  EdfiD, 
7*AcoiL  Bkłiomarjf  ;  and  aitides  England,  Chubch  of; 
and  Fbotestast  Episcopal  CHuncif. 

Hi^  CommiBsion,  Coubt  of,  a  ooart  establish- 
cd  in  Enicland  in  1559  to  Łake  cognizance  of  spuritual  or 
ecdesiastical  oflences,  and  to  inflict  penalties  for  the 
■ame.  The  Puritans  complaining  loudly  of  the  Juris- 
dictioti  of  thia  court,  a  bill  paased  for  putting  down  both 
it  and  the  Star-Chamber  in  the  year  1641.— Neal,  Iłist, 
ofPurUaaUy  i,  89  8q. 

Hish  Maos.  The  Mass  in  the  Ghnrch  of  Bome 
oonaiats  ia  the  ''ooiisecration  of  the  bread  and  winę  4nto 
the  tMMłr  and  blood  of  Christ,'  aa  they  say,  and  the  ofRer- 
ing  np  of  the  aame  body  and  blood  to  God  by  the  min- 
iitiy  of  the  prieat  for  a  perpetual  memoriał  of  Christ^s 
aacrifiee  upon  the  cross,  and  a  oontinuation  of  the  same 
anto  the  worid^s  end."  Hitjh  Mom  is  the  aame  senrice, 
aoeompanied  by  all  the  ceremonies  which  custom  and 
aatłftority  have  anttexed  to  its  celebration,  and  read  be- 
foie  the  high  altar  on  Sundays,  fiut-days,  and  particu- 
laroecaaion&    See  Hass. 

Bigh  place  0^'93,  hccMok';  often  in  the  plural, 
riiiaa ;  Sept.  in  the  historical  booku,  ra  \r^t\Ka^  rd  i;i^ ; 
in  tbe  Ptopheta,  Pwfwi;  in  the  Pentateuch,  <rr^\ai, 
]>v.  xxFi,  30,  etc;  and  once  <i^iuXa,  Ezek.  XAd,  16; 
Yol^.  eacoeUoj  foma)  often  oocurs  in  connection  with 
the  term  ffrote.  By  '*  high  plaoes*'  we  understand  nat- 
ml  or  arUBcial  (niisn  "^tnCi  1  Kinga  xiii,  82;  2  Kmgs 
XTi,  29;  oompb  1  Kinga  zi,  7;  2  Kinga  xxiii,  15)  emi- 
nenoea  wbere  woiship  by  sacrifioe  or  offering  was  madę, 
nanally  upon  an  altar  eracted  theieon ;  and  by  a  '^  groye"* 
ve  understand  a  plantation  of  trees  around  a  spot  in  the 
open  air  set  mpart  for  worship  and  other  sacred  8erviceS| 
and  therrfore  around  or  upon  the  **  high  pkces**  whicłf 
were  aet  apazt  for  the  same  purpoeea.    See  Gro\'e. 

We  find  tiacea  of  these  customs  so  soon  ąfler  the  del- 
oge  that  it  ia  piobaUe  thęy  existed  prior  to  that  eyent 
It  appean  that  the  first  altar  after  the  deluge  was  built 
by  NoAh  upon  the  mountain  on  which  the  ark  reated 
(Uen.  viii,  20).    Abraham,  on  entering  the  Promiaed 
Land,  tmilt  an  altar  upon  a  mountain  between  Beth-el 
and  Hai  (xii,  7, 8).    At  Beeraheba  he  planted  a  grove, 
and  called  there  upon  the  name  of  the  eyerksting  God 
(Gen.  xxi,  33).    The  same  patriarch  was  required  to 
timrel  to  the  Mount  Moriah,  and  there  to  oiTer  up  his 
aoa  laaac  (xxii,  2, 4).    It  waa  upon  a  mountain  in  Gil- 
ead that  Jaeob  and  Laban  offered  sacrifices  before  they 
parted  in  peace  (xxxi,  54).    In  fact,  such  seem  to  haye 
been  the  generał  phu;es  of  worship  in  those  timea;  nor 
doea  any  notioe  of  a  tempie,  or  other  coyered  or  encloaed 
ViiMi"g  for  that  porpoae,  oocur.    Thua  far  all  seems 
dear  and  intelligible.    There  is  no  reason  in  the  merę 
naturę  of  things  why  a  bill  or  a  groye  shonld  be  an  ob- 
jectśonable,  or,  indeed,  why  it  shouU  not  be  a  yery  suit- 
able  place  for  worship.     Tet  by  the  time  the  Israelites 
retucned  from  Egypt,  some  oormpting  change  had  taken 
plaoe,  which  canaed  them  to  be  icpeatedly  and  strictly 
cnjoined  to  overthiow  and  destioy  the  high  phKxs  and 
giores  of  the  C^anaanitea  whereyer  they  found  them 
(Exod.  xxxiy,  13;  Deut.yii,  5;  xii,  2,  8>    That  they 
woe  not  themselyes  to  worship  the  Lord  on  high  pUM^s 
or  in  groyea  is  implied  in  the  iact  that  they  were  to 
baye  but  one  altar  for  regnlar  and  oonstant  sacriflce; 
and  it  waa  expreBsly  enjoined  that  near  this  sole  altar 
no  treea  ahould  be  planted  (Dent  xyi,  21).    See  Altar. 
The  cxtanal  religion  of  the  patriarcha  waa  in  some 
ootward  obsenranoes  diflerent  ftom  that  subaequently 
estabhahed  by  the  Mosaic  law,  and  therefore  they  should 
not  be  oondonned  for  aotions  which  afterwards  became 
■nfoł  only  becanse  they  were  foibidden  (Heidegger, 
Hid*  Pair.  II,  iii,  §  58).    It  is,  howeycr,  quite  obyious 
that  if  ereir  groye  and  emioence  had  been  suffered  to 


beoome  a  pUoe  for  legitimate  worship,  espedally  in  a 
country  where  they  had  already  been  deHled  with  the 
sins  of  polytheism,  the  utmost  danger  would  haye  re- 
sttlted  to  the  pnre  worship  of  the  one  true  God  (HHyer- 
nick,  EinL  i,  592).  It  would  infallibly  haye  led  to  the 
adoption  of  nature-goddesees  and  **  gods  of  the  hills"  (1 
Kings  XX,  23).  It  was  therefore  implicitly  forbidden 
by  the  law  of  Moses  (Deut.  xii,  11-14),  which  also  gaye 
the  stricteat  injunction  to  destroy  these  monumenta  of 
Canaanitish  idolatry  (Lev.  xxyi,  80 ;  Kumb.  xxxiii,  52 ; 
Deut  xxxiii,  29;  where  Sept.  rpaxr;Xiuv),  without  stat- 
ing  any  generał  reason  for  this  command  beyoiid  the  fact 
that  they  had  been  connected  with  such  associations. 
It  seems,  howeyer,  to  be  assumed  that  eyery  Israelite 
would  perfectly  onderstand  why  groyes  and  high  plaoes 
were  prohibited,  and  therefore  they  are  only  condemned 
by  yirtue  of  the  injunction  to>  use  but  one  altar  for  the 
purpose  of  sacriflce  (Ley.  xyii,  8,  4;  Deut.  xii,/KiMtm; 
xvi,  21 ;  John  iv,  20).  This  practice,  indeed,  was  prob- 
ably  of  great  antiquity  in  Palestine.  Upon  the  summit 
of  lofly  Uermon  are  the  remains  of  a  smali  and  yery 
ancient  tempie,  towards  which  faced  a  circle  of  templń 
surrounding  the  mountain.  Sec  Heruon.  Tliat  a  tem- 
pie should  haye  been  built  on  a  summit  of  bare  rock 
perpetually  coyered  with  snów  shows  a  strong  religious 
motiye,  and  the  poeition  of  the  templcs  around  the 
mountain  indicatea  a  belief  in  the  sanclity  of  Hermon 
itaelf.  This  inference  is  supported  by  a  i)aa8age  in  the 
treaty  of  Kameses  II  with  the  Uittites  of  Syria,  in 
which,  besides  gods  and  goddesses,  the  mountains  and 
the  riyers,  both  of  tbe  land  of  the  Hittites  and  of  Egypt, 
and  the  winds,  are  mentioned,  in  a  list  of  Hittite  and 
Egj^ptian  diyinities.  The  £g>'ptian  diyinities  are  spo- 
ken  of  from  a  Hittite  point  of  view,  for  the  expres8ion 
**  the  mountains  and  the  riyers  of  the  knd  of  Egypt*"  is 
only  half  applicable  to  the  Egyptian  nature-wurship, 
which  had,  in  Egypt  at  least,  but  one  sacred  river  (Lep- 
sius,  DenkrndleTf  iii,  146;  ^igsch,  Geogrophische  Jn^ 
MAr\ftenj  ii,  29 ;  De  Rouge,  in  Jiev.  A  rch,  nour.  ser.  iy, 
872).  See  Hittitk.  That  Herman  was  worshipped  iu 
connection  with  Baal  is  probable  from  the  name  Mount 
Baal-Hermon  (Judg.  iii,  8),  Baal-Hermon  (1  Chron.  y, 
28)  being  appareutJy  given  to  it,  Baal  being,  as  the 
Egyptian  monumenta  indicate,  the  chief  god  of  the  Hit- 
tites. That  there  was  sucłi  a  belief  in  the  saiictity  of 
mountains  and  hilla  seems  eyident  from  the  great  num- 
ber  of  high  places  of  the  old  inhabitants,  which  is  cleai^ 
ly  indicated  in  the  probibition  of  their  worship  as  com- 
pared  with  the  statemcnt  of  the  disobedience  of  the 
Israelites.    See  Hiu. 

The  injunctions,  howcA-cr,  respecting  the  high  plaoea 
and  groyea  were  very  imperfectly  obeyed  by  the  Israel- 
ites; and  their  inyetcrate  attachment  to  this  modę  of 
worship  was  such  that  eyen  pious  kings,  wbb  opposed 
idolatry  by  all  the  means  in  their  power,  darcd  not  abol- 
ish  the  high  places  at  which  the  Lord  was  worshipped. 
It  appears  likely  that  this  toleration  of  an  acknowledged 
irregularity  arose  from  the  indisposition  of  the  people 
liying  at  a  distance  from  the  Tempie  to  be  confined  to 
the  altar  which  existed  there ;  to  their  detennination 
to  haye  phu;es  nearer  home  for  tbe  chief  acts  of  their 
religion — sacrifice  and  offering;  and  to  the  apprehension 
of  the  kings  that  if  they  were  prerentetl  from  having 
places  for  ofierings  to  the  Lord  in  their  own  ncighbor- 
hood  they  would  make  the  offerings  to  idols.  More- 
oyer,  the  Mosaic  command  was  a  prospectire  one,  and 
was  not  to  come  into  force  until  such  times  as  the  tribes 
wei%  settled  in  the  Promised  Land,  and  "  had  rest  from 
all  their  eneroies  round  about."  Thus  we  find  that  both 
Gtdeon  and  Manoah  built  altars  on  high  places  by  di- 
yine  command  (Judg.  vi,  25.  26;  xiii,  16-23),  and  it  is 
quite  elear  from  the  tonę  of  the  book  of  Judges  that  the 
law  on  the  subject  was  either  totally  forgotten  or  piac- 
tically  obsolete.  Nor  oould  the  unsettled  state  of  the 
countiy  haye  been  pleaded  as  an  excuse,  sińce  it  seems 
to  haye  been  most  fuUy  understood,  eyen  during  the 
life  of  Joshua,  that  bumt-offerings  could  be  legally  of- 


HIGH  PLACE 


240 


HIGH  PŁACE 


fered  on  om  altar  only  (Josh.  xxii,  29).  It  is  moPD  sur- 
prising  to  find  this  law  absolutely  ignored  at  a  much 
iater  period,  when  there  was  no  intelligible  reaaon  for 
its  violation — as  hy  Samuel  at  Mizpeh  (1  Sam.  vii,  10) 
and  at  Bethlehem  (xyi,  5) ;  by  Saul  at  Gilgal  (xiii,  9) 
and  at  Ajalon  (?  xiv,  85) ;  by  David  on  the  threshing- 
iioor  of  Oman  (1  Chroń,  xxi,  26) ;  by  £lijah  on  Mount 
Carmel  (1  Kings  xviii,  30) ;  and  by  other  prophets  (1 
Sam.  X,  5).  It  >rill,  however,  be  obseryed  that  in  these 
cascs  the  parties  either  acted  under  an  immediate  oom- 
mand  from  God,  or  were  invested  with  a  generał  oom- 
missiou  of  similar  force  with  reference  to  euch  transac- 
tions.  It  has  also  been  suggested  that  greater  latitude 
was  allowed  in  this  point  before  the  erection  of  the 
Tempie  gavc  to  the  ritual  principles  of  the  ceremonia! 
law  a  fixity  which  they  had  not  preyiously  possessed. 
This  is  po^ibic,  for  it  is  certain  that  all  the  authorizcd 
examples  occur  before  it  was  built,  excepting  that  of 
Elijah ;  and  that  occurred  under  circumstances  in  which 
the  sacrifices  could  not  possibly  have  taken  place  at  Je- 
rusalcm,  and  in  a  kingdom  where  no  authorized  altar  to 
Jehovah  then  existed.  The  Rabbins  have  invented  elab- 
orate  methods  to  account  for  the  anomaly :  thus  they 
say  that  high  phices  were  allowed  until  the  building  of 
the  tabemacle;  that  they  were  then  illegal  until  the  ar- 
rival  at  Gilgal,  and  then  during  the  period  while  the 
tabemacle  was  at  Shiloh;  that  they  were  once  morę 
permitted  while  it  was  at  Nob  and  Gibeón  (compare  2 
Chroń,  i,  3),  until  the  building  of  the  Tempie  at  Jem- 
Balem  rendered  them  iinally  unlawful  (K.  SoL  Jarchi, 
Abarbanel,  etc,  quoted  in  Carp20v,  App.  Crit^  p.  883  są. ; 
Kelaud,  Ant.  Hehr,  i,  8  Bq.).  Others  content  themselvefi 
with  saying  that  until  Solomon^s  time  all  Palestine  was 
considcrcd  holy  ground,  or  that  there  exi8ted  a  recog- 
nised  exemption  in  favor  of  high  places  for  private  and 
flpontaneous,  though  not  for  the  stated  and  public  sacri- 
fices.  Such  explanation8  are  sufficiently  unsatisfactory ; 
but  it  ia  at  any  ratę  certain  that,  whether  from  the  ob- 
yious  temptations  to  disobedience,  or  from  the  exam- 
ple  of  other  nations,  or  from  ignorance  of  any  definite 
law  against  it,  the  worship  in  high  places  was  organized 
and  all  but  universal  throughout  Judsa,  not  only  during 
(1  Kings  iii,  2-4),  but  even  after  the  time  of  Solomon. 
The  convenience  of  them  was  eyident,  because,  as  local 
centres  of  religious  worship,  they  obviated  the  unpleas- 
ant  and  dangerous  necessity  of  yisiting  Jerusalem  for 
the  celcbration  of  the  yearly  feasts  (2  Kings  xxiii,  9). 
The  tendency  was  engrained  in  the  national  mind ;  and, 
although  it  was  8everely  reprehended  by  the  lator  his- 
torianis  we  have  no  proof  that  it  was  known  to  be  sinful 
during  the  earlier  periods  of  the  monarchy,  except,  of 
ooursc,  where  it  was  directly  connected  with  idolatrous 
abominations  (1  Kings  xi,  7;  2  Kings  xxiii,  13).  In 
fact,  the  high  places  scem  to  have  supplied  the  need  of 
sjmagogues  (Psa.  lxxiv,  8),  and  to  have  ob\iated  the 
extreme  self-denial  involved  in  having  but  one  legalized 
locality  for  the  highest  forms  of  worship.  Thus  we  find 
that  Kehoboam  established  a  definite  worship  at  the 
high  places,  with  its  own  peculiar  and  separate  priest- 
hood  (2  Chroń,  xi,  15;  2  Kings  xxiii,  9),  the  members 
of  which  were  still  considered  to  be  pricsts  of  Jehovah 
(although  in  2  Kings  xxiii,  5  they  are  callcd  by  the  op- 
probrious  term  D'in^S).  It  was  therefore  no  wonder 
that  Jeroboam  found  it  so  easy  to  seduce  the  people  into 
his  symbolic  worship  at  the  high  places  of  Dan  and 
Bethel,  at  each  of  wliich  he  built  a  chapel  for  his  golden 
calve8.  Such  chapels  were,  of  course,  frequently  added 
to  the  merę  altars  on  the  hills,  as  appears  from  the  ex- 
pressions  in  1  Kings  xi,  7 ;  2  Kings  xvii,  9,  etc.  Indeed, 
the  word  Pl^^  became  so  common  that  it  was  uaed  for 
any  idolatrous  shrine  even  in  a  ralley  (Jer.  vii,  81),  or 
in  the  streets  of  cities  (2  Kings  xvii,  9;  Ezek.  xvi,  81). 
These  chapeLi  were  probably  not  stnicturcs  of  stone,  biit 
merę  tabernacles  hung  with  colored  tapestry  (Ezek.  xvi, 
16;  Aqu.,  Theod.  Iftj^oKitffia;  see  Jer.  ad  loc.;  Sept. 
iUiiiKov  pavTÓv),  like  the  (nn|vi|  upd  of  the  Carthagin- 


ians  (Diod.  Sic.  xx,  65;  Crenzer,  SywhoL  v,  176),  and 
like  those  mentioned  in  2  Kings  xxiii,  7;  Amos  v,  26. 
Many  of  the  pioua  kings  of  Judah  were  either  too  weak 
or  too  ill-informed  to  repress  the  worship  of  Jehoyah  at 
these  local  sanctuaries,  while  they  of  course  endeavond 
to  prevent  it  from  being  ooDtaminated  with  polythdfim, 
It  is  therefore  appended  as  a  matter  of  blaroe  or  a  (per- 
haps  venial)  drawback  to  the  character  of  some  of  the 
most  pious  princes,  that  they  tolerated  this  disobedience 
to  the  provisions  of  Deuteronomy  and  Leviticiu.    On 
the  other  hand,  it  is  mentioned  as  an  aggravation  of  the 
sinfulncss  of  other  kings  that  they  built  or  raised  high 
places  (2  Chroń,  xxi,  11 ;  xxviii,  25),  which  are  gener- 
ally  said  to  have  been  dedicated  to  idolatrous  purposes. 
It  is  aimost  inconceirable  that  so  direct  a  violation 
of  the  theocratic  prindple  as  the  puUic  ezistciioe  of 
false  worship  should  havc  been  tolerated  by  kings  of 
even  ordinary  piety,  much  leas  by  the  highest  saoerdo- 
tal  authorities  (2  Kings  xii,  8).    When,  therefore,  we 
find  the  recurring  phiase,  '^Only  the  high  places  were 
not  taken  away-;  as  yet  the  people  did  sacriflce  and  bom 
incense  on  the  high  places"  (2  Kings  xiv,  4 ;  xv,  5, 36; 
2  Chion.  XV,  17,  etc),  we  are  forced  to  limit  it  (as  abore) 
to  places  dedicated  to  Jehovah  only.    The  subject,  how- 
ever,  is  madę  morę  difficult  by  «  seeming  discrepancy,  for 
the  assertion  that  Asa  ^  took  away  the  high  places"  (2 
Chroń,  xiv,  3)  is  opposite  to  what  is  stated  in  the  fint 
book  of  Kings  (xv,  14),  and  a  similar  discrepancy  is 
found  in  the  casc  of  Jehoshaphat  (2  Chroń,  xvii,  6;  xx, 
83).    Morcover,  in  both  instances  the  chronider  is  op- 
parently  at  issue  with  Atnue//*  (xiv,  8 ;  xv,  17;  xvii,  6; 
XX,  83).     It  is  incredible  that  this  should  have  been 
the  result  of  cardeasness  or  oversight,  and  we  mi»Ł 
therefore  suppose,  either  that  the  earUer  notioes  ex- 
pressed  the  will  and  endeavor  of  these  monarchs  to  le- 
move  the  high  places,  and  that  the  hiter  cmes  recoided 
their  failure  in  the  atteropt  (Ewald,  ćrescA.  iii,  468;  Keil, 
Apolog,  Yersuch,  p.  290),  or  that  the  statements  refer 
respcctively  to  Bamoth  dedicated  to  Jehovah  and  to 
idols  (Michaelis,  Schulz,  Bertheau  on  2  Chion.  xvii,  6^ 
etc.).     *' Those  devoted  to  false  gods  were  removed, 
thoee  miBdevobed  to  the  tme  God  were  snffered  to  le- 
main.    The  kings  opposed  impiety,  but  winked  at  er- 
ror"  (bishop  Hall).     At  last  Hezekiah  aet  himself  in 
good  eamest  to  the  suppreasion  of  this  prevaknt  cot- 
mption  (2  Kings  xviii,  4,  22),  both  in  Judah  and  Isrsd 
(2  Chroń,  xxxi,  1),  although,  so  rapid  was  the  growth 
of  the  evil,  that  even  his  sweeping  reformation  leąniied 
to  be  finally  consummated  by  Jodah  (2  Kings  xxiii), 
and  that,  too,  in  Jerusalem  and  its  immediate  neighbor- 
hood  (2  Chroń,  xxxiv,  8).    The  measure  must  hare 
caused  a  very  violent  shock  to  the  religioos  prejudices 
of  a  largc  niunber  of  people,  and  we  have  a  corioos  and 
almost  unnoticed  tracę  of  this  resentment  in  the  lact 
that  Rabehakeh  appeals  to  the  disoontented  faction,and 
represents  Hezekiah  as  a  dangerous  innovator  who  had 
provoked  God's  anger  by  his  ubitrary  impiety  (2  Kings 
xviii,  22 ;  2  Chroń,  xxxii,  12).    After  the  time  of  Josi- 
ah  we  find  no  further  mention  of  these  Jehovistic  high 
places. 

As  long  as  the  nations  oontinned  to  worship  the 
heavenly  bodies  thcmselve8,  they  worshipped  in  the 
open  air,  holding  that  no  waUs  oould  contain  infinitude. 
Aflerwards,  when  the  symbol  of  fire  or  of  images  brought 
in  the  use  of  temples,  Uiey  were  tisually  built  in  groYCS 
and  upon  high  places,  and  sometimes  without  roofis. 
The  prindple  on  which  high  places  were  prefened  is 
said  to  have  been  that  they  were  neaier  to  tfae  gods, 
and  that  on  them  praycr  was  morę  aooeptable  than  in 
the  valleys  (Ludan,  De  Sacrif.  i,  4).  See  Kilu  The 
andent  writera  abound  in  allnsions  to  this  wonhip  of 
the  gods  upon  the  hill-tope;  and  some  of  their  divim- 
ties  took  thdr  distinctive  namea  from  the  hill  on  which 
their  prindpal  seat  of  worship  atood,  tuch  as  Mercoiiua 
Cyllenius,yenus  Eiydna,  Jupiter  Capitolinus,  etc  (see 
especiallv  Sophocles,  TruAw,  1207,  1208;  Appian,  £H 
Bello  MUhritL  §  131;  eompara  Creoser.  SgmboL  i,  150). 


HIGH  PLACE 


241 


HIGH-PRIEST 


Tempie  on  a  hill  snrronnded  by  trees,  and  haviag  an  Altar  in  the  approach  to  it.  A  yia- 
doct,  atreama  of  water,  etc.,  are  repreaented.  (5as-relief  from  KoayoDjik  in  the  British 
Mnaeam.) 

We  find  that  the  Trojana  sacrificed  to  ZeuR  on  Mount 
Ida  (//.  X,  171),  and  we  are  repeatedly  told  that  such 
WM  the  custom  of  the  Peniana,  Greeka,  Germans,  etc 
(Herod,  i,  131 ;  Kenoph.  Cyrop,  viii,  7 ;  Mem,  iii,  8,  §  10 ; 
Strabo,  xv,  782).  To  this  generał  custom  we  find  con- 
stant  allusion  in  the  Bibie  (Tsa.  lxv,  7 ;  Jer.  iii,  6 ;  Ezek. 
ri,  13;  xviii,  6;  Hos.  iv,  13),  and  it  ia  espedally  attrib- 
uted  to  the  Moabitcs  (Isa.  xv,  2;  xvi,  12;  Jer.  xlviii, 
35).  £vident  tracea  of  a  similar  usage  are  depicted  on 
the  Aasyrian  monomenta.  The  grovea  which  ancient 
usige  hod  establjshed  aroiind  the  placea  of  sacrifice  for 
the  aake  of  ahade  and  seclusion,  idolatry  preserved,  not 
only  for  the  aame  reasons,  bat  because  they  were  found 
convement  for  the  celebration  of  the  rites  and  mysteriea, 
often  obecene  and  abominable,  which  were  gradually 
nperadded.  According  to  Fliny  (book  xii),  trees  were 
aiao  ancientJy  consecrated  to  particular  dirinitiea,  aa 
the  eacolos  to  Jove,  the  laurel  to  Apollo,  the  olive  to 
Minerva,  the  royrtle  to  Yenua,  the  poplar  to  Hercules. 
It  was  also  believed  that  as  the  heaveos  have  their 
proper  and  peculiar  deities,  so  also  the  woods  have 
theiTB,  being  the  Fauna,  the  Sylyans,  and  certain  god- 
desses.  To  this  it  may  be  added  that  grovea  were  en- 
joined  by  the  Roman  law  of  the  Twelvc  Tables  aa  part 
of  the  public  religion.  Flutarch  {Numa,  i,  61)  calls  such 
gTove8  aAffif  9tunfy  *'grove8  of  the  goda,"  which  he  says 
Numa  frequented,  and  thereby  gave  rise  to  the  story  of 
his  intercotuae  with  the  goddess  Egeria.  In  fact,  a  de- 
gree  of  worship  was,  aa  Fliny  states,  transferred  to  the 
trcea  theniselve8.  They  were  sometimea  decked  with 
ribbons  and  rich  cloths,  lampa  were  placed  on  them,  the 
spoila  of  enemiea  were  hung  from  them,  vow8  were  paid 
to  them,  and  their  branchea  were  encumbered  with  vo- 

tive  oflferinga.    Tracea  of  this  arfoorolatiy  still  exist  ev- 

erywhere,  both  in  Moslem  and  Christian  countries;  and 

eren  the  Penians,  who  abhorred  images  as  much  as  the 

Hebiews  ever  did,  rendered  homage  to  certain  trees. 

The  story  ia  well  known  of  the  noble  plane-tree  near 

Sardia,  before  which  Xerxe8  halted  his  army  a  whole 

day  while  he  rendered  homage  to  it,  and  hung  royal  of- 

feringBiiponitafaranche8(Hen>d.vi,31).    Thereismuch 

enriooa  literaturę  oonnected  with  thia  subject  which  we 

]eave  unCooched,  but  the  reader  may  consult  Sir  W. 

Oii8eIey*s  leamed  dissertation  on  Sacred  Trees,  append- 

ed  to  the  first  volnme  of  his  TractU  in  ihe  East, — Kitto, 

i.  V. ;  Smith,  a.  v.    See  Idołatbt. 
Mr.  Paine  lemaika  {Sohmorit  TempUy  etc,  Bost.  1861, 

p.21),<'The  *high  plaoe,*  n^Sl,  moicnd^waa  smali  enough 


to  be  madę  and  built  ia 

every  street,  at  the  head 

of  eveTy  way  (Ezek.  xvi, 

24, 25),  in  all  their  citiea 

(2  Kings  xvii,  9),  and 

upon  every  high  hill,  and 

under  every  green  tree  (1 

Kings  xiv,  23).    It  could 

be  tom  to  pieces,  beat- 

en   smali   as  dust,  and 

biunt  up  (2  Kings  xxiii. 

15).     Thus    it    [often] 

was  of  combustible  ma- 

terials.   ....    These 

mounds,  with  their   al- 

tars,  were  built  in  the 

Btreets,    where      people 

could    assemble    around 

them.      When    on    the 

hills  out  of  the  city  they 

lasted  many  years;  for 

the    mounds    built    by 

Solomon   on  the    right 

hand  or  south  side  of 

the  Mount  of  Destruc- 

tion    before     Jerusalem 

were  destroyed  by  Jo- 

siah  (2  Kings  xxiii,  13 ; 

1  Kings  xi,  7),  nearly 

four  hundred  years  after  they  were  built    But  mounds 

of  earth  no  Uu-ger  than  Indian-com  or  potato-hills  will 

last  a  great  number  of  years,  and  those   somewhat 

larger  for  centuries  (compare  the  Indian  mounds  in 

the  West).    That  the  mounds  destroyed  by  Josiah  had 

lasted  so  many  centuries  is  a  proof  that  they  were  not 

whoUy  of  wood ;  that  they  could  be  bumt  is  a  proof 

that  they  were  not  whoily  of  stone;  that  they  coidd  be 

beaten  to  dust  indicates  that  they  were  madę  of  any- 

thing  that  came  readiest  to  hand,  as  earth,  soil,  etc   For 

the  houses  of  the  mounds,  or  high  placea,  in  which  were 

imagea  of  their  gods,  see  2  Kings  xvii,  29;  priests  of 

these  places  of  worship,  1  Kings  xii,  32 ;  xiii,  2, 33 ;  2 

Kings  xvii,  32 ;  xxiu,  9,  20 ;  beds  for  fomication  and 

adultery,  in  the  tents  about  the  mounds,  Isa.  lvii,  3-7; 

Ezek.  xvi,  16, 25,  etc     Some  of  these  houses  were  tents, 

for  women  wove  them  (2  Kings  xxiii, 7).   The  people — 

men,  women,  children,  and  priests — assembkd  in  groves, 

on  hiUs  and  mountains,  or  in  the  streets  of  their  cities; 

threw  up  a  mound, on  which  they  built  their  altar;  set 

upthe  wooden  idol  [Asherah]  before  the  altar;  pitched 

their  tents  around  it  under  the  trees;  sacrificed  their 

sons  and  daughters,  sometimes  on  the  altar  (Ezek.  xvi, 

20),  and  oommitted  fomication  and  adultery  in  the  tents, 

where  also  they  had  the  images  of  their  gods." 


Representatlon  of  an  Idolatrous  •*H!gh  place,"  with  łts 
"  Grove,"  altar,  and  worshippers.  (From  Puine^s  Tern' 
ple  of  Solomon.) 

High-prlest  OtysT^y  hah-Jx>k€n%  the  ordiuary  word 
for  **prie8t,"  with  the  article,  I  e.^łhe  priest;"  and  in 
the  lxx>ks  sub8equent  to  the  Pentatcuch  with  the  fire* 
ąuent  addition  bnałl,  łhegreaty  and  ttJKin,  "«Ac  headf' 
Lev.  xxi,  10  seems  to  exhibit  the  epithet  pSsi  [aa  iiKo- 


HIGH-PRIEST 


242 


HIGH-PRIEST 


Koiroc  and  ii&Kovoc  in  the  N.  T.]  in  a  tranaition  state, 
not  yet  wholly  tecbnical;  and  the  same  may  be  said  of 
Numb.  xzxy,  25,  where  the  explanaŁion  at  the  end  of 
the  reise,  *^  which  waa  anointed  with  the  holj  oil,"  aeems 
to  show  that  the  epithet  bS|k  was  not  yet  qaite  estab- 
lished  as  distmctive  of  the  chief  priest  [oomp.  ver.  28], 
In  all  other  passages  of  the  Pentateuch  it  is  simply  "  the 
priest,"  Exod.  xxix,  80,  44;  Lev.  xvi,  32 ;  or  yet  morę 
freąuently  *^  Aaron,"  or  *<  Aaron  the  priest,"  as  Numb.  iii, 
6;  iv,  83;  Lev.  i,  7,  etc.  So,  too,  "  Eleazar  the  priest," 
Numb.  xx:vii,  22;  xxxi,  26,  29,  31,  etc.  In  fact,  there 
could  be  no  such  distinction  in  the  time  of  Moees,  sińce 
the  priesthood  was  limited  to  Aaron  and  his  sons.  In 
the  Sept.  ó  apxiepi^Ct  or  UpivCy  where  the  Heb.  has  only 
ins.  So  likewise  in  the  N.  T.  dpxupłvc,  often  merely 
a  "  chief  priest"  Ynlgate,  Sacerdos  magmu,  or  primus 
porUifex,  prinoeps  sao^rhtum),  the  head  of  the  Jewish 
hierarchy,  and  a  lineal  descendant  of  Aaron. 

I.  The  leffol  view  of  the  high-priesfs  offioe  oompiises 
all  that  the  law  of  Moses  ordained  respecting  iL  The 
first  distinct  sepanition  of  Aaron  to  the  office  of  the 
priesthood,  which  preyiously  belonged  to  the  firstbom, 
was  that  recorded  in  £xod.  xxviU.  A  partial  anticipa- 
tion  of  this  cali  occurred  at  the  gathering  of  the  manna 
(£xod.  xvi),  when  Moees  bade  Aaron  take  a  pot  of  man- 
na, and  lay  it  up  before  the  Lord :  which  implied  that 
the  ark  of  the  Testimony  would  thereafter  be  under  Aa- 
ron'8  charge,  thoogh  it  was  not  at  that  time  in  exi8t- 
ence.  The  taking  up  of  Nadab  and  Abihu  with  their 
father  Aaron  to  the  Mount,  where  they  behdd  the  glory 
of  the  God  of  Israel,  seems  also  to  have  been  intended 
as  a  preparatory  intimation  of  Aaron's  hereditary  priest^ 
hood.  See  also  £xod.  xxvii,  21.  But  it  was  not  till  the 
oompletion  of  the  directions  for  making  the  tabemade 
and  ito  fumiture  that  the  distinct  order  was  given  to 
Moses,  ^Take  thou  unto  thee  Aaron  thy  brother,  and 
his  sons  with  him,  from  among  the  children  of  Israel, 
that  he  may  minister  unto  me  in  the  priesfs  office,  even 
Aaron,  Nadab  and  Abihu,  Eleazar  and  Ithamar,  Aaron*B 
sons"  (£xod.  xxviii,  1).  So  after  the  order  for  the 
priestly  garments  to  be  madę  ^  for  Aaron  and  his  sons," 
it  is  added, "  and  the  priest^s  office  shall  be  theirs  for  a 
perpetual  statute;  and  thou  shalt  consecrate  Aaron  and 
his  sons,"  and  *'I  will  sancdfy  both  Aaron  and  his  sons 
to  minister  to  me  in  the  priesfs  office,"  xxix,  9, 44. 

We  find  fh)m  the  very  first  the  foUowing  character- 
istic  attributes  of  Aaron  and  the  high-priests  his  suc- 
oessors,  aa  distinguished  from  the  other  priests. 

1,  Aaron  alone  was  anointed,  "•  He  poured  of  the 
anointing  oil  upon  Aaron*s  head,  and  anointed  him  to 
sanctify  him"  (Lev.  viii,  12) :  whence  one  of  the  distinc- 
tive  epithets  of  the  high-priest  was  17*^015^?  ''fiW,  "the 
anointed  priest"  (Lev.  iv,  3, 6, 16;  xxi,  10;  see  Ńumb. 
xxxv,  26).  This  appears  also  from  £xod.  xxix,  29, 80, 
where  it  is  ordered  that  the  one  of  the  sons  of  Aaron 
who  succeeds  him  in  the  priest's  office  shall  wear  the 
holy  garments  that  were  Aaron^s  for  seven  days,  to  be 
anointed  therein,  and  to  be  consecrated  in  them.  Hence 
Eusebius  (ffisL  Ecclet,  i,  6 ;  De^n,  Ev<mg,  viii)  under- 
Btands  the  Anointed  (A.  V.  "Messiah,"  or,  as  the  SepL 
reads,  xP^(rfŁd)  in  Dan.  ix,  26,  the  cmokUing  of  the  Jew- 
ish high-priests:  <'It  means  nothing  else  than  the  suc- 
cession  of  high-priests,  whom  the  Scripture  commonly 
caUs  xP^aTcvcj  anointed;"  and  so,  too,  Tertullian  and 
Theodoret  (Rośenm.  ad  loc.),  The  anointing  of  the  sons 
of  Aaron,  i  e.  the  common  priests,  seems  to  have  been 
confined  to  sprinkling  their  garments  with  the  anoint- 
ing oil  (Exod.  xxix,  21 ;  xxviii,  41,  etc),  though,  accord- 
ing  to  Kalisch  on  £xod.  xxix,  8,  and  Lightfoot,  foUow- 
ing the  Rabbinical  interpretation,  the  difference  consists 
in  the  abundant  pouiing  of  oil  (pX^)  on  the  head  of  the 
high-priest,  from  whence  it  was  drawn  with  the  finger 
into  two  streams,  in  the  shape  of  a  Greek  X,  while  the 
priests  were  merely  marked  with  the  finger  dipped  in 
»il  on  the  forehead  (nig:^).   But  this  is  probably  a  late 


iuTention  of  the  Rabbins.  The  anointing  of  the  higli- 
priest  18  alluded  to  in  Psa.  cxxxiii,  2,  -<  It  is  like  the 
predous  ointment  upon  the  head,  that  ran  down  npoo 
the  beard,  even  Aaron's  beard,  that  went  down  to  the 
skirts  of  his  garments."  The  oompośtion  of  this  anoint- 
ing oil,  consisting  of  myrrh,  ctonamon,  <^l*win«^  casaia, 
and  olive  oil,  is  prescribed  £xod.  xxx,  22-25 ;  and  iŁs  uae 
for  any  other  purpose  but  that  of  anointing  the  priesta^ 
the  tabemacle,  and  the  ve88e]8,  was  strictly  prohibited, 
on  pain  of  being  "  cut  off  from  his  people."  The  mann- 
facture  of  it  was  intrusted  to  certain  priests,  called  apoth- 
ecaries  (Neh.  iii,  8).  But  this  oil  is  said  to  have  been 
wanting  under  the  seoond  Tempie  (Prideaux,  i,  151; 
Selden,  cap.  ix).    See  Anoditiso  On* 

2.  The  high-priest  had  a  peculiar  dress,  which,  as  we 
have  seen,  passed  to  his  succesaor  at  his  death.  This 
dress  consisted  of  eight  parts,  as  the  Rabbins  oonstantly 
notę,  the  breasłplatey  the  ephod  with  its  curioos  girdle, 
the  robę  of  the  ephod,  the  miłre,  the  broidered  coat  or 
diaper  tunic,  and  the  girdkf  the  materials  being  gołd, 
blue,  red,  crimson,  and  fine  (white)  linen  (Exod.  xxTiii). 
To  the  above  are  added,  in  ver.  42,  the  breecket  or  draw- 
ers  (Lev.  xvi,  4)  of  linen ;  and  to  make  up  the  number 
eight,  some  reckon  the  high-priest*s  mitre,  or  the  plate 
(y^^)  wparately  from  the  bonnet;  while  others  reckon 
the  curious  girdle  of  the  ephod  separately  from  the 
ephod.  In  Lev.  viii,  7-12,  there  is  a  complete  aocount 
of  the  putting  on  of  these  garments  by  Aaron,  and  the 
whole  ceremony  of  his  consecration  and  that  of  his  80d& 
It  there  appears  distinctly  that,  beades  the  girdle  com- 
mon to  all  the  priests,  the  high-priest  also  wore  the  cu- 
rious girdle  of  the  ephod.  Of  these  eight  articles  of  at- 
tire,  four,  viz.  the  ooat  or  tunic,  the  girdle,  the  breechesy 
and  the  bonnet  or  turban,  tl^asp,  instead  of  the  mitre, 
nsasra  (Josephus,  however,  whom  Bfthr  follows,  calls 
the  fcibnnets  of  the  priests  by  the  name  of  rsS^ią.  See 
below),  belonged  to  the  common  priests.  '  It  is  weU 
known  how,  in  the  Assyrian  sculptures,  the  king  is  in 
like  manner  distinguished  by  the  shape  of  his  head- 
dress;  and  how  in  Persia  nonę  but  the  king  wore  the 
cidariśf  or  erect  tiara.  B%hr  compares  also  the  ajnces 
of  the  jiamen  Dialis,  Josephus  speaks  of  the  robes  {iv- 
dv  flara)  of  the  chief  priests,  and  the  tunics  and  girdka 
of  the  priests,  as  forming  part  of  the  spoil  of  the  Tempie 
(  Warj  vi,  8, 8).  Aaron,  and  at  his  death  Eleazar  (Numb. 
XX,  26, 28),  and  their  successors  in  the  bigh-priestbood, 
were  solemnly  inaugurated  into  their  office  by  being 
dad  in  these  eight  articles  of  dress  on  8even  8ucce8sive 
days.  From  the  time  of  the  second  Tempie,  when  the 
sacred  dl  (sald  to  have  been  hid  by  Josiah,  and  lost)  was 
wanting,  this  putting  on  of  the  garments  was  deemed 
the  official  investiture  of  the  office.  Hence  the  robes, 
which  had  used  to  be  kept  in  one  of  the  chambers  of 
the  Tempie,  and  were  by  Hyrcanus  dcposited  in  the  Ba- 
ris,  which  he  built  on  purpose,  were  kept  by  Herod  in 
the  same  tower,  which  he  called  Antonia,  so  that  they 
might  be  at  his  abeolute  disposaL  The  Romans  did  the 
same  till  the  govemment  of  Yitellius,  in  the  reign  of  Ti- 
berius,  when  the  custody  of  the  robes  was  restored  to 
the  Jews  (A  nt  xv,  11, 4 ;  xviii,  4, 8) Smith,  s.  v.  Tak- 
ing the  articles  of  the  high-priesfs  dress  in  the  order  in 
which  they  would  naturally  be  put  on,  we  have 

(1.)  The  "breeches"  or  drawers^  f^DSDą,  mibienm', 
of  linen,  oovering  the  loins  and  thighs,  for  purpoees  of 
modesty,  as  all  the  upper  garments  were  loose  and  flow- 
ing.  Their  probable  form  is  illustrated  by  the  subjoined 
cut,  from  Braun  CDe  Yeitiiu  Saoerdoium  Iłebraontmt^  p. 
364),  who  calls  attention  to  the  banda  (Tahnod,  D^SdO) 
for  drawing  the  top  together,  and  the  abeence  of  any 
opening  etther  before  (lT»*ł5n  ri"<a,  ttpertura  ad  pu' 
denda)  or  behind  (3p5rf  n''^,  apertura  ad  anum^. 

(2.)  The  inner  *<coat,"  Pdha,  ibctto^neO,  was  a  teme 
or  long  shirt  of  linen,  with  a  tesselated  or  diaper  pat- 
tem,  like  the  setting  of  a  stone  ()^$ęPif  tashbeWi  *<  bro&o 


HIGH-PRIEST 


243 


fflGH-PRIEST 


Tbe  Linen  '*Breecbe8"  of  the  Prie8t& 

dered'7i-  The  Babjoined  cnt  (also  Arom  Bnum,  p.  878) 
will  illustnte  ito  probable  fonn  (not  dilTerent  fiom  that 
of  the  ordinaiy  Oriental  under-gannent),  with  its  sleeyes 
and  modę  of  fastening  around  the  itecló    See  Coat. 


"Broidcred  Coat*'  of  Linen  worn  by  the  PriestSi 


(8.)  The  gircBe,  hdSSM,  cAnet^j  alro  of  linen,  was  wound 
round  the  body  seycral  times  from  the  breast  down- 
waids,  and  the  enda  hung  down  to  the  anklea.  Ita  form 
and  modę  of  wearing  may  be  illostrated  by  the  subjoin- 
ed  cuta  (fiom  Braun,  p.  404).    See  Girolk. 

(4.)  The  **  rt)be,"  b^^yp,  meU\  of  the  ephod.  Thia  was 
of  inferior  materiał  to  tłie  ephod  itself,  being  all  of  blue 
(rer.  31),  which  implied  ita  being  only  of  "  woven  work" 
(.yy^  ^^rf!?»  xxxix,  22).  It  was  worn  immediately 
nnder  the  ephod,  and  was  longer  than  it,  thongh  not  so 
kmg  aa  the  broidered  coat  or  tunic  (j^SUri  TSńS),  ac- 


The  Linen  Oirdle  of  tbe  Prie8t& 

cording  to  most  statements  (Bilhr,  Winer,  Kaliach,  etc.). 
Nor  do  the  Sept.  explanaŁion  of  b'^:^?3,  woitipiję,  and 
Josephua^B  description  of  it  (  War,  v,  5,  7),  aeem  to  out- 
weigh  the  reasona  given  by  Bfthr  for  thinking  that  the 
robę  only  came  down  to  the  knees,  for  it  ia  highly  im- 
probable  that  the  robę  should  thushave  swept  the  ground. 
Neither  doea  it  seem  likely  that  the  sleeres  of  the  tunic, 
of  wbite  diaper  linen,  were  the  only  parta  of  it  which 
were  yisible,  in  the  case  of  the  high-priest,  when  he 
wore  the  blue  robę  over  it;  for  the  blue  robę  had  no 
sleeres,  but  only  slits  in  the  sidea  for  the  arais  to  come 
through.  It  had  a  hole  for  the  head  to  pass  thiough, 
with  a  border  round  it  of  woven  work,  to  preyent  ita  be- 
ing rent,  The  skirt  of  this  robę  had  a  remarkable  trim- 
ming  of  pomegranates  in  blue,  red,  and  crimson,  with  a 
beli  of  gold  between  each  poroegraiuite  altemately.  The 
bells  were  to  give  a  sound  when  the  high-priest  went  in 
ańA  came  out  of  the  Holy  Place.  Joeephus,  in  the  An» 
ticuiłieSf  gives  no  explanation  of  the  use  of  the  bells,  but 
merely  speaks  of  the  studied  beauty  of  their  appearance. 
In  his  Jetoish  Ifar,  howerer,  he  tells  us  that  the  bcUs 
signified  thunder,  and  the  pomegranates  lightning.  For 
Philo's  very  curious  obserrations,  see  Lightfoot's  Worla^ 
ix,  25.  Neither  does  the  son  of  Sirach  very  distinctly 
explain  it  (Ecdus.  xlv),  who,  in  his  description  of  the 
high-priest^s  attire,  seems  chiefly  impressed  with  ita 
beauty  and  magnificence,  and  says  of  thia  trimming. 


HIGH-PRIEST 


244 


The  High-prie8i'8  Kobe.    (From  Braun,  ut  aup.  p.  4<K).} 

**  He  compaased  him  with  pomegranates  and  with  many 
golden  bells  round  about,  Łhat  as  he  went  there  might 
be  a  sound,  and  a  noiae  madę  that  might  be  heard  in 
the  Tempie,  for  a  memoriał  to  the  children  of  hia  peo- 
ple."  Perhaps,  however,  he  means  to  intimate  that  the 
use  of  the  bells  was  to  give  notice  to  the  people  outaide 
when  the  high-priest  went  in  and  came  out  of  the  sanc- 
tuary,  as  WhistonjYatablus,  and  many  others  hAve  sup- 
posed.    See  Kobe. 

(6.)  The  ephod,  ■('łBX,  consisted  of  two  parts,  of  which 
one  covered  the  back,  and  the  other  the  front,  i.  e.  the 
breast  and  upper  part  of  the  body,  like  the  imufiic  of 
the  Greeks  (see  Smith,  Diet, of  AtUiąuities^ s.  v.  Tunica). 
These  were  closped  together  on  the  shoulder  with  two 
large  onyx  Stones,  each  having  engraved  on  it  8ix  of  the 
names  of  the  tribes  of  IsraeL  It  was  fmlher  imited  by 
a  **curiou8  girdle**  of  gold,  blue,  purple,  scarlet,  and  fine 
twined  linen  round  the  waist.  Upon  it  was  placed  the 
breastplate  of  judgment,  which  in  fact  was  a  part  of  the 
ephod,  being  included  in  the  term  in  such  passages  as  1 
Sam.  ii,  28 ;  xiv,  3 ;  xxiii,  9,  and  was  fastened  to  it  just 
above  the  cuńous  girdle  of  the  ephod.  Linen  ephods 
were  also  woni  by  other  pńests  (I  Sam.  xxii,  18)..  by 
Samuel,  who  was  only  a  Levite  (1  Sam.  ii,  18),  and  by 
David  when  bringing  up  the  ark  (2  Sam.  vi,  14),  The 
expression  for  wearing  an  ephod  is  *^^'r(2ni  with  a  linen 
ephod."  The  ephod  was  also  frequent1y  used  in  the 
idolatrous  worship  of  the  Israelites  (see  Judg.  viii,  27 ; 
xvii,  5,  etc).    See  Ephod. 

(6.)  The  breastplate,  yśn,  cho'shen,  or,  as  it  is  further 
named,  ver8es  Id,  29,  30,  the  breastplate  of  judgment, 
tDDT^p  l^nH,  \oytiov  rwv  Kpi<rtuv  (or  rfjc  Kpiutuę)  in 
the  Sept.,  only  in  ver.  4  iript(rni9iov.  It  was,  like  the 
inner  curtains  of  the  tabemacle,  the  vail,  and  the  ephod, 
of  "cunning  work,**  3tJn  HiCC^  (Vulg.  optu  plumari- 
urn  and  arie  plumaria),  See  Embroider.  The  breast- 
plate was  ońginally  two  spans  long  and  one  span  broad, 
but  when  doubled  it  was  square,  the  shape  in  which  it 


HIGH-PRIEST 
1 


The  High-prle8t*8  BasABTPŁATB.    (From  Brami,  De  VtttUu 
Saeerdotum  HebrcBorum,  p.  4S6-&) 

1.  The  'j^n,  eho'»h£n  (lit  omamerU)^  orpectoral  gorget 
Itaeli;  with  Its  four  rings,  6,  ni]?2^C),  tabbaotk'  (lit.  moU 
or  signets).  constitnting  the  inside,  a,  when  pot  on,  be> 
Ing  then  folded  down  backward  auder. 

2.  The  pUte  of  lwelve  gems,  set  in  gold,  e,  attached  to  the 
linen  backing  at  the  npper  edge;  with  Its  two  gold 
wreatben  cbains,  d,  nibs^p  ni'^123"11$  (ehainś  ąfeordś^ 
to  hook  its  upper  comera  to  the  siłóatder-clanM  of  the 
ephod,  as  at/,  flg.  8;  «,  two  byadoth-colored  riobons  at- 


fflGH-PRIEST 


246 


fflGH-PRIEST 


tached  lo  Ibe  lower  eoraers  of  the  plate  for  pastdng 
throngh  tbe  other  two  rings  of  the  lineD,  and  Łhen  tying 
to  the  hłp-iingB  of  the  ephod,  aa  at  27,  lig  8. 
3.  Tbe  Spbod  (q.  t.),  with  Uie  breastplate  Tuaerted,  and  the 
two  atrapa,  A,  conatitntiiig  the  girdle,  3iz3n,  eheftheb 
(MOfOf  the  ephod. 

was  wom.  It  waa  faatened  at  the  top  rings  and  by 
chains  of  wreathen  gold  to  the  two  onyx  stones  on  the 
shoulders,  and  beneath  with  two  other  rings  and  a  hice 
of  blue  to  two  corresponding  rings  in  the  ephod,  to  keep 
it  fixed  in  \is  place,  above  the  curious  girdle.  But  the 
most  renuurkable  and  most  iroportant  part  of  this  breast- 
plate  were  the  twelre  precious  Stones,  set  in  four  rows, 
three  in  a  row,  thus  corresponding  to  the  twelve  tribes, 
and  divided  in  the  same  manner  as  their  canii)s  werc, 
each  stone  ha^ńng  the  name  of  one  of  the  children  of 
Israel  engraved  upon  it.  \Vliether  the  order  foUowed 
the  ages  of  the  sons  of  Israel,  or,  as  seems  most  probablc, 
the  order  of  the  encampment,  may  be  doubted ;  but,  un- 
less  some  appropriate  distinct  sjnrnbolism  of  the  different 
tribes  be  found  in  th6  names  of  the  precious  Stones,  the 
queation  can  scarcely  be  decided.  According  to  the 
Sept.  and  Josephus,  and  in  accordance  with  the  lan- 
gnage  of  Scripture,  it  was  these  Stones  which  consti- 
tuled  the  Urim  and  Thummim,  nor  does  the  notion  ad- 
Tocated  by  Gesenius  after  Spencer  and  others,  that  tliese 
names  designated  two  little  images  phiced  between  the 
folds  of  the  breastplate,  seera  to  rest  on  any  sufficient 
ground,  in  spite  of  the  Egyptian  analogy  brought  to 
bear  upon  it.  (For  an  account  of  the  image  of  Thmei 
woni  by  the  Egyptian  judge  and  pricst,  see  Kalisch^s 
notę  on  £xod.  xxviii;  Hengstenberg^s  Egypt  and  the 
Books  ofMoses ;  Wllkinson*s  EgyptianSj  ii,  27,  etc)  Jo- 
8ephi]S*s  opinion,  on  the  other  hand,  improved  upon  by 
the  rabbins;,  as  to  the  manner  in  which  the  Stones  gave 
out  the  oracular  answer,  by  pretematural  illumination, 
appeaiB  equally  destitute  of  probability.  It  seems  to  be 
far  simplest,  and  most  in  agreement  with  the  different 
aocounta  of  inquiries  madę  by  Urim  and  Thummim  (1 
Sam.  xiv,  3, 18, 19 ;  xxiii,  2, 4, 9, 11, 12 ;  xxviii,  6 ;  Judg. 
XX,  28;  2  Sanu  r,  23,  etc),  to  suppose  that  the  answer 
was  gireii  aimply  by  the  Word  of  the  Lord  to  the  high- 
priest  (comp.  John  xi,  51),  when  he  had  inąuired  of  the 
Lord,  dothed  with  the  ephod  and  breastplate.  Such  a 
view  agrees  with  the  true  notion  of  the  breastplate,  of 
which  it  was  not  the  leading  characteristic  to  be  oracu- 
lar (as  tbe  term  \oyiXov  supposes,  and  as  is  by  many 
thought  to  be  indmated  by  the  descriptivc  addition  "  of 
judgment,''  L  e.  as  they  linderstand  it, "  decision"),  but 
only  an  incidental  privilege  connected  with  its  funda- 
meatal  meaning.  What  that  meaning  yras  we  leam 
fnwn  Exod. xxviii, 80, where  we  read,  "Aaron  shall  bear 
the  judgment  of  the  children  of  Israel  upon  his  heart 
before  the  Lord  continually."  Now  aoiś^  is  the  judi- 
cial  senŁence  by  which  any  one  is  either  justified  or  oon- 
demned.  In  prophetic  yision,  as  in  actual  Oriental  life, 
the  »entence  of  justification  was  often  expre8sed  by  the 
naturę  of  the  robę  wom.  "  He  hath  clothed  me  with 
the  garmenta  of  salvation,  he  hath  covered  me  with  the 
robę  of  righteousness.  as  a  bridegroom  decketh  himself 
with  omaments,  and  as  a  bride  adometh  herself  with  ber 
jewels''  (Iśia.  lxi,  10),  is  a  good  iUustration  of  this;  corap. 
lxii,  3.  In  like  manner,  in  Rev.  iii,  5 ;  vii,  9 ;  xix,  14,  etc, 
the  wbite  linen  robę  expres8es  the  righteousness  or  justi- 
fication  of  saints.  Something  of  the  same  notion  may 
be  scen  in  Eeth.  vi,  8, 9,  and  on  the  contrary  ver.  12.  The 
addition  of  precious  Stones  and  costly  omaments  expre8s- 
cs  fclory  be^-ond  simple  justification.  So,  in  las.  lxii, 
3,  "  Thou  shalt  be  a  crown  of  glory  in  the  hand  of  the 
Lord,  and  a  royal  diadem  in  the  hand  of  thy  God."  £x- 
actly  the  same  s^^mbolism  of  glory  is  assigned  to  the 
precioiui  Htones  in  the  description  of  the  New  Jerusalem 
(Ber.  xxi,  1 1, 12-21),  a  passage  which  ties  together  with 
iinguLar  force  the  arrangement  of  the  tribes  in  their 
campa  and  that  of  the  precious  Stones  in  the  breastplate. 
But,  TOoreorer,  the  high-priest  being  a  repre8entative 
peraonage,  the  fortimes  of  the  whole  people  would  most 


properly  be  indicated  in  his  person.  A  striking  instance 
of  this,  in  connection,  too,  with  symbolical  dress,  is  to  be 
found  in  Zech.  iii:  "Now  Joshua  (the  high-priest, ver.  1) 
was  clothed  with  filthy  garments  and  stood  before  the 
angel.  And  he  answered  and  spake  .unto  those  that 
stood  before  him,  saying,  Take  away  the  filthy  garments 
from  him.  And  unto  him  he  said,  Behold,  I  have  caused 
thine  iniquity  to  pass  from  thee,  and  I  will  clothe  thee 
with  change  of  raimenU  And  I  said,  Let  them  set  a 
fair  mitrę  (C|'^32e)  upon  his  head.  So  they  set  a  fair 
mitrę  upon  his  head,  and  clothed  him  with  garments." 
Herc  the  priesfa  garments,  t3'^'lja,  and  the  mitrę,  ex- 
pressly  typify  the  restored  righteousness  of  the  nation. 
Hence  it  seems  to  be  sufficiently  obvious  that  the  breast- 
plate of  righteousness  or  judgment,  resplendent  with  the 
same  precious  Stones  w^hich  symbollze  the  gloiy  of  the 
New  Jerusalem,  and  on  which  were  engrayed  the  names 
of  the  twelve  tribes,  wom  by  the  high-priest,  who  was 
then  said  to  bear  the  judgment  of  the  children  of  Israel 
upon  his  heart,  was  intcnded  to  expre88  by  symbols  the 
acceptance  of  Israel  grounded  upon  the  sacrificial  func- 
tions  of  the  high-priest.  The  sense  of  the  symbol  is 
thus  nearly  identical  with  such  passages  as  Niunb.  xxiii, 
21,  and  the  meaning  of  the  Urim  and  Thummim  is  ex- 
plained  by  such  expressions  as  '?^^1K  ^5*''^  ^'y\t<  "^^ip, 
"  Arise,  shine ;  for  thy  light  is  come"  (Isa.  Lx,  1).  Thum- 
mim expresse8  alike  complete  prosperity  and  coroplete 
innocence,  and  so  falls  in  exactly  with  the  double  notion 
of  light  (Isa.  lx,  1 ;  lxii,  1 , 2).  The  privilege  of  receiving 
an  answer  from  God  bears  the  same  relation  to  the  gen- 
erał State  of  Israel  symbolized  by  the  priest^s  dress  that 
the  promise  in  Isa.  liy,  13,  "Ali  thy  children  shall  be 
taught  of  the  Lord,*'  does  to  the  precediiig  descriprion, 
"  I  will  lay  thy  Stones  with  fair  colors,  and  lay  thy  foun- 
dations  with  sapphires,  and  I  will  make  thy  windows  of 
agates,  and  thy  gates  of  carbuitcles,  and  all  thy  borders 
of  pleasant  stones,"  ver.  11, 12 ;  comp.  also  ver.  14  and  17 
(Heb.).  It  is  obyious  to  add  how  entirdy  this  view  ao- 
cords  with  the  blessing  of  Levi  in  Deut.  xxxiii,  8,  where 
Levi  is  called  God's  holy  one,  and  God's  Thummim  and 
Urim  are  said  to  be  given  to  him,  because  he  came  out 
of  the  trial  so  elear  in  his  iutegrity.  (See  also  Bar.  v,  2.) 
See  Breastplate. 

(7.)  The  "bonnet,"  łl^a^ip,  migbaah\  was  a  iuHHxn 
of  linen  covering  the  head,  but  not  in  the  particular  form 
which  that  of  the  high-priest  assumed  when  the  mitrę 
was  added  to  it.    See  Bonnkt. 

(8.)  The  last  article  peculiar  to  the  high-priest  is  the 
mUre,  rCSSCp,  miłsne^pheth,  or  upper  turban,  with  its 


HIGH-PRIEST 


246 


fflGH-PRIEST 


Form  of  tbe  Priestly  Tnrban  of  the  HebrewB,  as  enepend- 
ed  and  aa  woni.    (From  Braun,  ut  ntp,  p.  488.) 

gold  pUte,  engrayed  ¥rith  "Holineas  to  the  Lord,"  iasten- 
ed  to  it  by  a  ribbon  of  blue.  Josephns  applies  the  aame 
Heb.  term  (jjM9v(Ufi^0Tic)  to  the  turbana  of  the  oommon 
pńests  as  well,  but  says  that  in  addition  to  this,  and  sewn 
upon  the  top  of  it,  the  high-priest  had  another  turban 
of  blue;  that  beaides  thia  he  had  outaide  the  turban  a 
triple  crown  of  gold,  oonsisting,  that  is,  of  three  rims  one 
above  the  other,  and  terminating  at  the  top  in  a  kind 
of  conical  cup,  like  the  inrerted  calyx  of  the  herb  hyoA- 
cyamus.  Josephus  doubtleaa  gi  ve8  a  tnie  account  of  the 
high-priesfe  turban  aa  womin  his  day.  It  may  fairly  be 
conjectured  that  the  crown  waa  appended  when  the  A»- 
monseans  united  the  temporal  monarchy  with  the  priest- 
hood,  and  that  this  was  continued,  though  in  a  modified 
ahape,  after  the  80vereignty  was  taken  from  theoL  Jo- 
sephus also  describes  the  iriTaXovy  the  Uunina  or  gold 
plate,  which  he  says  covered  the  forehead  of  the  high- 
priesL  In  i4fi^  vii,  3, 8,  he  says  that  the  identical  gold 
plate  madę  in  the  days  of  Moees  existed  in  his  time;  and 
Whiston  adds  in  a  notę  that  it  was  still  presenred  in  the 
time  of  Origen,  and  that  the  inscription  on  it  was  en- 
grayed in  Sanoaritan  characters  {A  nt,  iii,  8, 6).  It  is  oer- 
tain  that  R.  £liezer,  who  flourished  in  Hadiian's  reign, 
saw  it  at  Komę.  It  waa  doubtless  placed,  with  other 
apoils  of  the  Tempie,  in  the  Tempie  of  Peaoe,  which  was 
bumt  down  in  the  reign  of  Commodus.  These  spoils, 
howeyer,  are  espedally  mentioned  aa  part  of  Alaric's 
plunder  when  he  took  Roroe.  They  were  carried  by 
Genseric  into  Africa,  and  brought  by  Belisarius  to  Byzan- 
tium,  where  they  adomed  his  triumph.  On  the  waming 
of  a  Jew  the  emperor  ordered  them  back  to  Jerusalem, 
but  what  became  of  them  is  not  known  (Beland,  de  Spo- 
Im  TempU).     See  Mitrk. 

8.  Aaron  had  peculiar  fundiona.  To  him  alone  it 
appertained,  and  he  alone  was  permitted,  to  enter  the 
Iloiy  of  Holies,  which  he  did  once  a  year,  on  the  great 
day  of  atonement,  when  he  sprinkled  the  blood  of  the 
ńa-offeiiąg  on  the  mercy-seat,  and  bumt  inoenae  with- 


in  the  vail  (Ley.  xyi).  He  is  said  by  the  Talmndista, 
with  whom  agree  Lightfoot,  Selden,  Grotius,  Winer, 
BiUir,  and  many  others,  not  to  have  wom  his  fuli  pon* 
tifical  robes  on  tbe  occaaion,  but  to  haye  been  dad  en- 
tirely  in  white  linen  (Ley.  xyi,  4, 82).  It  is  singular, 
howeyer,  that,  on  the  other  hand,  Josephus  says  that 
the  great  fast-day  was  the  chief,  if  not  the  oniy  day  in 
the  year  when  the  high-priest  worc  all  his  robes  (  War, 
y,  5,  7),  and,  in  spite  of  the  alleged  impropiiety  of  his 
wearing  his  splendid  apparel  on  a  day  of  humiliation,  it 
seems  far  morę  probable  that  on  the  one  occasion  when 
he  performed  functions  peculiar  to  the  high-priest  he 
should  have  wom  his  fuli  dress.  Josephus,  too,  could 
not  have  been  mistaken  as  to  the  fact,  which  he  repeata 
{cont,  Ap,  ii,  7),  where  he  sajrs  the  high-priests  alone 
might  enter  into  the  Holy  of  Holies,  "propria  stolA  cir- 
cumamictL"  For  although  Selden,  who  strenuoualy  sup- 
ports  the  Rabbinical  statement  that  the  high-priest  only 
wore  the  four  linen  garments  when  he  entered  the  Holy 
of  Holies,  endeayors  to  make  Josephus  say  the  same 
thing,  it  is  impossible  to  twist  his  words  into  this  mean- 
ing.  It  is  tme,  on  the  other  hand,  that  Lev.  xvi  dis- 
tinctly  prescribes  that  Aaron  should  wear  the  four  priest- 
ly  garments  of  linen  when  he  entered  into  the  Holy  of 
Holies,  and  put  them  ofT  immediately  he  camc  out,  and 
leave  them  in  the  Tempie;  no  one  being  present  in  the 
Tempie  while  Aaron  madę  the  atonement  (yerse  17), 
Either,  therefore,  in  the  time  of  Josephus  this  law  waa 
not  kept  in  practice^or  else  we  must  recondle  the  ap-> 
parent  oontradiction  by  supposing  that  in  conseąuence 
of  the  great  jealousy  with  which  the  high-priest'8  robes 
were  kept  by  the  civil  power  at  this  time,  the  custom 
had  arisen  for  him  to  wear  them,  not  eyen  a1wa3-8  on 
the  three  great  festiyals  (Ant,  xviii,  4,  8),  but  only  on 
the  great  day  of  expiation.  Clad  in  this  gorgeous  at- 
tire,  he  would  enter  the  Tempie  in  presence  of  all  the 
people,  and,  after  having  performed  in  secret,  as  the  law 
requires,  the  rites  of  expiation  in  the  linen  dress,  he 
would  resume  his  pontifical  robes,  and  so  appear  again 
in  public  Thus  his  wearing  the  robes  would  easily 
come  to  be  identified  chiefly  with  the  day  of  atonement; 
and  this  is,  perhaps,  the  most  probable  explanation.  In 
other  respects,  the  high-priest  performed  the  functions 
of  a  priest,  but  only  on  new  moons  and  other  great  feasts, 
and  on  such  solemn  occasions  as  the  dedication  of  the 
Tempie  under  Solomon,  under  Zerabbabel,  etc.  See 
Atonkment,  Day  of. 
4.  The  high-priest  had  a  peculiar  place  in  the  law  of 


The  Jewiah  High-priest  in  AiU  Costome,  aooording  tO 
Braun  (ut  tup,  p.  647). 


HI6H-PRIEST 


247 


fflGH-PRIEST 


Ure  numakąfer,  and  his  Uking  sanctiuury  in  the  eitiee 
of  lefąge.  The  numaUyer  might  not  leave  the  city  of 
refiłge  diuing  the  lifetime  of  the  ezisdng  high-priest 
who  was  anointed  with  the  holy  oil  (Numb^  xxxV|  25, 
28).  It  was  ałao  forbidden  to  the  high-priest  to  foUow 
m  iunenl,  ot  lend  his  clothes  for  the  dead,  acoording  to 
the  precedent  in  Ler.  z,  6.    See  Manslayer. 

&  The  other  lespects  in  which  the  high-priest  exer- 
dsed  superior  functions  to  the  other  priesŁs  arose  rather 
from  his  position  and  opportunities  than  were  distinctly 
attached  to  his  offioe,  and  thąy  conseąuently  varied  with 
the  personal  character  and  abilities  of  the  high-priest. 
Such  were  refonns  in  religion,  restorations  of  the  Tem- 
pie and  its  sendoe,  the  preservation  of  the  Tempie  from 
intnision  or  profanation,  taking  the  lead  in  eodesiastical 
or  civil  affiuis,  judging  the  people,  presiding  in  the  San- 
hedrim  (whieh,  however,  he  is  said  by  Ughtfoot  rarely 
to  have  done),  and  other  similar  tnmsactions,  in  which 
we  find  the  high-priest  sometimes  prominent,  sometimes 
not  even  mentioned.  (See  the  historical  part  of  this 
artide.)  £yen  that  poition  of  power  which  most  nata- 
rally  and  usually  fell  to  his  share,  the  nile  of  the  Tem- 
pie, and  the  govemment  of  the  priests  and  Levites  who 
ministered  there,  did  not  invariably  fali  to  the  share  of 
the  high-priest.  For  the  title  "  Ruler  of  the  Hoose  of 
God,"  D*^r6Kir-n*^a  n*^»,  which  nsually  denotes  the 
high-priest,  is  sometimes  given  to  those  who  were  not 
high-priests,  as  to  Pashnr,  the  son  of  Immer,  in  Jer.  xx, 
1 ;  compare  1  Chroń.  xii^  27.  The  Rabbins  speak  veiy 
irequently  of  one  second  in  dignity  to  the  high-priest, 
whom  they  cali  the  Sagan,  and  who  often  actod  in  the 
high-priest*s  room.  He  is  the  same  who  in  the  O.  T.  is 
csUed  ''the  second  priest'*  (2  Kings  xxiii,  4;  xxv,  18). 
They  say  that  Moses  was  sagan  to  Aaron.  Thus,  too, 
it  is  exp]ained  of  Annas  and  Caiaphas  (Loke  iii,  2),  that 
Annas  was  sagan.  Ananias  is  also  thoaght  by  some  to 
have  been  sagan,  acring  for  the  high-priest  (Acts  xxiii, 
2).  In  like  manner  they  say  Zadok  and  Abiathar  were 
high-priest  and  sagan  in  the  time  of  David.  The  sagan 
is  also  yery  freąuently  called  Memurmeh,  or  prefect  of 
the  Tempie,  and  upon  him  chiefly  hiy  the  care  and 
charge  of  the  Tempie  services  (Lightfoot,  jKiMtm).  If 
the  high-priest  was  incapacitated  from  oflSdating  by 
any  accidental  nncleanness,  the  sagan  or  vioe-high- 
priest  took  his  place.  Thus  the  Jerusalem  Talmud  tells 
a  story  of  Simon,  son  of  Kamith,  that  ''on  the  ere  of 
the  day  of  expiation  he  went  out  to  speak  with  the 
king,  and  some  spittle  feU  upon  his  garments  and  de- 
filed  him :  therefore  Jodah  his  brother  went  in  on  the 
day  of  expiation,  and  serred  in  his  stead ;  and  so  their 
mother  Kamith  saw  two  of  her  sons  high-priests  in  one 
day.  She  had  seren  sons,  and  they  all  served  in  the 
high-priestbood**  (Ughtfoot,  ix,  85).  It  does  not  ap- 
pear  by  whose  authority  the  high-priests  were  appoint- 
ed  to  their  office  before  there  were  kings  of  Israel ;  but, 
as  we  find  it  invariably  done  by  the  civil  power  in  later 
times,  it  is  probable  that,  in  the  times  preceding  the 
monarchy,  it  was  by  the  elders,  or  Sanhedrim.  The  in- 
stallation  and  anointing  of  the  high-priest,  or  clothing 
him  with  the  dght  garments,  which  was  the  formal  in- 
Testituie,  is  ascribed  by  Maimonides  to  the  Sanhedrim 
at  all  times  (Ughtfoot,  ix,  22). 

It  shonld  be  added  that  the  nsual  age  for  entering 
opon  the  functions  of  the  priesthood,  acoording  to  2 
Chroń,  xxxi,  17,  is  considered  to  have  been  twenty 
years  (by  the  later  Jews  thirty,  Nnmb.  iv,  8 ;  1  Chroń. 
xxiii,  2),  though  a  priest  or  high^riest  was  not  actually 
incapacitated  if  he  had  attained  to  puberty,  as  appears 
by  the  example  of  Aristobulus,  who  was  high-priest  at 
the  age  of  seventeen.  Onias,  the  son  of  Simon  the 
Jnst,  could  not  be  high-priest,  because  he  was  but  a 
chiM  at  his  father^s  death.  Again,  acoording  to  Łev. 
xxi,  no  one  that  had  a  blemish  could  ofBciate  at  the  al- 
tar.  Moses  enameratea  eleven  blemishes,  which  the 
Talmnd  expands  into  142.  Josephus  relates  that  An- 
tigonns  mutilated  Hyreanus*B  ears,  to  incapacitate  him 
ht  hang:  restored  to  the  high-priesthood.    Illegitimate 


birth  was  also  a  bar  to  the  high-prieBthood,  and  the 
subtlety  of  Jewish  distinctions  extended  this  illegitima- 
cy  to  being  bom  of  a  mother  who  had  been  taken  cap- 
tive  by  heathen  conąuerors  (Josephus,  c.  Apion,  i,  7), 
Thus  Eleazar  said  to  John  Hyrcanus  (though,  Josephus 
says,  falsely)  that  if  he  was  a  just  man,  he  ought  to  le- 
sign  the  pontificate,  because  his  mother  had  been  a  cap- 
tive,  and  he  was  therefore  incapacitated.  Łev.  xxi,  18, 
14,  was  taken  as  the  ground  of  this  and  similar  disąual- 
ifications.  For  a  fuli  account  of  this  branch  of  the  sub- 
ject  the  reader  is  referred  to  Selden's  leamed  treatises 
De  Succestiambus,  etc,  and  De  Sucoess,  m  Poni^f.  Ebna- 
or, ;  and  to  Prideaux,  ii,  306.  It  was  the  univerBal  opin- 
ion  of  the  Jews  that  the  deposition  of  a  high-priest, 
which  became  so  oommon,  was  unlawfuL  Joseph.  (A  nt, 
XV,  3)  says  that  Antiochus  Epiphanes  was  the  first  who 
did  this,  when  he  deposed  Jesus  or  Jason ;  Aristobulus, 
who  deposed  his  brother  Hyrcanus  the  Second;  and 
Herod,  who  took  away  the  high-priesthood  from  Ana* 
nelus  to  give  it  to  Aristobulus  the  Third.  See  the  stoiy 
of  Jonathan,  son  of  Ananus,  Ant,  xix,  6, 4. 

IL  The  ikeological  view  of  the  high^riesthood  win 
be  treated  under  the  head  of  Priest.  It  mnst  sufBce 
here  to  indicate  the  oonsideration  of  the  offioe,  dress, 
functions,  and  ministrations  of  the  high-priest,  as  typical 
of  the  priesthood  of  our  Lord  Jesus  Christ,  and  as  set- 
ting  forth  under  shadows  the  truths  which  an  openly 
taught  under  the  Grospel.  This  has  been  done  to  a 
great  extent  in  the  Epistle  to  the  Hebrews,  and  is  occa- 
sionally  done  in  other  parta  of  Scripture,  as  Kev.  i,  13, 
where  the  9ro^qpi|c,  and  the  girdle  about  the  papa,  are 
distinctly  the  robę,  and  the  curious  girdle  of  the  ephod, 
characteristic  of  the  high-priest  It  also  embraces  all 
the  morał  and  spiritual  teaching  supposed  to  be  mtended 
by  soch  symbols.  Philo  (De  vUd  MosU),  Origen  {Ho» 
mU.  in  LwiL)f  Eusebius  {DemonsL  Evang.  Ub.  iii),  Epi- 
phanius  icont»  Melchized,  iv,  etc),  Gregoiy  Nazianzen 
\Orai,  i,  EUa  Cretem,  and  Comment,  p.  195),  Augustine 
(Ofuett.  m  Exod,\  may  be  cited  among  many  othera  of 
the  andents  who  have  morę  or  less  thus  treated  tha 
snbject  Of  modems,  Biihr  (Symbolik  des  Motaischm 
CuUus),  Fairtudm  {T^^pology  ofScript.\  Kalisch  ((7om- 
maa,  on  Exod.)y  have  entered  fully  into  this  subject,  both 
from  the  Jewish  and  the  Christian  point  of  view. 

III.  The  history  of  the  high-priests  embraces  a  period 
of  about  1727  yean,  aocording  to  the  opinion  of  the  best 
chronologers,  and  a  sucosesion  of  about  88  high-priests, 
beginning  with  Aaron,  and  ending  with  Fhannias.  ''  The 
nnmber  of  all  the  high-priests  (says  Josephus,  Ant,  xx, 
10)  firom  Aaron  .  .  .  untii  Phanas  .  .  .  was  88,"  where 
he  gives  a  oomprehensiye  account  of  them.  They  nat* 
urally  anange  themselyes  into  three  groups — (a.)  those 
before  IXavid;  (ft.)  tltose  from  David  to  thłe  CaptiWty; 
(r.)  those  finom  the  return  from  the  Babyloiiian  captiv- 
ity  tiH  the  eessation  of  the  office  at  the  destruction  of 
Jerusalem.  The  two  former  have  come  down  to  us  in 
the  canonical  books  of  Scripture,  and  so  have  a  few  of 
the  earliest  and  the  latest  of  the  latter;  but  for  by  far 
the  laiger  pottion  of  the  latter  group  we  have  only  the 
authority  of  Josephus,  the  Talmud,  and  occańoned  no- 
tices  in  profane  writers. 

(a,)  The  high-priests  of  the  first  group  who  are  dis- 
tinctly madę  known  to  us  as  such  are,  1.  Aaron ;  2.  Ele^ 
azar;  8.  Phinehaś;  4.  Eli;  5.  Ahitub  (1  Chroń,  ix,  11; 
Neh.  xi,  11 ;  1  Sam.  xiv,  8) ;  6.  Ahiah ;  7.  Ahimelech. 
Phinehaś,  the  son  of  Eli,  and  father  of  Ahitub,  died  be- 
fore his  father,  and  so  was  not  high-priest  Of  the 
above  the  first  three  succeeded  in  regular  order,  Nadab 
and  Abihu,  Aaron^s  eldest  sons,  having  died  in  the  wil- 
demess  (Lev.  x).  But  Eli,  the  4th,  was  of  the  linę  of 
Ithamar.  What  was  the  exact  interval  betwecn  the 
death  of  Phinehaś  and  the  accession  of  EU,  what  led  to 
the  transference  of  the  chief  priesthood  from  the  linę  of 
Eleazar  to  that  of  Ithamar,  and  whether  any  or  which 
of  the  descendants  of  Eleazar  between  Phinehaś  and 
Zadok  (8even  in  number,  viz.  AIńshua,  Bukki,  Uzzi,  Zer- 
ahiah,  Heraiothi  Amariah,  Ahitub),  weie  high-priestflb 


HIGH-PRIEST 


246 


fflGH-PRIEST 


Form  of  Łhe  PriesŁIy  Tarban  of  Łhe  Hebrewg,  as  Buspeud- 
ed  and  aa  woni.    (From  Brano,  uł  ntp,  p.  49a) 

gold  plate,  engrmved  ¥rith  *^  Holineas  to  the  Lord,**  iasten- 
ed  to  it  by  a  ribbon  of  blue.  Josephns  applies  the  same 
Heb.  term  (jAatryeufi^Orię)  to  the  turbana  of  the  common 
priesta  aa  well,  but  aays  that  in  addition  to  thia,  and  sewn 
upon  the  top  of  it,  the  high-prieat  had  another  turban 
of  blue;  that  besides  thia  he  had  outaide  the  turban  a 
triple  crown  of  gold,  consiating,  that  ia,  of  three  rima  one 
above  the  other,  and  tenninating  at  the  top  in  a  kind 
of  conical  cup,  like  the  inverted  caly^  of  the  herb  hyoa- 
cjamufl.  Josephus  doubtleas  giyea  a  tnie  account  of  the 
high-prie8t*8  turban  aa  worn  in  hia  day.  It  may  fairly  be 
conjectured  that  the  crown  was  appended  when  the  Aa- 
monseans  united  the  temporal  monarchy  with  the  priesta 
hood,  and  that  thia  was  continned,  though  in  a  modified 
ahape,  ader  the  soyereignty  waa  taken  from  them.  Jo- 
sephus also  deacribes  tibe  ititclKop,  the  lamina  or  gold 
plate,  which  he  says  covered  the  forehead  of  the  high- 
priesL  In  Ani,  vii,  3, 8,  he  says  that  the  identical  gold 
plate  madę  in  the  days  of  Moees  existed  in  his  time  {  and 
Whiston  adds  in  a  notę  that  it  was  still  preserred  in  the 
time  of  Origen,  and  that  the  inscription  on  it  was  en- 
graved  in  Samaritan  characters  (AnL  iii, 8, 6).  It  is  oer- 
tain  that  R.  Eliezer,  who  flourished  in  Hadrian'8  reign, 
saw  it  at  Komę.  It  was  doubtleas  placed,  with  other 
apoila  of  the  Tempie,  in  the  Tempie  of  Peaoe,  which  was 
bumt  down  in  the  reign  of  Commodua.  These  spoils, 
howeyer,  are  especially  mentioned  aa  part  of  Alaric's 
plunder  when  he  took  Romę.  They  were  carried  by 
Genseric  into  Alrica,  and  brought  by  Beliaarius  to  Byzan- 
tium,  where  they  adomed  his  triumph.  On  the  waming 
of  a  Jew  the  emperor  ordered  them  back  to  Jerusalem, 
but  what  became  of  them  is  not  known  (Reland,  de  Spo- 
lut  Templi),    See  Mitke. 

8.  Auon  had  peculiar  fundioru.  To  him  alone  it 
appertained,  and  he  alone  was  permitted,  to  enter  the 
Iloly  of  Holiea,  which  he  did  once  a  year,  on  the  great 
day  of  atonement,  when  he  sprinkled  the  biood  of  the 
iiiłroffeiiiig  on  the  meicy-aeat,  and  bumt  inoenae  with- 


in  the  yail  (Lev.  xyi).  He  u  aaid  by  the  Talnradłata, 
with  whom  agree  Lightfoot,  Selden,  Grotius,  Winer, 
Bahr,  and  many  others,  not  to  haye  worn  his  fuli  pon- 
tifical  robes  on  the  occaaion,  but  to  haye  been  cLmI  en- 
tirely  in  white  linen  (Ley.  xyi,  4, 82).  It  ia  aingular, 
howeyer,  that,  on  the  other  hand,  Josephna  aaya  that 
the  great  fastrday  was  the  chief,  if  not  the  only  day  in 
the  year  when  the  high-priest  worc  all  his  robes  (^War, 
y,  5, 7),  and,  in  spite  of  the  alleged  impropriety  of  hia 
wearing  his  splendid  apparel  on  a  day  of  humiliation,  it 
seems  far  morę  probable  that  on  the  one  occasion  when 
he  performed  functions  peculiar  to  the  high-priest  he 
should  haye  worn  his  fuli  dress.  Josephus,  too,  oould 
not  haye  been  mistaken  as  to  the  fact,  which  he  repeata 
(cofrf,  Ap,  ii,  7),  where  he  sajrs  the  high-priests  alone 
might  enter  into  the  Holy  of  Uolies, "  propria  stola  cir- 
cumamictL"  For  although  Selden,  who  strenuously  sup- 
ports  the  Rabbinical  statement  that  the  high-priest  only 
wore  the  four  linen  garments  when  he  entered  the  Holy 
of  Holiea,  endeayors  to  make  Josephus  say  the  same 
thing,  it  is  impossiUe  to  twist  his  words  into  this  mean- 
ing.  It  is  tnie,  on  the  other  hand,  that  Lev.  x^i  dis- 
tinctly  piescribes  that  Aaron  should  wear  the  four  priest- 
ly  garmenta  of  linen  when  he  entered  into  the  Holy  of 
Holies,  and  put  them  ofT  immediately  he  came  out,  and 
leave  them  in  the  Tempie ;  no  one  being  preaent  in  the 
Tempie  while  Aaron  madę  the  atonement  (yerse  17). 
Either,  therefore,  in  the  time  of  Josephus  this  law  waa 
not  kept  in  practice^or  else  we  must  reconcile  the  ap- 
parent  oontnidiction  by  supposlng  that  in  conseąnence 
of  the  great  jealousy  with  which  the  high-pricst*s  robes 
were  kept  by  the  civil  power  at  this  time,  the  custom 
had  arisen  for  him  to  wear  them,  not  even  alwaya  on 
the  three  great  festiyals  (Ant.  xyiii,  4, 8),  but  only  on 
the  great  day  of  expiation.  Clad  in  this  gorgeous  at- 
tire,  he  would  enter  the  Tempie  in  presence  of  all  the 
people,  and,  after  having  performed  in  secret,  as  the  law 
requires,  the  rites  of  expiation  in  the  linen  dreaa,  be 
would  resume  his  pontifical  robes,  and  so  appear  again 
in  public.  Thus  his  wearing  the  robes  would  easily 
come  to  be  identified  chiefly  with  the  day  of  atonement; 
and  this  is,  perhaps,  the  most  probable  explanation.  In 
other  respects,  the  high-priest  performed  the  fimctions 
of  a  priest,  but  only  on  new  moons  and  other  great  feasts, 
and  on  such  solemn  occasions  as  the  dedication  of  the 
Tempie  under  Solomon,  under  Zembbabel,  etc.  See 
Atonksient,  Day  of. 
4.  The  high-priest  had  a  peculiar  place  in  the  law  of 


The  Jewbsb  High-prici^t  m  fuli  Costume^  accoedlng  tO 
firaiŁU  iut  tup,  p.  6*1). 


fflG&PRIEST 


247 


fflGH-PRIEST 


tlie  nunidiTcr,  and  his  Ukiiig  sandauury  in  the  cities 
of  refiige.  Tbe  manslajer  might  not  teaye  the  citj  of 
reluge  dumig  the  lifetime  of  the  existing  high-priest 
who  WM  anointed  with  the  holy  oil  (Numb^  xxxv,  25, 
28).  It  WM  aLbo  forbidden  to  tbe  high-priest  to  foUow 
A  fonem],  or  lend  his  clothes  for  the  dead,  acoording  to 
the  precedenŁ  in  Lev.  x,  6.    See  Hanslayer. 

5.  The  other  lespects  in  which  the  high-priest  eser- 
eiaed  superior  functioos  to  the  other  priests  arose  rather 
from  his  poaitłon  and  opportunities  than  were  distinctlj 
■rtarhed  to  his  offioe,  and  thąy  consegucntly  varied  with 
the  pezaonal  character  and  abiHties  of  the  high-priesL 
Such  were  lefonna  in  leligion,  restorations  of  the  Tem- 
pie and  ita  senrioe,  the  piesenration  of  the  Tempie  from 
intnisMił  or  profanarion,  taking  the  lead  in  ecdesiastical 
or  civil  affiuiB,  judging  the  people,  presiding  in  the  San- 
hedrim  (whIch,  however,  he  is  said  by  Ughtfoot  raiely 
to  haye  done),  and  other  similar  tiansactions,  in  whidi 
we  find  the  high-prieat  sometimes  prominent,  sometimes 
not  eyen  mentioned.  (See  the  historicai  part  of  this 
aitide.)  £ven  that  poition  of  power  which  most  natu- 
laUy  and  uaoałly  fell  to  his  share,  the  rule  of  the  Tem- 
pie, and  the  goyemment  of  the  priests  and  Levites  who 
miniateied  there,  did  not  inraiiably  fali  to  the  shaie  of 
the  hi^b-priest.  For  the  title  ''  Ruler  of  the  House  of 
God,**  D*^r6stn-n*^a  -f^ąp,  which  nsoaUy  denotes  the 
bigb-priest,  is  sometimes  giyen  to  those  who  were  not 
high-piiestB,  as  to  Pashur,  the  son  of  Immer,  in  Jer.  xx, 
1 ;  cotnpare  1  Chroń,  xii,  27.  The  Rabbins  speak  yeiy 
6eqtiently  of  one  second  in  dignity  to  the  high-priest, 
whom  tbey  cali  the  Sagan,  and  who  often  acted  in  the 
high-priea^s  room.  He  is  the  same  who  in  the  O.  T.  is 
called  ^the  second  priest"  (2  Rings  xxiii,  4;  xxy,  18). 
They  say  that  Moses  was  sagan  to  Aaron.  Thus,  too, 
it  is  expla]]ied  of  Annas  and  Caiaphas  (Loke  iii,  2),  that 
Amiaa  was  sagan.  Ananias  is  also  thoaght  by  some  to 
banre  been  sagan,  acting  for  the  high-priest  (Acts  xxiii, 
2).  In  Iike  manner  they  say  Zadok  and  Abiathar  were 
high-priest  and  sagan  in  the  time  of  David.  The  sagan 
is  also  yery  ftequently  called  Memurmeh,  or  prefect  of 
the  Tempie,  and  upon  him  chiefly  lay  the  care  and 
eharise  of  the  Tempie  senrices  (Lightfoot,^MiMim).  If 
the  high-priest  was  Sncapacitated  from  officiating  by 
any  accidental  uncleanness,  the  sagan  or  yioe-high- 
priesc  took  his  place.  Thus  the  Jerusalem  Talmud  tells 
a  story  of  Simon,  son  of  Kamith,  that  **on  the  eye  of 
the  day  of  expiarion  he  went  out  to  speak  with  the 
kiniic,  and  some  spittle  fell  upon  his  garments  and  de- 
fflfid  him :  therefore  Judah  his  brother  went  in  on  the 
day  of  expiation,  and  senred  in  his  stead ;  and  so  their 
mother  Kionith  saw  two  of  her  sons  high-priests  in  one 
day.  Sbe  had  seyen  sons,  and  they  all  seryed  in  the 
hłgb-priesthood"  (Ughtfoot,  ix,  85).  It  does  not  ap- 
pear  by  whose  aathority  the  high-priests  were  i^)potnt- 
ed  to  their  offioe  before  there  were  kings  of  Israd ;  but, 
as  we  find  it  inyariably  done  by  the  ciyil  power  in  later 
timea,  it  is  probable  that,  in  the  times  preceding  the 
monaschy,  it  was  by  the  elders,  or  Sanhedrim.  The  in- 
Btallation  and  anointing  of  the  high-priest,  or  dothing 
him  with  the  eight  garments,  which  was  the  formal  in- 
yeititiire,  is  ascribed  by  Haimonides  to  the  Sanhedrim 
at  all  times  (lightfoot,  ix,  22). 

It  riionld  be  added  that  the  nsual  age  for  entering 
upon  the  functions  of  the  priesthood,  aooording  to  2 
Chroń,  xxxi,  17,  is  conndered  to  haye  been  twenty 
yeaiB  (by  the  later  Jews  thirty,  Nnmb.  iy,  8 ;  1  Chroń. 
xxiii,  2),  though  a  priest  or  high-priest  was  not  actually 
ineapadtated  if  he  had  attained  to  puberty,  as  i^)pears 
by  tbe  example  of  Aristobulos,  who  was  high-priest  at 
the  age  of  seyenteen.  Onias,  the  son  of  Simon  the 
Jast,  coold  not  be  high-priest,  because  he  was  but  a 
chUd  at  his  iathei^s  death.  Again,  aooording  to  Łey. 
xxi,  no  one  that  had  a  blemish  could  officiate  at  the  al- 
tar.  Moses  enumerates  eleyen  blemishes,  which  the 
Tahnnd  expands  into  142.  Josephus  relates  that  An- 
tigomis  motilated  Hyreanus^s  ears,  to  incapacitate  him 
fo  boDS  restored  to  the  high-piiestbood.    lUegitimate 


birth  was  also  a  bar  to  the  high-priesthood,  and  the 
subtlety  of  Jewish  distinctions  extended  this  illegitima- 
cy  to  being  bom  of  a  mother  who  had  been  taken  cap- 
tiye  by  heaiben  conąuerors  (Josephus,  c.  Apion,  i,  7). 
Thus  Eleazar  said  to  John  Hyrcanus  (though,  Josephus 
says,  falsely)  that  if  he  was  a  just  man,  he  ought  to  le* 
sign  the  pontificate,  because  his  mother  had  been  a  cap- 
tive,  and  he  was  therefore  incapacitated.  Ley.  xxi,  18, 
14,  was  taken  as  the  ground  of  this  and  similar  disąual- 
ifications.  For  a  fuli  account  of  this  branch  of  the  sub- 
ject  the  reader  is  referred  to  Selden's  leamed  treatieea 
J>e  SucceMsiombus,  etc,  and  De  Sucoess,  in  Pontif,  Ehra^ 
or,  i  and  to  Prideaux,  ii,  806.  It  was  the  uniyerBal  opin- 
ion  of  the  Jews  that  tbe  deposition  of  a  high-priest, 
which  became  so  oommon,  was  unlawfuL  Joseph.  {A  nL 
xy,  3)  says  that  Antiochus  Epiphanes  was  the  first  who 
did  this,  when  he  deposed  Jesus  or  Jason ;  Aristobulus, 
who  deposed  his  brother  Hyrcanus  the  Second;  and 
Herod,  who  took  away  the  high-priesthood  from  Antf 
nelus  to  giye  it  to  Aristobulus  the  Third.  See  the  story 
of  Jonathan,  son  of  Ananus,  Ant,  xix,  6, 4. 

IL  The  thźological  yiew  of  the  high-priesthood  win 
be  treated  under  the  head  of  Priest.  It  must  suffice 
here  to  indicate  the  consideration  of  the  office,  dress, 
functions,  and  ministrations  of  the  high-priest,  as  typical 
of  the  priesthood  of  our  Łoid  Jesus  Christ,  and  as  set- 
dng  forth  under  shadows  the  truths  which  are  openly 
taught  under  the  Gospel  This  has  been  done  to  a 
great  extent  in  the  Epistle  to  the  Hebrews,  and  is  occa- 
sionally  done  in  other  parts  of  Scriptuie,  as  Rey.  i,  18, 
where  the  3ro^^pi7c,  and  the  giidle  about  the  papa,  are 
distinctly  the  robę,  and  the  curions  girdle  of  the  ephod, 
characteristic  of  tbe  high-priest  It  also  embraces  all 
the  morał  and  ^iritual  teaching  supposed  to  be  mtended 
by  such  symbois.  Philo  {De  viid  Mona),  Origen  (Ho- 
miL  in  LeciL\  Eusebius  (Denumst,  Evang,  lib.  iii),  Epi- 
phanius  (eon/.  AfekhizeeL  iy,  etc),  Gregoiy  Nazianzen 
{Orat,  i,  EUa  CreUna,  and  Comment,  p.  195),  Augustine 
((2u<s«/.  tn  £xod,),  may  be  cited  among  many  others  of 
the  ancients  who  haye  more  or  less  thus  treated  the 
Sttbject  Of  modems,  BlUir  (JSjfmbolik  des  Mosaischm 
CuUus)f  Fairbaim  {T^pologg  ofScript,\  Kaliach  (Cbm- 
meni.  on  £xod,),  haye  entered  fuUy  into  this  subject,  both 
from  the  Jewish  and  the  Christian  point  of  yiew. 

III.  The  hittory  of  tbe  high-priests  embraces  a  period 
of  about  1727  years,  aocording  to  the  opinion  of  the  best 
chronotogers,  and  a  succession  of  about  83  high-priests, 
beginning  with  Aaron,  and  ending  with  Fhannias.  ^*  The 
number  of  all  the  high-priests  (says  Josephus,  Ant,  xx, 
10)  from  Aaron  .  .  .  until  Phanas  .  .  .  was  9&y^  where 
he  giyes  a  oomprehensiye  account  of  them.  They  nat* 
urally  arrange  thettisełyes  into  three  groups— (a.)  those 
before  Dayid;  (6.)  dtoSe  from  Dayid  to  thłe  Capti^-ity ; 
(r.)  those  from  the  ^tum  from  the  Babylbiiian  captiy- 
ity  till  the  cessation  of  the  offioe  at  the  destruction  of 
Jerusalem.  The  two  former  haye  come  down  to  us  in 
the  canoiiical  books  of  Scripture,  and  so  haye  a  few  of 
the  earliest  and  the  latest  of  the  latter;  but  for  by  fat 
the  larger  portion  of  the  latter  group  we  haye  only  the 
authority  of  Josephus,  the  Tahnud,  and  occasioned  no^ 
tioes  in  profane  writers. 

{a,)  The  high-priests  of  the  first  group  who  are  dis- 
tinctly madę  known  to  us  as  such  are,  1.  Aaron ;  2.  Ele^ 
azar;  8.  Phinehas;  4.  Eli;  5.  Ahitub  (1  Chroń,  ix,  11; 
Neh.  xi,  11 ;  1  Sam.  xiy,  8) ;  6.  Ahiah ;  7.  Ahimelech. 
Phinehas,  the  son  of  Eli,  and  father  of  Ahitub,  died  be- 
fore his  father,  and  so  was  not  high-priest  Of  the 
aboye  the  first  thiee  succeeded  in  regular  order,  Nadab 
and  Abihu,  Aaron*s  eldest  sons,  haying  died  in  the  wil- 
demess  (Ley.  x).  But  Eli,  the  4th,  was  of  the  linę  of 
Ithamar.  What  was  the  exact  interyal  between  the 
death  of  Phinehas  and  the  accession  of  Eli,  what  led  to 
the  transference  of  the  chief  priesthood  from  the  linę  of 
Eleazar  to  that  of  Ithamar,  and  whether  any  or  which 
of  the  descendants  of  Eleazar  between  Phinehas  and 
Zadok  (seyen  in  number,  yiz.  Abishna,  Bukki,  Uzzi,  Zep- 
ahiah,  Meraioth,  Amariah,  Ahitub),  were  high-priestsb 


HIGH-PRlESt 


248 


fflGH-PRIEST 


we  have  no  positire  means  of  determining  from  Scrip- 
tare.  Judg.  xx,  28  leares  Phinehas,  the  son  of  Eleazar, 
priest  at  Shilob,  and  1  Sam.  i,  8, 9  finds  Eli  high-priest 
there,  with  two  grown-up  sona  priests  under  him.  The 
only  dew  is  to  be  found  in  the  genealogiea,  by  which  it 
appears  that  Phinehas  was  6th  in  succession  from  Leyi, 
while  Eli,  Bupposing  him  to  be  the  same  generation  as 
Samuers  grandfather,  would  be  lOth.  Josephus  asserts 
{Ant,  viii,  1, 3)  that  the  father  of  Bukki— whom  he  calls 
Joseph,  and  (^AnL  v,  11, 6)  Abiezer,  i.  e.  Abishua — was 
the  last  high-priest  of  Phinehas'8  linę  before  Zadok. 
This  is  a  doubtful  tiadition,  ńnce  Josephus  does  not  ad- 
here  to  it  in  the  aboye  passage  of  his  5th  book,  where 
he  makes  Bukki  and  Uzzi  to  have  been  both  high- 
priests,  and  Eli  to  have  eucceeded  Uzzi ;  or  in  book  xx, 
10,  where  he  reckons  the  high-priesta  before  Zadok  and 
Solomon  to  have  been  thirteen  (a  reckoning  which  in« 
cludes  apparently  all  Eleazar'8  descendants  down  to  Ahi- 
tub),  and  adds  Eli  and  his  son  Phinehas,  and  Abiathar, 
whom  he  caUs  Eirs  grandson.  If  the  last  of  Abishua's 
linę  died  leaving  a  son  or  grandson  under  age,  Eli,  as  the 
head  of  the  linę  of  Ithamar,  might  have  become  high- 
priest  as  a  matter  of  course,  or  he  might  have  been  ap- 
pointed  by  the  elders.  His  haying  judged  Israel  40  years 
(1  Sam.  iv,  18)  marks  him  as  a  man  of  abtlity.  If  Ahi- 
ah  and  Ahimelech  are  not  vaiiations  of  the  name  of  the 
same  person,  they  must  have  been  brothers,  sińce  both 
were  sons  of  Ahitub.  Of  the  high^priests,  then,  before 
David'8  reign,  8even  are  aaid  in  Scripture  to  have  been 
high-priests,  and  one  by  Josephus  alone.  The  bearing 
of  this  on  the  chronology  of  t^e  times  from  the  Exodus 
to  David  is  too  important  to  be  passed  over  in  silence. 
As  in  the  parallel  Ust  of  the  ancestois  of  David  (q.  v.), 
we  are  oompelled  by  the  chronology  to  oount  as  incum- 
bents  of  the  oilioe  in  regular  order  the  four  others  who 
are  only  named  in  Scripturo  as  lineal  descendants  of  the 
pontifical  family.  The  comparative  oversight  of  these 
incumbents  reoeives  an  explanation  from  the  naturę  of 
the  times.  It  must  also  be  noted  that  the  tabemacle  of 
God,  during  the  high-priesthood  of  Aaron*8  suocessors 
of  this  first  group,  was  pitched  at  Shiloh  in  the  tribe  of 
Ephraim,  a  fact  that  marks  the  strong  influence  which 
the  temporal  power  already  had  in  ecclesiastical  affiun, 
sińce  Ephraim  was  Jo0hua's  tribe,  as  Judah  was  David*8 
(Josh.  xxiv,  30,  33;  Judg.  xx,  27,  28;  xxi,  21 ;  1  Sam. 
i,  3, 9, 24 ;  iv,  3, 4 ;  xiv,  8,  etc ;  Pto.  lxxviii,  60).  Thia 
strong  influenoe  and  interference  of  the  secular  power 
is  manifest  throughout  the  subseąuent  history.  This 
first  period  was  also  nuurked  by  the  calamity  which  be- 
fell  the  high-priests  as  the  guardians  of  the  ark,  in  ita 
capture  by  the  Philistines.  Thia  probably  suspended 
all  inąuiries  by  Urim  and  Thummim,  which  were  madę 
before  the  ark  (1  Chroń,  xiii,  3;  comp.  Judg.  xx,  27;  1 
Sam.  vii,  2;  xiv,  18),  and  most  have  greatly  diminished 
the  influence  of  the  high-priests,  on  whom  the  laigeat 
ahare  of  the  humiliation  expressed  in  the  name  Ichabod 
would  naturally  fali.  The  rise  of  Samuel  as  a  prophet 
•at  this  veiy  time,  and  his  paramount  influence  and  im- 
portance  in  the  state,  to  the  entire  eclipeiug  of  Ahiah 
the  priest,  coincides  remarkably  with  the  ab^noe  of  the 
ark,  and  the  means  of  inąuiring  by  Urim  and  Thummim. 
,  (6.)  Passing  to  the  second  group,  we  begin  with  the 
.unexplained  circumstance  of  there  being  two  priesta  in 
the  reign  of  David,  apparently  of  nearly  equal  author- 
ity,  viz.  Zadok  and  Abiathar  (1  Chroń,  xv,  11 ;  2  Sam. 
viii,  17).  Indeed  it  is  only  from  the  deposition  of  Abi- 
athar,  and  the  placing  of  Zadok  in  his  room  by  Solomon 
\.  (1  Kings  ii,35),  that  we  leam  certainly  that  Abiathar  was 
the  high-priest,  and  Zadok  the  second.  Zadok  was  son 
of  Ahitub,  of  the  linę  of  Eleazar  (1  Chroń,  vi,  8),  and  the 
first  mention  of  him  is  in  1  Chroń,  xii,  28,  as  '^  a  young 
man,  mighty  in  valor,"  who  joined  David  in  Hebron  af- 
ter  Saul's  death,  with  22  captains  of  his  father's  house. 
It  is  thereforo  not  unlikely  that  after  the  death  of  Ahim- 
elech, and  the  secession  of  Abiathar  to  David,  Saul  may 
have  madę  Zadok  priest,  as  far  as  it  was  poasible  for  him 
to  49  BO  in  the  absenoe  of  the  ark  and  the  high-prieafs 


robea,  and  that  David  may  liave  av(ńded  the  diflicnlty 
of  deciding  between  the  claims  of  his  faithful  Mend  Abł* 
athar  and  his  new  and  important  ally  Zadok  (who,  per* 
hapa,  was  the  means  of  attaching  to  David*0  cause  the 
4600  Leyitea  and  the  8700  piiesta  that  came  under  J^ 
hoiada  their  captain,  ver.  26, 27),  by  appointing  them  ta 
a  joint  prieathood:  the  first  place,  with  the  ephod,  and 
Urim  and  Thummim,  remaining  with  Abiathar,  who  was 
in  actual  possession  of  them.  Gertain  it  is  that  fiom 
this  time  Zadok  and  Abiathar  aie  constantly  named  to- 
gether,  and,  aingularly,  Zadok  always  first,  both  in  the 
book  of  Samuel  and  that  of  Kings.  We  can,  however, 
tracę  very  dearly  up  to  a  certain  pomt  the  diviaon  of 
the  priestly  offices  and  dignities  between  them,  coin- 
ciding  as  it  did  with  the  divided  state  of  the  Leviticd 
worship  in  David'8  time.  For  we  leam  lirom  1  Chroń. 
xvi,  1-7,  87,  compared  ¥rith  89,  40,  and  yet  morę  dis- 
dnctly  from  2  Chroń,  i,  8, 4, 6,  that  the  tabemacle  and 
the  brazcn  altar  madę  by  Mosea  and  Bezaleel  in  the  wik 
demeas  were  at  this  time  at  Gibeon,  while  the  ark  was 
at  Jerusalem,  in  the  separata  tent  madę  for  it  by  David. 
See  GiBEox.  Now  Zadok  the  priest  and  his  farethrea 
the  priesta  were  left  "before  the  tabemacle  at  Gibeon* 
to  offer  bumt-oflferings  unto  the  Lord  moming  and  even-> 
ing,  and  to  do  accordmg  to  all  that  is  written  in  the  law 
of  the  Lord  (1  Chrou.  xvi,  89, 40).  It  is  therefore  obvi- 
ous  to  condude  that  Abiathar  had  special  charge  of  the 
ark  and  the  seryices  connected  with  it,  which  agreea  ex- 
actly  with  the  possession  of  the  ephod  by  Abiathar,  and 
hia  preyious  position  with  David  before  he  became  king 
of  Israel,  as  weH  as  yrith  what  we  are  told  1  Chroń,  xxvii, 
84,  that  Jehoiada  and  Abiathar  were  the  king's  oounael- 
loń  next  to  AhithopheL  Residence  at  Jerusalem  with 
the  ark,  and  the  priyilege  of  inąuiring  of  the  Ł4>id  be- 
fora  the  ark,  both  well  suit  his  oiBce  of  connseUor.  Abi- 
athar, howeyer,  forfeited  his  place  by  taking  part  with 
Adonijah  against  Solomon,  and  Zadok  was  madę  high- 
pńest  in  his  place.  The  pontificate  was  thua  ag^ain  Con- 
solidated and  transferred  permanently  from  the  linę  of 
Ithamar  to  that  of  Eleazar.  This  is  the  only  instance 
recordćd  of  the  depoeition  of  a  high-priest  (which  be* 
came  common  in  later  times,  eąpecially  under  Herod  and 
the  Romans)  during  thia  second  period.  It  was  the 
fulfilment  of  the  prophetic  denunciationa  of  the  ain  of 
£li's  sons  (1  Sam.  ii,  iii). 

Another  considerable  difficulty  that  meets  na  in  the 
histoiical  survey  of  the  high-priests  of  the  second  group 
is  to  aacertain  who  was  high-priest  at  the  dedication  of 
Solomon's  Tempie :  Josephus  {AnUiUjS,  6)  asaerta  that 
Zadok  was,  and  the  Seder  Olom  makes  him  the  high- 
priest  in  the  reign  of  Solomon.  Otherwise  we  might 
deem  it  very  improbable  that  Zadok,  who  muat  have 
been  very  old  at  Solomon*s  accesaon  (being  David*8  oon- 
temporaiy),  should  have  lived  to  the  llth  year  of  his 
reign;  and,  moreover,  1  Kings  iv,  2  distinctly  asserts 
that  Azariah,  the  son  of  2^ok,  was  priest  under  Solo- 
mon ;  and  1  Chroń,  vi,  10  tells  ns  of  an  Azariah,  grand- 
son of  the  former,  "  he  it  is  that  executed  the  priest^s 
Office  in  the  Tempie  that  Solomon  built  in  Jeniaalem," 
aa  if  meaning  at  its  first  completion.  If,  howeyer,  either 
of  these  Azariahs  (if  two)  was  the  first  high-priesi  of 
Solomon's  Tempie,  the  non-mention  of  him  in  the  ac- 
count  of  the  dedication  of  the  Tempie,  where  one  would 
most  have  expected  it  (as  1  Kings  yiii,  8, 6, 10, 11, 62 ;  2 
Chroń.  v,  7, 11,  etc),  and  the  prominence  giyen  to  Scdo- 
mon-*the  civil  power— would  be  certainly  remarkable. 
Comparo  also  2  Chroń,  viii,  14, 15. 

In  oonstmcting  the  list  of  the  snccession  of  pńeata  of 
this  group,  OUT  roethod  must  be  to  oompare  the  genea- 
logical  list  in  1  Chroń,  vi,  8-15  (A.y.)  with  the  notioea 
of  high-priests  in  the  sacred  history,  and  with  the  liat 
giyen  by  Josephus,  who,  it  must  be  remembered,  had  ao- 
cess  to  the  lists  preseryed  in  the  archives  at  Jerusalem, 
testing  the  whole  by  the  application  of  the  ordinaiy 
rulcs  of  genealogical  succession.  Now,  aa  regarda  the 
genealogy,  it  is  seen  at  oiice  that  there  is  something  de- 
fective ;  for  whereas  fn»n  Dayid  to  Jechoniah  there  *an 


fflGH-PRmST 


249 


HIGH-PRIEST 


-20  Ungiy  from  Zadok  to  Jehosadak  there  are  bat  18 
pirie8t&  Moreover,  Łhe  panage  in  ąaestion  is  not  a  liat 
of  higfa-pńeetą  but  the  pedigree  of  Jehosadak.  Then, 
again,  wbite  tbe  pedigree  in  ita  first  8ix  generationa  irom 
Zadok  inclusiYe  aeems  at  fint  aight  exactl7  to  suit  the 
•hifltoiy — ibr  it  makea  Amariah  the  8ixth  pńeat,  wbile 
the  hifltoiy  (2  Chroo.  xix,  1 1 )  telk  us  he  Uved  in  Jehoeh- 
aphat*8  reign,  who  was  the  8ixth  king  from  David,  in- 
daaye;  and  while  the  same  pedigree  in  ita last  five  gen- 
eiations  alao  aeems  to  soit  the  history— inasnnich  as  it 
places  HiUdah,  the  aon  of  Shallum^fourth  ftam  the  end, 
and  the  histocy  teUs  us  he  Uved  in  the  leign  of  Josiah, 
the  fonrth  king  from  the  end— yet  is  there  oertainly  at' 
kast  one  great  gap  in  the  middle.  For  between  .Ama- 
liah,  the  higb-prieat  in  Jehoshapbafs  reign,  and  Shal- 
lam,  the  iather  of  Hilkiab,  the  high-priest  in  Josiah's 
leign — an  interral  of  about  240  yeaia — there  are  bat  two 
namea,  Ahitab  and  Zadok,  and  these  Uable  to  suspicion 
from  thcir  reproducing  the  same  seąuenoe  which  oocois 
in  tbe  earUcr  part  of  the  same  geneak>gy— Amariah, 
Abitubk  Zadok.  Beńdes,  they  are  not  mentionod  by  Jo- 
sephns,  at  Icaat  not  under  the  same  names.  This  part, 
therefoie,  of  the  pedigree  ia  osekss  for  our  purpose.  But 
the  hłstońcal  books  sapply  us  with  fouf  or  five  names 
for  this  intenral,  tiz.  Jehoiada,  in  the  reigns  of  Athaliah 
and Joaah,  and  probably  still  eailier;  Zechariah,  hia  aon ; 
Aariah,  in  the  leign  of  Uzziah ;  Uńjah,  in  the  reign  of 
Ahas;  and  Asariah,  in  the  reign  of  Hezekiah.  If,  in 
the  genealogy  of  1  Chrou.  vi,  Azariah  and  Hilkiah  have 
been  accidentally  tranaposed,  as  is  not  imposaible,  then 
the  Azariah  who  was  high-priest  in  Hezekiah's  reign 
wooki  be  the  Azariah  of  1  Chroń,  vi,  13, 14^  Putting  the 
additional  historical  namea  at  four,  and  deducting  the 
two  suapicioas  names  from  the  genealogy,  we  have  16 
higb-priests  indicated  in  .Scripture  as  contemporary  with 
the  20  kinga^  with  room,  however,  for  one  or  two  moro 
in  the  hiatory.  Tuming  to  Josephus,  we  find  his  list  of 
17  high-pńests  (whom  he  reckons  aa  18  [Ant,  xx,  10], 
as  do  alao  the  Rabbins)  in  places  exoeedingly  oorrupt,  a 
conuption  sometimes  caosed  by  the  end  of  one  name  ad- 
hering  to  the  beginning  of  the  foUowing  (as  in  Axioia- 
mns),  sometimes  apparently  by  substituting  the  name 
sf  the  contemporary  king  or  prophet  for  that  of  the 
high-priest,  as  Joel  and  Jotham  (both  these,  however, 
eonfirmed  by  the  Rabbinical  list).  Perhaps,  however, 
Sodeas,  who  corresponds  to  Zedekiah,  in  the  reign  of 
Amaziah,  in  the  Seder  Olom,  and  Odeas,  who  corresponds 
to  Hoshainh,  in  the  reign  of  Manasseh,  according  to  the 
same  Jewinh  chronicie,  may  really  repiesent  high>priests 
whoaenJUDeahave  not  been  presenredin  Scripture.  This 
woold  bring  up  the  nnmber  to  17,  or,  if  we  retain  Aza- 
riah aa  the  fatber  of  Seraiah,  to  18,  which,  with  the  ad- 
ditioD  of  Joel  and  Jotham,  finally  agrees  with  the  20 
kingu 

Reriewing  the  h^^h-priests  of  this  second  gronp,  the 
IbUowing  are  aome  of  the  rooet  remarkable  incidents : 
(L)  The  transfer  of  the  seat  of  worship  from  Shiloh,  in 
the  tńbe  of  Ephraim,  to  Jerusalem,  in  the  tribe  of  Ja- 
dah,  eflected  by  David,  and  Consolidated  by  the  building 
of  the  magnificent  Tempie  of  Solomon.  (2.)  The  organ- 
ization  of  the  Tempie  serrice  under  the  bigh-priests, 
and  tbe  diviBon  of  tbe  priests  and  Levites  into  courses, 
wbo  resided  at  the  Tempie  during  their  term  of  senrioe 
— all  which  neoessarily  pat  great  power  into  the  banda 
of  an  abfe  high-priesL  (3.)  The  revolt  of  the  ten  tribes 
from  the  djmasty  of  David,  and  from  the  worship  at  Je- 
raaalem,  and  the  aetting  np  of  a  schismatical  priesthood 
at  Dan  and  Beersheba  (1  Kinga  xii,  31 ;  2  Chroń,  xiii, 
9,  etA.).  (4.)  The  overthrow  of  the  usurpation  of  Atha- 
liah, the  daughter  of  Ahab,  by  Jehoiada  the  high-priest, 
whoae  near  relationship  to  king  Joash,  added  to  his  zeal 
againat  the  idolatries  of  the  house  of  Ahab,  stimulated 
faim  to  head  tbe  revolntion  with  the  force  of  priests  and 
Levitea  at  hia  oommand.  (6.)  The  boldness  and  suooess 
with  which  the  high-priest  Azariah  withstood  the  en- 
cnacfanents  of  the  king  Uzziah  upon  the  offioe  and 
I  of  the  priesthood.   (6.)  The  repair  of  the  Tem- 


pie by  Jehoiada,  in  the  reign  of  Joash;  the  resŁoratioD 
of  the  Tempie  8ervices  by  Azariah  in  the  reign  of  Hez- 
ekiah ;  and  the  disooveiy  of  the  book  of  the  law,  and 
the  religious  reformation  by  Hilkiah  in  the  reign  of  Jo- 
siah.  See  Hilkiah.  (7.)  In  all  these  great  religious 
movement8,  however,  excepting  the  one  headed  by  Je- 
hoiada, it  is  remarkable  how  the  civil  power  took  the 
lead.  It  was  Dańd  who  arranged  all  tbe  Tempie  ser- 
vioe,  Solomon  who  diiected  the  building  and  dedication 
of  the  Tempie,  the  high-priest  being  not  so  much  as 
named ;  Jehoehaphat  who  sent  the  priests  about  to  teach 
the  people,  and  assigned  to  the  high-priest  Amariah  his 
share  in  the  work ;  Hezekiah  who  headed  the  reforma- 
tion, and  urged  on  Azariah  and  the  priests  and  Levites ; 
Josiah  who  encouraged  the  priests  in  the  service  of  the 
house  of  the  Lord.  On  the  other  band,  we  read  of  no 
oppońtion  to  the  idolatries  of  Manasseh  by  the  high- 
priest,  and  we  know  how  shamefully  subsenricnt  Urijah 
the  high-priest  was  to  king  Ahaz,  actually  building  an 
altar  according  to  the  pattom  of  one  at  Damascus,  to 
displace  the  brazen  altar,  and  joining  the  king  in  bis 
profane  wonhip  before  it  (2  Kings  xvi,  10-16).  The 
preponderance  of  the  civil  over  the  ecclesiastical  power, 
as  a  historical  fact,  in  the  kingdom  of  Jndah,  although 
kept  within  bounds  by  the  hereditary  succession  of  the 
bigh-priests,  seems  to  be  proved  finom  these  circum- 
stances. 

The  bigh-priests  of  this  series  ended  with  Seraiah, 
wbo  was  taken  prisoner  by  Nebuzar-adan,  and  slain  at 
Riblah  by  Nebuchadnezzar,  together  with  Zephaniah, 
the  second  priest  or  sagan,  after  the  buming  of  the  Tem- 
pie and  the  plunder  of  all  the  sacred  ve88e]s  (2  Kings 
xxv,  18).  His  son  Jehozadak  or  Josedech  was  at  tha 
same  time  carried  away  captive  (1  Chroń,  vi,  15). 

The  time  occupied  by  these  (say)  eighteen  high- 
priests  who  ministered  at  Jerusalem  between  the  times 
of  David  and  the  exi]e  was  about  424  years,  which  gives 
an  average  of  something  moro  than  tweiity-three  yeais 
to  each  high-priest.  It  is  remarkable  that  not  a  single 
instance  is  recorded  ailer  the  time  of  David  of  an  in- 
qiiiiy  by  Urim  and  Thummim  as  a  means  of  ascertaining 
the  Lord*s  wilL  The  ministry  of  the  prophets  seems  to 
have  superseded  that  of  the  bigh-priests  (see  e.  g.  2 
Chroń,  xv;  xviii ;  xx,  14, 15 ;  2  Kings  xix,  1, 2 ;  xxii, 
12-14;  Jer. xxi,  1, 2).  Some  think  that  Urim  and  Thum- 
mim ceased  with  tbe  theocrocy ;  others  with  the  divi- 
ńon  of  Israel  into  two  kingdoms.  Nehemiah  seems  to 
have  expected  the  restoration  of  it  (Neh.  vii,  65),  and  so 
perhaps  did  Judas  Maccabmis  (1  Mace  iv,  46 ;  comp. 
xiv,  41),  wbile  Josephus  affirms  that  it  had  been  exer- 
cised  for  the  last  time  200  yeais  before  he  wrote,  viz.  by 
John  Hyrcanus  (Whiston,  no(e  on  ii  n<.  iii,  8 ;  Prideaux, 
Caimect.  i,  150, 151).  It  seems,  therefore,  scarcely  true  to 
reckon  Urim  and  Thummim  as  one  of  the  marks  of  God's 
presence  with  Solomon's  Tempie  which  was  wanting  to 
the  second  Tempie  (Prid.  i,  138, 144,  są.).  This  early 
ceseation  of  answers  by  Urim  and  Thummim,  thougb 
the  high-priest^s  office  and  the  wearing  of  the  breast- 
plate  oontinued  in  force  during  so  many  centuries,  seems 
to  confirm  the  notion  that  such  answers  were  not  the 
fundamental,  but  only  the  accessory  uses  of  the  breast- 
plate  of  judgment 

(c)  An  interval  of  about  fifty-three  years  elapsed 
between  the  bigh-priests  of  the  second  and  third  group, 
during  which  there  was  neither  tempie,  nor  altar,  nor 
ark,  nor  priest.  Jehozadak,  or  Josedech,  as  it  is  written 
in  Haggai  (i,  1, 14,  etc),  wbo  should  have  succeeded  Ser- 
aiah, lived  and  died  a  captive  at  Babylon.  The  pontif- 
ical  oiBce  revived  in  his  son  Jeshua,  of  whom  such  fre- 
quent  mention  is  madę  in  Ezra  and  Nehemiah,  Haggai 
and  Zechariah,  1  Esdr.  and  Ecclus. ;  and  he  therefore 
stands  at  the  head  of  this  third  and  last  series,  honora^ 
bly  distingubhed  for  his  zealous  co-operation  with  Zerub- 
babel  in  rebuilding  the  Tempie  and  restoring  the  dilap- 
idated  commonwealth  of  IsraeL  His  successors,  as  far 
aa  the  O.  T.  guides  us,  were  Joiakim,  Eliashib^  Joiada, 
Juhanan  (or  Jonathan),  and  Jaddua.    Of  these  we  find 


fflGH-PRIEST 


250 


HIGH-PRIEST 


EUoBhib  hindering  rather  than  seoonding  the  zeal  of  tłie 
devoat  Tirsbatha  Kehemiah  for  the  obseryance  of  God's 
law  in  Isnel  (Neh.  xiii,  4, 7) ;  and  Johanan,  Joeephua 
tdls  U8,  muidered  his  own  hrother  Jesus  or  Joshua  iu 
the  Tempie,  which  led  to  its  further  profanation  by  Ba- 
goaes,  the  generał  of  Artaxerxe8  Mnemon'8  army  (AnL 
zi,  7).  Jaddua  was  high-priest  in  the  time  of  Alexan- 
der  the  Great.  Conceming  him,  Josephus  relates  the 
story  that  he  went  out  to  meet  Alexander  at  Sapha 
(probably  the  ancient  Mizpeh)  at  the  head  of  a  prooes- 
sion  of  priests;  and  that  when  Alexander  saw  the  mul- 
titude  dothed  in  wbite,  and  the  priests  in  their  linen 
garments,  and  the  high-piiest  in  blue  and  gold,  with  the' 
mitrę  on  his  head,  and  the  gold  plate,  on  which  was  the 
name  of  God,  he  stepped  forwaid  alone  and  adored  the 
Name,  and  bastened  to  embraoe  the  high-priest  (AnL 
zi,  8, 5).  Josephus  adds  many  other  particulais  in  the 
same  oonnectłon;  and  the  narrative,  though  sometimes 
disputed  as  sayoring  of  the  apocryphal,  deriyes  support 
from  the  circumstanoes  of  the  times,  especiaUy  the  leni- 
ency  of  Alexander  toward  the  Jews.  See  Alexandkb 
THE  Grbat.  It  was  the  hrother  of  this  Jsddua,  Manas- 
seh,  who,  according  to  the  same  authority,  was,  at  the 
reąuest  of  Sanballat,  madę  the  first  high-priest  of  the 
Samaritan  tempie  by  Alexander  the  Great.  (See  on 
this  whole  period,  Herzfeld,  Getch.  d.  Volhe$  ftrald,  186d, 
i,  868  8q.) 

Jaddua  was  sucoeeded  by  Onias  I,  his  son,  and  he 
again  by  Simon  the  Just,  the  last  of  the  men  of  the 
gieat  synagogttć,  as  the  Jews  speak,  and  to  whom  is 
usually  ascribed  the  oompletion  of  the  Canon  of  the  O.  T. 
(Prid.  Connecf .  i,  545) .  Of  him  Jesus,  the  son  of  Sirach, 
q[>eaks  in  terms  of  most  glowing  eulogy  in  Ecdus.  1,  as- 
cribing  to  him  the  repair  and  fbrtificadon  of  the  Tem- 
pie, with  other  works.  The  passage  (1-21)  contains  an 
interesting  aocount  of  the  ministrations  of  the  high- 
priest  Upon  Simon*s  death,  his  son  Onias  being  under 
age,  Eleazar,  Simon*s  hrother,  suoceeded  him.  The  high- 
priesthood  of  Eleazar  is  memorable  as  being  that  under 
which  the  Sept.  yersion  of  the  Scriptures  is  said  to  have 
been  madę  at  Alexandria  for  Ptolemy  Philadelphus,  ao- 
oording  to  the  account  of  Josephus  taken  ftom  Aristeas 
(Ant,  xii,  2).  This  translation  of  the  Hebiew  Scriptures 
into  Greek,  valuable  as  it  was  with  referenoe  to  the  wider 
interests  of  religion,  and  marked  as  was  the  providence 
which  gave  it  to  the  world  at  this  time  as  a  preparation 
for  the  approachlng  adyent  of  Christ,  yet,  yiewed  in  its 
relation  to  Judaism  and  the  high-priesthood,  was  a  sign, 
and  perhaps  a  helping  canse  of  their  decay.  It  marked 
a  growing  tendency  to  HeUemsm  utterly  inconsistent 
with  the  spirit  of  the  Mosaic  economy.  Accordingly, 
in  the  high-priesthood  of  Eleazar's  riyal  nephews,  Jesus 
and  Onias,  we  imd  their  yery  names  changed  into  the 
Gieek  ones  of  Jason  and  Menelaus,  and  with  the  intro- 
duction  of  this  new  feature  of  riyal  high-priests  we  flnd 
one  of  them,  Menelaus,  strengthening  himself  and  seek- 
ing  support  from  the  Syio-Greek  kings  against  the  Jew- 
ish  party  by  offering  to  forsake  thdr  national  laws  and 
customs,  and  to  adopt  those  of  the  Greeks.  The  build- 
ing  of  a  gymnasium  at  Jerusalem  for  the  use  of  these 
apostatę  Jews,  and  their  endeayor  to  conceal  their  cir- 
curacision  when  stripped  for  the  games  (1  Mace  i,  14, 16 ; 
2  Maoc.  iv,  12-15 ;  Joseph.  A  nt,  xii,  6, 1),  show  the  length 
to  which  this  spirit  was  carried.  The  acceptance  of  the 
spurious  priesthood  of  the  tempie  of  Onion  from  Ptole- 
my Philometor  by  Onias  (the  son  of  Onias  the  high- 
priest),  who  would  have  been  the  legitimate  high-priest 
on  the  death  of  Menelaus,  his  uncle,  is  another  striking 
indication  of  the  same  degeneracy.  By  this  flight  of 
Onias  into  Egypt  the  sucoession  of  high-priests  in  the 
family  of  Jozadak  ceased;  for  although  the  Syro-Greek 
kings  had  introduced  much  uncertainty  into  the  succes* 
sion,  by  deposing  at  their  will  obnoxious  persona,  and 
appointing  whom  they  pleased,  yet  the  dignity  had  nev- 
cr  gone  out  of  the  one  family.  Alcimus,  whose  Hebrew 
name  was  Jakim  (I  Chroń,  xxiv,  12),  or  perhaps  Jachin 
(1  Chroń,  ix,  10  *,  xxiy,  17),  or,  according  to  Rufflnus  (ap.  | 


Selden),  Joachim,  and  who  wai  madę  high^prieat  by  Au* 
tiochus  Eupator  on  Menelans  being  pot  to  death  by  him, 
was  the  fiist  who  was  of  a  diiferent  £unily.  One,  myt 
Josephus,  that  **was  indeed  of  the  stock  of  Aaron,  bot 
not  of  this  family"  of  Jocadak. 

What,  howeyer,  for  a  time  aayed  the  Jewish  institik- 
tions,  infused  a  new  life  and  oonsistency  into  the  priest- 
hood and  the  national  religion,  and  enabled  them  to 
fulfil  their  destined  couise  till  the  advent  of  Christ,  was 
the  cruel  and  impoUtic  persecution  of  Antiochua  Epiph- 
anes.  This  thoroughly  anmsed  the  piety  and  national « 
spirit  of  the  Jews,  «ad  drew  tpgether  in  defeooe  of  their 
Tempie  and  countiy  all  who  feared  God  and  weie  at- 
tached  to  their  national  institation&  The  resnlt  was 
that  after  the  high-priesthood  had  been  bioaght  to  the 
lowest  degradation  by  the  apostasy  and  crimes  of  the 
last  Onias  or  Menehuis,  and  after  a  yacancy  of  seyen 
years  had  followed  the  brief  pondficate  of  Aldmoa^  his 
no  less  infamous  suocessor,  a  new  and  glońoua  succes- 
sion  of  high-priests  arose  in  the  Asmonsean  family,  who 
united  the  dignity  of  civil  ruleis,  and  for  a  time  of  in- 
dependent soyereigns,  to  that  of  the  high-priesthood. 
Josephus,  who  is  followed  by  Lightfoot,  Sielden,  and 
others,  caUs  Judas  Maocabieus  "^  high-priest  of  the  n»- 
tion  of  Judah"*  (Ant,  xii,  10, 6),  but,  according  to  the  te 
better  authority  of  1  Maoc.x,20,it  was  not  tiU  after  the 
death  of  Judas  Maccab«is  that  Alcimus  himself  died, 
and  that  Alexander,  king  of  Syria,  madę  Jonathan,  the 
biother  of  Judas,  high-priest.  Josephus  himself,  too, 
callB  Jonathan  the  **  first  of  the  sons  of  Asmonseoa,  who 
was  high-priest"  (X(/e,  1).  It  is  possible,  howeyer,  that 
Judas  may  haye  been  elected  by  the  people  to  the  offioe 
of  high-prieet,  thoogh  neyer  confirmed  in  it  by  the 
Syrian  kings.  The  Asmonsean  family  were  priests  of 
the  couise  of  Joiarib,  the  fiist  of  the  twenty-four  oonzses 
(1  Chroń.  xxiy,  7),  whose  retom  from  captiyity  is  le- 
cordod  1  Chroń,  ix,  10;  Neh.  xi,  10.  They  were  piob- 
ably  of  the  hoose  of  Eleazar,  though  this  cannot  be  nS- 
firmed  with  certainty;  and  Josephus  teUs  us  that  be 
himself  was  related  to  them,  one  of  his  ancesUns  hay- 
ing  married  a  daughter  of  Jonathan,  the  first  hlgb- 
priest  of  the  house.  The  Asmonaan  dyrmsty  UtUd 
tnm  KC  158  till  the  ikrnily  was  damaged  by  intestine 
diyisions,  and  then  destioyed  by  Herod  the  Great.  Ai^ 
istobulus,  the  last  high-priest  of  his  linę,  brother  of  M*- 
riamne,  was  muidered  by  order  of  Herod,  his  brother-in- 
law,  RC.  85.  The  independence  of  Judasa,  under  the 
priest-kings  of  this  race,  had  lasted  till  Pompey  took 
Jerusalem,  and  sent  king  Aristobulus  II  (who  had  also 
taken  the  high-priesthood  from  his  brother  Hjncanns) 
a  prisoner  to  Romę.  Pompey  restored  Hyrcanus  to  the 
high-priesthood,  but  forbad  him  to  wear  the  diadwn. 
Ever>'thing  Jewish  was  now,  howeyer,  hastening  to  de- 
cay. Heroid  madę  men  of  Iow  birth  high-priestą  de- 
posed  them  at  his  will,  and  named  otheis  in  their  loom. 
In  this  he  was  followed  by  Aichelaus,  and  by  the  Ro- 
mans when  they  took  the  goyemment  of  Judaes  into 
their  own  hands;  so  that  there  were  no  fewer  thaa 
twenty-eight  high-priests  from  the  reign  of  Herod  to 
the  destruction  of  the  Tempie  by  Titus,  a  period  of  107 
years.  (Josephus  tells  us  of  one  Ananus  and  his  fiye  aoos 
who  all  filled  the  oiBce  of  high-priest  in  tuin.  One  of 
these,  Ananus  the  younger,  was  deposed  by  king  Agri|>> 
pa  for  the  part  he  took  In  causing  ^  James,  the  broUMS- 
of  Jesus  who  was  called  Christ,"  to  be  stoned  [AnL  xx, 
9, 1  ].)  The  N.  T.  introduoes  us  to  some  of  these  later 
and  ofb-changing  high-priests,  yiz.  Annas  and  Caiaphas 
— the  formcr  high-priest  at  the  oommencement  of  John 
Baptisfs  ministiy,  with  Caiaphas  as  second  prieat;  and 
the  hitter  high-priest  himself  at  our  Lord*s  cnicifixion 
(see  Sommel,  De  Anna  et  Caiapha,  Lund.  1772) — and 
Ananias  (erroneonsly  thought  to  be  the  Ananus  who  i 
murdered  by  the  Zealots  just  before  the  siege  of  Je 
lem),  before  whom  Paul  was  tried,  as  we  read  Acta  3 
and  of  whom  he  said,  *'God  shall  smite  thee,  thom 
whited  waU."  The  same  Caiaphas  was  the  high-piiest 
firom  whom  Saul  reoeiyed  letten  to  the  aynagogne  at 


HIGH.PRIEST 


261 


HIGTJERRA 


t  (Acts  ix,  1, 14).  Both  he  and  Ananias  seem 
oertamly  to  bave  preńded  in  the  Sanhediim,  and  that 
oBoMBy ;  nor  m  lightfoofa  exp]anadon  (ytii,  450  and 
484)  of  tbe  mcntion  of  the  high-priest,  thougb  Gamaliel 
and  his  son  Sinieon  were  respectiyelj'  presidenta  of  the 
Sanhedrun,  at  all  probable  or  aatiafoctoiy  (see  Acts  v, 
17,  etc.).  The  last  high-priest  was  appointed  by  lot  by 
the  Zealots  firom  the  coune  of  pńests  called  by  Josephiis 
Eniachim  (probably  a  corrapt  reading  for  Jadiim).  He 
is  thus  desciibed  by  the  Jewish  historian.  **  His  mune 
was  Fhannias:  he  was  the  son  of  Samuel,  of  the  irillage 
of  Aphtha,  a  man  not  only  not  of  the  number  of  the 
chief  priesta^bntwho,  soch  a  merę  rostic  was  he,  scaroe- 
ly  knew  what  the  high-priesthood  meant.  Yet  did  they 
drag  him  reloctant  firom  the  ooantiy,  and,  aetting  him 
lorth  in  a  bonowed  chancter  as  on  the  stage,  they  put 
the  aacred  i-estmenta  on  him,  and  inatracted  him  how 
lo  act  on  the  occasUm.  This  shocking  impiety,  which 
to  them  was  a  sabject  of  meniment  and  sport,  drew 
teaia  tam  the  other  priesta,  who  beheld  iiom  a  distance 
their  law  tamed  into  ridicnle,  and  groaned  over  the  sub- 
TCision  of  the  saored  honora"  (  War,  iv,  3, 8).  Thos  ig- 
nomtnioaaly  ended  the  aeriea  of  high-priests  which  had 
stieCched  in  a  acaroeiy  broken  linę  thiongh  morę  than 
aerentcen,  or,  acooiding  to  the  common  chronology,  flix- 
teen  centmea.  The  Egyptlan,  Aasyńan,  Babylonian, 
Fenian,  Grecian,  and  Boman  empirea,  which  the  Jewish 
high-priesta  had  seen  in  tom  oyershadowing  the  worki, 
had  eaeh,  exoept  the  last,  one  by  one  withered  away 
and  died — and  now  the  last  suocessor  of  Aaron  was 
stzipped  of  hia  saceidotal  robea,  and  the  tempie  which 
he  serred  laid  lerel  with  the  gronnd,  to  rise  no  morę. 
But  this  did  not  happen  tiU  the  tme  High-priest  and 
King  of  Israd,  the  Minister  of  the  aanctuary  and  of  the 
tme  tabemade  which  the  Lord  pitched,  and  not  man, 
had  olfered  hia  <hic  sacrifice,  once  for  all,  and  had  taken 
his  place  at  the  right  hand  of  the  Hajesty  in  the  heav- 
ens,  bearing  on  his  breast  the  judgment  of  his  redeemed 
peopie,  and  oraitinning  a  Prieat  forever,  in  the  sanctuary 
which  aliall  nerer  be  taken  down ! — Smith,  a.  v. 

Annex6d  ia  a  list  of  the  highrpriests  from  Aaron 
to  the  ftial  ovcithn>w  of  Jerosalem,  denred  from  the 


No. 

faauiCMOf 

JoMph.^itf.v,ll,ft^ 

B.C. 

88. 

Jettbna    '\^ 

f640-?500 

84. 

Joiakim  i  P 

f60a-?465 

35. 

Ellashib  r  H 

r4C5-r406 

W. 

Jolada     >i: 

406-871 

8T. 

JoaathanV^ 

871-389 

88. 

Jaddua   ;  = 

889.319 

89. 

(Onias  I) 
(Simon  I) 

319-809 

40. 

802-298 

41. 

(Eleazar  I) 

993-260 

48. 

(Manasseb) 

260-234 

43. 

(Simon  II) 

234-219 

44. 

219-199 

46. 

(Onias  Ul) 

199-175 

4«. 

(Jaaon) 
Onias  IV 

175-178 

47. 

173-162 

48. 

Jacimns 

162-160 

49. 

Jonathan 

160-148 

BO. 

Simon  III 

143-185 

BI, 

HyrcannsI 

185-106 

D2. 

Jada8 

106-105 

BB. 

Alezander 

105-78 

54. 

Hyrcanns  II 

78-41 

65. 

Antigonns 

41-37 

66. 

(Ananeel) 

87-35 

BT. 

(Aristobalos) 

35 

68. 

(Jeans  I) 

35-28 

69. 
60. 

(Simon  IV> 
(MatŁhiasI) 

28-5 
5-4 

61. 

(Joazar) 

jaC.  4-1 
■iA.D.l-4.5-T 

69. 

(Eleazar  II) 

4 

68. 

(Jeens  II) 

4-5 

64. 

ArmtM 

(Ananus  I) 

7-91 

66. 

(Isbmael  t) 

W-98 

66. 

(Sleazar  III) 

29-88 

67. 

(Simon  V) 

23-25 

68. 

Caiaphas 

(Joseph  1) 

25-86 

69. 

(Jonathan  I) 

86-87 

70. 

(Tbeophilus) 

87-48 

71. 

(Simon  VI) 
(Matthias  II) 

42-43 

78. 

43-44 

78. 

(Elłonens) 

44^48 

74. 

(Joseph  U) 

48 

75. 

Ął»^«<yi| 

(Ananias) 

48^ 

76. 

(f Jonathan  II) 

77. 

asbmnel  II) 

5!Mt8 

7& 

(Joseph  III) 
(Ananns  II) 

68 

79. 

02 

80. 

(Jesus  III) 

68-65 

81. 

(Jesus  IV) 

€5-69 

82. 

(MaUhias  III) 

69-70 

83. 

(Phannias) 

70 

iICttnm.YłyS-l&t 


L- Aaron 
2.  Sleazar 


Phiaehas 

Abiahoa 

Bnkki 

Uzzl 

rZerahiah 

?Meraioth 


«L?AmarlataI 

Cflłhamar'9 
linę. 


1& 
11. 
12. 

18. 

I        Une, 

14.. Zadek  1 
1&  Ahłmaaz 
16.  Aaarlah  I 
17. 

1&  f  Johanan 
19' 

2f. 

22.1 
83.'Azariahn 

84.  •Amariahm 

85.  > 
M-jnAbiUiblll 

ST.jrZadok 
28.  Sballnm 
S9.  Hllklah 
80.AzarUhIV 
81.  Seraiab 
S9LJehozadak 
ErOe, 


Bił 

Abitnb  I 
Ahlmelecb 
or  Ahlah 
Abiathar 


Utłicrpw- 

MfM    of 

Scriptnrg. 


Aaron 

Eleazar 

Phlnehaa 


Heraioth 


ZadokI 
Ahimaaz 


?Amariah 

n 


Jehoiada 

tZecbarlah 
fAzariahn 

UrlJah 
YAsariah 
III 

Mesfanllam 

Hilkiah 

AzariahIV 

Seraiah 

Jozadak 


JoMphin,^irf. 
»;  ł,8;  M,10. 


Aaron 

Eleazar 

Phineas 

Abiezer 

Bukki 

Ozi 


Eli 
(Ahitnb) 

(Ahlmelecb) 
(Abiathar) 


Zadoc 

Achimaa 

Azariaa 


Joram 

Issns 

Axioramii8 

Phideas 

Sudeaa 

Jnelns 

Jotham 

Uriaa 

Neriaa 
Odeas 
Sallumos 
Eldas 

Sareas 
Josedec 


Aaron 

Eleazar 

Phlnehaa 


Eli 
Ahltub 


Abiathar 


1067-1619 

1619-n5e0 

n680.n528 

n688-n466 

n466-?1409 

n409L.n858 

n868-n895 

n29fr-n888 

?123*-fll85 


ni85-1125 
1185-n085 


rioe5-io60 

1060-1012 


Zadok 

Ahłmaaz 

Azariah 

Jehoacbash 

Jehołarib 

Jehoshaphat 

Jehoiadah 

Phadaiah 

Zedekiah 

Joet 

Jotham 

Uriah 

Neriah 

Hosaiah 

Shailnm 

Hilkiah 

Azariah 

Jehozadak 


B.C. 


1018-n72 
?978-f966 
r966-r9l7 

?917-r887 

?887-884 


888-f887 
f837-?809 
f809-f776 
n76-?748 
f748-f730 

n8O-f70O 
r700-?647 
r647-y684 
r684-?609 

r609-rsoe 


688-?540 


Scriptures,  Josephus,  and  an  old  Jewish  chron- 
icie, the  Seder  Olom,  Details  may  be  fomid  un« 
der  their  respectiye  names. 

Higbway  (usually  nbDC,men22<iA',  or  [Isa. 
xzxv,  8]  b^boc,  madul,  a  raised  road  [see 
Gauseway]  for  public  use;  elsewhere  simply 
fVyt!^  o'rach,  a  paih,  or  ?J^1J,  cfeVfit,  ódóc,  a 
"tociy"  in  generał ;  once  [Amos  v,  16]  "J^in,  chut$, 
outńde),  Traycllers  have  frcquently  noticed^the 
lack  of  roads  in  Palestine.  Travel  and  transport 
being  all  performed  on  the  backs  of  beasts  of  bur- 
den,  which  usually  moye  in  single  iile,  the  most 
important  routes  are  only  marked  by  nanow 
winding  paths;  and  the  soil  is  often  so  haid  as 
to  take  no  iropression  from  the  feet  of  animala, 
so  that  the  eye  of  an  unpractised  travelier  there 
perceiTes,even  upon  a  common  thoroughfare,no 
evidence  that  others  have  passed  along  the  same 
way.  No  repairs  are  ever  madę,  no  labor  em- 
ph^red  to  remove  obetacles. — Bastow.  Hence 
the  striking  character  of  the  figurę  by  whicfi 
the  preparation  for  the  return  of  the  captirea 
and  the  Messiah^s  advent  are  announced  as  tbe 
constmction  of  a  grand  thoroughfare  for  their 
march  (Isa.  xi,  16;  xxxt,  8;  x],  8;  lxii,  10). 
The  Romans,  however,  durlng  their  occupancy 
of  Palestine,  constructed  Beveral  substantial 
roadsy  which  are  laid  down  in  the  ancient  itin- 
eraries,  and  remains  of  which  subsist  to  this  day« 
De  Saulcy  (Dead  Sea^  1, 892)  fancied  he  discorer- 
ed  traoes  of  the  old  Moabitish  highways  (Numb. 
XX,  17).    See  Road. 

Higaerra,  Husbostmus  Romaiccs  db  la,  a 


HILAIRE 


252 


HIŁARIUS 


Spanish  Jesuit  and  historian,  was  bom  at  Toledo  in  1588. 
He  established  his  leputatLon  by  fabricatang  supposed 
histories.  Thus  he  oomposed  Crotdoones,  fragments, 
which  he  announced  as  copies  of  MSSb  found  at  Worms, 
and  the  work  of  Flaviiis  Lucius  Dexter,  Marcus  Maxi- 
raus,  and  others,  purporting  to  throw  light  on  the  intio- 
duction  of  Chństianity  into  Spain.  Father  Bivar,  who 
belieyed  these  chronides  genuine,  added  a  commentaiy, 
and  published  them  at  Saragossa  in  1619.  They  were 
reprinted  at  Cadiz  (1G27),  at  Lyons  (1627),  and  at  Mad- 
rid  (1640,  fol.)^-Ticknor,  Hul,  of  Spanish  Lii.  iii,  168; 
Hoefer,  Nouv.  Biog,  Giner,  xxiv,  668  są.     ( J.  H.  W.) 

Hilalre.    See  Hiłartus. 

Hilall  Codez  of  the  O.  T.    See  Manuscrifts. 

Hilaria,  a  fesdval  among  the  ancient  Romans, 
which  they  obsenred  in  the  Kalends,  April  8,  or  on 
March  26,  in  honor  of  the  goddeas  Gybele.  Its  name 
it  derivcd  from  the  occasion,  which  was  one  of  generał 
mirth  and  Joy.  The  citizens  went  in  processions  through 
the  streets,  canrying  the  statuę  of  Cybele.  Masąuerades, 
and  all  sorts  of  disguises,  were  also  permitted.  The  day 
preoeding  the  festiral,  in  contrast  with  the  festive  day 
which  was  to  foUow,  was  a  day  of  mouming.  The  rea- 
Bon  for  this  ia  that  ^  Cybele  represented  the  eaith,  which 
atthat  time  of  the  year  begins  to  feel  the  kindly  warmth 
of  the  spring,  and  to  pass  from  winter  to  summer;  so 
that  this  sudden  tnuisition  from  sorrow  to  joy  was  an 
emblem  of  the  ricissitudes  of  the  seasons,  which  suo- 
ceeded  one  another.** — Broughton,  BibUath,  Jliitorioo- 
,8'acra,  i,  494.     (J.H.W.) 

Hilarl&zras,  a  youthful  martyr  of  the  2d  centmy, 
one  of  a  band  of  Christians  in  an  inland  town  of  Numid- 
ia  who  were  arraigned  before  the  Roman  pioconsul  for 
attending  the  Christian  meetings.  The  proconsid  sup- 
posed that  the  child  would  be  easily  intimidated;  but, 
when  threats  were  applied,  he  said,  <*  Do  what  you 
please ;  I  am  a  Christian."— Neander,  Ch,  Hist,  i,  162. 

Hilarlo  or  Hilarlanns,  Q.  Julius,  an  ecdesiastic- 
al  writer  of  the  4th  oentury.  We  have  no  details  oon- 
ceming  his  life,  as  nonę  are  giren  either  in  his  own 
works  or  in  those  of  his  contemporaries.  He  is  consid- 
cred  as  the  author  oiExp<młum  de  die  Patchm  ei  Afensit, 
at  the  end  of  Lactantius's  works  (Par.  1712),  and  in  Gal- 
land,  B3tL  PcUrum  (voL  viii,  app.  ii,  p.  746,yenioc,  1772, 
foL) :— Z>e  Mundi  Duratione,  or  De  Curtu  Temporum, 
first  published  by  Pithou  in  the  Appendix  to  his  BibUoth, 
PcUrum  (Paris,  1679),  and  afterwards  reprinted  in  Gal- 
land, viii,  235.  See  Fabricius,  Bibliotk,  Lat,  med,  et  infim, 
atatis,  iii,  251 ;  Hoefer,  Nouv,  Biog,  Geniraky  xxiv,  665. 

Hilarion,  St.,  of  Palestine,  was  bom  near  Gaza 
about  291.  He  had  been  a  heathen,  but  at  Alexan- 
dria  he  frcquented  the  Christian  schools,  and  was  bap- 
tized  there  in  306.  The  aoooonts  ot  him,  which  abound 
in  incredible  stories,  are  to  the  foUowing  purport :  Re- 
turoing  home  in  307,  he  gave  away  all  he  had,  and  re- 
tired  to  a  desert  near  Magiun,  not  far  from  Gaza,  where 
he  led  a  strictly  ascetic  Ufe.  His  protracted  fasts  and 
leligious  cxerci9cs  gained  him  the  reputation  of  a  saint, 
and  attracted  a  large  number  of  disciplea^  When  their 
numbers  became  too  great,  he  formed  oolonies  of  them 
in  yarious  parts  of  PaJestine  and  Syria,  and  thus  estab- 
lished seyeral  monasteries,  which  he  continued  to  yisit 
and  govem.  Having  gone  to  Alexandria  for  the  anni- 
vei8ary  of  the  death  of  St.  Anthony,  he  was  on  his  return 
lepnt^  to  work  miracles,  such  as  pródudng  rain,  ridding 
the  countjry  of  snakes,.etc  An  attempt  having  been 
madę  against  his  life  by  the  inhabitants  of  Gaza,  Hila- 
rion  retired  to  Libya,  and  afterwards  to  Sicily,  but  his 
miracles  eyeryuthere  betrayed  him(!).  He  afterwards 
went  to  Epidaurus  (now  Ragusę),  in  Dalmatia,  where  the 
legend  says  he  prevented  an  inundation  of  the  town.  To 
avoid  the  popularity  this  miracle  had  gained  him,  he  em- 
barked  secretly  for  C^^prus  with  his  disciple  Hesychius, 
and  hid  himself  in  the  neighborhood  of  Paphos.  Herę 
again  he  was  di8covered,  and  from  all  sides  they  brought 
sick  people  to  him,  whom  he  cured  by  the  laying  on  of 


handa.  He  died  in  the  ialand  in  871,  and  his  lenuin^ 
brought  back  to  Palestine  by  Hesychius,  were  bańed 
near  Magum.  The  Roman  CUitholic  Church  oommemo- 
rates  him  on  the  2l8t  of  October.  See  Jerome,  Vita  lii- 
larioni ;  Sozomen,  Uiat.  Ecdes.  lib.  iii,  cap.  14 ;  Uh.  v,  ca)i. 
9;  Baillet,  Kiet  des  Sainis^yol  iii,  21  Oct;  Richard  et  Ge- 
raud,  BibUoth.  Sacr, ;  Hoefer,  Nowo.  Biog,  Genirak,  xxiv, 
666;  Taylor,  AncietU  Chrittamiy,  i,  808,  309;  Neander, 
Ck,  Hist,  voL  ii ;  Fuhrmann,  IlaĄdwdrterb.  dL  Kirdat' 
Gesck,  8.  V. ;  Tillemont,  Mim,  viii,  987. 

HUaritu  Arelateosis,  Sr.  (Hilart,  biahop  op 
Arles),  was  bom  about  A.D.  408,  of  a  noble  fiunily,  and 
at  an  early  age  attached  himself  to  Hononitus,  firrt  ab- 
bot  of  Łerins.  When  about  twenty-flve  years  of  age  be 
aooompanied  Honoratus  to  his  see  of  Ailes,  but  shortly 
left  it  to  pnrsue  a  monastic  life,  lemored  ftom  the  csis 
and  bustle  of  the  world.  His  patron  Honoratus  ćying 
A.D.  430,  Hilaiy  was  elected  bishop,  but  he  aocepted  the 
Office  with  great  reluctance.  In  diseharging  its  fonc- 
tions  he  conducted  himself  as  an  humble  and  charitaUe 
man,  but  as  a  rather  severe  and  hanghty  ecdeaastic, 
A.D.  465  Hilary  deposed  the  bishop  of  Yasontis,  Chdi- 
donius,  on  a  charge  of  having  yioUted  the  canoo  law  ia 
becoming  a  priest  notwithstanding  he  had  fomcriy  mar^ 
ried  a  tndow,  Celidonius  referred  the  matter  to  pope 
Leo,  but  Hilary  refused  to  acknowledge  the  papai  joris- 
diction  in  the  matter.  Pope  Leo,  jealous  of  his  own  au- 
thority,  and  ałways  anzious  to  extend  his  power,  wai 
very  wrathful  at  Hilaiy^s  summary  prooeedinga,  nor 
could  Leo  be  appeased,  though  the  bishop  of  Aria  took 
a  joumey  on  foot  to  Bome  in  order  to  set  matten  rigfat 
Each  saint  adhered  to  his  own  opinłon,and  they  poted 
with  mutual  ill  will,  and  by  a  reecript  of  Yalentiman  in 
445,  the  metropolitan  of  Gaul  was  madę  yirtualty  subor- 
dinate  to  the  papai  see.  Hilary  died  AJ).  449.  His 
works  extant  are,  Vita  Baneti  HoitoraH,  a  panegyric:— 
Epistoła  ad  Eucharium,  both  of  which  may  be  found  in 
Bib.  Max,  Patr,  yoL  yIL  WaterUmd  attiibutes  the  com- 
poaition  of  the  Athanańan  Creed  to  Hilary  {JmOm  os 
A  than,  Creed),  See  Cave,  BisL  LU, ;  Hook,  EecL  Biog. 
vi,  54;  Mosheiro,  CA.  Hist,  i,  840;  Claike,  Suooetnon  of 
Bacred  Literaturę^  ii,  191;  Waterland,  Works,  i,  8;  iii, 
214  są. ;  Mihier,  Hist,  Ck.  Christ,  ii,  817 ;  Biddle,  CkriA 
AtUicttities ;  Milman,  Laiin  Christiamtyy  i,  272  sq. 

HilarloB  Diacónua,  a  deaoon  of  the  Chmrch  of 
Romę  in  the  4th  century,  who  was  sent  by  pope  Ubcri- 
us,  with  Ludfer  of  Cagliari  and  others,  to  ^ead  the  cause 
of  the  orthodox  faith  before  Constantios  at  the  CoudcU 
of  Milan.  Hb  boldness  was  so  offensive  that  he  wa« 
soourged  and  banished  by  order  of  the  emperor.  He 
afterwards  supported  thje  violent  opinion  of  Lnciler 
(q.  V.)  that  all  Arians  and  heretics  must  be  rebq)tized 
upon  applying  to  be  restored  to  communion  in  the 
Church.  Two  treatises,  of  doubtful  anthenticity,  are  as- 
cribed  to  him :  (1.)  Comm,  m  Ejnst,  PauU  (published 
often  with  the  works  of  Ambrose) ;  (2.)  Quast,  «i  Vel. 
et  Nor.  Test,  published  with  the  works  of  Augustine 
(Benedictine  óiiL  t,  iii,  App.).  The  Benedictine  editofB 
of  St  Ambrose  inform  us  that  the  manuscripts  of  the 
^^Commentary"  on  St.  Paul*s  Epistles  differ  considera- 
bly,  and  that  in  some  parts  thiere  appear  to  be  inteipo* 
lations  of  long  passages.  This  commentary  is  said  by 
Dupin  to  be  *' elear,  plain,  and  literał,  and  to  give  the 
meaning  of  the  text  of  St  Paul  well  enough ;  but  it 
give8  very  different  explanations  from  St  Augustine  in 
those  places  which  concera  predestination,  provocation, 
grace,  and  free  will."— Lardner,  Works,  iv,  882 ;  Mosheim, 
Ch.  HisL  cent  iv,  pt  ii,  ch.  ii,  n.  48 ;  Dupin,  EcoUs.  WriL 
cent  iv;  EnffHsh  Cydopadia. 

HilariuB  PiotaTienaia  (Hilary,  St.,  bishop  ov 
Poitiers),  one  of  the  moet  distinguished  opponents  of 
Arianism  in  the  4th  century,  was  a  native  of  the  city 
whose  name  he  beara.  He  was  of  noble  desoent  but  a 
heathen.  Having  beoome  a  oonvert  to  the  Christian 
faith,  he  was  baptized,  together  with  his  wife  and  daugh- 
ter.    He  was  subaeąuently  madę  bishop^  about  860,  not- 


HILARIUS 


253 


mLARITJS 


withflta&ding  las  beiog  a  married  man.  In  866  he  de- 
fended  Athanasius,  in  the  Coundl  of  Beziera,  againBt  Sa- 
tuininaą  bUhop  of  Arles  (said  to  haye  been  au  Arian,  and 
to  ha ve  beld  communion  with  Ureatius  and  Yalens).  For 
thu  defense  he  was,  by  order  of  Constantius,  exiled  to 
Fhiygia,  bat  he  stUl  continaed  to  defend  the  pnnciples 
of  tbe  Chuich  againat  the  Eastem  bishops,  most  of  whom 
were  Arian&  ^  In  359  he  attended  the  Coiincil  of  Selen- 
cis,  in  Isaoria,  which  had  been  sommoned  by  order  of 
Coofltantiaą  and  bokfly  defended  the  doctrine  of  the  Tńn- 
ity  agiinst  the  Arian  bishops,  who  formed  the  majority 
of  the  ooiiiiciL  He  afterwards  foUowed  the  deputies  of 
the  council  to  the  emperoi^s  ooort,  and  presented  a  peti- 
tioo  to  Omstantins,  in  which  he  desized  permission  to 
dispote  publidy  with  the  Arians  in  the  emperor^s  pres- 
enoe.  In  order  to  get  rid  of  so  formidable  an  opponent, 
the  Alians,  it  is  said,  indoced  the  emperor  to  send  him 
away  from  the  court ;  but  preyious  to  his  departure,  Hi- 
lańos  wrote  an  invectiye  against  Constantius,  in  which 
he  denoimced  him  as  Antichrist,  and  described  him  as  a 
pemn  who  had  only  professed  Christianity  in  order  that 
he  might  deny  Christ.  Afler  the  Catholic  bishops  had 
recovered  their  Uberty  under  Julian,  Hilarius  assembled 
sererd  oooncils  in  Gaul  for  the  re-establishment  of  the 
Catholic  faith  and  the  condemnation  of  Arian  bishopa. 
He  aiso  trareHed  in  Italy  for  the  same  purpose,  and  uśed 
eyery  exertton  to  purify  the  churches  of  that  country 
from  all  Arian  heiesies.  When  Auxentius  was  appoint^ 
ed  bishop  of  Milan  by  the  emperor  Yalentinian  in  864, 
Hikrios  presented  a  petition  to  the  emperor,  in  which 
he  denounced  Auxentiu8  as  a  heretic.  Though  this 
chaige  was  denied  by  Aaxentiu8,  Hilarius  still  continaed 
his  attacks  upon  him  for  heterodoxy,  and  created  so 
mach  confuńon  in  the  city  that  he  was  at  length  order- 
ed  to  retire  to  his  own  diocese,  where  he  died  in  the 
year367." 

In  theology,  Hilary  maintained  the  Athanasian  doc- 
trines  with  so  mach  vigor  that  he  acąuired  the  name 
atJHaUau  Arianorum.  His  exegeticid  writings  show 
€vid«nt  mazks  of  the  influence  of  Origen.  Of  his  com- 
mentaiy  on.  the  Plsalms,  Jeromesays,  **  In  quo  operę  imi- 
taiM  Origenemy  nonsmUa  ttiam  de  tuo  addiditJ*  His  the- 
ological  system  is  to  be  gathered  chiefly  from  his  De 
Trmiiaiey  lib.  xii  He  maintains  the  essential  oneness 
and  eąuality  of  the  Son  with  the  Father.  As  to  the 
Holy  Spirit,  he  teaches  that  *f  faith  in  him  is  neoessarily 
Gonnected  with  confessing  the  Father  and  tho  Son,  and 
to  know  this  is  saflSdent.  If  any  one  ask  what  the  Holy 
Spirit  ia,  and  is  not  satisfied  with  the  answer  that  he  ia 
thnmgh  him  and  from  him  through  whom  are  all  things ; 
that  he  is  the  Spirit  of  God,  and  his  gift  to  belieyers, 
eren  apoetlea  and  piophets  will  not  satisfy  such  a  per- 
son, for  they  only  assert  this  of  him,  that  he  is  (De 
TrimL  ii,  29).  He  doea  not  yenture  to  attriboto  to  him 
the  name  of  God,becauBe  the  Scripture  does  not  so  cali 
him  expieady.  yet  it  says  that  the  Holy  Spirit  seaiches 
the  deep  things  of  God,  and  it  therefore  follows  that  he 
parfakpą  the  divine  essence  (De  Trinit.  xii,  55)."  His 
view  of  the  body  of  Christ  is  not  entirely  free  from  Do- 
cetjam ;  and  in  speaking  of  the  haman  soul,  he  seems  to 
think  that  the  idea  of  a  cieatuie  indudes  that  of  corpo- 
mty  {Ccmm.  m  Mott,  y,  8).  As  to  predestination,  he 
"  emphadcally  asserted  the  harmonious  connection  be- 
tween  graoe  and  free-wiU,  the  porerlessness  of  the  lat- 
tcr,  and  yet  ita  iraportance  as  a  oondition  of  the  opera- 
tioo  of  diyine  grace.  '  As  the  organs  of  the  human 
body,'  he  says  (De  Trinit^  ii,  85),  *cannot  act  withoot 
the  addition  of  moying  causes,  so  the  human  has,  indeed, 
the  eapacity  for  knowing  God ;  bat  if  it  does  not  roceiye 
thiongh  faith  the  gift  of  the  Holy  Spirit,  it  will  not  at- 
taan  to  that  knowledge.  Yet  the  gLft  of  Christ  stands 
opeo  to  all,  and  that  which  all  want  Lb  giyen  to  eyery 
one  as  far  as  he  will  accepŁ  it.'  *  It  is  the  greatest  fol- 
iy,'  he  sBjrs  in  another  passage, '  not  to  peroeiye  that 
we  fiye  in  dependence  on  and  through  God,  when  we 
ima^iie  that  in  things  which  men  undertake  and  hope 
ffXj  they  may  reutare  to  depend  on  their  own  strength. 


What  we  haye,  we  haye  from  God ;  on  him  must  all  oui 
hope  be  placed'  (Comm,  in  Psa,  li).  Aocorduigly,  he  did 
not  admit  an  unconditional  predestination ;  he  did  not 
lind  it  in  the  passages  in  Kom.  ix  respecting  the  election 
of  Esau,  commonly  adduced  in  fayor  of  it,  but  only  a  pre- 
destination conditioned  by  the  diyine  foreknowledge  of 
his  determination  of  will ;  otherwise  eyeiy  man  would  be 
bom  under  a  necessity  of  sinning  {Comnu  in  Psa.  lvii)." 
As  a  writer  Hilary  is.copious,  and  fertile  in  thought 
and  illustration,  but  often  tuigid  and  obscure  in  style. 
A  pretty  fuU  analysis  of  his  writings  is  giyen  in  Ciarkę, 
SucoesHon  ofSacred  Literaturę,  i,  802  sq.  The  chief 
among  them  are,  I,  Ad  Consłantium  A  ugustum  Liber  Pri- 
noŁt,  written,  it  is  belieyed,  A.D.  855,  to  demand.  from 
the  emperor  protection  against  the  persecutions  of  the 
Arians :— 2.  Commeniariue  (s.  Tractatus)  in  Erangelium 
Maitktei  (A.D.  856),  in  the  tonę  and  ^irit  of  Origen :  it 
is  repeatedly  quoted  by .  Jerome  and  Augusdne.  The 
preface,  quo  ted  in  Cassianiis  (De  Incarn.  yii,  24),  is  lost : 
— 3.  De  Synodia  Fidei  Caiholicce  contra  Arianos,  etc., 
or  Epistoła  (A.D.  858),  explainmg  the  vicws  of  the 
Eastem  Church  on  the  Trinity,  and  showing  that  their 
difference  from  the  Westem  Church  lay  morę  in  the  ex- 
pressions  than  in  the  dogma: — Ł  De  Trinitate  Libri 
xii,  8.  Contra  Arianoi,  s.  De  Fide,  etc.  (A.D.  8G0)„his 
most  important  work,  and  the  first  great  controyersial 
treatise  on  the  Trinity  in  ihe  Latin  Church:— 5.  Ad 
Constcmtium  Angustum  Liber  secundut  (A.D.  860),  a  pe- 
tition conoeming  his  banishmcnt,  and  a  yindication  of 
his  principles: — 6.  Contra  Constantittm  Auguglum  Lir 
ber,  a  yirulent  attack  against  Constantius,  which  has 
be^  mentioned  aboye.  It  b  remarkable,  inasmuch  as 
it  oonfines  the  creed  to  the  words  of  Scripture,  and 
proyes  that  some  of  the  fundamental  doctrincs  of  the 
Romish  Church,  as  opposed  to  the  Protestant,  had  al- 
ready  been  called  in  ąuestion  at  that  time :— 7.  Comr 
mentarii  (s.  Tractatus,  s.  Escposiiiones)  in  Psałmos,  gen- 
erał reflections  upon  the  spirit  of  different  psalms,  writ- 
ten in  the  manner  of  Origen ;— 8.  Frofpnenta  Hilarii, 
containing  passages  from  a  lost  work  on  the  synods  of 
Seleucia  and  Ariminum,  etc,  first  published  by  Faber 
in  1598.  Some  of  his  works  are  lost,  and  othcrs  haye 
been  erroneously  attributed  to  him.  The  works  of  Hi- 
larius haye  been  published  by  Mirseus  (Faris,  1544),  Eras- 
mus  (Basel,  1523;  reprinted  1526, 1585, 1550, 1570),  Gil- 
lot  (Paris,  1572;  reprinted,  with  seyeral  improyements, 
1605, 1681,  1652);  by  Dom  Constant,  of  the  Benedic- 
tines  (Paris,  1698,  deemed  by  some  the  beat  edition),  the 
Marąuis  de  Maffei  (Yerona,  1730),  and  OberthUr  (1781- 
88,  4  yols.  8vo).  See  Vita  S,  Ńilarii,  operibus  ejus  a 
Dom,  Constant  coUectis  pr(pfixa ;  GaUia  Christiana,  yoL 
ii,  coL  1088 ;  Hist.  litiir.  de  la  France,  yoL  i,  pt  ii,  p.  139 ; 
Cire,  Scnptores  Fcdes,  i,  213 ;  Tillemont,  Memoires,  yii, 
482 ;  Oudin,  Script,  Ecclesiastici,  i,  426 ;  Ceillier,  Ilist.  des 
A  uteurs  EcdSsiastigues,  y,  X ;  Hoefer,  Nour,  Biog,  Geni" 
role,  xxiy,  660 ;  Smith,  Dictionary  of  Greeh  and  Roman 
Biogr. yoLW',  Engłish  Ct/doptedia;  Herzog, Real-Encjf" 
klopadie,  yi,  84  8q. ;  Domer,  Lehre  v,  d.  Person  Chrisii,  i, 
1037 ;  Dupin,  Eccksiastical  Writers,  cent.  iv ;  Ncander, 
History  of  Doffmas;  Neander,  Ch,  Ilisłory,  ii,  396,  419, 
427,  559;  Waterland,  Works;  Mosheim,  Eccies,  Hist,  i, 
248;  Lecky,  Raiionalism,  in  Europę,  ii,  13, 151 ;  Shedd, 
Guericke's  Ch,  History,  p.  294, 322, 372 ;  Milner,  Ilist.  Ch. 
Christ,  ii,  81 ;  Hook,  Eccl,  Bioy,  vi,  46 ;  Gibbon,  DecUne 
and  Fali,  MUman's  ed.,  ii,  320 ;  Schaff,  Ilist.  Chr,  Church, 
iii,  589, 664, 959  sq. ;  Bibliotheca  Saara,  \,  899;  xi,  299; 
Lardner,  Works,  \y,  178;  Riddle,  Christian  Antiguities; 
Darling,  Cydop,  BibL  i,  1476 ;  Milman,  Hist.  Christian- 
ity, ii,  487  są. ;  iii,  106, 286, 856 ;  Baur,  Dogmengeschichte ; 
Taylor,  Anaent  Chrisiianity,  i,  223,  326;  Christian  Re- 
mónbranoer,  July,  1858,  p.  241 ;  Brit,  and  For,  Etangel, 


iZer.Oct.  1866,  p.  689. 

Hilariua  or  Hilarus  I,  Pope,  or,  rather,  bishop 
of  Romę,  was  a  Sardinian  by  birth,  and  sacceeded  Leo 
the  Great  in  the  year  461,  "  He  had  been  employed  by 
Leo  in  important  affairs ;  among  others,  he  was  sent  as 
legato  to  thcRobber  Council  of  Ephesus  (q.  y.)  in  449, 


HILART 


254 


HIŁDERSHAM 


tgainst  the  EntychumB,  and  was  well  -rened  in  matten 
oonceming  the  disciplińe  of  the  Cburch,  which  he  dis- 
played  great  seal  in  enfoidng.  He  interfeied  in  the 
election  and  consecration  of  bishops  bj  their  metio- 
politans  in  France  and  Spain,  and  jostified  his  interfer- 
enoe  by  alleging  the  pre-eminenoe  of  the  aee  of  Romę 
OYer  aU  tho  sees  of  the  West,  a  pre-eminenoe  which  he, 
howeyer,  acknowledged,  in  one  of  his  lettera,  to  be  de- 
riyed  from  the  emperoi^B  fayor.  He  alao  forlMde  biah- 
ops  nominating  their  sucoessoia,  a  practioe  which  waa 
then  frequent.  He,  however,  did  not  dedare  elections 
or  nominations  to  be  Ulegał  merely  ftom  hia  own  aa- 
thority,  but  aasembled  a  ooundl  to  decide  on  thoee  qae8- 
tions.  Hilarins  died  at  Romę  in  467."  See  Engiiah 
CydojHBdia^  a.  r. ;  Bower,  HisL  ofiht  Pcpes,  ii,  141  są. ; 
Jaife,  ReffCMta  Pont,  Ronu  p.  48,  988. 
Hilaiy.    See  Hilarius. 

Hilda,  Sr.,  the  celebrated  abbesa  of  Whitby,  waa 
grand-niece  of  Edwin,  king  of  Northombria,  and  eon- 
apicuous  for  piety  and  devotion  to  the  Christian  faith 
from  the  age  of  thirteen.  When,  ailer  the  death  of  Ed- 
win, the  Northumbrians  relapsed  iiito  idolatiy,  Hilda 
withdrew,  probably,  into  East  Anglia,  bat  retumed  to 
Northumbria  on  the  acceasion  of  (^ald,  and,  deyoting 
herself  to  a  life  of  celibacy,  founded  a  smali  nuunery  on 
the  Wear.  She  subseąuently  (about  A.D.  650)  became 
abbess  of  Heorta,  now  Hartlepool,  where  she  remained 
aeyen  years.  Oswy,  the  brother  and  suocessor  of  the 
gentle  and  yirtuous  Oswald,  when  marching  to  defend 
his  throue  and  faith  against  Penda,  the  pagan  king  of 
Mercia,  yowed  that  if  the  Lord  yoachsafed  to  him  the 
yictoiy,  he  would  deyote  to  his  seryioe  in  holy  yir- 
ginity  his  infant  daughter,  the  princess  Elfleda.  Hfty- 
ing  defeatcd  and  slain  his  dreaded  foe  near  Leeds,  in 
Yorkshire,  Oswy,  in  punuance  of  his  yow,  oommitted 
Elfleda,  with  princely  gifts  in  lands,  etc,  to  the  care  of 
Hilda.  Soon  afterwards  Hilda  purchased  ten  ^^hides" 
of  land  at  Streoneshalb,  now  Whitby,  and  erected  a 
new  monastery,  in  which  she,  as  abbess,  took  up  her 
abodc  wich  her  royal  chaige.  The  wealth  of  this 
monastery,  and  the  dignity  and  high  religious  char- 
acter  of  Hilda,  madę  it  the  moat  celebrated  in  Eng- 
land,  and  a  nurseiy  of  eminent  men,  among  whom  may 
be  mentloned  Hedda,  Wilfrid,  and  Cndmon,  the  poet. 
Dugdale  (as  ąuoted  by  Mrs.  Jameson)  says  that  Hilda 
"  was  a  professed  enemy  to  the  exteiision  of  the  papai 
jurisdiction  in  this  country,  and  opposed  with  aU  her 
might  the  tonsure  of  priests  and  the  oelebration  of  Eas- 
ter  according  to  the  Roman  rituaL**  She  died  in  No- 
yember,  680,  aged  sixty-three  yeara,  and  was  succeeded 
as  abbess  by  Elfleda.  Among  the  maryela  related  of 
her  are  that  a  non  at  Hakenes  saw  angels  conyeying 
her  soul  to  bliss,  and  that  certałn  fossils  found  near 
Whitby  having  the  form  of  ooiled  snakes  were  thoee 
reptiles  thus  changed  by  the  power  of  her  prayen. — 
Smith,  ReL  o/Anc  Brit.  p.  843-47 ;  Butler,  Lwes  ofthe 
Saints,  Noy.  18;  Wright,  Biog,  Brit.  LU,  (Anglo-Saxon 
Period),  see  Index ;  Jameson,  Legemis  of  the  Moncutic 
Orders,  p.  58-62.     (J.  W.  M.) 

Hildebert  of  Tours  CHildkbebtus  TinioNEMsis), 
in  1097  bishop  of  Mans,and  in  1125  aichbishop  of  Tours, 
was  bom  about  1055  at  Layardin.  Though  accnsed  of 
licentiousness  before  his  admission  to  the  Church,  he  be- 
came one  of  its  brightest  omaments  for  piety  and  leam- 
ing.  During  the  time  of  his  being  bishop  of  Mans,  he 
and  his  church  suffered  much  from  the  contesŁs  of  Wil- 
liam Rufus  and  Helie,  oount  of  Mans;  nor  was  he  much 
morc  fortunate  in  his  archbishopric,  for  he  fell  under 
the  displeasure  of  Louis  the  Fat  because  he  refused  to 
dispose  of  his  Chiurch  patronage  as  the  king  desired : 
the  disagreement  was  at  last  sctUed,  and  Hildebert  re- 
Btored  to  fayor.  He  wrote  with  great  seyerity  against 
the  yices  of  the  court  of  Romę.  Hildebert  had  great 
^independence  of  mind,  practical  sense,  and  a  degree  of 
taste  which  preseryed  him  irom  falling  into  the  yain  and 
puerile  discuasioDs  of  his  oontemposaries.'*    His  Trao- 


tatuM  PhUoBophieuś  and  his  MondU  PkSouphiaj  ińunk 
are  oonsidered  his  beat  pcodoctioos,  are  the  fint  easays  to- 
waids  a  popular  system  of  theology.  He  died  A.D.  llSi 
His  epistles  and  sermons  were  ąuite  numerons;  they  ire 
ooUected  in  the  beet  edition  of  his  worka,  Opera  tan  ad- 
ila  qucan  maJKia,  studio  Beamgmdre  (Benedictine,  Puią 
1708,  foL).  See  MoaheiDi,  Ck,  HiaL  cent  zi,  pt  ii,  eh. 
ii,  n.  74;  VUa  HUdeberHf  pre&ced  to  his  works  (oom- 
plete  list  of  his  worka  to  be  foond  in  Darling,  C^dop, 
BibL  1  yoL) ;  GaUia  Christiana,  U  jdv ;  Brockhaos,  Om- 
ver$atioi»^LexihontVU,9i9;  Bayle,^t«f./)Mr.p.4M;  Ne- 
ander,  Ch,  Ilisł, ;  Neander,  HisL  Christ,  Dogmas,  p.  683; 
Fnhrmann,  Ilandwdrlerit,  d,  Chrisfl  Rdigions  uad  Kird- 
engesch,  ii,  800  sq. ;  Tenneman,  Mon,  o/PhUot,  p.  218. 

Hildebrand.    See  Greooby  YIŁ 

Hildegarde  or  HUdee^ardis,  abbess  of  StRo- 
pert's  Mount,  on  the  Rhine,  was  bom  at  B6ckelhem,in 
Germany,  A.D.  1098.  She  attracted  much  attentioD  by 
her  pretended  reyelations  and  ^isions,  which  were  hdd 
to  be  supematural,  and  obtained  the  oonntenance  of 
Bernard  and  others,  and  at  last  the  iq>proyal  of  Euge- 
nius  lU  and  the  three  sncoeeding  popes,  together  with 
numerons  prelates.  She  wrote  Three  Books  o/Rerth' 
łions  (Colonia5, 1628)  i-^L^fe  o/St,  Boberi  .•— thiee  Epih 
tleSf  yarious  Questions,  and  an  £xposition  of  St.  8aw- 
dict's  Bule  (all  Colon.  1566).  Most  of  them  may  also  be 
found  in  BibL  Max,  Patrumy  yoL  xxiii  She  died  AS>, 
1180.— Neander,  C%,  HisL  iy,  217,  686;  Mosheim,  Ck 
HisL  cent  xii,  pt.  ii,  ch.  ii,  n.  71 ;  BaUlet,  Vies  des  Bauit, 
Sept.  17 ;  Brockhaua,  Contfersations-Leiikon,  yii,  921. 

Hildegonde,  a  female  saint  ofthe  Romish  Church, 
whose  history  is,  in  fact,  a  satire  on  Romish  saintehip^ 
She  is  said  to  haye  been  bom  at  Nuitz,  in  the  diooese 
of Cologne, towards the  middle  ofthe  12th  centuiy.  Ucr 
father  haying  madc  a  yow  to  yi»t  the  Holy  Land,  she 
acoompanied  him,  dressed  in  man*s  dothes,  under  the 
name  of  Joseph,  Her  father  dying,  howeyer,  on  the 
way,  he  intrusted  her  to  a  man  who,  afler  conductiog 
her  to  Jerusalem  and  back  to  Ptolemais,  abandoned  her 
in  a  atate  of  destitution.  After  yarioua  yidssitudes,  she 
came  back  to  Cologne,  entered  the  senrice  of  a  canoo, 
and  finally,  in  ll85,retired  to  a  Ostercian  conyent  neir 
Heidelbe^,  where  she  died  April  20, 1188.  She  was 
known  to  the  other  monks  only  as  Brother  Joseph,  and 
her  8ex  was  not  discoyered  until  afler  her  death.  The 
Cisterdans  conunemorate  her  on  the  20th  of  ApriL  Her 
life  was  written  by  Cnsariua  of  Heisterbach.  See  Baii- 
let,  Vies  des  Saints,  April  20 ;  the  Bollandiais'  Ada 
SancLf  Richard  et  Giraud,  BtbUoth,  Sacrie;  Hoefer, 
Nowo,  Biog,  Generale,  xxiv,  675. 

BUdenliain,  Abthur,  a  pious  and  leamed  Puiitin 
diyine,  was  bom  at  Stechworth,  Cambridgeshire,  October 
6, 1568,  of  an  honorable  family.  He  was  brought  up  a 
papist,  and  edncated  at  Christ's  College,  Cambridge ;  bot 
while  therc  he  ayowed  himself  a  Protestant,  and  waą  ia 
conaequence,  cast  off  by  hb  father.  The  earl  of  Hont- 
ingdon,  a  distant  kinsman,  on  heaiing  of  the  ciicom* 
Btance,  became  his  patron,  and  caińod  him  throngh  the 
uniyersity.  In  1 587  he  was  settled  as  pieacher  at  Ashbr 
de  la  Zouch,  in  Leioeateiahire,  where  (though  ofteo  per- 
secnted,  and  forced  to  change  his  dwelling)  he  liyed  foi 
the  most  part  of  forty-three  years,  with  great  soccess  in 
his  ministry,  beloyed  and  reyered  by  aU  dassek  He 
suffered  for  consdenoe'  sake  in  1598, 1605, 1611, 1612, 
1616,  and  1680,  being  repeatedly  silenoed,  deprired,  cen- 
sured,  and  fined  to  the  amount  of  two  thouaand  pounds 
by  the  Court  of  High  Commission.  He  died  March  4, 
1681.  His  character  was  lich  in  Christian  exoeUenoe. 
His  published  works  consist  of  One  Htmdrcd  and  Eight 
lActures  on  John  iy  (2d  edit  Lond.  1682,  f6L):—Eig^ 
Sermons  on  Psa,  lxxy  (1682,  foL)  i— One  Hmudred  and 
Fijly-two  Sermons  on  Psa,  li  (London,  1685,  foL)  i-^A 
Treatise  on  the  Doctrine  of  the  Lord's  Supper  c^-Set' 
mom  on  Fa<^,  etc  (Lond.  1688,  foL) — ^e$X,HisLofihs 
Puriftmt,  1,829,546;  Midd]etoii,i?w^.i:pcD^iił,25; 
Hook,  Ecd,  Biog,  vi,  70. 


HILDESŁET 


255 


HTTJi 


Hlld«sley,  Mark,  a  dergyman  of  the  Chnieh  of 
Enf^d,  was  boni  in  1698  at  Muiboii,  Kent.  £ducated 
at  Trinity  CoUege,  Cambridge,  be  became,  in  1785,  alter 
fillmg  wreral  minor  positions,  rector  of  Holwell,  Bedford- 
sbire,  and  in  1755  bishop  of  Sodor  and  Man.  He  died 
December  7, 1772.  He  was  instrumental  in  the  trans- 
Ution  of  tbe  ScripUires  into  Łhe  Manx  language.  See 
Weeden  BuUer,  Life  ;  Hook,  EccL  Biog.  vi,  71. 

Hłldretb,  Hossa,  a  Congregational  minister,  was 
bom  in  Maasachufletta,  January  %  1782.  He  was  grad- 
iiated  at  łlarrard  Colk^  in  18()5,  and  was  engaged  for  a 
nomber  of  jrears  in  teaching,  being  professor  of  mathe- 
matics  in  Phillips  £x6ter  Academy  from  1811  to  1825. 
He  had  stadied  dirinity  in  the  mean  time,  and  was  in- 
stalled  minister  of  First  Farisb,  Gloucester,  Mass.,  on 
kaying  £xeter  Academy.  His  liberał  Tiews,  and  his 
penistenoe  in  exchanging  with  Unitarians,  caused  hb 
Mpaiation  irom  the  £6sex  Association.  He  was  an  ao- 
tive  pioiieer  in  the  Temperance  reform.  His  death  oo- 
curred  in  1835.  He  was  the  author  of  yarious  essays 
and  sermons.— Spiagae,  A  nnait^  viii,  445. 

Hildnl^  also  Hidnl^  of  ^.  Idon,  flourished  in 
the  second  half  of  the  7th  centory,  and  is  said  to  have 
been  bishop  of  Trier  under  king  Pepin.  This  position 
he  reaigned,  and  founded  a  monastery  in  the  Yogese 
moantaina.  Kettberg  {Kirdim-Guck.  DeuUchL  i,  487 
fiq. ;  522  sq.)  is  indined  to  think  that  Hildulf  never  hdd 
a  bishopric  Many  biographies  have  been  published  of 
him.— Heizog,  RealrEncsńop,  vi,  96.    ( J.  H.  W.) 

maen  (1  Chroń,  vi,  58).    See  Holos. 

HiUd^ah  (Heb.  CkiUayah%  rt';phn,portum  of  Je- 
kotah  ;  often  in  the  prolonged  form  ChiSii^a'hu,  ^łM  Jpin, 
2  Kings  xviii,  18, 26;  xxii, 4, 8, 14;  xxiii, 4, 24;  1  Chroń. 
xxvx,ll;  2  Chroń. xxxiv, 9, 14, 15, 18, 20, 22;  l8a.xxii, 
20 ;  xxxvi,  8, 32 ;  Jer.  i,  1 ;  Sept.  XcXicmr),  the  name  of 
a  nmnber  of  men,  all  priests  or  Łevite8. 

1.  The  soo  of  Amzi  and  father  o(  Amaztah,  the  8ixth 
in  desoent  fiom  Merari,  son  <i{  Levi  (1  Chroń,  vi,  45). 
Ra  long  antę  1014. 

2.  The  second  son  of  Hosah,  of  tho  fiunily  of  Merari, 
appointed  by  David  as  a  doorkeeper  of  the  tabemade 
(1  Chroń,  xxvi,  11).    RC.  cir.  1014. 

3.  The  father  of  Eliakim,  which  latter  was  orerseer 
of  the  hoose  (Tempie)  at  the  time  of  Sennacherib*s  in- 
va8iion  (2  Kings  xviii,  18, 26, 37;  Isa.  xxii,  20;  xxxvL 
3>     RC.  antę  713. 

4.  The  father  of  Gemariah  and  companion  of  Elasah, 
who  were  sent  with  a  message  to  the  captive8  at  Baby- 
Ion(Jer.xxix,3).  RC  long  antę  587.  He  was  possibly 
identical  with  the  foregoing. 

5.  The  fiuher  of  the  prophet  Jeremiah  (Jer.  L  1). 
Raante628. 

6.  Son  of  Shallum  (1  Cliron.  vi,  13;  £zra  vii,  1),  or 
Mesłrallaro  (1  Chion.  ix,  11 ;  Neh.  xi,  11),  and  father  of 
Azariah,  the  high-priest  who  aasisted  Josiah  in  his 
wOTk  of  reformation  (2  Kings  xxii,  4-14 ;  xxiii,  4, 24 ;  2 
Chroń,  xxxiv,  »-22;  xxxv,  8).  RC.  623.  <' He  is  e»- 
pecially  remarkable  for  the  diBcovery  which  he  madę  in 
the  house  of  the  L4«rd  of  a  book  which  is  called  *The 
Book  of  the  LaV  (2  Kings  xxu,  8),  and  *The  Book  of 
the  Covenant'  (xxiii,  2).  That  this  was  some  well- 
ksown  book  is  evident  from  the  form  of  the  expre88iou" 
(Kitto).  «  Kennicott  (BdK  Texi.  ii,  299)  is  of  opinion 
that  it  was  the  original  autogrsph  copy  of  the  Penta- 
tench  wiitten  by  Moses  which  Hilkiidi  found.  He  ar- 
gaes  from  the  peculiar  form  of  expre88ion  in  2  Chroń. 

xx3dT,  14,  n;go  n^a  njn;«  nn=in  •jcd,  *the  book  of 

the  law  of  Jehovah  by  the  band  of  Móses;'  whereas  in 
the  fonrteen  other  places  in  the  O.  T.  where  the  law  of 
Moses  or  the  book  of  Moses  is  mentioned,  it  is  either 
<  the  book  of  Moses,'  or  <  the  law  of  Moses,'  or '  the  book 
of  Łhe  law  of  Moses.'  But  the  argument  is  far  from  con- 
cli3aive,  becanse  the  phrase  in  ąuestion  may  quite  as 
piopefly  signify  *  the  book  of  the  law  of  the  Lord  given 
thsoogh  Moses.'    Compaie  the  expiesBu>n  iv  ^eipi  /u- 


9lTov  (GaL  Ui,  19),  and  rłtóo  n?ą  (Exod.  ix,  85 ;  __ ,, 
29 ;  Neh.  x,  29 ;  2  Chion.  xxxv,  6 ;  Jer.  1, 1).  Though, 
however,  the  copy  cannot  be  proved  to  have  been  Mo- 
ses'8  autograph  from  tbe  words  in  ąuestion,  it  seems 
probable  that  it  was  such,  from  the  place  where  it  was 
found,  viz.  in  the  Tempie ;  and,  from  ito  not  having  been 
discovcred  before,  but  only  being  brought  to  light  on 
the  occasion  of  the  repairs  which  were  necessary,  and 
from  the  discoverer  being  the  high-priest  himself,  it 
seems  natura!  to  conclude  that  the  particular  part  of  the 
Tempie  where  it  was  found  was  one  not  usually  fre- 
quented,  or  ever  by  any  but  the  high-priest.  Siich  a 
place  exactly  was  the  one  where  we  know  the  original 
copy  of  the  law  was  deposited  by  command  of  Moses, 
viz.  by  the  side  of  the  ark  of  the  covenant  within  the 
vail,  as  we  leam  from  Deut.  xxxi,  9,  26"  (Smith). 
"That  it  was  the  entire  PenUteuch  is  the  opinion  of 
Joeephus,Ton  Lengerke,  Keil,  Ewald,  HUveniick,  etc; 
but  others  think  it  was  only  part  of  that  collection,  and 
othere  that  it  was  simply  a  collection  of  laws  and  ordi- 
nances  appointed  by  Moses,  such  as  are  given  in  the 
Pentateuch,  and  especially  in  Deuteronomy.  The  ob- 
jection  to  its  being  the  whole  Pentateuch  is  the  im- 
probability  of  that  being  read  in  the  audience  of  the 
people  at  one  time,  as  was  this  book  (xxiii,  2) ;  and 
there  are  many  circumstances  which  render  it  probable 
that  what  was  read  to  the  people  was  the  book  of  Deu- 
teronomy, as  the  apparent  allosion  to  Deut  xxix,  1,  and 
xxx,  2,  Ul  xxiii,  2,  3,  and  the  spccial  efiFect  which  the 
reading  of  the  book  had  on  the  king,  who  did,  in  conse- 
quence,  just  what  one  impressed  by  such  paasages  as 
occur  in  Deut  xvi,  18,  etc,  would  be  likely  to  do.  At 
the  same  time,  even  if  we  admit  that  the  part  actually 
read  eonsisted  only  of  the  summary  of  laws  and  institu- 
tions  in  Deuteronomy,  it  will  not*  foUow  that  that  was 
the  only  part  of  the  Pentateuch  found  by  Hilkiah ;  for, 
as  the  matter  brought  before  his  mind  by  Huldah  the 
prophetess  (2  Kings  xxii,  15  są.)  respected  the  restora- 
tion  of  the  worship  of  Jehovah,  it  might  be  only  to 
what  borę  on  that  that  the  reading  specially  leferred. 
The  probability  b  that  the  book  found  by  Hilkiah  was 
the  same  which  was  intrusted  to  the  care  of  the  priests, 
and  was  to  be  put  in  the  side  of  the  ark  (Deut  xxxi,  9- 
26)  ;^  and  that  this  was  the  entire  body  of  the  Mosaic 
wiiting,  and  not  any  part  of  it,  seems  the  only  tenable 
oonclusion  (Hengstenberg,  Beitrage,  ii,  159  są.)"  (Kitto). 

7.  One  of  the  chief  priests  (contemporary  with  Je- 
shua  as  high-priest)  who  retumed  from  Babylon  with 
Zerubbabel  (Neh.  xii,  7).  His  son  Hashabiah  is  named 
in  ver.  21.    RC.  636. 

8.  One  of  those  who  supported  Ezra  on  the  right 
hand  while  reading  the  law  to  the  people  (Neh.  viii,  4). 
RC.  cir.  410.  It  is  somewhat  uncertain  whether  he 
even  belonged  to  the  Levitical  family ;  the  datę  of  the 
event8  with  which  he  is  associated  seems  to  forbid  his 
Identification  with  the  foregoing. 

Hill  is  the  rendering  of  the  foUowing  original  words 
in  the  Auth.  Vers.  of  the  Bibie.    See  Palestine. 

1.  Gib'ah',  n53a,  from  a  root  akin  to  Sna,  to  he  high, 
which  seems  to  have  the  force  of  currature  or  hmnpish'> 
ness.  A  word  involving  this  idea  ia  peculiarlv  appJica- 
ble  to  the  rounded  hills  of  Palestine,  and  from'it  are  de- 
rived,  as  has  been  pointed  out  under  Gibeah,  the  names 
of  8everal  places  situated  on  hills.  Our  translators  have 
been  consbtent  in  rendering  cib'ah  by  "hill:"  in  four 
passages  only  ąualifying  it  as  "littie  hill,"  doubtless  for 
the  morę  complete  antithesis  to  "mountain"  (Psa.  lxv, 
12 ;  lxxii,  3 ;  cxiv,  4, 6).    JSee  Topographical  Terais. 

2.  But  they  have  also  employed  the  same  English 
word  for  the  very  different  term  Aar,  ^n,  which  has  a 
much  morę  extended  sense  than  gibeah,  meaning  a  whole 
district  rather  than  an  individual  eminence,  and  to 
which  our  word  ^mountain"  answcrs  with  tolerable  ac- 
curacy.  This  exchange  is  alwaj^s  undesirable,  but  it 
sometimes  occurs  so  as  to  confuse  the  meaning  of  a  pas- 
sagę  where  it  is  desirable  that  the  topography  should 


HILL 


256 


HILL 


be  nnmistakftbie.  For  instancei  in  Ezek.  xxiv,  4,  the 
"  hill"  is  the  same  which  is  elsewhere  in  the  same  chap- 
ter  (ver.  12, 13, 18,  etc)  and  book  consistently  and  ac- 
curately  rendercd  "  mount"  and  "  roountain."  In  Numb. 
xiv,  44,  45,  the  **  hiir  is  the  *'  mountain*'  of  ver8e  40,  aa 
also  in  DeuL  i,  41, 43,  compared  with  24,  44.  In  Joeh. 
XV,  9,  the  allusion  is  to  the  Mount  of  01ive8,  conrectly 
caUed  ^^mountain"  in  the  preceding  verae;  and  so  also 
in  2  Sam.  xvi,  18.  The  country  of  the  "  hills,"  in  Deut 
i,  7;  Josh.  ix,  1 ;  x,  40;  xi,  16,  is  the  elevated  distiict 
of  Judah,  Benjamin,  and  Ephraim,  which  is  oorrectly 
called  "  the  momitain**  in  the  earlieat  descriptions  of 
Palestine  (Numb.  xiii,  29),  and  in  many  6ubsequent  pas- 
Bages.  The  "  holy  hill''  (Psa.  iii,  4),  the  <^  hiU  of  Jeho- 
vah"  (xxiv,  3),  the  "hill  of  God"  (lxviii,  15),  are  noth- 
ing  else  than  *' Mount  Zioń.*'  In  2  Kings  i,  9,  and  iv, 
27,  the  use  of  the  word  *'hill"  obscuies  the  allusion  to 
Carmel,  which  in  other  passages  of  the  life  of  the  proph- 
et  (e.  g.  1  Kings  xviii,  19;  2  Kinga  iv,  25)  haa  the  tenn 
"  momit"  oorrectly  attached  to  it.  Other  placea  in  the 
historical  books  in  which  the  same  subetitution  weakena 
the  force  of  the  narrative  are  as  follows:  Gen.  vii,  19; 
Deut.  viii,  7;  Josh.  xiii,  6;  xviii,  13,  14;  Judg.  xvi,  3; 
1  Sam.  xxiii,  14;  xxv,  20;  xxvi,  13;  2  Sam.  xiii,  34;  1 
Kings  XX,  23,  28 ;  xxii,  17,  etc     See  Mountain. 

8.  On  one  occaaion  the  word  ma*cdeh\  rt^lS,  ia  ren- 
dered  ^^  hill,"  viz.  1  Sam.  ix,  11,  where  it  would  be  better 
to  employ  *' ascent/ or  some  similar  term.   SeeBfAAUSH. 

4.  In  the  N.  T.  the  ¥rord  **  hill"  is  employed  to  render 
the  Greek  word  (Sowóc ;  but  on  one  occasion  it  is  uaed 
for  6poc,  elsewhere  ^^mountain,"  ao  as  to  obscuze  the 
connection  between  the  two  parts  of  the  same  narrative. 
The  **  hill"  from  which  Jesus  was  coming  down  in  Lukę 
ix,  36,  is  the  same  as  "  the  mountain"  into  which  he  had 
gone  for  his  transfiguration  the  day  before  (comp.  ver8e 
28).  In  Matu  v,  14,  and  Lukę  iv,  29,  upoc  is  also  ren- 
dered  **hill,"  but  not  with  the  inconvenience  just  no- 
ticeiL  In  Lukę  i,  39,  the  ''hill  country"  (r)  optiyłf)  is 
the  same  ''mountain  of  Judah"  to  which  frequent  refer- 
ence  is  mado  in  the  O.  Test— Smith,  s.  v.  See  Judah, 
Tbidb  of. 

HILL-GODS  (d-ł-in  ^Hb^  "gods  of  the  hiUs")  are 
mentioned  (1  Kings  xx,  23)  by  the  heathenish  Syrians 
as  being  those  of  the  Hebrews,  because  morę  powerful; 
and  such  deitics  (dii  motUium),  L  e.  those  that  have  their 
dwelling  or  throne  on  hiUs,  whence  they  command  con- 
trol  of  all  the  region  w^ithin  view,  were  generally  wor- 
shipped  by  the  ancient  pagans  (see  Dougtiei  AnaL  i, 
178;  DeyUng,  Obserr.  iii,  no.  12),  sometimes  in  generał 
(Gruter,  Inscript,  f.  21 ;  Lactant.  Mort.pertec.  11),  some- 
times as  indiriduals  (Amobius,  Ado.gentU  iv,  9 ;  Augus- 
tine,  Civ.  dd,  iv,  8),  sińce  heights  were  generally  regard- 
ed  as  seats  of  the  gods  (Herodotus,  i,  181 ;  Xenophon, 
Menu  iii,  8, 10;  Strabo,  xv,  732;  Dougtiei  AnaL  i,  107 ; 
Kimptsch,  De  sacris  gentium  in  montUmSf  Lipsis,  1719; 
Creuzer,  Symbolik,  i,  158  8q. ;  Gesenius,  Jesa,  ii,  282; 
Gramberg*8  Religionsid,  i,  20).  See  High  Place.  Gro- 
tius  (ad  loc.)  specially  compares  the  óciifiarrjc  Pan, 
(See  Walch,  De  deo  JĆbraor.  montano,  Jen.  1746.)— Wi- 
ner,  i,  154. 

Hill,  Gheorge,  D.D.,  a  divine  of  the  Church  of  Scot- 
land, bom  at  St.  Andrews  in  1748.  He  was  educated  at 
the  univer8ity  of  his  native  place,  where  he  obtained  the 
Greek  professorship,  and  afterward  that  of  divinity.  He 
subseąuently  became  principal  of  St  Mary'8,  chaplain  to 
the  king  for  Scotland,  and  fellow  of  the  Royal  Society 
of  Edinburgh,  and  was  long  an  ornament  of  the  Church 
of  Scotland.  He  died  in  1819.  Araong  his  publications 
are,  Sermons  (1796, 8vo)  i^Theological  InttUutes  (Edinb. 
1803,  8vo)  i-^Lectures  on  portiont  of  the  Old  Testament 
iUustratice  ofthe  Jewish  Uittory  (Lond.  1812, 8vo).  But 
his  greatcst  work  is  his  Lecturea  in  Ditimttfy  deUvered 
to  the  sŁudents  while  principal  of  St  Bfary's  CoUege,  St 
Andrews.  Dr.  Hill's  doctrinal  sentiments  were,  in  eon- 
sonance  with  the  standards  of  the  Church  of  Scotland, 
strongly  Calvinlstic.    He  was  the  suocessor  of  Dr.  Rob- 


ertson (1779)  in  the  high  offioe  of  moderate  leader  of  tht 
Asaerobly.  The  best  editions  of  his  Ijccture*  in  Dińóts 
are  those  of  Edinburgh  (1825,8  vo1b.8vo)  andKewYoik 
(Carter  &  Brothers,  8vo).  See  Jones,  ĆkritHan  Biog,; 
Chalmers,  Potth,  Work$,  ix,  125;  Allibone,  Diet.  o/Au- 
thors,  i,  846 ;  Hetherington,  Hiśf.  Ch.  of  Scotland,  ii,  397. 

Hill,  Gheorge,  a  Methodist  Episcopal  minister,  vns 
bom  in  Charleston,  S.  C.,  Februaiy  20, 1797,  was  conrert- 
ed  about  1817,  enteied  the  South  Carólina  Confeienoe  in 
1820,  was  presiding  elder  on  Savannah  District  in  1826- 
27-28,  and  then  stationed  at  MilledgeviUe,  where  he  died, 
August  22, 1829.  Mr.  Hill  poflBCiiocd,in  rare  combination, 
great  firmness  and  great  mUdnesą  which,  coupled  iKiih 
vigorous  ability,  madę  him  an  excellent  admiiustntiTe 
officer.  He  was  studious,  and  deeply  pious, "  and  vas 
univerBally  acknowledged  to  be  a  boki,  powerful,  and  em- 
inently  successful  minister."— i/«i.  o/*  Coii/er.  ii,  117. 

HiU,  Green,  a  colonel  in  the  Revolutionaiy  army, 
and  one  ofthe  pioneer  preachers  of  Methodiam  in  Ten- 
nessee, was  bom  in  North  Carolina  in  1741.  The  year 
1780  is  given  as  the  first  record  of  his  preaching.  The 
first  Conference  in  North  CaroUna  was  held  at  his  home 
in  1785.  In  1799  he  removed  to  Tennessee.  He  died  in 
1825.    See  McFeniu,  Methodism  in  Temteute,  p.  801 

Hill,  Noah,  a  leamed  Independent  minister,  wu 
bom  at  Cradley,  England,  1789,  and  educated  at  Daren- 
try,  where  he  was  classical  master  for  ten  yean.  He 
became  rector  of  the  Gravel  Lane  Chapel,  London,  1771, 
and  pieached  there  thirty-seven  yeaiSL  He  died  in  1815^ 
His  Semumt  (Lond.  1822, 8vo)  are  said  to  abound  in  fe- 
licitous  illustrations. 

Hill,  Sir  Richard,  one  of  a  family  distinguished 
for  piety,  eccentńcity,  and  usefulness,  son  of  Sir  Kofrknd 
Hill  of  Hawkestone,  was  bom  m  1783,  and  was  educrted 
at  Westmtnster  School  and  Magdalen  College,  OxfonL 
"  In  youth  he  was  subject  to  deep  religious  impiesńons; 
he  endeavored  to  remove  them  by  dissipation  on  ihe 
Continent,"  but  they  were  only  deepened.  On  bis  re- 
turn he  sought  advice  from  Fletcher  of  Maddcy,  and 
was  converted.  He  became  a  zealous  promoter  of  Meth- 
odism. When  the  "  Methodist  studenta"  were  expelkd 
from  Oxford,  he  wrotc,  in  rebuke  of  that  intolcrant  meas- 
ure,a  large  pamphlet,  entitled,  Pjf/a«  Oxonu9uit:  a  fuli 
Account  ofthe  ErpuUicm  of  Six  Siitden/s  from  Sf.Ed- 
mund't  Hatt  (Lond.  1768,  8vo).  When  the  Calvini8tic 
controver8y  arose  aroong  the  Methodista,  HiU  took  sides 
against  Wesley  and  Fletcher,  and  wrote  a  number  of  vir- 
ulent  Letters  to  Mr.  Fletcher  (answered  in  Fletchei^s 
Checkt  to  A  niinomianism).  He  also  wrote,  against  Wes- 
ley, The  Farrago  Double  DiMtUled:  a  Rerieto  of  Wtdeyt 
Doctrines;  The  Fittishing  Stroik,  and  other  pamphlets, 
ahswers  to  which  roay  be  found  in  Fletcher,  as  above, 
and  in  Wesley,  Works,  voL  vi,  He  afterward  found  bet- 
ter employment  in  ¥nriting  A  n  Apologg  for  Brotherltf 
Love,  againgt  Daubeng^s  Guide  (Lond.  1798,  8vo),  snd 
Letter  to  Mr,  Malan  on  his  Defense  of  Poljftfomg.  He 
preached  as  occasion  demanded  in  dissenting  chapels, 
and  was  an  active  and  useful  Christian  throughout  his 
life.  He  died  in  1808.  See  Rosę,  Gen,  Biog,  Dietionary ; 
Wesley,  Works,  vi,  144  sq.;  Stevens, /^wf ory  ofMeihnd- 
urn,  voL  ii,  ch.  i  and  ii ;  l^dney,  L}fe  ofSir  JHckea^ffiU 
(Lond.  1889,  8vo). 

HiU,  Rowland,  brother  of  Sir  Richard  Hill,  a 
popular  and  pious,  though  eccentric  minister,  was  bom 
at  Hawkestone  Aug.  13Łh  or  23d,  1744.  His  Tie\v8  were 
early  directed  towards  the  miniJstry  in  connection  wiih 
the  Church  of  England,  and  his  reUgious  life  was  great- 
ly  developed  during  his  residence  as  a  student  at  Eton 
and  St  John'8  College,  Cambridge,  where  he  irabibed  the 
principles  of  Whitefield  and  the  Calvinistic  Methodista, 
which  he  strenuously  maintained  through  life.  His  re- 
ligious zeal  at  college  was  strongly  marked,  but  he  did 
not  allow  it  to  interfere  with  his  studies.  He  expe- 
rienced  the  greatest  difficulty  in  obtaining  admission 
into  the  Chiurch— «ix  bishops  refused  in  tani  to  ordain 
him,  and  he  auoceeded  at  length  only  through  ftmily 


HILL 


257 


HIŁŁEŁ 


Afier  his  ordination  he  Ksomed  itineimoy, 
much  agwnst  the  wńhes  of  his  father.  In  1778  he  ob- 
tained  the  psiiah  of  Kingston,  Somenet,  and  .was  mar- 
fied  in  the  same  year,  yet  still  kept  up  his  itinenmt 
ministiy.  His  Tigor  of  thought,  earnestness,  ecoen- 
tńcity,  and  wit  drew  thousands  to  listen  to  him.  In 
1780  his  father^s  death  kft  him  wealth;  and,  with  the 
aid  of  his  nnmeious  friends,  he  biiilt  Soney  Chi^l, 
London,  in  17^2.  Herę  he  preached  to  vasŁ  oongrega- 
tions  for  many  yeaia.  He  died  April  U,  1833.  In  the 
contToveray  between  the  Arminian  and  Calvimstic  Meth- 
odisU HiUiook  an actire  part,  and  wrote  several bitter 
pamphleu  againat  John  Wesley,  especially  Impoeture 
detected  (Bri^l,  1777)  :—FuU  Awwer  to  John  Wesląf 
(Bristol,  1777).  AVhen  the  strife  ended  Hill  regretted 
his  8evere  language,  and  Buppressed  one  of  his  bitterest 
pubUcadons.  See  Sidney,  L\fe  ofRowUrnd  Jliil  (Lond. 
183Ó,  8ro) ;  Steyens,  Iligiory  of  Afetkodiim,  yoL  ii,  eh.  i 
and  ii ;  Wesley,  Works,  iv,  473 ;  vi,  193, 199. 

HUlfT^IUlam,  D.D..  a  Presbyterian  minister,  was 
bom  in  CumberUnd  Co.,  Ya.,  March  8, 1 769.  In  1785  he 
entered  Hampden  Sidney  College.  While  there  he  em- 
braoed  religion,  and  decided  to  study  for  the  ministiy. 
He  graduated  in  1788,  and  was  lioensed  to  preach  by 
the  lYesbyteiy  of  Hanover  July  10, 1790.  Afler  acting 
for  two  years  as  miańonary,  he  settled  in  Berkeley,  Ya., 
and  in  January,  1800,  aaeumed  charge  of  the  Presbyteń- 
an  ChuTch  in  Winchester.  In  February,  1834,  he  be- 
esme  pastor  of  the  Briery  Presbyterian  Chuich  in  Prince 
Edward  Co.,  where  he  remained  only  two  years,  when 
impaiied  health  obliged  him  to  resign,  and  he  retumed 
to  Winchester  to  pass  the  hut  days  of  his  life.  He  died 
there  Nov.  16, 1832.  Dr.  Hill  was  engaged  on  a  Jlistory 
o/tke  PrednfUrian  CAurch  m  the  UnUed  States,  intended 
to  make  two  8vo  vols.  He  decided  to  pablish  it  in  num- 
bers,  but  only  a  angle  number  of  it  appeared.  ^'  In  the 
great  contest  that  issued  in  the  division  of  the  Chuch, 
Dr.  Hill'8  judgment,  sympathies,  and  acts  were  fully 
with  the  New  SchooL"— Prcfóu  Quarterfy  Beview,  1853 ; 
Spiagae,^fma2f,iii,563.     (J.H.W.) 

Hilla  or  HiUel  Codex  of  the  O.  T.  See  Han- 
uacmFTs. 

HUael  (Heb.  HiM%  ^\n,praismff!  Sept.  'EXK^X, 
Jflsephns,  'EXXi|Xoc),  a  Firathonite,  father  of  the  judge 
Abdon  (Jodg.  idi,  13, 15).    RC.  antę  1238. 

Hillel  I,  Ha-Zaken  Ci^C»  ^^  ^  Great),  ben-Si- 
liox,  was  bom  at  Babylon  about  RC  75.  He  was  one 
of  the  most  emlnent  Jewish  rabbis,  foander  of  a  school 
which  borę  his  name,  and  by  his  self-denjring,  holy  Ufe, 
sod  great  wisdom  and  leaming,  exercised  a  yery  remark- 
sbłe  ioiittenoe  both  upon  the  theology  and  literaturę  of 
his  nation.  About  RC  36  he  came  to  Jerusalem,  where, 
whik  obliged  to  work  for  his  daily  bread,  he  attended  at 
the  same  time  the  lectures  of  Shemaja  and  Abtalion, 
tben  the  preatding  officers  of  the  Sanhedrim.  About 
RC  80  he  was  himself  chosen  president  of  the  Sanhe- 
drim. This  oiBce  he  held  for  forty  years  with  great  suc- 
eesL  Etheridge  aajrs :  **  His  administratlon,  along  with 
his  ooadjutor  Shammai,  forms  an  era  in  the  histoiy  of 
sabbinical  leaming.  His  scholars  were  numbered  by 
thwwsnds,  The  Talmud  commemorates  eighty  of  them 
by  name,  amoog  whom  aie  the  oelebrated  RJochanan 
ben-Zacbai,  and  Jonathan  ben-Uńel,  the  Chaldee  Tar- 
gumist  on  the  nrophets.**  Some  have  asserted  (Gins- 
burg  m  Kitto,  among  others)  that  by  his  teachings  he 
prepared  his  people  for  the  ooming  of  Christ,  but  we  are 
incUned  to  believe  that,  while  HUlel  was  a  most  noble 
leader  of  the  Jews,  teaching  as  he  did  that  the  cardinal 
doctzine  and  aim  of  life  is  ''to  be  gentle,  showing  all 
meeknesB  to  all  men,"  and  "  when  reyiled  not  to  reyile 
again,"*  yet  his  views  of  the  prophedes  rather  indined 
him  to  give  waming  to  his  nation— especially  prepared, 
by  their  sodai  and  political  discotnfort,  to  look  moie  in- 
tenUy  for  the  coming  of  that  mjrsterious  king  who,  ac- 
eocdhig  to  their  idea,  was  to  free  them  from  the  oppies- 
lioa  of  Herod  as  well  as  Cesar,  and  estabUshin  the  land 
IV.-R 


of  Jodah  a  throne  that  should  haye  8iqMramacy  oyer  aU 
others — by  asserting  that  "no  snch  king  will  eyer  ap- 
pear"  {Scmhedrim),  But  it  is  ondoubtedly  tnie  that  he 
foresaw  the  dispezsion  of  his  nation,  for  the  Talmud  in- 
forms  us  that  he  drew  np  dyil  and  political  ordinances 
intended  to  regulate  their  relation  to  each  other  after 
their  separation.  While  president  of  the  Sanhedrim,  his 
great  aim  was  to  giye  greater  precision  to  the  study  of 
Uie  law.  Before  his  time  traidition-leaming  had  been 
diyided  into  six  hundred,  or,  as  some  have  it,  seven 
hundred  sections.  He  simplified  the  subject  by  arrang- 
ing  this  onoe  oomplicated  mass  under  8ix  (Sedarim) 
treatises— the  basis,  really,  of  the  futurę  Mishna  labors 
of  Akiba,  Chijja,  and  Jehoda  Hakkodesh  in  this  depart- 
ment.  HiUel  was  also  the  first  who  laid  down  definite 
hermeneutical  rules  for  the  interpretation  of  the  O.T. 
They  are  very  important  for  a  proper  understanding 
of  the  ancient  yersions  (Midrash).  His  oolleague,  the 
yice-president  of  the  Sanhedrim,  Shammai,  became  dis- 
pleased  with  the  liberality  of  Hillel's  mind,  and  this 
tinally  resulted  in  the  establishment  of  "  the  school  of 
Shammai*'  by  the  side  of  "•  the  school  of  Hillel."  Their 
pointa  of  differencc  related  to  ąuestions  of  jurisprudenoe 
and  Church  discipUne,  not  to  dogmas,  yet  their  disputes 
caosed  great  excitement  among  the  Jews.  Hillel's  par- 
ty finally  preyailed,  in  oonseąuence,  it  is  said,  of  a  hceth 
hol  (q.  V.)  in  his  favor.  Jerome  and  some  other  writeiB 
have  conaidered  Hillel  as  the  founder  of  the  sect  oi 
Phariaees,  and  Shammai  as  the  first  Scribe.  This,  how- 
ever,  is  an  error,  for  the  Scribes  and  Fharisees  did  not 
constitute  two  distinct  sects,  and,  moreover,  were  antę* 
nor  to  these  two  teachers.  HiUel  died  when  Jesus  was 
about  ten  yeais  of  age.  It  seems  stiange  that  Josephus 
makes  no  mention  of  HilleL  Arnold  (in  Herzog,  Real" 
Encykiop,  yii,  97,  thinks  that  Pollio  {Ant.  xyi,  1, 1, 10) 
stands  for  HilleL  To  the  school  of  Hillel  is  attńbuted 
the  authorship  of  MegiUaih  Beih  Hashmonaim,  a  work 
on  the  histor)'  of  the  Maocabees,  now  lost.  See  Barto- 
locci,  Ma^na  Biblioth.  Rabbm,  ii,  783-796 ;  G.  £.  Geiger  ' 
et  H.  Giessman,  Bretris  ConmienUaio  de  Hillele  et  Scham* 
mai,  etc  (Altdorf,  1707, 4to) ;  Hoefer,  Now,  Biog.  GM" 
role,  xxiv,  686;  £n^  Cychpadia;  FUrst,  Kuitur-ges<^ 
i,  13 ;  Etheridge,  Introd,  to  Htbr,  Literat,  p.  33 ;  Grfttz, 
Gesch,  d.  Juden,  viii,  207;  Jost,  Gescfu  d.  TsraeL  i,  254; 
Kitto,  Cydop,  o/Bib,  Liter,  ii,  303 ;  Wolf,  BibUoth,  Hthr, 
ii,  824-8.     (J.H.W.) 

Hillel  II,  bek-Jehudah  IH  (somctimes  called  the 
younger,  becanse  a  descendant  of  Hillel  I,  or  the  elder, 
q.  V.),  came  to  the  presidency  of  the  Ssnhedrim  about 
A.D.  330  (some  say  A.D.  258),  which  he  held  for  about 
thirty-five  years.  As  president  of  the  Sanhedrim,  he 
was,  of  course,  the  head  of  the  Jewish  school  at  Tibe- 
rias,  and  it  is  said  that  while  in  this  position  he  was 
often  consulted  by  Ońgen.  Some  think  him  the  Ellel 
mentioned  by  Epiphanius  {adver,  Hares,  xxx,  4  sq.), 
who  embraced  the  Christian  faith  on  his  death-bed. 
But  this  fact  is  unlikely,  as  the  Jews  of  Hillel's  time 
make  no  mention  of  it  whatoyer.  Had  it  ocairred  thęy 
would  undoubtedly  haye  execrated  his  name.  It  is  an 
interesting  fact,  howeyer,  connccted  with  Biblical  liter- 
aturę to  leam  from  Epiphanius  that  a  Hebrew  transla' 
tion  of  the  Gospel  of  John,  of  the  Acts  of  the  Apostleą 
and  of  Chri8t'8  genealogy  as  recorded  by  Mat  the  w,  ex- 
isted  at  this  early  penod  of  Cbristianity,  for  it  is  said 
of  the  Ellel  aboye  referred  to,  that  a  Hebrew  tranalation 
of  the  parts  of  the  N.  T.  just  mentioned  was  found  se- 
cretod  in  the  cabinetof  the  nasi  (president),  subseąuent- 
ly  to  his  death.  Hillel  is  said  to  have  convoked  a  rsb- 
binical  synod  which  adjusted  the  period  of  the  sun  with 
that  of  the  moon  in  calculating  time,  though  it  was  not 
used  until  the  change  intioduced  under  Alphonso,  king 
of  Castile  (Bartolocd,  Magna  BibUotAeca  Baiinmcarum, 
ii,  415  sq.).  This  calendar,  while  it  greatly  facilitated 
the  uniform  obsenranoe  of  the  Paschal  festival  and  other 
great  feBtivals,  tended  to  promote  unity  among  a  people 
dispersed  through  so  many  lands.  "  If  the  acts  of  this 
synod  had  been  handed  down  in  a  written  tann,  we 


HILŁER 


258 


HIMTAKlTES 


] 


/diould  probably  hare  had  in  them  mme  ligbt  on  the 
preaent  discrepancies  between  the  chronology  of  the 
Uebrew  text  and  that  of  the  Septuagint"  It  is  gen- 
eraUy  believed  that  the  labbiiu  of  this  synod  fixed  the 
epoch  of  the  Creation  at  the  vernal  eqiiinox,  8761  yean 
before  the  birth  of  Christ.  Indeed,  Hillel^s  great  lepu- 
tation,  nay,  immortality,  rests  upon  his  introduction  of 
the  calendar  (q.  v.)  of  the  Jewish  year,  used  eyen  at 
piesent  with  litde  yaziation.  **Acoording  to  this  cal- 
endar,  the  difference  between  the  solar  and  lunar  year, 
upon  which  the  cycle  of  the  Jewish  festirab  depends,  is 
yeariy  madę  up;  the  length  of  the  month  is  madę  to 
approximate  to  the  astionomical  course  of  the  moon, 
and  attention  is  also  paid  in  it  to  the  Hałachic  mattere 
oonuected  with  the  Jewish  festiyals.  It  is  based  upon 
the  cycle  of  nineteen  yean  (nssbn  *^Tni3),  introduced 
by  the  Greek  astronomer  Meton,  in  which  occur  seven 
intercalary  yeara.  Each  year  bas  ten  unchaiigeable 
months  of  altemately  twenty-nine  and  tbirty  days;  the 
two  autnmnal  months,  Chedwan  and  Kislerj  which  fol- 
low  the  important  month  Tisri,  are  left  changeable  [see 
Haphtarah],  because  they  depend  upon  certain  astio- 
nomical phenomena  and  the  following  points  of  Jewish 
law :  1.  That  the  month  of  Titri  is  never  to  begin  with 
the  day,  which,  to  a  great  extent,  belongs  to  the  former 
month.  2.  The  Day  of  Atonement  is  not  to  fali  on  the 
day  before  or  after  the  Sabbath ;  and,  8.  That  the  Ho- 
Kama  Day  is  not  to  be  on  a  Sabbath.  It  is  imposaible 
now  to  say  with  certainty  how  much  of  this  calendar  is 
Hillers  own,  and  how  mach  he  took  fiom  the  naitonal 
traditions,  sińce  it  is  beyond  ąuesdon  that  some  astio- 
nomical rules  were  handed  down  by  the  picsidents. 
This  calendar  Hillel  introduced  A.D.  859.'*  A  similar- 
ity  of  namcs  has  cansed  him  to  be  considered  as  the  au- 
thor  of  a  MSw  oopy  of  the  O.  T.,  which  was  presenred 
until  the  close  of  the  18th  oentury,  and  was  used  to  cor- 
rect later  copies.  He  died  towards  the  dose  of  the  4th 
oentury.  —  Kossi,  Dizion,  ttorico  degH  Autori  Ebrei,  p. 
170, 171 ;  Wolf,  Bibliołh,  T/ebraica  ;  Hocfer,  Nouv,  Biog, 
GłneraU,  xxiv,  688 ;  Etheridge,  Introd.  Nebr,  LU,  p.  138 ; 
Griltz,  Geach,  d.  Juden,  iv,  886  8q. ;  Kitto,  Cydop.  o/Bib. 
ii/,  u,  805.     (J.H.W.) 

HiUer,  Matthias,  a  German  Protestant  theolo- 
gian  and  Ońentalist,  was  bom  at  Stuttgard  Feb.  15, 1646. 
He  became  professor  of  logie  and  metiq)hymc8  in  1692, 
and  of  Oriental  languages  and  theology  in  1698.  In 
1716  he  exchanged  these  offices  for  the  priory  of  Kon- 
igsbronn,  where  he  died,  Feb.  11, 1725.  He  acquired 
great  reputation  by  his  works  on  philology  and  herme- 
neutics.  He  wrote  Sciagraphia  GrammaliccB  HtbrcBm : 
— Lezicon  Latino-Hebratcum  (1685) : — J)e  A  rcano  Keri 
et  Kethib  (Tubing.  1692,  8vo),  on  the  accentuation  and 
puncŁuation  of  the  Bibie  i^Iruiituiiones  Lingua  Sancta 
(seyeral  Umes  reprinted,  as  Tubing.  1760,  8vo) : — Ow>- 
nuułicon  Sacrum  (Tubingen,  1706,  4to,  transL  into  Ger- 
man by  himself) : — Syntagmata  hermcneutioa  ctiibus  loca 
S,  Scripturce  plurima  ex  Hebraico  textu  notę  explicantur 
(TUbingen,  1711,  4to)  :—Hieroylyphicum:—De  Origme 
GeiUium  CeUicarum: — De  Origine^  dHa  et  terra  PcUas- 
łinorum: — De  Plantit  in  S,  Scriptura  memorałis: — //i- 
erophyticon  (Utrecht,  1725,  4to).  See  Fabricius,  Ilist. 
Biblioih.  vi,  44 ;  Ersch  und  Gruber,  AUg.  Encykk^padie ; 
Hocfer,  Nouv,  Btog,  Generale^  xxiv,  689.     (J.  N.  P.) 

Hiller,  Philip  Fradarick,  one  of  the  best  and 
most  prolific  hymn  writen  of  the  Evangelical  Church  of 
Southern  Germany,  was  bom  at  MUhlhausen  in  1699 ; 
educated  under  J.  A.Bengel;  became  pastor  at  two  or 
three  little  yiUages,  and  iinally  at  Steinheim  in  1782 ; 
lost  his  voice  in  1751,  and  died  in  1769.  After  his  re- 
tiiement  from  the  pulpit  he  devoted  himself  especially 
to  sacred  poetry,  and  produced  over  1000  hymns,  many 
of  which  bave  great  exoeIlencie8.  It  is  said  that,  next 
to  the  Bibie,  his  spiritual  songs  are  perhaps  the  most 
widely  ctrculated  book  m  WUrtemberg  (Hurst^s  Hagen- 
bach).  A  complete  edition  appeared  at  Reutlingen  in 
1844  and  1851^HeEzog,  J2ea^£iKytiop.voLvi;  Hagen- 


bach,  HuU  o/tke  ISth  and  19tk  Centuria  (tiandaŁedby 
Hurst),  ii, 898 ;  Winkworth,  Christian  Singert  o/Gema^ 
f^,p.278. 

HillhotiBa,  AuouSTUB  Ł.,  author  of  the  beaudM 
hymn  beginning  "  Trembling  before  thine  awful  throoe,* 
was  bom  at  New  Haven,  Conn.,  about  1792,  and  died  in 
Paris  Maich  14, 1859.  He  was  a  younger  brother  of 
James  A.  Hillhouse,  the  poet.— A^ew  Englandery  xviii, 
667. 

Hilliard,  Timothy,  a  Congregational  minister,  wts 
bora  in  1746  in  Kensington,  N.  H.  He  graduatcd  it 
Harvard  College  in  1764,  and  in  1768  was  appointed  tu- 
tor, in  which  poeition  he  lemained  until  1771,  wheo  he 
was  ordained  pastor  at  Bamstable.  This  charge  he  re- 
signed  April,  1788,  and  was  installed  co-pastor  at  C-om- 
bridge  Oct.  27,  where  he  remained  until  his  death,  Miv 
9, 1790.  He  published  the  Dudleian  I^ecture  at  Har- 
ward College  (1788),  and  seyeial  occasional  sennons*— 
Sprague,  A  nnals,  i,  660. 

Hillyar,  Asa,  D.D.,  a  Presbyterian  minister,  was 
bom  in  Sheffield,  Mass.,  April  6, 1763 ;  cntcred  Tale  Col- 
lege in  1782,  and  graduated  in  1786.  He  was  liccnscd 
to  preach  by  the  old  Presbyteiy  of  Suffolk,  L.  I.,  in  1788, 
and  was  appointed  to  the  churches  at  Connecticut  Famu 
and  Bottle  Hill  (now  Madison,  N.  J.,  the  seat  of  the 
Drew  Theological  Seminary),  and  shortly  after  (Sept. 
29, 1789)  was  ordained  and  installed  as  pastor  at  the  Ut- 
ter  place.  In  the  summer  of  1801  he  accepted  an  inyi- 
tation  to  the  church  in  Orange,  *<  one  of  the  largest  and 
most  influential  in  the  state."  Here  he  labored  with 
great  acceptance  and  success  for  more  than  thirty  yean. 
In  1818  he  received  the  degree  of  D.D.  from  Alleghany 
College.  In  the  disraption  of  the  Presbyterian  Chorch 
(1837),  Dr.  Hillyer  sided  with  thie  New  ŚchooL  •'Bat, 
though  he  regarded  the  diviston  as  an  unwise  meanire, 
it  neyer  distuibed  his  pleasant  rdations  with  those  of 
his  brethren  whose  yiews  and  action  in  refcrence  to  it 
differed  from  his  own"  (G.N.  Judd,  in  Sprague^s  Afmali). 
He  was  a  trustee  of  the  College  of  New  Jersey  from  1811 
to  his  death,  and  from  1812  until  the  diWsion  of  the 
Greneral  Assembly  one  of  the  iirst  directors  of  the  theo- 
logical seminary  at  Princeton.  This  school,  too,  he  re- 
garded to  the  last  with  undiminished  interest.— Tuttle, 
(Rey.  Samuel  L.),  Hitiory  of  the  Presbyterian  Ckurck, 
Madison,  JV.  J.  p.  39  0q. ;  Sprague,  Amials  ofths  Amur* 
ican  PulpUy  iii,  638.     (J.  H.  W.) 

EOmerilis  (Ififptoc)^  a  celebrated  Greek  sophist  and 
rhetorician,  was  bom  at  Prusa,  in  Bitfaynia,  A.D.  Zlh. 
Ile  receiyed  his  education  of  ProcresiuB,  whose  iival  be 
afterwards  became.  After  trayelling  considerably  in  the 
East,  he  settled  in  Athens  as  teacher  of  rhetoric.  He 
became  very  famous  in  his  piofession,  haying  among  his 
pupils  Basil,  Gregory  of  Nazianzen,  and  other  distin- 
guished  men.  The  emperor  Jidian,  during  his  yisit  at 
Athens,  A.D.  865,  attracted  by  his  leaming  and  eloąneoce, 
inyited  him  to  his  oourt  at  Antioch,  and  madę  him  bis 
secretary  (A.D.  862).  After  the  death  of  his  riyal,  Pro- 
aeresius,  in  A.D.  868,  be  retumed  to  Athena  and  resumed 
his  former  calling.  He  became  blind  toward  the  doee 
of  his  life,  and  died  in  a  fit  of  epilepsy  A.D.  886.  Hime- 
rius  was  a  pagan,  but  exoeedingly  kind  towards  the 
Christiana.  Of  hiis  works,  only  a  part  are  now  extant. 
— Lardner,  Works ;  Smith,  Diet,  Greek  and  Bom,  MytkoL 
ii;  Pierer,  {7mvena/JLear.yiii,388;  Hoefer, A^mr. iNi^ 
Generale,  xxiv. 

Himeritui,  bishop  of  Tarragona,  Spain,  known  by  a 
letter  which  was  addressed  to  him  by  Siridns,  bishop  of 
Bome  (886^98),  and  in  which  the  latter  arrogates  su- 
premę ecdesiastical  aothority,  and  seeks  by  flattery  to 
gain  Himerius's  oonsent  to  his  pretensions.  See  Hard, 
ConciL  U  848 ;  J.  A.  Cramer,  additions  to  Bossuet,  iy,  697. 
—Herzog,  Recd^Ewyklop,  yi,  98, 99.  The  Roman  Cath- 
olic  yiews  roay  be  f een  in  Wetzcr  u.  Welte,  Kirck<n-Le^ 
ikon,  y,  197  8q.    See  SiRicius. 

Himyaritea  (by  the  classics  called  Bomeritet  or 
Homeirites)^  an  Aralńan  people,  daiming  to  be  deBoeod- 


Hm 


259 


HINCMAR 


anta  of  HuDyar,  ft  gnuidson  of  Saba,  one  of  tbe  mythio- 
al  fiithen  of  tbe  Arabums,  wbo  is  aaid  to  bave  been  a 
prinoe  in  Soatb  Arabia  about  8000  befoie  Moham- 
med'8  time.  They  establiahed  in  tbat  part  of  Arabia 
aome  Teiy  floariabiiii^  towna,  induding  Saba  and  Aden 
(Athana),  tbe  f<Hiner  noted  morę  eapedally  from  its 
mentioo  in  the  Bibie,  and  extended  tbeir  dominion 
nearly  over  tbe  entire  coast  of  Soutb  Africa.  At  the 
timeof  Gonstantine  the  Gieat  thia  people  indined  to 
ChrisŁianity,  bat  in  529  they  weie  subjected  by  the  Etbi- 
opiana,  and  were  obliged  to  fonake  tbeir  Christian  faith. 
About  aerenty  years  later  tbe  Peraiana  took  the  moat 
important  dtiea&om  the  Uimyaritea,  and  in  A.D. 629 
they  were  sabjected  to  the  Mohaminedana,  and  em- 
bcaoed  Triamiwn.  The  Himyarites  had  a  langnage  of 
tbeir  own  [aee  Ababio  Lanouaob],  the  ao  called  Him- 
yańtic,  of  which  tzacea  bave  lately  been  found  in  the 
andent  remaina  to  whidi  the  Oriental  acbolar  Gesemos, 
and,  later,  Bodiger,  baye  given  mach  study.  Of  late 
Oaander  haa  undertaken  this  taak,  and  ^pparently  bas 
been  much  morę  Bucceasful.  The  reaulta  of  his  inve8ti- 
gations  are  found  in  ZeU8dur\ft  der  deutschen  Moryenland. 
GettUsdL  (roi  x  and  xix,  Lpz.  1856  and  1865).^Brodc- 
bana,  (7oiir.-i>z.  vii,  929.   See  Jsws. 


Hin  CC*},  Alfl,  Sept  c(v,  <v,  or  vv),  a  measora  of 
liąoida,  containing  the  aerenth  part  of  a  ^  bath"  (Numb. 
xv,4  aq.;  xxviii, 5, 7, 14;  Ezek.  iv,  11),  L e. tweive  Ro- 
man aeztam,  acoording  to  Joeepbus  (fcv,ilfi^iii,8,8; 
ix,  4),  or  abont  five  ąuarta.  The  word  oorreaponds  with 
tbe  £g3rptian  Aa,  Aito,  which  properly  aignifies  a  veuelj 
and  then  a  smaU  measore,  MartoruM,  Greek  ivov  (see 
y.*»m«m,  Lettre  a  SalcoUni,  p.  154;  Bockh,  Metrolog, 
^iifarnidl.p.  244, 260).  But  it  is  not  certain  tbat  the 
Hebffew  and  EngUsh  measures  were  of  the  same  size.— 
Geseniua.  AcconUng  to  the  Rabbins,  the  hin  oontains 
only  the  tixtk  part  of  the  bath.    See  Mkasure. 

Hinchcllfie,  Johk,  D.D.,  was  bom  in  Westminster 
in  1731.  He  was  educated  at  Westmuister  School  and 
Trinity  College,  Cambridge.  In  1764  he  was  appointed 
bead  master  of  Westminster  Seminary,  in  1766  yicar  of 
Greenwich,  and  in  1769  bishop  of  Peterborough.  Hinch- 
diife  was  a  man  of  sound  scholarship,  and  especially  cel- 
ebrated  aa  an  orator  both  in  the  pulpit  and  in  the  forum. 
He  died  in  1794.  He  only  published  three  sermons  de- 
]ivered  on  public  occasions.  A  collection  of  his  Sermoru 
(London,  1796, 8vo)  is  not  without  merit,  but  they  cer- 
tainly  did  not  meet  tbe  expectations  of  his  conteropo- 
raries. — Hook,  Ecdes.  Biog.  vi,  78 ;  Allibone,  Diet.  o/ A  u- 
C&or«,i,850. 

Hłnckelmttnn,  Abraham,  a  distinguished  German 
tbeokigian  and  Orientalist,  bom  at  Doebeln,  near  Ham- 
burg, May  2, 1652,  was  educated  at  the  Uni yersity  of  Wit^ 
tenberg.  Afler  filling  seyeial  important  appointments 
as  minister,  be  was,  in  1687,  madę  oourt  preacher  to  the 
landgiaye  of  Hesse-Daimstadt,  and  honoraiy  professor  at 
tbe  Uniyersity  of  Giessen.  But  in  the  year  immediate^ 
ly  foUowing  be  reaigned  these  positions  and  retumed  to 
Hamburg.  Here  he  was  aocused  by  some  ministers  of 
sympathy  with  Millenarians  and  Pietists,  which  so 
wrooght  opon  his  constitation  and  mind  tbat  he  died  af- 
ler a  short  illneas,  Februazy  1 1, 1695.  Among  bis  works 
are  especially  worthy  of  notę,  Syiloge  vocum  et  phrasum 
raUiaiearum  óbtcurioruM  (Lubeck,  1675,  4to):  —  De 
Schodu  llebrceorum  :—De  SacrificiU  HAr. :— Tettammt, 
Hpaayme»  inter  Muhammedem  H  ChristiamB  Jidei  Cul- 
tores  (Arab.  and  Lat,  Hamb.  1690,  4to).  He  published 
slao  Ałcoratt,  really  the  first  edition  of  the  Koran,  as  tbat 
of  Paganini  (Ven.  1530)  was  almost  wbally  dtatioyed  by 
oider  of  the  pope.  He  aiao  Mt  in  MSL  Lexicon  arabico' 
latiatm  in  Aliyt  iii— .  Jocher,  AUgem,  GeUhrt.  Lex.  ii, 
1612 ;  Hocftr,  JToiiP.  Biog,  Geru  xxiv,  705  są.    ( J.  H.  W.) 

Bnckley.  John,  DJ).,  an  Englisb  dergyman,  was 
bon  in  Warwickahire  in  1617,  and  was  educated  at  St. 
Alban'8  Hall,  Oxfonł.  He  filled  soocessiyely  the  vicaiw 
9te  of  Coleafai]],  Beikahin^  and  t^ae  lectorshipa  of  Dray- 


ton,  Leiceatersbire,  and  Kortbfield,  Woreestenhire.  He 
died  in  1695.  He  published  Four  Sermont  (Oxf.  1657, 
8vo) :  —  Ejpittola  Yeridica  (1659,  4to) :  —  Penuatioe  to 
Conformity  (1670, 8vo),  addieseed  in  the  form  of  a  letter 
to  the  Dissenters: — Fiuciaibu  Uterarum^  or  Letters  on 
toteral  Ocetuions  (1680,  8vo).  The  first  half  oontains 
letters  exchanged  between  bim  and  Richard  Baxter  on 
the  divisions  in  the  Church* — ^Hook,  Eedet,  Biog,  yi,  74 ; 
Hoefer,  Nouv,  Biog.  Gmir,  xxiv,  706 ;  Allibone,  Diet.  of 
Author$,  i,  850. 

Hincks,  Bdward,  D.D.,  a  deigyman  of  the 
Church  of  England,  and  a  distinguished  Assyrian  schol- 
ar, was  bora  in  August,  1792,  and  was  prepared  for  college 
under  his  father's  caze.  He  entered  Trinity  College, 
Dublin,  at  a  yery  eaily  age,  and  obtained  a  fellowship 
before  he  was  twenty-one,  being  /aeile  princep*  of  aU 
the  candidates.  Aiter  graduation  he  became  rector  of 
Ardtrea,  one  of  the  college  liyings,  whenoe  he  was  pro- 
moted  to  Killyleagh,  in  the  dioceae  of  Down  (north  of 
Ireland),  and  there  he  spent  the  last  forty-one  years  of 
his  life.  Dr.  H  incks  was  considered  one  of  the  best  phi- 
lologists  in  Europę.  He  contribnted  numerous  yaluable 
papers,  especially  on  £g3rptian  hieroglyphics  and  Assyr^ 
ian  cuneiform  inscriptions,  to  the  Royal  Irish  Academy, 
the  Royal  Society  of  literaturę,  the  Asiatic  Society,  and 
the  British  Assodation.  **  His  talent  for  dedphering 
texts  in  unknown  characters  and  languages  was  wonder- 
fuL  It  was  applied  to  the  study  of  Egyptian  hieroglyph- 
ics, and  to  the  inscriptions  in  the  cuneiform  character 
found  in  Persepolis,  Nineyeh,  and  other  parts  of  ancient 
Assyria.  In  this  field  especially  he  labored  for  yean  with 
great  per8everance  and  success,  having  been  the  first  to 
ascertain  the  numeral  system,  and  the  power  and  form 
of  its  signs  by  means  of  the  inscriptions  at  Tan.  He 
waa  one  of  the  chief  restorers  of  Assjrrian  kaming,  throw- 
ing  great  light  on  the  Unguistic  character  and  grammat- 
ical  stracture  of  the  languages  represented  on  the  As- 
syrian monuments.  Living  in  a  remote  country  vil- 
lage,  with  yery  limited  means  at  his  command,  he  had 
to  contend  with  great  difiiculties.  In  London,  beside 
the  British  Museum,  he  would  have  acoomplished  morę 
tban  he  did"  (London  A  theneeum,  December,  1866).  He 
died  December  8, 1866.    See  Citmeifobm  Imscbiptioks  ; 

HlEBOGLYPHICS.      (J.  H.  W.) 

Hincks,  John,  a  Unitarian  minister,  bom  in  Cork, 
Ireland,  in  1804,  was  educated  at  Trinity  CoUege,  Dub- 
lin, and  the  Belfast  Academical  Institution,  and  in  1827 
was  called  to  a  Unitarian  Church  at  LiverpooL  He  died 
in  1831.  The  only  published  writings  of  his  are  Ser- 
mons and  occasional  sermces,  with  Afemoir  bg  J.  //.  TTiom 
(Lond.  1832, 8yo).— Darling,  Cyclop.  Bibliog.  i,  1484 ;  Al- 
libone, DicL  o/A  uthors,  i,  850. 

Hinomar  of  Laon  was  nephew  of  Hincmar,  arch- 
biahop  of  Rheims,  who  at  first  patronized  him,  and  had 
bim  elected  bishop  of  Laon,  about  A.D.  856.  He  soon 
showed  an  obstinate  and  refractory  spirit;  set  at  naught 
his  unde,  who  was  his  metropoUtan ;  rebeUed  against  hia 
king,  and  soomed  the  decrees  of  synods,  whose  sentenoe 
of  condemnation  he  for  some  time  ayoided  by  appealing 
to  Romę ;  but  at  length  he  was  summoned,  heard,  con- 
demned,  and  depoeed  from  his  see  of  Laon.  He  waa 
also  imprisoned  and  his  eyes  craelly  put  out,  A.D.  871. 
Two  years  later,  at  the  Council  of  Troyes,  he  obtained 
access  to  the  pope,  who  reinstated  him,  assigned  him  a 
portion  of  the  eplscopal  reyenues,  and  permitted  him 
eyen  to  resume  his  pontifical  functions  in  part,  He  died 
about  A.D.  880.  He  wrote  many  lAiiers^  etc,  which  are 
kMt ;  but  a  few  may  be  found  with  his  life,  defence,  etc, 
in  Labbe,  ConciL  tom.  yii,  and  in  Sirmond's  edition  ofthe 
works  of  Hincmar  of  Rheims  (q.  v.).  See  Ciarkę,  Stuy 
cession  of  SacredUltraiure^  yoL ii ;  Cellot,  Vie  d^ Hincmar 
de  Laon ;  Biddle,  Uist,  ofthe  Papacy,  ii,  24-27 ;  Neander, 
Church  I  list.  iii,  364;  Wetzer  und  Welte,  Kirchen'Lex, 
y,  208 ;  Illgen,  ZeUsch.f.  d,  HisL  TheoL  1858,  p.  227. 

Hinomar,  archbishop  of  Rheims,  one  of  the  most 
leamed  diyines  of  hia  age,  was  bom  about  A.D.  809,  of 


HIND 


260 


HINDUISM 


L 


a  noble  familj,  related  to  the  connts  of  Touloiue,  and 
was  educated  in  the  Monasteiy  of  St  Denys,  near  Paria. 
After  finishing  his  studies  be  was  summoned  to  the 
court  of  Louis  le  Debonnaire,  to  whom  he  faithfuUy  ad- 
bered,  and  who  employed  him,  after  his  restoration,  in 
settling  the  eodesiastical  affain  of  the  empire;  after 
this  he  retired  to  his  nionastery,  whence  he  was  again 
summoned  ioto  pnblic  life  by  being  chosen  archbishop 
of  Kheims,  A.D.  84&  On  the  aocession  of  Lotbaire, 
attempt  was  madę  to  depose  him  from  bis  see,  wlthout 
sucoess.  He  was  a  zealous  supporter  of  the  ńghts  of  the 
Gallican  Church.  In  847  the  controveray  with  Gotto> 
chalk  (Godeschalcus)  (q.  y.)  about  predestination  arose, 
and  when  the  case  of  Gottschalk  came  before  him,  he 
drove  it  on  with  too  great  beat,  and  Gotteschalk  by  his 
means  was  condemned  and  punisbed  with  much  and 
unjust  seyerity.  One  of  the  most  important  eyents  in 
Hincmar's  life  was  his  controyersy  in  862  with  pope 
Kicholas  I,  one  of  the  most  leamed  men  of  the  Roman 
Catholic  Church.  Bothadius,  bishop  of  Soissons,  and 
suffiragan  of  Hincmar,  deposed  a  priest  of  his  diocese, 
who  appealed  to  Hincmar  as  metropolitan,  and  was  or- 
dered  by  him  to  be  restoied  to  office.  Botbadius,  who 
resisted  tbis  order,  was,  in  oonsequence,  condemned  and 
excommunicated  by  the  archbishop.  He  appealed  to 
the  pope,  who  at  once  ordered  Hincmar  to  restore  Ro- 
thadius,  or  to  appear  at  Romę  either  in  person  or  by  hb 
lepresentatiye,  to  yindicate  the  sentence.  He  sent  a 
legate  to  Romę,  but  refuaed  to  restore  the  deposed  bish- 
op ;  whereupon  Kicholas  annulled  the  sentence,  and  re- 
quired  that  the  cause  should  haye  another  hearing,  and 
this  time  in  Romę.  Hincmar,  after  some  demurrd,  was 
forced  to  acquiesoe.  The  cause  of  Rothadius  was  re- 
examined,  and  he  was  aoquitted  and  restored  to  his  see. 
But  perbaps  morę  bistorically  interesting  is  Hincmar*s 
opposition  to  the  temporal  power  of  the  medi«yal  papacy. 
See  Papacy.  Under  the  successor  of  Nicholas,  Adrian 
n,  the  succession  to  the  soyereignty  of  Lorraine  on  the 
death  of  king  Lothaire  was  que8tioned ;  the  pope  fayor- 
ed  the  pretensions  of  the  emperor  Louis  in  opposition  to 
those  of  Charles  the  Bold  of  France.  Adrian  addressed 
a  mandate  to  the  subjects  of  Charles  and  to  the  nobles 
of  Lorraine,  accompanied  by  a  menace  of  the  censure 
of  the  Church.  To  tbis  Hincmar  offered  a  firm  and 
penoBtent  opposition.  He  was  equally  firm,  ten  yeais 
later,  in  resisting  the  undue  exten8ion  of  the  royal  pre- 
rogatiye  in  ecdesiastical  alTairs.  Louis  III,  in  opposi- 
tion to  the  judgment  of  the  Council  of  Yienne,  wished  to 
bestow  upon  his  fayorite,  Odoacer,  the  see  of  Beauyais; 
but  Hincmar  boldly  remonstrated,  and  fearlessly  de- 
nounced  the  attempt  as  an  unjustifiable  usurpation. 
He  died  AD.  882.  His  works  consist  chiefly  of  Lełten 
about  local  ecdesiastical  affairs,  and  his  treatise  De  Prce- 
destmatione  Dei  et  libero  arhUrio,  and  smali  tracts  on 
discipline.  A  former  treatise  of  his,  De  PradesU,  is  loet. 
In  the  controyersy  with  Gottschalk  he  maintained  that 
**God  wills  the  salyaUon  of  all  men;  tliat  some  will  be 
sayed  through  the  gift  of  diyine  grace ;  that  others  are 
lost,  owing  to  their  demerit;  Christ  suffered  for  all; 
whoeyer  does  not  appropriate  these  sufferings  has  him- 
self  to  blame."  All  his  remains  are  to  be  found  in  the 
careful  edition  of  his  works  edited  by  Sirmond,  Opera, 
duos  in  tomos  digesta^  etc  (Paiis,  1645, 2  yols.  foL).  See 
Noorden,  Hinkmary  Erzbisdtjof  r.  Rheimś  (Bonn,  1863) ; 
Caye,  HisL  Litt. ;  Mosbeiro,  CA,  Hittory,  cent.  ix,  pt,  ii, 
eh.  ii,  n.  52 ;  Hagenbach,  Hisł,  ofDodrines,  ii,  50 ;  flodo- 

1  ard,  EcdesicB  Remenńa  Hist, ;  Gallia  Christiana^  ix,  89 ; 

\  Ilitt,  liitir,  de  la  France,  y,  544  Bq. ;  Hoefer,  N<mv,  Biog, 
Górale,  xxiy,  706  sq. ;  Neander,  Hittory  ofDogmae,  ii, 
464;  Riddle,  History  of  the  Papacy,  ii;  Milman,  Lat, 
ChriatiatUty,  iii,  51  et  al ;  iy,  84 ;  Illgen,  Zeitsch,/.  d,  Hist, 
Theol.  1859,  p.  478 ;  Hefele  (Rom.  Cath.)  in  Wetser  u. 
Welte^  Kirchen-Lerikon,  y,  208. 

Hind  (nb^K,  (^alah%  Gen.  xUx,  21 ;  2  Sam.  xxii, 
84 ;  Job  xxxiy,  1 ;  Psa.  xyiii,  83 ;  xxix,  9 ;  Cant  ii,  7 ; 
iii,  5;  Hab.  iii,  19;  or  rij«,  aye^leth,  Proy.  v,  19;  Jer. 


Female  Deer. 


xiy,  6;  "Aijaleth,"  Psa.  xxii,  tiUe),  the  female  of  tbe 
hart  or  stag,  *'doe"  being  the  female  of  tbe  tallow-deec, 
and ''  roe"  being  sometimes  used  for  that  of  the  roebuck. 
All  the  females  of  the  Cerridee,  with  the  excepŁion  of 
the  reindeer,  are  homless.  See  Dkbr.  The  hind  is  tx^ 
ąuently  noticed  in  the  poetical  parts  of  Scripture  as  esn- 
blematic  of  actiyity  (Gen.  xlix,  21;  2  Sam.  xxii,  84; 
Psa.  xyiii,  83 ;  Hab.  iii,  19),  gentleness  (Proy.  y,  19),  fem- 
inine  modesty  (Cant  ii,  7 ;  iii,  5),  eameat  longing  (IVa. 
xlii,  1),  and  matemal  affection  (Jer.  xiy,  6).  Its  aby- 
ness  and  remoteness  firom  the  haunts  of  men  are  alao 
noticed  (Job  xxxix,  1),  and  its  timidity,  causing  it  to 
cast  its  yonng  at  the  sound  of  thnnder  (Psa.  xxix,  9). 
The  conclusion  which  some  haye  diawn  from  the  paa- 
sagę  last  ąuoted,  that  the  hind  prodnces  ber  young  writh 
great  difBculty,  is  not,  in  reality,  dedudble  from  tJie 
words,  and  is  expre8sly  contradicted  by  Job  xxxi^  3. 
It  may  be  remarked  on  Pba.  2mii,  83,  and  Hah.  iii,  19, 
where  the  Lord  is  said  to  cause  the  feet  to  stand  fiim 
like  those  of  a  hind  on  high  places,  that  tbis  repiesenta- 
tion  is  in  perfect  harmony  with  the  habits  of  mountain 
stags;  but  the  yersion  of  Proy.  y,  19, "  Let  the  wife  of 
thy  bosom  be  as  the  bdoyed  hind  and  fayorite  roe," 
seems  to  indicate  that  here  the  words  aie  generalized  ao 
as  to  indude  under  roe  monogamous  q>ecies  of  ante- 
lopes,  whose  aflTections  and  consortship  are  permanent 
and  strong ;  for  stags  are  polygamousL  The  Sept  reada 
tlb'^^  in  Gen.  xlix,  21,  rendering  it  <nt\fxoc  avufu»a^^ 
"a  luxuriant  terebinth,** an  emendation  adopted  by  Bo- 
chart  Lowth  bas  proposed  a  similar  change  in  Pbb. 
xxix,  but  in  neither  case  can  the  emendation  be  aooepu 
ed.  Napbtali  yerified  the  comparison  of  himself  to  a 
"graoeful  or  tali  hind"  by  the  eyents  recorded  in  Jndg^ 
iy,  6-9 ;  y,  18.  The  inscription  of  PSa.  xxii,  **  the  hind 
of  the  moming,**  probably  rcfcrs  to  a  tune  of  that  name. 
— Kitto;  Smith.     See  Aijeleth. 

Hłndoatan.    See  I>-dia. 

Hlndw,  Samuel,  bishop  of  Norwich,  was  bom  aboni 
1798,  on  the  isle  of  Baibadoes.  At  an  eaily  age  he  was 
sent  to  England,  and  educated  at  Oxford.  In  1822  ho 
took  orders  in  the  Church  of  England,  and  in  1849  he 
was  appointed  bishop  of  Norwich.  Later,  he  was  madę 
yioe  prindpal  of  St  Alban's  Hall,  Oxford.  He  died  in 
1870.  Bishop  Hinds  wrote  The  three  Tempks  of  the 
true  Godcontrasted  (1880 ;  Sd  edit  1857, 8yo)  i^In^ńra-^ 
tion  andAułhority  ofScript,  (1831,  Syo)  i^Script,  and 
the  Authorized  Versum  of  ScĄ)L  (1853, 12mo)  i—Caie- 
chises  Mamai  (2d  ed.  1855, 12mo)  i^Hist.  of  Christian 
iły  (1829, 1846, 1850, 1853,  2  yols.  8yo),  which  was  origw 
inally  contiibuted  to  the  Eneydop.  MetropoKtamu — ^Al- 
libone.  Diet,  ofBrUish  and  A  merican  A  ntkors,  i,  850 ;  Ya- 
pereau,  Diet,  des  CorUcmporams,  p.  884.    ( J.  H.  W.) 

Hinduiam  or  Hindu  religion,  the  name  of  the 
yariety  of  creeds  deriyed  from  Brahmanic  eources.  It  is 
the  religion  of  the  East,  professed,  in  some  fonu  or  an- 
other, l^  nearly  half  of  the  human  lace  (see  Max  Mallo', 
Chips  from  a  German  Workskop,  i,  ^),  espedatty  if 


HIKDUISM 


261 


HINDUISM 


BDddbiflin  (q.v.)  is  indaded,  or  eonsłdered  as  a  derel- 
•pme&t  of  tu  The  different  secta  into  wbich  Łhe  Hin- 
dns  (on  tlie  origin  of  the  Hindna,  and  their  gradual 
OGCopadan  of  India,  aee  Laasen,  Ind.  AUerih,  i,  511  8q. ; 
Muller,  ^<CMacie<2^Zan^w^^p.  240  0q.;  Donaldion,  JVeio 
CnOyłus,  p,  118, 119, 2d  ed. ;  Haidwick,  Chriet  cmd  atker 
Ma/ten,  i,  171, 172, 2d  ed.)  are  divided  at  piesent  aie 
of  modem  origin,  and  the  sjrstem  of  theology  taught  by 
them  dilTen  rery  much  Ihiin  the  religion  of  their  fore- 
lathenL 

Ł  Hialorjf. — ^For  brevity*8  sake,  we  will  divide  Hindu- 
istt  into  thzee  greatperiodąthe  Vedic,£pic,  and  Puran- 
ic.  OorknowledgeofthefinŁiadeńYedfrońaŁhesacred 
books  of  the  Hindna,  the  YedA  (q.  v.) ;  that  of  the  sec- 
ond  from  the  epie  poem  RimAyana,  and  the  great  epos 
MababhanU;  and  that  of  the  third  chieily  from  tbe 
mythological  worka,  the  Pnranas  and  Tantns. 

1.  Tke  Vtdic  PertodU- Aooording  to  the  hjnnns  of  the 
Teda,  the  Hindos  of  that  period  regarded  the  elementa 
of  natore  as  heavenly  behigs,  and  woishipped  and  re- 
rered  them  as  euch.  Among  these  were  ftrst  in  order 
Agni,  the  fire  of  the  sim  and  lightning;  /iMfra,  the 
bffi^t,  doudlcas  firmament;  the  MarutSy  or  winds; 
Surfa,  the  snn ;  UsAat,  the  dawn ;  and  yarioos  kindied 
manifestatiooB  of  the  luminoos  bodies,  and  naturę  in 
gcnenL  ''They  are  supplicated  to  confer  temporal 
blennga  npon  the  worahipper,  riches,  life,  posterity — 
the  ahortsighted  yanities  of  haman  desire,  which  con- 
itidited  the  snm  of  heathen  pmyer  in  all  heatben  ooun* 
tńes"  (WiboD,  Leetura,  p.  9, 10).  The  great  oontrast 
in  this  particular  between  heathen  and  Christian  wor- 
shippen  haa  been  weU  oommented  apon  by  Stuhr  {Re- 
UgHu-SyMiene  d,  heidmtchen  YdUoer  d,  OrienU,  Einleit 
p.  xii)L  Indeed,  it  is  a  fact  worthy  the  noUce  of  philos- 
opheis  and  of  scholars  in  oompanitive  science  of  religion 
that  only  a  reiy  smali  firaction  of  heathen  prmyers  are 
offered  for  spiritnal  or  morał  benefits  (compare  Greuzer, 
SfMboSk,  iv,  162;  Hardwick,  Chriet  and  ołJker  Mastenj 
i,  181, 182)^  ^  We  prodaim  eageiiy,  Maruti,  your  an- 
dent  gieatness,  for  the  sake  of  indncing  your  prompt 
appeaiance,  aa  the  indication  of  (the  approach  of )  the 
■howercr  of  benefits;"  or,  ''OiTer  your  nutritious  yiands 
to  the  great  hero  (^Indrd),  who  is  pleaaed  by  praise,  and 
to  Yitkrnu  (one  of  the  forma  of  the  sun),  the  two  invin- 
dble  deities  who  ride  upon  the  radiant  summit  of  the 
ckNida  §»  upon  a  well«>tnuned  steed.  Indra  and  Ytiknu, 
the  dewat  wonhippęr  glorifies  the  radiant  approach  of 
yoa  two  who  are  the  granters  of  desires,  and  who  be- 
stow  npon  the  mortal  who  worships  you  an  immediate- 
ly  leceiTabłe  (reward),  throogh  the  distribution  of  that 
flre  which  ia  the  acatterer  (of  desired  bteasings)."  Suoh 
ia  the  stnun  in  which  the  Hindu  of  that  period  ad- 
dresaed  his  gods.  Ethical  constderations  are  foreign 
to  theae  religioua  outbursts  of  the  mind.  Sin  and 
eril,  indeed,  are  ofUn  adrerted  to,  and  the  gods  are 
piaiaed  beeanse  they  destroy  sinners  and  evil-doerB; 
but  one  would  err  in  amociating  with  these  words  our 
notioos  of  sin  or  wrong*  A  sinner,  in  these  hymns,  is 
a  man  who  does  not  address  praises  to  those  elementary 
deitiea,  or  who  does  not  gratify  them  with  the  oUations 
thęy  reoeiTO  at  the  banda  of  the  believer.  He  is  the 
foe,  the  robber,  the  dcmon—in  short,  the  borderer  in- 
festing  the  terńtory  of  the  "  pious"  man,  who,  in  his 
tnm,  injores  and  kiUa,  but,  in  adoring  Agni,  Indra,  and 
their  kin,  is  satiafied  that  he  can  eommit  no  evil  act. 

Keither  did  the  Hindu  in  that  early  period  so  fre- 
ąoently  erince  his  oonsciousness  of  imperfection  by  a 
display  of  animal  aacrifioes.  The  Yeda  contains  not  a 
sngle  ex8mple  of  human  victims  fbr  sacriflce.  It  in- 
foma  ns  that  by  fu  the  most  oommon  offering  waa  the 
formoating  Joice  of  the  aoma  (q.  v.)  or  moon  plant, 
which,  ezpraased  and  fermented,  madę  an  exhilatttlng 
and  inebriatingbereiage,  and  for  this  reason,mostpvob- 
ably,  was  olBued  to  the  gods  to  increase  their  beneficial 
potency.  In  this  tbe  Hindu  afterwards  beheM  a  rital 
aap  whereby  the  uniyezse  itself  is  madę  productive ;  I 
bnty  in  bri^ging  soch  an  oUaiaDn,  it  is  moro  Ukely  j 


that  he  was  actuated  by  the  hope  of  gratifying  the  an- 
imal wants  of  his  divinity  rather  than  by  the  idea  of 
deepening  his  own  sense  of  guilt,  or  by  a  desire  to  com- 
pensate  for  his  own  demerifc  (compare  Hardwick,  i,  188). 
Besides  this,  another  oblation,  mentioned  as  agreeable 
to  the  gods,  and  Ukely  to  belong  to  this  esrly  period  of 
Veda  worship,  was  darified  butter,  poured  upon  the  fire. 
There  is,  however,  a  cUws  of  hymns  in  the  Yeda  in  which 
<<this  distinctive  utteranoe  of  feeting  makes  room  for 
the  Unguage  of  speculation,"  in  which  *'the  allegories 
of  poetty  yield  to  the  mysticism  of  the  reflecting  mind, 
and  the  mysteriee  of  naturę  becoming  morę  keenly  felt, 
the  cirde  of  bdngs  which  overawe  the  popukr  mind 
beoomea  enlarged"  (Chambers,  Fncydopadia^  i,  541). 
The  objects  by  which  Indra,  Agni,  and  the  other  deities 
are  propitiated  now  become  g^s.  Thus,  for  esample, 
one  whole  section  of  the  Rig-Yeda,  the  prindpal  part 
of  the  Yeda  (q.  v.),  is  addressed  to  Soma  (see  above). 
StiU  morę  prominent  is  the  deification  of  Soma  in  the 
S4ma.Yeda  (comp.  Hardwick,  Chritt,  i,  178, 179;  Mul- 
ler, Ckipsj  i,  176). 

But  in  the  worship  of  theae  powers  of  natuie  there  is 
an  indination,  at  least,  if  not  a  real  desire,  to  pay  bom- 
age  to  one  higher  being  that  should  prove  the  Oeator 
of  all  perishable  and  changeable  beings.  There  ensued, 
so  to  Bpeak,  a  struggle  to  reconcile  the  worship  of  the 
dementary  powers  with  the  idea  of  one  supremę  being, 
or  to  emandpate  the  inquiry  into  the  prindple  of  crea- 
tion  from  the  dementary  rdigion  as  found  in  the  oldest 
portion  of  Yedic  poetry.  The  former  of  these  efforts  is 
apparent  in  the  Br&hmana  of  the  Yeda,  the  latter  in  the 
Upanishad  (q.  v.).  In  the  Br&hmanas — a  second  and 
later  dass  of  Yedic  hymns — ^we  see  the  simple  and  prim- 
itiye  worship  become  complex  and  artifidiL  A  spedal 
feature  is  '*  the  tendency  to  determining  the  rank  of  the 
gods,  and,  as  a  conscquenoe,  to  giving  |Mominence  to  one 
spedal  god  amongst  the  rest ;  whereaa  in  the  old  Yedic 
poetiy,  though  we  may  discover  a  predilection  of  the 
poets  to  bestow  mors  praise,  for  instance,  on  Indra  and 
Agni  than  on  other  gods,  yet  we  find  no  intention  on 
thdr  part  to  raise  any  of  them  to  a  supremę  rank. 
Thus,  in  some  Br&hmanas,  Indra,  the  god  of  the  firma- 
ment, Łb  endowed  with  the  dignity  of  a  ruler  of  the  gods ; 
in  otherB,  the  «tm  recdyes  the  attributes  of  snperiority. 
This  is  no  real  solution  of  the  momentous  problem  hint- 
ed  at  in  some  Yedic  hymns,  but  it  is  a  semblance  of  it 
There  the  poet  asks  *  whence  this  raried  world  arose" — 
here  tbe  priest  answers  that  <one  god  is  morę  elevated 
than  the  rest  ;*  and  he  is  satisfied  with  regulating  the 
detail  of  the  Soma  and  animal  sacriflce  acoording  to  the 
rank  which  he  assigns  to  his  deities.  A  red  answer  to 
this  great  question  the  theologians  attempt  who  e^plain 
the  'mysterious  doctrine'  held  in  the  utmost  reyerence 
by  all  Hindus,  and  laid  down  in  the  writings  known 
uuder  the  name  of  UpanUhads,  which  relate  not  only 
to  the  prooess  of  creation,  but  to  the  naturę  of  a  su- 
premę being,  and  its  relation  to  the  human  sonl.  In 
the  Upanishads,  Agni,  Indra,  Yayu,  and  the  other  ddties 
of  the  Yedic  hymns,  become  symbols  to  assist  the  mind 
in  its  attempt  to  understand  the  true  naturę  of  one  ab- 
sohite  being,  and  the  manner  in  which  it  manifests  it- 
sdf  in  its  worldly  form.  The  human  soid  itself  is  of 
the  same  naturę  as  this  supremę  or  great  soul :  its  ulti- 
mate  destination  is  that  of  becoming  reunited  with  the 
supremę  soul,  and  the  means  of  attaining  that  end  is  not 
the  performance  of  sacriiłdal  rites,  but  tbe  comprehen- 
sion  of  its  own  sdf  and  of  the  great  souL  The  doctrine 
which  at  a  later  period  became  the  foundation  of  the 
creed  of  the  educated— the  doctrine  that  the  supremę 
soul,  or  Brahm,  is  the  only  realit}',  and  that  the  world 
has  a  claim  to  notico  only  in  so  far  as  it  emanated 
from  this  bdng,  is  aiready  clearly  laid  down  in  these 
Upanishads,  though  the  langoage  in  which  it  is  ex- 
prossed  still  adapts  itself  to  the  legendary  and  allegor- 
ieal  style  that  characterizes  the  Br&hmanic  portion  of 
the  Yedas.  7*A«  Upanishads  became  thus  the  hasis  ofthe 
eidiffhtened/aiUk  oflmUa,    They  are  not  a  system  of 


HINDUISM 


262 


HINDUISM 


philoiophy,  but  thęy  contain  all  the  gemis  whenoe  the 
ihree  great  systems  of  Hindu  philociophy  uom;  and 
like  the  latter,  while  reyealing  the  struggle  of  the  Hindu 
mind  to  reach  the  oompreheiiBion  of  one  supremę  being, 
they  advance  sufficiently  far  to  expre88  their  belief  in 
such  a  being,  but  at  the  same  time  acknowledge  the  in- 
abili(y  of  the  human  mind  to  omnprehend  ita  eaaence*' 
(Chambers,  ^ncycZopoiia).    See  Upanishad. 

The  Yeda  alao  teachee  the  two  ideas  so  oontradictoiy 
to  the  human  understanding,  and  yet  ao  easily  recon- 
ciled  in  erery  human  heart :  God  has  eetablished  the 
eteznal  lawa  of  ńght  and  wrong ;  he  puniahea  sin  and  re- 
warda  yirtue;  and  yet  the  aame  God  ia  willing  to  for- 
giye ;  juat,  yet  mercdful ;  a  judge,  and  yet  a  father  (Mul- 
ler, i,  88).  But  there  ia  no  tracę,  at  leaat  not  in  the 
Yeda,  of  metempeychoaia,  which  has  generally  been  sup- 
poeed  to  be  a  diatinguiahing  feature  of  the  Indian  relig- 
ion,  eapedally  of  the  Yedic  period.  "  Inatead  of  thia, 
-we  find  what  is  really  the  ńne  qua  mm  of  all  leal  relig- 
ion,  a  belief  in  immortality,  and  in  peraonal  immortality 
....  paaaageawherein  immortality  of  the  aou],peiBonal 
immortality,  and  peraonal  lesponaibility  ailer  death  are 
clearly  prodaimed"  (Muller,  i,  45).  Frofeasor  Roth  (Jout^ 
nal  of  tke  German  Orienial  8oaety,  iv,  427)  aaya  that 
we  find  in  the  Yeda  '^beautiful  conceptiona  of  an  im- 
mortality expreased  in  nnadonied  language  with  child- 
Uke  couriction.  If  it  were  neceaaary,  we  might  find 
here  the  most  powerful  weapona  againat  the  view  which 
haa  lately  been  revived  and  prodaimed  aa  new,  that  Per- 
aia  waa  the  only  birthplaoe  of  the  idea  of  immortality, 
and  that  even  the  nationa  of  Europę  had  derired  it  from 
that  ąuarter— aa  if  the  leligioua  apirit  of  every  gifted 
race  waa  not  able  to  airive  at  it  by  ita  own  atrength." 
We  find  also  in  the  Yeda  rague  alluaiona  to  a  place  of 
puniahment  for  the  wicked.  "In  one  yerse  it  ia  aaid 
that  the  dead  are  rewarded  for  their  good  deeda ;  that 
they  leave  or  cast  off  all  eyil,  and,  glorified,  take  their  new 
bodiea.  .  .  .  A  pit  ia  meutioned  into  which  the  lawleaa 
are  aaid  to  be  huried  down,  and  into  which  Indra  caata 
thoae  who  offer  no  aacrificea. ...  In  one  paaaage  we  read 
that  *■  those  who  break  the  ooromandmenta  of  Yaruna, 
and  who  apeak  liea,  are  bom  for  that  deep  place'  "^  (Mul- 
ler, i,  47;  comp.  Dr.  Muir,  rama,  in  the  Journal  ofthe 
Royal  Asiaiic  Society,  p.  10). 

.  2. "  The  Ępic  period  of  Hinduiam  ia  marked  by  a  aimi- 
lar  deyelopment  ofthe  aame  cieeda,  the  generał  featurea 
of  which  we  haye  traoed  in  the  Yedic  writinga.  The  pop- 
ular creed  atriyea  to  find  a  centrę  round  which  to  group 
ita  imaginaiy  goda,  whereaa  the  philoaophical  creed 
finds  ita  expre88ion  in  the  gzoundworka  of  the  Sónkhfa, 
Ny6»fa,  and  Yedónta  ayatema  of  philoeophy.  In  the  for- 
mer,  we  find  two  goda  in  particular  who  are  riaing  to 
the  highest  rank,Yiahnu  and  Siya;  for  aa  to  Brahman 
(Łhe  maaculiue  form  of  Brahm),  though  he  waa  looked 
upon  now  and  then  as  superior  to  both,  he  gradually 
diaappears,  and  becomea  merged  into  the  philoaophical 
Brahma  (the  neuter  form  of  the  aame  word),  which  ia  a 
further  eyolution  of  the  great  aoul  of  the  llpanishada. 
In  the  R&móyana,  the  auperiority  of  Yiahnu  ia  admitted 
without  diapute;  in  the  great  epos,  the  Mahabhdraia^ 
howeyer,  which,  unlike  the  former  epoa,  ia  the  product  of 
auccesaiye  agea,  there  ia  an  iq)parent  riyalry  between  the 
daima  of  Ylshnu  and  Siya  to  occupy  the  higheat  rank 
in  the  pantheon;  but  Sanacrit  philology  will  firat  haye 
to  unrayd  the  cłuonological  poaition  of  the  yaiioua  por- 
tiona  of  thia  work,  to  lay  bare  ita  gioundwork,  and  to 
ahow  the  gradual  additiona  it  receiyed,  before  it  will  be 
able  to  determiiie  the  aucceaaiye  formation  ofthe  legenda 
which  are  the  baais  of  claaaical  Uindu  my thok>gy.  Yet 
ao  much  aeema  to  be  dear  eyen  already,  that  there  ia  a 
predilection  during  thia  £pic  period  for  the  aupremacy 
of  Yishnn,  and  that  the  policy  of  incorporating  rether 
than  combating  antagoniatic  creeda  led  roore  to  a  quiet 
admiasion  than  to  a  waim  support  of  Siya'8  daima  to 
the  highest  rank.**  For  the  character  of  theae  goda,  and 
their  rdadon  to  the  Yedic  and  the  £pic  period,  aee  he- 
lów. "  We  will  point,  howerer,  to  one  remarkable  mytb, 


aa  it  win  iUnatiate  the  altered  poaition  ofthe  godadnf* 
ing  the  Epic  period.  In  the  Yedic  hymna,  the  inmur* 
tality  of  the  goda  ia  neyer  matter  of  doubt;  moet  of  tha 
elementary  beinga  are  inyoked  and  deacribed  aa  e?cr- 
laating,  aa  liaUe  ndther  to  decay  nor  death.  The  offe^ 
inga  they  receiye  may  add  to  their  comfort  and  stnngth ; 
they  may  inyigorate  them,  but  it  ia  nowhere  atated  that 
they  are  indispenaable  for  their  eziatenoe.  It  ia,  on  the 
contrary,  the  pious  aacrificer  himadf  who,  thtough  his 
offeringa,  aecures  to  himadf  long  life,  and,  aa  it  ia  aome- 
timea  h3rperbolicaUy  called,  immortality.  The  aame  no- 
tion  alao  pręyaila  throughout  the  oMeat  Briihmanaa  It 
\b  only  in  the  lateat  work  of  thia  daaa,  the  Satapalha- 
Brafmanoj  and  more  eapecially  in  the  Epic  poema,  that 
we  find  the  inferior  goda  aa  mortal  in  the  beg^nning,  and 
as  becoming  immortal  throngh  ezterior  agency.  In  the 
SatapatharBróhmamŁ,  the  jnioe  of  the  soma' plant,  of* 
fered  by  the  worahipper,  or  at  another  time  darified  but- 
ter,  or  eyen  animal  aacrificea,  impart  to  them  thia  im- 
mortality. At  the  Epic  period,  Yishnu  teaches  them 
how  to  obtain  the  Amriiay  or  beirerage  of  immortality, 
without  which  they  would  go  to  deatruction ;  and  thit 
epic  Amriia  itaelf  ia  merdy  a  oomponnd,  increaaed  by 
imagination,  of  the  yarioua  aubstancea  which  in  the  Ye- 
dic wiitinga  are  called  or  likened  to  A mrita,  L  e. a'flab- 
atance  that  freea  from  death.'  It  ia  obyiooa,  theiefoie, 
that  goda  like  theae  could  not  atrike  root  in  the  religioos 
mind  of  the  nation.  We  muat  look  upon  them  more  ai 
the  goda  of  poetry  than  of  reai  life;  nor  do  we  find  that 
they  enjoyed  any  of  the  worahip  which  waa  allotted  to 
the  two  prindpal  goda,  Yiahnu  and  Siya." 

**  The  philoaophical  creed  of  thia  period  adda  little  to 
the  fundameutal  notiona  contained  in  the  Upanishadą 
but  it  freea  itaelf  from  the  lęgendazy  droes  which  ttiU 
imparts  to  those  worka  a  deep  tinge  of  myadciam.  On 
the  other  hand,  it  concdyea  and  deyelopa  the  notioo 
that  the  union  of  the  indiyidnal  aoul  with  the  aupreme 
apirit  may  be  aided  by  penancea,  auch  aa  peculiar  modcs 
of  breathing,  particular  poaturea,  protracted  faating,  and 
the  like ;  in  ahort^  by  thoae  practicea  which  are  sjratnn- 
atized  by  the  Yoga  doctrine.  The  moat  remarkaUa 
Epic  woriE  which  inculcatea  thia  doctrine  ia  the  cele- 
brated  poem  Bhagaoadgiid,  which  haa  been  wnmgly 
conaidered  by  European  writera  aa  a  pure  S&nkhya  work, 
whereaa  Scuikara,  the  great  Hindu  theologian,  who 
commented  on  it,  and  other  natiye  oommentaton  after 
him,  haye  proyed  that  it  ia  founded  on  the  Yoga  belief. 
The  doctrine  of  the  reunion  of  the  mdiyidoal  aoul  with 
the  aupreme  aoul  waa  neoeaaarily  founded  on  the  aa- 
aumption  that  the  former  must  haye  beoome  Iree  from 
all  guilt  affecting  ita  purity  before  it  can  be  remerged 
into  the  aouioe  whence  it  proceeded;  and  sińce  one  hu- 
man life  Lb  appaiently  too  ahort  for  enabling  the  eonl  to 
attain  ita  accompliahment,  the  Hindu  mind  oondoded 
that  the  aoul,  after  the  death  of  ita  temporaiy  owncr, 
had  to  be  bom  again,  in  order  to  oomplete  the  woik  it 
had  lefl  undone  in  ita  preyioua  exiatence,  and  that  it 
muat  aubmit  to  the  aame  fate  until  ita  task  b  fulAlled. 
Thia  ia  the  doctrine  of  metemp$ycho*i*j  which,  in  the  ab- 
sence  of  a  belief  in  grace,  is  a  logical  consequence  of  a 
aystem  that  holda  the  human  aoul  to  be  of  the  aame  na- 
turo aa  that  of  an  abaolute  God."  Thia  doctrine,  aa  we 
haye  already  atated,  ia  fordgn  to  the  Yedic  period.  It 
ia  found  in  aome  of  the  Upaniahada,  but  ita  fantaatical 
deydopment  belonga  deddedly  to  the  Epic  Ume,  where 
it  peryadea  the  legenda,  and  aifecta  the  aodal  life  of  the 
nation.     See  Metiempsyghosis;  CADAiJi,in,8. 

8.  ^*The  Purame  period  of  Hinduiam  ia  the  period  of 
ita  decline,  ao  far  aa  the  popular  creed  ia  conoemed.  Ita 
pantheon  is  nominally  the  aame  aa  that  of  the  Epic  pe- 
riod. The  triada  of  prindpal  Hindu  goda,  Bnhma, 
Yiahnu,  and  Siya,  remain  adll  at  the  head  of  ita  imag- 
inary  goda;  but  whereaa  the  Epic  time  ia  generally 
characterized  by  a  friendly  harmony  between  the  high- 
ei  occupanta  of  the  diyine  apherea,  the  Purftnic  penod 
showB  diacord  and  deatruction.  The  popular  adoration 
haa  tumed  away  firam  Bnhma  to  Yiahiia  aodSira,  wha 


HINDUISM 


268 


HINDUISM 


1  to  contend  witih  each  other  for  the  highest 
nnk  in  the  miiids  of  their  wonhippen.  The  elementaiy 
principle  which  originally  inhered  in  these  deities  is  thus 
completely  łoet  ńght  of  by  the  foUowen  of  the  Puranas. 
The  legenda  of  the  £pic  poems  leUting  to  theee  gods 
beooni  j  amplified  and  distoited,  according  to  the  sectap- 
lian  tendendes  of  the  masses;  and  the  divine  element 
whkh  atiU  disdngiuBhes  these  goda  in  the  Ramayana 
and  Mah&bhaiBta  ia  now  morę  and  morę  mtxed  up  with 
woiidly  conoems  and  intenwcted  by  historical  erents, 
diafignied  in  their  tum  to  suit  individual  interests.  Of 
tńe  ideas  impUed  by  the  Yedic  ritea,  scarcely  a  tracę  is 
TJaiUe  in  the  Par&nas  and  Tantraa,  which  are  the  text* 
books  of  this  creed.  In  short,  the  unbridled  imagina- 
tioa  which  per^adea  theae  worka  ia  neither  pleasing 
fiom  a  poetióU,  nor  elevating  from  a  philosophical  point 
of  Tiew.  Some  Poranaa,  it  ia  true — for  inatance,  the 
StkogeBOiOa — form  in  aome  aenae  an  exception  to  thia 
abenation  of  original  Hinduiam ;  but  they  are  a  com- 
ptoraiae  between  the  popular  and  the  Ved4nta  creedi 
which  ia  henceforward  chiefly  the  creed  of  Uie  edncated 
and  intełligent.  They  do  not  affect  the  woiahip  of  the 
manes  aa  practiaed  by  the  yaiiocia  aecta;  and  thia  wor- 
ahip  itaelf,  whether  hannleaa,  as  with  the  wofshippera 
of  Yiahnn,  or  offenai^e,  aa  with  the  adorers  of  Siva  and 
hia  wife  Dugft,  is  but  an  empty  ceremoniał,  which, 
here  and  thore,  may  remind  one  of  the  aymbolical  wor- 
diip  of  the  Yedic  Uindu,  but,  aa  a  whole,  haa  no  eon- 
nection  whaterer  with  the  Yedic  acripturea,  on  which 
it  aflfecta  to  reat.  It  ia  thia  creed  which,  with  further 
deteriorationa,  canaed  by  the  Upae  of  centuriea,  ia  still 
the  main  religion  of  the  maaaes  in  India.  The  opinion 
theae  enteitain,  that  it  \&  countenanced  by  the  ritnal, 
aa  w^  aa  by  the  theological  portion  of  the  Yeda,  ia  the 
ledeeming  feature  of  their  bdief ;  for,  aa  nothing  ia  ea- 
ater  than  to  diaabuae  their  mind  on  thia  acore  by  reviv- 
ing  the  atody  of  their  andent  and  aacred  language,  and 
by  wiaWing  them  to  read  again  their  oldcat  and  most 
aacred  booin,  it  may  be  hoped  that  a  proper  edncaUon 
of  the  people  in  thia  reapecl^  by  leamed  and  enlightenetl 
natirea,  will  remove  many  of  the  exiBting  eirora,  which, 
if  they  oontinued;  muat  ineyitably  lead  to  a  further,  and, 
nUimarely,  total  degeneration  of\he  Hindu  race. 

"The  phikMophical  creed  of  thia  period,  and  the  creed 
which  ia  atill  preaenred  by  the  educated  claaaea,  ia  that 
darived  fimn  the  teneta  of  the  Yedanta  philoaophy.  It 
ia  baaed  on  the  belief  of  one  aupreme  being,  which  im- 
aginatioa  and  apeculation  endearor  to  inyeat  with  all 
the  perfectaona  conceivab]e  by  the  haman  mind,  but  the 
tme  naturę  of  which  ia  nerertheleaa  decUffed  to  be  be- 
Tond  the  reach  of  thought,  and  which,  on  thia  ground, 
ia  defined  aa  not  poaaeaaing  any  of  the  ąualitiea  by  which 
the  hmnan  mind  ia  able  to  comprehend  intellectual  or 
materiał  entity"  (Chambera).     See  Yedanta. 

IŁ  DeUifa^—lt  haa  been  atated  abovG  that  the  origmal 
woiahip  of  the  Hindua  appeara  to  haye  been  addieased 
to  the  elements.  The  heayena,  the  aun,  the  moon,  fire, 
the  air,  the  earth,  and  apirita  are  the  objecta  moet  fre- 
qiicntly  addreaaed.  In  fact,  the  deitiea  inyoked  appear 
to  be  as  nomeroua  aa  the  prayera  addreaaed  to  them. 

''It  would  be  impoaaible  to  give  any  aocount  of  the 
nmnerous  inferior  deitiea,  whoee  number  ia  aaid  to 
amoont  to  330,000,000.  The  moat  important  are  the 
lA)kapaŁas,  that  ia,  'gnardiana  of  the  world,'  who  are 
the  eight  goda  next  in  rank  to  the  Triad :  1.  Indra,  the 
god  of  the  heayena;  2.  Agni,  the  god  of  fbre;  3.  Yama^ 
the  god  of  heli;  4.  SuryOt  the  god  of  the  aon ;  6.  Varu- 
ao,  the  god  of  water;  6.  Purtmoj  the  god  of  the  wind; 
7.  Ktnfera,  the  god  of  wealth ;  S,  Soma^  or  Chandra^  the 
god  of  the  moon.  Kany  other  deiliea  were  afterwaida 
indoded  in  the  list;"  among  them,  GaneM,  god  of  wis- 
dom  and  acience ;  Kama$,  god  of  k>ye ;  Gangot  goddeaa 
of  the  riy er  Gangea ;  Naradtu,  meaaenger  of  the  goda, 
etc  Each  of  the  goda  beaides  haa  his  legał  apouae. 
The  most  important  among  theae  goddeaaea  are  JSarat- 
«a(t,  wife  of  Brahma,  goddeaa  o(  eloqttence,  the  protect- 
or  of  arta  aod  adencea,  and  particolarly  of  mnaic,  where- 


fore  the  yina,  or  lute,  ia  her  attribate;  Sn,  Laktehmi^ 
etc.,  wife  of  Ybhnu,  diapenaer  of  bleasinga.  But  the 
moet  important  of  all  ia  Siva*a  fcmale  partner,  Durga, 
Kalit  or  Calee,  goddeaa  of  eyil  and  destmction,  whoae 
worship  ia  by  far  the  moet  extenaiye.  Aside  from  theae, 
there  ia  yet  a  moltitude  of  inferior  goda,  demigoda,  etc, 
the  principal  of  which  are  the  aeyen  or  ten  JircUunadi' 
kat  or  JlUkit  (seers),  the  moat  important  of  whom  ia 
Dakihaty  with  DiH  and  Aditi  for  wiyea;  from  Diti  come 
the  Daitjfcu  or  A$uraM,  the  damons  (of  deetruction), 
but  firom  Aditi  the  Suras  or  I}evtt8  (i.  e.  gods).  The 
G<mdharvas  are  the  muaiciana  and  dancers  of  heayen; 
the  Aptanuas,  the  heayenly  nympha;  the  Yakshas^ 
the  keepers  of  treaanree  in  the  moimtains ;  the  Hakaha- 
s(u,  the  enemiea  of  mankind  and  of  all  good.  The  earth 
ia,  beaidea,  inhabited  by  a  moltitude  of  eyil  apirita.  The 
exi8tenoe  of  the  three  worlda  (of  the  goda,  the  earth, 
and  the  lower  worid)  ia  not  conaidered  eterńal;  it  ia  to 
be  deatroyed  by  Kala,  the  god  of  time,  who,  in  regaid 
to  this  act,  ia  called  Mahapralaya,  or  the  great  end« 
Some  aitmuds  alao  are  the  objecta  of  religiouB  adoration 
or  fear,  particolarly  the  buU ;  alao  the  anakea,  whoee 
oonnection  with  the  demigoda  brought  forth  the  mon- 
keya,  which  are  the  objecta  of  auperstitioua  dread. 
Among  the  birda  the  Gonada  is  the  moat  honored,  and 
the  Banian  among  treea. 

III.  iMter  JSeds.—The  worship  of  theae  goda,  aa  well 
aa  of  numeroua  othera,  which  waa  once  yery  popular  in 
Hindoatan,  haa  almost  disappeared  in  consequenoe  of 
the  exclusiye  worship  which  is  paid  to  Yiahnu,  Siya, 
Kali,  or  Sakti,  and  a  few  other  deities,  by  the  religious 
secta  of  the  preaent  day.  Each  aect  maintaina  that  the 
god  it  worahipa  unitea  in  hia  person  all  the  attributea  of 
the  ddty.  Few  Brahmina  of  leaming,  howeyer,  will 
acknowledge  themaelyea  to  belong  to  any  of  the  popu- 
lar diyiaiona  of  the  Hindu  faith ;  they  acknowledge  the 
Yedaa,  Puianaa,  and  Tantraa  aa  the  only  orŁhodox  rit* 
ual,  and  regard  all  practicea  not  deriyed  from  theae 
aouTcea  aa  irregular  and  profanc  The  following  is  a 
liat  of  the  prindpal  aecta : 

(1.)  YaitknatKu,  who  worship  Yiahnu,  or,  lather,  J2a« 
ma,  Krithna,  and  other  heroes  connected  with  the  in- 
camation  of  that  deity.  This  sect  is  distinguished 
generally  by  an  abetinence  from  animal  food,  and  by  a 
worship  less  cruel  than  that  of  the  Saiyas  (2).  They 
are  dirided  into  numeroua  sects,  which  often  agree  only 
in  maintaining  that  Yishnu  ia  Brahma,  that  is,  Deity. 
One  of  the  most  important  of  the  Yaishnaya  sects  is  the 
Kcddr  PanŁki$,  founded  by  Kabir  in  the  15th  century. 
Kabir  assailed  the  whole  system  of  idolatrous  worship, 
and  ridicoled  the  leaming  of  the  Pundits  and  the  dcc- 
trinee  of  the  Shastra.  His  doctrines  haye  had  great  in- 
fluence. His  foUowers  are  induded  among  the  Yaish- 
nayaa  becaoae  they  pay  morę  reapect  to  Yiahnu  than  to 
any  other  ddty ;  but  it  ia  no  part  of  their  faith  to  wor- 
ship any  Hindu  deity,  or  to  obeerye  any  of  the  ritea  of 
the  Hindo  religion. 

(2.)  SaiwUj  who  worship  Siya,  and  are  morę  nomer* 
oos  than  any  other  sect.  The  mark  by  which  they  are 
distinguished  is  three  horizontal  lines  on  the  forehead, 
drawn  in  ashes,  obtained  from  the  hearth  on  which  a 
sacred  fire  is  kept;  while  that  of  the  Yaishnayas  con- 
sists  in  peipendicular  lines,  of  which  the  number  differs 
according  to  the  sect  to  which  the  indiyidual  bdongs. 
"  Siyaism  recałls  the  ancient  religion  of  naturę,  and  the 
gross  doaliam  of  Phoenicia"  (Preaaenae,  Religiom  before 
Christ,  p,bS), 

(3.)  aaktoB,  The  Hindu  mythology  haa  penonified 
the  abatract  and  actiye  powera  of  the  didnity,  and  haa 
aacribed  8exes  to  theae  personages.  The  Sakti,  or  ao* 
tiye  power  of  God,  ia  female,  and  is  conaidered  the  eon- 
sort  of  the  abstract  attribute.  The  Saktas,  who  may 
perhaps  be  regarded  as  only  a  subdiyision  ofthe  Saiyas, 
worship  the  Sakti  of  Siya,  and  are  not  yery  numerons, 

(4.)  Sauras,  the  worshippers  of  Sorya,  the  aun, 

(5.)  Ganąpatyat,  the  worshippers  of  Ganesa,  the  god 
of  Yriadouk 


HINDTJISM 


264 


HINDUKM 


The  Saonu  and  6aiiA{>aŁya8  aie  not  yeiy  numerona. 
The  religious  secto  of  India  are  diyided  into  two  classeB, 
which  may  be  calkd  clerical  and  lay.  The  priests  may 
alflo  be  divided  into  two  daases,  the  monaatic  and  secu- 
lar  deigy,  the  majority  belonging  to  the  monasdc  or- 
der, sińce  the  preference  ia  uaually  giyen  by  laymen  to 
teachers  who  lead  an  ascetic  life. 

The  secta  which  have  already  been  eniunerated  pro- 
feaa  to  foUow  the  authority  of  the  Yeda,  but  there  are 
other  sects  which  disarow  ita  authority,  and  are  there- 
fore  regarded  as  forming  no  part  of  the  Hindu  Chnrch. 
The  most  important  of  theae  are  the  Buddhists,  the  Jainas 
(q.  V.),  and  the  Sikhs.  The  Bnddhista  havo  long  siuco 
been  expelled  from  Hindustan,  but  it  ia  evident  that 
they  were  onoe  very  numerons  iu  all  parta  of  the  coun- 
try. See  BuDDHisM.  The  sect  of  the  Sikka  was  found- 
ed  by  Nanak  Shah  about  A.D.  1600.  Their  present  faith 
\b  a  crecd  of  pure  deism,  grounded  on  the  most  sublime 
generał  truths ;  blended  with  the  belief  of  all  the  absurd- 
ities  of  Hindu  mythology  and  the  faUes  of  Mohamme- 
daniam  (Malcolm).  They  despise  the  Hindus  and  hate 
the  MusBulman,  and  do  not  reoogmse  the  diatinction  of 
eaate.  They  also  reject  the  authority  of  the  Yeda,  the 
Puranas,  and  all  other  religioua  books  of  the  Hindus; 
eat  all  kinds  of  flesh  except  that  of  cows ;  willingly  admit 
pToselytes  from  evexy  caste;  and  consider  the  profession 
of  arms  the  religious  duty  of  eyery  indiyiduaL  An  in- 
teresting  account  of  this  sect  is  given  in  MalcoIm's  SheUh 
ofche  Sikhs^A  ńattc  Reaearekes,  xi,  197-292 ;  Cunning- 
ham,  Sikks,    For  the  distinctions  of  eatte^  see  India. 

lY.  Doctrines  and  Wor$h^»,-~AE  already  intimated,  a 
broad  distinction  exist8between  the  religion  of  the  peo- 
ple  and  that  of  the  leamed.  The  popular  religion  ia  a 
debased  poły theism,  without  unity  of  belief  or  worship. 
The  people  belieye  that  the  performance  of  certain  forms 
ia  the  only  and  surę  means  of  salyation,  and  that  thoee 
who  obeenre  these  thinga  will,  at  a  fixed  time  after  death, 
be  admitted  into  the  joys  of  paradise.  The  religion  of  the 
leamed  claas,  on  the  other  hand,  professea  to  rest  upon 
pureoontemplation;  itstheoiyoftheuniyerseispanthe- 
iadc;  and  reUg^ous  obeenrances,  apait  irom  absorptlon  of 
mind  in  the  uniyersal  mind,  are  of  no  yalue.  The  daily 
dttties  of  the  Brahmin  conaLst  of  fiye  religious  occupa- 
tions,  considered  as  fiye  sacraments:  the  study  of  the  Ye- 
da (brnhina-JagneUf  or  okuta,  i.  e.  not  offered) ;  offering 
for  the  progiess  of  the  honor  of  the  gods  {huta,  L  e.  offer- 
ed); entertalning  the  fire  of  the  dead  (tradda)  in  honor 
of  the  manes  (prósUa')\  offering  of  the  Bali  in  honor  of 
the  spińts  (^prahuta\  and  of  hospitality,  in  honor  of 
mankind  (hrdkmja-huta).  Offeringa  and  prayeis  for  all 
poflsible  objecta  foUow  each  other  from  moming  till 
night.  Prayer  ia  recommended  by  the  Yeda  for  eyery 
oocasion.  The  number  of  ablutions  the  Hindus  conaid 
er  as  obligatory  is  immense;  near  eyery  tempie  a  pond 
ia  pioyided  for  that  purpose;  but  the  moet  sanctifying 
ablutions  are  those  performed  in  the  Ganges,  particular- 
ly  at  the  fiye  points  where  it  unites  with  other  streams. 
The  holiest  of  all,  aoeording  to  the  popular  belief  of  the 
Hindus,  is  Allahabad,  where,  besides  the  Jnmna,  the  Sar 
rasyati  also  unites  with  the  Ganges.  The  moet  impor- 
tant act  of  worship  consists  partly  of  bloody  sacrificea. 
The  principal  among  these  is  that  of  A  namedha,  or  sac- 
rifioe  of  horses.  Bloody  sacrificea  are  moetly  madę  to 
Siya  and  Kali,  whilst  the  offeringa  to  Yiahnn  are  gener- 
ally  of  water,  oil,  butter,  fruit,  fiowers,  etc  All  sins  of 
oommission  or  of  omiasion  can  be  effaced  by  penances 
described  in  the  laws,  and  provided  for  eyery  caste  and 
eyery  case;  a  thoroogh  fast  of  twelye  days'  dunition 
{Pavaka)  canoels  all  sins.  Thtf  prescribed  penances 
must  be  observed  if  the  sinner  desires  to  ayoid  the  pen- 
alty  of  his  sin  in  a  new  form  of  exi8tence.  There  are 
therefore  a  great  ntunber  of  penitenta  and  herroits  in 
India,  who  seek  merit  by  the  renunciation  of  all  enjoy- 
ment,  and  the  raort  ification  of  the  flesh.  In  fact,  East- 
em  monachism  is,  in  many  respects,  the  type  of  that  of 
the  Komish  Church.     See  Monachism. 

The  gnotU  of  the  leamed  Hindus  consists  in  regarding 


union  (TogoC^  with  God  aa  the  highest  aim  of  man;  thia 
doctrine  is  further  deyeloped  in  the  philosophy  of  the 
Yeda.  The  liberation  following  death  ia  twofold.  Sodi 
souls  aa  haye  arriyed  at  high  perfection  are  admitted 
into  the  Bnhmic  heayens  i8varga),  where  they  enjoy 
much  higher  happineas  than  m  the  panulise  of  the  In- 
dia, but  after  a  time  they  are  sent  back  again  to  uoder- 
go  another  period  of  probation.  But  whoi  man  has  by 
oontemplation  identified  himself  with  the  diyiiut)',  or 
Niroana,  his  soul  enters  into,  and  beooroea  part  of  the 
immense  soul  {Atma),  and  enjoys  eyeriasting  felicity, 
nothayingtoassuroeanynewformofeKiatence.  Those 
who  aim  at  reaching  thia  unity  with  the  dlyinity  are 
called  Yogu  An  essential  meana  of  arriying  at  this  re- 
sult  is  found  in  the  penances  or  7*apa«.  On  ceitaan  oc- 
caaions  (feaats)  all  the  practioea  of  the  religion  are  ooi- 
ted,  sacrificea  offeringa,  prayera,  etc  There  are  eighteen 
such  feaats  considered  obligatoiy.  The  feaat  of  UaH,  or 
Holaka,  ia  the  oldeat  and  most  important.  The  Yau- 
vadera  is  the  offering  to  all  gods.  It  oonatsts,  as  has 
already  been  atated  in  our  treatment  of  the  Yedic  pe- 
riod, in  throwing  melted  butter  (ghee)  on  the  flame  of 
the  aacred  fire,  which  must  be  carefully  kept  buniag. 
The  Brahmina  muat  offer  it  eyery  moming  and  eyening, 
firat  to  the  god  of  fire  and  the  moon,  then  to  aU  the  oth- 
er goda  and  goddeasea.  Each  particular  feast  presenta 
aome  peculiaritiea,  and  they  are  differently  obaerved  in 
the  yarioua  localitiea.  Aaide  from  theae  generał  fetsts, 
each  important  pagoda  has  some  special  ones,  The 
moet  important  aie  thoae  of  Jaggemaut,  Benare8,Goja, 
AHahabad,  Tripety,  Dyaiaka,  Somnauth,  Rami88enui,the 
aea  Manaaaroyara,  Gangotri,  Omerkuntuk,  Trirobuck- 
Naseer,  Pemittum,  Parkur,  Mathnra,  and  Bindrabond. 

Y.  Image*,  Tempiles,  etc— The  Hindua  haye  images  of 
their  goda,  but  they  are  of  a  groteaque  or  fkntaatic  kind ; 
aome  are  repreaented  with  heada  of  animala  (aa  Cowm), 
others  with  auperabundant  limba  (aa  JSy-oAma,  with  fonr 
arma),  or  disfigured,  etc  Antiquity  waa  mora  sparing 
in  thia  linę,  but  afterwarda  the  arte  of  India  were  applied 
to  the  production  of  innumerable  monatroeitiea.  The 
lower  orders  of  diyinitiea  are  ofleu  repreaented  mida 
the  foim  of  animala  (thua  Hanuman  ta  lepreaented  aa  an 
ape,  Mundi  as  a  buli,  etc),  and  are  generally  oonńderMl 
aa  the  ateeda  of  the  higher  deitiea.  Theae  images  of 
the  goda  are  placed  in  the  templea,  which  originally 
were  grottoes ;  they  now  are  pagcidas,  built  in  the  ahape 
of  a  pyramid,  omamented  with  columna,  atatoea^  aiwi 
ajrmbolic  figurea ;  they  are  diyided  into  courta  by  meana 
of  oolonnades,  aurrounded  by  high  walla,  and  by  the  hab- 
itationa  of  the  prieata.  In  the  yeatibnle  there  ia  alwaya 
an  image  of  aome  inferior  deity  coniW>nting  the  wor- 
ahipper  as  he  entera.  Admiaaion  into  theae  couita  is 
only  granted  to  the  KsheUtnyas  and  the  Katayof;  the 
interior  of  the  pagoda  is  reaeryed  for  the  Brakmim  or 
prieata,  which,  in  each  pagoda,  are  under  the  command 
of  a  head  Brahmin,  who  admita  aa  many  aaaiatanta  aa 
the  income  of  the  pagoda  will  permit.  In  aome  of  the 
templea  there  are  aa  many  as  8000  Brahmina.  Their 
prieatly  dutiea  conaLst  in  offering  aacrificea  and  reading 
the  Yeda.  The  worship  ia  acoompanied  by  aoiYga  and 
dancea  from  the  two  higher  daaaea  of  dancing  girls,  the 
Dwadatia  and  the  Natakas, 

YI.  Liłentture, — See  Moor,  Hwdu  Pantheon  (London, 
1810);  Coleman,  Mytkol.of  HMm  (1882);  Rhode,  U^ter 
rdig.  Biidung,  der  Hindu  (Lpz.  1827, 2  yola.) ;  Wilaón,  Rt- 
lig,  Sects  o/the  Bmdoot  (A  $.  Res.  xvi  and  xvii) ;  Eat.  and  a 
Lecł.  on  the  Relig.  o/the  Hmd.  (2  yola.  8yo) ;  Vi$hnu  Pu- 
rana,  or  8ytt,  ofHin,  MfthoL  (4  yola.  8yo) ;  Colebrooke, 
MitcelL  Eseays  (Lond.  1887,  2  yola.) ;  /2e%.  wad  PhUot, 
o/the  Hindoot  (Lond.  1858,  8yo) ;  SmaU,  Hdbk,  o/San- 
skrit  Lit,  (Lond.  1869, 12roo) ;  Wheeler,  Biśtoiy  o/ India 
(yoL  i,  Yedic  period  and  the  Mahabhanta;  voL  ii,  the 
Kamyana,  the  Brahm.  period,  Lond.  1869, 8yo) ;  Wuttke, 
Geech,  d  Beiden^ums  (2d  ed.  Beri.  1865,  2  yol&) ;  We- 
ber, A  kadem,  Vorle«.  ii.  Ind.  LUeraturgetch.  (BerL  1852): 
Ind.  Stud.  (Beri.  1849-58, 1^  yola.) ;  Ind.  Bk&aun  (Beri. 
1857) ;  MUUer,  On  tke  LUerat.  o/the  YedoM  (Lond.  186$, 


HINDU  LITERATURĘ 


265 


HINNOM 


2  Yok.) ;  Chiptfrtm  a  German  Work$kop  (N.  Y.  1870, 2 
Yok.  12mo) ;  Hardwick,  CkriM  and  otker  Masten  (2d  ed. 
Loiid.l868,2voiB.12mo);  Scholten,  Gt$eh.  d.  JU/icion  u, 
Pkilot.  (Elberf.  1868,  8vo) ;  Wrightaon,  Introd,  Treatim 
on  Santirił  Uagiograpka^  or  tkt  Sacńd  lAierat,  of  the 
Hindus  (2  parts,  12dio)  ;  Corkiiuui'8  Preasens^,  Reiigioiu 
be/ore  Christ,  p.  44  8q. ;  Barlow,  Ess,  on  Symboiism  (Lond. 
limo),  eh.  iv  and  vUi ;  Williams,  Ind,  Epic  Poet,  (Lond. 
8vo) ;  Pieier,  Univ,-Lex,  viii ;  Chamben,  Cydop,  v,  640 
tq.;  Rtcw d,d£ux Moiidks,iu!u\9lii»\  A^.ilm.i2e9.April, 
1858,  p.  435.  A  elear  and  condse  sUtement  of  the  re- 
Ugion  of  India  is  given  by  Arthur,  Mission  to  the  My- 
sort,  eh.  ix  (Lond.  1847. 12mo).  For  India  as  a  Mission- 
/ddCby  the  Bev,T,J.Scoii),wii  Melhodist  Qiuui.Iiev, 
Jan.  1869,  ^  30;  Bibtioth,  Sacra,  Apr.  1852,  art  L  See 
alsoBuDDHiSM;  Brahma;  India.     (J.H.W.) 

Hiiidii  Iiiteratare.  See  Sanskrit  Litcraturk. 

Hindu  FIlllOBOphy  is  divided  into  8ix  systems  or 
sastra,  namelj,  the  Ńydya,  Yaiseshika,  Sankhyd,  Yoga, 
Iftndaad,  and  Yedanta,  The  Sankhyft  and  Yoga  agree 
in  all  eaaentials,  except  that  the  former  is  atheistic  and 
the  lalter  theistic  The  S3rstenis  generaUy  unitę  on  oer- 
tain  potnts :  1.  The  Mimfinsft  excepted,  their  end  is  to 
incokate  expedient8  for  *<  8alvation,"  which  is  deliver^ 
ance  (rom  "  bondage.**-  2.  The  soul,  though  distinct  ftom 
the  nund,  the  senses,  and  the  body,  yet  identifies  itself 
with  them.  As  a  conseąuence  of  this  delusion,  it  eon- 
eeiTes  the  thought  of  ownership  in  itsetf  and  others,  and 
Buppuaca  that  it  receiyes  pleasure  and  pain  through  the 
body.  As  a  farther  conseąuence,  it  engages  in  good  and 
cvii  works,  which  have  merit  or  demerit  As  this  merit 
or  demerit  must  be  awaided,  the  soul  must  pass  to  Ely* 
amn  or  Heli,  and  repeatedly  be  bom  and  die.  This  is 
horndape  cauaed  by  ignorance,  from  which,  when  the  soul 
is  delivered,  it  gains  abeorption  into  the  deity.  8.  As  a 
conaeqiience  of  the  foregoing,  good  deeds  and  their  re- 
ward  are  only  a  less  curse  than  their  oppoeites,  and  are 
to  be  deprecated,  as  they  oompel  the  soul  till  the  award 
is  expefienoed  to  abide  in  the  body  of  a  god,  or  a  man, 
or  other  soperior  being.  4.  Release  from  transmigration 
cm  only  he  had  through  **  right  apprehension^  which 
eonsisCa,  of  coorse,  in  the  recognition  by  the  soul  of  it- 
self as  d»dnct  fiom  the  mind  and  all  else.  To  gain 
this  **  right  apprehenńon"  one  must  study  the  Shastras ; 
and,  in  order  to  cleamess  of  intellect  and  heart  for  this 
wofk,  soch  good  works  as  sacrifices,  alms,  pilgrimages, 
repetitions  of  sacred  words,  and  the  like,  are  to  be  pei^ 
ibrmed,  bat  without  desire  for  reward.  5.  They  all 
maintain  that  the  soul  has  existed  from  eyerlasting,  and 
that  it  ia  exempt  from  liability  to  extinction,  though  it 
may  be  agmin  and  again  inyested  with  a  corporeal  body. 
6.  All  the  systematists  teach  the  eternity  of  matter.  7. 
They  aD  receive  the  words  of  theYeda  as  unquestionable 
authority.  See  Refittadon  o/Hindu  Systems,  by  N.  Gore 
(Calcntta,  1862) ;  Aphorisms  ofthe  Yogd,  Sankhyd,  etc. 
(AlUhabad,  India,  1864).     (J.T.6.) 

^^diiB,  Modern,  a  term  recently  used  to  desig- 
nate  a  dass  of  Hindu  reforroers,  who  cali  themselres 
Bcahmiits,  and  rcpresent  a  school  of  thought  which 
originated  fifty  or  sixty  ago  with  Rammohun  Roy,  who 
nndertook  to  reform  Hinduism  on  the  basis  of  the  Yeda 
alone,  the  rdigion  of  which  he  held  to  be  a  pure  theism. 
In  1846  they  bccame  dissatisfied  with  the  Yeda,  and 
adopted  Intmtionalism.  They  have  planted  societics 
thronghout  Bengal,  Madras,  the  North-west  Prorinces, 
the  I^njab,  and  Bombay.  They  ignore  idol  worship, 
caate,  metempsychosis,  and  all  Brahminical  ceremonies. 
The  Twttu  Bodheney  Press,  of  Calcutta,  has  issued  a  great 
mnnber  of  their  publications  (see  Dr.  Dnif,  in  Christian 
Work  for  1862 ;  Foreign  Missians,  by  Dr.  Anderson). 
See  Rammohun  Boy.    (J.  T.  G.) 

ffindtistan.    See  iNpiA. 

Hinge  (^"^S*  tsir,  that  upon  which  a  door  rerohes, 
Prov.  zxvi,  14;  aho  thepanffs  of  childbłrth,  Isa.  xiii,  8, 
^tc;  aiso  a  messemger,  Ppov.  xiii,  17,  etc.;  nb,  póth,  lit. 
an  intertUetf  pot.  Ua  jmdenda  wuUiebra,  Isa.  iii,  17;  fig. 


female  kinges,  i.  e.  the  eyes  or  parts  with  sockets,  1 
Kings  vii,  50).  ^  Doors  in  the  East  tum  rather  on  piv- 
ots  than  what  we  term  hinges.  They  were  sometimei 
of  metal,  but  generally  of  the  same  materiał  as  the  door 
itseli,  and  worked  in  sockets  above  and  bebw  in  the 
door-frame.  As  the  weight  of  the  door  rests  on  the 
lower  pivot,  it  opens  with  much  less  ease  than  one  mov- 
ing  on  hinges,  particularly  when  the  lower  socket  be- 
comes  wom  by  the  weight  and  friction."— Picf.  Bibie, 
noto  on  Plov.  xxvi,  14.    **  In  Syria,  and  espedally  the 


fi    9    y    ».  ^    D    m'  fi  ^  IJ 

_  -'"Miyliihf^F 


Ancient  EgypUau  Door-hioges.    (From  the  Britlsh  Ma- 
eeom.) 

Hauran,  there  are  many  ancient  doors  consisting  of 
stone  shiba  with  pivots  canred  out  of  the  same  piece,  in- 
serted  in  sockets  above  and  below,  and  fixed  during  the 
building  of  the  house.  The  allusion  in  Prov.  xxvi,  14 
is  thus  clearly  expUined.  The  hinges  mentioned  in  1 
Kings  vii,  50,  were  probably  of  the  £gyptian  kind,  at- 
tached  to  the  upper  and  k)wer  sides  of  the  door  (Buck- 
ingham, Arab  Tribes,  p.  177 ;  Porter,  Damascus,  ii,  22, 
192;  Maundrell,  Early  TraveU,  p.  447,  448  [Bohn]; 
Shaw,  Travels,  p.  210 ;  Loid  Lindsay,  Letters,  p.  292 ;  Wil- 
kinson,  Anc  Egypt,  abridgm.  i,  15)." — Smith,  s.  v.  See 
DooR. 

ITłwfwyn,  Clark  F.,  D.D.,  a  Methodist  Episcopal 
minister,  was  bom  at  Kortright,  Delaware  Co.,  N.  Y., 
Aug.  3, 1819.  He  gradnated  at  the  Wesleyan  UniverBity 
in  1839,  and  spent  8everal  years  in  teaching,  at  one  time 
as  principal  of  Newbury  Seminary,yt.  In  1849  he  was 
elected  principal  of  the  Wesleyan  Seminary  at  Albion, 
Michigan,  and  early  in  1853  president  of  the  North- 
western UniverBity.  In  this  position  he  devoted  his 
whole  energy  to  the  work  of  pntting  that  institution  on 
a  proper  footing,  and  his  labors  in  its  behalf  exhausted 
his  strength  and  broke  his  constitution  completely.  Yet 
he  refused  to  suspend  his  exertions  until  a  pending  list 
of  engagements  was  fulfilled,  and  while  thus  employed 
he  was  prostrated  at  Tray,  N.  Y.,  and  died  on  the  21st 
of  October,  1854.  Dr.  Hinman  distingulshed  himself  in 
every  relation  of  life,  from  boyhood  to  his  death,  by  ca- 
pacity,  energy,  and  piety.  He  was  a  good  schokr,  an 
earoest  and  eloquent  preacher,  and  a  very  successful  ed- 
ucator  of  youth.  His  early  death  was  a  great  loss  to 
the  cause  of  Christian  education  in  America.— Sprague, 
Annals  o/ the  Americcm  Pulpit,  y'ń,Si7. 

Hin'nom  (Het.  Hinnom',  DSrj,  for  tsn,  yrodow*,  or 
for  Db"^?!,  abundani),  or,  rather,  Bkn-Hinnom  (D3n"'|a, 
son  ofHinnom;  Sept.  vibc  '£vi/ó/i ;  also  in  the  plur.  '^sons 
of  Hinnom"*),  an  unknown  person  (prób.  one  of  the  orig- 
inal  Jebusites),  whose  name  (perh.  as  residcnt)  was  given 
to  the  valley  ("Yalley  of  Hinnom,"  otherwise  ealled 
"the  valley  ofthe  son"  or  "children  of  Hinnom,"  "n 
DŚrł,  or  "rria^Ji,  or  'H"^33"^a,  variou8ly  rendered  by 
the  Sept  ^payl  'Ewófi,  or  v\ov  'Ewó/i,  or  Paififpa, 
Josh.  xviii,  16;  Łv  yc  BipiirpofŁ,  2  Chroń,  xxviii,  3; 
xxxiii,  6;  ró  no\vdvdpiov  viiliu  rwy  riKvwv  airwyg 


HINNOM 


269 


BINNOM 


Jer.  xix,  2,  6)i  a  deep  aud  nazrow  ravine,  with  Bteep, 
rocky  sides,  on  the  southerly  side  of  JentBalenif  separa- 
ting  Mount  Zioń  on  the  aouth  fiom  the  ^  Hill  of  EtU 
Gounsel,"  and  the  doping,  rocky  plateau  of  the  '^plain 
of  Bephaim"  on  the  north,  taking  ita  name,  aocording  to 
Stanley,  from  '^some  ancient  hero,  the  son  of  Hinnom," 
haring  encamped  in  it  {S,  and  Pal,  p.  172).  The  earii- 
est  mention  of  the  ralley  of  Hinnom  in  the  eacied  writ^ 
ings  is  in  Joeh.  xv,  8,  where  the  boundaiy-line  between 
the  tńbcB  of  Judah  and  Benjamin  is  deecribed  with  mi- 
nutę topographical  accuracy,  as  paasing  along  the  bed 
of  the  ravine  from  £n-Rogel  to  the  top  of  the  mountain 
^  that  Ueth  before  the  valley  westward,"  at  the  north 
end  of  the  plain  of  Rephaim.  It  is  described  in  Joeh. 
xviii,  16  as  on  the  south  side  of  Jebusi,  that  is,  Mount 
Zioń,  on  which  the  ancient  stronghold  of  the  Jebusites 
stood.  The  valley  obtained  wide  notoriety  as  the  scenę 
of  the  barbarous  rites  of  Molech  and  Chemosh,  fiist  in- 
troduced  by  Solomon,  who  built  **  a  high  place  for  Che- 
mosh, the  abomination  of  Moab,  in  the  hill  that  is  be- 
fore Jerusalem  (01ivet);  and  for  Molech,  the  abomina- 
tion of  the  children  of  Ammon"  (1  Kinga  xi,  7).  The 
iuhuman  rites  were  oontinued  by  the  idolatrous  kings 
of  Judah.  A  monster  idol  of  brass  was  erected  in  the 
opening  of  the  valley,  facing  the  steep  side  of  01ivet, 
and  there  the  infatuated  inhabitanfes  of  Jerusalem  bumt 
their  sons  and  their  daughters  in  the  flre— casting  them, 
it  is  said,  into  the  red-hot  arms  of  the  idol  (Jer.  vii,  81 ; 
2  Chroń,  xxviii,  3 ;  xxxiii,  6).  No  spot  could  have  been 
selected  near  the  Holy  City  so  well  fitted  for  the  perpe- 
tration  of  Łhese  horrid  crudties:  the  deep,  retired  glen, 
shut  in  by  rugged  cliffs,  and  the  bleak  mountain  sides 
rising  over  alL  The  worship  of  Molech  was  aboliahed 
by  Josiah,  and  the  place  dedicatcd  to  him  was  defiled 
by  bcing  strewn  with  human  bones:  "He  defiled  To- 
pheth,  which  is  in  the  valley  of  the  children  of  Hinnom, 
that  no  man  might  make  his  son  or  his  daugbter  pass 
through  the  fire  to  Molech  .  .  .  and  he  brake  in  pieces 
the  images,  and  cut  down  their  groves,  and  fiUed  their 
places  with  the  bones  of  men**  (2  Kings  xxiii,  10, 14). 
The  place  thus  became  ceremonially  unclean ;  no  Jew 
oould  enter  it  (2  Chroń,  xxxiv,  4,  6).  From  this  time 
it  appears  to  have  become  the  common  ce8q)ool  of  the 
city,  into  which  its  sewage  was  conducted,  to  be  carried 
off  by  the  waters  of  the  Kidron,  as  well  as  a  laystall, 
where  all  its  solid  filth  was  collected.  It  was  afterwards 
a  public  cemetery  [see  Aceldama],  and  the  tiaveller 
who  now  stands  in  the  bottom  of  this  valley  and  looks  up 
at  the  mulŁitude  of  tombs  in  the  clifis  at)ove  and  around 
him,  thickly  dotting  the  side  of  01ivet,  will  be  able  to 
aee  with  what  wondrous  accuracy  the  curse  of  Jeremi- 
ah  has  been  fultilled :  ^  Behold,  the  days  come,  saith 
the  Lord,  that  it  shall  no  morę  be  called  Tophet,  nor 
The  Valley  of  the  Son  of  Hinnom,  but  The  Valley  of 
Slaughter;  for  they  shall  buiy  in  Tophet  till  there  be 
no  morę  płace"  (vii,  82).  We  leam  from  Josephus  that 
the  last  terrible  struggle  between  the  Jews  and  Romans 
took  place  here  ( War,  vi,  8,  5) ;  and  here,  too,  it  ap- 
pears the  dead  bodies  were  thrown  out  of  the  city  afler 
the  siege  (v,  12,  7).  The  inhuman  rites  anciently  prac- 
tised  in  the  valley  of  Hinnom  caused  the  latter  Jews  to 
regard  it  with  feeliugs  of  horror  and  detestation.  The 
Rabbins  suppose  it  to  be  the  gate  of  heli  (Lightfoot, 
Opera,  ii,  286) ;  and  the  Jews  applied  the  name  given 
to  the  valley  in  some  passages  of  the  Sept  Tiiwa,  to 
the  place  of  etemal  torment  Hence  we  find  in  Matt 
V,  22,  ^  WhoBoever  shall  say,  thou  fool,  shall  be  in  dan- 
ger  of  tĄv  yttway  tov  frvpóc — the  Geherma  of  fire." 
The  word  is  formed  from  the  Hebrew  fcjn  X*»a, "  Val- 
ley  of  Hinnom."  See  Helu  The  valley  was  also  call- 
ed ToPHETH  (2  Kings  xxiii,  10 ;  Isa.  xxx,  33 ;  Jer.  vii, 
81),  either  from  DUn,  "spittle,"  and  it  would  hence 
mean  "  a  place  to  spit  upon,"  or  from  hnCH,  *' place  of 
buming."     See  Topiiet. 

Most  commentators  follow  Bnxtorf,  Lightfoot,  and 
oth^B,  in  asserting  that  perpetual  fires  were  kept  up  for 


the  consamptton  of  bodies  of  criminals,  carases  of  am* 
mals,  and  whatever  else  was  combustible;  bnt  the  ial>> 
biniód  authorities  nsually  brought  forwaid  in  snpport  of 
this  idea  appear  insuffident,  and  Robinson  dedues  (i, 
274)  that "  there  is  no  evidenoe  of  any  other  fires  thaa 
those  of  Molech  having  been  kept  up  in  this  Yalley,**  re- 
feińng  to  Rosenmttller,  BMick  Geogr,  II,  i,  166, 164. 
For  the  morę  ordinaiy  view,  see  Hengstenbeig,  CkńśibL 
ii,  454 ;  iv,  41 ;  Keil  on  Kingt  ii,  147,  dark^s  ediL ;  and 
comp.  Isa.  xxx,88 ;  lxvi,  24.  See  Moxxx«.  It  is  call- 
ed. Jer.  ii,  28,  "  the  valley,"  kot  Uo^ify,  and  perhapi 
^  the  valley  of  dead  bodies,"  xxi,  40,  and  <*  the  valley  of 
viaion,"  Isa.  xxii,  1,  6  (Stanley,  S.andP,^  172, 482). 
The  name  by  which  it  is  now  known  is  (in  ignormce  of 
the  meaning  of  the  initial  syllable)  Wdtfy  Jehamam,  or 
Wódy  er-Rubeb  (Williams,  Hofy  City,  i,  56,  Supplem.), 
though  in  Mobammedan  traditions  the  name  Gehenna 
is  applied  to  theYaUey  of  Ke^nin  (Ibn  Batat^l2,4; 
Stanley,  ut  tup,),    See  Gehenna. 

The  valley  commences  in  a  broad  śk>|ung  baan  to  the 
west  of  the  city,  south  of  the  Jafia  road  (extendiiig  near- 
ly  to  the  brow  of  the  great  wady  on  the  west),  in  the  cm- 
tre  of  which,  700  yards  from  the  Jaffa  gate,  is  the  large 
resenroir,  supposed  to  be  the  ^upper  pool,"  or  "Gihoii" 
[see  Guion]  (Isa.  vii,  8 ;  xxxvi,  2 ;  2  Chroń,  xxxii, 30> 
now  known  as  Birhet  d-MamiUa,    After  running  sbont 
three  ąnarters  of  a  mile  east  by  south,  the  valley  takea  a 
Budden  bend  to  the  south  opposite  the  JaiEs  gate,  but  ia 
less  than  another  three  quarterB  of  a  mile  it  encounten 
a  rocky  hill-side  which  foroes  it  again  in  aa  eastedy  di- 
rection,  sweeping  round  the  predpitous  south-west  cor- 
ner  of  Mount  Zioń  almoet  at  a  right  angle.     In  this  part 
of  its  coune  the  valley  is  from  50  to  100  yards  bioadk 
the  bottom  every  where  oovered  with  smali  Stones,  and 
cultivated.    At  290  yards  from  the  Jaffa  gate  it  is  cross- 
ed  by  an  aqueduct  on  nine  V6ry  Iow  arches,  conveying 
water  from  the  **  pools  of  Solomon"  to  the  Tempie  Mount, 
a  short  distance  below  which  is  the  ''lower  pool"  (Iia 
xxii,  9),  Birket  es-Sult4n.    From  this  point  the  ravine 
narrows  and  deepens,  and  descends  with  great  lapidity 
between  broken  clilb,  rising  in  successi  ve  terraces,  hooeyr 
oombed  with  innumerable  sepulchral  receases,  foraiing 
the  northem  face  of  the  *<  Hill  of  £vil  Counsel,"  (o  the 
south,  and  the  steep  shelving,  but  not  predpitons  sooth- 
em  slopes  of  Mount  Zioń,  which  rise  to  about  the  heigfat 
of  150  feet  to  the  north.    The  bed  of  the  vaUey  is  plant- 
ed  with  olives  and  other  fruit-trees,  and,  when  pnctica- 
ble,  is  cultivated.    About  400  yards  from  tbe  south-weet 
angle  of  Mount  Zioń  the  valley  contracts  still  moie,  be- 
comes  quite  nairow  and  stony,  and  descends  with  mach 
greater  rapidity  towards  the  **^  valley  of  Jehoshaphat," 
or  "•  of  the  brook  Kidron,"  before  joining  which  it  openi 
out  again,  forming  an  oblong  plot,  the  site  of  Tophet,  de- 
voted  to  gardens  irrigated  by  the  waters  of  Siloam.  To- 
wards the  eastem  extremity  of  the  valley  is  the  tradi- 
tional  site  of  ''Aceldama/  authentlcated  by  a  bed  of 
white  clay  still  worked  by  potters  (Williams,  H<^  CHy, 
ii,  495),  opposite  to  which,  where  the  diff  is  uJrty  or 
forty  feet  high,  the  tree  on  which  Judas  hanged  him- 
self  was  located  during  the  Frankish  kingdom  (Baidsy, 
City  of  Grtat  King,  p.  208).    Not  far  from  Aceldama  is 
a  conspicuously  situated  tomb  with  a  Dońc  pediment, 
sometimes  known  as  the ''  whited  sepulchre,"  near  which 
a  large  sepulchral  recess,  with  a  Doric  portal  hewn  in 
the  native  rock,  is  known  as  tbe  **  Latibulum  apostolo- 
rum,"  where  the  Twelve  are  said  to  have  conoealed 
themse]ves  during  the  time  between  the  Cracifixion  and 
the  Resurrection*     The  tombs  oontinue  quite  down  to 
the  comer  of  the  mountain,  where  it  bends  oif  to  the 
south  along  the  valley  of  Jehoshaphat.     Nonę  of  the  se- 
pulchral recesses  in  the  vicinity  of  Jerusalem  are  so  well 
preserved ;  most  of  thcse  are  very  old— smali  gloomy 
caves,  with  narrow,  rock-hewn  doorways.    See  Jerusa- 
lem. 

RoUnson  places  « the  yalley  gate,"  Nefa.  ii,  18, 15 ;  2 
Chroń,  xxvi,  9,  at  the  north-west  comer  of  Mount  Zioń, 
in  the  upper  part  of  this  vaUey  {Reteareka^  i,  220^  889^ 


HINRICHS 


267 


HIPPICUS 


274,320,^8;  Williama, ^o/y  CUy,  i,  SuppL66;  u,496; 
BmcUt,  City  o/Great  Kmg,  p.  205, 208) ;  but  this  part 
was  rathcr  called  the  Yalley  of  Gihon.— Kitto;  Smith. 
See  Gihon. 

Hfnriohs,  Herxa2cv  Friedrich  Wilhielm,  a  Ger- 
man philosopher  of  the  old  Hegelian  school,  was  bom  at 
Karlseck,  in  Oldenburg,  August  22, 1794.  In  1812  he 
entered  the  Unirersity  of  Strasburg  as  a  student  of  the- 
ology,  bat  changed  for  law  in  1818  at  Heidelberg.  Herę 
he  studled  ander  Creuzer  and  Hegel,  and  became  apri- 
ratdocetU  in  1814.  In  1822  he  was  called  to  the  Uni- 
yersity  of  Breslau  as  a  professor  of  philoeophy.  In  1824 
Halle  gave  him  a  cali,  which  he  accepted,  and  here  he 
remained  until  his  death,  August  17,  1861.  The  work 
which  gave  to  him  particular  prominence  as  a  Hegelian 
was  his  Die  JUligion  im  itmem  YerkiUtniss  zur  Wis^a^ 
tckąft  (Heidelb.  1822),  an  essay  that  gained  him  a  prize 
sustoined  by  Hegel  himself.— Brockhaus,  Corw,  Lear.  vii, 
«3;  Vapcrcau,Z)irf.dMConton/).p.885.     (J.H.W.) 

Hinton,  Isaac  Taylor,  a  Baptist  preacher  and  au- 
thor  of  notę,  was  b<wn  at  Oxford,  England,  in  1799.  His 
fath«r,  who  w«j  teacher  in  a  boys*  school  of  considerable 
repute,  supcrintcnded  his  son^s  education.  At  the  ago 
of  fifteen  young  Hinton  was  apprenticod  at  the  "  Clar- 
endon  Pre»,"  and  in  1820  he  set  up  as  a  printer  and 
Publisher.  He  edlted  and  printed  the  Sunday  Scholari 
Magazi/te,  In  1821  he  was  converted  and  baptized.  He 
was  soon  licensed  to  preach,  continuing,  however,  in  busi- 
ness, which  be  removed  to  London.  He  also  assisted  his 
brother,  John  Howard  Hinton,  in  preparing  a  History  of 
Ae  (JniŁeil  States,  in  two  ąuarto  volumes,  with  100  engiay- 
ings.  While  thus  engaged,  his  republican  feelings  were 
80  dereloped  that  he  decided  to  eroigrate  to  this  coun- 
try. He  arri\<i;d  at  Philadelphia  in  1832.  His  seryices 
as  a  preacher  were  much  sought,  but  he  had  resoK-ed  on 
fixing  his  residence  in  the  West  He  was,  however,  in- 
duc€d  to  accept  the  pastorate  of  the  First  Bapti  <t  Church 
in  Richmond,  Ya.  The  church  had  a  laige  colored  mem- 
bership,  a  fact  from  which  some  embarraasment  was  ex- 
pąienced  by  him  in  the  consistent  appUcation  of  his 
principles.  This,  in  connection  with  his  original  predi- 
lecdona,  led  to  his  removal  in  1835  to  Chicago,  Łhen  in 
its  infancy.  The  Church  was  uii  ible  to  give  him  a  suffi- 
cient  support,  and  he  was  compelled  to  engage  in  teach- 
ing.  His  congregations  were  large,  and  he  delivered  a 
coorae  of  lectures  on  the  Prophecies,  which  attracted 
much  attcntion.  The  financial  disasters  of  1837,  how- 
e%'er,  depressed  the  materiał  prosperity  of  his  Church, 
and  dilTerences  on  the  8lavery  question  di\'ided  it.  In 
1841  he  removed  to  St  Louis,  where  he  laborcd  for  about 
three  years,  and  enjoyed  repeated  seasons  of  revival  and 
mgathering.  In  1844  he  accepted  a  cali  to  New  Or- 
leans,  where  he  had  evcry  prospect  of  success  and  use- 
fulness,  but  his  labors  were  cut  short  by  the  yellow  fe- 
Ter.  He  died  in  1847.  His  lectures  on  Prophecy,  above 
referred  to,  were  repeated  in  St  Louis,  and  were  pub- 
lisbed  afterwards  under  the  title  The  Prophecies  ofDcm^ 
id  (md  John  iUtutrated  by  the  Erents  of  History,  He 
also  published  a  History  of  Baptism^from  fnspired  cmd 
Umnspired  Sources.  He  was  diligent,  enthusiastic,  yet 
cautious  and  inrestigating  in  his  habit  of  mind,  genial 
in  h'is  private  intercourse,  and  an  impressiye  public 
ipeaker.  His  ardor  and  energy  fitted  him  for  the  work 
of  which  he  did  so  much,  that  of  a  pioneer,  foundiug 
•nd  building  up  churches.     (L.  E.  S.) 

Hioaen-tsang,  a  celebrated  Buddhist  traveller  of 
China,  waa  bom  A.D.  608.  At  the  age  of  twenty  he 
took  priest^s  orders.  Even  at  this  early  age  he  had  be- 
come  famous  for  his  vast  Information,  especially  in  the 
Buddhist  faith,  and  in  the  dcctrines  of  Confucius  and 
Ifotae.  A  desire  to  study  the  origin  of  Buddhism  madę 
him  orercoine  all  the  obstades  in  his  wav,  and  he  set 
out  on  a  joomey  to  Icdia  in  the  first  half  of  the  7th  cen- 
toiy  (629),  He  tiavelled  suteen  years  in  that  country, 
■ad  on  his  retum  wrote  a  work  describing  his  trayels, 
vhich  were  published  under  the  auspices  of  the  Chineae 


emperor  of  his  time.  In  this  work  he  gave  a  very  de* 
taUed  and  interesting  account  of  the  condition  of  Buddh- 
ism as  it  preyailed  at  that  period  in  India.  His  inqui- 
ries  haying  been  chieAy  deyoted  to  Buddhism,  he  did 
not  enter  much  into  details  conceraing  the  social  and 
political  condition  of  the  country;  but  many  cuńous  no- 
tices  which  he  giyes  on  other  matters,  besides  those  of 
Buddhist  interest  that  came  under  his  obseryation,  and 
the  high  degree  of  trustworthiness  which  his  narratiye 
poflsesses,  makes  it  one  of  the  most  iroportant  works  on 
the  history  of  India  in  generał,  and  of  Buddhism  in  par- 
ticular, during  this  period.  He  travelled  alone,  or  with 
a  few  occasional  companions,  wearing  the  garb  of  a  re- 
ligious  mendicant,  from  China  to  India.  He  brought 
with  him  on  his  retum  to  his  natiye  coun£ry,  besides 
images  of  Buddha  and  yarious  sacred  relics,  an  immense 
collection  of  works,  the  extent  of  which  may  be  esti- 
mated  from  the  statement  of  Muller,  "  It  is  said  that 
the  number  of  works  translated  by  Hiouen-tsang,  with 
the  assistance  of  a  large  staff  of  monks,  amounted  to 
740,  in  1385  volumes"  {Chips^  i,  272).  He  died  A.D. 
664.  Two  of  his  friends  and  pupils  have  left  an  account 
of  their  instroctor,  and  M.  Stanisjas  Julien,  who  has 
lately  translated  the  trayels  of  Hiouen-tsang  from  Chi- 
nese  into  French  ( Yoyages  des  Pelerms  BouddhisteSf  2 
yols.  8vo,  Paris,  1868-1867),  prefixes  a  translation  of 
this  biography  to  the  transhition  of  the  trayels  of  Hi- 
ouen-tsang. An  abstract  of  this  work,  by  the  late  Pro- 
fessor H.  H.  Wilson,  appeared  in  the  Journal  ofthe  Boy  al 
Asiałic  Society,  xyii,  106-187.  A  very  fuli  account  of 
the  life  and  works  of  Hiouen-tsang  is  giyen  by  Max 
Muller  {Chips)^  with  a  reyiew  of  the  translation  of  M. 
JuUen — MuUer,  Chips  from  a  German  Workshop,  i,  282- 
275;  Julien,  Histoirt  delaYiede  Hiouen-isany ;  Memoires 
sur  les  Contries  OoadentaleSf  par  Hiouatrisang  ;  Hoefer, 
Nouv,  Biog,  GMter.  xxiv,  716  są. ;  Chambers,  Encydop,  y, 
872.     (J.H.W.) 

Hip  (p'l^y  shókj  usually  *<  shonlder^  occurs  in  the 
A.  V.  only  in  the  phrase  "  hip  and  thigh**  (lit.  leg  upon 
thigh)y  in  the  account  of  Samson*s  slaughter  of  the  Phil- 
istines  (Judg.  xv,  8) ;  evidently  a  prorerbial  phrase,  i.  e. 
"  he  cut  them  in  pieces  so  that  their  limbs,  their  legs 
and  their  thighs,  were  scattered  one  upon  another,  q.  d. 
he  totally  destroyed  them"  (Gesenius).     See  Samson. 

Hip,  in  architecture,  is  the  extemal  angle  formed  by 
the  meeting  of  the  slop-  ^ 

ing  sides  of  a  roof  which 
haye  their  wall-platea 
mnning  in  different  di- 
rections:  thu8,when  a 
roof  has  the  end  sloped  ^ 
back,  instead  of  fmbhing  ^^ 
with  a  gable,  the  pieces 
of  timber  in  these  angles 
are  called  hip-rafters,  and  i 

the  tUes  with  which  they  The  lines  AB,  BC,  are  the  hips. 
are   covered  are   called 

hip-tiles.  The  intenud  angles  formed  by  the  meeting 
of  the  sides  are  teraied  vaUeys,  whether  the  hitter  be 
horizontal  or  sloping,  and  the  piece  of  timber  that  sup- 
porta  a  slopuig  yalley  is  termed  the  vaUey  rafter,  Such 
a  roof  is  called  a  Aijs-roo/^-Parker,  Glossary, 
Hip-knob.    See  Finiau 

Hipplcna  (linriKÓc,  ecuestrian),  the  name  giyen  by 
Herod  (in  honor  of  one  of  his  generała)  to  that  one  of 
the  three  towers  (Josephus,  War,  ii,  17, 9)  along  the  first 
wali  of  Jerusalem,  indosing  Mount  Zioń  on  the  north, 
which  lay  westemmost^  and  at  its  junction  with  the 
third  wali  ( War,  y,  4, 2),  being  built  up  with  immense 
strength  {ih,3).  Its  remains  are  still  a  yery  prominent 
object  in  the  city  (Robinson,  Researches,  i,  463  są. ;  Bart- 
lett,  WaUcs  about  Jerusalem,  p.  86  są.).  Schwarz  ab- 
surdly  identifies  it  (Palesł.  p.  261)  with  the  tower  of  Han- 
aneel  (ą.  y.)  of  Jer.  xxxi,  38,  on  the  authority  of  Jona- 
than'8  Targum,  which  there  has  "  the  tower  of  Pikus 

(P^P'^t)^*      See  j£BU6ALKH« 


HIPPO 


268 


mPPOLYTlIS 


Rlppo,  in  Aftica,  now  ealled  Bono,  m  maritime  col- 
ony. (See  Schaff,  Ck,  Hist,  iu,  998,  notę  1.)  A  generał 
oouncil  was  held  at  this  fdaoe  in  898.  AureUoB,  Uahop 
of  Garthage,  preńded.  Augustine  madę  a  diacoune  be- 
foie  the  council  on  the  subject  of  faith,  the  Oeed,  and 
againBttheManichsans.  Foity-one  canons  were  agreed 
to,  which  were  taken  as  the  model  for  after  oouncil& 
*^  The  first  ezpreas  deflnition  of  the  N^T.  Canon,  in  the 
form  in  which  it  has  ńnce  been  anivenally  retained, 
was  fixed  at  the  oouncU  of  A.D.  898,  at  Hippo."  Anoth* 
«r  oouncil  was  held  in  426,  in  which  Augustine  appoint- 
ed  Eiadius  his  saccessor,  reqairing  Eradios,  however,  in 
accordance  with  the  canon  of  Nicna,  to  remain  in  his 
priestly  Office  until  Augastine'8  death. — Smith,  TaUes 
ofCkurck  Ilittory ;  Lsndonf  Manuał  ofCoiMeils;  Schaff, 
Ckurch  Hittory,  i,  §  75 ;  liL  609. 

Hippolj^iiB,  St.  (Innókwoc),  the  name  of  ser- 
eral  saints  and  martyis  of  the  eariy  Ghorch,  espedally 
that  celebrated  one  of  the  fathers  of  the  Church  who 
probably  lived  in  the  eurly  put  of  the  8d  century. 
Eyery  particular  of  his  life  has  been  madę  a  point 
of  controyersy.  Thus  the  oldest  ecdesiastical  writers 
who  make  any  mention  of  him,  Eusebius  and  Jerome, 
give  him  the  title  of  bishop,  but  without  stating  of 
what  see,  the  latter  even  saying  that  he  was  unable 
to  ascertain  this  point  ^  The  Ckromcon  Patckale^  our 
earliest  authority,  makes  him  *  bishop  of  the  so-called 
Portus,  near  Romę;*  and  as  this  statement  is  supported 
by  the  authority  of  Cyril,  Zonarss,  Anastasius,  Nicepho- 
nis,  and  Synoellus  (see  Bunsen^s  Hippolytui^  i,  206),  and 
as  Prudentius  (lib.  mpl  ort^ytiw,  Hywm  ix)  describes 
his  martyrdom  as  having  taken  plaoe  at  Ostia,  doee  by 
Portus,  most  critics  will  ptobaUy  regaid  this  point  as 
finally  settled.  His  mastery  of  the  Greek  language 
would  render  him  peculiariy  fit  to  be  a  *  bishop  of  the 
nations,'  who  fTeqnented  the  haibor  of  Romę  in  multi- 
tudes.  In  spite  of  Jacobi'8  assertion  (see  below)  to  the 
oontrary,  thera  seems  to  be  no  leason  why  he  should  not 
at  the  same  time  have  been  (what  the  '£Xeyyoc  >hows 
him  to  have  been)  a  presbyter  and  head  of  a  party  at 
Romę.  We  know,  further,  that  he  was  a  disciple  of  Ire- 
nsBus  (Phot  Cod,  121),  and  was  engaged  in  some  wann 
disputes  with  Callistus  on  poiuts  of  doctrine  and  disci- 
pline,  which  are  graphically  descńbed  in  his  reooyered 
book,  rard  ira<rwv  aipeattay  t\iyxoc"  (Kitto,  Cydop.  s. 
V.).  On  the  other  hand,  the  treatise  De  duabus  Naiuris, 
attributed  to  pope  Gelasins  I,  gives  Hippolytus  the  title 
of  metropolitan  of  Arabia.  Le  Moync  eyen  indicated  a 
tOMrn  of  the  district  of  Aden,  cailed  Portus  BomanuSf  on 
aooount  of  its  being  the  great  mart  of  Koman  trade  in 
the  East,  as  the  seat  of  his  bishopric.  The  same  uncer- 
tainty  esists  with  regard  to  the  time  in  which  he  liyed. 
Eusebius  plaoes  him  in  the  flrst  half  of  the  8d  century. 
I^hotius  States  that  he  was  a  disciple  of  Iren»us ;  Baroni- 
us  says,  of  Clement  of  Alexandria ;  two  assertions  which 
appear  cąually  well  grounded.  Portius  adds  that  Hip- 
polytus was  the  intimate  friend  and  zealous  admiier  of 
Ongen,  and  that  he  invited  him  to  comment  on  the 
Scriptures,  fumishing  him  for  that  purpose  seyen  aman- 
uenses  to  write  mider  his  dictation,  and  seyen  copyists. 
Hippolytus  himself  testifies  to  his  3cquaintanoe  with 
Origen.  As  for  the  other  details  giyen  by  Fhotius,  they 
are  based  on  a  misinterpretation  of  a  paasage  in  Jerome. 
According  to  this  father,  Ambrosius  of  Alexandria,  struck 
with  the  reputation  Uippol3rtus  had  acquiied  by  his 
commentaries  on  the  Scriptures,  inyited  Origen  to  at^ 
tempt  the  same  task,  and  fumished  him  with  a  number 
of  secretaries  for  that  purpose.  The  martyrdom  of  Sl 
Hippolytus  is  not  mentioned  by  Eusebius.  jerome,  Pho- 
tius,  and  other  writers,  howeyer,  cali  him  a  mart>T,  and 
his  name  appears  with  that  title  in  the  Roman,  Greek, 
CJoptic,  and  Ab3rssinian  calendan.  Yet  thcse  martyrol- 
ogies  differ  so  much  from  each  other  that  they  appear 
lather  to  refer  to  differoit  parties  of  the  same  name 
than  to  one  indiyidual  only.  Prudentius,  a  Christian 
poet  of  the  4th  century,  wrote  a  long  poem  on  the  mar- 
tytóam  of  St.  Hippolytus,  bat  it  is  eyident  that  he  also 


oonfonnded  seyeml  paities  of  that  name,  and  his  pioni 
legend  is  deyoid  of  all  histoiical  authority.  The  datę 
of  St  Hippoly  tus's  death  is  yery  doubtfnl.  It  is  gener- 
ally  belieyed  to  haye  oocurred  under  Alezander  Ser- 
erus^  yet  it  is  weU  known  that  this  pńnoe  did  not  pene- 
cute  Christians.  If  we  admit  that  the  Erhortatmiiu 
ad  Sewrinamy  mentioned  among  Hippolytus^s  works,  is 
the  same  which  Tbeodoret  states  was  addressed  to  a  oer- 
tain  ąueen  or  empress  (wpóc  fiaoiKiŁa  nyó),  and,  fiir- 
ther,  that  this  Seyerina,  aoooiding  to  DoUinger  (see  b^ 
Iow),  was  the  wife  of  the  emperor  Philip  the  Ambian, 
this  would  bring  the  martyrdom  of  the  saint  to  the  time 
of  Decios^s  persecution  (abont  2fi0),  and  perhape  later.  In 
that  case,  Hippolytus,  haying  beińi  a  diseipie  of  Ireus- 
us,  who  died  about  190,  must  haye  been  ąuite  adv«need 
in  age  at  the  time  of  his  death.  It  is  geneiaily  suppoaed 
that  he  suffered  martyrdom  near  Rome^  piobably  at  the 
mouth  of  the  Tiber.  Aocoiding  to  geneial  opinioo,  it 
is  thought  he  was  thrown  into  the  sea  with  a  Btonic  tied 
around  his  neck.  In  1651  a  statuę  was  discoyered  at 
Romę,  near  the  church  of  St  Lorenzo,  which  appeaied 
to  datę  back  to  the  6th  century,  and  represented  a  niaa 
in  monastic  garb,  in  a  sitting  posturę.  The  inscription 
bore  the  name  of  Hippolytus,'  bishop  of  Portus,  and  on 
the  back  of  his  seat  was  found  inscribed  the  ecmtm  or 
paschal  ctfcU  which  he  introduced  into  Romę,  and  alm 
a  list  of  his  prindpal  works.  Some  of  these  watka,  men- 
tioned by  Eusebius,  Jerome,  Photius,  and  other  ecdesi- 
astical writers,  or  named  on  the  sutue,  are  yet  ejctant, 
and  we  haye  exten8iye  fragments  of  seyeral  othera.  A 
number  of  them  haye  been  published  sepaiatdy.  Fa- 
bndus  gaye  a  complete  coUection  of  them  under  tbe  title 
S,  Jlip^oUfti,  epitcopi  et  martyru^  Opera  «m  aniea  oof- 
lecta  etpaiietn  nuncprimutn  e  AfSJS,  in  lucern  edita,  Gnert 
ei  Latme  (Hamb.  1716-1718,  foL).  This  was  reprinted, 
with  additions  by  Galland,  and  inserted  in  his  BibHoikeca 
Patrum  (Venicc,  1766,  foL),  voL  ii.  A  coUection  of  fimg- 
ments  of  Syriac  translations  of  Hippolytus  is  giyen  in 
the  Analecta  of  Lagarde.  The  same  scholar,  in  an  ap- 
pendix  to  his  A  ncdeda  (Lagardii  ad  Analecta  sua  Syr' 
iaca  Appendix  [Lips.  1868]),  giyes  Arabie  fragments  of 
a  commentary  of  Hippolytus  on  Reydation. 

A  recent  <tiscoyery  has  directed  generał  attention  to 
this  old  ecdesiastical  writer.  In  1842  Bf.  Myn<ńde  Mi* 
nas,  on  his  return  from  a  mission  on  which  he  had  been 
sent  by  M.yillemain,  minister  of  public  instruction  in 
France,  brought  back  from  Mount  Athos,  among  other 
unpublished  works,  a  mutilated  Greek  MS.  of  the  14th 
century,  written  on  cotton  paper,  without  name  of  au- 
thor,  and  containing  a  Rejutation  ofaU  Heretiet  (mara. 
iraautif  aipi^einp  Aty^^c)*  This  MS.  was  deposited  in 
the  Imperial  Libraiy  at  Pańs,  where  it  remained  midis- 
turbed  until  M.  Emmanud  Miller  found  it  to  oontain 
the  last  part  of  a  treatise,  the  beginning  of  which  was 
printed  in  the  works  of  Origen.  At  Millei^s  reąuest,  the 
Uniyersity  of  Oxford  consented  to  publish  it,  under  his 
dlrection,  at  thdr  own  preas,  with  the  title,  'Qpiyivovc 
^tXo<ro^vfuva  rj  rard  ira(rSfV  alpktrtw  Acy^^C  (.Ori^ 
gema  PhUoiophumena  swe  onadwn  Nmresium  RefuteUto  .* 
e  Codice  Parisino  nunc  primum  edidit  Emmanud  Mil- 
ler [  Oxford,  1861 ,  8yo  J).  This  work  attracted  great  at- 
tention among  the  theologians  and  philologists  of  Ger- 
many and  France,  as  well  as  of  England.  The  first 
argument  published  to  show  that  Hippolytus  was  the 
anthor  of  the  MS.  may  be  found  in  the  Melhodiat  Ouar^ 
terUf  Review  for  October,  1861,  in  an  ardde  by  profenor 
J.  L.  Jacobi,  of  the  Uniyersity  of  Beriin.  After  proy- 
ing  that  Origen  was  not  the  author,  Jacobi  shows  that 
the  writer  was  certainly  contetnporary  with  Origen* 
"  He  places  himself  in  that  age,  and  all  his  statemcnts 
harmonize  with  this  yiew.  Taking  him,  then,  to  have 
liyed  in  the  first  quarter  of  the  dd  century,  at  tbe  time 
of  Zephyrinus,  bishop  of  Romę,  and  of  CallistuB,  we 
should  be  led  by  Eusebius  to  identify  him  with  the 
leamed  presbyter  Caius,  or  with  Hippolytus^  It  is  eaai* 
ly  shown,  howeyer,  that  Caius  could  not  haye  been  the 
anthor  of  the  book,  for  he  was  ^ptdaOjf  digtmgniahtid 


HIPPOLYTUS 


269 


HIPPOLTTUS 


fot  his  wńtingB  agaiiut  CennŁhcui,  and  for  his  p^ciiliar 
views  mth  ngard  to  that  Gnostic  leader;  while ova  aa- 
thor  has  nothing  of  his  own  to  offer  abouŁ  Cerinthus, 
and  bomm  aU  that  he  does  say  (and  that  is  not  much), 
woid  for  woldfirom  IrensBiia.  Caius  ascńbed  the  Apoo- 
alypse  to  Cerinthiis — our  aathor  aasigns  it  to  the  apoe- 
tle  John.  The  fonner  was  a  strenuous  opponent  of  the 
KDsual  Chiliasn;  the  latter,  while  he  blames  much  in 
Montaniam,  does  not  include  Chiliasm  under  it,  and  in- 
deed  it  is  morę  than  piobable  that  he  was  a  Mend  of 
that  doctiine."  On  the  other  hand,  thero  are  the  fol- 
iowing,  among  other  leasons,  for  ascribing  the  woik  to 
Uippolytoa.  (1.)  A  work  beaiing  the  same  or  a  aimilar 
title  was  ascńbed  by  Eiuebius,  Jerome,  Epiphanius,  and 
Nloepharas  to  UippoljtusL  (2.)  The  monument  dug  up 
at  Borne  (see  above)  has  on  it  the  names  of  writings 
which  the  aathor  of  the  treatise  on  kerenet  claims  as 
his  own.  (3.)  The  intemal  evidence  is  all  in  favor  of 
HippfAytOA,  Professor  Jacobi  developed  the  argument 
at  gieater  length  in  the  DeuUche  ZeUschriftJur  Chrittl 
WmaiMd»aft  (1862),  and  Dr.  Duncker  foUowed  in  the 
G&tiMfer  gMrU  Ameigm  (1851).  But  the  most  ear- 
nest  woffk  on  the  subject  was  done  by  the  Chevalier 
Baneen,  who  canYassed  the  whole  ąueetion  with  great 
Ifliming  in  his  copious  and  somewhat  dumsy  book,  /itjp- 
polytus  and  hu  Age,  or  the  Dodrme  and  Practice  of  the 
Chtrck  of  Romtt  under  Commodu*  and  Alexander  Seve- 
Tus,  and  emeimt  and  modem  ChrisHamty  and  Dwinity 
eompared  (Lond.  1852, 4  yols.  8vo).  In  this  work  it  is, 
we  thiak,  established  beyond  a  doubt  that  ihe  R^fuia- 
Hon  of  aU  Heruia  was  written  by  Hippolytus,  bishop 
of  Portns,  near  Bome,  in  the  first  quarter  of  the  dd  cen- 
toiy.  Sereral  writers,  however,  objected  to  aome  of 
Bońsen^s  conduaons,  and  he  repJied  to  them  by  repub- 
liahing  his  work,  greatly  enlarged,  under  the  dtle  Chrit- 
tianiiy  and  Mankmd  (London,  1854,  7  yols.  8vo).  This 
work  is  fuli  of  erudition,  but  often  adrances  hasty  state- 
ments  and  unauthorized  conclusions. 

The  importance  of  this  newly-discovered  work  of 
Hippolytos  in  the  sphere  of  Church  History  and  archce- 
ok)gy  can  hardly  be  orerstated.  It  throws  great  light 
upon  the  Gnoedc  and  other  heretical  sects  of  the  early 
ChuTch.  Kames  and  even  facts  are  given  of  which  we 
knew  abeolutoly  nothing  before ;  while  others  that  were 
bdd  to  be  as  unimportant  as  they  were  obscure  are 
btooght  out  into  light  and  prominendb,  illuminating 
many  dark  nooks  of  Church  History.  The  book  teUs 
os,  for  instance,  of  a  Gnostic,  by  name  Justin,  of  whom 
we  had  not  before  lieard ;  and  describes  at  length  Mo- 
Doiamoe  and  the  Peraticians,  of  whom  we  knew  only 
the  name&  The  Simonians,  and  the  strange,  firagmen- 
tary,  and  enigmatical  ideas  generally  attributod  to  Si- 
mon Magns,  me  here  treated  with  something  approach- 
ing  to  orderly  and  elear  connection.  That  part  of  the 
work  whidi  treats  of  the  morals  of  the  Roman  Church 
and  of  its  clergy  Ib  fuli  of  interest.  Hippolytus  cen- 
Bures  them  for  unchastity,  and  casts  it  up  to  them  as  a 
great  leproach  that  many,  even  of  the  higher  orderB  of 
cleigy,  were  marrted — aome  of  them  morę  than  once. 
His  acoount  of  Callistus  throws  much  light  upon  the 
etate  of  society  and  of  religion  in  Bome  at  the  time. 
The  work  thows  ns  also  that  the  receiyed  doctrine  of  the 
Church  at  that  tim&-^  centnry  before  the  Conncil  of 
Nice — ^was  the  orthodox  doctrine  of  the  Trinity  and  the 
person  of  Christ.  Its  reydations  are  fatal,  too,  to  many 
of  the  daims  of  the  papacy.  Bomanist  writós,  there>- 
fore,  haye  aought  to  inyalidate  the  conclusions  drawn 
by  Jacobi,  Bcmsen,  and  the  I^rotestants  generally.  Pro- 
feaaor  Dollinger  seeks  to  refute  the  "  calumnieB**  of  the 
book  against  CalUstus  in  his  Hippolytut  und  KaUishu 
(Batisb.  1858, 8yo),  and  to  settle  the  ąuestion  of  the  au- 
thonhip  of  the  PhUotophoumam,  He  undertakes  to 
show  ako  from  the  character  of  the  work  itself  that  the 
anthor  was  not  a  Catbollc,  but  a  heretic,  in  the  judgment 
of  the  Chorch  of  the  age  when  he  wroto  it.  The  abbć 
Cniee,  of  Paris,  pablished  Śtudei  ntrk$.,.  PkUoiophou- 
i  ^ańą  1868, 8yo),  to  ahow  that  the  book  is  neither 


genoine  nor  authentic;  and  he  has  sińce  followed  it  iq» 
by  his  Higtoire  de  PŹgliee  de  Romę  sous  leg  Poniificait 
de  St  Viełorj  Sł.  Zephyrm,  ei  St.  Calliste  (Paris,  1856). 
He  has  also  published  sn  degant  edition  of  the  PkUoto- 
phoumenoy  with  Latin  yersion,  notes,  and  indexe8  (Par. 
1861,  8yo).  The  best  edition  of  the  work,  howeyer, 
is  that  of  Duncker  and  Schddewin  (Gottingen,  1859, 
8yo).  Another  edition,  which  embraces  all  the  Greek 
works  of  Hippolytus,  was  published  by  Lsgarde  {Uip- 
polyti  Romani  gwefenmtur  omma  Greece,  Ldpa.  1858). 
The  subject  is  yery  aUy  treated  in  its  theological  as* 
pects,  especially  in  their  bearing  on  the  Bomish  contro- 
yersy,  by  Wordsworth,  Hippolytus  and  the  Church  of 
Ronie  (London,  1852, 8yo).  A  yery  good  account  of  the 
histoiy  and  contents  of  the  book,  with  an  English  trans- 
lation  of  the  most  important  parts,  is  giyen  by  Tayler, 
Hippolytus  and  the  Christian  Church  ofthe  Third  Cen- 
tury  (Lond.  1858, 12mo),  and  by  Yolkmar,  l/ippolytui  u, 
d,  róm,  Zeityenossen  (ZiUrich,  1855).  The  leading  re- 
yiews  haye  generally  giyen  articles  on  the  subject:  see 
especiaUy  Methodist  Ouarterły  Reriewj  Oct.  1851 ;  Jan. 
1868,  p.  160 ;  Ouarterły  Rev.  (Lond.)  lxxxix,  87 ;  Joum, 
ofSacred  Literaturę,  Jan.  1858,  and  Jan.  1854 ;  N,Brit, 
Reńew,  Noy.  1854 ;  Edinburyh  Reciew,  Jan.  1858 ;  lUgen, 
Zeitschrijlf  hist.  Theolog.  1842,  iii,  48-77 ;  1862,  ii,  218 ; 
Journal  des  DSbais,  Dec.  1852;  Baur,  Theolog,  Jahrbu- 
cher  (Tubingen,  1858) ;  Studien  u,  Kriiiken,  by  Giesder 
(1853).  Another  important  «rork  ascribed  to  Hippoly* 
tus,  a  oollection  of  canons,  has  latdy  been  published  for 
the  fiist  time,  in  an  Arabie  translation,  by  Dr.  Hamberg 
{Canones  8,Hippolyti  A  rabice  e  codicibus  Romams  cum 
rersione  Latina,  annotationibus  et  prolegomerds,  Munich, 
1870).  The  collection  contains  thirty-eight  canons 
which  are  known  to  haye  been  in  use  in  the  12th  cen- 
tury  in  the  Coptic  Church.  Before  this  time  no  men- 
tion  is  madę  of  this  work  by  any  ecclesiastical  writer; 
but  the  editor  regaids  this  as  no  argument  against  its 
authentidty  (which  he  defends),  as  all  the  works  of 
Hippolytus  had  fidlen  into  obliyion.  In  case  itis  gen- 
uine,  its  contents  are  of  considerable  importance  for  the 
histoiy  of  Christian  doctrines  and  on  the  constitution  of 
the  Christian  Church. 

Lipsins,  in  his  work  Zur  Ouellenkntik  der  Epiphamos 
(Yienna,  1865),  has  shown  that  the  work  of  Hippolytus 
against  thirty-two  sects,  the  condusion  of  which  is  still 
extant  under  the  title  of  a  homily  against  the  heresy  of 
Noetus,  is  the  basis  of  the  Philosophcnunenaj  and  can,  to 
a  large  extent,  be  reconstmcted  from  it.  See  also  Schaff, 
Church  History,  yol  i,  §  125;  Hare,  Contett  with  Romę, 
p.  214 ;  Neander,  History  ofDogmas,  i,  51 ;  Milman,  Lat, 
ChrisL  i,  66  8q. ;  Lardner,  Works,  ii,  409  sq. ;  Henog,  Real- 
Encyklop,  yi,  181  sq. ;  Hoefer,  Nouv,  Biog,  Ginir,  xxiy, 
777  sq. ;  Chambers,  Cydopsedia,  y,  876 ;  and,  for  the  Bo-> 
man  Catholic  side,  Wetzer  imd  Wdte,  Kirchen  Lexihm^ 
Y,  210  8q. ;  A  Ugem.  Reał-JBncykhp.f.  d.  KathoL  Deutsdi- 
land,  V,  874.  Early  monographs  on  Hippolytus  were 
written  by  Frommann,  Jnterprett  New  Test,  ex  Hippoh 
(Coblentz,  1765, 4to) ;  C  G.  HMnell,  De  Hippol,  (Gótting. 
1888, 8yo) ;  Heumann,  Ułd  et  qudUs  episccp.jfuerit  Hip" 
polytus  (Gotting.  1737, 4to) ;  Woog,  Fragment,  Hippolyti 
Martyris  (lips.  1762, 4to).  On  the  earlier  writings  oi 
Hippolytus,  see  Churke,  Suecession  ofSacred  Literaturę, 
i,  158 ;  Eusebius,  HisL  Ecdes.  yi,  20-28 ;  Lardner,  Credi* 
biUty  ofthe  Gospel  History,  ii,  85 ;  TUlemont,  Ałemoires, 
etc^  iii,  104 ;  Neander,  Ch,  Hist,  cent.  iii,  pt.  ii,  eh.  ii,  §  7. 

Hippolytus,  Brothers  (or  Hospital  Monks)  o^ 
TłUB  Christiak  Lo  vk  of,  a  monastic  order  of  the  Boman 
Catholic  Church,  established  about  1585  by  Bemardin 
Alyarea,  a  dttaen  of  Mezico,  for  nursing  the  dek.  It 
was  sanctioned  by  the  popes  Sixtus  Y  and  Clement  YIH, 
and  recdyed  the  same  rights  as  the  order  of  Brothers  of 
Charity  which  had  been  established  by  St.  Johannes  a 
Deo,  and  with  which  it  had  statutes,  aim,  and  dress  in 
common.  It  only  differs  from  it  by  the  color  of  the 
monastic  dress.  The  order  was  named  after  the  patron 
saint  of  the  city  of  Mezico,  in  commemoiation  of  the 
fali  of  psganism,  and  the  capture  of  the  dty  of  Mexioo 


fflPPOPOTAMtJS 


270 


HIPPOPOTAMUS 


hy  the  Christiana  on  the  day  of  StHifypolytuB  (Aogust 
18).  ItneyerspreadbeyondSpanish  America.   (A.J.S.) 


HoflpiUI  Monk  of  St.  Hlppoljtns. 

Hippopotamus,  an  animal  regarded  hy  Bochart 
(Hieroz,  iii,  705),  Ludolf  {ffist.  AUthiop.  \,  11),  Shaw 
(7Vat;.  ii,  299,  Ix)nd.  8vo),  Scheozer  {Phyn,  Sac  on  Job 
zl),  RosenmUller  {Not.  ad  Bochart.  Hieroz,  iii,  705,  and 
SckoŁ  ad  VeL  Test.  in  Job  xl),  Taylor  {Appendix  to  Cal- 
meeg  Diet.  BibL  No.  lxv),  Harmer  {ObterraHontj  ii,  819), 
Geeenius  {Thet.  s.  v.  ni^ną),  FUrst  {Concord.  Htb,  8.  v.), 
and  English  commentatorś  gencrally,  as  being  dcsig- 
nated  by  the  Heb.  word  M'«lj3  (hekemótk'  in  Job  xl, 
15),  by  which,  however,  some  writers,  aa  Vatablii8,  Dru- 
sius,  Grotius  {Cril.  Sac  A  rmotationu  ad  Job.  xl),  Pfeiffer, 
(Dubia  vexala  S.  S.,  p.  594,  Dresden,  1679),  CasteU  (Taz. 
HepL  p.  292),  A.  Schultens  (jComment.  in  Job.  xl),  Mi- 
chaelis  (SuppL  ad  Lex.  JJeb.  No.  208),  hare  understood 
the  elephant;  while  others,  again,  amongst  whom  is 
Lee  {Comment.  on  Job.  xl,  and  Lex.  Heb.  s.  v.  ni  CHa),  con- 
sider  the  Ilebrew  term  as  a  plcural  noon  for  ^cattle"  in 
generał ;  it  being  left  to  the  reader  to  apply  to  the  scrip- 
tural  allusions  the  particular  animal,  which  may  be,  ac- 
eonling  to  Lee,^'either  the  horae,  or  wild  ass,  or  wild 
bull"(!).  Compare  also  Reiske,  Conjecturoi  in  Job,  p.  167, 
Dr.  Mason  Good  {Book  ofJobliteraUy  tramlated,  p.  478, 
I^nd.  1712)  bas  hazarded  a  conjecture  that  the  behemoth 
denotes  some  extinct  pachyderm  like  the  mammoth, 
with  a  view  to  combine  the  characteristics  of  the  hippo- 
potamus  and  elephant,  and  so  to  fulfil  all  the  scriptural 
demandfl.  Compare  with  this  Michaelis  {Sup,  ad  Lex. 
Neb.  No.  208),  and  Hasnus  (in  Dissertat.  SyUog.  Na  vii, 
§  37,  and  §  m,  p.  506),  who  rejects  with  some  scom  the 
notion  of  the  identity  of  behemoth  and  mammoth.  Dr. 
Kitto  {Piet.  Bib.  Job  xl)  and  Colonel  Hamilton  Smith 
(Kitto'8  C^ci^t&.Lt^art  Behemoth),  from  being  nna- 
ble  to  make  aU  the  scriptural  details  correspond  with 
any  one  particular  animal,  are  of  opinion  that  behemoth 
18  a  plural  term,  and  is  to  be  taken  as  a  poetical  person- 
ification  of  the  great  pachydermata  generally,  wherein 
the  idea  of  hippopotamus  is  predominant.  The  term 
behemoth  would  thus  be  the  oounterpart  of  ieriathan,  the 
animal  mentioned  next  in  the  book  of  Job ;  which  word, 
although  its  signification  in  that  passage  is  restricted  to 
the  crocodile,  does  yet  stand  in  Scripture  for  a  python,  or 
a  whale,  or  some  other  huge  monster  of  the  deep.  See 
Leviathan.  Acoording'to  the  Talmud,  behemoth  is 
some  huge  land-animal  which  daily  consumes  the  grass 
off  a  thousand  hills ;  he  is  to  have,  at  some  futurę  period, 
a  battle  with  leviathan.  On  account  of  his  grazing  on 
the  mountains,  he  is  called  "  the  buli  of  the  high  moun- 
tains."  (See  Lewysohn,  ZooL  des  Tahnuds,  p.  855). 
"The  'fathers,'  for  the  most  part,"  suys  Cary  (Job,  p. 
402),  "  surrounded  the  subject  with  an  awe  equally 
dreadful,  and  in  the  behemoth  berę,  and  in  the  levii^ 


than  of  the  next  chapter,  saw  nothing  bat  mystical  re|>> 
resentations  of  the  devil :  others,  again,  have  faere  pie- 
tuied  to  them8elve8  some  hieroglyphic  monster  that  has 
no  real  existence ;  bot  these  wild  imaginations  are  8iir> 
passed  by  that  of  Bolducius,  who  in  the  behemoth  aotn- 
allybeholds  Christ  r 

The  foUowing  reasons  seem  deariy  to  identify  it  with 
the  hippopotamus.  1.  The  meaning  o/ the  originalword 
iiseff.  Gesenius  {Thetcatnu,  p.  183),  with  whom  also 
FUrst  agrees  {ffeb.  />2r.s.  v.),  holds  it  not  to  be  a  Heh. 
plur.,  but  the  Coptic  be-hemottt,  **  the  water-ox"  (see  Ja-* 
blonsky,  Opusc.  i,  52),  equivalent  to  the  imroc  b  iroraptoc 
or  river-horBe  of  the  ancients  (Herod,  ii,  71 ;  Arutot. 
A  mm.  ii,  1 2  [  4] ;  Diod.  Sic  i,  85 ;  niny,  viii,  39 ;  Ammian. 
Marceli,  xxii,  15 ;  Abdollatif,  Denker.  p.  146  sq. ;  Prosper 
Alpinus,  Res  ACg.  iv,  12 ;  Ludolph,  Hist.  jCth,  i,  11,  and 
Comment.  p.  1 55  sq. ;  Hasseląuist,  Trat.  p.  280  sq. ;  Sparr- 
mann,  Reise  druch  sOdL  Africaj  p.  562  sq. ;  RUppdl,  A  rah. 
Petr,  p.  55  sq. ;  comp.  Schneider,  Hist.  hippop.  rett.  criL  in 
his  edit  of  Artedi  Synoiupisc.  p.  247  sq.,  816  sq. ;  Bochart, 
Hieroz.  iii,  705  sq. ;  Oken,  ZooL  ii,  718  sq.).  KoaenmUl- 
ler*s  objection  to  the  Coptic  origin  of  the  word  is  worthy 
of  observation— that,  if  this  were  the  case,  the  Sept.  in- 
terpreters  would  not  have  given  ^pia  as  its  represen- 
tative.  Michaelis  translates  P*!^}!?  ^7  Jumenta,  and 
thuiks  the  name  of  the  elephant  has  dropped  out  (^  Mihi 
videtur  nomen  elephanUs  forte  b*^B  eKcidisse*").  Many 
critics,  RosenmUller  amongst  the  number,  beUeve  the 
word  is  the  plurai  majettatis  of  Hcns.  But  in  that 
case  it  would  hardly  be  employed  with  a  verb  or  adj. 
in  the  singular^  and  that  masc,  as  it  is. 

2.  A  careful  examination  of  the  text  shows  that  aB 
the  details  descriptive  of  the  behemoth  accord  cntirely 
with  the  ascertained  habits  of  that  animaL  Gesenius 
and  RosenmUller  have  remarked  that,  sińce  in  the  fiist 
part  of  Jehovah*s  discourse  (Job  xxxviii,  xxxix)  land 
animals  and  birds  are  mentioned,  it  suits  the  generał 
purpose  of  that  discourse  better  to  suppose  that  aąuatie 
or  amphibiou*  cieatures  are  spoken  of  in  the  last  half 
of  it;  and  that  sińce  the  leviathan,  by  almost  umver8al 
oonsent,  denotes  the  crocodile,  the  behemoth  scems 
clearly  to  point  to  the  hippopotamus,  his  assodate  in 
the  Nile.  Harmer  {Obserratians,  ii,  819)  says,  **There 
is  a  great  deal  of  beauty  in  arranging  the  descrip- 
tions  of  the  behemoth  and  the  le%ńathan,  for  in  the 
Mosaic  pavement  the  people  of  an  Egyptian  bark  are 
represented  as  darting  spears  or  some  such  wcapons  at 
one  of  the  river-hor8es,  as  anothcr  of  them  is  pictured 
with  two  sticking  near  his  shoulders. .  .  .  .  It  was  then 
a  customary  thing  with  the  old  Egyptians  thua  to  at- 
tack  these  animals  (see  also  Wilkinson,  A  nc,  Egypt.  iii, 
71) ;  if  so,  how  beautiful  is  the  arraiigement :  there  is  a 


Chase  of  the  Hippopotamus  (Wilkinson). 


most  happy  gradation ;  after  a  gruid  but  just  repre- 
sentatioo  of  the  terńblenesa  of  the  river<4kone,  tbft  iB» 


HIPPOPOTAMTJS 


271 


HIPPOPOTAMUS 


ttiighty  U  icpresented  as  going  on  with  his  expo6tiila- 
tłons  aometbiiig  after  this  manner:  *BaŁ  dreadful  as 
thia  animal  ia,  barbed  irons  and  spean  haye  sometimes 
preyaiJed  against  him ;  but  what  wilt  thou  do  with  the 
crooodile?  Canst  thou  fili  his  skin  with  barbed  irons?'" 
etc.  In  the  lMko$trołum  Prtmeatmumj  to  which  Mr. 
Harmer  refen,  there  are  two  crooodiles,  associates  of 
three  riyer-horaes,  which  are  represented  without  spears 
sticking  in  them,  though  they  seem  to  be  within  shot. 
Behemoch  **eateth  grasa  aa  an  otsP  (Job  x],  15) — a  cir- 
cumaUnce  which  is  noticed  as  peculiar  in  an  animal  of 
aqaatic  habits;  this  is  strictly  tnie  of  the  htppopota- 
mufl,  which  leaves  the  water  by  night,  and  feeds  on  yeg- 
etabka  and  green  cropSb  Its  strength  is  enonnous,  yer. 
16,.  18,  and  the  notice  of  the  power  of  the  muscles  of  the 
belly,  **■  his  force  is  in  the  navel  of  his  belly,*'  appears  to 
be  strictly  correct.  The  taił,  howeyer,  is  short,  and  it 
musi  be  conceded  that  the  first  iMirt  of  yerse  17,  **he 
Doyeth  his  taił  like  a  cedar,"  seems  not  altogether  ap- 
plicable.  His  modę  of  attack  is  with  his  mouth,  which 
is  azmed  with  a  formidable  array  of  teeth,  projecting  in- 
dsocBi  and  enormous  cunred  canines;  thus  **his  Creator 
offen"  him  a  swoid,"  for  so  the  words  in  yer.  19  may  be 
rendared.  But  the  use  of  His  sword  is  mainly  for  pacific 
purpoees, "  the  beasts  of  the  field  playing**  about  him  as 
be  feeds;  the  hippopotamus  being  a  remarkably  inof- 
fenaye  animal.  **  With  these  apparently  combincMi  teeth 
the  hippopotamus  can  cut  the  graw  as  neatly  as  if  it 
were  mown  with  the  scythe,  and  Sa  able  to  seyer,  as  if 
with  shears,  a  tolerably  thick  and  stout  stem"*  (Wood'8 
Nat.HiMł,  i,  762),  3^n  is  perhaps  the  Greek  u/oin;.  See 
Bochart  (lii,  722),  who  cites  Nicander  (Thenac.  566)  as 
oomparing  the  tooth  of  this  animal  to  a  scythe.  The 
Dext  yersc  explains  the  purpose  and  use  of  the  **  scythe** 
with  which  God  has  proyided  his  creature,  \ńz.,  in  or- 
der that  he  may  eat  the  grass  of  the  hills.  His  retreat 
U  among  the  lotuses  (tzelitn;  A.V.  "shady  trees"), 
which  abounded  about  the  Nile,  and  amid  the  reeds  of 
the  riycr.  Thoroughly  at  homc  in  the  water, "  if  the 
river  liseth,  he  doth  not  take  to  fligbt ;  and  he  cares  not 
if  a  Jonlan  (here  an  appellatiye  for  a  *strcam*)  press  on 
his  moath."  Ordinary  means  of  capture  were  ineffectual 
against  the  great  strengtb  of  this  animaL  *'  Will  any 
take  him  before  his  eyes  ?"  (i.  e.  openly,  and  without  cun- 
ning) ;  **  will  any  borę  his  nose  with  a  gin?"  as  was  usual 
with  large  animaK  Though  now  no  longer  found  in 
the  lower  Nile,  it  was  formerly  common  there  (Wilkin- 
son,  i,  239).  The  roethod  of  killing  it  in  Egypt  was  with 
a  spear,  the  animal  being  in  the  first  insUnce  secured  by 
a  laso,  and  repeatedly  struck  until  it  became  exhausted 
(Wilkinson,  i,  240) ;  the  very  same  method  is  pursued 
by  the  natiyes  of  South  Africa  at  the  preaent  day  (Liy- 
ińgstone,  p.  73 ;  instanccs  of  its  great  strength  are  no- 
ticed by  the  same  writer,  p.  231 ,  282, 497).  The  skin  of 
the  hippopotamus  is  cut  into  whips  by  the  Dutch  colo- 
nisu  of  South  Africa,  and  the  monuments  of  Egypt  tes- 
tify  that  a  slmilar  use  was  madę  of  the  skin  by  the  an- 
dent  Egyptians  (Anc, Effypt.\u,7S),  The  inhabitants 
of  South  Africa  hołd  the  fiesh  of  the  hippopotamus  in 
high  esteem ;  it  is  said  to  be  not  unlike  pork. 


UippopotatMt*  AmphibiJM, 

It  has  been  said  that  some  parts  of  the  description  in 
Job  cannot  apply  to  the  hippopotamus:  (1.)  The  20th 


yerse,  for  instance,  where  it  is  said  *Uhe  mountains 
bring  him  forth  food."  This  paasage,  many  writers  say, 
suits  the  elephant  well,  but  cannot  be  applied  to  the  hip- 
popotamus, which  is  neyer  seen  on  mountains.  Jn  an- 
swer  to  this  objection,  it  has  been  stated,  with  great 
reason,  that  the  word  kdńm  (D"^^}!)  is  not  necessarily 
to  be  restricted  to  what  we  understand  commonly  by 
the  expre8sion  "  mountains."  In  the  Pnenestine  paye- 
ment  alluded  to  above,  there  are  to  be  seen  here  and 
there,  as  Mr.  Harmer  has  observed,  "hillocks  rising 
aboye  the  water."  In  Ezek.  xliii,  15  (margin),  the  altar 
of  God,  only  ten  cubits  high  and  fourteen  8quare,  is  call- 
ed  "  the  mountain  of  God."  "  The  eminences  of  Egypt, 
which  appear  as  the  inundation  of  the  Nile  decreases, 
may  undoubtedly  be  callcd  mountains  in  the  poetical 
language  of  Job."  But  we  think  there  is  no  occasion 
for  80  restricted  an  explanation.  The  hippopotamus,  as 
is  well  known,  freąuently  Icares  the  water  and  the  riy- 
er'8  bank  as  night  approaches,  and  makes  inland  excup- 
sions  for  the  sake  of  the  pasluragc,  when  he  coromita 
sad  work  among  the  growing  crops  (Hasselquist,  Tra9, 
p.  188).  No  doubt  he  might  often  be  obaeryed  on  the 
hill-sides  near  the  spots  freąuentcd  by  him.  Agaiii,  it 
must  be  remembered  that  the  "  mountains"  are  mention- 
ed  by  way  of  contrast  with  the  natiural  habits  of  aquatic 
animals  generally,  which  nevcr  go  far  from  the  water 
and  the  banks  of  the  river;  but  the  bchemoth,  though 
passing  much  of  his  time  in  the  water  and  in  **  the  coy- 
ert  of  the  reed  and  fens,"  eateth  grass  like  cattle,  and 
feedeth  on  the  hill-sides  in  company  with  the  beasts  of 
the  field.  Acconling  to  a  reccnt  trareller  in  Eg>'pt, 
the  Rev.  J.  L.  Errington, "  the  ralley  of  the  Nile  in  Up- 
per  EgjTjt  and  Nubia  is  in  parts  so  ver}'  narrow,  that 
the  mountains  approach  within  a  few  huiulred  yarda, 
and  even  less,  to  the  river*s  bank ;  the  hippopotamus, 
therefore,  might  well  be  said  to  get  its  AkkI  from  the 
mountains,  on  the  sides  of  which  it  would  gn)w."  There 
is  much  beauty  in  the  passagcs  which  contrast  the  hab- 
its of  the  hippopotamus,  an  amphibious  animal,  with 
those  of  herbiyorous  land-quadrupcds ;  but  if  the  ele- 
phant is  to  be  understood,  the  whole  descriptiun  is,  com- 
paratiyely  speaking,  tamę. 

(2.)  Agam,  the  24th  yerse— "his  nose  pierceth  through 
snares" — seems  to  be  spoken  of  the  tmnk  of  the  elephant, 
"with  its  extraordinary  delicacy  of  scent  and  touch,rath- 
er  than  to  the  obtuse  perceptions  of  the  riyer-horse." 
With  respect  to  this  objection,  there  is  little  doubt  that 
the  marginal  readlng  is  nearer  the  Hcbrew  than  that 
of  the  text  "  Will  any  take  him  in  his  sight,  or  borę 
his  nose  with  a  gin  ?"  Perhaps  this  refers  to  leading 
him  about  alive  with  a  ring  in  his  nose,  as,  says  Kosen- 
mUller, "  the  Arabs  are  accustomc<l  to  lead  camels,"  and 
we  may  add  the  English  to  lead  bulls,  "  with  a  ring 
passed  Ihrough  the  nostrils." 

(3.)  The  expres8iou  in  yerse  17, "he  bendeth  his  taił 
like  a  cedar,"  has  given  occasion  to  much  discussion; 
some  of  the  adyocates  for  the  elephant  maintaining  that 
the  word  z^fia6  (SST)  may  denote  cither  extremit3',  and 
that  here  the  elephanfs  trunk  is  intended.  The  paral- 
lelism,  howeyer,clearly  requires  the  fiosterior  appendage 
to  l>e  signified  by  the  term.  The  cxpression  seems  to 
allude  to  the  stiff,  unbending  naturę  of  the  animaKs  taił, 
which  in  this  respect  is  compared  to  tho  trunk  of  a 
strong  cedar  which  the  wind  scarcely  mores. 

(4.)  The  description  of  the  animars  lying  undcr  "  tho 
shady  trees,"  amongst  the  "  reeds"  and  willowa,  is  pecul- 
iarly  applicable  to  the  hippopotamus.  It  has  been  ar- 
gued  that  such  a  description  is  eąually  applicable  to  the 
elephant;  but  this  ishardly  the  caso;  for, though  the  el* 
ephant  is  fond  of  freąuent  ablutions,  and  is  freq»ently 
seen  near  water,  yet  the  comłant  habit  of  the  hippopot- 
amus, as  implled  in  yerses  21, 22,  seems  to  be  especially 
madę  the  subjecŁ  to  which  the  attention  is  directed. 
"  At  eyery  tum  there  occurred  deep,  still  pools,  and  oc- 
casional  sandy  islands  densely  clad  with  lofly  reeds. 
Alwye  and  beyond  these  reeds  stood  trees  of  immense 


HIPPOS 


272 


HIRAM 


$lgbt  oeneath  which  grew  a  nuik  kind  of  gran  on  which 
Ihe  sea-cow  delights  to  paature"  (G.  Cummingi  p.  297). 
— Smith,  8.  V.    See  Behemotii. 

HippOB  ('Itnroc,  a  horse ;  but  Relind  suggests,  Pal- 
ast.  p.  830,  that  it  may  be  one  of  the  towns  called  KC^H 
in  the  Talmud),  a  city  of  Palestine,  30  stadia  fh>m  Ti- 
berias  (Joaephus,  Lifij  65),  one  of  the  Decapolis  (Re- 
land,  Palcesł,  p.  215),  frequently  mentioned  by  Joflephuii 
(i4 II/. XV, 7, 8;  xvu,ll,4;  IKar, ii,  18, 1 ;  18,5;  iu,8,l; 
Life,  31);  later,  an  epiacopal  city  (Reland,p.  440,821), 
identified  by  Burckhardt  with  the  ruin  tB-Sunuah,  at 
the  flouth-east  end  of  Lakę  Tiberias.^yan  de  Yeldc, 
Memoir,  p.  822. 

Hl'rah  (Heb.  Chirah',  ITn^^n,  nobiUły ;  Sept.  Eipac), 
an  Adullamite  and  fńend  of  Judah  (Gen.  xxxviii,  1, 12; 
comp.  ver.  20).    B.G  cir.  1896-1876. 

Hi'ram  (yi^h,Chiram'jW^T\,kighhom;  generally 
written  "  Huram,"  D'nin,  CAuram^,  in  Chroń.,  and  "  Hi- 
tom," ni^Y^ri,  Chirom/  in  1  Kings  v,  10,  18;  vii,  40; 
Sept.  XŁipafi  or  Xcpa/i ;  Joseph.  F^ipafioc  and  l!ip<ofŁoc), 
the  name  of  three  men. 

1.  HuRAM  (Sept.  makes  two  names,  'Axipav  koi 
*lo}lfji)j  the  last  named  of  the  sons  of  Bela,  son  of  Benja- 
min (1  Chroń,  viii,  5).    RC.  post  1856. 

2.  HiRAM,  HuRAM,  or  HiROM,  king  of  Tyre  at  the 
commencement  of  David'8  reign.  He  sent  an  embassy 
tó  felicitate  David  on  his  accession,  which  led  to  an  alli- 
ance,  or  strengthened  a  previous  friendship  between 
them.  It  seems  that  the  dominion  of  this  prince  ex- 
tended  over  the  western  slopes  of  Łebanon ;  and  when 
David  bnilt  himself  a  palące,  Hiram  materially  assisted 
the  work  by  sending  cedar-wood  from  Lebanon,  and 
able  workmen  to  Jenisalem  (2  Sam.  v,  11 ;  1  Chroń,  xiv, 
1).  RC.  cir.  1044.  It  was  probably  the  same  prince 
who  sent  to  Jenisalem  an  embassy  of  oondolence  and 
congratulation  when  David  died  and  Solomon  succeeded, 
and  who  contracted  with  the  new  king  a  morę  intimate 
alliance  than  ever  before  or  after  existed  between  a  He- 
brew  king  and  a  foreign  prince.  The  alliance  seems  to 
have  been  very  substantially  beneficial  to  both  parties, 
and  withont  it  Solomon  would  scarcely  have  been  able 
to  realize  all  the  great  designs  he  had  in  view.  In  con- 
sideration  of  large  quantiŁies  of  com,  winę,  and  oil  fur- 
nished  by  Solomon,  the  king  of  Tyre  agreed  to  supply 
from  Lebanon  the  timbcr  requinKl  for  the  Tempie,  to 
float  it  along  the  coast,  and  delivcr  it  at  Joppa,  which 
was  the  port  of  Jerusalem  (1  Kings  v,  1  Bq. ;  ix,  10  sq. ; 
1  Chroń,  ii,  8  9q.).  The  va8t  commeroe  of  Tyre  madę 
gold  very  plcntiful  there ;  and  Hiram  supplied  no  less 
than  500  talents  to  Solomon  for  the  omamental  works 
of  the  Tempie,  and  received  in  return  twenty  towns  in 
Galilee,  which,  when  he  came  to  inspect  them,  pleaae<i 
him  so  little  that  he  applied  to  them  a  name  of  con- 
tempt,  and  restored  them  to  the  Jewish  king  (2  Chroń. 
viii,  2).  See  Cabui-  It  does  not,  however,  appear  that 
the  good  understanding  between  the  two  kings  was  bro- 
ken  by  this  unpleasant  circumstance,  for  it  was  after 
this  that  Hiram  snggested,  or  at  least  took  part  in,  Sol- 
omon*s  traific  to  the  Eastem  Seas,  which  certainly  could 
not  have  been  undertaken  by  the  Hebrew  king  without 
his  assistance  in  providing  shipa  and  experienced  mari- 
ners  (1  Kings  ix,  27;  x,  11,  etc;  2  Chroń,  viii,  18;  ix, 
10,  etc).     RC.  cir.  1010.     See  Ophir;  Solomon. 

Josephus  has  presenred  a  valuable  fragment  of  the 
history  of  Mercander,  a  native  of  Ephesus,  relating  to 
the  intercoursc  of  Hiram  and  Solomon,  professedly  taken 
from  the  Syrian  archiveB  (Apian,  i,  18).  *^  After  the 
death  of  Abibalus,  Hiromus,  his  son,  succeeded  him  in 
his  kingdom,  and  reigned  thirty-four  yeais,  haviug  lived 
iifty-three.  He  laid  out  that  part  of  the  city  which  is 
called  Eurychoron,  and  consecrated  the  golden  column 
which  is  in  the  tempie  of  Jupiter.  And  he  went  up 
into  the  forcst  on  the  mountain  called  libanus,  to  fell 
cedars  for  the  roofs  of  the  temples;  and  having  demol- 
iahed  the  ancient  temples  he  rebuilt  them,  and  oonae- 


crated  the  fanea  of  Hereolea  and  Aatarte:  he  oańsiracted 
that  of  Hercules  first,  in  the  month  Peiitiaa;  then  that 
of  Astarte,  when  he  had  overcome  the  Tityiana  wbo  had 
refused  to  pay  their  tribute ;  and  when  he  had  aobjectcd 
them  he  retumed.  In  hia  time  was  a  oertain  yoaog 
man  named  Abdemonua,  who  nsed  to  solre  the  probŁena 
which  were  propounded  to  him  by  Solomon,  king  of  Je- 
rusalem." Acoording  to  the  same  authority  (t&  i,  17), 
the  historian  Dius^  likewise  from  the  Tyrian  aniials^  aaya, 
*'  Upon  the  death  of  Abibalus,  his  son  Hiromoa  sooceed- 
ed  to  the  kingdonu  He  raised  the  eastem  parta  q€  the 
city,  and  enliuged  the  citadel,  and  joined  it  to  the  tem- 
pie of  Jupiter  Olympius,  which  atood  before  upon  an 
island,  by  filling  up  the  intennediate  space ;  and  he 
adomed  that  tempie  with  donations  of  gold,  and  he  went 
up  into  Libanus  to  cut  timber  for  the  oonatmction  of  the 
temples.  And  it  is  said  that  Sokimon,  who  at  that  time 
reigned  in  Jerusalem,  sent  enigmaa  to  Hiromua,  and  de- 
sired  others  in  return,  with  a  proposal  that  whichaoever 
of  the  two  was  unable  to  solve  them,  ahould  forfett  moo- 
ey  to  the  other.  Hiromus  agreed  to  the  propoaal,  but 
was  unable  to  sQlve  the  enigmas,  and  paid  treasurea  to 
a  large  amount  as  a  forfeit  to  Solomon.  And  it  ia  aaid 
that  one  Abdemonua,  a  Tyrian,  8olved  the  enigmaa,  and 
proposed  others  which  Solomon  was  not  able  to  imzid- 
dle,  for  which  he  repaid  the  fine  to  Hiromua"  (CoKy'a 
Andeia  Fraffments,  p.  193.)  Some  of  these  liddles^  the 
Jewish  hiatorian  statea  (t&.  i,  17),  were  extant  in  hia  day ; 
and  in  A  nt,  viii,  2, 6, 7,  he  give8  what  he  dedarea  to  be 
authentic  oopiea  of  the  epistles  that  passed  between 
the  two  kings  respecting  the  materials  for  the  Tempie. 
See  Lebanon.  With  the  letters  in  1  Kinga  v,  and  2 
Chroń,  ii,  may  be  compared  not  ouly  his  copies  of  the 
letters,  but  also  the  still  less  authentic  letten  between 
Solomon  and  Hiram,  and  between  Solomon  and  Yaphies 
(Apries?),  which  are  pre8erved  by  Eupolemon  (ap,  Ea- 
sebius,  /Vepp.  Evang.  ix,  80),  and  mentioned  by  Alexanr 
der  Polyhistor  (Oem.  Alex.  Stronu  i,  24,  p.  332).  Some 
Phoenician  histońans  (ap.  Tatian,  cont.  Grac.  §  37)  re^ 
late  that  Hiram,  besides  auppljang  timber  for  the  Tem- 
pie, gave  his  daughter  in  marriage  to  Solomon.  Jew- 
bh  writers  in  less  ancient  times  cannot  overlook  Hizam*a 
uncircumdsion  in  his  senricea  towards  the  building  of 
the  Tempie.  Their  legends  relate  (Eisenm.  EiU.  Jud,  i, 
868)  that  because  he  was  a  God-fearing  man,  and  built 
the  Tempie,  he  was  received  alive  into  Paradiae ;  but 
that,  after  he  had  been  there  a  thousand  yeais,  he  ain- 
ned  by  pride,  and  was  thrust  down  into  helL  Eupole- 
mon (Euseb.  Prap.  Evang,  ix,  30)  sutes  that  David,  af- 
ter a  war  with  Hiram,  reduced  him  to  the  ooudition  of 
a  tribuŁaiy  prince.    See  David. 

Some  have  ręgarded  this  Hiram  aa  a  dilTerent  penon 
from  the  friend  of  David,  sińce  Josephus  states  that  the 
Tempie  was  built  in  the  twelfth  year  of  the  reign  of  the 
Tyrian  king  who  aided  Solomon  in  the  work  {Apion^  i, 
17  sq.;  the  eleventh,  according  to  i4n/<viii,  3, 1);  but 
this  is  probably  only  by  a  oomputation  of  the  hiatoiian, 
whose  numerical  calculations  in  these  pointa  are  far 
from  trustwoTthy .  (See  Nessel,  Dis*,  de  amicUia  Salom, 
eś  Hiramij  Upsal,  1734.)  Hiram  is  also  spoken  of  by 
Herodotus  (ii,  44)  as  the  builder  of  new  temples  to  Hera- 
cles,  Melcart,  and  Astarte,  and  the  adonier  of  that  of 
Zeus-Baalsamin. 

Ewald  (Geach,  Israely  HI,  i,  28, 83)  and  Mover8  (II,  i, 
826  sq.,446  są.)  give  a  Hiram  1 1,  who  reigned  from  651- 
532  RC,  toward  the  close  of  the  Cha]d.-Babyk>nian  em- 
pire, and  who  is  not  mentioned  in  the  Bibl& 

Dr.  Kobinson  describes  a  reraaikable  monument  of 
Solomon's  ally,  still  extant,  which  he  pasaed  a  little  be- 
yond  the  village  of  Hunaneh,  on  his  way  from  Safed  to 
Tyre  {Bib.  Bes.  iii,  385).  "  It  is  an  inmieoae  saroopha- 
gus  of  limestone,  resting  lipon  a  pedestal  of  large  hewn 
Stones;  a  oonspicuous  ancient  tomb, bearing  among  the 
common  people  the  name  of  Kaibr  Hairan,  *■  Sepulchre 
of  Hiram.'  The  sarcophagus  measures  twelve  feet  long 
by  six  f^t  in  height  and  breadth;  the  lid  ia  three  feet 
thicky  and  remaina  in  ita  original  poaitian;  but  a  hole 


HIRAM 


21S 


HIRMOLOGION 


htt  been  broken  tbroogh  the  saicophagiu  at  one  end. 
The  pedesul  consists  of  three  layen  of  the  like  gpecies 
of  8U»e,  each  of  three  feet  thick,  the  upper  layer  pro- 
jfcting  over  the  othen;  the  Stones  are  luge,  and  one 
of  them  measnres  nine  feet  in  length.  This  gray, 
weatlur-beaten  monument  stands  here  alone  and  soli- 
tary,  bearing  the  marka  of  high  antiqaity;  but  the 
name  and  the  reoord  of  hun  by  nirhom  or  for  whom  it 


The  "  Tomb  of  HiraoL" 

was  erected  have  perished,  like  his  ashes,  forever.  It 
is  indeed  possiblethat  the  present  name  may  have  come 
down  by  tradition,  and  that  this  sepolchre  once  held  the 
doat  of  the  friend  and  aUy  of  Solomon ;  morę  probably, 
howerer,  it  is  merely  of  Mohammedan  application,  like 
so  many  other  names  of  Hebrew  renown,  attached  to 
thcir  wdya  and  monuments  in  every  part  of  Palestine. 
I  know  of  no  historical  tracę  having  reference  to  this 
tomb:  and  it  had  first  been  mentioned  by  a  Frank  trav- 
dler  (Monro,  1838)  only  fiye  3rearB  befóre."  (See  also 
Thomson,  Land  and  Book,  i,  290  8q.) 

3.  The  son  of  a  widów  of  the  tribe  of  Dan,  and  of  a 
Tyrian  father.  He  was  sent  by  the  king  of  the  same 
name  to  execute  the  principal  works  of  the  interior  of 
the  Tempie,  and  the  yarious  utensils  reąuired  for  the 
aacred  senrices  (1  Kings  vii,  13, 14, 40).  We  recognise 
in  the  enuroeration  of  this  man*s  talents  by  the  king  of 
Tyre  a  character  common  in  the  industrial  histoiy  of 
the  ancients  (comp.  those  of  Bezaleel,  £xod.  xxxi,  3-5), 
namdy,  a  skilful  artificer,  knowing  all  the  arts,  or  at 
least  many  of  those  arts  which  we  practise,  in  their  dif- 
ferent  bnnches.  See  Handicraft.  It  is  probable 
that  he  was  selected  for  th»  purpose  by  the  king  from 
amflog  oihera  eąually  gifled,  in  the  notion  that  his  half- 
Hebrew  blood  wouM  render  him  the  morę  acceptable  at 
Jerasalem.  &C.  cir.  1010.  He  is  called  "Huram*"  in 
2  Chroń,  ii,  13;  iv,  11, 16-,  and  '^Hirom"  in  the  margin 
of  1  Kings  vii,  40.  In  2  Chroń,  ii,  18,  ■>aK  D^in  is 
ttndered  **Huram  my  father'sf  so  in  2  Chron.lv,  16, 
t'^JI  enąn  is  rendered  ^*Huram  his  father;"  where, 
howerer,  the  words  *fnK  and  n*^nK  can  hardly  bekuig  to 

"iv.-s' 


the  name,  bat  are  appellations;  so  that  "ffuram  my  (or 
hu)  father'*  seems  to  mean  Huram  my  cotauellor,  i  e. 
/breman,  or  masten^oorkman, 

Hiroa'niui  (TpKoyóCf  i.  e.  Hyrcamu)^  "a  son  of 
Tobias,"  who  had  a  huge  treasore  plaoed  for  security  in 
the  treasury  of  the  Tempie  at  the  time  of  the  visit  of 
Heliodorus  (2  Mace  iii,  11),  B.C  cir.  187.  Josephus 
also  mentiona  "children  of  Tobias"  (wai^cc  Tw/3ioi;, 
Ara,  xii,  5,  1),  who,  however, 
belonged  to  the  faction  of  Men- 
daus,  and  notices  especially  a 
son  of  one  of  them  (Joseph)  who 
was  named  Hyrcanus  {Ani.  xii, 
4,  2  8q.).  But  there  is  no  suf- 
ficient  reason  for  identifying  the 
Hyrcanus  of  2  Mace  with  this 
prandton  of  Tobias  either  by 
supposing  that  the  ellipsis  (tov 
Tai/3iot;)  is  to  be  8o  filled  up 
(Grotius,  Calmet),  or  that  the 
sons  of  Joseph  were  popularly 
named  after  their  grandfather 
(Ewald,  Gesch,  iv,  809),  which 
could  scarcely  have  been  the 
case  in  consequence  of  the  great 
eminence  of  their  father. — 
Smith.    See  Maccabees. 

The  name  of  Hyrcanus  oc- 
cnrs  at  a  later  period  under  the 
Maccabees.  It  bas  been  thought 
that  it  was  adopted  on  account 
of  a  victory  gained  by  John,  the 
son  and  successor  of  Simon  Mac- 
cabieus,  over  the  Hyrcanians 
(Euseb.  Chroń,  lib.  ii;  Sulp.  Se- 
verus,  Hisi.  Sacr.  lib.  ii,  c.  xxvi). 
Josephus  informs  us  that  Hyr- 
canus accompanied  Antiochus 
VH  Sidctes  into  Parthia,  and 
Nicolaus  of  Damascus  says  that 
a  trophy  was  erected  at  the  riv- 
er  Lycus  to  oommcmorate  the 
victory  over  the  Farthian  gen- 
erał {A  ni,  xiii,  8, 4).  The  Hyr- 
canians were  a  nation  whose 
tenritory  was  bounded  on  the  north  by  the  Caspian 
Sea,  and  would  thus  be  at  no  great  distance  froro  Far- 
thia,  where  John  HjTcanus  had  gained  the  victoiy. 
It  is  remarkable  that  the  dilferent  statements  agree  in 
the  position  of  the  countries,  Hyrcania,  Parthia,  and 
the  river  Lycus  (of  Assyria)  being  contiguous.  As  Jo- 
sephus, however,  does  not  give  any  explanation  of  the 
name  {A  »i/.  xiii,  7,  4 ;  War,  i,  2,  8),  and  the  son  of  Si- 
mon is  nowhere  called  Hyrcanus  in  1  Mace,  the  reason 
for  its  assumption  is  uncertain. — Kitto.    See  H  yrcamus. 

Hireling  ('^'^ąb,  takir';  iŁut^utToc),  a  laborer  who 
is  employed  on  hire  for  a  limited  time  (Job  xii,  1 ;  xivy 
6 ;  Mark  i,  20).  By  the  Mosaic  law  such  a  one  was  to 
be  paid  his  wages  as  soon  as  his  work  was  over  (Lev. 
xix,  18).  The  little  interest  which  would  be  felt  by 
such  a  temporary  laborer,  compared  with  that  of  the 
shepherd  or  permanent  keeper  of  the  flock,  fumish  a 
striking  illustration  in  one  of  our  Lord*s  discourses  (John 
X,  12, 13).  The  working-day  in  the  East  begins  with 
the  rising  of  the  sun,  and  ends  when  it  sets.  llie  para- 
ble  in  Matt.  xx,  1-14,  is  interesting,  not  only  as  show- 
ing  what  M'ere  the  day's  wages  of  a  laborer  at  this  pe- 
riod in  Judiea,  "a  penny,"  i.  e.  the  Roman  denarius, 
about  flfteen  cents  of  our  money,  but  also  as  showing 
that  the  salvation  of  the  Gentiles  can  in  itself  become 
no  impediment  to  the  Jews ;  and  as  etemal  life  is  the 
free  gift  of  God,  he  has  a  right  to  give  it  in  whatever 
proportions,  at  whatever  times,  and  on  whatever  condi- 
tions  he  pleases.     See  Servai9t  ;  Wages,  ete 

HinnologiOll  (f  ip/ioXuyiov),  a  coUection  of  hirmoi; 
also  the  exaltation  of  the  Fanaghia  (q.  v.)  in  the  Greek 


HIRMOS 


274 


HIRSCHEB 


Chuich(^eaii^ni8t,oftheEcut€rnChurch,p,890).    See 

HiRMOS. 

Hlrmos,  or  rather  Irmos  (cipftóC)  a  seriea)  is  the 
name  of  a  strophe  in  a  Greek  h^-miu  "  The  model  of 
succeeding  Btaiuas,  80  called  as  draMring  others  aiter  it." 
— Walcott,  Sac  Archmology  (8vo,  London,  1868). 

Himlieim  or  EUmhaym,  Hieronymus,  a  distin- 
guished  Roman  Catholic  theologian,  was  bom  at  Trop- 
pau,  proYince  of  Silesia,  in  1685.  He  took  orders  in 
1669,  and  pursued  his  theological  studies  at  Prague  wi- 
til  appointed  instractor  in  philosophy  at  the  Norbertin 
College.  A  short  time  afber  he  was  madę  abbe  of 
Mount  Sion,  and  later  generał  vicar  of  Bohemia,  Mora- 
via,  Silesia,  and  Austria.  Hiraheim  is  gcmerally  ranked 
among  modem  skeptics,  and  most  of  his  works  bave 
been  placed  in  the  Roman  /niear.  He  was  a  great  hater 
of  the  Protestant  Church,  and  cmployed,  in  common 
with  a  number  of  other  theologians  of  his  Church,  to 
oombat  Protestantism,  skeptical  weapons,  as  he  saw  no 
prospect  of  vanquŁshing  them  in  the  dogmatic  field. 
He  died  August  27, 1769.  His  most  important  work  is 
De  typho  generit  kumanij  swe  scierUiarum  ktunanarum 
mani  acvenło«o  tumore,  difficuUaUy  labiUtaU^  faUitai£j 
jactantiOf  prcBSumptione^  incommodU  et  periculiSf  łracta- 
łU8  brevist  etc.  (Prague,  1676, 4to),  put  into  the  Irtdex  April 
14, 1682.-J(Jcher8,  Gekhrł.  Lex.  Addenda  ii,  2018 ;  Kmg, 
PhilosopkUches  Handwórłerb.  ii,  438 ;  Hoefer,  Nouv,  Biog. 
GirUr.  xxiv,  791.     (J.  H.  W.) 

Hirom.    See  Hiram. 

Hirech,  Andreas,  a  Lutheran  minister  of  the  latter 
half  of  the  last  century.  He  studied  theology  at  Stras- 
burg, and  filled  Beveral  positions  as  preacher,  but  gave 
dissatisfaction  to  the  people,  and  was  driven  from  each 
of  them  in  sucoession.  Notwithstanding  all  persecu- 
tion,  he  found  sufficient  time  to  write  several  works, 
among  which  are,  Kircherus  JesuUa  GermanicB  redona^ 
tuSy  etc  (Halle,  1662,  8vo) : — ReUffiorugesprach  zwiscken 
tweierlei  ReUgionwerwandten  (Rottenburg,  1672, 4to)  :— 
Predigten  tmd  Gelegenkeitsfchrijien  (ibid.  1678,  8vo).~ 
Jocher,  GelehrL  Lex,  Addenda  ii,  2018. 

Hirech,  Carl  ChriBtian,  a  German  theologian, 
was  bom  at  Hersbrack  October  20, 1704.  He  studied  at 
Altorf,  Leipzig,  and  other  unirersities,  and  went  to  the 
theological  semuuiry  at  Nurem burg  in  1729.  He  en- 
tered  the  mimstry  in  1734,  and  in  174d  was  appointed 
deacon  of  Lorenz  Church  at  Nurembiu^.  He  died  Feb. 
27, 1754.  His  works  are :  Hadriani  PontU  Hiitorue  TA- 
bri  rariores : — Yenerab.  A  gnetis  Blaiwibeckin  Viła  et  ReV' 
elationes  (Frankf.  and  Leip.  1735) : — Caiechisniue  Hisło- 
r«B(NUmb.  1762,8vo)  •.—LebensbescJireib.aUerGeisdichen 
Niirnbergs  (oontinued  by  WilfiTel  and  Waldau,  published 
in  1756-1785,  4to) :  to  this  work  he  devoted  his  time 
mainly.  He  also  ¥rrote  a  number  of  monographs  insert- 
ed  in  the  Acta  Jlistor.  ecdes.  and  ii\  the  Acta  Scholttst, 
of  NurembuTg. — Jocher,  Gelehii,  y>x.  Append.  ii,  2021 ; 
Hoefer,  A^owr.  Biog.  Gener,  xxiv,  793 ;  Doring,  Gelehrt, 
Theoł.  DeutschL  i,  738. 

Hirsoh-Chotaoli,  Zebi,  ben-Jerachmibl,  a  Polish 
Rabbi,  and  one  of  the  most  eloquent  preachers  of  the 
]7th  century,  was  bom  at  Cracow,  but  spent  his  later 
days  in  Germany.  He  gained  renown  as  an  author  by 
•łąS  rtm,  or  Hereditas  decoris  ex  Jer.  iii,  19  (Frankf. 
1721,  foL) ;  an  allegorical  commentaiy  on  the  Penta- 
tench,  wiitten  in  German,  with  Hebrew  characters,  and 
in  the  main  drawn  from  "  Zokar"  one  of  the  works  of 
the  Cabalists :— K^ JCn"!  ncąd,  Sabbatkumfesti  (l'Urth, 
1608, 4to) :— *^S2t  T^^H,  or  Desiderium  decoris^  a  com- 
mentory  on  "  tAune  Żohar^  (Amsterd.  1706,  fol.),  etc.— 
FUrst,  Bib.  Judaica^  i,  177 ;  Hoefer,  Now.  Biog.  Gener. 
xxiv.  792 ;  Jocher,  Gelehrt  Lex.  ii,  1626.     (J.  H.  W.) 

Hirschau  or  Hirsau,  a  very  celebrated  old  Ger- 
man monastery,  of  the  Benedictine  order,  in  the  dio- 
cese  of  Speier,  having  much  in  common  with  the  con- 
gregation  of  Clugny  (q.  v.).    It  is  asserted  by  the  Roman 


Gatholics  to  have  been  opened  A.D.  645 ;  but  it  was  piob*' 
ably  founded  about  880  by  oount  Erlalned  von  Oalw  and 
bishop  Notting  of  Yeroelli  The  monks  and  the  diifer- 
ent  abbots  who  inhabited  it  were  distinguished  for  thetr 
scholarship.  Some  were  authors,  others  rosę  to  high  dis- 
tinction  in  the  Church.  Among  these,  the  abbot  Wilhelm 
der  Selige  (q.  v.)  did  perhaps  morę  than  any  other  to  tsr 
tabllsh  the  noble  reputation  of  this  monastery.  After  the 
Reformation  it  became  a  Protestant  seminary  until  1692, 
when  the  French,  on  their  inva8ion  of  the  country,  de< 
stroyetl  it.  A  history  of  this  monastery  was  writteii  by 
Johann  Trittenhemius,  one  of  its  abbots,  under  the  tiile 
Chrotdcon  Ilirsaugierue  (Basil,  1559,  foL,  and  1690, 2  vola. 
fol.).— Herzog,  Real-Encgklop.  vi,  143 ;  Wetzer  u.  Welte, 
Kircken-Lex.  v,  218 ;  Real-Encgklopadie  Jur  d.  KałkoL 
DeutschL  v,  375.     See  Bknedictikes.     (J.  H.  W.). 

Hirsoher,  Johjinn  Baptist  von,  a  celebrated  Ger- 
man Roman  Catholic  theologian,  was  bom  at  AJt-Ergar- 
ten,  Wllrtemberg,  Jan.  20, 1788.  He  was  educated  at 
the  Lyceum  of  Constance  and  at  the  UniverBity  of  Frń- 
burg,  and  was  madę  a  pńest  in  1810.  He  held  the  po- 
sition  of  instructor  in  philosophy  and  theology  in  difTer- 
ent  institutions  until  1817,  when  he  was  called  as  pro- 
fessor  of  ethical  and  pastorał  theology  to  the  UnJverEity 
of  Tubingen.  In  1887  he  was  called  to  the  Unireraty 
of  Freiburg,  and  in  1839  he.  became  a  member  of  the 
cathedral  chapter  of  the  archdiocese  of  Freibnig.  He 
was  also  appointed  an  '^  ecclesiastical  connsellor,"  and, 
Bomewhat  later,  a  pńvy  counsellor  (Geheim-Raih).  In 
1849  he  was  delegate  of  the  UniverBity  of  Freibuig  iu 
the  First  Chamber  of  the  grand-duchy  of  Baden,  into 
which  he  was  subseqnently  several  times  called  by  the 
confidence  of  the  grand-duke.  In  1850  he  became  dean 
of  the  cathedral  chapter.  In  1868  he  resigned  his  pom- 
tion  at  the  university  on  account  of  111  hcalth.  He 
died  Sept  4, 1865.  Hirscher  was  one  of  the  representa- 
tive  men  of  Roman  Catholic  theology  in  the  19th  cen- 
tury. At  the  beginning  of  his  literary  career  he  was  a 
zealous  advocatc  of  liberał  reforms  within  his  Church; 
Bubsequently  he  gradually  became,  ynt\i  Mohler  (q.  v.), 
Drey  (q.  v.),  and  other  professors  of  Tubingen,  a  morę 
outspoken  champion  of  the  tenets  of  his  Church  in  op- 
position  to  Protestantism,  and  joined  his  colleagu»  as 
founder  and  co-editor  of  the  Theologische  OaariaUdtrifi 
(established  1819),  one  of  the  ablest  theological  oigsns 
of  the  Church  of  Romę.  But,  though  a  prolific  and 
prominent  writer  in  behalf  of  his  Church,  he  continued, 
even  in  later  life,  to  favor  the  introduction  of  some  re- 
forms, as  the  admission  of  the  laity  to  diocesan  synods, 
and  laid,  in  generał,  greater  stress  on  thoae  pointa  which 
the  Roman  Catholic  Church  has  in  common  with  ortho- 
dox  Protestantism  than  on  those  which  sepanUe  the  two 
churches.  He  remained  an  opponent  of  Ultramontane 
theories,  and  was  therefore,  up  to  his  death,  the  objecc 
of  many  attacks  on  the  part  of  Ultramontane  writeiB. 
Sevenil  of  his  earlier  works,  in  particular  the  one  enti- 
tled  De  Missa  (Tubingen,  1821 ;  German  transL  Baden, 
1838),  in  which  he  advocated  the  uae  of  the  Latin  Urn- 
guage  at  divine  seryice,  were  put  in  the  Roman  /wfear. 
The  chief  aim  of  most  of  his  works  is  to  reprosent  the 
doctńnes  of  his  Church,  especially  those  most  oiTensiye 
to  Protestanta  and  liberał  Roman  Catholics,  in  as  favor- 
able  a  hght  as  possible.  The  most  important  among 
his  works  are  Atuichten  von  dem  Jubilaum  (TUb.  1826), 
the  second  edition  of  which  appeared  under  the  tide  Die 
Lehre  tom  hathoL  Ablau  (6th  ediLTftb.  1855) ;— Cesci 
Jesu  Chrisłi  (Tub.  1840 :  2d  edit,  1846)  .—Katechełik  (4lh 
ediL  Tub.  1840)  i—Beiracktungen  uber  Mommiliche  Kca»' 
celien  der  Fasłen  (Tub.  1848)  i—Die  HrchL  Zustande  i 
Gegenwart  (Tub.  1848)  i^Die  chridl.  Morał  (Tub.  1835, 
3  vol8. ;  5th  ed.  1850-1851)  i—BeUrage  zur  Homiletik  iu 
Katechetik  (TUb.  1852)  u—Betrachiwuf  uber  die  somtag- 
lichen  Erangelien  des  Kirchen^ahres  (6th  edit,  TUb.  1858, 
2  voK) : — ErOrtenmgen  uber  die  grossen  reUgiosen  Fror 
gen  der  Gegenwart  (3  numbers ;  8d  ed.  Freib.  1846-1 85r| : 
—Ifauptstiicke  des  chrisłhath.  Glauóens  (Tub.  1857)  :— 
Katechismus  (Freib.  1842,  and  many  edit.  sińce}:— JSe- 


HIRT 


275 


HISTORY 


irwAtmgen  uber  iSmmdicke  mmdja^  JSpisieln  (Freibarg, 
1860-1862, 2  Yols.)  :—D<u  Leben  Maria  (óth  ediu  Freib. 
186Ó).  He  Łook  a  spedal  interes!  in  tbe  education  of 
poor  and  abandoned  children,  bimself  establishing  tbree 
hotiKA  of  refuge.  He  wrote  on  this  subject  the  work 
IHe  Sorgejur  die  ńttlich  rencahrlosten  Kinder  (Freib. 
1856).  A  Yolume  of  minor  posthamous  worka  (AocA- 
cdoMene  kUimere  Schri/len,  Freib.  1868)  has  been  pub- 
lished  by  Rollfuss.  Tbis  work  contains  also  a  biogra- 
phy  of  Hirscher.— Hagenbach,  Hist,  o/Doctrmes,  transL 
by  Smith,  ii,  4ó7;  Haae,  Church  Uistory,  transL  by  Blu- 
menthal  and  Wing,  p.  664;  AUgem,  Real^Encyldop,  vii, 
€28.     (A.J.&) 

Hirt;  JoHAKN  Friedrich,  a  distinguished  German 
theokigian,  was  bom  at  Apolda,  in  Thuringia,  Aogust  14, 
1719.  He  studied  at  the  Univeraity  of  Jena,  and  in  1768 
was  madę  ext3nBoidinaiy  professor  of  pbiloeophy.  In 
1769  he  changed  to  the  chair  of  theology,  and  in  1775 
was  appointed  zegular  professor  of  theology  at  the  Uni- 
yenityof Wittenberg.  He  died  July  29, 1784.  Hirtwas 
zegaided  aa  one  of  the  first  theologians  at  the  Witten- 
beig  UniTersity,  and  inferior  to  no  other  person  as  a 
scholar  of  the  Oriental  languages.  He  is  especially 
known  in  this  department  by  the  development  which 
he  gare  to  the  systems  of  Alting  and  Danz  on  the  He- 
htKw  language  (jSyttema  irium  morarum) ;  but  the  ad- 
Tance  of  late  yeara  in  the  field  of  exegetical  theology 
deczeases  the  ralue  of  all  his  ellbrta  in  this  direction. 
His  mofit  impoirtant  works  are,  besides  a  host  of  disaer- 
tations  in  the  field  of  exegea8,  Biblia  Hebnea  cmalytiea 
(Jena,  1753, 4to) :—Philoioffigch-exeyeiisehe  Abhandlung 
&K  Paalm  xv,  14, 45  (ibid.  1763, 4to)  i—DidniUis  Christi, 
ex  efttś  remrrectione  demonstrata  (ibid.  1757, 4to)  :—Bib- 
Uontm  <mafyiicorum  pars  Ckaldaica  (ibid.  1757,  8vo) : 
—  yoOtianA  ErUSrung  d.  SprOcke  Sahmot  (ibid.  1768, 
4to)  '.-—InMłit.  Arabiea  lincum  (ibid.  1770, 8vo) i— Orient 
talisekB  und  exegtt,  BibiiotJL  (ibid.  1772-1776, 8  vols.  8vo ; 
oontinued,  mider  the  Łitle  Witttnb,  Oriental  wnd  ereget, 

BibHoiA^  Jena,  177^-1779,4  vóls.  8vo) JbchtiT.Gelehrłen 

Lex.  Addend.  ii,  2022 ;  Ddring,  Gekhrf.  Theol  Deut^cM, 
i,  740  8q. ;  Hoefer,  N<mc,  Biogrąph,  Generale^  xxiv,  795. 
(J.H.W.) 

EUrz,  Naphthau,  ben-Jacob-Elćhaman,  one  of 
the  most  celebrated  Jewish  Clabalists,  was  bom  at  Frank- 
fort-on-the-Main  in  the  latter  half  of  the  16th  ceutuiy. 
The  only  work  of  Hirz  which  was  printed,  TjfJBS^  p??, 
OT  VaUey  oftke  King  (Amst  1848,  foL),  is  a  complete 
expoee  of  the  Cabala.  The  vast  research  which  he 
madę  for  the  preparation  of  this  work  makes  it  indis- 
pensable  for  inquirers  into  tbe  CabaUstic  83r8tem.  He 
died,  FtłTst  says,  in  Palestine,  but  the  datę  is  not  cer- 
tainiy  known. — FUrst,  Bibłioth.  Judaica,  i,  401 ;  Hoefer, 
Aiwr.  Bi£fg.  Generale,  xxiv,  800.     (J.  H.  W.) 

Hirael,  Bernhard,  a  Swiss  theologian  and  Orien- 
ts^jst,  was  bom  at  ZUrich  in  1807.  He  was  for  many 
years  psator  of  a  smali  paiish  at  Pfilffikon.  Most  of 
his  Ufe  he  devoted>o  the  study  of  the  Oriental  and  San- 
flcnt  langnagea.  In  the  ecclesiastical  Tevolt  of  Sept.  6, 
1839,  he  led  the  peasants  to  the  city  of  ZUrich,  on  which 
incident  he  wrote  a  book  entitled  Mein  Antheil  a,  d.  Be- 
wgimgd,etm8ept.{Z{\x.\%SI&).  He  died  in  ParU  June, 
1847.  Among  his  worka  his  translation  of  the  dramas 
of  Kalisada,  Sakuntala  (Zurich,  1888),  and  of  Solomon*s 
Song:  Dos  Lied  d.  Lieder  (ibid.  1840),  and  the  Hebrew 
poem  Geaicht  d,  Todaboten  «.  d  Erdkreis  (ibid.  1844), 
are  best  known. — ^Hoefer,  Nows.  Biog,  GhUr,  xxiv,  801 ; 
BkoekhaiM,  Ccmie.  Lex,  vii,  946. 

Hirzel,  Johann  Heinrich,  a  German  theologian, 
was  bom  at  ZUiich  (Switzerland)  Dec.  18,  1710.  In 
1737  he  was  appointed  professor  of  oratory  and  Church 
history  at  the  univer8ity  of  his  place ;  in  1745,  of  logie 
sod  ihetoric;  and  in  1759  was  called  to  the  chair  of 
theokgy.  He  died  Kov.  20, 1 764.  Of  his  writings,  most 
renained  in  MS.  He  published  Disp,  de  rerbo  Dei  unico 
rrftrrmaUB  Beliff./undamefUo  CZUr.  1760, 4to)  ^-Ditp,  de 


m  et  ampUtudine  nonUnis  Div.  Jehotah  Zebaoth  (ibid 
1762,  4to).— Jocher,  Gelehrten  Lex%kon,  Add.  ii,  2025i 
(J.H.W.) 

HiBB  (py^t  tharak%  to  whietle)^  a  term  nsually  ex- 
pressing  insult  and  oontempt  (Job  xxvii,  28) ;  so  in  the 
denunciation  of  the  destnicfion  of  the  Tempie  (1  Kings 
ix,  8 ;  comp.  Jer.  xix,  8 ;  xlix,  17,  etc.).  To  cali  any  one 
with  hissing  is  a  mark  of  power  and  authority  (Isa.  v, 
26),  and  the  prophet  Zechariah  (x,  8),  speaking  of  the 
return  firom  Babylon,  says  that  the  Lord  will  gather  the 
house  of  Judah,  as  it  were  with  a  hiss,  and  bring  them 
back  into  their  own  country :  an  image  familiar  to  his 
readers,  as  Theodoret  and  Cyril  of  Alexandria  remark 
that,  in  Syria  and  Palestme,  those  who  looked  after  bees 
drew  them  out  of  their  hives,  canied  them  into  the 
fields,  and  brought  them  back  again,with  the  sound  of 
a  flute  and  the  noise  of  hissing  (Isa.  vii,  18).    See  Bee. 

HistopSd^  Ciarócy  a  most  ofa  ekip,  and  irovc,  a 
fooi\  a  term  applied  to  certain  heretics,  chiefiy  Euno- 
mians,  who  baptiżed  only  the  upper  parts  of  the  body  as 
far  as  the  breast,  and  this  with  the  heels  upward*and 
the  head  downward  {tovc  iróSac  aim,  Kai  rijv  cc0aXi)v 
Karta),  Hence  the  name  Bisłopedee,  or  Pederecti,  See 
Epiphanius, //osre^.  c.  79;  Bingham,  (?n^.  £:cc^«.  bk.  xl, 
chap.  xi,  §  4. 

Historles,  a  name  applied  to  anthems  composed 
either  out  of  Scripture  or  from  live8  of  the  saints.— Wal- 
cott,  Sacred  A  rehaoi.  p.  812. 

History,  in  its  modem  sense,  is  hardly  a  term  that 
expre8Bes  the  conoeption  of  the  sacred  writers,  who  nev- 
ertheless  have  given  us  invaluable  materials  for  its  con- 
struction.  The  earliest  records  of  the  O.  T.  are  rather 
family  pedigreea  (niiyp,  generations),  and  the  GospeŁj 
and  Acts  are  properly  memoirs  and  personal  memoranda. 
See  Chro}40logy. 

1.  It  is  eyident,  however,  that  the  Hebrew  people  were  a 
commemoratite  race;  in  other  words,  they  were  given  to 
creating  and  preserying  memorials  of  important  events. 
£ven  in  the  patriarcłud  times  we  find  monuments  set 
up  in  order  to  commemorate  events.  Jacob  (Gen.  xxviii, 
18)  "  set  up  a  pillar"  to  perpetuate  the  memoiy  of  the 
diyine  piomise ;  and  that  these  monuments  had  a  relig- 
ious  import  and  sanction  appeais  from  the  statement 
that "  he  poured  oil  upon  the  top  of  the  pillar"  (see  Gen. 
xxxi,  45 ;  Josh.  iv,  9 ;  1  Sam.  vii,  12 ;  Judg.  ix,  6).  Long- 
lived  trees,  such  as  oaks  and  terebinth8,were  madę  use  of 
as  remembrancers  (Gen.  xxxv,  4 ;  Josh.  xxiv,  26).  Com- 
memorative  names,  also,  were  given  to  persons,  places, 
and  things ;  and  from  the  earliest  periods  it  was  usual  to 
substitute  a  new  and  descriptive  name  for  an  old  one, 
which  may  in  its  origin  have  been  descriptive  too  (Exod. 
ii,  10 ;  Gen.  ii,  23 ;  iv,  1).  Genealogical  tables  appear, 
moreover,  to  have  had  a  very  early  exi8tenoe  among 
the  people  of  whom  the  Bibie  speaks,  being  carefully 
preserved  first  memoriter,  aflerwards  by  writing,  among 
family  treasures,  and  thns  tiansmitted  from  age  to  age. 
These,  mdeed,  as  might  be  expected,  appear  to  have  been 
the  first  beginnings  of  historyka  fact  which  is  illustra- 
ted  and  confirmed  by  the  way  in  which  wh4t  we  should 
term  a  nairatiye  or  historical  sketch  is  spoken  of  in  the 
Bibie,  that  is,  as  "the  book  of  the  generadon"  ("of 
Adam,*'  Gen.  v,  1) :  a  modę  of  speaking  which  is  applied 
even  to  the  account  of  the  creation  (Gen.  ii,  4), "  These 
are  the  generations  of  the  heavens  and  the  earth  when 
they  were  created."  The  genealogical  tables  in  the  Bi- 
bie (speaking  gcnerally)  are  not  only  of  a  very  early 
datę,  but  are  free  from  the  mixtures  of  a  theogonical 
and  cosmogonical  kind  which  are  fomid  in  the  e^rly  lit- 
eraturę of  other  primitive  nations,  wearing  the  iq)pear- 
ance  of  being,  as  far  at  least  as  they  go,  tnie  and  com- 
plete lists  of  indiyidual  and  family  descent  (Gen.  v,  1). 
But  perhaps  the  most  remarkable  fact  connected  with 
this  subject  is  the  employment  of  poetry  at  a  very  early 
period  to  perpetuate  a  knowledge  of  historical  events. 
£veu  in  Gen.  iv,  23,  in  the  case  of  Lamech,  we  find  po« 


HISTORY 


276 


raSTORT 


etry  thus  em]>loyed,  tbat  is,  by  the  great-gnuidson  of 
the  primitiye  father.  Other  instances  may  be  found  in 
£xocL  xy ;  Jadg.  v;  Josh.  x,  13;  2  Sam.  i,  18. 

2.  The  souices  of  Biblical  histoiy  are  chiefly  the  Bib- 
lical  books  themselYea.  Any  attempt  to  fix  the  precise 
value  of  these  sources  in  aicritical  point  of  view  would 
reqiiire  a  yolume  inatead  of  an  article.  Whatever  hy- 
potheBtB,  howeyer,  may  eyentually  be  beld  touching  the 
exact  time  when  these  books,  or  any  of  them,  were  put 
into  their  actual  shape,  as  also  touching  the  mateiials 
out  of  which  they  were  fonned,  one  thin^  appears  very 
certain,  that  (to  take  an  instanoe)  Genesis,  the  earliest 
book  (probably),  contains  most  indubitable,  as  well  as 
most  interesting  historical  facts ;  for  though  the  age,  the 
modę  of  llfe,  and  the  state  of  cultnre  differ  so  widely 
from  OUT  own,  we  cannot  do  otherwise  than  feel  that  it 
is  among  men  and  women,  parents  and  children— beings 
of  like  passions  with  ourselyes — and  not  with  merę  crea- 
Uons  of  fancy  or  fraud,  that  we  conyerae  when  we  pe- 
Tuse  the  narratiyes  which  this  composition  has  so  long 
presenred.  The  conyiction  is  much  strengthened  in  the 
minds  of  those  who,  by  personal  acquaintanoe  with  the 
early  profane  writers,  are  able  to  compare  their  produc- 
tions  with  those  of  the  Hebrews,  which  were  long  antę- 
rior,  and  must,  had  they  been  of  an  equally  earthly  ori- 
gin,  haye  been  at  least  eąoally  deformed  by  fablc.  The 
simpie  comparison  of  the  account  given  in  Genesis  of  the 
creation  of  the  world  with  the  Cosmogonies  of  heathen 
writer?,  whether  Hmdu,  Greek,  or  Latin,  ia  enough  to 
assure  the  impartial  reader  that  a  purer,  if  not  a  higher 
influence,  presided  oyer  the  composition  of  Genesis  than 
that  whence  proceeded  the  legenda  or  the  philosophies 
of  heathenism ;  nor  ia  the  conclusion  in  the  slightest  do- 
gree  weakened  on  a  closer  scrutiny  by  any  discrepancy 
which  modem  science  may  seem  to  show  between  ita 
own  discoyeries  and  the  statements  in  (irenesis.  The 
Biblical  history,  as  found  in  its  Biblical  souices,  has  a 
decided  peculiarity  and  a  great  recommendation  in  the 
fact  that  we  can  tracę  in  the  Bibie  morę  clcarly  and 
fuUy  than  in  connection  with  any  other  history,  the 
first  crude  elements  and  the  early  materials  out  of  which 
all  history  must  be  constructed. 

How  far  the  literaturę  supplied  in  the  Bibie  may  be 
only  a  relic  of  a  literaiy  cydus  called  into  bcing  by  the 
felicitous  circnmstances  and  fayorable  constitution  of 
the  great  Shemitic  family,  but  which  has  perished  in 
the  lapse  of  ages,  it  is  now  impossible  to  determine ;  but 
had  the  other  portions  of  this  imagined  literaturo  been 
of  equal  religious  yalue  with  what  the  Bibie  offers,  there 
is  littlc  risk  in  aflirming  that  mankind  would  scarcely 
haye  allowed  it  to  be  lost  The  Bibie,  howeyer,  bears 
traces  that  ita  were  not  the  only  books  current  in  the 
time  and  country  to  which  it  relates;  for  wiiting,  writ- 
ers,  and  books  are  mentioned  without  the  emphasis  and 
distinction  which  always  accompany  new  discoyeries  or 
peculiar  local  poescssions,  and  as  ordinary,  wcU-known, 
and  matter-of-course  thinga.  It  is  oertain  that  we  do 
not  possess  all  the  works  which  were  known  in  the  early 
periods  of  Israelitish  history,  sińce  in  Numb.  xxi,  14  we 
read  of  "  the  book  of  the  wara  of  the  Lord,*'  and  in  Josh. 
X,  13,  of  "  the  book  of  Jasher." 

Without  writing,  history,  properly  so  called,  can  haye 
no  existence.  Under  the  head  Writino  wc  shall  tracę 
the  early  rudiments  and  progress  of  that  important  art : 
here  we  mereły  remark  that  an  acquaintance  with  it  was 
possessed  by  the  Hebrews  at  least  as  early  as  their  Exo- 
dus from  Egypt— a  fact  which  shows  at  least  the  possi- 
bility  that  the  age  of  the  Biblical  records  stands  some 
'thousand  years  or  more  prior  to  the  earliest  Greek  his- 
torian,  Herodotus. 

Other  sources  for  at  least  the  early  Biblical  historj' 
are  comparatiyely  of  smali  yalue.  Josephus  has  gone 
oyer  the  same  periods  as  those  the  Bibie  treats  of,  but  ol>- 
yiously  had  no  sources  of  con9equencc  rclating  to  primi- 
tiye times  which  are  not  open  to  ns,  and  in  regaid  to 
those  times  does  little  more  than  add  here  and  there  a 
patch  of  a  legendary  or  traditional  hue  which  could  well 


haye  been  spared.  Hia  Greek  and  Roman  predilectłODS 
and  his  apologetical  aims  detract  from  the  yalue  of  his 
work,  while  in  relation  to  the  early  history  of  hia  country 
he  can  be  regarded  in  no  other  Ught  than  a  sort  of  philo- 
sophical  interpreter;  nor  ia  it  tiU  he  comes  to  hia  own 
age  that  he  haa  the  yalue  of  an  independent  (not  eyen 
then  an  impartial)  eye-witness  or  well-infonned  report- 
er. In  historical  criticism  and  linguistic  knowledge  he 
was  yeiy  insufficiently  fumished.  The  use  of  both  Jo- 
sephus  and  Philo  is  far  more  safe  for  the  student  of  tbe 
New  Testament  than  for  the  expoundcr  of  the  oJd.   See 

JOSKPHUS. 

llie  Talmud  and  the  Rabbina  afford  yeiy  Uttle  aasoBt- 
ance  for  the  early  periods,  but  might  probably  be  madę 
to  render  more  ser\dce  in  behalf  of  the  times  of  the  Sav- 
iour  than  has  generally  been  allowed.  The  illuatradoua 
which  Lightfoot  and  Wetatein  haye  drawn  from  these 
souices  are  of  great  yalue ;  and  Gfrbrer,  in  hia  Jakrkun- 
dert  des  HeiU  (Stuttgart,  1838),  haa  madę  ample  use  of 
the  materials  they  supply  in  order  to  draw  a  picture 
of  the  first  oentury,  a  use  which  the  leamed  authcir  ia  at 
no  smali  pains  to  justify.  The  compilations  of  the  Jew- 
ish  doctors,  howeyer,  require  to  be  employed  with  the 
greatest  caution,  sińce  the  Rabbina  were  the  depońta* 
ries,  the  expoundei8,  and  the  apologists  of  that  conupt 
form  of  the  prunitive  faith  and  of  the  Moaaic  institu- 
tiona  which  haa  been  called  by  the  diatinctiye  name  of 
Judaiam,  compriaing  a  heterogeneoua  mass  of  false  and 
true  things,  the  coUuyies  of  the  East  as  well  as  light 
from  the  Bibie,  and  which,  to  a  great  extent,  liea  under 
the  expre88  oondemnation  of  Christ  himsel£  How  eaay 
it  is  to  piopagate  fables  on  their  authority,  and  to  do  a 
disseryioe  to  the  Gospel  records,  may  be  leamt  from  the 
fact  that  okler  writeis,  in  their  undue  trust  of  Rabfain* 
ical  authority,  went  ao  far  as  to  maintain  that  no  codc 
was  allowed  to  be  kept  in  Jerusalem,  because  fowla 
scratched  undean  things  out  of  the  earth,  though  the 
authority  of  Scripture  (which  in  this  case  they  refused 
to  admit)  is  moet  express  and  dedded  (Matt  xxyi,  34 ; 
Mark  xiy,  80,  60, 72).  On  the  credibility  of  the  Rab- 
bina, see  Ravii  Diss,  PkiL  TkeoL  de  eo  cw>d  Fidei  meren^ 
tur,  etc,  in  Oehich^s  CoUect.  Opusc.  Iłist.  PML  TkeoL; 
Wolf,  ^1^  HAr,  ii,  1095 ;  Fabridna,  BiJUiog,  A  nłig.  1, 8, 
4;  Brunsmann,  Diss.  de  Judaica  (Hafni«,  1705). 

The  dassical  authors  betray  the  grosseat  ignoranoe 
almost  in  all  cases  where  they  tieat  of  tbe  origin  and 
history  of  the  Hebrew  peoplc ;  and  eyen  the  most  scri- 
ous  and  generally  philoeophic  writers  fali  into  ynlgar  et' 
rors  and  unaocountable  mistakes  as  soon  as  they  speak 
on  the  aubject.  What,  for  instance,  can  be  worse  than 
the  blunder  or  prejudice  of  Tadtus,  under  the  influence 
of  which  he  declared  that  the  Jews  deriyed  their  origin 
from  Mount  Ida,  in  Grete;  that  by  the  adyioe  of  an  ora- 
cie they  had  been  driyen  out  of  Egypt ;  and  that  they 
set  up  in  their  tempie  at  Jerusalem  aa  an  object  of  wor^ 
ship  the  figuro  of  an  ass,  sińce  an  animal  of  that  spedes 
had  directed  them  in  the  wildemess  and  dlacoyered  to 
them  a  fountain  (Tadtus,  Higł,  y,  1,  2).  Diou  Casaios 
(xxxyii,  17)  relatea  similar  fablee.  Plutarch  (^Qfuuf. 
Sympoe,  iy,  5)  makes  the  Hebrews  pay  diyine  honors  to 
swine,  as  being  thdr  instmctors  in  agriculture,  and  af- 
firms  that  they  kept  the  Sabbath  and  the  Feaat  of  Tab- 
emades  in  honor  of  Bacchua.  A  collection  of  these 
groes  misrepresentations,  together  with  a  profound  and 
successful  inquiry  into  thdr  origin,  and  a  fuU  expoaure 
of  thdr  falsehood,  has  been  giyen  by  Dr.  J.  G.  Muller,  in 
the  Thwlogiedie  Studien  und  Kritiien  (1843,  iy,  899). 

8.  The  children  of  the  faithful  Abraham  seem  to  hav« 
had  one  great  work  of  Providence  intnisted  to  them, 
namely,  the  deyeloproent,  traiismission,  and  infuaion  into 
the  world  of  the  rdigious  dement  of  ciyilization.  Thdr 
history,  accordingly,  is  the  history  of  the  riae,  progress, 
and  diffusion  of  tnie  religion,  conaidered  in  its  somve 
and  its  deyelopments.  Such  a  histoiy  must  poaaesB 
large  and  peculiar  interest  for  eyery  student  of  hmnan 
naturę,  and  pre-eminently  for  those  who  lorę  to  stndy 
the  unfoldings  of  Proyidenoe^  and  deaire  to  leam  that 


HISTORT 


211 


HISTRIOMASTIX 


gralot  of  all  aits— the  art  of  liring  aŁ  once  for  ttme 
and  lor  eienuty. 

Tbe  ftibjecUmatter  oontuned  in  the  Biblical  history 
IB  of  a  wide  and  most  esteońTe  naturę.  In  its  greatest 
lengŁh  and  fullcat  meaning  it  comes  down  from  the  cre- 
ation  of  the  world  till  near  the  cloae  of  the  Ist  centitiy 
of  the  Christian  aara,  thus  ooTering  a  apace  of  aome 
4000  yean.  The  booka  presenting  this  long  train  of 
hutorical  detaila  are  moet  diyerae  in  age,  in  kind,  in  ex- 
ecution,  and  in  wortL ;  nor  seldom  ia  it  the  fact  that  the 
modem  hiatorian  haa  to  oonatruct  his  naiTative  as  much 
out  of  the  implicationa  of  an  epistle,  the  highly-oolored 
materials  of  poctiy,  the  iar-reaching  yisiona  of  prophe- 
CT,  and  the  indirect  and  illuaiye  information  of  didactic 
and  morał  preoepta,  aa  from  the  immediate  and  espress 
atatementa  of  histoiy  strictl y  so  denominated. 

The  hiatorical  matKials  fumished  relating  to  the 
HAkw  nation  may  be  classed  under  three  great  divi- 
aiona:  1.  The  booka  which  are  oonaecrated  to  the  an- 
tiąoity  of  the  Hebrew  nation— the  perio<l  that  elapsed 
before  the  mn.  of  the  Judgea.  These  works  aro  the  Pen- 
tatench  and  the  book  of  Joehua,  which,  according  to 
Ewald  (fietddckU  da  Yolket  ItraĄ  i,  72),  properly  con- 
adtute  only  one  work,  and  which  may  be  termed  the 
great  book  of  original  docomenta.  2.  The  booka  which 
deacribe  the  timea  of  the  judgea  and  the  kings  up  to  the 
fint  destmctlon  of  Jeruaalem ;  that  ia,  Judgea,  Kinga, 
and  Samuel,  to  which  belonga  the  book  of  Ruth :  **  all 
these,"  aaya  Ewald,  **  constitute  also,  aooording  to  their 
bat  formation,  but  one  work,  which  may  be  called  the 
Great  Book  of  Kings.**  3.  The  thiid  claas  compriaes 
the  booka  Induded  under  the  head  of  Hagiographa, 
which  are  of  a  much  later  origin,  Chronicles,  with  Ezra 
and  Nebemiah,  forming  the  great  book  of  generał  his- 
tory  reacfaing  to  the  Gredan  period.  After  these  booka 
eome  Łhoee  which  are  daaaed  together  under  the  name 
of  Apocrypha,  whoae  use,  we  think,  haa  been  unduly 
ne^^ected.  Then  the  circle  of  eyangelical  recoida  be- 
gina,  which  closed  within  the  oentury  that  saw  it  open. 
Otber  booka  found  in  the  Old  and  New  Testamenta, 
which  are  not  properly  of  a  hiatorical  character,  connect 
thcmselyes  with  one  or  other  of  these  periods,  and  give 
important  aid  to  studenta  of  aacred  hiatory. 

4.  Biblical  hiatory  waa  often  treated  by  the  older  writ- 
cra  as  a  part  of  Church  Uistory  in  generał,  aince  they 
cooaideied  the  history  giren  in  the  Bibie  aa  presenting 
£llerent  and  successire  phaaea  of  the  Church  of  God 
(Bnddei  HUL  Eeda.  2  rola.  1726.29;  Stolberg,  Geach, 
der  JteliffioH  Jttu,  i,  111).  Other  writers  have  viewed 
thia  subject  in  a  morę  practical  light,  presenting  the 
diarocters  found  in  the  Bibie  for  imitation  or  aroidance; 
amonie  wbom  may  be  enomerated  Hess  {Guchichte  der 
Itrtułiim  vor  den  Zeiłen  Jegttj  ZUrich,  1775)  and  Nie- 
meyer  (Ckaracteristik  der  Bibely  Halle,  1630).  Among 
the'  roore  atrictly  leamed  writers  8everal.have  had  it 
in  riew  to  supply  the  gapa  left  in  the  suooession  of 
eventa  by  the  Bibie,  out  of  sources  found  in  profane 
writers.  Herę  the  chief  authora  are  of  Engliah  birth, 
namely,  Prideanx,  Shuckford,  Russell ;  and  for  the  New 
Testament,  the  leamed,  cautioua,  and  faiiMlealing  Lard- 
ner.  There  is  a  valuable  work  by  G.  Langen :  Yersudi 
emer  itarwunde  der  heitigm  und  profan.  $cnb.  in  der  Ge- 
ickiekU  der  Wdt  (Bayreuth,  1775-60).  Other  writera 
hare  pursued  a  strictly  chronological  method,  such  aa 
Usher  {A  tmalea  Veł.  N,  T.  Lond.  1650)  and  Dea  Yignoles 
iCknmoioffk  de  tHigtcire  SaiaU^  Berlin,  1788).  Heeren 
{ffamdbk  der  Geeekickte,  p.  50)  recommenda,  as  contain- 
ing  many  yaluable  inquirie8  on  the  monarchical  period, 
the  following  work :  J.  Bemhardi  Commentalio  de  cautia 
guiŁus  effeeUtm  »U  ul  regnum  Juda  diuŁiiu  persUteret 
quam  reymum  Itrad  (LoTanni,  1825).  Heeren  also  de- 
claies  that  Baner's  Handimch  der  GeedL  de»  Hebr.  YoUea 
(1800)  ia  the  best  introdnction  both  to  the  history  and 
the  antiquitie8  of  the  Hebrew  nation;  though  Gesenius 
Nmiplainy  that  he  ia  too  much  giren  to  the  construction 
of  hypotheaes.  The  English  reader  will  find  a  useful 
hut  not  auffidently  critiod  oompendlum  in  TAe  Hittory 


oflhŁ  HebreiD  Commonwealth,  translated  fiom  the  Ger- 
man of  John  Jahn,  D.D.,  by  a  E.  Stowe  (N.  Y.  1829, 
and  later).  A  far  morę  yaluable,  as  well  aa  morę  inter- 
esting,  yet  by  no  meana  faultiess  work,  is  Mihnan*8  //it* 
tory  o/the  Jeme  (London,  1829,  8  yola.  12mo;  rerised, 
lond.  and  N.  Y.  1870-1,  8  yola.  am.  8vo).  A  morę  le- 
cent  and  rery  yaluable  work,  Kitto's  Pictorial  Hiatory  of 
Paleetme  (Lond.  1841),  oombines  with  the  Bibie  history 
of  the  Jews  the  reaulta  of  trayel  and  antiąuarian  reaearch, 
and  ia  preceded  by  an  elaborate  Introducdon,  which 
forma  the  only  Natund  Hiatory  of  Palestine  in  our  lan- 
guagc.  A  yaluable  compendium  u  Smith'8  series  of 
"  Studenfs  Historiea**  {Old-Tettameni  Hiatory  and  New 
TeatametU  Hiatory,  Lond.  and  N.  Y.  1869,  2  yola.  12mo). 
Stanley's  Ledurea  on  Jewiak  Hiatory  (London  and  N.  Y. 
1868  sq.  2  yola.  8vo)  are  morę  brilliantly  written. 

German  theologians  are  strongly  imbued  with  the 
feeling  that  the  histoiy  of  the  Hebrews  haa  yet  to  be 
written.  Niebuhr'B  roanner  of  treating  Roman  history 
haa  had  a  great  influence  on  them,  and  haa  aroused  the 
theological  world  to  new  efforta,  which  have  by  no 
means  yet  come  to  an  end;  nor  can  we  add  that  they 
haye  hitherto  led  to  yery  definite  and  geuerally  ap- 
pn>ved  reaulta.  The  worka  of  the  leamed  Jews,  Jost 
{Geach.  der  Taraeliten  aeit  der  Maccabder,  9  yola. ;  Geach, 
dea  Judenthuma  und  Seiner  Sekten,  1857-59,8  yola.),Herz- 
feld  {Geach.  d.  VoHea  larael  r.  d,  YoUendung  dea  ZweUen  f 
Tempth  bia  tur  Einaefzung  dea  Mackabaera  Sckimcn, 
1854-67, 2  yols. 8yo), Grttta  {GeachidUe  d,Juden,n  yola. 
8yo,  not  yet  completed),  aa  well  aa  that  of  Nork  {Dat 
Leben  Moaia  vom  A  atron.  Stand,  betrachteł,  1888),  Raphall 
CPoat-HbL  Hiatory  o/the  Jewa,  N.  Y.  1866,  of  which  yola. 
i  and  ii  only  eyer  appeared),  and  others,  muat  not  be 
oyerlooked  by  the  professional  student ;  nor  will  he  fail 
to  study  with  care  the  yaluable  introductiona  to  the 
knowledge  of  the  Old  Testament  put  forth  in  Germany, 
with  which  we  haye  nothing  oomparable  in  our  lan- 
guage.  See  Inthoduction.  Of  the  morę  recent  worka 
we  may  mention  Stiihelin's  Kritiach  Unterauchungen  iiber 
den  PeiUateuch,  etc.  (1848),  and  H.  Ewald*s  Geachichłe 
dea  Yolkea  larael  bia  Chriatua  (Gntting.  1848  8q.,  1851-3, 
6  yola.  8vo),  the  first  part  of  which  has  been  translated 
into  English  (London,  1869, 2  vols.  8vo).  The  Utter  es- 
pecially  is  leamed,  acute,  and  profomid,  but  thoroughly 
peryaded  by  a  rationalistic  spiriL  Kurt2*8  Manuał  of 
Sacred  Hiatory  (Philadel.  1858, 12mo ;  from  the  German, 
Konigsberg,  1860,  8vo),  and  Hiatory  ofthe  Old  Cotenant 
^inbuigh,  1859,  8  yola.  8vo ;  from  the  German,  Ber- 
lin, 1848-65,  8  yols.  8yo),  are  morę  eyangelical,  but  less 
aearching  and  original.  Weber  und  Holtzniann*s  Geach. 
d,  Yolkea  larael  (Leipz.  1866, 2  vols.8vo)  is  rationalistic. 
The  Uitest  is  Hitzig's  GeacK  lar.  (Lpz.  1870).  For  other 
works,  see  Darling,  Cydopeadia,  coL  1830  sq.— Kitto. 

History,  Church,  Sec  Ecclksiasticał  Histo- 
ry. 

Hiatory  of  Doctrines.  See  X>octbine8,  His- 
tory OF. 

Hifltriomastiz  is  the  name  of  a  book  written  in 
1663  by  William  Płynne,  a  PuriUn  barrister,  againat 
pUiys,  maaka,  dancing,  etc.  It  ia  a  thick  quarto  of  1006 
pagea,  and  abounds  with  leaming  and  curioua  quota- 
tiona.  The  author  of  thia  work  was  arraigned  before 
the  Star  Chamber  Feb.  7,  1668,  on  account  of  passagea 
which,  it  was  alleged,  reHected  on  the  religious  con- 
duct  of  tbe  royal  house.  But  the  fact  was  that  the  au- 
thor condemned,  and  that  jiistly,  the  leyity  and  yolup- 
tuouanesa  of  the  court,  and  the  encouragement  whicl^ 
even  some  of  the  prelates  gavc  to  its  licentiousneas. 
Prynne  waa  sentenced  "  to  have  his  book  bumed  by  the 
hands  of  the  common  hangman,  to  be  put  from  the  bar, 
and  to  be  foreyer  incapable  of  his  profession,  to  be  tum- 
ed  out  of  the  society  of  Lincoln'8  Inn,  to  be  degraded  at 
Oxfonl,  to  stand  in  the  pillory  at  Westminster  and 
Cheapside,  to  lose  both  his  ears,  one  in  each  place,  to 
pay  a  fine  of  £5000,  aiul  to  suffer  perpetual  imprison- 
ment."    But  morę  remurkable  thaa  thia,  if  poasible,  waa 


HITCHCOCK 


278 


HITTITE 


the  riolent  speech  of  an  English  earl  (Donet)  on  thls 
occasioiL  "I  dedare  you  (Prynne)  to  be  a  schism- 
maker  iii  the  Church,  a  sedition  BO^wer  in  the  common- 
wealthy  a  wolf  in  sheep^s  dothing;  in  a  word,  omnium 
malorum  neąuiasimus/'  continaing  in  this  strain,  and 
closing  thus :  ^  I  would  have  him  branded  in  the  fore- 
head,  alit  in  the  nose,  and  have  his  eais  chopped  off/'— 
Neal,  Iłist,  of  łhe  PuritanSy  i,  316,  817 ;  Wood,  Athena 
Oxon.  ii,  815;  Granger,  Biog,  Jfist.  ii,  230;  Carwithen, 
Histon/  ofihe  Church  ofEngland,  ii,  78-«0.  (J.  H.  W.) 
Hitclicock,  Bd'V7ard,  D.D.,  LL.D.,  was  bom  in 
Oia  Deerfield,  Maa&,  May  24,  1793.  Povcrty,  generał 
ill  health,  ami,  worse  than  all,  an  aiTection  of  his  eyes, 
prcyented  him  from  Łhe  completion  of  a  collegiate 
course ;  but,  dcspite  this,  he  sucoeeded  in  obtaining  in 
1816  the  principalship  of  the  academy  in  his  native 
place,  and  his  succesa  aa  a  teacher  received  the  recogni- 
tion  of  Yale  College  in  the  degree  of  M.A.,  which  that 
institution  of  learning  conferred  on  him  only  two  yeara 
later.  In  1819  he  went  to  Yale,  and  atudied  theology 
under  Dr.  Taylor  for  about  three  yeara.  łlis  tirat  and 
only  settlement  in  the  ministry  was  at  Conway,  where 
he  remained  from  1821  to  1825,  whcn  agaiu  failing 
health  induced  him  to  accept  the  professorahip  of  natu- 
rai  history  and  chemistry  in  Amherat  College,  which 
gave  him  the  prospect  of  mo^  exerciae  and  less  ex- 
haustive  labora.  Ile  entered  thia  new  poaition  after 
aome  preparatory  atudy  under  Prof.  Silliman,  aenior,  of 
Yale  College.  In  1845  he  was  elected  president  of  Am- 
herat College,  and  profeaaor  of  natural  theology  and  ge- 
ology.  In  1854  he  reaigned  the  presidency,  but  atill 
continued  in  the  chair  of  geology.  He  died  Feb.  27, 
1864.  Dr.  Hitchcock  is  especially  deaerving  of  our  rec- 
ognition  in  this  place  on  account  of  hia  Rd^ion  of  Ge- 
ology and  Us  coimected  Scietux9  (Boaton,  1851, 12mo),  the 
reault  of  thirty  yeara'  atudy  and  reflection,  which  had  a 
very  extendcd  circulation  both  in  this  country,  and  in 
EurojKJ.  Among  Dr.  Hitchcock'a  pecuUar  literary  traita 
(aee  the  BibliotA.  Sacra,  July,  1851,  p.  662,  663)  may  be 
mentioned  "  hia  modę  of  anawering  the  objection  to  the 
resurrection  of  the  body;  his  proofa  from  geology  of  the 
beneyolence  of  God,  of  apecial  providence,  and  of  spccial 
divine  interpoaition  in  naturę"  (comp.  hia  articlea  in  Bib. 
Sacroj  X,  166-194,  "Relationa  and  Duties  of  the  Philos- 
opher  and  Theologian ;"  and  xi,  776-800, "  Special  Divine 
Interpositiona  in  Naturę").  Dr.  William  S.  Tyler,  pro- 
feaaor in  Amherat  College,  who  preached  a  diacourae  at 
Dr.  Hitchcock'3  funeral,  which  haa  been  printed,  gave 
*^an  admirable  eatimate  and  aummary  of  his  life,  char- 
acter,  attainmenta,  and  influence." — Appleton'a  Cydop, 
ix,  210,  and  Atmual,  1868,  p.  1428 ;  Chambera,  Cyclop. r, 
379 ;  A  mer,  Presb.  Rev,  July,  1864,  p.  528.    (J.  H,  W.) 

Hitchcock,  Enos,  D.D.,  a  Congregational  minis- 
ter, waa  born  in  Śpringfield,  Maas.,  gradiuited  at  Har\'ard 
in  1767,  and  waa  ordained  colleague  of  MnChipman,  pas- 
tor of  the  Second  Congregational  Church  of  Beverley, 
in  1771.  In  1780  he  became  a  chaplain  in  the  army, 
and  at  the  close  of  the  war  in  1783  he  took  a  pastorał 
charge  in  Piovidence,  K.  I.  He  bequeathed  at  his  death, 
which  occurred  in  1803,  $2500  as  a  fund  for  the  support 
of  the  ministry.  He  published  a  TreatUe  on  EducoHon 
(1790,  2  Yols.):— ;^crmoi»,  icUh  an  Essay  on  the  Jjord^i 
Supper  (1793-1800).— Allibone,  Dkt.  of  Auihors,  i,  852. 
'  Hitchcock,  Gad,  D.D.,  a  Unitarian  minister,  was 
bom  at  Springfield,  Mass.,  Feb.  12, 1718  or  1719.  He 
was  cducated  at  Harvard  Unireraity,  where  he  grad- 
Uated  in  1743,  and  was  ordained  and  installed  in  Pcm- 
broke  (now  Hanaon,  Mass.),  in  Octobcr,  1748.  During 
the  Revolutionary  War  he  8erve<l  aa  chaplain.  In  1787 
hia  alma  mater  conferred  on  him  the  degree  of  doctor  of 
divinity.  In  1797  he  waa  attacked  with  paralysis  while 
prcaching  to  hia  people,  from  M'hich  he  never  recovered 
80  aa  to  engage  any  further  in  active  aeryice.  He  died 
Aug.  8, 1803.  His  ¥rriting8  were  mainly  aermons  and  a 
(Dudleian)  lecture,  delivered  at  Harrard  College  in 
1779.— Sprague,  Arukofthe  A  mer.  Pulpit,  rm,  29, 


Hitt,  Daniel,  a  Methodist  Episcopal  minister  of 
oonaiderable  eminence,  waa  bom  in  Fauquier  Comit]^', 
Ya.,  entered  the  itinerancy  in  1790,  became  the  tnvel- 
ling  companion  of  biahop  Aabury  in  1807,  and  in  1808 
waa  elected  by  the  General  Conference  one  of  the  agenta 
of  the  Methodiat  Book  Concem,  the  duties  of  which  of- 
fioe  he  diachaiged  for  eight  yeara.  He  next,  with  gieat 
fldelity,  aeryed  as  presiding  elder  mitil  1822,  when  he 
became  the  trayelling  companion  of  biahop  M'Kendiee. 
In  1823  he  took  charge  of  the  Potomac  District ;  aftcr 
two  yeaia*  labors  he  passed  to  the  Carliale  District,  and 
there  doaed  his  earthly  work. ,  Mr.  Hitt  waa  a  man  of 
marked  "aimplicity  and  integrity,"  and  "the  afikbility 
of  his  manners  and  the  sweetnees  of  his  diapoaition,  in 
his  prirate  intercourse  in  aociety,  gained  him  the  affK- 
tion  of  alL"  He  died  of  typhus  fever,  in  great  peaoe  and 
surę  hope,  in  September,  lS2o,^9ftnttłe8  ofConf,  i,  507. 

Hit^tite,  or  rathcr  Chethite  (Heb.  CAi^i',  ''Pin, 
usnally  in  the  plur.  d^riH,  Sept,Xci-ratoi;  also  nn  *^:ą, 
"children  of  HethV'  fem.  Tr^V^r\,  Ezck.  xvi,  8;  pliir. 
ni^nn,  l  Kinga  xi,  1;  also  TH  niSS, « daughteia  of 
Heth,"  Gen.  xxvii,  46),  the  deńgnation  of  the  deacend- 
nta  of  Heth,  and  one  of  the  nations  of  Canaaii  (q.  v.). 

I.  Biblical  Notice3,—{l,)  With  five  exceptions,  Doticed 
below,  the  word  ia  '^P.nil="the  Chittite;"  in  the  sin- 
gular  uumber,  according  to  the  common  Hebrew  idiom. 
It  ia  occasionally  rendered  in  the  A.  V.  in  the  singulai 
number, "  the  Hittite"  (Ęxod.  xxiii,  28 ;  xjuciii,  2 ;  xxxiv, 
11 ;  Joah.  ix,  1 ;  xi,  3),  but  elsewh.  aa  a  |łlur.  (Gen.  xv, 
20;  £xod.  iii,  8,  17;  xiii,  5;  xxiii,  23;  Numb.  xiii,  29; 
DeuL  Wi,  1 ;  xx,  17 ;  Joah.  iii,  10 ;  xii,  8 ;  xxiv,  1 1 ;  Judg. 
iii,  5 ;  1  Kinga  ix,  20 ;  2  Chroń,  viii,  7 ;  Ezra  ix,  1 ;  Nch. 
ix,  8 ;  1  Eadr.  \-iii,  69,  X(rraioŁ),  (2.)  The  płural  form 
of  the  word  is  D*^rinil  =the  Chittim,  or  Hittites  (Joah. 
i, 4;  Judg. i, 26;  1  Kinga  x, 29;  2 Kinga  vii,6;  2  Chroń, 
i,  17),  (3.)  «A  Hittite  [woman]"  ia  n^^Pin  (Ezek.  xvi, 
3,  45).  In  1  Kinga  xi,  1,  the  same  word  is  rendered 
"  Hittitea." 

In  the  list  of  the  descendants  of  Koah,  Heth  occupies 
the  second  place  among  the  children. of  Canaan.  It  is 
to  be  obaerved  that  the  firat  and  second  names,  l^don 
and  Heth,  are  not  gentile  nouna,  and  that  all  the  names 
foUowing  are  gentile  nouna  in  the  aing.  Sidon  ia  called 
the  iirat-bom  of  Canaan,  though  the  naroe  of  the  town 
ia  probably  put  for  that  of  its  founder,  or  eponym,  **  the 
fiahcrman,"  'AXievc,  of  Philo  of  Byblus.  It  is  thercfoie 
probable,  as  we  find  no  city  Heth,  that  thia  is  the  name 
of  the  ancestor  of  the  nation,  and  the  gentile  noun,  chil- 
dren of  Heth,  makea  thia  almoat  ccrtain.  Afler  the  cmu- 
meration  of  the  nationa  sprung  from  Canaan,  it  is  add- 
ed,  '*And  aflerwarda  were  the  familiea  of  the  Canaanites 
apread  abroad"  (Gen.  x,  18).  Thia  paaaage  will  be  illus- 
trated  by  the  evidenoe  that  there  were  Hittites  and 
Amorites  beyond  Canaan,  and  also  beyond  the  wider 
territory  that  must  be  allowed  for  the  placing  of  the 
Hamathites,  who,  it  may  be  added,  iierhapa  had  not  mi- 
grated  from  Canaan  at  the  datę  to  which  the  list  of 
Noah*a  deacendanta  mainly  refeis  (aee  verae  19).  See 
Canaanite, 

1.  Our  first  introduction  to  the  Hittites  ia  in  the  time 
of  Abraham,  when  they  are  mentioned  among  the  in- 
habitanta  of  the  Promiaed  Land  (Gen.  xv,  20).  Abra- 
ham boughtfrom  the  Bene-Cheth, "  Children  ofHeth** 
— such  waa  thcn  their  title — the  field  and  the  cave  of 
Machpelah,  bclonging  to  Ephrou  the  Hittite  (Gen.  xxiii, 
3-18).  They  were  thcn  settled  at  the  town  which  was 
aflerwarda,  under  ita  new  name  of  Hebron,  to  beocme 
one  of  the  raoat  famoua  citiea  of  Palestine,  then  beaiing 
the  name  of  Kirjath-arba,  and  perhaps  aJso  of  Mamre 
(Gen.  xxiii,  19 ;  xxv,  9).  The  propenaties  of  the  tribe 
appear  at  that  time  to  have  been  rather  coramercial 
than  military.  The  "money  current  with  the  mer- 
chant,"  and  the  proceaa  of  weighing  it,  were  familiar  to 
them ;  the  peaceful  aaaembly  ^  in  the  gate  of  the  city** 
was  their  manner  of  receivi2ig  the  stranger  who  waa  de- 


HimTE 


2ł9 


HimTE 


sirous  of  hmTing  a  ^  posaeBsion''  **  secuied"  to  him  among 
them.  The  dignily  and  courtesy  of  their  demeanor  abo 
cooie  out  auongly  in  thi«  narrati  ve.  As  Ewald  well  says, 
Abmham  choee  his  allies  in  warfare  from  the  Amońtes, 
but  be  goes  to  the  Hittites  for  his  grave.  But  the  tribe 
was  evidently  as  yet  but  smali,  not  important  enough  to 
be  noticed  beside  **  the  Canaanite  aitd  the  Peiizzite/' 
who  shared  the  bulk  of  the  land  between  them  (Gen. 
xii,  6 ;  xiii,  7).  In  the  aouthem  part  of  the  country 
tbey  remained  for  a  considerable  period  after  this,  possi- 
Uy  extending  as  lar  as  (rerar  and  Beersheba,  a  good 
way  below  Hebron  (xxvi,  17;  xxviii,  10).  From  their 
famiiies  Esau  married  his  lirst  two  wive8  (Gen.  xxvi, 
S4;  xxxvi,  2  8q.),  and  the  fear  lest  Jacob  should  take 
the  same  cwurse  is  the  motive  given  by  Rebekah  for 
sending  Jaoob  away  to  Haran.  It  was  the  same  feeling 
that  had  nrged  Abzam  to  send  to  Mesopotaroia  for  a 
wife  for  Isaac  The  descendant  of  Shem  could  not  wed 
with  Hamites — "  with  the  daughters  of  the  CaAaanites 
among  whom  I  dwell  .  .  .  wherein  I  am  a  stranger,"  but 
"go  to  roy  country  and  thy  kiudred'*  is  his  father's  com- 
mand,  **■  to  the  house  of  thy  mother^s  father,  and  take 
thee  a  wife  from  thenoe"  (Gen.  xxviii,  2 ;  xxiv,  4).  See 
Hn-mc 

From  sereral  of  the  above  notices  we  leam  that  the 
cńginal  seat  of  the  Hittites,  the  city  of  Hebron,  was  found- 
ed  by  one  Arba  of  the  Anakim,  whence  its  earlier  luune, 
aod  had  inhabitants  of  that  giant  race  as  late  as  JoAhua's 
time.  U  is  also  connected  with  Zoan  in  Eg}'pt,  and  is  said 
to  have  beeii  built  8even  years  before  that  city  (Numb. 
xiii,  22).  Zoan  or  Avaris  was  built  or  rebuiit,  and  no 
doubt  received  its  Hebrew  or  Shemitic  name,  Zoan,  the 
translation  of  its  Egyptian  name  ha-awak,  in  the  time 
of  the  first  Shepherd-king  of  £g}'pt,who  was  of  Phoeni- 
cian  or  kindred  race.  It  is  also  to  be  noted  that,  in 
Abraham  s  time,  the  Amorites,  connected  with  the  giant 
race  in  the  case  of  the  Rephaim  whom  Chedorlaomer 
smote  in  Ashteroth  Kamaim  (Gen.  xiv,  6),  where  the 
Rephaite  Og  afterwards  ruled,  dwelt  dose  to  Hebron 
(\*er.  13).  The  11  ittites  and  Amorites,  we  shall  see,  were 
later  settlcd  together  in  the  Orontes  ralle}'.  Thus  at 
this  periocl  there  was  a  settlement  of  the  two  uations  in 
the  aouth  of  Paleśtine,  and  the  Hittites  were  mixed 
with  the  Rephaite  Aiudcim.     See  Hebron. 

2.  Throughout  the  period  of  the  settlement  in  Pal- 
estine,  the  name  of  the  Hittites  ocćurs  only  in  the 
usual  formuła  for  the  occupants  of  the  Promised  Land. 
Changes  occur  in  the  modę  of  stating  this  formuła,  but 
the  Hittites  are  never  omitted  (see  £xod.  xxiii,  28), 
In  the  enomeration  of  the  8ix  or  8even  nations  of  Ca- 
naan«the  first  names,  in  four  phrases,  are  the  Canaanites, 
Hittites,  and  Amorites;  in  two,  which  make  no  mention 
of  the  Canaanites,  the  Hittites  and  Amorites ;  and  in 
three,  the  former  thrce  names,  with  the  addition  of  an« 
ocher  nation.  In  but  two  phrases  are  these  three  nations 
further  separated.  It  is  also  to  be  remarked  that  the 
Hittites  and  Amorites  are  mentioned  together  in  a  bare 
roajority  of  the  forms  of  the  enumeration,  but  in  a  great 
majority  of  passages.  The  importance  thus  given  to 
the  Hittites  is  perhaps  eąually  cvident  iu  the  place  of 
Heth  in  the  list  of  the  descendants  of  Noah,  in  the  place 
<»f  the  tribe  in  the  list  in  the  promiae  to  Abraham,  where 
it  is  firet  of  the  known  descendants  of  Canaan  (xv,  20), 
and  ccrtainly  in  the  term  **  all  the  land  of  the  Hittites," 
as  a  d€sigiiation  of  the  l^mised  Land  iu  its  fuli  extent, 
from  Euphrates  to  the  Mediterranean,  and  from  Leba- 
non  to  the  desert  (Joeh.  i,  4).  The  close  relation  of  the 
Hiuitcs  and  Amorites  seems  to  be  indicated  by  the 
prophet  Ezekiel,  where  he  speaks  of  Jerusalem  as  daugh- 
ter  of  an  Amorite  father  and  a  Hittite  mother  (xvi,  3, 
40).  Indeed  the  Hittites  and  Amorites  seem,  in  these 
last-dted  passages,  to  be  named  for  the  Canaanites  in 
generał 

Whtn  the  spies  examined  Canaan  they  found  '^the 
Hittites,  and  the  Jebusites,  and  the  Amorites*'  dwelling 
*"  in  the  mountains**  (Numb.  xiii,  29),  that  is,  in  the  high 
ttacts  that  aflerwards  formed  the  refuges  and  rallying- 


points  of  the  Israelites  dming  the  troubled  period  of  the 
jttdges.  There  is,  however,  no  distinct  statement  as  to 
the  exact  position  of  the  Hittites  in  Palestine.  We 
may  draw  an  inference  from  their  connection  with  Je- 
rusalem and  the  Amorites,  and  their  inhabiting  the 
mountains,  and  suppose  that  they  were  probably  seated 
chiefly  in  the  high  region  of  the  tribe  of  Judah.  Of 
their  territon'  beyond  Palestine  there  are  some  indica- 
tions  in  Scripture.  The  most  important  of  these  is  the 
designation  of  the  Promised  Land  in  its  fuli  extent  as 
"  all  the  land  of  the  Hittites*'  already  mentioned,  with 
which  the  notices  of  Hittite  kings  out  of  Canaan  must 
be  oompared.  Whatever  temporary  circumstanccs  may 
have  originally  attracted  them  so  far  to  the  south  as 
Beersheba,  a  people  having  the  ąuiet  commercial  tastes 
of  Ephron  the  Hittite  and  his  coropanions  can  have  had 
no  cali  for  the  roving,  skirmishing  life  of  the  country 
bordering  on  the  desert ;  and  thus,  during  the  sojoum 
of  Israel  in  Eg\'pt,  they  had  withdrawn  theroselve8  from 
those  districts,  retiring  before  Amalek  (Numb.  xiii,  29) 
to  the  morę  secure  mountain  country  in  the  centrę  of 
the  land.  Perhaps  the  words  of  Ezekiel  (xvi,  8, 45)  may 
imply  that  they  helped  to  found  the  city  of  Jebus. 

From  this  time,  however,  their  quiet  habits  ranish, 
and  they  take  their  part  against  the  invadcr,  in  eąual 
alliance  with  the  other  Canaanitish  tribes  (Josh.  ix,  1 ; 
xi,  3,  etc).  i 

3.  Henceforward  the  notices  of  the  Hittites  are  very 
few  and  faint.  We  meet  with  two  individuals,  both 
attached  to  the  person  of  David.  (1.)  **Ahimelech  the 
Hittite,"  who  was  with  him  in  the  hiU  of  Hachilah,  and 
with  Abishai  accompauied  him  by  night  to  the  tent  of 
Saul  (1  Sam.  xxvi,  6).  He  is  nowhere  eise  mentioned, 
and  was  possibly  killed  in  one  of  David's  expeditions, 
before  the  list  in  2  Sam.  xxiii  was  drawn  up.  (2.) 
"Uriah  the  Hittite,"  one  of  "the  thirty"  of  David's 
body-guard  (2  Sam.  xxiii,  89 ;  I  Chroń,  xi,  41),  the  deep 
tragedyof  whose  wrongs  forms  the  one  biot  in  the  life 
of  his  master.  In  both  these  persons,  though  warriore 
by  profession,  we  can  perhaps  detect  traces  of  those  qual- 
ities  which  we  have  noticed  as  characterisHcs  of  the 
tribe.  In  the  case  of  the  first,  it  was  Abishai,  the  prac- 
tical,  unscrupulous  **  son  of  Zeruiah,"  who  pressed  David 
to  allow  him  to  kill^the  sleeping  king:  Ahimelcch  is 
elear  from  that  stain.  In  the  case  of  Uriah,  the  absenco 
from  Buspicion  and  the  generous  self-denial  M-hich  he 
displayed  are  too  well  known  to  need  morę  than  a  refer- 
ence  (2  Sam.  xi,  11, 12).  He  was  doubtless  a  prose- 
lyte,  and  probably  descended  from  8everal  generations 
of  proselytes ;  but  the  fact  shows  that  Canaanitish  blood 
was  HI  itself  no  bar  to  advancement  in  the  court  and 
army  of  David. 

SÓlomon  stfbjected  the  remaining  Hittites  to  the  same 
tribute  of  bond-senrice  as  the  other  remnants  of  the  Ca- 
naanitish nations  (I  Kings  ix,  20).  Of  all  these  the  Hit- 
tites appear  to  have  been  the  most  im|x>rtant,  and  to 
have  been  under  a  king  of  their  own ;  for  "  the  kings  of 
the  Hittites"  are,  m  1  Kings  x,  29,  coupled  with  the  kings . 
of  Syria  as  purchasen  of  the  chariots  which  Solomon  im- 
ported  from  £g>'P**  '^  api)ears  that  this  was  some  dif- 
ferent  division  of  the  Hittite  family  living  far  away  some- 
where  in  the  north ;  although,  from  their  coiuiection  in 
2  Kings  vii,  6,  with  the  Egjptians,  others  have  iuferred 
that  the  noise  came  from  the  south,  from  which  ąuarter 
it  seems  they  and  the  Egyptians  were  the  only  i)eople 
who  could.be  expected  to  make  an  attack  with  chariots, 
This  would  idcutify  them  with  the  southeni  Hivite8, 
who  were  subject  to  the  sceptrc  of  Judah,  and  show  also 
that  it  was  they  who  purchased  Egyptian  chariots  from 
the  factors  of  Solomon.  It  is  evident  in  any  case,  how- 
ever,  that  thej^  were  a  distinct  and  independent  body, 
apparentJy  outside  the  bounds  of  Palestine.  The  Hit- 
tites were  still  present  in  Palestine  as  a  distinct  people 
after  the  Exile,  and  are  named  among  the  alien  tribes 
with  whom  the  retumed  Israelites  contracted  those 
marriages  which  Ezia  urged  and  Nehemiah  compelled 
them  to  diasolve  (£zra  ix,  1,  etc ;  comp.  Neh.  xiii,  2&- 


HITTITE 


280 


HrmTE 


28).  After  tlufl  we  hear  no  more  of  the  Hittites,  who 
probably  loet  their  nadonal  identity  by  intenxiixture 
with  the  neighboring  uibes  or  lutiona.  (See  Hamels- 
yeld,  ui,  61  aą. ;  Joum,  o/Sac.  IM,  OcL  1861,  p.  166.)— 
Kitto,  &  V. ;  Smith,  s.  y.     See  Hkathkn. 

4.  Nothing  is  aaid  of  the  religion  or  wonhip  of  the 
Hittites.  £ven  in  the  ehumeration  of  Solomon*8  idola- 
trous  worehip  of  the  goda  of  his  wiyeft— among  whom 
wers  Hittite  women  (1  Kings  xi,  1) — no  Hittite  deity 
is  alluded  to  (see  1  Kings  xi,  6,  7 ;  2  Kings  xxiii,  13). 
See  beloMT. 

6.  The  names  of  the  indiyidoal  Hittites  mentioned  in 
the  Bibie  are  as  foUow.  They  are  all  sosoeptible  of  in* 
terpretation  as  Hebrew  words,  which  would  lead  to  the 
bclief  either  that  the  Hittites  spoke  a  dialect  of  the 
Aramaic  or  Hebrew  language,  or  that  the  words  were 
Hebraized  in  their  transferenoe  to  the  Bibie  records. 

AnAH  (a  woman),  Qen.  xxxTi,  2. 
AiiiMKLsoH,  1  Sam.  zxvl,  ft. 

Basu  KM  ATU,  accarately  Bas^math  (a  woman) ;  poesibly 
a  second  name  of  Adah,  Oen.  xxvi,  SŁ 
Bebbi  (father  of  Jadith,  below),  Gen.  xxvi,  84. 
Elom  (father  of  Basmath),  Oen.  xxvi,  84. 
Ephbon,  Oen.  xzii!,  10, 18, 14,  etc 
JuDiTH  (a  woman),  Oen.  xxvi.  M. 
Ubiau,  i  Sam.  xi,  8,  etc ;  xxii!,  89,  etc. 
ZouAB  (father  of  Ephron),  Gen.  xxiU,  8. 

In  addition  to  the  aboye,  Sibbbchai,  who  in  the  He- 
brew text  is  always  denominated  a  Hushathite,  is  by 
Joeephus  (Ani,  yii,  12,  2)  styled  a  Hittite. — Smith,  s.  y. 
II.  Notioa  m  Ancient  Irucriptumś.—!,  The  Egyptian 
monuments  giye  ns  much  Information  as  to  a  Hittite 
nation  that  can  only  be  that  indicated  in  the  two  pas- 
sages  in  the  books  of  Kings  above  noticed.  The  kings 
of  the  eighteenth  and  nineteenth  dynasties  madę  exten- 
siye  oonąuests  in  Syria  and  Mesopotamia.  They  were 
opposed  by  many  smali  states,  which  probably  always 
formed  one  or  more  confederacies.  In  the  time  of  Thoth- 
mes  HI  (KC.  cir.  1460),  the  leading  nation  was  that  of 
the  KUTEN  (or  łuten),  which  appears  to  have  once 
headed  a  oonfederacy  defeated  by  that  king  before  Me- 
giddo  (De  Rougć,  Retme  Archeolog,  n.  s.,  iy,  846  8q.). 
The  Khcta  were  oonquered  by  or  tributary  to  Thoth- 
mes  HI  (Birch,  Atmals  ofThothmea  Illy  p.  21);  bat  it 
is  not  until  the  time  of  Rameses  U  (B.C  cir.  1806),  sec- 
ond king  (acoording  to  Manetho)  of  the  nineteenth  dy- 
nasty, that  we  find  them  occupying  the  most  important 
place  among  the  eastem  enemies  of  the  Egyptians,  the 
place  before  held  by  the  rutrn.  The  name  is  general- 
ly  written  khct,  and  sometimes  kmcta,  and  was  prob- 
ably in  both  cases  pronounced  khat.  It  is  not  easy  to 
determine  whether  it  properly  denotes  the  people  or  the 
coontry ;  perhaps  it  denotes  the  latter,  as  it  rarely  has 
a  plural  termination ;  but  it  is  often  used  for  the  former. 
This  name  is  identical  in  radicals  with  that  of  the  Hit- 
tites, and  that  it  designates  them  is  elear  from  its  being 
connected  with  a  name  eqaa]ly  repreeenting  that  of  the 
Amorites,  and  from  the  oorrespondence  of  this  warlike 
people,  strong  in  chariots,  with  the  non-Palestinian  Hit^ 


tites  mentioned  in  the  Bibie.  The  chtef  or  stiongest 
city  of  the  kmcta,  or  at  least  of  the  territory  sobject  to 
or  confederate  with  the  king  of  the  khcta,  was  Keresn, 
on  the  riyer  arnut,  asurta,  or  arunata.  Keresu 
was  eyidently  a  Kadesh,  ''a  sacred  city,"  Ólp,  bat  do 
city  of  that  name,  which  oould  correspond  to  this,  is 
known  to  as  in  Biblical  geography.  It  is  rcprcscnted  in 
the  Egyptian  sculptures  as  on  or  near  a  lakę,  which  Dł 
Bnigsch  has  traced  in  the  modem  lakę  of  Kedes,  fed  by 
'  the  Orontcs,  southward  of  Hems  (Eroesa).  The  Oroo- 
I  tes,  it  most  be  obsenred,  well  corresponds  to  the  aruna- 
TA.  The  town  is  also  stated  to  haye  been  in  the  land 
'  of  AMAR  (or  aihara),  that  is,  of  the  Amorites.  Tbc 
poeition  of  this  Amoritish  territory  is  furthcr  defined  by 
Carchenush  being  plaoed  in  it,  as  we  shall  show  in  a 
later  part  of  this  artide.  The  territory  of  theae  Hit- 
tites, therefore,  lay  in  the  yalley  of  the  Oontes.  It 
probably  extended  towards  the  Euphrates,  for  the  KHe- 
TA  are  also  connected  with  meharbna,  or  Mesopotamia, 
not  the  NAiiiRi  of  the  cuneiform  inscriptions,  but  it  is 
not  elear  that  they  ruled  that  country.  Plrobably  they 
drew  confederates  thence,  as  was  done  by  the  Syrians 
in  Dayid*8  time. 

The  greatest  achieyement  of  Rameses  II  was  the  de- 
feat  of  the  khcta  and  their  allies  near  KeresH,  in  the 
fiflh  year  of  his  reign.  This  eyent  b  commemorated  in 
a  papyrus  and  by  seyeral  inscriptions  and  sculptures^ 
The  ńations  confederate  with  the  kbcta  were  the 
ARATu  (Aradus?),  maausu  (Mash?),PAAT8A  or  patasa, 

KKSHKE8H,  ARUNU,  KAT  A  WAT  ASA,  KHERABU  (Helbon?), 
AKATBRA,  KETESH,  RCTA,  ArkitcŚs,  TENTENK   (oT  TRA- 

tenuee),  and  karakamasiia  (Carchemish).  These 
names  are  difficult  to  identify  saye  the  seyenth  and  the 
last,  but  it  is  e\'ident  that  they  do  not  belong  to  Palea- 
tine.  The  Hittites  are  represented  as  haying  a  regidar 
army,  which  was  strong  in  chariots,  a  particuUr  which 
we  should  expect  from  the  Biblical  notices  of  them  and 
of  the  Canaanites,  where  the  latter  name  seems  applied 
to  the  tribe  so  called.  Each  chariot  was  drawn  by 
two  horses,  and  held  three  men,  a  charioteer  and  two 
warriors.  They  had  also  cavalry  and  disciplined  infim- 
try.  In  the  great  battle  with  Kameses  they  had  2600 
hoises,  that  is,  chariots.  The  representations  of  the 
KHeTA  in  the  sculptures  relating  to  this  campaign  prob- 
ably show  that  their  foroes  were  compoeed  of  men  of 
two  different  races.  Sir  Gaidner  Wtlkinson  thinka  that 
both  belonged  to  the  khcta  nation,  and  it  seeoas  haidly 
possible  to  form  any  other  condusion.  **  The  nation  ^ 
SheU  [the  initial  character  is  thos  sometimes  read  «A] 
seems  to  haye  been  compoeed  of  two  distinct  tribes,  both 
comprehended  under  the  same  name,  uniting  in  one 
common  cause,  and  probably  subject  to  the  same  goy- 
emment."  These  supposed  tribes  difiered  in  dress  and 
arms,  and  one  was  sometimes  bearded,  the  other  was 
beardless  {AnaaA  Effypltang,  i,  p.  400  8q.).  They  are 
rather  fair  than  yellow,  and  the  beardless  warrion  are 
probably  of  a  different  race  ftom  the  people  of  Palfirine 


Ancient  Hittites.    From  the  Bgyptian  Monuments. 


HrmTE 


281 


HIYITE 


genenDy.  In  somdGasestheyRnundiisaftheTatarBy 
and  it  is  impo»bIe  to  forget  that  the  EgyptiimB  of  the 
Gieek  period  eridently  took  the  khota  for  Scythians 
or  Bactnana.  The  luine  Scythian  is  not  lemote,  nor  is 
that  of  the  Kittaa,  or  wanioi^TatarB  in  the  Chinese 
gaizisoos;  but  merę  word  resemblances  are  dangerous; 
and  the  dicumatanoe  that  the  Scythians  appear  in  his- 
tory  when  the  Uittites  have  just  disappeared  is  not  of 
much  Taloe.  But  it  is  worthy  of  remark  that  in  the 
time  of  Moscs  there  was  a  Rephaite  ruling  the  Amorites 
in  Palesdne,  aa  the  sons  of  Anak  had  appaiently  long 
mled  the  Hittites  in  Hebron,  so  that  we  need  not  be 
snrpriaed  to  find  two  races  under  the  same  govemment 
in  the  caae  of  the  Hittites  of  Syria. 

In  the  twenty-fiiBt  year  of  Bameses  H,  the  great  king 
of  th«  Hittites,  meraBiii^  came  to  Egypt  to  make  a 
treaty  of  peace.  A  copy  of  the  treaty  is  preseryed  in  a 
hiciogłyphic  inscription.  From  this  it  appears  that 
ŁHCTMUtA  had  been  pieoeded  by  his  grandfather  ba- 
pRABAy  hia  father  haubasara,  and  his  brother  maut- 
HUSA,  and  that  in  the  reigns  of  aafraba  and  icautnu- 
SA  peace  had  been  madę  upon  the  same  oonditions. 
In  a  tablet  of  the  thirty-fourth  year  of  the  same  king, 
one  of  hia  wiyes,  a  Hittite  prinoess  with  the  Egyptian 
name  BA-MA-us-Ne-FBU,  is  represented  as  well  as  her 
lather,  the  king  (or  a  king)  of  the  KHerA.  Solomon 
aisoi  as  Dr.  Brugsch  ranarks,  took  Hittite  women  into 
his  haiem  (1  Kings  xi,  1).  Bameses  III  (KC.  cir.  1200) 
had  a  war  with  the  kkcta,  mentioned  in  one  of  his  in- 
Kriptiona  with  Keric  (KerreSH)  kara[k]am8A  (Carche- 
miah),  aratłt  (Aradus?),  and  a&asa,  all  described  as 
in  the  land  amaba. 

The  religion  of  the  Hittites  is  only  known  from  the 
aboire  treaty  with  Bameses  II,  though  it  is  probaUe  that 
addirinnal  information  may  be  denred  irom  an  exami- 
nation  of  pioper  names.  In  this  inscription  the  divini- 
ties  both  of  the  land  of  KHerA  and  of  Egypt  are  men- 
tioned, pfobably  because  they  were  invoked  to  see  that 
the  compact  was  dnly  kepL  They  are  described  from 
a  Hittite  point  of  view,  a  circnmstanoe  which  is  cuiious 
as  diowing  how  cirefiihy  the  Egjrptian  scribe  had  kept 
to  the  document  before  him.  They  are  the  goda  of  war, 
and  the  goda  of  women  of  the  land  of  khota  and  of 
Egypt,  the  sutekh  of  the  hmd  of  KHerA,  the  sutekh 
of  aerenl  forts,  the  ASHTeiiAT  (written  AsreRAT)  of 
the  land  of  KHerA,  seveml  unnamed  gods  and  goddeases 
of  plsfcpii  or  ooontries,  and  of  a  fortress,  the  moontains  and 
liren  of  the  land  of  KHerA,  and  of  Egypt,  Amen,  sutekh, 
andthewind&  SvTKKH,or8BT,  was  the  chief  godof  the 
Sbepherd-kings  of  Egypt  (one  cif  whom  appears  to  haye 
aboUsfaed  all  other  worship  in  his  dominions),  and  is  also 
called  BAR,  or  BaaL  Sutekh  is  perhaps  a  foreign  form, 
8BT  seems  certainly  of  foreign  origin.  AsHTeRAT  is,  of 
eome,  Ashtoreth,  the  consort  of  Bud  in  Palestine.  They 
were  the  principal  dirinities  of  the  KHerA,  for  they  are 
mentioned  by  name,  and  as  worshipped  in  the  whole 
land.  The  worship  of  the  mountains  and  ńven  is  re- 
markably  indicatire  of  the  character  of  the  religion,  and 
the  mention  of  the  gods  of  speciol  cities  points  in  the 
same  direction.  The  former  is  Iow  nature-wo»hip,  the 
la&er  is  entirely  consistent  with  it,  and,  indeed,  is  never 
foond  bot  in  connection  with  it, 

The  Egyptian  monnmenta  fumish  us  with  the  foUow- 
ing  additional  Hittite  names:  tarakanunasa,  kaha- 

KT,  TARKATATA8A  (an  ally?),  KHEBAPSARA,  SCńbe  of 

books  of  the  KHeTA,  fbsa,  tktaba,  krabctusa,  aak- 
XA  (an  ally?),  8A.marus,  tatara,  matrbma,  brother 
of  [the  king  of)  the  KHerA,  rabsunuha  (an  ally?), 
TUATASA  (an  ally?). 

Thcae  names  are  eridently  Shemitic,  but  not  Hebrew, 
a  cjicumstance  that  need  not  surprise  us  when  we  know 
that  Aramaic  was  distinct  from  Hebrew  in  Jacob^s  time. 
The  syllables  bera  in  KHer-SERA,  and  rab  in  rab^su- 
KusiA,  seem  to  conrespond  to  the  sar  and  rab  of  Assyr- 
ian  and  Baibylonian  names*  tbtara  may  be  the  same 
name  aa  the  Tidal  of  Scripture.  But  the  most  remark- 
able  of  all  theae  names  is  matrsma,  which  oorrespoods 


aa  dosely  as  posdble  to  Hizraim.  The  third  letter  is  a 
hard  t,  and  the  finał  syllable  is  constantly  used  for  the 
Hebrew  doaL  In  the  Egyptian  name  of  Mesopotamia, 
NEHARENA,  wc  find  tho  Chaldeo  and  Arabie  duaL  U 
woold  therefore  appear  that  the  language  of  the  khcta 
was  neaier  to  the  Hebrew  than  to  the  Chaldee.  tar- 
katatasa  probably  oommences  with  the  name  of  the 
goddess  Derceto  or  Atargatis. 

The  principal  sooroe  of  information  on  the  Egyptian 
bearings  of  this  subject  is  Brug8ch's  GeographMie  /i»- 
tchrijien,  ii,  20  8q.  The  documents  to  which  he  mainly 
refers  are  the  inscriptions  of  Bameses  II,  the  poem  of 
PENTAUR,  and  the  treaty.  The  tirst  are  giveu  by  Lep- 
sius  (Denkmfiler,  A  blh,  iii,  bL  158-161, 164-166, 187, 196 ; 
see  also  180,  209),  and  transłated  by  M.  Chabas  {Bee. 
A  rch.,  1859) ;  see  also  Brugsch,  Hietoire  ^Egyptt,  i,  187 
sq. :  the  seoond  is  transłated  by  M.  de  Bouge  {Remu 
Coniemporame,  No.  106,  p.  889  sq.),  Dr.  Brugsch  (^  ca), 
Mr.  Goodwui,  Cambridge  Essayi,  1858,  and  in  Bunsen's 
Egyp^M  Place,  iv,  675  sq. ;  and  the  third  is  transłated 
by  Dr.  Brugsch  {U.  cc.^  and  Mr.  Goodwin  (JParthmou^ 
1862).^Kitto,a.v. 

2.  In  the  As83nrian  inscriptions,  as  lately  deciphered, 
there  are  freąuent  references  to  a  nation  of  Khatti,  who 
"  formed  a  great  confederacy  rułed  by  a  number  of  petty 
chiefs,"  whose  territoiy  also  lay  in  the  valley  of  the 
Orontes,  and  who  were  sometimes  assisted  by  the  people 
of  the  sea-coast,  probably  the  Phoenidans  (Bawlinson*8 
HerodołtUj  i,  468).  <*  Twelve  kings  of  the  southem 
Khatti  are  mentioned  in  sereral  places."  If  the  identi- 
flcation  of  these  peopte  with  the  Hittites  should  prore 
to  be  correct,  it  agrees  with  the  name  Chat,  as  noticed 
under  Hbth,  and«ffords  a  elew  to  the  meaning  of  soroe 
passages  which  are  otherwise  puzzling.  These  are  (a) 
Josh.  i,  4,  where  the  expression  "  all  the  land  of  the  Hit- 
tites" appears  to  mean  all  the  land  of  Canaan,  or  at  least 
the  northem  part  thereoC  (6)  Judg.  i,  26.  Herę  near- 
ly  the  same  expression  recurs.  See  Luz.  (r)  1  Kings 
X,  29;  2  Chroń,  i,  17,  '*A11  the  kings  of  the  Hittites  and 
kings  of  Aram"  (probably  identicał  with  the  **  kings  on 
this  side  Euphrates,"  1  Kings  iv,  24)  are  mentioned  as 
purchasing  chariots  and  horses  from  Egypt,  for  the  poe- 
session  of  which  they  were  so  notorious,  that  (d)  it 
would  seem  to  have  beoome  at  a  later  datę  almost  pro- 
verbial  in  allusion  to  an  alarm  of  an  attack  by  chariots 
(2  Kings  vii,  6).— Smith,  s.  v. 

Hi'vite  (Heb.  CAtrtt",  "^sin,  usu.  with  the  art,  often 
oottectively  for  the  plur., "  the  Hivite,"  i.  e.  Hivites;  Sept. 
ó  Eva(oc),a  designation  of  one  of  the  nations  inhabiting 
Palestine  before  the  Israelites.  See  Canaan.  The  name 
is,  in  the  original,  uniformly  found  in  the  singular  num- 
ber. It  never  has,  like  that  of  the  Hittites,  a  plural,  nor 
does  it  appear  in  any  other  form.  Perhaps  we  may  as- 
sumę  from  this  that  it  originated  in  some  peculiarity  of 
locality  or  circumstance,  as  in  the  case  of  the  Amorites 
— "  mountaineers,'*  and  not  in  a  progenitor,  as  did  that 
of  the  Ammonites,  who  are  also  styled  Bene-Ammon — 
cbildren  of  Ammon,  or  the  Hittites,  Bene-Cheth — chil- 
dren  of  Heth.  The  name  is  ejcplained  by  Ewald  (Gesch, 
i,  818)  as  Bmnenlander,  that  is, "  Midlanders ;"  by  Gese- 
nius  ( The8,  p.  451)  as  parani, "  yillagers."  In  the  foUow- 
ing  passages  the  name  is  given  in  the  A.y.  in  the  singu- 
lar, "  the  Hivite :"  Gen.  x,  17 ;  Exod.  xxiii,  28;  xxxiii, 
2 ;  xxxiv,  1 1 ;  Josh.  ix,  1 ;  xi,  3 ;  1  Chroń,  i,  1 5 ;  also  Gen. 
xxxiv,  2 ;  xxxvi,  2.  In  all  the  rest  it  is  rendered  by  the 
plural. 

1.  In  the  genealogical  tables  of  Genesis  '*  the  Hi^ńte** 
is  named  as  one  of  the  descendants — the  sixth  in  order — 
of  Canaan,  the  son  of  Ham  (Gen.  x,  17 ;  1  Chroń,  i,  15). 
In  the  first  enumeration  of  the  nations  who,  at  the  time 
of  the  cali  of  Abraham,  occupied  the  Promised  Land  (Gen. 
XV,  19-21),  the  Hivites  are  omiŁtod  from  the  Hebrew 
text  (though  in  the  Samaritan  and  Sept.  their  name  is 
inserted).  This  has  led  to  the  conjecture,  amongst  oth- 
ers,  that  they  are  identicał  with  the  Kadmonites,  whose 
name  is  found  theie  and  there  only  (Keland,  Pakest,  p. 


HIYITE 


282 


HIYITE 


140 ;  Bochart,  Phal,  iv,  86 ;  Can.  i,  19).  But  are  not  the 
Kadmonites  rather,  as  their  name  implies,  the  represen- 
tatives  of  the  Bene-kedeip,  or  "children  of  the  East?" 
MoreoYcr,  in  this  paasage,  the  position  of  the  Hirites,  if 
lepresented  by  the  Kadmonites,  wonld  be  at  the  head  of 
the  nations  itsually  assigned  to  the  Land  of  Promise,  and 
this  is  most  uniikely,  unless  the  order  be  geographical. 
A  morę  ingenious  conjecture  is  that  which  suggests  the 
idcntity  of  the  Hivite8  and  the  Ayites,  or  Avim,  on  the 
grounds  (a)  that  at  a  later  time  the  GaliUeans  confound- 
ed  the  gutturals;  (6)  that  the  Sept.  and  Jerome  do  not 
distinguish  the  two  names ;  (c)  that  the  town  of  ha-Av- 
vim  (A.V. "  Awim")  was  in  the  same  district  as  the  Hi- 
yites  of  Gibeon ;  («?)  and  that,  according  to  the  notioe 
in  Deut.  ii,  the  Avim  disappear  before  the  Hiy-ites  ap- 
pear;  («)  to  which  we  may  add  that,  if  Gesenius^s  ety- 
mology  be  soand,  it  is  remarkable  that  the  Avim  are  de- 
acribed  as  dwelling  *'  in  yillagea."  See  Avim.  On  the 
other  hand,  (a)  it  is  unlikel}'  that  a  dialectic  difference 
would  be  recorded,  and  it  seems  too  slight  to  be  anything 
else ;  (h)  the  Sept.  and  Jerome  are  not  yery  careful  as  to 
exact  transcriptions  of  proper  names;  (c)  the  presence 
of  Avim  in  a  district  docs  not  prove  them  to  be  the  same 
as  other  inhabitants  of  that  district;  (d)  and  the  uarra- 
tive  in  Deut.  ii  speaks  only  of  the  overthrow,  before  the 
ooming  of  the  Israelites,  by  later  settlers,  of  certain  tribes 
or  peoples,  not  mentioned  in  the  list  ó(  Gen.  x,  which 
were,  as  far  as  stated,  Rephaim,  or  of  Rephaitc  stock. 
The  probability  that  the  Avim  were  of  this  stock  is 
strengthened  by  the  circumstance  that  there  was  a  rem- 
naiit  of  the  Rephaim  araong  the  Philistines  in  David'8 
time,  as  there  was  among  other  nations  when  the  Israel- 
ites conquered  the  country.  Therefare  it  seems  to  us 
very  uniikely  that  the  Avim  were  the  same  as  the  Hi- 
Yites,  although  they  may  have  been  related  to  each  oth- 
er. The  name  constantly  oocurs  in  the  formuła  by  which 
the  country  is  designated  in  the  earlier  books  (£xo(l.  iii, 
8, 17 ;  xiii,  5 ;  xxiii,  23, 28 ;  xxxiii,  2 ;  xxxiv,  U ;  Deut. 
vii,  1 ;  xx,  17 ;  Josh.  iii,  10 ;  ix,  1 ;  xił,  8 ;  xxiv,  U),  and 
also  in  the  later  ones  (1  Kings  ix,  20 ;  2  Chroń,  viii,  7 ; 
but  comp.  Ezra  ix,  1,  and  Neh.  ix,  8).  It  is,  however,  ab- 
sent  in  the  report  of  the  spies  (Numb.  xiii,  29),  a  docu- 
ment  which  fixes  the  localities  occupied  by  the  Canaan- 
itish  nations  at  that  time.  Perhaps  this  is  owing  to  the 
insignificance  of  the  Hivitefl  at  that  time,  or  perhaps  to 
the  fact  that  the  spies  were  indiffercnt  to  the  special  lo- 
cality  of  their  settleraonts. 

2.  We  first  cncounter  the  actual  people  of  the  Hivites 
ttt  the  time  of  Jac*)b'9  return  to  Canaan.  Shechem  was 
thcn  (according  to  the  current  Hebrew  text)  in  their 
posscasion,  Hamor  the  Hivite  being  the  "  prince  (K'^b3) 
of  the  land"  (Gen.  xxi\\  2).  The  narrative  of  the  trans- 
action  of  Jacob,  when  ne  bought  the  "  parcel  of  a  field," 
closely  resembles  that  of  Abraham's  purchase  of  the  field 
of  Machpelah,  They  were  at  this  time,  to  judge  of  them 
by  their  nilers,  a  warm  and  impetuous  people,  credulous, 
and  easily  doceivedby  the  crafly  and  cruel  sons  of  Jacob. 
Tlic  narratLve  further  cxhibits  them  as  peaceful  and  com- 
mercial,  given  to  ''trade"  (10,21),  and  to  the  acquiring 
of  "  posseaaions''  of  cattlc  and  other  "  wealth"  (10, 23, 28, 
29).  Like  the  Ilittitcs,  they  held  their  assemblies  or 
conferences  in  the  gate  of  their  city  (20).  We  may  also 
see  a  testimony  to  their  peaceful  habits  in  the  absence 
of  any  attempt  at  revenge  on  Jacob  for  the  massacre  of 
the  Shechemites.  Perhaps  similar  indications  are  fur- 
nished  by  the  name  of  the  god  of  the  Shechemites  some 
gcuerations  aftcr  this,  Baal-berith— Baal  of  the  league, 
or  the  alliance  (Judg.  viii,  33 ;  ix,  4, 46) ;  by  the  way  in 
which  the  Shechemites  were  beatcn  by  Abimelech  (40)  ^ 
and  by  the  unmilitary  chararter  both  of  the  weapon 
which  caused  Abimelech's  dcath  and  of  the  person  who 
diachargcd  it  (ix,  53).  In  the  matter  that  led  to  the 
overthrow  of  this  Hivite  city  we  see  an  indication  of  the 
corruption  that  afterwards  became  characteństic  of  the 
Canaaniti.słi  tribes  (Gen.  xxxiii,  18-20 ;  xxxiv).  Jacob^s 
reproof  of  his  sons  seems  to  imply  that  the  morę  power- 
ful  inhabitanta  of  at  least  this  part  of  the  Pn>mised  Land 


were  Canaanites  and  Perizzitcs,  these  only  being  i 
tioned  as  likely  to  attack  him  in  revenge  (xxxiv,  30). 
It  is  poasible,  but  not  certain,  that  there  is  a  referesoe  to 
this  matter  where  Jacob  speaks  of  a  portion  he  gave  to 
Joseph  as  having  been  taken  by  him  in  war  from  tb^ 
Amorite  (xlviii,  22),  for  his  land  at  Shechem  was  giveii 
to  Joseph,  bat  it  had  been  bought,  and  what  Simeon  and 
Levi  seized  was  probably  never  claimecl  by  Jacob,  nnlesa. 
indeedfthe  Hivites,  who  might  possibly  be  spoken  of  as 
Amorites  (but  comp.  xxxiv,  30),  attempted  to  recover  it 
by  force.  Perhaps  the  reference  is  to  some  other  oocuf- 
rence.  It  seems  elear,  however,  from  the  first  of  the  pas- 
sages  just  noticed  (xxxiv,  80),  that  the  Hivite8  ruled  by 
Hamor  were  a  smali  settlement,    See  Jacob. 

The  Alex.  MS.,  and  8everal  other  MSS.  of  the  Sept^ 
in  the  above  narrati ve  (Gen«xxxtv,  2)  subatitute  ^  Ho- 
rite"  for  "  Hivite.**  The  change  is  remarkable  from  the 
uBually  cloae  adherence  of  the  Alex.  Codex  to  Łhe  He- 
brew text,  but  it  is  not  corroborated  by  any  other  of  the 
ancient  ver8ions,  nor  is  it  recommended  by  other  OMisid- 
erationa.  No  instances  occur  of  Horites  in  this  part  of 
Palestine,  while  we  know,  finom  a  later  nanrative,  that 
there  was  an  important  colony  of  Hivite8  on  the  high 
land  of  Benjamin  at  Gibeon,  etc,  no  very  gieat  diatanoe 
from  Shechem.  On  the  other  hand,  in  Gen.  xxxvi,  2, 
where  Aholibamah,  one  of  £sau's  wive8,  ia  said  to  hare 
been  the  daughter  of  the  danghter  of  Ztbeon  the  Hivite, 
all  considerations  are  in  favor  of  reading  **  Uorite"  for 
^  Hivite.**  In  this  case  we  fortunately  posaess  a  detailed 
genealogy  of  the  family,  by  comparison  of  which  little 
doubt  is  left  of  the  propriety  of  the  change  (comp.  ver. 
20,  24, 25, 30,  with  2),  although  no  ancient  ver8ion  haa 
sugg^ted  it  here.     See  Horitf:. 

3.  We  next  meet  with  the  Hińtes  during  the  ooo- 
quest  of  Canaan  (Josh.  ix,  7 ;  xi,  19),  when  they  are  not 
mentioned  in  any  important  position.  Their  chancter 
was  then  in  some  respects  materially  altered.  They  were 
still  evidently  averse  to  fighting,  but  they  had  aoqiiireil 
— ^possibly  by  long  experience  in  traffic — an  amoimt  of 
craft  which  they  did  not  before  possess,  and  which  ena- 
bied  them  to  tum  the  tables  on  the  Isnelitea  in  a  highly 
succeasful  manner  (Josh.  ix,  8-27).  The  colony  of  Hi- 
vite8  who  madę  Joehua  and  the  heads  of  the  tribes  th^r 
dupes  on  this  occasion,  had  four  cities — Gibeon,  Chepbi- 
rah,  Beeroth,  and  Kirjath-jearim— situated,  if  our  pree- 
ent  knowledge  is  accurate,  at  oonsiderable  diatanoes 
apart.  It  is  not  certain  whether  the  last  three  weie 
destroyed  by  Joshua  or  not  (xi,  19);  Gibeon  certainly 
was  spared.  In  ver8e  11  the  Gibeomtea  speak  of  the 
"  elders"  of  their  city,  a  word  which,  in  the  absence  of 
any  allusion  to  a  Hivite  king,  has  been  thooght  to  point 
to  a  liberał  form  of  govemment  (Ewald,  (7eccA.  i,  818, 9). 
This  southem  branch  of  the  nation  embraced  the  Jew- 
ish  religion  (2  Sam.  xxi,  1,4:  Josh.  ix,  21. 27),  and  seem 
thus  to  łiave  been  absorbed. 

4.  The  main  body  of  the  Hivites,  łunTever,  irere  at 
this  time  living  on  the  northem  oonfines  of  western  Flal- 
estine— "  under  Hermom  in  the  land  of  Mizpeh*'  (Josh. 
xi,  3) — *'  in  Mount  Lebanon,  from  Mount  Baal-Hermon 
to  the  enteńng  in  of  Hamath'*  (Judg-  iii,  8).  Some- 
where  in  this  neighborhood  they  were  settled  when  Joab 
and  the  captains  of  the  host,  in  their  tour  of  numbering^ 
came  to  "  all  the  cities  of  the  Hivite8"  near  Tyre  (2  Sam. 
xxiv,  7).  A  remnant  of  the  nation  stiJl  existed  in  the 
time  of  Solomon,  who  subjected  them  to  a  tńbute  of 
personal  labor,  with  the  remnants  of  other  Ganaanitish 
nations  which  the  Israelites  had  been  unable  to  expd 
(1  Kings  ix,  20).  In  the  Jeruaelem  Taigum  on  Gen.  x, 
17,  they  are  called  Tripolitans  C^K^^B*^'?^),  a  name 
which  polnts  to  the  same  generał  northem  locality.  The 
IIermonitbs  may  perhaps  be  a  later  name  for  the  Hi- 
vites ;  we  recognise  in  the  EgyptLan  ReMeMeN  alone  any 
tracę  of  the  Hivites  in  the  conqaest8  of  the  Phanolu 
who  passed  through  this  tract  Chaaeaud  (/>nrMs,  pw 
361  sq.)  refers  the  modem  Druses  (q.  v.)  to  them. 

5.  There  are  few  Hivite  names  recorded  in  Scrip- 
tuie.    Hamor,  *'  the  he-asa,*'  was  probably  an  honorabla 


HIZKIAH 


283 


HOAG 


name.  Sheehem,  ''ahoalder,"  "back,"  may  also  be  in- 
dicatire  of  strength.  Such  names  are  siiitable  to  a 
pńmidre  people^buŁ  they  are  uot  sufficiently  numeroua 
or  chancterutk  for  ns  to  be  able  to  draw  any  Bure  in- 
ference.  IŁ  ia,  indeed,  posńble  that  they  may  be  con- 
nected,  as  the  ńmtlar  Hittite  names  seem  to  be,  with 
Iow  nature-wonhip.  See  Hittite.  The  iiames  of  the 
Hirite  towns  do  not  help  us.  Gibeon  merely  indicates 
lofty  pońtion;  Kirjath-jearim, "  the  city  of  the  woods," 
b  interesting  from  the  dse  of  the  word  Kirjah)  which 
we  Uke  to  be  probably  a  Canaanitbh  fonn :  the  other 
Dames  present  no  special  indicationa. 

6.  In  the  wonhip  of  Baal-beiith,  or  ^  Baal  of  the  coy- 
eDant,"*  at  Shechem,  in  the  tlme  of  the  Judges,  we  morę 
probably  see  a  tracę  of  the  head-city  of  a  Hmte  con- 
federscy  than  of  an  alliance  between  the  Israelites  and 
the  HiYitea.  (See  Hamelayeld,  iii,  62  8q. ;  Jour.  ofSac, 
JJl.OcL  1851,  p.  166.)— Kitto,  s.  v.;  Smith,  s.  v. 

Hiski^all  (Heb.  Chizkiyah\  mptri:  Sept.  'E^cri- 
ac ;  Yulg.  Eieckia)^  an  ancestor  of  Zephaniah  the  proph- 
H  (Zeph.  i,  1).    See  Hkzekiah. 

Hizki'Jah  (Heb.  Chizkiyak^  rłjpm;  Sept,  'E^i- 
na ;  Yulg.  Eteehid),  according  to  the  punctuation  of  the 
A,y^  a  man  who  sealed  the  corenant  of  reformation 
witb  Ezra  and  Nehemlah  (Neh.x,  17).  But  there  is  no 
vioubt  that  the  name  should  be  taJcen  with  that  preced- 
ing  it,  as  "  Ater>Hizkijah,^  a  name  given  in  the  lista  of 
tho«  who  retumed  from  Babylon  with  ZerubbabeL  It 
appean  also  extremely  likely  that  the  two  names  fol- 
łowing  thesc  in  x,  17, 18  (Azzur,  Hodijah)  are  only  cor- 
ropt  repetitions  of  them.— Smith,  a.  v.    See  Hezukiah. 

Hisr,  founder  of  the  Hizrerites,  a  monasŁic  order  of 
the  Mohammedans,  lived  at  the  time  of  Orchan  II.  łle 
U  umled  poor-houses  at  Cairo  and  Babylon,  and  many 
vbits  are  madę  by  the  Alohammedans  to  his  grave  at 
Bniaa.-Pierer,  Unio.-L^eikon,  viii,  416.     (J.  H.  W.) 

HjortfYiCTOR  Christian,  a  celebrated  h^nnnologist 
nf  the  Protestant  Church,  bom  at  (tunderslerholm,  in 
Denmark,  in  1735,  was  bishop  of  Ribe.  His  coUection 
nf  sacred  songs  were  ahnost  entirely  inaerted  in  the  pub- 
lic  hymn-book  of  the  Danish  Church.  He  publiahed 
ako  coDectiona  of  aongs  for  the  Smiday-achools  of  work- 
■iOL,  soldien,  etc  He  died  in  1818,  on  the  island  of 
Amagarf  near  Copenhagen. — Pierer,  Umv,-Lex.  viii,  417. 
(J.H.W.) 

Hoadley  (or  Hoadly),  Benjamin,  an  Eoglish 
prelate,  theologian,  and  politician,  was  born  at  Wester- 
bam,  in  Kent,  in  1676.  He  atudied  at  Catharine  Hall, 
Cambridge,  and  passed  A.M.  in  1699.  In  1700  he  was 
appointed  lecturer  at  St.  MUdred*s,  London,  and  in  1702 
Kctor  of  St.  Peter-le-Poor.  **  His  ability  as  a  contTOver- 
»Ali£t.  and  his  love  of  ci^ńl  and  religious  liberty,  became 
con^picuous  in  the  strife  of  partiea  at  the  beginning  of 
the  ccntuiy,  when  he  entered  the  field  against  bishop 
Atteibury  and  the  High-Chorch  party.  His  share  in 
this  debatę,  and  his  intimate  connection  with  the  settle- 
nient  of  the  new  dynasty  and  the  liberties  of  the  coun- 
try, were  recogniaed  by  the  House  of  Commons,  who  ad- 
(iresaed  the  ąueen  in  his  favor,  and  thus  paved  the  way 
fur  his  rapid  promotion."  In  1710  he  was  madę  rector 
of  Streatham,  and  on  the  acccssion  of  George  1, 1714,  he 
bcrame  cha{Jain  to  the  king.  In  1715  he  was  madę 
bishop  of  Bangor.  In  1717  he  preached  the  sermon  be- 
Torę  the  king,  on  the  text,  My  Jangdom  U  not  of  thia 
rorid,  which  gave  rise  to  the  famous  Bangorian  con- 
trnreny  (q.  v.),  in  which  Hoadley  was  assailed  by  the 
chiefs  of  the  nonjurors,  and  with  most  elfect  by  Wil- 
Bam  Law,  the  champion  of  authority  both  in  Church 
uhI  State.  This  controversy  was  brought  to  a  close 
about  1720,  without  conciliating  either  the  High-Church 
paity  on  the  one  band,  or  the  Dissenters  on  the  other, 
bot  with  great  credit  to  Hoadley 's  ability  and  tolerant 
HmL  In  1721  he  was  translated  to  Hereford,  and 
tbence  inl72S  to  Saliabury.  In  1734  he  was  madę  bish- 
op of  Wmchester.    Ile  died  in  1761.    In  the  political 


history  of  the  Church  of  England,  Hoadley  is  to  ^  be  re- 
garded  as  the  great  advocate  of  what  are  called  Low- 
Church  principles,  a  species  of  Whiggiam  in  ecclesias- 
tics  in  opposition  to  the  high  pretensions  sometimes  ad- 
vanced  by  the  Church  or  particular  churchmen.  It  was 
in  this  character  that  he  wrote  his  treatise  on  the  'Meas- 
ure  of  Obedience  to  the  Ci  vii  Magistrate,"  which  was  an- 
imadverted  upon  by  Atterbur}',  and  dcfended  by  Hoad- 
ley, whose  conduct  on  this  occasion  so  pleased  the  House 
of  Commons  (as  stated  above)  that  they  rbpresentcd  in 
an  address  to  queen  Annę  what  signal  6ervice  he  had 
done  to  the  caiise  of  civil  and  religious  liberty.*'  He 
maintained  the  same  principles  in  the  Bangorian  con- 
troversy.  The  war  of  pamphlets  on  the  subjcct  was 
wonderful;  the  number  issued  on  all  sides  was  nearly 
fifty.  His  doctrines  excited  so  violent  discussion  in 
the  lower  House  of  Convocation  that  the  govemmcnt, 
in  order  to  preveiit  further  dissensions,  suddenly  pro- 
rogued  the  Honses  of  Convocation,  and  they  have  never 
sińce  been  permitted  to  meet  for  the  dispatch  of  busi* 
ness.  The  burden  of  Hoadley's  offence,  m  the  eyes  of 
Higb-churchmen,  lies  in  his  doctrine,  aa  stated  in  the 
sermon  above  mcntioned :  that  the  "  Church  is  Chrisfs 
kingdom;  that  he  alone  is  Iawgiver;  and  that  he  haa 
left  behind  him  no  vi8ible  human  authority:  no  vicego- 
rents  who  can  properly  be  said  to  supply  his  place ;  no 
interpretera  upon  whom  his  subjects  are  absolutely  to 
depend;  no  judges  over  the  consciences  and  religion  of 
his  people."  Against  the  Dissenters,  and  especially  in 
answer  to  Calamy*s  abridgment  of  the  Li/e  and  Time$ 
o/Baiterj  he  wrote  his  Jicasonablenesa  ofConformity  io 
the  Church  of  England  (1708,  8vo),  and  his  Defence  of 
Episcopal  Ordinafion  (1707, 8vo).  Besides  the  writings 
named,  he  wrote  a  number  of  theological  treatises,  in 
which  he  shows  great  freedom  of  thought.  His  theol- 
ogy  is  Latitudinarian  (q.  v.).  These  writiugs  indude 
Utten  on  Miracka^  to  Dr,  Fleetwood  (1702,  4to) '.— X 
Preserrotioti  against  the  Principlet  of  the  Nonjurors 
(1716, 8vo)  i—Śennons  (1718  et  al.)  i-^Plain  A  ccount  of 
the  Naturę  and  Knd  ofthe  Jjtrd^t  Supper  (1735,  8vo). 
All  these,  with  his  Lijfe  of  Dr,  Sam,  Ciarkff  his  contro* 
versial  pamphlets,  sermons,  etc^  may  be  found  in  the 
Worh  of  Bishop  Jloadley,  edited  by  his  son,  John  Hoad- 
ley, LL.b.  (London,  1778,  8  v()ls.  fol.,  of  which  the  first 
volume  conŁains  a  life  of  bishop  Hoadley).  See  Engligh 
Cydopadia ;  Biographia  Britamtica ;  Hook,  Ecclet,  Bi' 
ography,  vol.  vi ;  Bogue  and  Bennett,  History  ofDissent^ 
ers,  ii,  154;  Buchanan,  Jt/^/i/.  p.  200-201;  Skeats,  Hisł, 
ofthe  Free  Churches  ofKnglandf  p.  227  Bq. ;  Gass,  Gesch, 
der  Dogmatikj  iii,  327;  Weslcy,  Works,  ii,  445;  vi,  510; 
Hagenbach, /yw/ory  of  Doctrines  (Smith^s),  ii,  417, 516; 
Mosheim,  Church  Jiist,  iii;  Allibone, />tc/Mma7y  of  Au* 
thorSf  i,  852. 

Hoadley,  John,  LL.D.,  youngest  son  of  bishop 
Hoadley  (q.  v.),  was  bom  in  1711,  and  educated  at  Cam- 
bridge. He  edited  the  works  of  his  father,  and  wrote 
himself  a  number  of  poems,  among  which  are  I^yre^s  Rt' 
renge,  a  pastorał  (1737, 4to)  '.-^ephtha,  an  oratorio  (1748, 
8vo)  i—łoroe  of  Truth,  oratorio  (1764),  and  others.  He 
died  in  1776.--Allibone,  Diet,  ofA  uthors,  i,  852. 

Hoag,  Ephraim,  a  Methodist  Episcopal  minister, 
was  bom  in  Peru,  N.Y.,S€pt.  15, 1815.  He  was  con- 
•  verted  in  1835,  and,  aftcr  a  course  of  study  at  Cazenovia 
Seminary,  entered,  in  1841,  the  Oneida  Confcreiice  (now 
merged  in  the  Central  New  York  Conference).  His  su- 
perior talenta  soon  procured  for  him  the  favor  of  the 
people  to  whom  he  was  aent,  and  the  good  wishcs  of  his 
brethren  in  the  ministry.  Although  comparatively  a 
self-made  man,  he  was  looked  upon  as  one  of  the  first 
Methodist  ministers  in  Central  New  York.  He  iilled 
the  chief  appointmeuts  of  this  Conference,  e.  g.  Iihaca 
(1852-3),  Utica  (1854-5),  Norwich  (1856-7),  Ca2enovia 
(1860-1),  and  in  1864  was  madę  presiding  elder  of  Cort- 
land  District.  Herę  he  labored  with  great  succcfs  for 
four  years,  when  he  was  sent  to  Canastota.  In  1869, 
while  at  the  session  of  iha  ncwly-formed  New  York  Cen- 
tral Conference,  he  was  suddenly  struck  with  paralysiak 


HOAG 


284 


HOBART 


and  was  obliged  to  aak  for  a  Bnpenumoate  relation.  He 
died  Oct.  8, 1869.  **Abł  preacher  he  was  eamest  and 
imoompiomisingi  seeking  to  please  God  and  saye  men ; 
as  a  pastor  he  ¥ras  diligent,  caring  for  and  seeking  the 
good  of  all  the  people  iinder  his  chaige.  Of  him  it  was 
tnie,  the  poor  weLoomed  his  ooming,  and  blessed  him 
when  he  went  away."— Rey.  L.  C  Queal,  in  the  NortJL 
ChrisLAdvocaie,  Dec  16, 1869.     (J.  H. W.) 

Hoag,  Wilbor,  a  Methodist  Episo^ud  minister, 
was  bom  at  Oswegatchie,  N.  York,  May  12, 1806;  was 
oonyerted  in  1821,  Joined  the  Genesee  Gonferenoe  in 
1826,  was  stationed  at  BoilUo  in  1881,  was  agent  for  the 
Genesee  Wesleyan  Seminaiy  in  1832,  and  died  April  12, 
1889.  Mr.  Hoag  was  a  man  of  ^qaick  peroeption, 
ready  utteranoe,  and  dear  discrimination."  He  was  an 
able  business  man,  and  highly  esteemed  as  a  winning 
and  saocessful  minister. — Min.  of  Coą/ereneetf  ii,  677. 

Hoar,  Leonard,  one  of  the  early  presidents  of  Hai^ 
yard  College,  was  bom  aboiit  1630.  He  gradoated  at 
Haryard  in  1650,  and  in  1668  went  to  England  and  oon- 
tanued  his  studies  at  Cambridge  UniverBity.  He  en- 
tered  the  miiiistry  at  Wensted,  in  SnssezCounty,  in 
1666,  but  his  nonconformity  to  the  EngUsh  Church 
caosed  his  deposition  in  1662.  A  few  years  afterward 
he  dedded  to  return  to  America.  His  flrst  appointment 
was  as  assastant  to  Dr.  Thacher,  in  Boston.  In  1672  he 
wal  dected  president  of  Haryard,  but  the  ooUege,  which 
had  suffered  from  mismanagement,  was  then  slenderiy 
supported,  and  he  retired  from  tbis  offioe  in  leas  than 
three  years.  SeeAIlibone,Z>ichbiiaryo/'XttMor»,i,868; 
Dietiornuwre  Unufend,  zix,  309. 

Hoard,  Samuel,  RD.,  was  bom  in  London  in  1599, 
and  educated  at  (>xford.  He  was  lector  of  Moreton, 
EsseK.  In  the  latter  years  of  his  life  he  forsook  the 
Calyinistic  path,  and  becamc  a  zealous  adyocato  of  the 
Arminian  doctrine.  He  is  said  to  haye  been  a  fine 
scholar,  espedally  at  home  in  che  works  of  the  fathers 
of  the  Church,  and  was  considered  a  superior  preacher 
and  good  disputant,  He  died  in  1657.  Hoard  wiote 
GotTs  Love  to  Mankind  (1633,  4to ;  anonymous,  and  an- 
swcred  by  Bp.  Davenant  [Cambridge,  1641, 8yo]  and  Dr. 
Twiss  [Oxford,  1658,  foL],  and  by  Amyraut  of  Saumur 
in  his  Doctrma  Jo,  Calmni  de  abtokUo  Reprobałioms  De- 
ertto  Defenno  adv,  Script,  anonymum  [Saum.  1641, 4to]) : 
— 7%«  ChurcJCs  AuthorUy  asserted  (1637,  4to;  and  in 
Hicke8'8  TradSj  1709,  8vo,  p.  190).  He  also  published 
some  sermona  of  less  yalue,  howeyer.— Smith^s  Hagen- 
bach,  Higf,  o/Doctrine$t  ii,  187 ;  Darling,  Cyclop,  Bibliog. 
i,  1498 ;  AUibone,  Diet.  o/Authont,  i,  853. 

Hoare,  Charles  James,  an  eminent  deigyman  of 
the  Church  of  Engbind,  the  date  of  whose  birth  b  un- 
certain,  was  educated  at  St.  John'8  College,  Cambridge, 
where  he  graduated  in  1803.  In  1806  he  was  dected  fd- 
low  of  his  alma  mater  j  in  1807  he  was  appointed  yicar  at 
Blanford  Forum,  Dorsetshire;  in  1821,  at  Godstone;  in 
1829,  archdeacon ;  and  in  183 1 ,  canon  of  Winchester.  In 
1847  ho  was  tnuisłated  to  the  archdeaconate  of  Surrey, 
which  poeition  he  resigned  in  1860  on  account  of  his 
age.  He  died  January  15, 1864.  He  was  an  extensiye 
writer,  and  many  of  his  works  haye  been  published.  A 
oomplete  list  of  them  is  giyen  in  Darling's  Cydop,  BibL 
i,  1498-99.  Among  them  are,  Course  o/DMne  Judg- 
ments;  eight  Lect.  principcdly  in  rt/erencB  to  the  pretent 
Times  and  the  impending  Pegtilence  (1881 ,  8yo ;  1832)  :— 
Baptitmy  or  the  mimttraHon  o/ public  Baptiam  of  In- 
fantty  to  be  read  in  the  Churchj  acripUiraUy  Utustraied 
andexplained  (1848,sm.8vo):— /Vwct>fe»  o/the  Tractt 
for  the  Time*  (1841, 8yo);  and  a  number  of  theological 
essays  and  sermons,  of  which  Sermons  on  the  Christian 
Character,  with  occasional  sermons  (3d  ediU  Lond.  1822, 
8vo),  desenre  special  notice.^Appleton's  Amer.  Amatal 
Cydop.  1865,  p.  664 ;  AUibone, Dicłionary  ofAuthors,  i, 

HoHbab  (Heb.  Chohab%  aah,  behwed;  Scpt  'Oj3aj3, 
in  Judg.  'Iw/3a/3),  the  son  of  Ragud  the  Midianite,  a 
kinsman  of  Moses  (Numb.  x,  29/  Judg.  iy,  11).    B.a 


1657.  He  has  usoaUy  been  identified  with  Jethro  {m 
£xod.  xyiii,  5, 27,  compared  with  Nomb.  x,  29, 80) ;  bot 
it  is  rather  his  father  Reud  to  whom  the  title  ^Hoksi 
father-in-law"  is  intended  to  ^)ply  in  Nnmbu  x,  29;  In 
that  these  two  latter  were  names  of  the  same  pemo, 
and  that  the  fiUher  of  Moses*s  wife,  seems  dear  from 
£xod.  ii,  6, 21 ;  iii,  1.  Hence  Hobab  was  Moses**  broth- 
er-in-law  (and  so  we  must  render  *)nh  in  Judg.  iy.  U, 
where  the  AutlLYers.  has  *<  father-in-law,"  being,  it  is 
tnie,  the  same  applied  ebewh^re  to  Jethró,  but  roerdy 
signifying  any  mide  rekUwe  by  marriage,  and  rendend 
eyen  "  son-in-ław"  in  Gen.  xix,  14) ;  so  that  whik  Jetb- 
ro  (as  was  natural  for  a  person  of  his  adyanced  age)  r»> 
turned  to  his  home  (£xod.  xyiii,  27),  Moses  preTsiled 
upon  Hobab  (whose  oompanttiye  youth  rendered  hii 
seryioes  the  greater  object  to  secure)  to  remain  (ai 
seems  implied  by  the  absenoe  of  any  lefusal  to  his  sec- 
ond  importunity  in  Numb.  x,  82),  so  that  we  find  his 
descendants  among  the  Israelites  (Judg,  iy,  11).    See 

jBTHItO. 

Ho^bah  (Heb.  Chobah%  nnin,  hidmg-place;  Sept 
Xo/3a),  a  phuie  to  the  northward  of  Damascus  (bfitsi09 
pica^b,  lit.  on  the  ^ft),  whither  Abraham  pursued  iho 
kings  who  had  taken  Lot  captiye  (Gen.  uy,  15) ;  per- 
haps  the  Chobcd  or  Choba  mention^  in  the  Apocrypht 
(X4tf/3at,  Judith  xy,  4;  Xw/3a,  iy,  4).  Eusebins  {Ono- 
most,  s.  y.  Choba)  confounds  this  place  with  Cooaba,  the 
seat  of  the  Ebionites  in  the  4th  century ;  and  Biuck- 
hardt  (Syria^  p.  812)  fomid  a  yillage  called  KohĄ  prob- 
ably  the  same,  which,  howeyer,  lies  south  of  Darnsscu 
This  b  apparently  also  the  yillage  Jlobctj  yisited  in  the 
year  1666  by  Ferd.  yon  Troiło,  who  says,  *'  It  lies  a  quar- 
ter  of  a  (German)  mile  north  from  the  town,  on  the  kft 
band.  Near  the  dty  of  Damascus  is  seen  a  laige  hill, 
where  the  patriarch  Abraham  oyertook  and  defeated  the 
army  of  the  four  kings.  There  formerly  dwdt  here  a 
sect  of  Jews,  conyerted  to  the  (Christian)  laith,  who 
were  called  Ebionites ;  but  at  present  the  plaoe  is  io- 
habited  by  a  great  number  of  Moors  (Arabe)  who  have 
a  mosque.  In  the  neighborhood  is  a  caye,  in  which  the 
patriarch  oflTered  to  the  Diyine  Bfajesty  his  thank^r- 
ings  for  the  yictory**  (TrateU,  p.  684).  On  the  other 
band,  Keland  thinks  of  a  castle  called  Cauoab,  mention- 
ed  by  Edrisi  as  being  on  the  kke  of  Tiberiaa  (PahuL  {k 
727).  '^JosephusmentionsatraditionconcemingAbn- 
ham  which  he  takes  from  Nioolaus  of  Damascus:  *  Abn- 
ham  reigned  at  Damascus,  being  a  foreigner  .  .  .  snd 
his  name  is  still  famous  in  the  country;  and  there  is 
shown  a  yillage  called  from  him  The  IłabitaHon  of 
Abraham'  (Ant.  i,  7,  2).  It  is  remarkable  that  in  th« 
yillage  of  Burzeh,  three  miles  north  of  Damascus,  there 
is  a  wely  held  in  high  yenenttion  by  the  Mohammedans, 
and  called  after  the  name  of  the  patriarch,  Ma^ 
Ibrahim,  *  the  prayer-plaoe  of  Abraham.'  The  treditioo 
attached  to  it  is  that  here  Abraham  offered  thanks  to 
God  afler  the  total  discomfiture  of  the  Eastem  kinf^ 
Behind  the  wdy  is  a  dcfl  in  the  rock,  in  which  another 
tradition  represents  the  patriarch  as  taking  rtfuge  on 
one  occasion  from  the  giant  Nimrod.  It  is  remarkshk 
that  the  word  Hobah  signifies  'a  hiding-plaoe.*  (See 
Ritter,  Syria,  iv,  312;  Wilson,  Lands  of  BiUe,  ii,  831.) 
The  Jews  of  Damascus  affirm  that  the  yillage  oiJćbaty 
not  far  from  Bunceh,  is  the  Hobah  of  Scriptnre.  They 
have  a  synagogue  there  dedicated  to  Elijah,  to  which 
they  make  frequent  pilgrimages  (see  Porter,  Ifandbook 
for  Syria  and  Palestine,  p.  491,  492;  Stanley,  Jewith 
Churchj  i,  481)."— Smith. 

Hobart,  John  Henry,  D.D.,  Fkotestant  Episoo- 
pal  bishop  of  New  York,  was  bom  Sept  14, 177&  In 
1788  he  entered  the  CoUege  of  Philadelphia,  but  soon 
after  went  to  Princeton,  where  he  paseed  AR  in  1796 
with  high  honor.  In  1798  he  took  chaige  of  two  sub- 
urban  churches  near  PhiUdelphia.  The  two  foDowing 
years  he  was  called  to  New  Brunswick,  next  to  Hemp- 
stead,  Long  Island,  and  later  became  assistant  minister 
of  Trinity,  New  York.    In  1799  he  was  chosen  i 


HOBART 


285 


HOBBES 


tary  to  the  Home  of  Bishops,  and  aabfleqiieiitly  to  the 
ConYention,  and  one  of  the  deputies  to  the  General 
Conyoition  in  1801.  In  1806  he  was  madę  D.D.  by 
Union  College,  and  in  1811  he  was  elected  asaiatant 
bishop  of  New  York.  Afterwaida  he  became  dtocesan 
of  New  York,  and  rector  of  Trinity  Church.  He  waa  es- 
pecially  instmniental  in  the  establishment  of  the  Gen- 
eral TheologiGal  Seminary,  in  which  he  held  the  chair 
of  pastorał  theology  and  pulpit  cloąuenoe.  In  1828,  his 
health  becoming  enfeebłed,  a  yoyage  to  Europę  was 
deemed  desiiaUe,  and  he  remained  there  above  two 
He  preached  in  Romę  when  Protestant  worship 


was  barely  tolerated,  and  madę  an  eifectiye  appeal  in 
behalf  of  the  WaUenses.  In  his  joumey  thiough  the 
Italian  States  he  encountered  much  annoyanoe,  and 
when  at  Milan  was  examined  before  the  civil  magis- 
tiatea  as  to  the  object  of  his  tonr.  He  defended  him- 
adf  with  a  freedom  and  frankneas  that  left  liule  doubt 
of  his  honesty.  When  m  London  he  published  two  vol- 
omes  of  IHtoaurKM  preached  in  America,  which  drew 
forth  warm  cKpiessions  of  approbation  from  the  lead- 
iDg  periodicalk  On  his  return,  he  resumed  his  yari- 
oua  dntiea  with  zeal  and  energy,  deyoting  himself  to 
the  promotion  of  eyery  good  work,  and  feeling  a  special 
interest  in  the  canse  of  the  Indiana.  He  died  at  Au- 
bum  Sept.  10, 1880.  His  publications  indude  A  Com- 
panimi  to  the  AUar  (N.  York,  1804,  8yo;  many  editions 
ńnce)  T—FetiivaU  and  Fasts  (N.  York,  1804, 12mo ;  oyer 
twcnty  editions) : — Apoiogy  for  ApottoUe  Order  (N.  Y. 
1807,  8vo;  1844,  8yo)  z— The  State  of  departed  Spirits 
(new  ed. N.York,  1846, 12mo)  '.--Cłergyman^a  Companion 
(new  ed.  18Ó6, 12mo)  -^Chrittian^a  Manuał  (r2mo ;  aey- 
eial  editions);  besides  numerous  charges  and  occasional 
disconnea  (reprinted,  New  York,  2  yols.  8yo).  His  Po»- 
thumotu  Wark»,  wiih  a  Memoir  btf  the  Rev,  Dr.  Berrian, 
were  iasoed  in  1838  (N.  Y.  3  yols.  8yo).  See  Schroeder, 
Mewutir  o/Bp.Hobart  (N.  Y.  1888, 12mo);  M»Vickar, 
Earfy  andpro/esnonal  Yeara  o/Hobart  (N. ^nrk,  1886, 
12mo) ;  Ckrietian  Spectator^  ix,  79 ;  Allibone,  iHctionary 
of  Authon,  i,  864;  Sprague,  AnnaU^  y,  440;  Christian 
Jcnmalj  YfA.  xiy;  Epiaeopal  Church  Reg,  A  flne  Łrib- 
lEte  ta  paid  to  bishop  Hobart  as  an  author  by  Lowndes 
in  his  BriHsh  Literaturę^  p.  666, 838. 

Hobait,  Noah,  a  Congregatlonal  minister,  was  bom 
at  Uin^faam  Jan.  12, 1706.  He  graduated  at  Haryard 
CoDege  in  1724,  and  was  ordained  pastor  of  the  First 
Congregatlonal  Church  at  Fairfield,  Connecticut,  Feb.  7, 
1733.  About  this  time  a  controyersy  arose  in  the  East- 
em  States  respecting  the  Epiacopalians,  in  which  Ho- 
bart enlisted,  and  wrote  m  behalf  of  the  yalidity  of 
Ptesbjrterian  ordination  a  pamphlet  entitled  Serious 
Addre$M  to  the  Epiteopai  SeparaHon  (1748;  2d  address, 
1751 ;  3d  addrees,  1761).  His  opponents  were  Dr.  John- 
aoo  and  other  mintsters  who  had  sweryed  from  Con- 
gregationalism.  Of  Mr.  Hobart's  ability  and  leam- 
ing,  Dr.  Dwight,  who  was  one  of  the  men  of  his  time, 
says:  **He  poasessed  high  intellectual  and  morał  dis- 
tinction.  He  had  a  mind  of  great  acuteneas  and  dis- 
oemnoient;  was  a  laborious  student;  was  exten8iyely 
leamed,  especially  in  histoiy  and  theology ;  adomed  the 
dflctrioe  which  he  profeased  by  an  exemplary  life,  and 
was  holden  in  high  yeneration  for  his  wiadom  and  yir- 
tne.  Among  the  American  writeis  of  the  last  centuiy, 
Dot  one  has,  I  belieye,  handkd  the  subject  of  Presbytć- 
ńaa  ordination  with  morę  ability  or  success.**  He  died 
0ec.  6),  1773.  Besides  seyeral  sermons,  he  published 
Prim^fiee  ofthe  Congreg,  Church,  etc  (1764).— Cofrfra. 
to  EecL  Hittorg  of  Connecticut,  p.  386 ;  Smith'8  Hagen- 
bach,  HiśU  ofDoctrineś,  ii,  448;  Sprague,  Awaaii  ofthe 
American  Pulpit,  i,  ^6.     (J.H.W.) 

Hol^art,  Peter,  a  Congregational  minister,  was 
bom  in  England  in  1604,  and  was  educated  at  Cam- 
bridge. After  teaching  and  preachlng  for  a  time,  he 
emigroted  to  this  country  in  1636,  and  settled,  with  his 
frienda  who  had  preoeded  him,  in  Hiogham,  Mass.  Af- 
ter a  leńdeoce  of  aome  yeais,  the  people  of  lus  fonner 


charge  at  Hayerhill,  England,  urged  him  to  return  to 
them  as  pastor,  but  he  declined,  and  remained  with  his 
friends,  preaching  only  at  times.  He  died  in  1678. — 
Sprague,  Atmals  ofthe  Amer,  Pulpit,  i,  68.     (J.  H.  W.) 

Hobbes,  Thomas,  an  English  philosopher  and  de- 
ist,  was  bora  April  6, 1688,  at  Malmesbury,  in  Wiltshire, 
and  was  educated  at  Magdalen  Hall,  Oxford.     In  1608 
he  became  tutor  to  lord  Hardwick,  subseąacntly  earl  of 
Deyonshire ;  and,  after  their  return  from  trarelling,  he 
resided  in  the  family  for  many  years,  during  which  pe- 
riod he  translated  Thucydides,  and  madc  a  Latin  yersion 
of  some  of  lord  Bacon*8  worka.     In  1628  he  went  abroad 
with  the  son  of  Sir  Genrase  Clifton,  with  whom  he  re- 
mained some  time  in  Fnmce.    He  retumed  in  1631  to 
undertake  the  education  of  the  young  earl  of  Deyon- 
shire.    In  1684  he  went  with  his  new  pupil  to  Paris, 
where  he  applied  himself  much  to  natural  philosophy, 
and  aflerwards  to  Italy,  where  he  formed  an  acquaint- 
ance  with  Galileo.    He  retumed  to  England  in  1637,  and 
soon  after  wrote  his  Elementa  Phihsophica  de  Cive  (Par. 
1642).     A  second  edition  was  printed  in  Holland  in 
1647,  under  the  superintendence  of  M.  Sorbi^re.     In 
1640,  after  the  meeting  of  the  Long  Farliament,  Hobbes 
withdrew  to  Paris.     Herę  he  became  acquainted  with 
Des  Cartes  and  Gassendi.     In  1647  Hobbes  was  ap- 
pointed  mathematical  tutor  to  the  prince  of  Wales,  af- 
terwards  Charles  II.    His  treatises  entitled  Ifuman  Na- 
turę and  De  Corpore  Polifico  were  published  in  London 
in  1660,  and  in  the  followiug  year  the  Leriaihan.    Of 
the  last  work  he  caused  a  cnpy  to  be  fairly  writtcn  out 
on  yellum,  and  presented  to  Charies  II ;  but  the  king, 
haying  been  informed  by  some  diyines  that  it  contained 
principles  subyersiye  both  of  religion  and  civil  govem- 
mept,  withdrew  his  fayor  from  Hobbes,  and  forbade  him 
his  presence.    After  the  publication  of  the  Leriaihan 
Hobbes  retumed  again  to  England,  and  published  his 
Letter  upon  Liberty  and  Necessifg  (1664),  which  led  to  a 
long  controyersy  with  bishop  Bramhall.     See  Bkam- 
HALL.     It  was  about  this  time,  too,  that  he  bcgan  a 
controyersy  with  Dr.  Wallis,  the  mathematical  profesfor 
at  Oxford,  which  lasted  until  Hobbes^s  dcath.     By  this 
last  controyersy  he  got  no  honor.     In  1666  his  Leria- 
than  and  De  Cite  were  censurcd  by  Farliament,    Short- 
ly  after  Hobbes  was  still  further  alarmed  by  the  intro- 
duction  of  a  bill  into  the  House  of  Commons  for  the 
punishment  of  atheism  and  profaneness;  but  this  storm 
Uew  oyer.     In  1672  Hobbes  wrote  his  own  life  in  Latin 
yerse,  being  then  in  his  eighty-fifth  year,  and  in  1676 
published  his  translation  of  the  Iliad  and  Odyssey.    This 
translation  is  wholly  wanting  in  Homeric  tire,  bald  and 
yulgar  in  style  and  diclion ;  and  it  must  be  alloM^ed  that 
the  famę  of  the  philosopher  is  anything  but  heightened 
by  hb  efTorts  as  a  poet.     Hobbe6'8  Dispułe  with  Lcmey, 
lishop  ofElg,  conceming  Liberty  and  Necessity,  appeared 
in  1676 ;  and  in  1679  he  sent  his  Behenwthf  or  a  Ilistory 
of  the  Ciril  Wara  from  1640  to  1660,  to  a  bookseller, 
with  a  letter  in  which  he  reąuested  him  npt  to  publish 
it  until  a  titting  occasion  olfered.     It  appcars  from  this 
letter  that  Hobbes,  being  anxious  to  publish  the  book 
some  time  before,  had  with  that  yiew  shown  it  to  the 
king,  who  refused  hb  permisńon,  and  for  this  reason 
Hobbes  would  not  now  allow  the  bookseller  to  publish 
it.     It  appeared,  howeyer,  almost  immediately  after 
Hobbes's  death,  which  -took  place  by  paralysis  Dec  4, 

1679. 

In  philoaophy  Hobbes  was  the  prccursor  of  the  mod- 
em materialistic  schools  of  Sensationalisro  and  Positiy- 
Professing  to  reject  **everything  hypothetical  (of 


all  gualiiatum  occułtarum),  he  affected  to  confine  himself 
to  the  coroprehensible,  or,  in  other  words,  to  the  p>henom- 
ena  of  motion  and  sensation.  He  deflnes  philosophy  to 
be  the  knowledge,  through  correct  reasoning,  of  phe- 
nomena  or  appearances  from  the  causes  presented  by 
them,  or,  yice  yersft,  the  ascertaining  of  possible  causes 
by  means  of  known  effects.  Philosophy  embraces  as  an 
object  eyery  body  that  admits  the  representation  of  pro- 
doction  and  presents  the  phenomena  of  composition  and 


HOBBHAHN 


286 


HOCHMANN 


deoompoaitioiu  Taking  the  term  Body  in  its  widest 
extent,  he  diyides  ita  meaning  into  natund  and  political, 
and  deyotes  to  the  consideration  of  the  fłnt  his  PhUo- 
aophia  Naturalis,  comprehending  the  departments  of 
logie,  ontology,  metaphysics,  phyńcs,  etc. ;  and  to  that 
of  the  secoud  his  Pkilosophia  Cwilia,  or  PolUy^  compre- 
hending morals.  Ali  knowledge  is  deriyed  from  the 
senses;  but  our  sensational  representations  are  nothing 
morę  than  appeaiances  within  us,  the  effect  of  extemal 
objects  operating  on  the  brain,  or  setting  in  motion  the 
vita1  spirits.  Thought  is  calculation  {computatio)^  and 
implies  addition  and  subtiaction.  Truth  and  falsehood 
consist  m  the  relations  of  the  terms  employed.  We  can 
beoome  cognizant  only  of  the  finite;  the  infinite  caimot 
be  imagined,  much  less  knoMm :  the  term  does  not  con- 
yey  any  accurate  knowledge,  but  belongs  to  a  Being 
whom  we  can  know  only  by  means  of  faith.  Gonse- 
quently,  rcligious  doctrines  do  not  come  within  the  com- 
pass  of  philosophical  cUscussion,  but  are  determinable  by 
the  laws  of  religion  itself.  Ali,  therefore,  that  Hobbes 
has  left  free  to  the  contemplation  of  philoaophy  is  the 
knowledge  of  our  natural  bodies  (somatology),  of  the 
mind  (psychology),  and  polity.  His  whole  theoiy  has 
reference  to  the  extemal  and  objectiye,  inasmuch  as  he 
deriyes  all  our  emotions  from  the  moyements  of  the 
body,  and  describes  the  soul  itself  as  something  corpo- 
real,  though  of  extreme  tenuity."  From  these  princi- 
ples  no  Tnoral  or  religiout  theoi^'  can  flow,  except  that 
of  infidelity.  Though  nonę  of  Hobbes^s  writings  are 
expre8sly  leyeUed  against  Christianity,  few  authors 
haye  really  done  morę  to  subyert  the  principles  of  mo- 
rality  and  religion.  He  makes  self-love  the  fimdamen- 
tal  law  of  naturę,  and  utility  its  end ;  morality  is  noth- 
ing but  utility,  and  the  soul  is  not  immortaL  His  writ- 
ings gave  rise  to  a  yery  yoluminous  controyersy.  "łhe 
Philosopher  of  Malmesbury,"  says  Dr. Warburton,  "was 
the  terror  of  the  last  age,  as  Tindall  and  Collins  are  of 
this.  The  press  sweat  with  controyersy,  and  eyery 
youug  churchman  mUitant  would  try  his  arms  in  thun- 
dering  on  Hobbes's  steel  cap"  (/Heine  Lfffation,  ii,  9, 
Preface).  His  principal  antagonista  were  Clarendon,  in 
A  brief  View  of  the  dangerout  and  pemiciout  Error»  io 
Church  and  State  in  Mr,  IIobbes^B  Book  eniitled  J^ma- 
than;  Cudworth,  in  his  Etemcd  and  immuiable  Morali- 
ty; and  bishop  Cumberland,  in  his  Latin  work  on  the 
Laws  o/ Naturę,  Bishop  Bramhairs  controyersy  with 
Hobbes  has  been  noticed  aboye.  We  may  also  mention 
archbishop  Tenison's  Creed  of  Mr,  Hohbea  ezamined,  and 
Dr.  Eacliard'8  Dialofpiei  on  Jlobbes,  Hobbes*s  whole 
works  have  been  carcfidly  rc-edited  by  Sir  William 
Molcsworth,  the  Latin  under  the  title  Opera  Philosophi- 
ca  gucK  Latine  ScripsU  W.  I/obbes  (Lond.  1839-45, 5  yols. 
8vo) ;  Enylish  Works  noicfirst  coUecłed  (London,  1839, 4 
yoU  8vo).  Soe  EnglUh  Cyclopadia ;  Tennemann,  Man, 
I/ist,  Philos,  §  324 ;  Mackintosh,  Ethical  Phiiosophy,  §  4 ; 
Mosheim,  Ch.  Iliat.  cent  xyii,  §  22 ;  Hallam,  Lit,  of  Eu- 
ropej  iii,  271 ;  Lcland,  Deistical  WriterSy  ch.  ii;  Moreli, 
Modern  Philosophy,  pt,  i,  ch.  i,  §  1 ;  Bayle,  Gen,  Diet,  s. 
V.;  Shedd,  llistory  of  Doctrines,  yo\,  ii;  British  Quar- 
terly  Beriew,  yi,  156;  Lewis,  Iłisł,  of  Phil,  ii,  226-235; 
Krug,  Handworterhuch  d,  pkilos.  Wiasensch.  ii,  441-443 ; 
Lcckcy,  I/isł,  of  Raiionalism  (see  Indcx) ;  Hurst,  Hist, 
of  Raiionalismy  p.  114  sq.;  Christian  Examiner,  xxix, 
320;  Leidner,  Philos,  p.  270;  Cudworth,  InłeU,  Syst,  ii; 
Farrar,  Ilist.  of  Free  Thoufjhł,  p.  121  sq.;  Domer,  Gesch, 
d,  prot,  Theol, ;  Gass,  Gesch.  d,  protest.  Doffmai,  iii,  39, 
322 ;  Waterland,  Works  (see  Indcx,  yol.  yi) ;  Watson,  | 
Works ;  Tennemann,  Gesch.  d,  Philos.  x ;  Sigwart,  Gesch,  ! 
</.  Philos,  ii  (see  Index);  Sclirockh,  Kirchen-Gesch,  s.  d. 
Reform,  iii ;  Doderlein,  Lit,  (see  Index) ;  Wesłm.  Review, 
April,  1807,  p.  162 ;  Contemp,  Retiew,  Feb.  1868,  yoL  iii ; 
Bibliołheca  Sacra^  yiii,  127. 

Hobbhahn,  Johann  Wilhelm,  a  German  theolo- 
gian,  VI v»  iKim  at  Ochsenberg  March  8, 1665 ;  studied  at 
the  uniyeniities  of  Ulm,  Strasburg,  and  Tubingen,  and 
entered  the  ministrj-  in  1690.  In  1716  he  was  appointed 
superintendent  oyer  a  number  of  churches,  and  pastor 


at  Knittlingen,  where  he  died  in  1727.  Hobbhaha 
wrote,  mainly  onder  lictitious  names,  a  number  of  ex- 
cellent  polemics  against  the  Romish  Church  and  the 
Syncretists.  Of  these,  his  Obsiegende  Wahrheity  and 
Apoloffet,  SchaupkUz  d,  triunq)hirenden  Wiihrheiłj  against 
Eust.  Eisenhut ;  ffistor,  theolog,  PrSfuny  d,  róm.  Pries- 
ter^Weihe^  against  M&ndle;  and  especially  Aw^etastete 
Jungfer^Ehe  d,  lutherisehen  Kirchsy  which  gaye  him 
much  trouble,  and  endangeied  his  life,  are  oonaidered 
the  best.— Jócher,  Gekhrt,  Lex,  ii,  1631.    (J.  H.  W.) 

HobbB,  Lewis,  a  Methodist  Episcopal  minister,  bom 
in  Burkę  County,  Ga.,  Feb.  1783 ;  was  conyerted  in  lł<(M, 
and  entered  the  itinerancy  in  1808.  He  was  atatioiie^l 
in  New  Orleans  in  1818,  and  died  in  Georgia  in  1814. 
Mr.  Hobbs  was  a  young  man  of  deep  and  uniform  piety, 
great  simplicity  and  zeal  as  a  minister,  and  nobly  en- 
dured  the  perils  and  hardships  of  missionary  life  in  the 
Southern  wildemesses  and  the  poisonous  dhnate  of  the 
MississippL — Minutes  of  ConferenceSj  i,  254.     (G.  L.  T.) 

HobhotiBe,  Sir  Benjamin,  was  bom  in  1757,  and 
educated  at  Oxford  for  the  bar.  From  1797-1818  he 
was  a  distinguished  member  of  the  House  of  Commons, 
and  iilled  other  important  stations.  He  died  in  1831. 
His  name  is  mentioned  here  on  account  of  his  Treafise 
on  Jferesy  (Lond.  1792, 8yo),  and  his  Reply  to  the  Rer,  F, 
Randołph^s  I^tter  to  the  Rev,  Dr,  Priestly,  or  an  Kram- 
ination  offhe  Rer,  F.  Randolph's  Scriptural  Rerisitm  of 
Socinian  A  rguments  (Lond.  1792, 8yo;  and  again,  Bath, 
1793, 8yo).— Allibone,  Diet.  ofA  uthors,  i,  856. 

Hobnim.    See  Ebony. 

Hoburg,  Christian,  a  mystic,  bom  at  LUnebuig  in 
1607,  waa  for  a  time  assistant  minister  at  Louenburg, 
and,  later,  subconrector  at  Uelzen.  Here  he  was  deposed 
from  his  pońtion  on  account  of  his  mystical  tendenciea, 
and  he  retired  to  priyate  life  at  Hamburg.  Later,  he  waa 
appointed  minister  to  congregations  in  the  duchy  of 
Brunswick,  and  finally  became  a  Mennonite  preacher  at 
Hamburg.  He  died  in  1675.  Hoburg  wrote  much  mt- 
der  the  pseudonym  Bachmann  and  Prlitorius,  as  Der  «»- 
bekannłe  Christus  (Hamb.  1858;  Frankf.  1695):— rA*oŁ 
MysL  (2d  edit  1656;  Nimeg.  1672;  Sd  edit.  16»4,  and 
often).  See  Lebenbeschreibunff  (by  his  son  Philip,  1076) ; 
Pierer,  Univ,  Lex,  yiii,  420 ;  Jocher,  Gelehrt,  Lex.  ii,  1668. 
(J.H.W.) 

Hocein.    See  Hossbik. 

Hoch,  John.    See  iEpiNua. 

Hooheisen,  Johann  Georg,  a  German  theologian, 
bom  at  Ulm  in  1677,  was  educated  at  the  Uniyersity  of 
his  natiye  place  and  at  Tubingen  and  Wittenberg.  At 
the  last  school  he  at  first  deyoted  his  time  mainly  to  the 
study  of  philosophy,but  aflerwards  changed  to  the  study 
of  theology.  He  next  went  to  Hamburg,  where  hia 
acquaintance  with  the  great  Fabricius  led  him  to  a  morę 
thorough  study  of  Greek  and  Hebrcw.  In  1705  he  was 
madę  M.A.  at  Wittenberg,  and  immediately  began  there 
a  course  of  lectures  which  procured  for  him  an  adjunct 
professorship  in  the  philosophical  department,  he  enter- 
ing  at  the  same  time  as  a  candidate  of  theology.  In  1709 
he  was  called  as  professor  of  Hebrew  to  the  gymnasinni 
at  Bresiau,  where  he  died  in  1712.  Hocheisen  contiib- 
uted  largcly  to  the  leamed  periodicals  of  his  day.  '  Of 
his  published  works  the  mf»t  important  are  De  Iłebree^h' 
rum  rocaiium  officio  et  ralore  in  constituenda  syliaba 
(Yiteb.  1705,  4to) : — De  Deismo  in  Cartesiamsmo  depre* 
henso  (ibid.  1708,  4to)  :^De  Deismo  in  Theosophia  dep-- 
rehenso,  contra  Weałphalum  noratorem  (ibid.  1709,  4to). 
Some  take  him  to  be  the  author  (though  this  is  unlike- 
ly)  of  the  first  letter  in  Vertrauter  Brirftoechsel  tweier 
guten  Freitnde  r.  Wesen  d,  Seele  (1713  and  1734, 8vo),  in 
which  the  soul  is  regarded  only  as  a  merę  mechaniam 
of  the  body.— Dorlng,  Gelehrt,'Theolog,  DeutM^lands,  U 
744 ;  Adelung'8  Jocher,  Gelehrt,  Lex.  Add.  ii,  2029.  (J. 
H.W.) 

Hochmann  (of  Hochenau),  Ernst  Curistoph,  a 
German  m}'8tic,  and  principal  repiesentatiye  of  the\^llŁ* 


HOCHSTETTER 


287 


HODEGETICS 


genatein  sepairndsts,  bom  at  Hochenau  (Łauenburg)  in 
1661  (aoconliog  to  Hagenbach,  1670),  and  educated  at 
Halle  L'Divenity.  During  his  reaidence  there  (1699) 
he  began  to  attract  attention  by  his  addiemes  to  the 
Jewa,  whom  be  endeavored  to  conyeit  to  Christianity. 
In  1702  he  madę  a  jouiney  through  nearly  all  (lermany, 
and  attacked  the  lułcewaimneas  of  the  dergy  with  great 
boldneaS)  oftentimes  entering  the  pulpit  either  during 
the  diacourae  or  immediately  after  it.  He  also  conduct- 
ed  derotional  exerciaes  in  prirate  houses,  which  were 
ItOTf^y  attended  by  the  people.  **  He  was  a  man  of  rare 
gifta,  and  was  inspired  by  a  ńncere  and  resigned  type 
of  piety,  which  brought  many  ńdes  to  his  heart."  He 
anffered  great  peiaecutiou,  and  was  eren  imprisoned  fre- 
ąuently,  but  it  "  waa  all  borne  by  him  with  patience, 
and  even  with  a  certain  degree  of  humor."  His  adhe- 
renta, in  spite  of  all  these  difficulties,  were  numerous,  and 
his  influence  over  them  without  bounds.  Stilling  says 
that  an  old  pietist  related  to  him  "that  Hochmami  once 
preached  on  the  great  meadow  below  Elberfeld,  called 
the  Ox  Comb,  with  ao  much  power  and  eloquence  that 
his  many  hondieds  of  hcarers  fuUy  belieyed  themselyes 
ruaed  to  the  clouda,  and  that  they  had  no  other  thought 
than  that  the  moming  of  eternity  had  really  dawned." 
The  thcological  riews  of  Hochmann  were  in  the  main 
the  same  aa  those  of  the  great  roystics,  Jacob  Boehmc 
(q.  v.)v  Weigel,  Gichtel,  etc  He  oppoeed  infant  bap- 
tism,  and  held  that  the  Lord*B  Supper  should  be  admin- 
istered  only  to  the  chosen  and  faithful  disciples  of  Christ, 
He  abo  insisted  on  a  complete  separation  of  Church  and 
State,  and  had  most  peculiar  view8  of  the  matrimonial 
State.  The  charge  has  been  laid  against  him  that  he  dis- 
beliered  the  doctrine  of  the  Trinity,  but  we  think  with- 
oot  just  came.  He  was,  howerer,  a  fenrent  believer  in 
the  doctńne  of  perfection,  and  held  that  only  those  men 
shoald  preaeh  the  Gospel  who  felt  that  the' Lord  called 
them  to  thia  sacred  work.  He  died  in  1721.  Hoch- 
mami'8  wńtinga  were  published  in  pamphlet  form,  and 
were  lew  in  number.  They  are  of  ralue  mainly  as  au 
index  to  hia  Ufe  and  works  as  a  Christian  man.  A  com- 
I^te  list  of  them  may  be  found  in  Gobel,  Gesch,  d,  christl. 
Lebent  m  d.  rkeuusch-tcestphal,  wangeL  Kirche  (Coblenz, 
1^2),  ii,  809  8q.  Among  these  we  consider  as  particu- 
larly  Yaloable  his  GUtubtnsbekenntniu  tamnU  tehier  an  die 
Jndoi  pekeUteneH  Redę  (1703, 12mo) : — Neoestaria  tup- 
pHeatio  et  dekartatio  ad  Germania  Hectares  s.  Magistra- 
tos  de  dura  peraec,  sic  dictor,  Piełiatarum  (without  year 
or  datę). — Hursfs  Hagenbach,  Ck,  Hitt.  ofthe  \Hth  and 
19rA  CeMturitBj  i,  167-8 ;  Adelung'8  Jbcher,  Gekhrt,  Lex, 
Add.  ii,  2029-2030 ;  Fuhrmann,  Udwrtrb.  d,  Kirchengesch. 
ii,  318 ;  Herzog,  Real-EncgUop.  vi,  163-164.    (J.  H.  W.) 

Hóchstetter,  Andrflas  Adam,  a  distinguished  Ger- 
man theologian  ofthe  Lutheran  confession,  was  bom  July 
13, 1668,  at  Tttbingen,  and  educated  at  the  unirersity  of 
his  natire  place.  In  1688  the  reigning  prince  of  his 
coontiy  sent  him  abroad  to  visit  the  diflTerent  uniyerń- 
ties  of  Germany,  Holland,  and  England,  where  he  formed 
an  acquaintanoe  with  a  number  of  distinguished  schol- 
am  He  paid  particular  attention  to  the  study  of  the 
Hebiew  and  English  languages.  In  the  latter  he  madę 
great  profidency,  and  tranalated  into  Latin,  among  oth- 
era,  StiUingfleefs  Episłolam  ad  deittam^  etc.  On  his  re- 
tora he  was  appointed  a  professor  extTaordinaiy  at  his 
abna  mater.  In  1707  he  was  advanced  regular  profess- 
or of  theology  and  city  preacher  of  Tubingen,  and  in 
1711  conrt  preacher  and  Contułorial  Rath  at  Stuttgart 
Four  years  later,  however,  he  retumed  again  as  professor 
to  the  unirersity.  He  died  April  27,  1718.  His  own 
works  were  mainly  dinertations,  of  which  the  few  pub- 
lished are  in  pamphlet  form.  AUstofthem  isgiyenby 
iodier,  GMkrt.  Lex,  ii,  1633.     (J.  H.  W.) 

Hochirtraten.    See  Hooostraten. 

Hochwart,  Laurektius  (Tursenrutams)t  a  dis- 
tinguished German  preacher  and  historian  of  the  16th 
ccntioy,  bora  at  Tirschenreut  in  1493,  and  educated  at 
His  fint  yean  after  gnduation  were  spent  in 


teaching,  fiist  at  Freysing,  and  later  at  Ingolstadt  In 
1628  he  became  pastor  at  Waldsassen,  and  later  at  Re- 
gensburg. In  1631  he  had  a  cali  as  preacher  to  the  court 
at  Dresden,  but  he  gave  the  preference  to  an  ofiFer  from 
Eichstadt  which  came  at  the  same  time.  In  1633  he  re- 
tumed again  to  Regensburg,  and  later  went  to  Passau. 
He  died  toward  the  close  of  1669  or  in  the  beginning  of 
1570.  His  yaluable  works  were  left  unpublished,  with 
the  exception  of  his  Całalog,  Uatigponentium  episcopO' 
rum  librit  m  (printed  in  A.  F.  Ocfers  Rerum  Boicarum 
script,  i,  148-242).  Among  those  unpublLshed  the  fol- 
lowing  are  of  especial  yalue:  Sermones  Varii:—Mono- 
(essaron  in  quatuor  łJrangtłia :— Chroń,  ingam  mundu— 
Wetzer  u.  Welte,  Kirchen^I^erikon,  i,  253 ;  Herzog,  Real- 
EncgUop.  vi,  164. 

Hook,  JoHK.    See  i£piMus. 

Hock  Tlde  (from  Anglo-Sax.  hocketiy  to  seize),  or 
HoKE  Days,  an  EngUsh  holiday,  usually  ob8er\'ed  on 
Monday  and  Tuesday  two  weeks  after  Eastcr,  iji  memo- 
ly  of  the  slaughter  of  the  Danes  by  Etheked,  Nov.  18, 
1002,  aocording  to  Henry  of  Huntingdon,and  mentioned 
in  the  Confessor^s  Laws.  It  was  the  custom  formerly  to 
collect  money  of  the  parishioners.  A  tracę  of  this  prao- 
tice  is  found  as  late  as  1667,  CoUections  were  also  taken 
up  at  town  gates,  as  at  Chichester  in  the  last  oentury.-— 
Walcott,  Sacred  A  rchaologg,  p.  312. 

Hod  (Heb.trf.'Tin,m<i/p«/y,asoften;  Sept."ca),  one 
of  the  Bons  of  Zophah,  of  the  tribe  of  Asher  (1  Chroń.  vu, 
37).     RC.  antę  1017. 

Hodai^^ah  (Hebrew  IIodayeva'hu,  ^T\V^yiT\,  marg. 
more  correctly,  Uodavya'hu^  ^n;)1^in,  a  prolonged  form 
of  Ilodariah;  Sept,  'O^outa,  Yulgate  Oduja),  the  fint 
named  ofthe  seven  sous  of  Elio^nai,  ofthe  desoendaiits 
of  Zerabbabel  (1  Cfcron,  iii,  24) ;  probabły  a  biother  of 
the  Nahum  of  Lukę  iii,  26  (see  Strong's  Iłarm.  and  JSr- 
pontion  ofthe  Gotpels,  p.  17).    B.C.  cir.  406.    See  Gen- 

EALOGY  OP  JbSUS  ChRIST. 

Hodavl'ah  (Heb.  Hodavyah\  tr^^^yiTl,  praise  of 
Jehovahj  or  perh.  L  q.  Ti^mn^  praise  ye  Jehorah ;  Sept, 
'QBovia,OT  'Q^ovta),  the  name  of  three  or  four  men, 

1.  A  chieftain  and  warrior  of  the  tribe  of  Manasseh 
East  at  the  time  of  the  Assyrian  captiyity  (1  Chroń.  v, 
24).     RC.  cir.  720. 

2.  Son  of  Has-scnuah  and  father  of  Meshullam,  of  the 
tribe  of  Benjamin  (1  Chroń,  ix,  7).     B.C.  antę  588. 

3.  A  Levite  whose  posterity  (to  the  number  of  74) 
retumed  from  Babylon  witli  Zcnibbabcl  (Ezra  ii,  40). 
In  the  parallel  passage,  Neh.  vii,  43,  his  name  is  written 
Hodetah'  (HJ*lirT,  by  contraction  for  Ilodariahj  marg. 
h^^in,  by  contraction  for  Jłodijah ;  Sept,  Oi^^ouia,  Vul- 
gate  Oduja),  RC.  aiite  686.  Apparently  the  same  is 
ebewhere  called  Judaji  (Ezra  iii,  9). 

4.  See  HoDAiAH. 

HodegetlCfl,  a  word  properly  signifying  the  art 
of  indudiotij  or,  better,  the  art  of  włroduction  (ri^yif 
being  miderstood  with  óiriyrfTiKrf)^  but  generally  taken 
to  signify  introduction  {óiriyia)  itself,  especially  when 
reference  is  madę  to  scientific  Ilodegetics.  The  //ode- 
geie  (oiriyrirTicjj  of  course,  is  expected  to  be  thoroughly 
conyersant  with  the  science  of  which  he  treats,  and 
which  he  is  to  introduce,  else  he  might  easily  lead  in 
the  wrong  direction,  or  into  another  departmeut.  Oth- 
er names  for  this  science  are  Methodulogy  (from  fil^o- 
Soc)f  or  PropflBdeutics  (from  irpó  and  itaiŁtvu>,  7raic)f  or 
Isagogics  (from  iic  and  dym),  The  difference  between 
Hodegetics  and  Encydopseilia  (q.  v.)  of  ITieologj-  is,  that 
"  the  former  has  regard  to  the  personal  ąualiiications  of 
the  student,  his  method  of  study,  his  preparatory  helpa, 
etc,  whereas  the  latter  has  regard  to  the  yarious  depart- 
ments  and  systems  of  the  science  itself."  The  literature 
of  Hodegetics  is  quite  extensive.  See  Schlcgcl,  Summe 
r.  Erfahrungen  vnd  Beobb.  z.  Rpford.  d,  Studien  in  gel, 
Schulen  undauf.  Unie,  (Kiga,  1790) ;  Kiesevettcr,  I^hrh, 
d,  Hod,  o. kurtt  Anweit,  s.  studieren  (BerL  1811) ;  Schel* 


HODEGETRIA 


288 


HODY 


\ingyV&rle8, Cb, d, Methock  d  akadm.  Studamt  (8d  edit 
TUbingen,  1882) ;  Scheidler,  Grundr,  d,H,  o.  Methodik  d, 
akadan.  Stad,  (8d  ed.  Jena,  1847).— Krug,  PkiL  Lex,  r, 
1,681 ;  Danz,  Unw.  Worł,  d.  theoLLU.  p.  404;  Bib.  Sac 
i,  179.    See  Introduction. 

Hodegetria  (Odijyfirpia,  the  ffuide)  is  the  name 
which  the  Greeks  g^ve  to  a  puntlng,  said  to  have  been 
the  work  of  St.  Lukę,  because  Michael  Palasologus,  upon 
his  entiy  at  Constantinople,  after  the  defeat  of  the  Latina, 
had  this  portrait  borne  in  adrance,  he  and  hia  anny  fol- 
lowing  on  foot.  The  Yirgin  Mai^^  ia  alao  wonhipped 
tuider  thia  name  by  the  Sicilians,  especially  at  Messina. 
At  Romę  they  erected  and  dedicated  a  chnrch  to  her, 
generally  called  the  Conatantinopolitan  Church.— Fahr- 
mann,  Handwdrierb,  d,  Kirchengesch,  ii,  820 ;  Broughton, 
BibUołh.  Hitt,  Sac,  i,  495. 

Ho''deBll  (Heb.  Cko^desh,  l!3'lh,  a  monthj  aa  often; 
Sept.  'ASd,  Vulg.  ffodei),  one  of  the  wires  of  Shaharaim, 
of  the  Łribe  of  Judah,  sereral  of  whose  children  are  enu- 
merated  (1  Chroń,  viii,  9) ;  called  in  yer.  8  morę  correct* 
ly  Baara  (q.  v.). 

Hode'va]l  (Neh.  yii,  43).    See  Hodaviah  8. 

Hodges,  Cjmm  Wliitman,  a  Baptist  cleigy- 
man,  was  bom  in  Leiceater,  YL,  July  9, 1802.  At  the 
age  of  tweuty  he  was  licensed  to  preach  in  Brandon,  Y t^ 
and  in  the  autumn  of  that  year  acoepted  an  invitation 
to  preach  at  Minerva  for  a  year.  In  connection  wiih 
thia  work  he  pursued  hb  ministerial  atudies  under  the 
Reir.  Daniel  O.  Morton,  at  Shoreham,  but  so  anxiou8  waa 
he  to  be  fully  engaged  in  the  work  of  his  calling  that 
he  abandoned  the  idea  of  a  fuli  coarse  of  atody.  He, 
however,  diligently  improyed  aoch  opportunities  aa  he 
had,  and  his  literary  and  theological  acątiiaitions  be- 
came  quite  respectable.  He  waa  ofdained  in  Chester, 
Warren  Co.,  N.  Y.,  in  1824,  and  remained  there  three 
years.  He  preached  two  years  in  Arlington,  Yt. ;  foar 
years  in  Shaftesbury;  four  yeare  in  Springfield;  aiz 
years  in  Westport,  N.  Y. ;  and  five  years  in  Bennington, 
Yt.  Thence  he  went  to  Bristol,  where  he  finished  his 
career.  He  died  April  4, 1851.  He  was  a  tnie  Christian 
pastor;  he  believe(d  heartily,  entirely.  His  sinccrity, 
his  thorough  consecration  to  his  work,  was  the  true 
aecret  of  his  effective  and  uaeful  miniatry.  In  1850 
Mr.  Hodges  published  a  smali  volume  of  aermons. — 
Sprague,  AtmalSf  vi, 724. 

Hodges,  Joseph,  a  Baptist  minister,  waa  bom  at 
Norton,  Mass.,  May  19,  1806,  and  waa  a  graduate  of 
Waeerville  CoUege'  in  the  class  of  1830.  He  took  the 
fuli  course  of  study  at  the  Newton  Theological  Institu- 
tion  (1830-33),  and  was  licensed  to  preach  by  the  Church 
at  Canton,  Mass.,  in  April,  1831.  He  was  ordained  at 
Weston,  Nov.  18,  1835,  and  was  pastor  of  the  Church 
in  that  pUce  four  years  (1835-39).  He  had  paatoratea 
of  a  shortcr  or  longer  duration  at  Amherst,  Coleraine, 
Three  Rivers,  Palmer,  East  Brookfield,  and  North  Ox- 
ford, all  in  Massachusetts,  for  fifteen  years  (1840-55). 
For  six  years  (1855-61)  he  waa  an  agent  of  the  Amer- 
ican and  Foreign  Bibie  Society.  He  died  at  Cambridge, 
Masa.,  Aug.  23, 1863. 

Hodgee,  Walter,  D.D.,  a  clefgyman  of  the  Hutch- 
insonian  school  and  provoflt  of  Oriel  College,  OxfoTd, 
tlourished  about  the  middle  of  the  last  century.  He 
provoked  a  great  deal  of  attention  by  hb  EKhu,  or  an 
Inąuiry  vUo  the  principal  Scope  and  Design  ofthe  Booh 
o/^Jo*  (London,  1750, 4to;  1751, 8vo;  8d  ed.  1756, 12mo, 
and  others),  in  which  he  endeavored  to  show  that  Elihu 
18  the  Son  of  God,  a  discovery  which  he  supposed  would 
throw  great  light  on  the  book  of  Job,  and  Bolve  the  con- 
troversie8  respecting  the  doctrincs  which  have  been  agi- 
tated  thereupon.  He  wrote  also  The  ChritHan  Plan  (2d 
edit.,  with  additions,  and  with  other  theological  pieces, 
London,  1775,  8vo),  a  no  leas  curioua  work  than  the  one 
above  mentioned,  thongh  it  failed  to  produce  so  much 
sensation.  "The  whole  meaning  and  cxtcnt  of  the 
Christian  phin  he  repreaenta  as  embodied,  acoording  to 


his  interpretatioo,  in  the  Hebrew  Elohim."  Tlie  othef 
theological  piecea  in  the  addenda  of  this  woik  are  on 
the  historical  acooont  of  David's  life;  and  on  SkeoL,  or 
ooneermng  the  Place  ofdeparied  Soule  beheten  the  Tim 
of  their  Dittobition  md  the  generał  JUturrecHtm;  abo^ 
Oratio  habUa  in  domo  comwcafKMnf .— Kitto,  Cgehp,  ii, 
817 ;  Darling,  Cydop.  Bibliog,  i,  1504;  AUibone,  Diet,  o/ 
i4tt«Aor*,  i,  857.     (J.H.W.) 

Hodgion,  Bernard,  LL.D.,  prindpal  of  Hertfoid 
College,  is  the  author  of  SolomonU  Song,  translatfd/ron 
the  Hebrew  (Oxford,  1785,  4to),  in  which  his  chief  de- 
sign haa  been  to  give  aa  literał  a  rendering  of  the  orig- 
inal  aa  poańble.  Also,  The  Proverb$  ofSoiomon,  trtmh 
kUed/rom  the  Hdfrew,  wiih  Noiee  (Oxford,  1788, 4to)  :- 
Ecclesiastegy  a  new  trantlaHon/rom  the  original  Hthrm 
(Oxford,  1791, 4to).  The  notes  are  few  in  number,  and 
are  principally  devoted  to  verbal  critidam.— Kitto,  Cf- 
dopmdia,  ii,  817. 

Hodgson,  Robert,  D.D.,  waa  dean  of  CaiUsle  in 
1820,  but  the  datę  of  hm  birth  ia  not  known.  He  pub* 
liahed  mainly  his  sermona  (London,  1803-42),  and  edited 
the  worka  of  hia  onde,  biahop  Porteus,  of  London,  with 
hia  life  (Lond.  1816, 6  yola.  8vo),  of  whom  he  also  pub- 
lished a  biography  (Lond.  181 1, 8vo).  He  died  in  1844. 
^Allibone,  DieL  of  A  uthors,  i,  858. 

HodheUlds,  an  heretical  sect  of  the  Mohamme- 
dans,  who  believe  that  the  sainta  Uve  in  Paradiae  in  an 
undisturbed  quiet    See  Mouammedanism. 

Hodl^ah  (njTtI,  the  same  as  JfodiJaM  [q.  v.]),  the 
wife  of  Mered  (Sept  ij  'lSovia ;  Alex.  MS.  *Ioviaia),  aod 
the  mother  of  Jered,  and  Heber,  and  Jekuthiel  (1  Chroń. 
iv,  19),  the  same  who  ia  called  Jkhuduau  (n^^l^i^n, 
the  Jeweu,  L  e.  hia  Jewish  wife,  m  distingaiahed  tm 
Bithiah,  who  waa  an  Egyptaan)  in  the  former  pait  of 
the  yerse. 

Hodl'jah  (Heb.  Ilodigah',  TJSr\n,  mąfegfg  ofJduh 
vah\  Sept.  'O^oum,  'O^oi/iac,  'O^ova,  'O^ovfa),  the 
name  of  at  least  two  men. 

1.  One  of  the  Le^ńtea  who  assisted  Ezra  in  expoi]nd- 
ing  the  law  to  the  people  (Neh.  viii,  7 ;  ix,  5),  and  sab- 
scribed  Nehemiah^s  covenant  (x,  18;  his  name  ia  wppu- 
ently  repeated  in  ver.  13).     RC.  dr.  410. 

2.  One  of  the  chief  Israelitea  who  subacribed  tha 
covenant  with  Nehemiah  (Neh.  x,  18).    B.C.  dr,  410, 

3.  See  Jehuduah. 

Hodahl    See  TARTDf-HoDSifi. 

Hody,  HuMPHRT,  D.D.,  an  English  divine,  was  bon 
Jan.  1, 1659,  at  Oldcombe,  Somersetahire,  and  was  edn- 
cated  at  the  Univer8łty  of  Oxford.  In  1684  he  wts 
ekcted  a  fellow  of  Wadham  College,  and  in  the  same 
year  he  published  a  DistertaHo  contra  Hittariam  A  rittees 
de  LXX  InterpretSnu,  Hody  became  prindpally  known 
by  his  publications  respecting  the  biahops  who  had  been 
deprived  of  their  biahoprica  during  the  reign  of  William 
and  Mary  for  refusing  the  oath  of  allegiance.  The  fint 
work  which  he  published  on  thia  subject  waa  a  tranela- 
tion  of  a  Greek  treatise,  aupposed  to  have  been  written 
by  Nicephorus  in  the  latter  end  of  the  13th  or  the  begin- 
ning  of  the  14th  centuiy,  in  which  the  writer  maintains 
that  ^  although  a  bishop  waa  unjuatly  deprived,  ndther 
he  nor  the  Church  ever  madę  a  aeparation,  if  the  aucces- 
sor  was  not  a  hcretic"  The  original  Greek  wotk,  as 
well  as  the  English  translation,  were  both  published  in 
1691.  Dodwell  replied  to  it  m  ^  Vinc^catian  ofthe  De- 
prived  Biśhops  (Lond.  1692).  In  the  following  year 
Hody  published  The  Caee  ofSees  Vacant  5y  an  Unta- 
nonical  Deprivałion  (Lond.  1698, 4to),  in  which  he  replies 
to  the  arguments  of  his  opponents.  These  exertioos  of 
Hody  in  favor  of  the  ruling  party  in  the  Church  did  not 
pass  unrewarded.  He  waa  appointed  domeetic  chaplain 
to  Tillotson,  archbishop  of  Canterbury,  which  ofBoe  he 
also  held  under  Tillot8on*8  suoceasor.  He  waa  preaented 
with  a  living  in  London,  and  waa  appointed  regius  pro- 
feasor  of  Greek  at  Oxford  in  1698^  and  aichdeeooa  of 


HOE 


280 


HOFACKER 


Oxloid  in  1704^  He  died  Jan.  20, 1706.  He  fonnded 
ten  ecbolanhips  at  Wadham  College  in  order  to  pro- 
OM>Łe  the  stodj  of  the  Greek  and  Hebrew  langnages. 

Of  Ihe  other  worka  of  Hody,  the  moet  important  are : 
1.  De  BMiorMm  TexUbus  Or^iitalibiay  rernonUms  GroB- 
CU  et  Laiima  Yulgaia,  Wnri  w  (Oxford,  1704,  foUo),  Which 
u  aaid  by  Bialiop  Manh  to  be  "  the  clasńcal  work  on  the 
Septoagint."  The  first  book  containa  the  diasertation 
against  the  history  of  Aristeas,  which  haa  been  mention- 
ed  above.  The  aeoond  girea  an  account  of  the  real 
translatora  of  the  Septuagint,  and  of  the  time  when  the 
tranalation  was  madę.  The  third  book  giyes  a  histor}' 
of  the  Hehrew  text  and  of  the  Latin  Yidgate ;  and  the 
foorth,  of  the  other  andent  Greek  Yersions :— 2.  The  Ee§- 
umction  oftke  (same)  Body  Asaerted  (Lond.  1694, 8iro): 
—S.  A  fnmadeernom  on  two  Pamphld$  lately  publUhed  hy 
Mr,  CoOier  (Lond.  1696, 8vo).  Sir  W.  Perkina  and  Sir  J. 
Friend  had  been  executed  in  1695  for  treason  against  the 
govenunent;  bat  preYiona  to  their  ezecution  they  had 
been  abeolved  of  their  crime  by  eome  nonjoring  deigy- 
men.  This  act  waa  condemned  by  the  ecdeaiastical 
anthoritiea,  bot  waa  jnstified  by  GolUer  in  two  pamphlets 
which  he  published  on  the  subject  :-^.  De  GrtBcis  Ilhu- 
tiibHs  Ungua  Gracaa  WUrarvmque  humamorum  inUaura' 
tonbuM  (Lond.  1742).  This  work  was  pablished  seyeral 
ycars  after  the  author^s  death  by  Dr.  Jebb,  who  haa  pre- 
fixed  to  it  an  account  of  Hody's  life  and  writings.  8ee 
EngHsh  Cyctopadia  ;  Allibone,  Diet,  of  A  uthors,  i,  868 ; 
Hook,  Eccieg.  Biogn^y^  vi,  104 ;  Kitto,  Cydop.  ił,  817, 

HoS,  Hattmias,  of  Hohenegg,  famous  in  hlstoiy  as 
the  oonfeseor  of  John  Geoige  I,  elector  of  Saxony.  He 
was  bom  of  a  noble  family  at  Yienna  in  1580,  and  edu- 
cated  at  Wittenberg.  In  1600  he  oommenced  at  this 
onirersity  a  coorse  of  lectures,  and  published  a  pn>- 
giamme  on  the  position  which  he  waa  to  take,  OrcUio 
detetUuu  Papam  et  CalmnisUUf  in  which  he  manifests 
that  great  hatred  for  Romanists  and  Calrinista  which 
characterizedall  the  acta  of  his  life.  Ho«  distinguished 
himaelf  greatly  both  as  a  student  and  a  lecturer.  In 
1612  he  waa  called  to  Dresden  by  the  elector,  and  be- 
eune  court  preacher  and  confeasor.  His  talenta  and 
adrattneaa  gave  him,  in  time,  complete  possession  of  the 
jodgment  and  consdence  of  the  elector,  whom  he  hin- 
dned  from  enteiing  into  a  kague  with  Fredeiick  Y,  the 
uiifialuimte  king  of  Bohemia,  by  representing  to  him 
that  the  Keibnned  religion,  which  Frederick  professed, 
was  fiitally  wrong,  and  oould  not  exist  withont  injury 
to  Latheraniam.  HoS  seems,  indeed,  to  have  hated  the 
Beformed  eren  moro  than  he  did  the  Romanists,  and 
there  appeara  not  the  ahadow  of  a  reason  to  aasert  that 
he  waa  bribed  by  the  emperor.  To  the  declaration  of 
bis  prindplea  while  a  kcturer  at  Wittenberg,  and  abore 
albded  to,  he  adhered  until  the  end  of  his  life,  though 
it  is  aaid  he  greatly  abated  in  his  hatred  against  the 
Galriniata  in  hia  last  days.  Hb  priyate  character  bas 
been  highly  oommented  opon  by  all  who  knew  him. 
He  wTote  a  CommcHtearńu  m  Apooalyptm  (Lpz.  1610-40, 
2  parts),  and  a  nnmber  of  contioyersial  works  against 
the  Reformed  Chorch  and  the  Romamstsi  He  died  in 
1645.  See  Bayle,  Gen. DicUonary,  s.  v.;  Herzog,  Real- 
EweyHop,  voL  ri,  165;  Moaheim,  ĆJu  Huiory,  cent.  xvii, 
sec  ii,  pt.  i,  eh.  i,  n.  12;  Gass,  Getdi.  d.  Dogmatik,  ii,  19, 
78;  Kartz,CA./Affoi^,ii,188;  l>omex,Geach.d, protest, 
TheoL  (see  Index) ;  Fuhrmann,  Handwdrterb.  d,  Kirch" 
fiV«dLii,a20-«22.     (J.HW.) 

HóefeL    See  Hofeu 

Hoftflltig.    See  Hófung. 

H08I,  bishop  of  Mana  in  the  18th  oentury,  madę 
himadf  ąuite  oonapicaons  by  the  part  which  he  took 
far  the  Engliah  in  the  revolt  of  the  nobUity  of  Mans 
against  them  afker  the  death  of  William  the  Conqueror. 
Ile  sullered  impriaonment,  and  after  the  accession  of 
Hugo  waa  even  obliged  to  seek  a  refuge  in  England. 
Bot  we  iind  him  again  at  Mans  in  1092,  and  an  attend- 
ant  at  the  coundls  of  Saumur  (1094)  and  Brives.  Later 
be  trayelled  for  a  time  with  pope  Urban  U.  He  died 
IV.-T 


July  28, 1096^Hoefer,  Noup.Bioy.  GhUrak, xxiv,  850. 

(j.aw.) 

Hoeaoheliiui,  Dayid,  an  eminent  Greek  scholar, 
bom  at  Augsburg  in  1556,  was  professor  at  St  Amie'8 
College,  and,  later,  the  librarian  of  his  native  dty.  He 
died  Oct  80, 1617.  He  desenres  a  notice  here  on  ac- 
count of  his  valuable  editions  of  some  of  the  Greek  (ł- 
thera,  and  of  a  number  of  Greek  authors  who  have  writ* 
ten  in  the  department  of  Christian  antiąuity  and  ecde- 
aiastical history.— Bayle,  Hitt.  Diet.  iii,  478. 

Hoeven  [pronounced  ^oom],  Abraham  (des 
AiiORue)  YAH  DKR,  a  celebnted  Dutch  preacher,  bom  at 
Rotterdam  in  1798,  was  for  a  time  professor  at  the  sem- 
inary  of  the  Remonstrants  at  Amsterdam,  and  later  pro- 
feasor  at  Utrecht.  He  died  July,  1855.  Hoeven  wiote 
De  Jocome  Clerico  et  PkU^ppo  a  lAmborch  (Amst.  184S> 
— ^Pierer,  Univertal-Lex,  viii,  435. 

Hofiioker,  Ludwig,  a  German  divine  and  cde- 
brated  preacher,  bora  at  Wildbad  April  15, 1798,  and  ed- 
ucated  at  the  Uniyersity  of  Tubingen.  While  here  he 
became  very  xealous  for  the  cause  of  religion,  and  esp&- 
dally  endeavored  to  encourage  the  study  of  the  Bibie 
among  his  fellow- studenta.  He  formed  Bible-dasses 
which  were  largely  attended ;  and  his  intimate  acąuaint- 
ance  with  the  works  of  the  orthodox  commentators 
Bengd,  Oetinger,  and  Steinhofer  rendeied  him  especial 
servioe  in  his  sermons,  which  he  finequently  ddivered  at 
this  time,  always  extemporaneously.  After  fiUing  the 
Ticaratea  of  Stettin  and  Flieningen,  he  was  appointed  aa- 
sistant  to  his  father,  preacher  at  St  Leonard'8,  in  Stutt- 
gard.  He  was  now  only  28  years  old,  but  his  sermons 
attracted  generał  attention,  espedally  on  account  of  hia 
eamestnesa  and  piety.  In  1826,  after  the  death  of  hia 
father,  he  was  sent  to  Rielingshausen,  near  Marbach.  It 
is  sald  that  his  andienoe  was  compoaed  not  only  of  his 
own  congregation,  but  that  strangers  came  from  afar  to 
hear  the  young  preacher.  In  the  fali  of  1827,  uiged  by 
his  admirers  and  many  friends,  he  began  the  publication 
of  some  of  his  sermons :  Predigten  (1827 ;  27th  ed.  1866). 
The  rapid  sale  of  these  was  really  surprising.  An  edi- 
tion  of  1500  was  exhausted  almoet  immediatdy  after 
publication.  His  sudden  death,  Noyember  18, 1828,  in- 
dted  his  friends  to  a  publication  of  all  his  sermons. 
They  have  now  been  spread  abroad  in  morę  than  100,000 
copics,  not  only  in  Germany,  but  also  in  translations  in 
France,  England,  Denmark,  Sweden,  Russia,  and  our  own 
country.  Speaking  of  his  ability,  Knapp  {Leben  v,  L, 
Ilofadcer,  Hdddb.  1852)  says  that  he  was  the  greatest 
and  most  powerful  preacher  of  the  WUrtemberg  Churdi 
in  this  century.  This  opinion  was  confirmed  by  the 
cdebrated  F.  W.  Krummacher :  **  The  Suabian  Land  lost 
in  him  its  most  powerful  preacher^  (in  his  AtUobiogra' 
phy,  transL  by  Eaaton,  p.  207).  A  prayer-book,  compiled 
from  posthumous  works  of  JEIofacker  and  from  his  ser- 
mons {Erbauunyt-  und  Gtbetbuch  Jur  aUe  Tage^  Stutt- 
gard),  appeared  in  1869.— Herzog,  Beal-Encyklop,  xix, 
646  8q. 

Holacker,  Wilhelm,  a  younger  brother  of  Lud- 
"^  (<!•  ^Ot  f^^i  ^e  lum,  a  cdebrated  preacher  of  the 
WUrtemberg  Church,  was  bom  Febniary  16, 1805.  In 
1828  he  became  assistant  to  his  brother,  who  was  then 
in  failing  health.  Aft«r  his  decease  he  tiavelled  thruugh 
Northern  Germany  on  a  literary  tour.  From  1830-1833 
he  delivered  lectures  at  the  Uniyersity  of  Tubingen  on 
Dogmatics,  based  on  the  work  of  Nitasch,  pursuing  him- 
aelf at  the  same  time  a  course  of  study.  In  1833  he  waa 
appointed  at  Waiblingen,  and  in  January,  1836,  at  St. 
Leionard^s,  in  Stuttgard,  a  church  which  his  father  and 
elder  brother  had  senred  before  him.  Here  he  died,  Au- 
gust 10, 1848.  Like  his  brother,  he  was  an  eamest  aer- 
vant  of  the  Church  of  Christ,  and  a  regular  attendant  at 
the  Bibie  and  Missionary  meetings  of  the  Uniyersity 
studenta  while  at  l^Ubingen,  where  he  also  was  educated.. 
He  was  a  zealous  defender  of  the  orthodox  doctrine  of 
the  diyinity  of  Christ,  asserting  that  modem  adence 
la  morę  in  harmony  with  the  Christian  doctnue  of 


HOPEL 


200 


HOFFMANN 


the  orthodox  Chtitcb  than  with  the  speculatiTe  theolo- 
riy  of  the  Hegel-StrauBs  BchooL  He  published,  beindes 
a  number  of  polemical  artides  in  different  theological 
periodicaLs,  Trdpjlem  aut  dar  r.eben*queUe  (Stottg.  1868 
and  1864),  and  Predigttnfitr  aUe  ehnrn-  und  Feattuge  (ib. 
1858).  Óf  his  sermons  nine  editiona  have  already  been 
published.  They  oontain  a  short  biography  yrritten  by 
Kapff,  a  German  preacher,  one  of  Hofacker^a  aflsociates 
at  Tubingen  Uniyereity.  See  Knapp,  Ldten  von  X.  Hof- 
acker ;  Hartmann,  in  Henog,  Real-EticjfHop,  xix,  649 
8q.     (J.H.W.) 

H6fel,  JoRA.TfN,  a  German  ławyer,  bom  at  Uffen- 
heim  in  1600,  and  educated  at  the  unirersities  of  Stras- 
burg, Giessen,  and  Jena,  desenres  mention  here  on  ao- 
oount  of  his  Muaica  Christiana  (1684),  and  Hittori»dita 
Gesanffbuch  (Schleuringen,  1681).  He  died  in  1688.— 
Pierer,  lTniver$,  Lex.  viii,  440. 

Hofer,  Joseph  Antos,  a  German  Roman  Gatholic 
priest,  bom  at  Kastelrath  May  19, 1742,  was  educated  at 
the  Unirersity  of  Innsprack.  In  1765  he  was  madę 
priest,-  in  1722  professor  of  rhetoric  and  prefect  of  the 
Gymnasium  at  Brix,  and  in  1776  professor  of  ecdesias- 
ticai  law;  here  he  remained,  with  an  inteimption  of 
foor  yewn  only,  which  hie  spent  at  Innspmck,  until  the 
discontinuance  of  the  school  in  1807,  when  he  was  pen- 
sioned,  retaining,  howerer,  the  title  of  an  ecdesiastical 
coundllor  (Rath)  of  the  govemment.  He  died  in  1820. 
Hofer  contributed  sereral  artides  to  periodical  litera- 
turę. Of  his  published  works,  Corupectus  Jurit  eccUa, 
pttbUd  (Brixen,  1781, 4to)  entitles  him  to  a  posidon  in 
theological  literaturę.  Hofer  published  sereral  sermons 
which  are  of  superior  meriU  Of  these  the  foUowing  aie 
perhaps  the  best :  Ermahnungsrede  cun  Titularfeste  Ma- 
ria (ib.  1798, 8vo)  i—Kunttgriffe  frammer  Eltem  «.  Er- 
tiehung  wohiguiU,  Kinder  (ib.  1794, 8yo)  i—UntrUgHches 
Kamzeichm  d,  tiOUch.  Au/ertteh.  (ibid.  1798, 8vo).— D5- 
ring,  Gelehrlm  Theolog.  DeuUckl.  i,  746. 

Hofifbaaer,  Clkmens  Maria,  a  Roman  Gatholic, 
and  the  fint  Redemptori»t  (q.  v.)  in  Germany,  was 

.  bora  at  Tasswitz,  in  Moravia,  Sept.  26, 1751.  His  par- 
ents  had  iutcnded  him  for  the  ministry,  but  the  sudden 
death  of  his  father  left  his  mother  in  destitute  circum- 
stances,  and  at  the  age.of  flfbeen  Hoffbauer  was  ap- 
prenticed  to  a  baker.  While  engaged  in  his  trade  he 
studied  Latin,  and  passed  an  examination  in  the  lower 
class  of  a  monastery  school,  determined  to  become  a 
priest  at  some  futurę  time,  if  poesible.  The  bishop  of 
Tivoli  (later  Pius  YII)  finally  took  him  under  his  pro- 
tection,  and  Hofifbauer  sucoeeded  in  making  his  way  to 
Yienna,  where  he  studied  at  the  uniyersity.  In  1783  he 
went  to  Roroe,  whither  he  had  joumeyed  already  twelve 
times,  and  joined  the  congregation  of  the  Redemptor- 
ists.  Two  years  later,  after  consecration  to  the  priest- 
hood,  he  retumed  to  Yienna,  and  then  to  Waraaw,  where 
a  house  and  a  church  of  St.  Benno  were  placed  at  his  di»- 
posaL  From  this  he  and  his  assodates  aflerwards  boie 
the  name  of  Bennonitet,    The  success  of  the  Redcmp- 

'  torists  in  the  establishment  of  a  monastery  at  this  place 
was  so  great  that  Pius  YI,  in  1791,  decided  to  give  them 
an  annual  support  of  100  scudL  The  Roman  Catholics 
assert  that  many  Protestants  became  converts  of  Hoff- 
bauer, and  that  their  confidence  in  him  and  his  brothers 
of  the  monastery  was  unbounded.  While  the  latter  may 
be  possible,  the  former  is  surely  improbable.  The  effect 
of  the  Frcnch  Reyolution  may  haye  led  some  disturbing 
minds  to  Join  the  ranks  of  the  Roman  Catholics,  because 
many  of  that  Church  had  taken  such  a  peculiar  attitude 
in  France  against  trae  Christlanity.  Later  Hoffbauer 
also  established  a  monastery  in  Switzerland.  Here  he 
and  his  foUowers  suffered  great  persecution,  which,  while 
it  is  possible  that  the  disturbed  state  of  the  pcople  gave 
risc  to  it,  is  morę  Ukely  to  have  been  proyoked  by  Hoff- 
bauer and  his  followers.  This  last  supposition  receiyes 
additional  strength  from  the  dealings  of  Napoleon  while 
in  Pmssia.  He  imprisoned  them  one  entire  month  in 
the  fortress  of  KUstrin,  and,  after  a  search  of  their  pa- 1 


pers,  demolished  the  monastery  and  discontinued  the 
order.  Some  time  later  Hoffbauer  sooceeded  in  es- 
tablishing  an  educational  institution  at  Yienna,  which 
had  been  presented  to  the  Redemptorista  by  a  ooo- 
yerted  (?)  Protestant.  In  1815  he  went  to  Balgaria, 
and  retumed  to  Yienna  in  1818,  where  the  goyem- 
ment  (Roman  Catholic)  ordered  him  from  the  ooim- 
try.  The  intercession  of  the  clergy  influenced  the  em- 
peror  not  only  to  annul  the  order  of  the  goverament, 
but  to  establish  eyen  a  monastery  at  Yienna  under  his 
own  protection.  Hoffbauer  died  suddenly  March  25, 
1820.  In  his  labors  he  was  assisted  by  J.  t.  Hibel,  who 
died  in  1807.  Initial  stepe  haye  been  taken  for  his  beat- 
iflcation  (q.  y.).  See  Pod,  D.  enie  deutsche  Reden^fłor^ 
isf.in  ».Lebm  vnd  Wirhm  (Reg.  1844);  S.Bnmner,^. 
und  aeine  Zeit  (Yienna,  1850) ;  ReaUEncyklop,/.  d.  Kd- 
tkoL  DeułśchL  v,  418  sq.     (J.  H.  W.) 

Hofieditz,  Thbodore  L.,  D.D.,  a  German  Refanned 
minister,  was  łx>m  near  Carhshayen,  on  the  Weaer,  Ger- 
many, Deoember  16, 1783.  He  emigtated  to  America  in 
1807.  He  first  followed  the  caUing  of  a  school-Ceacher. 
Subsequently  he  studied  theology  with  Rey.  Samuel 
Helfenstein,  D.D.,  in  Philadelphia.  He  was  lioensed 
and  ordained  in  1818,  and  became  pastor  of  German  Re- 
formed  congręgations  in  Northampton  County,  Pa^  and 
senred  this  charge  during  the  remainder  of  his  life,  with 
the  exception  of  brief  interyals,  during  which  he  senred 
numerous  congregations  which  he  oiganized  in  neigb- 
boring  counties.  In  1848  he,  with  Rey.  Dr.  Schneck,  yia- 
ited  Germany,  beaiing  a  cali  from  the  Synod  of  the  Ger- 
man Reformed  Church  to  Dr.  Krummacher  to  become 
professor  of  theology  in  the  semiuaiy  at  Mercerabuig. 
He  died  July  10^  1858.  Mild,  warm-hearted,  and  real- 
ous,  Dr.  Hoffeditz  ezerted  a  wide  and  blessed  infloence 
in  the  Church.    One  of  his  sons  enteied  the  ministry. 

Hoffinann,  Andreas  Oottlleb,  a  yeiy  distin- 
guished  theologian  and  Orientalist,  bom  Aprii  13, 1796, 
at  Welbsleben,  near  Magdeburg,  was  educatod  at  the 
Uniyersity  of  Halle,  where  the  infioence  of  Gesenius  led 
him  to  a  thorough  study  of  the  Shemitic  languagea,  e»- 
pecially  the  Syiiac.  Aiter  graduation  he  lectuied  at 
his  alma  mater  for  a  short  time  on  the  Arabie  language, 
and  in  1822  was  called  as  extraordinaiy  profeaaor  to 
Jena.  Here  he  was  adyanced  to  the  regular  profeasor- 
ship  in  1826,  with  the  degree  of  S.T.D.  and  membeiahip 
in  the  theological  faculty.  At  the  time  of  his  death, 
March  16, 1864,  he  was  senior  ol  the  theological  laccdty 
and  of  the  tenate  of  the  uniyersłty.  As  a  profeopor  at 
Jena  he  deyoted  himself  mauily  to  the  philokgical  de- 
partment  of  theology.  His  most  popular  lectures  weie 
on  Hebrew  Antiquitie8;  bttt,like  Gesenius,  he  lectured 
also  on  Church  History,  Isagogics,  both  of  the  Old  and 
New  Testament,  Esegesis  of  the  Old  Testament,  and  on 
all  the  Shemitic  and  £astera  languages  genetally  atndied 
at  a  German  uniyersity.  In  philology,  his  Grammaiica 
Syriaca  (HaL  1827;  translated  into  Euglish  by  Day  and 
Cowper)  is  by  some  of  the  best  authorities  oonaidered 
superior  to  any  other  yet  pubUshed,  that  of  Ullmann  in- 
cluded.  Among  his  other  works  are  Entwutfd,  hdnr,  A  I- 
tertkUmer  (Weim.  1832),  which  is  based  on  the  woik  of 
Wamekros(Weim.  1782  and  1794)  i—CommoUaruujML' 
criL  in  Motit  henedictumtm  (in  pamphlet  form.  Halle; 
later.  Jena,  1822,  etc)  .^ApMlyfriihar  dL  ok,  Zeit  wUer 
Juden  und  Chritten  (Jena,  1838^88,  yoL  i,  part  i  and  ii, 
containing  the  book  of  Enoch).  Hoffmann  was  also  ed- 
itor  of  the  second  section  of  the  great  Encydopftdia  of 
Ersch  und  Gmber.  In  addition  to  these  litemy  labota, 
he  contributed  laigely  to  the  German  theological  and 
philological  periodiciJa.  —  Herzog,  Real-EncgUapn  xix, 
651;  Hoefer,  Nout,  Biog,  Ginerale,  xxiy,  899;  &ock- 
haus,  Corwer»at.-Lex,  y,  20.     (J.  U.  W.) 

Hoffinann,  Daniel,  a  Lutheran  theologian,  waa 
bom  at  Halle  1540,  and  educated  at  the  Uniyetsity  of 
Jena.  In  1576  he  was  madę  professor  of  theidogy  at 
the  Uniyersity  of  Helmstadt  In  the  theological  con- 
troyersies  of  his  day  he  took  an  actiye  part,  oonteiMl- 


HOFFMANN 


291 


HOFFMIER 


Ulg  againsŁ  the  CalTinistic  thecny  of  the  tacnments,  pre- 
deatinatioi],  and  abo  agaioBt  the  doctrine  of  Ubiquity 
(q.  ▼.)  aa  beki  by  his  own  Chnich.  He  decńed  philcwo- 
pbj  as  hnitfol  both  to  religion  and  to  the  oommunity, 
attempcing  to  suatain  his  posilion  by  estiacto  from  the 
Ftaline  epistlea  and  the  tmtings  of  Luther  himaelf,  who, 
as  is  well  known,  did  in  his  earlier  yeara  hołd  that  there 
is  a  oontradiction  between  the  tmths  of  theology  and 
those  of  philosophy.  In  his  later  yeais  Luther  radically 
changed  his  yiews.  Hoffmann  was  attacked  by  the  two 
great  Aństotelian  philosophen,  Gaselius  and  Martini, 
who  also  oomplained  of  him  at  the  uniYersity.  The 
dnke  of  Bmnswick,  after  consulting  the  Unireraity  of 
Kostock.  ob&ged  Hofimann  to  retiact,  and  yacate  his 
chair  at  the  unirerńty.  He  died  at  WolfenbUttd  in 
1611.  His  followers,  on  aooount  of  their  adherence  to  a 
twofold  doctrine,  were  called  dupiicisłSf  and  their  oppo- 
nents  stBądiótts,  His  controyeraial  writings  are  nu- 
merous,  as  Be  dupłici  tferittUe  Lutheri  a  phHosopktM  t m- 
puffnala  (Blagdeb.  1600):— /9vper  quee$ii(m^  num  mfUo- 
gUmau  ratioma  locum  habeat  in  recno  fidn  (ibid.  1600). 
An  aoooont  of  his  disputes  may  be  found  in  Tbomasius, 
De  Cotśrtnenia  HoffmaimUma  (Erlangen,  1844,  8vo)  \ 
MaBem  ImpietaHs  Hoffinanmanm  (Frankf.  1604).  See 
Herzog,  ReaUEncyUop,  vi,  185  są. ;  Mosheim,  Ch»  Hitt, 
cent.  xvii,  pL  ii,  chap.  i,  §  10 ;  Enfield,  HiH,  of  Phiiot,  ii, 
506 ;  Gaasy  GescA.  d,  Do^aat,  ii,  73  8q. ;  Bayle,  HigU  Diet, 
iii,  478  aq. ;  Knig,  Philoi.  Lex.  v,  581 8q. ;  Schrockh,  Kir- 
ekeHffetek.  s,  d.  Reform,  iv,  159-61.    See  Hummius. 

Hoffinann,  Oottfiied,  bom  at  Flagwitz,  in  Silesia, 
ia  1678,  stiidied  at  Ldpsig,  and  was  rector  of  the  gym- 
naaia  at  Laaban  and  Zittau.  He  died  in  1712.  His 
name  ia  mentioned  here  on  aoooont  of  his  contribntions 
to  hymnobgy,  as  Ldchengetange  (Laub.  1704) : — Bun- 
Ueder  (ib.  1705) Pierer,  Uwiv,  Lex,  viii,  442. 

HoffiBUUm,  Heimloh,  a  German  preacher  of  the 
17th  oentuiy  at  Masko,  in  Fiuland,  was  aasociated  with 
othcr  diWnes  in  translating  the  Bibie  into  the  Finnish 
language,  puUished  at  Stockholm  (1642,  foL  and  1658). 
— Fierer,  Umc,  Lex,  viii,  447. 

Hoffinann,  Immannel,  bom  at  Tubingen  April 
16, 1710,  was  appointed  archdeacon  of  TUbingen  in  1741, 
and  in  1756  professor  of  Greek  in  the  university  of  the 
same  place.  He  died  in  1772.  Hoffmann  published  a 
namber  of  dissertations ;  of  these,  the  foUowing  are  eon- 
sideied  the  best :  DiM.  in  Oraculum  Rom.  x,  5-8  (TUb. 
1752, 4to) :— 2K».  de  stUo  ApoetoH  PauU  (1757) :—/)»«. 
m  loca  pamUela,  2  Peł.  ii,  4-17 ;  Jude  5-lB  (1762, 4to) : 
—Commeatatio  in  1  Cor,  i,  19-21  (1766, 4to).  He  wPote 
abo,  bot  left  unpubllshed,  Demonttratio  Evangelica  per 
^pnrm  wcripiurarum  eoruemum  in  oraeuHs  ex  Yetere  Te»- 
tameiUo  inNwo  aUegcUia  deehrcUa,  partes  iii  (TUbingen, 
1773-82, 4to).  T.  G.  Hegelmaier,  who  edited  this  work 
after  the  deoeaae  of  the  anthor,  prefixed  to  it  a  llfe  of 
Hoffinann,  and  an  excur8iis  on  the  right  method  of  in- 
terpreting  the  ąuotations  madę  from  the  O.  T.  in  the 
New.  Orme  speaks  of  this  work  as  "  fuli  of  learaing, 
and  in  generał  yeiy  judidous."— Kitto,  Bib,  Cydop.  ii, 
318. 

Hoffinann,  Johann,  a  distinguished  German  the- 
<^Łyfiyi,  was  bom  at  Schweidnitz.  The  datę  of  his  birth 
ia  not  known.  He  was  for  a  time  professor  of  theotogy 
at  the  Unirenity  of  Prague.  In  1409  he  and  Otto  of 
Mfinsterbeig  went  to  Leipzig,  and  induced  many  stn- 
deots  to  aecorapany  them.  They  thus  contribcd«d  to 
the  foanding  of  the  Leipzig  Uniyersity.  At  first  he  was 
one  of  its  pfofcaion,  but  in  1414  he  was  madę  bishop  of 
MciaBen.  He  died  there  m  1451^— Pieier,  Unio.  Lex.  viii, 
441. 

Hoffinann  (or  Hopmahw),  Melohior.  one  of  the 
most  celebrated  Anabaptist  (q.  v.)  prophets,  bora  at  Hall, 
in  Suabia,  originally  a  furtier,  went  to  Livoaia  about 
tfae  time  of  the  Reformation,  and  became  a  Protestant 
-  His  entbosiasm  for  the  caose  of  the  Ftotestants  led  him 
to  preach  at  Wofanar.  On  accoont  of  the  great  opposition 
.  wfaidi  he  there  csooootered,  he  went  to  I>Qipaty  w^ere 


the  opposition  against  him  was  no  leas  great,  and  he  be* 
came  so  embittered  against  the  Roman  CathoUc  priests 
that  he  sought  to  influence  the  people  in  favor  of  de* 
stroying  all  paintings  in  churches,  and  all  monasteries. 
This  conrse  estranged  from  him  even  his  own  fHends, 
and  he  left  in  1525  for  Wittenberg  to  consult  with  Lu- 
ther and  Bugenhagen,  who  encouraged  him  to  return  to 
Dorpat,  admonishing  his  friends,  at  the  same  time,  to 
harmonious  action.  But  his  succesB  was  no  better  than 
before,  and  he  soon  after  left  for  RevaL  Later  we  find 
him  at  Stockholm.  In  1527  the  king  of  Denmark  ap- 
pointed him  preacher  at  Kid,  but  his  determination  to 
explain  the  Bibie  apocalyptically,  and  his  deviation 
from  the  Lutheran  doctrine  of  the  sacraments,  madę 
Luther  and  his  foUowers  opponents  of  Hoffmami,  and, 
after  a  stay  of  only  two  years,  a  conference  to  examine 
his  doctrines  was  appointed.  He  was  condemned  for  her^ 
esy,  deposed  from  his  position,  and  ordered  to  leave  the 
country.  He  now  went  to  Strasburg,  and  next  to  Emden, 
where  he  allied  himself  with  the  Anabaptists,  and  soon 
became  one  of  their  principal  leaders.  At  the  latter 
place  he  so  infatuated  his  followers  that  they  took  him  for 
the  prophet  Elias,  and  announced  the  Day  of  Judgment 
aa  coming  in  1536.  From  Emden  he  retumed  to  Stras- 
burg, but  the  disturbances  which  he  proyoked  occasioned 
the  calling  of  a  ąynod  (June,  1588),  which  condemned 
him  jmd  caused  his  imprisonment.  He  died  in  prison  in 
1542.  On  the  person  of  Christ,  Hoffmann,  with  many 
other  Anabaptists,  and  like  the  Yaleiitinians  of  the  ear- 
ly  ages,  held  that  our  Lord*s  birth  was  a  merę  phantom, 
laying  great  stress  upon  iykytro  (John  i,  14) ;  that  the 
Logos  did  not  merely  assume  our  naturę,  but  he  became 
flesh — hence  his  blaiiphemous  expreBsion,  "Maledicta  sit 
caro  Marifi''  (Smith*8  Hagenbach,  ilitiory  o/Doctrines, 
ii,  349 ;  comp.  also  Tuchsel,  p.  34, 35).  On  the  Euchsr 
rist  he  diifered,  as  we  have  already  stated,  from  Luther 
in  his  doctrine  of  the  real  (spiritual)  presence,  holding 
that  the  bodily  bread  is  a  seal,  sign,  and  token  in  memo- 
ry  of  the  body ;  the  body,  however,  b  received  in  the 
word  by  an  unwavering  faith  in  our  heart;  the  word  is 
spirit  and  life ;  the  word  is  Christ,  and  is  partaken  of  by 
faith.  Thus  he  thought  it  possible,  whUe  considering 
the  bread  only  as  a  symbol,  to  adbere  to  the  symbol  of 
the  real  spiritual  presence  of  Christ.  The  followers  of 
Hoffmann,  who  took  the  name  of  their  leader,  flourished 
foir  a  short  time  ailter  his  death  near  Strasburg  and  Lower 
Germany,  but  finally  joined  the  other  Anabaptist  sects, 
from  which  Hoffmann,  while  aUve,  had  kept  distinct. 
Fuhrmann  {Hdicórierb,  d,  chrittl,  Religion*'  u.  Kirchenr 
gesch.  ii,  325)  says  that  a  number  of  this  sect  went  to 
England  in  1585,  and  that  there  also  they  suffered  greaU 
ly  from  persecutions ;  twenty-two  of  them  were  even  im- 
prisoned.  Under  Edward  YI.  (1548)  they  fared  some- 
what  better,  but  afler  Mary*s  accession  to  the  throne 
they  were  obliged  to  flee  the  country.  Under  the  reign 
of  Elizabeth  they  again  ventured  to  reside  in  England, 
but  in  1560  they  were  finally  banished  the  country.  A 
fuli  acoount  of  Hoffmann  and  his  sects  is  given  by  Krohn, 
Ge»ch.  d.fcmat.  w.  entkus.  Wiederfdu/er  in  Niederdeuttch- 
land  (Lpz.  1758,  8vo,  containing,  also,  a  comple^  list 
of  the  writings  of  Hoffmann,  which  were  mainly  apoc- 
alyptical) ;  Herrmann,  Sur  la  vie  et  le$  ecrits  de  M.  B. 
(Strasburg,  1858).  See  also  Schrockh,  Kirchengesck.  a,  d, 
Rtformai,  iv,  442  są. ;  Cunitz,  in  Herzog'8  RecU-Encyklop. 
vi,  191  Bq. ;  Bayle,  Nistor.  Diet.  ii,  480 ;  Niedner,  Lehrb. 
d.  Kirchengeack.  p.  64 ;  Molier,.  Cimbria  liUerata,  ii,  347 
8q.;  Eohrich,  in  Zeitachr.f.  histor.  TheoL  (1860,  p.  3  8q.) ; 
Ga88)(?etcA.</.i)ti97na/.ii,73;  Baumgarten-CrusiuSy  i>cś^ 
'  p.628.     (J.H.W.) 


HoiImanxiiteB.    See  Hofpmakn,  Mkix;hiob. 

Hoffmeier,  John  Henry,  a  minister  of  the  German 
Reformed  Church,  bora  at  Anbalt-Cobten,  Germany, 
March  17,  1760,  was  educated  at  the  UniverBity  of 
Halle.  He*Bpent  some  time  as  private  tutor  in  Ham- 
burg; then  went  to  Bremen,  where  he  preached  a 
short  time,  and  finally  emigrated  to  America  in  179^ 


HOFLING 


292 


H06E 


Herę  he  became  pastor  of  seyeral  Gremian  Reformed  oon- 
gregatioiu  in  Northampton  County,  Pa.  In  1806  he  waa 
called  to  Lancaster,  Pa.,  where  he  oontinued  to  labor  till 
1881.  He  was  able  to  preach  onlj  in  German ;  and,  the 
English  langtiage  being  needed  in  his  charge,  he  retired 
irom  the  actire  daties  of  the  ministry.  He  died  March 
18, 1888.  Weil  edueated  and  diUgent  in  his  work,  he 
was  a  Mooessful  minister.  Two  of  his  sons  and  three  of 
his  grandsotts  also  devoted  themselYes  to  the  ministry. 
Hdfllng,  JoHAinf  WiLREŁit  Friedrich,  an  emi- 
nent  German  Lutheran  minister,  bom  in  Drossenfeld, 
near  Baireuth,  in  1802,  was  edueated  at  the  Gymnasimn 
of  Baireuth  and  at  the  Unirerrity  of  Erlangen,  where 
he  was  an  attendye  hearer  of  Schelling,  whoee  lectures 
strengthened  hia  regard  for  historical  Christianity.  In 
1828  he  was  appointed  minister  at  Wurzbuzg,  and  in 
1827  at  Joet,  near  Nuremberg.  During  his  residence 
here  he  published  two  little  pamphlets  in  defenoe  of 
positlre  Christianity  against  Bationalism,  which  was 
then  making  rapid  progress.  These,  it  b  thought, 
pTocuried  him  the  appointment  as  professor  of  practical 
theology  at  the  Unirersity  of  Erlangen  (1838).  He 
died  April  5, 1853.  H5fling  was  a  firm  adherent  to  the 
old  Protestant  idea  of  the  ministry  and  of  the  Church, 
and  defended  them  yigorously  with  all  the  means  of 
modem  science.  His  theological  writings  were  mainly 
in  the  department  of  practical  theology,  especially  on  the 
constitution  of  the  Church,  worship,  and  related  dogmas. 
Of  his  earlier  works  the  best  are  I)e  symbolorum  natu- 
ra^ Moestitatej  audoritate  et  um  (Erlangen,  1835;  2d 
cd.  1841) :  —  LUurgische  AbhandL  v.  cL  Composiłion  der 
chriatl.  Gemeinde  Gottetdientte  (ib.  1837).  But  his  most 
important  work  is  undoubtedly  that  on  baptism :  Dcu 
ScikramenŁ  d,  Taufe,  etc,  docmatiachy  historUchf  und  lii- 
urfftsch  dargegłeiU  (voL  i,  1846 ;  voL  ii,  1848).  But  his 
GrttrubS/ze  evangd,4uther,  KirchetwtrfoMung  (1850 ;  3d 
edition,  1852)  attracted  morę  generał  attention  than  any 
other  work  of  his.  Since  his  decease  Thomasius  and 
Hamack  have  edited  and  published  his  Liturgisches  Ur- 
hindenbuch  (1854),  containing  the  rites  of  commimion, 
ordmation,  introduction  into  the  Church,  and  marriage. 
This  book  is  only  a  fragment  of  a  larger  work,  on  which 
he  had  been  engaged  the  last  years  of  his  life.  See  Zum 
Geddchtniiz  J.  W.  F,  Hojlins^s,  etc.,  by  Dr.  Nftgelsbach 
and  Dr.  Thomasius ;  Kurtz,  Texi-book  o/Ch.  HiaL  ii,  317, 
873 ;  Herzog,  Beal-EncyUop.  vi,  170, 171.     (J.  H.  W.) 

Hofinann,  Johann  Gtoorg,  a  German  theologi- 
an,  bom  at  Windsbeim  October,  1724,  was  edueated  at 
Eriangen  and  Leipzig.  In  1757  he  b^^an  philosophical 
lectures  at  Leipzig,  and  in  1762  was  honored  with  a  pro- 
fessorship.  In  1764  he  went  to  Giessen  as  professor  of 
Oriental  languages,  and  in  1765  was  madę  D.D.  In 
1769  he  was  called  to  Altorf  as  professor  of  theology, 
and  here  he  became  also  archdeacon.  He  died  May  10, 
1772.  His  principal  works  are  Die  Erbauung  n,  ihrem 
tcahrm  Begriffe  ihren  AfUieln  und  Bindermszen  (Frankf. 
1756,  8vo) :  —  Grammatica  Jlebrcta  Damiana  methodo 
(Gieszen,  1765, 8vo)  :—Lock'a  paraphrast,£rldarung  der 
Br^fe  an  d,  GaŁater,  Korinłherj  Homera  und  Epheser, 
aut  d,  Engl  iibera,  (Frankf.  1768-69,  2  vols.  4to),  besides 
seyeral  essaya^-Adelung^s  Jć)cber,  GelehrL'LexiL  Add. 
11,2079. 

Hofinann,  Karl  Oottlob,  D.D.,  a  distinguished 
German  theologian,  bom  a^  Schneeberg  Oct,  1, 1703,  was 
edueated  at  the  University  of  Leipzig,  and  lectured 
tbere  for  seyeral  ycan  on  philosophy  and  philology. 
Later  he  became  a  preacher  at  St.  Paul's  and  St,  Thom- 
as^B  churches,  and  later  sdll  he  was  called  to  the  St 
Nicolas  Church.  In  1789  he  was  called  to  the  Uniyer- 
sity  of  Wittenberg  as  professor  of  theology.  Here  he 
became  the  senior  of  the  theological  faculty,  and  one  of 
the  brightest  Ughts  of  the  day.  He  died  SepL  19, 1 774. 
He  published  many  yaluable  works,  of  which  Adelung'8 
Jocher  giyes  a  oomplete  list  We  haye  ^ace  only  to 
mention  his  IniroducUo  Theotog^-Crit.  tn  J^eeOonem  epiat. 
PauH  ad  Galot,  et  Cohaa,  (Lips.  1750, 4to),  and  a  series  of 


minor  works,  nnder  the  title  Varia  Sacra  (Wittenh.  et 
lips.  1751).  He  also  edited  and  enlarged  the  Imtroduc' 
Ho  m  Ledionem  N,  T,  of  J.  G.  Fritins  (Leipaic,  1737>— 
Jdcher,  Gelekn.  LerOe,  (Addenda  by  Adehuig,  11, 2049) ; 
Kitto,  BibUcal  Cydop,  ii,  8ia 

Hofineister,  Sebastiak.    See  Wao^ikb. 

Hofatede  de  Oroot,  Peter,  a  disdngulshed 
Dutoh  theologian,  was  bora  at  Kotterdam  in  1720,  and 
edueated  at  Groningen.  Soon  after  the  completion  of 
his  uniyersity  course  he  was  called  to  Rotterdam  as  pro- 
fesBor  of  theology.  Here  he  became  a  leader  of  a  theo- 
logical school  of  '^mediation,"  known  as  the  Groningen 
School,  fonnded  by  the  Platonist  Yan  Heusde  (1778- 
1839),  who  was  also  a  professor  in  the  Rotterdam  Uni- 
yersity at  that  time.  Hofstede,  assisted  by  Parean, 
published  a  dogmatic  theology,  containing  a  oomplete 
expoeition  of  the  doctrines  of  this  school,  which  are 
nothing  morę  or  less  than  a  spiritual  Arianism.  They 
held  that  there  is  in  human  naturę  a  diyine  element 
which  needs  deyelopment  in  order  to  enable  humanity 
to  reach  its  destination.  This  destination  is  oonformity 
to  God.  All  religions  have  aimed  and  worked  at  the 
same  problem,  but  Christianity  has  solyed  it  in  the 
highest  and  purest  manner.  Sdll  there  is  only  a  difler^ 
cnce  in  degree  between  that  and  other  religions.  God 
has  fulfilled  the  desire  of  man,  whom  he  had  prepared 
for  salyation  by  sending  perfection  embodied  in  Christ 
To  know  Christ  we  need  the  exegetical  stady  of  that 
preparation  of  man  for  Christ  which  is  fumished  by 
the  Old  Testament  The  New  Testament  is  the  ful- 
filment  The  latter  oontains  the  sayings  of  Jesus  and 
the  conclusions  of  the  apoetles.  The  writera  of  the 
Scriptures  were  not  infallible,  thongh  they  did  not  ofcen 
err.  Sin  is  regarded  as  a  merę  inconyenlenoe,  sinoe 
aU  ainnera  wiU  evaUually  be  kofy  and  happjf.  In  stating 
the  influences  of  the  Groningen  school  in  Dutch  theol- 
ogy, Hurst  {Rationaliamj  p.  366, 367)  says  that  it  is  sim- 
ilar  to  the  position  occupied  by  Channing  with  regard 
to  the  orthodozy  of  the  American  Church.  Ho^ede 
was  a  yiolent  opponent  of  the  Lutheran  Church ;  and 
when,  in  1779,  a  Lutheran  church  was  about  to  be  estab- 
lished  at  the  Cape  of  Good  Hope,  he  protested  loadly, 
and  wrote  Ootl^indianacke  Kerkzaaken^  or  Ecdesiastio- 
al  AfTairs  of  India  (Hagne,  1779-1780,  2  yol&  8yo>. 
Against  Marmontel*s  celebrated  noyd  Beluaire  he  also 
wTOte  a  work  ezpoeing  the  yices  of  distinguished  he»- 
thens,  and  showing  their  atter  unfitness  for  a  daim  to 
salyation,  to  which  Mamiontel  belieyed  those  entitłed 
who  had  lived  before  Christ'8  coming.  He  died  Noy.  27, 
1803.  SeeSchrbckh,A'»rcA«f^.yiii,735;Hurst^wlLq/' 
Rationałiamf  p.  364-367;  Fanar, Utai,  ofFrte  Thoughtr,  p. 
445  8q. ;  Hoefer,  N(mv.  Biog,  Gen,  xxiy,  908  aq.  (J.H.W.) 

Hog.    SeeBoAR;  Swnns. 

Hoge,  Jamea,  D.D.,  a  Presbyterian  minister,  was 
bom  at  MoorfieldjYiiginia,  in  1784.  He  was  edueated 
chiefly  by  his  father,  thongh  he  spent  one  year  at  an 
academy  in  Baltimore.  He  was  licensed  to  preach  April 
17, 1805,  was  ordained  in  1809,  and  was  appointed  mts- 
sionary  to  the  State  of  Ohio  by  the  Gen<»al  Assembly. 
Within  a  year  he  organized  a  church  at  Franklinton, 
and  in  1807  became  minister  of  the  Firrt  Chorch  at  Co- 
lumbus, Ohio.  Here  he  remalned  until  1658,  when  his 
age  and  infirmities  induced  him  to  resign.  Dr.  Hoge 
was  the  **  father  of  the  Presbytery  of  Coiomboa,  and  even 
of  the  S3rnod  of  Ohio."  Kot  merdy  in  his  own  parish, 
but  in  the  Church  courts  and  in  the  Geneial  Assembly, 
he  was  a  man  of  great  power  and  influence.  The  insti- 
totions  for  the  deaf,  dumb,  and  blind  in  Ohio  were  laigely 
due  to  his  exeTtions.  Though  bora  in  a  Blave  state;  he 
was  opposed  to  sUyeiy,  and  was  thoroughly  loyal  to  the 
nation.  He  died  at  Columbus  Sept  22, 1863.  A  memo- 
riał sermon,  preached  by  the  Rey.  William  C  Roberta 
Oct  4, 1863  (Columbus,  Ohio,  1863),  was  reyiewed  in  the 

Amer.  Preab.  Bet,  Jan.  1864,  p.  89  sq ^WUsod,  PrtA 

Uiatorical  Ałmanac,  1868,  p.  282 ;  1864,  p.  168. 

Hoge,  Moaeai  D.D.,  a  Pnsbyterian  nunistery  wm 


HOGE 


203 


HOHENLOHE 


tern  Feb.  15, 1752,  iit  Frederick  Gonnty,  Ya.  For  a  tim6 
be  attendfid  a  cUwńcnl  school  in  Culpepper  Coonty.  In 
1778  be  went  to  Liberty  Hall  Academy,  and  tbere  oom* 
pleted  bis  atiidiea  in  1780.  In  November,  1781,  be  waa 
licenaed  to  preacb,  and  was  ordained  |>a8toT  of  a  cburcb 
at  Hardy  Dec.  18, 1782.  In  1787,  tbe  Soutbem  climato 
]Koving  mjarioua  to  bis  heakb,  be  removed  to  Sbep- 
bfoditofwnywbere  be  gatbered  a  large  congiegation  and 
acqiiired  gnat  popularity.  In  1805  be  opoied  a  dassio- 
al  scbool,  mainly  for  tbe  education  of  bis  own  sona.  He 
maintaiDed  tbia,  bowever,  only  a  sbort  time,  wben  be  was 
called  to  tbe  piesidency  of  Hampden  Sidney  College,  as 
anoceaMM*  of  Dr.  Alexaiider.  Fire  years  kter,  while  at 
tbe  bead  of  tbe  college,  tbe  degree  of  D.D.  was  conferred 
on  him  by  Princeton  College.  In  1812  tbe  Synod  of 
lligima  estabłiabed  a  tbeological  seminary,  and  Dr. 
Hoge  was  called  to  it  as  a  piofenor.  He  accepted  tbis 
positioD,  retaining,  bowerer,  tbe  piesidency  of  Hampden 
Sidney  College.  He  died  Sept.  5, 1820.  He  enjoyed 
tbe  lepotation  of  being  a  superior  preacber.  **  Jobn 
Bandolpb  pronoonced  bim  tbe  most  eloquent  man  be 
bad  erer  heanL  ....  Yet  Dr.  Hoge  bad  some  great 
diaadrantages.  His  voioe  bad  oonsiderable  unpleas- 
antneas,  ariaing  from  a  nasal  twang;  so  that  be  miist 
be  regarded  aa  a  very  remarkable  man  to  win  sucb 
commen<iation  from  bis  gifted  cotintryman.'*  He  wrote, 
in  1798,  in  defenoe  of  tbe  Calyinistic  doctrine,  a  reply 
to  tbe  Rer.  Jeremiab  Walker,  a  Baptist  minister  wbo 
bad  snddenly  paased  from  nitra  Calyinism  to  tbe  en- 
tire  rejection  of  tbe  Calvinistic  doctrines.  He  also 
pnUisbed  Tke  ChriaHm  Panopfy  (1799),  designed  as  an 
antidote  to  Paine*Si4^  o/ Beatom  It  consists  of  two 
paits,  tbe  fint  containing  tbe  substanoe  ofWatson's  reply 
to  Fkine'8  first  part,  and  tbe  second  Hoge's  answer  to  the 
seoond  part  of  Paine's  work.  It  bad  a  wide  circtilation, 
and  eserted  a  yery  important  influence.  A  volume  of  his 
sermons  was  pubUsbed  sbortly  after  bis  deatb,  but  tbeir 
drcnlaŁkm  bas  been  very  Umited,  and  they  bardly  do 
justłce  to  bis  character  as  a  preacber.  A  memoir  of  Dr. 
Hogewaspartly  preparedby  his  sons,but  seems  to  haye 
been  loet,  as  it  bas  neyer  gone  into  print, — Amer.  Pretb. 
Ret,  Jan.  1864,  p.  98  są. ;  Spragne,  ^naoi!*  o/ the  Amer, 
/'k4Mr,iu,426sq.     (J.H.W.) 

Hoge,  Samuel  P^  D.D.,  a  Presbyterian  minister, 
son  of  Dr.  Moses  Hoge,  was  bom  in  Sbephen]8town,ya., 
in  1791.  His  eariy  instruction  be  receired  from  his  fa- 
tber,  after  wboee  aseumptioii  of  the  presidency  of  Hamp- 
den Sidney  College  be  became  a  student  in  that  college, 
and  graduated  in  1810.  He  ałso  pursued  his  theologicsl 
eomse  onder  his  father,  fiUlng  at  the  same  time  tbe  ap- 
poinimcnt  of  tutor  at  his  alma  mater.  Later  be  became 
profieasor,  and  at  one  time  be  acted  eyen  as  vice-preai- 
dent.  In  1816  be  entered  the  active  work  of  the  min- 
istiy,  senring  the  two  churches  of  Culpepper  and  Mad- 
isoOfTiiginia,  at  tbe  same  time.  In  1821  be  removed 
to  Hilbbifougb,  Ohio,  serying  ałso  a  cburcb  at  Rocky 
Spring  at  tbe  same  time.  Three  yeasB  later  be  was 
dected  professor  of  matbematics  and  natuial  pbilosopby 
in  tbe  Ohio  Univenity  at  Athens.  The  college  being 
at  tbis  time  witbout  a  president,  Dr.  Hoge  performed  tbe 
dntics  of  that  office,  and  greatly  increased  the  prosperity 
of  tbe  institution.  At  tbe  same  time,  be  preached  in  the 
college  chapel  and  in  the  cburcb  of  the  town  whenerer 
bis  time  and  healtbwouldpermit  HediedinDecember, 
1826.-Sprague,  Atm.  ofAm,Pufyii,  ir,  488. 

Bognah  (Heb.ao92aA',  n^fn,from  Arab. for ;>arf. 
ridft;  Sept.  'EyAa  v.  r.  AtyXa,  etc.),  tbe  third  of  the 
fire  danghtefs  of  Zdopbehad  tbe  Gileadite,  to  whom,  in 
tbe  ahsoioe  of  małe  bein,  poitions  were  assigned  by 
Moses  (Nnmb.  zxTi,  88 ;  xxvii,  1 ;  xxxvi,  II ;  Josh. 
XTii,S>    &a  1619.    See  abo  Bbth-Hoglah, 

HogBtraaten.    See  Hooostraaten. 

Boliam  (Hebu  Hokam%  tahiri,  prób.  for  bnin^, 

wbflm  Jekopok  impeU  or  cot^crnda}  Sept.  k(KaiŁ,  Yul- 
9>te  OAfloa),  tbe  king  of  fletnon,  wbo  joined  the  league 


against  Gibeon,  but  was  overthrown  in  batUe  by  Jodina 
and  slain  after  being  captured  in  the  cave  at  Makkedah 
(Josh.  X,  8).    RC.  1618. 

Hohburg.    See  Hobubo. 

Hohenborg  or  Odllienberg,  an  old,  odebrated 
monastery  on  the  Bhine,  is  said  to  bave  been  founded 
by  duke  Ethicot,  whose  daughter  Odilia  was  the  fint 
abbess.  She  is  supposed  to  hare  died  in  720.  Tbis 
monastery  was  celebrated  for  many  years  for  the  great 
leaming  of  its  inmates  and  the  enoouiagement  which  it 
gave  to  all  wbo  devoted  themsdyes  to  liteiaiy  labors. 
About  1429,  this,  as  well  ss  tbe  monastery  at  the  foot 
of  the  bill,  sald  to  haye  been  founded  by  Odilia,  in  or- 
der to  saye  weary  trayeUers  the  task  of  ascending  the 
mount,  was  dosed.  One  of  the  works  publisbed  by  an 
abbess  of  tbis  monastery  (Hemd,  1167),  Hortus  delicio' 
rum,  in  Latin,  contains  contributions  to  Biblical  bistory 
and  to  the  entire  field  of  theology.  See  Albricht,  fu- 
tory ron  Hohenb.  (Schletstadt,  1751, 4to) ;  Silbermann, 
Be9ckrt»b.  r.  Hohenb,  (Strash.  1781  and  1885) ;  Rettberg, 
KirtAen-Gesch,  DeuttchL  ii,  75-79 ;  MabiUon,  i4fifi.  i,  488 
są.,  599 ;  ii,  58  i  WeUer  u.  Wdte,  Kircke>^Lex,  v,  277. 
(J.H.W.) 

Hohenlohe,  Alekakdtsr  Leopold  Framz  Eh." 
MERiCH,  pritice  o/,  a  Hungarian  Boman  Cathclic  bishop, 
was  bom  near  Waldenburg  Aug.  17, 1794^  His  motber, 
baroness  Judith  de  Reviczky,  destined  him  for  the  der^ 
ical  life,  and  aiter  studying  at  tbe  Academy  of  Beme, 
and  tbe  seroinaries  of  Yienna,  Tynuni,  and  Elwangen, 
be  was  ordained  priest  in  1816.  In  the  same  year  he 
madę  a  joumey  to  Romę,  wheie  he  associated  mnch  witb 
Jesuits,  and  finally  joined  tbeir  Socieiy  <if  the  Sacred 
Heart  of  Jetut,  In  1819  be  retumed  to  Germany,  and 
settled  in  Bayaria,  wbere  his  birtb  and  fortunę  soon  pro- 
cured  for  him  a  high  position.  His  reputation  is  chief- 
ly  due  to  his  pretended  power  to  cure  diseases  in  a  mi- 
raculous  way.  He  is  said  to  haye  madę  cures  in  the 
boepitals  of  Wunburg  and  Bamberg.  But  the  anthori- 
ties  at  last  interfered,  and  eyen  the  pope  himself  adyised 
Hohenlohe  to  abstain  from  these  pretensions,  and  the 
prince  finally  left  Bayaria  for  Yienna.  He  next  went  to 
Hungary,  and  was  madę  bishop  ta  partHna  of  Sardica 
in  1814,  and  abbot  of  the  oonyent  of  St  Michad  of  Ga- 
bojan.  Dnring  tbe  Reyolution  of  1848  he  was  driyen 
from  Hungary,  and  be  went  to  Innspruck,  where  the 
emperor  of  Austria  then  resided.  In  Oct.  1849,  he  went 
to  Yienna  to  yisit  his  nephew,  connt  Fries,  wbo  bad  Just 
dedded  to  become  a  priest  He  died  at  bis  hoose  Nov. 
17, 1849.  The  renown  which  Hohenlohe  gained  by  bis 
cures  was  not  confined  to  bis  own  country,  but  extended 
to  England,  Ireland,  and  eyen  to  our  country,  where  the 
case  of  Mrs.  Ann  Bfattingly,  of  Washbgton,  D.  C,  who 
was  said  to  haye  miraculoudy  recoyered  of  a  tumor, 
March  10, 1824,  in  consequence  of  bis  pnyers,  caused 
oonsiderable  excitemenL  The  prince  ceased  these  prao- 
tices  many  years  before  his  death,  at  least  publidy.  Ya^ 
rious  theories  haye  been  propounded  to  aocount  for  the 
cures  attributed  to  bim :  the  most  rational  is  that  which 
aseigns  them  to  tbe  power  of  the  imsgination  oyer  so- 
called  nenrons  disorders.  His  prindpal  works  are  Der 
im  Geiste  der  kaihoł,  Kirche  betende  Christ  (Bamberg, 
1819 ;  8d  cdit.  Lpz.  1824)  *.— />m  kałhoUechen  Prieetera 
Beruf  WUrde  u,Pftiehi  (Bamb.  1821)  i^Wae  ist  d, Zeit- 
ffeist  (Bamberg,  1821),  an  attempt  to  show  that  nonę  but 
a  good  Roman  Catbolic  can  be  a  good  and  loyal  citizen, 
addressed  to  Francis  of  Austria  and  Alexander  of  Rus- 
sia : — Die  Wanderschaft  einer  GoU  suchenden  Seełe,  etc 
(Tienna,  1880)  i—LUMHcke  undErffebnieee  atu  d,  WeU  u. 
dem  Prie8łerM>en  (Ratisbon,  1886) ;  a  number  of  sermons, 
etc.  His  postbumous  works  were  publisbed  by  Brumier 
(Ratisbon,  1851).  See  Paulus,  Wundereuren  z,  Wurtzh, 
ti.  Banib,  untemommen  durdu  M,  itkkel  u.  d.  Pr,  v,  Ho^ 
hetdohe  (Lpz.  1822) ;  Gieatiiar,Kirchengeschichte  d.neuetł, 
Zeiiy  p.  821 ;  ReaUEficyklop,/,  d,  KathoL  DeuUchL  y,  484 
*5  (giyes  a  fuli  account  of  his  works) ;  Herzog,  Real^En' 
cyl^,  xix,  658  sq. ;  Hoefer,  Nowe,  Biog.  Ghu  xxiy,  914 


HOHENSTAUFEN 


294 


HOLCOMBE 


Hohenstaiifen. 

UKES. 


See  GuBŁPHs  Aia>  Ghibbł- 


Hołmbaum,  Johaxn  Christiaw,  a  distinguished 
German  pieacher,  bom  aŁ  Rodach,  near  Hildburghauaen, 
was  educated  at  tbe  Unirenity  of  Góttingen,  under  Mi- 
chaeliSi  Walch,  Heyne,  and  othera.  For  a  time  he  was 
privaŁe  tator  and  preacher.  In  1777  he  was  appointed 
oourt  preacher  at  Cobuig,  and,  nine  years  later,  minister 
and  supeiintendent  of  his  native  city.  He  died  Nov. 
13, 1825.  Hohnbaom  was  an  assistant  in  the  prepaia- 
tion  of  the  HUdburger  GeBcmgbuch  (hymn-book),  and 
oontributed  also  laigdy  to  diiferent  theological  period- 
icals.  His  theological  works  are  UAer  d.  heUige  Ahend- 
mahl  (Cobl  1781, 8iro)  -.^Pndigtm  vber  Gesck,  tLA.T, 
(ibid.  1788-89, 2  vols.  8vo)  i—Geaange  und  PredUgten  (ib. 
1800,  8yo).— Doring,  DeuitehL  Kanzdrediter,  p.  143  8q. 
(J.H.W.) 

Holbach,  Paul  Henry  Thiry,  baron  o/,  an  infidel 
of  the  18th  century,  was  bom  at  Heidelsheim,  in  the 
palatinate  (now  grand-duchy)  of  Baden,  in  1728.  He 
went  to  Paris  at  an  early  age  with  his  father,  who  at 
his  death  lefl  him  heir  to  a  large  fortunę.  Holbach's 
house  became  then  the  head-quarters  of  all  the  free- 
thinkers  and  writers  of  his  day.  At  the  dinners  which 
he  gave  twice  a  week,  either  in  Paris  or  at  his  castle  of 
Grandyal,  and  which  gained  him  the  tiUe  ofjirst  maitre 
dhółel  ofphilosophyj  met  the  abbot  Galiani,  Helretius, 
D'Alembert,  Diderot,  Baynal,  Grimm,  Buffon,  Rousseau, 
Marmontel,  Dudos,  Łaharpe,  Condorcet,  etc.  It  was  in 
these  reunions  that  they  exchanged  their  ideas,  and  pre- 
pared,  at  least  in  their  minds,  many  of  the  articles 
which  appeared  in  the  flrst  Encyclopedk  (Diderot'8), 
besides  many  anonymous  publications  which  were  also 
sent  forth,  consisting  either  of  original  articles  or  of 
translations  from  the  German  or  English.  They  car- 
ried  their  spectilation,  it  is  said,  to  such  daring  lengths 
that  Buffon,  D'Alembert,  and  Rousseau  felt  compelled 
to  withdraw  firom  the  circle.  Holbach  himself  was  one 
of  the  most  zealons  of  these  championa  of  naturalism, 
and  oontended  not  only  against  Christianity,  but  against 
eyery  positire  religion.  He  is  said,  according  to  Bar- 
bier,  to  have  published  no  less  than  forty-seven  anony- 
mous writings  of  his  own  composition.  His  flrst  philo- 
sophical  work  he  published  in  1767  under  the  name  of 
Boulanger:  it  is  entitled  Le  ChrisHamsme  devoiU,  ou 
examen  des  prmcipes  et  da  effeU  de  la  reUgum  reeeUe 
(AmsL).  In  this  work  he  says  explicitly  that  religion 
18  in  no  way  necessaiy  for  the  welfare  of  empires;  that 
the  dogmas  of  Christianity  are  but  a  heap  of  absurdities, 
the  propagation  of  which  has  exercised  the  most  iatal 
influence  on  mankind ;  that  its  morality  is  nowise  supe- 
rior to  the  morality  of  other  systems,  and  is  only  fit  for 
enthusiasts  incapable  of  fulfilling  the  duties  impoeed  by 
Bociety ;  finally,  that  through  the  eighteen  centuries  of 
its  existence  Christianity  had  led  to  the  most  deplora- 
ble  results  in  politics.  Soon  after  this  work,  which  his 
infidel  associates  themselves  declared  the  most  terrible 
that  had  ever  appeared  in  any  part  of  the  world,  he  pub- 
lished IJEeprii  du  Clergi^  ou  le  Chriatioadame  primUtf 
V€ngi  des  enireprieee  et  dee  exc«a  de  nosprSłret  modemes 
(Lond.  1767),  and  De  rimpotture  aacerdotale,  ou  recueil 
I  depiices  aur  le  dergi  (Amst.  1767).  In  the  same  year 
i  Holbach  published  his  most  important  work,  Syatamt  de 
la  Naturę  (Lond.  1770),  under  the  signature  of  "Mira- 
baud,  secr<<taire  perpetuel  de  TAcadfimie  Francaise."  It 
!  is  not  definitely  known  whether  he  wrote  the  book  alone, 
or  was  aasisted  by  La  Grange,  Grimm,  and  others,  but  it 
is  generally  oonceded  to  have  been  sent  forth  by  Hol- 
bach, and  that  he  defrayed  the  expen8e8  of  publication. 
So  radical  was  this  work  that  even  Yoltaire  attacked  it 
in  the  article  "God"  of  his  ''Philoeophical  Dictionao'." 
Yet  in  1772  Holbach  published  a  popular  edition  of  that 
work  under  the  title  Ije  bon  Sena,  ou  ideea  naturellee  op- 
posiee  aux  ideea  aumaturdlea  (AmsU;  oflen  reprinted 
under  the  name  of  the  abbot  Meslier).  The  wretched 
book  was  largely  zead  by  the  common  people,  and  con- 


tribttted  perhaps  morę  than  all  the  other  philosopliiaii 
works  of  the  18th  oentury,  taken  together,  to  the  aob- 
y ersion  of  morals  and  the  spread  of  infldelity.  It  teachea 
the  most  naked  and  atheistical  materialism,  and  eyen 
Yoltaire  abused  it  as  immoraL  In  it  Hdbach  diacosses 
the  maxims  of  religious  morality,  takes  a  horried  głance 
at  Bocial  and  sayage  life,  touches  the  ao-called  **  social 
compact,"  and  in  the  oourse  of  his  obeen-ations  endear- 
on  to  teach,  among  other  thingS)  that  self-inteK«at  is  the 
ruling  motiye  of  man,  and  that  God  is  only  an  ideał  be- 
ing,  created  by  kings  and  priests.  His  Syatime  Social, 
ou  le*  priacipea  naturela  de  la  morale  et  de  la  połiiicue 
(Amsterd.  1773),  aims,  as  its  title  indicates,  to  eatablish 
the  basis  and  rules  of  a  morał  and  political  system  alto- 
gether  independent  of  any  leligious  system.  Thu  work 
was  as  ill  leceiyed  by  the  philoeophers  as  by  the  relig- 
ious party,  and  the  Paris  Pailiament  (in  1778)  ooodemn- 
ed  this  and  all  other  preceding  works  of  Holbach  to  be 
publidy  bumed  by  the  hangman.  They  were  all  secret- 
ly  sent  to  Holland  in  MS.,  and  printed  there  by  Michad 
Rey,  who  circulated  them  in  France,  so  that  eyen  the 
friends  and  guests  of  Holbach  did  Aot  know  him  as  their 
author,  and  often  criticised  his  works  seyerdy  while 
partaking  of  his  hoepitality.  He  was  also  one  of  the 
oontributors  to  the  celebnited  Encydopndia  (q.  v.)  of 
Diderot  Ho]bach's  biographers  daim  that  he  was  a 
man  of  good  heart,  and  that,  notwithstanding  the  per- 
nidous  theories  of  materialism  which  he  sought  to  in- 
culcate,  especially  among  the  French  people,  his  life  was 
better  than  his  books.  They  daim  especiaHy  that  he 
was  a  man  of  most  unsdflsh  beneyolence,  and  that  he 
maide  his  house  eyen  an  asylum  for  his  foes.  Thus  he 
protected  and  gaye  a  refuge  to  the  Jesuits  in  the  days 
of  their  adyersity  under  Louis  XV,  though  he  faatćd 
thdr  system,  and  had  >vritten  agauist  them.  He  died 
at  Paris  January  21,  1789.  See  Yoltaire,  Dicłiotmaire 
PhUoeoph.;  Diderot,  Memoirea;  Damiron,  Ełudea  aur 
la  philoaophie  d Holbach  (in  Mhn,  de  tA  cademie  d.  Sci- 
ences  moralee  et  polUiguea) ;  Hoefer,  Nouv,  Biop.  Gene- 
role,  xxiy,  925  Bq.;  Biog,  Unit,  xz,  460  8q.;  SchlosMr, 
Geech,  d,  18  und  19  Jahrhund.  i,  680  w). ;  ii,  534 ;  Buhle, 
Geadu  der  neueren  Phiioa,  yi,  Abtheil  i,  p.  94  8q. ;  Hunt's 
Hagenbach,  Church  Hiatory  o/ the  ISfh  and  19th  Cent.  i, 
211  są.;  Farrar,//irt.o/'/'r«jrA<«f^A/,p.l81  aą.;  Yinet, 
French  Lit,  p.  352  8q. ;  Hagenbach,  Iliał,  of  RatumaUan^ 
p.  50 ;  Moreli,  Hiatory  ofPhUoe,  p.  11 1  8q. ;  Herzog,  Real- 
Aiicyitfop.yi,220Bq.    (J.H.W.) 

Holberg,  Ludwig  von,  a  Danish  diyine,  was  boonn 
Noy.  6, 1684,  at  Bergen,  in  Norway.  He  studied  tbeolo- 
gy  at  Copenhagen  Uniyersity,  and  became  a  profesmr  in 
that  schooL  In  1735  he  was  dected  rector  of  tbe  Uni- 
yersity, and  in  1737  treasurer.  In  1747  the  king  cre- 
ated Holberg  a  baron  on  account  of  his  literary  Kryice& 
He  died  Jan.  27, 1754.  He  is  known  as  the  creator  of 
modem  Danish  literaturę,  and  deseryes  our  notice  on  ac- 
count of  his  Kirchengeackit^  (1738-40, 2  yols.),  and  JO- 
diache  Geaeh,  (1742, 2  yols.).  Both  these  works  are  con- 
sidered  ąuite  yaluable  eyen  at  the  present  time. — Brock- 
haus,  Con»,  Lex,  yiii,  48  są. ;  Gorton,  Biograpk,  ZHel,  ii. 
(J.H.W.) 

Holoombe,  Henry,  D.D.,  a  Baptist  minister,  was 
bom  in  Prince  Edward  County,  Ya.,  Sept  22, 1762.  H  is 
early  education  was  limited.  \Miile  yet  a  boy,  he  en- 
tered  the  Reyolutionary  army.  In  his  twenty-second 
year  he  was  licensed  to  preach  by  the  Baptists ;  and  in 
Sept  1785,  was  ordained  pastor  of  the  church  at  Pikę 
Creek,  S.  C.  Some  time  after,  he  was  appointed  delegate 
to  the  Conyention  of  South  Camlina,  heid  at  Charteston, 
to  ratify  the  Constitution  of  the  United  SUtes.  In  1791 
he  became  pastor  of  the  Baptist  Church  at  Euhaw, 
preaching  also  at  May  Riyer  and  Sl  Helena ;  but,  the 
cUroate  not  agreeing  with  him,  he  remoyed  to  BeauJort. 
In  1799  he  accepted  a  cali  to  Sayannah.  Herę  he  la- 
borcd  with  great  success,  and  was  chiefly  inatnmiental 
in  organizing  the  Sayannah  Female  Asylmn  (in  1801 X 
at  the  same  time  conducting  a  Magarin^,  The  Georyia 


HOLCOMBE 


295 


HOLDHEIM 


Ąntd^lieal  Bepotiłory.  He  ako  touk  part  in  e8tablUh< 
iug  Mount  Eaon  Academy  in  1804,  and  a  Missionaiy 
Society  in  1806.  In  1810  he  was  madę  D.D.  by  Brown 
t'nivenity,  and  in  1812  became  pastor  of  the  FirsŁ  Bap- 
tist  Chorch  in  Philadelphia,  where  he  laborecl  with  great 
aocei)t.aice  until  his  death,  May  22, 1824.  He  publlahed 
a  number  ofoccawonal  sermons,  addresses,  etc— Sprague, 
Afmalsy\i,2l5, 

Holoombe,  Hosea,  a  Baptist  minister,  was  bom 
in  Union  Distńct,  S.  C,  July  20, 1780.  He  was  engaged 
in  agricultural  puzsiiits  until  1800,  when  he  tumed  his 
attention  to  tbeology,  and  was  licensed  the  foUowing 
year.  He  labored  in  his  native  region  until  1812,  when 
he  went  to  North  Carolina,  and  finally  settled  in  Jeffer- 
son Ca,  AUl,  in  the  fali  of  1818.  His  mmbtrations  in 
all  these  places  were  eminently  successful,  and  he  contin- 
ued  his  Ubofs  antil  his  death,  July  81, 1841.  Mr.  Hol- 
combe  published  a  CoUedion  ofSacred  Ilymna  (1815)  :— 
a  work  on  Baptism,  entitled  A  Rfpfy  to  ike  Rev,  FmU 
Ewmffyoftke  CitmberUtfid Pretbyierian  Socieły  (1882) :~ 
A  Re/ntaHon  of  the  Ret,  Jothua  Lawrence^t  Patriołic 
Diaamrte^  or  Anti^Miaion  Princ^tles  erpoted  (1886) : — 
The  History  ofthe  Alabama  Bąpt%$U  (1840).— Sprigue, 
ilnMab,Ti,442. 

Holcot,  RoBRKT,  an  English  scholastic  of  the  14th 
centmy,  doctor  of  OxfoTd  Unirersity,  and  a  member  of 
the  Dominican  order,  was  one  of  the  most  liberał  inter- 
preters  of  sacred  Scripture  in  his  day,  yet  an  obedient 
son  of  the  Roman  CathoUc  Church,  and  a  zealous  advo- 
cate  of  Nominalism  (q.  y.).  He  died  a  rictim  of  the 
plague  in  1349.  Holcot  wrote  malnly  on  the  sacred  Scrip- 
tures,  but  not  many  of  his  works  haye  ever  gone  into 
print.  This  may  aocount  for  the  fact  that  many  books 
whooe  authorship  is  doubtful  are  attributed  to  him  by 
the  Dominicans.  Mazonius  (in  Uńiv,  Piatonit  et  A  riatot, 
Philotoph.  p.  201)  has  seyerely  critidsed  the  philosoph- 
ieal  yiews  of  Holcot.  His  most  important  published 
the<dogical  works  are  De  Studio  Ser^ttura  (Venice,  1586, 
and  often) :— /»  Pronerh^  Salom.  (Pana,  1616,  4to)  :— /« 
Caidiea  Canłieorttm  et  «b  aeptem  Priora  Capita  Eodeeir 
astids  (Yen.  1609).  Among  the  works  attributed  to  him 
by  the  Dominicans  we  flnd  AforaliMtitmes  Iłigłoriarum 
(Parfa,  1510,  8vo).— Hoefer,  AIobp.  Biog.  Ghiiralfj  xxiy, 
941 ;  Jochcr,  Gelehii.  />er.  ii,  1671.     (J.  H.  W.) 

Hold  [veib]  is  often  used  flguratively,  but  in  obvi- 
ous  meanings,  in  the  Bibie.  To  tale  hold  o/God  and 
his  cotemnd  is  to  embrace  him  as  given  in  the  Gospel, 
and  by  faith  to  plead  his  promises  and  relations  (Isa. 
lxiv,  7,  and  lvi,  4).  Chritłiant  holdforth  the  tcord  of 
lift ;  they,  by  practising  it  in  thcir  lives,  give  light  and 
iostruction  to  others  (PhiL  ii,  16).  A'o/  holding  of  Christ 
the  head  is  neglecting  to  draw  gracious  influence  from 
him,  and  to  yield  due  subjection  to  him ;  as,  for  instance 
(CoLii,  18, 19),  worshipping  angels,  etc.  instead  of  Christ ; 
inaisting  on  penances,  etc  instead  of  on  the  merit  of 
CbrisŁ*8  work. — Brown,  Bibie  Dicttonary,  s.  v. 

Hold  fnoun]  (rrf4S7S,me^«iufaA',  Afortress^  as  often 
raidefed),  the  term  especially  applied  to  the  lurking- 
pUees  of  Dayid  (1  Sam.  xxii, 4, 5;  xxiy, 22, etc).  See 
Stbosohoujl 

Hołda.    See  Huij)a. 

Holden,  Henry,  D.D.,  a  distinguished  English  Ro- 
man Catholic  controyersialist,  was  bom  in  Lancashire 
in  1596.  He  studied  at  the  Seminaiy  of  Douai,  and 
afterwards  went  to  Paris,  where  he  took  the  degrce  of 
D.D.  He  became  a  priest  iu  the  parish  of  St.  Nicholas 
do  Cfaardonnet.  3f  uch  of  his  time  was  devoted  to  liter- 
ały labors,  which  ])laced  him  among  the  most  reno^-ned 
tbeologians  of  that  period.  He  died  in  1GG5.  His 
principal  work  is  Auafysis  Fidei  (Paris,  1652,  8vo;  2d 
•4.  by  Barbon,  1767,  12mo;  trmslated  into  English  by 
W.G.,  1658, 4to).  Dupin  commends  this  book  very  high- 
ly.  In  1660  he  puUished  Norum  Tettamentum^  with 
raafginal  notes,  and  a  I^etter  to  A  mavld  on  predestina- 
tion  and  grace.    See  Dupin,  Ecdes.  Wnter$f  cent.  xyii ; 


Allibone,  THciionary  of  AutkorSy  i,  863;  Hoefer,  Nouv, 
Biog.  GetUralfj  xxiv,  935. 

Holder,  Wilhelm  (also  known  as  Frater  Wilhd- 
mus  de  Stutgardia  Ordinis  Afinorum),  a  WUrtemberg  phi- 
loeopher  and  theologian,  was  bom  at  Marbach  in  1542, 
and  educated  at  Tubingen.  He  distinguished  himself 
especially  by  his  great  oppoaition  to  scholastic  philoeo- 
phy  and  theology,  against  which  he  wrote  Afus  ez«n- 
teraiut  contra  Jotauiem  Pittorium  (Tub.  1598,  4to) :— a 
very  rare  and  curious  work  on  the  Mass  and  baptism, 
of  which  extracts  have  been  given  in  the  A".  GOtting.  Jlisł. 
Mag,  voL  ii,  pt  iv,  p.  716  sq. ;— also  Petitorium  erhorta- 
torium  pro  resolutario  super  grossis  guibttsdam  dubteta- 
tOms  et  guastianibus,  ex.  (Tubing.  1594, 4to).  He  died 
July  24, 1609.— Adelung's  Jócher,  GeUhrt,  Lex,  ii,  1672 ; 
Kmg,  £ncgkkp.'philos.  Lex.  ii,  450. 

Holdheim,  Samuel,  a  distinguished  Jewish  diyine 
of  the  liberalistic  or  so-called  reform  school,  was  bom 
at  Kempen,  proyince  of  Posen,  Prussia,  in  1806.  His 
earl/  education  was,  like  that  of  evexy  other  Jewish 
Rabbi  of  his  time,  confined  to  a  thorough  study  of  the 
Scriptures  and  the  Talmud.  In  the  Utter  his  proA- 
ciency  was  yery  great,  and  was  pretty  generally  known 
throughout  his  native  province,  even  while  he  was  yet 
a  yonng  man.  With  great  perseyeiance,  he  paved  his 
way  for  a  broader  culture  than  the  study  of  the  Talmud 
aod  the  instmctions  of  the  Rabbins  could  afford  him, 
aod  he  went  to  the  uniyersities  of  Prague  and  Berhn. 
His  limited  preparation  madę  it,  however,  impossible 
for  him  to  graduate  at  those  high-schools.  In  1836  he 
was  called  as  Rabbi  to  the  cit^*  of  Frankfort  on  the  Oder. 
Herę  he  distinguished  himself  gieatly  by  his  endeayors 
to  advance  the  interests  of  his  Jewish  bretbren  in  Pnia- 
sia,  and  to  obtain  liberał  concessions  from  the  goyem- 
ment.  He  there  published,  besides  a  number  of  sermons 
deliyered  in  behidf  of  the  cause  just  alluded  to,  Gottes^ 
dienstUche  YortrSge  (Fmkf.  1889, 8yo),  in  which  he  treats 
of  the  Jewish  holy  days,  usagts,  etc  These  sermons 
were  the  subject  of  considiration  by  the  leading  Jewish 
periodicals  for  successiye  months.  Thustbe  distin- 
guished Jewish  scholar  J.  A.  Frankel  aimed  to  establish 
on  these  sermons  the  laws  of  Jewish  Homiletics  (comp. 
Liłeraturblatt  des  Orierds,  1840,  Na  85,  89,  47,  49,  50). 
His  scholarly  atuiiunents  were  such  at  thb  time  (1840) 
that  the  Uniyersity  of  Leipzig  honored  him  with  the 
degree  of  *' doctor  of  philosophy."  In  the  same  year 
Holdheim  accepted  a  cali  as  chief  Rabbi  of  Mecklen- 
burg-Schwerin,  and  was  insUlled  Scpt  19  (1840).  The 
prominence  which  this  position  gave  him  greatly  in- 
creased  his  influence  both  at  home  and  abroad,  and  his 
moycments  for  reform  in  the  Jewish  Ritnal  (q.  v.)  eon- 
tributed  perhaps  moro  than  the  efforts  of  any  other  per- 
son to  the  reform  moyements  at  Berlin  with  which  he 
was  afterwards  so  intimately  associated.  In  1843  he 
published  Utber  d.  A  utonomie  d,  Rabbinen  u,  d.  Princip, 
der  jad.  Ehe  (Schwerin  and  Berlin,  1843,  8vo).  Li  this 
work  he  labored  for  a  submission  of  the  Jews  in  matri- 
monial  questions  to  the  law  of  the  laiid  in  which  they 
now  sojounied,  instead  of  adhering  to  their  Talmudic 
laws,  80  oonflicting  with  the  duties  of  their  dtizenship, 
and  80  antagonistłc  to  the  principles  of  this  liberał  agc 
He  held,  first,  that  the  autonomy  of  the  Rabbins  must 
cease ;  secondly,  that  the  religious  obligations  should  be 
distinct  from  the  political  and  ci\'il,  and  should  yield  to 
the  latter  as  of  higher  authority ;  and,  thirdly,  that  mar- 
riage  is,  according  to  the  Jewish  law,  a  civil  act,  and 
consequentIy  an  act  indep«ident  of  Jewish  authorities. 
(Cn  the  controyersy  of  this  que8tion,  see  Jews,  Re- 
FORJMED.)  In  1844  he  published  Utber  d.  Besdtneidung 
zunachst.  in  religios-dogmaź.  Bezie fiung  (Schwerin  and 
Berlin,  1844,  8vo),  in  which  he  treats  of  the  ąuestion 
whcther  circumcision  is  caseutial  to  Jewish  membcrship, 
and  in  which  his  position  is  eyen  morę  liberał  than  in 
the  treatment  of  the  ąuestions  previously  alluded  to. 
Holdheim  was  also  a  prominent  member  of  the  Jewish 
comicils  held  from  1843  to  1846.    In  1847  he  was  called 


HOLDSWORTH 


296 


HOUNESS 


to  Berlin  by  the  Jcwish  Reform  Society  of  that  city,  con- 
sisting  of  members  who,  on  acoount  of  thcir  liberał  yiews, 
had  separated  from  the  orthodox  portion ;  and  he  entered 
upon  the  duties  of  this  podtion  on  September  6.  Hcre 
he  Ubored  with  great  diaónctJon,  and  from  this,  the  real 
centie  of  Germany,  he  scattered  the  seeds  of  his  extreme- 
ly  liberał  views  among  his  Jewish  brethren  throughoat 
the  entire  length  and  breadth  not  only  of  his  own  coun- 
try, but  of  the  world.  He  died  Aug.  22, 1860.  Perhape 
we  can  give  no  better  evidence  of  Holdheim'8  influence 
in  his  later  years  than  by  citing  the  words  of  Rabbi  £in- 
hom,  now  of  New  Yoric  dty  (in  Smai:  Organ  fur  Er- 
ken/Uniss  v.  Yeredbing  d,  Judenth,  Baltimore,  1860,  p.  288, 
the  Noyember  number  of  which  gi^es  a  pretty  fuli  bi- 
ography  of  Holdheim) :  « The  great  master  in  Israel, 
the  high-priest  of  Jewish  theological  science,  the  lion  in 
the  contest  for  light  and  truth,  no  longer  dwells  among 
us."  Besides  a  number  of  short  treatises  in  pamphlet 
form,  to  which  the  controrersy  between  the  Reformed 
and  Orthodox  Je¥r8  gave  rise,  he  published  Gesch,  der 
jud.  Rfformgemeinde  (Berlin,  1857,  8vo)  i—Rdigiona-u, 
SiOenlehren  d.  Miachfiah  z,  Gdtraudi  b.Religum8UfUerr.  i. 
jud,  JUliffiofu-adtulen  (Berlm,  1854, 12mo),  and  a  larger 
work  on  the  same  subject  under  the  title  HMISKn 
n^linj,  Jud,  Glaubens-u,  Sittenlehre  (ib.  1857,  8vo)  :— 
Gebete  'und  Geiłbigejur  das  Neujahr&-u.  YertOhnungśfest 
(Berlin,  1859,  8vo) ;  and  Prediffteu  (voL  i,  1862;  voL  ii, 
1863;  vol.  iii,  1855),  besides  a  number  of  sermons  sepa- 
lately  published  sińce  his  death.  A  oomplete  list  of  his 
works  up  to  1846  is  given  by  FUrst  {Bibliotk.  JudaOh. 
p.  404,  406).  See  Ritter  (Dr.  J.  H.),  Gesch,  derjOd,  Re- 
formaiion,  voL  iii  (Samuel  Holdheim,  BerL  1865) ;  Joet, 
N,  Gesch.  d,  Israel,  i,  99  są. ;  iu  (CuUurgesch.),  205  są. ; 
Gesch,  d,  Judenth,  u,  s,  Sekten,  p.  874  są.     (J.  H.  W.) 

Holda^RTorth  (Hols^Rrorth,  Oldsworth,  or 
Oldls^RTorth),  Richard,  an  English  divine,  was  bom 
in  1590,  and  educated  at  St  John'8  College,  Cambridge. 
lAter  he  became  a  fellow  of  that  uniyersity.  In  1620 
he  was  appointed  one  of  the  twelye  preachers  at  Cam- 
bridge, waa  thcn  called  to  St  Peter-le-Poor,  London,  and 
in  1629  was  appointed  professor  of  divinity  at  Gresham 
College.  In  1681  he  was  madę  prebendary  of  Linoohi, 
in  1633  was  further  promoted  to  the  archdeaoonry  of 
Huntingdon,  and  in  1687  was  recaUed  to  Cambridge  as 
master  of  Emanuel  College.  He  was  a  zealous  adherent 
to  the  cause  of  Charles  I,  and  suifered  on  this  account 
by  imprisonment  at  the  outbreak  of  the  RebeUion.  He 
died  iu  1649.  Holdsworth  wrote,  besides  a  large  ool- 
lection  of  sermons,  of  which  a  list  is  given  by  Darling 
(Cyclopofdia  Bibtiogr,  i,  1609)  and  by  Allibone  {Diet,  of 
Authors,  i,  863),  Pralectiones  Theologiocs  (London,  1661, 
fol.),  published  by  his  nephew,  Dr.  Wm.  Pearson,  with 
the  life  of  the  author ; — Yalley  of  Yisum,  in  twenty-one 
sermons  (London,  1651,  4to),  of  which  Fuller  speaks  in 
very  commendatory  terms,  paying  the  following  tribute 
to  Holdsworth  (alao  cited  by  Allibone):  "The  author 
was  composed  of  a  leamed  head,  a  gracious  heart,  a 
bountiful  hand,  and  a  patient  back,  comfortably  and 
cheerfully  to  endure  such  heavy  afflictions  as  were  laid 
upon  him.** — Hook,  Ecdes,  Biog,  vi,  106  są. 

Holda^RTorth,  Winch,  D.D.,  fellow  of  St.  John 
Baptist^s  College,  was  bom  in  the  first  half  of  the  I8th 
century,  and  educated  at  Oxford  Uniyersity.  He  is  es- 
peciaUy  celebrated  on  account  of  his  controyersy  with 
Locke,  which  arose  from  his  yiews  on  the  Resurrection 
ofthe  Body  (Oxfonl,  1720, 8yo ;  and  the  same  defended, 
Lond.  1727,  8vo).— Allibone,  Diet,  ofAuthors,  i,  863. 

Hole,  Mattiiew,  D.D.,  a  leamed  English  diyine, 
was  bom  about  1640.  He  entered  the  Uniyersity  of 
Oxford  as  seryitor  at  Exeter  College  in  1657,  was  elect- 
ed  fellow  in  1663,  and  became  M.A  in  1664,  prebendary 
of  Wells  in  1667,  and  rector  of  his  college  in  1715.  He 
died  in  1730.  His  sermons  were  of  high  repute  in  their 
day.  Among  his  writings  9X^  An  A ntidoie  against  In- 
fdeliły  (Lond.  1702,  8yo)  '.^-Pracfical  Discourses  on  the 
LUurgy  of  the  Church  of  England  (new  ed.  by  the  Bcv. 


J.  A-  Giles,  Lond.  1837, 4  yols.  8yo):— ^4  pracHodl  Eipth 
sition  ofthe  Church  Caiechism  (8d  ed.  Lond.  1732, 2  yola, 
8vo)  '.^Practical  Discourses  on  the  Naturę,  ProperHes, 
and  ExceUencies  of  Chariły  (Oxf.  1725, 8yo)^— Darling, 
Cydopesdia  BtbUographica^  i,  1515. 

Holgate,  archbishop  of  York  under  king  Edwsrd 
VI,  was  one  of  the  prelates  of  the  Reformers  who  were 
silenced  under  ąueen  Mary  shortly  aller  her  acccsaon 
to  the  throne  of  England,  under  the  pretense  that  their 
marriage  relations  were  non-ecdesiasticaL  Later  (Od. 
4, 1553)  he  was  imprisoned  in  the  Tower,  and  kept  there 
until  January  18  of  the  following  year,  when  he  was 
pardoned.  The  dates  of  the  birth  and  death  of  Holgate 
are  not  known. — Strype's  Memorials  ofthe  ReformatioH, 
iy,  57  sq. ;  Hsrdwick,  ffist,  ofthe  Christian  Church  dur^ 
ing  the  Reformalum,  p.  234. 

HoUdays.    SeeHoLY-DAY;  Fe8tivals. 

Holiness  (lÓ'l'p,  aytoowni),  prop.  the  state  of  sano- 
tity,  but  often  uaed  of  estemal  or  ceremoniał  relations 
(then  morę  prop.  oatortię), 

1.  Tntrinsie  /dea.—**  Holiness  suggests  the  idea,  not 
of  perfect  yirtuc,  but  of  that  peculiar  afiection  whcre- 
with  a  being  of  perfect  yirtue  regards  morał  cy  ił ;  and  so 
much,  indeed,  b  this  the  predse  and  characteristic  im- 
port of  the  term,  that,  had  tliere  been  no  eyil  either  act- 
uał  or  conceiyable  in  the  uniyerse,  there  would  hayc 
been  no  holiness,  There  would  haye  been  perfect  truth 
and  perfect  righteousness,  yet  not  holiness ;  for  this  is  a 
word  which  denotes  ncither  any  one  of  the  yirtues  in 
particułar,  nor  the  assemblage  of  them  all  put  together, 
but  the  leooil  or  the  repułsion  of  these  towards  the  op- 
posite  yices— *  recoil  that  neyer  would  have  been  felt 
if  yioe  had  been  so  far  a  nonentity  as  to  be  neither  an 
object  of  real  existence  nor  an  object  of  thought"  (Chal- 
mers,  Not,  TheoL  ii,  880).— Krauth,  Fleming^s  Yocab.  of 
Philos,  p.  217. 

IL  AppUcaOons  ofthe  TTerrn,— 1.  In  the  highest  sense, 
holiness  belongs  to  God  ak>ne  (Isa.  vi,  8;  Rey.  xv,  4), 
because  he  only  is  abeolutely  good  (Lukę  xyiŁi,  19),  and 
thus  demands  the  supremę  yeneration  of  those  who 
would  themselyes  become  good  (Lukę  i,  49;  John  zyii, 
U;  Actsiii,14[iy,27,80];  1  Johnii,20;  Heb.vii,26; 
Rey.  iy,  8).    See  HoLI^-E88  of  God, 

2.  Men  are  called  holy  (a)  in  as  far  as  they  are  ve8- 
sels  of  the  Holy  Spirit  and  of  diyine  power,  e.  g.  the 
prophets ;  and  also  in  as  far  as  they  bełong  to  an  organ- 
ization  which  is  dedicated  to  God.  In  the  ^.  T.  Cliris- 
tians  are  especially  holy,  as  being  wholły  consecrated  to 
God's  seryice.  (Comp.  Rom.  viii,  27 ;  xii,  18 ;  1  Ck»r.  vi, 
2;  Eph.  u,  19;  y,  3;  yi,  18;  CoL  i,  11 ;  iii,  12;  2  Pet.  i, 
21 ;  Rey.  xiii,  10 ;  Jude  14.)  Men  are  also  called  holy 
(5)  in  80  far  as  they  are  or  become  habitually  good,  de- 
nying  sin,  thinking  and  acdng  in  a  godlike  manner,  and, 
in  short,  conforming,  in  their  innermost  being,  as  welł  as 
in  their  outward  conduct,  to  the  highest  and  abeolut« 
law  or  the  wUl  of  God  (Rom.  vi,  19,  22;  Eph.  i,  4 ;  Tit. 
i,  8;  1  Pet.  i,  15;  Rey.  xx, 6). 

The  grounds  of  this  sanctification,  aocording  to  ont- 
ward  appearance,  are  twofold,  viz. :  (a)  Holiness  is  given 
of  God  by  the  mediation  of  Christ,  conditioned  upon 
faith  and  an  inward  surrender,  which  are  theooaelyes 
likewise  the  gift  of  God.  (6)  Man  from  within,  by  a 
proper  purification  of  the  heart,  may  atuin  this  sancti- 
ty.  Although  the  last  cannot  occur  without  the  asast- 
ance  of  God,  yet  the  pcrsonal  actiyity  of  man  is  neccs- 
sary  and  almóst  preponderant.  Still,  eyen  interior  holi- 
ness is,  as  aboye  implied,  the  direct  work  of  God. 

8.  As  eyerything  dedicated  to  God  partakes  in  a  cer- 
tain  manner  of  his  holiness,  so  even  things  (e.  g.  the 
Terapie),  forms,  and  ceremonies  (e.  g.  sacrilice)  :  hence 
"  to  hallów"  mcans  also  to  dedicaie  to  God,  to  offer  up, 
to  bring  as  an  offering,  to  present  one*s  selfas  dedicated  to 
God  through  Christ  (Rey.  xx\'i,  18;  1  Cor.  vi,  11;  Eph, 
y,  26 ;  Heb.  ii,  11 ;  x,  10, 14 ;  John  xvii,  17).  In  the  N, 
T.,  where  the  merciful  assistance  of  God  in  customary 
purity  or  objectiye  holiness  appears  prominent,  the  ez- 


HOLINESS 


297 


HOLINESS 


poresaion  to  ''sanetify  one'8  sdf  is  lued  ońly  conoeming 
Christ,  and  means  here  the  same  as  to  ofper  up  kimself 
ta  a  s&ciifice  for  himum  sin  (John  xvii,  19).  But  as  man 
mxy  make  himaelf  holy,  i.  e.  mider  the  assistance  of  the 
Holy  Spirit,  he  may  work  for  his  own  pority ;  similar 
phnueolocy  is  nsed  of  Christians  (Matt  xxiii,  17 ;  John 
xrii,19;  lTim.iv,5). 

4.  That  by  whtch  God  revea]s  his  holiness,  e.  g.  the 
Ław,  is  also  ho]y  (Kom.  vii,  12). 

III.  ProffresMon.  —  Complete  holiness,  as  applied  to 
men,  designates  the  state  of  perfect  Iove,  which  exhibits 
ttaełf  in  this,  that  every  thought  of  man,  eveiy  emotion 
md  vD]ition,  hence  also  eveiy  deed,  is  detennined  by 
the  will  of  God,  and  thus  the  old  man,  who  has  beeu 
Cuntiiig  nnder  the  bmdens  of  worldly  lust,  and  has  been 
earrying  the  chains  of  the  flesh,  is  cast  olT,  and  the  new 
man  is  folly  pat  on.  This  sanctification  is  both  a  work 
Df  God  and  of  man.  This  divine  grace  comes  through 
Christ,  first  at  oonver8ion,  and  by  8ucce8sive  steps  there- 
after  onder  the  influence  of  the  Holy  Spirit  Man  must 
aeize  the  proffered  hand  of  God,  use  the  meaiis  of  grace 
aflindied  him,  and  by  the  assistance  of  God  perfect  holi- 
ness. Thus,  on  the  one  hand,  eveTything  comes  from 
God,  and,  on  the  other,  the  personal  work  of  man  is  nec- 
essaiy.  Whatever  the  gocid  man  is,  he  U  through  God 
and  his  own  will;  the  evil  man,  however,  is  so  only 
through  his  own  will,  for  evil  ia  falling  away  from  God. 
Goodneas  consists  ultimately  in  susceptibility  for  the  dl-- 
vine  work  of  grace,  while  wickedness  has  its  finał  ground 
in  the  Ibee  haidening  of  the  heart  against  the  dirine  in- 


PerMmal  holiness  is  a  work  of  development  in  time, 
freqi>ently  onder  a  variety  of  hinderances  and  back- 
slidingB,  and  even  with  the  possibility  of  entire  ruin. 
Hence  the  admonitions  to  watchfulness,  to  continual 
pnyer,  to  perseverance  in  fiuth,  in  love,  and  in  hope, 
are'abandant  (1  Cor.  i,  80 ;  2  Cor.  vii,  1 ;  Eph.  iv,  23, 24 ; 
oomp.  Kom.  xii,  2) ;  hence  also  the  apo8tle's  prayer  that 
the  lofve  of  the  Philippians  might  abound  yet  morę  and 
more  (Phii  i,  9).  But  while  the  laying  aside  of  the  old, 
and  the  putting  on  of  the  new,  are  thus  referred  to  man, 
of  couTK  it  is  not  the  meaning  of  the  sacred  writer  that 
fiBDCtIfication  is  accomplished  by  our  own  power.  Christ 
is  our  sanctification,  as  he  is  our  righteousncss  (i  Cor. 
i,  30) ;  yet  all  that  Christ  through  the  Holy  Spirit  works 
in  man  may  become  in  vain,  because  man  by  his  mi- 
fidthfolness  can  hinder  the  operation  of  the  Spirit. 

IV.  Melaphorical  ReprtgentationB  ofa  State  ofHoli' 
neaa, — ^In  the  Scriptores  this  sanctification  is  dcscribed 
in  manifold  as  well  as  strong  and  explicit  figures  as  a 
''putting  ofT*  of  the  old  man,  and  a  putting  on  of  the 
new  man  (CoL  iii,  9),  the  subjcct  becoming  dead  to  the 
old,  and  haWng  recovercd  the  lost  image  of  God.  It  is 
lepresented  as  self-denial  (1  Cor.  ix,  26, 27) ;  as  a  cleans- 
ing  (i  John  i,  9 ;  comp.  Heb.  i,  8 ;  ix,  14 ;  Eph.  v,  26 ;  2 
Pet.  i,  9);  as  a  washing  (1  Cor.  vi,  11);  as  a  taking 
away  of  sin  (John  i,  29) ;  as  being  filled  with  the  fruits 
of  righteousness  (PhiL  i,  11);  with  the  water  of  life 
(John  \ii,38;  compare  iv,  14) ;  as  a  shedding  abroad  of 
the  kn-e  of  (jod  in  the  heart  (Kom.  v,  5) ;  as  baptism 
into  Christ  (Rom.  vi,  3 ;  Eph..  i,  10;  ii,  5;  Rev.  xv,  1) ; 
feDowshipwith  God  (1  John  i,  3);  as  being  in  the  Fa- 
ther,  and  in  the  Son,  and  in  the  light  (1  John  ii,  5, 6, 10, 
24;  compare  Eph.  ii,  15;  John  xiv,  20) ;  as  the  ha\dng 
God,  Christ,  and  the  Holy  Spirit  dwelllng  in  us  (John 
xiv,  17, 20;  GaL  ii,  20;  1  Cor.  v,  15;  1  John  ii,  24;  iv, 
4, 12-15;  Eph.  iv,  6) ;  as  a  birth  unto  God  and  Christ 
(1  John  ii,  29;  iii,  9,  10;  iv,  4-7;  v,  18,  19);  as  being 
partaker  of  the  divine  naturę  (2  Pet.  i,  4) ;  children  of 
God  (Rom.  viii,  14;  John  i,  12;  1  John  iii,  1,  2) ;  bom 
again  (John  iii,  5,  7 ;  Titus  iii,  5,  6) ;  as  beuig  one  with 
Christ  and  one  another  (John  xvii,  22, 26).~Krehl,  Nęu- 
talam,  W&rierb,  p.  856.    See  Sanctification. 

HouNEsa,  OM  a  notę  o/the  Churdu    See  Sanctitt. 

HOUNESS  OF  GOD,  his  essential  and  absolute 
morał  petfection.  Primarily,  the  word  holy  (Sax.  hcdig ; 
G«n&ieifi^,whole,  sound)  denotes  perfection  ia  a  moial 


As  applied  to  man,  it  denotes  entire  conformity 
to  the  win  of  God.  See  Sanctification.  "  But  when 
we  speak  of  God,  we  speak  of  a  Being  who  is  a  law  unto 
himself,  and  whose  conduct  cannot  be  referred  to  a  high- 
er  authority  than  his  own."    See  Holiness,  above. 

1.  "As  to  the  use  of  the  words  ttJi^J?  and  uyioc,  some 
critics  assert  that  they  are  only  used  in  Scripture,  with 
reference  to  God,  to  describe  him  as  the  object  of  awe 
and  veneration;  and  it  is  true  that  this  is  their  prevail- 
ing  meaning— e.  g.  Isa.  vi,  9 ;  John  xvii,  11  {iiyu  irdnp) 
—and  thataccordingly  ayidZtaOai  signifies  to  be  etteen^ 
ed  venerabk,  to  be  reuerenced,  Still  it  is  undeniaUe  that 
these  words  in  many  passages  are  applied  to  God  in  a 
mond  sense;  e.  g.  Lev.  xix,  2,  *Be  ye  holy,  for  I  am 
holy;'  comp.  1  Pet.  i,  14-16.  Thus  also  wriórric,  Eph. 
iv,  24 ;  and  ayiuMrvvti,  aytafffióc,  by  which  all  morał 
perfection  is  so  frequent]y  designated,  more  espedally 
in  the  New  Testament.  The  diflTerent  synonymical  sig- 
nificationa  of  the  words  ibi^l)?  and  Uyioc  are  clearly  eon- 
nected  in  the  following  manner :  (a)  The  being  ertemal- 
ly  pure;  e.  g.  2  Sam.  xi,  4;  Lev.  xi,  48,  44;  xx,  7,  26, 
26  8q.  (6)  The  being  teparattf  sińce  we  are  accustomed 
to  divide  what  is  pure  from  what  is  impure,  and  to  cast 
away  the  latter ;  and  therefora  (c)  The  posseseing  of 
any  kind  ofextemal  achantage^  disdncUon,  or  worth,  So 
the  Jews  were  said  to  be  holy  to  God,  in  opposition  to 
others,  who  were  Koivoi,prqfane,  commonj  unconsecrated, 
Then  evefything  which  was  without  imperfecfion,  dis- 
grace,  or  blemish  was  called  holy;  and  tći^p,  llyioc, 
sacroaanctuSf  came  thus  tó  signify  what  was  mviolable 
(Isa.  iv,  3 ;  1  Cor.  iii,  17) ;  hence  Ć'JiD»,  cuylum,  They 
were  then  used  in  the  more  Umited  sense  of  chaste  (Uke 
the  Latin  sanctitiu)^  a  sense  in  which  they  are  also  some- 
timea  used  in  the  New  Testament;  e.  g.  1  Thess.  iv,  8, 
7  (comp  Wolf,  ad  loc.).  They  then  came  to  denote  any 
intemai  morał  perfection ;  and,  fiiuUly,  perfection,  in  the 
generał  notion  of  it,  as  exclu8ive  of  all  imperfection." 

2.  '*  The  holinese  of  God,  in  the  generał  notion  of  it,  is 
his  morał  perfeaion— that  attńbute  by  włiich  all  morał 
imperfection  is  removed  from  his  naturę.  The  holiness 
of  the  will  of  God  Lb  that,  therefore,  by  which  he  chooeesy 
necessaiily  and  invariably,  what  is  morally  good,  and 
refuses  what  is  morally  eviL  The  holiness  and  justice 
of  God  are,  in  reałity,  one  and  the  same  thing ;  the  dis- 
tinction  consists  in  this  only,  that  holiness  denotes  the 
intemał  inclination  of  the  divine  will — the  disposition 
of  God,  and  justice  the  expre86ion  of  the  same  by  ac- 
tions.  This  attribute  implies,  1.  That  no  sinful  or  wiek- 
ed  mcłination  can  be  found  in  God.  Hence  he  is  said 
(James  i,  18, 17)  to  be  awŁtpaaroc  KOKuWf  incapable  of 
lieing  tempted  to  evil  (not  in  the  active  sense,  as  it  is 
rendered  by  the  Yulgate  and  Luther) ;  and  in  1  John  i, 
5,  to  be  light,  and  without  darkness;  i.  e.  holy,  and 
without  siu.  In  this  sense  he  is  called  "^in^d,  Kodapóc, 
ayyóc  (1  Jolm  iii,  8) ;  also  d^^lDPi,  atrkSoc,  integer  (Psa* 
xviii,  81).  The  older  writers  described  this  by  the 
word  ayaftapTTiTOCf  impeccabilit.  [The  sinlessiiess  of 
God  is  also  designated  in  the  New  Testament  by  the 
words  r£\f(oc  (Matt.  v,  48)  and  haioc  (Rev.  xvi,  5).  ]  2. 
That  he  never  chooees  what  is  false  and  deceitful,  but 
only  what  is  truły  good — what  his  perfect  intelligenoe 
recognises  as  such;  and  that  he  is  therefore  the  most 
perfect  teacher  and  the  highest  cxemplar  of  mora!  good- 
neas. Hence  the  Bibie  declares  that  he  łooks  with  dis- 
pleasure  upon  wicked,  deceitful  courses  (Psa.  i,  5  są.; 
V,  6 :  *Thou  hafcest  all  workers  of  iniąuity') ;  but,  on  the 
contrar}',  he  regards  the  pioos  with  favor  (Psa.  v,  7,  8 ; 
XV,  1  sq.;  xviii,  26  są. ;  xxxiii,  18)"  (Knapp,  Theologg, 
§  29).  Howe  speaks  of  the  holiness  of  God  as  "  the  ac- 
tual,  perpetual  rectitude  of  all  his  volitions,  and  all  the 
works  and  actions  which  are  conseąuent  thereupon ;  and 
ait  etemal  propension  thereto  and  Iove  thereof,  by  which 
it  is  ałtogether  impossible  to  that  iiv'iłł  that  it  shonld 
ever  vary." 

8.  Holiness  is  an  eueniial  attribute  of  God,  and  adds 


HOLINESS 


298 


HOLKOT 


gloiy,  lustre,  and  harmony  to  aU  his  other  perfections 
(Psa.  xxvii,  4 ;  £xocL  xv,  11).  He  could  not  be  God 
without  it  (Deut.  xxxii,  4).  It  is  mfimU  and  unbound- 
ed;  it  cannot  be  increased  or  diminiahed.  It  is  also  tm- 
tmUable  and  uwariabU  (MaL  iii,  6).  God  is  origwaily 
holy ;  he  is  80  of  and  in  himself,  and  the  author  and  pro- 
tnoter  of  all  holiness  among  his  creatures.  The  holiness 
of  God  is  visible  by  his  worka  f  he  madę  all  things  holy 
(Gen.  i,  81) :  by  his  promdencesj  all  which  are  to  pro- 
mote  holiness  in  the  end  (Heb.  xL,  10) :  by  his  prącej 
which  influences  the  subjccts  of  it  to  be  holy  (Tit.  ii,  10, 
12) :  by  his  toord,  which  commands  it  (1  Pet  i,  15) : 
by  his  ordmanceSf  which  he  hath  appointed  for  that 
cnd  (Jer.  xliv,  4,  6) :  by  the  pumskment  of  rin  in  the 
death  of  Christ  (Isa.  liii) ;  and  by  the  eUrncU putdskment 
of  it  in  wicked  men  (ItfatU  xx,  46)  (Buck),  See  At- 
TRiBUTKS.  The  holiness  of  God,  like  his  other  attii- 
butes,  constitutes  the  divine  essence  itself,  and  conse- 
quently  exists  in  him  in  the  state  of  absolute  perfection. 
It  were  therefore  impossible  to  consider  it  as  a  oonform- 
ity  of  God  to  the  laws  of  right,  sinoe  God  himself,  on 
the  oontrary,  is  the  idea  and  pńnciple  of  holiness.  But, 
on  the  other  hand,  we  may  not  say  that  the  will  of  Grod 
simply  constitutes  the  essence  of  divine  holiness.  To 
mankind,  indced,  the  simple  will  of  Grod  is  at  once  law 
in  all  things;  but  with  regard  to  God  himself,  his  will 
is  holy  because  he  wills  only  aooording  to  his  immanent 
holinesa,  i.  e.  his  own  naturę.  As  the  absolute  Being, 
God  is  necessarily  in  no  wise  dependent  on  any  outward 
law ;  but  as  a  morally  [łerfect  spińt  God  cannot  but  be 
tnie  to  himself,  and  thus  manifest  in  all  his  ageucy  his 
inherent  morał  perfection  as  his  immanent  law. 

The  earlier  dogmatists  of  the  Reformed  Church  large- 
ly  discussed  the  ąuestion  whether  right  is  right  because 
God  wills  it,  or  whether  God  wills  right  because  it  is 
right  Some  (e.  g.  Polanus)  maintained  the  former  view 
as  the  only  one  consistent  with  the  absolute  naturę  of 
God.  The  later  writers  maintain  the  opposite  view,  e. 
g.  Yoetius :  "God  is  subject  to  no  morał  iutyfrom  wUh- 
ovt,  because  he  is  no  man'8  debtor,  and  there  is  no  cause 
outside  of  God  that  can  bind  or  determine  him.  But 
from  tńthin  he  may  be  bound  (so  to  speak),  not,  indeed, 
in  the  sense  of  subjection,  because  he  is  his  oum  debtor, 
and  cannot  deny  himself,  Thus,  in  divine  things,  the  Fa- 
ther  is  bound  to  love  the  Son,  for  he  cannot  but  love 
him ;  while  the  Son,  by  the  very  necessity  of  his  di- 
vine  naturę,  is  bound  to  work  by  the  Father ;  nor  caa  he 
do  otherwise  whenever  a  work  outside  of  God  is  to  be 
performctL  So,  also,  in  extenial  acts,  the  creature  hav- 
ing  been  once  produced,  God  is  bound  to  maintain  it  by 
his  perpetual  power  and  continual  influence  (as  long  as 
he  wishes  it  to  exiat),  to  roove  directly  upon  it  as  its 
first  movcr,  and  guide  it  to  his  glory  (Prov.  xvi,  4 ;  Rom. 
xi,  34-36).  That  is  immutably  good  and  just  whose 
opposite  he  cannot  wish/'  So  also  Heidegger  {Corp. 
Theol,  iii,  89,  90):  «Whatever  is  the  holiness,  justicc, 
and  goodness  of  the  creature,  nevertheleB8  its  rule  and 
first  norm  in  the  sight  of  God  ia  not  his  free  will  and 
commandj  but  his  omi  essentialjustioe,  hoUness,  and  good- 
ness."^ On  thls  subject  Watson  remarks  as  foliowa: 
**  Without  conducting  the  reader  into  the  profitless  ąues- 
tion whether  there  is  a  fixed  and  unalterable  naturę  and 
fitness  of  things,  independent  of  the  divine  will  on  the 
one  hand ;  or,  on  the  other,  whether  good  and  evil  have 
their  foundation,  not  in  the  naturę  of  things,  but  only 
in  the  divine  will,  which  makes  them  such,  there  is  a 
method,  less  direct  it  may  be,  but  morę  satisfactor>',  of 
assistiug  our  thoughts  on  thls  subject  It  is  certain 
that  various  affections  and  actions  have  been  enjoined 
upon  all  rational  creatures  under  the  generał  name  of 
righteousncss,  and  that  their  contraries  have  been  pro- 
hibited.  It  is  a  matter  also  of  constant  experience  and 
observation  that  the  good  of  society  is  promoted  only 
by  the  one,  and  injured  by  the  other;  and  also  that  ev- 
ery  indtvidual  derives,  by  the  Yery  oonstitution  of  bis 
naturę,  bencfit  and  happiness  from  rectitude,  injuiy  and 
misery  from  vice.     This  constitution  of  human  naturę 


is  therefore  an  indication  that  the  Maker  and  Rnler  ot, 
men  formed  them  with  the  intent  that  they  shoold  avoid 
vice  and  practice  virtue ;  and  that  the  former  is  the  ob- 
ject  of  his  averBion,  the  latter  of  his  regard.     On  thit 
pńnciple,  all  the  lawSf  which  in  his  legiskuive  cbancter 
almighty  God  has  enacted  for  the  govemment  of  man- 
kind,  have  been  constructed.     '  The  law  is  holy,  and  the 
commandment  holy ^  just,  and  good.*    In  the  adminlstn> 
tion  of  the  world,  where  God  is  so  ollen  seen  in  hiajudi- 
cial  capadty,  the  punishments  which  are  infiicted,  indi- 
rectly  or  immediately  upon  man,  ckarly  tend  to  disoour- 
age  and  prevent  the  practice  of  eviL    *  Above  all,  the 
Gospel,  that  last  and  most  perfect  revelation  of  the  di- 
vine  will,  instead  of  giving  the  professors  of  it  any  aU 
lowance  to  sin,  because  grace  has  abounded  (which  is 
an  injurious  imputation  cast  upon  it  by  ignorant  and 
impious  minds),  its  chief  design  is  to  establish  that  great 
piinciple,  God*s  morał  purity,  and  to  manifest  his  abhor- 
rence  of  sin,  and  inńolable  regard  to  purity  and  virtue 
in  his  reasonable  creatures.    It  was  for  this  łie  aent  his 
Son  into  the  world  to  tum  men  from  their  uiiquities^ 
and  bring  them  back  to  the  paths  of  righteousneaa.    For 
this  the  blessed  Jesus  submitted  to  the  deepest  humilia- 
tions  and  most  grievous  sufferings.    He  gave  himself 
(as  StPaul  speaks)  for  his  Church,  that  he  mi^ht  sanc- 
tify  and  cłeanse  it ;  that  he  might  present  it  to  himself  a 
glorious  Church,  not  having  spot  or  HTinkle,  but  that  ic 
should  be  holy  and  without  blemish;  or,  as  it  is  else- 
where  expres8ed,  he  gave  himself  for  us,  to  redeem  os 
from  our  iniquities,  and  to  purify  unto  himself  a  pecuhar 
people,  zealous  of  good  works*  (Abemethy,  Sermonsy, 
Since,  then,  it  is  so  manifest  that  Hhe  Lord  loveth 
ńghteousness  and  hateth  iniquity,*  it  must  be  necessa- 
rily concluded  that  this  preference  of  the  one,  and  ha- 
tred  of  the  other,  flow  from  some  principle  in  bis  vcsy 
naturę-^*  that  he  is  the  righieous  Lord ;  of  pnrer  eyes 
than  to  behold  evil ;  one  who  cannot  look  upon  iniqui- 
ty.*    This  principle  is  holiness,  an  attribuce  which,  in 
the  most  emphatic  manner,  is  assumed  by  himself,  and 
attributed  to  him,  both  by  adoring  angels  in  their  choirs, 
and  by  inspired  saints  in  their  worship.    Ile  is,  by  his 
own  designation,  *fAe  Holy  One  oflsrad^  the  seraphs 
in  the  vision  of  the  prophet  ery  continually,  *HotT, 
HOLY,  IIOLY  w  tht  Ijord  God  ofhosts ;  the  tchok  earth  is 
fuU  of  his  glory ;'  thus  summing  up  all  his  glories  in  this 
sole  morał  perfection.     The  language  of  the  aanctuary 
on  earth  is  borrowed  from  that  of  heaven : '  Who  thaU 
notfear  thee,  O  Lord,  andglorify  thy  name,  for  thou  only 
art  Holy.'     If,  then,  there  is  thls  principle  in  the  di- 
vine  mind  which  leads  him  to  prescribe,  love,  and  re- 
ward  truth,  justice,  benevolence,  and  every  other  Tirta- 
ous  affection  and  habit  in  his  creatures  which  we  sum 
up  in  the  term  holiness,  and  to  forbid,  restnun,  and  pun- 
ish  their  opposites — that  piindple,  beuig  essenlial  in  him, 
a  part  of  his  very  naturę  and  Godhead,  must  be  the 
spring  and  guide  of  his  own  conduct ;  and  thus  we  oon- 
ceive  without  difiicułty  of  the  essential  rectitude  otr  holi- 
ness of  the  divine  naturę,  and  the  abeolutely  pure  and 
righteous  character  of  his  administration.    This  attri- 
bute  of  holiness  exhibits  itself  in  two  great  bnnchea, 
Justice  and  truth,  which  are  sometimes  also  treated  of  as 
separate  attributc&'^     See  Watson,  Theolog.  /nststułes,  i, 
436;  Knapp,  Theology,  §29;  Leland,  ^ermons,  i,  199; 
Abemethy,  Sermons,  ii,  190 ;  Heppe,  DognuUik  der  ertm^- 
reform.  Kirche,  p.  73  sq. ;  Pye  Smith,  Thed,  p.  173  8q. ; 
Pearson,  Exposition  ofthe  Creed,  i,  10, 531, 541 ;  Smith^s 
Hagcnbach,  flistory  ofDocfriaes,  i,  110  8q.;  Donier,  in 
Jahrb.f.  deutsche  TheoL  i,  2 ;  ii,  3 ;  iii,  3 ;  Hoefer,  Ao«r. 
Biog.  Generale,  xix,  618 ;  Herzog,  Real-EneyHop,  v,  1S3 
iii,  321 ;  xix,  618-624 ;  Bibliolh,  Sac  xii,  377 ;  xiii,  840 
Afeth.  Óuart,  Ret.  xi,  505 ;  Thomasius,  jiogmałiir^  i«  141 . 
Staudenmeier,  Dogmatik,  ii,  590-610 ;  Dn-ight,  TheoL  i 
(see  Index) ;  Martensen,  Dogmaiik,  p.  99 ;  Clark,  OtitL  of 
Theol  ii,  9  sq. ;  Calvin,  Institutes,  i,  877 ;  Wesley,  Works, 
ii,  430.     See  God. 

Holiness,  a  tide  of  the  Pope.    See  Porib 

HolkoŁ    See  Holcx>t« 


HOLLAND 


299 


HOLLAND 


HoUuid,  aiao  called  Tm  NEmKRLAMDS,  a  king- 
dom  in  Earope,  has  an  area  of  18,890  Engluh  Bquare 
miteSb  HoUand  atill  owiu  exten8ive  cołcmies  in  tbe  East 
and  West  Indks,  and  in  South  America,  which  together 
DuUce  an  area  of  about  680,700  £nglLBh  8quare  miles. 

I.  CkuTth  JIittory.r— At  the  beginning  of  the  Chris- 
tian «^^  the  oonntiy  which  is  now  caUed  UoUand  or 
the  Netherlanda  was  inhabited  by  Germanie  tribes,  of 
whom  tbe  Batairians  and  Friaiana  (q.  t.)  aie  best  known. 
Their  sutgection,  begon  by  Ccflar,  was  completed  by 
Germanicua.  At  the  beginning  of  the  4th  centor}'  the 
Fkanks  oonąuered  a  large  portion  of  the  country ;  only 
the  Frisians  maintained  their  independence  until  the 
7th  century.  Chaileroagne  appointed  oounta  in  Batayia 
and  in  Zealand,  and  oompelled  the  people  to  embrace 
the  Christian  religion.  After  the  diviuon  of  the  em- 
pire of  Chariemagne,  the  Netherlands  were  nnited  with 
Lomine,  and  they  both  were  madę  a  dependency  of  Ger- 
many. But  gradually  a  number  of  prinoes  became  aemi- 
independent ;  among  them  the  bishops  of  Utrecht,  who 
rutod  over  Upper- Yasel  and  Groningen.  The  most  pow- 
eiful  among  the  princes  were  the  counts  of  Flandcrs, 
and  after  f  he  exiinction  of  theee  last  their  knd  fell  by 
mairiage  to  the  dukesof  Burgundy,  who  gradually  came 
into  poaseeńon  of  the  whole  of  the  Netherlands,  lemain- 
ing,  howerer,  feudal  to  the  German  empeior.  The  mar- 
riage  of  the  daughter  of  the  hut  duke  of  Burgundy  with 
Hakimilian,  archduke  of  Austria  (later,  emperor  Maxi* 
Bńiian  I  of  Germany),  madę  the  Netherlands  a  part  of 
the  extensive  dominions  of  the  house  of  Hapsburg. 

The  Christianization  of  the  country  has  been  refenred 
to  in  the  arta.  Belgium  and  Frieslahd.  HoUand,  like 
Bdginm,  early  became  disdngnished  for  its  escellent  ca- 
thedral  schools,  espedally  tbat  of  Utrecht.  A  great  in- 
fluence upon  the  religious  life  not  only  of  Holland,  but 
of  many  other  countńes,  was  exerci8ed  by  the  BrotherB 
9f  Common  Life,  who  were  Ibunded  by  Gerhrrd  Groote 
(q.  V.)  <  1340-1384).  This  order  eoon  establiehcd  a  num- 
ber of  schoob,  espedally  in  the  Netherlands  and  the 
•djaeent  parts  of  Germany,  which  imparted  not  only 
doncntaiy  instruction,  but  alao  a  higher  education. 
Thns  HoUand  became  celebrsted  for  its  leaming  and 
•cbfdarship,  which  in  the  Idth  ccutury  was  ftirther  pro- 
moted  by  the  establishment  of  the  Um^ersity  of  Deren- 
ter.  Many  of  the  prominent  men  of  Holland  took  an 
aetire  part  in  the  elforts  to  reform  the  Church  of  Borne ; 
the  best  known  of  these  leformerB  is  John  de  WeawL 
The  Mennonites  (q.  v.)  fully  aepamted  irom  the  Church 
of  Romę,  and,  Uving  in  a  country  which  was  iavorahle 
Co  rdigiotis  toleration,  suffered  leas  from  peraecuŁicm  than 
moat  of  the  medioral  sects. 

The  Reformation  of  the  16th  century  found  in  few 
countries  so  congenial  a  aoil  as  in  HoUand.  Farored  by 
the  Uberal  traditions  of  the  country,  the  national  spirit 
of  independence,  and  the  exten6ive  commeroe  with  for- 
ógn  countńes,  it  spread  rapidly.  In  vain  did  CharlcB 
y  i»oe  a  number  of  cruel  edicts  (the  first  in  March, 
1620,  the  laat  in  1Ó50)  to  put  it  down;  it  grew  in  spite 
of  aU  peraecution.  Among  the  dilTerent  reformed  sys- 
tems  which  then  began  to  estabUsh  them8elves,  it  was 
cspeciaUy  tbat  of  Calvin,fir8t  introduced  by  3roung  Dutch 
atodents  of  Geneya,  which  struck  deep  root.  The  Lu- 
theran  doctńnes,  and,  still  morę,  Anabaptist  moyements, 
alao  found  numeroos  adherenta,  but  Calrinism  soon  ob- 
tatned  the  ascendency,  owing  to  a  large  extent  to  the 
influence  of  the  Reformed  churches  of  England  and 
France.  Thns  arose  the  Duich  Rffomud  Church^  em- 
bncing  at  its  origin  the  reformed  churches  of  Belgium, 
as  weU  as  thoee  of  HoUand,  as  these  countńes  were  at 
this  time  politicaUy  united.  [The  inner  history  of  this 
Chnrch  is  given  in  the  article  Reformed  Church.] 
PhiUp  II  was  determined  to  destroy  the  new  doctrine, 
■nd  introduced  into  the  Netherlands  all  the  horrors  of 
the  Spanish  Inąuisition.  Thb  caUed  forth  a  generał  op- 
poaition.  The  lower  noHUty  united  in  presenting  to 
the  regent  Margaret  of  Parma  a  protest  against  religious 
;  tibe  dtizens  aasemUed  in  the  open  field  for 


dińne  senrioe.  In  1666,  generał  attacks  began  against  * 
the  Roman  CathoUc  churches.  In  1667,  Philip  sent  duke 
Alba  to  the  Netherlands  with  an  army,  consisting  of 
Spaniards  and  ItaUans,  to  subdue  the  reUgious  movc- 
ment ;  but  the  cruel  tyranny  of  the  duke  led  to  very 
different  results.  WiUiam  of  Orange,  the  stadtholder, 
who  had  escaped  death  by  flight,  unsuccesefuUy  at- 
tempted,  at  the  head  of  an  army  of  exUcs,  to  expel  the 
Spaniards,  but  in  1572  nearly  the  whole  of  the  northera 
proyinces  fell  into  the  hands  of  the  patriots.  The  ef- 
forts  of  Alba  to  supprees  the  revolution  by  force  of 
arms  having  entirely  failed,  he  was  recaUed,  and  depart- 
ed  in  Jan.  1574,  boasting  that  during  his  administration 
18,600  men  had  been  executed,  chiefly  on  accoant  of  re- 
ligion. The  efforts  of  his  succeswrs  likewise  failed  to  re- 
establish  the  nile  of  Spain.  In  1579,  the  provinces  of 
Holland,  Zealand,  Utrecht,  Friesland,  Groningen,  Over-. 
yssel,  and  Gndderiand  formed  the  Union  of  Utrecht,  and 
thus  laid  the  foundation  of  the  repubUc  of  the  Seven 
United  Proyinces.  From  this  time  the  history  of  the 
Netherlands  divides  itself  into  that  of  HoUand,  in  which 
the  ascendency  of  Protestantism  was  henoeforth  estab- 
lished,  and  that  of  Flanders  (subseąuently  £«^«m,q.  v.), 
or  the  ten  prońnces,  which  remained  under  the  Spanish 
dominion,  and  adhered  to  the  Roman  Catholic  Church. 
William  of  Orange  was  assassinated  in  1584  by  a  partisan 
of  Spain,  but  his  son  Manrice  successfuUy  defended  the 
independence  of  Holland,  and  in  1609  compeUed  Spain  to 
agiee  to  a  tracę  for  twelve  years.  During  the  peace  an 
unfortunate  quarrd  broke  out  between  the  Calrinists 
and  the  Arminians  (q.  y.).  Mauńce,  who  aspired  to  be« 
oome  faereditary  soyereign  of  HoUand,  placed  himeelf, 
from  poUtical  reasons,  at  the  head  of  the  strict  Calyin- 
ists,  and  when  he  preyaUed,  the  yenerable  head  of  the 
Arminian  party,  Bameyeldt,  one  of  the  most  iUustńous 
of  the  Dutch  sUtesmen,  was  (May  18, 1619)  executed, 
while  Hugo  Grotius,  another  distinguished  leader  of  the 
Arminians,  or,  as  they  were  generaUy  called,  from  their 
remonstrances  in  favor  of  religious  toleration,  Bemdn- 
strants,  escaped  by  an  artifice.  The  war  with  Spain  waa 
renewed  in  1621,  but  at  the  Pcaoe  of  WcstphaUa  in  1648, 
Spain  had  to  recognise  the  independence  of  Holland. 

Under  rarious  poUtical  yiciautudes,  Holland  remained 
henoeforth  a  Protestant  country.  On  the  establishment 
of  the  Batayian  republic  in  1795,  in  consequenoe  of  the 
conquest  of  the  country  by  France,  Church  and  State 
were  separated ;  the  constitution  of  the  national  Church 
remained.  howeyer,  substantiaUy  as  before.  Simultane- 
ottsly  with  the  erection  of  the  kingdom  of  Holland  un- 
der Napoleon,  an  attempt  was  madę  to  reorganize  the 
Church,  at  the  head  of  which  the  national  Synod  was 
to  be  placed ;  but  this  plan,  also,  was  not  execute<l,  as  in 
1810  Holland  was  incorporated  with  the  French  empire. 
An  introduction  of  the  Organie  Artides  (1812)  was  then 
meditated,  but  neyer  carried  through.  The  re-cstab- 
lishment  of  the  Netherlands  as  an  independent  state, 
with  which  also  Belgium  was  united,  restorcd  to  the 
national  Church  most  of  the  rights  formerly  possessed 
by  ber,  and  gave  ber  for  the  first  time  a  national  Synod. 
In  the  new  state  a  majority  of  the  population  belonged 
to  the  Roman  Catholic  Church,  but  the  goyernment 
knew  how  to  maintain  in  its  legisUtion  the  ascend- 
ency of  Protestantism,  to  the  great  dissatidaction  of  the 
southem  proyinces,  which  reyolted  in  1830,  and  consti- 
tnted  the  independent  kingdom  of  Belgium  (q.  y.).  From 
that  time  Holland  again  became  a  predominantly  Prot^ 
estant  state,  in  which,  however,  the  Roman  CathoUc 
Church  comprises  about  two  fifths  of  the  entire  popula- 
tion. Of  late,  an  almost  complete  separation  between 
Church  and  State  has  been  eflected. 

II.  Church  i9fa<wlica.  — The  total  population  of  the 
kingdom  of  Holland  amounted  in  December,  1868,  ac- 
oording  to  an  official  calculation,  to  8,628,468.  This  is 
exclusive  of  the  grand-duchy  of  Luxemburg  (q.  y.), 
which  is  goyemed  by  the  king  of  Holland  as  grand- 
duke,  but  is  entirely  independent  from  Holland  in  point 
of  administiation,    A  Uttle  oyer  a  mąjońty  of  the  en- 


HOLLAND 


300 


HOŁLAKD 


iSn  population,  aecoiding  to  the  official  cennu  taken  in 
1859, 1,818,827,  belong  to  the  National  Reformed  Chiuch. 
The  present  oonstitation  of  this  Church,  which  almost 
makes  it  autonomoua,  was  regulated  by  a  law  of  March 
28, 1852.  The  Church  embraces  48  dasses  in  10  pro- 
vincial  districts.  A  daasis  oonsists  of  the  paaton  and  a 
namber  of  the  eldera,  but  the  number  of  the  latter  must 
not  exceed  the  number  of  the  pastora.  Each  dassis 
meets  annually,  and  electa  a  standing  committee,  which 
exerci8es  eccletdastical  diadpline.  The  Greneral  Synod, 
which  meets  erery  year  in  June  at  the  Hague,  consista 
of  ten  pastors,  one  being  elected  by  each  of  the  prorin- 
dal  synods,  three  elders,  and  the  representatires  of  the 
three  theological  faculties  of  Leyden,  Utrecht,  and  Gro- 
ningen.  To  these  are  added  ddegates  appointed  by 
the  Gommission  of  the  Reformed  Walloon  Churches 
(thoee  which  use  the  French  language),  and  by  the 
East  and  West  Indian  churches.  A  Synodal  Commia- 
sion,  consisting  of  the  piesident,  the  yice-president,  and 
the  secietaiy  of  the  Synod,  of  three  preachers  and  el- 
ders, and  one  professor  of  theology,  is  chosen  for  a  period 
of  three  years.  The  number  of  parishes  in  1868  was 
1806,  which  were  administered  by  1559  pastors.  The 
Walloon  churches  were  seventeen  in  number,  with  twen- 
ty-five  pastors,  and  a  population  of  abont  8000.  They 
are  placed  under  a  special  oommission  for  the  affairs  of 
the  Walloon  churches,  but  form  an  integral  part  of  the 
National  Reformed  Church.  Theological  faculties  rep- 
resenting  this  Church  are  connected  with  the  state  uni- 
▼ersities  of  Leyden,  Utrecht,  and  Groningen,  and  the 
Athensa  of  Deventer  and  Amsterdam.  The  famous 
theological  schools  of  Haiderwyk  and  Franeker  (q.  v.) 
have  been  abolished. 

As  the  National  Reformed  Church  in  Holland,  in  the 
second  half  of  the  18th  and  in  the  present  century,  fell 
morę  and  morę  under  the  predominant  influence  of  ra* 
tionaliam  [for  the  doctrinal  history  of  the  Church,  see 
the  art.  Reformbd  Church],  a  number  of  the  leading 
defenders  of  the  andent  creed  of  the  Church  deemed  it 
best  to  secede  from  the  National  Church,  and  to  organ- 
ize  an  independent  Church  (Z>e  a/pescheid,  rffomu  Jlxrk). 
In  1868  this  Church  comprised  forty  dasses  in  ten  prov- 
inceS)  with  200  ministers  and  808  congregations.  It  has 
a  theological  school  at  Kampen,  with  fifty  to  sixty  stu- 
denta. Its  membership  bdongs  chiefly  to  the  poorer 
dasses  of  the  population,  and  numbers  about  95,000  souls. 
The  Remonstrants  and  followers  of  Arminius  (q.v.)  hare 
considerably  decreased  sińce  the  beginning  of  the  present 
century.  AYliile  in  1809  they  still  nurabered  thirty- 
four  congregations  and  forty  pastora,  they  had  in  1869 
only  twenty-one  congregations  and  twenty-6ix  preach- 
ers  left.  They  regard  themsdves  as  members  of  the 
Reformed  Church,  and  cali  themsdTes  the  Remonstrant 
Reformed  Brotherhood.  They  have  been  supported 
Since  1795  by  the  state,  and  their  pastora  are  educated 
at  the  Athenienm  of  Amsterdam.  Their  Synod  meets 
annually,  altemating  between  Amsterdam  and  Rotter- 
dam. The  Lutherans  of  Holland  adopted  as  early  as 
1596  a  constitution  dmilar  to  that  of  the  Reformed 
Church.  Like  them,  they  have  dectaye  pastors,  ddera, 
and  deacons;  and  by  the  new  rcgulations  of  1858,  a 
Church  Council,  Sjmodal  Commiańon,  and  Synod,  as 
the  three  stages  of  ecclesiaatical  representation.  Their 
Synod  likewise  meets  annually  at  the  Hague.  The  pop- 
ulation connected  with  the  Church  amounted  in  1859  to 
56,982 ;  the  number  of  parishes  and  pastora  is  about  flfly ; 
the  number  of  dasses  six.  They  have  a  theological 
seminary  at  Amsterdanf.  The  professon  of  this  semi- 
nary,  as  well  as  the  pastors,  receive  salaries  from  the 
state.  The  Mennonites,  whose  origin  falls  into  the  time 
before  the  Reformation,  have  likewise  decreased  sińce 
the  beginning  of  the  present  century.  In  1809  they 
numbered  138  congregations  and  185  ministen;  in  1868, 
117  congregations  and  122  ministers.  They,  too,  hare  a 
seminary  at  Amsterdam,  with  twenty-five  studenta  in 
1869.  Rationalism  largely  preyails  among  them.  The 
population  connected  with  their  congregations  numbei^ 


ed  in  1859, 41,564.  The  chuidiea  are  sd^fluppordog; 
and  independent  of  each  other.  The  MoraTians  have 
two  churches  and  four  ministers.  The  Jewa  in  1859 
numbered  63,890  souls. 

Among  the  rdigious  sodeties  of  Holland  tbe  foUow- 
ing  are  the  most  important :  (1.)  The  NHheriands  Bibk 
Sodettfy  which  had  in  1867  a  drculation  of  32,251  copiea, 
and  an  income  of  $80,000.  (2.)  The  Sundt^fsckcol 
Union  had  in  1867  established  271  Sunday-echoola  in 
ninety-flve  diiferent  places ;  they  had  together  1301 
teachen  and  24,400  children.  It  pubUshes  a  weekly 
paper,  The  Chrittian  FamUy  Cirek,  (3.)  The  Sod^ 
for  Christian  Nationtd^school  Jfutruction  (establiahed 
in  1860),  whose  design  is  the  establishment  throughont 
the  country  of  schools  in  which  a  sound  Christian  edu- 
cation  shall  bo  given,  as  oppoeed  to  that  giren  in  the 
national  schools.  Eighty  schoois  had  in  1867  been  es- 
tablished in  diiferent  parts  of  the  oountry  on  this  pńn- 
ciple.  The  income  of  the  sodety  was  about  $9000.  (4.) 
The  Netherlandt  Etangełioal  Protestant  Union,  estab- 
lished in  1858,  endeayora  to  ^oounfeeract  the  terrible 
power  of  Romę,  and  unbelief  preyailing  throughout  the 
country,  by  means  of  oolporteura  and  eyangdists."  The 
inoome  of  the  sodety  is  about  $1500.  (5.)  The  missioD- 
axy  sodeties  of  Holland  labor  exchi8iyely  in  the  Dntch 
oolonies,  and  in  the  ndghbjring  islauds  of  tbe  Indian 
Archipelago.  Great  open-air  missionaiy  gatheringa  are 
now  held  eyery  year  in  Holland. 

Until  the  Reformation,  the  whole  of  modem  Hol- 
land bdonged  to  the  diocese  of  Utrecht  (q.y.).  In 
1559  this  see  was  madę  an  archbishopric,  and  fire  atif- 
fragan  seee  were  erected— Haaiiem,  Hiddleburg,  Deyen- 
ter,  Leeu waiden,  and  Groningen.  The  sncoess  of  the  Re- 
formed Church,  after  the  establishment  of  the  independ- 
enoe  of  Holland,  put  an  end  to  all  the  dioceees.  In  1583 
an  apostolical  yicariate  was  established  for  thoae  who 
continned  to  adhere  to  the  Church  of  Romę.  It  was  at 
first  administered  by  the  apostdical  nundo  in  Bmaads. 
At  the  beginning  of  the  17th  century  the  Dutch  mia- 
sion  again  recdyed  a  resident  yicar  apostolic  at  Utredit 
(who  was  to  Bupply  the  place  of  the  former  archbidi- 
ops),  and  flye  proyicars  at  the  former  episoopal  seesL  In 
1728  the  Jansenist  (q.  y.)  canons  of  Utrecht  dected  an 
archbishop;  in  1742  a  Jansenist  bishop  was  elected  for 
Haarlem,  and  in  1755  another  for  Deyenter.  AU  these 
sees  are  still  extant,  but  the  number  of  parishes  and  the 
membenhip  haye  decreased.  These  haye  at  preaent 
(1870)  a  population  of  about  4000  souls  in  tweiity-fiye 
parishes.  After  the  establishment  of  the  United  King- 
dom  of  the  Netheilands,  the  Roman  Catholic  Chureh  in 
the  seyen  old  proyinces  was  diyided  into  seyen  arch- 
presbyterates,  who  were  placed  under  the  papai  nando 
at  the  Hague  as  ^'yice  superior  of  the  Dutch  mission,'' 
while  the  apostolic  yicariates  of  Henogenbusch,  Bceda, 
and  limburg  (1840)  were  erected  into  districts  which 
had  formerly  bdonged  to  other  states.  On  Maich  7, 
1853,  Pius  IX  re-esUblished  the  regular  hierarchy  by 
erecting  the  archbishopric  of  Utrecht,  and  the  four  biah- 
oprics  of  Haarlem,  Biieda,  Herzogenbusch,  and  Roet^- 
monde.  The  Catholic  population  in  1862  numbered 
1,229,000  souls,  with  39  conyents  of  monks  (containing 
815  membera)  and  187  female  monasteries  (containing 
2188  membera).  Among  the  monks  are  Jesuita,  Be- 
demptoństs,  Dominicans,  Frandscans,  Carmditee,  and 
Norbertines.  Seyeral  congregations  of  Sistera  of  Chnr- 
ity  haye  aiisen  in  Holland. 

A  complete  Church  History  of  Holland  has  been  pub- 
lished  by  Glasius,  Geschiedeniss  der  chrisiel^ke  berk  en 
ffodsdierist  in  de  Nederianden  (Leyden,  1888  sq.,  6  yols.). 
The  introdttction  of  Christianity  into  the  Netherlanda 
is  specially  treated  of  by  Diest  Lorgion  {Gesck.  ram  de 
ineoerinff  des  christend.  in  Nederkmden  (Lenw.  1941), 
and  by  Prof.  Royaards  (Gesdu  dar  imeoering  en  vettighi^ 
f>an  et  christendJin  NederL  Utr.  1841 ;  3d  ed.  1844).  The 
latter  began  a  Church  History  of  Holland  during  tlie 
Middle  Ages  {Gfsck.  ran  et  gerestigde  Christendom  en  de 
christ,  kerk  in  Nederlande  gedttrinde  de  middeleeumen. 


HOLLAND 


301 


HOLLINGSHEAD 


Utr.  1849^-58, 2  yobi),  bot  the  death  of  this  eminent  his- 
toriAii  (1854)  pievented  the  oompletion  of  the  woik.  A 
biogni{^ical  Chuich  Histoiy,  from  a  Roman  Catholic 
stand-point,  was  begun  by  Alberdingk  Thijm  {Gtsch, 
der  kerk  m  de  NederL;  voL  i,  H.  WiUibrodus,  Apostel 
der  Nederlamkn,  Amsterd.  1861 ;  Genn.  transL  Munster, 
1863).  A  work  of  great  ability  is  the  Church  Histoiy 
of  Holland  before  the  Beformation,  by  MoU  {Kerkege- 
ickifdemss  ran  Nederkaid  voor  de  herrormwCf  Arnheim, 
1864  8q^  3  vol&).    See  Beusium.    (A.  J.  S.) 

Holland,  Onido^  an  English  Jesuit,  waa  bom  in 
linooln  aboot  1587.  He  was  educated  at  the  Unirer- 
sity  of  Cambridge,  deroting  his  time  mainly  to  meta- 
phymcsL  After  gńdoation  he  went  to  Spain,  and  here 
punaed  a  ooime  in  theology.  In  1616  he  entered  the 
order  of  the  Jesuits,  and  was  sent  to  England  as  a  Ko- 
man Catholic  miasionary.  He  died  Noy.  26, 1660.  He 
WTOte  a  work  of  some  importance  on  the  immortality  of 
the  aoul,  mider  the  titk  FrterogaŁioa  natura  humana, — 
Jocher,  GdekrL  Zer.  ii,  1674. 

Holland*  John  M.,  a  Methodist  Episcopal  minia* 
ter,  bom  in  Williamwtn  County,  Tenn.,  about  1808  or 
1804,  was  conyerted  in  early  life,  and  entered  the  min- 
ifltiy  in  1822.  After  holding  aeyeral  important  charges, 
he  was  appointed  presiding  elder  of  the  Cumberland 
Diatiict  in  1829.  Two  years  later  he  was  sent  to  Kash- 
TiUe,  and  in  1832  was  reappointed  presiding  elder  over 
ihe  Forked  De^  District,  transferred  in  1888  to  the  Mem- 
phis, and  in  1836  to  the  Florence  District.  In  1887  he 
was  aelected  as  the  agent  of  La  Grange  College,  but 
in  1838  he  retuined  to  the  actiye  work  of  the  minis- 
tiy  as  presiding  elder  of  Holly  Springs  District,  in  Mis- 
aastppi.  In  1839  he  was  once  morę  chosen  agent  for 
a  Ofrflei^ — this  time  for  Holly  Springs  Uniyeisity;  but 
in  1840  he  again  retuined  to  the  presiding  eldeiship, 
that  of  the  Memphis  DistricL  On  this  district  he  died 
in  1841.  Holland  was  one  of  the  most  able  and  useful 
serrants  of  the  Methodist  Episoopal  Church  in  his  day, 
and  is  generally  acknowledged  to  rank  foremoat  among 
the  pieachers  of  Tennessee.— Sprague,  Amials  ąf  iht 
American  PuipU,  yii,  662. 

Holland,  Thomas,  a  celebrated  English  diyine, 
bom  at  Ludlow,  in  Shiopshire,  in  1539,  was  educated  at 
Esetcr  College,  Oxford.  His  broad  and  thoiDagh  schol- 
anhip  secoied  him  the  regius  professorship  at  Oxford, 
and  in  this  station  **  he  distinguished  himsełf  so  much 
by  erery  kind  of  desirable  attainment,  diyine  or  hnman, 
that  he  was  esteemed  and  admired  not  only  in  our  sem- 
inaiies  of  leaming  at  home,  but  also  in  the  nniyersities 
abRMd*'  (Middleton,  Ev.  Biog,  ii,  373  są.;  oompare  also 
Jocher,  Gelehrt,  Lex,  ii,  1674).  He  died  March  17, 1612. 
HoUand  was  a  zealoos  Protestant,  and  labored  earaestly 
to  driye  from  Oxibrd  ali  Papists  and  their  sympathizers, 
of  whom  it  had  not  a  few  at  this  early  datę  of  P^tes- 
taatism  in  England.  It  is  to  be  regretted  that  most  of 
the  woriu  he  left,  and  these  were  few  indeed,  were  neyer 
printed.  Allibone  mentions  Oratio  Ozon,  (Oxford,  1599, 
4to)  snd  Sermong  (ibid.  1601,  4to). 

HoUas,  Da\id,  a  German  Lntheran  diyine,  was 
bom  at  Wulkow,  near  Stargard,  in  1648.  He  studied 
at  Wittenberg,  and  became  succesńyely  pastor  of  Put- 
aerkio,  near  Stargard,  in  1670,  oo-rector  of  Stargard  in 
1680,  rector  and  preacher  of  Colberg,  and,  finally,  pn>- 
yoit  and  pastor  of  Jakobshagen.  He  died  in  1713. 
Aside  from  minor  productions  on  diffeicnt  subjects,  as 
senwus,  etc,  he  wrote  a  work  on  dogmatics  which  was 
kng  in  great  fayor.  It  is  entitled  Examen  theolhgicum 
acroamatiatm  vmreraam  łheoloffiam  tJtetieo-paiemicam 
eompleeUw  (1707,  4to ;  reprinted  in  1717,  1722,  1725, 
1785,  and  1741 ;  and,  with  additions  and  oorrections,  by 
K  TeOer  in  1750  and  1763).  The  popularity  enjoyed 
by  this  work  was  not  so  much  due  to  its  scientific  orig- 
iasfity,  for  it  was  mainly  based  on  the  works  of  Ger- 
hard, Caloy,  Scherzer,  etc^  as  to  its  oonyenient  airange- 
nent,  the  deamess  and  predsion  of  its  definitions,  and 
the  careful  and  thoroogh  dasafication  of  its  contents* 


Another,  and  perhaps  still  morę  powerful  canse  of  its 
success  is  to  be  found  in  its  liberał  spirit,  coupled  with  un- 
impeachable  orthodoxy.  HoUaz  occupies  the  first  place 
among  the  Lutheran  theologians  of  the  doee  of  the  17th 
and  the  beginning  of  the  18th  centuiy.  He  sought  to 
find  a  medium  between  the  orthodox  scholastic  diyin- 
ity  and  the  wanta  of  practical  religion,  and  endeavored 
to  reooncile  ecdesiastical  orthodoxy  with  freedom  of 
thought.  See  Emesti,  Neue  TheoL  y,  185 ;  Walch,  BibL 
TheoL  i,  62 ;  Erach  und  Gruber,  A  Ug,  Encyklopadie ;  Uer- 
aog,  Real-Enofklop,  y\,  240 ;  Hagenbach,  HisL  ofDodr, 
u,  263,  264, 339 ;  Gass,  Geschichle  d.  Dogmat,  ii,  495  są. ; 
Kurtz,  Church,  JlisU  ii,  246;  Schrockh,  Kirchengesch,  #. 
d,  R^,  viii,  16  9q. ;  Donier,  Gesch,  d.  Dogmat,  p.  480  sq. 

HoUebeck,  Ewald,  a  Dutch  theologian,  bom  at 
Hamstede  in  1719,  was  educated  at  the  Uniyersity  of 
Leyden.  In  1762  he  was  called  to  his  alma  mater  as 
profesBor  of  theology.  He  is  espedally  distinguished  in 
the  Church  of  Holland  by  his  reyolutionaiy  c£forta  in 
the  homiletical  fidd  of  theology.  He  was  the  first  to 
condemn  the  old  method  of  making  a  sermon  an  exeget^ 
ical  dissertation,  and  to  introduce  the  English  method 
of  preachlng  to  the  edification  of  the  people.  He  set 
forth  his  yiews  in  De  optimo  concionum  genere  (Leyden, 
1768 ;  much  enlarged,  1770,  8yo).  At  first  he  encoun- 
tered  great  opposition ;  but,  as  he  borę  himself  calmly  in 
the  contest,  he  soon  got  the  better  of  his  opponents,  and, 
as  a  mark  of  his  popularity  at  the  uniyersity,  he  was 
dected  rector  in  1764.  He  died  Oct.  24, 1796.~Schrockh, 
Kirchenguch.  $.  d.  Reform,  yiii,  658  8q. ;  Walch,  Keuest, 
Religionsgesch.  ii,  411  Bq. ;  Emesti,  U,  Theolog.  Bibiioih,  i, 
230  Bq. ;  Adelung*s  Jocher,  Gelehrt,  Lez,  ii,  2098 ;  Biog, 
Unw,  XX,  480. 

Holleshow,  JoHANN  ton,  a  Benedictine  monk, 
bora  at  Holleshow,  in  Bohemia,  in  1366,  was  educated 
at  Paris.  He  was  one  of  the  most  yiolent  opponents  of 
HusB,  and  contributed  morę  than  any  other  person  to 
his  execution.  This  explain8  why  the  Huasites  after- 
wards  (1420)  destroyed  the  monasteiy  to  which  Holles- 
how belonged.  He  died  in  1436.  A  list  of  his  works 
is  given  in  Addung's  Jocher,  Gelehrt,  Lex,  ii,  2098.  (J. 
H.W.) 

HoUey,  Horacb,  LL.D.,  a  Unitarian  minister,  was 
bora  in  Salisbury,  Conn.,  Feb.  18,  1781 ;  graduated  at 
Yale  College  in  1803 ;  in  1805  was  minister  of  Greenfidd 
Hill,  Fairfidd,  and  in  1809  minister  of  Hollis  Street, 
Boston.  In  1818  he  became  the  president  of  Tnmsyl- 
yania  Uniyersity,  Lexington,  Ky.,  which  office  he  re- 
tained  until  1827.  He  died  on  a  yoyage  to  New  York 
July  31, 1827.  He  had  great  reputation  as  a  pulpit 
orator,  and  published  seyeral  oocasional  sermons  and 
addresseSb  See  Mentoir  of  Dr,  JłoUeyy  by  his  Widów ; 
Norih  AmericcM  Reciew^  xxyii,  403;  Allibone,  Dictioik-^ 
ary  of  AtUhort,  i,  866. 

Holliday,  Charles,  a  Methodist  Episoopsl  minister, 
bom  in  Baltimore  Noy.  23, 1771,  was  licensed  to  preach 
in  1797,  and  entered  the  itinerancy  in  1809.  He  was 
madę  presiding  dder  on  Salt  Riyer  District  in  1813 ;  lo- 
cated  in  1816 ;  was  again  presiding  dder  on  Cumberland 
District,  Tennessee  Conference,  1817-21 ;  on  Grcen  River 
District,  Kentucky  Conference,  1821-25;  and  on  Wabash 
District,  Illinois  Conference,  1825-28.  At  the  General 
Conference  of  1828  he  was  appointed  Book  Agent  at  Cin- 
cinnati,  where  he  remained  eight  years.  After  this  he 
was  for  seyeral  years  presiding  elder  in  the  Illinois  Con- 
ference. He  was  superannuated  in  1846,  and  died 
March  8, 1850.  Mr.  Holliday  was  a  "  dear,  sound,  and 
practical  preacher,"  a  deeply  pious  Christian,  and  amia- 
ble  and  beloyed  in  all  the  reliitions  of  life. — Afinutes  of 
Conferencetj  iv,  628;  Bedford,  Ilietory  of  Methodism  in 
Kentucky,  ii,  95  8q.     (G.  L.  T.) 

Hollingahead,  Willia^i,  D.D.,  a  Congregational 
minister,  bom  at  Philaddphia  Oct.  8, 1748,  was  educated 
at  the  Uniyersity  of  Pennsylyania  in  1770,  and  entered 
the  ministry  in  1772.  His  first  pastorał  charge  was  at 
Faizfldd,  N.  J.    In  1788  he  accepted  a  cali  ftom  a  church 


HOLUS 


302 


HOLMES 


in  Charleston,  S.  C  In  1798  Prinoeton  CoDege  confeiTed 
on  him  the  degree  of  D.D.  He  died  Jan.  26, 1817.  He 
published  sereral  sermons  (1789, 1794, 1805). — Sp^^^e, 
Afmals  o/Amer.  Pulpity  ii,  68. 

HoUiB,  Thomaa,  Sr.,  one  of  the  early  benefactors 
of  Han^ard  College,  waa  bom  in  London  in  1659.  Kia 
father,  though  a  Baptist,  was  a  member  of  the  Indepen- 
dent Charch  at  Pinner^s  Hall,  and  he  followed  in  the 
same  relation.  Ha^óng  accumulated  a  fortunę  in  trade, 
he  gave  large  suma  to  charity  and  to  adrancc  the  Bap- 
tist and  Independent  Churches.  Still  morę  substantial 
marks  of  his  liberality  were  confened  on  Harvard  Col- 
lege, Mass.,  in  which  he  founded  a  professorship  of  math- 
ematacs  and  one  of  theology,  and  endowed  scholarships 
ibr  poor  studenta,  enriched  the  library  and  the  cabtnets, 
etc.  He  died  in  London  in  1731.  See  Crosby,  Hiti,  of 
the  BapiistB,  iv,  229 ;  Bogue  and  Bennett,  History  oftAe 
Diuenters,  ii,  414 ;  Chrittian  EiammeTf  vii,  64;  Skeats, 
Free  Churehea  o/England^  p.  828. 

HolllB,  Thomas,  Jr.,  nephew  of  the  preceding,  was 
bom  in  London  in  1720,  and  devoted  himself  to  literaturę 
and  to  the  propagation  of  the  principles  of  civil  and  re- 
ligious  liberty.  He  travelled  over  the  Continent  from 
1748  to  1750,  and  then  setded  down  on  his  estate  at 
Corsecombe,  Dorset.  It  is  said  that  half  of  łóa  large  for- 
tunę was  given  away  for  benevolent  purposes.  Among 
his  benefactions  was  a  donataon  of  books  to  the  library 
of  Harvard  College  to  the  value  of  £1400  sterling.  He 
died  at  Corsecombe  in  1 774.  His  Memoin  were  published 
in  1780,  in  two  splendid  ąuartos,  with  engraving8.  See 
GentL Mag, voL lxxiv;  Allibone, DicU ofAuthon, i, 866. 

Hollister,  Theorism  O.,  a  Methodist  Episoopal 
minister,  was  bom  in  1822  at  Sharon,  Conn.  He  was 
converted  in  early  life,  preached  under  the  presiding 
elder  in  the  8tat«  of  New  York,  renio\'^  to  Wlsoonsin, 
and  joined  the  Wisconsin  Conference  in  1858.  His  ap- 
pointmonts  were :  Summit,  Fort  Atkinson,  Lakę  Milk, 
Greenbush,  Sheboygan  Falls,  Fond  du  Lac  Station,  Fond 
du  Lac  District,  Oconomowoc,Waukesha,  and  Hart  Prai- 
rie.  "  He  was  truły  a  laborer  in  God's  harvest,  zealously 
affected  always  in  every  good  thing,  senring  the  Lord 
most  emphatically  with  all  his  heart,  and  sonl,  and 
mind,  and  strength."  He  died  at  Salem,  Wisconsin, 
March  13, 1869.  Hollister  was  a  self-educated  man,  but 
good  native  talent,  a  logical  mind,  and  vivid  imagination 
atoned  for  his  earlier  deAciency,  and  he  ranked  among 
the  flrst  in  his  Conference.  See  Min.  Atm,  Cmf,  1869, 
p.  225. 

Hollman,  Samurł  Christian,  a  distinguished  Ger- 
man theologian,  bom  at  Stettin  Dec  8,  1696,  was  edu- 
cated  at  the  Uiuver8ity  of  Wittenberg.  After  lecturing 
a  short  time  at  the  universitie8  of  Greifswald  and  Jena, 
he  rctumed  in  1728  to  Wittenberg,  and  was  madę  ad- 
junct  professor  of  philosophy  in  1724.  Two  years  later 
he  was  promoted  to  an  extraordinary  professorship,  and 
in  1734  was  called  as  a  regular  professor  to  the  Univer- 
sityofGbttingen,thenopening.  He  died  in  1787.  Holl- 
man dcvoted  his  time  mainly  to  philoeophical  studies. 
He  waa  at  first  an  opponent  of  Wolfs  philosophy,  later 
an  admirer  of  it,  and  finally  became  an  Edectic.  He 
WTote  text-books  in  metaphysics,  which  were  well  re- 
ceived,  and  used  so  long  as  eclccticism  was  in  vogue  in 
Germany.  He  was  also  active  in  awakening  an  inter- 
est  in  hb  contcmporaries  for  the  study  of  the  natural 
Sciences.  His  most  important  works  are :  De  stupendo 
natura  mysUrio  aidma  sibi  ipsi  ignota  (Greifs.  and  Wit- 
tenb.  1722-24,  4to)  i—Commentatio  pkilos.  de  harmonia 
irUer  animam  et  corptu  pnBStahiliia  (Wittcnb.  1724, 4to) : 
— Apfihgia  Praelectionum  in  X,  T.  Grcec.  habitarum  (ibid. 
1727,  4to)  :—Comm.  phiL  de  miraadis  et  genuinis  eontn- 
dem  criteriisj  etc,  (Frankf.  and  Lpz.  1727,  4to)  '.—Ingfit. 
philoss,  (Wittenberg,  1727, 2  vol8. 8vo)  i—Ueberzeugender 
y^ortrag  r.  Gott  u.  Schrijl  (ibid.  1783, 8vo,  and  often) : — 
Von  d.  mengchl.  Krkenriniat  «.  d  QuelL  der  Weltweittheit 
(ibid.  1737, 8vo)  :—fnstił.pneumaiologite  et  theoiogia  nat- 
uraiit  (Gottingeiv  1740, 8vo),  etc    A  Ust  of  his  works  is 


g^ven  in  J<$cher,  GeJehrt  Lex,  Adelnng's  Add.  ii,  2099  iq. 
See  Krug,  Philoi,  Lex,  ii,  451  sq. 

Holm,  Peter,  Jr.,  a  Danish  divine,  bom  at  Moom, 
Norway,  June  6, 1706,  was  educated  at  the  univer8ity  at 
Copenhagen,  and  ailerwards  lectured  at  his  alma  mater. 
In  1788  he  was  appointed  professor  of  theology  and  phi- 
losophy, when,  in  addition  to  the  duties  of  his  chair,  he 
instracted  in  Greek  and  Hebrew,  and  assbted  in  the  revi- 
rion  of  the  Danish  verńon  of  the  Bibie.  In  1746  he  waa 
promoted  to  a  regular  professorship  of  theology.  He 
died  June  9, 1777.  His  writings,  which,  on  account  of  * 
his  exce8sive  labor  in  the  revi8ion  of  the  Bibie,  were  few 
in  number,  are  mainly  in  the  form  of  diasertationa.  A 
list  of  them  may  be  found  in  Adelnng^s  Addenda  ii  to 
JOcher^s  Gelehrt,  Lex,  p.  2102.     (J.  H.  W.) 

Holm-TREB  (TTplŁPoc^  tfec)  occuTB  only  in  the  i 
lyphal  story  of  Susanna  (ver.  58).  The  passai^ 
a  characteristic  play  on  the  names  of  the  two  treea  i 
tioned  by  the  elders  in  their  evidence.  That  on  tba 
mastich  (<rxivov  ,  .  .  dyyłKoc  trxi<rtt  «)  will  be  nodced 
under  that  head.  See  Mastigk.  That  on  the  holm- 
tree  (wfHPov)  is :  "  The  angel  of  God  waiteth  with  the 
sword  to  cut  thee  in  two"  (<va  wpiuM  m).  For  the  hl»- 
torical  signifleance  of  these  puns,  see  Susanka.  The 
irpipoc  of  Theophrastus  {Hitł,  Plant,  iii,  7,  §  8,  and  16, 
§  1,  and  elsewhere)  and  Dioaoorides  (i,  144)  denotes,  there 
can  be  no  doubt,  the  Qiiercas  eoccifera,  or  the  <2«  pseudo- 
eoceifera,  which  is  perhaps  not  specifically  disttnct  froin 
the  fiistrmentioned  oak.  The  Hex  of  the  Roman  wricen 
was  applied  both  to  the  holm-oak  (Ouerau  iler),  and  to 
the  O.  eoccifera,  or  kermes  oak.  See  Pliny  (A'.  N,  xvi, 
6).  For  the  oaka  of  Palestine,  see  a  paper  by  Dr.  Hooker 
in  the  Tranaactiotu  of  the  Lumaan  Śociety,  voL  zxiii, 
pt  ii,  p.  881-887.— Smith,  &  v.    See  Oak. 

Holman,  Da^id,  a  Congregational  minister,  waa 
bom  in  Sutton,  Mass.,  Dec.  18,  1777.  He  entered  the 
BOphomore  dass  at  Brown  Univer8ity  in  1800.  and  grad- 
uated  in  1803.  He  studied  theology  with  his  bpother, 
the  late  Bev.  Nathan  Holman,  of  Attleboroufi^h,  and  Rev. 
Dr.  Emmons,  of  Franklin,  commenced  preacbing  in  Doug- 
lass,  Mass.,  in  the  autunm  of  1807,  and  was  ordained  OcL 
19, 1806.  He  oontinued  pastor  of  the  church  in  Doug- 
kss  until  Aug.  17, 1842,  when  he  was  obliged  to  resign 
on  aocount  of  impaired  health.  **  In  1848  he  reDewed 
his  labors  among  his  old  floeks,  and  oontinued  to  peHbnn 
the  duties  of  a  paator  for  five  years.  Several  revi\'ak  of 
religion  weie  enjoyed  dnring  his  ministry,  as  the  icaults 
of  which  morę  than  200  were  added  to  the  Church.  He 
died  Nov.  16, 1866.     See  Congreg,  QuarteHg,  ix,  2061 

Holman,  'William,  a  Methodist  Episcopal  minis- 
ter, was  bom  April  20, 1790,  near  Shelbyville,  Ky,,  then 
in  Yirginia.  He  Joined  the  Church  in  1812 ;  four  years 
later  he  entered  the  Ohio  Conference,  and  was  appoint- 
ed to  Limestone  Circuit.  In  1821  he  waa  sent  to  the 
Newport  Circuit,  and  a  year  later  was  appointed  to 
Frankfort,  the  capital  of  the  state.  Herc  he  built  up  a 
fine  society,  and  remained  four  yean.  He  next  went 
to  Danville  and  Harrodsbuig,  where  he  labored  with 
equa]  zeal  and  success.  After  senring  Lesingtoii,  Rnasel- 
ville,  and  Mt.  Stirling  in  snceession,  he  was  appointed  to 
Loui8\'ille,  where  he  suoceeded  in  building  the  Brook 
Street  Church.  He  remained  in  this  city'**  from  188$ 
to  the  close  of  his  ministry,  except  two  yeais,  senring 
all  the  churches  either  as  pastor  or  presiding  elder.* 
During  the  war  he  separated  his  connectlon  with  the 
**  M.  £.  Church  South,"  and,  espousing  the  Federal  cauae, 
**  acoepted  a  post-chaplaincy,  to  the  aiduous  dutiea  of 
which  he  addressed  himself  with  a  faithfulnesB  that  waa 
really  surprising— visiting  hospitals,  and  admiuisterinfc 
to  the  sick  and  dying  night  and  dav."  He  died  Ang.  1, 
1867 —  Bedford,  Hiitory  of  Methódism  in  Kemtudi^,  ii, 
874  sq. 

Holmes,  Abiel,  D.D.,  a  Congregational  minister, 
bom  in  Woodstock,  Conn.,  Dec.  24, 1768,  was  edncated 
at  Yale  College  (class  of  1788),  and  8erved  his  alma  ma* 
ter  aa  tutor  a  short  time.    He  became  pastor  in  Ifid* 


HOLMES 


803 


HOLOFERNES 


way,  Geofgia,  Not.  1785,  and  Jan.  25, 1792,  pastor  of  the 
Fint  Chiirch,  Cambridge,  Masa.  When  the  increase  of 
new  theological  opinions  caused  a  diyiaion  of  the  aocie- 
ty,  he  retained  his  connection  with  the  *<  orthodox"  por- 
lion  of  the  parish.  A  coUeague  haying  been  settled 
with  him,  he  lesigned  his  share  of  the  duties  Sept  26, 
1831,  and  passed  his  łast  days  at  Cambridge.  He  died 
June  4, 1837.  Dr.  Hohnes  was  a  dlrector  of  the  Amer- 
ican Education  Sodety,  a  member  of  the  Massachusetts 
Historical  Sodety,  and  of  seyeral  other  well  known  as- 
sodations.  The  Unirersity  of  Edinborgh  oonferred  on 
him  the  degree  of  D.D.  in  1805.  He  published  Pro- 
cndingt  of  a  Cotmcil  at  the  OrdmcUion  of  Rev,  Abiel 
ffoimetj  tU  Midway,  Gtorgia,  with  the  Pastorał  Address 
(1787)  :—Life  ofPresident  Stilea  (1798, 8vo)  :—Memoir 
of  Stephen  Pasmemus,  of  Buda,  with  his  Latin  Poem 
tianslated;  aho  Memoir  of  the  Mohectgan  Indiaiu :  both 
pobłiahed  in  voL  ix,  Mas*,  ffist.  CoJL  (1804)  * — Ameri- 
can Annals  (1805,  2  rols.  %vo^v-^Biographiixd  Memoir 
oftke  Rec.  John  Ij>thropp,  in  Most,  Ilist,  CoU,  vol.  i,  2d 
series: — Historical  SketA  ofthe  EngUsh  TranskUions  of 
the  BiUe  (1815) :— Memoir  ofthe  French  Protestanta  who 
settled  in  Orford,  Mass.,  in  1686,  printed  in  Mass.  HisL 
Cott.  "ToL  ii,  8<l  series  (1826) : — Annals  of  America  from 
the  DiBCotery  hy  Columbus  in  1492  to  the  Year  1826  (1829, 
2d  ediu  2  toIl  8vo)  ;  and  a  laige  number  of  occasional 
sermoDS  and  addresses. — Sprague,  AmtaU^  ii,  240 ;  Allen, 
American  Biographif;  Dnyckinck,  Cyc^.  of  American 
Literaturę,  i,  511  8q.;  Allibone,  Dictionary  of  Authon, 
i, 868;  American  Almanae,  1836,  p.  316. 

Holmes,  Robert,  D.D.,  an  Engltsh  divine,  bom  in 
Hampahire  in  1749,  waa  educated  at  New  College,  Ox- 
foid.  He  became  succeasirely  rector  of  Staunton,  canon 
of  Salisbury,  and  finally  (1804)  dean  of  Winchester.  In 
1790  he  succeeded  Thomas  Warton  as  professor  of  po- 
elry  at  Oxford.  He  died  at  Oxford  in  1805.  Holmes 
wrote  The  Besurrection  of  the  Body  deducedfrom  the 
Resmrreetion  of  Christ  (Oxf.  1777, 4to)  :—0n  the  Proph- 
ecies  and  Testimany  ofJohn  the  Baptisł,  and  the  parallel 
Propkecies  of  Jesus  Christ  (Bampton  Lectores  for  17r" 
Ox£  1782, 8vo):— Four  tracts  on  the  Principles  ofRe- 
Ugkm  as  a  Test  of  Dirine  Authoriiy;  on  the  Principles 
of  Redemption  ;  on  the  Angdical  Message  ofthe  Yirgin 
Mary  ;  and  on  the  Besurrection  ofthe  Body^  with  a  Dis- 
eourse  on  HumiUty  (Oxf.  1788)  ;  etc.  But  his  principal 
woric  was  the  coUation  of  the  Septuagint  "As  early  as 
1788  he  published  at  Oxford  proposals  for  a  coOation  of 
aU  the  known  MSS.  of  the  Septuagint— a  labor  which  had 
never  yet  been  undertaken  on  an  eztensice  scalę,  and  the 
want  of  which  had  long  been  fdt  among  Kblical  schol- 
ara. Dr.  Holmes*8  undertaking  was  promoted  by  the 
ddegates  of  the  darendon  Press.  In  addition  to  the 
leamed  edit^yr^s  own  labors,  Uterary  men  were  engaged 
BO  diUerent  parta  of  the  Continent  ibr  the  business  of 
coUation,  and  Dr.  Holmes  annuaUy  published  an  ac- 
eonnt  of  the  progress  which  was  madę"  (Kitto).  The 
book  of  Genesis,  successirely  foUowed  by  the  other 
books  of  the  Peniateuch,  making  together  one  folio  vol- 
mne,  with  one  title-page  and  one  generał  preface,  was 
poblialied  at  Oxford  in  1798.  From  this  preface  we 
team  that  eleven  Greek  MSS.  in  uncial  letteis,  and  morę 
than  one  hundred  MSS.  in  curslye  writing  (containing 
either  the  whole  or  parts  of  the  Pentateuch),  were  col- 
lated  for  this  edition,  of  which  the  text  was  a  copy  of 
the  Boman  edition  of  1587  [that  of  Sixtus  V] :  the  devi- 
atioos  from  three  other  cardinal  editions  (the  Complu- 
tensian,  the  Aldine,  and  Grabe^s)  are  always  noted.  The 
ąuotations  found  in  the  works  of  the  Greek  fathers  are 
alao  alleged,  and  likewise  the  rarions  readings  ofthe  an- 
dent  ver»ions  roade  from  the  Septuagint.  "  The  plan  of 
Uiis  edition  thus  bore  a  dose  resemblance  to  what  had 
been  already  applied  by  Mili,  Wetstein,  and  Griesbach 
to  the  criticism  of  the  Greek  Testament,  and  the  execu- 
tioo  of  it  has  been  highly  commended  as  displaying  un- 
eommon  industry  and  apparently  great  accuracy.**  It 
is  to  be  regretted  that  "  the  leamed  editor  died  in  the 

"   ;  of  this  honoraUe  labor;  but  shortly  before  his 


death  he  had  published  the  book  of  Daniel,  both  acoord- 
ing  to  the  Sept.  yersion  and  that  of  Theodotion,  the  lat- 
ter  ordy  having  been  printed  in  former  editions,  because 
the  translation  of  this  book  is  not  contained  in  the  com- 
mon  MSS.,  and  was  unknown  till  it  was  printed  in  1772 
from  a  MS.  belonging  to  cardinal  Chigi"  (Kitto).  The 
work  was  continued  by  the  Rev.  J.  Parsons,  B.D.,  and 
oompleted  on  the  original  plan.  The  title  of  the  work 
is  Vetus  Testamentum  Gnecum,  cum  variis  Lectionilnis 
(Oxf.  1798-1804,  15  vols.  foL).  Tischendoif,  ho^'ever, 
condemns  the  work  as  inaccurately  done  {Proler/,  to  ed. 
of  Sept.  1856,  p.  lii-lvi).  See  Clialmers,  Biographical 
Diet. ;  Bp.  Marsh,  IHrudły  Lectures,  lect.  xii ;  Lowndes, 
Brit.  Lib.  p.  28,  29 ;  AUibone,  Diet.  of  A  uthors,  i,  870 ; 
Darling,  Cydopcedia  Bibliographica,  i,  1520 ;  Kitto,  Cy- 
dop.  ofBibL  Lit,  ii,  318.    (J.  H.W.) 

Holmpatriok,  Coumcil  of,  held  at  Holmpatrick, 
an  island  oif  the  eastem  coast  of  Ireland,  in  1148,  by  the 
advice  of  the  pope,  Innocent  II,  to  consider  the  ques- 
tion  of  granting  the  pall  to  the  archbishops  of  Armagh 
and  CasheL  This  synod  was  attended  by  fifteen  bish- 
ops  and  two  hundred  priests.  The  oouncil  lasted  four 
days,  the  fint  three  of  which  were  occupied  with  ąues- 
tions  conceming  the  generał  welfare  of  the  Chureh,  eon- 
fining  the  ąnestion  of  the  palla  to  the  last  day.  The 
result  was  a  fonnal  petition  to  pope  Eugenius  III  (who 
had  meanwhile  succeeded  Innocent),  which  Malachy 
0'Morgai8,  a  former  archbbhop  of  Armagh,  was  com- 
missioned  to  cariy  to  Romę,  in  favor  of  the  grant.^ — 
Todd,  Nist.  ofAncient  Chureh  in  Ireland,  p.  118;  Lan- 
don*s  Manuał  qf  Councils,  p.  265,  266. 

Holocaust.    See  Sacrifice. 

Holofer^ndfl,  or,  rather,  Olofernes  ('OXo^lpvf7c)t 
a  person  mentioned  only  in  the  Apocrypha  (Judith  ii,  4, 
eto.).  The  name  occurs  twice  in  Cappadocian  history, 
as  borne  by  the  brother  of  Ariarathes  I  (R.C.  cir.  860), 
and  afterwaids  by  a  pretender  to  the  Cappadocian 
throne,  who  was  at  flrst  supportcd  and  aftenfv'ard8  im- 
prisoned  by  Demetrius  Soter  (B.C.  cir.  158).  The  tcr- 
mination  (TisBophemes,  etc.)  points  to  a  Persian  origin, 
but  the  meaning  ofthe  woni  is  unccrtain.— Smith.  See 
Yolkmar,  Eitdritung  in  die  Apohryphen  (Tub.  1860-8), 
i,  179  są.;  GrMtz,  Geschichte  der  Juden^  iv,  455.  Ac- 
cording  to  the  account  in  the  book  of  Judith,  Nebuchad- 
nezzar,  "king  of  Nineveh,"  having  resoWed  to  "avenge 
himself  on  all  the  earth,"  appointed  Holofemes  generał 
of  the  expedition  intended  for  this  pturpose,  consisting 
of  120,000  foot  and  12,000  horsc.  Holofemes  marehed 
westward  and  southward,  carrj-ing  derastation  every- 
where  he  came,  destroying  harvc8ts,  and  flocks,  and 
cities,  as  well  as  men,  old  ani  yoimg;  making  even  the 
**  cities  of  the  sea-coast,"  which  had  subraittcd  to  him, 
feel  the  weight  of  his  arm.  Having  reached  Esdraelon, 
he  encamped  "  between  Gęba  and  Scythopolis"  a  whole 
month  to  collect  his  forccs.  The  Jews,  however,  re- 
solred  to  resist  him,  and  fortiiied  all  the  mountain  pass- 
es.  Dissuaded  by  Achior, "  captain  of  the  sons  of  Am- 
mon,"  from  attacking  the  Jews,  he  resented  the  advice, 
and  deliyered  Achior  into  the  hands  of  the  Jews  in  Be- 
thulia,  from  whom,  however,  he  met  with  a  kind  rccep- 
tion.  Holofemes  proceeded  against  Bethulia  (q.  v.), 
where  he  was  brought  to  bay ;  and,  inFtead  cf  attacking 
it,  seized  upon  two  wells  on  which  the  city  depended 
for  water,  and  sat  down  before  it  to  take  it  by  eiegc. 
While  here  he  fell  a  victim  to  the  treachery  of  Judith, 
a  beautiful  Jewish  widów,  who  artfully  managed  to  be 
brought  into  his  presence,  and  who,  by  playing  the 
hj-pocrite,  secured  his  favor  and  confidence.  Haring 
invitod  her  to  a  banąuet,  he  drank  freely,  and,  haring 
fallen  asleep,  fell  beneath  the  arm  of  his  fair  gucst,  who 
cut  off  his  head  with  his  oyn\  sword,  and  escaped  with 
her  bloody  trophy  to  her  own  people  in  Bethulia.  The 
Jews  immediately  fell  on  their  encmies,  who,  finding 
their  generał  dead  in  his  tent,  fled  in  confusion.  Such 
is  the  story.  Is  is  scarcely  necessary  to  add  that  it  is 
whoUy  unhistoricoL— Kitto.    See  Judith. 


HOLOMERIANS 


804      HOLY  CATHOLIO  CHURCH 


HolomeriaiiB.    See  Spibituausk. 
Hoaon  (Heb.  Chohn%  )'bh  ot  "j^h,  tcmdy),  the 
name  of  one  or  two  places. 

1.  (Sept  'U\iavy  *Q\wv,  etc;  Ytilg.  Hohn,  OloiL) 
A  city  in  Łhe  mountainB  of  Judah  (Jo«h.  xy.  51,  where 
it  18  mentioned  betweea  Goshen  and  Giloh);  assign- 
ed  to  the  Levites  (Josh.  xxi,  16,  where  it  is  mention- 
ed between  Eshtemoa  and  Debir) ;  in  the  parallel  pa»- 
sage  a  Chion.  vi,  58)  it  ia  written  Hilen  (Heb.  Cki- 
len\  *)7'^n;  Sept.  "SfiKuw,  but  transpoees  with  Jether; 
Yulg.  Ilelon).  De  Saulcy  is  incUned  to  identify  it  with 
the  yillage  NithhaUny  on  the  hiUa  {Dead  Sea^  i,  453, 
454)  west  of  Bethlehem,  or,  accoiding  to  Dr.  Robinson 
(new  ed.  of  Researche^,  iii,  284),  at  the  bottom  of  wady 
el-Musurr,  on  its  southem  side ;  but  thia  is  not  in  the 
Bame  group  of  towna  with  the  others,  which  all  Ue  in 
the  south-west  part  of  the  mountain  district  (Keil,  Com' 
menL  ad  loc).  The  poaition  seems  rather  to  correspond 
to  that  of  Beił  Amrehy  a  large  ruined  yillage  on  a  hill 
near  wady  el-Khulil,  north-west  of  Juttah,  on  the  road 
to  Hebron  (Robinson,  Researchet,  ii,  629  and  notę). 

2.  (SepL  Xc\biv,  Yulg.  ffehru)  A  city  of  Moab  (Jer. 
xlyiii,  21).  It  was  one  of  the  towns  of  the  Mishor,  the 
lcvel  downs  (A.  Y.  "plain  country")  east  of  Jordan,  and 
is  uamed  with  Jahazah,  Dibon,  and  other  known  places; 
but  no  identification  of  it  has  yet  taken  place,  nor  does 
it  appear  in  the  parallel  lista  of  Numb.  xxxii  and  Joeh. 
xiii«--Smith.    Perhaps  it  is  the  same  as  Hobonaim  (q. 

V.). 

HolBte  or  HolsteniiiB,  Lucas,  bom  at  Hamburg 
in  1596,  was  educated  at  the  Uniyersity  of  Leyden,  and 
ranka  as  one  of  the  first  scholars  of  his  time.  Failing 
to  secure  a  professorshlp,  he  trayelled  through  Italy, 
England,  and  othcr  countries,  and  settled  at  Paris,  where 
he  became  acquainted  with  the  distinguished  Jesuits 
Dupuy,  Peiresc,  and  other  leamed  men  of  that  order, 
and  he  ńnally  became  a  Roman  Catholic,  in  consequence, 
he  said,  of  liis  careful  study  of  the  works  of  the  fathers, 
and  of  his  seeking  for  the  principle  of  unity  in  the 
Church ;  but  others  think  that  his  conyersion  was 
whoUy  due  to  his  association  with  the  Jesuits,  and  to 
his  desire  to  haye  freer  access  to  the  libraries  of  Fnuice 
and  Italy ;  and  some  eyen,  among  whom  is  Salmasius 
(see  Molier,  Cimbr,  Lit.  iii,  323),  ascribe  it  to  his  seyere 
poyerty  and  great  ambition.  Soon  after  his  conyersion 
his  friends  introduced  him  to  the  pope'8  nuncio,  cardinal 
Barberini,  nephew  of  Urban  VIII,  whom  he  aocompa- 
nied  to  Romc  in  1527.  He  lived  with  the  cardinal,  and 
became  his  librarian.  Later,  he  was  promoted  canon  of 
St  Petcr'8,  and  finally  he  became  librarian  of  the  Yatican 
and  coruuUore  of  the  Congregation  of  the  Index.  He 
was  sent  on  seyeral  missions  to  Germany;  among  oth> 
ers,  to  Innspruck,  to  leoeiye  the  abjuration  of  queen 
Christina  of  Sweden.  He  was  also  instrumental  in  ef- 
fecting  the  conyersion  of  other  distinguished  Protestants 
to  Catholicism.  Holstenius,  eyen  in  his  eminent  posi- 
tions  in  the  Church  of  Romę,  retained  some  of  the  lib> 
eral  principles  imbibed  as  a  Protestant,  and  they  often 
seyerely  proyoked  his  Romish  friends.  Thus  he  advo- 
cated  eamestly,  but  in  yain,  the  union  of  the  Greek  and 
Roman  churches  in  1639,  adyising  liberał  action  on  the 
part  of  his  own  Church,  In  the  Congregation  of  the 
Index  alao,  he  would  ueyer  iayor  any  stringency  against 
yaluable  works  of  Protestants,  and  he  was  eyen  obliged 
to  retire  from  the  coundl  for  this  reason.  In  the  dis- 
pute  between  the  Jansenists  and  Molinlsts,  he  oounselled 
pope  Alexander  VII  against  any  deciaion  likely  to  be  in 
fayor  of  the  Jesuits,  notwithstandiiig  his  relation  to 
them.  He  died  at  Romę  Feb.  2, 1661,  Icaying  his  pa- 
tron, cardinal  Barberini,  his  uniyersal  legatee.  Holste- 
nius, with  much  application  and  a  great  thirst  for  knowl- 
edge,  lacked  pcrscyerange.  He  was  apt  to  desert  one 
branch  of  study  suddcnly  for  aoother;  thus  he  had 
collected  with  p^reat  care  and  much  application  a  yast 
ąuantity  of  scarce  books  and  MSS.,  but  had  not  pro- 
gressed  sufficiently  far  in  his  own  works  to  make  them 


of  much  yalue  in  their  unfinished  atate.  Among  bit 
pubUshed  works  are  the  foUowing:  Porphyrn  Uber  d$ 
Viła  PytkagortB^  etc  (Rom.  1630, 8yo ;  Cambr.  1655, 8yo), 
with  a  Latin  yeraion  and  notes,  and  a  disaertatioii  oa 
the  life  and  writings  of  Porphyrius,  oonsidered  a  modd 
of  leamed  biography :  —  DemophUif  Democrutis,  et  Se^ 
cundi  Veterum  PhiloMphorum  Sententim  Morale*  (Romę, 
1638, 8yo;  Leyden,  1639, 12mo):— A^bte  mi  SaUuttiMtm 
PAUosopkum  de  Diit  et  Mundo  (Romę,  1638, 8yo) :— 05- 
8ervaiiones  ad  ApoUomi  Rhodii  Argonautica  (Leyden, 
1641 ,  8yo)  i—A  rrianu»  de  Yenaiione,  with  a  Latin  yersion 
(Par.  1644, 8yo) : — Adnołaiiones  m  Geographiam  Sacrom 
CaroK  a  S.  PaulOj  Italiam  Aniicucm  ClurerU,  et  T^e- 
saurum  Geogrąphicum  OrtdU  (Romę,  1666, 8yo) : — Xota 
et  Caetigaiionet  PotthunuB  tn  Stępkom  BffzanHni  de  Urh- 
ibusy  edited  by  Ryckius : — Liber  Diumus  Pontifiaan  So-^ 
manorumy  a  oollection  of  papai  acts  and  decreea.  He 
also  wrote  a  collection  of  the  rules  of  the  earlier  monaa- 
tic  ordcrs,  published  after  his  death  (Romę,  1661 ;  later 
at  Paris;  and,  laatly,  much  enlarged,  Augsburg,  1759, 6 
yoK  foL),  which  is  oonsidered  as  among  the  most  yalua- 
ble of  his  writings;  he  also  edited  in  his  lifedme  the 
A  niiguitiei  of  Prameste,  by  Suares.  Hany  of  his  Latin 
letten  haye  also  been  published  in  the  CoUeetio  Romana 
veterum  aUcuot  hisłor,  eccles,  numutnentontm,  etc  See 
Wilkens,  Ld»en  cŁ  gelehrten  Luca  Holetemi  (Hamh.  1723, 
8vo);  English  Cyciop.;  Herzog,  Real-Lez.  yi,  241  8q.; 
Mosheim,  Ecdes.  Histor,  yoL  iii  (see  Index) ;  Gieaeler, 
Church  Hitł.  iii,  185,  notę;  Schrockh,  Kirchaięe»ckiekf 
8,  d.  Reform,  yii,  76 ;  Hoefer,  Nouv,  Biog.  Ghtir.  xxy,  4 
8q. ;  Dupin,  BibUotk.  EccUe,  (17th  centuiy).    (J.  H.  W.) 

Holstein.    See  Schłeswig-Holbtedi. 

Holy.    See  Holine8&. 

HOLY  OF  HoLiES.    See  Tabbsxacłe;  Tempłe. 

HOLY,  HOLY,  HOLY.    See  Tbisagiok. 

Holy  Allianoe,  a  compact  fonned  between  the 
Boyereigns  of  Rusńa,  Austria,  and^Ptuasia,  in  1815,  fot 
the  humane  and  libńal  administntion  of  their  gwem- 
menta.  See  Herzog,  J2ea^£iicyik2cp&lie,y,  669;  Wing^a 
Hase,  C%.  Ilitt.  (see  Index) ;  Hnrat^s  Ha^bacb,  HiML 
Christ.  Church  «n  18^  andldth  CenL  ii, 342  8q.;  and  the 
references  in  Poole's  lndex,  &  y.    See  AujAsicBp  Hołt. 

Holy  Ark.    See  Ark,  8. 

Holy  Aflhes  are  called,  in  the  Roman  Catholic 
Church,  the  Church  of  England,  and  the  Proteaumt 
Episcopal  Church,  the  ashes  used  at  the  old  ceremoniał 
in  Lent.— Eadie,  Eodes.  Cydop,  p.  812.    See  I^kt. 

Holy  Bibie.    See  Biblb. 

Holy-Bread  Skep  or  Matind  ia  called,  in  the 
Roman  and  Anglican  Churches,  the  baaket  uaed  for  the 
eulogia  (q.  y.).— Waloott,  Sac  A  rcheeoL  p.  812. 

Holy  Candle,  Blrssimo  with  the.  Bishopa  Lal- 
imer  and  T^ndale  say  that  in  their  day  **  dying  persona 
committed  their  souls  to  the  holy  candk,  and  tliat  the 
sign  of  the  Cross  was  madę  oyer  the  dead  with  it,  *  thert" 
by  to  be  discharged  of  the  burden  of  sin,  or  to  drive 
away  deyils,  or  to  put  away  dreams  and  phantaaiea.'  **— 
Walcott,  Sac.  A  rchceol.  p.  818.  Compare  the  uae  of  ta- 
pers  (holy  candles)  at  Candiemas.    See  Cakdlk. 

Holy  Catholio  Church,  the  *' congregation  of 
faithful  men  dispersed  throughout  the  whole  wotld.^ 
Some  persons  speak  of  this  Church  as  if  it  were  a  yisi- 
ble  community,  comprising  all  Christiana  as  ita  mem- 
beis,  as  haying  exiBted  from  the  earliest  daya,  and  aa 
retainiug  the  same  authority  which  it  forro^y  had  to 
frame  and  promulgate  decrees.  The  opponents  of  auch 
\'iews  maintain  that  no  proof  can  be  offered  ^  that  there 
is  or  eyer  was  any  one  community  on  earth  recogniaed, 
or  haying  any  daim  to  be  recognised  as  the  uniyersal 
Church,  bearing  nile  oyer  and  comprehending  all  partic- 
ular  churches.  They  further  allege  that  no  aocredited 
organ  exists  empowered  to  pronounce  its  decreea,  nor 
any  registry  of  those  decrees.  They  consider,  therefore, 
that  the  Catholic  Church  is  an  inyisible  community 


HOLY  CITY 


305 


HOLY  GHOST 


(beetoR  itsHetd  is  so)  in  itself  and  regarded  as  a  whole, 
though  yiaible  in  ita  seyenl  parta  to  thoee  of  its  memben 
wboconfltitoteeachseparatepart*— Eden.   SeeCuuBCH. 

Holy  City.    See  Jerusalem. 

Holy  Coat  op  Trkves,  a  relic  preseired  with  great 
reyerence  in  the  cathedral  of  Trerea,  in  the  southem 
part  of  France,  and  eateemed  as  one  of  the  greatest  treas- 
uTtt  of  that  dtj,  The  priesta  claini  that  it  was  the 
Eeamlefls  coat  of  otir  Saviour,  and  that  it  was  di8Covered 
in  the  4th  centory  by  the  empress  Helena  on  her  yisit  to 
Pakstine,  and  by  her  deposited  at  Trerea.  .  The  Treyes 


The  "Holy  Coat"  of  Treyea. 

lelics  were  conoealed  fiom  the  Normana  in  the  9th  cen- 
tmy  in  crypts,  bat  the  holy  coat  was  rediscoyered  in 
1196.  It  was  aolemnly  exhibited  again  to  the  pnblic 
in  1512.  Bloltitudes  flocked  to  see  and  yenermte  it,  and 
Leo  X  appointed  an  ezhibition  of  it  every  seren  years. 
The  Beibfmation  and  wars  prevented  the  regolar  ob- 
eenrance  of  thia  great  religioua  festiral,  but  it  was  cel- 
eboted  in  1810,  and  was  attended  by  a  cpncourse  of 
morę  than  225,000  persona,  and  in  1844  by  still  greater 
multitades.  Miraculona  curea  were  oonfidently  aaserted 
to  be  performed  by  the  precious  relic.  The  exhibition 
of  ihe  holy  coat  in  1844  is  otherwise  memorable  for  the 
icaction  which  it  produced,  leading  to  the  secesaion  of 
Bongd  and  the  Grerman  Catholica  from  the  Chnrch  of 
Romę.  See  Gildemeister  and  Sybel,  Der  heiL  Rock  zu 
Trier  (1845). — Chambers,  Cyclopadia,  s.  y. 

Holy  CroBS.    See  Cboss. 

Holy-CroBB-Day.  See  Cross,  £xaltation  of 
THE,  vol.  ii,  p.  581. 

HOLY  CROSS,  Order  of.    See  Cross,  Holy,  Orp 

I>EBOK. 

Holy  Day,  a  day  set  apart  by  oertain  churches  for 
the  oommemoration  of  some  aaint  or  some  remarkable 
putkular  in  the  life  of  Christ.  It  haa  been  a  ąuestion  agi- 
Uted  by  divine8  wbether  it  be  proper  to  appoint  or  keep 
«ny  holy  daya  (the  Sabbath  excepted).  The  adrocates 
lor  hoły  days  sappoae  that  they  have  a  tendency  to  im- 
pRM  the  roioda  of  the  people  with  a  greater  sense  of 
itligion ;  that  if  the  acąniaitions  and  rictoriea  of  men 
be  cekbiated  with  the  highest  joy,  how  much  morę 
those  erenta  which  relate  to  the  salvation  of  man,  auch 
•i  the  birth,  death,  and  reaurrection  of  Christ,  etc.  On 
tbe  other  ńde,  it  ia  obsenred  that,  if  holy  days  had  been 
IV^U 


necesaary  under  the  preaent  dispenaation,  Jesna  Christ 
would  have  said  something  respecting  them,  whereaa 
he  was  silent  abont  them ;  that  it  ia  bringing  ua  again 
into  that  bondage  to  ceremoniał  Uws  from  which  Christ 
Ireed  us ;  that  it  is  a  tacit  reflection  on  the  Head  of  the 
Church  in  not  appointing  them ;  that  such  days,  on  the 
whole,  are  morę  pemidoua  than  useful  to  society,  as  they 
open  a  door  for  indolence  and  profaneness ;  Vea,  that 
Scripture  apeaka  against  such  days  (GaL  iy,*9-ll). — 
Buck.    SeeFEASTS;  Festiyals. 

Holy  Family  is  the  generał  tide,  in  the  language 
of  art,  of  the  yarious  representations  of  the  domestic  life 
of  the  Yirgin  Mary  and  the  infant  Jesus  and  his  at- 
tendants.  **  In  the  early  part  of  the  Middle  Ages,  when 
the  object  in  yiew  was  to  excite  deyotion,  the  Yirgin  and 
Child  were  usually  the  only  persons  represented.  At  a 
later  period,  Joseph,  Elizabeth,  St.  Anna  (the  mother  of 
the  '\^rgin),  and  John  the  Baptist  were  included.  Some 
of  the  old  German  painters  haye  added  the  twelye  apos- 
tles  as  children  and  playfellows  of  the  infant  Christ,  aa 
well  aa  their  mothers,  as  stated  in  the  legenda.  The 
Italian  school,  with  its  fine  feeling  for  compoeition,  waa 
the  first  to  recognise  how  many  figures  the  group  must 
comprise  if  the  interest  is  to  remain  undiyided  and 
be  concentrated  on  one  figurę,  whether  that  figurę  be 
the  Madonna  or  the  Child.  Two  mastera  are  pre-emi- 
nent  in  this  species  of  representation — Leonardo  da  Vinci 
and  Raphael"  (Chambers).  Mrs.  Jameson  {Legendt  of 
the  Madonna^  p.  252  sq.)  also  insista  on  drawing  a  distino- 
tion  between  the  domestic  and  the  deyotional  treatmenL 
The  latter,  she  says,  is  a  group  in  which  the  sacred  per- 
sonages  are  placed  in  direct  relation  to  the  worshlppers, 
and  their  supematiural  character  is  paramount  to  eyeiy 
other.  The  former,  a  group  of  the  Holy  Family  so  called, 
in  which  the  personages  are  placed  in  direct  relation  to 
each  other  by  some  link  of  action  or  sentiment  which 
expre88es  the  family  connection  between  them,  or  by 
some  action  which  has  a  dramatic  rather  than  a  religioua 
significance. 

Holy  Father.  I.  "•  The  first  person  of  the  Trinity 
was  represented  aa  in  Daniel*a  yiaion,  yii,  9,  and  yested 
in  a  cope,  and  wearing  a  tiara.  It  was  contrary  to  our 
Lord*s  dedaration  (John  yi,  46),  and  indefensible." — 
Walcott,  Sac  A  rchaoL  p.  812.  IŁ  A  title  of  the  pope 
(q.y.). 

Holy  Fire,  a  ceremony  in  the  Romish  Church,  ob- 
senred on  Holy  Saturday  (q.  y.)  of  Easter,  with  especial 
pomp  at  Romę,  where  the  pope  himself  is  in  attendance. 
A  light  is  kindled  by  aparka  atruck  from  a  flint,  to  com- 
memorate  Christ — acoording  to  the  Misaal— aa  the  great 
comer-etone.  This  light  is  hailed  by  kneeling  eccleai- 
astica  saying  ^  Light  of  Chriat"  (Lumen  ChriMti),  all  the 
lighta  in  the  chapel  haying  been  preyioualy  extinguisb- 
ed,  to  be  rekindled  at  the  new  fire.  In  the  Church  of 
the  Holy  Sepulchre  at  Jerusalem,  at  the  Eaater  of  the 
Oriental  Church,  the  Holy  Fire  is  chumed  to  be  mirac- 
uloua.  ''The  Greek  and  Armenian  clergy  combine  on 
thia  oocaaion,  and  amidat  processions,  solemnities,  an 
excited  multitude,  and  scenes  disgraceful  not  only  to  the 
name  of  relig^on,  but  to  human  naturę,  the  expected 
fire  makea  ita  appearance  from  within  an  apartment  in 
which  a  Greek  and  an  Armenian  bishop  haye  kcked 
themselvea.'*— Chambera,  Cydop,  x,  565. 

Holy  Font,  the  yessel  containing  the  baptismal 
water.     See  Font. 

Holy  Fridays,  Fridays  in  Ember-weeka  (q.y.).— 
Walcott,  Sac,  A  rchaoL  p.  312.     See  Friday. 

Holy  Oatea.    See  Jubiler  (Roman  Cathouc). 

Holy  Ohost  (vvivfia  uycov),  the  third  person  in 
the  Trinity,  proceeding  from  the  Father  and  the  Son, 
and  equal  with  them  in  power  and  glory  (see  Yth  Art. 
of  Religion,  Church  of  England,  and  lYth  of  Methodist 
Episcopal  Church).  For  the  significations  of  the  orig- 
inal  words  rcndered  in  the  EngUsh  yersion  by  *'  Spirit,** 
"Holy  Spirit,"  ♦* Holy  Ghoet,"  see  Spirit.    The  Scrip- 


HOLY  GHOST 


306 


HOLT  GHOST 


tues  teach,  and  the  Church  maintaina,  L  the  Prooet- 
rion;  IX.  the  PersonaUty;  and,  IIŁ  the  DwmUjf  of  the 
Holy  Ghost  For  the  offices  of  the  Holy  Ghoat,  see 
Spirit,  Holy;  Paracletb;  Witness  of  thk  Holy 
Spibit. 

I.  Procession  ofthe  Hohf  GhoiU-^TYkt  orthodox  doo- 
tńne  is,  that  as  Christ  is  God  by  an  etemal  filiation,  so 
the  Holy  Ghost  is  Grod  by  an  etemal  procession,  He 
prooeedeth  from  the  Father  and  from  the  Son.  "  When 
the  Gomforter  is  oome,  whom  I  will  send  you  from  the 
Father,  eyen  the  Spirit  of  tnith,  which  prooeedeth  from 
the  Father,  he  shall  testify  of  me"  (John  xv,  26).  He 
is  the  Spirit  of  the  Father,  he  is  the  Spirit  of  the  Son : 
he  is  sent  by  the  Father,  he  is  sent  by  the  Son.  The 
Father  is  neyer  sent  by  the  Son,  bat  the  Father  sendeth 
the  Son ;  neither  the  Father  nor  the  Son  is  ever  sent  by 
the  Holy  Ghost,  bat  he  is  sent  by  both.  The  Nicene 
Creed  teaches,  *'And  I  believe  in  the  Holy  Ghost,  the 
Lord  and  Giver  of  life,  who  prooeedeth  from  the  Father 
and  the  Son,  who  with  the  Father  and  the  Son  together 
is  worshipped  and  glorified."  The  Athanasian  Creed, 
*<The  Holy  Ghost  is  of  the  Father  and  ofthe  Son,  nei- 
ther madę,  nor  created,  nor  begotteu,  but  proceedmg" 
The  artide  of  the  Chorch  of  England  says,  <'The  Holy 
GhoBt,  proceedmff  from  the  Father  and  the  Son,  is  of  one 
substance,  majesty,  and  glory  with  the  Father  and  the 
Son,  yeiy  and  etemal  Ciod.**  The  term  spiration  was 
introduoed  by  the  Latin  Church  to  denote  the  manner 
of  the  procession.  When  our  Lord  imparted  the  Holy 
Ghost  to  his  disciples,  ^*  he  breathed  on  them,  and  sald, 
Receiye  ye  the  Holy  Ghost"  (John  xx,  22). 

During  the  first  three  oenturies  there  was  nothing 
decided  by  eoclesiastical  authority  respecting  the  rela- 
tions  of  the  Holy  Spirit  to  the  Father  and  the  Son. .  The 
Nioene  Creed  (A.D.  325)  declared  only  that  "<  the  Holy 
Ghost  prooeedeth  from  the  Father"  (Ik  tov  llarpóc  Łk- 
iroptvófuvov)t  and  the  Greek  fathers  generally  adhered 
to  this  yiew :  so  Basil,  Gregory  of  Nazianzos,  Cyril  of 
Alexandiia,  and  others.  Epiphanius  added  to  the  for- 
muła, U  Tov  Tlarpóc  iKiroptvófŁivov,  the  explanatory 
dause,  U  tov  Yiov  \afŁfidvov  (John  xyi,  15).  John  of 
Damascos  represents  the  Spirit  as  proceeding  from  the 
Father  through  the  Son,  as  Noyatian  had  done  before 
him,  relying  on  John  xy,  26.  With  this  modification, 
the  formuła  adopted  at  the  Council  of  Constantinople 
(AJ).  881),  and  appended  to  the  Nioene  Creed,  was  re- 
tained  in  the  Greek  Chuich. 

**  But  there  were  many  in  the  Laiin  Church  who  main- 
tained  that  the  Holy  Spirit  did  not  proceed  from  the 
Father  only,  but  abofrom  the  Son,  They  appealed  to 
John  xvi,  18,  and  to  the  texts  where  the  Holy  Spirit 
is  called  the  Spirii  of  Christ,  e.  g.  Rom.  viii,  9  sq.  To 
this  doctrine  the  Gieeks  were  for  the  most  part  opposed. 
It  preyailed,  howeyer,  morę  and  morę  in  the  Latin 
Church ;  and  when,  in  the  fifth  and  sixth  centuries,  the 
Arians,  who  then  preyailed  yery  much  in  Spain,  urged 
it  as  an  argument  against  the  eąuality  of  Christ  with 
the  Father,  that  the  Holy  Spirit  proceeded  from  the  Fa- 
ther only,  and  not  from  the  Son,  the  Catholic  churches 
of  that  region  began  to  hołd  morę  decidedly  that  the 
Holy  Spirit  proceeded/roiia  both  (ab  utroqtu),  and  to  in- 
sert the  adjunct  FiUogue  afler  Patre  in  the  Symbobim 
NieiBno-Cansttmtinopolitanutn.  In  this  the  churches  of 
Spain  were  followed,  first  by  those  of  Fnmoe,  and  at  a 
later  period  by  nearly  all  the  Western  churches.  But 
aa  the  Eastem  Church  still  adhered  substantially  to  the 
moro  ancient  formuła,  it  accused  the  Western  Church 
of  falsifying  the  Nicene  symbol;  and  thus  at  different 
periods,  and  espedally  in  the  7th  and  9th  centuries,  yio- 
lent  controyersies  aroee  between  them"  (Knapp,  Theolo- 
^,  §  43;  Hey,  Lectures  on  Dińnity,  yoL  i).  The  trae 
cauaes  of  these  dissenńons  were,  howeyer,  yeiy  different 
from  those  which  w^re  alleged,  and  less  animated,  it 
aeems,  by  zeal  for  the  truth  than  by  the  mutual  jcal- 
oosies  of  the  Roman  and  Byzantine  biahopa.  But,  how- 
eyer uncertain  the  reason  tliat  proyoked  these  diąmtes, 
thej  terminated  in  the  llth  oeatory  in  aa  entiie  sepaia- 


tion  of  the  Eastem  and  Western  churches,  oontinniiig 
to  the  present  time.  The  addition  of  the  YfotdjUiogw 
to  the  creed  of  the  Western  Church  first  appeais  in  the 
acta  of  the  Synod  of  Braga  (A.D.  412),  and  in  the  tfaiid 
Council  of  Toledo  (A.D.  589).  See  Procter,  On  Common 
Prayer,  p.  234;  Haryey,  History  ofthe  Three  Creeds,  p. 
452 ;  and  the  article  Filioque. 

The  scriptural  argument  for  the  procession  of  the 
Holy  Ghost  is  thus  stated  by  bishop  Pearson :  ^  Now 
the  procession  of  the  Spirit,  in  refercnce  to  the  Father, 
is  delivered  expre88ly  in  relation  to  the  Son,  and  is  cod- 
tained  yirtually  in  the  Scriptures.  1.  It  is  eJupnsAj 
sald  that  the  Holy  Ghost  proceedeth  from  the  Father, 
as  our  Sayiour  testifieth,  *  When  the  Comforter  is  come, 
whom  I  wUl  aend  unto  you  from  the  Father,  even  the 
Spirit  of  tmth,  which  proceedeth  from  the  Father,  he 
shall  testify  of  me'  (John  xy,  26).  This  is  also  evident 
from  what  has  aiready  been  asserted ;  for  inasmuch  sis  the 
Father  and  the  Spirit  are  the  same  God,  and,  being  thie 
the  same  in  the  unity  of  the  naturę  of  God,  are  yet  dis- 
tinct  in  the  penonality,  one  of  them  must  haye  the 
same  natura  from  the  other;  and  because  the  Father 
hath  aiready  been  shown  to  haye  it  from  nonę,  it  folłow- 
eth  that  the  Spirit  hath  it  from  him.  2.  Thou^h  it  be 
not  expre8sly  spoken  in  the  Scriptuie  that  the  Holy 
Ghost  proceedeth  from  the  Father  and  the  Son,  yct  tbe 
substance  of  the  same  truth  is  yirtually  contained  there ;  . 
because  those  yery  expressions  which  are  spoken  of  the 
Holy  Spirit  in  rdation  to  the  Father,  for  the  very  rea- 
son that  he  proceedeth  from  the  Father,  are  also  spoken 
of  the  same  Spirit  in  relation  to  the  Son,  therefoR 
there  must  be  the  same  reason  presupposed  in  refeienoe 
to  the  Son  which  is  expressed  in  refcrence  to  the  Fa- 
ther. Because  the  Spirit  proceedeth  from  the  Father, 
therefore  it  is  called  <  the  Spirit  of  God,'  and '  the  Spirit 
of  the  Father.'  *  It  is  not  ye  that  spealc,  but  the  Spirit 
of  your  Father  which  speaketh  in  you'  (^latt.  x^  20). 
For  by  tbe  language  of  the  apostle,  *  the  Spirit  of  God' 
is  the  Spirit  which  is  of  God,  saying, '  The  things  of 
God  knoweth  no  man,  but  the  Spirit  of  God ;  and  we 
haye  receiyed  not  the  spirit  of  the  world.  but  the  Spirit 
which  is  of  God*  (1  Cor.  ii,  11, 12).  Now  the  same  Siur- 
it  is  aleo  called  *  the  Spirit  of  the  Son:'  for '  because  we 
aro  sons,  God  hath  sent  forth  the  Spuit  of  his  Son  into 
our  hearts'  (GaL  iy,  6).  *  The  Spirit  of  Christ :'  *  Now 
if  any  man  haye  not  the  Spirit  of  Christ,  he  is  nonę  of 
his'  (Rom.  yiii,  9);  <Even  the  Spirit  of  Christ  which 
was  in  the  prophets'  (1  Pet.  i,  11).  *  The  Spirit  of  Jesus 
Christ,'  as  the  apostle  speaks :  *  I  know  that  this  shall 
tum  to  my  salyation  through  your  prayer,  and  the  snp- 
ply  of  the  Spirit  of  Jesus  Christ'  (Phil.  i,  19).  If;  tfaoi, 
the  Holy  Ghost  be  called  <  the  Spurit  of  the  Father*  be- 
cause he  prooeedeth  from  the  Father,  it  foUoweth  that, 
being  called  also  'the  Spirit  of  the  Son,'  he  prooeedeth 
also  from  the  Son.  Again :  because  the  Holy  Ghost 
prooeedeth  from  the  Father,  he  is  therefore  sent  by  the 
Father,  as  from  him  who  hath,  by  the  original  commu- 
nication,  a  right  of  miasion;  aa,  *  the  Comforter,  which 
is  the  Holy  Ghost,  whom  the  Father  will  send'  (John 
xiy,  26).  But  the  same  ^irit  which  is  sent  by  the  Fa- 
ther, is  also  sent  by  the  Son,  as  he  saith,  *  When  the 
Comforter  is  come,  whom  I  will  send  unto  you.'  There- 
fore the  Son  hath  the  same  right  of  misnon  with  the 
Father,  and  consequently  must  be  acknowledged  to  haye 
oommunicated  the  same  essence.  The  Father  is  never 
sent  by  the  Son,  because  he  reoeiyed  not  the  Godhead 
from  him ;  but  the  Father  sendeth  the  Son,  because  be 
oommunicated  the  Godhead  to  him :  in  the  aame  man- 
ner, neither  the  Father  nor  the  Son  ia  eyer  sent  by  the 
Holy  Spirit,  because  neither  of  them  reoeiyed  the  divine 
nature  from  the  Spirit;  but  both  the  Father  and  the 
Son  send  tlie  Holy  Ghost,  because  the  diyine  naturę, 
oommon  to  the  Father  and  the  Son,  was  oommunicated 
by  them  both  to  tbe  Holy  Ghost  As,  therefore,  the 
Scriptnres  dedare  expresBly  that  the  Spirit  proceedeth 
from  the  Father,  so  do  they  also  yirtually  teach  that  be 
prooeedeth  fiom  the  Son"  (FteaiBOD,  Oa  eA«  CrwOL 


HOLY  GHOST 


807 


HOLY  GHOST 


IŁ  PSBSOHiarrT  ąf  ihA  Hóly  GhotL^L  DęfinHiąn 
and  HittoTjf  oftke  Dotirwe^-^ A  person  is  "a  tblnking, 
intfelligent  being  that  h«s  leascm  and  reflection;"  *'a 
singuLu-,  aubÓBteatf  inteUectual  being;''  "an  intelligent 
agent."  M  peraonality  impliea  thoaght,  reuaoD,  lefleo 
tioii,  and  an  individual  existeDoe,  distinct  from  that  of 
other  beingą  when  we  speak  of  the  personality  of  the 
Holy  Ghoflt  we  mean  his  distinct  and  individual  ejuatr 
eiłce  aa  an  intelligent  and  reflecting  being.  He  ia  rep- 
leeented  thnnighout  the  Scriptui^s  aa  a  personal  agent, 
and  the  eariier  Christian  writen  so  speak  of  him,though 
withoat  any  aim  at  dogmatic  predsion.  It  is  the  habit 
of  0ome  writeiBy  oppoeed  to  the  wtbodoz  doctrine,  to  as- 
aeit  that  not  ońly  was  the  doctrine  of  the  Holy  Ghoet 
not  predsely  defined  in  that  eariy  period,  but  Lhat  it  was 
not  reoeived.  ^  On  the  contimry,  the  thorough  inresti- 
gations  of  noent  times  show  plainly  that  the  ante-Ni- 
eene  fatheią  with  the  ezception  of  the  Monaichians, 
and  perhaps  Laotantius,  agreed  in  the  two  fundamental 
pointa  that  the  Holy  Ghost,  the  sole  agent  in  the  appli- 
cation  of  redemption,  is  a  supeniatuial  dxvine  being, 
and  that  he  is  an  independent  person ;  doBely  allied  to 
the  Father  and  the  Son,  yet  hypostatically  difTerent 
fh>m  them  botb""  (Schaff,  CA.  Bisiory,  i,  §  80).  The  fiist 
poaitive  and  doginatic  denkU  of  the  personality  and  de- 
ity  of  the  Holy  Ghost  seems  to  have  been  madę  by 
Aiios,  who  applied  the  doctrine  of  subordination  here, 
and  plaoed  the  same  distance  between  the  Son  and  the 
Spirit  as  between  the  Father  and  the  Son.  Aocording 
to  him,  the  Holy  Spirit  was  only  the  first  of  created  be- 
ings,  faronght  into  eustence  by  the  Son  as  the  organ  of 
the  Father.  Łater  anti-Trinitarians  represent  the  Holy 
Spirit  aimply  as  an  operation  of  the  divine  muid,  as  the 
'"eserted  energy  of  God,"  or  as  an  attribute  only  of  the 
dirine  activity. 

2.  Proof  o/ Oe  Personahiy  ofthe  SpiriL—**  The  Holy 
Spirit  is  represented  in  the  New  Testament  not  only  as 
different  from  the  Father  and  Son,  and  not  only  as  the 
peraonification  o/some  aUribute  of  Gad,  or  of  some  ef- 
iect  which  he  has  produced,  bat  as  a  Uteral  person  (aee 
Semler,  Di^.  SpiriiuM  Sancłum  redę  descriU  personom), 
The  proof  of  this  ia  thus  madę  out  from  the  following 
texts :  (1.)  From  the  texts  John  xiv,  16, 17,  26 ;  xv,  26. 
The  Holy  Spirit  is  here  called  'jraptu^roc,  not  com- 
/or(er,  adcocaie^  nor  merely  teadter,  as  Emeati  renders 
itybat  keiper,  assisUmt,  counstUor,  in  which  sense  it  is 
naed  by  Phiio,  when  he  saya,  God  needa  no  TapcucAi^roc 
(monitor).     Of  the  Paradetus,  Christ  says  thai  the  Fa- 
tktr  will  send  kim  in  his  (Chrisfs)  nante  (i.  e.  in  his 
płaoe)  to  insiruct  his  discipŁes,    To  these  three  subjects 
ainiilar  personal  predicates  are  here  equally  applied,  and 
the  Paradetus  is  not  designated  by  the  abstract  word 
axxitium,  but  by  the  concrete  auxiiiaior;  ao  that  we 
have  the  Father  who  aent  him,  the  Son  in  whoae  place 
he  comea,  and  the  Holy  Spirit  who  ia  aent    His  offioe 
is  to  cairy  forward  the  great  work  of  teacłung  and  8av- 
ing  men  which  Christ  commenoed,  and  to  be  to  the  dis- 
ciplea  of  Christ  what  Christ  himself  was  while  he  con- 
tinued  opon  the  earth.    John  xv,  26,  When  the  Para- 
eletMs  shaU  eome,  whom  I  will  send  to  tfou/rom  the  Fa- 
ther (/  mean  the  Spirit  —  i.  e.  teacher— o/*  ^ru/A,  tcho 
proeuds/rom  the  Father\  he  will  instruct  you  iurther 
in  my  rtUgion;  where  it  should  be  remarked  that  the 
phnae  iicirogiiftaBcu.  wapd  Uarpóc  meana  to  be  sent  or 
eommissioned  l^  the  Father.     (2.)  1  Cor.  sdi,  4-11,  There 
ort  tarious  giJU  (xapiafiara)t  but  there  is  one  and  the 
same  Spirit  (rb  ahrb  Ilv£v fŁa),  from  whom  they  allpro^ 
atd,    Here  the  xap^VM^ra  are  clearly  distinguiahed 
from  the  Spirit,  who  is  the  author  of  them.    In  veiae  5 
this  same  person  ia  distinguished  from  Christ  (6  Kv- 
ptoc),  and  in  ver.  6  from  ó  Qł6c.    In  ver.  11  it  is  aaid 
aU  these  (varioQS  gifts)  worketh  one  and  the  aelf-same 
Spirit,  who  imparteth  to  evcry  man  his  own,  as  he  will 
{KoOmę  ^v\tTai).     (3.)  Those  texU  in  which  auch  at- 
tzibotea  and  worka  are  ascribed  to  the  Holy  Spirit  as 
caa  be  predicated  of  no  other  than  a  peraonal  subject. 
In  John  xvi,  13  8q.,  he  is  aaid  to  * ^leak,'  to  'hear,'  to 


'take,'  etc  So  in  1  Cor.  ii,  10,  God  hath  repealed  th4 
doctrines  of  Christiamiy  to  us  by  his  Spirit  (the  irapa- 
KhjToc  before  mentioned,  who  was  aent  to  give  ua  this 
morę  perfect  instruction).  And  this  Spirit  searches 
(iptw^)  all  thingSf  even  the  most  secrei  dimne  purposes 
ifiaOri  6cov ;  comp.  Kom.  xi,  83  8q.) ;  in  hia  instruction, 
therefore,  we  may  safely  oonfide.  The  expression8,  the 
Holy  Spirit  speoks,  sends  any  one,  appoints  any  one  for 
a  particidar  purpose,  and  others,  which  occor  ao  fre- 
quently  in  the  Acta  and  elaewhere,  show  that  the  Holy 
Spirit  was  understood  by  the  early  Christians  to  be  a 
personal  agent  (Acts  xiii,  2,  4;  xx,  28;  xxi,  11  sq.). 
(4.)  The  formuła  of  baptism,  Matt.  xxviii,  19,  and  other 
aimilar  texts,  such  as  2  Cor.  xiii,  14,  where  Father,  Son, 
and  Holy  Ghost  are  mentioned  in  distinction  (ver.  85), 
may  now  be  used  in  proof  of  the  peraonality  of  the  Holy 
Spirit,  sińce  the  other  texts  upon  which  the  meaning 
of  these  depends  have  already  been  cited.  From  aU 
theae  texta,  taken  together,  we  may  form  the  following 
reault :  The  Holy  Spirit  ia  repreaented  in  the  Bibie  aa  a 
peraonal  subject,  and,  as  such,  is  distinguished  from  the 
Father  and  the  Son.  In  relation  to  the  human  raoe,  he 
is  deacribed  as  sent  and  commissicmed  by  the  Father 
and  the  Son,  and  as  oocupying  the  place  which  Christ, 
who  preceded  him,  held.  In  this  reą)ect  he  depends  (to 
speak  aiter  the  manner  of  men)  upon  the  Father  (John 
xiv,  16)  and  upon  the  Son  (John  xiv,  16,  26;  aiso  xvi, 
14,  U  rov  ifAoif  A^i^troi) ;  and  in  this  sense  he  prooeeds 
from  them  both,  or  is  aent  by  them  both.  This  may 
be  expre88ed  morę  Uterally  as  foliowa:  The  gieat  work 
of  converting,  sanctifying,  and  Baving  men,  which  the 
Father  commenoed  through  the  Son,  will  be  carried  on 
by  the  Father  and  Son,  throuyh  the  Holy  SpiriL 

**  The  objectora  to  this  doctrine  freąuently  say  that  the 
imaginative  Orientalists  were  accuatomed  to  represent 
many  thinga  as  personal  snłigects,  and  to  introduce  them 
as  speaking  and  acting,  which,  however,  they  themaelvea 
did  not  conaider  as  peraons,  and  did  not  intend  to  have 
80  considered  by  othen;  and  to  thia  Oriental  uaage 
they  think  that  Christ  and  hia  apoatka  might  here,  as 
in  other  caaea,  have  oonformed.  But,  whenever  Chiriat 
and  his  apoetlea  apoke  in  figurative  language,  they  al- 
¥(aya  showed,  by  the  explanations  which  they  gave, 
that  they  did  not  intend  to  be  understood  Uterally.  But 
they  have  given  no  such  explanation  of  the  language 
which  they  employ  with  fegard  to  the  Holy  Spirit  We 
therefore  fairly  conclude  that  they  intended  that  their 
language  ahould  be  understood  literally,  otherwise  they 
would  have  led  their  readera  and  hearera  into  eiror,  and 
the  morę  ao  aa  they  well  knew  that  their  readers  and 
hearers  were  aocustomed  to  personifications'*  (Knapp, 
Theohgy,  §  39). 

The  scriptural  argument  is  thus  logically  deveIoped 
by  Watson.  "  1.  The  modę  of  the  aubsiatence  of  the 
Holy  Spirit  in  the  aacred  Trinity  proveB  hia  peraonality. 
He  proceeds  from  the  Father  and  the  Son,  and  cannot, 
therefore,  be  either.  To  say  that  an  attribute  proceeds 
and  Gomes  forth  would  be  a  gross  absurdity.  2.  Many 
passages  of  Scripture  would  be  wholly  uuintelligible, 
and  even  absurd,  unleea  the  Holy  Ghost  is  allowed  to 
be  a  person.  For  as  those  who  take  the  phrase  as  as- 
cribing  no  morę  than  a  figurative  personidity  to  an  at^ 
tribute,  make  that  attribute  to  be  the  energy  or  power 
of  Gody  they  reduce  such  pasaagea  as  the  following  to 
utter  unmeaningness :  *God  anointed  Jesus  with  the 
Holy  Ghoet  and  with  power;'  that  is,  with  the  power 
of  God  and  with  power.  *  That  ye  may  abound  in  hopa 
through  the  power  of  the  Holy  Ghost ;'  that  is,  through 
the  power  of  power.  *  In  demonatration  of  the  Spirit 
and  of  power;'  that  ia,  in  demonatration  of  power  and 
of  power.  8.  Peraonification  of  any  kind  ia,  in  aome 
paaaagea  in  which  the  Holy  Ghost  is  apoken  of,  impos- 
aible.  The  reality  which  thia  figurę  of  apeech  is  aaid  to 
pre^nt  to  ua  is  either  aome  of  the  attributes  of  God,  or 
else  the  doctrine  of  the  Gospel  Let  thia  theory,  then, 
be  tried  upon  the  following  paaaagea:  'He  ahall  not 
speak  of  himself;  but  what8oever  he  shałl  hear,  that 


HOLY  GHOST 


SOS 


HOLY  GHOST 


8hali  he  upeak.*  What  attribate  of  God  can  here  be 
penonified?  And  if  tbe  doctńne  of  the  Gospel  be  ar^ 
rayed  with  pereonal  attribatea,  where  is  there  an  in- 
Biance  of  so  monstrous  a  prosopopceia  as  thU  paasage 
would  exhibit?  the  doctńne  of  the  Gospel  not  speaking 
'of  himself/  but  speaking  'whatsoerer  he  shall  hear!* 

*  The  Spirit  maketh  intercession  for  us.*  What  attri- 
bute  is  capable  of  interceding,  or  how  can  the  doctrine 
of  the  Grospel  interoede?  Personification,  too,  is  the 
language  of  poetry,  and  takes  place  natundly  only  in 
excited  and  elevated  discoorse;  bnt  if  the  Holy  Spirit 
be  a  peraonification,  we  find  it  in  the  ordinary  and  cool 
Btrain  of  merę  narration  and  azgumentative  discourse  in 
the  New  Testament,  and  in  the  most  inddental  oonver- 
sations.  'Haye  ye  received  the  Holy  Ghoet  sińce  ye 
belieyed?  We  have  not  so  much  as  heard  whether 
there  be  any  Holy  Ghost.*  How  impossible  is  it  here 
to  extort,  by  any  prooess  whatever,  even  the  shadow  of 
a  person  ification  of  either  any  attribute  of  God,  or  of  the 
doctrine  of  the  Gospel!  So  again:  *The  Spirit  said 
unto  Philip,  Go  near,  and  join  thyself  to  this  chariot.' 
Gould  it  be  any  attribute  of  God  which  said  this,  or 
oould  it  be  the  doctrine  of  the  Gospel  ?  Finally,  that 
the  Holy  Ghost  is  a  person,  and  not  an  attribute,  is 
pToved  by  the  use  of  masculine  pronouns  and  relatiyes 
Ul  the  Greek  of  the  New  Testament,  in  connection  with 
the  neuter  noun  Tlytyfia,  Spirit,  and  also  by  many  di»- 
tinct  personal  acts  being  ascribed  to  him,  as  '  to  come,' 
'  to  go,*  *  to  be  sent,*  *  to  teach,*  *  to  guide,'  *  to  comfort,' 
'  to  make  intercession,' '  to  bear  witness,' '  to  give  gifts,' 

*  dividing  them  to  evcry  man  as  he  wiUj^  *  to  be  vexed,' 
<  grieyed,'  and  *  quenched.'  These  cannot  be  applied  to 
the  merę  fiction  of  a  person,  and  they  therefore  estab- 
lish  the  Spirit'8  true  personality"  (Watson,  Theological 
InstifuieSf  i,  637  sq.). 

HL  DiviNiTY  o/łke  Holy  Spirit,— \,  The  same  argu- 
ments  that  prove  the  personality  of  the  Holy  Ghost,  go 
also,  to  a  certain  extent,  to  establish  his  divinity.  The 
direct  scriptural  argument  may  be  thus  summed  up :  (o.) 
NamtB  proper  only  to  the  Moet  High  God  are  ascribed 
to  him ;  as  Jehotah  (Acts  xxviii,  25,  with  Isa.  vi,  9;  and 
Heb.  iii,  7, 9,  with  £xod.  xvii,  7 ;  Jer.  xxxi,  81, 84 ;  Heb. 
ac,  16, 16),  God  (Acts  v,  8, 4),  Lord  (2  Cor.  iii,  17, 19). 
«  The  Lord,  the  Spirit."  (6.)  A  łtributes  proper  only  to 
the  Most  High  God  are  ascribed  to  him ;  as  omniscience 
(1  Cor.  ii,  10  11,*  Isa.  xl,  18,  14),  omnipresence  (PBa. 
cxxxix,  7;  £ph.  ii,  17,  18;  Rom.  viii,  26,  27),  omnipo- 
tence  (Lukę  i,  35),  eternity  (Heb.  ix,  14).  (c.)  Divine 
worlcs  are  evidentiy  ascribed  to  him  (Gen.  ii,  2;  Job 
xxvi,  13 ;  Psa.  xxxii,  6 ;  civ,  30).  (d)  Worship,  proper 
only  to  God,  is  required  and  ascribed  to  him  (Isa.  vi,  3 ; 
Acts  xxviii,  25;  Rom.  ix,  1;  Rev.  i,  4;  2  Cor.  xiii,  14; 
Matt.  xxviii,  19). 

2.  The  argument  for  the  personal  divinity  of  the  Spir- 
it is  developed  by  Watson  as  foUows:  (1.)  *'The  first 
argument  may  be  drawn  from  the  frequent  aasodation, 
in  Scripture,  of  a  Person  under  that  appellation  with 
two  other  Persons,  one  of  whom,  the  Father,  is  by  all 
acknowledged  to  be  divine;  and  the  ascription  to  each 
of  them,  or  to  the  three  in  union,  of  the  same  acts,  titles, 
and  authority,  with  worship  of  the  same  kind,  and,  for 
any  distinction  that  is  madę,  of  an  eąnal  degree.  The 
manifestation  of  the  existence  and  divinity  of  the  Holy 
Spirit  may  be  expected  in  the  law  and  the  prophets, 
and  is,  in  fact,  to  be  traced  there  with  certainty.  The 
Spirit  is  represented  as  an  agent  in  creation,  *  moving 
upon  the  face  of  the  waters ;'  and  it  forms  no  objection 
to  the  argument  that  creation  is  ascribed  to  the  Father, 
and  also  to  the  Son,  but  is  a  great  conArmation  of  it. 
That  creation  should  be  elfected  by  all  the  three  Peraons 
of  the  (lOdhead,  though  acting  in  different  respects,  yet 
80  that  each  should  be  a  Creator,  and,  therefore,  both  a 
Person  and  a  divine  Person,  can  be  explained  only  by 
their  unity  in  one  essence.  On  every  other  hypothesis 
this  scriptural  fact  is  disallowed,  and  therefore  no  other 
hypothesis  can  be  true.  If  the  Spirit  of  God  be  a  merę 
influence,  theu  he  is  not  a  Creator,  distinct  from  the  Fa- 


ther and  the  Son,  because  he  is  not  a  PerMm;  but  this 
is  refttted  both  by  the  passage  just  ąooted,  and  by  Puu 
xxxiii,  6 : '  By  the  word  of  the  Lord  were  the  heavem 
madę,  and  all  the  hoet  of  them  by  the  breath  (Hebrew, 
Spirit)  of  his  mouth.'  This  is  farther  oonfirmed  by  Job 
xxxiii,  4 :  '  The  Spirit  of  God  hath  madę  me,  and  the 
breath  of  the  Almighty  hath  given  me  life;'  where  the 
second  dause  is  obyiously  exegetic  of  the  former :  and 
the  whole  text  proves  that,  in  the  patriarchal  age,  the 
followers  of  the  true  religion  ascribed  creation  to  tbe 
Spirit  as  well  as  to  the  Father,  and  that  one  of  his  ap- 
pellations  was  '  the  Breath  of  the  Almighty.'  Did  soch 
passages  stand  alone,  there  might,  indeed,  be  some  plau- 
sibility  in  the  criticism  which  resolyes  them  into  a  per- 
Bonification ;  but,  connected  as  they  are  with  the  whole 
body  of  evidenoe,  as  to  the  concniring  doctńne  of  both 
Testaments,  they  are  inexpugnable.  Again :  If  the  per- 
sonality of  the  Son  and  the  Spirit  be  allowed,  and  yet  it 
is  contended  that  they  were  but  Instruments  in  creation, 
through  whom  the  creative  power  of  another  operated, 
but  which  creative  power  was  not  possessed  by  them ; 
on  this  hypothesis,  too,  neither  the  Spirit  nor  the  Son 
can  be  said  to  create,  any  more  than  Moees  created  the 
serpent  into  which  his  rod  was  tumed,  and  the  Scrip- 
tures  are  again  contndicted.  To  this  assodation  of  the 
three  Persons  in  creative  acts  may  be  added  a  Uke  aaso- 
dation in  acts  of  preservation,  which  has  been  well  cali- 
ed  a  corOituted  creŻaHon^  and  by  that  teim  is  expreaaed  in 
the  following  passage : '  These  wait  all  upon  thee,  that 
thou  mayest  give  them  their  meat  in  due  season.  Thoa 
hidest  thy  face,  they  are  troubled;  thou  takest  away 
their  breath,  they  die,  and  return  to  dust :  thou  aende^ 
forth  thy  Spirit,  they  are  created;  and  thou  renewest 
the  face  of  the  earth'  (PBa.  dv,  27-30).  It  is  not  aurely 
here  meant  that  the  Spirit  by  which  the  generations  of 
animals  are  perpetuated  is  wind;  and  if  he  be  called  an 
attribute,  wiMÓom^  power ^  or  botii  united,  where  do  we 
read  of  such  attributes  being  'sent,'  'sent  forth  frum 
God,'  *  sent  forth  from'  God  to  '  create  and  renew  the 
face  of  the  earth?' 

(2.)  '*The  next  association  of  the  three  Penom  we 
Ond  in  the  iiwpiration  of  the  prophets :  *  (tod  spake  anto 
our  fathers  by  the  prophets,'  says  Paul  (Heb.  i,  1).  Pe- 
ter dedares  that  these '  holy  men  of  God  spake  as  they 
were  moved  by  the  Holy  Ghost'  (2  Pet.  i,  21) ;  and  also 
that  it  was  '  the  Spirit  of  Christ  which  was  in  them^  (1 
Pet.  i.  U).  We  may  defy  any  Socinian  to  interpret 
these  three  passages  by  making  the  Spirit  an  influence 
or  attribute,  and  thereby  redudng  the  term  Holy  Ghost 
into  a  figure  of  speech.  *  God,'  in  the  first  passage,  is 
unquestionably  God  the  Father;  and  the  'holy  men  of 
God,'  the  prophets,  would  then,  aooording  to  this  view, 
be  moved  by  the  infiuenoe  of  the  Father;  but  tbe  influ- 
ence, according  to  the  third  passage,  which  was  the 
source  of  their  inspiration,  was  the  Spirit  or  the  m/Ca- 
emx  of  *  Christ'  Thus  the  passages  oontradict  each  oth- 
er. Allow  the  Trinity  in  unity,  and  you  have  no  diffi- 
culty  in  calling  the  Spirit,  the  Spirit  of  the  Father,  and 
the  Spirit  of  the  Son,  or  the  Spirit  of  dther;  but  if  tbe 
Spirit  be  an  influence,  that  in^uence  cannot  be  the  in- 
fluence of  two  persons,  one  of  them  God  and  the  otlier 
a  creature.  Even  if  they  allowed  the  pre-existence  of 
Christ,  with  Arians,  these  passages  are  inexplicable  by 
the  Socinians ;  but,  denying  his  pre-existence,  they  ha\*e 
no  subterfuge  but  to  interpret  *  the  Spirit  of  Christ,'  the 
spirit  which  prophesied  of  Christ,  which  is  a  purely  gca- 
tuitous  paraphrase ;  or  *  the  spirit  of  an  anointed  one,  or 
prophet :'  that  is,  the  prophefs  own  spirit,  which  is  just 
as  gratuitous  and  as  unsiipported  by  any  paralld  as  the 
former.  If,  however,  the  Holy  Ghost  be  the  Spirit  of 
the  Father  and  of  the  Son,  ąnited  in  one  essence,  the 
passages  are  easily  harmonized.  In  conjunction  with 
the  Father  and  the  Son,  he  is  the  sooice  of  that  pfo- 
phetic  inspiration  under  which  the  prophets  spoke  and 
acted.  So  the  same  Spirit  which  raised  Christ  finom 
the  dead  is  said  by  Peter  to  have  pieached  by  Noah 
while  the  ark  was  preparing,  in  allosion  to  the  ptnąge 


HOLY  GHOST 


309 


HOLT  GHOST 


'  Mt  Sptrit  shall  not  alwars  stńve  (contend,  debatę) 
with  man.'  Thią  we  may  obeeire,  affords  an  eminent 
proof  that  the  writers  of  the  New  Testament  andentood 
the  phraae  'the  Spińt  of  God,'  as  U  occuis  in  the  Oki 
TeBUancnt,  permmalfy.  For,  whatever  may  be  the  fuJI 
meanin^  of  that  difficult  passage  in  Peter,  Christ  is 
dearly  declaied  to  have  preached  by  the  Spirit  in  the 
days  of  Nooh ;  that  ia,  he,  by  the  Spirit,  inspired  Noah 
to  preach.  If,  then,  the  apostles  understocMl  that  the 
Holy  Ghoat  was  a*Penon,  a  point  which  will  ptesently 
be  estaUiahed,  we  haye,  in  the  text  just  ąuoted  from 
thebook  of  Genesis,  a  key  to  the  meaning  of  those  text8 
in  the  OM  Testament  where  the  phrases  *My  Spirit,' 
*the  Spirit  of  God,*  and  'the  Spirit  of  the  Lord'  occiir, 
and  inspired  anthority  is  thus  afforded  os  to  interpret 
them  as  of  a  Person;  and  if  of  a  Person,  the  very  effort 
madę  by  Sodnians  to  deny  his  personality  itself  indi- 
cates  that  that  Person  must,  from  the  lofty  titles  and 
works  ascribed  to  him,  be  ine^itably  divine.  Such 
phrases  occur  in  many  passages  of  the  Hebrew  Scrip- 
tores;  bat  in  the  foUowing  the  Spirit  is  aiso  eminently 
diatinguished  from  two  other  Persona :  *And  now  the 
lord  God,  and  his  Spirit,  hath  sent  me'  (Isa.  xlviii,  16) ; 
or,  rendered  better, '  hath  sent  me  and  his  Spirit,'  both 
tenns  being  in  the  accusatire  case.  *  Seek  ye  out  of  the 
book  of  the  Lord,  and  read ;  for  my  mouth  it  hath  com> 
manded,  and  his  Spirit  it  hath  gathered  them'  (Isa. 
X2cxiv,  16).  *  I  am  with  you,  saith  the  Lord  of  hosts, 
according  to  the  word  that  I  corenanted  with  you  when 
ye  came  out  of  £gypt,  so  my  Spińt  remaineth  among 
Tou:  fear  ye  not.  For  thus  saith  the  Lord  of  hosts,  I 
will  shake  all  nations,  and  the  Desire  of  all  nations  shall 
oome*  (Hag.  ii,  4-7).  Herę,  also,  the  Spirit  of  the  Lord 
is  seen  collocated  with  the  Lord  of  hoets  and  the  Desire 
of  ali  nations,  who  is  the  Messiah  [according  to  the  usu- 
sl  ittterpretation]. 

(8.)  ''Three  Persons,  and  three  only,  are  associated 
abo,  both  in  the  Old  and  New  Testament,  as  objecta  of 
supreaie  wonhip,  and  form  the  one  dirine  *  name.'  Thus 
the  fact  that,  in  the  rision  of  Isaiah,  the  Lord  of  hosts, 
who  spake  imto  the  prophet,  is,  in  Acts  xxviii,  25,  said 
to  be  che  Holy  Ghost,  while  John  declares  that  the  glo- 
ry  which  laaiah  saw  was  the  glory  of  Christ,  proves  in- 
dispotably  that  each  of  the  three  Persons  bears  thia  au- 
gust appellation ;  it  gives  also  the  reason  for  the  three- 
fold  repetition,  *  Holy,  holy,  holy !'  and  it  exhibits  the 
pruphet  and  the  rery  seraphs  in  deep  and  awful  adora- 
tion  before  the  Trione  Lord  of  hosts.  Both  the  prophet 
and  the  seraphim  were,  therefore,  worshippers  of  the 
Holy  Ghost  and  of  the  Son,  at  the  yeiy  time  and  by  the 
Yciy  acts  in  which  they  worshipped  the  Father." 

3.  In  the  ApottoUcal  Benedictioti,  "llie  grace  of  our 
Lord  Jesua  Christ,  and  the  love  of  God,  and  the  com- 
munion  of  the  Holy  Spirit,  be  with  you  all,  Amen,"  the 
Holy  Ghost  is  acknowledged,  equally  with  the  Father 
and  the  Son, "  to  be  the  source  of  the  highest  spiritual 
Ideasings;  while  the  benediction  is,  from  its  specific 
chaiacter,  to  be  ngaided  as  an  act  of  prayer  to  each  of 
the  three  Penons,  and  th^fore  is  at  once  an  acknowl- 
edgment  of  the  divinity  and  personality  of  each.  The 
same  remark  applies  to  Kev.  i,  4, 5 :  '  Grace  be  unto  ^-ou, 
and  peace,  from  him  which  was,  and  which  is,  and  which 
is  to  oomc;  and  from  the  seven  spirits  which  are  before 
his  thione'  (an  emblematical  reference,  probably,  to  the 
golden  Isanch  with  its  scren  lamps),  'and  from  Jesus 
Christ.'  The  style  of  this  book  suffidently  accounts  for 
the  Holy  Spirit  being  called  'the  seven  spirits;'  but  no 
created  spirit  or  company  of  created  spirits  is  ever  spo- 
kea  of  under  that  appellation ;.  and  the  place  assigned 
to  the  seven  spirits,  between  the  mention  of  the  Father 
and  the  Son,  indicates  with  certainty  that  one  of  the 
aacred  Three,  so  eminent,  and  so  exclusiYely  eminent  in 
both  dispensations,  is  intended. 

4.  "The  form  of  baptism  next  presenta  itself  with 
demonstratiye  evidenoe  on  the  two  points  before  us,  the 
p-onoality  and  diyinity  of  the  Holy  Spirit.  It  is  the 
fotm  of  ooyenant  by  which  the  sacred  Three  become 


oor  one  or  only  God,  and  we  become  his  peoplc :  '  €rO 
ye,  therefore,  and  teach  all  nations,  baptizing  them  in 
the  name  of  the  Father,  and  of  the  Son,  and  of  the  Holy 
Ghost'  In  what  manner  is  this  text  to  be  disposed  of 
if  the  personality  of  the  Holy  Ghost  is  denied  ?  Is 
the  form  of  baptism  to  be  so  understood  as  to  imply 
that  baptism  is  in  the  name  of  one  God^  one  crecUure^ 
and  one  attribute  f  The  grossness  of  this  absurdity  rc- 
futes  it,  and  proyes  that  here,  at  least,  there  can  be  no 
personilication.  If  all  the  Three,  therefore,  are  persons, 
are  we  to  have  baptism  m  the  name  of  one  God  and  two 
creatures?  I'hi8  would  be  too  near  an  approach  to 
idolatry,  or,  rather,  it  would  be  idolatry  itself;  for,  con- 
sidering  baptism  as  an  act  of  dedication  to  Gotl,  the  ac- 
ceptance  of  God  as  our  God,  on  our  part,  and  the  renun- 
ciation  of  all  other  deities  and  all  othcr  religions,  what 
could  a  heathen  conyert  oonceive  of  the  two  creatures 
so  distinguished  from  all  other  creatures  in  heaven  and 
in  earth,  and  so  associated  with  God  himself  as  to  form 
together  the  one  namey  to  which,  by  that  act,  he  was 
deyoted,  and  which  he  was  henceforward  to  profess  and 
honor,  but  that  they  were  eąually  diyine,  unless  special 
care  was  taken  to  instruct  him  that  but  one  of  the  Three 
was  God,  and  the  two  othera  but  creatures?  But  of 
this  care,  of  this  cautionary  instruction,  though  so  obvi- 
ously  necessary  upon  this  theory,  no  single  instance  can 
be  giyen  in  all  the  writings  of  the  apostles." 

5.  A  further  argument  is  deriyed  from  the  fact  that 
the  Spirit  is  "  the  subject  of  blasphemy :  '  The  blasphe- 
my  against  the  Holy  Ghost  shall  not  be  forgiyen  unto 
men'  (Matt  xii,  81).  This  blasphemy  consisted  in  as- 
cribing  his  miraculous  works  to  Satan ;  and  that  he  is 
capable  of  being  blasphemed  proyes  him  to  be  as  much 
a  person  as  the  Son;  and  it  proyes  him  to  be  diyine, 
because  it  shows  that  he  may  be  sinned  against,  and  so 
sinned  against  that  the  blasphemer  shall  not  be  forgiyen. 
A  person  he  must  be,  or  he  could  not  be  blasphemed :  a 
diyine  person  he  must  be  to  constitute  this  blasphemy 
a  ńn  against  him  in  the  proper  sense,  and  of  so  malig- 
nant  a  kind  as  to  place  it  beyond  the  reach  of  mercy. 
He  is  called  God:  'Why  hath  Satan  fiUed  thine  heart 
to  lie  unto  the  Holy  Ghost?  Why  hast  thou  conceiyed 
this  in  thine  heart?  Thou  hast  not  lied  unto  men,  but 
unto  God'  (Acta  v,  8,  4).  Ananias  is  said  to  have  lied 
particularly  *  imto  the  Holy  Ghost,'  because  the  apostles 
were  under  his  special  direction  in  establishing  the  tern- 
poraiy  rcgulation  among  Christiana  that  they  should 
haye  all  things  in  common :  the  detection  of  the  crime 
itself  was  a  demonstration  of  the  diyinity  of  the  Spirit, 
because  it  showed  his  omnisdence,  his  knowledge  of  the 
most  secret  acts"  (Watson,  Theol  IrwtituteSj  i,  629  8q.). 

See,  besides  the  works  already  cited,  Hawker,  Ser- 
mons  on  the  Dirinify  ofihe  Holy  Ghost  (Lond.  1794, 8vo) ; 
Owen,  Discourses  on  the  Spirit ;  Pye  Smith,  On  the  Holy 
Ghost  (Lond.  1831 ,  8yo) ;  Christian  i?crt«r,  xvii,  615  (on 
the  personality  of  the  Spirit) ;  Neander,  History  o/Dog- 
mas,  i,  171, 803 ;  Neander,  Ch,  History,  yoL  i,  ii ;  Kahnis, 
Die  Lehre  vom  Heil,  Geiste  (Lcipaic,  1847, 8yo) ;  Dewar, 
Personality,  Ditimiy,  etc,  of  the  Holy  Ghost  (London, 
1848,  8vo) ;  Fritzsche,  De  Spiritu  Sancto  (Halle,  1840) ; 
BUchsenschUtz,  Doctrine  de  FEsprit  de  Dieu  (Strasburg, 
1840);  Hase,  Etangel,  Dogmatik,  §  176;  Guyse,  God- 
head  of  the  Holy  Spirit  (London,  1790,  12mo) ;  Pierce, 
Diuinity  and  Personality  of  the  Spirit  (London,  1805, 
12mo)  ;  Heber,  Personality  and  Office  of  the  Spirit 
(Bampton  Lecture,  1816) ;  FfouUćes,  Diris.  in  Christen- 
dom,  i,  70, 101  są.;  Bickersteth,  Christ,  Stud,  Assist,  p. 
453 ;  Buli,  Triiwty,  i,  135  sq.;  ii,  470  sq, :  Wilson,  Apost, 
Fathers;  Baur,  ^o^men^^cA.  vol.  i,  ii ;  'M.ont^W,  Redemp- 
iion,  p.  156  sq. ;  Waterland,  Works,  yol.  vi ;  Hefele,  Con- 
cilienpesch.  voL  i ;  Milman,  Laiin  Christ,  i,  98 ;  Bumet, 
A  rtides  ofthe  Christian  Faith,  see  Index ;  Walcott,  Sa- 
cred A  rchceoL  p.  812 ;  Wesley,  Works,  i,  84  są. ;  Leidner, 
Phiiosophy,  p.  99;  Stillingfleet,  lForib,vol.  i;  Smeaton, 
A  tonement,  p.  298, 296 ;  Bethune,  Lect,  on  Catechism,  vol 
ii,  see  Index;  Hagenbach,  Hist.  ofDoct,  i,  125,  258, 262, 
453 ;  Stud,  w.  KrU.  1856,  ii,  298 ;  1867,  voL  iu ;  Mercers- 


HOLY  GHOST,  ORDERS  OF      310 


HOLY  LEAGTJE 


burg  Reo.  Jan.  1867,  p.  464 ;  Bib.  Sac  1868,  p.  600,  877 ; 
1864,  p.  119;  Am,  Prttb,  Rev,  April,  1863,  p.  386;  Chr, 
Reo.  XV,  115;  April,  1852,  arL  iv;  BuUet.  ThioL  i,  1868; 
Christian  Obseroery  voL  xx ;  Lond,  Quart.  RevieWy  April, 
1867,  lxiii,  267 ;  Ev.  CK  Reg,  voL  i ;  Brit.  and  For.  Ev, 
/ifeptctr,  April,  1869;  Ccngreg.Qaart.3\ńyyl9&9\  Baptist 
QuarU  Oct.  1869,  p.  498;  Christ.  Remembr.  July,  1853. 
6ee  Macedoniams  ;  Trinity;  Socinianism. 

HOLT  GHOST,  Blasphemt  aoaimst  the.  See 
Blasphemy. 

Holy  Ohost,  Orders  of.  1.  Order  ofthe  Hdy 
Ghost  di  Sassia  {Order  ofthe  Holy  Ghosł  de  MotOpel" 
Her),  established  in  1178  by  Guido  of  Montpellier,  ac- 
cording  to  the  rule  of  St  Augustine  for  hospital  knigbts. 
In  1204  the  order  obtained  the  Hospital  di  Sassia,  in 
Romę,  in  which  the  superior  of  the  order  took  his  seat 
as  grand  master.  Henceforth  the  members  of  the  onler 
were  divided  into  hospital  knights,  with  simple,  and 
into  regular  canons,  with  solemn  vow8.  Pius  II  abol> 
ished  the  knights  in  1459  in  Italy,  but  in  France  they 
8urvived.  Having  been  restored  in  1693,  the  order  was 
divided  into  the  degrees  of  Knights  of  Justice  and 
Grace,  Serving  Brothers  and  Oblates,  and  in  1700  was 
changed  into  regular  canons,  who  stiU  exist.  At  an 
early  period  in  the  history  of  the  order  a  female  branch 


Regalar  Canon  of  the  Order  of     Nan  of  the  Order  of  the 
the  Holy  Ghoat  Holy  Ghost 

was  established.  2.  Sisłers  ofthe  Holy  Ghost  ofPolig- 
ny,  established  in  1212,  and  still  oontinuing  in  France,  a 
branch  of  the  Whiłe  Sisłers.  8.  Hospitailers  (brothers 
and  sisters)  of  the  Holy  Ghost  in  France^  established  in 
1254  as  a  secular  association,  and  connected  with  the 
Order  of  the  Holy  Ghost  di  Sassia.  The  sisters,  on  ac- 
count  of  their  dress  commonly  called  the  White  Sistersj 
are  still  numerous;  they  are  devoted  to  the  nursing  of 
the  sick  and  the  poor,  and  to  the  education  of  young 
girls.  4.  Canons  ofthe  Holy  Ghosiy  probably  founded  in 
Lorraine  by  Jean  Herbert,  and  confirmed  in  1588  by 
Sixtus  V,  are  devotcd  to  instruction.  6.  The  Society 
ofMissionary  Priests  ofthe  Holy  Ghost  was  founded  in 
*  1700  by  abbć  Desplaces  and  Yincent  le  Barbier  for  mis- 
.  sions,  seminaries,  and  the  nursing  of  the  sick;  newly 
established  in  1805;  still  exists,  and  is  active  in  the  for- 
eign  missionary  fields  of  the  Roman  Catholic  Church. 

Holy  GrasB  (Hierochha  borealis)^  a  grass  about  a 
foot  high,  of  a  brownish  glossy  lax  panicle,  found  in  the 
Dorthem  psrts  of  Europę,  has  a  sweet  smell  like  that  of 
vemal  grass.  In  Icelaud,  where  it  is  plentiful,  it  is  used 
for  scenting  apartments  and  clothes.  In  some  coun- 
tiies  it  is  strewed  on  the  floors  of  places  of  worship  on 
holy-days,  whenoe  its  name. — Chambers,  Cydop.  v,  392. 

Holy  Handkerohief.    **  It  is  sald  that  one  of  the 


women  who  foDowed  Jesus  to  the  crudiixion  lent  him 
her  handkerchief  to  wipe  the  sweat  and  blood  from  his 
face,  and  that  the  impress  of  his  fcatnres  remained  upao 
it.  Of  course,  St.  Yeronica  (q.  v.)  very  carefuDy  pre- 
8erved  the  cloth,  and  it  is  now  at  Romę.  Jesus,  accor.l- 
ing  to  tradition,  sent  another  handkerchief  to  Agbanu 
(q.  V.),  king  of  Edessa,  who  had  reąuested  a  portrait  of 
him.  Yeronica  is  only  a  mythical  personage,  the  name 
being  a  hybrid  compotmd  signifying  *true  image.'"— 
Eadie,  EccUs.  Diet.  p.  803.     See  Christ,  Images  of. 

Holy  of  Holiea.    See  Tabkbnacle  ;  Temple. 
Holy,  Holy,  Holy.    See  Thisagiok. 
Holy  Hottrs.    See  Hours,  Holt. 

Holy  Imiocents,  a  festival  in  commemoration  of 
the  slaughter  of  infant  martyrs  (at  Bethlehem,  Matt.  ii, 
16),  of  which  the  Greek  menology  and  Ethiopic  litorgy 
give  th^  number  at  40,000,  is  aUudcd  to  by  the  early 
Christian  fathers,  especialiy  Irenaeus  and  Cyprian,  On- 
gen  and  Augustine,  as  of  memoriał  obsenrance.  In  the 
4th  century,  Prudentius  celebrates  it  in  the  hymn  "  AU 
hail,  ye  infant  Martyr-Flowers,"  and,  in  connection  wiih 
the  Epiphany,  also  Fulgentius,  in  hią  homilies  for  the 
day.  St.  Bernard  also  alludes  to  them :  **  Stephen  was  a 
martyr  before  men,  John  before  angels,  but  these  before 
Grod,  confessing  Christ  by  dying,  uot  by  speech,  and 
their  merit  is  known  only  to  God."  Yiolet  was  used  on 
this  day  in  memory  of  the  sorrow  of  their  mothers,  and 
the  Te  Deum,  Alleluia,  and  doxologies  were  forbidden. 
In  England,  at  Norton  (W''orcestershire), "  a  mufflcd  i>eal 
is  rung  to  commemoiate  the  slaughter,  and  then  a  peal 
of  joy  for  the  escape  ofthe  infant  Christ;  a  half-muffied 
peal  is  rung  at  Minety,  Irlaisemore,  Ldgh-on-Meudip, 
Wiek,  Rissington,  and  Pattington."  —  Walcott,  Sacred 
Archceology^  p.  313.     See  Innocents. 

Holy  Land.    See  Palestine. 

Holy  Leae:ne.  I.  The  name  given  to  an  offensire 
and  defensive  alliance  oontracted  betwoen  the  party  of 
the  Guises  in  France,  king  Philip  II  of  Spain,  the  pope, 
the  raonks,  and  the  French  Pariiament,  in  conseąaence 
ofthe  edict  of toleration  of Blay  14, 1576.  The  object  of 
the  league  was  the  overthrow  of  the  Hugnenot  party  in 
France,  and  of  its  chief,  king  Henry  III,  whom  one  of 
the  Guises  was  to  succeed  on  the  throne.  Duke  Henry 
of  Guise  (sumamcd  Lc  Balafr^)  was  the  head  of  the 
league.  In  order  to  avoid  the  danger,  Heniy  joined  the 
anti-Protestant  movement  himself,  and  was  thus  Łed  to 
rencw  the  persecutions  against  the  Huguenota  The 
war  commenced  in  1577,  but  soon  ended  by  the  peaoe  of 
Beigerac.  When  the  duke  of  Alencon  died  in  1584, 
leaving  Henry  of  Navarrc,  a  Protestant,  heir  presump- 
tive  to  the  throne,  the  league  sprung  again  into  exist- 
enoe  under  the  influence  of  the  adherents  of  the  Guises, 
the  strict  Roman  Catholic  members  of  the  Parliaznent, 
the  fanatical  clergy,  and  the  ultra  conservative  party. 
The  States,  especialiy  the  8ixteen  districts  of  Paris 
(whence  the  association  also  took  the  name  of  Ligve  €ks 
Seize),  took  an  active  part  in  it  A  treaty  was  finally 
concluded  with  Spain,  and  signed  at  the  castle  of  Join- 
ville  Jan.  3, 1585,  to  preyent  the  accession  of  Henry  of 
Navarre  to  the  throne.  The  contracting  parties  also 
pledged  themselves  to  the  total  uprooting  of  Protestant- 
ism  in  France  and  the  Netherlands.  The  results  of  the 
league  soon  became  manifest  in  the  intolerant  edict  of 
Nemours  in  1585,  and  led  in  1587  to  the  war,  known  as 
the  war  of  the  threc  Henrj-s.  (See  France,  vol.  iii,  p. 
642.)  Henry  III  having  caused  Henry  of  Guise  to  be 
murdered  at  Blois  in  1688,  his  brother,  the  duke  of  May- 
enne,  became  chief  of  the  league.  Henry  HI  was  in 
tum  murdered  near  Paris  in  1589,  and  the  war  continned 
until  the  abjuration  of  Henry  lY  in  1588.  The  pope 
having  ab6olved  him,  the  members  of  the  league  grad- 
ually  joined  the  royal  standard,  and  the  party  ceaaed  to 
exi8t,  See  Mignet,  Hist.  de  la  Ligue  (Par.  1 829, 5  vol&) ; 
Labitte,  De  la  DemocraHe  chez  les  Pridicaieurs  de  ia 
Ligue  (Paris,  1841) ;  Riddle,  Persec  (fP^tpery^  i,  309  są. ; 


HOLY  MORTAR 


311 


HOLY  WATER 


De  FeB<!e,  Hut.  of  ProtettantUm  m  France  (Lond.  1858, 
12mo) ;  Kanke,  UUłory  o/Papacy  (see  Index) ;  Wright, 
Bist^  ofFnmee,  i,  680  Bq. ;  Poujoulat,  Nouv.  CoH,  de  Mi- 
m<^żre»poMr  semr  a  FkitL  de  France  (Paris,  1839, 4to,  IsŁ 
senes,  ir,  1  są.) ;  Pierer,  Unkfer9al-Lexikon,  x,  874.  See 
Gl-is:.,  Housb  of;  Huguenots. 

IJL  UoLY  League  of  Nubembero,  Liga  Sancta, 
eoatracted  Juty  10, 1588,  by  the  eroperor  Charles  V,  the 
archbishops  of  Mayence  and  Salzburg,  dukes  William 
and  Loiiis  of  Bavaria,  Geoige  of  Saxony,  Erich  and 
Henry  of  Brunswick,  for  the  defence  of  the  Koman  Cath- 
olic  faith  agaiust  the  league  of  Smalcald  (q.  v.).  The 
tre*ty  was  oonduded  for  eleven  ye^rs.  The  armies  of 
the  oontiacting  partiea  were  to  be  divided  into  two  parts, 
respectiyely  oommanded  by  duke  Louis  of  Bavaria  and 
duke  Henry  of  Brunswick.  The  tmoe  of  April  19, 1589, 
re&doed,  howerer,  these  combinations  unnecesaary.— 
Leo,  Unkfertalgeech.  iii,  157  sq. ;  Hardwick,  Ckurch  Hia- 
tory  dKrńff  the  Rtformaiion,  p.  63  8q. ;  Kurtz,  Ch,  Hitt. 
from  the  JHe/orm.  p.  83 ;  Pierer,  Universal'Lex.  x,  874. 

Holy  Mortar  is  the  ''mortar  used  in  cementing  al- 
tar  Stones,  and  madę  with  holy  water."~£adie,  Eccles, 
Cydop.  p.  814. 

Holy  Mother.    See  Mary,  Yirgin. 

Holy  MountaiiL    See  Hermon;  Sinai;  Zioń. 

Holy  Night,  the  night  before  Holy  Day,  is  the 
fint  Sunday  in  LenL  *'  By  Theodulph^s  Chapters,  the 
preriooB  week  was  employed  in  shriYing  penitenta." — 
Walcott,  Sacred  Archaola^,  p.  813. 

Holy  Office.    See  Ministry;  Inquisition. 

Holy  of  HoUes.    See  Tabernaclb;  Temple. 

Holy  Oil,  a  name  applied  in  the  4th  oentury  to  oil 
farought  to  Europę  from  Jemsalem.  "^  It  was  cairied  in 
eotton  within  little  phials,  and  distributed  to  the  faith- 
fnl  at  a  ttme  when  relics  were  sparingly  distributed."  In 
Gregory  of  Toiirs's  time,  oil  blessed  at  soints'  tombs  was 
▼ery  gencial,  and  in  St  Gregory*s  day  oil  taken  from 
Ismps  which  bumed  before  the  grayes  of  martyrs  in  the 
Cataoorobs  was  called  *"  holy  oil"  **  Several  of  these  phi- 
als, which  Gregoiy  the  Great  gare  to  queen  Theodolin- 
di,  are  preaeiTed  at  Monza.** — ^Walcott,  Sacred  A  rcheeoL 
p.  313, 314.    See  Amfitlła  ;  Ghrism. 

Holy  Orders.    See  Ordiitation. 

Holy  Phial  or  Sainte  Ampoule,  Order  of, 
the  name  of  an  old  order  of  knighthood  in  France,  which 
was  compoaed  of  four  persons,  of  the  very  first  families 
in  the  province  of  Champagne,  and  were  styled  Baron* 
dt  la  Sainte  A  mpoute,  At  the  coronation  of  the  French 
kingB  they  were  hostages  to  the  dean,  priors,  and  chap- 
ter  of  Rheims  until  the  return  of  the  holy  phial  in  which 
the  coronation  oil  was  kept,  and  which,  according  to 
the  legend,  was  brought  from  heaven  by  the  Holy  Ghost 
nnder  the  form  of  a  dove,  and  put  into  the  hands  of  St. 
Bemy  at  the  coronation  of  CIoyIb,  an  enormous  crowd 
having  prerented  the  messenger  from  bńnging  in  time 
that  which  had  already  been  prepared.  The  knights 
of  tkia  order  were  only  knights  while  the  holy  phial  was 
naed  at  the  coroiuUion  senrice.  They  wore  as  a  batlgc 
a  cross  of  gold  enamelled  white,  cantoned  with  four 
fleor-de-lis,  and  on  the  cross  a  dove  descending  with  a 
phial  in  its  bealc,  and  a  right  hand  reoeiving  it.— Cham- 
bera,  Cycfop.y,  898. 

Holy  Place.    See  Tabernacle;  Temple. 

Holy  Places.  See  Hebroh;  Jbritaaloi;  Mbo 
ca;  pAŁissTUfE,  etc 

Holy  Rood  (rode  or  rod),  **the  name  of  the  cross 
■o  often  erected  in  chuTche8."~£adie,  Eccles,  Diet.  p. 
311    See  Cross;  KooD. 

Holy-Rood  I>ay,  a  festival  on  the  14th  of  Sep- 
tember  to  commemorate  in  churches  the  Exaltation  of 
the  Cntes;  the  Inrention  or  Finding  of  the  Holy  Cross 
beiDg  celebrated  on  the  3d  of  May.— Walcott,  Sac,  A  r- 
AeoL  p.  314 ;  Eadi^  £ccL  Diet,  p.  812.    See  Cross. 


Holy  Satnrday.  In  some  churches  the  Satmday 
before  Easter  is  so  called.    See  Holy  Week. 

Holy  Scrlptnre.    See  Scripture,  holy. 

Holy  Sepulchre.    See  Sepulchre  of  Christ. 

Holy  Sepulchre,  Orders  o£  1.  A  religious 
order  in  the  Koman  Catholic  Church  aecording  to  the 
rule  of  St  Augustine,  founded  in  1114  by  the  archdeacon 
(subseąuently  patriarch  of  Jemsalem)  Arnold;  accord- 
ing to  others,  it  was  founded  in  1099  by  Godfrey  of 
Bouillon.  It  embraced  regular  canons  and  canonesses, 
was  at  one  time  established  all  through  Europę,  and  r&- 
oeived  a  new  rule  under  Urban  VIII.  The  canons  be- 
came  extinct  soon  aflter  the  lenewal  of  their  nile,  but 
the  canonesses  stiU  haye  a  number  of  houses  in  France, 
Germany  (Baden),  and  the  Netherlands,  and,  liying  in 
strict  seclusion,  occupy  themselyes  with  the  instruction 
and  education  of  young  girls.  2.  The  Order  of  Knights 
of  the  Jłoly  Sepulchre  in  Enykrnd,  esUblished  in  1174; 
extinGt  Since  the  16th  century.  The  knights  were 
obliged  to  guard,  at  least  dunng  two  years,  the  Holy 
Sepulchre  of  Jemsalem.  8.  Knights  of  the  Holy  Stjntl- 
chre,  an  order  founded  yery  likely  by  pope  Alexander 
VI  to  guard  the  Holy  Sepulchre,  and  at  the  same  time  to 
afford  relief  and  protection  to  pijgrims  to  the  Holy  Land. 
Originally  the  pope  was  the  grand  master  of  the  order, 
but  he  finally  ceded  this  right  to  the  ^  guaidian  father  of 
the  Holy  Sepulchre."  The  knights  must  be,  according  to 
the  rules  of  the  order,  of  noble  descent,  hear  mass  daily, 
iight,  live,  and  die  for  the  Koman  Catholic  faith,  etc. 
But  they  enjoyed  also  extraordinary  priWleges,  as  ex- 
emption  ftom  taxation,  permission  to  many,  possessbn 
of  Church  property,  etc  When  Jerusalein  was  recap- 
tured  by  the  Turks,  the  knights  of  the  Holy  Sepulchre 
went  to  Peragia,  in  Italy.  '^After  a  temporary  union 
with  the  HospitaUers,  the  order  was  reconstmcted  in 
1814  both  in  France  and  in  Poland,  and  is  still  in  exist- 
ence  within  a  yery  smali  circle  of  knights  elected  by 
the  gnardian  father  from  the  most  respectable  pilgrima 
who  come  to  Jemsalem.*' — Chamben,  Cydop,  v,  393  sq. 

Holy  Spear  {ayia  \óyxn\  as  it  is  called  in  the 
Greek  Church,  is  a  kind  of  spear  with  a  long  handle, 
ending  in  a  cross,  '*with  which  the  altar-bread,  called 
sphragis  or  holy  lamb,  is  cut  out  from  the  loaf  for  eon- 
secration  by  the  priest,  with  a  solemn  form  in  the  litur* 
gy  of  Chr^'S06tom  fotmded  on  Isa.  liii,  78 ;  John  xiz, 
34."-Walćott,  Sacred  A rchcsoL  p.  814. 

Holy  Spirit.  See  Spirit,  Work  of  the;  Holy 
Ghost;  Paraclete;  Witness  of  the  Spirit. 

Holy  Synod  is  the  title  in  the  Greek  Church  of 
the  highest  goveming  body. 

Holy  Table,  as  it  is  called  in  some  churches,  is  the 
table  on  which  are  placed  the  bread  and  winę,  the  ap- 
pointed  emblems  of  the  Saviour*s  death.     See  Altar. 

Holy  ThuTBday  (called  also  Maujidy  Thursday, 
from  mandafum  [commandment],  the  first  word  with 
which  the  Church  serrices  of  the  day  begin),  a  day 
obsenred  in  some  churches  in  commemoration  of  our 
Lord^s  ascension.  In  the  Koman  Calendar  it  is  the  thir- 
ty-ninth  day  afler  Easter  Sunday.  See  Asceksiom 
Day;  Holy  Week. 

Holy  Union.    See  Holy  Leagl^ 

Holy  Wara.    See  Crusades. 

Holy  Water,  in  the  Komish,  as  also  in  the  Greek, 
Russian,  and  Oriental  churches,  denotes  water  blesaed  by 
a  priest  or  bishop  for  certain  religious  uses.  The  theoiy 
of  its  first  introduction  scems  to  have  been  that  water 
is  a  fitting  symbol  of  purity,  and  accordingly,  in  most  of 
the  ancient  religions,  the  use  of  lustral  or  purifying  wa- 
ter not  only  formed  part  of  the  public  worship,  but  also 
entered  largely  into  the  personal  acta  of  sanctification 
prescribed  to  individuals.  The  Jewish  law  also  pie- 
scribed  this,  and  it  was  a  practice  held  in  common  by 
many  Pagan  nations  (compare  Riddle,  Christ.  A  nt.  p.  725). 
The  sprinkling  of  the  hands  and  face  with  water  before 


HOLY-WATER  SPRINKLER      312 


HOLYOKE 


entering  the  sanctuary,  still  generally  ob«erved  by  the  ad- 
herenta to  that  law,  was  retained,  or,  no  doubt,  may  have 
given  rise  to  ita  adoption  by  the  early  Christian  Chuich. 
But  ita  uae  was  certaiiily  for  a  very  different  piirpofie. 
Thus  bishop  Marcellus  ordered  Eqaitius,  his  deacon,  tx) 
sprinkle  holy  water,  hallowed  by  him,  in  houses  and 
churches,  to  exorci8e  devils,  which  is  said  to  have  been 
done  also  by  pope  Alexander  L  **  Joseph,  the  conrert- 
cd  Jew,  Epiphanius  says,  used  oonsecrated  water  in  cx- 
ordsm.  Holy  water  was  used  in  all  benedictions  of 
palm  and  olive  branches,  yestments,  oorporals,  candlea, 
houses,  herds,  fields,  and  in  private  houses.  By  the  can- 
on  law  it  is  mingled  with  salt.  The  Council  of  Nantes 
ordered  the  priest  before  mass  to  sprinkle  the  church 
oourt  and  closc,  offering  prayers  for  the  departcd,  and  to 
give  water  to  all  who  asked  it  for  their  houses,  food,  cat- 
tle,  fodder,  fields,  and  yineyards.  By  the  Capitulars  of 
Charlemagne,  Louis,  and  Lothaire,  on  Easter  and  Whit- 
sun  eve8  all  the  faithful  might  take,  for  purposes  of  as- 
persion  in  their  houses,  consecrated  ynta  before  its  ad- 
mixture  with  chrism  (q.  v.).  In  monasteries,  a  novice 
carried  the  holy  water  before  the  cross  in  procession" 
(Wakott,  Sac  A  rchteoL  p.  814).  In  the  Romish  Church 
of  to-day  holy  water  is  directed  to  be  madę  of  pure 
spring  water,  with  the  admixture  of  a  little  consecrated 
salt.  This  water  (generally  plaoed  at  the  entrance  of 
plaoes  of  worship,  and  sanctified  by  a  solemn  benedic- 
tion,  prescribed  in  the  diocesan  ritual)  the  Romanist  haa 
come  to  look  upon  with  the  most  superstitious  regard, 
and  it  is  used  not  merely  for  the  sprinkling  of  persons 
on  entering  and  leaving  the  church,  but  also  in  sprink- 
ling books,  bells,  etc,  and  it  is  frequently  taken  to  their 
homes,  as  having  some  peculiar  yirtue.  Its  use  has  thus 
become  nothing  morę  than  a  charm.  In  the  Greek 
Church,  holy  water  is  usually  consecrated  by  the  bishop 
or  his  vicar-general  on  the  eve  of  the  Epiphany.  No  salt 
is  employed,  and  they  regard  the  use  of  it  by  the  Latins 
as  a  grievous  and  unauthorized  corruption.  The  Greeks 
perform  the  oeremony  on  January  6,  the  day  on  which 
they  beliere  that  Christ  was  baptized  by  John,  and  twice 
a  year  it  is  usual  to  drink  a  portion,  viz.  at  the  end  of 
the  midnight  mass  of  Christmas  and  on  the  feast  of 
Epiphany.  In  the  Armenian  Church,  holy  water  b  con- 
secrated by  plunging  a  cross  into  it  on  the  day  of  the 
Epiphany,  afler  which  it  is  distributed  among  the  con- 
gregation,  who  take  it  to  their  homes.  The  offering^ 
madę  on  thls  occasion  form  a  considerable  portion  of  the 
emoluments  of  the  Armenian  priesthood.  On  the  prac- 
tice  of  using  water  for  baptism,  see  Baptism,  voL  i,  p. 
650.— Bingham,  Orig,  Eccles.  bk.  viii,  eh.  iii,  §  67 ;  Eadie, 
JUccL  Cyclop,  p.  318,  658,  659 ;  Coleman,  A  nc,  Christian- 
Uy,  p.  869,  395 ;  Chambers,  Cydop,  v,  894.  For  mono- 
graphs,  see  Yolbeding,  Jndex  Program,  p.  142. 

Holy-water  Sprinkler,  "  the  aspergUl,  a  brush 
for  scattering  holy  water.  A  horrible  Tudor  mace,  with 
radiating  spikes,  was  called  the  moming  star,  or  sprin- 
kler."—Walcott,  Sacred  Archaology,  p,  314. 

Holy-water  Stook  (i.  e.  piUar)  or  Stoup  (i.  e. 
bucket).  Astation- 
ary  stone  basin  (any 
porous  substance 
which  could  suck  it 
up  was  to  be  care- 
fully  avoided)  for 
holy  water,  plaćed  at 
.  the  entrance  of  the 
house  of  worship, 
called  by  the  French 
henitier,  Pope  Leo 
III  erected  one  at 
Ostia.  "The  stoup 
is  found  in  all  peri- 
ods  of  architecture, 
formed  in  the  wali,  set  on  a  pillar,  or  in  the  porch,  or 
standing  on  a  pedestaL"  The  ressel  used  by  the  Tera- 
pie prieste  was  a  brazen  laver  (see  Isa.  i,  16 ;  lii,  2;  £xod. 


Holy-water  Stone  at  Romt«e3*,Hant«. 


xxx,  20;  2  Cor.  vii,  1 ;  PBa.li,2, 7).— Walcott,  Sac  Ar* 
ckaology,  p.  314  sq. 

Holy-water  Vat  (French,  ft^nificr;  Latin,  nfai^o, 
ra«),  a  vessel  in  which  the  holy  yrater  was  carried  about, 
and  which,  acoording  to  Micrologns,  was  first  consecra- 
ted by  pope  Alexander  Y,  as  Cranmer  says,  to  ^  put  us 
in  remembrance  of  our  baptism,  and  the  blood  of  Christ 
for  our  redemption,  sprinkled  on  the  cross."  Eadie  aays 
"  this  vessel  was  termed  arna  or  omula,  Du  Cange  rec- 
ognises  aspergołf  atperffillum,  and  atpertorium  aa  the 
ve6sels  from  which  the  priests  sprinkled  the  water,  and 
ffuadalerium  as  that  which  oontained  it.  The  first  three 
are  plainly  the  same  as  the  iriptf»pavrffpiov  of  pagan- 
ism."  »*  The  flxed  holy-water  stoup  (q.  v.)  waa  used  by 
those  who  came  too  late  into  church  to  receive  tbe  as- 
persion  by  the  sprinkler  and  water  carried  in  the  port- 
able  vat,  which  in  the  churches  of  the  West  represoited 
the  bodily  ablution  madę  by  the  Oriental  Christiana."— 
Walcott,  8acred  A  rchaology,  p.  816 ;  Eadie,  Ecde»,  Dic- 
tionaryj  p.81d. 

Holy  Week,  the  last  week  of  Lent  (q.  v.),  L  e.  the 
week  bdbre  Easter,  and  spedally  devoted  to  conunem- 
orating  the  sufferings  and  death  of  Christ  lu  £ng- 
lish  use,  it  is  also  called  Passion  Week  (a  name  appro- 
priated,  in  Roman  use,  to  the  week  before  Palm  Sun- 
day).  This  institution  is  of  very  early  origin,  and  was 
"  formerly  called  the  *  Great  Week,'  and  in  m6di«val 
times  the  *  Authentic,*  with  the  same  meaning;  in  Ger- 
many and  Denmark,  the  popular  title  is  *  Still  Week,*  in 
allusion  to  the  holy  quiet  and  abstraction  from  labor 
during  its  continuance."  In  the  Roman  Catholic  Church, 
the  special  characteristics  of  the  celebration  of  the  Holy 
Week  are  increased  solemnity  and  gloom,  penitential 
rigor,  and  mouming.  If  any  of  the  ordinary  Church 
festivals  fali  therein,  they  are  transferred  till  ailter  Easter. 
All  instrumental  musie  is  suspended  in  the  churches,  the 
altars  are  stripped  of  their  omaments,  the  pictures  and 
statues  are  veiled  from  public  sight,  manuał  labor  is  vol- 
untarily  suspended,  the  rigor  of  fasting  is  redoubled,  and 
alms-deeds  and  other  works  of  mercy  ard  sedukraaly  en- 
joined  and  practised.  The  dayt  specially  solenmized 
are  Palm  Sunday,  Spy  Wednesday,  Holy  (or  Maundy) 
Thursday,  Good  Friday  (q.  v.),  Holy  Saturday.  Holy 
Thursday  (q.  v.),  in  the  Roman  Catholic  Church,  ia  spe- 
cially designed  aa  a  commemoration  of  the  Laat  Supper, 
and  of  the  institution  of  the  Eucharist.  Besides  tbeee 
senrices,  there  are  stiU  others  annexed  to  the  day,  as  the 
solemn  consecration  of  the  oil  or  chrism  (q.  v.)  used  in 
baptism,  confirmation,  orders,  and  extreme  unction,  the 
washing  of  pilgrims*  feet,  and  the  chanting  of  the  Tene- 
broB  (darkness),  consisting  of  the  matins  and  lauds  for 
the  following  momings,  which  it  is  customary  to  recite 
at  night.  "  During  the  sernice,  a  large  candlestick,  sop- 
porting  iifleen  lights,  arranged  in  the  form  of  a  triangle, 
which  denote  Christ  and  the  prophets  who  predictcd 
his  coming,  stands  in  the  sanctuary;  the  lights  are  one 
by  one  extinguished  until  only  the  upper  one  remains, 
which  is  taken  down  and  placed  under  the  altar  luitil 
the  close  of  the  office,  and  then  brought  back ;  this  sym- 
bolizes  Christ^s  burial  and  resurrection."  On  Holy  Sat- 
urday follow  the  sołemn  blessing  of  fire  and  the  water 
of  the  baptisnuil  font,  the  baptism  of  catechumens,  and 
the  ordination  of  candidates  for  the  ministry.  From 
the  fire  solemnly  blessed  on  this  day  Ls  lighted  the  Pas- 
chal  Light,  which  is  regarded  as  a  symbol  of  Christ 
risen  from  the  dead.  This  s3nmbolical  light  is  kept  bum- 
ing  during  the  reading  of  the  gospel  at  Mass  through- 
out  the  interval  between  Easter  and  Pentecoet. — Wet- 
zer  u.  Welte,  KirchenrLez,  vol.  ii,  arr.  Charwoche ;  Proc- 
ter, Com,  Prayer^  p.  279  8q.;  Guericke,  Afitictittieg,  pt 
144  sq. ;  Chambers,  Cyclop.  v,  894 ;  Walcott,  Sacred  A  r- 
chaologyy  p.  815;  Appleton,  Arna;  Cydop,  ix,  240,  241. 
See  Passion. 

Holy  Wells,  sacred  springs  in  Popish  coontries — 
scenes  of  pilgrimage  and  expected  mirades. 

Holyoke,  Edward,  a  Congregational  minister,  was 


HOLZHAUSER 


813 


HOMES 


bom  in  1690  mt  Boston.  H«  graduated  at  Hanrard 
College  in  1705,  was  elected  tutor  in  1712,  and  on  April 
25,  1716,  was  ordained  fint  pastor  of  the  Second  Chnrch 
in  Martilehead.  In  1787  he  was  elected  president  of 
Hairaid  College,  and  remained  in  tbat  office  untU  his 
death,  June  1, 1769.  He  published  an  A  nswer  to  Wkite- 
fieUL  (1744),  and  a  few  oocasional  sermona. — Sprague, 
JfMMi&,  i,  298.     (G.L.T.) 

Holshatuer,  Barthou>mau9,  foonder  of  the  or- 
der of  Bartholomitea  (q.  v.),  was  bom  at  Langnan,  Switz* 
erland,  in  1613,  and  was  brought  up  to  his  father'8  trade, 
shoemaking.  By  the  exertion8  of  some  charitable  per- 
sooB  he  was  admitted  into  an  establishment  for  poor 
stodents  at  Neubing,  and  ailerwards  stiidied  philoeophy 
at  Ingolstadt  onder  the  Jesuits.  Ordained  priest  in 
1639,  he  eonceiyed  the  idea  of  bringing  back  the  priest- 
hood  to  the  common  life  of  the  primitive  Church.  He 
foanded  at  Tittmoningen  an  institution  intended  to  show 
the  wmking  of  his  system,  and  in  1640  founded  a  pre- 
pantoiy  seminary  at  Salzburg  in  connection  with  it 
Ue  was  saocessirely  corate  of  Tittmoningen,  L5ggen- 
thal,  and  Bingen,  where  he  died  in  1658.  His  zeal  and 
aacetic  practices  indined  him  to  rerery  and  exaltation, 
BO  that  he  datmed  to  hare  yisions;  and  it  is  said  that, 
having  been  risited  by  Charles  II,  then  a  fagitive,  he 
predicted  that  a  better  futurę  awaited  him.  He  wrote, 
Com§lihiiumn  cum  erertitiu  dericorum  (Colon.  1662  8q. ; 
apiffored  by  the  Chuich  of  Romę  in  1680)  i^De  kumUr 
•taise,  together  with  a  tieatise  On  the  Love  of  God  (May- 
cnce,  1663) : — Opuśculum  vitwmtm  narutrum,  A  biog- 
raphy  of  llolzhauser,  and  a  German  translation  of  his 
wocka»  were  published  by  Clanis  (Ratisbon,  1852) ;  a 
French  translation,  with  a  biography,  by  Gaduel  (Paris, 
1861).— Ersch  und  Gruber^  Ali/.  EncffhhpSdie ;  Hoefer, 
Nom.  Biog.  GhUrale,  xxv,  14;  Herzog,  Real^EncyUop, 
1,700.    (J.N.P.) 

Homage.  See  Adoration  ;  Dulia  ;  Fief  ;  Wob- 
snip. 

Homagiiim  is  a  term  applied  in  ecdesiastical  lan- 
guage  to  the  adoration  (q.  v.)  which  the  clergy  in  the 
Koman  CathoUc  Chnrch  pay  to  the  pope.— Fuhrmann, 
JiamAp&rterb,  d,  Rdig.  und  KirckengetcL  ii,  838. 

Ho^mmm.  (Heb.  Hornom',  ta^in,  ducomJUure ;  Sept 
AifMÓyj  Vu]g.  Homtm)f  the  second  named  of  the  two 
soos  of  LoCan,  son  of  Seir  the  Horite  (1  Chroń,  i,  89). 
In  the  parallel  paasage  (Gen.  xxxyi,  22)  his  name  is 
written  Hexax  (Heb.  JIeymam%  CO*^^,  Sept  Aifidvy 
Tulg.  Ilemany.  B.C.  oonsiderabiy  anto  1964.  Homam 
is  aanmed  by  (jesenius  to  be  the  original  form  {The»,  p. 
385  a).  By  Knobel  {jGenuU,  p.  254)  the  name  is  com- 
pared  with  that  of  el^Homaimaj  a  town  now  ruined, 
thoogh  once  important,half  way  between  Petra  andAi- 
latb,  on  the  andent  road  at  the  back  of  the  mountain, 
which  the  Arabie  geographers  describe  as  the  native 
place  of  the  Abassides  (Robinson,  Res.  ii,  572).  (See  La- 
borde,  Joumty,  p.  207,  A  meimś  ;  also  the  Arabie  author- 
ides  mentioned  by  Knobel.) 

Hombergk  xa  Vaoh,  Johann  Frikdbich,  a 

learoed  jurist,  bom  at  Marburg  April  15, 1673,  was  edu- 
cated  at  the  Unirersity  of  Utrecht.  He  visitod  £ng- 
land,  remaining  for  some  time  in  London,  Oxford,  and 
Cimbridge,  and  formed  an  intimato  acquaintance  with 
Richaid  Bentley.  He  died  April  20, 1748.  In  addition 
to  works  on  professional  topics,  he  pubUshed,  as  the  re- 
nit  of  his  private  study  of  the  New  Testament,  Parer- 
9a  Sacra  teu  interpretatio  tuceincta  et  nova  guorundam 
teztmtm  Novi  TeaUmenU  (UltraJ.  1708,  8vo),  and  en- 
larged  and  improved  under  the  title  Parerga  Sacra 
MV  ob»ervaiioaeg  cumdam  ad  Novwn  Tutamentum  (Ul- 
tc^.  1712, 4to).  The  critidsms  contained  in  this  work 
were  attacked  by  Elsner,  and  defended  by  the  author^s 
Ml,  .Amilins  Lodwig,  also  a  jurist— V.  H,  Hombergk  tu 
yoek  Parerga  sacra  ab  in^nignafionSnu  J.  Elmeri  vm- 
dicaia  (Marb.  1789, 4to),  replied  to  by  a  relatiye  of  Els- 
ner: Brevem  Hombergianarum  mndicarum  ode,  J,  KU^ 


nerum  proJKgaUonem  (Berlin,  1742, 4to).  "  Hombergk 
takes  a  medium  poeition  between  the  Hebraists  and  the 
Purists.**— Kitto,  BibL  Cydop,  ii,  819;  Jocher,  GeL  Iax, 
ii,  1686. 

Homburg,  Ermst  Crristoph,  a  German  hym- 
nologist,  was  bom  at  Muhla,  near  Eiseiiach,  m  1605. 
His  profession  was  that  of  lawyer.  In  his  early  years 
he  wrote  secular  yerses,  but  in  his  riper  years  he  was 
led  to  tum  his  thoughts  to  sacred  themes,  and  the  re- 
sults  are  some  yeiy  beautiful  hymna,  of  which  a  few  are 
found  in  the  Liturgg  and  Hymta  for  the  use  of  the  Prot^ 
estant  Church  of  the  United  Brethren  (1836),  and  in 
the  Chrietian  Psalmitt  (1882).  The  «  Man  of  Sorrows" 
is  generally  regarded  as  the  best  of  tbese.  Ile  died 
June  21,  1681.— Miller  (Josiab),  Our  Hymiu,  their  Au- 
tkors  and  Origin  (Lond.  1867, 12mo),  p.  82. 

Home,  Dayid,  a  French  divine  of  Scottish  birth, 
who  flourished  towards  the  doee  of  the  16th  and  th^ 
beginning  of  the  I7th  century,  "was  engaged  by  James 
I  to  attempt  the  impracticable  task  of  uniting  all  the 
Protestant  diyines  in  Europę  in  one  system  of  religious 
belief."  The  mostamportant  of  his  writings  is  Apoh' 
gia  BoMilioa,  stu  MachiartUi  Jngenium  Kxaminatum, 
He  łB  also  supposed  to  be  the  author  of  two  satires  against 
the  Jesuits,  entitled  Le  Contrę  Aesassin,  ou  reporue  it 
tApohgU  dea  Jesuiłeg  (1612,  8vo),  and  LQs$€utinai  du 
Roi,  ou  maximes  du  Viel  de  la  Moniagne  Yałicant,  etc 
(1617,  8vo).— JVbui;.  Diet,  Hist.  i,  271  j  Gorton,  Biogr. 
Diet.  ToL  ii. 

Home  Miflsions.    See  Missioms. 

Homer  (*»^n,  cho^mter,  a  heap,  as  in  Exod.  viii,  14), 
a  Hebrew  measure  of  capacity  for  things  dr}',  containing 
ten  baths  (Ley.  xxvii,  16 ;  Numb.  xi,  32 ;  Ezek.  xlv,  11, 
13,14).  In  later  writera  it  is  usually  termed  a  coR.  See 
Measure. 

The  Wiheh  (T^rl?»  yesscl  foT pouring ;  Sept.  rjfilKopoCf 
Yulg.  corus  dunic&iw,  EngLYers.  *'  half  a  homer*')  was  a 
measure  for  grain  of  half  the  capacity  of  the  homer  at 
cor,  as  seems  probable  from  the  only  paasage  where  it 
is  mentioned  (Hos.  iii,  8).    See  Stud. «.  Krit.  1846,  i,  123. 

Homer,  Jonathan,  .D.D.,  a  Congregational  minis- 
ter, was  bora  October,  1759.  He  graduated  at  Haryard 
College  in  1777,  was  ordained  pastor  of  the  First  Church 
in  Newton  Feh.  18,  1782,  resigned  in  April,  1839,  and 
died  Aug.  U,  1843.  Dr.  Homer  published  a  Deacripiion 
and  Hittory  o/ Newton  in  the  Mastachusett*  Historicai 
CoUection,  yoL  v  (1798),  and  a  few  oocasional  sermons. 
He  also  supermtended  an  edition  of  TeaTa  Columbian 
^iftfe.— Sprague,  AnnaU,  ii,  173. 

Homer,  William  Bradford,  a  Congregational 
minister,  was  bom  in  Boston  Jan.  81, 1617.  He  was 
educated  at  Amherst  College,  firom  which  he  graduated 
in  1836,  and  immediately  entered  on  a  course  of  theo- 
logtcal  study  at  Andover.  While  in  the  middle  year 
of  his  course  he  declined  the  ofTer  of  a  tutorahip  in  Am- 
herst College.  He  was  ordained  pastor  of  South  Ber^ 
wiek,  Me.,  Nov.ll,  1840,  where  he  died,  March  22, 1841. 
The  remarkable  devclopment  of  Homer'a  intellect  w^ 
a  matter  of  great  aurprise  to  all  of  hia  inatmctors. 
>Vlien  only  eleyen  years  old  he  was  already  thorough- 
ly  conyeraant  with  the  Latin,  the  modem  Greek,  and 
French  languages.  The  laat  two  he  is  aaid  to  haye 
spoken  with  fluency.  At  Andover  he  closed  the  exer- 
ciaea  of  his  class  by  an  esaay  ao  scholarly  in  ita  bearings 
that  he  was  reąuested  to  publish  it  An  oration  of  his, 
delivered  on  leaying  the  president^s  chair  of  the  Porter 
Rhetorical  Society  of  the  Theological  Seminary,  was  also 
printed.  His  "  writings"  have  been  published,  tńtk  an 
Introductorg  Essag  and  a  Memoir,  by  Prof.  Edward  A. 
Park,  of  Andoyer  Theological  Seminary  (2d  ed.  Boston, 
1849, 8yo).  See  also  the  Christian  Rerńew  (May,  1849> 
— Sprague,  Annah,  IL  758  sq. 

Homerites.    See  Himyaritks. 

Homes  or  Holmes,  Nathaniel,  a  leamed  Eng- 


HOMES 


314 


HOMILETICS 


]i{ih  dirine,  was  for  a  Łime  incumbent  of  the  liring  of 
BtMaiy  Staining,  London,  but  was  €jected  for  nonoon- 
foimity  in  1662.  He  died  in  1678.  His  publications, 
now  become  rare,  indude  The  Returrection  ReveaUd 
(Lond.  1664,  foL;  2d  ed«  1833,  8yo)  -^The  Buurrectum 
Reoealed  raised  above  Doubls  and  D^fiadtiet,  in  ten  Eac- 
ercUationa  (London,  1661,  folio) : — A  Contmuaiion  ofłhe 
Hifłories  of  Foreign  Martyrs  from  the  Reign  ofOuun 
Elizabeth  to  these  Times  (in  Fox*8  Actt  and  MonumeiUSy 
ed.  1684,  iii,  866):  — 7%e  New  World,  or  ihe  New  Be-- 
/ormed  Church  di8covered  outqf2  Pet,  iii,  18  (London, 
1641, 4to).  See  Wood,  A  thena  Ozon, ;  Darling,  Cydop. 
BibUographicGj  voL  i ;  Allibone,  IHet,  o/Authon,  i,  873. 

Homes,  William,  was  bom  in  Ireland  in  1663, 
and  was  oidained  in  that  country  in  1692.  He  emigra- 
ted  to  America  in  1714,  and  became  minister  at  Mar- 
tha's  Ylneyard,  Mass.  He  died  in  1746.  Homes  pub- 
lished  four  sermons  (1732, 1747,  etc).— Allen's  American 
Biographical  Dictionary, 

Homioide.    See  Mak-slaybr. 

Homiletics  is  tbe  science  of  Christian  address. 
The  term  is  derived  from  ofiikiai  conrerse,  which,  in 
early  Christian  usage,  signifled  a  religious  address;  or, 
morę  directiy,  from  the  adjective  ofuktfrtKÓc,  amoersa- 
tional,  or  pertaining  to  yerbal  commnnion.  It  came 
into  peitoanent  use  during  the  17th  centnry,  at  a  period 
when,  under  the  influence  of  the  scholastic  method,  the 
principal  branches  of  theology  receiyed  sdentific  desig- 
nations  derived  from  the  Greek  language :  e.  g.  Apolo- 
g^tics,  Dogmatics,  Hermeneutics,  Polemica.  Although 
promptly  naturalized  on  the  continent  of  Europę,  the 
term  Homiletics  was  not  for  a  long  time  generally  adopt- 
ed  in  England.  In  fact,  its  present  accepted  use  in  the 
English  language  is  largely  due  to  American  authoi^ 
ship.  In  Germany  some  attempts  have  been  madę  to 
introc|uoe  other  terms  also  derived  from  the  Greek. 
Stier  proposed  Keryktics^  from  KripvĘf  a  herald;  and 
Sickel  ffalieułicsy  from  a\uvCt  afisherman;  the  latter 
being  used  tropically  in  the  Gospels  in  application  to 
the  disciples  as  "•  fishers  of  men."  Both  of  these  terms 
have  been  regarded  as  fanciful  and  undesenring  of  per- 
petnation,  even  though  llmited  to  missionaiy  preach- 
ing.  The  term  Homiletics  is  not  entirely  unexception- 
able,  but  is  retained  and  employed  for  lack  of  a  better. 

I.  Higtory. -^W\th.  some  authors,  espedally  in  Ger- 
many, the  use  of  a  scientiflc  term  to  designate  the  the- 
ory  of  preaching  has  seemed  to  extenuate,  if  not  to 
soggest,  some  practical  crrors  in  its  treatment.  Set- 
ting  out  with  the  idea  of  exhibiting  a  science  in  a  sci- 
entiflc manner,  not  a  few  writers  have  ignored  the 
proper  origin  and  the  religious  design  of  preaching. 
They  have  treated  it  exdusively  from  the  rhetorical 
and  human  point  of  vicw.  They  haye  cumbered  it 
with  artiflcial  and  arbitrary  rules,  apparently  not  hay- 
ing  conceiyed  of  it  as  an  agency  specially  and  diyinely 
appointed  for  the  morał  renoyation  of  the  world.  But 
a  penrerted  use  of  terms  was  not  the  origin  of  mistakes 
on  this  subject,  nor  was  error  in  reference  to  it  flist  de- 
yeloped  in  modem  times.  Indecd,  misconceptions  of 
the  true  design  of  preaching,  as  well  as  of  the  Christian 
truth  it  had  been  appointed  to  propagate,  became  com- 
mon  at  a  yery  early  period  in  the  history  of  the  Church. 

1.  The  trae  scriptural  idea  of  preaching  was  conrupted 
in  the  ancient  Church  by  (1)  ritualistic  tendencies;  (2) 
rhetorical  ambition.  No  sooner  had  the  idea  that  the 
Christian  ministiy  is  a  priesthood  gained  preyalence  in 
the  Chiunch  than  preaching  became  secondary  to  sacer- 
dotai  rites,  and  the  power  of  the  Gospel  wancd  under 
an  increasing  array  of  forms  and  ccremonies.  Instead 
of  being  foremost  as  the  grand  agency  of  Christian  prop- 
agandism,  it  became  an  appendage  to  public  worship. 
Instead  of  going  forth  to  find  hearers  in  the  market- 
places  and  by  the  wayside,  preaching  began  to  be  re- 
garded as  one  of  the  mysteries  of  the  Church  from  which 
the  heathen,  and  even  catechumens  of  the  flrst  degree, 
were  exclttded.    Catechumens  of  the  second  degree  were 


called  by  the  Greek  Cfaureh  <lx(NMtf/tfvoi,  and  by  the 
Latin  audienteśf  **  from  their  being  admitted  to  hear  ao^ 
mons  and  the  Scriptnres  lead  in  the  church;  but  they 
were  not  allowed  to  stay  during  any  of  the  prmyeis,  not 
eyen  during  those  that  were  said  oyer  the  leat  of  the 
catechumens,  or  eneigumens,  or  penitents;  but  before 
these  began,  immediately  after  the  sermon,  at  the  wcrd 
of  command  then  solemnly  used—*  JVe  qui$  ouduatimi; 
Let  nonę  of  the  hearers  be  present* — ^they  were  to  de> 
part  the  church"  (Bingham,  Orig.  £ccL  bk.  x,  c.  ii,  §  3). 
Preaching,  haying  become  a  ceremony,  was  next  oor- 
rapted  by  embellishments,  and  an  artiflcial  style  adepta 
ed  from  the  Greek  rhetoricians.    £xhortations  and  aer- 
mons  of  a  scriptural  chancter  began  to  be  substitoted 
by  formal  orations,  and  panegyrics  opon  martyn  and 
oonfessors  8ubeequently  worshipped  aa  saints.    Nerer- 
thelesB,  homilies,  or  familiar  expo6itłons  of  Scriptuc^ 
were  maintained  by  the  ablest  of  the  fathers,  and  were 
sometimes  fumished  for  the  use  of  derics  inoompetent 
to  produce  original  addresses  (see  Augustine,  LodrtM 
Chrittianoy  hb,  iy).    The  6th  centuiy  has  been  called 
the  oratorical  period  of  the  CJhnrch,  with  reference  to 
the  distinguished  preachers  who  then  flonrishod,  sach 
as  Basil,  Gregory  Nazianzen,  Gregoiy  of  Nysaa,  Chiy- 
sostom,  and  Augustine.     Two  books  which  haye  come 
down  to  us  from  the  lastr-named  fatheri  are  often  quoted 
as  oontaining  the  best  spedmens  of  homiletical  litera- 
turę that  appeared  both  in  the  Greek  and  Latin  church^ 
es  during  the  long  i>eriod  of  a  thousand  yeais,  if  indeed 
they  haye  eyer  b€«n  excelled  in  those  chuiches;  yet 
neither  of  these  works  formally  or  fuUy  discnssed  the 
subject  of  preaching.     Chzysostom^s  ircpi  'ItctitawiK, 
being  deyoted  to  the  subject  of  the  priesthood,  only  al- 
luded  to  preaching  inddentally ;  neyerthdcaa,  it  embodr 
ied  some  exoellent  precepts  conceming  it,  such  as  maj 
be  supposed  to  haye  goyeraed  the  studies  and  the  hab- 
its  of  the  writer  himself,  and  by  means  of  which  he  ob- 
tained  his  wonderful  suocese.    Yet  no  estimate  of  Cbiy- 
sostom  (the  golden^-moułhed)  can  be  accepted  as  juat 
which  does  not  concede  to  him  extraordxnary  gcnins 
and  transcendent  abilitiea  as  an  orator.    Augustine,  in 
his  Docfrina  Christiana,  treated  the  subject  of  preach- 
ing morę  fully,  and  discussed  it  morę  systematically. 
He  diyided  his  treatise  into  four  book&    Three  of  them 
are  entitled  J)e  ineemendo,  and  treat  of  inyention  in  a 
broad  sense,  induding  the  interpretation  of  the  Scrip- 
tnres.    These  books  haye  not  in  modem  times  been 
yery  highly  yalued.    The  fourth  relates  to  expresaoD, 
De  profermdo.    Although  a  brief  fragment,  it  has  been 
pronounced  the  best  homiletical  production  that  ap- 
peared between  the  days  of  Paul  and  Luther.    It  has 
been  translated  into  yarious  languagcs,  and  its  most  im- 
portant  precepts  haye  often  been  quoted,  and  in  yarious 
forms  reproduced.     The  chief  intrinsic  iutercst  of  this 
fragment  from  the  pen  of  Augustine  consists  in  its  sbow- 
ing  the  best  yiews  of  an  eminent  Christian  bishop  of  the 
4th  century,  who,  ailer  his  conyersion,  madę  his  Roman 
rhetorical  education  in  a  high  degree  subscryient  to  the 
promulgation  of  Christian  truth.    Well  would  it  hare 
been  for  the  Church  of  the  following  centuries  had  the 
spirit  and  power  of  Augustine^s  instractions  to  preachen 
been  hdd  in  remembrance  and  kept  in  practice.    Bat, 
unhappily,  eyen  this  light  became  obecured.    The  Scrip- 
tures  of  trath  haying  lapsed  out  of  use,  ceremonies  be- 
came multiplied  morę  and  morę.    Th^  doctrine  of 
Christ*s  etemal  sacrifioe  for  sin  haying  become  oonupt- 
ed  by  incipient  theories  of  transubstantiation,  the  pre- 
tended  sacrifice  of  the  Mass  roee  to  greater  promincnce, 
and  so  far  usurped  the  time  of  public  worship  that  ser- 
mons and  homilies  gaye  plaoe  to  a  diminutire  form  of 
public  religious  address  caSS/eA  pottiU,    Eyen  the  fuzMS 
tion  of  postillating  was  chiefly  confined  to  bishope,  the 
common  dergy  not  attempting  or  being  allowed  to 
preach.    As  if  such  a  degradation  of  (me  of  tbe  bighest 
oflices  eyer  committed  to  men  was  not  suffident,  preach- 
ing sank  Btill  lower  by  being  employed  for  tbe  promo- 
tion  of  enor  under  the  guiae  of  truth.    Medi>Bval  proaeh- 


HOMILEnCS 


315 


HOMILEnCS 


tng  was  ItrgAj  occupied  in  eulogizing  the  Tiigin  Mary, 
and  in  exciting  reverence  for  the  pictoies  and  images 
of  saintSb  Thua  preaching  was  madę  to  cornipt  the 
ytry  rdigion  it  was  designed  to  promote.  Beyond  this, 
it  eren  became  the  agency  of  excituig  millions  of  men 
to  war  and  bloodshed.  Suocesshre  crusades  were  preach- 
ed  by  popes  and  firian,  and  even  the  cmel  peraecutions 
of  the  AJbigenies  were  stimulated  by  the  preaching  of 
▼engeance  againat  innoeent  noen,  who  sougbt  to  foUow 
Christ  in  sinoenty.  For  sach  ends,  moro  than  for  the 
promulgation  of  tmth,  were  sereral  orders  of  preaching 
and  mendicant  monks  estaUished  in  the  18th  centniy. 
Among  these,  the  Dominicans  were  the  founders  and 
piiDctpal  abettoTs  of  the  Inqtiisition,  while  others,  of  less 
cmel  temper,  went  about  to  harangue  the  masees  in  the 
interests  of  papai  supremacy,  and  to  promote  the  sale  of 
mdtłlgencea. 

2.  It  was  not  tiU  medieval  soperstition  had  culmina- 
ted  in  the  grossest  aboses,  and  the  Reformation  had  be- 
gon  to  exert  a  counter  influence,  that  the  Scriptures  be- 
gsn  to  be  restored  to  their  proper  supremacy.  From 
that  period  the  original  design  and  true  character  of 
preaching  came  to  be  better  comprehended.  Much  of 
the  preaching  of  the  Befonnation  was  indeed  contro- 
peisia],  bnt  so  iar  as  it  was  founded  on  the  Word  of  God 
it  teoded  to  revive  scriptuial  conceptions  of  the  preach- 
ing Office.  The  diligence  of  the  Protestant  refonners 
in  promolgating  their  yiews  madę  preaching  slso  nece»- 
saiy  to  Roman  Catholics,  among  whom,  ftom  that  time, 
it  became  morę  oommon,  and,  especially  in  Protestant 
ooontriei,  it  was  no  longer  confined  to  bishops,  but  en- 
joined  npon  the  dergy  of  all  gnules. 

11.  LUertUwre. — The  inspired  Scriptures,  especially 
those  of  the  New  Testament,  must  ever  be  oonaidered 
the  primary  and  most  valuable  source  of  homiletical 
instructioii.  Patristic  literaturę  on  this  subject,  as  al- 
ready  ebown,  is  meagre  and  fżagmentary.  Homiletical 
literaturę,  in  foUowing  ages,  may  be  cLissifi^il  in  four 
prindpal  departments:  1.  Treatises  on  preaching;  2. 
Aids  to  preaching,  so-caUed ;  8.  Sermons,  or  the  products 
of  preaching;  4.  Biographies  of  preachers  and  misoel- 
laneous  artides  relating  to  the  objccts  and  manner  of 
preaching.  The  flrst  only  of  these  departments  will  be 
particnlarly  considered  in  thin  artlde.  Immediately 
oonsequent  upon  the  reWral  of  preaching  in  the  16th 
eentury,  there  also  occuired  a  renaissance  of  homiletical 
prodnctiofis,  which  have  oontinued  to  multiply  ever  sińce. 
Prior  to  the  middle  of  the  17th  century  there  were  ex- 
tanŁ  some  serenty  different  treatises,  "writ  particnlarly 
upon  this  sabf  ect,"  chiefly  in  the  Łatin  language.  These 
books  were  classiiied  by  Draudius  in  his  BiUiołheea 
dośśiea.  under  the  head  of  *'  Condonatorum  wstrudio^^ 
and  by  Molanus,  ui  his  BibUotheca  McUeriarum,  under 
the  head  of  **  Coneionandi  munus^  To  these,  bishop 
Wilkins  remarfcs,  **  may  be  added  those  many  other  dis- 
counea  wherein  these  things  have  been  largely  handled 
by  the  by,  though  not  chiefly  intended,  in  all  which 
many  leamed  men  have  laid  down  such  rnles  as,  accord- 
ing  u>  their  sevend  geniuses  and  obsenrations,  seemed 
most  usefuL"  In  the  enumeration  of  works  referred  to, 
no  proper  distinction  was  madę  between  the  oflice  of 
preacher  and  pastor.  Henoe  we  find  enumerated  in  the 
fist  the  works  of  Bowls  and  Hemingius,  both  entitled 
IM  Pattore;  also  that  of  Hen.  Diest,  styled  De  ratione 
atudU  Tkeoloffici.  Some  of  the  earlier  books  on  the  sub- 
ject of  preaching  by  English  authors  were  written  in 
Latin,  e:  g.  that  of  William  Perkins,  entitled  **Ar(e  of 
Prupkecymff,  m  a  treatise  conceming  the  sacred  and 
onely  tnre  manner  d^  method  of  preaching.  First  writ- 
ten in  Łatin  by  Mr.  William  Perkins,  and  now  faithfully 
tnuslated  into  English  (for  that  it  containeth  many 
worthy  things  fit  for  the  knowledge  of  men  of  all  de- 
grea)  by  Thomas  Tukę.  Motto,  Nehemiah  viii,  4, 5, 6 
(Ounbiidge,  1618)."  Cotton  Mather's  ManducHo  ad 
Minitteruam,  written  about  1710,  in  addition  to  a  Latin 
titk,  had  a  rery  formal  and  sonorous  Latin  preface.  In 
tlM  test  of  his  tzeatise  the  leamed  author  makes  this 


remark  conceming  homiletical  literaturę  prior  to  the 
period  in  which  he  wrote :  "There  is  a  troop  of  authors, 
and  eren  an  hoet  of  God,  who  have  written  on  the  Pas- 
torał care  from  the  days  of  Gregory  down  to  the  days 
of  Gilbert ;  yea,  and  sińce  these,  every  year  some  to  this 
veiy  day.  I  cannot  set  you  so  tedious  a  task  as  to  read 
a  tenth  part  of  what  has  been  offered  on  the  art,  and 
the  gift,  and  the  method  of  preaching." 

In  modem  times,  several  different  epochs  of  homilet> 
ical  literaturę  may  be  recognised  corresponding  to  the 
character  of  preaching  at  dUTerent  periods  and  in  differ- 
ent oountrie&  In  Germany,  the  Lutheran  reformation 
was  characterized  by  great  eamestness  and  even  blunt- 
ncss  in  the  modę  of  preaching,  not  only  in  controrersial 
discoursee,  but  eren  in  the  prodamation  and  enforce- 
ment  of  erangelical  trath.  Łuther  wrote  no  work  on 
preaching,  but  by  his  example  and  occasional  preeepts, 
some  of  which  are  recorded  in  his  Table-Talkj  he  greatly 
influenced  his  coadjutors  and  foUowers  as  to  thdr  the- 
ory  and  practice  as  preachers.  The  following  are  some 
of  Luther^s  characteristic  sayings.  Portrait  ofa  good 
preacher:  *<  A  good  preacher  should  have  these  rirtues 
and  qua]ities :  1.  He  should  be  able  to  teach  plainly  and 
in  oider ;  2.  He  should  hare  a  good  head ;  8.  a  good 
voice;  4.  a  good  memory;  5.  He  should  know  when  to 
stop ;  8.  He  should  study  diligently,  and  be  surę  of  what 
he  means  to  say ;  7.  He  should  be  ready  to  stake  body 
and  Ufe,  goods  and  glory,  on  its  trath ;  8.  He  should  be 
willing  to  be  vexed  and  criticised  by  everybody."  A  rf- 
p»OM  to  ffouftg  preacher* :  *^  Tritt  frisch  auf,  ihu*a  ma^U 
auf,  h9r  baid  auf^  i.  e.  Stand  up  cheerily,  speak  up  man- 
fuUy,  leaye  off  speedily.  ^  When  you  are  about  to 
preach,  speak  to  God  and  say,  <  My  Lord  God,  I  wish  to 
preach  to  thine  honor,  to  speak  of  thee,  to  praise  thee, 
and  to  gknrify  thy  name.' "  "  Let  all  your  sermons  be  of 
the  siroplest.  Look  not  to  the  princes,  but  to  the  sim* 
ple  and  unleamed  people.  We  should  preach  to  the  lit- 
tie  children,  for  the  sake  of  such  as  these  the  oflioe  of 
preaching  is  instituted.  Ah !  what  pains  our  Lord  Christ 
took  to  teach  simply.  From  yineyards,  sheep,  and  treea 
he  drew  his  similes;  anything  m  order  that  the  multi- 
tudes  roight  understand,  embrace,  andretain  the  trath." 
^  If  we  are  found  trae  to  our  calling  we  shall  receire 
honor  enough,  not,  however,  in  this  Ufe,  but  in  the  liie 
to  come." 

After  LutheT*s  death  a  reacrion  occuned,  in  which 
there  was  a  return  to  scholastic  fonnulas  and  other  ob- 
jectionable  features  of  the  medinval  homilies  and  pos- 
tils.  This  second  period  has  sometimes  been  called  that 
of  the  poetilists,  in  allusion  as  well  to  Protestanta  as 
Catholics.  In  the  following  period  the  pietism  of  Spe- 
ner  and  Francke  promoted  a  healthful  reform  in  the 
Protestant  pulpit  of  Germany,  although  the  reform  was 
to  some  extent  neutralized  by  the  nearly  simultaneous 
deydopment  of  the  Wolfian  philoeophy,  which  gloried 
morę  in  logical  forms  than  in  the  power  of  the  cross. 
This  philoeophy  was  fascinating  to  students,  and,  hav- 
ing  gained  an  asoendency  in  the  uniyersities,  it  antag- 
onized  the  plainer  and  morę  evangelical  modę  of  preach- 
ing commended  by  Luther  and  Francke. 

Mosheim,  the  Church  historian  of  the  middle  of  the 
18th  century,  was  also  a  cdebrated  preacher,  and  is  re- 
garded  as  having  introduced  another  homiletical  epoch 
in  Germany.  His  style  was  majestic  and  oratorical, 
similar  to  that  of  Tillotson  in  England,  and  Bourdaloue 
in  France.  By  him  it  was  well  applied  to  rcligious  in- 
straction,  but  after  him  it  greatly  degenerated,  many 
of  his  imitatoTS  being  morę  noted  for  the  form  of  sound 
words  than  for  the  spirit  of  rital  piety.  By  degrees, 
preaching  dedined  in  its  rdigious  power,  until  sermons 
Bcaroely  aimed  at  being  morę  than  didactlc  or  rhetorical 
entertainments. 

Reinhard,  court  preacher  in  Dresden  about  1800,  not 
only  inaugurated  a  better  style  of  preaching,  but  illus- 
trated  his  theory  in  numerous  published  sermons  (a  ool- 
lection  of  his  sermons  was  published  at  Snlzb.  1831-7,  in 
89  ▼oIs.Syo),  and  also  in  a  series  of  letters  entitled  his 


HOMILEnCS 


316 


HOMILETICS 


**  Gonfessions.'*  His  style  was  chartcterized  by  richness 
of  thought,  deamess,  deiiniteness,  force,  and  digntty  of 
expression.  IŁ  prevailed  both  among  Łhe  rationalists  and 
the  orŁhodox  to  the  time  of  Schleiennacher.  The  pow- 
er  of  Schleiermacher  as  a  pieacher  oorresponded  to  his 
great  influence  as  a  theologiao,  and  his  example  is  re- 
gaided  as  having  introduoed  another  period  in  German 
homiletics,  although  he  did  not  write  specially  on  that 
topie  In  the  couise  of  his  life  his  own  style  of  preach- 
ing  improved,  rising  from  the  moralisms  with  which  he 
commenoed  to  a  morę  eyangelical  tonę  in  subeeąuent 
yeais. 

Apart  from  thosa  who  haye  treated  of  preaching  as  a 
branch  of  practical  theology,  the  morę  prominent  Ger- 
man authors  on  homUetics  during  the  corrent  century 
haye  been  Schott,  Reinhard,  Marheinecke,  Theiemin, 
Stier,  Lentz,  Paniel,  Palmer,  Ficker,  Schweitzer. 

In  France  the  golden  age  of  pulpit  oratory  oocurred 
about  the  close  of  the  17th  and  at  the  beginning  of  the 
18th  century.  It  was  the  age  of  Boesuct,  Boordaloue, 
Hassillon,  and  F^nelon,  among  the  Roman  Catholica, 
and  of  Claude,  Superyille,  and  Saurin,  among  the  Prot- 
estanta. Fenelon  and  Claude  became  representatiye 
authors  of  the  two  churches :  the  former  by  his  Dia- 
loguea  on  EłoguencCf  particukirly  that  ofthe  Pulpit ;  the 
latter  by  his  Esaay  on  tke  ComposUion  of  a  Sermon. 
These  yaluable  contributions  to  homiletical  literaturę 
are  sttll  read  with  interest,  not  only  in  the  French,  but 
in  the  English  language.  £yen  the  former  has  been 
morę  appreciated  and  oitener  reprinted  by  Protestanta 
than  by  Romanbts.  France,  in  the  19th  century,  has 
also  producGd  many  example8  of  great  preachera  and 
good  writers  on  homiletics.  Without  attempting  to 
enumerate  the  former,  the  pńncipal  authors  are  Yetu, 
Martin,  Bautain,  and  MuUois,  of  the  CathoUcs,  and  Yi- 
net,Yincent,  and  Coquerel,  ofthe  Protestanta 

In  Great  Britain,  the  principal  homiletical  writers  of 
the  18th  century  were  John  Edwarda,  1705;  Dr.  Dod- 
dridge,  1751 ;  Fordyce,  1754 ;  and  Greorge  Campbell,  1775. 

Apart,  howeyer,  from  the  influence  of  any  of  these 
writers,  there  arose  during  that  century  a  style  of  Chris- 
tian address  destined  to  haye  a  great  influence  opon  the 
8ubeequent  preaching  of  English -speaking  countries. 
AUuaion  is  madę  to  the  reformation  that  commenoed  in 
connection  with  the  labors  of  Wesley,  Whitefield,  and 
others  about  1740.  The  preaching  of  these  men  was 
characterized  by  a  return  to  scriptural  siroplicity  and 
fenror,  and  was  followed  by  extensiye  religious  awaken- 
ings,  which  in  due  time  extended  a  quickening  influ- 
ence to  ministers  of  all  the  churches.  The  Wesleyan 
reformation  was  further  characterized  by  field-preach- 
ing,  and  by  the  employment  of  unordained  men  as  lay 
preachcrs,  who  gaye  eyidence  of  a  diyine  impulse  to 
cali  sinners  to  repentance.  John  Wesley,  like  Luther, 
though  he  wrote  no  treatise  on  preaching,  gaye  numer- 
ous  adyices  and  some  rules  to  preachers,  which  largely 
influenced  the  practice  of  those  who  became  associated 
with  him,  and  which  did  not,  as  in  the  case  of  Luther, 
soon  aflcr  become  obsolete  under  the  influence  of  for- 
roalistic  reaction.  In  the  minutes  of  one  of  his  early 
conferences,  Wesley  gaye  rules  for  his  preachers  which 
haye  been  oflicially  perpetuated  in  Methodist  sodeties 
and  churches  eycr  sińce.  These  rules  pointed  out  in 
the  briefest  words  the  grand  objecU  and  essentials  of 
preaching,  regarding  all  rhetorical  precepts  and  '^small- 
er  adyices"  as  merely  auxiliaiy.  "(2Mf«<.What  is  the 
best  generał  method  of  preaching?  An»,  1.  To  inyite. 
2.  To  conyince.  3.  To  oflfer  Christ.  4.  To  build  up." 
Herę  was  the  essence  of  the  eyangelical  idea  of  preach- 
ing, and  its  fruits  followed.  Fletcher's  portrait  of  St, 
Paul  expanded  and  illustrated  the  same  idea;  but  no 
exŁendcHl  work  on  preaching  was  produced  by  any 
Methodist  of  that  period. 

The  early  part  ofthe  19th  century  witneesed  the  pnb- 
licatton  in  England  of  but  few,  if  any,  homiletical  works 
of  permanent  yalue.  Between  1808  and  1819  the  Rev. 
Chariea  Simeon,  of  Cambridge,  laboriously  deyekped 


the  eytibem  of  Claude  on  the  oompodtion  of  a  i 
a  series  of  plans  of  seimons  on  the  prindpal  texts  of 
Scripture  from  Genesis  to  Keyelation.  Thia  work,  which 
attained  the  magnitude  of  twenty-one  octayo  yolumes, 
was  designed  to  be  a  theaaunis  of  help  and  guidance  in 
sermonizing.  It  oontained  no  less  than  2fid6  '^skele- 
tons,"  enough  to  supply  two  seimons  each  Sabbath  for 
nearly  a  quarter  of  a  oentuiy.  What  moro  oould  a 
minister  want?  Sach  a  wealth  of  aopply  woukl  not 
haye  been  provided  had  there  not  been  a  demand.  The 
demand  may  haye  been  healthy  as  far  as  it  indicated  a 
disposition  on  the  part  of  the  English  deiigy  to  escape 
irom  the  stiU  morę  indolent  practice,  not  yet  eiitirely 
extinct,  of  oopying  sermons  in  fuli,  and  reading  noanu- 
scripts  prepared  for  market,  and  sold  in  the  shambles. 
NeyerthelesB,  the  idea  that  sermon  piana  for  use,  any 
morę  than  sermons  for  deliyeiy,  could  be  an  artide  of 
merchandise,  was  inberently  wiong,  and,  aa  far  as  adopt- 
ed,  oould  only  tend  to  mental  torpor,  and  a  senrile  de- 
pendence  on  the  brain-work  of  others.  Yet  pulpit  es- 
sistants,  pulpit  cydopsedtas,  books  of  sketches,  and  other 
deyices  for  **  preaching  madę  eBsy,**  haye  had  th«ir  day 
in  England,  as  well  as  in  Germany  and  Franoe.  Sim- 
eon's  Horm  IIomileiiotB,  notwithstanding  inherent  fanlts, 
was  by  far  the  noblest  of  its  dass.  It  may  now  be  pro- 
nounoed  obsolete  in  reference  to  its  primary  design,  yet 
one  of  its  fcatures  is  imitated  in  some  of  the  best  com- 
mentaries  of  the  present  day,  by  the  insertion  in  a  less 
formal  manner  of  homiletical  notes  on  important  texts 
andpassagee. 

Scyeral  yaluable  woiks  on  preaching  haye  becsi  pub- 
lished  in  England  during  the  last  thirty-fiye  jear^  The 
following  deserye  mention :  The  Mimsterial  Charader 
of  ChruŁ  practiealUf  con8idertd,hy  Charies  R  Somner, 
Ushop  of  Winchester  (London,  1824, 8yo);  ApogłoHcaŁ 
Preaching  conńdered,  by  John  Bird  Sumner,  lord  biahop 
of  Chester  (1889;  9th  ed.  1850);  EceknatieM  AngUca- 
nutf  a  treatise  oi>  preaching  as  adapted  to  a  Church-of- 
England  congr^gation,  by  W.  Greslęy  (Lond.  8d  edition 
1844, 12mo);  Preaching,  its  Warrantj  Subjwt,  and  Kf- 
fedSfhyW.  S.  BrickneU  (London,  1845);  The  Modem 
Pulpit,  ricKed  in  Rekttion  to  the  State  ofSociety,  by  Rob- 
ert Yaughan  (Lond.  1842,  post  8yo) ;  Paul  the  Preacher, 
by  John  Eadie,  D.D.  (Lond.  1859,  post  8yo ;  reprinted, 
N.Y.  12mo);  Thoughłs  on  Preaching,  apecialfy  in  Rela- 
tion  to  the  Recuirements  ofthe  Age,  by  Daniel  Moore 
(Lond.  1861,  er.  8yo);  The  Dułg  and  Ditcipline  of  Er- 
temporary  Prtaching,  by  F.  Barham  Zincke  (reprint, 
N.  Y.  1867, 12roo) ;  Sacred  Eloguence,  or  the  Theory  and 
Practice  qf  Preaching,  by  Thomas  J.  Potter  (Roman 
Catholic)  (Dublin,  1868). 

As  to  homiletical  authorship  in  America,  Cotton  Ma^ 
ther^s  Manductio  ad  Minitterium,  or  A  ngeU  prepantHf  to 
eound  the  TrumpHs,  although  rare  and  little  known,  had 
the  pre-eminence  of  being  the  first  and  only  work  of  its 
class  up  to  1824.  At  that  datę  Henry  Ware,  Jnn.,  of 
Cambridge,  Mass.,  published  his  liinte  on  Ertempora- 
neout  Preaching,  a  truły  yaluable  work.  In  1819  Ebe- 
nezer  Porter,  of  Andoyer,  republished  Fenekm^s  Difh. 
loguee,  Claude*s  Estay,  and  seyeral  minor  works,  under  the 
title  The  Young  Preacher^s  Manuał  (Boston,  1889, 8\-o). 
Subeeąuently  the  following  principal  works  haye  ap- 
peared :  Lectures  on  HomUetics  and  Preaching,  by  £be- 
nezer  Porter,  D.D.  (And.  and  N.  Y.  1884>  8yo);  Sacred 
Rketoric,  or  Composition  and  Delirery  of  Sermong,  bv 
Henry  J.  Ripley  (N.Y.  1849, 12mo);  The  Poteer  ofthe 
Pulpit,  Thoughtt  addrested  to  Christian  Ministers,  by 
Gardiner  Spring,  D.D.  (1854);  Prea<^nng  recuired  ^ 
the  Times,  by  Abd  Steyens,  LL.D.  (N.Y.  1856,  12iiio): 
The  Model  Preacher,  a  Series  of  Letters  on  the  best 
Modę  of  Preaching  the  Gospel,  by  William  Taylor,  of 
California  (Cindnnati,  1859,  12mo) ;  Preachers  and 
Preaching,  by  Nicholas  Mumy,  D.D.  (1860);  Thou^Att 
on  Preaching,  by  James  W.  Alexander,  D.D.  (1^1, 
12mo) ;  A  Treatise  on  HomUetics,  by  Danid  P.  Kidder, 
D.D.  (1864, 12mo) ;  HomUetics  and  Pastorał  Theohffy, 
by  W.  G.  T.  Shedd,  D J>.  (1867, 8yo) ;  Offiee  and  ivirk 


HOMILEnCS 


817 


HOMTTiEnCS 


of  ikt  CkrigHtm  MmUtry,  by  James  M.  Hoppin  (1869, 
12mo)«  The  laiger  part  of  the  last-named  work  is  de- 
voted  to  the  sobject  of  homiletics,  althougb  not  so  indi- 
cated  itt  the  title. 

From  the  foregoing  liats  it  may  be  seen  that  recently 
American  authonhip  on  thia  subject  is  eomewhat  in  ex- 
oes8  of  Engiiab.  Sereral  of  the  last-named  books  have 
been  written  by  teachers  of  practical  theology  repre- 
aenting  different  chnicheB,  and  have  the  merit  of  dis- 
cussing  the  subject  not  only  from  an  evangclical  point 
of  viev,  bat  in  the  light  of  the  most  modem  derelop- 
ments  and  applications  of  Christianity.  The  state  of 
society  in  the  United  States  of  America  is  favoimble  to 
the  illnstration  of  the  true  theoiy  of  preaching,  as  well 
sa  to  its  most  efficient  practice.  Ali  the  churches,  as 
were  thoee  of  primitive  times,  are  dependent  on  rolun- 
taiy  snpport.  Neither  their  oongregations  nor  their 
eoccesB  can  be  maintained  without  attractive,  and,  in 
same  degree,  effective  preaching.  Eren  the  Roman 
Gatholic  Chnrch  has  adopted  regular  Sunday  sennons 
and  week-day  missions,  a  spedes  of  revi  val  efforts.  CSon- 
tnuY  to  its  oniTersal  custom  where  maintained  as  a  re- 
ligion  of  the  state,  it  here  boilds  its  churches  and  cathe- 
dnls  with  pews  or  sittings  for  audiences  instead  of  open 
oires  for  proceasiona  and  moving  crowds.  The  people 
of  America,  of  whatever  dass,  are  free  to  hear  whom 
they  chooee,  or  not  to  hear  at  all,  uniess  addressed  in  a 
maniier  adapted  to  please  or  profit  them.  Conrespond- 
ing  to  thłs  Btal^  of  things,  the  preachers  of  all  churches, 
together  with  errorists  of  ereiy  description,  are  in  active 
oompetition  for  the  ears  and  hearts  of  the  masses.  The 
people,  too,  having  great  advantages  for  education,  and 
DO  reyerence  for  preacńptłve  aathority,  demand  the  best 
fbrms  of  Christian  address,  and  such  appeals  to  their  rea- 
son  and  their  emotions  as  challenge  tMeir  respect.  To 
nonę  of  these  oondittons  does  a  true  Christianity  object, 
ńnce  it  relies  for  its  propagation  upon  tmth  and  legit^ 
imate  persuaśon.  Neyertheless,  these  circumstanoes 
make  it  obligatofy  on  preachers  of  the  Gospel  to  com- 
prehend  well  their  Yocation,  and  the  manner  of  ^  rightly 
di^iding  the  tiuth."  That  this  necessity  is  morę  and 
morę  recognised  is  an  omen  of  promise  to  the  Church 
of  the  futurę,  especially  as  facilities  for  the  easier  and 
better  comprehenaion  of  this  branch  of  the  minister^s 
work  increaae. 

III.  Principles. — ^Homiletics,  in  a  haman  point  of  yiew, 
may  thua  be  considered  a  progressiye  science.  It  grows 
irith  the  growing  experienoe  of  the  Church,  and  be- 
comes  edriched  with  the  ever-aoeumulating  eicamples 
of  good  and  great  preachers.  It  arails  itself  of  the 
ag&Kj  of  the  preas  to  perpetuate  speciraens  of  the  erer- 
multipl^dn^  homiletical  productioiis  of  suocessire  gener- 
atłons,  and  alao  to  discuas  the  great  problems  of  human 
destiny  and  influence.  Thus  the  modem  study  and  dia> 
cusńoiis  of  homiletics  have  had  a  tendency  to  place  the 
subject  in  a  dearer  light,  and  to  make  it  morę  justly 
oomprehensible  than  it  has  been  at  any  former  period 
sinoe  the  daya  of  the  apostles.  This  result  has  not  been 
attained  by  means  of  modem  inventions,  but  rather  by 
a  retiiro  to  the  original  idea  of  preaching,  as  indicated 
and  illustrated  by  the  author  and  finisher  of  the  Chris- 
tian fiuth;  at  the  same  time,  all  science  is  madę  auxil- 
iiiy  to  the  Sarioar^s  grand  design  in  the  appointment 
of  preaching  as  an  instmmentality  for  the  diflTusion  of 
truŁh  and  the  salration  of  men.  Space  only  remains 
(ijr  a  brief  aummary  of  demonstrated  and  now  generally 
acoepted  homiletińl  principlea. 

1.  Tke  true  Idea  of  Preaching* — ^Preaching  is  an  orig- 
inal and  peculiar  institution  of  Christianity.  It  was 
not  deriyed  from  any  pre-€xisting  system.  It  had  no 
pioper  coonterpart  even  in  Judaism,  although  a  limited 
tsaching  ofBce  was  committed  to  both  the  priests  and 
(jTopheta  of  the  Jewish  dispensation.  See  Prophbt. 
Old-Testament  esamples  of  persons  called  preachers, 
tike  Koah,  Solomon,  and  Ezra,  fali  far  below  the  idea  of 
pieaehing  aa  afipointed  by  Christ.  See  Apostle.  Only 
ia  the  11  esaianic  prophedea  was  the  office  of  Christian 


erangelism  clearly  foreshadowed  (see  Isa.  lxi,  1, 2).  See 
GofiPBi*  In  the  fulness  of  time,  the  Lord  Jesus  Christ, 
recognising  his  predicted  mission,  authoritatively  es- 
tabUshed  and  appointed  the  office  and  work  of  preach- 
ing as  a  prindpal  means  of  eyangelizing  the  world.  See 
PREACHiMCk  In  preparation  for  this  office  he  instract- 
ed  his  disdples  both  by  precept  and  example,  giving 
them  before  his  aacension  a  world-wide  commiasion  to 
"go  and  teach  all  nations,"  and  "preach  the  Gospd  to 
evexy  creature."  In  this  appointment  the  Sariour  avail- 
ed  himself  of  no  pre-exi8ting  rhetorical  system,  but 
rather  a  nnirersal  capadty  of  the  human  race  now  for 
the  first  time  speciaUy  deroted  to  the  divine  use,  and 
consecrated  to  the  propagandism  of  reyealed  tmth.  See 
Jesus  Christ.  Yet  he  left  his  foliowers  free  to  adopt, 
as  auxiliary  to  their  great  work,  whatever  good  thing 
might  be  deriyed  from  human  study,  whether  of  l<^c, 
rhetoric,  or  any  other  science.  Thus,  as  Christianity 
multiplied  its  achieyemcnts  and  extended  its  influence 
along  the  ages,  facilities  for  comprehending  the  philoeo- 
phy  and  the  art  of  preaching  would  of  necessity  bicrease. 

The  pcculiarity  of  the  preaching  office  is  seen  in  the 
specialty  of  its  address  for  morał  ends,  not  merely  to  the 
judgment,  but  to  the  conscienccs  of  men ;  also  in  the 
grandeur  of  its  aims,  which  are  nothing  less  than  the 
salyation  of  the  human  soul  from  sin  in  the  present  life, 
and  its  oompiete  preparation  for  the  life  eyerlasting. 
As  the  objects  of  preaching  are  peculiar,  so  are  the  nec- 
easary  prereąuisites.  Of  these  a  trae  Christian  experi- 
ence  and  a  spedal  diyine  cali  may  be  affirmcd  to  be  es- 
sontiaL  The  merę  fomi  or  ceremony  of  preaching  may 
be  taken  up  and  laid  aside  as  easily  as  other  forms,  but 
tme  preaching,  the  preaching  that  Christ  instituted  and 
designed  to  be  maintained  in  the  Church,  demands  the 
constant  power  of  an  actiye  faith,  a  holy  sympathy,  and 
a  conscious  mission  from  God. 

2.  The  Subject-Matter  of  Preaching,— In  secular  ora- 
tory,  themes  are  perpetually  changing  with  circum- 
stanoes. In  preaching,  the  theme  ia  one.  Neyerthe- 
less, the  one  theme  prescribed  to  the  preacfaer  is  adapted 
to  all  drcumstances  and  all  times.  It  may  be  summa- 
rily  stated  to  be  God  manifested  in  Christ  Jesus  for  the 
redemption  of  men.  This  central  tmth,  which  is  the 
spedal  burden  of  reyelation,  embraces  in  its  correlations 
all  other  tmths,  natural  as  well  as  reyealed.  The  word 
of  God  should  be  considered  not  only  the  tcxt-book,  but 
the  grand  treasury  of  tmth  for  the  preacher.  In  it  he 
is  fumished  with  history,  poetiy,  experience,  and  phi- 
loeophy,  as  well  as  perceptiye  instmction  and  fuli  state- 
ments  of  the  Gospd  schcme ;  neyerthdess,  he  may  bring 
to  its  illustration  whateyer  tmth  will  aid  in  its  corrobo- 
ration  and  oomprehension.  Still,  the  preacher's  great 
work  must  be  to  publish  the  doctrine  of  the  cross, "  the 
tmth  aa  it  is  in  Jesus."  To  do  this  effectually,  he  not 
only  needs  an  intellectual  perception  of  its  excellence,  but 
the  oonsdousness  of  its  power  as  bestowed  by  the  bap- 
Usm  "  of  the  Holy  Ghost  and  of  fire."  Thus  the  persc- 
cuted  disdples  "  went  eyerywhere  preaching  the  word" 
(Acts  yiii,  4),  and  Paul,  as  a  representative  apostle,  em- 
phatically  declared, "  We  preach  Christ  cradfied ;"  "  We 
preach  not  ourselyes,  but  Christ  Jesus  the  Lord;"  "  Christ 
in  you  the  hope  of  glor}',  whom  we  preach,  waming  e-^- 
eiy  man  and  teaching  eyeiy  man  in  all  wisdom,  that  we 
mav  present  eyery  man  pófect  in  Christ  Jesus"  (Col.  i, 
28)1 

8.  Agendee  of  Homiletical  Preparation, — In  addition 
to  the  essential  preliminaries  of  character  and  experi- 
ence  heretofore  alluded  to,  the  preacher  must  bring  to 
bear  on  his  theme  such  mental  exerciBes  as  will  cnable 
him  to  elaborate  it  appropriatdy  and  to  the  best  eiTect. 
The  foUowing  are  indispensable  •  (1.)  Interpretatiotij  by 
which  the  tme  meaning  of  God's  word  is  elicited.  (2.) 
Itwentian,  by  which  suitable  materials,  both  of  fact  and 
of  thought,  are  gathered  from  the  uniyerse  of  matter 
and  of  mind.  Inyention  is  aided  by  generalization, 
analysis,  hypothesis,  comparison,  and  diligent  exercise. 
(8.)  Duposition,  by  which  all  materiał  employed  is  ar-' 


HOMILETICS 


918 


HOMILETICS 


nnged  in  the  most  appropriato  and  effective  order, 
whether  in  the  introdoction,  argument,  or  conclusion  of 
the  difloourse. 

4.  DifferenŁ  Forma  of  HomileUoal  Produćtion^—Tht 
prodamation  of  Christian  truth  ia  not  confinecl  to  any 
one  form  of  addreak  Our  Lord  opened  his  public  mis- 
sion  by  a  sermon — the  Sermon  on  the  Moont.  Most  of 
his  other  discourses  were  brief  and  informal,  and  many 
of  his  most  important  utterances  feU  from  his  lipa  in 
parables  and  conyeraations.  The  reported  addressea  of 
the  apostles  were  exhortations  rather  than  sermons  ao 
cording  to  the  modem  idea.  In  the  early  patristic  age 
expUnatory  and  hortatory  addreeses  preyailedi  resolting 
in  the  homily  as  the  leading  product  of  that  period.  As 
preaching  declined  in  medi»val  times,  the  homily  dwin- 
dled  into  the  poetiL  The  Beformation  brought  the  ser- 
mon again  into  use,  and  secured  for  it  the  prominence 
which  it  still  maintains.  In  addition  to  re-establishing 
the  sermon  in  its  original  prominence,  modem  Christian- 
ity  has  developecl  the  platform  addreśs,  in  which  a  semi- 
secular  style  of  oratory  is  madę  auxiUary  to  Tarious 
phases  of  Christian  benerolence.  At  the  present  time, 
it  is  essential  co  both  ministers  and  laymen,  who  would 
participate  in  the  moet  prominent  actiyities  of  the 
Church,  such  as  Sunday-echools  and  missionary  efforts, 
that  they  should  cultivate  the  talent  of  effective  plat- 
form speaking.  Neyerthdess,  the  sermon  is  likely  to 
remain  as  it  was  in  the  beginning,  the  fiist  and  moet 
important  of  homiletical  productions.  Hence  it  should 
be  specially  studied,  and  thoroughly  oomprehended  in 
all  its  capacities  and  bearings,  as  the  standard  form  of 
derical  Christian  address.    See  Sbbmok. 

6.  Style  and  Quaiities  of  Sermona, — It  is  due  to  the 
dignity  of  Christian  tnith  that  the  words  in  which  it  is 
uttered  should  be  well  chosen  and  fiUy  arranged.  Hence 
the  generał  ąualities  of  a  good  style,  such  aa  pority, 
precision,  perspLcuity,  unity,  and  strength,  should  be  re- 
garded  as  of  primary  and  absolute  necessity  in  pulpit 
style.  At  the  same  time,  Christian  discoiuse  stemly 
rejects  all  the  faults  of  style  which  rhetorical  laws  oon- 
demn,  such  as  diyness,  tautolog}',  floridity,  and  bom- 
bast.  Preaching  also  requires  morę  than  merę  rhetoric. 
In  order  to  its  higher  objects,  it  demands  certain  pecul- 
iar  combinatlons,  such  as  a  blendiug  of  dignity  with 
simplicity,  of  agroeablcness  with  pointedness,  and  of 
energy  with  ]ove.  The  style  of  the  sermon  should  at 
once  be  fully  within  the  comprehension  of  its  heareis, 
and  yet  elevated  by  a  certain  scriptural  congruity,  which 
shows  that  it  emanated  from  communion  with  God,  and 
a  familiarity  with  his  inspired  word. 

Beyond  merę  yerbal  expre88ion,  sermons  should  pos- 
sess  seyeral  important  ąualitiea.  (1.)  They  should  be 
ecangelical,  setŁiiig  forth  the  unadulterated  tmth  of  the 
Gospel  in  its  j  ust  proportions,  and  in  an  eyangelical 
spirit.  (2.)  Sermons  should  be  wkreaHing,  To  this 
end,  the  preacher  must  be  deeply  interested  himself. 
He  must  utter  his  thoughts  with  deomess  and  yiyid- 
ness.  He  must  use  frequent  illustrations.  He  must 
group  thinga  new  and  old  in  just  and  graphic  combina- 
tlons. (3.)  Sermons  should  be  tnstrucłwe,  The  minis- 
ter of  the  Gospel  must  neyer  forget  the  Sayiour's  com- 
mand  to  teach.  Hence  eyery  sermon  should  be  tribu- 
tary  to  the  diffusion  of  knowledge  as  well  aa  holiness. 
(4.)  Sermons  should  be  efficient,  Failing  to  aocomplish 
some  of  the  special  objects  of  preaching,  they  are  failures 
themselyea.  Hence  their  great  essentiality  must  be 
considered  an  adaptation  to  high  and  tme  religious  re- 
sults.  If  poasible,  all  these  qualities  should  be  combiued 
in  eyery  sermon,  though  in  proportions  to  suit  occasions. 

6.  Delirery, — Four  different  modes  of  deliyery  are 
recognised  in  Christian  oratory:  (1.)  the  eaiemporane^ 
ousf  (2.)  the  rccUaHve;  (8.)  that  of  rtadmg;  (4.)  the 
oompottite,  in  which  two  or  all  of  the  foregoing  are  blend- 
ed.  The  last  finds  little  fayor  among  theorists,  and  is 
ntrely  practiced  with  any  high  degiee  of  success.  llie 
first  is  the  normal  modę  of  human  speech.  No  other 
waa  practiced  by  the  Great  F^reacher,  the  i^wstks,  or 


the  eaily  fathen.  Becitatiye  came  into  the  Cbuich  ia 
the  4th  and  6th  centuries,  and  reading  in  the  16th. 
Few  ąuestions  pertaining  to  Homiletics  haye  doiiiig 
the  last  800  years  been  morę  zealoualy  diacossed  than 
the  relatiye  adyantages  and  disadyantagea  of  the  diia> 
ent  modes  of  pulpit  deliyery.  While  it  may  jostlj  be 
conceded  that  each  modę  haa  both  adyantagea  and  di»> 
adyantages,  espedally  when  considered  in  reference  to 
the  peculiar  capadty  of  indiyiduals,  yet  it  may  be  if- 
firmed  as  the  result  of  all  discussion  and  ezperie&ce 
that  the  primitiye  modę  of  eztempormeoua  addien  is* 
oommended  by  the  beat  modem  opinion  as  a  gift  u>  be 
eameatly  coyeted  by  eyery  minister  of  the  Gospel,  sod 
as  a  result  of  proper  eiEort  within  the  reach  of  most,  if 
not  all  eamest  preachers. 

7.  Conditiona  and  Elementa  ofSueeeaa  in  Preaekmg^ 
Merę  e]oquence,  although  a  great  auxiliary,  is  not  of  it^ 
self  a  guaranty  of  suooeas  in  the  prodamation  of  God*! 
word.  There  is  an  infinite  difference  between  the  fona 
and  the  power  of  preaching.  The  form  is  easy:  the 
power  is  the  gift  of  God  crowning  the  highest  human 
effort.  To  attain  this  great  gift  yarioos  oonditions  are 
prerequisite.  A  preacher  must  haye  dear  and  abidiog 
conceptions  of  the  dignity  and  oyerwhelming  impoi- 
tance  of  his  sacred  yocation.  With  these  must  be  as- 
Bociated  a  consuming  loye  for  his  work,  eyidcnced  by 
tirdeas  diligenoe  and  unslumbering  ^thfubiess  in  its 
discharge.  He  must  make  preaching  hia  great  bua- 
neas,  his  abaorbing  employment.  He  most  haye  diMre> 
tion  in  the  adaptation  of  his  subjects,  and  style  of  ad> 
dress  both  to  his  hearers  and  to  oocasiona.  He  must 
cultiyate  the  habit  of  making  all  his  obsenrations,  read- 
ing, and  experience  subeenrient  to  his  ci^Mdty  of  io- 
struction  and  religious  impression.  Aboye  all,  he  most 
aim  at  the  supi^me  glory  of  God,  and  at  the  end  of  his 
most  eamect  efforts  depend  with  trustfol  confideooe 
upou  the  diyine  blesaing  to  giye  effidency  to  his  labon, 
and  crown  them  with  anccess*  See  Pastobai.  Cask 
(D.  P.  K.) 

lY.  Addiiional  TrtaHaaa^—l,  Foreign  (Latin,  Frendł, 
and  German) :  Lange  (Joannes),  Oratoria  aaera  (Fraokt 
and  Lpz.  1707, 8yo;  Halle,  1713, 8yo) ;  Yitringa  (Campi), 
Animadtferaionea  ad  Mfthod,  kómiliar,  ecdeaiaatiear,  Hta 
inatituendar.  (Jena,  1722,  8yo) ;  Maitre  (J.  H.  Le),  Ri- 
JlexionB  aur  la  manierę  de  precher  (Halle,  1745^  8vo); 
ilollebeck  (Ebechard), /)e  Opt,  Coneionum  yenere  (Leyd. 
1768, 8yo) ;  Ammon  (a  F.),  Handlmck  d.  A  fJeit,  s.  Koh 
zelberedaamkeiŁ  (Gdtt.  1799;  dd  edit.NlUnb.  1858,  8to); 
GeadLd,IłomileiUc  v.Huaa  b.lAUher  (Gott.  1804,  Sro); 
Tittmann  (J.  A.  H.),  /^rft.  d,  HomUetik  (Breelau,  1804; 
2d  ed.  Lpz.  1824, 8vo) ;  Schott  (A.  H.),  Entit,  ettur  Th- 
orie  d,  Beredaamkeił,  fnit  beaonderer  Antomd,  a.  d,  Kmr 
te&ertdaamkeU  (Lpz.  1807, 1816, 8yo) ;  Tkeorie  d.Jifrtd- 
aamheU  (Lpz.  1815>28 ;  2d  edit.  1828-47, 8  X'ol&  in  4  pta 
8yo) ;  Fćnekm  (Fr.  Salignac  de  la  Motte),  Dudoytiea  mt 
telocuence  de  la  chaire  (Paris,  1714,  8yo ;  transL  by  Ste- 
yens,  Lond.  1808;  Bost  1882, 12mo);  Dahl  (J.  Cli.  W.), 
Lekrbuch  d.  HomUetik  (Lpz.  and  Bost  181  i,  8yo) ;  Mai^ 
heinecke  (Ph.),  Gnmdleg.  d,  HomUetik  (Hamburg,  1811, 
8yo);  Theremin  (F.),  Die  Beredaamkeit  eine  Tm^; 
oder  Gnmdliftien  e.  ąyate$nat,jautorik  (BerL  1814 ;  2d  ed. 
1837,  8yo) ;  Kaiser  (G.  Ph.  Ch.),  Entumrf  e,  Syatema  Ł 
ffeiailichen  Rhetorik  (Erhmgen,  1816, 8yo) ;  Grotefend  (J. 
*G.),  Anaicht,  Gedank.  «.  Erfakrungm  fi.  rf.  geiaiL  BereiF- 
aamkeit  (Hannoy.  1822);  Ziehnert  (J.  G.),  Caatttd-Utm^ 
UeL  und  Liturg,  (Meissen,  1825) ;  Schmidt  (A.  G.),  Die 
Homilie  (Halle,  1827) ;  Van  Hengd  (W.  A.),  Inałitutio 
oratoria  aacri  (Liigd.  1829);  Sickd  (G.  A  F.),  Gnadr. 
d.  ekriatlichen  HaUeufik  (Lpz.  1829, 8yo) ;  Stier  (Rudolf), 
Kurz,  Gntndriaa  e.  bibL  Kerykłik  (Halle,  1830) ;  Chene- 
yi^re  (J.  J.)f  Ohaerpoiiona  aur  PJSlocuenee  (Gen.  1831); 
Brand  (J.),  Handh,  d.  geiatl,  Beradaamk  (edit.  by  Hahn, 
Frankf.  1836, 1839 ;  new  ed.  Const.  1850, 2  yols.) ;  Zaibl 
(J.  R),  Handb,  d,  KathoL  HomUetik  (Landsh.  1838);  Alt 
(J.  K.  W.),  Kurze  Anlntmg  z. KirehL  Bembamk.  (Lps. 
1840);  Pahner(Ch.),A'fHiii9.^ofmte£k(Stttttgard,1842; 
4th  edition,  1857, 8vo);  Ficker  (Ch.  G.),  GrtmdUmm  d 


HOMIŁIARE 


319 


HOMILY 


L  HcmiUi.  (Lpt,  1847, 8vo) ;  Schweiaer  (A.),  Hom^ 
iUL  «L  eeat^-proL  Kirekć  (Lps.  1848, 8vo) ;  Baar  (Gitt- 
tar,)  GrumkSge  d  HomiieL  (Giessen,  1848, 8vo) ;  Gaupp 
(Ł  F.),  Praet,  TheoL  (BerL  1848, 1862,  2  vola.  8vo ;  voL 
ii,  pt.  i,  Homiletics) ;  Lutz  (J.)»  Handbuch  d.  KathoL  Kan- 
te&end$amŁiT\X\ang.  1851) ;  Yinet  {X»),HomiUtique  ou 
thiorie  de  la  predicaUom  (Paris,  1803) ;  Beyer  (J.  H.  F.), 
Dag  Wtśm  ŁchrittLPrtdigLfU  Norm  u,  UrbUd  d.  apo9- 
łoL  Pndifft  (Gdttingen,  1861, 8vo) ;  Hagenbach  (K.  R.), 
GrwtdtuŁ,  d.  UL  u,  Homiletik  (Leipńg,l9&»,9yoy,  Lang 
(Goit.),  HmOk  s.  hamileL  BehtmdL  d,  £vangdim  uadder 
EpiMn  (BreaL  1866. 1869,^yo) ;  Wapler,  Di^potU.  fi.  d. 
crcB^eiL  PeriŁopen  (Stendal,  1865, 8vo) ;  Pr&hle,  Prediffł 
iMtmwfe  (2d  ed.  NonUiaoseo,  1865^  8vo) ;  R5der  (Max), 
ifomileL  Jiandbtiek  z,  Gtbr,  5.  Predigłen  (a  rery  superior 
work,  to  be  in  5  Tolumea  when  completed,  NUrnbuig, 
1868  8q.  8vo) ;  Tbym,  Ifomilet,  Hmdb.  (Ist  part,  GrttU, 
1866,  8vo;  2d  part,  1868,  8vo);  Zimmennann  (Karl), 
Batr,  a.  reiyleichemim  HomUei,  (Dannst.  and  Lpa.  1866, 
8vo) ;  Palmer  (Chr.),  Ev€UtgeL  Homilei.  (5th  ed.  Stuttg. 
1867, 8vo) ;  Geiasler  (M.),  Pred,'£ntwur/e  mii  Ankit,  z. 
Pndigt-A  uaarbeiUn  (Hamb.  1867, 8vo) ;  Meineke  (J.  H. 
F.),  TagL  HamdLfur  Predicer^  edited  by  Dr.Wohliarth 
(Oaedlinburg  and  Lpz.  1867,  8vo) ;  Stock  (ProC  Chm.), 
HomUeU  Reed-Leańkon  (new  edit  St.  Louis,  Mo.,  and  Lpz. 
1867, 4to) ;  Wallioth,  Gtd,tmd  Anl.z.  Predigtm  (OldenU 
1868,  8vo);  Sommer  (J.  L.),  PndigMudien  (£rlangen, 
1868, 8vo). 

2.  In  EnffUah:  Barecrofl  (J.),  Arg  Concionandij  or, 
/Vaioft«i^, etc (Lond.  1715;  4thed.l75l);  D'Oyley  (Sam- 
uel), ChriU,  Elogwnce  in  Theory  and  Pract,  (Lond.  1718, 
12mo);  Henley  (Jobn),  On  Actum  m  Preachwig  (Lond. 
1730);  BUckwell  (&),  Meihod  of  Preacłung  (London, 
1736,  24mo) ;  Jennings  (John),  Digcourgeg  (Lond.  1754, 
12ino);  Fordjoe  (Dayid),  Theodontg;  Diaiogue  on  ihe 
Art  ąfPreachutg  (Lond.  1755, 12mo) ;  GlanviUe,  Eggay 
etmeamitiff  Preackkig  (London,  1768, 12mo) ;  Frankę,  The 
mott  uge/id  Wag  ofPrtachmg  (Lond.  1790, 8vo) ;  Claude 
(John),  On  the  Compogiium  ofa  Sermon  (5th  ed.  Gambr. 
1827, 8vo ;  edited  by  the  Bev.  Chas.  Simeon,  N.  Y.  1849, 
18mo) ;  Bickersteth  (Edward),  OnPreaching  andllear^ 
ing  (4th  ed.  London,  1829, 12mo) ;  Oose  (Francis),  Str- 
mong  on  tke  IMwrgg  (London,  1835, 12mo);  Williams, 
Ckrigtian  Preaeher  (eollection  of  treatisee  by  Wilkins, 
Jennings,  Franek,  Claude,  etc,  Lond.  1848, 12mo) ;  Bev- 
eńdge  (Bp.  William),  Sermong  (roL  i-iv  of  his  Workg^ 
Oxford,  1844-45,  8vo) ;  Thegaurug  Theologicug  (voL  ix 
and  X  of  his  WorŁg,  Oxford,  1847, 8vo) ;  Byland,  PulpU 
and  Ptople  (1847,  8vo);  Gouldbum  (Edward  M.),  Ser- 
mong (Lond.  1849, 8vo) ;  Russell  (W'.),  PulpU  Elocuence 
(2d  ed.  Ando^er,  1853) ;  ShoH  Sermong  (London,  1855, 2 
Yols,  12mo) ;  Stylea,  Naturę  and  EffecŁ  of  Erangelical 
Preackiag  (Lond.  1856,  2  yols.  12mo) :  Moore,  ThoughU 
on  Preacking  (Lond.  1861,  er.  8vo). 

Homiliftre  or  Homiliarlufl  is  a  term  appHed  to 
a  coUection  oontaining  such  homilies  of  the  early  fathers 
of  the  Chuich  as  were  read  on  Snnday,  on  the  festal 
days  of  the  saints,  on  Easter,  and  Pentecost.  See  Du- 
randł,  Raiwnalej  bk.  vi,  eh.  i ;  Fuhrmann,  Handwdrter- 
hmek  der  Kirekengegekiehtej  ii,  887. 

Homiliariiim,  the  name  given  to  coUecŁions  of 
aermons  for  the  ecclesiastical  year,  to  be  read  in  case  of 
incapacity  preyentiog  the  preaeher  from  deliyering  a 
sermon  of  hb  own.  The  idea  of  such  a  ooUeetion  arose 
in  the  early  part  of  the  Middle  Ages.  The  most  cele- 
brated  work  of  the  kind,  which  took  the  place  of  all 
preeeding  ones,  is  that  known  as  Charlemagne's  Homil- 
iarium  (see  Neander,  Ckurch  ffigł.  iii,  174).  The  title 
of  the  Cologne  edition,  1580,  seta  forth  Alcuin  as  ita  au- 
thor  Cffomilia  geu  mavig  germoneg  give  oonciones  ad  popw- 
lam,  prmgŁantiggimorum  ecdegia  doctorum,  Ilieronymi, 
Augugtini,  Ambrogii,  GregorU,  Origenu^  Chrygogtonńy 
Bida,  etc^  m  Kunc  ordinem  digóta  per  Alchuinum  Leci- 
tam,  idgue  injungenie  et  Carolo  M,  Rom,  Jmp.  cui  a  ee- 
creHg  fuW).  Aoeording  to  other  accounts,  howeyer— 
—and  eyen  to  the  inatruction  by  C^harlemagne  himaelf 


which  aecompamea  the  worko-Oharlemagne  had  caosed 
this  work  to  be  done  by  Paulus  Diaconus  because  (see 
Kanke  in  the  Stud,  u.  Krii,  1855,  ii,  387  8q.)  "  the  Hours 
coutained  a  number  of  fragments  from  the  fathers  used 
for  reading  which  were  fuli  of  faults  and  badly  selected." 
But  it  is  poseible  that  both  had  a  part  in  it,  Alcuin  form- 
ing the  plan  and  Paulus  Diaconus  executing  it.  The 
work  aoquired  great  importanoe  from  the  fact  that  it 
eatablished  morę  flrmly  the  system  of  Church  lessons 
introduced  by  Jerome,  which  had  heretofore  been  sub- 
ject  to  yarious  alterations.  See  Herzog,  Real-Ency^ 
klop,  yi,  249  sq.;  Rheinwald,  Kirchl,  ArckSoL  p.  276; 
Siegel,  Handb,  d,  ekrigtlMrchl,  AUertk,  ii,  331 ;  Nean- 
der, Ch,  Higtory,  iii,  126;  Mosheim,  Ch,  lligł.  li,  35 ;  and 
the  art.  Homily. 

Hdmllie&    See  Homilt. 

Homllista.  Among  the  homtUsts  who  have  dis- 
tinguished  themselyes  in  the  primitiye  Church,  Origen 
(8d  century)  ranks  first.  The  schools  of  Alexandria 
and  Antioch  appear  to  haye  been  the  great  centres  of 
this  claas  of  sacred  literaturę,  and  in  the  early  centuriea 
we  find  the  names  of  Hippolytus,  Metrodorus,  Clement 
of  Alexandria,  and  Gregory  Thaumaturgus  principally 
distinguished.  But  it  was  in  the  following  centuriea 
that  the  homily  reoeiyed  its  fuli  deyelopment  in  the 
hands  of  tHb  early  Greek  fathers  Ephraim  the  S3rrian, 
Athanasius,  the  two  Gregories  of  Nazianzum  and  of 
Nysea,  Basil  the  Great,  Chrysostom,  the  two  Cyrils  of 
Alexandria  and  of  Jerusalem,  and  Theodoret ;  in  the 
Latin  Church,  Cyprian,  Ambrose,  Augustine,  Leo  the 
Great,  Gregory  the  Great,  Peter  Chrysologus,  Fulgen- 
tius,  and  CoBsar  of  Aries.  In  later  oenturie8,yenerable 
Bede,  the  popea  Sabinian,  Leo  II  and  III,  Adrian  I,  and 
the  Spanish  bishops  Isidore  of  Se.yille  and  Ildefonsus, 
continued  to  use  the  homiletic  form. — Chambers,  Cg^ 
dop.  y,  899.  See  Catbchetics;  Catechists;  Homi- 
letics; Homiliakium;  Homily. 

HomiliuB,  GoTTFRiED  AuGUST,  one  of  the  moat 
celebrated  German  organista  and  Church  compoaers  of 
the  18th  century,  was  bom  at  Rosenthal  Fcb.  2,  1714. 
In  1742  he  bccame  organbt  at  the  **  Frauenkirche**  at 
Dicsden,  and  in  1755  was  promoted  musical  director. 
He  died  Junc  1,  1785.  Among  his  published  musical 
worka  thoee  eonsidered  best  are,  Pasgiongcaniate  (1755), 
and  Weihnachtgcantate  (1777).— Brockhaus,  Conv,  Lex, 
yiii,  76. 

Homily  (Gr.  6fu\la,  communion,  a  meeting;  hence 
a  dUcourse  adapted  ło  łke  peopłe),  the  name  ofa  certain 
class  of  sermons.  It  is  now  applied  to  a  simple  exposi- 
tion  of  a  text,  in  contradistinctiou  from  the  discussion 
of  a  topie.  In  the  early  Church  the  term  Xóyoc,  ora-- 
tion,  was  applied  to  less  familiar  diacourses;  6fuXia  to 
the  pUuner,  much  as  the  term  lecture  is  now  used. 

1.  The  distinction  between  the  homily  and  the  ser^ 
mon  is  thus  set  forth  by  Yinet .  *<  The  special  character 
of  the  homily  is,  not  that  it  has  to  do  most  frequently 
with  recitals,  or  that  it  is  morę  familiar  than  other  dia- 
courses, but  that  its  chief  business  is  to  set  in  relief  the 
suoceasiye  parta  of  an  extended  text,  subordinating 
them  to  its  contour,  its  accidents,  its  chanoes,  if  we  may 
so  speak,  morę  than  can  be  done  in  the  sermon,  properly 
so  called.  Nothing  distinguishes,  essentially,  the  hom- ' 
ily  from  the  sermon  except  the  comparatiye  predomi- 
nance  of  analysb;  in  other  terms,  the  preyalenoe  of 
eacpUmation  oyer  gggtem.  The  difficulty  as  to  unity  pre- 
sented  by  this  kind  of  discourse  neyer  amounts  to  im- 
possibility.  We  do  not  at  random  cut  from  the  generał 
text  of  the  sacred  book  the  particular  text  of  a  homily. 
The  selection  is  not  arbitrary,  The  limit  of  the  text  is 
predetermined  by  reference  to  unity,  which,  therefore, 
we  shaU  be  at  no  loss  to  discoyer  in  it.  The  oniy  dan- 
ger  ia  that  unity  of  subject  will  be  relinquished,  as  the 
thread  of  a  path  may  be  buried  and  lost  beneath  an  in- 
tertwined  and  tu(ted  yegetation.  As  the  preaeher  ap- 
peaiB  to  be  morę  sustained  by  his  text  in  the  homily 
than  in  the  synthetic  sermon,  the  former  is  thought  to 


HOMILT 


820 


HOMILT 


be  moro  easy  of  execution.  It  certainly  is  morę  easy 
to  make  a  homily  than  a  sermon,  bat  a  good  senncoi 
ia  madę  with  morę  facility  than  a  good  homily.  The 
great  mastera  in  the  art  of  preaching — Bouidaloae,  for 
example — have  not  aucceeded  iq  homily.  The  most 
excellent  judges  in  the  matter  of  preaching  have  leo 
ommended  the  homily"  (HomUeticSy  p.  14S  8q.). 

2.  In  the  primitive  Church  we  find  the  style  of  the 
homily  already  in  the  diacounes  of  Chriat  and  his  apos* 
tlea.  They  frequented  the  synagogues  of  the  Jews 
wherever  they  went,  and  in  theae  it  waa  customary,  af- 
ter  the  reading  of  the  Scriptiires,  to  give  an  invitation 
to  any  one  to  comment  upon  what  had  been  read.  In 
this  way  the  disciples  frequently  took  occasion  to  epeak 
of  ChńBt  and  his  doctrines.  Thus  we  find  in  the  Acts 
(i,  16;  ii,14;  iv,7;  v,  29;  vi,  84;  3dii,40,41i  xvii, 22; 
xxy  18 ;  xxii,  xxiii,  xxvi)  brief  notices  of  8everal  ad- 
dresses  madę  by  Peter  and  Paul,  and  one  by  Stephen, 
which  give  us  quite  a  distinct  impression  of  their  style 
of  address.  Tertnllian  and  Justin  ^lartyr  inform  us 
that  a  like  practice  waa  common  in  the  ehurchea  of 
Africa  and  Asia.  "  We  meet  together  to  read  the  Holy 
Scriptures,  and,  when  circumstances  permit,  to  admonish 
one  another.  In  such  sacred  disoourse  we  estabUsh  onr 
faith,  we  encourage  our  hope,  we  confiim  our  trust,  and 
ąuicken  our  obedience  to  the  word  by  a  renewed  appli- 
cation  of  its  truths"  (Tertullian,  ApoL  p.  89). 

(a)  A  similar  modę  of  discouise  we  find  again  in  the 
early  Greek  Church,  beginning  with  Origen  (A.D.  820). 
This  was  in  some  respects,  however,  a  new  style  of  ad- 
dress, as  it  incUned  to  an  allegorical  modę  of  interpret- 
ing  the  Scriptures.  But,  aside  from  this  characteristic, 
the  sermons,  or,  rather,  homilies  of  this  period,  were  soon 
followed  by  all  the  preachers,  as  Origen  waa  considered 
by  all  a  standard  who  was  to  be  imitated,  while  there 
were  others  less  commendable.  In  generał  they  wen 
faulty  in  style,  corrupt  with  "  philosophical  terms  and 
rhetorical  flourishes,  forms  of  expres8ion  extrava^ant 
and  farfetched,  Biblical  expre88ions  unintelligible  to  the 
people,  unmeaning  comparisous,  absurd  antitheses,  spir- 
itless  interrogations,  senseless  exclamatioDS,  and  bom- 
basL"  The  causes  which  contributed  to  form  this  style 
are  due  to  the  preva]ence  of  pagan  philosophy  among 
the  Christian •preachen  of  this  time,  many  of  whom  were 
converts  from  paganism,  and  had  received  an  imperfect 
preparat  ion  before  entering  on  the  dischazge  of  their 
sacred  office. 

(ft)  In  the  early  Łatin  Church,  the  homilies  of  this 
period  are,  if  anything,  even  greatly  inferior  to  Łhose  in 
the  Greek.  The  cause  of  this  was,  as  in  the  Greek 
Church,  the  imperfect  education  of  those  in  the  minia- 
try,  morc  especially  their  ignorance  of  the  original  lan- 
guagcs  of  the  Bibie.  See  Eschenburg,  Yermch  e.  Geach, 
der  Ojfentl,  Religiongrortrdge,  p.  800  sq. 

8.  In  the  Church  of  Romę,  at  an  early  i>eriod,  when 
few  of  the  priests  were  capable  of  preaching,  discourses 
were  framed  out  of  the  fathers,  chiefly  expository,  to  be 
read  from  the  pulpits.  These  were  also  called  homilies. 
See  HoMiLiARiuM. 

4.  In  England,  homilies  were  early  in  use  in  the  An; 
glo-Saxon  Church.  jEIfric,  archbishop  of  Canterbury, 
who,  after  Alfred,  ranks  first  among  the  Anglo>Saxon 
vemacular  writers,  finding  that  but  few  persona  of  his 
day  (lattcr  part  of  the  lOth  century)  could  read  the 
Gospel  doctrines,  as  they  were  written  in  the  Latui,  the 
language  of  the  Church,  was  led  to  compile  a  collection 
of  eighty  homilies,  some  of  which  were  perhaps  written 
by  himself,  but  most  of  which  he  translated  from  the 
Latin.  In  these  Anglo-Saxon  homilies  ''almost  every 
vital  doctńne  which  distinguished  the  Romish  from  the 
Protestant  Church  meets  with  a  direct  contradiction," 
and  they  proved  of  no  little  value  in  the  religious  con- 
troversy  at  the  period  of  the  EngUsh  Reformation. 
They  condemn  especially,  among  other  things,  without 
rescnre,  the  doctrine  of  transubetantiation  (q.  v.)  as  a 
growing  error,  and  go  to  prore  that  the  novelties  which 
are  generally  charged  to  the  Protestanta  are  really  of 


older  datę  than  the  boasted  argument  of  apoatolical  tia- 
dition.  Some  of  the  MSS.  of  these  homilies,  however, 
which  had  been  stored  away  in  monaatic  librańes,  aie 
found  to  be  mutilated  by  the  removal  of  all  sucb  obnox- 
ious  passages  (comp.  Soames,  fnguiiy  wio  the  Dodrimn 
of  the  Anglo-Sazon  Churth^  Bampton  LectoK,  Ozford, 
1880, 8vo).  A  second  oollection  of  ^Ifiric^s,  imdertaken 
at  the  reąuest  of  Ethelward,  oommemoratea  the  difiier- 
ent  sainta  revered  by  the  Anglo-Saxon  Church,  and, 
like  the  former  collection,  waa  divided  into  two  books. 
Of  theae  homilies  were  published,  An  Engtiśk-Saitm 
HomUy  on  the  Birihday  ofSt,  Gregory,  uaed  andenify  ta 
the  Engl%»h'Sax€n  Church,  givmg  an  AeeomU  of  the 
CofwerrioH  ofthe  Englishjrom  Pagamtm  to  Christian- 
tfy,  transL  into  mod.  Engl,  with  notes,  etc,  by  Elizabeth 
Elstob  (Lond.  1709,  8vo ;  new  ed.  Lond.  1889,  8vo);  £/- 
frici  HomiluB,  ed.  Eliz.  Elstob  (of  which  only  86  pages 
were  ever  published ;  Oxf.  1710,  foL).  Another  attempt 
waa  The  £nglish-Saxon  HwmUtM  of  jElfric,  tmnsL  by 
Eliz.  Elstob  (Oxf.  1715,  folio,  of  which  only  two  leaves 
were  printed,  now  preserved  in  the  British  Mnaeom). 
Besides  these,  there  are  some  Anglo-Saxon  homilies  ex- 
tant,  to  which  the  name  of  Lupus  Episcopua  ia  gener- 
ally affixed.  They  are  by  Wanley  {Catalog.  o/A.-S. 
MSS.  p.  140  8q.),  and  apparently  with  good  reaaon  at- 
tributed  to  Wulfstan  (q.  v.),  one  of  the  Angk>-Saxon 
prelates  of  the  llth  century.  ''The  most  remarkabłe 
of  these  is  the  one  entitled  in  the  MS.  Sermo  hqn  ad 
A  ngios  cuando  Dam  maxime  pereenUi  tunl  eo«,  in  which 
the  author  sets  before  the  eyes  of  his  oounti^inen  the 
crimes  which  had  disgraoed  the  age  preceding  that  in 
which  he  wrote,  and  the  increaaing  wickednesa  of  their 
own  time."  See  Wright,  Biop.  Briłish  Lit,  p.  487  8q., 
606  sq.    See  ^lfbic. 

5.  In  the  Church  of  England,  the  term  homily  has 
acąuired  a  special  meaning  from  the  fact  that  in  the 
time  of  the  Reformation,  a  number  of  easy  an&  ńmpłe 
discourses  were  composed  to  be  read  in  the  chnrches. 
''The  Thirty-fiflh  Article  of  religion  says,  'The  second 
Book  of  Homilies,  the  8everal  titles  whereof  we  bave 
joined  under  this  artide,  doth  contain  a  godly  and  whole- 
some  doctrine,  and  necessary  for  these  times,  aa  doth  the 
foimer  Book  of  Homilies,  which  were  set  forth  in  the 
time  of  Edward  YI;  and,  therefore,  wejudge  them  to  be 
read  in  churehes  by  the  ministeiB,  diligently  and  diatinct- 
ly,  that  they  may  be  understanded  of  the  people.*  The 
following  are  the  titles  of  the  homilies:  1.  Of  the  light 
use  of  the  church.  2.  Against  peril  of  idolatry.  8.  Of 
repaiiing  and  keeping  dean  of  ehurchea.  4.  Of  good 
works ;  first  of  fasting.  6.  Against  gluttony  and  dnink- 
enness.  6.  Against  excess  of  appareL  7.  Of  praydr. 
8.  Of  the  time  and  place  of  prayer.  9.  That  common 
prayers  and  sacramenta  ought  to  be  ministered  in  a 
known  tongue.  10.  Ofthe  reverend  estimation  of  God's 
Word.  11.0fahns-doing.  12.  Ofthe  nativityof  Christ. 
13.  Of  the  passion  of  Christ,  14.  Of  the  lesuirection  of 
Christ.  15.  Of  the  worthy  receiving  of  the  aacnment 
of  the  body  and  blood  of  Christ  16.  Of  the  gifta  of  the 
Holy  Ghost.  17.  For  the  Rogation  days.  IS.  Of  the 
State  of  matrimony.  19.  Of  repentanoe.  20.  A^aimt 
idleness.    21.  Against  rebellion." 

"  The  first  volume  of  these  homUies  is  suppo^ed  to 
have  been  composed  by  archbishop  Cranmer  and  bishops 
Ridley  and  Latimer  at  the  beginning  of  the  Reforma- 
tion, when  a  competent  number  of  ministera  of  aofilaent 
abilities  to  preach  in  a  public  oongregation  waa  not  to 
be  found."  It  waa  published,  aa  already  stated,  in  the 
article  above  dted,  in  the  beginning  of  the  reign  of  Ed« 
ward  YI.  The  second  volume  was  perhaps  prepared 
under  Edward  YI,  but  it  waa  not  published  until  1563, 
during  the  reign  of  Elizabeth  (oomp.  Hardwick,  Ckurch 
History  during  the  RrformaHon,  p.  206, 211,  249).  « In 
neither  of  these  books  can  the  8everal  homilies  be  as- 
signed  to  their  several  anthors  with  any  certainty.  In 
the  second  book  no  mngle  homily  of  them  all  haa  been 
appropriated.  In  the  first,  that  on  '  Salvatton'  was  prób- 
ably  written  by  Cranmer,  as  also  thoae  on  '  Faith'  aad 


HOMINES  INTELLIGENTI^     821 


HONERT 


'GoodWork&*  lDt«nuleTidence,«riaiiigoatof oerUin 
liomely  e^iMeaaions  and  peculiar  faniu  of  ejaculation, 
the  like  of  which  appear  in  LaŁiiner*B  aermoiu,  pretty 
clearijr  betny  Uie  hand  of  the  bUbop  of  Woroester  u 
hAFum^  been  engaged  in  the  homily  against '  BrawUng 
aorl  C.jntentłon  ;*  the  one  against  ^Adultery'  may  be 
■afely  given  to  Thomas  fiecon,  one  of  Cranmer^s  chap- 
lains,  in  whoae  worka,  publiahed  in  1564,  it  is  sŁill  to  be 
found;  of  the  lest  nothing  is  known  but  by  the  meiest 
oonjecture.  AU  memben  of  the  Church  of  England 
agree  that  the  homiliea  'ooutain  a  godly  and  wholesome 
doctrine/  but  thcy  are  not  agreed  as  to  the  precise  de- 
ffne  of  authority  to  be  attached  to  them.  In  them,  the 
authońty  of  the  fathen  of  the  fint  8ix  generał  councik, 
and  of  the  judgmenta  of  the  Church  generally,  the  holi- 
ncsB  of  the  primitire  Church,  the  aecondaiy  inspiration 
of  the  Apociypha,  the  sacramental  character  of  marriage 
and  other  ordinancea,  and  regeneration  in  holy  baptlsm, 
and  the  real  presence  in  the  Eucharist,  aro  asserted" 
(Bp.  Bomet).  One  of  the  best  editions  of  the  IlomUies 
Sa  that  by  Conie  at  the  Unirenity  press  (Cambridge, 
1800,  8vo),  and  the  latest,  and  perhaps  most  complete 
edition,  is  that  published  at  Oxfurd  (1859,  8vo>  See 
also  Darling,  Cychp.  Bibliogr,  i,  1524 ;  Wheatly,  Common 
Prayer^  p.  272 ;  Baxter,  Ck,  IHgtory,  p.  379  sq^  486  8q. ; 
Browne,  Erpoait. 89  A rticle»,  p.  782  są.;  Wealey,  Worh 
(see  Index,  voL  Tli) ;  Forbea,  On  the  39  ArHdes,  ii,  685 
9ą.\  Buchanan,  Jtutijic  p.  198, 198;  Uook,  Ch.  DicL  p. 
803. 

6.  For  the  Clementine  Homiliea,  see  Ctraf esitines  ; 
and  on  the  pointa  above  given,  see  Schmidt,  Die  HomUk 
(Halle,  1827, 8vo) ;  Augusti,  DtMknnirdigk,  a,  d,  chriałL 
ArckdoL  vi,  266  8q. ;  Sch{>ne,  Getckichta/anck,  Uber  die 
KirehL  Gebr,  i,  74  są.;  ii,  220-53;  De  concionibuś  re- 
temmy  in  Hoombeck's  MUcelUma  taera  (UltraJ.  1689) ; 
Sehrockh,  Kirckengefch,  iv,  20,  21, 81  są. ;  Neander,  Ck 
HtML  iii:  126;  Fuhrmann,  łJeadwdrierb,  d.  Kirchenffeteh. 
ii,  835;  Bingham,  OHff,  £ceie$»  book  xiv,  eh.  iv;  Cole- 
man,  A  ncient  CkrisHamly,  eh.  xvUi;  Primit,  Ck,  p.  887 ; 
Apoeb^  cmd  Primit.  Ck,  xiii;  Bickeisteth,  Chritt^  Stud, 
Ast.  p.  325,  470;  Taykir,  Ane.  CAt-iat,;  Siegel,  ffandb. 
ekrittL-kirekL  AUertk.  ii,  828  są.;  JAmdon  ReneWj  June, 
18;>4,  Jan.  1857 ;  Bib,  Sacr,  May  and  Aug.  1819 ;  PreA, 
Quarf,  Rer,  ApiU,  1862,  art.  ii;  Aletkoditt  Oitart,  Bet,  i, 
283 ;  yii,  63  są.     See  Homiuctics  ;  Uomiusts  ;  Fófi- 

TILLIŁ      (J.H.W.) 

Homincs  IntelligentiaB  (French  hommes  d^inteU 
Uffenee,  men  of  understanding),  a  hcretical  sect  which 
floorished  in  the  Netherlands  about  1412,  most  likely  a 
later  branch  of  the  Brethren  of  the  Free  Spirit  (q.  v.). 
It  was  founded  by  iEgtdius  CSantor,  and  the  most  cele- 
bnted  of  their  leadera  was  the  Grerman  Carmelite  Hil- 
demiasen.  iEgidius  Cantor  asserted  that  "  he  was  the 
aarioor  of  the  world,  and  that  by  him  the  faithful  should 
aee  Jesus  Christ,  as  by  Jesus  Christ  they  should  see  God 
tbe  Father;  .  .  .  that  the  ancient  law  was  the  time  of 
the  Father,  the  new  law  the  time  of  the  Son ;  and  that 
there  should  shortly  be  a  third  law,  which  was  to  be  the 
time  of  the  Holy  Ghost,  under  which  men  would  be  at 
fuli  liberty."  They  also  held  that  there  was  no  resur- 
rection,  but  an  immediate  translation  to  heaven;  and 
adrancod  the  pemicious  doctrines  that  prayer  had  no 
merit,  and  that  segsual  pleasures,  being  natural  actions, 
were  not  sinful,  but  rather  foretastes  of  the  jo}'s  of  hcav- 
en,  They  were  accuaed  of  heresy,  and,  Hildemissen 
having  recanted,  the  sect  finally  diśsolred.— Broughton, 
BibUotk.  Hiet,  Sacr,  i,  405;  Herzog,  Real-Encyhlop.  ii, 
899;  PSerer,  Unicere,  Tax,  viii,  511 ;  Fuhrmann,  Uand- 
wMerb.  d,  Kirchengetck,  p.  839. 

HomoBOUslan  or  Homoionsian,  a  term  de- 
•eńbiDg  the  opinions  of  Arius  and  his  fellow-heretics, 
vbo  declared  tbe  Son  of  God  to  be  only  otlihe  substauce 
{ofuuowtoc)  with  the  Father.    See  Arianism. 

HomologoumSna   (6fu>\oyovfuvat  nnirersally 
adancledged),  the  name  given  by  Eusebius  {JJiti,  Ec» 
c2tf.ili,  5, 25)  to  those  booka  of  the  New  Testament,  of 
1V.-X 


the  canonical  authority  of  which  no  donbta  had  beea 
expre88ed.  Eusebius  indudes  under  the  term  the  four 
gospeU,  the  Acta,  the  fourteen  epiatlea  of  Paul,  and  the 
tint  epistlea  of  Peter  and  John,  while  the  epistle  of 
James,  the  seoond  epistle  of  Peter,  and  the  second  and 
third  epistles  of  John,  and  the  epistle  of  Jude,  were 
placed  among  the  Antilegomena.  In  a  third  or  lower 
classi  some,  Eusebius  says,  placed  the  Apocalypse, 
though  others  placed  it  among  the  acknowledged  books. 
It  therefora  properly  belonged  to  the  Antilegomena. — 
Eadie,  Ecde$,  Diet,    See  AimutooMEMA. 

HomoOBSiaii,  a  term  nsed  to  describe  the  orthodox 
\iew  of  the  person  of  Christ,  established  at  the  Coundl 
of  Nioe  in  opposition  to  Arius,  viz.,  that  the  Son  of  God 
is**of  the  ternie  substance  (or  ettence)  with  the  Father,** 
{ofxoovvtoc  rtf  TLarpt),  See  Arianism;  Christ,  Per- 
son of;  Triutty. 

Honain,  Ibn-Isaac,  an  Arabic-Nestorian  philoso- 
pher  and  physician  of  the  Abadite  tribe,  was  bom  near 
Hirah  in  A.D.  809.  He  went  to  Greece,  and  there  stud- 
ied  the  Greek  language  and  phifosophy,  and  retumed 
to  Bagdad  with  a  large  collection  of  Greek  books,  part 
of  which  he  translated  into  the  Arabie  and  Smac.  He 
was  assisted  in  this  work  by  his  son  Isaac  Ibn-Honain 
and  his  grandson  Hobąiah,  who  likewise  distinguish-* 
ed  themselves  as  philosophers.  In  this  manner  many 
works  of  the  Greeks  became  accessible  to  the  Arabians 
and  thc.Syrians,  and  promoted  among  thera  morę  espe- 
dally  the  study  of  Greek  philosophy.  It  is  to  be  re> 
gretted  that  ailer  the  oompletion  of  the  translations  the 
original  works  were  bumed,  according,  it  is  said,  to  a 
command  of  the  caliph  Al  Mamun.  BŚddes  these  trana- 
lations,  Honain  wrote  largely  on  medicinc,  *philosophy, 
theok)gy,  and  philology.  He  leil  also  a  Syriac  gram- 
mar  and  a  Syriac- Arabie  dictionary,  the  first  dictionary 
of  the  kind  ever  prepared.  He  dłed  in  877.— -Herbelot, 
Biblioth,  Orientale^  p.  423 ;  Assemani,  Bibl,  OrietUale,  ii, 
270,  438;  iii,  pt.  ii,  p.  168;  Krug,  Philotoph,  Iax,  ii,  455 
sq. ;  Hoefer,  Nouv,  Biorj,  Generaie,  xv,  75. 

Honduras.    See  Central  America. 

Hone,  William,  an  Independent  minister,  whose 
father  is  said  to  have  been  an  occasional  preacher  among 
the  Dissenters,  was  bom  in  1779  at  Bath.  He  was 
brought  up  in  rigid  rellgions  notions,  and  in  his  early 
years  not  suffered  to  read  out  of  any  other  book  than 
the  Bibie.  At  the  age  of  ten  he  was  apprenticed  to  an 
attoroey,  but  he  finally  ąuitted  the  law,  and  became  a 
bookseller  in  London  in  1800.  He  devoted  himself  at 
the  same  time  to  the  study  of  literaturę,  and  wrote 
several  works  on  that  subject.  In  1828  he  publish- 
ed a  work  entitled  Andeta  Mytteriet  detcribedf  especial- 
Iff  the  Englith  Miracie  Platftj/ounded  on  the  apocryphal 
N,'T,  i9tory,  extant  among  the  unpubiithed  MS8.  m  the 
Briłith  Mtueum,  etc  (8vo).  **  This  is  a  curious  work, 
not  at  all  addressed  to  the  multitude,  or  chargeable  with 
any  irreverence  of  design  or  manner,  but  treating  an  in* 
teresting  antiąuarian  subject  in  the  dispassionate  style 
of  a  Btudious  inąuirer.**  His  aoąuaintance  with  mero- 
bers  of  the  ^^Independenta"  Ied  him  to  Join  the  Inde- 
pendent Church,  and  finally  he  became  a  minister  of  that 
flodety.  He  died  Nov.  6, 1842.  Hone  also  published 
The  Apocryphal  N,  T,  (Lond.  1820,  8vo;  4th  ed.  1821), 
for  an  aocount  of  which  see  Home,  Introd,  to  the  Study 
o/ the  ScripL,  and  Lond,  QuarL  Ber,  voL  xxv  and  xxx. 
See  his  Eariy  Life  and  Concertion  (1841,  8vo) ;  EnffKtk 
Ctfdopeedia ;  Darling,  Cydop,  Bibiioff,  i,  1525 ;  Allibone, 
Diet,  o/ A  uthort,  i,  874.     (J.  H.  W.) 

Honert,  Johann  yah  den,  a  dtstinguished  Dutch 
divine,  was  bom  near  Dortrecht  Dcc.  1 ,  1693.  His  early 
years  were  spent  in  military  ser>Mcc,  but  on  his  father*B 
accession  to  a  profes8or's  chair  in  the  Unirentity  of  Ley- 
den  he  decided  to  follow  a  literary  Ufe,  and,  aAer  four 
years  of  study,  he  became  a  candidate  for  the  ministry 
in  his  twenty-fourth  year.  In  1718  he  was  appointed 
minister  at  Catwick,  on  the  Rhine;  later,  at  Enkhuysen, 
and  then  at  Haarlem,    In  1727  he  was  called  aa  pro- 


HONESTTTS 


322 


HONEY 


hmar  of  theology  to  th«  Uniyenity  at  Utrecht,  and  łn 
1781  was  hoDored  with  the  profeasorahip  of  Church  Hia- 
tory.  In  1784  the  Unirenity  of  Leyden  called  him  as 
profesBor  of  theology,  to  which  was  added,  in  1788,  the 
depaitment  which  he  last  iilled  at  the  Utrecht  Univer- 
dty,  and  in  1746  the  department  of  Homiletics.  He 
died  April  7, 1756.  A  oomplete  list  of  his  works^  which 
in  a  great  part  hare  now  nearly  gone  ont  of  datę,  is 
given  by  Adelung  (in  Jdcher'B  GeL  Lezik.  Addanda  ii, 
2128  8q.)-  His  IM  groHa  Dń  non  ttnicenaU,  md  par- 
ticulari  (Lugd.  1728, 8ro),  which  was  intended  to  senre 
as  an  intermediator  at  the  time  when  the  Galyinistic  pre- 
destinarian  doctrine  was  much  softened  by  the  French 
and  Swifls  theologians,  ao  rigidly  oppoeed  by  many  83rB- 
tematic  thcologians,  involved  him  in  a  contiwersy  with 
some  of  the  Rcmonstrants  (q.  v.)*  (Comp.  A  cła  hisU  eccL 
ii,  819  8q.)  His  Orałio  de  kuł,  ecclea.  studio  Theologis 
mazinte  neeett,  (Lugd.  1784,  4to)  was,  like  many  other 
translations  of  German  theologicid  works,  of  great  value 
to  the  Church  of  his  country.  He  wrate  also  Institt, 
TheoL  (Lugd.  1785).  Honert  was  regarded  by  all  par- 
ties  as  a  very  scholarly  divine,  and  was  oonsulted  by  all 
of  them  wiUiout  distinction. — Gass,  Geach.  der  Protest, 
Doffmał.  iii,  1862;  Fuhrmann,  UandwórUrb.  d,  Kirdunr 
^efc«.ii,8398q.     (J.H.W.) 

Honestus,  Sr.    See  Damian,  Petbr. 

Honey  (Ó3^,  deftcuA',  sometimes  rendered  "^  honey- 
oomb,"  in  composition  with  *l?;^,  ya^ar,  or  S^^ISt,  tsuph  ; 
while  r&b^  no'phełh,  singly,  is  sometimes  trandated 
*'honey-comb;**  Greek  ft^Xc)  is  represented  by  seyeral 
terms,  morę  or  less  accorately,  in  the  original  languages 
of  Scrtpture. 

1.  *i?^,  ya^ar^  which  only  occurs  (in  this  sense)  in  1 
Sam.  xiv,  25,  27,  29;  Cant.  y,  1 ;  and  dcnotes  the  honey 
of  bees,  and  that  only.  The  word  properly  signiiies  a 
copse  or  forest,  and  refers  to  the  honey  found  in  the 
woods. 

2.  rsb,  no^pheth,  honey  that  drops  (from  q!ia,  to  tprin^ 
He  or  distil),  nsually  associated  with  the  comb,  and 
therefore  bee-honey.  This  occurs  in  Psa.  xix,  10 ;  Prov. 
T,  8;  xxiv,  13;  xxvii,  7;  CanL  iv,  11. 

8.  tiS^,  dehaih'  (from  its  glutinous  naturę).  This  is 
the  most  frequent  word.  It  sometimes  denotes  bee- 
honey,  as  in  Judg.  xiy,  8,  but  may  also  refer  to  a  vegę- 
taUe  honey  distilled  from  trees,  and  called  manna  by 
chemists;  also  the  sinip  of  dat«s,  and  even  dates  them- 
selyes.  It  appears  also  sometimes  to  stand  as  a  generał 
term  for  all  kinds  of  honey,  especiaUy  the  sirup  of 
grapes,  i.  e.  the  newly-expre88ed  juioe  or  must  boiled 
down.  At  the  present  day  this  slrup  is  still  common 
in  Palestine,  under  the  same  Arabie  name  dib»  (Robin- 
8on*8  Jieaearches,  ii,  442,  453),  and  forms  an  article  of 
oommerce  in  the  East;  it  was  this,  and  not  ordinary 
bee-honey,  which  Jaoob  soit  to  Joeeph  (Gen.  xliii,  U), 
and  which  the  Tyrians  purchascd  from  Palestine  (Ezek. 
xxyii,  17).  The  modę  of  preparing  it  ts  described  by 
Pilny  (xiv,  11) :  the  must  was  cither  boUed  down  to  a 
half  (in  which  case  it  was  called  de/nttum)f  or  to  a  third 
(when  it  was  called  Hracumj  or  sapa,  the  oipatoc  olvoc, 
and  tijnifia  of  the  Greeks) :  it  was  mixed  either  i\ńth 
winę  or  miik  (Virg.  Georg,  i,  296;  Ovid,  Fast,  iv,  780) : 
it  is  still  a  favorite  artidc  of  nutriment  among  the  S}t- 
ians,  and  has  the  appearance  of  ooarse  honey  (Russell, 
AleppOj  i,  82).  It  was  used  for  sweetening  food,  like 
sugar  with  us  (£xod.  xvi,  31). 

4.  ?)!)!{,  isuph  (literaUy  9,flowing)y  denotes  rather  the 
eeUt  of  the  honey-comb  fuli  of  honey  (Prov.  xvi,  24 ; 
Psa.  xix,  11). 

5.  The  "wild  honey"  (fłiXc  dyptoy)  which,  with  lo- 
custs,  formed  the  diet  of  John  the  Baptist^  was,  accord- 
ing  to  some,  the  manna  or  vegetable  honey  notieed  un- 
deir  debaih  (No.  8,  above),  but  may  very  naturally  refer 
to  the  honey  stored  by  bees  in  the  rocks  of  Judiea  De- 
serta,  in  the  abeence  of  the  trees  to  which  they  usually 


Such  wild  honey'  is  deariy  referred  to  in  Deot 
xxii,  18 ;  Psa.  lxxxi,  17.  Joaephus  {War,  iv,  8, 8)  spe- 
ciiles  bee-honęy  among  the  natonl  prodnctions  of  the 
plain  of  Jericho:  the  same  Greek  eKpreasionia  certainly 
applied  by  Diodorus  Siculus  (xix,  94)  to  honey  exttdisg 
from  trees;  but  it  may  also  be  applied,  like  the  Latui 
md  tUtettre  (Pliny,  xi,  16),  to  a  purticiUar  kind  of  bec- 
honey.  A  third  kind  has  been  described  by  some  writ- 
ers  as  '*  vęgetable"  honey,  by  which  is  meant  the  exu- 
dations  ofcertain  trees  and  shrubs,  such  nB  the  Tamatix 
manni/eraf  found  in  the  peninsula  of  Sinai,  or  the  stunt- 
ed  oaks  of  Luristan  and  Mesopotamia.  A  kind  of  honey 
is  described  by  Josephus  (JL  e.)  as  being  manuftctored 
ftom  the  juice  of  the  datę. 

Honey  was  not  permitted  to  be  offered  on  the  altir 
(Lev.  ii,  11).  As  it  is  coupled  with  leaven  in  this  pro- 
hibition,  it  would  seem  to  amount  to  an  interdiction  of 
things  sour  and  sweet.  Aben  Ezra  and  othera  allege 
that  it  was  because  honey  partook  of  the  fennenting 
naturę  of  leaven,  and  when  bumt  jridded  an  anpleasant 
smell->qualities  incompatible  with  offerings  madę  by 
tire  of  a  sweet  8avor  mito  the  Lord.  The  prohibition 
appears  to  have  been  grounded  on  the  fermentatioii  pro- 
duced  by  it,  honey  soon  tuming  sour,  and  even  forming 
vinegar  (Pliny,  xxi,  48).  This  fact  is  embodied  in  the 
Talmudical  word  hidlń»h=^*^  to  ferment,"*  derived  from 
debośk.  Other  explanations  have  been  offered,  aa  that 
bees  were  unclean  (PhiL  ii,  255),  or  that  the  honey  was 
the  artificial  dibe  (Bllhr,  SymboL  ii,  823).  But  Maimon- 
ides  and  others  think  it  was  for  the  purpose  of  making 
a  difference  between  the  religious  customs  of  the  Jewa 
and  the  heathen,  in  whose  ofTerings  honey  waa  much 
employed.  The  flrst-fruits  of  honey  were,  howevcr,  to 
be  presented,  as  these  were  destined  for  the  support  of 
the  priests,  and  not  to  be  offered  upon  the  altar  (2  Chroń. 
xxxi,  5).  It  is  related  in  1  Sam.  xiv,  24-^2,  thmt  Jona- 
than and  his  party,  coming  to  the  wood,  found  honey 
dropping  fVom  the  trees  to  the  ground,  and  the  prince 
extended  his  rod  to  the  honey-comb  to  taste  the  honey. 
From  all  this  it  is  elear  that  the  honey  was  bee-boney, 
and  that  honey-combs  were  above  in  the  trees,  fiom 
which  honey  dropped  upon  the  ground;  but  it  ia  net 
dear  whether  Jonathan  pnt  his  rod  into  a  honey-oonib 
that  was  in  the  trees  or  shrabe,  or  into  one  that  had 
fallen  to  the  ground,  or  that  had  been  formed  there  (Kit- 
to*8  Picł,  BiUe,  ad  loc.).  Moreover,  the  yegetable  hone^' 
u  found  only  in  smali  globuks,  which  must  be  caiefiilly 
oollected  and  stiained  before  being  used  (Wellsted,  ii, 
50).  In  India,  'Hhe  forests,"  sa^-s  Mr.  Roberta,  ««ltter- 
ally  flow  with  honey ;  large  combe  may  be  scen  hang- 
ing  on  the  trees  as  you  pass  along,  fuli  of  honey**  {Chi- 
ental  lUustratuMui).  We  have  good  reason  to  con<dude, 
from  many  allusions  in  Scripture,  that  this  waa  alao,  to 
a  considerable  extent,  the  case  formcrly  in  Palestine. 
It  is  very  evident  that  the  land  of  Canaan  abounded  in 
honey.  It  is  indeed  described  as  "  a  land  flowing  with 
milk  and  honey"  (£xod.  iii,  8,  etc);  which  we  appie- 
hend  to  refer  to  all  the  sweet  substances  which  the  dif- 
ferent  Hcbrew  words  indicate,  as  the  phrase  fcema  too 
large  to  be  confined  to  the  honey  of  bees  alonc.  Yet 
the  great  number  of  bees  in  Palestine  has  been  notioed 
by  many  trayellers;  and  they  were  doubtlees  still  morę 
common  in  andent  times,  when  the  soil  was  under  moie 
generał  cultivation.  Where  bees  are  vcry  numenws, 
they  sometimes  resort  to  places  for  the  deposit  of  their 
honey  which  we  would  Uttłe  think  of.  The  skeleton 
of  a  lion,  picked  dean  by  birds,  dogs,  and  insecta,  would 
afford  no  bad  substitute  for  a  hive,  na  in  Judg.  xiv,  8,  9 
(Kitto*s  Dai/y  Bibie  Illuił,  ad  loc).  A  recent^trareller, 
in  a  sketch  of  the  natural  histoi^'  of  Palestine,  njunes 
bees,  beetles,  and  moequitoe8  as  the  insects  which  are 
most  common  in  the  country  (Schuberta  Reise  hn  Mor^ 
(fertlnndef  ii,  120).  In  some  parts  of  Northern  AiBbim 
the  hiUs  are  so  well  stocked  with  bees  that  no  aooner 
are  hive8  placed  than  they  are  occupied  (Wel1flted*8 
TrareU,  ii,  128).  Dr.  Thomson  speaks  of  immense 
swarms  of  bees  in  the  diib  of  wady  Kum,  and  < 


HONOLULU 


323 


HONORIUS 


Deat.  xxii,  18  {Land  and  Book,  i,  4e0).  Piof.  Hackett 
nw  hiTes  in  8evend  places  in  Palestine  (lUusłraHoHt  of 
8er^,  p.  96).  Hilk  and  honęy  were  among  the  chief 
daifiriwi  in  the  eariier  ages,  as  they  aie  now  among  the 
Bedawin;  and  botter  and  honej  are  also  mentioned 
among  artides  of  food  (Isa.  vii,  15).  The  ancients  lued 
honcT  inatead  of  angar  (Paa.  cxix,  108 ;  Proy.  xxiv,  18) ; 
bat  when  taken  in  great  ąuantitiea  it  caiues  nansea,  a 
fiKt  employed  in  Pn>v.  xxv,  16, 17,  to  incukate  moder- 
ation  in  {deasarea.  Honey  and  milk  are  pat  also  for 
sweet  diaoonne  (Cant  iv,  11),  The  preservative  prop- 
eitiee  of  honey  were  kno¥m  in  andent  times.  Josephus 
reoords  that  the  Jewish  king  Aristobulus,  whom  Pom- 
pey*8  portiaans  destroyed  by  poison,  lay  buried  in  honey 
tUl  Antony  aent  him  to  the  royal  eemeteiy  in  Judiea 
{AiśL,  xiv,  7, 4).    See  Bee. 

HONEY,  a  portion  of  which,  with  milk,  was  sometimes 
given  to  newrly-baptized  penons  in  allosion  to  the  name 
andently  given  to  Canaan,  and  in  token  that  they  be- 
longed  to  the  spiritual  IsraeL  Honey  and  milk  had  a 
distinct  consecration  (Eadie,  Ecdet,  Diet.),  See  Au- 
guati,  CkrittL  A  rekSoL  ii,  446  są. ;  Riddle,  Christ,  A  ntiq, 
p.  519  aq. ;  Wheatly,  Common  Prayer,  p.  826. 

Honolulu.    See  SA2n>wicH  Islands. 

Honor,  (1.)  respect  paid  to  saperiora,  those  to  whom 
we  owe  particular  deferenoe  and  distinction.  (2.)  It  is 
sometimea,  in  Scńptore,  uaed  to  denote  real  aer^dces : 
«  Honor  thy  iather  and  mother  (Exod  xx,  12) ;"  that  is, 
not  only  show  respect  and  deference,  but  assist  them, 
aod  perform  such  senrices  to  them  aa  they  need.  By 
honor  b  alao  understood  that  adoration  which  is  due  to 
God  only :  **  Give  unto  the  Lord  the  honor  due  unto  his 
name  (Psa.  xxix,  2)."  (8.)  Specifically,  it  is  used  to  de- 
note the  teatimony  of  esteem  or  submission,  by  which 
we  make  known  the  veneration  and  respect  we  entertain 
for  any  one  on  aocount  of  his  dignity  or  merit  The 
word  ia  used  in  genend  for  the  esteem  due  to  virtue, 
gloty,  repatation,  and  probity.  In  every  situation  of 
life,  idigion  only  forms  the  tnie  honor  and  happiness  of 
man.  "  It  cannot  arise  from  riches,  dignity  of  rank,  or 
Office,  nor  from  what  are  often  called  splendid  actions  of 
heroes,  or  ctvil  accompliahments ;  these  may  be  found 
among  men  of  no  real  integrity,  and  may  create  consid- 
erable  fiune;  but  a  distinction  must  be  madę  between 
iame  and  tnie  honor.  The  former  is  a  loud  and  noisy 
applanae ;  the  latter  a  morę  silent  and  intenial  homage. 
Famę  floata  on  the  breath  of  the  multitude ;  honor  rests 
on  the  judgment  of  the  thinking.  In  order,  then,  to  dis- 
cem  where  true  honor,  lies,  we  mUst  not  look  to  any  ad- 
ventitioua  circumstanoe,  not  to  any  single  sparkling  qual- 
ity,  but  to  the  whole  of  what  forms  a  man ;  in  a  word, 
we  must  look  to  the  souL  It  wiU  di8cover  itself  by  a 
miód  superior  to  fcar,  to  selfish  interest,  and  corruption ; 
by  an  aident  love  to  the  Supremę  Being,  and  by  a  prin- 
ciple  of  uniform  lectitude.  It  will  make  us  netther 
afnid  nor  ashamed  to  discharge  our  duty,  as  it  relates 
both  to  God  and  man.  It  will  influence  us  to  be  mag- 
nsmmotts  without  being  proud;  humble  without  being 
mean ;  jost  without  being  harsh ;  simple  in  our  manners, 
bat  manly  in  our  feelinga  This  honor,  thus  fonmed  by 
rdigion,  or  the  love  of  God,  is  morę  independent  and 
morę  oomplete  thaii  what  can  be  aoquired  by  any  othcr 
naeans.  It  is  productive  of  higher  feiidty,  and  will  be 
commensurate  with  eternity  itself;  while  that  honor, 
ao  caDed,  which  arises  from  any  other  prindple,  will  re- 
aemble  the  feeble  and  twinkling  flame  of  a  taper,  which 
is  often  douded  by  the  smoke  it  sends  forth,  but  is  al- 
ways  wasting,and  soon  diea  totally  awav"  (Błair,  Ser- 
numi,  Senn.  88).  (4.)  The  term  «  honor"  'ia  also  used  to 
deoote  the  peraonal  qaality  of  magnanimity,  especially 
ńi  relation  to  tmth  and  fidelity.  Among  men  of  the 
worid,  the  ''sense  of  honor,"  so  called,  takea  the  place  of 
cooadeiice;  perhaps  it  might  moro  Justly  be  said  that  it 
«  oonsdence,  regidated,  however,  by  the  personal  pride 
of  the  individaal.  Coleridge  remarks  that  wherevcr 
^genoioe  morality  haa  given  way,  in  the  generał  opin- 


ion,  to  a  scheme  qf  ethics  founded  on  utility,  its  place  is 
soon  challenged  by  the  spirit  of  honor.  Paley,  who  de- 
grades  the  spirit  of  honor  into  a  merę  club-law  among 
the  higher  dasses,  originating  in  seUish  convenience,  and 
enforoed  by  the  penalty  of  exoommunication  from  the 
Bociety  which  habit  haid  rendered  indispensable  to  the 
happineas  of  the  individuals,  has  mtsoonstrued  it  not 
less  than  Shaftesbnry,  who  extolB  it  as  the  noblest  influ- 
ence of  noble  naturea.  The  spirit  of  honor  is  morę,  in* 
deed,  than  a  merę  conventional  substitute  for  honesty ; 
but,  on  the  other  hand,  instead  of  being  a  finer  form  of 
morał  life,  it  may  be  morę  tmly  described  as  the  shad- 
ow  or  ghost  of  virtue  deoeased ;  for  to  take  the  word 
in  a  sense  which  no  man  of  honor  would  acknowledge 
may  be  allowed  to  the  writer  of  satires,  but  not  to  the 
morał  philoaopher.  Honor  impliea  a  reverence  for  the 
invi8ible  and  supersensual  in  our  naturę,  and  so  far  it  is ' 
virtue;  but  it  is  a  virtue  that  ndther  understands  it^ 
self  nor  its  true  source,  and  therefore  often  unsubsŁan- 
tial,  not  seldom  fantastic,  and  often  morę  or  less  capii- 
cious.  Abstract  the  notion  from  the  live8  of  lord  Her- 
bert of  Cherbur}',  or  Heniy  the  Fourth  of  France,  and 
then  oompare  it  with  1  Cor.  xiii  and  the  Epistle  to  Fhi- 
lemon,  or,  rather,  with  the  rcalizatioii  of  this  fair  ideał 
in  the  character  of  St  Paul  himself.  This  has  struck 
the  better  class  even  of  infldels.  Collins,  one  of  the 
most  leamed  of  our  English  deists,  is  said  to  have  de- 
clared  that,  contradictory  as  mtradea  appeared  to  his 
reason,  he  would  bełieve  in  them  notwithstanding  if  it 
could  be  proved  to  him  that  StPaul  had  asserted  any 
one  as  having  been  worked  hjf  himtdf  in  the  modem 
sense  of  the  word  miracU;  adćmgy*St.PaiU  was  so 
per/ect  a  ffentleman,  and  a  man  of  honor  P  I  know  not 
a  better  test  Nor  can  I  think  of  any  investigation 
that  would  be  morę  instructive  where  it  would  be  «q/e, 
but  nonę,  likewise,  of  greater  delicacy  from  the  proba- 
bility  of  misinterpretation  than  a  history  of  the  rise  of 
honor  in  the  European  monarchies  as  connected  with 
the  corruptions  of  Christianity,  and  an  inqniiy  into 
the  specific  causes  of  the  inefficacy  which  has  attended 
the  oombined  effbrts  of  dirines  and  moralists  against 
the  practice  and  obligation  of  duelling."  Of  the  merę- 
ly  worldly  sense  of  honor,  Carlyle  remarks,  sharply 
enough,  that  it  '<revea]s  itsdf  too  clearly  aa  the  daugh- 
ter  and  heiress  of  our  old  acąuaintance,  Vanity"  {Essayt^ 
ii,  74).  Montesquieu  remarks  that  what  ia  called  honor 
in  Europę  is  nnknown,  and  of  course  onnamed,  in  Asia; 
and  that  it  would  be  diffiadt  to  render  the  term  intolli- 
gible  to  a  Perdan."  See  Montesąuieu,  Spirit  oflMics^ 
bk.  iii,  eh.  viii;  Coleridge,  Friend,  p.  877. 

Honoratos,  St.,  a  Maniducan,  and  archbishop  of 
Arles,  was  bom,  according  to  Baillet,  in  Belgian  Gaul,  in 
the  second  half  of  the  4Łh  centur}'.  He  belonged  to  a 
noble  family  who  were  pagans ;  and  when  he  and  his 
brother  Yenantius  beoame  Christians,  they  left  their 
oomitry  and  parents,  and  travelled  through  Achaia,  and 
afterwards  founded  a  monasteiy  on  the  island  of  Serlno, 
opposite  Cannes,  which  acąuired  great  celebrity.  Some 
of  the  most  eminent  bishops  and  theologians  of  the  5th 
and  6th  centuries  came  out  of  this  conrent.  Honoratus 
himself  became  archbishop  of  Arles  A.D.  426,  and  died 
AD.  429.     See  Hoefer,  Nouv,  Biog.  Ginirale,  xxv,  78. 

Honoratus,  St.,  bishop  of  Marseilles,  was  bom 
about  420  or  425,  and  is  said  to  have  been  educated  at 
the  school  of  Lerins.  He  was  the  suooessor  of  the  cele- 
brated  Tillemont  in  the  episcopacy  (probably  in  475), 
but  of  his  works  very  little  is  known  at  present.  Some 
ascribe  to  him  the  authorship  of  a  life  of  St  Hilarios, 
which  other  critićs  suppose  to  be  the  production  of  Yi- 
yentius.  He  died  about  492,  counting  pope  Gdadus  I 
among  his  admirers.— Hoefer,  Nouv,  Biog,  Genir,  xxv, 
78. 

Honorlns,  Soman  emperor,  son  of  Theododus  I, 
was  bom  in  884^  He  was  named  Augustus  Nov.  20, 
898,  and  suooeeded  his  father  Jan.  17, 895,  as  first  em- 
peror of  the  Western  empire,  with  Borne  aa  ita  oapital, 


HONORIUS 


324 


HONORIUS 


while  tbe  Eastem  feU  to  the  lot  of  his  brother  Aicadiua. 
Ilonorius  was  at  t^  time  only  ten  yean  of  age,  and  be 
was  therefore  put  under  the  guardianship  of  Stilicho,  a 
Yandal,  who  had  aided  him  in  aaoending  the  throne, 
and  whoee  daughter  Maria  he  manied.  Honoriua, 
80on  after  his  accession,  lenewed  and  even  rendered 
morę  Btringent  his  faŁher'8  enactmenu  against  heathen- 
ism ;  but  the  weakness  of  his  goyernment,  together  with 
the  fears  or  heathenish  tendencies  of  some  of  the  gov- 
ernore,  rendered  these  regulations  almoet  of  no  effect  in 
sereral  proYinces.  It  having  been  represented  to  Ho- 
norius  that  the  continued  exi8tence  of  heathen  templefl 
kept  up  the  heathen  spińt  among  the  people,  he  ordered 
(399)  that  all  such  tempłea  sbouid  be  quickly  destroyed, 
so  that  the  people  should  no  longer  haye  Uiis  tempta- 
tion  before  them.  As  the  heathen  laid  great  stress  on 
a  prediction  that  Christianity  would  disappear  in  its 
865th  year,  the  destniction  of  their  own  temples  at  that 
time  madę  gieat  impression  on  them.  Yet  in  some  dis- 
tricts  of  Northern  Africa  the  heathen  still  lemaiued  nu- 
merous  enough  not  only  to  zesist,  but  even  to  oppress 
the  Christiaiis.  After  the  death  of  Stilicho,  Honorius 
modified  his  severe  oourse  against  heathenism:  a  law 
was  promulgated  for  the  Western  empire  in  A.D.  410 — 
**  ut  libera  voluntaie  guit  cultum  Christianiłatis  exciperet" 
^by  which  the  penalties  pronounoed  by  preceding  laws 
against  all  who  participated  in  any  but  Christian  wor- 
ship  were  suspended.  This  law,  howerer,  remained  in 
force  but  a  short  time,  and  the  old  enactments  came 
again  into  use.  An  edict  of  416  excluded  the  heathen 
from  ciyil  and  military  offioes,  yet  we  are  told  by  Zozi- 
mus  (v,  46)  that  such  was  the  weakness  of  Honorius 
that  at  the  reąuest  of  a  heathen  generał,  who  decUned 
oontinuing  in  his  senrice  on  any  other  terms,  the  edict 
was  at  once  taken  back.  This  racillating,  irresolute 
prince  was  also  led  to  take  part  in  discussions  on  the 
points  of  doctrine  then  ag^tating  the  Church.  In  418 
he  promulgated  an  edict  against  Pelagius  and  the  Pela- 
gians  and  Coeliools,  which  was  framed  morę  in  a  theo- 
logical  than  an  imperial  style.  He  acted  in  the  same 
manner  towards  the  Donatists.  The  enyoys  of  the 
North  African  Church  sucoeeded  in  obtaining  from  the 
emperor  a  rule  that  the  penalty  of  ten  pounds  of  gold 
to  which  his  father  Theodoeius  had  condemned  heretic 
priests,  or  the  ownera  of  the  places  where  heretics  as- 
sembled  to  worship,  should  only  be  enforced  agunst 
those  Donatist  bishops  and  priests  in  whose  dioceses  vi- 
olence  had  been  oflfered  to  the  orthodox  priests.  In 
an  edict  Honorius  issued  against  the  Donatists  (405), 
he  condemned  them  as  heretics,  and  this  with  morę 
seyerity  eyen  than  the  Comicil  of  Carthage  demanded. 
Later  he  appointed  a  council,to  be  held  at  Carthage 
(411),  to  decide  the  difficulty  between  the  Donatists 
and  the  orthodox  party.  The  imperial  commissionerB, 
of  course,  decided  for  the  latter,  and  new  edicts  were 
published  exiliug  Donatist  priests,  and  condemning 
their  foUowers  to  be  fined.  The  ianaticism  of  the  op- 
pressed  party  was  excited  by  these  measures,  and  the 
heresy  only  spread  the  morę  rapidly.  While  the  reign 
of  Honorius  is  thus  of  great  importance  in  the  history 
of  the  Church,  the  emperor  himself  showed  the  greatest 
want  of  energy  in  all  his  dealings,  and  his  death,  which 
occurred  in  August,  423,  cannot  be  said  to  haye  been  a 
loss  to  either  the  State  or  tbe  Church.— Herzog,  Jieał- 
£nq/klop.  yi,  251 ;  Mosheim,  Ch,  History,  vol.  i ;  Gibbon, 
Declme  and  Fali,  chap.  xxix-xxxiii ;  Sozomen,  Hist,  Ec- 
cfc*. chap. yiii-x ;  Schaff, CA. //wf.ii, 66 są. ;  Lea, iS^cpcf r- 
dbtal  Celibacy,  p.  54, 72,  88 ;  Christ.  Remembrancer,  July, 
1868,  p.  237.    See  Donatists. 

HonoriuB,  an  archbishop  of  Canterbuiy  in  627. 
He  instituted  parishes  in  England;  but  litte  is  known 
of  his  life  and  works.     He  died  in  653. 

HonoriuB  of  Autuk  {Augustodunensis),  sumamed 
*'  the  Solitary,"  a  scholastic  theologian  of  the  first  half 
of  the  llth  century,  is  generally  8uppoee<l  to  haye  been 
bom  in  France,  and  was  connected  with  a  church  at 


Autun,  in  Borgondy.  His  peimnti  history  is  ndhtt 
obscure ;  but  if  he  be  really  the  author  of  Lhe  JLluddari" 
urn,  a  summary  of  theology,  published  in  France  as  the 
work  of  Anselm  (PariS|  1660,  8vo),  be  deserres  to  be 
ranked  among  the  most  cel^rated  men  of  his  oentuiy. 
The  Elucidarium  shows  that  Honorius  was  deroted  to  a 
practical  mysticism,  and  in  his  work  he  scems  to  haye 
followed  the  new  Flatonic-Augustiniau  theology.  He 
condemned  the  Crusades  and  pilgrimages  to  Jerusałem, 
all  deoorations  of  the  altar,  the  extreme  unction,  etc 
On  the  doctrine  of  the  Trinity,  he  held  that  the  godbead 
consists  of  three  distinct  powem.  He  is  ałso  said  to  haye 
been  the  author  of  a  ¥rork,  De  Pradestinaiione  et  libero 
arbitrio  (CoL  1552 ;  also  found  in  Cassander^s  WorkM,  p. 
628  sq.).  In  this  work  he  holds  that  **  God*s  foreknowl- 
edge  has  no  coropelling  influence  upon  our  actions^  nor 
his  predestination  any  neoeasitating  power  oyer  our  fate ; 
for,  as  all  futurity  is  present  to  an  omnipresent  Being, 
he  knows  our  futurę  acts,  because  he  sees  them  as  al- 
ready  done ;  and  his  predestination  to  either  life  or  death 
is  the  oonsequence  of  his  foreknowing  the  linę  of  oon- 
duet  which  his  creatures  would  choose  to  pursue."  In 
many  respects  he  agreed  with  Abelard  (q.  y.).  Hono- 
rius also  wrote  seyeral  Biblical  works,  among  which  bia 
Iniroduction  to  the  Erplanation  of  ŚoUmotCs  Song  is 
considered  as  his  best  production.  AU  his  theolc^cal 
and  phUosophical  works  are  coUected  in  the  BibL  Max. 
Pażr.  yoL  xx,  See  Dupin,  BibL  Nouv,  des  aut.  eecL  ul, 
154;  Oudin,  De  Sayjt,Eceks,;  Schrockb,J^trd(ai^adL 
xxiy,  361  8q. ;  xxyiii,  835,  416  8q.,  427  sq. ;  xxix,  841 ; 
Ritter,  Geach.  der  Philos,  yii,  485  sq. ;  Ciarkę,  Succt»i<m 
of  Sacred  Lit,  ii,  680;  WaterUnd,  Work$  (see  lDdex); 
Fuhrmann,  Handieórterb,  d,  Kirchengesch,  ii,  842 ;  Ascfa- 
bach,  KircheH-I^ex.  iii,  821  sq. ;  Hoefer,  Nour.  Biog,  Gł" 
nerole,  xxy,  19  sq.;  Darling,  Encyklop,  BiNiog,  i,  1536. 
(J.H.W.) 

Honorius  de  Sancta  Maria,  who  was  also  known 
as  Blaise  VauxeUe,  was  bom  at  Limoges,  in  France, 
July  4, 1651.  He  joined  the  Carmelites  at  Toulouae  in 
1671,  and  then  went  on  a  missiou  to  the  Leyant.  Be- 
tuming  to  France,  he  taught  theology  for  some  yeaia, 
and  became  prior,  counsellor,  proyinciid,  and,  finally,  yis- 
itor  generał  of  the  French  Carmelites.  He  died  in  1729. 
The  most  important  and  useful  of  his  publications  b  en- 
titled  Rifiezions  sur  les  Regles  et  sur  tUsage  de  la  Cri- 
tigue,  iouchant  tJIistoire  de  FEglise,  les  Outrages  des 
Peres,  les  A  des  des  anciens  Marlyrs,  les  Vies  des  Sahutes, 
etc.  (Paris  and  Lyons,  1712-1720, 8  yols.  4to).  He  wiote 
seyeral  treatises  against  Jansenism,  and  in  fayor  of  the 
buU  Unigenitus;  also  Vie  de  Saint  Jean  de  la  Croix 
(Toumay,  1724)  :~Observałions  sur  tUistoire  eccUstas^ 
tigue  de  Fleurg  (Mechlin,  1726-1729)  -.^Erpositio  Sym- 
boli Apostolorum,  etc.  (Peipignan,  1689) :  —  Traditicms 
des  Peres  et  auteurs  eccles,  sur  la  Coniempkdion  (Pkris, 
1706, 2  yols.  8vo),  which  last  was  translated  into  Iialian 
and  Spanish,  and  to  which  he  Bubsequently  addcd  Des 
Motifs  et  de  la  Pra1ique  de  Tamour  de  Dieu  (Paris,  1713, 
8vo) ;  etc. — Mor^ri,  Aouv,  Diet.  Histor, ;  Iloefer,  Nouv, 
Biog.  Generaley  xxy,  88. 

Honoiiiui  I,  Pope,  was  a  natiye  of  the  Campania, 
and  sucoeeded  Boniface  Y  in  625.  His  generał  admin- 
istrAtion  of  Church  aiEurs  has  been  fayorably  comment- 
ed  upon  by  historians,  and  his  name  is  yery  prom- 
inent in  the  histoiy  of  the  paschal  controyersy  in  Ire- 
land,  and  in  that  of  the  eariy  Anglo-Saxon  Choreh. 
The  feast.  of  the  eleyation  of  the  cross  was  organised 
during  his  time  (abmit  628),  and  he  was  yery  acttye  in 
conyerting  the  heathen.  He  died  in  688.  Some  of  his 
letters  are  preseryed  in  I^bbe's  Coliecf.  ConcUiontm, 
yoL  iiL  Honorius  is  especially  distinguished  for  the 
part  he  took  in  the  Monothelistic  controyersies  of  that 
period.  While  the  controyersy  was  gaining  gronnd 
in  the  West,  Sergius,  patriarch  of  Constantinople, 
wrote  to  Honorius,  explaining  the  Monothelistic  dcc- 
trines  in  the  most  fayorable  light,  and  suggested  that 
Honorius  should  impose  aiknce  on  both  partieB  in  a 


HONORIUS 


325 


HONORIUS 


dispate  wbich  really  did  not  affecŁ  the  tabstance 
of  the  Gathc^c  doctrine.  Mided,  it  is  alleged,  by  this 
■tatement  of  Sef^g^us,  Honorios  oonaented,  and  eren 
exprcaBcd  biimelf  in  langnage  which  woold  appear 
to  condemn  the  doctrine  of  two  willa  in  Christ  After 
ha  deathy  attempts  were  madę  at  Romę  to  excu]pate 
hk  memory  from  all  aocoaation  of  hereay,  yet  he  was 
oondemned  and  anathematized  by  the  CEcumenical 
Coundl  of  GonsUntinople  in  680,  and  this  sentenoe  was 
oonficmed  at  difTerent  times,  as,  for  instance,  by  Leo  II, 
who  anathematized  him  aa  heretic  for  having  atteropted 
apoeiolieam  eeclesiam^-prąfana  prodUione  immaculaiam 
subceriere  (Mansi,  x,  731).  Modem  Roman  Catholic 
historians  have  tried  in  yarious  ways  to  exonerate  Ho- 
noriua.  Baionius  says  that  the  acts  of  the  Council  of 
Coostantinople  were  falsified;  Bellannine  says  that  this 
was  the  case  with  Honorius*s  letter  to  Sei^us;  while 
Gamier  and  BaUerini  daim  that  he  was  not  anathema- 
tized for  heresy,  but  propter  ntgUgmtianu  Some  Roman 
Catholic  historians,  however,  maintain  that  eyen  in  di»- 
daiming  the  belief  of  two  wiUs  in  Christ,  Honorius 
merdy  dcnied  the  exi8tence  in  Christ  of  two  dtscordant 
or  eonflicting  wills,  that  is,  of  a  corrupt  and  ńnful  hu- 
mtm  will  opposed  to  the  divine  will,  and  that  he  did  not 
pot  forth  any  dogmatic  dcclarations  irreconcilable  yrith 
the  strict  ultramontane  doctrine  of  infallibiltty.  Orsi 
went  even  ao  far  aa  to  maintain  that  Honorius  com- 
posed  this  letter  to  Sergius  as  «  a  private  tcacher;"  but 
the  expreasion  doctor  pritrahu,  when  used  of  a  pope,  is 
like  talking  of  wooden  iron  (comp.  Janus,  The  Council 
and  the  Pope,  p.  40d).  In  modem  times,  the  agiUtlon 
of  the  qttestion  of  papai  infallibility  has  given  a  special 
inteiest  to  the  lettcrs  of  Honorius.'  The  champions  of 
infallibility,  foUowing  the  lead  of  the  above-roentioneil 
writers,  tried  all  kinds  of  arguments  to  explain  away 
the  assent  of  Honorius  to  the  heretical  doctrines  of 
Sergius,  without  being  able  to  adduce  any  new  argu- 
1  menL  The  Jesuit  Damberger  even  attetnpted  a  fuli 
\  justiiication  of  the  course  of  Honorius.  Most  of  the 
I  Roman  Catholic  writers,  however,  admitted  that  the 
words,.Łhough  they  may  bcar  an  orthodox  construction, 
must  have  appeared  as  faroring  the  heretics,  and  that 
Honorius  probably  fell  into  a  trap  which  the  shrewd 
patriarch  of  Constantinople  had  set  for  him.  The  Gal- 
licans,  and  the  opponents  of  papai  infallibility,  have  in 
generał  endeavored  to  show  that  Honorius  wis  really  a 
farorer  of  Monothelism.  The  ablest  treatment  of  the 
tubject  from  this  school  in  the  Roman  Catholic  Chureh 
may  be  found  in  the  work  on  The  Pope  and  the  Council, 
.  by  Janus;  two  works  by  P. Le  Page  Renouf  (The  Con- 
^  danmatum  of  Pope  Honorius,  London,  1868) ;  and  [in 
reply  to  the  ultramontane  reyiews  of  the  first  work  by 
Dr.  Wani,  the  editor  of  the  DuNin  Recitw,  and  the  Jes- 
uit Bottalla]  The  Caae  of  Pope  Honorius  reconsidered 
(London,  1869) ;  in  two  letters,  by  the  distinguished 
French  Oratorian  and  member  of  the  French  Academy, 
P.  Gratry  {L'iveque  ^Orleanu  et  rarcheveque  de  Maltnes, 
Paria,  1870);  and  in  an  essay  by  bishop  Hefele,  pub- 
Itshed  in  Naples,  1870.  Renouf,  whoee  thoroughness 
,  aad  keenness  is  admitted  by  all  his  opponents,  in  his 
works,  undertakes  to  pro\'e  three  assertions:  1.  Hono- 
rius, in  his  letters  to  Sergius,  really  gave  his  sanction  to 
the  MonothelisCic  heresy;  2.  Honorius  was,  on  account 
of  bere^,  oondemned  by  generał  coundls  and  popes ; 
8.  Honorius  taught  a  heresy  ex  cathedra.  The  fact 
that  Honorius  was  oondemned  by  generał  coundls  and 
popes  as  a  heretic  is  admitted  by  many.of  those  Catho- 
lic writen  who  insist  that  his  words  may  be  indeed, 
though  they  are  obscure,  exphuned  in  an  orthodox 
sense.  Since  the  oonyocation  of  the  Yatican  Council  in 
1869,  many  Roman  Catholic  theologians  (among  them 
Dóllinger  and  Gratry),  who  were  formeriy  regaided  as 
personally  farorable  to  the  doctrine  of  papai  infallibil- 
ity, now,  after  a  new  inveedgation  of  the  quesŁion, 
itnngly  urge  the  case  of  Honorius  as  an  irrefutable 
aignment  against  it.  The  literaturę  on  the  Honorius 
ąaesCioa  is  so  yoluminous  that,  according  to  the  opinion 


of  the  leamed  DGUinger,  dming  the  last  180  years  morę 
has  been  written  on  it  than  on  any  other  point  of  Chureh 
History  within  1500  years.  Recent  monographs  on  the 
aubject,  besides  the  works  alieady  mentioned,  have  been 
written  by  Schneemann  (JStudien  aber  die  Honoriue- 
frage,  1864)  and  Reinerding  {Beitrdge  zur  Honorius^ 
und  IJberiurfra^,  1866).  It  is  also  extensivdy  dis- 
cusaed  in  a  number  of  artides  iu  the  theologićal  re- 
yiews, espedaliy  those  of  the  Roman  Catholic  Chureh, 
in  the  larger  works  on  Churdi  History,  and  in  particu- 
hur,  sińce  1869,  in  a  vast  number  of  works  treating  of 
the  ąuestiou  of  papai  infallibility.  See  iMFALŁiBiii- 
iTY.  See  Richer,  Historia  ConciL  generaL  i,  296;  Du 
Pin,  J>e  antipta  ecdes.  ducipUna,  p.  849 ;  M.  Hav»- 
lange,  Eccleńee  v\faUibilitaB  infactie  dogmatidt  (Jounu 
hist.  et  Łitt,  April  1, 1790);  F.  Marcheńus,  Clypeus  for- 
tiuM  (1680) ;  Hoefer,  iVbMP.  Bia^,  Generale,  xxv,  88; 
Chambers,  Cydopadia,  v,  407 ;  CeiUier,  Hitł.  des  aut  sae, 
xvii,  622  8q. ;  Uorente,  Die  Pdpste,  i,  196-200 ;  Schrockh, 
Kirchengesch,  xix,  492  Bq. ;  Bower,  Historg  oftke  Popes, 
iii,  11  8q. ;  Fuhrmaim,  HandwOrterb,  d,  Kirchengesch,  ii, 
840  sq. ;  Neauder,  Ck,  History,  iii,  179, 196;  Dogmas,  ii, 
489 ;  Mihnan,  Latin  Christianiig,  ii,  169 ;  Riddłe,  History 
ofthe  Papacy,  i,  196;  Hardwick,  Chureh  HisL  (Middle 
Ages),  p.  70  and  n.  3,  p.  76  and  n.  8 ;  Hagenbach,  Hisł.  of 
Doctrines,  voL  ii ;  West.  Review,  Oct,  1 868,  p.  239 ;  Edinh, 
Rev.  OcL  1869,  p.  160;  Aschbaeh,  Kirchen-Lezihon,  iii, 
822  8q. ;  Lefevre,  in  Revue  CathoL  de  Louvain,  February, 
1870 ;  Hefde,  Honorius  m.  d.  sechste  allgem.  ConciL  (Tub. 
1870, 8vo).     See  MoNOTHEiSM.     (J.H.W.) 

Honorius  II  (Peter  Cadolaus),  Antipope,  was  dect- 
ed  in  1061,  through  the  influence  of  Henrj'  IV,  in  oppo- 
sition  to  Alexander  II,  who  had  been  choscn  by  the 
cardinals  without  his  assent.  The  election  took  place 
in  a  council  convened  at  Basie,  and  Honorius  afterwards 
went  to  Romc.  The  German  bi8ho{)8,  howercr,  un- 
der  the  influence  of  Hanno,  archbishop  of  Olognc,  sided 
with  Alexander  II  at  the  Synod  of  Augsburg,  1062; 
and,  finally,  the  Synod  of  Mantua,  1004,  pronounced  the 
deposition  of  Honorius,  and  he  was  obligcd  thereafter  to 
conflne  himself  to  the  bishopric  of  Padua,  which  he  held 
before  his  dection.  Yet  he  uphdd  his  preteusioiis  to 
the  pontiflcal  sec  until  his  death  in  1072.  He  was  ac- 
cused  of  simony  and  of  ooncubinage.  He  is  generally 
not  counted  among  the  popes  on  account  of  his  deposi- 
tion.— Herzog,  Real-Kncykhp.  vol.  v ;  Schrockh,  Kirch- 
engesch,  xxii,  882,  385  są.;  Riddle,  HisU  ofthe  Papacy, 
ii,  1 19 ;  Wetzer  u.  Welte,  Kirchen-Ler.  v,  318  sq. ;  Asch- 
baeh, Kirchen-LcT,  iii,  323.     Sec  Alex^vnder  II. 

Honorius  U  (cardinal  Lambert),  Pope,  originally 
bishop  of  Cstia,  was  elected  pope  by  the  carduiałs  in 
1 124,  after  the  death  of  Calixtus  II,  whilc  most  of  the 
bishops  assembled  at  Romc  dected  Tebaldus,  cardinal 
of  Sanu  Anastasia.  Tebaldus,  finding  that  Honorius 
was  supported  by  the  powerful  family  of  the  Frangipa- 
ni,  and  that  the  people  were  divided  in  opinion,  to  avoid 
furthcr  strife,  waived  his  claim.  Honorius  himself  also 
expresBed  doubts  conceming  the  validity  of  his  own 
dection ;  he  was  subsequently  re-dected  by  the  clcrgy 
and  the  people  of  Romę  without  opposition,  and  was 
consecrated  Dcc.  21, 1124.  He  refused  the  investiture 
of  the  duchies  of  Apulia  and  Calabria  to  Roger,  count 
of  Sicily ;  and  Roger  having  besieged  the  pope  within 
Beneyento,  Honorius  excommunicated  him ;  but  after- 
wards  peace  was  concluded  betwecn  them,  and  Hono- 
rius granted  the  investiture.  He  confirmed  the  elec- 
tion of  Lothaire  II  to  the  empire,  and  excommunicated 
his  rival,  Conrad  of  Franconia.  He  also  confirmed  the 
oiganization  of  the  order  of  Premonstratensis,  and  at 
the  Synod  of  Troyes  (1128)  that  of  the  Templars;  and 
condemned  the  abbots  of  Cluny  and  of  31ount  Cassin, 
against  whom  complaints  had  been  madę.  He  died  in 
the  convent  of  St  Andrew,  Fcb.  14.  1 180.— J5«^/«rA  Cy- 
cloptedia;  Hoefer,  Nour.  Biog,  Gener.  xxr,  89;  Bower, 
Hist,  ofthe  Popes,  vi,  19  są.;  Riddle,  Hist,  ofthe  Papa- 
cy, ii,  169;  SchrOckh,  Kirchengesch,  xxvi,  96  są.;  Mil- 


HONORroS 


326 


HONTHEEM 


man,  LaL  ChrisHanU^y  Wy  144, 151  8q. ;  Wetzer  a.  Welte, 
Kirchat^Lez,  v,  817  aq. ;  Aflchbich,  Kirchet^Ler,  iii,  828 

Honorins  HZ  (Cendo  Stw^i),  Pope,  a  natire  of 
Romę,  was  cardinal  of  St.  John  and  St.  Paul,  and  anc- 
oeeded  pope  Innocent  III  in  1216.  He  showed  a  Tery 
accommodating  spiiit  in  his  relations  with  the  temporal 
powen.  Thns,  when  Frederick  II  permitfced  hb  son 
lleniy,  alreadj  king  of  Sicily,  to  be  elected  king  of  Ger- 
many, in  April,  1220,  he  even  oonsented  to  officiate  at  (he 
coionation  (Norember,  1220).  But  it  is  generally  be- 
liered  that  the  object  of  the  pope  in  oonsenting  so  read- 
iiy  to  the  desires  of  Fredeńck  II  was  to  gain  him  for 
the  great  crosade  against  the  Mussuhnans  in  the  East 
which  he  contemplated.  This  good  undentanding  be- 
tween  the  pope  and  the  emperor  was  intemipted  when 
the  latter,  instead  of  proceeding  direcUy  to  Paleetine, 
tarried  in  Apulia  and  Sicily,  and  attempted  to  regain 
those  countries.  Honorius  sent  hb  chaplain,  Alatrinus, 
to  the  imperial  diet  at  Cremona  in  1226,  and  the  em- 
peror was  obliged  to  renounce  hb  plan  of  aggrandize- 
ment.  Honoritis  even  went  so  far  as  to  threaten  hlm 
(1225)  with  exoommumcation  if  he  did  not  start  for  the 
Holy  Land  by  August,  1227,  and  he  would  probably 
have  executed  hb  threat  had  not  death  interfered. 
Thb  Gonciliatoiy  spirit  Honorius  failed  to  manifest  to- 
waids  count  Raymond  VII  of  Toulouse.  He  excited 
Łoub  YIII  of  France  to  make  war  against  Raymond ; 
but  neither  Honorius  nor  Loub  lived  to  see  the  end  of 
the  conflict.  He  was  also  freqttently  at  rariance  with 
the  nobles  and  people  of  Romę,  by  whom  he  was  a  num- 
ber  of  times  driren  from  the  city.  Hb  pontiHcate  was 
therefore  not  a  very  quiet  one.  He  died  March  12, 1227. 
Officially  Honorius  confirmed  the  organization  of  the 
Dominicans  in  1216,  and  of  the  Franciscans  in  1223. 
He  was  the  first  pope  who  granted  indulgences  at  the 
canonization  of  saints.  He  was  oonsidered  a  leamed 
man  in  hb  day,  and  is  supposed  to  have  been  the  an- 
thor  of  the  Cof^urtUionea  adnertua  principem  tendirarwn 
(Romę,  1629,  8vo). — ^Herzog,  Real-Encyklopddiey  yoL  v ; 
Hoefer,  Nouv.  Biog,  Geniraley  xxvy  90 ;  Bower,  IlUt.  of 
tke  Popety  vi,  216-221 ;  Neander,  CA.  IlUtoryy  iv,  41, 177, 
270, 341 ;  Milman,  Lał,  Christiamty,  v  (see  Index) ;  He- 
fele,  Concilienffesck.  iii,  811  8q. ;  Ebrard,  Doffmmgesch.  ii, 
180;  Schrockh,  Kir(^enffetch,xxv\y32S;  xxv,  145  8q.,329 
8q.;  xxix,  632;  Fuhrmann,  Ifcmdwdrterb,  der  Kirchen- 
gesch.  ii,  341 ;  Cave,  Hist.  lit,  scripł,  eccL  ii,  287 ;  Wetzer 
u.  Welte,  Kirchen-Lex,  v,  819 ;  Aachbach,  Kirchen^Ler. 
iii,  324 ;  Raumer,  Oeśchichte  d,  Uohengtayjeny  iii,  307  są. 
(J.H.W.) 

Honorius  IV  (Giacomo  SaveUi)y  was  pope  from 
April  2, 1285,  to  April  3,  1287.  He  espoused  the  cause 
of  Charles  of  Anjou  against  the  Aragonese,  who  had  oc- 
cupied  Sicily ;  and  he  even  incited  to  a  crusade  against 
the  latter,  qualifying  it  as  a  "holy  war."  He  distin- 
guished  himself  greatly  by  hb  zeal  for  the  preservation 
and  augmentation  of  the  privileges  of  the  Church,  and 
for  the  recovery  of  the  Holy  Land.  He  cleared  the  Pa- 
pai States  of  the  bands  of  robbers  with  which  they  were 
overrun,  and  impartcd  a  new  impulse  to  arts  and  sci- 
ences,  which  up  to  hb  time  had  been  much  neglected ; 
among  other  improvements,  he  attempted  to  establbh  a 
coursc  of  Oriental  languages  at  the  Univer9ity  of  Paris, 
but  he  did  not  succeed.  During  hb  brief  pontificate  he 
b  said  to  have  succeedcd  in  enriching  hb  faraily. — 
Mignę,  Dicf,  Ecdes, ;  Hoefer,  Nouv,  Biog,  Gen^rale^  xxv, 
91 ;  Mosheim,  Ch,  IlisL  ii,  301 ;  Schrockh,  Kirchenfjesch, 
xxvi,  511  sq.;  Bower,  History  ofthe  Popes,  vi,  326  są. ; 
Milman,  LaHn  ChristianUyy  vi,  172;  Riddle,  liist,  ofiht 
Papacyy  ii,  236 ;  Neander,  Ch,  Uut,  iv,  65,  627 ;  Wetzer 
u.  Welte,  Kirckef^Lex,  v,  322 ;  Aschbach,  Kirchen-Ler. 
iii,  325. 

Honorliui,  Babtholomew,  a  Pnemonstratbt,  who 
flouibhed  in  the  second  half  of  the  16th  century,  was 
bom  at  Eerfel,  in  Brabant,  became  canon  at  FloreiTe, 
near  Kaumur,  later  preacher  at  Helmont,  and  finally, 


being  perMCuted  by  the  Galrioiats,  went  to  Bom^  H« 
wrote  Adnumitio  adfratret  u^eriorit  Gamaiua  (Her« 
zogenb.  1578)  \—Hodaporioon  cdArimum  <ndmi»  Pnt* 
monstrcUentu  per  orbem  umvermm  AbbaHantm  (ibid. 
1584)  :-^Qfi€Ułumet  theoloffica  LXX  adotmu  Cabńuu^ 
(at  (ibid.  1086)  i—Ekicidarium  Atmlmi  Ccmiuarimńi 
(ibid.  1586) ;  and  a  number  of  other,  but  less  ralnabk 
worka.— Pierer,  Umcen,  Lex,  viii,  622. 

Honter,  John,  one  of  the  apostles  of  Protestantism 
in  Transylvania,  was  bom  at  Cronstadt  in  1498 ;  stodied 
at  Wittenberg  under  Luther;  then  went  as  a  teacher  to 
Oracow,  whence  he  moved  to  Basie  to  continue  hb  stnd- 
ies.  In  1638  he  retumed  to  hb  native  city,  where  he 
started  a  printing  establbhment,  and  published  Luthei^s 
wiitings.  He  also  publbhed  at  hb  own  espense  a 
tranabtion  of  Luther's  works  in  Hungarian.  In  1544 
he  was  appointed  pastor,  and  became  quite  popolar  as  a 
preacher.  He  died  Jan.  28,  1549. — Herzog,  Reoi-Emey" 
Hop,  vi,  254;  Haidwick,  Ch,  Jlitt,  ofthe  RefomwUicn,  p. 
98;  UitL  ofProt,  Church  in  Uungary,  p.  59. 

Hontheim,  John  Nicolas  von  (known  oommon- 
ly  as  Febronius),  sufiragan  bbhop  of  TreveB  (in  Rhen- 
bh  Prussia),  was  bom  Jan.  27,  1701,  and  educated  at 
the  Jesuits*  college  and  univerBity  of  that  place.  Hav- 
ing  completed  hb  studies,  he  went  on  a  joniney  to 
Romę,  and  after  hb  return  (1727)  was  appointed  aiH> 
oefl8ively  to  BeveFal  high  poeitions  in  the  Church,  and 
Anally  became  suffragan  bbhop  May  18, 1748,  which  post 
he  mied  untU  1788.  He  died  Sept.  2, 1790.  Hb  //w- 
toria  TretfirenriMy  diplomoHca  et  pragmatiea  (Tiwir, 
1750,  3  vol8.  foL,  with  a  Prodromusy  1757,  2  vo]a.  foL; 
Augśb.  1757,  2  vol8.  foL)  b  considered  a  work  of  giest 
merit;  but  it  was  as  the  author  of  De  Statu  Eoeletim  e€ 
ItffUima  Potestałe  Ronumi  Pontificis  Liber  singukais,  ad 
reiŁniendos  diasidenłes  in  religiom  Christiana  compotituM 
(Bullioni  apud  Guillelmum  £vrard,  1763,  4to),  publish^ 
ed  under  the  pseudonym  of  "  Justiuus  Febronius,"  that 
he  attracted  the  attention  of  the  Christian  world.  The 
daring  exprefl8ions  of  independent  thought  which  char- 
acterize  the  entire  work  created  generał  excitemenC. 
As  earły  as  1763-5  he  issued  an  enlaiged  edition,  and  a 
third,  still  morę  enlarged,  in  1770-74.  An  abridgment  of 
the  work  appeared  in  German  in  1764,  another  in  Latin 
in  1777,  and  the  tranalations  into  the  various  noodem 
languages  soon  madę  it  known  throughout  Eniope 
(Freuch,  Sedan  and  Paris,  1767 ;  Italian,  Yenice,  1767, 
etc).  Many  Roman  celebrities  yrrote  against  it,  espe- 
cially  Zaccaria  (to  whose  writinga  an  answer  b  given 
in  Nova  de/ensio  Febronii  contra  P,  Zaccarioy  Bullioni, 
1763, 3  v(ds.)  and  Ballerini  {Depotestaie  ecdesiatiica  Ro- 
man, Ponłif,  et  conciL  generalium  contra  opus  J.  FtlrrO" 
nii  (Y^erona,  1768, 4to,  and  often).  Pope  Oement  Xin 
caused  the  book  to  be  entered  on  the  Indeiy  althoogh  it 
was  dedicated  to  himself.  Hontheim  seeks  especially 
to  draw  a  linę  of  dbtinction  betwcen  the  spiritual  and 
the  ecclesbstical  power  of  the  Roman  see.  He  seems 
to  say  to  hb  readers,  **WiŁhout  becoming  Ftotestants, 
you  may  very  well  oppose  the  eucroachments  and  abuse 
of  power  of  the  papai  court."  The  principal  points  of 
which  the  work  treats  are,  the  oonstitution  of  the  piim- 
itive  Church,  the  representative  character  of  generał 
oouncils,  the  thoroughly  human  basb  on  which  rests  the 
primacy  of  the  bbhop  of  Romę,  the  fatal  influence  of 
the  psęudo-Isidorian  decretab^  the  tendency  lo  osorpa- 
tion  of  power  by  the  nuncioa,  the  iO«gal  influence  of  the 
mendicant  ordeis,  and  the  monopoly  of  epboopal  elec- 
tions  poBsessed  by  the  chaptere  at  the  ezpense  of  the 
rights  of  the  lower  cleigy  and  the  people.  Aa  aU  his 
assertions  are  accompanied  by  historical  proofr,  and  hb 
book  contains  haidly  anything  but  ąuotations  ftom  the 
fathers  in  support  of  hb  views,  it  exeited  great  influ- 
ence. As  the  work  had  been  publbhed  under  the  mm 
de  plume  of  Justiiiius  Febronius,  the  system  of  Ghnreh 
govemment  which  Hontheim  propounded  b  generally 
called  Febronianism.  During  the  years  which  foUowed 
its  publication,  papai  aathority  was  gieatly  reatzicted  ia 


HOOD 


921 


HOOK 


numy  ooimtries.    Henoe,  as  soon  as  the  real  anthor  of 
the  De  Siaiu,  Ecduia  was  known,  he  became  the  object 
cf  cesselew  penecutions.    Pope  Pius  YI  showed  hlm- 
self  especially  the  enemy  of  Uontheinu    The  ex-Jesuit 
Beck,  privy  ooiindUor  of  the  elector  Cleroeut  Wenoeslas, 
not  aslufied  wiŁh  peraecuting  Uonthelm,  peisecuted  also 
all  the  memben  of  his  family,  moet  of  whom  held  of- 
fices  in  the  prorince  of  Trier.    The  old  man  (Hontheim 
was  then  nearly  seventy-nine),  tired  of  all  these  annoy- 
ances,  and  perhaps  frightened  at  the  proepect  of  what 
he  migfat  still  bave  to  undeigo,  finally  gave  way,  and 
sabmitted  to  the  pope.     When  his  lecantation  reached 
Romę  in  1778,  Pius  VI  held  a  spedal  consistoiy  in  order 
to  apprise  the  whole  Bonum  CathoUc  world  of  the  event ; 
but  aeveial  Bonaan  Catholic  goyomments  opposed  the 
poblicstioD  of  the  acts  of  this  consistoiy  in  their  states. 
Moreoyer,  the  effects  of  the  dispute  had  been  too  widely 
fdt  to  be  obliterated  by  a  tardy  ezpressioa  of  repent- 
ance.   The  author  himaelf  wrote  to  his  friends,  "^  I  gave 
way,  like  Fenelon,  in  order  to  avoid  ceaseless  annoy- 
anoe.    My  lecantation  can  do  no  harm  to  the  Christian 
rdigłon,  neither  can  it  in  any  way  benefit  the  court  of 
Borne;  the  thinking  world  has  read  my  arguments,  and 
has  indoned  them."     Some  of  the  morę  liberal-minded 
Koman  Catholic  historians  say  that  Hontheim,  in  his 
(fint)  recantation,  declared  his  object  to  have  been  to 
effect  a  anion  of  the  Roman  Catholic  and  the  Protestant 
churches.    He  believed  that  this  oould  only  be  accom- 
I^hed  by  alŁering  or  rerooring  some  of  the  institutions 
of  the  Romiah  Church.    Later,  he  modified  his  recanta- 
tion greatly  by  a  snbeeąuent  Commentary  (Frankfort- 
on-the>&Iaine,  1781),  to  which  cardinal  Gardi  replied,  at 
the  spedal  reqiiest  of  the  pope.     But  eyentually  Hont- 
heim madę  fuli  subnłission  to  the  Church.    In  1788  he 
resigned  his  charges,  and  spent  the  last  years  of  his  life 
on  his  estate  of  Monquentin,  in  Laxemburg.    See  Hoe- 
fer,  Nouv.  Biog,  GeMrale,  xxv,  91 ;  Heizog,  Real-Emy- 
%).vi,  265;  Hase,  Church  HisU  p.  628;  Mohler,  Sym- 
hoUsi»,  p.  45 ;  Menzel,  Neuere  Guch,  d.  Deutacheriy  xi,  456 
są.;  Fuhrmann,  Handwdrterb,  der  Kirchengegch,  ii,  843 
sq.;  Schrbckh,  Kirchenguch,  xxii,  13;  «.  dL  Befornu  yi, 
»2  Bq.;  Walch,  Neuate  Rdig,  Gtsch.  i,  145  są. ;  vii,  176 
■ą.,  210  8q.,  453  sq.;  Henke,  Kirchengeśch,  vu,  133  sq.; 
Baur,  GaUerie  hitt.  Gemalde  d,  IS*"*  Jahrh.  iv,  402  są.; 
Kurtz,  Text-iook  ofCh.  //atory,  ii,  234 ;  Hase,  CK  Hist, 
pw  528.    On  the  Roman  Catholic  side :  Aschbach,  KircK- 
Jaz,  ii,  746  są. ;  Wetzer  und  Welte,  Kirchen-l^,  v,  324 
iq.;  Reat-EneyUop./,  d.  KathoL  DeuUchl.  v,  473 ;  Wer- 
ner, (^eacA.  dL  l»l«o^  TAeo^  p.  209  aą.,  273,  and  especiaUy 
Brie/mcktei  zus.  d,  Churjjtrtłen  Cłemetu  Wenę,  r.  Trier 
u,d,Weihbuck.N.v.  Haniheim  H.  d, Buch  J. Fahroniut, 
etc  (Frankfort-«^M.  1818). 

Hood  C:pVft  tsaniph'),  a  tiara  round  the  head, 
^ken  of  a  female  head-band  (Isa.  iii,  23) ;  elsewhere 
rendered  "diadem,"  e.  g.  a  man's  turban  (Job  xxix,  14) ; 
the  higlk^riest^a  "  mitr^  (Zech.  iii,  5) ;  the  king^s  crotm 
(In.  Isii,  3,  mazg.).    See  Head-dress,  etc. 

HOOD  (Saxon  kod;  comp.  Gerro.  Au/,  hat),  bonowed 
from  the  Roman  eucuhu,  ia  (1.)  the  eowl  of  a  monk. 
(ź.)  In  England,  an  omamental  fold  that  hangs  down 
the  back  of  a  graduate  to  mark  his  degree.  This  part 
of  the  diess  was  formerly  not  intended  for  distinction 
and  ornament,  but  for  use.  It  was  generally  fastened 
to  the  back  of  the  cope  or  other  vesture,  and  in  case  of 
rain  or  oold  was  drawn  over  the  head.  In  the  univer- 
Bities  the  hoods  of  the  graduates  were  madę  to  signify 
their  d^rees  by  varying  the  colors  and  materials.  By 
the  tifty-eighth  canon  of  the  Church  of  England  ^  eve^' 
minister  saying  the  pnblic  prayera,  or  ministering  the 
aacramentS)  or  other  rites  of  the  Church,  if  they  are 
graduates,  shall  wear  upon  their  surplices,  at  such  times, 
aoch  hoods  as  by  the  ordera  of  the  univer8itie8  are  agree- 
aUe  to  their  degrees."— Hook,  Church  Dicticmary,  s.  v. ; 
Wbeatly,  Booko/C&mmon  Prayer,  p.  102, 103. 

Hoof  (nt5'nB,  par$ah'^  cUwen,  i.  e.  a  defl  hoof  as 
o(neatcattle»£zod.x,26;  £zek.xxii;  Mlciv,13,etc; 


hence  of  the  horse,  though  not  doyen,  Isa.  v,  28;  Jec 
xlvii,  3 ;  ^  daws"  of  any  animal,  Zech.  xi,  16).  In  Ley. 
xi,  3  są.;  Deut.  iv,  6  są.,  the  ^^parting  of  the  hoof"  is 
madę  one  of  the  main  distinctions  between  clean  and 
unclean  animals;  and  this  is  applied  even  to  the  camel, 
after  a  popular  rather  than  a  sdentific  classitication. 
See  Camel. 

Hooght,  Ebkrhard  tan  der,  a  distingnished 
Dutoh  Orientalist,  was  bom  in  the  latter  half  of  the  17th 
century.  He  was  a  Reformed  pieacher  at  Mieuwen- 
dam,  but  spent  the  greater  part  of  his  time  in  the  study 
of  the  Oriental  langnages,  eąpedaUy  the  Hefarew.  He 
died  in  1716.  He  wrote  Janua  Ih^gua  Banda  (Amst. 
1687, 4to ;  ibid.  1696  [?],  8vo)  :—MeduUa  gramm.  HAr. 
(Amst  1696, 8vo)  '.^8yntaxi»  Ebraa,  Chaid.  et  Syr,  :— 
Lex.  Novum  Test.  Grasco-Laiinum,  etc  Especially  cel- 
ebrated  is  his  edition  of  the  Biblia  Hebraica  (Amsterd. 
and  Utrecht,  1706,  Oxf.  1750,  London,  1774,  and  often; 
lately  again  bv  Tauchnitz,  Lpz.  1886^  and  oilen).— Fierer, 
Umo,  JL«r..viii,  624;  Wolf,  BibL  Utbr,  ii,  381;  iv,  117. 
See  Critictsm,  Bibucau 

HoogBtraten  (also  called  Hocrstraten),  Jaoob 
YAN,  prior  of  the  Dominican  A0nvent  of  Cologne,  and 
an  ardent  adverBary  of  Reuchlin,  Luther,  and  Erasmus, 
was  bom  at  Brabant  in  1464.  He  studied  at  the  Uni- 
yersity  of  Cologne  without  much  success.  Neverthe- 
less,  he  was  received  master  of  arts  in  1485,  and  after- 
waids  madę  prior.  His  great  zeal  and  oppoeition  to  the 
Reformation  secured  him  the  nomination  of  inąuisitor 
at  Louvain,  besides  a  professorship  of  theology  at  the 
Uniyersity  of  Cologne,  for  which  he  was  in  nowise  ąoal- 
ified.  In  1618  be  sommoned  Reuchlin  to  appear  befoie 
him,  thereby  transcending  his  powers,  as  Reuchlin,  re- 
siding  in  another  state,  oould  only  be  summoned  by  the 
proyindal  of  the  order.  He  had  already  published  his 
LibeUut  accusatoritts  contra  tpeculum  ocuU  Joh,  Eeuch" 
Hni,  when  the  chapter  of  Mentz  took  Reuchlin^s  case 
in  hand.  But  pope  Leo  X  gave  commisńon  to  bishop 
Greorge  of  Speer  to  settle  the  controreny.  Hoogstraten, 
not  appearing,  lost  his  cause,  and  was  condemned  to  pay 
the  coets;  but,as  he  refused  to  submit  to  the  decrec,  the 
whole  matter  was  brought  before  Leo  X,  and  Hoogstra- 
ten was  summoned  to  Romę.  UnwilUng  eithcr  to  of- 
fend  the  humanists  tn  the  person  of  Reuchlin,  or  the 
powerfnl  Dominicans  represented  by  Hoogstraten,  the 
pope  issued  a  mandatum  de  mpertedendo.  Retuming  to 
Cologne,  Hoogstraten  published  in  1518  two  so-called 
Apologies,  fuli  of  malice,  and  in  1619  his  Deetructio  ca- 
balie f  seu  cabalista  perfidia  a  Joh.  ReuckUno  teu  Capm^ 
one  (CoL  1619).  He  also  opposed  Luther  in  the  most 
violent  manner,  proposing  that  he  should  be  bumed  at 
once.  Hoogstraten  died  at  Cologne  Jan.  21, 1627.  His 
collected  works  were  published  at  Cologne  in  1626.  See 
Herzog,  Real-EncyHop.  vi,  267 ;  Echard,  Scriptor.  Ord, 
Pnedicatorum ;  Hoefer,  Nouv.  Biog.  GhUralCj  xxv,  105 ; 
Raumer,  Geet^  Europa's,  i,  210 ;  Maycrhoff,  Joh.  Reuch- 
lin u.  t.  ZeiL,  p.  168  sq. ;  Schrockh,  Kirchengetch.  xxx, 
248;  «.  d  Reform,  i,  139;  Bayle,  Hitt.  Diet.  iii,  471  są.; 
Mosheim,  Churw  History,  iii,  22. 

Hook  is  the  rendering  in  the  Auth.Yers.  of  the  fol- 
lowing  terms  in  the  original.  See  also  Fi8H*hook; 
F1.ESH-H00K;  Prunino-hook.  The  idea  of  a  łhom 
enters  into  the  etymology  of  8everal  of  them,  probably 
because  a  thora,  hooked  or  straight,  was  the  earliest  in- 
strument of  this  kind.  Tacitus  thus  describes  the  dress 
of  the  ancient  Gcrmans.  ^  A  looee  man  tle,  fastened  wi  th 
a  clasp,  or,  when  that  cannot  be  had,  with  a  thom'' 
{Germ.  17).    See  Thorn. 

1.  nn,  chach  (lit.  a  <Aom),  a  ritiig  inserted  in  the  nos- 
trils  of  animals,  to  which  a  cord  was  fastened  in  order 
to  lead  them  about  or  tamę  them  (2  Kings  xix,  28 ;  Isa. 
xxxvii,  29 ;  Ezek.  xxix,  4 ;  xxxviii,  4 ;  compare  Job  xl, 
26) ;  also  a  "  chain"  for  a  captive  (Ezek.  xix,  4, 9),  and 
"  bracelets"  for  females  (Exod.  xxv,  22,  where  others  a 
nose-ring,  others  a  claep  for  fastening  the  dress).  In  the 
first  two  of  the  above  passages,  Jehorah  intimates  his 


HOOK 


328 


HOOK 


abeolute  cotitrol  orer  Sennacherib  by  an  alluńon  to  tbe 
practioe  of  leading  bnffaloes,  camels,  dromedaries,  etc, 
by  means  of  a  cord,  or  of  a  cord  attached  to  a  rw$r,  paaa- 
ed  througb  tbe  nostrils  (Sbaw,  Trawlt,  p.  167^,  2d  ed.). 
Sucb  a  ring  is  oftentimes  placed  througb  tbe  noee 
of  a  buli,  and  ia  Ukewiae  uaed  in  tbe  East  for  leading 
about  lioDS,  camek,  and  otber  animals.  A  aimilar  metb- 
od  waa  adopted  for  leading  prisonera»  aa  in  tbe  case  of 
Manaaeeh,  who  waa  led  witb  rings  (2  Obron,  xxxiii,  11). 
An  illuatration  of  tbia  practice  ia  found  in  a  baa-relief 
diacoYered  at  Kborsabad  (Layaid,  ii,  876;  aee  also  tbe 
cat  under  Eyk).    Tbe  tenn  Ogio  ia  uaed  in  a  similar 


Andent  AuyrUn  Hook  of  Bronie  (belonginjr,  aa  Łayard 
thinks,  Nin,  and  Bab.  p.  178,  to  aome  part  of  a  charloC  or 
horee-trappUig*). 

aense  in  Job  xl, 24  (A- V.  ''boro  bia  noee  witb  a  gin." 
maigin).  Anotber  fon^  of  tbe  aame  term,  nin  (A.  Y. 
*'  tbom"),  ia  likewise  properiy  a  ring  plaoed  tbrougb  the 
moutb  of  a  laige  flsb,  and  attacbed  by  a  cord  (*bĄK)  to 
a  stake  for  the  purpose  of  keeping  it  alire  in  tbe  water 
(Job  xli,  2) ;  the  word  meaning  tbe  cord  ia  rendered 
"  hook*'  in  the  A.  V.     See  below. 

2.  The  cognate  word  HSIl,  <Aakkah\  meana  a  ^sh- 
hook  (Job  xli,  i,  <"  angle ;"  Isa.  xix,  8 ;  Hab.  i,  15).  Tbia 
paaaage  in  Job  baa  oocasioned  the  foUowing  specula^ 
tiona  (see,  for  instance,  Harria^s  Nai.  Hut,  o/ the  Bibie, 
art.  Leviatban,  Lond.  1826).  It  baa  been  aasumed  that 
Bochart  baa  oompletely  proved  tbe  Leviathan  to  mean 
the  crocockU  (RoaenmUller  on  Bochart,  iii,  787,  etc^  7^, 
etc,  Lipa.  1796).  Herodotua  baa  then  been  quoted, 
wherc  be  relates  that  the  Egyptiana  near  Lakę  Mooris 
select  a  crocodile,  render  bim  tamę,  and  suspend  oma- 
menta  to  bis  eaia,  and  eometimes  gema  of  great  value; 
his  fore  feet  being  adomed  witb  braceJett  (ii,  69) ;  and 
the  mummiea  of  crocodilea,  baving  their  ears  tbiia  bored, 
have  been  diaoovered  (Kenrick*B  £g!fpt  o/ łlerodotuM,  p. 
97,  Lond.  1841).  Hence  it  is  conduded  that  this  paa- 
eage  in  Job  refera  to  tbe  facta  mentioned  by  Herodotua ; 
and,  doubtless,  tbe  terma  employed,  eapecially  by  tbe 
SepL  and  Ynlg.,  and  tbe  Mtrdf  and  foUowing  rerses,  far 
Tor  tbe  Buppoeitiota,  for  tbere  the  captive  is  repreaented 
aa  auppliant  and  ob6equioufl»  in  a  atate  of  security  and 
seryitudc,  and  tbe  object  of  diyersion,  ''played  witb"  as 
witb  a  bird,  and  senring  for  tbe  sport  of  maidena.  He- 
rodotua is  furtber  quoted  to  show  that  in  bia  time  the 
£gyptian8  captured  tbe  crocodile  with  a  hook  (dyKUi^ 
rpov)f  with  wbich  (tU^KooOri  tic  rfjy  yiiv)  be  waa  drcntm 
aahore;  and  accounts  aro  certainly  given  by  modem 
trayelera  of  tbe  oontinuance  of  tbia  practice  (Maillet^ 
Deacrip,  dEgypte,  ii,  127,  ed.  Hag.,  1740).  But  does  not 
the  entire  deaaipłion  go  upon  tbe  supposition  of  the  im- 
poińbUity  of  so  treating  Leciathan  f  Supposing  the  al- 
lusiona  to  be  oorrectly  interpreted,  is  it  not  aa  much  as 
to  say, '  Canst  tbou  treat  kim  aa  thou  canst  treat  the 
crocodile  and  otherfarct  creatures?"  Dr.  Lee  bas,  in- 
deed,  given  reasons  wbich  render  it  dovbtfvl,  at  least, 
whetber  tbe  leviatban  does  mean  the  crocodile  in  tbis 
passage,  or  whetber  it  does  not  mean  some  species  of 
uihale,  as  was  formerly  supposed — the  Dtlphimu  orca 
communiSf  or  common  grampus,  found  in  the  Mediter- 
ranean,  the  Red  Sea,  and  also  in  tbe  Nile.  (See  bis  ex- 
amination  of  Bocbart's  reasonings,  etc.,  in  Trantkttion 
and  Notes  on  Job,  p.  197  and  529-639,  Lond.  1837).  So 
tbe  aboye  term  in  Ezek.  xxix, "  I  will  put  my  books  in 
tby  jaws,  and  I  will  cause  thee  to  come  vp  out  o/ the  midst 
ofthy  riters"  where  tbe  propbet  foretells  the  destruc- 
tion  of  Pharaob,  king  of  Egypt,  by  allusions  to  tbe  de- 
struction,  possibly,  of  a  crocodile,  tbe  s^^nbol  of  Egypt 
Thus  Pliny  {ffist.  Aa/,  viii,  25)  statcs,  that  tbe  Tentyri- 
tsB  (inhabitanta  of  Egypt)  foUowed  the  crocodile,  awim- 


ming  after  it  in  tbe  riyer,  aprung  upon  ita  back,  thnut 
a  bar  into  ita  moutb,  wbich  being  beld  by  iu  two  ex- 
tremities,  senres  aa  a  bit,  and  enables  them  toforct  it  on 
shore  (oomp.  Ezek.  xxix,  3, 4).  Strabo  relatea  that  the 
Tentyritn  displayed  their  featt  before  the  Romana  (xTii, 
560,  ed.  Casaub.).    See  Leyiatuan. 

8. 1^,  rar,  a  peg  or  pin,  upon  wbich  the  cattAina  of 
tbe  Tabemacle  were  bung,  springing  out  of  the  f^pitJiU 
(Exod.  xxvi,  82,  etc.).  The  Sept.  and  Jeiome  aeem  to 
have  understood  the  capitals  ofikt  pillars;  and  it  baa 
been  urged  that  tbis  is  morę  likely  to  be  the  meaning 
than  hookSf  especiaUy  as  1775  sbekels  of  silver  were  used 
in  making  these  D*^1])  for  the  pillars,  overUyin^  the 
chapiters,  and  fiUeting  them  (eh.  xxxTiii,  28),  and  that 
the  hookt  are  really  tbe  D^O^p,  taehes  (Exod.  xxTi,  6, 
11, 88, 85 ;  xxxix,  88).  Yet  the  Sept.  also  rendcn  O^^-t, 
cpiKoi,  rings  or  dasps  (Exod.  xxvii,  10, 1 1 ,  and  ayKvXaA^ 
Exod.  xxxviii,  17, 19) ;  and  from  a  compariaon  of  tbeae 
two  latter  passages,  it  would  seem  that  tbese  hooka,  or 
rather  tenters,  rosę  out  of  tbe  chapiters  or  heads  of  the 
pillars.  The  word  seems  to  have  given  name  to  the 
letter  1  in  the  Hebrew  alphabet,  possibly  from  a  aimi- 
larity  of  tbe  form  iu  wbich  tbe  latter  appears  in  the 
Greek  Digamnuju,  to  that  of  a  hook.  Mr.  Paine  {Soh- 
mon^s  Tempie,  etc.,  p.  25)  regards  tbese  "  books"  aa  bav- 
ing  been  rather  pins  driven  into  the  heads  of  the  pillars, 
and  tbua  projecting  upward  from  them  Uke  a  amall 
tenon,  upon  wbich  the  silyer  rods  were  slipped  by  meana 
of  a  smali  hole  or  eye  in  the  latter.  Tbis  would  8erve 
to  keep  the  pillars  together.     See  Tabbiwacle. 

4.  niS,  ttmnah'  (lit  ihom),  a  Jish-hook  (Amoa  ir,  2; 
elaewbere  a  shield),    See  Fishino,  etc ;  Angle. 

In  tbe  same  Tcrse,  Kl^T^D,  siroth%  ^' fish-hooka>** 
where  both  Sept  and  Yulg.  seem  to  have  takcn  ^"^C  in 
the  senae  of  a  pot  or  caldron  instead  of  a  fiab-hook.  See 
Całdrom. 

5.  Ąttt,  mazleg'  (I  Sam.  ii,  18, 14), "  fleab-hook,"  and 
the  niibtC,  «tbe  flesb-hooks"  (Exod.  xxvii,  8,  and 
elsewhere).  Tbis  was  eyidently  in  the  first  paaaage  a 
trident  ''of  three  tecth,"  a  kind  of  fork,  etc.,  for  tuming 
tbe  sacrifices  on  the  fire,  and  for  coUecting  fragmenta, 
etc.    See  Flesh-hook. 

6.  nh*nptQ,  mazmeroth'  (Tsa.  ii,  4,  and  elaewhere), 
*'beat  their  apears  into  pruning-hooka"  {ipiirava,Jal' 
ces),  The  Roman  poeta  bave  tbe  same  metapbor  (Mar^ 
tial,  xiv,  84, "  Falx  ex  ense'*)«  In  Mic.  iv,  8,  m  l^foms, 
weeding-books,  or  abovela,  spadea,  etc  Joel  revenes 
tbe  meUphor  "  pnming^hooks"  into  epetn  (iii,  10,  l^o- 
nes) ;  and  ao  Ovid  (Fasti,  i,  697,  ta  piia  Ugonet'),  See 
Prukuco-hook. 

7.  Donbtfnl  is  D^CD^,  shephatta*^,  staOs  for  cattle 
(''pots,"  Paa.  lxviii,  18),  alao  the  cedar  beama  in  the 
Tempie  court  witb  books  for  fiaying  the  yictima  (Eaek. 
xl,  48).  Otber  meanings  glven  are  ledgea  (Yulg.  la- 
bia)f  or  eaves,  as  thougb  the  word  were  D'^CfilD ;  pens 
for  keeping  the  animals  previous  to  their  being  slangh- 
tered ;  heartb-stones,  as  in  the  margin  of  the  A.  Y. ;  and, 
iastly,  gutters  to  receive  and  cany  off  the  blood  from 
tbe  slaughtered  animals.  Gesenius  {Thesaur,  p.  1470) 
explains  the  term  as  signifying  staUs  in  tbe  courta  of 
the  Tempie  where  tbe  sacrifidal  victims  were  fastened: 
our  translatore  give  in  tbe  margin  **  endirona,  or  the  two 
beartb-atones.*'  The  Sept  aeems  eqaally  at  a  loas,  rai 
ira\anrnjv  Howi  ytiooc ;  as  alao  Jerome,  who  mdefs 
it  labia.  Scbkusner  pronouncea  ytlooc  to  be  a  barba- 
rous  word  forraed  from  ]^*^n,  and  understands  epistylium, 
a  littlo  pillar  set  on  anotber,  and  capitellum,  columned. 
Tbe  Chaldee  renders  ^*^bpai?,  short  posts  in  the  boose 
of  tbe  slaugbterers  on  wbich  to  anspend  the  sacrifioss.. 
Dr.  Ligbtfoot,  in  his  chapter  "  on  tbe  altar,  the  rings, 
and  tbe  laver,"  obsenres,  "  On  the  north  side  of  tbe  al- 
tar were  six  ordera  of  ringa,  each  of  wbich  contained 


HOOK 


329 


HOOKER 


tix,  ai  which  they  killed  the  Bacrifices.  Near  by  were 
hw  piUarw  tet  up,  upon  which  were  laid  oyerthwart 
beanu  of  oedar ;  on  these  were  fastened  rows  of  kookt, 
on  which  the  sacrifices  were  hung;  and  Łhey  were  flay- 
ed  on  marble  tablea,  which  were  between  these  pillars" 
(see  yen.  41, 42 ;  Works^  voL  xi,  ch^  xxxiv,  Lond.  1684- 
5-6).    See  Tbmlpk. 

8.  Obrioualy  an  inooirect  rendering  for  *OQ{lK,  off- 
BKw',  a  rtuk-ropff  uaed  for  binding  animala,  perhape  bj 
meana  of  the  ring  in  their  nose  (Job  xli,  2;  elaewhere 
"  ruah"  or  **  cakiion*').    See  Flag. 

9.  FinaBy,  iptirav9fp6ca  in  2  Maoc.  xiii,  2  ia  rendered 
**  anned  with  hooka,"  referring  to  the  JcyfAe-armed  char- 
iota  of  the  andenta.    See  Cuariot. 

Hook,  James,  LL.D.,  an  English  prelate,  was  bom 
in  London  in  1771,  and  educated  at  St.Mar7'8  Hall,  Ox- 
ffjrd.  He  became  archdeaoon  of  Huntingdon  in  1814, 
dean  of  Worcester  in  1825,  and  held  alao  other  prefer- 
nenU  in  the  Engliah  Church.  He  died  in  1828.  Be- 
ńdea  aome  dramadc  pieoea  and  noyels  which  are  a»- 
cribed  to  Hook,  he  published  Atiffuig  in  Herbat  a  true 
Sketek  ofthe  Churek  of  England  and  ker  Clergy  (Lond. 
1802,  8vo) :— «»«n?iofw,  etc.  (1812,  8vo,  and  another  ae- 
ries  in  1818, 8vo).  For  a  biographical  sketch  of  Hook, 
see  the  London  Geni,  Mag.  April,  1828.— Allibone,  Diet. 
ó/Amtkon,i,«7b. 

Hooke,  Łuce  Joseph,  a  French  theologian  of 
Engliah  origin,  was  bom  about  1716,  and  edu^ted  at 
the  ieminary  of  **  Saint-Nicolas  dii  Chardonnet."  He 
receired  the  doctor'8  degree  from  the  Sorbonne,  and  was 
appointed  professor  of  theology  in  1750.  The  foUowing 
rear  he  presided  at  the  diacussion  of  abbć  Parades'8  ( \. 
T.)  thesis,  which  contained  many  heterodox  doctrincs, 
and  which  he  had  signed  withont  reading.  Hooke  was 
depoaed  from  his  professorship ;  but  the  professors  of  the 
Sorbonne  and  of  the  College  of  Navarre  interceded  in 
his  behalf,  and  obtaincd  the  revocation  of  the  order. 
At  the  outbreak  of  the  French  Revolation  he  was  madę 
libraiian  of  the  Mazarin  Library,  but  he  held  this  place 
ooly  a  ahort  time,  when  he  retired  to  SL  Cloud.  He 
died  in  1796.  Hooke  pnUished  ReUffUmu  mUuralit  rw- 
tlaia  ei  CatAoHecB  Principia  (Paris,  1764,  2  yols.  8vo; 
2il  ed.  1774,  8  voU  8vo)  ^-^Diteourt  et  Rtficr.  crit.  aur 
tkitL  et  U  goupemement  de  Canc.  Borne  (Paris,  1770-84, 4 
vols.  12ino— «  translation  of  one  of  his  father'8  works 
from  the  English)  :—Prinrt/M  sur  la  Naturę  et  FEstence 
du  Pomroir  de  FŹgliae  (Paris,  1791,  8vo).     (J.  H.  W.) 

Hooke,  'William,  a  Congregational  minister,  was 
bnm  in  Southampton  in  1601,  and  educated  at  Trinity 
College,  OxfoTd.  Aker  having  receiyed  orders  in  the 
Church  of  England,  he  became  vicar  of  Axmouth,  in 
Devonshire.  Abotit  1636  he  emigrated  to  this  country, 
as  his  nonconforming  views  had  caused  him  considera- 
Ue  trouble,  and  in  1644  or  1645  he  was  installed  pastor 
at  New  Haven,  Conn.  He  was  by  marriage  a  cousin 
of  01iver  Cromwell,  afler  whoee  asoendency  he  retumed 
to  England,  and  became  Cromwell's  domestic  chaplain. 
After  the  death  of  Cromwell,  Hooke  became  an  ejected 
and  alenced  minister,  and  he  spent  his  remaining  days 
in  letiremenL  He  died  near  London  March  21, 1678. 
Besides  sereral  sermons— «mong  them,  New  England'* 
Teartfor  OMEngland^s  Fearsy  a  Fast  sermon  (Taunton, 
IWO,  London,  1641,  4to),  which  is  considered  one  of  the 
beat  productions  of  hu  day— he  published  The  Priti- 
legrs  ofthe  Saints  on  Earth  heyond  thote  in  IIeaven^  etc., 
eimUining  also  a  Discouree  on  the  Gospel  Day  (1678).— 
Spragne,  Ann.  Am.  Pulpit,  i,  104  sq. ;  Allibone,  Diet.  of 
^lic/Aor#,  i,878. 

Booker,  Asahel,  a  Congregational  minister,  iras 
bom  in  Bethlehem,  Conn.,  Aug.  29,  1762.  He  gradua- 
tcd  at  Yale  College  in  1789,  and  was  inatidled  pMtor  at 
Goshen  in  September,  1791.  This  charge  he  leagned 
on  acooont  of  iU  health  June  12,  1810.  After  preaching 
in  yariooa  pnlpits,  he  became  pastor  of  Chelsea  pariah, 
Korwich,  Coon.,  Jan.  16, 1812,  wfaere  he  remained  nntil 


hia  death,  April  19, 1818.  Mr.  Hooker  published  sev- 
eral  oocasional  sermona,  and  a  number  of  articlea  in  the 
Conmectieut  EwmgeUeal  Magazine. — Sprague,  Annais,  ii, 
816. 

Hooker,  Herman,  D.D.,  a  Protestant  Episcopal 
clergyman,  was  bom  et  PoulUiey,  Vt.,  in  1804 ;  gradua- 
ted  at  Middlebury  College  in  1825,  and  later  at  the 
Princeton  Theological  Seminaiy,  and  was  licensed  as  a 
Presbyterian,  with  great  promise  both  as  a  scholar  and 
speaker.  He  tinally  joined  the  Protestant  Episcopal 
Church,  but  the  partial  loss  of  his  sight  and  of  his  voice 
soon  compelled  his  retirement  from  the  ministry ;  and 
he  became  a  bookseller  at  Philadelphia,  continuing,  how- 
ever,  at  the  same  time,  his  theological  studies.  He  died 
at  Philadelphia,  Pa.,  SepL  26, 1 865.  His  principal  works 
are,  The  Portion  ofthe  Soul  (Philad.  1835, 32mo,  and  re- 
published  in  England):  —  Popular  Injidelity  (PhiladeL 
1836, 12mo)  .-^Family  Book  ofDevotion  (1836,  8vo)  :— 
T%e  C/ses  ofAdtersitg  and  the  Provisions  of  Consolatum 
(Philad.  1846, 18mo)  i—Thoughts  and  Maxims  (Philad. 
1847,  16mo):— 7%«  Christian  L\fe  a  Fight  of  Faith 
(PhUad.  1848, 18mo).  He  also  published  a  large  number 
of  English  and  American  works.  "  Dr.  Hooker  was  a 
yigorous  and  close  thinker,  a  elear  writer,  a  devout  and 
consdentious  Christian,  fuli  of  trae  and  consLstent  char- 
ity.  He  madę  the  Nashotah  Seminaiy  a  residuary 
legatee,  which  bequest  probably  araounted  to  abont 
$10,000."  See  Church  Ret.  Jan.  1866;  AUibone,  Diet, 
ofAuthors,i,87S. 

Hooker,  Rioharcl,  one  of  the  moat  eminent  di- 
vines  in  the  histoiy  of  the  Church  of  England,  was  bom 
in  or  near  £xeter  abont  1558,  acoording  to  Walton,  or 
about  Eaater,  1554,  according  to  Wood.  His  early  edu- 
cation  was  receired  at  the  expen80  of  his  uncle,  John 
Hooker,  Chamberlain  of  Exeter,  and  he  was  afterwardś 
introduced  by  the  samo  ielative  to  the  nottce  of  biahop 
Jewel,  who  procured  him  in  1567  a  clerkshi|i  in  Corpna 
Christi  College,  Oxfofd.  In  December,  1 578,  he  became 
a  student  in  that  college,  and  a  fellow  and  maf  ter  of  arts 
in  1577.  In  1579  he  was  appointed  lecturer  on  Hcbrcw 
in  the  univerBity,  and  in  October  of  the  same  year  he 
was  expelled  hia  coUege,  with  Dr.  John  Reynolds  and 
three  other  fellows,  but  he  was  restored  the  same  roonth. 
About  two  years  after  he  took  orders,  and  was  appointed 
to  preach  at  PauFs  Cross.  Having  married  the  foUow- 
ing year,  he  lost  his  fellowship,  but  he  was  presented  to 
the  liying  of  Drayton-Beauchamp,  in  Bucks,  by  John 
Cherry,  E»ą.,  in  1584.  Through  the  influence  of  the 
archbishop  of  York,  he  was  appointed  Master  of  the 
Tempie  in  1585.  Herę  he  became  engagcd  in  a  contro- 
versy  on  Church  discipline  and  some  points  of  doctrine 
with  Walter  Trayers,  afterooon  lecturer  at  the  Tempie, 
who  had  been  ordained  by  the  Presbytery  at  Antwerp, 
and  held  moat  of  the  opinions  of  the  dirincs  of  Geneya. 
Trayers,  being  silenced  by  archbishop  Whitgift,  appealed 
to  the  priyy  council,  but  without  sucoessL  His  petition 
to  the  coundl  was  published,  and  answered  by  Hooker. 
Tiayera  had  many  adherenta  in  the  Tempie,  and  it  waa 
their  oppoaition,  according  to  Izaak  Walton,  which  in- 
duoed  Hooker  to  oommence  his  work  on  the  Lotm  of 
Ecdemasticai  PolUy.  Finding  that  he  had  not  leisure 
at  the  Tempie  to  oomplete  that  work,  he  applied  to 
Whitgift  for  remoyal  to  a  more  quiet  station,  and  was 
accordingly  presented  to  the  living  of  Boscombe  in  Wilt- 
shire  in  1591.  On  the  17th  of  July  in  the  same  year  he 
was  raade  a  prebendary  of  Salisbury.  At  Boscombe  he 
finished  four  books  of  the  Eccksiastical  Poliły,  which 
were  published  in  1594.  On  the  7th  of  July,  1595,  he 
was  presented  by  the  qaeen  to  the  living  of  Bishopa- 
bourae  in  Kent,  which  he  held  till  his  death,  on  the  2d 
of  Noyember,  1600.  **  Hooker's  manner  was  grayo  even 
in  childhood ;  the  mildness  of  his  temper  was  proyed  by 
his  moderation  in  controrersy ;  and  his  piety  and  leam- 
ing  procured  him  the  generał  esteem  of  his  contempora- 
riea.  His  great  work  is  his  defence  of  the  constitution 
and  discipline  of  the  Church  of  England,  in  eight  bookfl^ 


HOOKER 


330 


HOOPER 


imder  the  tiUe  of  Tke  Lawt  <if  EedentuHeal  PoUty, 
ThU  work  obtained  during  the  autlior^fl  lifetime  .the 
praise  of  a  pope  (Clement  YIII)  and  a  king  (James 
I),  and  bas  ever  sińce  been  looked  upon  as  one  of  the 
chief  bulwarks  of  the  Chuich  of  England  and  of  eoclesi- 
astical  establishments  in  genend.  As  a  work  of  solid 
learning,  profound  reasoning,  and  breadth  and  sustained 
digtiity  of  style,  it  is  indeed  beyond  praise ;  but  the  com- 
mon  objecŁion  is  a  just  one,  that  Hooker^s  reasoning  is 
too  AreąuenUy  that  of  an  adrocate.  The  publicalion  of 
the  iirst  four  books  has  been  mentioned  above;  the  flfth 
was  published  in  1597.  He  completed  the  last  three 
books,  but  they  were  not  published  tiU  sereral  years  af- 
ter  his  death.  The  account  which  Walton  giyes  of  the 
mutilation  of  the  last  three  books  is  very  improbable, 
and  little  doubt  can  be  entertained  of  their  authendcity, 
though  they  are  ccrtainly  imperfect,  and  probably  not 
in  the  condition  in  which  he  lefl  them**  {Engli»h  Cydo- 
padia),  Hooker  was  charged  with  Romanizing  tcn- 
dcncies,  but  the  charge  had  no  better  foundation  than 
his  prelatical  theory  of  the  Church.  For  a  aeries  of 
shrewd  and  genial  notes  and  critacisms  on  Hooker,  see 
Coleridge,  Complete  Works,  N.  Y.  edition,  v,  28  sq.  Of 
the  JLCclesiagtical  Polity  many  separate  editions  haye 
appeared.  //«  Worka,  tńth  Life,  edited  by  Dr.  Gauden, 
were  published  in  London,  1662  (fol.) ;  again  in  1666 
(foL),  with  life  by  Izaak  Walton.  The  latest  editions 
are  Hanbury^s,  with  life  of  Cartwright,  and  Notes,  from 
the  dissenting  point  of  view  (London,  1830, 3  vols.  8vo) ; 
Keble*s  (Lond.  1836,  4  rols.  8vo,  and  1841,  8  yols.  8vo ; 
without  the  Introduction  and  notes,  2  toIs.  8vo).  See 
Hook,  EccUi,  Bioffraphy,  vi,  126  Bq. ;  Orme,  TAfe  o/Bax- 
ter,  i,  22 ;  SUnley,  Life  o/A  mold,  ii,  64 ;  Hallaro,  Liter- 
aturę of  Europę,  ii,  98 ;  AUibone,  IHcHonary  ofA  uthors, 
i,  880 ;  Grant,  Ck,  Hitt.  i,  443 ;  Baxtcr,  CK  HitL  ofEnqL, 
>.  489,  537  8q.,  543;  Neal,^w/.  ofthe  Puritans,  i,  206; 
Bennett,  llist.  ofthe  Distenters,  p.  226;  Skeats,  Ilitt,  of 
the  Free  Churchea  of  EngL  p.  29  Bq. ;  Cunningham,  Ch, 
Principleg,  p.  821, 391  8q.;  Shedd,  Hiti.ofDoctrmea  (see 
Index) ;  Hagenbach,  Hist.  ofDoctr.  (see  Index,  voL  ii) ; 
Lecky,  Hist.  of  HaHoHoUsm,  ii,  79, 199  są. ;  .Bickeisteth, 
Studi  A  uisł.  p.  245 ;  Tulk>ch,  English  Puritanitm  and  iU 
Leaders,  p.  24  są. ;  Calamy,  Niti.  A  ecount  ofmy  L\fe,  i, 
286  są. ;  ii,  236 ;  Joum.  Śac,  Lii,  xxYii,  467 ;  Thleolog, 
Magazine,  vol.  iL 

Hooker,  Thomas,  an  eminent  Congregational 
minbter,  was  bom  July  7, 1586,  at  Maiiield,  Leicester- 
ahire,  £ng.  He  was  sucoessiyely  student  and  profeasor 
at  Emanuel  C^ollegc,  Cambridge.  After  preaching  a 
short  ttme  in  London,  he  settled  in  1626  at  Chelmsford 
as  assistant  minister.  In  1630  he  was  silenced  by  arch- 
bishop  Laud  for  nonconformity,  and  enjoined,  under  a 
bond  of  fifty  pounds,  to  come  before  the  Coort  of  High 
Commission ;  but  furfciting  the  bond,  he  escaped  to  Hol- 
land, and  remained  three  years,  when  he  retumed,  and 
sailed,  July,  1633,  for  Boston.  He  arrived  in  this  coun- 
try Sept.  4,  and  was  ordained  first  pastor  of  the  church 
in  Cambridge,  (>ct.  11.  After  a  stay  of  nearly  three 
years  (June,  1686),  in  company  with  Mr.  Stone,  the 
teacher  in  his  church,  and  others,  he  started  into  what 
was  theu  the  wildemess,  and  settled  at  Hartford.  He 
died  at  that  place  July  7, 1647.  Hooker  published  The 
SouTs  JnfpraJ)inf}  inio  Christ  (1637):~7'/i€  SouVs  Jmr- 
pkmtatum;  a  Treatise  contaimng  The  Brohm.  Jleart, 
The  Preparing  ofthe  Heart,  The  SouTs  Jngrąfting  into 
Christ,  SpirituailMve  and  Jog  (1687)  i-^The  SouFs  Prep- 
aration  for  Christ  (1638)  i—The  Unbeliewr^t  Prepara- 
tionfor  Christ,  parte  i  and  ii  (1638)  :^The  SouFs  Eral- 
tation — embraeing  Union  with  Christ,  Benefis  of  Union 
with  Christ,  and  Jusłification  (1688)  :— 7%«  SouTs  Voca- 
tion,  or  Effectual  CoUing  to  Christ  (1638)>— 7>n  Partie 
ułar  Rules  to  be  practised  erery  dag  by  Conoerted  Chris- 
łians  (164  O  :~-Survey  ofthe  *V«m  of  Church  Discipłine 
(1648) :— Chris fs  Prayerfor  Belierers ;  a  Series  ofDis- 
courses  fouiided  on  John  xvii,  20-26  (1657)  :—The  SouTs 
Possession  of  Christ : — The  SouFs  Justification ;  eleren 
Sermons  on  2  CoritUhians  v,  21 ;  Procerbi  i,  28, 29;  and 


a  number  of  OGCukmal  eermons.  See  Neal,  Hitt,  ofA\ 
Engkatd  -,  Sprague,  A  mais,  ii,  817 ;  Hagenbach,  Hiai.  <^ 
Dodrines,  ii,  192, 298 ;  Neal,  Hitt.  ofthe  PuritatUy  i,  817 ; 
ContrUb.  to  Eccks,  Hitt.  ąfComediaU  (1861, 8vo),  p.  16» 
23,87,404,412. 

Hooper,  Oeorge,  D.D.,  an  English  prelate,  bom 
in  Woroestershire  in  1640,  was  educated  at  St.  Paul'a  and 
Westminster  School,  and  afterwards  at  Christ  Church, 
Oxfonl.  He  fint  becarae  chaplain  of  Morley,  bishop  of 
Winchester,  and,  later,  archbishop  Sheklon  gave  him  the 
living  of  Lambeth.  In  1677  he  was  appointed  alimmer 
of  the  princess  of  Orange.  On  the  accession  of  William, 
the  ąueen  choae  Hooper  for  her  chaplain,  and  he  was 
appointed  dean  of  Canterbury  in  1691.  In  1708  he  waa 
madę  bishop  of  St.  Asaph,  and  in  March  following  was 
transferred  to  the  see  of  Bath  and  W^eUs.  He  died  at 
Barkley,  Somersetshire,  in  September,  1727.  His  prin- 
cipal  works  are,  A  fair  and  methodical  Discussiom  ofthe 
first  andgreat  Controtersy  between  the  Church  of  Es^ 
land  and  the  Church  of  Borne,  coneeming  the  It^aHibte 
Guide  (Lond.  1687)  :—De  YalentinUmorum  Hmreti  Cott- 
jecturtE,  guibus  illius  origo  ex  yEgyptiaea  theologia  de- 
dudtur  (ibid.  1711)  :-^AnInguiry  into  Amcient  Ateasures, 
etc^  and  espedaUy  the  Jewish,  with  an  Appendix  eossoem' 
ing  our  old  English  Money  and  Measures  of  ContaU  (ih. 
1721).  There  has  been  but  one  complete  edition  of  hia 
Works,  namely,  that  published  by  Dr.  Hunt,  Hebrew 
profeasor  (Oxfl  1757,  foL).  Sec  Todd,  Ures  of  the  Deans 
of  Canterbury ;  Hoefer,  Nouv,  Biog,  Generale,  xxv,  124. 

Hooper  (Hoper,  or  Houper),  John,  an  English 
bishop,  and  one  of  the  martyrs  of  the  Reformation,  was 
bom  in  Somersetehire  about  1495.  He  was  educated  at 
Merton  College,  Oxford.  Having  emfaraced  the  doo- 
trines  of  the  Reformation,  he  was  obliged  to  ]eav«  the 
uniyerńty,  and  finally  the  country  in  1540.  He  went 
to  Switzerland,  passing  most  of  his  time  at  Zurich.  On 
the  acoeasion  of  Edward  ^1  (1547)  he  retumed  to  Eng- 
land, and  acąuired  great  reputation  in  London  as  a 
preacher.  In  1550  he  was  madę  bishop  of  Gloucester, 
but  his  repugnanoe  to  wearing  the  vestments  of  that  of- 
fice  caused  considerable  delay  in  his  oonsecration.  Af- 
ter entering  on  his  duties,  he  labored  yrith  great  zeal  for 
the  cause  of  the  Reformation.  In  1562  he  was  appomt- 
ed  bishop  of  Worcester  in  oommendanu  In  the  eariy 
part  of  the  leign  of  Mary  (1558),  he  was  airested  and 
condemned  to  be  bnroed  at  the  stake  for  his  Froteatant 
zeaL  He  firmly  refused  all  offers  of  pardon  which  re- 
ąuired  the  abandonment  of  his  principies,  and  though, 
on  account  of  the  wood  with  which  he  was  bumed  be- 
ing  green,  he  suiTered  the  seyerest  torments  for  neariy 
an  hour,  he  manifested  unshaken  fortitude.  He  died 
Feb.  9, 1555.  Hooper  was  the  author  of  a  number  of 
sermons  and  oontroversial  treatises.  Among  his  beat 
works  are  A  Dedaraiion  of  Christ  and  his  O^See  (1547, 
8vo)  :—Lesson  ofthe  fncamation  of  Christ  (1549, 8vo) : 
— Twelne  Lectures  on  the  Creed  (1 581 , 8 vo).  Sevend  let- 
ters  of  Hooper  are  presenred  in  the  archives  of  Zurich. 
We  have  recent  reprints,  by  the  Parker  Society,  of  The 
Early  Writings  of  Bishop  Hooper,  edited  by  the  Rev.  S. 
Catr  (Cambridge,  1843, 8vo) ;  and  of  his  Later  Wriżńigs, 
with  lAtters^  etc.,  edited  by  the  Rev.  C.  Nevinson  (Cam- 
bridge, 1852,  8vo).  A  sketoh  of  his  life  and  writings 
is  given  in  the  British  Reformers,  voL  iv  (Lond.  Tract 
Society).  See  Wood,  A  thena  Ozomenses,  voL  i ;  Fox, 
Book  of  Martyrs  i  Mi^dieton,  ErangeŁ  Biogr, ;  Hoefer, 
Xouv.  Biog.  Generale,  xxv,  123;  Bumet,  Iłist,  of  EngL 
Reformation,  xo\s,  ii  and  iii ;  Hook,  Eedes,  Biography, 
vi,  148 ;  Tulloch  (John),  EngL  Puritamsm  and  its  Leaders 
(1861, 12mo),  p.  8  są. ;  fiaxter,  Ch,  Hist,  of  EngjL  p.  408, 
446;  Skeats,  ^wt  o/* /Ae  Free  Churdies,^.%  są.;  Mid- 
dlcton,  Reformers,  iii,  242 ;  Hardwick,/?^onii.  p.  215  są., 
409, 425  sq. ;  Wesley,  Works,  ii,  292 ;  v,  868 ;  vi,  67, 197 ; 
Collier,  Ecdes,  Hist.  v,  876  są. ;  Fuller,  Ch.  HisL  iv,  bk. 
\ói,p.66;  BriLandFor.Rer.OcLl96»,p.S8l;  Soames, 
Hist.  ofthe  Reform,  iii,  558  są. ;  Neal,  Hist.  ofthe  Puri- 
^onsy  i,  51  aą.;  Bennett,  i?if<;.<//>iaferilerf,p.  188;  Pim- 


^ 


HOORNBEEK 


831 


HOPE 


chtfd  (G«aige),  Hiat.  o/ Congngatumalwn  (N.  T.  1865, 
2  vo]&  12iiio)»u,194  aq^297. 

Hoombeek,  JoHASSy  a  dtstingnished  Dntch  diirine, 
was  bora  at  Harlem  Nor.  4, 1617.  He  entered  the  min- 
istrr  at  Cologne  in  1689,  and  was  appointed  to  Utrecht 
aa  ńńiiister  and  piofeasor  of  theology  in  1644.  In  1654 
he  went  to  Lejden  as  professor,  where  he  died  Sept.  1, 
1666.  He  was  a  proliiic  and  much  esteemed  writer. 
Among  those  of  his  works  which  msy  yet  be  of  interest 
tu  the  scholar  aie.  Epistoła  ad  Joh,  Duraum  de  Iindepen- 
demtismo  (Lugd.  Bat.  1659)  z—BrwiM  instU,  studU  theolo- 
ffifi  (Ultraj.  1658)  i—Summti  cowtroetrsiarum  reliffiomt 
(1653),  which  is  8till,with  Spanheim'8,  one  of  the  most 
uitftń  compendioms  of  reformed  polemics : — Socmiams- 
mta  cmftUałus  (Utrecht  and  Amst.  1650-1664,  8  yoIb. 
4to),  an  extract  of  which  was  given  by  KnibWe  (Leyd. 
\m)>^3łiscdianea  Sacra  (Utrecht,  1677).  Of  espe- 
cial  yalue  b  hb  Tkeoloffia  pracHca  cum  irmiea  (Ultraj. 
1663-1698, 3  vols.  4to;  new  edit.  1672).— Herzog,  Beai- 
ijwyłfep.  vi,  260;  Bayle,  Gen,  Dietionary^  s.  v. ;  Hook, 
£rci€»,  Bioffrapk^y  vi,  149;  Stiiudlin,  Getchichte  d,  theoL 
Morał  g.  d,  H^iederaujkbunff  d,  Wtueruchafi,  p.  429  8q. ; 
Schrockh,  KireAengeack, «.  d  Reform,  ym,  603  są. ;  Gass, 
(;e«oft.  dL  ZHo^moe.  ii,  287, 298. 

Hope  (lAiric),  a  term  nsed  in  Scripture  generaUy 
to  denote  the  desire  and  expectation  of  some  good  (1 
(V.  ix,  10)  ;  speciaUy  to  denote  the  assured  expectation 
of  aalration,  and  of  all  minor  blessings  included  in  sal- 
vation,  for  thb  life  and  the  life  to  come,  through  the 
meriu  of  Christ.  (1.)  It  b  one  of  the  three  great  ele- 
ments  of  Christian  life  and  character  (1  Cor.  xiii,  18). 
Faith  b  the  root,  love  the  fruit-bearing  stem,  and  hope 
the  hearen-reaching  crown  of  the  trce  of  ChristUn  life. 
Faith  appropriates  the  grace  of  Giod  in  the  facta  of  sal- 
ration ;  love  b  the  animating  spirit  of  onr  present  Chris- 
tian life ;  while  hope  takes  hołd  of  the  futurę  as  belong- 
in<;  to  the  Lord,  and  to  thoee  wbo  arc  his.  The  king- 
Uom  of  God,  past,  present,  and  future,  b  thus  reflected  in 
faith,  love,  and  hope.  Hope  b  joined  to  faith  and  love 
because  ^ńritoal  life,  thongh  present,  b  yet  not  accom- 
plbhed.  It  stands  in  opposition  to  seeing  or  possessing 
(Rom.  viii,  24  są. ;  1  John  iii,  2  są.) ;  but  it  b  not  the 
merę  wbh  or  aspiration  for  liberation  and  llght  which 
u  ammaon  to  all  creation  (Rom.  viii,  19-22),  nor  the 
mcre  reception  of  the  doctrine  of  a  future  life,  which 
may  be  found  even  among  the  heathen  philosophers. 
It  is,  be>-ond  these,  the  assurance  that  the  spiritual  life 
which  dwelb  in  us  here  will  be  prolonged  into  et«mity. 
Hence,  in  the  scriptures  of  the  N.  T.,  Chrbtians  are  said 
to  have  kopę  rather  than  kopes  (Rom.  xv,  4, 13;  Heb. 
iii,  6 ;  vi,  11, 18).  The  Holy  Spirit  imparted  to  believ- 
en  b  the  ground  and  support  of  their  hope  (1  Pet.  i,  8 ; 
Acu  xxiił,6 ;  2  Cor.  v, 5 ;  Rom.  viii,  11 ;  xv,  18 ;  GaL  v, 
bX  Hence  the  notion  of  iiope  appeared  first  in  the  dis- 
dples  in  iu  fuli  force  and  true  naturę,  after  the  resur- 
rection  of  Christ  and  the  descent  of  the  Holy  Ghost  In 
the  O.  Test.  we  do  not  find  it  with  its  ńgnificance  (see 
Heb.  vii,  19). 

Thus  hope  is  an  easential  and  fundamental  element 
of  Christian  life,  so  essential,  indeed,  that,  like  faith  and 
love,  it  can  itself  deńgnate  the  essence  of  Christianity 
(I  Pet-  iii,  15;  Heb.  x,  28).  In  it  the  whole  glory  of 
the  (Christian  vocation  b  centred  (£ph.  i,  18 ;  iv,  4) ;  it 
U  the  real  object  of  the  propagation  of  evangelical  faith 
<Tit.  i,  2 ;  CoL  i,  5, 23),  for  the  most  precious  posseasions 
rf  the  Christbn,  the  trumjpia^  airo\i;rpw(rcc,  hto^ŁoiCf 
ćiKaio9tnni,  are,  in  their  fulfilment,  the  object  of  his 
hope  (1  Thess.  v,  8  są. ;  Rom.  viii,  28 ;  comp.  Ezech.  i, 
14;  iv,  30;  (iaL  v,  5;  2  Tim.  iv,  8).  Unbelieyere  are 
expR«ly  designated  as  those  who  are  without  hopo 
(Eph.ii,  12;  1  Theas.  iv,  13),  because  they  are  without 
<jod  m  the  worid,  for  God  b  a  God  of  hope  (Rom.  xv, 
13;  1  Pet.  i,21).  But  the  actual  object  of  hope  is  Christ, 
wbu  is  himself  called  »/  i\xic,  not  only  because  in  him 
we  place  all  our  dependenoe  (the  genend  sense  of  iXvic) , 
but  eapecially  because  it  b  in  hb  seoond  coming  that 


the  C%riBtian's  hope  of  ^ory  shall  be  fulfUled  (1  Tim.  i, 
1;  CoL  i,  27;  Tit.  ii,  18).  The  fruU  of  hope  b  that 
through  it  we  are  enahled  patiently  and  steadfastly  to 
bear  the  difficultiea  and  trials  of  our  present  exbtenoe, 
and  thus  the  viro/ioW|  is  a  constant  accompaniment  of 
the  ikwic  (1  Thess.  i,  8 ;  Rom.  viii,  25),  and  even  b  some- 
timea  put  in  its  place  with  faith  and  Iove  (Tit.  ii,  2; 
oompare  2  Tim.  iii,  10;  I  Tim.  vi,  11).  As  it  b  the 
souice  of  the  beUever'8  patience  in  suffering,  so  it  b  also 
the  cause  of  hb  fidelity  and  firmness  in  actiou,  sinoe  he 
knows  that  hb  Ubor  ^  b  not  in  vain  in  the  Lord"  (1  Cor. 
xv,  58).  Christianity  b  the  religion  of  hope,  and  it  b 
an  esBcntbl  point  of  its  abeoluie  character,  for  wbatever 
b  everlasting  and  etenud  b  absolutc.  To  the  C^ria- 
tian,  as  such,  it  b  therefore  not  time,  but  eternity;  not 
the  present,  but  the  future  life,  which  b  the  object  of  hb 
efforts  and  hope.  See  Herzog,  Real-Encyhlop,  vi,  195 ; 
Krehl,  A",  r.  Ifandwdrterbuchj  p.  872. 

(2.)  "  One  scriptural  mark,"  says  Wesley,  "  of  those 
who  are  bom  of  (iod,  b  hope.  Thus  St.  Peter,  speaking 
to  all  the  children  of  God  who  were  then  scattered 
abroad,  saith,  *  Blessed  be  the  Grod  and  Father  of  our 
Lord  Jesus  Christ,  which,  according  to  hb  abundaiit 
mercy,  hath  begotteii  us  again  unto  a  lively  hope*  (1 
Pet.  i,  3)— «Xiri^a  Ciutfav,  a  Uceły  or  Uvwff  hope,  saith 
the  apoetlc,  because  there  b  abo  a  dead  hope  as  well  as 
a  dead  faith ;  a  hope  which  b  not  from  God,  bąt  from 
the  enemy  of  God  and  man,  as  evidently  appears  by  its 
fruits,  for  as  it  b  the  offspring  of  pride,  so  it  is  the  par- 
ent  of  every  evil  word  and  work ;  whercas,  every  man 
that  hath  in  him  the  li\'ing  hope  is  <holy  as  he  that 
caileth  him  b  holy'— ever>''  man  that  can  truły  say  to 
hb  brethren  in  Christ,  *  Beloved,  now  are  we  the  sons  of 
Giod,  and  we  shall  see  him  as  he  is,*  *purilieth  himself 
even  as  he  b  pure.*  Thb  hope  (tenned  in  the  Epistle 
to  the  Uebrews,  chap.  x,  22,  ir\fipo^opia  friWcwc*  and 
ebewhere  irXttpo^ia  iXviioCf  eh.  vi,  11 ;  in  our  tran^ 
Ution, '  the  fuli  assurance  of  faith,  and  the  fuli  assurance 
of  hope,'  expresBions  the  best  which  our  language  could 
afford,  altbough  far  weaker  than  thoee  in  the  original), 
as  described  in  Scripture,  implies,  first,  the  testimony  of 
our  own  spirit  or  oonscience  that  we  walk  *  in  simplicity 
and  godly  ńncerity  ;*  but,  secondly  and  chiefly,  the  tes- 
timony of  the  Spirit  of  God  *  bearing  witness  with'  or 
to  *  our  spirit  that  we  are  the  children  of  God,'  'and  if 
children,  then  heirs,  heirs  of  God,  and  joint  heirs  with 
Christ.'"  The  passage,  "Thou  didst  make  me  hope 
when  I  was  upon  my  mother's  breasts"  (Psa.  xxi,  9),  sug- 
gests  that  hope  b  an  inbred  sentiment.  Considered  as 
such,  it  implies  (a)  a  future  state  of  exbtence ;  (6)  that 
progress  in  blessedness  b  the  Uw  of  our  bcing;  (c)  that 
the  Christian  life  b  adapted  to  our  oonstitution.  See, 
besides  the  works  above  cited,/ir(niM/w/,  v,  116;  Joy^Ser- 
montj  vol.  ii ;  Tj^erman,  K»say  on  Christian  Hope  (Lond. 
1816,  8vo) ;  Craig,  Christian  Ilope  (Lond.  1820, 18mo) ; 
Garbett,  Sermons,  i,  489;  Wesley,  Sermons,  i,  157;  Lid- 
don,  Our  Lord's  Diviniły  (Bampton  Lecture),  p.  72,  75 ; 
Martensen,  Doymaticsy  p.  450  są. ;  Pye  Smith,  Christian 
Theoloffy,  p.  622  sq.;  Pearson,  On  the  Creed,  i,  24,  401, 
460,  501 ;  Fletcher,  Works  (see  Index,  voL  iv)  ;  Jahrb, 
deułsch,  TheoL  x,  694 ;  Bates,  Works  (sec  Index  in  voL 
iv) ;  Harless,  System  ofEthia  (aark'8  Thcol.  Libr.),  p. 
174  są. ;  Nitzsch,  System  d,  chrisil.  Lehre,  §  209  są. 

Hope,  Mattiikw  R,  a  dbtuigubhed  I^esbyterian 
raimster,  and  professor  at  Princeton,  was  bom  in  Penn- 
8ylvama  ia  1812,  and  was  educated  at  Jefferson  College 
in  that  state.  He  entered  the  theological  seminary  at 
Princeton  in  1831,  and,  after  completing  his  theological 
coiu^,  he  also  studied  medicine,  and  receired  the  ap- 
propriate  degree  from  the  University  of  Pcnn8ylvania ; 
hb  object,  in  this  additional  course  of  study,  being  the 
raore  completely  to  prepare  himself  for  the  missionary 
work.  He  was  ordained  as  a  missionary,  and  stationed 
at  Singapore,  India;  but  his  health  failing  him,  he  re- 
tumed  home,  after  a  stay  of  two  years  only.  He  was 
soon  aflen^-ards  elected  assbtant  secretary  of  the  Pres- 
byŁcńfui  Board  of  Education.    In  1846  he  accepted  the 


HOPFNER 


832 


HOPKINS 


offioe  of  professor  of  beUes-lettres  in  the  College  of  Xew 
Jersey.  In  1854  he  was  alm  madę  profesBor  of  political 
economy.  Diuing  the  foiuteen  yeazs  of  his  connectioti 
with  the  college,  he  continued  in  the  diligent  and  thor- 
ough  discharge  of  the  dutiea  of  hia  piofesBonhip,  with 
the  exception  of  an  interval  of  about  fifteen  montha,  the 
moat  of  which  was  paaaed  in  Southern  Europę,  whither 
he  had  goiie  to  aeek  some  aUevlaŁion  of  a  deeplj-eeated 
neuialgic  affection.  He  died  suddenly  at  Princeton, 
Dec  17, 1859.  He  publiahed  a  Treatite  o/Rhełorie  (a 
ayllabus  for  his  college  claaMs),  and  was  a  freąuent  eon- 
tributor  to  the  Prkieeton  BÓtiew, — Presbtfierkaiy  Dec. 
1859 ;  PrtibyUrian  Hi$U  A  Imanac,  1861,  p.  90 ;  Newark 
Daii^  A  dtertiser,  Dec  1859. 

Hópfiier,  Heinrich,  a  German  theologian,  was 
bom  at  Leipsic  in  1582,  and  edncated  at  the  uniyersity 
of  his  native  place,  and  at  Jena  and  Wittenberg.  In 
1612  he  was  appointed  professor  of  logie  at  Leipsic, 
and  veiy  soon  after  was  called  to  Jena  as  professor  of 
theology.  He  died  in  1642.  Hopfner  wrote  Commen- 
tarii  in  teferem  quam  rocani  logicam  (Leipsic,  1620)  :— 
Tracłatus  in  priorum  et  posteriorum  A  nal,  libr,  A  riśło- 
telis  (ibid.  1620)  :^Saxoma  wangelica  (ibid.  1626, 1672) : 
— De  jusłificafione  hotninis  peccałoris  coram  Dto  (ibid. 
1689  and  1653;  new  ed.  1728  and  often).— Pierer,  UnU}, 
Lex.  viii,  530. 

Hóph'ni  (Heb.  Chopkm%  *^aBri,  perh.  puffilitł^  ac- 
oording  to  others  client ;  Sept.  0^vi),  the  first-named 
of  the  two  sons  of  the  high-priest  Eli  (1  Sam.  i,  8 ;  ii, 
84),  who  fulfilled  their  hereditary  saoerdotal  duties  at 
Shiloh.  Their  brutal  rapacity  and  lust,  which  seemed 
to  acquire  fresh  yiolence  with  their  father^s  increasing 
years  (1  Sam.  ii,  22, 12-17),  fiUed  the  people  with  dis- 
gust  and  indignation,  and  proroked  the  cuise  which 
was  denounceil  agaiiist  their  father'8  house  flrst  by  an 
unknown  prophet  (ver.  27--86),  and  then  by  the  youth- 
ful  Samuel  in  his  first  di\*ine  communication  (1  Siam.iii, 
11-14).  They  were  both  cut  offin  one  day  in  the  flower 
of  their  age,  and  the  ark  which  they  had  aocompanied 
to  battle  against  the  Philistines  was  lost  on  the  same 
oocasion  (1  Sam.  iv,  10,  U).  KC  dr.  1130.  The  pre- 
dicted  ruin  and  ejectment  of  £li's  house  were  fulfilled  in 
the  reign  of  Solomon.  See  Zadok.  The  unbridled 
licentiousncas  of  these  young  priests  giyes  us  a  terrible 
glimpee  into  the  fallen  condition  of  the  chosen  people 
(Ewald,  GescL  ii,  538-638).  The  Scripture  calls  them 
**  sons  of  BeUaT  (1  Sam.  ii,  12)^Smith.    See  £u. 

Hoph'ra  (Heb.  Chophra\  ^^fiH;  SepŁ  Oua^pn 
[oompare  Ciem.  Alex.  Stroni,  i,  143],  Vulg.  Ephrec),  or 
pHAiL.voii-HoiMiRA,  kiug  of  Egypt  in  the  time  of  Zed- 
ckiah,  king  of  Judah,  and  of  Nebuchadnezzar,  king  of 
Babylon.  B.a  588.  He  formed  alliance  with  the  for- 
mer  against  the  latter,  and  his  advance  with  an  Egyp- 
tian  army  constrained  the  Chaldseans  to  nuse  the  siege 
of  Jerusalem  (.Jer.  xxxvii,  5);  but  they  soon  retumed, 
and  took,  and  destroyed  the  city.  This  momentazy  aid, 
and  the  daiiger  of  placing  reliance  on  the  protection  of 
Hophra,  leil  Ezekiel  to  compaie  the  Eg}'ptians  to  a 
broken  reed,  which  was  to  pierce  the  hand  of  him  that 
leaned  upon  it  (Ezek.  xxxix,  6,  7).  This  alliance  was, 
however,  disapproved  by  Gotl;  aud  Jcremiah  was  au- 
thorizcil  to  deliver  the  prophecy  contained  in  his  forty- 
fourth  chapter,  which  concludes  with  a  predictiou  of 
Hophra*8  dcath,  and  the  subjugation  of  liis  countty  by 
the  Chaldieans.     See  Eoypt. 

This  Pharaoh-Ilophra  is  identified  with  the  Apries 
CAirpiriCf  Herod,  ii,  161  8q.,  169;  iv,  159;  Diod.  Sic.  i, 
68 ;  'AirpiaCf  Athen.  xiii,  560)  of  ancient  authors,  and 


rsT 


ho  ph 

Hieroclyph  of  Hapknu  (The  llrst  character,  ra=:the  snn, 
i.  e.  Kinp,  18  reaa  Inst ;  the  other  cbaracters,  hoph^  elgniiy 
śervant  iRoPselllni,  I,  lv,  201]  orprie$ł  [oi»nA  Jablonsky, 


the  Ouapkris  (Oua^c)  of  Manetho,  the  eighth  kiog  of 
the  twenty-sixth  or  Saitic  dynasty  (Eusebius,  Ckron.  i, 
219).  Under  this  identification,  we  may  condude  that 
his  waiB  with  the  Syńanś  and  CyrensBana  preventcd 
him  from  affording  any  great  asaistance  to  Zedekisk. 
Apries  is  described  by  Uerodotns  (ii,  169)  as  a  nKnarck 
who,  in  the  zenith  of  his  gloiy,  fdt  penuaded  that  it 
was  not  in  the  power  even  of  a  ddty  to  dispossess  him 
of  his  kingdom,  or  to  shake  the  stability  of  hb  swsy; 
and  this  account  of  his  arrogance  fuUy  accords  i^iili 
that  contained  in  the  Bibie.  Ezekiel  (xxix,  3)  speaki^ 
of  this  king  as  "  the  great  dragon  that  lieth  in  the  midst 
of  the  riverB,  which  hath  said.  My  river  is  minę  owiu 
and  I  have  madę  it  for  myself."  His  overthrow  and 
subseąueut  captivity  and  death  are  foretold  wiih  le- 
markable  precision  by  Jeremiah  (xliv,  30) :  "  I  will  pve 
Pharaoh-Hophra,  king  of  Egypt,  into  the  hands  of  his 
enemies,  and  into  the  hands  of  them  that  seek  his  life." 
This  was  brought  about  by  a  revolt  of  the  troops,  who 
placed  Amads  at  their  heaid,  and,  after  Tarious  coujflids, 
took  Apries  prisoner.  RC.  569.  He  was  for  a  time 
kept  in  easy  captivity  by  Amasis,  who  wished  to  rpait 
his  life;  but  he  was  at  length  constrained  to  give  him 
up  to  the  vengcance  of  his  enemies,  by  whom  he  was 
strangled  (Rawlinson,  Herod,  ii,  209  8q.).— Kitto.  (Sc« 
Raphel,  De  Pharaone  Hophra^  Luneb.  1 784.)    See  Pha- 

RAOH. 

Hópltal  (also  Hospital),  Michel  dr  L*.,  a  distin- 
guLshed  French  statesman  and  opponent  of  the  Inqiuai- 
tion,  was  bom  at  Aigueperse,  in  Auvergne,  about  150i 
He  studied  law  at  Toulouae,  and  first  became  known  as 
an  advocate  in  the  Parliament  of  Paris;  and  after  dis- 
charging  vaiiou8  public  functions,  he  became  chanceUor 
of  France  in  1560,  during  the  minority  of  Francis  IŁ 
That  country  at  this  time  was  toni  by  contcndiug  fae- 
tions.  '*  llie  Guises,  in  particular,  were  powerful,  am- 
bitious,  and  intensely  CathoUc ;  and  when  one  of  the 
family,  the  Cardinal  de  Lorraine,  wished  to  establish  the 
Inquisition  in  the  country,  Hópital  boldly  and  finały 
opposed  it,  and  may  be  said  to  have  8aved  France  fniin 
that  detestable  institution.  He  summoned  the  states- 
general,  which  had  not  met  for  80  yean,  and,  bdng  s<a|h 
ported  by  the  mass  of  moderate  Catholica,  he  forced  the 
Guises  to  yield.**  His  speech  at  the  opening  of  the  as- 
sembly  was  worthy  of  his  wiae  and  magnanimous  spir- 
it :  "•  Let  us  do  away,"  said  he,  "  with  thoce  diabolical 
words  of  Lutherans,  Huguenots,  and  Papiats — ^luones  of 
party  and  sedition ;  do  not  let  us  changc  the  fair  appd- 
lation  of  Christians.**  An  onlinance  was  passed  abol- 
ishuig  arbitrary  taxe8,  regulating  the  fcudal  authonty 
of  the  noblcs,  and  correcting  the  abuaes  of  the  judidal 
S}'stem.  He  also  sccured  various  benefits  for  the  pene- 
cuted  Huguenots  in  various  ways,  but  efpecially  by  the 
edict  of  iMcification,  which  granted  to  the  IVotestanta 
the  free  exerci8e  of  their  religion  (issued  Janiuuy  17, 
1562).  In  1568  he  was  insdrumental  ui  esublishing  the 
peace  of  Longjumeau,  when,  on  account  of  his  oppoii- 
tion  to  Catharinc  de  Medicis,who  was  inclined  to  break 
the  compact,  he  was  suspeóed  of  bcing  a  Huguenot. 
Finding  it  impossible  to  prevent  the  execution  of  Ctth- 
arine'8  plans,  he  resigned  his  poeitiou  (Octobcr  7,  ld<V), 
and  retired  to  his  cstate  at  Yignay,  near  Etampes.  He 
died  May  13, 1573.  Hopitjd^s  family  had  all  embraced 
the  Protestant  faith,  and  this  was  well  known  even  at 
court  while  he  occupied  his  prominent  position  there. 
But  his  character  was  so  blameless  that  he  held  his  po- 
sition  for  some  time  even  during  the  fearful  cootesta 
preparatory  to  the  massacre  of  St,  Bartholomew.— Hoe- 
fer,  Nonv,  Biog,  Generale^  xxxi,  86  sq. ;  Chamben^  £t- 
a/clop,  V,  414  8q. ;  Pierer,  Umrer»,'lAr.  viii,  834 ;  Bayle, 
Uistor,  Diet,  p.  505  Bq. ;  Herzog,  Real-Encykiop,  vi,  283 
8q.;  Kaumer,  (r^«cA.  Auropa*«,  ii ;  Soldan,  ó^etcA.  dL /VW. 
«n  Frankr,  ii.     See  Huguenots.     (J.  H.  W.) 

Hopkins,  Daniel,  D.D.,  a  Congregational  mini»* 
ter,  was  bom  Oct.  16,  1784,  at  Waterfoury,  Onuu  and 
gniduatedat  Yale  College  in  1758.  After  being  licoosed, 


HOPKINS 


333 


HOPKINS 


he  pnached  in  Htliiks,  N.  Sb,  a  short  time.  In  1775  he 
was  chosea  member  of  the  Frovincial  Congrees,  atid  in 
1778  one  of  the  Council  of  the  Conventiontl  Goyern- 
ment.  He  was  orcUined  pastor  of  Łhe  Third  Choich  in 
Salem  Kor.  18, 1778,  and  remained  in  thia  place  until 
bis  death,  Dec  14,  1814.  Ue  puUished  two  or  three 
ojcasional  sermona. — Sprague,  AtmaU^  i,  581. 

Hopkins,  Ezekiel,  D.D.,  an  English  prekte  and 
luthor,  was  bom  at  Sandford,  Deyonshire,  in«163S.  He 
WIS  educated  at  Magdalen  College,  Oxford,  and,  after 
hulłing  a  short  time  the  chaplaincy  to  the  college,  he 
became  minister  of  SL  Mary  Woolnoth,  London,  and 
hter  of  StMary*s,  £xeŁer.  He  finally  removed  to  Ire- 
land  with  his  fkther-in-law,  lord  Robartes  (afterwards 
caii  of  TniTo),  and  was  madę  dean  of  Baphoe  in  1669, 
aod  bishop  of  the  aame  place  in  1671.  He  was  trans- 
ferred  to  Londondeny  in  1681,  but  in  conseąuence  of  the 
Koman  Catholic  troubles  in  Ireland  be  retumed  to  £ng- 
Iind  in  1688,  and  was  appointed  minister  of  Alderman- 
bun-,  London,  in  1689.  He  died  June  22,  1690.  In  his 
docirinea  he  was  a  Calrinist.  His  works  arc  remarka- 
ble  for  cleamess,  strength  of  thonght,  originality,  and 
pureneas  of  style;  the  most  important  are,  Expo»ition  of 
the  Ij)rd$  Praytr  (1691)  v—An  Expo8iHon  of  (he  Ten 
ConmaadmatU  (1692,  4to)  i—The  Doctrine  of  (he  two 
CormmU  (Lond.  1712,  8vo) ;  and  Works,  now  firtt  coł- 
kcted,  leith  Li/e  of  the  Author,  etc,  by  Josiah  Pratt 
(Lond.  1809,  4  Tola.  8\ro).  See  Wood,  Athenas  Oxonien- 
<«,Td.ii;  Prince,  Wor^%e$  of  Demm;  Chalmers,  Gen. 
Bwffr.Dkt,;  Hoefer,  Nouv,  Biogr,  Generale,  xxv,  128; 
DarUng,  Cydopadia  BHUiog,  i,  1536.     (J.  H.  W.) 

Hopkins,  John  Henry,  D.D.,  LL.D.,  biahop  of 
the  Plrotestant  Epiacopal  Church  in  the  diocese  of  Yer- 
mont,  was  bom  of  English  parents  in  Dublin,  Ireland, 
Jan.  30, 1792,  and  came  to  this  country  when  about 
eight  years  old.  Ile  waa  educated  chlefly  by  hia  moŁh- 
er.  In  1817  he  entered  the  legał  profesaion,  but  Bix 
years  later  he  quitted  the  bar  for  the  minbtry,  and  waa 
ordained  in  1824  as  rector  of  Trinity  Church,  Pittaburg. 
Ii  1827  he  was  a  prominent  candidate  for  the  offlce  of 
asasŁint  bishop  of  Pennsylvania,  but  na  the  vote  of  Mr. 
Hopkins  wm  to  decide  between  himaelf  and  Dr.  H.  U. 
Oadenlonk,  another  candidate,  h3  cxit  hia  vote  in  favor 
of  the  litter.  In  1831  he  became  aasistant  miniater  at 
Trinity  Church,  Boston,  and  profeasor  of  divinity  in  the 
Lpiflcopał  Theological  Seminaiy  of  Massachusetts.  In 
\^'i  he  was  elected  bishop  of  Yerroont,  and  was  conae- 
crated  OcL  31.  At  the  aame  time  he  acoepted  alao  the 
rectorsbip  of  St.Paul'8  Church,  Burlington,  Vu,  which 
he  held  until  1856.  Besides  this,  he  also  eaUbliahed  a 
schocd  fur  boys,  employing  poor  cleigymen  and  candi- 
datós  for  ordera  as  teachers.  His  heavy  expensea  from 
this  enterprise  embarraased  him  aerioualy  for  many 
yean.  After  relinquishing  thia  achool,  he  projected  and 
esiablbhed  the  **  Yermont  Epiacopal  Inatitutc,"  a  aemi- 
theological  achool,  over  which  he  preaided  until  hif 
death,  January  9,  1868.  In  1867,  biahop  Hopkina  waa 
prescnt  at  the  Pan-Anglican  Synod  heW  in  Lambeth, 
and  took  a  prominent  part  in  ita  pioceedinga.  In  the 
di*3ei»iona  dividLng  the  Anglican  Church  he  waa  a  dę- 
ci Jed  champion  of  the  High-Church  party,  and  refuaed 
to  aign  the  protest  of  a  majority  of  the  American  btahops 
againat  Romanizing  tendenciea.  Seyeral  of  the  poa- 
thomous  works  of  bishop  Hopkina  wiU  be  publiahed  by 
one  of  hia  aona.  Bishop  Hopkina  waa  one  of  the  moat 
leamed  nacn  of  bis  denomination,  He  had  remarka- 
We  yeraatility  of  mind,  and  waa  a  peraevering  and  auc- 
ccasful  atudent  in  the  field  of  theology.  Indeed,  "it 
^as  hard  to  find  a  highway  or  byway  of  ingenioua  in- 
^estigation  where  he  haa  not  left  his  footprint.**  The 
gnat  mistake  of  hia  life,  and  one  which  he  undoubtedly 
regretted  before  hia  death,  waa  hia  apology  for  the  inati- 
tuiion  of  haman  slarery.  But  we  have  every  reason  to 
believe  that  tbe  biahop  waa  aincere  in  what  he  preach? 
ed,  and  that,  notwithatanding  thia  failing,  he  waa  a  de- 
root  aod  oonaistent  man  of  God.   He  waa  a  yoluminoua 


¥nriter.  Beaides  a  number  of  pamphleta,  aermoiu,  and 
addreasea,  he  publiahed  Chietianify  rtndicaied  m  a  ae- 
riee  ofeeten  disoourees  on  the  extemal  Emdencea  ofthe 
N.  Test.  (Burlington,  1883, 12mo)  i—The  prinUHoe  Creed 
ezamined  and  explained  (1884, 12mo) : — The  prindtice 
Ch,  compared  vnih  the  P.  E.  Ch.  (1835, 12mo)  :—The  Ch. 
ofRome  in  her  prinwtwe  purity  compared  with  the  Ch,  of 
Romę  ai  the  pres,  day  (1839, 12mo) : — Causes,  Prwcipks, 
and  ResuUs  ofthe  BrU,  Rtform,  (Philad.  1844, 12mo)  :— 
Hist.  ofthe  Confessionais  (N.  Y.  1850, 12mo)  .—Refuta- 
tion  ofMUner^s  End  of  Controversy  (1854, 2  rola.  12mo). 
An  aoawer  haa  recently  been  publiahed  by  Kenrick,  Vin- 
dication  ofthe  Catholic  Church  (Baldmore,  1855, 12mo). 
Bishop  Hopkina'a  laat  worka  are  a  little  brochure  on  the 
law  of  ńtualiam— an  aiigument  baaed  on  acńptural  and 
hiatoiical  groonda  in  behalf  of  the  beauty  of  hoUnesa  in 
the  public  aeryicea  of  hia  Church;  and  a  History  ofthe 
Church  in  verse  for  Sunday-echoola. — Amer,  Ch.  Reoiew, 
April,  1868,  p.  160;  Allibone,  Diet,  ofAuthors;  Vape- 
reau.  Diet,  des  Contiemporains,  p.  897.     (J.  H.  W.) 

Hopkins,  Samuel,  D.D.,  a  notcd  Calriniatic 
diyiue,  waa  bom  at  Waterbury,  Conn.,  Sept  17,  1721, 
and  waa  at  once  aet  apart  by  hia  father  for  the  ministry 
of  the  Gospel  He  entered  Yale  College  in  September, 
1737.  During  hia  collegiate  conne  the  tomi  of  New 
Haren  waa  atirred  by  the  preaching  of  Whitefield  and 
Gilbert  Tennent  The  atudenta  were  deeply  affected, 
and  Hopkina  waa  one  of  the  converted.  After  gradua- 
tion  he  commenced  the  atudy  of  theobgy  with  presi- 
dent  Edwarda,  and,  though  not  an  imitator  of  the  preri- 
dent,  he  waa  morę  powerfuUy  influenced  by  him  than 
by  any  other  man.  In  1741  he  began  to  preach,  but 
with  great  embanaaament  and  despondency.  During 
hia  firat  few  montha  of  piobation  he  decUned  five  invi- 
tations  for  aetdement  On  Dec  23,  1743,  he  waa  or- 
dained oyer  an  infant  church  of  five  membera  in  Housa- 
tonick,  Row  Great  Barrington,  Mass.  He  remained  in 
thia  pastorate  twenty-fiye  yeara.  He  often  preached 
extemporaneoualy,  and  was  inde&tigabte  in  parochial 
labor.  He  gaye  oflTence  to  hia  people  by  his  practice 
of  reading  portiona  of  Scriptore  in  the  Sabbeth  aenricea, 
a  practice  which  waa  then  unusoal  in  New  England. 
Frum  1744  to  1768  the  prosperity  ofthe  church  was  mora 
or  leae  intemipted  by  the  French  and  Indian  war.  Hop- 
kins was  obliged  often  to  remoye  hia  family,  and  some- 
times  to  go  himaelf,  for  aafety  from  Great  Barrington. 
Hia  crittciama  on  the  military  moyemanta  of  the  Britiah 
anny  aro  quite  acute:  "Our  generała  are  very  grand. 
The  baggagc  of  each  one  amounta  to  fiye  cart-kMuła. 
Mighty  preparationa,  but  nothing  done."  On  the  banks 
of  the  Monongahela  Waahington  waa  uttering  almoat  the 
aame  wonla  to  generał  Braddock.  His  church,  during 
his  paatorate,  increased  in  memberahip  from  liye  to  116. 
He  labored  faithfuUy  among  the  Indiana  of  his  yicinity, 
and  apent  much  of  hia  time  in  personal  interoourse  with 
Jonathan  Edwarda,  then  of  Stockbridge.  He  became 
unpopular  with  aome  membera  of  his  parish  on  aooount 
of  his  atrict  terma  of  Church  communiou,  hia  bold  aaser- 
tions  of  Calyiniatic  doctrine,  and  hia  ataunch  patriotiam. 
He  waa  eapecially  dialiked  by  the  Britiah  Toriea.  Some 
of  hia  pariahioneis  would  giye  nothing  for  hia  aupport, 
and  othera  had  nothing  to  giye.  In  great  porerty,  he 
left  hia  paiiah  in  1769.  In  April,  1770,  he  was  installed 
pastor  of  the  chuich  at  Newport,  which  town  waa  then 
a  port  of  comraercial  importance,  and  for  many  years 
the  riyal  of  New  York.  During  the  lirst  year  of  hia 
paatorate  Hopkina  enjoyed  a  yiait  from  WhiK-tield.  Hia 
church  in  Newport  flouriahed  until  the  outbreak  of  the 
Reyolutionary  War.  In  1776  the  town  was  captured 
by  Łhe  Britiah,  and  remained  in  their  possession  three 
yeara.  Hopkina  continued  at  his  post  until  the  last 
moment,  and  then  waa  compelled  to  tlee.  He  apent 
the  interyal  in  aaeiating  hia  friend,  Dr.  Samuel  Spring,  of 
Newburyport  (aee  L\fe  and  Times  of  Gardiner  Spring 
[N.  Y.  1866,  2  yola.  12mo],  i,  12  aq.),  and  in  supplying 
destitttte  churchea  in  Connecticut.  During  bis  absenoe 
his  people  were  acattered,  and  hia  meeting-house  neariy 


HOPKINS 


334 


HOPKINS 


demoliBhed.  He  retomed  in  1779,  and  began  to  preach 
in  a  pńvate  room,  but  aoon  received  aid  fiom  hia  frienda 
in  Boston  and  Newbuiyport  for  the  reatoration  of  his 
cburch  edifice.  He  rejected  eligible  offers  of  settlement 
in  other  places,  and  remained  faithful  to  his  people,  re- 
ceiring  no  regular  salary,  .but  depending  on  preeańous 
and  meagre  contributions. 

As  soon  as  Hopkins  commenced  his  pastorał  labon  at 
Newport  he  begaii  to  agitate  the  subject  of  slayeiy.  At 
that  time  Newport  was  the  great  siaye-market  of  New 
Kngland.  Hopkins  afiirmed  that  the  town  was  built 
up  by  the  blood  of  the  AfHcans.  Some  of  the  wealthi- 
est  memben  of  his  church  were  slaye-traders,  and  many 
of  his  congregation  were  slaye-OMmers.  He  astonished 
them  by  his  iiist  sermon  against  the  slaye  system.  The 
poet  Whittier  says :  "  It  may  well  be  doubted  whether 
on  that  Sabbath  day  the  angels  of  Grod,  in  their  wide 
suryęy  of  his  uniYerse,  looked  down  upon  a  nobler  spec- 
tacie  than  that  of  the  minister  of  Newport  rising  up  be- 
fore  his  slayeholding  congregation,  and  demanding,  in 
the  name  of  the  Highest,  the  deUyerance  of  the  ci^ve, 
and  the  opening  of  the  prison-doors  to  them  that  were 
bound.**  Only  one  family  leSt  his  chuicb ;  the  others 
freed  their  slares.  He  continued  to  preach  on  the  sub- 
ject, and  madę  himself  intensely  unpopular  thioughout 
Rhode  IsUind.  In  1776  he  published  his  celebrated  Di^ 
aioffut  concermng  the  Slavtry  of  the  A/ricanSj  together 
with  his  Address  to  SiareholderSf  copies  of  which  were 
sent  to  all  the  memben  of  the  Continental*  Congress, 
and  to  prominent  men  throughout  the  country.  It  was 
leprinted  by  the  New  York  Manumiadon  Society  as  late 
as  1785.  Hopkins  entered  into  correspondence  with 
GranviUe  Sharp,  Zachary  Macaulay,  and  other  English 
abolitionista.  From  them  he  borrowed  the  idea  of  col- 
onizing  the  blacks ;  and  he  derised  a  cokmization 
scheme,  in  which  he  manifested  a  practical  statesman- 
ship  unusual  for  a  clergyman.  When  the  Fcderal  Con- 
stitution  was  framed  in  1787,  he  pointed  to  the  clanse 
recognising  slarery  in  the  United  States,  aiui  said,  **  I 
fear  this  is  an  Achan,  which  will  bring  a  curse,  eo  that 
we  cannot  prosper."  Of  a  movement  so  yast  as  the 
anti-eUiyery  reform  in  the  United  States  no  one  man 
oan  claim  to  be  the  author;  bat  Dr.  Hopkins  was  most 
oertainly  the  pioneer  in  that  moyement. 

It  is  not,  howeyer,  as  a  philanthropiat,  but  as  a  the- 
ologian,  that  Hopkins  is  generally  known.  In  his  ex- 
tremę  indigence  he  writes:  "I  have  been  sayed  from 
anxiety  abont  Itving,  and  haye  had  a  thoiisand  times  less 
care  and  troable  in  the  world  than  if  I  had  had  a  great 
abundance,  Being  unconnected  with  the  great  and  rich, 
I  have  had  morc  time  to  attend  to  my  studies,  and  par- 
ticularly  have  had  leisure  to  write  my  *  System  of  Di- 
yinity,'  which  I  hope  will  not  prore  useless.'*  By  this 
system,  and  by  his  yarious  independent  treatises,  he  gaye 
occasion  for  the  name  **  Hopkinsian,^  as  applied  to  the 
yiews  of  eminent  New  Kngland  divine&  He  regaided 
himself  as  an  Edwardean.  He  had  been  the  most  inti- 
mate  of  president  Edwards^s  companions,  had  reyised 
the  president^s  manuscripts,  had  carefully  edited  some 
of  them,  and  was  morę  exactly  acqnainted  than  any  oth- 
er man  ii^dth  the  presidenfs  original  speculations.  He 
wrote  the  first  memoir  of  Edwards,  of  which  the  Enof' 
dopadia  Britaimica  says,  it  is  '*equal  in  simplicity, 
though  by  no  mcans  in  anything  elae,  to  the  most  ex- 
ąuisite  biographics  of  Izaak  Walton." 

The  prominent  tenets  of  Hopkinsianism  are  the  fol- 
lowing:  1.  All  real  łioliness  consists  in  dińnterested  be- 
neyolence.  2.  All  sin  consists  in  selfishnesa.  8.  There 
are  no  promises  of  regenerating  grace  madę  to  the  do- 
ings  of  the  unregenerate.  4.  The  impotency  of  sinners 
with  respcct  to  believing  in  Christ  is  not  natural,but 
moraL  5.  A  sinner  is  reąuired  to  approye  in  his  heart 
of  the  diWne  conduct,  eyen  though  it  should  cast  him 
ofT  forever.  6.  God  bas  exerted  his  power  in  such  a 
manner  as  he  purposed  would  be  followed  by  the  exist- 
ence  of  sin.  7.  The  intioduction  of  morał  eyil  into  the 
opiyeise  is  so  oyerruled  by  God  as  to  promote  the  gen- 


erał good.  8.  Repentance  is  beforo  ftith  in  ChriaŁ.  9. 
Though  men  became  ainners  by  Adam,  aocording  to  a 
diyine  constitution,  yet  they  haye,  and  are  accoimtabłe 
for,  no  sins  but  personal.  10.  Though  belieyers  are  jus- 
tified  thzottgh  Christ^s  righteousness,  yet  his  righteooft- 
neaa  is  not  tiansferred  to  them.  Dr.  Ńatłumael  Emmona 
(q.  V.),  who  was  the  most  eminent  defender  of  Hopkin- 
sianism, and  who  described  it  as  characterized  by  the 
ten  preceduig  artides,  added  the  following  (sec  Park, 
Memoir  ofEmmons)  as  his  own  yiews,  and  as  supple- 
mentel  to  those  of  his  friend  Hopkins:  1.  Holiness  and 
sin  consist  in  free  yoluntary  exeTcise8.  2.  Men  act  fi«c- 
ly  under  the  diyine  agency.  8.  The  leasŁ  tran^^reaeton 
of  the  diyine  law  deseryes  etemal  punishment.  4.  Right 
and  wrong  are  founded  in  the  naturę  of  thinga.  5.  God 
exercise8  merę  grace  in  pardoning  or  justifying  penitent 
belieyers  through  the  atoncment  of  Christ,  and  merę 
goodness  in  rewarding  them  for  their  good  worka.  6. 
Notwithstanding  the  total  deprayity  of  sinners^  God  baa 
a  right  to  require  them  to  tum  from  ńn  to  hoUnesa.  7. 
Preachers  of  the  Gospel  ought  to  exhort  sinners  to  love 
God,  repent  of  sin,  and  belieye  in  Christ  immediately. 
8.  Men  are  actiye,  not  passiye,  in  regeneration.  Some 
of  these  eight  propositions  are  distinctly  ayowed,  olhera 
morę  or  less  clearly  implied  in  the  writings  of  Hopkins. 
Emmons  regarded  Hopkinsianism  as  in  some  respccta 
high  and  intense  Calvinisro ;  as,  in  other  respects  (the 
doctrine  of  generał  atoncment  for  example),  moderate 
Calyinlsm ;  and  as,  on  the  whołe,  ^  cocsistent  Całrin- 
ism." 

Amid  his  labors  as  a  reformer  and  theologian.  Dr.. 
Hopkins  yigorously  discharged  his  parochiał  duties,  un- 
til  he  was  struck  with  paralysis,  in  his  seyenty-eighth 
year.  He  continued  to  preach  during  the  ncxt  four 
years.  With  a  reyiyał  of  religion  his  ministry  had  com- 
menced, with  a  reyiyal  also  it  cndcd— the  rising  and 
the  setting  of  his  sun.  He  wrote  out  a  list  of  his  con- 
gregation, and  offered  a  separatc  prayer  for  each  indi- 
yidual.  Thirty-one  conyersions  followed.  After  his  dis- 
couTses  on  the  16th  of  Oct.  1808,  he  exclaimed,  <'Kow  I 
have  done ;  I  can  preach  no  morę."  He  staggered  from 
the  pulpit  to  his  bed,  from  which  he  neyer  rosę.  He 
died  on  the  20th  of  December,  1808. 

In  person  Dr.  Hopkins  was  tali  and  yigorous ;  in  his 
moyements  dignilied,  though  unwiddy.  His  head  was 
łarge  and  sąuare,  and  his  face  beamed  with  intelligence. 
The  moyements  of  his  mind  were  like  those  of  his  body, 
powerful,  but  oilen  clumsy.  Inflexible  faithfolness  to 
what  he  deemed  his  duty,  with  utter  selfnsacrifice  for 
the  right,  was  his  main  characteiistic  **  Loye  to  being 
in  generał"  was  with  him  not  the  merę  by-word  of  a 
sect,  but  the  enthpsiastic  purpose  of  his  łife.  He  had 
not  the  temperament  which  inspires  enthusiasm,  and  he 
had  but  litde  tact  in  personal  intercouise  with  men; 
but  in  the  depths  of  his  indigence  he  was  trae  to  him- 
self, and  showed  all  the  courage  of  a  Hampdcn.  He 
studied  hardly  eyer  less  than  fourtcen  hours  a  day,  and 
sometimes  eyen  as  many  as  eighteen,  in  alittle  room  of 
ełeyen  feet  by  seyen.  Eyery  Saturday  he  faated,  and 
thus  gained  spiritual  strength  for  the  toils  of  earth  by 
commuuion  with  Heayen.  He  labored  for  Indiana  and 
selfish  white  men ;  for  poor  negroes  who  had  tbcn  no 
other  friend ;  and  for  theological  science,  which  gaye  him 
respect,  but  little  tnread — rixU  propter  alios,  In  1854 
his  Worl'M  (before  repeatedly  reprinted)  were  pubUshcd 
by  the  Massachusetts  Doctrinal  Tract  Society  (8  yoK 
8vo),  containing  oyer  2000  pages,  with  a  Memoir  by 
Prof.  Edward  A.  Park  of  266  pages. 

The  character  and  writings  of  Dr.  Hopkins  have  rc- 
cently  been  depicted  for  generał  readers  in  a  yery  strik- 
ing  way  in  Mrs.  Stowe's  Muiigter^s  Wooinff,  See  also 
Conffr^gaf,  Quar,  Her.  1864,p.  1  8q. ;  Hagenbach.  History 
ofDoctr.  ii,  486, 438;  Shedd,  Hist,  o/Docfr.  i,  888. 408; 
ii,  26, 81, 489 ;  Buchanan,  Juttifcation,  p.  190.  For  the 
diffusion  of  Hopkinsianism  and  its  later  modifications, 
sec  Nkw  Englakd  Tłreoixx5T.  On  the  relation  of 
Hopkins's  theoiy  to  the  orthodox  yiew  of  redemption, 


HOPKINS 


335 


HOR 


see  Bangs,  Error§  of  Hopkinaianum  (N.  York,  12mo); 
Hodgson,  yew  Dicimhf  Exammed  (S,  York,  12mo) ;  art 
Edwarda,  in  Herzog,  Real-Encyldop, ;  Christian  Eiam- 
iiter,  1843,  p.  169  8q.;  Adams,  View  of  aU  RdufioMy  p. 
168;  Spring,  On  the  Naturę  o/Duty;  Ely,  Cońirast  be- 
ticttn  Cairimtm  and  Hopkiasianiam  (N.  Y.  1811) ;  Bib, 
Soć.  April,  1852,  p.  448  8q. ;  Jan.  1858,  p.  683, 671 ;  July, 
1862  (art.  vi) ;  New  Englańder,  1868,  p.  284  Bq. ;  Life  and 
Times  ofGardiner  Sprittg  (N.  Y.  1866, 2  Yola.  12mo),  ii, 
6aq.    (W.E.P.) 

Hopkins,  William,  1,  an  Engliah  divine,  was 
bora  at  E resham,  Worccstershire,  and  educat«d  at  Tńn- 
itj  CoUege,  Oxford.  He  entered  the  minisŁiy  in  1675, 
and,  after  holding  aeyend  minor  appointments,  was  madę 
Ticar  of  Lindridge  in  1686,  and  in  1697  master  of  St  Os- 
waki'8  Hospital,  Worceater.  He  died  in  1700.  He  pub- 
liflhed  Sermong  (1688, 4to)  i—Bartram  (or  Rartram)^  on 
(he  Body  and Bioodof  the  Lord  (2deA.lG88):-'Ammad. 
on  Jokmaont  A  nswer  to  Jovian  (Lond.  1691, 8 vo) : — /jOt- 
in  tranaL  of  a  Saron  Tract  on  the  Burial-placea  ofthe 
8axon  Samła  (in  Hickes^s  Septentrional  Grammar,  Oxf. 
1706).  After  his  death,  Dr.  Gea  Hickes  published  Sec- 
entesi  SerTMtna^  tcith  Life  (Lond.  1708, 8vo). 

Hopkixia,T^illiam,  2,  a  Church  of  England  dei^ 
gyman,  but  an  Arian  in  theology,  was  bom  at  Mon- 
mouth  in  1706.  He  entered  Ali  Souls  College,  Oxfoni, 
in  1724,  and  became  vicar  of  Bolney,  Su8Bex,  in  1781. 
In  1756  he  became  master  of  the  grammar-school  of 
Cucidield,  and  died  in  1786.  His  principal  worka  are 
Am  Appeai  to  the  Common  Senae  ofall  Chriatian  Peopfe 
on  the  doctrine  of  the  Trinity  (Lond.  1754, 12mo) : — £x^ 
odui^  a  correct  Tranalation^  tciłh  Noiea  criłical  and  ex- 
flaaalory  (Lond.  1784, 4to).  He  published  also  sereral 
anonymoua  pamphlets  against  compulsory  subecription 
to  theThirty-nine  Articles. — Alliboiie,i>tcf.o/*>lu^Aor«, 
i,  886 ;  Darling,  Cydop,  BUdiographica^  p.  1537. 

HopkinałaniBin,  a  name  given  to  the  ibeological 
ayitem  of  Dr.  Samuel  Hopkins  (q.  y.). 

HÓplothSca  (Owkol^rfioii  an  armory)  is  the  title 
of  a  book  which  contains  the  decLuons  of  the  Church 
fitbers  against  heretieal  doctrines,  and  which  was  used 
to  coDtroyert  soch  doctrinea.  It  was  most  probably  pre- 
pired  ai  the  request  ofthe  emperor  Emanuel  Comnenus. 
—f\^TtoaxattHandwdrterb,derKirckenge»di,iXtMl,  (J. 
IŁW.) 

Hdpton,  SusAKN AH,  a  religioos  writer,  bom  in  Staf- 
fordshiie,  Enghmd,  in  1627,  was  the  wife  of  Richard 
Hopcon,  a  Welsh  judge.  She  became  at  one  time  a 
Roman  CathoUc,  but,  realizing  her  mistake,  she  retum- 
ed  to  the  Protestant  Church.  She  died  in  1709.  Her 
writingB  are  all  on  religious  topics,  intended  to  lead  the 
leader  to  a  deyout  and  holy  life.  They  are  Daily  De- 
rotiow  (Lond.  1673, 12mo;  5th  ed.  1718)  i—MedUaiiona, 
etc.  (pubL  by  N.  Spinckes,  Lond.  1717,  8yo).  She  also 
remodded  the  Dewtiona  «n  the  ancienł  Way  of  Officea 
(ofiginally  by  John  Austin,  who  died  in  1669),  with  a 
prefiice  by  Dr.  George  Hickes  (q.  v.)  (1717, 8vo ;  new  ed. 
1*46, 8roV--Allibone,  Diet,  of  A  uthorsj  i,  887  j  Darling, 
Cydi^  BibUoffraph,  i,  1588. 

Hor  (HeU  id.  *lin  or  ih ;  Sept"Qp),  the  name  of 
two  ftninfnt  mountains  (">i^n  ^h,  ue,**  Hor  the  moun- 
tain,"  remarkaUe  as  the  only  case  in  which  the  name 
oomes  fiist:  Sept.  'Op  ro  upoc,Vulg.  Mona  Hor).  The 
word  Hor  is  r^ijaided  by  the  lexicogniphers  as  an  ar- 
chaic  form  of  Ilar,  the  nsoal  Heb.  term  for  "  mountain" 
Oeaen.  Thea,  p.  891  b;  FUrst,  Handwb,  a.  y.),  so  Łhat  the 
Bieaning  of  the  name  is  dmply  **  the  mountain  of  moun- 
tains," as  the  Sept.  haye  it  in  one  case  (see  below,  No.  2) 
ró  ópoc  TV  ópoc;  Yulg. mona  altiaaimua ;  and  Jerome  (£/>. 
odFabioUBn)  non  m  mofnte  aimpiiciUr  aed  in  montia  mon^ 
^   See  MouKT Alit. 

1.  An  eminent  moontain  of  Arabia  Petnea,  on  the 
coDflnes  of  Idnmiea,  and  forming  part  of  the  mountain 
duin  of  Seir  or  Edom.  ItisfintmentionedinScriptnre 
ia  cnnnection  with  the  ciicumstanoes  reoorded  in  NomU 


XX,  22-29.  It  was  "  on  the  boundary  linę"  (Numb.  xx, 
23)  or  *<at  the  edge"  (xxxiii,  87)  ofthe  land  of  Edom. 
It  was  the  next  htdting^place  of  the  people  after  Kadesh 
(xx,  22 ;  xxxiii,  87),  and  they  quitted  it  for  Zalmonah 
(xxxiii,  41),  in  the  road  to  the  Ked  Sea  (xxi,  4).  It 
was  during  the  encampment  at  Mt.  Hor  that  Aaron  was 
gathered  to  his  fathers  (Numb.  xxxiii,  87-41).  At  the 
command  of  Jehoyah,  he,  his  brother,  and  his  son  as- 
cended  the  mountain,  in  the  presence  of  the  people,  ^  in 
the  eyes  of  all  the  congregation.**  The  garmeiits,  and 
with  the  garments  the  office,  of  high-priest  wcre  taken 
from  Aaron  and  put  upon  Eleazar,  and  Aaron  died  there 
in  the  top  of  the  mountain.  In  the  circumstances  of 
the  ascent  of  the  height  to  die,  and  in  the  marked  ex- 
clusion  from  the  Promised  Land,  the  end  of  the  one 
brother  resembled  the  end  ofthe  other;  but  in  the  pres- 
ence of  the  two  suryiyors,  and  of  the  gazing  crowd  be- 
low, there  is  a  striking  difference  between  this  event 
and  the  solitaiy  death  of  Moses.  Sec  Aaron.  The 
Israelites  paseed  the  mountain  sereral  times  in  going  up 
and  down  the  Arabah;  and  the  station  Mosera  (Deut. 
X,  6)  must  haye  been  at  the  foot  of  the  mount  (Deut. 
xxxii,  50).    See  Mosera. 

The  mountain  now  identified  with  Mount  Hor  is  the 
most  conspicuous  in  the  whole  rangę  of  Mount  Seir,  and 
at  this  day  bears  the  name  of  Mount  Aaron  {Jebel-Ua* 
run),  It  is  in  N.  lat.  fHOP  18',  E.  long.  35°  33',  about 
midway  between  the  Dead  Sea  and  ihe  iElanitic  Gulf. 
It  may  be  open  to  ąuestion  if  this  is  really  Ihe  Mount 
Hor  on  which  Aaron  died,  seeing  that  the  whole  rangę 
of  Seir  was  andently  called  by  that  name ;  yet,  from  ita 
height,  and  the  remarkaUe  manner  in  which  it  rlaea 
among  the  surronnding  rocks,  it  seems  not  unlikely  to 
haye  been  the  choeen  scenę  of  the  high-priest^s  death 
(Kiimeir,  p.  127).  Accordingly,  Stanley  obseryes  that 
Mount  Hor  **  is  one  ofthe  yer>'  few  spots  oomiected  with 
the  wanderings  ofthe  Israelites  which  admit  of  no  rea^- 
sonable  doubt"  (8,  and  P,  p.  86).  It  is  almost  unnece»» 
sary  to  state  that  it  is  situated  on  the  eastem  side  ofthe 
great  yalley  of  the  Arabah,  the  highest  and  most  eon* 
spicuoas  of  the  whole  rangę  of  the  sandstone  mountains 
of  Edom,  haying  dose  beneath  it,  on  its  eastem  side — 
though,  strange  to  say,  the  two  are  not  yisible  to  each 
other>-the  mysterious  city  of  Petra.  The  tradition  haa 
exi8ted  from  the  earliest  datę.  Josephus  does  not  men* 
tion  the  name  of  Hor  {Ant,  iy,  4,  7),  but  he  describes 
the  death  of  Aaron  aa  taking  place  **on  a  yeryhigh 
mountain  which  surrounded  the  metropolts  of  the  Ar^ 
abs,"  which  latt«r  *^  was  formerly  called  A  rke  ("Apcif), 
but  now  Petra."  In  the  Onomaaticon  of  Eusebius  and 
Jerome  it  is  Or  mona — ^**a  mountain  in  which  Aaron 
died,  close  to  the  city  of  Petra."  When  it  was  yisited 
by  the  Crusaders  (see  the  quotations  in  Kobinson,  Re* 
aearcheay  ii,  521)  the  sanctuary  was  already  on  ita  top, 
and  there  is  litde  doubt  that  it  was  then  what  it  is  now 
—the  Jebel  Nfbi^łlarun^  **  the  mountain  of  the  prophet 
Aaron." 

Of  the  geological  formation  of  Mount  Hor  we  haye  no 
yery  trustworthy  aooounts.  The  generał  stracture  of 
the  rangę  of  Edom,  of  which  it  forma  the  most  promi- 
nent feature,  is  new  red  sandstone,  displaying  itself  to  an 
enormous  thickness.  Above  that  is  the  Jura  limcstone, 
and  higher  still  the  cretaceous  beds,  which  latter  in 
Mount  Seir  are  reported  to  be  8500  feet  thick  (Wilson, 
Bibie  Landa,  i,  194).  Through  these  depoftited  straU 
longitudinal  dikes  of  red  granite  and  porphyr^'  haye 
forced  thdr  way,  mnning  nearly  north  and  south,  and 
6o  completdy  silicifying  the  ncighboring  sandstone  aa 
often  to  giye  it  the  look  of  a  primitire  rock.  To  these 
cotebinations  are  due  the  extraordiiuu7  oolors  for  which 
Petra  is  so  famous.  One  of  the  best  dcscriptions  of  the 
mountain  itself  is  that  giren  by  Irby  and  Mangles  (  Tra^- 
eia,  p.  433  8q.).  It  is  said  to  be  entirely  sandstone,  in  yer}' 
horizontal  strata  (Wilson,  i,  290).  Its  height,  according 
to  the  latest  measurement^,  is  4800  feet  ( Eug.)  aboye  the 
Mediterranean,  that  is  to  say,  about  1700  feet  aboye  the 
town  of  Petra,  4000  aboye  the  leyd  of  the  Arabah,  and 


HOR 


336 


HOR 


View  of  MouuŁ  Hor,  with  "Aarou'8  Tomb.* 


morę  than  6000  above  the  Dead  Sea  (Roth,  in  PetennaiV8 
MUtheil,  1858,  i,  3).  The  mountain  ia  marked  far  and 
near  by  its  double  top,  which  rues  like  a  huge  castellated 
building  from  a  lower  baae,  and  is  surmounted  by  the 
drcular  dome  of  the  tomb  of  Aaron,  a  diBtinct  white  spot 
on  the  dark  red  suiface  of  the  mountain  (Laborde,  p.  143). 
This  lower  base  is  the  *'  plain  of  Aaron,'*  beyond  which 
Burckhardt  was,  ailer  all  his  toil8,prevented  from  ascend- 
ing  {Syria i  p.  431).  "  Out  of  this  plain,  culminating  in 
its  two  sumroits  Hprings  the  red  eandstone  mass,  from 
its  base  upwards  rocky  and  naked,  not  a  bush  or  a  tree  to 
velieve  the  rugged  and  broken  comers  of  the  sandstone 
blocks  which  compose  it.  On  ascending  this  mass  a  lit- 
tle  plain  is  found  to  lie  between  the  two  peaks,  marked 
by  a  white  cypress,  and  not  unlike  the  celebrated  plain 
of  the  cypress  under  the  summit  of  Jebel  Mdsa,  tradition- 
ally  beiieved  to  be  the  scenę  of  Elijah^s  Wsion.  The 
southenimost  of  the  two,  on  approaching,  takes  a  conical 
form.  The  northemmost  is  truncated,  and  crowncd  by 
the  chapel  of  Aaron*8  tomłx"  The  chapel  or  moeąuc  is  a 
smali  8quarc  building,  roeasuring  inside  about  28  feet  by 
83  (WilBon,  i,  295),  with  its  door  in  the  SwW.  angle.  It 
is  built  of  rude  Stones,  in  part  broken  columns;  all  of 
sandstone,  but  fragments  of  granite  and  marble  lie  about. 
Steps  lead  to  the  liat  roof  of  the  chapel,  from  which  riaes 
a  white  dome  as  usual  over  a  saint's  tomb.  The  interior 
of  the  chapel  consists  of  two  chambers,  one  below'  the 
other.  The  upper  one  has  four  large  pillars  and  a  stonc 
chest.,  or  tombstone,  like  one  of  the  ordinar>'  slabs  in 
church-yards,  but  larger  and  higher,  and  rather  bigger  at 
the  top  than  the  bottom.  At  its  head  is  a  high  round 
stone,  on  which  sacrifices  are  madę,  and  which  retained, 
when  Stephens  saw  it^the  marks  of  the  amOkeand  blood 
of  recent  offerings.  ^*  On  the  slab  are  Arabie  inscriptions, 
and  it  is  covered  with  shawls  chiefly  red.  One  of  the 
pillars  b  hung  with  votive  offerings  of  beads,  etc,  and 
two  ostrich  eggs  are  suspended  over  the  chest.  Steps 
in  the  north-west  angle  lead  down  to  the  lower  chamber, 
which  is  partly  in  the  rock,  but  plastered.  It  is  per- 
fectly  dark.  At  the  cnd,  apparently  under  the  stone 
chest  above,  is  a  recess  guarded  by  a  grating.  Within 
this  is  a  rude  protuberance,  whether  of  stone  or  plaster 
was  not  ascertainable,  resting  on  wood,  and  corered  by 
a  ragged  pall.  This  lower  recess  is  no  doubt  the  tomb, 
and  possibly  ancient,  What  is  above  is  only  the  arti- 
ficial  monument,  and  certainly  modem."  In  one  of  the 
walls  of  this  chamber  is  a  '*  round,  polished  black  stone," 
one  of  those  mysterious  stones  of  which  the  prototype  is 


the  Kaaba  at  Mecca,  and  which,  like  that,  would  appear 
to  be  the  object  of  great  devotion  (Martineau,  p.  419  6q.). 
The  chief  interest  of  Mount  Hor  will  always  con&ist 
in  the  prospect  from  its  summit — the  last  view  of  Aaron 
— "  that  view  which  was  to  him  what  Pisgah  was  to  his 
brother'*  (Ortlob,  De  Morfe  A  aronis,  IJpa.  1704).  It  is 
described  at  length  by  Irby  (p.  134),  Wilson  (i,  292-9), 
Martineau  (p.  420),  and  is  well  summed  up  by  Stanley 
in  the  foUowing  words:  "We  saw  all  the  main  point s 
on  which  his  eye  must  have  rested.  He  looked  ovcr 
the  valley  of  the  Arabah  countersected  by  its  hundrrd 
watercourseS)  and  beyond,  over  the  white  mountains  of 
the  wildemess  they  had  so  long  traver8ed;  and  at  the 
northem  edge  of  it  there  must  have  been  risible  the 
heights  through  włiich  the  Israelites  had  vainly  at- 
tempted  to  force  their  way  into  the  Promised  Land. 
This  was  the  western  view.  Oose  around  him  on  the 
east  were  the  rugged  mountains  of  Edom,  and  far  ałong 
the  horizon  the  widc  downs  of  Mount  Seir,  through 
which  the  passage  had  been  dcnied  by  the  wild  tribea 
of  Esau  who  hunted  ovcr  their  long  slopcs."  On  the 
north  lay  the  mysterious  Dead  Sea,  gkammg  from  the 
depths  of  its  profound  basin  (Stephens,  Incidents).  "A 
dreary  moment  and  a  dreary  scenę — such  it  must  have 
seemed  to  the  aged  priest.  .  .  .  The  peculiarity  of  the 
>ńew  ŁB  the  combination  of  wide  CKtension  with  the 
scarcity  of  marked  featurea  Pctra  is  shut  out  by  inter- 
vening  rocks.  But  the  8urvey  of  the  Desert  on  one 
side,  and  the  mountains  of  Edom  on  the  other,  is  com- 
plete ;  and  of  these  last  the  great  feature  is  the  mass  of 
red,  bald-headed  sandstone  rocks,  intersected,  not  by  val- 
leys,  but  by  deep  seams"  {S.  and  Pal.  p.  87).  Thougli 
Petra  itself  is  entirely  shut  out,  one  outlying  building— 
if  it  may  be  called  a  building— is  risiblef  that  which 
goes  by  the  name  of  the  />«>,  or  Conrent.  Professor 
Stanley  has  thrown  out  a  suggestion  on  the  connection 
between  the  two  which  is  well  worth  further  investiga<- 
tion.  (See  Robinson,  JieeeareheSy  ii,  548, 579, 651.)  The 
impression  received  on  the  spot  is  that  Aaron^s  death 
took  place  in  the  smali  bańn  between  the  two  peaks, 
and  that  the  people  were  stationed  either  on  the  plain 
at  the  base  of  the  peaks,  or  at  that  part  of  the  wady 
Abu-Kusheybeh  from  which  the  top  is  coromanded.  Jo- 
sephus  says  that  the  ground  was  sloping  downwards 
(Karamę  i}v  ró  x*^piov ;  Ant.  iv,  4,  7).  But  this  may 
be  the  merę  generał  expreflBion  of  a  man  who  had  nevó 
been  on  the  spot.— Smith.  (See  Bertou,  Le  numt  Oorf 
Par.  1860.) 


HORiE  CANONICI 


337 


HORCH 


2.  A  mountain  eaŁiidy  dutincŁ  firom  the  precediiig, 
Bamed  in  Namb.  zxxiv,  7,  8,  only  as  one  of  the  marlu 
of  the  northem  boundaiy  of  the  land  which  the  children 
of  Isnel  were  about  to  conquer.  By  many  it  has  been 
regazded  as  a  designation  of  Mount  Casius,  but  this  is 
lather  the  northem  limit  of  Syria.  The  Targum  Pseu- 
dojon.  rendezs  Mount  Hor  by  Umanotf  probably  intend- 
ing  Amana.  The  latŁer  is  also  the  reading  of  the  Tal- 
mud {Gittin,  8,  quoŁed  by  FUrst,  s.  t.))  u^  which  it  is 
oonnected  with  the  Amana  named  in  Cant.  iv,  8.  But 
the  situation  of  this  Amana  is  nowhere  indicated  by 
them.  It  cannot  have  any  connection  with  the  Amana 
or  Abana  rirer  which  fiowed  through  Damascus,  as  that 
is  ąoite  away  from  the  position  reąuired  in  the  passage. 
Schwarz  {Pakst,  p.  26),  after  Parchi  (in  Benj.  of  Tude- 
la,  pu  413  aq.),  identifies  it  with  Jebel  Nuria,  south  of 
Tnpoli,  but  on  frivobas  grounds;  nor  was  the  monnt  in 
qaestion  on  the  Mediterranean,  and  Palestine  did  not 
eztend  so  far  north.  The  original  is  lilrt  ".h,  mount 
tf  ike  mmmłainf  L  e.  by  a  common  Hebrew  idiom,  the 
Mountain,  by  way  of  eminenoe,  Ł  q.  the  lofty  mountain ; 
Sept  TÓ  upoc,  Yulg.  motu  altimmiu ;  and  therefore 
probably  only  denotes  the  prominent  mountain  of  that 
Tidnity,  i.  e.  Lebanon,  or  at  most  Mount  Hennon,  which 
b  an  o&hoot  of  the  Lebanon  rangę.  It  can  hardly  be 
Rgirded  here  as  a  proper  name.  The  northem  boun- 
daiy started  from  the  sea;  the  ftrst  point  in  it  was 
Mount  Hor,  and  the  second  the  entranoe  of  Hamath. 
Snce  Sdon  was  subseąucntly  allotted  to  the  most  north- 
em tribe— Asher,  and  was,  as  far  as  we  know,  the  most 
northem  town  so  allotted,  it  would  seem  probaUe  that 
the  northem  boundary  would  commence  at  about  that 
point;  that  is,  opposite  to  where  the  great  rangę  of  Leb- 
anon breaks  down  to  the  sea.  The  next  landmark,  the 
entrance  to  Hamath,  seems  to  have  been  determined  by 
Mr.  Porter  as  the  pass  at  Kalat  el-Husn,  close  to  Hums, 
the  andent  Hamath— at  the  other  end  of  the  rangę  of 
Ubanoa.  Surely  "Mount  Hor,"  then,  can  be  nothing 
ebe  than  the  great  chain  of  Lebanon  itself.  Looking 
at  the  massive  character  and  enormous  height  of  the 
raoge,  it  is  very  dlfficult  to  suppose  that  any  individual 
peak  or  mountain  is  intended  and  not  the  whole  mass, 
which  takcs  neariy  a  straight  couise  between  the  two 
points  just  named,  and  includes  below  it  the  great  plain 
of  the  Bukata,  and  the  whole  of  Palestine  properly  so 
called^-Smith. 

Hone  Canoido8B,  etc  See  Breviary;  Hours, 
CAso2ncAL;  etc 

Ho'rain  (HeU  Horom',  fi^h,  lofty;  Sept  'Opa/i 
V.  L  'EXa/i,  AiXa/ł),  the  king  of  Gezer,  who,  ooming  to 
the  relief  ofLachish,  was  orerthrown  by  Joshua  (Josh. 
Xt33).    aa  1618. 

Horapollo,  or  Horus  Apollo,  an  Egyptian 
priest,  and  author  of  a  treatise  on  £gyptian  Hieroglyph- 
ia  Sevenl  writers  of  this  name  are  mentioned  by  Sui- 
dai,  Stephanus  of  Bj-zantium  mider  Phenebethis,  Pho- 
tiu9  (p.  53j5,  ed.  Bekker),  and  EusUthius  (Homer,  Od. 
t).  but  it  is  doubtful  which  of  them  was  actually  the 
snthor  of  the  treatite  on  Egyptian  Hicroglyphics.  The 
probability  is  that  the  work  was  originally  writtcn  in 
the  Egyptian  Unguage,  and  transUted  into  Greek  by 
Philip.  Horus  was  the  name  of  one  of  the  Egyptian 
tóties,  who  was  considered  by  the  Greeks  to  be  the 
same  as  ApoUo  (Herod,  ii,  144-166).  We  leam  from 
Luaan  (Pro  Imag.  §  27)  that  the  Egyptians  were  fre- 
nuently  called  by  the  names  of  their  gods.  But,  what- 
ever  may  be  thooght  respecting  the  author,  it  is  evident 
that  the  work  was  written  after  the  Christian  era,  sińce 
»t  contains  alluaons  to  the  philosophical  tenets  of  the 
Gnoetica,  The  value  of  this  work  in  interpreting  cxi8t- 
fflf;  hierągljrphics  has  been  rariously  estimated.  Cham- 
pollłon,  Leemans,  and  other  reoent  scholars  esteem  it 
«ore  highly  than  former  critics  did.  It  was  printed  for 
«K  first  time  by  Aldus  (\exńxj^  1605),  with  the  Fables 
rf^Esop.    The  beat  editions  are  by  Mercer  (1651),  Hoe- 


schelius  (1596),  De  Panw  (1727),  and  Leemans  (Ainst 
1834).  The  last  discussed  in  his  Introduction  the  datę 
and  authorship  of  the  work.  See  EngUah  Cychpadia  ; 
Hoefer,  Nouv,  Biog,  GerUr,  xxv,  166 ;  Bnnsen,  jEggptem 
Stelle  md.W€Uffe$cA.i,402;  ChampomoD^Pricis du  Sy$^ 
time  IIUroffbfphique  des  Ancieiu  EgypHenty  p.  847  są. 

Comp.  HlKUOOLYPHICS. 

Horayoth.    See  Talmud. 

Horb,  JoHANN  Hkinrich,  a  distinguished  German 
pietist,  brother-in-law  and  co-worker  of  Spener,  was  bom 
at  Colmar,  Alsace,  June  11, 1646.  He  studied  at  the 
uniyersities  of  Strasburg,  Jena,  Wittenberg,  and  Co- 
logne,  aflterwards  trarelled  through  the  Netherlands, 
England,  and  France,  and  ilnally  retumed  to  Strasburg 
in  1670.  In  1671  he  receired  an  appointment  as  minis- 
ter at  Birkenfeld,  and  in  1678  at  Trarbacb.  Here  the 
boldness  with  which  he  presented  his  so-called  pietistic 
yiews  disturbed  the  eąuanimity  of  the  orthodox  author- 
ities,  and  he  was  obliged  to  resign.  He  next  became 
pastor  at  Windsheim,  Franconia,  and  in  1685  accepted  a 
cali  as  pastor  of  St.  Nicholas  Church,  Hamburg,  where 
he  found  himself  associated  with  two  other  pietists,  John 
Winkler  and  Abraham  Hinkelmann.  Their  joint  teach- 
ings  created  great  excitement,  which  culminated  when, 
in  1698,  Horb  published,  under  the  title  of  D.  KlughtU  d, 
Gerechtetij  a  translation  of  Pairefs  excelient  pamphlet, 
Le$  rraiś  principet  de  nducation  CkrStietme  du  enfanttj 
The  agitation  became  so  yiolent  that  in  1694  he  was  for- 
mally  suspended,  after  which  he  retired  to  Steinbeck, 
where  he  diod  in  Jan.  1696i  He  published  Higt.  Of>- 
geniana,  etc  (Frankf.  1670,  4to)  i—Biet,  MamduBonan 
(Argent,  1670, 4to)  :^Diequi$,  de  ultima  origine  hareteos 
Simonis  Afagi  (Leipz.  1669, 4to ;  also  in  Yogfs  BibL  kisL 
haredoL  i,  808  są.)  i—IIiet,  haree.  UnUarior,  (Frankfort, 
1671, 4to);  and  a  collection  of  sermons,  /).  Leiden  Jetu- 
ChrisH  (Hamburg,  1700).— Herrog,  Real-EncyHopSd&e, 
vi,  261 ;  Fuhrmann,  ITandiodrłeHf.  d.  Kirchengesck.  ii,847 
8q. ;  MoUeri,  Cimbr.  lif^ata,  ii,  865  są. ;  Walch,  Eeiig, 
Streitigkeii.  in  d.  htłh.  Kirche,  i,  6 1 5  sq. ;  Henke,  Kirchof 
geachichte,  iv,  626  sq.     (J.  H.  W.) 

Horbery,  Matthew,  D.D.,  an  English  divine,  was 
bom  at  Haxay,  Lincolnshire,  in  1707 ;  educated  at  Lin- 
cobi  College,  and  elected  feUow  of  Magdalen  College.  He 
became  successiyely  vicar  of  EcdeshaU,  canon  of  Lich* 
field,  vicar  of  Hanbury,  and  rector  of  Stanlake.  He  died 
in  1778.  He  was  greatly  respected  as  a  sound,  able,  and 
leamed  theologian,  and  an  amiable  and  excellent  man. 
His  sermons  were  praised  by  Dr.  Johnson ;  they  are 
written  in  nenrous,  animated  language,  yet  with  great 
simplicity.  Yan  Mildert  classes  them  ^  among  the  beat 
oompositions  of  English  divines."  His  Worla,  includ- 
ing  the  Sermont,  and  an  Esaag  on  the  Eternity  o/ Futurę 
Puni$kmentt,  have  been  coUected  and  published  (Oxford, 
1828. 2  vols.8vo).— Darling,  Cydopadia  BibUographiea, 
i,  1589;  Hook,  Eodeg.  Biog,  vi,  160;  Wateriand,  Worke, 
1,116,242,254;  vi,416sq. 

Horoh,  Heinrich,  S.T.D.,  a  German  Pietist  and 
Mystic,  was  bom  at  Eschwege,  Hessen,  in  1662.  He 
studied  theology  and  medidne  at  Marburg,  where  he 
came  under  the  influence  of  the  great  follower  of  Spener 
(q.  V.),  Theodor  Untereyk,  and  embraced  the  doctrines 
of  the  Mystica  He  also  studied  the  Cartesian  philoso- 
phy  with  much  interest.  In  1688  he  was  appointed 
minister  at  Heidelberg,  in  1685  court  preacher  at  Kreuz- 
nach,  but  in  1687  he  retumed  again  to  Heidelberg.  At 
the  university  of  that  place  he  obtained  the  degree  of 
doctor  of  theology.  In  1689  he  went  to  Frankfort  ss 
minister  of  a  Reformed  Church,  and  in  1790  was  madę 
professor  of  theology  at  Hembom.  By  his  firm  adhe- 
rence,  however,  to  the  Mystic  Arnold  (q.  v.),  and  his  pe- 
culiar  view8  of  theology,  holding,  e.  g.  that  divine  reve- 
lations  still  continue,  that  the  symbolical  books  are  use- 
less,  that  the  eucharist  and  baptism  are  unnecessary,  etc, 
he  flnally  lost  his  position  (1698).  He  afterwards  travel- 
led  about-,  preaching  in  city  haUs  and  in  cemeteries.  At 
times  be  even  entered  churches,  and  pceached  in  spite 


HOREB 


338 


HORAfAH 


ef  the  remonstranoes  of  the  ministen.  He  was  airested 
for  this  conduct  in  1699,  aod  became  partially  insane. 
He  ieoovered,  howeyer,  towards  the  clo8e  of  the  year 
1700,  and,  by  the  interpontion  of  his  friends,  he  was 
granted  a  pension  in  1708,  which  was  continued  until 
his  death,  August  6, 1729.  Horch  was  also  a  Millenari- 
an ;  he  Ukewise  demanded  a  second  and  morę  coroplete 
reformation  of  the  Church,  adyocated  celibacy,  though 
he  did  not  think  the  married  life  sinful,  and  ia  said 
to  have  been  a  member  of  the  Philadelphia  Society  (q. 
y.)f  founded  in  1696  by  Jane  Leade.  He  wrote  a  num- 
ber  of  works,  of  which  a  complete  list  is  giyen  by  Jocher 
(GeL  Lear.,  Adelung'8  Supplem.  ii,  2138  są.),  and  of  which 
the  Myituche  u,  Prophetische  Bibel  (Marb.  1712, 4to)  is 
especially  celebrated  as  the  forerunner  of  the  Berleburg 
Bibie  (q.  v.).  See  Haas  (G.  Fr.  L.),  Lebensbeschreib,  </. 
Dr,  Horch  (Casscl,  1769, 8vo) ;  Gobel  (M.),  GeackichU  cL 
christlicke  Ijcbena  in  d.  rkein,  wesłph.  er.  Kirche  (Coblenz, 
1852), ii, 741-51  i  Herzog, ^2ea^A«y«t)paif»p, vi, 262  są.; 
Fuhrmann,  Uandwdrierbuch  d,  Kirchengetch,  ii,  849  są. ; 
Tkeol.  Umv.  Lec.  ii,  369.     (J.  H.  W.) 

Ho'reb  (Heb.  Chore/,  '^y(n  or  3^h,  deaert ;  Sept. 
XutpriP  or  X^pi7j3 ;  ooousb  £xod.  iii,  1 ;  xyii,  6 ;  xxxiii, 
6;  Deut.  i,  2,  6,  19;  iv,  10,  15;  y,  2;  ix,  8;  xviii,  16; 
xxix,  1 ;  1  Kings  yiii,  9;  xix,  8;  2  Chroń.  v,  10;  Psa. 
cyi,  19 ;  MaL  iv,  4 ;  Ecclus.  xlviii,  7),  according  to  some, 
a  lower  part  or  pieak  of  Mount  Sinai,  so  calied  at  the 
present  day,  from  which  one  ascends  towards  the  south 
the  Bummit  of  Sinai  (Jebel  Musa),  properly  so  calied  (so 
Gesenius  and  others  afler  Buickhardt,  Trorelt  m  Syria, 
p.  566  są.) ;  but,  according  to  others,  a  genend  name  for 
the  whole  mountain,  of  which  Sinai  was  a  particolar 
summit  (so  Hengstenberg,  Aułh.  des  Pentat,  ii,  896; 
Robinson,  BibL  Reaearches,  i,  177,  551).     See  Sinai. 

Horebites,  a  sect  of  the  Hussites,  who^  upon  the 
death  of  Ziska,  when  they  had  retired  from  Bohemia, 
choee  Bedricus  of  Bohemia  as  their  leader.  They  calied 
themselyes  Horebites  because  they  had  given  the  name 
inf  Horeb  to  a  mountain  to  which  they  had  retired.— 
Schrockh,  Kirchengetch,  xxxiv,  688.     See  HussiTsa. 

.  Ho^rem  (HcU  Chorem',  D^fJ,  consecrated  [but^br- 
fresf  according  to  FUrst] ;  Sept.  'Opdfi  [but  most  text8 
blend  with  preueding  name  into  MtyaXaapifA  or  May- 
^aX(i|ftipa>],  Vulg.  Hortm),  one  of  the  "fenced  cities" 
of  Naphtali,  menttoned  between  Migdal-el  and  Beth- 
Anath  (Josh.  xix,  88).  Schwarz  {PaUgt,  p.  184)  con- 
founds  it  wiŁh  the  place  preceding,  and  seeks  to  identify 
both  in  the  modem  yillage  Medj  el-Kerutn,  cight  milee 
east  of  Akka;  but  this  does  not  lie  within  the  ancient 
limits  of  Naphtali  (Keil,  ad  loc).  Yan  de  Yelde  (i,  178, 
9;  Memoir,  p.  822)  suggests  Ilurah  as  the  site  of  Ho- 
rem.  It  is  an  ancient  site,  in  the  centrę  of  the  country, 
half  way  between  the  Ras  en-Nakhura  and  the  lakę 
Merom,  on  a  tell  at  the  southem  end  of  the  wady  el-Ain, 
one  of  the  natural  features  of  the  countr}'.  It  is  also  in 
favor  of  this  Identification  that  Hurah  is  near  Yardn, 
probably  the  representatiye  of  the  ancient  Iron,  named 
with  Horem.  (Compare  Seetzen,  Reittn  durch  Syrien, 
Berlin,  1854-9,  ii,  180.) 

Hor-hagld'gad  (Hebrew  Ckor  haff-Gidgad',  *in 
1J^  Jiłl,  hok  o/łhe  Gidffod;  Sept  ópoc  Ta^ya^jYulg.  mons 
Gadgad,  both  apparently  reading  or  misundeistanding 
*iłl  or  "nn  for  *lh),  the  thirty-third  station  of  the  Israel- 
ites  between  Bene-Jaakan  and  Jotbathah  (Numb.  xxxiii, 
82,  83) ;  eyidently  the  same  with  their  forty-first  sU- 
tion  GuDGODAH,  between  the  same  places  in  the  oppo> 
site  direction,  and  not  far  from  Mount  Hor  (Deut  x,  6, 
7).  Winer  (Healtoort.  s.  v.  Horgidgad)  aasents  to  the 
possibility  of  the  identity  of  this  name  with  that  of 
wady  Ghudhaffhid,  in  the  eastem  part  of  the  desert  et^ 
Tih  (Robinson^s  Reaearches,  iii,  App.  210,  b),  although 
the  names  are  spelt  and  signify  diiferently  (this  yalley 
would  be  in  Hebrew  cbaracteis  2E$M]CSp,  but  objects  to 
the  Identification  thus  proposed  by  Ewald  (Itral  Geseh, 


ii,  207)  on  the  ground  that  *1in  can  hardly  mean  a  vidt 
yalley.  This  difficulty,  howeyer,  does  not  weigfa  mach, 
sinco  the  wady  may  only  be  the  representatiye  of  the 
name  anciently  attached  to  some  spot  in  the  yidnity, 
morę  properly  calied  a  chatm ;  and  eyen  this  spot  is  snf- 
fidently  a  ffuUy  to  form  a  receptade  for  the  loose  aand 
washed  down  by  the  fresh^ts,  which  may  naturmlly  haye 
partly  filled  it  up  in  the  course  of  ages.  With  tlys 
Identification  Rabbi  Schwarz  likewise  agrecs  {PaUtt.  p. 
213).  See  Exodb.  The  name  Gidgad  or  Gudpod,  ac- 
cording to  Gesenius,  is  from  an  Ethiopic  reduplicaCed 
root,  signifying  to  reverberate,  as  thunder;  but,  accord- 
ing to  FUmt,  signifies  a  defl,  from  ^*1A  or  1*^f,  to  iaoM. 
See  GuDGODAH. 

Ho'ii  (Heb.  Chon\  "^y^  or  ^^in,  prób.  a  "troglo- 
dytę," or  dweller  in  a  caye,  ih,  otherwise  an  avger; 
Sept.  Xoppoi,  Oupi,  and  Xoppć ;  Yulg.  Ilori  and  Hurt), 
the  name  of  two  men. 

1.  A  sou  of  Lotan  and  grandaon  of  Seir,  of  the  abo- 
riginal  inhalńtants  of  Idumisa  (Gen.  xxxyi,  2 ;  1  Chroń, 
i,  39).     aC.  cir.  1964. 

2.  The  father  of  Shaphat,  which  latter  was  the  com- 
missioner  of  the  tribe  of  Siroeon  sent  by  Mooes  to  ex- 
plore  the  land  of  Canaan  (Xtunb.  xiii,  5).  RC.  antę 
1667. 

3.  (Gen.  xxxvi,  80.)    SeeHoRiTE. 

Ho^^rim  (Deut.  ii,  12,  22).    See  Hortfe. 

Ho^rite  (Heb.  Ckori',  '»'i'in  or  ■'^h,  prop.  the  same 
word  as  Hori;  but,  according  to  FUrst,  nohU;  often 
with  the  art  "^T^H),  a  designation  (both  singly  and 
collectiyely)  of  the  people  who  anciently  inhabited 
Mount  Seir,  before  their  supersedure  by  the  Edomites; 
rendered  "Horites"  in  Gen.  xiv,  6  (Sept  Xoppaioi, 
Yulg.  Corrhat),\  xxxvi,  21  (Xoppaioc,  Iłorratts),  29 
(Xof^i,  Ilorrał) ;  "  Horite,"  Gen.  xxxvi,  20  {XoppaŁOC, 
IłorrtBUs),  "  Horims,"  DeuL  ii,  12  (Koppaloc,  Ilorrha- 
us),  22  (Xo^a(oc,  UorrhtEi),  and  "  Hori,"  G<?n.  xxxvi, 
30  {Koftpi,  Ifomn),  See  lumiMA.  There  are  indica- 
tions  of  Canaanitish  affinity  between  the  Horitea  and 
the  Hittites  or  Hivites  (Michaelis,  Spicileg,  i,  169,  and 
De  Troglodytig  Seir,  in  his  Syntagtna  Commenł.  1759,  p. 
194 ;  Faber,  A  rchceoL  p.  41 ;  Hameln^eld,  iii,  29 ;  bot  see 
contra  Bertheaii,  Geteh,  der  Itr,  p.  150).  See  HrrrrrE. 
'*  Their  excavated  dwellings  are  still  found  by  himdreds 
in  the  sandstone  difb  and  monntains  of  Edom,  and  es- 
pecially in  Petra.  See  Edom  and  Edomite.  It  may, 
perhaps,  be  to  the  Horites  Job  refers  in  xxx,  6, 7.  They 
are  only  three  times  mentioned  in  Scripture:  first,  when 
they  were  smitten  by  the  kings  of  the  East  (Gen.  xiv, 
6) ;  then  when  their  genealogy  is  given  in  Gen.  xxxvi, 
20-80,  and  1  Chroń,  i,  88-42;  and,  lastly,  when  they 
were  exterminated  by  the  Edomites  (Deut.  ii,  12, 22). 
It  appears  probable  that  they  were  not  Canaanitea,  bat 
an  earlier  race,  who  inhabited  Mount  Seir  before  the  poa- 
terity  of  Canaan  took  poesession  of  Palestine  (Ewald, 
Getchichte,  i,  804,  5)"  (Smith).  Knobel  ( YdlkeriafeŁ  d 
Genesis,  p.  195, 206)  holds  that  they  formed  part  of  the 
great  race  of  the  Ludim,  to  which  abo  the  Rephaim,  the 
Emim,  and  the  Amorites  belonged  (comp.  Hitzig,  Gesck, 
d,  V,  Israel,  Lpz.  1869,  i,  29-36).  In  this  case  the  Amo- 
rites were  of  Shemitic  descent.  According  to  the  ac- 
count  in  Gen.  xxxvi,  20  są.,  they  were  diyided  into  aeyen 
tribes.     See  Canaan. 

Hor'mah  (Heb.  Chormah',  M^^n,  decoted  dty, 
otherwise  pectk  of  a  bill ;  Sept.  'Bp/ui  v.  r.  occasionally 
'Ep/io^  and  apa^ipa),  a  royal  dty  of  the  Omaanites  in 
the  south  of  Palestine  (Josh.  xii,  14;  1  Sam.  xxx,  30), 
near  which  the  Israelites  experienced  a  discomfiture 
from  the  Amalekites  reddent  there,  as  they  penrenely 
attempted  to  enter  Canaan  by  that  route  after  the  divine 
sentence  of  wandering  (Numb.  xiv,  45;  xxi,  1-3;  DeuL 
i,  44).  Joshua  afterwards  besieged  its  king  (Josh.  xv, 
30),  and  on  its  capture  asdgned  the  dty  to  the  tribe  of 
Judah,  but  finally  it  was  iududed  in  the  tenitoiy  giyen 


HORMANN 


330 


HORN 


to  Simeon  (Joeh.  xix,  4;  Jadg.  i,  17;  1  Chroń,  iy,  80> 
It  18  ehewhere  mentioned  only  in  1  Chroń,  iv,  80.  It 
was  ociginally  called  Zkphath  (Jadg.  i,  17),  nnder 
which  name  it  appeaiB  to  haye  been  again  rebiiilt  and 
occupied  by  the  CanaaniteB  (see  Bertheau,  ad  loc. ;  Heng- 
Btenbog,  Pmtat  ii,  220) ;  whereas  the  name  Hormah 
was  probaUy  giyen  to  the  site  by  the  Israelites  in  token 
of  its  demolition  (see  Numb.  xxi,  8).  Hence  traces  of 
the  older  name  alone  remaio.    See  Zkphath. 

Hdrmaiiii,  Simon,  with  the  snmame  Bavarusy  was 
prior  in  the  monastery  of  Altenmilnster  St  Salyator,  in 
Bayaria,  and  later  generał  of  the  order.  He  died  in 
1701.  His  works  are  Breciariam  una  cum  Afiuali  Mo- 
moHum,  and  an  edition  of  Recelationeg  cakfte*  S,  Bri- 
SfiUtB,  ordmU  S.  Saloatorii  Ftmdałricu  (Munich,  1680, 
foL). — ^Flerer,  Umv.'Lex»  yiii,  587. 

HonniadaB,  pope,  bom  at  Frosinone,  near  Romę, 
was  elected  bishop  of  Romę  in  514,  as  successor  of  Sym- 
machoa.  In  515,  by  invitaŁion  of  the  Eastem  emperor 
Anastasius,  he  sent  an  erobassy  to  a  council  held  at  Her- 
adea  for  the  purpose  of  settling  the  points  of  disonion 
between  the  Oriental  and  Occidental  churches ;  but  as 
this  eonncil,  n  well  as  a  second  one  held  in  517,  did  not 
bring  about  any  favorable  results,  Aiiastasius,  wearied 
by  Hormisdas^s  refusal  to  make  any  concessions,  broke 
off  all  relations  with  Romę.  After  his  death  in  518,  his 
sncoesBor  Justinos  madę  another  attempt  at  reconcilia- 
tion,  and  the  union  of  that  Church  with  Róme  was  flnal- 
]y  lestored  in  519,  after  a  schism  of  thirty-five  years. 
Hormisdas^s  conduct  was  much  morę  measured  in  the 
oontioyersy  oonceming  Faustus  of  Rhegium,  of  whom 
he  said  that,  though  his  writings  roay  not  deserve  a 
plaoe  with  thoae  of  the  fathers,  yet  that  such  parts  of 
them  were  to  be  received  as  did  not  conflict  with  the 
teachings  of  the  Church.  He  died  Aug.  6, 523.  Eighty 
letters  of  Hormisdas  are  presenred  in  Labbe.— Herzog, 
Real-EMyklop.  voL  vi;  Labbe,  ConcUia,  iv,  1415;  Mil- 
man.  Lał.  Chri$ł.  i,  342  8q. ;  Riddle,Papa<:y,  i,  199 ;  Row- 
er, //uf.  o/ the  Popes,  ii,  279  są. ;  Schaff,  CA.  I/ist,  ii,  325 ; 
Neander,  Ck,  Iliaionfy  ii,  533, 649  8q. ;  Hut,  ofDogmoi,  p. 
384;  Hagenbach,  HiaL  of  Dodr,  ii,  280;  Domer,  Lehrt 
V.  d.  Pers,  CArisłiy  ii,  156 ;  Wetzer  u.Welte,  Kir(Jun-Lex. 
y,  329 ;  DoUinger,  />eAr6.  d,  Kirchengesck,  i,  151.  See 
£irrYCHiA:«s.    (J.  H.  W.) 

Horn  (yy^t  ht'Ttn^  identical  in  root  and  signif.  with 
the  ŁAtin  cormi  and  EngL  homj  Gr.  Ktpac)  is  used  in 
Scriptnre  with  a  gieat  latitude  of  meaning. 

Ł  LUendbf  (Josh.  yi,  4, 5 ;  oompare  £xod.  xix,  18 ;  1 
Sam.  xyi,  1, 13 ;  1  Kings  i,  39 ;  Job  xlii,  14).— Two  pur- 
posea  are  mentioned  in  the  Scriptures  to  which  the  hom 
■eeilis  to  haye  been  applied.  As  homs  are  hoUow  and 
easily  polished,  they  have  in  ancient  and  modem  times 
been  used  for  drinkuig-yesseb  and  for  military  purpoees. 
They  were  especiaUy  oonyenient  for  holding  liąuids  (1 
Sam.  xvi,  1, 13 ;  1  Kings  i,  89),  and  were  eyen  inade  in- 
atmments  of  musie  (Josh.  vi,  5). 

1«  TmmptU  were  probably  at  first  merely  homs  per- 
focated  at  the  tip,  such  as  are  stiU  used  upon  mountain- 
farms  for  calling  home  the  laborers  at  meal-time.  If 
the  A.  y.  of  Josh.  vi,  4,  5  ("  rams'  homs,"  bsi^H  •,*.]?) 
were  correct,  this  would  settle  the  question  [see  Ram's 
HoB3i] ;  but  the  fact  seems  to  be  that  bsi*^  has  nothing 
to  do  with  ram,  and  that  ^*1{3,  hom,  senres  to  indicate 
an  instrument  which  originally  was  madę  of  hom, 
tlMNigh  alterwards,  no  doubt,  constmcted  of  diflTerent 
materiala  (oomp.  Yarro,  L.  L.  v,  24, 83, "  comua  quod  ea 
qu«  nunc  sant  ex  aere  tunc  fiebant  e  oorou  bubuli"). 
See  CoRXBT.  The  homs  which  were  thus  madę  into 
tnmipets  were  probably  thoee  of  oxen  rather  than  of 
lams:  the  latter  would  scaroely  produoe  a  notę  suffi- 
ciently  impoaing  to  suggest  its  association  with  the  fali 
ofJeiicho.     SeeTBUMPET. 

2.  The  word  **•  hom"  is  also  applied  to  a  fia»k,  or  ves- 
sel  madę  of  hom,  oontaining  cii  (1  Sam.  xyi,  1, 18;  1 
Kings  i,  89)y  or  osed  as  a  kind  of  toilet-bottle,  fiUed  with 


the  preparation  of  antiroony  with  which  women  tinged 
their  eyelashes  (Keren-happuch=:j>atnr-Aom,name  of 
one  of  Job's  daughters,  Job  xlii,  14).  So  in  English 
drinking-hom  (commonly  caUed  a  honi),  In  the  same 
way  the  Greek  Ktpac  sometimes  signifies  bugle,  trumpet 
(Xenoph.  ^4  m.  ii,  2, 4),  and  sometimes  drinking-hom  (yii, 
2, 28).  In  like  manner  the  Latin  comu  means  inmptiy 
and  also  oiln^-uet  (Horaoe,  Sat,  ii,  2, 61),  and/uime/  (Vir- 
gil,  Gwrff,  iii,  509).    See  also  Ink-horn. 

II.  Mełaphorkalbf. — These  uses  of  the  word  are  often 
based  upon  some  litend  object  like  a  hom,  and  at  other 
times  they  are  purely  figuratiye. 

1.  From  timUarity  ofForm, — ^To  this  use  belongs  the 
application  of  the  word  hom  to  a  tmmpet  of  metal,  as 
alieady  mentioned.  Homs  of  ivory,  that  is,  elephants* 
teeth,  are  mentioned  in  Ezek.  xxvii,  15,  either  meta- 
phorically,  from  similarity  of  form,  or,  as  seems  morę 
probable,  from  a  yulgar  error.  See  Ivory.  But  morę 
specific  are  the  following  metaphors : 

(1.)  The  altar  of  bumt-offerings  (Exod.  xxvii,  2)  and 
the  altar  of  incense  (Exod.  xxx,  2)  had  each  at  the  four 
comers  four  homs  of  shittiro-wood,  the  first  being  oyer- 
laid  with  brass,  the  second  with  gold  (Exod.  xxxvii,  25; 
xxxviii,  2 ;  Jer.  xvii,  1 ;  Amos  iii,  14).  Upon  the  homs 
of  the  altar  of  bumt-offerings  was  to  be  smeared  with  the 
finger  the  blood  of  the  slain  bullock  (Exod.  xxix,  12; 
Lev.  iy,7-18;  viii,  15;  ix,  9;  xvi,  18;  Ezek.  xliii,  20). 
By  laying  hołd  of  these  homs  of  the  altar  of  bumt-offer- 
ing  the  criminal  found  an  asylum  and  safety  (1  Kings  i, 
50;  ii,  28),  but  only  when  the  crime  was  aocidental 
(Exod.  xxi,  14).  These  homs  are  said  to  have  senred  aa 
a  means  for  binding  the  animal  destined  for  sacrifioe 
(Psa.  cxviii,  27),  but  this  use  Winer  (^Handw&rterb,)  de-> 
nieś,  asserting  that  they  did  not  and  could  not  answer 
for  such  ą  purpose.  These  altar>homs  are,  of  course,  not 
to  be  supposed  to  have  been  madę  of  hom,  but  to  haye 
been  metidlic  projections  from  the  four  comers  {yiariai 
KfpaTottSiiCf  Josephus,  War^  y,  5, 6).    See  Altail 

(2.)  The  petik  or  tummU  of  a  hill  was  called  a  hom 
(Isa.  V,  1,  where  hill = hom  in  Hcb. ;  comp.  KŚpac,  Xen- 
ophon,  i4n.  v,  6,  7,  and  comu,  Stat.  Theb,  v,  532;  Arab. 
**  Kuriln  Hattln,**  Robinson,  BibL  Res,  ii,  870;  German 
Schredtkom^  WetterhomyAarhomf  Celt.  caim), 

In  Isa.  V,  1,  the  emblematic  yineyard  is  described  as 
being  literally  *'  in  a  hom  the  son  of  oil,"  meaning,  as 
giyen  in  the  English  Bibie,  ''a  yeiy  fruitful  hill"— a 
strong  place  like  a  hill,  yet  combining  with  its  strength 
peculiar  fraitfulness. 

(8.)  In  Hab.  iii,  4  (^he  had  homs  ooming  out  of  his 
hand")  the  context  implies  ray*  oflighi  (comp.  Deut. 
xxiii,  2). 

The  denominatiye  *i?lJ=*'to  emit  rays,"  is  used  of 
Mofie9's  face  (Exod.  xxxiv,  29,  80,  85) :  so  all  the  ver- 
sions  except  Aąiiila  and  the  Yulgate,  which  haye  tho 
translations  KfparwSrfę  rjpj  comuta  erał.  This  curious 
idea  has  not  only  been  perpetuated  by  paintings,  coins, 
and  statues  (Zomius,  Bihlioth.  AnUg.  i,  121),  but  has  at 
least  passed  muster  with  Grotius  {Atmot,  ad  loc),  who 
cites  Aben-£zra's  identification  of  Moses  with  the  hom- 
ed  Mneyis  of  Egypt,  and  suggests  that  the  phenomenon 
was  intended  to  remind  the  Israelites  of  the  golden  calf ! 
Spencer  (Leg.  Uebr,  iii,  Diss,  i,  4)  tries  a  reconciliation 
of  renderings  upon  the  ground  that  comua = rada  lucis  ; 
but  Spanheim  (Diss,  vii,  1),  not  content  with  stigma- 
tizing  the  efforts  of  art  in  this  direction  as  "  pnepostem 
industria,"  distinctly  attributes  to  Jerome  a  belief  in  the 
yeiitable  homs  of  Mosea.     See  ^imbus. 

2.  From  similarity  ofPosition  and  Use, — Two  princi- 
pal  applications  of  this  metaphor  will  be  fofin^—strenffth 
and  honor,  Of  strength  the  hom  of  the  unicom  [see 
Unicorn]  was  the  most  frequent  representatiye  (Deut. 
xxxii,  17,  etc.),  but  not  always;  comp.  1  Kings  xxii,  11, 
where  probably  homs  of  iron,  wom  defiantly  and  sym- 
bolically  on  the  head,  are  intended.  £xpreB8ive  of  the 
same  idea,  or  perhaps  mereiy  a  decoration,  is  the  Ori- 
ental militaiy  ornament  mentioned  by  Tayk>r  (fiabnefa 


HORN 


340 


HORN 


Halr  of  Sonth  AIHchds  ornameDted  with  Baffalo-hornB. 
(LiTingstone.) 

Frag,  cxiv),  and  the  conical  cap  obseTved  by  Dr.  Liv- 
ingstone  among  the  natiyes  of  S.  Africa,  and  not  im- 
probably  soggested  by  the  hom  of  the  rhinoceros,  ao 
abondant  in  that  country  (see  Livingsione'8  Trarelsj  p. 
865, 450,  557 ;  comp.  Taylor,  L  c).  Among  the  Dmses 
upon  Momit  Lebanon  the  married  women  wear  silyer 
homa  on  their  heads.  The  spiral  coils  of  gold  wire  pro- 
jecting  on  either  side  from  the  female  head-dreas  of 
8ome  of  the  Dutch  proyinces  are  evidently  an  ornament 
borrowed  from  the  same  original  idea.  But  it  is  quite 
uncertain  whether  such  dresses  were  known  among  the 
covenant  people,  nor  do  the  figurative  allusions  in  Scrip- 
turę  to  homs  render  it  in  the  least  degrce  necessary  to 
suppose  that  reference  wbb  madę  to  personal  omaments 
of  that  description.    (See  below.) 


I  Headit  of  modern  ABbtlci*  ornftmeutL*d  wlth  Uótm. 

In  the  aenae  of  honor j  the  word  hom  stands  for  the 
ahsłract  (tm/  hom,  Job  xvi,  15;  all  the  homs  oflsrael^ 
Lam.  ii,  3),  and  ao  for  the  supremę  authority  (comp.  the 
story  of  Cippus,  Ovid,  Met,  xv,  565 ;  and  the  hom  of  the 
Indian  sachem  mentioned  in  Clarkson^s  Life  o/Penri), 
Perhaps  some  such  idea 
may  be  denoted  by  the 
homed  conical  cap  peculiar 
to  the  regal  apparel  on  the 
Ninevite  sculptures.  Italso 
stands  for  concreff ,  whence 
it  comes  to  mean  ibm^,  knuff- 
dom  (Dan.  viii,  2,  etc. ;  Zech. 
i,  18;  compare  Tarąuin^s 
dream  in  Acdus,  ap.  Cicero, 
Div.  i,  22) ;  hence,  on  coins, 
Alezander  and  the  SeleuddtB  wear  homs  (see  cut  in  voL 


Homed  Caps  of  the  Assyr- 
lanKiogB. 


Coin  of  Alezander  the  Great,  repreaented  as  homed. 


i,  p.  140),  and  the  former  is  called  in  Aiab.  two-bomed 
(Kor.  xviii,  85  są.),  not  ¥rithoat  refeience  to  Dan.  liiL 
SeeGoAT. 

Out  of  either  or  both  of  tbese  last  two  metaplton 
spnmg  the  idea  of  representing  gods  with  horas.  Span- 
heim  has  discoyered  such  figurea  on  the  Roman  dena- 
riuB,  and  on  numeroos  Egyptian  coina  of  the  reigna  of 
Trajan,  Hadrian,  and  the  Antonines  {Dits,  v,  853).  The 
Bacchus  TaypoKipiaCf  or  cortmUtś,  is  mentioned  by  Eo- 
ripides  {Baoch,  100),  and  among  other  pagan  abeurdities 
Arnobius  enumerates  "  Dii  comuti"  (c  Geni,  vi).  In  like 
manner  river-gods  are  repreaented  with  homs  ("  tauri- 
formis  Aufidus,"  Hor.  Od.  iv,  U,  25 ;  Tavp6fiop^v  ófi/ia 
Ki}^Mrov,  Eurip.  Jon,  1261).  For  various  opinions  on  the 
groundrihought  of  this  metaphor,  see  Notei  and  O^eria^ 
i,  419, 456.  Manx  legenda  speak  of  a  tarroo-usktey,  L  e. 
water-bull  (see  Cregeen^s  Manx  Diet,).  (See  Bodhart, 
Hieroz,  ii,  288 ;  and,  for  an  admirable  compendium,  with 
references,  ZormuBf  B3)Uotheca  AnŁiguariay  ii,  106  aq.). 

Some  of  these  metaphorical  applications  of  the  word 
hora  reqaire  morę  special  elucidation. 

(1.)  SymbolicaL — ^As  homs  are  the  chief  source  of  at- 
tack  and  defence  with  the  animals  to  which  God  bas 
given  them,  they  serve  in  Scripture  as  emblcms  of  pow- 
er,  dominion,  glory,  and  fierceness  (Dan.  viii,  5, 9 ;  1  Sam. 
xvi,  1,13;  1  Kingsi,89;  Josh.vi,4,5;  1  Sam. ii,  1;  Psa. 
lxxv,  5,  10 ;  cxxxii,  17 ;  Lukę  i,  69 ;  Deut.  xxxiii,  17 ; 
Lam.  ii,  3;  Mic  iv,  13;  Jer.  xlviii,  25;  Ezek.  xxix,  21 ; 
Amos  vi,  13).  In  1  Kinga  xxii,  11,  we  find  a  striidng 
display  of  symbolicai  action  on  the  part  of  the  false  proph- 
et  Zedekifldu  He  madę  him  homs  of  iron,  and  said, 
"Thus  saith  Jehovah,With  these  thou  shalt  push  the 
Syrians,  until  thou  have  consumed  them."  Henoe,  to 
defUe  the  hora'  in  the  dust  (Job  xvi,  2)  is  to  lower  and 
degrade  one's  sclf,  and,  on  the  contrary,  to  lift  up,  to  ex- 
alt  the  hora  (Psa.  lxxv,  4 ;  lxxix,  17 ;  cxlviii,  14),  is  poct- 
ically  to  raise  one*s  sclf  to  eminent  honor  or  prosperity, 
to  bear  one's  self  prondly  (comp.  also  1  Chroń,  xxv,  5). 
Something  like  this  is  found  in  the  dassic  authors  (aee 
Horace,  Carm.  iii,  21, 18).  The  expre88lon  "  hom  of  sal- 
vation,"  which  Christ  is  called  (Lukę  i),  is  equivalent  to 
a  salvation  of  strength,  or  a  Saviour,  who  ia  poBaeeaed 
of  the  might  reąuisite  for  the  work  (see  BrUnnings,  De 
comu  salutisj  Heid.  1743). 

Homs  were  also  the  sj^mbol  of  royal  dig^ity  and  pow- 
er;  and  when  they  are  distinguished  by  Rum6«r,  they 
signify  so  many  monarchies.  Thua  hom  signifies  a 
monarchy  in  Jer.  xlviii,  25.  In  Zech.  i,  18,  etc,  the  foor 
horns  are  the  four  great  monarchies,  which  had  each  of 
them  subdued  the  Jews.  The  ten  homs,  says  Daniel, 
vii,  24,  are  ten  kings,  The  ten  homa,  spoken  of  in  £ev. 
xiii,  1  aa  having  ten  crowns  upon  them,  no  doubt  signify 
the  same  thing,  for  so  we  have  it  interpreted  in  xvii,  12. 
The  king  of  Persia  is  described  by  Ammianus  Marcel- 
linua  as  wearing  golden  rams*  homs  by  way  of  diadem 
(69, 1).  The  efiigy  of  Ptolemy  with  a  ram*B  hom,  as 
exhibited  in  andent  sculpture,  is  mentioned  by  Span- 
heim,  Diaserf,  de  Nutniem,  Hence  also  the  kingą  of 
Media  and  Persia  are  depicted  by  Danid  (viii,  20)  on- 
der  the  figurę  of  a  homed  ram.    See  Ram. 

When  it  is  said,  in  Dan.  viii,  9,  that  out  of  one  of  the 
four  notable  homs  came  forth  a  Uttle  hora,  we  are  to 
understand  that  out  of  one  of  the  four  kingdoms  repre- 
aented by  the  four  horas  arose  another  kingdom,  "which 
became  exceeding  great."  This  is  doubtless  Antiochos 
Epiphanes;  othersreferittooneofthefirstCaeaais;  and 
others  refer  it  to  the  Turkish  empire,  and  will  have 
Egypt,  Asia,  and  Greece  to  be  the  three  homs  tom  up  or 
reduced  by  the  Turk.    See  LrrrLB  Horn. 

(2.)  Omamentalr—ln  the  East,  at  preaent,  homa  are 
used  as  an  ornament  for  the  head,  and  aa  a  token  of  em- 
inent rank  (RoeenmttUer,  Mórg,  iv,  85).  The  women 
among  the  Druses  on  Mount  Lebanon  wear  on  their 
heads  silver  horas  of  native  make,  '*  which  are  the  dia- 
tingiushing  badge  of  wifehood"  (Bowring^a  Report  on 
Syria,  i^S),  "Theae  ianloura  have  grown,  like  other 
homa,  from  amall  beginnings  to  their  preaent  enonnous 


HORN 


341 


HORNE 


itze  by  akm  degrees,  and  pride  is  the  aoil  that  nourished 
tbem.  At  fint  they  consUted  merely  of  an  apparatus 
deaigned  to  finish  offthe  headdieas  ao  as  to  rause  the  veil 
a  lltŁle  from  tbe  face,  Specimens  of  thia  pńmitiye  kind 
are  adll  found  in  remote  and  8emŁHdvilized  districta.  I 
łiave  aeen  them  only  a  few  inchea  long,  madę  of  pastę- 
boaid,  and  eren  of  oommon  pottery.    By  degrees  the 


Procession  of  Oriental  Horaed  Ładles. 

more  faahionahie  ladies  used  tin,and  lenicthened  them; 
then  riyalry  madę  them  of  silver,  and  stUl  farther  pro- 
longed  and  omamented  them ;  until  finally  the  princesses 
of  Lebanon  and  Hermon  sported  gold  homs,  decked  with 
jewels,  and  so  long  that  a  senrant  had  to  spread  the  veil 
orer  them.  But  the  day  for  these  most  preposteious 
appendages  to  the  female  head  is  about  over.  After  the 
wan  between  the  Maionites  and  Druses  in  1841  and  1845, 
the  Maronite  dergy  thundere<l  thdr  exoommunications 
against  them,  and  very  few  Christiana  now  wear  them. 
Many  even  of  the  Druae  ladies  hare  cast  them  off,  and 
the  probability  is  that  in  a  few  yeara  trarelers  will  aeek 
in  vain  fot  a  homed  lady**  (Thomaon,  L(md  and  Book,  i, 
101).— ^mith;  Kittoj  Fairbaim;  Wemyas.     SeeHB.u>- 

DKKSa. 

Horn,  JoHx,  OT,  more  properly,  John  Roh  (Cornu 
OT  Koks  bdng  a  tnuislation  of  the  siuname,  which  he 
aaumed  acoording  to  the  usage  of  the  times),  was  a  dis- 
tinguished  bishop  of  the  Ancient  Unitas  Fratrumi  or 
Church  of  the  Bohemian  and  Moravian  Brethren.  He 
was  bom  at  Yauas,  in  Bohemia,  near  the  doae  of  the 
loch  oentur>'.  In  1518  he  waa  ordained  to  the  prieat- 
bood,  and  in  1529  conaecrated  bishop  by  a  aynod  aa- 
armMcd  at  Brandela,  on  the  Adler.  Three  yeara  later 
(1532)  he  became  aenlor  biahop  and  preaident  of  the 
Ecclesiastical  Coundl,  which  posiŁion  he  hdd  until  his 
death,  goreming  the  Unitas  Fratrum  with  great  wis- 
dom,  and  furthering  its  interests  with  ardent  zeaL  Sup- 
portad  by  John  Augusta  (q.  v,\  he  inaogurated  a  new 
policy,  which  brought  the  Chunrh  out  of  its  partial  ob- 
scuiity,  and  madę  it  thereafter  an  important  dement  in 
the  nataonal  hiatory  of  Bohemia.  Hia  immediate  pre- 
deceaaor,  Martin  Skoda,  had  strictly  abstained  from  all 
intercourae  with  the  Reformera,  foUowing  the  prindplea 
established  by  Lukę  of  Prague  (q.  y.\  Horn,  who  had 
twice  bcen  a  delegate  to  Luther  (1522  and  1524),  and 
who  entertained  a  high  regard  for  him  and  hia  work, 
reopened  a  correspondence  with  him,  and  induoed  the 
publicatlon  of  a  new  Confesaion  of  the  Brethren'a  faith  at 
Wittenberg,  with  a  commendatoiy  preface  of  hia  own 
(1583).  Thia  led  to  a  atill  ckwer  feUowahip,  Horn  aend- 
ing  two  deputationa  to  Luther  in  1586,  a  third  in  the 
foDowing  year,  and  a  fourth  in  1542.  In  1688  Luther 
puhliahed  another  and  the  prindpal  Confeaaion  of  the 
Church,  again  with  a  prefaoe  from  Hom*a  pen.  Thia 
Confeaaion  had  been  drawn  up  in  1535,  and  formally  pre- 
aated  to  the  emperor  Ferdinand  at  Yienna  (Noyember 
14)  by  aeyeral  barona  and  divinea  in  the  name  of  the 
Unitas  Fratmm.  Encouraged  by  his  intercourse  with 
Luther,  Horn  alao  aent  an  embaaay  to  the  Swiaa  Reform- 
CTB  in  1540,  which  reaulted  in  a  correapondenoe  with 
Bocer,  Calyin,  and  othera.  Thua  the  Brethren  joined 
hands  with  the  Reformera  in  carrying  on  the  great  work 
of  erangelical  tmth,  and  gave  the  earlieat  tokena  of 
thoie  efforta  to  bring  about  a  union  among  all  Protest- 
anta which  afterwarda  reaulted  in  the  Coiuensu*  Sendo- 
^iriauis  of  the  Poliah  chuichea.  The  most  important 
fitetuy  production  of  bishop  Horn  was  the  authoiized 


edition  of  the  German  H^mn-book  of  the  Brethren,  pnb- 
lished  in  1540.  He  died  in  1547.  Bishop  Bialotilav,  the 
illustrious  historian  and  grammarian  of  the  Church, 
vrrote  his  biography,  which  is,  however,  no  longer  ex- 
tant.  (£.  de  S.) 
Hombeck.  See  Hoornbi^ck. 
Home,  George,  D.D.,  an  £nglish  prdate,  was 
bom  at  Otham,  near  Maidstone, 
Nov.  1,1730.  He  was  educated 
at  University  College,  Oxford, 
where  he  devoted  himself  espe- 
cially  to  the  study  of  Hebrew 
and  of  the  fathers.  He  became 
fellow  of  Magdalen  in  1749,  and 
president  in  1768.  In  1776  he 
was  madę  vice-chancellor  of  the 
University  of  Oxford,  dean  of 
Canterbu^  in  1781,  and,  finally, 
bishop  of  Norwich  in  1789.  Ho 
died  Jan.  17, 1792.  In  his  eariy  yonth  he  imbibed  the 
doctrines  of  John  Hutchinson  (q.  ▼.),  and  defended  them 
in  an  Apoloffy  (1756),  which  is  given  in  voL  vi  of  his 
collected  Works,  He  was  considered  the  best  preacher 
of  hia  time,  a  aincere  and  exemp]ary  Chriatian,  and  a 
thorough  acholar.  Many  of  hia  writinga  were  contio- 
yeraial  tracts,  arising  out  of  the  Hutchinsonian  theory, 
and  the  quarrela  which  it  provoked.  Hia  more  impor- 
tant and  durable  worka  are,  Commentary  on  the  PscUma 
(Oxford,  1766, 2  yola.  4to,  often  reprinted)  -.—DUcourtea 
on  severid  Subjecłs  and  Occasions  (London,  4th  ed.  1808, 
4  Yols.  8vo).  These,  with  his  other  writings,  are  col- 
lected in  The  Works  o/ Bishop  I/ome,  with  his  Life,  by 
William  Jones,  of  Nayland  (London,  1795,  6  vols.  8vo). 
See  Hook,  Eccles.  Biography,  vi,  160 ;  Darling,  Cydo^ 
pcsdia  Biblioyraph,  i,  1541 ;  Allibone,  Did.  of  A  uthors, 
i,  887;  Home  (T.  H.),  Bibliographical  Appiendiz;  Ch, 
Review,  i,  59 ;  Bickerateth,  Bib,  Siud,  A  ssist,  p.  806, 819 ; 
Hagenbach,  Ifist,  of  Doctr,  ii,  419 ;  Hardwick,  Uist,  of 
the  Beformation,  p.  252,  n.  1 ;  253,  n.  8. 

Home,  John,  a  Nonconformiat  diyine,  bom  in  1615, 
was  educated  at  Trinity  College,  Cambridge.  He  be- 
came suocessiyely  vicar  of  Allhallows,  Lynn,  Regis,  and 
finally  Norfolk  in  1647.  He  was  ejected  for  nonconfor- 
mity  in  1662,  and  died  in  1676.  ''He  was  a  leamed 
man,  of  most  exemplary  and  primitive  piety,  very  ready 
in  the  Scriptures,  skilled  in  the  Oriental  languages,  and 
an  Arminian  in  doctrine."  Shortly  before  his  ejection 
he  published  The  open  Door  for  Man's  Approach  to 
Gody  or  a  Vindicaiion  of  the  Record  of  God  concermng 
the  Extent  ofthe  Death  of  Christ,  His  other  principid 
works  are,  The  Brazen  Serpent,  or  God's  grand  Design — 
on  John  iii,  14,  15  (Lond.  1673, 4to)  i—The  best  Exercise 
for  Ckristians  in  the  tcorst  of  Times,  in  Order  to  their 
Security  against  Profaneness  and  Apostasy — on  Jude 
xx,  21  (Lond.  1671,  sm.  8vo),  etc— Darling,  Cydop,  Bib- 
liographica,  i,  1548 ;  Stoughton  (John),  Eccles,  Hist,  of 
EngUmd  (Lond.  1870,  2  vols.  8vo),  ii,  407  aq. 

Home,  MelTiUe,  a  Wealeyan  miniater,  bom  in 
England  in  the  latter  part  of  the  laat  century,  waa  orig- 
inally  a  lay  preacher  of  the  Wedeyan  aodetiea,  but  by 
the  advice  of  hia  brethren  he  took  orders  in  the  Church 
of  England,  and  went  aa  miaaionary  to  Sierra  Leone. 
On  hia  return  he  waa  madę  vicar  of  Ólney,  later  at  liac- 
cleafield,  and  finally  went  to  West  Thurrock,  £laaex.  He 
died  in  the  early  part  of  the  preaent  century.  Home  ia 
known  eapedally  by  his  Letiers  on  Missions,  addressed 
to  the  Protestant  Ministers  ofthe  British  Churches  (1794, 
8vo ;  reprinted  at  Boston,  1835),  which,  it  is  generally 
bdieved,  "prompted  the  first  counsds  that  led  to  the 
formation  of  the  London  Missionary  Society  (comp.  £1- 
lis's  Hist.  ofLond,  Miss,  Soc  i,  13-15 ;  Stevens,  Hist.  of 
Methodism,  ii,  295  8q.)*  He  published  alao  several  of 
his  sermons  (1791-1811),  and  an  InvestigcUion  of  the 
Definition  ofJust^fying  Faith  (1809, 12mo). 

Home,  Thomas  Hartwell,  D.D.,  an  English 
Bihlical  acholar,  bom  October  20, 1780,  waa  educated  at 


HORNECK 


842 


HORNEJTTS 


Christ*8  HospitaL  At  ftnt  he  became  derk  to  a  banris- 
ter.  Devoting  his  Idsure  hoan  to  the  study  ofthe  Bi- 
bie, in  1818  he  published  his  fniroduction  to  ihe  criHeal 
Stu(fy  and  Knowledge  of  the  HoUf  Scripture$  (which  has 
now  reached  the  llth  edition,  and  is  enlarged  from  8  to 
5  Yols.  8vo;  it  has  also  been  reprinted  in  this  country 
in  2  Yols.  imp.  8vo,  and  4  yoIs.  8vo),  a  work  which  pro- 
cured  for  him  admission  into  orders  without  the  usual 
preUminaries.  Subeeąuently  SU  John'8  College,  Cam- 
bridge, conferred  on  him  the  degtee  of  B.D.,  and  two 
American  colleges  that  of  D.D.  In  1824  he  found  em- 
ployment  in  the  library  ofthe  British  Museum  as  assist- 
ant  In  the  department  of  printed  books.  In  1888  arch- 
bishop  Howley  appointed  him  to  the  lectories  of  St. 
Edmund  and  St.  Nicholas,  London,  which  positions  he 
held  until  his  death,  Jan.  27, 1862.  Home  was  fcr  some 
years  actively  ęngaged  in  the  work  of  Methodism,  num- 
bering  among  his  iriends  Dr.  Adam  Ciarkę  and  Dr. 
Bunting.  He  entered  the  ministry  of  the  Church  of 
Eugland  in  deference  to  the  eamest  desire  of  his  father, 
with  the  hope  of  securing  leisure  for  literary  pursuits, 
but  he  always  maintained  a  heaity  interest  in  the 
Church  of  his  early  choice,  and  preseryed  to  the  end  of 
his  life  that  simple  and  eamest  godliness  which  Meth- 
odism had  taught  him  to  cultivate  in  his  youthful  days. 
He  was  distinguished  as  a  polemic  of  considerable  abil- 
ity ;  liis  controYerual  writings  alono  would  haYe  giYen 
him  a  high  status  among  the  men  of  his  time;  and  his 
Yersatility  is  further  attested  by  the  variety  of  his  pub- 
lications,  many  of  which  are  giYen  to  subjects  not  nsu- 
ally  treated  by  scholars  and  diYines.  His  researches  in 
bibliography  were  oonducted  with  amazing  industry, 
and  tabulated  with  great  judgment  and  skilL  But  he 
will  be  best  knoMrn  to  posterity  by  his  Jntroduction  1o 
the  criticcd  Studg  ofthe  Scripturtt  (referred  to  aboYe), 
which,  at  the  time  of  its  first  appearance,  was  a  manrel 
of  labor  and  scholarship.  Hundreds  of  Biblical  studenta 
owe  their  taste  for  critical  pursuits  to  the  reading  of 
this  work;  and,  though  somewhat  below  the  spirit  and 
results  of  the  morę  recent  criticisms,  it  is  yet  iuYaluable 
to  those  whoee  resources  will  not  permit  the  large  out- 
lay  which  the  oollection  of  a  critical  libraiy  demands. 
The  most  important  of  his  other  works  are,  Compend, 
Jnirod,  to  the  Studjf  ofthe  BUbie^  or  AnalytU  ofthe  In- 
trod,  to  the  JToiy  Scriptures  (I2mo,  1827)  i—Deism  Re- 
fttiedf  or  plam  Reatont  for  bewg  a  Christian  (12mo, 
1819)  :—Rofnam»m  cowtradictory  to  Scripture^  or  thep^ 
culiar  Tenets  ofthe  Church  ofRome^  a*  erhibited  in  her 
accredited  FormuktrieSt  corUrasted  tóith  the  Holy  Scrip- 
tures (12mo,  1827)  i—MarioUUry,  or  Facte  and  £vidence» 
demonstrating  the  Wonhip  ofthe  blested  Virffin  Mary  by 
the  Church  qf  Borne  (2d  ed.  1841)  :-^The  Scripture  Doc- 
trine  of  the  Trinity  (12mo) :  —  Manuał  of  Parochial 
Psalmody  {\^Tao,\%iff)'.— Manuał  for  the  A fflicied{\9mo, 
1882),  etc.  A  list  of  all  the  productions  of  Dr.  Home  is 
given  by  AUibone  {LHct.  of  Auihors,  i,  889-892).  See 
RemimscenceSf  peracmal  and  WAiographical,  of  Thomas 
HarłweU  Ifome,  with  Notes  by  his  daughter,  Sarah 
Annę  Cheyne,  and  a  short  Introduction  by  the  KeY.  Jo- 
seph B.  M*Caul  (Lond.  1862) ;  Chambers,  Cyclop.  v,  419 ; 
Kitto,  BiM.  Cyclop,  ii,  824 ;  KeU,  Mrod,  to  N.  T.  p.  88 ; 
Darling,  Cychp,  BibUog.  i,  164  sq.;  North  Am,  BevieWy 
XYii,  180  8q. ;  Joum,  Sac,  Lii,  y,  29,  250.     (J.  H.  W.) 

Homeok,  Antiiony,  D.D.,  an  English  dlYine,  was 
bom  at  Baccharack,  in  the  Lower  Palatinate,  in  1641. 
He  studied  at  Heidelberg  and  at  Leyden,  and  finally 
went  to  England,  and  entered  Queen*s  College,  OxfoKl, 
at  the  age  of  nineteen.  Two  years  after  he  became  tu- 
tor to  lord  Torrington,  who  gave  him  the  liring  of 
Doulton,  in  DeYonshire,  and  procured  him  a  prebend  in 
the  church  of  Exeter.  In  1671  he  was  chosen  preacher 
at  the  Savoy,  upon  which  he  resigned  his  Uving  in  DeY- 
onshire. Admirał  Russel,  afterwards  earl  of  Orford,  rec- 
ommended  him  to  the  queen  for  preferment,  and,  by  the 
advice  of  Dr.  Tillotaon,  then  archbishop,  he  was  present- 
ed  to  the  prebendary  of  Westminster  in  1698.  He  died 
Jan.  81 ,  1697.    He  was  a  good  linguist,  a  łeamed  diYine, 


an  exceUent  preacher,  and  a  faithfhl  pastor.  His  cbmeh 
was  80  crowded  that  it  was  often  dillicult  for  him  to 
reach  the  pulpit  In  the  rdgn  of  James  II,  when  it  be- 
came elear  that  there  was  danger  of  a  reYiYal  of  pc^Miy, 
he  spared  no  pains  in  resisting  the  moYement.  His 
zeal  for  the  promotion  of  practical  religion  was  inces- 
sant;  and,  among  other  means,  he  madę  use  of  the  ao- 
called  Beligious  Societies  of  the  time,  of  which,  indeed, 
some  suppoee  him  to  haYe  been  the  original  foander. 
The  rules  of  these  sodeties  seem  in  some  points  to  haire 
suggested  to  Wedey  his  dass-meetings  (q.  y.),  Tbe 
foUowing  is  a  summary  of  them :  *'  1.  All  that  enter  tbe 
society  shall  resolYe  upon  a  holy  and  serions  life.  S. 
No  person  shall  be  admitted  into  the  society  until  he 
has  arriYed  at  the  age  of  sisteen,  and  has  been  first  coo- 
firmed  by  the  bishop,  and  solemnly  taken  upon  himaelf 
his  baptismal  yows.  8.  The  members  shall  choose  a 
minister  of  the  Church  of  England  to  direct  them.  4. 
They  shall  not  be  allowed  in  their  meetings  to  disooniBe 
on  any  controYerted  point  of  diYinity.  fi.  Ndther  shaB 
they  discourse  on  the  goYemment  oi  Church  or  State. 
6.  In  thdr  meetings  they  shall  use  no  prayers  bot  those 
of  the  Church,  such  as  the  litany  and  collects,  and  other 
prescribed  prayers;  but  still  they  shall  not  use  any  that 
peculiarly  belongs  to  the  minister,  as  the  absolution.  7. 
The  minister  whom  they  choose  shall  direct  what  prac- 
tical diYinity  shall  be  read  at  these  meetings.  8.  They 
shall  haYe  liberty,  after  prayer  and  readmg,  to  sing  a 
psalm.  9.  After  all  is  done,  if  there  be  time  lefl,  they 
may  discourse  to  each  other  about  their  spiritual  oon- 
cems;  but  this  shall  not  be  a  standing  esercise  which 
any  shall  be  obliged  to  attend  to.  10.  One  day  in  the 
week  shall  be  appointed  for  this  meeting  for  such  as 
cannot  come  on  the  Lord's  day;  and  he  that  absents 
hirosdf  without  cause  shall  pay  threepence  to  the  box. 
11.  EYery  time  they  meet  they  shall  give  8ixpence  to 
the  box.  12.  On  a  certain  day  in  the  year,YiŁWhit- 
Tucsday,  two  stewards  shaD  be  chosen,  and  a  moderate 
dinner  proYided,  and  a  sermon  preached;  and  the  money 
distributed  (necessary  charges  deducted)  to  the  poor. 
18.  A  book  shall  be  bought  in  which  these  orders  shall 
be  written.  14.  Nonę  shaU  be  admitted  into  this  socie- 
ty ¥rithout  the  consent  ofthe  minister  who  presides  OYer 
it;  and  no  apprentioe  shall  be  capable  of  being  chosen. 
16.  If  any  case  of  consdence  shall  arise,  it  shaU  be 
brought  before  the  minister.  16.  If  any  member  think 
fit  to  leaYO  the  society  he  shall  pay  fiYe  shillings  to  the 
stock.  17.  The  major  part  of  the  society  shall  condude 
the  rest  18.  The  foUowing  rules  are  morę  espedally 
recommended  to  the  members  of  this  society,  viz. :  To 
loYe  one  another.  When  reYiled,  not  to  reYile  again. 
To  speak  eYil  of  no  man.  To  wrong  no  man.  To  pray, 
if  possible,  scYen  times  a  day.  To  keep  dose  to  the 
Church  of  England.  To  transact  all  things  peaceably 
and  gently.  To  be  helpful  to  each  other.  To  use  them- 
selYCS  to  holy  thoughts  in  their  coming  in  and  going 
out  To  examine  thcmselYes  CYery  night  To  giYe 
CYery'  one  their  due.  To  obey  superion,  both  spiritual 
and  temporaL"  Dr.  Homeck*s  writings  indnde  the  fol- 
lowing:  Sermons  on  the  jijth  of  St,  Matthett^  with  The 
lAfe  ofthe  Authory  by  Richard  (Kidder),  lord  bishop  of 
Bath  and  Wells  (Lond.  2d  ed.  1706,  2  yoIs.  8yo)  i— The 
crwĄfied  Jesus,  or  a  Treaiise  on  the  Sacrament  of  tke 
Lord^s  SupptTy  etc.  (London,  6th  edit.  1716,  8yo)  ^->7%e 
creaŁ  Law  of  Consideration  (Lond.  llth  ed.  1729,  8to); 
— The  happy  AsoeHc^  or  the  best  Ezercise  (on  1  Tim.  Iy, 
7),  to  tohich  is  added  a  Letter  amcemmg  the  holy  Lives 
oftheprimitipe  Christians  (Lond.  8d  ed.  enlaiged,  1693, 
8vo):— 7'A«  Fire  ofthe  Altar,  a  Preparałion  for  the 
Lord's  Stłpper  (London,  18th  ed.  1718, 12mo)  -.^-Sermon 
on  Rom,  Yiii,  20  (Lond.  1677, 4to).r— Darling,  Cydopitdia 
Bibliograph,  i,  1547;  Hook,  Ecdes,  Biography^  yi,  166; 
Birch,  Life  of  TiUotson, 

HornejuB  (Hornet),  Konrad,  a  German  Lutheran 
diYine,  was  bom  in  Branswick  Noy.  25, 1590.  He  stud- 
ied theology,  philosophy,  and  philology  at  HelmstSdt, 
where  he  settled  in  1612.    Herę  he  beome  professar  of 


HORNET 


843 


HORONAIM 


Ibgic  and  cthtcs  tn  1619,  and  of  theology  in  1628.  He 
died  bepc  26, 1649.  As  a  thcologian,  especially  in  the 
Syneigistic  controTeny  (q.  v.)*  ^^  ^^  distinguUhcd  for 
hi^  modeimtion.  His  prinapal  woikB  are,  Dispułatumes 
Hkicoe  (Hehnst.  1618;  7th  ed.  1666)  i—ł:xerdtałiones  eł 
dUpu.  ^ionet  logica  (1621) : — Digguiaitiones  metaphysica 
(1622)  '.r^ItŁBtituiumeś  logiem  (1623)  \—Compendium  dia- 
UetictB  stuKwctum  (1623;  12th  ed.  lWG):—Compendium 
historia  eades.  (1649) : — Commentar  z.  H^aer  vnd  den 
Kadkotischen  Brie/en  (1654) :  —  Co/n/wfMftuni  theologia 
(Bransir.  1655).  —  Pierer,  Unufertat-Lerikomf  riii,  542; 
Henof;,  RntlfKneyklop,  vi,  265;  Gass,  Dogmengetch,  u, 
147, 159, 210 ;  KurU,  Ck,  Hi$L  ii,  201. 

Homet  or  wasp  (n^^2C,  Uirah',  £xod.  xxiii,  28 ; 
Deut.  vii,  20 ;  Joah.  xxiv,  12 ;  SepL  afi^icia,  Vulg.  era- 
hro).  The  HeU.  term  appears  to  be  indicative  otttinff- 
img ;  and  the  anctent  ver8ioii8  with  the  Rabbina  favor 
the  interpretation  of  *^  homet"  rather  than  '*  wasp,"  as 
appean  from  the  application  of  the  above  Greek  and 
LaŁin  worda  (oomp.  Aristotle,  Hitt,  A  nim.  v,  19, 617 ;  ix, 
65,  66;  riiny,  Hist,  Not.  xi,  24).  The  above  passages 
in  which  the  wf»d  oocuze  refer  to  some  means  of  expul- 
sion  of  the  Canaanites  before  the  Israelitea.  Not  only 
were  bees  exceedingly  numerous  in  Palestine,  but  from 
the  name  Zoreah  (Josh.  xv,  33)  we  may  infer  that  hor- 
nets  in  particular  infested  some  parta  of  the  country : 
the  firequcnt  noŁices  of  the  animal  in  the  Talmudi^ 
writers  (Lewyaohn,  ZooL  §  405)  lead  to  the  same  con- 
dusion. .  Geseniua,  however,  nuintains  that  the  term  is 
not  to  be  taken  in  a  literał  senae,  but  metaphorically,  as 
the  symbol  of  the  panic  with  which  God  would  inspire 
the  inhabitants,  adducinf:  the  expres8ions  **torTor  of 
God"  (Gen.  xxxv,  5),  "mighty  destniction*"  (Deut  vii, 
23),  and  the  antithesis  of  the  angel  to  defend  them 
(£xod.  xxiii,  20,  etc),  in  favor  of  this  interpretation 
(see  Tkesattr.  //e5.  pL  1186).  Indeed,  the  foUowing  ar- 
guments  seem  to  decide  in  favor  of  a  metaphorical  senae : 
(1)  that  the  word  **  homet**  in  £xod.  xxiii,  28  is  parallel 
to  'TearT  in  ver.  27 ;  (2)  that  similar  expresaions  are  on- 
doubtedly  used  metaphoricaUy,  e.  g.  "  to  chase  as  the 
bees  do"  (Deut.  i,  44;  Psa.  cxviii,  12) ;  (3)  that  a  simi- 
lar transfer  from  the  literał  to  the  metaphorical  sense 
may  be  instanced  in  the  dassical  cutrus,  origiually  a 
"gid-fl}',"  aflerwanls  terror  and  madnets;  and,Ustly 
(4),  that  no  historical  notice  of  such  intervention  as  hor^ 
neta  occtus  in  the  Bibie.  We  may  therefore  rcgard  it 
aa  expres8ing  under  a  vivid  image  the  oonstemation 
with  which  Jehovah  would  inspire  the  enemies  of  the 
Israelitcs,  as  declared  in  Deu t^  ii,  25 ;  Josh.  ii,  1 1 .  Among 
the  modems,Michaeli8  has  defended  the  6gurative  sense. 
In  addition  to  other  reasons  for  it.,  he  doubts  whether 
the  expulsion  of  the  (canaanites  could  be  elfccted  by 
swarms  of  cr^tiKiai^  and  pioposes  to  derive  the  Hebrew 
fiom  a  root  signifying  "scouiges,"  "plagues,"  scufica, 
ploffa,  etc  (JSupplenu  ud  lAxic  Jlebr.  vi,  2154) ;  but  his 
reaaons  are  ably  rcfuŁed  by  KosenmlUlcr,  apud  Bochart 
(Hieroz.  Lips.  1796,  iii,  eh.  13,  p.  402,  eto.).  In  favor  of 
the  possibtlity  of  such  an  event,  it  is  ob6erved  thatyEIi- 
an  relates  that  the  Phaaelitae  were  actually  driven  from 
their  kxadity  by  such  means  (*a<nj\*'rac  ^«  <t^^«c  r.  r. 
X.  Flitł.  Amm.  ix,  28),  and  Bochart  has  shown  that  these 
Fhaselitse  were  a  Phaenician  people  {ut  sup,  p.  4 1 2).  For 
a  parallel  case  of  an  army  bemg  seriously  molested  by 
homets,  see  Ammian.  MarceU.  xxiv,  8.  Even  Kosen- 
mUller  himself  atiopts  the  figurative  sense  in  his  SchoUa 
on  Exod.  xxiii,  28;  but  on  Josh.  xxiv,  12  he  retracts 
that  opinion,  and  amply  refutes  it.  His  reasonings 
and  refutations  havc  been  adopted  by  numerous  writers 
(among  othens  «««  Paxton'9  JUustraHont  o/Scripture^ 
i,  303,  etc,  Edinb.  1819).  Michaeli8'8  doubt  of  the  ab- 
stiact  possibility  seems  verv-  unreaaonable,  whcn  the  irre- 
sisttUe  power  of  bees  and  wasps,  etc,  attested  by  nu- 
merous modem  occurrences,  an^  the  thin  and  partial 
dothing  of  the  Canaanites,  are  considered.  It  is  ob- 
aerrable  that  the  event  is  represented  by  the  author  of 
the  q)ocryphal  book  of  Wiadom  (xii,  8)  aj  a  merciful 


dispenaatłon,  by  which  the  Almighty,  he  says,  '^spared 
as  men  the  old  inhabitants  of  his  holy  land,"  and  ''gave 
them  place  for  repentance."  If  the  homet,  considered 
as  a  fyt  was  ui  any  way  connected  with  their  idolatry, 
the  visitation  would  convef  a  practical  refutation  of 
their  error.  Ewald  (Geteh,  d,  V.  Israelj  M  erU  Gotting. 
1864-8,  i»,  116  są.)  connects  the  word  (reading  HSnS 
L  q.  n7U'^2C)  with  ManeŁho*8  story  (Josephus,  Apion, 
i,  26)  of  the  expulsion  of  the  Israelites  from  Egypt  on 
acoount  of  a  disease.     See  Baausebub. 

Th9  homet  (  Yefpa  crahro)  is  a  hymenopterous  insect 
with  tix  legs  and  four  winga.  It  bears  a  generał  resem- 
blance  to  the  common  wasp,  but  is  of  a  darker  color,  and 
much  larger.  It  is  exceedingly  fierce  and  vonciou8, 
especially  in  hot  dimates,  but  even  in  Westem  countries 
ita  Sting  is  frequently  dangeroos.  Roberta  obeerve8  on 
Deut.  vii,  20,  ^  The  sting  of  the  homet  and  wasp  of  the 
East  is  much  moro  poisonous  than  in  Europę,  and  the 
insect  is  larger  in  size.  I  have  heard  of  8evenl  who 
died  from  having  a  single  sting;  and  not  many  days 
ago,  as  a  woman  was  going  to  a  well '  to  draw  water,'  a 
homet  Btung  her  in  the  cheek,  and  she  died  the  nezt 
day.  The  god  Siva  is  described  as  having  destroyed 
many  giants  by  homets."  It  may  be  remarked,  that 
the  homet,  no  less  than  the  whole  species  of  wasps,  ren- 
ders  an  essential  8ervice  in  checking  the  multiplication 
of  flies  and  other  insects,  which  would  otherwisc  becomo 
intolcmble  to  maii ;  and  that  in  regard  to  their  archi- 
tecture,  and  especially  their  inttinctt  and  habitSf  they  do 
not  yield  to  their  more  popular  congener,  the  bee,  but 
even,  in  several  respects,  greatly  excel  iL  The  homet, 
in  conunon  with  the  other  social  wasps,  displa^^s  gre&t 
ingenuity  in  the  manufacture  of  its  ncst.  It  is  macie  of 
a  coarse  gray  paper,  much  like  the  coarsest  "wr^pping- 
paper,  but  less  firm.  This  is  arranged  łn  several  globosc 
leave8,  one  over  the  other,  not  unlikc  the  outer  leavcs 
of  a  cabbage,  the  bese  of  which  is  attached  by  a  smali 
footstalk  to  the  upper  pert  of  the  cavity  in  which  it  is 
indoscd.  Within  this  protecting  case  the  combs  are 
built  in  parallel  rows  of  cells,  ex&ctly  like  thosc  of  the 
bee,  but  roadc  of  paper,  and  ranged  horizontally  instead 
of  vertica]ly,  and  in  single  series,  the  cntrances  alwa}'S 
being  downwanls.  Each  story  is  connected  with  that 
above  it  by  a  numbcr  of  pillars  of  the  common  paper, 
thick  and  maasiye.  Tliesc  cells  do  not  oontain  honcy, 
but  merely  the  eggs,  and.  in  duo  time,  ihc  young,  being 
in  fact  nursing  cradlcs.  The  paper  with  which  the  hor- 
net  builda  is  formed  cither  from  decayed  wood  or  the 
bark  of  trees,  the  fibres  of  which  it  abrades  by  means  of 
its  jaws,  and  kneads  into  a  pastę  with  a  vi8cid  saUva. 
When  a  morael  as  large  as  a  pea  is  prepared,  the  insect 
flies  to  the  nest  and  spreads  out  the  mass  in  a  thin  layer 
at  the  spot  whero  it  is  reąuircd,  moulding  it  into  shape 
with  the  jaws  and  feet.  It  is  soon  dr>',  and  forms  real 
paper,  coarser  than  that  of  the  common  wasp.  (Kiiby 
and  Spence,  Introducf,  to  Kntomology^  8vo,  Lond.  1828,  i, 
273, 274 ;  R^aumur,  Histoire  des  InsecteSy  vol.  vi,  Mem.  6, 
4to,  Par.  1734-42;  Wood,  Bibie  AnimaU,  LoncL  1869,  p. 
614  sq.) Kitto;  Smith ;  Fairbaim.     See  Wasi». 

Horologlon  (topo\óytov,  literally  a  dial)  is  the  ti- 
tle  of  one  of  the  "  office-books"  of  the  orthodox  Eastem 
Church.  It  contains  the  daily  hours  of  prayer,  so  far 
as  respects  their  immovablc  portions,  and  answcrs  in  a 
measure  to  the  Officium  fłebdomad<B  which  is  found  at 
the  opening  of  each  vo1ume  of  the  breviary  of  the  East- 
em (jhureh.  But  it  gcnendly  contains  also  other  for- 
mularies  of  that  Church.  See  Neale,  Introd.  to  the  Hist, 
of  the  Eastem  Church^  ii,  848.     Sec  Houna. 

Horon.    See  Bktu-horon  ;  Horonaim. 

Hórona^liin  (Heb.  Ckorona'yimj  D^ą^^n,  tieo  cav^ 
ems;  SepL  'Apwyulp.  and  'Qpufvaip)j  a  Moabitish  city 
near  Zoar,  Luhith,  Nimrim,  etc,  on  a  dcclirity  along  the 
route  of  the  invading  Assyrians  (Isa.  xv,  5 ;  Jer.  xlviii, 
3, 5, 84) ;  probably  the  same  called  Holon  {)iVn,  perh. 
by  an  error  for  "JTin,  Horon,  which  would  appear  to  be 


HORONITE 


S44 


HORSE 


the  original  form  of  the  word  Horoiudm;  from  *^n,  a 
hole)  in  Jer.  xlviii,  22  (Sept  Xf\wv,  Vulg.  ffekm).  The 
associated  names  only  afford  a  oonjectural  locality  east 
of  the  north  end  of  the  Dead  Sea,  probably  on  some  one 
of  the  great  roads  (Tj'!?'!?)  leading  down  from  the  plateau 
of  Moab  to  the  Jordan  ralley.  It  is  doubtless  the  Oro- 
fUB  CQpCavai)  of  JosephuB  (Ani.  xiii,  15,  4;  xiv,  1,  4). 
Sanballat « the  Horonite"  Oąih,  Neh.  ii,  10, 19 ;  xiii,  28) 
was  probably  a  native  of  thia  place,  and  not  (as  stated 
by  Schwarz,  Paiettine,  p.  147)  of  Beth-horon,  which  was 
entirely  different. 

Ho^ronite  [many  Hor^omte]  (Heb.  with  the  art. 
Aa-CAoront ', '^3inn ;  Sept  o  'Apuvi,OupaviTTjCfYu}iQ. 
HoronUeB\  the  deaignation  of  SanbaUat  (q.  v.),  who  was 
one  of  the  principal  opponents  of  Nehemiah*s  works  of 
restoration  (Neh.  ii,  10, 19;  xiii,  28).  It  is  derived  by 
Gesenius  {Thes,  p.  459)  from  Horonaim,  the  Moabitish 
town,  but  by  FUrst  {ffandtob,)  from  Horon,  i.  e.  Beth- 
horon. — Smith.  The  latter  supposition  agrees  with  the 
local  relations  of  Sanballat  towards  the  Samaritans,  but 
the  former  suits  better  his  heathenish  affinities,  as  well 
as  the  simple  form  of  the  pTimitive. 

Horse,  b^D,  sus,  'łwoc,  of frequent  occurrence ;  oth- 
er  less  usual  or  proper  terms  and  epithets  are :  nCilO, 
sutah^  a  ntaref  rendered  "company  of  horses,"  i.  e,  caval- 
ry.  Cant.  i,  9 ;  ^"^D,  parash',  a  horse  for  riding, "  horse- 
man,"  of  freąuent  occurrence ;  SS^I  or  3?^,  re^keb  or 
rakab/  a  beast  of  burden,  also  a  chariot,  charioteer,  or 
chariot-hoTse,  especially  a  team,  varioualy  rendered,  and 
of  freąuent  occurrence;  "^"^S^Ji,  aJbbir',  **strong/^  as  an 
epithcŁ  of  the  horse,  only  in  Jeremiah,  as  viii,  16;  xlvii, 
3;  1, 11;  ^3*1,  re'besh,  a  horse  of  a  nobler  breed,  a 
courser,  rendered  "  dromedaiy "  in  1  Kings  iv,  8 ;  "  mule," 
Esth.  viii,  10, 14;  "swift  beast,"  Mic  i,  13;  TjB*^!  ram- 
nMk%  a  nwrf ,  rendered  "  dromedary,"  Esth.  viii,  10.  The 
origin  of  the  ńrst  two  of  these  terms  is  not  satisfactorily 
madę  out;  Pott  {Ełym.  Forsch,  i,  60)  connects  them  re- 
8pectively  with  Susa  and  Pares,  or  Persia,  as  the  coun- 
tries  wheiice  the  horse  was  derived;  and  it  is  worthy 
of  remark  that  9us  was  also  employed  in  £g>'pt  for  a 
marf,  showing  that  it  was  a  foreign  term  there,  if  not 
also  in  Palestine.  There  is  a  marked  distinction  be- 
tween  the  sua  and  the  parash ;  the  former  were  horses 
for  driving  in  the  war-chariot,  of  a  heavy  build,  the  lat^ 
ter  were  for  riding,  and  partiailarly  for  cavalry.  Thb 
distinction  is  not  ob»er\-cd  in  the  A.  V.  from  the  circum- 
stance  ihtitpdrdah  also  signifies  horseman ;  the  correct 
sense  is  esscntial  in  the  following  passages — 1  Kings  iv, 
26,  "forty-thousand  cAa7'u><-hor8es  and  twelve  thousand 
earo/r^horses ;"  Ezek.  xxvii,  14,  "  driying-horses  and 
riding-horses ;"  Joel  ii,  4, "  as  riding-horses,  so  shall  they 
run ;"  and  Tsa.  xxi,  7, "  a  train  of  horses  in  couples.*" 

The  most  striking  feature  in  the  Biblical  notices  of 
the  horse  is  the  exclu8ive  application  of  it  to  warlike 
operations;  in  no  instance  is  that  useful  animal  em- 
ployed for  the  piuposes  of  ordinary  locomotion  or  agri- 
culŁure,  if  we  except  Isa.  xxviii,  28,  where  we  leam  that 
horses  (A.V.  **  horsemen")  were  employed  in  threshing, 
not.,  howeyer,  in  that  case  put  in  the  gears,  but  simply 
driven  about  wUdly  over  the  strewed  grain.  This  re- 
mark will  be  found  to  be  bonie  out  by  the  historical 
passages  hereafter  quoted,  but  it  is  -eąnally  striking  in 
the  poetical  parts  of  Scripture.  The  animated  descrip- 
tion  of  the  horse  in  Job  xxxix,  19-25,  applies  solely  to 
the  war-horse;  the  manc  streaming  in  the  breeze  (A.  V. 
"  thunder")  which  "clothcs'his  neck;"  his  lofty  bounds 
"as  a  grasshoppcr;"  his  hoofs  "digging  in  the  valley" 
with  excitement;  his  terrible  snorting — are  brought  be- 
fore  UB,  and  his  ardor  for  the  strife.  The  following  is  a 
dose  rendering  of  this  fine  description  of  the  war-horse : 

Canst  thon  plvc  to  the  horse  prowess  f 

CanfiŁ  thou  clothe  his  neck  [with]  a  sbadderlog  [mane]  ? 

Canst  thou  make  him  prance  like  the  locnst  ? 

The  grandeur  of  bis  snorting  [is]  formldable. 


They  wlll  [ess^rly!!  Pftw  In  the  vallęy, 
And  Ceach]  rejolce  In  vIgor; 
He  will  go  forth  to  meet  Ctbe]  we^>on: 
He  win  langh  at  dread, 
Nor  wlll  be  cower. 
Nor  retreat  fironi  before  [the]  sword: 
Asainst  him  may  rattle  quiv»r, 
Ffamiug  lance  or  dart  [In  vain]. 
With  pranclng  aud  restlessuess  be  wlll  abaori)  [the] 

earth  [by  flcetaest] ; 
Nor  can  he  stand  stlH  when  the  soimd  of  the  tnimpet 
[is  heard] : 
As  oft  [as  the]  trampet  [8onnds],he  will  say,  "Aha  P 
For  ft-om  afar  he  can  scent  [the  battle], 
The  thunder  of  the  captatns  and  shouiing. 

So,  again,  the  bride  advanceB  with  her  charms  to  an  im- 
mediate  oonąuest  "as  a  company  of  horses  in  Pharaoh's 
chariots"  (Cant.  i,  9) ;  and  when  the  prophet  Zechariah 
wishes  to  oonvey  the  idea  of  perfect  peace,  he  repreaenta 
the  horse,  no  mors  mixing  in  the  fray  as  before  (ix,  10), 
but  bearing  on  his  beli  (which  wasintended  to  slrike 
terror  into  the  foe)  the  peaceable  inscripdon,  "  HoUness 
unto  the  Lord"  (xiv,  20>  Lastly,  the  characteriatic  of 
the  horse  is  not  so  much  his  speed  or  his  utility,  but  hia 
strength  (Psa.  xxxiii,  17;  cxlvti,  10),  as  ehown  in  Łhe 
special  application  of  the  term  abbir  ('^'^ąK),  i.  c  atzong, 
as  an  equivalent  for  a  horse  (Jer.  viii,  16 ;  xlvii,  8 ;  1, 1 1).  * 
Hence  the  horse  becomes  the  symbol  of  war,  or  of  a 
campaign  (Zech.  x,  8;  comp.  Psa.  xlv,  5;  Deut.  xxxti, 
18;  Ptia.  lxvi,  12;  Isa.  lviii,  14,  where  horsemanship  is 
madę  t3rpical  of  oonquest),  especially  of  speedy  conąuest 
(Jer.  iv,  18),  or  rapid  execution  of  any  purpose  (Rev.  vi). 
The  Hebrews  in  the  patriarchal  age,  as  a  pastorał 
race,  did  not  stand  in  need  of  the  service8  of  the  horse, 
and  for  a  long  period  after  their  settlement  in  Canaan 
they  dispensed  with  it,  partly  in  conseąuence  of  the 
hilly  naturę  of  the  country,  which  only  admitted  of  the 
use  of  chariots  in  certain  locallties  (Judg.  i,  19),  and 
partly  in  consequence  of  the  prohibition  in  Deut.  xvii, 
16,  which  would  be  held  to  apply  at  all  perioda.  Ac- 
oordingly  they  hamstrung  the  horses  of  the  Canaanites 
(Josh.  xi,  6,  9).  David  first  established  a  foroc  of  cav- 
alry  and  chariots  after  the  defeat  of  Hadadezer  (2  Sam. 
viii,  4),  when  he  reaerved  a  hundred  chariots,  and,  as  we 
may  infer,  all  the  horses;  for  the  rendering  "houghed 
all  the  chariot-Aorsf^"  is  manifestly  inoorrect  Shortly 
after  this  Absalom  was  poesessed  of  some  (2  Sam.  xr,  1). 
But  the  great  supply  of  horses  was  sub6equently  effected 
by  Solomon  through  his  connection  with  Eg]^;  he  is 
reported  to  have  had  "40,000  stalls  of  horses  for  hia 
chariots,  and  12,000  cavah7-hor8es"  (1  Kings  ir,  26% 
and  it  is  worthy  of  notlce  that  these  forces  are  mention- 
ed  parenthetically  to  account  for  the  great  security  of 
life  and  property  noticed  in  the  preceding  vcr8e.  There 
is  probably  an  error  in  the  former  of  these  numbcre;  for 
the  number  of  chariots  is  given  in  1  Kings  x,  26;  2 
Chroń,  i,  14,  as  1400,  and  consequently,  if  we  allow  thiec 
horses  for  each  chariot,  two  in  use  and  one  as  a  rescric, 
as  was  usiud  in  some  countries  (Xenoph.  Cyrop.  vi,  1,  § 
27),  the  number  required  would  be  4200,  or,  in  round 
numbers,  4000,  which  is  probably  the  correct  reading. 
Solomon  also  established  a  very  active  trade  in  hoiwa, 
which  were  brought  by  dealera  out  of  Egypt,  and  resold 
at  a  profit  to  the  Hittites,  who  lived  between  Palestine 
and  the  Euphrates.  The  passage  in  which  this  com- 
merce  is  described  (1  Kings  x,  28,  29)  is  unfortunately 
obscure ;  the  tenor  of  verse  28  seems  to  be  that  there 
was  a  regularly  established  traffic,  the  Egyptiana  bring- 
ing  the  horses  to  a  mart  in  the  south  of  Palestine,  and 
handing  them  over  to  the  Hebrew  dealera  at  a  fixed 
tariff.  The  price  of  a  horse  was  fixed  at  150  shekels  of 
8ilver,  and  that  of  a  chariot  at  600 ;  in  the  latter  we 
must  include  the  horses  (for  an  Eg^nptian  war-chariot 
was  of  no  great  value),  and  conceive,  as  before,  that 
three  horses  accompanied  each  chariot,  leaving  the  va]ae 
of  the  chariot  itself  at  150  shekeK  In  addition  to  this 
source  of  supply,  Solomon  received  horaes  by  way  of 
tribute  (1  Kings  x,  25).  He  bought  chariots  and  teams 
of  horses  in  Egypt  (1  Kings  x,  28),  and  probably  in  Ar- 
menia, "  in  all  lands,"  and  had  them  brought  into  his 


HORSE 


845 


HORSE 


dominioDA  in  fltiings,  in  the  same  manncr  as  horaes  are 
still  coodncted  to  and  from  fain :  for  this  interpretatioD, 
as  offered  by  professor  Paxtoii,  appears  to  oonvey  the 
natunl  and  trae  meaning  of  the  text ;  and  not  ^  Btrings 
of  linen  yam,"  which  here  seem  to  be  out  of  place  (2 
Chroń,  i,*  16,  17;  ix,  26,  28).  The  cavahry  foree  was 
maintained  by  the  succeeding  kings,  and  freąuent  no- 
tioes  oeeur  both  of  riding-horses  and  chariots  (2  Kinga 
ix,  21,  33;  xi,  16),  and  particttlarly  of  war-chariots  (1 
Kings  xxii,  4;  2  Kings  iii,  7;  laa.  ii,  7).  The  foroe 
acems  to  have  failed  in  the  time  of  Hezekiah  (2  Kings 
xyiii,  23)  in  Judah,  as  it  had  prerioosly  in  Israel  uiider 
Jehoabaz  (2  Kinga  xiii,  7).  Josiah  took  away  the 
hones  which  the  kings  of  Judah,  his  predeoes^^rs,  had 
consecrated  to  the  san  (2  Kings  xxłii,  11).  See  Sex. 
The  number  of  horses  belonging  to  the  Jews  on  thdr 
return  from  Babylon  is  stated  at  786  (Neh.  %ii,  68). 

In  the  countries  adjacent  to  Palestine  the  use  of  the 
borse  was  much  moie  freąuent  It  was  introduoed  into 
Egypt  probably  by  the  Hyksos,  as  it  is  not  represented 
OD  the  monuments  before  the  18th  dynasty  (Wilkinson, 
i,  986,  abridgm.).  Yet  these  animals  are  not  mentioned 
amongthe  presenta  which  Abraham  reoeived  from  Pha- 
rK»h  (Gen.  xu,  16),  and  occur  first  in  Scripture  among 
the  Tslnables  paid  by  the  Egyptiaus  to  Joseph  in  ex- 
change  for  gnun  (Gen.  xlvii,  17).  They  wcre  still  suf- 
fioently  important  to  be  expre8s]y  mentioned  in  the 
fimeial  proceaslon  Srhich  acoompanied  the  body  of  Ja- 
oob  to  his  sepulchre  in  Ganaan  (Gen.  i,  9).  At  the 
period  of  the  £xodu8  horses  were  abundant  in  Egypt 
(Exod.  ix,  3;  xiv,  9,  28;  Deut  xvii,  17),  and  subae- 
ąuently,  as  we  have  already  seen,  they  were  able  to 
sBppły  the  nations  of  Western  Asia.  The  Tyrians  pur- 
ehased  these  ąiąimah  from  Solomon,  and  in  the  time  of 


Ancient  Egypdan  Horse. 

Ezekiel  impoited  horses  themselves  from  Togarmah  or 
Armenia  (£zek.  xxvii,  14).  The  Jewish  kings  sought 
the  assistanoe  of  the  Egyptians  against  the  Assyrians 
m  this  respect  (Isa.  xxxi,  1 ;  xxxvi,  8 ;  Ezek.  xvii,  16). 
The  Canaanitea  were  pooscsscd  of  them  (Deut  xx,  1 ; 
Jodu  xi,  4;  Judg.  iv,  8 ;  v,  22, 28),  and  Ukewise  the  Syr- 
ians(2SanLviii,4;  1  Kings  xx,  1 ;  2  Kings  vi,  14 ;  vii, 
7, 10)— notioes  which  are  oonfirmed  by  the  pictorial 
RpiesentalJons  on  Egyptian  monuments  (Wilkinson, 


i,  898, 897, 401),  and  by  thd  Assyiian  inacriptions  re- 
lating  to  Syrian  expeditions.  But  the  cavalry  of  the 
Assynans  them8elves  and  other  Eastom  nations  was  re- 
garded  as  most  formidable ;  the  horses  themselres  were 
highiy  bred,  as  the  Assyrian  sculptures  still  tesdfy,  and 
fuUy  merited  the  praise  bestowed  on  them  by  Habakkuk 
(i,  8),  "swifter  than  leopards,  and  morę  fierce  than  the 
evening  wolves;"  their  riders  "dothed  in  blue,  captains 
and  rulen,  all  of  them  desirable  young  men"  (Esek. 
xxiii,  6),  armed  with  "the  bright  swonl  and  glittering 
speaz"  (Nah.  iii,  8),  madc  a  deep  impresńon  on  the 
Jews,  who,  plainly  clad,  went  on  foot ;  as  also  did  theiz 
regular  array  as  they  proceeded  in  conples,  contrasting 
with  the  disorderly  troops  of  asses  and  camels  which 
foUowed  with  the  baggage  (Isa.  xxi,  7,  rekeb  in  this 
passage  signifying  rather  a  train  than  a  single  chariot). 
The  number  employed  by  the  Eastem  potontates  was 
very  great,  Holofemes  possessing  not  less  than  12,000 
(Judith  ii,  16).  At  a  later  period  we  have  ftequent 
notices  of  the  cavahy  of  the  GisBoo-Syrian  monarcha  (1 
Mace  i,  18;  iii,  89,  etc). 


Andent  Asąyrian  Horse. 


Andeut  Fenian  Horse. 

The  above  notices  of  the  use  of  the  horse  by  the  an- 
cient Egyptians  derivcs  abundant  illustration  from  thdr 
monuments. ,  In  the  sculptured  battle-scenes,  which  are 
believed  to  repreaent  victories  of  Sesostris,  or  of  Thoth- 
mes  II  and  III,  over  nations  of  Central  Asia,  it  is  evi- 
dent  that  the  enemy*s  armies,  as  well  as  the  fordgn 
allies  of  Egypt,  were  abundantly  supplied  with  horses, 
both  for  chariots  and  for  riders;  and  in  triumphal  pro- 
cesdons  they  are  shown  as  presents  or  tribute — proving 
that  they  were  portions  of  the  national  wealth  of  eon- 
quered  states  sufBciently  valuable  to  be  prized  in  Eg}'pt 
That  the  Assyrians  and  Babylonians  were  equally  well 
supplied  with  this  valtuible  animal  is  likewise  attested 
by  the  martial  scenes  depicted  on  the  sculptures  discov- 
ered  among  the  niins  of  Ninereh  and  the  vicinity. 
They  are  represented  in  almost  every  variety  of  posl- 
tion  and  employment,  such  as  the  chase,  and  for  other 
purposes  of  pleasure ;  but  chiefly  in  war,  for  which  the 
Assyrians  used  them  both  with  the  saddle  and  in  the 
chariot  According  to  Mr.  Layanl  (Nmerehj  Ist  series, 
i,  276  8q.),  the  horses  of  the  Assyrians  were  well  formed 
and  of  noble  blood,  as  appears  from  the  fig- 
ures  no  doubt  fatthfully  copied  on  the  sculp- 
tures. Cavahpy  formed  an  important  part  of 
the  Assyrian  army.  The  horsemen  carried 
the  bow  and  spear,  and  wore  coats  of  mail, 
high  greave8,  and  the  pointed  helroet.  Their 
horses  also  were  corered,  and  even,  it  would 
seem,  with  a  kind  of  leather  armor,  from  the 
head  to  the  taił,  to  protect  them  from  the 
arrows  of  the  enemy.  It  consisted  of  sev- 
eral  pieces  fastened  together  by  buttons  or 
loops.  Over  it  was  thrown  an  omamentcd 
saddle-doth,  or  a  leopard's  skin,  upon  which 
the  rider  sat  Under  the  head  of  the  horse 
was  hung  a  beli  (comp.  Zech.  xiv,  20)  or  a 
tasseL  The  reins  appear  to  have  been  tight- 
ened  round  the  neck  of  the  horse  by  a  slid- 
ing  button,  and  then  dropped  as  ihe  wa> 


HORSE 


346 


HORSE 


Chariot-horee  of  Ramet*es  III.    (From  the  Monaments  at 
Ipaainbonl.) 

nor  was  engaged  in  fight  Between  the  hone*s  ears 
was  an  arched  crest,  and  the  diflerent  parts  of  the  har- 
ness  were  richly  embroidered,  and  omamented  with  ro- 
settes  (Layard'8  Nin,  2d  ser.  \x  456).  See  Horsemak. 


AncieuŁ  Aseyriau  SUble :  Groom  cnrryiog  a  Uorse. 


With  regard  to  the  trappings  and  management  of  the 
horse  among  the  Ilebrews  and  adjoining  nations,  we 
have  little  infonnation ;  the  bridle  (resen)  was  placed 
over  the  horse^s  noee  (Isa.  xxx,  28),  and  a  bit  or  curb 
(tnetheg)  is  also  noticed  (2  Kings  xix,  28 ;  Psa.  xxxii,  9 ; 
Prov.  xxvi,  8 ;  Isa.  xxxvii,  29 ;  in  the  A.  V.  it  is  incor- 
rectly  given  "  bridle,"  with  the  exception  of  Psa.  xxxii). 
The  hamess  of  the  Aseyrian  horses  was  profusely  deco- 
rated,  the  bits  being  gilt  (1  Esilr.  iii,  6),  and  the  bridles 
adomed  with  tassels;  on  the  neck  was  a  collar  termina- 


Anclent  Aseyrian  Ridlng-horse,  with  Trappiogs. 


ting  in  a  beli,  as  described  by  Zechariah  (xiv,  20).    Sad- 
dles  were  not  used  until  a  Ute  period ;  only  one  is  rep- 
resented  on  the  Assyrian  sculptures  (Layaid,  ii,  367). 
The  horses  were  not  shod,  and  therefore  boofs  as  hsrd 
**as  flint"  (Isa.  v,  28)  were  regarded  as  a  great  meriu 
The  chariot-horses  were  covered  with  embroidered  trsp- 
pings — the  ^'predous  dotbes"  manufactured  at  Dedtn 
(Ezek.  xxvii,  20) :  these  were  fastened  by  straps  and 
buckles,  and  to  this  perhaps  reference  is  madę  in  Trwr. 
xxx,  91,  in  the  term  zanir,  ^  one  girded  about  the  loins" 
(A.  V.  "greyhound").     Thus  adomed,  Mordecai  rode  in 
State  through  the  streets  of  Shushan  (Esth.  Ań,  9).  White 
horses  were  morę  particularly  appropriate  to  such  occt- 
sions  as  being  significant  of  victory  (Rev.  vi,  2 ;  xi.x,  1 1, 
14).     itorses  and  chariots  were  used  also  in  idołatroos 
processions,  as  noticed  in  regard  to  the  sun  (2  Kingi 
xxiii,  11).     As  to  kinds  of  hamess,  etc,  by  means  of 
which  the  servioes  of  the  horse  were  andently  msde 
available  by  other  nations,  it  may  be  well  to  notice  thst 
the  riding  bridle  was  long  a  merę  slip-knot,  passed  roimd 
the  under  jaw  into  the  mouth,thas  furabhing  only  one 
rein ;  and  that  a  rod  was  comraonly  added  to  guide  the 
animal  with  morę  facility.    The  bńdle,  however,  and  the 
reiiis  of  chariot-horses  were,  at  a  very  early  age,  exceed- 
ingly  perfect,  as  the  monuments  of  Egypt,  Etruria,  and 
Greece  amply  proye.     Saddles  were  not  used,  the  rider 
sitting  on  the  bare  back,  or  using  a  cloth  or  mat  girded 
I  on  the  animaL    The  Romans,  no  doubt  copying  tte  Per- 
sian  Cataphractje,  first  used  pad  ssd- 
dles,  and  from  the  northera  nstiuns 
adopted  stimuli  or  spurs.    Stiinips 
wereunknown.  Avioenna  first  men- 
tions  the  rHeiab,  or  Arabian  stimifi, 
perhaps  the  most  ancient ;  although 
in  the  tumuli  of  Central  Asia,  Tahur 
horse  skcletons,  bridles,  and  stimip 
saddles  have  been  found  along  with 
idols,  which  proves  the  tombs  to  be 
morę  ancient  than  the  introduction 
of  Islam.     With  regard  to  horsc- 
shoeing,  bishop  Lowth  and  Bran' 
Clark  were  mistaken  in  beiie^ńng 
that  the  Koman  horse  or  mule  sboo 
was  fastened  on  without  nails  driven 
through  the  homy  part  of  the  hoof, 
asatpresent.  A  contraiy  conduńon 
may  be  inferred  from  seycral  pis- 
sages  in  the  poets ;  and  the  figurę  of 
a  horse  in  the  Pompeii  battle  mosaic,  shod  in  the  same 
manner  as  b  now  the  practice,leaves  little  doubt  on  the 
question.    The  principal  use  of  horses  andently  was  for 
the  chariot,  especially  in  war ;  to  this  they  were  attached 
by  means  of  a  pole  and  yoke  like  oxen,  a  practice  which 
continued  down  to  the  times  of  the  Romans.     (See 
Bibie  A  mmalsy  p.  248  sq.)    See  Chariot  ;  Bridle. 

It  appears  that  the  horse  was  derived  from  High 
Asia,  and  was  not  indigenous  in  Arabia,  Syria,  or  £g}Tt 
(Jardinc*s  NuturalisCB  Library,  voL  xii),  where  his  con- 
geners  the  zebra,  ąuagga,  and  ass  are  still  found  in 
primitive  freedom,  although  the  horse  is  found  in  all 
parts  of  the  world — ^free,  it  is  troe,  but  only  as  a  wild  de- 
scendant  of  a  once  domesticated  stock.  (See  Schlieben, 
Die  P/erde  de»  AUerthums^  Neuwied.  1867;  Abd  el- 
Kader,  Horses  ofłhe  Detfrty  trans,  by  Daumas,  London, 
1863.)  All  the  great  original  varieties  or  races  of  horses 
were  then  known  in  Western  Asia,  and  the  Hebrew 
prophets  themselves  have  not  unfreąuentJy  distinguish- 
ed  the  nations  they  had  in  view  by  means  of  the  pre- 
dominant  colors  of  their  horses,  and  that  morę  correctly 
than  commentators  have  surmised.  Taking  Bocharfs 
application  (ffieroz,  i,  81  sq.)  of  the  Hebrew  names,  the 
bay  race,  fiiHK,  adam\  emphatically  bdonged  to  Egypt 
and  Arabia  Feiix ;  the  white,  Q^3bb,  lebomm,  to  the  re- 
gions  above  the  Euxine  Sea,  Asia  Minor,  and  Dorthan 
High  Asia;  the  dun,  or  cream-colored,  Q*^ppib,  teruk- 
kim,  to  the  Medes ;  the  spotted  piebald,  or  skewbild, 


H0RSEM5ATE 


347 


HORSE-LEECH 


d'^2,  beruddim,  to  the  Macedonians,  the  Parthiana, 
and  later  Tahtan;  and  the  bUtckf  0*^*1*111^,  shcLchorm, 
to  the  Romans;  bat  the  cheghatt, yi^K,  amołz,  does  not 
bekmg  to  any  kno¥m  hiatorical  race  (Zech.  i,  8 ;  vi,  2). 
See  Ass;  Mule;  Dkomkdary.  Bay  or  red  horses  oc- 
cur  most  fiequently  on  Egjptian  painted  oMnumenta, 
this  being  the  ptimitive  color  of  the  Aiabian  stock,  bat 
white  hoTses  are  alao  oonunon,  and,  in  a  few  instancea, 
black— the  last  probably  only  to  relieve  the  paler  color 
of  the  one  beside  it  in  the  picture.  There  is  alao,  we 
understand,  an  instance  of  a  spotted  pair,  tending  to 
show  that  the  ralley  of  the  Nile  was  originally  suppiied 
with  hoTses  from  foreign  soarces  and  distinct  regiona,  aa, 
indeed,  the  Iribute  pictures  further  afcteat.  The  spotted, 
if  not  real,  but  painted  horses,  indicato  the  antiquity  of 
a  pcactice  adll  in  vogue ;  for  staining  the  hair  of  riding 
animals  with  spots  of  yarious  colors,  and  dyeing  thetr 
limbs  and  tails  crimaoii,  is  a  practice  of  common  occur- 
RDce  in  the  East.  These  colors  are  typical,  in  some 
paasagea  of  Scriptare,  of  yarioas  ąoalities,  e,  g.  tho  white 
of  yictory,  the  black  of  defeat  and  cakunity,  the  red  of 
blpodahed,  etc  (compare  Kev.  yi). — Kitto ;  Smith.  See 
Cou>B. 

HoTse-Gate  (D*«p!|&n  '^^^t  tha'ar  k<u-mtim\ 
Gate  oftke  horta;  Sept.  vv\fi  1inruv  or  (]nrc«iiv,yulg. 
porta  ecaorum\  a  gate  in  the  first  or  old  wali  of  Jerusa- 
lem,  at  the  west  end  of  the  bridge  leading  from  Zioń  to 
the  Tempie  (Neh.  iii,  28 ;  Jer.  xxxi,  40),  perhape  so  call- 
ed  aa  being  that  by  which  the  ^'horses  of  the  sim"  (2 
Kings  xx2ii,  11)  were  led  by  the  idolaters  into  the  sa- 
cred  indosuie  (2  Chroń,  xxiii,  15 ;  comp.  2  Kings  xi,  16). 
(See  Stiong's  I/armomf  oftke  Goapela,  Append.  i,  p.  14.) 
fiarday,  however,  thinka  of  a  position  near  the  Hippo- 
dmme  (which,  on  the  contrary,  waa  a  later  ediiłce),  at 
the  S.E.  comer  of  the  Tempie  wali  (City  of  the  Greał 
King,  p.  152).    See  Jkrusalem. 

Hone-leeoh  (M??^^^,  abikah';  Sept.  i)  fiBkXKtt^ 
Tolg.  soHffuiguffOf  A.  y.  aome  eds.  as  two  worda,  "  horse 
leech'*)  occurs  once  only,  yiz.  Prov.  xxx,  15,  **The  horae- 
leech  hath  two  daughters, crying,  Gi  v?,  gi re.**  AIthoagh 
tbe  Hebrew  word  is  tranalated  le.ch  in  nearly  all  the 
▼eiaiona,  there  has  been  much  Uisi^ute  whether  that  is 
ita  pioper  meaning.  Againtt  the  received  ŁranskUumj  it 
has  been  urged  that,  upon  an  examination  of  the  oon- 
text  in  which  it  occurs,  the  introduction  of  the  leech 
seems  atnuige;  that  it  is  impoasible  to  understand  what 
is  meant  by  its  *^two  daughters,"  or  three,  as  the  Septu- 
agint,  Syriac,  and  Arabie  yersions  assign  to  it ;  and  that, 
instead  of  the  incessant  craving  apparently  attributed 
to  it,  the  leech  drops  ofT  when  filled.  In  order  to  eyade 
theae  diflicułties,  it  has  been  attemptod,  but  in  vain,  to 
eoonect  the  passage  either  with  the  preceding  or  subse- 
ąaent  verse.  It  has  aiso  been  attompted  to  give  a  dif- 
ferent  aense  to  the  Hebrew  word.  But  as  it  occurs  no- 
where  besides  in  Scripture,  and  as  the  root  from  which 
it  wcNild  seem  to  be  derired  is  nerer  used  as  a  verb,  no 
awisTance  can  be  obtained  from  the  Scriptures  them- 
selres  in  thia  inrestigation.  Recourse  is  therefore  had 
to  the  Arabie  The  fullowing  is  the  linę  of  criticism 
puraued  by  the  leamed  Bochart  {Hierozoicon,  ed.  Rosen- 
mttller,  iii,  785,  etc).  The  Arabie  word  for  leech  is  altL- 
iboA,  which  is  deriyed  from  a  verb  rignifying  to  hang  or 
to  adhere  to.  But  the  Hebrew  word,  alvJ:<ihj  he  would 
deńve  fiom  another  Arabie  root,  alukf  which  means 
"fate,  heavy  misfortune,  or  impending  calamity;^'  and 
hence  he  infers  that  alukah  properly  means  destiny,  and 
particularly  the  necesaity  o/dtfinff  which  attachcs  to  ev- 
enr  man  by  the  decree  of  God.  He  urges  that  it  is  not 
ftrange  that  ojfapring  should  be  ascribed  to  this  divine 
appointment,  dnce,  in  Prov.  xxyii,  1,  ofTspring  is  attrib- 
uted to  time,  a  dayr-"Thou  kiiowest  not  what  a  day 
may  bringjbrtk"  Now  the  Hebrews  cali  event8  "  the 
cbildren  of  time.**  We  also  speak  of  '*  the  womb  of 
time."  He  dtes  Prov.  xxvii,' 20,  as  a  parallel  passage : 
"  Hen  (tkeol)  and  the  giaye  are  neyer  fuli.**    Hence  he 


suppofles  that  theol  and  the  grave  aie  the  two  danghtera 
of  Alukah  or  Destiny ;  each  cries  *'  giye**  at  the  same 
moment— the  former  asks  for  the  soul,  and  the  latter  for 
the  body  of  man  in  death ;  both  are  insatiable,  for  both 
inyolve  all  mankind  in  one  oommon  min.  He  further 
thinka  that  both  these  are  called  daughters,  because 
each  of  the  words  is  of  the  feminine,  or,  at  most,  of  the 
common  gender;  and  in  the  16th  yerse,  the  graye  (the- 
ol) ia  specified  as  one  of  the  "  things  that  are  neyer  sat^ 
iafied.**  In  further  confirmation  of  this  yiew,  Bochart 
cites  rabbinical  writers,  who  stato  that  by  the  word 
alukahy  which  occurs  in  the  Chaldee  paraphrase  on  the 
Psalms,  they  understand  destiny  to  be  signified;  and 
also  remark  that  it  has  two  daughters— Eden  and  Ge- 
henna, Paradise  and  Heli— the  former  of  whom  neyer 
has  enough  of  the  souls  of  the  righteous,  the  latter  of 
the  souls  of  the  wicked.  (See  also  Alb.  Schultens,  Com- 
meni.  ad  loc). 

In  hehalf  oftke  reeeived  translation,  it  is  urged  that  it 
ia  scarcely  credible  that  all  the  ancient  transUtors  should 
haye  confounded  alukah  with  alakah ;  that  it  is  pecul- 
iarly  unlikely  that  this  should  have  been  the  case  with 
the  Septuagint  translator  of  the  book  of  Proyerbs,  be- 
cause it  is  belieyed  that  *'  this  ranka  next  to  the  trans- 
lation  of  the  Pentatouch  for  ability  and  fidelity  of  exfr- 
cution  ;**  and  that  the  author  of  it  must  haye  been  well 
skilled  in  the  twolanguages  (Home*s  Introductionf  ii,  43, 
ed.  1828).  It  is  further  pleaded  that  the  application  of 
Anbic  analogiea  to  Hebrew  wonls  is  not  decisiye;  and 
finally,  that  the  theory  proposed  by  Bochart  is  not  es* 
sential  to  the  elucidation  of  the  passage.  In  the  pre- 
ceding yerse  the  writor  (not  Solomon — see  yer.  1)  speaks 
of  ^'a  generation,  whose  teeth  are  as  swords,  and  their 
jaw-teeth  as  kniyes  to  derour  the  poor  from  olf  the 
earth,  and  the  needy  from  among  men  ;**  and  then,  ait:er 
the  abrupt  and  picturesąue  style  of  the  East,  especially 
in  their  proyerbs,  which  is  nowhere  morę  vividly  exem- 
plified  than  in  this  whole  chapter,  the  leech  is  intro- 
duced  as  an  illustration  of  the  coyetousness  of  such  per- 
sons,  and  of  the  two  distinguishing  vices  of  which  it  is 
the  parcnt,  avarice  and  cruelty.  May  not  also  the  "  two 
dauyhterś  ofthe  leech,  crying,  Giye,  giye,"  be  a  figura- 
tiyc  description  of  the  two  lips  of  the  creaturc  (for  these 
it  has,  and  perfcctly  formed),  which  are  a  part,  of  its 
yery  complicated  mouth  ?  It  certainly  is  agreeable  to 
the  Hebrew  style  to  cali  the  offspring  of  inanimate 
things  dayghtertj  for  so  branches  are  called  daughters 
of  trees  (Gen.  xlix,  22,  margin).  A  similar  use  of  the 
woni  is  found  in  Ecdes.  xii,  4,  ^*  All  the  daughters  of  mu- 
sie shall  be  brought  Iow,*'  meaning  the  lips,  front  teeth, 
and  other  parts  of  the  mouth.  It  is  well  remarked  by 
Prof.  Paxton  that  "  this  figiuntiyc  ai)plication  of  the 
entire  genus  is  sufficient  to  justify  the  interpretation. 
The  leech,  as  a  symbol  in  use  among  rulers  of  erery 
class  and  in  all  ages,  for  ayaricc,  rapine,  plunder,  rapaci- 
ty,  and  even  assiduity,  is  too  well  knowu  to  need  illus- 
tration** (see  Plautus,  Epidic,  art.  2;  Cicero,  ad  Attic.; 
Horace,  A  rs,  Poet.  476 ;  Theocritus,  Pharmaceut. ;  etc). 
In  confirmation  of  this  view,  Prof.  Stuart  remarks  (Com- 
meni,  ad  loc),  "The  Anbians  have  the  same  word, and 
in  the  CamuSf  their  standard  dictionary,  it  is  defined  by 
another  Arabie  word,  yiz.  GhouL  This  latter  the  Ca- 
mds  again  defmes  as  meaning,  (1)  Calami/y^  (2)  Foreeł- 
deriif  (3)  A  dcemon  man-eating  and  insatiable.  The  Ara- 
bians,  down  to  the  present  hour,  maintain  that  it  is  of- 
ten  met  with  in  the  forests  of  Arabia,  and  they  stand 
in  great  terror  of  it  when  entering  a  thick  woocls.  (See 
Lane's  Modem  EgyptianSy  i,  344.)  The  Syrians  had  a 
like  superstition,  but,  like  the  Hebrews,  the>'  morę  gen* 
erally  named  the  sprite  lilith,  In  Isa.  xxxiy,  14,  thia 
last  word  occurs  (Auth.  Yersion  screech-owl),  and  it  ia 
amply  and  finely  illustrateil  by  Gesenius  {Comment,  ad 
loc).  In  like  manner.  Western  superstition  is  fuU  of 
spokes,  hobgoblins,  elyes,  imps,  and  yampires ;  aU,  espe* 
cially  the  last  of  which,  are  essentially  insatiable,  blood- 
sucking  spectres."  (See  also  Gesenius,  Theaaur,  Hd)»  pt 
1038.)— Kitto.     See  Spectue. 


HORSEMAN 


348 


HORSEMAN 


There  is,  then,  little  doubt  that  alukah  denotes  Bome 
Bpecies  of  leech,  or,  rather,  U  the  generic  term  for  any 
blood-sucking  annelid,  such  as  Hirudo  (the  medicinal 
leech),  Hcemopis  (the  horae-leech),  LinmaHs^  TrocheHoj 
and  AuUutoma,  if  ali  these  genera  are  foiind  in  the 
inanhes  and  pools  of  the  Bible-landa.  The  leech  or 
blood-suckcr  belongs  to  the  geniu  rermeSf  order  wtesti- 
nata,  Linn.  It  is  viviparous,  brings  forth  only  <me  off- 
spriug  at  a  time,  and  the  genos  contains  many  species. 
**  The  ^r*e-leech"  is  properly  a  tpeciea  of  leech  discard- 
ed  for  medical  piirpoees  on  account  of  the  coarseness  of 
its  bite.  There  is  no  ground  for  the  dutinctum  of  spe- 
cies madę  in  the  English  Bibie.  The  yaluable  use  of 
the  leech  (ffirudo)  in  medicine,  though  undoubtedly 
known  to  Pliny  and  the  later  Koman  writers,  was  in  all 
probability  unknowii  to  the  ancient  Orientals;  still  they 
were  doubtleas  acąuainted  with  the  fact  that  leeches  of 
the  above-named  genus  would  attach  themselres  to  the 
skin  of  persoiis  going  barefoot  in  ponds;  and  they  also 
were  probably  cognizant  of  the  propensity  horse-leeches 
(^ffeemopis)  have  of  entering  the  mouth  and  nostrils  of 
cattle,  as  they  drink  from  the  waters  frequented  by  these 
pests,  which  are  cAnmon  enough  in  Palestine  and  Syria. 
The  use  which,  from  its  thirst  for  blood,  we  make  of  the 
leech,  being  unknown  to  the  ancient  Orientals,  as  it  is 
unknown  in  the  East  at  the  present  day,  it  is  there 
siwken  of  with  feelings  of  horror  and  aversion,  particu- 
larly  as  it  causes  the  destruction  of  raluable  animals  by 
fastcning  under  their  tongues  when  they  come  to  drink. 
The  lakę  called  Birket  er-Ram,  the  ancient  Phiala, 
about  three  hours  from  Banias,  is  said  to  be  so  crowded 
with  leeches  that  a  man  can  gather  6000  or  even  8000 
in  a  day,  while  the  fountain  at  Banias  is  not  infested 
by  a  single  leech — Kitto;  Smith;  Bastow. 

The  mcchanism  by  which  the  leech  is  enabled  to 
gratify  its  grcedy  thirst  for  blood  is  highly  curious. 
The  throat  is  spacious, 
and  capable  of  being 
everted  to  a  great  de- 
gree.  The  front  border 
of  the  moulh  is  enlarged 
so  as  to  form  a  sort  of 
upper  lip,  and  this  com- 
bines  with  the  wrinkled 
muscular  margin  of  the 
lower  and  lateral  por- 
tions  to  form  the  suck- 
Moath  andJThroat  of  the  Leech.  ^y.    We  may  even  slit 


down  the  ventral  mar- 


opened  and  magnłfled. 

gin  of  the  sucker,  cxpo8ing  the  whole  throat  Then, 
the  edges  being  ft.ldetl  back,  we  see  implanted  in  the 
walls  on  the  dorsal  regions  of  the  cavity  three  white 
eminences  of  a  cartilaginous  texture,  which  rise  to  a 
sharp  crescentić  edge ;  they  form  a  triangular,  or,  rath- 
er,  a  triradiate  figurę,  and  by  a  peculiar  saw-likc  motion 
so  abrade  the  surface  as  to  cause  a  flow  of  blood,  which 
is  greatly  assŁsted  by  the  contraction  of  the  edges  form- 
ing a  yacuum  ILke  a  cupping-glass.— Fairbaim,  s.  v. 

Horseman  (properly  and  usually  C1D  brs.  ha'al 
parash'f  niasłer  of  a  horse),  Our  translation  would 
make  it  appear  that  a  forcc  of  cavalry  accompanied 
Pharaoh  in  his  pursuit— "his  horsemen"  (Exod.  xiv,  9, 
etc).  Ił  is,  however,  a  fact  not  a  little  remarkable,  that 
in  the  copious  delineations  of  battle-scencs  which  occur 
in  the  monuments,  and  which  must  have  beeu  coeral 
with  thcsc  events,  in  which,  moreover,  ever>'thing  that 
could  tend  to  aggrandize  the  power  or  flatter  the  pride 
of  Eg}'pt  would  be  introduced,  there  never  occurs  any 
representation  of  Egj^ptlan  cavahy.  The  armies  are 
always  composcd  of  troops  of  infantry  armed  with  the 
bow  and  spear,  and  of  raiiks  of  chariots  drawn  by  two 
horses.  Both  Diodorus  and  Herodotus  attribute  caval- 
ry  to  the  early  Pharaohs;  and  some  eminent  antiqua- 
rians,  as  Sir  Gardiner  Wilkinson,  endeavor  to  account 
for  the  abscnce  of  such  a  forcc  in  the  pictorial  represcn- 
tations  consistently  with  its  existence.     But  professor 


HengBtenberg  has  maintained,  and  not  withooŁ  mmm 
degree  of  probability,  that  the  word  ''horsemen'*  of  the 
above  passage  should  rather  be  rendered  ^'chariot- 
riders."  We  quote  his  words :  **  It  is  accordingly  oer- 
tain  that  the  cavalry,  in  the  morę  ancient  period  of  the 
Pharaohs,  was  but  little  relied  on.  The  question  now 
is,  what  relation  the  dedarationa  of  the  passage  befoie 
us  bear  to  this  resulL  Were  the  oommon  yiew,  accurd* 
ing  to  which  ridiiig  on  horses  is  saperaddcd  with  equai 
prominence  to  the  chariot  of  war,  in  our  passage,  the 
right  one,  there  might  arise  stzong  sospicion  against 
the  credibility  of  the  narratire.  But  a  more  accuratc 
examination  shows  that  the  author  does  not  roentiju 
Egyptian  cavalry  at  all ;  that,  according  to  him,  the 
Egyptian  army  is  composed  only  of  chariots  of  war,  and 


The  Son  of  king  Rameiies  with  his  Cbanoteer.    (Wilkm- 
sou.) 

that  hc  therefore  agrees  in  a  wonderful  manner  with 
the  native  Egyptian  monuments.  And  this  agreement 
is  the  more  minutę,  sińce  the  second  diyision  of  the 
army  represented  upon  them,  the  infantr}',  could  not,  in 
the  circumstances  of  our  narratiye,  take  part  in  the  pui^ 
suit.  The  first  and  principal  passage  conceming  the 
constituent  parts  of  the  Egyptian  army  which  pursued 
the  Israelites  is  that  in  Exód.  xiv,  6,  7 :  *  And  he  madę 
ready  his  chariot,  and  took  his  people  with  him;  and 
he  took  six  hundred  chosen  chariots,  and  all  the  char- 
iots of  Eg^^pt,  and  chariot-warriors  upon  all  of  them.' 
Ilere  Pharaoh^s  preparation  for  war  is  fully  described 
It  consists,  fint,  of  chariots,  and,  secondly,  of  chariot- 
warrior&  Cavalry  are  no  more  mentioned  than  iniao- 
try.  This  passage,  which  is  so  plain,  explains  the  sec- 
ond one  (ver.  9),  where  the  arrival  of  this  same  army  in 
sight  of  the  Israelites  is  plainly  and  graphically  de- 
scribed,  in  order  to  place  distincUy  before  the  reader 
the  impreasion  which  the  yiew  madę  upon  the  Israel- 
ites: ^And  the  Eg}'ptian8  foUowed  them  and  overtook 
them,  where  they  were  encamped  by  the  aea,  all  the 
ckariot-horses  of  Pharaoh,  and  his  ridtrSy  and  his  host' " 
{Egypt  and  MoseSj  eh.  iv).— Fairbaim,  &  y.     See  Chak- 

lOT. 

In  the  same  connection  we  may  remark  that,  althoogfa 
the  Egyptian  warriors  usually  lode  two  in  a  chariot 
only,  yet  it  appears,  from  the  use  of  the  peculiar  tenn 
d"^?^,  shaUsh'  (liL  third,  A-Y.  *«  captain'*),  appUed  to 


Ancient  Assjrrlau  Horseman,  ready  to  moonL 


HORSLEY 


348 


HORSTIUS 


AutiLiii  Ei^ptiflu  Princofl  in  tbtir  t.lijiiiot. 


the  chańoteen  clestroyed  in  the  Red  Sea  (£xod.  xy,  4), 
and  to  other  officcfs  (2  Sam.  xxiii,  8,  etc.),  that  occa- 
sionally  at  least  tkree  penons  were  accustomed  to  ridc 
together  in  battle;  and  this  is  confirmed  by  the  fact 
that  in  mnie  of  the  delineations  on  the  Eg^^ptian  roon- 
umenŁs  we  (ind  two  penmns  represented  aa  principab  in 
a  war-car,  while  a  third  manages  the  reins.     See  Cap- 

TADi. 

Among  the  Aw\Tian8,  on  the  other  hand,  single  ridcrs 
on  honeback  >rere  not  uncomnion,  although  with  them, 
too,  the  cavahy  arm  of  the  military  sen-ice  consisted 
chiefly  of  chańots.     See  Army. 

Honley,  S^uiuet^  one  of  the  most  distinguished 
dirines  ever  produced  by  the  Church  of  England,  was 
boni  in  London,  October,  1783.  He  was  the  son  of  the 
Kererend  John  Horsley  (whoee  father  was  originally 
a  Nonconfbnnist),  for  many  years  the  derk  in  orders 
at  SLMartinVin-the-Fields,  and  who  held  two  recto- 
riea,  Thorley  in  HerŁfordshire,  and  Newington  Butts  in 
Sonrey.  Samuel  Honley  was  educated  at  Westminster 
School  and  Trinity  Hall,  Cambridge,  and  had  the  rec- 
tory  of  Newington,  which  his  father  resigned  to  him 
sooa  after  he  had  taken  orders  in  1759.  *Hi8  morę 
pablie  career  may  be  said  to  have  commenced  in  1767, 
when  he  was  elected  a  fellow  of  the  Boyal  Societ}',  of 
which  body  he  became  secretary  in  1773.  His  earliest 
paUications  were  tnu:ts  on  scientific  subjecta,  but  in 
1776  he  projected  a  complete  and  uniform  edition  of  the 
phikMophical  works  of  Sir  Isaac  Newton.  This  design 
was  not  accomplished  till  1735,  when  the  fifth  and  last 
of  tbe  five  ąuarto  rolumes  madę  its  appearance.  lu  the 
eartier  years  of  his  public  life  he  found  patrons  in  the 
earl  of  Aylesford,  and  in  Lowth,bishop  of  London;  but 
we  pass  0A*er  the  presentations  to  his  rarious  lirings, 
and  the  dispensations  which  the  number  of  his  minor 
prefiaments  rendered  necessary.  In  1781  he  was  ap- 
pointed  arcbdeacon  of  St.  Albans.  It  was  a  little  before 
the  datę  last  named  that  he  first  appeared  in  the  field  of 
theological  controrersy,  in  which,  from  the  great  extent 
of  his  knowledge  and  from  the  vigor  of  his  intellect,  he 
•oon  showed  himself  a  very  powerful  combatant.  His 
attacks  were  chiefly  directed  against  Dr.  Joseph  Priest* 
ley,who  in  a  neries  of  publications  defended  with  great 
aubtilty  and  skiU  the  doctrines  of  philosophical  neces- 
ńty,  materialisro,  and  Unitarianism.  Dr.  Horsley  began 
his  attack  in  1778  on  the  que8tion  oTMan^s  Free  Affency ; 
it  wu  continued  in  a  Charge  delivered  in  1783  to  the 
clogy  of  his  archdeaconr}',  in  which  he  animadverted  on 
mmy  parta  of  Dr.  Priestley*s  Hisłmy  oftht  Cormplums 
o/Ckristkadty.  This  charge  produced  a  reply  from  Dr. 
Prieatley,  which  led  to  a  rejoinder  from  Dr.  Horsley  in 
SegeĘteen  Letlers  to  Dr.  Prieatley ^  a  masterly  defence  of 
the  orthodox  faith,  and  the  secure  foundation  of  a  last- 
ing  theological  rcputation.  These  writings  are  believed 
to  hare  stoppcd  the  progress,  for  that  age,  of  Socinian- 


ism  in  England.  The  tide  of  preferment  new  began  to 
flow  in  upon  him.  Thurlow,  who  was  then  chancellor, 
presented  him  with  a  prebendal  stall  in  the  church  of 
Gloucester,  obaerring,  as  it  is  said,  that  "  those  who  de- 
fended the  Church  ought  to  be  supported  by  the  Church ;" 
and  in  1788  he  was  madę  bishop  of  St  David'8.  In  Par^ 
liament  he  distinguished  himself  by  the  hcarty  support 
which  he  gave  to  the  measurcs  of  Pitt'8  adroinistration. 
His  political  conduct  gained  him  the  favor  of  the  court : 
in  1793  he  was  translated  to  Bochester,  and  in  1802  to 
St,  Asaph.  He  died  October  4, 1806.  Dr.  Horsley  haa 
been,  not  inaptly,  describcd  as  the  last  of  the  race  of 
episcopal  giants  of  the  Warburtonian  school.  He  was  a 
man  of  an  original  and  powerfid  mind,  of  yery  cxten8ive 
leaming,  and  profoundly  rersed  in  the  subjcct  of  ecclesi- 
astical  history,  of  which  he  gave  ample  eridence  in  his 
controyersy  with  Dr.  Prieatley,  while  archdcacon  of  St, 
Albans.  Even  Gibbon  says, "  His  spear  pierccd  the  So- 
cinian's  shiclA."  His  sermons  and  critical  disąuisitions 
freąuently  display  a  rich  fund  of  theological  acumen, 
and  of  succeasful  illustration  of  the  sacred  writings.  Be- 
sides  the  works  named  above,  his  theological  writings 
include  Crifiad Dugyisiiioru  on  Jsaiah  xviii  (Lond.  1799, 
4to) : — The  Booh  of  Psalmem  translated^  wiih  Notes  (3d 
edit.  London,  1833,  8to)  i—I/oseOj  t7'anslafed,  trith  Nota 
(2d  edit.  Lond.  1804)  v—BiJblkal  Criticism  on  the  O.  Test, 
(2d  edit.  Lond.  1844, 2  vols.  8vo) :— Sermons  on  the  Bes^ 
urrection  (3d  edit  Lond.  1822, 8vo) ;  all  which,  with  his 
tracta  iu  the  Prieatley  controyersy,  are  to  be  found  in 
his  Collected  WorTcs  (Lond.  1845, 6  yola.  8vo).  See  Eng^ 
lish  Cydopadia ;  Quarterly  Retiew  (Lond.),  rola.  iii  and 
ix;  Edirdmrgh  Rerierc^  yoL  xvii;  Allibone,  Diet.  of  Au- 
thorSf  i,  894 ;  Darling,  Cyclop.  BibliogiophicOf  i,  1548 ; 
Chalmers,  Biog.  Dicttonary ;  Hook,  Eccles.  Eiog,  yi,  171 
są. ;  Skeats,  Uist.  ofthe  Free  Churches  of  England,  p.  513 
sq. ;  Donaldson,  Iłisf.  of  Christ.  Lii.  and  DocfrineSj  i,  72 ; 
Ch.  nisł.  ofthe  13//i  Centwy,  p.  445 ;  Hagenbach,  Uist.  of 
Doctrines,  ii,  418, 421 ;  Shedd,  Jlistory  <f  Doctrines,  i,  57, 
386 ;  General  Repository,  i,  22,  229 ;  ii,  7,  267 ;  iii,  13, 
250;  Ouarterly  Retiew,  iii,  3r8;  ix,  30;  Edwburgh  Re- 
Herc,  xvii,  455 ;  Monfhly  Retiew,  1x3cxiv,  82 ;  A  nalyiical 
Magazine,  iy,  268. 

HorstiuB,  Jacob  Merlo,  a  Roman  Catholic  theo- 
logian,  was  bom  towards  the  close  of  the  IGth  century 
at  Horst,  Holland  (whcncc  his  naroe).  He  was  priest 
at  the  Lyskirchen  in  Cologne,  where  he  died  in  1644, 
Horstiua  ia  the  author  of  seyeral  ascetical  worka.  He 
wrote  Enchiridion  officii  dtrini ;  Paradisns  anhnoe  Chris^ 
tianas  (transL  into  French  bj'  Nicolaua  Fontane,  luidcr 
the  title  Heures  Chretiennee,  tirees  de  TEcrityre  et  des 
samts  Peres)  i^Septem  łubof  orbis  Christiani  (a  compila- 
tion  from  the  writings  of  the  fathers,  and  intended  for 
young  Roman  Catholic  prieat a).  He  also  edited  a  com- 
mentary  of  Estiua  on  the  Pnnline  lAtters ;  the  worka  of 
St.  Bernard  (2  vols.),  and  of  Thomas  k  Kempis.— Wetzer 


HORT 


350 


HORwrrz 


ond  Welte,  kircken-Tjerthony  xii,  598 ;  TheóL  Utdv.  Lex. 
(Elberf.l868),ii,d69. 

Hort,  Josi AH,  an  Anglican  prelate,  was  boni  towaids 
the  dose  of  the  17  th  century,  and  educated  at  a  Dissent- 
ing  school  together  with  Dr.  Isaac  Watta.  In  1695  be 
became  chaplain  to  John  Hanipden,  £8q.,  M.P.,  and  af- 
terwards  setUed  as  Dissenting  minister  at  Marshfleld. 
About  1708  he  conformed,  and  became  a  minister  of  the 
Church  of  England.  He  now  rosę  quickly  to  dtstin> 
guished  positions  in  the  Church.  In  1721  he  was  con- 
secrated  bishop  of  Fems  and  Leighlin  in  Ireland,  trans- 
lated  in  1727  to  Kilroore  and  Ardagh,  and  was  advanced 
to  the  archbishopric  of  Tuam  in  1742,  with  the  united 
bishopric  of  Enaghdoen,  and  with  permission  to  hołd 
also  his  former  bishopric  of  Ardagh.  He  died  Dec  14, 
1751 .  Bishop  Hort  published,  besides,  sereral  coUections 
or  Sermoiu  (1708-9, 1738, 1757)  i^Irutrutions  to  the  Cler-- 
fflfo/Tuam  (1742, 8vo;  1768,  8vo;  also  in  Clergyman'8 
Instructor),  Sec  Hook,  Eccl  Biog.  vi,  184  są. ;  Allibone, 
Dictionary  of  Authora,  i, 895. 

Hortig,  Karl  Anton,  a  distinguished  German  Ro- 
man Catholic  (also  known  by  the  name  given  him  by 
his  order,  Joiiann  Nbpomuck),  was  bom  at  Pleistein, 
Bararia,  in  1774,  and  was  educated  at  the  Unirersity 
of  Ingolstadt.  He  entered  the  order  of  the  Benedictines 
in  1794,  and  in  1799  became  chaplain  of  a  nunnery  at 
Nonnberg.  In  1802  he  was  appointed  professor  of  logie 
and  metaphysics  at  the  school  of  the  Andech  Cloister, 
and  promoted,  after  fUling  rarious  minor  positions,  to  a 
professorship  of  theology  at  Landshut  in  1821.  In  1826 
he  removed  with  the  university  to  Munich,  where  he 
received  many  honors,  and  died  Feb.  27,  1847.  His 
theological  works  are,  Predigtenf,  aUe  Fesłłage  (Landsh. 
1821 ;  8d  edit.  1832)  :—Predifften  u.  d,  sonldgigm  Evan- 
gel  (ibui  1827 ;  2d  ed.  1832)  '.—Ilaridb.  d.  christL  Kirch- 
enffesch,  (2  volś.  1826-28,  of  which  the  second  part  of 
voL  ii  was  completed  by  the  celebrated  Dollinger). — 
RtalrEncykhp,/,  d.  kalAoL  DeutschL  xii,  1031  8q.;  Herer, 
Univ,  Lex.  viii,  550. 

Horton,  Thomas,  D.D.,  an  English  divine,  was  bom 
at  London,  and  was  educated  at  Emmanuel  College, 
Cambridge,  of  which  he  became  fellow.  In  1637  he  was 
aniver8ity  preacher,  and  in  July  of  this  year  he  was 
choseu  master  of  Queen's  College,  Cambridge,  and  min- 
ister of  St,  Mary  Colechurch,  London.  In  1641  he  be- 
came professor  of  divinity  at  Greaham  College,  and  in 
1647  preacher  of  Gray's  Inn,  and  vice-chancellor  of  Cam- 
bridge in  1650.  He  was  ejected  for  nonconformity  in  1662, 
but  he  afterwards  conformed,  and  was  appointed  vicar 
of  Great  SU  Helen^s,  London,  in  1666.  He  died  in  1673. 
He  was  a  pious  and  learaed  man,  especially  skilled  in 
the  Oriental  languages.  Of  his  works,  which  are  veTy 
scarce,  the  principal  are  Sermon  (Psa.  lxxxvii,  4-6), 
ZiorCs  Birth-registtr  un/olded  (Lond.  1656, 4to) ;— Forty- 
six  Sermons  on  the  eighth  Chapter  of  the  Epistle  to  the 
Eomaru  (Lond.  1674,  foL)  :—Choice  and practical  Expo- 
sitiotu  onfour  select  Psalms  (iv,  xUi,  lix,  lxiii)  (London, 
1675,  fol.) : — One  hundred  select  Sermoiu  upon  secercd 
Teits  ;  fifty  upon  tJie  Old  Testament  andffty  on  the  New : 
lefŁ  perfectcd  in  the  press  under  his  own  hands  (Lond. 
1679,  fol.).— Stoughton  (John),  Ecdes.  Iłisf,  of  England 
(London,  1870, 2  vols.  8vo),  i,  156, 288 ;  Darling,  Cyclop. 
Bibliographica,  i,  1531 ;  Hook,  Eccles,  Biog,  vi,  185  są. ; 
Wood,  At  hen,  Oxon,  ii  (see  Index) ;  Allibone,  Dictionary 
of  A  uthorsy  if  805, 

HoruB  (^Q|Ooc),  the  Egyptian  god  of  the  sun,  gen- 
erally  written  in  hieroglyphics  by  the  sparrow-hawk, 
and  represented  with  a  bird*s  beak.  The  old  derivation 
from  the  Hebrew  aur,  light,  is  now  recognised  as  incor- 
rect.  As  an  Egyptian  divinity  he  is  mentioned  generally 
as  the  son  of  Isis  and  Osiris,  and  brother  of  Bubastis,  the 
Egyptian  Diana.  Yarious  esoteric  explanations  have 
been  given  of  him,  e.  g.  that  "  he  represents  the  Nile, 
as  Typhon  the  desert,  the  fmitful  air  or  dew  which  re- 
vives  the  earth,  the  moon,  the  sun  in  relation  to  the 
changes  of  the  year,  or  the  god  who  preaided  over  the 


course  of  the  sun."  He  also  represented  thiee  plan^ts-^ 
Jupiter  (Harapshta),  Saturn  (Harka),  and  Mars  (Har- 
teshr).  The  sparrow-hawk  was  sacred  to  him ;  ao  were 
lions,  wfiich  were  placcd  at  the  side  of  his  throne.  Thcare 
was  a  festival  to  celebrate  his  eyes  on  the  SOth  Epipłii, 
when  the  sun  and  moon,  which  they  represented,  were 
on  the  same  right  linę  with  the  earth.  A  movable  fesst, 
that  of  his  coronation,  is  supposed  to  have  been  selected 
for  the  coronations  of  the  kings  of  Egypt,  who  are  de- 
scribed  as  sitting  upon  his  thione.  Whea  adult,  he  is 
generally  represented  hawk-headed;  as  a  child,  he  is^ 
seen  canried  in  his  mother's  arms,  wearing  the  pshenŁ  or 
atf  and  seated  on  a  lotus-flower  yńih  his  finger  on  bis 
lips.  He  had  an  especial  local  ¥ror8hip  at  Edfou  ov  Hut, 
the  ancient  Apollinopolis  Magna,  where  he  was  identi- 
fied  with  Ra,  or  the  Sun.  There  were  also  booka  of  Ho- 
rus  and  Isis,  probably  referring  to  his  legend  (Ludan, 
De  Sonm,  sive  Gall,  s.  183).  The  magnet  was  called  his 
bonę ;  he  was  of  fair  oomplexion  (Chambers,  Cyclop,  v, 
430  są.).  He  was  also  worshipped  very  extensirely  in 
Greece,  and  later  at  Romę,  in  a  somewhat  modified  form. 
In  Grecian  my  thology  he  waa  oompared  with  ApoUo,  and 
identilied  with  Harpocrates,  the  last  son  of  Osiris  (PlnU 
De  la,  et  Ot,  19).  See  Horapollo.  They  were  both 
represented  as  youths,  and  with  the  same  attributea  and 
sjrmbols  (Artemid.  Oneir.  ii,  86 ;  Macrobius,  Sat.  i,  28 ; 
Porphyiy  ap.  Euseb.  Pm^,  Etang,  v,  10 ;  lamblichus.  De 
Myster,  vii,  2).  In  the  period  of  the  worship  of  this 
god  at  Romę  he  seems  to  have  been  regarded  as  the 
god  of  ąuiet  life  and  silenoe  (Yarro,  />e  L.  L.  iv,  17,  Bip. ; 
Ovid,  Met,  ix,  691 ;  Ausoniua,  Epigt,  ad  Paul  xxv,  27), 
which  was  due,  no  doubt,  to  the  belief  that  he  waa  boń 


A  flnely-execnted  brouze  figurę  of  Hab-Oebi,  son  of  Osi- 
ris and  Athor,  who  Is  freoncDŁly  called  the  elder  Homs. 
At  Ombos  he  Is  styled  "  Recident  in  the  eres  of  light. 
Lord  of  Ombos,  the  great  God,  Lord  of  the  Heavens. 
Lord  of  Eelak,  Philter  etc.,  and  is  evidently  connectea 
with  the  Sun.  From  Memphis.  (From  Abbott*8  Collec* 
tioo  of  Egyptian  Aotląaities.) 

with  his  finger  in  his  mouth,  as  indicative  of  secrecy 
and  mystery.  Horus  acts  also  a  prominent  part  in  the 
mystic  works  attributed  to  Hermes  Trismegistus  (q.  t.). 
See  Smith,  Dictionary  of  Greek  cmd  Roman  A  ntigńities, 
ii,  526;  Birch,  G(dL  of  Antig,  p.  85;  Wilkinson,  Afca&L 
and  Cust,  iv,  395 ;  Jabłoński,  Panth,  ii,  4,  p.  222 ;  Chiun- 
poUion,  Panth,  Eg. ;  Hincks,  Dublin  L'niv,  Mag,  xxviii, 
187 ;  Bockh,  Manetho,  p.  61 ;  Bunsen,  A  egyptene  Stelle  tn 
d,  Welłgetch,  i,  505  są.  See  Yalkntimiak  Thi£0U0gt. 
(J.H.W.) 

HorwitB,  a  Jewish  family,  8everal  membera  of 
which  have  become  distinguished  as  writcrs.  The  most 
renowned  are ; 

1.  HoRWiTz  (Sabbatai-Schejtel),  Ha-Lbvi  bkk-Aki- 
BA,  head  of  the  synagogue  of  Prague  at  the  beginning 
of  the  16th  century.  He  wrote  y^'a'\^  n^B  (Kerez, 
1793,  4to),  or  Commentary  on  Sam.  GaIicho*8  O'^©^ 
D'^aia'1 :— "^li^n  •'PąW  rwą  (Prague,  1616,4to),  m  di- 
alogue  expounding  the  Cabalistic  doctrine  of  the  soul : 
-i'^  rc^  (Zolkiew,  1780, 4to),  a  Cabalistic  work  di- 


HOSAH 


361 


HOSANNA 


Tided  into  two  partą  making  m  key  to  the  Jezirah,  Zo- 
har,  and  other  Cabalistic  books. 

2.  Hoswrrz,  Abraham,  son  of  the  preceding,  and 
known  aho  under  the  name  of  Schefielety  was  bom  at 
Pragnę  in  the  Itist  half  of  the  I6th  oentoiy.  He  wiote 
the  foUowuig  Hebraw  worka:  Dn'iąM  n-^*ną,  On  Re- 
pentiotce  and  Confution  (Cracow,  1602,  and  often)  • — 
Drr*>3K^  ^Cl?)  A  oomplete  commentar>'  ou  Maimoni- 
desa  introd.  to' the  book  Aboth  of  the  Telmud  (Cracow, 
1577,  and  often)  :— -pinia  Ó^  (Prague,  1615,  4to),  con- 
tainiog  monl  inatnictions,  especially  intended  for  hU 
own  chikiren'. — ^^^^^  P^?  (Amat.  1757,  4to),  oontain- 
ing  remarks  on  the  bleaaings  of  the  Jews  and  their  or- 
igin. 

3.  HoRWTTZ,  ISAiAH,  aon  of  the  foregoing,  bom  at 
Prague  abont  1550,  became  the  most  distinguished  of 
thia  family.  He  was  Rabbi  fint  at  Frankfort,  then  at 
Posen,  at  Cracow,  and  at  Prague.  In  1622  he  went  to 
Jeruaalem.  Poverty  induced  him  to  Ieave  that  city, 
and  he  retiied  to  Ttberias,  where  he  died  in  1629.  He 
wiotfi  ^•''^ąn  ninsii  '»30  (Amsterd.  1649,  foL ;  sereral 
timca  reprińted),  a  work  which  enjoĄ^a  great  reputation 
among  the  Jewa.  It  ia  divided  into  two  parU:  the 
first  treata  of  the  existence  of  God,  the  law,  the  piivi- 
legea  of  the  people  of  Israel,  the  attributea  of  God,  the 
aanctuary,  judgment,  free  agency,  the  Measiah,  worship, 
ceremoniea,  and  feaata.  The  aecond  part  containa  ten 
tieatises  on  Eix  hundred  and  thirteen  precepta,  the  orał 
law,  etc  Three  abridg^enta  have  been  published,  one 
by  Eppstein  (Amst.  1683,  4to ;  sereral  edit.) ;  the  sec- 
ood  by  Zoref  Ha-Levi  (Frankf.  1681, 4to) ;  and  the  third 
by  CEttling  Bcn-Jechia  (Ven.  1705,  8vo):— rcj  "^^ją, 
or  Cbmmentary  on  '*  the  book  of  Blordecai,"  was  at  firat 
published  only  in  part  with  the  Seder  Mohedf  then  aep- 
aratdy  (Amst.  1757,  4to;  Zolkiew,  1826,  foL),  and  oft- 
ener  aa  an  appendix  to  the  book  of  Mordecai,  or  in  some 
editions  of  the  Tahnud:— HSia  p«r  'tb  Pńnjn,  re- 
flections  cm  the  Etnek  Berakah  of  his  father,  and  pnnt- 
cd  along  with  it  (Cne.  1597,  4to) ;  also  in  the  two  sep- 
arate  editions  of  the  preceding  work :— Sl*?^**?  "'Cw 
(Amst.  1717,  4to;  with  a  preface  and  glosaarics  by  one 
of  his  descendanta,  Abraham  HorwiU) :  it  is  a  Caba- 
listic oommentaiy  on  the  Psalms  and  on  pnyers.  The 
same  work  containa  also  his  lather^s  Sepher  BeritA 
Ahraheaiu 

4.  IIoRWiTZ  (Sahbatai  Sckeftel)^  son  of  the  preced- 
ing, was  Rabbi  of  Frankfort,  then  of  Posen,  and  finally 
of  Yienna,  where  he  died  about  1658.  He  is  the  author 
of  three  Hebrew  worka,  the  first  entitled  A  Treatite  on 
MoraUj  in  8ix  parta,  ser^'ing  as  an  introduction  to  his 
iather^s  work,  n*^'^ąn  nini?  ^aą,  and  priuted  with  it 
(AmsL  1649,  foL;  sereral  editions) :— HK-IS,  printed  with 
his  gnndfather's  "f  ^nia  D^  (Amst  1717*,  4to),  a  work  on 
monłs  already  referred  to  above :— nis^ą  6^  *^i;^^'^Tl, 
printed  with  his  grandfather'8  Emeh  Berakah,  on  which 
it  is  a  sort  of  commentaiy  (Amst.  1757,  4to;  Zolkiew, 
1826,  foL). 

5.  HoRWiTZ,  IsAiAH  bkk-Jacob,  nephcw  of  the  fore- 
going, and  grandson  of  the  former  Isaiah  Horwitz,  was 
a  natire  of  PoUnd,  and  died  there  in  1695.  He  wrote 
•^kn  r''ą  (Yenice,  1668,  4to),  and  «omc  oommentaries 
on  the  Talmud  relating  to  Jewish  Jurispradence.  See 
J.  Buxtori;  Rahbmica  Bibłiotheca  ,*  Wolf,  BibUotheca  Ile- 
łtraiat ;  Kosai,  Dizionario  degli  A  uiori  EbrH ;  J.  FUrst, 
BibUofh.  Judaica  ;  Hoefer,  Nouv.  Biogr.  Gener,  xxv,  207. 
(J.H.W.) 

Ho^eah  (Heb.  Chotah'j  noh,  n/tr^;  Sept  '0<ra, 
'Otfa,  and  'Q9i|«),  the  name  of  a  place  and  also  of  a  man. 

1.  A  place  on  the  border  of  the  tribe  of  Asher,  at  a 
point  where  the  linę  tumed  from  the  direction  of  Tym 
to  its  teraiinus  on  the  Mediteiranean,  in  the  direction 
of  Achzib  (Joah.  xix,  29).  It  is  poesibly  the  same  with 
the  modem  viUage  el^GAazkk,  a  little  south  of  Zidon ; 


notwithstanding  the  objection  of  Schwarz  (who  thinka 
this  too  far  north,  and  prefers  a  village  called  d-Buuok^ 
a  little  north  of  £czib,  PaUst,  p.  194),  sińce  it  is  uncer- 
tain  which  way  the  boundary  is  here  described  as  run- 
ning,  and  the  account  is  a  good  deal  involved.  Yan  de 
Yelde  proposes  to  identify  it  with  d-Kauzah,  '*  a  rillage 
with  traces  of  antiquity  near  wady  el-Ain"  {Metnoir,  p. 
322),  the  Katizih  uf  Robinson  (new  Researches,  p.  61, 62) ; 
but  to  thls  Keil  objects  (Commenł.  on  Josh,  ad  loc.)  that 
"  the  aituation  does  not  suit  in  this  connection,"  although 
it  lies  very  near  Ramah,  and  in  the  direction  from  Tyre 
towards  Achzib.     See  Elkosii. 

2.  A  Leyite  of  the  family  of  Merari,  who,  with  thir- 
teen of  his  relatiyes,  was  appointed  by  David  porter  of 
the  gate  Shallecheth,  on  the  west  side  of  the  Tempie  (1 
Chroń,  xvi,  88 ;  xxvi,  10, 11,  16).     B.C.  1014. 

HoeaŁ    See  Hozai. 

Hosan^na  {waawa,  from  the  Heb.  K}*n9'^l^in, 
as  in  Psa.  cxyiii,  25;  Isa.  hx,  1 ;  xlv,  20),  a  form  of  ac- 
clamatory  bleesing  or  wishing  well,  which  signifles  8ave 
now  !  L  e.  ^  suocor  now !  be  now  propitious !"  It  occurs 
in  Matt.  xxi,  9  (also  Mark  xi,  9, 10 ;  John  xii,  13),  '<  Ho- 
sanna to  the  Son  of  David ;  Blessed  is  he  that  cometh  in 
the  name  of  the  Lord !  Hosanna  in  the  highest."  This 
was  on  the  occasion  of  our  Saviour'8  public  entry  into  Je- 
ruaalem, and,  fairly  constnied,  would  mean,  ''Lord,  pre- 
serve  this  Son  of  Davłd;  heap  fayors  and  blessings  on 
him !"  It  is  further  to  be  obeenred  that  Hosanna  was  a 
customary  form  of  acclamation  at  the  Feast  of  Tabema- 
des.  This  feast  waa  celebrated  in  September,  j  ust  before 
the  comroencement  of  the  civil  year,  on  which  occasion 
the  people  carried  in  their  hands  bundlcs  of  boughs  of 
palma,  myrtles,  etc  (Josephus,  i4n/.  xiii,  13, 6;  iii,  10, 4). 
They  then  repeated  the  25th  cnd  2CLh  ycrses  of  Psa. 
cxviii,  which  commence  with  the  word  lioFoma ;  and 
from  thiB  circumstance  they  cave  the  bouphp.  and  the 
prayers,  and  the  feast  itself  tho  name  of  Hosaiwa.  They 
obeenred  the  same  forms,  also,  at  the  Enca:iiia,  or  Festi- 
val  of  Dedication  (1  Mace.  x,  6, 7 ;  2  Maco.  xiii,  51 ;  Rev. 
vii,  9),  and  the  Passoycr.—  Kitto.  ITie  f.salm  from 
Which  it  was  taken,  the  118th,  was  one  with  which  they 
were  familiar,  from  being  accustomcd  to  recitc  the  25th 
and  26th  ver8es  at  the  Feast  of  Tabcniaclcs.  On  that 
occasion  the  Great  HalUl,  consisting  of  Psa.  cxiii-cxviii, 
waa  chanted  by  one  of  the  priests,  and  at  certain  inter- 
vals  the  multitudes  Joined  in  the  rcsponscs,  waving  their 
branches  of  willow  and  palm,  and  shouting  as  they 
waved  them  Hallelujah,  or  Hosanna,  or  "  O  Lord,  I  be- 
seech  thee,  send  now  prosperity"  (Psa.  cxviii,  25).  Thia 
waa  done  at  the  recitation  of  the  first  and  last  vcrscs  of 
Psa.  cxviii,  but,  according  to  the  school  of  Hillel,  at  the 
worda  "Save  now,  we  besccch  thce"  (ver.  25).  Tho 
school  of  Shammai,  on  the  contrai^',  say  it  was  at  the 
words  "  Send  now  prosperity"  of  the  same  rersc.  Rab- 
ban  Gamaliel  and  R.  Joshua  were  ob6erved  by  R.  Akiba 
to  wave  their  bnnches  only  &t  the  words  **  Save  now, 
we  beaeech  thee"  (Mbhna,  Succah,  iii,  9).  On  each  of 
the  seven  days  during  which  the  feast  lasted  the  people 
'  thronged  in  the  court  of  the  Tempie,  and  went  in  pro- 
t  cession  about  the  altar,  setting  their  boughs  bending  to- 
'  wards  it,  the  trumpets  sounding  es  they  shoutcd  Hosan- 
na. But  on  the  seyenth  day  they  marched  seren  tirocs 
I  round  the  altar,  shouting  meanwhile  the  great  Hosanna 
I  to  the  sound  of  the  trumpets  of  the  Leritcs  (Lightfoot, 
'  Tempk  Seroicf,  xvi,  2).  The  very  children  who  could 
wave  the  palm  branches  were  cxpected  to  takc  part  in 
the  solemnity  (Mishna,  8uccah,i\i,  15;  Matt.  xxi,  15). 
From  the  custom  of  waving  the  boughs  of  myrtle  and 
w^illow  during  the  Ber\'ice  the  name  Hosanna  was  ulti 
mately  transferred  to  the  boughs  thcmselres.  so  that, 
according  to  Elias  Levita  (Thislń,  s.  v.), "  the  bundlcs  of 
the  willowa  of  the  brook  which  they  carr^'  at  the  Feast 
of  Tabemacles  are  called  Hoscniias."  The  term  is  fre- 
quently  applied  by  Jewish  writers  to  denote  the  Feast 
of  Tabemacles,  the  8cventh  day  of  the  feast  being  dis^ 
tinguished  as  the  great  Hosanna  (Buxtorf,Xex.  Talm,  & 


HOSE 


352 


HOSEA 


y.  91!?'^). — Smith.  Monographs  on  this  ejaculAtion  hiive 
been  written  in  Latin  byBindrim  (Boa.  1671),NothduTfft 
(Brunsw.  1713),  Pfaff  (Tubingen,  1789),  Winzer  (lipB. 
1677-78, 1703),  Bucher  (Zittav.  1728),  Wenudorf  (Viteb. 
1765),  Zopf  (Lipa.  1703).    Sec  Halleł. 

HOSANNA.  The  early  Christian  Church  adopted 
this  word  into  its  iironhip.  It  is  found  in  the  apostol- 
ical  constitutions  connected  with  the  greAt  doxolog}«-  or 
exjclamation  of  tńumph, "  Glory  be  to  God  on  high,"  and 
was  frequently-  used  in  the  communion  senrice,  during 
which  the  great  doxology  was  also  sung.— Eadie,  Ecd, 
Diet,  p.  314 ;  Bingham,  ChritL  A  ntiq,  i,  41 ;  ii,  690.  (J. 
H.W.) 

Hose  CĆ^'^%pałii8h%  only  in  the  plur.,  marg.  0^&, 
pe'tesh,  Chald., "  hosen,"  Dan.  iii,  21).  What  artide  óf 
apparel  is  here  denoted  is  not  ceitain.  Theodotion  (per- 
haps  also  the  Sept.)  and  the  Yulg.  undentand  a  tiara  ; 
oompare  Greek  Trirajroc,  Tenet,  Gr.  ver».  iiva^vcic ;  but 
the  Heb.  interprctcrs  morę  oorrectly  render  a  twde  or 
under-garment  (rsns  =x(rwv),  a  signification  that  bet^ 
ter  agrees  with  an  ample  gaiment  (from  0Ś^&,  to  ea> 
pand).  The  term  does  not  elsewhere  occur;  but  see 
Buxtorfr,  Zear.  Tcdm,  ooL  1865.— Gesenius.     See  Dress. 

Hose^a  (Heb.  Ho»ht%  CCJin,  delirerance),  or  "  Ho- 
shea"  (as  it  is  morę  oorrectly  Anglidzed  in  Deut.  xxxii, 
44;  2  Kings  xv,  30;  xvii,'l,  8,  4,  6;  xviii,  1,  9, 10;  1 
Chroń,  xxvii,  20;  Neh.  x,  23;  but  '^Oshea**  in  Numb. 
xiii,  8, 6),  the  name  of  several  men. 

1.  HosHBA  or  OsHBA  (Sept.  Av<r4  and  'Itioovc,Yu\g. 
Osee  and  Josue),  the  originai  name  of  Joshua  (q.  y.), 
Moses^s  successor  (Numb.  xiii,  8, 16 ;  DeuL  xxxii,  44). 

2.  Hoshba,  the  son  of  Azariah,  and  yiceroy  of  the 
Ephraimites  under  David  (1  Chroń,  xxvii,  20). 

3.  HosEA  (Sept.  'Offłjf.yulg.  Osee,  N.  T.  'Q«i;, «  Osee," 
Bom.  ix,  25),  the  son  of  Beeri  (Hos.  i,  1, 2),  and  author 
of  the  book  of  propbecies  which  bears  bis  name.  See 
Prophet. 

The  personal  histor}'^  of  the  prophet  Hoeea  is  so  dose- 
ly  inter>voven  with  his  book  of  prophecies  that  it  wUl 
be  most  convenient  to  consider  them  together;  indeed, 
the  pńncipal  recorded  eyents  of  his  Ufe  were  a  series  of 
prophetical  symbols  themselve8.  The  figments  of  Jew- 
ish  writers  rcgarding  Hoflea's  parentage  need  scarcely 
be  mentioned  (see  J.  Fredericus,  ExercU,  de  Hotea  et  to- 
łicimis  ejusy  Lips.  1715).  His  father  has  been  confound- 
ed  with  Beerahf  a  prince  of  the  Reubenites  (1  Chroń,  y, 
6).  So,  too,  Beeri  has  been  reckoned  a  prophet  himself, 
acoording  to  the  rabbinical  notion  that  the  mention  of 
a  prophet*s  father  in  the  introduction  to  his  prophecies 
is  a  proof  that  sire  as  well  as  son  was  endowed  with  the 
oracular  spirit. 

1,  P/ace.— Whether  Hosea  was  a  citizen  of  Israel  or 
Judah  has  been  disputed.  The  pseudo-Epiphanius  and 
Dorotheus  of  Tyre  speak  of  him  as  being  bom  at  Bele- 
moth,  in  the  tribe  of  Issachar  (Epiphan.  De  Viti§  Proph- 
et, cap.  xi ;  Doroth.  De  Proph,  cap.  i).  Druaius  (Critici 
Sacriy  in  loc,  tom.  v)  prefers  the  reading  "  Beth-eemes," 
and  quote8  Jerome,  who  says, "  Osee  de  tribu  Issachar 
fuit  ortus  in  Beth-semes."  But  Maurer  contends  strenu- 
ously  that  hc  belonged  to  the  kingdom  of  Judah  (Com- 
ment,  TheoL^  ed.  RosenmUller,  ii,  391) ;  while  Jahn  sup- 
poses  that  he  exercised  his  office,  not,  as  Amos  did,  in 
Israel,  but  in  the  principality  of  Judah.  Maurer  appeals 
to  the  superscription  in  Amos  as  a  proof  that  prophets 
of  Jewish  origin  were  sometimes  commissioned  to  labor 
in  the  kingdom  of  Israel  (against  the  appeal  to  Amos, 
see  Credner,  Joel,  p.  66 ;  Hitzig,  Kurzgef.  €xtgeł,  Handb, 
zum  A,T,\t.  72).  But  with  the  exception  of  the  casc 
recorded  in  1  Kings  xiii,  1  (a  case  altogether  too  singu- 
lar  and  mysterious  to  8er\'e  as  an  argument),  the  in- 
stance  of  Amos  is  a  soli  tary  one,  and  seeras  to  have  been 
regardcd  as  anomalous  by  his  contemporaries  (Amos  vii, 
12).  Neither  can  we  assent  to  the  other  hypothesis  of 
Maurer,  that  the  mention  of  the  Jewish  kings  Uzziah, 
Jotham,  Ahaz,  and  Hezekiah,  by  Hosea  in  his  super- 


scription, is  a  proof  that  the  aeer  rągaided  them  as  his 
rightful  soyereigns,  sa  monarcha  of  that  teiritory  whkh 
gave  him  biith.  Hengstenbei^  has  well  replied,  that 
Maurer  forgets  "  the  relation  in  which  the  pioua  in  Is- 
rael genen^y,  and  the  propheta  in  particular,  atood  to 
the  kingdom  of  Judah.  They  considered  the  whole  aep- 
aration,  not  only  the  religious,  but  also  the  civil,  aa  an 
apostasy  from  God.  The  dominion  of  the  theocracy 
was  promised  to  be  the  throne  of  David."  The  lofty 
Elijah,  on  a  memorable  occasion,  when  a  direct  and  sol- 
emn  appeal  was  madę  to  the  head  of  the  theoccacy,  look 
twdoe  Stones,  one  for  each  tribe — a  proof  that  he  regard- 
ed  the  nation  as  one  in  religious  confederation.  It  was 
also  necessaiy,  for  correct  chronology,  that  the  kings  of 
both  nations  should  be  noted.  The  other  argument  of 
Maurer  for  Hosea^s  being  a  Jew,  yiz.  becauac  his  own 
people  are  so  seyerely  threatenedin  his  reproofs  and  de- 
nunciations,  implies  a  predominance  of  national  pirepos- 
session  or  antipathy  in  the  inapired  breaat  which  ia  in- 
consistent  with  our  notions  of  the  piety  and  patiiotism 
of  the  prophetic  oommisaion  (Knobel,  Der  Priphetismas 
der  ffdnraeTf  i,  203).  We  therefore  accede  to  the  opin- 
ion  of  De  Wette,  RosenmUller,  Hengstenberg,  Eichhom, 
Manger,Uhland,and  Kuinol,that  Hosea  was  an  larael- 
ite,  a  native  of  that  kingdom  with  whose  sins  and  fates 
his  book  is  specially  and  primarily  occupied.  The  name 
Ephraim  occurs  in  his  prophecies  about  thirty-fire  timea, 
and  Israel  with  eąual  frcquency,  while  Judah  is  not  men- 
tioned moro  than  fourteen  times.  Samaria  is  freąuent- 
ly  spoken  of  (vii,  1 ;  viii,  5, 6 ;  x,  5, 7 ;  xiv,  1),  Jeruaalem 
never.  Ali  the  other  localitiea  introduced  are  connected 
with  the  northem  kingdom,  either  as  forming  part  of  it, 
or  lying  on  its  borders :  Mizpah,  Tabor  (v,  1),  Gil^  (iv, 
15;  ix,  15;  xii,  12  [11]),  Bethel,  caUed  also  Bethaven 
(x,  15;  xii,  5  [4] ;  iv,  15;  v,  8;  x,  6,8) ;  Jezreel  (i,  4), 
Gibeah  (v,  8 ;  ix,  9),  Ramah  (v,  8),  Gilead  (yi,  8;  zii,  12 
[11]),  Shechem  (vi,  9),  Lebanon  (xiv,  6, 7),  Artiela  (x, 
14[?]). 

2.  Time^—Then  is  no  reaaon,  with  De  Wette,  Mau- 
rer, and  Hitzig,  to  doubt  the  genuineneaa  of  the  preaent 
auperscription,  or,  with  RosenmUller  and  Jahn,  to  sup- 
pose  that  it  may  have  been  added  by  a  later  hand — 
though  the  last  two  writers  uphold  its  authentidt^'. 
These  first  and  second  yerses  of  the  prophecy  are  so 
closely  connected  in  the  structuro  of  the  language  and 
style  of  the  narration,  that  the  second  yerse  itself  would 
become  suspicious  if  the  first  wero  reckoned  a  spnrious 
addition.  This  superscription  states  that  Hosea  proph- 
esied  during  a  long  and  eventful  period,  oommencing 
in  the  days  of  Jeroboam,  the  son  of  Joash,  extending 
through  the  lives  of  Uzziah,  Jotham,  Ahaz,  and  oon- 
duding  in  the  roign  of  Hezekiah.  As  Jeroboam  died 
B.C.  782,  and  Hezekiah  ascended  the  throne  726^  we 
have  the  round  term  of  about  sixty  years,  BbC  cir.  784- 
724,  as  the  probable  space  of  time  coyered  by  the  atter- 
ance  of  these  predictions  (Maurer,  in  the  Commeni,  TkeoL 
p.  284,  and  moro  lately  in  his  ĆommeiU,  Gramm,  J/isł. 
CriL  in  Proph,  Min.  Lips.  1840>  The  time  when  they 
were  committed  to  writing  may  probably  be  fixed  at 
about  B.C.  725.  This  long  duration  of  office  is  not  im- 
probable,  and  the  book  itself  fumishes  ationg  presomp- 
tive  evidence  in  support  of  this  chronology.  The  first 
prophecy  of  Hosea  foreteUs  the  overthrow  of  Jeha*8 
house ;  and  the  menace  was  fulfilled  on  the  death  of 
Jeroboam,  his  great-grandson.  This  prediction  most 
have  been  uttered  during  Jeroboam*s  life.  Again,  in 
eh.  X,  14,  allusion  is  madę  to  an  expedition  of  Shalma- 
neser  against  Israel;  and  if  it  was  the  first  inroad 
against  king  Hoshea  (2  Kings  xyii,  4),  who  began  to 
reign  in  the  twelfth  year  of  Ahaz,  the  event  refeired  to 
by  the  prophet  as  past  mtist  have  happened  dose  upon 
the  beginoing  of  the  goyemment  of  llezekiah.  These 
data  corroborate  the  limits  assigned  in  the  superscrip- 
tion, and  they  aro  capable  of  yerification  by  referenoe 
to  the  contents  of  the  prophecy.  (o.)  As  to  the  beipn- 
ning,  Eichhom  has  clearly  shown  that  we  cannot  ałlow 
Uoaea  much  ground  in  the  reign  of  Jeroboam  (828-783^ 


HOSEA 


The  book  cwnteifw  deacriptionB  which  are  utterly  inap- 
plicahle  to  the  oondition  of  the  kingdom  of  lanel  daiing 
this  reign  (2  Kinga  xiy,  25  8q.).  The  pictnres  of  aocial 
and  politiod  iife  which  Uoaea  dimwa  so  fordbly  are 
nther  appUcaUe  to  the  interregnum  which  foUowed 
the  death  of  Jeroboam  (781-771),  and  to  the  rdgn  of 
the  sucoeeding  kingą.  The  calling  in  of  Egypt  and 
Affi)Tia  to  the  aid  of  liral  factions  (x,  8 ;  xiii,  10)  has 
nothing  to  do  with  the  strong  and  able  govemment  of 
Jeroboam.  Nor  is  it  oonoeivable  that  a  prophet  who 
bad  Iived  long  imder  Jeroboam  should  hAve  omitted  the 
mention  of  that  moDaich*8  oonąueats  in  his  enomeration 
of  Jehovah'ii  kindneaaea  to  larael  (ii,  8).  It  seema,  then, 
ahnost  certain  that  very  few  at  leaat  of  his  propheciea 
vnn  wńtten  mitil  alter  the  death  of  Jeroboam  (781). 
(&)  As  ngaids  the  end  of  his  career,  the  title  leavefl  os 
in  itill  greater  doubt.  It  mereły  assures  na  that  he  did 
not  piophesf  beyond  the  leign  of  Hesekiah.  But  here, 
again,  the  contents  of  the  book  help  os  to  reduce  the 
Tsgueness  of  this  indication.  In  the  8ixth  year  of  Hez- 
ekiah  the  prophecy  of  Hoaea  was  fulfilled,  and  it  is  vexy 
improbaUe  that  he  should  have  pennitted  this  trium- 
phsnt  proof  of  his  divine  mission  to  pass  unnoticed.  He 
coołd  not,  therefoze,  hare  lived  long  into  the  reign  of 
Uezekiah;  and  as  it  does  not  seem  necessaiy  to  allow 
moR  than  a  year  of  each  reign  to  justify  his  being  rep- 
Rsentcd  as  a  contemporary  on  the  one  hand  of  Jerobo- 
am, on  the  other  of  Hezekiah,  we  may  suppoee  that  the 
Iife,  or,  rather,  the  prophetic  career  of  Hoaea,  extended 
fnm  782  to  725,  a  period  of  fifty-seyen  year& 

3.  Onkr  in  the  Prophetic  Series, — ^08ea  is  the  ffast 
in  order  of  the  twelye  minor  prophets  in  the  common 
editions  of  the  Scriptures  (Heb.,  SepL,  and  Vulg.),  an 
anangement,  howerer,  snppoeed  to  have  arisen  from  a 
mianterpretation  of  chap.  i,  2,  which  rather  deńotes  that 
vhit  foUows  were  the  first  divine  Communications  en- 
joycdby  this  particular  prophet  (see  Jerome,  PrtfaU  in 
2n  PnpketoM ;  Hengstenberg,  ChriHoL  Keith's  transL, 
U,  23;  De  Wette,  KifUtHung,  §  225;  RosenmUller,  Scho- 
Ha  ta  Min,  Proph,  p.  7 ;  Newcome,  Prrf.  io  Min,  Proph- 
<^  p.  45).  The  probable  causes  of  this  location  of  Ho- 
aea may  be  the  tboroughly  national  character  of  his 
ondea,  their  length,  their  eamest  tonę,  and  vivid  rep- 
raentations.  The  contour  of  the  book  has  a  closer  re- 
eemUance  to  the  greater  propheti  than  any  of  the 
eleven  pnMluctions  by  which  it  is  sncceeded.  (See  be- 
Iow.)  There  is  much  doubt  as  to  Uie  relatire  order  of 
the  fint  four  or  five  of  the  minor  prophets :  as  far  as 
titles  go,  Amos  is  Hoflea*s  only  rival ;  but  2  Kings  xiv, 
25  goes  far  to  show  that  they  must  both  yield  in  pńori- 
tr  to  Jonah.  It  is  perhaps  morę  important  to  know  that 
Uosea  must  have  been  morę  or  less  contemporary  with 
baiah,  Amoe,  Jonah,  Joel,  and  Nahum. 

4.  Ciramttcmee,  Scope,  nnd  Contents  o/ the  BooŁ— The 
yean  of  Hosea^s  public  Iife  were  dark  and  melancholy 
(«e  Pusey,  Minor  Prophetic  ad  loc).  The  nation  suffer- 
ed  onder  the  evils  of  that  schism  which  was  eifected  by 
"Jeroboam, who  madę  Israel  to  sin.**  The  obligations 
of  law  had  been  relaxed,  and  the  daims  of  religion  disre- 
garded;  Baal  became  the  rival  of  Jehoyah,  and  in  the 
«i«k  reoenea  of  the  groyes  were  practised  the  iropure 
■nd  rooiderous  rites  of  heathcn  deities;  peace  and  pnis- 
perity  lied  the  land,  which  was  haraascd  by  foreign  inva- 
9on  and  domestic  broUs ;  might  and  murder  became  the 
iwin  tentinels  of  the  throne ;  alliances  were  formed  with 
other  nations,  which  bro*^ght  with  them  seductions  to 
pagaoiam;  captiyity  and  insult  were  heaped  upon  Israel 
l>y  the  unciicumcised ;  the  nation  was  thoroughly  de- 
based,  and  but  a  fraction  of  its  population  maintained  its 
■piritual  allcgiance  (2  Kings  xix,  18).  The  death  of  Jero- 
tmun  U  was  foUowed  by  an  interregnum  of  eleven  years 
(RC  781-770),  at  the  end  of  which  his  son  Zachariah  as- 
"BBied  the  toyereignty,  and  was  slain  by  Shallum,  after 
^  rfiort  spaoe  of  8ix  roonths  (2  Kings  xv,  10).  In  four 
^^ecjcs  Shallum  was  assassinated  by  Menahem.  The  as- 
•MRn,daring  a  disturbed  reign  of  ten  years  CB.C.769- 
<  óO),  became  tributaiy  to  the  Assyiian  PuL    His  succes- 


HOSEA 

sor,  Pekahiah,  wore  the  crown  but  two  years,  when  he 
waa  murdered  by  Pekah.  Pekah,  after  swaying  his 
bloody  soeptre  for  twenty  years  (RC.  757>737),  met  a 
similar  fate  in  the  conspiracy  of  Hoahea;  Hoshea,the 
laat  of  the  usurpers,  after  another  interregnum  of  eight 
j^eaiB,  aaoended  the  throne  (B.C.  729),  and  his  adminiatra- 
tion  of  nine  yoars  ended  in  the  oyerthrow  of  his  kingdom 
and  the  expatriation  of  his  people  (2  Kings  xvii,  18, 23). 

The  prophecies  of  Hoaea  were  directed  espedally 
against  the  country  of  Israel  or  Ephraim,  whoae  sin  had 
brought  upon  it  such  disasters>-prolonged  anarchy  and 
finał  captiyity.  Their  homicides  and  fomications,  their 
peijury  and  theft,  their  idolatiy  and  impiety,  are  cen- 
suied  and  satirized  with  a  faithful  seyerity.*  Judah  is 
sometimes,  indeed,  introduced,  wamed,  and  admonished. 
fiiahop  Horsley  (  Worksy  iii,  236)  reckons  it  a  mistake  to 
snppose  "  that  Hoeea's  prophecies  are  almoat  wholly  di- 
rected against  the  kingdom  of  Israel."  The  bishop  de- 
scribes  what  he  thinks  the  correct  extent  of  Hosea^s  comh 
mission,  but  has  adduced  no  proof  of  his  assertion.  Any 
one  leading  Hoaea  will  at  onco  discoyer  that  the  orades 
haying  relation  to  Israel  are  primary ,  while  the  referenoes 
to  Judah  are  only  inddentaL  In  chap.  i,  7,  Judah  is  men- 
tioned  in  oontrast  with  Israel,  Io  whose  oondition  the 
sj-mbolic  name  of  the  prophet^s  son  is  spedally  applica- 
ble.  In  yer.  11  the  futurę  union  of  the  two  nations  is 
predicted.  The  long  oracie  in  chap.  ii  has  no  relation 
to  Judah,  nor  t^e  symbolic  representation  in  chap.  iiL 
Chap.iy  is  seyere  upon  Ephraim,  and  ends  with  a  yery 
brief  exhortation  to  Judah  not  to  follow  his  example. 
In  the  succeeding  chapters  allusions  to  Judah  do  indeed 
occasionally  occur,  when  similar  sins  can  be  predicated  of 
both  branches  of  the  nation.  The  prophet's  mind  was 
intenaely  interested  in  the  destinies  of  his  own  poople. 
The  nations  around  him  are  unheeded;  his  prophetio 
eye  beholds  the  crisis  approaching  hia  country,  and  sees 
its  cantona  ravaged,  its  tribes  murdered  or  ensUyed.  No 
wonder  that  his  rebukea  were  so  terrible,  his  menacea 
flo  alarming,  that  hia  soul  poured  forth  its  strength  in  an 
ecstasy  of  grief  and  afiection.  Inyitations  replete  with 
tendemeas  and  pathoa  aie  interspersed  with  his  waminga 
and  expoatu]ations.  Now  we  are  startled  with  a  yińon 
of  the  throne,  at  first  shrouded  in  darkness,  and  sending 
forth  lightnings,  thunderB,and  yoices;  but  while  we  gazę, 
it  becomes  encircled  with  a  rainbow,  which  gradually  ex- 
pands  tiU  it  is  loet  in  that  uniyenal  brilliancy  which  it- 
self  had  ońginated  (chapa.  xi  and  xiy). 

6.  The  PropheCs  Family  Jielations,  —  The  peculiar 
modę  of  instructioi>  which  the  prophet  detaila  in  the 
first  and  third  chapters  of  his  orades  has  giyen  rise  to 
many  disputed  theoriesi  We  refer  to  the  command  ex- 
presaed  in  i,  2 — **And  the  Lord  said  unto  Hoaea,  Go, 
take  unto  thee  a  wife  of  whoredoms  and  children  of 
whoredoms,"  etc. ;  iii,  1, "  Then  said  the  Lord  unto  me, 
Go  yet,  loye  a  woman  boloyed  of  her  friend,  yet  an 
adulteress,*'  etc.  Were  these  real  eyents,  the  result  of 
diyine  injunctiona  literally  understood,  and  as  literally 
fulfiUed?  or  were  these  intimations  to  the  prophet  only 
intended  to  be  pictoiial  illnstrations  of  the  apostasy  and 
spiiitual  folly  and  unfaithfulness  of  Israel  ?  llie  former 
view,yiz.  that  the  prophet  actually  and  literally  entered 
mto  this  impure  connubial  alliance,  was  adyocated  in 
andent  times  by  Gyril,  Theodoret,  Basil,  and  Augus- 
tine;  and  morę  recently  has  been  maintained  by  Mer- 
cer,  Grotius,  Houbigant,  Manger,  Horsley,  Eichhom, 
Stuck,  and  other&  Fandful  theories  are  alao  rife  on 
this  subject.  Luther  suppoeed  the  prophet  to  perform 
a  kind  of  drama  in  yiew  of  the  people,  giving  his  lawful 
wife  and  children  theae  mystical  appellations.  New- 
come {Minor  Prophets)  thinks  that  a  wife  of  fomicatioii 
means  mereły  an  Israelite,  a  woman  of  apostatę  and 
adulterous  IsraeL  So  Jac.  Capellus  {In  J/oteam ;  Opera, 
p.  G8S).  Hengstenbeig  supposes  the  prophet  to  relate 
actions  which  happened,  indeed,  actually,  but  not  out- 
wardly.  Some,  with  Maimonides  {Moreh  Nevochim,  pL 
ii),  imagine  it  to  be  a  noctumal  yision;  while  others 
make  it  whoUy  au  allegory,  as  the  Chaldee  Paraphrast, 


HOSEA 


354 


HOSEA 


Jerome,  Dnudus,  Bsner,  RoBenmtUler,  Koinol,  and  Jjowth. 
The  view  of  Hengstenbeig  {Christologg,  ii,  11-22),  and 
soch  as  have  held  his  theoiy  (Maikii  Diatribe  de  uxon 
/ormcationum  acc^denda,  etc.,  Lugdun.  Batav.  1696),  is 
not  materially  dilferent  from  the  last  to  which  we  have 
referred  (see  Lubkerk  in  the  TheoL  Stud,  u.  Krił,  1885, 
p.  647  8q.)<i  Besides  other  arguments  resting  on  the 
impurity  and  loathsomeness  of  the  supposed  nuptial 
contract,  it  may  be  aigued  against  the  extenud  reality 
of  the  event  that  it  must  have  reąuired  aereral  yean 
for  its  completion,  and  that  the  inipreasivenefl8  of  the 
symbol  wotild  theiefore  be  weakened  and  obliterated. 
But  this  would  almost  equally  apply  to  the  repeated 
case  of  Isaiah  (viii,  8 ;  xx,  8).  Other  prophetic  tnuis- 
actions  of  a  simila/ naturę  might  be  referred  ta  Jerome 
{Commmł.  ad  loc.)  has  referred  to  Ezek.  iv,  4.  On  the 
other  hand,  the  total  absence  of  any  figarativc  or  sym- 
boiical  phraseology  seems  to  require  the  command  to  be 
takcn  in  a  literał  sense,  and  the  immediate  addition  of 
the  declaration  that  the  order  was  obeyed  senres  to  oon- 
firm  this  view.  It  is  not  to  be  suppoeed,  as  has  some- 
times  been  aigued,  that  the  prophet  was  oommanded  to 
commit  fomication.  The  divine  injunction  was  to  mar- 
ry — ^  Scortum  aliqui8  ducere  potest  sine  peccato,  soor- 
tari  non  item"  (Dnisius,  Camm,  ad  loc  in  Critici  Saeriy 
tom.  V.).  Moreover,  if,  as  the  narrativc  implies,  and  as 
the  analogy  of  the  restored  nation  leąuires,  the  formerly 
unchaste  woman  became  a  faithful  and  reformed  wife, 
the  entire  ground  of  the  objection  in  a  morał  point  of 
view  vaniBhe8  (see  Cowles,  Minor  Prophełs,  ad  loc.). 
In  fact,  there  were  two  marriages  by  the  prophet:  the 
fiist,  in  chap.  i,  ii,  of  a  woman  (probably  of  lewd  indi- 
nations  already)  who  became  the  mother  of  three  chil- 
dren,  and  was  afterwards  repudiated  for  her  adultery ; 
and  the  second,  in  chap.  iii,  of  a  woman  at  least  attach-  ' 
ed  Ibrmerly  to  another,  but  evidently  reformed  to  a  vir- 
tuous  wife.  Both  these  women  represented  the  Israel- 
itish  nation,  especially  the  northem  kingdom,  which, 
although  unfaithful  to  Jehovah,  should  first  be  punish- 
ed  and  then  redaimed  by  him.  Keil,  after  combating 
at  length  (J/inor  Prophks^  introduct.  to  Hosea)  against 
Kurtz^s  arguments  for  the  literał  view,  is  obliged  to  a»- 
sign  the  morał  objection  as  the  only  tenable  one.  This, 
however,  is  a  very  unsatisfactory  modę  of  disposing  of 
the  question,  for  we  are  not  at  liberty  thus  to  explain 
away  the  reality  of  the  occurrence  simply  to  evade  its 
difficultie^  Moreover,  if  it  be  a  ttfwbol,  what  beoomes 
of  its  furce  unless  based  upon  a  fact  ?  Nor  do  the  proph- 
ets  receive  vu%on»  respecting  their  own  personal  acta. 
Finally,  the  intemal  suggestion  of  a  wrong  act  to  the 
pirophet's  mind  as  one  to  be  not  merely  tolerated,  but 
committed,  would  be  equivalent,  in  point  of  morał  ol>- 
liąuity,  to  the  actuał  deed  itself ;  at  least  accorditig  to 
OUT  Saviour'8  nile  of  guilt  in  such  a  matter  (Matt,  v, 
28).  This  last  reroark  leads  us  to  the  true  solution  of 
the  whole  difficulty,  which  has  simply  arisen  from  judg- 
iog  O.-T.  morals  by  a  Gospel  standard,  in  neglect  of  the 
important  principlc  enundated  by  Christ  himself  on  the 
very  ąnestion  of  the  relations  of  the  sexes  (Matt,  xix, 
8).  The  Mosaic  precept  (Lev.  xxi,  14)  has  no  perti- 
nence  here,  for  Hosea  was  not  a  priest 

But  in  whichever  way  this  ąuestion  may  be  8olved— 
whether  these  occurrenccs  be  regarded  as  a  real  and  ex- 
temal  transaction,  or  as  a  piece  of  spirituał  scenery,  or 
only  (Witsii  MisceU.  Sac.  p.  90)  as  an  ałłegorical  de- 
scription— it  is  agreed  on  all  hands  that  the  actions  are 
typical ;  that  they  are,  as  Jerome  calls  them,  merametaa 
Jułurorum,  One  question  which  sprang  out  of  the  lit- 
erał view  was  whether  the  connection  between  lloeea 
and  Gomer  was  marriage  or  fomication.  Another  que8- 
tion  which  followed  immediatdy  upon  the  preceding 
was  ^'an  Deus  possit  dispensare  ut  fomtcatio  sit  licita." 
Tłus  latter  question  was  much  discussed  by  the  school- 
men,  and  by  the  Thomlsts  it  was  avowed  in  the  affirm- 
ative, 

£xpo8itor8  are  not  at  all  agreed  as  to  the  meaning  of 
the  phiase*' wife  of  whoredoms,"  m^^J  nWK;  wheth- 


er the  phiase  refers  io  harlotry  before  maniage,  or  im* 
faithfnlness  after  iu  It  may  afibrd  an  eaty  solution  of 
the  difHcttlty  if  we  look  at  the  antit3rpe  in  its  htstofT 
and  chazacter.  Adultery  is  the  appellation  of  idolatnras 
apostasy.  The  Je¥rish  nation  were  espoused  to  God. 
The  contract  was  formed  in  Sinai;  but  the  Jewish  peo- 
ple  had  prior  to  this  period  gone  a^wharing.  Josh. 
xxiv,  2-14, "  Your  fathers  dwelt  on  the  other  aide  of  the 
fiood  in  old  time,  and  they  served  other  goda.**  Gomp. 
Lev.  xvii,  7,  in  which  it  is  implied  that  idolatrous  pm- 
pensities  had  also  deve]oped  them8elves  during  the 
abode  in  Egypt :  so  that  the  phrase  here  employed  may 
signify  one  devoted  to  laKivioa8ne8B  prior  to  her  mar- 
riage. Yet  this  propensity  of  the  Israelites  to  idolatiy 
had  been  measnrably  oovert  prior  to  the  £xode.  On 
the  other  hand,  nonę  but  a  female  of  previou8ly  lewd 
indinations  ¥rould  be  likdy  to  violate  her  conjugal  ob- 
ligations;  and  Eichhoni  showa  that  manying  an  avow- 
ed  harlot  is  not  necessaiily  implied  by  D*^3^ST  r^K, 
which  may  very  well  imply  a  wife  who  afler  marriage 
beoomes  an  adulteress,  even  though  chaste  before.  In 
any  case  the  marriage  must  be  supposed  to  have  been 
a  reał  contract,  or  its  significance  «rould  be  lost.  Jer. 
ii,  2,  "  I  remcmber  thee,  the  kindneas  of  thy  youth,  the 
love  of  thine  espousals,  when  thou  wentest  after  mc  in 
the  wildemeas,  in  a  land  that  was  not  sown.''  The  facta 
in  the  case  of  the  Israelitish  nation  correspond  with  thb 
symbol  of  a  woman  who  had  been  of  bad  repute  before 
marriage,  and  who  proved  a  notorious  profiigatc  after- 
wards. a''315t  ^*2^'^i  chUdrtn  ofushortdoms,  refcr  roort 
naturałly  to  the  two  sons  and  daughter  afterwards  to  be 
bom.  They  were  not  the  prophefs  own,  but  a  spurious 
oflspring  pdmed  upon  him  by  his  faitbless  ^Muse,  as  is 
intimated  in  the  allegory,  and  they  fullowcd  the  pemi- 
cious  examplc  of  the  mother.  Spirituał  adultcr>-  was 
the  debasing  sin  of  IsraeL  "Non  dicitur,"  obśerres 
Manger,  "  cognovit  uxorem,  sed  simplicitcr  concepit  cŁ 
peperit."  The  children  are  not  his.  It  is  sald,  iiidecd, 
in  ver.  8, "  She  bare  him  a  son."  The  word  ib  is  v.-ant- 
ing  in  some  MSS.  and  in  some  oopies  of  the  Sept.  If 
genuine,  it  only  shows  the  effinintery  of  the  adulteress^ 
and  the  patience  of  the  husband  in  recdving  and  edu- 
catiiig  as  his  0¥m  a  spurious  brood.  The  Israelites  who 
had  been  received  into  covenant  very  aoon  fell  from 
thdr  first  love,  and  were  characterized  by  insataable 
spirituał  wantonness:  yet  their  Maker,  their  husband. 
did  not  at  onoe  divorce  them,  but  exhibited  a  manreł- 
lous  long-suffering. 

The  names  of  the  children  being  symbolical,the  name 
of  the  mother  has  been  thought  to  have  a  similar  aigni- 
fication.  Gomer  Batk-Diblaim  may  have  tho  aytnboUc 
sense  of  "one  thoroughly  abandoned  to  sensual  delights;" 
^•^A  signifies  completion  (Ewald,  Grammaf.  §  228) ;  *rą 
D^^ą^,  "dauffhłer  of  grape-cakeg^  the  dual  forai  being 
expressive  of  the  modę  in  which  these  daintics  were 
baked  in  double  layera.  The  names  of  the  children  are 
Jezreel,  Lo-ruhamah,  and  Lo-ammi.  The  prophet  ex* 
plains  the  meaning  of  the  appellations.  It  is  generally 
supposed  that  the  names  refer  to  three  succeasive  gener- 
atioiis  of  the  Israelitish  people.  Hengstenberg,  on  the 
other  hand,  argues  that  *'  wife  and  children  both  are  the 
people  of  Israel :  the  three  names  must  not  be  consid- 
ered  separately,  but  taken  together.**  But  as  the  mar- 
riage is  first  mentioned,  and  the  births  of  the  children 
are  detailed  in  order,  some  time  elapsing  between  the 
evenŁs,  we  rather  adhere  to  the  ordinary  expo8ition. 
Nor  is  it  without  reason  that  the  second  child  is  de- 
scribed  as  a  female.  The  first  child,  Jezred,  may  refcr 
to  the  first  dynasty  of  Jeroboam  I  and  his  succcnors* 
which  was  terminated  in  the  blood  of  Ahab*s  house 
shed  by  Jehu  at  Jecred.  The  name  suggesta  also  the 
cruel  and  fraudulent  possession  of  the  rineyard  of  Na- 
both,  ^  which  was  in  Jezred,**  where,  too,  the  woman  Jez- 
ebd  was  slain  so  ignominiously  (1  Kings  xvi,  1 ;  2  Rings 
LX,  21).  But  sińce  Jehu  and  his  family  had  become 
as  ooiTupt  as  their  predeceasoiB,  the  scenes  of  Jezred 


HOSEA 


355 


HOSEA 


wefe  again  to  be  etiacted,  and  Jefau*8  race  muat  periah. 
Jesrael,  the  spot  referred  to  by  the  prophet,  U  alw,  ac- 
oording  to  Jennne,  the  plaoe  where  the  Aasyrian  ansy 
roated  the  laraelites.  The  same  of  thia  child  aaaociates 
the  past  and  futurę,  symbolizes  past  suis,  intennediato 
pomahmentii,  and  finał  overthrow.  The  name  of  the 
eecond  chtld,  Lo-nihamah,  ^  not-pitied,"  the  appelladon 
of  a  degnded  dtmgkter,  may  refer  to  the/eeble,  effemi- 
matę  period  which  foUowed  the  overthrow  of  the  fint 
dynasty,  when  Israel  became  weak  and  helpless  as  well 
as  sunk  aud  abandoned.  The  fayor  of  God  was  not  ex- 
hibited  to  the  natkm:  they  were  as  abject  as  impious. 
Bot  the  leign  of  Jeroboam  II  was  prosperous ;  new  en- 
ergy  was  infhaed  into  the  kingdom;  gleams  of  its  foi^ 
mer  proeperity  shone  upon  it.  This  ieTival  of  strength 
in  that  geneimtion  may  be  typified  by  the  birth  of  a 
thizd  child,  a  son,  Lo-ammi, "  not-my-people"  (2  Kings 
3dv,  25).  Yet  prosperity  did  not  bring  with  it  a  revival 
of  piety;  atill,  although  their  vigor  was  recniited,  they 
were  not  God*s  people  (Lectures  on  the  Jewiah  AtUigui- 
He*  crndScripturtM,  by  J.G.PaUjey,  ii,  422,  Boston,  1841). 
See  each  name  in  its  place. 

6.  Dirisum  o/ the  ^ool:.— Recent  writers,  such  as  Ber- 
tholdt,  Eichhorn,  De  Wette,  Stuck,  Maurer,  and  Hitzig, 
haye  labored  much,  but  in  vain,  to  divide  the  book  of 
Hosea  łnto  sepantte  portions,  assigning  to  each  the  pe- 
riod at  which  it  was  written ;  but  finom  the  want  of  suf- 
fident  data  the  atlempt  must  rest  prindpally  on  taste 
and  fancy.  A  suffident  proof  of  the  correctneas  of  this 
opinion  may  be  found  in  the  contradictory  sections  and 
aUotments  of  the  Tarious  writers  who  have  engaged  in 
the  task.  Chapters  i,  ii,  and  iii  evidently  form  one  di- 
Tiaiao :  it  is  next  to  impossible  to  separate  and  distin- 
gmsh  the  other  chapters.  The  form  and  style  are  very 
aimilar  throughout  all  the  seoond  portion. 

The  eubdirińon  of  these  sevenil  parts  is  a  work  of 
greater  dilficulty :  that  of  £ichhom  will  be  found  to  be 
based  upon  a  highly  subtle,  though  by  no  means  preca- 
rions  criticism.  (1.)  According  to  him,  the  first  diyision 
should  be  subdirided  into  three  sepazate  poems,  each 
originating  in  a  distinct  aim,  and  each  ałter  its  own 
fashioa  attempting  to  express  the  idolatiy  of  Israel  by 
imagery  borrowed  from  the  matrimonial  reUtion.  The 
fint,  and  therefbre  the  least  elaborate  of  these,  is  con- 
tained  in  chap.  iii ;  the  second  in  i,  2-11 ;  the  third  in  i, 
2-9,  and  ii,  1-23.  These  three  are  progressirely  elabo- 
rate derelopments  of  the  same  reitorated  idea.  Chap.  i, 
2-9  is  comroon  to  the  seoond  and  third  poems,  but  not 
repeated  with  each  severally  (iv,  273  8q.).  (2.)  Atteropts 
have  been  madę  by  WeUs,  Eichhorn,  eto.,  to  subdfyide 
the  second  part  of  the  book.  These  diyisions  are  madę 
either  according  to  reigns  of  oontomporaiy  kings,  or  ac- 
cording to  the  subject-mattor  of  the  poem.  The  former 
eoone  bas  been  adopted  by  WeUs,  who  gets^ce,  the  lat^ 
ter  by  Eichhorn,  who  gets  tixken  poems  out  of  this  part 
of  the  book. 

These  prophedes— so  scattered,  so  unconnected  that 
bishop  Lowth  bas  oompared  them  with  the  leaves  of 
the  Sibyl — ^weie  probably  collected  by  Hosea  himself  to- 
wards  the  end  of  his  career. 

9.  8tyk» — The  peculiarities  of  Hosea^s  style  ha  ve  often 
been  remarked.  Jerome  says  of  him,  '*  Commaticus  est, 
et  quasi  per  sententias  loquens"  {Proff,  ad  KIL  Proph,), 
Augustine  thus  criticises  him:  "Osea  quanto profundius 
loąmtor,  tanto  operońus  penetratur."  His  style,  says 
De  Wette,  "  is  abrupt,  unrounded,  and  ebollient ;  his 
rhythm  hard,  leaping,  and  yiolent.  The  buiguage  is  pe- 
cofiar  and  diificult"  (ii:M/e»tei^,  §  228).  Lowth  {Pra- 
UeL  21)  speaks  of  him  as  the  most  difficult  and  perplex- 
ed  of  the  prophets.  Bishop  Horsley  has  remarked  his 
pecnliar  idioma — his  change  of  person,  anomalies  of  gen- 
der  and  nomber,  and  use  of  the  nominative  abeolute 
{W^rŁtf  ToL  iii).  £ichhom*s  description  of  his  style 
was  probably  at  the  same  time  meant  as  an  imitation 
of  it  (A*tnMtea^,  §  555) :  "  His  discourse  is  like  a  garland 
woven  of  a  multiplicity  of  flowen :  images  are  woven 
upon  images,  comparison  wound  upon  comparison,  met- 


aphor  stnmg  upon  metaphor.  He  plucha  one  flowei^ 
and  throws  it  down  that  he  may  directly  break  ofT  an« 
other.  Like  a  bee,  hc  fiies  from  one  flower-bed  to  an- 
other,  that  he  may  suck  his  honey  from  the  most  raried 
pieoes.  It  is  a  natural  oonseąuence  that  his  figures 
sometimes  form  strings  of  pearls.  Often  hc  is  prone  to 
approach  to  allegory — often  he  sinks  down  in  obecurity" 
(oompare  v,  9 ;  vi,  3 ;  vii,  8 ;  xiii,  3,  7,  8, 16).  Obecure 
brevity  seems  to  be  the  characteristic  ąuality  of  Hosea ; 
and  all  commentaton  agree  that,  ^  of  all  the  prophets,  he 
is,  in  point  of  language,  the  most  obecure  and  hard  to 
be  understood'*  (Henderson,  iftaor  PropheiSj  p.  2).  Un- 
usual  words  and  forms  of  connection  sometimes  occur 
(De  Wette,  §  228 ;  see  also  Davidson,  in  Home,  ii,  945). 

9.  CUatioH  inthe  N.  T.— Hosea,  3S  a  prophet,  is  ex- 
pressly  ąuoted  by  Matthew  (ii,  15).  The  dtotion  is  from 
the  fint  ver8e  of  chap.  xi.  Hos.  vi,  6  is  ąuoted  twice  by 
the  same  6vangelist  (ix,  13;  xii,  7).  Other  ąuoutions 
and  references  are  the  folio wing :  Łukę  xxiii,  30 ;  Rev.  vi, 
16;  Hos.  X,  8;— Rom.  ix,  25, 26;  1  Pet.  ii,  10 ;  Hos.  i,  10 ; 
ii,  28 ;— 1  Cor.  xv,  4 ;  Hos.  vi,  2 ;— Heb.  xiii,  15 ;  Hos.  xiv, 
2.  Messianic  references  are  not  dearly  and  prominently 
developed  (Gramberg,  i^ef^iofMui  ii,  298).  This  book, 
however,  is  not  without  them,  but  they  lie  morę  in  the 
spirit  of  its  allusions  Łhan  in  the  letter.  Hosea^s  Chris- 
tology  appean  writton,  not  with  ink,  but  with  the  spirit 
of  the  living  God,  on  the  fleshly  tables  of  his  heart. 
The  futurę  conver8iou  of  his  people  to  the  Lord  their 
God,  and  David  their  king,  their  glorious  pTivilege  in 
becoming  sons  of  the  living  God,  the  faithfulness  of  the 
original  promise  to  Abraham,  that  the  number  of  his 
spiritual  seed  should  be  as  the  sand  of  the  sea,  are  among 
the  orades  whose  fulfilment  will  take  place  only  under 
the  new  dispensation. — Kitto ;  Smith. 

10.  Commeataries, — The  foUowing  are  the  ex^^tical 
helps  on  the  whole  book  of  Hosea  separately,  and  the 
most  important  are  designated  by  an  asterisk  (*)  prefix'- 
cd :  Origen,  Selecła  (in  Opp,  iii,  488) ;  Ephracm  Syrus,  Et' 
planatio  (in  Opp.  v,  234) ;  Kemigius  Antissod.,  Commen- 
larius  [frsgment]  (in  Mai,  Script,  Vet,\lj  ii,  103);  Jai^ 
chi,  Aben-Ezra,  and  Kimchi,  SchoKa  (ed.  with  Notes,  by 
Coddasus,  L.  B.  1628, 4to ;  by  De  Dieu,  ib.  1681, 4to ;  also 
extract8,  with  additions,  by  Von  der  Hardt,  Helmst  1702, 
4Ło  [with  a  historical  Introd.  ib.  eod.] ;  and  by  Mercer, 
Gen.  1574, 1578;  L.  B.  1621, 4to;  and  [mduding  8everal 
other  minor  prophets]  Gen.  15. .,  fol;  Giess.  1595,  4to; 
Gotting.  1755,  4to) ;  Abrabanel,  Comment,  (in  Lat.  with 
notes,  by  F.  al-Husen,  L.  B.  1687,  4to) ;  Luther,  Enarra- 
tio  (Yitemb.  1526, 1545;  Frcft  1546,  8vo;  also  in  Opp, 
iv,  598 ;  also  Sententta^  ib.  684) ;  Capito,  Commentarius 
(Argent.  1528,  8vo);  Quinquarboreus,  NoteB  [^induding 
Amos,  Ruth,  and  Lam.]  (Par.  1556,  4to) ;  Brentz,  Com- 
metUarius  (Hag.  1560,  4to;  Tub.  1580,  foL;  also  in  Opp. 
iv) ;  Box,  Commentaria  (Oesaraug.  1581,  foL ;  Yen.  1585, 
4to;  Lugd.  1587,  8vo;  improved  edition  by  Gjrrel,  Brix. 
1604,4to);  De  Castro, Commentaria  (Samant.! 586, foL); 
Yavassor,  Commentarius  (in  Opp.Yhemh.  iv,  848;  Jen. 
iv,  764) ;  Matthieus,  Prakctiones  (Basil.  1590, 4to) ;  Po- 
lansdorf,  AnalysU  (BasiL  1599, 4to ;  1601, 8vo) ;  Zanchi- 
us,  Commentarius  (Neost,  1600,  4to;  also  in  Opp.  v); 
Gesner,  lUugtratio  (Yitemb.  1601,  1614,  8vo);  Pareus, 
Commentarius  (Heidelberg,  1605, 1609,  4to) ;  Downame, 
Lecłures  [on.  eh.  i-iv]  (Lond.  1608,  4to);  Cocceius,  II- 
lustraiio  (in  Opp.  xi,  591) ;  Krackewitz,  Commentarius 
(Francof.  1619,  4to);  Meisner,  Commentarius  (Yitemb. 
1620, 8vo) ;  Rivetus,  Commentarius  (L.  B.  1625, 4to ;  also 
in  Opp.  ii,  488) ;  "^Burroughs,  Ledures  [chapter  xiv  by 
Sibbs  and  Reynolds]  (Lond.  1648  52,  4  vols.  4to;  Lond. 
1843, 8vo) ;  Ughtfoot,  ExposUio  (in  Works,  ii,  423) ;  Ur- 
sinus,  Commentarius  (Norib.  1677,  8vo) ;  ♦Pocock,  Com^ 
mentary  (Oxon.  1685,  fol.;  also  in  Works,  ii,  1);  *Seb. 
Schmid,  Commentarius  (F.  ad  M.  1687,  4to) ;  Bierroann, 
Ontledktg  (Utrecht,  1702,  4to);  Wacke,  EaposiHo  (Rat- 
isb.  1711, 8vo) ;  Graff,  Predifften  (Dresd.  1716, 4to) ;  Kro- 
mayer,  Specimen,  etc.  [induding  Joel  and  Amos]  (Amst. 
1780,  8vo) ;  Teme,  Erkldrung  (part  i,  Jen.  1740;  ii,  Ei- 
senb.  1748,  8vo) ;  Klemmius,  Notm  (Tubing.  1744,  4to) : 


HOSEIN 


356 


HOSHEA 


Dathe,  Diuertatio  [on  AqmU*8  yctb.  of  H.]  (Lipa.  1767  ? 
also  in  Opusc  lips.  1796) ;  Happach,  Exponiio  [on  cer- 
tain  passages]  (CobL  1766  8q.,  8vo) ;  Strucnsee,  Uebert, 
(Frankf.  and  Lpz.  1769, 8vo);  Neale,  CommaOary  (Lond. 
1771, 8vo) ;  Michaelis,  Chaldaica  [Jonathan*8  Targom] 
{G^tU  1775, 4tx>) ;  SUiudlin,  ErlduU  (in  hia  Bekr,  1  9q.) ; 
Euren,  Examm  [of  var.  readings]  (i,  UpaaL  1782 ;  ii,  ib. 
1786 ;  also  in  Aarivellii,  Diuert,  p.  694) ;  Schroer,  Ar- 
lauU  (Deasau,  1782, 8vo) ;  Manger,  C(mmefUaruL»  (Cam- 
pis,  1782,  4to);  Pfeiffer.  Udters.  (Erlangen,  1785,  8vo); 
Uhland,  A  tmotationes  (in  xii  pta.  Tubing.  1786-97,  4to) ; 
Yolborth,  Erldarung  (part  i,  Gott.  1787,  8vo);  Kuinol, 
Erl&uterung  (Leips.  1789,  8vo;  alao  in  Latin,  ibid.  1792, 
8vo) ;  lioofl,  Obseroationes  [on  diiiicult  passages]  (Er- 
lang.  1780,  4to) ;  Yaupel,  ErklSr,  (Dreaden,  1798,  8vo)  ; 
♦Horaley,  Notes  (Lond.  1801, 1804, 4to ;  also  in  Bib,  CriU 
ii,  184) ;  Philippson,  Commentirtmg  [indud.  Joel]  (De»- 
Bau,  1806,  8vo;  also  in  his  Tsraeliłi»cke  Bibel) ;  Bockel, 
Srldut,  (Konigsb.  1807, 8vo) ;  Gaab,  Dijudicaiio  [on  the 
Tcrs.  of  H.  in  the  Lond.  Polyglot]  (in  2  pts.  Tttb.  1812, 
4to)  j  RosenmUller,  SekoUa  (part  7,  voL  i,  1827,  8vo) ; 
GoldwiŁzer,  A  nmerk,  (Landsh.  1828, 8vo) ;  •Stuck,  Com- 
mentariuB  (Lips.  1828, 8vo) ;  Schroder,  Erlaut,  [voL  i  of 
min.  proph.,  includ.  Hosea,  Joel,  and  Amos]  (Lpz.  1829, 
8vo) ;  De  Wette,  Ud)er  d,  ffeschl.  Beziehung,  etc  (in  the 
Theol,  Słud.  u.  Krit,  1831,  p.  807) ;  Mrs.  Best,  DuihgueM 
(Lond.  1881, 12mo) ;  Redslob,  Die  Iniegritat^  etc.  [of  vii, 
4-10]  (Hamb.l842,8vo);  *Sim8on,  A>Jbtó>.  (Hamb.  1851, 
8vo) ;  Drakę,  Kotes  [includ.  Jonah]  (Lond.  1853,8vo;  also 
Sermona  [includ.  also  Amos],  ib.  ed.  8vo) ;  Kurtz,  Ehe 
d  //.  (Dorpat.  1859,  8vo);  Kara,  ttSlID  (Bredau,  1861, 
4to);  WUnsche,  Awkgung  [Rabbinicai]  (Lpz.  1868  są, 
8vo);  Bassett,  TroMlation  (London,  1869,  8vo).  See 
Pbophbts,  Minor. 

4,  5.  HosHEA  (q.  V.). 

Hosein.    See  Hocein. 

Hosen.    See  Hose. 

HoshaTah  (Heb.  Ho»hayah%  n^^t'^r\,  whom  J^ 
hovah  delicersf  Sept,  'Q(rata,  but  identifies  those  named 
in  Jer.  xlii,  1 ;  xliii,  2,  yet  changes  in  both  passages  to 
Haatraiac ;  Yolg.  Osajas)j  the  name  of  two  men. 

1.  The  father  of  Jehazaniah,  which  latter  besought 
Jeremiah  to  favor  the  flight  of  the  remnant  of  the  Jews 
into  Egypt  (Jer.  xlii,  1).  He  is  apparently  the  same 
with  the  father  of  Azariah,  which  latter  is  mentioned  as 
rejecting  the  advice  of  Jeremiah  after  he  had  thus  so- 
licited  it  (Jer.  xliii,  2).,  RC.  587. 

2.  One  who  headed  the  procession  of  the  chief  men 
óf  Judah  along  the  southem  section  of  the  newly-rebuilt 
walls  of  Jenisalem  (Neh.  xii,  82).    B.C.  446. 

HoBlia''ma  [many  Ho8h'ama]  (Heb.  Hoshama', 
5a'rin,  whom  Jehovah  kears;  Sept.  'Otra/iw  v.  r.  'Otrą- 
/la^  and  'liocafuó),  one  of  the  sona  of  king  Jehoiachin, 
bom  during  his  captivity  (1  Chroń,  iii,  18).  RC.  post 
598.  (See  Strong'8  Harm,  and£xpoa,  ofthe  Gospdsi  p. 
17.)     See  Jehoiachin. 

Hoahe^^lL  (Heb.  tłie  same  name  as  ''Hosea,"  q.  v.), 
the  name  of  sereral  persona. 

1.  The  original  name  (Deut.  xxxii,  44,  Sept  'It^oiżc, 
Vulg.  Josuef  A.V.  in  Numb.  xiii,  8, 16,  "Oshea,"  Sept, 
Aiftrr),  Yulg.  Osee)  of  the  son  of  Nun,  afterwards  called 
JosHUA  (q.  V.),  by  the  morę  distinct  recognition  of  the 
divine  name  Jah, 

2.  (Sept.  'Hań ;  Vulg.  Osee).  A  son  of  Azariah  in 
the  time  of  David ;  also  an  Ephraimite  and  pńncc  of 
his  people  (1  Chroń,  xxvii,  20).     RC.  1014. 

3.  The  prophet  Hosea  (q.  v.). 

4.  Hoshea  (Sept  'Q<rne,  Vulg.  Osee),  the  son  of 
£lah,  and  last  king  of  IsraeL  In  the  twentieth  (post- 
humous)  year  of  Jotham  (2  Kinga  xv,  30),  L  e.  RC. 
737-6,  he  conspired  against  and  siew  his  predecessor  Pe- 
kah,  thereby  fulMing  a  prophecy  of  Isaiah  (Isa.  vii,  16). 
Althotigh  Josephus  calls  Hoshea  n.friend  of  Pekah  (0i> 
\ov  Ttv6c  iin(5ov\twTavToc  airrąi,  Ant,  ix,  18,  1),  we 
łiaye  no ground  for  calling  thia  ''a  treacheroua  muider" 


(Frideaax,  i,  16).  Bnt  he  did  not  beoome  eaUibGahed 
on  the  throne  he  had  thas  nsorped  till  after  an  interreg- 
num  of  warfare  for  eight  yean,  namely,  in  the  twelfth 
year  of  Ahaz  (2  Kings  xvŁi,  1),  L  e.  &a  729-8.  "•  He 
did  evil  in  the  sight  of  the  Lord,"  but  not  in  the  same 
degree  as  his  predeoessors  (2  Kings  xvii,  2).  Aooording 
to  the  Babbis,  this  superiority  consiated  in  his  removiiig 
from  the  frontier  cities  the  goards  plaoed  tbere  by  his 
predeoessors  to  prevent  their  subjects  from  wotshippiog 
at  Jerusalem  (Seder  Olom  Rabba^  cap.  22,  ąnoted  by 
Prideaax,  i,  16),  and  in  his  not  hindeiing  the  IsmeliteB 
from  accepting  the  invitation  of  Hezekiah  (2  Chnn. 
xxx,  10),  nor  checking  their  zeal  againat  idolatiy  (id. 
xxxi,  1 ).  The  compolsory  ceasation  of  the  calf-woisłdp 
may  have  removed  his  greateat  temptation,  for  Tigiatb* 
Pileser  had  carried  oif  the  golden  calf  from  Dan  aoma 
years  before  (Sed,  OL  Bab,  22),  and  that  at  Bethel  waa 
taken  away  by  Shalmaneser  in  his  first  invaałan  (2 
Kings  xvii,  8 ;  Hos.  x,  14).  Shortly  after  hia  accenion 
(RC.  728)  he  submitted  to  the  supremacy  of  Shaknane- 
ser,  who  appeais  to  have  entered  his  tenritory  with  the 
intention  of  subduing  it  by  force  if  resisted  (2  Kingi 
xvii,  8),  and,  indeed,  seems  to  have  stormed  the  ationg 
caves  of  Beth-arbel  (Hos.  x,  14),  bat  who  reUred  paci- 
fied  with  a  present  This  peaoeable  temper,  howerer, 
appears  not  to  have  continued  long.  The  intenifpence 
that  Hosea,  encouraged  perhaps  by  the  revolt  of  Uexe- 
kiah,  had  entered  into  a  oonfederacy  with  So,  king  of 
£g3rpt,  with  the  view  of  shaking  off  the  Assyrian  yoke, 
caused  Shalmaneser  to  return  and  pnnish  the  rebellions 
king  of  Israel  by  imprisonment  for  withholding  the  tńb- 
Ute  for  several  years  exacted  from  his  country  (2  Kioga 
xvii,  4),  RC  dr.  726.  He  appears  to  have  been  aicain 
released,  probably  appeaaing  the  conquen)r  by  a  huge 
ransom ;  but  a  second  relapse  into  revolt  soon  aflerwarda 
provoked  the  king  of  Assyria  to  march  an  army  into  the 
land  of  larael,  RC.  723 ;  and  after  a  three-yeaia'  aiege 
Samaria  was  taken  and  destroyed,  and  the  ten  tiilKa 
were  sent  into  the  countriea  beyond  the  Euphrates,  BwC 
720  (2  Kings  xvii,  6,  6;  xviii,  9-12).  The  king  no 
doubt  perished  in  the  sack  of  the  dty  by  the  enng«d 
victor,  or  was  only  spared  for  the  torturę  of  an  Assyrian 
triumph.  He  waa  aparently  treated  with  the  utmoat 
indignity  (Mic  v,  1).  That  he  disappeared  very  md- 
denly,  like  "foam  upon  the  water,"  we  may  infer  liram 
Hos.  xiii,  11 ;  x,  7.  His  name  oocurs  on  the  Aa^nian 
monuments.  The  length  of  the  siege  was  owing  to  the 
fact  that  this  *^  glorious  and  beautiful"  dty  was  strongly 
situated,  like  "a  c»own  of  pride^^  among  her  hiila  (laa. 
xxvUi,  1-6).  During  the  course  of  the  aiege  Shalma- 
neser must  have  died,  for  it  is  oertain  that  Samaria  waa 
taken  by  his  successor  Sargon,  who  thus  laconically  de- 
scribes  the  event  in  his  annals :  "  Samaria  I  looked  at,  I 
captnred;  27,280  men  (families?)  who  dwelt  in  it  I  car- 
ried away.  I  constructed  fifty  chariots  in  their  country 
....  I  appointed  a  govemor  over  them,  and  continued 
upon  them  the  tribate  of  the  former  people"  (Botta,  pu 
145, 11,  quoted  by  Dr.  Hincka,  Joum,  ofScur.  Lit,  Oct. 
1858 ;  Layard,  Nin,  and  Bab,  i,  148).  For  an  accoont  of 
the  sub8equent  fortunes  of  the  unhappy  Ephraimitea, 
the  places  to  wl^ich  they  were  transplanted  by  the  policy 
of  thdr  conqueror  and  his  officer,  *'  the  great  and  noble 
Asnapper"  (Ezra  iv,  10),  and  the  nations  by  which  they 
were  saperseded,  see  Samaria.  Hoshea  came  to  the 
throne  too  late,  and  govemed  a  kingdom  tom  to  pieccs 
by  foreign  invasion  and  intestine  broils.  Sovereign 
after  soverdgn  had  fallen  by  the  dagger  of  the  assaasin ; 
and  we  see  from  the  dark  and  terrible  delineationa  of 
the  contemporary  prophets  [see  Hoska  ;  Mjgab  ;  Isa> 
lAir]  that  muider  and  idol^ry,  dnmkenness  and  lust, 
had  eaten  like  *'  an  incurable  wound"  (Mic.  i,  9)  into  the 
inmost  heart  of  the  national  morality.  Ephraim  waa 
dogged  to  its  ruin  by  the  apostatę  policy  of  the  renę- 
gade  who  had  asserted  ita  independence  (2  Kinga  xvii ; 
Joseph.  i4  fi/,  ix,  14 ;  Prideaiuc,  i,  15  sq. ;  Keil,  On  Kinffs^ 
ii,  50  Bq.,  English  ed.;  Jahn,  Hebr,  Com,  §  xl;  Ewald, 
Gesch,  iii,  607-613;  RosenmUller,  BibL  Geogr.  chap.  ij^ 


HOSIUS 


357 


HOSPmiAN 


L;Rav1i]iflon,F(erodli,U9).— Smith.   See 

ISltAKŁ,  KiKODOM  OP. 

5.  HoSHEA  (Sept  'Q<n7Ć,yu]g.  Osee)j  one  of  the  chief 
laraelites  who  Joined  in  the  sacred  coyenaiit  aiter  the 
Captivit7  (Neh.  x,  23).     RC  cir.  410. 

Hosina  or  Ooitis  C^moc,  the  »awt\  an  early  Chris- 
tian bishop,  waa  bom  probably  about  A.D.  256.  It  is 
doobtful  whether  he  was  a  naŁive  of  Spain,  but  he  was 
bishop  of  the  see  of  Coidova,  Spain,  for  some  Ax.ty 
Tears.  He  was  a  particular  favorite  of  the  emperor  Con- 
rtantin<s  who  is  said  to  have  been  converted  to  Chris- 
tianity  iinder  the  instmmentality  of  Hosius,  by  offering 
him,  as  an  inducement,  the  reroisBion  of  his  ńns,  a  satis- 
taction  which  the  heathen  priests  were  unable  to  grant. 
He  was  present  at  the  Counol  held  at  Eliberi  or  £l\ira  (q. 
x,\  near  Granada  (305  or  306),  and  suffered  for  hiB  (aith 
(oon/eiMtf  sum,  as  he  says  in  his  letter  to  Gonstantine) 
doring  tlie  persecntions  of  Diodetian  and  Maximianus. 
In  324  0>n8tant]ne  sent  him  to  Alexandria,  to  Bettle  the 
diflpnte  between  Aleiuuider  and  Arius,  alao  the  troubles 
which  had  ariaen  conceming  the  obseryance  of  the  East- 
er  featiraL  He  failed  in  this  miasion,  but  stiU  lemained 
in  favor  with  the  emperor.  He  took  part  in  the  Goun- 
cil  of  Nice  (325),where  Baronios  claims  thatHosius  at- 
toided  as  legate  of  the  pope;  but  this  is  notgenerally 
oonceded  eyen  by  Roman  Catholic  historians.  Hosiu8's 
ńgnature  is  the  first  amongst  the  subscriptions  to  the 
acts  of  this  coimcil.  He  pronoonced  {k^kitro)  or  drew 
up  (accoiding  to  Tillemont)  the  symbol  or  confesaion  of 
faith  of  Nioe.  In  347  he  presided  at  the  Coimcil  of  Sar- 
dica,  called  by  order  of  the  emperors  Constantius  and 
Constans  at  the  request  of  Athanasius.  In  365  Con- 
stantłos  deaired  him  to  take  part  in  the  condemnation 
of  Athanasius,  but  Hosius  repfied  by  a  letter,  recalltng 
aU  he  had  suffered  on  behalf  of  the  faith,  and  closing 
with  an  eamest  deiense  of  Athanańos.  A  second  at^ 
tempt  of  Constantius,  who  calied  him  to  Milan,  met  with 
the  same  opposidon,  and  likewise  a  third,  Hosius,  who 
w«  then  nearly  a  hmidred  years  old,  still  refusing  to  con> 
demn  Athanasius.  This  decided  stand  in  favor  of  Ath- 
anasios  finally  caused  HoBius's  banishment  in  355.  At 
length,  wom  ont  by  imprisonment,  he  consented  to  give 
ooantenance  to  Arianina  in  a  formuła  which  was  pre- 
sented  to  the  Synod  of  Sirmium  (357).  He  was  per- 
mitted  to  return  again  to  his  see,  where  he  died  in  859. 
Athanasius  and  Augustine  praise  his  virtues  and  excu8e 
his  weakness.  See  Athanasius,  Hisł,  A  Han.  ad  Afonach, 
c.  42, 44 ;  Augustine,  Cont,  Epittolam  Permenieenij  i,  7 ; 
Eoseimis,  De  Vił.  Constantini,  ii,  68 ;  iii, V ;  Socrates,  Ilisł. 
£cd,^7,S;  ii,  20,  29, 31 ;  Sozomen, i,  10, 16, 17 ;  iii,  11 ; 
Tillemont,  Memoire$  pour  sercir  a  tHist,  ĘecUt,  vii,  800 ; 
Baronius,  Ann,  Eedet, ;  Galland,  BibUofk.  Pairum,  voL  r, 
P^oleg.  c.  Tiii;  Hoefer,  Novv»  Biog.  GirUralej  xxv,  209 ; 
Herzog,  Real-EncyUop,  vi,  275  8q. ;  Moeheim,  Ch.  Hitf. 
i,  245 ;  Hefele,  CońcUiengeaeh,  i,  83  8q. ;  Keander,  Church 
HitL  ii,  164, 371, 898, 404;  Schaff,  Ch,  Hitt,  ui,  627,  685 
aą. ;  Schrockh,  Kirchenffe$<A,  v,  848  8q.,  849, 354  8q.,  864 ; 
Ti,  ^,  140;  Stanley^  Eoitem  Ch,  (see  Index);  Milman, 
Latim  Chrittkuaty,  i,  99, 101 ;  Baur,  Doffinengesch.  i,  146 ; 
Riddle,  Hut,  of  the  Papacy,  i,  127  sq.,  135, 140 ;  Wetcer 
nnd  Welte,  Kirehen-Ler,  v,  836  są. ;  Aschbach,  Kirchen- 
Z«r.  iii,  331  sq.     (J.H.W.) 

HofliiiB,  &rANiBijiU8,  a  distingoished  Romish  the- 
ologian  of  Poland,  of  German  origin,  was  bom  at  Cracow 
May  5, 1504.  He  stndied  at  Padua  and  Bologna,  and 
obtained,  on  his  retnrh  to  Poland  in  1538,  a  canonry. 
He  was  afterwards  madę  secretary  to  the  king,  and,  in 
1549,  bidiop  of  Culm.  He  was  intrusted  by  the  king 
with  important  misaions  to  the  emperors  Charies  Y  and 
Feidinand  I,  and  as  a  reward  for  his  seryices  was  madę 
ałw  l^op  of  Ermeland.  Hosius  was  an  ardent  oppo- 
ncnt  of  Luther,  and  having  written  the  Confeuio  cathol- 
iomfiki  (Mayence,  1551,  etc)  in  opposition  to  the  Augs- 
bag  Confession,  he  was  rewarded  with  a  cardinal's  hat. 
He  attended  the  Council  of  Trent  as  legate,  and  after- 
'^uds  letnmed  to  Poland,  where  he  used  his  influence 
Ib  fiiror  of  the  Jesuiti^  and  in  1564^  to  preTent  the  spiead 


of  lAitheranism,  he  established  the  CoUege  of  Brauns- 
berg,  called  after  him  CoUeymm  Hosianum,  and  stiU 
existing  with  the  two  facnlties  of  theology  and  philoso- 
phy.  He  afterwards  madę  a  Jonmey  to  Romę  for  the 
purpose  of  settling  some  ąuestions  of  importance  to  the 
Polish  Church,  but  was  detained  by  pope  Gregory  XIII, 
who  rocełvted  him  with  the  highest  honors.  He  died  at 
Caprarola  Ang.  15, 1579.  A  ooUection  of  his  works  has 
been  published  under  the  title  Opera  omma  (CoL  1584, 
2  Tols.  folio).  It  contains  De  Communione  eub  ufrague 
Speae;  De  Sacerdotutn  conjugio;  De  Aiissa  rulgari 
lingua  ceMn-anda,  etc  See  Father  Paul,  Hiałory  ofthe 
Couficil  of  Trent;  Krasiński,  Ref,  in  Poland  (London, 
1840,  2  voIa.) ;  Ch,  Hist.  mh  CenL  p.  248 ;  Kanke,  Hist. 
ofthe  Popesj  ii,  82 ;  Mosheim,  Church  Hist,  iii,  98 ;  Bayle, 
Uiet.  Diet,  iii,  499  są. ;  Wetzer  und  Welte,  Kirchen^Lex, 
V,  339  sq. ;  Aachbach,  Kirch,-Lese.  iii,  338  sq. ;  Schrockh, 
Kirehengeach.  s.  d.  Reform,  ii,  695;  Palavicinł,  Eitt.  Con- 
dUi  Trident.  lib.  ii,  ch.  iv ;  Ersch  u.  Gruber,  A  Ug.  EncykL  ; 
Hoefer,  Nouv,  Biog.  Generale,  xxv,  210;  Eichhom,  Der 
Bi&chof  Stan.  ffotiut  (Mainz,  1844-55,  2  vols.> 

Hosplce,  the  name  by  which  are  known  the  pions 
establishments  kept  up  by  monks  on  some  of  the  Alpine 
passes,  to  afford  assistance  and  shełter  to  trayellers.  The 
first  of  these  established  was  that  situated  on  the  Grcat 
St»  Bernard,  of  which  the  priests  of  the  canton  of  Yalais 
obuined  posaession  in  1825.  Another  hospice  exbted 
on  SuGothard  as  early  as  the  18th  century.  This  es- 
tablishment the  monks  have  left,  and  it  is  now  occu- 
pied  by  a  "  hospitaller,"  who  entertains  travellerB  gratis. 
Hospioes  are  aJso  found  on  Mount  Cenis,  the  Simplon, 
and  the  Łittle  St  BemanL—Ghambers,  Cyckp,  v,  482. 
See  HosPiTAŁS. 

Hospinian,  Rudolph,  a  Swiss  Protestant  theo- 
logian,  was  bom  at  Altdorf,  near  Zuńch,  Nov.  7, 1547, 
of  a  family  8everal  members  of  which  had  been  martyrs 
of  the  Rdbrmation.  Rudolph  was  brought  up  by  his 
uncle,  and  studied  theology  at  the  uniyersities  of  Mar- 
burg and  Heidelberg.  After  his  return  to  Zurich  in 
1568  he  began  to  preach,  and  became  succeB8ively  rectot 
in  1576,  archdeacon  in  1688,  and  pastor  of  the  church 
of  the  Abbey  in  1594.  He  died  March  11, 1626.  Hos- 
pinian  is  especially  distinguished  as  a  writer,  and  most 
of  his  works  are  of  a  polemic  character,  against  the 
Romish  Church,  inąuiring  into  the  cultus  and  consti- 
tution  of  that  Church.  The  first  of  them  was  his  De 
origme  et  progressu  Rituum  et  Cerenumiarum  Ecdetiat^ 
iicarum  (1585).  Two  years  after  he  publbhed  De  Tem- 
pUs  hoc  eet  de  origine,  progressu,  V9U  et  abusu  iemplorum, 
ae  omnino  rerum  ommum  ad  templa  pertinentium  (Zur. 
1587,  foL ;  enlarged  edition,  1602,  foL).  His  De  Mona- 
chia, aeu  de  origine  etprogreuu  Monachatue  ac  Ordinum 
Mcnaeticorum,  Eguitum  mUUarium  tam  aacrorum  guam 
acecularium  omnium  was  pubUshed  at  Zurich  (1588),  and 
reprinted,  with  additions,  as  an  answer  to  Bellamaine^s 
De  Monachia  (Zurich,  1609,  folio):  — i)e  Featia  Chria- 
tianorum,  hoc  eat  de  origine,  progreaau,  earimoniia  et  riti- 
Utafeatorum  dierum  Chriatianorum  Liber  unua,  etc  (Zur. 
1592-8,  2  vols.  foL ;  augmented,  ib.  1612,  fol) ;  the  ad- 
ditions to  the  second  edition  are  in  answer  to  the  objec- 
tions  of cardinal  BeUarmine  and  ofthe  Jesuit  Gretser  :— 
De  Featia  Judeeorum,  et  Ethnicorum,  Libri  trea  (Zurich, 
1592,  foL;  2d  edit.,  augmented,  Zurich,  1611,  foL)  ',-^De 
Origme  et  Progreaau  Controeeraim  Sacramenłarim  de 
Cana  Domini  inter  Lutheranoa,  Ubtguiataa  et  Orihodoioa 
guoa  Zuinglianoa  »eu  Calrwńataa  vocant  (Zur.  1602,  fol.)  : 
the  Lutherans  are  strongly  attacked  by  Hospinian  in 
the  work: — Sacra  Scripturte,  orthodoaeia  aymholia,  łoH 
aniicuitati  puriori,  et  ipri  etiam  A  uguatanm  Confeaaioni 
repugnantia,  etc.  (Zurich,  1609,  folio).  This  work  gave 
rise  to  great  contiover8y.  Frederick  TV,  elcctor  of  the 
Palatinate,  blamed  Hospinian  strongly,  and  Leonard 
Hutter  answered  this  and  the  preceding  work  in  his 
Concordia  Concort  (Wittcmb.  1614,  folio).  Hospinian 
intended  to  answer  Hutter,  but  gave  up  the  idea  lest  he 
should  displease  the  Protestant  princes  and  embitter  the 
contioverBy,  which  waf  vexy  agreeable  to  the  Roman 


HOSPITAL 


358 


HOSPITALITT 


Catholic  ^aity:r^ffistoria  Jesuitiea  (Zorich,  1619,  foL), 
a  yeiy  yaluable  work: — An  Atdma  »it  m  toto  corpore 
ńmulf  Dt  ImmortalUate  ejus  (Zurich,  1686,  4to).  A 
complete  edition  of  Ho0piiiian's  worka  was  published  by 
J.  H.  Heidegger  at  Geneya  (1669-81,  7  yola.  foL),  con- 
taining  a  fuli  memoir.  See  Fabricius,  Hittoria  BibL  pt 
i,  p.  349,  850;  pUii,p.610,611;  pt  iii,  p.  87, 88 ;  Dapix^ 
BibL  des  A  uteun  Uparis  de  la  communion  Romaine,  etc 
(Parła,  1718);  Pierer,  Unwtnal-LerUoon,  a.  y.;  Herzog, 
Jieal-Eacyklop,  a.  y. ;  Hoefer,  Now,  Biog.  Generale,  aŁxv, 
211 ;  Bayle,  Ilistorical  Diet.  iii,  502;  Darling,  Enofdop, 
BibUoff,  yoL  L  See  H  ctter.  (J.  N.  P.) 
Hospital,  MicuABL  DB  L'.  See  Hópitau 
Hospitality  (^o^cWa).  The  practioe  of  receiy- 
ing  atrangers  into  one*a  houae  and  giying  them  snitable 
entertainment  may  be  traoed  back  to  the  eariy  origin 
of  human  aodety.  It  waa  practiced,  aa  it  atill  La,  among 
the  least  cnltiyated  nationa  (Diod.  Sic.  y,  28, 84 ;  Oesar, 
Bell,  Gall.  yi,  23 ;  TaciL  Gtrm,  21).  It  waa  not  leaa  ob- 
aenred,  in  the  early  perioda  of  their  hiatory,  among  the 
Greeka  and  Bomana.  With  the  Greeka,  hoapitality  (Ce- 
VŁa)  waa  nnder  the  immediate  protection  of  religion. 
Jupiter  borę  a  name  (Kimoc)  aignifying  that  ite  righta 
were  under  hia  guardianahip.  In  the  Ocfyeeey  (yi,  206) 
we  are  told  expreaaly  that  all  gueata  and  poor  people  are 
apecial  objecta  of  care  to  the  goda.  There  were,  both  in 
Greece  and  Italy,  two  kinda  of  ho^itality,  the  one  pri- 
yate,  the  other  public  (aee  Smith'a  Diet,  ofClass,  Amig. 
a.  y.  Hoapitiom).  The  firat  esiated  between  indiyidu- 
ala,  the  aecond  waa  cnltiyated  by  one  atate  towaida  an- 
other.  Hence  aroae  a  new  kind  of  aocial  relation :  be- 
tween thoae  who  had  exerciaed  and  partaken  of  the  ritea 
of  hoapitality  an  intimate  friendahip  enaued,  which  was 
called  into  play  wheneyer  the  indiyidiuda  might  after- 
warda  chance  to  meet,  and  the  right,  dutiea,  and  adyan- 
tagea  of  which  paaaed  from  father  to  aon,  and  were  de- 
aervedly  held  in  the  higheat  eatimation  (Potter'a  Greek 
AntiquitieSf  ii,  722  aą.). 

But,  though  not  peculurly  Oriental,  hoapitality  has 
nowhere  be^  morę  early  or  morę  fully  practiced'  than 
in  the  Eaat.  It  ia  atill  honorably  obser\'ed  among  the 
Araba,  eapedally  at  the  preaent  day.  (See  Niebuhr, 
A  rabia,  p.  46 ;  Burckhardt,  i,  331, 459 ;  ii,  651, 739 ;  Jan- 
bert,  Trav,  p.  48 ;  Buaael*a  A  leppo,  i,  828;  Buckingham*a 
Metopot,  p.  23 ;  Robinaon'a  Reaearches,  ii,  381,  385,  603 ; 
Prokeach,  Erinn,  ii,  245 ;  Harmer,  ii,  1 14 ;  Schultena,  Er- 
cerpt.  p.  408,  424,  454, 462 ;  Layard'a  Ninevek,  2d  aer.  p. 
817  aq. ;  Hacketfa  IlL  o/Scripi.  p.  64  aą.)  An  Arab,  on 
arriyiiig  at  a  yillage,  diamounta  at  the  houae  of  some 
one  who  ia  kuown  to  him,  aaying  to  the  master,  ^I  am 
your  gueat.**  On  thia  the  hoat  reoeiyea  the  trayeller, 
and  performa  hia  dutiea,  that  ia,  he  aeta  before  hia  gueat 
hia  aupper,  conaiating  of  bread,  milk,  and  borgul,  and, 
if  he  ia  rich  and  generoua,  he  alao  takea  the  neceeaary 
care  of  hia  horae  or  beaat  of  burden.  Should  the  tray- 
eller be  unacquainted  with  any  person,  he  alights  at  any 
houae,  aa  it  may  happen,  faatena  hia  horae  to  the  aame, 
and  proceeds  to  amoke  his  pipę  until  the  maater  bida 
him  welcome,  and  oflfera  him  hia  eyening  meaL  In  the 
moming  the  trayeller  pursuea  hia  jouiuey,  making  no 
other  return  than  "  God  be  with  you"  (góod-by)  (Nie- 
buhr, i2e».  ii,  431, 462;  D'Arvieux,'iii,152;  Burckhardt, 
i,  69 ;  RoaenmUUer,  MorgenL  yi,  82, 267).  The  early  ex- 
iatence  and  long  continuance  of  tbia  amiable  practice  in 
Oriental  countriea  are  owing  to  the  fact  of  their  picsent- 
ing  that  condiŁion  of  thinga  which  necessitatea  and  calls 
forth  hoapitality.  When  population  is  thinly  acattered 
oyer  a  great  exteat  of  country,  and  trayelling  ia  com- 
paratiyely  infreąuent,  inna  or  placea  of  public  accoromo- 
dation  aze  not  found;  yet  the  trayeller  needa  ahelter, 
perhaps  auccor  and  aupport  Pity  prompts  the  dweller 
in  a  houae  or  tent  to  open  hia  door  to  the  tired  way- 
farer,  the  rather  becauae  ita  master  has  had,  and  is  like- 
ly  again  to  haye,  need  of  aimilar  kindnese.  The  duty 
has  ita  immediate  pleaaurea  and  adyantagea,  for  the 
trayeller  comes  fuli  of  newa— falae,  true,  wonderful ;  and 
it  ia  by  no  meaua  oneroua,  aiuce  yiaita  from  wayfarers 


are  not  yeiy  fipeqnent,  nor  are  the  needful  hoapitaUtiei 
coetly.  In  later  perioda,  when  population  had  greatly 
increaaed,  the  eatabliahment  of  inna  (carayanaeraia)  di- 
miniahed,  but  did  by  no  meana  aboliah  the  practioe  (Jo- 
sephua,  i4fir.  y,  1,  2 ;  Lnke  x,  84). 

Accordingly,  we  find  hoapitality  practiced  and  held  in 
the  higheat  eatimation  at  the  earliest  perioda  in  which 
the  Bibie  speaka  of  human  aociety  (Gen.  xviii,  8 ;  xix, 
2 ;  xxiy,  25 ;  Exod.  ii,  20 ;  Judg.  xix,  16).  £xpreaa  pro- 
yiaion  for  ita  exerdae  ia  madę  in  the  Moaaic  law  (Ley. 
xix,  83 ;  Deut  xiy,  29).  In  the  New  Testament  alao  ita 
obeeryance  ia  enjoined,  though  in  the  period  to  which 
ita  booka  refer  the  naturę  and  extent  of  hoapitality  would 
be  changed  with  the  change  that  aociety  had  undergone 
(1  Pet  iv,  9;  1  Tim.  iii,  2;  Tit  i,  8;  1  Tim.  y,  10;  Kom. 
xii,  13 ;  Heb.  xiii,  2).  The  reason  aasigned  in  thia  last 
paaaage  (aee  Pfa£f,  Din,  de  IfoepiialUate^  ad  loc.,  Tubing. 
1752),  "  for  thereby  aome  haye  entertained  angela  un- 
awarea,"  ia  illuatrated  in  the  inatancea  of  Abraham  and 
Lot  ((sen.  xyiii,  1-16;  xix,  1-3);  nor  ia  it  withont  a 
parallel  in  claaaical  literaturę ;  for  the  rdigioua  feeling 
which  in  Greece  waa  connected  with  the  exen3ae  of 
hoapitality  waa  strengthened  by  the  belief  that  the  tray- 
eller might  be  aome  god  in  diaguiae  (Homer,  Odyss,  xyii, 
484).  The  diaposition  which  genezally  preyailed  in  fa- 
yor  of  the  practice  waa  enhanoed  by  the  fear  leat  thoae 
who  neglected  ita  ritea  ahould,  afler  the  example  of  im- 
pioua  men,  be  aubjected  by  the  diyine  wrath  to  frigfat- 
ful  punishmenta  (iElian,  Animalia,  xi,  19).  £ven  the 
Jewa,  in  **  the  latter  daya,"  laid  yery  great  atieaa  on  the 
obligation:  the  rewarda  of  Paradiae,  their  doctors  de- 
clared,  were  hia  who  apontaneoualy  exerciaed  hoapitality 
(Schettgen,  Ilor,  Heb,  i,  220;  Kype,  Obeerr,  Sacr,  i,  129). 

The  gueat,  whoeyer  he  might  be,  was,  on  hia  appear- 
ing,  inyited  into  the  houae  or  tent  (Gen.  xix,  2 ;  £xod. 
ii,  20 ;  Judg.  xiii,  15 ;  xix,  21).  Courteay  dictated  that 
no  improper  ąueationa  ahould  be  put  to  him,  and  somc 
daya  elapaed  before  the  name  of  the  atranger  was  asked, 
or  what  object  he  had  in  yiew  in  his  jonmey  (Gen.  xxiy, 
33;  Odifss,  i,  123;  iii,  69;  Iliad,\'i,  175;  ix,  222;  Diod. 
Sic  y,  28).  Aa  aoon  as  he  arriyed  he  waa  fomished 
with  water  to  waah  hia  feet  (Gen.  xviu,  4;  xix,  2;  1 
Tim.  y,  10 ;  Odyu.  iy,  49 ;  xyii,  88 ;  yi,  215) ;  received  a 
supply  of  needful  food  for  himaelf  and  hia  beast  (Gen. 
xviii,  5 ;  xix,  3 ;  xxiy,  25 ;  £xod.  ii,  20 ;  Judg.  xix,  20 ; 
Ocfyes,  iii,  464),  and  enjoyed  couiteey  and  protection 
from  hia  hoat  (Gen.  xix,  5 ;  Joah.  ii,  2 ;  Judg.  xix,  23). 
See  Salt,  CoyEjyiNT  of.  The  caae  of  Siseia,  decoyed 
and  alain  by  Jael  (Judg.  iy,  18  aą.),  waa  a  grooa  infrac- 
tion  of  the  righta  and  dutiea  of  hoapitality.  On  hia  de- 
parture  the  trayeller  waa  not  allowed  to  go  alone  or 
empty-handed  (Judg.  xix,  5 ;  Waginaeil,  ad  Sitł.  p.  1020, 
1030 ;  Zom,  ad  Hecat,  A  bder,  22 ;  Iliady  yi,  217).  Thia 
courteay  to  gueata  eyen  in  aome  Arab  tribea  goes  the 
length  (comp.  Gen.  xxi,  8;  Judg.  xix,  24)  of  sacrificing 
the  chaatity  of  the  femalea  of  the  family  for  their  grati- 
fication  (Lane,  Modem  Eg,  i,  448 ;  Burckhardt,  Notet  on 
the  BedouinSf  i,  179).  Aa  the  free  practioe  of  hoapital- 
ity waa  held  right  and  honorable,  ao  the  nefclect  of  it 
waa  considered  diacreditable  (Job  xxxi,  32 ;  Odyss^  xiy, 
56) ;  and  any  interference  with  the  oomfort  and  protec- 
tion which  the  hoat  afforded  waa  treated  aa  a  wicked 
outrage  (Gen.  xix,  4  aą.).  Though  the  practioe  of  h<«- 
pitality  waa  generał,  and  ita  ritea  rarely  yiolated,  yet 
national  or  local  enmitiea  did  not  fail  aometimea  to  in- 
terfere ;  and  accordingly  trayellera  ayoided  those  pljKea 
in  which  they  had  reaaon  to  expect  an  unfriendly  recep- 
tion  (compare  Judg.  xix,  12).  The  ąuarrel  which  aroae 
between  the  Jewa  and  Samaritana  afler  the  Babjlooian 
captiyity  deatroyed  the  relationa  of  hoapitality  between 
them.  Regarding  each  other  aa  heretica,  they  racrificed 
eyery  better  feeling  (see  John  iv,  9).  It  waa  oiily  in  the 
greatest  extremity  that  the  Jewa  would  partake  of  Sa- 
maritan  food  (Lightfoot,  p.  99S);  and  they  were  accua- 
tomed,  in  conaeąuence  of  their  religioua  and  political 
hatred,  to  ayoid  pasaing  through  Samaria  in  joumey- 
ing  from  one  extremity  of  the  land  to  Uie  other.     The 


HOSPITALLERS 


359 


HOSPITALS 


anunoRty  of  the  Samaritans  towards  tłie  Jews  appean 
to  havc  beeii  somewtiat  leas  bitter;  but  they  showed 
an  adyeise  feeling  towards  those  penona  who,  in  go- 
łns;  ap  to  the  annual  feast  at  Jerusalem,  had  to  paaa 
thiroo^h  their  oountzy  (Lukę  ix,  58).  At  the  great  iuif- 
tiond  ^^stival9,  hoapitality  was  liberally  practioed  aa 
long  aa  the  state  retained  ita  identity.  On  theae  featire 
occafiions  no  inhabitant  of  Jeruaalem  considered  his 
houae  hia  own;  every  home  awarmed  with  strangen; 
yet  this  unbounded  hoapitality  could  not  find  accommo- 
dation  in  the  houses  for  all  who  stood  in  need  of  it,  and 
a  laige  proportion  of  visitora  had  to  be  content  with 
Buch  ahelter  aa  tenta  could  aflbrd  (Hekm,  PU^rinu  i,  228 
sq.).  The  primitiye  Christiana  oonaidered  one  prindpal 
pan  of  their  duty  to  consist  in  showing  hoapitality  to 
Btzangers  (1  Pet.  iv,  9;  1  Tim.  iii,  2;  Tit.  i,  8;  oompare 
Acts  ii,  44 ;  vi,  32, 85).  They  were,  in  fact,  so  ready  in 
dischaiging  thia  duty  that  the  very  heathen  admired 
them  for  it.  They  were  hospitable  to  all  strangera,  but 
tgpeÓMily  to  thoee  of  the  household  of  faith  (see  Am- 
bróse,  De  AbrakamOyY;  De  Offic,  ii,  21 ;  iii,  7 ;  Augiia- 
ttne,  A/nf/.  xxxTui,  n.  2 ;  Tertullian,  Ap(^oget,  xxxix). 
£ven  Ludan  praiaea  them  in  this  respect  {De  morte  per^ 
tyruL  ii,  p.  766).  Belieyers  scarcely  ever  travelled  with- 
out  lettera  of  communion,  which  teatified  the  purity  of 
their  faith,  and  procured  for  them  a  fayorable  reeeption 
whererer  the  name  of  Jesus  Christ  was  known.  Calmet 
ia  of  opinion  that  the  two  minor  epistles  of  John  may  be 
soch  letters  of  communion  and  recommendation.  (On 
the  generał  suhject,  see  Unger,  De  ĘtvoioKi^  ejiugue  riłu 
atitiquo,  in  his  Atmal.  de  CńiffułiSy  p. 811  sq. ;  Stuck,  An- 
Hj,  Ctmtir.  i,  27 ;  De  Wette,  Lekrimch  der  A  rchaoloffie  ; 
Scholz,  Handh.  der  BibŁ  Archaologie;  Deyling,  Oheerv, 
i,  118  aq.;  Jahn,  Archaoloffie,  I,  ii,  227  8q.;  KUster,  JCr- 
latOerunff,  §  202  sq.;  Laurent,in  Gronov.  Theeaurus,  ix, 
194  sq.;  Otho,  Z>x.  7?aM.  283.)— Kitto.  SeeCAKAYAN; 
E^ctektainmbmt;  Guest. 

Hospitallers  is  the  name  generalty  given  to  char- 
itable  farotherhoods,  consisting  of  laynien,  roonks,  chor- 
isten,  and  knights  of  religtous  ordera,  who,  whilc  eon- 
tinmng  onder  the  rules  and  exercise8  of  conventual 
life  (chiefly  after  the  rule  of  St.  Augustine),  deyoted 
Łhemselves  to  the  care  of  the  poor  and  the  sick  in  the 
hQ6|Htals.  These  brotherhoods  were  founded  at  various 
times  and  in  different  countries.  They  added  to  the  or- 
dioaiy  vows  of  poyerty,  chastity,  and  obediencc,  the  spe- 
dal  vow  that  they  would  devote  themselyes  to  this  work 
of  roercy.  The  hospitals  (q.  v.),  in  the  age  when  these 
were  instituted,  were  mostly  connected  with  monasteries, 
and  were  subject  to  the  bishopa.  Ollentimes  the  care 
of  them  was  so  great  that  a  spedal  offioer  was  appointed, 
with  the  appellation  of  generał,  and  the  officer  under  him 
as  intendant,  superior,  or  major.  Some  of  the  Hospital- 
ler  brotherhoods,  however,  were  not  subject  to  the  bish- 
opa, bot  only  to  the  pope,  as  the  Hospitallers  of  St. 
John  of  God,  also  caJled  the  Brethren  of  Love,  etc. 
As  an  order  of  spiritual  knights,  they  were  divided  into 
knighta,  piiesta,  and  8er\-ing  brethren.  Among  them 
we  find  (1.)  The  Hoefiitallers  of  Sł.Anthony  [see  An- 
THOXY,  ORDERa  of],  founded  by  Gfi^on  in  consequence 
of  an  epidemie,  known  aa  St.  Anlhonps  fire.  (2.)  The 
Brethren  of  the  UotpUal  of  St.  John  of  Jerusalem.  See 
Malta,  Knights  of.  (8.)  The  Order  of  Teutonic 
KmgkU  (q.  v.).  (4.)  The  Brethren  ofihe  HoipUal  ofthe 
Order  ofthe  HoLy  Ghott  [see  Holy  Ghost,  Orders  of], 
founded  by  (Tuido  at  Montpellier.  (5.)  The  Hospitallers 
ofBurgos,  founded  ui  1212.  (6.)  The  HospitaOers  of 
our  Ladjf  of  Christian  CharHy  were  founded  near  Chś- 
biia  in  the  end  of  the  13th  century  by  Guy  de  JoinviIle ; 
a  Uke  order  waa  founded  at  Paris  in  1294.  (7.)  The 
Ho^pUalŁers  ofour  Lady  Della  Scala^  which,  according 
to  some  authorities,  dates  aa'  far  back  aa  the  9th  cen- 
torr,  ia  said  by  others  to  have  been  founded  about  this 
time  at  Sienna,  in  Italy.  (8.)  The  IfotpitaUers  of  the 
Order  ofSt,  John  ofGod  (de  Dieu),  also  called  "  Broth- 
en  of  Charity,'*  etc.  See  Charity,  Brothers  or.  (9.) 
Of  the  Congreifation  of  peniieni  Brethren^  founded  in 


Flandera  in  1615;  the  HospUaUers  ofihe  Order  ofBeth- 
lehemUes  (q.  v.),  in  1655 ;  and  a  number  of  congregationa 
of  the  third  order  of  St«  Francis,  which  aroee  in  the  14th 
century,  some  are  still  in  existence.  The  dresa  of  the 
hoepitallers  waa  a  black  robę  or  cloak,  on  the  breast  of 
which  waa  wom  a  white  erosa,  with  eight  pointa,  which, 
according  to  their  statutes,  is  the  tnie  symbol  of  the  vir- 
tues.  See  Herzog,  Beal-KncyIdopddie,Yiy2Sb;  W ^tzf:r 
u.  Welte,  Kirchen-Lex,  v,  845 ;  Hdyot,  Gesch,  d,  KldsUr- 
u,  Ritterorden,  ii,  200  są. ;  iii,  86  są.,  463  są. ;  Yertot,  Bist, 
des  ChevaUers  de  8t,  Jean  de  Jemsalem  (Amst.  1782,  5 
vols.  8vo) ;  SchrOckh,  Kirchengesch,  xxv,  98  są. ;  Hard- 
yriek,Nist,  offhe  Middle  Ages,  p.  265  są,;  Riddle,  HitL 
ofthe  Papac^f  ii,  276 ;  Milman's  Gibbon,  Boman  Empire^ 
V,  598  są. ;  Lea,  Histor.  Sactrdot.  Celib.  p.  865  są.,  475; 
New  Bnglander^  Aug.  1851,  p.  888  są.  See  Jbrusalem  ; 
KsiiOHTB ;  Templars  ;  etc     (J.  H.  W.) 

Hospitals,  BO  caUed  from  the  medisval  hospitia,  are 
now  generally  undeistood  to  be  establishments  intend- 
ed  for  the  reeeption  of  the  poor,  the  sick,  or  the  infirm, 
where  their^spiritual  and  temporal  wanta  are  gratuitous- 
ly  ministered  to.  Though  varions  provi8ions  were  madę 
for  the  poor  among  the  Greeks  and  Bomans,  and  public 
largeases  were  distributed  in  many  ways,  hospitals  were 
unknown.  The  tme  spirit  of  Christian  charity,  how- 
ever,  considers  the  most  useless  and  abandoncd  charac- 
tera  as  most  in  need  of  assistance,  and  iroitates  Christ 
in  bestowing  it  upon  them.  The  early  Christiana  fed, 
not  only  their  own  poor,  but  also  those  of  the  heathen. 
£ven  Jidiaii  the  Apostatę  praised  their  example  in  this 
respect.  As  soon  as  the  early  Christ  iims  were  free  to 
practice  their  religion  opcnly,  they  commcnced  build- 
ing  charitable  institutions,  to  which  they  gave  vari- 
ous  names,  according  to  the  character  of  their  in- 
mates:  thus  they  had  the  Brtphotrophiumf  or  infant 
asylum ;  the  Orphanotrophium,  or  orphan  asyium ;  the 
Nosocomium,  or  dek  hospital ;  the  Xenodochivm,  or  re- 
treat  for  strangers,  morę  partirularly  pilgrims.  The  lat- 
ter  was  properly  the  hoi=pital,  or  house  of  hospitality; 
and  in  monasteries,  that  part  of  them  which  was  re- 
served  for  the  accommodation  of  yidtors,  and  waa  di- 
vided  into  sections  according  to  the  classes  of  society 
to  which  the  risitors  belonged,  was  also  so  called  (Du 
Cange,  Gloss,  s.  v.  Hospitale).  These  hospitals  were 
soon  found  in  all  the  large  cities.  Epiphanius  says 
{Hcsres,  76,  No.  1) :  "The  bishops,  in  their  charity  to- 
wards strangers,  are  in  the  habit  of  establishing  institu- 
tions whercin  they  receive  the  maimed  and  the  sick, 
proyiding  them  with  such  accommodations  aa  their 
means  will  aDow."  They  M'ere  generally  in  charge  of 
the  clergy  {Constił,  Apostoł,  I,  iii,  c  19),  though  rich  lay- 
men  would  occasionally  erect  hospitals  also,  and  wait 
on  their  inmates  theroselres,  as  did  Pammachius  of  Por- 
to, and  Gallicau  of  Ostia.  The  bishops  were  careful  to 
have  the  poor  properly  buried,  ransonied  the  prisoncrs 
of  war,  and  often  emancipated  slayes.  They  often  went 
80  far  as  to  sell  the  communion  scr\'ice,  or  the  altar  or- 
naroents,  to  raise  the  means  of  accomplishing  these 
charitable  objects  {Momrs  des  Chrittens,  §  51).  One  of 
the  most  famous  of  these  institutions  was  founded  at 
CsBsarea  in  the  latter  half  of  the  4th  century.  The  n€xt 
notable  institution  was  that  of  St.  Chrysostoro,  built  at 
his  own  expen8e  at  Constantinople.  There  was  also  a 
very  fine  hospital  at  Korne,  which  was  built  by  Fabiola, 
a  Roman  lady  and  friend  of  St  Jerome,  who  himself 
likewise  built  one  at  Bethlehero.  The  inmates  of  the 
hospitals  in  the  early  Church,  vcry  much  like  the  prac- 
tice of  our  own  day,  were  dlrided  according  to  sex.  The 
małe  portion  was  placed  under  the  charge  of  a  deacon, 
and  the  women  under  the  care  of  the  deaconesscs,  who, 
according  to  Epiphanius  (Exposii.fd.  c.  xvii),  rendered 
to  persons  of  their  8ex  whaŁever  Bervices  their  infinnity 
reąuired.  It  was  a  rule  for  the  deacons  and  deacoii- 
esses  to  seek  for  the  unfortunate  day  by  day,  and  to  in- 
form  the  bishops,  who  in  tum,  accompanied  by  a  priest, 
yisited  the  sick  and  needy  of  all  classes  (Augustine,  De 
cwit.  Dei,  I,  xxii,  c  8).     The  hospitals  known  as  Noso- 


HOSPITAL  SISTERS 


360 


HOSSEIN 


wmia  were  really  fint  institated  imder  Cohstantine. 
They  were  under  the  dtrect  care  of  the  biahop  himself, 
and  were,  until  the  Middle  Ages,  oftentimea  plaoed  near 
or  inoorporated  with  their  dwellings.  But  they  miut 
not  be  understood  to  bave  been,  like  the  hoapitala  of  ottf 
own  day,  one  immenae  building.  They  conńated  of  a 
nomber  of  smali  cottages  (dormancake),  each  intended 
for  a  certain  malady.  Procopiua  (De  aćif,  Justuńan,  I, 
i,  c  2 ;  Hist  Byzant.  iii),  in  speaking  of  an  ancient  yale- 
tudinarium  which  was  re-esŁabliahed  and  enlarged  by 
Justinian,  says  that  the  enlargement  conaisted  in  the 
additionofa  certain  number  of  smali  houaes  ("numeio 
dormunculamm"),  and  of  additional  annual  rerenues 
('^annuo  censu").  These  nomberleas  smali  houses, 
spread  over  a  large  area,  gave  to  a  hospital  the  appear- 
anoe  and  extent  of  a  rillage  by  itaelf.  Tho  nosoco- 
mia  were  also  established  in  the  West,  but,  milike  those 
of  the  East,  they  were  confined  to  the  houses  of  the 
bishops.  Thus  Augustine  dined  at  the  same  table  with 
the  sick  and  poor  to  whom  he  afforded  relief  (Posidias, 
In  ejus  VUa,  c  xxiii).  Ader  the  downfall  of  the  Ro- 
man 'empire,  we  find  no  mention  madę  of  hospitals  in 
Europę  for  seyeral  ceutuiies.  During  that  period  the 
bishops  generally  took  the  whole  care  of  the  poor  and 
the  sick.  The  bishops'  house  was  the  refuge  of  the 
poor,  the  widows,  the  orphans,  the  sick,  and  the  stran- 
gers;  the  care  of  receiving  and  entertaining  them  was, 
as  we  have  already  ststed,  always  oonsidered  one  of  the 
chief  duties  of  the  clergy.  During  the  troubled  times 
which  foUowed  the  downfall  of  the  Carloringian  dynas- 
ty the  poor  were  almost  forsaken ;  gaunt  famme  stalked 
ovcr  Europę,  and  the  clergy  were  hardly  able  to  keep 
off  staryation  from  their  own  doors.  But  in  the  13th 
and  14th  centuries,  when  contagious  diseases  were  rife 
in  Europę,  hospitals  were  generally  established  in  uear- 
ly  all  parta  of  the  continent.  Some  were  the  fruit  of 
prirate  charity,  others  were  established  by  the  Church, 
and  others  by  the  state.  They  were  usually  under  the 
direction  of  priests  and  monka,  and  in  tho  course  of 
time  many  abuaes  arose.  In  the  progress  of  civilization 
both  the  condition  and  the  mauagement  of  such  institu- 
tions  were  greatly  improved.  At  the  present  day,  no 
ciyilized  country  is  without  its  hospitals,  either  endowed 
and  supported  by  the  goyemment  or  by  priyate  charity. 
Tho  Protestant  Church  of  Germany  has  institutions  of 
deaconessea,  who  especially  deyote  themselyes  to  the 
care  of  ths  sick  in  hospitals,  and  from  Germany  these 
institutions  haye  spread  to  many  other  countries.  There 
are  alao  in  many  countries  special  schools  for  the  training 
of  nurscs  in  hospitaK  Among  those  who,  in  modem 
timcs,  have  exerted  themselyes  for  the  improyement  of 
the  hospital  seryice,  Florence  Nightingale  is  prominent 
Sec  Bergier,  Dictionnaire  de  Thiologie,  s.  y. ;  Martigny, 
Diet.  des  Anticuites  Chret,  p.  289  sti.;  Aschbach,  ifir- 
chen-Lei.  iii,  336  sq. ;  Leckey,  Hitlory  ofRojtunudim^  ii, 
263  sq. ;  Gosselin,  Power  ofthe  Pope^  i,  120, 222 ;  Church 
of  England  Iievkw,  July,  1855;  Low,  The  Chariiies  of 
London  (Lond.  1850, 12mo) ;  Nightingale,  Notes  on  Nurs- 
ing  (L«nd.  1859) ;  Dieffenbach,  Anleił,  zur  Krankemoar- 
tung  (BerL  1832).  See  Almonkr  ;  Alms  ;  Deacx>nk8Ses  ; 
FouNDLiNo  Hospitals  ;  Orphan  Asylums.  (J.  H.W.) 
Hospital  SiAters,  also  called  "  Daughters  of  God," 
are  communities  of  nuns  and  lay  sistera  founded  for  the 
same  purpose  originally  as  the  Hospitallers  (q.  v.).  Their 
organization  spread  cyen  morę  rapidly  than  the  latter, 
but  they  soon  abandoned  their  original  purpose,  and 
turned  their  attention  to  the  education  of  young  girls, 
especially  orphans,  and  alao  to  the  redeeming  of  lost 
women.  They  are  to  be  found  to  this  day  in  France, 
the  Nethcrlands,  and  in  Italy,  and  are  especially  uscful 
in  taking  care  of  the  sick.  Among  their  many  branches 
we  find  the  following:  (1.)  Hospital  Sisfers  of  Notre 
Damę  of  Refuge,  founded  in  1624  by  Elizabeth  of  the 
Cross  at  Nancy,  confirmed  in  1634  by  pope  Urban  VIII. 
They  received  in  their  houses  threeclasses  of  women— 
yirtuous  girla,  who  by  yows  bound  themselyes  to  works 
of  charity ;  fallen  women,  who,  after  their  leformation, 


were  likewise  admitted  to  taking  the  yows;  ńatSky,  to^ 
untaiy  penitenta,  and  women  who  were  sent  to  these  in- 
stitutions against  their  wiU  for  corzection.  (2.)  Hotpi- 
tal  Sisłers  ofLochet  (in  Tonraine),  founded  in  1630  by 
the  priest  Paaquier  Bouray.  They  had  a  yery  atrict 
rule.  (3.)  Hospital  Sisters  ofthe  Mercg  ofJenUj  estab- 
lished in  1680  according  to  the  rule  of  St. Augustine; 
confirmed  in  1638  by  patent  letters,  and  in  1664  and 
1667  by  papai  bulls.  (4.)  Hospital  Sisters  ofSi.Jomiph 
or  ofProndenoe;  see  PRoyiDEStCB,  Ordebs  op.  (5.) 
Hospital  Sisters  ofSt,  Thomas  of  ViUeneuve,  estahliahed 
in  1660  by  Angdus  le  Proust  and  Louis  Chaboiaseau, 
according  to  the  third  rule  ofSt. Augustine;  reoeived 
in  1661  the  royal  sanction,  and  still  exi8t  in  Franoc 
(6.)  Hospital  Sisters  ofSł.  Augustine  of  Notre  Dctme  of 
Christian  Loi>e,  who  originated  in  1679  at  Grenoble.  (7.) 
Hospital  Sisters  ofBesancon,  established  in  1685,  reyiyed 
in  1807,  haye  (1870)  about  eightecn  houses.  (&)  Hos- 
'pitol  Sisters  ofSL  Martha  ofPontarlier,  established  in 
1687.  (9.)  Hospital  Sisters  ofthe  Hofy  Ghost ;  aee  Uoly 
Ghost,  Orders  op.  To  the  dass  of  Hospital  Sisters, 
in  the  wider  sense  of  the  word,  may  alao  be  counted  the 
Elizabethines,  the  Sisters  of  Charity,  and  many  other 
congregations. — Herzog,  Real-Encyhlop,  yi,  285 ;  Wctaer 
u.  Welte,  KiirchenrIjeT.  y,  845  sq.;  Helyot,  Geschichie  d, 
Kloster-  a.  Ritterorden,  ii,  862 ;  iy,  404, 437, 475, 482 ;  vii, 
342  sq. ;  Theol  Umv.  Lex,  ii,  370  sq.     (A.  J.  S.) 

HoBSbach,  Petbh  Wilhclm,  S.T.D.,  a  distinguish- 
ed  .German  theologian,  bom  in  Wusberhauaen,  Pmaaa, 
Feb.  20, 1784,  was  educated  at  the  uniyeraities  of  Halle 
and  Frankfort  on  the  Oder.  He  was  a  rogular  attend- 
ant  at  the  lectnres  of  Knapp  and  Niemeyer.  After  his 
graduation  he  studiod  witli  great  interest  the  worka  of 
Schleiermacher,  with  whom  he  was  intimately  aasoci- 
ated  the  greater  part  of  his  life,  and  through  whoae  in- 
fluence hc  obtained  the  position  of  prcachcr  to  tho  P!ni»- 
sian  military  school  for  oflicers  (Kadettenhaus)  aŁ  Ber- 
lin. In  1819,  whilo  in  this  position,  hc  puUishcd  £ku 
Leben  Joh,  Y^cd,  AndredSj  wliich  was  highly  commented 
upon  by  Tholuck  (comp.  the  ardclc  Andrcii  in  Herzog, 
Real-Encgklop.  i,  and  Supplem.  i),  and  which  at  once  bb- 
signed  him  an  eminent  pońtion  in  the  ranks  of  the 
Church  historians.  In  1821  he  became  pastor  of  the 
New  Jerusalem  Church.  His  opening  sermon,  which  he 
publLshed,  led  to  the  publication  of  an  entire  \'olume  of 
his  sermons  (1822),  which  he  dedicated  to  his  friend 
Schleiermacher.  Óther  coUections  of  his  sermons  wera 
published  in  1824, 1827, 1831, 1837, 1843,  and  after  his 
death  another  oollection,  with  an  introduction  by  Pi- 
schon,  in  1848.  Hoesbach  published  his  most  important 
work  in  1828 :  Spener  u.  s.  Zeit  (2  yols.  8yo).  The  sec* 
ond  edition,  which  was  published  in  1853,  contains  alao, 
as  an  addendum,  an  introduction  to  the  history  of  the 
Eyangelical  Church  and  theology  of  the  18th  centmy, 
a  portion  of  a  work  on  which  he  was  engagcd  the  latter 
part  of  his  life,  and  which  was  left  uncomplcted.  He 
died  April  7, 1846.  Hossbach  was  a  popular  preacher, 
but  his  published  sermons  enjoyed  eyen  greater  popn- 
larity,  and  established  his  reputation  as  an  able  diyine. 
He  held  a  midway  position  between  the  strictly  ortho- 
dox  and  the  liberał  theologians  of  Germany,  and  his 
great  endeayor  was  to  effect  a  compromiae  between 
these  two  antagonbtlc  elcments.  A  yery  finc  auitofaio^ 
raphy  as  a  minister  Hossbach  has  fumished  in  hia  last 
sermon  of  the  sixth  collection,  deliyered  to  his  <xingre> 
gation  February  5, 1843,  after  a  suoceasful  treatment  of 
his  eyes,  one  of  which  the  physidan  was  obliged  to  r^ 
move.  See  Herzog,  Real-Encykiop,  xix,  655  8q. ;  TheóL 
Umv.  Lex.  ii,  371.     (J.  H.  W.) 

HoBsein  bem-Mansour,  Abou'ł  Mooifrrs,  a  Pep- 
sian  Mohammedan  Mystic  sumamed  A  l-HeUajywna  bom 
at  Khorassan  or  Beidah  (Fars)  in  the  aecond  half ofthe 
9th  ccntury.  He  was  a  descendant  of  a  Guebre  who 
had  embraoed  Isiamism.  After  studying  under  the  mosl 
distinguished  «<>^,  one  of  whom  proscribed  for  him  aoli* 
tude  and  silence  for  two  years,  he  trayelled  Łhiougfa  the 
East  as  lar  as  China,  preaching  on  hia  way.    Some  be- 


HOST 


861 


HOST 


nered  in  Mm,  othen  conaidered  him  an  impostot.  He 
nttered  new  opiniom  in  rełigion  and  morals,  which  did 
not  Teiy  well  hannonize  with  each  other,  nor  with  his 
modę  of  Uving :  thus  flometimee  he  was  a  atiict  obeeryer 
of  aU  the  pnctioea  of  Ulamism,  wliile  he  taught  that 
good  worka  were  morę  meritorioos  than  devotional  pnus 
tioea.  His  morale  however,  were  unimpeachable,  and 
his  life  one  of  the  atmoat  simplicity.  He  profeased  Pan- 
theism,  which  he  symbolized  in  these  words :  '^  I  am  God, 
and  all  is  God.**  The  imams  and  sheiksof  Bagdad  oon- 
demned  him  to  death,  and  handed  him  over  to  the  aec- 
iilar  power.  After  remaining  one  year  and  a  half  in 
prisoD,  by  order  of  the  Tizir,  Ali  benr Assa,  he  waa  taken 
out  to  undeigo  torturę.  Inatead  of  cursing  his  perse- 
euMOf  he  prayed  for  them,  and  died  thns,  the  28d  ómoulI- 
eadeh,  809  (March,  922).  His  body  was  bumt,  and  his 
ashes  thrown  into  the  Tigris.  His  theological  and  my»- 
ticai  worka  are  some  thirty  in  nnmber.  See  łba  Khal- 
WkaDtBioffrąpk.Diet,  i,  428;  and  Fragmenta  translated 
by  Tholnck,  BIStkmtammL  atu  d.  morffenUlmiiscken  MyM- 
tik  (Beilin,  1835,  8to),  p.  810,  827 ;  Hoefer,  Nowf.  Biog. 
Gimhrak,  xxv,  215;  D^Heibelot,  BibHoth.  OriMlaU,  p. 
992  (Hallage).     (J.N.P.) 

Host  occuTB  in  the  A.T.  of  the  Bibie  in  two  Tery 
differeDt  senses,  the  latter  and  most  frequent  now  near- 
lyobsolete. ' 

L  SociaHy  (Civoc,  l>t.  a  stranger,  as  usually ;  hence 
a  ^Kef<;  and  by  inference  an  enŁertamar,  Rom.  xvi,  28 ; 
firay^oxcvc,  one  teko  receheś  att  comen,  t  e.  a  tcatem- 
heper,  e.  g.  the  custodian  of  a  carayanserai  [q.  v.],  Lukc 
X,  85).    See  Hosprr ality  ;  Inn. 

2.  MiliUuy  (prop.  and  usually  feQ2C,  Uaba'^  warfare, 
henoe  an  armjf,  orparia ;  also  nsnp,  mackaneh',  an  en- 
eampmeat^kott;  aometimes  ^^*1ft, yecbMi',  a  troop;  ^^łl, 
dia'ifilj  or  b^^n,  duyly  uf  orce;  rta'jrp,  maarabah',  a 
militaiy  statitm;  Gr.  arpdrtvfia  or  arpar6vt8ov)f  the 
usual  designation  of  the  standing  army  among  the  Isra- 
elltcsw  This  consisted  originally  of  infantiy  (compare 
Numh.  xi,  21 ;  1  Sam.  iv,  10 ;  xv,  4),  not  simply  because 
the  country  of  Palestine  prevented  the  use  of  cavaliy, 
sinoe  already  the  Canaanites  and  Philistines  had  iron 
(iron-armed)  chariots,  which  they  knew  how  to  use  to 
advantage  in  the  plahis  and  open  land  (Josh.  xvii,  16 , 
Judg.i,19;  iv,  8, 13;  v,22;  1  Sam.  xiii,  5;  comp.Wich- 
mausen.  De  currih.  belHe,  w  oriente  usitatu,  Yiteb.  1722 ; 
sec  Cif  ariot),  and  the  same  was  tnie  of  horsemen  (2 
Sam.  i,  6) ;  nioreover,  the  neighboring  nations  (Syrians 
and  Egyptians)  empk>yed  these  militaiy  instruments  in 
their  campaigns  against  the  Israelites  (Josh.  xi,  9 ;  Judg. 
iT,  3 ;  2  Sam.  x,  18,  etc).  This  last  drcumstance  (which 
appeais  to  have  had  no  influence  ovcr  David,  2  Sam. 
^Tii,  4),  eapecially  when  the  thcatre  of  war  was  removed 
into  foreign  oountries,  may  natnrally  have  induced  Sol- 
omon  (oontraiy  to  the  command,  Deut.  xvii,  16 ;  comp. 
Gesenius,  CommenU  zu  Jescu  i,  186  aq.)  to  add  cavahy  to 
his  aimy  (1  Kings  iv,  26;  x,  26),  which  he  distributed 
among  the  dties  (1  Kings  ix,  19 ;  x,  26) ;  aleo  under  the 
later  kings  we  find  this  description  of  troops  mentioned 
(1  Kmgs  xvi,  9 ;  2  Kings  xiii,  7),  although  they  were 
eager  to  avałl  themselyos  of  the  assistance  of  theEgyp- 
tian  cavalry  (Isa.  xxxi,  1 ;  xxxvi,  9 ;  2  Kings  xviii,  24). 
The  Mosaic  laws  obliged  every  małe  Israelitc  from  20 
yeais  of  age  (Numb.  i,8 ;  xxvi,  2 ;  2  Chroń,  xxv,  5)  to 
50  (Joseph.  A  nt,  iii,  12, 4 ;  comp.  Macrob.  8aU  i,  6 ;  Sen- 
eca,  Vit.  brev.  20)  to  bear  arms  (see  in  Mishna,  SotOf  viii, 
7),yet  there  were  many  causes  of  exemption  (Deut.  xx, 
5;  oompare  1  Maoc.  iii,  55).  Whenever  an  occasion  of 
boetilities  oocurred,  the  young  men  assembled,  and  the 
RquisiŁe  enumeration  of  the  soldiers  (by  means  of  a 
IRO,  sopker,  "scribe"  or  rtffUtrar,  Jer.  lii,  25;  Isa. 
xxxiii,  18)  was  madę  aooording  to  the  8eveTal  tribes 
(Nmnh.  xxxi,  2  8q. ;  Joah.  vii,  8 ;  Judg.  xx,  10).  On 
•ndden  iocunioDS  of  enemies,  the  able-bodied  Israelites 
were  Bommoned  by  spedal  messengen  (Judg.  vi,  35),  or 
fcytheaouiidoftnimpet8,orbybeaeona(D3,fie«)  plaoed 


upon  the  hill-topa  (Judg.  iii,  27 ;  vi,  84 ;  rii,  24 ;  Jer.  iv, 
5  8q.;  vi,  1 ;  Ezek.  vii,  14;  comp.  Isa.  xiii,  2;  xlix,  22; 
2  Kinga  iii,  21 ;  Jer.  i,  2;  1  Mace.  vii, 45 ;  Diod.  Sic  xix, 
97).  The  entire  army,  thus  raised  by  levy,  was  divided, 
aooording  to  the  various  kinds  of  weapons  (2  Chroń. 
xiv,  8),  into  troopa  (officen  and  soldiers  together  being 
called  B''*75S3  0^*?^,  captains  and  serraniś)  of  1000, 
100,  and  50  men  (Numb.  xxxi,  14, 48;  Judg.  xx,  10;  1 
Sam.  viii,  12 ;  2  Kings  i,  9 ;  xi,  15),  each  having  its  own 
leader  (D^^B^Krt  *łto,  capitain  of  the  thousands;  *nig 
ninan,  eaptain  o/the  hundredtf  U^^'On  nb,  captain 
ofAftys  2  Kings  i, 9;  xi,4;  2  Chroń,  xxv,  5;  for  later 
times,  oomp.  1  Maoc  iii,  55) :  larger  divi8ions  are  also  re- 
fecred  to  (1  Chroń,  xxvii,  1  sq.;  2  Chion.  xvii,  14  są.). 
The  commander-in-chief  of  the  entire  army  (caUed  ^iQ 
^TT?*?*  captam  o/the  hoet,  or  KSKrt  *nb,  captain  o/the 
cirmy,  or  K^tth  bc  *lto,  captain  orer  the  army^  2  Sam. 
ii,  8 ;  xxiv,  2 ;  1  Kings  i,  19)  formed  a  council  of  war 
(general's  staiT)  with  the  commanders  of  the  chiliada 
and  centuries  (1  Chroń,  xiii,  1  8q.),  and  in  time  of  peace 
had  the  direction  of  the  military  enrolment  (2  Sam. 
xxiv,  2  są.).  But  the  king  generally  led  the  anny  in 
person  in  battlc  The  national  militia  of  the  Hcbrews 
wore  no  uniform,  and  at  first  each  soldier  was  at  his  own 
expense,  although  coromissaries  of  provi8ion8  are  occa- 
sionally  mentioned  (Judg.  xx,  10).  On  military  weap- 
ons, see  Armor.  The  strength  of  the  Israelitish  armies 
is  sometimes  stated  in  ver>'  high  figures  (1  Sam.  xi,  8; 
XV,  4 ;  1  Chroń,  xxvii,  1  są.),  which  is  not  so  surprising, 
aa  they  were  gathered  in  mass  by  messengers  (at  a  later 
day,  Josephus  got  together  in  Galilee  alone  100,000  men 
of  the  Jewish  soldiery.  War,  ii,  20, 6) ;  but  the  numbeis 
are  probably  oflen  corrupt  (2  Sam.  xxiv,  9  są. ;  1  Chroń. 
xxi,  5  są.;  2  Chroń,  xiii,  8;  xiv,  8;  xvii,  14;  xxvi,  12 
są.)  or  (in  the  Chronides,  see  Gramberg,  p.  117)  exag- 
gerated.    See  Number. 

The  organization  of  a  standing  srmy  was  bogun  by 
Saul  (1  Sanu  xiii,  2  są. ;  xxiv,  8)  in  the  establishment 
(by  voluntary  cnlistment)  of  a  picked  corps  of  8000 
strong  from  the  whole  mass  of  the  peoplc  subject  to 
military  duty  (1  Sam.  xiv,  52).  David  foUowed  his 
example,  but,  bcańdes  the  body-guard  (see  Ciieretiiitb 
and  Pelethtte),  he  likewise  instituted  a  national  army, 
to  serve  in  tum  in  monthly  divisions  (1  Chroń,  xxvii,  1 
są.).  Solomon  did  the  same  (1  Kings  iv,  26) ;  and  even 
princes  of  the  ro}'al  stock,before  they  camc  to  the  throne, 
inve6ted  themselve8  with  a  life-guard  of  troops  (2  Sam. 
XV,  1 ;  1  Kings  i,  5).  Likewise  under  Jehoshaphat  (2 
Chroń,  xvii,  14  są.),  Athaliah  (2  Kings  xi,  4),  Amaziah 
(2  Chroń,  xxv,  6),  and  Uzziah  (2  Chroń,  xxvi,  11),  aa 
alBO  under  Ahaziah  of  Israel  (2  Kings  i,  9  są.),  standing 
troops  are  mentioned  in  time  of  peace,  but  they  were 
probably  not  in  constant  senrice.  Their  pay  probably 
consisted  in  agricnltwal  produce.  Foreigners  were  not 
excluded  from  the  honors  of  war  (as  may  be  seen  in  the 
case  of  Uriah  the  Hittite,  and  othcr  warriors  of  David, 
ą.  V.) ;  and  Amaziah,  king  of  Judah  (although  with  the 
disapprobation  of  the  prophet),  even  hired  a  whole  troop 
of  Ephraimitish  soldiers  (2  Chroń,  xxv,  6  sq.).  (See 
generally  J.  F.  Zachari«,  De  re  milUari  ret.  I/ebr,  KiL 
1785,  a  work  of  no  great  mcrit.)  In  po8t-exiliBn  timcs 
a  fresh  oiganization  of  Jewish  military  forcc  was  insti- 
tuted under  the  Maccabees.  Judas  early  cMablishcd  his 
military  companies  (1  Mace.  iii,  55)  in  dirisions  of  1000 
100, 50,  and  10;  and  Simon,  as  prince,  first  paid  a  stand- 
ing army  out  of  his  own  resourccs  (1  Mace  xiv,  32). 
His  successora  commanded  a  still  larger  number  of 
troops,  and  John  Hyrcanus  was  the  first  who  enlisted 
also  foreigners  (Joseph.  Ant.  xiii,  8, 4), probably  Arabi- 
ans,  who  senred  in  merccnary  armies  (1  Mace.  v,  89). 
On  the  other  hand,  the  Jews  likewise  engaged  in  for- 
eign warfare,  for  instance,  as  auxiliaries  of  the  Egyp- 
tians (1  Mace.  x,86 ;  Joseph.  Ant,  xiii,  10, 4),  and  iiidi- 
viduals  even  attaineti  the  rank  of  commanders  (Joseph. 
Ant.  xiii,  10, 4;  18, 1 ;  Apion,  ii,  5),  although  they  gen- 
erally abatained  from  serving  in  foreign  armies,  on  ao- 


HOST  OF  HEAVEN 


362 


HOST 


coimt  of  being  oUiged  to  riolate  the  SabbaŁh  (Joseph. 
Ant,  xiy,  10, 11  sq.,  14).  The  discontent  and  pirty  jeal- 
Ottsies  of  the  Jews  rendered  neceesary  the  employment 
of  foreign  meroenaries  by  king  Alexander  and  queen 
Alexandra  (Joseph.  Ant.  xiii,  13, 6;  14, 1 ;  16, 2),  caUed 
heayy-armed  (ccarovrafuixo<,  Jo(ieph.v4n/.  xiii,  12,  5). 
Herod  the  Grcat  had  in  his  anny,  no  doubt,  many  for- 
eigners,  even  (rermans  (Joseph.  ^n<.  xvii, 8, 8;  Ifar,  ii, 
1,2) ;  Kilndler  (in  AcLAccuU  Erford.  MogunL  i, 415  są.) 
understands  also  a  special  choeen  corps  as  a  body-guard 
(łTwfiaro0uXa<c«c,  Joseph.^ nr.  xv,  9,  8;  comp.  War^  ii, 
1, 3).  He,  as  also  his  successor  (Joseph.  A  nt,  xvii,  10, 8 ; 
WoTf  ii,  20,  1),  suffered  his  troops  in  oertain  cases  to 
tinite  with  the  Koman  legions  (Josephus,  Wary  ii,  18, 9 ; 
iii,  4, 2 ;  i4  n/.  xvii,  10, 8),  and  these  Herodian  soldiers,  like 
the  Roman,  were  employed  to  guard  prisoners  (Acta  xii, 
4  8q.).  Respecting  the  discipline  of  these  Herodian 
troops  we  knuw  nothing  positive,  but  they  were  certain- 
ly  organized  on  Itoman  principles,  as  also  Josephus  him- 
self  armed  and  disciplined  the  Jewish  militia  who  were 
under  his  command,  after  the  Roman  custom  ( DTir,  ii, 
20, 7).  In  the  times  of  the  direct  Roman  gOYcmmeut 
of  Judea,  in  order  to  maintain  tranquillity,  there  were 
Roman  military  bodies  in  the  country,  who  were  regu- 
larly  stationed  at  the  head-quarters  of  the  procurator  at 
Caeśarea  (Acts  x,  1) ;  but  during  the  great  festival,  name- 
ly,  the  Passover,  they  were  in  part  detaUed  to  Jerusalem 
(Acts  xxi,  81 ;  Joseph,  l^ar^  ii,  12, 1).  Sec  Roman  Em- 
pire. (See  generaUy  Da,nz,  De  JCbrmor,  re  milii,  Jenae, 
1690;  J.  Lydii  Syntoffma  de  re  milit,  cum  uotis  S.  van 
Til,  Durdrac.  1698 ;  both  also  in  Ugolini  r/<«Mzi(r.xxviL) 
— Winer,  i,  682.    SeeARMY;WAR. 

HOST  OF  HEAYEN  (Q':^^r}  xas,  tseha'  hath- 
thanui'yxmj  army  of  tke  siaea),  in  Gen.  ii,  1,  refers  to 
the  sun,  muon,  and  stars,  as  the  host  of  heaven  under 
the  symbol  of  an  army,  in  which  the  sun  is  considered 
as  the  king,  the  moon  as  his  yicegerent,  the  stars  and 
planeta  as  their  attcudanta,  and  the  constellations  as  the 
battalions  and  sąuadrons  of  the  army  drawn  up  in  or^ 
der,  that  they  may  oume  with  their  leaders  to  execute 
the  dcsigns  and  commands  of  the  sovereign.  Acoording 
to  this  notion,  it  is  said  in  the  song  of  Deborah,  ^  The 
stars  in  their  courses  fought  against  Siscra**  (Judg.  v, 
20).  The  worship  of  the  host  of  hearen  was  one  of  the 
earliest  furms  of  idolatry  (q.  v.),  and,  from  finding  it  fre- 
quently  reprubated  in  the  Scriptures,  we  may  conclude 
that  it  was  very  common  among  the  Jews  iu  the  days 
of  their  declension  from  the  pure  8ervice  of  God  (Deut, 
iv,  19;  2  Kings  xvii,  16;  xxi,  8,  5;  xxiii,  5;  Jer.  xix, 
13;  Zeph.  i,  5;  Acts  vii,  42).     See  IIi£AVkx. 

In  the  book  of  Daniel  it  is  said,  "And  it  (the  little 
honi)  waxed  great,  cveu  to  the  host  of  heaven ;  and  it 
cast  down  some  of  the  host  of  the  stars  to  the  ground, 
and  8tam|)ed  ujwn  them"  (viii,  10,  11).  This  doubt- 
leas  points  to  the  aspiring  naturę  and  usiuping  power 
of  Antiochus  Epiphanes,  who  in  2  Mace.  ix,  10  is  de- 
scribed  as  the  man  who  thought  he  could  reach  to  the 
stars  of  heaveu ;  which,  from  Isa.  xiv,  13 ;  xxiv,  21,  may 
be  understood  to  signify  the  rulers,  both  ci  vii  and  cccle- 
siastical,  among  tlic  Jews.  The  priests  and  LevŁtes, 
like  the  angels,  wcrc  continuaUy  waiting  on  the  8ervice 
of  the  King  of  heavcn  iu  the  Tempie,  as  of  old  in  the 
tabemacle  (Xumb.  viii,  24),  aud  these  were  that  part  of 
the  host,  or  the  holy  people,  that  wcrc  thrown  down 
and  tramplcd  upon ;  fur  Antiochus  overthrew  some  of 
the  most  celcbrated  luminaries  among  the  leaders  of  the 
Jewish  people,  and  reduced  them  to  the  lowest  degra- 
dation.  Spencer,  in  his  treatise  De  Ijegibu*  Jfeb,  bk.  i, 
eh.  iv,  p.  202,  takos  notice  that  the  Scripture  often  bor- 
rows  cxprcs8ions  from  military  affairs  to  accommodate 
itself  to  the  usc  of  the  tabemacle,  and  hence  is  the  fre- 
qucnt  use  of  the  term  "host.'*  The  host  o/hearen  and 
the  prifice  of  the  host  he  thinks  must  refer  to  the  body 
of  the  pricsts,  who  exercised  the  offices  of  their  warfare 
under  the  standards  of  the  Deity.     See  Little  Hork. 

A  very  frcąueiit  cpithet  of  Jehovah  is  ^Jehotah  God 
qfhosUy'  u  c.  of  the  celestial  armies;  generaUy  rendered 


"Lord  God  of  hosta"  (Jer.  v,  14;  szzriii,  17;  xUv,  7; 
HoSb  xii,  5;  Amoa  iii,  13;  F^  lix,  5;  lxxx,  4,  7,  14). 
This  18  a  very  usual  appellation  of  the  Most  High  God 
in  MMne  of  the  prophetical  and  other  books,  espedally 
in  Isaiah,  Jeremiah,  Zechariah,  and  Malachi;  bvt  doea 
not  occur  in  the  Pentateuch,  in  the  books  of  Joahua  aod 
Judges,  nor  in  Ezekiel,  Job,  and  the  vrritinga  of  Solo- 
mon.  The  Hebrew  woid  *^Sabaothj"  L  c.  hogtSj  ia  osed 
by  the  apostles  Paul  and  James  (Rom.  ix,  29;  James  t, 
4),  and  is  retained  untianslated  in  the  English  Ycrsiao. 
As  to  the  grammatical  conatruction  cfJekavak  o/hatts, 
some  auppose  it  to  be  by  ellipsis  for  Jekocak  God  of 
kostt;  Gesenius  says  thia  is  not  neoeasary,  and  the  Ar- 
abs,  too,  subjoin  in  like  manner-  a  genitive  of  attiibote 
to  the  proper  names  of  persona,  as  A  ntara,  of  the  kor$e, 
q.  d.  Antara,  chief  of  the  horae,  So,  too,  in  the  oon- 
struction  God  ofhotta,  the  word  hotts  may  be  taken  aa 
an  attribute  which  could  be  put  in  apposition  with  the 
names  of  God.  The  kosU  thus  aignified  in  Jekovak  of 
hottt  can  hardly  be  doubtful  if  we  oompare  the  expre8- 
sions  host  and  hosfs  ofJehotak  (Josh.  v,  14, 15 ;  Paa.  ciii, 
21 ;  cxlviii,  2),  which,  again,  do  not  differ  ftom  koU  of 
heaven,  embracing  both  angełs,  and  the  sun,  moon,  and 
stars  (Gen.  xxxii,  1,  2;  Deut.  iv,  19).  The  phrase  Je^ 
horah  of  hosłSf  therefore,  differs  little  from  the  lattcr 
form,  God  ofheacen^  and  Jehotah  God  ofhearen  (Gen. 
xxiv,  7;  2  Chroń,  xxxvi,  23;  Job  x%-,  15;  Ezra  i,  2;  v, 
1 1, 12;  v\j  9, 10 ;  Neh.  i,  4, 5 ;  ii,  4, 20 ;  Psa.  cxxxvi,  20 ; 
Jon.  i,  9 ;  Dan.  ii,  18, 87 ;  Rev.  xi,  13).     Sec  Sabaotii. 

Host  (oblation,  from  hostia,  victim,  aacrifice),  the 
name  given  in  the  Romish  Church  to  the  bread  or  wa- 
fers  used  in  the  celebration  of  the  Euclmrist.  It  ia  un- 
Ieavened,  thui,  flat,  and  of  circular  form,  and  has  oertain 
emblematic  devicee,  aa  the  crucifixion,  the  Lamb,  or 
some  words,  or  initials  of  words,  having  refcrcnco  to  the 
sacriflce,  impressed  on  it.  The  Greek  and  other  Orien- 
tal  churchcs,  as  wcll  as  the  variou8  Protestant  chuichca, 
celebratc  the  Eucharist  by  using  leavened  bread,  only 
differing  from  ordinary  bread  in  being  of  a  finer  qaal- 
ity ;  and  one  of  the  grounds  of  separation  from  the  Wcat 
alleged  b}'  Michael  Cerularitis  was  the  Western  pimctice 
of  using  unleavened  bread.  "  The  Greek  and  Prot»- 
tant  controversialLsU  allege  that  in  the  early  Church 
ordinary  or  leavened  bread  was  alwa}'s  used,  and  that 
our  Lord  himself,  at  the  Last  Supper,  employed  the 
same.  Even  the  leamed  cantinal  Bona  and  the  Jcsuit 
Sirmond  are  of  the  same  opinion ;  but  most  Romsn  di- 
vines,  with  the  great  Mabillon  at  their  head,  contend 
for  the  antiquity  of  the  use  of  the  un]eavencd  bread,  and 
cspecially  for  its  conformity  with  the  institution  of  our 
Lord,  inasmuch  as  at  the  paschal  supper,  at  which  *  ha 
took  bread,  and  blessed,  and  brake  it,'  nonę  other  than 
the  unleavencd  was  admissible  (£xod.  xii,  8,  16;  Lev. 
xxiii,  5).  (See  Klec,  Dogmatik,  iii,  190.)"— Chambera. 
At  the  Council  of  Florence  it  was  lefl  et  the  option 
of  the  churchcs  to  use  leavened  or  unlcavcned  faread. 
"  Romanists  worship  the  host  under  a  false  presumptioa 
that  they  are  no  longer  bread  and  winę,  but  tnuisub- 
stantiated  into  the  real  body  and  blood  of  Christ,  -who 
is,  on  each  occasion  of  the  celebration  of  that  sacraroent, 
ojfered  up  ancw  as  a  ridim  (hostia)  by  the  so-called 
*■  priests.'  Against  this  crror  the  XXXIst  Article  of  Re- 
ligion  is  exprcssly  directed,  and  also  these  words  in  the 
consecration  praycr  of  the  Communion  Scr\-ice  of  the 
Protestant  Ei)isco{)al  Church,  'By  his  one  oblation  of 
himself  once  offered,*  etc,  that  Church  pointedly  dedar- 
ing  in  both  those  places  that  the  minister,  *8o  far  from 
oifering  any  sacrifice  himself,  refers*  the  people  *  to  the 
sacrifice  already  madc  by  anotbcr" "  (Eden).  After  the 
Cx)uncil  of  Trent  had  determined  that,  upon  consecra- 
tion, the  bread  and  winę  in  the  sacramcnt  are  changed 
into  the  I^ord  Jesus  Christ,  tnie  (lod  and  man,  and  that 
though  the  Saviour  always  sita  at  the  right  hand  of  God 
in  hcaven,  he  is,  notwithstanding,  in  many  other  placet 
sacramentally  prescnt,  this  decision  follows:  **  There  is, 
therefore,  noroom  to  doubt  that  all  the  faithful  in  Christ 
are  bound  to  venerate  thia  moat  buły  iacrament,  and  to 


HOSTAGE 


863 


HOTTENTOTS 


render  thereto  Ihe  wonhip  of  UUria,  which  is  due  to  the 
tnie  God,  acoording  to  the  constant  usii^  of  the  Caiho- 
lic  Church.  Nor  u  it  the  less  to  be  thua  adoied  that  it 
was  iostitutcd  by  Christ  the  Lord."  We  leam  that,  iii 
eonformity  with  thia  inatzuctioD,  aa  the  Miaaal  diiecta, 
the  priest,  in  every  maas,  aa  aoon  as  he  haa  oonsecrated 
the  bcead  and  winę,  with  bended  kneea  adcnea  the  aao- 
nment.  He  worships  what  is  before  him  on  the  paten 
and  in  the  chalice,  and  gives  to  it  the  supremę  wonhip, 
both  of  mind  and  body,  that  he  would  pay  to  Christ 
himself.  With  hia  hesid  bowing  towards  it,  and  his 
eyes  and  thoughu  fixed  on  it  and  directed  towarda  it, 
he  prays  to  it  aa  to  Christ :  ^  Lamb  of  God,  wbo  takest 
away  the  sina  of  the  world,  have  mercy  on  us.  Lamb 
of  God,  who  Ukest  away  the  sins  of  the  world,  have 
mercy  on  aa.  Lamb  of  God,  who  takest  away  the  ains 
of  the  world,  give  us  peace."*  The  following  is  a  trana- 
Istłon  from  the  rubric  of  the  Missal:  "Having  uttered 
the  words  of  oonsecration,  the  prieat,  immediately  fall- 
ing  on  his  kneea,  adorea  the  consecrateil  host;  he  lises, 
ahows  it  to  the  people,  placce  it  on  the  oorporale,  and 
agsin  adores  it.**  When  the  winę  is  consecrated,  the 
prieat,  in  like  manner,  "  faUing  on  his  knee^  adorea  it, 
raca,  shows  it  to  the  people,  puts  the  cup  in  ita  place, 
ooven  it  over,  and  again  adores  it**  The  priest,  rising 
up  afler  he  has  adored  it  himself,  lifls  it  up  as  high  as 
he  can  convenient]y,  and,  with  his  eyes  fixed  upon  it, 
shovrs  it,  to  be  devoutly  adored  by  the  people;  who, 
]iaving  notice  adao,  by  ringing  the  mass-bell,  as  soon  as 
Łhey  sec  it,  fali  do«m  in  the  humUest  adoration  to  it,  as 
if  it  were  God  himself.  If  Christ  were  visibly  present, 
they  could  not  bestow  on  him  morę  acta  of  homagc 
than  ihcy  do  on  the  host.  They  pray  to  it,  and  use  the 
same  acts  of  inyocation  as  they  do  to  Christ  himself. 
The  host  is  also  worshipped  when  it  is  carried  through 
the  Street  in  soleron  procession,  either  before  the  pope, 
or  when  taken  to  aome  sick  peraon,  or  on  ti>e  feast  of 
Corpos  Chriati.  The  person  who,  in  great  chorchcs, 
oonrcys  the  sacimment  to  the  numerous  commuuicants, 
is  called  hofuliu  Dei,  the  porter  or  carrier  of  God.  Thia 
idolatioos  custom  of  the  Church  of  Romę  was  not  known 
tiil  the  year  1216;  for  it  waa  in  1210  that  transubatan- 
tiation,  by  the  Gouncil  of  Laterin,  under  pope  Innocent 
lU,  was  mado  an  artide  of  fai;h ;  aud  we  also  find  in 
the  Roman  canon  law  that  it  waa  pope  Honorius  who 
ordered,  in  the  following  year,  that  the  priesŁs,  at  a  cer- 
tain  part  of  the  mass  sernice,  should  elevate  the  host, 
and  cause  the  people  to  prostrate  themaclyea  in  wor- 
shipping  it.  See  Augusti,  DenkwUrdtgkeiten  aus  der 
duislL  A  rckaol,  vłii,  275  sq. ;  Elliott,  DdmecUion  ofRo- 
RinatiM,  bk.  ii,  eh.  iv,  v ;  Brown,  Expo9,  ofłhed9  A  rłi- 
doy  p.  606,  731,  n. ;  Neale,  Inirod.  Katt.  Church^  ii,  616; 
Siegel,  Ckritt.  AUerth.  i,  30;  Bingham,  Christ,  sĄtOic.  ii, 
819;  Farrar,  s^  v.  Ailoration;  Schriickh,  Kirckengetck, 
xxTiii,  p.  73 ;  and  the  artidea  Azymites  ;  Loiu>'s  Sup- 
pkr;  HAaa;  Tkamsubstajitiation.    (J.H.W.) 

Hostage  (ra^^rn,  tactnibah\  mrdyahip),  a  per- 
son dcliycred  into  the  hands  of  another  as  a  security  for 
the  performance  of  some  engagement.  See  Pledoe. 
Conąueretl  kings  or  nations  often  gave  hostages  for  the 
psyromt  of  tbeir  tribnte,  or  for  the  continuance  of  their 
Młbjection;  thus  Jehoash,  king  of.  larael,  exacted  hos- 
tages from  Amaziah,  king  of  Judah  (2  Kings  xiv-,  14 ;  2 
Chroń.  3Łxv,  24).     See  War. 

Hotchkin,  Ebbnezer,  a  Presbyterian  roissionary 
to  the  Indiana,  was  bom  at  Richmond,  Mass.,  March  19, 
1^^  He  was  sent  as  an  assistant  missionary  to  Łhe 
Choctaw  nation  in  1828,  and  spent  the  rest  of  his  lifc 
laboring  among  thcra.  He  die<1  at  the  residence  of  his 
brother,  the  late  Rcv.  John  Hotchkin,  at  Lenox,  Mass., 
Oct  28, 1867.  Hotchkin  waa  not  only  a  minister,  bot 
abo  an  instmctor.  and  waa  actire  in  the  management 
of  boarding  and  other  schools. — Wilson,  Pretbytarian 
HiśtorioaŁ  Almanac,  1868,  p.  334  sq. 

Hot  Cross-Bniui,  a  kind  of  muffin  or  biscuit,  with 
the  figuie  of  the  croas  impreased  upon  them,  quite  gen- 


erally  used  in  England  by  the  adherents  of  the  Choich 
of  England  for  breakfast  on  Good  Friday.  These  bia- 
cuits  are  said  to  be  derived  from  the  Ecclesiastical  £u- 
logiie  (q.  V.),  formerly  given  as  a  token  of  friendship,  or 
sent  to  the  houses  of  those  who  were  hindered  from  r^ 
ceiving  the  host— See  Suunton,  Ecdetiastkal  Dictum- 
ary^  p.  877. 

Ho^tham  (Heb.  Chotham%  Cnin,  a  seal  or  signet- 
ring,  as  in  Exod.  xxviii,  12,  etc.;  SepL  Xfa*&a^,  Yulg. 
Hotham)j  the  name  of  two  men. 

1.  One  of  the  sons  of  Heber,  the  grandaon  of  Asher 
(1  Chroń,  vii,  82).  B.C.  dr.  1668.  He  is  probably  the 
same  with  Helem,  whose  sons  are  enumeratcd  in  verse 
85,  and  grandsons  in  verse8  36,  37. 

2.  An  Aroerite,  and  father  of  Shama  and  Jehiel,  two 
of  David's  champions  (1  Chroń,  xi,  44,  where  the  name 
is  Anglidzed  '*  Hothan/'  after  the  Sept.  Xai3ai/).  B.a 
1046. 

Ho^than  (1  Chroń,  xi,  44).    See  Hotiiam  2. 

Ho^thir  (Heb.  Uoihir\  "^^Tm,  prtserrer  i  Sept. 
'ItM^tpi,  'Ii^ipO,  the  thirteenth  son  of  Heman  (q.  v.), 
who,  with  eleven  of  his  kinsmen,  had  charge  of  the 
twenty-first  diYision  of  Levitical  singers  (1  Chroń.  xxv» 
4,  28).    BwC.  1014.    See  Giddalti. 

HottentOtB,  the  abori^al  inhabitants  of  Cape 
Colony,  in  Southern  Africa.  They  are  divided  into 
three  laige  tribea:  1.  the  Nama,  or  Namaąua;  2.  the 
Kora  (Korana,  Koraqua) ;  and,  3.  the  Saab,  or  Bushmen 
(Boajesmana).  In  modem  times  they  have  been  pushed 
northwarda,  partly  by  European  immigrants,  partly  by 
the  Betchuanaa  and  kailre&  The  Nama,  or  Namaąua, 
live  aa  nomada  along  the  Orange  River,  in  Great  Na- 
maqualand,  which  ia  an  independent  cbnntry,  with  about 
100,000  sąuare  milea,  and  oniy  40,000  Inhabitants,  and 
Uttle  Namaąualand,  which  is  a  part  of  Cape  Cok>ny. 
The  Kora,  or  Korana,  were  about  fifty  years  ago  vcry 
numerous  in  the  vicinity  of  the  Yaal  and  Hart  rivers; 
now  they  dwell  as  nomada  on  both  sides  of  the  Upper 
Orange  River,  both  in  Cape  Colony  and  in  the  Orange 
Free  State  (q.  v.).  The  Saab,  or  Bushmen,  live  scat- 
tereil,  partly  in  the  northem  districts  of  Cape  Colony, 
partly  in  the  desert  Kalahar}'.  In  Cape  Colony  there 
were,  acoording  to  the  ccnsus  of  1866,  81,698  Ilotten- 
tots,  by  the  side  of  181,692  Europcans,  and  100,636 
Katfres,  in  a  total  population  of  496,381.  Little  is 
known  of  the  Hottentots*  religion  further  than  that  they 
beliere  in  a  good  and  an  evil  6pirit,hold  fcstival8  on  the 
occasion  of  the  new  and  fuli  rooon,'  and  look  upon  ccr- 
tain  spots  as  the  abode  of  departed  spirits.  They  havo 
no  regular  priest,  nor  anything  like  an  estabUshed  wor- 
ship,  although  they  render  espccial  homagc  to  a  smali, 
shining  bug.  They  have  magicians  for  whom  they 
have  great  respect.  The  BastardSy  or  Griąuof,  rcsiUt- 
ing  from  the  amalgamation  of  Hottentots  and  Europc- 
ans, appear  much  morę  susceptible  of  mcntal  and  intel- 
lectual  culture;  they  also  form  a  distinct  race,  and  a 
colony  of  6000  of  them,  esUblished  at  the  Cat  River  in 
1826,  has  been  quite  successful,  and  numbered  in  1870 
about  20,000,  nearly  all  Christians.  They  are  partly 
nomads,  partly  agriculturists.  The  Hottentots  in  Cape 
Colony  and  the  Griquas  no  longer  speak  the  Hotten- 
tot  language,  but  a  Dutch  dialect,  strongly  mixcd  with 
Hottcntot  and  Kaffre  words.  The  Hottentot  language 
is  not  related  ta  any  other,  and  is  especially  differcnt 
from  the  large  South  African  family  of  languages. 
The  words  are  mostly  monosyllabic,  and  usually  end 
in  a  vowel  or  nasal  sound.  Among  the  consonanta, 
l,fy  and  V  are  wanting.  There  are  many  diphthonga 
Non-Africans  find  it  impossible  to  imiutc  the  guttu- 
rals  which  the  Hottentots  breathe  with  a  hoarse  voice 
from  a  hollow  chest,  as  well  as  the  four  dicking  sounda 
which  are  produced  by  a  lashing  of  the  tongue  against 
the  palate,  and  which  in  writing  are  represented  by 
linea  and  points  ( I  =  dental ;  !  —  palatal ;  ±  =  cerc- 
bral;  |],  lateral).  Modem  lingiusts  enumerate  four  dia- 
locU:  1.  that  of  the  Nama;  2.  tłiat  of  the  Kora ;  8.  that 


HOTTINGER 


864 


HOmNGER 


oTthe  eastetn  Hottentots,  or  GoiiaquaB;  4.  the  dead  dia- 
lect«  of  the  colonial  Hottentots.  l*he  BubsUntires  have 
three  genden,  masculine,  feminine,  and  oommon;  and 
three  numbers,  aingular,  dual,  and  pluraL  There  are 
no  cases ;  the  adjective  and  verb  are  not  inflected.  The 
prepositions  are  usually  placed  after  the  words  wbich 
they  goYem.  The  language  of  the  Bushmen  diffen 
from  that  of  the  other  Hottentot&  By  the  Dufcch  oon- 
ąuerors  of  the  country  of  the  Hottentots  the  poor  inhab- 
itants  were  considered  unworthy  of  Chriatianity,  and 
even  many  members  of  the  colonial  churches  diaooim- 
tenanced  and  prevented  all  missionary  enterprisea.  The 
first  missionary  among  the  Hottentots  began  hia  opeia- 
tions  in  1709,  bat  he  ccaaed  them  afler  a  few  weeka.  In 
1737,  the  Moravian  miasioiiary,  G.  Schmidt,  gained  an 
atŁentive  hcaring;  but  whcn,  after  a  few  yeara,  the  fniit 
of  his  labora  appeared,  he  waa  compeUed  by  the  colonial 
goYcmment  to  leare.  During  the  next  lifty  yeara  no 
missionary  waa  allowed  to  viait  the  HotUntota.  In  1792 
the  Moravians  succceded  in  re-eatabliahing  their  miaeion, 
but  not  until  the  country  paased  into  the  banda  of  the 
KngUsh  did  the  missionariea  find  the  neoeaaary  protection, 
under  which  their  atation  at  Bariaanakloof  (at  preaent 
called  Genadendal)  became  very  ilouriahing.  The  woik 
grew  steadily,  and  (amce  1818)  haa  extended  from  the 
Hottentots  to  the  Kaffrea.  The  Morayiana,  even  as 
early  as  1798,  were  joined  by  the  London  Miaaionary 
Socicty.  The  misaionary  Yon  der  Kemp  eatabliahed  in 
the  eaatem  part  of  the  colony  a  miasion  among  the  Hot^ 
tentota,  aiul  the  latter  labored  among  the  Buahmen. 
In  Little  Namaqualand  the  miańon  waa  likewiae  begun 
by  the  London  Socicty,  and  continued  by  the  Rheniah 
Misaionary  Society,  which,  after  the  croancipation  of 
the  Hottentots,  eatabliahed  a  number  of  atationa  in  the 
castem  districta.  Scveral  thouaanda  of  Griquas  aettled 
on  the  Cat  River,  where  the  atation  Philipton,  with  aevr- 
cral  out-stations,  arose.  Among  the  Koma  miastona 
have  bcen  cstablished  (aince  1884)  by  the  Berlin  Mis- 
aionary Society.  Morę  recently,  a  number  of  other  mia- 
aionary societiea,  of  almoat  all  the  churchea  repreeent- 
ed  in  Cape  Colony,  have  taken  part  in  the  missions 
among  the  Hottentots.  Beyond  the  limits  of  Gapo 
Colony,  the  London  Misaion  Society  waa  the  first  to  e»- 
tablish  (1805)  miaaiona  in  Great  Namaąualand.  Subse- 
quently  the  field  was  occupieil  by  the  Wesleyan  Metho- 
dista  and  the  Rhcnish  Miasionary  Society.  Sereral  ata- 
tiona established  by  the  former  in  the  northem  parta  of 
the  country  were  again  abandoned  (Concordiaville  and 
Weslcyyale,  1845-63),  but  in  1869  they  atill  had  three 
districta  in  the  south— Nisbethbath,  Hoole^s  Fountain, 
and  Jerusalem — all  of  which  were  occupied  by  nativc 
helpers,  and  occasionally  risited  by  a  Wesleyan  misaion- 
ary from  Little  Namaąualand.  Morę  extenaive  ia  tho 
work  of  the  Khenish  Society,  which  in  1842  established 
ita  first  out-station  at  Bcthania,  and  gradually  advanced 
northwards  as  far  as  the  Zwachaub.  Their  labors,  espe- 
cially  at  Bethania,  hare  been  very  successful,  and  Great 
Naroaqualand  may  now  be  regarded  as  a  Christianized 
country.  See  Tindall  (Wesleyan  misaionary),  Tteo  /.«c- 
turtt  on  Great  Namagualand  and  i/s  Jnhałńtanta ;  Moo- 
die,  The  Becordy  or  a  Series  ofofficial  Papers  relaiire  to 
the  Condition  and  Trtatment  ofthe  natire  Tribes  in  South 
A/rica  (Capeto^Tn,  1838  sq.,  6  yoK).  A  Grammar  of 
the  Hottentot  language  bas  been  prepared  by  Tyndall 
(Capetown,  1867),  and  a  work  on  etymology  by  Wall- 
roann  (Berlin,  1857).  On  the  history  of  the  missions 
among  the  Hottentots,  sec  Grundemann,  Afitnonstttku 
(Gotha,  1867).     (A.J.S.) 

Hottinger,  Johann  Heinrich,  1*  a  celebrated 
Swiss  theolopaii  and  scholar,  bom  at  Żtłrich  March  10, 
1 620.  He  8tudied  thoology  and  the  Oriental  languages  at 
ZUrich,  Genera,  Groningen,  and  Leyden.  In  1642  he  be- 
came professor  of  Church  History  at  ZUrich,  and  in  1643 
added  to  it  a  professorship  at  the  Carolinum.  In  1665 
hc  became  profesaor  of  Oriental  languagea  at  Heidel- 
berg, but  in  1661  he  returped  to  ZUrich.  In  1666,  af- 
ter the  decease  of  Hoombeck  (q.  tO,  the  UnivciMty  of 


Leyden  urged  Hottinger  to  eome  as  hia  auooesBor.  He 
finally  consented,  by  adrioe  of  the  Swiaa  gorermnent, 
to  aerve  that  uniyeraity  a  feW  yean.  While  making 
hia  arrangementa  prepaiatoiy  to  his  Joiimey,  he  waa 
drowned  in  the  Limmat,  Jonę  6, 16(>7.  Hottinger  oc- 
cttpiea  a  diatinguished  place  among  the  phik>logista  of 
the  17th  century,  who  labored  to  promote  the  knowl- 
edge  of  the  Shemitic  languagea.  He  was  one  of  the 
first  to  bring  to  public  notice  a  number  of  Syriac  and 
Arabie  worka  by  giving  extnct8  ftom  them  and  biogra- 
phiea  of  their  authora.  He  aiao  gave  a  powerful  impulse 
to  the  atudy  of  Oriental  languagea  by  eatabliahing  at 
hia  own  expenae  an  Arabie  printing-oflioe  at  Heidel- 
berg while  profeaaor  in  that  dty.  The  great  aim  of  his 
writinga  waa  to  eaUblish  the  inteipreution  of  Scnpturc 
on  a  morę  thoroughly  historical  and  giammatical  foun- 
dation ;  yet  he  rather  fumished  the  meana  for  such  a 
ayatem  than  establbhed  it  himself.  Hia  worka  consi^t 
chiefly  of  compilations,  and  were  yalnable  iiom  the  fiurt 
that  they  were  from  aourcea  prerioualy  not  generałly 
known.  He  aeldom  girea  an  exegeBis,  but  when  he 
does  it  is  baaed  on  grammatical  and  historical  conńder- 
ationa  rather  than  on  dogmaticaL  Hia  principal  worka 
are,  Ererciiationes  A  ntmorimanm  de  Pentateudko  Sama' 
rił,  (1644)  '.-—Erołemojfa  Ungua  tancfa  (1647 ;  2d  edition, 
16G7):^GraiimaiieaChaldaO'Syriaea  (1658):— //«/. 
orienkUia  de  Muhammeditmio,  SaracemsmOf  Chaldaitmo 
(Zur.  1650)  '.^Historia  ecdesiast.  Novi  Tett,  (1651-67,  9 
Yols.),  of  which  Schaff  {Ch,  Hisf.  i,  21)  aays  that  it  is  a 
counterpart  of  the  Magdeburg  Centuriea.  **  It  ia  leea 
original  and  rigonma,  but  morę  aober  and  moderate  :** — 
Jus  HtbrcBorum  (1655): — Smegma  orientale  oppotitum 
sordffnu  barbaiHtmi  (1657)  i—Bibliatheca  orienfałis  (Hei- 
ddb.  1658)  :^Thnauru9  phiM,  (Zur.  1649) :— IfrjTirn- 
•er,  dadurch  mon  rertichert  werden  moff,  fpo  keut  zu 
Toffe  der  vahre  katkoŁische  Glaube  zujindm  sei  ( 1647-49, 
8  Yola.)  :—Cur»U3  theolofficus  (1660).— Pierer,  Unirersał 
ljexikon,  s.  v. ;  Kitto,  BM,  Cyclop,  ii,  831  \  Hoefef,  Nowt, 
Biogr,  Generale^  xxv,  280  sq. ;  Heizog,  Beal-Ettcyklop. 
vi,  287  8q. ;  Hirzcl,  J.  //.  Hottinger  der  OrientaliM  d.  17 
Jakrhunderts;  Bayle,  Uiti.  Diet,  ii,  625  8q.;  BiUioiheca 
SacrOf  vii,  63. 

Hottinger,  Johann  Heinrich,  2,  a  Swisa  Protes- 
tant theologian,  grandson  of  the  preceding,  waa  bont  at 
ZUrich  Dec.  5, 1681.  He  studied  theology  at  the  uni- 
Yersitiea  of  Ztirich,  Geneva,  and  Amsterdam,  and  in  1704 
was  appointed  professor  of  philosophy  at  Martwurg.  In 
1705  he  became  profeaaor  of  Hebrew  antiquitieB,  and 
in  1710  professor  of  theology.  To  strictly  Calvini«tic 
viewa  he  added  moat  of  Cocceiua^a  principles,  and  from 
thia  mixture  reaulted  a  ayatem  of  hia  own,  which  he 
aet  forth  in  a  treatiae  on  dogmatic8,entitled7^Ma  7>oc- 
trinm  Christiana  (Francf.  ad  Main,  1714,  8vo).  This 
work  created  great  excitement;  the  author  was  ar- 
cuaed  of  inculcating  m>*6tical  doctrincs,  and  waa  obliged 
to  resign  his  position  In  1717.  Hottinger  retired  to 
Frankenthal,  where  he  became  pastor  of  the  Keforroed 
Church.  In  1721  he  was  appointed  professor  of  theol- 
ogy at  Heidelberg,  where  hc  died  April  7, 1750.  The 
most  important  of  his  later  writings  are  I}isqu\ntio  de 
BetekUionibus  extraordinariis  in  geners  et  de  guibusdam 
hodiemia  rulgo  dictis  inspiratis  in  tpecie  (1717,  8vo), 
in  which  he  treata  of  the  prophets  of  the  Cevenne8,  who 
were  just  then  attracting  great  attention  in  Germany. 
— Hoefer,  Nouv,  Biog.  Generale,  xxv,  239;  Hilgenfeld, 
Zeitschriftf,  wissenschajtl  TheoL  1868,  p.  81.    (J.  N.  P.) 

Hottinger,  Johann  Jakob,  1,  son  of  Johann 
Heinrich,  No.  1,  was  bom  at  Zttrich  Dec  1, 1652.  He 
studied  theology  at  ZUrich  and  Basie,  and  be<'ame,  in 
1680,  pastor  of  Śtallikon,  near  Zttrich.  In  1686  hc  was 
appointed  dean  of  the  cathedral  of  Zttrich,  and  in  1698 
professor  of  theology  iu  the  uniycrsity  of  that  place. 
He  dicd  Dec.  18, 1735.  Hottinger  labored  eameatly  to 
establish  a  union  of  the  Protestant  churches,  and  with 
that  view  published  his  Diss,  irenica  de  rertiatis  et  char- 
itniis  in  ecdesim  ProtesttmtiuM  comuMo  (1721).  He  waa 
an  ardent  opponent  of  the  Bomaa  Chmch.  and  wrote 


HOTTINGER 


365 


HOUGH 


•gttoflt  ii  hk  Diuaiatio  dmctUariś  de  necestaria  mo^ 
rum  ab  ecdesia  Romana  secetsione  (1719).  His  princi- 
pAl  other  works  MiefHeheiiache  Kirchenffeschichte  (169^ 
1729, 4  yois.  4to) : — Ueber  cL  Zuttand  der  Seeie  nach  dem 
Tode  (1715) : — Die  chrisUiehe  Lehre  r.  d,  heilsamen  Gnade 
Gottes  (1716): — Hittoria  fornwia  consensut  (1728): — 
ra!a  dodrituB  de  prtedeałmałione  et  gratia  Dei  (1727), 
etc— Pierer,£/ittFcr#a/-X«ar£(»n,  s.  v.;  Heizogj  Real-En^ 
tyLkjK  vi,  290  aą. ;  Hoefer,  Xouv,  Biog,  Genir,  xxv,  238 
8q.;  Vfnk\i,  BibUotk.  Theolog.  (see  Index):  Fuhrmann, 
Jf.tndirorterinch  di  KircHengeach^  ii,  S54 ;  Gase^  Doffmen- 
getckickte^  iii,  78  sq. 

Hottinger,  Johann  Jakob,  2,  nephew  of  a 
f;:TandaoD  of  tbe  fereguiiig,  and  also  a  distanguLshed  the- 
okigiao,  was  bora  at  Zttńch  May  18, 1783.  He  war*  ap- 
pointed  professor  of  histoiy  at  the  uniyenity  of  his  na- 
tive  place  in  1844,  and  died  Łhere  May  18, 1859.  His 
principal  works  one  Ge8ch,d,8ckiceizer,Kirchenirefmung 
(Ztlr.  1825-27, 2  yoIs.  8vo)  .—Huldreich  Ztemgli  u,  s,  ZeU 
(ibid.  1841, 8vo).  He  also  edited,  in  connection  with 
Yiigcli,  BiiUinger*8  Rrfonnation»ge»ch.{yol,  i-iii,  Frauenf. 
1  MO,  8%'o).  See  Pierer,  Umv,  /jeańkoH,  yiii,  358 ;  Hoefer, 
.V()iir.  Bioff.  Genende^  xxv,  239;  Brockbaus,  Conv,  Lex, 
Tiii,108. 

Hoaames  is  the  namc  of  a  Mohaminedan  sect  of 
roring  licentious  Arabians,  who  dwell  in  tcnts,  as  is  the 
cmtom  of  the  Arabians.  ^  They  have  a  particular  law, 
by  which  they  are  oommandcd  to  perform  their  cerę- 
Donies  and  prayers  under  a  pavilion,  without  any  light, 
after  which  they  lie  with  the  fir»t  woman  they  can 
meet**  Some  followers  of  this  sect  are  living  concealed 
at  Alesamlria  and  other  placeai  They  are  not  tolerated 
br  their  fellow-eountrymen,  and  are  bumt  a]ive  if  dis- 
covered.  The  name  given  them  signifies  in  Arabie 
widaed,  laseieiotts,  or  c^omńtable  personę,  See  Brongh- 
toa,BiUiołJLffui,Sac.  1,495.    (J.H.W.) 

Hcmbigant,  Charles  Fkancois,  a  French  pricst 
of  the  Orator^',  and  an  emtnent  Biblical  scholar,  was 
born  at  Paris  in  1686.  He  Joined  his  order  in  1704,  and 
■000  became  distinguished  for  his  great  attainments. 
He  loctured  suoceasiyely  on  beUcs-lettres  at  Jeuilly,  on 
rhetońc  at  Maneilles,  and  on  philosophy  at  Soissons, 
and  was  called  to  Paris  in  1722  to  conduct  the  confer- 
enocs  of  St.Mag^oire.  His  deyotion  to  the  dnties  re- 
qaired  by  theee  new  offices  produced  a  serious  iUness, 
which  tenninmted  in  total  deafness.  Being  thus  inca- 
pańtaied  for  poblic  duty,  he  devoted  all  his  time  to 
•ludy,  applying  himaelf  especially  to  the  Oriental  lan- 
miages.  Towards  the  close  of  his  long  career,  his  intcl- 
lectual  faculties  became  impaired  in  conseąuence  of  a 
falL  He  died  at  Paris  October  81, 1783.  In  1772  he 
foonded  a  scbool  for  girls  at  Arill^',  where  he  had  a 
cniintry  rcaidence,  and  at  his  death  he  left  an  annual  in- 
oome  of  175  fiancs  to  that  institution.  His  principal 
amusement  was  to  set  in  type  and  print  his  works  him- 
lelf,  and  for  that  purpose  he  established  a  printing- 
rnom  in  his  ooontiy  hoiise.  He  wrotc  Racmea  de  la 
Lmgue  Ilebraigw  (Paris,  1732, 8vo)  in  yerse,  in  imita- 
tioo  of  the  Baemes-Greeguee  of  Rort-RoyaL  In  the 
preiace  Hoabigant  defends  Masclefs  system,  and  at- 
tempto  to  pn)ve  the  uselessness  and  danger  of  vowel 
points  in  the  study  of  Hebrew :— Prolegomena  m  Scrip- 
A(rajn^'acram  (Paris,  1746, 4to).  In  this  work  he  follows 
Cappel,  seeking  to  prove  that  the  original  text  of  the 
O.  T.  has  undeigone  alterations  which,  without  touch- 
iag  on  points  of  dogma  or  of  morals,  tend  to  obscure  the 
Kose ;  aud  he  gives  mles  by  which  these  fanits,  due  most- 
ly  to  the  carelesoiess  of  copyists,  may  be  discovercd  and 
(wrrected :— Coi;/3refioM  de  Metz,  In  this  work,  pub- 
lishcd  without  name  of  place  or  datę,  he  giyes  a  popular 
erpośi  of  the  prindples  of  criticism  deyeloped  in  the 
pwceding  worki— Peabni  Jfebraki  mendie  cuam  pluri- 
■woyitfpa/,-  (Łcyden,  174^,  16mo),  the  text  corrected 
•wording  to  the  principles  laid  down  by  the  author  in 
'óiProlęgomemi:— Biblia  Hebraica  cvm  notie  criiicie  et 
ftrtione  Laiina  ad  notae  critieae /acta  f  acoedunt  Ubri 


Greed  qui  deuiero-^atiomci  tocantur,  in  tret  daeees  diw- 
tribitH  (Paris,  1758  and  1754, 4  yols.  foL).  This  work, 
which  cost  its  author  twenty  years*  labor,  was  published 
by  the  Congregation  of  the  Oratory  at  an  eKpense  of 
40,000  franca.  It  is  yery  carefuUy  executed,  and  is 
printed  in  two  columns,  one  containing  the  text  and  the 
other  the  translation.  The  text,  printed  without  yowd 
points,  is  but  a  reprint  of  Yan  der  Hooghfs  edition  of 
1705.  The  coirections  proposed  by  Houbigant  (who 
makes  no  acoount  of  the  Keri  and  Kethib  of  the  Maso- 
rites),  are  plaeed  either  in  the  margin  or  in  the  form  of 
tabtos  at  the  end  of  each  yolume.  The  corrections  of 
the  Pentateuch  are  taken  irom  the  Samaritan  Codex,  to 
which  Houbigant,  as  well  as  Morin,  attached  undne  im- 
portance;  others  are  taken  fram  yarious  MSS.  belong- 
ing  te  the  Congregation  of  the  Oratory,  or  to  the  Impe- 
rial Library  of  Paris,  but  are  not  fuUy  indicated  by  him ; 
a  large  number,  finally,  are  merely  conjectural,  and  de- 
rived  from  the  appUcation  of  his  principles  of  criticism 
contained  in  the  I*rolegomena.  These-  corrections  have 
not  receiyed  the  approbation  of  oompetcnt j  udgcs.  Hou- 
bigant appean  not  to  have  had  a  very  elear  idea  of  the 
relatiye  yalue  of  his  authorities,  and  he  has  been  ao- 
cused  of  waiit  of  thoroughness  in  his  knowledge  of  Ile- 
brew,  as  ly-cU  as  of  arbitnuriness  in  his  corrections.  The 
Latin  translation  was  published  separately,  under  the 
titłe  Veierie  Teetamenti  rersio  nova  (Paris,  1753,  5  yols. 
8yo) ;  the  critical  notes  and  Prolegomena  haye  also  been 
printed  separately,  under  the  title  NoUe  Criticm  in  uni» 
rereoe  Veterie  Test€tmenti  libroe,  cum  Jlebraice  tum  Grace 
ecriploej  cum  integrie  Prolegomenis,  ad  exemplar  Pariti- 
en$e  denuo  reoenea  (Francf.  ad  Main,  1777,  2  yols.  4to). 
Houbigant  translated  hishop  Sherlock'8  Sermont  and 
Lealie*8  Metkod  fcith  the  DeiH  into  French.  He  Ici^  a 
large  number  of  MSS.  which  werc  ncyer  published  See 
Cadry,  Notice  sur  la  Vie  et  lee  Ourrages  du  P,  Houbigant 
(In  the  MagoMn  łJncyclopidigue,  May,  180G) ;  G.  W. 
Meyer,  Gesch.  d,  Sdiriflerkiar,  iy,  154-156, 2C4-270, 465, 
466;  Hoefer,  Nour.  Biog,  Generale^  xxv,  241  są. ;  Her- 
zog, Real-Encyklop,  ii,  158;  Schrockh,  Kirckengesch,  8» 
d  Ref.  vii,  168 ;  viii,  50. 

Houdayer,  Julien,  a  French  theologian,  was  bom 
at  Noyen  in  1562.  In  1595  he  was  appointed  rector  of 
the  Sorbonne,  and  later  filled  seyeral  positions  of  dis- 
tinction  in  the  Koman  Catholic  Church  of  France.  He 
died  Nor.  28, 1619.  His  only  thcological  work  is  Du 
Decoir  dee  Curee  (Le  Mans,  1612, 12mo). — Hoefer,  Nouv, 
Biog,  GeninUe,  xxy,  247. 

Hondry,  Yincent,  a  French  Jesuit  preacher  and 
religious  writcr,  was  bom  at  Tours  January  22,  1681. 
He  entered  the  order  in  1644,  preached  some  thirty 
years,  and  thcn  devoted  his  time  to  writing  only.  He 
died  March  29, 1729.  His  principal  works  are  SermoM 
tur  ioue  lee  eujete  de  la  Morale  Chreticnne  (Paris,  1696, 
etc,  20  yoK  12mo) : — Troite  de  la  manierę  dimiter  lee 
bons  predicateure  (Par.  1702, 12mo);  and  most  especially 
Bibliołhegue  dee  Predicateure:  cotUenant  lee  piincipaux 
eujete  de  la  morale  Chrit,  (Par.  1712,  etc,  23  yols.  4ło).— 
Hoefer,  A^our.  Biog,  Generale,  xxy,  258;  Chandon  and 
Delandine,  Nouv.  Did,  Hiet.  xvi,  313. 

Hotiel,  Nicolas,  a  French  philanthropist  of  the  16th 
century.  He  foundcd  at  Paris  the  Maieon  de  la  Ckar- 
ite  Chritienne  in  1578.  Two  years  later  he  published 
his  Arertieeetnent  et  dedarałion  de  VImtitution  de  la 
Charite  Chretienne  (Par.  1580, 8vo).— Hoefer,  Nouv,  Biog, 
Generale,  xxv,  258  sq. 

Hough  C^ł??,  ahl-er',  Piel  of  *J|?5,  to  esctirpafe'),  a 
method  cmploycd  by  the  ancient  Israclitcs  to  rendcr 
useless  the  captured  horses  of  an  enemy  (Josh.  xi,  6 ; 
comp.  Gen.  xlix,  6),  as  they  were  not  allowed  or  able  to 
use  that  animal  (so  also  2  Sam.  yiii,  4 ;  1  Chroń,  xviii, 
4).  It  consisted  in  hametringing,  i.  e.  seyering  "  the  ten- 
don  Achilles"  of  the  hinder  legs  (Sept  rtifpoKoirnp ; 
compare  ^akar;  S>t.  the  same,  Barhebr.  p.  220).  The 
practice  is  still  common  in  Arab  warfare  (Hoscnmkiller, 
Inetitut.jurie  Mokam,  circa  bellum,  §  17).    See  Hobsb. 


HOUGH 


366 


HOUR 


Hough,  John,  D.D.,  1,  a  distingatshed  English  di- 
▼ine,  bom  in  Middle8ex  in  1651,  and  educated  at  Mag- 
dalen College,  Oxford,  of  which  lie  was  elected  preńdent 
in  1687,  in  spite  of  the  mandamuB  of  king  Jamefl  II,  who 
endeayored  to  procure  the  election  to  the  headship  of  the 
coUege  iirst  of  Anthony  Farmer,  and  then  of  Dr.  Samuel 
Parker  (q.  v.),  bishop  of  Oxford,  both  Koman  Gatholićs 
in  bclief,  and  neither  of  them  feUows  of  the  college,  aa 
the  statute  reąuired.  Lord-oommiflsionere  having  been 
sent  to  enforce  the  royal  mandates  on  the  studenta, 
Hough,  together  with  twenty-eix  out  of  the  twenty- 
eight  fellows  of  the  college,  courageously  proteated 
against  their  arbitraiy  prooeedingB,  and  refused  to  de- 
liver  the  keys  of  the  college.  Finally,  in  Oct  1687,  Dr. 
Paiker  was  by  main  force  inatalled  in  Hough's  place. 
**  The  nation,  as  well  as  the  unirersity,  looked  on  all 
thb  procceding  with  a  just  indignation.  It  was  thought 
an  open  piece  of  robbery  and  buiglary,  when  men  au- 
thorized  by  no  legał  commisńon  came  forcibly  and  tum- 
ed  men  out  of  their  poeseesion  and  freeholda**  (bishop 
Bumet).  "  The  protest  of  Hough  was  everywhere  ap- 
plaudcd;  the  forcing  of  his  door  was  eyerywhere  men- 
tioned  with  abhorrence."  Less  than  a  year  after,  James 
II,  under  the  pressure  of  political  events,  thought  it  pru- 
dent,  however,  to  retrace  his  sieps,  and  to  conciliate 
Hough  and  his  adherents.  The  former  was  restored  to 
his  position  as  preadent,  After  the  Rerolution,  Hough 
became  successively  bishop  of  Oxford  in  1690;  of  lich- 
field  and  Coyentry  in  1699 ;  and  finally,  after  refuńng 
the  archbbhopric  of  Canterbui>%  bishop  of  Worcester  in 
1717.  He  died  in  1743.  Hough  wrote  Semums  and 
Charffes,  published  with  a  Memoir  o/his  Life,  by  Wil- 
liam Russell,  B.D.  etc  (Oxf.  1821) ;  and  other  occasional 
sermons.— Darling,  Cj/clopadUi  Bibliographica,  i,  16M ; 
Macaulay,  Ilistory  ofEnghtnd,  vol.  ii ;  AUibone,  Dictum- 
€iry  o/Authors,  i, 897 ;  liIcMasters,  Biog»  fnd.  to  IJume^i 
Jiiitory  of  Evglcmd^  p.  368  sq.;  Stoughton  (John),  J5t> 
cfea  Higt.  o/Enffland  (Lond.  1870),  ii,  188  są. 

Hough,  John,  D.D.,  2,  a  Congregational  minis- 
ter, was  bom  in  Stamfoni,  Conn.,  August  17, 1783.  He 
graduated  at  Yale  in  1802,  then  studied  divinity,  and 
was  sent  in  1806  as  missionary  to  Yermont,  whcre  he 
was  ordained  pastor  at  Yergennes  in  1807.  This  pas- 
torate  he  resigned  in  1812,  and  became  professor  of  lan- 
guages  in  Middlebury  College,  Yt.  Herę  he  remained 
twenty-seven  years,  occupying  sereral  chatrs  in  tum. 
He  left  in  1839,  and  was  some  time  in  the  ser\'ice  of  the 
Colonization  Society.  In  1841  he  was  installed  pastor 
at  Windham,  Ohio.  He  obtained  a  dismisaon  in  1850, 
on  account  of  failing  eyesight,  which  finally  became 
blindness.  He  died  at  Fort  Wayne,  Indiana,  July  17, 
1861.  Hough  was  emihently  sucoessful  and  popular  as 
an  instmctor.  He  published  three  sermons,  preached  at 
ordinalions  (1810, 1823, 1826),  and  was  one  of  the  editors 
of  "  The  Adviser,  or  Yermont  Erangelical  Magazine."* — 
Congreff,  Quart,  iii,  378 ;  Wilson,  Preabyt,  HUtorical  A  /• 
manar,  1862,  p.  186. 

Houghtaling,  J.  6.,  n  Methodist  Episcopal  minis- 
ter, was  bom  in  Northeast,  Dutchess  Co.,  N.  Y.,  Oct.  9, 
1797;  8tudicxl  law  for  five  years,  frora  1813;  was  eon- 
verted  about  1817,  and  entered  the  itinerant  ministry 
in  1828.  He  was  appointed  agent  of  the  Troy  Confer- 
ence  Academy  in  1835,  and,  on  account  of  poor  health, 
took  a  supemumcrary  relation  in  1847,  which  he  retain- 
ed  until  his  death  in  1856  or  7.  He  was  a  very  useful 
preacher  and  an  cxcellent  pastor.  His  business  abilities 
were  linę,  and  he  was  for  many  years  secretary  of  the 
Troy  Conferencc,  and  twicc  assistant  secretar}'  of  the 
General  Conference.  —  Minules  of  Conftrences^  vi,  353. 
CG.L.T.) 

Hour  (Chald.  tXTĆ,  thaah%  a  momenty  prop.  a  look, 
I  q.  "the  wink  of  an  eye"  [Germ.  AufffnMici'} ;  Greek 
&pa)y  a  term  iirst  found  in  Dan.  iii,  6;  iv,  19,  33;  v,  5; 
and  occurring  several  times  in  the  Apocrypha  (Judith 
xix,  8 ;  2  l'.s^(\,  ix,  44).  It  seems  to  be  a  vague  expre8- 
Słon  for  a  short  period,  and  the  freąuent  phrase  "in  the 


same  houi^'  means  **  immediatdy :"  henoe  we  find  )^9^ 
Bubstituted  in  the  Taigum  for  ST^^ą,  "in  a  moment" 
(Numb.  xvi,  21,  etc).  The  oorrespouding  Gr.  term  is 
fiequently  used  in  the  same  way  by  the  N.-T.  wńten 
(Matt  viii,  13;  Lukę  xii,  39,  etc.).  The  word  kaur  is 
sometimes  used  m  Scripture  to  denote  some  detennioate 
season,  as  "  minę  hour  is  not  yet  oome,**  "  this  is  your 
kourj  and  the  power  of  darkness,"  "  the  hour  is  coming," 
etc  It  occurs  in  the  Sept  as  a  rendering  for  rarioos 
words  meaning  time,  just  as  it  docs  in  Greek  writcas 
long  before  it  acquired  the  specific  meaning  of  aur  wotd  ^ 
"  hour.*"  Saah  is  still  used  in  Arabie  both  for  an  hour 
and  a  moment 

The  andent  Hebrews  were  probably  unacąoainted 
with  the  division  of  the  natural  day  into  twenty-fonr 
parts.  The  generał  distinctions  of  **moming,  erenlng, 
and  noonday"  (Psa.  lv,  17 ;  comp.  Gen.  xv,  12 ;  xviii,  1  j 
xix,  1, 15,  23)  were  sufficient  for  them  at  first,  as  they 
were  for  the  early  Greeks  (Homer,  //.  xxi,  3, 1 1 1) ;  «ł- 
terwards  the  Greeks  adopted  five  marked  periods  of  the 
day  (Jul  Pollux,  Onom,  i,  68 ;  Dio  Chrysoet.  Orat,  in  De 
Ghr.),  and  the  Hebrews  parcelled  out  the  period  be- 
twecn  sunrise  and  sunset  into  a  scries  of  minutę  divi- 
sions  distinguished  by  the  sun*s  ooursc,  as  is  atill  dooe 
by  the  Araba,  who  have  stated  forms  of  pnyers  for  each 
period  (Lane's  Mod.  Eg.  voL  i,  eh.  iii).    See  Day. 

The  early  Jews  appear  to  have  dtvided  the  day  into 
four  parts  (Keh.  ix,  3),  and  even  in  the  N.  T.  we  find  a 
tracę  of  this  diyision  in  Matt  xx,  1-5.  Thcre  ia,  how- 
ever,  no  proof  of  the  aasertion  sometimes  madę,  that  &pa 
in  the  Gospels  may  occasionally  mean  a  space  of  three 
hours.  It  has  been  thought  by  some  interprcters  (see 
Wolfii  Curm  mN,T,ad  John  xix,  14)  that  the  eyangel- 
ist  John  always  oomputes  the  hours  of  the  day  alter  the 
Roman  reckoning,  i.  e.  from  midnight  to  midnight  (aee 
Pliny,  IłUł. N€tł,  ii,  79;  AuL  GelL  NocL  Alt,  iii,  2) ;  but 
this  is  without  support  from  Hebrew  analog}-,  and  obitgea 
the  gratuitous  supposition  of  a  reckoning  also  from  mid- 
day  (against  John  xi,  9). 

The  Greeks  adopted  the  division  of  the  day  into 
twelve  hours  from  the  Babylonians  (Herodotus,  ii,  109 ; 
comp.  Rawlinson,  Herod,  ii,  334).  At  what  period  the 
Jews  became  first  acquainted  with  this  way  of  reckon- 
ing time  is  unknowh,  but  it  is  generally  suppoeed  that 
they,  too,  leanied  it  from  the  Babylonians  duriog  the 
Capdyity  ( Wahncr,  A  tU,  Hebr,  §  v,  i,  8,  9).  They  may 
have  had  some  such  division  at  a  much  earlier  period, 
as  has  been  inrerred  from  the  fact  that  Ahaz  erected 
a  suu-dial  in  Jcruaalem,  the  use  of  which  had  probably 
been  Icamed  from  Babylon.  Theje  is,  howe%-er,  the 
greatest  uncertainty  as  to  the  meaning  of  the  word 
rńb?«  (A.  Y.  "degrees,"  Isa.  xxxviii,  8).  See  Diai. 
It  is  strange  that  the  Jews  were  not  acquainted  with 
this  method  of  reckoning  even  earlier,  for,  although  a 
purely  conventional  one,  it  is  naturally  suggested  by  the 
months  in  a  year.  Sir  G.  Wilkinson  thinks  that  it  artwe 
from  a  less  olnHous  cause  (Rawlinson,  Herod,  ii,  884). 
In  whatever  way  it  originated,  it  was  known  to  the 
Egyptians  at  a  very  early  period.  They  had  twcive 
hours  of  the  day  and  of  the  night  (called  Almi  =  hour), 
each  of  which  had  its  own  geniiis,  drawn  with  a  star  on 
its  head.  The  word  is  said  by  Lepsius  to  be  f<mnd  aa 
far  back  as  the  fiflh  dynasty  (Rawlinson,  Herod,  ii,  185). 
The  night  was  divided  into  twelve  equal  portions  or 
hours,  in  predsely  the  same  manner  as  the  day.  The 
most  ancient  division,  howevcr,  was  into  three  watches 
{Ant.  lxiii,  6:  xc,  4)— the  first,  or  beginning  of  the 
watches,  as  it  is  called  (Lam.  ii.  19) ;  the  middle  watch 
(Judg.  vii,  19) ;  and  the  moming  watch  (Exod.  xłv,  24). 
See  Watch.  When  Judaea  bccune  a  pn>vince  of  Romę, 
the  Roman  distribution  of  the  night  into  four  watches 
was  mtroduced;  to  which  division  freąuent  alluńoiw 
occur  m  the  Ne^T  Testament  (Lukę  xii,  88 ;  Malt  xiv, 
25 ;  xiii,  85),  as  well  as  to  that  of  hours  (Matt  xxv,  IS ; 
xxvi,  40 ;  Mark  xiv,  37 ;  Lukę  xvii,  69 ;  Acta  xxiii,  23  ; 
Rev.  iii,  3).    See  CocK-CKOwma 


H0UIW5LASS  STAND 


867 


HOURS 


There  are  two  kinds  of  hoiin,  viz.  (1.)  the  astronom- 
iesl  or  eąninoctial  hour,  i  e.  the  Łwenty-fourth  part  of  a 
dvii  daj,  which,  although  **•  known  to  astronomerR,  was 
not  ued  in  the  alAtiTs  of  oommon  life  till  towardu  the 
end  of  the  4th  centary  of  the  Christian  lera'*  (Smith, 
DicL  of  Classieal  Antig.  a.  v.  Hora) ;  and  (2.)  the  natu- 
nl  hour  (soch  the  Rabbis  called  ri'^3QT,  Kcupucaif  or 
temporales),  L  e.  the  twelfth  part  of  the  natural  day,  or 
of  the  timc  between  sunriae  and  sunaet.  These  are  the 
houTB  mcant  in  the  New  TesU,  Josephus,  and  the  Rabbis 
(John  xi,  9;  Acta  v,  7;  xix,  31 ;  Josephus,  Anł,  xiv,  4, 
S),  and  it  must  be  remembered  that  they  perpetiuilly 
Tary  in  length,  so  as  to  be  yeiy  dilTerent  at  dilTerent 
timea  of  the  year.  Besides  this,  an  hour  of  the  day 
woold  alwa>'8  mean  a  diflerent  length  of  time  from  an 
hour  of  the  night,  except  at  the  equinox.  From  the 
conaequent  uncertainty  of  the  term  there  arose  the  pro- 
'  Ycrbial  exprea8ion  **not  all  hours  are  eqaal**  (R  Joi^ua 
op.  Carpzoy,  App,  CriL  p.  845).  At  the  equinoxe8  the 
third  hour  would  correepond  to  nine  o*ck)ck;  the  8ixth 
would  aUeayi  be  at  noon.  To  find  the  exact  time  meant 
at  other  aeaaons  of  the  year,  we  must  know  when  the 
ion  lisea  in  Palestine,  and  reduce  the  hours  to  our  reck- 
oning  acoordingl}'-  (Jahn,  Biblie,  A  rch,  §  101).  In  an- 
cient  timea  the  only  way  of  reckoning  the  progpress  of 
the  day  was  by  the  length  of  the  shadow>-a  modę  of 
reckoning  which  was  both  oontingent  on  the  sunshine, 
and  8erved  only  for  the  guidance  of  indiyiduals.  See 
Shadow.  By  what  means  the  Jews  calculated  the 
length  of  their  hours — whether  by  dialling,  by  the  dep- 
ąfSa  or  water-dock,  or  by  sóme  horological  contrivance, 
like  what  was  used  andently  in  Pcrsia  (Josephus,  Anf. 
xi,  6),  and  by  the  Romans  (Martial,  viti,  JCpiff,  67 ;  Juv. 
8aL  X,  214),  and  which  is  still  used  in  India  (A  siat.  Re- 
searckesj  ▼,  88),  a  serrant  notifying  the  intenrals— it  is 
now  impossible  to  disoover  (see  Buttinghausen,  Speei- 
mm  koramm  Iłdf,  et  A  rab.  Tr.  ad  Rh.  1758).  Mention 
is  aiao  roade  of  a  curious  invention  called  T\SXŚ  ^1^2C. 

TT  :  ł 

by  which  a  Agnre  was  constructed  so  as  to  tlrop  a  stoue 
tuto  a  brazen  basin  every  hour,  the  aound  of  which  was 
heard  for  a  great  distance,  and  announced  the  time 
(Otbo,  Lex.  Bab.  s.  v.  Hora). 

For  the  purposes  of  prayer,  the  old  division  of  the  day 
into  fomr  portions  was  continued  in  the  Tempie  8er\ńce, 
as  we  see  firom  Acts  ii,  15;  iii,  1 ;  x,  9.  The  stated  pe- 
riods  of  prayer  were  the  third,  sixth,  and  ninth  hours 
of  the  day  (Psa.  xlv,  17 ;  Josephus,  A  nł.  iv,  4, 3).  The 
Jews  suppoMd  that  the  third  hour  had  been  consecrated 
by  Abratuun,  the  sixth  by  Isaac,  and  the  ninth  by  Ja- 
cob  (Kimchi ;  SchSttgcn,  Hor.  Hebr.  ad  Acts  iii,  1).  It 
is  probable  that  the  canonical  hours  obsenred  by  the 
Bomanists  (of  which  there  are  eight  in  the  twent>'-four) 
are  derivod  from  these  Tempie  hours  (Goodwin,'  Moaes 
and  Aaron,  iii,  9).    See  Hours,  Canonical.  - 

The  Rabbis  pretend  that  the  houEB  were  divided  into 

1080  W^hn  (minutes),  and  56^  U*7y^  (soconds), 

which  numbers  were  cfaosen  becanse  they  are  so  easily 

diviaible  (Gem.  Hier.  Berachoth,  2,  4;  in  Reland,  Ant. 

UAr.  iv,  1,  §  19).    See  Time. 

Honr-glaMl  Stand,  a  frame  of  iron  for  the  hour- 

^^^^^^       glass,  often  placed  near  the  pulpit 

Jl^Bi^^^     after  the  Reforraation  in  England. 

^^^^^^^B     They  were  almost  uniyersally  in- 

^■HB|V^  troduced  in  churches  during  the 

^  ID^   ^^^  oentury,  and  continued  in 

^Ł^^^BJP      UM  ontil  about  fifty  years  ago,  to 

^^^^^"^       regulate  the  length  of  8ermon& 

^^L  Some  of  them  are  yct  to  be  seen, 

^^P  •■  «t  \Volvercot  and  Beckley,  in 

^^m  Oxford8hire,  and  Leigh  Church, 

.^^^^H  in  Kent    One  was  recently  set 

„  ▼^  up  in  the  Savoy  Chapel.— Parker, 

?2Ehfi|!!r«.5*?f„f*  ^'fo««ry  of  ArdiiUćhirt,  p.  127; 

lełghT;hurch,KenL   Walcott, /or.  ^ rcA«o/.  p.  817. 

HcrariM,  a  designatioa  by  Europeans  of  those  imag- 
inaiy  beings  whoae  company  in  paiadise,  accoiding  to 


the  Mohammedans'  belief,  is  to  form  the  principal  fe- 
lidty  of  the  belieyers.  The  name,  derived  from  kur  al 
oyiin,  signifies  black-eyed.  They  are  represented  iii  the 
Koran  as  most  beautiful  i-irgins,  not  created  of  day,  like 
mortal  women,  but  of  pure  musk,  and  endowed  with  im- 
mortal  youth,  and  immunity  from  all  diaease.  Ste  the 
Koran,  chap.  lv,  lvi  (Sale's  translation) ;  and  the  PreL 
Ditc.  8. 4 ;  Brande  and  Cox,  Diet.  ofSdenctf  Liter,  and 
Art,  ii,  158. 

HouTB,  Canonical,  signifies,  in  ecdesiastical  usage, 
the  daily  round  of  prayers  and  praise  in  some  churches, 
both  ancient  and  modem.  The  ancient  order  of  these 
*'  hours"  is  as  follows : 

1 .  Noctttnu  or  Matintj  a  senrioe  performed  before  day- 
break  (properly  a  night  8er%'ice),  called  riffils  by  the 
Coundl  of  Carthage  (398),  but  afterwards  the  Hrst  hour 
after  dawn;  mentioned  by  Cyprian  as  midnight  and 
matins,  and  by  Athanasius  as  noctitms  and  midnight 
(Pba.  cxix,  62-147 ;  Acts  xvi,  25).  Cassian  and  Isidore 
say  this  season  was  first  obsenred  in  the  5th  centuiy,  in 
the  monastery  of  Bethlehem,in  memoiy  of  the  n8tivity. 

2.  Laudif  a  service  performed  at  daybreak,  foUowing 
the  matin  shortly,  if  not  actually  joined  on  to  it,  men- 
tioned by  Bańl  and  the  Apostolical  Constitutions. 

8.  Prime,  a  senrice  performed  at  about  8ix  o*dock 
A.M.,  ^  the  fbBt  hour,"  mentioned  by  Athanasius  (PMu 
xcii,  2;  v,8;  lix,  16). 

4.  Tierce  or  Terce,  a  senrice  performed  at  9  A.M., 
"the  third  hour;"  mentioned  by  Tcrtullian  with  Sexts 
and  Nones  (see  bdow),  as  commemorating  the  time 
when  the  disdples  were  asaembled  at  Pentecost  (Acts 
ii,  16). 

5.  Sext,  a  seryioe  performed  at  noonday,  **  the  sixth 
hour,"  commemorating  Peter*s  praying  (Acts  x,  19). 

6.  ATonef,  a  service  performed  at  3  P.M.,  "  the  ninth 
hour,"  commemorating  the  time  when  Peter  aud  John 
went  up  to  the  Tempie  (Acts  iii,  1). 

7.  Ve9per$,  a  serrice  performed  in  the  eorly  evening*, 
mentioned  by  Basil,  Ambrose,  and  Jerome,  and  by  the 
Apostolical  Constitutions  (which  we  cite  below),  to  com- 
memorate  the  limę  when  Christ  instituted  the  Eucha- 
rist,  showing  it  was  the  eventidc  of  the  world.  ^  This 
hour  is  called  from  evening,  according  to  StAugustine, 
or  the  evening  star,  says  St  Isidore."  It  was  also  known 
as  the  ofike  and  the  hour  of  lights,  as,  until  the  8th  or 
9Łh  century,  was  usual  in  the  East  and  at  Milan ;  alao 
when  the  lamps  were  lighted  (Zcch.  xiv,  7).  "  The  Ro- 
man custom  of  saying  Yesper  after  Nones  then  came 
into  use  in  the  West"  (Walcolt,  Sac.  A  rchceoL  p.  316). 

8.  Compline,  the  last  eveniiig  or  **  bedtime  seryioe** 
(Pśa.  cxxxii,  8) ;  firet  separated  from  YeepcrB  by  Bene- 
dict. 

The  Office  of  LAuds  was,  howcver,  yery  rarely  separ- 
ated from  that  of  Matins,  and  these  eight  houro  uf  pray- 
er were  therefore  practically  only  scyen,  founded  on  Da- 
vid*s  habit  (Psa.  ly,  17;  cxix,  62'). 

The  Apostolical  Constitutions  (viii,  84)  mention  the 
hours  as  follows:  **Ye  shall  make  prayer  in  the  mom- 
in?>  giving  thanks,  because  the  Lord  hath  cnlightened 
you,  remoying  the  night,  apd  bringing  the  day ;  at  the 
third  hour,  because  the  Lord  then  receiyed  senteiice 
from  Pilate ;  at  the  8ixth,  because  he  was  crucilied ;  at 
the  ninth,  because  all  things  were  shaken  when  the  Lord 
was  crucified,  trembling  at  the  audacity  of  the  impious 
Jews,  not  enduring  that  the  Lord  should  be  insulted ;  at 
eyening  giying  thanks,  because  hc  hath  given  the  night 
for  rest  fron>  labor;  at  cock-crowing,  because  that  hour 
giyes  glad  tidings  that  the  day  is  dawning  in  which  to 
work  the  works  of  light"  Cfussian  likewise  mcntions 
the  obseryation  of  Tierce,  Sext,  and  Nones  in  monaster- 
ies.  TertuUian  and  Pliny  speak  of  Christian  8er\'ioe8 
before  daylight.  Jerome  names  Tierce,  Sext,  Nones, 
YesperB,  and  Lauds ;  also  Augu»tine — for  the  two  latter 
hours,  howeyer,  substituting  *'  Karły  Vigił."  Archdea- 
con  Freeman,  of  the  Church  or  Englancl,  giyes  (Pruic*- 
ple9  ofDiv.  Serv.  i,  219  sq.)  the  foUowing  explanation, 
Yiz.  that  these  offices,  *Hhough  ndther  of  apostolic  nor 


HOURS 


368 


HOUSE 


early  post-apostolic  datę  as  Church  aeryices,  had,  never- 
theless,  probably  existed  in  a  rudimentary  fonn,  as  pń- 
vate  or  houaehold  deyotions,  from  a  very  early  peńod, 
and  had  been  received  into  the  number  of  recognised 
public  formularies  previou8  to  the  reorganizatiou  of  the 
Western  ritual  afŁer  the  Easteni  model."  "  Yańous  rea- 
sons  have  been  assigned  for  a  deeper  meaning  in  the 
hours;  one  is,  that  Łłiey  are  the  thanksgiying  for  the 
completion  of  creation  on  the  seyenth  day.  Another 
theory  beautifully  connects  them  with  the  acts  of  our 
Lord  in  his  passion :  £veii8ong  with  his  institution  of 
the  Eucharibt,  and  washing  the  disciples'  feet,  and  the 
going  out  to  (Jcthsemane ;  Compline  with  his  agony  and 
bioody  sweat ;  Matins  with  his  appearance  before  Caia- 
phas;  Prime  and  Tierce  with  that  in  the  presence  of 
Pilate ;  Tierce  also  with  his  scourging^  crown  of  thoms, 
and  presentation  to  the  people ;  Sext  with  his  bearing 
the  cross,  the  seven  words,  and  crucifixion ;  Nones  with 
his  dismission  of  his  Sptrit,  descent  into  heli,  and  rout  of 
the  devi];  Yespcrs  with  his  deposition  from  the  cross 
and  entombment;  Compline  with  the  setting  of  the 
watch ;  Matins  with  his  resurrection"  (Walcott,  Sacred 
A  rchaol,  p,  317).  Of  the  origin  of  these  "  hours,"  Bing- 
ham  {Antiąuities  ofthe  Ch-ist,  Churchy  bk.  xiii,  cłu  ix, 
p.661  8q.)  says  that "  thcy  who  liave  madę  the  most  ex- 
act  inquiries  can  find  no  footsteps  of  them  in  the  first 
thrce  ages,  but  conclude  that  they  came  first  into  the 
Church  with  the  monastic  life"  (compare  also  Pearson, 
PraUcK  m  Acf.  AposU  num,  8, 4).  It  is  obsenrable  fur- 
ther,  that  most  of  the  writers  of  the  fourth  age,  who 
speak  of  sbc  or  seren  hours  of  prayer,  speak  of  the  ob- 
seryances  of  the  roonks  only,  and  not  of  the  whole  body 
of  the  Church.  ITius  Jerome,  Desil,  Gregory  of  Nyssa, 
Cassian,  Cassiodorus,  and  most  other  writers  of  the  early 
Christian  Church,  speak  but  of  three  hours  of  prayers ; 
thus,  also,  even  Chrysostom  himself,  who,  however,  when 
**speaking  of  the  monks  and  their  institutions  (łłotniL 
14  in  1  Tim.  p.  1599),  gives  about  the  same  number  of 
canonical  hours  as  othcrs  do."  Yet  it  is  yery  likely 
even  that  in  some  Eastem  churches  these  hours  of  pray- 
ers might  have  been  practised  in  the  4th  century,  and 
quite  certain  that  the  diffcreiit  churches  obeerving  the 
hours  raried  greatly  both  as  to  the  number  of  the  hours 
and  the  8er\'icc  in  their  first  originaU  "At  the  time  of 
the  Reformat ion,  the  canonical  hours  were  reduced  in 
the  Lutheran  Church  to  two,  moming  andeyening;  the 
Keformed  Church  neyer  obser\-ed  them"  (Brande  and 
Cox,  Diet,  o/ Science f  Literat,  and  A  rty  ii,  152),  In  the 
Church  of  Kngland  these  seryices  were,  at  the  time  of 
the  English  Kcformation,  used  as  distinct  offices  only 
by  stricter  rcligious  persons  and  the  dergy.  At  the 
reyision  of  the  liturgy  of  that  Church  under  Edward 
VI,  it  Avas  decided  to  have  "  only  two  solemn  8er\'ice8 
of  public  wnrship  in  the  day,  viz.  Matins,  composed  of 
matins,  lauds,  and  prime ;  and  Eveti9ong,  consisting  of 
yespera  and  ctłrapline."  In  the  Greek  Church,  Nealc 
{Esaays  on  Liturgiology  and  Church  Hisł.,  Essay  i,  p.  6 
aq.)  says, "  There  are  eight  canonical  hours-;  prayera  are 
actually,  for  the  most  part,  said  three  times  daily— mat- 
ins, lauds,  and  prime,  by  aggrcgation  early  in  the  mom- 
uig;  tierce,  sextfl,  and  the  liturgy  (communion)  later; 
nones,  yespers,  and  compline,  by  aggregation  in  the 
eyening."  So,  also,  is  it  in  the  AYest.  "  Except  in  mo- 
nastic iKKlies,"  says  the  same  writer  (p.  46  sq.), "  the 
breyiar>'  ns  a  church  oflice  is  scarcely  eyer  used  as  a 
whole.  You  may  go,  we  do  not  say  from  church  to 
church,  but  from  cathedral  to  cathedral  of  Central  Eu- 
ropę, and  nevcr  hear  matins  save  at  high  festiyals.  In 
Spain  and  Portugal  it  is  somcwhat  morę  frequent,  but 
there,  as  eyerj^where,  it  is  a  clerical  deyotion  exclusive- 
ly  .  .  .  .  Then  the  lesser  hours  are  not  often  publicly 
said  exccpt  i  u  cathedrals,  and  then  principally  by  ag- 
gn^ation,  and  in  connection  with  mass.  ....  In  no 
national  Church  under  the  sun  are  so  many  matin  ser- 
yices said  os  in  our  own."  It  may  not  be  out  of  place 
here  to  add  that  seyen  hours  formed  the  basis  of  the 
**  Primers"  (q.  v.).    "  English  editions  of  these,  set  forth 


by  anthoiity  in  the  leigiis  of  Henry  VIII,  Edwaid  VI, 
and  of  queen  Elizabeth,  show  that  the  English  reform- 
ers  did  not  wish  to  disoounge  the  observance  of  the  an- 
cient  hours  of  prayer.  As  Ute  as  1627,  by  command  of 
Charles  I,  bishop  Cosin  published  a  *  CoUection  af  Fki- 
yate  Deyotions  in  the  practice  of  the  ancient  Church, 
called  the  Hours  of  Prayer,  as  they  were  after  thia  num- 
ner  published  by  authority  of  queen  Elizabeth,  16G0,' 
etc"  See,  besides  the  authorities  already  referred  to, 
Procter,  Prayer  Book,  chap.  i;  Blunt  (the  Rey.  J.  H.), 
JHct,  ofDoctrinal  and  UisU  TheoL  (Lond.  1870),  i,  315; 
Siegel,  ChristL-KirchL  A  kerłhUmer,  i,  270  aq. ;  iy,  65  a<^ 
Compare  Canonical;  BesyiARY.     (J.  H.  W.) 

Hours  of  our  Lady,  the  title  of  a  deyotion  inati- 
tuted  by  pope  Urban  II  at  the  Council  of  Clermont  in 
1095.— Walcott,  Sac,  A  rchasoL  p.  818. 

House  (r^a,  ha'yithj  which  is  used  with  much  lat- 
itude,  and  in  the  ''constnict"  form  n'^^,  heytk,  AngU- 
dzed  *^  Beth,"  [q.  y.]  enters  into  the  oomposition  of  many 
proper  names;  Gr.  óIkoc,  or  some  derivative  of  it),  a 
dwelUng  in  generał,  whether  literally,  as  houae,  tent, 
palące,  citadel,  tomb,  deriyatiyely  as  tabemade,  terapie, 
heayen,  or  metaphorically  as  family.    See  Palące. 

I.  Histojy  and  Sourcet  <yf  Comparimnu — Although,  in 
Oriental  language,  eyery  tent  (see  Geaeiu  rAf5.py32)  may 
be  regarded  as  a  house  (Harroer,  Ohs,  i,  194),  yet  the  dis- 
tinction  between  the  permanent  dwelling-house  and  the 
tent  must  haye  taken  rise  from  the  moment  ofthe  diyis- 
ion  of  numkind  into  dwellers  in  tents  and  buildera  of 
cities,  t.  e.  of  permanent  habitations  (Gen.  iy,  17, 20 ;  Isa. 
xxxyiii,  12).  The  agricultural  and  pastorał  forms  of  life 
are  described  ui  Scripture  as  of  equally  ancient  origin. 
Cain  was  a  husbandman,  and  Abel  a  keeper  of  aheept 
The  former  is  a  settled,  the  latter  an  unsettled  roode  of 
life.  Hence  we  find  that  Cain,  when  the  murder  of  his 
brother  constrained  him  to  wander  abroad,  btiilt  a  town 
in  the  land  where  he  settled.  At  the  same  time,  donbt- 
less,  those  who  foUowed  the  same  roode  of  life  as  Abel, 
dwelt  in  tents,  capable  of  being  taken  from  one  place  to 
another,  when  the  want  of  fresh  pastures  constrained 
those  remoyals  which  are  so  ftequent  among  people  of 
pastorał  habits.  We  are  not  required  to  suppose  that 
Cain'8  town  was  morę  than  a  collection  of  huta.  See 
City.  Our  information  respecting  the  abodes  of  men  in 
the  ages  before  the  Deluge  is,  howeyer,  too  acanty  to  af- 


Oriental  Hat 


ford  much  ground  for  notice.  The  enterprise  at  Bobd, 
to  say  nothing  of  Egypt,  shows  that  the  constructive  arta 
had  madę  considerable  progress  during  that  obscore  but 
interesting  period ;  for  we  are  bound  in  reason  to  con- 
clude that  the  arts  possessed  by  man  in  the  ages  imme- 
diately  foUowuig  the  Deluge  existed  before  that  great 
catastrophe.    See  Ain-BDU.uyiAKS. 

The  obseryatioiis  offered  under  AncHiTBcrtJRE  will 
preclude  the  e:(.pectation  of  finding  among  this  Eastem 
people  that  accomplished  style  of  building  which  Yitni- 
yius  requires,  or  that  refined  taste  by  which  the  Greeks 
and  Romana  excited  the  admiration  of  foreign  nationa. 
T^e  tents  in  which  the  Aiabs  now  dwell  are  in  all  prob- 
ability  the  same  as  those  in  which  the  Hel  rew  patriarcha 
spent  their  liyes.  It  is  not  likely  that  what  the  Hebrews 
obseryed  in  Egypt,  during  their  loiig  sojoum  in  that  coun- 
try, had  in  this  respect  any  direct  influence  upon  their 
own  sub6equent  practice  in  Palestine.  See  Tent.  Ney- 
ertheless,  the  information  which  may  be  deńyed  from  the 
figores  of  houaes  and  parts  of  houaee  in  the  Egypdan 


HOUSE 


369 


HOUSE 


t(»ib9  is  not  to  be  oyerlooked  or  stightecL  We  have  in 
them  the  cmUf  lepiesentations  of  ancient  hoiues  in  that 
put  of  the  world  which  now  esist ;  and  howeyer  differ- 
ent  may  luive  been  the  state  architecture  of  Egypt  and 
Paleetine,  we  have  eveiy  reaaon  to  conclude  that  there 
WB8  conaiderable  lesemblance  in  the  priyate  dweUings 


Hodel  of  an  andent  Bsiryptian    Ancient  Aasyrian  Honse 
three-storied  Hon«e»  fn  calcar  (Konyoaąjik). 

reooe  stooe.    (In  the  Brltlsh 
Hofleani.) 

of  Łhese  neighboring  countries.  The  few  representations 
of  boUdings  on  the  Assyiian  monuments  may  likewise 
be  of  aome  asslstance  in  completing  our  ideas  of  Hebrew 
dwelllngaL  The  Hebrews  did  not  become  dweUers  in 
cities  till  the  sojoum  in  Eg3rpt  and  after  the  conąuest  of 
Cinun  (Gen.  xlvii,  3 ;  £xocL  xii,  7 ;  Heb.  xi,  9),  while 
the  Caoaanites,  as  well  as  the  Aasyrians,  were  from  an 
earlier  period  boilders  and  inhabitants  of  cities,  and  it 
wad  into  the  houses  and  cities  built  by  the  former  that 
the  Hebrews  entered  to  take  possession  after  the  conąiiest 
(Gen.  x,l  1,19;  xix,  1;  xxiii,  10;  xxxiv,  20;  Numb.xi, 
27  i  Deut.  vi,  10, 1 1),  The  private  dwellings  of  the  As- 
syrians  and  Babylonians  have  altogether  peńshed,  but 
the  lolid  materiał  of  the  houaes  of  Synria,  cast  of  the  Jor- 
ih:i,  may  perhaps  have  preserved  entire  specimens  of  the 
ancient  dwellinga,  even  of  the  original  inhabitants  of  that 
ro;jian  (Porter,  Damascus^  ii,  195, 196 ;  C.  C.  Graham  in 
^Cimb.  Easays,**  1859,  p.  160,  etc. ;  comp.  Buckingham, 
.4ra&rnfc«,p.  171,172). 

IL  Materiah  and  generał  Character,— There  is  no  rea- 
»n  to  aappose  that  many  houaes  in  Palestine  were  con- 
structed  with  wood.  A  great  part  of  that  country  was 
always  yery  \ioot  in  timber,  and  some  parts  of  it  had 
8ctr%ly  any  wood  at  alL  But  of  stone  there  was  no 
want,  and  it  was  conseąuently  much  used  in  the  building 
ofhouws.  The  law  of Moees  respecting  leprosy  in  houses 
(Ler.  xiv,  33-40)  seems  to  prove  this,as  the  characteris- 
tics  there  enumerated  ooidd  only  occnr  in  the  case  of 
etone  walls.  Still,  when  the  Hebrews  intended  to  build 
ahouK  in  the  most  splendid  style  and  iu  accordance 
with  the  taste  of  the  age,  as  much  wood  xis  possible  was 
used.  Houses  in  the  East  weie  freąuently  built  of  burnt 
OT  mereiy  dried  clay  bricks,  which  were  not  very  durable 
(Job  iv,  19 ;  Matt.  vii,  26).  Such  were  very  liable  to  the 
attacks  of  burglars  (Job  xxiv,  16 ;  Matt  vi,  19 ;  xxiv,  16. 
See  HackeU's  TUust,  of  ScripU  p.  94).  The  better  dase 
of  houaes  were  built  of  stone,  the  palaces  of  squared  stone 
(1  Kings  vii,  9;  laa.  ix,  10),  and  some  were  of  marble 
(1  Chroń,  xxix,  2).  lime  or  gypsum  (probably  with 
ashesor  chopped  straw)  was  used  for  roortar  (Isa.  xxxiii, 
12;  Jer.  xliii,  9) ;  perhaps  also  asphaltum  (Gen.  xi,  8). 
A  plastering  or  whitewashing  is  often  mentioned  (Lev. 
xiv,  41, 42;  Ezek.  xiii,  10 ;  Matt.  xxiii,  27) ;  a  wash  of 
colored  lime  was  chosen  for  palaces  (Jer.  xxii,  14).  The 
Ueama  consisted  chiefly  of  the  wood  of  the  sycamore, 
from  its  extreme  durability  (Isa.  ix,  10) ;  the  acacia  and 
the  palm  were  employed  for  columns  and  transyersc 
^»eama,  and  the  cypreas  for  flooring-planlcs  (1  Kings  vi, 
13;  2  Chroń,  iii,  6).  The  flr,  the  olive-tpee,  and  cedars 
'fere  greatly  esteemed  (1  Kings  vii,  2 ;  Jer.  xxii,  14) ;  but 
^  most  precious  of  all  was  the  almug-tree :  this  wood 
■ema  to  have  been  brought  through  Arabia  from  India 
(I  Kings  X,  11, 12),  Wood  was  used  in  the  construction 
IV^Aa 


of  doors  and  gatee,  of  the  folds  and  lattices  of  windows, 
of  the  fiat  roofs,  and  of  the  wainscoting  with  which  the 
walls  were  omamented.  Beams  were  inlaid  in  the  walls, 
to  which  the  wainscoting  was  fastened  by  nails  to  ren- 
der  it  morę  secure  (Ezra  vi,  4).  Houses  finished  in  this 
manner  were  called  ceiled  houses  and  ceiled  chambers 
(Jer.  xxii,  14 ;  Hag.  i,  4).  The  lower  part  of  the  waUs 
was  adomed  with  rich  hangings  of  velvet  or  damask 
dyed  of  the  liveliest  colors,  suspended  on  hooks,  and  taken 
down  at  pleasnre  (Esth.  i,  6).  The  upper  part  of  the 
wałłs  was  adomed  with  figures  in  stucco,  with  gold,  ailver, 
gems,  and  ivory ;  hence  the  eKpressions  *'  ivory  houses," 
"  ivory  palaces,"  and  "  chambers  omamented  with  iyorjr" 
(1  Kings  xxii,  39;  2  Chroń,  iii,  6;  Psa.  xlv,  8;  AmoB,iii, 
15).  Metals  were  also  employed  to  some  extent,  as  lead, 
iron,  and  copper  are  mentioned  among  building  materi- 
ale; but  espc^ńally  gdld  and  silver  for  various  kinds  of 
solid,  plated,  and  inlaid  work  (Exod.  xxxvi,  84, 38).  The 
oeiling,  generally  of  wainsoot,  was  painted  «rith  great  art. 
In  the  days  of  Jeremiah  these  chambers  were  ceiled  with 
cosUy  and  fragrant  wood,  and  painted  with  the  richest 
colors  (Jer.  xxii,  14).  (See  each  of  these  parts  and  mate- 
rials  in  their  alphabetical  place.)  The  splendor  and  mag- 
nifioence  of  an  edifice  seems  to  have  been  estimated  in  a 
measure  by  the  size  of  the  square  stoues  of  which  it  was 
constracted  (I  Kings  vii,  9-12).  In  some  cases  these 
were  of  brilliant  and  variegated  hues  (1  Chroń,  xxix,  2). 
The  foundation  stone,  which  was  probably  placed  at  the 
comer,  and  thence  called  the  comer  stone,  was  an  object 
of  peculiar  regard,  and  was  selected  with  great  care  from 
among  the  others  (Psa.  cxviii,  22 ;  Isa.  xxviii,  16 ;  Matt. 
xxi,  42 ;  Acts  iv,  11 ;  1  Pet  ii,  6) .  ITic  sąuare  Stones  in 
biuldings,  as  far  as  we  can  ascertain  from  the  ruins  which 
yet  remain,  were  held  together,  not  by  mortar  or  cement 
of  any  kind,  exoept  a  very  smali  ąuantity  indeed  might 
have  been  used,  but  by  cramp  irons.  Walls  in  some 
cases  appear  to  have  been  covered  ¥rith  a  composition 
of  chalk  and  gypsum  (Deut.  xxvii,  2  j  comp.  Dan.  v,  6 ; 
Acts  xxiii,  3.  See  Chardin^s  YoyagtSf  ed.  Langles,  vol. 
iv).  The  tiles  dried  in  the  sun  were  at  first  united  by 
mud  placed  between  them,  afterwards  by  lime  nuxed 
with  sand  to  form  mortar.  The  latter  was  used  with 
bumt  tiles  (Lev.  xiv,  41, 42;  Jer.  xliii,  9).  For  the  ex- 
temal  decoration  of  large  buildings  marble  oolumns  were 
employed  (Cant,  v,  15).  The  Persians  also  took  great 
delight  in  marble.  To  this  not  only  the  ruins  of  Persep- 
olis  testify,  but  the  Book  of  Esther,  where  mention  is 
madę  of  white,  red,  and  black  marble,  and  likewise  of 
veined  marble.  The  Scriptural  allusions  to  houses  re> 
ceive  no  illustration  from  the  recently  diacovered  monu- 
ments of  the  Mesopotamian  mounds,  as  no  private  houses, 
either  of  Assyria  or  Babylonia,  have  been  preseryed ; 
owing  doubtless  to  their  having  been  oonstructed  of  pei^ 
ishable  mud  walls,  at  most  inclosed  only  with  thin  słaba 
of  akbaster  (Layard's  Nineteh,  ii,  214).     See  Templk. 

The  Hebrews  at  a  very  ancient  datę,  like  the  Orient- 
als,  had  not  only  summer  and  ¥rinter  rooms  (Jer.  xxxvi, 
22;  see  Chardm,  iv,  119),  but  palaces  (Judg.  iii,  20;  1 
Kings  vii,  2-6;  Amos  iii,.  15).  The  houses,  or  palaces 
80  called,  madę  for  summer  reaidence,  were  very  spacious. 
The  lower  stories  were  fireąuently  under  ground.  The 
front  of  these  buildings  faced  the  north,  so  as  to  secure 
the  advantage  of  the  breezes,  which  in  summer  blow 
from  that  direction.  They  were  supplied  with  a  current 
of  fresh  air  by  means  of  yentilators,  which  consisted  of 
perforations  madę  through  the  upper  part  of  the  northem 
wali,  of  conaiderable  diameter  extemal]y,  but  diminishing 
in  size  as  they  approached  the  inside  of  the  walL    See 

D^TCLLISG. 

Houses  for  jewels  and  armor  were  built  and  fumished 
under  the  kings  (2  Kings  xx,  18).  The  draught-hoose 
(n*'łX'nr|tt;  jcorpióv;  latrina)  was  doubtless  a  public 
litrine,  śuch  as  exi8t8  in  modem  Eastem  cities  (2  Kings 
x,27;  Russell,  i,  84). 

Leprosy  in  the  house  was  probably  a  nitrous  eflBorcs- 
cence  on  the  walls,  which  was  injurious  to  the  salubrity 
of  the  house,  and  whose  removal  was  therefore  stiictly 


HOUSE 


870 


HOUSE 


Gojoined  by  the  law  (Ley.  xiv,  34, 55 ;  Kitto,  PAy«.  Geogr, 
o/PaLp.n2). 

III.  DeŁcaJU  of  Hebrew  DwlUngs^—ln  infemng  the 
plan  and  airangement  of  ancient  Jewish  or  Ońental 
houses,  as  alluded  to  in  Scripture,  from  exi8ting  dwell- 
ings  in  Syria,  Egypt,  and  the  East  in  generał,  allowance 
must  be  madę  for  the  difference  in  dimate  between 
Egypt,  Peraia,  and  Palestine,  a  cause  from  which  would 
proceed  differenoes  in  certain  caaes  of  materiał  and  con- 
stniction,  as  wcll  as  of  domestic  arrangemenL 

1.  The  houaee  of  the  rural  poor  in  Egypt,  as  well  as 
in  most  parts  of  S}Tia,  Arabia,  and  Persia,  are  for  the 
most  part  merę  huta  of  mud,  or  sun-bunit  bricks.    In 


Hat  of  a  Oreek  peasant  formed  of  mad  imbeddlng  sUcka 
and  Btraw.    (From  Fellowes's  Lycia.) 

some  parts  of  Palestine  and  Arabia  stone  is  used,  and  in 
certain  districts  cayes  in  the  rock  are  used  as  dwellings 
(Amos  V,  11 ;  Bartlett,  Walh,  p.  1 17).  See  Cave.  The 
houses  are  usually  of  one  story  only,  viz.  the  ground  floor, 
and  sometimes  contain  only  one  apartment  Somctimes 
a  smali  court  for  the  cattle  is  attached;  and  in  some 
cases  the  cattle  are  housed  in  the  same  building,  or  the 
people  live  on  a  raised  platform,  and  the  cattle  round 
them  on  the  ground  (1  Sam.  xxviii,  24 ;  Irby  and  Man- 
gles,p.  70;  Jolliffe,  L«//er«,  i,  43 ;  Buckingham,  ^  roi 
Tribesy  p.  170 ;  Burckhardt,  Tratels,  ii,  1 19).  In  Lower 
'Egypt  the  oxen  occupy  the  width  of  the  chamber  far- 
thest  from  the  entrance :  it  is  built  of  brick  or  mud,  about 
four  feet  high,  and  the  top  b  often  used  as  a  sleeping- 
place  in  winter.  The  windows  are  smali  apertures  high 
up  in  the  walls,  sometimes  grated  with  wood  (Burck- 
hardt, TravelSy  i,  241 ;  ii,  101, 119,  301,  829;  Lane,  3fod. 
EffypdcmSf  i,  44).  The  roofs  are  commonly,  but  not  al- 
ways,  flat,  aild  are  nsually  formed  of  a  plaster  of  mud  and 
straw  laid  upon  boughs  or  raflers;  and  ui)on  the  ilat 
roofs,  tonts  or  "booths''  of  boughs  or  nishes  are  often 
raised  to  be  used  as  sleeptng-places  iu  summer  (Irby  and 


Modem  Nestorlan  House,  with  stoges  on  the  roof  for 
sleeping. 

Mangles,  p.  71 ;  Niebuhr,  Ikicr,  p.  49,  63 ;  Layard,  Nin, 
and  Bab,  p.  112 ;  Ninereh,  i,  176 ;  Burckhardt,  Syria,  p. 
280 ;  Travel*,  i,  190 ;  Van  Egmont,  ii,  32 ;  Malan,  Maff- 
dala  and  Betkany,  p.  15).  To  this  descńption  the  houses 
of  andent  Egypt,  and  also  of  Assyria,  as  represented  in 


the  monument8,in  great  measore  correspond  (Layard, 
3foii.q/'JNrtn.ptii,pL49,60;  Wilkinson,iti»cMii<^.i,13; 
Martineau,  East.  Life,  i,  19, 97).  In  the  towns  the  boom 
of  the  inferior  kind  do  not  differ  much  from  the  abore 
descńption,  but  they  are  sometimes  of  morę  than  one 
story,  and  the  roof-terraoes  are  morę  carefolly  constmct^ 
ed.  In  Palestine  they  are  often  of  stone  (Jolliffe,  i,  26). 
In  the  inferior  kinds  of  Oiiental  dwdlings,  soch  as  are 
met  with  in  villages  and  yery  smali  towns,  there  is  no 
central  court,  but  there  is  generally  a  shaded  platform 
in  front    The  yillage  cabins  and  abodes  of  the  peasant- 


Ordinary  Uouses  at  Beyrout. 

ly  are,  of  course,  of  a  still  inferior  description ;  and,  being 
the  abodes  of  people  who  live  much  in  the  open  air,  will 
not  bear  comparison  with  the  houses  of  the  same  class  in 
Northern  Europę,  where  the  cottage  is  the  home  of  the 
owner.  (See  jahn,  Bibl,  ArdiasoL  translated  by  PtoC 
Upham,  pt  i,  eh.  ii.) 

2.  The  difference  between  the  pMX>re8t  houses  and  thoee 
of  the  dass  next  above  them  is  greater  than  between 
these  and  the  houses  of  the  fiist  raiik.  The  prevailing 
plan  of  Eastem  houses  of  this  class  prescnts,  as  was  the 
case  in  ancient  Eg>'pt,  a  front  of  wali,  whoee  blank  and 


Front  of  au  ancient  E^ptian  Besidence. 


mean  appearance  is  usually  relieved  only  by  the  door 
and  a  few  latticed  and  projecting  windows  (!*«•«  t« 
Syria,  ii,  25).  The  privac)'  of  Oriental  domestic  liabita 
would  render  our  ])lan  of  throwing  the  front  of  the  housc 
towards  the  strcet  most  rcpulsirc.  The  doorway  or  door 
bears  an  inscription  from  the  Koran  as  the  andent  £g\'p- 
tian  houses  had  iuscriptious  over  their  doore,  and  as  the 


HOUSE 


sn 


HOUSE 


Isradites  were  directed  to  wiite  sentences  from  the  Law 
over  iheir  gates.  See  Mezuzah.  Ch-cr  the  door  U  iwu- 
ally  the  kiosk  (^sometimes  projecting  like  a  bay-window), 
or  screened  baloony, 
probably  the  "siim- 
mer  parlor"  in  which 
£hud  smote  the  king 
of  Moab  (Judg.  iii, 
20),  and  the  "cham- 
ber  on  the  walL*' 
which  the  Shunam- 
mite  prepared  for  the 
prophet  (2  Kings  iv, 
10).  Besides  this, 
there  roay  be  a  smali 
latticed  w  ind  o  w  or 
two  high  up  the  waU, 
giving  light  and  air 
to  iipper  chambcrs, 
which,  exccpt  in 
tiracs  of  public  cele- 
brations,  is  usually 
closed  (2  Kings  ix, 
80;  Shaw,  rraF«/:»,p. 
207 ;  Lane,  Mod,  Eg. 
i,  27).  The  entrance 
is  usually  guarded 
within  from  sight  by 
a  wali  or  some  ar- 


Entrance  to  a  hou^e  in  Cairi>. 
(From  Lane^s  Mod.  Eguptiam.) 


langement  of  the  passagca.  In  the  passage  is  a  stone 
seat  for  the  porter  and  uther  serrants  (Lane,  Mod,  Eg,  i, 
32;  Chardin,  Vog,  iv,  Ul).     See  Door. 

The  boildings  which  form  the  house  front  towards 
an  inner  sąuare  or  coiurt.  Smali  houscs  have  one  of 
these  courts,  but  superior  houses  have  two,  and  first-rate 
houses  three,  comrounicating  with  each  other  \  for  the 
Orientals  dislike  ascending  stairs  or  steps.  It  is  only 
when  the  bnilding-giound  is  oonfined  hy  naturę  or  by 
foTtilications  that  they  build  high  houses;  but,  from  the 
loftiness  of  the  rooroa,  baildings  of  one  story  are  often 
ts  high  as  houses  of  three  stories  among  ourselres.  If 
theie  are  three  or  roore  courts,  all  except  the  outer  one 
sre  much  alike  in  size  and  appearance ;  but  the  outer 
one,  being  deToted  to  the  morę  public  life  of  the  occu- 
|>ant,  and  to  his  intercourse  with  society,  is  matcrially 
different  from  all  the  others.  If  there  are  roore  than 
two,  the  secoad  is  deroted  chiefiy  to  the  use  of  the  mas- 
ter, wbo  is  there  attended  only  by  his  eunuchs,  children, 
and  femalea,  and  sees  only  such  persons  as  he  calls  from 
the  third  or  interior  court,  in  which  they  reside.  In 
the  history  of  Esther,  she  inctus  danger  by  going  from 
ber  interior  court  to  that  of  the  king,  to  invite  him  to 
visit  her  part  of  the  palące ;  but  she  would  not,  on  any 
account,  have  gone  to  the  outermost  court,  in  which  the 
king  held  his  public  audience&  Some  of  the  finest 
houses  in  the  East  are  to  be  found  at  Damascns,  where 
in  some  of  them  are  seven  such  courts.  When  there 
are  only  two  courts,  the  innermost  is  the  harem,  in 
which  the  women  and  children  live,  and  which  is  the 
tnie  domicile  of  the  master,  to  which  he  withdraws 
when  the  claims  of  business,  of  society,  and  of  friends 
hare  been  satisfied,  and  where  no  ouuibut  himself  ever 
enters,  or  could  be  induced  to  enter,  even  by  strong  ()er- 
soaśons  (Burckhardt,  TrareU,  i,  188;  Van  Egmont,  ii, 
246,  253 ;  Shaw,  p.  207 ;  Porter^  Danuuau,  i,  84, 37, 60 ; 
Chardin,  Yoyages,  \\,  6;  Lane,  Modem  Eg,  i,  179,  207). 
See  below. 

Entering  at  the  street  door,  the  above-named  pas- 
ssge,  usually  sloping  downwards,  conducts  to  the  outer 
court;  the  opening  from  the  passage  to  this,  as  before 
obaenred,  is  not  opposite  the  gate  of  entrance,  but  by  a 
aide  tum,  to  preclude  any  view  ftom  the  street  into  the 
court  when  the  gate  is  openod.  This  open  court  corre- 
flponds  to  the  Roman  imj^ńum,  and  is  often  paved  with 
marble.  Into  this  the  principal  apartments  look,  and 
are  either  open  co  it  in  front,  or  are  entered  from  it  by 
doors.    An  awning  is  sometimes  draMm  over  the  court, 


and  the  floor  strcwed  with  carpets  on  festiye  occańonfl 
(Shaw,  iK  208).  Around  part,  if  not  the  whole,  of  the 
court  is  a  yeranda,  often  nine  or  ten  feet  deep,  over 
which,  when  there  is  roore  than  one  floor,  runs  a  second 
gallery  of  like  depth,  with  a  balustradę  (Shaw,  p.  208). 
The  stairs  to  the  upper  apartments  or  to  the  roof  are 
often  shaded  by  vines  or  creeping-plants,  and  the  courts, 
especially  the  inner  ones,  planted  with  trees.  The  court 
has  often  a  well  or  tank  in  it  (Psa.  cxxviii,  3 ;  2  Sam. 
xvii,  18;  Russell,  Aleppo,  i,  24,  82;  Wilkinson,  i,  6,  8; 
Lane,  Mod,  Eg,  i,  32 ;  Views  in  Sgi-ia,  i,  56) .  See  Court. 
On  entering  the  outer  court  through  this  passage  we 
(ind  opposite  to  us  the  public  room,  in  which  the  master 
receiyes  and  givcs  audience  to  his  friends  and  clients. 
This  is  entirely  open  in  front,  and,  being  richly  fitted 
up,  has  a  splendid  appearance  when  the  flrst  view  of  it 
is  obtained.  A  refreshing  coolness  is  sometimes  given 
to  this  apartment  by  a  foutain  throwing  up  a  jet  of  wa- 
ter  in  front  of  it  This  is  the  caraAi;/ia,  or  guest-cham- 
ber,  of  Lukę  xxii,  U ;  not  necessarily  an  drayaioy,  or 
upper  chamber,  as  in  verse  12.  A  large  portion  of  the 
other  aide  of  the  court  is  occupied  with  a  frontage  of 
lattice-work  filled  with  colored  glass,  belonging  to  a  room 
as  large  as  the  guest-chamber,  and  which  in  winter  is 
used  for  the  same  purpose,  or  8er%'es  as  the  apartment 
of  any  visitor  of  distinction,  who  cannot,  of  coiirse,  be 
admitted  into  the  interior  parts  of  the  house.  The 
other  apartments  in  this  outer  court  are  comparatively 
smaU,  and  are  used  for  the  accommodation  of  yisitors, 
retainers,  and  servant8.    See  GuKsr-ciiAMnER. 


Court  of  a  lluu»e  al  Autioch. 

In  the  bettcr  class  of  houses  in  modem  Egypt,  the 
above  ground-floor  room  is  generally  the  apartment  for 
małe  yisitors,  called  mandaroh,  having  a  portion  of  the 
floor  sunk  below  the  rest,  called  durhfah,  This  is  often 
paved  with  marble  or  colored  tiles,  and  has  in  the  cen- 
trę a  fountain.  The  rest  of  the  floor  is  a  raised  platform 
called  liwdn,  with  a  mattress  and  cushions  at  the  back 
on  each  of  the  three  sides.  This  seat  or  sofa  is  called 
diiodn,  Every  person,  on  entrance,  takos  off  his  shoes 
on  the  durkd^ah  before  stepping  on  the  liwdn  (Exod.  iii, 
5;  Josh.  y,  15;  Lukę  yii,  38).  The  ceilings  oyer  the 
/itran  and  durkć^ah  are  often  richly  panelled  and  oma- 
mented  (Jer.  xxii,  14).     See  Divan. 

fiearing  in  mind  that  the  reception-room  is  raised 
above  the  level  of  the  court  (Chardin,  iv,  118;  View9  in 
Syria,  i,  56),  we  may,  in  explaining  the  circumstances 
of  the  miracic  of  the  paralytic  (Mark  ii,  3 ;  Lukę  y,  18), 
suppose,  1.  either  that  our  Lord  was  standing  under  the 
veranda,  and  the  pcoplc  in  front  in  Ihe  court.  The 
bearers  of  the  sick  man  ascended  the  stairs  to  the  roof 
of  the  house,  and,  taking  off  a  portion  of  the  boarded 
covering  of  the  yeranda,  or  rcmoving  the  awning  oyer 
the  impluvium,  ró  fJLi<rov,  in  the  formcr  casc  let  down 
the  beti  through  the  yeranda  roof,  or  in  the  lattcr,  doum 
by  way  ofihe  roof,  ha  Tiov  Ktpafuuv,  and  dcposited  it 
before  the  Sayiour  (Shaw,  p.  212).  2.  Anothcr  expla- 
nation  presents  itself  in  considering  the  room  where  the 
company  were  assembled  as  the  i^ipifoy,  and  the  roof 
opened  for  the  bed  to  be  the  tme  roof  of  the  house 
(Tzench,  Miradet,  p.  199  i  Lane,  Modem  Eg,  i,  39).    8. 


HOUSE 


8ł2 


HOUSE 


And  one  still  roore  simple  is  found  in  regarding  the  j  muifemnarUm)  is  noticed  in  thc  book  of  EsŁher  (U,  S> 

hoase  as  one  of  thc  rude  dwellings  now  to  be  seen  near   See  Woman. 

the  Sea  of  Galilee,  a  merę  room  "  ten  or  twelve  feet 

high,  and  as  many  or  morę  8quarc,"  with  no  opening 

except  the  door.     The  roof,  used  as  a  sleeping-pUce,  is 

reached  by  a  ladder  from  thc  outside,  and  thc  bearers 

of  the  paralytic,  unable  to  approach  the  door,  woidd 

thus  have  ascendcd  the  roof,  and,  haying  uncovered  it 

{iKopvKavric)y  let  him  down  into  the  room  where  our 

Lord  was  (Malan,  /.  c).     See  below. 

Besides  thc  mandarah  some  houses  in  Cairo  haye  an 
apartment  called  maJ^culf  open  in  front  to  the  court, 
with  two  or  morę  arches,  and  a  railing ;  and  a  pillar 
to  support  the  wali  above  (Lane,  i,  88).  It  was  in  a 
chamber  of  this  kind,  probably  one  of  the  largest  size 
to  be  found  in  a  palące,  that  our  Lord  was  arraigned 
before  the  high-priest  at  the  time  when  thc  denial  of 
him  by  Peter  took  phice.     Ho  "tumed  and  looked"  on 

Peter  as  hc  stood  by  the  fire  in  thc  court  (Lukę  xxii,  In^rior  of  a  Honse  {Harem)  in  Damascna. 

56,  61 ;  John  xviii,  24),  while  he  himaelf  was  in  the  Sometimes  the  diwiin  b  raised  sufficiently  to  allow 
"  hall  of  judgment,"  the  mak'ad,  Such  was  thc  "  porch  of  cellars  undemeatb  for  stores  of  all  kinds  (ra^uta, 
of  judgment"  built  by  Solomon  (1  Kings  vii,  7),  which  Matt.  xxiv,  26;  Russell,  i,  32).  This  basement  is  occu- 
tinds  a  parallel  in  the  golden  alcove  of  Mohammed  Uz-  pied  by  various  offices,  stores  of  com  and  fuel,  places  for 
bek  (Ibn  Batuta,  Travtls,  p.76,  ed.  Lee).     Sec  PRiETO-    the  water-jars  to  stand  in,  places  for  grinding  com, 

baths,  kitchens,  etc.  In  Turkish  Arabia 
most  of  the  houses  havc  underground  cel- 
lars or  yaults,  to  which  the  inhabitants 
rctreat  during  the  midday  hcat  of  sum- 
mer,  and  thcre  enjoy  a  rcfrcshing  cool- 
ncss.  We  do  not  discover  any  notice  of 
this  usage  in  Scripture.  But  at  Acre 
the  substructions  of  very  ancien t  houses 
were  some  years  ago  discorercd,  having 
such  cellars,  which  wcre  veiy  probablr 
Bub8er>'ient  to  this  usc  In  the  rest  oir 
the  year,  these  cellars,  or  serdattbt,  as 
they  are  called,  are  abandoned  to  the 
bats,  which  swarm  in  them  in  scaioely 
credible  numbers  (Isa.  ii,  20). 

Thc  kitchens  are  always  iu  this  inner 
court,  as  the  cooking  is  performed  by 
womcn,  and  the  ladies  of  the  family  su- 
perintcnd  or  actually  assist  in  the  pro- 
cess.     The  kitchen,  open  in  front,  is  on 
the  same  side  as  the  entrance  from  the 
outcr  court;  and  the  top  of  it  forms  a 
terracc,  which  aflfords  a  communication 
bctween  the  first  floor  of  both  courts  by 
a  pnvatc  door,  seldom  used  but  by  the 
master  of  the  hoiise  and  attendant  eu- 
nucha.    There  are  usually  no  fircplaces  except  in  the 
kitchen,  the  fumiture  of  which  consists  of  a  sort  of  raised 
platform  of  brick,  with  reccptaclcs  in  it  for  fire,aD8;wering 
to  thc  "  boiling-places"  (rii'i'ąp ;  fiayetpiia^  atlhw) 
of  Ezekiel  (xlvi,  28 ;  sec  Lane,  i,  41 ;  Gcsenius,  Tkft.  p. 
249).    In  these  differcnt  compartments  the  yarious  dish- 
cs  of  an  Eastem  feast  may  be  at  once  prepared  at  char- 
coal  flres.     This  place  being  wholly  open  in  front,  the 
half-tame  doves,  which  have  their  nests  in  the  trees  of 
the  court,  often  yisit  it,  in  the  absence  of  thc  sen^ants, 
in  search  of  crumbs,  etc    As  they  sometimes  blacken 
themselyes,  this  perhaps  cxplains  the  obscure  passage 
in  Psa.  lxviii,  18,  "Though  ye  have  lien  among  the  pofs 
[but  Gcsenius  renders  "sheepfołds"],  ye  shall  be  as  the 
wings  of  a  dove  covered  with  silyer,"  etc. 

Besides  the  mamdarah,  there  is  sometimes  a  second 
room,  cither  on  thc  ground  or  thc  uppcr  floor,  called 
keCah^  fitted  with  diwdrut^  and  at  the  comers  of  these 
rooms  portions  taken  offand  inclosed  form  retiring  rooms 
(Lane,  i,  21 ;  RusseU,  i,  81, 83).  While  speaking  of  the 
interior  of  the  house,  we  may  obeerve,  that  on  the  di- 
wón,  the  comer  is  the  place  of  honor,  which  is  nevcr 
quitted  by  the  master  of  the  house  in  receiving  stran- 
gers  (Russell,  i,  27 ;  Malan,  Tyre  andSidon,  p.  88).  When 
there  is  an  upper  story,  the  ta^th  forms  the  most  im- 
portant  apartment,  and  thus  probably  answers  to  the 
v7r<p^ov,  which  was  often  the  ^'guest-chamber^  (Lukę 


Port  of  the  Court  of  a  House  m  Cairo,  with  Mak'ad  (Lane). 


Riu^ki.  The  circumstance  of  Samson's  pulling  down  thc 
house  by  means  of  the  pillars,  may  be  explained  by  the 
fact  of  the  company  being  assembled  on  tiers  of  balco- 
nies  above  each  other,  supported  by  central  pillars  on 
the  basement ;  when  these  were  pulled  down,  the  whole 
of  the  upper  floors  woidd  fali  also  (Judg.  xvi,  26;  see 
Shaw,  p.  21 1).     See  Pillak. 

When  there  is  no  second  floor,  but  morę  than  one 
court,  thc  women*s  apartments  (Arabie  harem  or  haram^ 
secluded  or  prohibUed,  with  which  may  be  compared  the 
Hebrcw  Armon,  '|i^7^f  Stanley,  S.  and  P,  App.  §  82), 
are  usually  in  the  second  court:  othenvise  they  form  a 
Bcparatc  building  within  the  generał  inclosure,  or  are 
abovc  on  thc  first  floor  ( Ytetcs  in  Syria,  i,  66).  The 
entrance  to  the  harem,  as  ob8erved  above,  is  crossed  by 
no  one  but  the  master  of  the  house  and  thc  domestics 
bclonging  to  thc  fcmalc  establishment.  Though  this 
rcmark  would  not  apply  in  the  same  degrec  to  Jewish 
habits,  thc  privacy  of  thc  women's  apartments  may  pos- 
sibly  be  indicated  by  thc  "imicr  chamber"  ("'"IH,  ra/ii- 
1101/;  cu&*c}i^m), resorted  to  as  a  htding-place  (i  Kings 
xx,  30 ;  xxii,  25 ;  sec  Judg.  xv,  1).  Solomon,  in  his  mar- 
riagc  with  a  foreigner,  introduced  also  foreign  usage  in 
this  respect,  which  was  carried  further  in  subseąuent 
times  (1  Kings  vii,  8;  2  Kings  xxiv,  15).  The  harem 
of  the  Persian  monarch  (D^^TŚJ  r''^ ;  o  ywaiKwy ;  rfo- 


HOUSE 


8Y3 


HOUSE 


Ka*ak  of  a  House  in  Cairo.    (Laue.) 

xxii,  12;  Acta  i,  13;  ix,  37;  xx,  8;  Burckhardt,  Trat- 
tU,  i,  IM).  The  windowa  of  the  upper  rooms  oflen 
projecŁ  one  or  two  fcet,  and  form  a  kiosk  or  Uttice<l 
chamber,  the  ceilings  of  which  are  claborately  orna- 
mented  (Lane,  i,  27;  Russell,  i,  102;  Burckhardt,  Trar, 
i,  lOO).  Such  may  have  been  the  "•  chamber  in  the  wali" 
(n^^7,  ifirŁpi}ov^  ccmaculunij  Gcscn.  p.  1030)  madę,  or 
nthcr  set  apart  for  Elisha  by  the  Shunammite  woman 
(2  Kings  iv,  10, 1 1).  So,  also,  the  **8ummcr  parlor**  of 
Egiem  (Jttdg.  iii,  20,  23;  but  see  Wilkinson,  i,  U),  the 
♦^loft^  of  the  widów  of  Zarephath  (1  Kings  xvii,  19). 
The  "latticc**  (*^33^i  ^irrywróc,  canceUt)  through 
which  Ahaziah  fell  perhaps  helonged  to  an  upper  cham- 
ber of  this  kind  (2  Kinga  i,  2),  as  also  the  "  third  loft" 
{rpiffnyor)  from  which  Kutych us  fell  (Acta  xx,  9;  com- 
pare  Jer.  xxii,  13).  See  Upper  Koom.  The  inner  court 
Vi  entered  by  a  passage  and  door  similar  to  those  on  the 
stref  t,  and  usually  situated  at  one  of  the  innermost  cor- 
nen  of  the  outer  court.  The  inner  court  is  generally 
mach  larger  than  the  former.  It  is  for  the  most  pait 
pared,  excepting  a  portion  in  the  middle,  which  is  plant- 
cd  with  tiecs  (usually  two)  and  shrubs,  with  a  basin  of 
water  in  the  midst.  That  the  Jews  had  the  like  ar- 
rangcment  of  tiees  in  the  oourts  of  their  houses,  and 
that  the  błrds  nested  in  them,  iq)peaEB  from  Psa.  lxxxiv, 
2, 3.  They  had  also  the  basin  of  water  in  the  inner 
court  or  hartMy  and  among  them  it  was  used  for  bathing, 
as  b  sbown  by  David  s  fliacovering  Bathsheba  bathing 
u  he  walked  on  the  roof  of  his  pałace.  The  arrange- 
ment  of  the  inner  court  is  very  similar  to  that  of  the 
outer,  but  the  whole  is  morę  open  and  airy.  The  build- 
ings  usually  occupy  two  sides  of  the  sąuare,  of  which 
ibe  one  opposite  the  entrance  containa  the  principal 
apartments.  They  are  upon  what  we  should  cali  the 
fint  floor,  and  open  into  a  wide  gallery  or  veranda,  which 
in  good  houses  is  ninc  or  ten  feet  deep,  and  covered  by 
a  woodcn  penthouse  supported  by  a  row  of  wooden  col- 
anms.  This  terracc  or  gallery  is  fumished  with  a  strong 
wooden  balustradę,  and  ia  usually  paved  with  aąuared 
Stones,  or  else  floored  with  boarda.  In  the  centrę  of 
the  principal  front  is  the  usual  open  drawing-room,  on 
which  the  best  art  of  the  Eastem  decorator  is  expended. 
Much  of  one  of  the  aides  of  the  court  front  ia  usually  oc- 
cupied  by  the  largc  sitting-room,  with  the  latticed  front 
cn>cred  with  cok>red  glaas,  similar  to  that  in  the  outer 
eoort.  The  other  rooms,  of  smaller  size,  are  the  morę 
pńxTitc  apartments  of  the  mansion. 

No  andent  houses  had  chimneys.  The  word  so  trans- 
lated  in  Hot.  xiii,  8,  means  a  hole  through  which  the 
^nsokc  eflcaped;  and  this  exiated  only  in  the  lower  dąsa 
»f  dwellinga,  where  niw  wood  waa  empk)yed  for  fuel  or 


cooking,  and  where  there  waa  an  opening  immediately 
over  the  hearth  to  let  out  the  amoke.  In  the  better  aoń 
of  houaea  the  rooma  were  warmed  in  winter  by  charcoal 
in  braziera  (Jer.  xxxvi,  22 ;  Mark  xiv,  54 ;  John  xviii, 
18),  aa  ia  atill  the  practice  (Rusaell,  i,  21 ;  Lane,  i,  41 ; 
Chardin,  iv,  120),  or  a  fire  of  wood  might  be  kindled  in 
the  open  court  of  the  house  (Lukę  xxii,  55).    See  Fire. 

There  are  usually  no  doors  to  the  sitting  or  drawing- 
rooms  of  Eastem  houses:  they  are  cloRe<l  by  curtains, 
at  least  in  summer,  the  opening  and  shutting  of  doors 
being  odious  to  most  Orientals.  The  same  seems  to 
have  been  the  case  among  the  Hebrews,  as  far  aa  we 
may  judge  from  the  curtains  which  senred  inatead  of 
doors  to  the  tabemade,  and  which  aeparated  the  inner 
and  outer  chambera  of  the  Tempie.  The  outer  doors 
are  closed  with  a  wooden  lock  (Lane,  i,  42 ;  Chardin,  iv, 
123 ;  Russell,  i,  21).    See  Lock  ;  Curtain. 

The  Windows  had  no  glaas;  they  were  only  latticed, 
and  thus  gave  firee  paasage  to  the  air  and  admitted  light, 
while  birda  and  bata  were  excluded.  In  winter  the  cold 
air  waa  kept  out  by  veila  over  the  windowa,  or  by  ahut- 
tera  with  holea  in  them  aufiicient  to  admit  light  (1  Kings 
vii,  17;  Cant.  ii,  9).  The  aperturcs  of  the  windowa  in 
Kgyptian  and  Eaatem  houses  gcneraUy  are  smali,  in  or^ 
der  to  exclude  heat  (Wilkinson,  A  nc.  Eg.  ii,  124).  They 
are  closed  with  folding  valve8,  secured  with  a  bolt  or 
bar.  The  windowa  often  project  conaiderably  be}*ond 
the  lower  part  of  the  building,  ao  aa  to  overhang  the 
atreet.  The  windowa  of  the  courts  within  also  project 
(Jowett,  Christian  Res,  p.  (J6, 67).  The  lattice  ia  gener- 
ally kept  doeed,  but  can  be  opened  at  pleaaurc,  and  ia 
opened  on  great  public  occasiona  (Lane,  J/od  £gyj)t.  i, 
27).  Those  within  can  look  through  the  latticea,  with- 
out  opening  them  or  being  aeen  them8dves ;  and  in  some 
roonas,  especially  the  largc  upper  room,  there  are  several 
Windows.  From  the  allusions  in  Scripture  we  gather, 
that  while  there  was  usually  but  one  window  in  each 
room,  in  which  invariably  there  was  a  lattice  (Judg.  v, 


Latticed  Windows  of  a  Honse  in  Caira 


28,  where  "a  window**  is  in  Ileb.  "Me  window;"  Josh. 
ii,  15 ;  2  Sam.  vi,  16,  in  Heb.  **  the  window  ;'*  2  Kings  ix, 
30,  do. ;  Acta  xx,  9,  do.),  there  were  sometimes  soreral 
Windows  (2  Kings  xiii,  17).  The  room  here  spoken  of 
was  probably  such  an  upper  room  as  Robinson  describcs 


HOUSE 


374 


HOUSE 


above  with  many  windowB  (Res,  iii,  417).  Daniel*s  room 
had  8everal  windowa,  and  his  lattices  were  opened  when 
hia  enemies  found  him  in  prayer  (Dan.  vi,  10).  The 
projectiiig  naturę  of  the  window,  and  the  fact  that  a  di- 
van,  or  raised  seat,  encircles  the  interior  of  each,  so  that 
usually  persons  sitting  in  the  window  are  seated  cloec 
to  the  aperture,  easiiy  explains  liow  Ahaziah  may  have 
fallen  through  the  lattice  of  his  upper  chamber,  and 
Eutychus  from  his  window-seat,  especialiy  if  the  lat- 
tices  were  open  at  the  time  (2  Kings  i,  2;  Acta  xx,  9). 
See  Window. 

There  are  usually  no  special  bedrooms  in  Eastem 
houses,  and  thus  the  room  in  which  Ishbosheth  was 
murdered  was  probably  an  ordinaiy  room  with  a  (liwan, 
on  which  he  was  sleeping  during  the  heat  of  the  day  (2 
Saro.  iv,  5,  6 ;  Lane,  i,  41).     See  Brdchamber. 

'fhe  stairs  to  the  uppcr  apartroents  are  in  Syria  usu- 
ally in  a  comer  of  the  court  (Robinson,  iii,  302).  When 
there  is  no  upper  stoiy  the  lower  rooms  are  usually  lof- 
tier.  In  Persia  they  are  open  from  top  to  bottom,  and 
only  divided  from  the  court  by  a  Iow  partition  (Wilkin- 
toiifAnc.Eff.iylO;  Chardin,iv,  119;  Burckhardt,  Tror- 
tU,  i,  18, 19 ;  Vietc8  in  Syria,  i,  6C).  This  flight  of  stone 
Bteps  conducts  to  the  gaUer>',  from  which  a  plainer  stair 
leads  to  the  house-top.  If  the  house  be  largc,  there  are 
two  or  three  seta  of  steps  to  the  different  sides  of  the 
ąuadrangle,  but  seldom  morc  than  one  Hight  from  the 
terraco  to  the  house-top  of  any  one  court.  There  is, 
however,  a  separate  stair  from  tho  outer  court  to  the 
roof,  and  it  is  usually  near  the  ent rance.  This  will 
bring  to  mind  the  case  of  the  paralytic,  noticeil  above, 
whosc  friends,  finding  they  could  not  get  access  to  Jesus 
through  the  people  who  crowded  the  court  of  the  house 
in  which  he  was  preaching,  took  him  up  to  the  roof,  and 
let  him  down  in  his  bed  through  the  tiling  to  the  place 
wherc  Jesus  stood  (Lukc  v,  17-26).  If  the  house  in 
which  our  Lord  then  was  had  morę  than  one  court,  he 
and  the  auditors  were  certainly  in  the  outer  one ;  and  it 
u  reasonable  to  conclude  that  he  stood  in  the  veranda 
■ddrcssing  the  crowd  bclow.  The  men  bearing  the 
paralytic,  thereforc,  perhaps  went  up  the  steps  near  the 
door;  and  finding  they  could  not  evcn  then  get  near 
the  person  of  Jesus,  the  gallery  being  also  crowded,  con- 
tinued  their  course  to  the  roof  of  the  house,  aiid,  remov- 
ing  the  boards  over  the  covering  of  the  gallery,  at  the 
place  wherc  Jesus  stood,  lowered  the  sick  man  to  his 
feet  But  if  they  could  not  get  access  to  the  steps  near 
the  door,  as  is  likely,  from  the  door  being  much  crowd- 
ed, their  altemative  was  to  take  him  to  the  roof  of  the 
next  house,  and  there  holst  him  ovcr  the  parapet  to  the 
roof  of  the  house  which  they  desircd  to  enter.  (See 
Strong*s  J/amt.  and  £xpo8.  o/ the  GospelSf  p.  64.)  See 
Stairs. 

The  roof  of  the  house  is,  of  course,  flat.     It  is  formed 


by  layers  of  branches,  twigs,  matting,  and  earth,  laid 
over  the  rafters,  and  trodden  down;  after  which  it  is 
covered  with  a   compost  that  acąuires  considenUe 
hardness  when  dry.     Such  roofs  would  not,  however, 
endure  the  heavy  and  continuous  rains  of  our  climate; 
and  Ul  those  parts  of  Asia  where  the  climate  is  morę 
than  usuaUy  moist,  a  stone  roller  is  usually  kept  on  ev- 
ery  roof,  and  afler  a  showcr  a  great  part  of  the  popula- 
tion  is  engaged  in  drawing  thesc  roUers  over  the  roofs. 
It  is  now  very  common,  in  countries  where  timber  is 
scarce,  to  have  domed  roofs ;  but  in  that  case  the  flat 
roof,  which  is  indispensablc  to  Eastem  habita,  is  obuin- 
etl  by  filling  up  the  hollow  intervals  between  the  8evcral 
domes,  so  as  to  form  a  fiat  surface  at  the  top^    These 
dat  roofs  are  oflen  alludcd  to  in  Scripture,  and  the  al- 
lusions  show  that  they  were  madę  to  8erve  the  same 
iises  as  at  present.     In  fine  weather  the  inhabitants  re- 
8ortc<l  much  to  them  to  breathe  the  fresh  air,  to  enjoy  a 
fine  prospect,  or  to  witness  any  event  that  occurred  in 
the  neighborhood  (2  Sam.  xi,  2;  Isa.  xxii,  1;  Matt. 
xxiv,  17;  Mark  xiii,  15).     The  dry  air  of  the  snmmer 
atmosphere  enabled  them,  without  injury  to  health,  to 
enjoy  the  bracing  coolness  of  the  night-air  by  sleeping 
on  the  house-tops ;  and  in  order  to  havc  the  benefit  of 
the  air  and  pn>spect  in  the  daytime,  without  inoonven- 
iencc  from  the  sun,  aheds,  booths,  and  tenu  were  some- 
timea  erected  on  the  house-tops  (2  Sam.  xvi,  22).    See 

H01TRK-T01». 

The  roofs  of  the  houses  are  well  protected  by  wills 
and  parapcts.  Towards  the  street  and  neighboring 
houses  is  a  high  wali,  and  towards  the  interior  court- 
yartl  usually  a  parapet  or  wooden  raił.  *•  Battlements* 
of  this  kind,  for  the  prevention  of  accidents,  are  strictly 
enjoined  in  the  law  (Deut.  xxii,  8) ;  and  the  form  of 
tho  battlements  of  Egyptian  houses  suggest  somc  inter- 
esting  analogies,  if  we  consider  how  recently  the  Isra- 
elitea  łuul  quitted  Egypt  when  that  law  was  delivered. 
See  Battlkmknt. 


vvwvvv 


7    1 

Ancient  Batilemeuts: 


1,  2.  Assyrian 


s 
8.  Egjrptiao. 


Flat-roofed  Uoiues  at  Oaaa. 


In  the  East,  wherc  the  climate  allow«  the  people  to 
spend  so  much  of  their  time  out  of  doors,  the  artides 
of  fumiture  and  the  domestic  utensils  have  always  been 
few  and  simple.  See  Bed;  Lamp;  PoTTBRY;'SitAT; 
Table.  The  rooms,  however,  although  compaiatively 
vacant  of  morables,  are  far  from  having  a  naked  or  un- 
fumished  appearance.  This  is  owing  to  the  high  dc^grec 
of  ornament  giveii  to  the  walls  and  ceilinga.  The  walls 
are  broken  up  into  variou8  recesses,  and 
the  ceiling  into  compartments.  The  ceil- 
iiig,  if  of  wood  and  fiat,  is  of  curioua  and 
complicated  joineiy ;  or,  if  yaulted,  is 
wrought  into  numerous  co\'efl^  and  cn- 
riched  with  fretwork  in  stucoo;  and  the 
walls  are  adomed  with  arabeaąueai,  mo- 
saics,  mirrois,  painting,  and  gokl,  which, 
as  set  off  by  the  marble-like  whitcness 
of  the  stucoo,  has  a  tnily  brilliant  and 
rich  effect.  There  is  much  in  tbb  to 
rem  ind  one  of  such  descriptiona  of  splen- 
ilid  interiors  as  that  in  Isa.liv,  II,  12.— 
Smith ;  KiUo ;  Fairbaim.  See  Cei  ling. 
IV.  Mełaphorv.vUly.--Thc  word  łiouae 
has  some  ligurative  applications  in  Scrip- 
ture.  Heaven  is  considered  as  the  house 
of  God  (John  xiv,  2) :  "  In  my  Father*s 
house  are  many  mansiona.'*  Herc  is  an 
evident  allusion  to  the  Tempie  (q.  v.), 
with  its  many  rooms,  which  la  emphat- 
ically  styled  in  the  Old  Testansent  **  the 
House  of  the  Lord."    The  graye  is  the 


HOUSE  OF  BISHOPS 


376 


HOUSE-TOP 


hoofle  ftppomted  for  all  the  liying  (Job  xxx,  23 ;  latu 
xiv,  18).  Houae  is  taken  for  the  body  (2  Cor.  y,  1) : 
"If  oor  earthly  hoiue  of  this  Ubemacle  were  dis- 
8olved  ;**  if  our  bodies  were  taken  to  pieces  by  death. 
The  compaiifion  of  the  body  to  a  hotue  is  uaed  by 
Mr.  Hanner  to  explam  the  similes,  Eccles.  xii,  and  is 
illustrated  by  a  paasage  in  Plautus  {MoMtlL  i,  2).  The 
Chuch  of  God  is  his  house  (1  Tim.  iii,  15) :  <'How 
thou  ooghtest  to  behave  thyself  in  the  house  of  God, 
that  ia,  the  Church  of  the  living  God."  In  the  same 
sense,  Moses  was  faithful  in  all  the  house  of  God  as  a 
senrant,  but  Christ  as  a  son  over  his  own  house ;  whose 
house  are  we  (Chrbtians).  But  this  sense  may  iudude 
that  of  household,  persona  composing  the  attendants  or 
letainers  to  a  prince,  etc  This  intimate  reference  of 
house  or  dwelling  to  the  adherenta,  intimates,  or  parti- 
sans  of  the  householder,  is  probably  the  foundation  of 
the  aimile  used  by  the  apostle  Peter  (1  Pet.  ii,  6) :  "  Ye 
(Christians),  as  living  Stones,  are  built  up  into  a  spiritual 
house."*  Gen.  xliii,  16 :  "  Joseph  said  to  the  roler  of  his 
borne ;"  L  e.  to  the  manager  of  his  domestic  concenis. 
Isa.  xxxvi,  3 :  **  Eliakim,  who  was  over  the  house,  or 
bousehold  f  L  e.  his  steward.  Gen.  xxx,  80 :  "  When 
ihall  I  provide  for  minę  own  house  also  ?"  L  e.  get  wealth 
to  provide  for  my  family  (aee  1  Tit.  v,  8).  Gen.  vii,  1 : 
"  Enter  thou  and  all  thy  house  (family)  into  the  ark." 
£xod.  i,  21 :  "And  it  came  to  pass,  because  the  mid- 
wive9  feared  God,  that  he  madę  them  houaes ;"  L  e.  he 
pro8pefe<l  their  families.  So  also  in  1  Sam.  ii,  35 ;  2 
Sam.  Tli,  27;  1  Kings  xi,  38.  Thos  the  Lord  plagued 
Płuuraoh  aod  his  hoa%  (Gen.  xii,  17).  "  What  is  my 
house,  that  thou  hast  brought  me  hitherto?"  (2  Sam.  vii, 
18).  So  Joseph  (Lukę  i,  27 ;  ii,  4)  was  of  the  house  of 
David,  but  morę  especially  he  was  of  his  royal  lineage, 
or  family ;  and,  as  we  conceive,  in  the  direct  linę  or  eld- 
est  branch  of  the  family,  so  that  he  was  next  of  kin  to 
the  throne,  if  the  govemment  had  stiU  continued  in 
poascssion  of  the  descendants  of  Dayid  (see  also  1  Tim. 
V,  8).  2  Sam.  vii,  11 :  "Also  the  Lord 
telleth  thee  that  he  will  make  thee  a 
house;"  i.  e.  he  will  give  thee  offapring, 
who  may  receive  and  may  presen^e  the 
roj-al  dignity.  Psa.  xUx,  12 :  **  Their  in- 
waid  thought  is  that  their  houses  shall 
oontinue  forever  f  i.  e.  that  their  poster- 
ity  sholl  always  flouńsh. — Calmet ;  We- 
mj-ss.  See  Household. 
House  of  Bisliops.    See  Convo- 

CATION. 


the  term  ^^^r^  abuddah/  lit  tenńee  (**»ervanU"  Gen. 
xxvi,  24),  between  the  domettica  and  the  n^a,  hay'ith, 
or  proper  family  of  the  master  of  the  house ;  and  some 
have  thought  a  like  difference  to  be  denoted  between 
the  Greek  term  oUia  (lit.  residence)  and  oUoc  of  the  N.  ' 
T.,  which  are  both  indiscriminately  rendered  "  house" 
and  "  household"  in  the  Engl.  Yersion.  This  latter  view 
is  confirmed  by  the  improbability  that  any  of  the  im- 
mediate  imperial  family  (Nero's)  should  have  been  in- 
cluded  in  the  converts  to  Christianity  expressed  in  the 
phrase  they  ofCa»ar'»  household  (oi  Ik  rfjc  Kaiaapoc 
oUiaCf  PhiL  iv,  22).    See  CifssAR. 

Householder  (oiKOćłotrÓTric^  master  ofthe  house,  < 
as  rendered  Matt.  x,  25 ;  Lukę  xiii,  25 ;  xiv,  21),  the 
małe  head  of  a  family  (Matt.  xiii,  27,  52;  xx,  1 ;  xxi, 
23).  There  are  monographs  on  the  parable  Matt.  xx, 
by  Feuerlein,  De  scriba  pro/erente  e  thesauro  nova  ei  ve- 
Ura  (Alt  1Z30) ;  Bagewitz,  De  scriba  dodo  (Rost  1720). 
See  Goodman  of  the  house. 

Housel,  ''the  old  Saxon  name  for  the  Eucharist, 
supposed  by  some  to  be  from  the  Gothic  ^hunsa,*  a  vio- 
tim." — Eadie,  Ecdes,  DtcHonary^  p.  315. 

House-top  (^,  gag,  ddfia),  the  fiat  roof  of  an  Ori- 
ental  house,  for  such  is  usually  their  form,  though  there 
are  sometimes  domes  over  some  of  the  rooms.  The  fiat 
portions  are  plastered  with  a  oomposition  of  mortar,  tar, 
ashes,  and  sand,  which  in  time  beoomes  very  hard,  but 
when  not  laid  on  at  the  proper  season  is  apt  to  crack  in 
winter,  and  the  rain  is  thus  admitted.  In  order  to  pre- 
vent  this,  every  roof  is  provided  with  a  roUer,  which  is 
set  at  work  afler  rain.  In  many  cases  the  terrace  roof 
is  little  better  than  earth  roUed  hard.  On  iU-compacted 
roofs  grass  is  ofŁen  found  springing  into  a  short-lived 
existence  (Prov.  xix,  13;  xxvii,  15;  Psa.  cxxix,  6,  7; 
Isa.  xxxvii,  27 ;  Shaw,  p.  210;  Lane,  i,  27;  Robinson,  iii. 
39,44,60).    See  Grass. 


House   of  Clerical  an4  Łay 
Deputies.    See  Cosyocation.  ^'i. 

House  of  Ood,  a  name  freąuently 
given  to  the  edifice  in  which  Christiana 
asserable  for  the  worship  of  God,  not  be- 
cause God  dweiis  there  by  any  visible  or 
special  presence,  as  of  old  he  *'dwelt  be- 
tween the  cherubims,"  but  because  it  is 
drdicaUd  to  God,  and  set  apart  for  his  ser- 
Tice.  It  is  thus  synonymons  with  the 
word  *'  church"  in  that  modem  use  of  it  by  which  it  sig- 
nifies  a  buiiding  (Eden).    See  Bethel;  House;  Tkh- 

FLK. 

House  of  Prayer,  places  where  persons  asscmble 
to  pray,  nnd  to  receive  religious  instniction,  but  where 
the  sacraments  are  not  administered.  It  is  the  generał 
name  of  the  Protestant  churches  in  Hungary,  and  was 
such  in  Silesia  under  the  Austrian  rule,  to  distinguish 
them  from  the  Roman  Catholic  places  of  worship.  It  is 
alao  used  in  Germany  to  designate  the  churches  of  such 
sects  as  are  not  ofHcially  recognised,  as  the  Moravians, 
etc  The  synagogues  are  also  called  houses  of  prayer 
(laa.  lvi,  7). — Pierer,  Utdc,  Lex,  s.  v.     See  Pisoseuch^b. 

Household  (usually  same  in  the  orig.  as  "  house"), 
the  members  of  a  family  residing  in  the  same  nbode,  in- 
duding  senrants  and  dependants,  although  in  Job  i,  3  a 
djatinction  (not  obscr%'ed  in  the  A.y.)  is  intimated  by 


Modern  KgviJUaii  Houte-tops. 


In  no  point  do  Oriental  domestic  habits  differ  morę 
from  European  than  m  the  use  of  the  roof  (Hackett,  II- 
lustra,  ofScripture,  p.  71  sq.).  Ita  flat  surface  is  madę 
useful  for  various  household  purposes  (Josh.  ii,  6),  as 
drying  com,  hanging  up  linen,  and  preparing  figs  and 
raisins  (Shaw,  p.  211 ;  Burckhardt,  Trav,  i,  191 ;  Bart- 
lett,  Footsteps  ofour  Lord,  p.  191)).  The  roofs  are  used 
almost  univer8ally  as  places  of  recreation  in  the  even- 
ing,  and  often  as  sleeping-places  at  night  (2  Sam.  xi,  2; 
x\'i,  22 ;  Dan.  iv,  29 ;  1  Sam.  ix,  25, 26 ;  Job  xxvii,  18 ; 
Prov.  xxi,  9;  Shaw,  p.  211 ;  Russell,  i,  35;  Chardin,  iv, 
1 16 ;  Layard,  Ninereh,  i,  177).  Thcy  were  also  used  as 
places  for  devotion,  and  even  idolatrous  worship  (Jer. 
xxxii,  29 ;  xix,  13 ;  2  Kings  xxiii,  12 ;  ZeplL  i,  5 ;  Acta 
X,  9).  At  the  time  of  the  Feast  of  Tabemades  booths 
were  erected  by  the  Jews  on  the  tops  of  their  houses,  as 
in  the  present  day  huts  of  boughs  are  sometimes  erected 


HOUSE-TOP 


376 


HOYEY 


•n  the  house-tops  as  aleeping-places,  or  places  of  retire- 
ment  from  the  heat  in  Bummer  time  (Nch.  viii,  16; 
Burckhardt,  fi'yna,  p.  280).  As  aniong  the  Jews  the  se- 
dusion  of  womeii  was  not  canied  to  the  extent  of  Mo- 
hammcdan  usagc,  it  is  probable  that  the  house-top  was 
madę,  as  it  is  among  Christian  uihabitauts,  more  a  place 
of  public  meeting  both  for  men  and  women,  than  is  the 
case  among  Mohammedans,  who  carefully  seclude  their 
roofs  from  inspection  by  partitions  (Burckhardt,  Trav, 
i,  191 ;  compare  Wilkinson,  i,  23).  The  Christians  at 
Aleppo,  in  Russell^s  time,  lived  contiguous,  and  madę 
their  housc-tops  a  means  of  mutual  communication  to 
avoid  pasaing  through  the  strects  in  time  of  plague  (Rus- 
sell, i,  85).  In  the  same  manner,  the  hotise-top  might 
be  madę  a  means  of  escape  by  the  stairs  by  which  it 
was  reached  without  entering  any  of  the  apartments  of 
the  house  (Matt.  xxiv,  17 ;  x,  27 ;  Lukę  xii,  8).  Both 
Jews  and  heathens  were  in  the  habit  of  wailing  publicly 
on  the  house-tops  (Isa.  xv,  3 ;  xxii,  1 ;  Jer.  xlviii,  88). 
The  expre8sion  used  by  Solomon,  "  dwelling  upon  the 
house-top'*  (Prov.  xxi,  9),  is  illostrated  by  the  frequent 
custom  of  building  chambers  and  rooms  along  the  side 
and  at  the  comers  of  the  open  space  or  terrace  which 
often  constitutes  a  kind  of  upper  story  (Hackett,  uł  sup. 
p.  74).  Or  it  may  refer  to  the  fact  that  booths  are  some- 
times  constructed  of  branches  and  leaves  upon  the  roof, 


Anclent  Egyptian  fiat  Roof  supportad  by  a  Balustradę. 


which,  although  of  cramped  dimensions,  fumish  a  cool 
and  quiet  rctreat,  not  unsuitable  as  a  relief  from  a  dam- 
orous  wife  (Pococke,  Trartls,  ii,  69).  It  is  ob\4ous  that 
8uch  a  place  would  be  convenient  for  ob8ervation  (Isa. 
xxii,  1),  and  for  the  proclamation  of  news  (Lukę  xii,  8 ; 
oomp.  Thomson,  Latid  aitd  Booh,  i,  51).  See  RooF. 
Frotection  of  the  roof  by  parapets  was  enjoined  by 


▲ncient  Assyrian  flat-roofed  Ilonseii,  włtb  Parapets  aud 
pillared  coreriiig. 


the  law  (Dent  xxii,  8).  The  parapets  thoa  conatiucŁed; 
of  which  the  types  may  be  seen  in  ancient  Egypdan 
houses,  were  sometimes  of  open  work,  and  it  is  to  a  fali 
through  or  over  one  of  these  that  the  injury  by  which 
Ahaziah  su£fered  is  sometimes  ascribed  (Shaw,  p.  211). 
To  pass  over  roofs  for  plundering  purposes,  as  wdl  as  for 
safety,  would  be  no  difficult  matter  (Joel,  ii,  9).  In  an- 
cient Egyptian,  and  also  in  Assyrian  houses,  a  sort  of 
raised  story  was  sometimes  built  above  the  roof,  aod  in 
the  former  an  open  chamber,  roofed  or  covered  with 
awning,  was  sometimes  erected  on  the  house-top  (AVil- 
kinson,  i,  9 ;  Layard,  Mon,  o/Nin,  ii,  pi.  49, 50).— Smith. 
See  UousK. 

Houasay,  Brother  Jean  du,  a  distinguished  mem- 
ber  of  an  order  of  hermits  who  lived  on  Mount  Yalerian, 
near  Paris,  was  bom  at  Chaillot  in  1539.  These  pious 
men  formed  a  community  of  thdr  own,  distmct  from  the 
outer  world,  and  took  the  vows  of  poverty,  chastity.  and 
obedience.  Houssay  died  Aug.  8, 1609.— Hoefer,  Nohr. 
Biog,  Generale,  xxv,  27L  See  Yalcrian  Monks.  (J. 
H.W.) 

HouBta,  Baudoin  de,  an  Augustine  monk,  was  bom 
at  Toubise  in  the  early  part  of  the  18th  century,  and 
distinguished  himself  greatly  by  his  piety  and  erudition. 
He  is  especially  celebrated  as  the  would-be  critic  of 
Fleury*s  work  on  eccle^astical  histor}',  which  he  at- 
tacked  in  a  work  entitled  Mauvaue  foi  de  M,  Fleuty, 
prourie  par  plusieurs  pauages  des  Samtt  Peres,  dt^s 
conciles  et  d'auteurs  eccUsiasticues  quU  a  onUs,  trońcurs 
ou  infidilement  łraduUs  daru  son  histoire  (Alalines,  1733, 
8vo).  Of  coursc  the  monk,  from  his  narrow  and  biascU 
stand-point,  was  unable  to  comprehend  the  greatneas  of 
Fleury  and  the  liberality  of  his  view8,  and  he  cndeav- 
ored  to  ridicule  Fleur}%  and  stamp  him  as  an  intidcL 
Ilousta  died  at  Enguien  in  1760.— Chaudon  and  Ddan- 
dine,  Xouv,  Diet.  IJist.  vi,  816  sq. ;  Fuller,  Diet,  Jlisf,  ix, 
45.     (J.H.W.) 

Houteville,  Alexandre  Claudb  Francois,  a 
French  theologian,  was  bom  at  Paris  in  1688,  UŃcame  a 
member  of  the  Congregation  of  the  Orator}'  in  1704,  and 
remained  such  for  some  eighteen  years.  He  was  ihen 
appointcd  sccretary  to  cardinal  Dubois.  In  1722  he 
published  La  V'erite  de  la  religion  Chritiemie  prowee  par 
les/aiU  (Paris,  4to;  new  ed.  Paris,  1749, 4  vola.  12mo), 
^  which  had  a  wonderful  though  scarcely  de8er^'c<l  pop- 
ularity  at  one  time"*  (Hook,  Kcdes,  Bing,  vi,  198),  and 
provoked  considerable  controver8y.  In  1723  he  was 
madę  abbe  of  St.  Yincent  du  Bourg-sur-3fer,  in  the  dio- 
cese  of  Bordeaux.  In  1728  he  published  Essai  philoso- 
phique  sur  la  Prońdenoe,  In  1740  he  published  a  sec- 
ond  edition  of  his  Veriti  de  la  religion  Chretienne  (Paris, 
3  vols.  4to).  This  edition,  greatly  enlaiged,  coutaina  a 
kistorical  and  criticai  discourse  vpon  the  meihod  of  tha 
principal  authors  who  wrotefor  and  against  Christian^ 
iły  from  its  beginning  (which  was  translated  and  pub- 
lished separatdy,  with  a  Dissertation  on  the  Life  of 
ApoUonius  Tyanceus,  and  some  Ohserrations  on  Ihe  Pio-' 
tonisłs  o/the  laiter  SchooL,  Lond.  1739,  8vo).  ^*lt  eon- 
tains  little  Information  conceming  the  authors  or  the 
events,  but  a  dearly  and  correctly  written  analysis  of 
their  works  and  thonghta"*  (Farrar,  Crit,  Ilistory  o/Free 
Thought,  p.  xv).  In  1742  he  was  honored  with  the  ap- 
pointment  of  ^'perpetual  secretar}*"  to  the  French  Acad- 
emy,  He  died  Nov.  8,  1742. — Biographie  Unie,  X3C, 
620  sq. ;  Chaudon  and  Delandine,  Aouv,  Diet,  Hiat,  vi, 
316 ;  Diet,  Hist,  ix,  45  8q.     (J.  H.  W.) 

Hovel  or  Honaing  is  a  term  applied  to  a  canopy 
or  niche.— Wallcot,  Sac.  ArchaoL  p.  818. 

Hovey,  Jonathan  Parsons,  D.D.,  a  Presbyteriau 
minister,  was  bom  in  Waybridge,  Yt.,  Oct  10, 1810.  He 
recdved  a  coUegiate  education  at  Jack8onville,  DL,  and 
South  Hanover,  Ind.  He  studied  theology  at  Aubum 
Seminary,  and  was  ordained  for  the  ministry  March, 
1837.  He  was  settled  four  times :  first  at  Gaines,  N.  T.; 
then  at  Burdette,  N.  Y. ;  then  at  Richmond,  Ya. ;  and 
from  September,  1850,  for  thirteen  yean^  in  New  Yoik 


HOW 


377 


HOWARD 


(Sty,  "His  chmch  oocopied  a  difficult  field.  It  was 
nnoanded  hy  Genum  Catholica,  and  by  those  who 
raloed  little,  thongh  they  greatly  needed,  the  inatitu- 
tioiia  of  tłke  GospeL  Herę  he  labored  with  Bignal  fidel- 
itjr  and  uttfułneas.  Seyeral  revirals  were  enjoyed  dur- 
ing  bia  ministiy,  and  many  additioiis  were  madę  to  the 
Chnrch.'*  Dnring  oor  late  civil  war  Dr.  Hovey  seryed 
ai  chaplain  of  the  7l8t  Regiment  New  York  State  Yol- 
imteen,  and  continued  with  them  diuing  their  entire 
period  of  aonrice,  at  the  expiration  of  which  he  retumed 
•gain  to  hia  duu^  in  New  York  City.  He  died  there 
Dec.  16, 1868.— Wi]8on*8  Pr&b.  HisL  Alm.  1864,  p.  805 
aq.;  Bev.  Dr.  Field,  in  the  Christian  IntetUffencer,  Dec. 
24,1863. 

Hov,  Samuel  R,  D.D.,  was  bom  in  1788,  groduated 
at  the  Univenity  of  Pennsylvania  in  1710,  and  at  Prince- 
ton Theological  Seminary*  in  1813.  He  was  settled  suc- 
cesatydy  in  Presbyterian  churches  at  Salisbury,  Pa., 
1813-15;  Trcnton,  N.  J.,  1815-21 ;  and  New  Brunswick, 
N.  J.,  18-21-23.  From  1823  to  1827  he  was  pastor  of 
the  Independent  Ghurch  at  Sarannah,  Ga.,  then  for  a 
year  in  New-York,  whence  he  was  called  to  the  presi- 
dcDcy  of  Dickinson  College,  Pa.,  1830-31.  In  1832  he 
Aocepted  the  charge  of  the  Firat  Keformed  Dutch  Church 
IB  New  Brunswick,  N.  J.,  but  resigned  on  account  of  ill 
heiith  in  1861.  In  all  these  positions  his  fine  daaaical 
acbołanhip  and  solid  and  extensive  theological  leaming 
were  stiidioaaly  maintained  and  conspicuousiy  display- 
ed.  Deroat,  oonsdentious,  a  Christian  gentleman  in 
Ihe  best  aense  of  the  term,  a  most  faitbful  preacher  and 
pastor,  fearless  and  independent,  zealous  and  snccessful, 
as  a  minister  he  was  rcmarkable  for  scriptural  instruc- 
tion  and  pious  fcrvor.  His  ideał  of  the  ministry  was 
lofty,  and  his  lifo  was  the  best  commentary  upon  it.  In 
1855  he  published  an  elabor&te  pamphlet  entitled  Stare- 
holding  not  ^infu!,  which  grew  out  of  the  request  of  the 
North  Caiolina  Classis  of  the  German  Reformed  Chiurch 
to  be  united  with  the  Reformed  Dutch  Church.  The 
important  and  Gxcited  discussion  which  foUowed  in  the 
General  Synod  of  the  latter  body  ended  in  a  decided  le- 
fuul  to  oompły  with  the  application.  Dr.  How's  pam- 
phlet was  answered  in  the  same  form  by  the  Rev.  Her- 
vey  D.  Ganso  and  others,  and  it  was  long  before  the 
intcreat  prodoced  by  it  died  away.  Dr.  How  published 
aiso  seyeral  occańonal  sermons  of  eminent  ability.  He 
was  a  frequent  contributor  to  religious  periodicals,  espe- 
cially  in  lelation  to  the  pending  theological  oontroyer- 
sies  of  his  time.  The  last  seyen  years  of  his  llfe  were 
spent  in  letircment  from  public  seryice.  He  preached 
when  hia  health  would  permit.  He  dwelt  among  his 
own  people,  a  model  of  Christian  rirtues  and  of  li/mis- 
terial  exceUence.  He  died  in  1868. — Corwin^s  Manuał 
Ref,  Church,  p.  118;  Christian  fntellif/encer ;  Rev.  R.  H. 
Słeele,  D.D.,  Hisł.  ofBff,  D,  CK  New  Brunswick  (1809). 
(W.  J.  B.  T.) 

Howard,  Besaleel,  D.D.,  a  Unitarian  Congre- 
gaUonal  minister,  was  bom  at  Bridgewater,  Mass.,  Noy. 
22,  1753.  He  entered  Harvard  Cf)Uege  in  1777,  and, 
alter  graduation  in  1781,  engaged  in  teaching,  pursuing 
at  the  same  time  a  course  of  theological  study.  In  1783 
he  was  appointcd  tutor  at  Hanrard.  In  Noyember,  1784, 
he  was  called  as  minister  to  the  Fint  Church  and  Soci- 
ety  in  Springfield,  Mass.,  and  was  ordained  April  27, 
1785.  He  continuod  in  this  position  until  September, 
iSf&,  when  impured  health  obliged  him  to  discontinue 
his  work;  but  his  resignation  was  not  accepted  by  the 
Church  nntU  Jan.  25, 1809,  when  his  successor  was  or- 
dained. In  1819  he  associated  himself  with  a  new  Uni- 
tarian Church  which  had  been  forroed  from  members  of 
his  old  congregatton,  and  he  continued  with  them  till 
his  death,  Jan.  20, 1837.  In  1824  Hanraid  College  con- 
ferred  the  dcgree  of  D.D.  upon  him.  The  Rey.  Daniel 
Wałdo,  in  a  sketch  of  Dr.  Howard  (in  Sprague's  Atmais 
o/the  Am,Pufyit,viM,  181  są.),  says  that  the  theological 
Tiewa  of  Dr.  Howard  had  been  Arminian  until  his  latest 
yearai  when  he  came  to  belieyo  ^  the  solc  sopremacy  of 


the  Father.  He,  howerer,  held  to  the  doctrine  of  the 
atonement,  in  the  sense  of  propitiation  or  expŁation, 
with  the  utmost  tenadty ;  and  he  regarded  the  rejection 
of  it  as  a  rejection  of  Chństianity.  His  yiewa  of  the 
chazacter  of  the  Sayiour  were  not,  perhaps,  yery  accu- 
rately  defined;  he  seemed  to  regard  him  as  a  sort  of 
etemal  emanation  irom  Deity;  not  a  creature  in  the 
strict  sense,  on  the  one  hand,  nor  yet  the  supremę  God 
on  the  other."  He  published  a  sermon  deliyered  at  the 
ordination  of  the  Rey.  Antipas  Steward  (1793).  (J.  H. 
W.) 

Ho'ward,  John,  one  of  the  most  eminent  of  modem 
Christian  philanthropists,  was  bom  at  Hadcney  in  1726. 
His  father  apprentioed  him  to  a  wholesale  grocer,  but 
died  when  his  son  was  about  nineteen  years  of  age, 
leaying  him  in  possession  of  a  handsome  fortunę,  and 
yoang  Howard,  who  was  in  weak  health,  determined  to 
make  a  tour  in  France  and  Italy.  On  his  retum  he 
took  lodgings  in  Stoke  Newington,  where  his  landlady 
— a  wiilow  named  Loidore — ^haying  nursed  him  careful- 
ly  thnmgh  a  seyere  illness,  he,  out  of  gratitude,  married 
her,  though  śhe  was  twenty-scyen  years  his  senior.  She, 
howeyer,  died  about  three  years  ailer  the  marriage,  and 
he  now  conceiyed  a  desire  to  yisit  lisbon,  with  a  yiew 
to  alleyiate  the  miseries  caused  by  the  great  earthąuake 
in  1756.  On  his  yoyage  he  was  captured  by  a  French 
priyateer,  carried  a  prisoner  to  Brest,  and  subseąuently 
remoyed  into  the  interior,  but  was  finally  permitted  to 
retum  to  England  on  the  promise  of  inducing  the  goy- 
emment  to  make  a  suitable  exchange  for  him.  This 
was  effected,  and  Howard  retired  to  a  smali  estate  he 
possessed  at  Cardington,  near  Bedford,  and  there,  in 
April,  1758,  he  married  Miss  Henrietta  Leeds.  It  is 
mentioned  as  a  chancteristic  trait  that  he  stipulated 
before  marriage  "  that,  in  all  matters  in  which  there 
shottid  be  a  diflcrence  of  opinion  between  them,  his  yoioe 
should  rule."  For  seyen  years  he  was  chietly  engaged 
in  the  task  of  raising  the  physical  and  morał  condition 
of  the  peasantry  of  Cardington  and  its  neighborhood  by 
erecting  on  his  own  estate  better  cottages,  establishing 
schools,  and  yisiting  and  relieying  the  sick  and  the  des- 
titute;  in  his  beneyolent  exertions  he  was  assisted  by 
his  wife.  She  died  March,  1765,  and  Howard  from  that 
time  lost  his  intercst  in  his  home  and  its  occupations. 
He  liyed  some  years  at  Cardington  in  seclusion,  then 
madę  another  Continental  tour,  and  in  1773  was  nomi- 
nated  sheriff  of  Bedford.  The  sufTerings  which  he  had 
endured  and  witnessed  during  his  own  brief  confine- 
ment  as  a  prisoner  of  war  stmck  deep  into  his  mind, 
and,  shocked  by  the  misery  and  abuses  which  preyailed 
in  the  prisons  under  his  charge,  he  attempted  to  induce 
the  magistrates  to  remedy  the  morę  obyious  of  them. 
The  repiy  was  a  demand  for  a  precedent,  and  Howard 
at  once  set  out  on  a  tour  of  mspection.  But  he  soon 
found  that  the  eyil  was  generał,  and  he  set  himself  diii- 
gently  to  work  to  inquire  into  the  extent  and  precise 
naturę  of  the  mischief,  and,  if  possible,  to  discoyer  the 
true  remedy  for  the  eyiL  He  yisited,  in  two  joumeys, 
most  of  the  town  and  county  jails  of  England,  and  ac- 
cumulated  a  large  mass  of  Information,  which,  in  March, 
1774,  he  laid  before  the  House  of  Commons.  This  was 
the  commenoement  of  prison  reform  in  England.  Once 
actiyely  engaged,  he  became  morę  and  morę  deyoted  to 
this  beneyolent  pursuit.  He  trayelled  repeatedly  oyer 
the  United  Kingdom,  and  at  different  periods  to  almost 
eyery  part  of  Europę,  yisiting  the  most  offensiye  places, 
relieying  personally  the  wants  of  the  most  wretched 
objects,  and  noting  all  that  seemed  to  him  important 
either  for  waming  or  example.  The  iirst  fruit  of  these 
labors  was  The  StaU  o/the  Prisons  in  EngUmd  and 
WaieSf  with  an  Account  ofsome  Foreign  Prisons  (1777). 
"As  soon  as  it  appeared,  the  world  was  astonished  at 
the  mass  of  yaluable  materials  accumulated  by  a  priyate 
unaided  indiyidual,  through  a  course  of  prodigious  la« 
bor,  and  at  the  constant  hazard  of  life,  in  consequence 
of  the  infectious  diseases  preyalent  in  the  soenes  of  his 
ii:quiries.    The  cool  good  sense  and  modemtion  of  his 


HOWARD 


378 


HOWARD 


natntiTe,  oontnsted  with  that  enthuaiaatic  ardor  wbich 
must  haye  impelled  him  to  his  undertakingy  were  not 
less  admired,  and  he  was  immediately  regaided  as  one 
of  tlie  extraordinaiy  chaiacters  of  the  age,  and  as  the 
leader  in  all  plans  for  ameliorating  the  condition  of  that 
wretched  part  of  the  community  for  whom  he  interested 
himseir  (Aikin).  In  1778  he  imdertook  another  tour, 
reyisited  the  oelebrated  Rasp-honses  of  Holland,  and 
oontinued  his  loute  throogh  Belgium  and  Germany  into 
Italy,  whence  he  retumed  throngh  Switaserland  and 
France  in  1779.  In  the  same  year  he  madę  another 
8urvey  of  Great  Britain  and  Ireknd.  In  these  toors  he 
extended  his  yiews  to  the  inyestigation  of  hospitals. 
The  results  were  pablished  in  1780,  in  an  AppemUz  to 
**  The  Stałe  ofłhe  PrUon»  tn  Encland  and  WaUs^"*  etc 
Having  trayelled  oyer  nearly  all  the  sonth  of  Europę, 
in  1781  he  yisited  Denmarl^  Sweden,  Rnssia,  and  Po- 
land,  and  in  1783  he  went  through  Spain  and  Portu- 
gal, continuing  at  interrals  his  home  inąuiries,  and  pub- 
lished  in  1784  a  second  appendix,  together  with  a  new 
edition  of  the  original  work,  in  which  the  additional 
matter  was  comprised.  The  importance,  both  in  pris- 
ons  and  hospitals,  of  preyenting  the  oocurrence  or  spread 
of  infectious  diseaaes,  produoed  in  Mr.  Howard  a  deaire 
to  witness  the  woridng  and  suocess  of  the  Lazaretto  sys^ 
tem  in  the  south  of  Europę,  morę  especiaUy  as  a  safe- 
guard  against  the  plagoe.  Danger  or  disgnat  neyer 
tomed  him  from  his  path,  but  on  this  occaaion  he  went 
without  eyen  a  seryant,  not  thinldng  it  right,  for  oon- 
yenience  sake,  to  expoee  another  person  to  such  a  risk. 
Ouitting  England  in  1785,  he  trayelled  through  the 
south  of  France  and  Italy  to  Malta,  Zante,  and  Constan- 
tinople,  whence  he  retumed  to  Sm3rma,while  the  plague 
was  raging,  for  the  purpoae  of  sailing  ftom  an  infected 
port  to  Yenice,  where  he  might  undergo  the  utmost  rig^ 
or  of  the  quarantine  system.  He  retumed  to  England 
in  1787,  resumed  his  home  touis,  and  in  1789  puUished 
the  result  of  his  late  inąuiries  in  another  important  yol- 
ume,  entitled  An  A ccount  o/łhe prwc^pal  Lazaretto*  m 
Europę,  etc,  with  additional  Remarkt  on  thepretent  Staże 
oftht  Priaom  tn  Greai  Britain  and  Irelattd.  The  same 
summer  he  renewed  his  oourse  of  foreign  trayels,  mean- 
ing  td  go  into  Turkey  and  the  East  through  Russia.  He 
had,  howe\'er,  proceeded  no  farther  than  the  Crimea 
when  a  nipid  illneas,  which  he  himaelf  belieyed  to  be  an 
infectious  feyer,  caught  in  prescribing  for  a  lady,  put  an 
end  to  his  life  on  the  20th  of  January,  1790.  He  re- 
ąuested  that  no  other  inscription  should  be  put  upon 
his  grare  than  simply  this,  "  Christ  is  my  hope."  He 
was  buried  at  Dauphiny,  near  Chersoń,  and  the  utmost 
respect  was  paid  to  his  memory  by  the  Russian  goyem- 
menu  The  intelligence  of  his  death  cansed  a  profonnd 
feeling  of  regret  in  his  native  country,  and  men  of  all 
classes  and  parties  yied  in  paying  their  tribute  of  rever- 
ence  to  his  memory.  A  marUe  statuę  by  Bacon  of  ^  the 
philanthropist"  was  crected  in  St.Paul*s  Cathedral  by  a 
public  subscription. 

Mr.  Howard'8  piety  was  deep  and  feryent,  and  his 
morał  character  most  pnre  and  simple.  His  literary  aio 
ąuirements  were  smali,  neither  were  his  talents  brilliant ; 
but  hc  was  fearless,  single^minded,  untiring,  and  did 
great  things  by  devoting  his  whole  eneigies  to  one  good 
object.  The  influence  of  diainterestedness  and  integiity 
is  remarkably  dispUiyed  in  the  ready  access  granted  to 
him  even  by  the  most  absolute  and  most  suspicious  goy- 
emments,  in  the  respect  inyariably  paid  to  his  person, 
and  the  weight  attached  to  his  opinion  and  authority. 
He  was  strictly  economical  in  his  personal  expense8,  ab- 
stemious  in  his  habits,  and  capable  of  going  through 
great  fatigue ;  both  his  fortuno  and  his  constitution  were 
freely  spent  in  the  cause  to  which  his  life  was  deyoted. 
The  only  blemish  which  has  ever  been  suggestcd  as 
reating  upon  his  memory  is  in  oonnection  with  his  con- 
dnct  to  his  son.  Mr.  Howard  was  a  strict,  and  has  not 
escapcd  the  charge  of  being  a  seyere,  parent.  The  son, 
unhappily,  in  youth  fell  into  dissolute  habits,  which  be- 
ing carcfully  concealed  from  the  father,  and  coneeąuent- 


ly  nnchecked,  brougfat  on  a  diseaae  whidi  terminarod  in 
insanity.  He  soryiyed  his  fakba  nine  yeais,  dytng  on 
the  24ch  (^April,  1799;  bat  he  remained'till  hia  death  a 
hopeless  lunatic  The  ąuestion  of  Howard*8  alleged 
harshneas  to  his  son  has  been  thoroughly  inyestigated 
and  effectuaUy  disproyed.  (See  Dizon'8  lĄfe  o/Mow^ 
artf.)  That  his  deyotion  to  the  great  philanthropic  oIh 
ject  to  which  he  gaye  up  his  life  may  not  haye  inter- 
fered  with  his  patemal  duties,  it  is,  of  cooise,  impoaaUde 
to  affirm :  but  that  John  Howard  was  an  affectionate 
and  kind-hearted  father,  as  well  as  a  aingle-minded  ben-^ 
e&ctor  to  his  spedes,  there  can  now  be  no  reasonable 
doubt  See  Etk^Utk  Ć^dopadia ;  Aiken,  Character  ami 
Serrices  ofJokn  Howjord  (London,  1792, 8yo) ;  Brown, 
Memoin  o/John  Howard  (Lond.  1818, 4to) ;  Dixon,  Joku 
Howard  and  the  Priton  World  of  Europę  (London,  1850, 
12mo;  reprinted,  with  an  introduction,  by  the  Rcy.  R 
W.  Dickinson,  D.D.,  N.  Y.  1854, 18mo);  Field,  Ltfe  of 
John  Howard  (Lond.  1850. 8yo) ;  Skeats,  Hittorg  oftht 
Fret  Omrtku  of  England,  p.  479. 

How^ard,  John,  a  Methodist  Episoopal  minister, 
was  bom  of  Roman  Catholic  anoestry  in  Onslow  CouBtj, 
North  Carolina,  in  1792.  His  early  edncation  was  lim- 
ited,  as  his  father  died  shortly  after  Uie  birth  of  Jofan, 
and  he  was  plaoed  in  a  storę  at  the  age  of  twdye.  He 
was  oonyerted  in  1808,  and  entered  the  ministry  in  1818 
at  Georgetown.  In  1819  he  joined  the  South  Carolina 
Conferenoe,  and  was  stationed  at  Sandy  Riyer  Circuit. 
In  1820  he  was  appointed  to  Geoigetown,  1821  to  Sayan- 
nah,  1822  to  Augusta,  and  1828  and  1824  to  Chariesion. 
He  located  from  1825  till  1828,  when  he  was  appointed  to 
the  Washington  and  Greoisborongh  Circuita.  In  1829 
and  1880  he  labored  on  the  Appalachee  Circuit  In  1831 
he  joined  the  Georgia  Conferenoe,  thcn  forming,  and  for 
three  years  became  presiding  elder  of  the  MilledgcriDe 
District.  From  1834  to  the  time  of  his  death  in  1836^ 
he  was  agent  for  the  "  Manuał  Labor  SchooP  of  the  Con- 
ferenoe. "  Mr.  Howard*s  ministry,  espedally  in  Saran- 
nah,  Augusta,  and  Charleston,  was  attended  with  marked 
success.  He  labored  with  great  fidelity,  not  only  in  the 
pulpit,  but  with  penitents  at  the  altar,  being  aUke  fer- 
yent in  his  prayers  and  appropriate  in  his  counsels.  As 
a  pastor,  too,  he  was  always  on  the  alert  to  promote  the 
best  interests  of  his  penple.  Wheneyer  there  was  daik- 
ness  to  be  dissipated,  or  grief  to  be  assuaged,  or  sinking 
hope  to  be  enoouraged,  or  eril  of  any  kind  to  be  le- 
moyed,  there  he  was  surę  to  be  present  as  an  angel  of 
mercy."— Sprague,  AtmaU  ofthe  American  Pulpit,  tu, 
614  sq. 

Howard,  Simeon,  D.D.,  a  Unitarian  Congrega- 
tional  minister,  was  bom  at  Bridgewater,  Maine,  Aptil 
29, 17S3,  and  educated  at  Ilaryard  College,  where  be 
graduated  with  distinguished  honor  in  1758.  After  a 
course  of  theological  study,  pursued  while  himaelf  cn- 
gaged  in  teaching,  he  accepted  a  cali  to  a  church  at 
Cumberland,  Noya  Scotia.  In  1765  he  retumed  to  Cam- 
bridge as  a  resident  giaduate  student,  and  was  elected 
tutor  the  year  following.  In  1767  he  accepted  the  pa»- 
torate  of  West  Church,  Boston,  and  was  ordained  May 
6, 1768.  During  the  Reyolution  his  oongregation  aof- 
fered  greatly,  and  haying  madę  many  friends  durinf^  hia 
residence  in  Noya  Scotia,  he  proposed  that  his  congre- 
gation  should  emigrate  with  him  thither,  which  they 
did.  After  about  one  year  and  a  half  he  retumed  to 
Boston,  and  again  seryed  his  congregation  there,  receiy- 
ing  only  such  oompensation  for  his  seryices  as  be  was 
fully  satisfied  they  could  afibrd  to  giye  in  their  desti- 
tute  circumstancea.  He  died  in  the  midst  of  hb  labon 
among  them,  August  18, 1804.  The  degree  of  D.D.  was 
conferred  on  him  by  Edinbuigh  Uniyersity.  He  was 
an  oyerseer  and  fellow  of  Haryard,  and  a  member  of 
must  of  the  American  sodeties  for  the  pronotion  of  lit- 
erały, chaiitable,  and  religious  objects,  and  an  officer  of 
seyeral  of  them.  Dr.  Howard  was  "  bland  and  geotle  in 
his  manner,  calm  and  equaUe  in  his  temper,  cheerful 
without  leyity,  and  serious  without  gloom.  .   .  .   Hia 


HOWE 


379 


HOWE 


pągMhmnMHi  Iov«d  him  as  a  bfother,  and  honond  bim 
aa  a  father;  his  brethren  in  the  minutry  always  met 
him  with  a  grateful  and  cordial  welcome ;  and  the  oom- 
manity  at  large  reyerenced  him  for  his  simplicity,  in- 
tegńty,  and  beneyolence.**  Dr.  Howard  published  Ser^ 
mona  (1773, 1777, 1778, 1780):— CArtfftaiw  hav€  no  Caiue 
to  be  atkamed  ofiheir  Beliffion  (sermon,  1779):— Ordir 
nation  Sermon  (1791).— Sprague,  AnnaU  o/ the  Amerir 
can  PufyU,  viii,  65. 

Howe,  Besaleelf  a  Methodist  Episcopal  minister, 
was  bom  at  Tower  Hill,  Datchess  County,  N.  Y.,  July 
14, 1781.  In  eaily  life  be  was  a  student  uf  Paine  and 
Bouascau,  and  for  seyeral  years  a  profeseed  infidel;  but 
the  unhappy  death  of  a  notorious  infidel  of  his  aflquaintr- 
anee  was  the  means  of  his  oonrerBion,  and  in  1828  be 
entered  tbe  New  York  Confezenoe,  in  which  be  labored 
with  great  zeal  and  suocess  until  his  death,  June  25, 
1851.  He  was  fond  of  study,  and  his  piety  and  abilities 
hooored  and  edified  the  Church.— Jfm.  o/ Coąferenoet, 
T,683.     (G.L.T.) 

Howe,  Charles,  a  distinguished  English  diidoma- 
tiit  under  Charles  II,  was  bom  in  Glouoestershire  in 
1661.  Being  of  a  stnmg  rebgious  tura,  be  finaUy  for- 
iook  publie  life,  and  retired  into  the  country,  where  be 
wroCe  his  J)evout  MedUationa  (8vo;  2d  ed.  Edinh.  1752, 
12mo;  Lond.  1824, 12nK»,  and  oflten),  of  which  the  poet, 
Dr.  Edward  Young,  says,  **  1  sball  never  Uiy  it  far  out  of 
my  reacb,  for  a  greater  demonstration  of  a  soond  bead 
and  sincere  heart  I  never  saw.""  Howe  died  in  1745. — 
LomL  GeniL  Mag, roL  lxiv;  Allibone,  DicL  ofAuŁhore^ 
i,  902;  Gorton,  Bioc,  Diet,  a.  v. 

Boyre,  John,  a  Nonconformist  divine,  and  one 
of  the  greatest  of  English  theologians,  who  is  often 
caUed  tbe  "  PbUonic  Puritan,"  was  bom  May  17, 1680, 
at  Lougbborough,  in  Leicestersbiie,  where  his  father 
was  the  incumbent  of  the  parisb  church ;  but,  baving 
beoome  a  Nonconformist,  be  was  ejected  from  bis  living, 
and  leiired  to  Ireland.  He  soon,  bowever,  retumed  to 
England,  and  settled  in  tbe  town  of  Lancaster,  where 
John  Teceived  his  mdimentary  instracdon  from  his  fa- 
ther. He  was  afterwards  educated  at  Christ  College, 
Cambridge,  but  iemoved  to  Brazenose  College,  Oxford, 
of  which  be  became  the  biUe-clerk  in  1648,  and  where 
he  for  the  second  time  took  bis  degree  of  B.A.  in  1649. 
He  was  madę  a  demy  of  Magdalen  College  by  tbe  par- 
liamentazy  yisitors,  and  was  afterwards  cbosen  a  fcl- 
knr.  In  July,  1652,  be  took  the  degree  of  M.A.  Af- 
ter  having  been  ordained  by  a  Nonconformist  diyine, 
aaisted  by  others,  he  became  a  minister  at  Great  Tor- 
rington,  in  Devonshire.  In  1654  Cromwell  appointed 
him  his  domestic  cbaplain.  He  g^ve  some  oiTence  to 
the  piotector  by  one  of  his  sermons,  in  which  he  cen- 
sured  oertain  opinions  about  divine  impulses  and  special 
impressions  in  answer  to  prayer,  but  retained  bis  situa- 
tion  till  Cromwell*s  death,  and  afterwards  till  tbe  depo- 
ńtion  of  Kicbaid  CromwelL  He  then  resumed  and 
ooatinned  his  ministry  at  Great  Torrington  till  the  Act 
of  Unifonnity,  August,  1662,  obliged  bim  to  restrict  his 
preaching  to  private  bouses.  He  went  to  Ireland  in 
1671,  where  he  lesided  as  cbaplain  to  the  famiiy  of  k>rd 
MaaMoene,  enjoying  there  the  friendship  of  tbe  bishop 
of  that  diooese.  Howe  was  granted  liberty  to  preach  in 
sil  the  churches  under  the  juriadiction  of  this  bishop. 
He  wrotc  at  this  time  his  Yamty  of  Man  cu  MortaL, 
and  bęgsn  his  greatest  work,  The  lAoing  Ten^yle^  be- 
]ow  referred  to.  In  1675  he  aocepted  an  invitation  to 
beoome  tbe  minister  of  a  congregation  in  London.  Dur- 
ing  the  year  1680  he  eng^aged  in  a  oontroyeiBy  with  Dra. 
Stillingfleet  and  Tillotson  on  tbe  queBtion  of  nonconfor- 
mity,  and  it  is  said  that  Dr.  Stillingfleet,  who  had  pro- 
Toked  the  controrersy  by  a  discouise  which  he  preach- 
ed  befoire  the  lord  mayor  and  aldetmen  of  London  on 
"The  Mischief  of  Scparation,"  was  subdued  when  he 
nad  Howe's  leply,  and  oonfessed  that  he  discouised 
**vaan  like  a  gentleman  than  a  diyine,  without  any 
mistnre  of  rancor,  or  ony  shaip  leflections,  and  some- 


tunes  with  a  great  degree  of  kindness  towazds  him,  for 
which,  and  his  prayers  for  him,  he  heartily  tbanked 
bim**  (BogerB*s  Life  qfHowe^  p.  183).  In  August,  1685, 
he  went  to  the  Continent  with  lord  Wharton,  and  in 
1686  became  one  of  the  preachers  to  the  English  church 
at  Utrecht  When  James  II  published  his  "dedar*- 
tion  for  liberty  of  oonscienoe,*'  Howe  retumed  to  London, 
and  at  the  Reyolntion,  the  year  foUowing,  be  headed  the 
deputation  of  diseenting  ministers  who  presented  tbeir 
petition  to  the  thione.  In  1689  he  again  pleaded  tbe 
cause  of  tbe  Nonoonformists  in  an  anonymous  pampblet 
entitled  The  Caae  o/ the  Protestant  Dissentere  represeni- 
ed  and  euyued.  In  1691  he  became  inyolred  in  the 
Antinomian  contioyeisy  by  a  recommendation  which 
he  g^ye  to  the  works  of  Dr.  Crisp.  He  aoon,  boweyer, 
deared  his  reputation  by  a  strong  recommendation  of 
Flayel's  Bhw  at  the  Boot,  a  work  against  Antinomian- 
ism,  then  in  the  couise  of  publication.  In  1701  he  be- 
came entangled  in  a  contzoyersy  with  the  Puritan  De 
Foe  (q.  y.)  on  acoount  of  one  of  Howe*s  members,  who 
had  been  elected  lord  mayor,  and  who,  in  order  to  qual- 
ify  bimself  for  that  office,  had  taken  tbe  Lord*s  Supper 
in  an  Establisbed  church.  The  manner  in  which  Howe 
answered  (Some  Coneideratione  o/a  Preface  to  an  /»- 
quiry,  etc)  the  objections  of  De  Foe,  who  opposed  com- 
munion  in  tbe  Establisbed  Church  by  Nonconfonnists, 
is  to  be  regretted  by  all  who  yenerate  the  name  of  John 
Howe.  He  died  April  2, 1705.  Among  the  Puritans, 
John  Howe  ranks  as  one  of  tbe  most  emiuent.  He  was 
also  unąuestionably  a  man  of  great  genend  leaming. 
"  The  originality  and  compass  of  Howe's  mind,  and  tbe 
calmness  and  moderation  of  bis  temper,  must  eyer  in- 
spire  sympathy  and  awaken  admiration  in  reflective 
leaders:  his  Platonie  and  Alexandrian  culture  com- 
mends  bim  to  tbe  philosophicd  student,  and  the  prac- 
tical  tendency  of  bis  religious  tbinking  endears  him  to 
all  Christians"  (Stoughton  [John],  fTcc/e*.  Nist.ofEngU 
ii,  422,  428).  "  Perbaps  it  may  be  considercd  as  no  un- 
fair  test  of  intellectual  and  spiritual  exccllencc  that  a 
person  can  relish  the  writings  of  John  Howe ;  if  he  does 
not,  be  may  baye  reason  to  stispect  that  somcthing  in 
his  bead  or  heart  is  wrong.  A  young  minister  who 
wisbes  to  attain  eminence  in  bis  profession,  if  be  bas  not 
tbe  works  of  John  Howe,  and  can  procure  them  in  no 
other  way,  shouid  sell  his  coat  and  buy  them ;  and,  if 
that  will  not  suiiicc,  let  him  sell  bis  bcd  and  lie  on  tbe 
floor ;  and  if  he  spends  bis  days  in  reading  them,  be  will 
not  complain  that  he  lics  bard  at  night"  (Bogue  and 
Bennett,  Hist.  of  Diuenterg^  i,  437).  "  Howe  seems  to 
baye  understood  the  Gospel  os  wcll  as  any  uninspired 
writer,  and  to  baye  imbibed  as  much  of  its  spirit.  There 
is  tbe  tmest  sublimity  to  be  found  in  his  writings,  and 
some  of  tbe  strongest  pathos;  yct,  often  obscure,  gener- 
ally  harsh,  be  bas  imitated  the  worst  parts  of  Boyle*8 
style.  He  bas  a  yast  numbcr  and  yariety  of  uncommon 
thoughts,  and  is,  on  tbe  whole,  one  of  tbe  most  yaluable 
writcrs  in  our  language,  or,  I  belieye,  in  tbe  world"  (Dr. 
Doddridge).  ^  I  haye  leamed  morę  from  John  Howe 
than  fiom  any  other  author  I  eyer  read.  There  is  an 
astonishing  magniikence  in  his  conceptions"  (Hobert 
Hall).  **  This  great  man  was  one  of  the  few  who  baye 
been  yenerated  as  much  by  tbeir  contemporaries  as  by 
their  suocessors.  Time,  which  oommonly  adds  incrcased 
lustre  to  the  memory  of  tbe  good,  bas  not  been  able  to 
magnify  any  of  the  qualities  for  which  Howe  was  so 
conspicuous.  His  strong  and  capacious  intellect,  his 
sublime  eleyation  of  thought,  bis  flowing  eloąuenoe,  tbe 
holiness  of  bis  life,  the  dignity  and  courtesy  of  his  man  • 
ners,  the  humor  of  his  conyersatton,  won  for  him  ftom 
the  men  of  his  own  time  the  title  of '  the  great  Howe' " 
(Skeats,  Ilitł.  ofthe  Free  Churches  of  England^  p.  169). 
Howe's  most  important  works  arc,  The  JAving  Tempie 
(many  editions;  first  in  1676),  in  which  he  proyes  the 
existence  of  God  and  his  conyersablencss  with  men,  and 
which  occupics  one  of  the  highest  places  in  Puritan 
tbeology: — The  Hedeemer^s  Tears  over  lost  SouU  [Lukę 
x\xy  41, 42],  with  an  Appendiz  on  tlie  Blaaphemy  against 


HOWE 


380 


HOWEŁL 


(he  Hdy  GhoH  (Lond.  1684 ;  often  reprinted),  in  wfaich 
Howe  does  not,  unlike  many  high  Ćalvini8tic  theolo- 
gians,  enter  at  all  into  the  predestination  coutroveny, 
but  coniines  himself  to  a  solution  of  the  ąuesŁion  of 
Giod'8  omniiicience  and  nian'8  responsibility : — Inguiry 
conceming  the  Trimty^  etc: — Cffice  and  Work  of  ike 
Jloly  Spirit.  These,  with  his  Sermoru  and  other  writ- 
ings,  are  to  be  found  in  his  Cołlected  Works,  vńth  LĄft 
hy  Dr,  Calamy  (1724,  2  vols.  folio) ;  and  in  The  whole 
Works  of  the  Rev,  John  Howe,  M.A^  edited  by  Hunt 
(London,  1810-22,  7  Yols.  8vo,  with  an  eighth  voL,  eon- 
taining  a  Memoir  and  additional  works),  and  again  in 
The  Works  of  the  Jiev,  John  Jlowe,  M,A  ^  om  jmbłished 
dnring  his  life,  comprisiny  the  whole  ofthe  iwo  folio  «o^ 
umesy  ed  1724,  roith  a  Life  ofthe  A  uthor,  by  the  Rev.  J. 
P.  Hewlett  (London,  1848, 3  yoIs.  8vo)«  There  is  also  an 
edition  of  his  Works  in  1  voU  imp.  8vo  (London,  1888), 
and  an  American  edition  (Phila.  2  rola.  imp.  8vo).  See 
also  Wilson,  Selections  from  Howe,  teith  his  lĄfe  (Lond. 
1827,  2  vol«.  12mo) ;  Taylor,  8ei/Kt  TreaHses  of  John 
Howe  (1835,  12mo) ;  Kogers,  LĄfe  of  John  Howe,  with 
an  Analysis  ofhis  Writmgs  (Lond.  1836, 12mo) ;  Dnnn, 
How€'s  Christian  Theoloyy  (Lond.  1886, 12mo) ;  English 
Cydopacka ;  Allibone,  IHct,  of  A  ułhors,  i,  902 ;  Ojuar^ 
terly  Rev%ew  (Lond.),  xxxvi,  167 ;  Literary  and  Theolog- 
ical  Reriew,  iv,  588 ;  Meth,  Quart,  Rev.  Oct«  1862,  p.  676 ; 
Hook,  Ecd,  Biog,  vi,  108  są.     (J.  H.  W.) 

Howe,  Joseph,  a  Ck>ngTegational  minister,  bom 
at  Killingly,  Connecticut,  January  14,  1747,  was  edu> 
cated  at  Yale  College,  whcrc  he  graduated  in  1765,  the 
first  in  his  class.  By  recommendation  of  the  president 
of  his  college  he  was  appointed  pńncipal  of  a  public 
school  at  Hartford,  at  that  time  the  most  important  in> 
stitution  of  that  class  in  the  colony.  He  was  licensed 
to  preach  in  1769,  and  was  appointed  tutor  at  Yale  in 
the  same  year.  He  held  this  position,  preaching  quite 
frequently,  until  called  to  the  New  South  Church,  Bos- 
ton, in  1772,  where  hc  was  ordained  May  19, 1773.  At 
the  outbreak  of  the  Revolution  (1775)  he  fled  to  Nor- 
wich,  wherc  he  remained  only  a  short  time,  as  his 
health  had  become  cnfecbled.  He  went  to  New  Haven, 
and  on  his  return  stopped  at  Hartford,  where  he  died, 
Aug.  25, 1775.— Sprague,  A  rnials  ofthe  A  merican  Pulpit, 
i,  707  eq. 

Howe,  Joaiah,  an  English  divine  of  the  17th  cen- 
tury,  bom  at  Crendon,  Bucks  County,  was  educated  at 
Oxford,  and  obtained  a  fellowship  at  Trinity  College,  of 
that  Univer8ity,  in  1637.  He  found  great  favor  with 
Charles  I,  at  whosc  command  he  was  admitted  to  the 
dcgrec  of  bachelor  of  diyinity  ui  1646.  After  the  min 
of  the  royal  housc  he  was  cjected  from  his  fellowship, 
but  was  rcstored  to  his  prcfcrment  ofter  the  restoration 
of  the  monarchy.  He  died  in  1701.  See  Wood,  A  then. 
Oxon,  YoL  iii ;  Gorton,  Biog,  Diet,  ii,  s.  v. 

Howe,  Nathaniel,  a  Congregational  minister, 
was  bom  in  IpsM'ich,  Mass.,  Oct.  6, 1764.  He  graduated 
at  Har^'ard  College  in  1786,  and  was  ordained  pastor  at 
Hopkinton  Oct.  5, 1791,  where  he  labored  until  his  death, 
Feb.  15,  1837.  He  published  An  Attempt  to prove  that 
John's  Baptism  was  not  Gospel  Baptiam,  being  a  Reply 
to  Dr.  Baldicin*s  Essay  on  the  same  Subject  (1820) : — A 
Catechism  with  misceUaneous  Ouestions,  and  a  Chapter 
of  Prorerbs  for  the  ChUdren  under  his  parochial  Care, 
See  Sprague,  Annals,  ii,  307;  North  American  Retiew, 
iv,  93-97. 

Howell,  Horatio  S.,  a  Presb3rteTian  minister,  bom 
ncar  Trenton,  N.  J.,  in  1820,  was  educated  at  Princeton 
CJollcge,  and  the  Union  Theological  Seminary,  N.  Y.  In 
1846  he  was  ordained  pastor  of  East  W^iteland  Church, 
Pa.  He  subseąuently  bccamc  pastor  of  the  Church  at 
Elkton,  Md.,  and  at  the  Delaware  Water  Gap,  Pł  While 
he  was  laboring  at  this  latter  place  the  Eebellion  broke 
out.  He  at  once  entered  the  army  as  chaplain  of  the 
90th  Regiment  PennsyWania  Yolunteers.  His  reputa- 
tion  as  chaplain  was  pre-eminent  for  ardMous,  zealous, 
and  judidous  deyotion.    He  was  killed  at  the  battle  of 


(i^ettyabnig,  Pa^  July  1, 1868^Wil8on,  Pm.  flttf.  ii  bia- 
fiar,1864. 

Howell,  Ławrence,  a  distinguished  Nonjunnr, 
was  bom  soon  afler  the  Kestoration,  about  1660.  He 
studied  at  Jesus  College,  Cambridge,  wherc  he  gradua- 
ted B.A.  in  1684,  and  M.A.  in  1688.  Having  enterod 
the  Church,  he  was  ordained  in  1712  by  the  nonjuring 
bishop.  Dr.  Hickes,  who  had  taken  the  title  of  su^gan 
bishop  of  Thetford.  He  soon  after  published  a  pam- 
phlet  entitled  The  Case  ofSckim.  tn  the  Churdi  ofEmg- 
land  truły  stated,  for  which  he  was  committed  to  New- 
gate,  convicted,  and  condemned  to  three  years'  impris- 
onment,  besides  whipping,  a  fine  of  £500,  and  dcgnida- 
tion.  This  Utter  part  waa  remitted  him,  howcver,  by 
the  king.  He  died  in  Ncwgate  in  1720.  Whatevcr  hia 
errors,  the  punishment  appears  to  have  been  dispiopor- 
donate  to  his  offence.  He  was  a  man  of  exten8ive 
leaming  and  great  capacity.  He  wiote  Synopsis  Cano- 
num  S,S,  ApoBtohrum  et  Condliorum  (Ecumenicorum  et 
Provincialium  abEcdesia  Graca  receptorum  (1708,  foL) : 
^Synops,  Canon,  Eceks,  Lat,  (1710-1715,  fol.)  t^A  Yitw 
of  the  Pontificate  from  Us  supposed  begimung  to  the  end 
ofthe  Couneil  of  Trent,  etc  (Lond.  1716, 8vo)  '.^Detidc- 
Hus,  or  the  original  Pilgrim;  a  dirine  Dialogue  (from 
the  Spanish)  (Lond.  1717, 12mo) : — A  compUte  History 
of  the  Holy  Bibie,  with  additions  by  Itev,  Geo.  Bnidcr 
(Lond.  1806, 8  vola.  8vo)  '^-^Certain  Oueries  proposed  by 
Roman  Catholies,  etc  (Lond.  1716) ;  etc— Darling,  Cy- 
clopadia  BUAiographica,  i,  1563 ;  Hook,  Eecles,  Biog,  vi, 
199 ;  Hoefer,  Nouv,  Biog,  Gen.  xxv,  818  są.    (J.  N.  F.) 

Howell,  Robert  Boyte  Crawford,  D.D.,  a 

prominent  Baptist  preacher  in  Tennessee,  was  bora  in 
Wayne  County,  North  CaroUna,  March  10, 1801.  Ile 
pursued  his  literaiy  and  Łheological  studies  in  Coluin- 
bian  College,  also  the  study  of  medicine,butwithout  in- 
tending  its  practicc  With  this  prcparation,  he  entered 
upon  the  duties  of  the  ministry  in  the  Episcopal  Chmrch, 
of  which  his  family  were  communicants;  but,quite  un- 
expectedly  to  his  friends,  he  soon  joined  the  Baptista, 
traveUing  fourteen  miles  to  reach  the  nearest  Baptist 
church  for  this  purposc,  Feb.  6, 1821.  Five  days  after^ 
wards  he  received  liccnse  to  preach  the  doctrinea  of  the 
Baptist  Church.  At  Washington  he  perfoTmed,in  con- 
nection  with  his  theological  studies,  the  duties  of  a  dty 
missionary,  and  for  a  year  after  the  complction  of  his 
course  he  was  a  roissionaiy  in  Yirginia.  He  then  accepted 
a  cali  to  the  pastorate  ofthe  Cumberiand  Street  Baptist 
Church  in  Norfolk.  He  was  ordained  Jan.  27, 1 827.  A 
revival  immediately  foUowed,  as  the  fmits  of  which  he 
baptized  about  200  within  a  few  months.  His  labors 
continued  herc  for  eight  years.  In  1884  he  removed  to 
Nash^ńlle,  Tenn.  The  First  Baptist  Chuitrh  had  been 
dispersed  by  the  Rev.  Alexander  Campbell  and  hia  dia- 
ciples,  but  under  Mr.  Howell's  labors  it  was  revived  and 
built  up.  He  cstablished,  and  for  some  time  edited  a 
religious  newspaper.  Hc  exertcd  morę  influence  in 
the  support  of  missions  than  any  other  minister  of  the 
denomination  in  Tennessee.  After  the  organization  of 
the  Southem  Baptist  Convcntion,  hc  was  electcd  and 
re-elected  its  president.  In  1860  he  removed  to  Rich- 
mond, Ya.,  where,  in  addition  to  the  charge  of  a  church, 
hc  was  a  tmstee  of  Richmond  College,  and  ofthe  Rich- 
mond Female  Institute,  a  mcmber  of  the  Southem  Bap- 
tist Foreign  Mission,  Publication,  and  Sunday  -  school 
Boards,  and  of  the  Yirginia  Baptist  Misaion  and  Educc- 
tional  Board.  In  1857  he  yielded  to  en  urgent  cali  to 
reoccupy  his  former  field  of  labor  in  N8shville.  Thcrc, 
besides  effidently  prcmoting  all  the  State  Baptist  organ- 
izations,  he  was,  by  appointment  of  the  Legiflature,  a 
trustee  of  the  Institution  for  the  Blind,  and  in  other  ed- 
ucational  trusts.  His  labors  were  arduous ;  in  addition 
to  which,  he  performcd  a  considerable  amount  of  literały 
work,  including  some  ofhis  most  uaeful  books.  He  died 
in  1 867,  greatly  honored  and  lamented.  Dr.  Howell  was 
a  man  of  commanding  prcscnce  and  dignified  addresa, 
wann  and  genial  in  his  manners.     His  labon  as  a 


HOWGILL 


381 


HOYER 


pieacher  of  Łhe  Gospel  were  abmidanŁ  and  sucoeasful, 
and  »me  of  his  pablUhed  works  hjul  a  wide  circulation 
in  thifl  Goimti^%  and  were  republished  in  England.  He 
was  Łbe  authcn-  ofJCeiU  ąflnfofd  Baptism : — The  Cross : 
— The  CorematUs: — The  Early  BapHsts  of  Virtiuna  :— 
Oh  Commttnhn:—The  Deticonship  :-^The  Way  of  Sal- 
ration,  He  left  several  works  in  manuscript,  among 
them,  "The  Christology  of  the  Pentateuch,"  an  enlarge- 
ment  of  '^  The  Covenaiits,"  aud  "  The  Family."  He  was 
alao  a  frcąuent  conUibuŁor  to  the  peńodicals  of  his 
Church.    (L.E.S.) 

Howgill,  Frakcis,  a  noted  pieacher  of  ^the 
Fiiends,**  was  bom  about  1688  in  Westmoreland,  Eng- 
land. He  was  brought  up  and  educated  in  the  Church 
of  England,  but  withdrew  from  the  uational  Church  af- 
ter  graduation  in  the  unirersityi  and  joincd  the  Inde- 
pendenta, among  whom  he  held  an  emtnent  podtion  as 
minister.  In  1652  he  became  an  adherent  to  the  doc- 
trinea  of  George  Fox,  the  Quaker.  Two  years  later,  he 
set  out  with  two  others  of  the  Sodety  of  Fiiends  to 
preach  their  doctrines  for  the  first  time  at  London.  He 
eTen  went  beftire  the  protector  Cromwell,  to  seek  his  in- 
fluence in  aid  of  the  Qiuker8,  who  were  then  greatly 
persecnted,  both  in  the  country  and  at  London ;  but  he 
does  not  seem  to  have  been  suoccssful  in  his  effort  He 
escaped,  however,  after  this  interview,  all  personal  mo- 
lestation  aa  long  as  he  continued  preaching  in  London. 
He  and  his  friends  next  went  to  Bristol,  where  they  met 
with  much  better  success.  "  Multitudes  fłocked  to  hear 
them,  and  many  embraced  their  doctrine."  The  dergy 
became  alaimed,  and  Howgill  and  his  oolaborers  were 
snmmoncd  before  the  magbtratcs,  and  commanded  to 
leare  the  city  immediaŁely.  Considering  themselyes 
entitled  to  remain,  as  "  free-boni  Englishmen,"  they  tar- 
ried  in  the  city,  and  continued  to  meet  with  success. 
In  1663  we  find  Howgill  at  Kendal,  again  summoned  be- 
fore the  justices  of  the  place,  who  tendered  him  the  oath 
of  allegiance,  and  on  his  conscientlous  refusal  of  it  com- 
mitted  him  to  prison,  in  whicU  he  remained  until  his 
death,  Jan.  20, 1688.  Howgill  wrote  a  copious  treatise 
against  oaths  while  in  prison.  He  also  published  The 
DawHutffS  of  the  Gospel  Day,  and  iłs  Light  and  Glory 
diseovered  (Lond.  1676,  fol.).  See  Neale,  J/istonf  of  the 
PwriiaM  (Harper*8  ediL),  ii,  413, 420 ;  Gough,  Jlist,  ofthe 
Quahers,  i,  112, 126, 144,  etc. ;  U,  81,  96  sa.,  236  są.  (J. 
H.W.) 

Howie,  Jou:ff  a  Scotch  Presbyterian,  was  bom  at 
Lochgoin  Nov.  14,  1785.     His  father  died  when  John 
wos  only  one  year  old,  and  he  was  removed  to  his  grand- 
parents'at  BlackhDl, where  he  recdved  a  limitcd  educa- 
tion.    In  1766  he  retumed  to  the  farm  of  Lochgoin,  to 
pimue  the  study  of  Church  history  and  religious  biog- 
rsphy,  to  whidi  he  had  deroted  much  of  his  time  for 
serend  years.     In  1767  his  early  religious  impressions 
asBumed  the  form  of  dedded  piety,  and  he  determined 
to  sen-e  the  Church  by  preparing  the  book  for  which  he 
is  odebrated,  The  Sootch  Worthies.    <"  It  is  a  work  of  no 
inconaderablc  labor;  for,  though  the  biographical  Infor- 
mation he  had  procured,  and  with  which  his  powerful 
memory  was  richly  storcd,  must  have  greatly  fadlitated 
the  task,  ^'et,  liring  remote  from  dties,  and  almost  shut 
out  from  the  abodes  of  drilized  life,  the  difficulty  of  oor- 
respondenoe  and  the  want  of  books  must  have  tended 
not  a  Uttle  to  render  his  task  both  painful  and  irksoroe. 
Under  all  theae  disadrantages,  however,  did  Mr.  Iłowie, 
in  the  sedusion  of  Lochgoin,  bring  the  work  to  a  suc- 
ceatful  termtnatbn.    The  first  edidon  appeared  in  1774, 
md  a  second,  greatly  enlarged,  in  1786  (new  edit,  rc- 
▼isedfcorrected,  and  enlarged,  with  a  preface  and  notes 
by  Wm.  HcGa^ńn,  Edinb.  and  N.  Y.,  18d8, 8vo).     Like 
the  *Fdgrim's  Progress,'  it  has  been  long  so  extensively 
popular  with  all  daases  of  the  community,  that  it  has 
Mcored  for  itsdf  a  poeition  ftom  which  it  will  neyer  be 
didodged,  as  lanQ  as  Presbyterianism,  and  a  religious  at- 
Uchment  to  the  oovenanted  work  of  Beformation,  con- 
tiaue  to  engage  the  attention  of  the  natiyea  of  Scot- 


land.** Besides  this  work,  Mr.  Howie  pnblished,  1.  a 
collection  of  Lecłures  tmd  SermonSj  by  some  of  the  moet 
eminent  ministers,  preached  during  the  stormiest  daya 
of  the  Persecution :— 2.  An  Alann  to  a  secure  Genem- 
iion: — 3.  FaiU\ful  Contendings  displayed;  an  account  of 
the  suffering  remnant  of  the  Church  of  Scotland  from 
1681-1691:— 4.  Faithful  WUness-hearing  eiemplified:— 
5.  PatroTuige  Awtłoniizedy  a  work  which,  next  to  the 
"Scots*  Worthies,"  must  be  rcgardcd  as  superior  to  all 
his  other  writiugs: — 0.  Yitidicałion  ofthe  Modes  ofhatir 
dUng  the  JClements  in  the  Lords  Supper  bffore  giving 
Thanks ;  writton  during  the  controrersy  on  this  subject 
among  the  Antiburgher  seceders :— 7.  ClarksoiCs  jdaui 
Reasonsfor  Disseniing,  with  a  preface  and  notes,  and  an 
abstract  of  the  principles  of  the  Reformed  presbytery 
regarding  civil  govemment :— 8.  Pi-eface  to  Mr.  Brown 
of  Wan^ray^s  TA>okmg^-gUu8  ofthe  Law  and  the  Gos- 
pel Howie  died  in  Śept.  1791.  "  He  was,  indeed,  a 
marked  character,  whether  at  home,  in  the  public  mar- 
ket, or  at  church ;  and  wherevcr  he  went,  the  femc  of 
his  piety  and  raried  acquiremenŁs  contributed  greatly 
to  his  influence"  (Biogr.  Sketch  prefixed  to  the  Amer. 
editiou  of  his  "Scotch  Worthies").— Allibone,  Diet,  of 
.4u<Aor«,i,905.     (J.H.W.) 

Howley,  William,  D.D.,  an  English  prelate,  was 
bom  at  Ropley,  Hampshire,  in  1765.  He  was  educated 
at  Winchester  school,  and  in  1783  went  to  New  College, 
Oxford.  He  was  electcd  fellow  iu  1785,  became  canon 
of  Christ  Church  iu  1804,  regius  professor  of  dirinity  in 
1809,  bishop  of  London  in  1813,  and,  flnally,  archbishop 
of  Canterbury  in  1828.  He  died  in  1848.  His  princi- 
pal  works  are  Sernwn  [on  Isa.  lir,  13]  (London,  1814, 
8vo) : — Sermon  [on  Psa.  xx,  7, 8]  (Thanksgiying,  when 
the  eagles  taken  at  Waterloo  were  dcposited  in  the 
Chapd  Royal,  Whitehall)  (Lond.  1816, 4to)  i—A  Charge 
delirered  to  Łlie  Clergy  ofthe  Diocese  of  London  at  the 
yisUation  o/"  1818  (Lond.  1818, 8 vo):—^  Charge  delie- 
ered  to  the  Clergy  ofthe  Diocese  of  London  in  July^  1826 
(Lond.  1826, 4to).— Darling,  CyclojKudia  Bibliographica, 
i,  1564. 

HowBon,  JoHX,  an  English  divinc,  bom  in  London 
in  1656,  was  educated  at  Christ  Church,  Oxford.  He 
fiUed  succesńvdy  the  ricarate  of  Bampton,  in  Oxford- 
shire,  the  rectorate  at  Brightwell,  in  Berkshire,  and  then 
became  fellow  of  Chelsea  College,  and  canon  of  Herc- 
ford.  In  1619  he  was  ap]K)inted  bishop  of  Oxford,  and 
was  transferred  to  the  bishopric  of  Durham  in  1628. 
He  was  also  at  one  time  vice-chaiicellor  of  Oxford. 
While  in  this  position  **  he  exerted  himsdf  agauist  thoae 
Puritans  who  opposed  the  discipline  and  ceremonies,but 
was  afterwards  a  morę  distinguished  ii-riter  and  preach- 
er  against  poi^ery."  He  died  m  1681.  Howson  was  the 
author  of  a  number  of  sermons  (published  1597-1661) ; 
and  four  of  his  polemical  discourses  against  the  suprem- 
acy  of  St.  Peter  were  published  by  order  of  king  James 
I, "to  elear  the  aspersions  laid  upon  him  (Howson)  of 
fayoring  popery"  (1622,  4to).  See  Hook,  Ecdes,  Biogr. 
vi,  202 ;  Allibone,  Diet,  ofA  uthors,  i,  908. 

Hoyer,  Anka,  a  German  enthusiast,  was  bora  at 
CroldenbUttd,  near  Eiderstadt  (Schleswig),  in  1584. 
Her  maiden  name  was  Owen.  In  1599  she  married  a 
noblenum  called  Hoyer,  and  when  he  died  she  retired 
to  one  of  her  estates,  where  she  devoted  hersdf  to  belles- 
lettres  and  poetry.  Becoming  acąuainted  with  an  al- 
chemist  named  Teting,  who  attended  her  during  a  sick- 
ness,  she  was  soon  fascinated  by  the  views  of  the  mys- 
tic,  whom  she  took  into  her  house,  and  considered  as  a 
prophet.  She  aflerwanls  joined  the  Anabaptists,  and 
thought  herself  inspired.  Her  ardor  in  making  prose- 
lytes  caused  her  to  lose  nearly  her  whole  fortunę,  and, 
leaving  her  country,  she  went  to  Swcdeii,  where  she 
fuund  a  protector  in  queen  Eleonora  Maria,  who  pre- 
sented  her  with  an  estate  on  which  she  resided  until 
her  death  in  1656.  Her  views,  derived  from  Paraod- 
sus,  David  Joris,  Schwenckfcld,Wdgel,  and  other  mys- 
ticSf  are  exprc8Bed  in  indifferent  yeises  iu  her  Worki 


HOZAI 


382 


HUBER 


(Amsterd.  1650).  Some  of  her  writings  were  directed 
ag«inst  the  Lutheniu.  See  J.  G.  Feuchtking,  CynecoB- 
um  harei,  fanaJU  p.  856  8q. ;  Amoldi  A'trcAen-«.  KeUer- 
hist.  iii,  10, 14;  Hoefer,  Aotir.  Biog.  Gen.  xxv,  819. 

Hosal  (Heb.  Chozay%  ''Tin,  teer;  Sept.  oć  opUm-łc, 
Vulg.  Hozai,  Auth.  Yers. "  the  aeere,"  maig. «  Hosai"),  a 
pTophet  or  secr,  the  historiographer  of  Manasseh,  king 
of  Judah  (2  Chroń,  xxxiii,  19).  RC  p.  642.  The  Jews 
are  of  opinion  that  Uosai  and  Isaiah  are  the  same  per- 
son ;  the  Sept,  Łakes  Hosai  in  a  generał  eense  for  proph- 
ets  and  seers :  the  Syriac  calls  him  Ifanan,  the  Arabie 
SapkafK—Calmet,  a.  v.  Bertheau  (Chronik,  Einleit.  p. 
85)  conjcctures  that  ^1^T^  is  herc  a  comipt  rendering  for 
0*^^*1^!,  as  in  ver.  18 ;  but  for  this  there  is  only  the  au- 
thority  of  a  ńngle  Codex  and  the  Sept.  (DavidBon,  Re^ 
fńnon  o/Heb,  Textt  p.  221,  b).    Seo  Chronicles. 

HrabanuE.    See  It.vBANus. 

Hroswitha.    Sec  I^oswitiia. 

Hu,  the  most  eminent  god  of  the  Celtic  religion, 
originally  the  founder  of  the  religion  of  the  Druida. 
See  vol.  ii,  p.  180. 

Huarte,  Jl-an,  the  rcpresentative  of  Spanish  phi- 
losophy  in  the  Middle  Ages,  was  a  Frenchman  by  birth, 
and  bom  about  1530.  lie  was  cducatcd  at  the  Univer- 
sity  of  Huesca,  and  aftcrwards  deroted  himself  to  the 
study  of  medicine  and  philosophy.  The  work  to  which 
he  owes  his  great  reputation  is  entitled  Eiamm  de  Jn- 
genioSf  para  ku  sciencias  donde  de  muestra  la  diff&tncia 
de  habUidades  que  hay  en  los  hombreSj  y  elgenero  de  letrat 
guecada  uno  responde  en  parHcular  officina  plantiniana 
(1593 ;  sm.  8vo,  Pamplon.  1575,  and  often).  This  work 
aims  to  show,  *^  by  mar\'ellous  and  tiseful  secrets,  drawn 
from  true  philosophy,  both  natural  and  divine,  the  gifts 
and  diifcrent  abilitics  found  in  man,  and  for  what  kind 
of  study  the  genius  of  crery  man  is  adapted,  in  siich  a 
manner  that  whoever  shall  rcad  this  book  atteutively 
will  discover  the  properties  of  his  own  genius,  and  be 
able  to  make  choice  of  that  science  in  which  he  will 
make  the  greatest  improvement."  It  has  been  trans- 
lated  into  English  by  Carew  and  Bellamy,  under  the 
title  Trial  ofthe  Wite;  iiito  German  by  Lessing  {Prii- 
fung  der  KOpfe\  and  into  many  other  languagea. 
Huarte  has  been  8everely  reproached  for  having  pub- 
lished  as  gcnuine  a  spurious  letter  of  Lentulus,  the  pro- 
cousul,  from  Jcnisalem,  in  which  a  description  of  the 
Sa\*iour's  person  is  given.  He  died  iiear  the  dose  of 
the  16th  century.  See  Antonio,  Bibiioth.  Uitpana  nocoy 
i,  543;  Bayle,  łligłor.  Diet,  iii,  628;  Ticknor,  Ilietory  of 
Spanish  Lit. iii,  189 ;  Uoefcr,  Aour. Biog,  GineraUy xxr, 
883  sq.     (J.H.W.) 

Hubald.    Sec  Uucbald. 

Hubbard,  Austin  Osgpood,  a  Congregational 
minister,  was  bom  in  Sunderlaiid,  ^fass.,  Aug.  9, 1800. 
He  was  educatcd  at  Yale  College,  where  he  graduated 
in  1824.  He  pursued  his  theological  studies  under  the 
dircction  of  the  Presbytery  of  Baltimore,  teaching  at 
the  same  time  in  the  academy  at  Franklin,  Md.  He 
was  licensed  to  preach  in  1826,  and  labored  as  a  mis- 
sionary  some  two  years  in  Frederick  County,  Md.  From 
1831  to  1833  he  was  at  Princeton  Theological  Seminary 
in  further  theological  studies,  and  preaching  to  vacant 
chuTches  in  the  ^ńcinity.  In  1833,  during  Dr.  Alexan- 
der'8  abeence  in  Europę,  Mr.  Hubbard  was  appointed 
assistant  professor  of  Biblical  Literaturę.  In  1835  he 
went  to  Melbourne,  C.  E.,  and  labored  as  a  missionary. 
In  1840  he  removc<l  to  Hardwick,Vt.,  and  was  installed 
pastor  of  the  Congregational  Church  in  that  place  July 
7th,  1841.  In  1845  he  was  called  to  Bamet,yt.,  and 
preached  there  until  1851.  In  1855  he  accepted  a  cali 
to  Crafte8bury,Vt,  where  he  remained  until  the  death 
of  his  wife  in  the  fali  of  1857,  when  he  became  mentally 
and  physically  prostrated,  and  he  was  removed  to  the 
Termont  Insane  Asylum  in  March,  1858,  where  he  died 
Aug.  24th,  1858.  He  published  Five  Diseourses  on  the 
morał  ObUgation  and  the  partictdar  Duties  ąftke  Salh 


hath  (Harm.,  K.  H.,  1848, 16mo>  <<Fervent  piety  ani 
thorough  Bchołarship  combined  to  render  him  a  faithfiil 
and  able  minister  of  the  New  Testament  His  iriewa 
of  divine  truth  wero  elear  and  strong,  his  manner  of  pr»- 
senting  them  forcible  and  impressiye.  His  sennoiłs 
were  logical,  and  weighty  with  matter." — CongregaHem- 
al  OHarlerly,  i,  412  sq. 

Hnbbard,  John,  an  English  dirine  and  adherent, 
of  tlie  ** Independenta,**  was  bom  about  1692.  He  was, 
at  first  assistant  at  a  church  in  Stepney,  and  after  the 
decease  of  Dr.  Taylor  succeeded  him  as  pastor  of  a 
oongiegation  at  Deptford.  This  poaitton  he  hdd  for 
twenty-two  yean  ¥rith  distinguished  skill,  fidelity,  and 
diligenoe.  In  1740  be  was  appointed  to  the  dirinity 
chair  of  the  academy  of  the  Independenta  at  Londoo. 
*'  He  applied  himself  to  the  duties  of  this  office  with  ex- 
emplary  diligenoe,  and  the  most  pleaaing  hopes  were 
entertained  of  matiy  years  of  usefulneas;  bul  they  wera 
extinguished  by  his  decease  in  July,  1743."  He  pub- 
lished Two  Sermons  at  Coward's  Lecture  (London,  1729. 
8vo).  Ninę  of  his  sermons  are  in  the  Berry  Stieet 
(Coward's  Lectore)  JSermons  (2d  ed.  2  vols.  8vo,'l7a9>. — 
Bogue  and  Benoett,  Hist.  o/Dissenfers  (2d  ediu),  ii,  219 
8q.;  Allibone, />Kr.  o/Authors,  i,  909. 

Hubbard,  177illiam,  a  Congregational  minister, 
was  bom  in  England  in  1621,  and  came  to  this  country 
with  his  parents  in  1630.  He  was  educated  at  Harvard 
College,  where  he  graduated  in  1642,  a  member  of  the 
first  class.  He  is  said  to  have  pursued  a  course  of  the- 
ological studies  with  the  Rev.  Mr.  Cobbet,  of  Ipswich, 
whom  he  also  assisted  in  the  pulpit.  He  was  ordained 
about  1 656.  In  1685  Mr.  Cobbet  died,  and  Hubbard  be^ 
came  his  successor.  In  1686  he  served  as  assistant  to  the 
Kev.  John  Dennison,  gramlson  of  Major  General  Den- 
nison, who  was  also  a  graduate  of  Har\'aTd  (1684).  In 
1689  Dennison  died,  and,  about  three  years  after,  the 
Rev.  John  Rogers,  sou  of  the  president  of  Har\'anl,  be- 
came Hubbard*s  coUeague.  In  1703,  enfeebled  by  age, 
Hubbard  was  obliged  to  resign  his  charge,  and  the  pco- 
ple  yoted  him  sixty  pounds  as  a  gratuity.  He  died 
Sept.  14, 1704.  His  writings  were  mainly  on  the  his- 
tory  of  New  England,  and  he  lefl  a  work  in  MS.  which 
has  been  of  senrice  to  American  historiana.  He  pub- 
lished a  Narratire  ofthe  Trotddes  with  the  fndimufrom 
1607-1677,  tcith  a  IHscourse  (Bost,  1677, 4to)  -^Sermons 
(1676, 1682, 1684) :— and,  in  connection  with  the  Ber. 
John  Higginson,  of  Salem,  Testimony  to  the  Order  ofthe 
Gospel  in  the  Churches  (1701).  Hubbard  is  represented 
by  his  contemporaries  to  have  been  "  for  many  yeaza  the 
most  eminent  minister  in  the  county  of  Es8ex,  equal  to 
any  in  the  province  for  Icaniing  and  candor,  and  supe- 
rior to  all  his  contemporaries  as  a  writer.*' — Sprague, 
A  tmals  A  mer.  Pulpit,  i,  148  są. ;  Allibone,  Dietionary  of 
^ttMor«,  1,909. 

Hnbberthom,  Richard,  a  celebrated  Qaaker  of 
the  17th  century,  was  at  first  a  preacher  in  the  Pariia- 
mcnt*s  army,  but  he  afterwards  joined  the  QuakerB,  and, 
in  accordance  Mrith  their  princij^es  of  peace,  ąuitted  the 
army.  After  preaching  some  nine  yean,  he  was  im- 
prisoned  on  acoount  of  his  religious  belief,  and  died  from 
the  effects  at  Newgate,  June  17, 1662.  Hubberthoni 
was  one  of  the  Quakcr8  liberated  by  king  Charles  upon 
his  marriage  with  Catharine  of  Braganza,  who  ordered 
*'  the  release  of  Quakers  and  others  in  jail  in  London 
and  Middle8ex  for  being  present  at  unlawfitl  assemblies, 
who  yet  profess  all  obedience  and  allegiance,  prorided 
they  are  not  indicted  for  refusing  the  oath  of  alleigiance. 
nor  have  been  ringleaders  nor  preachers  at  their  aasem- 
blies,  hoping  thereby  to  reduce  them  to  a  better  eon- 
formity."  Just  before  this  event,  Hubberthom,  together 
with  George  Fox,  had  addressed  the  king  and  demand- 
ed  the  liberation  of  their  suflcring  brethren. — Neal,  Wig', 
ofthe  Puritansj  ii,  418 ;  Stoughton,  Eccles.  Hist.  of  Eng- 
land, i,276. 

Huber,  Johann  Ludwig,  a  German  author  who 
at  first  studied  theology,  but  afterwards  devoted  his  time 


HUBER 


883 


HUBMAYER 


msiiily  to  the  stndy  of  jurisprodenee,deflenres  our  no- 
tioe  on  iccoant  of  łds  Vemu^  mit  Gott  tu  redkn  (sacred 
soogs)  (ReusL  1775;  Tubing.  1787).  He  died  at  Stutt^ 
gaidtinlSOO.  (J.H.W.) 
Hnber,  Kaspar.  See  Hubert^^us. 
Haber,  Maria,  a  cdebrated  mystic,  was  bom  at 
Geneva  in  1694.  She  retired  into  soUtude  in  171*2,  to 
indulge  in  contemplation  and  mysticUm.  She  after- 
wards  returned  to  live  in  Genera,  joincd  the  Roman 
Church,  and  died  at  Lyons  in  1759.  She  is  generally 
namcd  as  a  deiat,  yet  her  opinions  partook  rather  of  ex- 
trame  mystidai]]  than  of  infidelity.  Her  principal  works 
are  Letirea  tur  la  reliffion  ettentielle  a  łhomme  (Amsterd. 
1788 ;  Lood.  1789, 2  roK),  in  which  **  she  traces  all  reHg- 
jon  to  the  morał  neoeasities  of  the  heart,  and  oonsideis 
revelatłon  a  merę  auxiliary  to  natural  theology,  a  meana 
of  interpretiog  it  to  our  own  consciousness**  (Hagenbach, 
Gtrm,  RtUumaiiMmj  p.  56  8q.) : — ReeueUde  direrses  piśce* 
9ervamt  de  suppUmcnt  aux  Lettre$  tur  Ut  religum,  etc. 
(BerL  1754, 2  vols. ;  Lond.  1756) :— /^  mondefou  prłftri 
au  monde  ttufe^  dieitś  en  troit  parties^faitant  iAprome- 
nadet  (whence  the  work  is  sometimcs  styled  Prtme- 
nadat)  (Amst.  1731  and  1744):— 7^  Sytttme  tlet  fhMo- 
gknt  anciau  et  modemett  tur  Feiai  det  dmet  tepariea  det 
corpt  (Amst.  1731, 1733, 1739)  i—Reduction  du  Speciałeur 
Anglma  a  ce  qu'U  renferme  de  meUltur,  etc  (Par.  1753, 
12mo).  Senebier  oonsiilers  her  as  the  author  of  the  /lit- 
toire  d^Abattatf  (1753, 8vo),  which  is  generally  attriba- 
ted  to  Mins  Faiique.  See  Senebier,  HitL  litiir.  de  Genere, 
iii,  84;  Haag,  La  France  Protettante;  Pierer;  Hoefer, 
Aonr.  Bioff,  ĆiniraUj  xxa',  844. 

Hnber,  Samuel,  a  German  theologian,  was  bom 
at  Beme  in  1547.  He  studied  theology  in  Germany, 
and  became  pastor  at  Burgdorf.  He  was  much  given 
to  controver9y,  especially  in  behalf  of  the  Lutheran  doc- 
trine  on  the  Lord's  Supper.  Censured  for  a  speech  he 
madę  on  the  15th  of  April,  1588,  he  nerertholess  con- 
tinoed  to  attack  the  doctrines  of  the  Reformed  Church, 
and  was,  in  oonseąuenoe,  first  imprisoned,  and  then  ex- 
łkd.  In  July,  1588,  he  went  to  Tubingen,  where  he 
joined  the  Latheran  Church.  He  became  pastor  of 
Doiedingen,  and  in  1592  professor  nt  Wittenberg.  His 
beiief  in  free  grace,  and  in  the  uiiivcr«lity  of  the  atone- 
ment,  brought  him  into  antagonizm  with  Hunnius,  Ley- 
ser,  and  Gcsner  (1592) ;  the  bieach  between  them  was 
not  healcd  by  pubhc  discussiom  held  at  Wittenberg  and 
Regensburg  in  1 591.  Huber  has  been  wrongly  ch«rge<l 
with  teaching  the  doctrine  of  uniyersal  salration.  He 
was  a  determined  opponent  of  the  Calvinistic  doctrine 
of  prcJestination,  and  held  that  the  words  ''deciec"  and 
"ekction"  were  equiralcnt  to  *<gracious  invitation," 
which  God  extends  to  all  men  without  distinction. 
"  Bot,  to  mAke  their  calling  and  election  surę,  they  must 
repent  and  beliere.*'  Driven  out  of  Hesae-Casscl  in 
1591,  he  reńded  for  some  time  at  Jena,  Hclmstiidt,  and 
Godar.  He  died  March  25, 1624.  The  most  important 
among  his  numerous  works  are  Chritium  ette  mortuum 
propeceaiit  onmium  hommum  (Tubing.  1590)  iSettSnr 
diget  Behenninitt  (1597)  i^Anti-BeUarnumt  ((JosL  1607, 
6  vols.).  See  ^  eto  Iluberiana  (TUb.  1597 ;  LUb.  1598) ; 
Góue,  Ac(a  Hub,  (Lab.  1707);  Schmid.  l^ebenabetchrep- 
bvag  (Helmst  1708) ;  Pfaff,  Inirod,  in  Jiitt,  Liter.  TheoL 
pt.  ii,  bk.  iii,  p.  431 ;  Arnold,  Keizerhitlorie,  i,  952 ;  Mos- 
heim,  CA.  Hittory,  iii,  158. 

Hubetinns  (Huber),  Kaspar,  a  Bavarian  monk, 
afterwards  a  oonvert  to  Protestantism,  was  bom  near 
the  cUmc  of  the  15th  century.  He  became  a  Protestant 
preacher  in  1525  at  Augsburg,  and  was  appointed  to  a 
chorch  at  that  place  in  1527.  He  was  a  zealous  oppo- 
nent of  the  Anabaptists,  who  wcre  quite  numerous  at 
Augsburg  about  that  time,  and  he  abo  engaged  in  the 
Berne  disputations  on  the  ministiation  of  the  sacrament. 
He  was  in  faror  of  the  Lutheran  doctrine  on  this  point, 
and  in  1536  he  went  to  Wittenberg,  to  oonsult  with  Lu- 
ther  penonally,  and  to  regain  for  Augsbuig  the  oelebrar 
ted  Urfaanus  Rlicsius  (q.  v.).    Huberiaua  was  also  ac- 


tirely  engaged  in  introdocing  the  Reformation  in  the 
Pfalz,  and  in  the  tcrritory  of  Hohenk>he.  In  1551  he 
retumed  to  Augsburg  as  preacher,  bat  as  he  alone  of  the 
Protestant  preachcrs  at  Augsburg  had  accepted  the  In- 
terim (q.  V.),  he  was  obliged  to  leave  the  city  in  1552, 
and  died  of  grief  at  Gehringen  Oct.  6, 1553.  Huberinus 
wrote  quite  extensiyely;  among  other  works,  we  ha\'e 
from  his  pen  Trdttlicker  Sermon  r.  d  Urttetule  Chritti 
(1525)  i^Sehluttreden  r.  d,  rechien  Hond  Gottet  u.  d.  Ge- 
waU  Chritti  (1529) ;  ete.  See  Keim,  Schwab.  Ref,  Getch. 
p.  273, 278;  DdUingcr,i2c/b77na/»ofi,ii,576;  Herzog,  A«a^ 
JincjfUop&Hey  vi,  296 ;  ThcoL  Unio.  Lex.  p.  372 ;  IHerer, 
6"mr.Z«r.  viii,  569.    (J.H.W.) 

Hubert,  Leonard,  a  Belgian  theologian,  ilourish- 
ed  about  the  year  1490.  He  wcs  at  first  a  Carmelite 
monk,  afterwards  he  became  bishop  of  Darie,  then  suf- 
fragan  of  the  bishop  of  Liege,  and  finally  **  inąuisitoi^ 
of  Liege.  He  wrote  qnite  exten8ively.  His  most  cele- 
bratcd  works  are  De  Immumłate  EocUtiattica : — Ser^ 
mofW.^Hoefer,  Nouv.  Biog.  Gen.  xxv,  354. 

Hubert,  Matfaleu,  a  distinguished  French  Ro- 
man OthoUc,  bom  at  (^tlUon  in  1640,  was  a  priest  of 
the  Gongregation  of  the  Oratory,  and  one  of  the  most 
brilliant  preachers  of  his  country  and  Ghurch.  He  died 
at  Paris  in  1717.  He  published  Sermont  (Paris,  1725, 
6  yols.  12mo).— Feller,  Diet.  Ifitt.  ix,  49  sq. ;  Hook,  Ac- 
det.  Biog,  vi,  202;  Hoefer,  Nouv.  Biog.  Gen.  xxv,  355. 
(J.  H.W.) 

Hubert  (Hubbrtus),  St.,  son  of  Bertrand,  duke  of 
Gaionne,  was  high  in  office  under  Theoderic,  king  of 
the  Franks,  having  been  a  great  sportsman,  and,  accord- 
ing  to  tradition,  converted  by  a  stag  which  borę  a  shin- 
ing  cross  between  his  antlers,  and  which  spoke,  entreaU 
ing  him  to  tum  from  his  gay  life  and  8erve  the  Church. 
He  at  once  entered  the  Church,  succeeded  his  religious 
instmctor,  Lambert  (Lamprecht),  as  bishop  of  Luttich 
in  708,  and  died  in  727.  His  body  was  in  827  transfer- 
red  to  the  Benedictine  convent  of  Andain,  in  the  Ar- 
dennes,  which  thence  rccpivcd  the  name  of  St.  Iluber- 
tus,  and  it  is  herc  he  is  satd  to  havc  had  the  above- 
mentioncd  vision.  Tradition  also  holds  that  his  relics, 
by  yirtue  of  the  goldeu  hey  of  St.  Iłubert,  which  he  rc- 
ceived  from  St.  Peter,  can  cure  hydiophobia,  etc  The 
3d  of  November  {Sł.Huheii^t  day)  marks  the  end  of  the 
hunting  season,  and  was  celebrated  by  great  hunts  (St. 
Hubert*s  chase).— Pierer,  Unio.  Z«ex.  viii,  570;  Theolog. 
Unie.  Iax.  i,  372. 

Hubert,  Order  of  8Ł,  the  oldest  and  highest  or- 
der of  Bavaria,  was  founded  in  1444,  and  often  reformed, 
the  last  time  in  1808.  The  sign  of  the  order  is  a  golden 
cross  on  a  shield,  in  the  middle  of  which  is  the  pictnre 
of  St.  Hubertus  (q.  v.).    It  is  bome  on  a  golden  chain. 

Hubertłne  Annallat,  an  anonymous  writer  of 
the  chronides  of  St.  Hubert's  monastery,  flourished 
about  the  middle  of  the  llth  century.  In  his  ChnM., 
St.  Hub.  Andaginentit  the  style  of  Sallust  is  imitated. 
Bcthmann  (L.  C.)  and  Wattenbach  (W.)  issued  a  new 
edition  of  it  in  Pertz,  ScripL  ^iii,  565-630,  and  the  fol- 
lowing  opink>n  of  the  author  is  expressed  by  them: 
**Satis  habeamus  nosse,  auctoiem  operis  fuisse  virum 
inter  medias  res  versatum,  acrem  judicio,  yeritatis  stu- 
diosum :  hoc  enim  totum  ejus  dicendi  genus,  hoc  simplex 
et  sincera  reram  narratio  suadent."— Herzog,  Real-En- 
ąfklop.  vi,  296  8q. 

Hilbmayer  or  Hiibmeyer  (H(7b:ii6r),  Baltha- 
SAR,  one  of  the  most  leamed  of  the  Anabaptists,  was 
bom  at  Friedberg,  near  Augsburg,  Bayaria,  in  1480. 
He  studied  theology  and  philosophy  at  Freiburg  with 
£ck,  and  in  1512  went  with  his  teacher  to  Ingolstadt, 
where  he  became  preacher  and  professor.  In  1516  he 
werit  to  Regensburg,  where  his  ministrations  led  to  the 
expulsion  of  the  Jews;  but,  having  opeiily  expre88ed 
sentiments  favorable  to  the  Reformation,  he  was  himself 
obliged  to  leave  Regensburg,  and  taught  school  for  some 
time  in  Schaffhausen.  In  1522  he  was  appointed  pa»- 
tor  to  Waldahut,  where  he  came  under  the  influence  of 


HUBY 


984 


HUESCA 


MUnz^r,  and  embraoed  the  Anabaptut  yiews.  He  wiote 
seyeral  works  in  support  of  hia  new  riews,  moie  partie- 
ularly  upon  baptism  and  thc  aacramcnU;  but  the  ground 
which  he  took  against  his  early  coadjutor  and  intimate 
fńend  Zwingle  provoked  a  violent  rcply  from  the  latter, 
and  cauaed  the  estrangement  of  the  two  friends.  Dńv- 
en  to  Zilńch  in  1625  by  the  Auatrian  penecution  at 
Waldshut,  he  was  branded  as  a  heretic  by  Zwingle,  and, 
after  siiffering  imprlsonment,  iinaUy  fled  from  the  Aus- 
trian  tcrritory  (1526).  He  preached  a  short  tlme  at 
Constance,  and  then  joumeyed  to  Moravia.  In  1528  he 
was  arrestcd,  probably  at  BrUnn,  by  the  Austrian  aa- 
thorilics,  and  was  bunied  at  the  stake  in  Ylenna  (Maich 
10).  His  wifc,  who  steadfastly  adhered  to  Hubmayer^s 
viewSf  was  impńsonod  ^dth  him,  and  saffercd  martyr- 
dom  by  drowning.  litlbmayer  is  now  conceded  by  all 
historians  to  have  been  a  man  of  very  exalted  charoc- 
ter,  and,  although  a  fanatic  in  religion,  it  is  cert-ain  that 
he  never  favored  the  extreme  view8  of  some  of  the  Ana- 
baptists.  See  Brown,  Memoriala  of  Baptut  Marłyrs^  p. 
106  są. ;  BapHst  Quarłerły  Jłecieic,  1869  (July),  p.  833 : 
Mosheim,  cL  Hist,  iii,  203 ;  Herzog,  Real- Ency klop.  vi, 
298  są. ;  TheoL  Umr.  Lex.  i,  372.     (J.  H.  W.) 

Hllby,yiKCENT,  a  French  Roman  Catholic  theolo- 
gian,  was  bom  at  Hennebon,  in  the  Bretagne,  May  15, 
1608.  He  entercd  the  order  of  the  Jesuits  in  1643,  and 
contributed  greatly  to  the  growth  of  this  order.  He 
died  March  24,  1693.  He  wrote  a  number  of  ascetic 
works,  which  have  been  edited  by  abbć  Lenoir  Duparc, 
and  published  under  the  title  (Euvres  8piriłueUe$  (Paris, 
1753, 1761, 1769 ;  Lyons  and  Paris,  1827, 12mo) ;  also  by 
the  abbć  Baudrand  (Paris,  1767,  12mo).  See  Hoefer, 
Nouv.  Biog.  Gin,  xxv,  361. 

Hue,  £vARiSTR  Ri^TS,  a  French  Roman  Catholic 
mlssionar}',  was  bom  at  Touloosc  Aug.  1, 1813.  He  was 
educated  in  his  native  city,  and  cntcred  the  order  of  St. 
LAzarus,  and  in  1839  was  sent  as  missionary  to  China. 
After  about  three  years  of  missionary  kbor  in  the  north- 
em  districts  of  China,  he  started  with  father  Gabet,  in 
the  fali  of  1844,  to  cxplore  the  wilds  of  Tartary  and 
christianize  Thibet,  according  to  thc  directions  of  the 
apostolic  vicar  of  Mongolia.  Accompanied  by  a  single 
Chinesc  conrert,  a  young  lama,  they  rcached  the  lama 
convcnt  of  Kounboun,  where  they  acąuired  the  dialect 
of  Thibet,  Towards  the  end  of  Scptembcr,  1845,  they 
joined  a  cararan  from  China,  with  which  they  went  to 
Lhassa,  the  capital  of  Thibet.  Herę  they  were  permit- 
ted  to  remain  on  their  dcclaration  that  they  had  come 
only  for  the  purpose  of  preaching  thc  religion  of  Christ. 
But  they  had  barely  scttled  whcn  thc  Chinese  ambas- 
sador  commanded  them  to  leave  the  country.  They 
wcre  put  in  charge  of  a  Chinese  escort,  and  carricd  back 
a  jouroey  of  nearly  2000  miles  to  the  extreme  south, 
and  arrired  in  October,  1846,  at  Macao.  Herę  they 
were  subjected  to  a  trial  by  the  Chinese  tribunals,  and 
were  tinally  permitted  to  retum  to  the  station  from 
which  they  had  originally  started  on  this  Joumey. 
Hue,  whose  health  completely  failed  him,  retumed  to 
Tonlouse  in  1849,  and  gave  an  account  of  this  joumey 
in  his  Souvenir$  dTun  Voyaffe  dam  la  Tartariej  le  Thibeff 
tł  la  Chine,  pendant  lea  amues  1844, 1845,  et  1846  (Paris, 
1850,  2  vols.  8vo).  This  book  met  with  great  success, 
and  was  translated  into  yarioos  languages  (English  by 
liazlitt,  Lond.  1851,  2  voK ;  and  New  York,  1853).  It 
owed  its  great  sucoess  partly  to  its  description  of  a  coun- 
try heretofore  unknown,  and  also  to  its  livcly  style.  In 
this  work  the  abbe  also  pointed  out  the  similarities  be- 
tween  the  Boddhist  and  Roman  Catholic  ceremonials, 
and  for  it  was  punbhed  by  seeing  his  book  placed  on 
the  "  Index"  (comp.  Mtłller,  Chips  from  a  German  Worh- 
thopy  i,  187,  notę).  By  order  of  the  emperor,  he  then 
published  L^ Empire  Ckmoit, /aiaant  wite.  a  towrage 
intituU  "Sourenir  dun  Yoyage  dana  la  Tartarie  et  le 
Thibet  (Par.  1854, 2  yols.  8vo).  This  work  was  crown- 
ed  by  the  Academy.  There  are  sereral  editions  of  it, 
juid  it  was  also  translated  into  English  (N.  York,  1855, 


2  To]&  12mo).  His  laat  work,  Le  Chriatiamme  en  dum^ 
en  Tartarie,  et  au  Thibet  (Paris,  1857,  3  yola.  8to,  with 
map),  oontains  a  vast  amount  of  historical  information ; 
but  its  chief  topie  is  the  propagation  óf  Romanism  in 
China.  Hue  thinks  that  **  the  Gospel  will  soon  take  in 
Asia  the  place  now  oocupied  by  the  philosophy  of  Gon- 
fucius,  the  traditions  of  the  Buddhists,  and  the  endkas 
legcnds  of  the  Yedas;  finally,  that  Brahma,  Baddha, 
and  Mohammcd  will  disappcar  to  make  zoom  for  thc 
tme  God,"*  etc.  Hue  died  in  Paris  Marcn  31,  186<>. 
See  Chambers,  Cydopccdia,  v,  445;  Hoefer,  Aour.  liioff. 
Gin,  xxv,  361 ;  Methodiat  Ctmrterly  Remeitf  Oct.  If^Tib ; 
Christian  Exwninery  Januaiy  to  May,  1858.    (J.  H.  W.) 

Hucarius,  an  English  deacon  who  flourishcd  in  the 
llth  centur}'.  He  wrote  one  hundred  and  eight  borni- 
lies,  *^  which  were  extant  in  Leland'8  time  in  Canterbury 
College  (now  Christ  Church),  Oxfbrd,  but  which  appear 
to  be  no  longer  in  existencc  In  the  prologue  to  thia 
b<x>k,  Hucariua  statcd  his  name  and  counti}',  but  noth- 
ing  morc  is  known  of  him."  He  is  sald  to  have  madę 
an  extract  from  the  penitential  work  of  archbishop  Eg- 
bert  of  York,  of  the  8th  ccntury,  as  an  introduction  to 
the  homilies.  See  Wright,  Biog,  Brit,  Lit,  (Anglo-Sax. 
Period),  p.  426;  Herzog,  «M/-A«£;yX^.  xxi,  604 ;  TheoL 
Umv,Lex.  i,  S7Z    (J.H.W.) 

Hucbald,  also  called  Hcctsou),  Huobald,  Ubai  j>, 
and  IIuBAiJ>,  a  celcbrated  monk,  was  probably  bom 
abont  850,  and  was  educated  by  his  leamed  relatiye  Milo 
(ą.  V.)  in  the  monastery  of  Sr,  Amandus  in  Flandem. 
After  Milo*s  death,  Hucbald  succeeded  him  aa  teacber 
and  presiding  ofliicer  of  the  school  of  this  monastery. 
About  893,  archbishop  Fuloo,  of  Rheims,  called  Hncbakl 
to  that  city,  to  preside  ovcr  the  cathedial  school  there. 
He  died  in  930.  He  distinguished  himself  greatly  in 
musie,  and  was  the  first  to  establish  the  laws  of  harmo- 
ny  (diaphonia).  His  lives  of  some  of  the  saints  are  eon- 
sidcrcd  yaluablc,  especially  Vita  S,Lelmini,  Vita  Aide- 
gu7tdisj  Viia  Rictrudis,  See  Aschbach,  Kirchen-Ler^  iii, 
342 ;  Herzog,  ReaUEncyJdopudie,  vi,  297  są.     ( J.  H.  W.) 

HndBOn,  Joiin,  D.D.,  an  English  philologist  and 
theologian,  was  bom  at  Widehope  in  1662,  and  was  edu- 
cated at  QDecii*s  College,  Oxford.  He  obtaiued  the  de- 
gree  of  Master  of  Arts  in  1684,  and  shortly  alterwards 
that  of  Doctor  of  Diyinity.  In  1701  he  was  appointed 
librarian  of  the  Bodleian  library  at  Oxfoid,  and  died 
Nov.  27, 1719.  He  is  chiefly  known  on  account  of  his 
Geographia  Veteris  Scriptores  Grteci  ndnores,  etc.  (Ox- 
ford, 1698, 1703, 1712,3  vols.  8vo),  and  his  edition  nf  Jo- 
sephus,  entitled  Flavii  Josephi  Opera  (Oxf.  1720, 2  volft 
foL),  which  appeaied  shortly  after  his  death. — Hoefer, 
Xouv,  Biog,  Generale^  xxv,  872  są. 

Huel,  Joseph  Nicolas,  a  French  philoeopher,  was 
bom  at  Mattainoourt  June  17, 1690.  After  the  oomple- 
tion  cf  his  studies  at  Paris  he  took  orderu,  and  was 
madę  cniate  of  Rameux.  He  is  eaid  (Baibier,  Diet,  des 
Anongmes)  to  be  the  author  ofEssai  philoscpkipte  sur 
la  crainte  de  la  yfort,  and  of  Moyen  de  rendre  nos  rtUg- 
ieuses  uliles  et  de  nous  erempter  des  dots  qv'eUes  erigeni 
(1750),  in  which  important  reforma  of  the  religions 
houses  of  the  Roman  Catholic  Church  are  advocated« 
His  spedal  aim  was  the  cmployment  of  the  inmatcs  of 
convents  in  instracting  the  youth  of  the  land,  instead  of 
spending  a  life  of  idleness,  partly,  if  not  wholly,  at  the 
expense  of  the  state.  The  book  was  suppressed,  bot  re« 
printed  eleven  years  after,  without,  however,  awakcn- 
ing  any  generał  interest  in  this  reformatoiy  morement. 
Huel  died  at  Romeax  Sept.3, 1769.— Hoefer,  Ncnt. B^, 
Giner,  xxv,  877  są. ;  Classe,  Renutrgues  bSiliograpkigues 
svr  I/ueij  in  the  Memoirts  de  VA  cademie  de  Xancg  (1856), 
p.251.     (J.H.W.) 

Huesoa,  Couxcił  of  (Concilium  Oscense),  a  oonn- 
cil  held  at  Huesca,  in  Spain,  in  598,  of  which  only  two 
canons  are  extant.  One  orders  that  the  dioceaan  syn- 
ods,  composed  of  the  abbots,  priests,  and  deacons  of  the 
diocese,  bo  held  annually,  in  which  the  bishop  ahall 
exhort  his  clergy  upon  the  duties  of  fhigality  and  eon- 


HUESCA 


885 


HUFNAGEL 


dnence:  Łhe  other  that  the  biflhop  ahaU  inform  himadf 
whether  Łhe  pricsts,  deacona,  and  aubdeacona  ołnerre  the 
Uw  of  oontinence  (tom.  V|  Gonc.  1604). — ^Landon,  Mant- 
ualofCotmcUs,  p.  266. 

Hnesca,  Ditrando  de,  a  cdebrated  member  of  the 
Albigemes  (q.  v.),  floariabed  in  the  fint  half  of  the  13th 
centuiy.  He  at  length  yielded  to  Komiah  influencea, 
and  retumed  to  that  Ćhurch,  in  which  be  founded  a  re- 
ligioua  community  under  the  name  of  **  Poor  Catholics." 
In  1207  be  went  to  Korne,  and  obtained  the  remiaaion  of 
his  berety  from  Innocent  III,  and  waa  by  thia  popc  de- 
clared  the  auperior  of  bia  fraternity.  The  membera  of 
this  community  liyed  on  abna,  applied  themaeh-ea  to 
atuilr  and  teaching,  kept  Lent  twioe  a  year,  and  wore  a 
habit  of  white  or  gny,  with  aboes  open  at  the  top,  but 
distingntshed  by  aome  particular  mark  iirom  those  of  the 
Poor  Men  of  Lyona  (Inaabatati).  **  The  new  order  apread 
80  rapidly  that  in  a  few  yeara  it  had  numeroua  conventa 
both  aouth  and  north  of  the  Pyreneea.  Bat,  aUbongh 
they  piofeased  to  devote  theinaelvea  to  the  conyeraion 
of  heictica,  and  Hueaca  wrote  aome  booka  with  that 
riew,  they  aoon  incurred  the  auapidon  of  the  biahopa, 
wbo  accińed  them  of  favoring  the  Yaudoia  (q.  v.))  and 
oooeealing  iheir  heretical  teneta  under  the  monaatic 
garb.  They  had  aufficient  influence  to  maintain  them- 
adrea  for  aome  time,  and  even  to  procure  letterR  from 
hia  holinfwfs  exhorting  the  biahopa  to  cndeavor  to  gain 
them  by  kindneaa  inatead  of  alienating  their  minda  from 
the  Church  by  aeyere  tieatment;  but  their  enemiea  at 
last  prrrailed,  and  within  a  ahort  time  no  tracę  of  their 
establisbments  waa  to  be  found.**^McCrie,  Reformałion 
ń  Spain,  p.  36  aą. ;  IHst.  Gen.  de  Languedoc,  iii,  147  są. 
(J.H.W.) 

Hnet,  Francoia,  a  diatinguiahed  French  pbiloao- 
pfaer,  was  bom  I>ec.  26, 1814,  at  Yilleau,  Flance.  He 
waa  for  a  time  profeaaor  at  the  Uniyeraity  of  Ghent,  and 
diatinguiahed  himaelf  greatly  by  his  elforta  to  reform 
modem  phiioaophy  upon  the  principlca  of  Bordaa-De- 
moolin,  who  aimed  to  oonciiiate  all  the  political  and 
aodal  influencea  of  the  Reyolution  with  the  religioua 
traditions  of  ancient  Gallicaniam.  Hia  last  yeara  were 
■pent  in  educating  the  young  prince  of  Senria.  He 
died  aoddenly,  while  on  a  yiait  at  Paria,  July  1, 18C9. 
His  prindpal  worka  are  Heeherches  sur  la  tie^kM  ouv^ 
ragn  H  le»  doetrmu  de  Hmri  <f«  Gitnd  (1888,  8yo)  t— 
Le  Cartwamtme  ou  lu  tiriiabk  renovatioH  des  aci- 
aiees  (1843,  2  rob.  8yo),  crowned  by  the  French  Acad- 
tmyv^Le  Regne  sociai  du  Christiamsme  (1858,  8yo) : — 
Enais  sur  la  JU/orms  Catkolique  (1856,  8yo),  writtea 
in  connection  with  Bordaa-Demoulin  :~La  aciaice  de 
Cłsprit,  jnincipes  de  phUosophie  pure  et  applicuśe  (2 
rola.  8yo,  1864). — ^Yapereau,  Diet,  des  Contemporuins,  p. 
907 ;  Bróckhaua,  Unsere  Zeił,  5th  ycar,  yoL  ii 


Hiiet  (Humus),  Pierre  Daniel,  a  French  acholar, 
ind  eedeaiaatic,  waa  bom  at  Caen  Feb.  8, 1680.  He  waa 
cdncated  at  the  Jeauit  acbool  of  Caen,  and  waa  original- 
iy  iiitended  for  the  profcańon  of  the  Uw ;  but  the  peniaal 
of  che  *"  Principtes**  of  Des  Cartea  and  Bochart*a  **  Sacred 
Geography*'  tumed  hia  attention  to  generał  literaturę, 
anil  he  bceame  a  zealoua  pupil  of  theae  diatinguiahed 
mzn.  In  1652  he  aocompanied  Bochart  to  Sweden. 
Hm  be  diaooyered  and  tranacribed  the  MS.  of  Origen, 
which  aubaeąuently  became  the  baaia  of  hia  odebrated 
hWtkm  of  that  Church  father.  He  waa  aolicited  by  the 
qQMn  to  aettle  in  her  dominiona,  but  he  refuaed  the 
offer,  and  returaed  to  France.  In  1664  he  publiabed  an 
casay  De  Interprełatume,  and  in  1668  hia  editiou  of  Ori- 
<5«i'«  CommehMrut  in  Sac  Scripł;  (Rouen,  2  rola.  foL ; 
Cologne,  1685, 3  rola.  ft»L),  with  a  leamed  introduction, 
cotitlcd  Origetuamty  aince  reprintcd  in  the  Benedictine 
editiaii  of  Origen.  He  thna  acąuiied  ao  great  a  leputa- 
tioo  that  he  was  honored  with  the  degiee  of  doctor  of 
^t  and  ahoctly  after  waa  appointed  aubtutor  to  the 
<ł*aphiti.  He  alao  took  a  leading  part  in  editing  the 
i^dphini  editkm  of  tbe  I^tin  daadca.  In  1674  he  waa 
IV.— B  B 


dected  a  member  of  the  French  Aeademy;  and  haying 
taken  ordera  in  1676,  he  waa  appointed  in  1678  to  the 
abbey  of  Aunay,  near  Caen.  In  1685  he  waa  madę  biab- 
op  of  Soiaaona,  but  he  neyer  entered  on  thia  poaition, 
and  waa  trantferred  to  tbe  aee  of  Ayranchea  iu  1692. 
Deaiioua  of  deyoting  hia  time  to  atudy,  he  leaigned  hia 
biahoprio  in  1699,  and  obtained  tbe  abbey  of  Fontenay, 
near  Caen.  In  1701  he  remoyed  to  Paria,  and  rcdded 
at  the  Jeauita'  houae.  He  died  Jan.  26, 1721.  Hia  oth- 
er prindpal  worka  are  Demonstratio  JCvangelica  (Paria, 
167S,  often  reprinted).  ^  Thia  work,  which  ia  the  great 
monument  of  Huet'a  literary  repntation,  waa  the  reault 
ofy ariona  oonyeraatwna  with  the  eminent  Rabbi  Manas- 
aeh  ben-Israd  at  Amaterdam.  It  begina  with  a  act  of 
definitiona  on  the  genuineneaa  of  booka,  biatory,  proph* 
ecy,  the  Meaaiah,  and  the  Christian  religion.  Then  fd- 
low  two  poetidatca  and  four  axioma.  •  The  propoaitiona 
oocopy  the  reat  of  the  book,  and  in  the  diacuańon  of 
theae  the  demonstration  conaiata"  (Kitto)  i^De  la  siiucb- 
tion  du  Paradis  Terresire  (Par.  1691,  l2mo)  i—Commeih- 
tarius  de  rebus  ad  auctorem  pertwentUnu  (Amat.  1718, 
12mo),^hia  autobiographical  memoin— a  model  of  pure 
Latinity,  aa  well  aa  the  moat  intereating  record  of  the 
biatory  of  hia  time.'*  It  waa  tranalated  by  John  Aikin, 
M.D.  (London,  1810, 2  yola.  8yo) :— C«fwura  Pkihsophia 
Cartesiana  (Par.  1689, 1694, 12mo)  :—Quasiiones  AUie^ 
łona  de  Concordia  Rationis  et  Fidei  (Caen,  1690).  The 
two  laat-named  worka  are  aimed  at  the  Carteaian  phi- 
ioaophy, to  which  Huet  had  adhered  in  hia  earlier  daya, 
and  againat  which  he  appeara  in  theae  worka  aa  one  of 
the  moat  formidable  opponenta: — Traiie  phUosophigue 
de  la/aiblesse  de  PEsprU  Humaia  (Amaterd.  1723, 8vo), 
**  which,  aocording  to  Yoltaire,  waa  regarded  by  many 
aa  a  refutation  of  hia  Demonstraiio  Ewmgdica,  and  baa 
cauaed  him  to  be  daaaed  among  8ceptic&"  AU  the  worka 
of  Huet  were  publiabed  in  a  collected  form  in  1712,  and 
an  additional  yoltune,  entitled  Huetiana^  in  the  year  fol- 
k>wing  hia  death  (1722).  See  Hoefer,  Nouv.  Biog,  Gin. 
xxv,  387  aq.;  English  Cyclopadia,  a.  y. ;  Ouarterly  Ren, 
(Lond.),iy,  103  aq.;  Chambera,  C:^do/7.  v,  449  aą.;  Mo- 
rdl,//iff.o/jro(f.PAaaM^jr,p.l95  8q.,523.    (J.H.W.) 

HUffel,  JoiiAiTK  Jakob  Ludwig,  a  German  diyine, 
was  bom  May  6, 1784  at  GUdenbach,  in  Heaae,  and  ed- 
ucated  at  tbe  uniyeraitie^  of  Gieaaen  and  Marbuig.  In 
1817  he  waa  appointed  miniater  at  Friedbeig,  in  1825 
aenior  profeaaor  in  the  theological  aeminaiy  at  Herbom, 
and  in  1829  prdate  of  Badcn  and  religioua  counsdlor  of 
the  duke  of  Baden.  He  died  July  26, 1856.  Besides  a 
coUection  of  aermona  (Gieaaen,  1817-29),  HtlfTd  publiab- 
ed Wesen  u,  Beruf  d.  evanff,  GeistUchen  (ibid.  1821, 4th 
edit.  1843)  i—Stunden  chrisłL  A  ndacht  (1844)  -^Brie/e  &. 
d.  UnsłerUichkeit  (2d  edit  Karlamhe,  1832).  llie  aame 
aubject  ia  still  further  treated  in  a  later  work,  entitled 
Die  Unsterblichkeit  aufs  neue  beleuckłeł  (2d  edit  1888) : 
—Der  Pietismus  geschichtlich  hekuchtei  (Hdddb.  1849). 
— TheoL  Umvers,  Lex.  i,  372;  Pierer,  Unieers.  Lex,  yiii, 
581. 

Hufhagel,  Wilhelm  Friedrich,  a  German  theo- 
kigian,  waa  bom  at  Hall,  Swabia,  June  15, 1754,  and  ed- 
ucated  at  the  uniyeraitiea  of  Altorf  and  Erlangen.  Iu 
1779  he  was  appointed  profeaaor  extraordinaiy  of  phi- 
ioaophy at  Erlangen,  and  in  1782  he  waa  tranaferred  to 
the  chair  of  theology  aa  regular  profeaaor.  In  1788  he 
reoeiyed  the  paatorate  of  the  uniyeraity  church,  and  waa 
madę  oyeraeer  of  the  aeminary  for  preachen.  In  1791 
he  remoyed  to  Frankfort-on-the-Main  aa  preacher  of 
one  of  the  oldeat  churchea  of  that  dty.  He  died  Feb.  7, 
1830.  Hufnagd  waa  diatinguiahed  both  aa  a  preacher 
and  ca  a  theologuin,  but  he  was  especially  at  borne  in  the 
Shemitic  languagea.  Hia  publicationa,  adde  from  hia 
Sermons  (1791-96),  are  Yariarum  lecUonum  e  BiUiis  d 
Nisseiio  curatis  ercerpłarum  speeimen  (1777) : — Salomos 
hohes  Lied  gepnifi,  iibersetzt  u.erldutert  (1784)  t— JVor. 
BibUoth.  theoL  (i,  1782^)  -^Bearbeit.d.8chrifUn  d.A.T. 
nach  ihrem  Inhalt  u,Zweck  (1784),  in  which  he  took  a 
rationaliadc  poabaon  v^Hiob  neą  itbers,  m,  Anok  (i781)£ 


HUG 


386 


HUGHES 


— Distertatio  de  PtcUmii  prophetiat  Jfnńan.contm&Ui" 
bua  (2  pta.  17Si)r-'Bwgraphie  UniterseUe,  xxvii,  428 ; 
Kitto,  BibL  Cydop.  ii,  839  sq.;  Doiingi  G^hri.  TkeoL 
DmitchL  i,  7^7  aą.    (J.H.W.) 

Hug,  JoHAMN  Leonhabd,  Ul  eminent  Gemuui  Ro- 
man Gatholic  theologiAn,  was  bom  at  Constanoe  Jnne  1, 
1765,  and  educated  at  Freiburg  UniYenity.  In  1789  be 
took  piicst^s  orden,  and  in  1791  was  appointed  profeasor 
of  CHd-Teatament  exege8u  at  his  alma  mater.  In  1792 
the  New-Testament  exegesi8  was  added  to  tbe  duties  of 
his  chair.  To  fit  htmeelf  matę  thoroughly  for  bis  pro- 
feasional  duties,  he  yisited  the  great  iibnuies  and  imi- 
yersities  of  Central  Europę.  Though  a  Roman  Gatho- 
lic, he  was  too  well  aoąuainted  ¥rith  sacred  criticism, 
and,  like  the  cciebrated  Dr.  Jahn,  too  impartial  to  be 
▼eiy  greatly  influenoed  in  his  views  as  a  BiUical  schol- 
ar and  ciitic  by  his  eodesiastical  eonnections.  He  wrote 
Erjmdnng  d,  Buchstabentchrifi  (Uim,  1801)  '^EinleUung 
m  d,  8<Ariften  d.  Neuen  Tettamentt  (Stuttg.  1808, 2  toIb.  ; 
4th  ed.  1847).  This  work,  in  which  he  attempts  to  vin- 
dicate  and  sustain  the  genuineness  of  all  the  books  com- 
monly  regarded  as  canonical,  has  been  translated  into 
French  and  English  {Ifdroduction  to  the  New  Tettament, 
by  Wait,  Lond.  1827, 2  toIb.  8vo  ;  far  better  by  Fosdick, 
Andorer,  Mass.,  8vo),  and  is  considered  one  of  the  ablest 
works  of  the  kind.  Untersuchungen  uber  den  Mythus  d, 
heruhmUsten  YoUoer  d,  aken  Welt  (Fieibi  1812)  :—Ueber 
d.  Hohe  Lied  (ibkL  1818-1818)  i—De  cor^ugU  Christiam 
mado  wuUsmUubUi  eommenł.  exeget,  (ib.  1816),  in  which 
he  took  ground  against  ewil  maniages : — Kaieckimmu 
(ib.  1836)  \^De  PenŁaUuchi  tertione  AUxandrwa  contr 
rnenL  (ib.  1818)  :^Gutachten  Sber  d,Leben  Jem  tom  D,  F, 
Strauss  (ib.  1840-1844, 2  yoIs.).  Hug  was  also  one  of 
the  cditors,  with  Hirscher  (q.  v.)  and  othen,  of  the  Frei* 
burger  ZeiUckrifl  fUr  Theotogis  (Bonn,  1889^2).  See 
Maier,  OedSehtmssrede  cmfHug  (łYeiburg,  1847) ;  ReaU 
Encyklop^f,  d,  KałhoL  DtuUddaudy  v,  518  tą, ;  Herzog, 
Real-EncyklopSdiej  xix,  658;  Chambers,  CgdcpeBdia,  v, 
449  sq. ;  Kitto,  Bibl.  Cgclop,  ii,  340 ;  Haag,  ffisi.  d.  Dog- 
mas  Chreł,  i,  §  112 ;  Werner,  Geschickłe  d,  KatAolischen 
TkćoL  p.  527  są.;  Hoefer,  Nouv,  Biog,  Gmer,  xxv,  400. 
(J.H.W.) 

Hugg,  IsAAC^  a  Hethodist  Episoopal  muiister,  was 
bom  in  Gloucester,  now  Camden  County,  New  Jersey, 
abont  1814.  But  little  is  known  of  his  early  life.  He 
was  conyerted  in  1841,  lioensed  to  preach  about  1844,  and 
Joined  the  New  Jersey  Conferenoe  in  1845.  Thencefor- 
ward  he  filled  with  zeal  and  effidency  the  several  poei- 
tions  assigned  him,  being  in  many  plftces  eminently  uae- 
foL  On  Romę  and  Wantage  Circuit,  on  Cedarvllle  charge 
and  elsewhere,  he  had  extensive  and  powerful  revłvals 
of  religion,  and  founded  the  first  Methodist  sodety  at 
the  yillage  of  Cranberry,  N.  J.,  consistang  at  first  of  sey- 
^  members,  which,  before  the  year  dosed,  increased  to 
flfty.  About  1855,  while  laboring  on  Yemon  Circuit,  he 
had  his  hip  dislocated  by  a  fali  from  his  carriage,  which 
caused  him  a  great  deal  of  sufTering,  and  in  the  spring 
of  1864,  being  pressed  by  increasing  affliction,  he  was 
obliged  to  take  a  superannuated  relation,  and  settled  at 
Pointyille,  in  Burlington  County.  Herę  he  labored  as 
he  had  ability,  being  greatly  beloyed  by  the  people.  He 
died  suddenly,  while  preparing  to  re-enter  the  actiye 
work  of  the  ministiy,  April  5,  1866.  "  Hngg  was  em- 
phatically  a  good  man :  the  poor  knew  well  how  to  prize 
him,  and  the  children  eyerjrwhere  loved  him.  He  was 
a  good  preacher,  and,  when  health  permitted,  a  faithful 
pastor."— JV«i0  Jersey  Conf.  Minuies,  1867. 

Hiigh.    See  Hueo. 

Hughes,  Oeorge,  BJ>.,  an  EngUsh  Nonconformist, 
was  bora  in  Soothwark  in  1606,  and  educated  at  Corpos 
Christi  CoUege,  Oxford.  He  became  fellow  of  Pembroke 
CoUege,  then  lecturer  at  AUhalbws,  I^ondon,  and  alter- 
wards  minister  of  Tayistock.  During  the  RebeUion  he 
obtained  the  liying  of  St  Andrew^s,  Plymouth,  but  was 
e|ected  for  Donoonformity  in  1662.  He  died  in  1667. 
Hnghea  was  a  dtyine  of  good  natural  capacity  andkam- 


ŁDg,  and  an  exact  critic  for  his  time.  His  i 
works  smi.AnA nab/iioal  Eaeposition  ofthe  wkoU  Book 
of  Gettesis,  and  ąf  ihejirst  twetity-iAree  Ckąpters  o/L> 
odusy  ujherein  the  carious  rtadmgs  are  ohterredy  etc  (1672, 
foL)  i—Aphoritms,  or  Select  Propotiiions  of  the  ScHp- 
tureSf  shortly  detemUmng  the  Doctrine  of  tke  Sabbaik 
(1670, 8m.8yo).— Darling,  Cydopcsdia  BibHographka,  i, 
1568. 

Hughes,  Jabes,  an  English  diyine,  bom  in  168&, 
was  educated  at  Cambridge  Uniyersity,  and  aflenriids 
became  fellow  of  Jesus  College.  He  i«  chiefly  known  as 
the  editor  of  Chrysostom^s  treatise  vipi  itputmnrący  or 
On  tke  PrietUhood  (Cambr.  1710, 8vo;  2d  edit.  in  Gnek 
and  Ladn,  with  notes  and  a  preliminary  disaertation 
against  the  pretended  BigkU  ofthe  Chureh,  etc,  1712, 
8vo>  He  died  in  1731.^A«w  Gen,  Biog,  Uiet. yii, 276; 
Lond,  Geni,  Mag,  xlyiu,  588, 673. 

Hughes,  John,  an  English  diyine,  was  bora  in  1682, 
educated  at  Jesus  CoUege,  Cambridge,  and  afterwsnis 
became  a  fellow  of  the  uniyersity.  But  fittle  is  kncfwn 
of  his  life.  He  died  in  1710.  Among  his  works  we  fiod 
Dtsserłationes  tn  guUms  Aucłoritas  £cclesiasiiea,cuatf 
nus  h  civili  sit  diglimia,  defenditur  contra  EroMitm* 
(Cambridge,  1710, 8yo ;  and  in  English  by  Hilk.  Bedfofd, 
Lond.  1711, 8yo):— i^/.  Chrysostom*s  Treat.  on  the  Priest- 
hood  (Cambr.  1710, 8yo;  2d  edit.,  with  notes,  etc,  1712, 
8yo).  See  Allibone,  IHcf.  ofAuthors^  i,  911 ;  Lowndei, 
Brit.  Liter,  p.  585  sq. 

Hughes,  John,an  American  Roman  Gatholic  pifl- 
ate,  was  bora  in  Ireland  in  1798,  and  emigrated  to  this 
countr}'  in  1817,  his  father  haying  preoeded  him  aboat 
two  years.  At  first  he  went  to  a  llorist  to  leara  the  sit 
of  gardening,  but  a  few  years  later  he  entered  the  Theo- 
logical  Semiiuuy  of  Śt.  Mary*s  at  Emmittsbuigh,  1I(L, 
teaching  also  at  the  same  tlme.  In  1825  he  was  ordsin- 
ed  priest  in  Philadelphia,  and  settled  oyer  a  pari^h  of  i 

that  city.     In  1887  he  was  appointed  ooadjutor  of  bbh-         ' 
op  Dubois,  of  New  York,  and  immediately  after  his  cna- 
secration  in  1838,  he  assumed  the  yiitual  administration 
of  the  diocese,  but  he  was  not  madę  bishop  until  1841 
In  1850  New  York  was  ralsed  to  the  dignity  of  an  archi- 
episoopal  see,  and  aichbishop  Hughes  went  to  Bonę 
to  receiye  the  pallium  at  the  hands  of  the  pope.    He 
died  January  8,  1864.    £yen  before  his  ele\*atidii  to 
the  episoopacy  he  had  gained  among  his  cardigionists 
some  distinction  as  a  champion  of  his  Chmch  by  a 
controrersy,  in  1880  and  1884,  with  Dr.  John  Breckin- 
ridgc,  on  the  ąuestion,  ''Is  the  Protestant  religion  the 
religion  of  Christ  ?**    Some  years  later  he  had  anothcr 
celebrated  controyersy  with  Dr.  Nicholas  Murrsy,  of 
Elizabeth,  who,  under  the  name  of  *<  Kirwan,**  published 
A  series  of  able  and  interesting  articles  against  the  Koman 
Catholic  Church.    ''Both  controyorsies  increased  his  lep- 
utation  among  his  coreligionists ;  but  non-Catholics  were 
notstruck  by  his  arguroents  in  fayor  of  Roman  Cathołi- 
cism,  and  he  failed  to  attract  anything  like  the  attentioo, 
or  produce  anything  like  the  impression,  which  wiitiogt 
of  real  ability,  such  as  those  of  Mohler  in  Gemiany,  and 
of  Brownson  and  Hecker,  are  always  surę  to  oommand." 
As  archbishop,  in  the  administiation  of  the  iwoperty  of 
the  Church,  and  the  use  which  he  madę  of  it  for  the 
spreading  of  his  Church,  he  displayed  a  talent  lardy 
found.    An  immense  property  gradualły  aocmnokted 
in  his  hands,  which  enabled  him  to  increase  laigely  the 
nnmber  of  Roman  Catholic  chorches,  schoois^  and  other 
denominational  institutions.    Thus,  in  1841,  he  opened 
the  Roman  Cathcdic  SL  John*s  CoUege,  at  Fondham,  New 
York,  to  which  he  afterwards  added  tbe  Theological 
Seminaiy  of  St.  Joseph.    The  archbishop  aostained  a 
celebrated  controyersy  on  this  subject  with  Erastus 
Brooks,  editor  of  the  New  York  Krpress^  and  al  that 
time  a  state  senator,  who  had  stated  in  an  addreas  in 
the  senate  chamber  that  the  archbishop  owned  propaty      i 
in  New  Yoric  to  the  amount  of  $5,000,000.    A  long  dis- 
cussion  took  plaoe,  and  this  time  the  ability  with  whidi 
tha  archbisbop  defended  his  statements  and  hia  poaitiflB      | 


HUGHES 


387 


HUGO 


waś  ttcknowledged  alike  by  Flrotestants  and  Romanisto. 
But  h*  opened  a  lyreach  between  the  Itonumisto  and 
Protertmts  by  his  nnauthorized  demands  in  the  School 
Oneation,  to  Łbe  effect  tbat  the  Common  Goundl  of  New 
York  City  ahonld  deaignale  8even  of  the  public  achools 
as  Cathoiic  achoolayaiid  wben  this  was  denied  both  by 
tbe  Common  Cooncil  and  the  Legiilature,  bishop  Hugfaea 
advlaed  Uie  Catholici  to  mn,  at  the  next  political  cam- 
paign,  an  independent  ticket.  He  defended  liia  cauae 
with  great  ability,  bat  fiiikd  to  convince  Protestanta 
generalły  of  the  faiinesB  of  the  demand  to  grant  to  the 
Koman  Cathołic  oommunity  aii  exoeptional  prerogatlye, 
which  was  neither  possessed  nor  daimed  by  any  Protes- 
tant body.  He  also  opposed  the  leading  of  the  Protes- 
tant reiBion  of  the  Bibie  in  the  common  school,  in  which 
be  was  not  qaite  ao  snooessful  as  in  his  other  efforts  in 
behalf  of  Bonoanism.  Archbishop  H  ughes^s  political  in- 
ftoenee  in  the  United  States  was  very  great,  and  be  was 
bonored  by  all  sects  in  a  manner  unknown  in  any  other 
Protestant  eonntry.  Thus,  in  1847,  be  was  inyited  by 
both  hooses  of  Congress  to  deli^-er  a  lecture  in  the  hall 
of  the  Honse  of  Kepresentatiycs  in  Washington,  and 
alter  the  oatbreak  of  the  Rebellion  (1862)  he  was  even 
intrasted  wiib  a  semi-olBdal  mission  to  France.  As  a 
wziter  archbishop  Hughes  bas  done  but  little,  except  by 
the  discossions  above  alluded  to.  These  were  all  pub- 
lisbed  in  book  form  (Phila.  1836, 8vo).  He  also  publish- 
ed  a  nomber  of  his  sermons  and  addresses.  Since  his 
deoease  his  *^  works**  haire  been  oollected  by  Lawrence 
Kehoe  (N.Y.2  volft.8vo;  2d ed.  1865).— JNT.  Y,  TabUt^Jm. 
1864  ;  Methoditt,  Jan. 9, 1864;  An.Amer,  Cychp.  1868,  p. 
429.     (J.H.W.) 

aughea,  Joseph,  D.D^  an  eminent  Baptist  di  vine, 
was  hora  in  London  Jan.  1, 1769.  In  1784  he  became  a 
member  of  the  Baptist  Chureh,  and  enteced  the  Baptist 
Colkege  at  Bristol,  where  he  remained  as  a  student  tili 
1787.  He  studied  also  three  years  at  Aberdeen,  where 
he  paassd  M^in  1790.  In  1791  he  became  dassical 
tntoY  in  the  Baptist  College;  1792  to  1796  he  was  assist- 
ant  minister  at  Broadmead  Chapel,  Bristol;  and  in  1796 
he  beeame  pastor  of  the  Baptist  Chapel,  Battenea. 
When  the  **Keligioii8  TrMt  Society"  was  formed*in 
ITSK^,  ha  waa  chosen  its  first  secretaiy,  and  he  rptained 
thia  Office  until  his  death,  Oct  12, 1883.  His  industry 
ia  official  work  was  enormous,  and  a  great  part  of  the 
soccesB  of  the  Tnct  Society  is  due  to  his  labozs.  He 
also  took  a  laige  part  in  the  forroation  of  the  British 
and  Foreign  BiUe  Society,  and  was  its  first  secretary,  re- 
taining  the  office  until  his  death.  His  peraonal  history 
is  largely  that  of  this  great  organization.  Sce  Leifchild, 
Memoir  oftke  Hec.  J,  Hughes  (Lond.  1834, 12mo) ;  Jubi- 
lee  Volume  ofthe  BeUffiow  Traci  Society;  Owen,//t#- 
tory  oftke  Briiish  (tnd  Fordffn  BiitU  Society  ;  Timpson, 
Bibie  Triuwgfks  (18^,  12mo> 

Hugo,  a  friar  of  the  order  of  the  Minimiy  and  a  doc> 
tor  of  thcology,  was  bora  at  Prato,  near  Florcnoe,  in  the 
lattcr  half  of  the  Idth  centuiy.  He  was  a  roan  of  re- 
i  aosterity,  and  iraposed  upon  himself  the  most 
i  mortifications.  He  died  in  Tartary  after  the  year 
1312.  Among  his  works,  which  remain  in  MS.,  are  a 
ieHer  to  the  Minimi  of  Prato,  a  treatise  JM  VUa  ConŁem- 
piaUtOj  and  De  Perfeetiom  /Sfa^aain.— Hoefer,  Nowi,  Bi" 
mgr^  Gemrale,  xxv,  451. 

Hugo  OF  Amibns,  or  of  Roobh,  a  distinguisbed  Ro- 
BMn  CathoKe  divine,  was  bora  at  Amiens,  France,  to- 
wards  the  dose  of  the  lith  century,  and  was  educated 
at  Laon  nnder  the  celebmted  Anselm.  He  entered  the 
Benedictlne  monastery  of  Clugny,  and  became  prior  of 
tbe  monastery  of  limoges  in  11 18.  On  account  of  his 
great  learaing  and  unoommon  talent  he  was  transferred 
as  prior  to  the  monastery  at  Lewes,  in  England,  and  in 
1125  was  appointed  abbot  of  Reading  Abbey  by  Henry 
I,  the  fomider.  In  1 129  Hugo  was  clected  archbishop  of 
Koaen,oTer  which  see  he  preaided  until  his  death,  Nov. 
11, 1164.  He  was  ąoite  prominent  in  the  history  of 
itBbacy  dnriiig  his  day.    While  archbishop  of  Rouen, 


he  songht  to  oouTert  an  obacnre  sect  in  Brittany,  in  aU 
Ukelihood  a  branch  of  the  Petiobnianans,  whose  doo 
trines  were  '<  a  protest  against  the  oyerwhehning  sacer- 
dotalism  of  the  period,  by  an  elaborato  dentmeiation  of 
their  tenets,  among  wliieh  he  enumerates  |»omiscuou8 
lieentiousness  and  disregard  of  dciieal  oelibacy."  In- 
deed,  Hugo  was  distinguished  among  his  contempora* 
ries  not  only  as  a  theologiaii,  but  also  as  a  statesman. 
'*  It  was  he  wbo,  in  1139,  at  the  Council  of  Winchester, 
sayed  king  Stophen  from  exoommunication  by  the  £ng* 
lish  bishops."  He  wrote  Dialogi  de  Summo  Bono  LiM 
vii  (published  by  Martwe  in  his  Thesaur.  A  necdotwUf 
V,  895),  a  work  of  especial  interest  both  to  the  tbeolo- 
gian  and  the  philosopher  on  account  ofthe  views  which 
it  sets  forth  on  morał  philosophy  :-*/>e  HcBrenbus^  print- 
ed  by  D*Achezy  as  an  appendix  to  the  works  of  Guibert 
de  Ncgent,  is  a  work  levelled  against  the  heretics  of  hia 
day,  and  alTording  valuable  raaterials  on  the  history  of 
the  Chureh  in  the  12th  centuiy  :^De  Fide  Caiholioa, 
containing  an  explication  ofthe  Apostles'  Creed  and  the 
Lord's  Prayer,  published  by  Martene  and  Durand  in 
thelr  Tketaurus  Anecdotum,  voL  v,  and  in  theu:  Vete- 
rum  Scriptorum  CoUectio^  voL  ix.  See  Schrockh,  Kirch' 
engesch,  xxvii,  409  sq. ;  Lea,  Hisf.  o/Sacerdotal  CeUba- 
cy,  p.  872  są. ;  Hoefer,  Nouv,  Biog,  Ginir,  xxv,  439  są. ; 
Gorton,  Biog,  Diet,  s.  v.     (J.  H.  W.) 

Hugo  op  Angoulkme  flonrished  in  the  lOth  centu- 
iy. As  soon  as  he  had  become  the  incnmbent  of  the 
see  of  Angouldme  (March  21, 973)  he  sought  also  to  as- 
suroe  the  toroporal  goverament  over  his  diocese,  and 
became  entangled  in  oontroyersies  «rith  count  Arnold, 
the  prince  of  that  country,  against  whom  he  even  waged 
war.  It  is  thought  that  Hugo  finally  withdrew  from 
the  bishopric,  retired  to  the  abbey  of  St  Cibard,  and 
died  in  obscurity  in  990.  Ile  is  said  to  liave  lefŁ  sey- 
eral  works,  but  they  bave  not  yet  come  to  light.— //u/. 
Liłł,  de  la  France^  voL  viii;  Hoefer,  Nouv,  Biog,  Geni- 
raley  xxv,  428. 

Hugo  OF  Besamcoh  was  bom  towards  the  dose  of 
the  lOth  centuiy,  and  waa  appointed  archbishop  of  Be- 
sancon,  as  aucoessor  of  archbishop  Gaucher  of  Salins,  in 
1031.  Immediately  on  assuming  the  charge  of  the  see 
he  dismissed  the  canoos  of  St,  Anatole  of  Saluw,  and 
gare  this  chureh  to  the  monks  of  St. Bćnigne  of  Dijon; 
but  he  afterwards  repented  sf  the  change,  «id  reinstated 
the  chapter  of  Sl  Anatole  in  1048.  He  is  said  to  have 
been  an  iudnstrious  prelate,  and  to  have  enjoyed  the 
confidence  of  his  pope  and  of  his  emperor.  Under  the 
emperor  Henry  III  he  was  arch-chanccllor.  He  also 
aasisted  at  the  ooronation  of  king  Philip  I  of  France. 
He  died  July  27, 1066.— Dunod  de  Carnage,  Jfistoire  de 
riglise  de  Bttcmcon,  i,  29  są. ;  Hoefer,  Nowa,  Biog,  Gm, 
xxv,  429. 

Hugo  OP  Bbeteuił  was  bora  near  the  opening  of 
the  llth  century,  and  was  educated  as  a  theologian  at 
the  school  in  Chartres.  He  was  madę  bishop  of  Lan- 
gres  by  king  Robert  some  ttme  in  the  first  months  of 
1081.  Conducting  himsctf  in  a  manner  unworthy  of 
his  high  position  in  the  Chureh,  he  was  finally  accused 
of  adulteiy  and  homicide,  and  other  even  morę  atro- 
cious  crimes,  and  was  brought  to  tiial  before  a  council 
at  Rheims.  At  first  be  bnived  the  aocusations,  and 
sought  to  defend  himself;  but,  fiiuling  that  the  proof 
against  him  was  impossible  of  oontiadiction,  he  finally 
fled,  and  was  punished  with  eYCommnnication.  To  e»- 
piaU  his  crimes  he  went  on  foot  to  Romę,  where  he  pro- 
cured  an  audience  with  pope  Leo  IX,  and  obtaiued  pat- 
don.  On  his  retura  home  he  died  at  Biteme,  France^ 
March  16, 1051.  He  is  the  author  of  an  interesting  let- 
X/BiOnike  Errors  ofBkrenger  (published  as  an  appendix 
to  the  works  of  Lanfranc).^^ur.  IMi,  de  la  Frawxy  vii, 
438 ;  Hoefer,  AToar.  Biog,  Gin,  xxv,  428  są. 

Hugo  OF  Castro -Novo  {Newcastle),  an  Engiiah 
theologian,  fiourished,  according  to  Wadding  (AnnaL 
Min.  iii),  about  1310.  He  beloiiged  to  the  order  of  the 
Minimi,  and  was  an  ardent  defewler  of  tha  pkikiaophy 


HUGO 

ot  Diins  Scotas.  He  is  said  to  have  been  the  author  of 
De  Vicłoria  Chriali  contra  Aniichristum  (pńnted  in 
H71).  But  his  most  important  work  is  De  Laudiłm* 
B,  Marim  (published  1697, 1698, 1704).  It  comprises 
twelve  books,  the  fint  of  which  is  a  simple  paraphrase 
of  the  angelical  salutation  (Lukę  i,  26  8q.).  The  third 
book  treats  of  the  camal  prerogatives  of  Bfanr,the  foorth 
of  her  Ylrtues,  the  sixth  of  the  names  by  which  she  is 
kno^^mii  the  serentb  and  eighth  of  the  celestial  and  ter- 
restrial  objects  to  which  she  is  ordinańly  coinpared,  etc. 
— Hoefer,  Nouc.  Biog,  Ginirale,  xxv,  460  są. 

Hugo  OF  Champfłrurt,  a  French  prelate,  was  bom 
in  the  early  part  of  the  r2th  centuiy.  Of  his  carly  life 
but  little  is  known.  In  1 161  he  was  oppointed  chancel- 
lor  of  France,  and  in  1169  he  was  elected  bishop  of  Soi&> 
sons,  retaining,  however,  his  position  in  the  state,  from 
both  of  which,  for  unknown  reasons,  he  was  deposed  in 
1171.  He  dicd  Sept.  4, 1 175.— Ilisł.  Litt.  de  la  France, 
xiii,  636 ;  Hoefer,  łiour.  Biog.  Gm,  xxv,  446. 

Hugo  OF  Cite:aux,  a  French  Roman  Catholic  theo- 
logian  who  fiourished  in  the  12lh  century,  was  a  disciple 
of  St.  Bernard  and  abbć  of  Trois  Fontaincs.  In  1 160  he 
was  madę  bishop  of  Ostie  and  cardiiud  by  pope  Eugene 
III.  He  died  in  1 168.  Hugo  wrote  a  narrative  of  the 
death  of  pope  Eugene  III,  and  several  other  works.  He 
was  a  prelate  of  great  merit  and  piety.  See  Encydop, 
Theolaificue  (DicL  des  Cardinaux),  xxxi,  1083. 

Hugo  OF  Clugny.    See  Clugny. 

Hugo  Falcandus.    See  Falcasdus. 

Hugo  OF  Farfa.    See  Farfa. 

Hugo  DE  Fleury  or  dk  St.  Marie  (oftentimes  call- 
ed  St.  Benoit  sur  Loire),  a  celebrated  Benedictine  monk 
of  the  abbey  of  Fleurj',  on  the  Loire,  fiourished  about 
the  middle  of  the  Uth  centur>'.  His  Chronicon,  a  bis- 
iory of  religion  and  of  the  Church,  prepared  after  the 
mannet  of  his  day,  viz.  consisting  of  notices  of  popes, 
martyrs,  and  other  saints,  Church  fathers,  peraecutions, 
heresiesj  etc.,  a  work  of  great  celebrity,  was  piobably 
never  bronght  down  by  him  later  than  866,  and  the 
continoation  from  that  datę  to  1034  was  in  all  likelihood 
prepared  by  other  Benedictine  monks  (Munster,  1688, 
4to).  He  %vTote  also  De  la  Puissance  Royale,  et  de  la 
Digniti  Sacerdotale  (found  in  the  MisceUanea  of  Baluze). 
^chrockh,  Kirchengesch.  xxiv,  601  są. ;  Hook,  £cck$. 
Biog.  xiyi06.     (J.H.W.) 

Hugo  DE  FouiLLOi,  a  distinguished  French  theolo- 
gian,  canon  of  St.  Augustine,  was  bom  in  the  early  part 
of  the  12th  century.  In  1149  he  was  chosen  abbe  by 
the  regular  canons  of  St.  Denis  of  Rheims,  but  he  de- 
clined  this  high  office.  On  the  decease  of  the  person 
selected  in  his  stead  in  1163,  however,  be  consented  to 
accept  the  honor.  He  abdicated  in  1174,  and  his  death 
is  supposcd  to  have  occurred  shortly  after.  He  is  said 
to  be  the  author  of  a  number  of  works,  but  as  they  were 
not  written  under  his  own  name,  and  as  some  were 
even  printed  as  the  productions  of  others,  it  is  difficult 
now  to  determine  them.  He  is  generaUy  believed  to 
be  the  author  of  De  Claustro  Amma,  a  work  often  at- 
tributed  to  Hugo  St.  Yictor  :—De  A  rca  Noe  my$tica  De- 
scriptio : — De  A  rca  Noe  moralis  tnterpretcUio : — De  van- 
itate  rerum  mundanarum,  etc. — Oudin,  Seript.  Ecdes, ; 
HiatoireLitł, de  la  France,  xiii,  492  są.;  Hoefer,  Nouv. 
Biog.  GinirajUf,  xxv,  442  sq. 

Hugo  OF  FiAviONT,  a  French  Church  historian, 
was  bom  at  Verdun  about  the  year  1065.  While  yet  a 
youth  he  entered  the  convcnt  of  St.  Vitonius  at  Verdun, 
trhere  he  studied  under  the  abbot  Rodolph.  In  conse- 
ąuence  of  some  persecutions,  Hugo  and  the  other  mem- 
bers  of  his  order  removed  to  Fla\'igny.  In  1097  he  was 
dected  abbot  of  his  convent,  and  in  1111  he  exchanged 
this  abbey  for  that  of  St.yannes.  According  to  some, 
he  died  there  tA  early  as  1 1 16,  but  aooording  to  others  he 
lefl  this  convent  for  St.  Dijon  abojut  1116,  and  the  time 
of  his  death  is  much  later.  Hugo  wrote  a  chronicie  ex- 
kndiDg  fiom  the  birth  of  Chiist  to  the  year  1102.  dl- 


388 


HUGO 


vided  into  two  parts,  under  the  title  Chromcon  Virdm^- 
enae,  a  guibutdam  dictum  Flammacenae  (in  Ph.  Labbei 
BibUoiheca  Nova,  tom.  i).  The  fint  i>art  of  this  woric, 
which  doees  with  the  lOth  century,  is  trifling  and  eno- 
neous,  but  the  second  part  contains  much  important  in« 
formation  on  the  ecclesiasttcal  histoiy  of  France  in  the 
llth  and  12th  centuriea.— Hoefer,  Now.  Biog.  Gimłraie, 
xxv,  483 ;  Herzog,  Beal^EncgUopddie,  vi,  808. 

Hugo  OF  Frazak  or  Tra8Ax,  tenth  abb^  of  Clug- 
nj'  (q-  ^')j  who  flourished  in  the  12th  century,  became 
abbe  in  1157  or  1168.  Taking  sides  with  theanti-pope 
Yictor  IV,  he  was  excommunicated  by  pope  Alcxandcr 
III,  and  driven  from  the  abbey.  He  died  after  the  year 
1 166.  Several  works  are  attributed  to  him,  but  without 
good  reason.— //m/.  litt.  de  la  France,  xiii,  571  są. ;  Hoe- 
fer, Nouv.  Biog.  Generale,  xxv,  442. 

Hugo  (St.)  of  Grenoble  was  bom  at  Chateauneof, 
in  the  Dauphiny,  and  became  a  priest  at  Yalence.  In 
1080  he  was  appointed  bishop  of  Grenoble,  but  he  only 
accepted  the  position  after  cousidcrable  hesitancy,  and 
even  left  the  bishopric  some  time  after,  and  retired  to 
the  abbey  of  Chaise-Dieu,  in  Clerroont,  as  a  Benedictine 
monk.  By  order  of  pope  Gregory  VII,  however,  he  re- 
tumed  again  to  Grenoble.  He  died  there  April  1, 1199. 
He  was  decląred  saint  two  years  after  by  pope  Innocent 
II.  Hugo  was  a  very  pious  mau,  and  e^)ecially  rigid  in 
the  enforcement  of  the  vow  of  celibacy.  Doring  filty- 
three  years,  spent  in  the  active  duties  of  his  bishopric, 
it  is  said  he  never  saw  the  face  of  a  woman  except  that 
of  ono  aged  mendicant.  See  ReaUEncgldcp.f.  d.  KaikoL 
Deutsckl.  V,  630  są. ;  Lea,  IJistory  o/Sacerdotal  Celibacy, 
p.  238. 

Hugo  OF  Langres.    See  Berekoarius. 

Hugo  OF  Lincoln,  was  bom  in  1140  at  Gratianopo- 
lia,  Burgundy,  and  was  first  a  regular  canoo,  and  later  a 
Carthuaian  monk.  When  Henry  II  founded  the  Car- 
thuaian  monasteiy  at  Witham,  in  Somersetahire,  he  in- 
vited  Hugo  to  accept  the  priorship  of  this  new  fonn- 
dation.  After  many  entreaties  by  Regina!,  bishop  of 
Bath,  Hugo  consented.  He  was  also  madę  biahc^  of 
lincohi  by  Henry  II.  He  died  in  Nov.  1200,  and  was 
canonized  at  Komę  in  1221.  See  Hoefer,  A  oar.  Biogr, 
GhłhtiU,  xxv,  448 ;  Wheatly,  JSooI;  ofCommon  Prayer, 
p.  76;  Lea,  liist.  o/Sacerdoi.  Celib,  p.  296.     (J. H.  W.) 

Hugo,  archbbhop  of  Lyoms,  ^vas  bom  about  the  mid- 
dle of  the  llth  century,  and  was  one  of  the  most  distin- 
guished supportcrs  of  the  Romish  Church,  in  her  efforts 
to  exalt  the  papacy,  during  the  last  half  of  the  llth  cen- 
tury, when  Gregory  VII  and  the  emperor  Henry  were 
arrayed  against  eech  other.  He  was  the  papai  lęgate 
(under  pope  Urban  II)  at  the  Council  of  Autun,  A.  D. 
1094rWho  pronoimced  the  ban  on  king  Philip  of  France 
for  the  repudiation  of  his*  lawful  w^ife  Bertha.  Hugo 
died  Oct.  7, 1 106.  His  only  works  are  hb  lettcrs,  which, 
according  to  the  Bitt.  Lit,  de  la  France  (ix,  p.  30B),  aie 
very  valuable  to  the  historian  of  the  12th  century.  See 
Neander,  Ch.  Bitt.  iv,  ;2S ;  Hoefer,  Nouv,  Biog.  Ghu  xjct, 
429  sq. 

Hugo  OF  Macon,  a  French  ecclesiastic,  was  hom 
about  the  close  of  the  llth  century,  and  was  educated 
by  his  cousin  St.  Bernard.  He  was  appointed  ahbć  of 
Pontigny,  as  the  representative  of  which  he  appeared 
in  1128  at  the  Council  of  Troyes.  In  August,  1186,  ha 
was  elected  bishop  of  Auxerre,  and  was  consecrated  the 
January  following.  He  was  an  attendant  at  the  Coun- 
cil of  Sens,  which  condemned  the  doctrines  of  Abelard 
(ą.v.) ;  also  in  1148  at  the  Council  of  Rheims,  where  be 
oombated  the  opinions  of  Gilbert  de  la  Poiree.  He 
stood  high  in  the  estimate  of  popes  and  prinoea.  After 
his  death,  Oct.  10, 1161,  the  manner  in  which  he  dia- 
poeed  of  the  immense  fortunes  which  he  had  amawed 
by  great  avariciousness,  and  which,  instead  of  being  be- 
ąueathed  for  distribution  among  the  poor  of  his  diocese, 
were  given  to  his  nephew,  greatly  annoyed  his.friendS) 
and  his  couaiii,  the  pious  St,  Bernard,  flnalty  had  the  witt 


HUGO 


389 


HUGO 


aniMillwl  by  pope  Eugene  III.  He  is  sald  to  have  writ^ 
ten  aeyenl  boolu,  bat  tbere  ara  no  writings  extant  wbicb 
can  be  definitely  daimed  as  laa.^Hitt.  LiłLde  la  France, 
Xli,  408 ;  Hoefer,  JVbttr.  Biog,  Gm,  xxv,  488. 

Hugo  op  MoNCEAUx,  a  distinguiabed  French  di- 
rine,  was  bom  in  the  early  part  of  the  12th  century. 
He  was  fint  monk  at  Yizchty,  then  abb^  of  Su  Germain 
(1162).  He  was  consecrated  by  pope  Alexander  IH, 
April  21, 1163.  The  pretensions  of  bishop  Haurice,  of 
Paris,  to  assist  in  the  ceremony  were  energetically  op- 
poeed  by  Hago,  and  this  occasioned  a  controyeny,  of 
which  a  sommary  was  publUhed  by  Hugo.  It  forma  a 
Tery  inceresting  document  of  his  time  (printed  in  the 
coUection  of  Andre  Duchesne,  yoL  iv).  In  the  same  year 
(May  19)  Hugo  aasisted  at  the  Council  of  Toun,  where 
he  continued  the  contioversy  with  Maurice,  which  was 
finally  biought  before  the  pope,  who  decided  in  favor  of 
the  monk.  In  1165  (Aug.  22)  Hugo  was  one  of  the  ab- 
b^  who  presided  at  the  baptism  of  the  ro3ra]  infant, 
later  Philip  Augustus.  He  was  also  about  this  time  in- 
tniBted  with  rarious  ecdesiastical  offices,  and  in  1179  he 
attcnded  the  Council  of  Latran.  He  died  Mar.  27, 1 182. 
— Hoefer,  Now.  Biogr,  Ghtirale,  xxv,  446 ;  rOsł.  Litt 
de  la  France,  xiii,  615;  GaiKa  Christiana,  vii,  coL  442. 
(J.H.W.) 

Hugo  OF  NoNAMT,  an  English  divine,  was  bom  at 
Konant,  in  Nomiandy,  in  the  first  half  of  the  12th  cen- 
tury, and  was  educated  at  Oxford  Univenuty.  About 
1 17S  he  becazne  archdeacon  of  Li8ieux,and,  towards  1 185, 
bishop  of  (3oventry.  He  was  the  Romish  legate  to  £ng< 
land  during  the  administration  of  the  bishops  of  Dur- 
ham  and  of  £ly,  in  the  absence  of  Richard  to  the  East^ 
and  his  influence  caused  the  removal  of  these  bishope  in 
1191.  Only  three  years  later  he  was  himself  driven 
fmm  his  see,  but  he  was  permitted  in  1195  to  retom 
agiin,  on  paying  a  fine  of  5000  roarks  8ilver  to  the  royal 
tieasoiy.  He  died  in  April,  1198,  during  a  voyage,  or, 
more  probably,  while  in  exile  a  second  time.  The  re- 
cital of  the  diśgiace  of  the  bishop  of  £ly  was  written 
down  by  Hago^  and  has  been  published  by  Roger  of 
Hoveden  (^Scripf,  Rer,  Ang,^  702).  It  is  a  veiy  vioIent 
pamphlet.— //iftf.  Litt,  de  la  France^  xv ;  Hoefer,  Noiw, 
Biog.  Gimerakj  xxv,  447. 

Hii^O  DB  Paoanis.    See  Knioht  Tempłars. 

Hugo  OP  Poitiers,  a  monk  of  T^zelay,  of  whose 
life  but  little  is  known,  flourished  in  the  12th  century. 
He  wiote  a  history  of  the  monasteiy  of  Tezelay,  which 
bas  been  pablished  by  D'Achery  in  his  SpiciUgium,  iii. 
He  is  also  supposed  by  some  to  be  the  author  of  the 
Ckromgue  de»  Comłes  de  Nerers,  inserted  by  Labbe  in 
his  N<mveUe  BibUołhegue  det  Manuscrits,  He  died  about 
n^l.—Hisf,Litt.dela  Franw, vii, 668 są.;  Hoefer, A^our. 
Biogr,  Gin,  xxv,  439. 

Hugo  OF  Porto  was  bom  about  the  middle  of  the 
llth  oentuiy.  He  was  archdeaoon  of  Compostelle  nntil 
the  biahopric  of  Porto  was  established  in  1114,  when 
lingo  was  elected  to  this  see.  He  was  a  member  of 
aerenl  Chorch  councils  in  1122-25.  He  died  about 
1125.  Of  his  writtngs,  the  Hittory  of  the  Church  of 
CompoMteU/e,  which  has  never  been  printed,  is  of  especial 
valQe  for  the  history  of  his  diocese.— //«» ^oire  LUt.  de  la 
France,  xi,  115 ;  Hoefer,  N<mv,  Biog.  Genirale,  xxv,  436. 
(J.H.W.) 

Hago  w  Rhbisis,  son  of  count  Herbert  of  Yerman- 
dois,  flouriahed  in  the  lOth  centuiy.  He  was  elected 
arebbishop  of  Rheims  when  not  quite  flve  years  old, 
and  installed  as  head  of  the  Church  in  that  city  by  the 
power  of  his  father ;  bat  only  six  years  later  Hugo  was 
nceeeded  by  the  monk  Artokl  or  Artaud.  Herbert, 
disatiafled  with  this  appointment,  madę  Artold  prison- 
cr,  and  caUed  a  synod  at  Soissons,  which  oonfirmed  his 
son  Hugo  in  the  aichbishopric.  After  Heiberfs  death 
Artokl  was  liberated,  and  great  oontentions  aroee  be- 
tween  the  two  incumbents  of  the  same  see.  in  947  a 
•TDod  was  hekl  at  Terdun ;  but  this,  as  well  as  another 


held  at  Mousson  in  948,  proved  of  no  avail,  as  Hng4 
had  secuied  for  himself  the  intercession  of  the  pope,  who 
decreed  that  Hugo  should  hołd  the  archbishopric.  The 
friends  of  Artold  finally  re8olved  to  hołd  a  national  R\'n- 
od,  when  Hugo  was  deposed  and  Artold  installed.  See 
Schrbckh,  Kirehengeseh.  xxii,  252  sq. 

Hugo  of  Riremont,  a  French  theologian  of  the 
12th  century,  of  whose  life  but  little  is  known,  was  the 
author  of  Epistoła  de  Natura  et  Origine  Amma  (in 
Martynę,  Anecdota,  i,  868),  which  is  based  on  the  real 
and  supposed  works  of  Augustine.  Of  Aristotle^s  treat- 
ise  On  the  Soul  he  seems  to  have  been  unaware.— Hoe- 
fer, M>ur.  Biog.  Gen.  xxv,  447 ;  Ilist,  Litt.  de  la  France, 
xi,  113. 

Hugo  OP  Sancto  Caro  (ffugh  ofSł.  Cher),  some* 
timcs  also  called  Huoo  de  S.Tiieodorioo,  an  eminent 
French  theologian,  was  bom  at  St.  Cher  (whence  his 
sumame),  a  suburb  of  Yicnne,  France,  about  1200.  He 
studied  theology  and  canon  law  at  ]?aris,  and  in  1224 
joined  the  Dominicans  in  the  oonvent  of  SL  Jacąuea 
(whence  he  is  also  called  Huoo  de  St.  Jacobo),  and  iu 
1227  was  madę  "  provincial*'  of  this  order  in  France. 
He  also  taught  theology  in  Paris,  and  was  counected 
with  se  veral  scientific  undertakinga.  He  was  one  of  the 
commissioners  who  examined  and  oondemned  the  Jn^ 
Łrodoctorius  in  £vang.  atem.  of  the  Franciscan  Gerhard, 
which  developed  the  fanatical  doctrines  of  Alb.  Joachim 
of  Florę  (q.  v.),  and  was  active  in  the  controver8y  of 
William  de  St  Amour  with  the  mendicant  orders.  In 
1245  he  was  madc  cardinal  by  Innocent  lY,  and  died  at 
Oirieto  in  1268.  The  reputation  of  Hugo,  however, 
rests  chiefly  upon  his  Biblisal  studies  and  writtngs.  In 
1230  he  executed  a  revision  of  the  tcxt  of  the  Latin 
Yuigate,  an  immense  labor  for  that  age.  A  copy  of  this 
work.  preservcd  in  the  Nuremberg  IJbrary,  has  this  ti* 
tle :  ^^  Liber  de  correctionibus  norie  super  Biblia,  ad  scien- 
dum  qutB  sit  verior  et  communior  litera,  Reverendisimi 
patris  et  domini  D.  Hugonis,  sacra  Rom.  eccL  presby- 
teri  cardinalis,  sacra  theologiiB  professoiis  et  de  ordine 
prsBdicatorum."  His  principal  published  works  are  PoS" 
tiUtB  in  unicersa  Biblia,  a  sort  of  brief  oommentar^',  pre* 
pared,  however,  without  sufiicient  acquauitance  with 
the  original  languages  of  the  Bibie  (Basil,  1487,  etc) : — 
Speculum  ecclesia  (Lyons,  1554).  But  his  most  imi)or- 
tant  senrioe  to  Biblical  literaturę  was  his  conception  of 
the  plan  of  a  Concordance,  which  he  executed,  with  the 
aid  of  many  monks  of  his  order,  in  his  Sacrontm  BibL 
ConcordantuB  (latest  ed.  Avignon,  1786,  2  vols.  4to).  I( 
is  an  alphabetical  iudex  of  all  the  wotdis  in  the  Yulgate, 
and  has  formeil  the  model  of  all  Concordances  to  the 
Bibie.  It  had  the  effect  also  of  briuging  the  divi8ion 
into  chapters  and  verses  into  generał  use.  See  Qućtif 
et  Echard,  Scriptores  ordinis  prte€Hcatorum,  i,  194  8q.; 
Hist,  Litter.  de  la  France,  xix,  88  są. ;  Richard  Simon, 
NoureUes  óbsercaiions  sur  le  fexte  et  les  rersions  du  N, 
Test.  ii,  128;  Herzog,  Real-Encyldop*  voL  vi;  Hoefer, 
Nouv.  Biog.  Gen.  xxv,  450 ;  Kitto,  BibL  Cgdop.  ii,  340. 

Hugo  of  St.  Yictor,  said  to  have  been  count  of 
Blankenbarg,  was  bom  at  Ein,  near  Ypree,  about  1097, 
and  educated  in  the  oonvent  of  Hammersleben,  near 
HalbeiBtadt.  When  eighteen  years  of  age  he  went  to 
Parts,  and  joined  the  Augustines  of  St.Yictor.  He  next 
became  professorof  theology,  and  his  success  as  a  teach- 
er  and  writer  was  very  brilliant  He  died  at  Paris  about 
1141.  Hugo  was  the  most  spiritual  theologian  of  his 
time,  and  the  precuraor  of  the  later  Mystics.  He  rec- 
ommended  the  use  of  the  Bibie  for  private  devotion,  and 
urged  also  its  study  on  priests  and  teachers.  He  fol- 
lowed  the  theology  of  Augustine  so  strictly,  and  ex- 
pounded  it  so  succeasfully,  that  he  was  called  Augustine 
the  Second,  and  the  Mouih  ofA  ugustine.  "  In  Hugo  we 
see  the  repie8entative  of  a  school  distinguished  in  the 
12th  century  for  its  hearty  religious  spirit,  and  its  tend- 
ency  to  praćtical  reform ;  a  school  which,  though  it  imi- 
ted' more  or  less  the  my8tico-€ontemplative  with  the 
specu]ative  element,  yeŁ  constantly  kept  np  the  contesi 


HUGO 


390 


HUGO 


witk  th«  prodominanŁ  dUIectic  tendency  of  the  tioMS. 
If,  in  Abelard,  we  eee  thoae  spińtuAl  tendenciee  whicb 
h«d  been  hannonioudy  united  by  Anwliii,  brought  into 
oonflict  niitk  each  other,  we  we  them  onoe  morę  recon- 
ciled  in  Hugo,  but  with  this  differenoe,  that  in  him  the 
dialectical  dement  tB  not  bo  strong  as  it  was  in  Anselm. 
In  his  doctrinal  inyestigationB,  he  often  has  refeienoe  to, 
and  contends  against  Abelaid,  though  without  mention- 
ing  his  name.  The  empirical  department  of  knowledge 
generallyi  and  in  theology  the  study  of  the  older  Church 
teachen,  and  of  the  Bibie,  was  madę  specially  promi- 
nent by  Hugo,  in  opposition  to  one-sided  speculation  and 
innovating  influences.  His  principle  was,  ^  Study  every- 
thing;  thou  wilt  afterwards  see  that  nothing  is  super- 
fluous.'  Adopting  the  definition  of  faith  in  the  eleventh 
chapter  of  the  Epistle  to  the  Hebrews,  he  remarks, 
'Faith  is  called  the  substance  of  things  inyisible,  be- 
cause  that  which,  as  yet,  is  not  an  object  of  open  vision, 
is  by  faith,  in  a  oertain  sense,  madę  present  to  the  soul 
.— actuaUy  dweUs  in  iu  Nor  is  there  anything  else 
whereby  the  things  of  God  could  be  demonstrated,  sińce 
they  are  higher  than  all  others ;  nothing  resembles  them 
which  could  serre  ns  as  a  bridge  to  that  higher  knowl- 
edge.' Hence  he  declared  that,  in  regard  to  the  essence 
of  tnie  faith,  much  morę  depends  on  the  degree  of  devo- 
tion  than  on  the  extent  of  knowledge ;  for  divine  grace 
does  not  look  at  the  amount  of  knowledge  united  with 
faith,  but  at  the  degree  of  devotion  with  which  that 
which  ooustitutes  the  object  of  faith  is  loved"  (compare 
Trench,  Sac  LaL  Poetry,  p.  54).  In  the  struggle  then 
laging  between  scholasttctsm  (Bernhard)  and  mysticism 
(Abelard),  Hugo  inclined  rather  to  mysticism ;  but,  in- 
stead  of  favoring  exclusively  the  one,  he  aimed  rather 
at  combining  the  two  antagonisdc  doctrines,  and  giving 
birth  to  a  new  system,  oontaining  the  better  elements 
of  both.  It  is  for  this  reasou  that  we  oftentimes  find 
one  or  the  other  of  these  doctrines  quite  promiscuously 
advocated  in  his  writings.  A  toleiably  accurate  idea  of 
Hugo*s  OMm  doctrines,  and  of  the  peculiarities  of  his  sys- 
tem, may  be  obtained  by  a  study  of  his  Summa  sentm- 
tiarum,  In  man,  says  he,  there  is  a  threefold  eye :  the 
bodUtf  eye,  for  yisible  things ;  the  eye  of  reason,  which 
enables  man  to  see  his  own  soul  and  its  faculties;  and 
the  eye  of  contempiaiumf  to  view  dirine  things.  But 
j  by  sin  the  eye  of  contemplation  has  become  blinded,  so 
that  faith,  which  has  the  advantage  of  realizing  with- 
out seeing,  comes  in  its  stead,  and  is  the  organ  of  the 
knowledge  of  the  superterrestiial ;  while  the  eye  of  rea- 
sou is  not  80  greatly  obscured  as  to  excu8e  man's  ig- 
norance  of  diviue  things.  Thus  he  acutely  distinguishes 
between  what  is  possible  to  be  known  ex  ratione,  the 
♦*  necessaria"  (natural  laws),  and  what  secundum  ratum- 
em,  the  **  probabilia,"  as  well  as  what  lies  mpra  ration- 
em,  the  ''mirabilia"  (di\óne  things),  and  what  must  be 
acknowlcdged  to  be  contra  rationem,  the  "  incrcdibilia." 
Subject  to  knowledge  are  the  neceuariai  subject  to  faith 
the  probabilia  and  mirabilia,  Faith,  he  continues,  is 
supported  by  leason,  leason  is  perfccted  by  faith.  The 
certainty  of  faith  is  superior  to  opinion,  but  not  to 
knowledge ;  stiU  scire  quod  ipgum,  sit  must  precede  faith ; 
after  (aith  comes  iaUlUffere  guid  ipmnn  sif,  Purity  of 
heart  and  prayer  lead  upon  the  steps  of  cogitaHo,  medi- 
tatiOf  and  amten^tlałiOf  gradually  to  this  higher  intui- 
tion,  which  aifords  a  leal  foretaste  of  beaven  itself  (com- 
pare Ebrard,  UdbaeK  d.  KirdL  u.  Dogmen-Getch.  ii,  220). 
In  his  De  aacramenii*  fidei,  treating  of  redemption,  he 
regards  man  as  the  end  of  creation,  and  God  as  the  end 
of  man.  Li  the  doctrine  of  the  attributes  of  God,  he 
consideis,  Uke  Abelard,  power,  wisdom,  and  goodness  as 
primary,  but  oontradicts  Abelard  in  his  yiew  that  what 
God  does  is  the  limit  of  his  omnipotence.  With  An- 
selm,  he  seeks  to  exhibit  the  doctrine  of  the  Trinity  by 
analogy  with  the  human  spiriu  Spirit,  wisdom,  and 
love,  says  he,  coirespond  to  the  three  divine  persons; 
but,  while  human  wisdom  and  alTection  are  liable  to 
changes,  the  divine  are  not.  On  the  doctrine  of  the  will, 
he  modified  Angustine  alightly.    He  distiogoiahesi  in 


order  to  hannoiiise  the  fieedom  of  man  with  the  on* 
nipotenoe  of  God,  between  willingjMr  je,  and  the  fbasą 
of  the  wiil  upon  something  definite ;  making  the  fonns 
free,  and  the  latter  boond  by  the  raoral  goYcmment  of 
God.  God  is  oomeąuently  not  OMclor  ruendi,  bat  only 
ordinator  utoedatdi,  Hugo  was  also  the  first  to  adranoe 
distinctly  the  idea  of  ffraiia  ntperaddita.  Grace  is  boik 
creatrix  and  salvatrixf  of  these,  the  creatrix  involved 
the  power  to  be  free  from  sin,  but  positirdy  to  do  good 
required  gratia  appoeiia,  Ailer  the  fali,  ^otea  opatmt 
had  to  be  added  to  graiia  co-operoM*  The  essence  of 
original  sin  he  holds  to  consist  in  ignoranoe  and  concn- 
piscence.  To  the  doctrine  of  the  sacramenta  Hugo  wis 
the  first  of  the  scholastics  to  give  definiteneas.  Unsit- 
isfied  with  Augustine's  definition  of  them  aa  sacnt  rei 
M^num,  he  says,  in  his  Summa,  that  the  sacrament  is  rip- 
tbilis  forma  imńaibilis  graiia,  in  eo  eoUatte,  Jnhń  Jk 
sacramerUis^fidei  he  defines  it  stiil  more  distinctly  as*^a 
corporeal,  actually  peroeptible  element,  which,  by  virtiie 
of  the  dirine  institution,  exhibits,  and  really  containa. 
symbolically,  inyisible  giace."  He  also  distinguishes 
three  classes  of  sacraments :  the  first,  those  on  which 
salyation  espedally  depends  (Baptian  and  the  Loid's 
Supper) ;  the  second,  those  which  ue  not  neceasaiy  to 
salyation,  but  yet  useful  for  sanctification—the  number 
of  these  is  indefinite ;  and,  thirdly,  that  which  aeryes  to 
qua]ify  for  the  administration  of  the  other  sacraments-^ 
priestly  ordination.  To  the  first  daas,  Baptism  and  the 
Lord*s  Supper,  he  gaye  not  only  especial  prominenoe, 
but  he  laid  particular  streas  on  their  careful  obseryance. 
Of  course  he  beliered  in  transubstantiation,  calling  the 
modę  of  the  change  transitio,  but  he  considered  it  a 
means  of  comrounion  with  Christ.  The  best  edition  of 
his  oollected  works  is  the  fint— Opera  Omnia,  stud.  Badii 
Ascensti  et  J.  Par>d  (Paris,  1526, 3  yols.  fol).  The  later 
editions  are  Yenice,  1588;  Cologne,  1617;  Rouen,  1648: 
all  in  8  yols.  See  Neander,  Ck.  Iliatorp,  iy,  401  sq. ;  Du- 
pin, Jiccles.  Writers,  12th  century ;  Oudin,  CommaU.  de 
Script.  Eceles.  t  ii,  p.  1 138 ;  Schmid,  AfytHcitmus  d.  Afit- 
telalłers  (Jena,  1824) ;  Liebner,  Monogrophie  Uber  Ifvgo 
(Leips.  1832).  A  number  of  the  writings  attributed  to 
Hugo  are  probably  not  his,  and  others  of  his  real  writ- 
ings remain  unedited.  The  task  of  selecting  what  are 
and  what  are  not  his  genuine  works  has  becn  under* 
taken  by  M.  Haufiteu,  of  Paris,  who  will  doubtkas  do  it 
fuli  jusUce.  See  Hoefer,  Kouv,  Biog.  Genirale,  xxy,  436 
8q.;  Herzog,  J2ea^£'ncyib/c!p.yi,  308  sq.;  Manrioe,  i^edf- 
(Kval  Płulos.  p.  144  sq. ;  Tiedemann,  GtisL  der  ^peemlaL 
Philof.  iy,  289  Bq. ;  Tennemann,  Geaeh,  d.  Pkiia$,  yiii,  206 
sq.;  Schruckh,ArtrcAen^e«dl.xxiy,p.d92sq.;  xzix,374 
sq.;  Hagenbach,//M&  o/* /)oe/riw«  (seelndex);  Nean- 
der, Hisł.  o/ Christian  Dogmas,  ii,  467  są.    (J.  H.  W.) 

Hugo  Alcelln  db  Billom,  or  Huoo  Si^rnc,  was 
bom  at  Billom,  in  Auyergne,  about  1230,  was  educatcd 
at  the  college  of  the  Church  of  SL  Sirfene,  and  after- 
wards entered  the  monastery  at  dermont  He  preach- 
ed  at  yarious  places  with  great  suocess,  and  was  award- 
ed,  on  account  of  his  superior  scholarship,  the  doctonhip 
of  diyinity  by  the  Uniyerńty  of  Paris,  where  he  was  af- 
terwards profesBor  of  theology.  In  1285  Hugo  went  to 
Bome,  and  was  appointed  1^  pope  Honorius  IV  master 
of  his  palące.  Nicolas  IV  madę  him  caidinal,  May  15, 
1288.  He  died  at  Borne  Dec.  29, 1297.  He  is  said  to 
haye  written  works  on  the  heatific  rision,  an  apologetic^ 
al  work  against  the  coRupters  of  the  doctrines  of  St 
Thomas,  On  Jeremiah,  a  yolume  of  Sennons,  etc.  See 
Echard,  Scripłores  ordims  Prcedicatoruwt,  i,  450  8q.; 
Encgdoj),  Theoiog.  xxxi,  1091  aq.;  Hoefer,  Aoup.  Biog, 
Generale,  xxy,  460. 

Hugo,  Eth^iien,  a  Tuscan  theologian  of  the  12th 
century,  contemporary  of  pope  Alexander  III,  to  whom 
he  dedicated  the  principal  of  his  works,  liyed  some  time 
at  the  oourt  of  Constantinople,  and  was  higfaly  estcemed 
by  the  empeior  Comnenus.  On  the  occaaion  of  his  oon- 
ference  with  the  Greek  theologians  he  wrote  his  treatise 
Zte  Hesresibus  quas  Grad  m  Lattnos  dewbfuntt  ałso 


HUGO 


391 


HTJGUENOTS 


known  nmler  tbe  title  of  De  ImmorłaU  Dto,  libri  iii.  Ii 
is  poblished  in  the  Lyons  edition  of  Łhe  LSbrary  ofthe 
Fatkers,  toL  xxii,  coL  1196.  The  same  oollecdoii  oon- 
tal:i8  abo  a  treatise  of  Hago  on  the  Statt  ofthe  Soul 
9fpara*fl  from  the  Ak^^— Dupin,  Bibl,  des  Auteura  «s 
dis.  da  dotaikme  nidef  Hoefer,  Nouv.  Biog,  Gin.  xxt, 

Haso  GrotinB.    See  Grotius. 

Hn^Oi  Herman,  a  distingnished  Jesuit,  bom  at 
Brnitels  in  1588,  'wrote  8evei«l  histoiical  and  theological 
workflL  He  is  celebrated  on  aoooont  of  his  Pia  denderia 
eaUflemaiamiilu*trala(iG2i,Bvoi  1629, 12mo;  Łransla- 
ted  into  English  as  Dińne  Addresses,  by  Edmund  Ark- 
water,  3d  ediU  oorrected,  Lond.  1702, 8vo).  He  died  of 
the  plague  at  Rheinbeig  Sept.  10, 1629.  See  Darling, 
C^c^^>ULii,1572;  Aou9.Z>fct//M&p.886. 

Hnsoclano,  Frahcois,  a  distingoished  Roman 
Catholic  prelate,  acoording  to  some  was  an  Englishman 
br  birth,  but  acoording  to  others  was  bom  at  Fiu  in  the 
(^  half  of  the  14Łh  century.  By  an  acquaintance 
which  he  foraied  with  pope  BÓniface  IX  he  was  able  to 
procoie  the  archbishopric  of  Bordeaux  in  1889,  and  some 
time  aftier  be  was  alao  madę  Bonifa£e*s  legate  to  Gas- 
cogne,  the  kingdoms  of  Nararre,  Castile,  Leon,  and  Ar^ 
agOD.  In  1406  he  was  madę  cardinal  by  pope  Innocent 
VII,  and  was  employed  by  the  papai  chair  in  sereral 
theokigłcftl  controTersiesL  He  was  especially  prominent 
at  the  Gooncil  of  Pisa  in  1409.  He  died  at  Florence 
Ang.  14, 1412.  See  i:iKyd(^.rAio£.  xxxi,  1082  są.  (J. 
H.W.) 

Hngonet,  Fhiubert,  a  distinguished  Roman 
Catholic  prelate  who  flourishcd  in  the  15th  century, 
was  educated  at  the  uniyeniŁies  of  Dijon,  Turin,  and 
Pkdua.  and  sucoeeded  his  uncle  in  the  bishopric  of  Ma- 
con.  He  was  madę  cardinal  in  1473  by  pope  Sixtas  lY, 
and  died  at  Romę  in  1484.  See  Kncychp,  TkeoL  xxxi, 
1083 ;  Hoefer,  Now.  Biog.  Gin.  xxv,  426. 

Hngnoeio  of  Pisa.    See  Glossatobiss. 

Hagoenota,  originally  a  nickname  applied  to  the 
partiflaos  of  the  Reformation  in  France.  The  origin  of 
ihis  word  is  lather  obecure.  Some  derive  it  from  Htn- 
ffuom,  a  word  applied  in  Tooiaine  to  penons  who  walk 
at  nigbt  in  the  street— the  early  French  Protestants, 
hke  the  eaiiy  Christians,  haying  chosen  that  time  for 
their  religious  assemblies.  Others  deńre  it  ftom  a 
fiuilty  pronnnciation  of  the  German  Eidgenouen,  signi- 
fyii^  amfederatet,  on  account  ofthe  connection  between 
the  French  Protestants  and  the  Swiss  confederates,  who 
maintained  theroselres  against  the  tynmnical  attcmpts 
of  Charles  III,  duke  of  Savoy,  and  were  called  Eignott. 
Others  derive  it  from  the  put  which  the  French  Ph>t^ 
c«tants  took  in  sustaining  Henry  IV,  the  descendant  of 
Hagnes  Capet,  to  the  throne  of  France  against  the 
Gaises.  Another  derivation  is  from  the  subterraneous 
Tanlto  in  which  they  held  their  assemblies,  ontside  the 
walls  of  Tours,  near  a  gate  called  Fourgon,  an  alteration 
fnm/eu  Iłw^on.  This  last  derivation  is  strengthened 
by  the  iact  that  they  were  originally  called  *'  Huguenots 
oi  Tonn."  StiU  others  derive  it  firom  the  namc  of  a 
rety  smali  coin  of  the  time  of  Huguee,  to  dcnote  the 
Tile  eonditioa  of  the  Protestanta.  Thos  the  distin- 
guished German  philologlst,  Prof.  Mahn,  of  Berlin,  in 
his  Etfmohgudte  Uwlermckungen  auf  dem  Gebide  der 
Romamtckm  Sprathen^  gives  no  less  than  fifteen  sup- 
posed  deiiyations,  bat  inclines  himself  to  the  opinion 
that  the  word  Hoguenot  was  originally  applied  as  a 
nickname  to  the  eariy  French  Pr^estants,  and  that  it 
was  deriyed  firom  Hughuetj  the  name  of  some  heretic  or 
oonspiiator,  and  was  formed  ftom  it  by  the  addition  of 
the  French  diminatiTe  ending  o^,  like  Jacot,  Margot, 
Jeannot,et<:i 

At  the  veiy  oommencement  of  the  Reformation  in 
Gennany,  adherenta  of  the  cause  of  the  Reformen 
qitaog  np  in  France,  then  under  the  goyemment  of 
Fnods  L    Under  the  powerftil  support  which  these 


French  Reflmners  found  in  Margaret  of  NaTarre,  aister 
of  the  king,  as  eariy  as  1523  Melchior  Wolmar,  a  Swiss, 
preached  the  Gospel  in  the  south  of  France,  and  Ui- 
theran  societies,  at  this  time  calling  themselves  Gospel- 
lers  (q.  v.),  were  organized  by  Gerhard  Ronssel  and  Ja- 
cob  Lefevrek  See  Fabeb.  The  circulation  of  Lefevre's 
New  Testament  by  the  thoosand  throughoot  France  by 
peddlers  ftom  Switxeriand,  where  copies  were  printed 
by  Farel  (q.  v.),  still  further  increased  the  number  of 
the  Reformers,  and  flnally  led  to  the  promulgataon  of  an 
ordinance  by  the  Sortwnne,  obtained  from  the  king,  for 
the  mppreśfhn  ofjninimg  (Feh.  26, 1685).  In  1538,  Cal- 
vin  (q.  V.),  who  had  been  inyited  to  Paris  by  the  rector 
of  the  Uniyersity,  began  to  preach  the  new  doctrines  in 
that  and  other  dties,  and  by  his  eflbrts  greatly  further- 
ed  the  success  ofthe  French  Protestanta,  who  now  began 
to  be  known  by  the  name  of  Hnguenots.  Indced,  so 
nmnerons  had  they  become,that  to  exterminate,  if  poe- 
sible,  by  force,  their  doctrine  before  it  should  spread  for- 
ther,  the  Church  resorted,  by  oonsent  of  the  king,  in 
1545,  to  a  massacre  in  the  Vaudois  of  Provence,  which 
was  acoompanied  by  horrors  impossible  to  describe. 
The  new-yiew  religion,  howeyer,  madę  rapid  progreBS 
in  spite  of  all  persecotions,  and  men  of  rank,  of  leaming, 
and  of  arms  ranged  themselyes  in  its  defence.  **  The 
heads  of  the  house  of  Bourbon,  Antoine,  duke  of  Ven- 
d6me,  and  Louis,  prinoe  of  Conde,  decbńed  themselyes 
in  its  fiiyor.  The  former  became  the  husband  of  the 
celebrated  Jeanne  d*Albret,  queen  of  Nayarre,  daughter 
of  the  Protestant  Margaret  of  Valois,  and  the  latter  be- 
came the  recognised  leader  of  the  Huguenots.  The 
head  of  the  Coligny  family  took  the  same  side.  The 
Montmorencies  were  diyided ;  the  Constable  halting  be- 
tween the  two  opinions,  waiting  to  see  which  should 
proye  the  stronger,  while  others  of  the  family  openly 
sided  with  the  Reformed.  Indeed,  it  seemed  at  one 
time  as  if  France  were  on  the  point  of  tuming  Protest- 
ant." The  Huguenots  had  become  strong  enough  to 
hołd  a  iynod  as  early  as  1559,  and  in  1561  cardinal  De 
Sainte-Croix,  becoming  alarmed,  ^note  the  pope,  "  The 
kingdom  is  lóready  half  Huguenot,"  while  the  Yenctian 
arobassador  Micheli  reported  to  his  govemmcnt  that  no 
proyinoe  in  France  was  free  fnm  Pkotestants.  The 
Roman  Catholic  clcrgy,  in  influence  at  court,  now  de- 
cided  to  driye  Henry  II  to  a  morę  determined  opposi- 
tion  against  the  Huguenots  by  assuring  him  that  his  life 
was  threatened.  Cardinal  de  Lorraine,  the  head  of  the 
Church  in  France,  dcclared  to  him  that,  **  if  the  secnlar 
arm  failed  in  its  duty,  all  the  malcontents  would  throw 
themselyes  into  this  detestable  eect.  They  would  first 
destroy  the  ecclesiastical  power,  and  the  royal  power 
would  come  next.*'  The  immediate  consequence  was  a 
royal  edict,  in  1559,  declaring  the  crime  of  heresy  pun- 
ishable  by  death,  and  forbidding  the  judges  to  remit  or 
mitigate  the  penalty.  The  fires  of  persccution,  which 
had  for  a  time  been  smouldcring,  again  burst  forth. 
The  proyincial  Parliaments,  at  the  instigation  of  the 
Guises,  established  Chamhrts  ardentet  for  the  punish* 
ment  of  Protestanta;  and  exccutions,  confiscations,  and 
banishments  became  the  order  of  the  day  throughout 
France.  The  death  of  Henry  II,  and  the  accession  of 
Francis  II,  did  not  modify  in  the  Icast  the  exi8ting  state 
of  afiairs.  Morę  violent  measures,  eyen,  were  taken, 
nonę  of  which  succeeded  in  eradicating  the  great  eyc- 
sore  of  the  adherenta  of  the  prevalent  Church,  whose 
oflfice  had  now  become  that  ofthe  execuŁioner  and  hang* 
man.  The  Protestants  could  endure  these  pcrsccutions 
no  longer,  and  resolyed  on  open  rerolt.  Protccted  by 
Antoine  de  Bourbon,  king  of  Nayarre,  by  the  Condes,  the 
Colignys,  and  also  by  such  Romanists  as  were  political- 
ly  opposed  to  the  Guises,  the  Huguenots  formed  a  strong 
opposition.  Haying  chosen  Louis  de  Condć  for  their 
leader,  they  decided,  Feb.  1, 1560,  at  Nantes,  to  address 
a  petition  to  the  king,  and,  in  case  it  were  rejected,  to 
put  down  the  Guises  by  force  of  arms,  capture  the  king, 
and  make  the  prince  of  Conde  goyemor  ofthe  kingdom. 
The  canying  out  of  this  plan  was  intrusted  to  Geoigea 


HUGUENOTS  2i 

de  Dani  de  U  Henaudie,  a  nobleman  from  Perigord. 
The  conspiracy,  how€vcr,  was  diaccwered  thiough  the 
treachery  of  count  Louis  de  Sancerrc,  and  the  court  was 
removed  to  Amboise.  Some  of  the  Huguenots  foliowed 
it  in  arms,  whcnce  the  whole  affair  became  known  as 
the  conspiracy  of  Amboise.  They  were  defeatcd,  how- 
ever,  by  the  forces  of  the  Guises,  and  1200  of  them, 
taken  as  prisonera,  were  executed.  The  Guises  now 
aimed  at  the  introduction  of  the  Inquisition  in  France ; 
bat,at  the  instigation  of  the  noble  chanoelloi  THopital 
[see  Hopital],  the  king  gave  to  Parliament,  by  the 
edict  of  Romorandn,  in  May,  ICCO,  the  right  of  deciding 
in  matters  of  faith,  leaying,  however,  to  the  bishopa  the 
priyilege  of  discorering  and  pointing  out  heretics. 

During  the  minority  of  Charles  IX,  who  ascended  the 
throne  I^c.  5, 1560,  a  boy  only  ten  years  old,  the  strife 
between  the  parties  which  dirided  the  court  became 
morę  yiolent,  as  the  chancellor  de  THópital,  on  the  as- 
sembling  of  Parliament  in  Dec  16(i0,  had  exhorted  men 
of  all  parties  ^*  to  rally  round  the  young  king ;  and,  while 
condemnlng  the  odious  punishments  which  had  recent- 
ly  been  inflicted  on  persona  of  the  Reformed  faith,  an- 
nounced  the  intended  holding  of  a  national  council,  and 
expre8sed  the  desire  that  henceforward  France  should 
recogniae  ndther  Huguenots  nor  papists,  but  only 
Frenchmen."  Catharine  de  Medicis,  the  regent,  who  re- 
gardcd  it  to  her  interest  to  balance  the  power  of  the  two 
parties  so  as  to  govern  both  morę  easily,  seconded  the 
yiews  of  the  chanceUor.  The  two  princes  of  Conde, 
who  had  been  prisonesB  at  Lyons  after  the  affair  of  Am- 
boise, were  liberated.  Antoine  de  Navarre  was  madę 
oonstable  of  France,  and  a  new  edict  was  published  in 
July,  1561,  which  granted  fuli  forgireness  to  the  Hugue- 
nots, who,  it  was  stated,  were  no  longcr  to  be  designated 
by  Buch  nicknames.  Finally,  a  conference  was  appoint- 
ed  (Sept.d)  for  both  parties  to  meetwith  a  view  to  eon- 
ciliation.  ITiis  conference  is  famous  in  history  as  the 
Conference  of  Poissy  (q.  v.).  The  Cardinal  de  Lorraine 
led  the  Roman  Catholic  thcologians,  but  was  signally 
defeated,  cspedally  by  the  arguments  of  Theodore  Beza. 
The  Huguenots,  emboldened  by  thcir  sucoess,  now 
adopted  the  Calyinistic  Confe88ion,<and,thus  unitcd,Tose 
roore  strongly  against  Romanism,  countuig  among  their 
friends  Catharine  herself,  who  had  been  forccd  to  their 
side  by  the  machinations  of  the  Guises.  January  17, 
1562,  a  royal  edict  was  issued,  guaranteeing  to  the  Prot- 
estants  liberty  of  worship.  The  Guises  and  thcir  parti- 
sans  now  became  exasperated.  On  Christmas  day,  1 562, 
about  3000  Protestanta  of  Yassy,  in  Champagne,  met  fogr 
divine  worship,  and  to  celebrate  the  sacrament  accord- 
ing  to  the  practices  of  their  Church.  Yassy  was  one  of 
the  possessions  of  the  Guises,  and  the  bishop  of  Chfilons 
complaining  to  Antoinette  de  Bourbon,  an  ardent  Roman 
Catholic,  she  threatened  the  Huguenots,  if  they  persist- 
ed  in  their  proceedings,  with  the  yengeance  of  hcr  son, 
the  duke  of  Guise.  Undismayed  by  ihis  threat,  the 
Protestants  of  Yassy  continued  to  meet  publicly,  and 
listen  to  their  preachers,  belieying  themselyes  to  be  on- 
der  the  protection  of  the  law,  according  to  the  terms  of 
the  royal  edict.  On  March  1, 1568,  while  the  Hugue- 
nots of  Yassy,  to  the  number  of  about  1200,  were  again 
aasembled  for  diyine  worship  in  a  barn —as  they  had 
ahortly  before  been  depriyed  of  their  churches  hy  Cath- 
arine, who  madę  this  concession  to  Antoine  de  Navarre, 
in  order  to  secure  her  support,  sdll  leaying  them,  how- 
eyer,iree  to  assemble  in  the  suburbe  and  in  the  country, 
on  the  estates  of  noblemen — they  were  attacked  by  a 
band  of  armed  men,  kd  by  the  duke  of  Guise,  and  mas- 
aacred.  For  an  hour  they  tired,  hacked,  and  stabbed 
amongst  them,  the  duke  coolly  watching  the  camage. 
Sixty  persons  of  both  sexes  were  leit  dead  on  the  ppot, 
morę  than  two  hundred  were  seyerely  wounded,  and  the 
rest  contriyed  to  escape.  Ailer  the  maseacre  the  duke 
aent  for  the  local  judge,  and  8e\'erely  reprimanded  him 
for  haying  permitted  the  Huguenots  of  Yassy  to  meet. 
The  judge  intrenched  himself  behind  the  edict  of  the 
king.    The  duke'8  eye  flashed  with  ragę,  and,  stiiking 


2  HUGUENOTS 

the  hilŁ  of  his  sword  with  his  haiid,  he  sald, "  The  ahaif  - 
edge  of  this  will  soon  cut  your  edict  to  piecea**  (Smiles, 
IluguenoU,  p.  48 ;  comp.  Dayila,  Hittoire  des  Gutrrta  d- 
mks  de  France,  ii,  379).  This  massacre  was  the  matdi 
applied  to  the  charge  ready  to  explode.  Ic  was  the 
signal  to  Catholic  Fnmce  to  rise  in  masa  against  the 
heretics,  and  to  Protestant  France  a  waming  for  thcir 
liyes.  An  army  of  Roman  Ctetholics  gatheied,  at  the 
head  of  which  were  the  duke  of  Guise,  the  constatle  of 
Montmorency,  and  marshal  St.  Andr^,  who  seizcd  the 
king  and  the  regent  under  pretence  of  proyiding  for 
their  safety,  proclaimed  the  Huguenots,  who  had  at  the 
same  time  been  gathering  at  Orlcans  under  Cond<^,  rtb- 
els,  and  sent  an  army  against  them.  Thus  bcgan  ihe 
firsŁ  war  of  the  JlyguettoU.  September  II,  1562,  the 
royal  troops,  after  much  bloodshed,  took  Rouen,  and  De- 
cember  19  a  battle  was  fought  at  Dreux,  in  which,  after 
a  terrible  struggle,  the  Protestants  jńc  Idcd.  One  of  the 
leaders  of  the  Romanists,  marshal  St.  Andre,  fell  in  bat- 
tle ;  another,  the  oonstable  of  Montmorency,  was  m&de 
prisoner  by  the  Huguenots,  and  Ihc  leader  of  the  latter 
in  tum  fell  into  the  hands  of  the  Guises.  An  excłiange 
of  prieoneis,  howerer,  was  immediatcly  clTectcd.  The 
duke  of  Guise  now  marched  against  Orleans,  but  wu 
assassinated  in  his  oiku  camp,  Fcb.  18, 1563,  before  he 
had  been  able  to  attack  thb  great  stronghoki  of  the 
Protestants.  The  queeu  mother,  realizing  the  loes  which 
the  Romanists,  to  whoee  side  she  had  been  forced  by 
policy,  had  sustaincd  in  the  death  of  the  duke  of  Guise, 
and  informed  of  a  threatened  in\7i6ion  of  the  English  on 
the  coast  of  Nonnandy,  conckidcd  the  pcace  of  Amboite, 
March  19,  by  which  the  Protestants  were  again  giantcd 
the  priyilcges  of  the  edict  of  1562,  with  seycral  addi- 
tions.  The  armies  now  unitcd,  and  madę  commcn  cause 
Against  the  English.  As  soon,  howeyer,  es  Catharine 
thought  herself  able  to  difpcnse  with  the  aid  of  the  Hu- 
guenots, whom  she  both  feared  and  hated,  and  on  whose 
destructlon  fhe  włs  rcsolyed,  fhe  egain  restricted  the 
priyileges  ccnccdcd  them  in  the  edict  of  Amboise,  form- 
ed  a  closc  alliance  with  Spain  for  the  CKtirpation  of 
heresy,  and  madę  attempts  to  secure  the  impriaonment, 
and  death  if  possible,  of  Cond<$  and  of  the  admirał  Co> 
ligny  (q.  y.).  The  Huguenots  now  became  aUmned, 
and  their  leaders  adopted  the  rcsolution,  Sept,  29, 1567, 
to  secure,  &t  the  castle  of  Morccanx,  the  king*s  person, 
in  whose  name  Catharine  de  Medicis  was  acting.  The 
court,  haying  receiycd  information  of  this  decision,  fled 
to  Pańs.  Cond^  immcdiately  foliowed,  and,  laying  dege 
to  the  city,  opened  the  seeond  tcar  of  the  Hugucnoit, 
After  a  uege  of  one  month,  Cond<$  and  the  conatable 
Montmorency  met  for  battle,  Nox'ember  10, 1567,  at  Sr. 
Denis.  Herę  2700  Huguenots  fought  against  no  less 
than  20,000  royal  troops.  But  so  well  did  the  Huguenots 
maintain  thdr  ground,  that  the  yictoiy  was  undeddedL 
The  Euperior  force  of  the  royal  troops  Icd  Comle  to  f&n 
back  into  Lorraine,  whcre  he  was  re-enforced  by  10,000 
German  wanrioni,  under  prince  John  Casimir.  Condć 
with  thcse  forces  now  threatened  Paris  (Feb.  1568),  acd 
Catharine,  in  hcr  fright,at  once  oifered  a  treały  of  prace, 
which  was  contracted  at  Longjurocau  March  27, 1568, 
re-establishing  the  terms  of  the  treaty  of  Amboiee.  gcn- 
erally  known  as  tha  pełite  paix  (little  pesce)  i^Long- 
jumeau.  Notwithftanding  this  treaty,  which  both  par^ 
ties  secm  to  haye  signed  only  because  they  fek  imdcr 
compulsion,  Catharine  continued  all  manner  of  pereecu- 
tions  against  the  Plrotestants.  **The  pulpits,  cncout^ 
aged  by  the  court,  resounded  with  the  honid  mudm 
that  faith  need  not  be  kept  with  heretics,  and  that  to 
massacre  them  was  just,  pioua,  and  uscful  for  salyation* 
(De  Thou,  Pte  de  CoUgny^  p.  860).  Tn  less  than  three 
months  morę  than  8000  Pliotestanta  were  either  assassi- 
nated or  executed.  UH6pita],  the  friend  of  peace,  and 
the  npholdcr  cf  the  rights  of  all  citizens  without  dia- 
tinction  of  creed,  who  had  become  obnosious  to  Rnme 
and  her  adherenta,  was  dismissed  or  furced  to  tcsign, 
and  the  sd^ure  of  Condć  and  Coligny  resolyed  upoti. 
Fortuiiately,  howeyer,  for  the  Fhitestants^  some  otf  th« 


HUGUENOTS 


398 


HUGUENOTS 


lojal  olBeen  were  iinwilliiig  to  be  instrumente  in  the 
mmacre  Ukdy  to  ensue  upon  such  on  act,  and  Condś 
and  Coligny  receiyed  waming  to  flee  for  their  lires. 
Rochelle,  one  of  the  atrongholda  of  the  FkotesUnta, 
which  had  baffled  all  the  attacks  and  piana  of  Gatha- 
rine»  was  open  to  reoeive  them,  and  thither  they  conse- 
qiiently  directed  their  atepa  for  aafety,  doeely  punued 
by  the  loyal  blood-honters.  Measurea  had  also  been 
planned  for  entrapping  the  other  leading  Protestanta, 
but  they  all  failed  in  the  execution.  "  The  caidinal  of 
Ouitillon,  an  adherent  to  the  Protestant  eause,  who  was 
at  his  aee  (BeauYais),  escaped  into  Normandy,  took  the 
diagnise  of  a  aailor,  and  croeaed  over  to  England  in  a 
smali  Tessel,  and  theie  became  of  great  serWoe  to  the 
Protestant  cauae  by  his  negotiations.  The  queen  of 
Nararre,  wamed  in  time  by  Coligny,  also  hastened  to 
Bochelle  with  her  son  and  daoghter,  oontributing  some 
money  and  four  thoiisand  soldiers.  The  chiefs-in-gen- 
eral  took  the  defenaire,  and  immediately  raised  leries 
in  their  different  proyinces.  The  guerrillaa  maintained 
by  these  persons  kept  the  Catholic  army  in  fuli  employ- 
ment,  and  presenred  Rochelle  ftom  a  generał  attack  tiJl 
proper  meaaures  had  been  taken  for  its  defence."  Cath- 
aiine^  outwitted  in  her  diabolical  attempts,  now  resoWed 
to  cajole  the  Huguenots  into  sobmission,  and  to  this 
cnd  piiblished  an  edict  dedaring  the  willingness  of  the 
goTcnunent  to  protect  the  Protestanta  in  futiue,  as  well 
as  to  lender  them  justioe  for  the  past.  But  so  oom- 
pJetely  waa  this  edict  at  varianoe  with  her  oonduct  that 
it  paased  unnoticed.  Enraged  at  this,  she  now  promul- 
gałed  aevecal  edicta  against  the  Protestanta,  Tevoking 
ereiy  edict  that  had  ever  been  pubUshed  in  their  favor, 
and  Ibrbade,  nnder  the  penalty  of  death,  the  exercise  of 
any  other  religion  than  the  Roman  Catholic  Thia  sud- 
den  leTocation  of  all  former  edicts  madę  her  acta  a  pub- 
lic  dedaration  that  she  was  resolred  on  a  war  of  relig- 
ion, and  the  Uugaenota,  forUAed  in  their  Btronghol^ 
and  with  asaLstanoe  which  they  had  obtained  from  Ger- 
many and  England,  now  began  the  third  reliffunu  war. 
On  Maich  13, 1569,  the  two  contending  armiea  met  in 
battSe  at  Jamac,  near  La  Rochelle,  in  which  the  Catho- 
Ucs,  headed  by  the  duke  of  Anjou,  later  Henry  III,  de- 
leated  the  Protestanta,  making  prinoe  Cond^  a  prisoner, 
whom  they  afterwaids,  on  reoognition  in  the  camp,  mur- 
deied  in  oold  bkNKL  The  Protestanta  betng  thus  leit 
withoot  a  leader,  the  oommand  waa  intmsted  to  Colig- 
ny. Bot  the  admirał,  ever  unselfish  in  his  motires,  find- 
ing  that  the  army  had  beoome  greatly  dispirited  by 
their  reoent  reyerses,  uiged  Jeanne  D'Albret,  queen  of 
Navaire,  to  give  them  her  son  as  prinoely  leader.  She 
at  oooe  hastened  to  Cognac,  where  the  army  waa  en- 
campad,  and  piesented  her  son,  prinoe  Henry  of  Beam, 
afterwards  Henry  IV,  then  in  his  16th  year,and  Henry, 
son  of  the  lately  fallen  Condć,  still  younger,  as  the  lead- 
cn  of  the  cauae,  under  the  guidance  of  Coligny.  Hav- 
ing  obtained  fuither  re-enfoioements  from  Germany,  the 
Huguenots  now  laid  siege  to  Poitiers,  but  on  Oct.  8, 
1569,  were  again  defeated  in  a  battle  at  Monoontour. 
Still  sustained  by  means  from  England,  Switaerlaud, 
and  Germany,  the  Huguenots  were  enabled  to  take 
Nlmes  in  1569,  to  free  prinee  Henry  of  Navarre  and  the 
eldett  Henry  of  ConM  in  La  Rochelle,  to  beat  the  royal 
anny  at  Luc<m  and  Amay-le-Duc  in  1570,  to  besiege 
Puu,  and,  finally,  to  dicUto  (Aug.  8, 1570)  the  terma  of 
the  peaoe  of  Sl  Germain-en-Laye,  by  which  they  were 
to  htM  La  Rochelle,  Li  Chaiit^  Montauban,  and  Cog- 
nae  for  two  yean,  and  were  guaranteed  liberty  of  wor- 
■hip  ontaide  of  Paris,  equality  before  the  law,  admission 
to  the  uniyersiŁies,  and  a  generał  amneaty.  ^  Under 
the  tenns  of  this  treaty,  France  enjoyed  a  sUte  of  ąuiet 
lor  aboot  two  yean,  but  it  waa  only  the  ąuiet  that  pre- 
eeded  the  outbreak  of  another  stonn." 

Haring  failed  to  crush  the  Pkotestanta  in  the  open 
tedCatharin^,  now  sought  to  aocompliah  her  object  by 
treachery  and  by  a  gmral  massacre.  In  her  artful 
way  she  contrived  a  marriage  between  her  own  daugh- 
ter  Maigaret  of  Yatois,  sister  of  the  king,  and  Heniy  of 


Beam,  king  of  Nararre,  the  prodaimed  leader  of  the 
Huguenots.  Jeanne  d'Albret,  the  mother  of  Henry  of 
Beam,  and  even  the  admirał  Coligny,  heartily  concur- 
red  in  the  projected  union,  in  the  hope  that  it  would  be 
an  important  stop  towards  a  dosc  of  the  old  feud ;  but 
many  of  the  Ptotestant  leadera  mistrusted  Catharine'a 
intentions,  especially  aiter  her  lato  attempt  to  aasassi- 
luite  Coligny,  and  they  felt  indined  to  withdraw.  Nonę 
the  less,  as  the  preparadons  for  the  royal  nuptials  were 
in  progress,  the  Reformers  took  courage,  and  resorted  in 
laige  numbeis  to  Paris  to  oelebrate  the  great,  and  to 
them  BO  promising,  event,  Catharine  now  felt  that  her 
lavorable  moment  had  come.  On  the  day  after  the 
marriage,  which  had  been  celebrated  with  great  pomp, 
and  was  followed  by  a  sucoession  of  feasts  and  gayeties, 
in  which  the  prindpal  members  of  the  nobility,  Protes- 
tant as  well  as  Ronianist,  were  psrUdpating,  and  while 
the  fears  of  the  Huguenots  were  oompletely  disarmed,  a 
prirate  council  was  hdd  by  Catharine  and  the  king,  in 
which  it  was  decided  that  on  a  given  night  all  the  Prot- 
estonts  should  be  murdered,  with  the  exoeption  of  Hen- 
ry of  Beam  and  the  young  prinoe  of  Condć.  For  the 
head  of  Coligny  the  king  offered  a  special  price  of  50,000 
crowns;  but  the  attompt  madę  upon  his  life  failed  to 
prove  fatal  to  Coligny,  and  the  hypocritical  Charlea 
even  professed  sorrow  for  the  injuiy  he  sustained.  See 
COUG2CY.  The  night  of  August  24, 1572,  was  appoint- 
ed  for  the  massacre.  About  twilight  in  the  moming 
of  the  24th,  as  the  great  beli  of  the  church  of  St.  Ger- 
main  was  ringing  for  early  prayers,  to  open  the  festi- 
val  of  St.  Bartholomew*s  day,  Charles,  his  mother,  and 
the  duke  of  AnJou  aat  in  a  chamber  of  the  pałace  to 
give  the  signal  for  the  massacre.  A  pistol-shot  flrsd 
from  one  of  the  windowa  of  the  pałace  called  out  800  of 
the  royal  guard,  who,  wearing,  to  distinguish  themsdYes 
in  the  darkness,  a  white  sash  on  tłie  left  aim  and  a 
włiite  cross  in  their  hats,  rushed  out  into  the  streets, 
shouting  '*  For  God  and  tlte  king !"  and  commenced  the 
most  perfidioua  butchery  recorded  in  liistor}'.  The 
houses  of  the  Huguenots  were  broken  in,  and  all  who 
could  be  found  murdered,  the  king  hiraself  firiug  from 
his  windowa  on  thoee  who  passed  in  the  streeL  Some 
5000  Huguenots,  among  them  their  great  and  noble 
leader,  the  admirał  Coligny  (q.  v.),  were  thus  killed  in 
Paris;  whilc  many  Roman  Catholics  met  with  the  same 
fate  at  the  hands  of  personal  enemies,  under  the  plea  of 
their  being  inclined  to  Protestantism.  The  next  dny 
orders  were  sent  to  the  goremors  of  the  provinces  to 
fułlow  the  example  of  the  capitaL  A  few  only  liad  the 
manliness  to  resist  this  order,  and  in  the  spaoe  of  aix^ 
daya  some  70,000  persons  were  murdered  in  the  proy- 
inces. See  Bartholome^s  Dat.  Tlioee  who  es- 
caped took  refuge  in  the  mountains  and  at  La  Rochelle. 
Henry  of  Navarre  was  compelled  to  sign  a  lecantation. 
The  prinee  of  Condć  became  a  Roman  Catholic,  and 
Charles  IX  declared  in  Parliament  that  Protestantism 
was  extinct  in  France.  **  Catharine  de  Medicis  wrote 
in  triumph  to  Ałva  (the  ignominious  commmander  of 
Płulip's  troops  in  tłie  Netherlands),  to  Philip  II  of 
Spaiu,  and  to  the  pope,  of  the  results  of  the  three  days* 
dreadful  work  at  Paris.  When  Pliilipheard  of  the 
massacre,  he  is  said  to  have  laughcd  for  the  iirst  and 
only  time  in  his  life.  Romę  was  tlirown  into  a  delirium 
of  joy  at  the  news.  The  cannon  were  iired  at  St.An- 
geło;  Gregory  XIII  and  his  cardinals  went  iu  procession 
from  sanctoary  to  sanctuary  to  give  God  thanks  for  the 
massacre.  The  subject  was  ordered  to  be  painted,  and 
a  medal  was  struck  to  cdebrato  the  atrocious  event, 
with  the  pope's  head  on  one  side,  and  on  the  other  an 
angel,  with  a  cross  in  one  hand  and  a  sword  in  the  other, 
pursuing  and  shiying  a  band  of  flying  heretics.  Tłie 
legend  it  bears,  *  Ugonottorum  StrageSy  1572/  brieily  epit- 
omizes  the  temble  stoiy."  The  festival  of  St  Barthol- 
omew  was  also  ordered  to  be  yearly  cdebrated  in  com- 
memoration  of  the  eyent.  Not  satisfied  with  these 
demonstiations  at  Romę,  Gregory  sent  cardinal  Ondni 
on  a  special  mission  to  Paris  to  congiatulato  the  lun^ 


HUGUENOTS 


894 


HUGUENOTS 


Hii  passage  was  throiigh  Lyotaa,  where  1800  pettons 
had  been  killed,  the  bodies  of  many  of  whom  had  been 
thrown  into  the  Khone  to  honrify  the  dwelten  near  that 
rirer  below  the  city  (Smilea,  Huguenotś,  p.  «0). 

Although  depńved  so  Boddenly  of  their  leadera,  and 
greatly  weakened  by  the  aUughter  of  great  numben  of 
their  best  and  bnivest  men,  the  Firoteetaota  gatbered 
together  in  their  strong  places,  and  piepared  to  defend 
themselYeB  by  foice  against  foroe.  **  In  the  Cerennea, 
Dauphiny,  and  other  ąuarters,  they  betook  themadyea 
to  the  mountains  for  ref  uge.  In  the  plaina  of  the  aoath 
fifty  towns  closed  their  gates  againrt  the  royal  troops. 
Whereyer  resistanoe  waa  poaaible  it  showed  itaełf." 
Thtu  opened  the  fourth  war  of  the  HuguenoU,  The 
duke  of  Anjou,  at  the  head  of  the  Romaniata,  marched 
against  the  forb*  in  the  handa  of  the  Huguenots.  He 
attackcd  La  Rochelle,  but  was  repnlaed,  and  obliged  to 
retire  from  the  Biege,  after  losing  nearly  his  whole  army. 
The  duke  of  Anjou  beooming  king  of  Pdand,  peaoe  waa 
oonduded  June  24, 1573,  and  the  Protestanta  recetyed 
aa  security  the  towns  of  Montauban,  Nlmes,  and  La  Bo- 
chelle,  beddes  cnjoying  freedom  of  oonscience,  though 
not  of  worship,  throughout  the  klngdom.  Chariea  IX 
faUing  ill,  the  so-called  Conspiraiion  det  polUiguet  waa 
formed  by  the  Huguenots,  with  a  aection  of  the  Roman 
Catholic  nobility,  to  depoee  the  queen  and  the  Guises, 
and  to  place  on  the  throne  the  chief  of  the  Komanists, 
the  duke  of  Alencon,  the  youngest  son  of  Catharine  and 
of  Francis  II,  who,  from  poUtical  motiyes,  madę  common 
cause  with  the  Huguenots.  The  leadera  madę  arrange- 
ments  with  Henry  of  Nayarre  and  the  prince  of  Condć, 
Protestant  princes,  for  the  humiliation  of  Austria,  and 
only  a  premature  rising  of  the  Protestanta  defeat«d  the 
plan.  Some  of  the  conspirators  were  executed,  D*Alen- 
con  and  Henry  of  Nayarre  were  arrested,  and  Conde 
fled  to  Germany,  where  he  retumed  to  Protestantism, 
aaying  that  his  abjuration  had  been  obtained  iW>m  liim 
by  yiolence. 

The^A  war  ofthe  Huguenots  begtti  mider  Henry 
m,  the  former  duko  of  Alencon,  who  became  king  of 
France  in  1574.  In  this  war  the  Roman  Catholics  lost 
aeyeral  strong  towns,  and  were  repeatedly  defeated  by 
the  Huguenots.  The  prince  of  Condć  retumed  to  France 
with  a  German  aimy  under  the  ordera  of  John  Casimir, 
and  in  March,  1576,  was  joined  by  the  duke  of  Alencon, 
who  was  at  enmity  with  the  king.  In  the  south.  Henry 
of  Nayarre  was  making  rapid  progress.  The  court  be- 
came alaimed,  and  finally  concluded  the  peace  of  Beau- 
lieu,  May  8,  1576,  granting  the  Huguenots  again  a 
number  of  places  of  security,  and  freeing  them  from  all 
restrictions  in  the  eKercise  of  their  religion,  also  the 
promise  to  indemnify  the  German  alliea  of  the  Hugue- 
nots for  the  war  expen8es.  The  Guises,  thus  ftiistrated 
in  their  pclitical  designs,  instigated  the  inhabitants  of 
Peronne,  under  the  leadership  of  Humieres,  to  organice 
an  association  called  the  Holy  League  (q.  y.),  in  1576, 
for  the  defcnce  of  the  interests  of  Romanism.  The 
league  rapidly  increased,  was  supported  by  the  king,  by 
Spain,  and  the  pope,  and  finally  led  to  the  nxth  tear  of 
łke  Huguenots,  The  States,  howeyer,  refusing  to  giye 
the  king  money  to  carry  it  on,  and  the  Roman  Catho- 
lics being  di\ńded  among  themselyes,  the  peace  of  Ber- 
gerac  was  signed  in  Septcmber,  1577.  The  conditions 
were  the  same  as  on  the  former  occasions;  but  Catha- 
rine, in  her  anxiety  to  diminish  the  growing  power  of 
the  Guises,  entered  into  a  priyate  treaty  with  Henry  of 
Nayarre  (at  Ncrac),  and  thus  the  Protestanta  were  put 
in  possession  of  a  few  morę  towns. 

The  $evmth  war  ofthe  HuguenoU^  called  at  court  the 
Guei-re  des  amoureur^  was  occasioned  by  the  Guises, 
who  instigated  the  king  to  demand  back  the  towns 
giyen  to  the  Protestants  as  securities,  and  to  yiolate  the 
treaty  in  various  ways.  Conde  answered  by  taking 
Laf^re  in  Noyember,  1579,  and  Henry  by  taking  Cahors 
in  ApriI,  15S0.  The  duke  of  Anjou  intending  to  em- 
ploy  the  royal  forces  in  the  Netheiiands,  and  the  Hugue- 
nots haying  met  with  seyeral  dlaaatroua  enooontera  with 


the  Romaniata,  peace  was  conduded  again  at  Flez^  Scpt 
12, 1580,  and  the  Hnguenota  were  pennitted  to  letaia 
their  strongholds  aix  yeara  longer.  A  comparatiyely 
long  interyal  of  peace  for  France  now  foUowed. 

But  when  the  duke  of  Anjou  (Ibnneiły  of  Aknęon) 
died  in  1584,  leaying  Henry  of  Nayairc,  a  Pkoteatant, 
heir  iMreanmptiye  to  the  throne,  the  '^Holy  League" 
aprang  again  into  esistenoe  under  the  influence  of  the 
adherenta  ofthe  Guisea,  the  strict  Roman  Catholic  mem- 
bers  of  the  Parliament,  the  fanatical  cleigy,  and  the  ul- 
tra oonseryatiye  party.  The  statea,  esp^ally  the  az- 
teen  districta  of  Paris  (whence  the  aasodation  aiao  took 
the  name  ofLigue  des  S€ixe\  took  an  actiye  |)arfc  in  it. 
Henry,  duke  of  Guiae,  finally  oondnded  a  treaty  with 
Spain,  aigned  at  the  caatle  of  Joinyille  January  3, 1585, 
creating  a  stnmg  oppoaition  to  the  sacoeasionof  Kemy 
of  Nayaire  to  the  timme,  and  aimed  eyen  againat  Hen- 
ry III,  who  seemed  indined  to  ikyor  his  brother-in-law. 
At  the  eame  time  the  Guisea  aought,  though  not  alto- 
gether  auccesefnlly,  the  approbation  of  pope  Gregony 
XUI  to  the  declairation  of  caidinal  of  Bourbon  aa  helr 
to  the  throne,  under  the  pretense  that,  aa  a  'laitJaM 
Catholic,  he  would  aid  hia  Chnrch  in  extirpating^  here- 
sy.  The  real  ol]ject  of  the  duke  of  Guise,  howevcar,  in 
proposing  so  old  an  incumbent  for  the  throne,  waa  to  cb- 
tain  for  himsdf  the  crown  of  France,  which  aeemed  by 
no  meana  a  chinierical  attempt,  as  he  had  reoeiyed 
strong  assuranoea  of  aupport  from  Spain.  With  the  a»- 
sistance  of  soldiers  and  funda  aent  him  by  his  ^laniah 
ally,  the  duke  suoceeded  in  taking  seyeral  towna,  not 
only  from  the  Huguenots,  but  also  fiom  the  king.  Heoiy 
III,  hesitating  to  send  an  army  against  the  duke  c( 
Guise  promptly,  was  finaUy  obliged  to  sign  the  edict  of 
Nemours,  July  7, 1585,  by  which  all  modes  of  worship 
except  that  of  the  Roman  Catholic  Church  were  forbid- 
den  throughout  France.  All  Huguenot  rainisteis  wen 
giyen  one  month,  and  the  Huguenots  8ix  montba,  to 
leaye  the  country,  and  all  their  priyileges  were  dedarod 
forfeited.  Though  put  under  the  ban  as  herctica  by 
pope  Sixttta  Y,  Henry  of  Nayarre  and  the  prince  of 
Cond^  prepared  to  renst  the  execution  of  the  royal  edict 
by  force  of  arms.  With  the  aid  of  money  from  England, 
aud  an  army  of  80,000  men  sent  from  Germany,  they 
took  the  field  in  1587,  and  began  the  iighiA  war  ofike 
Huguenots^  oalled  also,  from  the  names  of  the  leadeia, 
the  war  of  the  three  Hmtrys^  The  Huguenots  gained 
the  battle  of  Coutras,  Oct.  8, 1587,  but  were  subeeąaeiit- 
ly  defeated,  and  their  German  allies  were  obliged  to 
leaye  the  country.  The  duke  of  Guise  waa  leli  m«ater 
of  the  field.  He  waa  not  slow  to  grasp  the  power  ofthe 
atate,  and  oUiged  the  king  to  sign  the  edict  of  reimlan 
of  Rouen,  July  10, 1588,  for  the  fordble  snbmiasion  of 
the  Huguenots,  and  the  excłusion  of  Henry  of  Navane 
from  the  snocession  to  the  throne.  The  king,  to  whom 
it  now  became  eyident  that  the  duke  of  Guisc^s  aim  wai 
to  secure  the  throne  for  himself,  fcigned  acquieaoenoe  in 
the  demand,  called  a  Parliament  at  Blois  in  arder  to 
gain  time,  and  there  caused  both  of  the  Gniaea  to  be 
murdered  (Dec  28, 1588).  Both  Protestanto  and  Bo- 
man  Catholics  were  indignant  at  this  aot  of  treachay; 
the  Parliament  denounced  the  king  as  an  ■^B»«a"^  aod 
Charles  of  Guise,  duke  of  Mayenne,  who  had  eaó^»ed 
the  massacre,  madę  himself  maater  of  seveiał  prorinoeB^ 
marched  on  Paris,  and  took  the  title  of  lieutenanfc  gen- 
erał of  the  kingdom.  Catharine  haying  died  in  1589, 
Henry  III  madę  a  treaty  with  Henry  of  Nayarre,  hut 
was  himself  asaaasinated  in  the  camp  of  St.  Ckmd  by 
the  monk  Jacqaes  Clement,  August  1 ,  1588.  Henry  of 
Nayarre,  a  Protestant  in  belief,  now  succeedad  to  the 
throne  under  the  title  of  Henry  lY.  His  first  step  was 
to  conąuer  for  himself  the  possessiona  which  had  beea 
wrested  from  his  kingdom  by  the  league  and  the  Span- 
iards.  But  finding  that  he  oould  obtain  aecozity  of  life 
and  permanent  poaaession  of  hia  dominion  only  by  b»- 
coming  a  Roman  Catholic,  he  abfured  the  faiih  of  his 
fathers  in  the  church  of  St,  Dema,  July  25, 1598.  The 
duke  of  Mayenne,  supported  by  Spain,  atill  ^^ffBtinfl^ł4 


HUGUENOTS 


S»5 


HUGUENOTS 


the  war  agaiiist  Łho  king,  tmt  th«  latter  having  obtain- 
ed  abtolution  from  the  pope  in  1595^  notwitlutanding 
the  eilbrte  of  the  Jesoit^  who  had  sold  their  influence 
to  Spaiiiy  many  fonook  the  league  to  join  the  royal 
ftandazd,  and  the  duke  of  Mayenne  was  finally  obliged 
to  make  peace  with  the  king.  On  April  15, 1598,  Hen- 
ry lY  grantad  to  the  Protestanta,  for  whom  he  ever 
dieiished  great  aflfection,  the  celebrated  Edid  ofNaniea 
{ą,  V.)}  consiiting  of  ninety-one  articles,  by  which  the 
Huguenota  were  aflowed  to  wonhip  in  their  own  way 
thiooghottt  the  kingdom,  with  the  excepdon  of  a  few 
towns;  their  ministers  were  to  be  sopported  by  the 
State ;  inability  to  hoM  offłces  was  removed ;  their  poor 
and  sick  were  to  be  adndtted  to  the  hospitals ;  and,  flnal- 
ly,  the  towns  given  them  as  security  were  to  remain  in 
their  hands  eight  years  longer.  Pope  Olement  YIII 
became  eniaged  at  the  concessions,  and  wrote  Henry 
that  **«  decree  which  gave  liberty  of  oonscience  to  all 
was  the  noost  acouzsed  that  had  ever  been  madę."  His 
influenoe  waa  ałso  osed  to  indace  Pailiament  to  refuse 
its  appn>val  to  the  edict,  but  it  was  finally  registered 
in  spite  of  Komish  craftineas,  Feb.  25, 1599. 

Aller  lepeated  attempts  upon  the  life  of  the  king,  who 
had  raade  himself  especially  obnoxiou8  to  the  Jesuits, 
he  was  erentually  assassinated  by  RaTaillac  May  14^ 
1610.  Henfy's  seoond  wife,  Mary  of  Medicis,  and  her  son 
Loids  XIII,  scill  a  minor,  now  assomed  the  goyemmenL 
Tbe  edicts  of  Udeiatien  were  by  them  also  ratified ; 
but,  notwithstanding  this  public  decUuation  on  their 
part,  Łhey  were  practically  disregarded  and  riokted. 
When  prince  Henry  II  of  Condć  rosę  against  the  king 
in  Kov.  1615,  the  Protestanta  skled  with  him.  By  the 
tieaty  of  Loudon,  May  4, 1616,  their  privileges  were  con- 
finned ;  bnt,  at  the  insdgation  of  the  Jesuits,  a  new  edict 
of  1620  restored  Roman  Gathotidsm  as  the  official  relig- 
km  of  Beam,  and  decided  that  the  Hoguenots  sfaould  be 
deprived  of  their  chmches.  The  latter  resistt^d,  headed 
by  the  princes  of  Kohan  and  Soubise,  and  the  war  oom- 
menoed  anew  (in  1621),  bnt  this  time  proved  unfavora- 
bfe  to  the  Protestants ;  yet  at  the  peaoe  of  Montpellier, 
Oct.  21, 1622,  the  edict  of  Nantes  was  confirmed,  and  the 
FroCestancs  only  k)st  the  right  of  holding  asaemblies. 
In  1632,  Louis  XIII  called  Kichelieu,  whom  the  pope  had 
ktely  created  caidinal,  to  his  cunncils.  The  power  of 
the  chancellor  onee  firmly  established,  he  determined  to 
cnish  the  Haguenots,  whose  destruction  he  considered 
esKntial  to  the  unity  and  power  of  France,  not  so  much 
on  aoooont  of  their  religion,  as  on  acooont  of  their  polit- 
ieal  influence  at  home,  and  particularly  alHoad.  He  ac- 
eordingiy  paid  little  attention  to  the  stipuladons  of  the 
tieaty  which  the  king  had  madę  with  the  Huguenots, 
and  pcoYoked  them  to  rebellion  by  all  poaeibie  meana. 
In  1625,while  the  govemment  was  involved  in  difficul- 
ties  in  Italy,  the  Protestants  improred  the  opportunity 
aad  nse  in  aims.  Their  nayal  foroe,  under  Soubise, 
beat  tbe  loyal  marinę  in  8everal  engagements,  and  car- 
dinal  Bichelieu  found  himself  under  the  necessity  of  of- 
fering  conditions  of  peace,  which  this  time  the  Protes- 
tanu  vwy  nnwisely  refused  to  acoept  The  cardinal 
now  resolved  to  reduce  La  Rochelle,  their  stronghold. 
A  powerful  army  was  aasembled  and  marohed  on  the 
doomed  place,  liichelieu  oombining  in  himself  the  func- 
tiofis  of  biahop^prime  minister,  and  commander-innsbief. 
The  Huguenots  of  Bochelle  defended  themselyes  with 
gnat  bravcry  for  morę  than  a  year,  during  which  they 
cndured  the  gieatest  privattons.  But  their  resistonce 
was  in  rain ;  even  a  fleet  which  the  English  had  in- 
daoed  Charles  I  to  aend,  under  the  oommand  of  the  duke 
of  Buckingham,  to  their  assistanoe,  was  defeated  off  the 
Iiiand  of  Kh^,  Nov.  8, 1627.  On  the  28th  of  Oct.  1628, 
Sicheliea  rode  into  Roahelle  by  the  king'8  side,  in  Tel- 
net and  cnirass,  at  the  head  of  the  royal  army,  after 
which  he  prooeeded  to  petform  high  mass  in  the  church 
of  St.Maigaret,  in  oelebration  of  his  victory  (compare 
Snika,  Hug.  p.  118).''  The  kiss  of  La  Rochelle  was  the 
dcath-bkfw  to  the  Huguenots  as  a  political  power.  As 
ii  waa  foUowed  by  the  kss  of  all  their  other  strong- 


holds,  Nismes,  Montauban,  Castres,  etc,  they  wen  notr 
left  defenceless,  and  entirely  dependent  on  the  will  of 
their  conqneror.  Richelieu,  however,  acting  in  a  wise 
and  tolerant  spirit,  refrained  from  pushing  the  advan- 
tages  which  he  had  gained  to  extrem«8,  and  adyised 
the  pnblication  of  an  edict  which  should  grant  the  Prot^ 
estants  freedom  of  worship,  no  doubt  actuated  to  this 
course  by  considerations  of  state  pohcy,  as  he  had  just 
entered  into  a  league  with  the  Swedes  and  Germans,  and 
needed  the  good>¥rill  of  his  Protestant  subjects  as  much 
as  that  of  the  Romanists.  June  27, 1629,  peace  was  eon- 
duded  at  Alais,  and  in  the  same  year  au  edict  foUowed, 
called  "  the  Edict  of  Pardon,"  granting  to  the  Protes- 
tants the  same  pririleges  as  the  edict  of  Nantes,  with 
except]on  of  their  strongholds,  which  were  demolished, 
they  ceasing  to  have  political  influence,  and  becoming 
distingubhed  as  a  party  only  by  their  religion.  The 
reign  of  Louis  XIII  dosed  in  1629,  and  his  successor, 
Louis  Xiy,  as  well  as  cardSnal  Mazaiin,  tbe  successor 
of  Ridielieu,  who  had  died  a  short  time  before  Louis, 
confirmed  to  the  Protestants  the  rights  and  priyileges 
granted  them ;  and  aithough  they  suffered  from  a  grad- 
ual  defectioti  of  nobles,  who,  flnding  them  no  longer 
ayailable  for  purposes  of  faction,  now  rejoined  the  old 
Church,  they  nerertheless  enjoyed  comparative  freedom 
from  persecution. 

The  death  of  Mazarin  in  1661  forms  another  epoch  in 
the  history  of  the  Protestants.  New  edicts  were  pub- 
lished,  intended  to  damagc  their  financial  interests,  and 
to  become  impediroents  to  the  free  exercłse  of  their  re- 
ligion. Thus,  in  1662,  an  edict  fiorbade  them  to  inter 
their  dead  except  at  daybreak  or  at  nightfall.  Another 
decree  in  1663  excused  new  converts  from  payment  of 
debts  preriously  contracted  with  their  fellow-reli^on- 
ists.  In  1665  their  children  were  allowed  to  decLire 
themselres  Roman  CathoUcs^if  boys,  at  fourteen ;  if 
girls,  at  twelve  years  of  age;  parents  either  to  continue 
to  provide  for  their  apostatę  chUdren,  or  to  apportion  to 
them  a  part  of  their  possessions.  In  1679  it  was  de- 
creed  that  converts  who  had  relapsed  into  Protestant- 
ism  should  be  banished,  and  their  property  conflscated. 
In  1680  Hiiguenot  clerks  and  notaries  were  deprived  of 
their  employments,  intermarriages  of  Protestants  and 
Roman  Oatholics  were  forbidden,  and  the  issue  of  snch 
marriages  decłared  illegitimate,  and  incapable  of  succes- 
sion.  In  1681,  to  strike  terror  to  the  hearts  of  the  Prot- 
esUnts,  a  royal  declaration  granted  the  right  to  Hu- 
guenot  children  to  become  converts  at  the  age  of  #«?«• 
years.  ^  The  kidnapping  of  Protestant  children  was  ac- 
tiyely  set  on  foot  by  the  agenta  of  the  Roman  Catholic 
priests,  and  their  parents  were  subjected  to  heavy  pen- 
alties  if  they  yentnred  to  complain. '  Ordera  were  issued 
to  puli  down  Protestant  places  of  worship,  and  as  many 
as  eighty  were  shortly  destroyed  in  one  diocese.  The 
Huguenots  ofi^red  no  resistance.  All  that  they  did  was 
to  me^  together  and  pray  that  the  kiiig*8  heart  might 
yet  be  softened  towards  them.  BIow  upon  blow  foUow- 
ed. Protestanta  were  forbidden  to  print  books  without 
the  authority  of  magistrates  of  the  Romish  communion. 
Protestant  teachers  were  interdicted  from  teaching  any- 
thing  more  than  reading,  writing,  and  arithmetic.  Such 
pastora  as  held  meetings  amid  the  Auns  of  the  churches 
which  had  been  pulled  down,  were  compelled  to  do  pen- 
ance  with  a  ropę  round  their  necks,  after  which  they 
were  to  be  banished  the  kingdom.  Protestants  were  pro- 
hibited  from  singing  pealms  on  land  or  water,  in  work- 
shop  or  in  dweUings.  If  a  priestly  prooession  passed  one 
of  their  churches  while  the  pealms  were  sung,  they  must 
stop  instantly,  on  pain  of  fine  or  imprisoiiment  to  the 
ofiiciating  minister."  In  short,  from  the  pettiest  an- 
noyance  to  the  most  exasperating  cruelty,  nothing  was 
wanting  on  the  part  of  the  ^  most  Christian  king'*  and 
his  abettors.  The  intention  apparently  was  to  proyoke 
the  Huguenots  into  open  resistance,  so  as  to  find  a  pre- 
text  for  a  second  massacre  of  Su  Bartholomew. 

In  1688,  Colbert,  who  had  been  Louis's  minister  for 
seyend  yeais,  and  who,  conyinced  that  the  strength  of 


HUGUENOTS 


396 


HUGUENOTS 


lUtefl  conoBted  in  the  number,  the  inteUigenoe,  and  the 
industry  of  their  citizeus,  had  labored  in  all  poasible 
ways  to  prevent  the  hardships  which  Louis,  led  by  hia 
miatreas,  Madame  de  Maintenon,  aiid  his  Jesuit  oonfess- 
or,  Pfere  la  Chaise,  was  inflicting  on  the  ProŁestants,  was 
remoyed  by  death.  Military  executions  and  depreda- 
tions  against  the  Protestanta  now  began  throughout  the 
kingdom.  *'  Pity,  terror,  and  anguish  had  by  tums  agi- 
tated  their  minds,  until  at  length  thcy  were  reduced  to 
a  State  of  despair.  Life  was  madę  almost  intolerable  to 
them.  AU  careers  were  dosed  against  them,  and  Prot- 
estanta of  the  working  dass  were  under  the  necessity  of 
abjuring  or  8tarving.  The  mob,  obsenring  that  the 
Protestanta  were  no  longer  within  the  pale  of  the  law, 
took  the  opportunity  of  wreaking  all  manner  of  outiages 
on  them.  They  broke  into  their  churches,  tore  up  the 
benches,  and,  j^ing  the  Bibie  and  hymn-books  in  a 
pile,  set  the  whole  on  fire;  the  authorities  usually  lend- 
ing  their  sanction  on  the  proceedings  of  the  rioters  by 
banishing  the  bumed-out  ministers,  and  interdictuig  the 
further  celebration  of  worship  in  the  destroyed  church- 
es" (Smiles,  HuguetwtSy p.  135-C).  Bodies  of  troops  which 
had  been  quartered  upon  the  Protestanta  to  harass  them, 
now  madę  it  a  business  to  conyert  the  Protestants.  Ac- 
companied  by  Jesuits,  they  passed  through  the  south- 
em  proYinces,  compelling  the  inhabitauts  to  renounce 
their  religion,  demolishing  the  places  of  worship,  and 
putting  to  death  the  preachers.  Hundreds  of  thousands 
of  Protestanta,  unwilling  to  renounce  their  religion,  fled 
to  SwitzerUmd,  the  Netherlands,  England,  and  Germany. 
In  Yain  was  it  attempted  to  restrain  this  self-expatria- 
tion  by  cordons  along  the  borders.  Many  Protestants 
also  madę  an  insincere  profession  of  Boman  Catholi- 
ciam.  These,  on  tlic  slightest  nppearance  of  relapse, 
were  put  to  death.  On  October  23, 1685,  Louis  at  laat 
revoked  the  edict  of  Nantes.  This  revocation  enacted 
the  demolition  of  all  the  remaining  Protestant  temples 
throughout  France  \  the  cntire  proscription  of  the  Prot- 
estant religion;  the  prohibition  of  even  private  wor- 
ship under  penalty  of  confiscation  of  body  and  property ; 
the  banishment  of  all  Protestant  paators  from  the  king- 
dom within  fiiteen  days ;  the  closing  of  all  Protestant 
achools;  the  prohibition  of  parents  from  instructing 
their  children  in  the  Protestant  faith ;  the  obligation, 
under  penalty  of  a  heavy  fine,  of  haring  their  children 
baptized  by  the  parish  priest,  and  educating  them  in 
the  Boman  Catholic  religion;  the  confiscation  of  the 
property  and  goods  of  all  Protestant  refugees  who  failed 
to  return  to  France  within  four  months ;  the  penalty  of 
the  galleys  for  life  to  all  men,  and  of  iroprisoiiment  for 
Itfe  to  aU  women  detected  in  the  act  of  attempting  to 
escape  from  France.  **  Such  were  a  few  of  the  daatard- 
ly  and  uihuman  provisions  of  the  edict  of  Berocation. 
It  waa  a  proclamaiion  of  war  by  the  armed  against  the 
wiarmed — a  war  against  peaceable  men,  women,  and 
children^a  war  against  property,  against  family,  against 
society,  against  public  morality,  and,  roore  than  all, 
against  the  right  of  conscience.*"  But  when  we  take 
into  conaideration  the  private  charactcr  of  the  king, 
how  completely  hc  was  controlled  by  abandoned  women 
and  their  friends,  the  Jesuits,  who  both  feared  and  hated 
Protestantism,  because,  if  sticcessful,  it  would  bave  been 
a  death-blow  to  their  own  wicked  association,  we  can- 
not  wonder  that  '*  great  was  the  rcjoicing  of  the  Jesuits 
on  the  revocation  of  the  edict  of  Nantes,"  and  that 
''Borne  sprang  up  with  a  shout  of  joy  to  celebrate  the 
erent,"  and  that "  Te  Deums  were  sung,  processions  went 
from  shrine  to  shrine,  and  the  pope  sent  a  bricf  to  Louis, 
conyeying  to  him  the  congratulations  and  praises  of  the 
Bomish  Church." 

The  edict  of  Berocation  was  carried  out  with  rigor; 
and  but  one  feeling  now  possessed  the  minds  of  the  Be- 
formed,  to  make  their  escape  from  that  devoted  land. 
Disgiused  in  eveiy  form  which  ingenuity  could  suggest, 
by  every  outlet  that  could  anj^where  be  madę  available, 
through  every  hardship  to  which  the  majority  were 
0OBt  unaccustomed,  the  crowd  of  fugitives  pressed  for- 


ward  eageriy  from  their  onoe  dearly-feyed  country.  It 
is  impossible  to  estimate  with  accuracy  the  number  of 
the  refugees.  Sismondi  {Uitt,  de  France)  compuied  that 
the  total  number  of  those  who  emigiated  ranged  from 
800,000  to  400,000,  and  he  was  further  of  opinion  that  a 
like  number  perished  in  priaon,  on  the  scaifold,  at  the 
galleys,  and  in  their  attempta  to  escape;  and  Weisa  (in 
his  łiitiory  of  the  French  Protestant  Hrfugees)  thinkt 
the  number  no  less  than  300,000  of  those  who  departed 
the  French  kingdom.  Yauban  wrote,  only  a  year  after 
the  Bevocation,  that  Fnmce  had  loet  e0,00o',000  of  fnwcs 
in  specie,  9000  sailon,  12,000  veterans,  600  officera,  and 
hcr  most  flourishing  manufactures;  and  Fenekm  thus 
described  the  last  years  of  the  reign  of  Louis  Xiy :  **•  Tbe 
cultiration  of  the  soil  ia  almost  abandoned ;  the  townt 
and  the  country  are  beooming  depopulated.  All  indua- 
tries  languiah,  and  fail  to  support  the  laborers.  France 
has  beoome  aa  but  a  huge  hospital  without  proriaiona." 
The  hospitable  shores  of  Eng^d,  which  had  long  be- 
fore  this  period  famished  an  asylum  to  the  fugiŁive  Hu- 
guenots,  were  now  eagerly  sought,  and  the  Hugiwnota 
met  with  kindness  and  assistanoe  from  the  Engliah  gov- 
emment.  To  Holland,  also,  and  to  Denmark,  the  best 
talent  of  the  land,  the  most  skilful  artiaana,  directed 
their  steps,  and  many  gieat  branches  of  industry  of 
France,  by  the  foUy  of  a  king  who  had  taken  hia  mia- 
tress  as  hia  first  state  counadlor,  received  their  death- 
blow.  The  industry  of  some  places  waa  for  a  time  com- 
pletely prostrated.  Indeed,  morę  than  a  century  really 
passed  before  they  were  restored  to  Iheir  ibrmer  pros- 
perity, ''  and  then  only  to  suffer  another  eąually  atag- 
gering  blow  from  the  riolence  and  outrage  which  ac- 
ooropanied  the  outbreak  of  the  French  BerolutioD.'^ 
In  fact,  this  last  terrible  event  may  justly  be  considered 
not  only  aa  a  providential  retribution,  but  likewiae  a 
natural  penalty  for  the  ciril  wrongs  inflicted  upon  tbe 
Protestanta,  sińce  these  cruel  measurea  exiled  from  the 
country  a  large  part  of  its  piety  and  intelligence,  by 
which  alone  that  catastrophe  mtght  have  been  areitcd. 

From  the  ricinity  of  Nismes,  where  the  Huguenoto 
had  always  been  Teiy  numerous,  thouaanda,  unwilling 
either  to'  abjure  their  faith  or  to  leare  thór  nattve 
country,  betook  themselres  to  the  mountaina  of  the  Ce- 
yennes,  and  continued  the  exerci8e  of  their  religion  in 
seciet.  These,  and  the  mountaineers  of  the  Cerennca, 
among  whom  sprang  up  a  sect  which  displayed  a  le- 
markable  fanatical  enthusiasm,  under  the  name  of  Gam* 
iaards  (q.v.),  finally  commenced  to  wagę  war  against 
the  royal  forces,  which  waa  called  the  War  offkt  Ct^ 
rennet,  or  the  Camisard  War,  It  was  aucoessfully  car- 
ried on  until  1706,  when,  in  conaequeiioe  of  the  war  of 
succession  with  Spain,  they  were  allowed  a  respite,  the 
royal  troops  being  otherwise  employed.  Their  number 
now  rapidly  augmented,  especially  in  Prorence  and  I>au* 
phiny,  and  thus,  notwithstanding  all  the  persecatMos 
which  the  Protestants  had  suffered,  about  two  millioBS 
continued  to  adhere  to  their  religion  (Chariea  CoąueRl, 
Bist.  des  Eglises  du  JMserły  Par.  1341, 2  volsu> 

A  partial  repose  which  ihe  Uuguenota  now  enjoycd 
for  morę  than  ten  years  greatly  increased  their  nuniben^ 
especially  in  Pkoveuoe  and  Dauphiny;  but  in  1724, 
Louis  XV,  who  had  aacended  the  throne  in  1715,  at  the 
instigation  of  the  eyer-conspiring  Jesuits,  issiied  a  veiy 
serere  ordinance  against  them.  The  spiiit  of  the  age, 
howerer,  waa  too  much  opposed  to  persecution  to  wlfer 
the  edict  to  work  the  nuschief  intended.  The  goveni- 
ors  of  sereral  proyinces  tolerated  the  I^rotestanta,  and 
as  early  as  1743  they  resumed  their  assembliea  in  the 
mountaina  and  woods,  and  oelebrated  their  Mariagm  du 
deterL  In  1744  new  edicta  were  iasued  against  them, 
reąuiring  upon  those  who  had  been  baptized  or  mairied 
in  the  desert  (as  it  was  called)  a  repetition  of  tbe  rite 
by  the  dergy  of  the  Boman  Catholic  (^urch.  Eren 
the  Boman  CathoUcs  themselyea  soon  became  lood  in 
opposition  against  theae  yiolent  meąsuies,  and  the  per- 
secution gradually  ceaaed.  Men  like  Monteaąuien  and 
Yoltaire  successfully  adyocated  mild  treatment,  and  it 


HU6UEN0TS 


897 


HUISH 


mmt  be  eonceded  tluiŁ  the  FkotesUnts  owed  much  of 
the  tolerition  they  afterwarda  met  with  to  Yoltaire^s 
treatise  on  the  aabject,  wiitten  in  1768,  and  to  hia  pro- 
cariDg  the  releaae  of  John  Calaa  (q.  v.).  Their  poeition 
was  still  farther  hnpioyed  on  the  acoeaaion  of  Louia 
XYI  u>  the  thione  (1774).  In  1787  an  edict  was  isaned 
(which  the  Pailiament,  howerer,  regiateied  only  in 
17^)  hy  which  the  validity  of  Proteetant  baptiama  and 
Durriai^es  waa  reoogniaed,  thongh  aabject  to  aome  pnre- 
\j  dvń  ngahtums ;  they  were  given  ocmeteriea  for  the 
biirial  of  thór  dead,  were  allowed  to  foUow  their  lelig- 
ion  priratelj,  and  granted  the  righta  of  dtizenahip,  with 
the  exoeption  of  the  right  of  holding  any  offidal  poeition. 

After  the  breaking  out  of  the  French  Rerolution  in 
1789,  a  motioa  waa  madę  in  the  General  AaaemUy  to 
admit  the  Protertants  to  equal  righta  with  the  Roman 
CuhoUca :  thia  motion  was  at  firat  rejected,  but  flnally 
carried.  A  decree  of  1790  reatored  the  ProteatanU  to 
the  poaaeaaioo  cf  all  the  righta  and  property  they  had 
lo9t  sobseąuently  to  the  rerocation  of  the  edict  of 
Nantea.  The  "Codę  Napoleon"  placed  the  Proteatanta 
eqnal  m  their  civil  and  political  righta  with  the  Roman 
Cathotics,  aa,  in  iact,  they  had  alieady  been  for  morę 
than  fiileen  jreara;  and  thongh,  after  the  restoration  of 
the  Bjorbona^  eapc^ially  in  1815  and  1816,  the  prieata 
mnrefdoA  in  esciting  the  popuhK»  of  the  department 
of  the  Gard  to  riae  and  murder  the  Protestanta,  the 
authoiities  conniring  at  the  crime,  still  they  remained  ^ 
eqtial  to  the  Roman  Catholics  in  the  eyc  of  the  law. 
The  ^>irit  of  persecution,  howerer,  continued,  though  in 
a  aomewhat  weaker  form,  both  among  the  people  and 
the  goyemment  of  the  BourbonSy  even  in  that  of  the 
Orieaos  family,  though,  after  the  July  Revolution  of 
1830,  the  reformed  charter  of  France  had  prodaimed 
imiveraal  freedom  of  conscienoe  and  of  worship,  a  prin* 
cipie  which  was  reaaserted  in  1818.  (For  the  preaent 
State  of  Protestantism  in  France,  see  France.) 

The  desoendanta  of  the  Huguenots  long  kept  them- 
selrea  a  distinct  people  in  the  countries  to  which  their 
lathen  had  fled,  and  entertained  hopes  of  a  return  to 
their  coun^ ;  but  as  time  paased  on  these  hopes  grew 
fainter,  while  by  habit  and  interest  they  became  moie 
onited  to  the  nations  among  whom  it  feU  to  their  lot  to 
establish  a  new  home.  The  great  crash  of  the  fint 
Keyolution  finally  serered  all  the  ties  that  bound  them 
lo  their  native  land.  They  either  changed  their  names 
tbemsdyea  by  tranaUting  them,  or  they  were  changed 
by  the  people  among  whom  they  resided  by  mispro- 
aoneiatwn,  Thus,  in  England,  "the  Lemaltres  called 
themselyes  Master;  the  Leroys,  King;  the  Tonnelien, 
Cooper;  the  Lejeunes,  Young;  the  Leblancs,  White, 
the Lenoin, Black;  the Loiaeans, Bird.  Thenceforward 
the  French  colony  in  London  no  longer  existed.  At  the 
pieaent  day,  the  only  yestige  of  it  that  remains  is  in 
the  Spitalflelds  district,  where  a  few  thousand  artisans, 
for  the  moat  pert  poor,  still  betray  their  origin,  less  by 
^eJrlangoage  than  by  their  costuroe,  which  bears  some 
resemblance  to  that  of  the  corresponding  chus  in  Louis 
KIY^i  time.  The  architecture  of  the  houses  they  in- 
habit  resembles  that  of  the  workmen  of  lilie,  Amiens, 
ind  the  other  manufacturing  towns  of  Picaidy.  The 
castom  of  wwking  in  ceUars,  or  in  glaaed  garrets,  is  also 
hwiowed  firom  their  original  country**  (Weiss,  p.  288, 
284).  In  our  own  country  also,  where  the  Huguenoto 
"cttled  at  an  early  day,  their  descendants  may  be  found, 
particolarly  in  New  York,  Kary  land,  Yirginia,  and  the 
CaroUnas;  and,  as  in  England,  they  hAve  beoome  nat^ 
Bolized,  and  their  namea  hAve  been  changed,  until  it 
h38  beoome  difficult  to  recognise  them.  "Their  sons 
«ni  grandsona,  little  by  Uttle,  have  become  mingled 
viih  the  society  which  gave  a  home  to  their  fathers,  in 
the  same  way  as  in  England,  HoUand,  and  Germany. 
As  their  Chuich  diaappeared  m  America,  the  members 
became  attached  to  other  evangelical  denominations, 
ttpecially  the  Epiacopal,  Reformed  Dutch,  Methodist, 
wd  Presbyterian.  The  French  language,  too)  bas  long 
ńce  disappeared  with  their  Church  senrice,  which  used 


to  eall  to  mind  the  oountiy  of  their  anoestors.  French 
waa  preached  in  Boston  until  the  dose  of  the  last  cen- 
tory,  and  at  New  York  the  Huguenot  senrices  were  cel- 
ebrated  both  in  French  and  Knglish  as  late  as  1772. 
Herę,  at  the  French  Protestant  church,  which  suoceeded 
the  Huguenot  years  sińce,  the  Gospel  was  preached  in  the 
same  language  in  which  the  prinoo  of  French  pulpit  or- 
atorem Saurin,  used  to  dedare  divine  truth  two  centuriea 
aga  The  Huguenot  church  at  Charieston,  South  Car- 
olina,  alone  has  retained  in  itB  primitive  purity,  in  their 
public  worship,  the  old  Calyinistic  liturgy  of  ita  fore- 
fiithera.  The  greater  part  of  the  exiled  łYench  familiee 
haye  long  sinoe  disappeared,  and  their  scattered  com- 
mnnities  haye  been  dissolyed  by  amalgamation  with 
the  other  racea  around  them.  These  pious  fugitiyes 
haye  become  public  blesaings  throughout  the  world,  and 
haye  increased  in  Germany,  Holland,  and  England  the 
elements  of  power,  prosperity,  and  Chrisdan  deyelop- 
ment.  In  our  land,  too,  they  helped  to  lay  the  firm 
comer-stones  of  the  great  rcpublic  whoee  glory  they 
most  justly  share"  (G.  P.  Disosway,  The  HugumoU  tn 
America,  as  Appendix  to  Harper's  edition  of  Sniile8's 
UuguenotSj  p.  442).  See  Beza,  Hist,  des  Efflises  rifor^ 
meea  en  France  (Antw.  1580,  3  yols) ;  Thuane,  Historia 
sui  temporis  (Paris,  1620,  and  often,  7  vols.) ;  Dayila, 
Storia  delie  guerre  cimli  di  Francia  (Yenice,  1630) ;  SL 
Aignon,  De  Fetat  des  ProłestatUs  en  France  (Paris,  1808 ; 
2d  ed.  1818);  Lacretelle,  Histoire  de  France  pendant  les 
guerres  de  la  reUffion  (Paris,  1814, 1816, 4  vola.) ;  Benoita 
Histoire  de  tedit  de  Nantes  (Delft,  1693,  2  yola.) ;  Rul- 
bi^re,  Źclaircissęments  hisłorigues  sur  les  causes  de  la 
Recocation  de  TEdit  de  Nantes  (Par.  1788, 2  yols.) ;  Court 
de  Gebelin,  IlisL  des  troubles  des  Cśvennes  (Yillefranche, 
1760,  2  yols.);  Browning,  Ilist,  ofthe  Huguenots  (Lond, 
1828,  2  yols.) ;  Brockhaus,  Conversatums-Lexikony  viii, 
129  są. ;  Pierer,  Unirerscd  Lexikon,  yiii,  583  sq. ;  Weiss, 
History  of  the  French  Protestant  Refugees ;  Coquerel, 
Histoire  des  Eglises  du  desert  (Paris,  1857,  2  yols.  8yo) ; 
Felice,  Histoire  des  Protestants  de  France ;  Peyrat,  Hu> 
ioire  des  Pasteurs  du  Desert  (Paris,  2  yols.  8yo) ;  Crowc, 
Hisłorg  qf  France  (London,  1867, 1869, 5  yols.);  Smiles, 
The  Huguenots  (3d  edit.  London,  1869) ;  Lond,  Her.  July, 
1855 ;  Chambers,  Cydop,  y,  450  sq.  For  special  biog- 
raphies,  Haag,  La  France  Proiestante  (Par.  8  yols.  8yo) ; 
Michelet,  Louis  XIV  et  la  Rhocation  de  VEdit  de  Nantes 
(Paris,  1860,  8yo) ;  Michelet,  Guerres  de  Religion  (Par. 
1857,  8yo) ;  Drion,  Histoire  Chronol,  de  PEglise  Protes' 
tanie  de  France  (2  yols.  12mo) ;  Smedley,  Hisłory  ofths 
Reformed  Religion  in  France  (London,  1827,  8  yols.) ; 
Athanase  Coquerel  fils,  Les  Forcats  pour  la  jfoi  (Paris, 
1868).     (J.H.W.) 

Hugnes.    SeeHuoo. 

Hugnet,  Marc  Aktoine,  a  French  prelate,  was  bom 
at  Moissac  in  1757.  He  entered  the  sacred  order  in  his 
youth,  and  became  cnrate  of  a  little  yillage  in  Auyergne. 
In  1791  he  was  elected  bishop  of  Creuse.  During  the 
French  Reyolution  he  was  a  member  ofthe  Legislatnre, 
and  of  the  National  Conyention,  and  yoted  for  the  death 
of  the  king.  Complicated  in  seyeral  popular  disturb- 
ances,  and  conspiring  against  the  established  goyem- 
ment, he  was  arrested  in  1795,  and  imprisoned  at  Ham 
for  8e^'eral  months.  Engaging  in  another  oonspiracy 
which  failed  to  aocompUsh  its  object,  he  was  again  ar- 
rested, condemned  to  death,  and  executed  Oct.  6, 1769, 
— Hoefer,  Ncfuv,  Biog,  Gen,  xxy,  466. 

Hnish,  Alezander,  a  leamed  English  diyine,  who 
flourished  in  the  17th  century,  was  feUow  of  Magdalen 
College,  rector  of  Beckington  and  Horablotton,  Somer- 
setshire.  He  published  Lectures  on  the  LordkS  Prayer 
(Lond.  1626, 4to).  He  was  also  a  yeiy  superior  schoUr 
of  esęgesis,  and  a  prominent  assistant  on  Walton's  Poly^ 
ghi  Bibie.  His  senrices  were  highly  commented  upon 
by  bishop  Walton  himself.  See  Wrangham,  Proleg,  ii, 
203 ;  Todd,  Life  of  WaUon,  p.  269  sq. ;  Stoughton  (John), 
Eccles,  Hist,  ofEngL  (London,  1870, 2  yols.  8yo),  ii,  882; 
Allibone,  Diet,  ofAuthors,  i,  58. 


HUI^EATr 


398 


HULDAH 


HniBseau,  JaoąuM  d*,  1,  a  Fnmch  theotogian, 
was  bom  in  the  latter  half  of  the  16th  centmy.  He  en- 
tered  the  monastery  at  Mannoutien,  and  was  madę 
great  prior  of  his  order  in  1594.  Refusing  in  1604  ad- 
mission  to  Matthiea  Benusson,  yisitor  of  the  order  of  St. 
Benoit  for  the  province  of  Toors,  he  was  deposed  from 
his  position,  deprived  of  ali  power,  and  excommunica- 
ted.  He,  however,  sncceeded  in  r^aining  his  posttion. 
At  the  dme  of  his  death,  Sept  24, 1626,  he  was  proTin- 
ciał  of  the  Benedictine  congregation  of  exemptB  in 
France.  He  published,  for  the  use  of  hb  abbey,  a  col- 
lection  of  pmyers,  entitled  Enehiridion  Precum  ^Tours, 
1607)  : — Supplimmt  a  la  Chromque  des  Aibis  dt  Mar» 
moutiers  (1615)  '^Chrfmiqve  des  Prieun  (1625).  This 
last-named  work  Huisseau  tianslated  himself  into  Lat- 
in.^-Hoefer,  Now,  Biog.  Gin,  xxv,  468  są. 

Huisseau,  Jacąuea  d*,  2,  another  French  minis- 
ter and  Łheologian,  who  fioarished  in  the  17th  centory. 
But  little  is  kuown  of  his  early  life.  He  was  professor 
of  theology  at  Saumur,  and  rendeied  himself  fiunons  by 
his  La  disciple  des  Eglites  Rrformiti  de  Franoej  avec  un 
recueii  des  offserraiiofu  et  guesŁions  sur  la  plitpart  des  ar- 
tides  tire  des  actes  des  synodes  natiofumsc  (1650, 4to,  prob- 
ably  published  at  Saumur;  Geneva,  166is,4to;  Bionne, 
near  Orleans,  1675,  12mo).  The  great  snccess  which 
foflowed  this  work  estranged  from  him  many  of  his  ac- 
ąuaintances  and  assodates  in  the  Church,  who  enried 
his  prospects,  and  who  even  presented  oomplaints  against 
him  in  1656,  meeting,  however,  with  no  encouragement 
from  the  superiors  of  Huiseeau.  In  1670  he  published 
La  Reunion  du  Christiasdsme,  ou  la  matiere  de  rejoindre 
les  Chretiens  dans  une  seule  Confession  de  foi  (Saumur, 
12mo).  It  fsYored  the  union  of  all  who  believed  in 
Christ  aa  the  God  or  man  Savlour,  and  was  attacked  by 
La  Bastide  in  his  Remargues  sur  un  livre  inUtule  ^^La 
Reumotły'*  etc.  (1670, 12mo),  and  it  was  conderoned  by 
the  Synod  of  Anjou.  Huisseau  endeavoxed  to  explain 
his  YiewB,  but  the  83rnod  dedtned  to  give  him  a  hear- 
ing,  and  finally  deposed  him  from  the  priesthood.  He 
emigrated  to  England,  and  was  reinstated  as  minister 
witbout  being  obliged  to  retract.  He  died  there  before 
1690,  about  70  years  of  age. — Biographie  Uniperselle, 
lxvii,  44L 

Huit,  Ephraim,  a  dissenting  English  minister,  of 
whose  early  life  but  little  is  known.  He  was  minister 
for  some  tlme  at  Boxhall,  Warwickshiie,  and  flnally  em- 
igrated to  this  country,  and  settled  in  Kew  England. 
He  became  minister  of  a  congregation  at  Windsor,  Conn., 
|uid  died  in  1644^  Huit  published,  in  his  mother  coun- 
try, PropAccie  o/ Daniel  erplained  (Lond.  1648,  4to).— 
Allibone,  Diet,  o/AuthorSj  i, 913. 

Huk'kok  (Hebrew  Chukkok',  p^n,  incised;  SepL 
'Lcttc  V.  r.  'laicava,Vu]g.  Hucusd),  a  town  on  the  bor- 
der  of  Naphtali,  near  Zebulon,  not  far  from  Jordan,  west 
of  Aznoth-Tabor,  and  in  the  direction  of  Asher  (Josh. 
xix,  34) ;  elsewhere  written  Hitkok  (PP^H,  Chukok^, 
X  Chroń,  vi,  75 ;  Sept.  'loicac,  Yulg.  Hueac)  \  but  próba- 
bly,  in  this  latter  passage,  erroneously  for  Hbułath 
(Josh.  xxi,  85;  comp.  xix,  25).  Eusebius  and  Jerome 
(Onomasf,  s.  v.  Icoc),  as  well  as  Benj.  of  TudeU  (ii,  421), 
allode  to  it.  It  is  doubtless  identical  with  the  modem 
smali  Yillage  Yakuk^  between  the  plain  of  Genesaieth 
and  Safed  (Robinson^s  Researches,  iii,App.  p.  133;  Bilh 
liołh,  Sac,  1843,  p.  80),  said  to  contain  the  grave  of  Ha- 
bakkuk  (see  new  edit.  of  Researches,  iii,  81 ;  and  comp. 
Schwarz,  Palestine,  p.  182). 

Hu'kok  (1  Chroń,  vi,  75).    See  Hukkok. 

Hul  (Heb.  Chul,  ^^in,  a  circk ;  Sept.  OvX),  the  name 
df  the  seoond  son  of  Aram  (B.C.  cir.  2414),  who  appears 
to  have  given  name  to  an  Aramisan  region  settled  \sy 
him  (Gen.  x,  23;  1  Chroń,  i,  17).  Josephus  {Ant,  i,  6, 
4)  places  it  (Ot^Xov,  as  Havercamp  corrects  for  'Orpoc) 
in  Armenia,  compańng  it  with  the  district  Cholchotene, 
aooording  to  the  conjecture  of  Bochart  {Pkaleg,  ii,  9). 
Ifichaelis,  taking  the  word  in  the  sense  of  a  koUow  ot 


Yalley  {SpioSeg,  ii,  185),  nndeistands  Ceal^^Byna  (conpb 
Joaq)hus,  Ant,  xii,  7, 1 ;  1  Maoc  iii,  13) ;  aod  Seiuilteni 
{Parad,  p.  282)  refers  it  to  the  southem  part  ef  Hckh 
potamia,  from  the  significatioB  saad.  Mon  probaUe 
seems  the  identiAcation  piopoaed  by  RosounlUkr  {Al- 
tertkum,  i,  2,  p.  263)  with  the  district  now  caUed  BmIA^ 
aiound  the  lalce  Merom,  at  the  npper  souees  of  the  Jor- 
dan (Burckhardt,  Trav,  i,  87),  which,  althongh  a  aiiaO 
tract  and  no  proptf  part  of  Anunsea,  seems  to  be  np> 
ported  by  the  rendering  of  Saadias  (compare  Schwin, 
Palestinef  p.  41,  notę).  Aocording  to  Dr.  fiobinaoo,  tlie  ^ 
name  el-Huleh,  as  used  by  the  present  inhabitants,  bs- 
longs  strictly  to  the  northem  part  of  the  basin  in  which 
the  lakę  Ues,  but  is  oommonly  extended  to  cmbzaoe  the 
whole;  its  different  qaartcEB  foli  within  vaiioas  jioii- 
dictłons,  and  have  special  names  {Researdkes,  iii,  d42> 
A  great  portion  of  this  northern  traci  near  the  iake  ii 
now  an  impassaUe  marsh,  pzobaUy  in  conseąuence  <tf 
the  choking  up  of  the  streams  by  mbbish  {BibUotketa 
Saara,  1846,  p.  200,  201).  The  remamder  is  a  ver7  io- 
tile  plain,  forming  a  valley  near  Banias  (Rofainsan'8  £e- 
searchu,  new  ed.  iii,  396-898).  Traces  of  the  name  Hd 
or  Huleh  appear  in  the  district  Ulaiha  {Oiikaba)  arauid 
Paneaa,  menttoned  by  Joeq)hii8  as  originally  bebnging 
to  Zenodorus,  and  bestowed  by  Augustus  upon  Herod 
{A  nt,  XV,  10,  3 ;  comp.  Wars,  i,'  20,  4)^-<aeseniittL  See 
Mbrom. 

Hulda  or  Hołda  (the  friendlgy  or  benignant\  s 
German  goddeas,  known  in  the  old  legenda  as  "Fnn 
Holle,"  was  originally  the  goddeas  of  marriage  and  fe- 
cundity,  worshipped  and  invoked  by  maids  and  wires; 
she  sent  bridegiooms  to  the  former  and  childien  to  the 
latter.  She  was  represented  as  a  beautifiil  white  wam- 
an,  surronnded  by  great  numbers  of  children,  in  her  la- 
vorite  haunts  in  the  depths  of  the  sea  or  the  hearu  of 
hills.  She  was  alm  the  patnmess  of  agricultore  aad 
domestdc  life,  with  its  manifold  employmentsi  I^ter 
she  appears  in  the  foiry  tales  of  Hesse  and  Thuringia— 
probably  written  by  Christian  priests— as  an  old  and  ogl? 
woman,  with  a  long  nose,  laige  teeth,  coarse  hair,  and  a 
companion  of  the  wild  and  the  roaming.  But  eren  b 
these  last  tales  traces  of  kind  and  pleasant  wajrs  are  kft. 
— ^Piercr,  Vmv,  Lex,  viii,  480 ;  Chambers,  C^dap.  v,  458. 
(J.H.W.) 

Hul^dah  (Hebrew  Chddah',  nnbn,  weasd;  SepL 
'0\SaVj  Josephus  'OX^a,  Anf,  x,  4,  2),  wife  of  ShalluiB, 
a  prophetess,  who^  in  the  reign  of  Joeiab,  abode  in  that 
part  of  Jerusalem  called  the  Hishneh,  where  the  book 
of  the  law  was  discovered  by  the  high-priest  HiDdah. 
B.C.  628.  This  prophetess  was  consulted  reepecting  the 
denunciations  which  it  oontained.  She  then  delirend 
an  oracular  response  of  mingled  jiadgment  and  mercy; 
dedaring  the  not  remote  destruction  of  Jerusalem,  bat 
promising  Josiah  that  he  shoold  be  taken  from  the 
world  before  these  evil  days  came  (2  Kings  xxii,  14-20; 
2  Chroń,  xxxiv,  22-28).  Hnldah  is  only  known  for 
this  circiunstance.  She  was  probably  at  tbia  time  the 
widów  of  Shallam,  a  name  too  oommon  to  suggest  sny 
Information ;  he  is  said  to  hare  been  *'  kecper  of  the 
wardrobe,"  but  whether  the  pńestly  or  the  royal  wazd- 
robę  is  uncertain.  If  the  former,  he  muat  bave  been  a 
Levite,  if  not  a  priest.  See  Haiiha&  As  to  her  roi- 
dence  HSdaa,  in  the  Mishneh,  which  the  A.y.  readen 
*Mn  the  college,"  there  is  no  ground  to  condnde  that 
any  echool  or  college  of  the  prophets  is  to  be  undeistood. 
The  name  means  second  or  double ;  and  many  of  the 
Jews  themselyes  (as  Jarehi  states)  underBtood  it  as  the 
name  of  the  suburb  lying  between  the  inner  and  outer 
wali  of  Jerusalem;  perhaps  L  q.  "the  lower  city,"  or 
i4era(q.v.).  It  is  safest  to  regard  it  as  a  proper  name 
denoting  some  quarter  of  Jerusalem  about  which  we  are 
not  certain,  and,  accordingly,  to  tnmalate  m  the  MiA- 
nehj  for  which  we  have  the  precedent  of  the  Septoagint, 
which  has  Łv  rj  Maotrj.  The  phKX  of  her  leaidcnce 
is  mendoned  probably  to  show  why  she,  being  at  hsaid, 
was  resoited  to  oo  this  orgent  oceaaian,  and  not  Jer»> 


mjLDERICUS 


999 


HULSEMANN 


hf  who  WM  then  plob«bly  away  at  hU  native  town 
Anathoth,  or  at  aome  moro  diatant  place.  There  were 
gates  of  the  tempie  in  the  middle  of  the  aouthem  wali, 
called*'the  gates  of  Huldah"  (Mishna,  tXLMiddoth,i,d\ 
whicb,  if  they  were  so  named  fiom  any  ooanection  with 
the  propbetesB,  may  indkate  her  residenoe  on  OpbeL — 
Kitto.    SeeSuALLUM;  JosiAU. 

Huldezlcui,  AuausTENSKs  Episoopus,  who  floor- 
iahed  in  860f  waa  a  scholar  of  Adalbert,  and  descended 
firom  the  coants  of  Kilbury  and  Dillengen.  He  is  known 
hy  bis  letter  addressed  to  pope  Nichdias  against  the  cel- 
ibacy  of  the  dergy  (EpUiola  de  Clari  caliSału).  It  was 
tranalated  into  English,  and  published  about  the  time 
of  the  Beformation  (in  16mo),  without  date.--Darling, 
C^eiop,  BibUagraphica  ;  Ciarkę,  Succetsion  of  S<ęc  IM- 
trature,  ii,  581. 

Holdrich,  Jean  Jaoquks,  a  Swiss  theologian,  bom 
at  Zmich  in  1683,  belonged  to  a  family  of  which  seyeral 
membera  hare  distinguished  themseWes  as  theologians 
and  philologista.  See  Huldkricus.  He  devo(ed  much 
of  bil  time  to  the  aoqnt8ition  of  Hebrew,  and  went  to 
ihe  murerńties  of  Holland  to  pursae  a  courae  of  stody 
łn  the  Oriental  languagea.  On  his  return  to  his  natiye 
plaoe  in  1706  he  was  madę  pastor  of  the  House  of  Or- 
phana.  In  1710  he  was  appointed  profesaor  of  morał 
sdenee  at  the  Gymnasium  of  ZOrich.  His  scholanhip 
was  of  a  superior  order,  and  he  was  frequenŁly  soltdted 
to  aooept  a  professorship  at  the  nniYernties  of  Ueidel- 
bag  and  Groningen.  He  died  at  Zurich  May  26, 1781. 
He  published  hiMtoria  Jetekua  Nazartnij  a  Judmii 
hla^piteaie  otfrrupta,  ex  nunmuripto  kadenua  inedUo  Heb. 
€t  Lat^  cum  Mołi$  (Leyd.  1705,  8vo)  :—GentiU$  Obtrecta- 
lor,  swe  de  eałumiuis  ge$iiilium  in  Judaos  commeniarius 
(Zttrich,  1744, 4to),  a  coUection  of  sermons,  etc«— Hoefer, 
Nouv,  Biog,  Gen,  xxv,  470  8q. 

HoH,  HoPE,  a  Methodist  EpuMsopal  minister,  was 
bom  Much  18, 1763,  in  Woroester  Oounty,  on  the  east- 
cm  ahore  of  Maryland.  Hb  early  edocation  was  rather 
nęglected,  and  he  was  apprenticed  to  a  carpenter  at  Bal- 
timore. In  this  city  he  was  converted,  and  entered  the 
itinerancy  in  1785.  He  was  first  appointed  to  Salis- 
bory,  North  Garolina.  With  the  exceptLon  of  a  brief 
period  spent  in  New  England,  his  time  was  gi^en  to 
the  introduction  of  Methodism  in  the  Southern  States. 
Hia  laat  appointment  was  the  Savannah  Circuit,  Geor- 
gia. In  1794  he  tnvelled  with  bishop  Asbury,  and  lo- 
eated  in  1795.  He  died  October  4, 1818,  at  Athens,  Ga. 
HuH  poaacfloed  wonderful  power  over  thoee  who  came 
within  hia  influence,  and  was  one  of  the  most  eloquent 
mimatera  in  the  Methodist  Episcopal  Church  in  his  day. 
His  piety  was  deep,  and  many  were  oonverted  under  his 
labora.  During  his  active  work  in  the  mimstry,  he  se- 
curad  for  himsdf  a  pretty  good  education,  and  was  at 
one  time  able  eyen  to  assume  the  duties  of  teacher  of 
Łatin.  He  was  aiao  one  of  the  first  and  strongest  stip- 
porta  of  the  Univerńty  of  Georgia,  wbich  was  founded 
dnring  his  residence  at  AthenSir— Sterens,  MemoriaU  of 
Metkodism,  chap.  ix ;  Boehm,  Hiator.  Remimac.  p.  866 ; 
Spmgue,^NiMii^  ^mer.iPu^it^  yii,112  8q.    (J.H.W.) 

Htdn,  GuiLŁAUME,  a  Roman  cardinal,  bora  at  £tain, 
in  the  diooese  of  Yerdnn,  in  the  latter  half  of  the  14th 
oentury.  He  was  at  one  time  archdeaoon  of  Yerdun, 
and  later  of  Meta.  He  was  an  attendaut  at  the  Coun- 
cil  of  Basie  in  1440,  and  was  one  of  the  supporters  of 
the  antipope  (Amadeus  of  Savoy)  Felix  Y,  who  gaye 
him  the  caidinal*B  hat.  Nicholas  Y  confirmed  the  car- 
dinal after  the  schism  Dec.  19, 1449.  He  died  at  Romę 
Oct.  28, 1455.— Mignę,  Diet.  TheoL  xxxi,  1092. 

Hnlot,  HsMia  Louia,  a  French  theologian,  was  bom 
at  ATenay  March  1, 1757.  He  was  profesBor  tirst  at  the 
Mminary,  then  at  the  UniYersity  of  Rouen,  where  he 
waa  obI%ed  to  resign  at  the  outbreak  of  the  Reyolu 
tioo,  and  to  fleo  from  pecsecution  which  thieatened 
hia.  He  went  to  Gand,  where  he  was  madę  grand- 
▼iear,  ontil  the  ontnmoe  of  the  French  into  the  Netber^ 
landa  in  1794  foroed  him  again  to  flee.    He  went  suo- 


cessiyely  to  Munster,  Eifhrt,  Dresden,  and  Augsbuig; 
When  he  was  pemitted  to  return  to  his  natiye  land,he 
was  appointed  curate  of  the  pariah  of  Avancon,  and  later 
of  Antigny.  Afttf  twenty  yeais  of  assiducus  labor  at 
this  parish,  he  was  madę  canon,  and  finally  grand  vicar 
and  official  at  Rheims.  He  died  Sept  1, 1829.  His 
principal  writings  are  Lettre  attx  catholiąues  de  Reims 
(in  Latin  and  French,  Gand,  1793, 8vo) :— Lettre  deapre- 
tres  łrancaie  a  Vevique  de  Gand: — CoUect,  dee  href*  du 
papę  Pie  VI  (Augsh.  1796)  i—Lettree  a  M.  Schrofenberg, 
evegue  de  Freyeinffue  et  de  Raiisborme,  enfaveur  despre^ 
tres  Franc.  (1796,  8vo)  :—Etai  des  CathoL  Anffl.  (1798, 
8yo) :  —  ŚalisburffCHsis  cujusdem  religioti  delecła  casti- 
ffoiiOf  teu  rindicias  deri  Gallicam  exulis  (1800,  8vo) : — 
GaUiecmorum  Episcoporum  dissensus  imiocuus  (1801, 
8yo) : — Sedis  apostolica  TriuTnphua,  teu  sedes  apostolica, 
proteetore  deo,  semper  inuńcta  (Laon,  1836, 8vo).  Sey- 
eral  controyer^  works  and  sermons  were  left  in  MS. 
— Hoefer,  Now.  Biog,  Gen,  xxv,  479. 

Hulse,  John,  was  bora  at  Middlewich  in  1708;  He 
was  educated  at  St.  John'8  0)llege,  Cambridge ;  obtained 
a  smali  curacy  in  the  country ;  and,upon  the  death  of  bis 
father  in  1753,  withdrew  to  his  patenial  inheńtance  in 
Cheshire,  where,  owiog  to  his  delicate  state  of  health, 
he  Uvcd  in  retirement  until  his  death  in  1790.  He  b^ 
queathed  estates  in  order  to  found  two  divinity  scholar- 
ships  in  St  John's  College,  the  Hulsean  Pńze  £8say,and 
to  endow  the  ofiices  of  "  Christian  Advocate"  and  **  Chris- 
tian Preacher''  in  the  Uniyersity  of  Cambridge.  The 
duties  of  the  ^  Christian  Preacher,"  or  Hulsean  Lectur^ 
er,  according  to  this  appointment^  were  to  deliver  and 
print  twenty  sermons  eyery  year,  either  upon  the  evi- 
dences  of  Christianity,  or  the  difficulties  of  Holy  Scrip- 
ture.  The  funds  being  inadeąuate,  the  lectures  were 
not  commenoed  undl  1820,  and  in  1830  the  number  of 
sermons  to  be  delivered  in  a  ycar  was  reduced  to  eight, 
In  1860  the  office  of  ^*  Chriatian  Advocate''  wjs  changed 
to  a  professorship,  called  the  Hulsean  Professorship  of 
Diyinity.  Bishop  Ellicot  was  the  first  incumbent  in 
the  new  chair.  At  present  the  office  of  the  Hulsean 
Lecturer  or  Preacher  is  annual,  and  the  duty  of  the 
lecturer  to  preach  not  less  than  four,  nor  morę  than  8ix 
sermons  in  the  course  of  the  year.  Among  the  most 
important  of  the  Hulsean  sermons  are  the  foUowing: 
Blunt  (J.J.),  Principles  for  the  proper  Understandinff 
ofthe  Mosaic  WrUings,  1832  (Lond.  1833, 8vo) ;  Alford, 
The  Consisłenof  ofthe  Dirine  Conduct  in  rerealing  the 
Doctrinea  of  Redempticn,  1841  (Cambridge,  1842, 8vo); 
Trench,  The  Fitness  ąfthe  J/oh/  Scripfurefor  unfolding 
the  SpiriłualLife  ofMan,  1845  (Cambridge,  1845, 8vo) ; 
Trench,  Christ  the  Desire  of  all  Nations,  1846  (Cam- 
bridge, 1846,  8vo) ;  Wordsworth,  On  the  Canon  of  the 
Scriptures  of  the  Old  and  New  Testament,  and  on  the 
Apoaypha,  1847  (Lond.  1848,  8vo);  Wordsworth,  Lec- 
tures on  the  Apoealypae,  crUical,  ejcpositoryy  and  prac* 
ticaly  1848  (Lond.  1849, 8vo).— Dariing,  Cydopadia  Bib- 
liogrętphica,  i,  1578;  Chambers,  Cychp,  v,  453;  Farrar, 
Hiat,  ąfFree  Thought,  p.  207. 

Hulsean  Leotores.    See  Hulsb,  John. 

HttlBemann,  Johann,  a  German  theologian,  was 
bom  in  Ostfriesland  in  1602,  and  was  educated  at  the 
uniyersities  of  Wittenberg  and  Leipzig.  In  1629  he 
was  appointed  professor  of  theology  at  the  Uniyersity 
of  Wittenberg;  he  was  also  a  roember  ofthe  "  Leipziger 
Conyent"  of  1680,  and  of  the  "  CoUoąuium"  at  Thora  in 
1645,  where  he  performed  the  office  of  inodeniix>r  theolo- 
fforum  Auguatana  oonfestioms.  In  1646  he  was  called 
as  professor  of  systematic  theology  to  the  Uniyersity  of 
Leipzig.  He  died  in  1661.  In  connection  with  his 
son-in-law,  Caloyius  (q.  v.),  he  carried  on  the  contro- 
yeny  against  Calyinism  as  a  strictiy  orthodox  Luther- 
an.  An  able  poleraic  and  a  thoroughly  educated  theo- 
logian, who  in  many  reapccts  may  be  compared  to  the 
scholastics  ofthe  16th  century,  Hulsemann  distinguish- 
ed in  his  attacks  against  Calvinism  (in  his  work  Cal- 
irreconc»/»a5tfw,  Witt.  1644,  Lpz.  1646),  indted 


HUMAŃ  DEPRAYITY 


400 


HUME 


by  bishop  Joseph  Hall'8  Borna  irrelDonaliahUis,  the  fun- 
dttmental  articles  and  the  presappońtioiis  from  the  pos- 
sible  inferences.  His  most  oelebrated  work  is  Breviar- 
rum  iheolog.  ockibensprtBcipuatJidei  amtrotersias  (1640, 
and  often),  and  in  an  enlarged  fonn,  £xłauio  breviarii 
theoloffici  (1655, 1657).— Herzog,  Rec^Encyklop,  vi,  304 
sq.;  TheoU  Umv.  Aea;.  i,  372;  Gass,  Protest.  Dogmat,  i, 
318  są. ;  ii,  38  8q. ;  Tholuck,  Geitt.  d,  luther.  TheoL  Wit- 
tenberff'8f  p.  164  sq. 

Humań  Deprayity.    See  Depratitt. 

Humanista  (from  the  Latin  Utcrn  kumamoret,  po- 
lite  letten)  was  the  name  assumed  in  the  beginning  of 
the  16th  century  by  a  party  which,  with  Erasmus  and 
Beuchlin  at  their  head,  was  especially  devoted  to  the 
cultiTation  of  classical  literaturę,  and  which,  as  not  un- 
freąuently  happens  in  the  enthusiasm  of  a  new  pursuit, 
was  arrayed  in  opposition  to  the  reoeived  system  of  the 
schools,  not  alone  in  the  study  of  the  classical  languages, 
but  even  in  philosophy,  and  eventually  in  theology. 
See  Chambers,  Cyclop,  voL  v. ;  Gieseler,  Ch,  Hist,  iii,  406 
są.;  Kurtz,  Ck,  /list.  ii,  35, 127. 

Humanltarians:  I.  A  name  giyen  to  those  sev- 
eral  classes  of  anti-l^rinitarians  who  believe  that  Christ 
was  nothing  roore  than  a  merę  man,  bom  according  to 
the  usual  course  of  naturę,  and  one  who  lived  and  died 
According  to  the  ordinary  ci rcumstances  of  mankind.  As 
sach  are  generally  regarded  the  early  Judaizing  sects 
of  Ebion,  Gerinthus,  and  Carpocrates;  but  this  classifi- 
cation  b  by  no  means  justiiied,  especially  as  regards  the 
Ebionites  (q.  y.),  who  Uught  that  at  the  baptism  in  the 
Jordan  the  Mcssianic  calling  first  arose  in  Jesus,  and 
that  at  this  time  a  higher  spirit  Joined  itself  to  him,  in- 
vesting  him  with  miniculous  powers,  that  lefl  him  only 
at  the  hour  of  his'  departure  from  this  world.  The  ear- 
liest  recorded  author  of  the  purely  hnmanitarian  theory 
is  generally  regarded  as  Theodotus  (q.  y.)  of  Byzantium 
(A.D.  196),  surnamed  the  Taimer,  who,  haying  denied 
Christ  in  timc  of  peisecution,  defended  himsdf  after- 
wards  by  declaring  that,  in  so  doing,  ^  he  had  denied 
not  God,  but  man."  A  contemporaiy  of  Theodotus,  Ar- 
temon  (q.  y.),  in  like  manner  belieyed  in  God  the  crea- 
tor,  but  held  that  Christ  was  a  roere  man,  bom  of  a  yir- 
gin,  howeyer,  and  superior  to  the  prophets,  and  asserted 
that  such  had  becn  the  uniyersal  belief  of  Christians  till 
the  time  of  Zephyrinus,  202  (comp.  Liddon,  Our  LortTs 
Dwudly  [Bampton  Lect  1866],  p.  425).  These  opinions 
raust  of  course  be  distinguished  from  the  doctrines  of  the 
Arian  sects,  cvcn  the  lowest  schools  of  which  admit  the 
pre-exi8tence  of  Christ,  and  his  pre-eminence  among  the 
ereatures  of  God.    See  Alogi  ;  Arians  ;  Artemonites  ; 

SOCINIANS ;   UnITARIAKS. 

II.  The  name  Ilumanitarian  is  also  sometimes  applied 
to  the  disciplcs  of  St.  Simon  (the  successor  of  Baboeuf, 
who  flourished  tmder  Napoleon  I),  and  in  generał  to 
those  who  look  to  the  perfectibility  of  human  naturę  as 
their  grcat  rooral  and  social  dogma,  and  ignore  tMo- 
gether  tlie  dependence  of  man  iipon  supematural  aid, 
belieying  in  the  all-snfficiency  of  his  own  innate  powers. 
A  party  of  Communista  who  arose  in  France  about  1839 
also  took  the  name  from  the  newspaper  Lhumamiairfj 
their  orgaik— Buck,  TheoL  Diet, ;  Pierer,  Uniters.  Ler. ; 
Chambers,  Ct/clop.,-  Shedd,  History  ofDoctrines^  i,  259. 
See  CoMMUKisM. 

Hnmanity,  the  exercise  of  the  social  and  beneyo- 
lent  yirtues ;  a  fellow-feeling  for  the  distresses  of  an* 
other.  It  is  properly  called  humanity  because  there  is 
little  or  nothing  of  it  in  bmtes.  The  social  affections 
are  conceiyed  by  all  to  be  morę  refined  than  the  selAsh. 
Sympathy  and  humanity  are  uniyersally  esteemed  the 
iincst  temper  of  mind,  and  for  that  reason  the  preya- 
lence  of  the  social  affections  in  the  progress  of  society  is 
held  to  be  a  retinement  of  our  naturę.— Buck. 

HUMANITY  AND  CHRISTIANITr.    See  Chris- 

T1ASITY. 

H UM ANITY  OF  Christ.    See  Christ,  Persom  of; 

CuBISTOLOOY;  IsfCARMATX02ff. 


Hnman  Saorifioea.    See  Sacsifigb. 

Human  Ek>uL    See  Soitł. 

Humbert  (by  some  improperly  called  Hcbert),  a 
French  cardinal,  was  bom  probably  towards  the  dose  of 
the  -lOth  centuiy.  He  entered  the  order  of  the  Bene- 
dictines  at  Moyen-le-Moutier  in  1015.  In  1049  pope 
Leo  IX,  who  had  beeii  bishop  of  Toul,  the  diocese  in 
which  the  monastery  of  Moyen-le-Moutier  was  situated, 
called  Humbert  to  Komę,  and  he  was  first  created  aich- 
bishop  of  Sicily,  and  in  1051  cardinal  bishop  of  Silva 
Candida.  Humbert  is  belieyed  to  be  the  first  Freneh- 
man  who  reoeiyed  the  cardinal^s  hat  He  was  inti- 
matdy  assodated  with  the  pope,  was  admitted  to  all  his 
oouncils,  and  was  the  Koman  ambassador  to  Constanti- 
nople  to  effect  a  union  with  the  Eastem  or  Greek 
Church.  Under  pope  Victor  HI  he  was  madę  cbancel- 
lor  and  librarian  at  the  Yatican,  which  offices  he  con- 
tinued  to  hoid  under  the  pontifical  successors  Etienoe 
HI,  Nicolas  II,  and  Alexander  U.  He  was  at  the  head 
of  the  party  opposed  to  Berenger,  and  obliged  him  to 
make  a  confession  of  faith  at  the  synod  at  Korne  in 
1059.  He  died  about  1063.  He  wrote  a  number  of 
works,  among  othcrs  a  treadse  against  the  Simoiuans 
(published  by  Martene  in  his  ^  neodoła),  and  a  namtiye 
of  his  embassy  to  Constantinople.  This  narratlye  and 
two  other  polemical  works  against  the  Greek  Church 
haye  been  printed  seyeral  times,  especially  in  the  An^ 
naks  EcclekoMłici  of  Baronius.  All  his  writingt  haye 
been  coUected  and  printed  by  Mignę,  yoL  cxliii  (1858), 
p.  929-1278.— Hoefer,  Aoup.  Biog.  Ginerale,  xxy,  483; 
Mignę,  Enofdop,  TheoL  xxxi,  1092  sq. 

Humbert,  generał  of  the  order  of  Dominican  monks, 
was  bom  at  Romans,  France,  about  1200.  He  was  early 
sent  to  Paris  to  be  educated  as  a  cleigyman,  and  soan 
became  prominent  as  an  aasistant  preacher  to  the  eefe- 
brated  Jourdan.  He  entered  the  order  in  1224,  and  was 
madę  priest  at  Lyons.  In  1242  he  was  elected  *'pR>- 
yindar  of  Tuscany,  in  1244  **  proyincial"  of  France,  and 
in  1254  generał  of  his  order.  In  1268,  howeyer,  he  ab- 
dicated  this  high  poaition,  and  retired  as  a  aimple  monk, 
first  to  a  monastery  at  Lyons,  and  later  to  a  like  insti- 
tution  at  Yalencia.  The  patiiarchate  of  Jenisalem  was 
offered  him  in  1264,  but  he  dedined  it  He  died  Jnly 
14, 1277.  He  wrote  Offidwn  Ecdtsiastkwn  amwiaa* 
tam  noctumum  quam  Humum^  ad  utumordimt  prmdiea' 
tonim: — £xpońłio  super  reffilatn  8t.  Auffttstud:—EX' 
potUio  mper  Consttttttionet  ordinis  Jraintm  pradkatO" 
rum,  not  quite  complete :— Liber  de  nutructiome  ogieiaH' 
fun  ordinis/rałrumpr<B<HcaiotiŁm(pńnt»d  sereral  tamcs; 
the  best  edition,  Lyons,  1515)  :^De  Erudiliam  Pradiaf 
łantm,  also  entitled  De  A  rtt  prmdicandij  haa  been  inseit- 
ed  in  the  Cołlecłion  ofthe  Church  Faihen,  voL  xxv:— 
Liber  de  Prcedicatione  Crucigf  an  appeal  to  the  Chzis- 
tiaAs  against  iniidels: — Liber  de  eu  qum  tractanda  ridt- 
bantur  in  Concilio  generaH  Luffduni  celtbramhf  of  which 
extracts  were  published  by  Martynę  in  his  Thesaana 
Aneodot.  yoL  yii,  etc — Hoder,  Nouv,  Biog,  GMr.  xxy, 
488  sq. 

Humbert,  a  French  theolog^an,  was  bom  at  Gea- 
drex,  near  Paris,  about  the  middle  of  the  IStłi  ceotmy. 
In  July,  1296,  he  was  elected  abbć  of  PraDi,  in  the  dio- 
cese of  Sens,  and  he  died  there  March  14,  1298.  He 
wrote  seyeral  theological  and  philoaophical  wtwka,  all 
of  which  remain  unpriiited.  His  moet  important  work 
u  Sententite  super  libros  Metaphysica  A  ristoteUs,  a  com- 
mentary  on  Aristotle^s  metaphysics^— Hoefer,  Nasmeau 
Biog.  Generaief  xxy,  485 ;  Hist.  Litł.  de  la  France^  xxi, 
86. 

Humble  Access,  Pratbb  of,  ia  a  phrase  In  aome 
chnrches  for  a  diyine  aupplication  madę  by  the  prieat 
kneeling  at  the  altar  before  the  conaecration. 

Hume,  DAyro,  the  moet  notable  man  of  letten  and 
speculation  in  Scotland  during  the  last  century.  He 
was  almost  equally  eminent  as  a  metaphyaician,  a  his- 
torian,  and  a  political  eesayist  He  was  bom  at  Edin- 
boigh  April  26  (O.  S.),  17IL    On  his  iathei^fl  ńda  hA 


HUME 


401 


HUME 


ww  mUted  to  tłie  earls  of  Home  or  Hume,  and  throagli 
his  mother  be  was  the  grandson  of  Sir  David  Falconer, 
lord  president  of  tbe  oourt  of  jnBtioe.     His  father  was 
not  ricb,  but  he  was  an  independent  proprietor,  owning 
tbe  eatate  of  Ninewells^  in  Berwickshire.    But  David 
was  the  joonger  son,  and  was  entitled  to  only  asoiall 
share  of  his  iather^s  substance.    He  was  left  an  orpban 
in  bis  inijmcy,  and,  witb  hb  brotber  and  one  sister,  de- 
pended  on  tbe  sole  care  of  bis  ejccellent  motber.    He 
pssaed  witbout  specialnote  Łbrougb  tbe  UniyerBity,and 
was  designcd  for  the  Sootcb  bar,  but  be  bad  no  taste  for 
tbe  pcofession;  and  baving  spent  seyen  years  at  borne 
at  Ninewells,  after  leaying  college,  ostensibly  engaged 
in  stodying  tbe  sages  of  tbe  law,  be  risited  Bristol  in 
1733  with  some  mercantile  aspirations.    Thence,  after 
a  few  montba  of  disgust,  be  passed  over  into  France,  and 
took  up  his  abode  fint  at  Rheims,  and  afterwards  at  La 
FlftchL    Herę  he  devoted  bimself  to  pbilosopby  for  life, 
and  oomposed  bis  TretUiae  of  Humań  Naturę,    It  was 
in  a  discnssion  with  one  of  the  Jesuit  fatbers  of  La 
Fldchi  that  tbe  oelebrated  aigument  against  miracles 
flashed  upon  bis  mind.    The  Treatise  of  Humań  Naturę 
waa  pabUsbed  in  1787,  alter  his  return  to  England.    He 
aays  himself  of  it,  ''It  fell  dead-bom  from  the  press." 
The  ftmily  home  at  Ninewells  was  again  his  sbelter, 
and  here  he  rencwed  bis  studtes  and  extended  his  spec- 
alationj^     In  1742  he  pnblisbed  the  first  part  of  his  Et- 
sajftj  Morał  and  Połiticali  which,  in  his  opinion,  met 
with  considerable  favor.    Still,  he  bad  obtained  no  as- 
soied  prorision  in  life.    He  was  disappointed  in  an  ap- 
pUcation  for  a  profeseonhip  in  the  Unirersity  of  Edin- 
boigb,  and  in  1746  he  accepted  tbe  charge  of  tbe  mar- 
qait  of  Annandale.    With  bim  he  resided  twelve  un- 
r>— — "»  montbs,  but  he  deńved  some  emolnment  from 
the  asBociation.    In  1746  he  became  secretary  to  gen- 
end  Sc  Clair,  whom  in  1747  he  attended  on  bis  miiitary 
embassy  to  Tienna  and  Turin.    The  Inquiry  conoenmg 
tht  Humań  UndertUndmg—tk  recast  of  the  first  part  of 
his  first  treatise— was  published  wbile  he  was  at  Turin. 
In  1749  he  resougbt  bis  old  refnge  at  Ninewells,  and  oc- 
cnpted  bimself  with  tbe  oomposition  of  his  PolUical 
Ditcourms,  and  his  Ingwiry  into  the  prmcipkt  ofMor- 
ab.    The  former  constitnted  the  seoond  part  of  his  es- 
says;  tbe  latter  was  a  reyision  and  modiiication  of  the 
second  part  of  his  TreaUae  of  Humań  Naturę,  which  bas 
always  been  better  known  in  Germany  than  in  England. 
In  1761,  on  the  mairiage  of  his  brotber,  he  abandoned 
the  family  seat^  and,  in  company  witb  bis  sister,  madę 
a  new  home  in  Edinburgh.    He  applied  for  a  chair  m 
tbe  Uniyenńty  of  Glasgow,  but  again  failed.    In  1762 
he  aooepted  the  post  of  librarian  to  the  Adrocates'  li- 
tniiy  in  Edinbnigh,  but  transferred  nearly  all  his  smali 
talary  to  the  blind  poet,  Blacklock.    He  now  engaged 
in  the  compositiou  of  his  Hittory  of  England^  which  bad 
attncted  his  rogards  some  years  before.    The  partisan 
temper  in  which  it  is  designed  is  revealed  by  tbe  period 
which  be  first  took  up.     He  plunged  tn  midUu  re»,  ot, 
rather,  be  commenced  nearly  at  tbe  end,  and  worked 
backwards.    From  its  publication  Hume  experienced 
soch  hostility  and  disappointment  that  he  would  bave 
chaoged  bis  name  and  redred  to  the  Continent  if  he 
bad  not  been  preyented  by  the  occuirence  of  the  Seyen 
Yesn'  War.    The  fint  rolume  of  the  Hittory  of  Eng- 
land ttippetand  in  1764;  the  second  in  1766  or  1767.    Be- 
tveen  the  two  was  published  the  Natural  Hittory  of 
Btiigion  (8yo),  which  was  answered  by  bishop  Hurd. 
The  Hittory  ofthe  Hmue  of  Tudor  came  out  in  two  yol- 
umes  In  1769 ;  and  in  1761,  two  yolumes,  containing  the 
eidy  history  of  England,  completed  the  work,  wbicb,be- 
fure  iu  oonduaion,  was  reoognised  as  an  Englisb  dassic, 
sad  itill  is  justly  so  regarded.    If  tbe  work  encountered 
yańoas  and  yiolent  opposition,  it  gradually  acbieyed 
cniiaent  popularity,  and  rendered  the   author  '^not 
ooły  independent,  but  opulent.**    Being  now  "  tumed  of 
fif^,"  be  resolyed  to  spiend  tbe  remainder  of  his  life  in 
philosopbical  dignity  and  comfortable  retirement    Tbe 
ittolye  was  of  no  long  duration.    Tbe  marąuis  of  Hert- 
TY— Cc 


ford  inyited  Home,  with  whom  he  was  personally  un-* 
acquainted,  to  become  bis  secretaiy  of  legation  at  the 
French  oourt,  The  distinguisbed  philosopber  and  his- 
torian  was  reoeiyed  with  marked  attentions  and  flatter- 
ies  by  the  eminent  persons  assemblrd  at  Paris.  It  was 
the  period  when  the  nnion  of  infidel  sentiments  with 
literary  renown  bad  become  tbe  ragę  in  the  most  bril- 
liant  taiant.  After  two  yean  lord  Hertford  was  recall- 
ed,  but  Hume  remained  as  charyi  ^ąffairet  till  1766^ 
and  receiyed  a  pension  of  X400  for  bis  diplomatic  ser- 
yices.  The  *'canny  Scot"  bad  become  a  ricb  old  bach- 
elor,  and  was  able  to  extend  his  patronage  and  aid  to 
Rousseau  on  his  aniyal  in  England,  and  eyen  to  procure 
for  bim  the  offer  of  a  pension  from  the  crown.  Theae 
fayon  ended  in  a  quarrel  between  the  protected  and  the 
protector,  of  which  an  aocount  was  giyen  by  the  latter 
in  a  pamphlet  About  this  time  Hume  became  under- 
secretary  of  state,  and  held  the  offioe  for  two  yean,  re- 
tnming  to  Edinburgh  in  1769.  Here  he  passed  the  re- 
maining  yean  of  bis  life,  with  tbe  ezception  of  a  brief 
yiflit  to  Harrowgate  and  Bath,  and  it  was  shortly  before 
setting  out  on  this  Joumey,  undertaken  for  the  restora- 
tion  of  his  dedining  health,  that  he  wrote  his  Autotnog^ 
rapky,  He  had  been  attacked  with  diarrhoea  in  the 
spring  of  1776,  and  succumbed  to  the  disease  on  Sun- 
day,  Aug.  26, 1776.  He  was  serene  in  Ufe,  he  was  equa]- 
ly  serene  in  death.  If  Christianity  had  no  consolations 
fcr  an  expiring  foe,  the  graye  presented  no  terron  to 
the  man  wbo  had  cayilled  about  all  religion.  Yet  few 
persons  will  assent  to  the  unmeasured  eulogy  of  Adam 
Smith,  wbo  "  considered  him,  both  in  his  life,  and  sińce 
bis  death,  as  approacbing  as  nearly  to  the  idea  of  a  per- 
fectly  wise  and  yirtuous  man  as  perhaps  the  naturę  of 
human  firailty  will  permit"  But  Smith,  notwithstand- 
ing  this  testimony,  refused  to  publish  the  JHahguet  on 
Natural  Rdigian,  though  a  special  legacy  of  £200  was 
attached  to  such  pubhcation.  They  were  not  giyen  to 
the  world  until  1779,  and  then  by  the  agency  of  Hume's 
nephew.  His  Life,  wriUen  by  kimteff  with  a  Letterfrom 
Adam  Smith  giving  an  Account  ofhit  Death,  appeared 
in  1777  (Lond.  8yo).  A  better  ^'iew  of  the  life  and  the 
chancter  of  Hume  than  this  edition  of  his  autobiogra- 
pby  is  giyen  in  the  A  utobioyrctphy  ofA  Uxander  CaHylt 
(Edmb.  and  N.Y.  1860). 

Tbe  pbilosopby  of  Hume  underwent  three  reyisions, 
with,  howeyer,  scarcely  any  essential  changc.  It  bas 
been  customary  to  enlarge  upon  tbe  acumeu  and  logical 
predsion  of  Hume,  but  these  qualifications  resolye  them- 
selyes,  on  doee  scrutiny,  into  merę  dialectical  subtlety. 
If  bis  artifices  imposed  upon  otben,  be  was  often  tbe 
yictim  of  them  hiinself,  and  he  was  crushed  to  tbe  earth 
beneath  the  ruins  of  the  systems  which  he  oyerthrew. 
Hume's  f undamental  thesis  is  that  all  human  knowledge 
(no  pun  is  designed)  consists  of  imprettiont  and  ideat, 
Imprtttiont  are  the  direct  perceptions  of  sense :  idea»  are 
only  tbe  relics  or  signs  of  former  impressions.  Impret- 
tiont  are  always  particular,  and  incapable  of  yariation : 
ickat  are  conseąuently  the  unalterable  spectres  of  for- 
mer sensations.  The  theory  of  Locke  is  accepted  and 
simplified  by  discarding  the  office  of  reflection.  The 
theory  of  Berkdey  is  accepted  and  expanded  by  apply- 
ing  bis  argument  against  matter  to  mind,  and  denying 
all  eyidence  of  the  existence  of  eitbcr.  Tbe  result  is 
a  tboroughly  Fyrrbonistic  doubt,  Tbe  application  of 
these  postulates^  for  postulates  they  are,  genemted  tbe 
wbole  pbilosopby  of  Hume.  Tberc  are  only  two  objects 
of  knowledge— the  relations  of  ideas,  and  the  relations 
of  impressions  or  facts.  The  former  relations  are  con- 
cemed  with  unchanging  signs,  and  are  therefore  simple, 
and  readily  discemed  by  tbe  discursion  of  tbougbt ;  but 
the  latter  always  inyolye  tbe  prindple  of  caute  and  ef" 
fect,  because  due  to  some  exciting  influence.  Tbe  rela- 
tion  of  cause  and  efiect  is  nothing  morę  than  tbe  habitu 
uai  sucoeBsion  of  eyents;  because  all  our  complex  con- 
ceptions  are  liuked  togetber  only  by  customary  associa- 
tion,  and  it  is  impossible  that  particular  objects  sbould 
produce  a  generał  idea.    General  ideas  are,  indeed,  im* 


HUME 


402 


HUME 


pOBsibiUdes,  for  all  abstnctions  are  ooly  Ttgae  images 
of  particulan.  Ideas  may  represent  either  raalities  or 
phenomena,  but  no  inreatigatioiu  can  reach  beyond  the 
phenomenon  to  the  reality.  Thia  leality  Ib  a  pure  de- 
iiuiou— A  figment;  it  is  ońljr  the  name  arbitrarily  giyen 
to  a  system  of  connected  impressioiis  and  ideaa.  There 
ia  neither  reality  nor  substanoe,  neither  matter  nor 
mind;  at  least,  there  ia  nothing  to  authorize  the  aaser^ 
tion  of  their  existenoe  except  as  factitious  phenomena. 
The  connection  of  phenomena,  or  of  the  oonceptions  cor- 
responding  with  them,  ia  acoepted  aa  truth  in  oonse- 
qaenoe  of  a  primordial  tendency  of  the  mind,  called  be- 
lief.  This  belief,  however,  importa  nothing  morę  than 
the  tenacity  of  certain  notions  in  con8equence  of  the 
vivacity  of  the  impressions  by  which  they  are  prodaced. 
The  credibility  of  facta  is  thus  resoWed  into  their  appre- 
henaibility,  and  beoomes  merely  a  ąuestion  of  probabil- 
ities.  This  constitution  of  belief,  and  this  oomplerion 
of  knowlcdge,  result  from  the  modę  in  irhich  the  mate- 
rials  of  thought  are  obtained.  They  are  gathered  by 
obaerration  and  experience,  and  are  distinguiahed  into 
two,  and  only  two  classcs,  aooording  to  their  relatire 
8trength--«nprMM0fM  and  ideas;  the  fonner  being  the 
primary  and  morę  forcible  perceptions ;  the  Uitter  being 
the  derivative  and  weaker,  and  being  only  copies  of  im- 
pressions. Further  than  thia  it  is  impossible  to  carry 
apeculation.  The  mind,  the  instrument  of  thought,  liee 
fc^yond;  but  its  naturę  ia  diacemible  only  in  ita  opera- 
tions,  and  theae  constitute  its  whole  naturę  so  far  aa  any 
attainable  knowledge  ia  concemed.  Thua  the  fauman 
mind  is  the  mould  and  meaaure  of  all  knowledge,  and 
yet  that  mind  is  itaelf  only  a  problematical  phenome- 
non. A  good-humored  soepticiam  is  acoordingly  the 
Bole  result  of  philosophy. 

From  this  brief  and  imperfect  synopaia  of  Hume^s  doc- 
trine— ao  well  summed  up  by  Maduntosh :  **  He  aimed  at 
proying,  not  that  nothing  waa  known,  but  that  nothing 
Gould  bo  known** — it  ia  eaay  to  reoognise  the  modę  in 
which  he  reached  its  most  startling  applicationa.  He 
might  aasert  the  morał  sense,  but  the  asscrtion  waa  nu- 
gatoiy,  for  there  could  be  no  foundation  for  morala,  nor 
anything  morę  yalid  than  expediencic8  growmg  out  of 
particular  impreasions  and  their  obaerred  seqnence8. 
He  might  admit  the  poasibility,  even  the  probability,  of 
diN-ine  intelligenoe,  but  could  not  tell  whether  it  was 
"  ane  or  mair,"  aince  revelation  oonld  not  be  subatituted 
for  sensible  perceptions.  The  scheme  bad  no  room  for 
the  admiaaion  of  miradea,  as  they  wera  unsnpported  by 
ordlnary  ezpeiienoe,  and  human  testimoiiy  was  falla- 
cioua.  All  thia  mischieyoua  error  ia  the  appropriate 
fruit  of  the  tree  on  which  it  hanga.  Many  reAitations 
of  these  positions  haye  been  attempted,  and  a  yigorous 
warfare  has  been  waged  on  the  principlea  suppoaed  to 
form  the  foundation  of  thia  philosophy ;  but  too  little 
attention  has  been  paid  to  the  ambiguity  of  the  terma 
employod,  and  to  the  yadllation  with  which  they  are 
uaed  by  the  conjuror.  A  atrict  definition  of  ^  miracles" 
and  '^experience,"  and  a  rigid  adherenoe  to  euch  defini- 
tion, will  reduce  the  celebrated  argument  againat  mira- 
des  to  a  bald  petitio  prineipHj  or  to  a  manifest  abaurdity. 
Hume  endeayored  to  proye  that "  no  testimony  is  snffi- 
cient  to  establish  a  mirade,"  and  the  reaaoning  employ- 
ed  for  this  purpose  is,  that  **  a  mirade  being  a  yiolation 
of  the  lawB  of  naturę,  which  a  firm  and  unalterable  ex- 
peńenoe  has  established,  the  proof  againat  a  mirade, 
from  the  yeiy  naturę  of  the  fact,  ia  as  entire  aa  any  ar- 
gument fram  experience  can  be;  whereaa  our  experi- 
ence  of  human  yeradty,  which  (acoording  to  him)  is  the 
aole  foundation  of  the  eyidenoe  of  teatimony,  ia  far  from 
being  uniform,  and  can,  therefc^e,  neyer  prepondente 
againat  that  experience  which  admita  of  no  exception." 
This  boaated  and  planaible  argument  haa,  with  equal 
candor  and  acuteness,  been  examined  by  Dr.  Cam{^ll, 
in  his  Dissertation  en  AfiracUs,  who  justly  obeenres  that, 
ao  f ar  is  experience  from  being  the  aole  foundation  of 
the  eyidence  of  testimony,  that,  on  the  contrary,  testi- 
mony ia  the  sole  foundation  of  by  far  the  greater  pait 


óf  what  Mr.  Hume  calls  firm  and  unalterable  experieiioe*, 
and  that  if,  in  certain  drcumatanoea,  we  did  not  give  id 
implicit  faith  to  testimony,  oor  knowledge  of  eyentB 
would  be  confined  to  those  which  had  fallen  under  the 
immediate  obeeryation  of  our  own  senses.  Hume  main- 
tained  that  a  mirade  is  contrary  to  experience;  but, in 
reality,  it  ia  only  different  firom  ordinaiy  experieoce. 
ThAt  diaeases  should  generalia  be  cured  by  the  applict- 
tion  of  medicine,  and  sometimes  at  the  merę  woid  of  a 
prophet,  are  facta  not  inconsiatent  with  each  other  in 
the  naturę  of  things  themselyes,  nor  irreconcilable  ac- 
cording  to  our  ideas.  Each  fact  may  arise  from  iu  own 
proper  cauae ;  each  may  exi8t  indepcndently  of  the  oth- 
er ;  and  each  ia  known  by  its  own  proper  proof,  whether 
of  sense  or  testimony.  To  pronounce,  therefore,  a  mir- 
ade to  be  falae,  becauae  it  ia  dilferent  from  ordinaiy  ex- 
perience,  ia  only  to  condude  against  ita  exi8tence  fiora 
the  yery  circumstance  which  oonstitutęs  its  spedfic 
character ;  for  if  it  were  not  different  from  ordinaiy  ex- 
perience,  where  would  be  ita  aingularity  ?  or  what  proof 
could  be  drawn  from  it  in  attestationof  a  diyine  nie»> 
aage?    See  Miracles. 

The  importance  and  yalue  of  Hume*a  political  easajs 
haye  raidy  been  appredated.  They  are  the  bcst  of  aH 
his  productions,  but  they  haye  been  almost  disn^gaided 
in  the  estimation  of  his  genins.  They  exerdsed  a  eon- 
siderable  but  unacknowledged  influence  on  the  age  near- 
eat  his  own.  It  is  impossible  to  ignore  the  obligatiooi 
of  the  Constitution  of  the  United  Statea  to  the  enay  <n 
the  Idea  of  a  Perfect  Commonwealth.  Lord  Brougham 
does  no  moro  than  justice  to  the  author  when  he  de- 
darea  that  '*Mr.  Hume  is,  beyond  doubt,  the  author  of 
the  modem  doctrinea  which  now  rule  the  world  of  sd- 
ence,  which  are  to  a  great  extent  the  guide  of  prectieil 
statesmen ;  ...  for  no  one  descrving  the  name  of  leg- 
islator pretenda  to  doubt  the  soundness  of  the  theory." 
Many  of  the  intdlectual  yices,  as  all  the  exceUence8'af 
Hume— his  speculatiye  audadty,  his  regard  for  materiał 
comfort  and  independence,  his  want  of  enthusiasm,  the 
restriction  of  his  yiew  to  obseryation  and  expeńenee, 
his  acceptance  of  expediency  as  a  prindplo,  hia  acąuaiot- 
ance  with  oourta  and  with  affairs  of  state,  hia  knowl- 
edge of  histoiy,  hia  philoeophic  habits,  his  slow  progress 
Irom  pincbed  to  eagy  drcumatanceo,  all  farored  profi- 
dency  in  this  branch  of  inquiry.  Many  of  theae  char- 
acteristica  were,  howeyer,  adyene  to  hia  career  aa  an 
hiatorian.  Tnie,  in  Hume's  Hittory  af  England,  the  yig- 
orous, easy,  and  unaffected  style,  the  yiyacity  of  the  de- 
lineationa,  the  arrangement  of  the  topics,  the  diapoation 
of  the  personages,  the  yaiiety  and  frenetration  of  the  le- 
flections,  are  all  admirable.  The  narratiye  ia  aJwari 
faadnating,  if  the  expre8sion  is  rarely  idiomatic,  some- 
times  ungrammatical,  and  ofiten  proyinciaL  fiut  to  the 
highest  merits  of  histoiy  it  possessea  no  daim.  It  is 
haatily,  carelessly,  and  inaccurately  composed ;  it  ia  in- 
curious  of  truth ;  it  diaregards  authentic  sourcea  of  in- 
formation  from  indolence  and  indifference;  it  ia  equal]y 
partial  and  prejudiced.  In  form,  it  is  a  model  of  hiator^ 
ical  art,  but  not  of  the  art  in  its  highest  conception;  in 
subetance  and  in  spirit  it  diaplays  nearly  eyciy  ńn  and 
corruption  which  a  hiatorian  should  abhor.  Hia  wńt- 
ings  called  forth  many  antagoniats,  &nd,  in  fact,  may  be 
aaid  to  haye  giyen  rise  to  the  Scotch  roetaphyaical  adMd 
of  Common  Sftue,  so  called,  of  which  the  beat  cxposi- 
tion,  and,  at  the  same  time,  the  beat  answer  to  Hume^s 
scepticism,  is  to  be  proyed  by  Beid*s  Camplete  WorkSj 
tpith  Notes  hy  Sir  WilHam  JłamUton  (Edinboigh,  1846, 
8vo).  Beattie'8  Essay  on  Trutka  and  Oswald*a  Appeal 
to  Common  Sense  (Edinb.  1772, 2  yola.),  were  ałao  writ- 
ten  in  leply  to  Hume. 

See  The  PhHosopMcal  Works  of  Daxid  Hwne^  ta- 
chtding  aU  the  Essays,  and  ezMbiUng  the  morę  imporiaHt 
Atieraiions  and  Correclions  in  the  tuecessiee  Ediiions 
pnbUshed  by  the  Author  (Edinbnrgh  and  Boston,  18H 
4  yola.  8vo);  Burton,  Life  and  Letters  ofI>avidffume 
(Eduib.  1847,  2  yola.  8yo) ;  /.ełfers  of  eminenł  Persons 
addressed  to  Damd  ffume  (Edinb.  and  Lond.  1820, 4to) ; 


HUMERALE 


403 


mjMILlTY 


Bkongham,  Z^trct  ofMen  ofLetUrs  and  of  Science  (Lon- 
don, 1845,  Svo) ;  Tennemann,  Mamai  Hittory  ofPhUoe. 
§  876;  EnffliMk  Cyehp.  b,  v.;  Moreli, /^«<.  o/Mod.  Pki- 
btophy,  pt.  i,  du  iii ;  Sir  Wm.  Hamilton,  L«f .  on  Meta- 
phyties  ;  Mackintosh,  Ilitf,  o/Ełkical  PkUos,  p.  146  są. ; 
Allibone,  Diet.  of  A  utkore,  i,  914  8q. ;  Lewes,  Jlistory  of 
PkUoe,  ii,  305  sq. ;  Teiinemaiui,  Geack,  d,  Philos,  xi,  425 
są.;  Ri«cr,CAywfŁPA*to».Tiii,6,r,  ch.ii;  Coiisin,//**^ 
de  la  PkUot.  modernę,  Lecon  xi;  Farnir,  Crif.  Uitt.  of 
Pręt  Thouffhi,  p.  148  iq. ;  JuUnb.  Rev,  Jan.  1847 ;  Owort. 
Reeiew,  lxxiii,  292 ;  lxxvii,  40 ;  1844*  ^  815  flq. ;  Blado- 
woodt  Maffozine  (on  the  argument  against  mirades), 
xlvi,  91  8ą. ;  June,  1869 ;  Brit,  Reńew,  Aug.  1847,  p.  288 ; 

1868,  p.  77  8q.;  New  Kn^ander,  i,  169, 172;  ii,  212;  iv, 
405 ;  XTiii,  168 ;  North  A  merican  Renew,  lxxix,686  Bq. ; 
ChritL  Remembrancerj  Oct.  1868,  p.  272 ;  Brit.  and  For, 
Erang,  Betf.  Oct,  1865.  p.  826  8q. ;  Contemp,  Retńew,  May, 

1869,  art.  vi,  leprinted  in  the  Amer.  Pretbył.  Bev,  Jnly, 
1869,art.TiiL     (G.F.H.) 

Humerale.    See  Amice. 

Hmnili&ti,  a  monastic  order  founded  about  1184 
by  some  Italian  noblemen  whom  the  emperor  Henry  II 
had  sent  as  hoetages  to  Germany.  In  1161  they  were 
tnusTormed  into  canons  of  St.  Benedict,  and  as  such 
icceireii  the  aanction  of  pope  Innocent  III  in  1200.  A 
conesponding  order  of  nuns  was  afterwards  organized 
in  3Iilan  by  a  lady  naroed  Blassoni  (whence  they  were 
a]90  called'  Nuns  of  BloMoni),  NoŁwithstanding  the 
nuroeroos  disonlers  they  occaaioned,  these  nuns  did 
grest  good  as  nurses,  etc;  their  nile  was  adopted  in 
ioroe  ninety-eight  conrents,  but  they  were  finally  sup- 
presged  byFius  V  in  1571.  A  few  convent8,  without 
paiticular  attention  to  ibress  and  ob8ervances  of  the  old 
order,  sttll  remain  in  Italy.  The  habit  of  the  order 
conai^ed  in  a  white  dress  and  cloak,  to  which  a  white 
scapuhtf}'-  ¥ras  afterwards  added;  aiso  a  smali  hood. 
The  nuns'  dress  was  white,  with  gjray  under-garments, 
OT  rice  versa. — ^Piercr,  Unwers,  Lerikon,  viii,  609 ;  Fehr, 
AUgem.  Gesdu  der  Monc/uorden  (TUb.  1845),  p.  132  są.; 
Hclyot,  Gtachiekte  cŁ  Kldsłer  «.  Bitterorden,  vi,  179  sq.; 
Aschbach,  Kirchen-LezU-on,  iii,  347 ;  Wetzer  und  Welte, 
if»rcA«-i>x.  V,  3%  są.    (J.H.W.) 

HmniUation  of  Christ  (in  the  language  of  the 
oliler  Refbrmed  theoiogians,  the  status  hunUHationis  sice 
earimmiHoms},  the  **  hombling  of  himseir  (PhiL  ii,  8)  to 
which  the  son  of  God  snbmitted  in  accomplishing  the 
redemption  of  mankind.  As  to  the  ąuestion  whether 
the  LEigos,  at  the  incamation,  yoluntarily  diyested  him- 
self  of  his  diyine  aelf-conscioosness  in  order  to  deyelop 
faimself  in  purely  human  form,  see  Kbnosis.  On  the 
ąuestion  of  his  descent  into  Hades,  see  Hieli^  Descent 
istro.  For  monographs  on  this  subject,  see  Yolbeding, 
JndexProffraMmatum,^M;  l{aaeyLebenJesu,p»US. 

The  humiliation  of  Christ  u  genęrally  set  forth  by 
theologians  as  shown  in  his  birth,  his  circamstances, 
temptation,  soiferings,  and  death.  1.  In  his  birth :  he 
was  bora  of  a  tooman — a  sinful  woman;  though  he  was 
without  sin  (GaL  iv,  4) ;  of  a  poor  woman  (Lukę  ii,  7, 
24) ;  in  a  poor  country  vil]age  (John  i,  46) ;  in  a  sta- 
Ue— an  abject  place ;  of  a  naturę  subject  to  infirmities 
(Heb.  ii,  9),  hunger,  thirst,  weariness,  pain,  etc  2.  In 
his  ciraimstances :  laid  in  a  manger  when  he  was  bora, 
lived  in  obscurity  for  a  long  time,  probably  worked  at 
the  tiBde  of  a  carpenter,  had  not  a  place  where  to  lay 
his  hesd,  and  was  oppressed  with  poveTty  while  he  went 
about  pieaching  the  Gospel.  8.  It  appeared  in  his  rep- 
vUUion:  he  was  loaded  with  the  most  abusive  ralling 
and  calumny  (Isa.  liii),  the  most  false  accusations  (Matt. 
xxvi,  59,  67),  and  the  most  ignominious  ridicule  (Psa. 
xxii,  6;  Matt.  xxii,  68 ;  John  vii,  85).  4.  In  his  soul: 
he  was  often  tempted  (Matt  iv,  1,  etc ;  Heb.  ii,  17, 18 ; 
iv,  15) ;  grieyed  with  the  reproaches  cast  on  himself,  and 
with  the  sifui  and  miseries  of  others  (Heb.  xii,  8 ;  MatL 
xi,  19;  John  xi,  35);  was  burdened  with  the  hidings 
of  his  Father*s  fiśoe,  and  the  fears  and  impressions  of  his 
vrath  (Pn.  xxi,  1 ;  Loke  xxii,  48;  Heb.  v,  7).    5.  In 


YoB  death:  scouiged, ciowned  with  thorns, Teceived  gali 
and  vinegar  to  drink,  and  was  cradAed  between  two 
thieves  (Lukę  xxiii ;  John  xix;  Mark  xv,  24,  25).  6. 
In  his  hurial:  not  only  was  he  bora  in  another  man*8 
honse,  but  he  was  buried  in  another  man^s  tomb ;  for  he 
had  no  tomb  of  his  own,  or  family  vault  to  be  interred 
in  (Isa.  liii,  10,  etc  ;  Matt.  xiii,  46).  The  humiliation 
of  Christ  was  necessary,  1.  To  execute  the  purpose  of 
God,  and  covenant  engagements  of  Christ  (Acts  ii,  23, 
24;  Psa.  xl,  6,  7,  8);  2.  To  fulfil  the  manifold  types 
and  piedictions  of  the  Old  Testament;  3.  To  satisfy 
the  broken  law  of  God,  and  procure  eternal  redemptiou 
for  us  (Isa.  liii ;  Heb.  ix,  12, 15) ;  4.  To  leave  us  an  un- 
spotted  pattem  of  holinees  and  pataence  under  suffering. 
~Buck,  TheoL  Biot,  s.  v.  For  a  snmmary  of  the  views 
of  the  Reformed  theologians  on  the  humiliation  of 
Christ,  see  Heppe,  Dogmatik  der  £vanff,'Beform,  Kirche 
(Elberfeld,  1861),  Locus  xix.  See  also  Hase,  Evang,' 
Prot,  Doffmatik,  §  156, 166;  GUI,  Body  ofDimnUy,  vol. 
ii ;  Robert  HaU,  Works,  voL  iu;  Knapp,  Theology,  §  96- 
97.    See  Jesus  Christ. 

ttmnUlty  (Lat.  humilkas ;  from  hunuts,  the  ground), 
as  a  Christian  grace,  is  the  oppoaite  of  •*  highminded- 
nesB."  It  was  unknown  to  the  andent  heathen  mond- 
ists;  the  word  humilis,  with  them,  indicated  baseness 
of  mind. 

1.  The  bdiever  is  indeed  ^  exalted*'  to  a  higher  stage 
of  manhood  by  his  onion  with  Christ,  and  beoomes, 
moreover,  a  "  king  and  priest  unto  God.''  But  he  never 
"  exalts'*  himself.  Whatever  he  has,  he  owes  (and  feels 
that  he  owes)  not  to  himself,  but  to  the  love  of  God,  his 
creator;  to  the  grace  of  Christ,  his  redeoner;  and  to 
the  fdlowship  of  the  Holy  Ghoet,  his  sanctifier.  He 
perceives  all  his  blessings  only  in  God  the  Father,  Son, 
and  Holy  Ghost.  If  he  looks  upon  himself,  he  finds 
that  all  he  is  or  has  is  but  what  has  been  mercifully 
vouchsafed  to  him ;  if  he  looks  upon  his  indiWdual  ego, 
apart  from  these  privileges,  he  finds  only  a  wcak,  impo- 
tent personality,  oonrupted  by  sin  and  error,  and  un- 
worthy  of  such  great  privileges.  If  he  rejoices  in  the 
possession  of  Christian  graces,  he  rejoices  in  them  as 
having  been  given  him  (1  Cor.  iv,  7),  and  considers  at 
the  same  time  the  merits  of  others  (Kom.  xii,  8 :  ''For 
I  say,  through  the  grace  given  unto  me,  to  eveTy  man 
that  is  among  you,  not  to  think  of  himself  morę  highly 
than  he  ought  to  think ;  but  to  think  soberly,  acoording 
as  God  hath  dealt  to  every  man  the  measure  of  faith"). 
Consdous  of  the  gifts  he  has  received,  he  yet  prais^ 
the  grace  which  has  given  them  to  him  (Rom.  xv,  17, 
18:  "I  have  therefore  whereof  I  may  glory  through 
Jesus  Christ,  in  those  things  which  pertain  to  God.  For 
I  will  not  dare  to  ^>eak  of  any  of  those  things  which 
Christ  hath  not  wrought  by  mc"  Phil.  iv,  11-13 :  "  I 
have  learaed,  in  whatsoever  state  I  am,  therewith  to  be 
oontent.  I  know  both  how  to  be  abased,  and  I  know 
how  to  abomid :  everywhere  and  iu  all  things  I  am  in- 
stracted  both  to  be  fuli  and  to  be  hungiy,  both  to  abound 
and  to  sufler  need.  I  can  do  all  things  through  Christ 
which  strengtheneth  mc"  2  Cor.  iii,  5 :  "  Not  that  we 
ara  snffident  of  ourBelves  to  think  anything  as  of  oui^ 
selves;  but  our  suffidency  \b  of  God."  1  Cor.  iii,  5-7 : 
*^Who  then  is  Paul,  and  who  is  ApoUos,  but  ministers 
by  whom  ye  believed,  even  as  the  Lord  gave  to  every 
man  ?  I  have  planted,  ApoUos  watered ;  but  God  gave 
the  increasc  So  then,  ndther  is  he  that  pUnteth  any- 
thing, neither  he  that  watereth;  but  God  that  giveth 
the  increase").  The  best  Christians  ara  but  unprofiU- 
ble  8ervants,  and  unworthy  instraments  of  the  grace  of 
God  (Lukę  xvii,  10:  "So  likewise  ye,  when  ye  shall 
have  done  all  these  things  which  ara  commanded  you, 
say.  We  ara  unprofiUble  8ervant8:  we  have  done  that 
which  was  our  duty  to  do").  The  feeling  of  obligation 
for  all  one  is  or  has,  and  of  shortcoming  in  the  use  of 
those  gifts  which  we  cannot  even  praiae  our8elves  for 
having  well  employed,  is  a  mark  of  hunuUtg, 

2.  "  To  conńder  this  grace  a  little  mora  particularly, 
it  may  be  obeerved,  1.  That  humility  does  not  oblige  a 


HUMUJTY 


404 


HUNGART 


man  to  wrong  the  truth  or  himself  by  entertaining  a 
meaner  or  wone  opinion  of  himaelf  than  he  deseirea. 
2.  Nor  does  it  oblige  a  man,  right  or  wrong,  to  give 
everybody  eke  the  preference  to  hinuelf.  A  "wifle  man 
cannot  belieye  himself  inferior  to  the  ignorant  multi- 
tude,  nor  tho  yirtnous  man  that  he  is  not  so  good  aa 
tho6o  whoee  ]ive8  are  yidoua.  8.  Nor  does  it  oblige  a 
man  to  treat  hinuelf  with  contempt  in  his  words  or  ao- 
tions :  it  looks  morę  like  affectation  than  homility  when 
a  man  says  such  things  in  his  own  dispraise  as  others 
know,  or  he  himself  belie\'es,  to  be  false ;  and  it  is  plain 
also  that  this  is  often  done  merely  as  a  bait  to  catoh 
the  praises  of  others.  Humility  consists,  1.  In  not  at>- 
tributing  to  ourseK-es  any  exceUence  or  good  which  we 
have  not.  2.  In  not  orerrating  anything  we  do.  3.  In 
not  taking  an  immoderate  delight  in  ourselres.  4.  In 
not  assiiraing  morę  of  the  praise  of  a  quality  or  action 
than  belongs  to  us.  5.  In  an  inward  sense  of  our  many 
imperfections  and  sins.  6.  In  ascribing  all  we  have  and 
are  to  the  grace  of  God.  True  humility  wiU  expre9S 
itself,  1.  By  the  modesty  of  our  appearance ;  the  hum- 
ble  man  wili  consider  his  age,  abilities,  character,  func- 
tion,  etc.,  and  act  accordingly;  2.  By  the  modesty  of 
our  pursuita :  we  shall  not  aim  at  anything  above  our 
strength,  but  prefer  a  good  to  a  great  name.  3.  It  will 
exprc8S  itself  by  the  modesty  of  our  conreraation  and 
behayior :  we  shall  not  be  loquacious,  obstinate,  forward, 
enrious,  disoontented,  or  ambitious.  The  advantages 
of  humility  are  numerous:  1.  It  is  well>pleasing  to  God 
(1  Pet.  iii,  4).  2.  It  has  great  influence  on  us  in  the 
performance  of  all  other  duties,  praying,  hearing,  oon- 
rerse,  etc  8.  It  indicates  that  morę  grace  shall  be 
given  (James  iv,  6 ;  Psa.  xxv,  9).  4.  It  prescr^-es  the 
soul  in  great  tranquillity  and  contentment  (Psa.  lxix, 
32,  33).  5.  It  makes  us  patient  and  resigned  under  af- 
Aictions  (Job  i,  22).  6.  It  enables  us  to  exeTcise  mod- 
eradon  in  eyerything.  To  obtaiii  this  excellent  spirit, 
we  should  remember,  1.  The  example  of  Christ  (Phil.  ii, 
6,  7,  8)  ;  2.  That  heaven  is  a  place  of  humility  (Rev.  v, 
8) ;  8.  That  our  sins  are  numerous,  and  deserye  the 
greatest  punishment  (Lam.  iii,  89) ;  4.  That  humility 
is  the  way  to  honor  (Proy.  xvi,  18) ;  5.  That  the  great- 
est promises  of  good  are  madę  to  the  humble  (Isa.  lvii, 
16;  lvi,  2;  1  Pet.v,6;  Psa.  cxlvii,  6 ;  Matt.v,5)"  (Buck, 
TkeoL  Diet.  s.  v.).  **  It  has  been  deemed  a  great  para- 
dox  in  Christianity  that  it  makes  humility  the  ayenue 
to  glory.  Yet  what  other  avenue  is  there  to  wisdom, 
or  even  to  knowledge?  Would  you  pick  up  precious 
trutbs,  you  must  bend  down  and  look  for  them.  £v- 
ery  where  the  pearl  of  great  price  lies  bedded  in  a  shell 
M'hich  has  no  form  or  comeliness.  It  is  so  in  physical 
science.  Bacon  has  dcclared  it,  Natura  non  nisi  parm- 
do  rincititr ;  and  the  triurophs  of  science  sińce  his  dhys 
have  proved  how  willing  Naturę  is  to  be  conquered  by 
those  who  will  obey  her.  It  is  so  in  morał  speculation. 
Wordsworth  has  told  us  the  law  of  his  own  mind,  the 
fulfllment  of  which  has  cnabled  him  to  reveal  a  new 
world  of  poctry :  Wisdom  is  ofttimet  ftearer  ithm  ve 
stoop  tĄan  when  we  soar,  That  it  is  so  likewise  in  re- 
ligion  we  are  aasured  by  those  most  comfortable  words, 
Exoept  ye  become  as  lUtlt  chitdrtn,  ye  shall  not  ertter  into 
the  kinffihm  ofhe€weTh  Moreoyer,  the  whole  intercoursc 
between  man  and  man  may  be  seen,  if  we  look  at  it 
closely,  to  be  guided  and  regulated  by  the  same  per- 
yading  principle ;  and  that  it  ought  to  be  so  is  general- 
ly  recognised,  instinctiyely,  at  least,  if  not  consciously. 
As  I  have  oftcn  heard  soid  by  him,  who,  among  all  the 
persona  I  have  conyersed  with  to  the  editication  of  my 
nnderstanding,  had  the  kcenest  practical  insight  into 
human  naturę,  and  beat  knew  the  art  of  controlling  and 
goyeming  men,  and  winning  them  over  to  their  good — 
the  moment  anybody  is  satisfied  with  himself,  eyery- 
body  else  becomes  dissatisfied  with  him ;  wheneyer  a 
person  thinks  much  of  himself,  all  other  pepple  gtve 
ovcr  thinking  about  him.  Thus  it  is  not  alone  in  the 
parable  that  he  who  takes  the  highest  room  is  tumed 
down  with  shame  to  the  lowest,  while  he  who  sits 


down  in  the  lowest  room  is  bid  to  go  np  higher."  See 
Hare,  Guesses  at  Truth,  i,  242;  Kiehl,  IlandwOrterłmek 
des  N.  Test^  s.  y.  Demuth ;  Groye,  Morał  PhUoaopbyj  ii, 
286;  Whately,  Dangers  io  Christian  Fakk^  p.  88;  Gon- 
ybeare,  SemumSj  p.  141. 

Humphrey,  Lawrencb,  an  English  Ptoteatant  di- 
yine  and  philologian,  was  bom  at  Newport -PagneU, 
Buckinghamshire,  about  1527.  He  was  educated  at 
Ombridge,  where  he  applied  himself  especially  to  the 
classics.  After  bccoming  fellow  of  Magdalen  College, 
Oxford,  and  professor  of  Greek  in  the  rndyeińty,  he 
enteied  the  Church.  In  1565  he  left  England  in  con- 
seąuence  of  the  persccutions  to  which  Protestanta  were 
subject,  and  remained  a  while  in  Ztłrich.  AAcr  the 
death  of  qneen  Mary  he  retumed  home  and  resamed 
his  professoTship.  He  became  successiyely  proieaaor 
of  theology  at  Queen*s  College  in  1560,  preaident  of 
Magdalen  College,  Oxford,  in  1661,  dean  of  Glonces- 
tor  in  1570,  and  dean  of  Winchester  in  1580.  He  died 
February  1, 1589.  He  was  a  man  of  oonciliatory  man- 
ners,  and  of  great  piety  and  leaming ;  of  great  poritr 
of  character,  moderato  and  conscientious,  and  to  thb 
he  owed  his  last  prcfcrments.  He  was  a  good  linguist, 
and  a  yery  skilful  controyertist.  He  wrote  Epistoła  de 
Gracis  literis  et  Jlomeri  lectione  et  imitaiione  (printed  in 
the  first  part  of  Junius's  Cormicopia,  Basie,  1658,  foL) : 
—De  rełiffionis  oonserratione  et  r^formaiionej  defue  Pri- 
matu  Regum  (Basie,  1669,  8vo) :  —  Oiadui*  Propheta, 
Jlebraice  et  Latine,  et  Phiło  ""De  Judkey"  Grace  rf  La- 
tine,  at  the  end  of  the  preceding  treatise  ^r—Optimates, 
sive  de  nobilitate  efus^ue  atUigua  oriffinef  natura^  oficHs, 
disciplina  (Basie,  1561,  8vo,  with  a  Latin  translation  of 
Philo's  treatise  De  NobilHate)  :—Joamas  Juelli,  episcopi 
SalisburiensiSf  Vita  et  Mors  (London,  1573,  4to) : — Jesti- 
itismi  pars  prima^  sive  prazis  Homana  curia  contra 
respuhUcas  et  prindpes  (Lond.  1582,  8vo)  i-^etuitismi 
pars  secunda,  Puritano  Papismi  seu  doctrina  Jesuitiett 
aliguot  ratiombus  ab  Edm,  Campiano  comprehenses  et  a 
Johanne  Durceo  drfensa  Con/utaiio  (London,  1684, 8vo), 
ete.  See  Wood,  A  thence  Oxomenses  (yoL  i) ;  ChalmcrB, 
Gen,  Biog,  Dictionary ;  Chauffepi^  Diet,  Hist, ;  Hoefer, 
Nouv,  Biog.  Generale^  xxv,  543;  Allibone,  Diet,  of  Au- 
thors,  i,  918 ;  Neal,  History  ofthe  Puriians  (see  Index) ; 
Hook,  Ecdes,  Biography,  vi,  207  8q.    (J.  N.  P.) 

Hum^tah  (Heb.  Chumłah'j  M^^n,  prób.  from  the 
Syr.  fortresSt  otherwise /Tface  oflizards;  Sept.  'Appard 
V.  r.  Eiffid  and  XaftfŁaTa\  Yulg.  Athmathd)^  a  town  in 
the  mountains  of  Judah,  mentioned  between  Aphekah 
and  Hebron  (Josh.  xv,  54),  apparently  in  the  diatńct 
lying  immediately  west  of  Hebron  (Keil,  Commaa,  ad 
loc).  It  is  not  mentioned  by  any  other  ancient  wiiter 
(Reland,  Palast.  p.  723)  except  Eusebius  and  Jerome 
(Onomast,  s.  y.  'Afiara^  Ammatha).  There  ia  some  rc- 
semblance  between  the  name  and  that  ofKimatk  (Ki- 
/iaO}j  one  of  the  plaoes  added  in  the  Yat.  text  of  tbe 
Sept.  to  the  list  in  the  Heb.  text  of  I  Sam.  xxx,  27-^1. 
It  possibly  corresponds  with  the  ruined  aite  marked  aa 
Sabzin  (or  Romet  el-Ałmeh)  on  Yan  deYelde^s  M(q>  at  1| 
miles  north  of  Hebron,  j  ust  west  of  the  Jeruaalem  hmkL 

Hundred  (as  a  diyision  of  the  Heb.  people).     See 

HOST. 

Huneric.    See  Tandals. 

Hungarian  ConfeBSlon  {Confessio  nungarlea\ 
the  Onfession  of  Faith  of  the  Reformed  Church  in 
Hungary.  It  was  drawn  up  in  1667  and  1658  by  the 
Synod  of  Czenger  (hence  also  called  Confetsio  Czei^eri- 
ana\  and  published  in  1670  in  Debreczin.  It  is  strong^ 
ly  Calyinistic,  especially  in  the  doctrine  of  the  Lord'8 
Supper,  and  it  was  on  that  acoount  not  adopled  by  the 
Reformed  churches  of  Poland.    (A.  J.  &) 

Hungary,  a  kingdom  in  Eastem  Europę,  which  has 
for  seyeral  centuries  been  nnited  with  the  empire  of 
Austria.  It  has  82,889  8quare  milea,  and  its  population 
was,  according  to  the  census  of  1857,  9,900,786.  Om- 
nected  with  it,  as  dependencies  ofthe  crown  of  HuBgaiy, 


HUNGARY 


405 


HUNGART 


ue  TnnaylTaiuji  (q.  v.),  Croatia,  and  SUvonu.  This 
wliołe  cUviaion,  which  is  sometimes  called  the  Tnuu- 
Tif^thii'*"  divisLon  of  the  empire,  sometimes  eimply 
Hangary,  baa  124,000  sąuare  milea,  and,  according  to 
the  offidja  census  of  1857, 18,768,813  inhabitants.  Ac- 
eoiduig  to  the  official  oenaus  of  Dec  31, 1869,  the  total 
popalation  of  the  ooontńea  subject  to  the  Uungarian 
crown  amounted  to  15,429,238,  of  which  Hungary  proper 
had  about  11,109,000 ;  Tiansylyania,  2,109,000 ;  Croatia 
aod  Slaronia,  1,015,000 ;  the  Militaiy  Frontier,  1,195,000. 

I.  Hitiory.-^Tht  Hungariana,  a  Scythian  tńbe,  were, 
as  it  seema,  akin  to  and  alUea  of  the  Chazari,  who  in  the 
fizst  oentnry  of  the  Christian  sra  had  kft  their  original 
seata,  the  plateaua  of  Central  Asia,  and  had  founded  In 
the  coorae  of  time  a  powerfol  empire  on  the  Tauric  pen- 
insula.  At  the  ckwe  of  the  9th  centory  the  Hungariana 
(Magyara)  were  living  on  the  north-eaatem  frontier  of 
this  empire,  which  Łhey  defended  under  their  own  chiefa 
against  the  powerfol  neighboring  nationa.  Aiter  the 
destractioa  of  thia  empire,  the  Uagyars,  who  were  un- 
able  to  reaiat  aingly  the  onaet  of  other  tribea,  croased  the 
Dnieper,  and  aettled  (884)  near  the  mouth  of  the  Dan- 
ube,  between  the  Ri^ers  Bugh  and  Szereth.  The  impe- 
rial thnme  of  Constantinople  was  at  that  time  occapied 
by  Leo  the  Wise,  who  called  the  bravery  of  hia  new 
nelghbors  to  hia  aid  againat  Simeon,  the  chief  of  the 
Bdgarians.  The  cali  waa  cheerfuUy  accepted  by  Ar- 
pad,  the  eon  of  the  Magyar  duke  Almoe.  Simeon  waa 
conqiiered,  and  hia  country  laid  waste.  The  renown  of 
the  Magyara  aoou  indaced  king  Amulf,  of  Germany,  to 
ask  them  for  aid  againat  Szyatoplugk,  the  grand  prince 
9f  Koraria.  Again  they  accepted  the  iuTitation,  en- 
tered  Upper  Pannonia,  which  then  belonged  to  the  Mo- 
rawian empire,  and  obtained  a  complete  victory ;  after 
that  they  retomed  to  their  homea.  Theae,  howeyer, 
had  iu  the  meanwhile  been  invaded  and  tenibly  devaa- 
tated  by  the  Bolgariana,  and  the  Magyara  therefore  con- 
duded  to  aetUe  permanently  in  Pannonia,  from  which 
they  had  joat  retumed  aa  yictorsw  The  oocupataon  of 
the  ooontry  began  in  894;  it  waa  oompleted  in  900. 
The  country,  diatributed  among  seyen  tribea  and  108 
tamiliea,  waa  conyerted  into  a  militaiy  atate.  Their 
biayery  and  their  renown  cauaed  many  people  of  the 
districta  which  they  had  trayereed,  and  many  soldiers 
of  finreign  coontriee^  to  join  them.  Thua  strengthened, 
they  were  able  to  undertake  expeditiona  aa  far  aa  the 
North  Sea,  the  South  of  France  into  Italy,  and  to  the 
Black  SeL  But  repeaied  defeata  by  the  kings  and  em- 
penw  of  Germany  put  a  atop  to  their  conąueata  and 
gaye  a  different  direction  to  their  energiea.  The  fron- 
tietB  of  their  new  country  were  morę  definitely  marked 
and  fartified,  and  many  morę  foreign  oolonista  drawn 
into  the  country. 

The  laige  nnmber  of  Christian  slayes,  the  connec- 
tion  with  the  emperors  of  Constantinople,  but  in  par- 
tJcular  the  efforta  of  duke  Geysa  (972-997),  and  of  his 
Christian  ¥rife  Sarolta  (Caroline),  gradually  prepared 
the  introdncŁion  of  Christianity.  Geysa  madę  peace 
with  all  his  neighbors,  and  at  the  diet  which  he  aasem- 
bled  reeommended  a  hospitaUe  reception  of  foreign  yia- 
iton  and  the  introduction  of  Christianity.  Geysa  him- 
Klf  was  baptized  by  biahop  Pilgrin  of  Pasaau,  who,  eyen 
dnriog  the  reign  of  Tacaony,  the  father  of  Geysa,  had 
bęgon  to  show  a  warm  intereat  in  the  oonyersion  of 
Hangary.  Besides  him,  the  emperor  Otto  I  and  Ińshop 
Adalbert  of  Pragnę  showed  a  great  ceal  for  the  Chria- 
tianization  of  the  Magyara.  Thua  the  Roman  Catholic 
Chorch  obtained  the  aacendency  oyer  the  few  missiona 
which  onder  former  chiefa  had  been  eatablished  by  mia- 
Bcoaries  of  the  Greek  Church.  Adalbert,  in  994,  bap- 
tized, at  GraUfToik,  the  son  of  Geysa,  who  received  the 
naoie  of  Stephen.  Immediately  after  his  acceasion  to 
the  thrane,  Stephen  madę  it  the  first  object  of  hia  rule 
to  aecure  the  complete  yictory  of  Christianity;  nor  did 
be  hesitate  for  this  end  to  employ  foroe.  He  iasued  at 
ooce  an  order  that  all  Magyara  must  reoeiye  baptism, 
nd  that  all  Chriadan  alayea  moat  be  aet  free.    Thia 


decree  fflled  thoae  Magyars  who  were  opponenta  of 
Christianity  with  the  utmost  indignation  against  the 
young  king  and  against  the  Germans  who  surrounded 
him.  Kuppa,  a  relatiye  of  Stephen  and  duke  of  the 
Sumegians,  put  himself  at  the  head  of  the  malcontenta, 
but  at  Yeszprim  he  waa  totally  defeated  and  killed ; 
and  henceforth  all  serious  opposition  to  the  Christiani- 
zation  of  Hungary  ceased.  Stephen  himaelf  trayersed 
the  country  in  eyery  direction,  euoouraging  the  people 
to  beoome  Chriatiana,  and  threatening  with  seyere  pun- 
iahmenta  all  who  would  refuae  to  obey  thia  order.  He 
established  achoola  in  his  residence,  called  many  monka 
aa  teachers,  established  ten  richly-endowed  biahoprics, 
introduoed  the  tithą  and  madę  the  prelates  the  first  ea- 
tate  of  the  empire.  For  these  labora  Stephen  receiyed 
from  pope  Sylyester  II  a  crown,  which  haa  sińce  then 
conatituted  the  upper  part  of  the  Mera  regni  ffungarim 
oorono,  while  ita  lower  part  couaiata  of  a  crown  which 
the  Greek  emperor  Manuel  Dukaa  gaye  to  Geysa.  With 
this  crown  Stephen  receiyed  from  the  pope  a  patriarch- 
al  erosa  and  the  title  of  apoatolic  king.  Thus  Hun- 
gary became  a  kingdom,  the  chief  aupporta  of  which, 
according  to  the  Conatitution  giyen  by  Stephen,  were 
to  be  the  clergy  and  the  nobility.  The  following  kings 
enlai^ged  the  priyileges  of  the  deigy,  who  thua,  in  the 
couise  of  time,  became  richer  than  in  any  other  £u- 
ropean  country.  After  the  death  of  Stephen  seyeral 
morę  efforta  were  madę  by  the  natiye  pagan  party  to 
diaplace  both  Christianity  and  the  German  party  at  the 
oourt,  which  waa  regarded  aa  the  chief  support  of  Chria- 
tianity.  But  all  theae  attemptą  utterly  failed,  and  pa- 
ganism  soon  became  extinct.  The  ftontiers  of  the  em- 
pire were  enlarged  by  the  conquest  of  Croatia  and  Siar 
yonia  in  1089,  and  that  of  Dahnatia  in  1102;  at  home 
the  clergy  eztorted  fitmi  the  weak  Andrew  II  (1202- 
35)  a  fayorable  Concordat.  In  1437  Hungaiy  fell  for 
the  firat  time  to  the  house  of  Hapabuig.  In  1526  the 
linę  of  independent  kingą  of  Hungary  became  extinct 
by  the  death  of  king  Louis  II.  A  large  portion  of  Hun- 
gary waa  subjugated  by  the  Turka,  and  remained  a  Turk- 
iah  proyince  for  morę  than  a  centuzy;  the  remainder 
waa  long  rent  by  civil  wars,  which  ended  in  connecting 
the  country  permanently  with  the  crown  of  Hapaburg. 
When  the  first  knowledge  of  the  Beformation  reaclked 
Hungary,  the  Diet  of  1528  issued  a  cruel  decree  that 
the  Lutlierana  and  all  fayorers  of  Lutheranism  should 
be  captured  and  bumed.  But  amidst  the  disorder  which 
foUowed  the  death  of  Louis  II  the  Reformation  spread, 
and  gained  a  firm  footing  in  apite  of  the  cruel  prohib- 
itory  lawa.  Probably  the  first  to  preach  in  fayor  of  the 
Reformation  waa  Thomaa  Preusaner,  of  Kaesmark,  who 
is  said  to  haye  publidy  announoed  hia  concurrence  in 
the  yiews  of  Luther.  A  great  impresaion  was  madę  by 
the  Augsburg  Confeesion,  as  the  giandeea  who  aooom- 
panied  king  Ferdinand  to  the  Diet  of  Augsburg  brought 
back  a  fayorable  aocount  of  the  Lutheran  Reformation. 
Seyeral  acholars  went  to  Wittenberg  to  atudy  under 
Luther,  among  whom  were  Deyay,  Quendel,  Stochel, 
Andrew  Fischer,  Leutacher,  Bogner,  Tranaylyanua,  lia- 
dan,  Siklosy,  and  Kopaczy.  The  further  progress  of 
the  Reformation  waa  yery  quiet,  only  a  few  btahope  and 
magnates  trying  to  employ  force.  Prince  Zńpolya, 
who  conteated  with  king  Ferdinand  the  poasession  of 
Hungary,  issued  a  seyere  edict  against  the  Protestants, 
and  the  parish  (Hriest  of  libethen  waa  in  1527  bumed  as 
a  fayorer  of  the  Reformation;  but  as  the  majority  of 
the  towns,  nearly  the  whole  nobility,  and  many  of  the 
most  powerful  magnatea  were  fayorable  to  the  Refor- 
mation, the  persecution  of  Protestantlsm  soon  ceasecL 
Many  of  the  priests  then  joined  the  Reformation  with 
their  entire  congregations ;  in  other  instances  the  cou- 
gregations  waited  until  the  death  of  the  Catholic  pastor, 
and  then  called  an  eyangelical  auccessor.  The  eyan- 
gelical  pastora  continued  for  a  long  time  to  pay  tribute 
to  the  bishops,  and  were  protected  by  the  latter  in  their 
rights  and  priyijeges,  proyided  they  would  remain  faith* 
ful  to  the  Augsburg  Confeasion,  and  not  join  the  detest- 


HUNGARY 


406 


HUNGART 


ed  SacnimentarianB  (Calyiniats).  In  1549  the  royal 
free  citieB  of  Upper  Hungary  had  Łheir  Gonfenion  of 
Faith  drawn  up  by  Leonhard  Stockel  in  the  senae  of  the 
Augsbuiig  ConfessioD,  and  {weeented  it  to  king  Ferdi- 
nand.  Thb  Confession  was  approved  and  confirmed  not 
oRł^  by  the  king,  but  alao  b}'  the  piimate  Nicholas  Olah 
and  the  blshop  Yerantiua,  ¥rith  several  CathoUc  prel- 
ates,  as  bishop  Kechery  of  Yeszprim,  bishop  Thuizo  of 
Neutra,  and  bishop  Dudich,  who  had  attended  the  Gonu- 
cii  of  Trent  as  representatires  of  Ferdinand.  King  Fer- 
dinand  himself  appeared  to  be  favorable  to  the  Protes- 
tants,  for  he  permitted  the  election  of  the  foremost  pa- 
tron of  the  Keformation,  Thomas  Nadasdy,  as  palatine 
of  Hiuigary.  Still  morę  auspidous  was  the  reign  of  the 
mild  Maximilian,  who  ttied  to  gain  the  Pntestants  by 
wise  concessions.  Thos  they  found  time  to  derelop 
their  Church  Constitution,  to  hołd  synods,  and  to  regu- 
late  their  Church  and  school  afGurs  under  the  protection 
of  the  eyangelical  magnatea.  A  large  majority  of  the 
inhabitants  belonged  to  the  erangelical  faith;  only 
three  magnates  continued  to  be  Koman  Catholic,  and 
probably  Ptotestantism  would  haye  forever  established 
its  ascendency  had  not  the  Protestancs  themselres  been 
split  into  Lutherans  and  CalTinists,  who  seemed  to  hate 
each  other  morę  than  other  religious  denominations. 
Thus  weakened  by  intemal  dissenaions,  the  Protestanta 
suffered  greatly  ftom  the  persecutions  which  began 
against  them  under  the  reign  of  Rudolphos.  The  Jes- 
uits,  who  had oome  fora  short  time  to  Hungary  in  1561, 
at  the  invitation  of  the  primas  Nicholas  Olah,  but  had 
been  unable  to  do  any  thing  under  the  tolerant  reign 
of  Maximilian,  retumed,  and  began  to  display  a  great 
actiyity  for  the  restoration  of  the  old  Church.  Jacob 
Barbian  of  Belgioso  took  from  the  Protestants  a  num- 
ber  of  churches,  and  the  complaints  of  the  people  against 
theee  acts  of  yiolence  remained  without  eŚect,  Ru- 
dolphiis,  instead  of  redressing  the  grierances,  madę  to 
the  laws  passed  by  the  Ilungarian  Diet  an  addition, 
which  dedared  the  grievances  of  the  Protestants  to  be 
unfouuded  and  their  conduct  scandalous,  and  which  con- 
firmed  all  the  formcr  laws  against  them.  Boczkai,  the 
prince  of  Transylyania,  rosę  against  this  law,  and  was 
joined  eyeiy  where  by  malcontents.  Soon  he  was  mas- 
ter of  all  Transylrania  and  of  Northern  Hungary. 
Basta,  the  imperial  generał,  was  defeated,  and  Budol- 
phus  compelled  to  condude,  in  1606,  the  peace  of  Yien- 
na,  which  assured  the  Ptotestants  throughout  the  em- 
pire of  religious  liberty,  and  promised  that  the  emperor 
would  never  allow  any  yiolation  of  this  proyision.  To 
the  proyision  was,  howeyer,  added  this  clausula,  *'  with- 
out any  injury  to  the  Catholic  religion."  When  the 
articles  of  the  Vienna  treaty  of  peace  were,  in  1608, 
read  to  the  Diet  at  Pressburg,  the  bishop  of  Yeszprim 
protested  in  the  name  of  the  dergy  against  the  religious 
liberty  granted  to  the  Protestanta;  but  the  firmness  of 
archduke  Matthias  oyercame  the  opposition  of  all  the 
Catholics,  and  the  treaty  of  peace  was  unanimously  rat- 
iiied  by  all  saye  cardinal  Forgacz.  Neyertheless,  Ru- 
dolphus  declared  the  resolutions  of  the  Diet  inyalid. 
This  breach  of  faith  cost  him  the  thione ;  his  brother 
Matthias  was  crowned  king  of  Hungary  on  Noyem- 
ber  8, 1608,  two  days  after  the  eyangelical  count  Illes- 
hazy  had  been  dected  palatine  by  a  large  majority. 
Through  the  liberality  of  Illeshazy,  who  was  in  poeses- 
sion  of  immense  riches,  the  Protestanta  receiyed  a  large 
number  of  churches  and  schools.  Illeshazy  died  the 
next  year  (May  6, 1609) ;  but  his  successor,  count  George 
Thurzo,  was  an  eąuaUy  zealons  Protestant.  Under  his 
presidency,  a  synod  was  hdd  in  March,  1610,  at  Sillein. 
in  the  comitat  of  Trentshin,  at  which  the  Protestant 
churches  were  organized  into  three  superintendentships, 
the  duties  of  superintendents,  seniors,  and  inspectors  de- 
fined,  and  many  rules  adopted  for  the  regulation  of 
Church  goyemment  and  Church  discipline.  The  reso- 
lutions of  the  synod,  which  were  printed  by  order  of  the 
palatine,  and  circiilated  among  all  the  Protestant  oon- 
giegations  of  the  country,  aroused  the  Catholic  dergy 


to  extraordinaTy  eflbrts  against  the  fuither  spnading 
of  Protestantism.  Unfortunatdy,  palatine  Tbuizo  died 
soon,  and  the  Catholics  found  a  leader  of  rare  ability  m 
the  Jesuit  Pazroany,  who  snooeeded  in  caosing  witlun 
a  short  time  morę  than  fifty  of  the  first  noble  hnnJks 
to  return  to  the  Catholic  Church.  They,  in  tura,  cob- 
pdled  hundreds  of  thousands  of  their  aubjects  to  leare 
the  Protestant  churches.  At  the  diets  t  he  Roman  Cath- 
olics again  obtained the  ascendency;  the resdutionsof 
1608  were,  it  Ib  true,  seyeral  times  confirmed,  but  the 
goyemment  did  not  respect  the  decrecs  of  the  diets, 
and  the  persecutions  of  Protestants  contimied.  For  i 
time  the  Reformed  prince  Bethten,  of  Tnmsylyania,  ex- 
torted  by  his  yictoriee  from  Idng  Ferdinand  U  promises 
of  redress,  but  nonę  of  these  promises  were  kept  At 
the  Diet  of  1687,  the  Protestants,  under  the  name  of  the 
Erangelical  Estates  (Statut  el  Ordinet  Evanffeiici),pn- 
sented  their  grieyances  in  writing ;  but  the  Diet  con- 
tented  itself  with  a  new  confirmation  of  former  lawą 
and  gaye  to  the  Jesuits  the  first  landed  property  in  the 
kingdom.  The  discontent  of  the  Protestants  was  sup- 
ported  by  Racoczy,  prince  of  Tnmsylyania,  who  inyaded 
Hungary  at  the  head  of  10,000  men,  and  finalły  com- 
pelled Ferdinand  III  to  condude  the  peace  cł  Lim, 
1645,  in  which  the  Protestants  again  obtained  the  fiee 
exercise  of  their  religion,  the  use  of  bells^  and  the  per- 
misdon  to  build  towers  and  to  keep  thdr  own  cemeter* 
ies.  But  the  Catholic  dergy  refused  to  recpgnise  Uie 
proyisions  of  this  treaty,  and  soon  the  rdgu  of  Leopold  I 
brought  on  the  sorest  trials  for  Protestantism.  The 
complaints  of  the  Protestants  regarding  the  oonstsnt 
>'iolations  of  their  rights  were  not  listened  to;  they 
were  ordered  not  to  bring  their  grieyances  before  the 
Diet,  but  before  the  courts.  Seyeral  Protestant  nohk- 
men  entered,  therefore,  into  a  conspiracy  ibr  the  sepan- 
tion  of  Hungary  from  Austria,  but  the  plot  was  discoy- 
ered,  and  all  who  had  taken  part  in  it  sentenced  to  death. 
The  Jesuits  used  this  as  a  pretext  for  the  most  yiolent 
measures  against  Protestants.  Archbishop  Szdepczen- 
yi  summoned  the  eyangelical  ministers  of  the  mountain 
towns  before  his  court  at  Plressburg,  where  they  were 
chargiMl  with  being  accomplices  of  the  Turks^  with  le- 
ditious  sermons,  reyolutionary  sympathies,  abuse  of  the 
Catholic  host,  opening  of  the  prisons,  sale  of  Catholic 
priests  to  the  Turks.  The  preachers  were  all  sentenced 
to  death ;  but  the  emperor  pardoned  them  on  the  con- 
dition  that  they  should  renounce  their  titles  of  preach- 
ers and  pastors,  not  discharge  the  dntics  connected  with 
such  a  title,  keep  no  schools,  not  preach  dther  secretly 
or  publidy,  and  sign  a  declaiation  acknowledging  their 
guilt^  Whosoeyer  should  refiisc  to  sign  this  dedantion 
mnst  leaye  Hungary  within  thirty  days.  In  the  next 
year  all  the  eyangelical  preachers,  eyen  thoae  who  fired 
under  Turkish  dominion,  were  summoned  to  Pteasburg. 
The  latter  did  not  come;  but  those  liying  under  the  scrp- 
tre  of  Leopold  madę  their  appearance,  250  of  the  Confes- 
sion  of  Augsburg  and  57  of  the  Helyetic  Confeasion.  The 
majority  signed  the  demanded  dedaration;  those  who  re- 
fused were  imprisoned ;  the  most  obetinate,  about  29  in 
number,  were  sent  to  the  galleys.  The  Swedish  goyem- 
ment, the  dukes  of  Saxony ,  Brandenbui^g,  and  Łuneborg, 
remonstrated  with  the  emperor  in  fayor  of  the  prisoDeis, 
but  not  until  about  a  year  later  did  they  recoyer  their 
liberty.  A  great  massacre  of  PA>testants  was  soon  after 
(1657)  committed  at  Eperies  by  the  imperial  generał  Ca- 
raffii,  who  pretended  to  haye  discoyered  a  wide-spread 
conspiracy,  and  caused  the  execution  of  a  large  number 
of  prominent  men,  among  whoro  were  many  of  the  lead- 
ers  of  the  Protestanta.  The  peace  of  Carloyics,  in  1699, 
restored  to  Hungary  all  the  districts^  with  the  only  ex- 
ception  of  that  of  Temesyar,  which  for  roore  than  a 
hundred  years  had  been  under  the  nde  of  the  Tnrkk 
At  home,  the  oontinued  discontent  of  the  people  led  to 
a  new  insurrection,  headed  by  Francis  Racoczr,  which 
was  suppressed  in  1711  by  the  peace  of  SŹathmar. 
This  peace  again  reaffinned  the  rights  which  had  been 
granted  to  Protestanta.    New  complaints  of  distmb- 


HUNGARY 


407 


HUNGARY 


aaces  of  Protestant  wonhip  indnced  Charles  TI  (as 
king  of  Uuiigary,  Charles  III)  to  appoint  a  royal  oom- 
miasioii,  on  the  recommendation  of  which  it  was  decreed 
Łhit  the  erangelical  preachers  should  be  soperintended 
by  Catholic  archdeaoons;  that  the  ministerial  functions 
of  the  pieachers  of  the  two  Protestant  Confessions  must 
be  limited  to  those  chnrches  (at  most  two  in  each  comi- 
tal)  in  which  a  resolution  of  the  Diet  of  Oedeiiburg,  held 
in  1681,  expces9l7  authorized  the  Protestanta  to  hołd 
divine  seryice;  that  the  Protestanta,  wben  elected  to 
Office,  must  take  their  oaths  ¥rith  an  invocation  of  the 
bleaaed  Yirgin  and  all  the  saints ;  and  that  all  Protea- 
tants  must  take  part  in  the  celebration  of  the  Catholic 
festivals  and  in  the  public  proceasiona.  The  establish- 
ment of  a  royal  chanoellory  and  stadtholdership,  which 
in  the  name  of  the  sovereign  had  to  promulgate  and 
execuŁe  the  imperial  laws,  was  unfayorable  to  the  Prot- 
estanta, as  a  majority  of  the  coundllors  were  taken  from 
the  ranks  of  the  bishops,  magnates,  and  noblemen. 
Thos  the  Protestanta  were  annoycd  by  this  board  in 
every  poasible  way.  Conrersions  from  Catholicism  to 
PtotestanŁism  were  strictly  forbidden;  Catholics  were 
forbidden  to  attend  a  Protestant  school,  and  the  Protes- 
tant yoath  to  stady  at  foreign  schools;  members  of  one 
Ph>teBtant  denomination  were  not  allowed  to  risit  the 
dinne  senrice  of  the  other;  Protestant  books  were  sub- 
mitted  to  Protestant  censora,  their  tiials  of  diroroe  to 
Catholic  judges.  Maria  Theresa  expre86ed  personal 
sympathy  with  the  oppressed  condition  of  Protestanta, 
bat  pretended  to  be  unable  to  do  any  thing  for  them 
on  accoont  of  her  coronation  oath  and  the  lawa  of  the 
coontiy.  An  essenttal  amelioration  in  the  condition 
of  Ptoteatants  was  elfected  under  Joseph  II,  who,  in  1781, 
by  the  edict  of  toleration,  granted  to  all  the  Protestanta 
of  his  dominions  fteedom  of  conacience  and  of  religion, 
and  the  right  of  public  worship.  Now  a  new  sra  in 
the  history  of  Protestantism  began.  A  lai^ge  number  of 
newdmrches  and  schools  were  established,  hundieds  of 
deigymen  were  called.  Protestants  became  eligible  to 
erery  ofiice ;  the  religious  oath  was  abolished ;  the  Prot- 
estant superintendents  were  allowed  to  yisit  the  church- 
es,  and  persons  Uying  in  mixed  marriagca  to  bring  up 
their  children  in  the  eyangelical  faith,  as  we]l  as  to  se- 
kct  for  them  any  school  they  chose ;  the  press  waa  to  be 
fice  and  nnfettered.  Leopold  II  also  showed  a  iirm  dis- 
pcńtion  to  be  j  ust  toward  the  Protestanta.  The  Diet  of 
1791  was  petitioned  by  the  Protestants  to  sanction  the 
myt!  decree  which  had  granted  them  religious  freedom. 
Kotwithatanding  a  yiolent  opposition  on  the  part  of  the 
bbhops,  the  diet  granted  the  reąuest,  chiefly  moyed  by 
the  eloqaent  plea  of  the  Catholic  oount  Aloysins  Batthy- 
4ni  Accordingly,  the  26th  artide  of  religion  of  1791  pro- 
yides  that  the  Protestanta  of  both  Confessions  shall  enjoy 
the  firee  esercise  of  their  religion ;  that  they  shall  not  be 
focced  to  attend  processions,  masses,  or  other  ceremonies ; 
that  in  eoclesiastical  affairs  they  shall  be  subordinate 
only  to  their  own  ecclesiastical  superiors;  that  they 
may  boild  chnrches  and  schools,  elect  preachers  and 
teachers ;  that  they  shall  not  haye  to  contribute  to  the 
boilding  of  Catholic  clmrches  and  schools.  The  Prot- 
estants at  once  hastened  to  perfect  their  eccleaiastical 
ooDstltution.  In  the  same  year  (1791),  a  synod  of  both 
the  Protestant  chnrches  waa  held  at  Ofen  and  Pesth,  at 
which  iong-pending  oontroyersiea  between  the  clergy 
and  prominent  laymen  were  settled,  and  the  establish- 
ment of  a  generał  Consistory  proposed.  The  protest  of 
a  few  eyangelical  ckrgymen,  aa  well  aa  that  of  the 
Catholie  clergy  and  the  early  death  of  the  soyereign, 
preyented  the  resolutions  of  this  diet  from  receiying 
the  royal  sanction.  During  the  reign  of  Frands  I  the 
rights  of  the  Protestants  were  often  encroached  upon, 
cspedaUy  in  the  case  of  mixed  mairiages.  The  Diet 
of  1843  to  1M4  interfered,  howeyer,  in  fayor  of  the  Prot- 
ciUntB,  and  enlarged,  in  its  proyisions  conceming  mix- 
cd  marriages  and  the  right  of  joining  the  Protestant 
Chiuch,  the  law  of  1791.  The  fulness  of  eąoal  rights 
was  finallysecored  to  Protestanta  by  a  law  of  1848,    In 


conseąuenoe  of  the  failure  of  the  Hungarian  War  of  In- 
dependence  in  1848  and  1849,  these  rights  were,  how- 
eyer, for  a  time  suspended.  The  imperial  command- 
er,  baron  Haynau,  himself  a  Protestant,  abolished  the 
officea  of  generał  inspector  and  the  district  inspectors 
for  the  ChuTch  of  the  Augsburg  Confession,  and  that 
.of  curators  for  the  Chnrch  of  the  Helyetic  C!onfe8sion. 
The  holding  of  conyentions  was  forbidden,  and  only 
after  a  time  the  holding  of  "  senioral  conyentions"  al- 
lowed when  attended  by  an  imperial  commisńoner. 
After  repeated  petitions  and  representations,  the  minis- 
ter of  public  worship  and  instruction,  on  August  21, 
1856,  laid  the  draft  of  a  law  on  the  reorganization  of 
the  Constitution  of  the  Protestant  churches  before  the  su- 
perintendents. The  latter  declined  this  draft,  and  unan- 
imoualy  asked  for  the  oonyocation  of  tlie  General  Synod. 
On  September  1, 1859,  an  imperial  patent  was  published, 
which  undertook,  on  the  ground  of  the  law  of  1791,  to 
giye  to  the  Protestant  churohes  a  new  Constitution. 
Nearly  the  entire  eyangeUcal  Church  of  both  Confes- 
sions protested  against  the  legality  of  this  imperial 
patent,  claiming  for  the  Church  the  right  to  make  her- 
self  the  neoessary  changes  in  her  Constitution  on  the 
legał  basis  of  the  ław  of  1791.  Only  a  few  congregap 
tiona  of  the  Lutheran  Sloyacks,  numbering  together 
about  54  congregations,  accepted  the  patent.  All  the 
efforts  to  break  the  opposition  of  the  Protestants  failed; 
and  when,  in  1867,  the  Austrian  goyemment  concluded 
to  make  peace  with  Hungaiy,  the  patent  of  1859,  and 
all  the  decrees  acoompanying  it,  wero  repealed.  The 
two  Protestant  churches  were  assured  that  they  would 
be  at  łiberty  to  rearrange  their  Church  matters  in  a  con- 
stitutional  way.  At  the  General  Conyention  of  the 
Confession  of  Augsburg,  which  was  held  in  Pesth  in  Sep- 
tember, the  reunion  of  the  Lutheran  Sloyacks  who  had 
accepted  the  patent  with  the  remainder  of  the  Church 
waa  consummated.  In  December,  1867,  a  General  Con- 
yention of  the  two  Protestant  churches  was  hełd  under 
the  presidency  of  baron  Nicholas  Vay,  in  order  to  ac- 
quaint  the  Hungarian  Diet  with  the  wishes  and  opinion 
of  the  churches  conceming  religious  and  school  ques- 
tions.  The  Conyention  resolyed,  1,  that  the  affairs  of 
tho  Protestants  be  regulated  by  generał  laws,  and  not 
by  special  ławs  for  each  of  the  two  denoroinations;  2, 
that  no  pri\'ileges  be  granted  to  any  on  aocount  of  re- 
ligion ;  8,  that  the  equality  pronounced  in  the  20th  ar- 
tide of  the  law  of  1848  extend  to  all  denominations ;  4, 
that  the  Church  with  regard  to  the  state  be  autonomoua, 
and  that  to  the  state  belong  only  the  right  of  supremę 
inspection  and  of  protection.  Other  liberał  resolutions 
were  adopted  by  this  and  by  a  later  Conyention  respect^ 
'mg  a  change  of  religion,  mixed  marriages,  diyoroes, 
schools,  and  endowment.  The  majority  of  the  Diet 
showed  itsełf  just  toward  the  Protestanta,  and  their 
chief  demands  were  fulfilłed.  The  reconciliation  which 
took  płace  in  1867  between  the  people  of  Uungary  and 
the  emperor  of  Austria  gaye  to  Hungaiy  a  greater  in- 
dependence  than  it  had  eyer  enjoyed  before.  A  spedal 
miniatry  was  appointed  for  the  countries  of  the  Hunga- 
rian crown,  which  also  had  their  own  diet,  and  retained 
only  a  few  pointa  of  administration  in  common  with  the 
remainder  of  the  monarchy.  One  of  the  most  impor- 
tant  reforma,  introduoed  into  Hungary  in  conseąuence 
of  the  new  Constitution,  was  the  declaration  of  the  au- 
tonomy  of  all  the  rełigions  recognized  in  Hungary,  and 
the  transfer  of  the  extensiye  rights  in  ecclesiastical  af- 
fairs, which  had  formerly  l)een  connected  with  the  Hun- 
garian crown,  to  ełectiye  assemblies  reprcsenŁing  the 
seyeral  religious  denominations.  The  first  assemblies  of 
those  chnrches,  which  had  thus  far  been  without  them, 
were  conyoked  by  the  goyemment ;  they  fixed  the  roode 
of  ełection  for  the  subsequent  assemblies.  Thus,  with 
the  other  denominations,  the  Roman  Catholic  Church 
receiyed  an  autonomy  congress,  the  only  ełectiye  aasem- 
bly  of  this  kind  in  the  Church,  and  regarded  with  great 
distrust  by  the  ultramontanc  party.  It  con^ts  of  all 
the  bishops,  and  of  chosen  dełegates  of  the  łower  clergy 


HUNGARY 


408 


HUNNIUS 


and  the  laity.    The  preliminaiy  congress  was  held  on 
June  24, 1869,  and  consisted  of  157  memben. 

n.  3taii8iics,—AccoT^ig  to  the  last  official  census  of 
1857,  the  religioua  statistics  of  the  countńes  belonging 
to  the  Hungarian  crown  were  as  foUows : 


Csthołtcs. 

PfotMtant. 

Ualti. 

riUM. 

Otbcr 
Swto. 

J«ws. 

Utin. 

GrNk. 

Nen-UDlt«d 
GrMk. 

^ate. 

H«lv«tle 
ConfaMlon. 

UaDgazy 

6,188,013 
720,898 
228,096 
448,708 

827,702 
1,844 

651,094 
6,585 

1,106,688 
129,787 
626,060 
087,288 

190,861 
10,864 

964 
81 

48,040 
4 

97 

898,100 

0,041 

14,152 

404 

Croatia  and  Slavouia. 
Tnmffvlvan1a... ..  .. 

MlliteryFrontier.... 

Hangary  bas  a  national  nniyerńtj  at  Pesth,  48  Ca&m 
ollc  and  89  Protestant  gymnasia.  The  nmnber  of  efo> 
mentary  schools  amounted  (1864)  in  Hangary  to  11,452, 
in  Transylwania  to  1798,  in  €roatia  and  SUTonia  to  490, 
in  the  Militaiy  Frontier  to  907.  A  large  number  of 
oommnnitiea  were  in  1809 


Acoording  to  an  official  calcolaUon,  the  Hungaiian  coun- 
tńes had,  in  1864,  7,120,000  Latin  Catholics,  1,498,000 
Greek  Gatholics,  9000  Armenian  Gatholics,  2,680,000 
Oriental  or  Non-United  Greeks,  8,088,000  Erangelicals, 
54,000  Unitarians,  428,000  Israelites,  20,000  belonging 
to  other  sects. 

The  Roman  Catholic  Cliurch  has  foor  aichbishops, 
those  of  Gran  (who  is  primate  of  aU  Hangary),  Kalocza, 
Erlaa,  and  Agram.  The  archbishopric  of  Gran,  which 
was  founded  by  St.  Stephen,  had  in  1870  ten  saffragan 
aees,  namely,  the  Latin  bishoprics  of  Yeszprim,  Neusohl, 
Waitzen,  Neutra,  Stahlweissenburg,  FUnf  kirchen,  Steui- 
amanger,  Baab,  and  the  United  Greek  sees  of  Mancacz 
and  Eperies.  The  archdiocese  of  Colocza  (and  Bacz) 
has  the  Latin  suffnigan  sees  of  Czanad,  Gran  Wardein, 
and  Transylwania.  The  sa£fragans  of  the  archbishop 
of  Erlau  are  the  bishops  of  Zips,  Bosenau,  Kaschaa,  and 
Szathmar.  Agram,  which  had  formerly  been  a  suifra- 
gan  of  Gran,  and  was  constituted  an  archbishopric  on 
Dec.  20, 1852,  embraces  Croatia  and  Sławonia,  and  has  as 
suflragans  the  Latin  bishoprics  of  Zengg-Modruss  and 
Diacowar  (Bosnia-Syrmiam),  and  the  Greek  bishop  of 
Creutz. 

The  Greek  CathoUc  (United  Greek)  Chnrch  has,  be- 
sides  the  bishops  of  Muncacz,  Eperies,  and  Creutz,  who 
have  already  been  mentioned,  an  archbiBhop  (sińce  1858) 
at  Fogaras,  who  has  as  suifragans  the  bishops  of  Logos, 
Gran  Wardein,  and  Szamos-Ujwar. 

The  Oriental,  or  Non-United  Greek  Church,  has  for 
the  Serrian  nationality  a  patriarch  at  Carlowicz,  and 
sulfragan  sees  at  Alt-Ofen,  Arad,  Temesyar,  Neusatz, 
Pakratz,  and  Carlstadt ;  for  the  Roumanian  nationality, 
a  metropolitan  of  Transylwania. 

The  Church  of  the  Augsburg  Confesńon  (cwangelical 
Lutherans)  has  four  superintendencies  (Cis-Danubian, 
Tratis-DanQbian,Montan  District,  and  Theiss  District) ; 
the  superintendencies  are  subdiwided  inŁo«eniorats,  the 
iatter  into  congregations.  The  Church  of  the  Helwetic 
Confession  has  likewise  four  superintendencies,  which 
are  also  subdivided  into  seniorats  and  congregations. 
Transylwania  has  one  Lutheran  and  one  Reformed  su- 
perintendent.  Each  congregation  of  the  two  Protes- 
tant churches  chooses  its  own  pastors  and  a  presbytery, 
which  is  presided  ower  in  the  Church  of  the  Augsburg 
Confession  by  a  local  inspector,  and  in  the  Church  of  the 
Helwetic  Confession  by  a  cnrator,  in  common  with  the 
pastor.  The  congregations  belonging  to  one  seniorat 
choose  a  senior  and  a  senioral  inspector  (Lutheran),  or 
subcurator  (Reformed).  In  the  Reformed  seniorats,  the 
senior  presides  in  the  senioral  conwentions ;  in  the  Lu- 
theran Church,  the  inspector.  The  superintendents  and 
the  Buperintendential  inspectors  (Lutheran)  or  curators 
(Reformed)  are  chosen  for  lifetime  by  all  the  congrega- 
tions. The  superintendential  conwentions,  which  are 
held  annually,  and  compoeed  of  all  the  seniors,  and  of 
one  derical  and  one  lay  deputy  from  each  seniorat,  are 
presided  ower  by  the  superintendent  in  common  with  the 
superintendential  inspector  or  curator.  The  Protestanta 
of  the  Helwetic  Confession  are  all  Magyars,  with  the  ex- 
ception  of  eight  German  congregations ;  to  the  Church 
of  the  Augsburg  Confession  belong  about  200,000  Ger- 
mans,  200,000  Mag>'ars,  and  400,000  Slawes. 

The  Unitarians  in  Transylwania  hawe  a  superintend- 
ent (bishop)  and  Supremę  Consistory  at  Clausenborg, 
104  parishes,  and  120  mimsters. 


still  without  i 
There  are  also  five  nonnal 
schools  at  Pesth,  Sgezedin, 
Neuhilaael,  Miakolcz,  and 
Grosakanizsa.  —  Herzog, 
Real-Entyklop,  xwi,  686  ; 
Mather,  KirckL  Chromk,  1867  and  1869 ;  Neber,  KireU 
Geogr,  u.  Statistik,  i,  216  Bq. ;  Wiggers,  KirckL  StaOstik, 
ii,  128.     (AJ.S.) 

Hunger  (H^*^,  raah';  irtwaw)  Ajn>  Thibst  are  the 
8]rmbols  of  affliction.  Thus  in  Deut  wiii,  3,  **  He  hum- 
bied  thee,  and  suifered  thee  to  hunger,"  where  the  Utter 
is  the  instrument  of  the  former.  So  Deut.  xxxii,  24, 
*'  They  shall  be  bumt  with  hunger  ;**  L  e.  thęy  shall  be 
tormented  or  afflicted.  So  to/asŁ  is  often  called  to  ąf- 
Jlici  one^s  touły  as  in  Lew.  xwi,  29-81 ;  Isa.  Iwiii,  5.  In 
Aristophanes  (^Aves)  hunger  is  prowerbially  used  for 
great  misery.  See  1  Cor.  iw,  11 ;  2  Cor. xi, 27;  PhiL iw, 
12.  In  our  Lord*s  Sermou  on  the  Mount,  to  hunger  and 
tkirtt  signifies  to  long  for  and  relish  the  Gospel  (Matt, 
w,  6 ;  Lukę  wi,  21),  but  elsewhere  to  be  in  want  of  hear- 
ing  God's  word ;  that  is,  to  be  hindered  by  persecution 
from  worshipping  God  in  peace  (Psa.  xxiii;  Ecdes. 
xxiw,  19;  John  iw,  18, 14;  wi,  85;  Amoe  wiii,  11 ;  Ezek. 
wii,  26).— Wemyss.    See  Faiiine. 

HunnluB,  JEgidius,  an  eminent  German  Luther- 
an theologian,  was  boni  at  Winenden,  in  WUztembeig, 
Dec  21, 1550,  and  studied  theology  at  Tubingen,  where 
he  ailerwards  became  first  tutor,  and  deacon  in  1574. 
In  1576  he  went  to  Marburg  aa  professor  and  pieacher. 
Herę  his  strict  adhcrenoe  to  the  doctrine  of  ubiąuity  in 
the  Eucharbt,  and  his  adwocacy  of  the  Fonnula  of  Con- 
cord,  sowed  the  germ  of  the  separatum  of  the  Heasian 
Church.  In  1592  he  became  piofessor  at  the  Uniweni- 
sity  of  Wittenberg,  where  he  oppoaed  the  modente 
wiews  of  Melancthon.  In  1594  he  accompanied  tłie 
duke  Frederick  William  to  the  Imperial  Diet  at  Re- 
gensburg, where  his  influence  oppoeed  the  union  of  the 
different  ewangelical  free  dtieSb  In  1595  he  sustjuned 
a  sharp  controwersy  with  Samuel  Huber  (q.  w.)  on  the 
doctrines  of  election  and  predestination,  and  in  1602,  ai 
the  Conference  of  Ratisbon,  he  was  one  of  the  principal 
opponents  of  the  Jesuits  Gretzer  and  Tanner.  He  dłed 
April  4, 1608.  His  principal  works  are,  Confanom  r.  d 
PerMon  Christi  (1577,  1609) ;  also  in  Latin,  De  permma 
Ckristi  (lb8Si)'^CaMmi*  JudaUam  (1593) :— i«  nl^. 
rtBUs  (1 594  and  1 599)  i—JostphuSf  a  drama  (1597).  His 
works  in  Latin  hawe  been  coUccted  and  published  by 
Garthius  (Wlttenb.  1607-9,  5  wols.  folio>  See  Huttcr, 
Ldfmsbeschrtibnnp  (1603);  Adami,  Yita  J%eoloffortms 
Eisch  und  Gruber,  Enctfldopddu ;  Hoefer,  Nouv.  Biog, 
Generale,  xxw,  554 ;  Herzog,  Rtcd^Enc^klop,  wi,  316  8q. ; 
Kurtz,  Ok.  HUl.  ii,  140 ;  Bay  le,  Hitt,  DieL  iii,  534  aą. 

HunnlUB,  NikolatiB,  son  of  iEgidios  Hmmiaą 
was  bom  at  Marburg  July  11, 1585.  He  studied  pfaikd- 
ogy,  philosophy,  and  theology  at  Wittenberg,  where  he 
bogan  lectureson  theology  and  philosophy  in  1609.  In 
1612  he  went  as  superintendent  to  Eilenbuig,  and  in 
1617  retumed  to  Wittenberg  as  professor,  in  the  plaoe 
of  Hutter  (q.  w.).  In  1628  he  became  head  pastor  of 
the  Church  of  Mary  at  Lubeck,  and  superintendent  of 
the  Church  in  the  same  dty  the  foUowing  year.  He 
died  April  12, 1648.  He  resembled  his  father  aa  weU 
in  his  attachment  to  the  Lutheran  orthodoxy  as  in  his 
leaming  and  oontrowersial  powera  He  dewised  the  plan 
of  a  Collegium.  Irenicum,  which  was  called,  after  him, 
^  Collegium  Humuanum,"  and  which  was  to  form  a  su- 
premę tribunal  in  all  theological  disputcs.  He  was  also 
distinguished  as  an  able  opponent  of  Popeiy.  His  prin- 
cipal works  are,  Mimeterii  Lutheraiti  ^Mm  <tdeoqtu  l»- 


HUNOLT 


409 


HUNT 


piimi  demoiutratio  (Wittenb.  1614)  i^Etamen  errorum 
Pkotmianofwn  (1618,  1620) :  —  l^itoma  credaidanm 
(ynttaŁberg,  1625;  18  ed&,  and  translated  into  Dutch, 
Swcdish,  and  Polish)  ■«-<-^ia<rxc<^(£  theoL  de  fundament 
tali  dUaauu  dodriuM  ttfmgd,  IjuiherancB  eł  CaMmcaue 
(Wittenb.  16S6)  :^Bedaikm  ob  u.  wis  d.ind,  Eranffel- 
itek-lMtkeritchen  Kirche  d.  »ckw^)ende  ReUffionstreHiff' 
beiL  heSiegen  od^fortsteUm  u,  endigm  mdffm  (Lttb.  16S2, 
1638, 1666, 1667)  i-^Anweintoff^  tum  rtdUm  Christenthum 
(Łab.  1637  tnd  1648).  See  Heller,  LebenabachreSnaiff 
(1848);  Picrer,  Umotrtal  Lex.  ToLviii;  Henog,  JUal^ 
Em^khp,  Ti,  821  są. ;  Kurtz,  Ch.  HitL  ii,  201. 

Hunolt,  Franz,  a  distinguished  Koman  Catholic 
pulpit  orator,  was  bom  in  the  duchy  of  Nassau  towards 
the  close  of  the  17th  centuiy.  He  was  a  member  of  the 
Jesoit  order,  and  his  Sermons  (Ologne,  1737, 6  voIs.  foL, 
and  often)  gave  him  rank  as  one  of  the  best  pieachers 
of  the  18th  century.  He  died  at  Trier  in  1746 — ^Wet- 
«r  ŁWelte,  Kirchen-Lex.  xii,  606. 

Hnns  (Latin  ffmmi)^  a  nation  of  Asiatic  origin,  and 
in  aU  liketihood  of  Mongolian  or  Tartar  stock,  theńfore 
akin  to,  and  perhaps  to  be  identified  with,  the  Scffihiam 
and  the  Tarka,  were,  according  to  De  Guigneś  {Hitt.  des 
Hwu)j  whose  theory  was  accepted  by  Gibbon,  and  is 
now  entertained  by  all  oompetent  critics,  lineal  descend- 
ants  firont  the  Bionff-noto  nation,  '*whoso  ancient  seat 
was  an  extensive  bat  barren  tract  of  country  immedi- 
atdy  to  the  north  of  the  great  wali  of  China.  About 
the  year  B.(X  200  these  people  orerran  the  Chinese  em- 
pire,* defeated  the  Chinese  armies  in  numerous  engage- 
ments,  and  even  drove  the  emperor  Kao-ti  himself  to 
an  ignominioos  capitohition  and  treaty.  During  the 
reign  of  Yoti-ti  (B.C.  141-87)  their  power  was  very 
much  broken.  £ventnally  they  separated  into  two  dis- 
tinct  camps,  one  of  which,  amoonting  to  about  60,000 
ianńliea,  went  aonthwards,  while  the  other  endeavored 
to  tn^iwłaiw  itflelf  iu  its  original  seat  This,  howerer, 
tt  was  very  difBcuit  for  them  to  do;  and  erentually  the 
iBost  warlike  and  enterprising  went  west  and  north-west 
in  seasch  of  new  homea.  Of  thoae  that  went  north- 
west,  a  huge  number  established  thcmselYes  for  a  whUe 
on  the  baiScs  of  the  Yolga."  About  the  earlier  part  of 
the  4th  century  they  crossed  this  river,  and  advanced 
into  the  territories  of  the  Alani,  a  pastorał  people  dwell- 
ing  between  the  Yolga  and  the  Don.  The  incursion 
was  resisted  with  much  bravery  and  some  effect,  until 
at  length  a  bloody  and  decisiye  battle  was  fought  on 
the  banks  of  the  Don,  in  which  the  Alan  king  was  slain, 
and  hia  army  ncterly  routed,  and  the  vast  majority  of 
the  sarvivors  agreed  to  join  the  inraders.  They  next 
encountered  snocessfully  the  aged  leader  of  the  Goths, 
who  daimed  as  his  dominions  the  land  situated  between 
the  Beltic  and  the  £uxine,  and  then  his  successor  With- 
nnir,  whom  they  siew  in  battle.  The  Goths  still  re- 
maining  placed  themselves  under  the  protection  of  the 
empewii  Yalens,  who  in  876  gave  permission  to  a  great 
mmber  of  them  to  cross  the  Danube,  and  settle  in  the 
conntńes  on  the  other  side  as  auxiliarie8  to  the  Roman 
aima  against  forther  inrasion.  The  Hans  thus  became 
the  occopants  of  all  the  old  territories  of  the  Goths ;  and 
when  these,  not  long  afterwards,  rerolted  against  Ya- 
lens, the  Huna  also  crossed  the  Danube,  and  joined  their 
arms  to  those  of  the  Goths  in  hostilities  against  the  Ro- 
man empire.  In  the  wars  that  foUowed,  the  Huns  were 
less  oonspicnous  than  the  Goths,  their  former  enemies. 
In  the  5th  centuiy  they  were  strengthened  by  fresh 
hordes  of  their  brethren,  and  they  determined  to  gain 
foither  conqae8t8.  In  the  reign  of  Theodosius,  under 
their  king  Attila  (q.  v.),  they  were  even  strong  enough 
to  xeoeive  an  annoal  tńbute  from  the  Romans  to  secure 
their  empire  against  extemal  injuiy.  With  Attila*s 
death,  however,  in  454,  their  power  was  totally  bro- 
ken. A  few  feeble  soyeieigns  sucoeeded  him,  but 
then  was  now  strife  ererywhere  among  the  sereral  na- 
tkną that  had  owned  the  firm  sway  of  Attila,  and  the 
Hani  neyer  regained  their  power.    Many  of  them  took 


serrice  in  the  armies  of  the  Romans,  and  others  again 
joined  fiiesh  hordes  of  invader8  firom  the  north  and  east, 
which  were  undonbtedly  tńbes  related  to  them,  espe- 
dally  the  Ayares,  whom  they  joined  in  greąt  numbers, 
and  henoe  perhaps  the  reason  why,  at  this  period  of 
their  history,  they  are  frequently  called  Humumarea, 
They  now  madę  themselves  nuuters  of  the  country 
known  by  us  as  Lower  Austria.  But  the  Slaves  (Sla- 
yoniana?)  in  Bohemia  and  Morayia  regained  their  ter- 
ritory  in  the  8th  century,  and  many  of  the  Hunnayares 
were  madę  slaves,  and  were  thus  brought  to  a  knowl- 
edge  of  Christianity.  Their  inclinatious,  howerer,  led 
them  to  oppose  most  fieroely  all  the  inroads  of  Christi- 
anity, and  they  transformed  CSiristian  churches  into 
heathen  temples  whererer  they  were  successful  in  gain- 
ing  territoiy.  About  791  Charlemagne  waged  war 
against  the  Ayares,  as  the  Huns  were  then  called,  in 
which  many  of  them  were  slain,  and  but  fcw  weak  tribes 
remained.  About  the  year  799  they  were  finally  conąuer^ 
ed,  and  their  power  broken.  Charles  himself  regarded 
this  war  as  a  sort  of  crusade  or  holy  war,  and  sent  to 
the  pope  and  the  Church  all  the  tribute  paid  him  by 
the  yanquished  foe.  The  first  great  conyert  to  Christi- 
anity was  one  of  their  princes,  called  Tudem,  who  sent 
a  legation  to  Charlemagne  in  795,  with  the  declaration 
that  he  would  become  tributary  to  him  and  accept  the 
Christian  religion.  He  was  baptizcd  at  Aix-la-Cha- 
pelle  in  796,  but  shortly  aft/er  his  return  to  his  trlbe  he 
abjured  the  newly-acoepted  faith.  King  Pepin  paid 
particular  attention  to  the  conyersion  of  the  Huns,  in 
whose  behalf  Alcuin  (q.  y.)  also  was  greatly  interested. 
By  peopling  the  territory  assigned  to  them  with  Ger- 
mans,  especially  Bayarians,  and  by  founding  seyeral 
monasteries  and  cathedrals,  the  subseąuent  Christian 
princes  furtheied  Christianity  among  them,  until  they 
became  amalgamated  with  the  Germans. 

The  Huns  are  said  to  haye  been  of  a  dark  complexion, 
almost  black ;  dcformed  in  their  appearance,  of  unoouth 
gestnre,  and  shrill  yoice.  The  ancient  descriptions  un- 
mistakably  ally  them  to  the  Tartars.  ♦*  They  were  dis- 
tinguished from  the  rest  of  the  human  species  by  their 
broad  shoulders,  fiat  noses,  and  smali  black  eyes  deeply 
buried  in  the  head ;  and,  as  they  were  almost  destitute  of 
beards,  they  neyer  enjoyed  either  the  manly  graces  of 
youth  or  the  yenerable  aspect  of  age.  A  fabulous  origin 
was  assigned  worthy  of  their  form  and  manners — that  the 
witches  of  Scythia,  who,  for  their  foul  and  deadly  prac- 
tices,  had  been  driven  from  society,  had  copulated  in  the 
dcsert  with  infemal  spirits,  and  that  the  Huns  were  the 
offspring  of  tms  execrable  conjunction"  (Gibbon).  See 
Wetzer  und  Welte,  Kirchen-Lez.  y,  397  sq. ;  Chambers, 
Cyclop,  y,  462;  Appleton,  Am,  Cyclop.  ix,  318;  Gibbon, 
Decline  and  Fali  o/ the  Roman  Empire  (Milman'8  ed.), 
yol.  yi  (see  Index).     (J.  H.  W.) 

Hunt,  Aaron,  an  early  Methodist  Episcopal  min- 
ister, was  bom  of  Episcopal  parents  at  Eastchester,  N. 
y.,  March  28, 1768,  and  emigrated  to  New  York  City  at 
seyenteen.  Herę  he  was  conyerted  in  1789,  and  licensed 
to  preach  in  1790.  He  was  first  employcd  as  assistant 
to  Dr.  Wm.  Phoebus  on  the  Long  Island  Circuit.  In 
1791  he  entered  the  New  York  Conference,  and  was 
sent  to  Fairfield  Circuit  In  a  few  years  his  labors  were 
extended  all  through  the  state  of  Connecticut,  on  the 
east  as  well  as  on  the  west  side  of  the  riyer  by  that 
name,  and  into  adjoining  states,  exploring  new  ground, 
and  contending  with  opposition  and  difficulties  common 
to  Methodist  ministers  of  those  times.  Afler  this  we 
find  him  laboring  on  yarious  circuits  in  the  state  and 
city  of  New  York,  haying  charge  of  the  whole  work  in 
that  great  city.  He  was  8ixty-8eycn  years  in  the  min- 
istry,  thirty-eeyen  of  which  he  was  an  effectiye  laborer 
in  the  regular  itinenmt  work;  and  whether  located,  su- 
pemumenry,  or  superannuated,  he  continued  to  labor 
and  preach  as  he  had  opportunity,  and  health  would 
permit,  until  March,  1855.  He  died  at  Sharon,  Conn., 
April  25, 1858.  See  Minuies  of  Confereaces,  yii,  158; 
Steyens,  Meiaorialt  qfMetkodisnL 


HUNT 


410 


HUNTER 


Hunt,  Abaalom,  a  MethodiBt  EpiBcopal  miiiiBter, 
was  bom  in  Yirginia  Dec.  4, 1773,  and  emigrated  when 
a  boy  to  East  Tennessee,  and  later  removed  to  Fleming 
Go.,  Kentucky.  He  was  licenaed  as  a  local  preacher 
about  1793.  In  1815  he  joined  Łhe  Kentucky  Gonfer- 
ence  on  tiial,  and  was  sent  to  the  Madison  Circuit.  He 
was  next  appointed  to  the  Lexington  Ciicuit,  and  two 
years  afterwards  suocessirely  to  the  Hinkstone,  Limę- 
stone,  Mt.  Sterling,  and  Fleming  Circuits.  In  1823  he 
was  superannuated,  but  retunied  at  the  next  session  of 
the  Conferencc,  and  was  sent  to  the  Liberty  Circuit. 
From  1825-28  he  8erved  as  superoumerary  at  Paris,  Lex- 
ington,  and  Hinkstone,  and  then  retumed  to  the  super- 
annuat«d  list,  (inding  his  health  inadequate  to  the  ac- 
tive  work  of  the  ministry.  He  died  February  21, 1841. 
Hunt  was  a  "  natural  orator,"  and, "  though  comparatire- 
ly  illiterate  and  unpolished,  snch  was  his  native  good 
sense,  his  deep  acąuaintance  with  the  human  heait,  his 
quick  perception  of  the  characters  of  men,  and  the  un- 
affected  kindness  of  his  manners,  that  he  was  not  only 
generally  popular  as  a  preacher,  but  was  offcen  the  ad- 
mired  faVorite  with  the  leamed  and  the  refined." — Meth" 
oditt  Monthlyj  1850 ;  Bedford,  Methodism  in  Kentuchfj  ii, 
84<J8q.     (J.H.W.) 

Hunt,  Chrlstopher,  a  minister  of  the  Reformed 
(Dutch)  Church,  was  born  at  Tarrytown,  N.  Y.,  near  the 
opening  of  our  century;  graduated  at  Kutgers  College 
in  1827,  and  at  New  Brunswick  Theological  Seminary  in 
1830.  He  was  settled  at  Clarkstown,  N.  Y.,  1830-2 ;  at 
Nassau,  N.  Y.,  1832-7 ;  and  at  Franklin  St,,  N.  York,  1837 
-9.  Bereft  of  both  parents  when  very  young,  he  roade 
his  home  an  orphan  asylum,  whcre  Christian  kindness 
and  spiritual  training  were  blessed  to  him.  He  was  an 
earnest,  devotcd  preacher,  a  man  of  comprehensire  riews, 
and  well  ąualificd  by  natural  endowraents,  as  well  as  by 
divine  grace,  for  the  laige  and  important  charge  in 
which  he  ended  his  ministry.  His  memory  is  ardently 
cherished  among  the  churches  which  he  serv'ed.  He 
fell  in  the  prime  of  life,  a  victira  of  pulmonaiy  disease. 
His  last  words  were, "  Ali  is  well." — Corwin's  Manuał  of 
the  Reformed  Dutch  Church,  p.  1 19.     (W.  J.  R.  T.) 

Hunt,  Jeremlah,  D.D.,  a  leamed  English  dissent- 
er,  was  bom  at  London  in  1678.  He  studied  first  in 
that  city  under  Mr.  Thomas  Kowc,  and  afterwards  at 
Edinburgh  and  Lcydcn.  On  his  return  to  England  he 
preached  at  Tunsted,  near  Norwich.  He  received  the 
degree  of  D.D.  from  the  Uniyersity  of  Edinburgh  in 
1707,  and  died  Sept.  5, 1744.  Dr.  Lardner  preached  his 
funeral  sermon,  which  contained  a  biographical  sketch. 
Dr.  Benson  edited  Hunt'8  sermons,  which  are  elaborate 
and  exact  compositions,  but  not  interesting.  His  princi* 
pal  works  are  /I  n  Essai/  towarda  explawing  the  Jlistory 
and  Iłeuelationi  of  Scripture  in  thdr  seterad  Periods,  pL 
i;  to  which  b  added  a  DisserŁałion  on  the  FaU  of  Man 
(Lond.  1731, 8vo)  i—Sermona  and  Tracts  (Lond.  1748,  4 
Yols.  8vo).— Darling,  Cydopadia  Bibliographica,  i,  1580. 

Hunt,  John,  a  Congregational  minister,  was  bom 
at  Northampton  Nov.  20, 1744,  and  was  educated  at  Hai^ 
vard  (dass  of  1764).  From  1765-69  he  taught  a  gram- 
mar  sohool  at  łiis  native  place.  While  in  this  position  he 
was  oonverted,  and  having  pursued  a  theological  course 
in  his  last  years  of  teaching,  he  was  licensed  to  preach 
in  1769.  Only  two  years  later  he  was  called  to  the  old 
South  Church,  Boston,  as  associate  of  the  Rev.  John  Ba- 
con (q.  V.).  In  1775,  while  on  a  visit  to  his  home,  he 
died  (Dec.  20).  Though  young  even  when  he  died, 
Hunt  had  already  acquired  a  great  reputation  as  a  ready 
speaker  and  a  superior  thinker.  He  pubUshed  two  of 
his  termom  (1771). — Sprague,  Anncdt  ofthe  A  mer,  Pu^ 
pitfi,GS6aą. 

Hunt,  John,  a  Wesleyan  misstonaiy  to  the  Fiji 
Islands,  and  a  model  of  Christian  excellence,  was  boro 
at  Hykeham  Moor,  near  Lincoln,  England,  June  18, 1812. 
His  carly  education  was  vcry  liroited,  and  John  was 
łrought  up  to  assist  his  father  on  a  farm,  orer  which  he 
was  bailiff  or  orerseer.     When  serenteen  years  old  he 


was  oonyerted,  and  joined  the  Weelejan  aocietjyto  wbon 
senrice  he  resolyed  to  devote  all  his  powen.  He  began 
at  onoe  to  preach,  and  by  dose  appUcation  aoqaired  onh 
siderable  łmowledge.  In  1835  he  reGeived  the  leoom- 
mendation  from  a  Ouarterly  Meeting  to  join  Conference, 
and  in  May,  1836,  he  waa  accepted  by  that  body  as  a 
"preacher  on  triid."  His  intention  was  to  preach  a 
short  time  at  home,  and,  after  snffident  prepantioo,  go 
to  Africa  as  a  missionaiy.  Upon  examination  at  Lon- 
don before  the  Miasionary  Committee,  he  waa  found  to 
be  80  far  beyond  the  avenige  standard  that  it  was  de- 
cided  that  Hunt  should  be  Mnt  to  the  theological  insti- 
tution  at  Hoxton.  In  1838,  when  it  became  the  task 
of  the  Missionary  Committee  at  London  to  detcnnine 
the  futurę  course  of  Hunt,  the  wants  of  Fiji  seemcd  to 
press  upon  them,  and  they  orerruled  the  original  design 
of  sending  him  to  Africa.  He  was  ordained  March  27, 
and  sailed,  with  his  lately-wedded  bride,  April  29, 1888, 
and  they  cntered  on  their  work  at  Rewa  Jan.  3, 1839L 
His  only  object  was  to  d(«  snccessfiilly  the  work  for 
which  he  was  sent.  He  labored  earoestly  to  aoqiure  a 
thorough  masteiy  of  the  language  of  the  natiTO,  and 
Boon  met  i^ith  such  success  as  has  rarely  crowncd  tbe 
work  of  a  Christian  miasionai^'.  Indeed,  h^  becsme  a 
living  example  to  all  missionaries  through  those  island& 
"  Neither  distance  nor  dangcr  delayed  or  daunted  him. 
In  one  of  his  tours  he  preached  the  Gospel  to  five  dil^ 
ferent  nations  and  kingdoms,  who  had  ncver  before  scen 
a  missionary.  He  died  in  the  midst  of  his  labon,  Oct 
4, 1848.  Besides  a  translation  of  the  New  Testament 
for  the  Fijis,  Hunt  wrote  a  work  on  Entire  Sanctifco' 
tion,  **  the  matured  thoughta  of  a  Christian  profoniidly 
submissire  to  divine  tcachings;  written  amidst  the  moit 
robust  labors  of  untiring  actiTity,  prompted  by  the  prin- 
dple  of  holiness;  and  himself  able,  through  gnoe,  to 
illustrate  the  truths  he  taught  by  his  spirit  and  life. 
The  book  will  live;  for  it  is  a  thorough  discossion  d 
the  doctrine  of  holy  Scripture,  untinctured  with  mysti- 
cism,  free  from  enthusiastic  extravagance,  and  not  bui^ 
dened,  like  some  recent  writings,  with  estnncoos  mat- 
ters  interesting  only  to  the  writer."  See  Rowe,  Life  of 
John  Hunt  (Lond.  1860, 12mo).     (J.  H.  W.) 

Hunt,  Hobert,  a  very  pious  and  devoted  clergy- 
man  of  the  Church  of  England,  and  one  of  the  petition- 
crs  for  the  charter  grant ed  by  king  James  I  to  the  "Lon- 
don Company"  April  10, 1606,  emigrated  for  this  comi- 
trj'  as  i)reacher  of  the  first  colony  to  Tirginia  Dec  19, 
1606.  The  histciy  of  Mr.Hunfs  life  previous  to  this 
time  is  not  known,  neither  is  it  definitely  known  whcth- 
er  he  spent  the  remainder  of  his  life  in  Tii^nia,  though 
this  is  generally  supposed  to  have  been  the  case,  nor  is 
Łhe  time  of  his  death  at  all  asccrtained.  Diuing  his 
connection  with  the  colony  their  church  was  bumcd, 
and  with  it  Mr.  Hunt*s  library,  but  he  livcd  to  rce  at 
last  the  church  rebuilt  (1608).— Hawks,  ^if«  cmd  Prog- 
res8  ofthe  Prot,  Episc,  Ch,  m  Va,  p.  17  8q, 

Hunt,  Thomas,  D.D.,  a  distinguished  Eoglish  He- 

braist,  was  bom  in  1696.    He  studied  at  the  Uniyersity 

of  Oxford,  wheie  he  took  the  degree  of  M^  in  1721. 

He  was  one  of  the  first  fellows  of  Hertford  College,  and 

applied  himself  especially  to  philosophical  reseaichcs  in 

the  O.  Test.     He  greatly  assisted  Walton  iu  publishing 

the  London  Polyglot.     In  1738  he  waa  calkd  to  tbe 

chair  of  Arabie  founded  by  Laud.    In  1747  he  becsme 

professor  of  Hebrew  at  Oxford;  in  1740  he  was  madc 

fellow  of  the  Royal  Society  of  London,  and  received  the 

'  degree  of  D.D.  in  1744.    He  died  at  Oxford  October  31, 

1 1774.     Hunt  wrote  De  Benedidione  patriarcha  JaccU 

(Oxford,  1724,4to)  >-De  antiguUaie^  elegantia  et  tttUitate 

I  Lingua:  A  rabicee  (Oxford,  1739, 4to) :— />«  Um  Diaketo- 

'  rum  Orientalium,  etc.  (Oxford,  1748) : — Oh»ervaiiom  on 

seteral  PassageM  ofthe  Book  ofPrcmerbe,  toitk  two  Ser- 

mons  (Oxf.  1775, 4to).  his  best  and  a  most  valuable  work, 

published  after  the  author^s  death,  under  the  caie  of 

Kennioott    (J.  N.  P.) 

Ennter.    See  HuirnKO. 


HUNTER 


411 


HUNTING 


Huiiter,  Henry,  D.D^  a  Sootch  Preabyteriaii  di- 
▼ine,  boni  at  CuIrms,  Perthshire,  in  1741,  was  educated 
at  the  Uniyersity  of  Edinburgh.  In  1766  he  became 
minister  of  South  Leith,  and  in  1771  minister  of  the 
Sootch  Church,  London  Wall,  London.  He  died  at  Bris- 
tol Hot  Wells,  October  27, 1802.  Hunter  was  a  man  of 
leaming,  and  an  eloquent  writer.  His  principal  works 
are  Sermons,  coUected  tmd  rtpubliahed  in  tkeir  reępectite 
onkr,  etc  (Lond.  1795, 2  yok.  8vo) : — Sacred  Biography, 
or  łke  Hittorjf  o/tke  Patriarcha ;  being  a  course  of  lec- 
tuKS  deliyered  at  the  Scotch  Church,  London  Wall  (6th 
ed.  Lond.  1807, 5  vols.  8vo).  This  work  has  often  been  re- 
printed  both  in  England  and  America,  and  has  had  great 
popularity.  It  is,  to  a  laige  extent,  an  unacknowladged 
trsnslation  from  Saurin'8  Ducourt  Iłiitorigues,  Hunter 
edited  8everal  other  French  books,  and  exoelled  in  this 
linę  of  labor.  After  his  death  appeared  a  collection  of 
his  SermoHM  and  other  Piecet,  with  a  Sketch  o/ his  L\fe 
and  Writbigs  (Lond.  1804, 2  vols.  8 vo).  See  Jones,  Chri§- 
(ian  Biographyj  s.  v. ;  Darling,  Cydopcsdia  Bibliograph- 
icoj  i,  1582 ;  Allibone,  Dtctionary  of  A  uthorf,  i,  922. 

Hunter,  Htunphre  j,  a  Presbyterian  minister  and 
patriot,  was  bom  near  Londonder- 
TY,  Ireland,  May  14,  1755.  His 
widowed  mother  came  to  this 
coantry  when  Humphiey  was 
only  four  years  old.  During  the 
Bevolution  he  scn^ed  oor  nation 
in  the  strugglc  for  independence, 
first  as  a  privatc,  and  later,  for  a 
short  time,  as  lieuŁenant,  against 
the  Cherokee  Indians.  He  final- 
ly  decided  to  prepare  himself  for 
a  liierary  career,  and  to  this  end 
pursaed  a  course  of  study  at  the 
Oueens  Moseuro,  afterwards  cali- 
ed  Liberty  Hall  Acadcmy,  at 
Charlotte,  N.  C.  After  the  suirender  of  Charlestown  he 
re-enllsted,  and  was  taken  prisoner  at  the  battle  of  Cam- 
den.  He  succeeded  in  making  his  escape  from  the  en- 
emy, and  took  a  gallant  part  in  tho  battle  at  Eutaw 
Spriugs.  Aiter  this  he 
resumed  his  studies  at 
Mount  Zioń  College, 
Minnsborough,  S.  C,  and 
graduated  in  1787.  Two 
years  later  he  was  or- 
dauied  for  the  ministiy, 
and  in  1805  was  installed 
as  pastor  over  the  Steele 
Creek  Chuich,  N.Cwhere 
hR  remained  untU  his 
death,  Aug.  21, 1827.  (J. 
H.W.) 

Hunter,  'William, 
a  Methodist  Episcopid 
minister,  was  bom  in  the 
County  of  Tyrone,  Ire- 
land, May  5, 1 755.  When  about  twenty-four  years  old  he 
was  converted,  and  joined  the  Wesleyan  Methodist  Sod- 
ety,  and  shortly  after  his  connection  with  the  Church  be- 
gan  to  preach.  He  became  personaUy  acąuainted  with 
Mr.Wesley,  and  felt  so  drawn  towards  him  that  he  decided 
to  accompany  him  from  place  to  place,  to  profit  by  the 
godly  life  of  the  founder  of  Methodism.  In  May,  1790, 
he  emigrated  to  this  country,  and  settled  in  Delaware. 
He  was  admitted  on  trial  in  the  trarelling  connection 
in  1793,  was  ordained  deaoon  in  1794,  and  in  1796  an 
ełder.  He  successiyely  travelled  Chester,  Bristol,  Do- 
rer,  Cocil,  Kent,  Queen  Anne's,  Strasburg,  Dauphin,  and 
Lancaster  circuits.  For  two  years  he  Ubored  as  a  mis- 
sionary  in  Pennsylrania,  and  during  four  years  he  pre- 
sided  on  the  Schuylkill  District.  In  1814  he  was  re- 
tumed  snperannuated,  but  in  1816  he  again  resumed  his 
labors.  In  1819  he  was  retumed  supemumerary,  and 
ftom  1822  to  1827  continued,  and  so  remained,  till  his 


death  at  Coyentry,  Pa.,  Sept  27, 183S.  In  the  yarious 
appointments  he  filled  in  the  Church  ^  he  was  accepta- 
Ue  and  useful  as  a  preacher,  and  discharged  the  duties 
of  his  Yocatioil  with  simplicity  and  fidelity." — Mimttes 
ofConf. 

Hunting  (^7^,  Gr.  ayca).  The  pursuit  and  capture 
of  beasts  of  the  field  was  one  of  the  first  means  of  suste- 
nance  to  which  the  human  race  had  recourse.  In  proc- 
ess  of  time,  howeyer,  when  ciyilization  had  madc  some 
progress,  when  cities  were  built  and  lands  cultiyated, 
hunting  was  carried  on  not  so  much  for  the  food  which 
it  brought  as  for  the  recreation  it  gaye  and  its  condu- 
dyeness  to  health.  Hunting  has  always  borne  some- 
what  of  a  regal  character,  and  in  Persia  immense  parks 
{napahiooi)  weie  inclosed  for  nurturing  and  presery- 
ing  beasts  of  the  chase.  The  monarch  himself  led  the 
way  to  the  sport,  not  only  in  these  preseryes,  but  also 
over  the  wide  stuface  of  the  countiy,  being  attended  by 
his  nobles,  especiaUy  by  the  younger  aspirants  to  famę 
and  warlike  renown  (Xenoph.  Cyr.yiii,  1, 88).  Scenes 
of  this  character  are  abundantly  portrayed  on  the  As- 
syrian  and  Babylonian  monuments  recently  discoyered 


Audeut  Aei^jriaD  HuntEnuiD^ 

by  Botta  and  Layard.  The  king  is  represented  as  por- 
suing  not  only  smaller  gamę  on  horseback,  but  also  en- 
gaged  in  the  chase  of  roore  formidable  animals,  such  aa 
lions  and  wild  bulls,  in  the  chariot  (Layard'8  Nmerek, 


Royal  lion-haut.    From  the  Assyrian  Monuments. 


Ist  ser.  ii,  328).  See  Lion.  This  was  especially  a  fa- 
yorite  employment  of  princes,  and  Darius  caused  to  be 
engrayed  on  his  tomb  an  epitaph  recording  his  proficien- 
cy  as  an  archer  and  hunter  (Strabo,  xy,  212). 

In  the  Bibie  we  find  hunting  connected  with  royalty 
as  early  as  in  Gen.  x,  9.  The  great  founder  of  Babel  was 
in  generał  rcpute  as  ^  a  mighty  hunter  before  the  Lord.'* 
See  NiMROD.  The  patriarchs,  howerer,  are  to  be  re- 
garded  rather  as  herdsmen  than  hunters,  if  respect  is 
had  to  their  habitual  modę  of  life.  The  condition  of 
the  herdsman  ensues  next  to  that  of  the  hunter  in  the 
early  stages  of  ciyilization,  and  so  we  find  that  eyen 
Cain  was  a  keeper  of  sheep.  This,  and  the  fact  that 
Abel  is  designated  ''a  tiUer  of  the  ground,"  would  seem 
to  indicate  a  yeiy  rapid  progress  in  the  arts  and  pur- 
suits  of  social  life.  The  same  contrast  and  similar  hos- 
Łility  we  find  somewhat  later  in  the  case  of  Jacob  and 
Esau;  the  first  "a  plain  man  dwelling  in  tents,"  tho 


HUNTING 


412 


HUNTINGDON 


second  **  a  ctinning  hunter,  a  man  of  the  fidd**  (Gen. 
xxv  8q.)<  The  account  given  of  Esau  ia  connecdon 
with  his  father  seems  to  show  that  hunting  was,  oon- 
jointly  with  tillage,  puisued  at  that  time  as  a  means  of 
subsistcnce,  and  that  hunting  had  not  then  passed  into 
its  secondary  state,  and  l)eoome  an  amuaement. 

In  Egypt  the  children  of  Israel  doubtless  were  specta- 
tors  of  hunting  cairied  on  exten8ively  and  pursued  in  dif- 
feient  methods,  but  chiefiy,  as  i^peais  probable,  with  a 


Ancient  EgypUan  Hunter  carrying  Home  the  Oame. 

view  rather  to  recreation  than  subsistence  (Wilkinson*s 
Anc  Egypt  vol.  iii).  Wild  oxen  are  repreaented  on  the 
Egyptian  scnlptures  as  captured  by  means  of  the  lasso, 
but  dogs  appcar  to  havc  been  usually  employed  in  the 
chase.  See  Doa.  That  the  land  of  promise  into  which 
the  Hebrews  were  conducted  on  leaving  Egypt  was 
plentifully  supplied  with  bcasts  of  the  chase  appears 
elear  from  £xod.  xxiii,  29,  "  I  wDl  not  drivc  them  out 
in  one  year,  lest  the  land  become  desolate  and  the  beast 
of  the  field  multiply  against  thee"  (comp.  Deut.  iii,  22). 
Also  from  the  rcgulation  given  in  Lev.  xvii,  15,  it  is  man- 
ifest that  hunting  was  practised  afler  the  settlement  in 
Canaan,  and  was  pursued  with  the  view  of  obtaining 
food.  Prov.  xii,  27  proves  that  hunting  animals  for 
their  fiesh  was  an  estabILshed  custom  omong  the  He- 
brews, though  the  tum  of  the  passage  may  8erve  to 
show  that  at  the  time  it  was  penned  sport  was  the 
chief  aim.  If  hunting  was  not  forbidden  in  the  "  year 
of  rest,"  special  provision  was  madę  that  not  only  the 
cattle,  but  "  the  beast  of  the  field,**  should  be  allowed  to 
enjoy  and  flourish  on  the  uncropped  spontaneous  prod- 
uoe  of  the  land  (ExoiL  xxiii,  11 ;  Lev.  xxv,  7).  Har- 
mer  (iv,  357)  says,  *'  There  are  various  sorts  of  creatures 
in  the  Holy  Land  proper  for  hunting;  wild  boars,  ante- 
lopcs,  harcs,  etc.,  are  m  considerable  numbers  there,  and 
one  of  the  Chiistian  kings  of  Jcrusalem  lost  his  life 
(jGesta  JJei^  p.  887)  in  pursuing  a  hare."  That  the  lion 
and  other  ravenous  beasts  of  prey  were  not  wanting  in 
Palestinc  many  passages  of  the  Bibie  make  obviou8  (1 
Sam.  xvii,  34 ;  2  Sam.  xxiii,  20 ;  1  Kings  xiii,  24 ;  Har- 
ris, Nalural  Iłiatory  of  the  Bibie ;  Kitto*8  Pictorial  Pal- 
estine),  The  lion  was  even  madę  use  of  to  catch  other 
animals  (Ezek.  xix,  3),  and  Harmer  long  ago  remarked 
that  as  in  the  vicinity  of  Gaza,  so  also  in  Judsa,  leop- 
ards  were  traincd  and  used  for  the  same  purpose  (Har- 
mer, iv.  358 ;  Hab.  i,  8),  That  lions  were  taken  by  pit- 
falls  as  well  as  by  nets  appears  from  Ezek.  xix,  4,  8 
(Shaw,  p.  172).  In  the  latter  ver9e  the  words  of  the 
prophet,  *•  and  spread  their  net  over  him"  (comp.  2  Sam. 
xxii,  6),  allude  to  the  custom  of  inclosing  a  wide  extent 
of  country  with  nets,  into  which  the  animals  were  Tiriv- 
en  by  huntera  (Wilkinson,  Anc  Egyptiana^  iii,  4).     The 


spots  thus  indosed  were  usually  in  a  hilly  conntiy  and 
in  the  vicinity  of  water-brooks;  whcnoe  the  propriety 
and  force  of  the  language  of  Psa.  xlii,  1,  *^  As  the  (huni^ 
ed)  hart  panteth  after  the  water-brooks."  These  places 
were  selected  because  thcy  were  thoee  to  which  the  an- 
imals were  in  the  habit  of  repairing  in  the  monung 
and  evening.  Scenes  like  the  one  now  suppoeed  are 
found  portrayed  in  the  Egyptian  paintings  (Wilkinaon). 
Hounds  were  used  for  hunting  in  Egypt,  and,  if  the 
passage  in  Josephus  {AnL  iv,  8,  9)  may  be  conaidered 
dedsiye,  in  Palestine  as  welL  From  Gen.  xxvti,  3, 
"  Now  take  thy  weapons,  thy  quiver  and  thy  bow,"  we 
leam  what  arms  were  employed  at  least  in  captuziog 
gamę.  Bulls,  after  being  taken,  were  kept  at  least  for 
a  time  in  a  net  (Isa.  li,  20).  Yarious  missiks,  pitiaU% 
snares,  and  gins  were  madę  use  of  in  fawiting  (Psa.  zci, 
3 ;  Amos  iii,  5 ;  2  Sam.  xxiii,  20).  See  the  vazioas  an- 
imals and  means  of  capture  enumerated  above  in  their 
alphabetical  place.  That  himting  condnued  to  be  fol- 
lowed  till  towards  the  end  of  the  Jewish  state  appears 
from  Josephus  (War,  i,  20,  13),  where  the  histarian 
speaks  of  Herod  as  "ever  a  most  excellent  hunter,  for 
in  one  day  he  caught  forty  wild  beasts."  The  same 
passage  makes  it  elear  that  horses  were  employed  in  the 
pureuits  of  the  chase  (compare  Josephus,  AtU.  xv,  7,  7 ; 
xvi,  10,  3).— Kitto.     See  Chase. 

The  prophets  sometimes  depict  war  under  the  idea 
of  hunting :  "  I  will  send  for  many  hunters,"  says  Jere- 
miah,  **and  they  shall  hunt  them  from  every  roountain, 
and  from  every  hUl,  and  out  of  the  holes  of  the  rocks" 
(xvi,  16),  referring  to  the  Chaldasans,  who  hcld  the  Jews 
under  their  dominion,  or,  according  to  othera,  to  the  Per- 
sians,  who  set  the  Hebrews  at  liberty.  Ezekiel  also 
(xxxii,  30)  speaks  of  the  kings,  who  were  persecutors  of 
the  Jews,  under  the  namc  of  hunters.  The  pealmist 
thanks  God  for  having  delivered  him  from  the  snares 
of  the  hunters  [  Eng.  trans. "  fowler"]  (Psa.  xci,  3).  iU- 
cah  complains  (vii,  2)  that  evcry  one  lays  ambuscadcs 
for  his  neighbor,  and  that  one  brother  hunts  after  an- 
other  to  destroy  him.  Jeremiah  (Lam.  iii,  52)  repre- 
sents  Jerusalem  as  complaining  of  her  enemiea,  who 
have  taken  her,  like  a  bird,  in  their  nets.— Calmet.  See 
Net. 

Hunticgdon,  Selina,  Couktess  of,  a  lady  diatin- 
guished  in  the  religious  history  of  the  18th  centuiy,  was 
bom  Aug.  24, 1707,  and  was  one  of  the  three  daughters 
and  co-hein  of  Washington  Shirley,  earl  of  Ferrera.  Se- 
lina, the  second  daughter,  married,  in  1728,  Theophilns 
Hastings,  earl  of  Huntingdon,  a  nobleman  of  retired 
habits,  with  whom  she  appears  to  have  had  a  vexy  hap- 
py life  till  his  sudden  death,  on  the  18th  of  October,  1746, 
of  a  fit  of  apoplexy.  She  had  many  children,  foor  of 
whom  died  in  youth  or  early  manhood.  It  was  proba- 
bly  these  domestic  afflictions  which  disposed  this  lady 
to  take  the  course  so  opposite  to  that  which  is  gener- 
ally  pursued  by  the  noble  and  the  great.  She  became 
deeply  religious.  It  was  at  the  time  when  the  preacb- 
ers  and  foundera  of  Methodism,  Wesley  and  Whitefield, 
were  rousing  in  the  country,  by  their  exciting  roinis- 
try,  a  spirit  of»more  intense  devotion  than  was  generally 
prevalent,  and  leading  men  to  look  morę  to  what  are 
called  the  distiiiguishing  truths  of  the  Gospel  than  to 
its  morał  teachings,  to  which  the  deigy  had  for  some 
time  chiefiy  attended  in  their  public  ministrstions.  She 
found  in  these  doctrines  matter  of  consolation  and  de- 
light,  and  she  sought  to  make  othera  participate  with 
her  in  the  advantages  they  were  believed  by  her  to  af- 
ford.  The  character  of  her  religion,  as  well  as  of  her 
mind,  was  too  decided  to  allow  it  to  shrink  from  promi- 
nence ;  on  the  contrary,  her  high  soul  compasaianated 
the  fearful  condition  of  the  weidthy  and  noble,  and  she 
boldly  sought  to  spread  the  influences  of  Methodism, 
not  only  through  the  highest  aristocracy  of  the  realm, 
but  to  the  royal  family  itself.  She  took  Whitefield  nn- 
der  her  cspecial  patronage,  defied  all  ecclesiastical  or- 
der, and  even  engaged  him  to  hołd  senrices  in  her  own 
residence,  which  she  invited  her  friends  of  the  nobili- 


HUNTINGFORD 


41S 


HUNTINGTON 


ty  lo  attend.  She  persuaded  the  bighest  ladies  of  the 
court  to  listen  to  the  proaching  of  the  great  erangełists, 
with  an  influence  morę  ot  less  powerful  upon  fiome,  and 
a  aaTiog  change  in  othera.  Among  the  fonner  were 
the  celebrated  dochen  of  Mariborough  and  the  duchess 
of  Buckingham;  among  the  latter  the  dochess  of  the 
cekbiated  Chesieifleld,  lady  Ann  Fiankland,  and  lady 
Fanny  Shirley,  the  theme  of  the  admiring  muse  of 
Fope.  She  numbered  among  her  friends  some  of  the 
most  Yeneiated  penonages  of  £ngli8h  hiatory:  Watta, 
Doddridge,  Romaine,  Yenn,  and  the  sainted  Fletcher. 
When  Mr.  Wedęy  and  his  conferenoe  of  preachera  came 
to  the  condisńon  that  they  had  "  leaned  too  much  to 
Calrimsm,**  lady  Hnntingdon,  who  had  imbibed  from 
'^lutefield  the  CalTinism  by  him  imported  from  New 
England,  received  the  impression,  enoneoua  bat  inyet- 
eiate,  that  Mr.AYeaiey  denied  the  doctiine  of  jnstificar 
tion  by  iaith,  and  inaisted  upon  the  aaving  meiit  of 
workai  Her  Telative,  Bev.  Walter  Shirley,  with  the 
smali  renuuuit  of  Calyinistłc  preachera,  called  for  recan- 
tation.  A  controversy  arose,  in  which  the  virulent 
Toplady  was  chief  champion  of  Calviniam,  and  love  and 
tnóh,  on  the  Arminian  aide,  found  their  model  in  Fletch- 
er. £ach  party  went  on,  in  spite  of  the  break,  in  spread- 
ing  the  wential  truths  of  the  Gospel  maintained  by 
both.  Lady  Hnntingdon  and  Mr.  Wealey  nerer  again 
met  on  earth;  but  when,  near  the  cloee  of  her  own  ca- 
reer,  she  read  the  dying  ascription  madę  by  Mr.  Wesley 
of  his  salration  to  the  blood  of  the  Łamb,  and  when  she 
leamed  from  Wealey*B  fellow-traveller,  Bradford,  that 
soch  had  erer  been  the  tenor  of  his  preaching,  her  soul 
melted,  and,  borsting  into  teais,  she  lamented  that  the 
nahappy  aepaiation  had  erer  taken  plaoe.  Whitefiekl 
madę  no  attempt  to  found  a  separate  sect,  but  the  oounŁ- 
es9  chose  to  assumc  a  sort  of  leadership  among  his  fol- 
lowen,  and  to  act  hcrself  as  the  foundcr  of  a  sect,  and 
those  who  might  properly  haye  been  called  Whitefield- 
ian  Methodiata  came  to  be  known  as  **  the  countess  of 
Hontingdon^s  Connection.''  On  Whitefield*s  death  in 
\ni  she  was  appointed  by  will  sole  proprieŁrix  of  all 
his  posseasions  in  Georgia  (U.  S.  A.),  and  a  resulfc  of 
this  was  the  oiganization  of  a  miasion  to  America.  But 
the  counteas  had  also  at  her  own  command  a  oonsidera- 
Ue  income  during  the  forty-four  yeara  of  her  widow- 
hood,  and,  as  her  own  penonal  expenae8  were  few,  she 
established  and  aupported,  with  the  aaatstance  of  other 
opuleiit  persona,  members  of  her  own  family,  or  other 
persona  who  were  wrought  upon  as  she  was,  a  college 
at  Trerecca,  in  Wales,  for  the  education  of  ministers; 
bnllt  numerous  chapela,  and  aaaisted  in  the  support  of  the 
ministers  in  them.  She  dled  in  1791,  and  the  number 
of  her  chapels  at  the  time  of  her  death  is  stated  to  have 
been  aixty-four,  the  principal  of  which  was  that  at 
Bath,  where  ahe  herself  frequently  attended.  She  cre- 
ated  a  trust  for  the  management  of  her  college  and 
chapels  after  her  death.  The  college  was  soon  after  xe- 
mored  to  Cheshunt,  Herts,  where  it  still  fiourishes ;  but 
her  chapels  have,  for  the  most  part,  beoome  in  doctrine 
and  piacŁice  almost  identical  with  those  of  the  Gongre- 
gational  or  Independent  body,  the  chief  distinction  be- 
ing  in  the  use  of  a  portion  at  least  of  the  ^*  Book  of 
Common  Player,**  though,  where  not  expres8ly  directod 
in  the  tnist-deed,  that  practice  has  in  many  instanoes 
been  abandoned.  In  1851  there  were,  according  to  the 
ccnsus,  109  chapels  belonging  to  the  counteas  of  Hunt- 
ingdon'8  Gonnection  in  England  and  Walea.  Sec  £nff- 
l!«k  Cfdopadia!  Mtihodiat  QuarUrly  Remew^  January, 
1858,  p.  ie2;  Stevens,  HisL  of  Methodism,  i,  167;  Life 
aad  Time$  o/tAe  Counteas  of/Iuntmffdon  (I^nd.  1840,  2 
Yolai  8vo) ;  Mudge,  Ladif  Uuntmgdon  portrayed  (New 
York,  1857,  i2mo) ;  Skeats,  HtMł,  o/Ae  Free  Churcha  of 
li^iaad;  p.  388  sq. 

Hnntin^forĄ  George  Isaac,  D.D.,  an  English 
pRlate,  was  bom  in  Winchester  in  1748,  and  was  edu- 
cated  at  Winchester  School  and  at  New  College,  Ox- 
foid.  In  1772  he  became  master  of  Westroinster  School ; 
in  1789,  wardcn  of  Winchester  School;  in  1802,  bishop 


of  Gloooeater ;  and  in  1815  bishop  of  Herefeid.  He  died 
in  1832.  Besidea  seyeral  Greek  and  Latin  dass-booka, 
he  puUished  TkoughU  on  the  TrinUy,  toith  Charyes,  etc. 
(2d  edit.  Lond.  1832, 8yo) ;  and  a  number  of  occasional 
sermons  and  charges.  See  Genikman^e  Magaemej  June 
and  Dec.  1882 ;  Darling,  Cydop.  BOdiocrapkica,  i,  1584 ; 
Allibone,  Dietumary  o/AiUkon,  i, 924. 

Huntington,  Joseph,  D.D.,  a  Congregational 
minister,  was  boni  in  1785,  at  Windham,  Conn.  He 
graduated  at  Yale  College  in  1762,  and  was  ordained 
pastor  of  the  First  Church,  Coventry,  Conn.,  June  29, 
1768,  where  he  died  Dec  25,  1794.  In  1780  he  was 
madę  a  member  of  the  board  of  oyeraeers  of  Yale  Col- 
lege. He  publłshed  A  Plea  hefore  the  Ecdesiastical 
CouncU  at  Stoddbridge  in  the  Ccue  o/Afra.  Fiskfj  ezcom" 
mumcatedfor  marrying  a  profome  Man  (1779) : — An 
Addreaa  to  kia  Anabaptisi  Brethren  (1783)  .—Thought* 
on  the  Atonement  of  Christ  (1791) : — Cahnmam  imprwed 
(post,  1796) ;  and  a  few  occasional  8eimons^->Sprague, 
AnnalSf  i,  602. 

Huntington,  Joshna,  a  Congregational  mmister, 
was  bom  Jan.  81 ,  1786,  at  Norwich,  Conn.  He  graduated 
at  Yale  College  in  1804,  entered  the  ministry  in  Sept. 
1806,  and  was  ordained  co- pastor  of  the  Old  South 
Church,  Boston,  May  18, 1808,  where  ho  labored  until  his 
death,  Sept.  1 1, 1819.  He  was  one  of  the  founders  of  the 
"  American  Educational  Society,"  and  President  of  the 
"  Boston  Society  for  the  Religioua  and  Morał  Instraction 
of  the  Poor**  from  ita  formataon  in  1816.— Sprague,  An^ 
nalsy  ii,  501. 

Huntington,  Robert,  D.D.,a  dlstingulshed  Eng- 
liah  thcologian  and  Orientalist,  was  bora  in  Februaiy, 
1636,atDeorhyr8t,in  Gloucestershire,  where  his  father, 
of  the  same  names,  was  parish  cleigyman.  He  was  edu- 
cated  at  the  frec-school  of  Bristol,  was  admitted  in  1652 
a  portionist  of  Merton  College,  Oxford,  receiyed  his  bach- 
elor's  degree  in  1658,  and  was  shortly  after  elected  to  a 
fellowship  in  that  college.  He  took  his  degree  of  mas- 
ter of  arts  in  1663,  and,  having  then  applied  himself  with 
great  succesa  to  the  study  of  the  Oricntal  languages,  ho 
was  in  1670  appointed  to  the  ńtuation  of  chaplain  at 
Aleppo.  From  1677  to  1682  he  trayelled  in  the  East, 
and  a  short  time  afler  his  return,  in  1683,  was  appointed 
proyost  or  master  of  Trinity  College,  Dublin,  receiying 
about  this  time  the  degree  of  D.D. ;  he  resigned  this  po- 
sition  in  1691,  and  once  morę  retumed  to  England.  In 
August,  1692,  he  was  presented  by  Sir  Edward  Turner  to 
the  rectory  of  Great  Hallingbury,  in  £8sex ;  and  while 
there  he  marricd  a  aister  of  Sir  John  PoweIl,one  of  the 
justices  of  the  King'8  Bench.  In  1701  he  was  elected 
bishop  of  Raphoe,  but  he  died  before  conaecration,  Sept. 
2,  of  this  year.  Dr.  Huntington  is  principally  distin- 
guished  for  the  numerous  Oriental  manuscripts  which 
he  procured  while  in  the  East  and  brought  with  hlm  to 
England.  Besides  those  which  he  purchased  for  arch- 
bishop  Marsh  and  bishop  Feli,  he  obtained  between  six 
and  seyen  hundred  for  himself,  which  are  now  in  the 
Bodleian  Library,  to  which  he  fint  presented  thirty-fiye 
of  them,  and  then  sold  the  rest  in  1691  for  the  smali  sum 
of  X700.  Hun tington,  howeycr,  missed  the  principal  ob- 
ject  of  his  searchjthe  yery  important  Syriac  yersion  of 
the  epistles  of  St  Ignatius,  a  laige  portion  of  which  was 
recoyered  in  1843  by  Mr.  Tattam  from  one  of  the  very 
monasteries  in  Nitria  which  Huntington  had  yisited  in 
the  courae  of  his  inąuiries.  Seyeral  of  Huntington*8  let- 
ters,  which  are  addressed  to  the  archbishop  of  Mount 
Sinai,  contain  inąiuries  about  the  manuscript  of  St.  Ig- 
natius, and  the  same  eamest  inquiries  are  madę  in  his 
Ictters  to  the  patriarch  of  Antioch.  See  Vita  U.  et  epis- 
iolce,  edited  by  Thomas  Smith  (Lond.  1704, 8vo) ;  Eng- 
lish Cyclop.  8.  V. ;  Allibone,  Diet.  o/A  uthors,  i,  924 ;  Hook, 
£cdes,  Biog,  yi,  224 ;  Darling,  Cydap,  Bibliogr,  i,  1585. 
(J.H.W.) 

Huntington,  'William,  a  Calyinistio  Methodist 
preacher,  was  bom  in  1744.  He  paased  his  eariy  life  in 
menial  seryioe  and  dissipation,  but  after  oonyoraioii  he 


HUNYAD 


414 


HUR 


entend  the  ministiy,  and  became  a  popular  preacher  in 
Londoo.  On  his  books  he  took  the  title  of  &  S.,  or  Sumer 
Sctoed,  He  died  in  1813.  A  reyiew  of  his  works  by 
Southey  will  be  found  in  the  Quarterlif  RemeWy  xx,  462. 
His  writings  bave  been  ooUected  and  pablished :  WiMrkt 
(London,  1820,  20  vol£.  8vo,  and  hia  aelect  works,  edited 
by  his  son,  6  rola.  8vo,  1838,  and  leprinted  in  1856)  i— 
ContetnplaHfmt  on  the  God  ofitrad,  in  a  aeries  of  letters 
to  a  friend  (Sleaford,  1830, 12mo)  i—The  Law  atabUshed 
hy  the  Faiłh  of  Christa  a  sermon  on  Kom.  iii,  dl  (Lond. 
1786,  8vo) :— n<  EpisOe  o/Faith  (Lond.  1789,  8vo)  :— 
The  Kingdom  o/Hearen  taJeen  by  Prayer,  with  Life  of 
the  author  (Andoyer,  1832, 82mo) : — The  wUe  andfool- 
iah  Yityins  described,  the  substance  of  two  sermons  on 
Matt.  xxv,  3, 4  (Lond.  1808, 8vo).— Darling,  Cychpadia 
Bmiographica,  i,  1586. 

Hun  jad,  Johansies  Goryinus.    See  Hunoaby. 

Eupfeld,  Hermann,  D.D.,  a  German  theologian, 
and  one  of  the  most  disdnguished  Hebraists  of  Europę, 
son  of  the  clergyman  Bernhard  Karl  Hupfeld,  who  died 
at  Spangenbuig,  Hesse,  in  1823,  was  bom  Blarch  31, 
1796,  at  Marburg,  and  educated  at  the  uniyersity  of  his 
natire  place,  under  the  especial  protection  of  the  great 
Orientalist  Amoldi  (q.v.).  After  preaching  a  short 
time  as  assistant  to  the  first  Reformed  preacher  of  Mar- 
burg, he  acoepted  in  1819  the  position  as  third  teacher 
at  the  gymnasium  at  Hanau.  He  resigned  in  1822  on 
acoount  of  impaired  health,  and,  afler  a  summer's  jour- 
ney  through  Switzerland,  and  the  nse  of  minerał  wa- 
ters  at  the  springs  of  two  watering-places  in  WUrtem- 
berg,  he  went  first  to  his  father*s  house  at  Spangenburg 
to  resume  his  theological  studies  and  to  prepare  for  the 
mlnistry,  and  later  to  the  Unirersity  of  Halle,  where  he 
became  acąuainted  with  Gesenius,  and  was  led  to  a 
morę  thorough  sŁudy  of  the  Scriptures,  especially  the 
Óld  Testament.  In  1824  he  began  to  lecture  at  the 
university,  and  propared  an  elaborate  essay  on  the  Ethi- 
opLc  language  (kzercitationea  yEtkiopica,  Leipzig,  1825), 
which  was  favorably  reccived  and  commentcd  upon  in 
the  Heidelberger  Jahrbucher  and  the  UaUische  Literatur 
Zeiiung,  In  1825  he  was  appointed  extraordinary  pro- 
fessor  of  theology  at  the  Unirersity  of  Marburg,  and  in 
1827,  afler  Hartmann's  death,  professor  ordinariut  of 
the  Oriental  languages,  retaining  the  chair  of  theology, 
which  was  madę  a  regular  professorship  in  1830.  During 
the  Revolution  of  1830  he  was  on  the  side  of  those  who 
favorcd  a  reform  of  the  ecclesiastical  oonstitution  of 
Hesse,  and  strongly  opposed  the  con8ervative  minister 
Hassenpflug.  In  1843  he  went  to  Halle  as  the  successor 
of  Gesenius,  by  whose  influence  Hupfeld  had  peceived 
the  degree  of  D.D.  in  1834.  During  the  revolution  of 
1848  he  was  active  in  the  interests  of  a  popular  form  of 
govemment,  and  urged  the  establishment  of  a  German 
empire  on  a  historical  basis.  He  died  April  24, 1866.  In 
theology,  Hupfeld  was  called  ort.hodox  in  Germany,  but 
in  America  he  would  be  much  morę  likely  to  have  been 
dassed  with  "  Liberals.*'  On  inspiration,  for  instance,  he 
held  that  only  certain  portions  of  the  sacred  writings  are 
of  divine  origin,  and  that  the  Spirit  reveals  to  all  sincere 
readers  the  real  character  of  such  passages.  In  criticism, 
he  belonged  to  the  school  of  his  friend  De  Wette  (q.  v.). 
''His  researches  were  extensive,  but  guarded  in  their 
deductions  by  his  caution.  In  the  elaboration  of  his 
works  he  was  extremely  fastidious.  A  cormoisseur  in 
work,  he  could  not  go  on  if  the  machinery  were  not  ex- 
act,  if  one  slight  element  were  lacking  to  harmony  and 
completeness.  This  sensibility  sometimes  impeded  the 
actiyities  of  a  mind  whose  powers  of  acąuisition  and 
production  were  immenae.  In  his  department  he  was 
among  the  first  scholars  of  his  day.  Few  burial-grounds, 
indeed,  inclose  the  ashes  of  two  such  aarans  as  Hupfeld 
and  his  predecessor  Gesenius.  At  the  close  of  his  aj-du- 
ooa  life,  when  in  his  serenty-first  year,  his  mental  v2gor 
showed  no  dedine,  his  diligence  no  slackening.  As  a 
religious  man,  Hupfeld  belonged  to  the  Fietists,  who 
correspond  in  the  religious  scalę  with  our  strict  evan- 
geliod  ChristiaiUb    He  was  a  deyout  man,  though  not 


after  oor  atamp  of  devotion.    It  ia  doubtful  whethci  hs 
knew  anything  by  expeńeooe  of  oor  immediate  oodtow 
sion.    Ptobably  he  was  never  in  a  prayer-meeting ;  $sA 
he  looked  upon  reYiyals  as  ąnestionabk,  if  not  ol^ 
tionaUe  measnres.    Of  devotional  methods  aad  ezer- 
cises,  then,  he  had  limited  knowledge;  bat  be  bdieved, 
neyertheless,  *  with  the  heart  unto  righteonsneBB.'    He 
liyed  as  all  Ghrtstians  must  live,  by  faith"  (N,  Y.  Mdk' 
odiit,  1866,  No.  813).    Hupfeld  left  merę  monognpbs, 
the  resolts  of  most  careful  inqmry  on  certain  points 
bearing  on  the  subjects  to  which  he  devoted  his  liler 
years,  and  but  few  booka  proper.    Thua,  in  1841,  he  com- 
menced  a  Hebrew  grammar,  łn  which  he  attempted  to 
punufi  the  same  course  in  the  Shemitic  as  Grimm  did 
in  the  Germanie  language,  viz.  the  deyelopnient  of  the 
Hebrew  geneUcalfy  by  a  conaideratioii  of  its  soundu 
Only  a  few  aheets  of  the  work  were  pnblished,  under 
the  title  KriHeche*  Lekrb,  der  Ae(r.  Spntcke  und  Schrift 
(Caseel,  1841).    His  most  important  works  are,  U^ 
d.  Begriffu,  d,  Mełhode  d,  hibL  Einleił,  (Maib.  1644)>- 
De  anłicuioribua  apud  Judaoe  acoentwtm  Kr^orSm 
(Halle,  1846  and  1847, 2  yoIs.)  -^De  prinut.  et  rera  foto- 
rum  apud  Hehrmoa  rałime  (1851,  1852,  1858, 1865,  2 
YOla.)  i^Ouast.  m  Jobeidoe  locos  (1853)  '^IXe  Oudlen  I 
Gtneeii  (Beri  1885)  i--Die  Pealmen,  Uherulzt  «.  erldbt 
(1855-62, 4  Yols.  8yo  ;  of  a  2d  ed.,  begun  in  1867  by  Dr. 
Edward  Kiehm,  3  yola.  are  now  [  1870]  pubUshed)  \—Dk 
heutige  theotoph,  v.  mytholog.  Theologie  und  SekHfteriii- 
rung  (Berlin,  1861).    A  biography  of  Hupfeld  was  pub- 
Uahed  by  Dr.  Riehm  (Dr.  Hermom  Hupfeld,  Halle,  1867> 
See  Theol,  Umie.  Lex.  i,  874 ;  Pierer,  Umver»al  Lex,  riii, 
681;  i9ftM/.tf.irrAl.l868, 1,184 sq.;  Jah^deutach,Tkeohg. 
1868,  iv,  758  8q. ;  Bib.  Sac  1866,  p.  678  8q.     (J.  H.  W.) 
Hu^pham  (Heb.  Chupham%  fifiilfl,  according  to 
Gesenius  pcrh.  eoatt-man,  according  to  Furst  screened; 
Sept.  omits,  but  some  eds.  have  'O^ap ;  Yulg.  JJvpham)j 
a  person  apparently  mentioned  as  one  of  the  sons  of 
Benjamin  (Numb.  xxvi,  39) ;  elsewhere  less  correctly 
called  HuppiM  (Gen.  xlvi,  24).    His  descendacts  are 
called  HuPUAMiTES  (Hebrew  Chuphami',  *^^9^n,  Sept 
omits,  but  some  eds. 'Ofa/ii,  Yulg.  ^ujnAomi/ce,  Numb. 
xxYi,39).    B.ai856.    The  name  iiTy/^wm  being  in  the 
plur.  (Heb.  Chuppim',  D**Bn,  coveriitff§;  Sept  omits  ia 
Gen.  xlYi,  21,  but  some  copies  haye  '0^/ifV  or  'O^/ii/i 
as  a  son  of  Bela;  Yulg.  Ophim),  snggeats  the  possibility 
that  it  is  a  oontraction  for  Ifuphamites.    See  SiiurriM. 
The  only  other  passages  where  it  occurs  are  1  Chroo. 
vii,  12  (Sept  'A^eł>,  Yulg.  Hapham)  and  15  (Sept 
'A^0f f/l, Yulg.  Happhim),  in  both  which  it  has  the  same 
fratemity  with  Shuppim,  and  in  the  latter  mention  is 
madę  of  a  aister  Maachah  as  married  to  Machir,  the  son 
of  Manasseh  by  a  concubine,  wbile  in  the  former  Hup- 
pim  and  Shuppim  are  expressly  called  the  sons  of  Ir, 
apparently  a  son  of  Benjamin  additional  to  the  three 
mentioned  in  yer.  6,  but  probably  not  the  Iri  mentioned 
in  yer.  7.    Hence  results  the  probability  that  Hapham, 
whose  descendants  are  thus  spoken  of,  was  a  grandsoa 
of  Benjamin,  and  conseąuently  a  son  of  one  of  his  fi^e 
sons  exprea8ly  named  in  order  in  1  Chroń,  viii,  1,  2.  bat 
whether  of  the  fourth  or  fiilh  is  uncertain.     See  Bih- 

JAMIN. 

Hn'phamite  (NumK  xxvi,  89).    See  Huphau. 

Hup^pah  (Heb.  Chuppah\  MBn,  a  coverit^  or  bń- 
dal  canopy,  as  in  Fta.  xix,  6 ;  also  proteded,  aa  in  Isa. 
iv,  5;  Sept  'O^^a  y.  r.  'Oir^,  and  evcn  'Oxxof^^)» 
the  head  of  the  thirteenth  of  the  twenty-four  clanes 
into  which  Da\'id  divided  the  priests  (1  Chioo.  xxiv, 
13).     RC,1014. 

Hup^pim  (Gen.  xlYi,  21;  1  Chroń,  yii,  1S>    See 

HUPHAM. 

Hur  (Heb.  Chur,  "^^in,  a  hołtf  aa  of  a  Yiper,  Isa.  xi, 
8 ;  ałso  a  narrow  and  filthy  subterraneanjpruon,  Isa.  xlii, 
22;  comp.  the  *'black  hole"  of  Calcutta;  otherwise  im>- 
hle;  Sept*Qp,  Ovp,  but  Sovp  in  Neh.  lii,  9;  Joeephus 
'Opoc  and  Ovpifc))  the  name  of  flye  men. 


HURAI 


415 


HURTER 


1.  A  Boa  of  Galeb  (Judah*s  g^eat-grandson  throogh 
Hesron),  the  fint  one  by  his  seoond  wife  Ephrath,  and 
gnndfather  of  Bezaleel  (q.  ▼.)*  ^^c  fiunoua  aitiiioer, 
Ihrough  Uli  (1  Chroo.  ii,  19,  60;  iv,  1,  4;  oorop.  ii,  20; 
2  Chion.  i,  5;  £xod«  xxxi,  2;  xxxv,  80;  xxxyiii,  22). 
RC.  between  1856  and  16M.  By  some  (after  Joaephiu, 
^itf.  iii,  6, 1)  he  haa  been  oonfounded  with  the  following. 

2.  The  husband  of  Miriam,  the  aister  of  Moaes,  ao- 
eoiding  to  Joaephua  (^4  n^  iii,  2, 4).  Diiring  the  eonflict 
with  the  Amalekites  he  aasiated  Aaron  in  wiwtaining  the 
arms  of  Moees  in  that  pnying  attitude  upon  which  the 
suooeflB  of  the  laraelites  waa  found  to  depend  (Exod. 
K^ńi,  10-12);  and  when  Moees  was  absent  on  Sinai  to 
reoei\-e  the  law,  he  associated  Hor  with  Aaron  in  charge 
of  the  people  (Exod.  xxv,  14).     B.C.  1658. 

3.  The  fourth  named  of  the  five  princes  or  petty 
ku^  of  Midian  C^l^  '^^^P)*  ^^^  ^^^  defeated  and 
aiain  shortly  befoie  the  death  of  Moses  by  the  Israelitee, 
imder  the  leadenhip  of  Phinehas,  the  son  of  Eleazar 
(Nnmb.  xxxi,  8;  Josephus,  Ant.  iv,  7,  1).  B.C.  1618. 
In  Josh.  xiii,  21  these  five  Hidianites  are  termed  "^9*^09 
'piT^p,  the  v€iśsab  of  Sikom,  and  are  also  described  as 
]^Stn  "^"yć^  dwellen  in  the  land,  which  Keil  (ad  loc.) 
espIaiDs  as  meaning  that  they  had  for  a  long  time 
dwelt  in  the  land  of  Canaan  with  the  Moabites,  whereas 
the  Amorites  had  only  recently  effected  an  entrance. 
After  the  defeat  of  Sihon  these  chiefUins  appear  to 
haye  madę  common  cause  with  Balak,  the  king  of  Moab 
(Nnmb.  xxu,  4, 7),  and  to  have  joLned  with  him  in  urg- 
ing  Ralaam  to  curae  the  laraelites.  The  e\ól  counsel  of 
Balaam  having  been  followed,  and  the  Israelites  in  oon- 
aeąuence  sedaced  into  transgression  (Xumb.  xxxi,  16), 
Moses  waa  directe<l  to  make  war  upon  the  Midianites. 
The  latter  were  utterly  defeated,  and  ^  Balaam  also,  the 
son  of  Beor,  they  siew  with  the  sword."    See  Siiion. 

4.  A  person  whose  son  (Ben-Uur)  was  Solomon*8 
parve3'or  in  Mount  Ephraim  (1  Kiiigs  iv,  8).  Josephus 
caOs  him  Cm  (Ovpi|c),  and  makes  him  to  have  been 
himself  militaiy  govemor  of  the  Ephraimites  (kn/.  viii, 
2, 3).     B.C.  antc  995. 

5.  Father  of  Rephaiah,  which  Utter  is  caUed  **  niler 
of  the  half  part  of  Jerusalem"  afler  the  exile,  and  re- 
paired  part  of  the  waUs  of  Jerusalem  (Neh.  iii,  9).  RC. 
anie  416. 

Ha^rai  (Heb.  Churajf',  ^y(r\  Chald.  perhape  /men- 
acorfar,  otherwise  nobU;  SepL  O^pi,  Yulg.  Ifurm),  a 
nativie  of  the  vaUeys  Q*  brooks'*)  of  Mount  Gaash,  one 
of  David*s  heroes  (1  Chroń,  xi,  82) ;  called  less  correctly 
in  the  panllel  passage  (2  Sam.  xxiii.  80)  Hiddai.  B.C. 
1046. 

Hn^ram  (o,  1  Chroń.  viii.  5;  6,  1  Chion.  xiv,  1, 
maig.;  2  Chroń.  11,8,11,12;  viii,  2, 18;  ix,  10,  21;  c,  2 
Chnm.  ii,  13 ;  iv,  11, 16).     See  Hihasi. 

Hord,  Richard,  D.D.,  an  eminent  English  prelate, 
was  bora  at  Congreve,  Stafibrdshire,  in  1720.  He  was 
admitted  at  Emanuel  College,  Cambridge,  in  1783.  In 
1750,  by  recommendation  of  his  iriend,  bishop  Warbur- 
^'^  (q-  v'.)>  he  became  one  of  the  Whitehall  preachers, 
and  in  1757  rector  of  Thurcaston.  He  afterwards  be- 
came 8uccessively  rector  of  Folkton,  Yorkshire,  in  1762, 
preacher  of  LincoIn*s  Inn  in  1765,  archdeacon  of  Glouces- 
ter in  1767,  and  finally  bishop  of  Lichfield  and  Coven- 
try  in  1775,  whence  he  was  translated  to  Worcester  in 
1781.  In  1788  he  was  olfered  the  arehbishopric  of  Can- 
terboiy,  which  he  declined.  He  <Bed  in  1808.  His 
Sfrmont  (5  vols.  8vo),  distingnuhed  by  degant  sim- 
plicitT  of  style,  perspicnity  of  roethod,  and  acuteness  of 
^ucidadon,  are  to  be  found,  with  his  other  miseenane- 
ow  writmgs,  in  his  Worka  (London,  1811, 8  vols.  8vo). 
His  most  important  contribution  to  theology  is  his  /n- 
tródaeiioH  to  the  Sftufy  of  the  Propheeiu  (1772,  8vo; 
1788,  2  vols.  8vo;  1889,  edited  by  Biekersteth,  12mo). 
This  was  the  flrst  of  the  ''Warbnrtonian  Lectnres." 
Notwithstanding  the  polemical  cast  of  some  of  these 
Mnaona,  the  dear  exposition  of  the  generał  prindples 


of  pmpheey  and  of  the  claims  which  this  portion  of  tha 
sacred  Scriptures  has  on  the  serious  and  unprejudiced 
attention  of  thoughtful  readerS)  conveyed  in  perspicuous 
and  even  elegant  language,  has  secured  a  large  amount 
of  populaiity  for  the  work  even  up  to  reccnt  times 
(Kitto,  £t&  C^dbp.  ii,  843).  He  also  edited  TAe  fTorAt 
of  WajinurUm  (1788,  7  vols.),  and  published  a  Hfe  of 
Warimrton  (Loiid.  1794, 4to).  See  AUibone,  Didumary 
ofA  uthora,  i,  925 ;  Ofiarterljf  Retńew  (London),  vii,  883 ; 
HaUam,  Lit.  łfitt,  of  Europę  (4th  ediL,  Lond.  1854),  iii, 
475 ;  L\fe  and  Writingt  of  Hurd,  by  Francis  Kilvert 
(Lond.  1860) ;  Christ.  Remembroncer,  1860,  p.  262 ;  North 
Briłiah  Ret.  May,  1861,  art.  iv;  Uook,  Ecdei.  Biog.  vi, 
225  sq. 

Hurdis,  James,  an  English  divine,  was  born  at 
Bbhopstone,  Su8sex,  in  1763,  and  was  educated  flrst  at 
Chichester  School  and  next  at  Sl  Mary's  Hall,  Oxford. 
In  1782  he  was  chosen  demy  of  StMary  Magdalenę  Col- 
lege, and  some  time  alter  was  madę  a  fellow.  In  1785 
he  became  curate  of  Burwash,  in  Sus8ex,  and  in  1791 
was  presented  to  the  Iiving  of  his  native  place.  In 
1793  he  was  dected  to  the  professorship  of  poetT>'',  hav- 
ing  previously  published  some  poeras  of  great  cxcel]enoe. 
He  took  the  degree  of  B.D.  in  1794,  and  that  of  D.D.  in 
1797.  He  died  Dec  23,  1801.  Bcsides  poetical  works, 
Huntis  published  several  works  of  interest  to  the  Bib- 
Ucal  student.  They  are :  SeiecŁ  Critical  Remarks  upon 
the  Engliah  Verńon  of  the  firsŁ  ten  Chapten  of  Geneait 
(Lond.  1793,  8vo) : — A  short  critical  ZHsguisition  upon 
the  łrue  Meamng  ofihe  Word  O-^pSn  (Gen.  i,  21)  (ibid. 
1790,  8vo),  in  which  he  contends  that  this  word,  wher- 
ever  it  occurs,  signifies  crocodile.  "  His  remarks  on  the 
various  passages  in  which  it  is  found  are,  to  say  the 
least,  very  ingenious.**  He  also  -wrote  Ticelre  DistertO" 
tions  on  the  Naturę  and  Occańon  ofPsabn  and  Propheof 
(ibid.  1800).— Kitto,  Bth.  Cyd,  ii,  343 ;  Hook,  KccL  Biogr. 
vi,  227  8q. ;  Allibone,  Diet.  ąfA  uthort,  i,  925. 

Hurdwar  (morę  accurately  Hardwar,  i.  e.  Gatć 
of  J/ari)y  also  called  Gangadwara  (Ganges  Gafę),  an 
Indian  city,  is  cdebrated  on  account  of  the  pilgrimages 
which  are  madę  to  it.  Morę  than  two  million  people 
from  all  parta  of  India  resort  to  this  place  to  take  the 
sacred  bath  in  the  Ganges  (q.  v.)«  that  flows  by  the  side 
of  it.  As  in  Bfecca,  the  occasion  is  also  improved  for 
business  purposes,  and  great  fairs  are  held  annually  in 
April— Ihrockhaus,  Conr.  Lex.  viii,  167-8. 

Ha'rl  (Heb.  Churi\  "^"iin,  according  to  Gesenios 
perhaps  Uneft-ieorbery  likc  Arab.  Iłaririf  so  also  FUrst; 
Sept.  Ovp(,yulg.  Uuri),  son  of  Jaroah  and  father  of 
Abihail  of  the  descendants  of  (iad  in  Bashan  (1  Chroń. 
V,  14).     B.a  antę  781. 

HnriB.    SeeHouRis;  Mohammedanism. 

Hurrlon,  John,  an  English  Independent  minister, 
was  bom  about  1675.  He  became  pastor  of  a  congre- 
gation  at  Denton,  Norfolk,  in  1696.  In  1724  he  re- 
moved  to  London  as  minister  to  a  congregation  in  Hare 
Court,  and  died  in  1781.  He  cmployed  his  time  great- 
ly  in  study,  chiefly  of  the  Church  fathers.  His  style  is 
natural,  unaffected,  and  roanly.  His  writings  include  a 
Treatise  on  the  Hohf  Spirit  (1734,  8vo),  and  a  Uuge 
number  of  sermons  and  lectures,  all  of  which  have  been 
ooUected  and  published  under  the  titlc  The  whole  Works 
ofjohn  Hurrion,  nowfrst  coUected;  to  which  isprffixed 
the  L\fe  ofthe  Author  (Lond.  1823,3  vols.  12mo).— Dar- 
ling, Cychpcedia  BibUographica,  i,  1587;  AlIiłK)nc,  Z>tcf. 
ofAtUhors,  i,  926;  Lond.  £vang.  Mag.  Jan.  1827.   . 

Horter,  Friedrich  Emanuel  von,  a  Swiss  the- 
ologian  who  became  a  convert  to  Komanism,  was  bom 
at  SchafThansen  March  19, 1787.  He  studied  Protestant 
theology  at  the  UniverBity  of  Gottingen,  became  pastor 
of  a  country  congregation  in  his  native  canton,  1824, 
flrst  pastor  of  the  city  of  SchaiThauscn,  1835,  antistes 
(chief  ofthe  clergy  ofthe  canton)  and  dcan  ofthe  synod. 
His  intimate  association  with  some  of  the  ultramontane 
Roman  Catholics,  and  the  great  attention  paid  him  by 


HURTER 


416 


HUSBANDMAN 


communicants  of  the  Chorch  of  Borne  cm  a  joinney 
through  Bayaria  and  Austria,  biought  on  him  thc  stig^ 
ma  of  Cr>'ptocaŁholicisn],  and  he  was  raąuested  by  hia 
coUeagucs  at  Schaffhausen  to  define  his  poeition  to  the 
Refonncd  Church  in  which  he  held  ordeis.  As  the  dec- 
laration  which  Hurter  madę  gave  dissatisfaction  to  his 
Ph>te8tant  fńends  and  brethren  in  the  ministry,  he  re- 
signed  his  positiou  in  1841,  and  in  June,  1844,  madę 
open  declaration  of  his  abjuration  from  the  Reformed 
and  adheronce  to  the  Romish  Church.  He  now  devoted 
his  timc  mainly  to  the  study  of  hbtoiy,  and  In  1845  ac- 
oepted  a  cali  to  Yienna  as  imperial  historiographer.  Un> 
der  the  liberał  ministry  of  PiUerBdorf  he  had  to  resign 
this  position,  but  recorered  it  in  1851,  when  he  was  also 
ennoble<l.  He  died  at  Gratz  Aug.  27, 1865.  His  works 
of  especial  int<>rest  to  the  theologian  are,  Geschichte  des 
Papst€S  Innocenz  III  «.  8.  Zeitalter  (Hamb.  1834-42,  4 
voik  8vo)  '.—Befeindung  d.  KaźAol.  Kirche  in  d.  Sckwtiz 
(Schaffh.  1840)  :—Gdmri  u.  Wiedergdmrt  (ibid.  1845,  4 
Tols.  8vo;  4th  cd.  1867,  etc)  .^Geschichte  Ferdinand  II 
und  seiner  EUem  (Scliaffhaus.  1850-64, 11  rols,).  The 
researches  madc  for  his  history  of  Innocent  HI,  the  Ro- 
man Catholics  claim,  led  to  Hurter's  oonyeraion  to  their 
Church.— Pierer,  Unit,  Lex,  viii,  633 ;  Weiner,  Gesóh,  der 
KathoL  Th€ol,]i.b2i  8q. 

Hurter,  Johann  Georg,  a  German  Pietist  and 
philanthropist,  was  bom  in  the  latter  half  of  the  17th 
centur>%  Of  his  early  histozy  we  know  but  little.  He 
was  pastor  of  a  church  at  Schaffhausen  from  1704.  He 
is  oflen  called  "  an  Augustus  Hermann  Francke  in  min- 
iaturę'' on  account  of  the  school  and  orphan-honses 
which  he  built  without  poasessing  the  necessary  means, 
lelying  solely,  like  Francke,  on  proridential  help.  His 
first  tmdertaking  was  the  buUding  of  a  schoolrhouse  for 
the  instruction  of  the  children  of  his  own  scattered  conr 
gregation,  who  were  obliged  to  go  a  long  way  to  the 
town  school,  and  of  whom  many  could  not  get  there  at 
an.  "In  Deccmber,  1709,  seyenty  childien,  with  their 
pastor,  Hurter,  at  their  head,  oelebrated,  with  prayer 
and  thanlcsgiving,  their  entrance  into  their  new  house." 
The  contributions  which  he  had  receiyed  for  the  under- 
taking  had  been  so  numerous  and  so  ready  that  on  the 
oompletion  of  the  school-house  he  decided  to  build  an 
orphan  asyluro.  One  benerolent  man  laid  the  comer- 
Btone  by  a  gift  of  200  florins.  To  make  a  bcginning, 
one  of  the  rooms  in  the  school-house  was  set  apart  for 
the  reception  of  orphans,  and  in  July,  1711,  a  widów  with 
seyen  children  was  receiyed.  The  contributions  mul- 
tiphcd,  and  with  them  the  children.  Hurter  contrib- 
utcd  cycn  much  of  his  own  means;  and  when  in  1716  he, 
with  other  Pietists,  was  rewarded  for  his  sen-ice  by  dep- 
ońtion  from  the  ministry,  he  modestly  seduded  him- 
self  in  a  little  room  in  his  orphan  asylum,  and  there 
spent  the  latter  years  of  his  life.  He  died  in  1721. — 
This  article  is  based  altogether  on  Hurst*s  tranalation 
of  Hagenbach,  I/ist,  ofthe  Church  in  the  ISth  and  I9th 
Cerduries  (N.  York,  Scribner  and  Co.,  1869,  2  voIs.  8yo), 
i,  181. 

Horwitz,  Hymax,  a  dbtinguished  Jewish  scholar, 
of  whose  carly  life  but  little  is  known,  was,  up  to  the 
time  of  his  dcath  (about  1850),  professor  of  Hebrew  in 
the  Uniyersity  College,  London.  He  is  best  known  as 
the  author  of  YindicUe  IlebraicaSj  or  A  Defence  of  the 
Hebrew  Scripłures  (Lond.  1820, 8vo),  which,  at  the  time 
of  its  appcarance,  was  highly  commented  upon  by  the 
London  Quarłerly  Rerieir,  and  by  Home  in  his  Bibl, 
Bib.  Hurwitz  also  publishcd  a  yolume  of  Hebrew  Tales, 
collected  chiefly  from  the  Talmud,  to  which  he  pays  a 
yery  high  tribute,  and  of  which,  while  endeayoring  to 
free  it  from  the  objection  so  frequently  madę  to  aome 
of  its  indecent  passages  and  many  contradictions,  hc 
says,  "I  do  not  hesiute  to  avow  my  doubts  whether 
there  exists  any  uninspired  work  of  cqual  antiquity  that 
contains  morę  interesting,  morc  yarious  and  yaluable 
Information,  than  that  of  the  still-existing  remains  of 
the  ancient  Hebrew  sages."    In  1807  Hurwitz  bęgan 


the  puUication  of  text>4xK>ks  for  the  stndy  of  the  He- 
brew language,  which  are  considered  among  the  bot 
eactant  in  the  English  language.  They  were,  EUmeHis 
ofthe  Ilebr,  Lang.  pt  i,  Ortbi^phy  (Lond.  1807, 8vo; 
4th  ed.  1848, 8yo)  i^Etymoiogy  and  Sgntaz  <fthe  Ht^, 
Lang,  (4th  ed.  1850, 8yo)  i—Hebrem  Grammar  (4th  ed. 
1850, 8yo).— Etheridge,  /fa^rod  ta  Hebr.  LU,  p.  183  sq.; 
Allibone,  JHcL  ofAutkars,  i,  926. 

Husband  (prop.  Ó*^  or  tbiSM,  a  man,  Mip;  ila> 
bcą,  nuuteTy  'jrin,  spouse  [in  £xod.  ir,  24,  the  phian 
"bloody  husband"  has  an  allusion  to  thc  matrimonial 
figurę  in  the  coyenant  of  circumdsion  (q.  y.)],  etc:),  a 
married  man,  the  house-band,  or  band  which  connects 
the  whole  family,  and  keeps  it  together.  Johnson  {EngL 
Diet,  s.  y.)  refers  the  term  to  the  Runie,  house-imda, 
master  of  the  house ;  but  seyeral  of  his  instances  seem 
allied  to  the  sense  of  binding  together,  or  aasemUing  mto 
union.  So  we  say,  to  hushmd  smali  portions  of  thingi, 
meaning  to  collect  and  nnite  them,  to  manage  them  t» 
the  greatest  adyantage,  etc,  which  is  by  aasociating 
them  together;  making  the  most  of  them,  not  by  dis> 
peision,  but  by  union.  A  man  who  was  betrothed,biit 
not  actually  married,  was  esteemed  a  husband  (Matt 
i,  16,  20 ;  Lukę  ii,  5).  A  man  recently  married  was  ex> 
empt  from  going  out  to  war  (Deut.  xx,  7;  xziy,  5). 
The  husband  is  described  as  the  head  of  his  wife,  ind 
as  haying  control  oyer  her  conduct,  so  as  to  supeisede 
her  yows,  etc  (Numb.  xxx,  6-8).  He  is  also  the  guide 
of  her  youth  (Proy.  ii,  17).  Sarah  called  her  hnsbtnd 
Abraham  lord,  a  tltle  which  was  continued  long  after 
(Hos.  ii,  16)  [fcao/t,  my  lord],  The  apostle  Peter  seems 
to  reoommend  it  as  a  title  implying  great  respect,  as 
well  as  affection  (1  Pet.  iii,  6).  Perhaps  it  was  rather 
used  as  an  appellation  in  public  than  in  priyate.  Oor 
own  word  master  [J/r.]  (and  so  oorrel.tiyely  mistiesE) 
is  sometimes  used  by  married  women  when  speaking  of 
their  husbands;  but  the  ordinary  use  madę  of  this  word 
to  all  pcrsons,  and  on  all  occasions,  deprires  it  of  sny 
claim  to  the  expre8iaon  of  particular  affection  or  re- 
spect, though  it  was  probably  in  former  ages  implied  by 
it  or  connected  with  it,  as  it  still  is  in  the  instances  of 
proprietors,  chiefs,  teachers,  and  supcriors,  whether  in 
ciyil  life,  in  polite  arts,  or  in  liberał  studies.— Cahnet. 
See  Marriaoe. 

HuBbandman  (properiy  ra^K  ^'^K,  num  ofih 
ground;  ytdopyóc),  one  whose  profession  and  labor  is  to 
cultiyate  the  ground.  It  is  among  the  most  ancient 
and  honorable  occupations  (Gen.  ix,  20;  xxyi,  12,  U; 
xxxyii,  7;  Job  i,  2;  Isa.  xxyiii,  24-28;  John  xr,  1). 
All  the  Hebrews  who  were  not  consecrated  to  religious 
oifices  were  agriculturists.  Husbandmen  at  work  ttf 
depicted  on  the  ancient  monuments  of  Egypt.  It  wu 
remarked  by  the  members  of  the  French  Commission 
that  there  is  a  great  similarity  between  the  joyksi 
looks  of  the  husbandmen  on  the  monuments  and  the 
sombre  oountenances  of  the  modem  fellaha^  whose  toil 
is  BO  miserably  remunerated.  In  reference  to  the  hii»> 
bandmen  of  Syria,  Dr.  Bowring  says,  ^  The  laboiiDg 
dasses,  if  lefl  to  thcmselyes,  and  allowed  unmolested  to 
tum  to  the  best  account  the  natural  fertility  and  rich- 
ness  of  the  country,  would  be  in  a  highly  fayorsble  coo- 
dition.  But  this  cannot  be  considered  as  the  caac  when 
their  seryices  may  be  and  are  caUed  for  as  often  as  tbe 
goyemment  require  them,  and  for  which  they  are  al- 
ways  inadeąuately  paid;  they  are  likewiae  frequcntly 
sent  from  one  part  of  the  country  to  another  wboily 
without  their  consent.  The  fellah,  or  peasant,  eams 
little  morę  than  a  bare  subsistenoe.  In  Syria  a  giett 
proportion  of  the  labor  is  done  by  females,  and  they  are 
constantly  seen  canying  heayy  burdens,  and,  aa  in 
Egypt,  a  Uige  portion  of  their  time  is  employed  in  fetcb- 
ing  water  from  the  wells  for  domestic  use.  They  biing 
home  the  Umber  and  brushwood  from  the  foresta,  aad 
assist  much  in  the  cultiyation  of  the  fieldL** — Butaw, 
SeeHuuEUKO. 

God  is  oompared  to  a  huabandman  (John  xy,  1  v  1 


HUSBANDRT 


41 1 


BUSBANDRY 


Gmt.  iii,  9) ;  and  tbe  amile  of  land  carefuUy  coltirated, 
or  of  a  Yineyard  caref tilly  drened,  Ib  often  used  in  the 
Mcred  wńtings.  The  ait  of  huałiandry  is  from  God, 
aajB  the  prophet  Itaiah  (xzviii,  24-28),  and  the  rarious 
operatłons  of  it  are  each  in  their  seaaon.  The  sowing 
of  seed,  the  waiting  for  hanrest,  the  ingathering  when 
leady,  the  storing  up  in  granaries,  and  the  uae  of  the 
prodocts  of  the  earth,  afford  many  points  of  compariaon, 
of  apt  flgoreą  and  ńmilitodea  in  Scriptaic— Calmet. 

See  HUSBA2(DRT. 

HuBbandry  (in  Heb.  by  circumlocution  Hc^M,  the 
ground;  Gr.  prop.  yewpyia,  2  Mace.  xii,  2;  alśo  ytwp- 
yiov,  uplot  of  tiUed  ground,  1  Cor.  iii,  9).  The  cultuie 
of  the  aoil,  althoogh  ooeval  with  the  histoiy  of  the  hu- 
man  race  (Gen.  ii,  15;  iy,  2;  ix,  20),  was  held  of  sec- 
oodary  aocoiint  by  the  nomadę  Hebrews  of  the  early 
period  (Gen.  xxvi,  12, 14 ;  xxxvii,  7 ;  see  Job  i,  3 ;  comp. 
Uarmer,  i,  88  8q. ;  Yobiey,  Trcveltf  i,  291 ;  Burckhardt, 
Beduin.  p.  17 ;  see  Michae1i<s  De  antiguiiatibut  cecon.po' 
triardu  i,  Halle,  1728,  and  in  Ugolini  Theiaunu,  xxiv, 
etc.),  bot  by  the  Jewish  lawgiver  it  was  elevated  to  the 
nnk  of  a  fundamental  institation  of  national  economy 
(Michaelia,  Mot,  RecM,  i,  249  są.),  and  hencc  became  as- 
adnoiialy  and  skilfully  practiced  in  Pakstine  (comp.  1 
Sam.  xi,  5;  1  Kings  xix,  19;  2  Chroń,  xxvi,  10 ;  Prov. 
xxzi,  16;  Eodns.  vii,  15;  also  Isa.  xxvii,  27,  and  Gese- 
niiia,  ad  loc.),  as  it  oontinues  in  a  good  degree  to  be  at 
the  present  day  in  the  £asŁ«  Upon  the  fields,  which 
were  divided  (if  at  all)  accordiug  to  a  vague  land-meas- 
OK  tenned  a  yoke  (^2C,  1  Sam.  xiv,  14),  and  occaaion- 
aDy  fenoed  in  (see  Knobel,  Zu  Jeaaiasj  p.  207),  were 
mostly  raised  wheat,  harley,  flax,  lentils  (2  Sam.  xxiii, 
11),  garlic,  and  sometimes  spelt,  beans,  a  kind  of  durra 
or  koleuM  (*fn^)i  commin,  fennel,  cucombersy  etc  (Isa. 
xxviii,  25).  See  these  and  other  yegetables  in  their 
alphabetical  place;  for  the  later  periods,  compare  the 
Misbna,  Ckilatm,  i.  The  fertility  of  Palestine  (q.  v.), 
espedally  in  many  parts,  madę  the  ciiltivation  tolerably 
easy,  and  it  was  gndually  increased  by  the  clearing 
away  of  foresta  (Jer.  iv,  8),  thos  enlarging  the  arabie 
plains  O*^^,  n(wale\  comp.  PA>v.  xiii,  23);  the  hills  (2 
Chion.  xxTi,  10 ;  Ezek.  xxxviii,  6,  9)  being  formed  into 
temccs  (compare  Niebuhr,  Betehr^ih,  156 ;  Burckhardt, 
7>ar.  i,  64),  apon  which  the  earth  was  kept  by  a  iadng 
of  Stones,  while  the  km  groimds  and  flats  along  streams 
were  intersected  by  ditchea  (D^p  *^A^B)  Fh>v.  xxi,  1 ; 
oompi  Psa.  i,  13)  for  drainage  (oomp.  Mishna,  Moed  Kar 
ton,  i,  1;  Niebnhr,  Beadir,  156;  Trem,  i,  856^  437;  Hai^ 
mer,  ii,  331  8q.),  or,  morę  nsoally,  imgation  by  means 
of  water-wheeb  (Mishna,  Ptak,  v,  8).  The  soil  was 
manined  (1^^)  sometimes  with  dong  (compare  Jer.  is, 
22;  2  Kings  ix,  87),  sometimes  by  the  ashes  of  bumt 
fltnw  or  stabbie  (Isa.  v,  24 ;  xlvii,  14 ;  Joel  ii,  5).  More- 
orer,  the  keeping  of  cattle  on  the  fields  (Pliny,  xviii, 
63),  and  the  leaving  of  the  chaff  in  thieshing  (Korte, 
RduMy  p.  438),  oontributed  greatly  to  fertilization.  For 
brcaking  np  the  smiace  of  the  groond  (ID^H,  also  aSi^), 
pŁooghs  (POTTO?),  probably  of  various  constniction, 
were  used  (^  Syria  tenui  suloo  arat :"  Pliny,  xviii,  47 ; 
comp.  ThcophrasL  Causscs  plant,  iii,  25;  on  D^riSjt  Joel 
iv,  10,  aee  Credner,  ad  loc).  The  latter,  like  the  har- 
roin,  which  were  early  used  for  oovering  the  seed  (Pliny, 
XTiii,  19, 3 ;  see  Haniuin,  ad  loc.),  were  drawn  by  oxen 
(1  Kiogs  xix,  19  8q. ;  Job  i,  14 ;  Amos  vi,  12)  or  cows 
(^udg.  xiv,  18 ;  Baba  Mez.  vi,  4),  seldom  by  asses  (Isa. 
ux,  24;  oomp.  xxxii,  20;  Yairo,  ii,  6, 8,  <* Ubi  levis  est 
terra**),  bot  never  with  a  yoke  of  the  two  kinds  of  ani- 
nuls  together  (Deut.  xxii,  10),  as  is  now  customaiy  in 
the  East  (Niebuhr,  Beschreib.  p.  156):  the  beasts  were 
dńven  with  a  cndgel  ("t^bp,  goad).  (Delineations  of 
EgypUan  agricnltnre  may  be  seen  in  Wilkinson,  2d  ser. 
i,  48;  Koaellini,  Mon.  civ.  table  82,  88.)  See  each  of 
tlie  abore  agricultaial  implements  in  its  alphabetical 
Vkn.    The  furrows  (C^ri,  MdM),  amoog  the  Hebrews, 


piobably  ran  usually  lengthwise  and  croeswise  (Pliny, 
xviii,  19 ;  Niebuhr,  Beschr,  p.  155).  The  sowing  occur- 
red,  for  winter  grain,  in  October  and  November;  for 
smnmer  firuit,  in  January  or  February;  the  hanrest  in 
ApriL  The  unexceptionable  aoconnts  of  fif  ty-fold  and 
hundred-fold  crops  (Gen.  xxvi,  12  [on  the  reading  here, 
see  Tuch,  ad  loc.] ;  Matt.  xiii,  8  są. ;  compare  Josephus, 
War,  iv,  8,  3;  Herod,  i,  193;  Pliny,  xviii,  47;  Strabo, 
XV,  731 ;  xvi,  742;  Heliod.  jEth.  x,  5,  p.  895;  Sonnini, 
Tratf.  ii,  806;  Shaw,  Trat,  p.  123;  Burckhardt,  i,  463; 
yet  see  Rappel,  Abyś*,  i,  92;  Niebuhr,  BeMchreSb,  p.  151 
sq.)  seem  to  show  that  the  andents  aowed  (planted,  i  e. 
deposited  the  grain,  D^liS,  Isa.  xxviii,  25)  in  drills,  and 
with  wide  spaces  between  (Niebuhr,  Betehreib,  p.  157 ; 
Brown*s  Trarelt  m  A/rioa,  p.  457),  as  Strabo  (xv,  781) 
expreBBly  says  was  the  case  among  the  Babylonians. 
(See  further  under  the  above  terma  respectively ;  and 
oomp.  generally  Ugolini,  Commaa,  de  re  nutica  vet.  //e6., 
in  his  Tkuaur.  xxix ;  H.  G.  Paulsen,  Nachrichien  wnn 
Adcerbau  der  MorgenUmdery  Helmstildt,  1748 ;  id.  >4dk- 
erbau  d,  Morpenlander,  Helmstfldt,  1748;  Norbery,  De 
OffHcultura  orient.,  in  his  Opusc,  Acad.  ii,  474  8qq.;  P. 
G.  Purmann,  5  proffr,  de  re  nutica  ret.  Jlebr.  FranckC 
1787 ;  also  the  CaUndar.  Pokut,  aconom.  by  Buhle  and 
Walch,  Gotting.  1784 ;  Reynier,  UEconomAe  rurale  dei 
Arabes;  Wilkinson,  Ane.  Egypiiant;  Layard^s  Nineteh, 
1849;  his  Ninereh  and  Babylon,  1853;  Kitto*B  Physical 
ffisł.  ofPaUst,  1843.)    See  Aoriculture. 

The  legal  regulations  for  the  security  and  promotion 
of  agriculture  among  the  Israelites  (compare  Otho,  Leae. 
Rabb.  p.  23  8q.)  were  the  following :  o.  £very  heredi- 
tary  or  family  estate  was  inalienaUe  (Lev.  xxv,  28) ;  it 
could  indeed  be  sold  for  debt,  but  the  pnrchaser  held  oniy 
the  nsofirnct  of  the  ground ;  hence  the  land  itself  revert» 
ed  withont  redemption  at  the  year  of  Jubilee  to  its  ap» 
propriate  owner  (Lev.  xxv,  28),  whether  the  original 
possessor  or  his  heirs-at-law;  and  at  any  time  during 
the  intenral  before  that  period  it  might  be  redeemed  t^ 
Buch  person  on  repayment  of  the  purchase-money  (Lev. 
xxv,  24).  See  Land;  Jubił£e.  b.  The  removal  of 
fieki-lines  marked  by  bonndary-stones  i^temnuT)  was 
strongly  interdicted  (Deut.  xix,  14;  compare  xxvii,  17; 
Prov.  xxii,  28 ;  Hos.  v,  10),  as  in  all  andent  nations 
(comp.  Plato,  Leg.  viii,  p.  843  są.;  Dougtsi,  Analecł,  i, 
110;  sińce  these  metes  were  established  with  religious 
ceremonies,  see  PUny,  xviii,  2;  compare  Ovid,  Fasti,  ii, 
639  są.);  yet  no  special  penalty  is  denounced  in  law 
against  offenders.  For  any  damage  done  to  a  fidd  or 
its  growth,  whether  by  the  overmnning  of  cattle  or  the 
spr^ing  of  fire  (£xod.  xxii,  5  są.),  fuli  satisfaction  was 
exacted  (Philo,  Opp.  ii,  839  są.).  But  it  was  not  ao- 
counted  a  trespass  for  a  person  to  pluck  ears  of  grain 
from  a  8tranger's  fidd  with  the  naked  hand  (Deut  xxiii, 
26;  Matt  xii,  1;  Lukę  ri,  1).  This  last  prescńption, 
which  prevails  likewise  among  the  Arabs  in  Palestine 
(Robinson*8  Researchee,  ii,  419,  430),  was  also  extended 
to  the  gleanings  (13^^,  comp.  Robin«)n*s  Res,  Iii,  9)  and 
to  the  comers  of  the  fidd  (see  Mishna,  Peah,  i,  2,  where 
these  are  computed  at  a  sixtieth  part  of  the  fidd),  which 
were  left  for  the  poor,  who  were  in  like  manncr  to  share 
in  the  remnants  of  the  produce  of  >incyards  and  fruit- 
treea.  See  Gleamimg.  e.  Eveiy  seventh  year  it  was 
ordained  that  all  the  fidds  throughout  the  cntire  land 
should  lie  fallow,  and  whatever  grcw  spontaneously  be- 
longed  to  the  poor  (Lev.  xxv,  4  są.).  See  Sabbaticał 
Year.  d,  Yarious  seeds  were  not  allowed  to  be  planted 
in  the  same  field  (Lev.  xix,  19 ;  Deut  xxii,  9).  These 
benefioent  statutes,  however,  were  not  uniformly  ob- 
senred  by  the  Israelites  (before  the  £xile).  Coveton8 
farmera  not  only  suffered  themseWes  to  remove  thdr 
neighbor*8  land-mark  (Hos.  v,  10;  comp.  Job  xxiv,  2), 
but  even  kings  bought  large  tracts  of  land  {latifumUd) 
together  (Isa.  v,  8;  Mic  ii,  2),  so  that  the  entuhnent 
and  right  of  redemption  of  the  original  possessor  appear 
to  have  fallcn  into  disuse ;  neither  was  the  Sabbaticał 
year  regulariy  ob6erved  (Jer.  xxxiv,  8  są.).    (For  fui^ 


HUSGEN 


418 


HUSK 


ther  agricultural  details,  see  Jahii*8  BibL  Archmot  chap. 
iv.)— Winer,  i,  17.     See  Fabjł 

HUBgen,  JoHAMN,  a  Gennan  Roman  Catholic  di- 
vine,  wa«  bom  at  Giesenkirchen,  near  Cologne,  in  1769. 
In  1792  he  became  vicar  and  teacher  at  hu  native  place, 
and  after  filling  different  yicarages,  was  appointed  super- 
intendent  over  the  Roman  Catholic  schools  at  Aix-]a- 
Chapelle  in  1816,  in  1825  generał  yicar  to  archbishop 
Spiegel  of  Desenberg  and  dean  in  Cologne,  and  in  1835, 
upon  the  death  of  the  archbiahop,  preńding  officer  of  the 
archiepiscopacy  pro  tem,  in  which  offices  he  greatly  dis^ 
tinguished  himaelf  by  his  kind  and  conciliatory  spirit 
towards  all  sects.  He  died  in  1841.— Pieier,  Vfdv.  Ltx, 
viii,  635. 

Hu^^flhah  (Hebrew  Chuthah',  MtŚ^n,  hasłe;  Sept 
'Q(rav,  Yulg.  Ho8a\  son  of  Ezer  and  grandson  of  Hur, 
of  the  family  of  Judah  (I  Chroń,  iv,  4);  whence  proba- 
bly  the  patronymic  Hushathite  (Heb.  Chuthathi', 
''nwsin,  Scpt.  'Afftu^i,  Ouffa^i),  2  Sam.  xxi,  18;  1  Chroń. 
xi,  29 ;  XX,  4.  He  secms  to  be  the  same  person  called 
Shuah  in  1  Chroń,  iv,  1 1.  Comp.  Hushan.  RC.  post 
1612. 

Hu^shai  (Heb.  Chushay',  '^ttJSłn,  guick;  Scpt.  and 
Josephus  [Ant,y\\j  9,  2]  Xoi;<yO»  caUed  "the  Archite" 
(q.  V.)  (comp.  Josh.  xvi,  2)  and  "  the  king's  companion," 
L  e.  tizier  or  intimate  adriser  (1  Chroń,  xxvii,  33),  a 
post  which  he  doubtless  attained  by  his  eminent  services 
to  David  in  defeating  (RC.  cir.  1023)  the  plots  of  Ahith- 
ophel,  in  league  with  the  rebellious  Absalom  (2  Sam. 
XV,  82,  87 ;  xvi,  16-18 ;  xvii,  5-15).  See  David.  Bar 
ankh,  Solomon's  vicegerent  in  Asher,  was  doubtless  the 
0on  of  the  samo  (1  Kings  iv,  16), 

Ha'sham  (Heb.  Ckutham',  DlC^n,  but  defectively 
Dlbn  in  Gen.  xxxvi,  34,  85,  hatty;  Sept  'Affiifł  and 
'Aoó)i),  a  Temanite,  successor  of  Jobab  and  predecessor 
of  Diedad  among  the  native  princes  of  Mount  Seir  before 
the  usurpation  of  the  Edomites  (Gen.  xxxvi,  84,  35;  1 
Chroń,  i,  45).  RC.  long  antę  1093,  and  probably  antę 
1618. 

Hu^flhathite  (2  Sam.  xxi,  18;  xxiii,  27;  1  Chroń. 
xi,  29;  XX,  4;  xxvi,  11).     See  Hushah. 

Hu'8llim  (Heb.  Chushim^  t3''ią!in,  or  defect.t3''TL*n 
in  Gen.  xl\'i,  23;  1  Chroń,  vii,  12,  hastę;  Sept.  'Q(ti>, 
but  'Affó^  in  Gen.  xlvi,  28,  and  A(tó/3  in  1  Chroń,  vii, 
12),  the  name  of  two  men  and  one  woman. 

1.  A  son  of  Dan  (Gen.  xlvi,  23) ;  morę  properly  caU- 
ed  Shuham  (Numb.  xxvi,  42).  "  Hushim  figures  prom- 
inently  in  the  Jewish  traditions  of  the  recognition  of 
Joseph,  and  of  Jaoob'8  buńal  at  Hebron.  See  the  quo- 
tations  from  the  Midrash  in  Weil's  Bib,  Legenda,  p.  88, 
notę,  and  the  Targum  Pseudojon.  on  Gen.  1, 13,  In  the 
latter  he  is  the  executioner  of  Esau"  (Smith). 

2.  A  name  given  as  that  of  "  the  sons  of  Aher"  or 
Aharah,  the  third  son  of  Benjamin  (1  Chroń,  vii,  12; 
comp.  viii,  1),  and  therefore  only  a  plur.  form  for  Shu- 
ham (see  the  foregfting  name,  and  compare  the  fact  that 
the  following  is  a  fem.  appellation)  as  a  rcpresentative 

'  of  his  brethren.    Comp.  Huphoi,  and  see  Benjamin. 
Ra  post  1856. 

3.  One  of  the  wives  of  Shaharaim,  of  the  tribe  of 
Benjamin,  in  the  country  of  Moab,  by  whom  he  had 
Ahitub  and  Elpaal  (1  Chroń,  viii,  8, 1 1).     RC.  dr.  1618. 

Husk  (at,  zag,  the  tJdn  of  a  grapę,  so  called  as  being 
fraiMpar«ii/,  Vumb.  vi,  4;  lii;?^,  tsild^\  a  sack  for 
grain,  so  called  from  being  Hed  together  at  the  mouth,  2 
Kings  iv,  42)  oocurs  also  in  Lukę  xv,  16  as  a  rendering 
of  «pariov  (from  its  horned  extremities),  in  the  paraWe 
of  the  prodigal  son,  where  it  is  said  that  "  he  would  fain 
have  filled  his  belly  with  the  hushs  that  the  swine  did 
eat;  and  no  man  gave  [even  this  poor  provender,  so 
Meyer,  ad  loc]  unto  him."  In  the  Arabie  Yersion  of 
the  New  Testament,  the  word  kharub,  often  written 
JAamubf  is  given  as  a  synonym  of  keratia,  AcconUng 
to  Celsius,  the  modem  Greeks  bave  converted  the  Ar- 


abie name  into  ^ó^P^^y  ^^^  '^  &  aimilar  form  it  bn 
passed  into  most  European  languages.  Though  with 
us  little  morę  than  its  name  is  known,  the  carob-tree  is 
extremely  common  in  the  south  of  Europę,  in  Syria, 
and  in  Egypt  (See  Thomson,  Land  and  the  Boók,  i, 
21.)  The  Arabs  distinguish  it  by  the  name  of  Kkar- 
nub  shamir— that  is,  the  S}rrian  Carob.  The  andents, 
as  Theophrastus  and  Pliny,  likewise  mention  it  ts 
a  native  of  Syria.  Cebdus  statcs  that  no  tioe  is 
morę  frequently  mentioned  in  the  Talmud  (Miahna, 
i,  40;  iv,  164;  vi,  494),  where  its  frtiit  is  sUted  to 
be  given  as  food  to  cattle  and  swiuc :  it  is  uow 
given  to  horses,  asses,  and  mules.  During  Ihe  Penin- 
sular  War  the  horses  of  the  Bńtish  cavalry  were  oftm 
fed  on  the  beans  of  the  carob-tree.  Both  Pliny  (Z/irf. 
Nat,  XV,  23)  and  Columella  (vii,  9)  mention  that  it  was 
given  as  food  to  swine  (comp.  Mishna,  Shaab.  xxiv,  2), 
yet  was  somctimes  eaten  by  men  (Horace,  Epitt. ii,  1, 123; 
Juv.  xi,  58 ;  Pers.  iii,  55 ;  Sonnini,  Trarelt  in  Crecw ,  p. 
26).  By  some  it  haa  been  thought,  but  apparently 
without  reason,  that  it  was  upon  the  husks  of  this  tre« 
that  John  the  Baptist  fed  in  the  wildcmess:  from  this 
idea,  however,  it  is  often  called  St  John*8  Biead  and 
Locust-tree.     Ceraiia  or  Ceratonia  is  the  name  of  a 


CtraUmia  8Hiq;tia, 


tree  of  the  fiunily  of  leguminoos  plants,  of  which  the 
fruit  used  to  be  called  SiUgua  eduKi  and  SiUgua  dakis. 
By  the  Greeks,  as  Galen  and  Paulus  .£gineta,  the  tree 
is  called  ccpana,  KtpaTutpia,  from  the  resemblance  of 
its  fruit  to  Kfpacj  a  hom ;  also  cvKn  a/ywirWa,  or  £gsji- 
tianfig  (Theophr.  PlaTU.  i,  18).  The  carob-tree  grows 
in  the  south  of  Europę  and  north  of  Africa,  usually  to  a 
moderate  size,  but  it  sometimcs  becomes  veTy  large, 
with  a  trunk  of  great  thickne8^  and  aifords  an  agreet- 
ble  shade.  It  bas  been  seen  by  traveller8  near  Beth- 
lem  (Rauwolf,  Trarelt,  p.  458;  Schubert,  iii,  115),  and 
elsewhere  (Robinson's  Researchet,  iii,  54).  Prof.  Hack- 
ett  saw  it  growing  around  Jerusalem,  and  the  fruit  ex- 
posed  for  sale  in  the  market  at  Smyma;  and  he  de- 
scribes  its  form  and  uses  {lUustra,  of  Scripture,  p.  129, 
Bost  1855).  Wilde,  being  in  the  pUun  near  Mount 
Carmel,  obsenred  several  splendid  specimens  of  the  ca- 
rob-tree. On  the  15th  of  Maroh  he  notioed  the  frait  as 
having  been  perfected.  The  husks  wece  acattered  on 
the  ground,  where  some  cattle  had  been  feeding  oo 
them.    It  is  an  eveigreeD,  and  pats  folth  a  great  maaiy 


HUSS 


419 


HUSS 


bcoKhefl^  corered  with  lagę  puuiAted.leayeB.  The 
bJoMom  Ib  of  A  leddish  or  dark  parple  coior,  and  is  suc- 
ceeded  by  laige,  alender  pods  or  capsuks,  cunred  like  a 
hom  or  sickle,  oontaining  a  aweetiah  pulp,  and  seyeral 
smali,  flhiiiuig  seedo.  These  poda  are  aometimea  eight 
or  ten  inches  long,  and  an  inch  and  a  half  broad;  the 
eoknr  is  dark  brown,  and  the  seeda  which  they  oontain 
are  aboat  the  aize  of  an  oidinary  dry  pea,  not  perfectly 
rotmd,  flattened,  hard  and  bitter,  and  of  a  dark  red  color. 
The  ąuantity  of  poda  borne  by  each  tree  ia  yeiy  oonaid- 
erabl^  beingoften  aa  much  aa  800  or  900  pounda  weight ; 
they  are  of  a  aubaatringent  taste  when  unripe,  but  when 
come  to  matnrity  they  aecrete  within  the  huska  and 
aroond  the  aeeda  a  aweetish-taated  pulp.  When  on  the 
tree  the  poda  have  an  unpleasant  odór,  but  when  dried 
opon  hurdlea  they  become  eataUe,  and  are  yalued  by 
poor  people,  and  during  fiunine  in  the  countries  where 
the  tree  ia  grown,  especially  in  Spain  and  £gypt,  and 
by  the  Araba.  They  are  giiren  aa  food  to  catde  in 
modem,  aa  we  read  Uięy  were  in  ancient  timea,  but  at 
the  best  ean  only  be  conaidered  Tery  poor  farę.  (See 
CelaoS)  i,  227 ;  Oedmann,  yi,  187  8q. ;  Sahnaa.  JSactrcH. 
PSm»  p.  45  aq. ;  Haasekittiat,  Tr<xveU^  p.  581 ;  Aryieuz, 
V9fagey  pw  206  tą, ;  Pemiy  Cydopndiay  a.  y.  Ccratonia.) 

HuBS*  John  (morę  properly  Hu$^  the  other  modę  of 
•pelling  hia  name  being  a  merę  uaage  which  haa  estab- 
lithed  itaelf  in  the  Engliah  language),  waa  the  illuatrtous 
Bohemian  reformer  before  the  Reformation,  and  the  pre- 
cmaor  of  the  Church  of  the  Bohemian  and  Morayian 
BMhren. 

Ł  SkeUA  o/ kia  Lift^—Ht  waa  bom  Joly  6, 1869,  or, 
acomding  to  aome  authorities,  1878,  at  Hoainec,  a  smali 
market-town  of  Bohemia,  on  the  Planitz.  His  parents 
were  common  people,  but  in  good  drcumstances  for  their 
flUtion  in  life.  Yeiy  Httle  is  known  of  his  early  yeais. 
He  entered  the  UniyerBity  of  Ftague,  and  took  his  first 
degree  in  1393.  The  deyelopment  of  his  mind  was  slow, 
but  his  beha^ior  was  distinguished  by  the  strictcst  prob- 
ity  and  the  most  genuine  godllnese.  In  his  intercouise 
with  others  he  was  modest  and  kind.  A  spirit  of  mel- 
aocholy  gaye  a  subdued  tonę  to  his  bearing.  He  was  a 
tali  man,  with  a  thin,  pale,  sad  face.  His  public  career 
began  in  1398,  when  he  was  appointed  a  profeseor  in  the 
tmiYersity.  In  1401  he  became  dean  of  its  theological 
iaculty,  and  in  1402  its  rector.  At  the  same  time  he 
was  paator  of  the  Bethlehem  Chapel  at  Prague,  erected 
by  John  de  Milheim  (1891),  in  order  to  give  the  people 
an  opportunity  of  hearing  the  Gospel  in  their  native 
toDgue,  and  in  this  position  he  exerted  great  influence. 
Multitndes  flocked  to  his  chapel,  among  tbem  Queen  So- 
phia, who  also  choee  him  for  her  confessor.  His  ser- 
mons  were  not  oratorical,  but  lucid,  feryent,  and  simple, 
disptaying  a  thorough  knowledge  of  the  Bibie,  and  leay- 
ing  an  indelibłe  impression  upon  the  minds  of  the  peo- 
ple. It  waa  from  the  pulpit  of  this  chuich  that  he  set 
f<nrth  the  trath  with  such  force  as  to  make  Bome  trcmble. 
The  Keformation,  which  Husa  may  be  sald  to  have  in- 
angorated,  may  be  dated  from  the  28th  of  May,  1408, 
when  the  doetrines  of  John  Wickliffe  were  publidy  con- 
demned  in  a  meeting  of  the  faculties  and  doctors  of  the 
oniyenity,  in  spite  of  the  efforts  of  Huss  and  his  fiiends 
to  pcereot  such  a  decision.  The  formation  of  two  par- 
ties  was  the  result ;  the  one  in  iayor  of  reform,  the  other 
oppoaed  to  it.  At  the  head  of  the  fint  stood  Huss,  who 
kborecl  with  zeal  and  boldnees,  uncoyering  the  putrid 
wres  of  the  Church,  and  particularly  the  grosa  immoral- 
itks  of  the  deigy.  For  a  time  Zybnek,  the  archbish- 
op  of  Prague,  recognised  the  honesty  of  Huss^s  inten- 
tion&  But  soon  disagreementa  occurred  between  them  ; 
and  when  thoosands.of  students  lefl  the  uniyetsity  be- 
ąine  of  a  new  distritwtion  of  yotes  on  academical  occa- 
■on  (1409),  which  Huas  had  been  mainly  instrumental 
in  bringing  about,  the  archbishop  openly  arrayed  him- 
■elf  on  the  side  of  his  enemie&  An  opportunity  soon  of- 
fiandforshowingZybnek^sillwiU.  TheclergyofPkague 
Uid  befon  him  formal  accusatipns  of  heresy  against 
HosB,  which  the  latter  met  with  coimter  accusations  I 


against  Zybnek.  Both  appealed  to  the  pope.  In  re- 
sponse,Alexanderyconferred  extraordinacy  powers  on 
the  archbishop  to  root  out  heresies  from  his  diocese. 
Aocordingly,  the  latter  prohibited  preaching  in  priyate 
chapels;  cansed  morę  than  200  yolumes  of  Wickliife*s 
writings  to  be  committed  to  the  flames,  amidst  the 
chanting  of  the  Te  Deum;  and  excommunicated  Huss 
(July  18, 1410).  In  this  emeigency  king  Wenzel  came 
to  the  reecue,  commanding  Zybnek  to  reimburse  the 
owners  for  the  loes  of  their  books,  and  annulling  the  ban 
against  Hoss.  Nor  was  the  prohibition  tonching  chap- 
els carried  out.  Meantime  Alexander  died,  and  was  suo- 
ceeded  by  John  XXIII,  an  atrocious  wretch,  formerly  a 
pirate,  and  now  the  embodiment  of  vice.  To  him,  Wen- 
cel, the  ąueen,  many  noUes,  and  Huss  himself  appeałed 
for  redress.  But  the  new  pope  adhered  to  the  policy  of 
his  predeoessor,  oonfirmed  the  acta  of  Zybnek,  and  cited 
HuBB  before  his  tribunal  in  person.  The  king,  however, 
sent  two  adyocates  to  Bologna,  where  the  papai  oourt 
had  ita  seat,  to  plead  Husb's  cause,  and  they  were  join- 
ed  by  three  morę  delegated  by  Huas  himself.  But  they 
effected  only  a  transfer  of  the  suit  to  other  hands ;  while 
an  attempt  on  the  part  of  Zybnek,  at  Prague,  to  lay  an 
interdict  upon  the  city,  cansed  an  open  rupture  between 
him  and  the  king,  who  ooerced  him  by  violent  means. 
At  last,  in  the  summer  of  1411,  the  archbishop  yielded, 
and  a  pacification,  induding  Huas,  waa  brought  about. 
But  in  September  of  the  same  year  Zybnek  died,  and 
was  suoceeded  by  Albicus,  a  weak  and  miserly  old  man, 
who  receiyed,  in  the  following  spring  (1412),  a  papai 
buli  commanding  a  crusade  against  La^Uslaus,  king  of 
Naples,  an  adherent  of  the  anti-pope,  and  offering  ple- 
nery indulgence  to  all  who  would  take  part  in  it,  or  oon- 
tribute  money  towards  its  prosecution.  The  publication 
of  this  buli  put  a  sudden  end  to  the  peaoe  which  had 
been  patched  up  in  the  Church  of  Bohemia.  Huas  re- 
garded  the  buU  as  an  infamous  document,  oontrary  to 
all  the  principles  of  the  Holy  Scriptures,  and  at  onoe 
publicly  took  this  stand.  A  number  of  his  friends,  on 
the  oontrary,  maintained  that  the  will  of  the  pope  must 
be  obeyed  under  all  drcumstances;  they  accordingly 
broke  mth  him,  and  went  oyer  to  the  anti-reform  party. 
Seyeral  of  them  afterwards  became  his  most  embittered 
foes;  and  one  of  them,  Stephen  de  Palec,  was  the  chief 
instigator  of  his  subeeqttenŁ  condemnation  at  Constance. 
In  nothing  tenrified  by  his  adyersańes,  however,  Huss 
continued  to  preach  against  the  buli,  and  hdd  a  public 
disputation  upon  it  in  the  aula  of  the  uniyersity ;  on 
which  occasion  his  friend  and  coadjutor,  Jerome  of 
Prague,  delivered  an  addresa  of  such  fervid  eloąuence 
that  the  students  formed  a  fantastical  prooession  the 
next  day,  bearing  as  many  copies  of  the  document  aa 
they  could  iind  to  the  outskirts  of  the  city,  where  they 
were  heaped  up  and  bumed.  Huss  took  no  part  in  these 
proceedings.  King  Wenzel  now  became  alarmed.  He 
had  a  reputation  to  support  in  Rooush  Christendom,  and 
issned  a  decree  making  any  further  revilement  of  the 
pope  or  the  papai  buli  punishable  with  death.  In  eon- 
seąuence,  three  young  men  were  ezecuted,  who,  on  the 
following  Sunday,  publicly  gave  the  lie  to  a  priest  while 
adyocat&Bg  the  plenery  indulgence  offered  by  the  pope. 
Huss  buried  them  in  the  Bethlehem  Chapel,  with  all 
the  rites  of  the  Church,  and  extolled  them  as  martyrsL 
When  John  XXIII  was  informed  of  these  eyeuts,  he  ex- 
communicated  the  Reformer  a  seoond  time,  ordered  hia 
arrest,  commanded  his  chapel  to  be  razed  to  the  ground, 
and  laid  an  interdict  upon  the  whole  city  of  I^gue. 
Wenzel  again  interfered,  sayed  Huss  from  arrest,  and 
preyented  the  chapel  from  being  destroyed;  but,  as  tlie 
ban  was  eyery  where  published,  and  the  interdict  rigid- 
ly  enforced,  he  adyiaed  Huss  to  leaye  the  city  for  a  time. 
Huss  obeyed,  and,  after  having  affixed  a  protest  to  the 
walls  of  his  chapel,  appealing  from  the  comipt  Romish 
tribunal  to  the  only  incormptible  and  infallible  Judge, 
Jesus  Christ,  he  retired  to  the  Castle  of  Kosd  Hradek 
(December,  141 2).  There,  and  subeequently  at  the  Castle 
of  Krakowec,  he  n^mąioflii  JHiril,AByist,  1414,  engaged 


HUSS 


420 


HUSS 


In  Ittenuy  labon,  which  resnlted  in  some  of  the  most  im- 
portant  boŁh  of  his  Latin  and  Bohemian  woika,  canying 
on  a  yoluminous  oorrespondence,  and  preaching  to  the 
])eople  of  Łhe  neighbońng  yiUages. 

Meanwhile  a  generał  council  of  the  Church  had  been 
called  to  meet  at  Gonstance  on  the  Ist  of  Noyember, 
1414,  under  the  auspices  of  SigiBmtind,  a  brother  of  Wen- 
zel,  and  designated  emperor.  Thia  monarch  inrited 
Husa  to  attend,  that  his  cauae  might  be  examined  and 
peace  given  to  the  Bohemian  Chuich.  He  pledged  him- 
aelf  to  grant  him  a  safe-eonduct,  and  to  aend  him  back 
unharmed,  even  in  the  event  of  his  not  submitting  to 
the  councU.  Modem  Romish  historians  try  to  disproye 
the  reality  of  such  a  promise.  But  it  is  inoontroyerti- 
ble.  The  instniment  which  Sigismund  actually  fumiah- 
ed  says :  *<  Ut  ei  tranaire,  stare,  morari,  redire  Ubere  per- 
mittatis."  Huas  joyfully  obeyed  the  aummona,  for  it 
was  the  great  wLsh  of  his  heart  to  defend  his  doctrines 
in  the  presence  of  the  assembled  representatiyes  of  Latin 
Christendom,  and  to  unitę  with  them  in  reforming  the 
Church,  for  which  pnrpose  the  Ckiuncil  had  been  special- 
ly  convened.  Leaying  Prague  on  the  llth  of  October, 
with  testimonials  of  orthodoxy  from  the  papai  inquiai- 
tor  and  the  archbishop,  and  aocompanied  by  an  escort 
of  nobles  whom  the  king  appointed  to  defend  him,  he 
trayeled  through  Bohemia  and  Germany,  held  disputa- 
tions  upon  his  doctrines  in  all  the  towns  whcre  he  pass- 
ed  a  night,  and  anriyed  at  Constance  on  the  8d  of  No- 
yember.  The  next  three  weeks  he  spent  in  strict  seclu- 
aion.  Sigismund  had  not  yet  come,  and  the  pope  had 
temporarily  suspended  the  sentence  of  excommunication, 
besides  giying  him  the  most  solemn  pledges  for  his  per- 
sonal  safety.  But  Stephen  de  Palec  and  others  among 
his  Bohemian  enemies  began  so  persistently  to  incite  the 
ecclesiastics  against  him,  that  he  was  arrested  on  the  28th 
of  Noyember,  and  on  the  6th  of  December  he  was  cast 
into  the  dungeon  of  the  Dominican  monastery.  When 
Sigismund  reached  the  city,  Huss^s  escort  yainly  at- 
tempted  to  securc  his  releaśe.  The  emperor  was  per- 
suaded  by  the  priests  that  it  would  be  wrong  to  keep 
faith  with  a  heretic.  Huss  not  only  remained  a  prisoner, 
but,  after  the  lapee  of  tlirec  months,  was  conyeyed  to  the 
Castle  of  Gottliebeii,  wherc  a  merę  hole,  so  Iow  that  he 
could  not  stand  upright  in  it,  was  asaigned  him  as  his 
celi,  and  where  his  feet  were  fastened  to  a  błock  with 
hcayy  irons,  and  at  night  his  right  arm  was  chained  to 
the  walL  In  this  miserable  plight  he  remained  from 
the  end  of  March  to  the  beginning  of  June,  in  spite  of  the 
unceasing  efibrts  of  his  friends,  and  the  solemn  protest 
of  the  whole  Bohemian  nation. 

Huss  had  three  hearings  before  the  council ;  the  first 
on  the  5th  of  June  (1415),  the  second  on  the  7th,  and 
the  third  on  the  8th.  For  the  most  part  they  were 
stormy  debatcs,  or  iiregular  philippics  against  him.  He 
was  not  pcrmittcd  to  explain  and  defend  his  doctrines. 
An  immediate  and  explicit  recantation  was  required  of 
him,  which  he  dcclined  giving,  unless  convicted  of  her- 
esy  by  the  testimony  of  Christ  and  his  apostlcs.  After 
the  last  hearing  sereral  weeks  elapsed,  in  which  every 
concciyable  effort  was  madę  to  inducc  him  to  recant. 
But  he  remained  firm,  and  calmly  prepared  for  death. 
On  Saturday,  July  6,  he  was  once  morę  cited  before  the 
council,  condemned  as  a  heretic,  degraded  from  the  priest- 
hood,  and  delivered  into  the  hands  of  the  secular  power 
for  execution.  The  propcr  officera  immediately  conyey- 
ed him  to  the  outskirts  of  the  city,  where,  at  about  ten 
o*clock  in  the  moming,  he  was  bumed  aliye  at  the  stake, 
while  the  council  continued  in  session.  He  suffered  with 
the  heroism  of  the  early  martyrs.  His  ashes  were  casŁ 
into  the  Rhine.  A  simple  monument,  erected  by  the 
present  generation  of  his  countrymcn,  marks  the  spot. 
Erasmus  pithily  said:  "  Joanncs  Hus  exu8tu8,  non  con- 
yictus."  The  tradition  of  a  peasant  woman  bringing  a 
fagot  to  the  pile,  and  moying  him  to  exclaim  *'0  sancta 
siroplicitas  !*'  is  ycry  doubtful ;  the  other  tradition  of  a 
prophecy  with  regard  to  Luther,  under  the  image  of  a 
Bwan,  uttered  by  Husa  on  his  way  to  execution,  lacks  all 


historie  baais.  Jerome  of  Prague  (q.  ▼.),  who  bad  stood 
faithfully  by  the  side  of  Huss,  and,  on  the  death  of  his 
friend,  himself  led  the  followers  of  the  lamented  Husa 
soon  suffered  the  same  fate.  The  distuitHmces  which 
then  foUowed  we  treat  under  Hussities. 

U.  ffuM's  I  Aurory  Xraior«.r— BesideB  tihe  many  lettera 
which  Huss  wrote,  and  which  dearly  set  forth  his  theo- 
logical  yiewS)  he  waa  the  author  of  flfteen  Bohemian, 
and  a  large  number  of  Latin  worka.    Of  the  fonner, 
among  which  his  PotUUa  and  Treatise  on  Stmony  are 
particularly  important,  seyeral  haye,  unfortnnately,  ner^ 
er  been  tnunslated,  and  others  remain  in  manuscript.   Of 
the  latter,  his  Tractatus  de  Ecdaia  deserrea  to  be  par- 
ticularly mentioned,  together  with  the  polemical  treat- 
ises  against  Palec  and  StaniaUras,  that  foim  Ua  eapple- 
menta  {HiHoria  et  MomtmaOa  JoamtU  Hus,  i,  24S-381, 
ed.  of  1715).    Other  of  his  Latin  worka  are  of  an  exe- 
getical  character.    He  also  oompoaed  numeroua  hymns 
and  didactic  hexameten.    Many  of  hia  hymns  were 
adopted  by  the  Bohemian  and  Mmayian  Brethrcn,  and 
some  of  them  are  still  in  use  in  the  Morayian  Chmch. 
Moreoyer,  he  carefully  reyised  the  old  Bohemian  yenton 
of  the  Bibie,  which  had  been  translated  aa  eaiiy  aa  the 
13th  centuiy ;  and,  quite  recently,  Palacky,  the  great  Bo- 
hemian antiąuaiy  and  hiatorian,  has  diaoovered  a  cate- 
chism  in  that  language,  which  he  supposes  to  be  fiom 
the  pen  of  Husa,  and  which,  no  doubt,  formed  the  hasia 
for  the  catechism  of  the  Brethren,  pnblidied  in  1522. 
As  a  writer  of  his  mother  language  the  merita  of  Hnss 
cannot  be  oyerestimated.     He  purified  it ;  fixed  etymo- 
logical  and  syntactical  rules,  and  inyented  a  new  system 
of  orthography,  distinguished  by  its  simplicity  and  pre- 
dsion.    It  was  brought  into  generał  use  by  the  Bohe- 
mian and  Morayian  Brethren  in  the  8ixteenth  centmy, 
sińce  which  time  it  has  remained  the  acknowledged 
standard.     Ulrich  yon  Hutten  was  the  first  to  puUish 
the  Latin  works  of  Huss.    The  cdition  by  O.  Bkunfels 
(Strasb.  1525,  4to,  with  woodcuta),  is  yery  scaice.    A 
morę  complete  edition  appeared  at  Nurembeig  in  155S, 
entiUed  Historia  et  Motmmenta  Joamtis  Huss  atgue  Hie- 
ront/mi  Pragensit,  in  two  fol.  yolinnes.    Still  morę  com- 
plete is  the  edition  of  1715,  which  came  out  at  the  same 
place  with  the  same  title.    A  smali  but  yery  important 
yolume  of  his  sermons,  translated  from  a  copy  of  tbe  Bo- 
hemian Postills,  brought  to  Hermhut  by  the  Morayian 
refugees,  appeared  at  Gdrlitz  in  1855.    Ita  tide  reada  as 
follows :  Johannes  Hus  Predigten  uber  die  Sonu-  und  Fest- 
tags-^Epongelim  des  Kirdienjahrs,    A  us  der  Bókmiscken 
in  die  Deutsche  Sprache  iibersetzt  ton  Dr^Jokenmes  AV 
wotntf,     They  are  pre-eminently  sermons  for  the  timea, 
and  abound  in  poleroics.     His  letters  haye  been  trans- 
lated into  English  (Edinb.  1859, 1  yoL)  and  other  mod- 
em languages.     A  collection  of  his  writings  in  Bohemi- 
an was  begun  by  Erben  (Prague,  1864,  etc). 

III.  Huss^s  Tkeological  Ftnr«,  andihePrmeipies  ofkis 
Re/ormation.— The  yiews  of  Huss  were  moulded  b>'  tbe 
writings  of  two  men  in  particular;  the  one  Matthias  of 
Janów,  a  Bohemian,  the  other  Wickliffe,  the  English 
Reformer.  He  was  attracted  by  the  latter,  inasmtich  as 
Wickliffe  always  traced  the  truth  ap  to  its  aource  in  the 
New  Testament,  and  desired  to  renew  Christłanity  in  its 
apostolic  sense.  Hence  he  madę  him  his  guide  in  thoee 
principles  which  he  had,  first  of  all,  leanied  from  Janów, 
but  which  Wickliffe  deyeloped  morę  fully  and  conaistent- 
ly.  Not  haying  passed  through  the  same  conflict  which 
brought  Luther  into  the  inner  sanetuary  of  diyine  icrace, 
through  Christ,  and  justification  by  faith, he  did  not  tum 
his  attention  so  much  to  doctrine  as  to  practioe,  and  aet 
forth  the  Sayiour  of  the  worid  rather  from  the  BUnd- 
point  of  that  perfect  law  whereof  he  ia  the  author,  than 
from  that  of  his  redeeming  woric.  As  a  neceasny  coih 
seąuence,  he  insisted  morę  upon  the  refonnation  of  tbe 
Church  in  regard  to  life  than  in  regard  to  ita  unsoond 
and  conrupt  dogmatical  yiewa.  lliis  was  the  ^eak 
point  of  his  Reformation,  bringing  it  to  a  prematurp  «iid, 
and  him  to  the  stake.  In  order  to  auoceaa,  an  abaolnte 
reform  of  the  dogmasof  the  Church  waa  esBentiaL   Hma 


HUSSET 


421 


HUSSITES 


did  not  aee  tliia,  becauae  he  had  formed  no  plan  of  oper- 
ations  antagonistical  to  Romę.  He  adyanced,  not  in 
obedience  to  a  systematic  process  inwardly  deyeloped, 
but  nnder  the  influence  of  outwaid  circumstaiicea.  Wliile 
Christ  was  the  centrę  of  his  own  faith,  and  he  hcld  to 
Christ's  Word  alone  aa  the  norm  of  the  faith  of  all,  he 
did  not,  on  that  account,  reject  Bomish  dogmas  until  he 
became  conscioua  of  a  contradiction  between  them  and 
the  Scriptures.  The  morę  any  theological  ąnestion  was 
madę  prominent  by  the  circumstances  of  the  times,  the 
morę  clearly  he  apprehended  the  truth  in  its  eyangel- 
ical  import.  Upon  Bome  pointa,  howeyer,  as,  for  in- 
Stańce,  the  aeyen  aacramentSi  and  transubstantiation  in 
the  Łord'8  Supper,  he  neyer  changed  the  views  which 
were  his  by  edacation.  No  outward  impulse  was  giyen 
him  to  invesdgate  these  pointa  in  a  reformatory  spirit. 
So  also  he  allowed,  with  certain  ąualiiicationa  and  great 
cauŁion,  prayers  for  the  dead,  althoogh  he  did  not  deem 
them  of  any  importance ;  alao  confesaion  to  a  priest  and 
absolutiiHi,  though  nonę,  he  said,  could  forgiye  ains  but 
God  only;  and  he  was,  at  flrst,  satisfied  with  the  holy 
commonion  in  one  kind.  When  thia  latter  usage,  how- 
ever,  grev  to  be  a  subject  of  dispute  between  the  na- 
tiooal  and  the  Romish  party  in  Bobemia,  he  emphatio- 
ally  endorsed  the  position  of  Jacobeliua  of  Hiea,  who 
was  the  great  adyocate  of  the  cup^  For  an  ejcposition 
ef  his  view8  on  the  Chtirch,  as  set  forth  in  the  work 
meoiioned  aboye,  aee  Neander^s  Kirchengetchiditt^  yi. 
390,  etc,  or  Toirey*s  TrantiaHon,  y,  3d9,  as  also  Gillett^s 
lAft  <md  Times  o/IIuss,  i,  244,  etc  In  generał,  it  may 
be  said  that  it  was  not  until  his  trial  before  the  oouncil 
that  he  recogniaed  the  necessity  of  breaking  with  the 
Church  of  Romę  in  order  to  eifect  a  reformation.  If  he 
had  been  able,  at  that  time,  to  escape  from  the  handa  of 
his  enemiea  and  return  to  Bohemia,  he  would  haye  been 
the  Luther  of  the  world,  and  Proteatantism  would  haye 
begon  its  enlightening  course  a  century  earlier.  See 
Reformation.  While  Husa  failed  to  bring  abont  a 
ge&ersl  reformation,  hia  principles,  deyeloped  and  puri- 
fied,  found  an  ecclesiastical  form  forty-two  years  later 
in  the  Church  of  the  Brethren,  and  haye,  through  that 
chaonel,  oome  down  to  the  present  day  as  a  power  in 
Christendom.     See  MoRAyiAna. 

IV.  IMenOwre, — ^For  a  study  of  the  life  of  Huas,  in 
addition  to  the  histories  of  the  Oouncil  of  Gonstance,  the 
most  important  works  are:  Ltbensbefdirtibung  deś  M, 
Johamet  Hus  ran  UusHnecz,  yon  Aug.  Zitte,  Weltpriest- 
er  (Prague,  1790) ;  an  anonymous  histoiy,  in  German, 
^Oftke  mtumer  in  which  the  Jlofy  Gotpelj  toffether  with 
John  Iltus,  was  condemned  in  the  CouncU  o/Constance  6y 
tke  Papę  and  hisjacfion,"  written  by  an  eye-witnesa,  and 
publisbed  in  1548 ;  Becker's  Life  ofHuss;  Koehler^a  łluss 
tudtone  ZeU  ;  hisł,  o/łhe  Hussites^  by  Cochleius ;  Hodg- 
aon,  Re/ormerSf  p^  123  sq. ;  Neander*s  Kin^engeschichłe, 
yi ;  GJikU^sLife  and  Times  o/ John  Huss  ;  and  eapecial- 
ly  Palacky,  F.,  Geschichie  ton  Bóhmen^  iii,  pt.  i,  c.  iii>y ; 
Falacky,  F.,  Documenta  Mag.  J,  Hus  titam^  docinnam, 
oausam  in  Conc.  Constani,  acttun^  etc*,  nunc  ex  ipsis/wU- 
hus  kausta  (Prag.  1869);  Bonnechose  (EmUe  de),  Les 
JUformaHons  avanŁ  la  Re/orme  (Paria,  1847,  2  yola. 
12iiio) ;  Good  Words,  Jan.  6, 1866,  p.  21  8q. ;  Rankę,  Hi$t. 
o/tke  Popes,  ii,  79  8q. ;  Zitte,  Lebenbeschrtib.  d.  Mag,  J, 
ilftts  (Piag.  1789-95, 2  yola.) ;  Wendt,  Gesch,  p.  Huss  tmd 
d,  JIttstiten  (Magdeb.  1845) ;  Helfert,  Huss  u.  Hierongmus 
(Prag.  1853);  Bćihringer,  D,  Kirdie  Christi  v. ihre  Zeugen 
(ultramontane)  (Zttr.  1868,  ypL  ii,  pt.  iy);  Krummel,  J. 
Hius  (Dannst.  1863);  Hofler,  Afag»  J,  Huss  (Prague, 
1864) ;  Coaiemp,  iZer.  April  and  July,  1869 ;  Słud.  u,  Krii, 
1863,  iv,  J!/ea.QiMirt.ifer.  1864,  P.  176.     (RdeS.) 

HoBoey,  Robebt,  B.D.,  an  eminent  minister  of  the 
Charch  of  England,  was  bom  at  Sunderland,  Kent,  Oct. 
7«  1801.  He  studied  at  Christ  Church,  Oxfoni,  and  grad- 
uted  in  1825  with  great  crediL  He  discharged  for  a 
vhile  the  office  of  proctor,  and  waa  afterwards  appoiut- 
ed  one  of  the  pubUc  examinen  in  the  classical  school. 
In  1837  he  took  the  degree  of  BJ>.  In  1842  he  was  ap- 
pointed  regius  profeaaor  of  ecclesiastical  history,  which 


poaition  he  held  nntil  his  death,  Deoember  2, 1858.  Hns- 
sey  possessed  an  immense  fund  of  Information,  to  which 
his  numerous  works  on  all  kinds  of  siibjects  bear  fuU  tea- 
timony.  The  pńncipal  of  these  aie :  SermonSf  mastlg 
aeademicalf  with  a  prefaoe  containing  a  refutation  of  the 
theoiy  founded  upon  the  Syriac  fragment  of  the  epistles 
of  Stignatius  (Oxf.  1849, 8yo)  .—The  Papai  Supremacg, 
its  Eise  and  Progress,  traced  in  threeLecłures  (Lond.  1851 , 
8yo).  This  little  work  demonstrates  that  **the  papai 
system  grew  up  and  increaaed  by  means  of  usnrpation 
and  freąuent  acts  of  oppresaion,  fayored  by  the  weakness 
of  other  paits  of  the  Church,  and  the  yicea  of  ages.''  He 
had  preyiously  prepared  for  the  Uniyersity  Press  an  edi- 
tion  of  Homer^s  Odgssey  (Oxf.  1827) :— also  the  Latin 
text  of  Bede*8  EcdesiasticcU  History  o/Englandy  with 
short  notes  (Oxf.  1846)  :-^d  the  Greek  text  of  Soo- 
rates^s  JSodesiasHcal  History  (1844).  In  1658  he  edited 
again  for  the  Uniyemity  Presa  another  edition  of  Soo- 
rates,  and  this  time  not  a  merę  text-book  for  his  lec*- 
tures,  but  an  elaborate  edition,  with  a  Latin  yersion, 
notes,  and  index,  forming  three  yolumes  8yo.  In  1854 
he  publbhed  a  sermon,  by  request,  on  Uniuersiiy  ProS' 
pects  and  Umeersity  DutieSf  and  in  1856  an  ordination 
sermon  on  The  A  tonement.  An  edition  of  Soaomeii  waa 
suspended  by  his  death. 

HtiMtites,  a  generał  name  for  the  followers  of  Johh 
Huss  (q.  y.).  The  Council  of  Constance,  in  its  dealinga 
with  Huss,  seems  to  haye  foifcotten  that  the  adherenta 
to  his  cause  were  not  the  handful  of  men  who  had  gath- 
ered  around  their  friend  and  teacher  in  hia  last  hours, 
but  were  scattered  throughont  Bohemia  and  Morayia. 
No  sooner  had  the  news  of  the  execution  of  Huss  reach- 
ed  them  than  disturbances  became  the  order  of  the  day. 
Eyery  where  in  the  two  kingdoma  named  the  life  of  the 
prieats  was  in  danger.  The  archbishop  of  Albicus  (q.  y.) 
himself  was  obliged  to  flee  for  his  life.  King  Wencea- 
lauB,  of  Bohemia,  waa  indignant  at  the  action  of  the 
coundl,  and  the  queen  heaitated  not  to  espouse  openly 
the  cause  of  the  HusaiteB.  September  8, 1415,  the  Diet 
of  Bohemia  addreased  a  manifeato  to  the  council,  fuli  of 
reproachea  and  threata;  and  September  5  it  yoted  that 
eyery  landowner  should  be  free  to  haye  the  doctrinea 
of  Huas  preached  on  his  estate.  Fearful  of  the  danger 
threatened,  the  priesthood,  and,  indeed,  all  stiict  adher^ 
ents  of  the  Romish  Church,  formed  (October  1)  a  league 
(Herrenbund),  yowing  obedience  to  the  council  and  fidel- 
ity  to  the  Romish  Church.  Encouraged  by  theee  asso^ 
ciationa,  deemed  strong  enough  not  only  to  oppose  suo- 
cessfuUy  any  further  attacka  on  Romanista,  but  eyen 
any  further  inroads  of  the  heretica  among  the  people, 
the  council  assumed  a  morę  authoritatiye  position.  Not 
satiatied  with  the  mischief  it  had  already  done,  it  now 
threatened  all  adherenta  of  Huss  with  ecclesiastical  pun- 
ishments.  Jerome  of  Prague  (q.  y.),  the  friend  and  dis- 
dple  of  Huss,  waa  the  6r8t  to  snffer.  He  waa  summon- 
ed  before  the  council,  summarily  tńed  and  condemned, 
and,  like  his  master,  bumed  at  the  stake  (May  80, 1416). 
The  452  signers  of  a  protest  against  the  ezecution  of 
Huss  were  the  next  summoned  before  the  bar  of  the 
oouncil  to  answer  for  their  heretical  oonduct.  Indeed, 
had  not  the  emperor  Sigismund  interfered,  the  king  and 
queen  of  the  Bohemians  would  haye  been  added  to  thia 
number.  But  the  execution  of  Jerome,  following  that 
of  Huss,  was  too  great  an  outrage  In  the  eypa  of  the  Bo- 
hemians not  to  destroy  the  last  yestige  of  respect  for  the 
body  by  whose  order  these  atrocious  deeds  were  commiU 
ted.  The  threata  of  the  council  became  to  (hem  a  merę 
brutum/ulmen.    They  treated  them  with  contempt. 

Meanwhile,  the  adherenta  of  Huta  had  diyided  into 
two  parties,  the  moderate  and  tthe  extreme.  The  mod- 
erate  party,  led  by  the  Uniyersity  of  Pngue,  took  the 
name  of  CcUixtines  (q.  v.),  whp  deriyed  their  name  from 
the  chalice  (calix)t  holding  that  oommunion  in  both 
kinda  was  essential  to  the  sacrament;  and  the  extreme 
party,  called  the  TaborUes,  from  the  mountain  Tabor 
(now  Austin),  which  was  originally  their  headquartera. 
Herę,  where  Huss  himself  had  foimerly  preached,  they 


HUSSITES 


422 


HUSSITES 


assembled  in  the  open  air,  Bometimes  to  the  number  of 
over  40,000,  and  partook  of  communion  under  both  kinds 
on  tables  erected  for  the  occasion.  The  Calixtuiee  pre- 
aerved  the  belief  in  piugator}',  praying  for  the  dead, 
images  of  the  saints,  holy  water,  etc.;  but  in  Harch, 
I  1417,  tliey  dedared  openly  for  the  right  of  all  to  receiye 
communion  in  both  kinda.  In  consequenoe  of  this  dec- 
laration,  all  the  privileges  of  the  unirersity  vren  sus- 
pended  by  the  oouncil,  and  the  forcible  abolition  of  the 
heresy  demanded  by  pope  Martin  V.  In  the  early  part 
of  1419,  king  WencealauB,  unwilling  to  loee  the  favor  of 
either  party,  and  fearing  the  wrath  of  Romę,  decreed 
the  restoration  of  Roman  Catholic  priesta  to  their  for- 
mer  officea.  But  no  sooner  had  the  Romamata  leamed 
of  the  enactmenta  in  their  favor  than  they  attacked  the 
Hussłtes,  and  began  all  manner  of  persecutions  against 
them.  Fefaruary  22, 1418,  Martin  V  issued  a  buli  against 
the  followers  of  Wickliffe  and  Hubs.  All  who  should  be 
found  "  to  think  or  teach  otherwiae  than  as  the  holy 
Roman  Catholic  Church  thinka  or  teachea;"  all  'who 
held  the  doctrines,  or  defended  the  characters  of  Husb  or 
Wickliffe,  were  to  be  delivered  oyer  to  the  secular  arm 
for  punishment  aa  heretics.  The  document  is  a  model 
from  which  bigoted  intoleranoe  and  peraecution  might 
copy  and  exhau8t8  the  odium  of  language  in  describing 
thecharacter  of  the  objecta  of  its  yengeanoe.  They  are 
'<  ochismatic,  seditioua,  impelled  by  Luciferian  pride  and 
wolfish  ragę,  duped  by  deyilish  tricks,  tied  together  by 
the  taił,  however  scattered  orer  the  world,  and  thua 
leagued  in  fayor  of  Wickliffe,  Huas,  and  Jerome.  These 
pestilent  persona  had  obstinately  sowu  their  pen-erse 
dogmas,  while  at  first  the  prelates  and  ecclesiastical  au- 
thority  had  shown  themselyes  to  be  only  dumb  doga, 
unwilling  to  barie,  or  to  restrain,  according  to  the  canons, 
these  deceilful  and  pestiferous  heresiarchs."  These  in- 
tolerant  meaaures  added  strength  to  the  party  whom  it 
was  their  object  to  extirpate.  The  Bohemians,  threat- 
ened  at  home  by  a  feeble  and  yacillating  king,  and  abroad 
by  the  official  emissariee  of  the  papai  pontiff,  felt  them- 
selres  obliged  to  gather  m  nurobers  for  self-defence,  and 
chose  Nicholas  of  Hussinecz  (q.  y.)  and  John  Zisca  (q. 
y.)  as  their  leadera.  They  also  prepared  an  anai^-er  to 
the  buli,  and  circulated  It  far  and  wide,  It  was  entitled 
**Afaitk/ul  and  Christian  Exhortaiion  ofihe  Bohemians 
to  Kinffs  and  Princes^  to  stir  them  up  to  the  zeal  o/ the 
Gospel,"  and  was  signed  by  four  of  their  leading  cap- 
taina.  ^  It  is  honorable  at  onoe  to  their  courage,  their 
prudence,  their  Christian  intelligence,  and  their  regard 
for  the  supremę  authority  of  the  Word  of  God."  Their 
iirst  aim  was  to  secure,  if  possible,  the  capital  of  the  king^ 
dom.  July  80,  Zisca  entered  the  old  city,  or  that  part 
of  the  city  in  which  resided  the  reformers,  and  pre- 
pared for  an  aasault  on  the  new  city,  joined  by  the  in- 
habitanta  of  the  old.  His  aim,  howeyer,  for  the  present, 
was  only  to  intimidate  the  papai  party.  After  Zisca 
had  gained  the  city,  some  of  his  men  sought  entrance  ki 
churches  to  obserye  their  religious  rites.  They  were 
denied  adroission  to  some  of  them,  and  the  conseąuence 
was  a  forcible  entrance,  and  the  summary  execution  of 
the  fanatic  priesta.  With  the  council  of  the  city  also 
they  experienoed  trouble.  While  a  number  of  the 
Hussitea  were  in  a  prooession  from  one  of  the  churches, 
their  minister,  bearing  the  chalice,  was  struck  by  a 
stone  which  had  been  thrown  from  one  of  the  windows 
of  the  State -house.  The  Hussites  became  enraged. 
Under  the  command  of  Zisca  himself,  the  state-house 

^was  BtormecL  Se\'en  of  the  oouncillors,  who  had  been 
unable  to  make  their  escape,  were  thrown  from  the 
upper  windows  and  impaled  on  the  pikes  of  the  soldiers 
below.  The  king,  when  the  news  reached  him,  be- 
came 80  excited  that  he  died  of  a  fit  of  apoplexy.    Gen- 

Wal  anarchy  now  ensued.  The  Hussites,  undi8i)ated 
masters  of  Prague,  restored  the  forms  of  civil  goyern- 
ment  by  the  appointment  of  four  magistrates  to  hołd  of- 
fice  until  the  next  generał  election,  and  then  withdrew, 
under  Zisca,  to  Pilsen.  The  ąueen  Sophia  sought  not 
only  to  secure  the  aid  of  the  emperor  Sigismund  against 


these  armed  heretics,  but  eyen  endeayored  to  influence 
the  citiaena  of  Prague  to  admit  Sigismund  as  the  suc- 
cessor  of  Wenoealaua.  The  people  appeaied  to  Zisca  for 
aid  against  the  probaUe  inyasion  of  the  dty  by  Sigis- 
mund. Noyember  4,  1419,  Zisca  re-entered  the  city. 
The  emperor,  inyolyed  in  a  war  with  the  Torics,  negkct- 
ed  at  first  to  attend  to  Bohemia.  Finally,  in  1420,  he 
besieged  Prague,  but  waa  driyen  firom  his  poaitioDa. 

Widely  differing  in  their  political  and  religious  send- 
ments,  the  Hussitea  became  daily  morę  diyided.  Some 
fayored  the  CaUxtines,  othere  the  Taborites,  and  between 
thesetwo  parties  stiong  jealousies  wereconstantly  spring- 
ing  up.  In  the  old  town  of  Pmgue  the  Oa]ixtine8  pie- 
yailed,  in  the  new  the  Taborites  held  sway,  and,  finding 
it  thua  difiicult  to  aatisfy  and  pleaae  all  partiea,  and  ercn 
fearing  a  union  of  the  Ćalixtinea  with  the  Royalists,  Zi»- 
ca  finally  withdrew  to  the  counti^'.  During  the  siege 
the  Praguers  had  preaented  to  the  emperor,  as  condi- 
tions  of  submission  and  adherence  to  him  as  subjectt, 
four  artides  (A  riicles  of  Prague),  These  were  stipula- 
tiona  for,  1,  the  fne  and  untrammeled  pieaching  of  the 
Word  of  God,  throughout  the  kingdom  of  Bayaiia,  by 
evangelical  preachers;  2,  the  free  use  of  oommunianin 
both  kinds  by  all  true  Christians  who  had  not  oommitted 
mortal  sin;  8,  the  keeping  of  all  priests  and  monks  out 
of  any  tempord  power,  and  obliging  them  to  liye  acooid- 
ing  to  the  examplo  of  Christ  and  the  apostles;  4,  the 
punishment  of  all  mortal  sins,  and  of  all  disorders  con- 
trary  to  the  law  of  God  committed  by  the  priesta.  The 
Taborites,  howeyer,  presented  no  leas  than  twelye  aiti- 
des,  namdy,  the  suppression  of  all  unnecessaiy  church- 
es, altars,  images,  etc ;  the  application  of  capital  poniah- 
ment  for  other  sins,  such  as  drinking  in  tayems,  luKury 
in  dothes  or  in  the  style  of  liying,  etc.  But  tho  eon- 
tinued  persecutions  of  the  Hussitea,  and  the  unąualified 
approyal  of  them  by  Sigismund,  eyer  united  the  two  par- 
ties for  common  defence.  March  1, 1420,  Martin  V  in- 
yited  a  regular  crusade  against  them,  incited  thereto  in  a 
great  measure,  no  doubt,  by  Sigismund,  who  fdt  himself 
tooweak  to  gain  the  kingdom  with  hiaanny.  The  Huss- 
ites were  now  to  be  dealt  with  as  "  rebds  against  the  Ko- 
man Church,  and  as  heretics ;"  and  the  emperor  excrted 
himself  for  the  publication  of  this  buli  throughout  his 
dominions.  £yen  morę  than  the  preyious  documents  of 
like  character,  it  shows  the  blind  zeal  and  persecating 
bigotry  of  Romę.  A  Christian,  not  a  heathen  pcople, 
were  now,  howeyer,  to  be  the  objects  of  its  yengeance 
— **  a  people  whose  great  heresy  was  that  they  madę 
the  Word  of  God  their  supremę  authority,  and  eon- 
tended  for  the  inśtitutions  of  the  Goepd  in  their  piim- 
itiye  simplidty  and  integrity."  To  animate  his  fol- 
lowers with  greater  feryor  in  the  execation  of  the  boli, 
the  pope,  "  by  the  mercy  of  Almighty  God,  and  the 
authority  of  the  holy  apostles  St.  Peter  and  St.Paul,ai 
well  as  by  the  power  of  binding  and  loosing  bestowed  by 
God  upon  himself,  granted  to  thoee  who  should  enter 
upon  the  crusade,  or  to  auch  eyen  as  should  die  opon 
the  TonAypUnary  pardon  of  their  sins,  •  .  .  andeternal 
salvcUion;"  and  to  such  as  could  not  go  in  person,  bat 
contributcd  to  it  in  any  wiB^fuli  remission  of  their  sou. 
Thus  '^all  Chrlstendom,  with  its  generała  and  armicą 
was  aummoned  to  crush  out  the  heresiea  of  men  whom 
the  council  chose  to  bum  rather  tlian  refnte."  **  But  the 
result  disappointed  all  human  expectationa.  The  forcea 
of  the  empire  dashed  and  shattered  themsdyes  against 
the  inyindbłe  resolution  and  desperate  courage  of  a  luuid 
of  men  sustained  by  religious  enthusiaam,  and  conducted 
by  able  generals." 

Measures  for  defence  were  at  oocc  taken  by  the  Huaa- 
itea.  The  dtizens  of  Prague,  who  had  frequently  been 
divided,  now  united  against  the  onmmon  foe.  Calixtine 
and  Taborite  were  ready  to  join  hands  in  a  league  of  mn- 
tual  defence.  Never  was  there  a  morę  signal  defeat  than 
the  imperial  foroes  now  sustained,  ałthough  their  anny 
was  140,000  to  150,000  strong.  Prague  waa  the  first 
city  freed  from  the  bdeaguering  enemy;  bat  the  great 
battle  which  dedded  the  fate  of  the  Imperialista  waa 


HUSSITES 


423 


HUSSITES 


fooght  at  Galgenber)^  or  Witków,  known  thereafter  as 
the  Ziflcaberg  (Hill  of  Ziaca).  Yet  the  opposition  of  the 
Taboritea  to  all  hieiaichical  pomp,  and  the  threatened 
rain  of  aome  of  the  most  splendid  structures  of  Prague, 
indined  the  Galixtine8,  as  soon  as  the  danger  had  pass- 
ed,  t  j  jccept  the  terais  of  peaoe  which  Sigismund  seem- 
ed  rery  ansioos  to  grant,  provided,  howeyer,  they  could 
induoe  the  emperor  at  the  same  time  to  remoye  the 
stigma  of  heiesy  which  rested  on  the  four  *' Articles  of 
Ftagne."  This  they  failed  to  aocomplish,  and  peace 
was  fiuther  delayed.  A  second  and  third  attempt  of 
Sigismund  at  pacification  met  with  no  better  suocess. 
An  eflbit  was  now  raade  to  oompromise  the  dilTerences 
hetireen  the  Galixtines  and  Taborites.  But  the  great^ 
C3t  ohstacle  to  this  was  fonnd  to  be  their  political  rather 
than  leligioas  riews.  The  ąuestion  who  should  wear 
the  crown  of  Bohemia  was  a  matter  of  no  little  impor- 
tance,  and  each  party  seemed  anxious  to  secure  it  for 
one  of  thdr  number.  A  conyention  of  the  states  was 
held  at  Gsaslaii,  July,  1421,  to  determine  the  matter.  A 
regency  was  appointed  of  twenty  members,  taken  from 
the  difTerent  orders  of  the  nation.  Zisca  appeared  in  it 
in  the  first  rank  of  the  nobles.  It  was  resoiyed,  with 
remarkable  onanimity,  that  the  four  Articles  of  F^agiie 
should  be  universally  receiyed.  Sigismund  was  de- 
clsred  incapable  of  reigning  oyer  Bohemia,  and  the 
crown  was  oflcred  to  the  king  of  Poland.  He  refused, 
howeyer,  to  accept  iL  Withold,  grand  duke  of  Lithua^ 
ma,  was  next  chosen ;  he  also  dedined,  but  reoommend- 
ed  Sigismund  Corybut,  his  brother,  to  the  Bohemian 
barona,  and  accompanied  him  to  Prague,  where  they 
both,  by  partaking  of  the  oommunion  of  the  cup,  sealed 
thór  adheienoe  to  the  faith  of  the  Calistines,  who  held 
now  the  supremacy  at  Prague,  and  who  had  reyived 
their  old  hostility  against  the  Taborites.  The  nation 
divided  into  two  '^fierce  parties,  embittered  by  preju- 
dice  and  mutual  aggressions,"  so  that  the  opposition 
to  Corybut  became  irrecondlable,  eyen  although  Zisca 
himself  eapoused  his  cause,  as  the  Taborites  were  un- 
willing  to  follow  their  leader  blindiy.  A  diet  held  at 
Prsgtte  in  Noyember,  1421,  to  detormine  the  ąuestion, 
brooght  it  no  nearer  to  its  solution,  while  it  effected  the 
estiangement  of  Zisca  from  the  CaUxtinea,  who  now  re- 
garded  him  and  his  foUowera  as  their  enemies.  An 
army  was  gatheied  against  them;  but,  as  often  before, 
the  Taborites  were  yictorious,  and  the  Calixtines  se- 
yerely  beaten«  Another  attempt  proyed  eyen  less  fa- 
▼orable  to  them,  and,  thus  driyen  to  desperation,  Zisca 
now  attempted  to  crush  the  Calixtines,  who  were  yir- 
toally  leagued  with  the  ImpenalLsta  After  yarious  vic- 
tories  oyer  his  enemies,  Zisca  appeared  before  Prague 
September  11, 1423,  and  inyested  the  city,  suffering  no 
one  to  issae  forth  from  its  gates.  When  eyer>*thing  was 
ready  to  storm  the  city,  a  deputation  of  the  Calixtines 
appeared  before  him  and  offered  terms  of  submission, 
which  he  readily  accepted.  Zisca  entered  Prague  with 
great  honors,  and  was  intrusted  with  the  exerci8e  of 
pizamount  authority.  The  emperor's  hopes  of  being 
king  of  Bohemia  had  of  late  been  based  upon  the  diris- 
ioms  of  the  nation,  and,  baffled  by  this  new  agreement 
between  the  Hussites,  he  now  sought  to  win  them  oyer 
by  liberał  concessions.  He  offered  to  Zisca  the  goyem- 
ment  of  the  kingdom,  and  asked  for  himself  only  the 
wearing  of  the  crown. 

"But,  at  this  culminating  point  of  Zisca'8  fortunes, 
death  overtook  him  (October  11, 1424).  He  liyed  to 
foU  the  purposes  of  Sigismund,  and  died  at  the  moment 
when  his  death  was,  in  some  respects,  another  defeat  to 
his  hopes."  Zisca's  death  left  the  Taborites  without 
any  rńl  leader.  Their  success  they  chiefly  owed  to 
him,  and  some  of  them,  to  indicate  their  deep  sense  of 
the  loss  they  had  suffered,  took  the  name  of  Orphamtes 
(q.  ▼.).  Others  were  absorbed  by  the  Horebites  (q.  y.), 
while  sttll  other*  retained  their  old  name,  and  chose  St. 
Prooopios  ''the  Gieat"  (q.  y.)  as  their  leader.  The  Or- 
phanites,  howeyer,  had  relapsed  to  a  belief  in  transub^ 
■tantiation:  they  obsenred  the  iastSjhonored  the  saints, 


and  their  priests  performed  worship  in  robes,  all  which 
the  Btrict  Taborites  oontinned  to  reject.  Among  the 
Orphanito  leaders,  Procopius  ^  the  LŃser**  was  the  most 
eminent.  Yainly  did  the  pope,  assisted  by  the  emperor, 
preach  another  crusade  against  the  Hussites,  who  sal- 
lied  out  from  Bohemia  in  troope  to  make  invasions  into 
neighboring  oountries,  and,  considering  alwa>'s  Bohemia 
as  their  home,  and  other  places  as  the  land  of  the  Phil- 
istines,  treated  the  latter  accordingly.  Bands  of  robbers 
of  all  nations  soon  joined  them.  Frederick  ^  the  Y aliant" 
madę  war  against  them,  and  entered  Bohemia  in  1425, 
and  again  in  1426,  with  20,000  men,  but  was  repulsed, 
on  the  second  occasion  suffering  a  terrible  defeat  at  the 
battle  of  Ausch,  June  15.  A  panic  now  seizcd  all  Ger- 
many, which  was  increased  by  the  storming  of  Miess 
and  Tachow  by  the  Hussites  in  1427.  Another  crusade, 
instigated  against  them  by  the  emperor  Sigismund  m. 
the  same  year,  met  with  no  better  success  than  before. 
At  the  opening  of  1428,  a  Conyention  was  called  at 
Beraun  to  bring  about,  if  possible,  a  generał  pacification 
of  the  nation.  But  so  yarying  were  the  yiews  of  the 
different  sects,  especially  the  doctrines  of  free-will,  justi- 
fication,  and  predestination,  that  the  Convention  was 
broken  up  without  accomplishing  anything.  In  1429, 
the  Orphanites,  assisted  by  a  portion  of  the  Taborites, 
madę  a  great  inyasion  into  Saxony  and  Silesia.  They 
took  Dresden,  marched  along  the  Elbę  to  Magdeburg, 
then  tumed  into  the  proyince  of  Brandenburg,  and  flnaU 
ly  returned  to  Bohemia  by  way  of  Silesia,  distributing 
Uiemselyes  into  different  bands  in  yarious  places,  and 
adopting  names  according  to  their  fancy.  Some  were 
known  as  CoUecton,  some  as  *"  Smali  Caps"  (PełU  Cha' 
peciusy  8a,ys  UEnfant),  some  as  Little  Cousins,  others  as 
Wolf-^andM.  In  the  spring  of  1430  they  were  ready 
to  undertake  another  inyasion.  With  20,000  cayalr^", 
30,000  mfantry,  and  8000  chariots,  and  with  I^rocopius 
and  other  able  geneials  at  their  head,  they  re|)eated  the 
inyasion  of  the  countrics  that  had  been  risited  the  pre- 
yious  year.  Diyiding  into  aeveral  bands,  they  desolated 
or  reduced  to  ashes  morę  than  a  hundred  towns  and  yil- 
lages,  beat  a  Saxon  army  at  Grimma,  then  went  to 
Franconia,  and  returned  home  through  Lowcr  Bayaria. 
Meanwhile  the  pope  had  been  busy  with  his  bigots  cry- 
ing  a  new  crusade  against  the  Hussites.  Norember  1, 
1429,  a  diet  had  been  summoned  to  meet  atYienna,  but 
the  delay  of  Sigismund  in  reaching  the  place  had  caused 
its  transfer  to  Presburg.  Herę  the  deliberations  were 
protracted  for  eight  months,  and  at  length  nearly  all 
the  prelates  and  princes  of  the  empiro  were  brought  to- 
gether,  dther  in  person  or  by  ambassadors.  "  It  was 
finally  resoiyed  to  make  still  another  inyasion  of  Bohe- 
mia. The  papai  legato  came  proyided  for  the  cmergen- 
cy.  He  had  brought  with  him  a  buli  of  Martin  V,  or- 
daining  a  crusade,  which  was  now  opportunely  to  be 
published.  Indulgences  were  profusely  promiaed  to 
those  who  should  engage  in  the  enterprise,  or  oontrib- 
ute  to  its  promotion.  Those  who  should  fast  and  pray 
for  its  Buccees  should  haye  a  reroission  of  penance  for 
sixty  days.  From  other  yows  interfering  with  enliBt- 
ments  in  the  holy  war,  a  dispensation  should  be  freely 
bestowed."  Great  efforts  were  madę  to  insuro  the  suc- 
cessful  issue  of  this,  the  sixth  inyasion  of  Bohemia  by 
the  Imperialista  (or  the  third  papai  crusade  urged  by 
Martin  Y).  June  24, 148 1,  wss  the  time  appointed  for  it. 
But,  before  it  was  undertaken,  the  emperor,  to  tost  the 
spirit  of  the  Bohemians,  madę  again  propositions  for  the 
crown.  The  Orphanites  were  the  only  Hussites  that 
opposed  him.  The  Calixtine8  and  Taborites  returned 
a  deputation  of  four  to  confer  with  Sigismund.  But, 
eyen  before  this  deputation  had  returned  to  Prague,  the 
Hussites  became  distrustful,  and  the  most  cautious  and 
moderate  among  them  felt  satisfied  that  the  emperor 
only  intonded  to  mislead  them  into  a  state  of  security, 
and  then  surpriae  and  conąuer  them.  "•  The  old  leagnes 
and  confederations  were  reviyed.  Old  feuds  were  for^ 
gotten.  The  barons  of  Bohemia  and  Morayia,  the  Ca- 
lixtlnes  of  Prague,  and  the  indomitable  Taborites  and 


HUSSITES 


424 


HUTCHESON 


Oiphattites,  again  united  to  repel  the  iDvader.  In  a  feir 
weeks  50,000  infantry,  7000  cavali^,  and  8600  chariots 
were  gathered."  The  crusading  force  alao  had  been  col- 
lecting,  and  now  numbered  80,000  (some  aay  180,000) 
men,  under  the  command  of  the  elector  of  Brandenburg. 
This  army,  immense  as  it  was,  and  powerful  and  in- 
yincible  as  it  seemed,  was,  Uke  its  predecessora,  com- 
pletely  routed  at  Tausch,  August  14, 1431,  and  the  hopes 
of  the  Imperialists  of  subjecting  the  Bohemians  by  force 
of  arms  dfectually  crushed.  Sigiamund  now  most  ear- 
nestly  endearorcd  to  make  peaoe,  and  intrusted  the  ne- 
gotiations  to  the  Council  of  Basie  (which  met  Decem- 
ber,  1431).  The  Bohemians  were  inyitcd,  promised  a 
«afe-conduct,  and  freedom  to  remain  at  Basie,  to  act,  de- 
dde,  treat,  and  enter  into  airangements  with  the  coun- 
cil; alao  *'perfect  liberty  to  celebrate  in  their  houaes 
their  peculiar  forms  of  worship;  that  in  public  and  in 
priyate  they  should  be  allowed  from  Scripture  and  the 
holy  doctors  to  advance  proof  of  theit /our  ArłicUtj 
against  which  no  preaching  of  the  CathoUcs  should  be 
allowed  while  they  remamed  within  the  city.*'  But 
eyen  with  these  proffered  favorable  conditions  the  Bo- 
hemians at  first  kept  aloof,  mistnisting  the  sincerity  of 
Łhe  offers  madę  them ;  yet  in  1432  they  consented  to 
send  enyoys  to  the  counciL  It  was  in  the  beginning 
of  the  next  year  (January  4, 1433)  that  the  Bohcmian 
deputation,  nurobering  300,  was  chosen  from  the  most 
noble  in  the  land,  and  with  Procopius  "  the  Great,"  the 
colleague  of  Zisca,  the  hero  of  many  battles,  the  leader 
of  many  inyasions,  at  its  head.  On  the  16th  of  January 
the  Bohemian  deputation  appeared  before  the  council, 
and  presented  the  four  Articlea  of  Prague  as  the  basis 
of  negotiations.  After  diacussing  them  for  fiily  days, 
the  parties  had  been  brought  no  nearer  together,  and 
the  Bohemians,  growing  impatient,  prepared  for  their 
return  to  Prague.  Towards  the  doee  of  the  same  year, 
however,  the  council  sent  envo3r8  to  Prague,  and  iinally 
the  Treaty  of  Prague  was  concluded,Novcmber  80, 1433, 
known  in  history  as  the  Conyi>actata,  stipulating  first 
for  the  restoration  of  ])eace  and  the  abolition  of  eodesi- 
astical  censorshlp,  then  for  the  admission  of  the  four 
Artidcs  of  Prague,  modified  as  follows:  1,  the  eucharist 
to  be  administcred  eąually  under  one  or  both  kinds ;  2, 
that  preaching  should  be  free,  but  only  peimitted  to  reg- 
ularly  ordained  ministers;  3,  that  priests  should  have 
no  possessions,  but  should  be  permitted  to  administer 
upon  them ;  4,  that  sin  should  be  punished,  but  only  by 
the  rcgularly  constituted  authorities.  The  Taborites  dis- 
approved  the  proceedings;  a  diet,held  at  Prague  in  1434, 
in  which  the  Calixtiue8  acknowledged  the  authority  of 
the  pope,  brought  the  difficulty  to  a  crisis,  and  the  Ca- 
Iixtines,  joined  by  the  Roman  Catholics,  defeated  the 
Taborites  near  Bohmischbrod,  May  80, 1434.  The  two 
Procopiuses  were  killed.  The  Taborites  were  now  driven 
to  their  strongholds,  which  they  were  obllged  to  surren- 
der  one  by  one.  In  another  diet,  held  at  Prague  in 
1435,  all  Bohemians  acknowledged  Sigismmid  for  their 
king,  he  granting  them,  on  his  part,  yery  adrantageous 
conditions  for  their  country  and  sect  The  Romish 
Church,  in  aocepting  the  four  Articles,  haying  conceded 
to  them  the  use  of  the  cup  in  the  eucharist,  and  many 
other  priyileges,  they  were  finally  absolyed  from  ecclesi- 
astical  interdict,  and  the  emperor  came  to  Prague  Au- 
gust 23, 1436.  The  Taborites  submitted  gradually,  and 
the  thus  united  Hussites  took  the  name  of  Utraquisłs 
(q.v.). 

Sigismund,  howcyer,  did  not  keep  the  promises  he 
had  roade  on  ascending  the  throne  of  Bohemia,  but 
rather  used  eyer}'  means  to  restore  the  Koman  Catholic 
faith  in  that  country.  The  chief  of  the  Hussites,  John 
Rokyzan,  whom  the  emperor  himsdf  had  at  first  con- 
finned  in  the  office  of  archbishop,  came  to  be  in  danger 
of  his  life.  This  created  new  disturbances,  which  con- 
tinued  mitil  the  death  of  Sigismund  in  1487.  The  Ro- 
man Catholic  party  now  elected  Albrecht  of  Austria 
king,  but  the  Hussites  chose  Caaimir  of  Poland.  The 
former  finally  preyailed;  but  at  his  death,  in  October, 


1489,  during  the  minority  of  his  son  ŁadidaiiSy  two  gor- 
emors  were  appointed  (in  1441),  the  one  a  Roman  Cath- 
oUc,  the  other  a  Hueńte,  to  goyem  the  kingdom.  Ib 
1444,  George  de  Podiebrad  was  the  Huasite  goremor 
choeen,  and  in  1450  he  assumed  the  sole  controL  This 
change  created  no  disorder,  as  the  Roman  Catholics, 
who  were  busily  engaged  undermining  the  Huaaite  doe- 
trine  and  gaining  oyer  its  adherenta,  were  anxious  to 
ayoid  an  open  confiict  with  them.  At  the  death  of 
Ladislaus  in  1457,  George  himsdf  was  elected  king.  In 
order  to  oonciliate  the  pope,  he  cauaed  himsdf  to  be 
crowned  by  Roman  Catholic  bishops,  and  swore  obcdi- 
ence  to  the  Church  and  to  the  pope.  During  his  reign 
the  Calixtines  enjoyed  fuli  rdigious  liberty;  and  when 
Pope  Pius  II  declared  the  treaty  abolished  in  14G2, 
George  sent  the  papai  legates  to  prison  withont  further 
forms.  For  this  he  was  put  under  the  ban,  and  finally 
deposed  by  the  pope  in  1463. 

^  Meanwhiie  the  warlike  Taborites  had  disappeared 
from  the  scenę.  They  no  longer  formed  a  national 
party.  But  the  feeUe  remnants  of  that  multitude  which 
had  once  followed  the  standards  of  Zisca  and  Ptooopius 
still  dung  to  their  chcrished  faith,  and,  with  tho  Wofd 
of  God  as  their  only  supremę  authority,  the  United 
Brethrm  (q.y.)  appear  as  their  lineal  representatiyea. 
How,  from  such  an  origin,  should  haye  sprung  a  people 
whose  peaceful  yirtues  and  misaionary  zeal  haye  been 
acknowledged  by  the  world,  is  a  problem  only  to  be 
solyed  by  admitting  that,  in  the  faith  of  the  dd  Tabor- 
ites, howeyer  they  may  haye  been  guilty  of  fanatical 
CKcesses,  there  was  to  be  found  that  fundamental  prin- 
ciple  of  reverence  for  the  authority  of  Scripture  alone 
which  they  bequeathed  as  a  cherished  legacy  to  those 
who  oould  apply  and  act  upon  it  in  morę  fayorable  cxx^ 
cumstanoes  and  in  morę  peaceful  timea."  The  snoeess- 
or  of  Greorge,  Ladislaus  of  Poland,  who  camć  to  the 
goyemment  in  1471,  held  fast  to  the  conditions  of  Che 
treaty,  though  himself  a  Roman  Catholic.  In  1485  he 
conduded  the  peace  of  Kuttenberg,  according  to  which 
the  Utraąuists  and  Subunists  (Koman  Catholics  who 
communed  but  in  one  kind)  were  promised  eąual  tolo- 
ation;  and  in  1497  he  gaye  the  Utraąuists  the  ligfat  to 
appoint  an  administrator  of  the  archbbhopric  of  Fkagne 
as  their  ecdesiastical  chief.  When  the  Reformation 
began  in  Germany,  it  was  gladly  hailed  by  both  the 
Cdixtines  and  the  Bohemian  Brethren,  and  in  1524 
they  dcdded  to  continue,  under  the  guidance  of  Luther, 
the  refonn  begun  by  Huss.  A  large  part  of  them  now 
diyided  themsdyes  iuto  Lutherana  and  Calyinists,  and 
in  1575  both  these  united  with  the  Bohemian  Brethien 
in  a  joint  oonfession,  and  became  a  strictly  Proteatant 
denomination.  They  were  permitted  to  enjoy  idigw 
ious  liberty  until  1612,  when  they  were  subjected  to 
many  restrictions  by  the  emperor  Matthiaa,  and  to  stiU 
morę  by  the  emperor  Rudolph  in  1617.  This  was  the 
fiiBt  cause  of  the  Thirty-years*  War,  and  it  was  only 
under  Joseph  II  that  the  Calijctines  recoyered  their  le- 
ligious  liberty.  See  CochliŁus,  Hitt.  Huukaram  (May- 
ence,  1549,  foL) ;  Theobald,  Huaaitenkneg  (Wittenberg, 
1609 ;  Nuiemb.  1628 ;  BresL  1750, 8  yols.) ;  GeachuMe  d. 
IfussUen  (Lpz.  1784) ;  Schubert,  Gefchkhfe  d.  Huttiłfn- 
kriegs  (Keustadt,  1825) ;  Pierer,  Unicersal  Lexihon^  yiii, 
636 ;  Koppen,  Der  ak.  Huma,  BruderJórche  (Lpz.  1845) ; 
The  Heformałion  and  Anti-Rtformation  tn  Bokemia 
(London,  1849, 2  yols.  8vo) ;  Palacky,  Geśchichie  r.Bóh- 
men  (1845, 8  yols.)}  yoL  iii ;  Beziehunffen  tuYerkalłniu  d. 
Waldemerz,d,ehemaUgenSddeninB6hmai(^tŁQ.lWdy, 
Vorldv/er  d,  Iftudfenthunu  tn  BdkmeH  (new  edit.  1869) ; 
Jean  Gochlee  and  Theobddus,  Bitł.  de  la  Gtterre  deś 
HuMgUea ;  Keander,  Ckurdi  HUt.  y,  172 ;  Ginddy,  G«Kk. 
d,  Bókmischen  Bruder  (Ptague,  1857,  2  yols.  8yo);  and 
especially  Gillett,  Li/e  and  Times  o/ John  Huu  (Boston, 
1863,  2  yols.  8yo),  from  which  eztracts  haye  freąuently 
been  madę  in  this  artide,  Roman  Catholic — ^Aachbacfa, 
Kirchenrljesńkony  iii,  348  8q. ;  Getdi,  Kaiter  Sigmumda 
(Hamb.  1838-45, 4  yols.  8yo).    See  Huss.    (J.  H.  W.) 

Hutcheson,  FranoiB,  calied  by  Mackintoah  the 


HUTCHESON 


425 


HUTCHINSON 


<<firt]ker  of  8pecii]adv«  philosophy  in  Sootland,**  w«8  the 
■on  of  a  Presbyterian  minister  in  IrelAnd,  and  was  bom 
Aug.  8j  1694.  He  entered  the  Unirenity  of  Glasgow 
in  1710,  and  afterwaids  became  mimster  of  a  Presbyte- 
rian  church  in  the  north  of  Iieland;  but,  preferring  the 
sŁudy  of  phUosophy  to  theology,  he  was  induced  to  open 
a  private  academy  at  Dublin.  The  publication  of  some 
of  his  works  soon  piocured  him  the  fiiendship  of  many 
distingoished  penons,  and  in  1729  he  was  called  as  pro- 
feasoT  of  morid  philoaophy  to  the  Univenity  of  Glas- 
gow. He  died  in  1747.  His  principal  works  Kn,Phu- 
loiopkia  moralis  msłUuiio  compendiaria,  etkieea  etjurig^ 
pntdaiim  nahuralis  elementa  conlutau  (Glasgow,  1742, 
12mo) : — A  shori  InŁroductum  to  Morał  PhUosophy,  cor^- 
łftming  ike  EUmads  ofEtkic$  and  the  Law  of  Naturę, 
tianabted  (Glasgow,  1747,  sm.  8vo)  * — An  Estay  on  the 
Naturę  and  Conduct  o/Pastiont  and  Ajfeeiiona  (8d  ed. 
Glaag.  1769,  sm.  8vo) : — Synopńa  nutapkyncce,  Ontotogi- 
am  et  Pneumatoiogiam  oompledene  (editio  8exta,  Glasg. 
1774,  smali  8vo)  :—An  Inguiry  into  the  Origmal  o/our 
Ideoi  o/Beauty  and  Yirtae,  in  two  treatises  (5th  edit 
oorrected,  Lon^m,  1753, 8vo) : — Lettera  hetween  the  We 
Mr,  GUberi  Bumet  and  Mr,  Huicheaon  concermnff  the 
true  Fomdaikm  of  Virłue  or  Morał  GoodneUy  etc.  (Lon* 
don,  1785, 8vo).  After  his  death,  his  Spetem  o/ Morał 
PkUom^ihg  was  published  by  his  son,  Francis  Hutchc- 
son,  M.D.,  with  a  sketch  of  his  life  and  writings  by  Dr. 
WiOiam  Leechman  (Glaag.  1765,  2  yols.  4to).  « In  his 
metapktfdcaŁ  system  Hutcheson  rejectod  the  theory  of 
innate  ideas  and  prindples,  but  insisted  upon  the  admis- 
lion  of  certain  uniyerBal  propositions,  or,  as  he  terma 
thera,  metaphjrsical  axioms,  which  are  aelf*evident  and 
immntab&e.  These  axiom8  are  primary  and  original, 
and  do  not  deriye  their  anthority  from  any  simpler  and 
anteoedent  principle.  Con8eqaentIy,  it  ia  idle  to  seek  a 
criterion  of  truth,  for  this  is  nonę  other  than  reason  it- 
self,  or,  in  the  words  of  Hutcheaon,  'menti  congenita 
inteBigendi  vis.'  Of  his  ontological  axiom8  two  are  im- 
portant:  £verything  esists  leally;  and  no  ąoality,  af- 
fection,  or  action  is  real,  exoept  in  ao  far  as  it  e^ista  in 
aome  objęci  or  thing.  From  the  latter  proposition,  it 
IbDows  that  aU  abstract  affirmatwe  propoahions  are  hy- 
pochetical,  that  is,  they  invariably  auppoee  the  exi8t- 
enoe  of  aome  object  without  which  they  cannot  be  tnie. 
Trath  ia  di^ided  into  logical,  morał,  and  metaphyńcal. 
Łogioal  tnith  ia  the  agreement  of  a  proposition  with  the 
o1]9ecŁ  it  relates  to;  morał  trath  is  the  harmony  of  the 
outaraid  act  with  the  inward  sentiroents;  lastly,  meta- 
phymeal  tnith  is  that  naturę  of  a  thing  wherein  it  is 
known  to  God  as  that  which  actually  itia,  or  it  ia  ita  abso- 
latereality.  Perfect  truth  is  in  the  infinite  alone.  The 
truth  of  finite  things  is  imperfect,  inasmuch  as  they  are 
Itmited.  It  ia,  howeyer,  from  the  finite  that  the  mind 
riaes  to  the  idea  of  absolute  trath,  and  so  forms  to  itaelf 
a  betief  that  an  absolute  and  perfect  naturę  exi3ts,  which, 
in  regaid  to  duration  and  space,  is  infinite  and  eteraaL 
The  aoul,  as  the  thinking  eaaence,  is  spirituid  and  incor- 
poreaL  Of  its  naturę  we  have,  it  is  trae,  but  little 
knowlfidge;  nererthelcfla,  its  apedfic  differenoe  from 
body  ia  at  once  attested  by  the  oonacionsneas.  It  ia 
aimple  and  active ;  body  is  composite  and  passiye.  From 
the  apiritnal  naturę  of  the  aoul,  however,  Hutcheaon 
does  not  derivo  its  immortality,  but  makes  thia  to  rest 
upon  the  goodneas  and  wtadomof  God.*'  In  fnoro/ phi- 
loaophy he  was  the  firat  to  uae  the  term  <<  morał  aenee" 
to  denote  « the  faculty  which  peroeives  the  morality  of 
adioM,"  and  heheld  it  to  be  an  eaaential  part  of  human 
naturę.  *'He  allows  the  appellation  of  good  to  thoae 
actions  akme  which  are  disinterested  and  flow  fVom  the 
principle  of  benevolence.  The  last  has  no  referenoe  to 
€xp«iieiiey  nor  personel  adyantages,  nor  even  to  the 
more  refined  enjoyments  of  morał  sympathy,  the  obli- 
gatioitt  c€  reaaon  and  trath,  or  of  the  divine  will.  It  is 
*  diatinct  and  peculiar  principle,  a  morał  aentiment  or 
nuthict  of  great  dignity  and  anthority,  and  its  end  is  to 
Rgolate  the  pasaions,  and  to  decide,  in  fayor  of  Yirtue, 
the  oooflict  between  the  interested  and  disinterested 


afBdCtions.  On  this  foondation  Hutcheaon  erected  all 
the  auperstracture  of  the  morał  dudea."  See  KngUth 
Cgchpadia  ;  Mackintoah,  Hittory  of  Ethical  PhiloeO' 
phjf,  p.  126 ;  Tennemann,  Manuał  History  of  PhUoeo- 
phff  §  350;  Stud,  tu  Krił.  1866,  p.  406;  Moreli,  History 
ofMod,  PML  p.  179  aq. ;  M^Cosb,  Intuitione  ofthe  Mind, 
p.  92,  248, 411  Bq. ;  Allibone,  i>tcf.  ofAuthors,  i,  926. 

Hutoheson,  George,  an  English  Biblical  achol- 
ar,  of  whoae  early  Ufe  but  littlo  ia  known,  flourished 
about  the  middle  of  the  17th  century.  He  was  a  min- 
ister first  at  Colomonell,  and  later  at  Edinburgh,  but 
was  ejected  for  nonconformity  about  1660.  In  1669  he 
preached  at  Indne,  though  he  continued  steadfastly  to 
oppoee  the  use  of  the  Eplaoopal  lituigy.  He  died  iu 
1678.  He  wiote,  Exposition  ofthe  iicehe  Minor  Proph- 
eU  (Lond.  1655,  am.  8vo)  i—fipońt,  ofJohn  (1657,  foL) : 
—EscpołUum  ofJob  (1669,  fol.)  i-^Forty-fitfe  Semumt  on 
the  IdOth  Peabn  (Edinb.  1691, 8vo).  — Kitto,  BibL  Cy 
clop,  ii,  845 ;  Allibone,  Diet,  of  A  uthore,  i,  927.  (  J.  H. 
W.) 

Hutchinson,  Annę,  an  American  religious  en- 
thusiast,  and  founder  of  a  party  of  Antinomtans  (q.  v.) 
in  the  New  England  colony,  emigrated  from  Lincoln* 
shire,  England,  to  Boston  in  1636.  She  claimed  to  be  a 
medium  of  divine  revelation, and, being  "a  woman  of 
admiraUe  underatanding,  and  proiitable  and  aober  car- 
riage,  she  won  a  powerful  party  in  the  country,  and  her 
enemies  could  never  apeak  of  her  without  acknowledg- 
ing  her  eloquence  and  ability."  She  held  that  the  Holy 
Spirit  dwells  in  every  believer,  and  that  the  revelation 
of  the  Spirit  ia  auperior  to  the  ministry  ofthe  word.  As 
her  doctrines  affected  not  only  the  religious,  but  also  the 
politicał  profeasions  ofthe  people,  great  controrersiea  en- 
aued ;  a  aynod  was  finałly  called,  in  which  her  teachings 
were  condemned,  and  ahe  and  her  asaociate  leadera  were 
baniahed  from  the  colony.  Annę  and  her  friends  now 
obtained  from  the  chief  ofthe  Narragaiiaetts  permisaion 
to  reaide  in  Rhode  laland.  Herę  "  they  aet  up  a  commu- 
nity  on  the  highly  commendable  principle  that  no  one 
was  to  be  'accounted  a  delinquent  for  doctrine.' "  After 
the  decease  of  her  huaband  (who  aharcd  her  opiniona), 
ahe  remoyed  to  a  Dutch  aettlement  in  the  colony  of  New 
York.  In  1643,  ahe  and  her  whole  family  of  fifleen  per- 
aons  were  taken  prisoners  by  the  Indiana,  and  all  but  one 
daughter  barbarously  murdered.  See  Bancroft,  Hist,  of 
the  United  States,  i,'388  aq.;  Chambera,  Cyciop,  v,  472; 
A  merican  Presb,  Rev.  1860,  p.  225.     (J.  H.  W.) 

Hutchinson,  John,  1,  a  Puritan  colonel  in  the 
Parliamentary  army  during  the  time  of  the  Engliah 
Civil  War,  waa  bom  at  Nottingham  in  1617,  He  was 
a  nonconformist  (Baptiat),  and,  being  of  a  religioua  tum 
of  mind,  much  of  hia  time  waa  giyen  to  the  atudy  of  the- 
ology.  At  the  outbreak  of  the  Ci\il  War  he  aided  with 
the  Parliament,  and  was  appointed  goyemor  of  Notting- 
ham Castle.  At  the  trial  of  the  king  (Charles  I)  he 
concurred  in  the  aentence  pronounced  on  him,  having 
firat  "  addreaacd  himaelf  to  God  by  prayer."  Cromwell'a 
conduct  after  thia  unfortunate  affair  Hutchinaon  diaap- 
proyed;  and  while  yarious  aentiments  are  entertained 
on  hia  politicał  conduct,  '^none  que&tion  his  integrity  or 
piety."*  At  the  Bestoration  he  auffered  the  generał  fate 
of  the  Republicans,  and  died  in  priaon,  Sept.  11,  1664. 
See  Neale,  Ilisi.  of  the  Puritans  (Harper's  edit.),  ii,  878 
aq. ;  Appleton'a  A  nu  Cyciop.  ix,  396. 

Hutchinson,  John,  2,  inyentor  of  a  theory  of  her- 
meneutics  which  gaye  rise  to  much  discussion  in  the 
17th  century,  and  atill  has  a  few  adherenta,  waa  bom  in 
1 674,  at  Spennithome,  in  Yorkshire.  After  priyate  edu- 
cation,  he  became,  at  the  age  of  19,  atcward  to  Mr.  Bath- 
urat,  and  aflerwards  to  the  duke  of  Somcrset,  who  be- 
stowed  upon  him  many  marks  of  confidence,  and  finally 
procured  for  Hutchinaon  a  ainecureappoinlmentof£200 
per  annum  from  the  goyemment.  Hia  time  was  now 
mainly  deyoted  to  religious  study.  He  alao  madę  a  laige 
and  raluable  collection  of  fosailE.  In  1724  he  published 
the  firat  part  of  a  curious  work  entitled  Moses^s  Princip" 


HUTCHINSON 


426 


HUTTER 


ioj  in  which  he  attempted  to  refate  thc  doctrine  of 
gravitatioii  as  Uught  in  the  Prmc^na  of  Newton.  In 
the  seoond  part  of  this  work,  which  appeared  in  1727,  he 
continaed  his  attack  upon  the  Newtonian  philoflophy, 
and  maintained,  on  the  authority  of  Scripture,  the  exi8t- 
ence  of  a  plenum,  From  thia  time  to  his  death  he  pub- 
liahed  yearly  one  or  two  Tolumes  in  further  eluddation 
of  his  yiews,  which  erince  estensiYe  knowledge  of  the 
Hebrew  Scriptuies.    He  died  August  28, 1787. 

''Aocording  to  Hutehinaon,  the  Old  Testament  oon- 
tains  a  complete  system  of  natural  hiaUny,  theokigy,  and 
religion.  The  Hebrew  language  was  the  medium  of 
God's  commouication  with  man;  it  is  therefore  peifect, 
and  oonseąuently,  as  a  peifect  langoage,  it  must  be  co- 
exten8iye  with  iii  the  objects  of  knowledge,  and  its  aev- 
eral  terms  are  truły  significant  of  the  objects  which  they 
indicate,  and  not  so  many  arbitraiy  signs  to  represent 
them.  Accordingly,  Hutchinson,  after  Ońgen  and  oth- 
en,  laid  great  stress  on  the  evidence  of  Hebrew  etymolo- 
gy,  and  asaerted  that  the  Scripturea  are  not  to  be  under- 
stood  and  interprcted  in  a  literał,  but  in  a  typical  sense, 
and  accoiding  to  the  radical  import  of  the  Hebrew  ex- 
pressions.  By  this  plan  of  interpretation,  he  maintained 
that  thc  Old  Tesuunent  would  be  found  not  only  to  tes- 
tify  fully  to  the  naturę  and  offices  of  Christ,  but  also  to 
oontain  a  perfect  systom  of  natural  philosophy."  His 
editors  give  the  following  compendium  of  the  Hutehin- 
aonian  theor^^:  *'The  Hebrew  Scriptures  nowhere  ascribe 
motion  to  the  body  of  the  sun,  or  Axedne8s  to  the  earth ; 
they  deacribe  the  created  s}'stem  to  be  ApUnum  without 
any  rcunium,  and  reject  the  assistance  of  graritation,  at- 
traction,  or  any  such  occult  qualities,  for  performing  the 
atated  operations  of  naturę,  which  are  carried  on  by  the 
mechanism  of  the  heavens  in  their  threefold  condition 
of  fire,  light,  and  spirit,  or  air,  the  materiał  agents  set  to 
work  at  the  beginning :  the  heavens,  thus  framed  by 
Almighty  wisdom,  are  an  institutcd  emblem  and  visible 
aubstitute  of  Jehovah  Elohim,  the  etemal  three,  the  co- 
equal  and  co-adorable  Trinity  in  Unity :  the  imity  of 
aubstance  in  thc  heavens  points  out  the  unity  of  essence, 
and  the  dbtinction  of  conditions  the  triune  personality 
in  Deity,  without  confounding  the  persons  or  diridiiig 
the  substance.  From  their  being  madę  emblems,  they 
are  called  in  Hebrew  Shemim^  the  nameSjrepresentatiyes, 
or  subetitutes,  expre88ing  by  their  names  that  they  are 
emblems,  and  by  their  conditions  or  offices  what  it  is 
they  are  emblems  of."  As  an  instańce  of  his  ety  mologic- 
al  interpretation,  the  word  BerUhy  which  our  translation 
renders  Coteriantf  Hutchinson  construes  to  signify  "he  or 
that  which  puri^es,"  and  so  the  purificr  or  punfication 
"for,""  not  "with,"  man.  From  similar  etymologies, hc 
drew  the  conclusion  "  that  all  the  rites  and  ceremonies 
of  the  Jewish  dispensation  were  so  many  delineations  of 
Christ,  in  what  he  was  to  be,  to  do,  and  to  sufTer,  and 
that  Łhe  early  Jews  knew  them  to  be  t}'pes  of  his  actions 
and  sufTerings,  and  that,  by  performing  them  as  such, 
were  in  so  far  Christians  both  in  faith  and  practice." 
All  his  writings  are  collected  in  The  Philoaophical  and 
Theoloffical  Works  o/the  IcUe  truły  Uamtd  John  Jlutch- 
inson,  Eaą,  (Lond.  1749, 3d  edit,  12  yols.  8vo). 

^4Iutchinson*8  philological  and  exegetłcal  riews  found 
numerous  followers,  who,  without  constituting  a  doctri- 
nal  sect,  came  to  be  distinguishcd  as  *  Hutchinsonians.' 
In  their  number  they  reckoned  sevcral  distinguished 
dirines  in  England  and  Scotland,  both  of  the  Establish- 
ed  Church  and  of  Dissenting  communities.  Aroong  the 
most  cminent  of  these  were  bishop  Home,  and  his  biog- 
raphcr,  Mr.  William  Jones ;  Mr.  Komaine,  and  Mr.  Julius 
Bat&s  to  whom  thc  duke  of  Somerset,  on  the  nomination 
of  Mr.  Hutchinson,  presented  the  liying  of  Sutton,  in 
Susscx;  Mr.Parkhur9t,the  lexicographer;  Dr.Hodges, 
provost  of  CJricl;  and  Dr.Wetherell,  master  of  Univer- 
sity  College, Oxford;  Mr. Holloway,  author  ofLetter  and 
Spirit ;  and  Mr.  Lee,  author  of  Sophron,  or  Nature^a  Char- 
acteristics  of  Truth,  The  principles  of  Mr.  Hutohinson 
are  still  entcrtaincd  by  many  divines  without  their  pro- 
feasing  to  be  followers  of  Mr.  Hutohinson,  but  the  num- 


ber ofpiofesBingHutchinaoniansisnowTerysmaU."  Stt 
Ef^Uah  Cydop,  s.  v. ;  Jones  of  Noylaiid,  Worla,  Tobi  iii 
and  xii ;  Bishop  Home,  Works^  voL  vi  (ed.  1809) ;  Bitc^ 
Defmoe  of  Hutchinson  (Lond.  1761 ,  8vo) ;  Spearmao,  A  h- 
straot  ofHutchinson's  Works  (Edinh.  1765, 12mo);  Kit^ 
to,BibLCyełop,u,Si6. 

Hutchinsonianlsm.    SeeHvTCHix8ox,JoHii,l 
Hutten,  Ulrich  von,  a  German  knight  and  Re- 
foimer,  was  bom  April  20  (or  22),  1488,  at  Castle  Steck- 
elbeig,  in  Hesse-Caasel,  and  entered  the  monasteiy  of 
Fnlda  in  1498,  intending  to  become  a  monk,  but  fled  in 
1604  to  Erfurt,  where  he  continued  his  thecdogical  stad* 
ies  for  a  while.    In  1606  he  went  to  CologiM,  and  tbe 
foUowing  year  to  Frankfort  on  the  Oder,  where  the  new 
uniyersity  had  recently  boen  esUblished.    Herę  he  ap- 
plied  himself  to  the  study  of  philology  and  poetrf. 
From  Frankfort  he  went  to  Greifswald,  and  afteiwanb 
to  Roetock,  where  he  lectured  on  philosophy.    In  1510 
he  went  to  Wittenberg,  and  thenoe  to  Tienna,  where  bt 
remained  until  1612.    He  aflerwards  yisited  Pavia  and 
Bologna,  studied  law,  and  deyoted  himself  particulaily 
to  the  humanities  and  poetry.    What  he  saw  in  Italj 
had  the  effect  of  making  him  an  cnlightened  opponeot 
of  popery.    Later  he  joined  the  army  of  the  empoor 
Maximilian,  and  retumed  to  Germany  in  1 61 7.    Taking 
part  in  Reuchlin*s  ąuarrel  agatnst  the  Dominicans  of 
Cologne,  he  wroto  against  the  atate  of  the  Bomish 
Church,  and  particularly  against  the  pooti£    Bolder, 
and  morę  open  in  the  ezpiession  of  his  opinioos  than 
most  men  of  his  age,  he  did  much  to  prepare  the  way 
for  the  Beformation,  though  he  sympathized  with  Ld- 
ther  only  in  his  attack  upon  the  pope,  his  great  aia 
bdng  not  80  much  to  change  the  Church  as  to  irce 
Germany  from  the  tyranny  of  which  popeiy  was  thc 
basis.     In  1522  he  madę  an  alliance  with  Fiana  roo 
Sickingen,  who  was  choaen  chief  of  the  nobility  of  thc 
Upper  Rhine  at  Landau.    In  that  year,  as  the  Gemiaa 
princes  did  not  approye  of  Sickingen'a  plan  of  freeing 
Germany  from  the  Bomtsh  rule,  he  appeakd  to  the 
Statea,  and  endeayored  to  make  them  aide  with  the  no- 
bility against  the  prinoea.    But  Sickingen  snccumbed 
in  1628,  and  Hutten  was  obliged  to  flee  from  Gennany. 
In  Switzeriand,  his  fonner  friend  Erasmus  withdnńr 
from  him,  and  the  Council  of  Zttrich  droye  him  out  of 
their  territory.    He  then  retired  to  the  ialand  of  Ufnao. 
on  the  lakę  of  Zurich,  where  he  died,  Aug.  29,  1523L 
Hutten  has  been  yeiy  yarioualy  judged,  according  to 
the  different  stand-points  of  his  critics;  yet  it  is  ccrtaia 
that  he  was  honest  in  his  conyictioos,  and,  though  not 
a  partisan  of  the  Beformation  from  any  religious  feel- 
ing,  he  did  all  he  could  to  free  his  natiye  land  from 
the  subjection  to  the  papacy.    For  that  end  he  gare 
Luther  all  the  aid  in  his  power.    He  was  one  of  the  ao- 
thors  of  the  greater  part  of  the  Epistoła  obtteuronm  rt- 
rorttm,  and  most  of  his  iKnritings  were  satires  against 
the  pope,  the  monks,  and  the  dergy.    Seyeral  editions 
of  his  works  haye  been  puUished;  tbe  principal  aie 
Mttnch's  (Berlin,  1821-28,  6  yols.)  and  Ed.  Bóckiog^i 
(LpK.  1869  sq.,  7  yols.).     See  Epistoła  U.  ab  ffuttm  ad 
R,  Crocum  (Ldpzig,  1801) ;  Bocking,  Ein  Yerzeiekmts 
der  Schr^en  Huiten^s^  Indez  b&iiogrąphicus  Jłatteniama 
(Leips.  1868) ;  Schubart,  Biographie  (Lpz.  1791) ;  ri»- 
cher,  Biographie  (Lpz.  1803) ;  Planzer,  Ulrich  von  hut- 
terif  in  łiterarischer  UtnaiclU  (NUmbuig,  1798) ;  Giess, 
H.  V.  sein  Zeitalter  (1818) ;  £.  yon  Brunnow,  Uiridt  roa 
H.  (Lpz.  1842, 8  yok.) ;  BUrck,  Ulrich  r.  //.  (Dresden  u. 
Lpz.  1846) ;  Dayid  Friedrich  Strsusa,  Ulrieh  r.  IL  (Lpi. 
1867,  2  yols.) ;  Rerue  (7miMim^r,  March,  1868;  Eeitctie 
Reriew  (Lond.),  July,  1868,  p.  64  sq. ;  Pierer,  Unirtrsal 
Lexikon,  voL  yiii ;  Hase,  Ch,  History,  §  814 .  Ulrich  ros 
Hutten,  transL  from  Chauifour-KesUier^a  Źtudes  tur  Ies 
Reformateurs  du  16"*  siscU,  by  A.  Young  (Lond.  1868) ; 
Lecky,  Hist.  of  Rationalism,  ii,  188;  Hardwick,  Refn-- 
nuaion,  p.  32  sq. ;  National  Maffozine,  1868,  p.  243  8q.; 
Lond.  Ouart.  Rev.  1867  (AprU) ;  1867  (Apńl). 

Hutter,  lOias,  a  German  Hebraiat,  waa  bom  at 


HUTTER 


427 


HYACINTHUS 


Głtilits  in  15M,  studied  the  Oriental  languages  in  the 
nnirenities  of  Jena  and  Leipzig,  and  became  iu  1579 
Hebieir  teacher  of  the  dector  Aug^t  of  Saxony.  He 
next  reaided  succeBuyely  in  diffeient  parta  of  Germany, 
set  up  a  printing  establishment  in  Nuremberg,  and  flnal- 
ly  retired  to  Augsburg,  where  he  died  (others  aay  he 
died  at  Fruikfort)  in  1605.  His  reputation  as  a  lin- 
guist  he  established  by  editing  seTeral  PoIygloŁ  Bibles* 
The  fiist  of  them,  Opu*  guadrytartitum  Saipi.  Sacra 
(Hamb.  ]596),oontained  the  O.T.in  Hebrew  and  three 
other  Teisioiia.  In  1599  he  published  at  Nuremberg  the 
New  Test  in  twelye  different  rersions,  and  in  1602  his 
Noc,  TcMt,  ł/arm&iu  Ebr.  Gr,  LaU  et  Germ,  At  present, 
howerer,  llutter^s  works  are  morę  corious  than  usefuL 
Among  them  is  a  Hebrew  Bibie  in  remarkably  bold  and 
kige  letter,  in  which  the  ternlet  are  distinguished  by 
hoUow  type,  and  the  defectire  radicals  iuterlined  in 
mail  characters,  as  in  Bag8ter'8  edition  of  the  Psalms. — 
Pierer,  Tntr.  Lex.  viii,  646  8q. ;  Kitto,  Biblieal  Cydop,  ii, 
S4& 

Hntter,  Łaonhard,  a  German  Lutheran  tbeolo- 
gian,  was  bom  at  NeUingen,  near  Ulm,  in  January,  1568, 
stodied  phiksophy,  phUology,  and  theology  at  Stras- 
bnig,  Ldpzig,  Heidelberg,  and  Jena ;  became  piiyate  tu- 
tor in  the  latter  nniversity  in  1594,  and  in  1596  professor 
at  WiUenberg,  where  he  died,  Oct.  23, 1616.  He  waa  a 
sealoos  upholder  of  Lutheran  orthodoxy.  His  Compen^ 
dimn  locorum  theoiogicorum  (Wittenb.  1610,  etc.),  pre- 
paml  by  order  of  the  elector  Christian,  took  the  place 
of  MeIancthon*s  Aoct  as  a  text-book,  and  was  tranalated 
into  seyeral  languages  (into  German  by  Holstenius 
[Lnb.  1611],  and  by  Hutter  himself  [1618,  etc]  into 
Swedish  £Stock.  1618]),  and  oommented  on  by  Cundis- 
ius  (Jena,  1648,  etc),  Glassius  (1656),  Chemnitz  (1670), 
Lachmann  (1690),  etc  It  bas  Utdy  been  reproduced 
by  Hasc  under  the  title  HuUenu  redivivu8  (BerL  1854), 
and  tranalated  into  EngUsh,  under  the  title  of  Compend 
of  Lutheran  Tktohgy,  by  the  Rey.  H.  E.  Jacuba  and  the 
Ke\-.  G.  F.  Spieker  (Phila.  1868, 8yo).  He  carried  out 
the  Compendium  further  in  his  IjOci  communeś  iheolog. 
(Wittenb.  1619,  fol,  etc).  He  also  wrote  against  John 
Sigismund  of  Brandenburg,  who  had  embraced  (}alvin- 
tsm,  his  Caldmsta  auUco-poliłrtts  (Wittenb.  1609-14, 2 
ToU),  and  against  Hospinian^s  Conaprdia  discors  another 
wofk,  entitled  Concordia  conoort  (Wittenb.  1614).  His 
other  writings  are  IH  Fo/totfote  Dfi  circa  mtemumprm- 
dettitiaiiomg»al9anihrum  Decretum  (Wittenb.  1605, 4to) : 
^Ezpiieaiio  Ubri  Christiana  coiKordanłia  (Wittenberg, 
1608,  8yo;  twice  reprinted)  i-^Iremcum  vere  Christia- 
mcm,  sive  traetatus  de  synodo  et  umone  evanffeUcoruM  non 
fucała  canciUanda  (Rośt.l616,4to;  1619,  folio),  against 
the  plan  of  fusion  between  the  Lutheran  and  Reformed 
ehurchea  of  Paieus,  and  espedally  against  the  laŁter's 
Irrmeum.  SeeJXXErdnuaaDfLebenabe»ch.u.Literarttche 
NaekrichL  r.  d.  Wittenberg  Theohgen  seit  1502  bia  1802 
(WUtenbeig,1804);  Bayle,/)id.i/irf.;  J.G.Walch,BiWL 
TAeologica  Stkcta ;  Hoefer,  jVbif  9.  Biog,  Ginirale^  xxy, 
655;  Unio,  Z>x.  1,376;  Hook,  Eodes.  Biog,\\,  288. 

Hntton,  James,  a  preacher  of  the  Morayian  Breth- 
ren.  was  bom  in  London  in  1715.  He  was  the  son  of  a 
clergyman,  and  senred  an  apprcnticeship  to  a  printer 
and  a  bookseller;  but,  coming  under  the  influence  of 
Mr.  Wesley^s  preaching,  he  waa  awakened,  and  was  con- 
ycrted  under  the  labors  of  the  distinguished  Morayian, 
Peter  Bohler.  Soon  afler  bis  conyersion  he  yisited 
the  brethren  at  Hemhut,  and  became  a  dcvoted  disciple 
and  scn-ant  of  count  Zinzendorf,  under  whose  direction 
he  henceforth  deyoted  all  his  time  and  eneigy  to  the 
miity  of  the  Morayian  brotherhood  in  EngUnd.  ''His 
counsel  and  aid  were  afforded  it  in  all  its  complicated 
phms  of  goyemment  and  projecto  of  usefulness ;  he  held, 
as  ye«rB  roUed  on,  eyeiy  lay  office  in  it,  and  preached 
and mlnisteced  as  a  deaoon;  he  was  the  soul  of  ito  mis- 
aionary  labois  as  a  'aociety  for  the  furtherance  of  the 
Gospel;'  he  defended  it  in  iu  distresses;  helped  it  by 
his  eneigy  and  śkill  thiough  all  its  heayy  finandal  em- 


bamasments ;  tnyeUed  for  it  oyer  Europę ;  and,  towards 
the  doee  of  his  life,  became,  as  it  were,  its  representatiye 
to  the  court  and  people  of  England."  He  died  in  1795. 
Hutton  was  a  man  of  great  piety  and  indomitable  ener- 
gy.  The  history  of  the  Morayian  Brethren  in  the  sec 
ond  half  of  the  18th  century  is  eminently  the  history 
of  his  own  life,  See  Memoirt  of  James  Hutton,  con^ris^ 
ing  the  annals  ofkis  life,  and  connexion  toith  the  United 
Brethren,  by  Daniel  Benham  (Lond.  1856,  8yo) ;  Lond, 
Qu,  Beo.  yiii,  289  8q. 

Huygbens,  Gummabus,  a  Roman  CJatholic  theo- 
logian  and  philosopher,wa8  bom  at  Liere  or  Lyre  (Bia- 
bant)  Feb.  1631.  When  only  twenty-one  years  of  age 
he  was  appointed  professor  of  philoaophy  at  Louyain, 
and  here  he  distinguished  himself  greatly.  In  1668  he 
was  honored  with  the  doctorate  of  theology,  and  in  1677 
was  madę  president  of  the  college  of  pope  Adrian  YL 
He  died  at  Louyain  Oct.  27, 1702.  Huyghens  wrote  a 
number  of  works,  of  which  the  best  are  Conferetttias  th»- 
ohgieaifiD.  8  vols.;  Breoes  ob$erv€tL,or  a  courte  ofdir- 
timiffy  in  16  vols.  12mo.  As  he  refused  to  fayor  the  pe- 
culiar  yiews  of  some  of  the  French  moralists,  and  opposed 
the  celebrated  four  artides  of  the  French  dergy  (1682), 
he  was  inyolyed  in  great  controyersies.— Jocher,  AUgenu 
Gelehrten  Lex,  ii,  1794 ;  Hook,  Ecdes,  Biog,  yi,  239.  (J. 
H.W.) 

Hus  (Gen.  xxii,  21).    See  Uz. 

HoaotlL    See  Kirjath-huzotb. 

Huz^sab  (Hebrew  Huistsab\  2SM),  rendered  as  a 
proper  name  iu  the  Auth.TeiBion  of  Nah.  ii,  7,  is  either 
Hoph.  pisBt.  of  D2C9,  to  piaoe  firmly,  and  so  the  dause 
may  be  translated,  **And  ii  is  fxed!  she  is  led  away 
captiye,"  i.  e.  the  decree  is  oonflrmed  for  the  oyerthiow 
of  Nineyeh  (so  the  margin,  and  most  interpretera;  see 
Lud.  de  Dieu;  the  Sept.  and  Yulg.  both  confound  with 
DKp,  Kai  Ą  ywóaraotę  [military  station]  ó?r£caXv^dł|, 
et  mUes  capUous  abductus  est;  the  Talmud  and  Hebrew 
interpretera,  confounding  with  D^)!,  render  ''the  queen 
sitting  on  her  couch**) ;  or,  rather,  of  3?^  to  ftow,  by 
Chaldai!»m,  and  the  meaning  will  then  be  (with  Gese- 
nius,  Thes,  Heb.  p.  1147,  who  joins  the  word  to  the  last 
of  the  preced.  yerse), "  the  palące  shall  be  disaolyed  and 
madę  tojhw  down^  L  e.  the  palaces  of  Nineyeh,  inunda- 
ted  and  undermin^  by  the  waters  of  the  Tigris,  shall 
diasolye  and  fali  in  ruins  (comp.  Diodorus,  ii,  26).  Mr. 
RawUnson  supposes  {Herod,  i,  570,  notę)  that  Huazab 
may  mean  ''the  Zab  country,**  or  the  fertile  tract  easi 
of  the  Tigris,  watered  by  the  Upper  and  Lower  Zab  riy- 
ers  {Zab  Ala  woOl  Zab  Aąfal),  the  A-diab-^nh  of  the 
geographerB.  This  proyince— the  most  yaluable  part 
of  Assyria — ^might  well  stand  for  Assyria  itself,  with 
which 'it  is  identified  by  Pliny  {Hist,  Not.  y,  12)  and 
Aromianus  (xxiii,  6).  The  name  Zab,  as  applied  to  the 
riyen,  is  certainly  yery  ancient,  being  found  in  the  great 
inscription  of  Tiglath  Pileser  I,  which  bdongs  to  the 
middle  of  the  12th  century  KC. ;  but  in  that  case  the 
name  would  hardly  be  written  in  Heb.  with  :ł, 

H^Tlid,  Andbkas  Christian,  a  Danish  Grientalist, 
was  bom  ()ct.  20, 1749,  at  Gopenhagen.  He  was  high- 
ly  educated,  and  enjoyed  great  adyantages  by  trayel  in 
foreign  countriea.  Thiis  from  1777  to  1780  he  spent  in 
Germany,  espedally  at  Crottingen,  where  he  studied  un* 
der  the  celebrated  Michaelis  and  Heyne,  and  in  Italy, 
where  he  enjoyed  the  eociety  of  seyeral  cardinals,  al- 
though  a  Protestant  in  belicdT.  On  his  return  he  was 
appointed  professor  at  the  Royal  OUege.  He  died  May 
3, 1788.  Hwiid  wrote  Specimen  inedita  Yersioms  A  rab* 
ico-Samaritana  Pentateuchi  (Rom.  1780, 4to)  t—LibeHuś 
criticus  de  indoie  codicis  MSS,  N.  T,  biblioth,  Caaareo- 
Yindoboneneit  (Cop.  1785)^Hoefer,  Nouv,  Biog.  Głnir, 
xxy,688. 

Hyaointh.    See  Jacinth. 

Hyaclnthtia  de  Jan-ua,  a  Capuchin  monk  of  dis« 
tinction,  who  flouriahed  in  the  flrst  half  of  the  17th  oen« 


HTiENA 


428 


HYENA 


tory,  was  named  after  his  native  city,  Genoa.  He  was 
generał  preacher  of  his  order,  and  enjoyed  the  confi- 
dence  of  Maxiniilian  to  such  an  extent  Łhat  in  1622  he 
was  chargedby  GregoryXy  with  a  special  commiasion 
to  the  Spanish  ooort  He  trauslated  Castlglio'i  histoiy 
of  the  Dominican  order  into  Italian  (Palermo,  1626, 2 
Tols.  fol).— Jocher,  A  Ugem,  GeUkrt.  Lex,  ii,  1795;  Ranke^ 
Ei8t,  oftAe  Popes,  ii,  485. 

Hysena.    See  Hykna. 

Hyatt,  John,  a  Calyinistic  Hethodist  preacher  of 
considerable  talent,  was  bom  at  Sherbome,  in  Dorset- 
shire,  in  1767.  He  became  minister  of  a  congregation 
at  Mere,Wiltshire,  in  1798,  but  removed  in  1800  to  one 
at  Frome,  Somersetshire,  and  soon  afterwards  to  Totten- 
ham  Court  Chapel  and  the  Tabemade,  London.  Herę 
he  was  co-pastor  with  the  Rev.  Matthew  Wilks  until  his 
death  in  1826.  His  principal  works  are,  Chrittian  Duły 
€md  EncouraffemaU  in  Times  of  Distress  (2d  edit.  Lond. 

1810,  8vo)  i—SermoM  on  seleci  Subjecfs  (2d  ed.  London, 

1811,  8vo)  t—Sermons  on  rarious  Subjecłs,  edited  by  his 
son,  Charles  Hyatt,  with  memoir  of  the  author  by  the 
Rev.  John  Morison,  etc.  (2d  ed.  Lond.  1828,  8vo).— Dai^ 
ling,  Cydopadia  BibUographica,  i,  1597. 

Hydas^^pds  (TdaaiFrię),  a  river  noticed  in  Jndith 
i,  6,  in  connection  with  the  Euphrates  and  Tigrls,  men- 
tioned  by  Arrian  {Ind,  4)  and  Strabo  (xv,  697),  which 
flowed  westwards  into  the  Indus,  and  is  now  called  Je- 
lum  (Rawlinson,  Herod,  i,  558).  The  weU-known  Hy- 
daspes  of  India  is  too  remote  to  accord  with  the  other 
localities  noticed  in  the  context.  We  may  perhaps 
identify  it  with  the  Ckoaspea  or  EuUkus  of  Susiana, 
which  was  called  I/ydaspes  by  the  Romans  (Yoss,  ad 
Juatin,  ii,  14). 

Hyde,  Alvan,  D.D.,  a  Congregational  minister, 
was  bom  Feb.  2, 1768,  at  Norwich,  Conn.  He  gradu- 
ated  at  Dartmouth  College  in  1788,  entered  the  minis- 
try  in  June,  1790,  and  was  ordained  pastor  in  Lee  June 
6,^1792,  where  he  remained  until  his  death,  Dec.  4, 1883. 
Hyde  published  Shetdiea  ofihe  L\fe  o/tke  Rep,  Stephen 
West,  D.D,  (1818)  :—An  Essay  on  the  State  qf  InfoaUs 
(1830);  and  several  occasional  Sermons. — Sprague,  An^ 
tioZf,  ii,  300;  TheoL  liev,Y,biŁ 

Hyde,  Edwwr^  a  Methodist  Episcopal  minister, 
was  bom  in  Norwich,  Conn.,  March  81, 1786.  He  was 
oonyerted  in  1803,  entered  the  New  Ęngland  Conference 
in  1809,  was  presiding  elder  on  Boston  District  in  1822- 
26,  and  again  in  1830,  and  meantime  four  years  on  New 
London  District,  and  in  1881  was  appointed  steward  of 
the  Wesleyan  Academy  at  Wilbraham,  where  he  re- 
mained until  his  death,  March  16, 1882.  His  indefati- 
gable  and  succcssful  labors  were  veiy  valuable  to  the 
Ct}uch,—Mimties  of  Con/erenoeSy  i,  162 ;  Stevens,  ATe- 
moriaU  of  Methodism,  ii,  cxlii ;  FwiercU  Sermon,  by  Dr. 
Fisk.     (G.  L.  T.) 

Hyde,  Laviu8,  a  Congregational  minister,  was 
bom  in  Franklin,  Conn.,  in  1789.  He  lost  his  father 
whilc  quite  young,  and  was  prepared  for  college  by  his 
brother,  the  Rev.  Alvan  Hyde,  D.D.  He  graduated  at 
Williams  College  in  1813,  and  afterwards  pursned  a 
900186  of  theological  studies  at  Andovcr.  In  1818  he 
was  ordained  minister  over  a  church  in  Salisbary,  Conn. ; 
in  1823  he  changed  to  Bolton,  Conn.,  senred  subseąuent- 
ly  at  Ellington,Wayland,  and  Becket,  Mass.,  and  final- 
ly  again  at  Bolton.  At  the  age  of  seventy  he  retired 
from  the  active  work  of  the  ministry,  and  remored  to 
Yemon,  Conn.,  where  he  died,  April  8, 1865.  He  wrote 
a  biography  of  his  brother,  Alvan  Hyde,  and  edited  Net- 
tleton*8  Yillage  Hymns, — ^Appleton,  Am,  Ammal  Cydop, 
1865,  p.  636. 

Hyde,  Thomas,  D.D.,  a  leamed  English  diyine 
and  Orientalist,  was  bom  in  Shropshire  in  1636.  He 
was  educated  at  King's  College,  Cambridge.  In  1653 
he  went  to  London,  and  rendcred  essential  service  in 
the  preparation  of  Walton*8  Polyglot  Bibie.  He  was 
admitted  fellow  of  Queen*s  College,  Ozford,  in  1659,  and 


afterwards  became  keeper  of  the  Bodleian  library.  In 
1666  he  became  prebendary  of  Salisbuiy,  in  1678  aicfa- 
deacon  of  Gloucester,  Arabie  professor  in  1691,  and  final- 
ly  regius  professor  of  Hebrew  and  canon  of  Cbiist 
Church  in  1697.  He  died  in  1703.  His  principal  work 
is  Historia  reUffioms  veterum  Persamm  eorumgue  ifa- 
gorum,  uhi  etiam  ncma  Abrahami  ei  Mithra,  et  Yefltt, 
et  Massetis,  etc  (Oxonii,  1700,  4to ;  2d  edit.,  revi«ed  and 
augmented  by  Hunt  and  Costar,  under  the  titlc  Yeienm 
Persarumf  Parthorutn  et  Medorum  ReUgionis  Histońoj 
Lond.  1760,  4to,  illustrated).  The  work  e\-iuce8  great 
research  and  considerable  acumen  in  sifting  the  ancient 
Greek  writers  and  some  Persian  works  posterior  to  the 
Hegira,  but,  in  consequence  of  the  want  of  the  most  es- 
sential documents,  such  as  the  sacred  books  of  the  an- 
cient Persians,  which  were  then  luiknown  in  Europę, 
Hyde  necessarily  fell  into  some  cttotb.  Thus  hc  main- 
tains  that  Monotheism  prevailed  at  first  in  Penia,  was 
afterwards  mixed  ^ńth  Sabeism,  was  brought  bock  to 
its  original  purity  by  Abraham,  and  was  finally  loct 
again  by  belng  oonnected  with  the  worship  of  the  hcav- 
enly  bodies.  The  incorrectnees  of  the  opinion  has  ńnoe 
been  shown  by  abbot  Foucher  (in  Mejnoires  dc  T.-J  rodle- 
mie  des  Inscripttons  et  Belies-LettreSj  1759),  and  especiil- 
ly  by  Anquetil  Duperron,  who  brought  to  France  ibc 
sacred  books  of  the  Persians.  Hyde'8  other  writings  are 
collected  in  Syntagma  disserłationum,  guas  oHm  audor 
doctissimus  Thomas  Hyde,  S.T.P,,  separaiim  edidit,  ac- 
ceasenmt  nonnulla  ejtudem  opuscula  hact«nus  inedita, 
etc,  omnia  diligenter  recognita,  a  Gregorio  Sliarpe, 
LL.D.  (Oxonii,  1767,  2  vols,  4to).  See  Darling,  Cydop, 
Bibliographica,  i,  1698;  Hoefer,  Now,  Biog,  Centrale^ 
xxv,  691 ;  EngHsh  Cydopadia,  s.  v.;  Hook,  Eoeks,  Biog. 
vi,  239 ;  Allibone,  Dictionary  ofA  uthors,  i,  980. 

Hydropara8t&tse(vĄ)03rapa(rrarai,a;iian^'^of- 
ferers  of  water^,  a  name  givcn  to  the  Encratites  (q.  v.) 
because  they  avoided  winę,  and  even  in  the  Lord's  Sup- 
per  used  nothing  but  water.  See  Theodoret,  Uar,  Fab, 
i,  c  XX ;  Bingham,  Orig.  Ecdes,  bk.  xv,  eh.  ii,  §  7. 

HyemanteB  {winterers,  or  tossed  by  a  wttOer  błast), 
an  epithet  given  by  the  Latin  fathcrs  to  demoniacs^— 
Neale'8  Inirod.  to  the  Hist,  ofthe  Eastem  CA-  i,  209.  See 
Enkbgumeks;  £xorci8t. 

Hyena  (yaiua,  Ecclesiasticus  xiii,  18)  does  not  oc- 
cur  in  the  A.  Y.  of  the  canonical  Scriptures^  but  is  prob- 
ably  denoted  by  Ciins  (łsabtt'a,  sŁreaked  or  racemm^ 
only  Jer.  xii,  9;  so  Sept  ^aiva,  but  Yulg.  avis  discohr, 
and  Auth.  Yers.  **  speckled  bird"),  as  the  context  and 
parallelism  of  the  preceding  ver8e  require;  an  Identifi- 
cation disputed  by  some,  on  the  groond  that  the  aiiimil 
is  not  mentioned  by  ancient  authors  as  oocurring  in 
Westem  Asia  before  the  Maoedonian  conąuest,  and  iras 
scarody  known  by  name  eyen  in  the  time  of  Pliny;  it 
has  sinoe  been  ascertained,  howerer,  thiat  in  Romaic  or 
modem  Greek  the  word  krokahs  and  glanos  have  been 
substituted  for  the  ancient  temi  kgena,  and  that  the  an- 
imał  is  still  known  in  thoso  regions  by  names  cognate 
with  the  Hebrew  (see  RUppel,  A  byss,  i,  227 ;  Shaw,  7'mr. 
154;  Kfimpfer,  ^mcm.  411  sq.;  RusBeU'8  AUppo^ii,^ 
8q. ;  comp.  Pliny,  viii,  44 ;  xi,  67).  The  only  other  in- 
stance  in  which  it  occurs  is  as  a  propcr  name,  Zeboim 
(1  Sam.  xiii,  18, "the  valley  of  hyena8,''Aquiia;  Nch. 
xi,  34).  See  Zeboim.  The  Talmudical  wiiters  describo 
the  hyena  by  no  less  than  four  names,  of  which  tsaUia 
is  one  (Lewysohn,  ZooL  §  1 19).  Bochart  {Hieroz.  ii,  163 
są.)  and  Taylor  {continnation  ofCalmet)  have  indicated 
what  is  probably  the  trae  meaning  in  the  above  pa&- 
sage  in  Jer.,  of  C!!D2C  Sa^?'  ^^  tsabua,  the  stripedrusher, 
i.  e.  the  hyena,  tuming  round  opon  bis  lair^introduced 
after  an  allusion  in  the  previous  verse  to  the  lion  call- 
ing  to  the  beasts  of  the  field  (other  h3renas  and  jackals) 
to  come  and  devour.  This  alluńcm,  followed  up  as  it  is 
by  a  natural  association  of  ideaa  with  a  description  of 
the  pastor,  feeder,  or  rather  conamner  or  deronrer  of 
the  vineyard,  treading  down  and  destroying  the  v]nes, 
renders  the  natural  and  poetical  pictuie  oomplete ;  for 


HYGINUS 


429 


HYKSOS 


the  bjena  seeks  burrows  and  cayerns  for  a  lair;  like  the 
dogf  it  tuins  roand  to  lie  down ;  howls,  and  occaaionaUy 
acts  in  concert ;  ia  loathaome,  sayage,  insatiable  in  ap- 
petite,  ofTenaiTe  in  amell,  and  will,  in  the  seaaon,  like 
canines,  deroar  grapea.  The  hyena  waa  common  in  an- 
cient  as  in  modern  Egypt,  and  is  constantly  depicted  on 
monuments  (WilłdnaMi,  i,  218, 226);  it  must,  therefore, 
have  been  well  known  to  the  Jews,  as  it  is  now  yery 
common  in  Palestine,  where  it  is  the  last  and  most  com- 
plete  scayenger  ot  carrion  (Y^oodf  Bibie  ^mmaZf,p.62 
sq.).  Though  cowardly  in  his  natóre,  the  hyena  is  yery 
savage  when  once  he  attacką  and  the  strength  of  his 
jaws  is  such  that  he  can  crunch  the  thigh-bone  of  an 
ox  (Living9tone's  TravelSj  p  600). 

*^  Ttabudy  therefore,  we  consider  proyed  to  be,  gener- 
ically,  the  hyena ;  morę  specifically,  the  Canis  hytena  of 
Iinn.,the  Uyama  wigoru  of  morę  recent  naturalists,  the 
fjodk  of  Barbary,  the  duby  duhbah,  dabah,  zabahf  and 
kajlaar  of  modem  Sheroitic  nations ;  and,  if  the  an- 
dents  iinderstood  anything  by  the  word,  it  was  also 
their  łrockus,  The  striped  species  is  one  of  three  or 
four— all,  it  aeems,  origuiaUy  African,  and,  by  following 
araiies  and  caravans,  gradually  spread  over  Southern 
Asii  to  beyond  the  Ganges,  thoogh  not  as  yet  to  the 
cast  of  the  Bramapootra.  It  is  now  not  uncommon  in 
Aaia  Hinor,  and  has  extended  into  Southern  Tartary ; 
but  ihis  progress  is  comparatively  so  recent  that  no  oth- 
er  than  Shemitic  names  are  well  known  to  belong  to  it. 
The  head  and  jaws  of  all  the  species  are  broad  and 
stnmg:  the  muzzle  truncated;  the  tongue  like  a  rasp; 
the  teeth  robust,  large,  and  eminently  formed  for  bitiug, 
lacerating,  and  reducing  the  very  bonę;  the  neck  stilT; 


Hyena. 

the  body  short  and  compact;  the  limbs  tali,  with  only 
four  toes  on  each  foot ;  the  fur  coarse,  forming  a  kind  of 
Bemi-erectile  mane  along  the  back ;  the  taił  rather  short, 
with  an  iroperfect  brush,  and  with  a  fetid  pouch  beneath 
iu  In  statare  the  species  yaries  from  that  of  a  large 
wolf  to  mach  less.  Hyenas  are  not  bold  in  comparison 
with  wolyes,  or  in  proportion  to  their  powers.  They  do 
not,  in  generał,  act  collectiyely;  they  prowl  chiefly  in 
the  night;  attack  asses,  dogs,  and  weaker  animals;  feed 
most  willingly  on  corrupt  animal  oifal,  dead  camcis,  etc. ; 
and  dig  into  human  grayes  that  are  not  well  protected 
with  stakes  and  brambles.  The  striped  species  is  of  a 
dirty  ashy  buff,  with  some  oblique  black  streaks  acroes 
the  shoolderB  and  body,  and  numerous  cross-bars  on  the 
legs;  the  muzzle  and  throat  are  black,  and  the  tip  of  the 
taił  wbite**  (Kitto).  (See  Penm/ CycU^pcBdia,8.y,)  See 
Jackal;  Wolf;  Bbar. 

HygIniiB,  considered  as  the  eighth  or  tenth  bishop 
of  Komę,  appears  to  haye  held  that  station  from  A.D. 
137  to  Ul .  According  to  the  Liber  porUificalis^  he  was  a 
iutive  of  Athens,  and  before  his  clection  to  the  see  of 
Korne  taught  philosophy.  Nothing  is  known  of  his 
life,  and  the  Liber  pontif,  mercly  says  of  him, "  Clerum 
cofflpoaoit  et  distribuit  gradus."  The  Pseudo  Decretals 
[aee  Dbcretals]  ascribe  to  him  a  number  óf  rules  on 
Charch  discipline,  and  he  is  said  to  haye  intfoduced  the 
customs  of  godfathere  and  Church  consecrations,  but 
tbtt  is  doubtfuL  The  Martyrologies  giye  some  the  lOth, 
otboB  the  llth  of  January,  142,  as  the  datę  of  his  death. 
Some  ditica  deny  his  haying  been  morę  than  a  simple 


confessor.  A  certain  Hyginus,  bishop  of  Cordoya,  is 
said  to  haye  been  the  first  opponent  of  Priscillian  (q.  y.). 
See  Papebroch,  A  eta  Sanctorum ;  Tillemont,  Memoiret ; 
Baillet,  Yies  de$  Saints ;  Hoefer,  Nour,  Biog,  Genirale, 
xxy,  706 ;  Dupin,  Ecdes,  WriterSj  cent.  ii. 

HykedB  (TKOutCf  correctly  explained  [comp.  Raw- 
linson,  Herod,  ii,  297]  by  Josephus  [^Apion^  i,  14]  as  be- 
ing  compounded  of  the  Egyptian  kt/k,  "  king,"  and  ao*, 
"shepherd"  or  "Arab,"  i.  e.  nomadę'),  a  race  who  in- 
yaded  Egypt,  and  oonstituted  the  15th  and  one  or  two 
of  the  following  d3masties,  according  to  Manetho  (see 
Kenrick,  Egypt  under  the  Pharaoks^  ii,  152  sq.)T  espe^ 
cially  as  preseryed  by  Josephus  {ut  supra) :  "  In  the 
reign  of  king  Timaus  there  came  up  from  the  east  men 
of  an  ignoble  race,  who  had  the  coniidence  to  inyade 
OUT  country,  and  easily  subdued  it  without  a  battle, 
buming  the  cities,  dcmolishing  the  temples,  slaying  the 
men,  and  reducing  the  women  and  children  to  slayery." 
They  madę  Salatis,  one  of  themselyes,  king :  he  reigned 
at  Memphis,  and  madę  the  upper  and  lower  region  trib- 
utary.  Of  the  17th  dynasty  also  wcre  forty-three  shep- 
herd  kings,  called  Hyksos,  who  reigned,  perhaps  con- 
temporaneously  with  the  preceding,  at  Diospolis.  In 
the  18th  dynasty  of  Diospolis  a  rising  took  place,  and 
the  shepherd  kings  were  expelled  out  of  the  other  parts 
of  Egypt  into  the  district  of  Ayaris,  which  they  forti- 
fied.  Amosis  besieged  and  compelled  them  to  capitu- 
kte ;  on  which  they  left  Egypt,  in  number  240,000,  and 
"  marched  through  the  desert  towards  Syria,  and  built 
the  city  of  Jerusalem."  The  last  few  words  seem  to 
render  it  probable  that  Manetho  confounded  the  Hyksos 
with  the  Israelites,  which  is  the  less  surprising,  sińce 
the  Hyksos  were,  as  he  ńghtly  calls  them,  Phomicians 
of  the  andent,  if  not  originid  race  which  inhabited 
Phoenicla,  or  Palestine  (taken  in  its  widest  sense),  be- 
fore the  conąuest  of  the  country  by  the  Hebrews. 
Chronological  considerations  seem  to  refer  the  time  of 
the  domuiion  of  the  Hyskos  to  the  period  of  Abraham 
and  Joseph  (say  from  B.C.  2000  to  1500).  When  Jo- 
seph  went  into  the  land  he  found  the  name  of  shepherd 
odious — which  agrees  with  the  hypothesis  that  places 
the  irruption  of  the  shepherd  kings  anterior  to  his  time ; 
and  possibly  both  the  case  with  which  he  rosę  to  power 
and  the  fact  that  Jacob  tiumed  towards  Egypt  for  a 
supply  of  food  when  urged  by  want  may  be  readily  ac- 
counted  for  on  the  supposition  that  a  kindred  race  held 
dominion  in  the  land,  which,  though  hated  by  the  peo- 
ple,  as  being  foreign  in  its  origin  and  oppressiye  in  its 
character,  would  not  be  indlsposed  to  show  fayor  to 
members  of  the  great  Shemitic  fanuly  to  which  they 
themselyes  belonged.  The  irruption  into  Egypt,  and 
the  conquest  of  the  country  on  the  part  of  the  Phoeni- 
cian  shepherds,  seems  to  haye  been  a  conseąuence  of 
the  generał  pressure  of  population  from  the  north-east 
towards  the  south-west,  which  led  the  nomadę  Shemitic 
tribes  first  to  oyercome  the  original  inhabitants  of  Pal- 
estine, and,  continuing  in  the  same  łine  of  adyance,  then 
to  enter  and  sułnlue  Egypt.  The  inyasion  of  the  Hyk- 
sos is  indeed  to  he  regarded  as  the  result  of  the  moye- 
ment  from  the  Euphrates  westward  of  the  most  power- 
fuł  and  (comparatively)  most  ciyilized  people  then  found 
in  Western  Asia,  who  in  their  progress  suł)dued  or  ex- 
pełled  in  the  countries  tlirough  which  they  not  improt>- 
ably  were  urged  by  a  pressure  from  other  adrancing 
tribes,  nation  and  trił)e  one  ailcr  another,  driving  them 
down  towards  the  sea,  and  compeUing  those  who  dwełt 
along  the  shóres  of  the  Mediterranean  to  seek  shdter 
and  safety  in  the  islands  of  that  sea  and  other  distant 
parts.  To  conąuerors  and  aggressors  of  the  cłiaracter 
of  these  shepherd  hordes  'Egypt  would  offer  special  at- 
tractions.  They  continued  sweeping  onwards,  and  at 
last  entered  and  conquered  Egypt,  estabłlshing  there  a 
new  dynasty,  which  was  hatefuł  l)ecau8e  foreign,  and 
because  of  a  lower  degree  of  cułture  than  the  Egyptians 
themselyes  had  reached.  Nor  would  these  shepherds 
be  less  odious  l>ecause,  coming  from  the  east  and  imme- 
diately  from  the  deserts  of  Arabia,  they  were  from  the 


HYKSOS 


430 


HTŁOZOISM 


qii«iter  whence  the  mild  and  cultiyated  Egyptians  had 
long  been  wont  to  sufTer  fiom  the  predatory  incuTBiona 
of  the  wild  nomadę  tribea  {Die  Phdnuitrf  by  Moyen, 
Bonn,  1841 ;  Bertheau,  Geaehichie  der  Itraditen,  Gotr 
tingen,  1842),  between  whom  and  the  agiicaltnral  nar 
tivefl  of  the  countiy  diflTerent  porsuitai  habita,  and  tastea 
would  naturally  engender  animoeitiea.  ThU  feeling  of 
alienation  CKista  at  the  preaent  day.  The  Arab  ia  atill 
a  depreased  and  deapiaed  being  in  Egypt.  Bowring,  in 
hia  Report  on  the  country,  remarka,  **  It  ia  ecaicely  al- 
lowable  eyen  to  aend  a  meaaage  to  a  peraon  in  authori- 
ty  by  an  Arab  aenrant"  (p.  7).  The  expu]aion  of  the 
ahepherda  aeema  to  have  been  atrangely  oonfounded  by 
Joaephua,  afler  Manetho,  with  the  £xodua  of  the  lara- 
elitea.  The  ahepherda  were  oonąaerora,  nilere,  and  op- 
preaaon;  the  laraelitea  gneats  and  alarea.  The  ahep- 
herda were  expelled,  the  laraelitea  were  delivered.  Jo- 
aephua  elaewhere  CApiany  i,  26)  giyea  from  Manetho  a 
narratiye  of  another  event  which  weara  a  much  nearer 
likeneaa  to  the  £xodua  (although  Josephua  expre88ly 
oombata  auch  an  identification)  In  the  caae  of  a  king 
Amenophia,  who  waa  ordered  by  the  goda  to  deanae 
Egypt  of  a  multiUide  of  lepera  and  other  unclean  peraona ; 
many  of  whom  were  drowned,  and  othera  aent  in  great 
nombera  to  work  in  the  quanriea  which  are  on  the  east 
aide  of  the  Nile.  After  a  time  they  were  permitted  to 
eatabliah  themaelvea  in  Avaria,  wMch  had  boen  aban- 
doned  by  the  ahepherda.  They  then  elected  a  ruler, 
Oaaraiph,  whoae  name  waa  afterwarda  changed  to  that 
of  Mosea.  Thia  chief  '*  madę  thia  law  for  them,  that 
they  ahould  not  worahip  the  Egyptian  goda,  but  ahould 
kill  the  animals  held  aacred  by  the  EgypUana ;  nor  were 
they  to  have  interoourae  with  any  but  auch  aa  were 
membera  of  their  own  body — in  all  reapecta  aiming  to 
oppoee  the  cuatoma  and  influence  of  the  nationa.  Theae, 
aending  for  aid  to  the  ahepherda  who  had  aettled  in  Je- 
niaalem,  and  havuig  receiyed  troopa  to  the  number  of 
200,000  men,  were  met  by  Amenophia,  the  king,  with  a 
yet  larger  force,  but  not  attacked.  On  a  aubeequent 
oocaaion,  howeyer,  they  were  aaaailed  by  the  Egyptiana, 
beaten,  and  driyen  to  the  coniinea  of  Syria."  Lyaima- 
chua  giyes  an  account  not  diaaimilar  to  thia,  adding 
that,  under  the  leaderahip  of  Moeea,  theae  mixed  hordea 
aettled  in  Judaea  (Cor}'*a  Ancieni  Fragmentt),  The  ac- 
count which  Diodorua  givea  of  the  migration  of  the  la- 
raelitea from  Egypt  to  Paleatine  ia  of  a  aimilar  tenor. 
The  deyiatłona  from  the  aacred  narratiye  may  eaaily  be 
accounted  for  by  £g3rptian  ignorance,  yanlty,  and  pride. 
(See  Aker8'a  Bibiical  Chronology,  chap.  y).  It  ia  alao 
apparent  that  Josephua  conaiderably  trayeatiea  the  orig- 
inal  narratiye  of  Manetho  (Kenrick,  Egypt^  ii,  159).  The 
expul8ion  of  the  Hykaoa  aeema  to  haye  taken  place 
about  two  centuriea  after  the  Exode  (q.  y.) 

If,  aa  we  haye  aome  reaaon  to  belieye,  and  aa  the 
reader  may  aee  aatisfactorily  eatabUshed  in  Moyera  and 
Bertheau  {ut  suprd),  a  race  of  the  Shemitic  family, 
coming  down  from  the  upper  (Aram)  countiy  into  the 
lower  (Canaan),  in  courae  of  time  aubjugated  Egypt  and 
eatabliahed  their  dominion,  maintaining  it  for  aome  fiyo 
hundrcd  years,  such  a  hiatorical  eyent  muat  haye  had 
a  marked  influence  on  the  religion  of  the  land.  Theae 
inyadera  are  described  (Herod,  ii,  128)  aa  enemiea  to  the 
religion  of  Egypt,  who  deatroyed  or  doaed  the  templea, 
broke  in  piecea  the  altara  and  imagea  of  the  gods,  and 
killed  the  aacred  animala.  Their  influence  on  the  Egyp- 
tian religion  waa  probably  not  unUke  that  of  the  Per- 
aiana  on  the  Grecian,  haying  for  ita  aim  and  e£fect  to 
diecountenance  and  dcatroy  a  Iow  and  degrading  ayatem 
of  idolatry ;  for  the  worahip  of  the  heayenly  bodiea,  to 
which  the  Phoenician  eąually  with  the  Peraian  inyadera 
were  giyen,  waa  higher  in  ita  character  and  effecta  than 
the  8er\'ice  of  the  ordinary  goda  of  Greece,  and  atill 
morę  so  than  the  degrading  homage  paid  by  the  Egyp- 
tiana to  the  loweat  animals.  By  thia  meana  the  She- 
mitic religion  exerted  on  the  natiye  Egyptian  religion 
a  decidcd  and  improying  influence,  which  may  be  aeen 
and  traced  in  that  element  of  the  religion  of  Egypt 


which  containa  and  preeenta  the  worahip  of  the  hei?a- 
ly  bodiea.  The  two  ayatema,  that  of  the  Egyptians  ba- 
fore  it  receiyed  inoculation  from  the  Eaat,  and  thit  d 
the  Eaatem  inyadera,  agreed  in  thia,  that  they  wereboth 
the  worahip  of  the  powen  of  naturę ;  but  they  diffend 
in  thia,  and  an  important  difEerence  it  waa,  that  the 
Egyptiana  adored  the  bmte  creation,  the  Phoenicians 
the  hoat  of  heayen.— Kitta  (See  Stud.  itnd  KriL  1839, 
ii,  898,  408;  SaalachUtz,  Forsekungen,  abth.  iii,  1849; 
Schulze,  De  fotUUm  historia  Hyktorum,  Berlin,  1848; 
Uhlemann,  IsraelUen  vnd  Hyk$oB  m  jEg^e^j  Łpz.  18dik)  * 
SeeEoYPT;  SiiKPHKiiD-Kiiiaa, 

Hylaret,  Maurice,  a  French  theobgian,  was  bon 
at  Angouldme  Sept  5, 1689.  In  1561  he  entered  the  of^ 
der  of  the  *^  Cordeliera."  About  1662  he  went  to  Finis 
to  continne  hia  atudiea,  and  returaed  to  Angooleme  in 
1667  to  be  ordained  for  the  prieathood.  He  now  de- 
yoted  hia  time  excluaiye]y  to  the  atudy  of  thedogy,  aod 
in  1662  waa  madę  a  profeaaor  of  philoaophy,  and  a  shoft 
time  later  a  profeaaor  of  theology.  In  1666  he  madę 
himaelf  quite  oonapicuoua  by  a  public  controreny  with 
the  Calyiniat  Godet.  In  1568  he  waa  called  to  the  Sor- 
bonne,  and  waa  honored  with  the  doctorate  two  yean 
later.  Henoeforward  he  preached  much,  and  the  ce- 
lebrity  he  gained  aa  a  pulpit  orator  procured  him  t 
pońtion  aa  preacher  at  Orieana  in  1672.  He  died  ia 
December,  1691.  Hia  woika  are,  Sacra  Decades  ^na- 
queparHta,  concionea  guodraffeńmaleHf  afcue  Pałdkala 
numero  gumguaffinta  (Lyona,  1691,  2  yola.  8yo) :— Con^ 
cionmn  per  adrentwn  JCnneadet  sacra  ąuatuor^  homUiat 
triginta  sex  compUeterUes,  e  quUna  riginti  septem  priora 
Joelem  propheU  explieanł,  norem  vero  posteriom  Enm- 
gdia  adwnłus  et  jfestanm  per  id  iempus  occurrenthm 
expUoant  (Paria,  1691, 8yo) : — Hwmlia  in  Erangelia  do- 
tninicalia  per  fotum  atmum  (Paria,  1604,  2  yola.  8vd). 
Dupin  also  aacribea  to  Hylaret  De  nom  conrtniendo  om 
haretids  et  de  wm  ineundo  cum  haretica  a  viro  catM- 
ico  conjitgio  (GrL  1587).— Uoefer,  A'o«r.  Biog.  Ghurak, 
xxy,  707  aq. 

Hyld  (r'Xf7,  fnatter)  waa,  acoording  to  the  doctrinet 
of  the  Manicłueana  (q.  y.),  the  Lord  of  darkiieas.  They 
held  that  the  world  ia  goremed  by  tufo  piimary  prinń- 
plea,  yiz.  **  a  subtle  and  a  groaa  aort  of  matter,  or  H^l 
and  darkneaSf  aepanted  from  cach  other  by  a  nazronr 
apaoe,**  oyer  each  of  which  preaidea  an  ełemal  LonL 
God  they  termed  the  Lord  of  the  Korld  ofLi^t;  Hrle 
the  Lord  of  the  toorJd  ofdarbtess;  and  both  of  tbese 
worlds,  **  although  diiTerent  in  their  naturea,  haye  aome 
thinga  in  common.  Each  ia  diatributed  into  fiye  cp- 
poaing  elementa,  and  the  aame  number  of  proyinoa; 
both  are  equaUy  etemal,  and,  with  their  reapectiye  loids, 
aelf-exiatent,  both  are  unchangeable,  and  exi8t  foreyer; 
both  are  of  yaat  extent,  yet  the  trorU  o/*^^^  aeems  to 
fili  morę  apace  than  the  empire  o/dttrbtess,  The  cod- 
dition  of  the  two  lords  preaiding  oyer  the  two  kinds  of 
matter  ia  eqttal,  but  they  are  totally  nnlike  in  their  na- 
turea and  diapoaitiona.  The  2j»rd  ofLight^  being  him- 
aelf happy,  ia  beneficent,  a  loyer  of  peace  and  qnietae3i, 
juat  and  wiae ;  the  Lord  ofdarknessy  being  himaelf  Toy 
miaerable,  wiahea  to  aee  othera  unhappy,  u  qiiarre]aoiiie, 
unwiae,  unjuat,  iraacible,  and  enyioua.  Yet  they  aie 
equal  in  the  eternity  of  their  exiatence,  in  their  poirer 
to  beget  beinga  like  themaelyea,  in  their  unchangetble- 
neaa,  and  in  their  power  and  knowledge;  and  yet  the 
King  of  light,  or  God,  excela  the  Princc  of  daikneaa.  or 
the  Daemon,  in  power  and  knowledge."— Moriieimt  Ck 
Iłist.  of  the  first  ihree  Centurifs,  ii,  §  41,  p.  276;  Nean- 
der,  Hisł.  ofDogmas,  i,  118, 127, 181,  etc. 

HylOBOiBm  (vXi|,  wtod,  oaed  by  andent  phikeo- 
phera  to  aignify  the  abatract  idea  fń matter;  and  (w^, 
lift)  ia  a  term  for  the  atheiatical  doctiine  which  teaćhes 
that  life  and  matter  are  inaeparable.  But  the  fonu 
which  haye  grown  out  of  thia  doctrine  haye  been  rather 
yaiiable.  Thua  ^  Strato  of  Lampaacoa  hekl  that  the 
ultimate  partidea  of  matter  were  each  and  all  of  then 
poaaeased  of  life,"  approaching,  of  courBe,  in  thia  i 


HYMEN 


431 


HTMEN^US 


to  pfwłłioiwn ;  bat  **  the  Stoics,  on  the  other  hand,  while 
they  did  not  aocord  actirity  or  life  to  eyeiy  distinct 
partide  of  matter,  beld  that  the  unirene,  aa  a  whole, 
wts  animated  by  a  principle  which  gare  to  it  motion, 
fonił,  and  life."  The  foUowera  of  Pbtinua,  vrho  held 
that  the  **  mol  of  tbe  nniyene"  animated  the  least  parti- 
cie of  matter;  or,  in  other  wordą  while  they  admitted  a 
ccitain  materiał  or  plaatic  life,  eisential  and  substantial, 
ingeneraUe  and  inoomptible,  attritmted  all  to  matter, 
eapedally  favored  the  Stoical  doctrine,  and  **  Spinoza  a»- 
leited  that  all  thinga  were  aliye  in  dilferent  degreea  (*om- 
nia  ąnamris  diveraia  gradibaa  animaU  tamen  snnt')." 
AU  the  Tariona  forma  of  thia  doctrine  evidently  miatake 
foree  for  Ufi^  Aocording  to  Łeibnita,  Boflcovich,  and 
othen,**  Matter  ia  alwaya  endowed  with  force.  £ven 
the  mi  iMrHa  aacribed  to  it  ia  a  force.  Attiaction  and 
icpnlflon,  and  chemical  affinity,  all  indicate  activity  in 
matter;  but  life  ia  a  force  alwaya  connected  with  or- 
ganizatioR,  which  much  of  matter  wanta.  Spontaneoua 
moiioii,  growth,  nutrition,  aeparation  of  parta,  genera- 
tion,  aie  phenomena  which  indicate  the  preaence  of  life, 
which  is  obrioualy  not  ooextenaive  with  matter."  See 
Fleming,  Yocalmlary  ofPkUoi,  (edited  by  Krauth),  p.  219 
8q. ;  Cadworth,  InteOecL  S^ttem,  i,  106  acj.,  144  aą.,  etc. ; 
Hańam,  Uitt,  of  Europę,  ir,  188. 

Hymen,  or  HymenSBUS,  in  Grecian  mythology, 
is  the  god  of  marriage.  Originally  the  word  aeema  to 
hare  deooted  only  the  bridal  aong  of  the  companions  of 
the  biide,  aung  by  them  aa  ahe  went  from  her  father^s 
house  to  that  of  the  bridegroom.  The  god  Hymen  ia 
fint  meotioned  by  Sappho.  **  The  legenda  conceming 
him  are  Tarioua ;  but  he  ia  generally  aaid  to  be  a  aon  of 
ApoOo  and  aome  one  of  the  Muaea.  He  ia  repreaented 
as  a  boy  with  winga  and  a  garland,  a  bigger  and  grayer 
Gapid,with  a  bńdal- toreb  and  a  yeii  in  hia  banda." 
— Chambera,  Encyclop,  y,  494. 

Hymenao^tiB  CYfiiraioc,  hymmeal),  a  profeaaor  of 
Chriatianity  at  Epheaua,  who,  with  Alexander  (1  Tim.  i, 
20)  and  Philetus  (2  Tim.  ii,  18),  had  departed  from  the 
tnth  both  in  principle  and  practice,  and  led  othera  into 
apoataay  (Neander,  PJUtnz.  i,  475).  The  chief  doctrinal 
enror  of  theae  peraona  oonaiated  in  maintaining  that "  the 
reaurrection  was  paat  already."  The  preciae  meaning  of 
thu  expre88ion  is  by  no  meana  dearly  aacertained :  the 
most  generał,  and  perhapa  beat  founded  opinion  ia,  that 
theyanderttood  the  resorrection  in  a  figuratiye  aenae  of 
the  gicat  change  prodooed  by  the  Goapel  diapenaation. 
See  below.  Some  haye  aoggeated  that  they  attempted 
to  aopport  their  yiewa  by  the  apoatle^a  language  in  hia 
Epiatle  to  the  Epheaiana  {ywfHnic — (rvvf^(uwoiif9ev— 
oiw^ytipcy,  etc.,  ii,  l<-6) ;  bat  thia  ia  yery  improbaUe ; 
lor,  if  auch  miaconoeption  of  hia  language  had  ariaen,  it 
might  eaaily  have  been  corrected ;  not  to  aay  that  one 
of  them  appeara  to  haye  been  peraonally  inimical  to  Paul 
(2  Tim.  iy,  14),  and  would  acarcely  haye  appealed  to  him 
as  an  anthority.  Moat  critica  auppoae  that  the  aame  per- 
aoo  ia  referred  to  in  both  the  epiatlea  to  Timothy  by  the 
name  of  Hymensus  (aee  Heidenreich,  Pcutoralbr,  i,  1 1 1). 
Mosheim,  howeyer,  oontenda  that  there  were  two.  He 
aeema  to  lay  great  atieaa  on  the  apoatle^a  declantion  in 
1  Tun.  i,  20,  **  Whom  /  have  deUcered  utUo  Satan,  that 
they  may  kam  not  to  blaapheme."  But,  whateyer  may 
be  the  meaning  of  thia  expreaaion,  the  infliction  waa  ey- 
idently  dcaigned  for  the  beneflt  and  reatoration  of  the 
pntiea  (compb  1  Cor.  y,  6),  and  was  therefore  far  from  in- 
dicating  their  hopeleaa  and  abandoned  wickedneaa.  See 
bebw.  Nor  do  the  terma  employed  in  the  aeoond  epia- 
tle import  a  leaa  flagrant  yiohition  of  the  Christian  pro- 
feańon  than  thoae  in  the  firat.  If  in  the  one  the  indiyid- 
oala  alloded  to  are  charged  with  haying  '*diacarded  a 
good  cooacienoe"  and  **  madę  ahipwreck  of  faith,"  in  the 
other  they  are  described  aa  indulging  "  in  yain  and  pro- 
fana babblings,  which  would  increaae  to  morę  ungodli- 
neaa,*  aa  ''haying  erred  conceining  the  truth,"  and 
"oyeithrowing  the  faith"  of  othera.  Theae  can  hardly 
he  aaid  to  be  "two  distinct  charactera, haying  nothing 
in  conunon  but  the  name"  (Moaheim^s  CommaUaritśy  i, 


804-806).  For  other  inteipretations  of  2  Tim.  ii,  18,  aee 
Gill'a  Commentary,  ad  loc,  and  Walchii  MisceUanea  Sa^ 
era,  i,  4;  i>e  NymencBO  Phiieto,  Jen.  1785,  and  Amatel. 
1744.— Kitto.  Two  pointa  refeired  to  aboye  require  ful« 
ler  elncidation. 

1.  Tke  Error  of  ffymenenu,—TtóB  was  one  that  had 
been  in  part  appropriated  fh>m  othera,  and  haa  freąuent- 
ly  been  reyiyed  aince  with  additiona.  What  initiation 
waa  to  the  Pythagoreana,  wiadom  to  the  Stoica,  adence 
to  the  followera  of  Plato,  contemplation  to  the  Peripatet- 
ica,  that  **  knowledge"  (yy&mc)  waa  to  the  Gnostica.  Aa 
there  were  likewiae  in  the  Greek  achoola  thoae  who 
looked  forward  to  a  complete  reatoration  of  all  thinga 
(j&iroKaTaffrdotę,  aee  Heyne,  ad  Yirg.  Ed,  iy,  5 ;  comp. 
jEn.  vi,  746),  ao  there  waa  "  a  regeneration"  (Tit.  iii,  6; 
Matt  xix,  28),  *<a  new  creation"  (2  Cor.  v,  17 ;  aee  Al- 
ford,  ad  loc. ;  Key.  xxi,  1), "  a  kingdom  of  heayen  and  of 
Meaaiah  or  Christ"  (Matt.  xiii;  Rey.  yii)— and  herein 
popular  belief  among  the  Jewa  coincided— unequiyocal- 
Iy  pnipounded  in  the  N.  T. ;  but  here  with  thia  remark- 
able  dilTerence,  yiz.,  that  in  a  great  measure  it  was  prea- 
ent  as  well  as  futurę — the  same  thing  in  germ  that  waa 
to  be  had  in  perfection  e>'entually.  "  The  kingdom  of 
God  ia  within  you,"  aaid  our  Lord  (Lukę  xyii,  21 ).  ^ He 
that  ia  apiritual  jndgeth  all  thinga,"  aaid  Paul  (1  Cor.  ii, 
15).  ^  He  that  ia  bom  of  God  cannot  ain,"  aaid  John  (1 
Ep.  iii,  9).  Thefe  are  likewiae  two  deatłu  and  two  rea- 
urrections  apoken  of  in  the  N.  T. ;  the  firat  of  each  aort, 
that  of  the  aoul  to  and  from  ain  (John  iii,  8-8),  "  the 
hour  which  now  is**  (ibid.  y,  24, 25,  on  which  aee  Augus- 
tine,  De  Civ.  Dei,  xx,  6) ;  the  aecond,  that  of  the  body  to 
and  from  corruption  (1  Cor.  zy,  86-44 ;  alao  John  y,28, 
29),  which  laat  ia  proapecti^e.  Now,  aa  the  doctrine  of 
the  reaurrection  of  the  body  was  found  to  inyolye  im- 
menae  difficultiea  eyen  in  thoae  earły  ida}^  (Acta  xyii, 
82 ;  1  Cor.  xy,  85 :  how  keenly  they  were  preaaed  may 
be  aeen  in  Augustine,  De  Cir.  Dei,  xxii,  12  aq.),  while, 
on  the  other  hand,  there  waa  ao  great  a  prodispoaition 
in  the  then  current  philoaophy  (not  cren  cxttnct  now) 
to  magnify  the  excellence  of  the  aoul  aboye  that  of  ita 
earthly  tabemacle,  it  was  at  once  the  eaaier  and  morę 
attractiye  conrae  to  insist  upon  and  aigue  from  the  force 
of  thoae  paaaagea  of  Holy  Scripture  which  eniarge  upon 
the  glońea  of  the  apintual  life  that  now  ia,  under  Chriat, 
and  to  paaa  over  or  explain  away  allegorically  all  that 
refera  to  a  futurę  aute  in  oonnection  with  the  reaurrec- 
tion of  the  body.  In  thia  manner  we  may  deriye  the 
firat  errora  of  the  Gnoattca,  of  whom  Hymenania  waa  one 
of  tbe  earlieat  They  were  apreading  when  John  wroto ; 
and  hia  grand-diaciple,  Irenasoa,  compiled  a  yoluminoua 
work  againat  them  {adr,  Jłesr.).  A  good  account  of 
their  fuli  deyelopment  ia  giyen  by  Gieaeler,  E,  IJ^  Per, 
i,  Diy.  i,  §  44  aq.     See  Resurrection. 

2.  The  Sentenoepaeaed  upon  him,— It  bas  been  aaserted 
by  aome  writora  of  eminence  (aee  Corn.  k  Lapide,  ad  1 
Cor.  y,  5)  that  the  **  deliyering  to  Satan"  ia  a  merę  ayn* 
onym  for  eodeaiastical  excommunication.  Such  can 
hazdly  be  the  case.  The  apoatles  poaaeeaed  many  ex- 
traordinary  prerogatiyea,  which  nonę  haye  aince  am>- 
gated.  Eyen  the  title  which  they  borę  has  been  aet 
apart  to  them  eyer  aince.  The  ahaking  off  the  duat  of 
their  feet  againat  a  city  that  would  not  receiye  them 
(Matt.  X,  14),  although  an  injunction  afterwards  giyen 
to  the  Seyenty  (Lukę  x,  11),  and  one  which  Paul  found 
it  neoeaaary  to  act  upon  twice  in  the  couiae  of  hia  min- 
iatry  (Acta  xiii,  51,  and  xviii,  6),  has  never  been  a 
practice  aince  with  Christian  ministera.  "Anathema," 
aaya  Bingham,  **is  a  word  that  occura  frequently  in 
the  ancient  canona"  (A  ntig,  xyi,  2,  16),  but  the  form 
*' Anathema  Maranatha"  ia  one  that  nonę  have  eyer  yen- 
tured  upon  aince  Paul  (1  Cor.  xvi,  22).  Aa  the  apoatles 
healed  all  manner  of  bodily  inłirmitiea,  ao  they  aeem  to 
haye  poaaeaaed  and  excrcised  the  aome  power  in  inflic&> 
ing  them — a  power  far  too  periloua  to  be  continued  when 
the  manifold  exigenciea  of  the  apostolical  age  had  paaaed 
away.  Ananiaa  and  Sapphira  both  fell  down  dead  at 
the  lebuke  of  Peter  (Acta  y,  5, 10) ;  two  words  from  the 


HYMN 


432 


HYMN 


mne  lips,  **  Tabitha,  arise,"  saf&ced  tp  raise  I>oTca8  from 
the  dead  (ibid.  ix,  40).  Paura  first  act  in  entering  npon 
his  miniady  waa  to  strike  Elymas  the  soroerer  with 
blindneea,  his  own  sight  haring  been  restored  to  him 
throagh  the  medium  of  a  disciple  (ibid.  ix.  17,  and  xiii, 
U),  while  8oon  afterwards  we  Tead  of  his  healing  the 
cripple  of  Lystra  (ibid.  xiv,  8).  £ven  apart  from  actual 
interventioa  by  the  apostles,  bodily  yisitaŁiona  are  spoken 
of  in  the  caae  of  those  who  approached  the  Lord*8  Supper 
unworthUy,  when  as  yet  no  (Uscipline  had  been  establish- 
ed:  '^For  this  catue  many  are  weak  and  aickly  among 
you,  and  a  good  number  (iKapoi,  in  the  fonner  case  it  łb 
iroKKoi)  sleep"  (1  Cor.xi,80). 

On  the  other  hand,  Satan  waa  held  to  be  the  instru- 
ment or  execationer  of  all  these  yiaitations.  Such  is 
the  character  assigned  to  him  in  the  book  of  Job  (i,  6-12; 
ii,  1-7).  Similar  agencies  are  described  1  Kinga  xxii, 
19>22,  and  1  Chroń,  xxi,  1.  In  Psa.  lxxviii,  49,  such  are 
the  causes  to  which  the  plagnes  of  Egypt  are  assigned. 
Even  our  Lord  submitted  to  be  assailed  by  him  morę 
than  once  (Matt  iv,  1-10 ;  Lukc  iv,  18  says, "  Departed 
from  him  for  a  seasorC^) ;  and  **  a  messenger  of  Satan 
was  sent  to  buffet"  the  veiy  apostle  whose  act  of  deliyer- 
ing  another  to  the  same  power  is  now  under  discussion. 
At  the  same  time,  large  powers  over  the  woild  of  spirits 
were  auŁhoritaŁively  oonveyed  by  our  Lord  to  his  im- 
mediate  followers  (to  the  Twelre,  Lukę  ix,  1;  to  the 
Seventy,  as  the  results  showed,  ibid«  x,  17-20).    See  Sa- 

TAK. 

It  only  remains  to  notice  flve  particulam  connected 
with  its  exerciBe,  which  the  apostle  himself  supplies :  1. 
Xhat  it  was  no  merę  prayer,  but  a  solemn  authoritative 
eentence  pronounced  in  the  name  and  power  of  Jesus 
Christ  (1  Cor.  v,  8-5);  2.  That  it  w^as  never  exercised 
upon  any  without  the  Church :  '*Them  that  are  without 
God  judgeth"  (ibid.  v,  18),  he  says  in  express  terms ;  8. 
That  it  was  ^'for  the  destruction  of  the  fleeh,"  t.  c.  some 
bodily  yisitation ;  4.  That  it  was  for  the  improvement 
of  tho  offender;  that  *'his  spirit  might  be  saved  in  the 
day  of  the  Lord  Jesus"  (ibid.  v,  6) :  and  that  "  he  might 
leam  not  to  blaspheme"  while  upon  earth  (1  Tim.  i,  20) ; 
5.  That  the  apostle  could  in  a  given  case  empower  others 
to  pass  such  sentenoe  in  his  abśence  (1  Cor.  v,  8, 4).  See 
Anathema. 

Thus,  while  the  *'deliveting  to  Satan"  may  resemUe 
eodesiastical  excommunication  in  some  respects,  it  has 
ita  own  characteristics  likewise,  which  show  plainly  that 
one  is  not  to  be  confounded  or  placed  on  the  same  level 
with  the  other.  Nor  again  does  Paul  himself  deliver  to 
Satan  all  those  in  whose  company  he  bids  his  oonverts 
**  not  even  to  eat"  (1  Cor.  v,  11).  See  an  able  review  of 
the  whole  subject  by  Bingham,  AnHq.yif2j  15. — Smith. 
See  £xcoautuNicATiON. 

Hymn  C^fipoc).  This  term,  as  used  by  the  Greeks, 
primarily  signified  simply  a  sonff  (comp.  Homer,  OdL  yiii, 
429 ;  Hesiod,  Op,  et  Diet,  669 ;  Pindar,  OL  i,  170 ;  xi,  74 ; 
Isthm.  iv,  74 ;  Pyth,  x,  82 ;  iEsch.  Eum,  881 ;  Soph.  A  ntig. 
809;  Plato,  RepubL  v,  459,  E,  etc.) ;  we  find  instances 
even  m  which  the  cognate  verb  v/ivavis  used  in  a  bad 
sense  {(paiikuic  iicKafi^ópirat,  Eustath.  p.  634;  comp. 
Soph.  Elecł.  382 ;  (EcL  Tyr,  1275 ;  Eurip.  Med,  426) ;  but 
usage  ultimately  appropriated  the  term  to  songs  in  praisc 
of  the  gods.  We  know  that  among  the  Greeks,  as 
among  most  of  the  nations  of  antiquity,  the  chanting  of 
songs  in  praise  of  their  gods  was  an  approved  part  of 
their  worship  (Ciem.  Alex.  Strom,  vi,  633,  ed.  Sylburg.; 
Porphyr.  de  A  bsHn,  iv,  sec.  8 ;  Phumutus,  De  Nat,  Deor,  c 
14 ;  Alex.  ab  Alex.  Oen,  DieSy  iv,  c  17,  s.  f. ;  Spanheim  in 
Ttot,  ad  CattimachutHj  p.  2  ;*  comp.  Meiners,  Geschichie  aUer 
Heligionen,  c.  13) ;  and  even  at  their  festive  entcrtain- 
ments  such  songs  were  sometimes  sung  (Athen.i>»/mo«. 
xiv,  XV,  14 ;  Polyb.  Hist,  iv,  20,  ed.  Emesti).  B^ides 
those  hymns  to  diffcrent  deities  which  have  coroe  down 
to  us  as  the  composition  of  Callimachus,  Oipheus,  Ho- 
mer, Linus,  Geanthes,  Sappho,  and  others,  we  may  with 
confidence  refer  to  the  chorał  odes  of  the  tragedians  as 
aflfoiding  q)ecimen8  of  these  sacred  songa,  such  of  them, 


at  least,  aa  were  of  a  lyiic  chancter  (Snedor^  De  Hymuii 
Vei,  Grac  p.  19).  Such  songs  were  propeiiy  caUeditymsi;. 
Henoe  Arrian  says  distinctly  (De  Jueped.  AŁex,  iv,  11, 2), 
vfivoi  fŁtv  lc  roifę  ^toifę  irocoOirm,  iwmvoi  di  ic  ay 
9pbnrovc,  So  also  Phavoiinu8 :  ^fivoc,  t)  irpoc  dtov  ^i|. 
Augustine  (m  P»€ulxxu)  thus  fully  states  the  meaning 
of  the  term :  *^  Hjnoani  landes  sunt  Dei  cum  cantiea 
Hymni  cantns  sunt,  continentes  landea  Dd.  Si  sit  Uai, 
et  non  sit  Dei,  non  est  hymnus.  Si  sit  laua  et  Dei  lans, 
et  non  cantatur,  non  est  hymnus.  Oportet  eigo  ut  u  ńt 
hymnus,  habeat  haec  tria,  et  łaudan  et  Dei  et  canliam,* 
See  Crant. 

<'Hymn,"  as  soch,  ia  not  used  in  the  English  veision 
of  the  O.  T.,  and  the  noun  only  occun  twice  in  the  N.T. 
(£ph.v,19;  CoLiii,  16),  though  in  the  original  ofthe 
latter  the  derivative  verb  {ufipiui)  oocurs  in  four  płaoes 
C^sing  a  hymn,**  Matt.  xx\'i,  30 ;  Mark  xiv,  26;  "ńng 
prałses,''Actsxvi,25;  Heb.ii,12).  TheSepŁ.,h0wevei^ 
employs  it  ireely  in  transiatiiig  the  Hebre  w  names  far  al- 
most  every  kind  of  poetical  composition  (Schleu8n.Lfir. 
ł;/ivoc).  In  fact,  the  word  does  not  seem  to  have  in  the 
Sept.  any  yery  ^jecial  meaning,  and  hence  it  calls  the 
Heb. book  of  TehUHm  the  book  ofPtabM,  not  oiUywmt; 
yet  it  frequently  uses  the  noun  ^iivoc  or  the  verb  vfivim 
as  an  equivalent  ofptahn  (e.  g.  1  Chroń,  xxv,  6;  2  Chroń. 
vii,6;  xxiii,  13;  xxix, 80;  Neh.  xii, 24;  P&a.  xl,  1,  and 
the  titles  of  many  other  paalms).  The  woid  psahOf 
however,  generally  had  for  the  later  Jcws  a  definite 
meaning,  while  the  word  hjfmn  was  more  or  less  vagtie 
in  its  applicatłon,  and  ci^łable  of  being  used  as  oocasion 
should  aiise.  If  a  new  poetical  form  or  idea  should  be 
produced,  the  name  of  Ayntn,  not  being  embarraased  hy 
a  previous  determination,  was  ready  to  aasociate  itself 
with  the  firesh  thought  of  another  literaturę.  This  seeint 
to  have  actually  bron  the  case.    See  Sok<i. 

Among  Christiana  the  h^-mn  has  alwaya  been  some- 
thing  differeut  ftom  the  psalm ;  a  different  conception 
in  thought,  a  dilTerent  type  in  composition.  See  Hym- 
KOUMY.  The  "Aym»"  which  our  Lord  sung  with  his 
disciples  at  the  Last  Supper  is  generally  supposed  to 
have  been  the  latter  part  of  the  //a/Ze/,  or  series  of 
psalms  which  were  sung  by  the  Jews  on  the  night  of 
the  PasBover,  comprehending  Psa.  cxiii'-cxviii ;  Psa. 
cxiii  and  cxiv  being  sung  before,  and  the  rest  aftcr  the 
PasBover  (Buxtorfii  Lex.  Talm,  s.  y.  ^bh,  quoted  by  Kui- 
nol  on  Matt.  xxvi,  30;  Lightfoofs  Heb,  and  Taim,  £v- 
ercitaHoru  on  Mark  xiv,  26 ;  Workt,  xi,  4S5).  See  HaLt 
ŁEŁ.  But  it  is  obyious  that  the  word  kjfńm  is  in  this 
case  not  applied  to  an  indi\'idual  psalm,  but  to  a  nmnbcr 
of  psalms  chanted  successiyely,  and  altogether  foimisg 
a  kind  of  deyotional  exerci8e  which  is  not  unaptly  call^ 
ed  a  hymn.  The  prayer  in  Acts  iv,  24-80  is  not  a  hynm, 
unlcss  we  allow  non-metrical  as  well  as  metrical  hymna 
It  may  havc  been  a  hymn  as  it  was  originally  nttered; 
but  we  can  only  judge  by  the  Greek  transUtion,  acd 
this  is  without  metre,  and  therefore  not  properly  a  hymn. 
In  the  jail  at  Philippi,  Paul  and  Silas  **  sang  hymns"  (A 
V.  **  praises")  unto  God,  and  so  loud  was  their  song  that 
their  fellow-prisoners  heard  them.  This  must  bare  been 
what  we  mean  by  singing,  and  not  merely  recitatioD. 
It  was,  in  fact,  a  yeritable  singing  of  hymns.  It  is  re- 
markable  that  the  noun  hynm  is  only  used  in  refenooe 
to  the  seryioes  of  the  Gredcs,  and  in  the  same  passagcs 
is  clearly  distinguished  from  the  psalm  (Eph.  y,  19;  CoL 
iii,  16) , "  psalms,  and  hymns,  and  spińtual  songs.'*  It  has 
been  conjectured  that  by  <*  psalms  and  hymns"  the  po- 
etical compositions  of  the  Old  Testament  are  chiefly  to 
be  understood,  and  that  the  epitbet "  spiritual,"  here  ap- 
plied to  "  songs,"  18  intended  to  mark  those  deyout  efib- 
sions  which  resnlted  from  the  spiritual  gifts  granted  to 
the  primitiye  Church ;  yet  in  1  Cor.  xiv,  26,  a  produo- 
tion  of  the  latter  class  is  called  "  a  psalm."  Joaephns,  it 
may  be  remarked,  used  the  terms  <^/<voi  and  ^ai  in 
refercnoe  to  the  Pjulms  of  Dayid  {AnL  yii,  12, 8).  See 
Psalm. 

It  is  probable  that  no  Greek  yersion  of  the  Psalms, 
eyea  suppoi^g  it  to  be  aooommodated  to  tbe  Groek 


HYMN 


433 


HYMNOLOGT 


metiea^  wouM  take  root  in  the  affections  of  the  Gentile 
conrerts.  It  was  not  only  a  que8tion  of  metre,  it  was  a 
quesrion  ottwie;  anil  Greek  tones  require(l  Greek  hymns. 
So  it  was  in  Syria.  Richer  in  tunes  than  GreecCi  for 
Greeoe  had  bat  eight,  while  Syria  had  275  (Benedict. 
Prtf.  yoLv,  Op,  EfiL  Syr,'),  the  Syrian  hymnographcn 
reveUed  in  the  variedluxury  of  their  native  musie;  and 
the  result  was  that  splendid  derelopinent  of  the  Hymn, 
as  moulded  by  the  genius  of  Bardesanes,  Harmoniiis,  and 
Ephiaem  Synis.  In  Greece,  the  eight  tones  which  seem 
to  have  latiafiert  the  exigencie8  of  Church  musie  were 
probably  accommodated  to  fixed  metrea,  each  metre  be- 
ing  wedded  to  a  particular  tnne ;  an  arrangement  to 
wMch  we  can  obserre  a  tendency  in  the  Direelioiu  (tbotU 
tmiei  (ud  meamreg  at  the  end  of  our  English  version  of 
the  Psahns.  This  ia  ako  the  case  in  the  German  hym- 
nok}gy,  where  certain  ancient  tunes  are  recognised  as 
modela  for  the  metres  of  later  oompositions,  and  their 
names  are  ałwaya  prefixed  to  the  hymns  in  oommon  use. 
See  Musie. 

It  ia  worth  while  inąuiring  what  profane  models  the 
Greek  hymnographers  chose  to  work  aftcr.  In  the  old 
religion  of  Greece  the  word  hjfmn  had  already  acquired 
a  aacred  and  liturgical  meaning,  which  oould  not  fail  to 
auggest  its  mpplication  to  the  productiona  of  the  Ghris> 
tian  muae.  So  mach  for  the  name.  The  apecial/omu 
of  the  Greek  hymn  were  yarioos.  The  Homeric  and 
Orphic  hymns  were  written  in  the  epic  style,  and  in 
hexameter  yerae.  Their  metre  waa  not  adapted  for 
ainging;  and  therefore,  thongh  they  may  have  been  re- 
cited,  it  ia  not  likely  that  they  were  aung  at  the  celebra* 
tion  of  the  mysteriee.  We  tum  to  tho  Piiidaric  hymua, 
and  here  we  find  a  aofficient  rariety  of  metre,  and  a  defi- 
nite  relaticm  to  musie.  Theae  hymna  were  sung  to  the 
aooompaniment  of  the  lyre,  and  it  ia  yery  likely  that 
they  engaged  the  attention  of  the  early  hymn-writers. 
The  dithyramb,  with  its  development  into  the  dramatic 
chorus,  was  aufficiently  connected  with  musical  tnidi- 
tions  to  make  ics  form  a  f  tting  rehicle  for  Christian  po- 
etrr;  and  there  certainly  ia  a  dithyrambic  aayor  about 
the  earUest  known  Chriatian  hymn,  aa  it  appears  in 
Oem.  Ależ.  p.  312, 318,  ed  Potter. 

The  iiiBt  impolae  of  CHuiatian  deyotion  waa  to  run 
into  the  moulds  ordinarily  uaed  by  the  worahippers  of 
the  old  religion.  Thia  waa  morę  than  an  impulse — it 
was  a  neccssity,  and  a  twofold  neceaaity.  The  new 
spirit  was  atrong;  but  it  had  two  limitationa:  the  difli- 
ailty  of  ooncńying  a  new  musioo-poetical  literatura ; 
aod  the  ąnality  so  peculiar  to  deyotional  musie,  of  lin- 
gering  in  the  heart  after  the  head  haa  been  conyinced 
and  the  belief  changed.  The  old  tunes  woidd  be  a  real 
neoeańty  to  the  new  life;  and  the  exile  firom  his  an- 
cient fiaith  woold  delight  to  hear  on  the  foreign  aoil  of 
a  new  religion  the  familiar  melodies  of  home.  Dean 
Treneh  has  indeed  labored  to  show  that  the  reyerse  was 
the  case,  and  that  the'eariy  Christian  ahrank  with  hor- 
ror from  the  sweet  but  polluted  enchantmenta  of  his  un- 
belieying  aUtc.  We  can  only  asaent  to  thia  in  eo  far  as 
we  allow  it  to  be  the  aeoond  phase  in  the  history  of 
hymns.  When  old  traditions  died  away,  and  the  Chris- 
tian acqturetl  not  only  a  new  belief,  but  a  new  aocial  hu- 
manity,  it  was  posaible,  and  it  was  desirablo  too,  to  break 
fororer  the  attenuated  thread  that  bound  him  to  the  an- 
cient world.  Thus  it  was  broken ;  and  the  trochaic  and 
iamiiie  metres,  onaaaociated  as  they  were  with  heathen 
worship,  though  largely  asaodated  with  the  heathen 
drama,  oUaincil  an  aacendant  in  the  Chriatian  Chureh. 
In  1  Cnr.  xiy,  26,  allusion  is  madę  to  imptwised  hymns, 
which,  being  the  outbontof  a  paasionate  emotion,  would 
pfobaliły  aaaume  the  dithyrambic  form.  But  attempts 
have  been  madę  to  dctect  fragmenta  of  ancient  hymns 
coofonned  to  mora  obyioos  metrea  in  Eph.  v,  14 ;  James 
i,  17 ;  Rer.  i,  8  8q. ;  xy,  8.  These  pretended  fragments, 
howeyer,  may  with  much  greater  likelibood  be  referred 
to  the  awing  of  a  proae  oompoaition  unconacioualy  cul- 
minating  into  metre.  It  waa  in  the  Latin  Church  that 
the  tiochaie  and  iambic  metrea  became  moat  deeply  root- 
IV.— Ek 


ed,  and  acquired  the  greatest  depth  of  tonę  and  grace  of 
finish.  As  an  exponent  of  Christian  feeling  they  soon 
auperaeded  the  accentual  hexamcters;  they  were  used 
mnemonically  against  the  heathen  and  the  heretics  by 
Commodianus  and  Augustine.  The  introduction  of 
hymns  into  the  Latiu  Church  is  commonly  referred  to 
Ambroae.  But  it  is  impossiblc  to  conceirc  that  ( hc  West 
should  haye  been  ao  far  behind  the  £ast :  similar  neces- 
sities  muat  harc  produced  similar  results ;  and  it  \n  morę 
likely  that  the  tradition  is  duc  to  the  yery  marked  prom- 
inence  of  Ambroae  aa  the  greateat  of  all  the  Latin  liym- 
nographers. 

The  trechaic  and  iambic  metres,  thus  impressed  into 
the  aenrice  of  the  Chureh,  haye  continucd  to  hołd  their 
growid,  and  are,  in  fact,  the  7*8,  S.M.,C.M.,  and  I^M.  of 
our  modem  hymna,  many  of  which  aro  translations,  or, 
at  any  ratę,  imitations  of  Latin  originals.  Thcsc  metres 
were  peculiarly  adapted  to  the  graye  and  aombrc  spirit 
of  Latin  Cliristianity.  Less  ecstatic  than  the  yaricd 
chorus  of  the  Greek  Chureh,  they  did  not  aoar  upon  the 
ptnion  of  a  lofty  piaise  so  much  as  they  drooi)ed  and 
sank  into  the  depths  of  a  great  aorrow.  They  were  aub- 
jectirc  rather  thanobjectirc;  they  appealed  to  the  heart 
more  than  to  the  understandiug ;  and,  if  they  containeU 
leaa  theology,  they  were  fuUer  of  a  rich  Christian  hu* 
manity.  (See  Deyling,  Obst,  Sacr,  iii,  430 ;  II Uligcr,  1)6 
PsaL  Hymn,  cUgue  odar.  gac,  dtacrtmtn^jYiteb.  1720 ;  Ger« 
bert,  Dt  cantu  et  muficoy  Bamb.  et  Frib.  1774, 2  vols.  4to; 
Rheinwald,  ChrittL  Archaol,  p.  262.)  Our  Information 
respecting  the  hymnology  of  the  iirat  Christiana  is  ex- 
tremely  acanty :  the  most  distinct  noticc  we  possess  of  it 
is  that  contained  in  Pliny's  celebrated  cplstlc  (A)7.x,97) : 
"  Carmen  Ckrisło  cuan  deo^  dicere  tecum  iiwicem,^  (See 
Augusti,  llandbuch  der  ChritiUchen  A  rchaoloffity  ii,  1- 
160 ;  Walchii  Miscdlanea  Sacra ^  i,  2 ;  De  hymnia  ecdesim 
ApotłoHctTf  AmsteL  1744 ;  and  other  monographa  ci  ted 
in  Yolbeding,  Itidex  Programmatum,  p.  Ia3.) — Kit  to; 
Smith. 

Hymnar  or  Hymnal  is  the  name  by  which  ia 
designated  a  Church  book  containing  hymns.  Buch  a 
hymnar,  acconling  to  Gennadiua,  was  compUed  by  Pau- 
linus  of  Nola  (q.  v.).— Walcott,  Sacred  A  rchceoL  p.  320 ; 
Augusti,  ChrisU,  A  rckaoL  iii,  710  aq. 

Hymnarium.    See  Hymnar. 

Hymnology.  "  Poetry  and  its  twin  sister  rausic 
are  the  most  sublime  and  spiritual  arts,  and  are  much 
more  akin  to  the  geniua  of  Christianity,  and  minister 
far  moro  copiously  to  the  purposes  of  deyotion  and  cdifi- 
cation  than  architecture,  painting,  and  sculpture.  They 
employ  word  and  tonę,  and  can  speak  thereby  moro  di- 
rectly  to  the  spirit  than  the  plastic  orts  by  stone  and 
oolor,  and  giye  more  adeąuate  expre88ion  to  the  whole 
wealth  of  the  world  of  thought  and  feeling.  Li  the 
Old  Testament,  as  is  well  known,  they  were  essential 
parts  of  diyinc  worship ;  and  ao  they  haye  been  in  all 
ages,  and  almost  all  branches  of  the  Christian  Church. 
Of  the  yarious  spccies  of  religious  poetry,  the  hyn^n  is 
the  earliest  and  most  important.  It  has  a  rich  history, 
in  which  the  deepest  experiencc8  of  Christian  lifc  aro 
stored.  But  it  attained  fuli  bloom  (as  we  will  noticc  bc- 
low)  in  the  eyangelical  Chureh  of  the  German  and  £ng* 
lish  tongue,  where  it,  like  the  Bibie,  became  for  the  first 
time  truły  the  possession  of  the  people,  instcad  of  being 
restricted  to  priest  or  choir"  (Schaff",  Ch,  History),  "A 
hymn  is  a  lyrical  discourse  to  the  feelings.  It  should 
either  cxcite  or  expre88  feeling.  The  recitation  of  his* 
torical  facts,  descriptions  of  sccner}',  narrations  oferenta, 
meditations.  may  sdl  tend  to  inspire  feeling.  Hymns  are 
not  to  be  excluded,  thcrefure,  because  they  are  deticicnt  in 
lyrical  form  or  in  feeling,  if  experience  shows  that  they 
haye  power  to  excite  pious  emoŁions.  Not  many  of 
Newton'8  hymns  can  be  called  poetical,  yet  few  hjinns 
in  the  English  language  aro  more  useful"  (Beecher, 
Preface  to  the  Plymouth  Collection).  The  hymn,  as 
such,  is  not  intended  to  be  didactic,  and  yet  it  is  one 
of  the  surest  meana  of  conyeying  '^aound  doctrine,"  and 


HYMNOLOGY 


434 


HYMNOLOGY 


of  perpetuating  it  in  the  Chuich.  The  Greek  and  Latin 
Tathcrs  well  undentood  tbis.  Bardesanes  (see  below) 
'Idiffused  his  Gnostic  errors  in  Syńac  hymns;  and  tiU 
that  language  ceased  to  be  the  Uving  organ  of  thought, 
thc  Syrian  fathers  adopted  this  modę  of  inculcatiug 
truth  in  metrical  oompositions.  The  hymna  of  Arius 
were  great  farorites,  and  contributed  to  spread  his  pe- 
culiar  doctrinea.  ChryBo«tom  found  the  hymns  of  Arian 
worship  80  attractive  that  he  took  care  to  couuteract 
the  effect  of  them  as  much  as  possible  by  proyiding  thc 
Catholic  ChuTch  with  metńcal  oompositions.  Aagu2»- 
tine  also  composed  a  hymn  in  order  to  check  the  enors 
of  the  Donadsts,  whom  he  represents  as  making  great 
use  of  newly-composed  hymns  for  the  propagation  of 
their  opinions.  The  writings  of  Ephraem  Syrus,  of  the 
4th  centuiy,  contain  hymns  on  yarious  topics,  relating 
chicfly  to  the  religious  ąuestions  of  the  day  wbich  agi- 
tated  the  Church."  Yet  a  merę  setting  forth  of  Chris- 
tian doctrine  in  rerse  does  not  constitute  a  hymn ;  the 
thoughts  and  the  language  of  the  Scriptures  must  be  re- 
produoed  in  a  lyrical  way  In  order  to  serye  the  needs  of 
song.  The  most  popular  and  lasting  hymns  are  thoae 
which  are  most  lyrical  in  form,  and  at  the  same  time 
most  deeply  penetnited  with  Christian  Hfe  and  feeUng. 
Nor  can  hymns,  in  the  proper  sense  of  the  ivord,  be  other 
than  popuJar.  The  Romish  Church  discourages  oongre- 
gational  worship,  and  therefore  she  produoes  few  hymns, 
notwithstanding  the  number  of  beautiful  religious  oom- 
positions which  are  to  be  found  in  her  offices,  and  the 
fine  metrical  productions  of  the  Middle  Ages,  of  which 
morę  in  a  later  portion  of  this  article.  Hymns  for  Prot- 
estants,  being  *'  composed  for  congregational  use,  must 
express  all  the  yarieties  of  cmotion  common  to  the 
Christian.  They  must  include  in  their  wide  rangę  the 
trembling  of  the  sinner,  the  hope  and  joy  of  the  belieyer  \ 
they  must  so^md  the  alarm  to  the  impenitent,  and  cheer 
the  afflicted;  they  must  summon  the  Church  to  an  ear- 
nest  following  of  her  Redeemer,  go  down  with  the  dying 
to  the  vale  of  death,  and  make  it  yocal  with  the  notes  of 
triumph ;  they  must  attend  thc  Christian  in  eyery  step  of 
his  life  as  a  heayenly  melody.  There  can  be  nothing 
eaoteric  in  the  hymn.  Besides  this,  the  hymn,  skilfully 
liuked  with  musie,  becomes  the  companion  of  a  Chris- 
tian's  solitary  hours.  It  is  thc  prop^y  of  a  good  lyric 
to  exist  in  the  mind  as  a  spińtual  presence ;  and  thus, 
as  a  '  hidden  soul  of  harmony,'  it  dwells,  a  soul  in  the 
soul,  and  ńses,  often  unsought,  into  distinct  conscious- 
ness.  The  worldly  Gothe  advised,  as  a  means  of  mak- 
ing life  less  commonplace,  that  one  should  *  eyery  day, 
at  least,  hear  a  little  song  or  read  a  good  poem.'  Hap- 
pier.  he  who,  from  his  abundant  acquaintance  with 
Christian  lyrics,  has  the  song  within  him ;  who  can  fol- 
low  the  purer  counsel  of  Paul,  and  'speak  to  himtelfin 
hymns  and  spińtual  songs,  singing  and  making  melody 
t»  his  heart  to  the  Lord'  (Eph.  y,  19)"  {MeŁhodiH  Ouar- 
tedy,  July,  1849).  For  the  yocal  execution  of  hymns 
rjB  a  part  of  Church  sernice,  see  Sixgino;  and  for  their 
instrcmental  accompaniments,  see  Musie. 

On  the  que8tion  of  the  use  of  hymns  of  human  com- 
positian  in  the  Church,  there  were  disputes  at  a  yery 
carly  period.  The  Council  of  Braga  (Portugal),  A.D. 
563,  forbade  the  use  of  any  form  of  song  except  psalms 
and  passages  of  Scripture  (Canon  xii).  On  this  subject, 
Bingham  remarks  that  it  was  in  andent  times  ''no  ob- 
jection  against  the  psalmody  of  the  Church  that  she 
sometimes  madę  use  of  psalms  and  hjnrans  of  human 
composition,  besides  thoee  of  the  sacred  and  inspired 
writers.  For  though  St  Austin  reflects  upon  the  Dona- 
tists  for  their  psalms  of  human  composition,  yet  it  was 
not  merely  because  they  were  human,  but  because  they 
preferreil  them  to  the  diyine  hymns  of  Scripture,  and 
their  indecent  way  of  chanting  them,  to  the  graye  and 
Bobcr  method  of  the  Church.  St.  Austin  himself  madę 
a  psalm  of  many  parts,  in  imitation  of  the  119th  Psalm ; 
and  this  he  did  for  the  use  of  his  people,  to  presence 
them  from  the  errors  of  Donatus.  It  would  be  absurd 
to  thiuk  that  he  who  madę  a  psalm  himself  for  the 


people  to  sing  should  quanel  with  other  psalms  mcRly 
because  they  were  of  human  composition.  It  has  beta 
demonstiated  that  there  always  were  such  psalms,  asd 
hymns,  and  doxologies  composed  by  pioua  men,  and  med 
in  the  Church  from  the  first  foundation  of  it;  nor  did 
any  but  Paulus  Samosatensis  take  exceptioa  to  tłw 
use  of  them ;  and  he  did  so  not  because  diey  were  of 
human  composition,  but  because  they  containcd  a  doc- 
trine oontrary  to  his  owu  priyate  opinions.  St.Hilaiy 
and  St.  Ambrose  madę  many  such  hymns,  which,  wboi 
some  muttered  against  in  the  Spanish  churches  becauK 
they  were  of  human  composition,  the  fourth  Conncil  of 
Toledo  madę  a  decree  to  coniirm  the  use  of  them,  togetłip 
er  with  the  doxologie8  'Glory  be  to  the  Father,'  ecc, 
'Glory  be  to  God  on  high,'  threatening  excommuiiica- 
tion  to  any  that  should  reject  them.  Thc  only  thing 
of  weight  to  be  urged  against  all  this  is  a  canon  of  the 
Council  of  Laodicea,  which  foibids  all  i6ŁWTitovc  ^X- 
fiovc,  all  priyate  psalms,  and  aU  uncanonical  books  to  be 
read  in  the  Church.  For  it  might  seem  that  by  pri- 
yate psalms  they  mean  all  hymns  of  human  composi- 
tion. Bnt  it  was  intended  rather  to  cKclude  apocn^ihal 
hymns,  such  as  went  under  the  name  of  Solomon,  as  Bal- 
zamon  and  Zonaras  understand  it,  or  else  such  as  were 
not  approyed  by  public  authority  in  the  Church.  If  it 
be  extended  further,  it  contradicts  the  cuirent  practice 
of  the  whole  Church  besides,  and  cannot,  in  reasoo,  be 
construed  as  any  morę  than  a  priyate  order  for  tbc 
churches  of  that  proyince,  madę  upon  some  particolor 
reasons  unknown  to  us  at  tlus  day.  Notwithstanding^ 
therefore,  any  argument  to  be  diawn  from  this  canon,  it 
is  eyident  the  ancients  madę  no  scruple  of  using  psalms 
or  hymns  of  human  composition,  proyided  they  were 
pious  and  orthodox  for  the  substance,  and  composed  by 
men  of  eminenoe,  and  receiyed  by  just  authority.  and 
not  brought  in  clandestinely  into  the  Church*"  (Ori^ 
EodeM,  bk.  xiy,  eh.  i). 

The  Christian  Church,  in  all  periods,  has  been  aocus- 
tomed,  as  we  haye  already  stated,  to  use  psalma  and 
hyntns  in  public  worship.  The  psalms  are  portiona  of 
the  Psalms  of  Dayid;  thc  hymns  are  human  oompon- 
tions.  On  the  history  of  singing  in  worship  generaUy, 
see  PsALMODY,  mider  which  head  will  also  be  giyen  an 
account  of  the  standard  hymn-books  in  the  seyeral  eran- 
gelical  denominations. 

I.  Ancimt  Hymns, — A  few  hymns  have  come  down  to 
us  from  yery  remote  antiquity.  "  Basil  cites  aa  eren- 
ing  hymn  from  an  unknown  author,  which  he  describei 
as  in  his  time  (4th  century)  yeiy  ancient,  handed  floim 
from  the  fathers,  and  in  use  among  the  people.  Dr.  J. 
Pye  Smith  consideis  it  the  oldest  hynm  extant.  The 
following  is  his  translation  of  it:  "Jesus  Christ,  Joyfid 
light  of  the  holy !  Glory  of  the  Etemal,  heayenly,  holy, 
blessed  Father !  Haying  now  come  to  the  setting  of  the 
sun,  beholding  the  eyening  light,  we  praise  the  Father, 
and  the  Son,  and  the  Holy  Spirift  cf  God.  Thou  art 
worthy  to  be  praised  of  sacred  yoices,  at  aU  seasons,  O 
Son  of  God,  who  giyest  life.  Whereforc  the  univene 
glorifieth  thee!"  (Coleman,^iiafn<  CArMfMonfy,  eh.  xvi, 
§  5).  From  the  letter  of  the  elder  Pliny  to  Trajan  we 
know  that  as  early  as  the  beginuiug  of  the  2d  centnry 
the  Christians  praised  Christ  as  their  God  in  aongs:  sod 
from  Eusebius  (Ecdes.  Hitt,  y,  28)  we  leam  that  there 
existed  a  whole  multitude  of  such  songs.  Bat  the  old- 
est hymn  to  Christ,  remaining  to  us  complete  fnHn  the 
period  of  persecution,  is  that  of  Clemens  Alexandrinns 
(q.  y.).  It  is  giyen  in  fuU,  Greek  and  Latin,  in  Cok- 
man  {L  c.) :  see  also  Piper,  Ciemenfis  I/ymmts  w  Saha/o- 
rem  (Gotting.  1835),  and  BuU,  Defnuiofdei  Nicana,  § 
111,  eh.  ii,  cited  by  Coleman.  ''lliough  regarded  as  a 
poetical  production,  it  has  little  claim  to  conaderatioo; 
it  shows  the  strain  of  the  deyotion  of  the  eaily  Chris- 
tians :  we  see  in  it  thc  heart  of  primitiye  piety  labor- 
ing  to  giye  utterance  to  its  emotiona  of  wonder,  lorę, 
and  gratitude,  in  yiew  of  the  offices  and  cbaracter  of 
the  Redeemer.  It  is  not  found  in  the  later  offices  of  (he 
Church,  because,  as  is  supposed,  it  was  thoughŁ  t6  te- 


HYMNOLOGY 


435 


HYMNOLOGY 


,  in  its  meaflure  and  antiphoiul  stractiure,  the 
flongs  nsed  in  pagan  wofBhip"  (Coleman,  Prim,  Church,  p. 
870>  The  oldcst  Chiistian  hynm-whten,  how€ver, 
were  moatly  Gnostics  in  Łheir  doctrines,  and  they  seem 
to  hare  nsed  their  aongs  aa  ''a  popular  means  of  com- 
mending  and  propagattng  their  errors."  The  fint  of 
theae  was  Bardesanea,  in  the  S jrian  Church  of  the  2d 
ontniy,  wbo  wrote  in  imitation  of  the  Ptahns  150  hymna, 
«te4  GnotUe  additiont.  Yalentinus  of  Alexandria  be- 
kmgs  alao  to  the  oldeat  hynn-writen  (comp.  Mttnter, 
Ode  (7iHweibee,Copenh.  1712).  TYieGloriainExoeMs(ą, 
T.),  which  la  atill  reUuned  in  uae,  ia  aacribed  to  the  thiid 
cenUny.    See  Asigbucal  Hymn. 

1.  Óriemial  and  Greek.  —  The  Thertq)attm  in  Egypt 
Mng  in  their  aaaembliea  old  hymna  tianamitted  by  tr»- 
ditioa.  When,  nnder  Conatantine  the  Gieat,  Chriati- 
anity  becune  the  religion  of  the  atate,  the  hymna  ac- 
ąnired  the  importance  of  regular  liturgical  Church  aonga. 
Ephraem  Synia  (q.  y.),  in  the  4th  centnry,  who  may  be 
ooHidered  aa  the  repreaentadye  of  the  whole  Syrian 
hymnology,  aonght  to  bring  the  heretical  hymna  of  the 
Gnoatics  ińto  diaiiae.  In  the  Eaatem  Church  the  hymna 
of  Arins  had,  by  their  practical  Chriatian  apirit,  acquired 
morę  popcdarity  than  the  orthodox  hymna,  which  con- 
ssted  mostly  of  an  asaemblage  of  dogmatic  formulaa. 
To  oppoae  thia  tendency,  Gregory  of  Nazianzum  and 
Syneńoa  oompoaed  a  number  of  new  orthodox  hymna, 
but,  not  being  adapted  to  the  comprehenaion  of  the  peo- 
ple  generally,  theae  did  not  become  popular,  and  thua 
iailed  to  answer  the  purpoee  of  the  writera.  Sacred  po- 
etry  in  generał  began  to  decline  among  the  Grraka ;  and 
aa  in  the  next  oentuiy  the  atrife  conceming  the  adoration 
of  Maiy  and  the  aainta  began,  the  orthodox  hymna  be- 
eame  merę  aongs  of  praiw  to  theae.  Sach  are  the  hymna 
of  Coamas,  biahop  of  Majumena  (780) :  Andreaa,  biahop 
of  Crete  (660-782) ;  Germanns,  patriarch  of  Conatantino- 
ple  (634-784) ;  Johu  Damaacenna  in  the  8th  centuiy,  and 
Theophanea,  metropolitan  of  Nicsa,  and  Joaephus,  dea- 
eon  of  Coostantinople,  in  the  9th. 

In  the  hiatory  of  hymnology,  Schaff  diatingniahea 
three  perioda,  both  in  the  Greek  and  Latin  Church  po- 
etiy :  (I.)  that  of  formation,  while  it  was  alowly  throw- 
iag  off  dasaical  metres  and  lnventing  ita  peculiar  atyle, 
down  to  about  650 ;  (2.)  that  of  perfection,  down  to  820 ; 
Ck)  that  of  decline  and  decay,  to  1400,  or  to  the  fali  of 
Conatantinople.  **  The  firat  period,  beautiful  aa  are  some 
of  the  odea  of  Gregory  Nazianzen  and  Sophroniua  of 
JeruaaJem,  haa  impreaaed  acarcely  any  tracea  on  the 
Greek  oIRce  booka.  The  fiouriahing  period  of  Greek 
poetry  ooincides  with  the  period  of  the  image  contro- 
Tcniea,  and  the  moet  eminent  poeta  were  at  the  aame 
time  adrocatea  of  iroagea;  pre- eminent  among  them 
bdng  John  of  Damaacua,  who  haa  the  double  honor 
of  being  the  greateat  theolog^an  and  the  greateat  poet 
ef  the  Greek  Church.  The  flower  of  Greek  poetry 
bdonga,  thcrefore,  to  a  later  dirision  of  our  hiatory. 
Yet,  sińce  we  find  at  leaat  the  riae  of  it  in  the  5th  cen- 
imy, we  ahall  give  here  a  brief  deacription  of  ita  pecul- 
iar character.  The  earlieat  poeta  of  the  Greek  Church, 
e^iedalty  Gregory  Nazianzen  in  the  4th,  and  Sophro- 
niua of  Jeniaalem  in  the  7th  century,  employed  the  daa- 
eical  metrea,  which  are  entirely  unsuitable  to  Chriatian 
ideaa  and  Church  aong,  and  therefore  graduaUy  fell  out 
of  nae.  Rh>'me  found  no  entranoe  into  the  Greek  Church. 
In  ita  atead  the  metrical  or  harmonie  proee  waa  adopt- 
ed  from  the  Hebrew  poetry  and  the  earlieat  Chriatian 
hymna  of  Mary,  Zachariaa,  Simeon,  and  the  angelic  hoat 
Anatdius  of  Conatantinople  (t4ó8)  waa  the  first  to  re- 
nouace  the  tyranny  of  the  daaaic  metre  and  atrike  out  a 
new  path.  The  eaaential  pointa  in  the  peculiar  ayatem 
of  the  Greek  reraification  are  the  foUowing:  The  firat 
ataaza,  which  forma  the  model  of  the  ancceeding  onea, 
ia.  called  in  technicai  langnage  Ilirmos,  becauae  it  drawa 
the  othcn  after  it.  The  auoceeding  atanzaa  are  called 
Traparia  (stanaaa),  and  are  divided,  for  chanting,  by 
eonmaa,  without  r^paid  to  the  aenae.  A  number  of 
tmparia,  fram  thiee  to  twenty  or  morę,  form  an  Ode, 


and  thia  conesponda  to  the  Latin  Seguenoe^  which  waa 
introduced  about  the  aame  time  by  the  monk  Notker  in 
St.GaU.  £ach  ode  ia  founded  on  a  Atrmof,  and  enda 
with  a  troparion  in  praiae  of  the  hol^^Yirgin.  The 
odea  are  commonly  arranged  (probably  afler  the  exam- 
ple  of  Buch  Psalma  aa  the  25th,  112th,  and  119Łh)  in 
acroatic,  aometimea  in  alphabetic  order.  Ninę  odea  form 
a  Canon,  The  older  odea  on  the  great  eventa  of  the  in- 
camation,  the  reaunection,  and  the  aacenaion,  are  aome- 
timea aublime ;  but  the  later  long  canona,  in  glorification 
of  unknown  martyra,  are  extremely  prosaic  and  tediona, 
and  iidlofelementaforeign  to  the  Gospel  £ven  the  beat 
hymnological  productiona  of  the  £aat  lack  the  healtb- 
ful  8im{dicity,  naturalneaa,  fenror,  and  depth  of  the  Latin 
and  of  the  evangelical  Protestant  hymn. 

**  The  Greek  Church  poetry  ia  contained  in  the  liturg- 
ical booka,  eapedally  in  the  twelve  yolumee  of  the  Meniea, 
which  correapond  to  the  I^tin  Breriary,  and  conaiBt,  for 
the  moet  part,  of  poetic  or  half  poetie  odea  in  rhythmic 
proee.  Theae  treaaurea,  on  which  nine  centuriea  haye 
wrought,  have  hitherto  been  almoet  excluaiyely  confined 
to  the  Oiiental  Church,  and,  in  fact,  yield  but  few  gndna 
of  gokł  for  generał  uae.  Neale  haa  latterly  madę  a  hap- 
py effort  to  reproduoe  and  make  aooeaaible  in  modem 
Eng^h  metrea,  with  very  conaiderable  abridgmenta,  the 
moet  Yaluabk  hjrmna  of  the  Greek  Church.  We  give  a 
few  apecimena  of  Nea]e'B  tranalationa  of  hymna  of  St.  An- 
atoliua,  patriarch  of  Conatantinople,  who  attended  the 
Council  of  Chalcedon  (451).  The  first  ia  a  Christmaa 
hymn,  commencing  in  Greek:  Mćya  koi  irapddo^ov 
dai/fia. 

'  Asreat  and  mtghty  wonCer, 

The  featal  makea  aecure : 

The  Ytrcio  beara  the  Infimt 

With  Yirgin-hoDor  pnre. 

The  Word  la  madę  incamate, 

And  yet  remaina  on  high : 
And  cbernbim  aing  anthema 

To  ahepherda  from  the  aky. 

And  we  with  them  trinmphant 

Repeat  the  hymn  agaln : 
*'  To  OoD  on  hfgh  be  glory, 

And  peace  on  earth  to  men  !** 


Whlle  thu8  they  »ng  yonr  Monarcha 

Thoee  brlght  angelic  banda, 
Rejoice,  ye  ralea  and  monntatna ! 


Ye  oceaua,  clap  your  banda ! 
Since  all  He  oomee  to  ranaom, 

By  all  be  He  adored, 
The  Infant  bora  In  Bethlehem, 

The  SaYionr  and  the  Lobd  ! 
Now  idol  forma  shall  periab, 

All  error  ahall  decay. 
And  CoBiaT  ahall  \rield  Hia  aceptra, 

Our  LoBD  and  Gon  for  aye.' 

Another  apectmen  of  a  Chriatmaa  hymn  by  the  aamc^ 
commencing  lv  Btt^kufA : 

'  In  Bethlehem  ia  He  bom  1 
Haker  of  all  thinn,  eTerlaeting  God  1 

He  opena  Edenie  gate, 
Monarch  of  ages  I    Thenoe  the  flery  sword 

Glvee  glortoae  paaaage ;  thence, 
The  eevering  mia-wall  overthrown,  the  powera 

Of  earth  and  Heaven  are  one ; 
Anęels  and  men  renew  their  auclent  leagae, 

Tne  pnre  ręjoln  the  pnre, 
In  happy  nnion  \    Now  the  Ylrglo-womb 

LIko  Bome  chemblc  throne 
Containetb  Hlm,  the  Uncontainable : 

Beara  Him,  whom  while  thev  bear 
The  aerapha  tremble !  beara  Him,  aa  He  oomea 

To  Hhower  opon  the  world 
The  fhlneaa  of  Uia  eyerlaating  love  V 

One  morę  on  Chriat  calming  the  storm,  Zo^ac  rpucu* 
fAiaCf  as  reproduced  by  Neale : 

*  Plerce  waa  the  wUd  billów, 

Ihirk  waa  the  night ; 
Oars  lftbor*d  heavily ; 

Foam  g1immer'd  whlte ; 
Marinera  trembled ; 

Ferii  waa  nigb ; 
Then  sald  the  God  of  God, 

"Peace I    ItlaL" 
RIdge  of  the  monntaln-waye, 

Lower  thy  crest ! 


HYMNOLOGY 


436 


HYMNOLOGY 


I 

L 


Wail  of  Earocljdoo, 
Bo  tkoa  at  w»% ! 

Perli  can  nonę  be— 
Sorrow  miiat  fly— 

Wbere  uith  the  Łlght  of  light, 
"Peąceł   Ittal/' 

Jesu,  Dellyerer ! 
ComeThontorae: 

Soothe  Thon  mj  Yoyaglog 
Over  life's  sea ! 

Thoa,  wheu  the  atomi  of  death 
Roara  sweeplng  bj, 

Whlaper,  O  Trnth  of  trath ! 
"Peacel  ItlaL'"" 
2.  Latm  Churek.^OT  far  morę  importance  to  the 
Christian  Chnrch  than  the  Greek  are  the  Latin  hymna 
produced  in  the  earlier  ageis  or  the  period  coveriiig  the 
4th  to  the  16th  oentories.  Thoagh  sroaUer  in  oompassi 
Latin  hymnology  far  surpaaaea  the  Greek  '*in  artLeaa 
aimplicity  and  tnith,  and  in  richneasi  vigor,  and  fiihiesB 
of  thought,  and  la  much  morę  akin  to  the  Proteatant 
apirit.  With  objectire  churchljr  character  it  combines 
deeper  feeling  and  morę  8ubjective  appropriation  and 
experienoe  of  aalvation,  and  henoe  morę  warmth  and 
fer\'or  than  the  Greek.  It  forma  in  these  respecta  the 
timnaition  to  the  erangelical  hymn,  which  givea  the 
most  beautiftil  and  profound  ezpresaion  to  the  personal 
enjoyment  of  the  Saviour  and  his  redoeming  grace. 
The  best  Latin  hymna  have  come  through  the  Koman 
Breviary  into  generał  uae,  and  through  tranalationa  and 
reproductiona  have  beoome  naturalized  in  Protestant 
churches.  They  treat,  for  the  rooat  part,  of  the  great 
iacts  of  aalyation  and  the  fundamental  doctrines  of 
Ghristianity"  (Schaff,  CA.  I/ist.  ii,  585).  But  many  of 
them,  like  the  later  productiona  of  the  Greek  Church, 
are  devoted  to  the  praisea  of  Mary  and  the  martyrB,  and 
are  ritiated  vith  ail  manner  of  superstitions.  One  of 
the  oldest  writers  of  Latin  h>inns  is  Hilary  of  Poitiers 
(Pictariensis),  who  died  in  368.  Banished  to  Phrygia, 
he  was  incited  by  hearing  the  singing  of  Arian  hymns 
to  compose  some  for  the  orthodox  Church,  and  among 
these  productiona  his  Lucis  largiior  splautide  is  the 
most  celebrate(L  There  is  no  doubt  that  the  author- 
ship  of  a  great  many  hymns  is  spurious,  especially  in 
the  case  of  Ambrose  (q.  v.),  bishop  of  Milan,  who  died 
in  897,  and  who  ia  generally  conńdered  the  proper  fa- 
thcr  of  Latin  Church  song.  Among  his  genuine  pro- 
ductiona we  find  the  grand  h3rmns  O  lux  Jbeata  triruUu ; 
Veni  redemptor  genUum;  Deus  creator  onmtiim,  etc. 
The  80-calIed  Ambroaian  song  of  praise,  Te  deutn  lau- 
damus,  "by  far  the  most  celebrated  hymn,"  fonnerly 
ascribcd  to  Ambrose,  "which  ak>ne  would  have  madę 
his  name  immortal,"  and  which,  with  the  Gloria  in  ea> 
cflsis,  is  "  by  far  the  most  raluable  legacy  of  the  old 
Catholic  Church  poctry,  and  which  will  be  prayed  and 
sung  with  devotion  in  all  parta  of  Christendom  to  the 
end  of  time,"*  he  is  said  to  have  comix)eed  for  the  hap- 
tism  of  Augustine.  But  it  is  now  agreed  by  our  b<»t 
critics  that  this  h^inn  was  ^Titten  at  a  later  datę 
(Schaff,  Ch.  Ilist,  ii,  592) .  Another  distinguished  h}'mn- 
writer  of  the  Middle  Age  was  Augustine, "  the  greatest 
theologian  among  the  Church  fathcrs  (f  430),  whoae 
aoul  was  fiUed  with  the  genuine  essence  of  poetry." 
He  is  said  to  have  oomposed  the  reaurrection  hymn, 
Cum  rex  gloria  Chrisłus ;  the  h^nnn  on  the  glory  of 
Paradise,  Ad  perermis  vit<e  fontem  Meng  ńłirit  arida, 
and  others.  Damascua,  bishop  of  Romę  (f  384),  who 
is  said  to  hare  been  the  author  of  the  rh}'me  of  which 
we  spoke  above,  is  perhaps  not  less  celebrated  than  the 
prece<ling  names.  Yery  promincntly  rank  also  Pruden- 
tius,  in  Spain  (f  405),  whom  Neale  calls  "  the  prinoe  of 
primitire  Christian  poets,"  the  author  of  Jam  meuta 
cuiesce  guerelUf  and  others;  Paulinua  of  Nola ;  Sedulius, 
who  composed  two  Christmas  hymns,  A  eoHs  ortus  car- 
dine  and  Hosłis  Nerodes  impie ;  Enodius,  bishop  of  Pa- 
via  (f  521) ;  and  Fortunatus,  bishop  of  Poitiers  (about 
600),  who  wrote  the  passion  hymns,  Pangt  lingua  glori- 
ońPrceiium  oerUtmhm  and  VexiUa  regiaprodeunł,  These 
hymns  (the  text  and  translations  of  most  of  which  are 
giyen  by  Schaff,  I  c.)  soou  became  popular,  and  though 


many  of  them,  long  in  use  in  the  Church,  were  not  to 
be  aet  aside,  stiil  the  Council  of  Toledo  (683)  reoam- 
mended  the  use  only  of  auch  hymna  aa  thoee  of  Hilair, 
Ambrose,  etc.,  in  public  worship.  Gregoiy  the  Great, 
who  intioduced  a  new  ayatem  of  aii^c^ing  into  the  Church 
[see  Grboorian  Chastt],  also  oompoaed  hymns,  amcmg 
others  the  lłex  Ckritte/aelor  onudum  ;  Primo  dientm  om- 
mam,  generally  regarded  as  his  best,  etc  Aftor  him  the 
moat  noteworthy  h3rmn-writerB  are  laidoma,  bishop  of 
SeyiUa;  Eugeniua,  Ildefonsua,  and  Jnlianns,  biahops  of 
Toledo ;  and  Beda  Yenerabilis.  Chaiiemagne  (8th  oen- 
tuiy),  who  intioduced  the  Grągorian  chant  into  France 
and  Germany,  also  attempted  aacred  poetiy,  and  ia  atid 
to  be  the  anthor  of  the  Penteooat  hymn.  Fan  ereator 
spiritusy  though  othera  ascribe  it,  and  perhapa  on  bcttfr 
grounda,  to  Khabanus  Maurua.  Alcuin  and  Fuilns  Di- 
aoonus  also  compoaed  hymns.  Although  Chriatianitr, 
during  that  century  and  the  next,  apread  thnNi|;h 
France,  Germany,  and  northwards,  yet  Latin  hymns  r^ 
mained  in  exclu8ive  uae  during  the  whole  of  the  Middk 
Agea,  aa  the  clergy  alone  took  an  activ«  part  in  dirine 
worship.  In  the  9th  centuiy  appeared  aome  notewor- 
thy hymn-writera.  Theodulf,  bi^op  of  Orleany  whoee 
Gloria  lau*  et  honor  łibi  waa  alwaya  aung  on  Palm  Sun- 
day ;  Rhabanua  Maurus ;  Walafrid  StnbOy  the  first  Geiw 
man  hymn-writer;  Notker  (f  912),  who  introdnoed  the 
uae  of  seąuences  and  recitativea  in  the  h3rmna,  and  com- 
poaed the  renowned  altemate  chant.  Media  tiia  m  morit 
eumus,  During  the  lOth  and  llth  centuries  aacred  po- 
etry  was  cultivated  by  the  Benedictines  of  Conatance, 
among  whom  Hermann  of  Yeruigcn  (f  1054)  waa  cepe- 
ciaUy  diatinguiahed.  King  Robert  of  France  wrote  the 
Penteooat  hymn,  Vem  sande  spiritus;  Petrua  Damiani 
wrote  also  penitential  hymna.  To  the  llth  centmy  b»* 
longs  the  altemat«  hymn  to  Mary  entided  Sahe  Regi- 
na mater  misencon^ca,  In  the  12th  century  hymn- 
writmg  fłouriahed,  particularly  in  France,  where  vc 
notioe  Marbord  (1128);  Hildebert  of  Tours;  Petnis 
Yenerabilis ;  Adam  of  St.  Yictor ;  Bernard  of  Chur- 
vaux,  author  of  the  Salre  ad  faciem  Jem,  and  the  hymn 
beginning  Salce  caput  cruen/aUtm  ;  Abelartl,  writer  of 
the  Annwidation  hymn,  Mittit  ad  rirginem ;  andBenuud 
of  Cluny,  author  of"  The  Celcatial  Country,"  about  AD. 
1145.  It  was,  moreover,  a  practice  of  conrentual  dis- 
cipline  to  connect  hymns  with  all  the  yarioua  offioes  of 
daily  life :  thus  there  were  hymns  to  be  sung  before  and 
after  the  meala,  on  the  Ughting  of  lamps  for  the  night, 
on  faata,  etc  In  the  18th  century  ihe  aentimentalism 
of  the  Franciacans  became  a  rich  source  of  poetrr,  and 
the  Latin  hymna  perhaps  attaincd  their  higheat  peifee- 
tion  under  writers  of  that  order.  Francis  of  Aasisi  him- 
self  wrote  sacred  poetry.  Among  the  Franciacan  hymn- 
writers  are  especially  to  be  noticed  Tłiomaa  of  Cdano 
(affcer  1255),  author  of  the  grand  Judgment  hymn,  Din 
irm  dies  iUa  [see  Dies  Iił«];  Bonarentura;  Jacopo- 
nua,  who  wrote  the  Stabał  vtater  dolorosa  and  Sttibai 
maier  speciosa,  See  Stabat  Mater.  Among  the  I>o- 
minicana,  Thomaa  Aąuinaa  distinguished  himaelf  by  his 
Pange  lingua  gloriosi  and  Lauda  Sion  Salcałot^em,  Af- 
ter attaining  thia  eminence  Latin  hymna  retrogiadel 
again  during  the  14th  and  15th  centuries,  and  became 
merę  rhymed  piecea.  The  mystica  Henry  Suao  (q.  r.) 
and  Thomaa  k  Kempia  (q.v.')  alone  deaerrc  mentioo 
among  the  writers  of  good  hymna. 

On  hymns  of  the  Andent  and  Middle  Agea,  aee  Bing- 
ham,  Orig,  Ecdea,  bk.  xiii,  chap.  v,  and  bk.  xiv,  chapt  i; 
Daniel,  The$aurus  Hymńologicus,  eite  kgnmontm,  etc^ 
coUecłio  ofl^Mfiaia  (Leipz.  1841-56, 5  To]a.8vo) ;  a  good 
selection  in  Konigafeld,  Lat.  Iłgnmen  vnd  GeaSnge,  in 
which  the  Latin  and  German  yeraiona  are  printed  face 
to  face,  with  an  Introd.  and  notea  by  A.  W.  von  Schlegel 
(Bonn,  1847,  12mo,  and  seoond  collection  1865,  ISnio); 
Trench,  Sacred  Latin  Poetry,  cMeffy  Lgrieal,  irirA  A  vl<», 
etc.  (2d  ed.  Lond.  1864, 18mo) ;  Ćoleman,  Apo&toUc  and 
Primitive  Church,  ch.  xii;  Coleman,.^iKiflil  Christian- 
ity,  ch.  xvi ;  Walch,  De  Hgrnds  EoeŁes.  Apottolitm  (Je- 
na, 1837);  RambM^h,  Anthologk  ChrittL  Ges&ie  (AUo- 


HTMNOLOGT 


487 


HYMNOLOGT 


na,  1817-88) ;  Bjdm,  ffymm  Va,  Patrum  Christ.  Eedes. 
(Hafii.  1818) ;  Kehiein,  Latemische  Antholoffie  (Frankf. 
1840) ;  (UltnuDontane)  Monę,  LaL  Hymnm  des  Mittel- 
akers  (Freib.  1853  8q^  8  vol&  8vo) ;  MoU,  Iłymnarium 
(Halle,  1861, 18mo) ;  Wackemagel,  Das  deutsche  Kirch- 
aUad  (Lps.  1864^  2  vol&),  part  of  voL  i,  p.  9-362; 
Chandkr,  Ilymns  o/tks  Primitwe  Chureh  (Lond.  1837) ; 
Neak,  łłgmms  o/the  Eastem  Chureh  (dd  edit.  London, 
1866) ;  Jfedicnal  J/ymiu  cmd  Stqumces  (8d  ed.  London, 
1867);  The  Foms  ofChristUm  Ltfe  m  Song^  or  Hymns 
mi  ilynm,  WrUers  ofmamf  Landt  and  Afjts  (N.  Y.  1864, 
12mo);  Miller,  Our  Hynms,  their  Auihors  and  Origm 
(Lond.  1866, 12mo) ;  Koch,  Geach,  d.  KirchenL  (2d  edit. 
Stuttgart,  1852  8q.,  4  yol&,  eapedally,  i,  10-80) ;  EdUes- 
taad  du  Meril,  Pośsiet  populaires  Lałmes  anŁśrieuret  au 
douzikme  siade  (Paiia,  1843) ;  Fortłage,  GesOngs  Chrisłf. 
YoneU  (Berlin,  1844) ;  MUman,  LaJlin  Christiamły^  viii, 
302  aą.;  HilJ,  EmgUsh  MonasHcism,  p.  824-873  (on  me- 
di«val  booka  and  hymns) ;  Rheimrald,  KirchL  A  rehSoL 
p.  262  8q.;  Augiuti,  HaiM.  der  chrisfL  ArchdoL  ii,  106 
8q. ;  Rłdflle,  Christian  A  rUiquities,  p.  384  9q. ;  Martign y, 
ikcL  des  A  miiqmiśSf  p^  475  8q. ;  Christ.  Examinerj  xxviii, 
art  i ;  Christian  Ranembrancery  xliv,  art.  iv ;  A"*.  Amer, 
Raf.  1857,  art.  iv;  and  on  the  first  8ix  centuriea  a  yery 
esccelleot  article,  Aist  puhlished  in  the  British  and  For- 
eiffn  Ee.  Rec.  (Oct.  1866),  in  Schaff,  Ch.  Hist.  iii,  575  8q. 
II.  Modem  Jlynmagraphy. — 1.  (?en?uiR.— The  origin 
ofGennan  hymns,  which  are  without  ąuestion  the  rich- 
est  of  any  in  modem  tongues,  may  be  traced  to  the  9th 
centuiy.  But  the  history  of  German  hymnology,  atrict- 
ly  ipeaking,  does  not  b^gin  earlier  than  the  Keforma- 
tioD.  For  **  it  was  not  until  the  people  poaseased  the 
Word  of  God,  and  liberty  to  worship  him  in  their  own 
laognage,  that  nich  a  body  of  aongs  oould  be  created, 
though  yemacolar  hymns  and  sacred  lyrics  had  exi8ted 
in  Genmuiy  thioughout  the  Middle  AgesL  It  was  then 
that  a  great  outburst  of  national  poetry  and  musie  took 
plaee  which  rcflected  the  spirit  of  those  times;  and  on 
a  somewhat  smaller  scalę  the  same  thing  has  happened 
both  before  and  sinoe  that  time,  at  eveTy  great  crisis  in 
the  history  of  the  German  people."  The  most  marked 
of  these  periods  are,  besides  the  Beformation,  the  12th 
and  13th  centtiries,  or  the  Crusading  period,  and  the 
latter  part  of  the  17th,  and  18th  oentwries.  The  earliest 
attempts  at  German  hymns  are  traced  to  the  9th  cen- 
tuiy. For  some  oenturies  preceding  the  Koman  Chureh 
had  abandoned  congregational  singing,  and  the  hymns 
fonned  part  of  the  liturgical  senrice  performed  by  the 
priests  and  the  canonical  singers.  In  some  churches, 
bowever,  the  people  still  oontinued  '*  the  old  practioe  of 
nttering  the  response  Kyrie  Eleison,  Chrisie  Ekison,  at 
certain  interva]s  during  the  singing  of  the  Latin  hymns 
and  paalma,  which  finaily  degenerated  into  a  oonfused 
damor  of  Yoicea.  The  first  attempt  to  remedy  this  was 
madę  by  adding,  soon  afler  Notker,  who  originated  the 
I^tin  Seąuence  or  Prose,  a  few  German  rhymes  to  the 
Kyrie  Eleison,  **•  from  the  last  syilables  of  which  these 
eailiest  German  h>'mn8  were  called  Leisen,"  But  as 
they  were  never  used  in  Mass  8ervice,  but  were  oonfined 
to  popular  festiyals,  pilgrimages,  and  the  like,  they  did 
not  come  into  generał  use,  and  it  may  be  said  that  the 
rcal  employment  of  Leisen  (or  Leiche,  as  they  were  also 
called)  did  not  begin  before  the  12th  century.  At  that 
time  they  had  become  the  oommon  property  of  the  Ger- 
man people,  and  hymns  in  the  yernacular  were  freely 
pPDdnoed,  among  them  the  oldest  German  Easter  hymn, 
ChristMs  itt  u/ersianden,  attribnted  to  Sperrvogel,  which 
has  descended  to  our  own  day  as  a  ver8e  of  one  of  Lu- 
thar^sbest  hymns: 

Christ  the  Lord  is  risen, 
Out  of  death*8  dark  prison ; 
X^t  ns  all  rąloice  to-day, 
Christ  shall  be  oar  hope  and  stay ; 
Kyrie  eleison. 
Allelaia,  Allelala,  AUelnla ! 
Sercral  of  the  great  Latin  hymns  were  also  trans- 
lated  into  German,  and  although  their  use  in  the  Chureh 
was  morę  or  less  restricted,  and  was  always  regarded 


with  suspicion  by  the  morę  papai  of  the  dergy,  yet 
they  continued  to  be  favored  by  the  people,  as  is  fully 
evinoed  by  the  quantity  of  sacred  yerse  written  from 
this  time  onwards.  Thus  Wackemagel,  in  his  work  on 
religious  poetry,  prior  to  the  Beformation  {Das  deutsche 
Kirchenlied  v.  d.  ditest.  Zeii  bis  zu  A  nfang  d.  17<«"  Jahr- 
huniart),  exhibits  nearly  1500  specimens,  and  the  names 
of  no  less  than  85  different  poets,  with  many  anon3rmou8 
authors.  Among  the  writere  named  we  find  not  a  few 
of  the  celcbrated  knightly  minne-singers,  as  Hartmann 
von  der  Aue,  Wolfram  von  Eschenbach,  Walther  von  der 
Yogelweide,  and  others.  But  the  German  sacred  songs 
of  this  time,  Itke  the  old  Latin  hymns,  were  confined  to 
addressing  the  saints,  and,  above  all,  the  Yirgin  Mary. 
*'  The  fonner  class  is  not  very  important,  either  as  to 
number  or  to  quality ;  but  the  Marien-Liżeder,  and,  in  a 
minor  degree,  Annen-Lieder  (hymns  to  Mary  and  to 
Annę),  constitute  a  very  large  and  well-known  class 
among  the  poems  of  the  ante-Iteformation  times  in  Ger^ 
many.  .  .  .  They  form  a  sort  of  spiritual  counterpart 
to  the  minne-songs  or  love-aong8  addressed  to  hb  earth- 
ly  lady  by  the  knight.  It  was  easy  to  transfer  the  tum 
of  expression  and  tonę  of  thought  from  the  earthly  ob- 
ject  to  the  heavenly  one,  and  the  degree  to  which  this 
is  done  is  to  us  very  ollen  startling.  .  .  .  The  honora 
and  titles  belouging  to  our  Ix>rd  Jesus  Christ  are  attńb- 
uted  to  his  mother;  God  is  said  to  have  created  the 
world  by  her,  and  to  have  rested  in  her  on  the  seventh 
day;  she  is  said  to  have  risen  from  the  grave  on  the 
third  day,  and  ascended  into  heaven ;  she  is  addressed 
not  oniy  as  a  persuasive  mediator  with  her  Son,  but  as 
heiself  the  chief  sourcc  of  mercy  and  help,  especially  in 
the  hour  of  death  and  at  the  day  of  judgment.  By  dc- 
grees,  her  mother  is  inve8ted  with  some  of  her  own  at* 
tributes ;  forit  is  said,  if  Christ  would  obey  his  own  moth- 
er, ought  not  she  much  morę  to  obey  hers?  So  a  set 
of  hymns  to  Annę  sprang  up,  in  which  she  is  entreated 
to  afford  aid  in  death,  and  obtain  panlon  for  the  sinners 
from  Christ  and  Mary,  who  will  refuse  her  nothing" 
(Winkworth,  Christian  Singers  oj  Germany ^  p.  96,  97). 
See  Hyperdulia.  It  is  no  wonder  that  in  the  face  of 
such  extravagances  Wackemagel  is  constrained  to  say 
that  the  exi8tence  of  so  many  godless  hymns  addressed 
to  the  Yirgin  and  the  saints,  or  teaching  the  whole  doo- 
trine  of  indulgences,  is  an  indisputable  testimony  to  the 
degeneracy  into  which  the  nation  had  fallen,  rendering 
the  Beformation  necessar}';  and  that  the  *existence  of 
so  many  breathing  an  mistained  Christianity  is  at  the 
same  time  a  witncss  to  the  pre8ervation  of  so  much  tnie 
religion  as  madc  the  Beformation  at  all  possiblc.  The 
use  of  German  hymns  was  taken  up  by  the  heretical 
sects  that  began  to  spring  up  under  the  persecuting  in- 
fluence of  Korne.  The  (yerman  Flagellants,  the  Bohe- 
mians,  the  Waldenses,  and  the  Mystics,  who  all  encour- 
aged  the  study  of  the  Scriptures,  of  course  favored  the 
singing  of  German  hymns;  and  they  contributed  not  a 
few  sacred  songs  themselves  to  those  ahneady  existing. 
Thus  the  Mystic  Tauler  (q.  v.)  (to  whom  was  long  at- 
tribnted the  Theoloffia  Germania,  in  all  probability  the 
work  of  Nicholas  of  Basie)  wrote  several  hymns,  which 
became  widely  known.  His  best,  perhaps,  are  the  fol- 
lowing : 

WHAT  I  MUST  DO. 
"  From  ontward  creatnres  I  must  flee. 

And  seek  heart-oneuess  deep  witntn, 
If  I  would  draw  my  sonl  to  Thee. 

O  Ood,  and  keep  It  pure  from  sin,"  etc 

ONLY  JESUa 
*'  O  Jeau  Christ,  most  eood,  most  fair, 
Morę  ftagrant  than  Ma7'8  flowery  air, 
Who  Thee  wlthin  his  soal  doth  bear, 

Tme  caose  for  Joy  hatb  won  t 
Bnt  would  one  have  Thee  in  his  heart, 
From  all  sclf-will  he  must  depart ; 
God'8  bIddiDg  ouIv  where  thoa  art 

Mnst  evennore  be  done. 
Where  Jetos  thne  doth  tmly  dwell. 
His  presence  doth  all  tumnlts  qne1l, 
And  traD»ieDt  carcs  of  earth  dispel 

Llke  mists  before  the  snn,"  etc 


HYMNOLOGY 


488 


HYMNOLOGY 


A  marked  impiorement,  however,  took  place  in  Ger- 
man hymnobgy  duiing  the  15th  oenttu^i  espedally 
neai  its  doae.  The  chief  hynm-wiiter  of  this  period 
was  Henry-  of  Laufenbeig,  who  waa  particularly  active 

Iin  transforming  secular  into  religioua  songs,  as  was  fre- 
qaent  at  this  time ;  he  aiso  tranalated  for  the  Germans 
^  many  of  the  old  Latin  hymns.    One  of  the  best  sped- 
i  mens  of  a  religious  song  transformed  we  cite  heie.    The 
origuial  was  "  Innsbruck,  I  must  forsake  thee.'* 

FAREWfiLŁ. 

0  world,  I  must  forsake  thee, 
And  far  away  betake  me. 

To  seek  my  natlve  shore ; 
80  long  rve  dwelt  in  sadness, 

1  wish  not  now  for  gladness, 
Earth'B  Joys  for  me  are  o*er. 

Sore  is  my  grief  and  lonely, 
And  I  can  tell  it  oniy 

To  Thee,  my  Frieud  most  sore  I 
God,  let  Thy  band  npbold  me, 
Thy  pitytne  heart  enfold  me, 

For  else  I  am  most  poor. 
My  refnse  where  I  hlde  me, 
From  Tnee  shall  naught  divide  me. 

No  pain,  no  porerty : 
Nanght  Is  too  bad  to  fear  it 
If  Tfioa  art  there  to  share  it ; 

My  heart  aaks  only  Thee. 

Many  of  these  transformed  hymns  were  presenred,  like 
the  one  above  cited,  tlurough  the  Beformation.  An- 
other  Teiy  popular  hymn,  Dm  liebtten  puelm  den  ich 
han  der  isłindes  HimeU  Trone,  was  transformed  from 
the  song  "  Den  liebeten  puelen  den  ich  han  der  liegt 
beim  Wirt  im  Keller."  Of  the  transformation  of  ballada 
by  the  minnesingers  into  hymns  to  Mary  and  Annę  we 
have  already  spoken.  We  return,  therefore,  to  Laufen- 
berg,  and  cite  one  of  his  hymns,  which  well  deserres  to 
be  called  not  only  one  of  the  best  of  his  age,  but  one  of 
the  loveliest  sacied  songs  that  has  ever  been  written. 
We  copy  the  first  stanza  of  it  from  Mrs.  Winkworth  (p. 
98): 

CBADLE  SONG. 
Ah  Jesu  Christ,  my  Lord  most  dear, 
As  Thon  waat  once  au  infant  here, 
80  giTe  this  little  cblld,  I  pray, 
Thy  srace  and  blessinń  day  by  day : 
Ah  Jeso,  Lord  dlTme, 
Goard  me  this  babę  of  mlne  1 

Łaofenberg  also  wrote  and  widely  introduced  the  use 
of  many  hynms  in  mized  Latin  and  German,  a  kind 
of  Yerse  wHich  was  the  favorite  amusement  of  the 
monks,  and  which  had  acquired  oonsiderable  popularity 
at  his  time.  The  best  known  of  these  productions  was 
a  Christmas  carol,  dating  from  the  lAth  century,  In 
duici  jubilOf  Nu  swffet  und  seidfro,  Peter  Dresdensis 
was  generally,  but  erroneously,  regarded  as  the  author 
of  these  perhaps  properly  termed  "Mixed  Hymns." 
^  His  real  work,  however,  lay  in  the  strenuous  efforts  he 
madę  to  introduce  hymns  in  the  yemacular  morę  freely 
into  public  worship^  especially  into  the  senrioe  of  the 
Mass,"  from  which  they  had,  as  we  hare  already  had 
occasion  to  obserye,  beói  escluded.  But  these  efforts 
met  with  violent  opposition  from  the  Church,  and  the 
use  of  hymns  in  the  vemacular  still  continued  to  be  al- 
most  ezclusively  oonfined  to  festivals  and  like  occasions. 
Among  these  yemacular  hjnnns  are  particularly  oele- 
brated  "  Em  Kindelem  so  łobełich,''  « CkrUt  furę  zu 
Ilimmely"  "  GoU  sei  ffdobet  und  gdinedeist,''  ''Wir  dan- 
len  dir  lieber  Ilerre,"*  etc.  Af  ter  the  inyention  of  the  art 
of  printing,  the  followers  of  Hubs,  who  had  formed  them- 
selyes  into  a  separate  and  organized  Church  of  their 
own  in  1467  (Bohemian  and  Morayian  Brethren),  and 
who  madę  it  one  of  their  distinctiye  peculiarities  to  use 
hynms  inthe  yemacular,  as  their  seryice  was  maiiily 
conducted  in  their  mother  tongue,  especially  their  pray- 
ers,  gaye  new  encouragement  to  the  writing  of  German 
hymns.  In  1504,  Lucas,  then  chief  of  the  Bohemians, 
collected  400  of  the  most  popular  of  the  German  hymns 
and  had  them  printed.  This  is  ^  the  first  example  of  a 
hymn-book  composed  of  original  compoaitions  in  the  yer- 
nacular  to  be  found  in  any  Western  uation  which  had 


onoe  owned  the  supremacy  of  Borne."  Preyioas  to  tłu 
time,  towards  the  dose  of  the  15th  oentuiy,  theie  ezjat- 
ed  two  or  three  ooUections  of  German  yenioos  of  the 
lAUin  hymns  and  seąuencea,  bat  they  are  of  yeiy  iiife> 
rior  merit. 

The  Beformation  in  the  16th  oentary  marks  tbe  nezt 
aera  in  the  history  of  German  hymnológy.  The  intio- 
duction  of  the  yemacular  into  the  Uturgy  of  tbe  Chuch 
gaye  an  impulae  to  the  German  language  that  was  only 
eclipaed  by  Luthei^s  tranalatioa  of  the  Bibie  for  the  ed- 
ification  and  education  of  the  entire  German  peo|]k 
But  it  was  Luther^s  aim  not  only  to  fumish  his  foUoir- 
ers  the  Book  of  books,  but  aiso  to  introduce  ererywhere 
the  singing  of  such  hymns  as  already  ojcistedin  tbe 
yemacular,  and  by  the  creation  of  a  taste  amoDg  the 
peopLe  for  German  sacred  song  to  promote  its  cultira- 
tion.  Of  this  he  set  himself  the  best  examp]e.  Aa  in 
the  cause  of  religion  he  knew  how  to  enlist  a  laige  di^ 
de  of  eminent  men  and  scholars  to  cany  out  his  great 
designs,  so  also^  with  a  true  appredation  of  sacred  sit, 
both  in  poetry  and  song,  he  soon  gathered  about  him 
many  friends,  who  l>ecame  the  compilen  of  seyend  col- 
lections  of  hymns,  that  were  issued  from  the  pres  ii 
remarkably  short  interyals.  See  Psałmody.  Lother 
himself,  besides  tranalating  anew  many  of  the  Latin 
hymns,  **  which  he  counted  among  the  good  things  thst 
God's  power  and  wonderful  working  had  kept  alire 
amid  so  much  conruption,"  and,  besides  transfonning  or 
reproducing  some  four  of  the  early  German  bymną 
composed  some  twenty-one  in  the  yemacular,  moet  of 
which  are  known  in  our  own  day  by  moet  of  the  rm- 
estant  nations  of  tbe  globe,  and  some  of  which  are  par- 
tieular  fayorites  eyen  with  the  £nglish-«peaking  peo- 
ple.  The  spcdal  object  of  the  composition  of  these 
hymns,  int4>  which  Luther  threw  *'all  his  own  ferrent 
faith  and  deep  deyotion,"  was  undoubtedly  ^'to  gire 
the  people  a  short,  dear  confesaaon  of  faith,  easy  to  be 
rememl)ercd.  For  the  doctrines  which  Luther  propt- 
gated  were  yet  too  new  to  be  well  understood  by  all  aa 
he  desired  them  to  be.  He  wished  men  to  know  what 
they  profeseed.  Protestantism  meant  the  profesaion  of 
a  faith  by  choioBy  and  not  by  compulsion ;  a  bdief  that 
was  cherished  by  the  oonfessor,  and  not  a  blind  follonr- 
ing  after  the  teacher.  He  required  a  comprehenaon 
of  hb  great  doctrines  of  justification  by  faith,  of  the  one 
Mediator  betwcen  God  and  man,  which  gaye  peace  to 
tbe  oonsdence  by  deliyering  it  fWim  the  burden  of  the 
past  sins,  and  a  new  spring  of  life  to  the  soul  by  show- 
ing  men  that  their  dependence  was  not  on  anything  in 
themselyes,  on  no  worics  of  their  own  performance,  bat 
on  the  infinite  love  and  mercy  of  God,  which  he  had 
manifested  to  all  manldnd  in  his  Son;  of  his  doctrise 
of  the  uniyeraal  priesthood  of  all  belieyera,  which  put  a 
new  spirit  into  the  Church,  by  yindicating  for  eyefy 
memlier  of  it  his  right  and  duty  to  offer  for  himself  tbe 
sacrifice  of  pnuse  and  prayer,  and  to  study  for  hinaelf 
God's  word  in  the  Scriptures"  (comp.Winkworth,  p.  106). 
One  of  Luther's  hymns  best  known  to  us  u  that  found- 
ed  on  the  46th  Psalm,  the  famous  "Marseillaise  of  the 
Beformation,"  as  Heine  called  it.  He  is  generally  aup- 
posed  to  haye  written  it  on  his  way  to  the  Diet  of 
Worms.  Some,  howeyer,  think  that  it  ^:as  composed 
at  the  dose  of  the  seoond  Diet  of  Spire  (1629).  It  baa 
been  again  and  again  tranalated.  Mrs.  Winkiroith 
giyes  us  the  following : 

THE  STBONGHOLD. 

A  sare  stron^hold  onr  God  Is  he, 

A  trusty  shleld  and  weapon ; 
Our  help  he'll  be,  aud  set  ns  free, 
Whatever  ill  may  happen. 
That  old  mallcioas  foe 
Intends  ns  deadly  woe ; 
Armed  with  the  strength  of  heU, 
And  deepest  crafl  as  well, 
On  earth  Ła  not  his  fellow. 

Throngh  our  own  force  we  nothing  can« 

Straigtat  were  we  lost  forever, 
Bnt  for  ns  tights  the  proper  Man, 

By  God  sent  to  delWer. 


HYMNOLOGY  439 


HTMNOLOGY 


Ank  76  who  thiB  may  be  ? 

Christ  Jesus  named  is  he, 

Of  Sabaoth  the  Lord, 

Sole  Ood  to  be  adored ; 

lis  be  mnst  win  the  battle. 

And  were  the  world  witb  derOs  fUled, 

Ali  eager  to  deToor  ns, 
Oor  SODU  to  fear  shoald  litŁle  yield ; 
Thev  canuot  OYCipower  us. 

Thef  r  dreaded  prince  no  morę 
Can  harm  ns  as  of  yore ; 
Look  gńm  as  e*er  he  may, 
Dooraed  is  his  ancient  sway, 
A  word  can  ovenhrow  bim. 
Stłll  shall  tbey  leare  that  world  Its  mlght. 

And  v«t  uo  thanks  shall  merlt ; 
Still  isbe  with  us  In  the  flght 
By  his  good  gifts  and  Spirłt 

£*en  ehonid  they  take  oar  Hfe, 
Ooods,  honor,  children,  wife, 
Thoagh  all  of  these  were  gone, 
Yet  Dothing  haye  they  won— 
God>  kingdom  onrs  abidetb ! 

AnoŁher  hymn  of  Łutber'8  wbich  bas  gained  a  worid- 
wide  ciiculation  is  the  one  that  was  written  by  bim  on 
the  bnming  of  two  martyis  for  tbeir  faitb  at  Brussela  in 
1523,  and  wbicb  was  traiiaUted,  or,  ratber,  tnmsformed 
by  D'Aubigne  in  hia  History  ofthe  Reformatian,  begin- 
ning, 

"  Flung  to  the  heedless  winds, 

Or  on  the  waters  cast, 
Tbeir  ashcs  sball  be  watcbed, 

And  gathered  at  the  last,**  etc. 

As  an  example  of  tbe  songs  be  transformed  most  8uc- 
ceasfolly,  we  ąnote  tbe  old  ditty, 

«  O  tbon  naagbty  Jadas  I 
Wbat  hast  thon  done, 
To  betray  oar  Master, 

God*s  oniy  Son ! 
Tberefore  mnst  thon  safTer 
Heirs  ogony, 
Łocłfer^s  compaolon 
Most  forever  oe. 

Kyrie,  EMaonT 

Thia  Lutber  cbanged  to  tbe  following: 
II  >Twaa  oar  great  transgresalon 
And  oar  sore  misdeed 
Hade  tbe  Lord  our  Sarlonr 

On  tbe  cross  to  bleed. 
Hot  tben  on  thee,  poor  Jadaa, 

Nor  on  that  Jewish  crew. 
Oar  yengeance  dare  we  yisit— 
We  are  to  blame.  not  yoa. 
SyrUfEleisonl 
"  All  hall  to  thee,  Christ  Jesos, 
Who  honsest  on  tbe  tree, 
And  bor*8t  for  oar  transgrowionB 

Botb  shame  and  agony. 
Now  beside  thy  Fatber 

Relgnest  thoo  on  high ; 
Biesa  as  all  oar  Hfetime, 
Take  os  when  we  die ! 

Kyrie,  BUtaonT 

(Ckrisliem  Examiner,  1860,  p.  239  8q.) 

Of  the  frienda  wbom  Lutber  was  sucoessful  in  enlist- 
ing  as  writers  for  his  new  bymn-books  we  bave  space 
h«re  to  mention  only  tbe  moet  prominent  names.     One 
of  thcm,  Jostus  Jonas,  was  a  colleague  of  Latber  and 
Mdanetbon  at  the  Uniyermty  of  Wittenberg.    His  spe- 
dal  serWce  was  the  tranaformation  of  the  Psalms  into 
metńcal  Gennan  Tenions,  ^cboosing,  aa  one  can  weU. 
undentand,  thoae  wbich  speak  of  Dayid*s  sufTerings 
from  his  enemiea,  and  hia  trust  in  GocFs  deliyerance." 
One  of  hia  beat  is  on  the  124tb  Psalm,  beginning  thos : 
"  ir  God  were  not  npon  oar  side, 
When  foee  aroand  aa  ragę : 
Were  not  Himself  our  Help  and  Guide, 

When  biltcr  war  tbey  wago ; 
Were  He  not  leraera  mighty  Shield, 
To  whom  tbeir  utmost  crafts  most  yleld, 
We  sarely  must  haye  perlshed." 
Aiłotber  of  Lather^s  colaborers  was  Paul  Eber,  wbose 
hymna  bave  ^  a  tonę  of  tendemess  and  patboe  wbich  is 
much  leaa  chcracteriatic  of  tbis  period  than  the  grave, 
manly  tniadubiesa  of  Lutber  and  Jonas.**    But  they  be- 
came  very  estensiyely  known,  and  during  the  t^ng 
period  of  the  Thirty-yean'  War  tbey  were  oonstantly 
heard  botb  in  puUic  and  around  the  fiunily  bearth- 


stone.  A  special  favorite  at  that  time  was  the  one,  conSf 
poaed  when  the  imperial  armies  were  besieging  Witten- 
berg (1647),  beginning: 

"  When,  in  tbe  boar  of  utmost  need, 
We  know  not  where  to  look  for  aid, 
When  days  and  niehts  of  ansious  thought 
Nor  help  nor  comiort  yet  have  bronght, 
Then  this  our  comfort  is  alone, 
That  we  may  meet  before  Thy  throne. 
And  ery,  oTaitbful  God,  to  Thee, 
For  rescue  from  our  misery." 
Two  of  Ebefs  bymns  for  the  dying  haye  been  great  fa- 
yorites  by  tbe  aide  of  death-beds  and  at  funerals,  not  only 
among  the  German  Protestanta,  but  also  among  tbe  Bo- 
man  Catbolica.     The  one  is  Uerr  Jem  Christ,  wahr 
Mensch  und  Gott  (Lord  Jesus  Christ,  true  man  and  God) ; 
the  other  is  tbe  following  childlike  expre88ion  of  perfect 
trust,  beautifully  rendered  by  Mra.  WinkworŁh  (p.  121) : 

DEATH  IN  THE  LORD. 
"  I  fali  asleep  in  Jesn*s  arms, 
Sin  washea  away,  husbed  all  alarms, 
For  bis  dear  blood,  his  righteoasneea, 
My  Jewels  are,  my  glorious  dress, 
Wberein  before  my  God  I  stand 
When  I  shall  reacb  the  heayenly  land. 
WItb  peace  and  joy  I  now  depart, 
God*B  cblld  I  am  with  all  my  beart: 
I  thank  thee,  Death :  thou  leadest  me 
To  that  true  life  where  I  woald  be. 
So  cleaneed  by  Christ  I  fear  not  Death, 
Lord  Jesu,  strengtbeu  thou  my  faitb  !*' 

But  Luther  and  bis  associates  were  only  tbe  foundeia 
of  the  new  German  h^-mnolog^',  wbich  soon  spread  over 
a  much  morę  extended  field.  Hymn-writers  became 
common  all  over  the  land,  and  tbeir  number  is  legion, 
80  that  it  is  almoat  impossible  for  us,  in  our  Umited 
space,  to  giye  morę  than  a  brief  account  ofthe  most  dis- 
tinguisbed,  and  the  names  only  of  thoae  of  lesaer  uote. 
Thus  Nicholas  Deciua,  a  conyerted  monk,  produced  a 
translation  ofthe  Gloria  in  Excdais  ('' Allein  Gott  in  der 
Hoh',  sei  Ehr.,"  AU  ffłory  be  to  God  on  kit/h),  wbich, 
with  its  noble  chorale,  soon  camc  into  use  all  over  Ger- 
many. Paul  Speratus  (vun  Spretten),  the  chaplain  of 
the  duke  of  Prussia,  is  perbaps  the  most  noted  of  all  the 
hymnologista  of  this  period,  and  is  best  known  as  the 
author  of  the  bynm  on  the  doctrine  of  Justi^cation  hy 
faUh: 

"  SaWation  hath  come  down  to  ns 
or  freest  grace  and  Iove, 
Works  cannot  stand  before  aod'8  law, 

A  broken  reed  they  prove : 
Faith  looks  to'Jesus  Christ  alone, 
He  must  for  all  our  sina  atonc, 
He  is  onr  one  Redeemer.'* 

This,  in  Luther*s  day,  was  as  popular  among  the  Ger- 
mans  as  one  of  bis  own  bymns.    Indeed,  it  is  sald  that 
when  Luther  first  heard  it  sung  by  a  beggar  on  tbe 
roadside  be  gaye  bim  tbe  last  coin  he  bad.    Princea 
also  became  sacred  poeta,  such  as  tbe  margrare  of  Bran- 
denburg and  Hesse,  known  as  the  author  of 
"  Grant  me,  eterual  God,  such  grace 
That  no  distrem 
May  canse  me  e*er  to  flee  flrom  Thee,"  etc. 

The  elector  John  of  Saxony  was  also,  at  that  time,  count- 
ed  among  hymn-writers,  but  it  now  appears  that  he 
never  wrote  any  bymns  himself,  although  he  was  paa- 
sionately  fond  of  them.  Hans  Sachs  (1494-1576),  tbe 
celebrated  and  popular  poet  of  tbis  period,  also  wrote 
sacred  yerse,  and  figures  not  less  prominently  than  the 
persona  wbose  names  we  haye  already  mentioned.  The 
most  famous  of  hia  bymns  he  wrote  during  the  siege  of 
Nuremberg,  his  iiatiye  city,  in  1661 :  "Why  art  thou 
thus  caat  down,  my  beart?**  (Warunt  betrubsł  du  didi 
mein  Herz  ?).  He  wrote  also  a  yery  beautiful  hymn  on 
the  explicit  confldence  in  the  saying  merits  of  Christ, 
entitled  "'  The  Mediator,'*  wbich  is  trauslated  by  Mra. 
Winkworth  {Christ,  Sing,  p.  184).  Among  the'Bobe- 
mian  Brethren,  who,  as  is  well  known,  were  on  intimate 
terms  with  the  Lutberans,  Micbael  Weiss  is  distin- 
guisbed  botb  as  the  translator  of  Bohemian  bymns  into 
German,  and  aa  the  author  of  a  number  of  beautiful 
Crennan  bymns.    Two  of  them,  **Once  he  came  in 


HYMNOLOGY 


440 


HYMNOLOGY 


Uessing,"  and  the  well-known  "  Christ,  the  Loid,  U  risen 
again"  (Christus  isŁ  ersUmden  von  des  Todea  Banden), 
Łranslated  into  English  by  Mra.  Winkworth,  may  be 
found  in  her  Lyra  Germanica,  ii,  62,  and  in  Schaff, 
Christ  in  Sotiff,  p.  15,  259.  Not  less  worthy  of  notice, 
though  perhaps  not  quite  so  prominent  in  their  day,  are 
Johaim  Matthesius  (f  1561)  and  Nichohia  Hennann 
(t  1561).  The  fonner  wrote,  among  othersy  the  beauti- 
fol  moniing  hymn,  '*  My  inmost  heart  now  raiaes"  (^4  us 
m^ines  IlerzerCs  Grunde),  "which  was  a  favorite  with 
king  Gustavus  Adolphus.  Hermann^s  hymns  are  to  be 
found  in  nearly  all  German  hymn-books.  Among  his 
best  hymns  are  Lobt  Gott  ikr  Christen  aUzugleick,  and 
Weim  meui  StUndlein  rorhanden  ist.  Mrs.  Winkworth 
gives  Matthesius^s  ^  Miner's  Song'*  (p.  144)  and  Her- 
mann*s  "  'Rymu  for  the  Dying." 

In  the  latter  half  of  the  16th,  and  even  at  the  opening 
of  the  17th  century,  a  gradual  decline  is  manifest  in  the 
quality  of  the  hymns,  though  the  quantity  continued. 
They  were  now  no  longer  the  spontaneous  production 
of  men  of  all  classes,  moved  to  worship  God  in  songs 
of  praise,  but  the  work  of  professional  h3rmnologi8ts. 
*^Still  this  period,  too,  bas  some  very  good  and  fine 
hymns,  but  a  marked  change  of  toneis  perceptible  in 
most  of  them ;  they  are  no  longer  iilled  with  the  joyful 
welcome  of  a  new  day :  they  morę  often  lament  the  wick- 
edness  of  the  age,  and  anticipate  comiiig  evil  tlmes,  or 
the  end  of  the  world  itself.**  Most  prominent  among 
the  hymn-wńters  of  this  period  are  the  foUowing:  (1.) 
Ambrose  Lobwasser,  who  translated  the  French  Psalter 
of  Marot  and  Beza;  but  the  literarj^merit  of  the  work  was 
rather  mediocre.  "  It  does  not  rise  above  the  level  of  a 
sort  of  rhymed  prose,  and  it  furnishcd  an  unfortunate 
model  for  a  flood  of  very  prosaic  rhymed  paraphrases 
of  doctrinal  statements  or  passagcs  of  Scripture,  which 
became  wonderfully  numcrous  at  this  tirae."  (2.)  Bar- 
tholomaeus  Ringwaldt  (1680-98)  is  the  author  of  the 
hymn,  in  Kngland  erroneonsly  attributed  to  Luther, 
"  Great  God,  what  do  I  see  and  hear,"  which  was  writ- 
ten  in  iraitation  of  the  "  IHes  ira^  dies  Ula,"  He  really 
de9er\'es  to  be  placed  flrst  among  the  hymnologists  of 
this  period.  It  is  incorporatcd  in  the  New  Congrega- 
titmal  Ifgmn-book  (London),  No.  420.  His  hjinns  par- 
take  of  the  penitential  style,  by  which,  as  above  rcmark- 
ed,  this  period  is  characterized.  One  of  his  best  on 
"  Penitcnce"  Mn,  Winkworth  has  clothed  in  English 
dress  (p.  149).  (8.)  Nicolaus  Sehiecker  (1530-92),  au- 
thor of  Gleich  wie  sein  Ifaus  der  Vogel  baufj  based  on  the 
84th  Psalm.  (4.)  Louis  Helmboldt,  the  poet  laurcate 
of  the  emperor  Maximilian,  who  wrote  "  The  true  Chris- 
lian's  Vade-Mecum"  (From  God  shaU  naugkt  diride  me, 
Mrs.  Winkworth,  p.  154),  which  is  containcd  in  all  Ger- 
man hymn-books, "  and  has  rooted  itself  among  the  peo- 
ple.'*  To  this  period  belong  also  l^Iartin  Schalling  (1 532- 
1608),  among  whose  hymns  Herzlich  lieh  haV  ich  Dich 
o  Herr  ("  O  Lord,  I  love  thee,"  in  Schaff,  Christ  in  Song, 
p.  609)  is  best  known ;  Kaspar  Melissander  ("  Herr, 
we  du  willst,  so  8chick's  mit  mir"),  Mart.  Molier,  Mart. 
Behemb,  Mart.  Butilius  ("Ach,  Herr  u.  Gott,  wie  gross 
u.  schwer!"),  Joh.  Pappus  ('^Ich  hab  mein  Sach'  Gott 
heirogesteUt**),  and  roore  especially  Philip  Nicolai  (1556- 
1608),  who  was  the  first  to  reintroduce,  after  the  Refor- 
matiou,  the  mystical  union  of  Christ  with  the  soul  in 
his  hymns,  whence  they  have  often  been  called  the 
"Hymns  of  the  Love  of  Jesus."  His  two  best  hymns 
have  gained  a  remarkable  popularity,  **and  are  indeed 
admirable  for  their  fer\''or  of  emotion  and  mastery  over 
difficult  but  musical  rhythms."  They  are,  Wachet  anfy 
rujl  uns  die  Stirnme  ("  Wake,  awake,  for  night  is  fly- 
ing,"  in  Schaff,  Christ  in  Song,  p.  382 ;  in  the  Xew  Con- 
gregational  Ifgmu-booky  No.  749),  and  Wie  schdn  łeuchteł 
der  Morgenstern  ("  How  lovely  shincs  the  Star,"  Christ 
in  Song,  p.  551),  which  latter  especially  "became  so 
popular  that  its  tunes  were  often  chimed  by  city  bełls, 
lines  and  rerses  were  printed  from  it  by  way  of  orna- 
ment on  the  common  earthenwaie  of  the  country,  and  it 
was  invariably  used  at  weddiugs  and  certain  festiyala." 


AU  German  hymn-books  still  cootain  it,  thoo^  in  a 
somewhat  modified  form. 

The  tempest  of  war  which  for  thirty  yean  swept 
over  Germany,  and  caused  a  tale  of  disasters  from  which 
it  would  seem  society  oould  have  nerer  recoyend,  ev€n 
promoted,  or  at  least  did  not  impede  in  any  way,  the 
iitenury  and  intellectual  acti\ity  of  the  German  mind; 
and  this  period  is  not  only  recognised  as  having  heca 
signalized  by  "  a  great  outbuist  of  religious  song "  but 
as  haying  produoed  the  most  famous  hymnoto^śts  of 
Germany.     First  among  these  stands  the  great  Martin 
Opitz  (1597-1639),  of  the  Silcsian  school  of  Goman  po- 
ets,  who  greatly  improved  all  German  poetrr.    He 
wrote  many  rersions  of  some  of  the  epistleSjand  of 
many  of  the  Psalms,  and  of  the  Song  of  Solomon.    But 
his  original  yersions  are  by  far  the  best ;  e.  g.  his  mora- 
ing  hymn,  "O  Ligbt,  who  out  of  Łight  wast  bom" 
(Winkworth,  p.  173).     Next  to  him  we  find  Paul  Flem- 
ing (q.  V.)  (1609-40),  author  of  "In  allen  unseren  Tha- 
ten."    But  most  famous  at  this  time  were  undoubtedly 
Johann  von  Rist  (q.  v.)  (1607-67),  Johann  Heermann 
(q.  V.)  (1685-1647),  and,  a  Utłle  Uter,  Paul  Gerhard  (q. 
V.)  (1606-76),  who  was  the  greatest  of  them  all,  "the 
prinoe  of  German  hymnists."    Bist  wrote  as  many  i9 
600  to  700  religious  poems  and  h>'mnB, "  intended  to 
supply  erery  possible  requirement  of  public  worship  or 
priyate  experience."    Hb  best  are  perhaps  "Wcrde 
munt«r  mein  GemUthe,"  "  Aof,  auf  ihr  Reicfasgenosscn,"" 
and  "  Werde  Licht,  du  Volk  der  Heiden"  (tianslation  in 
Schaff,  Christ  in  Song,  p.  1 18).     Heermann'a  best  hymns 
are  "  Herzliebstcr  Jesu,  was  hast  du  veiforochen"  {Christ 
in  Song,  p.  171),  "Jesu,  deine  tiefc  Wunden,"  "Zioń 
Klage  mit  Angst  u.  Schmerzen"  (Winkworth,  p.  198), 
"  FrUh  Morgens  da  die  Sonn*  aufgeht"  (Christ  in  Soitg, 
p.  263),  and  "O  Jesu  Christe,  wahrcs  Ucht"  (Christ  in 
Song,  p.  116).    Yery  beautiful  is  the  foUowing  (tianai 
by  Mrs. Winkworth): 

IN  TEMPTATION. 
"  Jesu,  Tictor  over  sin, 
Help  me  now  the  flght  to  win. 
Thou  didst  Tsnqulph  once,  I  know, 
Him  who  sceks  my  orcrthrow ; 
So  to  Thce  my  falih  will  cleave. 
And  her  hołd  will  never  lcave, 
TUI  the  weary  battle's  done, 
And  the  flnal  trininnh  won ; 
For  I  too  throngh  Thee  niny  włn, 
Yictory  over  death  and  sin." 

In  Gerhard*shands  the  German  hymn  reached  its  high- 
est  perfection,  and  his  namc  is  to  the  Gernian  justly 
dearer  than  that  of  any  other  sare  Luther.  His  hymns 
are  "per\'aded  by  a  spirit  of  the  most  cheerful  and 
healthy  piety— a  piety  which  shows  itself  not  merely  in 
direct  derotion  to  God  and  to  Christ,  but  in  a  pure  and 
childlike  love  of  naturę,  and  good  wiU  towards  men. 
They  exemplify  Coleridge*s  Uncs : 

'  He  prnyeth  best  who  loTeth  best 
All  thlngs  both  great  and  smali ; 
For  the  dear  Ood  who  loyeth  os, 
He  madę  and  loveth  all.* 

They  have  the  homely  simpUcity  of  Luther\  and  a 
strength  like  his,  if  not  quite  equal  to  it,  with  a  rena- 
tiUty,  smoothness,  and  literary  finish  not  to  be  found  in 
Luther's,  and  unsurpassed  in  any  period  of  German 
hymnology"  (Christian  £xaminer,  1860,  p.  247).  Ger- 
hardt  has  been  aptly  considered  "  the  typical  poet  of  the 
Lutheran  Church,  as  Herbert  is  of  the  English ;"  bot  it 
must  not  be  thought  that  he  was  by  any  means  a  vola- 
minous  writer.  On  the  contrary,  he  only  wrote  alto- 
gether  about  120  hymns.  His  life  and  writings  have 
been  dwelt  upon  so  much  in  detaU  that  we  ean  do  no 
better  here  than  leave  him  with  a  fcw  worda  of  tribnte 
80  ably  paid  by  Mrs.  Winkworth :  "  His  hymns  seem  to 
be  the  spontaneous  outpouring  of  a  heart  that  ov<erflows 
with  loye,  trust,  and  praise ;  his  language  is  aimple  and 
pure;  if  it  has  sometimea  a  touch  of  homelinese,  it  has 
no  Yulgarism,  and  at  timea  it  rises  to  a  beauty  and 
grace  which  always  giyes  the  impression  of  being  un- 
studied,  yet  could  hardly  haye  been  improred  by  art 


HYMN0L06T 


441 


HYMNOLOGT 


Hifl  teodemett  and  ferror  neyer  degenente  into  the 
Bentimentality  and  petty  oonceits  which  wero  already 
beoomiiig  fashiooable  in  his  days,  nor  his  penitenoe 
and  flonoir  ioto  that  morbid  deapondency ...  for  which 
the  disappointineiita  of  his  own  life  might  have  fnmiah- 
ed  aooie  eacoue.''  Other  hymn-yrriterB  of  thia  period 
are  Andieaa  Giyphina  (1616-^),  of  the  aame  country 
as  Opita,  and,  like  him,  alao  a  great  wtiter  of  aecuhur 
literaturę;  Martin  Rinkart  (q.  v.),  the  writer  of  Nun 
daaia  aile  GoU  ("*  Let  all  men  praiae  the  Lord") ;  Simon 
Dach  (q.  t.),  aothor  of  lek  hin  Ja  Herr  m  Dtmer 
MadU;  Heinrich  Ałbertos  (160Mt8),  whoae  beat  hymn 
18  oonaidered  to  be  Gott  d. Himmtit  te d  Erden;  Georg 
Weinel  (first  half  of  the  17th  century),  who  wiote  Macht 
kock  dk  Tkur,die  Thor  macki  weił  (in  Ckritt m  Songy  p. 
17) ;  the  dectofeaa  Louisa  Henrietta  of  Brandenburg, 
who  oomposed  in  1649,  after  the  death  of  her  firat  hua- 
bsndfthe  hymn  Je«i<a,flKmeZ»oemcA/,  well  known  in  the 
Eąglish  dreas,  '^  Jeaoa,  my  Bedeemer,  fiyea"  (see  Ckriat 
ta  Soi^,  pi  265) ;  Emat  Chr.  Hombuig  (1605-81),  whoee 
hymoB  were  pabliahed  together  under  the  title  GeittUcke 
Lieier  (Naombw  1758).  Perhapa  hia  beat  hymn  ia  Jera, 
««MeiLe6eMLc«ea,or ''Christ,  the  life  ofaU  the  Uving" 
{Ckrigt  M  SoHfff  p.  188) ;  another,  hardly  lesa  beautifnl,  bb 
his  ve&-known  '<  Man  of  Soirowa."  Johann  Fnuik  (1618 
-77),<'irho  ranka  ooly  aeoond  to  Gerhardt  as  a  hymn- 
wiitcar,  and,  with  him,  marka  the  tranaition  from  the  ear- 
liertothelater  achool  of  German  religioua  poetry,"  pub- 
lished  hia  sacred  aonga  under  the  title  of  Geialidtei  Zioń 
(Goben,  1764).  One  of  hia  beat  ia  Sckmilcke  dick  o  UAt 
Sede, "  Deck  thyadf,  my  soul"  (Winkworth,  Ljfra  Ger- 
aia«*Da,ii,138;Schaif,CArifrmi9of^,p.690).  Weadd 
berę  oaly  Geoig  Neumark  (q.  y.)  (1621-81),  for  a  ttme 
prafeasor  of  poetiy  and  poet  lauieate  at  the  Uniyeiaity 
of  Konigaberg,  whoae  most  fiunona  hymn  is  Wer  nur 
dat  Uba  Gott  Idtst  walten,  *"  Leaye  God  to  order  all  thy 
wayi**  {Ljfra  Germamea,  p.  152) ;  J.  M.  Meyfiurth  (1590^ 
1642),  Jerutakm  du  kockgebaute  Stadle  tranalated  in 
the  Chittian  Exammer,  lxix,  254  ("  Jeruaalem,  thon 
hii^h-boUt,  fair  abode**),  and  in  Lgra  Germamea,  ii, 
»ó);  Friedrich  y.  Spee  (1591  or  159&-1636),  a  Roman 
GathoUc,  who  labored  eameatly  to  introduce  yemacular 
hymns  into  the  diyine  aeryice  of  hia  Church,  wrote  A  t(/*, 
oh/,  GottwiUffehbet  •eia;  Johann  Jaoob  Balde  (1608- 
68),  also  a  Roman  Catholic,  but  he  ¥rrote  mostly  in 
ladn  (hia  sacred  poema  being  puUished  under  thetitle 
of  OimMa  Zynca) ;  Geoig  Phil.  Harsdorfer  (1607-^), 
ofSoathem  Germany;  A.H.BuchhobE  (1607-71);  Jo- 
bann  Olearius  (1611-84),  belonging  to  a  family  who  in 
this  oentory  were  hymn-writers  of  aome  notę. 

Angehn  Sileaiua  (1624-77)  (aa  a  Lutheran,  Johann 
Scheffer)  wrote  beautiful  hymna,  205  of  which  were 
pttbliflhed  under  the  title  ofHeUiffe  SeekfUusf,  oder  Geitt" 
ii(Ae  nirtadieder  (BresL  1657,  and  often).  Particularly 
t3uxiamtanh\aIcktcMdicklkbe»meiM8łarhe{**Theti 
will  I  love,  my  strength,  my  tower^),  and  Lidte,  die  Du 
9idi  ZMM  Biide  ("  O  Loye,  who  formedst  me,"  in  Schaff, 
ChriiŁ  m  Song,  p.  414;  Christian  Examiner,  hóx,  246). 
Angeliia  was  the  founder  of  the  ao-called  second  Sile- 
sUa  Sehool  of  poeta,  as  OpiU  ia  regarded  as  the  lead- 
er of  the  first.  They  wrote  both  aecular  and  religioua 
poetzy,  but  the  latter  far  ezcela  the  former.  To  this 
achool  beionged  Homburg,  mentioned  aboye ;  the  two 
oountesaea  of  Schwarzbuig  Rudol&tadt ;  Knorr  y.  Rosen- 
mh  (l63ft-89),  who  wrote  the  loyely  litUe  hymn,  Mor^ 
g^^an  dar  EwigkeU  ("  Dayapring  of  eternity") ;  Chris- 
tian Saiyer,  author  of  Jera,  metner  Setk  Leben,  and  oth- 
eo;  Sigismund  y.  Birken  (1626-81),  who,  with  Hars- 
<iorfer,  aiready  noticed,  beionged  to  the  aentimental 
Khool;  Gottlned  Wilhelm  Saoer  (1685-99),  G.  Hoff- 
nnnn,  &  Ptiltoriua,  Johann  Neunherz,  Kaspar  Neumann, 
who  wiote  Au/mein  Uerz  du  Herm,  also  Tug,  O  Gott 
voa  dem  wir  ABet  kaben,  and  many  othera. 

In  striking  oontcaat  with  the  formal  and  unspiritual 
bjrmns  of  the  aceond  Silesian  achool  atand  the  poetical 
^ńtinga  of  the  ao-called  Pietiata,  originating  with  Spe- 
Ber,  <«who  for  neariy  a  hundred  years  exerted  a  most 


powerfnl  influence  both  on  the  rełigious  and  sodal  life 
of  Germany."  The  representatires  of  this  sehool  are 
Philip  Jacob  Spener  (1685-1705);  his  friend  and  asso- 
ciate,  August  Hermann  Fiancke  (1668-1727),  the  founder 
of  the  Halle  Orphan  Asylum;  Anastasius  Freylinghan- 
sen,  a  son-in-law  of  Fntnke,  who  wiote  44  hymns,  and 
published  (1704)  a  collection  which  remained  for  some 
generations  the  fayorite  collecUon  for  priyate  reading 
among  pious  persons  in  Germany.  To  the  same  pe- 
riod belong  J.  C  Schade ;  Fr.  yon  Canitz ;  Joachim  Ne- 
ander  (1640l^),  of  the  Reformed  Church,  who  wrote 
Lobe  den  Herm  den  Maektigeni  Johann  C  Schttts,  au- 
thor of  8ei  Lob  v.  Ekr  dem  kdchetm  Gut ;  Christian  Ti- 
tiua;  Adolph  Drese;  Sam.  Rodigast,  who  composed  in 
1675  the  world-renowned  Wob  Gott  tkut,  das  iat  lookl- 
getkan  (*<Whate'er  my  God  ordains  is  right");  J.  Ad. 
Haaslocher;  Christ.  Pressoyius;  Laur.  Laurenti,  whose 
best  hymn  Dr.  Schaff  designates  ErmutUert  euck  ikr 
Frommen  (^  Rejoioe  all  ye  bdieyers,"  in  Ckriet  in  Song,  p. 
888);  J.  &  Freisteiu;  a  GUnther,  HaU  im  Geddckłmts 
Jentm  Ckriet;  SaL  Liskoyius;  J.  T.  Breithaupt;  J. 
Lange;  J.  D.  Hennachmid;  Christ.  F.  Richter;  J.  G. 
Wolf;  Chr.  A.  Bernstein ;  Chr.  J.  Koltach ;  J.  Tribecho- 
ytus;  J.J.Winkler;  J.H.Schroder;  J.K Schmidt;  P. 
Lackmann;  J.Chr.  Lange;  L.  A.  Gotter;  B.  Crasselius, 
HeiUgtter  Jesu  Heiiigungtgueile;  M.  MuUer;  A.  Hinkel- 
mann ;  H.  G.  Neuss;  A.  Creutzbeig;  J.  Muthmann ;  Ernst 
Lange  (1650-1727),  Im  Abend  blinkt  der  Morgenstern,  or 
*<The  wondering  sages  traoe  from  far"  (Christ  in  Song, 
p.  120);  L.  J.  Schlicht;  C.  H.  yon  Bogatzky,  the  cele- 
brated  author  of  the  ^  Gk>lden  Treasuiy"  {Dos  gołdene 
Sckatzkasdein),  also  one  of  the  compUers  of  the  "Co- 
then  Hynm-book ;"  J.  J.  Rambach ;  T.  L.  K.  Allendorf ; 
L.  F.  F.  Lehr ;  J.  S.  Kunth ;  £.  G.  Woltirsdoif,  and  many 
others.  There  were  also  the  WUrtembeigers,  the  best 
representatiyes  of  the  pietism  of  South  Germany,  of 
whom  Albert  Bengel  (1687-1782)  may  be  looked  upon 
as  a  prominent  leader,  though  as  a  hymn-writer  he  was 
far  excelled  by  another  great  light  of  this  section  of 
Germany,  PhiUp  Friedrich  Hiller  (1699^1769),  who  took 
Paul  Gerhardt  for  his  modeL  He  publislied  seyeral 
yolnmes  of  hymna,  of  which  the  ^^  Casket  of  Spiritual 
Songa"  {Geitłliehes  Liederkdstlein),  containing  only  his 
own  sacred  songs,  ''obtained  yery  wide  popularity,"  and 
is  "atiU  the  commoneat  book  in  WUrtemberg  next  to 
the  Bibie  itaelf*  (Winkworth,  p.  288  8q.).  Herę  deeenre 
mention,  alao,  J.  R.  Hedinger,  S.  Urlsperger,  F.  O.  Hiller, 
Ph.  IŁWeisaenaee,  £.  L.  Fischer,  J.  Chr.  Storr,  Ph.  D. 
Burk,  Chr.  Fr.  Ottinger,  Chr.  K.  L.  yon  Pfeil,  J.  T.  yon 
Moeer,  and  atill  others. 

The  achool  of  Spener  deydoped  the  Myatica  and  Sep- 
aiatiats,  who  alao  fumiahed  a  number  of  contributors  to 
h3nnnology;  but,  although  aome  of  them  were  quite 
able,  the  influence  of  the  new  achools,  as  a  whole,  on 
hymnology  '^was,  for  the  most  part,  simply  mischiey- 
otts,  and  their  hymn-books  oontain  about  the  worst 
specimens  to  be  found— poor  aa  poetry,  fiercely  intolei^ 
ant  towarda  their  fe]low-<^hristians,  and  fuli  of  a  fanta^ 
dc  and  irteyerent  adoratiou  of  the  Redeemer**  (Wink- 
•worth,  Christian  Singers  of  Germany,  p.  290).  The  only 
hymnologists  who  really  deserye  praiae  aro  Gottfried 
Arnold  (1666-1714)  and  Gerhard  Tersteegen  (1697- 
1769).  The  former,  although  an  extensive  writer  on 
Church  Hiatory,  etc,  ia,  indeed,  best  remerobered  in  our 
day  by  his  hymna,  of  which  he  wrote  130,  and  among 
them  aeyeral  of  yery  great  beauty.  Perhaps  tbe  best 
of  Amold's  hymns  is  his  deeply  though  tf ul "  Ho  w  bless^d 
to  all  thy  foUowers,  Lord,  the  road,"  etc.  Tersteegen 
(q.  y.),  who,  although  he  neyer  actually  separated  from 
tbe  Reformed  Church  to  which  he  beionged,  was  nonę  ' 
the  less  '^aMjrstic  of  the  purest  type,"  wrote  moro  than 
100  hymns;  but  he  bas  become  especially  familiar  to 
English-speaking  Christians  by  the  English  dress  which 
W^ley  gaye  to  two  of  his  best  hymns — *'Lo!  God  is 
here ;  let  us  adorc,"  and  **  Thou  hidden  loye  of  God, 
whose  height.,"  etc  Lesser  lights  of  these  schools  are  J. 
Dippel,  J.  W.  Petersen,  G.  Arnold,  and  otheia. 


HYMNOLOGT 


442 


HTMNOLOGY 


Hero  alflo,  finaUy,  desenre  notice  the  hyiiin*wńt«n  of 
the  Moraviaimy  vho  ha^e  had  no  despicable  influence  on 
hymnology.  Of  eą)ecial  credit  an  a  few  of  ocunt  Ztn- 
zendorf 'a  hymns,  who,  nnfortonately,  carod  mora  for  their 
quanŁiŁ7  than  thdr  ąnality;  he  ¥rrote  moie  tfaan  2000, 
many  of  which,  natonDy  enough,  foand  a  place  in  £ng- 
lishhymn-booka.  Hisownflecthasin9ertedl28.  Cbaries 
Wealey  ako  Uanslated  some  of  thenL  Among  his  bert 
aro  *' Jesus,  still  lead  on"  {Jem  geh  vorm),  and  **  Jesus, 
thy  blood  and  righteousness"  {ChritU  Bha  u,  Gereckiig- 
kaś).  We  might  also  mention  in  the  same  connection 
J.  Nitschmann,  Chr.  David,  L.  J.  Dober,  F.  yon  Watte- 
Tille,  A.  G.  Spangenberg,  Louisa  von  Hayn,  and  othen. 

By  the  end  of  the  centuiy  the  influence  of  pietism 
had  madę  itself  felt  even  among  the  so-cilled  *'  ortho- 
dox,"  who  imitated  the  Pietists  in  producing  many 
hymns  which  may  be  counted  among  the  beat  wńtten 
at  this  time.  Of  the  roprosentatiyes  of  this  school  we 
name  a  few :  Benjamin  Schmolke,  who  wrote  moro  than 
1000  hymns,  many  of  which  have  been  tianslated  into 
English.  Among  his  best  we  count  **  Welooroe  yictor 
in  the  stnfe*'  (  Wiłkommen  ffdd  im  Strtke),  and  <<  Heav- 
enward  doth  our  journey  tend'*  {Himnulan  geht  wure 
B<M).  Wolfgang  G.  Dessler  wrote  Wie  teohl  ist  mir 
o  Freund  der  Seelen  {Christ  ta  <Soi^,  p.  491, 655, 842) ; 
and  Salomon  Frank,  Sckmucke  dich,  o  Uebe  Seele  ('*  Deck 
thyseif,  my  soul,"  in  Lyra  Germaniea,  ii,  138 ;  ChriH  in 
Sottffj  p.  590).  Hero  desenre  mention,  also,  Erdmann 
Neumeister,  B.  Marpergor,  J.  G.  Hermann,  J.  Chr.  Went- 
zel,  F.  Fabricius,  P.  Busch,  J.  Lehmua,  and  others;  of 
the  Reformed  Churoh:  J.  J.  Sprong,  Ć.  ZoUikofer,  and, 
later,  J.  £.  Layater. 

Modem  German  Hynmologista, — ^Towards  the  dose  of 
the  18th  century  Grennany  was  waking  to  a  new  sera  in 
literaturę.  But  the  philosophic,  or,  as  some  acutely  cali 
it,  '*the  critical  doubting"  religion  of  this  period  by  no 
means  affected  hymnology  farorably,  ''for  really  good 
hymns  must  have  in  them  something  of  the  naturo  of 
the  popular  song;  they  must  spring  ftom  a  cordial,  un- 
que8tioning  faith,  which  has  no  misgiyings  about  the 
response  it  will  evoke  from  other  hearts."  The  influ- 
ence of  the  Leibnitz-Wolfian  philosophy,  and  of  Gtott- 
8ched*s  school  of  poetry,  caused  the  sacrod  songs  to  be 
of  a  diy,  stifl^  and  artificial  style.  **  £ven  the  dassical 
hymns,  though  oonsecrated  by  aseodation,  could  no 
longer  satisfy  the  moro  pedantic  taste  of  the  age,  and 
there  spraiig  up  a  pcrfect  mania  for  alteriug  them,  and 
for  making  new  oollections  of  such  modemized  reisions. 
. . .  These  alterations  generally  oonsisted  in  diluting  the 
old  Tigor,  substituting  *vurtue'  for  'holiness'  or  *laith,' 
<the  Supremę  Being'  for  'our  faithful  God,'  and  so  on," 
80  that  these  modifled  hymns  may  be  sald  to  have  be^ 
changed  from  rełigious  to  morcU  songa.  See  Psauiody. 
One,  howeyer,  whose  songs,  on  aocount  of  their  ^  ration- 
al  piety  and  quiet  good  taste,"  deserye  especial  praise,  is 
Christian  FUrchtegott  Gellert  (q.  y.).  Other  hjrmnok)- 
gists  of  this  time,  for  the  mention  of  whose  names  we 
have  only  space  herc,  aro  J.  A.  Schlegd,  J.  F.  yon  Cro- 
negk,  J.  P.  Uz,  J.  F.  Lowen,  J.  S.  Diterich,  J.  a  Patzke, 
J.  F.  Feddersen,  R  MUnter,  J.  F.  Mudie,  H.  C.  Heeren,' 
J.  A.  Hermes,  F.W.  Loder,  J.  Eschenbui-g,  J.  Chr.  Fro- 
bing,  S.  G.  Buide,  Chr.  F.  Neander,  R  Haug,  Christ  G. 
Goz,  and  others.  The  pathetical  direction  was  taken  by 
Friedrich  Gottlieb  Klopstock  (q.v.),in  his  Aufertteh^n, 
ja  aufersteh^n,  He  was  followed  by  J.  A.  Cramer,  a 
yery  popular  hymnologist,  and  a  ftiend  of  Gellert  and 
Klopstock,  G.  P.  Funk,  C.  W.  Ramler,  Chr.  Chr.  Sturm, 
A.  H.  Niemeyer,  Chr.  F.  Dan,  Schubart,  and  others. 

But  the  one  really  ''great  step"  that  was  madę  in 
German  hymnology  at  this  time  was  the  offidal  sanc- 
tion  of  the  use  of  yemacular  hymns  in  the  Roman  Cath- 
olic  churches  of  South  Germany  and  Austria.  Katural- 
ly  enough,  many  of  the  Roman  Catholic  hymns  of  the 
period  aro  tnuislations  from  the  Latin;  many  of  the 
oiiginal  oompositions  follow  dosdy  in  style  both  Gel- 
lert and  Klopstock;  nay,  the  producdons  of  seyeral 
Protestant  hymnologista,  espedally  those  of  the  two 


last-named  poeta,  wero  eyen  nsed  in  the  Roman  Catlw 
olic  Churdi,  of  course  often  in  a  somewhat  modifled  and 
eyen  distorted  form.  Of  their  own  hymn-writen,  the 
following  deaerye  especial  mention :  J.  M.  Saikr  (bidi- 
op  of  RatiSbon),  J.  M.  Fennebeig,  J.  H.  C  yon  Wosen- 
beig,  J.  Speri,  and  J.  Franz.  Hero  deserye  notice  also 
the  Morayians,  Chr.  Grogor,  H.  yon  Bminingk,  C  von 
Wobeser,  G.  H.  Łoekid,  J.  J.  Boesart,  and  othen;  the 
Wurtemboigers,  a  F.  Hartmann,  W.  L.  Hoech,  Chr.  Ad. 
Dami,  M.  Hahn,  Christ  G.  Pregizer;  in  other  German 
proyincea,  C  liebich,  Matth.  Oaudins,  J.  G.  Schoner; 
and  in  the  Reformed  Churoh,  H.  Annoni,  F.  A  Kraomia- 
cher,  Jung-Stilling,  G.  Henken;  the  foreranner  of  the 
latest  period  is  Friedrich  yon  Hardenbeig  (No^ralia). 

Preaent  German  Hymnotogg,— The  most  modem  pe- 
riod begins  with  the  war  c^  liberation  (1813-15),  and 
with  the  reawakening  of  a  genuine  roligious  life,  which, 
after  ali,  is  dowly  gaining  the  upper  hand  oyer  that 
generally  supposed  dominating  sceptidsm.  Althoogfain 
the  modem  productions  the  subjectiye  greatly  predoan- 
inates,  and  they  aro  still  rather  the  work  of  art  inatead  of 
popular  songs,  yet  they  do  not  quitc  attain  to  the  ibrce 
and  condensed  pregnancy  of  the  clasaic  hymns,  ao  that 
thero  is  yery  apparent  in  them  a  striying  after  objectir- 
ity,  and  "they  haye  at  least  much  sweetnese,  earoest- 
ness,  and  simplidty."  To  the  Romantic  schód  of  which 
Noyalis  was  mentaoned  bdong  E.  M.  Arndt,  M.  yon 
Schenkendorf,  Fr.  H.  de  la  Hotte  Fouquć,  Louise  Hensel, 
and  Fr.  Ruckert  Of  the  other  latest  Lutheran  hym- 
nologists,  whose  most  prominent  ropresentatlycs  aro  Alh 
Knapp,yict  Strauss,  J.  C  Ph.  Spitta,  Chr.  R.  H.  Puch- 
ta,  C.  A.  Doring,  deserye  mention  hero :  Chr.  CL  J.  Aa- 
Bchenfdd,  J.  F.  Bahnmaiw,  Chr.  G.  Barth,  J.  Bentz,  Ed. 
Eyth,  F.  A.  Fddhoff,  G.  W.  Fink,  W.  R.  Frcudenthal  C 
yon  Grlłneisen,  W.  Hej-,  Christ  G.  Kem,  J.  Fr.  Molier, 
Chr.  F.  H.  Sachśe,  R.  Stier,  and  Chr.  H.  Zeller ;  among  the 
Reformed,  J.  P.  Lange.  Among  the  Morayians,  the  high- 
est  rank  in  this  period  bekmgs  to  J.  R  yon  Albertini,  one 
of  their  bishops,  whose  hymns,  it  is  sud,  Schleiemiachtf 
asked  to  haye  read  to  Mm  in  his  dying  hours.  C.  R  Garre 
hero  deseryes  also  high  encomiums  as  a  bymnologist 
Among  the  Roman  Cathollcs,  whose  prominent  model  is 
Spee,  "with  all  the  defects,  no  less  than  the  beauties  of 
style,"  the  Yiigin  8erving  as  the  most  usual  theme,  H. 
yon  Diepenbrock  deseryes  especial  mention.  The  ex* 
tent  of  German  hymndogy  may  be  inferred  from  the 
fact  that  the  Eyangelical  Churoh  alone  has  produced  no 
lees  than  80,000  hymns.     See  Psalmody.     (J.  H.  W.) 

2.  Enfflish,— The  sacred  poetry  of  England  antedatea 
by  many  generations  its  tme  hymnology.  The  author 
ot  Englemd^B  Ant^kon  (George  Macdonald)  deyotes  an 
interesting  chapter  to  the  sacred  lyrics  of  the  ISth  cen- 
tury, in  which  he  giyes  specimena  of  genuine  deyo- 
tional  song  from  the  Percy  Sodety  pubUcations,  taken 
from  MSS.  in  the  British  Museum,  and  ascribcd  to  the 
reign  of  Edward  I.  "  Mary  at  the  Ctosb,"  "  The  Moun- 
ing  Disciple,'*  and  the  "  Canonical  Houis"  of  MlHiaro  of 
Shoroham  fumish  iUnstrations  of  most  tender  and  acrip- 
tural  yene,  but  aro  written  in  a  dialect  that  needs  fie- 
quent  translation  into  modem  Englbh.  The  "Mirade 
Plays"  wero  originally  introduced  by  the  Nonnans  after 
the  Conquest,  and  aro  written  in  Ńoraian  Frendi,  bnt 
in  1388  the  pope  pemaitted  them  to  be  trandated  into 
English.  In  this  14th  century  **the  father  of  English  po- 
etry,** Geoflroy  Chaucer,  gaye  a  new  yoice  to  Christian 
song.  It  was  fuli  two  hundred  years  from  his  adyent  be- 
foro  England  produced  another  really  great  poet  But 
the  age  of  Elizabeth,  as  if  to  make  up  for  the  barrenneaa 
of  preceding  centuries,  is  remarkable  for  the  groat  num- 
ber  of  its  writers  of  sacred  yeree,  as  well  as  for  its  other 
literary  prodigies.  In  a  sdection  madę  and  edited  by 
Edward  Farr,  Esq.,  for  the  **  Parker  Society,"  consisting 
chiefly  of  deyotional  poems,  he  has  given  the  namca  and 
brief  biognphical  nodces  of  no  less  than  one  hundied 
and  thirty-seyen  different  authors.  Among  the  ilhis- 
trious  writers  of  sacred  yeraes  in  this  asra  we  fiod  qaeen 
Elizabeth,  arohbiahop  Parker,  Edmund  Spenser,  Geoige 


HYMNOLOGY 


448 


HYMNOLOGY 


Gtfcaigiw,  Mjchad  Drayton,  Sii  Walter  Rateigh,  Sir 
Philip  SidnejTythe  Fletcher  brotben— Giles  and  Phin- 
eUf  Dr.  Donne^  Geoige  Withera,  lord  Baoon,  the  ooant- 
en  of  Pembroke  (aiater  of  Sir  Philip  Sidaey,  and  Joint 
aotbor  with  bim  of  a  veraon  of  the  Paalma).  Later  still 
we  fiod  quaiDt  old  Philip  QiiaElefl»  and  Bobert  Southwell, 
the  martyr  monk,  and  their  oontemporaiy,  sweet  Cłecrge 
Herbert.  The  gieat  dramatiats  of  that  golden  age  haye 
left  here  and  there  some  ontbursts  of  deep  religious  po- 
etry  and  aong,  wbich  at  leaat  show  Ibrth  their  obliga- 
tions  to  the  BiUe  and  to  the  Chri^tianity  of  the  period. 
Haywood,  Shirley,  and  Ben  Jonaon,  Beaumont  and 
fletehefy  and  Shakespeaie,  greatest  of  all,  swell  the 
hymnie  chonuL  But  the  dramadc  gave  way  gradually 
to  lyric  poetry,  and  in  the  aaccceding  centuiy  we  haye 
an  increaaing  nomber  of  deyont  poeta,  of  whom  the  im- 
mortal  Milton  muat  alwaya  be  the  chief.  Yet  the  ain- 
gular  fact  remaina  that  doring  all  theae  ages  there  was 
*"  nothing  like  a  People'8  Hyron-book  in  Eugland."  It 
is  tnie  that  Christian  worship  was  not  withont  its  tem- 
pie soDga.  The  Paalms  of  Dayid,  the  Te  Deam,  the 
Magmfieai,  the  Ghrias,  and  the  ^  Song  of  the  Angels," 
the  "Ambroflian  Hymn,"  and  some  of  the  hynms  of 
the  Mjddle  Ages,  were  chanted  in  the  choiches  and  ci^ 
tbedrala.  But  the  so-called  hymna  of  Spenser  and  Mil- 
ton, and  of  minor  wiiteis,  neyer  entered  into  the  Chri»- 
tian  hearty  Ufe,  and  woiship  of  British  Ghristianity. 
Germany  poasessed  a  cUsoc  litentnre  of  this  sort  a  oen- 
tciy  and  a  half  before  Eogland  had  a  hymnaL  The 
rude  yersion  of  the  Pbalms  by  Stemhold  and  Hopkins, 
the  flmoother  but  insipid  yersion  of  Brady  and  Tatę 
whłch  aaperseded  it,  and  the  morę  faithful  Scottish 
yenion,  which  was  the  work  of  an  English  Puritan 
(Rooae),  were  sung  by  those  whose  steru  reyolt  against 
Romaniam  led  them  to  reject  eyen  what  was  really 
good  and  scriptnral  in  her  order  of  worship  and  litur- 
gical  booksL  The  faults  of  the  age  aie  conspicnoos  in 
its  poetry.  It  is  intellectnal,  met^[>hysical,  reflectiye, 
litenry,  fuli  of  ''ąnips,  and  cranks,  and  waiiton  wiles;" 
cumbrous  and  oyerdone.  With  yery  few  exceptiona, 
there  is  molhing  that  people  would  care  to  sing,  or  oould 
aing,  for  there  is  Uttle  of  that  emoriotial  element  which 
goes  out  in  musical  expresston.  The  rhymes  are  rude 
and  Ecregular,  and  the  yery  art  of  the  poetry  seems  to 
defy  any  attempts  to  set  it  to  popular  musie  For  "  peo- 
ple cannot  think  and  sing ;  they  can  only  fed  and  suig." 
£yen  Milton's  magnifioent  hymn,  ^  On  the  Moming  of 
Chriat*8  Natiyity,"  is  not  adapted  to  common  Sabbath 
worship;  and  there  are  few  of  George  Herbert's  yeraes 
that  aorviye  in  the  songs  of  the  sanctuary. 

The  period  suoceeding  this  reyiyal  of  literaturę  pro- 
dnoed  aome  Christian  poeta  of  notę,  and  a  few  hymns 
which  8urviye  their  authors.  Bunyan,  and  Baxter,  and 
Jeremy  Taylor  all  wrote  yeraes,  but  their  proee  had 
morę  ófpoetryinitthan  their  attemptsat  song.  Among 
thoae  whose  good  old  hymns  haye  stood  the  test  of 
time,  we  muat  not  foiget  the  Rey.  John  Mason,  of  Wa- 
ter-Stzatford,  who  died  in  1694,  author  of  "  Come,  dear- 
est  lArd,  and  feed  thy  sheep,  on  this  sweet  day  of  reat," 
*"  Now  from  the  altar  of  our  hearta,"  **  What  shall  I  ren- 
der  to  my  God?"  etc  He  published  a  yolume  of 
''Spiritoal  Songs"  in  1686.  Dr.Watta  borrowed  much 
from  him.  The  good  non-j  uror,  bishop  Ken  (1687-1711), 
beqaeathed  to  Chiistendom  his  Cunous  **  Moming  and 
£vening  Hymna,"  and  that  matchless  doxology,  ^  Praise 
God,  from  whom  all  blessings  ikrw."  Next  comes  Jo- 
seph Addison,  whose  elegant  yerńon  of  the  nineteenth 
Psalm,  oommendng  **  The  spacious  firmament  on  high," 
first  iq»peaied  in  the  Spedaior  in  1712,  at  the  dose  of 
an  aitide  on  '^  the  right  means  to  strengthen  faith ;" 
and  aboot  the  same  time  was  published  his  sweet  para- 
phiase  of  the  twenty-third  Psalm.  Perhaps  the  most 
familiar  of  his  hymna  ia  that  beginning  *'  When  all  thy 
maciea,0  my  God."    See  Addison. 

The  Beformation  in  England  did  not,  as  in  Germany, 
gnnr  by  the  spontaneous  ntteranoe  of  popular  Christian 
aoąg.    That  was  left  lor  the  period  of  the  greateyangeli- 


cal  reńyal  which  crowned  the  last  oentury  with  its  bless- 
ings. All  that  had  beendone  before  was  as  the  broad  and 
deep  fonndation-work,  rude  and  unchiselled,  but  strong 
and  esMntial  to  the  majestic  superstructure  which  haa 
riaen  upon  it.  The  stream  of  Christian  yerse  ilowed  on 
in  ita  old  channels  until  the  publication  of  the  Psalms  and 
Hymns  of  Dr.  Watts  began  a  new  nra  in  English  hym- 
nology.  The  poet  Montgomery  says  that  '<  Dr.  Watts 
may  almost  be  called  the  inyentor  of  hymns  in  our  lan- 
gnage,  for  he  so  far  departed  from  aU  precedent  that 
few  of  his  oompositions  resemble  those  of  his  forenm- 
ners,  while  he  so  lar  estabUshed  a  precedent  to  all  his 
saooeasors  that  nonę  haye  departed  from  it  otberwise 
than  acoording  to  the  peculiar  tum  of  mind  of  the  writ- 
er,  and  the  style  of  escpressing  Christian  trath  employed 
by  the  denomination  to  which  he  bekmged."  Dissenter 
as  he  waa,  hia  Psalms  and  Hymns  are  so  catholic  in 
their  spirit  that  many  of  them  haye  been  adopted  by 
all  denominataons  of  Protestant  Christians  in  their  Sab- 
bath worshipb  His  Dwme  8<mg»  for  ChUdren^  and 
some  of  his  Ptalms,  wili  liye  while  the  language  endures. 
The  defects  of  his  style  are  obyioos  in  many  of  his  lyr- 
ics,  which  eyince  hastę  and  negligence,  faulty  rhymes, 
and  a  proting  feebleness  of  eipression.  Yet  he  broke 
brayely  through  the  mannerisms  of  preoeding  ages,  and 
inangurated  a  style  of  Christian  hymnology  which  has 
■like  enriched  the  eyangelical  poetry  of  the  English 
tongue,  and  filled  the  temples  and  homes  of  the  race 
that  speaks  that  language  with  the  most  delightful 
praiaes  of  the  Most  High.  His  example  was  soon  fol- 
lowed  with  snooess  by  others.  But  to  him  belongs  the 
undispated  honor  of  being  the  great  precentor  of  the 
immense  chorus  which  he  will  foreyer  lead  in  these  gla 
rious  hannonies.  His  first  hymn  was  giyen  to  the 
Church  under  drcumstances  of  prophetic  interest.  He 
had  complained  to  some  officbd  in  the  Independent 
church  of  Southampton,  of  which  his  father  was  a  dea- 
con,  "that  the  hymnists  of  the  day  were  sadly  out  of 
taate."  *<Give  us  something  better,  young  man  "  waa 
the  reply.  The  young  man  did  it,  and  the  Church  waa 
invited  to  close  its  eyening  seryioe  with  a  new  hymn, 
which  commenoed, 

"  Behold  the  glorles  of  the  Łamb 
Amldst  His  Father^s  throne ; 
Prepsre  new  honors  for  His  name, 
And  songs  before  unkDown.*' 

From  that  time  his  eyer-ready  mose  gaye  forth,  in 
strains  which  are  almost  diyine,  '*  hannonies"  for  his 
Saviour's  name,  and  ''songs  before  unknown."  We 
need  only  indicate  a  few  of  the  first  lines:  ''When  I 
sunrey  the  wondrous  cross,"  "My  God,  the  spring  of  all 
my  joys,"  "When  I  can  read  my  title  elear,"  "Come, 
ye  that  loye  the  Lord,"  "  Come,  let  us  join  our  cheerful 
songs,"  "  He  dies,  the  friend  of  sinnen  dies."  His  "  Cra- 
dle  H3rmn"  has  taught  countless  mothers  and  chOdren 
to  sing  of  Jesus,  and  the  angels  and  manger  of  Bethle* 
hem :  "  Hush,  my  dear,  lie  still  and  slnmber."  It  was 
while  looking  out  from  his  quiet  chamber  window  at 
Southampton  "upon  the  beautiful  soenery  of  the  harbor 
and  riyer,  and  upon  the  green  glades  of  the  New  Forest 
on  its  farther  bank,  that  the  idea  suggested  itself  of  the 
image  of  the  heayenly  Canaan,"  which  he  soon  embodied 
in  those  sweetest  of  all  his  yeraes, "  There  is  a  land  of 
pure  delight,"  etc    See  Watts. 

Only  seyen  years  before  the  first  edition  of  Watts*s 
Hymns  was  giyen  to  the  world,  Philip  Doddridge  was 
bom  (1702) ;  and  before  the  death  of  his  great  predeoes- 
sor,  whose  yerses  cheered  his  own  dying  hours  in  a  dis- 
tant  land,  he  had  published  most  of  his  sweetest  hymns. 
Some  of  these  are  imperishable,  for  they  haye  beoome 
part  of  the  spiritual  life  of  our  Protestant  Christianity. 
Many  of  them  grew  out  of  and  were  appended  to  his 
sermons,  which  he  crystallized  into  such  h3rmns  aa 
"Thine  earthly  Sabbaths,  Lord,  we  loye"  (Heb.  iy,  9), 
"Jesus,  I  love  thy  charming  name"  (1  Pet  y,  7).  His 
Rim  and  Progress  of  Relu/ion  in  the  Souł,  which  was 
wiitten  at  the  suggestion  of  Dr.  Wattsy  and  has  been 


HTMNOLOGY 


444 


HYMNOLOGY 


tranalated  into  the  leadmg  laognages  of  Euope,  and  his 
Family  Erpońtor  o/the  New  Testatamty  are  monuments 
of  his  wonderful  religious  power  and  usefulness.  But 
his  hymns  will  be  sung  where  hu  laiger  worka  are  nev- 
er  heard  of,  and  the  world  will  never  cease  to  echo  the 
stcains  of  such  songs  as  *<  Awake,  inj  soul,  stietch  evei>' 
nerye!"  "Hark,  the  glad  sound,  the  Sayiour^s  comeT 
^  Grace,  'tis  a  charming  sound,"  ^  Ye  golden  lampę  of 
heaveu,  fareweli  !'*    See  Doddkidge. 

The  inost  yoluminous  and  sucoessful  of  all  English 
hymnists  is  the  Rev.  Charles  Wedey.  Over  seyen  thou- 
sand  psalms  and  hymns  were  wiitten  by  his  facile  pen ; 
and  these  were  merely  the  by-play  of  a  tireless  itiner- 
ant  eyangelist,  who,  with  his  morę  celebrated  brother 
John,  himself  also  a  hymn-writer  of  no  mean  powers, 
preached  the  Gospel  in  the  Old  and  New  worlds,  and 
gave  a  new  style  to  Christian  song.  Their  history,  la- 
borą  persecutionsy  and  trtnmphs  are  so  well  known  that 
we  need  oniy  mention  their  sainted  names.  John  Wes- 
ley  was  tho  autbor  or  translator  of  sevend  ezoellent 
hymns,  and  a  capital  critic  on  hymnology.  Of  Charles 
We8ley'8  hymns  a  laige  nomber  have  taken  a  morę  thau 
dassic  place  in  our  poetic  literaturę.  The  Christian 
Church  wiU  never  cease  to  slng  **  Oh  love  divŁne,  how 
sweet  thou  art  !**  **  Jesus,  lover  of  my  soul,"  *<  Hark !  the 
herald  angels  sing,"  <<The  earth  with  alł  its  fnlness 
owns,"  *'Come,  let  us  join  our  fńends  above."  Dr. 
Watts  said  of  Charles  Wesley^s  inimitaUe  rendering  of 
the  wrestling  of  Jacob  at  Peniel  with  the  angel, "  That 
single  poem,  *  Wrestling  Jacob,*  is  worth  all  the  verses 
which  I  have  ever  written."  Doubtless  much  of  the 
power  of  his  hymns  is  attributable  to  the  drcumstances 
which  gaye  riae  to  them,  and  to  his  fadlity  in  giTing 
them  the  most  fresh  and  vivid  forms  of  expresBion.  On 
the  last  projecting  rock  on  Land*s  £nd,Comwall,  he  stood 
and  wrote  that  memorable  hymn,  *<  Lo !  on  a  narrow  neck 
of  land,'*  etc  His  judgment  hymn,  oommencing  ^  Stand, 
the  omńipotent  decree,"  and  two  others,  were  written  and 
published  in  1756,  just  after  the  destmction  of  the  city  of 
losbon  by  an  earthąuake.  "  Glory  to  God,  whose  8oveiv 
eign  grace,*'  was  written  for  the  Kingswood  colliers, whose 
wonderful  conversion,  undcr  the  preaching  of  White- 
field  and  the  Wesleys,  was  among  the  miracles  of  grace 
which  attended  their  apostolic  ministiy.  '^Oh  for  a 
thousand  tongues,  to  sing  my  great  Redeemer^s  piaiae,*' 
commemorates  his  own  spiritual  birth,  and  was  written 
in  response  to  a  Gennan  friend,  the  Morayian  Peter 
Boehler,  who  said  to  him,  when  hesitating  to  confess 
publicly  his  conyersion,  ^  If  you  bad  a  thousand  tongues 
you  should  publish  it  with  them  alL"  Another  power- 
ful  accesaory  of  the  Weslej^an  hymns  was  the  musie 
with  which  many  of  them  were  accompanied.  The 
great  oompoeer  Handel  set  some  of  them  to  noble  tnnes, 
thd  MSS.  of  which  are  still  presenred  in  the  libraiy  of 
Cambridge  Uniyersity.  But  their  greatest  interest  and 
auocess  doubtless  comes  from  their  scriptnral  character, 
their  immense  rangę  over  all  varieties  of  Christian  ex- 
perience,  and  their  intimate  relation  to  the  great  reri- 
Tal  of  religion  of  which  these  remarkable  men  and  their 
oompeers  were  the  leading  Instruments.  (A  stiiking 
illustration  of  all  these  features  is  giyen  in  the  hymn — 
at  once  expository  and  experimental--of  which  we  haye 
spaoe  for  only  part  of  one  stanza : 

**'Ti8  mystery  all—the  Immortnl  dłes  f 
Who  can  explore  his  strange  design  7  *  *  * 
Tls  mcrcy  all  I  let  eartn  adore : 
Łet  angel  minds  Inąuire  no  morę.**) 

They  were  among  the  proyidential  and  gracious  deyel- 
opments  of  a  period  whose  influenoes,  at  the  end  of  a 
hundred  years,  are  yet  only  beginning  to  show  forth  the 
high  praises  of  thdr  Master.    See  Wesley,  Jfomx  and 

ChARIJ£S. 

We  haye  giyen  moro  space  to  these  celebrated  hymn- 
writers  because  of  their  historical  relations  to  the  new 
aera  of  deyotional  and  sanctuary  song  which  they  intro- 
duced.  From  that  period  the  number,  yariety,  and  ex- 
oeUenoe  of  the  contributions  to  our  Christian  lyńcs  has 


increased,  until  the  hymmdogy  of  the  English  toDgae 
is  second  only  to  that  of  Germany  in  yolume  and  divei^ 
sity.  The  literary  character  of  these  productioDs  haa 
been  raised  to  a  higher  standard,  and  their  scriptund 
and  ezperimental  yalue  has  been  tested  both  by  their 
denominational  uses,  and  by  that  truły  catholic  s|ńrit 
which  haa  madę  them  the  property  of  the  Church  Uni- 
yenud.  Inferior  compositions  haye  been  graduaUy 
dropped,  and  replaced  by  othen  of  nndoubted  merit,  un- 
til the  collections  of  the  yarioua  Christian  chuichcs 
haye  oyerflowed  with  the  yeiy  beat  hymns  of  all  ages. 
The  most  remarkable  eyidence  of  these  statemcnta  is 
found  in  the  recent  attention  giyen  to  the  history  and 
literaturę  of  our  sacred  poetey  by  English  and  American 
writers,  who  haye  patiently  explored  tho  whole  field, 
and  haye  gameied  its  treasures  in  many  admirable  col- 
lections. Refening  our  readers  to  these  accessible  pnb- 
lications,  we  can  de>-ote  the  limited  spaoe  left  in  thia 
artide  only  to  brief  noticee  of  the  principal  oontribotors 
to  the  yolume  of  diyine  praises  sinoe  the  Wesleys  died. 

Of  their  contemponuries,  we  can  neyer  forget  Angos- 
tus  Toplady  (1741-1778),  and  his  almost  inspired  hymn, 
**  Rock  of  Ages,  deft  for  me,"  and  others  of  his  excelknt 
collection.  SeeToPŁADT.  Nor  will  the  churches  cease 
to  sing  the  magnificent  Btrains  of  his  thedogical  oppo- 
nent,  Thomas  Oliyers  (1725-1799),  in  his  Judgment 
hymn,  beginning  *^  Come,  immortal  King  of  gloiy.^'  See 
OŁiyERS.  Along  with  them  camo  William  Williams 
(1717-1791),  the  Methodist  « Watts  of  Walea,"  mng- 
ing  '^0'er  the  gloomy  hiUs  of  darkneas,"  and  **  Guide 
me,  oh  thou  great  Jehoyah ;"  and  John  Cennick,  the  de- 
yottt  Morayian,  to  whom  we  areindebted  for  two  of  the 
finest  hymns  eyer  written— "Rise,  my  soul,  and  atretch 
thy  wings,"  and  "  Lo  1  he  comes  with  douds  deacending.* 
The  latter  has  been  erroneously  attributed  to  Oliyci^ 
in  whose  judgment  hymn  are  stanzas  which  it  rerena- 
Ues  in  some  respects,  but  a  close  inspection  shows  them 
to  be  entirely  different  productions.  Cennick^s  hynaa 
first  appeared  in  a  '*  Collection  of  Sacred  Hymi»''  in 
1752.  See  Cbkntgk.  Next  in  order  appeared  the  col- 
lection of  hymns  by  the  Rey.  Benjamin  Beddome  (1717- 
1795),  a  Baptist  dergyman,  whom  a  London  congrega- 
tion  oould  not  tempt  to  leaye  his  little  flock  at  Bmirtoo, 
where  he  labored  fiily-two  years,  and  preached  and 
sang  of  Jesus.  He  was  the  author  of  *'  Did  Chrirt  o*er 
sinners  weep  ?"  "  Faith,  'tis  a  precious  grace,** "  Let  par> 
ty  names  no  morę,"  etc.  Thomas  H&weis,  chaplain  to 
the  countess  of  Huntington,  a  theological  author  of 
notę,  and  one  of  the  founders  of  the  London  Misi^ionanr 
Society  (1739-1820),  was  the  author  of  oycr  two  ł  nndred 
and  fifiy  hymns,  some  of  which  are  fayoritea  still ;  but  to 
the  countess  hersdf,  the  patron  and  friend  of  Whitefidd, 
and  Berridge,  and  Romaine,  we  are  indel  ted  for  such 
undying  hymns  as  '^  Oh !  when  my  righteous  judge  shaU 
come,"  **  We  soon  shall  hear  the  midnight  ciy."  She  died 
in  1791,  atthe  age  of  dghty-four,  hayingdeyoted  ber  for- 
tunę and  life  to  the  cause  of  Christ.  Some  of  the  sweet- 
est  hymns  for  the  Church  and  the  home  which  this  age 
produced  were  written  by  the  daughter  of  a  Baptist 
dergyman  at  Broughton,  Miss  Annę  Stede  (1716-1778). 
She  withheld  ber  name  from  her  poems,  hut  the  £ng^ 
lish-speaking  Christian  world  still  sings  from  its  myriad 
hearts  and  tongues,  ^  Father,  whate*er  of  earthly  blias," 
*' Jesus,  my  Lord,  in  thy  dear  name  unitę  All  things  my 
heart  calls  great,  or  good,  or  sweet,**  etc;  '^Come,  ye 
that  loye  the  Sayiour*s  name;**  and  some  of  her  sacn- 
mental  hymns  are  fine  spedmens  of  Christian  song. 

The  next  hymn-book  of  importance  that  appeared  in 
Great  Britain  was  the  Oiney  ffymnt,  which  is  the  joint 
produGtion  of  those  gifled  and  illuatrioua  men,  so  diifer- 
ent  in  their  characters  and  liyee,  and  yet  ao  united  in 
the  loye  of  Christ— the  Rey.  John  Newton  and  WilHam 
Cowper.  To  this  book  Newton  fumished  two  hundred 
and  eighty-eix  hymns,  and  Cowper  8ixty-twa  It  wsa 
published  first  in  1779,  before  Cowper*s  repotation  as  a 
poet  was  madę.  The  hymns  were  written  between 
1767  and  1779,  and  doubtless  would  haye  contaaocd 


HYMNOLOGT 


445 


HTMNOLOGT 


more  of  Cowper^s  contiibotioiis  but  for  a  return  of  hk 
insaoity.  The  histoiy  of  these  noble  coworkers  for 
Christ  is  too  well  known  to  requini  more  than  thLs  allti- 
aion.  Their  deep  peraonal  experienceft  are  written  in 
many  of  their  delightful  yersea,  and  reflected  in  the 
Chnstian  life  of  saoceeding  generations.  Who  that  le- 
members  Nearton'8  manrellous  conrersion,  and  hia  sub- 
seqaent  life  of  piety  and  distinguished  asefulness,  nntil 
his  death  at  the  age  of  eighty-two  (1807),  will  not  ap- 
predate  the  fervor  with  which  he  Bang, 

"  Amaztog  grace  I  how  sweet  the  scond 
That  8aved  a  wrelch  like  me ;" 
or  "  How  sweet  the  name  of  Jesna  soonda 
In  a  bellever's  ear  ;** 

or  "  SonietJmes  a  llght  snrprlses 

Tbe  Christian  while  he  slngs  ;** 

or  "Day  of  Jndgment,  day  of  wondere, 

Uark !  the  trampet*s  awfh]  sonnd  1" 

See  Newton,  John.  And  the  English  langnage  itself 
must  die  before  Cowper'8  plaintive  musie  ceases  to  yi- 
brate  through  belieyers'  souls  in  those  almost  perfect 
hymns  in  which  he  wrote  out  and  yet  reiled  the  stnmge, 
sweet,  and  attractive  experience8  of  his  own  religious 
life:  ^'To  Jesus,  the  crown  of  my  hope,"  ^*Far  from  the 
world,  O  Lord,  I  flee,"  *<0h!  for  a  closer  walk  with 
God,""  "There  is  a  fountain  filled  with  blood,**  "God 
mores  in  a  mysterious  way."  It  bas  been  well  said  by 
Dr.  Cheerer  that  "if  Cowper  had  never  giyen  to  the 
Chorch  on  eartb  but  a  single  score  of  those  exquisite 
breathings  of  a  pious  beart  and  creations  of  his  own  ge- 
niua,  it  had  been  a  beąuest  worth  a  life  of  suffering  to 
accompliab."    See  Cowpeb. 

It  was  long  before  another  bard  arose  to  take  up  the 
lyre  whicb  this  gentle  singer  laid  down.  A  few  strains 
come  floating  through  the  succeeding  years,  such  as 
Robinson*s  "  Come,  thou  fount  of  every  blessing,"  and 
**  Jesus,  and  can  it  ever  be,  a  mortal  man  ashamed  of 
thceP  written  in  1774  by  Thomas  Grcen  of  Ware,  then 
a  precocious  boy  of  only  ten  years !  Of  female  bym- 
nisis  we  harc  at  this  period  Mrs.  Barbauld  (1743-1825) 
and  Jane  Taylor,  botb  of  whom  left  some  sweet  hymns 
for  the  sanctuary.  The  former  will  be  best  remembered 
by  ber  beauttful  lines  on  the  death  of  a  belieyer — 
^  Sweet  is  the  soene  when  Christians  die  ;**  the  latter  by 
ber  UymnBfor  Infant  Minds,  To  them  we  must  add 
Miss  Hannah  More  (1744-1833),  whose  practical  Chris- 
tian proee  writings  poescss  a  mssculine  yigor  and  Bib- 
lical  eamestness,  and  whose  poetry,  although  not  of  the 
highest  order,  yet  often  oyeiflows  with  melody  and  ten« 
der  feeling.  Her  Christmas  hymn,  '^Oh!  how  won- 
drous  is  the  story  of  our  Kedeemer'8  birth,*'  is  a  fayora- 
Ue  specimen.  Among  the  minor  poeta  of  this  period 
we  mention  Dr.  John  Ryland,  boro  in  1753,  author  of 
**  In  all  my  LonI*s  appointed  ways,"  ^  Lord,  teach  a  lit- 
tle  child  to  pray,"  "  Soyereign  Rider  of  tbe  skies,"  "  O 
Lord,  I  would  delight  in  thee;"  and  the  Rey.  John  Lo- 
gan,  who  died  in  1788,  at  the  age  of  forty,  a  Soottish 
preacher  faroed  for  his  eloqucnce,  who  wrote  such  hymns 
as  **  Where  high  the  beavenly  tempie  stands,"  "  Oh,  city 
of  tbe  Lord,  begin  the  unireraal  song,"  "  Oh  God  of 
Bethd !  by  wboee  band  thy  people  still  are  fed,"  **  The 
honr  of  my  departurc*s  come,"  etc.  To  the  poet  of  the 
poor,  Rey.  George  Crabbe,  we  are  indebted  for  those  de- 
ligfatfol  lines,  "  Pilgrim,  burdened  with  thy  sin,  come 
the  wmy  to  Zion*s  gate;"  and  to  Rey.  Samuel  Medley,  a 
Baptiat  mimster  of  liyerpool  (1788-1799),  for  the  stir- 
ring  hrrics,  *<Mortals,  awake!  with  angds  join,"  and 
"  Awafce,  my  soul,  in  joyful  lays."  The  name  of  Henry 
Kirke  White  (1785-1808)  wiU  eyer  liye  in  the  spiendid 
hymn  in  which  he  sang  the  story  of  the  birth  of  the 
Redeemer  and  of  hia  own  conyersion,  ^  When  marsbal- 
led  on  the  mighty  plidn."  From  his  pen  also  flowed 
thoie  dunacteristic  hymns  beginning  *'The  Lord  our 
God  ia  fali  of  might,"  *'0  Lord,  another  day  is  fłown," 
''Throogh  sottow*s  night  and  danger's  path."  See 
Hbkbt  K.  Wurns.  The  coronation  hymn,  "AU  hail 
the  power  of  Jeans*  name,"  waa  written  by  the  Rev. 


Edward  Perronet,  an  English  dissenting  dergynuuii 
who  died  at  Canterbury  in  1793,  exclaiming, "  Glory  to 
God  in  the  height  of  his  dinnity,  glory  to  God  in  the 
depth  of  his  humanity,  glory  to  God  in  his  all-suffiden- 
cy,  and  into  his  hands  I  commend  my  spiiit !"  The 
grsnd  tnne  which  bas  always  been  associated  with  these 
lines  was  composed  for  them  by  a  Mr.  Sbrubsole,  a  friend 
of  the  antbor,  and  organist  at  the  chapel  of  Spa  Fields, 
London,  1784-1806.  We  can  only  allnde  in  a  sentenoe 
to  the  well-known  occasional  hymns  of  the  great  poets, 
Pope  and  Dryden,Wordsworth,  GampbeU,  Moore,  South- 
ey,  and  some  of  their  assoeiatee. 

But  the  Church  Uniyersal  owea  a  greater  debt  to 
James  Montgomery  (1771-1854).  No  man  sińce  the 
days  of  Cowper  bas  added  so  many  admirable  yersions 
of  tbe  Psalms  and  noble  hymns  to  the  English  language 
as  this  gifted  Morayian,  whose  prolific  muse  neyer  ceased 
to  layish  its  treasures  until,  at  fouisoore  years,  he  weut 
up  higber.  His  paraphrsse  of  the  aeyenty-second 
Psalm,  oommendng  '*Hail  to  the  Lord's  anointed,"  is  a 
classic  fuli  of  the  old  Hebrew  iłre  and  of  the  best  mod- 
em misńonaiy  spirit.  His  "  Thrice  holy"  (Isa.  yi,  8), 
beginning  "  Holy,  holy,  holy  Lord,"  seems  to  blend  the 
yoices  of  '^saints  and  seraphim"  in  one  glorious  pro- 
phetic  anthem.  Of  his  other  hymns  we  need  only 
name  the  Hallelajah, "  Hark !  the  song  of  Jubilee ;"  the 
Christmas  choruses,  **  Angels  from  tbe  realms  of  glory," 
and  "  Hark !  the  herald  angels  sing ;"  the  song  of  heay- 
en,  "Foreyer  with  the  Lord;"  the  hymn  on  the  death 
of  an  aged  minister,  *'  Seryant  of  God,  well  done,"  writ- 
ten in  memory  of  his  friend,  Rey.  Thomas  Taylor;  and 
that  on  the  decease  of  the  Rey.  John  Owen,  secretaiy 
of  the  British  and  Foreign  Bibie  Sodety,  "  Go  to  the 
graye  in  all  thy  glorious  prime."  His  yerses, "  Prayer  ia 
the  Bonrs  dncere  desire,"  "Oh!  where  shall  rest  be 
found?"  **What  are  these  in  bright  array?"  are  only  a 
few  of  tbe  pricdess  gems  which  he  bas  set  in  the  crown 
of  our  Christian  praises.    See  Montgomery,  James. 

In  this  later  period  of  English  hymnology  many  and 
yery  sweet  haye  been  the  singers  and  their  sacred  songs. 
There  is  Henry  F.  Lyte,  the  rector  of  Brixham  (1793- 
1847),  author  of  *  'Jesus,  I  my  cross  haye  taken,"  and  of 
those  delightful  "hymns  from  beneath  the  doud,"  "My 
spirit  on  thy  care,  bleet  Sayiour,  I  redine,"  and  the  last 
that  he  eyer  wrote, "  Abide  with  me,  fast  falls  the  eyen- 
tide."  It  was  of  his  Talei  m  Yerse  that  professor  Wil- 
son, in  the  "Noctes  Ambrosiante,"  wrote,  "Now  that  ia 
the  right  kind  of  rdigious  poeti^'.  He  ought  to  giye 
us  another  yolume."  That  yoluroe  soon  came,  entitled 
Poemf^  ehi/pfy  rdigums.  The  female  bymnists  increase 
in  number  and  in  power  in  this  period.  Mrs.  Fdida 
Hemans,  Caroline  Bowles,  and  others  of  great  repute, 
lead  the  way  with  theur  sweet  musie.  We  haye  learn- 
ed  to  sing  "Nearer,  my  God,  to  thee,"  from  Miss  Sa- 
rah F.  Adams,  who  died  in  1849  in  her  old  home,  Dor- 
setsbire ;  and  Charlotte  Eiliott,  of  Torqnay,  struck  a  new 
chord  for  all  the  world  when  she  ¥nrote,  in  1836,  those 
inimitable  yerses,  "  Just  as  I  am,  without  one  plea." 
She  is  the  author  of  seyeral  yolomes,  and  fumisbed  one 
hundred  and  seyenteen  hymns  to  Tke  Jnoalid^s  Jlynm^ 
booky  the  last  edition  of  which  she  superyised.  Mrs. 
Barret  Browning,  Mrs.  Charles,  of  "Schonberg  CotU" 
famę,  Miss  Adelaide  Proctor,  Mary  Howitt,  and  the 
Bronte  sisters — Charlotte,  Emily,  and  Annę,  Isabella 
Craig,  and  Mrs.  Craik,  formerly  Miss  Mulock,  author  of 
John  Halifaxj  Gentleman,  are  among  the  kter  chief 
singers  of  their  sex  whose  yerses  haye  enriched  our 
bymnals.  Sir  John  Bowring,  bom  in  1792,  author  of 
"  In  tbe  cross  of  Christ  I  glory,"  "  Watchman,  tell  us  of 
the  night;"  the  dean  of  St.Paul'8,  Dr.  Henry  Hart  Mil- 
man,  archbishop  Trench,  John  Keble,  with  his  ChrU' 
Han  Yeary  the  poet  leader  of  the  Anglican  Catholic 
moyement  in  the  English  establishment,  Alexander 
Knox,  AlUn  Cunningham,  Robert  Pollok,  bishop  Heber, 
with  his  glorious  adyent,  and  judgment,  and  missionary 
hymns,  Bernard  Barton,  the  Quaker  poet,  canon  Worda- 
worth,  and  the  late  dean  Alford,  of  Weatminatei  Abbey, 


HTMNOLOGY 


446 


HTMNOLOGY 


Faber,  the  deToat  Eomish  hymnitt,  and  Dr.  John  H. 
Newman,  once  of  Oxford  and  now  of  Romę,  Robert  Mar- 
ca/ M^Cheyne,  and  John  R.  IfDoff,  the  Scottiah  preach- 
ers,  with  Horatioa  Bonar,  of  Kelm,  autbor  of  the  de- 
Ughtful  HymM  of  Faiih  cod  Ifope,  many  of  which  are 
already  familiar  as  houaehold  words,  and  Edward  H. 
Bickersteth,  whoee.poem  "Yerterday,  to-day,  and  ibr- 
ever"  is  **one  of  the  moet  remarkable  of  the  age** — all 
these,  and  morę  whom  we  cannot  even  name,  swell  the 
majestic  voIume  of  our  most  recent  British  sacred  song. 
It  is  not  any  ezaggeration  to  say  that  many  of  their 
hymns  will  compare  favorably  with  the  best  that  pre- 
oeded  thcm,  and  that  some  of  them  can  never  die  while 
their  mother  tongue  is  the  vehicle  of  Christian  pndse. 

3.  i4tRmccui.— Poetiy  was  not  cultiTated  in  onr  he- 
loic  age  for  its  own  sake,  and  the  singers  were  few  and 
far  between.  The  chorches  mostly  used  the  psahns 
and  h>anns  which  they  bronght  with  them  from  the 
Old  World  tmtil  after  the  Rerolutionary  War.  Presi- 
dent  Davies  (1724-1761)  left  some  poems,  among  which 
his  lines  on  the  birth  of  an  infant,  and  the  noble  hymn 
commencing  "  Great  God  of  wonders !  all  thy  ways,"  are 
most  familiar.  The  oelebrated  Dr.  Timothy  Dwight,  at 
the  request  of  the  Congregational  ministers  of  Connec- 
ticut, revised  the  pealms  of  Dr.  Watts,  and  added  over 
twenty  of  his  own  yersifications  to  the  yolome.  Of  all 
that  he  wrote,  howerer,  nonę  haye  soch  beanty  and  yi- 
taUty  as  his  rendering  of  Psalm  czix,  <*  How  predoiia  is 
the  Book  diyinel"  Psalm  cxxxyii,  **I  k>ye  thy  king- 
dom,  Lord ;"  and  of  Fftalm  cl,  **  In  Zion's  sacred  gates.' 
These  are  nniyersal  fayorites.  In  his  pre&ce  to  that 
admirable  yolume,  Ckrigt  mi  Sonę,  Dr.  Philip  Schaff 
says,  ^The  Łyra  Sacra  of  America  is  well  represented. 
Although  only  about  thirty  years  old,  it  is  fiur  richer 
than  our  Britiah  friends  are  aware  ofl"  Abnndant  proof 
of  its  ricbness  is  fumished  in  the  Hymu  of  Immanuelf 
which  the  aiithor  has  gathered  into  this  remaikable 
collection  of  Christological  poetry,  a  nmnber  of  which 
were  fumished  by  their  authors  for  this  work.  It ' 
scarcdy  necessary  in  these  pages  to  qaote  at  any  length 
thoee  hymns  which  haye  been  adopted  into  nearly  all 
of  tho  recent  booka  of  praise  for  the  yarioos  denomina- 
tions.  We  shall  therefore  only  refer  to  the  moet  noted 
anthors,  and  giye  paits  of  some  of  the  hymns  which 
seem  destined  to  secure  a  permanent  pUu»  in  our  Amei^ 
ican  hymnals.  The  earlier  poets— Perciyal,  Pierpont, 
Henry* Ware,  Jr.,  Richard  H.  Dana,  Washmgton  Alston, 
John  Ncal,  N.  P.Willis,  Brainard,  J.W.  Eastbum,  Car- 
los  Wiloox,  HiUhouse,  with  Bryant,  Longfellow,  Tuck- 
erman,  and  Whittier,  who  are  still  liying— haye  all  madę 
oocasional  contributions  to  the  stock  of  popular  hymns, 
chiefly  of  the  Unitarian  and  Uniyersalist  bodies.  The 
dergy  of  the  American  chorches  haye  probably  been 
the  most  fertile  contributon  to  this  department  of  sano- 
tuary  worship  during  this  period. 

The  late  bishop  Doane  (q.  v.),  of  New  Jersey,  wrote 
aome  yery  beautiful  hymns,  which  k>i)g  ago  passed  be- 
yond  the  body  of  which  he  was  a  champion  into  the  hym- 
nals of  other  churches.  His  eyening  hymn  is  worthy  of 
oomparison  eyen  with  that  of  good  bishop  Ken :  ^Softly 
now  the  light  of  day.**  There  is  a  trumpet-like  musie 
in  his  majestic  lines  on  the  Banner  of  the  Cross  which 
reminds  us  of  Heber  and  Milman :  "  Fling  out  the  ban- 
ner !  let  it  float,*'  etc  The  same  Church  has  abo  given 
us  Dr.  W.  A.  Muhlenbergh's  weU-known  hymn,  **  I  would 
not  live  alway,"  and  other  delightful  yerses  from  his  now 
patriaichal  musc.  Another  buhop.  Dr.  Arthur  Oeyeland 
Coxe,  among  his  finc  Christian  ballada  and  poems,  has 
rendered  into  yersc,  with  morę  spnit  and  power  than  any 
other  English  writer,  thoee  words  of  Christ,  ^  Behoid,  I 
stand  at  the  door  and  knock." 

To  the  late  Dr.  James  W.  Alexander  (q.v.)  we  owe 
the  best  yersion  in  our  language  of  Gerhardt*s  imper- 
ishable  hjrmn, "  Oh  sacred  head !  now  wounded."  One 
of  the  most  chaste  and  fenrid  of  our  hymn-writers 
was  the  late  Dr.George  W.Bethune  (q.y.),  author  of 
"It  is  not  death  to  die,"  <<0h  Jesus,  when  I  think 


of  thee,  thy  manger,  cross,  and  crown,"  and  many 
other  well-known  lyrics.  The  Rey.  Dr.  A]exaDder  B. 
Thompson,  of  the  Refonned  Church,  New  York,  hai 
pnblished  some  admirable  original  hymns  for  Clsist- 
mas  and  Easter,  and  yery  spirited  translations  fimn  in- 
dent  and  mediseyal  hymns.  We  spedfy  only  his  rcr- 
sion  of  the  ^Aurora  cćelum  purpurit,"  which,  with  otb- 
en  from  his  pen,  are  giyen  in  fuli  in  SchalTs  Ckritt  in 
8ong,  Ouite  in  another  linę,  but  not  less  happy,  is  i 
new  hymn  by  the  Rey.  Henrey  D.  Ganse,  a  po^raltr 
deigyman  of  the  same  Church  in  New  Yoik  Gty.  It* 
is  the  story  of  BartimKus,  so  sweetly  told  that  we  re- 
gret  we  haye  not  space  for  at  least  a  part  of  it  Tbere 
are  no  morę  delightfiil  hymns  in  the  language  thaa 
those  of  the  Rey.  Ray  Palmer,  DJ).,  a  CongrcgatioDtl 
dergyman,  author  of  Hynma  ofmy  koly  ffoun,  Iłfwm 
and  sacred  Pieoes^  and  many  sacred  poems.  That  ''ae- 
lectest  and  most  perfect  of  our  modem  hymns,"  "Hy 
faith looks  up  to  thee,**  etc., was  composedin  ISSa  It 
has  been  translated  into  Arabie,  Tamil,  Tahitian,  the 
Hahratta,  and  other  langnages,  and  seems  destined  to 
ibllow  the  Cross  oyer  the  whole  world.  Among  his 
other  hymns  are  thoee  beginning  <<  Jesus,  then  eres 
haye  neyer  seen  that  radiant  form  of  thine,"  **Alóne 
with  thee!  alone  with  thee!  O  friend  diyine,"  "O  Je- 
sus! sweet  the  tears  I  shed,"  ^  Jesus!  thon  Joy  of  kyy- 
ing  hearts,"  etc 

The  Rey.  Russdl  S.  Cook  (q.y.)  wrote  and  sent  to 
Miss  EUiott,  the  author  of  **  Just  as  I  am,  without  one 
plea,"  a  counterpart  to  her  own  sweet  hymn,  so  beautifol 
and  complete  that  it  seems  almoet  as  if  the  same  pen 
had  giyen  them  both  to  the  world :  **  Just  as  thou  art! 
without  one  tracę,"  etc  It  has  sińce  been  incoiporsted 
with  Sir  RoundeU  Palmer*s  ^ooib  o/Praiae  and  seyerd 
American  hymn-books. 

It  would  be  inexcusable,  in  a  snmmazy  like  this,  to 
omit  a  hearty  tribnte  of  acknowledgment  to  the  femsk 
h3rmn-writers  of  our  country.  First  among  these,  Mn. 
Sigoumey,  who  may  be  called  the  Hannah  Morę  of 
America,  has  an  established  place  among  these  honored 
authors,  although  moet  of  her  poetry  was  written  ia 
blank  yerse,  or  in  metre  not  adapted  to  Church  musie 
Yether  cnnireisaiy  Iiymns  for  Sunday-echools  and  mis- 
sionary  meetings  haye  been  yery  popular.  Her  yerses 
are  Aill  of  a  tender,  deyotional  spirit,  and  expre86ed  in 
chaste  and  beautiful  language.  Mrs.  Harriet  Beecber 
Stowe,  in  some  of  her  ReUgwus  Poems,  published  in 
1867,  has  caught  the  spirit  of  the  inspired  won),  and 
rendered  its  utteranoes  into  yerse  with  singular  felicity. 
We  may  instance  the  iine  hymns  commencing  *^  Wbea 
winds  are  raging  in  the  upper  ocean,"  ^  Life*s  mysteiy 
— dcep,  restless  as  the  ocean,"  "  That  mystic  wćml  of 
thine,  O  soyereign  Lord,"  and  the  one  entitled  "  Still, 
still  with  thee"  The  Cary  ststers,  Phocbe  and  Alice, 
haye  added  a  few  graceful  and  touching  hymns  to  onr 
Lyra  Americana,  and  haye  been  partictilarly  sucoessfiil 
in  their  writing  for  the  yonng.  That  farorite  and  de- 
lightful hymn  (which  reminds  us  of  Cowper^s  sensitire 
strains), "  I  loye  to  steal  a  while  away  from  eyciy  com- 
bering  care,"  was  written  by  Mrs.  Phoebe  H.  Brown  after 
being  intemipted  while  at  prayer.  On  giring  up  hei 
only  son  to  preach  Christ  to  the  heathen,she  wrote  that 
sweet  misńonary  hymn  beginning 

*'  Go,  messenger  of  Iove,  and  bear 
Upon  thy  irentle  wlng 
The  song  whlcb  seraphs  lora  to  hear. 
And  angels  Joy  to  aing.** 

Many  a  reyiyal  of  religion  has  been  aoaght  and  pro- 
moted  in  the  use  of  her  familiar  strains, 

"  O  Lord,  Thy  work  reyłye 
In  Zion'B  gloomy  hoor.** 

These  are  but  tpedmens  of  a  few  of  onr  best  ftmak 
hymnists.  Many  others  we  cannot  eyen  mention,  to 
whom  the  whole  Church  owes  a  debt  of  gintitude  for 
<<  psahns,  and  hymns,  and  spiritual  songs,"  in  which  they 
haye  taught  her  to  "  make  roelody  unto  the  Lord."  For 
additiooal  literaturę,  see  Psalmcwy.    (W.  J.  B.  T.) 


I 


HTPAPANTE 
Hypapante.    See  G^uidłemab. 


447 


HYPERDULIA 


Hypatia  of  Alkxandria,  bora  in  the  lattcr  half 
oT  tbe  4th  centuiy,  was  the  daughter  of  Theon  the 
youoger,  by  vrhom  she  was  instructed  in  mathematics 
and  philosophy,  and  professed,  like  her  father,  the  old 
heathen  doctrines,  of  which  she  was  one  of  the  most  el- 
oąuent  advocates.  So  eminent  did  she  become  in  the 
andent  philosophy  that,  in  the  earlj  part  of  the  5th 
centmy,  ahe  publidy  lectured  on  Aristotle  and  Flat0| 
both  at  Atbens  and  Alexandria,  with  imroense  sucoess. 
Socntes  (Wells'*  tranalation,  1709,  of  the  Latin  of  Ya- 
lesiiu)  thus  lumrates  her  history :  **  There  was  a  woman 
at  Alexandri&  by  name  Hypi^ia.  She  was  daughter  to 
Theon  the  philosopher.  She  had  anivG<l  to  so  eminent 
a  degree  of  learning  that  she  excelled  all  the  philoao- 
phers  of  her  own  times,  and  sncceeded  in  that  Platonie 
school  derived  from  ńotinus,  and  expounded  all  the 
pieoepts  of  philosophy  to  those  who  would  hear  her. 
Wherefore  all  peraons  who  were  studious  about  philoao- 
phy  flocked  to  her  ttom  all  parts.  By  reason  of  that 
eminent  confidenoe  and  readiness  of  expreaeion  where- 
with  she  had  aocomplished  heraelf  by  her  learning,  she 
frequently  addreased  even  the  magistmtes  with  a  sin- 
golar  modeaty.  Nor  was  she  ashamed  of  appearing  in 
a  public  aasembly  of  men,  for  all  persons  revered  and 
admired  her  for  her  eximious  modesty.  £nvy  armed 
itaelf  against  this  woman  at  that  time;  for  because  she 
had  fieqaent  oonferences  with  Orestes  [the  prefect  of 
Alezandria],  for  this  reason  a  calumny  was  framed 
against  her  among  the  Christian  populace,  as  if  she 
hindered  Orestes  from  coming  to  a  reconclLiation  with 
the  biahop.  Certain  persons  therefore,  of  Aerce  and  orer- 
hot  minda,  who  were  headed  by  one  Peter,  a  reader, 
eoosplred  against  the  woman,  and  obsenred  her  retuni- 
ing  home  from  some  place ;  and,  having  pnlled  her  out 
of  her  chariot,  they  dragged  her  to  the  church  named 
Cfisaienm,  where  they  stripped  her  and  murdered  her. 
And  when  they  had  tom  her  piecemeal,  they  carried  all 
her  members  to  a  place  called  Cinaron,  and  oonsumed 
thetn  with  fire.  lilis  fact  brought  no  smali  disgrace 
npoa  C^Tillua  and  tbe  Alexandrian  Church**  (Hitt,  Ec- 
ciet.  bk.  vii,  c.  15).  The  death  of  Hypatia  occurred  in 
415w  Suidas  Cr-Karia),  iii,  538,  puts  the  guilt  of  Hy- 
paUA*s  death  morę  directly  upon  Cyril;  but  his  account 
is  by  the  best  authoritiea,  Gibbon  of  couise  excepted, 
not  thought  to  be  trustworthy  (oomp.  Schaff,  Ch,  Uigł. 
iii,  943).  There  is  a  spurious  epistlc  attributed  to  Hy- 
patia, addressed  to  Cyiil,  in  favor  of  Nestorius  (Baluze, 
ConeiUoy  i,  216).  Toland  wrote  a  sketch  of  Hypatia 
(Lond.  1730,  8vo),  and  Kingsley  has  recently  madę  her 
atory  the  subject  of  a  novel  ("^ypa^ta").  See  Cave, 
BisL  LU.  anno  415;  Wernsdorf,  Diss,  Acad.  de  Hypatia 
(1747):  EngUsK  Cydopctdia;  lil^nnge,  ffist  3fuL  PhUo- 
topk.  p.  52 ;  Mllnch,  Hypatia,  in  his  YermtMchł,  Schrifien 
(Lodwigab.  1828),  vol.  i ;  Schaff,  CA.  History,  ii,  67 ;  Gib- 
bon, D^ine  and  Fali  o/ the  Roman  Empire,  iv,  502  aq. 

Hypatitia  of  GA^fORA,  a  distinguished  member  of 
the  Coondl  of  Mice,  of  whose  life  hat  little  is  known, 
was  fltoned  to  death  March  31, 327,  in  a  pass  near  Gan- 
gra,  by  a  gang  of  Novatian  ruffians,  in  all  probability  on 
accoont  of  the  opposition  which  he  had  manifested  to- 
waids  the  Noyatians  (q.  v.)  at  the  counciL  See  Stan- 
ley, History  oftke  Eastem  Church,  p.  266. 

Hyperbole.  Any  one  who  carefully  examines  the 
Bibie  must  be  aurprised  at  the  yeiy  few  hyperbolic  ex- 
pressions  which  it  oontains,  oonsidering  that  it  is  an 
Oriental  book.  In  Eastem  Asia  the  tonę  of  compoai- 
tion  is  pitched  so  high  aa  to  be  scarcely  intelligible  to 
the  sober  intellect  of  Euzope,  while  in  Western  Asia  a 
iBedimn  seems  to  have  beói  struck  between  the  ultr»- 
extiBvaganoe  of  the  far  East  and  the  firigid  exactne8B 
of  the  far  West.  But,  even  regarded  as  a  book  of  West- 
ern Asia,  the  Bibie  is,  as  oompared  with  almost  any 
oCfaer  Western  Asiatic  book,  so  singularly  free  from  hy- 
pctbolic  expreaBions  as  might  well  excite  our  surprise, 
did  Bot  our  kuowledge  of  ita  diviiie  odgin  pennit  ua  to 


anppose  that  eren  the  style  and  modę  of  expresBion  d 
the  writen  were  so  far  oontroUed  as  to  exćlude  from 
their  writings  what,  in  other  ages  and  countries,  might 
excite  pain  and  offence,  and  prove  an  obstacle  to  the 
reoepdon  of  dirine  truth.  See  Inspiratiok.  Nor  is 
it  to  be  said  that  the  usage  of  hyperbole  is  of  modem 
growth.  We  find  it  in  the  oldest  Eastem  writings 
which  now  exiBt;  and  the  earlier  Rabbinical  writings 
attest  that,  in  times  approaching  near  to  those  in  which 
the  writers  of  the  New  Testament  flourished,  the  Jew- 
ish  imagination  had  nm  riot  in  this  direction,  and  haa 
left  hyperboles  as  frequent  and  outrageous  as  any  which 
Persia  or  India  can  produce.    See  Tai^i  ud. 

The  strongest  hyperbole  in  all  Scripture  is  that  with 
which  the  Goejpttl  of  John  condudes:  <<  There  are  also 
many  other  things  which  Jesus  did,  the  which,  if  they 
should  be  written  eveiy  one,  I  suppoee  that  the  world 
itself  oould  not  contain  all  the  booka  that  should  be 
written."  This  has  so  much  pained  many  commenta- 
tors  that  they  have  been  disposed  to  regard  it  as  an  un- 
authorized  addition  to  the  sacrod  text,  and  to  reject  it 
accordingly— a  process  always  dangerous,  and  not  to  be 
adopted  but  on  such  overwheiming  authority  of  coUated 
manuscripts  as  does  not  exist  in  the  present  case.  Nor 
is  it  necessary,  for  as  a  hyperbole  it  may  be  illustrated 
by  many  examples  in  sacred  and  profane  authors.  In 
Numb.  xiii,  88,  the  spies  who  had  retumed  from  seaich- 
ing  the  land  of  Canaan  say  that  they  saw  giants  there 
of  such  a  prodigious  size  that  they  were  in  their  own 
sight  but  as  grasshoppers.  In  Dcut.  i,  28,  dties  with 
h%h  waUs  about  them  are  said  to  be  "walled  up  to 
heaven."  In  Dan.  iy,  7,  mention  is  madę  of  a  tree  where- 
of  "the  height  reachcd  unto  heayen,  and  the  sight 
thereof  unto  the  end  of  all  the  eaTth>'*  and  the  anthor 
of  Ecdesiasticus  (xlvii,  15),  speaking  of  Solomon*8  wia- 
dom,  says,  **  Thy  soul  oovered  the  whole  earth,  and  thou 
filledst  it  with  parables."  In  Josephus  {Ant,  xiv,  22) 
Grod  is  mentioned  as  promising  to  Jaoob  that  he  would 
give  the  land  of  Canaan  to  him  and  his  seed;  and  then 
it  is  added,  ^  they  shall  fili  the  whole  sea  and  land  which 
the  sun  shines  upon."  Wetstein,  in  his  notę  on  the 
text  in  John,  and  Basnage,  in  his  Histoire  des  Juifs  (iii, 
1-9;  V,  7),  haye  dted  from  the  ancient  Rabbinical  writ- 
ers such  passages  as  the  following :"  If  all  the  seas  were 
ink,  and  «yeiy  reed  was  a  pen,  and  the  whole  heayen 
and  earth  were  parchment,  and  all  the  sons  of  men  were 
writers,  they  would  not  be  sufficient  to  write  all  the  les- 
sons  which  Jochanan  compoeed:"  and  conceming  one 
Eliezer,  it  is  said  that  "  if  the  heayens  were  parchment, 
and  all  the  sons  of  men  writers,  and  all  the  trees  of  the 
forest  pens,  they  would  not  be  sufficient  for  writing  aU 
tłie  wisdom  which  he  was  possessed  of."  Homer,  who, 
if  not  bom  in  Asia  Minor,  had  undoubtedly  lived  there, 
has  sometimes  foUowed  the  hyperbolic  manner  of  speak- 
ing which  preyailed  so  much  in  the  East :  thus,  in  the 
//ia<;  (xx,  246,247),  he  makeSiEneas  say  to  Achilles,  "Let 
us  haye  done  with  reproaching  one  another,  for  we  may 
throw  out  80  many  reproachful  words  on  one  another 
that  a  ship  of  a  hundred  oais  would  not  be  able  to  cany 
the  load."  Few  instanoes  of  this  are  to  be  found  in  Oo- 
ddental  writers;  yet  it  is  obseryed  that  Cicero  {PhiL ii, 
44)  has  ^'Pnesertim  quum  illi  eam  gloriam  consecuti 
sint,  quiB  yix  ooelo  capi  posse  yideatur,"  and  that  Liyy 
(yii,  25)  says,  ^  H»  yires  populi  Bomani,  qua8  vix  ter* 
rarum  capit  orbis."  See  bisbop  PeaTce'8  Commentary 
on  thefour  Etangelists,  1777,  etc  Modem  examples  of 
equal  hyperbole  may  be  found  cited  in  ahnost  any  work 
on  rhetoric — Kitto. 

Hypercalvini8in.  SeeCALyiNi8M;ULTRA-CAL- 

YINISH. 

Hyperdnlia  (łfa-Ś/o,  above;  iov\ia,  worship,  ser^ 
9Mx),  the  worship  of  the  Yiigin  Mary  in  the  Boman 
Church.  The  Bomanists  speak  of  three  kinds  of  adora- 
tion,  namdy,  latria,  hyperdulioj  and  dulia^  "  The  ado- 
ration  ofłatria,"  they  say,  "is  that  which  is  due  to  God 
alone,  and  is  giyen  on  account  of  his  supremacy ;  hyper^ 
dulia  is  wonhip  paid  to  the  Yiigin  on  account  of  what 


HYPERIUS 


448 


HYPOCRISY 


the  Papists  cali  the  matemiiy  of  God,  and  other  emi- 
nent  gifts,  and  her  sapereminent  sanctity ;  dulia  is  wor- 
Bhip  paid  to  saints  on  aocount  of  their  aanctity.*'  These 
distinctions  are  too  lefined  for  the  common  people;  and 
it  is  (creatly  to  be  feaied  that  multitudea  woiBhip  the 
Yirgin  insteeid  of  God,  or  take  her  aa  a  mediator  uutead 
of  Christ,  The  prayer-books  of  the  Roman  Chorch  are 
not  free  from  the  charge  of  cncouraging  a  belief  in  the 
mediation  of  Maiy.  A  book  in  common  use,  called  The 
Sacred  Iłeart  ofJetus  andofMary^  which  is  published 
with  on  indult  of  pope  Pius  in  favor  of  its  ose,  oontains 
the  foUowing  pasaages :  "Come,  then,  hardeneid  and  in- 
yetcrate  siimer,  how  great  soeyer  your  crimes  may  be, 
oome  and  behold.  Mary  stretches  oat  her  hand,  opens 
her  breaat  to  receive  you.  Tkough  iruefuibU  to  the  ffreat 
coneems  o/ your  takfcUion,  though  unfortuncOehf  proof 
agcńnst  the  most  engagwg  woitaJtwM  and  intpirations  of 
the  łloly  Ghoetf  fling  yourself  at  the  feet  of  this  power- 
ful  adyocate."  Again  (p.  256) :  "  Rejoice,  O  most  glo- 
rious  Yirgin,  such  is  thy  fifiyor  with  God,  sach  the  power 
of  thy  intercession,  that  the  whde  tieasury  of  heayen 
is  open  to  thee  and  at  thy  dispoaal.  When  thou  art 
pleased  to  intercede  in  fayor  of  a  sinner  his  case  is  in 
surę  hands;  there  is  no  danger  of  refusal  on  the  part  of 
Heayen  when  thy  mediation  appears  in  his  behalf." 
**Thoa  art  the  great  mediatrix  between  God  and  man, 
obtaining  for  sinners  all  thcy  can  ask  and  demand  of 
the  blessed  Trinity."  Another  book  in  common  nse, 
The  Gloriea  of  Mary^  Mother  of  God^  prepared  by  Li- 
gnori  (q.  y.),  is  fuli  of  similar  passages.  We  eztract  only 
the  following  prayer :  "  O  holy  Yirgin !  deign  to  man- 
ifest your  generosity  towards  me,  a  miserable  ńnner. 
If  you  grant  me  your  aid,  what  can  I  fear  ?  No,  I  shall 
no  longer  apprehend  either  my  sins,  sińce  you  can  re- 
pair  them ;  or  the  deyila,  sińce  you  are  morę  powerful 
than  heli;  or  your  Son,  justly  inritated,  sinoe  one  word 
from  you  will  appease  him.  I  shall  only  fear  myself, 
and  that-,  forgetting  to  inyoke  you,  I  may  be  lost  But 
this  will  not  be  the  case.  I  promise  you  to-day  to  re- 
cur  to  you  in  all  my  wants,  and  that,  during  life  and  at 
my  death,  your  namc  and  remembrance  shaU  be  the  de- 
Iłght  of  my  souL  Amen."  See  Cumming  and  French, 
Protestant  Diacuańon  (London,  1856, 12mo),  p.  288  8q. ; 
Ferraris,  Prompta  BibUotkeca,  Yenerat.  Sonet,  §  84^9; 
EUiott,  Delineaiion  of  Jiomaniam,  bk.  iy,  eh.  iy.     See 

M^\RIOLATRY. 

HyperiUB,  Andrew  Gerhard,  an  eminent  Protes- 
tant theologian  of  the  16th  centui^"^,  was  bom  at  Ypres, 
Belgium,  May  16, 151 1.  His  family  name  was  Gerharda 
but  he  assumed  the  name  Ilyperws  finom  his  birtbplace. 
His  father  directed  his  first  studies,  after  which  Hype- 
rius  attended  the  Uniyersity  of  Paris  during  the  years 
1528-35.  After  completing  his  studies  he  madę  a  short 
stay  at  Louyain,  then  trayeUed  through  the  Nether* 
lands,  and  yisited  Germany.  On  his  return  be  was  de- 
priyed  of  a  benefice  which  had  bcen  obtaiued  for  him, 
on  the  ground  that  he  had  embraced  the  doctrines  of 
the  Keformation.  He  went  to  England,  where  he  re- 
roained  four  years  with  the  son  of  William  Mountjoy,  a 
ftiend  of  Krasmus,  studying  at  the  uniyersitics  of  Ox- 
fbrd  and  Cambridge.  The  persecutions  directed  against 
the  Protestanta  after  Cromweirs  death  compelled  him, 
kn  1541,  to  leaye  England,  and  he  purposed  going  to 
Strasburg,  attracted  by  the  repntation  of  Bucer;  but  his 
friend  Geldenhauer,  professor  of  theology  at  Marburg, 
persuaded  hira  to  remain  in  the  latter  city,  and  he  suc- 
ceedcd  his  friend  in  1542  as  professor.  He  died  at  Mar- 
burg Feb.  1, 1564.  To  profound  and  exten8iye  leaming 
Hyperius  joined  great  intellectual  powers,  and  a  remark- 
ably  mild,  yet  straightforward  disposition.  Greatly  in 
adyance  of  his  times  as  a  scholar,  he  held  deep  and  cor- 
rect yiews  on  the  system  with  which  theological  re- 
searches  and  studies  should  be  conducted  in  stńking 
oontrast  with  the  arbitrary  proceedings  of  the  exegetcs 
of  the  IGth  ccntury,  as  well  as  the  scholastic  theories  of 
contemporary  theologians.  His  yiews  haye  beoome  the 
boais  of  modem  scieutific  theology.    Ho  had  also  a 


clearer  and  morę  practical  notion  of  preaching  fban  the 
other  preachers  of  his  tlme,  who,  instead  of  expotm^iig 
Christian  doctrines  to  their  hearers  in  yiew  of  edifyiog 
them,  brought  abstract  discussions  or  irritating  contro- 
yersies  uito  the  pulpit.    Hyperius  wrote  Deformaadit 
Conciombus  tacrit^  seu  de  interpretatione  JScripturantm 
popularif  Libri  ii  (Dort,  1555, 8yo;  latest  ed.,  angment- 
ed,  and  containing  a  biography  of  the  author,  Halle, 
1781, 8yo).    It  is  Uie  fint  complete  work  on  Homiletica, 
and  one  of  the  best  \—De  theohgo^  seu  de  ratione  studii 
theoioffici,  LSk  iv  (Basie,  1556, 8yo ;  often  reprintcd) :  thU 
is  a  work  of  great  meńt,  which  may  haye  had  the  most 
fayorable  efifect  on  theological  study,  had  not  the  large- 
ness  of  yiews  and  the  Zuinglian  opinion  of  the  author 
in  regard  to  the  Eucharist  rendered  it  suspicious  in  the 
eyes  of  the  orthodox  Lutheran  party.    LaurentiusTlUa- 
yincentius,  an  Augustinian  monk  of  Xere8,  in  Andaloós, 
madę  great  use  of  this  as  well  as  of  the  preceding  woiiE, 
or,  rather,  caused  them  to  be  reprinted  almost  word  foc 
word,  as  his  own  production,  with  the  ezccption  of  pss- 
sages  too  fayoiable  to  Protestantism,  in  a  work  he  pub- 
lished at  Antwerp  in  1565,  and  the  plagiarism  was  not 
detected  until  half  a  century  later: — Elementa  Chruti- 
aruB  reliffionis  (Basie,  1563,  8yo): — Topica  theciogica 
(Wittemb.  1565, 8vo ;  Basie,  1573,  8yo)  -^Methodi  The- 
ologieBf  sive  pracipuorum  Chrisłiatue  religioms  locormn 
commumum,  Libri  iii  (Basie,  1566,  1568,  8yo>    This 
work  was  to  haye  had  three  morę  parts,  but  it  was  kit 
incomplete : — Optucula  Theoioyica  varia  (Basie,  1570, 2 
yola.  8yo).     His  exegetical  works  are  among  the  most 
yaluable  productions  in  that  department  by  the  Refoim- 
ers,  and  were  frequenLly  used  by  Bloomfield  in  his  notes 
on  the  New  Testament.    His  most  important  work  in 
this  department,  a  Commentary  on  the  Epistle*  of  Pcad 
and  ihe  Epistle  to  the  TTArcwa  (Comment,  in  Epistolat  ad 
Timołhy  Tiłunij  et  Phikm,  1582;  Comment,  m  Pauli 
Epistolaa,  1583 ;  Commeut.  in  Epist,  ad  J/ebraos,  1585), 
was  published  after  his  death  by  Mylius  (Zllrich,  1582-8, 
4  yols.  folio),  and  under  the  care  of  J.  Andreas  Schmidt 
(Helmstadt,  1704,  8yo).     In  it  "Hyperius  puisues  the 
grammatico-historical  method  of  inteiprctation,  exam- 
ining  the  meaning  of  the  words,  carefully  tradng  the 
connection  of  the  passage,  taking  notę  of  the  analogy 
of  Script  ure,  and  so  arriying  at  the  tme  sense  of  the 
place.    Not  until  he  has  thus  done  justice  to  the  exe- 
gesis  does  he  proceed  to  the  dogmatical  or  prmctical  use 
of  the  passage.    He  also  frequently  giyes  citations  from 
the  fathers  to  show  the  agreement  of  his  conclusions 
with  the  undcrstanding  of  the  andent  Church**  (Kitto). 
A  collection  of  smali  pamphlets  had  bcen  preyiously 
published  scparately;  among  them,/)e  Sacrte  Scriptwra 
Lectione  et  Meditatume  (Basie,  1581,  8yo).     See  Bcis- 
sard,  Icone*  Yirorum  lUusirium^  pan  iii ;  Melch.  Adam, 
yiła  Germanontm  Theoloyorum ;  Bayle,  Du^,  J/ist.;  J. 
M.  Schrockh,  Lebnubetch.  berOhnU,  GeUhrten,  yoL  i,  acd 
Kirchengesch.  s.  d.  Ref  vol.  y ;  Hoefer,  A  oirr.  Biog,  Gin. 
xxy,  71 ;  Mercersb.  Per,  1857,  p.  271  8q. ;  Ch.  Motdhljf, 
June,  1866;  M^Crie,  Reform,  in  Spain,  p.  882;  Hanek, 
Jahrb.  d.  TheoL  ii,  256.     (J.  H.  W.) 

Hypocrisy  {uTrÓKpimę ;  but  m  James  v,  12,  two 
words,  V7rb  rpi(7iv,as  the  A.  V.  justly)  is  the  name  for 
the  successful  or  unsucces&ful  cndeayor  of  a  person  ta 
impart  to  others,  by  the  expressiou  of  his  features  or 
gestures,  by  his  outward  actions,  and,  in  fine,by  his  whole 
appearanoe,  a  fayorable  opinion  of  his  principles,  his 
good  intentions,  loye,  unselfishness,  trathftdncfli,  and 
conscientionsness,  while  in  leality  these  ąualities  are 
Mranting  in  him.  It  is,  tberefore,  a  peculiar  kind  of 
untrathfuhiess,  which  has  its  definite  aima  and  meam 
It  is  predsely  becauae  theae  aims  refer  to  the  morał 
qaaliflcation8  of  the  subject,  because  he  speaks  and  aets 
as  if  an  honest  man,  that  hypocrisy  has  found  rootn  and 
opportunity  in  social  Hle,  in  commerce  and  induatiy,  in 
politics,  and,  aboye  all,  in  the  field  of  reyeakd  religion. 
This  may  appear  paradoxical,  becauae  this,  as  well  aa 
the  religion  of  the  old  coyenant,  placea  man  befove  the 
face  of  an  ahnighty  Bttng  who  seea  the  heait,  and  who 


HYPOCRISY 


449 


HYPOCRITE 


penetntes  honum  thought  even.  from  its  yery  beginning; 
who  peroeives  deaily  its  deydopment  and  ripening;  so 
that  the  hypocrite,  eyen  if  he  shoal<l  suGceed  in  deceiy- 
iug  men,  can  certamlj  haye  do  benefit  from  his  acts  in 
the  end.    On  the  other  band,  becaose  religion  consista 
not  entirdy  in  the  perfonnance  of  outward  actions,  but 
makes  the  worth  of  the  penon  dependent  on  the  right- 
eous  State  of  hia  heait  and  mind,  it  creates  the  greater 
desiie  in  him  to  acquire  the  reputation  of  really  haying 
these  qualiti€s;  and  becanae  these  ąuaUties,  though  they 
are  of  a  purely  spiritnal  naturę,  yet  can  oniy  be  mani* 
fested  by  outward  acts,  which,  siuce  they  are  materiał, 
Btrike  Łhe  eye  of  the  world,  and  may  be  enacted  without 
the  possesaon  of  the  genuine  mental  and  morał  state,  it 
resolts  that  there  b  here  such  a  wide  field  for  hypo- 
critical  actions.     We  infer,  therefore,  from  what  we 
have  said,  that  there  is  less  opportunity  for  hypocrisy 
in  heathenism  than  in  Jndaiam;  in  Catholicism  than 
in  Ph)testantism.     For  whereyer  the  principal  weight 
is  laid  on  the  outward  action,  on  the  opus  operatum, 
there  one  esperiences  far  less  the  indination  to  coyer 
the  inconsistency  of  the  inner  world  by  the  outer  world; 
while,  on  the  other  hand,  where  eyery  thing  depends 
on  the  inward  state,  and  where,  with  the  merę  enact- 
ment  of  outward  oeremony,  God  and  conacience  can- 
not  be  appeased,  there  originates  in  the  unregenerate 
man  the  temptation  to  do  what  may  giye  him  at  least 
the  semblance  of  a  quality  which  he  rc^y  does  not  po»- 
■689.    When  a  friyolous,  reckless  fellow  kneels  at  the 
Catholic  altar  to  perform  by  feature  and  gesture  his  de- 
Totions,  no  one  would  think  of  accusing  him  of  hypoc- 
risy; while  a  Protestant,  in  a  similar  case,  could  not  es- 
cape  this  judgment.     Still,  this  does  not  fully  solye  the 
paradox  how  the  hypocrite  can  hope  to  carry  on  his 
false  gamę,  while  he  knows  yery  well  that  before  the 
God  of  tmth  no  one  can  pass  for  righteous  who  possess- 
es  limply  the  semblance  of  righteouaness,  but  does  not 
connect  therewith  the  belief  in  its  power.    It  must  here 
be  remembered  that,  in  the  (me  case,  the  person  endeay- 
on  to  acquire  for  himself,  in  the  community  to  which  he 
behmgs,  the  eplthet  of  a  pious  man ;  and,  if  he  is  satis- 
fied  herewith,  tben,  in  regard  to  his  futurę  state,  in  yiew 
of  Łhai  day  which  will  bring  eyery  thing  to  light,  he  is 
either  tboughtless  and  careless,  or  else  totally  unbeliey- 
iog.    AYhen  his  earthly  scenę  has  ended,  the  curtain 
drops  for  him,  and  all  b  oyer.    But  in  another  case  the 
person  b  animated  by  the  hope  that,  in  yirtue  of  those 
Gtitwaid  acts  by  which  he  thinks  to  do  good,  hb  pray- 
ingf  almsginng,  etc,  he  may  preyail  before  God ;  thb  is 
the  true  Phariaeeism,  which  dims  the  faculty  of  know- 
ing  God,  and  not  only  deceiyes  men,  but  counterfeits 
tmth  itself,  and  tbereby  cheata  itself  worst  of  aa    A 
specul  means  of  detecting  the  real  hypocrite  b  hb  un- 
merciful  judgment  oyer  othen.    Thb  has  its  ground  in 
the  lact  that  by  such  expressions  he  not  only  seeks  to 
confirai  hb  own  atanding,  but  it  b  also  a  self-deceit  into 
which  he  falb;  the  morę  be  finds  to  blame  in  others, 
the  moTB  oonfident  he  grows  of  hb  own  worth,  and  the 
morę  easily  he  appeases  hb  conscience  in  regard  to  the 
inconsistency  of  hb  morał  state  with  hb  actions,  and  the 
incongniity  of  hb  secret  with  hb  open  ways.     Ethics 
finds  among  the  different  gradations  of  sin  a  oertain 
«ale  of  hypocrisy  which  b  far  worse  than  absolute  sub- 
jeciion  to  sin,  inasmuch  as  in  the  latter  state  there  may 
cxi3t  at  least  the  ęamest  desire  in  the  individual  to  rid 
Itimself  of  hb  faulfe,  although  he  no  longer  possesses  the 
power  to  do  80 ;  tfie  hypocrite,  on  the  other  hand,  is 
ąuite  contenced  wiOi  himself,  and  has  no  desire  whatey- 
cr  to  repent  of  the  sin  so  deeply  bdged  in  hb  heart,  but 
nierely  endeayors  to  hide  it  from  God  and  men,  in  order 
t)  be  able  to  gratify  hb  ainful  inclinations  the  morę  se- 
«ffely  onder  the  cover  of  an  assumed  sanctity.    In  cer- 
Uin  respecta  the  friyolous  sinner  b  far  bctter  than  the 
^•Tpocńte,  inasmuch  as  the  former  has  at  least  no  desire 
to  deceive  any  one  about  hb  condition,  and  does  not 
l*esent  himself  to  the  world  otherwise  than  he  really  is. 
This  fonnal  tmthfulneas  in  the  open  sinner,  howeyer,  b 
IY^Ff 


connterbalanoed  by  the  fact  that  the  hypocrite  reoog- 
nises  at  least  a  diyine  law  and  judgment ;  he  b  still 
aliye  to  the  conaciousness  of  the  incongniity  of  hb  state 
of  mind  and  heart  with  thb  diyine  law ;  but  yet  hypoc- 
risy, as  a  permanent  untruthfulness,  as  a  systematic  de- 
ceit,  as  a  life  in  dissimubtion,  must  gradually  annihilate 
all  sense  of  its  own  condition,  Thus,  in  the  issue,  pub- 
licans  and  harlots  are  nearer  to  the  kingdom  of  heayen 
than  Pharisees.  —  Herzog,  Real^Encyldop,  xix,  643  sq. 
See  Hypocritk. 

Hypoorite  (Greek  vvoKCiTi}c)  aignifies  one  who 
feigna  to  be  what  he  b  not ;  who  puts  on  a  false  person, 
like  actors  in  tragedies  and  comedies.  It  b  generaUy 
applied  to  those  who  assume  appearances  of  a  rirtue 
without  poesessing  it  m  reality.  Our  Sayiour  accused 
the  Pharisees  of  hypocrisy.  Hypocrisy  is  vain  and  fool- 
bh,  and,  though  intended  to  cheat  others,  is,  in  truth,  de- 
ceiying  ourselyes.  No  man  would  flatter  or  dissemble 
if  he  thought  that  he  was  seen  and  discoyered.  All  hb 
hypocrby,  howeyer,  b  open  to  the  eye  of  God,  from 
whom  nothing  can  be  hid.  The  ways  of  man  are  before 
the  eyes  of  the  Lord,  and  he  seeth  all  hb  doings;  there 
b  no  darkness  nor  shadow  of  death  where  the  workeis 
of  iniąuity  may  hide  themselyes.  Whoeyer  dissembles, 
and  seems  to  be  what  he  b  not,  thinks  that  he  ought  to 
possess  such  a  quality  as  he  pretends  to;  for  to  countcr- 
feit  and  dissemble  is  to  assume  the  appearance  of  somo 
real  excellence.  But  it  is  best  for  a  man  to  be  in  reality 
what  he  would  seem  to  be.  It  b  difficult  to  personate 
and  act  a  false  part  long,  because,  where  truth  does 
not  exbt,  naturę  will  endeayor  to  return,  and  make  a 
discoyery.  Truth  carries  its  own  light  and  eyidenco 
with  it,  and  not  only  commends  us  to  eyery  man*s  con- 
science, but  to  God,  the  searcher  of  our  hearts.  Hence 
sinceri^  is  the  truest  wisdom,  for  integrity  has  many 
adyantages  oyer  all  the  artful  ways  of  dissimubtion  and 
deceit.  On  the  contrar}',  a  dissembler  must  be  always 
upon  hb  guard,  lest  he  contndict  hb  own  pretences. 
He  acts  an  unnatural  part,  and  puts  a  continual  foroe 
and  restraint  upon  himself.  Truth  always  lies  upper- 
most,  and  will  be  apt  to  make  its  appearance;  but  he 
who  acts  sincerely  haa  an  easy  task,  and  needs  not  inyent 
pretences  before,  or  excuses  after,  for  what  he  says  or 
does.  Insincerity  b  difficult,  to  manage;  for  a  liar  will 
be  apt  to  contradict  at  one  time  what  he  said  at  another. 
Truth  is  always  consistent  with  itself,  needs  nothing  to 
assist  it,  and  b  always  near  at  hand ;  but  a  He  is  troub- 
lesome ;  it  sets  a  man'8  inyention  upon  the  rack,  and  is 
freąuently  the  occasion  of  many  morc.  Truth  and  sin- 
cerity  in  our  words  and  actions  will  carry  us  through 
the  world,  when  all  the  arts  of  cunning  and  deceit  shall 
fail  and  deceiye  us.  In  the  day  when  God  shall  judge 
the  secrets  of  men  by  Jesus  Christ,  plainness  and  sinceri- 
ty  Mrill  appear  the  most  perfect  beauty ;  the  craftiness  of 
men,  who  lie  in  wait  to  deceiye,  will  be  stripped  of  all 
its  colors;  all  specious  pretences,  all  the  methods  of  de- 
ceit, will  then  be  disclosed  before  men  and  angels,  and  no 
artifice  to  conceal  the  defonnity  of  iniquity  can  there 
take  place.  Then  the  ill-designing  men  of  thb  world 
shall  with  shame  be  conyinced  that  the  upright  simplic-^ 
ity  which  they  despised  was  the  truest  wisdom,  and  that 
those  dissembling  and  dishonest  arts  which  they  so  high- 
ly  esteemed  were  in  reality  the  greatest  folly. 

Hypocrites  haye  becn  diyided  into  four  sorts :  1.  The 
toorldly  hypocrite,  who  makes  a  profeasion  of  religion, 
and  pretends  to  be  religious  merely  from  worldly  con- 
siderations (Matt  xxiii, 5) ;  2.  Thelegal hypocrite,  who 
relinqubhes  his  yicious  practices  in  order  tbereby  to 
merit  heayen,  while  at  the  same  time  he  has  no  real  loye 
to  Gtod  (Rom.  x,  3) ;  8.  The  ev<mgdical  hypocrite,  whose 
religion  is  nothing  morę  than  a  bare  oonyiction  of  sin ; 
who  rejoioes  under  the  idea  that  Christ  died  for  him, 
and  yet  has  no  desire  to  liye  a  holy  life  (Matt  xiii,  20 ; 
2  Pet.  ii,  20) ;  i.  The  entkuńastic  hypocrite,  who  has  an 
imaginary  sight  of  hb  sin  and  of  Chrbt;  talks  of  re- 
marlćable  impubea  and  high  feelings;  and  thinka  hino' 
self  yery  wise  and  good  while  he  Uves  in  the  most  scan* . 


HYPONOIA 


450 


HYRCANUS 


daloiu  practice8(BIattxiii,89;  2  Cor.xi,  14>— Kobinaon, 
TheoL  DicŁionary ;  Buck,  TheoL  Dictionary ;  Warner, 
System  o/*  J/oratóy,  iii,  828 ;  Giore,  Morał  PkUoaopky, 
11,258;  Gilfillan, £uay« on  J/£pocr%  (1826);  ESiiAySelf- 
Deceiver  duawered  (1781) ;  Edwarda,  Workt  (aee  Index). 
See  HYrocmsY. 

Hyponoia  (u7rói/om,vfM2er««»ue),atenn  applied  to 
the  kidden  meanmg  suppoeed  by  aome  to  underlie  the  lan- 
guage  of  Scriptuie.  If  by  this  ia  imderstood  a  significa- 
tion  totally  dliferent  from  the  plain  statements,  the  the- 
ory  is  to  be  condemned  aa  sayoring  of  mysticiam  (q.  v.); 
bat  if  it  18  only  iutended  to  deaigiiate  the  collateral  and 
ulterior  application  of  language  which  has  likewise  a 
morę  obrloua  or  literał  import,  it  may  be  receiyed  to  a 
limited  degree.  See  Double  Sesse.  Tlie  Scriptiues 
themselyes  authorize  such  a  yiew  of  the  deeper  signiii- 
cance  of  lioly  Writ,  especially  of  propheciea,  wliich  nec- 
esaarily  await  their  fnlfilment  in  order  to  their  complete 
eluddation  (1  Pet.  i,  11);  and  the  apostle  John  accord- 
ingly  in^'ites  his  readers  to  the  doae  exaroination  of  hia 
eymbols,  under  which,  for  prudential  conńderations,  was 
couched  a  somewhat  enigmatical  alluaion  (Rev.  xiii,  18). 
See  Interpretation.  To  infer  from  this,  howerer, 
that  the  sacred  wiiters  were  not  theroseWes  aware  of 
the  meaning  of  what  they  uttered  or  penned  is  to  take 
an  unworthy  and  fabe  yiew  of  their  intelligent  instni- 
mentality  (Stier,  Wordi  o/JeMUSy  i,  482  są.,  Am.  ed.).  See 
Imspibation. 

HypopBalma.    See  Acrostic. 

HypOBtftsifl  (from  ^iró, UJKler, and  (ffnjfu, to  ttand; 
hence  suhńgienoe),  a  term  used  in  theology  to  signify 
person,  Thua  the  orthodox  hołd  that  therc  is  but  one 
naturę  or  eseeuce  in  God,  but  three  hypoatasea  or  peraons. 
This  term  is  of  yery  andent  use  in  the  Churclu  Cyril, 
in  a  letter  to  Neatonus,  employs  it  instead  of  wpótfunrop, 
person,  which  did  not  appear  to  him  sufficiently  cxpre8-> 
siye.  The  term  occasionea  great  dissensions,  both  among 
the  Greeks  and  Latins.  In  the  Council  of  Nicea,  hypos' 
iasis  was  defined  to  mean  esscnoe  or  substancc,  so  that 
it  was  heresy  to  say  that  (Christ  was  of  a  differcnt  hypoa- 
tasis  from  his  Father.  Gustom,  howeyer,  altered  its 
meaning.  In  the  necesaity  they  wero  under  of  expres8- 
ing  themselyes  strongly  against  the  Sabellians,  the 
Greeks  used  the  word  hyposUui8j  tho  Latins  persona, 
which  proyed  a  source  of  great  disagreemcnt.  The  bar- 
renneas  of  the  Latin  ianguage  allowed  them  only  one 
word  by  which  to  transLate  the  two  Greek  ones  oMa 
and  yirócTaffic,  and  thus  preyented  them  from  distin- 
guishing  essence  from  hypostasis.  An  end  was  pat  to 
these  disputes  by  a  synod  held  in  AIexandria  about  A.D. 
862,  at  which  Athanasius  assistcd,  when  it  was  deter- 
mined  to  be  synonymous  with  irpótrunrov.  AHer  this 
time  the  Latins  madę  no  great  scruple  in  sa}ring  tres 
hgposUues,  or  the  Greeks  three  persona*— Farrar.  See 
Trinity;  Homousian. 

Hypostatical  Union,  the  subsistmce  (vir6ora<nc) 
of  two  natures  in  one  person,  in  Christ  While  the  reali- 
ty  of  auch  a  union  is  establiahed  by  the  Scriptures,  and  is 
on  that  aocount  maintained  by  our  Church  (see  2d  Arti- 
de  of  Beligion, "  So  that  two  whole  and  perfect  natures," 
etc),  it  ia  to  be  lamented  that  many  intńcate  and  fniit^ 
less  metaphysical  ąuestiona  haye  been  debated  among 
diiierent  sects  of  Christiana  aa  to  the  diyine  naturę  of 
our  Lord,  and  the  manner  of  the  union  between  the  Ddty 
and  a  man— the  parties  engaged  in  theae  questioiis  being 
too  often  hunied  into  presumptuous  ui  well  ui  unpiofitr 
able  speculationa-— on  pointa  as  far  be3rond  the  reach  of 
the  human  infeellect  as  oolors  to  a  man  bom  blind ;  and 
forgetting  that  the  union  of  the  soul  and  body  of  any 
one  among  us  can  neither  be  explaŁned  nor  comprehend- 
ed  by  hinuelf  or  any  other,  and  appeaia  the  morę  mya- 
terious  the  morę  we  refiect  upon  it  (Eden).  See  Trin- 
ity;  Christ,  Person  or;  Monopmysites ;  Nestori- 

ANS. 

Hypothetical  Baptism  is  a  phrase  sometimes 
naed  to  denote^in  the  Church  of  England,  a  baptism  ad- 


minisfeered  to  a  child  of  whom  it  is  unoertain  whetber  it 
has  already  been  baptized  or  not.  The  rubric  statee 
that  ^  if  they  who  bring  the  infant  to  the  church  do 
make  such  uncertain  answers  to  the  priest'B  ąuestioos 
as  that  it  cannot  appear  that  the  child  was  beptized 
with  water  in  the  name  of  the  Father,  and  of  the  Son, 
and  of  the  Holy  Ghost,**  then  the  priest,  on  perfoiBiing 
the  baptism,  is  to  use  this  form  of  words,  xii. :  **  U  thott 

art  not  already  baptized,  N ,  I  baptizc  thee  in  the 

name,"  etc. — Hook,  Church  Dictionary. 
Hypothetical  nniYenaliBm.  SecHYPOTHEi> 

ICI. 

Hypothetitci,  a  name  giyen  to  the  foUowcrB(Freiich 
Protestanta)  of  Amyraut,  who,  whilc  they  aascrted  a^rti- 
łia  universalis,  nonę  the  less  ought  not  to  be  daand  with 
modem  Uniyersalists,  as  they  simply  taught  that  God 
desires  the  happiness  of  aU  men,provtded  they  tńU  rtomt 
his  mercy  injaiih,  and  that  nonę  can  obtain  salTStion 
without  faith  in  Christ  See  Amyraut;  Camebos; 
Umiyersausm. 

Hsrpaiatarians  (wcNTshippers  of  the  ^ibc  vf  (9roc, 
or  ''Most  High  God,"  aa  such),  a  aect  mentioned  l^ 
Gregory  of  Nazianzum,  whoae  father  was  a  member  cl 
it  before  his  oonyersion  to  Cliristianity.  They  arc  rep> 
reaented  as  oombining  in  their  doctrines  the  elementa 
of  Judaism  and  paganism.  They  asaigned  a  place  to 
flre  and  light  in  their  worship,  but  rejected  drcumdsioD 
and  the  worsliip  of  imagea;  they  kept  the  Sabbath, 
and  abatained  from  the  eating  of  certain  kinds  of  m«ata. 
Gregory  of  Nyssa  also  mentions  the  Hypsistańi,  to 
whom  he  giyes  the  sumame  "Ti/^cff na voi.  He  says 
that,  like  the  Christiana,  they  acknowledge  ooJy  one 
God,  whom  they  cali  \i^iOT0v  ot  irayroxpóropa,  bat 
are  distinguished  from  them  in  not  conaidering  him  u 
Father,  Ali  that  Bubscquent  writera  haye  said  of  this 
sect  is  deriyed  from  the  aboye  statement&  The  Hyp- 
sistarii  do  not  appear  to  haye  extended  outside  of  Cap- 
padocia,  and  they  seem  to  haye  existcd  but  a  sboit 
time  there,  for  no  mention  is  madc  of  them  dthcr  be- 
fore or  ailer  tho  4th  centuiy.  Contrary  to  tho  state- 
ment  of  the  andent  writen,  who  described  them  u 
Monotheists,  Bohmer  concludes  fh»m  the  remark  madę 
by  Gregory  conceming  his  father,  V7r'  ci^ctfAcic  irapoc 
>)cv  Z*!»*ov,  that,  though  the  Hypsistarii  woiahipped  but 
one  God,  they  did  not  formaUy  deny  tho  exi8tenoc  of 
morę.  IŁ  is  not  to  bo  wondered  at,  in  \ievr  of  the  scan- 
ty  Information  we  possess  conceming  this  sect,  thtt 
yery  great  differencea  of  opinion  ahoidd  exist  in  regani 
to  them.  Mosheim  considera  them  aa  bdonging  to  the 
Gnostic  school;  J.  J.Wetstein  (in  Proletfom.  L,  N.  T, 
p.  81,  88)  and  D.  Harenberg  consider  them  as  identicd 
with  the  CtBlicola  (q.  v.),  regarding  them  as  dcscend- 
anta  from  the  worshippers  of  Thor;  others  tiacc  a  re- 
semblance  between  their  doctrinea  and  thoee  of  Zorms- 
ter.  That  they  werc  not  a  Christian  sect  b  proyed  by 
the  fact  of  Gregoiy  of  Nazianzum's  father  having  be- 
longed  to  it  before  hb  becoming  a  Chriatbn.  Lllnumn 
considers  them  as  Eclecticsi,  oombining  the  dements  of 
Judaism  with  tho  PersUn  religion,  whilc  Bbhmcr  looks 
upon  them  aa  identical  with  the  EuphemiteS)  which 
Neander  (Ch.  liist.  ii,  507)  also  thinks  probable.  Their 
morals  are  represented  aa  haying  been  yery  good.  See 
Heraog,  Real-Encyldop,  a.  y.;  Fuhrmann,  IłandvdrtefK 
d.  Kirchengesch.  ii,  880  sq.;  Wakh,  lOst.  d.  Ketzertie^, 
ii,  180  sq. ;  Schrockb,  Kirchengesch.  xiii,  278  są. ;  C  UH- 
mann,  IJe  Iłypsistariis  (Hdddb.  1888) ;  G.  Bohmer,  A 
I/ypsistariis  (BeroL  1884). 

HyrcftnuB  (TpKav6c,  see  ^Iircakcs),  the  name 
of  two  of  the  high-priests  and  ^kings  of  the  Maocaban 
luie  of  the  Jews.    See  Macc^bizs. 

1.  John  Hyrcamus,  the  gięm  of  Simon  Maccabcas, 
who  senthim  with  hb  broth'^r  Judas  to  repd  Gendeb»- 
us,  the  generał  of  Antiochu^  VTI,  B.C.  187.  On  the 
assassination  of  hb  father  <  imd  two  brotber^,  John  a»- 
oended  the  thnme,  B.C.  13^.  During  the  lirst  year  of 
hb  reign  Jeruaalem  was  bojcsieged  by  Antiochua  Sidetc^ 


HTSSOP 


461 


HYSSOP 


and  at  length  Hjtcama  was  obliged  to  submit  The 
waUs  of  Jenisalem  were  destroyed,  and  a  tribate  im- 
posed  apon  the  dty.  Hyrcanua  afterwarda  acoompa- 
nied  Antiochus  in  his  expedition  against  the  Parthians, 
but  letumed  to  Jeniaalem  befoie  the  defeat  of  the  Syr- 
ian  army.  After  the  defeat  and  death  of  Antiochus, 
RC 130,  HyrcanoB  took  seveial  cities  belonging  to  the 
Syrian  kingdom,  and  completely  established  his  own 
independence.  He  strengthened  his  power  by  an  alli- 
ance  with  the  Romans,  and  extended  his  dominions  by 
the  coiiqae8t  of  the  Idomcans,  whom  he  compelled  to 
sibmit  to  drcumdsioD  and  to  obsenre  the  Mosaic  Uw; 
and  also  by  taking  Samaria,  which  he  levelled  to  the 
pnund,  and  flooded  the  spot  on  which  it  had  stood. 
The  latter  part  of  his  leign  was  tronbled  by  dispates 
between  the  Phariaees  and  Sadduoees.  Hyrcanos  had 
origioally  belonged  to  the  Phariseea,  bat  had  qmtted 
tbeir  party  in  conseąuenoe  of  an  insult  he  reoeived  at 
an  entertałnment  from  Eleazar,  a  person  of  importance 
among  the  Phariaees.  By  uniting  himself  to  the  Sad> 
docees,  Hyrcanus,  notwithstanding  the  benefits  he  had 
oonfeired  upon  his  country  by  his  wise  and  yigorous 
goTcnimeoŁ,  became  very  unpopular  with  the  common 
people,  who  were  mostly  attached  to  the  Phariaees. 
Hyrcanus  died  B.C  106,  and  was  succeeded  by  his  son 
Aristobalns  (Joseph.  Ant.  xiii,  7  sq. ;  War^  i,  2 ;  1  Mace 
xv,xri ;  Justin,  xxxvi,  1 ;  Diodorus,  Exc.  /Icesch,  xxxiv, 
1;  Plut.  Apopkth,  p.  184  sq.;  Eusebius,  Chrom,  Arm,  p. 
94,167).  See  Snńthj  Diet,  o/ Clatsical  Bioffn^,  a, 
V.    See  Antiochus. 

2.  Hyrcanus  II,  son  of  AIexander  Janncus,  and 
grandaon  of  the  preceding.  On  the  death  of  his  father 
(B.C  78)  he  was  appointed  high-priest  by  his  mother 
Ale.xandia,  who  niletl  Judsea  herseif  for  the  next  nine 
yean.  A/ter  her  death  (B.C.  69),  his  younger  brother, 
Aristobuliu,  a  bravcr  and  morę  energetic  man,  seized 
the  govemroeiit,  and  forced  Hyrcanus  to  withdiaw  into 
im?ate  life.  Induced  by  the  Idumiean  Antipater,  and 
aided  by  Arctas,  king  of  Arabia  Petnea,  he  endeavored 
to  win  back  his  dominions,  but  was  not  succeasful  imtil 
Pompey  began  to  favor  his  cause.  After  some  years  of 
tumultnous  fighting,  Aristobulus  was  poisoncd  by  the 
p«rtiaans  of  Ptolemy  (B.C.  49),  and  Hyrcanus,  who  had 
for  some  time  possessed,  if  he  had  not  enjoyed,  the  dig- 
nity  of  high-priest  and  ethnarch,  was  now  deprived  of 
the  latter  of  these  offices,  for  which,  in  truth,  he  was 
YboUy  incompetent.  CaoBar  (B.C.  47),  on  account  of 
the  serrices  rendered  to  him  by  Antipator,  madę  the 
latter  procurator  of  Judna,  and  thus  left  in  his  banda 
■U  the  real  power,  Hyrcanus  busying  himself  only  with 
the  aJIairB  of  the  priesthood  and  Tempie.  Troubles, 
howevcr,  were  in  storę  for  him.  Antipater  was  aasasain- 
ated,  and  Antigonus,  son  of  Aristobulus,  with  the  help 
of  the  Parthian  king,  Orodcs  I,  invaded  the  land,  cap- 
tured  Hyrcanus  by  treachery,  cut  off  his  ears,  and  thus 
dł9qualified  him  for  the  office  of  high-priest,  and  carried 
hitn  off  to  Seleucia,  on  the  Tigris.  Some  years  later, 
Herod,  son  of  his  old  friend  Antipater,  obtained  supremę 
power  in  Judsa,  and  invited  the  aged  Hyrcanus  home 
to  JemaalenL  He  was  allowed  to  depart,  and  for  some 
time  liyed  in  ease  and  comfort,  but,  falling  under  suspi- 
non  of  mtriguing  against  Herod,  he  was  put  to  death 
(B.C.  80)  (Joscphua,  Ani.  xiu,  16 ;  xiv,  1-18 ;  War,  i,  6- 
11;  Dio  Caas.  xxxvii,  16, 16;  xlviii,  26;  Diod.  xl,  £x. 
J'rf.p.l28;Oroe.vi,6;  Euseb.CAnm.i4rTO,p.94).  See 
Smith,  Diet,  o/Class.  Biog,  s.  v.     See  Hebod. 

HyBBOp  p'lTK,  izób^y  of  nncertain  etjrmology ;  Gr. 
mwToc),  a  plant  difficult  to  define,  especially  as  the 
"imilarity  of  the  above  terma  haa  early  led  to  their  oon- 
fiisioD.  As  the  wtotaifoc  of  Greek  authors  is  generally 
•cknowledged  to  be  the  conunon  hyssop  {ffytśopus  cffi- 
^''aUt  of  botanists),  it  haa  been  inferred  that  it  most 
tlso  be  the  pUnt  of  the  OM  Testament,  as  well  as  that 
referrcd  to  in  the  New  Testament.  This  infeience  bas 
not,  however,  been  univer8ally  aoąuieaced  in;  for  Cel- 
ei-js  enumerates  no  leaa  than  eighteen  different  plants 
which  have  been  adduced  by  variouB  authors  as  the 


h3r8Bop  of  Scripture.  The  chief  difiiciilty  arises  from 
the  fact  that  in  the  Sept.  the  Greek  ^fftinroc  is  the 
uniform  rendering  of  the  Hebrew  Stób,  and  that  this 
rendering  is  indorsed  by  the  aposde  in  the  Epistle  to 
the  Hebrews  (ix,  19,  21),  when  speaking  of  the  cei^ 
monial  observance8  of  the  Levitical  law.  Whether, 
therefore,  the  Sept.  madę  use  of  the  Greek  {^cntiroc  ui 
the  wofd  most  nearly  resembling  the  Hebrew  in  sound, 
aa  Stanley  soggests  (S,  tmd  PaL  p.  21,  note),  or  as  the 
tme  repreaentative  of  the  plant  indicated  by  the  latter, 
is  a  point  which,  in  all  probobility,  will  never  be  de- 
cided.  Botaniata  differ  ¥ridely  even  with  regard  to  the 
Identification  of  the  v<T<r(uiroc  of  Diosoorides.  The  name 
bas  been  given  to  the  Satureia  Grmca  and  the  S,  Juli~ 
ancL,  to  neither  of  which  it  is  appropriate,  and  the  hys- 
sop of  Italy  and  South  France  is  not  met  with  in  Greece, 
Syria,  or  Egypt  Danbeny  {Leeł,  on  Rom.  Hiubcundnfy 
p.  813),  foUowing  Sibthorpe,  identifiee  the  mountain 
hyssop  with  the  Tkymbia  spioatc^  but  this  conjecture 
is  disapproved  of  by  Kuhn  {Comm.  tn  Diosc,  iii,  27),  who 
in  the  same  passage  gives  it  as  his  opinion  that  the  He- 
brews used  Uie  Origanum  ^gypdcum  in  Egypt,  the  O* 
Syriaumm  in  Palestine,  and  that  the  hyssop  of  Diosoor- 
ides was  the  O.  Smjfmawn,  The  Greek  botanist  de- 
scribes  two  kinds  of  hyssop,  h^uńi  and  ci|ircvrj7,  and 
giyes  iTiooKiii  as  the 
Egyptian  equivalent 
The  Talmudista  make 
the  same  distinction  be- 
tween the  wild  hyssop 
and  the  garden -plant 
used  for  f ood.  The  hys- 
sop is  of  three  species, 
but  only  one  of  these  is 
cultivated  for  uae.  The 
common  hyssop  isa 
shrub,  with  Iow  boshy 
stalks,  growing  a  foot 
and  a  half  high ;  smali, 
pear-shaped,  dose-set- 
ting,  opposite  leaves, 
with  several  smaller 
ones  rising  from  the 
same  joint;  and  all  the 
stalks  and  branches  ter- 
minatod  by  erect,  whorl- 
ed  spikes  of  flowers,  of 
dilTerent  colors  in  the 
varietie8i  Theyarevery 
hardy  planta,  and  may 
be  propagated  either  by  slips  or  cuttings,  or  by  seeds. 
The  leaves  have  an  aromatic  smell,  and  a  warm,  pun- 
gent  taste.  It  is  a  native  of  the  South  of  Europę  and 
theEast. 

The  first  notice  of  the  scriptnral  plant  oocnrs  in  Exod. 
xii,  22,  where  a  bunch  of  hyssop  is  diiected  to  be  dipped 
in  blood  and  struck  on  the  lintels  and  the  two  side-poeta 
of  the  doors  of  the  houses  in  which  the  Israelites  re- 
sided.  It  is  next  mentioned  in  Lev.  xiv,  4, 6, 52,  in  the 
ceremony  for  dedaring  lepers  to  be  deansed ;  and  again 
in  Numb.  xix,  6, 18,  in  preparing  the  water  of  separa- 
tion.  To  these  passages  the  apostle  alludes  in  Heb.  ix, 
19  :  *<  For  when  Moses  had  spoken  every  precept  to  all 
the  people,  according  to  the  law,  he  took  the  blood  of 
calves,  and  of  goats,  with  water,  and  scarlet  wool,  and 
hyssop,  and  sprinkled  both  the  book  and  all  the  people." 
From  this  text  we  find  that  the  Greek  name  wrautieoc 
was  oonsidered  83nionymous  with  the  Hebrew  ezob ;  and 
from  the  preceding  that  the  plant  must  have  been  leafy, 
and  large  enough  to  serve  for  the  purpoees  of  sprinkling, 
and  that  it  must  have  been  found  in  Lower  Egypt,  aa 
well  as  in  the  country  towards  Mount  Sinai,  and  on- 
wards  to  Palestine.  From  the  following  passage  we  get 
some  Information  respecting  the  habits  and  the  suppoeed 
properties  of  the  plant.  Thus,  in  1  Kiogs  iv,  88,  it  is 
said, "  Solomon  spoke  of  trees,  frora  the  cedar-tree  that 
is  in  Lebanon,  eveu  unto  the  hyssop  that  springeth  out 


Hy9»opu»  OffieinaiXXt, 


HYSSOP 


452 


HYSSOP 


of  the  wali ;"  and  in  the  penitential  psalm  of  Dayid  (U, 
7),  *'  Purge  me  irith  hysfiop,  and  I  shall  be  dean :  wash 
me,  and  I  shall  be  whiter  than  snów."  In  thia  laat  pas* 
sagę,  it  is  true,  the  word  is  thought  by  some  commenta- 
ton  to  be  used  in  a  figoratiye  aense ;  but  still  it  is  poB- 
ńble  that  the  plant  may  have  possessed  some  generał 
jdeansing  properties,  and  thus  come  to  be  employed  in 
preference  to  other  plants  in  the  ceremonies  of  puriiica- 
tion.  It  ought,  at  all  event8,  to  be  found  growing  upon 
walls,  and  in  Palestine.  In  the  aocount  of  the  cracifix- 
ion  of  OUT  Sayiour,.the  erangelist  John  says  (xix,  29), 
*<  Now  there  was  set  a  yesael  fuli  of  vinegar,  and  tliey 
filled  a  sponge  with  vinegar,  and  put  it  upon  hytaf^, 
and  put  it  to  his  mouth."  In  the  parallel  passages  of 
Matthew  (xxvii,  '\»)  and  Mark  (xy,  86)  it  is  stated  that 
the  sponge  fUled  with  yinegar  was  put  upon  a  leed  or 
stick.  To  reconcile  these  statements,  some  oommenu- 
tors  haye  supposed  that  both  the  sponge  and  the  hyssop 
were  tied  to  a  stick,  and  that  one  eyangelist  mentions 
only  the  hyssop,  becauae  he  conńdered  it  as  the  most 
important;  while,  for  the  same  reason,  the  other  two 
mention  only  the  stick;  but  the  simplest  roode  of  ex> 
plaining  the  appareut  discrepancy  is  to  consider  the 
hyssop  and  the  stick  to  be  the  same  thing— in  other 
words,  that  the  sponge  was  affixed  to  a  stick  of  hyssop. 
Of  the  different  plants  addneed  by  Celsiiis  as  haying 
morę  or  less  claims  to  be  regarded  as  the  hjrssop  of 
Scripture,  some  belong  to  the  daas  of  fems,  as  Capillu* 
YenerUf  maiden-hair,  and  Ruta  muraria,  or  wall-rue, 
because  they  will  grow  upon  walls;  so  also  the  Poly- 
trickumf  or  hair-moss,  the  Klaster  hytsops,  or  ])earlwort, 
and  Saffinaprocumbeas  are  suggested  by  others,  because, 
from  thcir  growing  on  rocks  or  walls,  they  will  answer 
to  the  passago  in  1  Kings  iy,  88,  and  from  their  smali- 
ness  contrast  well  with  the  cedar  of  Lebanon,  and  are  a 
pioof  of  the  minuto  knowledge  of  Solomon.  Some  again 
contond  for  species  of  wormwood,  as  being,  from  their 
bittomess,  most  likely  to  haye  been  added  to  the  yine- 
gar in  the  i^ngc,  that  it  might  be  morę  distasteful  to 
our  Sayiour.  The  majority,  howeyer,  haye  selected  dif- 
ferent  kinds  of  fragrant  plants  belonging  to  the  natural 
family  of  Labiata,  seyeral  of  which  are  found  iu  di^ 
and  barren  ńtuations  in  Palestine,  and  also  in  some  parta 
of  the  desert.  (See  Rauwolf,  Trav,  p.  59, 456 ;  Hassel- 
ąuist,  Trav.  p.  654, 617 ;  Burckhardt,  Trar,  ii,  918 ;  Rob- 
inson. Researchetf  i,  162, 167.)  Of  these  may  be  mcn- 
tioned  the  roeemary,  yarious  species  of  layender,  of  mint, 
of  marjoram,  of  thyme,  of  sayory,  of  thymbra,  and  oth- 
ers of  the  same  tribe,  resembling  each  other  much  in 
character  as  well  as  in  properties;  but  it  does  not  ap- 
pear  that  any  of  them  grow  on  walls,  or  are  possessed 
ef  cleaiising  properties;  and,  with  the  exception  of  the 
roeemary,  they  are  not  capable  of  yielding  a  stick,  nor 
are  they  found  in  all  the  required  situations.  If  we  look 
to  the  most  recent  authors,  we  lind  some  other  plants 
adduced,  though  the  generality  adhere  to  the  oommon 
hyssop.  Sprengel  (Hitt.  Ifei  iłerb.  i,  14)  seems  to  enter- 
tain  no  doubt  that  the  Thymbra  spicała  found  by  Has- 
selquist  on  the  ruins  about  Jerusalem  is  the  hyssop 
of  Solomon,  though  Hasseląuisfc  himself  thought  that 
the  moss  called  Gymnoałomum  trunccUum  was  the  plant. 
Lady  Calcott  asks  '^whether  the  hyssop  upon  which 
St.  John  says  the  sponge  steeped  in  yinegar  was  put,  to 
be  held  to  the  lips  of  Christ  upon  the  cross,  might  not 
be  the  hyssop  attached  to  its  stafT  of  oedar-wood,  for  the 
purposes  of  sprinkling  the  people,  lest  they  should  con- 
tract  defilement  on  the  eye  of  the  Sabbath,  which  was  a 
bigh-day,  by  being  in  the  field  of  execution"  (Scnpture 
MerłcU,  p.  208).  SoeenmUller,  again,  thinks  that  the 
IjEebrew  woid  ezob  does  not  denote  our  hyssop,  but  an 
aromatic  plant  resembling  it,the  wild  marjoram,  which 
the  Germans  cali  Dosteti,  or  Wohlgemulk,  the  Araba  Za- 
iar^  and  the  Greeks  Origcamvu  In  the  Pictorial  Bibie 
(i,  161),  Mr.Kitto  obsenres  **  that  the  hyssop  of  the  sa- 
cred  Scriptures  has  opened  a  wide  field  for  conjecture, 
but  in  no  instance  haa  any  plant  been  suggested  that,  at 
the  same  timę,  has  a  snfficient  leagth  of  stem  to  answer 


the  purpose  of  a  wand  or  pole,  and  snch  detergent  or 
cleansing  properties  Bi  to  render  it  a  fit  emblem  for  pu- 
riiication;"  and  he  suggests  it  ui  probable  that  "the 
hyssop  was  a  species  of  Phytolacca,  as  oombining  leogth 
of  stom  with  cleansing  properties,  from  the  quantity  of 
potash  which  is  yielded  by  the  ashes  of  the  American 
species,  P.  decandra,  of  this  genus.*'    P.  A  bystmea  grom 
to  the  size  of  a  shrub  in  A^^ssinia.     Winer  (BibUReal' 
worterbuck,  s.  y.  Ysop)  obsenres  that  the  Talmudiats  di»> 
tinguish  the  hyssop  of  the  Greeks  and  Komans  from  that 
mentioned  in  the  law.     He  thcn  adduces  the  Oriyainm, 
mentioned  in  the  ąuotation  from  RosenmUller,  as  the 
exob  of  the  Hebrews;  but  concludes  by  obserying  that 
a  morę  aocurate  examination  is  iequired  of  the  hyssops 
and  Origana  of  that  pait  of  Asia  before  the  meaning  of 
the  Hebrew  term  can  be  considcred  as  satiafactorily  de- 
termined.    Fiye  kinds  of  hyssop  are  mentioned  in  the 
Talmud.    One  is  called  SitM  simply,  without  any  epi- 
thet:  the  others  are  distinguished  bb  Greek,  Boman, 
wild  hyssop,  and  hyssop  of  Cochali  (Mishna,  Ntyaim, 
xiy,  6).    Of  these,  the  four  last  mentioned  were  profane, 
that  is,  ^ot  to  be  employed  in  purifications  (Mishna, 
Parahj  xi,  7).    Maimonides  (de  Vacca  Rufa*  iii,  2)  sa}i 
that  the  hyssop  mentioned  in  the  law  is  that  whidi  wai 
used  as  a  condimenr.  According  to  Porphyry  {De  A  bttk, 
iy,  7),  the  Egyptian  priests  on  certain  occasions  ate  their 
bread  mixed  with  hyssop;  and  the  zaaiar,  ot  wild  mar- 
joram, with  which  it  has  been  identified,  is  offcen  an  in- 
gredient  in  a  mixture  called  dukkak,  which  is  to  this 
day  used  as  food  by  the  poorer  classes  in  Egypt  (Lane, 
Mod.  Eg,  i,  200).     It  is  not  improbable,  therefore,  that 
this  may  haye  been  the  h^^ssop  of  Maimonides,  who 
wrote  in  Egypt;  mM>re  especiaUy  as  R. D. Kimchi  {La, 
s.  y.),  who  reckons  seyen  diflerent  kinds,  giyes  as  the 
equiyalent  the  Arabie  zaatar,  origanum,  or  maijonm, 
and  the  German  Dosten  or  Woklgerauth  (RosenmDlicr, 
Ilctndb.).    With  this  agrees  the  Tanchum  Hiero&SIS. 
quoted  by  Gesenius.     So  in  the  Judieo-Spanish  yeision, 
£xod.  xii,  22  is  translated  "y  tomaredes  manojo  de  ari' 
gano"  This  is  doubtless  the  species  of**  hyssop**  {zaatar) 
shown  to  Dr. Thomson,  who  dcscribes  it  as  "haying  the 
fragrance  of  thyme,  with  a  hot,  pungent  taste,  and  long 
slender  stems"  (Land  and  Bookj  i,  1 61).     But  Dioscorides 
makes  a  distinction  betwecn  origanum  and  hyssop  when 
he  describes  the  leaf  of  a  species  of  the  formar  as  resem- 
bling the  latter  (comp.  Plin.  xx,  67),  though  it  is  erident 
that  he,  as  well  as  the  Talmudists,  regarded  them  ss  be- 
longing to  the  same  family.     In  the  Syriac  of  1  Kings 
iy,  88,  hyssop  is  rendered  by  /w/o,  "houseleck,"  although 
in  other  passages  it  is  represented  by  zv/o,  which  the 
Arabie  translation  follows  in  Psa.  li,  9,  and  Hek  ix,  19, 
while  in  the  Pentateuch  it  has  zaatar  for  the  same. 
Patrick  (on  1  Kings  iy,  88)  was  of  opinion  that  ezńh  is 
the  same  Ttith  the  Ethiopic  ozuft,  which  represents  the 
hyssop  of  Psa.  li,  9,  as  well  bb  JiŁioafiop,  or  mint,  in 
Matt.  xxiii,  28.    The  monks  on  Jebel  Musa  give  the 
namc  of  hyssop  to  a  fragrant  plant  called  ja  VeA,  which 
grows  in  great  quantiti€8  on  that  momitain  (Robuiscm, 
BibL  Reg,  i,  157).    It  has  been  reseryed  for  the  ingenuity 
of  a  German  to  tracę  a  coimection  between  iEsop,  the 
Greek  fabulLst,  and  the  ezób  of  1  Kings  iv,  83  (Hiuig, 
DieSpriicheSalomo%Eińl^2),   (SeeCelsiuB,J7«7v&of. 
i,  407  sq. ;  comp.  Bochart,  Ifieroz,  i,  689;  Plenk,  PUmł. 
Med,  tab,  465;  Otho,  Lex.  Rabb,  p.  284  8q.;  Faber,  in 
Keirs  A  nakct.  i,  8  sq. ;  Geiger,  PharmaceuL  Bet,  i,  491 ; 
Gesenius,  Thesaur,  i,  57  sq. ;  Sprengel,  ad  Dioacor,  ii,  306 
sq. ;  Prosp.  Alpin.  PUmi,  ^gypt,  c  20 ;  Spencer,  Ijfy,  Rit. 
ii,  15, 4 ;  and  the  Talmudical,  dassieal,  and  otfaer  author- 
ities  there  cited.) 

The  latest  result  is  that  of  Dr.  J.  F.  Royle  (communi- 
cated  in  a  paper  read  before  the  Royal  Asiatic  Society, 
and  published  in  their  Journal  for  Norember,  1844),  who 
infers,  first,  that  any  plant  answering  to  all  that  was  re- 
quired  should  be  found  in  Lower  Egypt  (Exod.  xii,  22) ; 
in  the  desert  of  Sinai  (Ijey.xiy,4,6,  and  52;  Kumh.xix, 
6, 18) ;  in  the  neighborhood  of  Jerusalem  (John  xix,  29) ; 
secondly,  that  it  should  be  a  plant  growing  on  waUs  <x 


HySTASPES 


453 


HYTTAYANES 


Tocky  atofttions  (1  Kinga  ir,  83) ;  and,  finally,  that  it 
shoold  be  pooacaBcd  of  some  cleansing  pioperties  (Psa.  li, 
7),  though  it  ia  probable  that  in  this  paaaage  it  is  used 
in  a  figuratiye  aenae.  It  ahould  also  be  large  enough  to 
yidd  a  stick,  and  it  ought,  moreorer,  to  have  a  name  in 
the  Arabie  or  oognate  languages  similar  to  the  Hebrew 
name.  After  a  careful  and  minutę  exaroination  of  all 
Łbe  andent  and  modem  testimony  in  the  caae,  he  fmds 
all  these  drcmnatances  onited  in  the  caper- plant,  or 
Capparittpitiosa  oflAnnauB.  See  Cafer-plant.  The 
Anbic  name  of  this  plant,  asuff  by  which  it  is  some- 
times)  though  not  commonly  described,  bears  conaidera- 
ble  resemblance  to  the  Hebrew.  It  is  found  in  Lower 
Egypt  (Forakal,  Flor.  Eg,- A  rab, ;  Plin.  xiu,  44).  Burek- 
hanit  {Trwf,  m  8yr,  p.  536)  mentions  the  asząfaa  a  tree 
of  freąuentoccnrrence  in  the  Yalleys  of  the  peninsula  of 
Siiiai,"the  bright  green  creeper  which  climbs  out  of 
the  fissures  of  the  rocks"*  (Stanley,  8.  and  P*^  21,  etc.), 
and  prodnces  a  frult  of  the  size  of  a  walnut,  called  by  the 
Azabe  Fel/d  Jibbei,  or  mountain-pepper  (Shaw,  Spec, 
Pkytoffr.  Afr,  p.  89).  Dr.  Royle  thought  thia  to  be  un- 
doabtedly  a  species  otoapparia,  and  probably  the  caper- 
plant.  The  Capparis  apinota  was  found  by  M.  Borę 
{Rd.  iw  Vcy,  Bot<m,  en  Eg^  etc)  in  the  desert  of  Sinai, 
at  Gaza,  and  at  Jemsalem.  Lynch  saw  tt  in  a  ravine 
near  the  conrent  of  Mar  Saba  {Erped.  p.  888).  It  is 
tbni  met  with  in  all  the  localicies  where  the  ezob  is 
mentioDed  in  the  Bibie.  With  regard  to  its  habitat,  it 
grows  in  dry  and  locky  places,  and  on  walls:  **quippe 
qaum  eapparia  qaoque  seratur  ńccit  maxime"  (Flin.  xix, 
48).  De  Candolle  deacribes  it  as  found  **  in  muris  et  ru- 
pcstribns."  The  caper-plant  was  believed  to  be  poesess- 
ed  of  detogent  ąiialltiea.  According  to  Pliny  (xx,  59), 
the  root  was  applied  to  the  cure  of  a  disease  similar  to 
tbe  leproi^.  Lamaick  {Enc  Baton,  art  Caprier)  says, 
*'Le8  capciers  •  .  .  sont  regaides  comme  .  .  .  antiscorbu- 
tiqiwii"  FinaUy,  the  caper-plant  is  capable  of  producing 
a  stick  three  orfoiir  feet  in  length.  Pliny  (xiii,  44)  de- 
acribes it  in  Egypt  as  "firmioris  ligni  fnitex,**  and  to 
this  pKoperty  Dr.  Boyle  attaches  great  iroportance,  iden- 
tifying,  as  he  does,  the  v<nr<tf7ry  of  John  xix,  29  with  the 
KaXafuf  of  Matthew  and  Mark.— Kitto ;  Smith.  To  this 
ideotifieation,  however.  Dr.  G.  £.  Post  (in  the  Am.  ed. 
of  Smith^s  BibL  Diet,)  Justly  objects  that  the  caper-plant 
bas  a  thomy  atem,  and  is  too  stmggling  and  otherwise 
miwiitaMe  in  form  for  the  uses  deaignated;  and,  more- 
orer,  that  its  Arab.  name  really  has  little  affinity  with 
tbe  Ueb.  ezob,  He  therefore  retums  to  Celaius*s  idea  of 
the  Labiata,  or  marjoram  tribe,  specially  the  Origanum 
^aru  (Aiabi  Zupka),  which  grows  on  the  walls  of  ter- 
nces,  has  a  long  slender  stem,  or  cluster  of  stems,  with 
t  boshy  top,  a  fragraut  odór,  and  a  bitter  but  wholesome 
flayor.  With  this  agrees  one  of  the  Arabie  and  Syriac 
Rnderings  above  noted. 

Hystaspes  (YeraowriCę  also  Hystaspas,  i.  e.  /Ty- 
<faqw),  a  prophetico-apocalyptic  work  among  the  early 
Christiana,  thought  to  contain  predictions  of  Christ  and 
tbe  futurę  of  his  kingdom,  so  called  ftom  a  Persian  sa- 
vant  (Magns),  Hystaspes,  under  whoae  name  it  was  cir- 
cidated.  As  in  the  case  of  the  SibylHnes  (q.  v.),  the 
work  in  ąnestion  seems  to  have  been  an  attempt  madę 
by  the  early  Church  fathers  to  (ind  in  the  religion  and 
phikwophuśl  systems  of  the  heathen  predictions  of  and 
^elations  to  the  Christian  religion.  The  first  mentlon 
of  tbese  rałkima  HytUupu  we  find  in  two  passages  of 
Joatin  {ApoUig,  i,  20,  cap.  21,  pt  66  c,  ed.  Otho,  i,  p.  180, 
md  cap.  44,  p.  82  c,  ed.  Otho,  p.  226).  According  to  the 
fiist  paaaage,  the  destruction  of  the  world  is  predicted 
by  Hyita^ws  as  it  is  foretold  by  the  Sibylla  (Kat  Zi- 
0vXXa  cai  Tora^iric  yfy^^^fa^at  rwv  ^aprUiy  &va- 
Wtv  ^  Togbc  k^tfoay).  In  the  second  passage  Jus- 
tin  aaserta  that  the  hed  dasmons,  in  their  efforts  to  pre- 
reat  nian's  knowing  the  truth,  succeeded  in  establishing 
a  law  whieh  forbids  the  reading  of  the  filpiKoi  'Tarćur- 
wov  fi  Si/3vXXjf c  fi  rwv  irpo^Tiiv  under  penalty  of 
d«tth;  bot  the  Christiana,  notwithstanding  this  law, 
not  only  read  the  books  themaelyes,  but  even  incited  I 


the  heathen  to  study  them.  Morę  particular  informa^ 
tion  in  regard  to  their  contents  is  given  us  by  Clcment 
of  Alexandria  (JSlromata,  v,  6,  §  48,  ed.  Potter,  p.  761). 
But  so  yarying  have  been  the  interpretations  of  this 
passage  that  it  is  difficult  to  deterroine  defiiiitely  wheth- 
er  the  book  is  of  older  origin  than  the  first  half  of  the 
2d  century.  To  this  opinion  Wagenmann  (in  Herzog*s 
ReaUEncykhji,)  indines.  The  information  which  Clemr 
ent  fumishes  us  is :  1.  There  exi8ted  in  the  2d  century 
a  pi(3Xoc  'EWriPticfjy  a  work  wiitten  in  Greek,  and  cir- 
culated  in  Christian  and  heathen  cirdes,  entitled  u  'T<r- 
TÓffinic,  2.  The  Christiana  found  in  it,  even  morę 
plainly  than  in  the  books  of  the  SibylUnes,  references  to 
Christ  and  the  futurę  of  his  kingdom,  and  especially  a 
reference  to  Christ*s  divine  sonship,  to  the  sulferings 
which  awaiteil  him  and  his  followers,  to  the  lnex- 
haustible  patienoe  of  the  Christiana,  and  the  finał  return 
of  Christ  The  third  and  last  of  the  Chnich  fathera 
who  make  mention  of  the  Hystaspes  is  Łactantius.  He 
speaks  of  it  in  three  different  passages  {InsHł.  diy.  yii, 
cap.  16,  cap.  18;  Epitom,  ii,  69).  In  the  first  passage 
Łactantius  speaks  of  the  Hystaspes  in  connection  with 
the  Sibyl,  and  in  the  two  other  passages  he  speaks  of  it 
in  connection  with  the  Sibyl  and  Hermes  Trismegistua. 
According  to  the  first  passage,  Hystaspes,  like  the  Sibyl, 
predicts  theextinction  of  the  empire  and  name  of  Romę. 
According  to  the  second  passage  (cap.  18),  the  troubles 
and  warfares  which  shall  precede  the  finał  day  of  the 
world  haye  been  prophesied  of  by  the  prophetn  ex  Dei 
gpiritu ;  also  by  the  vałes  ex  uutmcłu  dtemonum.  For 
instance,  Hystaspes  is  said  to  haye  predicted  and  de- 
scribed the  miguitas  mcuU  hujuM  ertrendy  how  a  eepara- 
tion  of  the  just  from  the  unjust  shall  take  place,  how 
the  pious,  amid  cries  and  sobs,  will  stretch  out  their 
hands  and  implore  the  protection  of  Jupiter  {implorahŁ'* 
rośjidem  Jovi8),  and  how  Jupiter  will  look  down  upon 
the  earth,  hear  the  ery  of  men,  and  destroy  the  wicked. 

With  regard  to  the  person  of  Hystaspes,  who  is  said 
to  be  the  author  of  the  work  containing  these  predic 
tions,  Justin  and  Clement  of  Alexandria  haye  leffc  us  no 
information,  and  we  depend,  therefore,  solely  on  Łactan- 
tius, according  to  whom  he  was  au  old  king  of  the 
Medes,  who  flourished  long  before  the  Trojan  iirar,  and 
after  whom  was  named  the  riyer  Hystaspes.  In  all 
probability,  Łactantius  here  thinks  of  the  father  of  king 
Darius  I,  known  to  us  from  the  writings  of  Herodotus, 
Xenophon,  and  other  Greek  authors,  but  to  whom  the 
prophetic  talents  of  Hystaspes  were  entirely  foreign. 
Ammianus  Marcellinus  (xxiii,  6),  who  flourished  in  the 
4th  century  of  our  aera,  informs  us  that  one  Hystaspes 
had  studied  astronomy  with  the  Brahraas  of  India,  and 
had  eyeii  informed  the  Magi  of  his  ability  to  know  the 
futurę.  Agathias,  the  Byzantine  historian  of  the  6th 
century,  knows  of  a  Hystaspes  who  was  a  contemporary 
with  Zoroaster,  but  he  does  not  dare  to  asaert  that  this 
Hystaspes  was  the  same  as  the  one  spoken  of  as  the  fa- 
ther of  Darius  I.  See  Parsism.  In  yiew  of  the  un- 
certainty  of  the  authorship,  it  is  wellnigh  impossible  to 
determlne  fuUy  the  origin,  contents,  form,  and  tenden- 
cy  of  the  VaHcima  Hyatatpia.  We  know  not  even 
whether  it  emanated  from  Jewish,  Christian,  or  heathen 
writers,  although  all  our  present  knowledge  points  to 
the  last  as  its  probable  origin.  That  the  author  was  a 
Gnostic,  as  Huetius  thinks  {Ouasf,  Alnet,  I,  iii,  ep.  21, 
p.  280),  is  poasible,  but  cannot  be  definitely  stated,  nor 
at  all  proyed ;  beyond  this,  the  only  answer  left  us  to  aU 
ąuestions  that  might  be  put  is  a  non  liguet.  See  Her- 
zog, Reai^Encyklop,  xix,  660  8q. ;  Walch,  De  Hysta^ 
ejmąue  raiicmiiSf  in  the  Comment,  Socief,  Gotting,  kist, 
et  phiL  (1779),  ii,  1-18 ;  Fabridus,  BibHołh,  Grac,  i,  93 
sq. ;  Łttcke,  EinUitung  in  d,  Offenb,  Joh,  (2d  ed.  1848),  p. 
287 ;  Reuae,  Gesehichłe  d,  heiL  Schriff,  d,  N,  T,  (4th  edit. 
1864),  p.  270 ;  Neander,  Ch.  Hitt,  i,  176  sq.     (J.  H.  W.) 

HjrttaYaneB,  in  the  mythology  of  the  Finns,  is  the 
name  of  the  god  of  the  chase,  especially  of  hares.-* 
Pierer,  Univ,  Lex,  yiii,  698. 


lAMBUCHUS 


45i 


IB£X 


I. 


lambllohnB.    See  Jambuchus. 

Ibarra,  Joaquin,  a  Spanish  printer  celebrated  for 
his  magnificent  editions  of  the  Bibie  and  Aralńc  litur- 
gies,  was  bom  at  Saragossa  in  1725|  and  died  at  Madrid 
in  1785.  Hia  printing-house  was  established  at  thc  lat- 
tcr  place. — Hoefer,  Nouv,  Biog,  GeniraUf  xxv,  724. 

Ibas  Clfiac)y  bishop  of  Edessa,  in  Syria,  from  435 
to  457,  distinguished  htmself  by  the  tnmslation  of  the 
works  of  Theodore  of  Mopsuestia  into  the  Syriac  His 
lenient  policy  towards  the  Nestorians,  and  the  fact  that 
he  distributed  the  trandation  of  Theodore  eKtensiyely 
throughout  Persia  and  Syria,  caused  several  priests  of 
his  diocese  to  accose  him  before  the  emperor  Theodosius 
II,  and  before  the  archbishbps  of  Antioch  and  Constan- 
tiuople,  for  fayoring  Nestorianism.  The  emperor  ap- 
pointed  the  bishops  Uranius  of  Himera,  Photius  of 
Tyre,  Eiuthate  of  Berytus,  and  the  prefect  of  Damascus 
a  commission  to  tiy  him.  Tmto  Synods,  held  respeo- 
tively  at  Beryt4is  and  Tyre  in  448,  failed  to  conyict  him, 
and  he  was  left  midisturbed  until  the  Robber-S3mod  of 
Ephesus  (A.D.  449),  when  he  was  finally  depoeed  from 
his  diocese.  He  appealed  to  the  Council  of  Chalcedon, 
and  was  restored  to  his  bishopric  in  451.  Long  after 
his  death,  in  553,  the  fifth  generał  Council  of  Constan- 
tinople  condemned  him  as  a  Nestorian,  in  spite  of  the 
efforts  of  pope  Yigiliua.  The  principal  ground  for  this 
Accosation  was  a  letter  written  by  him  to  the  Persian 
bishop  Maris,  in  which  he  blames  his  predecessor,  Rą- 
bałaś, for  haying  condemned  Theodore  of  Mopsuestia. 
The  greater  part  of  this  letter  is  oontained  in  the  Re- 
cueil  des  ConcUes,  iv,  661.  See  Baronius,  Aimalet^  an. 
448, 449, 451, 553 ;  Dupin,  BiblioŁh,  eccUs.  du  &^'  SUde ; 
Cave,  Hut,  litłer. ;  Hoefer,  Nouv,  Biogr,  Generale,  xxv, 
727 ;  Landon,  Manuał  of  Councils,  s.  v.  Chalcedon ;  Ne- 
ander,  Church  Hittory^  ii,  538-552. 

IbbetBon,  James,  D.D.,  an  English  divine,  was 
bom  in  1717,  and  educated  at  £xeter  College,  Oxford. 
He  fllled  successiyely  the  rectorate  of  Bushey,  in  Hert- 
fordshire,  and  the  archdeaconry  of  St.  Alban'8,  and  died 
in  1781.  His  works  are,  Epistoła  ad  Phil-H^fraos  Oi- 
omenses  (1746) : — Short  History  ofthe  Prorince  ofCan- 
łerbury ;  and  8everal  other  theological  treatises  and  ser- 
mons.— Hook,  Eccks.  Biog,  vi,  241. 

Ibbot,  Benjamin,  D.D.,  a  leamed  English  divine, 
bom  at  Beachamwell,  Norfolk,  in  1680,  was  educated  at 
Clare  Hall  and  Corpus  Christi  College,  Cambridge.  He 
became  treasurer  of  Wells  Cathedral  and  rector  of  St. 
Yedast,  London,  in  1708 ;  was  some  time  afler  appoint- 
ed  rector  of  St.Paul,  Shadwell;  chaplain  of  George  I  in 
1716;  and,  finally,  prebendary  of  Westminster  in  1724. 
He  died  April  15,  1725.  His  principal  works  are,  A 
Course  ofSermons  preachedfor  the  Boyle  Lectun  (1713, 
1714),  in  which  he  refutes  the  infidel  objections  of  Col- 
lins (Lond.  1727, 8vo)  • — Thirłt/six  Discourses  on  prac- 
Ocal  Subjecłs  (Lond.  1776,  2  vols.  8vo) ;  and  a  transla- 
tion  of  Puffendorfs  De  Habitu  Religioms  Christiancs  ad 
vitam  cirHem  (1719).  See  Chalmers,  Gen,  Biog,  Diet.; 
Hoefer,  Nouv,  Biogr,  GśneraU,  xxv,  727 ;  Darling,  Cy- 
dop,  Bibliograpkicaj  ii,  1601. 

Iberians,  an  Asiatic  nation  inhabiting  the  Caaca- 
sian  isthmus,  described  by  Yirgil,  Horace,  and  Lucan  as 
a  warlike,  cruel,  and  uncivilized  people,  while  Strabo 
speaks  of  them  as  a  very  quiet  and  religious  people. 
Rufinus  and  Moses  of  Chorene  relate  that,  during  the 
reign  of  thc  emperor  Constantine,  the  great  Christina, 
probably  a  Christian  woman  (some  cali  her  Nino,  others 
Nunia),  was  madę  prisoner  by  the  Iberians,  and  became 
a  8lave.  Her  piety  aoon  won  for  her  the  esteem  and 
consideration  not  only  of  her  master,  but  of  the  Iberians 
gencrally;  and  being  on  one  occasion  asked  to  cure  a 


sick  child  of  royal  rank,  she  told  the  people  that  Christ, 
her  God,  alone  conld  cffect  the  core.  She  prayed  for 
thc  child,  and  it  recorered.  She  is  next  said  to  hav« 
cured  the  queen  by  her  prayers.  The  king,  Mirans, 
and  his  queen  were  converted,  and  did  their  utmoat  to 
spread  Christianity  through  their  dominions.  The 
country  has  sińce  remained  Christian,  though  the  tme 
religion  was  long  mixed  with  many  old  superstitions. 
Some  claim  that  Christina  was  from  Byaantium,  on  the 
ground  that  Procopius  (v,  9)  mentions  an  oW  cooreot 
presenred  in  Jerusalem,  and  rebuilt  by  Justinian  in  the 
6th  century,  which  was  called  Iberian  or  Iwerian.  Mo- 
ses of  Chorene,  rooreover,  saj^s  that  she  was  an  Anne- 
nian,  and  that  teachers  were  demanded  ofthe  Aimenisn 
bishop  Gregorj',  not  of  Romę.  The  Iberians  spresd 
Christianity  among  the  surrounding  nation&  Thdr 
country  is  now  called  Georgia  (q.  v.),  and  they  hołd  ec- 
clesiastical  relations  with  the  Greek  Church  (q.  v.)^— 
Herzog,  Real-Encyldop,  8.v.;  Pierer,  Uniwrsal  LeriJcoUf 
8.  V. ;  Schrockh,  Kirchengesch,  vi,  27  sq. 

Ibex,  the  ancient  name  of  the  Boucuetin  or  Steith 
bok  of  the  Alps,  an  animal  generally  thought  to  be 
designated  by  the  Heb.  bcj,  yail*  (always  in  the  plur, 
A.  V.  "wild  goats"),  represented  as  well  known,  and  in- 
habiting the  highest  and  most  inaccessible  steeps  (see 
Job  xxxi,  1 ;  Psa.  civ,  18).  Seyeral  species  have  beea 
described  by  naturalists  as  inhabiting  the  diiferent 
mountain  ranges  of  the  Eaat  (e.  g.  Arabia,  Fonk&l,  De- 
scrip,  Anim,  pnef.  4;  Ruppell,  Abyss,  i,  126;  and  Pales- 
tine,  Seetzen,  xWii,  435),  all  of  them  slightly  >'arying 
from  the  European  form  (Capra  ibex)f  and  known 
among  the  Arabe  by  the  generał  name  of  beden,  Among 
the  Sinai  mountains  the  chase  is  punmed  in  much  the 
same  manner  and  under  much  the  same  drcumstanoed 
as  that  of  the  chamois  in  the  Alps  and  the  TyroL  The 
hunters  exercise  great  vigilance  and  hardihood,  taking 
vast  drcults  to  get  above  their  qiłarry,  and  e^^edally 
aiming  to  surprise  them  at  early  day.  Like  most 
mountain  quadrapeds  that  are  gregarious,  they  have  a 
leader  who  acts  as  sentinel,  and  give8  the  alaim  on  the 
occurrence  of  any  suspicious  sight,  sound,  or  smdl, 
when  the  whole  flock  makes  odŚT  for  a  loflier  peak 
Their  numbers  are  said  to  have  much  decreaaed  of  Ute 
years;  for  the  Arabs  report  them  bo  abundant  fifty  yean 
ago,  that  if  a  stranger  sought  hospitality  at  a  Bedoain's 
tent,  and  the  owner  had  no  aheep  to  kill,  he  would  with- 
out  hesitation  take  his  gun  and  go  confidently  to  sboot 
a  beden.    The  flesh  is  excellent,  with  a  ilavor  similar  to 


:^^^ 


Caucaaian  lbex. 


IBHAR 


455 


IBN-AKNDT 


thtt  of  rraison.  The  Bedonińs  make  water-bottles  of 
tbeir  skiiu,  as  of  thoee  of  the  domestic  goats,  and  rings 
of  tbeir  homa,  which  they  wear  on  their  thumba.  Dogs 
cisily  catch  Łhem  wben  sorprised  in  the  plains,  but  in 
the  ahnipt  precipices  and  chasma  of  the  rocka  the  ibex 
is  aaii  to  elode  pnrsait  by  the  tiemendona  kaps  which 
it  niake&  It  is  likely  that  this  apeciea  ia  identical 
with  that  which  bears  the  name  oipoteng  {Caprus  aga- 
gnu),  and  which  inhabits  all  the  loftier  ranges  that 
tnvene  Asia,  fh>m  the  Taorus  and  Caucasus  to  China. 
It  is  very  robust,  and  much  larger  than  any  domestic 
goat ;  its  generał  color  iron-gray,  shaded  with  brown, 
with  a  Uack  line  down  the  back  and  across  the  with- 
en,  and  a  white  patch  on  the  crapper.  The  homs  of 
the  małe  are  very  large,  compreseed,  and  shghtly  di- 
rerging  as  they  arch  over  the  back;  their  front  side 
makes  an  obtoae  edge,  and  is  marked  by  a  series  of 
knobs,  with  deep  hoUows  between.— Fairbaim.  See 
WiŁD  Goat;  Hitid,  etc, 

Ib^liar  (Heb.  Yibchar%  *nną%  chosen;  Scpt  'IjSf- 
ac,  'lipaap  [cod.Vat  *E^idpf  'E^adp];  Josephus  'U- 
^,  Ant.  rii,  3,  3),  one  of  the  sons  of  David  (by  a  sec- 
ondary  wife,  1  Chroń,  iii,  9)  bom  to  him  in  Jerusalem, 
meiitiooed  next  after  Solumon  and  before  Elishua  (2 
SauLT,  15;  1  Chroń,  iii,  6;  xiv,  5).  RC.  post  1044. 
See  Dayid. 

Ibifl,  a  genuB  of  birds  of  the  family  A  rdeida,  or,  ac- 
cording  to  some  omithologists,  of  Scolopacida,  and  per- 
haps  to  be  regarded  as  a  connecting  link  between  them. 
The  bill  is  long,  slender,  curv-ed,  thick  at  the  base ;  the 
point  rather  obtuse ;  the  upper  mandible  deeply  groovcd 
throughout  its  length.  The  face,  aud  generally  the 
greater  part  of  the  head,  and  sometimes  even  the  neck, 
are  destitute  of  feathers,  at  least  in  adult  birds.  The 
neck  is  long.  The  legs  are  rather  long,  naked  above 
the  taisal  joint,  with  three  partially  united  toes  in  front 
and  one  behind;  the  wings  are  moderatcly  long;  the 
taił  is  Tery  short.     The  Sacrcd  or  Egj-ptian  ibis  {Ibis 


Sacredlbis. 

rdigioid)  is  an  African  bird,  two  feet  8ix  inches  in 
length,  although  the  body  is  lit  tle  Urger  than  that  of  a 
common  fowL  It  was  one  of  the  birds  worshipped  by 
the  ancient  Egyptians,  and  called  by  them  Ifah  or  //tft, 
and  by  the  modem  Egyptians  Abtt-Ifannes  (i.  e.  Father 
John).  It  is  represented  on  the  monumcnts  os  a  bird 
with  kmg  beak  and  legs,  and  a  heart-shapcd  body,  cov- 
<Ted  with  black  and  white  plnmage.  It  was  supposed, 
from  the  color  of  its  feathers,  to  symbolize  the  light 
and  ahade  of  the  moon,  its  body  to  represent  the  heart ; 
its  legs  described  a  triangle,  and  with  its  beak  it  per- 
formed  a  medical  operation;  from  all  which  esoterical 
ideas  it  was  the  aratar  of  the  god  Thoth  or  Hermes  (q. 
V.),  wbo  escaped  in  that  shape  the  pursuit  of  Typhon, 
as  the  hawk  was  that  of  Ra,  or  Horus,  the  suń.  Its 
feathers  were  supposed  to  scare,  and  even  kill,  the  croc- 
odilc.  It  appeared  in  Eg>i)t  at  the  rise,  and  disappear- 
ed  at  the  inundation  of  the  Nile,  and  was  thought,  at 


that  time,  to  deliver  Egypt  from  the  winged  and  other 
serpents  which  came  from  Arabia  in  oertain  narrow 
passea.  As  it  did  not  make  its  nest  in  Egypt,  it  was 
thought  to  be  self-engendering,  and  to  lay  cggs  for  a 
lunar  month.  According  to  some,  the  basilisk  was  en- 
gendered  by  it  It  was  celebrated  for  its  purity,  and 
only  drank  from  the  purest  water,  and  the  most  strict 
of  the  priesthood  only  drank  of  the  pools  where  it  had 
been  seen ;  beaides  which,  it  was  fabled  to  entertain  the 
most  invincible  love  of  Egypt,  and  to  die  of  self-stan'a- 
tion  if  transported  elsewhere.  Its  flesh  was  thought  to 
be  incormptible  afler  death,  and  to  kill  it  was  punisha- 
ble  with  death.  Ibises  were  kept  in  the  temples,  and 
unmolested  in  the  neighborhood  of  cities.  Ailter  death 
they  were  mummied,  and  there  is  no  animal  of  which 
so  many  remains  have  been  found  at  Thebes,  Memphis, 
Hermopolis  Magna,  or  Eshmun,  and  at  Ibiu  or  Ibeum, 
fourteen  miles  north  of  the  same  place.  They  are  madę 
up  into  a  conical  shape,  the  wings  flat,  the  legs  bent 
back  to  the  breast,  the  head  placed  on  the  left  side,  and 
the  beak  under  the  taił ;  were  prepared  aa  other  mum- 
mies,  and  wrapped  up  in  linen  bandages,  which  are 
sometimes  plaited  in  pattems  extemally.  At  Thebes 
they  are  found  in  linen  bandages  only ;  well  prescired 
at  Hermopolis  in  wooden  or  stonc  boxes  of  oblong  form, 
sometimes  in  form  of  the  bird  itself,  or  the  god  Thoth ; 
at  Memphis,  in  conical  sugar-loaf-shaped  red  earthen- 
ware  jars,  the  taił  downwards,  the  cover  of  convex  form, 
cemcnted  by  limc;  There  appear  to  be  two  sorts  of 
embalmed  ibises — a  smaller  one  of  the  size  of  a  com- 
crake,  very  black,  and  the  other  black  and  white^the 
Ibis  Nvmemu$y  or  Ibis  reUgiota.  This  last  is  nsually 
found  with  its  eggs,  and  sometimes  with  its  insect  food, 
the  PimeliapUosaj  Akis  rejiexa,  aud  portions  of  snakes, 
in  the  atomach.  (Wilkinson,  Marmerś  and  Customs,  v, 
7,  217;  Passoloegua,  CcUalogue  Rcńaoimi,  p.  255;  Petti- 
grew,  Hutory  of  Mummietf  p.  205 ;  fforapoUOf  i,  c.  30, 
36.)--Chamber3. 

Ib^leOm  (Heb.  Yibleam\  ^sh^*^,  people-waster ; 
Sept  'lap\aafi,  'Up\aafi  [but  some  codd.  occosionally 
omit]),  a  city  (with  suburban  towns)  within  the  natur- 
ał  precincts  of  Issachar,  but  (with  five  others)  assigned 
to  Manosseh  (Josh.  xvii,  11,  where  it  is  mentioned  be- 
tween Beth-sheau  and  Dor),  but  from  which  the  Israel- 
ites  were  unable  to  expel  the  Canaanites  (Judg.  i,  27, 
where  it  is  mentioned  between  Dor  and  Megiddo) ;  ly- 
ing  near  the  pass  of  Gur,  in  the  vicinity  of  Megiddo, 
where  Jehu  siew  Ahaziah  (2  Kings  ix,  27).  It  was  as- 
signed as  a  Levitical  city  to  the  family  of  Kohath  (1 
Chroń,  vi,  70,  where  it  is  less  correctly  called  Bileam, 
and  mentioned  along  with  Aner  as  lying  within  Manaa- 
seli) ;  coropare  Josh.  xxi,  25,  where  it  is  called  Gath- 
RiMMON  (apparently  by  error;  see  the  Sept.,  and  comp. 
1  Chroń,  vi,  G9).  According  to  Schwarz  {Palest,  p.  148), 
it  is  the  modem  village  Jabla,  south-west  (north-west) 
of  Beth-shean,  and  about  two  English  miles  south  of 
the  villagc  Kefrah ;  but  no  map  has  this  place,  and  the 
indications  reąuire  a  different  position.  See  Gur.  The 
site  is  probably  represented  by  that  of  Jdameh,  a  smali 
village  about  two  and  a  half  miles  north  of  Jenin  (Rob- 
inson, Researcftes,  iii,  161). 

Ibn-Aknin,  Joseph  ben-Jeiiudah,  called  in  Ar- 
abie Abulkagag  Jussujjf  Ibn-Jahja  Ibn-Shimun  Ąlsabłi 
Almaghrebi,  a  Jewish  philosoper  and  commentator  of 
some  notc,  was  bom  at  Ceuta  (Arab.  Sebta),  in  Arabia, 
about  1 160.  His  first  religious  training  was,  at  least  to 
all  outside  appcarances,  in  the  Mohamraedan  religion, 
but  he  was  at  a  very  early  age  ałso  taught  Hebrew,  and 
instmcted  in  the  Talmud  and  Hebrew  Scriptures,  ao 
that,  as  soon  as  he  arrived  at  years  of  maturity,  he  might 
forsake  the  religion  forced  upon  him  by  the*  law  of  the 
country  that  gave  him  birth,  and  return  to  the  faith  of 
his  forefathers.  About  1185,  having  previously  decided 
in  favor  of  the  Jewish  religion,  he  fled  to  Alexandria, 
and  there  became  a  zealous  disciple  of  the  great  Moees 
Maimonidcs,  whose  attention  łiad  been  called  to  Ibn* 


IBN-BALAAM 


466 


IBN-BARUCH 


Aknin  by  a  BclentiAc  work  of  his,  and  by  his  Mdkamm,  I 
which  he  had  sent  to  Maimonides.  Although  be  le- 
mained  with  this  celebrated  Jewish  8avant  oiily  a  little  ' 
over  a  year,  then  removiiig  \o  Aleppo  to  practioe  medi-  | 
cine,  he  had  nerertheleaii  endeared  himself  ao  much  to 
•  him  that  Maimonides  loved  him  as  his  own  son,  and 
eyer  affcerwards  labored  to  promote  the  interests  of  his 
beloyed  disciple,  and  the  philosophical  work  MorehnNe- 
bochim  (Doctor  perplexorum)y  which  Maimonides  (q.  v.) 
published  in  1190,  is  often  asserted  to  have  had  for  its 
prindpal  aim  the  remoral  of  certain  soeptical  opinions 
which  Ibn-Aknin  cherished  at  that  time.  In  1192,  not- 
withstanding  the  frequent  oounsels  of  Maimonides  to 
the  contiary,  Ibn-Aknin  went  to  Bagdad,  and  there 
founded  a  Uabbinic  college.  After  the  decease  of  his 
great  master  he  figured  quite  prominently  at  the  court 
of  the  sułtan  Azzahir  Ghasi  of  Damascus,  and  be  deliy- 
ered  lectures  at  the  high  schools  on  roedicine  and  phi- 
losophy.  He  died  about  1226.  Besides  a  number  of 
works  on  medicine  and  metaphysics,  he  wrote  Commertr 
tary  on  the  Song  of  SongB  (in  Arabie),  now  in  the  Bod- 
leian  Libraiy,  Oxford  (Pococke,  p.  189).  He  espouses 
the  notion  of  the  Talmud,  that  the  Song  of  Songs  is  the 
tnott  aacred  of  all  the  twenty-four  canonical  books  of 
the  O.  T.,  and  accordingly  exp]ains  it  allegorically  as 
reprcsenting  the  relationship  of  God  to  his  people  IsraeL 
^  There  are,"  he  says,  *'  three  different  modes  of  explain- 
ing  this  book :  1.  The  lUercd^  which  is  to  be  found  in 
the  philologians  or  grammarians,  e.  g.  Saadia,  Abu  Sa- 
chaija  Jahja  ben-David  el  Fasi  (Chajug),  Abulwalid 
Ibn  Ganach  of  Saragossa  (Ibn-Ganach),  the  Nagid  B. 
Samuel  Ha-Levi  ben-Nagdilah,  Abn-Ibrahim  ben-Ba- 
ran  (Isaac  ben-Joseph),  Jehudah  ben-Balaam  (Ibn-Ba- 
laam),  and  Moses  Ibn-GikatilU  Ha-Cohen  (Gikatilla) ; 
2.  The  alUgoricaly  to  be  found  in  the  Midrash  Chasit, 
the  Talmud,  and  in  some  of  the  ancient  interpretations ; 
and,  3.  The  phUogophical  interpretation,  which  regards 
this  book  as  referńng  to  the  acłite  intellecl  [i/ot/c  iroii;- 
rucócji  here  worked  out  for  the  firet  time,  and  which, 
though  the  last  in  point  of  time,  is  the  first  of  all  in 
point  of  merit  These  three  different  explanations  cor- 
respond,  in  reverse  order,  to  the  three  different  natures 
of  man,  namely,  to  his  physical,  vital,  and  spiritual  na- 
tures." Ibn-Aknin  always  gives  the  first  and  second 
explałuition8  first,  and  then  the  philosophical  interpre- 
tation. The  commentary  is  inva]uablc  to  the  hisŁory 
of  Biblical  literaturę  and  cxegesis,  iiuumuch  as  all  the 
iuterpreters  therein  enumerated  have,  with  the  exccp- 
tłon  of  Saadia,  hitherto  not  becn  known  as  commenta- 
tors  of  the  Song  of  Songs.  These  expo8itors  form  an 
important  addition  to  the  history  of  inteipretation  given 
by  Ginsburg  {Ilistorical  and  Critkal  Commentary  o/the 
Song  ofSongSy  Longman,  1857).  See  Gr9t2,  Gesch,  der 
Juden,  W,  854, 362 ;  yii,  7,  43 ;  Jost,  Geschichte  d  Juden- 
thunu  u.  8,  Sekien,  ii,  457;  iii,  11 ;  Kit  to,  Cydop,  BibU- 
txU  Liter,  ii,  849  8q.;  Lhc  ably  wiittcn  monograph  of 
Munk,  Notice  sur  Joiej)h  b.-Jehuda  (Paris,  1842) :  and 
the  yery  elaborate  artide  of  Steinschneider,  in  Erach 
und  Grubcr's  AUgemtme  Encgllopadie,  s.  v.  Joseph  Ibn- 
Aknin. 

Ibn-Balaam,  jEiiroAH  (in  Arabie  JahJa  Abu- 
Zakaria)j  a  very  distinguished  Jewish  philologian 
and  commentator,  was  bom  at  Serille,  in  Spain,  about 
1080.  He  was  especially  prominent  as  a  dcfendcr  of 
the  authority  of  the  Maasora  (q.  v.).  He  died  about 
1100.  His  works  (in  Hebrew)  are:  I,  On  the  Accents 
of  the  Btblfy  edited  by  Jo.  Mercer  (De  accentibus  scrip- 
turm  proaaicif,  Paris,  1565).  Some  portions  of  this 
book  Heidenheim  (q.  v.)  incorporated  in  his  '^^fi^p 
D''p5^n  :~2.  On  the poetical  Accents  ofJob,  Próeerbi, 
and  the  Psaimt  (Paris,  1556).  It  bas  recently  been  re- 
edited,  with  remarks  of  the  most  ancient  grammarians 
upon  these  peculiar  accents,  notes,  and  an  introduction, 
by  J.  G.  Polak  (Amsterdam,  1858) :— 8.  On  the  denonUna- 
iive  Verb8  in  the  Utbrew  jAinguage.  The  denominatires 
•re  ammged  in  alphabetical  order,  and  commented  upon 


iji  Arabie.    This  work  has  not  yct  been  pOblisbed,bQt 
specimens  of  it,  in  Hebrew,  have  been  printed  by  Leo- 
poU  Dukes  in  the  LHeraturhlaU  dee  Orieutt,  1846,  Na 
42  :--4.  A  Treatise  on  the  Hebrew  Partides,  in  alphabet- 
ical order.    This  work,  too,  has  not  as  yet  been  printc<I, 
but  specimens  of  it  hare  been  published  both  by  Dukes 
and  FUrst  in  the  Liłeraturblatt  dei  Oriente^  Noa  29  and 
42 : — 5.  A  Tretdise  on  the  Hebrew  Homcngma,  in  alphabet- 
ical order,  of  which  extracts  have  bc«n  published  by 
Dukes  in  the  fAlerałurblatt  dee  OrienU,  1846,  No.4:- 
6.  Commentary  on  the  Penlattsuch,  written  in  AraUc. 
Though  this  work  has  long  becn  known  thnmgh  Aben- 
Ezra,  who  quotes  it  in  his  commentary  on  Gen.  xlix,  6; 
Exod.  V,  19,  yet  it  is  only  lately  (1851)  that  Dr.  Stein- 
schneider discovered  a  M&  in  the  Bodleian  Libiary  cod- 
taining  a  commentary  on  Numbere  and  Deuteronon^. 
*^  Ibn-Balaam  always  gives  the  grammatical  explaDa- 
tion  of  the  wonls  first;  he  then  enters  into  a  minutę 
di8quisition  on  Saadia'8  translation  and  exposation  of 
the  Pentateuch,  which  he  generally  rejects,  then  ex- 
plains  the  passage  according  to  its  context,  and  finally 
sets  forth  the  Ilalachic  and  the  judicial  interpietatioo 
of  the  Talmud.    A  specimen  of  this  commentan",  which 
is  extremely  important  to  the  Hebrew  tcxt  and  the 
Massora,  has  been  communicated  by  Adolph  Neubauer 
in  the  Journal  Atiatique  of  December,  1861.    It  is  oo 
Deut  y,  6,  upon  which  Ibn-Balaam  remarks,  'As  to  the 
different  readings  of  the  two  Decalogues  (i.  e.  £xod.  xx, 
2-17,  and  Deut.  y,  6-21),  Saadia  is  of  opinion  that  ther 
contain  two  different  reyelations.     He  entertains  the 
same  yiew  respecting  those  Psalms  which  occur  twice, 
with  some  yerbal  yariations  (e.  g.  Psa.  xiy  and  liii),  and 
respecting  the  different  readings  of  the  Babylonian  and 
Palestinian  codices.'     We  thus  leam  of  a  rcmarfcabk 
yariation  between  the  Western  and  Eastero  codicei 
which  is  not  mentioned  clsewhere,  namely,  that  the 
words  Kinn  D1*^n  (Zech.  xiv,  2)  are  omitted  in  the  lat- 
ter ;  we  discoyer  why  the  Syriac  yersion  has  not  these 
words ;  and  we,  moreovcr,  sec  in  what  light  Saadia  and 
others  regarded  the  yarious  readings**  (Ginsbuig  in 
Kitto) : — ^7.  Commentary  on  the  PealnUy  frequently  qiioted 
by  Aben-Ezra : — 8.  Commentary  on  the  Song  of  Songt^ 
which,  according  to  Ibn-Aknin  (q.  y.),  who  quote8  it, 
giyes  a  literał  expo6ition  of  this  book : — 9.  Commentary 
on  Jsaiahj  quoted  by  Joseph  Albo  (Ikarhnj  sec  i,  1). 
"  Ibn-Balaam,  here,  contrary  to  the  geneiaUy  receired 
opinion,  explains  away  the  Mcssianic  prophecics,  and 
interprets  Isa.  xi  as  referring  to  Hezekiah.  From  Aben- 
Ezra's  quotation  on  Zech.  ix,  7  and  Dan.  x,  1,  it  seems 
as  if  he  had  also  wrirten  commentarics  on  these  booka. 
Ibn-Balaam  is  one  of  the  most  liberał  intcrpretcn,  and 
quote8  Christian  commentators  and  the  Koran  in  his 
cxpositiou8L**     See  GrMtz,  Geechichte  der  Juden,  yi,  83 
8q. ;  Jost,  Geeehichte  des  Judenłhunu  v.  s.  Sekten,  ii,  406; 
Fllrst,  Biblioth.  Jud,  i,  81 ;  Steinschneider,  Catahgut  Libr. 
Hebr,  in  BiHiotheca  BodieianOj  coL  1292-1297 ;  He-Cha- 
luz  (Lembcrg,  1858),  ii,  60  sq. ;  Leopold  Dukes,  BtOrage 
zur  Geschichte  der  alietten  A  udegung  und  Spracherkto' 
rttng  des  Alten  Testamentes  (Stuttgart,  1844),  ii,  186  sq.; 
Geiger,  in  the  JSdische  ZeiUchyifur  Wissenschaft  rad 
Leben,  1862,  p.  292  8q. 

Ibn-Baruch,  Baruch,  a  Jewish  philoaopher  and 
commentator,  flourished  at  Yenice  in  the  IGth  centuir. 
But  little  is  known  of  the  history  of  his  life.  He  pub- 
lished a  twofold  commentary'  on  Ecdesiastes,  called  both 
^P?^  ^^OP  ^'^^  Congregation  of  Jacob)  and  t^p 
bK';^':'  (Holy  Israel)  (Tenice,  1699),  the  firet  of  which 
is  discureiye  and  diffuse,  and  the  second  exegetical  and 
brief.  ^  Based  upon  the  first  ycrse, '  the  words  of  Cohe- 
leth,  son  of  Dayid,  king  in  Jerusalem,*  he  maintains 
that  two  penons  are  speaking  in  its  book,  a  sceptic 
named  Coheleth,  and  a  belicyer  called  Ben-Darid^  and 
accordingly  treats  the  whole  as  a  dialoguc,  in  which 
these  two  characteis  are  shown  to  discuss  the  most  im- 
portant problems  of  morał  philosophy,  and  the  philo- 
sophic  systems  of  Greece  and  Arabia  are  madę  to  fninidi 


IBN-CASPI 


457 


IBN^ANACH 


tbe  two  heroes  of  the  dialogue  with  the  neoessary  phil- 
osophic  maieriida." — Ginaborg  in  Kitto.  The  Qu<b$H' 
oma  dUputata  de  Amma  of  Thomas  Aąninaa,  which 
were  tmiBlated  into  Uebrew  by  Ali  Xabilio,  aro  used  in 
this  work  both  to  put  obJectioDS  into  the  mouth  of  the 
tcepCic  and  to  fiiniiah  the  belierer  with  tene  repUes 
(oonip.alflo  Conunentory, 65,  a;  71,  b;  96,  a;  97,  c;  117, 
a;  118,  b;  119,  a).  It  is  a  very  yaluable  aid  to  the 
Siudy  of  Jewish  philosophy.  See  JeUineck,  Thomat  v. 
Aquv»  u  d,jiid,  LiL  (Lpz.  1868),  p.  ii  (18)  and  yii.  (J. 
H.W.) 

Ibn-Caspi  or  CaBpe,  Joseph  brn-Abba  Mari 
(abo  oalled  Bonafma  de  PArffeiUiire),  an  able  Jewish 
writer,  was  bom  of  c  wealthy  family  about  1280  at  Ar- 
genti^re,  in  France.  He  remoyed  while  qiiite  yoang 
to  Tarasoon,  and  deyoted  his  time  mainly  to  fiiblical 
Btudiea.  When  only  seyenteen  yean  old,  he  pubtished 
as  a  resnlt  commentaries  on  Aben-£zra'8  csposition  of 
the  Pentateoch,  and  on  Ibn-Ganach*8  grammatical  work. 
When  aboat  thirty  yean  old  he  extended  his  lange  of 
study  to  metaphyńcal  subjects,  and  thereafter  became 
an  aident  admirer  of  Maimonides,  whose  method  of  in- 
teipretation  he  alao  adopted.  Indeed,  so  far  was  he 
canied  away  in  his  admiradon  for  the  great  philosopher 
that  he  emigrated  to  Egypt,  haring  decided  to  study 
under  the  descendants  of  Maimonides.  But  he  failed 
to  meet  thece  that  great  fountain  of  knowledge  which 
he  suppoeed  the  foUoweis  of  the  second  great  Moses  ca- 
pible  of  supplying,  and,  after  a  few  months*  travel  in 
Egypt  and  the  East,  he  retumed  to  France.  In  1327 
he  again  set  out  on  a  joumey  to  promote  his  studies  by 
a  residencc  at  foieigii  high-schools,  aud  he  yisited  Cat^ 
akMila,  Malloica,  Aragonia,  and  Yalencia,  and  at  one 
time  eyen  desired  to  go  to  Fez,  having  been  informed 
that  in  that  African  city  sereral  noted  Jewish  schohirs 
resided,  whose  instructions  he  ooyeted.  Towards  the 
latter  part  of  1332  Ibn-Caspi  retumed  to  his  native 
country,  and  deroted  himself  to  the  production  of  a 
nnmbtf  of  valaable  exegetical  worka.  He  died  about 
1340.  In  all  he  wrote  some  thirty-sLX  works,  most  re- 
maining  to  us  only  in  MS.  form,  of  which  lists  may  be 
fonnd  in  a  Jellineck,  C^p-^HJ  D-ł-im,  voL  ii,  1846; 
Ddttzach  and  Zunz,  Catal,  318. ;  and  in  FUrst,  Biblioth. 
Jud.  i,  147.  Besides  a  commentary  on  Maimonides^s 
Jłore  Nebockim,  his  most  yaluable  works  are,  n*i;S*1t? 
5)D3  (or  nidO  only,  the  word  r)G3,  «/rer,  being  an 
allusion  to  his  own  name,  *^B&3,  which  is  found  iu  the 
titles  of  all  his  works)  (smali  silrer  chauu  or  roots),  a 
Hebrew  Dictionary,  which  is  one  of  his  most  inteiesting 
and  important  works.  "He  starts  from  the  principle 
that  ereiy  root  has  only  ono  generał  idea  as  its  basiS; 
and  logi<^y  deduces  from  it  all  Łho  other  shades  of 
meaning.  A  copy  of  this  work  in  MS.,  2  yols.  4to,  is  in 
the  Paris  library,  and  another  in  the  Angelica  at  Korne. 
Abrabanel  frequently  quotes  it  in  his  oommeutaiy  on 
the  PenUteuch  (comp.  p.  7),  on  Isaiah  (comp.  xly,  3; 
bcyi,  17),  etc. ;  Wolf  giyes  a  specimen  of  it  {Bibliotheca 
Iltbreeay  i,  1543) ;  Richard  Simon  used  the  Paris  MS. 
(Hist,  Crił.  lib.  i,  cap.  xxxi),  and  LeopoM  Dukes  print^ 
ed  extTacts  from  it  {LUeraturblatł  des  Orients,  1847,  p. 
486) :— A  Commentary  on  Proyerbs,  the  Song  of  Songs, 
and  Ecdesiastea.  "  Of  the  commentary  on  Proyerbs, 
which  is  one  of  Ibn-Casp^s  most  yaluable  contributions 
to  RiMical  cxege8is,  the  beginning  and  end  haye  been 
puhliahed  by  WerWumer  (comp.  C)03  n^inp,  1846,  p. 
19,  etc.) ;  an  analysis  of  the  commentary  on  Ecclesiastes 
is  giyen  by  Ginsbnig  (compare  Uistorical  and  Crilical 
CommaHwy  on  EcdesiasUSy  Longman,  1861,  p.  60,  etc), 
and  the  brief  commentary  on,  or,  rather,  introdnction  to 
the  Song  of  Songs,  which  was  published  in  1677,  but 
which  is  rarer  than  the  MSS.,  has  been  reprinted  with 
aa  English  tianalation  by  Ginsbuig  in  his  Historical 
oad  CriHoal  Commentary  on  the  Song  of  Songs  (London, 
18Ó7,  p.  47,  etc)  :"--5)03  HlOta  («/pw  «tow«),  or  com- 
^  on  cight  prophets,  in  which  he  attacks  with 


great  seyerity  those  who  explain  these  prophecies  as  r^ 
ferringto  theMessiah  [see  Ibm-Dakan]  :— C)03  !7*^a3  (a 
siher  cup)y  or  commentary  on  the  mirades  and  other 
mysteries  found  in  the  Pentateuch,  Prophets,  and  Ha- 
giographa.  His  principles  of  interpretation  he  laid 
down  dearly  in  his  commentary  on  the  Proyerbs  aboye 
mentioned  in  these  words :  "  The  sacred  Scriptures 
must  be  explained  according  to  thcir  plain  and  literał 
sense;  and  a  recondite  meaning  can  as  little  be  intro- 
duced  into  them  as  into  Aristotle^s  writings  on  logie 
and  natural  history.  Only  where  the  literał  meaning 
is  not  sufficient,  and  reason  rejects  it,  a  deeper  sense 
must  be  resortod  to.  If  we  once  attempt  to  alłegorize  a 
simple  and  intelligible  passage,  then  we  might  just  as 
well  do  it  with  the  whole  contents  of  the  Bibie."  ^  The 
logical  diyision  of  sentences  is  the  most  indispensaUe 
and  best  auxiliary  to  the  right  understanding  of  the 
Bibie,  and  the  criterion  to  the  proper  order  of  the  words 
are  the  Massora  and  the  accents"  It  b  eyident  from 
this  extract  tliat  Ibn-Caspi  antidpated  the  hermeneu- 
tical  niłes  of  modem  criticism  at  a  time  when  the  school^ 
men  and  the  depositaries  of  Christian  leaming  were 
engaged  in  hair-splitting  and  in  allegorizing  eyery  fact 
of  the  Bibie.  It  is  greatly  to  be  regretted  that  most  of 
his  exegetical  works  are  left  unpublished.  See  Gins- 
burg,  in  Kitto,  Bibl,  Cydop.  ii,  351  8q. ;  Griitz,  Gesch,  d. 
JtLden,  yii,  361  sq. ;  Kirchheim,  Werbbtmer^s  Kdition  oj" 
Ibn-Caspts  Commentary  on  Alaimanidfss  Morę  Nebo' 
chim  (Frankfort-on-the-Maine,  1848),  p.  10  sq. :  Leopold 
Dukes,  in  the  Literatui^b,  des  Orients^  1848 ;  and  Schnd- 
der, in  Ersch  u. Graber'B  Alłgem^  EncyUop,  sec  ii,  xxxi, 
58  sq. 

Ibn-Chajlm,  AARoy,  a  Jewish  commentator,  was 
bom  at  Fez,  Africa,  about  1570.  But  little  is  known  of 
his  personal  history.  His  works  are,  a  Commentary  on 
Joshua  (Yenice,  1608-9),  from  which  a  selection  was 
madę  by  Frankfurter  (q.  y.)  in  his  great  Rabbinic  Bi- 
bie : — a  commentary  on  Sifra  (tradition  of  Lerilicus), 
published  under  the  titłe  of  The  Obhiian  of  Aaron 
(Yenice,  1609-11)  i^The  Rules  of  Aaron,  a  treatise  on 
K  Ishmad's  (q.  v.)  ttiirteen  rules  for  interpreting  the 

O.-T.  Scriptures  (Ten.  1609,  Dres.  1712) Kitto,  BibL 

Cydop,  ii,  352. 

Ibn-Danan,  Saadia  ben-Maimon,  a  Jewish  writer 
of  some  distinction,  was  Rabbi  to  the  congregation  at 
Granada  prcyioos  to  the  cession  of  this  country  by  the 
Moors  to  Ferdinand  and  Isabella,  and  the  expatriation 
of  the  Jews.  He  was  bom  in  the  first  half  of  the  15th 
century,  and  flourished  at  Granada  from  1460  to  1502. 
Ho  was  especialły  giyen  to  the  study  of  the  Talmud 
and  history,  and  as  a  result  of  the  former  we  haye  sey- 
eral  works  on  the  interpretation  of  the  O.-T.  Scriptures, 
and  the  eluddation  of  the  łanguage  of  the  originaL  His 
exegetical  works  are,  a  Commentary  on  Isaiah  liii,  18 
(MSw  Michael,  412),  in  which  he  takes  ground  against 
Ibn-Caspi  (q.  v.)  -.—a  Hebrtto  Lexicon  (written  in  Ar- 
abie). This  work,  which  he  is  thought  to  haye  com- 
pleted  in  1468,  also  remains  only  in  MS.  form,  but  an 
extract  from  it  has  been  printed  by  Pinsker  in  his  Li- 
kute  Kajdmonioth  (Menna,  1860),  p.  74.  His  historical 
worlu  are,  A  ^skort  History  of  the  Jetcs  to  the  Days  of 
Moses  Maimonides  (^I^H  *1X&),  which  he  originałły  in- 
tended  for  his  own  pupiłs,  of  whom  hc  seems  to  haye 
had  a  number.  See  Griltz,  Geschichte  d.  Juden,  yiii,  345 
sq. ;  Eddmann,  Chemda  Genusa,  lutrocL  p.  xyii  są.,  and 
Text,  p.  13  sq. ;  Kitto,  Biłd,  Cydop.  ii,  352.     (J.  H.  W.) 

Ibn-Dand.    See  Chajug. 

Ibn-DJanah.    See  Ibn-Ganach. 

Ibne^ah  (Heb.  Yiłmeyah%  ^^33%  Jehorah  will 
build  liim  up ;  Sept.  'U(5vad\  a  son  of  Jeroham,  who, 
with  other  Benjamites,  retumed  to  Jerusałem  after  tho 
CaptiWty  (1  Chroń,  ix,  8).     B.C.  536. 

Ibn-Esra.    See  Aben-Ezra. 

Ibn-Ganaoh,  Abulwaud  MER\yAN  or  Joxah 


IBNGANACH 


468 


IBN-GIATH 


Djanah  (in  Hebraw  called  Jonah\  <me  of  the  most 
disUnguished  Jewiah  scholara  of  the  Middle  Ages,  was 
bora  at  Cordova  about  995.    WhUe  yet  a  boy  he  erinced 
his  fondness  for  Hebrew  by  writlng  yerses  in  that  lan- 
guage,  but  as  he  continued  in  his  scudies  he  determined 
to  dcYOte  his  wbole  life  to  the  advancenient  of  the  He- 
brew as  a  philological  study,  and  even  abandoned  the 
pnictice  of  mediciiie,  which  he  had  chosen  as  his  pro- 
fession  after  his  removal  to  Saragossa  in  1015,  whither 
he  had  been  forced  by  the  persecutions  which  the  Jews 
of  Cordoya  sufiered  at  the  hand  of  Al-Mostain  Sulei- 
man  sinco  his  occupation  of  that  place  in  1018.     He 
soon  acquired  a  proficiency  which  even  in  our  day  has 
not  been  excelled,  and  he  descnres  greater  praise  than 
any  other  Jewish  scholar  on  accoimt  of  the  impolse  he 
gave  both  to  his  contemporaries  and  to  his  immediate 
Buccessors  (among  them  the  two  Kimchis  and  Aben- 
Ezra),  who  have  freąuently  acknowledged  their  obliga- 
tions  to  him.     The  thorough  manner  in  which  he  eon- 
ducted  his  inyestigations  enabled  him  to  accomplish 
much  morę  than  bis  illustrious  predeceaaor  Chajug  (q. 
T.),  and  by  his  criticism  of  Chajug's  works,  in  which  he 
readily  acknowledged  all  that  was  meritorious,  he  fre- 
ąuently encountered  the  ardent  followers  of  that  great 
master,  and  became  entangled  in  a  number  of  controver- 
fiies,  which  finally  resulted  bencficially  to  Hebrew  phi- 
lology.    He  died  about  1050.     His  first  great  work  in 
liuguiBtics  is  his  KUab  d^Tankieh  ("book  of  inquiry"), 
wiitten  in  Arabie  (the  native  tongue  in  his  day  of  that 
part  of  Spain),  consisting  of  two  great  parts,  the  first, 
Kitab  el-Luma'  ("book  of  variegated  fields"),  treating 
at  leugth  of  Hebrew  grammar,  and  the  second,  Kitab 
el-Azul  ("  book  of  roots"),  a  Hebrew  Dictionary,  which 
was  afterwards  translated  into  Hebrew  by  seyeral  Jew- 
ish  scholars,  but  of  which  only  the  translations  madę 
by  Ibn-Parchon  and  by  Ibn-Tibbon  are  presenred.    The 
original  is  at  Oxford  (MS.  Ure,  No.  456,  457),  and  was 
estensirely  used  by  Gesenius  in  his  Theaaurus,    Speci- 
mens  of  it  which  (iesenius  gave  in  his  Diet.  ofihe  Jleb. 
Lang.  were  translated  by  Dr.  Robinson,  and  published 
in  the  Amer,  Bib.  Reposil^ry,  1888.     That  pirt  of  this 
work  which  refers  to  Hebrew  graromar  was  published 
by  Kirchheim  (Frankf.  a."M.  1856, 8vo).     «  This  gigan- 
tic  work  is  the  most  important  philological  production 
in  Jewish  literaturę  of  the  Middle  Agcs.    The  mas- 
tery  of  the  science  of  the  Hebrew  language  in  all  its 
delicate  points  which  Ibn-Ganach  therein  displays,  the 
lucid  manner  in  which  he  explains  every  grammatical 
difficulty,  and  the  sound  exegetical  rules  which  he 
therein  propounds,  haye  few  parallels  up  to  the  present 
day.     He  was  not  only  the  creator  of  the  Hebrew  syn- 
tax,  but  almost  brought  it  to  perfection.    He  was  the 
.first  who  pointed  out  the  ellipees  and  the  transposition 
of  letters,  words,  and  yerses  in  the  Hebrew  Bibie,  and 
explained  in  a  simple  and  natural  manner  morę  than 
two  hundred  obscure  passages,  which  had  up  to  his 
Łime  greatly  perplexcd  all  intcrpreters,  by  showing  that 
the  sacred  writers  used  abnormalfor  normal  expre8sions 
(compare  Map^irt  ^DD,  eh.  xxyiii;  Aben-EzTa's  Com- 
mentary  on  Daniel  i,  1,  and  Plins  ^fiD,  ed.  Lippmann, 
p.  72,  notę).     Though  his  faith  in  the  inspiration  of  the 
Hebrew  Ścripturcs  w^as  absolute,  yet  he  maintaincd 
that,  being  addressed  to  men,  they  are  subject  to  the 
laws  of  language,  and  hence  urged  that  the  abnormal 
expressioiu  and  fonns  in  the  Bibie  are  not  to  be  ascribed 
to  the  ignorance  of  transcribers  and  punctuators,  nor  to 
wilful  comiption,  but  are  owing  to  the  fact  that  the  sa- 
cred wiiters,  being  human,  paid  the  tńbute  of  human- 
ity."     But  also  m  metaphysics  Ibn-Ganach  was  no 
tyro,  and  he  spcaks  of  Flato  and  Aństotle  like  one  who 
had  studied  them  diligently.     He  wrote  a  work  on 
logie,  Aristotelian  in  pńnciple,  and  strenuously  opposed 
the  cfforts  of  his  contemporaries,  especially  Ibn-Gebirol, 
in  their  metaphysical  inyestigations  on  the  relation  of 
God  to  the  world,  holding  that  these  inquiries  only  en- 
dangered  the  bclicf  in  the  Scriptures.     See  Munk,  AV 
tioeturA,  M.  IbnrDJanah  (Paris,  1851) ;  Grtttz,  Getcfu 


d.  Jtufen,Ti,  25  sq.,  205  8q.;  FUzst,  ffebr,  Dićt,  Intnd. 
p.xxxsq.;  yiiXto,Cyi^.ifJiibLIJt.\^ZfAwi^\  Fttni, 
Bilbiioth.Jud.\M^ 

Ibn-Oobirol  or  Gabirol,  Salomon  bhu-Jehu- 
DAH,  a  yery  distinguished  Jewish  phikwopher,  oommeD- 
tator,  and  grammarian,  ti^  well  »^  bymnologist,  wasbon 
at  Malaga,  in  Spain,  about  1021.    When  only  nineteoi 
years  of  age  he  eyinced  his  great  skill  as  a  p(>(et,and  bii 
thorough  acqttaintance  with  Hebrew  grammar  by  writ> 
ing  a  grammar  of  the  Hebrew  language  in  Hebiew 
yerse.     It  has  neyer  been  printed  entire,  but  parts  of  it 
haye  been  published  by  Parchon  in  his  Btbrew  Lmam 
(Paris,  1844),  and  by  Leop.  Dukes^  in  his  Skire  Skdom 
(Haonoy.  1858).    About  1045  Ibn-Gebirol  published  hii 
first  philosophical  work,  which  was  translated  by  Ifan- 
Tibbon  into  Hebiew,  entitled  CB|n  ni^p  'j^ptn  (pub- 
lished in  1550  and  oflen).    He  propounds  in  this  waric 
"  a  peculiijr  theory  of  the  human  temperament  and  pas- 
sions,  enumerates  twenty  propensitics  coiTeq)ODdiDg  to 
the  four  dispositions  mulUplied  by  the  fiye  senses,  and 
shows  how  the  leaning  of  the  soul  to  the  one  side  mar 
be  brought  to  the  morał  equipoi8e  by  obsenring  the 
dedarations  of  Scripture,  and  ethical  sayuigs  of  the 
Talmud,  which  he  largely  quotes,  and  which  he  inter- 
sperses  with  the  chief  sayings  of '  the  diyine*  Socrates, 
his  pupil  Plato,  Aristotle,  the  Arabie  philosophers,  and 
especially  with  the  maxims  of  a  Jewish  morał  phikiM- 
pher  called  Chefez  Al-Kute,  who  is  the  author  of  an  A^ 
abic  paraphrase  of  the  P&alms  in  rhyme  (Steinschnei- 
der,  Jewish  Literaturę  [Lond.  1857],  p.  101)."    But  as 
this  work  contained  also  personal  aUusiona  to  some  lesd- 
ing  men  of  Saragossa,  he  was  expatriated  in  1046.    Af* 
ter  traydling  from  one  place  to  another,  he  finally  found 
a  protector  in  the  celebrated  Samuel  Ha-Kagid,  a  Jew 
also,  thcn  prime  minister  of  Spain,  and  he  was  enabled 
to  continue  his  philosophical  studies,  as  the  resnlt  of 
which  he  produced  Tlit  Fotmiain  of  Lifty  his  grcstitst 
work.     Fragments  of  a  Hebrew  tninslation  and  an  en- 
tire Latin  yersion  of  it  were  published  by  Munk  in  bis 
Melangea  de  philosopkie  Juire  et  A  rabę  (I^uis,  18ó7-69> 
He  died  in  1070.    The  influence  which  Ibn^Sebinl  ez- 
erted  on  Arabian  and  Jewish  philosophy  cannot  be  too 
highly  cstimated.    He  certainly  deseryes  to  be  caDed 
*^  the  Jewish  Plato,"  u  Griits  chooses  to  name  him;  boi 
the  assertion  that  ho  was  the  Jirtt  philosopher  of  tbe 
Middle  Ages,  and  that  his  philosophical  treatiscs  wen 
used  by  the  scholastic  philosophers,  is  an  crror,  as 
Lewis  {f/iMory  of  Phildophif,  ii,  63)  fully  prorcs,  al- 
though  Munk,  and  ader  him  Griitz,  fell  into  the  same 
mistake,  as  also  Ginsburg,  the  writcr  of  the  article  <m 
Ibn-Gebirol  in  Kitto  (BibL  Cydop.  ii,  856).    From  fit- 
quent  quotation8  in  Aben-£zra*8  commentaries,  it  seems 
that  Ibn-Gebirol  must  also  have  writtcn  some  €xp08i- 
tions  of  the  Old-Test.  Scriptures,  though  nonę  snch  are 
known  to  us  at  present  existing.     Ibn-Gebirol  also  had 
a  natural  talent  for  yerse-making.     One  of  his  hymns, 
entitled  The  royal  Diadem,  **  a  bcautiful  and  patbetic 
poetical  composition  of  profound  philosophical  send- 
ments  and  great  deyotion,  forms  an  important  pait  of 
the  diyine  seryice  on  the  eyening  preceding  tbe  great 
Day  of  Atonemcnt  with  the  devout  Jews  to  the  present 
day."     See  GrUtz,  Geschichte  d,  Juden,  yi,  81  sq. ;  Sachs, 
Reliffióse  Poesie  d.  Juden  t.  Spanien  (BerL  1845),  p.  8  są., 
218,  etc.;  Zunz,  Synagogah  Poesie  der  JdittdaUert,  p. 
222 ;  Furst,  Biblioth,  Jud.  i,  820  8q. 

Ibn-Giath,  Isaac  bcx-Jehudah,  a  Jewifh  Babbl 
of  a  yery  distinguished  family  who  resided  in  Lucena,  not 
far  from  Cordoya,  was  bom  about  1080.  He  was  a  Teiy 
able  philosopher  and  h}nnnologist,  and  well  conycnant 
with  the  Talmud.  He  is  said  to  haye  written  a  C<m- 
tnentary  on  Eceksiaetesy  which  has  not  as  yet  come  to 
light«  From  the  iVequent  quotations  madę  from  it  bv 
the  best  interpreters  and  lexicographeT8,  it  appean  that 
it  contained  important  contributions  to  the  oritical  espo- 
Słtion  of  this  difiicult  book.  From  the  references  to  his 
writings  madę  by  Aben-Ezra  (comp.  comment  on  Dent. 
X,  7 ;  Psa.  czlyii,  3),  Kimchi  (Lesdoon,  mider  aitides 


IBN-GIKATILLA 


459 


IBN-LATIF 


p^nO,  ru9,  ni39,  *Vyo,  yna,  'ISt),  and  Solomon  ben- 
Melech  (oomment  on  2  Sam.  xxii,  86),  it  is  eyident  that 
Ibn-GUŁh  must  have  ako  wńtten  some  otber  exegetic- 
al  and  grammatical  tieatiaes,  and  that  he  mateiially 
oontributed  to  the  derelopnoent  of  Biblical  exegesiB. 
Kia  deyotional  poetry,  which  ia  rather  infeiior  to  Ibn- 
Gebliora  (q.  v.)i  ia  uwd  in  the  Jewish  senrice  to  the 
preaent  day.  He  died  in  1089.  See  Zona,  Synagogcde 
PoeBie<LAiitteiaUtr»,p.225aą,\  Wint,  BibUotk,  Jud,  i, 
832  8q.;  Stuchs,  J)ie  MijfioMe  Poeńe  d,  Judea  tn  Spamok 
(Berlin,  18łd),  p.  46,  etc,  255,  etc;  Landshut,  ArKadt 
Ahoda  (Beri.  1857),  faMaculuB  i,  111,  etc;  Griltz,  G€$ch. 
(fer^aufasvi,74. 
Ibn-Ołkatilla.    See  Joseph  Ibn-Ohiouitilła. 

Ibni^Jah  (Heb.  Tilmyah',  M;^Y^  '*  ^'  ^^n^A>' 
Sept.  'Ic^ayaat),  the  father  of  Reuel,  which  latter  was 
the  grandiather  of  the  Meshnllam,  another  Benjamite, 
who  settled  in  Jerusalem  after  the  return  from  Baby- 
lon  (1  Chroń,  ix,  8).    RC.  long  antę  536. 

Ibn- Jachja,  Da^id,  a  Jewish  scholar,  was  bom 
abouŁ  1440.  He  was  a  Rabbi  at  Lisbon,  in  Portugal, 
and  had  gained  great  celebrity  by  his  scholarship  when 
he  waa  soddenly  accused  of  giving  aid  to  the  Spanish 
Karanea  (q.  v.),  who^  having  witnessed  the  peadiar 
piactices  of  the  Spanish  disciples  of  Christ,  preferred  to 
retum  to  the  faith  of  their  fathers.  Ibn-Jachja  was 
oondemned  to  death,  and  barely  escaped  the  punish- 
ment  by  a  fltght  to  Naples.  Later,  he  remoyed  to  Con- 
stantinople,  and  taught  the  sciencea.  He  died  in  1504. 
His  works  are,  LesAan  Limmodim,  a  large  Hebrew  gram- 
mar;  and  Skekel  I/akhodesh,  on  the  metric  and  poetical 
laws  of  the  new  Hebrew  dialect.  See  Carmoly,  Die 
Jachjidaif  p.  17 ;  GriŁtz,  Gesch.  der  Juden,  ix,  8 ;  Ether- 
idge,  Inłrod.  to  Neb,  LiL  p.  462;  Fttrst,  BUfiioth.  Jud  ii, 
2sq. 

Ibn-Jachja,  Oedalja,  a  Jewish  histońan,  was 
born  at  Imola  about  1515.  He  deserres  mcntion  here 
on  account  of  his  work  ShdUhdeth  HakkabalcL,  or  Cham 
of  Tradiłum  (Zolkiew,  1804).  It  is  a  history  of  the 
Jews,  and  is  divided  into  thiee  part9,  of  which  part  fint 
ooly  is  the  Skalskekthj  or  liteiary  chronicie  of  rabbinism ; 
the  other  parta  treat  not  only  of  histoiy  proper,  but  in- 
dude  also  natura!  history,  pneumatology,  and  economicsL 
He  died  about  1587.— Carmoly,  Die  Jachjidm,  p.  38  sq. ; 
Gri&tz,  GeMch,  der  Juden,  ix,  435;  Etheridge,  JtUrod,  to 
Heb,  Lit,  p.  452 ;  FUrst,  BibUoth.  Jud,  ii,  3. 

Ibn-Jachja,  Joaeph  b.-David,  a  distingnished 
Jewish  oommentator,  was  bom  at  Florence  in  1494.  His 
anceston  .were  citizens  of  Spain,  but  had  fied  from  the 
Iberian  Peninsula  on  account  of  the  religious  penecu- 
tions  which  the  Jews  had  to  suffer,  especially  under 
John  II.  His  education  he  received  first  at  Yerona, 
then  at  Imola  and  Padua,  and  he  setded  at  Imola.  He 
died,  exhausted  by  exce88ive  studies,  in  1539.  His 
works  are,  commentaries  on  the  Song  of  Songs,  Ruth, 
Lamentaiions,  KcdettoMte*,  and  Etther;  Psalm$f  ProV' 
erłm,  and  Daniel  (tnuisL  into  Latin  by  Constantin  TEm- 
pereur  [Amsterdam,  1633],  with  the  Hebrew  text  and  a 
refntation  of  aiiti-Christian  passages).  A  special  fea- 
ture  of  thesc  commentaries,  which  aie  aU  inserted  in 
Frankfurter*s  Kabbinical  Bibie,  is  the  midrashic  lorę 
contained  in  them,  which  is  yaluable  to  the  historico- 
cricical  exGgetist.  Ibn-Jachja  wrote  also  Torah,  or 
**  The  Law  of  LighT  (Bologna,  1538),  a  very  raluable 
work  on  the  theology  of  Judaism,  in  which' he  rcjects 
the  introduction  of  philoeophy  in  the  consideration  of 
reiigiooa  topics.  See  Grtttz,  (j«cA.  der  Juden,  ix,  285 ; 
Etheridge,  JniroŁ  to  Heb.  Lii,  p.  452 ;  Jost,  IsraelitiMche 
A  tmalenj  ii,  393  sq. ;  Fjsch  u.  Gruber's  A  Ogem.  Encykhp, 
sec  ii,  xxxi,  81  sq.;  Kitto,  Cydop.  ofBibL  Zt^  ii,  356 ; 
FUiat,  BiblioiA,  Jud,  ii,  4. 

Ibn-Jaiah,  Baritoh,  a  Jewish  scholar,  flouiished 
at  CordoTa,  in  Spain,  in  the  15th  century.  He  wrote 
commentańes  on  the  Song  of  Songs  (The  bleaaed  Foun- 
taany  etCy  Constantinople,  1576),  and  on  Eodesiastea  and 


Job  (The  ileased  Fountaią  ofJob  and  Ecderiasiei,  Con- 
stantinople, 1576).  ^  He  generally  gires  the  literał  ex- 
planation  of  eveiy  passage  aocording  to  the  context, 
and  tńes  to  solve  the  gmmroatical  difficulties  of  the 
text."— Kitto,  Cydop,  ofBibL  LiUrature,  ii,  357 ;  FUist, 
iriUto^Judii,12. 
Ibn-Kaator.    See  Itzchaki. 

Ibn-Korelah,  Jehudah,  one  of  the  earliest  Jewish 
lexicogTaphers,  fiourished  in  the  latter  half  of  the  9th 
century  at  Tuhart  or  Tahort,  in  Africa,  and  was  one  of 
the  flrat  who  wrote  on  comparative  philology.  He  was 
thoroughly  conrersant  not  only  with  the  Berber  tongue, 
but  also  with  the  three  Shemitic  languages;  he  had 
carefuUy  studied  the  traditions  of  the  Jews  and  the  Mo- 
hammedans,  and  was  eminently  qualified  to  write  on  the 
Hebrew  language.  and  introduce  frequent  comparisons 
with  the  other  Shemitic  tongues.  His  works  are, 
';i'^|iK,  a  HArew  Lexicon  in  alphabetical  order,  but  with 
that  pecoliar  arrangement  which  all  works  of  this  clasa 
were  subject  to  at  that  time,  vix.  each  gronp  of  words 
belonging  to  a  letter  was  acoompanied  by  introductions, 
one  on  those  words  which  have  only  the  letter  in  ąuestion 
for  a  radical  theme,  and  another  on  the  changes  of  that 
letter.  The  work  has  been  lost,  but  its  existence  is  at- 
tested  by  the  fact  that  not  only  the  author  himself  re- 
fers  to  it  in  another  of  his  works,  but  also  the  great 
Bcholars  of  his  and  subseąuent  periods; — Riadlet  (Heb. 
nbM0*1),  or  a  letter  addresMd  to  his  Jewish  brethren  at 
Fez,  in  which  he  exhorts  them  to  continue  the  study  of 
the  Aramaic  Targum,  and  of  the  Aramaic  as  well  ns  the 
Shemitic  languages,  without  a  thorough  knowledge  of 
which  the  Old-Test.  Scriptures  can  only  be  imperfectiy 
comprehended.  After  the  introduction  he  divided  the 
work  into  three  parts.  In  Part  I  he  arranged  in  alpha- 
betic  order  all  difficolt  Hebrew  words  that  could  only 
be  properly  understood  from  the  Chaldee  paraphrases 
of  Onkebs  and  Jonathan  ben-UzieL  Psrt  II  contained 
an  exphmation  of  BibUcal  Hebrew  words  found  also  in 
the  Mishna  and  the  Talmud.  In  Part  III  he  instituted 
a  compańscn  with  the  Arabie  of  all  analogous  Hebrew 
roots,  forms  of  expre8Bions,  prefixes  and  sufBxe8,  etc. 
This  work  is  certainly  a  very  important  contribution  to 
Hebrew  philology,  and  it  is  only  to  be  regretted  that 
we  do  not  poesess  it  completely,  sińce  the  first  part 
breaks  up  with  letter  3,  and  does  not  begin  again  till 
letter  n,  tnm  which  Ftlrst  (Hdfr.  Diet.  vol.  xxiii)  in- 
fers  that  the  author  intended  it  only  as  a  continuation 
of  his  (lost)  Hebrew  Dictionary.  It  has  lately  been  pub- 
lished  in  the  Arabie  under  the  title  Epistoła  de  ttudn 
Targum  utilitate  et  de  lingua  ChaldaiccBy  MisTiicte,  Tal' 
mudicoBf  ArabicKt,  rocabulorum  item  noimullorum  bar^ 
baricorum  convementia  cum  Hebraa ;  ediderunt  J.  J.  L. 
Barg^s  et  D.  R  Goldberg  (Paris,  1857).  The  introduc- 
tion, with  specimens  from  the  work,  have  been  publish- 
ed  in  Arabie,  with  a  G^man  translation  hy  Schnurrer, 
in  Eichhora*8  AUgem,  Bibliołhek  d.  BiUisch.  Literatur 
(Lpz.  1790),  iii,  951  8q.;  the  introduction  has  also  been 
published  with  a  German  translation  by  Wetstein  in 
the  Literaturhlatt  des  Orients  (1845),  iii,  2 ;  and  extnict8 
are  given  by  Ewald  and  Dukes,  Beitrage  zur  Geschichte 
d,  Aełtesten  Auslegung  und  Spracherktdrung  d,  A.  Test, 
(Stuttgart,  1844),  i,  1 16-23 ;  ii,  1 17, 1 18.  He  wrote  also 
p^'np^  ^&C,  a  Hebrew  grammar,  which  Aben-Ezra 
nsed  in  the  preparation  of  his  own  work.  See,  besides 
the  works  already  referred  to,  Grtttz,  Gesch,  d,  Juden^  v, 
293 ;  Kitto,  Cydop,  Biblical  Lit,  ii,  357 ;  FUrst,  BUtUołh, 
Jud,  ii,  203. 

Ibn-Łatłf  or  AUatif,  Isaac  ben-Abrah^\3i,  a  Jew- 
ish philosopher,  was  bom  in  Southern  Spain  about  1270. 
But  litde  is  known  of  his  personal  history.  Ho  devoted 
much  of  his  time  to  the  study  of  the  Cabala,  and  be- 
came  one  of  its  most  celebrated  exponent8  in  Spain. 
With  greater  correctness  than  Cabalists  who  preoiKled 
him,  he  advocated  the  doctrine  that  the  worlds  of  spirit 
and  of  matter  are  cloeely  allied,  and  Ukewise  God  and 


IBN-LIBRAT 


460 


IBZAN 


his  creation.    The  divine  is  in  everything,  and  every- 
thing  in  the  divine.     He  al80  believed  in  the  power  of 
prayer,  but  that  man,  in  order  to  be  aocepted  of  God, 
must  approach  at  least  perfection;  hence  the  most  per- 
fcct  of  men,  the  propheto,  interceded  by  prayer  for  the 
people.     The  development  of  the  8elf-revelation  of  the 
diyinity  in  the  worid,  of  the  spirits,  spheres,  and  bod- 
ies,  Ibn-Latif  esplains  by  mathematical  formulas.    He 
died  about  1290.    Of  his  worka,  which  are  ąuitc  numej- 
oufl,  the  foUowing  have  been  printed :  Jggereth  hat-To- 
skubak,  replies  to  the  ąuestions  of  Judah  ben-Naaaon 
(Prague,  1839,  8vo) : — a  Hcb.  Commentary  on  Ecdesir 
astes  (Constantinople,  s.  a.  8vo).     See  Gratz,  Getchichte 
d.  Juden,  vii,  220 ;  Fllrst,  BUdioik  Judaica,  ii,  224 ;  Car- 
moly,  Revue  Orientcde^  i,  61  są. 
Ibn-Łibrat.    See  Du2f  ash. 
Ibn-8aktar.    See  Itzchakl 
Ibn-Sargado,  Aaron,  abo  called  Aaron  Ha- 
Ck>HEN  BEN-JosEPH,  a  Jewish  8chohir,floiiri8hed  in  Bag- 
dad towards  the  middle  of  the  lOth  century.     He  was  a 
wealthy  merchant,  but  very  fond  of  study,  and,  taking 
groimd  against  Saadia  (q.  v.),  for  whoee  deposition  from 
the  ^  Gaonate"  he  expended  large  sums  of  money,  short- 
ly  after  Saadia'8  deceaae  he  was  elected  Gaon  (spińtual 
head)  of  the  academy  at  Pumbadita  (943),  and  by  his 
aseal  for  leaming  and  his  great  wealth  greatly  furthered 
the  interests  of  this  academy  at  the  expen8e  of  the  Su- 
ran  school,  over  which  Saadia  had  presided.     Ibn-Sar- 
gado,  during  the  eighteen  years  of  his  presidency,  de- 
voted  himself  not  only  to  the  expo8ition  of  the  O.-Test 
Scriptures,  but  also  ąuite  extensively  to  the  study  of 
philosophy  (comp.  Munk,  Guide  des  egares^  i,  462).    He 
wrote  a  philosophical  work  and  a  Commentary  on  the 
PenUUeuchy  but  they  are  not  as  yet  known  to  us.    From 
the  fragments  of  the  latter  preserved  by  Aben-Ezra 
(Gen.  xviii,  28;  xxxiv,  80;  xlix,  6, 7;  Exod.  x,  12 ;  Lcv. 
xviii,  6),  we  see  that,  though  abiding  by  the  traditional 
explauation  of  the  Hebrew  Scriptures,  Ibn-Sargado  was 
by  no  means  a  slayish  follower  of  ancient  opinions.    See 
Gratz,  GescL  der  Juden,  v,  335  sq. ;  Kitto,  Cyclop,  Bib, 
I4Ł  ii,  357;  FUrst,  BihUoth,  Jud.  iii,  246;  Geiger,  JU- 
duche  Zettschri/Ł/Ur  Wissenscha/t  und  Leben  (1862),  p. 
297 ;  Zunz,  in  Geiger'8  ZeiUchrift,  vol.  iv  (Stuttg.  1889), 
p.  389,  etc 
Ibn-Sanik.    See  Menachbm. 
Ibn-Shoeib,  Joei^  a  Jewish  commentator,  fkiur^ 
ished  at  Tudela  in  the  latter  half  of  the  15th  century. 
But  little  is  known  of  his  personal  history.    His  works 
show  him  to  have  been  a  man  of  consideiable  cnltuie 
and  great  libeiality  of  mind.    He  wrote  commentaries 
on  the  Pentateuch,  entided  The  Hohcausł  of  Sahbath 
(VeiL  1577) ;  on  the  Psalms,  entitled  Fear/ul  in  Praises 
(Salonaica,  1568-69) ;  on  the  Song  of  Songs,  entitled  A 
britf  Erpotiiion  (Sabionetta,  1658);  and  an  Exposition 
of  Lamentations  (Venice,  1589).    In  his  commentary  on 
the  Psalms  he  maintained  that  pious  Gentiles  would 
have  a  share  in  the  worM  to  come,  which,  when  we  con- 
sider  the  severe  persecutions  they  inflicted  at  this  time 
on  the  Jews,  is  by  no  means  a  smali  concession  on  the 
part  of  ron-Shoeib.— Kitto,  Cyclop.  ofBib.  Lit.  ii,  358; 
Zunz,  Zur  Geacfu  u.  Literatur  (Beri.  1845),  p.  884.     (J. 
H.W.) 

Ibn-Sitta  (»a''t  ',a),  a  distingubhed  Jew,  flour- 
ished  at  Irak  towards  the  dose  of  the  9th  century.  He 
wiote  a  commentary  on  the  Scriptures,  of  which  frag^ 
ments  only  aie  left.  Such  we  find  in  Aben-Ezra  (on 
Exod.  xxi,  24,  35;  xxii,  28).  Saadia  Gaon  thought 
Ibn-SitU  of  sufficient  importance  to  refute  his  interpre- 
tations,  while  Aben-Ezra  exerci8es  his  withering  sarcasm 
upon  him.— Kitto,  Cydop,  ofBibL  Lit,  ii,  353;  Pinsker, 
Likhtte  Kadmoniotk  (Yienna,  1860),  p.  43 ;  FUrst,  Gesch, 
d.  Karaerthums  (Lpz.  1862),  p.  100, 178. 

Ibn-Thofeil,  an  Arabian  philoeopher  who  flour- 
ished  in  the  12th  century,  wrote  a  work  in  which  the 
ezistenoe  of  God  is  proyed  in  so  able  a  manner  that  the 


aiguments  temain  unrefuted  to  this  day.  It  was  tnns- 
lated  into  Pereian,  Hebrew,  and  Latin.  The  Ust-nomed, 
by  Ed.  Pococke,  was  entitled  PkUosoptuu  autodidaetut, 
sive  ąństola  Abi  Jaafor  Ebn-TopkaU  de  Hai  Ebn-Yok' 
dham  (Oxf.  1671  and  1700,  4to;  and  also  in  EtigUsh  by 
S.  Ockley,  Lond.  1708, 1731, 8vo,  and  other  modem  Iss- 
guages). — ^Hoefer,  Kouv,  Biog.  Gin,  xxv,  752. 

Ibn-Tibbon,  Jehndah  ben -Sani,  a  Jewidi 
scholar  of  Spanish  desoent,  waa  bom  at  Lunel,  Fnnee, 
about  1120.  He  was  educated  a  physician,  but  bis  ardeot 
love  for  the  study  of  Hebrew  led  him  to  abandon  the 
practice  of  his  profession,  and  he  devoted  himself  main- 
ly  to  the  translation  into  Hebrew  of  some  of  the  most 
yalnaUe  worka  of  able  Jews  written  in  Arabie.  He 
died  about  1190.  His  tranalations  are  The  Duiks  of 
the  Heart  of  Joseph  b.-Bechai,  the  Elhics  of  Ibn-Ge- 
birol,  the  Kutari  of  Judah  Ha-Levi,  the  Morał  Phi- 
losophy of  Saadia  Gaon,  and  the  grammatical  and  lexi- 
cographical  work  of  Ibn-Ganach  (q.  v.).  AU  his  trans- 
lations  bear  his  own  pedantic  character :  they  are  literał, 
and  therefore  dumsy,  and  we  can  hanily  see  why  he 
should  have  gained  the  sumame  ofprince  of  trandaton, 
unless  it  was  for  the  senrice  which  he  rendcred  by  pre- 
sentlng  the  Jews  translations  of  works  not  otherwise  ac- 
cesńhle  to  them.  He  is  also  said  to  have  written  a  woik 
on  the  purity  of  the  Hebrew  knguage  (nina  TO 
"pttjbn),  which  is  lost  See  Kitto,  Cydop.  Bibl,  Lit,  ii, 
358 ;  Steinschndder,  Catalogus  Libr.  I  febr,  m  BMiołheea 
Bodleiana  (coL  1874-76) ;  Grfitz,  Gesch,  d,  Juden^Yi,  241; 
FUrst,  Biblioth,  Jud,  iii,  401  sq. 

Ibn-Tlbbon,  Samuel,  son  of  the  preceding,  was 
bom  about  1160.  He  was  educated  by  his  father  both 
in  the  Hebrew  and  cognate  languagcs,  and  foUowed  him 
in  the  practice  of  medicine.  He  waa  wild  and  even 
reckless  in  his  youth,  but  finally  became  iutercstcd  in 
his  studies,  and  evinced  greater  skiU  as  a  translator  than 
his  father.  He  died  about  1230.  Besides  translating 
philosophical  works  both  of  Jewish  and  heathen  authon, 
among  whom  were  Aristotle  and  Alfarabi,  he  wrote  a 
commentary  on  Ecclesiastes  (nbnp  ©II^^B),  which  ex- 
ists  in  MS.  in  several  of  the  European  libnuics ;  and  a 
commentary  on  Gen.  i,  1-9,  entitled  d^^cn  "Jp^  *CX» 
(Presburg,  1837),  being  a  dissertation  on  the  creation.— 
Gratz  Gesch.  d.  Juden,  \-i,  242 ;  Kitto,  Cydop,  Bib.  UL 
ii,  358 ;  FUrat,  BiUioth,  Jud,  iii,  402  aq. 

Ibn-Tnmart,  Abdallah,  a  religious  enthusiast, 
flourished  in  the  second  half  of  the  12th  oentuiy  in 
Northern  Africa.  He  appeared  bcfore  the  rimple-mind- 
ed  hordes  of  Barbary,  and  preached  against  the  Suiinit- 
ical  doctrine  of  the  Mohammedan  orthodoxy  [see  Su5- 
nites],  and  the  literał  interpretation  of  the  ver9C8  of 
the  Koran,  and  the  Mohammedan  belief  that  God  feeb 
and  acta  like  man.  His  followers,  on  acoount  of  their 
belief  in  the  strict  unity  of  God  without  corporeal  ppp- 
resentation  (Tauchid)^  called  them8dve8  AłmoteatkidM^ 
or  Almohads.  Ibn-Tumart  they  recognised  as  Mahdiy 
or  the  God-sent  Imam  of  Islam.  Likc  Mohammed,  be 
went  forth  to  conąuer  by  the  sword  the  territories  of 
the  AlmoraWds,  and  his  doctrine  soon  found  followers 
thioughonfc  Korth-west  Africa.  See  Morajimeda^ 
(J.  H.W.) 

Ib'rł  (Heb.  Ibri\  -^naj,  an  JSberile  or  « Hebrew;' 
Sept  has  'Q/3^t  v.  r.  'A/iit),  the  last  named  of  "the 
sona  of  Merari  by  Jaaziah,"  i.  c,  apparently  a  descenil- 
ant  of  Levi  in  the  time  of  David  (1  Chroń,  xxiv,  27> 
B.a  1014. 

Ibnm  is  a  name  for  the  Jewish  ceiemony  of  the 
marriage  of  a  childless  wido%v  by  the  brother  of  the  de- 
ceased  husband.    See  Leviilvte  Law. 

Ib^san  (Heb.  Jbttan%  "iSąS?,  from  yM,  to  Aine, 
hence  iUustrious ;  but  acoord.  to  Geaoi.  perb.  ofHny^ 
grievouSy  from  the  Chald. ;  Sept,  *^(cap  v.  r.  'AjSai^ 
vdv ;  Joseph.  'A^^awrC,  Ant,  v,  7, 13),  the  tenth  "jndge 
of  larad"  (Judg.  xii,  &>10).    He  waa  of  Bethleheii^ 


ICARD 


461 


ICELAND 


protMbly  Łhe  Bethlebem  of  Zebalun  (so  Michaelis  and 
Uezel),  and  not  of  Judah  (as  Josephus  sars).  He  gov- 
cmed  «even  ycars,  RC.  1249-1243.  The  prosperity  of 
Ibzaa  is  marked  by  the  great  number  of  his  children 
(thirty  sona  and  thiity  daughten),  and  his  wealth  by 
their  maniages — ^for  they  were  all  mamed.  Sorae  haye 
held,  with  little  piobability,  that  Ibzan  was  the  same 
with  Boaz.— Kitto. 

loard,  Charles,  a  Fiench  Protestant  diyine,  was 
bom  at  SL  Hippolyte,  Langaedoc,  in  Febnuury,  1636. 
Me  attended  school  at  Anduze,  Orange,  and  Nlmes,  and 
ooncłuded  his  theologtcal  stadies  at  Geneva  from  16d5- 
58,  and  in  1659  went  to  Paris.  After  ordination  by  the 
proTindal  synod  of  Ay  he  was  appointed  pastor  of  La 
Nonrille,  where  he  remained  ontil  1668,  when  he  ao- 
cepted  a  pastoiship  at  Nlmes.  Under  the  influence  of 
the  peisecutions  which  heralded  the  approaching  zevo- 
cation  of  the  edict  of  Nantes,  the  Protestants,  at  the 
aoggertion  of  Oaude  Brousson,  formed  a  central  oom> 
miuee  for  the  protection  of  their  generał  interests,  and 
Icani  wss  chosen  to  represent  it  at  the  Synod  of  Lower 
Langaedoc,  aasembled  at  Uz&s  in  1632.  In  the  mean 
time,  the  popiUation  of  a  part  of  Yivarais  and  Lower 
langaedoc  haring  risen  in  arms  to  resist  the  persecn- 
tioD,  the  insurrection  was  extinguished  in  blood,  and 
the  members  of  the  central  committee,  accused  of  being 
the  instigators,  were  proceeded  against  with  the  utmost 
ae\'eritr.  Icard  succeedcd  in  reaching  Geneva,  and 
theoce  went  to  Neufchatel  for  greater  security.  While 
on  his  way,  at  Yyerdun,  he  leamed  that  he  had  becu 
condemned,  June  26, 1682,  as  contumacious,  to  die  on 
the  mck.  He  remained  ns  pastor  at  Neufchatel  until 
1688,  when  he  went  to  Bremen,  and  supplied  a  French 
cungregatlon  there.  Hedied  June9,1715,  Icard  wrote 
two  Sermons,  A  via  salutaire  aux  Egliaes  ri/ormees  de 
France  (Amst.  1685, 12mo),  cxhorting  the  Protestants 
not  to  give  way  under  persecution.  He  abo  edited  an 
edition  of  the  JnstUutioni  de  Ccdrw  (flrst  two  books, 
Bremen,  1696, 1697,  Ito ;  the  whole,  Bremen,  1718,  fol.) ; 
and  an  edltloa  of  the  Entreiteru  d'un  Psre  et  de  son  Fils 
fur  U  ChangemnU  de  Religion,  par  Josue  de  La  Place, 
See  Hossat,  Detail  abrigi  delaViede  Charles  Icard  (in 
Hut,  criLdela  RepubHcue  det  Lettres  (1717),  xiy,  283- 
301 ;  Haag,  La  France  ProUstante ;  Hoefer,  Nouv,  Biog, 
Geaeraie,  xxv,  768. 

Ice  (n^J^t  ke^rachj  so  called  from  its  smoothnea$f  Job 
vi,  16;  xxyiii,  29;  elsewhere  cold,  ^^frost,"  Gen.  xxxi, 
40;  Jer.  xxxyi,  30 ;  i.  e.  ice,  Job  xxxyii,  10 ;  but  ^crys- 
tat  in  Ezek.  i,  82 ;  or  nyp,  ho'raeh,  id.,  poet.  for  haU, 
F^  cxlyii,  17).  See  the  aboye  terms,  and  climate  un- 
der Palbstine, 

Iceland,  an  ialand  belonging  to  Denmarfc,  situated 
between  the  North  Atl&ntic  and  the  Arctic  Oceans,  dis- 
taat  130  miles  froir.  the  south-east  coast  of  Greenland, 
andabout  850  miles  west  of  Norway,  extending  between 
lat  633  24'  and  66°  88'  N.,  and  long.  13^  81'  and  24° 
The  area  is  abont  88,400  sąoaie  miles,  of  which  only 
15^  aie  cultiyated.  The  total  population  of  Iceland 
was,  according  to  the  censos  of  1860,  66,987  souls. 

Aa  tany  as  795  the  eastem  coast  of  Iceland  was  in- 
habited  by  some  Irish  monks,  but  it  did  not  receiye  a 
wtUed  popuhOion  until  860,  when  king  Harald  Har- 
iagr,  of  Korway,  afler  conqnering  the  other  kings,  madę 
himseif  sole  soyereign  of  the  country,  and  induced  large 
DdffibeiB  of  the  malcontents  to  emigrate  to  Iceland. 
Nearly  all  the  new-comers  wero  pagans,  and  thus  the 
Kpnblic  which  was  estahUshed  by  them  was  thorough- 
\j  pagan.  The  legisladon  of  Ulfliot  (about  927)  cre- 
ated  thd  Althing,  an  assembly.of  the  wisest  men  of  all 
diatrists,  which  met  annually  to  discuss  the  afTairs  of 
the  country,  and  to  giye  the  neceesaiy  lawa.  The  first 
Christian  missionary  amoug  the  Icelanders  was  Thor- 
raldr  Kodranason  (981-985),  with  the  same  YldfórU 
("who  has  madę  wide  joumeys"),  who  was  supported 
by  Frederick,  aocorJing  to  the  legend,  a  Saxon  bishop. 
With  g;eat  yigor  the  miasbnary  work  was  subseąuently 


continnea  by  king  Olaf  Tryggyaaon  of  Norway,  who  not 
only  tried  by  persuasion,  bribery,  and  intimidation  to 
gain  for  the  Christian  ridigion  aU  the  Icelanders  wh« 
came  to  Norway,  but  also  sent  missionarics  to  Ice- 
land, and  supported  their  labors  by  the  whole  influence 
which  he  could  commandL  The  first  to  go  was  the  Ice- 
lander  Stefnir  Thoi^gilsson  (996-997),  foUowed  by  the 
Saxon  priest  Dankhrand,  who,  after  many  adyentures, 
had  beoome  court  chaplain  of  the  king  (997-999) ;  two 
noble  Icelanders,  the  "  White  Gizur,"  and  Hjalti  Skegja- 
son,  succeeded  finally  in  cffecting  a  oompromise  with 
the  pagan  chief  functionary  of  the  island,  Thorgair  of 
Ljosayatu,  according  to  which  Christianity  was  madę 
the  State  religion  of  Iceland,  while  many  resenrationa 
were  madę  in  favor  of  paganism  (1000).  The  whole  peo- 
ple  were  then  baptized,  part  of  them  reluctantly,  yet  with* 
out  open  resistanoe.  A  few  years  later,  king  Olaf  Har- 
aldason  caused  the  last  remnants  of  paganism  to  be  ef^ 
foced  from  the  laws.  Some  traces,  howeyer,  of  the  for- 
mer  religion  remained  in  the  faith  and  usages  of  the 
Christian  Icelanders,  particularly  in  their  Church  con- 
stitution.  During  the  pagan  period  the  erection  and 
possession  of  a  tempie  had  been  a  priyate  aflTair;  aa 
there  was  no  separate  order  of  priests,  diyine  worship 
had  been  held  in  eyery  tempie  by  its  owner;  subse- 
quently,  when  the  political  constitution  of  the  island 
waa  regulated  (965),  a  limited  number  (thirty-nine)  of 
templea  obtained  a  political  importance,  and  eyery  Ice- 
lander  was  obliged  to  connect  himself  with  the  owner 
of  the  principal  tempie  as  his  subject,  and  to  pay  a  con- 
tribution  for  the  maintenance  of  the  tempie.  Priyate 
temples  were  maintatned  beside  the  public,  and  the  lat- 
ter  remained  likewise  the  priyate  property  of  the  chiefa. 
The  idea  of  chief  temples  ceased  with  the  introduc- 
tion  of  Christianity ;  but  erection,  dotation,  and  mainte- 
nance of  the  temples  remained  a  priyate  aifair.  The 
law  only  provided  that  the  erection  of  a  church  in- 
yolyed  the  duty  of  maintaining  it ;  and  the  clergy  could 
compel  the  dotation  of  a  churoh  by  delaying  its  conse- 
cration  until  dotation  was  proyided  for.  Otherwise  the 
administration  of  the  property  of  the  church  by  ita 
owner  was  yery  arbitrar}',  and  he  had  only  to  uke  caro 
of  the  maintenance  of  the  churoh  and  of  the  holding  of 
diyine  worship.  He  eithcr  could  take  orders  himself  or 
hire  another  priest.  In  the  former  case  the  priest  waa 
morę  of  a  peasant,  merohant,  or  a  judge  than  a  clergy- 
man ;  in  the  latter  he  was  financtally  dependent  upoń 
the  owner  of  the  tempie,  and,  likc  other  seryants,  obliged 
to  perform  domestic  or  militaiy  senrices.  lodand  re- 
ceiyed  its  own  and  natiye  bishop  in  1055,  having  up  to 
that  time  been  only  yiaited  by  missionary  bishops.  The 
bishop  enjoyed  the  beneflt  of  the  old  tempie  duties; 
otherwise  he  had  to  liye  out  of  his  own  meansi  Under 
the  second  bishop,  Gizur,  the  see  was  endowed,  and  per- 
manently  established  at  Skalahold ;  8ubsequently  (about 
1106)  a  second  see  was  established  at  Holar,  to  which 
waa  giyen  the  jurisdiction  of  the  northem  district,  while 
the  three  other  districts  remained  subject  to  the  bishop 
of  Skalahold,  The  bishops  wero  elected  by  the  people ; 
the  priests  by  the  o  wners  of  the  seyeral  churches.  Thus 
the  clergy  were  less  independent  than  in  other  countries, 
and  oonseąuently  less  powerfuL  Their  influence  some- 
what  increased  when  bishop  Gizur,  in  1097,  preyailed 
upon  the  National  Assembly  to  introduce  the  tithe,  and 
when  the  bishops  ThorUJur  Runolfson  and  Retill  Thor- 
steinson,  by  compiling  the  Churoh  laws,  gained  a  firm 
basis  (1128 :  it  was  pubUshed  in  1776  by  Grim  Job.  Thor- 
kelin,  under  the  title  Jus  ecdesiasticum  vetus,  sire  Thor^ 
laco-KetHHanum,  or  Kristmrettr  Atnn  gandiy.  Still  the 
condition  of  the  Icelandic  Church  continued  to  romain 
in  many  particulars  difTerent  from  that  of  other  chnroh- 
es.  Lay  patronage  was  recognised  to  its  fullest  extent; 
no  celibacy  separated  the  clergy  from  the  people ;  eyen 
the  bishops  wero  generally  married.  The  bishops,  though 
they  had  a  seat  in  the  National  Assembly,  had  no  sepa- 
rate ecdesiastical  jurisdiction;  and  marriage  and  other 
afiairs  wero  rogolated  contrary  to  Churoh  law. 


ICELAND 


462 


ICONIUM 


The  Chorch  of  loeland  was  at  flnt  subordinate  to  the 
archbishopric  of  Bremen  and  Hamburg ;  when  the  arch- 
Diahopńc  of  Lund  was  established  (1108),  Iceland  was 
transfenred  to  it;  ilnally,  it  was  Łransferred  to  the  new 
archbishopiic  of  Nidaroa.  About  the  middle  of  the  VJth 
centuiy  the  island  became  subject  to  the  crown  of  Nor- 
way,  and  was  conseąucntly  affected  by  the  war  between 
Church  and  State  which  took  place  in  that  country. 
This  chiefły  concemed  the  pationage  of  laymen,  and 
ended  with  the  adoption  of  a  new  Church  law  intro- 
duced  about  1297  by  bishop  AmL  (This  Church  law 
was  published  in  1777  by  Grim  Job.  Thorkelin,  under 
the  title  Jui  ecduiatticum  novum  twe  Amacammy  or 
Krittinnrettr  trm  nyi,) 

The  inner  condition  of  the  people  was  anything  but 
satisfactory,  as  immorality  and  other  yices  appear  to 
haye  prevailed  to  a  large  extent  among  the  laity  as 
well  as  among  the  clergy.  The  conyents  which  had 
arisen  sińce  the  12th  oentuiy  fully  participated  in  the 
generał  degeiieration.  £xtema]ly  alf  ciasses  of  the  peo- 
ple showed  a  strong  attachment  to  the  Church  of  Bome, 
and  three  natiyes  of  the  island  obtained  a  place  among 
the  saints  of  the  Church— Thorlakr,  Jon,  and  Gud- 
mnndr;  the  last  named,  however,  was  not  formally  can- 
onized. 

The  Reformadon  soon  found  a  number  of  adherenta; 
among  the  earliest  and  most  deyoted  was  Oddr  Gotts- 
chalksson,  the  author  of  the  first  translation  of  the  New 
Testament  into  Icelandic  (printed  at  Roeskilde,  1540). 
The  Danish  goyemment,  of  which  loeland  formed  a  de- 
pendency  sińce  the  union  of  Norway  with  Denmark 
(1897),  endearored  to  introduce  the  Reformation,  which 
in  1536  had  been  declared  to  be  the  religion  of  the  state 
by  the  Diet  of  Copenhagen,  by  foroe ;  but  the  bishops, 
especially  bishop  Arason  of  Holar,  madę  a  detormined, 
and  at  Icngth  an  armed  opposition,  which,  howcyer, 
finally  (1550)  ended  in  his  capture  and  execution.  This 
put  an  end  to  the  Church  of  Romę  in  loeland,  and  in 
the  next  year  (1551)  the  Reformation  was  fully  carried 
through. 

The  real  improyement  in  the  condition  of  the  Church 
was,  howcyer,  only  graduaL  Many  of  the  customs  of 
the  medtaeval  Church,  such  as  the  uae  of  the  Latin  lan- 
guage  at  diyine  seryice,  maintained  themselyes  for  a 
long  time ;  and  the  same  was  the  oase  with  the  igno- 
rance  and  the  immorality  of  the  clergy  and  the  people. 
But  gradually  these  defects  were  remedied  by  the  es- 
tablishment of  leamed  schools  in  connection  with  the 
two  cathedrals  (1552) ;  by  the  establishment  of  a  print- 
ing-press  at  Holar  by  the  exceUent  bishop  Gudbrandr 
Thorlakson  (1574) ;  and  in  particular  by  the  new  trans- 
lation of  the  Bibie  by  this  bishop,  a  seryice  that  coutrib- 
uted  largely  to  a  thorough  reform  of  the  Church,  which 
now  belongs  to  the  best-educated  portions  of  the  Prot- 
estant world. 

As  regards  the  present  constitution  of  the  Church  of 
Iceland,  it  resembles  in  ita  prindpal  features  that  of 
Denmark,  yet  not  without  preserying  soroe  of  its  own 
peculiaritie&  The  soyereign  is  the  chief  bishop  (summus 
fpiseopus)j  who  exercise8  his  authority  partly  through 
the  bishops,  partly  through  secular  officers.  The  bish- 
ops, in  the  clection  of  whom  the  people  take  part,  oocu- 
py  the  position  of  superintendents,  and  still  hav'e  an 
extended  jurisdiction.  At  the  close  of  the  18Łh  century 
the  see  of  SkaUhold  was  transfenred  to  Reykjayik,  and 
somewhat  later  (1825)  a  cathedral  was  established  at 
Langames,  near  Reykjayik.  The  episcopal  see  of  Ho- 
lar had  previou8ly  (in  1801)  been  abolished,  and  the 
whole  island  placed  tmder  one  bishop.  Next  to  the 
bishops  are  the  proyosts,  whose  office  was  in  the  Bfid- 
dle  Ages  chiefly  of  a  financial  naturę,  and  therefore 
aometimes  occupied  byla3rmen.  Since  the  Reformation 
(1678-1574)  the  dignity  has  been  wholly  of  an  ecclesi- 
astical  character,  and  includes  the  right  and  duty  of  su- 
perintending  large  districts.  On  the  whole,  there  are  19 
proyosts,  each  of  whom  is  placed  oycr  a  number  of  par- 
iahes.    The  pastors  were  at  first  appdnted  by  the  bish- 


ops, contniy  to  the  proyłsions  of  the  Danish  Chmcfa 
constitution,  but  sinoe  1568  they  haye  been  eiected,  in 
acoordance  therewith,  by  the  congregation,  under  tbe 
snperintendenoe  of  the  proyost.  To  the  royal  btilit 
was  reseryed  the  right  of  inyesting  the  pastor  ekct  with 
his  Office.  Subeequently  the  manner  of  appointmeat 
was  somewhat  modified,  the  appointing  power  being 
giyen  to  the  bailiif,  and  a  right  of  co-operation  to  the 
bishop.  To  the  king  of  Denmark  was  reserred  the 
right  of  sanctioning  the  appointment  to  one  of  the  ibity- 
seyen  benefices,  whose  yearly  income  is  from  40  to  100^ 
dollars  annually.  Only  fiye  of  the  299  chuicba  yield 
an  income  higfaer  than  100  doUars.  Some  detgymea 
haye  an  income  of  no  morę  than  fiye  dolUn  annusUy. 
AU  haye  therefore  to  depend  for  their  support  chiefly  od 
fees  and  on  the  prooeeds  of  the  lands  connected  with  the 
ohurches.  See  Maurer,  in  Herzog,  RealrEneyUopSdkf 
yii,  90 ;  Finnus  Johannseus,  Hittor,  EceU$,  lakmdia  (ton. 
iy,  Haynise,  1772-78;  extending  to  the  year  1740,  and 
continued  till  1840  under  the  same  title  by  Petur  Fetat- 
son,  Copenhagen,  1841) ;  MUnter,  Kirehtmffttek,  rm  Dm- 
mark  u.  Nor^j^gen,  yoL  i-iii  (Leipzig,  1823-83) ;  Maurer, 
Die  Be&ehrung  dei  nortctg,  8tammeś  ztm  ChristeMkum 
(Munich,  1855-56, 2  yols.) ;  Harbon,  Om  nformaiumn  i 
/«fafMi(Copenh.l848>    (A.J.S.) 

loh^abod  (Heb.  I-habód'  "Tins-^K,  When  is  the 
glory  f  L  q.  There  is  no  glory,  L  e.  wglorunu  f  SepU  *1«- 
Xa/3^^  y.  r.  '£xor/3w^,  and  eyen  Ovaixal3uiy  etc),  the 
son  of  Phinehas  and  grandson  of  Eli.  The  pains  of  la- 
bor  came  upon  his  mother  when  she  heard  that  tbe 
ark  of  God  was  taken,  that  ber  husband  was  shdn  in 
battle,  and  that  these  tidings  had  proyed  fatal  to  hb 
father  £11  They  were  death-pains  to  ber;  and  when 
those  around  sought  to  cheer  her,  saying,  ^Tear  not, 
for  thou  haft  borne  a  son,"  she  only  answered  by  giy- 
ing  him  the  name  of  I-chabod,  adding,  ^  The  glory  is 
departed  from  Israel"  (1  Sam.  iy,  19-22).  RC.  1125. 
The  name  again  occurs  in  1  Sam.  xiy,  8,  where  his  son 
Ahitub  is  mentioned  as  the  father  of  the  priest  Ahiah. 
— Kitto. 


Ichthys  (Greek,  ijfittę,  a>EiA),  in  Christian  i 
ology  a  s>'mhol  of  Christ.  The  word  is  found  en  many 
seals,  rings,  lamps,  and  tombstones  bdonging  to  tbe 
earliest  Christian  times.  It  is  formed  of  the  iiiitial  let- 
ters  of  our  Sayiour's  names  and  titles  in  Greek :  'li}9ovc 
Xpt<rróc,  Ofot)  'Yióc,  ^urtip^  Jenu  Christ,  the  S<m  o/ 
Godj  the  Sariour.  Tertullian  speaks  of  Christiana  at- 
customed  to  please  themselyes  with  the  name  pueieuHf 
"fishes,*"  to  denote  that  they  were  bom  again  into 
Christ*s  religion  by  water.  He  says, "  Kos  fusctcdi  se- 
cundum  ix^vv,  nostrum  Jesum  Christnm,  in  aqui  nas- 
cimur"  {De  Bapt,  i,  2).  See  Fish.  Baptinnal  fonts 
were  often  omaroented  with  the  figurę  of  a  fish ;  seyend 
such  remain  in  French  cathedrals.  Optatus,  biehop  of 
Milesia,  in  the  4th  century,  first  pointed  out  the  woid 
iyjdię  as  formed  of  the  initials  of  Clirist's  titles  as  abors 
giyen,  and  from  that  time  forward  ^'Oriental  enbtkty 
repeated  to  satiety"  religious  simiHtudes  drawn  from 
the  sea.  Julius  Africanus  caUs  Christ  ^'the  great  fish 
taken  by  the  fish-hook  of  God,  and  whose  fledi  nour- 
ishes  the  whole  world."  Auguatine  says  that  *^  iyOic  is 
the  mystical  name  of  Christ,  became  he  deacended  alire 
into  the  depths  of  this  moital  life^into  the  afaysB  of 
waters"  (De  Cirit.  Dfi),  See  Didron,  ChruHam  leoMh 
graphy,  i,  844  sq.;  Mttnter,  SwnbUder  d,  aU  Chrittm 
(AlL  1825);  Augnsti,  ArchUoL  i,  121  sq.;  Peamo,  On 
the  Creed;  Riddle,  ChriU.  AnHgmi.  p.  184.     See  loono- 

ORAPHY. 

loo^nitiiii  C^k6vłov,  of  nnknown  deriyatioo),  a 
town,  formerly  the  capital  of  Lycaonia  (acooiding  to 
EHol.  y,  6, 16 ;  but  Phrygia  according  to  Strabo,  xii,  5^; 
Xenoph.  Anab,  i,  2, 19;  Pliny,y,  25;  and  even  Piadia 
according  to  Ammian.  Marcel.  xiy,  2),  as  it  is  now,  by 
the  name  of  Koniyeh,  of  Karamania,  in  Asia  Minor.  It 
is  situated  in  K.  lat.  87<>  51',  £.  long.  32^  40',  about  120 
miles  inland  from  the  MediterraneaOi    It  was  on  the 


ICONIUM 


463 


ICONOCLASM 


gnat  fiae  of  oommimicatŁon  between  Epheeus  and  the 
westcm  ooast  of  the  peniiuula  on  one  ńde,  and  TstbuSi 
Antioch,  and  the  Eaphrates  on  the  other.  We  see  this 
iwlicił^  by  the  nanatiye  of  Xenophon  (Ł  r.)  and  the 
ktten of  Cioeio  (ad  Fam,  iii,  8;  v,  20;  xv,  4).  When 
the  Roman  provincial  system  was  matozed,  some  of  the 
most  important  n»ds  intersected  one  another  at  this 
point,  as  mar  be  seen  irom  the  map  in  Leake's  Aria 
Mrnor,  These  ciicumstanoes  should  be  borne  in  mind 
when  we  tiace  Paal'8  joameys  through  the  distńct. 
looninm  waa  a  weU-<:ho8en  plaoe  for  misnonary  opera- 
tiona.  The  apoetle'8  fint  yisit  was  on  his  fiist  drcuit, 
in  company  with  Bamabas;  and  on  this  oocaaion  he 
approached  it  fiom  Antioch  in  Piaidia,  which  lay  to  the 
west.  A.D.  44.  Fiorn  that  city  he  had  been  dnven  by 
the  peiaecuŁion  of  the  Jews  (Acts  xiu,  50, 51).  There 
were  Jews  in  Iconiom  a]so ;  and  Paulus  fiisŁ  efforts  here, 
aocoiding  to  his  custom,  were  madę  in  the  synagogue 
(xiT,  i).  The  results  were  considerable  boŁh  among 
the  Uebrew  and  Gentile  population  of  the  place  (ibid.). 
We  should  notice  that  the  working  of  mirades  in  Ico- 
nium  is  emphatically  mentioned  (xiv,  3).  The  intiigues 
of  the  Jews  again  drove  him  away ;  he  was  in  danger 
of  being  stoned,  and  he  withdrew  to  Lystn  and  Derbe, 
in  the  eastem  and  wilder  part  of  Lycaonia  (xiv,  6). 
Thither  also  the  enmity  of  the  Jews  of  Antioch  and 
Iconium  pursued  him;  and  at  Lystra  he  was  actually 
stoned  and  left  for  dead  (xiv,  19).  After  an  intenral, 
hoirever,  he  letumed  over  the  old  ground,  reyisiting 
looniom,  and  encouraging  the  Church  which  he  had 
foonded  there  (xiv,  21, 22).  A.D.  47.  These  sufferings 
and  diffictłlties  are  alluded  to  in  2  Tim.  iii,  11 ;  and  this 
bńngs  us  to  the  oonsideration  of  his  next  \ńsit  to  this 
neighborhood,  which  was  the  occasion  of  his  first  prao- 
tically  aasociAting  himself  with  Timothy.  Paul  lefl  the 
Syrian  Antioch,  in  company  with  Silas  (Acts  xv,  40), 
on  his  second  missionary  circuit ;  and,  travelling  through 
Ciiicia  (xr,  41),  and  up  through  the  passes  of  Taurus 
into  Lycaonia,  approached  Iconinm  from  the  east,  by 
Deibe  and  Lystra  (xvi,  1, 2).  Though  apparently  a 
native  of  Lystra,  Timothy  was  evidently  well  known  to 
the  Ghristians  of  Iconium  (xvi,  2) ;  and  it  is  not  ira- 
probable  that  his  drcumdaion  (xvi,  8)  and  ordinataon 
(1  Tim.  i,  18;  iv,  14;  vi,  12;  2  Tim.  i,  6)  took  plaoe 
there.  On  leaving  Iconium,  Paul  and  his  party  trav- 
elled  to  the  north-west ;  and  the  place  is  not  mentioned 
again  in  the  sacred  narrative,  though  there  is  little 
donbt  that  it  was  visited  by  the  apostle  again  in  the 
early  port  of  his  third  drcuit  (Acts  xviij,  23).  From 
its  position  it  oould  not  fail  to  be  an  important  centrę 
of  Christian  influence  in  the  early  ages  of  the  Church. 
The  cnrious  apocryphal  legend  of  St.  Theda,  of  which 
looninm  is  the  soene,  must  not  be  entirely  paased  by. 
The  **Acta  PauU  et  Theds"  are  given  in  fuli  by  Grabę 
(SpieiL  voL  i),  and  by  Jones  (On  the  Canon,  ii,  353-411) ; 
aod  in  brief  by  Conybeare  and  Ilowaon  (SL  Paul,  i,  197). 
The  Church  plantecl  at  this  place  by  the  apostle  con- 
tinued  to  flourish  (Hierocles,  p.  675)  until,  by  the  per- 
secotions  of  the  Suacens,  and  afterwards  of  the  Sdju- 
kiana^  who  madę  it  one  of  their  sultanies,  it  was  nearly 
extingui8hed.  fiut  some  Christiana  of  the  Greek  and 
Aimenian  churches,  with  a  Greek  metropolitan  bishop, 
are  ttill  found  iu  the  suburbe  of  the  city,  not  being  per- 
mitted  to  reside  withiit  the  walls. 

Koniyeh  ia  situated  at  the  foot  of  Mount  Taurus 
(Hannert,  vi,  1,  p.  195  8q.),  npon  the  border  of  the  lakę 
Trogitia,  in  a  fertile  plain,  rich  in  valuable  productions, 
parUculaily  apricots,  winę,  cotton,  fhuc,  and  grain.    The 


CoinoflooDlnm. 


circnmferenoe  of  the  town  is  between  two  and  thiee 
miles,  and  beyond  theee  are  suburbe  not  much  less  pop- 
ulous  than  the  town  itself,  which  has  in  all  about  30,000 
inhabitanta,  but  acoording  to  others  80,000.  The  waUs, 
strong  and  lofly,  and  flanked  with  sąuare  towers,  which, 
at  the  gates,  are  placed  close  together,  were  built  by  the 
Sdjukian  sułtana  of  Iconium,  who  seem  to  have  taken 
considerable  pains  to  exhibit  the  Greek  inacriptions,  and 
the  remaina  of  architecture  and  aculpture  belonging  to 
the  andent  Iconium,  which  they  madę  uae  of  in  build- 
ing  the  walla.  The  town,  suburbe,  and  gardens  are 
plentifully  supplied  with  water  from  streams  which  flow 
from  some  hilla  to  the  westward,  and  which,  to  the 
north-east,  Join  the  lakę,  which  yariea  in  size  with  the 
season  of  the  year.  In  the  town  carpets  are  manufao* 
tured,  and  blue  and  yellow  leathers  are  tanned  and 
dried.  Cotton,  wool,  hides,  and  a  few  of  the  other  raw 
productions  which  enrich  the  superior  induatiy  and  akill 
of  the  manufactorera  of  Euiope,  are  aent  to  Smynui  by 
carayana.  The  most  remarkable  building  in  Koniyeh 
ia  the  tomb  of  a  priest  highly  revered  throughout  Tur- 
key,  called  Hacrlt  Mevlana,  the  founder  of  the  Mevlevi 
Denriahes.  The  dty,  like  all  those  lenowned  for  supe- 
rior sanctity,  abounds  with  denrishes,  who  meet  the 
passenger  at  every  tuming  of  the  streets,  and  demand 
paras  with  the  greatest  clamor  and  insolence.  The  bi^ 
zaars  and  houses  have  little  to  reoommend  them  to  no- 
tioe.  (Kinneir's  Trapels  m  Atia  Mmor ;  Leake's  Gwg^ 
rapky  ofAiia  Minor;  Arundell's  Tour  inAńa  Mmor; 
Niebtthr,  Trav. i,  118, 149 ;  Haasd,  Erdbetchr,  Anau, ii» 
197;  RosenmiOler,  Bik  Geog.  i,  1,  p.  201,  207;  Hamil- 
ton's  Reśearckea  in  Asia  Minor,  ii,  205  sq.;  etc  For 
the  early  and  Gredan  history  of  this  place,  and  the  fan- 
ciful  etjrmologies  of  the  name,  see  Anthon's  Claum  DieL 
s.  V.) — Kitto;  Winer;  Smith. 

loonoolasm,  or  Imaor-brkakiko  (cMy,  imoffe; 
cAa^ccy,  to  break),  is  a  name  for  the  atniggle  in  the 
Christian  Church  in  the  Middle  Ages,  which,  as  its 
name  indicates,  had  for  its  object  the  destruclion  of  all 
images  used  for  worship  in  the  churches.  From  the 
age  of  Constantine  the  reverence  for  pictures  and  im- 
ages oonstantly  increased,  as  they  were  suppoeed  to  pos- 
sess  a  certain  sanctity  or  miraculous  power;  and  at  ao 
early  an  age  aa  that  of  Augustine  we  hear  him  oonfeas 
that  many  had  fallen  into  the  superatition  of  adoring 
pictures  rather  than  the  Deity.  But  the  Iconoclaatio 
contiwersy  aasnmed  a  morę  aerioua  aspect  in  the  8ih 
oentury,  when  the  emperor  Leo  III,  the  Isaurian  (717* 
741),  who,  previous  to  his  accesńon  to  the  throne,  had 
associated  much  with  Jews  and  Mohammedans,  on  tak* 
ing  the  side  of  the  Iconoclasts  in  the  tenth  year  of  his 
reign,  iasned  an  edict  against  the  uae  of  imagea  in 
churches.  He  waa  iniluenced,  no  doubt,  by  a  desire  to 
draw  into  the  Christian  Church  the  Mohammedans  and 
Jews,  who,  aside  from  thdr  simple  theistic  faith,  were 
debarred  ftom  joining  the  Christiana  by  an  averBion  to 
the  uae  of  images.  But  the  people—who  felt  that  <<it 
swept  away  (rom  their  churches  objects  hallowed  by 
devotion,  and  suppoeed  to  be  endowed  with  miraculous 
agency ;  objecta  of  hope  and  fear,  of  gratitude  and  im- 
memorial  veneration" — ^roae  up  in  maaaea  againat  tho 
edict,  and  violent  disturbances,  espedaUy  at  Constan- 
tinople,  where  the  patriarch  himsdf  sided  with  them, 
were  of  daily  occurrenoe.  The  superior  power  of  the 
govemment,  however,  soon  madę  itself  felt,  the  pictures 
were  destroyed,  the  inaurrectionista  slain  or  banished^ 
and  order  restored,  after  a  feariul  maaaacre.  Yet,  not- 
urithatanding  all  the  penaities  which,  by  order  of  Leo^ 
were  inflicted  on  the  opponents  of  Iconoclasm,  cham- 
pions  in  favor  of  the  uae  of  images  in  churches  roae  up. 
Among  them  waa  the  great  John  of  Damaacus  (q.  v.), 
who,  after  addndng  the  ordinary  argumenta  for  images 
with  greater  elegance  and  ingenuity  than  any  other 
writer  of  his  day,  went  forth  in  bitter  invective8  againat 
the  Iconoclaata  aa  enemies  of  Chriat,  the  Yirgin,  and  the 
aainta.  '*  Picturea  are  atonding  memoriale  of  trinmph 
oyer  the  devil;  whoaoever  destzoya  them  ia  a  friend  of 


ICONOCLASM 


464 


IDAŁAH 


ehe  devi1,  a  Manichsaii,  and  a  Docetiat"  The  pope 
himself,  Gregory  III,  put  all  the  opposen  of  images  un- 
der  ban ;  but,  desptte  this  and  other  efforte  on  his  part, 
Leo's  successor,  Ćonstantuiua  CopronymuB,  went  even 
fiirther  than  Leo.  Having  obCained  the  condemnation 
of  image-woTship  in  the  Synod  of  Constantinople  in  A. 
D.  764,  ho  enforced  it  against  the  dergy  and  the  most 
noted  of  the  monka.  Many  monka,  who,  together  with 
the  patriarcha  of  Alexandiia,  Antioch,  and  Jeruaalem, 
were  in  faror  of  the  imagea,  and  were  unwilling  to  aub- 
Bcribe  to  the  decrees  of  the  council,  wero  cnielly  perse- 
cuted.  The  emperor  Leo  lY  alao  enforced  thia  law ;  but 
hia  widów,  Irenę,  one  of  the  baaeat  of  women,  uaed  the 
tendency  of  the  people  in  fayor  of  image-worahip  to  en- 
able  her  to  ascend  the  throne.  With  the  aid  of  the 
newly-^lected  patriarch  of  Conatantinople,  Teraaioa,  she 
called  a  synod  at  Nicasa  in  787,  wherein  the  adoration 
of  images  by  proatration,  kiaaing,  and  ineenaing  waa  re- 
eatablished.  Mattera  remained  in  thia  atate  during  the 
rdgna  of  the  emperora  Nioephonia  and  Michael  (802> 
813),  although  there  atill  were  Iconodaata  to  be  found. 
But  as,  during  the  atrife,  the  adoration  of  imagea  had 
paaaed  into  the  groaaeat  idolatry,  Leo  Y  (818-821) 
cauaed  it  to  be  abolLshed  by  the  Synod  of  Conatantino- 
ple, and  puniahed  thoee  who  persiated  in  it  (moatly 
monka,  with  Theodoroe  Studita  at  their  head).  Mi- 
ehael  II  (821-824),  who  overthrew  Leo,  tolerated  the 
worship  of  imagea  without  thereby  satiafying  the  image- 
worshippers;  but  Theophilus,  his  son  (829>842),  on  his 
aole  acceaaion  to  the  goyemment,  renewed  aU  the  edicts 
against  them.  After  hia  death,  hia  widów  reatored  im- 
age-worahip in  842,  and  inatituted  the  festiyal  of  the 
Orthodoxy,  which  is  yet  kept  by  the  Greek  Church 
in  remembrance  of  thia  reatoration  (aee  Buddaeua,  De 
fetto  orthodoTOf  Jena,  1726).  The  Greek  Christiana 
haye  sińce  retained  imagea  in  their  churches,  but  with- 
out worshipping  them.  The  Latina  also  decided  that 
the  images  ahould  be  retained,  but  not  worshipped ;  while 
the  French  Church  declarcd  most  poaitiyely  against 
image-worship  in  the  Synod  of  Gentiliacum  in  767,  and 
in  790  Charlemagne  presented  to  the  Council  of  Nicaea 
a  memoriał.  De  impio  imagmum  adtu  {Libri  Carolim), 
Thereupon  imagea  were  allowed  to  be  retained  for  pur- 
poeea  of  education  only.  At  the  Synod  of  Frankfort  in 
794,  Chaiiemagne,  with  the  aasent  of  the  Engliah  Church, 
cauaed  image-worship  to  be  condemned.  Afler  the  9th 
century  the  popea  were  gradually  morę  indined  towarda 
image-worship,  and  it  soon  became  generał  throughoat 
the  Weat,  The  Roman  Catholic  Church  continued  to 
fayor  the  practice,  aud  the  Council  of  Trent  decided 
formally  in  ita  twenty-fiflh  aeasion  that  the  imagea  of 
Chriat,  of  the  holy  Yirgin,  and  of  other  aainta  are  to  be 
plaoed  in  churchea;  that  they  ought  to  receiye  due 
yeneratiou,  not  becauae  they  haye  any  diyinity  or  yir- 
tue  in  them,  but  because  honor  ia  thua  reflected  upon 
thoee  whom  they  repreaent ;  ao  that  the  people,  by  kia»- 
ing  the  images,  bowing  to  them,  etc,  pray  to  Chriat 
and  honor  the  sainta  whom  the  imagea  repreaent.  This 
image-worship  led  to  pilgrimages  to  the  shrines  of 
aainta  great  in  repute  for  their  power.  The  Greek 
Church  admita  only  the  painted  and  raiaed  imagea,  not 
caryod  figures,  like  the  Church  of  Romę.  All  the  Chria- 
tian  aects  in  the  East  are  giyen  to  image-worahip  with 
the  exoeption  of  the  Neatoriana,  the  CJhristiana  of  St 
Thomaa,  and  the  Ruaaian  Roskohiiki.  llie  Grerman  Re- 
formera,  although  opposing  image-worship,  held  aome- 
what  different  opiniona  on  the  subject:  thua  lAither 
tolerated  imagea  aa  an  ornament,  and  alao  aa  edifying 
mementoea,  and  condemned  the  deatruction  of  the  im- 
agea and  the  aitara  at  Wittenberg  in  1622.  The  Swiaa 
Reformera  oppoaed  imagea  in  any  ahape  or  for  any  pnr- 
pose,  and  had  them  taken  out  of  all  the  churchea— oiten 
with  great  \HiolDnce,  aa  in  the  Netherlanda.  They  are 
not  eyen  now  tolerated  in  the  Reformed  Church,  nor  in 
the  particular  denominationa  that  haye  sprung  from  it. 
Mohammedanism  proscribes  image-worship;  it  eren 
forbida  the  leproduction  of  the  image  of  any  Uying  be- 


ing,  thoogh  it  be  not  for  the  puipoae  of  wonhippifig  it 
See  Weaaenbeig,  Die  chrittUckm  Biidar^  em  B^fMk' 
rungt  mitiel  d.  christl.  Simet  (Constanz,  1827,  2  yoK); 
Schloaaer,  Gesck,  der  BiidenturmeHden  KaUer  (Fianki; 
ad.M.1812) ;  Manc,  Der  Bilderttreii  der  B^tmUmiscka 
KaUer  (Trier,  1889);  Ketter  Lex.  ii,  287;  MihBan's 
Gibbon,  Dtdme  and  Fali  of  Rom,  Emp,  y,  10  eq. ;  Mil- 
man,  Latin  Ckrietiamty,  ii,  293  aq.;  Pierer,  Umhertai 
Lexikonf  a.  y.  Bilder;  Bingham,  Orig,  Ecdee,  book  yiii, 
eh.  yiu;  BuUer,  Ecclee.  Hist,  (Phila.  1868),  i,  860  iq.; 
Rankę,  Hiatory  ąf  the  Popea,  i,  19-25.  See  Image-wok- 
8H1P.     (J.H.W.) 

loonoolasts.    See  Iookoclasm. 

Iconodolists.    See  Imagb-worship, 

Iconography  (eMv,  image^  and  ypa^i  TdeicrShe\ 
the  ecience  of  ao-called  "  (^riatian  art"  in  the  Middk 
Agea.  It  indudea,  therefore,  the  hiatory  and  deacnp- 
tion  of  imagea,  picturea,  moeaica,  gema,  emblema,  etc; 
There  exiat  in  our  day  many  exquiaite  apedmena  of 
Christian  iconography,  which  are  preaenred  in  Uhraries 
and  muaeuma,  and  are  inyaluable  to  ua  in  deteimining 
the  exact  hbtoiy  of  thia  **  Christian  art."  The  chaiac- 
ter  of  the  illuatrationa,  the  form  of  the  letters,  auiRce  to 
determine  the  age  and  country  whero  the  work  was  pro- 
duced.  Thus  a  comparison  of  MSS.  of  Eaatem  and 
Weatem  Europę  bringa  before  ua  the  aerenl  atages 
which  mark  the  growth  of  Christian  iconogTiq)hy.  See 
Illumination,  Abt  of.  The  moet  important  'modem 
work  on  the  aubject  ia  Didron,  Manuel  ^IcottograpMe 
Chritienne  (Paria,  1846, 8yo) ;  trana.  into  Engliah,  Chrii- 
Han  Iconography,  yoL  i  (London,  1861, 12mo).  Oldcr 
worka  are,  Paleotti,  De  imag.  sacr,  etprofanU  (Ingolat. 
1694,  4to) ;  Molanua,  De  Piet,  et  Imagg,  Sacris  (Lour. 
1570) ;  De  Hiatoria  Sacr,  Imagg.  et  Picturarum  (1619, 
12mo)  ;  Munter,  SimAUder  der  Alłen  Chritten  (Altooa, 
1826, 2  yola.  4to) ;  Wesaenberg,  Die  Christl,  Bilder  (Om- 
Stańce,  1827).    See  Imag]&-^'0B8HIp.    (J.  H.W.) 

Iconolatry  {titcuw,  image,  and  \arptia,  vorthg>), 
the  worahip  or  adoration  of  imagea.  Hence  image-wor- 
ahippera  are  called  Icanolatrut,  or  IccmolaterB.    See  bi< 

AOB-WORSHIP. 

Iconomaofay.    See  Iookocłasił 

loonoBtftfliB  {iiK0v6aTa9ic)  ia  that  part  of  an 
Eastem  church  which  corresponda  to  the  alłcnr-raSt  in 
Engliah  churchea.  It  ia  oilen  miataken  for  the  rood- 
acTcen  (q.  y.),  which  in  ita  generał  anangement  it  le- 
aemblea,  only  (the  mysteriea  being  abaolutely  to  be 
yeiled  from  the  cyea  of  the  people)  the  panela  are  solid 
to  the  top.  The  rood-ecreen  separatca  naye  and  choir; 
the  iconoataais,  howeyer,  aeparatea  choir  and  bema.  '^It 
haa  three  doors;  that  in  the  centrę  condncting  directly 
to  the  bema;  that  to  the  right  to  the  diacomcon;  that 
of  the  left  to  the  prothesit,  through  which,  of  oouisc, 
the  great  entrance  ia  madę.  On  the  right  of  the  cen- 
tral door,  on  entcring,  ia  the  icon  of  our  Lord;  on  the 
left,  that  of  the  mother  of  God;  the  others  are  arranged 
according  to  the  taate  or  deyotion  of  the  architect  or 
founder."  The  earliest  iconoatasis  ia  belieyed  to  be  the 
one  remaining  in  the  Arian  crypt-chnrch  of  Tepeker- 
man,  in  the  Orimca,  which  probably  datea  frtim  about 
A.D.  360.— Neale,  IłisL  ŁasUm  Church,  Introd.  i,  191 
sq. 

Ida,  fiist  abbcss  of  the  conrcnt  cf  Ai^gensoles,  flour^ 
ished  in  the  first  ludf  of  the  13th  century.  She  waa  a 
remarkable  woman,  yery  leamed,  and  acknowledged  to 
haye  disputed  on  the  most  intricate  theological  ąucstions 
with  great  ability.  She  died  in  1226.  Her  Hfe  was 
written  by  a  monk  of  Citeaux,  but  remaina  in  MS.  fonn. 
—Histoire  Litt,  de  la  France,  xyiii,  261 ;  Hoefcr,  Now, 
Biog,  Ginirale,  xxvi,  174. 

Id^alah  (Heb.  Yidalah',  ^^K7%  probably  eraHed; 
Sept  'lac^ijAo),  a  city  near  the  weatem  border  of  Zebu* 
lon,  mentioned  between  Shimron  and  Bethlehem  (Joah. 
xix,  16).  According  to  Schwarz,  it  ia  called  CkirH  in 
the  Talmud,  and  ia  identical  with  the  rintige  KeUoh  al* 


IDBASH 


465 


roEALISM 


CkM,  mx  EiifpliBh  miles  sonth-west  of  Shumon  or  Se- 
munie  {Pakttme^  p.  172).  He  doubtless  refen  to  tbe 
niace  marked  on  Kobinaon^s  map  as  Kuiat  tl-Kirehy  in 
ihe  vti]ey  of  the  Kishon,  souŁh-west  of  Semanieh  or 
^iIlloniJu;  a  pońtion  not  improbable,  cspedally  if  mark- 
ed by  tbe  luins  on  tbe  nortb  ode  of  the  river.  Dr. 
Kobinson,  who  afterwards  yuited  it,  calk  it  "'Jeida,  a 
misenble  riUage  witb  no  traces  of  antiąoity"  {LaUr 
Bnearckoy  p^  113) ;  but  Tan  de  Yelde  sbows  that  it  ac- 
tuilly  bas  many  mark8,althougb  now  much  oblitented, 
of  being  an  old  ńte  {Memoir^  p^  822). 

Idadns  or  Idathins,  aamamed  Clarus,  a  Span- 
idh  preUte,was  bom  in  tbe  first  balf  of  tbe  4tb  century, 
After  his  aocesaion  to  the  bisbopric  of  Emerida  he  dis- 
tiagnished  himaelf  by  the  intemperate  zeal  with  whicb, 
together  with  Ithadna  (q.  t.),  bisbop  of  Ossonoba,  be 
opposed  tbe  beresy  of  Priscillian  (q.  v.).  He  wrote  a 
Rfatation  of  the  latter*8  doctrine  nnder  the  title  Apolo' 
getiati,  which  is  now  loet.  In  888,  after  the  death  of 
the  emperor  MaTimna,  who  had  persecuted  the  Priscil- 
lianislB,  Idadna  leaigned  his  bisbopric  IIaving  sabae- 
qaent]y  attempted  to  regain  it,  he  was  esiled,  and  dicd 
aboat  the  year  892.  Aocording  to  Sulpittus  Sereras, 
Idacita's  oondoct  was  less  sererely  jndged  by  his  oon- 
tempoiaiies  than  that  of  Ithadus.  l^e  writings  as- 
ciibed  to  him  are  giren  in  the  Bibliotheca  Patrum,  voL 
T.  See  Solpitioa  Seyeras,  Historia  Sacra;  Isidore  of 
Serille,  De  ScnpUnUmt  Eecksiattieit ;  Antonio,  Bibl, 
Hitpma  ttht$^  i,  172;  Hoefer,  Ncuv,  Biogr,  GMraUy 
xxiz,  775;  Neander,  CA.  Hist,  ii,  111  aą.;  Kurtz,  CK 
But,  i,  214  aq.    See  PsisciLUAmara. 

IdadtiB  op  LA3CEOO  (^Lamecentis'),  wbo  became 
bisbop  of  Gallicia  in  427,  distingnished  bimself  by  his 
oppońtion  to  the  Manichćansy  whom  he  sought  to  drire 
from  Spain.  He  is  sopposed  to  bare  died  in  469.  He 
is  tbe  anthor  of  a  history,  a  continuation  of  the  Chroni- 
dea  of  SL  Hieronymns,  beginning  with  the  year  879  and 
endiog  with  468.  The  asaertion  that  tbis  work  origi- 
Dated  with  Pelagios,  bisbop  of  Ońedo,  in  the  12th  cen- 
tury, is  by  no  meana  aatisfactorily  proved.  It  bas  often 
beea  printed  and  annotated,  as  by  Sirmond,  Opp, roi.  ii; 
Boaąaet,  ScriptL  Fronc.  voL  i ;  and  best  by  Florez  £s- 
pinn.  Sagrada,  iv,  845  sq.  He  is  also  supposed  to  be 
the  anthor  of  Foalf  cofwu&ir».— Aschbach,  Kirch.-Lex. 
iii,  402. 

IdThaah  (Heb.  Tidbash',  tśan^prob.  Aonf^ecf;  Sept 
'lyapńc  V.  r.  'It^dc,  Vnlg.  Jedebos),  a  descendant  of 
Judab,  who,  with  his  two  brotbers  and  a  sister  (the 
Ttddponite),  are  aaid  (1  Chroń,  ir,  8,  acoording  to  the 
Anth.  Yerai)  to  be  «of  the  father  of  Etam,"  probably 
meardog  of  the  lineage  of  the  founder  of  that  place,  or 
perhaps  they  were  tbemselres  its  settlers.  B.C.  cir. 
1612.    SeeJBZRKBŁ2. 

Id'do,  the  name  of  sereral  men  in  the  Old  Testa- 
ment, of  different  forms  in  the  Hebrew. 

1.  Iddo'  (i^r,  titnefy,  or  bom  to  a  festital;  Sept 
'A^^i,VaIg.  Addo)y  a  Levite,  son  of  Joah  and  father  of 
2erah  (1  Chroń,  vi,  21) ;  called  morę  accuratdy  perhaps 
Adauu  in  ver.  41. 

2.  Yiddo'  {W,lovelg;  Sept. 'laSiat,Yu\g.  Jaddo), 
son  of  Zechariah,  and  David's  viceroy  of  the  balf  tiibe 
of  ^lanaasA^ehst  (1  Chroń,  xxvii,  21).     B.C.  1014. 

3.  /dUo'  (S-inj,  a  prolonged  form  of  No.  1;  ScpL 
'A£^ii,Vulg.  Addo),  the  father  of  Ahinadab,  which  lat- 
ttf  was  Sok>nion*s  parveyor  in  the  district  of  Mahanaim 
(lKingsiv,  14).     RC  dr.  996. 

4.  Iddo'  (i^r,  same  as  fiist  name,  2  Chroń,  xii,  16; 
xiii,  22;  Sept,  'A^e«,  Vulg.  Addo)  or  Yedo'  O^ny;^,  2 
Chion.  ix,  29,  maigin,  but  Yedi%  *^'n5.'^,  text;  both  less 
•ccnrate  forms  for  tbe  last  name ;  Sept  has  'IwiTX,yu]g. 
Addo,  A.  Yers. « Iddo"),  a  prophet  of  Judah,  who  wrote 
tbe  history  of  Rehoboam  and  Abijah ;  or  rather,  per- 
Hm,  who,  in  oonjnnction  witb  Seraiah,  kept  the  pablic 
loOt  dming  tbeir  reigns  (2  Chroń,  zii,  15) ;  and  who  in 

IV.--Go 


that  capadty  reoorded  certain  predictions  against  Jero- 
boam  (2  Chroń,  ix,  29;  although  Berthean,  ad  loc.,  and 
Ewald,  lar.  Geśch.,  8d  ed.,  i,  216,  think  tbis  a  dilTerent 
person).  B.C  poet  968.  It  seems  from  2  Chroń,  xiii,  22 
that  he  named  his  book  O^^P*  Midnuh,  or  **  £xpo«i- 
tłon."  Joeephus  {Ant.  viii,  9, 1)  states  that  this  Iddo 
Claiu)v)  was  the  prophet  who  was  sent  to  Jeroboam  at 
Betbel,  and  conscąuently  the  same  that  was  slain  by  a 
lion  for  disobedience  to  his  instmctions  (1  Kings  xiti) ; 
and  many  commentators  have  foUowed  this  statement. — 
Kitta  He  is  also  identified  with  Oded  (see  Jerome  on 
2  Chroń,  xv,  1).— Smith. 

5.  Iddo'  0*^^,  same  name  as  last,  Zech.  i,  1,  else- 
wbere  Ki'ny,  id. ;  but  K*^^7,  Iddi\  apparently  by  eiror, 
in  Neh.  xii,  16 ;  Sept  'Aodu,  but  'Adatac  in  Neh.  xii,  4^ 
and  'AóaSat  in  Neh.  xii,  16 ;  Yulg.  Addo,  but  Adaja  in 
Neh.  xii,  16),  the  father  of  Barachiah  and  grandfather 
of  the  prophet  Zechariah  (Zech.  i,  1,  7 ;  oomp.  Ezra  v, 
1 ;  vi,  14 ;  Neh.  xżi,  16).  He  was  one  of  the  chief  prieala 
who  retumed  from  Babylon  with  Zerubbabel  (Neh.  xii, 
4>    B.a636. 

6.  Iddo'  (i^M,  mithap ;  Sept  omits,  Yulg.  Eddo), 
chief  of  the  Jews  of  the  Captivity  establisbed  at  Ca- 
siphia,  a  place  of  which  it  is  difficult  to  determine  the 
position.  It  was  to  him.  that  Ezra  sent  a  reąuisition 
for  Levites  and  Nethiniro,  nonę  of  whom  had  yet  joined 
his  caTavan.  Thirty-eight  Levites  and  250  Nethinim 
responded  to  his  cali  (Ezra  viii,  17-20).  B.C.  459.  It 
wottld  seem  from  this  that  Iddo  was  a  chief  person  of 
the  Nethinim,  descended  from  those  Gibeonites  who 
were  charged  with  the  ser\-Ue  labors  of  the  tabemade 
and  Tempie.  Tbis  is  one  of  8everal  drcnmstances  which 
indicate  that  tbe  Jews,  in  tbeir  several  colonies  under 
the  Exile,  were  still  ruled  by  the  heads  of  thoir  nation, 
and  allowed  the  free  exercise  of  tbeir  worship. — Kitto. 

7.  See  Jadak. 

IdealUm  (from  idea)  is  a  term  given  to  several 
systems  of  philosophy,  and  therefore  vaTying  in  its  sig- 
nification  according  to  the  meaning  which  they  8ever* 
ally  attach  to  the  word  idea.  Until  the  17th  centay, 
when  Descartes  came  forward  with  his  Ditconrte  on 
Method  0^7),  it  had  the  significatiou  which  Plato  gave 
to  it,  and  was  understood  to  refer  to  the  Platonie  doc- 
trine of  etemal  forms  (iSkat)  existing  in  the  divine 
mind,  according  to  which  the  world  and  all  aenaible 
things  were  framed.  *'  Plato  agreed  with  the  rest  of 
the  andent  philosophers  in  this— that  all  things  consist 
of  matter  and  forai,  and  that  the  matter  of  which  all 
things  were  madę  exiftted  from  eternity  withoat  form ; 
but  he  likewiae  bclieved  that  there  are  etemal  forms  of 
all  possible  things  which  exiat  withoat  matter,  and  to 
those  etemal  and  immaterial  forms  he  gave  the  name 
of  ideas.  In  tbe  Platonie  aense,  then,  idetu  were  the 
pattems  according  to  which  tbe  delty  fashioned  the 
phenomenal  or  ect^^pal  world"  (Rdd,  InieBectuat  Powers, 
Ess.  i,  chap.  ii).  The  word  was  iised  in  this  sense  not 
only  in  philosophy,  but  also  in  literaturę,  down  to  the 
17tb  century,  as  in  Spenser,  Shakspeare,  Hooker,  and 
Milton.     Thus  Milton,  in  his  ParocUse  Łosi  .- 

"Ood  suw  his  works  were  good, 
Answering  his  fair  idea.** 

Sir  William  Hamilton,  who  informs  ns  that  the  change 
of  signification  afidea  was  first  introdnced  by  I>avid  Bu- 
chanan in  1686,  one  year  earlier  than  Descartes,  says  in 
his  Disctissions,  p.  70':  **  The  fortmie  of  this  word  is  cn- 
rious.  Ediployed  by  Plato  to  expre8S  the  real  forms  of 
the  hitelligible  worid,  in  lofty  contrast  with  the  Unreal 
images  of  the  sensible,  it  was  lowered  by  Descartes,  who 
extended  it  to  tbe  objects  of  our  consciousness  in  gen- 
eraL  When,  afler  Gassendi,  the  school  of  Condillac 
had  analyzed  our  highest  faculties  into  our  lowest,  the 
idea  was  still  morę  deeply  degraded  from  its  high  orig^ 
inaL  Like  a  fallcn  angel,  it  was  relegated  fh>m  the 
sphere  of  divine  intelligence  to  the  atmoephere  of  bumaa 
sense,  till  at  last  ideoUgńe  (moce  conectly  ideologie),  a 


roEALISM 


466 


IDŁE 


word  which  oonld  only  properly  soggesŁ  an  a  priori 
8cbeme,deducing  our  knuwledge  fnm  the  intellect,  h«s 
in  France  become  Łhe  luune  peculiarly  distinctlye  of 
that  philosophy  of  mind  which  excluBively  derires  our 
knowledgc  from  the  Benaes."  Instead  of  employing  the 
terms  image,  species,phantcumj  etc.,  with  referenco  to  the 
mental  reprcaciiUtion  of  extemal  things,  w  had  pre- 
riously  been  done,  Descartes  adopted  the  word  idecu 
In  tfais  use  of  the  word  he  waa  followed  by  other  philos- 
nphersy  as  Leibnitz  and  Locke,  who  desired  the  word  to 
staud  for  "  whatevcr  U  the  object  of  the  understand* 
ing  when  a  man  thinks."*  Hence  the  mental  impresaion 
that  we  are  sapposed  to  have  when  thinking  of  the  sun, 
without  fleetng  the  actual  object,  is  called  our  idea  of 
the  twm.  The  idea  is  thus  in  contrast  with  the  sensa- 
tioD,  or  the  feeting  that  we  have  when  the  senses  are 
engaged  directly  or  immediately  upon  the  thing  itaelf. 
The  senaation  is  the  resiilt  of  the  pressure  of  Łhe  object, 
and  declares  an  extemal  reality;  the  impression  per- 
nsting  afler  the  thing  haa  gone,  and  recorerable  by 
mental  caases  without  the  original,  is  the  idea.  Al- 
though  the  word  in  this  application  may  be  so  guarded 
aa  to  lead  to  no  bad  oonaeąuences,  Keid  {IntelL  Pow,  Ess. 
i,  chap.  i)  moet  vehemently  protested  against  its  use  in 
auch  a  sense,  holding  that  it  gave  oountenance  to  the 
aetting  up  of  a  new  and  fictttious  element  in  the  opera- 
tions  of  the  mind.  But  this  raises  the  great  que&- 
tion  of  metaphysics,  namely,  the  exact  naturo  of  our 
knowledge  of  an  extemal  world.  Bishop  Berkeley  (q. 
V.),  howerer,  must  be  regarded  as  the  tnie  repreaenta^ 
tive  of  modem  idealism.  He  held  that  ^  the  qualities 
of  suppoeed  objects  cannot  be  perceived  distinct  from 
the  mind  that  perceires  them ;  and  these  qualitie8,  it 
will  be  allowed,  are  all  that  we  can  know  of  such  ob- 
jects. If,  therefore,  there  were  extemal  bodies,  it  is  im- 
possible  we  should  ever  know  it ;  and  if  there  were  not, 
we  should  have  exactly  the  same  reason  for  beliering 
(here  were  as  we  now  have.  Ali,  thereforc,  which  really 
exisŁ8  is  spirit,  or '  the  thinking  principlc' — ourselres,  our 
fellow-men,  and  God.  What  we  cali  idcas  are  prescnt- 
ed  to  us  by  God  in  a  certain  order  of  succesńon,  which 
order  bf  successire  presentation  is  what  we  mc&n  by  the 
laws  of  naturę.**  This  modę  of  speculation  of  bishop 
Berkeley,  which  he  defended  with  so  much  acuteness, 
and  which  Lewis  {Higt.  o/Phil,  ii,  288)  now  goes  forth 
to  defend,  daiming  that  the  bishop's  critics  misunder- 
atood  him,  he  held  to  be  the  only  possible  true  view  of 
our  naturę  and  the  goremment  of  God.  But  there  is 
DO  question  that,  whatever  benefits  it  may  have  bestow- 
ed  upon  the  bishop  and  his  immediate  disciples,  it  has 
been  found,  practi(»lly,  to  lead  to  sefpticitm.  "  By  tak- 
ing  away  the  grounds  of  a  belief  which  is  both  natural 
knd  unirersal,  and  which  cannot,  at  first,  be  evcn  doubt- 
ed  without  a  serere  exercise  of  thought,  it  shook  men'8 
faith  in  all  thoae  primaiy  truths  which  are  at  once  the 
basis  of  their  knowledge  and  the  guides  of  their  cou- 
duct  It  seemed  to  throw  distrust  on  the  eyidence  of 
the  senses,  as  it  reaUy  inyalidated  the  spontaneous  con- 
dusions  which  every  man  inevitably  forms  from  that 
eyidence."  This  theory  is  conclusiyely  proyed  by  the 
conduct  of  Hnme;  for,  if  a  main  pillar  of  theedifice 
oould  so  easily  be  shaken,  what  was  there  to  hinder 
from  throwing  down  the  whole  fabric?  Beginning 
where  Berkeley  began,  Hume  prooeeded  much  farther, 
and  left  unassaUed  haidly  one  artide  of  human  faith. 
He  denied  the  reality  not  only  of  the  object  perceiyed, 
but  of  the  mind  peroeiying.  He  reduced  all  thinking 
exi8tence  to  a  succeasion  of  rapidly  fleeting  ideas,  each 
one  belng  known  only  at  the  instant  of  its  manifestation 
to  oonsciousness,  and  then  fading  away,  leaying  no  surely 
recognisable  tracę  of  itself  on  the  memoiy,  and  affording 
no  ground  for  an  antidpation  of  the  futurę.  We  do  not 
eyen  know,  he  maintains,  that  any  one  thing  depends 
upon  another  in  the  relation  of  an  eflect  to  ita  cause. 
We  know  no  tnie  cauae  whateyer,  and  our  only  idea  of 
power  is  a  fiction  and  a  blunder.  The  condusion  of  the 
whołe  matteTj  aocoiding  to  his  philoeophy,  is,  not  the 


merę  negation  of  this  or  that  posidre  belief,  bot  amve^ 
sal  distrust  of  the  human  faculties,  considered  as  meani 
for  the  acquisition  of  truth.  They  contiadict  each  nh*. 
er,  and  leaye  nothiiig  certain  esccept  that  nothing  cm 
be  known.  See  Humb;  Rgid.  The  Genooan  phim> 
^hers  Kant,  Fichte,  and  SchcUing,  who  are  often  di*- 
Vd  among  the  idealistic  school,  uśed  the  word  iden  m 
the  Platonie  or  transcendental  sensc.  Hef;tl,  on  tłie 
other  hand,  moditied  the  use  of  the  word  to  such  an  rx- 
tent  that  his  ideaUsm  does  not  only  dcserye  to  be  calied 
a69o^/e-idealism,  but  much  morę  properly  pantheittir, 
no  less  than  the  doctrine  of  the  Ćleatics  andtntly,  ar 
of  Spinoza  in  modem  times.  It  is  thus  apparent,  from 
the  looseness  of  the  application  of  the  word  idta,  snd 
the  danger  of  its  not  couyeying  a  dejadte  aiguificstln, 
that  we  need  a  generał  word  in  the  Englisfa  langiugt 
which  may  morę  accuratdy  expre88  the  contraetto  len- 
sation  or  to  actuality.  But,  as  no  better  has  yet  beea 
found,  it  is  difficult  to  ayoid  the  use  of  idfoWjf^^hÓBi^ 
what  is  common  to  mcmoiy  and  to  imagination,  ani 
expressing  the  mind  as  not  under  the  preecnt  impfesaoa 
of  real  objects,  but  as,  by  its  own  tenadty  and  anoda- 
ting  powcrs,  having  those  objocts  to,  all  practical  ends  be- 
fore  its  vicw.  Thus  all  our  sensations,  whethcr  of  agbr, 
heaiing,  touch,  tastc,  or  smell,  and  all  the  fedings  thit 
we  hare  in  the  exercise  of  our  moviug  energies,  bccone 
transformed  into  ideas  when,  without  the  rcal  pnsincc 
of  the  original  agency,  we  can  deal  with  them  in  tbe 
way  of  pursuit  or  ayoidance,  or  can  disciiminate  and 
compare  them,  nearly  as  if  in  their  first  condition  u 
sensation.**  Sir  W.  Hamilton,  in  his  I^ctum  m  Lo^ 
(i,  126),  has  endeayored  to  ayoid  employing  the  wod, 
but  other  writers  on  mental  philosophy  haye  fredy 
adopted  it  in  the  aboye  acceptation.  Soc  Chambers, 
Cyclop,  V,  610  Bq.;  Krauth's  Fleming,  Yocah,  o/Thilot, 
p.  222  sq. ;  Brande  and  Cox,  Dicf,  of  Science,  Lit.  avd 
i4r^,  ii,  189 ;  Moreli,  Iłistory  ofPhilos,  p.  65  sq.;  Lewa, 
Hisł,  o/Philcs,  (cnUrged  cd.)..  see  Indcx;  Farrar,  Crit. 
Fłisf.  o/Free  Thouffkt,  p,  422;  M^Cosh,  IntuitioM  o/ike 
Mind,  p.  317  8q. ;  Morcirs  Tcnncmann,  I/isL  o/ Philof, 
see  Index ;  A".  A .  Per.  No.  btxvi,  p.  CO  są. ;  Jour.Sac.  LU. 
XX,  298  sq.     See  Nihilism  ;  Beausm.    (J.  H.  W.) 

Idiótao  {ihiuTai,  private  men),  a  term  applied  by 
some  eariy  writcn  to  laymen  in  distiuctkm  fiom  minis- 
ters  (K\rłpot).  Chr>'so6tom  {Ilomil.  85)  and  Theodoret 
{Comm.  in  1  Cor.)  cmploy  the  word  in  this  signilkatiao, 
and  show  that  the  apoetle  Paul  (1  Cor.  xiv,  16)  thoi 
designates  a  private  person,  wbether  Icamcd  or  un- 
leamed.  So  also  Origen,  Cnntra  OU.  vii,  p.  334.  See 
Bingham,  Orig.  Eccles.  bk.  i,  eh.  v,  §  6.     See  Laitt. 

Idi5t^B  (Cr.  ihónic)  i^  ^  ^^i"™  aometimes  used  in 
the  orthodox  doctrine  of  the  Triuity  of  the  Godhead  to 
designatc  the  properfy  (lAUproprieUui)  of  each  divine 
person.  This  must,  however,  not  be  confoundcd  wiih 
the  divine  attr{bute$  (eternity,  omuipresence,  omnipO" 
tence,  etc.),  for  they  are  inhercnt  in  the  diyine  eumce, 
and  are  the  common  poseession  of  all  the  diyine  hypos- 
tases,  while  the  idiotes,  on  the  other  hand,  is  a  peculiar- 
ity  of  Łhe  kypo9tasi$,  and  thercfore  cannot  be  comrouni* 
cated  or  transferred  from  one  to  another. — Schaff.  Ck 
Iliat.  iii,  679.     See  Trikitt. 

Idle  (n;p"l,  slothful,  also  deeeitfid;  rT^>,  to  he  tceat, 
in  Niph.  to  be  Jazy,  Exod.  v,  8, 17;  r.sj^S?,  tmMciKf, 
Proy.  xxxi,  27;  risibcc,  rtmiianesŁ,  Ecclea.  x,  18; 
I3pt^,  to  re$t,  Ezek.  xyi,  49 ;  apyóc,  not  worlimg,  litcr- 
ally,  Matt,  xx,  3, 6 ;  1  Tim.  y,  13 ;  ta>frui[ful,  2  Pet.  i,  8; 
stupid,  TiL  i,  12 ;  morally,  Matt.  xii,  3G ;  A^poCi  an  *'  ŃiZe 
tale,"  Lukc  xxiv.  U).  Of  the  foregoing  instanccs  of 
the  use  of  this  word,  the  only  one  rcqutring  spedal  cod- 
sideration  is  Matt,  xii,  36,  "I  say  unto  you,  that  etery 
idle  word  that  men  shall  speak,  they  shall  giye  an  ac 
count  thereof  in  the  day  of  judgment,*'  where  there  bas 
been  oonaiderable  difierence  of  opinion  as  to  the  intei^ 
pretation  of  pijna  apym*,  tnmslated  "idle  word.**  To 
the  ordinary  explanatioD,  which  makea  the  pfaiaae  hen 


IDŁENESS 


48t 


cąoiyalent  to  Tam,  and  bence  wicked  langnage,  J.  A.  H. 
Tiitnum,  in  u  eztended  criddflin  {On  the  prmdpal 
C€auet  of  FoToed  IitierprtU  of  tke  N.  T^  printed  in  the 
Amer,  BA,  SątM.  for  1881,  p.  481-484),  objects  that  it 
vioUŁc8  tbe  natiye  meaning  of  the  word,  which  rather 
denotes  an  empt^r,  inoonsiderate,  and  hence  inainoere 
ouDYenadoa  ot  statement,  appealing  to  the  contextf 
which  is  aimed  at  the  hypooital  Phariaees.  On  the 
other  hand,  the  nsaal  interpretation  ia  supported  by 
the  actual  oocuirence  of  7rovrfp6vi  tcicked,  in  the  parallel 
renę  3h,  and  bj  the  oaage  of  other  Greek  writers,  e.  g., 
Svmniadui8  in  Lev.  xix,  7,  for  bilAD,  where  Sept.  dSvrov ; 
Xenoph.  Mem,  i,  2, 57 ;  Cicero,  de  FaL  12.  (See  Kuinol,  ad 
loc.)  The  term  ia  probably  intended  to  be  of  wide  sig- 
nification,  bo  as  to  include  both  these  aenaes,  namely, 
krify  and  caUtmuf,  aa  being  both  speciea  of  untruth  and 
heedlesiiy  attered,  yet  productiye  of  miachief. 

IdleneM,  arersion  from  labor.  The  idle  man  ia, 
in  erenr  view,both  foolbh  and  criroinaL  He  lives  not 
to  God.  Idleneas  waa  not  madę  for  man,  nor  man  for 
idleneaa.  A  smaU  measure  of  reflection  raight  convince 
erery  one  that  for  some  aaeful  purpose  he  was  sent  into 
the  worid.  Man  ia  pUced  at  the  head  of  all  things  here 
below.  He  is  fumished  with  a  great  preparation  of  fac- 
nlties.and  powera.  He  is  enlightened  by  reason  with 
many  important  discoYeries;  even  taught  by  rerelation 
to  oonaider  himaelf  as  ransomed  by  the  death  of  Christ 
from  DUBoy,  and  intended  to  rise  to  a  still  higher  rank 
in  the  oniyerae  of  God.  In  snch  a  situation,  thus  dis- 
tingnished,  thus  farored,  and  assisted  by  his  Creator, 
does  he  answer  the  end  of  his  being.if  he  aim  at  no  im- 
proremeot,  if  he  porsue  no  iiseful  design,  if  he  Uve  for 
no  other  purpose  than  to  indulge  in  sloth,  to  consume 
the  fraits  of  the  earth,  and  spend  his  days  in  a  dream 
of  Tanity?  Exbtence  is  a  sacred  trust,  and  he  who 
thus  miaemploys  and  squandeT8  it  away  is  treacherooa 
to  its  author.  Look  around,  and  you  will  behold  the 
▼hole  imirerje  fuli  of  active  powers.  Action  is,  so 
to  spealc,  the  genius  of  naturę.  By  motion  and  exer- 
tion.  the  system  of  being  is  presenred  in  vigor.  By  its 
dilTerent  parts  always  acting  in  subordination  to  each 
other,  the  perfection  of  the  whole  is  carried  on.  The 
hesTenly  bodies  perpetually  revolve.  Day  and  night 
ioceasantly  repeat  their  appointed  course.  Coutinual 
operations  are  performing  on  the  earth  and  in  the  war 
teia.  Nothing  standa  still.  All  is  alive  and  stirring 
thioughout  the  unirerse.  In  the  midst  of  this  ani> 
nated  and  busy  scenę,  is  man  alone  to  remain  idle  in 
hb  place?  Bdongs  it  to  him  to  be  the  sole  inactive 
and  slothful  being  in  the  crestion,  when  in  so  many 
wajs  hc  might  improve  his  own  naturę,  might  advance 
the  gloiy  of  the  God  who  madę  him,  and  contributo  his 
P«rt  to  the  generał  good?  The  idle  live  not  to  the 
world  and  their  feUow-creatures  any  morę  than  to  God. 
Ifany  man  had  a  title  to  stand  alone,  and  to  be  inde- 
pendent of  his  fcllows,  he  might  consider  himself  as  at 
K^y  to  indulge  in  solitary  ease  and  sloth,  without 
being  retponaible  to  others  for  the  manner  in  which  hc 
chooies  to  Iive.  But  there  is  no  such  person  in  the 
world.  We  are  connected  with  each  other  by  yarious 
nlations,  which  create  a  chain  of  mutual  dependence 
that  reaches  from  the  highest  to  the  lowest  station  in 
■poety.  Withoat  a  perpetual  circulation  of  actire  du- 
tJo  and  ofBces,  which  all  are  required  to  pcrform  in  their 
toni,  the  order  and  happiness  of  the  world  could  not  be 
muntained.  Superiora  are  no  morę  independent  of  their 
inferiort  than  these  inferiors  of  them.  Each  have  de- 
"Mads  and  daims  upon  the  other ;  and  he  who,  in  any 
■itnation  of  lifc,  refoaes  to  act  his  part,  and  to  contribute 
|^»»Łaie  to  the  generał  stock  of  felicity, dcseryes  to  be 
P«*mbed  from  aociety  as  an  unworthy  raember.  **  If 
17  man  win  not  work,"  says  Paul  (2  Thess.  iii,  10), 
"neither  ihall  he  eat"  If  he  will  do  nothing  to  ad- 
yaice  the  porposes  of  aociety,  he  has  no  right  to  enjoy 
itibeneflta. 

The  idle  man  liyes  not  to  himself  with  any  morę  ad- 
^■ntage  than  he  liyea  to  the  world.    Though  he  imag- 


moL 

ines  that  he  leayes  to  others  the  dmdgery  of  life,  and 
betakes  himself  to  enjoyment  and  ease,  yet  he  enjoys  no 
tnie  pleasure.  He  shuts  the  door  against  improyement 
of  eyery  kind,  whether  of  mind,  body,  or  fortunę.  Sloth 
enfeebles  equally  the  bodily  and  the  mental  powers. 
His  character  falls  into  contompt.  His  fortunę  is  con- 
sumed.  Disorder,  confusion,  and  embarrassment  mark 
his  whole  situation.  Idlcness  is  the  inlet  to  licentious- 
ness,  yioe,  and  immorality.  It  destroys  the  principles 
of  religion,  and  opens  a  door  to  sin  and  wickedneas.  Ey- 
ery man  who  recoUects  his  conduct  must  know  that  his 
hours  of  idleneas  always  proycd  the  hours  most  danger- 
ous  to  yirtue.  It  was  then  that  crtminal  desires  aroae, 
guilty  passions  were  suggested,  and  designs  were  formed, 
which,  in  their  issoe,  disquiet  and  embitter  his  whole 
life.  Habitual  idleneas,  by  a  silent  and  secret  progreaa, 
undermines  eyery  yirtue  in  the  souL  Morę  yiolent  pa»> 
sions  run  their  course  and  terminate.  They  are  like 
rapid  torrents,  which  foam,  and  swell,  and  bear  down  ey- 
ery thing  befbre  them ;  but,  after  haying  oyerflowed  their 
banks,  their  impetuosity  subsides,  and  they  return,  by 
degrecs,  into  their  natural  channeL  Sloth  resemblea 
the  slowly-flowing  putrid  stream,  which  stagnates  in 
the  marsh,  produces  yenomous  animals  and  poisonoua 
piants,  and  infects  with  pestilential  yapors  the  whole 
Burrounding  country.  Haying  once  tainted  the  aoul, 
it  leayes  no  part  of  it  sound,  and,  at  the  same  time,  it 
giyes  not  to  conacienoe  those  alarms  which  the  erup- 
tions  of  boLder  and  fleroer  emotiona  often  oocasion. 
Nothing  is  so  great  an  enemy  to  the  liyely  and  spirited 
enjoyment  of  life  as  a  relazed  and  indolent  habit  of 
mincL  He  who  knows  not  what  it  is  to  labor,  knowa 
not  what  it  is  to  enjoy.  The  happiness  of  hnman  life 
dependa  on  the  regular  proaecution  of  some  laudable 
purpose  or  object,  which  keepa  awake  and  enliyens  all 
our  powers.  Kest  is  agieeable,  but  it  is  only  from  pre- 
ceding  labors  that  rest  acąuires  its  true  relish.  When 
the  mind  Is  suffered  to  remain  in  continued  inaction,  all 
its  powers  decay :  it  soon  languishes  and  sickens ;  and  ' 
the  pleasures  which  it  proposed  to  obtain  from  rest  ter- 
minate in  tediousness  and  insipidity.  See  Blair,  Ser- 
monsy  Sermon  xxxix;  Warner,  iSyafmi  ofDivintty  and 
MoraUłyy  iii,  151 ;  Logan,  Sermons,  Sermon  iy;  Kobin- 
son,  Theological  DicHonary^  a.  y. 

Idol,  properly  an  outward  object  adored  as  diyine,  or 
as  the  s>inbol  of  deit}'.     See  Idolatry. 

I.  CUusi/KOfwn  of  Scriptural  term*  hamnff  phffneai 
refertnce  to  auck  dt^etU, — As  a  large  number  of  different 
Hebrew  words  haye  been  rcndered  in  the  A.y.  either 
by  idol  or  image,  and  that  by  no  means  uniformly  (be- 
sides  one  or  morę  in  Greek  morę  uniformly  translated), 
it  will  be  of  some  adyantage  to  attempt  to  diacriminate 
between  them,  and  aasign,  as  neafly  as  the  two  lan- 
guages  will  allow,  the  Engliah  equiyalenta  for  each. 
See  Imagk. 

(I.)  Abstract  terma,  which,  with  a  deep  morał  signifi- 
cance,  expre8s  the  degradation  asaodated  with  idolatry, 
and  stand  out  as  a  protest  of  the  language  against  its 
enormities. 

(i.)  General  terms  of  (2ot<6(/ii/signification.— 1.  ^"^^K, 
iUV,  is  thought  by  some  to  haye  a  sense  akin  to  that  of 
'l^d,  $he'ker, "  falsehood,'*  with  which  it  stands  in  par- 
allelism  in  Job  xiii,  4,  and  would  therefore  much  resem- 
ble  dv€H,  as  applied  to  an  idoL  It  Ib  generally  derired 
from  the  imused  root  bbK,  to  &e  empty  or  yain.  De- 
li Łzsch  (on  Hab.  ii,  18)  deriyes  it  from  the  negativc  par- 
ticie bn,  al,  "die  Nichtigen;"*  but  according  to  FUrst 
{Handw.  s.  y.)  it  is  a  diminutiye  of  bM,  ^  god,"  the  addi- 
tional  syllable  indicating  the  greatest  contempT.  In 
this  ease  the  signification  aboye  mentioned  is  a  sub- 
sidiary  one.  The  same  authority  asscrts  that  the  word 
denotes  a  smali  image  of  the  god,  which  was  consulted 
as  an  oracie  among  the  Eg>'ptians  and  Phcenicians  (Isa. 
xix,  3 ;  Jer.  xiv,  14).  It  is  certainly  used  of  the  idoli 
of  Noph  or  Memphis  (Ezek.  xxx,  13).  In  strong  con- 
trast  with  Jehoyah,  it  appears  in  Pba.  xc,  6 ;  xcyii,  7,  the 


IDOL 


468 


rooL 


oontnst  probftUy  hńng  heightened  by  the  resemblanoe 
between  ililim  and  ilóhim,  A  somewhat  similar  pUy 
upon  wordB  ia  obeeryable  in  Hab.  ii,  18,  ta^si^K  Q^b*^bM, 
ililim  iUSmimy  A-V. "  dumb  idola"     See  Eu 

2.  D^^bil^ą,  ffiUuŁim%  alao  a  term  of  oontempt,  of  iin- 
certain  origin  (Ezek.  xxx,  18),  but  probably  derived 
from  bb  a,  to  r(^  as  dung^  hence  rfftt§e,  The  Rabbinical 
authorities,  referring  to  such  paeaagcs  aa  Ezek.  iy,  2; 
Zeph.  i,  17,  haye  fayored  the  interpretation  giyen  in  the 
margin  of  tho  A.y.  to  Deut.  xxix,  17,  "dungy  goda" 
(Vu^.  **8oide8,"  *<8oxde8  idolonim,"  1  Kinga  xy,  12). 
Jahn,  connecting  it  włth  bbft,^2a^  "to  roli,** applies  it 
to  the  Stecka  of  trees  of  which  idola  were  madę,  and  in 
mockery  called  giUulim^ "  rolling  things"  (a  vohendo,  he 
8a3rfl,  though  it  ia  difficult  to  see  the  point  of  his  remark). 
Geaenius,  repudiating  the  deriyation  ftom  the  Arabie 
jaUa,  ^  to  be  great,  illuatrious,"  giyes  his  preferenee  to 
the  rendering  *^  Stones,  atone  gc>ds,"  thus  deriying  it  from 
bą,  gal, "  a  heap  of  stonea  f  and  in  thia  he  ia  followed  by 
Furet,  who  translates^u/  by  the  German  «  Steinhaufe." 
The  expre88ipn  is  applied,  principally  in  Ezekiel,  to  false 
gods  and  their  symbols  (Deut  xxix,  17 ;  Ezek.  yiii,  10, 
etc.).  It  stands  side  by  side  with  other  contemptuoos 
terms  in  Ezek.  xyi,  36 ;  xx,  8,  as,  for  example,  ^ C^t 
thekeU,  ^filth,'*  "  abomination"  (Ezek.  yiii,  10),  and  oDg- 
nate  terms.  See  Dung*  May  not  D^^ls^^ft  mean  seara- 
hoBty  the  oommoneat  of  Egyptian  idola?  The  sense  of 
dung  is  appropriate  to  the  dung-beetle;  that  of  rolling 
ia  doubtful,  for,  if  the  meaning  of  the  ycrb  be  retained, 
we  shonld,  in  this  form,  rather  expect  a  passiye  sense, 
''a  thing  rolled;"  but  it  may  be  obsenred  that  these 
grammatical  rulea  of  the  sense  of  deriyatires  are  not  al- 
ways  to  be  stńctly  insisted  on,  for  Sidon,  'jS^I^^Sf ,  though 
held  to  signify  **  the  place  of  flshing,**  is,  in  the  list  of 
the  Noachians,  the  name  of  a  man,  "  the  fisherman," 
*AA<c  ucy  of  Philo  of  Byblus.  That  a  specially-applicable 
woni  ia  used  may  perhaps  be  conjectured  from  the  oo- 
currence  of  D^^h^^PK,  which,  if  meaning  little  gods,  would 
aptly  describe  the  pigmy  pteh-sekeb-hesar,  Ptah- 
Sokari-Osiris,  of  Memphis.  Ezekiel  uses  the  term 
D*^^lb:k  of  the  idols  of  Egypt  which  the  Israelites  were 
commanded  to  put  laway  at  or  about  the  time  of  the 
Exodua,  but  did  not,  and  seem  to  haye  carried  into  the 
Desert,  for  the  same  woid  is  used,  unqualified  by  the 
mention  of  any  country,  of  thoee  worshipped  by  them 
in  the  Desert  (xx,  7, 8, 16, 18, 24) ;  it  is,  howerer,  appa- 
rently  employcd  also  for  all  the  idols  worshipped  in 
Canaan  by  the  Israelites  (yer.  81 ;  xxiii,  87).  Scanbei 
were  so  abundant  among  the  Egyptians  and  Phoenicians 
that  there  is  no  reason  why  they  may  not  haye  been 
eińptoyed  also  in  the  worship  of  the  Canaanitish  false 
gods;  but  it  camiot  be  safely  supposed, without  further 
eyidence,  that  the  idola  of  Canaan  were  yirtually  termed 
acarabeL    Sec  Bketle. 

(ii.)  General  terms  of  hnown  signification.— 3.  I^K, 
<S'rfn,  rendered  elsewhere  "nought,"  "yanity,"  "iniąui- 
ty,"  "wickedness,"  "sorrow,"  etc,  and  only  once  "idoF 
(Isa.  lxvi,  8).  The  primary  idea  of  the  root  seems  to 
be  empłinessj  nothingness,  as  of  breath  or  yapor;  and, 
by  a  natural  tranaition,  in  a  morał  sense,  wickedness  in 
ita  actiye  form  of  mischief ;  and  then,  as  the  result,  sor- 
row and  trouble.  Hence  avm  denotes  a  vain,  false, 
wicked  thing,  and  expre88es  at  once  the  essential  naturę 
of  idols,  and  the  con8equences  of  their  worship.  The 
character  of  the  word  may  be  leamt  from  its  associates. 
It  stands  in  parallelism  with  OfiK,  e'phes  (Isa.  xli,  29), 
which,  after  undergoing  yarious  modificationa,  comes  at 
Icngth  to  signify  "  nothing ;"  with  ban,  he^bel, "  breatli" 
or  "  yapor,"  itself  applied  as  a  term  of  contempt  to  the 
objects  of  idolatrous  reyerence  (Deut  xxxii,  21 ;  1  Kings 
xyi,  13;  Psa.  xxxi,  6;  Jer.  viii,  19;  x,  8);  with  KIĆ, 
9haVf  "nothingness,"  "yanity;"  and  with  'ijsti, »*e'iw, 
<<  DfOsehood"  (Zech.  x,  2) :  all  indicating  the  uitter  worth* 


leasnesa  of  the  idola  to  wbom  homage  was  paid,  cnd  the 
false  and  delusiye  naturę  of  their  worship.  It  is  em- 
ployed  in  an  abstract  sense,  to  denote  idolatry  in  gen- 
erał, in  1  Sam.  xy,  23.  There  ia  much  ngnifieaDce  in 
the  change  of  name  ftom  Bethel  to  Beth^ayen,  the  gresl 
centrę  of  idolatry  in  Isnel  (Hos.  iy,  15).    See  Bcm- 

AYEN. 

4.  ]'Sł|»ti,aAiibtó/#',«fflth,''«impnrity,"e8pedanyajv. 
plied,  like  the  cognate  yj^^,  the'beiSf  to  that  which 
produced  ceremoniał  undeaimess  (Ezek.  xxxyii,  23; 
Nah.  iii,  6),  such  as  food  offered  in  sacrifice  to  idols 
(Zech.  ix,  7 ;  comp.  Acta  xy,  20,  29).  Aa  referring  ia 
the  idols  themselyes,  it  primarily  denotes  the  obscene 
rites  with  which  their  worship  waa  associated,  and 
hence,  by  metonymy,  ia  applied  both  to  the  objects  of 
worship  and  also  to  their  worahippers,  who  partook  of 
the  impurity,  and  thus  ^  became  loathaome  like  their 
]ove,"  the  foul  Baal-Peor  (Hos.  ix,  10).    See  Abom iha* 

TION. 

5.  In  the  same  connection  muat  be  noticed,  thongh 
not  actually  rendercd  "  image**  or  "  idol,**  ndSl,  b6'»kitkt 
'"shame,"  or  ''shameful  thing**  (A.y.  Jer.  ia,  18;  Hoa 
ix,  10),  applied  to  Baal  or  Bsal-Peor,  aa  chaiacterizio^ 
the  obsc^ty  of  his  worship.    See  Baal-peor. 

6.  n^^K,  fymóh*y  ^  horror**  or  "  terror,**  and  hence  sn 
object  of  horror  or  terror  (Jer.  1, 38),  in  refcrence  cither 
to  the  hideousneas  of  the  idols  or  to  the  grosa  chancter 
of  their  worship.  In  this  respect  it  is  doaely  conneeted 
with— 

7.  r.ąclsfip,  mipWttethy  a  "  fright,** «  honor,**  applied 
to  the  idol  ofMaachah,  probably  ofwood,  which  Asa  cat 
down  and  bumed  (1  Kings  xy,  13;  2  Chroń,  xv,  16),  and 
which  was  unquesUonably  the  Phallus,  the  symbol  of 
the  productiye  power  of  naturę  (Moyers,  Phćn,  i,  571; 
Selden,  de  Di*  Sgr,  ii,  5),  and  the  nature-goddess  Aihe- 
ra.  Allusion  is  supposed  to  be  madę  to  this  in  Jer.  x, 
5,  and  Epist  of  Jer.  70.  In  2  Chroń,  xv,  16  the  Yulg. 
render  "  simulacnmi  Pńapi**  (comp.  Horaoc,  **  furum  avi- 
umque  maxima  ybrmufo'*).  The  Sept  had  a  dilTerent 
reading,  which  it  is  not  easy  to  determine.  They  trans- 
late,  in  1  Kings  xv,  13,  the  same  word  both  by  tnryoloc 
(with  which  corresponds  the  Sj-riac  *i<45,  "  a  festival,* 
reading,  perhaps,  n^3C7,  ^Stureth,  aa  in  2  Kings  x,  20; 
Jer.  ix,  2)  and  KaraŁytnic,  while  in  Chronidea  it  is 
Łi^uiKoy.  Possibly  in  1  Kings  xv,  18  they  may  haye 
read  {nn^:ST3,  meUuUathdk,  for  nns^fir,  mipklamaJt, 
as  the  Yulg.  ^tecum,  of  which  "  aimulacrum  tnipisń- 
mum"  ia  a  correction.    See  Gbo>'e. 

(II.)  We  now  come  to  the  consideration  of  those 
words  which  morę  directly  apply  to  the  imagea  or  idds 
as  the  outward  symbols  of  the  deity  who  waa  worship- 
ped through  thero. 

(i.)  Terms  mdicating  the  form  of  idola. — 8.  >C0  or 
b^D,  si'fndj  with  which  Geacniua  compares  aa  cogiiate 
b^TS.  mdshdl,  and  fibs.  Udem;  the  Lat  śimiUg  and  Gr. 
ófiaAuc,  signifies  a  "  likeness,**  *<  semblance.**  The  Tar- 
gum  in  Deut  iy,  16  giyea  K^I^IS,  ^ntnS,  *<  figurę,**  as  the 
equiyalent,  while  in  Ezek.  viii,  8,  5  it  is  rendercd  hf 
Dbse,  tsełam^  *^  image.**  In  the  latter  pasaages  the  S}1^ 
iac  has  hoimió,  **  a  statuę**  (the  irr^Afi  of  the  Septuagint), 
which  morę  properly  corresponds  to  moMaStók  (see  Now 
1 3,  below) ;  and  in  Deut  genit,  ^  kind**  ( = ykvoc)*  The 
passage  in  2  Chroń,  xxxiii,  7  ia  rendered  "images  of 
four  faces,**  the  hitter  words  representing  the  one  under 
consideration.  In  2  Chroń,  xxxiii,  15  it  appears  as 
^  carved  images,'*  following  the  Sept  rb  yKvimv.  On 
the  whole,  the  Gr.  ttKw  of  Dent  iy,  16 ;  2  Chroń,  xxxiii, 
7,  and  the  "  simulacrum**  of  the  Tulg.  (2  Chroń,  xxxiii, 
15)  most  nearly  resemble  the  Heb.  ańndL    See  Cnaym, 

9.  fib^,  tu'lem,  (Cniald.  id,  and  D^S,  Mam'),  ia  by  aU 
lexicographerB,  ancient  and  modem,  conneeted  with  7X, 
t»il,  **  a  shadow.**  It  is  the  "image"*  of  God  in  which 
man  waa  created  (Gen.  i,  27;  comp^Wiad. ii, 23),  diatin- 


IDOL 


469 


IDOL 


gaished  fiom  n^TS?,  deimiihj  or  **  likeneas,"  as  the  *<  im- 
age" ftora  the  "  idea"  which  it  repreaents  (Schmidt,  De 
Imag,  Dei  m  H<m,  p.  84),  though  it  wooid  be  rash  to 
inaiat  opon  thia  distinction.  In  Łhe  N.  T.  UKutv  ap- 
peazs  to  zepresent  the  latter  (CoL  iii,  10;  eompare  the 
Sept.  at  Gen.  v,  1),  as  ofioiiafui  the  former  of  the  two 
woids  (Rom.  i,  23;  viii,  29;  PhiL  ii,  7),  but  in  Heb.  x, 
1,  tlnw  ia  opposed  to  mńa  as  the  snbstance  to  the  un- 
safaetantial  form,  of  which  it  is  the  perfect  representa- 
tire.  The  Sept.  render  denUUh  by  ofioiuKnę,  oftoiuffta, 
tinty^  Siiofoc,  and  Udem  most  fzequently  by  cikc^i', 
thoogh  o/Łoiutfia^  ei$ui\ov,  and  ruicoc  a]80  occor.  But, 
whatever  abstnet  tenn  may  best  define  the  meaning  of 
ttelem,  it  is  unquestionably  used  to  denote  the  yisible 
forms  of  extenial  objtets,  and  is  applied  to  figores  of 
gold  and  silyer  (i  Sam.  vi,  6;  Numb.  xxxiii,  52;  Dan. 
iii,  i),  such  as  the  golden  image  of  Nebuchadnezzar,  as 
wen  as  to  those  painted  upon  walls  (Ezek.  xxxiii,  U). 
"Image"  perhaps  most  nearly  represents  it  in  all  pas- 
sagesi  Applied  to  the  human  ooontenanoe  (Dan.  iii, 
19),  it  ńgn^es  the  **  expre88ion,"  and  oorresponds  to  the 
iiia  of  Matt.  xxvxii,  3,  thoogh  demuih  agrees  mther  with 
the  Platonie  naage  of  the  latter  word.    See  GnAysN. 

10.  ri3!l73ri,  temundh',  lendeied  **  image"  in  Job  iv, 
16;  ebewhoe  "similitode"  (Deut  iv,  12),  ^^likeness" 
(Deot  V,  8) :  "  form,"  or  ^  shape"  woold  be  better.  In 
Deut.  iv,  16  it  is  in  paialleUsm  with  n*^33n,  tahmłh\ 
UteiaHy  ''boild;"  hence  '"plan"  or  *< model"*  (2  Kings 
zvi,  10;  Gompare  £xod.  xx,  4;  Numb.  xii,  8). 

11.  nS7,  aUab',  32(9,  t'UA  (Jer.  xxii,  28),  or  S^j^, 
6't9A  (laa.  xlviii,  5),  *^a  figurę,"  all  derived  from  a  loot 
a^^,  aUfA,  **  to  work"  or  ^  fashion"  (akin  to  S^H,  cha- 
fmft,  and  the  like),  are  terms  applied  to  idola  as  expre88- 
ing  that  their  origin  was  due  to  the  labor  of  man.  The 
verb  in  its  derivod  senses  indicates  the  sorrow  and 
tronUe  eonaeąuent  npon  8evere  labor,  but  the  latter 
•eems  to  be  the  radiod  idea.  If  the  notion  of  sonów 
were  most  prominent,  the  words  as  applied  to  idols 
might  be  compared  with  Sben  above.  Isa.  lviii,  8  is 
rendered  in  the  Peshito  Syriac  "idols"  (A.y.  ''labors^, 
butthereadingwaseyidentlydifferent.  In  Psa.  cxxxix, 
21,  S3U?  'H'?!?  M  "idolatry." 

12.  n*«S,  tetr,  once  only  applied  to  an  idol  (Isa.  xlv, 
16;  Sept.  v^o(,  as  if  D*^^M,  tytm).  The  word  usually 
denotes  "a  pang,"  but  in  thia  instance  u  probably  con- 
nected  with  the  roots  ^?X,  Mir,  and  'nSC^,  5r<Stear,  and 
signifies  "^  a  shape"  or  "  mouM,"  and  hence  an  *'  idoL" 

13.  nnsp,  maUta3fah\  anything  set  up,  a  '<  statuę" 
(=3^39,  meUib,  Jer.  xliii,  18),  applied  to  a  memoriał 
itone  like  those  erected  by  Jaoob  on  fonr  seyeral  occa- 
Bons  (Gen.  xxviii,  18 ;  xxxi,  46 ;  xxxv,  14, 20)  to  com- 
memoiate  a  criais  in  his  tife,  or  to  mark  the  gTave  of 
RaeheL  Soch  were  the  Stones  set  up  by  Joshua  (Joeh. 
iv,  9)  after  the  paasage  of  the  Jordan,  and  at  Shechem 
(xxiv,  26),  and  by  Samuel  when  victoriou8  over  the  Phi- 
lisliues  (1  Sam. vii,  12).  When  solemnly  dedicated  they 
were  aoointed  with  oil,  and  libations  were  ponied  upon 
them.  The  word  is  applied  to  denote  the  obelisks  which 
stood  at  the  entiaaoe  to  the  tempie  of  the  sun  at  Heli- 
opolis (Jer.  xliii,  13),  two  of  which  were  a  hnndred  cu- 
Ittts  high  and  eight  bioad,  each  of  a  single  stone  (Herod, 
ii,  111).  It  is  aiso  used  of  the  statues  of  Baal  (2  Kings 
iii,  2),  whether  of  stone  (2  Kings  x,  27)  or  wood  (id.  26), 
which  stood  in  the  innermost  reoess  of  the  terapie  at 
Samaria.  Mover8  (PAJn.  i,  674)  conjectures  that  the 
latter  were  statues  or  colnmns  distinct  from  that  of 
Baal,  which  waa  of  stone  and  conical  (p.  673),  like  the 
''oMta"  of  Paphoe  (Tadt  H,  ii,  3),  and  probably,  theie- 
foR,  bdonging  to  other  deities,  who  were  his  wapt^poi 
or  9vfifittftoŁ,  The  Phosnicians  oonsecrated  and  anoint- 
cd  ttoiiea  like  that  at  Bethel,  which  were  called,  as  some 
thlnk,  from  this  cirenmstanoe,  Bahfha,  Many  such 
are  said  to  have  been  seen  on  Mt  Leban<Hł,  near  Heli- 
<1»li8»  dMicrt^ed  to  varioas  gods,  and  many  piodigies 


are  rdated  of  them  (Damasdus  in  Photius,  ^ooted  by 
Bochart,  Canaan^  ii,  2).  The  same  authority  describes 
them  as  aerolito^  of  a  whitish  and  sometimes  purple 
cok>r,  spherical  in  shape,  and  about  a  span  in  diameter. 
The  Palladium  of  Troy,  the  bUck  stone  in  the  Kaaba 
at  Mecca,  said  to  have  been  brought  from  heaven  by 
the  angel  Gabriel,  and  the  stone  at  Ephesns  *<  which 
fell  down  from  Jupiter"  (Acts  xix,  85),  are  examples  of 
the  belief,  anciently  so  common,  that  the  gods  sent  down 
their  images  upon  earth.  In  the  older  worship  of 
Greece,  Stones,  aocording  to  PknBanias.(vii,  22,  §  4),  oc* 
cnpied  the  place  of  images.  Those  at  Phara,  about 
thirty  in  number,  and  ąuadrangular  in  shape,  near  the 
statuę  of  Hermes,  reoeived  divine  honors  from  the  Pha- 
rians,  and  each  had  the  name  of  some  god  oonferred 
upon  it.  The  stone  in  the  tempie  of  Jupiter  Ammon 
("umbilico  maxime  similis"),  enriched  with  emeralda 
and  gems  (Curtius,  iv,  7,  §  81) ;  that  at  Delphi,  which 
Saturn  was  said  to  have  swallowed  (Pausan.  Pkoc.  24,  § 
6) ;  the  black  stone  of  pyramidal  idiape  in  the  tempie 
of  Juggemaut,  and  the  holy  stone  at  Pessinus,  in  Gala- 
tia,  sacred  to  Cybele,  show  how  widely  spread  and  al- 
most  univerBal  were  these  ancient  objects  of  worship. 
SeePiŁLAR. 

Closely  connected  with  these  <*  statues"  of  Baal,  wheth- 
er in  the  form  of  obelisks  or  otherwise,  were 

14.  D^^S^n,  chammanim\  rendered  in  the  maigin  of 
most  passages  "  sun-images."  The  word  has  given  rise 
to  much  discussion.  In  the  Vulg.  it  is  translated  thrice 
simulacroj  thrice  delubra,  and  onct  fana,  The  Sept. 
gives  Ttfievri  twice,  ciJaiXa  twice,  lv\tva  ^Mpoiroiiyra, 
/3^eXv7/UEra,  and  rd  tnjnikd.  With  one  exception  (2 
Chroń,  xxxiv,  4,  which  u  evidently  corrupt),  the  Syriac 
has  vagnely  either  ''fears,"  L  e.  objects  of  fear,  or 
**  idols."  The  Targum  in  kil  passages  translates  it  by 
K^Oap^ąn,  chamanesaya^  ''houses  for  star-wonhip" 
(Furst  compares  the  Arab.  Chimnaa,  the  planet  Mercury 
or  Yenus),  a  rendering  which  RosenmUUer  supporta. 
Gesenius  preferred  to  consider  these  chani9ne$aya  as 
<<  Yeils"  or  "shrines  surrounded  or  shrouded  with  hang* 
ings"  (Ezck.  xvi,  16 ;  Targ.  on  Isa.  iii,  19),  and  scouted 
the  interpretation  of  Buxtorf—"  status  solares" — as  a 
merę  guess,  though  he  somewhat  paradoxicaUy  assent- 
ed  to  RoscnmUlIer*8  opinion  that  they  were  "shrines 
dedicated  to  the  worship  of  the  stars."  Kimchi,  under 
the  root  "i^Pl,  mentions  a  conjecture  that  they  were 
treea  like  the  Ashtrim^  but  (s.  v.  DOM)  elsewhere  ex- 
presses  his  own  belief  that  the  Kun  is  epenthetic,  and 
that  they  were  so  called  *^  becauae  the  sun-worshippen 
madę  them."  Aben-Ezra  (on  Lev.  xxvi,  30)  says  tliey 
were  ^'houses  roade  for  worshipping  the  sun,"  which 
Bochart  approves  {jCanaan,  ii,  17),  and  Jarchi  that  they 
were  a  kind  of  idol  placed  on  the  roofs  of  houses.  Yo*- 
sius  (De  IdoL  ii,  363),  as  Scaliger  before  him,  connecta 
the  word  with  Amanus  or  Omanus,  the  sacred  fire,  the 
symbol  of  the  Persian  sun-god,  and  renders  it  pyrcea 
(corop.  Selden,  ii,  8).  Adelung  (MUhriŁ  i,  159,  quoted 
by  Gesenius  on  Isa.  xvii,  8)  suggested  the  same,  and 
compared  it  with  the  Sanscrit  homo.  But  to  such  in- 
terpretations  the  passage  in  2  Chroń,  xxxiv,  4  is  inim- 
ical  (Yitringa  on  Isa.  xvii,  8).  Gesenius's  own  opinion 
appears  to  have  fluctuated  considerably.  In  his  notes 
on  Isaiah  (/«  c.)  he  prefers  the  generał  rendering  **col- 
umns"  to  the  morę  definite  one  of '*  sun-columus,"  and 
is  inclined  to  look  to  a  Persian  origin  for  the  dcrivation 
of  the  word.  But  in  his  Thesaurus  he  mentions  the 
occurrence  of  Chamman  as  a  synonym  of  Baal  in  the 
Phcenician  and  Palmyrene  inscriptions  in  the  sense  of 
*'Dominus  Solaris,"  and  its  after  application  to  the  stat- 
ues or  oolumns  erected  for  his  worship.  Spencer  {De 
Legg.  H^r,  ii,  25),  and  after  him  Michaelis  (SuppL  ad 
Las,  Hdn-.  s.  V.))  maintained  that  it  signified  statues  or 
lofty  columns,  like  the  p3nramids  or  obelisks  of  Egypt. 
Mover8  {Ph^n.  i,  441)  concludes  with  good  reason  that 
the  sun-god  Baal  and  the  idol "  Chamman"  are  not  es- 
sentially  different    In  his  diaconion  of  Ckimmamm  he 


IDOL 


470 


rooE 


saysy "  These  images  of  tho  fire-god  were  plaeed  on  for- 
eign  or  non-Ianelitish  altan,  in  conjunction  with  the 
symbolfl  of  the  natuie-goddess  Asherah,  or  (rv/i/3iiifcoi 
(2  Chroń,  xiv,  8, 6 ;  xxxiv,  4, 7 ;  Isa.  xvił,  9 ;  xxvii,  9), 
as  was  otherwise  usual  with  Baal  and  Asherah."  They 
are  mentioned  with  the  Asherim,  and  the  latter  ai^ 
coupled  with  the  atatues  of  Baal  (1  Kinga  xiv,  28 ;  2 
Kinga  xxiii,  14).  The  chimmamm  and  atatuea  are  uaed 
promiscooiuly  (comtMre  2  Kinga  xxiii,  14,  and  2  Chroń. 
xxxiv,  4 ;  2  Chroń,  xiv,  8  and  5),  but  are  never  apoken 
of  together.  Such  are  the  atepa  by  which  he  arrives  at 
his  conduńon.  He  is  aupported  by  the  Palroyiene  in- 
scription  at  Oxford,  alluded  to  above,  which  has  been 
thus  rendered:  *'This  column  (K3^n,  Chammdna),  and 
this  altar,  tho  aons  of  Malchu,  etc.,  ha^e  erected  and 
dedicated  to  the  sun."  The  Yeneto- Greek  Yersion 
leavea  the  word  nntranalated  in  the  strange  form  ajca- 
pcnrrfę.  From  the  expreaBions  in  Ezek.  vi,  4,  6,  and 
Lev.  xxvi,  80,  it  may  be  inferred  that  these  oolumns, 
which  perhaps  repreaented  a  rising  flame  of  fire  and 
Btood  upon  the  altar  of  Baal  (2  Chroń,  xxxiv,  4),  were 
of  wood  or  atone.    See  Asherak. 

15.  n*^Stoc,  nuukith%  occurs  in  Lev.  xxvi,  1 ;  Nomb. 
xxiii,  52 ;  Ezek.  viii,  12 :  ^  deyice,*'  moat  nearly  auita  all 
passages  (compare  Psa.  lxxiii,  7 ;  Prov.  xviii,  11 ;  xxv, 
11).  This  word  has  been  the  fruitfol  cause  of  tta  much 
di^ute  as  the  preceding.  The  generał  opinion  appears 
to  be  that  Q  "jSK  signifies  a  stone  with  figures  graven 
upon  lU  Ben-Źeb  explainB  it  as  *^  a  stone  with  figures 
or  hieroglyphica  carved  upon  it,"  and  so  Michaelis;  and 
it  is  maintained  by  Movers  {Phon,  i,  105)  that  the  ba- 
fyfłiay  or  columns  with  painted  figures,  the  "lapides  efB- 
giati"  of  Minucius  FeUx  (c.  8),  are  these  ''stones  of  de- 
yioe,"  and  that  the  charactera  engiaven  on  them  are 
the  Upd  oroixtia,  or  characters  sacred  to  the  8everal 
deities.  The  invention  of  theae  charactera,  which  is 
ascribed  to  Taaut,  he  conjectures  originated  with  the 
Seres.  Gesenius  explainB  it  as  a  stone  with  the  image 
of  an  idol,  Baal  or  Astarte,  and  refers  to  his  Motk  Phmu 
p.  21-24,  for  others  of  a  similar  character.  Rashi  (on 
Lev.  xxi,  1)  deńves  it  from  the  root  "^SiS,  to  cover, 
"because  they  cover  the  floor  with  a  pavement  of 
Stones."  The  Targum  and  Syriac,  Lev.  xxvi,  1,  give 
*'  stone  of  devotion,"  and  the  former,  in  Numb.  xxxiii, 
52,  has  "  house  of  their  deyotion**  where  the  Syriac  only 
renders  '*  their  objects  of  devotion.**  For  the  formcr  the 
Sept  has  \iBoc  noiróCf  and  for  the  latter  tUc  woiridę 
avTwVf  connecting  the  word  with  tho  root  HSb,  "to 
look,**  a  circumstance  which  has  induced  SaalschUtz 
(Afot.  Rechtj  p.  882-885)  to  conjecture  that  thm  masldth 
was  ońginally  a  amooth  elevated  stone  employed  for 
tł^e  purpose  of  obtaining  from  it  a  freer  proepect,  and 
of  offering  prayer  in  prostration  upon  it  to  the  deities 
of  heaven.  Hence,  generally,  he  concludes  it  signiiies 
a  stone  of  prayer  or  devotion,  and  the  "  chambers  of 
imagery"  of  Ezek.  viii,  7  are  "  chambera  of  devotion.** 
The  renderinga  of  the  last  mentioned  passage  in  the 
Sept.  and  Targum  are  curious  as  pointing  to  a  various 
reading,  insiSTS,  or,  morę  probably,  133^13.  See 
Imagert. 

16.  d'^fi'Jl?,  ter6phim\    See  Teraphim. 

(ii.)  The  terms  which  follow  have  regard  to  the  ma- 
teriał and  workmanśhip  of  the  idol  rather  than  to  its 
character  as  an  object  of  worship. 

17.  bOD,  pe'tel,  usually  translated  in  the  Authorized 
Yersion  "  gTaven  or  carved  image."  In  two  passages  it 
is  ambiguously  rendered  ^'ąuarries'*  (Judg.  iii,  19,  26), 
ailer  the  Targum,  but  there  seems  to  be  no  reason  for 
departing  from  the  ordinary  signification.  In  the  ma^ 
jority  of  instancea  the  Sept  has  yXtrgrróv,  oncc  y\vfifia. 
The  verb  is  employed  to  denote  the  fimshing  which  the 
stone  reoeived  at  the  hands  of  the  masons  after  it  had 
been  rongh-hewn  from  the  quarries  (£xod.  xxxiv,  4 ; 
1  Kings  V,  82).    It  is  probably  a  Uter  usage  which  has 


applied  jwff/  to  a  fignre  cast  in  metsl,  as  in  laau  zl,  i9| 
xliv,  10.  (Morę  probably  atill,  petel  deuuies  by^itidp^ 
tion  the  molten  image  in  a  later  atage,  after  it  had  been 
trimmed  into  shape  by  the  caster.)  Theae  **  aculptured* 
images  were  apparently  of  wood,  iron,  or  stone,  coTend 
with  gold  or  silver  (Deut.  vii,  25 ;  Isa.  xxx,  22 ;  Hih.  ii, 
19),  the  morę  coetly  being  of  solid  metal  (Isa.  x],  19). 
Thcy  could  be  bumed  (Deut.  vii,  5;  Isa.  xly,  2U;  i 
Chroń,  xxxiv,  4),  or  cut  down  (Deut.  xii,  8)  and  pouńd- 
cd  (2  Chroń,  xxxiv,  7),  or  broken  in  picoea  (Isa.  xxi,  9). 
In  making  them,  the  skill  of  the  wise  inm-smith  (Dent 
xxvii,  15;  Isa.  3d,  20)  or  carpenter,  and  of  the  goU- 
smith,  was  employed  (Judg.  xvii,  8,  4;  Isa.  xli,  7^  the 
former  supplying  the  rough  mass  of  iron  beateu  into 
shape  on  his  an^il  (Isa.  xliv,  12),  wbile  the  lalter  ova^ 
laid  it  with  plates  of  gold  and  8ilver,  probably  fitom 
Tarshish  (Jer.  x,  9),  and  decoirated  it  with  Bilver  chainn 
The  image  thus  formed  received  the  further  adonuncnt 
of  embroidered  robes  (Ezek.  xvi,  18),  to  which  iMSBiUr 
allusion  may  be  madę  in  Isa.  iii,  19.  Brass  and  cUy 
were  among  the  materiab  employed  for  the  same  pur- 
pose (Dan.  u,  88;  v,  28).  (Imagea  of  glazed  potteiy 
have  been  found  in  Egypt  [Wilkinson,  ^nc  A]^.  iii,  90; 
comp.Wisd.  xv,  8].)  A  description  of  the  three  greit 
images  of  Babylon  on  the  top  of  the  tempie  of  Bda 
will  be  found  in  Diod.  Sic  ii,  9  (compare  Layard,  Nuu  ii, 
433).  The  8evcral  stages  of  the  prooeas  by  which  the 
metal  or  wood  became  the  **  graven  image"  are  so  tit- 
idiy  described  in  Isa.  xliv,  10-20,  that  it  b  only  neces- 
Miy  to  refer  to  that  passage,  and  we  are  at  once  iDtro- 
duced  to  the  mysteries  of  idol  mannfacture,  which,  u  st 
Ephesus,  "  brought  no  smali  gain  unto  the  craftanen.' 
See  SiiRiNK. 

18.  T\0)  or  "^^ęr,  ne'iek,  and  nSDp,  moweibaA',  are 
evidently  synonymous  (Isa.  xli,  29 ;  xlviii,  5 ;  Jer.  x.  U) 
in  later  Hebrew,  and  denote  a  **  mt^ten**  image.  Ma*- 
sehah  is  frequenćly  nsed  in  distinction  from  peael  or  pe- 
ńłim  (Deut.  xxvii,  15 ;  Judg.  xvii,  8,  etc.).  The  goUen 
calf  which  Aaron  madę  was  laahioned  with  ^'tlie  grav< 
er"  (^*|^T1,  cheret),  but  it  is  not  ąuite  dear  for  what  poiw 
pose  the  graver  was  used  (Exod.  xxxix,  4).  The  ehent 
(oomp.  xopdrTui)  appears  to  have  been  a  sharp-pointed 
instrument,  used  like  the  styku  for  a  writing  implement 
(Isa.  viii,  1).  ^Vhether  then  Aaron,  T)y  the  help  of  the 
chereł^  gave  to  the  molten  mass  the  shape  of  a  calf,  or 
whether  he  madę  use  of  the  graver  for  the  purpose  of 
carving  hieroglyphics  upon  it,  has  been  tKought  doubt- 
fuL  The  Syr.  has  tipió  (ńtroc), "  the  mould,"*  for  ehe- 
ret.  But  the  expres8ion  '^^^j,  rajf^atsar,  decides  that 
it  was  by  the  cherełf  in  whatever  manncr  employed, 
that  the  shape  of  a  calf  was  given  to  the  metaL  See 
Molten. 

(ui.)  In  the  New  Test  the  Greek  of  idol  ia  f  i^«Xov, 
which  exactly  cocreaponds  with  it  In  one  passaiĘe 
(iKwv  is  the  **  image"  or  head  of  the  emperor  on  the 
coinage  (Matt  xxii,  20).    See  also  AufiCEMA. 

IL  Actual  Forms  of  Idola, — Among  the  earliest  ob- 
jects of  worship,  regaided  as  symbols  of  deity,  were  the 
meteoric  Stones  which  the  ancients  believed  to  han 
been  the  images  of  the  gods  sent  down  lirom  hesren. 
See  Diaka.  From  these  they  tranaferred  their  regard 
to  rough  unhewn  blocks,  to  stone  columns  or  pillais  of 
wood,  in  which  the  divinity  worshippcd  was  anpposed 
to  dweU,  and  which  were  conaecrated,  like  the  aacred 
stone  at  Delphi,  by  being  anointed  with  oil,  aod  crowned 
with  wool  on  solemn  da3rs  (Pauaan.  Phoc,  24,  §  6>  Ts- 
vemier  (quoted  by  ^o&eom^oSkiyAU.aRdK.MorgmUaĄ 
i,  §  89)  mentions  a  black  stone  in  the  pagoda  of  Bcnaret 
which  was  daily  anointed  with  perfumed  oil,  and  such 
are  the  "  Lingams"  in  daily  use  in  the  Siva  woiship  of 
India  (compare  Amobius,  i,  80 ;  Min.  Felix,  c.  3).  Such 
customs  are  remarkable  illuatrations  of  the  solemn  coo- 
aecration  by  Jacob  of  the  stone  at  Bethel,  as  showing 
the  religious  reverenoe  with  which  these  memoriala 
were  regarded.  Not  only  were  single  Stones  thus  hoo- 
ored,  but  heaps  of  stone  were,  in  later  times  at  Ieas^ 


moŁ 


471 


IDOLATRY 


considered  ns  sacrcd  to  Hennes  (Homer,  0<L  xvi,  471 ; 
comik  Łhe  Vulg.  at  Prov.  xxvi,  8, "  Sicut  qui  mittlŁ  Upi- 
dem  in  acerviim  Mercurii"),  and  to  tbese  each  pasaing 
trareller  oontribut«d  hiii  offeriug  (Creuzer,  Symb.  i,  24). 
The  h?ap  of  stonea  which  Laban  erected  to  commemo-, 
ntz  ue  aoleinn  compact  between  himself  and  Jacob, 
and  on  which  he  invoked  the  goda  of  hia  fatbers,  ia  an 
inatance  of  the  intermediate  atage  in  which  auch  heapa 
were  aasodated  with  religioua  obeenrancea  before  they 
became  objects  of  worahip.  Jacob,  for  hia  part,  dedi- 
ctted  a  aingle  atone  aa  hia  piemorial,  and  called  Jehovah 
to  witneas,  thoa  holding  himaelf  aloof  from  the  ritea  em- 
plojed  by  Laban,  which  may  have  partaken  of  hia  an- 
cestnl  idolatiy.     See  Jboar-Sahadutha. 

Of  the  forma  aaaumed  by  the  idolatroua  imagea  we 
hare  not  many  tracea  in  the  Bibie.  Dagon,  the  fiah-god 
uf  the  PhiUatinea,  was  a  human  figurę  terminating  in  a 
fbh  [aee  Dago:«  ] ;  and  that  the  Syrian  deitiea  were 
lepreaented  in  later  timea  in  a  aymbolical  human  ahape 
we  know  for  certainty.  See  alao  NiSKOCii.  The  He- 
brewB  imitated  their  neighbora  in  thia  reapect  as  in  oth- 
en  (Isa.  xliv,  13 ;  Wiad.  xiii,  13),  and  from  various  allu- 
tiona  we  may  infer  that  idola  in  hftman  forma  were  not 
unoommon  among  them,  though  they  were  morę  an- 
dently  aymbolized  by  animala  (Wiad.  xiii,  14),  aa  by  the 
cdres  of  Aaron  and  Jcroboam,  and  the  brazen  eerpent 
which  waa  afterwards  appUed  to  idolatroua  uaea  (2  Kinga 
xviii,  4;  Rom.  i,  23).  When  the  image  came  from  the 
hands  of  the  maker  it  waa  decorated  richly  with  ailver 
and  goli,  and  aometimes  crowned  (Epist  Jer.  9),  dad  in 
robea  of  blue  and  purple  (Jer.  x,  9),  like  the  draped  im- 
agea of  Pallaa  and  Hen  (Molier,  IIwuL  d.  A  rch.  d  Kunst, 
§  69),  and  faaten^  in  the  niche  appropriated  to  it  by 
meaaa  of  chaina  and  naila  (Wiad.  xiii,  15),  in  order  that 
the  influence  of  the  deity  which  it  repreaented  might  be 
aecuied  to  the  apoL  So  the  Epheaiana,  when  beeieged 
by  Craeans,  connected  the  wali  of  their  city  by  meana  of 
a  ropę  to  the  tempie  of  Aphrodite,  with  a  view  fco  in- 
auring  the  aid  of  the  goddeaa  (Herod,  i,  26) ;  and  for  a 
aimilar  object  the  Tyriana  chained  the  atone  image  of 
Apdb  to  the  altar  of  Herculea  (Curt  iv,  8,  §  15).  Some 
imagea  were  painted  red  (Wiad.  xiii,  14),  like  thoae  of 
Diooysua  and  the  Bacchantea,  of  Hermea,  and  the  god 
Pan  (Panaan.  ii,  2,  §  5 ;  MuUer,  Jland,  d.  A  rch,  d,  Kunsł, 
§69).  This  color  was  formerly  considered  aacred.  Pliny 
relatea,  on  the  authority  of  Yerriua,  that  it  waa  custom- 
ary  on  featival  daya  to  color  with  red-lead  the  face  of 
the  image  of  Jupiter,  and  the  bodiea  of  thoae  who  cele- 
bnted  a  triumph  (xxxiii,  36).  The  figurea  of  Priapua, 
the  god  of  gardena,  were  decorated  in  the  aame  maimer 
("  ruber  cuatoa,"  TibulL  i,  1, 18).  Among  the  objecU  of 
worship  enumerated  by  Amobius  (i,  39)  are  bonea  of  el- 
ephanta,  picturea,  and  garlanda  auapended  on  treea,  the 
**mmi  coronati**  of  Apuleiua  {de  Mag.  c.  56). 

'Wlicn  the  proceaa  of  adoming  the  image  waa  com- 
pleted,  it  waa  placed  in  a  tempie  or  ahrine  appointed  for 
it  {oiKta,  Epiat.  Jer.  12, 19 ;  oiKiifiaj  Wiad.  xiii,  15 ;  twut- 
\uop,  1  Cor.  viii,  10 ;  aee  Stanley*a  notę  on  the  latter 
paaaage).  In  Wiad.  xiii,  15,  oiKtifui  ia  though  t  to  be 
uaed  oontemptuoualy,  aa  in  TibuU.  i,  10, 19,  20,  **  Cum 
paapere  cultu  Stabat  in  exigua  ligneua  cede.  deua" 
(Fritache  and  Grimm,  H€jmdb,)j  but  the  paaaage  quoted 
ia  by  no  meana  a  good  illustration.  From  theae  templea 
the  idola  were  aometimea  carried  in  proceaaion  (Epiat 
Jer.  4,  26)  on  featival  daya.  Their  pricata  were  main- 
tained  fióm  the  idol  treaaury,  and  feaated  upon  the 
meata  which  were  appointed  for  the  idola*  uae  (Bel  and 
the  Dragon,  3, 13).  Theae  aacrificial  feaata  formed  an 
important  part  of  the  idolatroua  ritual,  and  were  a  great 
itambUng-block  to  the  early  Chriatian  converta.  They 
were  to  the  heathen,  aa  Prof.  Stanley  haa  wcU  obeenred, 
what  the  obeenrance  of  circurocision  and  the  Moaaic 
ńtual  were  to  the  Jewiah  convert8,  and  it  waa  for  thia 
leaaon  that  Paul  eapecially  directed  hia  attention  to  the 
anbject,  and  laid  down  the  rulea  of  conduct  contained  in 
his  firat  letier  to  the  Corinthiana  (viii-x).— Smith; 
Kitto.    See  Idołatby. 


Idolatry  ia  divine  honor  paid  to  any  created  object 
It  ia  thua  a  wider  tenn  than  inkoge^wonk^f  (q.  v.).  For 
many  old  monographa  on  the  varioua  forma  of  ancient 
idolatry,  aee  Yolbeding,  Index  Programmatum,  p.  108  Bq. 
See  Goi>8,  False;  Bkast-worship. 

We  find  the  idea  of  idolatry  expre8Bed  in  the  O.  T.  by 
nta  (a  lie,  Paa.  xlv,  5;  Amos  ii,  4),  or  KjlĆ  (nuUkif), 
and  adll  oftener  by  na^in  (abommation),  In  after 
timea  the  Jewa  deaignated  it  aa  n$^  rn^a?  {fortign 
worahip),  Thua  we  aee  that  it  had  no  name  indicative 
of  ita  naturę,  for  the  Biblical  expre88iona  are  morę  a 
monotheistic  qualification  of  divine  worahip  than  a  def- 
inition  of  it;  the  laat  Hebrew  exprea8ion,  howerer, 
ahowa  idolatry  aa  not  being  of  Jewish  origin.  The 
word  tiiuikokaTciia  in  the  N.  T.  ia  entirdy  due  to  the 
Septuagint,  which,  wherever  any  of  the  heathen  deitiea 
are  mentioned,  even  though  deaignated  in  the  aacred 
text  only  aa  D^^b^^^M  (noikmgi),  tranalatea  by  iidut\ov, 
an  idolf  a  practice  generaUy  followed  by  later  vezBiona. 
A  apecLal  aort  of  idolatry,  namely,  the  actual  adoration 
of  imagea  CldoioUUria)  thua  gave  name  to  the  whole 
apedea  (1  Cor.  x,  14 ;  Gal.  v,  20 ;  1  Pet  iv,  3).  Subae- 
quently  the  morę  comprehenaive  word  tiSo\arpiia  {idol- 
cariuy  inatead  of  idolotatria)  waa  adopted,  which  induded 
the  adoration  and  worahip  of  other  viaible  aymbola  of  the 
deity  {tldoc)  beaidea  thoae  due  to  the  atatuaiy  art— 
Herzog. 

I.  Origm  of  Idolatry,— In  the  primnval  period  man 
appeara  to  have  had  not  alone  a  revelation,  but  alao  aa 
implanted  natural  law.  Adam  and  aome  of  hia  deacend- 
anta,  aa  late  aa  the  time  of  the  Flood,  ccrtainly  lived 
under  a  revealed  ayatem,  now  uaually  apoken  of  aa  the 
patriarchal  diapenaation,  and  Paul  tella  ua  that  the  na- 
tiona  were  under  a  natural  law  (Kom.  ii,  14, 15).  *<  Man 
in  hia  natural  atate  muat  alwaya  have  had  a  knowledge 
of  God  auf&cient  for  the  condition  in  which  he  had  been 
placed.  Although  God  *in  timea  paat  auffered  all  na- 
tiona  [or,  rather,  'all  the  Gentilea,'  iravra  ra  k9vii\  to 
walk  ia  their  own  ways,  ueverthdeB8  he  left  not  him- 
aelf without  witneea,  in  that  he  did  good,  and  gavo  ua 
rain  from  heaven,  and  fruitful  aeaaona,  filling  our  hcarta 
with  fuod  and  gladneaa*  (Acta  xiv,  17).  '  For  the  invia- 
ible  thlngs  of  him,  from  the  creation  of  the  world,  ar^ 
clearly  aeen,  being  underatood  by  the  thinga  that  are 
madę,  [even]  hia  etenul  power  and  godhead'  (Rom.  i, 
20).  But  the  people  of  whom  we  are  apeaking '  changed 
the  glory  of  the  incorruptible  God  into  an  image  madę 
like  to  corruptible  man,  and  to  birda,  and  four-footed 
beaata,  and  creeping  thinga,'  *  and  worahipped  and  aenred 
the  crcature  morę  than  the  Creator,  who  ia  blcaaed  forr 
ever'  (Rom.  i,  21-25).  Thua  aroee  that  atrange  auper- 
atition  which  ia  known  by  the  term  FetUhiam  [or  Iow 
nature-worahip],  conaiating  in  the  worahip  of  animala, 
treea,  river8,  hilla,  and  atonea**  (Poole,  Geneńs  of  the 
Earih  and  of  Man,  2d  ed.  p.  160, 161).  Paul  apeaka  of 
thoae  who  inventeid  thia  idolatry  aa  therefore  foraakea 
of  God  and  auffered  to  aink  into  the  deepeat  morał  cor- 
ruption  (Rom.  i,  28).  It  ia  remarkable  that  among 
highly-civilized  nationa  the  converse  obtaina;  morał 
corruption  being  very  freąuently  the  cauae  of  the  aban- 
doning  of  tnia  religion  for  Infidelity.  —  Kitto.  That 
theoiy  of  human  progreaa  which  auppoeea  man  to  have 
gradually  worked  hia  way  up  from  barbarie  ignoranoe 
of  God  to  a  ao-called  natural  religion  ia  contradicted  by 
the  facta  of  Biblical  hiatory. 

Nothing  ia  diatinctly  atated  in  the  Bibie  aa  to  any 
antediluvian  idolatry.  It  U,  howerer,  a  reaaonable  aup- 
poeition  that  in  the  generał  corruption  before  the  Flood 
idolatry  waa  practised.  There  ia  no  undoubted  tracę  of 
heathen  dirinitiea  in  the  namea  of  the  antediluviana ; 
but  there  are  dim  indicationa  of  anoeatral  worahip  in 
the  poatdiluvian  worahip  of  aome  of  the  antediluvian 
patriarcha.  It  haa  been  auppoeed  that  the  bet  or  sur- 
EKH  of  the  Egyptian  Pantheon  ia  the  Hebrew  Seih. 
The  Cainite  Enoch  waa  poaaibly  commemorated  aa  An- 
nacus  or  Nannacua  at  Iconium,  though,  thia  name  being 


roOLATRT 


472 


IDOLATRY 


łddntified  with  Enocb,  the  leference  may  be  to  Enoch 
of  the  linę  of  Seth.  It  is  reaaonable  to  suppoBe  that  the 
-wonhip  of  tfaese  antediiuYiaiis  origniated  before  the 
Flood,  for  it  is  unlikely  that  it  wouM  have  been  insti- 
tated  afler  it.  Some  Jewish  wńten,  groimding  their 
theory  on  a  foioed  interpretation  of  Gen.  iv,  26,  auign 
to  Enos,  the  son  of  Seth,  the  uuenyiable  notoriety  of 
having  been  the  fizst  to  pay  divine  honon  to  the  hoet 
of  heaven,  and  to  lead  othen  into  the  like  enor  (Mai- 
mon.  De  IdoL  i,  1).  R.  Solomon  Jarchi,  on  the  other 
hand,  while  admitting  the  same  yene  to  contain  the 
fizBt  account  of  the  oiigin  of  idolatiy,  understands  it  aa 
implying  the  deification  of  men  and  plants.  Arabie 
tiadition,  acoording  to  Sir  W.  Jones,  connects  the  people 
of  Yemen  with  the  same  apostasy.  The  third  in  de- 
scent  from  Joktan,  and  therefore  a  oontemporary  of  Ka- 
hor,  took  the  sumame  o(  Abdu  SHomm,  or  "senrant  of 
the  sun/'  whom  he  and  his  family  worshipped,  while 
other  tribes  honored  the  planets  and  lixed  stara  (Hales, 
ChronoL  ii,  69, 4to  ed.).  Nimrod,  again,  to  whom  is  aa- 
cribed  the  introduction  of  Zabianism,  was  after  his  death 
transferred  to  the  oonstellation  Orion,  and  on  the  slen- 
der  foundation  of  the  expre8Bion  ^  Ur  of  the  Chaldeea" 
(Gen.  xi,  31)  is  built  the  fabolous  history  of  Abraham 
and  Nimrod,  narrated  in  the  legenda  of  the  Jewa  and 
Mossulmans  ( Jellinek,  Bet  ka-Midrash,  i,  28 ;  Weil,  BibL 
Leg.  p,  47-74 ;  Hyde,  ReL  Pers,  c.  2).— Smith. 

IL  Class\ficatUm  of  Idolairy,—AXi.  unmixed  83rBtem8 
of  idolatry  may  be  dassifled  under  the  follo¥ring  heads; 
all  mixed  systema  may  be  resolyed  into  two  or  morę  of 
them.  We  gire  in  thia  connection  generał  illuatrationa 
of  these  speciea  of  false  worship  as  evinced  by  the  na- 
tiona  associated  with  the  Jewish  people,  reserring  for 
the  next  head  a  morę  complete  survey  of  the  idolatroos 
systema  of  the  most  important  of  these  nations  sępa- 
rately. 

1.  Low  natnre-worahip,  or  fetiśhim,  the  woiahip  of 
animala,  trees,  riyers,  hilla,  and  Stones.  The  fetishism 
of  the  negroes  is  thought  to  admit  of  a  belief  in  a  su- 
premę intelligence :  if  this  be  tnie,  such  a  belief  u  either 
a  relic  of  a  higher  religion,  or  else  ia  derived  from  the 
Moslim  tribea  of  Africa.  Fetishism  is  doeely  connected 
with  magie,  and  the  Kigritian  prieata  are  uniyeraally 
magicians. 

Beast^-worship  was  exemplified  in  the  calvea  of  Jero- 
boam  and  the  dark  hinta  which  aeem  to  point  to  the 
goat  of  Mcndes.  There  is  no  actual  proof  that  the  Is- 
raelitea  ever  joined  in  the  aeryioe  of  Dagon,  the  fiah-god 
of  the  Philistinee,  though  Ahaziah  aent  atealthily  to 
Baalzebub,  the  fly-god  of  Ekron  (2  Kinga  i).  Some  haye 
explained  the  alluaion  in  Zeph.  i,  9  aa  referring  to  a  prae- 
tice  connected  with  the  worship  of  Dagon;  comp.  1  Sam. 
y,  6.  The  Syriana  are  atated  by  Xenophon  {Anab,  i, 
4,  §  9)  to  have  paid  divine  honors  to  fiah.  In  later 
timea  the  brazen  aerpent  became  the  object  of  idolatrous 
homage  (2  Kinga  xviii,  4).  Bat  whether  the  latter  was 
regarded  with  auperstitaous  reverence  as  a  memoriał  of 
their  early  history,  or  whether  inccnae  waa  offered  to  it 
aa  a  aymbol  of  some  power  of  naturę,  cannot  now  be  ex- 
actly  determined.  The  threatening  in  Lev.  xxvi,  80, 
**  I  will  put  your  carcaases  upon  the  carcasses  of  your 
idols,"  may  fairly  be  conaidercd  aa  diredled  againat  the 
tendency  to  regard  animala,  aa  in  Egypt,  aa  the  sym- 
bols  of  deity.  Tradition  says  that  Nergal,  the  god  of 
the  men  of  Cuth,  the  idol  of  fire  according  to  Leusden 
{PhiL  Ifebr,  Mixt,  diss.  43),  waa  worahipped  under  the 
form  of  a  oock ;  Aahima  aa  a  he-goat,  the  emblem  of 
generatiye  power;  Nibhaz  aa  a  dog;  Adrammelech  aa  a 
mule  or  peacock ;  and  Anammelech  aa  a  horae  or  pheaa- 
ant 

The  aingular  reyerence  with  which  treea  haye  in  all 
agea  been  honored  ia  not  without  example  in  the  histo- 
ry of  the  Hebrewa.  The  terebinth  at  Mamre,  beneath 
which  Abraham  built  an  alŁar  (Gen.  xii,  7 ;  xiii,  18), 
and  the  memoriał  grove  planted  by  him  at  Beersheba 
(Gen.  xxi,  83),  were  intimately  connected  with  patri- 
archal  worship  though  in  afler  agea  hia  deacendanta 


were  forbidden  to  do  that  which  he  did  with  impmuty, 
in  order  to  ayoid  the  contamination  of  idolatry.  Jerańe 
(OmmeuticoH,  a.  y.  Drya)  mentiona  an  oak  near  Heteoa 
which  exiated  in  hia  infancy,  and  waa  the  traditknal 
tree  beneath  which  Abraham  dwelL  It  waa  leginted 
with  great  reyerence,  and  waa  madę  an  object  of  wor- 
ahip  by  the  heathen.  Modem  Paleatine  abounds  with 
aacred  trees.  They  are  found  "  all  oyer  the  land  eorer^ 
ed  with  bita  of  raga  from  the  garmenta  of  paasing  vii- 
lagera,  hnng  up  aa  acknowledgmenta,  or  aa  deprecatory 
aignala  and  charma;  and  we  find  beautiftil  clumps  of 
oak-treea  aacred  to  a  kind  of  beinga  called  JaeoV8 
daughtera"  (Thomson,  The  Land  and  the  Book,  ii,  161). 
See  Grove.  Aa  a  aymptom  of  the  rapidly  degener- 
ating  spirit,  the  oak  of  Shechem,  which  atood  in  the 
aanctuary  of  Jehoyah  (Joah.  xxiy,  26),  and  beneath 
which  Joahua  aet  up  the  atone  of  witneaa,  perhaps  ap- 
pears  in  Judges  (ix,  87)  aa  "  the  oak  (not  'plain,'  as  in 
the  A.  y.)  of  soothsayers"  or  ^augurs."  Thia,  indeed, 
may  be  a  relic  of  the  ancient  Canaanittah  wonhip;  an  ' 
older  name  aasodated  with  idolatry,  which  the  conquei^ 
ing  Hebrewa  were  oommanded  and  endeayored  to  oblit^ 
erate  (Deut  xii,  8).  ^ 

2.  Shanumiim,  or  the  ma^^cal  aide  of  ietiabiam,  tbe 
religion  of  the  Mongolian  tribea^  and  apparently  the 
primitiye  religion  of  China. 

8.  High  nature-4Ponkipy  the  worship  of  the  son,  mooo, 
and  stara,  and  of  the  suppoaed  powers  of  naturę.  The 
old  religion  of  the  Shemitic  racea  consisted,  in  the  o{mb- 
ion  of  Moyers  {Phdn,  i,  c.  5),  in  the  deification  of  the 
powers  and  laws  of  naturę;  theac  powers  being  consid- 
ered  either  as  diatinct  and  independent,  or  as  manifes- 
tationa  of  one  aupreme  and  all-ruKng  being.  In  most 
inatancea  the  two  ideaa  were  co-exiatent.  The  deity, 
following  human  analogy,  waa  conceiyed  aa  mak  and 
female :  the  one  repreaenting  the  -actiye,  the  other  the 
paaaiye  principle  of  naturę;  the  former  the  aonrce  of 
spiritual,  the  latter  of  phyaical  life.  The  transference 
of  the  attributea  of  the  one  to  the  other  resulted  either 
in  their  mystical  conjunction  in  the  hermaphroditc,  as 
the  Persian  Mithra  and  Phoenician  Baal,  or  the  two 
combined  to  form  a  third,  which  symbolized  tbe  essen- 
tial  unity  of  both.  (Thia  will  explain  the  oocurrence 
of  the  name  of  Baal  with  the  maaculine  and  feminine 
articles  in  the  Sept ;  comp.  Hoa.  xi,  2 ;  Jer.  xix,  6 ;  Rom. 
xi,  4.  Philochorus,  quoted  by  Macrobius  \_Sa(.  iii,  8], 
says  that  men  and  women  sacrificed  to  Yenna  or  the 
Moon,  with  the  garmenta  of  the  aexea  interchanged,  be- 
cauae  ahe  waa  rągarded  both  aa  maaculine  and  feminise 
[aee  Selden,  De  DU  Syr,  ii,  2].  Hence  LunuM  and  JUi- 
na,)  With  these  two  aupreme  beinga  all  other  beinga 
are  identical ;  so  that  in  different  nations  the  same  na- 
ture-worship  appears  under  different  fonns,  repreaenting 
the  yarious  aapecta  under  which  the  idea  of  the  power 
of  naturę  ia  preaented.  The  sun  and  moon  were  eaily 
aelected  aa  outward  syrobola  of  thia  all-per^'ading  power, 
and  the  wonhip  of  the  heayenly  bodiea  waa  not  ouly 
the  most  ancient,  but  the  moat  prevalent  system  of  idoK 
atry.  Taking  ita  riae,  according  to  a  probaUe  hypoth- 
eaia,  in  the  plains  of  Chaldea,  it  apread  through  Egypt, 
Greece,  Scythia,  and  eyen  Mexico  and  Ceylon ;  and  it 
is  worthy  of  notice  that  even  the  religion  of  remote 
India  preaupposea  a  grand  symbolic  representation  of 
the  divine  by  the  worship  of  theae  great  phyrical  pow- 
ers (compare  Lassen,  Ind,  AUerth,  i,  756  sq. ;  Roth,  (7e* 
schichłe  der  Rełigionen),  See  Hikduism.  It  waa  re- 
garded aa  an  offence  amenable  to  the  ciyil  authoritiea  in 
the  days  of  Job  (xxxi,  26-28),  and  one  of  the  atatutea 
of  tbe  Mosaic  law  was  directed  against  its  obeenrance 
(Deut.  iy,  19 ;  x\'ii,  3) ;  the  fonner  refeiring  to  the  atar- 
worship  of  Arabia,  the  latter  to  the  concrete  form  in 
which  it  appeared  among  the  Syriana  and  Phoeniciamk 
It  is  probable  that  the  lamelitea  leamed  their  first  k«- 
sona  in  aun-worship  from  the  Egyptians,  in  wbose  rclig- 
ious  system  that  luminary,  as  (>»izis,  held  a  prominent 
place.  The  city  of  On  (Bethshemesh  or  Heliopolis) 
took  ita  name  from  hia  tempie  (Jer.  xliii,  13),  and  the 


IDOLATRT 


4ł3 


IDOLATRT 


trife  of  Joseph  was  tbe  danghter  of  his  priest  (Gen.  xli, 
45).  The  PhcBoidans  wonhipped  him  under  the  Łitle 
of^Locdof  hearen,"  D^CÓ  b?ą,  Baalrshśmayim  {jit- 
lAffa/up',  aoc.  to  Sanchoniatho  in  Philo  Byblius),  and 
Adon,  the  Greek  Adonią  and  the  Tammuz  of  Ezekiel 
(Tiii,  14).  See  Tammuz.  As  Molech  or  Milcom,  the 
fon  was  wonhipped  by  the  Ammonites,  and  as  Cheniosh 
by  the  Moabttea.  The  Hadad  of  the  S3nians  is  the 
tamę  ddty,  whose  namc  is  traceable  in  Benhadad,  Ha- 
dadezeiV  *n^  Hadad  or  Adad,  the  Edomite.  The  As- 
syńaik  Bel  or  Belns  is  another  form  of  BaaL  According 
to  Philo  {De  Vit.  ConU  §  8),  the  Essenes  were  wont  to 
pray  to  the  sun  at  moniing  and  evening  (Joseph.  War^ 
ii,  8,  5).  By  the  later  kings  of  Judah,  sacred  horses 
and  chariots  were  dedicated  to  the  sun-god,  as  by  the 
F^nians  (2  Kinga  xxiii,  11 ;  Bochart,  Hieroz,  pt.  i,  bk. 
ii,  c.  xi;  Selden,  De  Dis  Syr.  ii,  8),  to  maich  in  procea- 
ńon  and  greet  his  rising  (K.  Solomon  Jarchi  on  2  Kinga 
xxiii,  11).  The  Masaagetce  offered  horaes  in  aacrifice  to 
hun  (Sdrabo,  xi,  p.  518),  on  the  principic  enunciated  by 
Uacrobtus  (5a/.  vii,  7),  <<like  rejoioeth  in  like"  (*<8imil- 
ibus  amilia  gaadent ;"  compare  Herod,  i,  216),  and  the 
citttooi  was  oommon  to  many  nations. 

Tbe  moon,  wonhipped  by  the  Phoenicians  nnder  the 
name  of  Astarte  (Lucian,  de  Dea  Syra^  c.  4),  or  Baaltia, 
the  puBtre  powcr  of  naturę,  as  Baal  was  the  active 
(lloren,  i,  149),  and  known  to  the  Hebrews  as  Aahta- 
roth  or  Ashtoreth,  the  tutelary  goddess  of  the  Zido- 
luans,  appean  early  among  the  objects  of  Isnielitish 
idtdaby.  Bat  this  Syro-Phoenidan  wonhip  of  the  aun 
and  moon  was  of  a  grosser  character  than  the  pure  atai^ 
wonhip  of  the  Magi,  which  Moren  distinguishes  as 
Upper  Asiatic  or  Assj^ro-Peraian,  and  was  eąually  re- 
inóved  from  the  Chaldaean  astrology  and  Zabianiam  of 
later  tames.  The  former  of  theae  ayatema  tolerated  no 
imagea  or  altara,  and  the  oontemplation  of  the  heavenly 
bodiea  from  elevated  spots  consdtuted  the  grcater  part 
ofitaritoaL 

Bot,  thoagh  we  hare  no  poeitire  historical  account 
of  star-Wonhip  before  the  Aaayrian  period,  we  may  infer 
that  it  waa  early  practiced  in  a  concrete  form  among  the 
Isrulitea  from  the  allusiona  in  Amoa  v,  26,  and  Acts  vii, 
42, 43.  Even  in  the  desert  they  are  aaid  to  have  been 
giren  np  to  wonhip  the  faoat  of  heavcn,  while  Chiun 
aod  Remphan,  or  Rephan,  have  on  various  grounds  been 
identified  with  the  planet  Saturn.  It  was  to  counteract 
idolatry  of  this  naturę  that  the  stringent  law  of  Deut. 
xvii,  3  was  enacted,  and  with  a  view  to  withdrawing 
the  laraelites  from  undue  contemplation  of  the  materiał 
imiTene,  Jehovah,  the  God  of  larael,  is  constantly  placed 
befon  them  as  Jehovah  Sabaoth,  Jehovah  of  Hoats,  the 
king  of  hearen  (Dan.  iv,  86,  37),  to  whom  the  heaven 
and  heaven  of  heavens  belong  (Deut  x,  14).  However 
this  may  be,  BIoven  (Photu  i,  65, 66)  contends  that  the 
later  atar-wonhip,  introduced  by  Ahaz  and  foUowed  by 
Manaaseh,  was  puier  and  morę  spiritual  in  its  naturę 
than  the  Israelito-Phoenician  wonhip  of  the  heaven]y 
bodiea  andcr  aymbolical  forma,  as  Baal  and  Asherah; 
and  that  it  was  not  idolatiy  in  the  aame  aenae  that  the 
latter  waa,  but  of  a  aimply  contemplative  character.  He 
is  Rpported,  to  somc  extent,  by  the  fact  that  we  find  no 
mention  of  any  images  of  the  sun  or  moon  or  the  host 
of  hearen,  but  merely  of  ve88e1s  derotcd  to  their  aer%ńce 
(2  King^  xxiii,  4).  But  therc  ia  no  reaaon  to  belierc 
that  the  divine  honon  paid  to  the  "Queen  of  Hearen** 
(Jer.  vii,  18 ;  xlix,  19 ;  or,  aa  othen  render, "  the  frame" 
or  "atructare  of  the  heavens")  were  equal]y  diaaociated 
fromimagc-wonhip.  Mr.  Layard  (ArtR.il,  45 l)discovered 
a  bas-relief  at  Nimroud  which  repreaented  four  idola  car- 
ried  in  procession  by  Asayrian  warrion.  One  of  theae 
figorea  he  identifles  with  Hera,  the  Asayrian  Aatartc, 
Rpreaented  with  a  star  on  her  head  (Amoa  v,  26),  and 
with  the  *^qneen  of  heaven,*'  who  appean  on  the  rock- 
tableta  of  Pteriam  ^standing  erect  on  a  lion,  and 
wowned  with  a  tower,  or  mural  coronet,"  aa  in  the  Syr- 
ian  tempie  of  Hierapolis  {ib,  p.  466 ;  Lucian,  de  Dea  Syroy 
Sit  d2).    But,  in  bis  renuuks  upon  a  figuro  which  reaem- 


bles  the  Shea  of  Diodoms,  Layaid  adds,  **The  represen- 
tation  in  a  human  foim  of  the  celestial  bodies,  them- 
aelres  originally  but  a  type,  was  a  coiruption  which  ap- 
pean to  have  crept  at  a  later  period  into  the  mythology 
of  Assyria;  for,  in  the  morę  ancient  bas-reliefa,  figures 
with  caps  sarmoonted  by  atan  do  not  occur,  and  the 
aun,  moon,  and  planeta  stand  alone"  (ifr.  p.  457, 458). 

The  allusions  in  Job  xxxviii,  31, 82  are  too  obecure  to 
allow  any  inference  to  be  drawn  as  to  the  mysterious  in- 
fluences  which  were  held  by  the  old  astrologen  to  be 
exerciaed  by  the  stan  over  human  destiny,  nor  ia  there 
anffident  evidence  to  connectthem  with  anything  morę 
recondite  than  the  astronomical  knowledge  of  the  pe- 
riod. The  aame  may  be  said  of  the  poetical  figurę  in 
Deborah*s  chant  of  triumph, "  the  atan  ftom  their  high- 
ways  warred  with  Siaera"  (Judg.  v,  20).  In  the  later 
times  of  the  monarchy,  Mazzaloth,  the  planets,  or  the 
zodiacal  aigns,  reccived,  next  to  the  sun  and  moon,  their 
ahare  of  popular  adoiation  (2  Kings  xxiii,  5) ;  and  the 
history  of  idolatry  among  the  Hebrews  ahowa  at  all 
times  an  intimate  oonnection  between  the  deification  of 
the  heavenly  bodies  and  the  supentition  which  watched 
the  ckiuds  for  signs,  and  used  dirination  and  enchant^ 
ments.  It  was  but  a  step  from  auch  cuituie  of  the  side* 
real  powen  to  the  wonhip  of  Gad  and  Meni,  Babylonian 
divinitie8,  ajrmbols  of  Yenus  or  the  moon,  9s  the  goddesa 
of  Inek  or  fortunę.  Under  the  latter  aapecŁ  the  moon 
was  rererenced  by  the  Egyptians  (Macrob.  SaL  i,  19); 
and  the  name  Baal-Gad  is  posaibly  an  example  of  the 
manner  in  which  the  wonhip  of  the  planet  Jupiter,  as 
the  bringer  of  łuck,  was  grafted  on  the  old  faith  of  the 
Phcentcians.  The  ialse  goda  of  the  coloniata  of  Sama- 
ria were  probably  oonnected  with  Eastem  astrology: 
Adiammelech  Moven  regarda  as  the  sun-fire— the  solar 
Mara,  and  Anammelech  the  aolar  Saturn  {Ph&iu  i,  410, 
411),  The  Vulg.  rendering  of  .Ptt)v.  xxvi,  8, «  Sicut  qui 
mittit  lapidem  in  acemmm  Mercurii"  foliowa  the  Mid- 
rash  on  tlie  pasaage  quoted  by  Jarchi,  and  reąuires 
merely  a  passing  notice  (aee  Selden,  de  Dis  Syris,  ii,  15; 
Maim.  de  Idol  iii,  2 ;  Buxtorf,  Tjoe.Tabtu  a.  v.  D^bnp*^«). 

4.  Hero-wonhip,  the  wonhip  of  deceased  anceston 
or  leaden  of  a  nation.  Of  pure  hero-wonhip  among 
the  Shemitic  races  w^e  find  no  tracę.  Moses,  indeed, 
aeems  to  have  entertained  aome  dim  apprehenaion  that 
hb  coimtrymen  might,  after  his  death,  pay  him  morę 
honon  than  were  due  to  man,  and  the  anticipation  of 
this  led  him  to  review  his  own  conduct  in  terms  of 
atrr>ng  reprobation  (Deut.  ir,  21,  22).  The  expre8eion 
in  Paa.  cvi,  28,  **  The  aacrificea  of  the  <fcar/,"  ia  in  all  prob- 
ability  metaphorical,  and  Wisd.  xiv,  16  refen  to  a  later 
practioe  due  to  Greek  influence.  The  Rabbinical  com- 
mentaton  discover  in  Gen.  xlviii,  16  an  alluaion  to  the 
wonhipping  of  angels  (Gol.  ii,  18),  while  they  defend 
their  anceston  from  the  charge  of  regarding  them  in 
any  other  light  than  mediatora,  or  intercceaon  with  God 
(Lewis,  Oriff.  Hebr.  v,  8).  It  is  needleaa  to  add  that 
their  inference  and  apology  aro  equaUy  groundleas. 
With  like  probability  haa  been  advanced  the  theory  of 
the  diemon-wonhip  of  the  Hebrewa,  the  only  founda- 
tion  for  it  being  two  highly  poetical  pasaagea  (D^ut 
xxxii,  17 ;  Paa.  cvi,  37).  It  ia  poasible  that  the  Peraian 
dualism  ia  hinted  at  in  laa.  xlv,  7. 

6.  Idealism,  the  wonhip  of  abstractiona  or  mental 
ąualitica,  auch  as  juatice,  a  ayatem  never  found  unmixed. 
— Kitto;  Smith.  ThŁa  conatituted  the  mythology  of 
the  Greeks  and  Romans,  as  also  of  the  Scandinavian8. 
See  M  iTHOLOOY. 

III.  Idolatry  of  certcńn  ancient  Ileatkm  Nations  in 
DetaH. — All  idolatry  ia  in  ita  naturę  heatheniah,  and  it 
haa  in  all  agcs  been  a  characteristic  mark  of  heathen- 
dom,  80  that  to  the  present  day  the  vivid  description  of 
Rom.  i  remains  the  most  atriking  portraiture  of  heathen 
peoples.  We  have  apace  in  thia  article  for  a  ayatematle 
view  only  of  thoee  early  nationa  whoae  contact  with  the 
Hebrew  race  waa  the  means  of  the  importałion  of  idoUp 
try  among  the  choeen  pcople.     See  Polythbism, 

1.  Mesapotamian  Mytholoffy^— -The  orig^ial  idolatrona 


IDOLATRT 


474 


IDOLATRT 


condition  of  thc  kindred  of  Abnihun  (q.  v.)  himself  in 
the  great  plain  of  Aram  is  distinctly  alioded  to  in  Judg. 
xziVf  2.  Acoording  to  Rawliiuon  (Easay  in  hia  Herod,), 
the  Pantheons  of  Habylon  and  Ninereh,  though  origin- 
ally  dissimilar  in  the  names  of  the  diYinities,  cannot  as 
yet  be  treated  separately.  The  piincipal  god  of  the 
Assyńans  was  Asshur,  replaced  in  Babylonia  by  a  god 
-whose  name  is  read  II  or  Ra.  The  special  attributes  of 
Aflshur  were  soyereignty  and  power,  and  he  was  regard- 
ed  as  the  especial  patron  of  the  Assyrians  and  their 
kingą.  It  is  the  Shcmitic  eąoiyalent  of  the  Hamitic  or 
Scythic  Ra,  which  suggests  a  connection  with  Egypt, 
although  it  is  to  be  noticed  that  the  same  root  may 
perhaps  be  traced  in  the  probably  Canaanitish  Heres. 
Next  to  Asshur  or  U  was  a  triad,  consisting  of  Anu, 
whe  appcars  to  have  corresponded  to  Pluto,  a  divinity 
whose  name  is  doubtful,  corresponding  to  Jupiter,  and 
Hća  or  Hoa,  corresponding  in  position  and  partly  in 
character  to  Neptune.  The  supremę  goddess  Mulita  or 
Bilta  (Mylitta  or  Beltis)  was  the  wife  of  the  Babylonian 
Jupiter.  This  triad  was  foUowed  by  another,  consisting 
of  iEther  (Iva?),  the  sun,  and  the  moon.  Next  in  or- 
der are  **  the  five  minor  gods,  who,  if  not  of  astronomical 
origin,  were  at  any  rato  identified  with  the  fiyc  planets 
of  the  Chaldsean  system."  lu  addition,  Sir  H.  Rawlin- 
8on  enumerates  sereral  other  diyinities  of  less  impor- 
tance,  and  mentions  that  there  are  "a  vast  nurober  of 
other  names,*'  adding  this  remarkable  obserration : 
**  £very  town  and  yillage,  indeed,  throughout  Babylo- 
nia and  Assyria  appears  to  have  had  its  owii  particular 
deity,  many  of  these  no  doubt  being  the  great  gods  of 
the  Pantheon  disguised  undcr  ruatic  names,  but  others 
being  distinct  local  diyinities.**  Sir  H.  Rawlinson  con- 
tents  himself  with  stating  the  facts  discoyerable  from 
the  inscriptions,  and  does  not  theorize  upon  the  subject 
further  than  to  point  out  the  strong  resemblances  he- 
tween  this  Oriental  system  and  that  of  Greece  and 
Romę,  not  indeed  in  thc  Aryan  ground-work  of  the  lat- 
ter,  but  in  its  generał  stiperstructure.  If  we  anal^^ze  thc 
Babylonian  and  Assyrian  system,  we  discorer  that  in  its 
preseut  form  it  is  mainly  cosmic,  or  a  system  of  high 
nature-worship.  The  supremę  divinity  appears  to  hare 
been  regarded  as  the  ruler  of  the  univene,  the  first  triad 
was  of  powers  of  naturę,  the  second  triad  and  the  rc- 
maining  chief  di\'initie8  werc  distinctly  cosmic.  But 
beneath  this  system  were  two  otherB,  eHdeuUy  distuict 
in  origin,  and  too  deep-eeated  to  be  obliterated,  the  wor- 
flhip  of  anoestors  and  Iow  nature-worship.  Asshur,  at 
the  vcry  liead  of  the  Pantheon,  is  thc  deified  ancestor 
of  tłie  Assyrian  race;  and,Tiotwithstanding  a  system  of 
great  gods,  each  city  had  its  own  special  idolatty,  eithcr 
openly  reverencing  its  primitire  idol,  or  concealing  a 
deriation  from  the  fixed  belief  by  making  that  idol  an- 
other  form  of  one  of  the  national  divinities.  In  this 
separation  into  its  first  clements  of  this  ancient  religion, 
we  (Uscorer  the  superstitions  of  those  races  which,  mix- 
ed,  but  neyer  completely  fused,  formed  the  population 
of  Babylonia  and  Assyria,  three  races  whose  three  lan- 
guages  were  yet  distinct  in  the  inscribed  records  as  late 
as  the  time  of  Darius  Hystaspis.  These  races  were  the 
primitive  Chaldieans,  called  Hamites  by  Sir  H.  Rawlin- 
son, wlio  undoubtedly  had  strong  affinities  with  the  an- 
cient lilgyptians,  the  Shemidc  Assyrians,  and  the  Aryan 
Persiaus.  It  is  not  difficult  to  assign  to  these  races 
their  rcspcctive  shares  in  the  composition  of  the  my- 
thology  of  the  countrics  in  which  they  successiyely 
ruled.  The  ancestral  worship  is  here  distinctly  She- 
mitic :  thc  name  of  Asshur  proyes  this.  It  may  be  ob- 
jected  that  such  worship  neyer  charactcrized  any  other 
Shemitic  stock ;  that  we  find  it  among  Turanians  and 
Aryans :  but  we  reply  that  the  Shemites  borrowed  their 
idolatry,  and  a  Tiu-anian  or  Aryan  influence  may  haye 
giyen  it  this  peculiar  form.  The  Iow  nature-worship 
must  be  due  to  the  Turanians.  It  is  neyer  discemcd 
except  where  there  is  a  strong  Turanian  or  Nigritian 
element,  and  when  once  established  it  seems  always  to 
haye  been  yery  hard  to  lemoye,    The  high  nature- 


worship)  as  the  last  element,  lemains  for  the  Aiyan  ne^ 
The  primitiye  Aryan  belief  in  ita  different  forms  w»s 
reyerence  for  the  sun,  moon,  and  stara,  and  the  powen 
of  naturę,  combined  with  a  belief  in  one  supremę  being, 
a  religion  which,  though  yarying  at  tlilTereiit  tima,  ind 
deeply  influenced  by  ethnic  causes,  was  neyer  deprired 
of  its  esseutially  cosmic  characteristics.     See  AssnaA, 

2.  £ffyj}łian.—The  strongest  and  most  remarkable  pe- 
culiarity  of  the  Egyptlan  religion  is  the  worship  of  ini- 
mals  (see  Zickler,  Ż)e  rdigione  besłiarum  ab  jEggptiit 
ootuecratarumy  Lips.  1745 ;  Scbumacker,  De  aiibii  om- 
medium  imter  jEyyptioM  et  Judcsoa,  Wołfenb.  1773),  treea, 
and  like  objects,  which  was  umyersal  in  thc  conntir, 
and  was  eyen  connected  with  the  belief  in  the  fatuR 
State.  No  theoiy  of  the  usefubiess  of  certain  aoimsls 
can  explain  the  worship  of  others  that  were  uttcrly  use- 
less,  nor  can  a  thcory  of  some  strange  anomaly  find  eren 
as  wide  an  application.  The  explanation  u  to  be  dis- 
coyered  in  cyery  toi^-n,  eyery  yillage,  eyeiy  hut  of  the 
negroes,  whose  fetishism  corresponds  perfectiy  with  tbiB 
Iow  nature-worship  of  thc  ancient  Egyptians. 

Connected  with  fetishism  was  thc  local  character  of 
the  religion.  Each  nome,  city,  town,  and  probsbiy  vii* 
lagę,  had  its  diyinities,  and  the  position  of  many  gods  in 
the  Pantheon  was  due  rather  to  the  importance  of  theii 
cities  than  any  powers  or  qualities  they  were  suppoecd 
to  haye.  For  a  detailed  accoimt  of  the  Eg>'pt  ian  deitiei^ 
with  illustratiye  cuts,  see  Kitto's  Pictorial  Bibie,  notę  <m 
Deut.  iy,  16;  compare  also  Eoypt. 

The  Egyptian  Pantheon  shows  three  distinct  d^ 
ments.  Certain  of  the  gods  are  only  personifications 
connected  with  Iow  nature-worsliip.  Others,  the  great 
gods,  are  of  Shemitic  origin,  and  are  connected  with  high 
nature-worship,  though  showing  traces  of  the  wonhip 
of  ancestors.  In  addition,  there  are  certain  personifica- 
tions of  abstract  ideas.  The  first  of  these  claeses  is  evi- 
dently  the  result  of  an  attcmpt  to  connect  the  old  bv 
nature-worship  with  some  highcr  s>'stcm.  The  seccoid 
is  no  doubt  the  religion  of  the  Shemitic  settlerL  It  is 
essentially  the  same  in  character  as  the  Babylonian  snd 
Assyrian  religion,  and,  aa  the  belief  of  a  dominant  race, 
took  the  most  importaiit  place  in  the  intricate  sj^em 
of  which  it  ultimately  formed  a  part.  The  last  daa 
appears  to  be  of  later  inyention,  and  to  haye  had  ila 
origin  in  an  cndeayor  to  construct  a  philoeophical  sp- 
tem. 

In  addition  to  these  particulars  of  the  Egyptian  re- 
ligion, it  is  importaiit  to  notice  that  it  comprised  yuy 
remarkable  doctrincs.  Man  was  held  to  be  a  rccpona- 
ble  being,  whose  futurę  after  death  depended  upon  his 
actions  done  while  on  earth.  He  was  to  be  judged  br 
Oairis,  ruler  of  the  West,  or  unseen  world,  and  eithcr  le- 
warded  with  felicity  or  punished  with  tormcct.  Wheth- 
er  these  futurę  states  of  happiness  and  misery  were  beld 
to  be  of  etemal  duration  is  not  certain,  but  there  is  little 
doubt  that  thc  Egyptians  belieyed  in  the  immortality 
of  the  soul. 

The  religion  of  the  Shephcids,  or  Hyksoa,  is  not  eo 
distinctly  known  to  us.  It  is,  howeyer,  elear  from  the 
monuments  that  their  chief  god  was  set,  or  sutekb, 
and  we  Icam  from  a  papyrus  that  one  of  the  Sbcp- 
herd-kings,  apepi,  probably  Manet ho*s  "Apopłuą'*  cs- 
tAblished  the  worship  of  set  in  his  dominions,  and  rev- 
erenccd  no  other  god,  raising  a  great  tempie  to  him 
in  Zoan,  or  Ayaris.  Set  continued  to  be  worshipped 
by  the  Egyptians  until  thc  time  of  the  22d  d>-nastT, 
when  we  lose  all  tracę  of  him  on  the  monumentai  At 
I  this  period,  or  aiterwards,  his  figurę  was  cfiaccd  in  the 
inscriptions.  The  change  took  place  loog  after  thc  ex- 
pulsion  of  the  Shephenls,  and  was  effccted  by  the  22d 
dynasty,  which  was  probably  of  As8}-rian  or  Babylonian 
origin ;  it  is,  therefore,  rather  to  be  considercd  as  a  re- 
sult of  the  influence  of  the  Median  doctrinc  of  Onnozd 
and  Ahriman  than  as  due  to  the  £g}'ptian  hatred  of  the 
foreigners  and  all  that  conccmed  them.  Besidcs  set, 
other  foreign  diyinities  were  worsb^)ped  in  Egrpt — the 
god  liENPu,  the  goddesses  ken,  or  ketesh,  ascta,  and 


IDOLATRY 


475 


IDOLATRY 


ASTASCTA^  AH  Łhese  dirinities,  except  astarta,  as  to 
whom  we  ]uive  no  poiticular  information,  are  treated  by 
thfi  Egyptians  as  powen  of  destniction  and  war,  aa  set 
was  consideied  the  penonification  of  physical  eviL  Set 
was  always  identified  by  the  figypdans  with  Baal ;  we 
do  not  know  whether  he  was  wonhipped  in  Egypt  be- 
foie  the  Shepheid-peiiod,bat  it  is  piobable  that  he  was. 

This  foreign  worship  in  Egypt  was  probably  never 
reduced  to  a  system.  What  we  know  of  it  sbows  no 
regularity,  and  it  is  not  unlike  the  imitations  of  the 
Egyptian  idoLs  madę  by  Phoenician  artists,  probably  as 
lepreseiitations  of  Phcsnidan  dirinities.  The  gods  of 
the  Hyksos  aie  foreign  objecta  of  woiship  in  an  £g3i>- 
tum  dresSk    See  Hyksos. 

3.  Idolatry  o/Canaan  dtnd  the  adjoiimuf  Countrietr— 
The  centrę  of  the  idolatiy  of  the  Paiestinian  raoes  is  to 
be  songht  for  in  tho  religion  of  the  Kephaites  and  the 
Canaanitea.  We  can  distinctly  connect  the  worship  of 
Baal  and  Ashtoreth  with  the  earliest  kind  of  idolatry ; 
and,  haring  thiis  established  a  oentre,  we  can  understaud 
how,  for  instance,  the  same  infemal  rites  were  ceiebrated 
to  the  Ammonitish  Molech  and  the  Carthaginian  Baal. 
The  moet  important  document  for  the  idolatry  of  the 
Hittites  is  the  treaty  concluded  between  the  branch  of 
that  people  seated  on  the  Oiontes  and  Rameses  II.  From 
thjs  we  leam  that  sutbkh  (or  skt)  and  AsrenAT  were 
the  chief  diriniiies  of  these  Hittites,  and  that  they  also 
worriupped  the  mountains  and  rirers  and  the  winds. 
The  suTEKłis  of  several  forta  are  also  specified.  See 
HrrrrrKS^  Set  is  known  from  the  Egyptian  inscrip- 
tions  to  haTe  corresponded  to  Baal,  so  that  in  the  two 
chief  diyinities  we  discorer  Baal  and  Ashtoreth,  the 
only  Canaanitbh  dirinities  known  to  be  mentioned  in 
Scripture.  The  local  worship  of  different  forms  of  Baal 
well  agrees  with  the  Iow  natore-worship  with  which  it 
is  found  to  have  prerailed.  Both  are  equally  mentioned 
in  the  Bibie  histoiy.  Thos  the  people  of  Shchem  wor- 
shipped  Baal-berith,  and  Hoont  Hermon  itsclf  seems  to 
havc  been  worshipped  as  Baal-Hermon,  while  the  Iow 
nattue-worship  may  be  traced  in  the  rererence  for 
groyesy  and  the  oonnection  of -the  Canaanitish  religion 
with  hilis  and  treea.  The  woist  f 'iiŁ  jre  of  this  system 
was  the  sacrifice  of  children  by  th«;ir  parents — a  feature 
that  shows  the  origin  of  at  least  tw.j  of  its  oifshoots. 

The  Bibie  doos  not  give  a  very  dear  description  of  Ca- 
naanitish idolatiy.  As  an  abominable  thing,  to  be  root^ 
ed  out  and  cast  into  obliyion,  nothing  is  needlessly  said 
of  it.  The  appellation  Baal,  ruler,  or  posaesaor,  implies 
SDpremacy,  and  connects  the  chief  Canaanitish  diyinity 
with  the  Syrian  Adonis.  He  was  tho  god  of  the  Canaan- 
itish city  Zidon,  or  Sidon,  where  *' Ashtoreth,  the  abom- 
ination  of  the  Zidonians,"  was  also  specially  worshipped. 
In  the  Judge-period  we  readof  Baalim  and  Ashteioth  in 
the  plural,  probably  indicating  rarious  local  forms  of 
these  divinities,  bat  perhaps  merely  the  worship  of 
many  images.  The  worship  of  Baal  was  oonnected 
with  that  of  the  grores,  which  we  take  to  have  been 
representations  of  trees  or  other  regetable  prodacts. 
8e3  High  Place.  In  Ahab*3  time  a  tempie  was  built 
for  Baal,  where  there  was  an  image.  His  worshippers 
aacrificed  in  garments  pnvided  by  the  priests;  and  his 
prophetB,  sceking  to  propitiate  him,  wero  wont  to  ery 
and  cot  themselyes  with  swords  and  lancea.  Respecting 
Ashtoreth  we  know  less  from  Scripture.  Her  name  is 
not  derivable  from  any  Shemitic  root  It  is  equivalent 
to  the  lahtar  of  the  cimeiform  inscriptions,  the  name  of 
the  AM^an  or  Babylonian  Yenos,  the  goddess  of  the 
planet.  The  identity  of  the  Canaanitish  and  the  Assyr^ 
ian  or  Babylonian  goddess  is  further  shown  by  the  con- 
nection  of  the  former  with  star-worship.  In  the  Iranian 
languages  we  fmd  a  doae  radical  resemblance  to  Ashto- 
reth and  Ishtar  in  the  Persian,  Zend  ttara,  Sansk.  strcL, 
aertfp,  siem,  all  equxvalent  to  our  **  star.**  This  deriva^ 
Uon  con£nns  our  opinion  that  the  high  nature-worship 
of  the  Babykmians  and  Assyrians  was  of  Aryan  origin. 
As  no  other  Canaanitish  diyinities  are  uoticed  in  S^ip- 
tore,  it  seems  probable  that  Baal  and  Ashtoreth  were 


alone  wonhipped  by  the  nations  of  Canaan.  Among 
the  neighboiing  tribes  we  find,  besides  these,  other 
names  of  idols,  and  we  haye  to  inąuire  whether  they 
apply  to  dilTerent  idols  or  are  merely  different  appella- 


Beginning  with  the  Abrahamitic  tribes,  we  find  Mo- 
lech, Malcham,  or Miloom  (Ty?.^j  ^?'^^}  CSbp)  spoken 
of  as  the  idol  of  the  Ammonites.  This  name,  iłi  the  fintt 
form,  always  has  the  article,  and  undoubtedly  signifiea 
the  king  (Tf^inn,  equivalent  to  Tf^^il?),  for  it  is  indiffer- 
ently  used  as  a  proper  name  and  as  an  appellative  with 
a  8uffix  (comp.  Jer.  xlix,  1, 3,  with  Amos  i,  15).  Milcom 
is  firom  Molech  or  its  root,  with  D  formatiye,  and  Mal- 
cham is  probably  a  dialectic  rariation,  if  the  points  are 
to  be  relied  upon.  Molech  was  regarded  by  the  Am- 
monites as  their  king.  When  Dayid  captured  Rabbah, 
we  are  told  that "  he  took  Malcham'8  crown  from  off  his 
head,  the  weight  whereof  [was]  a  talent  of  gold  with 
the  precious  stones:  and  it  was  [set]  on  Da\'id's  head" 
(2  Sam.  xii,  80;  comp.  1  Chroń,  xx,  2).  The  prophets 
speak  of  this  idol  as  ruler  of  the  children  of  Ammon,  and 
doomed  to  go  into  captiyity  with  his  priests  and  princes 
(Jer.  xlix,  1, 8 ;  Amos  i,  15).  The  worship  of  Molech  was 
performed  at  high  plaoes,  and  children  were  sacrifioed 
to  him  by  their  parents,  being  cast  into  fiies.  This  hor- 
rible  practioe  preyailed  at  Carthage,  where  children  were 
sacrified  to  their  chief  diyinity,  Baal,  called  at  Tyre 
«  Mclcarth,  lord  (Baal)  of  Tyre"  ^:c  bra  n^ipba  (Inscr. 
Melit.  Biling,  ap.  Gesen.  rjex,  s.y.  b^S),  the  first  of  which 
words  signiiles  king  o/the  city,  for  n^|^  T)^^*  There  can 
therefore  be  no  doubt  that  Molech  was  a  local  form  of 
the  chief  idol  of  Canaan,  and  it  is  by  no  means  certain 
that  this  name  was  liroited  to  the  Ammonitish  worship, 
as  we  shall  see  in  speaking  of  the  idolatry  of  the  Israel- 
ites  in  the  Desert. 

We  know  for  certain  of  but  one  Moabitish  diyinity,  as 
of  but  one  Ammonitish.  Chemosh  appears  to  have  held 
the  same  place  as  Molech,  although  our  information  re- 
specting him  is  less  fuli.  Moab  was  the  ''people  of 
Chcmosir  (Numb.  xxi,  29 ;  Jer.  xlviii,  46),  and  Chemosh 
was  doomed  to  captiyity  with  his  priests  and  princes 
(Jer.  xlviii,  7).  In  one  place  Chemosh  is  spoken  of  as 
the  god  of  tho  king  of  the  children  of  Ammon,  whom 
Jephthah  conquered  (Judg.  xi,  24) ;  but  it  is  to  be  re- 
marked  that  the  cities  held  by  this  king,  which  Jeph- 
thah took,  were  not  originally  Ammonitish,  and  were 
apparently  claimed  as  once  held  by  the  Moabites  (21- 
26 ;  comp.  Numb.  xxi,  23-80),  so  that  at  this  time  Moab 
and  Ammon  were  probably  united,  or  the  Ammonites 
ruled  by  a  Moabitish  chief.  The  etymology  of  Che- 
mosh is  doubtfiil,  but  it  is  elear  that  he  was  distinct 
from  Molech.  There  is  no  pońtire  tracę  of  the  cruel 
rites  of  the  idol  of  the  Ammonites,  and  it  is  unlikely 
that  the  settled  Moabites  should  have  had  the  same 
sayage  disposition  as  their  wild  brethren  on  the  north. 
There  is,  however,  a  generał  resemblance  in  the  regal 
charactcr  assigned  to  both  idols  and  their  solitary  posi- 
tion.  Chemosh,  therefore,  like  Molech,  was  probably  a 
form  of  BaaL  Both  tribes  appear  to  have  had  other 
idols,  for  we  read  of  the  worship,  by  the  Israelites,  of 
"  the  gods  of  Moab,  and  the  gods  of  the  children  of  Am- 
mon" (Judg.  X,  6) ;  but,  as  there  are  other  plurals  in  the 
passage,  it  is  possible  that  this  may  be  a  generał  expre8- 
sion.  Yet,  in  saying  this,  we  do  not  mean  to  suggest  that 
there  was  any  monotheistic  form  of  Canaanitish  idola- 
try. There  is  s^me  difficulty  in  ascertaining  whether 
Baal-Peor,  or  Peor,  was  a  Moabitish  idol.  The  Israelites, 
while  encamped  at  Shittim,  were  seduced  by  the  women 
of  Moab  and  Midian,  and  joined  thcm  in  the  worship  of 
Baal-Peor.  There  is  no  notice  of  any  later  instance  of 
this  idolatry.  It  seems,  therefore,  not  to  havc  iMsen  na- 
tional  to  Moab,  and,  if  so,  it  may  have  been  borrowed,  and 
Midianitish,  or  else  local,  and  Canaanitish.  The  former 
idea  is  supported  by  the  apparent  connection  of  prosti* 
ttttioD,  even  of  women  of  rank,  with  the  worship  of 


IDOLATRY 


419 


IDOLATRY 


Baal-Peor,  which  would  not  hare  been  repngiumt  to  the 
pagan  Arabs ;  the  latter  finds  some  Bupport  in  the  name 
Shittim,  the  acaeiat,  as  though  the  place  had  its  name 
from  8ome  acacias  sacred  to  Baal,  and,  moreoyer,  we 
have  110  oertain  instance  of  the  application  of  the  name 
of  Baal  to  any  non-Canaanitish  dirinity.  Had  such  rile 
wonhip  as  was  probably  that  of  Baal-Peor  been  national 
in  Moab,  it  is  most  iinlikely  that  Dańd  would  have 
been  on  very  friendly  terms  with  a  Moabitish  king. 

The  Philistine  idolatry  is  connected  with  that  of  Ca- 
naan,  although  it  has  peculiarities  of  its  own,  which  are 
indeed  so  stiong  that  it  may  be  ąuestioned  whether  it 
is  entirely  or  even  mainly  derired  from  the  Canaanitish 
source.  At  Ekron,  Baal-zebub  was  worshipped,  and 
had  a  tempie,  to  which  Ahaziah,  the  wicked  son  of 
Ahab,  sent  to  inquire.  This  name  means  either  the  lord 
of  the  fly,  or  Baal  the  fiy.  It  is  generally  held  that  he 
was  worshipped  as  a  driver-away  of  flies,  but  we  think 
it  mora  probable  that  some  yenomons  fly  was  sacred  to 
him.  The  use  of  the  term  Baal  is  indicative  of  a  eon- 
nection  with  the  Canaanitish  system.  The  national  di- 
yinity  of  the  Philistines  seems,  howerer,  to  have  been 
Dagon,  to  whom  there  were  temples  at  Gaza  and  at 
Ashdod,  and  the  generał  chaimcter  of  whoee  worship  is 
evident  in  such  traces  as  we  obsenre  in  the  names  Ca- 
phar-Dagon,  near  Jamnia,  and  Beth-Dagon,  the  latter 
applied  to  two  places,  one  in  Judah  and  the  other  in 
Asher.  The  deriyation  of  the  name  Dagon,  *)'l!l'^,  as 
that  of  a  iish-god,  is  from  ^*^,  a  JUh.  Gescnius  considers 
it  a  diminutive, "  little  fish,"  used  by  way  of  endearment 
and  honor  (  Thet.  s.  v.) ,  but  this  is  surdy  hazardous.  Da- 
gon was  represented  as  a  man  with  the  taił  of  a  fish. 
There  can  be  no  doubt  that  he  was  connected  with  the 
Canaanitish  system,  as  Derceto  or  Atargatis,  the  same  as 
Ashtorcth,  was  worshipped  under  a  like  mixed  shape  at 
Ashkelon  {avTfi  Bk  tó  idv  irp6ciarrov  ć^fi  ywaiKÓc,  to 
d'  &Wo  aCjfia  vav  l)fivoCy  Diod.  Sic  ii,  4).  In  form  he 
is  the  same  as  the  Assyrian  god  supposed  to  correspond 
to  the  planet  Saturn.  The  housc  of  Dagon  at  Gaza, 
which  Samson  overthrew,  must  havo  been  very  large, 
for  abouŁ  3000  men  and  women  then  asscmbled  on  its 
roof.  It  had  two  principal,  if  not  only,  pillara  in  the 
roidst,  between  which  Samson  was  placed  and  was  scen 
by  the  people  on  the  roof.  The  inncr  portion  of  some 
of  the  ancient  Eg^^ptian  temples  consisted  of  a  hypie- 
thral  hall,  supported  by  two  or  morę  pitlars,  and  inner 
chambers.  The  overthrow  of  thcse  pillars  would  bring 
down  the  stone  roof  of  the  hall,  and  destroy  all  pcrsons 
beneath  or  upon  it,  without  necessarily  oyerthrowing 
the  side-walls. 

The  idolatry  of  the  Phoenicians  is  not  spoken  of  in  the 
Bibie.  From  their  iiiscriptions  and  the  statemeuts-of 
profane  authors  we  leam  that  this  nation  worshipped 
Baal  and  Ashtoreth.  The  details  of  their  worship  will 
be  spoken  of  in  the  articlc  Ph<enicia. 

Syrian  idols  are  mentioned  in  a  few  places  in  Scrip- 
tnre.  Tammuz,  whom  the  women  pf  Israel  lamented,  is 
no  doubt  Adonis,  wliose  worship  iroplies  that  of  Astarte 
or  Ashtoreth.  Rimmon,  who  appears  to  harc  been  the 
chief  diyinity  of  the  Syrian  kings  ndin?  at  Damascus, 
may,  if  his  name  signifies  high  (from  bC'^),  be  a  local 
form  of  Baal,  who,  as  the  sun-god,  had  a  tempie  at  the 
gieat  Syrian  city  Heliopolis,  now  cislled  Baalbek. 

The  book  of  Job,  which,  whateyer  its  datę,  representa 
a  primitiye  statc  of  society,  speaks  of  cosmic  wonhip  ba 
though  it  was  practiced  in  his  oountr}',  Idunuea  or  north- 
em  Arabia.  *^  If  I  behekl  a  sim  when  it  shined,  or  a 
splendid  raoon  progressing,  and  my  heart  were  secretly 
enticed,  and  my  hand  touched  my  mouth,  surely  this 
[were]  a  deprayity  of  judgment,  for  I  should  hayc  de- 
nied  God  aboye"  (xxxi,  26-28).  See  Poole,  Gttiesis  of 
the  Earth  and  o/Man,  2d  ed.  p.  184.  This  eyidence  is 
important  in  connection  with  that  of  the  ancient  preya- 
lence  of  cosmic  worship  in  Arabia,  and  that  of  its  prac- 
tice  by  some  of  the  later  kings  of  Judah. — Kitto. 

4.  Much  indirect  eyidence  on  this  subject  might  be 


supplied  by  an  inrestigation  of  proper  name$,  Ib, 
Layard  has  remaiked,  '*  Aocoiding  to  a  cnstom  esaśón^ 
from  time  immemoiial  in  the  East,  the  name  of  the  su- 
premę deity  was  introdnoed  into  the  names  of  noL 
This  custom  preyailed  from  the  banka  of  the  Tigris  to 
the  PhoBnidan  colonies  beyond  the  PiOan  of  Heroultt; 
and  we  recognise  in  the  Sardanapalos  of  the  Aasyiiain, 
and  the  Hannibal  of  the  Carthaginiana,  the  identity  of 
the  religions  system  of  the  two  nations,  as  iridclydifr- 
tinct  in  the  time  of  their  exi8tenoe  as  in  their  goograph- 
ical  positaon"  (AtneneA,  ii,  450).  The  hint  which  he  hss 
giyen  can  be  bnt  briefly  foUowed  out  here.  Tracce  of 
the  Bun-worship  of  the  ancient  Canaanitea  remain  in  the 
nomenclature  of  their  country.  BeCh-Shemesh,  **  honse 
of  the  sun  ;*'  £n-Shemesb,  *'  spring  of  the  san,"*  and  Ir- 
Shemesh,  **city  of  the  sun,"  whether  they  be  the  orig- 
inal  Canaanitish  names  or  their  Hebrew  renderings,  at- 
test  the  reyerence  paid  to  the  souroe  of  ligbt  and  hett, 
the  sjrmbol  of  the  fertilizing  power  of  naturę.  Samson, 
the  Hebrew  national  hero,  took  his  name  from  the  same 
luminary,  and  was  bom  in  a  moontain  yillage  aboye  the 
modem  'Ain  Shems  (£n-Shemeah :  Thomson,  The  Land 
and  the  Book,  ii,  861).  The  name  of  Baal,  the  sun-god, 
is  one  of  the  most  oommon  occurrence  iu  compound 
words,  and  ia  ofben  asaodated  with  placca  consecrated  to 
his  worship,  and  of  which,  perhaps,  he  was  the  tutelanr 
deity.  Bamoth-Baal,  **  the  high  pUces  of  Baal  ;**  Baal- 
Hermon,  Beth-Baal-Meon,  Baal-Gad,  Baal-Hamon,  in 
which  the  compound  names  of  the  aun-god  of  Phamicii 
and  Egypt  are  aasodated,  Baal-Tamar,  and  many  och- 
ers,  are  instances  of  this.  [That  temples  in  Syria,  ded- 
icated  to  the  seyeral  diyinities,  did  tnnafer  their  names 
to  the  places  where  they  stood,  is  eyident  firom  the  tes- 
timony  of  Ludan,  an  Assyrian  himself.  His  deriyałkm 
of  Hiera  from  the  tempie  of  the  Assyrian  Hera  shows 
that  he  was  familiar  with  the  drcnmstance  {Ih  łka 
8yr.  G.  i).  Baisampaa  (=Bethsheme8h),  a  town  of 
Arabia,  dcriyed  its  name  ftatn  the  sun-worahip  (Yosa- 
us,  De  Theol,  Geni,  ii,  c.  8),  like  Kii^Hcrea  (Jer.  x1yiii, 
31)  of  Moeb.]  Nor  waa  the  practice  confined  to  the 
names  of  places :  proper  namea  are  found  with  the  same 
element.  Esh-bajsl,  Ish-baal,  etc,  are  example8.  The 
Amorites,  whom  Joshua  did  not  driye  ou^  dwdt  on 
Mount  Heres,  in  Aijalon,  *Hhe  momitain  of  the  sun." 
See  TiMMATH-HKREa  Here  and  there  we  flnd  traces 
of  the  attempt  madę  by  the  Hebrews,  on  their  conąneit 
of  the  countvy,  to  extirpate  idolatry.  Thus  Baakh  or 
Kirjath-Baal,  **•  the  town  of  Baal,"  becamo  Kirfath-Jea- 
rim,  ^  the  town  of  forests"  (Josh.  xy,  60).  Tłie  Moon, 
Astarte  or  Ashtaroth,  gaye  her  name  to  a  dty  of  Ba- 
shan  (Joeh.  xiii,  12,  81),  and  it  is  not  improbable  that 
the  name  Jericho  may  haye  been  deriyed  firom  being 
aasociated  with  the  worship  of  this  goddesa.  See  Jkr- 
iCHa  Kebo,  whether  it  be  the  name  under  whidi  the 
Chaldeans  worshipped  the  Moon  or  the  planet  Mercory, 
enters  into  many  compounds:  Kebu-caradan,  Samgar- 
nebo,  and  the  like.  Bel  is  found  in  Belsfaazzar,  Bdte- 
shazzar,  and  others.  Were  Baladan  of  Shemitic  origin, 
it  would  probably  be  deriyed  from  Baal-Adon,  or  Ado> 
nis,  the  Plioenidan  ddty  to  whose  worship  Jer.  xxii,  18 
seems  to  refer;  but  it  has  more  properly  been  traced  to 
an  Indo-Germanic  root.  Hadad,  Hadadezcr,  Benhadad, 
are  deriyed  from  the  tutelar  ddty  of  the  Syrians,  and 
in  Kergalsharezer  we  rect^^ise  the  god  of  the  Oiahit€& 
Chemosh,  the  fire-god  of  Moab,  appears  in  Carchemish, 
and  Peor  in  Beth-Peor.  Malcom,  a  name  which  occors 
but  once,  and  then  of  a  Moabite  by  birth,  may  haye 
been  connected  with  Molech  and  Milcom,  the  abomina- 
tion  of  the  Ammonites.  A  glimpee  of  star-wnrshtp  may 
be  seen  in  the  name  of  the  city  Chesil,  the  Shemitic 
Orion,  and  the  month  Chisleu,  without  recognising  in 
Rahab  ^  the  glittering  fragments  of  the  sea-«nake  trail- 
ing  acroas  the  northeni  sky."  It  would,  peiiiape,  be  go- 
ing  too  far  to  tracę  in  Engedi,  ^  spring  of  the  kid,"  any 
connection  with  the  goat-worship  of  Mendesi,  or  any  id- 
ics  of  the  wars  of  the  gianta  in  Bapha  aad  Rephain. 
Fttrrt,  indeed,  reoogniaea  in  Gedi^Yenua  or  Astarte,  tbe 


IDOLATRT 


477 


IDOLATRY 


goddett  of  fortunę,  and  identied  with  Gad  (Handw,  a. 
V.).  But  there  ara  fragments  of  ancient  idolady  in 
oŁher  namea  in  which  it  ia  not  8o  palpable.  Ishboaheth 
is  identical  with  Esbbaal,  and  Jerubbesheth  with  Je- 
rabbaaL  and  Mephiboaheth  and  Meńbbaal  are  but  two 
uames  for  one  penon  (com]i.  Jer.  xi,  13).  The  worship 
of  the  Syrian  Rinunon  appears  in  the  names  Hadad- 
Rimmon,  and  Tabrimmon;  and  if,  aa  aome  auppoae,  it 
be  deńTed  from  '{'119*1,  RwunSuj  ^a,  pomegnuiate-tree," 
we  may  connect  it  with  the  towna  of  the  aame  name  in 
Jodah  and  Benjamin,  with  En-Rimmon  and  the  pre- 
Tailin^  tree-wonhip.  It  ia  impoaaible  to  pursue  thia 
invcstigation  to  any  length :  the  hinta  which  haye  been 
thiown  ont  may  pn>ve  auggestire. — Smith.  See  each 
of  theae  namea  in  ita  place. 

6.  Idolatrotu  U$affe$,  —  Moimtaina  and  high  pUces 
were  choaen  apota  for  ofTcring  aacrifice  and  incenae  to 
idołs  (1  Kinga  xi,  7 ;  xir,  23),  and  the  retireroent  of 
gardens  and  the  thick  abade  of  wooda  offcred  great  at- 
tnctions  to  their  worahippera  (2  Kinga  xvi,  4 ;  laa.  i, 
29;  Ho8Liv,  13).  It  waa  the  ridge  of  Cannel  which 
Elijah  aelected  aa  the  acene  of  hia  conteat  with  the 
prieata  of  Baal,  lighting  with  them  the  battle  of  Jeho- 
vah  aa  it  weie  on  their  own  ground.  See  Carmel. 
Carmel  was  regarded  by  the  Roman  hiatoriana  aa  a  aa- 
cred  moantain  of  the  Jewa  (Tacit.  Ilitt,  ii,  78 ;  Sueton. 
Vf»p,  7).  The  hoBt  of  heaven  waa  worahipped  on  the 
hooaetop  (2  Kinga  xxiii,  12;  Jer.  xix,  8;  xxxii,  29; 
Zeph.  i,  5).  In  deacribing  the  aun-worahip  of  the  Na- 
batsi,  Strabo  (xvi,  784)  mentiona  Łwo  characteriatica 
which  atrildngly  iOoatrate  the  worahip  of  Baal.  They 
built  their  altara  on  the  roofa  of  houaea,  and  offercd  on 
them  incenae  and  libationa  daily.  On  the  wali  of  his 
dty,  in  the  aight  of  the  beaieging  arraiea  of  Israel  and 
Ediom,  the  king  of  Moab  ofTered  hia  eldeat  aon  aa  a 
bnmt-oireTing.  The  Peraiana,  who  worahipped  the  aun 
under  the  name  of  Mithra  (Strabo,  xv,  782),  aacriiiced 
on  aif  elevatcd  spot,  but  built  no  altara  or  images.  See 
Motnrr. 

The  prieata  of  the  falae  worship  are  aometimea  deaig- 
nated  Chcnuuim,  a  word  of  Syriac  origin,  to  which  dif- 
ferent  meaninga  have  been  asaigned.  It  ia  applied  to 
the  non-Levitical  prieata  who  bumt  incenae  on  the  high 
places  (2  Kinga  xxiii,  5)  aa  well  aa  to  the  prieata  of  the 
calve8  (Hos.  x,  5);  and  the  correaponding  word  ia  uaed  in 
thePeahito  (Judg.  xviii,  80)  of  Jonathan  and  hu  descend- 
ants,  priesta  to  the  Łribe  of  Dan,  and  in  the  Targum  of 
Onkelos  (Gen.  xlvii,  22)  of  the  prieata  of  Egypt.  The 
Rabbia,  foUowed  by  Geaeniua,  have  dcrived  it  frora  a 
root  aignifying  ''to  be  biack,**  and  without  any  atithor- 
ity  aaaert  that  the  name  waa  given  to  idohitroua  prieata 
fiom  the  black  yeatmenta  which  they  wore.  But  wbite 
waa  the  diatinctive  color  in  the  prieatly  garmcnta  of  all 
nations  from  India  to  Gaul,  and  black  waa  only  wom 
when  they  aacrificed  to  the  aubterranean  gods  (Biihr, 
Symb.  ii,  87,  etc).  That  a  apecial  drcaa  was  adopted  by 
the  Baal-worshippera,  aa  well  aa  by  the  falae  propheta 
(Zech.  xiii,  4),  ia  evident  from  2  Kinga  x,  22  (where 
the  rendering  ahould  be  '*  fhe  apparel") :  the  yeatmenta 
weie  kept  in  an  apartment  of  the  idol  tempie,  under  the 
charge  probably  of  one  of  the  inferior  prieata.  Micah'8 
Lerite  was  provided  with  appropriate  robea  (Judg.  xvii, 
11).  The  ''foreign  apparel'*  mentioned  in  Zeph.  i,  8, 
doobtless  refera  to  a  aimilar  dreaa,  adopted  by  the  la- 
raelltea  in  dcflanoe  of  the  aumptuary  law  in  Numb.  xv, 
37-40.     See  Cheuarim. 

In  addition  to  the  prieata,  there  were  other  persona 
intimately  connected  with  idolatrona  ritea,  and  the  im- 
pmities  from  which  they  were  inaeparable.  Both  men 
and  women  conaecrated  themaeWea  to  the  aer\'ice  of 
idob:  the  foimer  aa  D*^d'np3,  kedeshim,  for  which  there 
ia  reaaon  to  believe  the  A.y.  (Deut  xxiii,  17,  etc)  haa 
not  givea  too  harah  an  equivalent ;  the  latter  aa  ni^^p, 
hedukótkf  who  wove  ahrinea  for  Aatarte  (2  Kinga  xxiu, 
7),  and  leaembled  the  haipai  of  Gorinth,  of  whom 
Stźabo  (viii,  378)  aaya  there  were  mora  than  a  tboosand 


attached  to  the  tempie  of  Aphrodite.  Egyptian  pioa- 
titutes  conaecnted  themaelyea  to  laia  (Juvenal,  vi,  489; 
ix,  22-24).  The  same  daaa  of  women  exi8ted  among 
the  Phcenidana,  Armeniana,  Lydiana,  and  Babyloniana 
(Herod,  i,  83, 199;  Strabo,  xi,  p.  582;  Epiat.  of  Jerem. 
ver.  43).  They  are  diatingniahed  ftom  the  public  pros- 
titutea  (Hoe.  iv,  14),  and  aaaociated  with  the  perform- 
anoea  of  aacred  ritea,  jnat  aa  in  Strabo  (xii,  p.  659)  we 
find  the  two  daaaea  Go-exiatang  at  Comana,  the  Gorinth 
of  Pontua,  much  frequented  by  pilgrima  to  the  ahrine 
of  Aphrodite.  The  wealth  thua  obtained  flowed  into 
the  tieaanry  of  the  idol  tempie,  and  againat  auch  a  prao- 
Uce  the  injunction  in  Deat.  xxiii,  18  ia  directed.  Dr. 
Maitland,  anxioua  to  defend  the  morał  character  of  Jew- 
ish  women,  haa  with  much  ingenuity  attempted  to  show 
that  a  meaning  foreign  to  their  tnie  aenae  haa  been  at- 
tached to  the  worda  a>bove  mentioned ;  and  that,  though 
cloaely  aaaociated  with  idolatroua  aervicea,  they  do  not 
indicate  auch  foul  comiption  {Ettaj^  an  FaUe  Wonk^), 
But  if,  aa  Moyera,  with  gieat  appearance  of  probability, 
haa  Gonjectuied  {Phón,  i,  679),  the  claaa  of  peraona  al- 
luded  to  was  compoaed  of  foreignera,  the  Jewiah  women 
in  thia  reapect  need  no  auch  advocacy.  That  auch  cus- 
toma  exiated  among  foreign  nationa  there  ia  abundant 
evidence  to  prove  (Lucian,  De  Syra  Dea^  c  5) ;  and 
from  the  juxtapoaition  of  proetitution  and  the  idola- 
troua ritea  againat  which  the  lawa  in  Lev.  xix  are  aim- 
ed,  it  ia  probable  that,  ncxt  to  its  immorality,  one  main 
reaaon  why  it  was  viaited  with  auch  atringency  waa  ita 
connectiou  with  idolatry  (compare  1  Cor.  vi,  9).  See 
Harijot. 

But  beaidea  theae  aoceaaoriea  there  were  the  ordinaiy 
ritea  of  worahip  which  idolatroua  ayatema  had  in  com- 
mon  with  the  reUgion  of  the  Hebrewa.  OiTering  bumt 
aacrificea  to  the  idol  goda  (2  Kinga  v,  17),  buming  in- 
cenae in  their  honor  (1  Kinga  xi,  8),  and  bowing  down 
in  worahip  before  their  imagea  (1  Kinga  xix,  18)  were 
the  chief  parta  of  their  ritoal,  and,  from  their  very  aual- 
ogy  with  the  ceremoniea  of  true  worahip,  were  morę 
aeductive  than  the  groaaer  forma.  Nothing  can  be 
atronger  or  morę  poeitive  than  the  languagc  in  which 
theae  ceremoniea  were  denounced  by  Hebrew  law.  £v- 
ery  deUil  of  idol-worahip  waa  madc  the  aubjcct  of  a 
aeparate  enactment,  and  many  of  the  lawa,  which  in 
themaeh-ea  aeem  trivial  and  almoat  abeuid,  receive  from 
this  point  of  view  their  true  aignificance.  We  are  told 
by  Maimonidea  (J/or.  N«b.  c  12)  that  the  prohibitiona 
againat  aowing  a  field  with  mingled  aeed,  and  wearing 
garmenta  of  mixed  materiał,  were  directed  againat  the 
practicea  of  idolatera,  who  attributed  a  kind  of  magical 
influence  to  the  mixture  (Lev.  xix,  19;  Spencer,  De 
Leff.  Ildn-.  ii,  18).  Such,  too,  were  the  precepta  which 
forbade  that  the  garmenta  of  the  aexea  ahould  be  iuter- 
changed  (DeuL  xxiii,  5;  Maimonidea,  De  Idol  xii,  9). 
According  to  Macrobiua  {8aL  iii.  8),  other  Aaiatica,  when 
they  aacriiiced  to  their  Yenua,  changed  the  dreaa  of  the 
aexea.  The  prieata  of  Cybele  appeared  in  women'8 
clothea,  and  uaed  to  mutilate  themaelvea  (Creuzer,  Sywb, 
ii,  34, 42)  :  the  aame  cuatom  waa  obeerved  ^  by  the  Ithy- 
phalii  in  the  ritea  of  Bacchua,  and  by  the  Atbeniana  in 
their  Aacophoria*'  (Young,  Idol  Cor,  m  ReL  i,  106 ;  comp. 
Lucian,  De  Dea  Syra^  c  15).  To  preaerve  the  larael- 
itea  from  oontamination,  they  were  prohibited  for  three 
yeara  after  their  conqueat  of  Canaan  from  cating  of  the 
lhut«>treea  of  the  land,  whoae  cultivation  had  been  at- 
tcnded  iitith  magical  ritea  (Lev.  xix,  23).  They  were 
forbidden  to  *'round  the  comer  of  the  head,"  and  to 
"mar  the  comer  of  the  beard"  (Lev.  xix,  27),  aa  the 
Arabiana  did  in  honor  of  their  goda  (Herod,  iii,  8;  iv, 
176).  Hence  the  phraae  HKB  '^^^'^'^  (Uterally),  ''ahom 
of  the  comer,"  ia  eapecially  applied  to  idolatera  (Jer.  ix, 
26 ;  xxv,  23).  Spencer  {De  Leg.  HAr.  ii,  9,  §  2)  explaina 
the  hiw  forbidding  the  offering  of  honey  (Lev.  ii,  11)  as 
intended  to  oppose  an  idolatroua  practice.  Strabo  de- 
acribea  the  Magi  aa  offering  in  all  their  aacriflcea  liba- 
tiona of  oil  mixed  with  honey  and  milk  (xv,  p.  733), 
Offeringa  in  which  honey  waa  an  ingredient  weie  madę 


IDOLATBY 


478 


IDOLATRT 


to  the  inferior  deities  and  the  dead  (Homer,  Od,  x,  619; 
Poiph.  De  Anir,  Nymph,  c  17).  So  alao  the  practice 
of  eating  the  flesh  of  sacrifioes  **0Ter  the  Uood"  (Lev. 
xix,  26 ;  Ezek.  xxxui,  25,  26)  waa,  acconling  to  Mai- 
monides,  common  among  the  Zabii.  Spencer  give8  a 
double  reaaon  for  the  prohibition :  that  it  was  a  rite  of 
diyination,  and  divination  of  the  worst  kind,  a  species 
of  necromancy  by  which  they  attempted  to  raise  the 
spirita  of  the  dead  (comp.  Horace,  8at,  i,  8).  There  are 
aappoaed  to  be  allusions  to  the  practice  of  necromancy 
in  Lml  lxy,  4,  or,  at  any  ratę,  to  auperstitioua  ritea  in 
oonnection  with  the  dead.  The  grafting  of  one  tree 
upon  another  waa  forbidden,  becauae  among  idolaters 
the  process  was  acoompanied  by  grosa  obscenity  (Mai- 
mon.  Mor,  Neb,  c.  12).  Catting  the  fleah  for  the  dead 
(liOT.  xix,  28;  1  Kinga  xviii,  28),  and  making  4i  bald- 
neaa  between  the  eyea  (Deut.  xiv,  1),  were  aasociated 
with  idolatrous  rites,  the  latter  being  a  custom  among 
the  Syrians  (Sir  GwWilkinflon  in  Rawlin8on'8  Herod,  ii, 
158  notę).  The  thrice-repeated  and  much-vexed  i>a»- 
aage,  *'Thou  shalt  not  seethe  a  kid  in  his  mother's  milk" 
(Exod.  xxiii,  19 ;  xxxiv,  26 ;  Deut.  xiv,  21),  interprcted 
by  some  as  a  precept  of  humanity,  is  explained  by  Cud- 
worth  in  a  yery  diiTerent  manner.  He  quote8  from  a 
Karaite  commentary  which  he  had  seen  in  MS.:  "It 
was  a  custom  of  the  ancient  heathens,  when  they  had 
gathered  in  all  their  fruit,  to  take  a  kid  and  boil  it  in 
the  dam's  roilk,  and  then  in  a  magical  way  go  abont 
and  besprinkle  with  it  all  the  trees,  and  fields,  and  gar- 
dens,  and  orchards ;  thinking  by  this  means  they  should 
make  them  fructify,  and  bring  forth  again  morę  abun- 
dantly  the  following  year^  {On  the  Lorda  Supperj  c.  2). 
Dr.  Thomson  mentions  a  favorite  dish  among  the  Aiabs 
called  Ubn  immu,  to  which  he  oonceive8  allusion  is  madę 
(The  lAtnd  and  the  Book,  i,  135).  The  law  which  regu- 
Uled  clean  and  unclean  meats  (Lcv.  xx,  28-26)  may  be 
oonsidcred  both  as  a  sanitar}'  reguUtion  and  also  as 
haying  a  tendency  to  separate  the  Israelites  from  the 
surrounding  idolatrous  nations.  It  was  with  the  same 
object,  in  the  opinion  of  Michaclis,  that  while  in  the 
wildcmess  they  were  prohibited  from  killing  any  animal 
for  food  without  first  offering  it  to  Jehoyah  {Laws  of 
Motes,  art.  203).  The  mouse,  one  of  the  unclean  ani- 
mals  of  Leviticu8  (xi,  29),  was  sacrificed  by  the  ancient 
Magi  (Isa.  lxvi,  17 ;  Moyers,  Phófu  i,  219).  '  It  may  have 
been  some  such  reason  as  that  assigned  by  Lewis  {Orig. 
ł/ebr,  V,  1),  that  the  dog  was  the  symbol  of*an  Egyptian 
deity,  which  gave  rise  to  the  prohibition  in  Deut  xxiii, 
18.  Movers  says  (i,  404)  the  dog  was  offered  in  sac- 
riitee  to  Moloch,  as  swine  to  the  moon  and  Dionysus  by 
the  Egyptians,  who  afterwards  ate  of  the  flesh  (Herod, 
iii,  47 ;  Isa.  lxv,  4).  Eating  of  the  things  offered  was 
a  necessaiy  appcndage  to  the  sacrifice  (compare  £xod. 
xviii,  12;  xxxii,  6;  xxxiv,  16;  Numb.  xxv,  2,  etc). 
Among  the  Persians  the  victim  was  eaten  by  the  wor- 
shippers,  and  the  soul  alone  lefl  for  the  god  (Strabo,  xv, 
732).  *'  Hence  it  is  that  the  idolatry  of  the  Jews  in 
worshipping  other  gods  is  so  oflen  describcd  synecdoch- 
ically  under  the  notion  of  feasting.  Isa.  lvii,  7,  •  Upon 
a  high  and  lofty  mountain  thou  hast  »eł  thy  bed,  and 
thither  wentcst  thou  up  to  oifcr  sacrifice  ;*  for  in  those 
ancient  timos  they  were  not  wont  to  sit  at  feasts,  but  lie 
down  on  bcds  or  couches.  Ezek.  xxiii,  41 ;  Amos  ii,  8, 
*Theylaid  themselyes  down  upon  clothes  laid  to  pledge 
by  erery  altar,'  i.  e.  laid  themselve8  down  to  eat  of  the 
sacriflce  that  was  offered  on  the  altar;  compare  Ezek. 
xviłł,  1 1"  (Cudworth,  ut  mpra,  c  1 ;  comp.  1  Cor.  viii, 
10).  The  Israelites  were  forbidden  "  to  print  any  mark 
upon  them"  (Lev.  xix,  28),  because  it  was  a  custom  of 
idolaters  to  brand  upon  their  flesh  some  S3nnbol  of  the 
deity  they  worshipped,  as  the  ivy-leaf  of  Bacchus  (3 
Mace.  ii,  29).  According  to  Lucian  {f}e  iJea  Syra^  59), 
all  the  Assyrians  wore  marks  of  this  kind  on  their  neck» 
andwrists  (comp.  Isa.  xliv,  6;  GaL  vi,  17;  Rev.  xiv,  1, 
11).  Many  other  practices  of  false  worship  are  alluded 
to,  and  madę  the  subjects  of  rigoroiis  prohibition,  but 
nonę  are  morę  freąuently  or  morę  aeveielj  denounoed 


than  thoae  which  pecnliaily  diatingnidied  the  ^ 
of  Molech.    It  has  been  attempted  to  deny  that  the 
worship  of  this  idol  was  polluted  by  the  fool  stain  of 
human  sacriflce,  but  the  idluaions  are  too  plain  and  tDo 
pointed  to  admit  of  reasonable  doubt  (Deńt  xii,  81;  2 
KingBiii,27;  Jer.  vii,  81;  Psa.  c^  87;  Ecek.  xxiii,  89). 
Nor  was  this  practice  oonfined  to  the  rites  of  Mokdi; 
it  extended  to  those  of  Baal  (Jer.  xix,  5),  and  Ibe  kii^ 
of  Moab  (2  Kings  iii,  27)  offesed  his  son  as  a  bomi-of- 
fering  to  his  god  Chcmosh.    The  Phoenicians,  we  iie 
told  by  Porphyry  (De  Abełi$u  ii,  c.  56),  on  occasńnt  of 
great  national  calamit}'  sacrifloed  to  Knoos  one  of  their 
dearest  fńends.     Some  aUuaions  to  thia  custom  may  be 
seen  in  Micah  vi,  7.     Kisaing  the  images  of  the  gods  (I 
Kings  xix,  18 ;  Hos.  xiii,  2),  hanging  votive  offeringt  in 
their  temples  (1  Sam.  xxxi,  10),  and  canying  them  to 
battle  (2  Sam.  v,  21),  as  the  Jews  of  Maccab«is'8  araif 
did  with  the  things  consecrated  to  the  idola  of  the  Jaia- 
nites  (2  Mace.  xii,  40),  are  usages  connected  with  idola- 
try which  are  casually  mentioned,  thoogh  not  madę  the 
objects  of  expTe8s  legislation.    But  aoothsaying,  inter^ 
pretatiou  of  dreams,  necromancy,  witchcraft,  magie,  and 
other  forms  of  diviiuition,  are  alike  forińddcn  (DeoL 
xviii,  9;  2  Kings  i,  2;  Isa. lxv, 4;  Ezek. xxi, 21).    The 
history  of  other  nations— and,  ińdeed,  the  too  comnMn 
practice  of  the  lower  class  of  the  popnlation  of  Syria  at 
the  present  day— shows  us  that  such  a  statute  as  that 
against  bestiality  (Lev.  xviii,  28)  was  not  unnecessaiy 
(comp.  Herod,  ii,  46 ;  Rom.  i,  26).    Pniificatoiy  rites  in 
connection  with  idol-worship,  and  eating  of  forbidden 
food,  were  vi8ited  with  sevcre  retribution  (Isa.  beri,  17). 
It  is  evident7  from  the  contcxt  of  Ezek.  riii,  17,  that  the 
^^tańes  of  the  sun,  who  worshipped  with  their  faces  to 
the  east  (vcr.  16),  and  "  put  the  hranch  to  their  noae," 
did  BO  in  observance  of  some  idolatrous  rite.    Moren 
{Phdn,  i,  6C)  unhesitatingly  affirms  that  the  allusion  is 
to  the  branch  Barsom,  the  holy  branch  of  the  Magi 
(Strabo,  xv,  p.  733),  while  Hiivemick  (Comm,  at  Ezmh. 
p.  117),  with  equal  confidence,  denies  that  the  paange 
supports  such  an  inference,  and  rendeiB,  having  in  view 
the  lament  of  the  women  for  Tammuz,  **  Sie  entsenden 
den  Trauergesang  zu  ihren  Zom."     The  waving  of  a 
myrtle  branch,  says  Maimonides  {De  IdoL  vi,  2),  accom- 
panied  the  repetition  of  a  magical  formuła  in  incanta- 
tions.    An  Ulustration  of  the  use  of  boughs  in  worship 
will  be  found  in  the  Greek  innipia  (iEsch.  Ann.  48; 
SuppL  192 ;  Schol  on  Aristoph.  Plut,  383 ;  Porphyr.  De 
A  nt,  Nymph,  c  33).     For  deUiled  accounts  of  idolatrous 
ceremonies,  reference  must  be  madę  to  the  articlea  upon 
the  8everal  idola.— Smith.     Sce  Saciupick. 

lY.  History  of  Idolairy  among  the  Jews, — 1.  Tbe  fSni 
undoubted  allusion  to  idolatry  or  idolatrooa  customs  in 
the  Bibie  is  in  the  account  of  Kachel*s  stealing  hcr  f»- 
ther'8  teraphim  (Gen.  xxxi,  19),  a  relic  of  tbe  wonhip 
of  other  gods,  whom  the  ancestors  of  the  Israelitoa  serred 
**  on  the  other  side  of  the  river,  in  old  time*'  (Josh.  xxiv, 
2).  By  these  household  deitlea  Laban  was  guided,  and 
thesc  he  consolted  as  oracles  C^tncnd,  Gen.  xxx,  27,  A 
y.  ^  leamed  by  experience"),  though  without  cntirely 
losing  sight  of  the  God  of  Abraham  and  the  God  of  Na- 
hor,  to  whom  he  appealed  when  occasion  offered  (Gen. 
xxxi,  53),  while  he  was  ready,  in  the  preaence  of  Jacoh, 
to  acknowledge  the  benefita  oonfeired  upon  him  by  Jc- 
hovah  (Gen.  xxx,  27).  Such,  indeed,  was  the  charwter 
of  most  of  the  idolatrous  worship  of  the  Israclitea.  like 
the  Cutluean  colonists  in  Samaria,  who  *^  feared  Jebovah 
and  served  their  own  gods"  (2  Kings  xvii,  88),  they 
blended  in  a  strange  manner  a  theoretieal  bcdief  in  tbe 
true  God  with  the  extemal  reverence  which,  in  diiTer- 
ent stages  of  their  history,  they  were  led  to  pay  to  the 
idols  of  the  nations  by  whom  they  were  surroundcd. 
For  this  species  of  false  worship  they  seem,  at  all  evcntf. 
to  have  had  an  incredible  propension.  On  their  joor- 
ney  from  Shechem  to  Bethel,  the  fhmily  of  Jacob  pot 
away  from  among  them  **the  gods  of  the. /bm^^;" 
not  the  teraphim  of  Laban,  but  the  goda  of  the  Canaan- 
ites  throogh  whose  land  they  pasaed,  and  the  amukts 


IDOLATRT 


470 


IDOLATRY 


■nd  charms  which  were  wom  as  the  appenduges  of  their 
w(»ship  (Gen.  xxxv,  2, 4).    Sec  Jacob. 

Doring  their  long  residenoe  in  £g3rpt,  the  country  of 
symboliam,  Łhey  defiled  them§elve8  ¥rith  the  idola  of  the 
land,  and  it  was  long  before  Ihe  taint  was  renioved  (Josb. 
xxiT,  14;  Ezek.  xx,  7).  To  these  gods  Moses,  aa  the 
herald  of  Jehovah,  flong  down  the  gauntlet  of  detianoe 
(Kurta,  G&eh.  d,  A  //.  B.  ii,  39),  and  the  plagues  of  Egypt 
amote  their  symbols  (Numb.  xxxiii,  4).  Yet,  with  the 
ttemory  of  their  delirerance  fresh  in  their  minds,  their 
leader  absent,  the  Israelites  clamored  for  some  yińble 
shape  in  which  they  might  worriiip  the  God  who  had 
bioóght  them  up  out  of  Egjrpt  (£xod.  xxxii).  The  la- 
ndites,  aa  dwellers  in  the  most  outlying  and  separate 
tzact  of  the  Shemitic  part  of  Lower  Egypt^  are  morę  like- 
ly  to  faave  Ibllowed  the  corruptions  of  the  Shephenl- 
Btrangen  than  thoee  of  the  Eg3rptian8,  morę  especially 
as,  saTing  Joeeph,  Moees,  and  not  improbably  Aaron  and 
Miriam,  Łhey  aeem  to  have  almost  univenally  pieserved 
the  manners  of  their  former  wandering  life.  There  is 
ecaiedy  a  traoe  of  Egyptian  influence  beyond  that  seen 
in  the  namea  of  Moses  and  Miriam,  and  perhaps  of  Aa- 
ron alao,  for  the  only  other  name  besides  the  former  two 
that  is  certainly  Egyptian,  and  niay  be  reasonably  re- 
fened  to  this  period,  that  of  Hamepher,  ovidently  the 
Egypdan  hab-xbfbu,  "  Horus  the  good,"  in  the  gene- 
alpgica  of  Asher  (1  Chroń,  yii,  86),  probably  marks  an 
EnO^pCiaa  taken  by  marriage  into  the  tribe  of  Asher, 
whether  a  proselyte  or  not  we  cannot  attempt  to  decide. 
There  hiis  been  a  difference  of  opinion  as  to  the  golden 
calf,  some  holding  that  it  was  madę  to  represent  God 
hinńelf,  others  maintaining  that  it  was  only  on  imi- 
tation  of  an  Egyptian  idoL  We  first  obaerve  that 
this  and  Jeroboam's  golden  calve8  are  shown  to  hare 
been  identical  in  the  intention  with  which  they  were 
madę,  by  the  circumstance  that  the  Israelites  addressed 
the  former  as  the  God  who  had  bronght  them  out  of 
Egypt  (Exod.  xxxii,  4, 8),  and  that  Jeroboam  procUiim- 
ed  the  same  of  his  idols  (1  Kinga  xii,  28).  We  next  re- 
mark  that  Aaron  called  the  calf  not  only  god,  but  the 
Loro  (Exod.  xxxii,  5) ;  that  in  the  Ps^ms  it  b  said 
**'  they  changed  their  glory  into  the  similitude  of  an  ox 
that  eateth  hay"  (cvi,  20) ;  that  no  one  of  the  calf-wor- 
shipping  kings  and  princes  of  Israel  bears  any  name  con- 
nected  with  idolatry,  while  many  have  names  oompound- 
ed  with  the  most  sacred  name  of  God ;  and  that  in  no 
place  b  any  foreign  divinity  connected  with  calf-wor- 
ship  in  the  slightest  degree.  The  adoption  of  such  an 
image  as  the  golden  calf,  howeyer,  shows  the  strength 
^^  £gyp^uui  associations,  else  how  would  Aaron  have 
iixed  upon  so  ignoble  a  form  as  that  of  the  (jod  who 
had  brooght  Israel  out  of  Egypt?  Only  a  mind  thor- 
ooghly  accustomed  to  the  profound  respect  paid  in  Egypt 
to  the  aacred  buUs,  and  especially  to  Apis  and  MneviB, 
oonld  have  hit  upon  so  scrange  a  representation;  nor 
eoold  any  people  who  had  not  witnessed  the  Egyptian 
pnctioes  have  found,  as  readily  as  did  the  Israelites,  the 
fulfilment  of  their  wiahes  in  such  an  image.  The  feast 
that  Aaron  oelebraŁed,  when,  alter  eating  and  drinking, 
the  people  aroee,  sang,  and  danoed  naked  before  the  idol, 
ia  stfikingly  like  the  fe8tival  of  the  finding  of  Apis, 
which  was  oelebrated  with  feasting  and  dancing,  and 
also,  apparenUy,  though  this  custom  does  not  seem 
to  have  been  part  of  the  public  festivity,  with  indeoent 
gestores.  See  Golden  Calf.  The  golden  calf  was 
not  the  only  idol  which  the  Israelites  worshipped  in  the 
Deaert.  The  prophet  Amos  speaks  of  others.  In  the 
IŁasoKetic  text  the  passage  is  as  foliowa:  *<Bot  ye  bare 
tbę  tent  [or  tabemade]  of  your  king  and  Chiun  your 
inugea,  the  star  of  your  gods  [or  your  ood],  which  ye 
madę  for  yourselyes"  (v,  26).  The  Sept.  has  MoXóx  for 
'"yonr  king,"  as  though  their  original  Heb.  had  been 
DSbc  instead  of  Q3Ąbc,  and  'Pai^ay  for  Chiun,  be- 
ńdea  a  transpoaition.  In  the  Acta  the  reading  is  almost 
the  aame  as  that  of  the  Sept.,  **  Yea,  ye  took  up  the  tab- 
I  of  Moloch,  and  the  star  of  your  god  Remphan, 
I  which  ye  madę  to  worship  them"  Cvii,  48).    We 


cannot  here  diacoss  the  probable  canses  of  these  differ* 
ences  except  of  the  morę  important  ones,  the  substitn- 
tion  of  Moloch  for  *'your  king,"  and  Kaiphan  or  Rem- 
phan for  Chiun.  It  should  be  obseryed,  that  if  the  pas- 
sage related  to  Ammonitish  worship,  nothiiig  would  be 
morę  likely  than  that  Molech  should  have  been  spoken 
of  by  an  appellative,  in  which  case  a  strict  rendering  of 
the  Masoretic  text  would  read  as  does  the  A.  V.;  a  freer 
could  foUow  the  Sept.  and  Acts;  but,  as  there  is  no  ref- 
erence  to  the  Ammonites  or  even  Canaanites,  it  is  moie 
reasonable  to  suppoee  that  the  Sept  foUowed  a  text  in 
which,  as  above  suggested,  tho  reading  was  D^^p,  Mal- 
charo,  or  "your  king."  The  likelihood  of  this  being 
the  true  reading  must  depend  upon  the  rest  of  the  pas- 
sage. Remphan  and  Chiun  are  at  once  recognised  as 
two  foreign  divinitie8  worshipped  togethcr  in  Egypt, 
RENPU,  probably  pronounced  rempu,  and  kek,  the  for- 
mer a  god  represented  as  of  the  type  of  the  Shemitea, 
and  apparently  connected  with  war,  the  lattcr  a  goddese 
represented  naked  standing  upon  a  lion.  They  were 
worshipped  with  khem,  the  Egyptian  god  of  produc^ 
tivene8B,  and  the  foreign  war-goddess  anata.  £xclud- 
ing  KRESf,  who  is  probably  asaociated  with  ken  from  her  ^ 
being  connected,  as  we  shall  see,  with  productivene88, 
these  names,  renpu,  ken,  and  anata,  are  clearly  not, 
except  in  orthography,  Egyptian.  We  can  suggest  no 
origin  for  the  name  of  renpu.  The  godddes  ken,  as 
naked,  would  be  connected  with  the  Babylonian  Mylit^ 
ta,  and  as  standing  on  a  lion,  with  a  goddeas  so  repre- 
sented in  rock-sculptures  at  Maltbei37'eh,  near  Nineveh. 
The  former  aimilarity  connects  her  M-ith  generatton ;  the 
latter,  perhapa,  doca  ao  likcwiae.  If  we  adopt  thia  sup- 
position,  the  name  ken  may  be  traced  to  a  root  connect- 
ed with  generation  found  in  many  yarieties  in  the  Ira- 
nian  family,  and  not  out  of  that  family.  It  may  be  suf- 
iicient  to  cite  the  Greek  yh-ofiai,  yvv-ij :  she  would 
thua  be  the  goddeas  of  prodnctiyenesa.  Anata  ia  the 
Peraian  Anaitia.  We  have  shown  earlier  that  the  Baby- 
lonian high  nature-worahip  seems  to  liavc  been  of  Aiy- ' 
an  origin.  In  the  present  case  we  tracę  an  Aryan  idola- 
try connected,  from  the  mention  of  a  star,  with  high  na- 
ture-worship.  If  we  accept  this  explanation,  it  becomes 
doubtful  that  Molech  is  mentioncd  in  the  passage,  and 
we  may  rather  suppose  that  some  other  idol,  to  whom  a 
kingly  character  was  attributed,  is  intended.  Here  we 
must  leave  this  diiiicnlt  point  of  our  inquiTy,  only  aum- 
ming  up  that  this  false  worship  was  evidently  derived 
from  the  ahepherda  in  Eg^'pt,  and  may  poasibly  indicate 
the  Aiyan  origin  of  at  least  one  of  these  tńbes,  almost  • 
certainly  ita  own  origin,  dircctly  or  indirectly,  from  an 
Aryan  source. 

The  next  was  a  temporaiy  apostasy.  The  charms  of 
the  daughters  of  Moab,  as  Bahiam's  bad  genius  foreaaw, 
were  potent  for  evil :  the  Israelites  were  "  yoked  to  Baal- 
Peor"  in  the  trammels  of  his  fair  worshippera,  and  the 
character  of  their  devotions  is  not  obscurely  hinted  at 
(Numb.  xxv).  The  great  and  terrible  retribution  which 
followed  left  so  deep  an  impress  upon  the  hcarts  of  the 
people  that,  after  the  conquest  of  the  promised  land,  they 
looked  with  an  eye  of  terror  upon  any  indication  of  de- 
fection  from  the 'worship  of  Jehovah,  and  denounced  as 
idolatrous  a  memoriał  so  slight  as  the  altar  of  the  Ren- 
benites  at  the  passage  of  Jordan  (Josh.  xxii,  IG). 

2.  It  ia  probable  that  during  the  wacdeńngs,  and  nn- 
der  the  atrong  rule  of  Joshua,  the  idoUitry  Icamt  in  Egypt 
was  ao  destroyed  as  to  be  afterwarda  utterly  foigotten  by 
the  people.  But  in  entering  Palestine  they  found  them- 
selvcs  aroong  the  monuments  and  associations  of  anoth- 
er  false  religion,  less  attractive  indeed  to  the  reason  than 
that  of  Egypt,  which  still  taught,  notwithsUnding  the 
wTCtched  fetishism  that  it  supportcd,  some  great  truths 
of  man*s  present  and  future,  but  of  a  religion  which,  in 
ita  deification  of  nature,  had  a  atrong  hołd  on  the  imagi- 
nation.  The  genial  sun,  the  refreshing  moon,  the  stars, 
at  whose  risings  or  settings  fcll  the  longcd-for  rains, 
were  naturally  reverenccd  in  that  land  of  green  hills 
and  va]leys,  which  were  fed  by  the  water  of  heaven.    A 


IDOLATRY 


480 


IDOLATRY 


mtion  thrown  in  the  Boene  of  such  a  religion  and  mixr 
ed  with  those  who  professed  it,  at  that  period  of  nation- 
al  life  when  impressions  are  most  readily  madę,  such  a 
nation,  albeit  living  while  the  recollection  of  the  deUv- 
erance  from  Egypt  and  the  wonden  with  which  the  Law 
was  given  was  yet  fresh,  soon  ML  away  into  tho  prsc- 
tices  that  it  was  strictiy  enjoincd  to  xoot  out.  In  the 
first  and  seoond  laws  of  the  Decaloguc,  the  Israelites 
were  oommanded  to  worship  but  one  God,  and  not  to 
make  any  image  whatever  to  wonhip  it,  lest  they  and 
their  children  should  fali  under  God's  heavy  displeasure. 
The  commands  were  explicit  enoogh.  But  not  alone 
was  idolatry  thus  dearly  condemned :  the  Israelites  were 
chaiiged  to  destroy  all  objects  connected  with  the  relig- 
ion of  the  inhabitants  of  Oanaan.  They  were  to  destroy 
utterly  all  the  heathen  places  of  worship,  **  upon  the 
high  mountains,  and  upon  the  hills,  and  under  every 
green  tree."  They  were  to  "overthrow"  the  "altars" 
of  the  heathen,  ^  break  their  pillars,"  *'  bum  their  grores, 
hew  down  the  graven  images  of  their  gods,  and  destroy 
the  names  of  them  out  of  that  place"  (Deut.  xii,  2,8),  a 
passage  we  cite  on  account  of  the  fulness  of  the  enumer- 
ation.  Had  the  conquered  nations  been  utterly  extir- 
pated,  their  idolatry  might  have  been  annihilated  at 
(Mice.  But  soon  after  the  lands  had  been  apportioned, 
that  separate  life  of  the  tribes  began  which  was  never 
intemipted,  as  far  as  history  tells  us,  nntil  the  time  of 
the  kingą.  Divided,  the  tribes  were  unable  to  cope  with 
the  remnant  of  the  Canaanites,  and  either  dwelt  with 
them  on  equal  tenns,  reduced  them  to  tribute,  or  be- 
came  tributaries  themselres.  The  Israelites  were  thus 
aurrounded  by  the  idolatry  of  Omaan;  and  sińce  they 
were  for  the  most  part  conUned  to  the  mountain  and 
hilly  districts,  where  its  associations  were  strongest,  they 
had  but  to  leam  from  their  neighbors  how  they  had  wor- 
shipped  upon  the  high  hills  and  under  every  green  tree. 
From  the  use  of  plural  forms,  it  is  probable  that  the  Baals 
and  Ashtoreths  of  several  towns  or  tribes  were  woiship- 
ped  by  the  Israelites,  as  Baal-Peor  had  been,  and  Baal- 
berith  afterwards  was.  It  does  not  seem,  howerer,  that 
the  people  at  onoe  iell  into  heathen  worship:  the  first 
step  appears  to  have  been  adopting  a  coiruption  of  the 
tnie  religion. 

During  the  liyes  of  Joshua  and  the  elders  who  out- 
Uved  him,  iudeed,  they  kept  true  to  their  allegiance ; 
but  the  generation  following,  who  knew  not  Jehoyah, 
nor  the  works  he  had  done  for  Israel,  sweryed  from  the 
plain  path  of  their  fathers,  and  were  caught  in  the  toils 
of  the  foreigner  (Judg.  ii).  Fiom  this  time  forth  their 
history  becomes  little  morę  than  a  chronicie  of  the  in- 
eritable  8cquence  of  offence  and  punishment.  *'  They 
proYoked  Jehovah  to  anger  .  .  .  and  the  anger  of  Je- 
hovah  was  hot  against  Israel,  and  he  delivered  them 
into  the  hands  of  spoilers  that  spoiled  them"  (Judg.  ii, 
1 2, 14).  The  narratives  of  the  book  of  Judges,  contem* 
poraneous  or  successiYC,  tell  of  the  fieice  struggie  main- 
tained  against  their  hated  foes,  and  how  women  forgot 
their  tendemees  and  forsook  their  retirement  to  sing  the 
song  of  yictory  oyer  the  oppressor.  By  tums,  each  con- 
quering  nation  stroye  to  establish  the  worship  of  its 
national  god.  During  the  rule  of  Midian,  Joash,  the 
father  of  Gideon,  had  an  altar  to  Baal,  and  an  Asherah 
(Judg.  vi,  25),  though  he  proved  but  a  lukewarm  wor- 
sHpper  (yer.  81).  Eyen  Gideon  bimself  gayje  occasion 
to  idolatrous  worship;  yet  the  ephod  which  he  madę 
from  the  spoils  of  the  Midianites  was  perhaps  but  a  yo- 
tive  offering  to  the  true  (yod  (Judg.  yiii,  27).  It  is  not 
improbable  that  the  gold  omaments  of  which  it  was 
Gomposed  were  in  some  way  connected  with  idolatry 
(comp.  Isa.  iii,  18-24),  and  that,  from  their  haying  been 
wom  as  amulets,  some  superstitious  yirtue  was  oonceiycd 
to  cling  to  them  eyen  in  their  new  form.  But,  though 
in  Gideon*8  lifetime  no  ovcrt  act  of  idolatry  was  prac- 
tised,  he  was  no  sooner  dead  than  the  Israelites  again 
retumed  to  the  sernice  of  the  Baalim,  and,  as  if  in  sol- 
emn  mockery  of  the  corenaiit  madę  with  Jehoyah,  choti^ 
fam  among  them  Baal-Berith, "  Baal  of  the  Coveaant' 


(comp.  Zf  dc  Spnoc),  as  the  object  of  their  speoal  ad»* 
ration  (Judg.  viii,  88).     Of  this  god  we  know  only  that 
his  tempie,  probably  of  wood  (Judg.  ix,  49),  wcs  a  t/aoog' 
hołd  in  time  of  need,  and  that  his  treasury  was  fiSed 
with  the  silver  of  the  woishippen  (ix,  4).    Nor  woe 
the  całamities  of  foreign  oppression  confined  to  the  land 
ofCanaan.   The  tribes  on  the  eastof  Jordan  went  aatrar 
after  the  idols  of  the  land,  and  were  deliTcred  into  the 
hands  of  the  children  of  Ammon  (Judg.  x,  8).    But  they 
put  oway  from  among  them  "  the  gods  of  tho  foreigner," 
and  with  the  basebom  Jephthah  for  their  leader  gaioed 
a  signal  yictory  over  their  oppreaaois.     The  exptoiis«f 
Samson  against  the  Philisttnes,  though  achiered  withia 
a  narrower  space  and  with  less  important  resulu  than 
those  of  his  póredeceasorB,  fiU  a  brilliant  page  in  his  coun- 
tr/s  histor}%    But  the  tale  of  his  maryellous  deeds  is 
prefoced  by  that  erei^recurring  phrasc,  so  monrafiiny 
familiar,  **  the  children  of  Israd  did  evU  again  in  the 
eyes  of  Jehovah,  and  Jehoyah  gave  them  into  the  hand 
of  the  Fhilistines.**    Thus  far  idolatry  is  a  national  m. 
The  episode  of  Micah,  in  Judg.  xyii,  xviii,  shcds  a  hsid 
light  on  the  secret  practices  of  indiyiduals,  who,  without 
fomally  renouncing  Jehovah,  though  ceasing  to  raa^ 
nise  him  as  the  theocratic  king  (xyii,  6),  linked  with 
his  worship  the  symbols  of  andent  idolatry.    The  houe 
of  God,  or  sanctuaiy,  which  Micah  madę  in  imitatim 
of  that  at  Shiloh,  was  decoiated  with  an  ephod  and  ter- 
aphim  dedicated  to  God,  and  with  a  grayen  and  moltai 
image  consecrated  to  some  inferior  deities  (Seldcn,  De 
JHt  Syriif  synt.  i,  2).    It  is  a  significant  fact,  ahowing 
how  deeply  rooted  in  the  people  was  the  tendency  to 
idolatry,  that  a  Leyite,  who^  of  all  others,  should  haye 
been  most  sedulous  to  maintain  Jehoyah's  worship  in 
its  purity,  was  found  to  assume  the  offioe  of  priest  to 
the  images  of  Micah;  and  that  this  Leyite,  priest  after- 
wards to  the  idols  of  Dan,  was  no  other  thiui  Jonathan, 
tho  son  of  Gershom,  the  son  of  Moees.    Tnidition  says 
that  these  idols  were  destroyed  when  the  Fhilietinies 
defeated  the  army  of  Israel  and  took  from  them  the  ark 
of  the  ooyenant  of  Jehoyah  (1  Sam.  iy).     The  Danitea 
are  supposed  to  have  carried  them  into  the  field,  as  the 
other  tribes  borę  the  ark,  and  the  Pbilistinca  Uie  im- 
ages of  their  gods,  when  they  went  forth  to  battle  (2 
Sam.  V,  21 ;  Lewis,  Oriff,  Hebr.  y,  9).     But  the  Seder 
Olom  Babba  (c.  24)  interprets  *'  the  captiyity  of  the 
land"  (Judg.  XYiii,  80),  of  the  captiyity  of  Manaaaeh; 
and  Boijamin  of  Tudela  mistook  the  remaina  of  later 
Gentile  worship  for  traces  of  the  altar  or  statuę  which 
Micah  had  dedicated,  and  which  was  wonhipped  by 
the  tribe  of  Dan  (Selden,  /"<?  Di*  Sfr.  synt  i,  2 ;  Stan- 
ley, S.  and  Pal  p.  898).     In  kiter  timea  the  practice  of 
secret  idolatry  was  carried  to  greater  lengtha.     Images 
were  set  up  on  the  com-floors,  in  the  wine-yata,  and  be- 
hind  the  doors  of  priyate  honacs  (Isa.  lyii.  8 ;  Uoa.  ix,  1, 
2);  and  to  check  this  tendency  the  statate  in  Deut 
xxvii,  15  was  originally  promulgatod.    It  is  ix»ticeable 
that  they  do  not  aeem  during  this  period  to  hare  gen- 
erally  adopted  the  religions  of  any  but  the  ^nT^aait^^f*, 
although  in  one  remarkable  passage  they  are  said,  be- 
tween  the  time  of  Jair  and  that  of  Jephthah,  to  haye 
forsaken  the  Lord,  and  seryed  Baalim,  and  Aahtaroth, 
and  the  gods  of  Syria,  Zidon,  Moab,  the  children  of  Am- 
mon, and  the  PhiUstines  (Judg.  x,  6),  as  thoogh  there 
had  then  been  an  utter  and  profligate  aposiasy.    The 
cause,  no  doabt,  was  that  the  Canaanitish  worship  waa 
borrowed  in  a  time  of  amity,  and  that  but  one  Oanaan^ 
itish  oppressor  is  spoken  of,  whereas  the  Abrahamites  of 
the  eaat  of  Paleetine,  and  the  Philistines,  were  ahnoel 
alwa^^s  enemiee  of  the  Israelites.    Each  time  of  idolatry 
was  punished  by  a  ser\'itude,  each  reformaticm  fdloweil 
by  a  deliyeranoe.    Speedily  as  the  nation  rctomed  ta 
idolatr>%  its  heart  was  fresher  than  that  of  the  ten  tribea 
which  followed  Jeroboam,  and  neycr  aeem  to  haye  had 
one  thorough  national  repentance. 

3.  The  notices  of  their  great  wan  show  that  tha  cn- 
mity  between  the  Philistines  and  the  Isndites  waa  too 
gieat  for  any  idolatry  to  be  then  boirowad  from  the  Ibi^ 


IDOLATRY 


481 


IDOLATRT 


mer  bf  Łhe  ktter,  though  at  an  earHer  time  tbis  was  not 
the  case.  Under  Samuel*B  adnuniatnition  a  faat  was  held, 
and  puiiiicaŁory  rites  peiformed,  to  mark  the  public  le- 
ouDciation  of  idolatiy  (1  Sam.  vii,  3-6).  Saul'B  family 
were,  however,  taiuted,  aa  it  seema,  with  idolatxy,  for 
the  names  of  lahboaheth  or  £ah-baal,  and  Mephiboaheth 
or  Merib-baal,  can  scarcelj  harc  bcen  given  but  in  hon- 
or of  BaaL  From  the  circumstancea  of  Bilichal'8  stiata- 
gem  to  save  David,  it  aeema  not  onlj  that  Saul^s  family 
kept  ter^>him,  but,  apparently,  that  they  uaed  them  for 
puipoaes  of  dirination,  the  Sept.  haviiig  "Urer"  for 
"piilow,"  aa  if  the  Hebr.  had  been  123  instead  of  the 
picaent  *)''39.  See  Piulow.  The  drcumatance  of 
haiing  tenphim,  morę  eapecially  if  they  were  uaed  for 
dirinatioD,  lenda  eapectal  force  to  Samuers  reproof  of 
Saul  (1  Sam.  xv,  23).  During  the  reign  of  David  idol- 
atry  in  public  ia  unmentioned,  and  no  doubt  waa  almoat 
unknowiL    See  Dayid. 

The  eariier  daya  of  Solomon  were  the  happiest  of  the 
kiogdom  of  laraeL  The  Tempie  worahip  was  fully  es- 
tabliahed,  with  the  higheat  magnificence,  and  thero  was 
00  excttse  for  that  worahip  of  (^  at  high  places  which 
aeems  to  hare  been  before  permitted  on  aocount  of  the 
ooosuułt  diatracŁiona  of  the  eountiy.  Bat  the  doee  of 
that  reign  was  marked  by  an  apostasy  of  which  we 
lead  with  wonder.  Hitherto  the  people  had  been  the 
ainneiB,  their  leadera  reformera;  thia  time  the  king,  led 
aatiiy  by  hia  many  stnmge  wirea,  perverted  the  people, 
and  taiaed  high  placea  on  the  Mount  of  Comiption,  op- 
poaite  God'8  tempie.  He  worshipped  Ashtorcth,  god- 
deas  ot  the  Zidoniana,  Ghemoah,  the  god  of  the  Moab- 
ites,  and  Miloom,  the  abomination  of  the  Ammonitea, 
boilding  high  placea  for  the  latter  two,  as  well  as  for  all 
the  gods  of  his  atraoge  wive&  Solomon,  no  doubt,  waa 
Toy  toleiant,  and  would  not  pieyent  theae  women  ftom 
foDoiring  their  natiye  auperatitiona,  even  if  they  felt  it 
a  daty  to  bum  their  and  hia  children  before  Molech. 
Foteign  idolatry  was  openly  imitated.  Three  of  the 
nmmita  of  Oliret  were  aowned  with  the  high  placea 
of  Ashtoreth,  Chemosh,  and  Molech  (1  Kinga  xi,  7;  2 
Kinga  xxiii,  13),  and  the  foorth,  in  memory  of  hia  great 
apostasy,  was  branded  with  the  oppcobrious  tiile  of  the 
"Mount  of  Corroption."  Calamity  apeedily  followed 
thia  great  apostasy :  the  latter  years  of  Solomon  were 
tnubled  by  continoal  premonitions  of  thoae  political  re- 
TCTKa  which  were  the  ineyitable  penalty  of  thia  high- 
tnaaon  against  the  theocracy.  Thia  u  deaily  brought 
out  by  the  marked  and  freqaent  denunciationa  of  the 
hterpropheta.—Kitto;  Smith.    See  Solomon. 

Kehoboam,  the  son  of  an  Ammonitiah  mother,  perpet- 
nated  the  worst  featores  of  Solomon^s  idolatry  (1  Kinga 
ziv,22-24);  and  in  his  reign  waa  madę  the  great  schism 
in  ihe  national  religion— -when  Jeroboam,  fieah  from  hia 
lecollections  of  the  Apis  worahip  of  Egypt,  erected  goM- 
en  calrea  at  Bethel  and  at  Dan,  and  by  this  crafty  atate 
policy  8evered  foreyer  the  kingdoms  of  Judah  and  la- 
»el  (1  Kinga  xji,  26-33).  To  their  use  were  temples 
consecrated,  and  the  aerrice  in  their  honor  was  studi- 
owały copied  ftom  the  Moaaic  rituaL  High-priest  him- 
nit,  Jeroboam  ordained  priesta  ftom  the  lowest  ranks  (2 
Chno.  xi,  15);  incense  and  sacrifloes  were  offered,  and  a 
•ofenm  festiyai  appointed,  ckieely  resembling  the  feast 
of  tabemacfea  (1  Kinga  xii,  23, 38 ;  comp.  Amoa  iv,  4, 6). 
See  JiEROBOASf.  The  worahip  of  the  calvea,  « the  sin 
of  laraer  (Hoe.  x,  8),  which  waa  apparently  associated 
with  the  goat-wonhip  of  Mendes  (2  Chroń,  xi,  16 ; 
Herod,  ii,  40)  or  of  the  ancient  Zabu  (Lewis,  Oriff.  H^. 
▼,  3),  and  the  Aaherim  (1  Kinga  xiv,  16 ;  A.V. «  groyes"), 
okimately  epread  to  the  kingdom  of  Judah,  and  centred 
in  Beeraheba  (Amoa  v,  6 ;  vii,  9).  At  what  preciae  pe- 
liod  it  waa  introdnced  into  the  Utter  kingdom  is  not 
certatn.  The  Chnmiclea  teU  ns  how  Abijah  tounted 
Jeroboam  with  his  apostasy,  while  the  leas  partial  nar- 
ntive  in  1  Kinga  repceaents  his  own  oonduct  as  iar  fh>m 
ezempbuy  (1  Kinga  xv,  8).  Asa'8  sweeping  reform 
^pned  not  even  the  idol  of  his  grandmother  Maachah, 
ind,  with  the  exoaiitian  of  the  high  places,  he  rem<yved 

nr--HH 


all  relica  of  idolatrous  worahip  (1  Kinga  xv,  12-14),  with 
ita  aooompanying  impuritiea.  His  reformation  waa 
oompleted  by  Jehoshaphat  (2  Chroń,  xvii,  6).  See  each 
king  in  alphabetical  order. 

The  suoceaaora  of  Jeroboam  followed  in  hia  atepa,  till 
Ahab,  who  manried  a  Zidonian  princeaa,  at  her  instiga- 
tion  (1  Kinga  xxi,  26)  built  a  tempie  and  altar  to  Baal, 
and  revived  all  the  abominationa  of  the  Amoritea  (1 
Kinga  xxi,  26).  For  this  he  attained  the  bad  pre-emi- 
nence  of  having  done  *'more  to  provoke  Jehovah,  the 
God  of  Israel,  to  anger  than  all  the  kings  of  Israel  that 
were  before  him"  (1  Kings  xvi,  88).  Compared  with 
the  worahip  of  Baal,  the  worahip  of  the  calvea  was  a 
Tenial  offenoe,  probably  becaoae  it  waa  morally  less  de- 
testable,  and  also  leaa  anti-national  (1  Kinga  xii,  28;  2 
Kings  X,  28-81).  See  Ełuak.  Henoeforth  Baal-woiw 
ahip  became  ao  oompletely  identifled  with  the  northem 
kii^gdom  that  it  is  described  as  walking  in  the  way  or 
statutea  of  the  kingą  of  Israel  (2  Kings  xvi,8;  xvii,  8), 
aa  distinguished  ftom  the  sin  of  Jeroboam,  which  ceaaed 
not  tUl  the  Captivity  (2  Kinga  xvii,  28),  and  the  corrup- 
tion  of  the  ancient  inhabitants  of  the  land.  The  idoUb- 
trona  prieats  became  a  numerous  and  important  caste  (1 
Kings  xviii,  19),  living  under  the  palionage  of  royalty, 
and  fed  at  the  royal  table.  The  extirpation  of  Baai*B 
priests  by  Elijah,  and  of  hia  followera  by  Jehu  (2  Kinga 
x),  in  which  the  royal  family  of  Judah  ahared  (2  Chroń. 
xxii,  7),  waa  a  death-blow  to  this  form  of  idolatry  in  Is- 
rael, though  other  syatema  sdU  remained  (2  Kinga  xiii, 
6).  But,  while  larael  thua  ainned  and  waa  punished, 
Judah  was  morally  morę  guilty  (Izek.  xvi,  61).  The 
alliance  of  Jehoshaphat  with  the  family  of  Ahab  trana- 
ferred  to  the  aouthem  kingdom,  during  the  leigns  of  hia 
son  and  grandaon,  all  the  appurtenancea  of  Baal-worship 
(2  Kinga  viii,  18, 27).  In  leaa  than  ten  yeara  after  the 
death  of  that  king,  in  whose  praise  it  ia  reoorded  that  be 
"^  sooght  not  the  Baalun,"  nor  walked  **  after  the  deed  of 
Israel*'  (2  Chroń,  xvii,  3, 4),  a  tempie  had  been  built  for 
the  idol,  Btatues  and  altars  erected,  and  priesta  appointed 
to  minister  in  his  scrvice  (2  Kinga  xi,  18).  Jehoiada'a 
vigoroua  measures  checked  the  evil  for  a  time,  but  hia 
reform  waa  incomplete,  and  the  high  plaoea  atiU  r^ 
mained,  aa  in  the  daya  of  Aaa,  a  nuclens  for  any  fireah 
ajratem  of  idolatry  (2  Kinga  xii,  8).  Much  of  thia  might 
be  due  to  the  influence  of  the  king'a  mother,  Zibiah  of 
Beeraheba,  a  place  intimately  oonnected  with  the  idolar 
troua  defection  of  Judah  (Amoa  viii,  14).  After  the 
death  of  Jehoiada,  the  princea  prevailed  upon  Joaah  to 
reatore  at  least  aome  portion  of  his  father*8  idoUitry  (2 
Chroń,  xxiv,  18).  The  conąuest  of  the  Edomites  by 
Amasiah  introdnced  the  worahip  of  their  gods,  which 
had  disappeared  sinoe  the  days  of  Solomon  (2  Chrom. 
xxv,  14, 20).  After  this  period,  even  the  kings  who  did 
not  lend  them8elve8  to  the  encouragement  of  false  wor- 
ship  had  to  contend  with  the  oomption  which  still  lin- 
gered  in  the  hearta  of  the  people  (2  Kings  xv,  86;  2 
Chroń,  xxvii,  2).  Hitherto  the  tempie  had  beói  kepi 
pure.  The  statuea  of  Baal  and  the  other  goda  were 
worahipped  in  their  own  ahrinea;  but  Ahaz,  who  '^aao- 
rifioed  nnto  the  goda  of  Damaacus,  which  smote  him"  (2 
Chroń,  xxviii,  28),  and  built  altan  to  them  at  every  cor- 
ner  of  Jerusalem,  and  high  plaoes  in  every  dty  of  Judah, 
replaced  the  teazen  altar  of  bnmtHiffering  by  one  madę 
after  the  model  of^  the  altar"  of  Damascus,  and  dese- 
crated  it  to  his  own  uses  (2  Kings  xvi,  10-16). 

The  oonąnest  of  the  ten  tńbea  by  Shalmaneser  waa 
for  them  the  last  scenę  of  Mie  drama  of  abominationa 
which  had  been  enacted  unintermptedly  for  npwarda  of 
260  yeara.  In  the  northem  kingdom  no  reformer  aroae 
to  vary  the  long  linę  of  royal  aposUtes;  whatevcr  was 
effected  in  the  way  of  reformation  was  done  by  the 
handa  of  the  people  (2  Chroń,  xxxi,  1).  But  even  in 
their  captivity  they  helped  to  perpetuate  the  comiption. 
The  colonists,  whom  the  Aasyńan  conqueror8  placed  in 
their  atead  in  the  citiea  of  Samaria,  brought  with  them 
their  own  gods,  and  were  taught  at  Bethel,  by  a  priest 
of  the  captive  nation,  **  the  manner  of  the  god  of  tta« 


IDOLATRY 


482 


IDOLATRY 


landi**  the  lesaons  thus  leamt  resulting  in  a  etrange  ad- 
mizture  of  the  calf-woiship  of  Jeroboam  ytith  the  hom- 
age  paid  to  their  national  deities  (2  Kinga  xvii,  24-41). 
Iheir  descendants  were  in  conseąuence  regarded  with 
■twpicion  by  the  elden  who  returned  from  tbe  captivity 
with  Ezra,  and  their  oifeia  of  aasiatance  rejected  (Ezra 
iV|  8).    See  Samaritans. 

The  fint  act  of  Hesekiah  on  aacending  the  throne 
waa  the  restoration  and  purification  of  the  Tempie,  wbich 
had  been  disoiantled  and  dofled  during  the  latcer  part 
of  his  iather'8  Ufe  (2  Chroń.  xxyiii,  24 ;  xxix,  8).  The 
multitudes  who  flocked  to  JeruBalem  to  celebrato  the 
PassoYer,  ao  long  in  abeyance,  remored  the  idolatroua 
altara  of  bamt>offering  and  incenae  erected  by  Ahaz  (2 
Chroń,  xxx,  14).  The  iconodaatic  apirit  waa  not  eon- 
fined  to  Judah  and  Benjamin,  but  apread  throaghout 
Ephraim  and  Manaaaeh  (2  Chroń,  xxxi,  1),  and  to  all 
extemal  appearance  idolatry  waa  exdrpated.  But  the 
reform  extended  little  below  the  aurtaoe  (laa.  xxix,  18). 
Among  the  leadera  of  the  people  there  were  many  in 
high  poaition  who  oonformed  to  the  neceaaitiea  of  the 
time  (laa.  xxviii,  14),  and  undcr  Manaa8eh'B  patronage 
the  falae  worahip,  which  had  been  merely  driven  into 
obacurity,  broke  out  with  tenfold  virulence.  IdoUtry 
of  every  form,  and  with  all  the  aoceaaoriea  of  enchantr 
menta,  divination,  and  witchcraft,  waa  again  rife;  no 
place  waa  too  aacred,  no  aaaociationa  too  hallowed,  to  be 
apared  the  contamination.  If  the  conduct  of  Ahaz  in 
erecting  an  altar  in  the  tempie  court  ia  open  to  a  char- 
itable  conatruction,  Manaaeeh'a  waa  of  no  doubtful  char- 
acter.  The  two  oourta  of  the  Tempie  were  profaned  by 
altara  dedicated  to  the  hoet  of  heaven,  and  the  image  of 
the  Aahcrah  poUuted  the  holy  place  (2  Kinga  xxi,  7 ;  2 
Chroń,  xxxiii,  7, 15 ;  comp.  Jer.  xxxii,  84).  Even  in  hia 
lato  repentance  he  did  not  entirely  deatroy  all  tracea  of 
hia  former  vnnong.  Tndition  atatea  tbat  the  remon- 
strancea  of  the  a^  laaiah  (q.  v.)  only  aerved  to  aecore 
hia  own  martyrdom  (Gemara  on  Yebamothf  iv).  The 
people  atiU  bumed  incenae  on  the  high  placea ;  but  Je- 
hovah  waa  the  oetensible  object  of  their  worahip.  The 
king'a  aon  aacrificed  to  hia  father'a  idola,  but  waa  not  aa- 
aociated  with  him  in  his  repentance,  and  in  hia  ahort 
reign  of  two  yeara  reatored  all  the  altara  of  the  Baaliro 
and  the  imagea  of  the  Aaherah.  With  the  death  of  Jo- 
aiah  endcd  the  laat  effort  to  revive  among  the  people  a 
piuer  ritual,  if  not  a  purer  faith.  The  lamp  of  Dayid, 
which  had  long  ahed  but  a  atmggling  ray,  flickered  for  a 
while,  and  then  went  out  in  the  darkneas  of  Babylonian 
captivity^-Smith.    Se6  Judah,  Kingdoh  of. 

It  will  be  uaeful  here  to  recapitulate  the  main  vari- 
etiea  of  the  idoUtry  which  ao  greatly  marred  the  relig- 
ioua  character  of  this  monarchical  period  of  the  Jewiah 
atate.  It  haa  been  a  ąaeation  much  debated  whether 
the  laraelitea  were  ever  ao  far  giyen  up  to  idolatry  aa  to 
loee  all  knowledge  of  the  true  God.  It  would  be  bard 
to  aaaert  thia  of  any  nation,  and  atill  morę  difficult  to 
proye.  That  there  alwaya  remained  among  them  a 
faithful  few,  ^ho  in  the  face  of  cvery  danger  adhered  to 
the  worahip  of  Jehorah,  roay  readily  be  belieyed,  for 
even  at  a  time  when  Baal-worahip  waa  most  prevalent 
there  were  found  8even  thouaand  in  lanel  who  had  not 
bowed  before  hia  image  (1  Kinga  xix,  18).  But  there 
ia  atill  room  for  grave  auapicion  tbat  among  the  maaaea 
of  the  people,  though  the  idea  of  a  aupreme  Being>-of 
whom  the  imagea  they  worahipped  were  but  the  diatort- 
ed  repreaentatiyea— waa  not  entirely  loat,  it  waa  ao  ob- 
acured  aa  to  be  but  dimly  apprehended.  And  not  only 
were  the  ignorant  multitade  thua  led  aatray,  but  the 
prieata,  acribea,  and  propheta  became  leadera  of  the  apoa- 
taay  (Jer.  ii,  8).  Warburtoo,  indeed,  maintained  that 
they  neyer  formally  renounced  Jehovah,  and  that  their 
defection  consisted  "  in  joining  foreign  worahip  and  idol- 
atroua ceremoniea  to  the  ritual  of  the  true  God"  (Dio, 
Lep.  b.  V,  §  8).  But  one  paaaage  in  their  hlatoiy,  though 
oonfeaeedly  obacure,  aeema  to  point  to  a  time  when,  un- 
der  the  rule  of  the  judgcs,  ^  larael  for  many  daya  had  no 
me  God,  and  no  teaching  prieat,  and  no  law"  (2  Chion. 


XV,  8).  The  oorrelative  argument  of  Codwoith,  wha 
contenda  from  the  teaching  of  the  Hebrew  docton  and 
rabbia  *'that  the  pagaii  nationa  anciently,  at  least  the 
intelligent  amongst  them,  acknowledged  one  aopreme 
God  of  the  wholc  world,  and  that  all  other  gods  were 
but  creaturea  and  inferior  miniatera,''  ia  controTCited  bj 
Moaheim  (ItaelL  Sytt.  i,  4^  §  80,  and  notes).  There  caa 
be  no  doubt  that  much  of  the  idolatr)"  of  the  Hebiein 
oonaiated  in  worahippmg  the  true  God  under  an  imige, 
auch  aa  the  calvea  at  Bethel  and  Dan  (Joacphut,  Aia. 
viii,  8,  6;  daiŁaktvQ  itrutyiifimfę  rtf  0f^),  and  by  •»>- 
dating  hia  worahip  with  idolatroua  ritea  (Jer.  xli,  5)  tad 
placea  conaecrated  to  idola  (2  Kinga  xviii,  23).  From 
the  peculiarity  of  their  poaition  they  were  nevcr  diftin- 
guiahed  aa  the  inventor8  of  a  new  panthcon,  nor  did  thej 
adopt  any  one  syatem  of  idolatiy  ao  exdusivdy  is  ever 
to  become  identified  with  it  (ao  the  Moabitea  with  the 
worahip  of  Chemoah  [Numb.  xxi,  29]);  but  they  no 
sooner  came  in  contact  with  other  nationa  than  they 
readily  adapted  themaelyea  to  their  prscticea,  the  old 
apirit  of  antagoniam  dicd  rapidly  away,  and  iDtexma^ 
riage  waa  <»ie  atep  to  idolatry. — Smith. 

a.  Sun-wonhip,  though  menUoned  with  other  kiods 
of  high  nature-worahip,  aa  in  the  enumention  of  thoae 
auppreaaed  by  Joaiah,  aeema  to  have  been  practioed  alone 
aa  wdl  aa  with  the  adoration  of  other  heayenly  bodiea 
In  Ezekiera  remarkable  vtaion  of  the  idolatriea  of  Jeni- 
aalem,  he  aaw  about  four-and-twenty  men  between  tha 
porch  and  the  altar  of  the  Tempie,  with  their  backi  to 
the  Tempie  and  their  facea  to  the  eaat,  wonhipping  tbe 
aun  (Ezek.  viii,  16).  Joaiah  had  before  thia  taken  away 
"  the  horsea  that  the  kingą  of  Judah  had  given  to  the 
aon,  at  the  oitering  in  of  the  houae  of  the  Lord,"  and 
had  "  bumed  the  chariota  of  the  aon  with  fire"  (2  Kiogi 
xxiii,  1 1).  The  aame  part  of  the  tempie  is  perhaps  here 
meaot.  There  ia  nothing  to  ahow  whether  these  were 
imagea  or  living  horaea.  The  hone  was  aacred  to  the 
aun  among  the  Carthaginiana,  but  the  worship  of  the 
Yisible  aun  inatead  of  an  image  looka  rather  like  a  Per- 
aian  or  an  Arab  cuatom.    See  Suk. 

h,  In  the  acconnt  of  Josiah*8  reform  we  read  of  the 
abolitioir  of  the  worahip  of  Baal,  the  aun,  the  moon, 
Mazzaloth,  also  called  Mazzaroth  (Job  xxxviii,  82), 
which  we  hołd  to  be  the  manaiona  of  the  moon  [eee 
AsTROKoan'],  and  all  the  hoat  of  heavcn  (2  Kuigs  xxiii, 
6).  Manaaaeh  ia  rdated  to  have  aenrcd  "  all  the  hot 
of  heaven"  (xxi,  3).  Jeremiah  apeaka  of  *'  the  housci 
of  Jeruaalem,  and  the  houeea  of  the  kingą  of  Judah,**  as 
to  be  defilcd,  **becau8e  of  all  the  houses  upon  wboce 
roofa  they  liave  bumed  incenae  unto  all  the  hoat  of 
heaven,  and  have  poured  out  drink-offerings  unto  other 
goda"  (Jer.  xix,  18).  In  this  prophet*8  time  the  peq4e 
of  Judah  and  Jeruaalem,  among  other  abominations, 
madę  cakea  for  "  the  queen  of  heaven,"  or  **  the  worship 
of  heaven :"  a  difTerent  forai  justifying  the  lattcr  read- 
ing.  The  uaual  reading  ia  r«br,  $irenr,  which  the 
Sept.  once  foliowa,  the  Vulg.  always ;  some  oopica  givc 
nSKb^,  worsk^f  that  ia,  "a  ddty  or  goddeaa."  The 
former  reading  aeema  preferable,  and  the  context  in  two 
paaaagea  in  Jcremiali  ahowa  that  an  abetract  aenae  ti 
not  admiaaible  (xliv,  17,  18,  19,  25).  In  Egypt,  the 
remnant  that  fled  after  the  rouider  of  Gedaliah  were 
waroed  by  the  prophet  to  abandon  thoae  idolatroua  pn^ 
tlcea  for  which  their  countiy  and  citiea  had  been  deco- 
lated.  The  men,  oonadoua  that  their  wive8  had  burncd 
incenae  to  falae  goda  in  Egypt,  declared  that  they  would 
certainly  bum  incenae  and  pour  out  drink-olTeriogs  to 
the  qucen  of  heavcn,  aa  they,  thdr  fathers,  their  kingi^ 
and  thdr  princea  had  done  in  a  time  of  plenty,  aaaerting 
that  aince  they  had  left  off  these  practioea  they  had 
been  conaumed  by  the  aword  and  by  famine :  for  this  a 
frcah  doom  waa  pronounced  upon  them  (eh.  xliv).  It  i* 
very  difficult  to  conjecture  what  goddeaa  can  be  here 
meant:  Aahtoreth  would  suit,  but  ta  nevcr  mcntioned 
interchangeably;  the  moon  muat  be  rejected  for  the 
aame  leaaon,    Here  we  certainly  see  a  strong  leaen* 


IDOLATRT 


483 


IDOLATRT 


blance  to  Anb  idolatry,  which  wu  irholly  composed  of 
oosmic  wonhip  and  of  fetishiam,  and  in  which  the  man- 
sians  of  the  moon  were  reverenced  on  aoooimt  of  their 
oonnection  with  leaaona  of  lain.  This  83r8tem  of  oosmic 
wonhip  may  have  been  introduced  from  the  Nabath»- 
ans  or  Edomitea  of  Petra,  irom  the  Sabians,  or  fttnn 
ocher  Arabe  or  Chaldaana.    See  QuEKit  of  Hkavkx. 

e.  Two  idola,  Gad,  ^f,  or  Fortune,  and  Mem,  "^ao,  or 
Fate,  from  MS^,  heorit  dkided,  astigned,  numbered,  are 
Bpoken  of  in  a  single  passage  in  the  later  port  of  Isaiah 
O*''.  11).  Gesenios,  depending  upon  the  theory  of  the 
post-Iaaian  anthorship  of  the  later  chapters  of  the  proph- 
et,  makes  these  to  be  idols  worshipped  by  the  Jews  in 
Babjrlonia,  bot  it  most  be  remarked  that  their  names 
are  not  traceable  in  Babylonian  and  Assyrian  mytholo- 
gy.  Gesenins  has,  however,  following  Pococke  {Spec, 
Hiit.Arabum,  p.  93),  compaied  Meni  with  Manah,  a 
goddesB  of  the  pagmn  Arabs,  worshipped  in  the  form  of 
a  stone  between  Mekkeh  and  £1-Medlneh  by  the  tribes 
of  Hudheyl  and  Khnzaah.  Bat  EUBeydawl,  though  de- 
riTing  ihe  name  of  this  idol  from  the  root  mana,  "  he 
cat,"  npposes  it  was  thus  called  because  yictims  were 
alain  upon  it  {CommmL  m  Coran.  ed.  Fleiacher,  p.  293). 
This  meaning  certainly  soems  to  disturb  the  idea  that 
the  two  idola  were  identical,  but  the  mention  of  the 
srord  and  alaoghter  as  punishments  of  the  idolaters 
wbo  worshipped  Gad  and  Meni  is  not  to  be  forgotten. 
Gad  may  hare  bcen  a  Canaanitish  form  of  Baal,  if  we  are 
to  judge  from  the  gcographical  name  Baal-gad  of  a 
plice  at  the  foot  of  Mount  Hermon  (Josh.  xi,  17 ;  xii,  7 ; 
ariii,  5).  Perhaps  ihe  grammnlical  form  of  Meni  may 
throw  8ome  light  upon  the  origm  of  this  idolatry.  The 
worahip  of  both  idols  reaembles  that  of  the  cosmic  di- 
Tinities  of  the  later  kings  of  Judah.     See  Meni. 

d.  In  Ezekicrs  rision  of  the  idolatries  of  Jerusalem 
he  bshcld  a  chamber  of  imagery  in  the  Tempie  itsclf, 
haviiig  «cvery  form  of  creeping  things,  and  abominable 
bearts,  and  [or  even]  nil  the  idols  of  the  house  of  Israel, 
portraycd  upon  the  wali  round  about,"  and  serenfry  Is- 
weiitiah  clders  offcring  incenae  (Ezek.  viii,  7-1 2).  This 
is  »  CMct  a  description  of  an  Egyptian  sanctuary,  with 
the  iJols  depicted  upon  its  waUs,  dimly  lighted,  and 
fiUed  rńth  incensc-offering  priests,  that  we  cannot  for  a 
moment  doubt  that  these  Jcws  derived  from  Egypt 
their  fctishisra,  for  such  this  q)ccial  worship  appears 
mainly,  if  not  whoUy  to  have  been.  See  Imageby, 
Ch-uiber  of. 

e.  In  the  same  rision  the  prophet  saw  women  weep- 
ing  far  Tammuz  (vcr.  13, 14),  knoTł-n  to  be  the  same  as 
-\doni3,  from  whom  the  fourth  month  of  the  SjTian 
ycar  was  iiamed.  This  worship  was  piobably  intro- 
duced by  Ahaz  from  Sj-ria.     See  Tammuz. 

/.  The  imoffe  ofjealoumj,  n«3pĘ>n  hw,  spoken  of  in 
the  same  passago,  which  was  placed  intiie  Tempie,  has 
not  been  satisfactorily  explained.  The  meaning  may  only 
b3  that  it  waj  an  image  of  a  falsc  god,  or  there  may  li 
a  play  in  the  aecond  part  of  the  appelUtion  upon  the 
prjpcr  name.  We  cannot,  however,  suggest  any  name 
that  might  be  thus  intendcd.    See  Jealousy,  Image  of. 

g-  The  brazen  serpent,  having  become  an  object  of 
idoUtioos  worship,  was  destroycd  by  Hczekiah  (2  Kings 
atviii,  4).    See  Brazen  SERr*KNT. 

A.  MokKjh-worahip  was  not  <mly  cclebrated  at  the 
nigh  place  Solomon  had  madę,  but  nt  Tophcth,  in  the 
valley  of  the  sona  of  Hinnom,  wherc  children  were  madę 
to  pass  through  the  fire  to  the  Ammonitish  abomination. 
This  place,  aa  wcU  as  Solomon*s  altaw,  Josiah  defiled, 
•nd  we  Pcad  of  no  later  worship  of  Moloch,  Chemoeh, 
«n4  .Yshtoreth.    Sec  Moixx7H. 

I.  For  the  supposcd  divinity  inH  cf  Isa,  lxvi,  17 
(compare  Meier,  DevMO  deo  Assyriorum.  HehnsL  1734) 
«eAciŁ\i>.  ^' 

The  new  population  pkcetl  by  the  king  of  Assyria  in 
the  citiea  of  Samaria  adopted  a  strangc  raćcturc'  of  re- 
h;cions.    Terrified  at  the  destruction  by  Jions  of  somc 


«  thcjr  numbcr,  they  pctitioned  the  kmg  of  Assyria,  |  naturalJy  madę  no  penrerta. 


and  an  laraeUtiah  prieat  was  aent  to  them.  They  then 
adopted  the  old  worship  at  high  places,  and  still  serred 
their  own  idola.  The  people  of  Babylon  madę  Succoth- 
benoŁh ;  the  Cuthitea,  Necgal ;  the  Hamathites,  Ashima; 
the  Airitea,  Nibhaz  and  Tartak;  and  the  people  of  Se- 
phanraim  bumed  their  children  to  their  native  goda, 
Adrammelech  and  Anammelech.  Neigal  ia  a  well- 
known  Babytonian  idol,  and  the  oocurrence  of  the  ele- 
ment mekek  (king)  in  the  names  of  the  Molechs  of  Se- 
phanraim  ia  very  remarkable  (2  Kinga  xyii,  24-41 )._ 
Kitto. 

4.  The  Babytonian  £xile  was  an  effectual  lebuke  or 
the  national  sin.  It  is  true  that  even  during  the  cap- 
tivity  the  deroteea  of  ftlse  worship  plied  their  cnft  as 
prophets  and  diviners  (Jer.  xxix,  8;  Eaek.  xiii),  and 
the  Jews  who  fled  to  Egypt  carried  with  them  recolleo- 
tions  of  the  materiał  prosperity  which  attended  their 
idolatious  sacrificea  in  Judah,  and  to  the  neglect  of 
which  they  attributed  their  exi]ed  condition  (Jer.  xliv, 
17, 18).  One  of  the  fitat  difficultiea,  indeed,  with  which 
Ezra  had  to  oontend,  and  which  bfonght  him  wellnigh 
to  despair,  was  the  hastę  with  which  hia  oonntarymen 
took  them  foreign  wires  of  the  peopto  of  the  land,  and 
followed  them  in  all  their  abominations  (Ezra  ix).  The 
priesta  and  rulers,  to  whom  he  looked  for  assiatance  in 
hia  great  enterpriae,  were  among  the  first  to  fali  away 
(Ezra  ix,  2 ;  x,  18 ;  Neh.  vi,  17, 18 ;  xui,  28).  Still,  the 
poat.exilian  pn^heta  speak  of  idolatry  aa  an  evil  of  the 
paat,  Zechaiiah  foietelling  the  time  when  the  veiy 
names  of  the  falae  goda  would  be  forgotten  (xiii,  2).  In 
Malachi  we  aee  that  a  coki  foimaham  was  abeady  the 
national  ain,  and  such  was  ever  ailer  the  case  with  the 
Jewish  peopto.  The  Babylonian  Exile,  theiefore,  may 
be  aaid  to  hare  purified  the  Jewa  from  their  idototroua 
tendendea.  How  thia  great  change  was  wiought  does 
not  appear.  Partly,  no  doubt,  it  was  due  to  the  piooe 
example8  of  Ezra  and  Nehemiah;  partly,  perhaps,  to 
the  Persian  contempt  for  the  tower  kinds  of  idolatry, 
which  insured  a  respect  for  the  Hebrew  religion  on  the 
part  of  the  goyemmeut ;  partly  to  the  sight  of  the  ful- 
fihnent  of  God's  predicted  judgments  upon  the  idototrow 
nationa  which  the  Jews  had  either  sought  as  allies  or 
feared  as  cnemies.    See  Exilk. 

6.  Years  pasaed  by,  and  the  names  of  the  idols  of  Ca- 
naan  had  been  forgotten,  when  the  Hebrews  were  as- 
sailed  by  a  new  danger.  Greek  idototry  under  Alexan- 
dcr  and  his  successors  was  practised  throughout  the 
ciyilized  world.  The  conque8ts  of  Alexander  in  Asia 
caused  Greek  influence  to  be  extenBiTeIy  felt,  and  Greek 
idototiy  to  be  first  tolerated  and  then  practised  by  the 
Jews  (1  Mace  i,  43-60,  54).  Some  placc-hunting  Jews 
were  baae  enough  to  adopt  it.  At  first  the  Greek 
princes  who  ruled  Paleatine  wiaely  forbore  to  interfere 
with  the  Hebrew  religion.  The  politic  earlier  Ptole- 
miea  even  encouraged  it;  but  when  the  countiy  had  fall- 
en  into  the  handa  of  the  Seleucidap,  Antiochus  Epipha- 
nes,  reyersing  his  (ather's  policy  of  toleration,  seized 
Jerusalem,  set  up  an  idol-altar  to  Jupiter  in  the  Tempie 
itaelf,  and  forbade  the  obser\'ance  of  the  law.  Weakly 
supported  by  a  miserable  faction,  he  had  to  depend 
wholly  upon  his  military  power.  The  attempt  of  An- 
tiochus to  establish  this  form  of  worship  was  vigoroualy 
reaisted  by  Mattathias  (1  Mace.  ii,  28-26),  who  was 
joined  in  his  rebellion  by  the  Assidieans  (vcr.  42),  and 
destroyed  the  altars  at  which  the  king  commanded 
them  to  sacrifice  (1  Mace.  ii,  25,  46).  The  crection  of 
synagogues  haa  been  assigned  as  a  reason  for  the  com- 
parativc  purity  of  tho  Jewish  worship  after  the  Captiv- 
ity  (Prideaux,  Corm.  i,  874),  while  another  cause  haa 
been  disoorered  in  tho  hatred  for  images  acquired  by 
the  Jcws  in  their  intercourso  with  the  Persians.  The 
Maccabaean  revolt,  smali  in  its  beginning,  had  the  na- 
tional heart  on  its  aide,  and,  after  a  long  and  yaried 
stniggle,  achieved  morę  than  the  natiou  had  eyer  before 
cffectcd  Since  the  days  of  the  Judges.  Thenceforward 
idototry  was  to  the  Jew  the  religion  of  his  enemies,  and 


IDOLATRY 


484 


IDOLATRT 


6.  The  eańy  Chiistians  were  brought  into  contact 
with  idolaten  when  the  Gospel  was  preached  among 
the  Gentiles,  and  it  became  neoessary  to  enact  legula- 
tions  for  preyenting  scandal  by  their  being  involved  in 
pagan  pnusdces,  when  joining  in  the  pri^ate  meals  and 
festiyities  of  the  heathen  (1  Cor.  viii).  But  the  Cientile 
conTerts  do  not  seem  to  have  been  in  any  danger  of  re- 
yerting  to  idolatry,  and  the  cruel  penecutions  they  un- 
derwent  did  not  tend  to  lead  them  back  to  a  religion 
which  its  morę  refined  Yotaries  despised.  It  is,  howey- 
er,  not  impoesible  that  many  who  had  been  originally 
educated  as  idolaten  did  not,  on  professing  Christianity, 
really  abandon  all  their  former  supeistitions,  and  that 
we  may  thus  explain  the  yery  early  outbreak  of  many 
customs  and  opinions  not  sanctioned  in  the  N.  T. — Kitto ; 
Smith. 

y.  Ełhieal  Yiewt  reapecHng  Idolatry.—TYiat  thb  b  a 
cardinal  sin,  and,  indeed,  the  highest  formi  if  not  essen- 
tial  principia  of  all  sin,  as  aiming  a  direct  blow  at  the 
throne  of  God  itself,  is  evident  iiom  iU  prohibition  in 
the  yery  fore-front  of  the  Decalogae.  Henoc  the  tena- 
city  with  which  the  profeasors  of  all  tnie  religion  in  ey- 
ery  age  have  opposed  it,  under  every  disguise  and  at 
whateyer  coet.  It  has  always  and  naturally  been  the 
associate  of  polytheism,  and  those  comipt  forma  of 
Christianity,  such  as  the  Roman  and  Greek  Churches, 
which  haye  endeayored  to  apologize  for  the  adoration 
of  pictnres,  images,  etc,  on  the  flimay  pretext  that  it  is 
not  the  inanimate  objects  themselyes  which  are  reyered, 
but  only  the  beings  thus  represented,  aro  but  imitators 
iu  this  of  the  sophistry  of  certain  refined  spcculators 
among  the  groaser  heathen,  e.  g.  of  Egypt,  Greeoe,  etc, 
who  put  forth  similar  cUum&     See  Imaoe-worship. 

Three  things  are  condemned  in  Scriptuie  as  idolatry: 
1.  The  worshipping  of  a  false  God;  2.  the  wonhipping 
of  the  tnie  God  through  an  image ;  8.  the  indulgence 
of  thoae  passions  which  draw  the  soul  away  from  God, 
e.  g.  coyetousness,  lust,  etc  The  Israelites  were  guilty 
of  the  Arst  when  they  bowed  the  knee  to  Baal;  of  the 
aecond  when  they  set  up  the  golden  calyes;  and  both 
Israelites  and  Christians  aie  oilen  guilty  of  the  third. 

1.  Liffki  M  which  Idolairy  waś  regarded  in  Ihe  MoBoic 
Codćy  and  thepenoMes  wiih  which  U  waa  viiited,—l(  one 
main  object  of  the  Hebrew  polity  was  to  teach  the  uni- 
ty of  God,  the  extennination  of  idolatry  was  but  a  sub- 
ordinate  end.  Jehoyah,  the  God  of  the  Israelites,  was 
the  ciyil  head  of  the  state.  He  was  the  theocratic  king 
of  the  people,  who  had  deliyered  them  from  bondage, 
and  to  whom  they  had  taken  a  wiłling  oath  of  all^i- 
ance.  They  had  entered  into  a  solemn  league  and  coy- 
enant  with  him  as  their  chosen  king  (comp.  1  Sam.  viii, 
7),  by  whom  obedience  was  requited  with  temporal 
blessings,  and  rebellion  with  temporal  punishment  This 
original  oontract  of  the  Hebrew  goyemment,  h^  it  has 
been  termed,  is  contained  in  £xod.xix,  8-8;  xx,  2-5; 
Deut.  xxxix,  10~xxx ;  the  Uessings  promised  to  obedi- 
ence are  enumerated  in  Deut  xxviii,  1-14,  and  the  withei^ 
ing  curses  on  disobedience  in  yerses  15-68.  That  this 
coyenant  was  sŁrictly  insisted  on  it  needs  but  slight  ao- 
quaintance  with  Hebrew  history  to  perceiyc  Often 
broken  and  oilen  renewed  on  the  part  of  the  people 
(Judg.  X,  10 ;  2  Chroń.  xy,  12, 18 ;  Neh.  ix,  38),  it  was 
kept  with  unwayering  constancy  on  the  part  of  Jeho- 
yah. To  their  kings  he  stood  in  the  relation,  so  to 
spcak,  of  a  feudal  superior :  they  were  his  representap- 
tiyes  upon  earth,  and  with  them,  as  with  the  people  be- 
fore,  his  coyenant  was  madę  (1  Kings  iii,  14;  xi,  11). 
Idolatry,  therefore,  to  an  Israelite  was  a  state  offenoe  (1 
Sam.  xy,  23),  a  political  crime  of  the  grayest  character, 
high-treaaon  against  the  majesty  of  his  king.  It  was  a 
transgroBsion  of  the  coyenant  (Deut.  xyii,  2),  **  the  eyil" 
pre-cminently  in  the  eyes  of  Jehoyah  (1  Kings  xxj,  25, 
opp.  to  "niajn,  **  the  right,"  2  Chroń,  xxvii,  2).  But  it 
was  much  more  than  all  this.  While  the  idolatry  of 
foreign  nations  is  stigmatized  merely  as  an  abomina- 
tion  in  the  sight  of  (jod,  which  called  for  his  yengeance, 
the  aia  of  the  Israelites  is  ręgarded  as  of  more  glaring 


enormity,  and  greater  morał  guilt.  In  the  figoiatifi 
language  of  the  prophets,  the  relation  betwem  Jehonh 
and  his  people  is  represented  as  a  marriage  hond  (Isl 
liy,  5;  Jer.  iii,  14),  and  the  wonhip  of  fidse  godi^  with 
all  its  aocompaniments  (Ley.  xx,  66),  beoomea  then  tlie 
greatest  of  sodal  wrongs  (Hoa.  ii ;  Jer.  iii,  etc).  This 
is  beantifully  brought  out  in  Ho&  ii,  16,  where  the  hea- 
then name  Baali,  my  master,  which  the  apostatę  Isnel 
has  been  accustomed  to  apply  to  her  foreign  ponwor, 
Ib  contrasted  with  Ishi,my  man,  my  husban^the  na> 
tive  word  which  she  is  to  use  when  restored  to  her 
rightful  husband,  Jehoyah.  Much  of  the  significflioe 
of  this  figure  was  unąuestionahty  dne  to  the  impońtiei 
of  idolaters,  with  whom  such  oorruption  was  of  no  mere- 
ly spiritual  character  (£xod.  xxxiv,  16;  Numb.xxT,l, 
2,  etc),  but  manifested  itself  in  the  groasest  and  mott 
reyolting  forms  (Rom.  i,  26-82). 

Regaided  in  a  morał  aspect,  fialse  gods  are  ciDed 
''stumbling-blocks"  (Rzek.  xiv,  8),  ''lies**  (Amos  ii,  4; 
Rom.  i,  25), "  horrors"  or  «  ftights"  (1  Kings  xy,  13 ;  Jet 
I,  88),  *^  abominations"  (Deut.  xxix,  17;  xxxii,  16;  1 
Kings  xi,  5;  2  Kings  xxiii,  18),  '^ guilt"  (abstract  lor 
concrete,  Amos  yiii,  14,  tyo^l^cuhm&h;  comp. 2  Chroo. 
xxix,  18,  perhaps  with  a  play  on  Ashima,  2  Kings  xvii, 
80) ;  and  with  a  profound  sense  of  the  dcgradation  conse- 
quent  upon  their  worship,  they  are  characterized  by  the 
prophets,  whosc  mission  it  was  to  wam  the  peopie 
against  them  (Jer.  xliy,  4),  as  ''shame"  (Jer.  xi,  IS; 
Hos.  ix,  10).  As  considered  with  reference  to  JehoTsh, 
they  are  **other  gods"  (Joeh.  xxiv,  2,  16),  "strange 
gods"  (Deut.  xxxii,  16), "  new  gods"  (Judg.  v,  8),  "der- 
ils— not  God"  (Deut.  xxxii,  17;  1  Cor.  x,  20, 21);  and, as 
denoting  their  foreign  origin,  <*gods  of  the  foreigner^ 
(Josh.  xxiy,  14, 15).  Their  powerlessnesa  is  indicated 
by  describing  them  as  *<gods  that  cannot  aaye"  (Isa. 
xly,  20),  **  that  madę  not  the  heayens"  (Jer.  x,  11), 
" nothing"  (Isa.  xli,  24 ;  1  Cor.  viii,  4), "wind  and  emp- 
tiness"  (Isa.  xli,  29), "  yanities^f  the  heathen"  (Jer. xiv, 
22 ;  Acts  xiv,  15) ;  and  yet,  while  their  dcity  is  denied, 
their  perBonal  exi8tence  seems  to  have  been  acknowl- 
edgcd  (Kurtz,  Gesch. d,A.B,  ii,  86,  etc),  though  not  in 
the  same  manner  in  which  the  pretensions  of  local  dei- 
ties  were  reciprocally  recognised  by  the  heathen  (1 
Kings  XX,  23, 28;  2  Kings  xyii,26).  Other  tenns  of 
oontempt  are  employed  with  reference  to  idols,  D*^b*«^K, 
mim  (Ley.  xix,  4),  and  ti^^^^b,  gUłulim  (DeuL  xxix, 
17),  to  which  different  meanings  have  been  assigned, 
and  many  which  indicate  ceremoniał  undeanneai^  Sea 
Idou 

Idolatry,  therefore,  being  from  one  point  of  vicw  a  po- 
litical offence,  could  be  punished  wiUiout  infringement 
of  ciyil  rights.  No  penalties  were  attached  to  merę 
opinions.  For  aught  we  know,  theological  speculatioa 
may  have  been  as  rife  among  the  Hebrews  aA  in  mod- 
em times,  though  such  was  not  the  tendency  of  the  She- 
mitic  mind.  It  was  not,  howe%'er,  such  apeculatioos, 
heterodox  though  they  might  be,  but  oyert  acts  of 
idolatry,  which  were  madę  the  subjects  of  legialstion 
(>Iichaelis,  Lawa  of  MoKSy  §  245, 246>  The  first  and 
second  commandments  are  directed  against  idolatiy  of 
evcry  form.  Indiyiduals  and  communitiee  were  eąnal- 
ly  amenable  to  the  rigorous  codę.  The  indiyidoal  of- 
fender  was  deyoted  to  dcstniction  (£xod.  xxii,  20) ;  bit 
nearest  relatives  were  not  only  boand  to  denoonce  him 
and  deliyer  him  up  to  punishment  (Deut.  xiii,  2-10),  bot 
their  hands  were  to  strike  the  first  blow  when,  on  the 
eyidence  of  two  witnesees  at  least,  he  was  stoned  (Deut 
xvii,  2-5).  To  attempt  to  sednce  othcrs  to  fabe  wor- 
ship was  a  crime  of  equal  enormity  (Deut  xiu,  &-10). 
An  idolatrous  nation  shared  a  similar  fatc  No  facts  are 
more  strongly  declared  in  the  Old  Test.  than  that  the 
extermination  of  the  Canaanites  was  the  punishment  of 
their  idolatry  (Exod. xxxiv,  15, 16;  Deut.  vii;  xii, 29- 
31 ;  XX,  17),  and  that  the  calamities  of  the  Israrlites 
were  due  to  the  same  cause  (Jer.  ii,  17).  A  dty  guilty 
of  idolatiy  was  looked  upon  as  a  canoer  of  the  state ;  it 


IDOLATRY 


485 


roOLATRY 


was  ooDodered  to  be  in  lebellion,  and  tieated  acoording 
to  tfae  lawa  of  war.  Its  inhabitanta  and  all  their  cattle 
weie  put  to  death.  No  spoil  was  taken,  but  eyerything 
U  oootained  was  błimt  with  itaelf ;  nor  was  it  lUlowed 
to  be  rebuilt  (Deat  ziii,  13-18 ;  Josh.  vi,  26).  Saol  loat 
his  kiiigdom,  Achan  hia  Ufe,  and  Hiel  hia  family  for 
tnnsgreflaing  this  law  (1  Sam. xv;  Jo6h.vil;  1  Kinga 
XYi,34).  The  8ilver  and  gold  with  which  the  idola 
were  oovered  were  accursed  (Deut.  vii,  25,  2G).  Not 
only  were  the  Israelitea  forbidden  to  8erve  the  goda 
of  Canaan  (£xod.  xxiii,  24),  but  even  to  mention  their 
names,  that  ia,  to  cali  upon  them  in  prayer  or  any  form 
of  worship  (Exod.  KKiii,  13 ;  Josh.  xxiii,  7).  On  taking 
poaaeasbn  of  the  land  they  were  to  obliterate  all  traces 
of  the  exł8ting  idolatiy;  statuea,  altars,  piUaia,  idol- 
templeS)  eveiy  person  and  every  thing  connected  with  it, 
were  to  be  swept  away  (£xod.  xxiii,  24, 32 ;  xxxiv,  13 ; 
Deat  vii,  5, 25;  xii,  1-3;  xx,  17),  and  the  name  and 
wonhip  of  the  idola  blotted  out.  Such  were  the  pre- 
caaŁioos  taken  by  the  framer  of  the  Mosaic  codę  to  pre- 
senre  the  worship  of  Jehovab,  the  tnie  God,  in  ita  puri> 
ty.  Of  the  manner  in  which  his  deacendanta  have 
"put  a  fence**  about  **  the  law"  with  reference  to  idola- 
t^,  many  instances  will  be  found  in  Maimonidea  {De 
IdoL),  They  were  prohibited  from  using  ve88el8,  scar- 
let  gannents,  bracelets,  or  rings,  marked  with  the  aign 
of  the  sun,  moon,  or  dragon  (ś&.  vii,  10) ;  trees  planted  or 
atones  erected  for  idol-worship  were  forbidden  (viii,  5, 
10);  and,  to  gnard  againat  the  poaeibility  of  contamina- 
tioD,  if  the  image  of  an  idol  were  found  among  other 
images  intended  for  ornament,  they  were  all  to  be  caat 
into  the  Dead  Sea  (vii,  11).— Smith.     See  Anathema. 

2.  New-Test,  lĄfinUunu  on  the  Subject.— {!,)  The 
name  "idolater**  ia  giyen  not  only  to  persona  who  wor- 
ship heathen  goda,  but  also  such  aa  worship  idola  of  their 
own.  Acts  xvii,  16 :  "  Now,  while  Paul  waited  for  them 
at  Atheos,  his  spirit  waa  stirred  within  him  when  he  saw 
the  dty  whoUy  given  to  idoUtry."  1  Cor.  v,  10,  U  : 
''Yet  not  altogether  with  the  fomicatora  of  thia  world, 
or  with  the  covetoua,  or  extorti0ner8,  or  with  idolaters ; 
for  then  most  ye  needa  go  out  of  the  workL  But  now  I 
have  written  unto  you  not  to  keep  company,  if  any  man 
that  is  called  a  brother  be  a  fomicator,  or  covetou8,  or 
aa  idoiater,  or  a  railer,  or  a  drunkard,  or  an  extortioner : 
vith  such  a  one  no  not  to  eat."  1  Cor.  vi,  9:  **  Know 
ye  not  that  the  unrighteous  ahall  not  inherit  the  king- 
dom  of  God  ?  Be  not  deoeived ;  neither  fomicatora,  nor 
idolateza.**  1  Cor.  x,  7:  *<  Neither  be  ye  idolaters,  aa 
were  some  of  them."  Rev.  xxi,  8:  ''But  the  fearful 
....  and  idolaters  ....  shall  have  their  part  in  the 
lakę  which  bumeth  with  fire  and  brimstone." 

(1)  The  term  idolatry  is  figuratively  uaed  to  deaig- 
nate  cotetotunets,  which  tokea  Mammon  for  ita  god 
(MatL  \ri,  24;  Łukę  xvi,  13).  CoL  iii,  5:  "Mortify, 
therefore,  your  membera  which  are  upon  the  earth ;  for- 
nication,  ondeanneea,  inordinate  alTection,  evil  concu- 
piaoenoe,  and  covetouane88,  which  ia  idolatry,"  Henoe 
it  is  said  (EphesL  v,  5),  *<  For  this  ye  know,  that  no  whore- 
nMmger,  nor  nndean  person,  nor  oovetou8  man,  who  is  an 
idoleóer,  hath  any  inheiitanoe  in  the  kingdom  of  Chriat 
t&d  of  God."  St  Paul  fiurther  designatea  all  evil  concu- 
pucence  in  generał  by  the  name  of  idolatry ;  e.  g.  PhiL 
ijit  19:  **  Whoae  end  ia  destruction,  whoee  god  is  their 
belly,  and  whoae  glory  ia  in  their  shame,  who  mind 
ettthly  things ;"  comp.  Bom,  xvi,  18, «  For  they  that  are 
wch  senre  not  our  Lord  Jeaua  Chiiat,  but  their  own 
belly;  and  by  good  worda  and  fair  speechea  deceive  the 
hearto  of  the  aimple."  The  same  is  aaid  (2  Tim.  iii,  4) 
of  those  who  are  <'loverB  of  pleasure  morę  than  lovers 
of  God."  Accocding  to  Rom.  i,  21,  idolatiy  takee  ita 
Koite  in  the  impurity  of  the  will,  or  in  the  heart,  not  in 
Łhe  mind;  it  ia  conaeąuently  a  reault  of  the  abuac  of 
^^mnan  free  agency.  It  ia  aaid,  in  the  above-mentioned 
Ptange,  **  Becanae  that  when  they  knew  God  they  glo- 
lified  him  not  aa  God,  neither  were  thankful,  but  became 
Tain  m  their  imaginationa,  and  their  fooliah  heart  waa 
darkened."    The  not  glorifying  and  the  not  praiaing 


manifest  the  badneaa  of  the  will  or  heart  In  the  Book 
of  Wisdom  (xiv,  14)  it  is  said  that  idolatry  came  into  the 
world  through  the ''  idle  vanity  of  man."  Idolatry  and 
sin  have  oonsequently  the  same  origin,  namely,  the  mia- 
uae  of  morał  fireedom.  They  therefore  aaaist  each  other, 
yet,  at  the  aame  time,  preaent  separately  a  difficult  protK 
lem  for  reaaon  to  nnderstand.  To  some  extent  idolatry 
may  be  conaidered  aa  the  theorettcal,  and  ain  aa  the  prac- 
tical  effect  of  evil,  which,  in  ita  compiete  manifestation, 
embracea  both  the  mind  and  the  heart,  but  takea  ita 
souroe  excluaively  in  the  latter ;  for  all  evil  reaulta  firom 
the  will,  by  ita  own  firee  action,  aeparating  itaelf  from  the 
divine  wilU— Krehl,  Mamhodrterbuck  des  N.  T.  p.  12. 

3.  In  łhe  UUer  Christian  Churdu — The  fathera  gener* 
ally  define  idolatry,  from  Rom.  i,  28,  aa  a  "  taking  away 
from  God  the  glory  which  belonga  to  him"  (TertulL  De 
IdolokUria,  c.  11),  or  '^diYine  honor  given  to  another'' 
(Cjrprian ;  Hilar.  Diac.) ;  sometimes,  also,  aa  a  tranafer* 
ring  of  prayer  from  the  Creator  to  the  creature  (Gregor. 
Naz.).  Christian  wiiters  in  generał  had  no  doubt  on 
the  aubject  (see  Finnicua  Matemua,i>e  errore  profana-' 
rum  reUgionum,  ed.  MUnter,  c.  1-6).  When  Clement  of 
Alexandria  regarda  aatoniahment  at  the  light  emitted 
by  the  heavenly  bodiea^  thankfninww  towarda  the  in- 
ventor  of  agńculture,  conadouanesa  of  ain,  a  peraonifica- 
tion  of  effecta,  etc,  as  the  origin  of  myths,  he  does  not 
mean  to  conaider  them  aa  the  original  souroe  of  idolatiy, 
but  only  of  ita  contemporary  forma.  From  the  primi- 
tive  worship  of  the  heavena  aa  the  abode  of  the  inviaible 
God,  acoording  to  the  oldeat  traditiona,  the  worship  of 
the  different  nations,  as  they  became  diaseminated  over 
the  globe,  and  divided  geographically  and  otherwise, 
tnmed  to  other  symbola.  Again,  nationa  preaenring  the 
remembrance,  and,  ao  to  speak,  living  under  the  influence 
of  their  foundera  and  heroea,  as  soon  aa  they  forgot  the 
true  God,  madę  these  the  objecta  of  their  veneration  and 
worship.  Thua  they  came  to  worship  their  progenitors 
(aa  in  China)  and  their  heroea,  which  latter  worship  ia 
by  some  (Boń,  for  inatance)  oonsidered  aa  the  only  source 
of  mythology.  How  from  thence  they  passed  to  the 
worship  of  symbolic  animala,  thence  to  anthropomor^ 
phism,  and  finaUy  to  the  adoration  of  atatuea  aa  imagea 
of  the  deity,  haa  been  beat  explained  by  Creuzer  in  his 
Sffmbolik  u.  Mythologie  d.  aJUn  Vdlker  (3d  edit  i,  5  8q.). 
The  fathera  did  not  fali  to  peroeive  the  influence  which 
the  original  tmdition  of  the  tme  God  had  on  the  devd- 
opment  of  the  symboliam  and  mytha  of  the  heathen  re- 
ligious  systems.  Lactantiua  (Defalsa  relig,  i,  11)  con- 
sidera  the  consensus  geaUum  in  the  bdief  in  goda  aa  a 
proof  that  they  are  touched  by  them.  The  early  Prot- 
estant theologiana  had  especially  to  contend  againat  nat- 
urałiam,  which  asaerted  that  *'  the  lecognition  of  one  su- 
premę God  ia  innate  in  man,"  and  denied  our  knowledge 
of  the  unity  of  God  being  due  dther  to  ieve]ation  or  to 
tradition,  sińce  it  ia  found  at  the  foundation  of  the  leam- 
ed  polytheiatic  ayatema.  They  conaidered  all  further 
developmenta  in  these  syatema  aa  reaulting  irom  inten- 
ti<Hud  additiona  madę  in  sopport  of  theii  hierarchy  by 
an  interested  priesthood,  or  by  ruleia  from  motŁvea  of 
policy  (see  Herbert  of  Cherbury,  De  rdig,  genOHum, 
p.  6, 168  sq.).  These  viewa  were  aUy  opposed  by  Ger- 
hard Jo.  Yoaaiua  {De  theologia  gentili  et  pkifsiclogia 
Christiana,  i,  3  8q.),  Yan  Dale  {De  origine  etprocressu 
idololatri€B,  i,  2, 3),  SeMen  {De  dUs  JSyris  [Lips.  1662],  p. 
26  8q.).  They  however  meant,  as  did  alao  Farmer  {The 
ceneral  Preeaknce  of  the  Worsh^f  of  Humań  Spirits 
in  the  Ancient  Heathen  NaHons  [Lond.  1783]),  that  the 
dannona,  whether  evil  spizita  or  departed  human  souls, 
had  very  early  become  the  objecta  of  veneration  on  the 
part  of  the  heathen.  The  Jewa  came  gradually  to  the 
idea  that  the  heathen  deitiea  were  not  nonentities,  aa  the 
propheta  had  stated  them  to  be,  but  really  exiatang  evil 
spirita,  a  view  which  waa  continued  by  the  fathera,  ea- 
pecially  in  relation  to  the  so-called  orade&  The  earlieat 
German  theologiana  alao  admitted  thia  doctrine  of  a  wor- 
ship of  diemons.  Thia,  however,  waa  gradually  diacarded 
after  the  reaeazchea  of  S.  J.  Banmgarten  {Gesch.  d.  JHe^ 


IDOLATRY 


486 


IDTJM^EA 


Uffiontparteim,  p.  176  8q.)i  and  idolatiy  is  now  generaUy 
oonsidered  as  the  restilt  of  a  aophiaticated  tradition. 
Bationaliam,  baaed  on  Pelagian  principles,  either  em- 
braced  the  view8  of  the  naturaliats,  or  else  thoee  of 
Heyne,  J..H.  BoflB,  etc,  who  maiutain,  the  former  that 
the  myths  and  idolatiy  were  either  the  natnial  conse- 
ąuences  of  historical  erents  or  the  peculiar  garb  of  philo- 
Bophical  ideaa  (historical  and  philoflophical  m3rthici8m), 
while  the  latter  deriyes  idolatry  partly  from  the  oniyer- 
■al  wiadom  whoee  higher  thoughta  asBumed  that  form  in 
order  to  be  the  morę  readily  appreciated  by  the  people, 
and  partly  from  the  interesta  of  the  priesthood ;  he  oon- 
siders,  alao,  the  tradition  of  real  heroes  as  an  abundant 
aource.  Othera  (Uke  Lobeck,  etc.)  see  in  the  mythology 
of  the  heathen  but  a  childish  play  of  the  imagination. 
But  the  opinion  which  most  generally  obtained  is  that 
behind  the  outward  form  of  mythology  is  hidden  a  real 
philosophical  or  religious  idea,  and  that  personalities 
and  historical  facts  are  only  erroneously  introdoced  into 
it  (Buttmann ;  G.  Hermann).  Finally,  others  oonsidered 
idolatiy  in  its  iiill  development  as  the  result  of  the  in- 
tentional  manoBuyres  of  the  priesthood  (so  Fr.  Creuzer, 
in  the  first  editions  of  his  Symbolik),  or  of  a  hierarchical 
system  of  natore,  which  amonnts  nearly  to  the  same  (K. 
O.  Muller,  Prolegonu  zu  einer  teiuentchaftlichm  Mytho^ 
hgie,  p.  816-844).  The  latter  considers  the  rery  origin 
and  naturę  of  the  gods,  and  conseąuently  of  idolatry,  as 
the  result  of  an  imconscious  popular  necessity,  which 
from  the  first  was  connected  or  identiiied  with  illusion, 
instead  of  remaining  a  ixu%  and  special  idea.  From 
this  view— whose  only  defect  u  its  too  great  disregard 
of  the  original  religion — ^it  is  easy  to  come  to  those 
which  govem  the  newer  systems  of  religious  philosophy, 
Buch  as  are  upheld  by  Hegel  {yorlenmgen  ii,  JHeligunu- 
pkiio»cphie)y  according  to  which  religion  has  recdved  a 
steady  development  fiom  an  earthly  basta,  so  that  idol- 
atry was  but  one  of  its  first  forms,  and  not  at  all  an  es- 
trangement  from  God,  but  a  neccssary  part  of  the  prog- 
ress  towards  him.  This  view  of  it  completely  makes 
away  with  idolatry  by  the  presumed  connection  of  all 
religions  amying  by  successiye  developments  at  abso- 
lute  religion.  This  view  is  supported  by  Hinrichs  (Z>. 
-  Religion  im  iimem  Yerhaltnisee  z,  WiueMehąfi  [Heidelb. 
1821  ], p.  141 8q.)  and  Krafl  (D. Reliffionen  aller  YdUcer  tn 
philowpMadier  DanteOwng  [Stuttg.  1848  ]).  Feuerbach 
and  other  extreme  Rationalists  even  consider  religion  it- 
self  as  a  siekły  ideał  phenomenou  in  human  life. 

We  must  rank  under  idolatry  all  adoration  not  ad- 
dreased  to  the  one  invisible  God  of  the  Bibie,  or  such 
adoration  of  him  as  is  rendered  in  any  manner  not  con- 
formiug  to  the  reyelations  of  the  Bibie.  It  results  part- 
ly from  additions  and  the  influence  of  the  world,  partly 
from  the  original  traditional  oommand  to  seek  Grod, 
which  seeking,  wben  unaided  by  him  (in  revelation), 
ends  in  error,  so  that,  unconsdously,  it  is  worldly  exist- 
ence  that  is  apprehended  instead  and  in  the  place  of  God. 
The  modę  of  this  apprehension  yaries  in  different  na- 
tions,  according  to  their  geographical,  historical,  and  in- 
tellectual  circamstanoes,  and  may  degenerate  into  the 
adoration  of  the  most  yain  and  arbitnuy  objects  (feUsh- 
es)  which  priests  or  soroerers  may  set  up.  Between  the 
original  symbolic  and  the  most  abject  idolatiy  there  are 
yarions  stages.  While  the  majority  of  the  heathen  are 
either  on  the  brink  or  in  the  midst  of  fetishism,  the  morę 
enlightened  part  look  upon  the  idols  only  aa  symbols, 
somedmes  of  seyeral  deities,  and  sometimes  of  one  God. 

Idolatiy  was  formeriy  considered  as  diyided  into  two 
distinct  claases,  real  and  comparatiye;  the  former  was 
abeolute  polytheism — the  belief  in  the  real  diyinity  of 
the  images— while  the  latter  was  either  (Baumgarten) 
the  worship  of  the  seyeral  deities  ta  subordinate  to  one, 
or  (G.H.Yoasius)  the  considering  of  the  images  wor- 
shipped  as  merę  symbols  of  the  inyiaible  God.  In  CoL 
iii,  6  we  find  a  metaphorical  use  madę  of  the  word  idol- 
atr>'  to  expre8s  undue  attachment  to  earthly  possesaions 
and  adrantagcs.  The  same  name  has  also  been  giyen, 
with  good  reaeon,  to  the  use  madę  of  images  in  the 


Boman  and  Greek  Churches.— Herzog,  ReaUEmytiop, 
8.  y.  AbgottereL  On  this  last  point,  see  Mariolatsy  ; 
Saint-worship,  etc 

Idu^el  ('I^ot;^\oc),  the  second  named  of  the  Irad- 
ing  Jews  sent  by  £zra  to  procure  the  aid  of  the  priots 
in  the  return  from  exile  (1  Esd.  yiii,  48) ;  eyidcntly  the 
Aeiel  (q.  V.)  of  the  Hebrew  text  (Ezn  viii,  16). 

Idumae^a  (IdoufŁaid),  the  Gr.  form  of  the  Ueb.xume 
Udom,  as  found  in  the  Sept,  the  N.  TcsL,  and  JoEephts. 
According  to  Josephns  {A  nt.  ii,  1,  l),lioweyer,  it  is  only  s 
morę  agreeable  modę  of  pionouncing  what  would  othcr- 
wise  be  'A^uż/ia  (comp.  Jerome  on  Ezek.  xxv,  12).  In 
the  Sept  we  sometimes  meet  with  '^wfi,  but  morc  gen- 
erally with  *lSovfŁala  (the  people  being  callcd  'llmf 
fialoi),  which  is  the  uniform  orthography  in  the  Apoe- 
rypha  (1  Mace  iy,  15,  29,  61 ;  v,3;  vi,  81;  2Macc.xii, 
82),  as  well  as  in  Mark  iii,  8,  the  only  passage  in  the  N. 
T.  where  it  occura.  Our  Auth.  Yers.  has  in  three  oi  four 
places  (Isa.  xxxiv,  5, 6 ;  Ezek.  xxxv,  15 ;  xxxvi,  5)  wb- 
stituted  for  Edom  *'Iduinsea,"  which  is  the  name  em- 
ployed  by  the  writers  of  Greece  and  Komę,  thougfa  it  is 
to  be  noted  that  they,  as  well  as  Josephus,  indude  im- 
der  that  name  the  south  of  Palestine,  and  somctinm 
Palestine  itself,  because  a  large  portion  of  that  counUy 
came  into  possession  of  Łhe  Edomiles  of  later  times. 

The  Heb.  dK,  Edom,  as  the  name  of  the  people,  is 
matcuUne  (Numb.  xxii,  20) ;  as  the  name  of  the  coui>- 
tTy,/eminine  (Jer.  xlix,  17).  We  often  meet  with  the 
phrase  D^K  y*^^  EreU-Edom,  **  the  Land  of  Edom," 
and  once  with  the  poetic  form  ti^M  H^O,  Sedek-Edom, 
"  the  Field  of  Edom"  (Judg.  y,  4).  *The  inhafaitants  aie 
sometimes  stylcd  d4m  "^^21,  Bene^Edom^  **  the  Chlldrm 
of  Edom,"  and  poeticaUy  d4k  r3,  Batk-Edom,  ''the 
Daughter  of  Edom"  (Lam.  iy,  21,  22).  A  single  penon 
was  called  ^chi(,  Adomi,  ^an  Edomite"  (Deut.  xxiii, 
8),  of  which  the  feminine  H^^CIK,  Adomiih,  occurs  in  1 
Kings  xł,  1. 

1.  Oriffin  ofthe  Name.— Thn  name  was  deriycd  from 
Isaac^s  son  Edom,  otherwise  called  Esao,  the  eldcr  tirin- 
brother  of  Jacob.  See  Esau.  It  signifies  red^  and 
aeems  first  to  ha%'e  been  suggestcd  by  his  appearance  at 
his  birth,  when  "  he  came  out  all  red,"  i.  e.  coycitd  with 
red  hair  (Gen.  xxv,  25),  and  it  was  afterwards  morę  for- 
mally  and  permanently  iroposed  on  him  on  account  of 
his  unworthy  disposal  of  his  birthright  for  a  mesa  of 
red  lentiles  (Gen.  xxv,  80):  "And  Esau  said  to  Jac«h, 
Feed  me,  I  pray  thee,yrom  the  red,  that  red  (cSfitJT^IS 
HTin  D^d(ri),  for  I  am  faint;  therefore  was  his  name 
dJled  i?ed"  (Edom ;  tahiK).  In  the  East  it  has  alwB}'8 
been  usual  for  a  chief  either  to  give  his  name  to  the 
countiy  which  he  conąucis,  or  over  which  he  rulca,  or 
to  take  a  name  from  it.  Esau,  during  the  life  of  his 
father,  seized  the  mountainous  region  occopicd  by  tbe 
Horites.  He  had  two  names ;  but  one  of  them  was  pe- 
culiariy  applicable  to  the  newly-acqnired  tciritoiy. 
The  mountains  of  Seir  were  remarkable  for  their  rrddUk 
color;  hence,  doubtless,  the  name  Edom^  ^nd,"  was 
giyen  to  them.  Esau  ia  called  '*  the  father  of  Edom,* 
giying  to  it  his  name  and  ruling  over  it  (Gen.  xxxvi, 
48) ;  and  the  country,  in  a  yery  few  caaes,  is  also  called 
"  the  mount  of  Esau"  (Obad.  8, 9, 19). 

The  original  name  of  the  country  was  Mount  Seir, 
and  it  was  probably  so  called  from  Seir,  the  progenitor 
of  the  Horites  (Gen.  xiv,  6;  xxxvi,  20-22),  though  the 
signification  of  this  name,  rugged,  may  haye  been  the 
cause  of  its  adoption,  as  the  mountains  are  singularły 
rough  and  rugged.  And  so  says  Josephus  {Ant.  i,  20, 
8) :  ^  Esau  named  the  countiy  *  Boughnces*  from  his 
own  hairy  roughness."  Part  of  the  region  is  still  called 
ISAh-Sherah,  in  which  some  fiud  a  traoe  of  Seir,  but  the 
two  words  haye  no  etirmological  relation.  Tbe  name 
Seir  continued  to  be  applied  to  Edom  after  its  occupa- 
tion  by  the  deaoendants  of  Eaan,  and  eren  down  to  the 
dose  of  the  O.-T.  histoiy  (see  Josh.  xi,  17 ;  2  ChnHLiz, 


IDUMiEA 


4S1 


IDUMIEA 


10:  Ezek.  xxv,  8,  etc).  The  aborigines  were  called 
Uurites  (SepL  Koppdiot ;  Gen.  xiy|  6) ;  that  is,  Trofflo- 
^tesj  or  "  caTe-dwellen,"  from  the  naturę  of  their  habi- 
titioDS.  See  Horitb.  The  mountaina  of  Edoni,  aa  all 
tmveUen  know,  are  filled  with  caves  and  grottoea  hewn 
m  th.-  doft  aandatone  strata. 

2.  SUuaHon  and  Bow»darie$^—Edom  proper,  or  Idu- 
mea,  ia  sitoated  on  the  aouth-eaatem  border  of  Palea- 
tine,  extendiiig  from  it  to  the  northem  estremity  of  the 
Elanitic  Gulf.  It  was  hounded  on  the  west  by  the  great 
valley  of  the  Arabali,  on  the  south  by  a  linę  drawn  due 
east  from  the  modem  fortress  of  Akabah,  on  the  east 
by  the  desert  of  Arabia,  and  on  the  north  by  the  an> 
cient  kingdom  of  Moab.  Its  length  from  north  to  south 
was  about  100  miles,  and  its  breadth  averaged  20. 
These  boundaries  are  nowhere  directly  defined,  but  we 
can  flscertain  them  from  rarious  incidcntal  references  in 
Scriptore.  When  the  Israelites  encamped  at  Kadesh- 
baraea  they  were  close  to  the  border  of  £dom  (Numb. 
xx),  and  Mount  Hor  ia  said  to  be  within  its  border 
(xxxiii,  37).  Hcnce,  aa  Kadesh  was  situated  in  the 
ralley  of  the  Arabah,  and  as  Mount  Hor  ia  oniy  a  few 
miles  to  the  east  of  it,  we  conclude  that  the  Arabah  ia 
the  western  boundary.  The  Israelites  aaked,  but  were 
refoaed,  a  passage  through  either  Edom  or  Moab,  so  as 
to  go  direct  from  Kadesh  to  the  east  side  of  the  Jordan 
(Nnmb.  xx,  U-20;  Judg.  xi,  17, 18).  In  conseąuence 
of  this  refu3a],  they  were  obliged  to  morch  south  along 
the  Arabah  to  Ezion-geber,  and  thence  eastward  by  the 
wUdemess  round  the  territories  of  Edom  and  Moab  (id. 
with  Nomb.  xxt,  4).  Hencc  we  conclude  that  Edom  and 
Moab  occupicd  the  whole  region  along  the  east  side 
of  the  Talley  of  the  Arabah,  from  the  Dead  Sea  to  the 
Elanitic  Gulf.  Edom  waa  whoUy  a  mountainoua  coun- 
try, as  may  be  inferred  from  the  names  given  to  it  in 
the  Bibie  and  by  andent  writers  (Deut.  i,  2 ;  ii,  6 ;  Jo- 
8ephu3,  Ant.  ii,  1,  2;  Eusebius,  Onomast.  s.  v.  Idumsa). 
The  foot  of  the  mountain  rangę,  therefore,  may  be  re- 
garded  as  marking  its  eastem  border.  On  the  north  it 
appears  to  have  been  separated  from  Moab  by  the 
"brook  Zered"  (Deut.  ii,  13,  14,  18;  Numb.  xxi,  12), 
which  ia  probably  identical  with  the  modem  wady  el- 
Ahsy.  These  views  are  corroborated  by  other  and  in- 
dependent testimony.  In  the  Samaritan  Pentateuch 
the  woni  Gabla  la  substituted  for  Seir  in  Deut.  xxxii, 
2;  and  Eusebius  and  Jerome  state  that  Idumtea  waa  in 
their  tim3  called  Gebalene,  which  is  a  Greek  (rtfia\rivii) 
corraption  of  the  Hebrew  GebcUj "  mountain"*  (Onomatt, 
id.  et  8.T.  Seir),  and  is  retained  to  this  day  in  the  Arabie 
form  JebdL  The  modem  provincc  of  Jebał  is  bounded 
on  the  west  by  the  Arabah,  and  on  the  north  by  wady 
el-Ahsy  (Robinson,  Bib.  Res.  ii,  151 ;  Burckhardt,  Trav. 
in  Syria,  p.  410).  We  may  safely  conclude  from  this 
that  the  ancienc  province  had  the  same  boundaries,  as  it 
hatl  the  same  name.  Thus  Josephus  writes  (Ant,  v,  1, 
22) :  «The  lot  of  Simeon  induded  that  part  of  Idumsea 
which  bordered  upon  Egypt  and  Arabia;"  and,  though 
thb  ia  tm?,  it  doea  not  oontradict  the  language  of  Scrip- 
ture— "  I  will  not  give  you  of  their  land,  no,  not  so 
mach  aa  a  footbreadth,  becauae  I  have  given  Mount 
Seir  unto  Eiiu  for  a  possession"  (Deut  ii,  5).  Not  a 
footbreadth  of  Edom  Proper,  or  Mount  Seir,  was  ever 
givea  by  dirine  sanction  to  the  Jews. 

Josephus  divides  Idumaea  into  two  proyinces,  Goboli- 
tis  and  Amalekitis  (A  ni,  ii,  1, 2).  The  former  embraced 
l(lam«a  Proper,  being  identical,  aa  the  name  would  in- 
dicate,with  "3/oairf  Seir;"  the  other  embraced  a  por- 
tion  of  Southern  Palestine,  with  the  desert  plain  south 
of  it,  which  wan  origlnally  occupied  by  the  Amalekites 
(Numb.  xiii,  29),  and  subaeąuenUy,  as  we  shall  see,  by 
the  Edomitca.  Pliny  phicea  Idunuea  to  the  south  of 
Pslestine,  bordering  upon  Egypt  {Hist,  Nat,  v,  14). 
Stiabo  (xvi,  2,  36,  p.  760)  stotea  that  the  Idumajans 
*we  originaUy  Nabathosans,  but,  being  drireu  out 
thence,  they  joined  themselyes  to  the  Jews.  See  Smith, 
I>ict,  o/Ciass.  Gtog,  s.  v. 

8.  ffutorsT.— The  first  mcntion  of  Mount  Seir  ia  in 


Gen.  xiv,  6,  where  the  confederate  kingą  are  aaid  to 
have  amitten  the  **  Horites  in  their  Mount  Seir."  RC. 
dr.  2080.  Theae  Hońtea  appear  to  have  been  a  tńbe 
of  the  gigantic  aboriginea  of  Western  Aaia,  so  called 
from  dwelling  in  cavea  (Gen.  xxxvi,  20-80).  They 
were  a  paatond  people,  divided  into  tribea  like  the  mod- 
em Bedawin,  having  independent  chiefa  called  AllAph 
(C)^bK,  ver.  29).  E8aa'8  marńage  with  the  daughtera 
of  Canaan  alienated  him  from  hia  parents,  and  he  then 
obtamed  a  settlement  among  the  Horites,  where  he  ao- 
ąuired  power  and  wealth  as  early  as  the  time  of  Ja* 
cob's  return  from  Padan-aram  (Gen.  xxvii,  46).  Prob- 
ably hia  doee  alliance  with  lahmad  tended  to  increaae 
hia  influence  in  hia  adopted  country  (xxviti,  9 ;  xxxii, 
3  8q.).  Though  then  eatablished  in  Edom,  Eaau  had 
still  aome  part  of  hia  flocka  in  Western  Palestine,  in  con- 
nection  with  those  of  his  father;  but  on  the  return  of 
Jacob  he  removed  all  hia  property  from  Canaan  and 
dwelt  in  Mount  Seir  (xxxvi,  6-8).  He  gradually  aub- 
dued  and  finally  exterminated,  or  perhapa  rather  sup- 
planted,  the  Horitea  (Deut,  ii,  12,  22),  and  a  distinct 
tribe  of  hia  deacendants,  the  Amalekites,  leaving  Edom, 
took  possession  of  the  desert  plateaua  south  of  Canaan 
(Gen.  xxxvi,  12 ;  Exod.  viii,  14  są.).  The  earliest  form 
of  govemment  among  the  Edoroitea  waa,  like  that  of 
the  Horites,  by  chitft  (in  the  A.  V.  rendered  "dukes,** 
but  manifestly  the  same  as  the  modem  Arab  sheiks), 
exercising  independent  authority  over  distinct  tribea 
(Gen.  xxxvi,  15-19).  It  appears,  however,  that  the  va- 
rious  tribes  were,  at  Icast  in  times  of  generał  war,  united 
under  one  leader,  to  whom  the  title  of  king  {T\?.'0)  waa 
given.  The  namea  of  eight  of  theae  kings  (only  one 
of  whom  is  spoken  of  aa  related  to  any  other,  Anah,  the 
son  of  Zibeon)  are  mentioned  in  Gen.  xxxvi,  81-39,  who 
are  said  to  have  rdgned  in  Edom  '*  before  thcre  reigned 
any  king  over  the  children  of  Israel,"  that  is,  apparent- 
ly  before  the  time  of  Moses  (see  Deut  xxxiii,  5 ;  Exod. 
x\'iii,  16-19).  Most  of  the  hirge  nomad  tribes  of  Ara- 
bia have  now  an  acknowle'lged  chief,  who  ia  styled  emir, 
and  who  takea  the  lead  in  any  gr^t  emergency,  while 
each  division  of  the  tribe  enjoys  independcncc  under  its 
own  Mheik  on  all  ordinar}'  occasions.  Such  would  seem 
to  have  been  the  case  with  the  Edomites,  and  thia  af- 
fords  an  easy  soluŁion  of  the  apparent  confusion  in  the 
account  given  by  Moses,  Gen.  xxxvi,  31-43 ;  and  again 
in  Exod.  xv,  15,  where  it  is  said  "  the  duhsś  of  Edom 
shall  be  amazed,"  and  Judg.  xi,  17,  where  Moses  is  rep- 
resented  as  having  sent  "  messengers  from  Kadesh  unto 
the  king  of  Edom."  The  primitive  and  pastorał  char- 
acter  of  the  people  is  incidcntally  brought  out  by  the 
circumstance  that  this  Anah,  though  a  cliieftain*8  son, 
was  in  the  habit  of  tending  his  fathcr'8  asses  (Gen. 
xxxvi,  24).  It  was  when  thus  employed  that  he  found 
in  the  wildemess  D^^H,  ha-ffemim,  rendered  in  the 
Eng.yerB.  by  ^  the  mules,"  but  meaning  morę  probably 
"the  hot  Bprings."  There  is  in  the  country  to  the 
south-east  of  the  Dead  Sea  (which  formcd  part  of  the 
Seirite  poaaeasions)  a  place,  Callirhoi,  celebratcd  among 
the  Greeks  and  Komana  for  its  warm  batha,  which  has 
been  visited  by  modem  travellerB  Uosephus,  War,  i,  83, 
5 ;  Pliny,  nisf.  Nai,  v,  5, 17 ;  LeglA  TraveU), 

Though  the  Israelites  and  Edomites  were  closely  re- 
lated, and  though  the  former  were  commanded  *'  not  to 
abhor  an  Edomite,  for  he  ia  thy  brother"  (DeuL  xxiii,  7), 
yet  the  bitterest  enmity  appears  to  have  exisŁed  be- 
tween  them  at  every  period  of  their  history,  as  a  per^ 
petuation  of  the  imbrotherly  feud  between  their  pro- 
genitora.  When  the  Israelitea  asked  perroission  to  paaa 
through  the  territory  of  Edom  on  their  way  to  Canaan, 
they  were  raddy  rcfused.  B.  C  1619.  The  road  by 
which  it  was  sought  to  penetrate  the  countr}'  was  term- 
ed  "the  king^a  highway"  (ver.  17),  suppoeed  by  Dr. 
Robinson  {Reaearches,  ii,  556;  but  see  a  differcnt  expla- 
nation  in  De  Saulc>'*s  Narratire^  i,  392 ;  comp.  278, 276) 
to  be  wady  el-Ghuweir,  for  it  ia  almost  the  only  valley 
that  affords      direct  and  eaay  paasage  through  theae 


TOUMMA 


4S8 


IDUMiEA 


moimtaiiifl.    From  a  comparison  of  these  incidents  it 
]i»7  be  infened  that  the  change  in  the  form  of  goyem- 
ment  took  place  during  the  wanderings  of  the  laraelltes 
in  the  Deaert,  uidess  we  suppose,  with  RoflenmUller, 
that  it  was  only  this  north-eastem  pait  of  Edom  which 
was  now  subject  to  a  monarch,  the  rest  of  the  country 
remaining  under  the  sway  of  its  former  chieftains.    But 
whether  the  regal  power  at  this  period  embraced  the 
wfaole  territory  or  not,  perhape  it  did  not  supplant  the 
ancient  constitution,  but  was  rather  grafted  on  it,  like 
the  authority  of  the  Judges  in  Israel,  and  of  Saul,  the 
first  king,  which  did  not  materiaUy  interfere  with  the 
goTemment  that  previou8ly  exiBted.    It  further  ap- 
pears,  from  the  list  of  Idunuean  kings,  that  the  monarchy 
was  not  hereditary,  but  electire  (for  no  one  is  spoken  of 
as  the  son  or  relative  of  hb  predeoessor) ;  or  probably 
that  chieftain  was  acknowledged  as  sorereign  who  was 
best  able  to  vindicate  his  daim  by  force  of  arms.   £ very 
8ucce8sive  king  appears  to  have  selected  his  own  seat  of 
goremment :  the  places  mentioned  as  haying  enjoyed 
that  distinction  are  Dinhabah,  Ayith,  Pagu  or  Fai. 
£ven  foreigners  were  not  excluded  from  the  throne,  for 
the  successor  of  Samlah  of  Masrekah  was  Saul,  or  Shaul, 
*^of  Rechoboth,  on  the  riyer."    The  word  Rechoboth 
means,  literally,  slreets^  and  was  a  not  uncommon  name 
given  to  towns ;  but  the  emphatic  addition  of  "  the  riv~ 
er^'  points  evidently  to  the  Euphrates,  and  between 
Bakkah  and  Anah,  on  that  river,  there  are  still  the  re- 
mains  of  a  place  called  by  the  Arabs  Rachabath  Malik 
Ibn-Tauk.     In  the  age  of  Solomon  we  read  of  one  Ha- 
dad,  who  "  was  of  the  king^s  seed  in  Edom"  (1  Kings  xi, 
14) ;  from  which  some  have  conjectured  that  by  that 
period  there  was  a  royal  dynasty  of  one  particular  fami- 
ly;  but  all  that  the  expres8ion  may  imply  is  that  he 
was  a  blood  relation  of  the  last  king  of  the  countr}-. 
Hadad  was  the  name  of  one  of  the  early  soyereigns  "who 
amote  Mldian  in  the  field  of  Moab"  (Gen.  xxxyi,  86). 
The  country  was  attacked  by  Saul  with  partial  suc- 
cess  (1  Sam.  xiv,  47).     A  few  years  later  Dayid  over- 
threw  the  Edomites  in  the  "  yalley  of  Salt,"  at  the 
Bouthem  extremity  of  the  Dead  Sea  (Robinson,  J?t:6./2eff. 
ii,  109),  and  put  garrisons  in  their  cities  (2  Sam.  viii,  14 ; 
1  Chroń,  xviii,  11-13;  1  Kings  xi,  15.     Comp.  the  in- 
scńption  of  Psa.  lx,  and  y,  8, 9;  cyiii,  9, 10,  where  "  the 
atrong  city"  may  denote  Selah  or  Petra).     Then  were 
fulfilled  the  prophecies  in  Gen.  xxy,  28,  and  xxyii,  40, 
that  the  "elder  should  serve  the  younger;"  and  also  the 
prediction  of  Balaam  (Numb.  xxiy,  18),  that  Edom  and 
Seir  should  be  for  possessions  to  IsraeL    Solomon  created 
a  naval  station  at  Ezion-geber,  on  the  Elanitic  Gulf, 
from  whence  his  ships  went  to  India  and  Eastem  Africa 
(1  Kings  ix,  26 ;  2  Chroń,  viii,  18).     Towards  the  dose 
of  his  reign  an  attempt  was  madę  to  restore  the  inde- 
pendence  of  the  country  by  one  Hadad,  an  Idumsan 
prince,  who,  when  a  child,  had  been  carried  into  Egypt 
at  the  time  of  David'8  invasion,  and  bod  there  married 
the  sister  of  Tahpanhes  the  queen  (1  Kings  xi,  14-28). 
See  Hadad.     If  Edom  then  succeeded  in  shaking  off 
the  yoke,  it  was  only  for  a  season,  sińce  in  the  days  of 
Jehoshaphat,  the  fourth  Jewish  monarch  from  Solomon, 
it  is  said  "  there  ww  no  king  in  Edom ;  a  deputy  was 
king;"  Le.he  acte^as  yiceroy  for  the  king  of  Judah. 
For  that  the  latter  was  still  master  of  the  country  is  ev- 
ident  from  the  fact  of  his  having  fitted  out,  like  Solomon, 
a  fleet  at  Ezion-geber  (1  Kings  xxii,  47, 48 ;  2  Chroń. 
XX,  86, 37).     It  was,  no  doubt,  his  deputy  (called  kinc) 
who  joined  the  oonfederates  of  Judah  and  Israel  in  their 
attack  upon  Moab  (2  Kings  iii,  9, 12, 26).     Yet  there 
aeems  to  have  been  a  partial  reyolt  of  the  Edomites,  or 
at  least  of  the  mountaineera  of  Seir,  even  in  the  reign  of 
Jehoshaphat  (2  Chroń,  xx,  22) ;  and  under  his  success- 
or, Jehoram,  thcy  whoUy  rebelled,  and  "  madę  a  king 
ovcr  themselYCs"  (2  Kings  viii,  20, 22 ;  2  Chroń,  xxi,  8, 
10).    From  its  being  added  that,  notwiŁhstanding  the 
temporary  suppression  of  the  rebellion, "  Edom  revoltcd 
from  under  the  hand  of  Judah  unto  this  day,"  it  is  prob- 
able  that  the  Jewish  dominion  was  neyer  completely  re- 


stoced.   Amaziah,  indeed,  iayaded  the  ooimtiT,  and  htr- 
ing  taken  the  chief  city,  Selah  or  Petia,  he,  in  memoii- 
al  of  the  conque8t,  changed  its  name  to  Joktheel  (q.<L 
sabdued  of  God) ;  and  his  successor,  Uzziah,  retained 
poflsession  of  Elath  (2  Kings  xiy,  7 ;  2  Chroń,  xxv,  11- 
14 ;  xxvi,  8).     But  in  the  reign  of  Ahaz,  hordes  of 
Edomites  roade  incurńons  into  Judah,  and  carried  awiy 
captiyes  (2  Chroń.  xxyiii,  17).     About  the  same  period, 
Rezin,  king  of  Syria,  expeUed  the  Jews  from  Elath, 
which  was  thenceforth  oocupied  by  the  Edomites  (2 
Kings  xyi,  6,  where  for  Sj^rians,  D'^Ol"SK,  we  ought  to 
read  Edomites^  D'<131'TK,  De  Rossi,  VariaB  Ijćcliona,  ii, 
247).    Now  was  fulfilled  the  other  part  of  Isaac^s  pre- 
diction, viz.,  that  in  course  of  time  Esau  *^  should  take 
his  brother^s  yoke  from  ofT  his  neck"  (Gen.  xxvii,  40). 
It  appears  from  yarious  incidental  expTe9Bions  in  the 
later  prophets  that  the  Edomites  cmployed  their  recov- 
ered  power  in  the  enlargement  of  their  territor}'  in  all 
directions.     Tbey  spread  as  far  south  as  Dedan  in  Ara- 
bia, and  northwanl  to  Bozrah  in  the  Hauran;  though 
it  is  doubtful  if  the  Bozrah  of  Scripture  may  not  have 
been  a  place  in  Idumaea  Proper  (Isa.  xxxiy,  6 ;  lxłii,  1 ; 
Jer.  xlix,  7, 8-20 ;  Ezek.  xxy,  18 ;  Amos  i,  12).    Doring 
the  decline  of  the  Jewish  power,  and  wars  of  Judah  and 
Israel,  the  Edomites  graduaHy  enlarged  their  possessions. 
"Wlien  Nebuchadnezzar  besieged  Jerusalem,the  Edomites 
joined  him  and  took  an  actiye  part  in  the  pluuder  and 
slaughter  which  followed.     Their  cruelty  at  that  time 
is  specially  rcferred  to  in  Psa.  cxxxvii,  and  was  the 
chief  cause  of  those  dreadful  prophetic  curses  which 
have  sińce  been  executed  upon  their  country  (Jer.  xlix, 
17 ;  Lam.  iv,  21 :  Ezek.  xxv,  13, 14 ;  Obad.  IOI21).    Frań 
the  language  of  Malachi  (i,  2, 8),  and  also  from  the  m^ 
counts  pre8er\'^ed  by  Josephus  (Anf,  x,  9,  7),  it  would 
seem  that  the  Edomites  did  not  wholly  escape  the  Chal- 
dfean  scourge ;  bnt  instead  of  being  carried  capti ve,  like 
the  Jews,  they  not  only  retained  poasession  of  their  own 
territory,  but  bccame  masters  of  the  south  of  Judah,  as 
far  as  Hebron  (1  Mace.  v,  66,  comp.  with  Ezek.  xxxv,  10; 
xxxvi,  5).     Probably  as  a  reward  for  the  aasistance  al^ 
forded  by  tbem  to  the  Chaldseans,  the  Edomites  were 
permitted  to  settle  in  Southern  Palestine,  and  in  the 
country  lying  between  it  and  the  borders  of  Egypt.    Tha 
name  Idumsea  was  now  given  to  the  whole  country,  from 
the  yalley  of  the  Arabah  to  the  Mediterranean  (Joaepłu 
^  fi/.  V,  1, 22 ;  Strabo,  xvi,  2),  and  from  Eleutheropolis  to 
Elath  (Jerome,  Commenł,  in  Obad.).    Hence  aroee  the 
mistakes  of  Roman  writers,  who  sometimes  gire  the 
name  Idunuea  to  all  Palestine,  and  even  cali  the  Jews 
Idunueans  (Yirgil,  Georg,  iii,  12 ;  Juyenal,  viii,  160). 

While  the  Edomites  thus  exiaided  their  conąuests 
westward,  they  were  driyen  out  of  their  own  country 
by  the  Ńabathseans  (q.  v.),  who,  leaying  the  nomad 
babits  of  their  ancestois,  setUed  down  amid  the  moim- 
tains  of  Edom,  engaged  in  commerce,  and  founded  the 
little  kingdom  of  A  rabia  PetrtBa.  Some  of  their  mon- 
archs  took  the  name  Aretas  (2  Mace  v,  8;  Joeeph.  Jnf. 
XV,  ] ,  2),  and  some  Obodas  (Joseph.  A nt.  xiii,  5, 1).  One 
of  them  was  that  Aretas  whose  daughter  Herod  Antipas 
married  CSLaiL  xiy,  8, 4) ;  and  it  was  the  same  king  of 
Arabia  who  captured  Damascus,  and  held  it  at  the  time 
of  Paurs  conyeiBion  (Acts  ix,  25;  2  Cor.  xi,  82).  Idu- 
nuea  was  taken  by  the  Romans  in  A.D.  105,  and  under 
their  patemal  govemment  the  enterprising  inhabitants 
increased  greatly  in  wealth  and  power.  A  lucrati\-e 
transport  trade  between  India,  Persia,  and  the  Levant 
was  in  their  hands.  Roads  were  oonstructed  across  the 
desert  of  Arabia,  through  the  dcfiles  of  Edom,  and  west- 
ward and  northward  to  the  Mediterranean  and  Pales- 
tine. Traces  of  them  still  remain,  with  ruinous  milita- 
ry  stations  at  inter^-als,  and  fallen  milest^Mies  of  the  times 
of  Trajan  and  Marcus  Aurelius  {Peutinger  Taitltn  ;  La- 
borde'8  Yoyage;  Burckhardfs  Syria^  p.  874,  419;  Irby 
and  Mangles^s  Traifds,  p.  871, 877,  Ist  ed.).  The  mag- 
niflcent  rock-temples,  palaces,  and  tombs  of  Petra  were 
then  constructed,  which  still  continue  to  be  the  wonder 
and  admiration  of  Eastem  trayellers.    They  are  not  tha 


IDUILEA 


489 


TTfrrMMA 


worka  <^  the  Edomites,  bat  of  the  descendants  of  Nebai- 
otk,  Ishmaers  oldest  son  and  Esau^s  brotber-in-law  (Gen. 
xxv,  18 ;  xxxvi,  3 ;  Joaeph.  AnLij  12, 4 ;  Diod.  Sic  19.) 

On  the  reyiyal  of  Jewish  power  under  the  Asmons- 
ana,  that  part  of  Soutbem  Palestine  to  which  the  name 
Idimuea  had  been  giyen  by  claasic  writen  waa  seized, 
and  aboat  B.C.  125  they  were  finally  sabdued  by  John 
Hyrcaniu,  who  compeUed  them  to  submit  to  circum- 
ciśion  and  other  Jewish  ritea,  with  a  view  to  incorpo- 
nte  them  with  the  nation  (1  Mace.  ▼,  8, 66 ;  2  Mace.  x, 
16;  xii,82;  Joseph.  Ani,  xiii,  9, 1 ;  15,4).  The  amal- 
gamation,  however,  of  the  two  races  seems  never  to  have 
been  perfected.  The  country  was  goremed  by  Jewish 
piefe<^  and  one  of  these,  an  Idumaean  by  biith,  became 
procurator  of  Judsa,  and  his  son  was  Hexx>d  the  Great, 
"king  of  the  Jewa"  (Joseph.  Ant,  xii,  8,  6 ;  xiii,  9,  2 ; 
zir,  1, 3  and  8 ;  xy,  7, 9 ;  xvii,  11,4).  Not  long  beforo  the 
siege  of  Jemsalem  by  Titua,  20,000  Idunuums  were  call- 
ed  in  to  the  defenoe  of  the  city  by  the  Zealots,  but  both 
partiesgaye  themselyes  up  to  rapine  and  murder  (Joseph. 
War,  iv,  4, 5 ;  5, 1 ;  vii,  8, 1).  This  is  the  last  mention 
madę  of  the  Edomites  in  history.  The  author  of  a  work 
on  Job,  once  ascribed  to  Origen,  says  that  their  name 
and  langoage  had  perished,  and  that,  like  the  Ammon- 
ites  and  Moabitea,  they  had  all  become  Arabs.  In  the 
second  centory  Ptolemy  limits  the  name  Idumiea  to  the 
ooootiy  west  of  the  Jordan. 

In  the  fiist  centnries  of  the  Christian  aera  Edom  was 
induded  in  the  proyince  of  Pakutma  Tertia^  of  which 
Petra  was  metropolia  (S.  Paulo,  Geogr,  JSac,  p.  807 ;  Ro- 
land, Palast,  p.  218).  Afler  the  Mohammedan  conqucst 
its  conunerdal  importance  declined,  its  ilourishing  port 
and  inland  dties  fell  to  ruin.  The  Mohammedans  were 
the  instruments  by  which  the  fearful  predictions  of 
the  Soipture  were  finally  fulfllled.  The  Cmsaders  madę 
sereral  expeditions  to  Edom,  penetrating  it  as  far  as  to 
Petra,  to  which  they  gave  the  name  ^Yalley  of  Moses** 
{Gfgta  Deiper  Francos,  p.  518, 555,  etc),  a  name  still  ex- 
iiting  in  the  Arabie  form  Wadtf  Musa.  On  a  command- 
ing  hill  aome  twelve  miles  north  of  Petra  they  built  a 
fortress,  and  caUed  it  Mans  Regalu ;  its  modem  name  is 
Shobek  (&  p.  61 1).  The  Cmsaders  occupied  and  forti- 
iled  Kerak,  the  ancient  Kir  Moab,  and  raised  it  to  the 
dignity  of  an  episcopal  see,  under  the  impression  that  it 
was  Petra  (t6.p.  812, 885, 1119).  From  the  age  of  the 
Crosaders  until  the  present  century  nothing  was  known 
of  Idonuea.  No  traveller  had  passed  through  it,  and  as 
a  coantry  it  had  disappeared  from  histor^'.  Yolney 
beard  some  vague  reports  of  its  wonders  from  Arabs. 
Seetxen  also  heaid  much  of  it  in  the  year  1806,  but  he 
was  nnable  to  enter  it.  Burckhardt  was  the  first  to 
traver9e  the  country.  In  1812  he  travelled  from  Kerak 
south  by  Shobek  to  Petra  ( Trem,  m  Syr,  p.  377  sq. ;  Rob- 
iDaon,irA./2ef.  li,  165).  In  1828,  Laborde,  proceeding 
Dorthward  from  Akabah  through  the  defiles  of  Edom, 
■Iso  yiaited  Petra,  and  brought  away  a  portfolio  of  splen- 
did  dzawinga,  which  proved  that  the  descriptions  of 
Burckhardt  had  not  been  exaggerated.  Many  have 
Bince  foUowed  the  footsteps  of  the  first  explorerB,  and  a 
trip  to  Petim  now  forma  a  neoeasary  part  of  the  Eastem 
tniTellei^s  grand  tour. 

1  Pkjfgical  (reo^ropAy.— Idumsa  embracea  a  section 
of  a  bro«d  mountain  rangę,  extending  in  breadth  from 
the  valley  of  the  Arabah  to  the  desert  plateau  of  Arabia. 
"Along  the  base  of  the  rangę  on  the  side  of  the  Arabah, 
>re  Iow  calcareous  hills.  To  these  sucoeed  lofty  masses 
of  igneous  rock,  chiefly  porph3rTy ;  over  which  lies  the 
red  aod  variegated  sandstone  in  irregular  ridgea  and 
*2>rapt  diflb,  broken  by  deep  and  wild  rayinea.  Thelat- 
ter  strata  give  the  mountaina  their  most  striking  feat- 
TO"  (P<nUsr,Handb.forS.andPaLi,U).  "The  firat 
(^ung  that  stmck  me,''  says  Stanley,  **  in  tuming  out  of 
the  Arabah  np  the  defiles  that  kad  to  Petra  was,  that 
▼e  had  soddenly  leit  the  desert  Inatead  of  the  abso- 
Inte  nakedneaa  of  the  Sinaitic  yallejrs,  we  found  our- 
Klyes  waUdng  on  grass,  sprinkled  with  fiowers,  and  the 
lerel  platforma  on  each  side  were  fiUed  with  sprouting 


córa;  and  this  continues  through  the  whole  descent  to 
Petra,  and  in  Petra  itself.  The  next  peculiarity  was 
when,  aiter  having  left  the  summit  of  the  pass,  or  after 
descending  from  Mount  Hor,  we  found  ourselves  insensi- 
bly  encircled  with  rocks  of  deepening  and  decpening 
red.  Red,  indeed,  even  from  a  distance,  the  mountaina 
of '  red'  Edom  appear,  but  not  morę  so  than  the  granite 
of  Sinai ;  and  it  is  not  till  one  is  actually  in  the  midst 
of  them  that  this  red  becomes  crimson,  and  that  the 
wonder  of  the  Petra  colors  fully  displays  itselT'  (^Sin,  and 
Pailp.88).  The  rayines  which  interaect  these  sand- 
stone mountains  are  very  remarkable.  Take  them  as  a 
whole,  there  is  nothing  like  them  in  the  world,  especial- 
ly  thoee  near  Petra.  "  You  descend  from  wide  downa 
.  .  .  and  before  you  opena  a  deep  deft  between  rocka  of 


Ravine  in  Idumiea. 

red  sandstone  rising  perpendicularly  to  the  height  of 
one,  two,  or  three  hundred  feet.  This  b  the  SiŁ  .... 
Follow  me,  then,  down  this  magnificent  gorge— the  most 
magnificent,  beyond  all  doubt,  which  I  have  ever  beheUL 
The  rocks  are  almost  precipitous,  or  rather  they  would 
be  if  they  did  not,  like  their  brethren  in  all  this  region, 
over]ap,  and  crumble,  and  crack,  as  if  they  would  crash 
over  you"  (ib.  p.  90).  Such  are  the  ravine8  of  Idumasa, 
and  the  dark  openings  of  the  numerous  tombs  and  grot- 
toca  which  dot  their  sides;  and  the  sculptured  facades 
here  and  there  hewn  out  in  their  gorgeously  colored 
cUffs  add  vastly  to  their  picturesque  grandeur.  The 
average  elevation  of  the  sandstone  rangc  is  about  2000 
feet.  Immediately  on  its  eastem  side,  and  indeed  so 
close  to  it  as  to  make  up  part  of  one  great  rangę,  is  a 
parallel  ridge  of  limestone,  attaining  a  somewhat  high- 
er  eIevation,  and  extending  unbroken  far  to  the  north 
and  south.  The  latter  sinka  with  a  gentle  slope  into 
the  desert  of  Arabia.  The  deep  valley8  and  the  litUe 
terraces  along  the  mountain  sides,  and  the  broad  downa 
upon  their  summits,  are  covered  with  ricb  soil,  in  which 
trees,  shmbs,  and  fiowers  grow  luxuriantly.  While 
Edom  is  thus  wild,  mgged,  and  almost  inaccessible,  the 
deep  glens  and  fiat  terraces  along  the  mountain  sides 
are  covered  with  rich  soil,  from  which  trees,  shmbs,  and 
fiowers  now  spring  up  luxuriantly.  No  contrast  could 
be  greater  than  that  between  the  bare,  parched  pkins 
on  the  east  and  west,  and  the  mddy  cliflfs,  and  verdant,^ 
fiower-spangled  glens  and  terraces  of  Edom.  This  ii-* 
Instrates  Bibie  topography,  and  reconciles  seemingly 
disoordant  statements  in  the  sacred  volume.  While 
the  posterity  of  Esau  dwelt  amid  rocky  fastnesses  and 
on  mountain  heights,  making  their  houses  like  the 
eyriea  of  eaglea,  and  living  by  their  aword  (Jer.  xlix, 


IDUMiEA 


4^0 


IGNATIUS 


16 ;  Gen.  xxvii,  40),  yet  Isaac,  in  his  piophetic  bleseiiig, 
promifled  his  disappointed  bou  that  his  dwelling  shouM 
be  *<  of  the  fatness  of  the  esrth,  and  of  the  dew  of  heav- 
en  fipom  above"  (Gen.  xxvii,  39).  But  many  critics  arc 
of  opinion  (e.  g.  Yeter,  De  Wette,  GeddesjYon  Bohlen) 
that  *^9^1Ś^  should  there  be  rendered  fnm,  I  e.  "far 
away  from,  or  destitute  of,''  the  fatness  of  the  earth,  etc. ; 
and  it  is  immediately  added,  <<  for  thou  shalt  live  by  thy 
sword  ;**  and  it  does  not  appear  that  Idumna  was  ever 
particularly  noted  for  its  fertihty.  Some  other  paasages 
of  Scripture  are  also  illustrated  by  a  glance  at  the  tow- 
ering  precipices  and  peaks  of  Edom.  The  border  of  the 
Amorites  was  from  **  the  ascent  of  soorpions  (^4  łroMim), 
from  the  rock"— that  is,  from  the  rocky  boundary  of 
Edom  (Judg.  i,  SC).  We  read  that  Amaziah,  afler  the 
oonquest  of  Seir,  took  ten  thousand  of  the  captires  to 
the  "  top  of  the  cliff,*'  and  thence  cast  them  down,  dash- 
ing  them  all  to  picces  (2  Chroń,  xxv,  11, 12). 

5.  Present  State  o/ the  Country, — Idumsea,  once  so  rich 
in  its  flocks,  so  strong  in  its  fortresses  and  rock-hewn 
cities,  so  extensive  in  its  comroercial  relations,  so  re- 
nowned  for  the  architectural  splendor  of  its  temples  and 
palaces— is  now  a  deserted  and  desohite  wildemess.  Its 
whole  popnlation  is  oontained  in  some  three  or  four  mis- 
erable  villages;  no  merchant  would  now  dare  to  enter  its 
borders;  its  highways  are  untrodden,  its  cities  arc  all  in 
ruins.  The  predictions  of  God*s  Word  have  been  fulfiUed 
to  the  very  lettor  (see  Estlflnder,  Yaticima  JesaitB  in 
IdtuncBoa,  Aboce,  1825).  "■  Thoms  shall  oome  up  in  her 
palaces,  nettles  and  brambles  in  the  fortresses  thereof. 
.  .  .  When  the  whole  earth  rejoioeth  I  will  make  thee 
desolate.  ....  Thou  shalt  be  desolate,  O  Mount  Seir, 
and  all  Idumiea,  even  all  of  it.  .  .  .  Edom  shall  be  a  des- 
olation ;  every  one  that  goeth  by  it  shall  be  astonished' 
(Isa.  xxxiv,  13 ;  Ezek.  xxxv,  14 ;  Jer.  xlix,  17).  Idumea 
is  now  divided  into  two  districts,  J«6a/,  including  the 
Dorthem  aection  as  far  as  wady  el-Ghuweir,  and  Esk- 
Sherah^  embracing  the  southem  part  (Burckhardt,  Trav. 
in  Ssfriot  p.  410;  Robinson,  Bib.  Res.  ii,  154).  Burck- 
hardt raentions  a  third  district,  Jebał  Jlesma ;  but  Rob- 
inson says  that  though  there  is  a  sandy  tract,el-Hismah, 
with  mountains  around  it,  on  the  east  of  Akabah,  it  does 
not  constitute  a  scparate  diyision.  The  site  of  the  an- 
ćlent  capital  Bozrah  is  now  roarked  by  the  smali  village 
of  Busaireh,  and  Petra,  the  Nabothsaan  capital,  is  well 
known  as  wady  Musa. 

The  whole  of  this  region  is  at  present  occupied  by 
yarious  tribes  of  Bedouin  Arabs.  The  chief  tńbe  in  the 
Jebał  is  the  Hejaya,  with  a  branek  of  the  Kaabineh, 
while  in  esk-Sherah  they  are  all  of  the  nuroerous  and 
poweiful  tribe  of  the  Haweitat,  with  a  few  independent 
allies.  The  Bedouins  in  Idumsa  have  of  late  yean 
been  partially  subject  to  the  pacha  of  Egypt,  paying  an 
annual  tribute,  which,  in  the  case  of  the  Beni  Sukhr,  is 
one  camel  for  two  tents.  The  fellahin,  or  peasants,  are 
half  Bedouin,  inhabiting  the  few  yillages,  but  dwelling 
also  in  tents ;  they  too  pay  tribute  to  the  £g3rptian  gov- 
emment,  and  fumish  supplies  of  grain. 

6.  The  character  of  the  Edomites  was  drawn  by  Isaac 
in  his  prophetic  blessing  to  Esau — *^  By  thy  sword  shalt 
thou  live"  (Greń.  xxvii,  40).  War  and  rapine  were  the 
only  professions  of  the  Edomites.  By  the  sword  they 
got  Mount  Seir — by  the  sword  they  exterminated  the 
Horitcs— by  the  sword  they  long  battled  with  their 
brethren  of  Israel,  and  iinally  broke  off  their  yoke— by 
the  sword  they  won  Southem  Palestine — and  by  the 
sword  they  peiformed  the  last  act  in  their  long  historie 
drama,  massacred  the  guards  in  the  Tempie,  and  pillaged 
the  city  of  Jerusalem. 

Little  is  known  of  their  religion,  but  that  little  shows 
them  to  have  been  idolatrous.  It  is  probable  that  £sau'8 
mairiagc  with  the  "  daughters  of  Ganaan,"  who  ^  were 
a  grief  of  mind"  to  his  father  and  mother  (Gen.  xxvi, 
84, 85),  ioduced  him  to  embrace  their  religion ;  and  when 
Esau  and  his  followers  took  possession  of  Mount  Seir, 
they  seem  to  have  foUowed  the  practice  common  among 
andent  nations  of  adopting  the  country'8  gods,  for  we 


read  that  Amaziah,  king  of  Judah,  after  his  oopąneit  a( 
the  Edomites,  "  brought  the  gods  of  the  chikiren  of 
Seir,  and  set  them  up  to  be  his  gods"  (2  Chroń.  xxt,14, 
15, 20).  Josephus  also  refers  both  to  the  idols  (one  of 
which  he  named  Kou)  and  priests  of  the  Idamcani 
(i4«/.xv,17,9). 

7.  Lft/fra/urf«— With  req)ect  to  the  striking  fulfilment 
of  the  prophetic  denunciations  upon  Edom,  we  need 
only  refer  the  leader  to  the  well-known  work  of  Keith, 
who  firequently  errB,  however,  in  straining  the  sense  of 
prophecy  beyond  its  legitimate  import,  as  well  as  in  seek- 
ing  out  too  literally  minutę  an  accomplishment.  On 
Idunuea  generally,  see  C.  B.  Michaelis,  Dit.  De  A  nApau, 
Idummor,  Iliat,  in  Pott  and  Ruperti's  SyUoge  Ccmmat, 
Thtoloffic  part  vi,  p.  121 ;  J.  D.  Michadią  Comnent,  ót 
Troglodyiia  SetrUis^  in  the  Syntagma  CommenU^  part  i, 
p.  194.  For  the  ancient  geography,  Re]and's  Palmstina ; 
ForBter's  Geography  o/ Arabia;  Kitter'8  Palastima  md 
Syrien.  For  the  history  and  commerce,  Nolde^  //tiT. 
Idumaa^  Frank.  1726 ;  Vinccnt's  Commerce  and  Nań' 
gation  ofthe  AncieniSy  vol.  ii.  For  modem  geognphv, 
the  trayeLs  of  Burckhardt,  Laborde,  Wilson,  Stanley, 
and  Porter*8  IIandb./or  Syria  andPaL  ;  but  espedally, 
Sketchet  of  Idumea  and  itg  preaetd  fnhabitcmts,  by  Dr.  E. 
Robinson,  in  the  A  mer.  BUt.  Bepository  for  April,  1833, 
p.  247,  and  his  Bib.  Betearchetf  ii,  551.~Kitto;  Smith. 
See  Edomitb,  eto. 

IdnmaB^an  ( *lSovfAaXoc),  an  inhabitant  of  the  land 
of  Idunuea  (q.  v.)  (2  Mace.  x,  15,  IG). 

I''gal  (Heb.  Yigał%  ^^y^t  arenger),  the  name  of  three 
men. 

1.  (Sept,  'lyoA,  Vulg.  Tgal,  Eng.  Yers.  **  IgaL")  Soa 
of  Joseph,  and  commissioner  on  the  part  of  lasachar  io 
explore  the  land  of  Canaan  (Numb.  xiii,  7).  He  of 
oourse  pcrished  with  his  nine  falsehearted  companioni 
on  their  return  (Numb.  xiv,  37).     B.C  1657. 

2.  (Sept.  'lyaa\  Vulg.  Tgaal,  A.  V. « IgaL")  Son  of 
Nathan  of  Zobah,  and  one  of  David*8  famous  waniors 
(2  Sam.  xxiii,  36).  B.a  1046.  In  the  parallel  list  of  1 
Chroń,  the  name  is  given  as  "Joef  the  brother  of  Ka- 
than**  (xi,  38,  'I uti\).  Kennioott,  afler  a  minutę  exaBi- 
ination  of  the  passage,  both  in  the  original  and  in  the 
ancient  version8,  deddes  in  favor  of  the  latter  as  moat 
likely  to  be  the  genuine  text  (2)u»ffY(^ton,p.212>214> 

3.  (Sept.  'Iuri\  Vulg.  Jegaal,  A.  V.  « IgeaL")  One 
of  the  Bons  of  Shemaiah,  of  the  descendants  of  Zembba- 
bel  (1  Chroń,  iii,  22).  The  number  "  six''  there  given  is 
that  of  the  grandchildrcn  of  Shechaniah  (see  Stiong^i 
ffarm.  and  Erpos.  of  the  Gotp.  p.  17).     KC  antc  406w 

Igdali''ah  (Heb.  Yigdalyah',  but  only  in  the  pio- 
longedform,  Yigdalya'hVf^tV^h'^^'^,'whom  Jekwah  tnH 
make  great;  Sept  ro^oXiac,  Vulg.  Jegedalia\  the  father 
of  Hanan,  into  the  chamber  of  which  latter  Jeremish 
brought  the  Rechabites  to  propose  the  test  of  their  tem- 
perance  (Jer.  xxxv,  4).     B.C  antę  606. 

Ig'e&l  (1  Chroń,  iii,  22).  See  Igal  3. 
Ignatian  Bpistles.  See  Ignatius  op  AmnociL 
Ignatius  OF  Antioch,  one  ofthe  apoetolical  fathcn 
(q.  V.),  called  also  Theophonu  (o  Ołofópoc),  a  title  whkh 
he  explained  to  the  emperor  Trajan  as  mean!ng  "ooe 
who  has  Christ  in  his  heart"  We  have  no  tnostworthy 
accounts  of  the  life  and  ministry  of  Ignatiua.  The  chief 
authority  is  the  Marłyritim  IgnatU  (see  below),  but  evcn 
thoee  who  assert  the  genuineness  of  that  work  admit 
that  it  is  greatly  interpolated.  There  are  8ever«l  ud- 
supported  stories  in  the  fathers,  e.  g.  that  Ignatins  wa 
the  child  whom  Christ  took  into  his  arras  (Mark  ix.  86), 
that  he  had  seen  Christ,  etc  Abulpharagius  {Dynase. 
vii,  75,  ed.  Pococke,  1663)  was  understood  to  assert  that 
Ignatius  waa  bom  at  Nura,  in  Sardinia  or  Cappadoda, 
but  Mr.  Cureton  (see  below)  shows  that  the  wnrds  used 
have  no  such  reference.  The  3fartyrutm  (c.  8)  asserti 
that  he  was,  along  with  Polycarp,  a  hearer  of  St  Johik 
Chryaoetom  says  that  he  was  nominał  bishop  of  Antioch 
by  the  layiag  on  of  the  hands  of  the  apostles  themadTcą 


IGNATIUS 


491 


IGNATIUS 


bnt  Eosebios  fixes  the  datę  of  his  ordination  at  A.D.  69, 
irhen  sevenl  of  the  apostles  were  dead.  Aooofding  to 
the  same  hiatorian,  he  was  the  second  suocoasor  of  St. 
Pani,  £voditłB  haviiig  been  the  finL  The  Apostolic 
Cofudtntions,  on  the  other  hand,  aay  that  Ignatios  and 
ETodius  held  the  oflke  together,  EvodiuB  by  appoint*- 
ment  fiom  Peter,  Ignatios  iiom  PauL  So  say,  aiso,  Bap 
lonios  and  Natalis  Alexander,  making,  boweTer,  E  rodius 
bisbop  of  the  Jewa,  and  Ignatios  of  the  Gentile&  **  Of 
the  episoopate  of  Ignatios  we  know  littłe.  He  appean 
10  hive  been  oyer-eamest  in  insisting  upon  the  prerog^ 
atives  of  the  cle^y,  especially  the  bishops.  The  Mar- 
tjfrium  Itptatii  represents  him  as  anxioos  for  the  stead- 
faitness  of  his  flock  during  the  peneention  said  to  hare 
taken  place  in  Domitian^s  reign,  and  inceasant  in  watch- 
ing  and  prajer  and  in  instrocting  his  people,  fearing 
lest  the  morę  ignorant  and  timid  among  them  ahould 
(all  away.  On  the  ceaaation  of  the  peraecution  he  re- 
joieed  at  the  Uttle  injory  the  chorch  at  Antioch  had 
tosUined.  When  the  empeior  Trajan,  elated  with  łua 
Tktofies  orer  the  Dactana  and  other  nations  on  the  Da- 
mbian  frontier,  began  to  peraecute  the  Choich,  the  anx- 
iety  of  Ignatios  was  renewed,  and,  eager  to  avert  the 
Tiolence  of  peraecution  from  hia  ilock,  and  to  obtain  the 
crown  of  martyidom,  he  offered  himaelf  aa  a  rictim,  and 
was  bconght  before  the  empeior,  then  at  Antioch  on  his 
way  to  the  eastem  frontier  to  attack  the  Armenians  and 
Parthiana.  The  conference  between  Trajan  and  the 
bUłłop  is  given  in  the  Mcartyrium  Ignaiii;  it  ended  in 
an  order  of  the  emperor  that  Ignatios  shoold  be  taken 
to  Rom3,  and  there  thrown  to  the  wild  beaata.  Ile  was 
led  thither  by  a  iong  and  tedioos  ro^^te,  bot  was  allowed 
to  hare  communication  with  his  feUow-Christians  at 
the  plaoes  at  which  he  atopped.  He  was  thrown  to  the 
vild  beaata  in  the  Roman  amphitheatre,  at  the  feaat  dis- 
tiagoiahed  aa  i|  rpuTKatitKonij  *  the  feast  of  the  thir^ 
teenth'  (Smith,  DicL  of  CUm.  Antią.  8.v.  Satomalia). 
Soch  parts  of  him  as  remained  were  coUeci.-d  by  his 
somwing  fKenda^  and  taken  back  to  Antioch,  where  in 
Jen>nie*s  time  they  wers  resting  in  the  cemetery  outside 
the  gate  toward  Daphne.  From  thence  they  were  re- 
mored  by  the  emperor  Theodosios  U  to  the  Chorch  of 
Ignatios  (previoasly  known  as  the  lychieum,  or  Tempie 
of  Fortone),  in  the  city  of  Antiooh  (Evagr.  //ta/.  Ecd,  i, 
1(S).  Their  aobaeąuent  remoyala  are  oncertain.  The 
martyrdom  of  St.  Ignatioa  ia  commemorated  by  the  Bo- 
naa  Chorch  on  the  lat  of  Febroary;  by  the  Greek 
Church  on  the  20Łh  of  December,  the  correct  anniver- 
tary  of  hia  martyzdom."  The  year  of  Ignatiaa'a  death 
bas  been  mnch  diapoted.  Many  of  the  best  writen 
(foUowing  the  Martyrium  fgmUu)  pUce  it  in  A.D.  107 ; 
but,  aa  it  ia  now  gonerally  oonceded  that  Trajan  did  not 
▼iait  the  East  till  1 14,  and  as  he  probably  apent  the  win> 
ter  114-115  at  Antioch,  the  beat  aitics  agree  on  A.D.  115 
aa  the  most  probable  datę. 

Epistles  of  IgnaUus.—On  his  way  from  Antioch  to 
Bome,  Ignatioa  ia  aaid  to  hare  written  aeren  epistles. 
Theae  arc  enumerated  both  by  Eoseblos  (^Hitł,  EecL  iii, 
«)  and  Jerome  {De  Viri»  lUiutr.  c.  16).  At  present, 
howerer,  there  are  filteen  epistles  extant,  all  ascribed  to 
Ignatioa  Seven  of  these  are  considered  by  many  to  be 
gennme,  namely,  1.  Ilpbc  '£^f<rJovc,  Ad  Ephetiotf  2. 
Mayvif(ric0tfiv,  Ad  Magnetianos;  8.  TpaXXmvotc,  Ad 
TraBtmoi;  4.  np6c*PufŁaiovc,AdRomanos;  &  4»tXa- 
iiX^v<nv,AdPhUadelpkau>9;  6.  ^/wpuaiotCtAdSmyr- 
aoof ;  and,  7.  IIpoc  no\vicctpwoVt  A d  Pofyccurpufn,  The 
tiUea  of  these  epistles  agree  with  the  enomeration  of  Eo- 
aebioa  and  Jerome.  There  are  foond  two  reoenaiona  of 
tbem— a  kmger,  now  regarded  as  an  interpolated  one, 
fint  p^)lished  by  Pacaeos  (1567),  and  a  shorter  form, 
which  ia  considered  as  tolerably  uncorrupted.  Many 
4»bt  the  genoinenesB  of  either  (aee  bekm).  Two  an- 
oentLatin  versions  are  extant,  corresponding  in  a  great 
d^gree  to  the  two  forms  or  recensions  of  the  Greek  text : 
the  Iszger,  known  as  the  comraon  (puiffaia)  yeraion,  the 
other  fint  discorered  and  poblished  by  arehbishop  Usher 
(1614)  (see  bek>w).    The  epistles  to  the  Ephesians,  Bo- 


mansy  and  Polycarp  were  pnblished,  with  a  translatioa, 
in  a  still  shorter  Syriac  veraion,  by  Coreton  (1845). 
Many  of  the  interpolationa  foond  in  the  larger  form  are 
of  paaaagea  from  the  N.  T. 

Fiye  other  epiatlea,  thoogh  extant  in  Greek,  are  re- 
garded by  nearly  all  daaaea  of  critica  aa  aporiona,  name- 
ly, 8.  npóc  Mapiav  ilc  'Stdiro\tv  tĄv  Trpoc  tw  Łac^, 
or  TLpŁc  Mapiay  Kao9o&>XAnyi/,  or  U  Ka90bri\wv,  or 
Kaorof  aXirtv,  or  U  KaerraSoAoił/,  A  d  Mariom,  Neapo^ 
Hm,  qua  eat  ad  Zarbum,  or  Ad  Mariom  Cassobolitam, 
▼ariooaly  written  CaatabaŁiUan,  ot  CaitabcUenseni,  or  ex 
CouobeUtj  or  Chassaoboiorum,  or  Ckasabohrtan,  or  Cas' 
tabohrum;  9.  Ilpóc  robę  *v  Tapotf,Ad  Taramtet;  10. 
Ilp6c  *Avrioxtlc$  Ad  Aniiochenos ;  11.  Upbc  "Hfnapa, 
SiÓKoyop  'Avrtoxtiac,  Ad  Neronem  Diaconum  Anti^ 
ochia  f  12.  Upóc  ^tXiinnioiovc,  A  d  PhUipperues,  Some 
oopiea  add  to  the  title  of  thia  laat  epistle  tlie  words  wcpt 
BaTTrifffAaToc,  De  Baptitmate,  an  addition  which  by  no 
meana  describes  the  oontents.  Of  four  of  theae  apnrioos 
epistles  two  andent  Latin  rersions  are  extant,  the  com- 
mon  yersion,  and  that  poblished  by  Uahcr.  Of  that  to 
the  Philippians  there  ia  bot  one  yeraion,  namely,  the 
common.  The  epistle  to  Polycarp  in  the  common  Latin 
yersion  is  defectiye,  oontaining  only  aboot  one  third  of 
what  ia  in  the  Greek  text  There  ia  alao  cxtant,  both 
in  the  Greek  and  in  the  two  Latin  reraiona,  an  epiatle 
of  Mary  of  CasaobeUe  (called  alao  HfiooiiKuroc,  Proee^ 
bfia)  to  Ignatios,  to  which  his  letter  profeases  to  bo  au 


The  remaining  three  epistles  ascribed  to  Ignatios  ara 
foond  only  in  Latin.  They  are  yery  short,  and  hare 
Iong  been  giyen  op  as  sporions.  They  are,  18.  S.  Joamii 
Evanffeii$ta;  li.  Ad  £undem;  and,  15.  Beata  YirffinL 
With  theae  is  foond  a  letter  of  the  Yirgin  to  Ignatios, 
Beata  Virgo  Tffnatio,  profeaaing  to  be  an  anawer  to  his 
letter.     This  also  is  giyen  op  as  sporious. 

The  oontroyeray  respecting  the  genoineness  of  these 
writings  began  at  an  early  period.  In  A.D.  1495  the 
three  Latin  epistles  and  the  letter  of  the  Yirgin  were 
printed  at  Paris,  sobjoined  to  the  Vita  et  Procetm*  3, 
TkonuB  Cantuarentis  Martyrit  super  Libertaie  Ecdeti- 
asticiu  In  A.D.  1498,  three  yeais  after  the  appearance 
of  theae  Ictters,  another  collection,  edited  by  J.  Faber,  of 
Staples  (Stapolensis),  was  printed  at  Paris  in  foliO)  con- 
taining  the  common  Latin  yersion  of  eleven  letters,  that 
of  Mary  of  CasaobeUe  not  being  among  them.  They  were 
pobliahed  with  aome  of  the  worka  ascribed  to  Dionysios 
Areopagita  and  an  epistle  of  Polycarp.  These  eleyen 
epistles  were  reprinted  atyen.1502;  Paris,  1515;  Basel, 
1520;  and  Strasborg,  1527.  In  1516  the  preceding  foor- 
teen  epiatlea,  with  the  addition  of  the  letter  to  Mary  of 
Caaaobelc,  were  edited  by  Symphorianoa  Champcrioa  of 
Lyons,  and  poblished  at  Paris  in  4to,  with  aeyen  letters 
of  SL  Antony,  commonly  called  the  Great.  In  A.D. 
1557,  the  twdrc  epiatlea  of  Ignatioa,  in  Greek,  were  pob- 
liahed by  Yalentinoa  Paoeoa,  or  Pacaeos,  in  8vo,  at  DiUin- 
gen,  in  Soabia  on  the  Danobe,  from  an  Aogsborg  MS. 
They  were  reprinted  at  Paris,  1558,  with  critical  emen- 
dations.  The  same  twelre  Greek  epistles,  from  another 
MS.  from  the  library  of  Gaspar  a  Nydpryck,  were  pnb- 
lished by  Andreas  Gesner,  with  a  Latin  yersion  by  Jo- 
aanes  Bronner,  Zttrich,  1559,  folio.  In  these  editions 
the  Greek  text  of  the  seyen  epistles  was  giyen  in  the 
larger  form,  the  shorter  form,  both  in  Greek  and  Latin, 
being  as  yet  undiscoyered.  The  genoineness  of  these 
remains  was  now  called  in  qoestion.  Tho  aothors  of 
the  Centuria  Magdeburgentet  were  the  iirat  to  expre88 
their  doobts,  thoogh  with  caotion  and  moderation.  Cal- 
yin,  in  his  Inetitutiones  (i,  8),  declared  that  **  nothing 
coold  be  more  silly  than  the  stoff  (nanue)  which  had 
been  brooght  oot  onder  the  name  of  Igiiatius,  and  ren- 
dered  the  impodence  of  thoec  persona  more  insuffera- 
ble  who  had  set  themaclyes  to  deceive  people  by  soch 
phantoms  (/arwa)."  The  controversy  grew  warm,  the 
Roman  writers  and  the  Epiacopalians  commonly  con- 
tending  for  the  genoineness  of  at  least  a  psrt  of  the  epis- 
tles^ and  the  Ptesbyteiians  denjing  iL    The  three  epis- 


IGNATIUS 


492 


IGNAHUS 


tles  not  extant  in  Greek  were  the  fint  giv«n  np,  but  the 
rest  were  stoutly  oontended  for.  Seyeral,  howeyer,  dis- 
Łinguished  between  the  seyen  enumerated  by  Eusebiiis 
and  the  rest,  and  some  contended  that  even  those  which 
were  genuine  were  interpolated.  While  the  coutrorersy 
was  in  this  Btate^Yedelius,  a  profesBor  at  Geneya,  pub- 
lished  an  edition  (S.  IgnaiH  qua  eztant  OmnioLy  Geneya, 
1623,  4to)  in  which  the  seyen  genuine  were  arranged 
apart  from  the  other  fiye  epbtles;  he  marked,  also,  in 
the  genuine  epistles,  the  parta  which  he  regarded  as  in- 
terpoUtions.  In  1644  archbishop  Usher'8  (4to,  Oxford) 
edition  of  the  epistles  of  Poiycarp  and  Ignatius  appeaied. 
It  contained,  1.  Polycarpuma  Epistolarum  Ignatianarum 
Syiloge  (Polycarp'8  GoUection  of  the  Epistles  of  Ignar 
tius),  containing  Polycarp'8  epistle  to  the  Philippians 
and  8ix  of  the  suppoeed  genuiue  epistles  of  Ignatius ;  2. 
Epistoła  B,  Iffnatio  adscripta  a  Media  jEtatia  Grmds 
Sex  (Six  Epistles  ascribed  to  St.  Ignatius  by  the  Greeks 
of  the  Middle  Age).  llłe  epistle  of  Poiycarp  was  in- 
duded  in  this  dass,  with  the  fiye  spurious  epistles  ex- 
tant  in  Greek.  The  common  Latin  yersion  was  alao 
printed  with  these  in  parallel  columns,  and  the  three 
epistles  which  are  extant  only  in  Latin  were  subjoined; 
8.  A  Latin  yersion  of  eleyen  epistles  (that  to  the  Philip- 
pians being  omitted)  from  ICkk^  two  MSS.  obtained  by 
Usher,  and  now  first  printed.  This  corresponds,  in  the 
maili,  to  the  shorter  tcxt  of  the  so-called  genuine  epis- 
tles. The  work  of  Usher  contains  alao  a  yaluable  intro- 
duction  and  notes  to  the  epistles  of  Ignatius  and  Poiy- 
carp, the  Apoetolical  Constitutions,  and  the  Canons 
ascribed  to  Clcment  of  Romę.  In  1646  the  epistles  of 
Ignatius  were  pubUshed  by  Isaac  Yoasius  (4to,  Amst.), 
lirom  a  MS.  in  the  Medicean  Library  at  Florence.  The 
MS.,  which  is  not  aocurately  written,  and  is  mutilated 
at  the  end,  is  yaluable  as  the  only  one  containing  the 
shorter  reccnsion  of  the  genuine  epistles ;  it  wants,  how- 
eyer, that  to  the  Romans,  which  was  giyen  by  Yossius 
in  the  longer  form,  as  in  the  former  editions.  The  fiye 
spurious  epistles,  and  that  of  Mary  of  Cassobelie  to  Igna- 
tius, from  the  Medicean  MS.,  the  text  of  which  d^ers 
materially  from  that  preyiously  published;  the  thiee 
Latin  epistles;  Usher's  Latin  yersion  of  the  eleyen 
Greek  epistles;  and  the  common  yersion  of  that  to  the 
Philippians,  were  all  giyen  by  Yossius.  In  1647  Usher 
published  his  Appettdix  Ignaticma,  containing  the  Greek 
text  of  the  seyen  epistles,  and  two  Latin  yersions  of  the 
Martyrium  Ignatiu  He  gave  the  Medicean  text  of  8ix 
of  the  epistles;  that  to  the  Romans  was  the  common 
text,  with  the  interpolations  expunged,  as  determined 
by  a  coUation  of  the  epistle  contained  in  the  Mariyri- 
umy  both  in  the  Greek  of  Symeon  Metaphrastes  and  the 
Latin  yersion  publbhed  by  Usher.  After  the  oontro- 
yersy  had  been  carried  on  for  some  time,  and  great  pcog- 
ress  had  been  madę  towards  the  settlement  of  the  text, 
the  most  formidable  attack  on  the  genuinencss  of  the 
epistles  was  madę  by  Dailló  (Dallcus),  one  of  the  most 
eminent  of  the  French  Protestants,  in  his  work  De  JScr^ 
tU  qum  mb  Bionysii  Areopagitce  et  Ignatii  Antiodieni 
drcumferenłur  Libri  duo  (Gen.  1666, 4to).  The  worka 
of  Ignatius  form  the  subject  of  the  second  book.  This 
attack  of  Daille  called  forth  tho  Ywdicice  Ignatianm  of 
bishop  Pcarson  (Cambridge,  1672, 4to),  which  was  long 
supposcd  to  haye  settled  the  contioyers}'.  But  it  has 
recently  been  rcopcncd  with  fresh  yigor  and  interesL 
Archbishop  Usher,  in  his  edition  of  tho  Igiuitian  Epis- 
tles published  at  Oxford  in  1644,  declared  that  he  could 
not  yenture  to  promise  that  the  genuine  Ignatius  could 
be  recoyered  without  the  aid  of  another  Greek  text, 
which  he  hoped  to  obtain  from  a  MS.  in  the  Medicean 
Library  at  Florence,  or  at  least  without  the  aid  of  a 
Syiiac  oopy,  which  he  did  not  deą»air  of  procuring  from 
Borne.  The  Medicean  MS.  was  published,  but  the  difii- 
culties  remained  the  same.  Tho  Syriac  yersion,  which 
was  thcn  looked  to  as  alTording  tho  only  probable  dew 
to  the  soltttion,  duded  the  most  diligcnt  and  anxious 
search  for  a  period  of  200  years.  It  was  rcserycd  for 
the  Rey.  William  Cureton,  a  canon  of  Westminster,  to 


supply  this  dew.    Mr.  Cureton  disooveved,  amonf^  t 
most  important  coUection  of  Sjniac  MS&,pTOci]xed  tor 
the  British  Museum  by  archdeaoon  Tattam,  in  the  yar 
1843,  from  the  monastery  of  St.  Mary  Ddpara  of  the 
Syiians,  in  the  Desert  of  Nitria,  three  entii«  epistka, 
which  he  published  in  the  year  1845.     This  paUicatian 
naturally  exdted  gieat  attention  on  the  put  of  those 
who  fdt  an  interest  in  the  subject,  and  called  forth  8&- 
yere  strictnies  from  some  who  seemed  to  consider  that 
to  remoye  any  part  of  the  seyoi  epistles  of  Ignatius  wts 
to  take  away  so  much  fiom  the  foimdationa  of  episco- 
pacy.    The  form  which  the  oontioy«rsy  now  took  kd 
to  the  puhlication,  in  1849,  by  Mr.  Cureton,  of  the  Corpn$ 
IffnaUamtm,  in  which  the  editor  brought  together  a  con- 
pkte  CoUeetion  of  ihe  Ignatian  Epittle»-'--gemimty  iaier^ 
pokUedj  cand  spurious ;  together  teith  mtmerous  Ertrmts 
from  them,  as  cuoted  bg  Ecdesiastical  Wriiers  dbim  to 
ihe  Tenth  Centuryy  and  aocompanied  by  a  fuU  histoiy  of 
the  controyersy  lirom  its  oommeneement    Mr.  Cnreton^s 
conduńon  was  that  the  three  epistles  which  he  pub- 
lished were  the  only  genuine  productions  of  Ignatius  in 
the  series  bearing  his  name.    If  this  did  not "  take  away 
80  much  from  the  foundations  of  episcopacy,"  it  is  be- 
cause  the  supposed  testimony  of  a  most  yencrable  apos- 
tolic  father  is  not  one  of  its  foundations,  for  certainly  the 
three  letters  are  as  bare  of  prdatic  alluńon  as  any  of 
PauPs.    But  the  matter  did  not  rest  here.    Seyersl  cńt- 
ical  rcyiews  of  this  position  appeared,  the  most  important 
of  which  was  by  Uhlhcnn,  in  the  2]8t  volume  of  theZnf- 
schrifif  d,  kisi,  TheoL,  in  which  a  long  and  leamed  ex- 
amination  of  the  question,  under  the  title  Dom  YerkSU" 
niss  d.  syrischen  Reccnsion  d.  ignatiamschen  Brirfe  zu  d 
Jcurtem grieckischen,  v,  d,  AtOheniie  d,  Briefe  vherhcatpt 
(translated  into  Engliah,  in  a  somewhat  oondenaed  form, 
by  the  Rey.  Henry  Browne,  in  the  TheoL  Criiic  [1852]), 
is  entered  into,  which  finally  asserts  that  **  the  seyen  let- 
ters, according  to  the  shorter  Greek  recension,  are  the 
genuine  productions  of  Ignatius  of  Antioch.'*    Another 
Translation  of  the  Epistles  of  Ignatius  (together  irtfA 
Cłemens  BomctnuSj  Poigcarpy  and  the  Apohgies  ofJustin 
Martyr  and  TertuUUm),  with  notes,  and  an  aocoimt  of 
the  present  statc  of  the  question  respecting  the  epistles 
of  Ignatius,  by  the  Rey.  Tempie  Cheyallier,  B.D.  (8vo), 
appeared  iii  1852.    In  1859  the  questioo  was  again  opcn- 
ed,  and  again  in  the  Zeiisck^fur  hist.  TheoL,  by  Dr.  B. 
A.  Lipsius,  who^  in  a  paper  entitled  Utber  die  Aechtheit 
der  syrischen  Recension  der  ignatianischen  Briefe,  goes 
oyer  the  ground  again  with  all  the  leaming  of  his  pre- 
decessors  in  the  same  field,  but  morę  at  length,  examin- 
ing  in  detail,  and  with  great  critical  acumen,  the  aigu- 
ments  which  haye  been  adduced  by  both  sidea  in  this 
discussion.     Dr.  Lipsius  adopis  all  the  reasoning  of  the 
leamed  editor  of  the  Corpus  Ignaiiamtm,  and  aniyes  at 
the  same  conclusion,  namely,  that  the  three  letters  to 
Poiycarp,  to  the  Ephesians,  and  to  the  Romans,  in  the 
form  in  which  they  appear  in  the  Syriac  recension,  aic 
the  genuine  letters  of  Ignatius,  but  that  the  piresent  re- 
cension of  the  seyen  letters  are  from  a  later  hand,  in 
which  the  three  genuine  letters  haye  been  remodefled, 
and  to  these  three  four  new  oncs  added.    It  is  a  cimnn- 
stance  not  to  be  oyerlooked  that  this  fuli  adoption  of  Mr. 
Cureton^s  yiewshas  appeared  in  the  same  jouniał  which 
gaye  to  the  world  Uhlhom^s  lucubrations,  and  speaks 
highly  for  tho  honest  dcsirc  of  its  conductors  to  promote 
the  cause  of  truth,  and  that  ody.    Bunscn  also  adopted 
the  yiews  of  Cureton  in  his  JHe  drei  eckten  ttnd  tier 
unechłen  Bri^e  des,  Ignatius  (Hamburg,  1847,  8vo),  and 
his  condusions  haye  been  admitted  by  some  eminent 
Presbyterian  authorities  (see  B3>L  Rq>os.  3uky,  1849) ; 
but  Dr.  Killen,  the  Irish  Presbyterian,  in  hia  AncievA 
Church  (Belfast  and  N.  Y.  1859, 8yo>,  condemns  aU  the 
epistles  as  worthless  and  spurioua    He  remailcs  that  *^  it 
is  no  mean  proof  of  the  sagarity  of  the  great  Calyin  that 
upwards  of  three  hundred  years  ago  he  passed  a  sweep- 
ing  sentence  of  oondemnation  on  Uitese  Ignatian  epistles. 
At  the  time  many  were  etartled  by  the  boldneas  of  his 
langnage,  and  it  was  thought  that  he  was  somewliat  pre- 


IGNATIUS 


493 


IGNATIUS 


cipitate  in  pronaanciog  snch  a  deciuye  judgnaent.  Bat 
he  aaw  dutinctly,  and  he  therefore  spoke  fearleady. 
Tbere  ia  «  far  more  intimate  oonnecdon  than  many  are 
dispoaed  to  beliere  between  Bound  thedogy  and  sound 
oitidam,  for  a  right  knowledge  of  the  Word  of  God 
fltrengthens  the  intellactuaL  yiaion,  and  asaists  in  the 
detection  of  ezior  wherever  it  may  reveal  itaelfl  Had 
Peanon  oijoyed  the  aame  elear  yiews  of  Gospel  truth  as 
the  refocmer  of  Genera,  he  would  not  haye  waated  so 
many  precioiia  years  in  wńting  a  leamed  Tindicatlon  of 
the  noosenae  attributed  to  Ignatiua.  Calvin  knew  that 
an  apoatolic  man  must  haye  been  acquainted  with  apos- 
tolic  doctóiMy  and  he  aaw  that  theae  letten  must  haye 
been  the  prodaction  of  an  age  when  the  puie  light  of 
ChrisUanity  was  greatly  obscuied.  Hence  he  denounced 
them  80  emphatically ;  and  time  has  yerified  his  deliy- 
enmoe.  His  language  respecting  them  has  been  often 
qQoced,biit  we  fwł  we  cannot  more  appropriately  dose 
oor  obseryatłons  on  this  subject  than  by  another  repeti- 
tion  of  it,  *  Theie  is  nothing  moie  abominable  than  that 
tiash  which  is  in  drculation  under  the  name  of  Igna- 
tioa.*  ^  Dr.  Killen^s  positiye  arguments  against  the  gen- 
nineness  ofall  the  epistles  are,  1.  The  style  is  suspicious ; 
2.  The  epistles  ignore  €iod's  Word,  which  is  neyer  done 
by  any  of  the  genuine  writtngs  of  the  early  fathers;  3. 
They  contain  chranological  blunders ;  4.  They  iise  words 
in  meanings  whieh  they  did  not  aoquire  tiU  long  ailer 
the  time  of  Ignatius;  6.  They  abound  in  puerilitłes,  ya- 
pońng,  and  mysticism ;  €.  They  manifest  an  wihallowed 
and  insane  desire  for  martyrdem.  Banr  and  Hilgenfeld 
also  hołd  them  all  not  to  be  genoine,  but  think  that  the 
seyen  of  the  shorter  Greek  reoensions  were  the  first  to 
be  foiged  after  iuD.  150,  and  that  the  Syriac  three  are 
simpły  firagmentary  translations  from  the  Greek.  With 
Uhlhom  agree  alao  many  able  and  sound  critacs  of  the 
Bomaniflts  and  Protestanta,  as  Mohler,  Uefele,  and  Gie- 
seler. 

The  most  complete  edition  of  Ignatius  is  that  eon* 
tained  in  the  Patres  Aposłolici  of  Gotelerius,  the  second 
edition  of  which,  by  Le  CSerc  (Amst.  1724, 2  yols.  foUo), 
contains  all  the  genoine  and  spurious  epistles  (Greek  and 
Łatin),  with  the  epistles  of  Mary  of  CassobelflB  and  of  the 
Yirgin,  the  two  ancient  Łatin  yersions  (the  common  one 
and  Usher^s),  the  Mari^rium  Iffnatii^  the  Dissertałionea 
(L  e.  the  Introduction)  of  Usher,  the  YindicuB  of  Pear- 
son,  a  Diisertatio  da  IffHo^iams  EpistoliB  by  Le  Clerc, 
and  yariorum  notes.  A  useful  edition  of  the  genuine 
epistles,  with  those  of  Clement  of  Romę  and  Polycarp, 
and  the  Martyna  of  Ignatius  and  Polycarp,  was  pub- 
fished  by  Jacobson  (Oxford,  1838^  2  yols.  8yo).  There 
are  yerśons  in  seyeial  languages  of  modem  Europę,  in- 
duding  two  Engliah  translations,  an  old  one  by  arch- 
bishop  Wake  (Genuine  EpistU*  ofthe  ApostoUc  Fathera, 
Lond.  1693,  Syo),  and  a  modem  one  by  Clementson  (1827, 
8yo).   Wake*s  translation  has  been  repeatedly  published. 

The  Martyrium  IgnaiU,  which  is  oor  chief  authority 
lor  the  circomstances  of  Ignadus^s  death,  professes  to  be 
written  by  eye-witnesses,  the  companions  of  his  yoyage 
to  Korne,  suppoaed  to  be  Philo,  a  deacon  of  Tarsus  or 
aome  other  church  in  Cilida,  and  Rheus  Agathopus,  a 
Syrian,  who  are  mentioned  in  the  epistles  of  Ignatius 
iAdPkHaddph.(i.U',  AdSmyrneos^ciS),  Usher  adds 
to  them  a  third  person,  Gaius,  but  on  what  authority  we 
know  not,  and  Gallandios  adds  Oocus,  mentioned  by  Ig- 
natius {Ad  Bomanus,  c.  10).  The  aocount,  with  many 
interpoladons,  is  incorporated  in  the  work  of  Symeon 
Metapfarastes  (Dec.  A.D.  20),  and  a  Latin  translation 
fiom  him  u  giyen  by  Surius,  De  Prohaiu  Sancłor.  Yitist 
and  in  the  ^Gto  Sandorumy  under  the  datę  of  the  Ist  of 
Febnuuy.  The  Martyrium  was  first  printed  in  Latin  by 
arehbishop  Usher,  who  gaye  two  distinct  yersions  from 
different  MSa  The  Greek  test  was  first  printed  by 
Roinait,  in  his^cto  Martyrum  Sincera  (Par.  1689, 4to), 
from  a  MS.  in  the  Ck>lbertine  library,  and  in  a  reyised 
I  in  Le  CIerc*8  (Gotelerius.  It  is  giyen  by  Jacob- 
i  and  by  most  of  the  later  editois  of  the  epistles.  Its 
I  is  generally  recogniaedybut  it  is  thought  to 


be  interpolated.  See  the  remarks  of  Gnbe,  quoted  by 
Jacobson  at  the  end  of  the  Marłyriunu  A  consideiable 
fragment  of  an  andent  Syriac  yerńon  of  the  Martyrium 
of  Ignatius  has  been  published  by  Mr.  Cureton. 

See  Smith,  DicL  ofBiog,  and  MythaL  s.  y. ;  Gaye,  ffitt, 
IMt,  anno  117 ;  Lardner,  CredibiUty  of  Goetel  Ilistory  ; 
Edmburgh  J2er£eu7,  July,  1849;  Coleman,  ^ncićn^  Ckru- 
ttamty^  p.  197-200 ;  Bohringer,  Kirckengesch.  in  Biog,  i, 
7  sq. ;  Milman,  /.o/.  ChrisL  i,  68  Bq. ;  Neander,  CA.  Hist, 
i,  269, 295, 631 ;  Cureton,  Corjnu  IgnatUmum  (Lond.  1849, 
8yo) ;  Milton,  Prote  Worka,  i,  78  sq. ;  N,  Y.  Bemew,  i,  367 ; 
Kitto,  Joum,  8ac  Lii,  April,  1850 ;  New  Englander,  Noy. 
1849 ;  Ouarteriy  Reńew,  Dec.  1850 ;  lipsius,  in  ZeiUch. 
/  kiałor,  TheoL  1856,  Hdl  1 ;  Uhlhom,  in  Herzog  a  Real- 
EncyJdop,  yi,  623  8q. ;  BriL  and  For,  Be»,  xxxiii,  640  ac^ ; 
Am,  Preab,  Bev.  Jan.  1867,  p.  187  8q. ;  PrinceL  Bep.  1849, 
p.  378  sq. ;  Atner,  QuarL  Church  Betiew,  Jan.  1870,  p.  563 
sq.    See  abo  Epistles. 

Ignatius,  patriarch  of  Constastinople,  flouiish- 
ed  about  the  bcginning  ofthe  9th  centuiy.  The  schism 
of  the  Greek  and  Roman  churches,  which  began  under 
Photius  (q.  y.),  who  persecnted  Ignatius  and  usurped 
his  see,  giyes  importance  to  his  life.  The  foUowing  ao- 
count of  him  is  (necessarily)  chiefly  from  Roman  sourcesi 
and  must  be  taken  with  allowance.  He  was  bom  in 
799,  and  was  the  son  of  the  emperor  Michael  Curopala^ 
tes ;  his  mother,  Procopia,  was  the  danghter  of  the  em- 
peror Nicephorus.  On  the  reyolt  of  Leo  the  Amienian, 
Michael  surrendered  to  him  the  throne,  which  he  had 
occupied  for  the  short  period  of  a  year  and  nine  months 
only,  and  embraced  monastic  life.  His  sons  followed 
the  example  of  their  father,  and  the  youngest,  Nicetas, 
then  aged  fourteen,  changed  his  name  to  Ignatius.  The 
new  emperor,  in  order  not  to  be  disturbed  in  the  posses- 
sion  of  power,  separated  the  seyeral  members  of  the 
family  of  Michael,  and  caused  his  two  sons,  Eustratius 
and  Nicetas,  to  be  madę  eunuchs.  During  the  reign  of 
the  three  emperors,  Leo,  Michael  II,  and  Theophilus, 
the  young  men  were  allowed  to  enjoy  in  tninquillity 
the  monastic  life  to  which  they  had  deyoted  themselres. 
Ignatius  was  admitted  into  the  order  of  priesthood  by 
Basil,  bishop  of  Paioa,  in  the  Hellespont,  a  prelate  who 
had  suffered  great  persecution  in  opposing  the  loono- 
clasts,  and  to  whom  Ignatius  was  much  attached.  On 
the  death  of  Theophilus,  the  empress  Theodora  was  de^ 
clared  regent  in  the  name  of  her  eon,  Michael  III.  Be- 
ing  opposed  to  the  Iconoclasts,  she  banished  John,  the 
patriarch  of  Oonstantinople,  and  caused  Methodius  to 
bo  elected  in  his  place.  Four  years  after,  on  the  death 
of  Methodius,  the  patriarchal  dignity  was  bestowed  upon 
Ignatius.  But  he  did  not  long  enjoy  this  honor.  Bar- 
das,  the  brother  of  the  empress,  whom  he  had  excom- 
municated  on  acconnt  of  his  scandalous  exce88es,  haying 
obtained  conińderable  influence  on  the  mind  of  the 
3roung  emperor  Michael,  whose  yices  he  flattered  and 
encouraged,  indnced  him  to  take  the  reins  of  goyem- 
ment,  and  to  compel  his  mother  to  withdraw  to  a  con- 
yent,  and  to  accept  the  yows.  Ignatius,  when  sum- 
moned  to  lend  his  authority  to  this  unfilial  act,  did  not 
oontent  himself  with  remonstrating  against  it,  but  gaye 
a  stem  refusaL  He  was,  in  conseąuence,  banished  to  the 
isle  of  Terebinthos,  and  depriyed  of  his  see,  which  he 
had  held  for  eleyen  years.  Photius,  a  eunuch  related 
to  Bardas,  and  a  person  of  considerable  learoing,  who 
fayored  the  Iconoclasts,  was  by  the  will  of  the  emperor, 
but  withouŁ  the  oonsent  of  the  Church,  appointed  to  the 
patriarchate  of  Constantinople.  For  the  controyersy  of 
Photius  with  the  Church  of  Romę  and  its  issue,  see 
Photius.  All  means  employed  to  induce  Bardas  to  re- 
sign  remaining  inefPectlye,  his  death  was  finally  deter- 
mined  upon,  and  he  was  murdered  in  866.  Basil  the 
Macedonian  now  became  possessed  of  the  supremę  pow- 
er. One  of  the  first  acts  of  his  reign  was  to  banish 
Photius  and  recall  Ignatius,  who  was  triumphantly  re- 
instated  in  his  patriarchal  dignity  Noy.  8,  867.  At  his 
suggestion  a  oouncil  was  assembled  at  Constantinople, 
which  raoks  in  the  Roman  Church  as  the  eighth  oecu- 


IGNATIUS  LOrOLA 


494 


IH.S. 


menicaL    It  was  preaided  oyer  by  the  legate  of  pope 
AdrUn  II,  and  in  it  Photiua  and  his  partisans  were  ex- 
oommonicated,  and  their  q>imonB  condemned.    From 
this  time  Ignatius  was  allowed  to  rule  the  Greek  Chnich 
without  opposition.    He  died  Oct.  23,  878,  on  which 
ćay  the  Greek  and  Roman  choiches  atall  odebrate  his 
memory.    He  was  buried  in  the  church  of  St*  Sophia, 
but  his  remains  were  afterwazds  transfeired  to  that  of 
St*  Michael,  near  the  Boephorus.    The  details  of  his  life 
are  principally  drawn  from  Nioetas  Dayid,  who  had 
known  him  peraonally.     Ignatius  wrote  Bioc  Tap€uriov 
rov  fraTptacxov  Kaivffravrłvowiró\fwCł  the  Greek  text 
of  which  remains  unpublished,  but  a  Latin  translation 
of  it  is  to  be  foond  in  Surins,  De  probatii  Scenetorum 
YUit,  and  in  the  Acta  Scmdorum  (Feb.  26),  iii,  576  :— 
Bioc  Tov  ayiov  Nuci|^i>pov,  irarpŁapxov  Kutpcr.f  the 
Greek  text  of  which  is  contained  in  the  ii  eto  Scauto- 
rum  (March  12),  ii,  704,  Append.    He  alao  wrote  other 
works,  among  them  an  abridgment  of  fifty-three  fabłes 
ftom  Babrius  in  lambic  yenes,  each  faUe  containing 
only  four  yerses.    These  were  published  at  fint  under 
the  name  of  Gabrias,  Gabiius,  or  Babrius,  in  the  Aldine 
£iop  (yenioe,  1505),  and  afterwards  under  the  author^s 
real  name  (Ignatius  Magister),  in  Ritterhusius's  Pke- 
dnuy  and  19evelet*s  Myłholagia  Aitopiccu  —  Hoefer, 
Nouo.  Bioffr,  Ghtirak,  xxv,  795;  English  Cydopcadia; 
Smith,  Diet,  of  Biograpky ;  Moeheim,  CK  HisL  ii,  52, 
96;  Neander,a./yM^  iii,  558  są.;  Hardwicke, O. /fist. 
(Middle  Ages),  p.  195  Bq. 
Ignatius  lioyola.    See  Loyola. 
IgnlB  PargatorioB.    See  Purgatory. 
Ignorance,  the  want  of  knowledge  or  instraction. 
It  is  oflen  uscd  to  denote  illiteracy.    Bir.  Locke  obeeryes 
that  the  cauBCS  of  ignorance  are  chiefly  three :  1,  want 
of  ideas ;  2,  want  of  a  diaooverable  connection  between 
the  ideas  we  haye ;  8,  want  of  tradng  and  examining 
OUT  ideas.    As  respects  religion,  ignorance  has  been  dis- 
tinguished  into  three  sorts :  1.  An  uwincible  ignorance, 
in  which  the  will  has  no  part.    It  is  an  insult  upon  jus- 
tice  to  suppose  it  will  punish  men  because  they  were 
ignorant  of  things  which  they  were  physically  incapa- 
ble  of  knowing.     2.  There  is  a  wiifil  and  obsłinate 
ignorance;  such  an  ignorance,  far  from  exculpating, 
aggrayates  a  man's  cńmea.    8.  A  sort  of  yoluntary  ig- 
norance, which  is  ncither  entirely  wilful  nor  entirely 
inyincible,  as  when  a  man  has  the  roeans  of  knowledge, 
and  does  not  use  them. — Locke,  On  the  Under8t€tnding,  ii, 
178 ;  Groye,  Morał  PhUosophy,  ii,  26,  29,  64 ;  Watts,  On 
the  Mind;  Henderson^s  Buck,  Tkeoloff.  Diet,  s.  v.     See 
Kmowlkdoe. 


Ignorantinea  (Latin,  Fralrts  IgnorimiuB ;  French, 
Freres  Igmraniin»\  also  known  as  the  CangreffoHon  of 
Christian  Insfruction  and  Chritłian  SchooU,  is  the  name 
of  a  Jesuitical  foundation  for  the  gratnitous  instruction 
of  poor  childreu  in  sacred  as  weU  as  secular  leaming, 
which  was  founded  in  France  in  the  early  part  of  the 
18th  centuiy  (1724)  by  the  abb^  de  la  Salle.  As  the 
object  is  to  confine  the  instraction  to  such  brancbes 
as  do  not  confiict  with,  but  eyen  fayor,  the  religious 
yiews  of  the  Koman  Catholics,  yirtually  preparing  the 
young,  by  the  exclnsion  of  all  books  by  Protestants,  to 
remain  true  to  the  church  of  their  fathers,  they  haye 
gradually  been  introduced  into  eyery  Catholic  country 
of  Europę.  In  France  this  society  shared  at  the  Reyo- 
Itttion  the  fate  of  all  the  other  religious  bodies;  but, 
under  the  name  of  Brothers  of  the  Christian  Schools^ 
they  were  recalled,  and  re-established  under  Napoleon 
in  1806.  They  are  now  exceedingly  numerous  in  France, 
Italy,  and  in  some  parts  of  Bohemia  and  Gennany. 
Many  brancbes  exist  also  in  England  and  Ireland.  In 
the  lattcr  country  they  haye  large  educational  estab- 
Ushments,  with  a  senes  of  school-books  specially  design- 
ed  for  Koman  Catholics.  The  Ignorantinea  wear  a  dress 
yery  similar  to  that  of  the  Jesuits.-— Chambers,  Cydop, 
y,  517 ;  Herzog,  Recd-Encykhp.  yi,  682. 

Igumen  or  Hegumen  is  the  title  of  an  abbey  in 


the  małe  monasteries  of  the  Greek  Church,  i 
cially  in  Russia. 

Ihre,  JoHANN  YOJr,  a  Swedish  philologian,  was  bom 
March  8, 1707,  at  Lund,  and  educated  at  the  nnireni- 
ties  of  Upeala,  Greifswald,  Jena,  and  Halle.    At  the 
lastr-named  high-school  he  allerwaids  lectored  for  a  time 
on  the  Oriental  languages,  then  trayelled  extenaiyely  in 
Germany,  HoUand,  England,  and  Fncoe,  and  on  hit  re- 
turn to  his  natiye  country  was  appointed  Ubnriaa  at' 
Upsala  Uniyersity.    In  1787  he  was  appointed  prafeaor 
of  poetry,  and  the  yeu  foUowing  profcaaor  of  ihelBiic,^ 
which  he  remalned  for  forty  yean.    He  died  Noy.  26, 
1780.    He  dlstinguished  himself  greatly  by  his  thor- 
ough  inyesttgations  into  the  phiklogical  meńts  of  his 
mother  tongue,  and  by  his  labors  on  the  Gothie  yenkm 
of  Ulfilas,  the  results  of  which  are  kft  ua  in  Saipta 
cersionem  UlphUanam  et  Ung,  Mtno-^fotkieam  ittnstrmh' 
tia,  which  were  oolleeted  and  editod  by  A.  F.  BOichmg 
(BerL  1778,  4to).     This  collection  (which  ia  yery  nre, 
as  only  181  copies  were  printed)  contains,  1.  UipkUas  ił- 
lusłratuSf  a  series  of  critical  obsenrations  on  the  readingi 
of  the  Codex  A  rge/deus^  with  a  preface,  in  which  he  at- 
tempts  to  proye  <<  that  the  letters  of  the  Codex  were 
produoed  by  an  encaustic  process,  the  surface  of  the 
parehment  haying  been  oo^^ered  with  wax,  on  which 
silyer-leaf  was  laid,  and  the  fonn  of  the  letter  atamped 
thereon  with  a  hot  iron ;"  2.  Fra^menta  vers,  UlpK^  <<»" 
taining  the  portlons  of  the  Epistle  to  the  Romans  pub- 
lished by  Knittel,  with  annotations;  8.  Dissertatio  de 
origimbus  Ling,  iMt.  et  Cr.  inter  Masogołhos  reperńoh 
dis;  4.  De  rerbis  McBSogoik;  Analeeta  UlpkiL,  i^deCod. 
Aiyent,  et  litt.  Goth,,  ii, de  wmmOms  wi^jeLei  adject, Ms^ 
sogoth. ;  5.  De  Ung,  Cod,  Arg.;  S.  Specimen  Gloss.  Uh 
phiLy  cum  prafaHonSbus,    An  Appendix  to  the  woHe 
contains  tracts  by  other  wiiters.    He  wrote  also  De  «» 
LXX  inierpreium  in  N.  T.  (UpsaL  1780)  *.— /^  mmi  a<s 
centuum  Ilebraorum  (ibid.  1783).    See  Kitto,  Cgdopadia 
Bib,  LiL  ii,  877;  JOcher,  Gekhrt.  J>r.,  Adelung^s  Add, 
ii,  2270  sq. 

I.  EL  8.  is  an  inscription  or  monogram  which  has 
probably  been  used  by  the  Christian  Church  fram  an 
early  datę  among  the  sacred  S3rmbols  on  church  funii- 
ture,  and  in  paintcd  windows  of  the  house  of  God,  but 
its  use  has  by  no  means  been  oonAned  to  ecctesiasticai 
buildinga.     On  tombs,  roofs,  and  walls  of  houses,  oa 
books,  and  on  other  poeseesions  of  Christians,  this  mon- 
ogram  has  been,  and  is  eyen  now,  frequently  impmsed, 
especially  among  the  adherenta  of  the  Roman,  Greek, 
and  Anglican  churchea.     The  interpretations  which 
haye  been  giyen  of  this  mystic  title  are  threefold.    One 
is  that  they  are  the  inidals  of  the  words  "  In  Hoc  Signo^ 
borrowed  from  the  luminous  cross  which  it  is  said  wai 
miraculously  displayed  in  the  sky  before  Constantine 
and  his  army.     Others  make  them  the  initials  of  the 
words  ^  Jesus  Homimtm  Sidrator"  especially  the  J«- 
uits,  who  use  it  for  their  badge  and  motto  in  the  fonn 
l.fl) .  S. ;  and  sdll  another,  that  they  are  the  fii^t  three 
letteń  of  the  Greek  lH£OT2,  Jesus.'   This  last  opinim 
has  been  espoused  by  the  late  *<  Cambridge  Camden  So- 
ciety^ in  a  work  which  they  published  on  this  subjert: 
A  rgumenffor  the  Greek  Origin  ofłhe  Monogram  /.  Ił.  S. 
(London,  1841).     The  earliest  Christian  emblems  foond 
also  seem  to  confirm  this  opinion,  as  they  aro  in  erenr 
case  unitten  in  the  Greek  language,  and  <*  the  celebrated 
monogram  inscribed  by  Constantine*s  order  on  the  Itdu- 
rum,  or  standard  of  the  cross,  was  undoubtedly  Greek."* 
Eusebius  {Eccłes.  Hist,)y  in  describing  the  faroous  stand- 
ard, says,  **A  long  spear,  oyerlaid  with  gold,  formed  the 
flgure  of  the  cross  by  means  of  a  piece  laid  transrenelj 
oyer  it.    On  the  top  of  the  whole  was  fixed  a  crown, 
formed  by  the  intertexture  of  gold  and  precioos  Stones; 
and  on  this  two  letters  indicating  the  name  of  Christ 
symbolized  the  Sayionr^s  title  by  means  of  its  first  char- 
acters,  the  letter  P  being  intersected  by  a  X  exact]y  in 
its  centrę;  and  these  letters  the  emperor  was  in  the 
habit  of  wearing  on  his  helmet  at  a  later  period.**    In 
regaid  to  the  shape  of  the  letter  S  beii^  Roman,  and 


IIM 


405 


ILDEFONSUS 


not  Greek,  Tke  Chnrchj  a  papcr  of  the  Charch  of  Eng- 
land  in  Canada,  says,  **It  might  easily  haire  beoome  ooi^ 
ropted  (L  e.  the  Greek  S  into  a  Latin  S)— ii  wouM  not, 
indeed,  ba^e  been  intelligible  except  to  a  few  of  the  best 
scholan  uiłle«  it  were  oomipted — and  ao  could  scarcely 
bave  escaped  tzansmutation  when  the  knowlcdge  of  the 
Gieek  tongue,  which  we  are  certtfied  waa  the  case,  per- 
isbed,  or  very  nearly  so,  during  the  Middle  Ages  in  the 
Westein  Chuich."— SUunton,  £ccL  Diet.  p.  882 ;  Blunt, 
Ecciet,  Diet,  i,  875.    See  Lababujł 

ITun  (Heb.  Ipm',  D''^3?i  nan»,  as  in  Jer.  xxvi,  18, 
etc.),  the  name  of  two  placee. 

L  (SepL  Ai'fi/i,  Vulg.  lim.)  A  dty  in  the  extTeme 
sooth  of  Judah,  mentioned  between  Baalah  and  Azem 
(Josh.  XV,  29),  and  therefore  doubtless  incladed  within 
the  territory  aet  off  to  Simeon,  as  the  assodated  plaoes 
were  (Josh.  xix,  8),  which  afford  the  only  means  for  a 
ooDjectural  pońtion  nearly  midway  tW>m  the  Dead  Sea 
towards  the  Mediterranean. 

2.  (Sept.  Tai,  Yolg.  Jjeabarim^  both  reading  the  same 
as  in  the  preoedlng  verae.).  One  of  the  stationa  of  the 
bnelites  not  long  before  reaching  the  Jordan  (Nnmb. 
xxxiii,  45);  nsaally  called  folly  Ijb-abarim  (ver.44). 

Ijar.    See  Iyar. 

Ij'd-ab'arim  (Hebrew  lyeh'  ha-Abarim',  ^^:p 
C^^^Sn,  naru  ofihe  Abarinif  or  regions  beyond;  Sept. 
'Axayai,  but  in  Numb.  xxxiii,  44  simply  Fat;  Yulg. 
Jtttbarim  and  lfeabarim\  the  forty-fleventh  station  of 
the  Israelites  on  approaching  Canaan,  described  as  be- 
ing  between  Oboth  and  Dibon-gad,  "in  the  border  of 
Moab'*  (Numb.  xxxiii,  44),  or  between  Oboth  and  the 
brook  Zered,  **  m  the  wildemess  which  is  before  (i.  e. 
east  of)  Moab^  towards  the  sun-rising'*  (Numb.  xxi,  11), 
sod  theiefore  not  far  from  A  inek,  a  little  south  of  wady 
eIrAhiy,  which  forms  the  southem  boundaiy  of  the  Mo- 
sbituh  territor}',  and  lies  near  the  southem  end  of  the 
rangę  of  Abarim,  that  give  this  compound  form  to  the 
name  (omply  luf  in  Numb.  xxxiii,  44),  to  distinguish 
it  fn»i  the  lim  of  Judah  (Josh.  xv,  29).    See  Abarim. 

rjon  (Eeb.  7yon',  )W,  plaoe  of  rtcHw;  SepL  'Atv, 
Aiav,  Aiwy),  a  frontier  city  of  the  klngdom  of  Israel, 
mentioned  as  being  captured,  along  with  Abel-Beth- 
Meholah  and  other  plaoea  in  Naphtali,  first  by  Benha- 
dsd  of  Syria  (1  Kings  xv,  20;  2  Chion.  xvi,  4),  and  af- 
tenranlA  by  Tiglath-pileser  of  Assyria  (2  Kings  xv,  29). 
The  asaodated  names  and  drcumstances  render  the  sup- 
pnsition  of  Dr.  Robinson  (JUtearehea,  iii,  846)  veTy  prob- 
abtc,  that  this  locality  oorresponds  to  a  large  Tuin<-cov- 
ered  hill  caUed  Tell  Mbin  (Thomson,  Lcmd  and  Book, 
1,335},  in  the  present  Merj  A}run  (meadow  of/ountaint\ 
a  fijie  meadow  tract  between  wady  et-Teim  and  the 
Lłtanr,  north  of  Łake  Huleh  (comp.  BibUotheca  Sacra, 
18^(6,  p.  2(H,  214;  new  edition  of  Betearchee,  iii,  875; 
Scbwaiz,  Pakstinej  p.  86). 

Iken,  Konrad,  a  German  Protestant  theologian  and 
Hebraiat,  bom  at  Bremen  Dec  26,  1689,  was  professor 
of  tbeok>gy  at  the  gymnasium  of  that  city,  and  pastor 
of  one  of  the  Reformed  churches.  He  died  Jnne  80, 
1758.  Ikm  vnote,  A  niiqttitałe»  Ifebraica  (Bnm.  1730 j 
4to,  5th  ed.,  annotated  by  J.  H.  Schacht,  1810,  8vo)  :— 
Theiaunu  Nov.  TkeoUfff.-PhiloL  Diisertatumum  ereffet" 
ieantm  ex  Sfuueo  TIL  Ifascei  et  Conrad,  IkenU  (Leyden, 
1732, 2  vol8.  foL):— />e  tempore  eelebrałm  ultinuB  Cama 
patekaUś  Ckritti  (Bremen,  1785  and  1789,  8vo) ;  thU 
work  and  the  folk>wing  are  directed  against  G.  F.  Gude 
if^^r^ir—DistertaHo  gyue  contra  Gudium  demontłratur 
CoRom  Ckristi  irravpiiHTifiov  rerepaschal^m/uisse  (Bre- 
BMfi,  1742, 8vo)  i—Tractattu  Talmudicus  de  cultu  cuo- 
tidiano  TempU,  quem  vertione  IxŁtina  donatum  et  natis  il- 
hiMratwa  eruditorum  examud  stAJicit  Conrad,  Ikemus 
(Bremen,  1786, 4to)  i—8ymbol4B  Utterarim  ad  tncrement- 
»•  MMntiarum  onuds  generi$,  a  partit  amicis  coUata 
(Bremen,  1744-49, 8  voli  8vo) : — ffarmonia  historia  per- 
peuUmim  J.  Chritti  (Bremen,  1743, 4to ;  2d  cd.  Utrecht, 
1758, 4to)  '.^DitterUUi(me$  pkUoL-iheohg.  m  dioerta  mc. 


cod,  utr%Hiqw  inatrumentałia  loea  (Leyden,  1749, 4to ;  2d 
ed.  augmented,  pub.  by  J.  U.  Shacht,  Utrecht,  1770, 4to) : 
— De  Inttiłutia  et  Carimomis  Legit  Mosaica  antę  Moten 
(Bremen,  1752,  2  parts,  4to).— Hoefer,  Nouv.  Biog.  Gin, 
JOY,  8  sq. ;  Kitto,  Cyclop.  Bib.  Lit.  ii,  377.    (J.  N.  P.) 

Ik^kesh  (Heb.  Ikkesh',  ^;^9,  perver9e,  as  in  Psa.  ci, 
4,  etc. ;  Sept.  'Elicie,  '£ffr//c,  '£«ic^c),  the  father  of  Iia 
tlie  Tekoite,  which  latter  was  one  of  David'8  famous 
wairiors  (2  Sam.  xxiii,  26 ;  1  Chroń,  xi,  28),  and  cap- 
tain  of  the  sixth  regiment  of  his  troops  (1  Chroń,  xxvii, 
9).    B.C.  antę  1046. 

Ikonobortsi  is  the  name  of  a  smali  sect  of  Russian 
dissenters  who  are  opposed  to  paintings,  both  in  church- 
es and  in  privatc  houses.    See  Russia. 

Ikrlti,  Shbmakja  ben-Eliaii,  a  Jewish  philoeophet 
and  commentator,  originally  from  Romę,  flourished  at 
Negroponte  towards  the  clone  of  the  18th  and  the  open* 
ing  of  the  14th  oentuiy.  His  father  Eliah  was  a  di»> 
tinguished  scholar  of  the  ialand  of  Crete,  whence  he 
deEived  his  name.  Shemaija  deroted  his  early  years 
to  the  study  of  philoeophical  writings,  but  later  he  gave 
his  time  almoet  exclusively  to  the  study  of  exege8is,  aa 
the  result  of  which  he  translated  and  wroto  commenta- 
ries  on  all  the  books  of  the  O.  T.,  with  the  exception  of 
Leviticus,  Numbers,  and  Deuteronomy.  His  edition  of 
Genetis,  to  which,  according  to  his  own  sutement,  he 
devoted  no  less  than  twenty-five  years,  he  dedicated, 
with  other  works  of  his,  to  king  Robert  of  Naples  (m 
13*28).  The  main  object  of  writing  these  commenti^ 
ńes,  which  have  never  yet  been  published,  was  to  reo» 
oncile  the  Rabbanites  and  Karaites.  Himself  a  Rabbim 
nite,  he  held  that  the  Karaites  were  in  the  wrong  to 
set  aside  altogether  the  Talmudical  traditions ;  and  the 
Rabbanites,  he  asserted,  missed  the  mark  also  by  not 
only  assigning  the  first  place  Ło  the  Talmud,  but  by  dis- 
regarding  the  Kble  (comp.  Ozar  NechmadfYieiu  1857, 
ii,  93).  But,  whatever  his  success  may  have  been  with 
the  Rabbanites,  he  certainly  failcd  to  conrincc  the  Ka- 
raites, who  read  his  works  exteiisively,  that  the  Talmu* 
dical  Hagada  contained  a  deep  meaning  unrevealed  to  the 
superficial  student,  or  to  persuade  them  that  the  Bibie 
and  Talmud  both  deserved  a  philoeophical  interpreta- 
tion.  Another  aim  which  Shemaija  is  said  to  have  had 
In  writing  his  commentaries  was  the  union  of  the  follow- 
ers  of  Maimonidcs  (q.  v.)  with  the  old  orthodox  schooL 
He  also  wrote  a  Logic,  after  the  Greek  style,  and  a  He- 
brew Grammar.  See  Grfttz,  Gesch.  d,  Juden,  vii,  818 
8q. ;  Carmoly,  in  Josfs  A  rmalen  (1839),  p.  69, 155;  Dukes, 
Shir  Shelomo  (Hannor.  1858),  ii,  4;  Kitto,  Cydopesdia 
BibL  Liter,  U,  877 ;  .FUrst,  Bibliołh.  Jud.  iu,  27  sq.  (J. 
H.W.) 

riai  (Heb.  //ajr',  '^b*'?,  L  q.  Chald.  ^^^9,  tigfreme; 
Sept.  'HXO)  an  Ahohite,  and  one  of  David's  chief  heroes 
(1  Chroń,  xi,  29);  called  Zalmon  in  the  parallel  list  (2 
Sam.  xxiii,  28).    &C.  1046. 

ndefonstifl,  St.,  archbishop  of  Toledo,  was  bom  in 
that  city  in  607.  He  studied  under  Isidore  of  SeviUe, 
became  monk,  then  abbot  of  the  convent  of  Agli,  near 
Toledo,  and  was  finally  madę  archbishop  of  his  native 
city  in  658.  According  to  Julian  of  Toledo,  Ildefonsos 
coroposed  a  large  number  of  works,  most  of  which,  how- 
evcr,  were  left  nnfinished.  The  only  writings  supposed 
to  be  authentic  that  we  now  possess  undcr  his  name  are. 
De  Ulibata  h.  Virgim»  rirtpnitate  (in  the  Bibłiofh.  Patr., 
Lugd.,  xii)  : — two  books.  De  cognitione  haptismi  et  de  iti^ 
nerę  deserłi  quo  pergitur  post  hapłismnm,  a  role  of  faith 
and  conduct  for  converts: — a  continuation  of  Isidorus*s 
De  riris  iliusłribuSf  beginning  with  Gregory  the  Great, 
and  containing  notices  of  thirtecn  other  writers,  mostly 
Spanish  bishops  (in  Fabricius,  BibL  eccles.  p.  60  9q.).  One 
of  his  successors  in  the  see  of  Toledo,  St.  Julian  (680-690), 
added  to  this  a  Vita  Ildefonsi  Toletani,  from  which  al- 
most  all  OUT  Information  conccming  Ildcfonsus  is  de- 
rived.  Two  lett^rs  of  his,  with  answers  by  Quirinus, 
bishop  of  Barcelona,  are  f onnd  in  D' Achćiy ,  Spidl,   The 


IŁGElir 


4M 


ILLUMINATI 


Adoptianists  (q.  t.),  in  Łhe  8th  centnry,  qnoted  Łhe  writ- 
ings  of  JCugadus,  Jldefimstu^  JuUamu,  Toietana  tedis  om- 
tittUeSf  as  favoring  their  peculiar  Tiews  (see  Alcuin,  Opp. 
ii,  568).  See  the  fiollandists,  Jan.  28d ;  Gregorio  May- 
ans,  Vida  de  S,  IldrfoMo  (Yalentia,  1727, 12mo) ;  Baro- 
nius,  Atmak»y  667,  No. 5, 6 ;  Baillet,  Vie»  iks  Sainis^  Jan. 
28d.  — Heizog,  Real-EncyUop.  vi,  688;  Hoefer,  Aottv. 
Biog,  Generale,  xxv,  811  sq. ;  Neander,  Ck,  Hist,  iii,  681. 

Ilgen,  Karl  Dayid,  an  eminent  Geiman  theologian, 
was  bom  Febniary  26, 1768,  at  the  village  of  Sehna,  in 
Prussian  Saxony.  When  fourteen  yeais  old  he  was 
able  to  enter  the  secoud  dass  in  the  gymnasium  of 
Naumburg;  but  his  parents  being  unable  to  give  him 
any  further  help,  he  was  fiom  that  time  obliged  to  de- 
pend  on  his  own  exertion8  alone.  His  struggle  for  sub- 
sistence  strengthened  his  mind,  and  in  1788,  with  a  good 
elementaiy  education,he  entered  the  Univeraity  of  Lieip- 
zig.  Herę  were  written  his  fint  essays,  which  are  to  be 
found  in  the  collection  of  his  works  entitled  Opuscula 
philoloffica  (Erford,  1797, 2  vo]s.).  He  q)plied  himself 
with  particuUr  zeal  to  the  study  of  the  Oriental  lan- 
guages,  especially  the  Hebrew.  In  1789  he  was  called  to 
the  rectorship  of  the  Academy  of  Naumburg,  and  so  dis- 
tingnished  hunself  as  an  instnictor  that  five  years  aitei^ 
waids  he  was  called  as  profesaor  of  Oriental  languages 
to  Jena,  and  there  he  was  finally  transferred  to  the 
chair  of  theology.  In  spite  of  his  eminent  attainments, 
his  blnntness  and  dryneas  of  manner  prevented  his  be- 
ing as  efficicnt  in  his  new  sphere  of  action  as  he  might 
otherwise  have  been.  His  leaming  was  better  display- 
ed  in  his  writings  than  in  his  lectures.  He  began  to 
write  a  work  on  the  **  HLstorical  Documents  of  the  Tem- 
pie of  Jerusalem,"  for  which  he  intended  to  make  a  thor- 
ough  inveBtigation  of  all  the  JewLsh  sayings,  traditions, 
and  fables,  and  to  compare  them  with  what  historical 
knowledge  we  possess  on  the  same  points,  so  as  to  se- 
cure  a  histor}'  of  the  Jews,  their  political  institutions, 
their  modę  of  divine  worship,  their  morał,  relig^ous,  and 
intellectual  state,  such  as  would  truły  have  de8erved  the 
name  of  a  criticaUy  correct  historyk"  but,through  the 
agency  of  G.  Hermann,  this  work  was  interrupted  by  a 
cali  as  rector  to  Pforte  (in  Prussian  Saxony)  (1802). 
He  heU  this  position  for  twenty-nine  years,  and  ful- 
fllled  its  duties  with  distinguished  ability.  In  1816  he 
was  appointed  counseUor  of  the  Consistory.  In  1881  he 
was  oompeUed  to  ask  for  his  discharge,  and  retired  to 
Berlin,  where  he  died  September  17, 1834.  All  that  he 
has  leffc  us  of  any  value,  beńdes  the  De  Jobi  cmtiguis^ 
»mi  carminie  Hebr,  natura  aique  virtute  (Leips.  1789), 
is  a  few  philosophical  treatises  which  he  wrote  duiing 
his  rectorship  at  Pforte.— Herzog,  Beal-Encyhlop,  vi,  633 
sq. ;  Kitto,  Cyclop.  Bib.  Lit,  ii,  878. 

Ilive,  Jaoob,  an  English  infidel,  bom  in  1710,  was 
both  a  printer  and  a  type-founder  by  trade.  In  1788 
he  pnblished  a  discourse  to  prove  the  plurality  of  worids. 
He  maintained  that  earth  is  a  heli,  and  that  the  souls 
of  men  are  fallen  angels.  Before  and  afler  this  publica- 
tion  he  lectured  publidy  on  the  same  topie.  In  the 
same  year,  1783,  he  published  another  work,  entitled 
A  Dialoffue  behceen  a  Doctor  o/ the  Church  ofEngUmd 
and  Mr.  Jacob  Ilive  upon  the  eubfect  o/ the  Oration.  In 
1761  he  published  what  claimed  to  be  a  translation  of 
The  Book  of  JasheTf  which  he  attributed  to  a  certain 
Alcuin  of  Brittany,  although  he  was  himself  the  real  au- 
thor  (see  Home^s  BibL  Bib,).  Another  pamphlet,  enti- 
tled Modeet  Bemarka  onBithop  Shertod^e  Sermons,  caused 
him  to  be  condemned  to  two  years'  imprisonment.  Dur- 
ing  his  forced  residence  at  Qerkenwell  Bridewell,  he 
wrote  Reasons  ojjfered/or  the  Bfformation  ofthe  Houee 
of  Correction  in  ClerhemoelL  IUve,  however,  did  some 
leal  service  to  Biblical  statistics  in  publishing  a  second 
edition  of  Calasio,  ConoordanluB  Sacrorum  Bibliorum 
(Lond.  1747, 4  vol8.  foL).  See  Gough,  Brit.  Topography ; 
Wilson,  Ilift,  of  Diseenting  Churchee ;.  Chalmeis,  Gen, 
Biog,  Diet, ;  łloefer,  Nouv.  Biog,  Generale,  xxv,  814 ; 
Darling,  Cyc^.j&ft6/M^.  ii,  1605.    (J.K.P.) 


lUatio  18  a  tenn  nsed  in  old  titoab  ofthe  Mas  for 
presfatio, 

IUesoaa»  Jaoob  de  0SKpC9'fb*f1  mp?*^),  a  Jew- 
ish  philosopher  and  commentator,  flouiished  in  the  14th 
centuiy  at  Illecas,  not  far  from  Madrid,  whenoe  his  ftm- 
ily  derived  their  name.  He  wiote  a  Commentary  on  the 
Pentatetteh  (contained  in  Frankfhrtci^s  great  BtMbde 
Bibie)  in  an  allegorical,  cabałistic  sense,  with  many  val- 
uable  grammatical  explanations  of  difficnlt  paasages. 
He  also  paid  particular  attention  to  obscure  passages  of 
Rashi  and  Aben-Ezra^s  expoaitions  <m  this  portion  of  ^ 
the  Hebrew  ScripUum,  and  freely  quote8  other  celebia- 
ted  Jewish  liteńti,  as  Lekach  Tob^  Joseph,  Tam,  Be- 
chor  Shor,  Jchudah  the  Pious,  Isaac  of  Yienna,  Mosea 
de  Coney,  Aaron,  Eljakim,  the  Tosafoth,  etc  See  Kit- 
to, Cyclop.  Biblical  Liter,  ii,  378 ;  FUist,  BMoOu  JwL 
ii,  91. 

nigen,  CiiBiSTiAir  FraEDRiCH,  a  Geiman  theolo- 
gian, was  bom  at  Chemnitz,  in  SAxony,  SepL  16, 1786» 
studied  at  the  Univei8ity  of  Leipsig,  where  he  fint  lec- 
tured, and  then  became  extnordinaiy  profeasor  of  phi- 
blogy  in  1818,  of  theology  in  1828,  oidinaiy  profeasor 
of  theology  in  1825,  and  finally  caaon.  He  was  paitic- 
ularly  distinguished  for  his  knowledge  of  theokgical 
histoiy.  He  died  Ang.  4, 1844.  Hu  prindpal  wetka 
are,  Laluu  Socimu,  Leben  (Lpz.  1814  and  1826, 2  paits, 
4to) : — Menuoria  vtriusque  caiechismi  Lutheri  (Ldpzig, 
1829-^0)  '.^Hiiłoria  colleynphHobibUci  (1886^40)  :~il  6- 
handUung  U,  den  Werth  der  ehrietHchen  Dogmengesckidde 
(1817);  and  a  collection  ofPrediyten:  die  Yerklinagd. 
irdiachen  Lebens  durch  d.  Evangdium  (1823).  He  fonnd- 
ed  the  Historical  Theological  Society,  and  finom  1825  to 
the  time  of  his  death  he  edited  the  Zeitechr\ftfir  hitL 
TheoL  See  S.  Bruno  Lindner,  EHnnenmffeH  an  Dr.IW- 
gen  in  the  Zeitechr^f.  d.  hittorische  ThetSogie  (1845),  p. 
8 ;  Hoefer,  Nowo.  Biog.  Ginir,  xxv,  814 ;  Henog,  Beal- 
Encyklop3die,Ti,  685. 

Illnminated  {(^uirtZ^/upoC)  was  a  term  used  in  the 
early  Christian  Church  for  the  baptized.  See  Baptibsc 
The  apostle  Paul  writes  in  two  plaoes  (Heb.  vi,  4 ;  x, 
82)  of  those  who  were  HiraK  funadkwic ;  and  the 
CouncU  of  Laodicea  (A.D.  872),  in  its  thiid  canon,  caDs 
the  newly  baptized  irpoa^drtac  ^tarw^kyrac.  Jnstin 
Martyr,  in  his  second  Apology,  expUun8  the  name  to  re- 
fer  to  the  ępiritual  knowledge  acquired  by  those  who 
were  baptized,  and  there  was  probaUy  an  association 
between  the  term  and  the  ritiial  uae  of  lights  in  the 
baptismal  aenrioe.— Blunt,  Cyclop,  of  TheoL  i,  828.  f^ 
some,  however,  the  title  ''illuminated"  is  supposed  to 
have  been  given  to  those  newly  baptized  in  the  eaźty 
Church,  because  a  lighted  taper  was  put  into  their  hands 
as  a  symbol  of  their  enlightenment.  See  Lionra  ( J. 
H.W.) 

niomin&ti,  a  name  aseumed  at  dilTerent  peiiodshj 
sects  of  Mystics  or  Enthusiasts  and  Thcosophs,  who 
claim  a  greater  degree  of  illumination  or  perfectiom  than 
other  men. 

1.  The  first  sect  known  under  this  name  was  a 
party  of  mystic  enthusiasts  who  madę  their  appearanoe 
in  Spain  about  1575,  and  who  also  borę  the  name  of 
AlunUfrados  or  Akmbradoi,  They  considered  prayer 
as  such  an  efficacious  means  of  union  with  God  that  the 
soid  of  man  oould  by  it  become  entirely  identified  with 
the  naturę  of  God,  so  that  its  actions  would  therefore  be 
really  the  actions  of  God  himself;  and  they  further  beki 
that  for  such  pereons  good  works,  the  saciaments,  etc, 
are  superfluous  as  a  means  of  sanctification.  (We  invite 
here  to  a  oomparison  of  the  doctrines  of  this  sect  with 
the  Jesuits,  when  first  instituted  by  Ignatius  Loyola. 
See  Rankę,  Ilittory  of  the  Popee,  tninaL  by  Mr&  Austin, 
i,  190.)  They  were  persecuted  by  the  Ingnisition,  and 
then  disappeared  from  Spain ;  but  in  1628  they  leap- 
peared  in  France,  under  the  name  of  Guermete^  a  aect 
very  similar  to  the  Alombrados  of  Spain,  a  aort  of  Din- 
minati,  but  who,  in  addition  to  the  mystic  belief  of  the 
Alombradofli  believed  in  a  q)eaal  revelation  of  peifectł- 


ILLUMINATI 


497 


niiUMINATI 


bility,  madę  to  one  of  Łheir  number,  a  friar,  whoae  name 
was  lioaquet.  But  they  alao  soon  became  exŁinct,  and 
were  no  longer  known  in  Fnmoe  iu  163d. 

Another  yery  similar  sect  aroee  iu  Belgiom. 

2.  But  the  name  of  "  lUuminati"  was  leally  fint  given 
to  an  aasociation  of  Deists  and  Repablicans  which  was 
founded  May  1, 1776)  by  Adam  Weiahaupt,  professor  of 
canon  law  «t  the  Uniyenity  of  Ingolstadt.  This  "  or- 
der," which,  by  ita  founder,  was  first  caUed  the  Order  of 
the  Per/ecłżiUsis,  was  established  on  a  masonie  founda- 
tion  like  that  of  the  organization  of  the  Jesuito.  Thęy 
announced  as  their  aim  to  elevate  mankind  to  the  high- 
est  poasible  degree  of  morał  pority,  and  to  lay  the  foun- 
dation  for  the  reformation  of  the  world  by  oiganizing 
an  association  of  the  best  men  to  oppoee  the  piogress 
of  morał  eyiL  Practically,  however»  the  *' order"  soon 
erinced  Łendendes  dangerous  alike  to  Chuch  and  State. 
In  their  opposition  to  religioua  and  poUdcal  Jeanitismi 
which  at  that  time,  in  Boman  Catholic  Germany,  im- 
posed  unbearable  reatrainta  on  the  human  mind,  they 
aimed  at  nothing  less  than  revolutionizing  religion, 
abolishing  Christianity  in  order  to  subatitute  reaaon  in 
its  place,  d^msing  all  civii  powers,  and  establishing  a 
nominał  repoblican  govemmenL  Welshaupt  himself, 
howeyer,  waa  a  yery  honorable  man,  actuated  by  the 
porest  motiyea,  and  zeabos  for  the  religious  and  poUt- 
icai  improyement  of  mankind.  Tho  most  acti  ve  disciple, 
thnmgh  whose  influence  the  sodety  increased  with  ex- 
traordinary  ri^iLdity,  was  the  baron  Adolph  yon  Knigge, 
who  joined  the  Bluminati  in  1780.  The  baron  main- 
tained  that  Christianity  was  not  so  much  a  popular  re- 
%ion  aa  «  system  ezclusiyely  appUcable  to  the  elect, 
and  th&ty  intioduced  by  the  Mystics,  it  had  found  its 
form  of  highest  deyelopment  in  Freemasoniy.  Only 
a  smali  number  of  the  elect  were  allowed  an  inaight  into 
the  liltimate  object  of  the  new  oiganization,  but  the 
whole  system  was  madę  profuseły  attractiye  to  a  oerUun 
class  of  minds  by  mysterious  ceremonies  and  forms.  The 
order  aimed  steadfastly  at  obtaining  the  oontrol  of  the 
higher  offices  in  Church  and  State;  and,  although  lib- 
erty  and  eąuality  were  prodaimed  aa  its  fundamental 
principles,  it  sought  absoluto  supremacy.  With  a  view 
to  reach  that  end,  Weishaupt,  who  had  himself  been  a 
Jesuit,  finally  madę  ose  of  the  same  means  by  which 
the  Jesuits  had  been  so  suocesafuL  Thos  he  sought 
to  win  oyer  to  his  side  all  peisons  of  any  influence;  to 
sorround  rulers  with  members  of  the  order;  to  make 
proael^-tea  of  men  weak  in  mind  but  strong  of  purse, 
while  at  the  same  time  he  exduded  such  as,  on  ao- 
eoont  of  their  pride  or  their  strength  of  character,  would 
be  milikdy  to  proye  pliant  subjects,  or  whose  want  of 
discretlon  might  injure  the  order.  Strict,  unquestioning, 
and  bllnd  obedience  was  madę  the  first  duty  of  eyery 
member;  eyery  one  was  under  the  direct  control  of  his 
immediato  superiors,  and  knew,  in  fact,  no  other  mem- 
beiB  of  the  order.  Aside  firom  this,  each  member  was 
snbject  to  a  priyato  superyision,  which  extended  to  the 
head  of  the  sodety;  ''and  the  Illuroinati  were  soon  in- 
yolyed  in  a  system  of  mutnal  espionage,  confession,  and 
the  like,  essentially  inconsistent  with  true  freedom,  but 
caicttlated  to  place  the  threads  all  in  one  hand,  by  which 
the  holy  legion  was  to  be  led  on,  as  it  was  imagined,  to 
the  benefaction  of  mankind."  Only  such  persons  as 
were  distinguished  for  prudence,  wisdom,  complete  ab- 
negation  for  sdf,  and  zeal  for  the  interest  of  the  sodety, 
veie  admitted  to  the  higher  degrees,  wherein  the  mys- 
teries  of  the  higher  order  were  reyealed  to  them,  while 
tboie  of  the  kmer  degrees  hardly  suspected  their  exist- 
ence.  Theie  mysteiies  related  to  religion,  on  which 
auhject  they  were  of  the  character  of  natmnalism  and 
free-thinking;  and  to  politics.  in  regard  to  which  the 
ńm  was  to  replace  monarchy  by  repuUicantsm  and  so- 
óalism.  An  actiye  ooirespondenoe  was  kept  up  be- 
tween  the  chiefa  and  the  members  of  the  order  in  the 
diUerent  districto  where  lodgea  were  established.  It 
was  carńed  on  by  means  of  a  dpher,  generally  of  the 
vaal  figures;  but  the  higher  oiders  also  madę  iise  of 
IV^Ii 


other  signi.  The  months  were  designated  by  particn* 
lar  names;  thns  January  became  Dimeh,  Febniairy  jSa»- 
meh  ;  and  Germany  was  caUed  the  OrieiUj  Bayazia  A  chaia^ 
Munich  Athens,  The  order  waa  represented  by  O*  a 
lodge  by  ^^  The  letters  addressed  to  a  superior  were 
marked  Q.  L.,  i.  e.  Q,wU»u  Uoet,  to  open  the  letter;  if  the 
letter  was  addressed  to  one  of  the  higher  chiefs,  it  was 
marked  SoU;  and  if  to  one  still  superior,  Primo.  Each 
one  of  the  Illuminati  was,  besides,  known  in  the  order  by 
some  particular  name.  Thns  the  founder  went  by  the  om- 
inoua  appellation  of  Spartacus ;  Knigge  by  that  of  Philo, 
etc.  The  attractions  which  the  order  presented  by  its 
mysteriona  secret  forms,  and  the  eztraordinary  eneigy 
and  Jesuitical  acumen  which  the  leaders  brought  to  b^ 
on  their  undertaking,  soon  swelled  its  numbers,  and, 
during  ita  most  proeperous  period,  the  association  eon- 
siated  of  oyer  2000  members,  among  them  some  of  the 
most  prominent  namea  of  Germany,  and  eyen  prinoes, 
who,  howeyer,  could  only  be  initiated  into  the  lower 
orders,  as  the  higher  mysteries  of  the  order  inculcated 
repubUcaniam.  The  head-quarters  of  the  order  were 
in  Bayaria,  which,  with  Suabia  and  Franconia,  formed 
the  first  proyinoe  of  the  association  in  Geimany,  and  it 
was  not  only  established  in  aU  the  prindpal  citlee  of 
Germany,  but  also  gained  a  foothold  in  France,  Belgi- 
om, Holland,  Dennuizk,  Sweden,  Poland,  Hungary,  and 
Italy. 

As  regards  its  interior  organization,  the  order  was  es- 
tablished on  tho  basis  of  the  Sodety  of  Jesus,  of  which, 
aa  we  haye  ahready  obseryed,  Weiahaopt  had  once  been 
a  memt>er.  In  1777  he  had  Joined  the  freemasona. 
From  the  first  it  had  been  hia  aim  to  oonnect  his  new 
society  with  freemasoniy,  for  the  puipose  of  giying  it  a 
firmer  fonndation,  and  with  the  oltimato  object  of  final- 
ly absorbing  the  latter  in  the  former.  Knigge*s  actiyi- 
ty  and  entorprise  finally  socoeeded  in  bringing  the  Illu.- 
minati  to  be  considered  as  freemasona  by  the  craft,  bot 
this  stop  madę  new  enemies  for  the  Dhuninati,  and  ul- 
timatdy  caused  their  oyerthrow.  Knigge  modelled  the 
materiał  organization  of  the  sodety  after  that  of  free* 
masoniy,  diyiding  the  members  into  thzee  daaees^  each 
of  which  was  again  oomposed  of  seyeral  degrees.  The 
first,  a  preparatory  dass,  was  oomposed  of  noyices.  Mi- 
neryites,  and  Ittumutati  minorta.  Any  man  eighteen 
years  of  age  could  become  a  noyice,  and  on  his  conduct 
depended  his  promotion  to  the  next  degree,  which  could 
be  eflected  after  one,  two,  or  three  years.  The  second 
dass,  or  that  of  freemasons,  embraoed  iq>prentices,  nuif- 
sons,  and  master-masons,  besides  the  two  higher  grades 
of  lUummatua  major  and  of  lUummatus  dirigem,  or 
Soottish  knights.  These  latter  had  the  control  of  the 
Mineryite  lodgea.  The  third  class,  or  that  of  the  ^  Mys- 
teries," was  diyided  into  higher  and  lesser  mysteries; 
the  latter  embraoed  the  priests  and  the  regenta,  or  mem- 
bers. to  whom  had  been  imparted  the  mysterious  aima 
of  the  sodety  in  regard  to  religion  and  politics.  The 
initiation  to  the  degree  of  regent  was  conducted  with 
great  aolemnity,  and  was  yeiy  impressiye.  The  adepta 
of  the  higher  mysteries  were  also  of  two  degrees,  the 
Moffiau  and  the  JSea;,  to  whom  the  prindples  of  natu- 
rałism,  republicanism,  and  sodalism  were  further  deyd- 
oped.  These  were  the  Areopagites  of  the  order,  and 
had  no  superiors  but  the  secret  coundl,  presided  oyer  by 
the  generał  of  the  order  (Weishaupt),  which  composed 
the  highest  court  of  appeał  for  all  members  of  the  order. 

A  jeabus  feeling  and  contention  for  leadership  which 
sprang  up  between  Weishaupt  and  Knigge,  and  a  differ- 
enoe  of  opinion  of  the  two  greatest  heads  of  the  sodety 
on  many  pointa  of  organization  and  discipline,  haatened 
the  dedine  of  the  order,  espedalły  after  Knigge  had  lefb 
it  (Jniy  1, 1784).  As  soon  as  the  State  and  Chureh- 
disturbing  tendency,  which  for  a  time  had  renudned 
hidden,  became  known,  the  order  was  yehemently  de- 
noonoed.  June  22, 1784^  the  dector  of  Bayazia  iasued 
an  edict  ibr  its  suppression.  But  the  society  continned 
to  exist  in  secret  When,  howeyer,  the  authorities  had 
luoceeded  in  obtaining  further  eyidenoea  of  the  danges* 


ILLUMINATIO 


498 


ILLYRICUM 


ona  tendency  of  the  order  by  aecuring  aome  of  the  pft- 
pen  of  the  assocUtion  (which  they  pubLished),  they 
pimished  the  memben  by  fine,  impruoiinieiit,  and  exile. 
Mimy  qiiit  the  ooiintiy,  among  Łhem  Weishaupt  (Feb. 
16, 1785),  on  whoee  head  a  piice  had  been  let.  He  fled 
to  Gotha  (aome  say  Halle),  and  reeided  there  until  his 
death,  Nov.  18, 18S0.  Edicts  were  again  published  by 
the  elector  of  Bararia,  March  2  and  August  16,  1783, 
which,  by  the  seyere  punishment  which  it  threaten- 
ed  to  memben,  cauaed  the  rapid  4lecline  of  the  order, 
and  they  diaappeared  altogether  towards  the  cloae  of  the 
last  century  (eighteenth).  "Great  importance  was  at 
one  tlme  attached  to  the  order  of  the  lUuminati,  whoee 
aecret  influence  was  regarded  aa  a  principal  cauae  of 
many  of  the  political  event8  of  the  time  of  the  French 
Rerolution,  and  the  worka  of  Abbś  Barruel  and  of  Plro- 
iessor  Kobisou  of  Edinbuigh  upon  this  subject  were  ea- 
geily  read,  but  the  highly  exaggented  character  of 
their  iriews  is  now  generally  acknowledged.*'  See  Her- 
zog, Real-  EncyHop.  vi,  636 ;  Chambers,  Cydop,  v,  619 ; 
Gro»9e  Abtichtm  d,  Ordens  <LJUutnmcUen,  etc.,  voh  vier 
ehemaiigen  Afitt^Uedem  (Munich,  1786) ;  Nachtrag  2.  d. 
ffrosten  Absiehim  (Mun.  1786) ;  GrundtStze,  Yerfauung 
tu  SdddetctU  d,  lUumimitenordeiu  w  Bayem  (1786) ; 
Weiahaupt,  Apofogie  d.  lUumuuUen  (Frank.  1786) ;  same, 
Ekddtung  z,maner  Apohgia  (Frank.  1787) ;  same,  Iku 
verbe»serte  SyiUm  d,  fUuminaien,  etc  (Frank.  1787) ; 
Philo's  (Knigge'8)  EndluAe  ErJddrung  und  Anhcorł^ 
etc  (HannoY.  1788) ;  Lit  neuen  A  rbeUen  d.  SpartaeuM  u. 
PhiŁo  m  </.  lUummaiaiorden,  etc  (1794) ;  Yoss,  Ueber  d. 
JUummatenorden  (1799);  £imge  OrigindUchriJUn  d,  II- 
Uuiunatenordmty  etc,  airfkdduiea  Bfjehl  z,  Druck  hefir- 
derf  (MUnch.  1787) ;  Nachtragr.toeUerenOricinalschrifl'' 
en,  und  der  IttummeUenadde  Sberhaupt,  etc  (HflUnch. 
1787);  Henke,  KirchegigeidL  vii,  206  8q.;  ZeiischHftf, 
hut.  TheoL  vi,  art.  ii ;  Knch  und  Gruber,  A  Ugem,  EncyHap, 
aect.  iiy  xvi,  206  8q. ;  Kahnis,  German  ProłettatUitm,  p. 
59  Bq.    SeeMYSTics.     (J.H.W.) 

lUuminatio  (taeramentum  iUumuuUionis),     See 

lULUMINATEn. 

niominatioii,  Art  of.  The  ait  of  illuminating 
manuscripts  with  gold  and  oolor  seems  to  pre>'ail  in 
oouotiiea  where  the  ait  of  printing  is  unknown.  It  has 
been  erroneoualy  suppoeed  to  have  been  origiuated  by 
Christianity ;  it  is  oertain,  however,  that  under  its  sway 
it  was  brought  to  its  known  perfection.  The  time  when 
the  Christiana  flrst  adapted  the  art  of  illumination  it  is 
imposeible  to  determine  deflnitely,  but  it  most  probably 
dates  from  the  time  when  the  ancient  fashion  of  rolled 
manuscripts  (comp.  the  artideTHOBAH),  which  the  Jews 
atill  preserye,  was  changed  for  the  present  book  form. 
The  earliest  specimens  extant  are  from  the  first  half  of 
the  2d  century ;  and  we  find  St.  Jerome,  no  later  than  the 
4th  century,  complaining  of  the  abuse  of  filling  up  books 
with  oinamental  capital  letten  of  an  enormous  size.  In 
the  5th  century  many  of  the  MSa  were  illuminated, 
especially  oopies  of  the  Gospels  and  other  Scriptures. 
They  were  written  on  a  blue  ground  in  8ilver,  with  the 
name  of  God  in  gold.  By  the  influence  of  B3rzantine 
luzury  there  were  even  produced  some  oopies  on  agiided 
ground  in  letten  of  black.  Gne  of  the  best  specimens  of 
the  perfection  to  which  the  art  had  been  brought  in  that 
century  is  the  Codex  A  rgeiUeus,  or  copy  of  the  Gothic 
(Ulphilas'8)  ver8ion  of  the  N.  T.  in  letten  of  sUver,  with 
the  initials  in  gold,  now  preseryed  in  the  royal  library 
at  Upsala.  It  is  also  supposed  that  at  that  time  the  va- 
rious  Bchools  of  illumination  originated.  ^  Romę  had 
auocnmbed  to  barbarian  yiolenoe,  and  her  arta,  though 
deeaying,  still  exerted  an  influence  in  this  new  style  of 
painting,  then  in  its  infancy.  That  influence  was  natu- 
rally  stronger  in  Italy,  and  therefore  the  early  illnmina- 
tions  of  the  Italian  school  bear  traces  of  the  old  Roman 
style.  In  France  the  same  influence  was  manifest,  mix- 
ed  up  with  national  peculiarities,  and  this  school  was 
eonsequently  called  the  Franoo-Roman."  But,  itemark- 
aUe  as  it  may  appear,  it  is  now  found  that  Ireland  was 
far  in  advance  of  other  nations  in  the  Imowledge  of  this 


ait,  as  she  was  genendly  in  adyance  of  them  in  the 
scalę  of  civilization.  **Her  famę  had  extended  orcr 
Europę,  her  monasteries  were  adomed  with  men  of 
great  piety  and  leaming,  who  were  the  trainen  of  the 
leading  spirits  of  the  age.  She  was  the  fint  to  bieak 
through  the  dense  darknese  of  the  times,  and,  as  she 
gave  Christianity  to  Scotland,  ao  she  also  impśited  to 
the  Saxons  the  art  of  illumination.**  The  first  Ulumi- 
nator  seems  to  have  been  Dagaeus,  abbot  of  Iniskdtn, 
who  flourished  in  the  second  half  of  the  6th  centuiy. 
Of  English  illumination,  the  finest  specimen  extant  ii 
from  the  lOth  century,  the  celebrated  *^  RenedictioDsT 
by  St.  Ethelwold,  bishop  of  Winchester,  written  and 
painted  between  968  and  984.  In  the  13th  century,  sod 
even  down  to  its  dedine  three  centuries  later,  the  sit 
was  greatly  furthered  by  Bonaventura'8  series  of  medi- 
tations  on  the  life  of  CSuist,  which  gave  minutę  descńp- 
tions  of  the  several  soenes  of  which  it  treated,  and  thus 
formed  a  sort  of  ideaL  During  the  Byzantine  period  it 
was  mainly  the  Scriptures,  the  works  of  the  fathen^  and 
books  for  Church  aeirice  generally  that  were  iUumini- 
ted.  Later,  voluraes  for  private  devotion  were  also  thni 
enriched,  until,  at  the  close  of  the  15th  century,  the  art 
of  illumination  was  genenlly  applied  not  onły  to  boob^ 
but  to  MSS.  of  almost  any  sort.  The  invention  of  print- 
ing seemed  to  sound  its  death-knell,  and  it  is  not  to  be 
wondered  at  that  the  monks,  who,  being  cut  oiffmm 
secular  business,  and  having  found  employment  by  the 
application  of  this  art,  then  madc  a  strong  resistanoe  to 
the  introduction  of  an  art  that  would  deprive  them, 
sooner  or  later,  of  their  own  employment.  But  the 
popular  mind  had  beomie  so  accustomed  to  the  iUmni- 
nation  of  works,  that  its  estinction  was  murh  morę 
gradual  than  had  been  antidpated,  and  the  eariieit 
printed  books  were  not  only  illuminated,  but  the  print- 
en  even  attempted,  by  a  process  of  their  art,  to  super- 
sede  manuał  labor.  Perhaps  the  latest  effort  of  this 
kind  was  an  edition  of  the  liturgy,  brought  out  in  1717 
by  John  Short,  entirely  engraved  on  copper  platea 
"  The  pages  were  surrounded  by  borders,  and  embei- 
lished  with  pictnres  and  decorated  initial  letter^" 
See  HiU,  En^ish  Manasticum,  eh.  xii,  where  may  also 
be  found  the  details  of  the  work  as  it  was  cairied  on 
for  centuries  in  the  varioua  monasteries  of  Europę.— 
Brande  and  Cox,  Diet,  o/Seimee,  LUeraiure,  and  Art,  ii, 
193  sq. 

IHaminism.    See  Illuminati  ;  Rationausk. 

niyea,  Andreas,  a  Hungarian  prelate,  was  bom  at 
Szont^Gyocrgy,  in  Transylyania,  in  the  first  half  of  the 
17th  century,  and  educated  at  Romę.  On  his  Rtum  to 
his  uative  country  he  fiUed  sereral  positions  of  trust, 
then  went  to  Poscn  as  canon,  and  later  bccame  bishop 
of  Weissenbuig.  On  account  of  the  political  dlstuib- 
ances  in  Transylyania  he  removed  to  Yienna.  The 
time  of  his  death  is  not  generally  known.  He  publiah- 
ed  Yerbum  adcerbiarum,  74  sennons  in  Hungarian  (Yi- 
enna, 1698, 4to)  :^Vit(B  sanatorum  (ibid.  1693),  in  Hun- 
garian (Tynian,  1705,  and  often),  etc— Jćk:her,  GekhrL 
X«?.Add.ii,2276. 

niyrioa,  0>UNCiL  op  (ConciUtm  JflfyricioR^heSdiB 
the  year  875,  according  to  Ceillier  aud  Hefele,  by  order 
of  the  emperor  Yalentinian.  It  was  aUended  by  a  laige 
number  of  bishops,  who  met  to  consider  the  doctrine  of 
the  consubstantiality  of  the  three  divine  persona,  u  it 
had  been  set  forth  at  Nictea.  They  issued  «  synodsl 
letter  to  the  churches  of  Asia,  etc,  cołifirming  the  doc- 
trine with  great  emphasis,  and  they  further  decreed 
that  the  homousiastical  trinity  doctrine  should  be  ev* 
erywhere  taught,  and  all  thoee  who  should  reject  it  be 
punished  by  anathema.  See  Hefele,  ConcHiemguek,  i| 
716  sq. ;  Landon,  Man,  ąfCoundU^  p.  266  sq.    See  Asi* 

ANISX. 

lUyr^ioum  ClXXvf>uró>r,  lit  lUgrian,  but  the  woid  if 
of  unknown  though  prób.  native  et3rmology),  or  lOyriOt 
a  country  lying  to  the  north-west  of  Macedonia,  and 
answering  neaily  to  that  which  is  atpKsent  called  i>al- 


ILLYRICUS 


499 


IMAGE  OF  GOD 


maiia  ;  by  which  name,  indeed,  tbe  soatbem  part  of  II- 
Ijnicnm  itadf  was  known,  and  whither  St.  Paul  infonna 
Timothy  that  Titua  had  gone  (2  Tim.  iv,  10).  The 
apofltie  Paulf  tn  bia  third  great  miarionaiy  Jocumey,  after 
traTcising  AaU  Minor  and  Macedonia,  tells  the  Chuich  of 
Home  that  ** round  aboat  unto  niyricnm  (rtrcAy  /'ĆXP'  ^oti 
'IXXvpurov)  I  have  foUy  preached  tbe  Gospel  of  Christ*' 
(Rom.  xr,  19).  The  exaet  meaning  of  the  passage  is 
somewhat  doabtfuL  The  kvkKoc  may  be  joined  with  Je- 
nualem,  and  signify  ita  neighborhood  (as  Alford,  ad  loc) ; 
or  it  may  be  joined  with  the  iuxP^  roo  'lAAupcmC,  and 
denote  the  dreuU  of  the  apostle^s  jomney  '*  aa  far  as  Dlyr- 
icum"(an  ezpresaion  wamnted  by  the  indefinite  phiaae 
of  Loke,  *^  thoee  parta,"  Acta  zx,  2).  Thiongh  the  south- 
em  part  of  Dlyria  proper  ran  the  c^reat  road  called  Via 
Kgnaiut^mhAcYk  oonnected  Italy  and  the  East,  beginning 
at  Apoilonui  and  Dyirhachium,  passing  through  Thessa- 
koica  and  Philippi,  and  terminating  at  the  Hellespont 
{A  wiamm  Itmerarium,  ed.  WesseL,  p.  317^  Along  this 
road  Plaul  may  have  tnivelled  on  his  third  jonmey  till  he 
leaehed  that  region  on  the  shore  of  the  Adriatic  which 
was  called  Dlyricam.  From  Dyrrhachimn  he  may  have 
tmmed  north  into  that  dbtriet  of  lUjrricttm  then  called 
Dalmatia,  and  may  have  founded  the  chnrchea  subse- 
ąnently  Tisited  by  Titas  (2  Tim.  iv,  10).  Afterwards 
he  may  have  gone  southwazds  by  Nioopolis  to  Gorintb. 
(But  see  Gony beare  and  Howson,  Life  ofSL  Paul,  i,  889 ; 
ii,  128;  Ist  cd.)  lUjTicum  is  a  wild  and  bare  mountain- 
ons  region.  A  ridge  of  lugged  Hmestone  moontains 
nms  throttgh  it  from  north  to  south,  aflbrding  a  fitting 
home  for  a  nnmber  of  wild  tribes,  who  now,  aa  in  au- 
cient  times,  inhabit  the  country.  The  coast-line  is 
deeply  indented,  and  possesses  some  exoellent  harbora 
(Grotę,  Hittory  o/Greeee,  voL  iv ;  Willcinson,  Dalmatia 
ani  AfomemeffTo).  Its  boundaries  were  not  very  dis- 
tinct;  Fliny  (iii,  28)  and  Strabo  (vii,  813)  placing  it  east 
of  tbe  Adriatic  Gnlf,  wbile  Ptolemy  (ii,  17)  divide8  it 
into  libamia,  lapodia,  and  Dalmatia  (compare  Mannert, 
vii,  806).  The  earliest  notioes  state  that  oertain  tribes 
caiied  'iKkifpiot  inhabited  the  moimtainous  region  along 
the  coaat  between  Epirus  and  Libumia  (Scylax,  eh.  xix 
sq.).  On  the  invasion  of  the  country  by  the  Gotbs, 
these  tribes  were  scattered  eastward  and  northwanl, 
and  gave  their  name  to  a  wider  region;  and  this  was 
probably  the  geographical  import  of  the  name  as  used 
by  FauL  At  a  later  period  Illyricum  became  one  of  the 
iour  great  divi8ions  of  the  Roman  empire,  and  embraoed 
the  wbole  country  lying  between  the  Adriatic,  the  Dan- 
obe,  the  Black  Sea,  and  Macedonia  (Gibbon's  Roman 
JEmpire,  chapb  i).  The  beat  ancient  description  of  it  is 
that  of  Appian  {BelL  IUipr.\  and  among  moderna  that 
of  Cramer  {Aneimt  Greece,  i,  29  są.).  See  Dalmatia. 
(For  ita  history,  see  Anthon*s  Cktu,  Diet,  s.  v.)— Smith, 
DićL  ofCkut,  Geog.  s.  v.;  Kitto. 

myricns.    See  Fuiciua  (Matthias). 

Image  (prop.  D^S,  łte'lem;  iIkwv  ;  but  alao  desig- 
nated  by  varioiłs  other  Hebrew  terma;  often  rendered 
**graven  image,"  **n]olten  image,"  etc).  See  Idol. 
For  the  mterpretation  of  the  colossal  statuę  of  Nebu- 
chadnexzar'8  dieam  (Dan.  U,  31),  see  Daniel,  Book  of. 

Image-breaken.    See  Iconoclatts. 

Image  of  Goci  The  notion  of  the  "image  of 
God  in  man"  is  one  of  the  fundamental  conceptions  of 
Christian  theok)gy.  It  takes  its  root  in  the  Mosaic  ac- 
oount  of  creation,  where  we  find  God  sayiiig  (Gen.  i,  26), 
"Let  us  miUce  man,  ««bsa  and  sisnsła^S,  in  our  im- 
sge,  after  our  likeness."  This  first  expres8ion  is  again 
nsed  in  the  next  yerse,  where  the  act  of  creation  is  le- 
corded,  and  subsequently  also,  ix,  6,  after  sin  had  en- 
tered  the  workL  There  is  consequentIy  no  further  dif- 
ference  between  D^^  and  T\W  than  that  the  one  is 
the  ooocrate,  the  other  the  abatract  expre8Bion  of  the 
aame  idea.  Thia  is  also  seen  in  compariiig  v,  8  an<l  ix, 
&  The  two  synonymes  are  in  fact  uaed  (br  the  sake  of 
I  q.  d.  ta  eaeacl  retemblance  ofut. 


**'So  one  doubts  that  the  phrase  <  image  of  God*  de- 
notes  in  generał  a  Ukeness  of  God;  but  the  opinions  of 
theologians  have  alwaya  been  different  respecting  the 
particttlar  pointa  of  resemblance  which  Moaes  intended 
to  expre8B  by  the  phrase.  Nor  b  this  strange,  sińce 
Moses  does  not  explain  what  he  means  by  it,  and  it  is 
uaed  in  very  different  significations  in  the  Bibie,  a  fact 
that  bas  not  been  sufficiently  noticed.  The  common 
opinion  is,  that  this  phrase  denotes  oertain  excellences 
which  man  originally  poasessed,  but  which  he  loet,  in 
part  at  least,  by  the  falL  The  principal  text8  cited  in 
behalf  of  this  opinion  are  Gen.  i,  26 ;  compare  ii,  15  sq. ; 
and  from  the  N.  Test,  CoL  iii,  19;  compare  Eph.  iv,  24, 
where  a  renewal  after  the  image  of  €iod  is  mentioned, 
which  is  understood  to  mean  a  rutoration  of  this  image, 
implying  that  man  must  have  lost  it ;  also  2  Cor.  xi,  8. 
Agisinst  this  common  opinion  it  may  be  objected  that 
tbe  image  of  God  is  described  in  many  paasages  as  ex- 
isting  after  the  fali,  and  as  still  di8coverable  iu  men ;  aa 
Gen.  ix,  6;  James  iii,  9;  1  Gor.  xi,  6, 7;  and  especially 
Gen.  V,  1-8,  from  which  it  appears  that  Seth,  being  madę 
in  the  likeness  of  Adam,  must  have  had  the  same  im- 
age of  God,  whatever  it  was,  which  Adam  poasessed" 
(Knapp,  Christian  Theolog^y  bk.  i,  art  vi,  sec.  53,  p.  168). 

In  the  works  of  tlie  fathera  we  find  great  diyeraity  of 
opinion  oonceming  thia  image  of  God  (Gregor.  N3rss.  De 
komin,  opi/  c  iv,  v,  or.  x\*i).  Some  of  the  early  Latin 
fothers  also  maintained  a  bodily  likeness  to  God  (Irenaeus, 
Adv.H€Br,Vj6),  The  Audseans  (q.  v.)  admitted  only 
the  physical  resemblance  (Theodoret,  HitL  Eccleś,  iv,  9), 
wbile  Augustine  and  the  Church  of  Alexandria  rejected 
it  altogether  (Clemens,  Strom,  ii,  19).  They  also  agreed 
in  making  the  divine  image,  in  a  morał  point  of  view,  to 
consist  in  uprightness  before  God,  and  in  the  harmony 
between  the  higher  and  the  lower  facultiea  of  the  soul; 
aa  also  physically  in  the  immortality  of  the  body,  and 
the  mastership  over  all  other  creatures.  Others  admit 
a  confirmation  and  strengthening  of  the  image  of  God 
in  man  by  the  indwelling  of  the  Holy  Spirit,  which  they 
conaider  not  only  as  a  gift  of  fnt  grace,  but  also  as  neo- 
essaiy  to  the  completeness  of  man  (Cyr.  Alex.  Tkes, 
xxxiv,  dioL  vi).  These  different  parties  make  great 
use  of  the  distinction  between  the  two  expre86ions  im^ 
ago  and  nmiUtudo ;  the  scholastics  maintaining  that  by 
the  imago  (which,  though  weakened  by  the  fali.  was 
still  extant)  is  to  be  understood  the  essence  of  the  in^ 
nate,  natural  attributes  of  the  spirit,  especially  reaaon 
and  liberty;  and  by  the  mmilUudo  (which  was  obliter- 
ated  by  the  fali)  the  morał  naturę  of  man,  which  waa 
agreeable  to  God,  or,  in  other  words,  the  thorougb  uni- 
son  with  the  diyine  will  originating  in  the  divine  grace 
(Hugo  Vict  De  Sacram.  L  i,  p.  6,  c  ii ;  Petr.  Lomb.  JSent 
L  ii,  dist  16,  D.).  Tbe  creed  of  Trent  makes  no  posl- 
tive  mention  conceming  the  image  of  God,  but  the  Caie- 
chismue  JUmamte  considers  it  as  consisting  in  the  pecul- 
iar  inherent  dispositions  of  the  human  soul,  for  after  ita 
definitions  conceming  Adam*s  body  it  8ay8,*'Quod  au- 
tem ad  animam  periinet,  eum  (hominem)  ad  imaginem 
et  similitudinem  suam  formayit  liberumque  ei  arbitrium 
tribuit,"  which,  however,  does  not  satisfactorily  explain 
in  what  relation  this  liberum  arbiirium  (free  will)  stands 
with  regard  to  the  imago  dei  (image  of  God)  in  the  soul. 
It  also  leaves  undecided  the  ąuestion  whether  the  eon- 
seąuent  siibmission  of  the  desires  to  the  dicutes  of  rea^ 
son  is  also  to  be  considered  as  forming  part  of  this  im- 
age of  God.  From  the  woni  addidU  we  can  only  infer 
that  the  originaUsjustitia  aebnirable  donum  is  sometbing 
independent,  not  inherent  (Co/.  Rom,  i,  2, 19).  The  Ko- 
mish  theologians  still  endeavor  to  maintain  the  distino- 
tions  madę  by  the  scholastics  between  imago  and  nmiU- 
tudo. **The  'original  justice'  is  further  considered  as 
a  aupematural  gift,  which  man  possesses  by  a  special 
grace,  so  that  it  is  madę  to  counterbalance  the  natural 
division  between  tbe  higher  and  the  lower  forces  (the 
spirit  and  the  flcsh.  reason  and  sensuality),  thus  direct- 
ing  the  forces  towards  God,  and  introducing  the  «mt/t- 
fudi}  in  the  imago  (Bellarmine,  De  Groź,  PHm,  Homimt^ 


IMAGE  OF  GOD 


500 


IMAGE  OF  GOD 


▼,  6).  ThuB  the  Roman  Catholie  Chuich  rtarts  in  its 
theory  from  the  |ireaent  staie  of  man,  as  Teanlting  from 
the  fali,  in  legard  to  which  state  communion  with  God 
Ib  something  tuperadded.  Some  Romaniat  theologiens 
iłistinguieh  between  originaiyuffice  and  oiiginal  kolmess 
(communion  with  God),  maintaining  the  fonner  to  be 
the  attribnte  of  pnie  naturę  as  it  came  from  the  band 
of  the  Creator,  and  holding  the  latter  to  be  exclaaively 
the  gift  of  superadded  and  sapematuial  graco.  The 
evangelical  Church,  on  the  contniry,  by  conaadering  the 
image  of  Crod  as  belonging  to  Adamus  tme  naturę,  as  he 
came  from  the  hands  of  his  Creator,  obtains  a  doctrine 
at  onoe  morę  dear,  morę  simple,  and  moie  tme  (ApoL  i, 
17 ;  comp.  Fornu  Conoord.  toL  ded,  i,  10).  It  Gonsiders 
habitnal  communion  with  God  as  a  state  natural  to  man, 
and  belonging  to  his  normal  organization  before  the  fali, 
not  as  a  special  particnlar  gift  It  maintains,  further, 
that  this  original  image  of  God  was  lost  by  the  fali  of 
man. 

"  But  in  the  papai  anthropology,  man,  as  he  comes 
from  God,  is  imperfect  He  is  not  created  sinful  in- 
deed,  but  neither  is  he  created  holy.  To  use  the  papai 
phnse,  he  is  created  ta  ptaria  naiuraUbnu;  without  posi- 
tire  righteousness  and  without  positire  unrighteousness. 
The  body  is  fuli  of  natural  camal  propensitiea,  and  tends 
downwards.  The  sonl,  as  rational  and  immortal,  tends 
upwards.  But  there  is  no  harmony  between  the  two  hy 
crtatioiu  An  act  8ubaequent  to  that  of  creation,  and 
additional  to  it,  is  neoessary  to  bring  this  harmony 
about ;  and  this  is  that  act  by  which  the  gift  of  original 
righteousness  is  tuperadded  to  the  gifts  of  creation.  In 
and  by  this  act  the  higher  iiart  is  strengthened  to  ac-- 
quire  and  maintain  dominion  oyer  the  lower,  and  a  pos> 
itive  perfection  is  imparted  to  human  naturę  that  was 
previously  lacking  in  it.  Original  righteousness  is  thus, 
in  reference  to  the  created  and  natural  characteristics 
of  man,  a  ntpematured  gift. 

"  The  second  peculiarity  in  the  papai  anthropology 
oonSLBts  in  the  tenet  that  apostaty  inroltes  the  Ums  ofa 
nipemałural,  but  not  ofa  natural  gij>.  By  the  act  of 
transgression,  human  naturę  lapses  back  into  that  eon- 
dition  of  oonflict  between  the  flesh  and  the  cpirit  in 
which  it  was  created.  In  loeing  its  original  righteous- 
ness, therefore,  it  loses  nothing  with  which  it  was  en- 
dowed  by  the  creatwe  act,  but  only  that  superadded  gift 
which  was  bestowed  sub0equently  to  this.  The  su- 
premacy  of  the  higher  over  the  lower  part  b  lost  by  the 
Adamie  transgrenion,  and  the  two  perts  of  man,  the 
tiesh  and  the  spirit,  fali  into  thwrprimiłire  and  natural 
antagonism  again.  Original  righteousness  being  a  su- 
pematural  gift,  original  sin  is  the  loss  of  it,  and,  in  reali- 
ty,  the  restoration  of  man  to  the  state  in  which  he  was 
created"  (Shedd,  Hia.  ofDod.  ii,  146). 

The  *Mmage,"  or  likeness  of  God,in  which  man  was 
madę,  has,  by  some,  been  aasigned  excln8ively  to  the 
body ;  by  others  aimply  to  the  soul;  others,  again,  have 
found  its  essencein  the  circnmstance  of  his  having*'d!t>- 
mimotT  oyer  the  other  creatures.  As  to  the  body,  it  is 
not  neoessary  to  take  up  any  large  spaoe  to  proye  that 
in  no  instance  can  that  literaDy  bear  the  image  of  God, 
that  is,  be  **  like"  God.  Descant  eyer  so  much  or  ev& 
so  poetically  upon  man*s  upright  and  noble  form,  this 
has  no  moie  likeness  to  God  than  a  prone  or  reptile  one : 
God  is  incorporeal,  and  has  no  bodily  shape  to  be  the 
antitype  of  any  thing  materiał.  Not  morę  tenable  is  the 
notion  that  the  image  of  God  in  man  consisted  in  the 
'Mominion"  which  was  granted  to  him  oyer  this  lower 
,  world.  Limited  dominion  may,  it  is  tnie,  be  an  image 
of  laige  and  abeolute  dominion;  but  man  is  not  said  to 
haye  been  madę  in  the  image  of  God'8  dominion,  which 
is  aocident  merely,  for,  before  any  creatures  exi8ted,  God 
himself  could  haye  no  dominion  but  in  the  image  and 
likeness  of  God  himself,  of  something  which  constitutes 
kia  naturę.  Still  further,  man,  acoording  to  the  history, 
was  eyidently  madę  in  the  image  of  God,  tu  order  to  his 
haying  dominion,  as  the  Hebrew  connectiye  particie 
(«  and")  imports.    He  who  was  to  haye  dominion  must 


neceasarily  be  madę  before  he  oould  be  inreated  triłh 
it,  and  therefore  dominion  was  oonseqaent  to  his  ezift- 
ing  in  the  ^'image''  and  '^likeneas"  of  God,  and  conid 
not  be  that  image  itself. 

The  attempts  which  haye  been  madę  to  fix  upoa  lome 
OM  essential  quality  in  which  to  place  that  "image"  of 
God  in  which  man  was  created,  are  not  only  nncaUed  for 
by  any  scriptural  reąuirement,  but  are  eyen  contiadicled 
by  yarious  parts  of  Scripture,  from  which  alone  we  mnsŁ 
deriye  our  information  on  tlds  subject  It  la  in  yain  to 
say  that  this  ^^  image"  must  be  aomething  essential  to 
human  naturę,  aomething  <Mily  which  cannot  be  kat 
We  shall,  it  is  tnie,  find  that  reyelation  places  it  in  what 
is  esKntial  to  human  naturę;  but  that  it  sbonkl  oom- 
prehend  nothing  else,  or  one  quality  only,  has  no  proof 
or  reason;  and  we  are,  in  fact  Uught  that  it  compriscs 
also  what  is  not  essential  to  human  naturę,  and  what 
may  be  lost  and  be  regained.  As  to  botli,  the  eridoice 
of  Scripture  is  explicit. 

(1.)  When  God  is  called  «the  FaOier  of  apirita,*  a 
likeness  is  certainly  intimated  between  man  and  God  in 
the  gpiritualify  of  their  naturę.  This  is  also  implied 
in  the  striking  argument  of  Phul  with  the  Athemam: 
^^Foraamuch,  then,  aa  we  are  the  offępring  of  God,  we 
ought  not  to  think  that  the  godhead  is  like  mito  goU, 
or  silyer,  or  stone  grayen  by  art,  and  man's  deyice;* 
plainly  referring  to  the  idolatrous  statuea  by  which  God 
was  represented  among  heathens.  If  likeneas  to  God  ia 
man  consisted  in  bodily  shape,  this  would  not  haye  been 
an  argument  against  human  representations  of  the  Be- 
ity ;  but  it  imports,  m  Howe  well  erprcases  it,  that  **  we 
are  to  understand  that  our  resemblance  to  him,  as  ▼« 
are  his  oflbpring,  lies  in  some  higher,  morę  noble,  and 
morę  exce]lent  thing,  of  which  there  can  be  no  figurę^ 
as  who  can  tell  how  to  giye  the  figurę  or  image  of  a 
thought  or  of  the  mind  or  thinking  power  V"  In  spirit- 
uality,  and  oonaeąuently  imraateriality,  this  image  of 
God  in  man,  then,  in  the  first  partlcular,  oonsistSi 

(2.)  The  sentiment  expre88ed  in  Wisdom  ii,  28,  is  er- 
idenoe  that,in  the  opinion  of  the  ancient  Jews,  the  im- 
age of  God  in  man  comprised  tmmtniaUfy  also:  **For 
God  created  man  to  be  immortal,  and  maide  him  to  be 
an  image  ef  his  own  eternity;"  and  though  other  crea- 
tures, and  eyen  the  body  of  man,  were  madę  capaUe  of 
immortality,  and  at  least  the  materiał  human  frame, 
whateyer  we  may  think  of  the  case  of  animab,  wonld 
haye  eacaped  death,  had  not  sin  entered  the  world,  ret 
without  running  into  the  absurdity  of  the  ^  natural  im- 
mortality" of  the  human  aoul,  that  easence  mnat  hays 
been  constituted  immortal  in  a  high  and  peculiar  scnse, 
which  has  eyer  retained  its  prerogatiye  of  etemal  dma- 
tion  amidst  the  uniyersal  death,  not  only  of  aninia]s,faat 
of  the  bodies  of  all  human  beings.    See  Immortauty. 

(8.)  To  these  correspondences  we  are  to  add  that  tX 
intełlectual  poteerSf  and  we  haye  what  diyines  haye  cali* 
ed,  in  perfect  accordance  with  the  Scriptum,  the  nałn- 
rai  image  of  God  in  his  creature,  which  is  essential  aod 
ineilaceable.  He  was  madę  capable  of  kmneledge^  and 
he  was  endowed  with  liberty  cftoilL 

(4.)  This  natural  image  of  God,  in  which  man  was 
created,  was  the  foundation  of  that  morał  image  by  which 
also  he  was  distinguished.  Unleaa  he  had  been  a  epir- 
itual,  knowing,  and  willing  bdng,  he  would  haye  been 
wholly  incapable  of  morał  ąualitiee.  That  he  had  such 
ąualities  eminentJy,  and  that  in  them  consisted  the  im- 
age of  God,  as  well  as  in  the  natural  attributes  jusŁ  suted, 
we  haye  also  the  expres8  testimony  of  Scripture.  '^Lo 
this  only  haye  I  found,  that  God  madę  man  upright  but 
they  haye  sought  out  many  inyentions.**  There  is  also 
an  expres6  allusion  to  the  rooral  image  of  God,in  which 
man  was  first  created,  in  CoL  iii,  10,  **  And  haye  put  on 
the  new  man,  which  is  rcnewed  in  knowledge  after  the 
image  of  him  that  created  him ;"  and  in  Eph.  iy,  S4, 
''Put  on  the  new  man,  which  after  God  is  created  in 
righteousness  and  tme  holiness.**  This  also  may  be 
finally  argned  from  the  satisfaction  witJi  which  the  hi»> 
torian  of  the  creation  reprceenta  the  Creator  as  yiewiog 


IMAGE  OF  GOD 


501 


IMAGERY 


the  YCfiks  of  bis  bands  "as  veiy  good."  Ttiii  U  pro- 
noimoed  with  leferenoe  to  each  individually  as  well  as 
to  the  whole:  ''And  God  saw  tterythmg  that  he  had 
madę,  and  behold,  it  was  veiy  good."  But  as  to  man, 
this  goodness  musi  necessarily  imply  morał  as  well  as 
pbyaical  ąualitiea.  Withoat  them  he  would  bave  been 
imperfect  as  wm ;  and,  had  they  exiBted  in  him,  in  Łheir 
fint  ezeiciaes,  perveited  and  sinful,  he  must  haye  been 
an  excepdon,  and  oould  not  have  been  pionounced  *'  very 
good."*— Wntson,  InstUuJte»^  ii,  9-18. 

Fiom  this  point  of  yiew  we  may  airiye  at  a  correct 
apprehenaion  of  the  idea  of  the  diyine  image.  God,  as 
an  abaolute  spirit,  whoee  essential  element  of  life  is  loye, 
cannot  but  manifest  himself  in  an  etemal  object  of  this 
loye,  of  the  same  essence  with  himself.  This  is  the  Son, 
the  etenud,  absolute,  immanent  image  of  God.  But  as 
God,  by  yiztue  of  his  unfathomable,  oyerliowing  loye, 
calłs  also  foith  (or  creates)  other  beings,  to  whom  he 
wills  to  impart  his  blissful  life  by  the  establishing  of  his 
kingdom,  he,  the  type  of  all  perfectlon,  cannot  create 
them  but  aiber  his  own  image,  as  he  sees  it  from  all  eter- 
nity in  the  Son.  This  creaUd  image  of  God  is  man  in 
his  primitiye  condition.  Maft  was  the  real  object  of 
God's  cieadye  actiyity,  as  is  seen  in  God*s  spedal  de- 
dsion  with  regard  to  his  creation  (Gen.  i,  26;  comp.Psa. 
yiii),  and  mankind  are  called  to  be  the  real  population 
of  his  kingdom.  The  whole  uniyerse  (and  eyen  in  some 
sense  the  angela,  HeK  i,  14)  was  only  created  for  man, 
which  is  the  reason  why  he  was  not  created  till  all 
other  things  were  ready  for  him.  The  faculties  which 
other  creatoies  present  only  in  a  limited,  dtsoonnected 
manner,  were  in  him  (as  the  fugpÓKwrfMc)  united  into  a 
harmoniiwia  whole;  moreoyer,  in  him  alone  (as  the  /u- 
cpó^coc),  of  all  creatuies,  was  the  persorad  spiritual  life 
of  God  minored ;  and  by  direct  inspiration  of  the  diyine 
bieath  of  life,  the  spirit  was  infused,  by  which  he  be- 
came  a  spiritoal,  self-conscious,  free,  and  indiyidoal  sonl. 
Man  was  created  God's  image  in  his  indiyiduaUsm.  As 
God  is  not  an  abstract,  but  a  real  spirit,  fuli  of  the  liying 
powers  which  created  the  world,  so  the  image  of  God  in 
man  erabraced  his  whole  naturę.  It  extended  also  to 
the  body  as  the  outward  image,  the  dwelling  and  organ 
of  the  scNiL  Man  was  created  the  im«ge  of  God  in  the 
totality  of  his  being.  But,  while  man  was  thus  madę 
the  image  of  God  to  himself,  he  was  alM>  madę  the  im- 
age of  God  to  the  world  before  wliich  he  stands  as  the 
representattye  of  God,  a  relation  by  which  the  mastery 
oyer  the  outer  world  ascribed  to  him  in  Scripture  (Gen. 
i,  28-30)  is  shown  to  haye  an  inner  foundation.  Thus 
&r  the  image  of  God  was  innate  in  man  and  inaliena- 
bl&  This  innate  state,  howeyer,  bespoke  a  oorrespond- 
ing  habitual  state.  Inasmuch  as  €rod  the  Spirit  is  loye, 
man  was  destined  to  a  life  of  k>ye,  and  was  at  onoe 
bnnight  into  it  by  communion  with  God.  From  the 
heart,  howeyer,  as  the  centrę  of  individual  life,  the  pow- 
er  of  loye  manifests  itself  in  the  direction  of  knowledge 
as  trath  and  wisdom  (objectiye  and  subjectiye  direc- 
tions),  and  in  the  direction  of  the  will,  as  lVeedom  and 
sanctity  (formal  and  materiał  directions),  yet  so  that 
these  spiritual  oonditions  in  their  original  working  pro- 
dnced  a  suto  partly  of  nntried  innocenoe  and  partly  of 
unfokHng  derelopment.  To  the  body,  the  image  of 
God  procuied  immortality  (jmusm  fion  mort),  as  the  out- 
ward disBoiutioa  of  the  foroes  (death)  is  but  the  result 
of  an  inward  dissolution  of  the  principle  of  life.  With 
regard  to  the  world,  howeyer,  man  obtained  by  it  a  pow- 
er,  in  oouseąuenoe  of  which  the  world  beoomes  subject  to 
him  by  loye, and  notby  foroe;  and  by  his  knowledge  of 
its  natore  (Gen.ii,  19, 20),  he  is  euabled  to  cany  out 
God^s  will  in  it. 

This  habitual  resemblanoe  to  God,  which,  with  the 
imsge  of  God  innate  in  man's  naturę,  formed  the  nat- 
uial,  origimd  state  of  man,  was  lott  by  sin,  as  the  life 
of  loye,  conńng  from  (Sod,  which  formed  its  basis,  was 
dettroyed  by  telfishneas  coming  from  the  heart  of  man. 
It  Goidd  onJy  be  reirtoied  by  the  absolute  image  of 
God  the  SoDy  sonree  of  the  life  of  love  for  the  world, 


assuming  himself  the  form  of  man.  Jesus  Christ,  the 
Son  of  God,  madę  ilesh,  is  the  real,  personal  restoration 
of  the  image  of  God  in  humanity.  Since  in  the  flesh  he 
oyercame  sin  for  us  by  his  death,  and  raised  our  naturę 
to  gUay  in  his  resuirection,  man  can  again  beoome  par^ 
taker  of  the  righteousness  and  spiritual  glory  which  be- 
long  to  him.  By  the  Holy  Spirit,  which  fiUs  our  hearts 
with  loye  for  God,  the  image  of  God  is  restored  in  us  in 
truth  and  nprightness.  See  O.  Sartorius,  2>.  Lehre  v.  d. 
keUigm  LiOm  (Stuttg.  1843),  i,  84  sq.) ;  J.  T.  Beck,  2>. 
ckristL  LehrwiuenKhaft  nack  den  bibL  Urhtnden  (Stutt 
1841),  i,  §  19 ;  H.  Martensen,  2>.  ckristL  Dogtnatik  (Kieł, 
1850),  p.  156 ;  J.  Chr.  K.  Hofmann,  Der  Schriftbeweie 
(Nordlingen,  1851),  i,  248-254;  G.  Thomasios,  ChrUti 
Person  k.  H^erk  (Erlangen,  1858),  i,  147-224 ;  Herzog, 
Real^EncyHop,  iii,  614 ;  Knapp,  Tkeohgy^  sect.  58  et  są. ; 
Winer,  Comparat,  DarsteUtmg,  p.  83;  Watson,  InstUutes, 
yoL  ii,  eh.  i ;  Criiici  Sacri,  ^Dt  Imagme  Dn,"  i,  40 ;  Faw- 
cett,  SermonSy  p.  284 ;  Dwight,  Tkeology,  i,  845 ;  South, 
Sermons,  i,  45;  Grinfldd,  Inguuy  into  fA«  Image  ofGod 
m  Man  (Lond.  1887, 8yo) ;  Uamess,  Sermons  on  tAa  Im- 
age of  God  (Lond.  1841,  8yo) ;  BibUotkem  Sacra,  vii, 
409 ;  Jackson,  Thoe.,  Origmal  State  ofMan,  in  Works. 
ix,  1 ;  Yan  MUdert,  Works,  y,  148 ;  Harris^  Man  Primeodl 
(N.Y.1851,12mo). 

Image  of  Jealoujiy.    See  Jealoust,  Image  of. 

Imagery  (r^*^3tcp,  matkUh',  an  image,  as  rendered 
Ley.  xxyi,  1 ;  ot  picture,  as  rendered  Numb.  xxxiii,  52), 
only  in  the  phrase  **ckambers  of  kis  imagery"  (Ezek. 
yiii,  12).  The  scenes  of  pictorial  representation  referred 
to  by  this  phrase  are  connected  with  an  instnictiye  pos- 
sage  in  the  history  of  Ezekiel  and  the  Jewish  esdles, 
who  were  stationed  in  Assyria,  on  the  banks  of  the  Che- 
bar.  At  one  of  their  interesting  prayer-meetings  for 
the  restoration  of  Israel,  which  had  been  held  so  often 
and  so  long  without  any  prospect  of  brighter  days,  and 
when  the  faith  and  hopes  of  many  of  the  unfortunates 
were  waxing  dim  and  feeble,  Ezekiel,  in  presence  of  his 
friends,  consisting  of  the  exiled  elders  of  Judah,  was 
suddenly  rapt  in  mystic  yision,  and  graciously  shown, 
for  his  own  satisfaction,  as  well  as  that  of  his  pious  as- 
sociates,  the  reasons  of  God's  protracted  contioyersy 
¥rith  ińael,  and  the  sad  necessity  there  was  for  stiń 
dealing  hardly  with  them.  Tnuisported  by  the  Spirit 
(not  bodily,  indeed,  nor  by  extemal  force,  but  in  imag^ 
ination)  to  the  city  and  Tempie  of  Jerusakm,  he  there 
saw,  as  plainly  as  if  it  had  been  with  the  eye  of  sense, 
atrocities  goiiig  on  within  the  precincts  of  the  holy 
place — the  perpetration  of  which  in  the  yery  capital  of 
JudsM,  the  place  which  God  had  choeen  to  put  his  name 
there,  afforded  proof  of  the  wofnl  extent  of  national 
apostasy  and  corruption,  and  was  tuffident  to  justify, 
both  to  the  mind  of  the  prophet  and  his  cirde  of  pious 
associates,  the  seyerity  of  the  diyine  judgments  on  Is- 
rael, and  the  loud  cali  there  was  for  prolonging  and  in« 
creasing,  instead  of  putting  a  speedy  end  to,  the  dire 
calamities  they  had  so  long  been  suffering  (Ezek.  viii). 
See  EzEKiKu 

The  lirst  spectacle  that  caught  his  eye  as  be  peram- 
bulated,  in  mystic  yision,  the  outer  court  of  the  Tempie 
— Łhat  court  where  the  people  usually  assembled  to 
woT8hi[>— was  a  colossal  statuę,  probably  of  Baal,  around 
which  crowds  of  deyotees  were  performing  their  frantio 
reyelries,  and  wbose  forbidden  ensigns  were  proudly  bla* 
zoning  on  the  walls  and  portals  of  the  bouse  of  him  who 
had  proclaimed  himself  a  God  jealous  of  his  honor  (ver. 
3 ;  Lowtb,  ad  loc).  Scaicely  had  the  prophet  reoover- 
ed  from  his  astonishment  and  horror  at  the  open  and 
undiBguised  idolatiy  of  the  mnltitnde  in  that  sacred  in- 
dosurc,  when  his  celestial  guide  bade  him  tum  another 
way,  and  he  would  see  greater  abominations.  Leading 
him  to  that  side  of  the  court  along  which  were  ranged 
the  bouses  of  the  priests,  his  conductor  pointed  to  a  mud 
wali  (ver.  7),  which,  to  screen  themselyes  from  obserya- 
tion,  the  apostato  senrants  of  the  tme  God  had  raised ; 
and  in  that  wali  was  a  smali  chink,  by  widening  which 


IMAGERY 


£02 


IMAGERY 


he  discoyered  a  passage  into  a  secret  chamber,  which 
was  completely  imperyious  to  Łhe  rays  of  the  sun,  but 
which  he  found,  on  entenng  it,  lighted  up  by  a  profu- 
sion  of  brilliant  laraps.  The  sides  of  it  were  ooYered 
with  numerous  paintings  of  beasts  and  reptiles — Łhe  fa- 
Yorite  deities  of  Egypt;  and  with  their  eyes  intendy 
fixed  on  these  decorations  was  a  conclare  of  seyenty 
persons,  in  the  garb  of  priests— the  exact  number,  and, 
in  all  probability,  the  individual  membere  of  the  Sanhe- 
drim,  who  stood  in  the  attitude  of  adoration,  holding  in 
their  hands  each  a  golden  censer,  oontaining  all  the 
costly  and  odoriferous  materialB  which  the  pomp  and 
magnificence  of  the  Egyptian  ritual  reąuired.  ^  There 
was  eyery  form  of  creeping  things  and  abominable 
beasts,  and  all  the  idols  of  the  house  of  Israel  portrayed 
Tound  about"  The  scenę  described  was  wholly  formed 
on  the  model  of  Egyptian  worship  ^  and  eyery  one  who 
has  read  the  works  of  Wilkinson,  Belzoni,  Richardson, 
and  others,  will  perceiye  the  doee  resemblance  that  it 
bears  to  the  outer  walls,  the  sanctoaries,  and  the  hiero- 
glyphical  figures  that  distinguished  the  ancient  my thol- 
ogy  of  Egypt  (see  Kitto,  Piet,  BibU,  notę  ad  loc).  Wliat 
were  the  strange  and  unsightly  images  engrayen  on  the 
walls  of  this  chamber  discoyered  by  Ezekiel,  and  that 
formed  the  objects  of  the  profane  reyerence  of  these 
apostatę  councillors,  may  be  known  from  the  following 
metrical  description,  which  the  late  Mr.  Salt,  long  the 
British  consul  in  Egypt,  has  drawn  of  the  gods  worship- 
ped  by  the  ancient  idolatrous  inhabitants  of  that  coun- 
try ("Egypt,"  in  Hall's  Life  of  Scdty  ii,  416).  Thoee 
who  haye  prosecuted  their  researches  among  the  rub- 
bish  of  the  temples,  he  says,  haye  found  in  the  deeply- 
seąuestered  chambers  they  were  able  to  reach— 

*'  The  wildest  images,  unheard  of,  strange, 
That  ever  puzzled  antiąnarlaDs'  brains: 
Oenii,  with  heads  of  bird?,  hawks,  ibis,  drakes, 
Of  lions,  foxes,  cats,  flsh,  fros^s,  and  snakes, 
BallSt  rams,  and  monkeys,  htppopotami, 
With  knife  in  paw,  saspended  from  the  sky : 
Gods  germinanng  men,  and  men  tnmed  gods, 
Seatea  in  honor,  with  gilt  crooks  aud  rods ; 
Vast  scarabaei,  fflobes  bj  hands  upheld, 
From  chaos  spnnginc,  ^mid  an  endless  field : 
Of  forms  grotesqne.  the  sphinx,  the  crocodlle, 


And  olher  reptiles  ih>m  the  slime  of  Nile." 


Interior  of  the  Tempie  at  Mediuet-Aba. 
In  order  to  show  the  reader  still  further  how  exactly 


this  inner  chamber  that  Ezekiel  aaw  was  conatnetad 
after  the  Egyptian  fashion,  we  subjoin  an  extract  from 
the  work  of  another  trayeller,  descriptiye  of  the  greai 
tempie  of  EdfO,  one  of  the  admirable  relics  of  antiąui- 
ty,  from  which  it  will  be  seen  that  the  degenerate  priuts 
of  Jenisalem  had  borrowed  the  whole  style  of  the  edificc 
in  which  they  were  celebrating  their  hidden  rites— it« 
form,  its  entrance,  as  well  aa  iu  pictorial  omaments  on 
the  walls — ^firom  their  idolatrous  neighbors  of  Egypt: 
"  Considerably  below  the  sorface  of  the  adjoining  biiild> 
ing,"  says  he, "  my  conductor  pointed  out  to  me  a  dmtk 
inanold  wailj  which  he  told  me  I  should  creep  throngh 
on  my  hands  and  feet;  the  aperture  was  not  two  feek 
and  a  half  high,  and  scarcely  three  feet  and  a  hilf 
broad.    My  companion  had  the  comage  to  go  first, 
thrusting  in  a  lamp  before  him :  I  foUowed.  The  passsge 
was  so  narrow  that  my  mouth  and  noee  were  almost 
buried  in  the  dust,  and  I  was  nearly  aaffocated.    Afto 
proceeding  about  ten  yards  in  utter  darkneas,  the  hest 
became  exces8iye,  Łhe  breathing  was  laborious,  the  pei^ 
spiration  poured  down  my  face,  and  I  wonld  haye  giren 
Łhe  world  to  haye  got  out;  but  my  companion,  whose 
person  I  could  not  distiAguish,  though  his  yoioe  wis 
audible,  called  out  to  me  to  crawl  a  few  feet  liijther, 
and  that  I  should  find  plenty  of  room.     I  joined  him  at 
length,  and  had  the  inexpressible  satisfactioB  of  stand- 
ing  once  morę  upon  my  feet.    We  found  ounelyes  in  t 
spkndid  apartmeni  offfreat  magnitude,  adomed  with  aa 
incredible  profusion  of  sacred  painUngt  and  kieroglt/pk- 
ict"  (Madden's  TrareU  ta  Turkey^  ^^ffSPfy  e/c ;  see  albo 
Maurice,  Indian  A  ntiq,  ii,  2 12>     In  the  dark  receases  of 
such  a  chamber  as  this,  which  they  entered  like  tbe 
trayeller  through  a  hole  in  the  outer  wali,  and  in  whick 
was  painted  to  the  eye  the  groteaąue  and  motky  groap 
of  Egyptian  diyinities,  were  the  chief  men  at  Jenisa- 
lem actually  employed  when  Ezekiel  aaw  them.    T^ltk 
minds  highly  excited  by  the  dazzling  splendor,  and  the 
clouds  of  fragrant  smoke  that  fiUed  Łhe  iq>artnient,  the 
performers  of  those  clandestine  rites  seem  Ło  haye  sdt- 
passed  eyen  the  enthusiastic  zeal  of  their  anceston  in 
Łhe  days  of  Moses,  when,  crowding  round  the  pedestal 
of  the  golden  calf,  they  rent  the  air  wiŁh  their  cries  of 
"  These  be  Łhy  gods,  O  Israel  !"*     BeneaŁh  a  calmer  ex- 
terior,  Łhe  acŁors  in  the  scenę  pointed  out  to  Ezekiel 
concealed  a  stronger  and  morę  intense  paańon  for  idob- 
try.     Eyery  form  of  animal  life,  from  Łhe  nohkat  quad- 
ruped  to  Łhe  most  loaŁhsome  repŁile  that  spawned  in 
Egypt,  receiyed  a  share  of  their  insane  homage;  and 
the  most  extraordinary  feature  of  the  scenę  was  that 
the  indiyidual  who  appeared  to  be  the  director  of  theae 
foul  mysteries,  the  master  of  ceremonies,  was  Jaazaniab, 
a  descendant  of  Łhat  zealous  scnbe  who  had  gained  ao 
much  renown  aa  the  principal  adyiser  of  the  good  king 
Josiah,  and  whose  family  had  for  generationa  becn  re- 
gaided  as  the  most  illustrious  for  piety  in  Łhe  land.    The 
presence  of  a  scion  of  this  yenerated  houae  in  snch  a  deo 
of  impurity  struck  the  prophet  as  an  elecŁric  shock,  and 
showed,  beŁŁer  Łhan  all  Łhe  oŁher  painful  specŁacks  thii 
chamber  exhibited,  to  what  a  fearfnl  extenŁ  idolatzy 
had  inundated  Łhe  land.     See  Idolatrt. 

It  might  haye  been  supposed  impoesible  for  men  to 
haye  sunk  to  a  lower  depth  of  superstition  Łhan  that  of 
imiŁaŁing  Łhe  EgypŁians  in  worshipping  Łhe  moostcn 
of  Łhe  Nile,  or  Łhe  yegeŁable  produce  of  Łheir  fields  and 
gardens,  had  noŁ  Łhe  propheŁ  been  direcŁed  Ło  ton  yet 
again,  and  he  would  see  greaŁer  abominaŁions  that  they 
did.  "Then  he  brought  me  Ło  Łhe  gate  of  the  Lord'* 
houae,  which  was  towards  Łhe  north ;  and  behold,  there 
saŁ  women  weeping  for  Tammuz*"  (yer.  14).  This,  the 
principal  deity  of  Łhe  Phoenicians,  and  who  was  often 
called  also  by  ŁhaŁ  people  Adoni,  that  is,  My  Lofd,  be- 
came afterwards  famous  in  Łhe  Grecian  myUiology  nn- 
der  the  well-known  name  of  Adonis;  and  tbe  drcum- 
stance  of  his  bdng  selected  for  Łhe  subject  of  their  most 
beautiful  iiction  by  so  many  of  the  daasic  poets  is  a 
sufHcient  proof  of  the  great  popular  intereat  his  naone 
and  rlŁual  ezdted  among  the  idolaters  of  the  ; 


ntAGE-WORSmP 


603 


IMAGE-WORSHIP 


world.  Ił  is  said  to  hare  onginated  in  a  tragie  adren- 
tiiie  that  befell  an  intrepid  and  beautlM  prince  of  Pha»- 
mam,  wbo  was  killed  while  hunting  a  wild  boar,  by 
irhich  that  land  was  infested,  and  whose  untimely  death 
in  the  cause  of  his  country  was  bewailed  in  an  annual 
featiyal  held  to  commemoiate  the  disostrons  event. 
Duiing  the  seven  days  that  the  festiyal  lasted,  the 
PhoBBidans  appeaied  to  be  a  nation  of  moomers;  and 
in  eveiy  town  and  yillage  a  fictitious  representation  of 
Tammoz  was  got  up  for  the  oocasion,  and  the  whole 
popnlation  aasembled  to  potir  forth  their  unbounded  sor- 
IOW  for  his  hi^iless  fate,  morę  espedally  at  Byblos,  in 
Syria,  where  a  tempie  was  erected  in  honor  of  this  na- 
tional  detty.  A  strange  impoetnre  was  practised  to  in- 
fluence the  public  lamentations.  There  was  in  this 
tfemple  a  gigantic  statne  of  the  god,  the  eyes  of  which 
were  fiUed  with  lead,  which,  on  fire  being  applied  with- 
in,  of  ooorae  melted  and  fell  in  big  drops  to  the  gfound, 
a  signal  for  the  load  wailings  of  the  by-standeis,  whose 
eyes^  in  sympathetic  imitation,  were  dissolred  in  tears. 
CoDspicnoiis  among  the  crowd  on  snch  occasions,  a  band 
of  meroenaiy  females  directed  the  oigies;  and,  in  con- 
fonnity  with  an  ancient  cuatom  of  bewailing  the  dead 
on  annirersańes  at  the  door$  o/houtes  (Potter^s  Greeian 
Autiq,  bk.  iv,  eh.  iii),  others  took  their  station  at  the 
galty  with  their  faces  directed  northwards,  as  the  son 
was  aaid  to  hare  been  in  that  qiiarter  of  the  heavens  at 
tłie  time  when  Tammuz  died.  'fhese  yiolent  efTorts  in 
moamtng  weie  alwąys  foUowed  by  scenes  of  the  most 
lioentious  and  rcTolting  revelry,  which,  though  not  men- 
tioned,  are  manifestly  implied  among  the  '^greater 
abominations"  which  degraded  this  other  group  of  idol- 
ateia.    See  Tammuz. 

Besides  the  hieroglyphics  of  Egypt  and  the  oigies  of 
Tammuz,  there  was  another  ibrm  of  superstition  still, 
which  in  Jerusalem,  then  ahnoet  whoUy  given  to  idola- 
try,  had  its  distinguished  patrons.  *<Tam  thee  yet 
again,"  said  his  celestial  gnidę  to  the  prophet,  '*and  thou 
shait  aee  greater  abominations  than  these*'  (irer.  16). 
So  be  brought  him  **unto  the  inner  court  of  the  Lord'8 
hoase,  and  behold,  at  the  door  of  the  tempie  of  the  Lord, 
between  the  porch  and  the  altar,  were  about  flve-and- 
twenty  men,  with  their  backs  towards  the  tempie  of  the 
Lord,  and  their  faces  towards  the  east;  and  they  wor- 
shipped  the  sun  towards  the  east.'*  Perhaps  of  all  the 
yarieties  of  superstition  which  had  crept  in  among  the 
Hebrews  in  that  period  of  genend  dedine,  nonę  display- 
ed  soch  flagrant  dishonor  to  the  God  of  Israel  as  this 
(Ciem.  Alesandrinus,  Sfrom.  vii,  520) ;  for,  as  the  most 
boly  place  was  situated  at  the  west  end  of  the  sanctu- 
ary,  it  was  imposaible  for  these  twenty-five  men  to  pay 
their  homage  to  the  rising  sun  without  tuming  their 
backs  on  the  consecrated  place  of  the  divine  presence; 
and  accordingly  this  foorth  cirde  is  introdaced  last,  as 
if  their  employment  formed  the  climax  of  abominations 
— ^the  worst  and  most  wofhl  sign  of  the  times.  Gould 
■tninger  proofis  be  waated  that  the  Lord  had  not  for- 
aaken  Israel,  bat  was  driven  from  them  ?  This  was  the 
lesBoa  intended,  and  actually  aocompUshed  by  the  vi- 
sion;  for  while  the  prophet  was  madę  aware  by  this 
mystic  scenę  of  the  actoal  state  of  things  among  his  de- 
geoerate  countrymen  at  home,  he  saw  himself— and  in- 
Btrucied  the  pious  cirde  aroond  him  to  see — a  proof  of 
the  kmg^auffering  and  the  just  8everity  of  God  in  defer- 
rii^  to  answer  their  fenrent  and  long-continued  prayers 
for  the  emandpation  of  their  country.  —  Kitto*  See 
Scnr. 

Image-^^onhip,  the  adoration  of  artificial  reprie- 
sentaŁions  of  real  or  unaginary  objects.    See  Idolatry. 

L  Imaffe-wonhip  amonff  the  Jews, — It  bas  always 
been  a  tendency  of  the  hnman  mind,  untaught  by  tnie 
reveIation,  to  embody  the  invisible  deity  in  some  vlsible 
form,  and  especially  in  the  haman  form.  This  l«d  to 
representations  of  God,  or  of  the  gods,  as  conceived  by 
the  mind,  in  painting  or  statuary,  under  all  ktnds  of 
shapea,  such  as  men,  rooosters,  animals,  etc.  In  the 
ooane  of  time  these  lepreeentations  came  to  be  oonsid- 


ered  as  being  themselyes  the  gods,  and  to  be  worahipped 
in  temples  and  on  altars.  The  Jews,  as  worshippers  of 
ofie  God,  were  by  the  law  of  Moses  forbidden  to  make 
any  image  of  Jehovah ;  but  the  people,  comipted  by  the 
examp]e  of  the  Egyptians,  compdled  Aaron  to  erect  a 
golden  calf  in  the  Desert.  After  their  entrance  into  Ca- 
naan,  as  the  worshtp  of  Jehovah  was  not  yet  fully  organ- 
ized  and  aocessible  to  all,  they  madę  use  in  their  house- 
hold  deyotions  of  images  of  the  Inyiaible,  and  that  prao- 
tice  became  quite  generał ;  but,  as  the  dyil  and  rdigious 
organization  of  the  Jews  became  morę  developed,  this 
practice  fell  gradually  into  disose,  and  it  was  no  k>nger 
tolerated  under  Dayid  and  Solcmon.  After  the  separa- 
tion  between  Judah  and  Israel,  Rehoboam  restored  tlie 
use  of  images  in  the  latter  kingdom  for  political  motives, 
erecting  golden  calves  in  Dan  and  BetheL  In  the  king- 
dom of  Judah  the  worship  of  images  foand,however,  but 
few  partisans.  After  the  captiyity  of  Babylon  we  find 
nottacesofit 

II.  In  the  Christian  C^ttrcA.— Images  weie  unknown 
in  the  worship  of  the  primitiye  Chiistians ;  and  this  fact 
was,  indeed,  madc  the  ground  of  a  chaige  of  atheism  on 
the  part  of  the  heathen  against  the  Christians.  The 
primitiye  Christians  abstained  from  the  wcHTship  of  im- 
ages, not  as  the  Romanists  pietend,  from  tendemess  to 
heathen  idolaters,  but  because  they  thought  it  unlawfal 
in  itsdf  to  make  any  images  of  the  deity.  Tertullian, 
Clemens  Alezaudrinos,  and  Origen  were  eyen  of  opinion 
that,  by  the  second  commandment,  painting  and  engray- 
ing  were  unlawful  to  a  Christian,  styling  thera  evil  and 
wicked  aits  (Tertullian,  de  IdoL  c  iii ;  Ciem.  Alezand. 
Adnum.  ad  Genf.  p.  41;  Origen,  contra  Celsum^  yi,  182). 
Some  of  the  Gnostic  sects,  espedally  the  BasiUdians  (q. 
y.)  and  the  Ourpocratians  (q.  v.),  madę  effigies  of  Christ, 
St  Paul,  etc  See  Gncnstics.  This  example  of  professed 
philosophera  was  not  without  its  influence  on  the  Church, 
and  it  was  sec4>nded  by  a  aimilar  usage  among  the  Man- 
ichseans  (q.  v.),  and  by  the  steady  pressure  of  heathen 
ideas  and  habits  npon  Christianity.  Emblems,  such  as 
the  dore,  the  flsh,  the  anchor,  yine,  lamb^  etc,  engrayed 
on  seals,  formed  the  first  step;  then  came  paintings 
represcnting  Biblical  cyents,  saints  or  martyrs,  etc., 
wliich  were  plaoed  in  the  yestibule  of  the  church.  Yet 
this  practice  was  unfayorably  r^garded  by  the  synods 
of  the  4th  oentury.  When,  however,  in  the  same  oen- 
tury,  Christianity  was  proclaimed  the  religion  of  the 
State,  many  distingui8hed  persons  embraced  it^  and  its 
ceremoniał  became  roore  imposing;  and  in  the  5th  oen- 
tury the  use  of  painting,  sculpture,  and  Jewelry  became 
generał  for  the  decoration  of  the  churches.  This  re- 
sulted  in  the  adoption  of  a  regular  system  of  symbolie 
religious  images.  Paulinus  of  Nola  (q.  v.)  was  chiefly 
instrumental  in  introducing  these  practices  in  the  West, 
and,  as  the  images  were  at  fiist  chiefly  used  in  books 
intended  for  the  instruction  of  the  poor  and  the  huty 
[see  Biblia  Paupebum],  who  were  too  ignorant  to  read, 
they  probably  did  morę  good  than  harm  at  the  time; 
but  as  the  teachem  of  the  Church  became  gradually 
morę  accommodating  in  their  relations  with  the  hea- 
then, holding  out  greater  priyileges  to  them,  and  allow- 
ing  them  to  retain  their  old  osages  while  conforming  to 
the  outward  forms  of  Christianity,  the  worship  of  im- 
ages became  so  generał  that  it  had  to  be  repeatedly 
checked  by  laws.  In  the  6th  oentury  it  had  grown  into 
a  great  abuse,  especially  in  the  East,  where  images  were 
madę  the  object  of  espedal  adoration :  they  were  kisaed, 
lamps  were  bomed  before  them,  incense  was  olTered  to 
them,  and,  in  short,  they  were  treated  in  every  respect  , 
as  the  heathen  were  wont  to  treat  the  images  of  their 
gods.  Some  of  the  heads  of  the  Church  encouraged 
these  practices  from  motiyes  of  policy,  while  the  morę 
enlightened  and  eyangelical  portion  strongly  opposed 
thera.    This  gaye  rise  to  the  loonoclasts  (q.  v.). 

Neander  describes  the  origiu  of  the  use  of  images  in 
churches  as  foliows:  "It  was  not  in  the  Church, but  in 
the  family,  that  rdigious  images  first  came  into  use 
among  the  Christians.    In  their  daily  intercourse  with 


IMAGE-WORSHIP 


604 


IMAGE-WORSHIP 


men,  the  Chiistians  saw  ŁhemselreB  eyerywhere  sor- 
rounded  by  the  objects  of  pagan  mj^thology,  or,  at  least, 
by  objects  offensiye  bo  their  maral  and  Christian  senti- 
ments.  Representations  of  this  sort  oovered  the  waUs 
in  shops,  and  were  the  omaments  of  drinking-yessek 
and  seal-rings,  on  which  the  pagans  frequent]y  had  en- 
grayed  the  images  of  their  gods,  so  that  they  might 
worship  them  when  they  pleased.  It  was  natnral  that, 
in'  place  of  these  objects,  so  ofTensiye  to  their  religious 
and  monU  sentiments,  the  Christiana  should  substitute 
otheis  morę  agreeable  to  them.  Thua  they  preferied 
to  havc  on  the  goblets  the  figurę  of  a  shepherd  earrying 
a  lamb  on  his  shoulder,  which  was  the  symbol  of  our 
Sayionr  rescning  the  repentant  sinner,  acoording  to  the 
Gospel  paiable.  Clement  of  Alexandria  says,  in  refei^ 
ence  to  the  seal-rings  of  the  Christiana,  *  Let  our  signets 
be  a  doye  (the  symbol  of  the  Holy  Spirit),  or  a  fish,  or 
«  ship  saifing  towards  heayen  (the  sjnnboi  of  the  Chris- 
tian Church  and  of  the  indiyidual  Christian  floul),  or  a 
lyre  (the  symbol  of  Christian  joy),  or  an  andior  (the 
symbol  of  Christian  hope) ;  and  he  who  is  a  fisherman 
will  not  be  forgetful  of  the  apostle  Peter,  and  of  the 
children  taken  from  the  water;  for  no  images  of  gods 
should  be  engrayed  on  the  rings  of  those  who  are  for- 
bidden  all  interoourse  with  idols;  no  sword  or  bow  on 
ihe  rings  of  those  who  striye  after  peaoe ;  no  goblets  on 
the  lings  of  those  who  are  the  friends  of  sobriety.*  Yet 
religious  emblems  passed  irom  domestic  use  into  the 
churches  perhaps  as  eariy  as  the  end  of  the  8d  oentury. 
The  walls  of  them  were  painted  in  this  manner.  The 
Council  of  Elyira,  in  the  year  803,  opposed  this  innoya- 
tion  aa  an  abuse,  and  forfoade  Hhe  objects  of  worship 
and  adoration  to  be  painted  on  the  walls*"  (Neander, 
Church  History,  i,  292). 

IIL  Image  toorship  «n  the  Roman  CathoUc  Churdu-^ 
The  Romanists  deny  the  charge  of  worshipping  images, 
oridolatry,  which  has  often  been  and  is  still  madę 
against  them  by  Protestanta.  They  haye  always  care- 
fully  refrained  from  such  doctrinai  dtfinUions  on  the 
sttbject  as  would  fuUy  convict  the  Church  of  idolatry. 
In  this  respect  the  oourse  of  the  Romish  Church  is  sim- 
ilar  to  its  procedurę  with  regard  to  the  doctrine  of  good 
worka,  which  it  presents  in  such  a  manner  as  might  lead 
one  to  think  that  it  strictly  asserts  the  merits  of  Christ 
as  alone  rendering  our  works  nseful,  whilst  th  pradice 
the  belieyer  Ib  pointed  to  good  works  as  the  means  of 
salyation.  So,  with  regard  to  prayers  to  the  Yirgin 
and  the  aaints,  it  draws  a  dear  distinction  between  the 
adoration  and  the  worship  of  saints,  but  practically  the 
prayers  of  the  Roman  Catholics  are  morę  generally  ad- 
diessed  to  the  saints  than  to  Christ.  The  same  takes 
place  with  regard  to  images.  The  Council  of  Trent 
(Sess.  xxy,  De  tmocatione  Sanctorum,  etc.)  states  *Uhat 
the  images  of  Christ  and  of  the  eyer  yirgin  Mother  of 
God,  and  in  like  manner  of  other  saints,  are  to  be  kept 
and  retained,  and  that  due  honor  and  reneration  is  to 
be  awarded  to  them.  Not  that  it  is  belieyed  that  eny 
divinity  or  power  resides  in  them,  on  aocoimt  of  which 
they  are  to  be  worshipped,  or  that  any  benefit  is  to  be 
sought  from  them,  or  any  oonfldence  placed  in  images,  as 
was  formerly  done  by  the  Gentiles,  who  fixed  their  hope 
in  idols.  But  the  honor  with  which  they  are  regarded 
is  referred  to  those  who  are  represented  by  them ;  so 
that  we  adore  Christ  and  yenerate  the  saints,  whose 
likenesses  these  images  bear,  when  we  kiss  them,  and 
uncoyer  our  heads  in  their  presence,  and  prostrate  our- 
selve8."  The  council  quotes  on  this  snbject  the  seoond 
Synod  of  Nioea.  To  this  **  honor  and  yeneration"  be- 
long  the  solemn  consecration  of  the  images,  offering  np 
inoense  before  them,  the  special  prayers  accompanying 
these  oeremonies  as  contained  in  the  PonHficah  Borna- 
num^  othcr  prayers  for  priyate  use  to  be  repeated  before 
the  images,  and  the  indulgences  granted  to  those  who 
fulfil  that  duty,  etc.  All  this  shows  that  the  Romish 
Church,  whfle  rejecting  in  form  the  doctrine  of  image 
worship,  has  introduced  the  pradice  among  the  people. 
The  masses  do  not  and  cannot  nnderstand  the  subtle 


distinction  madę  by  the  Chm^h,  and  not  ałwajrs  iMef 
ly  obeeryed  eyen  by  the  dergy.  The  Church  knmn 
of  this  evil,  but  places  it  among  things  sfae  tolentes  for 
the  sake  of  charity,  though  she  does  not  appioye  them. 
Yet  some  Roman  Catholic  theokigians  appear  to  hare 
oome  yery  cloee  indeed  to  the  same  conception  as  the 
masses  on  this  point.  Thomas  Aąuinas  exprened  hii 
yiews  of  images  in  a  dilemma :  **A  pictnre  oonsidaed 
in  itself  is  worthy  of  no  yeneration,  but  if  we  ooosider  it 
as  an  image  of  Christ  it  may  be  allowable  to  make  an  in- 
temal  distinction  between  the  image  and  its  subject,  and 
adoroHo  and  latria  are  as  well  due  to  it  as  to  Cluist" 
(iii  Sent,  dist.  9,  qu.  1,  art.  2, 8 ;  Summa,  qu.  28,  art.  4, 5). 
Bonayentun  drew  a  oonrect  condusion  from  the  prind- 
ple :  **  Sinoe  all  yeneration  shown  to  the  image  of  Chiict 
is  shown  to  Christ  himsdf,  then  the  image  of  Chiiat  is 
also  entitled  to  be  prayed  to"  (CuUus  latria,  L  iii,  diit 
9,  art  1,  qu.  2).  Bellarmine  says  that  **  the  images  of 
Christ  and  the  saints  are  to  be  adored  not  only  in  a  flg- 
uratiye  manner,  but  quite  posidyely,  so  that  the  ya^ 
ers  are  durectly  addreseed  to  them,  and  not  mody  as 
the  representatiyes  of  the  original  (Ita  ut  ipsi  [imag- 
ines]  terminent  yenerationero,  nt  in  ae  considerantnr  et 
non  ut  yicem  gerant  exemplaris).  The  image  itself  is 
in  some  degree  holy,  namely,  by  its  likeness  to  one  hdy, 
its  consecration  and  its  use  in  wonhip;  ftom  whence  it 
follows  that  the  images  themsdyes  are  not  entitled  to 
the  same  honor  as  God,  but  to  less**  {De  ImagiaSbns,  L  ii, 
c.  x),  L  e.  the  difference  between  the  diyine  wonhip 
and  image  worship  is  one  of  degree  or  quantity,  not  of 
naturę  or  quality.  Such  theories,  ałthongh  far  oreiy 
stepphig  the  limits  of  the  decree  of  Trent,  are  yet  fteelj 
permitted  by  the  Romish  Church ;  it  neither  openly  ad- 
mits  nor  officially  condemns  them,  and  thus  leayes  an 
opening  for  all  possible  degrees  of  idolatiy,  over  which 
many  an  honest  Roman  Catholic  priest  monmi  in  se- 
cret. 

History  shows  that  the  first  tendeney  to  image-wor- 
ship  was  the  result  of  a  dow  but  condnued  degencncr. 
The  same  argnments  now  used  by  the  Romish  Church 
to  defend  image-worship  were  rąjected  by  the  Christiana 
of  the  first  three  centuries  when  used  in  the  defenoe  of 
idol-worship.  The  heathen  said.  We  do  not  wonhip 
the  images  themsdyes,  but  those  whom  they  represent 
To  this  Łactantius  answeis  (/iMf.  Dit.  UK  ii,  c  2),  **  Yoa 
worship  them ;  for,  if  3roa  belieye  them  to  be  in  heayen, 
why  do  yott  not  raise  your  eyes  np  to  heayen?  why  do 
you  look  at  the  wood  and  stone,  and  not  up,  where  yoa 
belieye  the  originals  to  be?"  The  andent  Church  re- 
jected  the  use  of  all  images  (Synod  ofEMra,  805,  c.  80: 
"  Fhuzuit,  picturas  in  ecclesiis  esse  non  dcbere,  ne  qnod 
colitur  aut  adoratur,  in  parietibns  depingatur").  The 
early  Christiana  eridently  feared  that  pictures  in  their 
churches  would  eyentually  become  ol^ecta  of  prayer. 
The  admission  of  imagcs^into  the  church  in  the  *4th 
and  6th  centuries  was  justified  on  the  theoiy  that  the 
ignorant  people  could  leam  the  fiu*ts  of  Christianity 
fh>m  them  better  than  from  sermons  or  booka.  Bot  the 
people  soon  lost  sight  of  this  use  of  the  images,  and 
madę  them  the  objects  of  adoration.  This  took  place 
earlier  in  the  East  than  in  the  West;  but  the  almae  gain- 
ed  gronnd  in  the  latter  region  in  a  short  time.  Serenus, 
bishop  of  Marsdlles,  broke  seyeral  images,  and  had  them 
taken  out  of  the  church,  because  he  found  that  tbe  peo- 
ple prayed  to  them.  Gregory  the  Great  prodaims  that 
he  does  not  allow  any  praying  to  (adorari)  tbe  images, 
and  adds  to  this  that  Paulinus  of  Nola  and  Kilus  had 
aheady  sud  that  paintings  were  plaoed  In  the  church 
only  in  order  that  the  uneducated  might  read  on  the 
walls  what  they  were  unable  to  read  in  books  (liU  ix, 
ep.  105).  He  also  laid  down,  as  a  generał  princtple,  m 
his  letter  to  Secundinus,  that  it  waa  expedient  to  ute 
the  yisible  to  represent  the  inyisible  (Kh.  ix,  ep.  52). 
But  he  shows  eyidently  that  he  is  not  speaking  of  a 
merę  objective  representation  of  Deity,  for  he  says  that 
he  prostrates  himself  (proefemimwi)  before  the  imaii^es, 
making  the  well-known  Roman  Catholic  condition  that 


IMAGINATION 


606 


IMAGDfATION 


be  thos  reaUy  pnys  to  Christ  The  aeoond  Gcnmcil  of 
NicKA  (A.D.  797)  decreed  the  Yalidity  of  imege-wonhip, 
and  anathcmatised  all  who  opposed  it.  The  Fnnkbh 
Chuich,  on  the  other  haad,  though  it  did  not  foibid  the 
lue  of  imageB  in  the  church,  formally  deckied  against 
thdr  hang  wonhipped.  Charlemagne  oppooed  to  the 
decRCfl  of  the  synod  the  so-called  Cuuluie  books  (q.  v.)» 
in  which  it  is  ezprasaly  ssid  that  images  are  allowed 
in  the  chuzch,  but  not  to  be  prayed  to,  only  to  excite 
the  ainntion  on  the  sobjects  they  commemorate,  and  to 
adom  the  walls.  **  For,"  as  it  says  fuither  on,  **  if  some 
enlightened  penona,  who  do  not  pniy  to  the  image  it- 
self,  bat  to  him  it  lepreaents,  shoold  piay  before  the  im- 
age, it  woold  mialead  the  ignorant,  who  pray  only  to 
what  they  see  before  their  eyes"  (Ub.  iii,  16).  The  Syn- 
od of  Fnnkfort  (snmmoned  by  Charlemagne,  A.D.  794, 
and  eonasŁing  of  300  bishops)  and  the  Synod  of  Pana 
(825)  acdemnly  oondemned  image-woiship.  The  latter 
eouacil  eren  yentiued  to  reject  the  pope'8  contiary  opin- 
ion  in  Tery  stzong  terms.  Doring  the  whole  of  the  9th 
centnry  the  mattcr  was  thns  at  rest,  Chiiidins  of  Torin, 
Agoboid,  and  other  of  the  most  important  theok)gians  of 
that  period  approring  the  action  of  the  synods.  Jonas 
of  Orieans,  an  opponent  of  CUmditis,  expressly  says,  in 
his  De  euUu  miO^mkjm,  that  images  are  plaoed  in  the 
chnreh  "aolummodo  ad  instrnendas  nescientium  men- 
tesL*  The  Coundl  of  Trent,  as  cited  above,  recommends 
images  as  means  of  instmsting  the  people,  and  to  incite 
the  iaithfnl  to  imitate  the  saints;  but  in  later  times 
the  Bomiah  Church  has  added  to  this  what  the  Frank- 
ish  Church  of  the  8th  and  9th  centuries  had  so  wisely 
rejecied^— Heizog,  JUal-Encyklop.  ii,  288-286.  The  fluc- 
toations  of  opinion  and  variations  of  discipline  in  the 
Romish  Church  on  the  subject  of  image-worship  are 
weH  ezhibited  by  Faber  {D^tcuUieg  ofRomamsm^  p.  10 
et  S!}.).  See  White,  BampUm  Leeturei,  p,  8 ;  Coleman, 
AneiaU  Ckrittiamfyt  chap.  xiii,  §  14;  Spanbeim,  Hist. 
Imagmum,  Opera,  tom.  ii ;  Bingham,  Orig,  Eedes^  book 
riii,  cb.  viii;  Tenison,  On  IdokUryt  p.  269  są.;  Winer, 
Comp.Dar8telUmg,  iii,  1.  See  aiao  articles  I€X>iioclast8  ; 
Ioo!fOOiiAFHT;  Grebk  Chubch;  Roman  Church. 

TnMgInation  (LaLimagmatio),  '^Themeaningof 
this  word  enters  into  many  reUtioaships,  and  is  thereby 
mdered  difficult  to  define.  The  principal  meaning  is 
doubtleas  what  oonnects  it  with  poetry  and  fine  art,  (h»m 
which  the  other  signilwations  branch  off.  The  simplest 
modę  of  explaimng  this  eomplicated  rehitionship  wili  be 
to  State  in  separation  the  dilEsrent  constitoents  of  the 
power  in  ąnestion.  We  shall  then  see  why  and  where 
it  tooches  upon  other  laculties,  which  still  requue  to  be 
diułingiiished  from  it. 

"1.  Imagination  has  for  its  ol^ects  the  amerde,  the 
leal,  or  the  individnal,  as  opppsed  to  abstractions  and 
gCDenlitiea,  which  are  the  matter  of  sdenoe.  The  fuli 
ookifing  of  reality  is  implied  in  our  imagination  of  any 
scenę  of  naturę.  In  this  respect,  there  is  something 
ooounon  to  imagination  and  memory.  K  we  endeavor 
to  imagine  a  yolcano,  aooording  as  we  sucoeed,  we  have 
befim  the  mind  everything  that  a  spectator  wouM  ob- 
seive  on  the  spot.  Thus,  senaation,  memory,  and  imag^ 
instłon  alike  deal  with  the  fulneas  of  the  actual  world, 
at  oppoeed  to  the  abstractions  of  sdenoe  and  the  reason- 
isg  facukies. 

"The  Cundty  caUed  ooneeptiont  in  one  of  its  meanings, 
hit  aIao  to  do  with  this  concrete  fulness,  although,  in 
what  Sir  William  Hamilton  deems  the  original  and 
proper  meaning  of  that  word,  this  power  is  excluded. 
In  popular  language,  and  in  the  philoeophy  of  Dogaki 
Stewart,  conception  is  applied  to  the  case  of  our  re^iz- 
ing  any  description  of  actual  life,  as  giren  in  history  or 
in  poetoy.  When  we  completely  enter  into  a  scenę  por- 
tf^ned  by  a  writer  or  speaker,  and  approach  the  situa- 
tion  of  the  actual  obserrer,  we  are  often  said  to  ooneeive 
what  is  meant,and  also  to  imagine  it ;  the  best  word  for 
this  HgDification  probably  is  'realize.' 

"  2.  It  is  further  essential  to  imagination  in  its  strictest 
Mme  that  then  sbould  be  aome  original  coostmction,  or 


that  what  is  imagined  should  not  be  a  merę  pictnre  ot 
what  we  have  seen.  Creatireness,  origination,  inyen- 
tion,  are  names  abo  designating'  the  same  power,  and 
excloding  merę  memory,  or  the  literał  reproduction  of 
past  experience.  £very  artist  is  aaid  to  have  imagina- 
tion according  as  he  can  rise  to  new  combinations  or  ef- 
fects  diiferent  from  what  he  has  found  in  his  actual  ob- 
seryation  of  naturę.  A  litera],  mattcr-of-fact  historian 
would  be  sald  to  be  wanting  in  the  faculty.  The  exact 
copying  of  naturę  may  be  very  meńtorious  in  an  artist, 
and  Tery  agreeable  as  an  eifect,  but  we  should  not  des- 
ignate  it  by  the  term  imagination.  There  are,  however, 
in  the  sdences,  and  in  all  the  common  arts,  strokes  of  in- 
vention  and  new  constructions,  to  which  it  might  seem  at 
first  sight  unfair  to  lefuse  the  term  in  question,  if  origi- 
nality  be  a  leading  feature  in  its  deflnition.  But  still  we 
do  not  nsually  apply  the  term  imagination  to  this  case, 
and  for  a  reason  that  will  appear  when  we  mcntion  the 
next  peculiarity  attaching  to  the  faculty. 

*'8.  Imagination  has  for  its  ruling  element  some  emO' 
tion  of  the  mind,  to  gratify  which  all  its  constructions 
are  guided.  Herę  lies  the  great  contrast  between  it  and 
the  creadveness  of  science  and  roechanical  inyention. 
These  last  are  instnimental  to  remote  objects  of  eon- 
renience  or  pleasure.  A  creation  of  the  imagination 
oomes  home  at  onoe  to  the  mind,  and  has  no  ulterior 
view. 

<*  Whenerer  we  are  under  the  mastery  of  some  strong 
emotion,  the  current  of  our  thoughts  is  aiTected  and  col- 
ored  by  that  emotion ;  what  chimes  in  with  it  is  retained, 
and  other  things  kept  out  of  sight  We  also  form  new 
constructions  that  suit  the  state  of  the  moment.  Thus, 
in  fear,  we  are  orerwhelmed  by  objects  of  alarm,  and  even 
conjure  up  spectres  that  have  no  exi8tence.  But  the 
highest  example  of  all  is  presented  to  us  by  the  con- 
structions of  flne  art,  which  are  determined  by  those  emo- 
tions  called  cesthełicy  the  sense  of  beauty,  tlie  pleasures  of 
taste;  they  are  sometimcs  expres8ly  styled  ^pleasures 
of  the  imagination.'  llie  artist  has  in  himself  those 
yarious  sensibilities  to  an  unusual  degree,  and  he  caryca 
and  shapes  his  creations  with  a  yiew  to  gratifying 
them  to  the  utmost,  Thus  it  happens  that  fine  art  and 
imagination  are  related  together,  while  science  and  use- 
ful  art  are  connected  with  our  reasoning  faculties,  which 
mąy  also  be  faculties  of  inyention.  1 1  is  a  dcyiation  from 
the  correct  use  of  language,  and  a  confounding  of  things 
easentially  distinct^  to  say  that  a  man  of  science  stands 
in  need  of  imagination  as  well  as  powers  of  reason ;  he 
needs  the  power  of  original  conttruction,  but  his  inyen- 
tions  are  not  fnmed  to  satisfy  present  erootions,  but  to 
be  instnimental  in  remote  ends,  which  in  their  remote- 
ness  may  excite  nothing  that  is  usually  understood  as 
emotion.  £yexy  artist  exerci8es  the  faculty  in  ques- 
tion  if  he  produoes  anything  original  in  his  art. 

'*The  name  'Fancy*  has  subetantially  the  meanings 
now  described,  and  was  originally  identical  with  imag- 
ination. It  is  a  coRuption  oi/aniasy,  from  the  Greek 
^ttvraoia.  It  has  now  a  shade  of  meaning  somewhat 
different,  being  applied  to  those  creations  that  are  most 
widely  remoyed  from  the  world  of  reality.  In  the  ex- 
ercise  of  our  imagination  we  may  keep  doee  to  naturę, 
and  only  indulge  the  liberty  of  recombining  what  we 
find,  so  as  to  surpass  the  original  in  some  points,  with- 
oat  forcing  together  what  could  not  co-exut  in  reality. 
This  it  the  sober  style  of  art.  But  when,  in  order  to 
gratify  the  unbounded  longings  of  the  mind,  we  con- 
stnict  a  lairy-land  with  characteristics  altogether  be- 
yond  what  human  life  can  fumish,  we  are  said  to  enter 
the  regions  of  fimcy  and  the  fantasticaL 

^The  'ideał'  and  *ideality*  are  also  among  the  syn- 
onymes  of  imagination,  and  their  usnal  acceptation  il- 
luatrates  still  further  the  property  now  discussed.  The 
*  ideał*  is  sometliing  that  fascinates  the  mind,  or  gratifies 
some  of  our  strong  emotions  and  crayings,  when  reality 
is  inaoffident  for  tliat  endL  Desiring  something  to  ad- 
mire  and  lorę  beyond  what  the  world  can  supply,  we 
atrike  out  a  oombination  free  fiom  the  defecta  of  com- 


IMANI 


606     IMMACULATE  CONCEPTION 


mon  hnmanity,  and  adomed  with  mora  than  exoellence. 
Thii  is  OUT  4deal,'  what  satisiies  our  emotiona,  and  the 
fact  of  its  80  doing  is  the  detennining  influence  in  tbe 
construction  of  if  (ChambeiB).    See  Idkausm. 

Imani  is  the  name  of  the  third  sacred  book  of  laws 
of  the  Turks,  containing  the  directions  for  a  reasonable 
conduct  of  life.— Pierer,  Umv,  Lex,  viii,  880. 

Imaum  or  Iman  is  the  title  of  a  person  belonging 
to  a  dass  of  the  Mohammedan  Ulema  (q.  v.)  or  priestly 
body,  but  not  set  apart  from  the  rest  of  the  world 
like  the  clergy  or  priesthood,  with  whom  he  is  usually 
classed.  He  is  not  ordained,  nor  is  any  sacred  charac- 
ter  conferred  upon  him.  The  name  is  Arabie,  and  sig- 
nifies  '*he  who  is  at  the  head.^*  In  this  sense  it  is  ap- 
plied  even  to  the  sułtan,  ^*  Imaum  ul-Muslemin,"  or 
simply  *^  Imaum,"  and  is  ^ven  to  the  most  bonored 
teachers  of  Mohammedanism,  who  in  the  first  centuries 
of  the  Hegira  dereloped  and  settled  the  opinion  and 
lair  of  Islam,  as  "  those  whose  teachings  are  followed.** 
The  imaum,  whose  instruction  generally  e^tends  only 
to  the  understanduig  of  the  Koran,  calls  the  Moslem  to 
prayer  from  the  top  of  minarets,  performs  the  rites  of 
drcumcision,  marriage,  burial,  etc.,  and  presides  over 
the  assembly  of  the  faithful  at  prayers,  except  at  the 
aolemn  noon  prayers  on  Friday,  which  are  under  the  su- 
perintendence  of  the  khatib,  a  higher  minister  {"  who 
is  alao  called,  from  that  circumstance,  the  Imaum  uUJu- 
mdf  or  Friday  Iman").  He  is  elected  to  his  office  by 
the  people,  and  conńrmed  by  the  authorities,  to  whom 
be  remains  subject  in  all  ci\41  ana  crimuud  matters ;  but 
be  certainly  enjoys  many  pńy-ileges ;  among  otbers,  hc 
cannot  be  roade  to  suffer  death  puuisbment  as  long  as 
be  retjuns  his  office  as  imaum.  In  spiritual  affairs  he 
becomes  independent.  He  can  resign  his  office  and  re- 
turn to  the  laity  whenerer  he  chooses.  The  imaums  are 
greatly  revcred  by  the  people.  For  striking  an  imaum 
a  Turkish  layman  is  punished  with  the  loss  of  one  of 
his  hands,  but  a  Christian  with  death.  In  dress  he  is 
distinguished  from  the  laity  by  a  turban  somewhat 
broader,  madę  of  different  materiał,  by  a  long  beard,  and 
by  long  sleeres  in  his  coat  (tunic).  Sec  Taylor,  IJistory 
o/ Mohammedanism,  eh.  viii ;  Pierer,  Univ,  Lfx,  viii,  830. 
(J.  H.W.) 

Imitation  of  Christ.    See  Kkahfłe. 

Im'la  (Heb.  YimJa%  Kb«7,  replemskerf  Sept  'Ufi- 
\a)f  the  father  of  Micaiah,  which  latter  was  the  prophct 
who  ironically  foretold  the  defeat  of  the  alhed  kings  of 
Judah  and  Israel  against  Ramoth-Gilcad  (2  Chroń,  xviii, 
8,  9).  In  the  paralld  passage  (1  Kings  xxii,  8,  9)  his 
name  is  ^mtten  Imlaii  (Heb.  Yimlah%  f^^^f,  *d, ;  Sept. 
*Io|i/3Xń).     B.C.  antę  896. 

Im^Iah  (1  Kings  xxii,  8,  9).  See  Imła. 
^  Immaculate  Conception  of  the  Y iRonr  Mary, 
a  doctrine  early  broached  in  the  Roman  and  Greek 
churches,  that  the  Yirgin  Mary  was  conceived  without 
the  stain  of  original  sin.  Bernard,  in  the  12th  century, 
rejected  this  doctrine  in  opposition  to  the  canons  of 
Lyons,  but  it  was  not  much  agitated  until  (1801)  the 
Francifican  Duns  Scotus  took  strong  grounds  in  favor  of 
the  doctrine,  and  henceforward  it  became  a  subject  of  ve- 
hement  controversy  between  the  Scotists  and  Thomists. 
The  Dominicans  espoused  the  cause  of  the  Thomists, 
who  impugned  the  dogma ;  the  Franciscans  that  of  the 
Scotists,  who  defended  it  Sixtus  lY,  himself  a  Fran- 
ciscan,  in  1488  declared  himself  in  favor  of  toleration  on 
the  point  The  Councii  of  Trent  (Sess.  v)  declared  that 
the  doctrine  of  the  conception  of  all  men  in  sin  was  not 
intended  to  include  the  Yirgin.  The  controversy  was 
revived  in  the  UniverBity  of  Paris  towaids  the  close  of 
the  16th  century.  During  the  pontiflcates  of  Paul  Y 
and  Gregory  XY,  sach  was  the  dissenńon  it  occasioned 
in  Spain,  that  both  Philip  and  his  successor  sent  special 
embassies  to  Romę  in  the  vain  hope  that  this  oontest 
might  be  tenninated  by  a  bulL  The  dispute  ran  so 
high  in  that  kingdom  that,  in  the  militaiy  oiders  of  St 


James,  of  the  Sword,  of  Calatrava,  and  of  Akantara,  fke 
knights,  on  their  admission,  vowcd  to  maintam  tbe  doc^ 
trine.    In  1708,  Clement  XI  appointed  a  festiral  to  be 
celebrated  thronghout  the  Chnrch  in  honor  of  the  im- 
maculate conception.    It  is  firmiy  beUered  in  the  Greek 
Church,  in  which  the  feaat  is  cel^wated  mider  the  muse 
of  the  Conception  of  St  Annę;  but  it  was  not  till  1854 
that  it  was  madę  a  dogma  in  the  Roman  Catholic  Cfanith. 
"  Pope  Pius  IX,  dniing  liis  whole  pontificate,  bas  show- 
ed  himself  the  most  devoted  of  the  worshippers  of  Msir. 
In  his  exile  at  Craeta  in  1849  he  addreased  his  famoós 
*  Encydical  on  the  Mystery  of  the  Immaculate  Concep- 
tion' (Feb.  2)  to  the  patriarchs,  piimates,  aichbishopi, 
and  bishops  of  the  whole  Catholic  Chnrch,  affimung 
the  existence  of  *an  ardent  desire  thronghoot  tbeCiih- 
olic  world  that  the  apostolic  see  should  at  length,by 
Bome  solemn  judgment,  define  that  the  most  holy  Motb- 
er  of  God,  the  most  k>ving  mother  of  us  all,  the  inuBic- 
ulate  Yirgin  Mary,  had  been  conceired  without  originsl 
sin.'     <  These  desires,'  he  adds,  <  have  been  most  acoept- 
able  and  dellghtful  to  us,  who,  from  our  eaiiiest  yetn, 
have  had  nothing  dearer,  nothing  more  at  heart,  than 
to  revere  the  most  blessed  Yirgin  Mary  with  an  eq)ecisl 
piety  and  homage,  and  the  most  intimate  affections  of 
our  heart,  and  to  do  evexything  which  might  seem  like- 
ly  to  procure  ber  grcater  glory  and  praiae,  and  to  am- 
plify  her  worship.'    A  commission  was  appointed  ftr 
the  examination  of  the  question,  under  the  presideonr 
of  cardinal  Fomarini ;  cardinal  Lambmschini  prodoced 
his  tract,  and  Perrone  the  work  Ih  ImmacuUrio  B.  V, 
Maria  cancepłu ;  Passaglio  also  wrote  a  large  essay,  and 
the  results  of  these  im-estigations  were  issued  ł^  the 
Propaganda  press  (2  vols.  4to).    The  special  conunis- 
sion  reported,  in  a  fuli  conclav6  of  the  Sacred  Golkgf, 
May  27, 1854.    Answers  had  come  from  602  bishops,  sil 
favorable  to  the  dogma,  though  52  doubted  the  oppor* 
tuneness,  and  four  the  possibility  of  a  decision.    Tbe 
'special  congregation'  demanded  the  definition  with 
alacrity  and  zeaL    A  consistory  of  consnltation  wai 
procUimed,  and  held  at  Romę  Nor.  4, 1854 ;  it  was  not 
a  generał  coundl,  nor  was  any  authońty  attńboted  to 
it     Fifty-four  cardinałs,  46  archbiahops,  and  about  400 
bishops  are  reported  to  have  been  present  at  these  de- 
liberations ;  576  rotes  are  said  to  have  been  cast  for  the 
dogma,  and  only  four  against  it;  among  the  latter  weie 
the  archbishop  de  Sibour,  of  Ptais,  on  the  groond  that 
the  pope  had  no  power  to  decide  such  a  ąuestion ;  and 
abo  the  bishop  01ivier,  of  £vTeux,  lately  decased,  who 
sent  in  his  vote  by  pn>xy.     On  the  8th  of  December,  ia 
St  Peter*8,  m  the  midst  of  the  celebration  of  the  'Con- 
ception,' in  the  presence  of  more  than  200  ecclesiastical 
dignitaiies,  and  in  answer  to  a  petition  presentedby  the 
Sacred  College  of  the  Cardinałs,  the  supremę  pontiff. 
Mdth  a  'tremulous*  voice,  read  in  Latin  tbe  foUowmg 
decree:  *We  declare,  pronounce,  and  define  that  the 
doctrine  which  holds  that  the  blessed  Yirgin  Maiy,  at 
the  fint  instaftt  of  her  conception,  by  a  slngular  pmi- 
legę  and  grace  of  the  omnipotent  God,  in  virtue  of  the 
merita  of  Jesus  Christ,  the  Sariour  of  mankind,  was 
preserved  immaculate  from  all  stain  of  original  an,haa 
been  rereaUd  hy  God^  and  therefore  shotdd  firmiy  and 
constantly  be  beliered  by  the  faithfuL*    The  canńoo  of 
the  castle  of  St  Angeło,  the  joyful  chime  of  all  the  beSs 
of  Romę,  the  enthusiastic  plaudita  of  the  assembled 
thousands,  the  magniflcent  illumination  of  St  Petei^ 
church,  and  the  splendor  of  the  moat  gorgcons  festire 
rites,  gave  responsc  to  the  inftUible  deciee.     It  was  a 
grand  pageant,  befitting  an  idolatrous  entbudasm.    The 
pope  himself,  with  '  trembling  Jor,'  crowned  the  image 
of  the  Yirgin;  medals  of  Austnlian  gold  were  stniclE, 
and  distributed  in  her  honor.    '  Romę,'  say  the  behold- 
ers,  *was  intoxicated  with  Joy.'    An  infalłible  voice  had 
spoken;  a  new  article  of  faith  was  amiounoed  by  *di- 
vine'  antbority;  the  people  rejoiced  in  hope  that  Mair 
woułd  be  yet  more  'propitious,'  that  her  'preraleiit  in- 
teroession  -woiild  give  peaoe  and  plenty,  wonłd  atay  the 
power  of  infideility,  pat  an  end  to  insmrectkrn,  and  cnmn 


1 


IMMACULATE  CONCEPTION     60Y     IMMACULATE  CONCEPTION' 


Home  with  higher  honor  and  saocess.*  The  controrer- 
sy  of  aeren  hiindred  yeais  is  brotight  to  a  finał  decision ; 
Romę  is  committed  irreTocably  to  the  worship  of  the 
*yirgm  mother  of  God,  conceired  without  original  sin.* 
*  Roma  locata  est,'  and  doubt  is  now  heresy.  'fhe  work 
begun  by  the  thiid  generał  coundl  at  Ephesus  in  481, 
prodaiming  Maty  *  the  mother  of  God,'  is  dedaied  to  be 
consummated  by  the  papai  decree  of  Dec  8, 1854,  as- 
serting  the  piivilege  of  her  immaculate  conception  on 
the  authority  of  Petersa  chair."  For  an  aocount  of  the 
history  of  the  dogma,  and  a  fuli  discusnon  of  ito  theo> 
logical  merits,  see  Smith,  in  Metkoditt  Quarterly  Retiew, 
April,  185Ó.  See  also  The  (fficial  Doeuments  cormeeted 
tcith  lAe  DfJbdUon  ofthe  Dogma  ofthe  Immaeukae  Ccm- 
eeptitm  (Lai.  and  £ng.),  pubUshed  with  the  approbation 
of  the  Abpw  of  Baltimore  (Balt.  1866, 8yo).  See  Cox- 
cEmox. 

Tketdogy  ofthe  Dodrćm*.— The  theology  of  the  doc- 
tiine  of  the  immaculate  conception  of  Mary  has  been 
the  sabject  of  many  distingmshed  wiiters  in  the  Ro> 
man.  Greek,  and  Frotestant  chuiches.  The  greatest 
difficolties  which  the  adrocatea  of  the  doctrine  have  to 
contend  against  are  really  the  foUowing  three:  1.  It 
lacka  the  evident  support  of  the  Holy  Scripturea.  2.  It 
lacka  the  authority  of  the  eaily  Chnrch,  and  may  well 
be  termed  **  a  comparative  norelty  in  theology."  8.  It 
is  direetly  and  most  distinctly  oppoeed  to  the  doctrine 
oforiginalsin. 

As  to  the  fint,  the  aaiptural  aigumenta  advanced  by 
the  adrocates,  they  are  oertainly  very  slight  and  unten- 
able,  and  haye  been  yirtually  yielded  by  the  best  of  the 
Roman  Catholic  authorities,  such  as  Penone  (/>e  Im- 
mac  B.  V.  Maria  eonaptUj  ete^  p.  85  są.,  57  są.,  1 12  sq.). 
There  are  only  two  passages  which  the  beat  and  most 
leamed  of  Romę  have  adduced.  The  first  of  these  is 
Gen.  iii,  15,  the  irpwrtuayyiAioy  of  divine  rerelation : 
"And  I  will  put  enmity  between  thee  and  the  woman, 
and  between  thy  seed  and  her  seed;  it  (she)  tthall  bruise 
thy  head,  and  thou  shalt  bruise  his  heel."  **  The  ar- 
gumentation  hcre  is  curious.  The  received  Yulgate 
reading,  not-  found,  howerer,  in  all  the  copies,  is  *  ipsa,* 
tihe;  while  the  Hebrew  reads  M'*^,  he,  or  it;  Jerome, 
too,  reads  *ip6e;*  SŁxtus  Ts  Ctiitiuu  of  the  Septuagint 
icads  atróc."  The  best  Roman  critics  (see  De  Rossi^s 
ańudsm  in  Pusey*s  Eirenicon,  ii,  885)  dlscard  the  read- 
ing  as  it  sŁands  inp  the  received  Yulgate.  Perrone, 
howerer,  contends  that  it  is  IndifTerent  which  read- 
ing  is  adopted,  because,  at  any  ratę,  Mary  could  not 
haye  had  the  power  to  conąuer  the  serpent  except 
thioogh  Christ.  But  how  does  this  proye  the  immac- 
ulate conception— giye  to  the  dogma  ''a  firm  founda- 
tion?'*  Simply  for  the  reason  that  in  these  words  a 
''special  privilege  is  conferred  upon  Mary,**  and  that 
special  priyilege  could  **only  haye  been  the  immunity 
firom  original  sin."  But  the  priyilege  conferred  is  sole- 
ly,  eyen  on  the  author's  own  ground,  that  she  should  be 
in  some  way  a  means  of  subduing  Satan,  and  that  she 
was  this  as  the  mother  of  our  Lord.  To  assert  that,  in 
order  to  be  the  mother  of  Christ,  she  must  be  free  from 
original  sin,  is  purely  to  beg  the  whole  ąuestion.  The 
"Letters  Apostolic"  of  Pius  IX  upon  the  dogma  sanc- 
tion  infallibly  the  iq>plicatiou  of  the  clause  "  bruise  thy 
head"  to  Mttry,  who,  the  pope  says,  "has  crushed  the 
serpent^s  head  with  her  immaculate  footJ*  Another  pas- 
aagc  adduced,  upon  which  Perrone  lays  less  stress  than 
00  the  one  already  cited,  is  the  angelic  saluUtion  Lukc 
1,28,  comp.  80,  coupled  with  the  words  spoken  by  Eliz- 
sbeth,  Lnke  i,  42 :  <<  Hail,  thou  that  art  highly  fayored, 
the  Lord  is  with  thee :  blessed  art  thou  among  women 
. .  .  Fear  not.  Mary,  for  thou  hast  found  fayor  with  God 
. . .  Hessed  art  thou  among  women,  and  blessed  is  the 
frmt  of  thy  womh."    They  aigue  that  the  greeting 

Xatpf ,  Kfxaptrutfuvtif  tranalated  in  the  Yulgate  by 

gratiaplenOf  means  fulness  of  grace  in  a'  sense 

that  neoessitates  exemption,  from  the  yery  beginning 
of  existcnce,  from  any  poasible  taint  of  sin,  and  that  the  i 
stnift  meaning  must  neceasarily  be  allowed  to  the  ex- 1 


pression  *<  blessed  art  thou  among  women*  (comp.  Lie« 

bermann,  Itufił.  TheoL  ii,  883 ;  Perrone,  PrcdecU  Theoi, 

ii,  651).     Roman  Catholic  writers  assign,  howeyer,  no 

reason  why  these  words  should  be  so  interpreted.  "  They 

are,  in  fact,  uncritioally  and  iUogically  forced  into  the 

seryice  of  the  doctrine,  and,  as  in  the  case  of  the  *  Prot« 

eyangelium'  of  the  O.  T.,  they  offer  no  real  support  of 

it  whateyer."    As  for  other  passages  of  a  mysticid  type 

which  an  used  as  a  seoondaiiy  eyidence,  they  would  be 

of  yalue  only  as  oonfinraing  and  iUustrating  any  in 

which  the  fact  was  direetly  and  undoubtedly  stated. 

Certain  it  is  that  in  the  goq)elB  Mary  is  represented  om 

she  isy  and  not  as  an  immaculate  being;  that  neither  in 

the  Acta  nor  in  the  Epistles,  notwithstanding  Paulus 

minutę  description  of  Christ's  scheme  of  salyation,  is 

she  mentioned  at  aU.    The  great  trouble,  in  short,  with 

Roman  Catholic  theologians,  is  that  they  transfer  the 

sayings  ofthe  prophets  and  ofthe  apoetles  conoeming 

Jesus  Christ,  and  all  the  passages  which  point  to  one 

mediator  between  God  and  man,  yirtually  to  Mary,^he 

mother  of  Christ,  instead  of  assigniog  this  position  feo     .   y  i 

Christ, the  Son  otGod.)i^4Mr^  ( /  ,  %Hi  Jli^J.  /W/v^' 

The  comparatiye  noyelty  of  the  doctrine  in  tlieology 
is  proyed  by  history.  Theie  is  not  one  great  teacher 
of  the  Christian  Church  who,  before  the  breaking  out  of 
the  controyersy  between  Lyons  and  Bernard  in  1140 — 
that  is,  for  the  first  eleven  centuries  of  our  sera— was  i 

fayorable  to  the  doctrine  as  now  propagated  by  the  j 

Church  of  Romę.     ''The  ąuestion  does  not  exist  for  i 

them ;  they  know  nothing  of  this  spedfic  doctrine^  they 
speak  in  respect  to  original  sin  and  the  need  of  rederoi^  i 

tion  in  such  a  way  as  to  proye  that  the  immaculate 
conception  of  Mary  could  not  haye  been  any  part  of 
thdr  creed.  Their  praises  of  the  Yirgin  are  often  im- 
moderate;  they  defend  her  perpetnal  yifginity  (Epi- 
phanius,  Haer,  78;  Jerome,  ade,  Helńdianum,  etc.); 
many  of  them  believe  that  she  was  '  sanctified*  in  the 
womb;  most  of  them  declare  that  she  neyer  was  gnilty 
of  actual  sin ;  but  they  do  not  know  anythiog  abont  her 
exemption  from  all  infection  of  original  sin.  Augustine 
defends  her  only  against  the  charge  of  actoal  sin  {De 
Nałvra  et  GraciOy  c  86) :  *£xcepta  sancta  Yirgine  3fa^ 
ria,  de  qua  propter  honorem  Domini  nnllaro  prorsus,  cum 
de  peccaltiś  affitur,  haberi  yolo  ąocestionem.'  This  pas- 
sage  is  ąuoted  in  fayor  of  the  dogma,  but  it  plainly  re- 
fers  only  to  actual  transgression,  and  it  is  contained  in 
a  reply  to  the  position  of  Pelagius,  that  there  weie 
saints  who  had  not  sinned.  In  his  treatise  on  the  J?e- 
mission  of  Sine  (bk.  ii,  eh.  xxiy,  §  88),  this  greatest  of  the 
Latin  fathers  says  explicitly  that  Christ  alone  was  with- 
out sin :  *  Solus  ergo  Ule  etiam,  homo  factus,  manens 
Deus,  pcccatum  nullum  habuit  unąuam  ;*  nor  does  he 
intimate  any  exception.  In  his  work  De  Genesi,  ad  Ht, 
c.  18,  n.  82,  he  speaks  of  Hhe  body  of  Christ  as  taken 
from  the  fiesh  of  a  woman,  who  was  conceiyed  of  a 
mother  with  sinful  flesh  ;*  and  he  indicates  a  elear  dis- 
tinction  between  Mary's  naturę  and  Christ^s  naturo  in 
this  respect.  Aogustłne's  followers  make  similar  state- 
ments.  Eusebius  Emissenus  (supposed  by  some  to  be 
Hilary)  on  the  'Natiyity'  says,  *From  the  hond  of  the 
old  sin  is  not  eyen  the  mother  of  the  Redeemer  free.* 
Fulgentius  writes,  'The  fiesh  of  Mary,  which  was  con- 
ceiyed in  unrighteousness  in  a  human  way,  was  truły 
sinful  fiesh ;'  and  he  adds  that '  this  fiesh  is  in  itself 
truły  sinfuL'  referring  to  Paul's  nse  of  the  term  *  fiesh* 
to  designate  our  common  hereditary  sinfnlness.  Otii- 
crs  of  the  fathers  make  use  of  similar  statements,  irreo- 
oncilable  with  a  belief  in  the  immaculate  conception. 
(See  Perrone,  p.  40  sq.  Bandellus,  De  Singulari  Puri» 
taie  et  Pr<erogativa  Conceptionie  Chrisii  [1470],  a  work 
by  a  Dominican,  contains  some  foui  hundred  testimo- 
nies  against  the  dogma  from  the  fathers :  see  also  the 
work  of  the  cardinal  Turrecamata,  De  Yeritate  Concep^ 
tumie  [1550]).  It  ia,  indeed,  true  that  the  fathers  do 
not  often  speak  direetly  upon  the  point  in  ąuestion;  but 
this  is  for  the  simple  reason,  conclusire  against  the 
daim  of  uniyersality,  that  they  did  not  know  anything 


IMMAC3ULATE  CONCEPTION     508    IMMACULATE  CONCEPTION 


aboat  it.  The  doctrine  ib  deckred,  A.D.  1140,  by  Ber- 
nard, to  be  a  'norelty;*  and  he  aayi  that  the  featival 
ia '  the  mother  of  presumption,  the  siater  of  auperstition, 
and  the  dAughter  of  levity'  (Ep.  174,  ad  Canon  Litgd, 
§  6  Bq. ;  comp.  Serm.  78  m  CanL),  Othen  of  the  earlier 
fathers  apeak  of  Maiy  in  auch  a  way  aa  is  abeolutely 
irreooncilable  with  the  idea  that  they  beliered  in  her 
immacnlate  conception.  Hilary  (PUu  cxix,  lib.  8,  §  12 ; 
oomp.  TracUfor  the  Time*,  No.  79,  p.  86)  dedarea  that  ahe 
18  expo0ed  to  the  fire  of  judgment.  Irenmia,  Tertullian, 
Origen,  Baatl  the  Great,  and  Chryaoetom,  do  not  heai- 
tatę  to  speak  of  faulu  of  'i/Lary,  of  her  being  rebuked  hy 
Christ  *  If  Maiy,'  saya  Origen, '  did  not  feel  ofTence 
at  OUT  Lord'8  sufferings,  Jeana  did  not  die  for  her  aina;' 
Chrysostom  aacribes  to  her  *  exće8siye  ambition  at  the 
marriage  feati^al  at  Gana ;'  Basil  thinka  that  ahe,  too, 
*wayered  at  the  time  of  the  crucifixion;'  all  of  which 
atatementa  are  utterly  inconaiatent,  not  only  with  the 
dogma  of  the  immaculate  conception,  but  alao  with  a 
beSlef  in  her  perfect  innooency  (oomp.  Gieaeler,  Ch.  HiaL 
§  99,  notę  80,  with  the  referencea  to  lren«eaa,'iii,  18; 
Tertullian,  De  Came  CkriKti,  7 ;  Origen,  i»  Lvcam  Horn. 
17 ;  Baail,  £p.  260  (817) ;  Chryaoatoni,  Horn.  45  in  Mott. 
Horn,  21  tn  John),  Tertullian,  De  Came  Chritti,  §  xvi, 
dedarea  that  *  Chriat,  by  putting  on  the  fleeh,  madę  it 
hia,  and  taade  it  tudesa;^  Irensua,  that  'Chriat  madę 
human  naturę  pure  by  taldng  it;'  Athanaaiua,  on  the 
'Incamation,'  teachea  the  aame  doctrine,  that  'Chriat 
aanctified  hia  own  body,*  and  that  <  he  hath  purified 
the  body,  which  waa  in  itaelf  comiptible.*  Of  courae, 
the  body  he  aaaamed  waa  not  in  and  of  itaelf  ainleaa. 
Gfegory  of  Kazianzum,  and  John  of  Damąacua  (780), 
teach  expre88ly  that  the  Yirgin  waa  aanctified  by  the 
HoLy  GhoBt  If  Chriat,  by  aaauming  human  naturę  in 
Maiy,  *  madę  it  ainleaa,*  it  waa  not  ao  before  hia  incama- 
tion"  (Smith,  uŁ  nip.) .  The  view  which  some  hołd  on  the 
title  of  3foróieoc»  given  to  Mary  at  the  Councii  of  £ph- 
eaua,  we  think  bean  ao  whoUy  on  the  incamation  of 
Christ  that  we  refrain  from  introducing  it  here.  Sec 
alao  Nestorianum.  Of  the  numberleaa  paaaagea  from 
the  fathera  which  aet  forth  the  doctrine  of  the  unirer' 
aality  of  sin,  and  the  nniyeraal  need  of  redemption 
through  Christ,  without  making  the  Yirgin  Mary  the 
exoeption,  we  will  apeak  under  the  third  head.  An  ad' 
ditional  aouroe  of  evidenoe  ia  afforded  us  by  the  early 
lituigiea  of  offioea  of  the  Church.  '*  They  exalt  Mary 
and  her  conception,  but  they  do  neyer  cali  it  an  *  im* 
maculate'  conception.  It  ia  only  in  the  lateat  years 
that  the  term  *  immaculate'  haa  been  introduced  into 
the  Weatem  offioea  of  the  higheat  authority.  The  of- 
ficea  themselyes,  in  honor  of  the  Yirgin,  did  not  becoroe 
current  in  the  West  till  the  llth  centuiy.  In  the  office 
foK  her  birth,  in  the  ancient  churches,  it  ia  read  that 
*  ahe  waa  sanctified  from  the  atain  of  ain ;'  in  one  of  the 
German  liturgiea,  *  that  she  waa  bom  with  a  propenaity 
to  sin ;'  in  the  Roman  Church  itaelf,  the  office  apoke  of 
the  *  *anctiJuxUton  of  the  Yirgin.'  Thia  silence,  and  the 
late  alteration  of  theee  offices,  are  conclusive  as  to  the 
non-existence  of  the  dogma.  In  the  year  791  (aL  796) 
a  councii  waa  held  at  Fńuli  (Condlium  Forojuliense), 
called  by  Paulinua  (Paulus),  patriarch  of  Aquileif,  dur- 
ing  the  pontificate  of  Adrian  I,  to  oonsider  the  Trinity 
and  the  Incamation,  in  respect  to  the  procession  of  the 
Holy  Spirit,  and  ^  Adoptianism,'  that  ia,  the  opinion 
maintained  by  archbiahop  Elipandua  of  Toledo,  and  oth- 
eri^  that  Chriat  in  hia  human  naturę  was  the  Son  of 
God  only  by  *  adoption.'  A  long  and  explidt  Confea- 
sion  of  Faith  waa  publiahed  by  this  coundl,  in  the 
courae  of  which  it  is  said,  *  Soltts  enim  tme  peccato  natus 
eU  homo,  quoniam  aolua  eat  incamatua  de  Spiritu  Sancto 
et  immaculata  Yirgine  novus  homo.  Consubstantialis 
Deo  Patri  in  sua,  id  eat,divina;  cooaubatantialis  etiam 
matri,  tiw  sordepeocati,  in  noatra,  id  est,  humana  natura' 
(Harduin,  Acta  ConciL  1714,  iy,  856,  C).  If  the  beUef 
in  the  immaculate  conception  of  tlie  Yirgin  had  been 
any  part  of  the  orthodoxy  of  the  Limes,  it  would  haye 
been  in\poaaible  for  a  oouncU  to  have  spoken  in  this 


way  of  Chriat,  aa  ^alone  hom  without  sin;*  and  the^ba* 
maculateneas'  ascribed  to  the  Yiigin  cannot  poasibly.tB 
the  connectton,  be  interpreted  of  her  conception,  or  erea 
of  her  birth;  for,  if  it  could,  then  Chriat  couki  not  ht 
said  to  be  the  'ouly*  one  of  men  bom  without  sin" 
(professor  Smith,  ut  sup.). 

No  better  does  the  case  fiue  in  the  mediaeyal  Cbmth. 
**  The  amount  of  the  argument  and  the  reault  of  the  tcs- 
timony  here  are,  that  the  doctrine  waa  first  inyented  in 
the  12th  century«  that  it  waa  opposed  by  the  greatcet 
and  beat  of  the  scholasticB,  and  that  it  madę  ita  way,  in 
apite  of  thia  oppoaition,  through  the  foroe  of  popular  ni- 
peretition,  and  from  the  neceaaaiy  working  out  of  the 
inherent  tendenciea  of  a  system  of  creature-worsbip^ 
Some  of  the  mediseyal  testimony  we  haye  already  ad- 
duced ;  we  add  only  the  most  important  dtations.  An- 
sekn  (1070),  though  cited  for  the  immaculate  concep- 
tion, teachea  in  hia  Cur  Deus  Homo  (ii,  16)  that  Maiy 
waa  conceived  in  ain :  *  Yirgo  tamen  ipaa,  unde  aasump- 
tua  eat,  eat  tn  iniquitatibu*  concepta,  et  inpeccaiii  amce- 
pit  eam  mater  eju$f  et  cum  origUujtU  peccato  nota  atj 
quoniam  et  ipsa  in  Adam  pcccayit,  in  quo  omnes  pecca> 
yerant' "  (See  also  the  cloae  of  that  chapter  and  tbe 
next,  ii,  17.)  We  thua  notice  that,  up  to  the  time  of 
Bernard,  that  ia,  for  the  firat  eleyen  ccnturiea  of  our  era, 
no  writer  of  the  Church  uaed  such  strong  language  abont 
the  holinesa  of  the  Yirgin  Mary  aa  he  did  in  hia  letter  to 
the  canona  of  Lyons  (1140)  already  refencd  to.  He 
writes :  "  The  mother  of  God  waa,  without  doubt,  saDC- 
tified  before  ahe  waa  bom ;  nor  is  the  holy  Church  in  ei^ 
ror  in  accounting  the  day  of  her  natiyity  holy.  I  thiok 
that  eyen  a  morę  abundant  blesaing  of  sanctification  d^> 
acended  on  her,  which  not  only  aanctified  her  birth,  but 
also  preseryed  her  life  from  all  ain,  as  happened  to  nooe 
other  of  the  children  of  men.  It  waa  befitdng,  indeed, 
that  the  queen  of  yirgina  ahould  pass  her  life  in  the  piir- 
ilege  of  a  singular  sanctity,  andiree  from  all  sin,  who,ia 
bearing  the  Destroyer  of  all  ain  and  death,  obtained  for 
all  the  giil  of  life."  There  is  certainly,  eyen  here,  no  ad- 
yocacy  of  the  immaculate  conception  of  Mary.  £xactly 
similar  yiews  were  held  by  Peter  Lombard,  whoae  Fow 
Boóka  o/Sentences  were  "the  theological  text-book  of 
the  Middle  Agea,"  and  "  upon  which  all  the  great  scho- 
lastics  madę  their  comments  and  built  their  sy^tems. 
He  says  (Liber  Sentent^  iii,  distinct.  iii)  of  the  flesh  of 
Mary,  which  our  Lord  assumed,  tl^at  it  waa  'preyiously 
obnoxioua  to  sin,  like  the  other  flesh  of  the  Yirgin,  but 
by  the  operation  of  the  Spirit  it  was  deansed.' . . .  'The 
Holy  Spirit,  coming  into  Mary,  purified  her  from  ńn, 
and  from  all  desire  of  sin.* "  Yery  explicit  is  also  the 
testimony  of  Alexander  of  Halea,  the  irrefragaUe  doctor 
and  master  of  SU  Bonayentura,  the  commentator  oa 
Lombard:  <*It  was  necessaiy  that  the  bleased Yirgin, 
in  her  generation,  should  contract  sin  from  her  parents; 
she  was  sanctified  in  the  womb."  Bonayentura,  the 
seraphic  doctor,  the  glory  of  the  Frandscana,  who  dicd 
in  1274,  and  was  canonized  in  1482,  is  exhau8tle8B  in  the 
praiae  of  Mary  in  hia  Speculum  and  Corona,  He  sanc- 
tifies  her  yeneration  in  the  most  rapturous  terma.  Yet 
on  this  question  he  is  also  decided,  explicitly  dedaring 
that  "  the  sanctification  of  the  Yirgin  was  ąfter  she  had 
oontracted  ohginal  sin;"  she  was  *< sanctified  in  the 
womb"  (Ub.  iii,  dist,  iii,  p.  1 ,  qii.  2, 8).  Albertua  Magnus, 
who  Uught  in  Cologne  1260  to  1280,  madę  the  aune 
ayowals.  Bonayentura  was  the  pupil  of  Alexander  of 
Hales,  Albertus  Magnus  of  Bonayentura,  and  next  euc- 
ceeds  the  greateat  of  all  the  scholaatic  theologiana, 
Thomas  Aquinas,  "the  angelic  doctor,"  who  died  in 
1274,  was  canonized  in  1328,  and  in  1567  waa  dedared 
by  Piua  Y  to  be  « teacher  of  the  Church."  In  hia  Sw^ 
ma  Theologias,  p.  iii,  qu.  27,  art.  i,  it  standa,  **Mary  was 
sanctified  in  the  womb."  Art  2. « Not  before  the  mfumn 
ofthe  90ul;  for  if  she  had  been  she  would  not  h^ye  incnr- 
red  the  stain  of  original  sin,  and  would  not  haye  needed 
the  redemption  of  Christ."  Art.  8.  The  complete  deliy- 
erance  from  original  ain  waa  only  giyen  her  when  she 
concdyed  Christ  ("  £x  prole  redundayerit  in  ; 


IMMACULATE  CONCEPTION     609    TMMACULATE  CONCEPHON 


totaliter  fomite  Babtracto*^.  About  the  festlral  of  tbe 
Conception,  he  nys  that  the  Roman  Church  does  not 
obaerre  it  henelf,  jet  it  tolerates  the  custom  of  other 
chmches :  **  Unde  talia  celebritaa  non  est  totaliter  repro- 
banda."  Such  b  the  teetimony  of  the  moet  eminent 
mediieTal  diTineą  to  which  we  need  not  add  namea  of 
lefls  weight.  It  is  not  to  be  wondered  at  that,  in  the 
face  of  the  dilBcultieB  to  be  encoanteied  by  the  modem 
defendeis  of  the  immacolate  conception,  cardinal  Pei^ 
rone,  **  the  generał  rector  of  the  Roman  College,"  and 
**  the  prinoe  of  oontemporary  theologians,"  ia  led  to  ar- 
gue  that  if  theae  scholaśtic  dtyinee  had  reasoned  conect- 
ly  ffom  what  they  oonccded  aboat  the  biith  of  the  Yir- 
gin,  they  woold  have  madę  her  oonoeption  immacnlate ; 
alm,  that  what  they  teach  can  aU  be  beat  explained  in 
harmony  with  the  doctrine;  or,  if  not  so,  that  they 
taught  what  they  did  aa  prirate  teachera ;  as  alao  that 
they  were  ignonuit  of  antiąoity ;  and  again,  that  their 
i^ews  on  ori^łnal  sin  were  soch  as  allowed  them  to 
speak  as  they  did ;  in  fine,  that  they  did  not  hare  any 
guidance  from  an  infallible  decision  in  what  they  utter* 
ed;  and  that  while  they  were  wrangling  in  the  schools, 
the  dognui  was  making  ita  way  among  the  people.  Ali 
this  goes  to  show  that  the  mediasral  iegtimcmy  is  against 
it;  that,  as  far  as  the  Middle  Ages  aie  ooncemed,  only 
isoUited  opiniona  are  for  the  doctrine,  and  the  weight  of 
authoricy  is  against  it.  The  only  distinct  argumenta- 
tire  attempt  which  Penrone  makes  to  parry  the  force  of 
their  aathority  and  argtunents  is  the  assertion  that  these 
doctors  of  the  schools,  when  they  speak  of  the  concep- 
tion  of  3Iary,  havc  reference  to  what  he-calls  the  flist,  or 
actire  conception,  and  not  to  the  pasńye,  or  the  infnsion 
of  the  smil  into  the  seed.  But  this  explanation  is  irrel- 
evant,  for  two  reasons;  one  is,  that  many  of  these  doo- 
ton  do  not  make  this  distinction,  and,  of  coorae,  they  in- 
dnde  both  parta  of  the  conception  in  their  statement. 
They  make  the  distinction  between  **  conception"  and 
''Banctification,"aud  say  that  all  that  praoedes  sanctifi- 
catton  belongs  to  the  "  conception,"  and  is  infected  with 
origtnal  sin;  thii,  of  coorse, includes  the  '^passiye"  con- 
ception. Another  reason  that  inyalidatea  this  modę  of 
ezplanation  la,  that  some  of  these  doctors  do  make  the 
Tcry  distinction  in  ąuestion,  and  yet  maintain  that  the 
whóle  oonoeption,  both  actiye  and  passiye,  was  in  origi- 
nal  sin.  Thfs  Alezander  of  Hales  says  that  ^  the  Vir^ 
gin  afler  her  natirity,  and  after  the  iąfiuion  oftke  toul 
iiUo  the  bod4fy  was  sanctified ;"  Bonayentuia  aseeits  that 
the  infusion  of  grace  may  haye  been  aoon  ąfter  the  wa- 
rnom ofthit  mmi,  and  Aquinas  dedares  expreiuly  that  the 
cleanaing  can  only  be  from  original  sin ;  that  the  faiilt  of 
ociginal  sin  can  only  be  in  a  rational  creatore,  and,  there- 
fore,  that  be/ore  the  infunon  o/ the  rational  toul  theYlr- 
gin  was  not  sanctified.  In  fact,  this  roode  of  meeting 
the  difficulty  can  only  be  canied  through  by  supposing 
that  the  mediaeyal  diyines  belieyed  that  original  sin 
eoułd  esist  in  the  merę  fleshly  materiał  deriyed  from  pa- 
renta,  an  opinion  widely  abhorrent  to  their  weU-known 
Tieira.  We  may  therefore  well  say  that  the  doctrine 
of  tbe  immacnlate  conception  of  Mary,  the  mother  of 
Christ,  is  a  "novelty  in  theology,"  for  the  łustorical  lec- 
ords  of  antiqaity  are  silent;  in  the  Middle  Ages  the 
great  anthorities  are  diyided;  and  in  modem  timea,  as 
onr  historical  aketch  bas  shown,  there  haye  been  per- 
petoal  contests  and  diyisions.  Twenty  years  ago  hard- 
ly  a  single  name  of  eminence  among  the  Roman  Catho- 
lica  of  Germany  would  haye  pronounoed  in  its  fayor. 
SfHdn,  it  is  trae,  continued  her  deyotions,  but  France 
was  indifferent,  mitil  the  Ultramontane  party  began  to 
gain  power,  and  to  k)ok  about  for  the  means  of  arousing 
popokr  feding  in  behalf  of  the  papacy. 

There  remains  for  us  now  only  to  oonsider  the  doc- 
trine as  opposed  to  the  doctrine  of  original  ńn.  The 
ircry  neeessity  for  a  miracnlous  conception  in  the  case 
cf  bim  who  was  to  be  without  sin  [see  Incarkation] 
ii  in  itaelf  a  proof  that  eyeiy  peraon  conceiyed  in  a  nat- 
ml  manner  mnst  be  conceiyed  in  sin  [see  Naturę,  Hu- 
iuv],  and  the  BiUe  is  too  ezpieas  and  unmistakahle 


on  this  point,  that  all  are  conceiyed  in  sin  [see  Origi« 
NAL  Sm].  In  the  position  which  the  Roman  Catholic 
Chureh  thua  assumes,  we  encounter  again  the  yital  de- 
fects  of  her  theology  on  original  sin,  that  semi-Pelagian- 
ism  against  which  all  the  Protestant  Confessions  haye 
protested  as  unscripturaL  ''The  Roman  Catholic  doc- 
trine puta  the  esaence  of  original  sin  sdely  in  defect; 
makes  it  negatiye ;  asserting  that  it  ia  only  the  want 
of  that  righteonsneas  in  which  Adam  was  created;  this 
is,  in  scholastic  usage,  the  '  formal*  part,  or  the  yery  ea- 
senoe  of  original  sin.  Concupiscence  is  not  of  the  na- 
ture  of  sin.  This  ia  the  doctrine  of  original  sin,  which 
Perrone  escpressly  lays  down  in  the  opening  of  his  treap 
tise  (p.  2, 8  sq.),  *  that  the  eseence  of  original  sin  is  in 
the  defect  of  grace  or  of  original  righteousneas.'  This 
is  the  only  yiew  of  the  matter  with  which  the  dogma 
of  the  immacnlate  conception  can  poasibly  be  reconciled* 
If  this  yiew  is  false^if  original  sin,  as  Protestanta  hołd, 
accOTding  to  the  Scriptures,  be  positiye  and  not  nega* 
tiye,  and  come  by  desoent,  then  the  oonduńou  ia  irre* 
aistiblo  that  Mary,  by  descent,  must  haye  had  a  part 
therein.  The  dogma  of  her  immaculate  conception  ia 
poeńble  only  with  a  false  yiew  of  the  natnre  of  the  'sin 
of  birth.*  Angnstine  oonld  not  haye  held  it,  nor  coold 
Aquinaa.  The  dogma  ia  conodyed  in  a  defectiye  no- 
tion  of  original  sin.  Yet  again,  eyen  with  this  defectiye 
yiew  of  original  ńn,  the  dogma  is  inyolyed  in  difficuU 
ties  and  intemal  conflicts  by  what  it  asserts  and  impliea 
as  to  the  origin  of  the  soul  of  Mary.  The  theory  on 
which  it  rests  is,  that  Mary's  soul  was  directly  created 
by  God.  It  declares  that  theYirgin  Mary, '  at  the  iirat 
inatant  of  her  conception,'  was  preseryed  immaculate. 
What  ia  meant  by  'conception*  here?  It  is  the  so- 
caUed  '  passiye  conception,'  or  the  infusion  of  the  soul 
into  the  seed,  the  union  of  the  soul  of  Mary  with  the 
body,  prepared  beforehand  in  the  '  actiye  conception.' 
Whenoe,  now,  this  aoul  ?  It  was  *  created:  The  « Łet^ 
ters,'  in  another  passage,  say  that  Mary  was  the  '  tabei^ 
nade  created  by  God  himself.'  Pius  IX  also  dtes  the 
formuła  of  Alexanderyil  t»  haying  'decretiye'  authori- 
ty,  and  that  formuła  declares  '  that  Maiy'8  soul,  at  the 
flrst  instant  of  creatiom  cmd  ofmfitrion  into  the  body,' 
was  preseryed  Iree  from  original  sin.  This  hypotheaia 
of  'creatianism'  ia  alao  the  only  hypotheaia  consonant 
with  the  doctrine.  But  now  put  these  two  pońtions  t^- 
gether,  nameły,  that  original  sin  consists  essentiałly  in 
priyation ;  that  is,  in  the  defect  of  original  juatice ;  and 
that  Mary's  soul  was  directly  created  by  God,  and  we 
arriye  at  the  foUowing  dlificultiea  and  dilemmas.  The 
poeition  ia  this :  When  Mary's  soul  was  created  and  in- 
fnaed  into  her  body,  ahe  waa  by  grace  preaeryed  free 
irom  original  sin.  Would  the  original  sin,  from  which 
she  was  kept,  haye  come  to  her  from  her  body  or  from 
her  aoul?~for  it  most  haye  come  from  one  or  the  other. 
If  one  says  that  it  would  haye  come  from  the  aoul,  this 
inyolyes  the  conaequenoe  that  God  nauałly  creates  origi- 
nal sin  in  the  soul  before  it  is  nnited  with  the  body, 
and,  of  courae,  before  it  ia  connected  with  Adam  by  de- 
acent  If  one  aays,  on  the  other  band,  that  original  ain 
would  haye  come  to  Mary  from  her '  actiye  conception,' 
tłiat  is,  from  her  prepared  body,  then  it  was  already 
there,  in  germ  and  seed,  before  the  infuaion  of  the  sooL 
Crod  either  creates  the  human  soul  with  original  sin,  or 
the  original  sin  is  from  the  parenta.  If  the  former,  we 
haye  original  ain  without  any  connectiota  with  Adam ; 
if  the  latter.  Mary  must  haye  t>een  reałly  poaaesaed  of  it. 
But  it  may  be  aaid  original  ain  oonaiata  in  defect,  priya- 
tion, and  that  the  dogma  means  that  God  created  Ma- 
ry's  soul  perfectly  holy.  This  raises  another  difficulty ; 
for  it  is  also  asaerted  that  he  created  her  thus  holy  on 
the  ground  of  Chrisfs  merita,  and  that,  had  it  not  been 
for  Christ*s  merits,  she  would  haye  shared  the  sin  of  the 
race.  This  creation,  now,  muat  haye  been  either  through 
the  race  (the  connection  with  Adam)  or  aboye  the  race, 
dther  mediate  or  immediate.  If  thnragh  the  raoe  or 
mediate,  then  ahe  must  haye  had  a  part  in  its  sinfulneaa ; 
if  aboye  the  race,  or  an  immfdiatp  creation,  then  then 


IMMACULATE  CONCEPnON    610 


IMMANUEŁ 


18  no  theological  or  ntional  ground  for  saring  thst,  as 
iśr  as  ber  creation  was  ooncemed,  she  was  liable  to  sin, 
or  ooold  be  sared  from  it  thiough  Chrisfs  merita.  Nor 
can  any  relief  be  foond  by  conjoining  the  two  points, 
and  asserting  that  the  exemption  from  original  sin  con- 
cems  the  time  or  point  of  tmUm  of  the  sool  with  the 
seed,  the  oonjunction  of  the  active  with  the  passiye  oon- 
ception.  For  the  still  ananswered  ąaestion  here  ia,  and 
must  be  this :  In  the  imion  of  the  soul  with  the  body, 
ftom  which  of  the  two,  sool  or  body,  would  the  original 
sin  have  oome,  if  grace  had  not  prevented  ?--for  it  must 
have  come  finom  one  or  the  other.  If  finom  the  soal,  then 
you  haye  original  sin  ¥rithout  any  oonnection  with  Adam ; 
if  from  the  body,  then  original  sin  must  already  have 
been  there ;  if  ftom  both  together,  this  simply  dodges 
the  que8tion,  or  else  rasolyes  original  sin  into  some  act 
oonseąuent  upon  the  union^-that  is,  into  actual  trans* 
gression.  Nor  is  the  matter  helped  by  saying  that  orig- 
inal sin  is  essentially  negative,  priyative ;  for  the  pńya- 
tion  has  lespect  to  either  the  soul  or  the  body,  or  to  both 
oonjoined,  and  the  same  dilemmas  resnlt,  The  *  Let- 
teiB  Apostolic,*  in  other  passages,  speak  of  the  dogma  in 
this  yriise :  that  the  '  Elessed  Y irgin  was  ibee  from  all 
contagion  of  bo^^  soul,  and  mind;*  that  she  had  'com- 
munity  with  men  only  in  their  naturę,  but  not  in  their 
fault:'  and  that  <the  flesh  of  the  Yirgin  taken  from 
Adam  did  not  admit  the  stain  of  Adam,  and  on  this  ao- 
ooont  that  the  most  blessed  yirgin  was  the  tabemade 
created  by  God  himself,  formed  by  the  Holy  Spirit.* 
These  expres8ions  imply  that  the  &ult  in  the  case  could 
haye  been  a  fault  of  'naturę;'  that  the  contagion  might 
haye  been  of  the  'body;'  that  the  *  stain  from  Adam' 
would,  under  other  circumstances,  haye  oome  to  her 
thioogh  the  'flesh.'  But  in  her  'actiye  oonoeption,' 
before  the  infusion  of  the  soul  and  of  grace,  the  'nar 
turę,'  the  '  body,'  the  'flesh,'  were  already  eztant,  ere 
the  'passiye  conception'  took  place :  were  they  with  or 
without  the  fault?  If  with  the  fault,  then  you  haye 
original  sin ;  if  withont,  then  it  would  follow  that  the 
flesh,  the  body,  the  naturę,  before  the  passiye  conception, 
had  been  already  deliyered  from  the  bondage  of  oorrup- 
tum.  In  short,  if  original  sin  come  from  the  lace,  from 
the  'active  conception,*  then  Mary  must  haye  had  it; 
if  it  come  finom  the '  passiye  conception,'  then  God  is  its 
direct  author  in  eyery  indiyidual  case.  This  dogma  of 
the  immaculate  conception,  then,  contains  contradictory 
elements ;  it  rests  on  a  false  yiew  of  original  sin.  £yen 
that  false  yiew  cannot  well  be  reoonciled:  it  assumes 
the  theory  that  souls  are  direcUy  created,  and  here  again 
itinyolyes  itself  in  inextiicable  difficulties  in  relation  to 
original  sin.  It  is  opposed  to  Scripture,  to  tnditaon,  and 
it  is  eelf-oppoeed." 

In  conclusion,  there  is  left  to  ns  only  the  present  at^ 
titude  of  the  Roman  pontifT,  who,  sinoe  his  declaiation 
of  infallibility,  morę  than  eyer,  is  forced  into  a  poaition 
which  puts  the  matter  of  papai  infallibility  in  a  disa- 
greeable  dilemroa  and  dualism.  "  The  decree  of  Pius 
IX  is  in  opposition  to  the  expre8S  declarations  of  pre- 
ceding  pontiffs;  pope  is  arrayed  against  pope;  infalli- 
bility is  discordant  yrith  infallibility.  Not  only  has  'a 
probable  opinion  become  improbable,'  but  Peter'8  chair 
•  is  diyided  against  itself;  and  how,  then,  can  that  king^ 
dom  stand?  The  Jansenist  Launoy,  in  his  Prcescrip- 
Horu,  has  collected  the  opinions  adyerse  to,  or  irrecon- 
dlable  with  the  dogma,  of  seyen  of  the  successors  of  St. 
Peter,  who  neyer  change.  From  pope  Leo  (44(M61), 
the  greatest  and  most  leamed  of  the  early  bishops  of 
Romę,  he  cites  four  passages  in  which  Leo  declares  that 
Christ  alone  'was  innooent  in  his  birth,'  alone  was 
'  free  from  original  sin,'  and  that  Christ  receiyed  from 
his  mother  'her  naturę,  but  not  her  fault;'  and  he  as- 
serts  that  Mary  obtained  '  her  own  pur^ficoHon  through 
her  conception  of  ChrisC  This  is  whoUy  ayerse  to  tlie 
dogma.  Innocent  III,  who  called  the  Lateran  Coundl 
jn  1213,  in  a  sermon  on  the  'Assumption  of  Christ,'  com- 
paring  £ye  and  Mary,  writes :  '  Dla  fuit  sine  culpa  pro- 
■  dncta,  sed  in  culpa  produzit;  h«G  autem  fuit  tn  culpa 


/>rodtecta,  sed  sine  culpa  prodosit*  Gregory  asys  (SW^ 
604),  'John  the  Baptist  was  conceiyed  in  sin*;  ChriA 
cUone  was  conceiyed  withont  sin.'  Innocent  Y  (127€X 
in  hia  Commentary  on  the  Matter  of  Sentenou:  'Koa 
conyenit  tant»  Yirgini  ut  dm  morata  nt  in  peocato;' 
and  he  adds  that  she  was  sanctified  quickly  after  the 
animation  (that  is,  of  the  body  by  the  soul),  akKough 
not  in  the  very  moment,  This  is  direcUy  against  the 
dogma.  John  XXII  or  Benedict  XII  (c  1840)  says  that 
Mary  '  passed  at  fint  from  a  stale  oforigwal  inXo% 
sute  of  grace.'  Clement  YI  (1842-4>2), '  I  suppose,  ae- « 
cording  to  the  oommon  opinion  as  yet,  that  the  Uest* 
ed  Yirgin  was  in  original  sin'  modica  morula, '  becnue, 
acoording  to  all,  she  was  tancfijied  t»  soon  as  she  oodd 
be  Mmcf  t/£e(/.' 

"  Thus  the  papacy,  in  committing  itself  to  thu  new 
and  idolatrous  dogma,  is  in  hoetility  to  Scripture,  to 
uniyersal  oonsent,  and  also  to  itself.  It  espLuns  the 
sense  of  Scripture  by  tradition;  and  it  ezplains  the 
sense  of  tradition  by  an  infalUble  expositor,  and  that 
infallible  expoator  contndicts  itself.  The  new  dogma 
makes  the  whole  ofthe  earfy  Churdk  to  haye  been  igno- 
rant of  a  truth  which  is  now  declared  to  be  neoessar)'  to 
the  faith ;  it  makes  Leo,  Innooent  III,  Innocent  Y,  ind 
Clement  Y  to  haye  taught  heresy;  it  puts  the  grńtest 
scholastic  diyines  under  the  ban ;  and,  whiłe  doing  this, 
it  declares  that  what  is  now  decreed  has  always  been  of 
the  &ith  of  the  Church,  and  that  it  is  a  part  of  the  rer- 
elation  of  God,  giyen  through  Christ  and  the  apoitle% 
and  handed  down  by  oonstant  sucoession  and  genenl 
consent" 

See  Smith,  in  Meth,  Qu.  Rev,  April,  1855 ;  ChrMm 
Remembrancer,  Oct  1855,  p.  419 ;  Jan.  1866,  p.  175 ;  Jaly, 
1868,  p.  184;  Wettmintfer  Ret,  April,  1867,  p.  155  tą.\ 
Ffoulkes,  Chrutendom*s  Dwińont,  i,  108 ;  Neander,  Ckr, 
DogmaSf  ii,  599 ;  Haag,  Hitł,  des  Dogmes  Chritienes,  i, 
291  sq.,  485  8q.;  Cramp,  Teseł-booh  ofPopery,  p.  101  «q.; 
Milman,  Lat,  Chrisiiaiiy,  p.  8, 208 ;  Ptenas,  I)ie  rdmude 
Lehre  v.  d,  unbejlecklen  Żmpjangwiss  a.  d.  QueUen  dar- 
gesteUt  u,  a  Gottes  WoH  %eida^  (BerUn,  1805) ;  Bfamt, 
TheoL  Encyclop,  i,  828  są.    See  also  Mary  ;  Marioła- 

TSY. 

IiDipacalate-Ccnceptioii  Oath  is  among  the 
Roman  Catholics  the  assurance  by  oath  of  a  belief  in 
and  support  of  the  doctrine  of  the  immaculate  coooep* 
tion  of  the  Yiiigin  Mary.  It  was  introduoed  by  the 
Sorbonne  in  oonsequence  of  the  disputes  on  this  snbjcct 
between  the  Franciscans  and  Dominicans  [see  Ijuiao 
ULATE  Conception],  as  a  test  oath  for  admission  to  sn 
academical  degree.  The  Jesuits  madę  this  a  test  oath 
also  for  other  priyileges^— TAeo/.  Umr.  Lex.  i,  40Ł  (J. 
H.W.) 

Immanent  Aotivity  or  Gon,  the  pantheistical 
tenet  that  God  does  not  enst  outside  of  the  worid,  as  a 
free  personal  (transcendental)  being,  but  inside  oT  it,  ai 
the  highest  unity  of  the  world,  beeause  God  cannot,  ac- 
cording  to  it,  be  conceiyed  of  without  the  world.  SaisMt 
{Mod,  Pantheismy  ii,  91)  thus  soms  it  up:  "He  (God) 
creates  the  world  within  himself,  and  thenceforth  theie 
is  no  separation  of  the  Creator  and  the  creature,  for  the 
creature  is  still  the  Creator  considered  in  his  etcmal  aod 
neoessazy  action."    See  Pantheism. 

Imman'nSl  (Hebi  Immcaatel',  ^K^Sa?,  somctimeB 
separately  ^K  ^3B9,  God  tpith  u«,  as  it  is  interpircted 
Matt.  i,  28,  where  it  is  written  £fi^ayovqX,  aa  in  the 
Sept,  and  Anglicized  "  Emmanuel;"  the  Sept.  howerer, 
in  Isa.  yiii,  8,  translates  it  /m5'  ripvv  o  ^łóc  ;  Yulg.  Em^ 
manuel)f  a  figuratiye  name  prescribed  through  the  proph- 
et  for  a  child  that  should  be  bom  as  a  sign  to  Ahaz  of 
the  speedy  downfall  of  Syria  (B.a  cir.  789 ;  see  2  Kinga 
xyi,  9)  and  yiolent  interregnum  of  the  kingóom  of  !»> 
lael  (KC.  737-728 ;  see  2  Kinga  zy,  80 ;  comp.  xyii,  1), 
bef(»e  the  infant  should  become  capaUe  of  distingiiiah- 
ing  between  wholesome  and  improper  kinda  d  food. 
The  name  occurs  only  in  the  celebrated  yeise  of  laaiah 
(yii,  14), "  Behold,  a  [rather  tht]  yiigin  shall  ooiiceive 


IMMANUEŁ 


fili 


IMMENSITT  OF  GOD 


and  benr  a  son,  and  shaU  oall  his  name  Immatmd^  and 

in  a"n^*»*>T  paaaage  of  the  aame  propbet  (laa.  yiii,  8), 

where  the  ravaging  army  of  the  Anyrians  U  described 

as  ere  loog  to  ^'fill  the  bieadth  of  thy  land,  O  Imman- 

md^  i»  e.  Judsa,  with  evident  allusion  to  the  fonner 

dBdamtion.    See  Ahaz.    In  the  name  itself  there  is 

no  difficolty ;  but  the  vene,  as  a  whole,  has  been  yari- 

oosLy  interpreted.    From  the  manner  in  which  the  woid 

God,  and  even  JehoTah,  is  nsed  in  the  oompoeition  of 

Hebrew  names,  there  is  no  such  peculiańty  in  that  of 

TmmMinfl  as  in  itKlf  reąiiires  us  to  undentand  that  he 

who  bose  it  must  be  in  fiict  God.    Indeed,  it  is  used  as 

a  pioper  name  among  the  Jews  at  this  day.    This  high 

tenae  haa,  however,  been  assigne^  to  it  in  consequence 

of  the  appUcation  of  the  whok  vene,  by  the  evangelist 

MałUiew  (i,  23),  to  ouz  divine  Savioar.    £ven  if  this 

leferenoe  did  not  exist,  the  history  of  the  Nativity 

would  imsistibly  lead  us  to  the  condusion  that  the 

veiae — ^wbatever  may  have  been  its  intermediate  aigni- 

ficatioa — had  an  ultimate  reference  to  Christ,    See  Isai- 

ABm     The  State  of  opinion  on  this  point  has  been  thos 

conciady  summed  up  by  Dr.  Henderson  in  his  notę  on 

the  text :  ^  This  vflne  has  long  been  a  snbject  of  dis- 

pute  beifreen  Jews  and  profewedly  Christian  writers, 

and  among  the  latter  mutually.    While  the  former  re- 

ject  \is  appUcation  to  the  Messiah  altogether— >the  ear- 

lier  Babbins  explaining  it  of  the  queen  of  Ahaz  and  the 

birth  of  his  aon  Uesekiah,  and  the  hUer,  ma  Kimchi 

and  Abarbanel,  of  the  prophet^s  own  wife — the  great 

body  of  Christian  interpreters  have  held  it  to  be  direct- 

ly  and  excluaively  a  prophecy  of  our  SaWour,  and  have 

oanaidered  themselves  fuUy  borne  out  by  the  in^ired 

testimony  of  the  evangelist  Matthew.     Others,  how- 

crer,  hare  departed  from  this  oonstructioii  of  the  pas- 

aage,  and  haye  invented  or  adopted  various  hypotheses 

in  aapport  of  such  disseuL    Grotius,  Faber,  Isenbiehl, 

Hezd,  Bolten,  Fritzsche,  Pluschke,  Gesenius,  and  Uit^ 

zig,  auppose  either  the  then  present  or  a  futurę  wife  of 

Isaiah  to  be  the  n^^^,  abnah  [rendered  <viigin'],  r&- 

ferred  to.    Eichhoni,  Paulus,  Hensler,  and  Ammon  are 

etf  opinion  that  the  piophet  had  nothing  morę  in  view 

than  an  ideał  virgin,  and  that  both  she  and  her  son  are 

BMRly  imaginary  peisonages,  intioduced  for  the  pui^ 

pose  of  piophetic  illustration.    Bauer,  Cube,  Steudel, 

and  some  otbers^  think  that  the  propbet  pointed  to  a 

young  woman  in  the  pcesenoe  of  the  Idng  and  his  court- 

ien.    A  fourth  daas,  among  whom  are  Richard  Simon, 

Łowth,  Koppe,  Dathe,Wiilianw,  Von  Meyer,  Obhausen, 

and  Dr.  J.  Fye  Smith,  admit  the  hypothesis  of  a  double 

aense  (q.  ▼.) :  one,  in  which  the  words  apply  primarily 

to  some  female  li\'ing  in  the  time  of  the  prophet,  and 

ber  giving  birth  to  a  aon  aooording  to  the  ordinary  laws 

of  natnie;  or,  as  Dathe  holds,  to  some  Tiigin,  who  at 

that  time  should  miracnlously  oonceiTe ;  and  the  other, 

in  which  they  ieceived  a  seoondaiy  and  plenaiy  fulfil- 

nent  in  the  minculons  oonception  and  birth  of  Jesus 

Christ."    (See  the  monographs  enumerated  by  Yolbe- 

ding,  Ifidex,  p.  14 ;  4Uid  Fttrst,  Bih,  Jud,  ii,  60 ;  also  Heng^ 

stmbeig,  ChrittoL  des  A,  T.  ii,  69,  and  the  oommentan 

ton  in  generał ;  compare  the  Stttd.  u.  Krit.  1880,  iii,  538.) 

This  last  seema  to  us  the  only  consistent  interpretation. 

That  the  child  to  be  so  designated  was  one  soon  to  be 

bom  and  already  spolien  of  is  elear  from  the  entire  con- 

text  and  drift  of  the  prophecy.    It  can  be  no  other  than 

the  Ifaher-shalal-hash-baz  (q.  v.),  the  ofbpring  of  the 

propbet^s  own  marriage  with  the  rirgin  prophetess,  who 

thos  became  an  eminent  type  of  the  Messiah^s  mother 

(ba.  Tiii,  18).     See  YiBotw. 

Immanoel,  bkn-Saiomon  Romi,  a  Jewish  philos- 
opher,  commentator,  and  poet,  was  bora  at  Romę  about 
1265.  Endowed  with  great  natural  ability,  and  with  a 
foodnesB  for  study,  he  soon  madę  himself  master  of  Bib- 
lical  and  Talmudic,  as  well  as  of  Grecian  and  Latin  lit- 
eraturę. He  was  a  oontemporary  of  Dante,  and,  being 
ttoeh  giren  to  a  coltiyation  of  the  same  ait  in  which 
Dmie  immortalized  his  name, "  the  two  spirits,  kindied, 
•ad  yet  diffeicftt  in  auuy  respectSb  formed  a  mutoal  and 


intimate  attachment"  He  died  about  1830.  Imman* 
ueł  wrote  commentaries  on  the  wbole  Jewish  Bibie,  ex- 
oepting  the  minor  prophets  and  Ezra.  They  are  en- 
riched  not  only  by  vałnable  grammatical  and  archso- 
logical  notes,  but  contain  also  some  able  remarks  on  the 
naturę  and  spirit  of  the  poetical  books.  *'  It  is  greatly 
to  be  regretted  that  of  all  his  exegetical  works,  wliich 
are  in  diflerent  public  libraries  of  Europę,  the  C7om* 
menkuy  on  Proterim  and  Some  Glonet  on  the  Pscdms  are 
the  only  ones  as  yet  published,  the  former  iu  Naples  in 
1486,  and  the  latter  in  Parma  iu  1806.  The  introdue- 
tion  of  his  commentaiy  on  the  Song  of  Songs  has  been 
published,  with  an  English  tranalation,  by  Ginsburg: 
łiistoricai  and  Crkical  Commeniary  on  the  Song  of 
Songs  (Lond.  1857,  p.  49-55)"  (Ginsburg  in  Kitto).  He 
wrote  also  some  philosophical  ti^atises,  and  translated 
for  his  Jewish  brethreu  the  philosophical  writings  of 
Albertus  the  Great,  Thomas  Aąuinas,  and  other  oele- 
brated  philosophers.  See  GrHtz,  Geach,  der  Juden.  yii, 
307  8q. ;  Geiger,  Witsenschąfiliehe  Zeittchri/i,  1839,  iv, 
194  sq. ;  FUrst,  Bibliofh.  Jud  u,  92  8q.     ( J.  H.  W.) 

Immateilality  is  a  ąuality  of  God  and  of  the  ho* 
man  souL  The  inmiateriality  of  God  denotes  that  he 
forms  an  absolute  oontrsst  to  matter;  he  is  simple,  and 
has  no  parts,  and  so  cannot  be  dissolyed ;  matter^  on  the 
other  hand,  is  madę  up  of  parts  into  which  it  can  be  re- 
solyed.  God  is  also  free  from  the  limitations  to  which 
matter  is  snbject,  L  e.  from  the  limits  of  space  and  time. 
The  immatenality  of  God  is  therefore  the  basis  of  the 
qualitie8  of  eternity,  omnipresence,  and  uncbangeable- 
ness.  Thus  the  inmiateriality  of  the  soul  indudes  Uk&- 
wise  simpUdty  as  another  of  its  qualities.  This,  of 
course,  does  not  abeolutely  set  it  aboye  the  limitations  of 
space  and  time,  sinoe  the  soul  needs  the  body  for  a  neo- 
essary  organ  of  its  life ;  nor  does  it  set  atiide  any  further 
deyeiopmeiit,  but  it  certainly  indudes  indestructibility, 
and  thus  seryes  as  a  proof  of  immortality  (q.  v.).  The 
ntatericUity  of  the  soul  was  asserted  by  TertuUian,  Arno- 
bius,  and  others,  during  the  fint  thrce  ccnturiea.  Near 
the  doae  of  the  fourth,  the  immateriality  of  the  soul 
was  maintained  by  Augustine,  Nemesius,  and  Mamertus 
Claudianus.  See  Guizot,  Uutory  ofCiciłization,  i,  394 ; 
Krauth,  Vooab.  o/Phiios.  p,  245.  See  also  Ibimkksity 
OF  God  ;  SouŁf  Traduction  of. 

Immadiate  Impntation  op  Sin.    See  Ibohj- 

TATION. 

Immenflity  of  God  is  explained  by  Dr.  J.  Pye 
Smith  (Firtt  lAnes  of  Christ,  TheoL  p.  138)  to  be  the  a5- 
«o/ttte  necestUp  of  being,  considered  in  relation  to  space. 
^  There  is  with  God  no  diiftasion  nor  contraction,  no  ex- 
tension  nor  circumspection,  or  any  such  relation  to  space 
as  belongs  to  limited  natures.  God  is  cqually  near  to, 
and  equiilly  far  from,  every  point  of  space  and  eyeiy 
atom  of  the  nniyerse.  He  is  uniyersally  and  immedi- 
ately  present,  not  as  a  body,  but  as  a  spirit;  not  by 
motion,  or  penetration,  or  fiUing,  as  would  be  predicatcd 
of  a  diflused  fluid,  or  in  any  way  as  if  the  infinity  of 
God  were  oompoaed  of  a  countless  number  of  finite 
parts,  but  in  a  way  pecuUar  to  his  own  spiritual  and 
perfect  naturę,  and  of  which  we  can  form  no  ooncep- 
tion." In  the  passages  of  Job  xi,  7-9 ;  1  Kings  yiii,  27 
(2  Chroń,  yi,  18) ;  Psa.  cxxxix,  7-13 ;  Isa.  ]xyi,  1 ;  Jer. 
xxiii,  23,  24;  Amos  ix,  2,  3;  Matt.  yi,  4,  6;  Acta  xyii, 
24,  27,  28 ;  also  Isa.  xl,  12-15, 21, 22, 25, 26, ''  the  repre- 
sentaticms  are  such  as  literally  indicate  a  kind  of  dif- 
fnsed  and  fllling  subtile  materiał ;  but  this  is  the  conde- 
soending  manner  of  the  Scriptures,  and  is  eyidently  to 
be  understood  with  an  cxdusion  of  materiał  ideas. 
Metaph3^cal  or  philosophical  preciaeness  is  not  in  the 
character  of  scriptural  oompoeition,  noi:  would  it  eyer 
suit  the  bulk  of  mankind;  and  no  language  or  ooncep" 
tions  of  men  can  reach  the  actual  expreaBion  of  the  tnith, 
orbe  any  other  than  analogical.  When  the  Scriptures 
speak  of  "  God  being  in  heaven"  they  mean  his  supren^ 
acy  in  all  perfection,  and  his  uniyersal  dominion." 

Immensity  and  omnipresence,  again,  are  distinguished 
in  that  **  the  foimer  is  absolute,  being  the  neceasaiy  in- 


IMMER 


512 


IMMERSION 


hei«nt  perfection  of  Łbe  Deity  in  itwlf,  aa  iniinitely  ex- 
alted  above  all  conception  of  Bpaoe ;  and  that  the  latter 
U  relatiye,  aiising  out  of  the  position  of  a  created  world. 
The  moment  that  world  oommenoed,  or  the  fint  created 
portion  of  it,  there  ictu  and  ever  lemains  the  diyine 
presence  {owowiay  adutaiHa)^* 

The  quiditie8  of  ext€n»i(M  and  daństbiUłff  ara  thoae  of 
hod^f  not  of  a  pure,  pioper,  highest  ^ńriL  ^'Sodntu 
and  his  immediate  followen  denied  a  proper  ubiąuity, 
immensity,  or  omnipresence  to  the  eesence  or  aubatance 
of  the  Deity,  and  repreaented  the  univer8al  presenoe  of 
God  spoken  of  in  Scriptura  aa  denoting  only  the  acta 
and  effects  of  his  power,  favor,  and  aid."  Des  Cartea 
and  bis  followers  held  <*  that  the  easence  of  the  Deity  is 
thouffht,  and  that  it  bas  no  relation  to  space."  See  J.  Pye 
'  Smith,  First  Lines  ofCkrisiian  Thtoloyyy  edited  by  W. 
Farrar  (2d  ed.  Lond.  1861) ;  Augostine,  De  Civ,  Dtiy  20 ; 
Bretschneider,  Dogmattk^  i,  396  aą.  See  Omnipresknce 
OF  God. 

Jm^mer  (Heb.  Immer',  ^^V^  talkałite,  or,  acooid- 
ing  to  Fltrst,  higk ;  Sept  'EfAfitip)^  the  name  of  aeyersl 
prieata,  mostly  near  the  time  of  the  £xile. 

1.  The  bead  of  the  aijcteenth  saoerdotal  di^iaion,  ac- 
cording  to  Dayid's  appointment  (1  Chion.  xziy,  14). 
B.a  1014. 

2.  The  father  of  Paahur,  wbich  latter  ao  groedy  mie- 
naed  the  prophet  Jeremiah  (Jer.  xx,  1).  B.C  antę  607. 
By  many  the  name  is  ragarded  here  aa  put  patronymio 
aUy  for  the  preoediug. 

3.  One  whose  desoendanta  to  the  number  of  1062  re- 
tumed  from  Babylon  with  Zerubbabel  (Ezra  ii,  87;  Neb. 
vii,  40).  He  is  very  poeaibly  the  aame  with  the  father 
of  Meshillemoth  (Neb.  xi,  18)  or  Meshillemith  (1  Chroń. 
ix,  12),  certain  of  whoae  deacendanta  took  a  conapica- 
ous  part  in  the  eacred  dntiea  at  Jemaalem  ailer  the  £x- 
ile ;  and  probably  the  aame  with  the  one  aome  of  whoae 
deacendants  diyorced  their  Gendle  wiyea  at  the  inatanoe 
of  Ezra  (Ezra  x,  20).  B.C.  much  antę  686.  By  aome 
he  ia  identified  with  the  two  preceding. 

4.  One  who  aocx)mpanied  Zerubbabel  from  Babylon, 
bat  waa  unable  to  proye  hia  laraelitiah  deaoent  (Ezra  ii, 
69;  Neh.yii,6i).  RC.686.  It  does  not  deariy  appear, 
boweyer,  that  be  daimed  to  bdong  to  the  prieatly  or- 
der, and  it  is  poaaible  that  the  name  ia  only  giyen  aa 
that  of  a  place  in  the  Babylonian  dominions  from  whidi 
aome  of  thoae  named  in  the  foUowing  yeiaea  came. 

5.  The  father  of  Zadok,  włuch  latter  repaired  part  of 
the  walla  of  Jerusalem  oppoeite  hia  houae  (Neb.  iii,  29). 
.B.G.  antę  446.    He  waa,  perhapa,  the  aame  aa  No.  8. 

Immersion,  the  act  of  plnnging  into  water,  eape- 
dally  the  peraon  of  the  candidate  in  Chiiatian  baptiam, 
aa  pŃerformed  by  the  Baptist  (q.  y.)  denomination,  and 
occaaionally  by  others.  There  ara  two  oontioyeraiea 
that  reąuira  to  be  noticed  under  thia  head. 

L  Is  fhis  tnode  or  act  essenłicU  to  the  vaiidiły  ofthe 
ordinance  itselff — ^The  affirmatiye  of  thia  ąneation  ia 
maintained  by  thoae  denominadonally  atyled  ''Bap- 
tiato,''  and  is  denied  by  nearly  all  other  daaaea  of 
Chriatiana.  For  the  aigumenta  on  both  aidea^  aee  the 
artide  Baftism. 

II.  A  re  the  temu  "  immerse,^  «  immersion,"  etc.  prefer- 
aUe  or  morę  correct  in  a  rersion  ofthe  Scriptures,  than 
**haptize,''  '^baptism,"  etc? —The  affirmatiye  of  thia 
queation  ia  taken  by  many,  but  not  by  all  Baptiata,  and 
it  ia  approyed,  to  aome  extent  at  leaat,  by  oertain  acbol- 
ara  in  moet  other  denominationa,  while  the  negatiye  ia 
held  by  the  vast  majority  of  KUe  readers.  The  change 
waa  actually  madę  by  Dr.  Campbell  in  hia  work  on  the 
Goapels,  and  reoently  a  ayatematic  effort  baa  been  madę 
on  a  large  acale  to  giye  cmreney  to  the  alteration  by 
the  translations  put  forth  under  the  auapicea  of  the 
American  (Baptist)  Bibie  Union.  See  Bible  Socie- 
TiBS,  6.  The  argumenta  for  thia  rendering  are  aet  forth 
in  all  their  atrength  by  Dr.  Conant,  in  a  notę  to  hia 
tranalation  of  Matthew,  at  ii,  6,  aa  folk)wa  (to  each  of 
Which  we  aubjoin  the  counter  argumenta) : 

**L  Thia  word  expreaaed  a  particnlar  act,  yiz.  iMmer- 


iion  in  a  fluid  or  any  yielding  anbatance.  See  tba  Ap> 
pendix  to  thia  ydume,  aectiona  i->iii."  The  Appendii 
thua  referred  to  ia  Dr.  Conant^a  treatiae  On  the  Mtasmę 
and  Use  ofBapUgein,  etc  The  pioofa  there  giyen,  bow- 
eyer, do  not  aeem  to  austain  thia  predae  point;  theiiaa* 
aagea  dted  do  indeed  ahow  that  fiawrii^w  mcau  to 
whebn  or  enydop  with  a  liquid,  but  do  not  indicate  any 
unifonn  method,  auch  aa  dipping,  plunging ;  oor  do  they 
necesaaiily  imply  motioii  on  the  part  ofthe  aułgeot  into 
the  fluid,  aa  *'  immenion"  deariy  doea. 

^iL  The  word  had  no  other  meaning;  it  expranad 
thia  act,  either  literaliy  or  in  a  metapborical  amie, 
through  the  whde  period  of  ita  uae  in  Greek  litcntoe. 
Append.  aect  iiL"  Thia  aaaertion  iapalpably  relatedby 
the  fact  that  Dr.  Conant  himadf,  in  but  a  part  of  thcae 
yery  quotationa  ha«  appealed  to,  baa  yentorad  to  raa- 
der  PairriKtip  by  **  immeiae;"  for  he  ia  yery  Ampieat- 
ly  conatrained  to  tranalate  it  *<immeige,"  <'aiibiD8ge,* 
«dip»"  **płunge,"  "imbathe,"  «whdm,"  etc  Thoe 
worda,  it  ia  tnie,  baye  the  aame  generał  aigniflcatieD; 
but,  auppoaing  that  they  were  in  eyery  caae  auitdda 
renderinga  (which  in  many  caaea  they  are  not),  yet  they 
do  not  eetabUah  the  identical  point  in  diapute,  namcfy. 
the  exclu8iye  tranaUtion  by  ** immerae,"  etc,  aa  if  "the 
word  had  no  other  meaning." 

"  UL  Its  grammatical  construction  with  other  words, 
and  the  circumatanoes  oonnected  with  ita  uae^  aocori 
entirely  with  thia  meaning,  and  exdnde  erery  other. 
Append.  aect  iii,  2."  On  the  oontnuy,  the  prepoaitiait 
and  caaea  by  which  it  ia  followed,  being  geneiaUy  h 
with  the  dativef  mdicate  predaely  the  oppoeite  eondo- 
aion;  insomuch  that  in  eyen  the  comparatiTely  lew  in- 
atancea  whera  *'immerae*'  can  be  giyen  aa  a  rendering 
at  all,  it  ia  acarody  allowable  except  by  the  ambigmty 
"  immeraed  tu,**  which  in  Engliah  ia  uaed  for  **  imuKranl 
into.^  In  the  Greek  language,  aa  eyery  achokr  kmwi^ 
no  auch  imprednon  exi8t8. 

**  iy.  In  the  age  of  Chriat  and  hia  apostlea,  aa  m  aH 
perioda  of  the  language,  it  waa  in  common  uae  to  ex- 
preaa  the  most  fainiliar  acta  and  oocutreneca  of  croy- 
day  life;  aa, for  examplc,  immertinff  a»  axe  m cafer,to 
hardenit;  voo/t»a<l^,tocolorit;  anamaui/»waier, 
to  drown  it ;  a  ahip  subrneryed in  the  wayea;  loeka  » 
mersed  in  the  tide ;  and  (metaphoirically)  immtrsed  ta 
caresy  in  sorraw,  ta  ą^nortmor,  m  pocerłyj  aa  <M^,ia  «(»• 
por  and  deep,  etc  Append.  aect.  iii,  1."  Bathcr  tbeaB 
examplea  ahould  be  rendered,  an  axe  tempered  bf  cold 
water,  wool  tiuffed  tcith  dye,  drowntd  m  water,  aioił  tf 
the  wayea,  cotered  icith  the  Ude^  oterwhdmeditiiA  carei, 
etc  Thefamiliarity  of  the  woid  ia  another  noatlar,  ba- 
longing  to  the  next  argument. 

^  y.  There  waa  nothing  aacred  in  the  word  itaeł^  er 
in  the  act  which  it  expraeed.  The  idea  of  aaicrednfw 
bdonged  addy  to  the  relation  in  whidi  the  act  waa 
performed.  Append.  aect  iy,  7."  Thia  fiact  ia  no  good 
reaaon  why,  when  it  ia  manifeatly  empkiyed  in  audi  aa- 
cred reUdons,  it  ahould  not  be  renderod  hj  a  teim  ap- 
propriate  to  auch  a  aacredneaa.  Thia  argument  apphca 
only  to  thoae  paaaages  in  whidi  the  word  oocms  in  a 
aecularaenae;  about  tbeae  there  ia  no  diąmtcw 

^\i,  In  nonę  of  theae  reapecta  doea  the  word  haplisr^ 
aa  uaed  by  Engliah  writera,  comapond  with  the  erigi- 
nal  Greek  word.*'  Thia  baa  alieady  been  met  in  anb- 
atance  aboye.  The  remainder  of  the  argumenta,  with 
one  exception,  need  not  be  reproduced,  aa  they  are  of 
a  doetrinal  character,  aimed  at  the  odium  theohpieum, 
wbich  ia  a  metbod  of  reaaoning  incondnaiTe,  if  not  un- 
worthy  in  a  philological  queBtion. 

"xi  In  rendering  the  Greek  wofd  by  immerae,  I  fd- 
low  the  example  of  the  leading  yemacnlar  yenioną 
madę  from  the  Greek,  in  the  languagea  of  ContinenUl 
Europę,  and  ałao  of  the  critical  ^-eraiona  madę  fer  the 
uae  of  the  leamed."  Facta,  howerer,  do  not  support  thia 
daim  with  any  uniformity.  The  modem  yeiaioBą  of 
courae,  render  aocording  to  the  thedogical  leaniąga  of 
their  authora,  and,  were  they  mian]inoa8,they  eonld  not 
be  pemutted  to  dedde  a  qaefltioii  of  thia  kiod  Iy  oh- 


DIMOLATION 


613 


iMMORTALrrr 


łioriij^.  The  best  and  ddast  gmdes,  the  eariy  Łatiiifl, 
f/eelr  transfer  the  tenn  hapiizOf  giying  it  a  regolar  ter- 
minaftion  like  oŁher  natiye  yerba;  they  larelj,  if  ever, 
nader  by  *'  immeigo,"  *^  immerBio/'  etc^  bat  lunially  giye 
**  tango,""  or,  at  moet,  '*  mei^"  See  Dale,  CloMńc  Bap- 
tum  (Fhilad.  1867),  which  thoroughly  reriews  the  in- 
ttanoes  of  the  uae  of  /SanTi^w.  In  a  sabfleąoent  yol- 
orne,  Judcńe  Baptitm  (Philad.  1870),  Dr.  Dale  meets  the 
whole  oontroyeny  in  que8tion,  and  proyes  concluńyely 
the  inoorrectnen  of  translating  /Sairri^w  by  *<  immerae." 
There  aie  other  poeitiye  aigaments  against  the  sub- 
•titution  of  *<immer9e"  as  an  equiyalent  to  jSairri^ciy: 
L  The  woid  is  no  morę  English  than  ^  bapŁize  ;**  one  is 
of  Lfttin  deriration,  and  the  other  Greek,  while  neither 
is  of  Sason  origin.  Yet  both  are  perfectly  intelligible, 
and  it  is  pretty  oertain  that,  bnt  for  the  adyantage  which 
**■  immerse"  giyes  to  one  {Mrty  in  polemics,  it  woold  ney- 
er  hmTe  been  thooght  worth  whiie  to  make  the  ex- 
change.  2. "  Immeise,'*  as  a  oompound  woid,  does  not 
oonespond  etymologically  with  the  Greek.  There  is 
nothing  answeiing  to  the  **tn-"  in  /Sairrć^w ;  it  should 
haye  been  i/i/Sairri^w  (which  seldom  occurs),  or,  rather, 
iiafiairriZu  (which  is  never  used  at  all,  obyiously  on 
aocoiint  of  the  incongraity  between  the  natiye  foroe  of 
the  pcimitiye,  and  the  moium  inherently  implied  in  iic). 
Z,  The  ontrageous  awkwardness  of  such  phrases  as  ''he 
win  immerM  you  in  holy  spirit  and  fire"  (sic  Conant), 
lendered  neoeasary  by  this  change,  is  a  snfficient  critical 
objeccion  to  the  proposed  rendering,  were  there  no  other 
argmnent  against  it»  A  theory  that  breaks  down  in 
this  shocking  mannei  the  moment  it  is  applied  desenres 
ooly  a  summary  rejection.  4.  These  translatora  are  in- 
eooBatent  with  themselyes,  for  they  retain  the  expre8- 
aion  "  John  the  Baptiit,*^  instead  of  calling  him  Jo^m  łke 
Immener,  Nay,  they  ought  to  go  one  step  further,  and 
themselyes  abjure  the  title  of  "^  Baptists,"  which  they 
prc-cminently  anogate,  and  should  name  themselyes 
appiopriately  **  the  Immersionists."  It  is  highly  cred- 
itiUile  that  the  mass  of  that  large  denomination  are  not 
dispoaed  to  be  drawn  into  this  spedous  innoyation. 

Immolation  (LaŁumnofa/tb)  is  the  name  of  a  cer- 
cmony  performed  in  the  sacrifices  of  the  Romans.  It 
consisted  in  throwing  some  aort  of  com  or  frankincense, 
together  with  the  mola  or  salt  cake,  and  a  little  winę, 
on  the  head  of  the  yictim.  See  Brande  and  Cox,  Diet, 
of  Sdaice^  LiL,  and  ArtjU,  197.  See  SACBincE.  (J. 
H.W.) 

Immorality.    See  Morałs. 

Immortality  ia  the  perpetuity  of  ezistenoe  after 
it  has  once  begon  (Lat  immortalitaSy  not  dyinff) .  *^ '  If  a 
man  die,  shall  he  liye  again?'  is  a  qae8tion  which  has 
natmally  agitated  the  heart  and  stimulated  the  intelleo- 
toal  corioaity  of  man,  whereyer  he  has  risen  aboye  a 
State  of  barbarism,  and  oommenoed  to  exercise  his  intel- 
lect  at  alL"  Withoot  soch  a  belief,  Max  Muller  (CA^p* 
/rom  a  German  Workshop^  i,  45)  well  says,  *<  religion 
amely  is  like  an  arch  lesting  on  one  pillar,  like  a  bridge 
ending  in  an  abysB."  It  is  yeiy  gratifying,  theiefore,  to 
the  bdieyer,  and  a  fact  worthy  of  notice,  that  the  afBi^ 
matiye  on  this  que8tion  is  aasamed  morę  or  less  by  all 
the  nations  of  earth,  so  far  as  oor  infoimation  reaches 
at  the  present  day,  although,  it  is  troe,  their  yiews  often 
aasome  yeiy  yagae  and  eyen  materialistic  forms. 

L  IdeoM  ofride  Nations^^We  ooncede  that  the  yiews 
of  most  rude  heathen  nations,  both  ancient  and  modem, 
respectmg  ihe  state  of  man  aiter  death  are  indeed  dark 
aad  obacure,  as  well  as  their  notions  respecŁing  the  na- 
tm  of  the  sool  itself,  which  aome  of  them  regard  as  a 
kind  of  aerial  snbstance,  resembling  the  body,  though 
of  a  finer  maferial.  Still  it  ii  found  that  the  greater 
psit  of  mankind,  eyen  of  those  who  are  entirdy  uncul- 
tirated,  thoogh  they  may  be  incapable  of  the  higher 
philoBophical  idea  of  the  peraonal  immortality  of  the 
aool,  are  yet  indined  to  belieye  at  least  that  the  soul 
■nrriyes  the  body,  and  oontinnes  either  foreyer,  or  at 
laatt  fis  a  yeiy  kog  time.    This  fiuth  seems  to  rest  in 


nncnltiyated  nations,  or,  better  perhi^  races,  1,  npon 
the  love  of  l\fe,  which  ia  deeply  planted  in  the  human 
breast,  and  leads  to  the  wish  and  hope  that  life  will  be 
oontinued  eyen  beyond  the  graye;  2,  upon  iradkiom 
tranamitted  from  their  ancestois;  8,  upon  dream»t  in 
which  the  dead  appear  speaking  or  acting,  and  thus  con- 
firming  both  wishes  and  traditions.    See  Kecromancy. 

1.  Hindus*— In  the  sacred  books  of  the  Hindus  called 
the  Yeda,  **  immortality  of  the  soul,  as  well  as  peraonal 
immortality  and  peraonal  responsibility  afker  death,  ia 
dearly  prodaimed"  (MtUler,  Chips,  i,  45).  (We  haye 
here  a  refutation  of  the  opinion  that  has  hitherto  been 
entertained,  that  the  goal  of  Hinduism  ia  absorption  [q. 
y.]  into  the  Uniyersal  Spiiit,  and  therefore  loss  of  indi- 
yidual  existenoe,  and  that  the  Hindus  as  well  as  Brah- 
mans  belieye  in  the  trasmigration  [q.  y.]  of  the  soul, 
and  a  refutation  by  a  writer  who  is  most  oompetent  to 
speak.  Profesaor  Both,  another  great  Sanacrit  scholar, 
in  an  artide  in  the  Journal  o/ the  German  Orienial  80-^ 
dęty  [iy,  427],  oorroborates  Frof.  Muller  in  these  words: 
**  We  here  [in  the  Yeda]  find,  not  without  astonishment, 
beautiful  conoeptions  on  immortality  expre8aed  in  nn- 
adomed  language  with  childlike  oonyiction.  If  it  were 
neceaaary,  we  might  find  here  the  most  powerful  weap- 
ons  against  the  yiew  which  has  latdy  been  reyiyed  and 
proclaimed  as  new,  that  Persia  was  the  only  birthplace 
of  the  idea  of  immortality,  and  that  eyen  the  nations  of 
Europę  had  deriyed  it  from  that  quarter.  As  if  the  re* 
ligious  spirit  of  eyery  gifted  race  was  not  able  [which 
Muller  (ii,  267)  holda]  to  arriye  at  it  by  ito  own 
streng^h.")  Thus  we  find  these  passages:  *'He  whe 
giyes  alms  goes  to  the  highest  place  in  heayen ;  he  goea 
to  the  gods"  (Ry.  i,  125, 56>  <<£yen  the  idea,  so  fn- 
quent  in  the  later  literaturę  of  the  Bkahmans,  that  im- 
mortality ia  secured  by  a  son,  seems  implied,  unless  our 
transłation  decdyes  us,  in  one  passage  of  the  Yeda  (yii, 
56,  24) :  'O  Maruts,  may  there  be  to  us  a  strong  son^ 
who  ia  a  liying  ruler  of  men;  through  whom  we  may 
cross  the  watera  on  our  way  to  the  happy  abode ;  then 
may  we  come  to  your  own  house!*  One  poet  piays 
that  he  may  see  again  his  father  and  mother  after  death 
(Ry.  i,  24, 1) ;  and  the  fathers  are  inyoked  almoet  like 
gods,  oblations  are  offered  to  them,  and  they  are  belieyed 
to  enjoy,  in  company  with  the  gods,  a  life  of  neyer-end- 
ing  fdidty  (Ry.  x,  15, 16).  We  find  this  prayer  ad- 
dresaed  to  Soma  (Ry.  ix,  118, 7) :  *  Where  there  ia  eter- 
nal  light,  in  the  world  where  the  sun  is  placed,  in  that 
immortal,  imperishable  world  place  me,  O  Soma !  Mniere 
king  Yaiyasyata  reigns,  where  the  secret  place  of  heay- 
en ia,  where  these  mighty  watera  are,  there  make  me 
immortal!  Where  life  is  free,  in  the  third  heayen  of 
heayens,  where  the  worlda  are  radiant,  there  make  me 
inunortal!  Where  wishes  and  desires  are,  where  the 
bowl  of  the  bright  Soma  is,  where  there  is  food  and  re- 
joidng,  there  make  me  immortal*.  Where  there  ia 
happiness  and  delight,  where  joy  and  pleasure  reside, 
where  the  desires  of  our  desire  are  attained,  there  make 
me  immortal!'" 

2.  Chinese,  — WhUe  it  ia  true  that  Confncins  himself 
did  not  expres8ly  teach  the  immortality  of  the  soul,  nay, 
that  he  rather  purposely  seems  to  haye  ayoided  enter- 
ing  npon  thu  snbject  at  all,  taking  it  most  probably 
like  Moaes,  as  we  shall  see  bdow,  simply  for  granted 
(comp.  Muller,  Chips,  i,  308),  it  ia  neyerthdeas  implied 
in  the  worship  which  the  Chinese  pay  to  their  ances- 
tors.  Another  eyidence,  it  seems  to  us,  is  giyen  by  the 
absence  of  the  word  death  from  the  writings  of  Confo* 
dus  (q.  y.).  When  a  person  dies,  the  Chincae  say  ^  he 
has  retumed  to  his  family."  "  The  apirits  of  the  good 
were,  according  to  him  (Confudus),  permitted  to  yisit 
their  andent  habitations  on  earth,  or  soch  anoestral 
halls  or  places  as  were  appointed  by  their  descendantą 
to  reoeiye  homage  and  confer  benefactions.  Hence  the 
duty  of  performing  rites  in  soch  places,  under  the  pen- 
alty,  in  the  caae  of  those  who,  while  liying,  neglect  such 
duty,  of  their  spiritual  part  being  depziyed  after  death 
of  the  supremę  bliss  flowing  from  the  homage  of  de- 


IMMORTALITY 


514 


IMMORTALnr 


scendante"  (Legge,  Li/e  and  Teachuigs  of  ConfuchUy 
PhUadelphia,  1867, 12mo). 

8.  i:;^^ii«.— Perhaps  we  may  say  that  the  idea  of 
immortality  aasumed  a  morę  defiziite  shape  among  the 
Egyptians,  for  they  dearly  recognified  not  only  a  dwell- 
inff-ptace  of  the  deady  but  also  a  futuie  judgment 
*^  Oeiris,  the  beneficent  god,  judges  the  dead,  and,  *  hav- 
ing  weighed  their  heait  in  the  scales  of  justice,  he  sends 
the  wicked  to  regions  of  darkness,  while  the  jost  are  sent 
to  dweU  with  the  god  of  light'  The  latter,  we  read  on 
an  inscription,  *  found  favor  before  the  great  God ;  they 
dwell  in  glory,  where  they  live  a  heayenly  life;  the 
bodiea  they  have  quitted  wiU  forever  repose  in  their 
tombs,  while  they  rejoioe  in  the  life  of  the  aupreme 
God.'  Immortality  was  thus  plainly  taoght,  although 
boand  up  with  it  was  the  idea  of  the  pre8er\'ation  of 
the  body,  to  which  they  attached  great  importance,  as  a 
condition  of  the  sool^s  oontinued  life;  and  hence  they 
built  yast  tombs,  and  embalmed  their  bodies,  as  if  to 
last  fopever." 

4.  Persiam, — In  the  religion  of  the  Persians,  also,  at 
least  sińce,  if  not  preyious  to  the  time  of  Zoroaster,  a 
prominent  part  is  assigned  to  the  exi8tenee  of  a  futurę 
world,  with  its  goyeming  spirits.  ''Under  Ormuz  and 
Ahrinum  there  are  ranged  regular  hierarchies  of  spirits 
engaged  in  a  perpetual  conflict ;  and  the  soul  paases  into 
the  kingdom  of  light  or  of  darkness,  oyer  which  these 
spirits  respectiyely  preside,  aocording  as  it  has  liyed  on 
the  earth  well  or  ilL  Whoeyer  has  liyed  in  puiity,  and 
has  not  suiFered  the  divs  (eyil  spirits)  to  haye  any  power 
oyer  him,  passes  after  death  into  the  reakns  of  light" 

5.  American  Indiatu. — ^The  natiye  tribes  of  the  lower 
part  of  South  America  belieye  in  two  great  powers  of 
good  and  eyil,  but  likewiae  in  a  number  of  inferior  dei- 
ties.  These  are  supposed  to  haye  been  the  creators  and 
ancestors  of  different  famiiies,  and  hence,  when  an  In- 
dian ^es,  his  soul  goes  to  liye  with  the  deity  who  pre- 
sides  oyer  his  particular  family.  These  deities  haye 
each  their  separate  habitations  in  yast  cayems  under 
the  earth,  and  thither  the  departed  repair  to  enjoy  the 
happiness  of  being  etemally  drunk  (oompare  Tyler,  Re- 
searckes  into  the  early  History  ofMankmd^  and  the  De- 
vdopmeni  ofCtcUization^  Lond*  1868).  Another  Amer- 
ican tribe  of  Indiana,  the  Mandans^  haye  with  their  be- 
lief  in  a  futurę  state  oonnected  this  tradition  of  their 
origin :  ^  The  whole  nation  resided  in  one  large  lóllage 
under  ground  near  a  subterraneous  lakę.  A  grape-yine 
extended  its  roots  down  to  their  habitation,  and  gaye 
ihem  a  yiew  of  the  light  Some  of  the  most  adyentu- 
rous  dimbed  up  the  yine,  and  were  delighted  with  the 
sight  of  the  earth,  which  they  found  coyered  with  buf- 
falo,  And  rich  with  eyery  kind  of  fruit  Retuming  with 
the  grapes  they  had  gathered,  their  countrymen  were 
so  pleased  with  the  taste  of  them  that  the  whole  nation 
resolyed  to  leare  their  duli  residence  for  the  charms  of 
the  npper  region.  Men,  women,  and  children  ascended 
by  means  of  the  yine;  but  when  about  half  the  nation 
had  reached  the  snrfaoe  of  the  earth,  a  corpulent  woman 
who  was  dambering  up  the  yine  broke  it  with  her 
weight,  and  dosed  upon  herself  and  the  rest  of  the  na- 
tion the  light  of  Xhe  sun.  Those  who  were  left  on 
earth  expect,  when  they  die,  to  return  to  the  original 
seata  of  their  forefathera,  the  good  reaching  the  aucient 
yiliage  by  means  of  the  lakę,  which  the  burden  of  the 
ains  of  the  wicked  will  not  enable  them  to  cross**  (Ty- 
ler). The  Choetaw  tribe*s  belief  in  a  futurę  state  is 
equally  «urioua.  **  l%ey  hołd  that  the  spirit  liyes  after 
death,  andlhat  it  has  a  great  distanoe  to  trayel  towards 
the  west ;  4hat  it  has  to  cross  a  dreadful,  deep,  and  rapid 
Btream,  oyer  which,  fiom  bill  to  bill,  there  lies  a  long, 
aiippery  pine  log,  with  the  bark  peeled  off.  Oyer  this 
the  dead  haye  to  pass  before  they  reach  the  delightful 
hnnting-grounda.  The  good  walk  on  safely,  though 
six  people  Irom  the  other  side  throw  Stones  at  them ; 
but  the  wicked,  trying  to  dodge  the  stones,  slip  off  the 
log,  and  fali  thousands  of  feet  into  the  water  which  is 
dashing  oyer  the  noka"  (aee  Bzinton,  p.  288  sq.). 


6.  Polynetians^  —  The  natiyes  of  Polynesia  "  imi^ 
that  the  sky  descends  at  the  horizon  and  indoses  tlie 
earth.  Hence  they  cali  foreigners  'palangi*  or  *beay- 
en-bursters,'  as  having  broken  in  from  another  wadi 
outsidc.  According  to  their  yiews,  we  liye  uptm  the 
ground  floor  of  a  great  house,  with  upper  stories  liang 
one  oyer  another  aboye  us,  and  cellars  down  bdow. 
There  are  holes  in  the  ceiling  to  let  the  rain  thromgh, 
and  as  men  are  supposed  to  yisit  the  dweUers  aboye,  the 
dweUers  from  below  are  belieyed  to  come  sometimes  ap 
to  the  surface,  and  likewise  to  receiyc  yisits  from  mea 
in  return.'* 

7.  New  ffoUanders,— The  natiye  tribes  of  Australia 
belieye  that  all  who  are  good  men,  and  haye  bcen  prop- 
erly  buried,  enter  heacen  after  death.  "  Hea^-cn,  which 
is  the  abcde  of  the  two  good  diyinities,  is  represented  u 
a  delightful  place,  where  there  is  abundance  of  gamę 
and  food,  neyer  any  exoeas  of  heat  or  cold,  run  or 
drought,  no  malign  spirits,  no  sickness  or  death,  bot 
plenty  of  rioting,  singing,  and  dancing  for  eyennor^ 
They  also  bdieye  in  an  eyil  spirit  who  dwells  in  the 
nethermoet  regions,  and,  strange  to  say,  they  represent 
him  with  homs  and  a  taił,  though  one  would  thiok  tbit, 
prior  to  the  introduction  of  cattk  into  New  Holland,  tbc 
natiyes  could  not  haye  been  aware  of  the  eristeuce  of 
homed  beasts*'  (Oldtield). 

8.  Greenlandert,  —  <*The  Greenlander  belieyes  thst 
when  a  man  dies  his  soul  trayels  to  Tomgarsuk,  the  Isod 
where  reigns  perpetual  summer,  all  snnshine,  and  no 
night;  where  there  is  good  water,  and  birds,  fish,  seslą 
and  reuideer  without  end,  that  are  to  be  caught  withoot 
trouble,  or  are  found  cooking  aliye  in  a  huge  kettle. 
But  the  joumey  to  this  land  is  difficult;  the  souls  haye 
to  slide  fiye  days  or  morę  down  a  precipice,  all  stained 
with  the  blood  of  those  who  haye  gone  down  befose. 
And  it  is  espedally  grieyous  for  the  poor  souls  when  the 
joumey  must  be  madę  in  wintcr  or  in  tempcat,  for  thca 
a  soul  may  come  to  harm,  or  suffer  the  other  death,  ss 
they  cali  it,  when  it  perishes  ntterly,  and  noihing  is 
left.  The  bridge  £s-Sirat,  which  liretches  oyer  the 
midst  of  the  Moslem  hill,  finer  than  a  hair,  and  sharper 
than  the  edge  of  a  sword,  conyeys  a  similar  concepiion.* 
Tyler,  on  whose  works  we  mainly  rdy  for  the  Informa- 
tion here  conyeyed  on  rude  nations,  Łraces  the  idea  of  a 
bridge  in  Jaya,  in  North  America,  in  South  Ameiica, 
and  he  also  shows  how  in  Polynesia  the  bridge  is  re- 
placed  by  canoes,  in  which  the  dead  were  to  pass  the 
great  gulf.  It  is  noteworthy  that  the  Jews,  also,  when 
they  first  establishcd  a  firm  belief  in  immortalit}-,  im- 
agined  a  bridge  of  heli,  which  all  unhelieyers  were  lo 
pass. 

II.  Ideas  ofmare  cułtwated  Nations, — Whereycr  pa- 
gan  thought  and  pagan  morslity  reach  the  highesi  per- 
fection,  we  find  their  ideas  of  the  immortality  of  the 
soul  gradually  approaching  the  Christian  \'icf^*s.  The 
first  tracę  of  a  belief  in  a  futurę  existence  we  find  in 
Homer*s  Iliad  (xxiii,  108  sq.),  where  he  rcpresents  that 
Achilles  first  became  conyinccd  that  souls  and  shadowy 
forms  haye  a  real  existence  in  the  kingdom  of  the 
shades  (Hades)  by  the  appearance  to  him  of  the  dead 
Patrodus  in  a  dream.  These  yisions  were  often  regan^ 
ed  as  diyine  by  the  Greeks  (comp.  IL  i,  68,  and  the  case 
of  the  rich  man  and  Lazarus  in  Lukc  xyi,  27).  Coo- 
pare  also  the  artide  Hades.  But,  while  in  the  eariy 
Greek  paganism  the  idea  of  the  futurę  is  eyerywhere 
melancholie,  Hades,  or  the  lealms  of  the  dead,  being  to 
thdr  imagiiiation  the  emblem  of  gloom,  as  may  be  scen 
from  the  following:  *' Achilles,  the  idcal  hero,  dedarei 
that  he  would  rather  till  the  ground  than  live  in  pale 
Elysiiun,"  we  find  that,  with  the  progress  of  HeUenic 
thought,  a  higher  idea  of  the  futurę  is  found  to  chancs 
terize  both  the  poetry  and  philosophy  of  Greece,  till,  in 
the  Platonie  Socratea,  the  conceptton  of  immottality 
shines  forth  with  a  deamess  and  predsicm  tndy  imprea- 
siye.  *^  For  we  must  remember,  O  men,"  said  Socntci, 
in  his  last  speech,  before  he  drained  the  poison  cqp^ 
**that  it  depends  upon  the  immortality  of  the  aool 


IMMORTALITT 


S15 


IMMORTALITT 


wbether  we  hare  to  Uve  to  it  and  to  eare  for  it  or  not 
For  the  danger  seems  fearfully  great  of  not  caring  for 
it  [Compare  Łocke*B  statement :  If  the  best  that  can 
bAppen  to  the  iinbeliever  be  that  he  be  right,  and  the 
woret  that  can  happen  to  tHe  believer  be  that  he  be 
wrong,  who  in  his  madness  would  dare  to  run  the  ven- 
turc?]  Yea,  were  death  to  be  the  end  of  all,  it  would  be 
truły  a  fortunate  thing  for  the  wicked  to  get  rid  of  their 
body,  and,  at  the  same  time,  of  their  wickedness.  But 
now,  sińce  the  soul  shows  itself  to  us  immortal,  there 
can  be  for  it  no  refuge  from  evi],  and  no  other  salration 
than  to  become  as  good  and  iutelligible  as  possible.** 
3Iore  clearly  are  his  view8  set  forth  in  the  Apohgy  and 
Łhe  Phaedo,  in  language  at  once  rich  in  faith  and  in 
beauty.  **  The  soid,  the  immaterial  part,  being  of  a  na- 
turę 80  superior  to  the  body,  can  it,"  he  asks  in  the 
Pkado,  ^  as  soon  as  it  is  separated  from  the  body,  be 
dispeised  into  nothing,  and  perish  ?  Oh,  far  otherwise. 
Saiher  will  this  be  the  result  If  it  take  ita  departure 
in  a  State  of  purity,  not  carryiog  with  it  any  dinging 
impurities  of  the  body,  impurities  which  during  life  it 
nerer  willingly  shar^  in,  but  always  aroided,  gather- 
ing  itself  into  itself,  and  making  the  separation  from 
the  body  its  um  and  study — that  is,  deyoting  itself  to 
trae  philosophy,  and  studying  how  to  die  calmly;  for 
this  is  Łrue  philosophy,  is  it  not? — ^well,  then,  so  pre- 
pared,  the  soul  departs  into  that  invisible  region  which 
is  of  its  owm  naturę,  the  region  of  the  divine,  the  im- 
mortal,  the  wise,  and  then  its  lot  is  to  be  happy  in  a 
State  in  which  it  is  freed  from  fears  and  wild  desires, 
and  the  other  evils  of  humanity,  and  spends  the  rest  of 
its  existence  with  the  gods."  This  view,  or  better  doc- 
trine  of  the  immortality  of  the  soul,  held  by  Socrates 
and  his  disciple  Plato,  implied  a  double  immortality, 
the  past  eternity  as  well  as  that  to  oome.  They  cer- 
tainly  offer  a  yery  striking  contrast  to  the  popular  su- 
perstitions  and  philosophy  of  their  day,  which  in  many 
respects  recall  the  views  held  by  the  Hindus^  The  peo- 
ple,  especially  those  who  held  the  most  enlaiged  view8 
up  to  this  time,  had  "entertained  what  might  be  term- 
ed  a  doctrine  of  semi-inunortaliłif.  They  looked  for  a 
continuance  of  the  soul  in  an  endless  futurity,  but  gave 
themselres  no  concem  about  the  eternity  which  is  past 
But  Plato  conńdered.the  soul  as  having  already  eter- 
nally  existed,  the  present  life  being  only  a  moment  in 
our  career;  he  looked  forward  with  an  undoubting  faith 
to  the  changes  through  which  we  must  hercafter  go" 
(Draper,  InłelL  Detelopmeat  ofEuropty  p.  118 ;  compare 
below,  Philosophical  Argument). 

III.  Ideag  o/ the  Jewish  Naiiaru^l.  It  has  frequently 
been  asserted  that  the  doctrine  of  the  immortality  of 
the  soul  is  not  taught  in  the  O.  T.  The  Socinians  in 
the  16th  and  17th  centuries  took  this  ground.  Some 
have  gone  so  far  as  to  construc  the  supposed  sUence  of 
the  O.-T.  Scriptures  on  this  subject  into  a  formal  denial 
of  Łhe  poesibility  of  a  futurę  life,  and  have  furthermore 
fortified  their  positions  by  selecting  some  passages  of 
the  Old  Testament  that  are  rather  obscure,  e.  g.  Eccles. 
iii,19sq.;  Isa.  xxxviii,  18;  Psa.  vi,  6;  xxx,  10;  lxxxviii, 
1 1 ;  cxv,  17 ;  Job  vii,  7-10 ;  x,  20-22 ;  xiv,  7-12 ;  xv,  22. 
In  the  most  odioos  manner  were  these  objecdons  raised 
by  the  "Wolfcnbttttel  Fragments"  (see  the  fourth  frag- 
ment by  Lessing,  Beitrage  z,  Gesch.  tu  Lit,  a.  d,  Wolfenr 
hSttdgcken  B3diotheky  iv,  484  sq.).  Bishop  Warburton, 
on  the  other  hand,  deriyed  one  of  his  main  proofs  of 
the  diyine  miaston  of  Moses  from  this  supposed  silenoe 
on  the  subject  of  immortality.  "Moees,"  he  arguea, 
**  being  snstained  in  his  legislation  and  govemment  by 
immediate  divine  anthority,  had  not  the  same  necessity 
that  other  teacbers  have  for  a  recourse  to  threatenings 
and  pumshments  drawn  from  the  futurę  world,  in  order 
to  enforce  obedience."  In  a  similar  strain  argues  pro- 
feeeor  Ernst  Stilhelin  in  an  articlo  on  the  immortality 
of  the  soul  (in  the  Foundatioru  o/ our  Faith,  Lond.  and 
N.  Yoric,  1866, 12mo,  p.  221  sq.) :  «  Moees  and  Confuciua 
did  not  erpressly  teach  the  immortality  of  the  soul,  nay, 
tbcy  seemed  pnrposely  to  avoid  entering  upon  the  sub- 


ject; they  timply  took  it  for  granted,  Thus  Moses 
spoke  of  the  tree  of  life  in  Paradise,  of  which  if  the  man 
took  he  should  live  forever,  and  called  Grod  the  God  of 
Abraham,  Isaac,  and  Jacob,  thus  implying  their  oontin- 
ued  exi8tence,  sińce  God  cotdd  not  be  a  God  of  the  dead, 
but  only  of  the  living ;  and  Confucius,  while  in  some  re- 
spects avoiding  all  mention  of  futurę  things,  neverthe- 
less  enjoined  honors  to  be  paid  to  departed  spirits  (thus 
assuming  their  life  after  death)  as  one  of  the  chief  du- 
ties  of  a  religious  man."  Another  evidence  of  the  be- 
lief  of  the  Jews  at  the  time  of  Moses  and  in  subseąuent 
periods  in  the  immortality  of  the  soul,  as  a  doctrine 
self-eyident,  and  by  them  univerBally  acknowledged  and 
receiyed,  is  the  fact  that  the  Israelitea  and  their  ances- 
tors  resided  among  the  Egyptians,  a  people  who,  as  we 
have  seen  above,  had  cheriahed  this  faith  from  the  re- 
motest  ages  (comp.  Herodotus,  ii,  123,  who  asserts  that 
they  were  the  first  who  entertained  such  an  idea).  It 
is  further  proved  that  the  Jews  believed  in  immortality, 
(a)  from  the  laws  of  Moses  against  Necromaney  (q.  v.), 
or  the  invocation  of  the  dead,  which  was  very  generally 
practised  by  the  Ganaanites  (Deut  xviii,  9-12),  and 
which,  notwithstanding  these  laws,  is  fonnd  to  have 
been  prevalent  among  the  Jews  even  at  the  time  of 
king  Saul  (1  Sam.  xxviii),  and  later  (Psa.  cvi,  28,  and 
the  prophets) ;  (h)  from  the  name  which  the  Jews  gave 
to  the  kingdom  of  the  dead,  biKti  (ff^i7c)i  which  so  fre- 
quently  occurs  in  Moses  as  well  as  8ubsequent  writings 
of  the  O.  T.  That  Moses  did  not  in  his  laws  hołd  up 
the  punishmentB  of  the  futurę  world  to  the  terror  of 
transgressors  is  a  circumstance  which  redounds  to  his 
pnuse,  and  cannot  be  alleged  against  him  as  a  matter 
of  reproach,  sińce  to  other  legialaton  the  charge  has 
been  laid  that  they  were  either  deluded  or  impostors 
for  pursuing  the  veiy  oppoaite  coorse.  Another  reason 
why  Moees  did  not  touch  the  ąuestion  of  the  immortal- 
ity of  the  soul  is  that  he  did  not  intend  to  give  a  sys- 
tem of  theology  in  his  laws.  But  so  much  is  elear  from 
certain  passages  in  his  writings,  that  he  was  by  no 
means  ignorant  of  thia  doctrine.  Compare  Michaelis, 
ArgumaUapro  Immortalitate  A  nimi  e  Mose  CoUectOjin 
the  Syntagm,  Comment,  i  (Gottingen,  1759) ;  LUderwald, 
Untert,  wm  d,  Kenntniss  eines  kunffigen  Lebens  i.  A .  Tett. 
(HelmstUdt,  1781) ;  Semler,  BeatUiportunff  d.  Fragen  d, 
WolfenbutteUchen  Ungenarmim;  Seiler,  Oi>8erv.  ad  ptg^ 
choiogiam  sacrom  (Erlang.  1779). 

**  The  following  texts  from  the  writings  of  Moses  may 
be  regarded  as  indications  of  the  doctrine  of  immortal- 
ity, viz.  Gen.  v,  22, 24,  where  it  is  said  respecting  Enoch, 
that  because  he  lived  a  pious  life  God  took  him,  so  that 
he  was  no  morę  among  men.  This  was  designed  to  be 
the  reward  and  conseąuence  of  his  pious  life,  and  it 
points  to  an  inyisible  life  with  God,  to  which  he  attain- 
ed  without  previously  suffering  death.  Gen.  xxxvii, 
35,  Jacob  says, '  I  will  go  down  to  « the  grave"  (biXlC) 
unto  my  son.*  We  have  here  distinctly  exhibited  the 
idea  of  a  place  where  the  dead  dwell  connected  together 
in  a  society.  In  conformity  with  this  idea  we  must  ex- 
plain  the  phrase  to  go  to  hisfathers  (Gen.  xv,  15),  or  to 
be  gathered  to  his  people  [morę  literally,  to  enter  wUo 
their  habitaiion  or  abodel  (Gen.  xxv,  8;  xxxv,  29; 
Numb.  XX,  24,  etc.).  In  the  same  way  many  of  the  In- 
dian sayages  (as  we  have  already  seen)  expre8s  their 
expectation  of  an  immortality  beyond  the  grave.  Paul 
argues  from  the  text  Gen.  xlvii,  9,  and  similar  passages 
where  Jacob  calls  his  life  mjoumey,  that  the  patriarchs 
expected  a  life  aHer  death  (Heb.  xi,  13-16 ;  yet  he  says, 
very  truły,  nóppuOty  ISóyrtę  rdc  iirayyi\iac).  In 
Matt  xxii,  23,  Christ  refers,  in  arguing  against  the  Sad- 
ducees,  to  Exod.  iii,  6,  where  Jehovah  calls  himself  the 
God  of  Isaac  and  Jacob  (i.  e«  their  protector  and  the  ob- 
ject  of  their  worship),  long  after  their  death.  It  could 
not  be  that  their  ashes  and  their  dust  should  worship 
God;  hence  he  concludes  that  they  themselyes  could 
not  have  ceased  to  exist,  but  that,  as  to  their  souls,  they 
still  łived  (comp.  Heb.  xi,  13-17).   This  passage  was  in- 


IMMORTALITY 


516 


IMMORTALITY 


terproted  in  the  same  way  by  tbe  Jews  after  Chiist 
(Wetsteiii,  ad  loc.).  In  the  eubseąuent  books  of  the  O. 
T.  the  textB  of  thU  oatuie  aie  far  morę  namerous.  Still 
morę  definite  descriptionB  are  giren  of  bii(^,  and  the 
condition  of  the  departed  there ;  e.  g.  Isa.  xlv,  9  8q. ; 
also  in  the  Psalma  and  in  Job.  £ven  in  these  text8, 
however,  the  doctrine  of  the  reward  of  the  righteous 
and  the  punishment  of  the  wicked  in  the  kingdom  of 
the  dead  is  not  so  dearly  developed  as  it  is  in  the  N.  T. ; 
this  is  trae  even  of  the  book  of  Job.  AU  that  we  find 
here  with  respect  to  this  point  is  011I7  obscure  intima- 
tion,  80  that  the  Pauline  ir6ppu9iv  idórrię  is  applica- 
ble,  in  relation  to  this  doctrine,  to  the  other  books  of 
the  O.  T.  as  well  as  to  those  of  Moees.  In  the  Psahns 
there  are  some  plain  allosions  to  the  expectation  of  re- 
ward and  punishment  after  death,  partictUarly  Psa.  xvii, 
15;  xlix,  16, 16;  lxxiii,  24.  There  are  some  passages 
in  the  propheta  where  a  remr^ficoHon  of  the  dead  is 
spoken  of,  as  Isa.  xxvi,  19 ;  Dan.  xii,  2;  £zek.  xxvii; 
but,  althongh  these  do  not  teach  a  literał  resurrection 
of  the  dead,  but  rather  refer  to  the  restoration  of  the 
nation  and  land,  still  these  and  all  snch  figurative  rep- 
resentatioiis  presuppoee  the  proper  idea  that  an  invis- 
ible  part  of  man  8urvives  the  body,  and  will  be  here- 
after  united  to  it.  Very  dear  is  aJso  the  passage  £c- 
des.  xli,  7,  *  The  body  must  return  to  the  earth  from 
whence  it  was  taken,  but  the  spirit  to  God  who  gave  it,' 
evidently  alluding  to  Gen.  iii,  19.    See  Sheou 

**From  all  this  we  draw  the  oondusion  that  the  doc- 
trine of  the  immortality  of  the  soul  was  not  unknown 
to  the  Jews  before  the  Babylonian  exile.  It  appears 
also  from  the  fact  that  a  generał  expećtation  exi8ted  of 
lewarda  and  punishments  in  the  futurę  world,  although 
in  comparison  with  what  was  afterwards  tanght  on  this 
point  there  was  at  that  time  very  little  definitdy  known 
respecting  it,  and  the  doctrine,  therefore,  stood  by  no 
meana  in  that  near  relation  to  religion  and  morality  into 
which  tt  was  afterwards  brought,  as  we  find  it  often  in 
other  wholly  uncultivated  nations.  Hence  this  doctrine 
is  not  80  often  used  by  the  prophets  as  a  motive  to  right- 
eousneas,  or  to  deter  men  from  evil,  or  to  console  them 
in  the  midst  of  sufTering.  But  on  this  yery  account  the 
piety  of  these  andent  saints  deseryes  the  morę  regard 
and  admiration.  It  was  in  a  high  degree  unpretending 
and  disinterested.  Although  the  prospect  of  what  lies 
beyond  the  grave  was,  as  Paul  said,  the  promised  blessing 
which  they  saw  only  from  afar,  they  yet  had  pious  dis- 
positions,  and  trusted  God.  They  held  merdy  to  the 
generał  promise  that  God  their  Father  would  cause  it 
to  be  wcll  with  them  even  after  death  (Psa.  lxxiii,  26, 
28, '  When  my  stiength  and  my  heart  faileth,  Crod  will 
be  the  strength  of  my  heart,  and  my  portion  foreyer*). 
But  it  was  not-  untU  aiter  the  Babylonian  captivity  that 
the  ideas  of  the  Jews  on  this  sobject  appear  to  have  be- 
come  enlaiged,  and  that  this  doctrine  was  brought  by 
the  prophets,  under  the  divine  guidance,  into  a  morę 
immediate  connection  with  religion.  This  result  be- 
comes  very  apparent  after  the  reign  of  the  Gredan 
kings  over  Syria  and  Egypt,  and  their  persecutions  of 
the  Jews.  The  prophets  and  teachers  living  at  that 
time  (of  whose  writings,  however,  nothing  has  come 
down  to  us)  must  therefore  have  given  to  their  nation, 
time  after  time,  morę  instruction  upon  this  subject,  and 
must  have  explained  and  unfolded  the  allusions  to  it  in 
the  earlier  prophets.  Thus  we  find  that  after  this  time, 
morę  frequently  than  before,  the  Jews  sought  and  found 
in  this  doctrine  of  immortality  and  of  futurę  retribution, 
oonsolation,  and  encouragcment  under  their  trials,  and 
a  motive  to  piety.  Such  dLscourses  were  therefore  fre- 
quently  put  in  the  mouths  of  the  martyrs  in  the  second 
book  of  Maocabees,  e.  g.  yi,  26 ;  vii,  9  8q. ;  comp.  xii,  43- 
45 ;  see  also  the  Book  of  Wisdom,  ii,  1  są. ;  and  espedal- 
ly  iii,  1  8q.,  and  the  other  apocryphal  books  of  the  O.  T. 
At  the  time  of  Christ,  and  afterwards,  this  doctrine  was 
unirersally  recdved  and  taught  by  the  Pharisees,  and 
was,  indeed,  the  prevailing  belief  among  the  Jews,  as  is 
well  known  from  the  testimony  of  the  N.  T.,  of  Jose- 


phufl,  and  also  of  Philo.  Tadtus  also  refeis  to  it  in 
his  histoiy,  *  Animas  pnelio  aut  supplidis  peremptcmm 
setemas  putant,'  Consult  an  essay  comparii^  the  iden 
of  the  apocryphal  books  of  the  O.  T.  on  the  sobjeds 
of  immortality,  resurrection,  judgment,  and  retribution, 
with  thoee  of  the  N.  T.,  written  by  Frisch,  in  Eiebbaro^ 
BibUotkekderjBiblischenLiŁeratur,h.iv;  Ziegler, fieoŁ 
AbhandL  pt.  ii,  No.  4;  Flugge,  GttehUkte  da  GkaAaa 
an  UfuterbHchkeity  etc,  pt  L  The  Sadducees,  bosidng 
of  a  great  attachment  to  the  O.  T.,  and  especiaDy  to  tbe 
books  of  Moses,  were  the  only  Jews  who  denied  this 
doctrine,  as  well  as  the  exi8tence  of  the  soul  as  distinct 
from  the  body"  (Knapp,  Theotogif,  §  cxlix).  (See  Jo- 
hannsen,  Yet,  Hd>,  nołiones  de  rSiM  j)o§t  morten,  Hain. 
1826.)     See  Resurrection. 

2.  Among  the  modem  Jews,  the  late  oelebrated  Jew- 
ish  savant  and  successor  to  Rćnan  at  the  Sorfoomie,  pr»- 
fessor  Munk,  regarded  as  one  of  the  strongest  eyidenoes 
which  the  O.  T.  aflibrds  for  a  doctrine  of  the  immortalitj 
of  the  soul  the  expre88ion  *'He  was  gathered  to  his 
people,**  so  freąuent  in  the  writings  of  the  O.  T.    The 
Rev.  D.  W.  Marks,  in  a  series  of  Sermont  (Lond.  5611  = 
1851),  p.  103  sq.,  says  of  it :  *<  It  has  generally  been  aip- 
posed  that  *  to  be  gathered  to  one^s  people*  is  an  ordinsiy 
term  which  the  sacred  historian  employs  in  order  to 
conyey  the  idea  that  the  person  to  whom  it  is  applied 
lies  buried  in  the  place  where  the  remains  of  the  same 
family  are  depodted.    But  wboever  attentivdy  coiuid- 
ers  aU  the  passages  of  the  Bibie  where  this  cxpre«on 
occun  will  find,  says  Dr.  Munk,  that  being  'gathered 
to  one*s  ancestors*  is  expre8sly  distinguished  from  the 
rite  of  sepulture.    Abraham  is  '  gathered  unto  his  peo- 
ple,'  but  he  is  buried  in  the  cave  which  he  bought  ocar 
Hebron,  and  where  Sarah  alone  is  interred.    This  is  the 
first  instance  where  the  paasage  *  to  be  gathered  to  0De'fl 
people'  is  to  be  met  wlLh ;  and  that  it  caunot  mean  that 
Abraham's  boues  reposed  in  the  same  cave  with  those 
of  his  fathers  is  vcry  dear,  sińce  the  ancestors  of  the 
patriarch  were  buriód  in  Chaldsea,  and  not  in  GanaaiL 
The  death  of  Jacob  is  related  in  the  following  worda: 
*And  when  Jacob  had  finished  charging  his  sons,  he 
gathered  up  his  feet  upon  the  bed,  and  he  expired,  and 
was  gathered  unto  his  people*  (Gen.  xlix,  83).    It  is 
equally  certain  that  the  phrase  '  he  was  gathered  anto 
his  people'  cannot  refer  to  the  burial  of  the  patriarch, 
because  we  Icam  from  the  next  chaptcr  that  he  wm 
embalmed,  and  that  the  Egyptiana  moumed  for  him 
se venty  da3rs ;  and  it  is  only  after  these  three  aoore  and 
ten  days  of  mouming  are  ended  that  Joseph  transpona 
the  remains  of  his  father  to  Canaan,  and  inten  them  in 
the  cave  of  Machpelah,  where  the  ashes  of  Afaiaham  and 
Isaac  repose.    When  the  inspired  penman  alludes  to 
the  actual  burial  of  Jacob  he  uses  very  different  tenni 
He  makes  no  mention  then  of  the  patriarch  *bcic^ 
gathered  to  his  people,'  but  he  simply  employs  the  vab 
^2)^,  *  to  buiy :'  *  And  Joseph  went  up  to  bury  hia  fa- 
ther.'   The  very  words  addressed  by  Jacob  on  his  death- 
bed  to  his  sens,  <  I  am  about  to  be  gathered  unto  dt 
people;  bury  me  with  my  fathers,'  idTord  ns  aafficicot 
evidence  that  the  speaker,  as  well  as  the  persons  ad- 
dressed, understood  the  expre8sion  *  being  gathered  to 
one's  people'  in  a  sense  totally  different  from  that  of  be- 
ing lodged  within  a  tomb.    But  a  stronger  instance  still 
may  be  advanced.    The  Israelites  arrive  at  Mount  Hor, 
near  the  borders  of  £dom,  and  immediately  is  issued 
the  diyine  command,  'Aaron  shaU  be  gathered  unto  hii 
people,  for  he  shall  not  come  into  the  land  which  I  hare 
given  to  the  children  of  IsraeL  .  .  .  Strip  Aaron  of  his 
garments,  and  dothe  in  them  Eleazar  hia  scm.    And 
Aaron  shall  be  gathered,  and  there  he  shaU  die.'    No 
member  of  his  family  lay  buried  on  Mount  Hor;  and 
still  Aaron  is  said  to  have  been  there  'gathered  to  bis 
people.'    Again,  Moses  is  charged  to  chastiae  ttmittf 
the  Midianites  for  having  sedooed  the  laraeUtes  to  fd- 
Iow  the  abominable  practices  of  "l*l&  b:Pl  ('  Baal  Peor'); 
and,  this  act  accomplished,  the  legialatoT  is  toki  'that 
he  will  be  gathered  unto  his  people.'    This  ] 


IMMORTALITY 


617 


IMMORTALmr 


tainly  cannot  mean  that  Moses  wm  to  be  gathered  in 
the  grave  with  any  of  his  people.  The  Uebrew  law- 
giver  died  on  Mount  Abarim ;  and  the  Scripture  testi- 
fies  *  that  no  one  eyer  knew  of  the  plaoe  of  his  sepul- 
chre;*  and  still  the  term  to  be  gathered  to  his  people  is 
there  likewiao  employed.  Sufficient  instanoes  have 
now  been  cited  to  prove  that  1'>139  bit  S)OMh  is  to  be 
nndeiBlood  in  a  different  sense  from  the  rite  of  sepul- 
tore,  and  that  the  Hebrews  in  the  times  of  Moses  did 
entertain  the  belief  in  another  state  of  eiistenoe,  where 
ipińt  joined  spirit  after  the  death  of  the  body. 

*^  Bot,  althongh  the  poaition  here  assomed  seems  Tery 
tenaUe,  it  is  neyertheless  trae  that  the  Israelites  oer- 
tainly  did  not  haTe  a  Tery  dear  conoeption  of  the  futurę 
eadisteooe  of  the  sonl,  and  *  that  life  and  immortality' 
were  not  bionght  to  light  rtry  óittmcłly  before  Christ 
came,  £ar  whom  the  office  was  reser^ed  of  making  dear- 
ly  known  many  high  matters  before  but  obscurely  in- 
dicated"  (Jotuial  ofSaered  LUerature,  yiii,  179). 

lY.  N€KHTettamad  Fteirj;— When  Jesus  Christ  ap- 
peaied  in  this  world,  the  Epicurean  philosophy  (q.  y.), 
the  fables  of  poets  of  a  lower  worM,  and  the  corruption 
which  was  preralent  among  the  nations  had  fully  de- 
stroyed  the  hope,  to  say  nothing  of  a  belief,  in  futura 
cxisteaoe.  It  was  lelt  for  him  to  dedare  the  existence 
of  the  aoul  after  death,  e^en  though  the  "earthly  honse 
of  this  Ubemade  were  dissolyed"  (2  Cor.  r,  1),  with 
great  oertainty  and  very  expUcitly,  not  only  by  an  al- 
hisioa  to  the  joys  that  await  ns  in  the  futurę  world, 
and  io  the  dangers  of  retribntion  and  divine  justioe 
(Matt.  JŁ,  28),  bot  also  in  refutation  of  the  doctrines  of 
the  unbeiieving  Sadducees  (Matt  xxii,  28  sq.;  Mark 
xii,  18  8q.;  Łukę  xx,  28  sq.).  Jesus  Christ,  said  Paul, 
**  hath  aboliahed  death,  and  hath  brought  life  and  im- 
tmfrtaUły  to  light"  (2  Tim.  i,  10),  and  <<  will  render  to 
erery  man  aocording  to  his  deedsi  To  them  who  by 
patient  oontinuanoe  in  weil  doing  seek  for  glory,  and 
honor,  and  immortality,  etemal  life*'  (a^aptriap)  (Rom. 
ii,  6  8q.)«  The  original  for  etemal  life  hcra  used  (a^- 
dapoia)  denotes  nothing  else  than  the  immortality  of 
the  aoiU,  or  a  continuation  of  the  substantial  being,  of 
Dian*s  person,  of  the  tffOy  after  death,  by  the  destruction 
of  the  body  (oomp.  Matt.  x,  28 ;  Lnke  xii,  4).  See  the 
artide  £ter3CAL  Lifs;  and  on  the  origin  of  the  soul, 
and  iu  pre-existence  to  the  body,  the  artide  Souu 

It  ia  evident  from  the  passagcs  dted  that  Christ  and 
his  apostles  did  morę  to  illustrate  and  confirm  the  belief 
in  the  immortality  of  the  soul,  as  cherished  at  the  pres- 
ent  day,  than  had  been  done  by  any  nation,  even  the 
Jewa  induded.  "  Ue  first  gave  to  it  that  high  practical 
interest  whidi  it  now  poosesBes;"  and  it  is  owing  to 
Chriatianity  that  the  doctrine  of  the  80ul's  immortdity 
has  beoome  a  common  and  well-reoognised  truth— no 
merę  reanlt  of  speculation,  t»  ara  those  of  the  heathen 
and  Jewish  philiosophers,  nor  a  product  of  priestly  in- 
Tention— but  a  light  to  the  reason,  and  a  giude  to  the 
oonsdence  and  conduct  **The  aspiiations  of  philoso- 
phy, and  the  materialistic  conoeptions  of  popular  my- 
thology,  ara  found  in  the  Gospd  transmuted  into  a  Uv- 
iDgf  spiiitual,  and  divine  fact,  and  an  anthoritatiye 
influence,  not  only  touching  the  present  life,  but  gov- 
eming  and  dirocting  it.** 

Y.  CkritUan  VieufM. — In  the  early  Christian  Church 
the  viewB  on  the  immortality  of  the  soul  were  vexy  ya- 
ried.  Thera  wera  nonę  that  actually  denied,  far  from 
ii,  nor  eyen  any  that  doubted  iu  poesibility.  **But 
sonie  of  them,  e.  g.  Jostin,  Tatian,  and  Theophilus,  on 
yarioos  groanda,  supposed  that  the  soul,  though  mortal 
in  itadf,  or  at  least  indiflerant  in  rdation  to  mortality 
or  immortality,  either  acquireB  immortality  as  a  prom- 
ised  reward,  by  ita  union  with  the  spirit  and  the  right 
lae  of  its  liberty,  or,  in  the  opposite  ease,  perishes  with 
the  body.  They  wera  led  to  this  yiew  partly  because 
they  laid  so  much  stress  on  froedom,  and  because  they 
thotight  that  likeness  to  God  was  to  be  obtained  only 
by  this  freedom ;  and  partly,  too,  because  they  supposed 
(aooonling  to  the  trlchotonustic  diyision  of  human  nar 


tura)  that  the  soul  (yjnfxh)  recdyes  the  seeda  of  immoiw 
tal  life  only  by  the  union  with  the  spirit  (iry»v/ia),  as 
the  higher  and  free  life  of  reason.'*  This  yiew  was  also 
afterwards  iutroduoed  into  the  Greek  Church  by  Nicho- 
las of  Methone  (compare  Hagenbach,  DodrineSj  ii,  16). 
"And,  lasUy,  other  philoeophical  hypotheses  oonceming 
the  natura  of  the  soul  doubtless  had  an  influence.  On 
the  contrary,  Tertullian  and  Origen,  whose  yiews  differ- 
ed  on  other  subjects,  agreed  on  this  one  point,  that  they, 
in  accordanoe  with  their  peculiar  notions  conoeming  the 
natura  of  the  soul,  looked  upon  its  immortality  aa  essen- 
tial  to  it"  (Hagenbach,  i,  158).  "  The  schoohnen  of  the 
Middle  Ages  in  the  Western  Church  considęred  the  im- 
mortality of  the  soul  a  theological  trtUh;  but  their  chief 
leaders,  Thomas  Aquinas  and  Duns  Scotus,  were  at  is- 
Bue  on  the  ąuestion  whcther  reason  funushes  satiafacr 
tory  proof  of  that  doctrine.  ...  As  Anselm  of  Canter- 
bury  had  infeired  the  existence  of  God  himsdf  from  the 
idea  of  God,  so  Thomas  Aquinas  proyed  the  immortality 
of  the  soul,  in  a  similar  manner,  by  an  otUoloffieal  argu- 
ment: 'Intellectus  apprehendit  esse  absolute  et  secun- 
dum  omne  tempus.  Unde  omne  habens  intellectum 
naturaliter  desiderat  esse  semper,  naturale  autem  desi- 
derium  non  potest  est  inane.  Omnis  igitur  intellectua- 
lis  substantia  est  incoiiuptibilis'  (compare  Engelhardt, 
Dogmenffesck.  ii,  123  8q.).  On  the  other  hand,  Scotus, 
whose  yiews  were  morę  nearly  allied  to  those  of  the 
Nominalista,  maiiitained:  *  Non  posse  demonstrari,  quod 
anima  sit  immortalis'  {jComm.  in  M,  Sentent,  bk.  it,  dist. 
17,  qu.  i;  comp.  bk.  iy,  dist.  43,  qu.  2).  Bonayentura, 
on  the  contrary,  asserted:  *Animam  esse  immortalem, 
auctoritate  ostenditur  et  ratione*  (De  NaL  Deor,  ii,  55). 
Conoeming  the  further  attempts  of  MoneU  of  Cremona 
(13th  century),  William  of  Anyergne  (bishop  of  Paris 
from  1228  to  1249),  and  Raimund  Martini  {PugukFidei 
ady.Maor.  p.  i,  eh.  iy),  to  proye  the  immortality  of  the 
soul,  compare  MUnscher,  Dogmengnchichte,  ed.  by  Yon 
CoUn,  p.  92  są."  (Hagenbach).  On  the  yiews  sinoe  the 
Reformation,  see  Soul,  Immobtauty  of. 

VI.  PAifołopAicaM  rywinai^— There  ara  many  writ- 
ers,  both  in  philosophy  and  theology,  who  deny  that 
the  immortality  of  the  soul  can  be  proyed  apart  from 
reydation.  £.  StHhdin  {Foundatioiu  of  our  FaUh,  p. 
282)  says :  **  We  might  Uke  np  a  linę  of  argument  used 
by  philosophy  both  in  andent  and  modem  times— fh>m 
Siocrates  down  to  Fichte— to  proye  the  immortality  of 
the  inner  being;  an  argument  deriyed  from  the  asser- 
tion  that  the  soul,  being  a  unity,  is,  as  such,  incapable 
of  decay,  it  being  only  in  the  case  of  the  complex  that 
a  falling  to  pieces,  or  a  dissoluŁion,  is  ooncdyable." 
^  But,"  he  oontinues,  **  the  abetruse  natura  of  this  meth- 
od  leads  us  to  rcnounce  a  linc  of  argument  from  which, 
we  freely  oonfess,  we  expect  little  profiuble  result  For, 
after  all,  what  absolute  proof  haye  we  of  this  unity  of 
the  soul?  Cul  we  subject  it  to  the  microsoope  or  the 
scalpd,  as  we  can  the  yisible  and  tangible?  It  must 
content  us  for  the  present  simply  to  indicate  that  the 
instinct  and  consdousness  of  immortality  haye  nothing 
to  fear  from  the  most  searching  examination  of  the  rea- 
son, but  find  far  mora  of  confirmation  and  additional 
proof  than  of  contradiction  in  the  profonndest  thinking. 
Further,  that  this  instinct  and  consdousness  do  actually 
exi8t,  and  ara  traceable  through  all  the  stages  and  ram- 
ifications  of  the  human  race,  .  .  .  is  oonfinned  to  us  by 
our  opponents  themsdyes  .  .  .  that  there  is  in  man 
something  which  is  deeper  and  stronger  than  the  max- 
ims  of  a  sdf-inyented  philosophy,  namely,  the  diyindy- 
created  nobility  of  his  naturę,  the  inherent  breath  of 
life,  breathed  into  him  by  God,  the  relation  to  the  Etei^ 
nal,  which  secures  to  him  etemity."  Watson  (/«/t- 
<tt/eff,  ii,  2)  goes  eyen  further,  and  declares  that  nowhere 
else  but  in  the  Bibie  is  there  any  ^  indubitable  dedara- 
tion  of  man'8  immortality,"  or  ^any  facta  or  prindples 
so  obyious  as  to  enable  us  confidently  to  infer  it  All 
ob»ervation  lies  directly  against  the  doctrine  of  man*s 
immortality.  He  diet,  and  the  probabilities  of  a  futura 
life  which  haye  been  established  upon  the  nnegual  dis* 


IMMORTALITY 


518 


IMMOETALTIT 


tribution  of  rewazds  and  punishmento  in  this  lifci  and 
thc  capadties  of  the  human  soul,  are  a  pre8umptive  ey- 
idence  which  bas  been  adduoed,  as  we  sball  ailerwarda 
show,  only  by  those  to  whom  tbe  doctrine  bad  been 
transmitted  by  Łradition,  and  wbo  were  Łherefore  in  pos- 
session  of  tbe  idea ;  and  even  then,  to  have  any  effeo- 
tual  force  of  peisuasion,  tbey  must  be  built  upon  ante- 
cedent  principles  fumished  only  by  tbe  reYclations  con- 
tained  in  boly  ScripŁure.  Hence  some  of  the  wisest 
heathens,  wbo  were  not  wholly  unaided  in  their  specu- 
lations  on  tbese  subjects  by  the  reflected  light  of  these 
revelations,  oonfessed  themselyes  unable  to  oome  to  any 
satisfactory  conclusion.  The  doubts  of  Socrates,  wbo 
expre8sed  bimself  tbe  most  bopefully  of  any  on  the  sub- 
ject  of  a  futurę  life,  are  well  known ;  and  Cicero,  wbo 
occasionally  escpatiates  witb  so  much  eloquence  on  this 
topie,  shows,  by  the  skeptical  expreflsions  which  be 
thiows  in,  tbat  his  belief  was  by  no  means  confirmed." 

The  first  attempt  of  a  pbiloeopbical  tenet  on  tbe  doc- 
trine of  immortality  is  offered  in  Plato'8  Phado,  On 
it  the  New  Platonics  learcd  their  structure,  adomed 
with  many  fanciful  additions.  Ali  scientific  attempts 
thronghout  tbe  Middle  Ages,  and  np  to  our  own  day, 
have  been  modified  yiews,  allied  morę  or  less  to  Plato- 
nism.  In  opposition  to  these,  the  French  materialisn 
of  tbe  18th  century  attempted  to  destroy,  or  at  least 
undeimine,  the  belief  in  immortality.  Not  less  mate- 
rialbtic  is  the  position  of  the  Panthebts,  headed  by  Spi- 
noza. *<  These  hołd  tbat  the  World-Soul,  which,  in 
their  opinion,  produces  and  fiUs  the  universe,  also  fills 
and  rules  man;  nay,  tbat  it  is  only  in  him  tbat  it 
reacbes  its  special  end,  which  is  self-consciousncss,  and 
attains  to  thought  and  wilL  It  is  true,  tbey  go  on  to 
say,  tbat  at  the  death  of  the  individual  this  World-Soul 
retreats  from  him,  just  as  the  setting  sun  seems  to  draw 
back  its  rays  into  itself;  and  that  self-consciousness 
now  sinks  once  morę  into  the  great,  unconscious,  undis- 
tinguished  spirit-ocean  of  the  whole/'  The  answer  to 
this  ridiculous  position  bas  been  best  given  by  M^Cosh 
{Tniuitiont  o/ the  Mmdj  p.  892  8q.) :  <*  We  can  conceiv€ 
of  air  thus  rushing  into  air,  and  of  a  bucketful  of  water 
luaing  itself  in  a  river;  and  why?  because  neither  air 
nor  water  ever  bad  a  separate  and  conscious  personality. 
The  soul,  as  long  as  it  ezists,  must  retain  its  personality 
as  an  essential  property,  and  must  carry  it  along  with  it 
whereyer  it  goee.  The  morał  conyiction  clusters  round 
this  personal  self.  The  being  who  is  judged,  wbo  is 
sayed  or  condemned,  is  the  same  who  ińnned  and  eon- 
tinued  in  his  sin,  or  who  belieyed  and  was  jnstified 
when  on  eartb.** 

Kant,  Locke,  and  other  metaphyaicians,  on  the  other 
hand,  like  some  theologians,  as  we  have  seen  above, 
alBo  exclude  the  immortality  of  the  soul  from  the  proy- 
ince  of  natursl  theology.  "  Tbey  deem  it  impossible  to 
proye  our  futurę  existence  from  the  creation,  or  eyen 
from  the  admitted  attributcs  of  the  Creator,  and  are 
thus  in  singular  opposition  to  the  andent  Platonists, 
who  regarded  the  etemal  continuance  of  our  being  as 
the  morę  obyious  doctzine  of  natural  theology,  and  in- 
ferred  from  it  tbe  diyine  existenoe  as  the  less  direct  in- 
timation  of  naturę.  It  is  said  that  much  of  the  reason- 
ing  employed  by  pagan  writers  to  proye  the  immortality 
of  the  soul  is  unsound.  This  is  a  fact,  and  yet  by  no 
means  inyalidates  their  right  to  belieye  in  the  conclu- 
sion which  tbey  deduoed  illogically.  There  are  many 
tniths,  the  proof  of  which  lies  so  near  to  us  that  we 
oyerlook  it  Belieying  a  propodtion  firmly,  we  are  sat- 
isfied  with  the  merę  pretence  of  an  argument  for  its  sup- 
port;  and  searching  in  the  distance  for  proofs  which 
can  only  be  found  in  immediate  contact  with  us,  we  dis- 
coyer  reasons  for  the  belief  which,  long  before  we  had 
disooyered  them,  was  yet  fully  established  in  our  own 
minds;  and  yet  we  deem  these  reasons  sufiicient  to  up- 
hold  the  doctrine,  although,  in  point  of  fact,  the  doc- 
trine does  not  make  trial  of  their  strength  by  resting 
upon  them.  If  tbey  were  the  props  on  which  our  be- 
lief was  in  reality  founded,  their  weakness  would  be 


obyious  at  once ;  but,  mb  they  haye  nothing  to  soatain, 
their  insufficiency  is  the  less  apparent;  our  belief  ood- 
tinues,  notwithstanding  the  frailness  of  the  argnments 
which  make  a  show  of  upholding  it,  and  thus  the  rery 
defects  of  the  proof  illustrate  the  strength  of  tbe  (u.- 
clusion,  which  remains  firm  in  despite  of  them.  That 
the  immortality  of  the  soul  has  been  fiimly  bcliered  in 
by  men  destitute  of  a  written  reyelation  will  not  be  de- 
nied  by  fair-minded  scholara.  It  probably  would  ne>-cf 
haye  been  doubted  had  not  some  leamed,  thougb  iiijB> 
dicious  controyersialists,  as  Leland  and  others,  decmcd 
it  neoessaiy  to  magnify  the  importance  of  the  Babie  hy 
underyaluing  the  attainments  of  heathen  eage&  The 
singular  attempt  of  Warburton  to  proye  tbat  the  to- 
tbority  of  the  Mosaic  writings  is  eyinoed  by  their  not 
teaching  the  doctrine  of  a  futuro  state  led  him  to  an 
equally  paradoxical  attempt  to  show  that  the  pbraseol- 
ogy  of  pagan  sages  fumishes  no  yalid  eyidence  of  their 
belief  in  the  80ul*8  immortality.  But  each  of  these  ef- 
forts  was  abortiye ;  and  if  each  had  been  Boocessful,  sodi 
a  kind  of  success  would  haye  resulted  in  eyen  greater 
eyils  than  haye  come  from  the  want  of  it,  Tbe  fsct, 
then,  that  our  exi8tence  in  a  futurę  world  has  been  an 
artide  of  faith  among  pagan  philoeophen  indicaiestbat 
this  doctrine  is  an  appropriate  part  of  natural  theologr. 
But,  eyen  if  it  had  not  been  thus  belieyed  by  heathena, 
it  ought  to  haye  been ;  and  the  aiguments  which  cod- 
yince  the  unaided  judgment  of  its  truth  aro  also  reasom 
for  classifying  the  doctrine  among  the  teachings  of  na- 
turę. These  argumcnts  may  be  conyeniently  arranged 
under  six  difTerent  classes :  first,  the  metaphyskal,  which 
proye  that  the  mind  is  entirdy  distinct  from  the  body, 
and  is  capable  of  exi8ting  while  separate  finom  it ;  that 
the  mind  is  not  componnded,  and  will  not  thereftnre  be 
dissolyod  into  dementary  particlcs;  that,  being  impo^ 
ceptible,  it  cannot  peiish  except  by  an  annihilating  aci 
of  God  (comp.  Dr.  M*Cosh*s  argument  aboye  dted) ;  sec- 
ondly,  the  analogical,  which  induces  us  to  bdieye  tbat 
the  soul  will  not  be  annihilated,  eyen  aa  matter  doei 
not  cease  to  exist  when  it  changes  its  form ;  thirdly,  tbe 
tekolofficał,  which  indine  us  to  think  that  the  mental 
powers  and  the  tendendes  so  imperfectly  derdopcd 
in  this  life  will  not  be  sbut  out  from  that  sphcie  of 
futuro  exertion  for  which  thęy  aro  so  wisdy  adapted; 
fourthly,  the  ikeological^  which  foster  an  exp€ctatiGn 
that  the  wisdom  of  God  will  not  fail  to  oomplete  wbat 
otherwise  appears  to  haye  been  commenced  in  vain, 
that  his  goodness  will  not  cease  to  bestow  the  happioess 
for  which  our  spiritual  naturo  is  eyer  longing,  and  that 
his  justice  will  not  allow  the  present  disorders  of  tbe 
morał  world  to  continue,  but  will  rightly  adjust  tbe  bal- 
ances,  which  haye  now  for  a  season  lost  thdr  cqułpoise: 
flflhly,  the  morale  which  compel  us  to  hope  that  our  to- 
tues  will  not  lose  their  reward,  and  to  fear  that  our  vice* 
¥011  not  go  unpunished  in  the  futuro  world,  which  seems 
to  be  better  fitted  than  the  present  for  morał  retiibudon; 
and,  Bixthly,  the  kutorical,  the  generał  belief  in  a  fotwe 
State  of  rewards  and  punishments,  the  ezpectatioos  of 
dying  men,  the  premonitions  of  the  gnilty,  and  the  te- 
nadous  hopes  of  the  beneficent.  Ali  these  argumenu 
aro  in  fayor  of  our  unending  exiBtence,  and  there  are 
nonę  in  oppodtion  to  it;  and  it  is  an  axiom  that  what- 
eyer  has  existed  and  now  exist8,  will,  unleas  there  be 
special  proof  to  the  contrary,  continue  to  eKist**  {B&U- 
otheca  Sacroj  May,  1846,  art  ii). 

The  natural  proofs  of  the  immortality  of  the  soul  are 
treated  yezy  skilfully  by  professor  Chace,  in  the  BtUi- 
otheca  Sacra  for  February,  1849.  First  be  analyzea  tbe 
Phiedo  of  Plato,  and  fuids  it  to  contain  the  following  ar- 
guments  for  immortality :  1.  From  the  capadty  and  de- 
siro  of  the  soul  for  knowledge,  beyond  what  in  this  life 
is  attainable;  2.  From  the  law  of  contraries,  aooordiog 
to  which,  as  rest  prepares  for  labor,  and  labor  for  rest; 
as  light  ends  in  darkness,  and  darkness  in  light ;  so  life, 
leading  to  death, death  must,  in  tum,  terminate  in  life; 
3.  From  the  reminiscences  of  a  prey  ious  ezasteuce,  which 
the  soul  brings  with  it  into  ^e  present  life;  Ł  Fkom 


IMMORTALITY 


519 


TMMuyrrr 


the  slmple  and  indiTisible  natnie  of  the  soul ;  otdy  oom- 
poond  subsUnoes  undezgo  diaaolution ;  5.  From  tbe  es- 
Bential  vitality  of  the  soul  itself.  He  adds  that  al- 
t!i3ugh  theae  argnments  did  not  amount,  iii  the  estima- 
tion  of  Sooates,  ^  to  an  absolute  proof  of  the  doctrine, 
he  tlisioght  them  suffident  not  only  to  deprive  death  of 
all  ita  temm,  but  to  awaken  in  the  mind  of  a  good  man, 
wben  approaching  death,  the  cahn  and  che^nl  hope 
of  a  better  life."  Theae  argnments,  however,  are  far 
behind  the  present  state  of  science.  The  second  and 
ifaird  rest  on  purely  imaginary  fotmdations;  the  fourth 
and  filth  are  inconclasive ;  and  the  first  only,  we  grant, 
bas  a  leal,  thotigh  subordinate  yalue.  Cicero  adds  to 
these  aigoments  one  from  the  anuentut  gentium,  a  uni- 
▼enal  pieyalence  of  a  belief  in  immortaUty.  Of  But^ 
ler^a  aigmnent  for  immortality  in  the  Anałog^f  the  pro- 
feasor  lemarks  that  it  is  perhapa  less  fortunate  Łhan  any 
ottaer  part  of  that-great  work.  ^  Both  of  the  main  ar- 
grumcnts  empbyed  by  him  are  no  less  applicable  to  the 
lower  animals  than  to  man,  and  just  as  much  prove  the 
immortality  of  the  liying  principle  oonnected  with  the 
minutest  insect  or  hnmblest  iiifusoria  as  of  the  human 
aoiiL  It  is  not  a  little  remarkable  that  this  fact,  which 
in  lealiŁy  oonTerts  the  attempted  proof  into  a  redudio 
ad  abna-dum  of  the  prindples  firom  which  it  is  drawn, 
ahonld  not  have  awakened  in  the  cautious  mind  of  But- 
ler a  suspidon  of  their  sotmdness,  and  led  him  to  seek 
other  means  of  establishing  the  truth  in  ąuesdon.  These 
he  wonld  hare  found,  and,  as  we  think,  far  better  suited 
to  hia  purpose,  in  the  facts  and  prindples  so  ably  and  so 
ihlly  set  forth  in  his  chapters  on  the  morał  govemment 
of  God,  and  on  probation  considered  as  a  means  of  disci- 
pline  and  improrement.  Indeed,  we  have  always  been 
of  the  opinion  that  these  two  chapters  contain  the  only 
leal  and  solid  grounds  for  belief  in  a  futurę  life  which 
the  work  presents;  the  considerations  adduoed  in  the 
one  particularly  appropriated  to  that  object  senring  at 
foithest  only  to  answer  objections  to  the  doctrine." 
Ftofeasor  ChiBU»  founds  his  own  argument  chiefly  upon 
the  gradoal  and  progreańye  development  of  life  in  our 
planet,  from  the  epoch  of  its  earliest  inhabitant  down  to 
the  present  hour,  which  derelopment,  takcn  in  connec- 
tion  with  the  capacities  and  endowments  of  the  soul,  in- 
dicates,  on  the  part  of  the  Greator,  a  purpose  to  eon- 
tinue  it  in  being. 

See,  besides  the  anthorities  already  refened  to,  Mar- 
silios  Ficinos, De  Tmmortaliiaie  Animm  (Par.  1641,  foL) ; 
an  extract  of  it  is  given  in  Buhle,  Guch,  d,  neueren  Phi- 
lotophie,  ii,  171  8q. ;  Spalding,  Besdmmung  des  Afeaschm 
(Leips.  1794) ;  Struyius,  Ilitt.  Doct.  Gracorum  et  Roma- 
mnum,  de  Statu  Animarum  post  mortem  (Alten,  1803, 
8ro) ;  Meier,  PhilotopMsche  Lehre  r.  Zustand  der  Seele; 
Mendelssohn,  PAonfon  (Berlui,  1821);  Hamann,  Unster- 
hliehkeii  (Leips.  1773,  8vo);  Jacobi,  PhUos,  Beweis,  d. 
UmsUrblichkeU  (Dessau,  1788) ;  Fichte  (J.  G.),  DesUna- 
tion  ofMan  (tr.  by  Mra.  R.  Sinnett,  London,  1846, 12mo) ; 
Jean  Paul  Bichter,  Dat  Campaner-ThaL  (Frankf.  1797, 
8yo);  Olshausen,  Antią.Pairum  de  ImmortałUałe  Sen- 
iejUiae  (Regiom.  1827, 4U)) ;  Herrick,  SifUoge  Scripiorum 
de  ImmortalUaiej  etc  (Regensb.  1790, 8vo) ;  Knapp,  Tke- 
aioffy,  §  149 ;  HllffeU,  Ueber  d.  UnsterUichJeeU  d.  mensch- 
Uchen,  SeeU  (Carlsnihe,  1832);  Hase,  Evangtl  Protest, 
Dwpnaiik,  §  82, 84 ;  Duncan,  Evidence  ofReason  for  Im- 
mortaWy  {1779,  Svo);  Tillotson,^ermoiM,ix,309;  Hale, 
Sir  Katthew,  Works,  i,  331 ;  Stanhope,  Boyle  T^ectures 
(1702, 4to,  serm.  3);  Foster,  Sermoru,  i,  873;  Shcrlock, 
WarŁs,  i,  124;  Dwight,  Sermons,  i,  145;  Channing, 
Works,  ir,  169 ;  Chahners,  Works,  x,  415 ;  Drew,  on  Im- 
martaUły  (Philadel  1830,  12mo) ;  Ne>vman,  The  Soid 
(Lond.  1849,  l2mo) ;  Quarterly  JRemew,  Aug.  1834,  p.  35 ; 
łłew  York  Remew,  i,  831 ;  Coleridge,  Aids  to  Refiecłion, 
p.  20^.212;  Robert  Hall,  Works,  i,  189;  ii,  373;  Howe, 
Works,  8ro  ed.,  p.  193 ;  Amer.  Bibie  Repository,  x,  41 1 ; 
Christian  Spectator,  viii,  556;  New  Engkmder,  ix,  544 
8q. ;  xi,  862  8q. ;  xir,  1 15  są.,  161  są. ;  Melh,  Quart  Rev, 
July,  1864,  p.  515 ;  Oct.  1868,  p.  685 ;  Julr,  1860,  p.  610 ; 
Jan.  1866,  p.  138;  ^i&.  Sacra,  1860,  p.  810  są.;  BaptisŁ 


Ouart,  Rev.  1870,  April,  art  y;  Joumai  o/ Speeulative 
Pkiloaopky,  April,  1870,  art.  i;  Schalberg  (Dr.  J.),  Un- 
słerblichkeit  o,  d,pers,  Fortdauer  d,  Seele  n.  d,  Tode  (3d 
edit.  Naumberg,  1869) ;  Egomet,  Life  and  Immortality 
(Lond.  1860) ;  Schott,  Sterhen  u.  Unsterblickkeit  (Stuttg. 
1861);  Dumesnil,  L7mmor^a^  (Paris,  1861);  Nayille, 
La  Vie  EtemeOe  (Par.  1863) ;  Huber,  Idee  d.  UnsterbUch- 
keit  (Munich,  1864) ;  Bagnenault  de  Puchessc,  VImmor- 
ialite  (Par.  1864) ;  Ffaif,  Jdeen  e,  A  rztes  u,  d.  Unsterbiich- 
keit  d,Seeie  (Dresden,  1864) ;  Wilmarshof,  Das  Jetaeits 
(Lpz.  1863);  Nitzsch,  System  o/ Christian  Doctrine  (see 
Index);  Pye  ^mith,  First  Lwu  of  Christ,  TheoL  p.  144, 
352, 357 ;  Saisset,  Modem  Panikeism  (Edinbuigh,  1863, 2 
yoU.  12mo),  i,  140  są.,  263 ;  ii,  36  są. ;  Alger,  History  of 
Futurę  Life  (8d  ed.  Phila.  1864) ;  Schndder,  Die  Unsterb- 
lichkettsidee,  etc.  (Regensb.  1870,  8vo) ;  Brinton,  My^ 
qfthe  New  World  (N.  Y.  1868, 12mo).     (J.  H.  W.) 

Immovable  Feasts.    See  Fsasts. 
ImmunitleB  of  the  Cleboy.    See  Immunity. 

Immunity,  Eccłssiastical.  In  ecdesiastical  ja- 
risprudence  a  disttnction  is  madę  between  ecdesiastical 
inomunity  (immuniłas  ecdesiastical  and  the  immunity 
of  the  Church  (immunitcu  ecdesue),  The  latter  is  the 
right  of  refuge  or  asy  kun  (ą.  v.),  the  former  denotes  the 
exemption  of  the  Chuich  from  the  generał  obligations 
of  the  community.  The  ministers  of  religion  haye  at 
all  times  and  in  all  countries  enjoyed  particular  priyi- 
leges  and  liberties.  This  was  the  case  with  the  priests 
of  pagan  Romę,  whose  priyileges  were  tiansferred  to  the 
Christian  clergy  by  Constantine.  Among  these  priyi- 
leges we  notice  particularly  exemption  from  taxcs  (oen- 
sus),  from  menial  seryice  {munera  sordida),  etc  To 
this  was  added  also  the  priyilege  of  separate  spiritual  ju- 
risdiction.  See  Jurisdiction,  Ecclesiasticau  These 
immunities  bdonged  to  the  members  of  the  clergy,  their 
wiyes,  children,  domestics,  and  to  the  goods  of  the 
Church,  but  did  not  extcnd  to  thdr  pńyate  property,  or 
to  peraons  entering  the  clergy  nimply  to  free  themsdyes 
from  ciyil  charges.  In  532  Justinian  addcd  to  these 
priyileges  that  of  guardiauship,  permitting  presbyters, 
deacons,  and  subdeacons  to  act  as  guardians  or  trustees, 
but  not  extending  the  priyilege  to  bishops  or  monks 
(Nor.  cxxiii,  cap.  5 ;  A nth,  Presbyieros  C.  ciL  i,  8).  The 
ancient  Germans  also  granted  great  priyileges  to  their 
priests.  Julius  Ciesar  considered  them  as  the  next  dass 
to  the  nobility,  and  said,'*Magno  (Draides)  sunt  apud 
eos  honore"  {De  bello  Gallico,  lib.  yi,  cap.  13).  "  Druides 
a  bello  abesse  consneyerunt,  neąue  tiibuta  una  cum  reli- 
quis  pendunt,  militiie  yocationis  omniumąue  rerum  ha- 
bent  immunitatem"  {ib,  cap.  14).  When  Grermany  was 
Christianized,  the  clergy  preseryed  the  same  priyileges, 
besides  those  granted  them  by  the  Roman  law,  which 
was  recognised  a»  the  standard  {secundum  legem  Roma- 
num  eodesia  vivit  lLex  Ribuaria,  tit  lviii,  §  1,  etc]). 
The  stipulation  of  the  third  Council  of  Tdedo  in  589,  can. 
21  (c.  69,  can.  xii,  ąu.  ii)  that  the  auditors,  bishops,  and 
dergy  should  not  be  snbject  to  compulsory  scnrices,  was 
also  granted  afterwards  {Capitulare  a.  744,  cap.  7 ;  oom- 
pare  fienedict^s  C(Rpt^u/ar»en^9amni/t{ii47,lib.iii,cap.290). 
The  protection  which  the  Church  granted  to  all  who 
connected  themsdyes  with  it  soon  becamo  a  source  of 
great  profit;  it  was  known  in  the  6th  century  under 
the  name  of  mitium,  or  mittium  Ugitimum  (Roth,  Gesch,  d, 
Benefcialwesens  [Eriangen,  1850],  p.  163  są.).  To  this 
right  of  protection  of  the  Church  was  subseąuently  add- 
ed that  of  collecting  and  appropriating  to  its  own  use 
the  taxes  which  would  otherwise  haye  been  leyied  on 
its  proteg^  by  the  fiscal  ofBcers :  this  right  was  called 
emunitas,  and  was  oonferred  by  the  kings.  These  fiscal 
taxe8  induded  fine^  etc,  of  which  the  holders  of  immu- 
nities became  the  redpients.  In  after  times  the  Churoh 
obtained  also  the  right  of  assembling  armies,  which  was 
called  territorium  (see  Formuła  Andegatensee,  4,  8,  21, 
22,  etc),  and  which  laid  the  foundation  of  the  subse- 
ąuent  ecclesiasdcal  prindpalities  (Ree  Rettberg,  Kir- 
chengeschichte  DeutchUmds,  yoL  ii,  §  97 ;  Waitz,  Deutsche 


TMMUTABIŁrrY 


520 


mPANATION 


Verfatnmff9get^u^  ii,  290  8q^  570  są.).  These  im- 
munities  wcre  fi2rther.specified  in  the  Iawb  of  tha  French 
kingdom  (see  Capitula  aynodi  Yemeiuis  a.  756,  c.  19, 28 ; 
Cap,  Motau,  a  756,  c.  8,  etc.),  u  were  ciao  those  of  the 
indiyidual  memben  of  the  deigy,  and  of  the  Chorch 
piopertiea.  St.  Louis  decided  that  each  cfanrch  ahould 
have  a  piece  of  land  (tnansut)  free  ftom  all  tasations, 
etc.  {Capu,  a.  816,  c.  10,  25;  can.  xxiii,  qu.  viii).  Sach 
properties  subject  to  taxe8  as  did  oome  into  the  hands 
of  the  Church  did  not,  howeyer,  beoome  free  on  that  ac- 
ooont,  unless  by  an  especial  favor  of  the  Idng  (fiapU,  ui, 
Caroli  M.  a.  812,  c.  11 ;  CapiL  w,  Ludov,  a.  819,  c.  2). 
The  immonities  were,  however,  greatly  abused,  and  lost 
their  importance,  notwithstanding  the  dedsions  of  the 
Gouncil  of  Trent,  Sess.  xxv,  cap.  20  (**  Eodesia  et  ecde- 
aianun  penonanim  immunitatem  Dei  ordinatione  et  ca- 
nonicis  sanctionibos  constitutam  esse**),  and  the  buli  In 
coena  Domim  (q.  v.).  To  what  extent  the  properties 
of  the  dergy  and  of  the  Church  are  now  free  has  been 
settled  by  subseąuent  decrees.  As  a  role,  the  dergy  are 
free  from  the  generał  taxe8,  and  from  the  personal  dnties 
of  private  dtizens.  The  candidates  for  priesta'  ordeiB 
and  studenta  in  theology  are  nsually  exempt  (rom  mil- 
itary  sendce.  The  churches  and  their  property  enjoy 
generally  the  same  privileges  aa  the  goyemment  build- 
ings  and  state  property.  Personal  immunity  from  taxes, 
military  seryices,  etc^  is  legularly  granted  to  the  dergy, 
aa  abo  to  teachers,  in  Protestant  as  well  as  in  Roman 
Gatholic  oonntńes.  See  Herzog,  Real-EnąfJdopadie,  yi, 
642;  Goe8elin,Potoer  ofthe  Pope  (see  Index);  Augusti, 
Sandbuch  d,  chriaL  A  rchdoL  i,  803  8q. 

ImnmtabUlty,  the  diyine  attribute  of  unchange- 
ableness  indicated  in  the  great  title  of  God,  I  Au.  So 
James  i,  17 :  **  Eyery  good  gift  and  eyery  perfect  gifl  is 
fiom  above,  and  oometh  down  finom  the  Father  of  lighta, 
with  whom  is  no  yariableness,  neither  shadow  of  tnm- 
ing."*  Psa.  xxxiii,  11 :  ^  The  counsel  of  the  Lord  stand- 
eth  foreyer,  the  Uioughts  of  his  heart  to  all  genera- 
tions ;"  cii,  25>27 :  '<  Of  old  hast  thou  laid  the  foundation 
of  the  earth,  and  the  heayens  are  the  work  of  thy  handa. 
They  shall  perish,  but  thou  shalt  endure;  yea,  all  of 
•  them  shall  wax  old  like  a  garment;  as  a  yesture  shalt 
thou  change  them,  and  they  shall  be  changed :  but  thou 
art  the  same,  and  thy  years  shall  haye  do  end.**  God  is 
immutable  as  to  his  essence,  being  the  one  necessaiy 
bdng.  He  is  immutable  also  in  ideas  and  knowledge, 
anoe  these  are  etemaL  '*  If  we  consider  the  naturę  of 
God,  that  he  is  a  8elf-existent  and  independent  Being, 
the  great  Creator  and  wise  Goyemor  of  all  things;  that 
he  is  a  spiritual  and  simple  Being,  without  parta  or 
mixture  such  as  might  induce  a  change ;  that  he  is  a 
soyereign  and  nnoontrollable  Being,  whom  nothing  from 
without  can  affect  or  alter ;  that  he  is  an  etemal  Being, 
who  always  has  and  always  will  go  on  in  the  same  ten- 
or of  existence;  an  omnisdent  Being,  who,  knowing  all 
things,  has  no  reason  to  act  oontiaiy  to  his  first  re- 
8olves;  and  in  all  respecta  a  most  porfect  Being,  who 
can  admit  of  no  addition  or  diminntion ;  we  cannot  but 
bdieve  that,  both  in  his  essence,  in  his  knowledge,  and 
in  his  will  and  purposes,  he  must  of  necessity  be  un- 
changeable.  To  suppose  him  otherwise  is  to  suppose 
him  an  imperfect  being;  for  if  he  change  it  must  be 
either  to  a  greater  perfect  ion  than  he  had  before  or  to 
a  less;  if  to  a  greater  perfection,  then  was  there  plainly 
a  defect  in  him,  and  a  priyation  of  something  better 
than  what  he  had  or  was;  then,  agBin,was  he  not  al- 
ways the  best,  and  consequently  not  always  God :  if  he 
change  to  a  lesser  perfection,  then  does  he  fali  into  a 
defect  again ;  lose  a  perfection  he  was  possessed  once  of, 
and  so  ceasing  to  be  the  best  being,  cease  at  the  same 
time  to  be  God.  The  soyereign  pefTection  ofthe  Deity, 
therefore,  is  an  invincible  biu*  against  all  mutability; 
for,  whicheyer  way  we  suppose  him  to  change,  his  su- 
premę excellency  is  nuUed  or  impaired  by  iu  We  es- 
teem  changeableness  in  men  dther  an  imperfection  or  a 
fault:  their  natural  changes,  as  to  their  peisons,  are 
from  weaknesB  and  yanity ;  their  morał  changes,  as  to 


their  indinations  and  puposes,  are  ftom  ignonmce  ci 
incoDstancy,  and  therefore  thia  quaUty  is  no  way  coio- 
patible  with  the  glozy  and  attribates  of  God"  (Cha^ 
nock,  On  (he  Dimm  Atiributea), 

"Yarious  speculations  on  the  diyine  immotabiUty 
oocur  in  the  yrritings  of  diyines  and  others,  whicfa, 
though  often  wdl  intended,  ooght  to  be  reońyed  wiib 
caution,  and  sometimes  even  rejected  aa  bewildering  or 
pemidous.    Such  are  the  notioiis  that  God  knows  er* 
erything  by  intuiUonf  that  there  is  no  suocesnou  of 
ideas  in  the  diyine  mind ;  that  he  can  recdye  no  new 
idea;  that  there  are  no  affections  in  God,  for  to  suppoas 
this  would  imply  that  he  is  capaUe  of  emotion ;  that  if 
there  are  affiections  in  God,  as  loye,  hatred,  etc,  they 
always  ex]st  in  the  same  degree,  or  else  he  woohi  soiSer 
change:  for  these  and  similar  gieciilationa,  refereioc 
may  be  had  to  the  schoolmen  and  metaphystdans  by 
thoee  who  are  curious  in  such  subjecta;  but  the  impie^- 
sion  of  the  diyine  character,  thua  represented,  will  be 
found  yery  different  from  that  conyeyed  by  tbose  in- 
spired  wiitings  in  which  God  is  not  spoken  of  igr  men^ 
but  speaks  of  hmuelf;  and  nothing  could  be  morę  esailj 
shown  than  that  most  of  these  notions  are  dther  idle, 
as  assuming  that  we  know  morę  of  God  than  is  reyealr 
ed ;  or  such  as  tend  to  represent  the  diyine  Being  u 
rather  a  neceesary  than  a  free  agent,  and  his  mord  per* 
fections  as  resuldng  from  a  Uind  phydcal  necettity  of 
naturę  morę  than  ftom  an  easential  mord  excdlence; 
or,  finally,  as  unintelligible  or  abeurd.    The  trae  iranm- 
tability  of  God  oonsuts,  not  in  his  adherence  to  his  jmr- 
poBegj  but  in  hia  neyer  changing  the  principUs  of  his 
administration ;  and  he  may  therefore,  in  peifect  ao- 
oordance  with  his  preordination  of  things,  and  the  im- 
mntability  of  his  naturę,  puipoae  to  do,  under  caam 
oonditions  dependent  upon  the  free  agency  of  man,  what 
he  wiU  not  do  under  others;  and  for  this  reason,  that 
an  immutable  adherence  to  the  prmc^ilet  of  a  wise,  jost, 
and  gracious  goyemment  reąuires  it.     Plrayer  is  ia 
Scripture  madę  one  of  these  conditions ;  and  if  God  has 
established  it  as  one  of  the  prindples  of  his  moial  goy- 
emment to  aooept  pra3rer  in  eyery  caae  in  which  he  has 
giyen  ns  authority  to  ask,  he  has  not,  we  may  be  aa> 
sured,  entangled  his  actual  goyemment  of  tln  worid 
with  the  bonds  of  such  an  eteinud  predestination  of  pti^ 
ticular  eyents  as  dther  to  reduce  prayer  to  a  mcie  fona 
of  words,  or  not  to  be  able  himsdf,  oonsiatently  with  his 
decrees,  to  answer  it,  wheneyer  it  is  encouraged  by  his 
express  engagements."     See  Watson,  TnttUutet^  i,  401; 
ii,  492 ;  Perrone,  Traełatus  de  Deo,  part  ii,  eh.  ii  •  Knapp, 
Theology,  §  20 ;  Grayes,  Works,  iii,  288 ;  Doraer,  in  Jahp- 
buch  /.  deuische  Theohgiey  1859, 1860  (see  Index).    See 
also  ATTRiBUTEfl ;  God. 

Im''iia  and  Im^nab,  the  name  of  serenl  men,  of 
diflfcrent  form  in  the  origind,  which  ia  not  accorately 
obseryed  in  the  Englidi  Yerdon. 

1.  Hebrew  Yimka'  t^J^^,  resframer;  Sept.  'lpava, 
Vulg.  JetnnOj  Auth.  Ters.  "Imna^Oł  one  of  the  sona  ap- 
parently  of  Hdcm,  the  brother  of  Shamer,  a  descendant 
of  Asher,  but  at  what  distance  is  not  dear  (1  Chroń,  yii, 
35).    B.a  prób.  cir.  1618.    See  Hotham. 

2.  Hebrew  Yimnah'  (jn^'0^,fortunałe!  Sept.  in  Gen. 
xlvi,  17,  'Uprą,  Vulg.  Jamne^  Auth.  Yers.  '^  Jimnah;** 
in  Kumb.  xxyi,  44,  *lapiv  and  'laptri,  Jenma  and  Jim- 
nait<e, "  Jimna"  and  'Mimnites  ;**  in  1  Chroń,  yii,  80,  'Uft' 
va,  Jemna,  *^Imnah"),  the  flrst^named  of  the  sous  of 
Asher,  and  founder  of  a  family  who  borę  his  name.  E 
C.  1874. 

3.  (Same  Hebrew  name  aa  laat;  Sept  'Upyd^Yi^ 
Jenma,  AutluTers. ''  Imnah**).  The  father  of  Korę,  whick 
latter  was  the  Leyite  in  charge  of  the  eaat  gałę  of  the 
Tempie,  and  appointed  by  Hezekiah  oyer  the  free-will 
offerings  (2  Chroń,  xxxi,  14).    B.  C  726. 

Impanation  (Latin,  inyxma(io ;  from  m  and  pamuj 
bread;  otherwise  oittcmp^M),  a  name  giyen  to  one  of 
the  many  different  ahadea  of  the  doctiine  of  tlie  red 
presence  of  the  body  and  blood  of  Chdai  in  the  Eoeh*- 


IMPECCABILES 


521 


mposinoN  OF  hands 


liflt  The  theory  was  fint  preeented  in  the  13th  oen- 
Vasrj  by  Kapracht  ot  Deutz  in  the  foUowing  ahape  {Op- 
tra ed.  CoL  1602,  i,  267;  Comm.  m  Eaeod.  ii,  10):  **Ab 
God  did  not  alter  human  natura  when  he  incamated 
divinity  in  the  womb  of  the  Yiigin  Mary,  uniting  the 
Word  and  the  fleah  into  one  bemg,  so  he  doea  not  alter 
the  aubetanoe  of  the  bread  and  the  winę  in  the  Encha- 
riflt,  whieh  stili  retain  the  materiał  propertiea  by  which 
Łhey  are  known  to  our  aensea  (mmbut  subactum)^  while 
by  his  Word  he  bringa  them  (the  component  elementa) 
into  eombination  with  the  identical  body  and  the  iden- 
tical  bJood  of  Chriat.  As  the  Word  descended  from  on 
high  (a  sununo),  not  to  become  flesh,  but  to  assume  the 
floh  (astwnendo  ootmem),  so  are  the  bread  and  winę, 
fram  their  inferior  (ab  imoi)  position,  raiaed  into  beoom- 
ing  fledi  and  blood  of  Christ,  without,  therefore,  being 
tnnamuted  (non  mutatum)  in  such  a  manner  as  to  ao- 
qiiire  the  taste  of  flesh  or  the  appearance  of  blood,  but 
do,  on  the  oontraiy,  imperceptibly  beoome  identical 
with  both  in  their  easence,  partaking  of  the  divino  and 
human  immortal  substance,  which  is  in  Christ.  It  is 
not  the  effect  of  the  Holy  Ghoet^s  operation  {ajfechu)  to 
alter  or  destzoy  the  naturę  of  any  substance  used  for  his 
porpoae,  but,  on  the  contrary,  to  add  to  that  substance 
Bome  qualitie8  which  it  did  not  at  first  possess*'  (De  Opp, 
SpirU,  8.  iii,  p.  21,  22).  In  his  work  De  dhmu  Offi- 
cuf  (ii,  9;  Opp,  ii,  762),  he  says :  *"  The  Word  of  the  Fa- 
ther  oomes  in  between  the  flesh  and  the  blood  which  he 
reoeiTed  fittm  the  womb  of  the  Yirgin,  and  the  bread 
and  winę  receiyed  from  the  altar,  and  of  the  two  makes 
a  Joint  ofliering.  When  the  priest  puts  this  into  the 
mooth  of  the  belierer,  bread  and  winę  are  receiyed,  and 
are  ahaoibed  into  the  body;  but  the  Son  of  the  l^igin 
remains  whole  and  unabsorbed  in  the  receirer,  united 
to  the  Word  of  the  Father  in  heaven.  Such  as  do  not 
belicTe,  on  the  contrary,  receive  only  the  materiał  bread 
and  winę,  but  nonę  of  the  offering."  His  contemporary, 
Alger,  or  Adelher,  of  Lnttich,  writing  in  defense  of  the 
dogma  of  transubstantiation  (L  iii,  De  wcuram,  corp.  et 
M»ff,  D.  in  BibL  Max.  Patr,  L  xxi,  Lugdun.  1677),  was 
the  first  to  make  use  of  the  expre88ion  impanatio  in  this 
sense  (p.  251),  ^  In  pane  Christum  impanatum  sicut  De- 
urn  in  came  personaliter  incamatum."  Before  him, 
howev^,  Goitmnnd  of  Ayersa  had,  in  1190,  used  the 
same  word  to  expreas  the  probable  meaning  of  Berengar 
{BibL  Max.  Pair,  Lugdun.  xviii,  441),  whose  supporters 
are  sometimes  called  Adeteenaru  (q.  v.)  (from  adeuej  to 
be  present). 

The  doctrine  of  impanation  was  afterwards,  in  the 
Beformataon  period,  but  wrongly,  attributed  to  Osiander 
by  Caiistadt.  Some  Roman  C^holic  writers,  e.  g.  Bel- 
larraine  (DinerL  de  impan.  ti  eoneubetanł.  Jenie,  1677), 
Du  Cange,  and  others,  aocoaed  Lnther  of  having  reyired 
the  dd  enor  of  impanation.  The  Formuła  C<mcordm 
(1577)  declares  that  the  **mode  of  union  between  the 
body  of  Christ  and  the  bread  and  winę  is  a  mystery," 
and  does  not  dedde  positlyely  what  that  modę  is,  but 
only  negatiYely  what  it  is  not.  ''It  is  not  a  periotuU 
union,  nor  is  ic  cotuitbitantio ;  still  less  is  it  a  union  in 
which  duage  of  substance  is  wrought  (trantubtłanUa- 
Ho),  not  a  union  in  which  the  body  and  blood  of  Christ 
are  indoded  in  the  bread  and  winę  {m^>anatio\  but  a 
union  whieh  exists  only  in  this  sacnunent,  and  there- 
fore is  called  tacramentalu.'*  See  Herzog,  Real-Eney- 
U^i^Ti,  644;  Knapp^  Theohgy,  §  146;  and  the  articles 
LoitD'8SuprBB;  CostsuBSTAimATiON ;  Tbamsubstan- 

TUTIOS. 

ImpeocabUda,  a  name  giren  to  certain  heretics 
in  the  ancient  Chuich,  who  boasted  that  they  were  in- 
capaUe  of  sin,  and  that  there  was  no  need  of  rapent- 
anoe;  such  were  some  of  the  Gnostics,  Frisdllianists, 
etCi    See  iMPEOCABiŁrrT. 

Impeccability,  the  state  of  a  peraon  who  camot 
M,  or  who,  by  grace,  is  deUyered  from  the  poasibility 
of  sinning.  Some  specnlations  have  appeared  in  the 
woiid  opon  the  snpposed  peccability  ot  the  human  na- 
torsof  Christ,  founded  chiefly  on  oertain  expreesion8  in 


the  Epistle  to  the  Hebrews  (iy,  15)  and  elsewhere,  as* 
serting  that  Christ  was  *'in  all  points  tempted  like  as 
we  are."  It  is  argued,  on  the  other  hand,  that  as  the 
Scripture  has  been  silent  on  this  point,  it  is  both  need- 
less  and  presumptuous  to  attempt  to  draw  any  infer- 
enoes  firom  such  expres8ions  as  that  aboye  cited;  and 
that  we  should  acquiesce  in,  and  be  satisfied  with,  the 
dedaration  that  '*  in  him  is  no  sin"  (I  John  iii,  5).  See 
Art  xy  of  Cburch  of  England, "  Of  Christ  alone  without 
sin."  Impeccability,  or,  at  least,  sinless  perfection,  has 
also  been  cUimed  for  eyeiy  tnie  child  of  God  upon  the 
authority  of  1  John  iii,  9,  though  improperly,  the  word 
''canuot"  requiring  to  be  taken  (aa  in  many  other  pos- 
sages  of  Scripture)  in  such  a  latitude  as  to  expre88,  not 
an  abeolute  impońibUity  of  sinning,  but  ^  a  strong  disin- 
dination,"  in  the  renewed  naturę,  to  sin  *'  in  such  a  man- 
ner and  to  such  a  degree  as  others." — ^Eden,  Theol,  Diet, 
s.  y. ;  UUmann,  SMeamua  of  Jesus  (Edinb.  1856, 12mo), 
p.  46 ;  Haag,  Hut,  des  Dogmes  ChrSt.  (see  Index).  See 
Chbist,  SiNUBBSKKSS  OF;  Pebfection;  Sanctifiga- 

TION. 

Imperlall,  Łatirent,  a  Koman  CathoUc  prelate  of 
whose  early  Ufe  nothing  is  known,  was  bom  about  the 
year  1612,  and  was  created  cardinal  in  1652  by  pope  In- 
nocent X.  He  died  Sept  21, 1673.— Mignę,  Encydop. 
TkioL  xxxi,  1094. 

Imperiali,  Joseph  Renć,  an  Italian  prelate  of 
the  Roman  Catholic  Church,  was  bom  at  Oria,  April 
26, 1651.  Dcscending  ftom  a  high  family,  and  enjoy- 
ing  the  intercession  of  great  prelates,  he  took  orders  in 
his  Church,  and  was  rapidly  promoted.  In  1690  Inno- 
cent XI  created  him  cardinal,  and  he  was  sent  as  ambas- 
sador  to  Ferrara.  At  the  papai  oonclaye  in  1780  he  came 
within  one  yote  of  being  elected  the  incumbent  of  the 
papai  throne.  He  died  Jan.  15, 1787.— Hoefer,  Nouo. 
Biog.  Ginirale,  xxy,  888 ;  Mignę,  Encydop.  ThioL  xxxi, 
1094  8q. 

Impliolt  Faith.    See  Faith. 

Impltivimn,  anciently  a  large  area  or  spot  of 
ground  between  the  great  porch  of  the  church  and  the 
church  itself.  Because  imcovered  and  expo8ed  to  the  air, 
it  was  called  atrium  or  impłumum,  Eusebius  caUed  it 
a'i^piov.  "  In  this  court  or  church-yard  was  the  station 
of  the  energumens  (q.  y.),  and  that  class  of  penitenta 
called  TTpooKKaiowtc  or  Jlentes.  These  persona  were 
commonly  entitlcd  x«*/*óCovrfC  or  x^i^^tófuvoi,  from 
the  circumstance  of  their  standing  in  the  open  air,  ex- 
poeed  to  all  changes  of  the  weather"  (Riddle,  Christian 
ArUig.  p.  725  są.).  The  practice  of  buming  their  dead 
in  the  impluyium  was  initiated  in  the  4th  ccntury,  but 
it  did  not  become  generał  until  after  the  6th  century. 
There  were  also  freąuently  buildings  auxiliary  to  the 
cburch  edifice  placed  in  the  impluyium,  such  as  the 
baptisteries,  pUoes  where  the  candidates  of  the  Church 
were  instmcted  and  prepared  for  baptism,  etc  See  Far- 
rar,  Ecdes,  Diet.  s.  v.     (J.  H.  W.) 

Zmportunity  (avaMa)  in  prayer,  an  important 
element  of  success  (Lukę  xi,  8),  as  erincing  eamestness, 
a  faith  that  takes  no  denial,  and  espccially  a  persever- 
ance  that  continues  to  interoede  until  the  reąuest  is 
granted  (compare  Lukę  xviii,  1 ;  1  Thess.  y,  17).  See 
Prayer. 

Impositloii  of  Hands,  a  ceremony  used  by  most 
Christian  churches  in  ordination,  and  by  others  in  con- 
firmatłon.  The  expressions  generally  used  in  the  Scrip- 
tures  for  the  rite  of  impoeition  of  hands  are :  D*^iC,  or 
n-^d  (-jaD),  with  1%  $?,  etc,  in  the  O.  T.;  and  »iri- 
rt^m,  ri^rifu  Xitpa  "vi,  tiri  Tiva,  itri^imę  xf*P^v  in 
the  N.  T.    See  Hand. 

I.  Origin  and  symbolical  Meamnff  of  the  Act.—Tbe 
practice  of  the  impoaition  of  hands  as  a  symbolical  act 
is  of  remote  antiąuity.  It  is  "  a  natural  form  by  which 
benediction  has  been  expressed  in  all  ages  and  among 
all  people.  It  is  the  act  of  one  superior  either  by  age 
or  spiritual  position  towards  an  inferior,  and  by  its  yery 
form  it  appears  to  beatow  some  gift,or  to  manifest  a  de- 


IMPOSmON  OP  HANDS        622        IMPOSITION  OF  HANDS 


Blie  that  some  gift  should  be  bestowed.  It  may  be  an 
evU  thing  that  la  symbolically  bestowed,  as  vhen  goilt- 
iness  was  thus  transferred  bj  the  higb-priest  to  the 
scape-goat  from  the  ooagregation  (Lev.  xiv,  21) ;  but,  in 
generał,  the  gift  is  of  something  good  whtch  God  is  sup- 
posed  to  bestow  by  the  chaimel  of  tlie  laymg  on  of 
hands."  The  principle  of  the  practice  seems  to  rest  on 
the  importance  of  the  hand  itself,  both  in  the  bodily  or- 
ganism  and  in  the  morał  actiyity  of  man,  in  its  power 
and  in  its  actioii.  Thus  we  find  the  hand  raised  in  an- 
ger,  extended  in  pity,  the  avenging  hand,  the  helping 
hand,  etc.  In  Greek  a  distinction  exist8  between  the 
hand  extended  to  shelter  or  protect  (jcf'tpa  vvipix^*v)t 
and  the  hand  held  out  imploringly  (xtipac  dva<rxuv) ; 
oonaequently  between  the  pow^ul,  directing  hand  of 
God,  and  the  imploring  hand  of  man.  The  BMical  ag- 
nification  of  the  imposition  of  hands  rests,  in  generał,  on 
the  consideration  of  the  hand  as  the  organ  ^transmu- 
non,  both  in  the  real  and  ui  the  symbolical  sense.  Ttiis 
lesidts  from  the  fact  that  not  only  did  the  party  offer- 
ing  sacrifice  bless  the  offering  by  the  imposition  of 
hands,  but  by  the  same  act  he,  as  sinner,  imparted  to  it 
aiao  his  sins  and  his  curse  (see  Lev.  i,  4;  iii,  2;  viii,  14 
aq. ;  xyi,  21, 24).  Bilhr  {SynUtoWs  d,  tnosaiachen  CulłuSy 
ii,  839)  rejects  this  idea  of  transmission  of  sin  by  the 
laying  on  of  hands  on  the  expiatory  yictim ;  he  consid- 
ers  it  only  as  a  symbol  of  *' renunciation  of  one's  own," 
and  argues  from  the  fact  of  a  like  imposition  of  hands 
in  the  case  of  thanksgiying  ofTerings.  According  to 
Hofmann  {Schr^ftbeweU^  ii,  1,  p.  155),  the  imposition  of 
hands  in  sacrifices  signified  the  power  of  the  party  of- 
fering it  over  the  life  of  the  yictim.  Baumgarten,  on 
the  contrary  (Commentar  z,  Penłateuch,  i,  2,  p.  180),  and 
Kiutz  (Das  mosaische  Opfer^  p.  70;  Geach.  d,  A.  B,  p. 
832),  maintain  the  idea  of  transmission.  The  imposi- 
tion of  hands  on  all  offerings  presents  no  difBculty  when 
we  adhere  to  the  generał  notion  of  transmiasion ;  the 
Łlianlc8giving  offering  is  by  it  madę  tlie  recipient  of  the 
giver*s  feelłngs.  This  idea  of  transmission  is  especially 
manifest  ui  the  im}io8ition  of  hands  in  consecration  or 
blessing.  Thus,  "  in  the  Old  Testament,  Jacob  accom- 
panies  lus  blessing  to  Ephraim  and  Manasseh  w^ith  im- 
position of  liands  (Gen.  idyUi,  14) ;  Joshua  is  ordoined 
in  the  room  of  Moses  by  imposition  of  łiands  (Numb. 
xxvii,  18;  Dcut.  xxxiv,  9);  cures  seem  to  have  been 
wrought  by  the  propbets  by  imposition  of  hands  (2 
Kings  V,  11) ;  and  the  high-priest,  in  giving  his  solemn 
l>enediction,  stretched  out  his  hands  over  the  peopic 
(Lev.  ix,  22).  The  same  form  was  used  by  our  Lord  in 
blessing,  and  occasionally  in  healing,  and  it  was  plainly 
regarded  by  the  Jews  as  customary  or  befitting  (Matt 
xix,  13 ;  Mark  yiii,  23 ;  x,  16).  One  of  the  promises  at 
the  end  of  Mark'8  Crospel  to  Christ^s  fuUowers  is  that 
they  should  cure  the  sick  by  laying  on  of  hands  (Mark 
xvi,  18) ;  and  accordingly  we  find  that  Saul  receiyed  his 
sight  (Acta  ix,  17),  and  Publius's  father  was  healed  of 
liis  fever  (Acts  xxviii,  8)  by  imposition  of  hands." 

II.  Classification  o/BUdical  Uses, — ^^lore  particiilarly, 
the  imposition  of  łumds,  in  the  O.T.,  may  be  diyided 
into  (1)  the  patriarchal-typicał  laying  on  of  liands  in 
blessing;  (2)  the  legał-symbolical, in  consecration  to  of- 
fice ;  and  (3)  the  prophetico-dynamical  in  healing.  The 
formcr  (see  Gen.  xlviii,  14)  is  a  sort  of  typical  trans- 
mission of  a  promised  hereditary  blessing  continued, 
through  the  party  thus  błessed,  on  his  posterity;  the 
second  (see  £xod.  xxix,  10 ;  Numb.  xxvii,  18)  is  a  legał 
figuratiye  imparting  of  the  rights  of  office,  and  a  prom- 
ise  of  the  blessing  attached  to  it;  the  third  is  the  trans- 
mission of  a  miraculous  healing  power  for  the  restora- 
tion  of  life  (2  Kings  iv,  34).  Yet  in  the  latter  case  we 
must  notice  that  the  prophet  put  his  hands  on  the 
luinds  of  the  child,  and  coyered  it  with  his  whole  body. 
Thus  tłiis  transmission  points  us,  in  its  yet  imperfect 
sute,  to  the  N.  Test.  The  N.-T.  imposition  of  hands  is 
symbolical  of  the  transmission  of  spirit  and  life.  Herę, 
as  in  the  O.  T.,  we  find  three  uses:  (1)  the  spiritual-pa- 
triarchai  imposition  of  handa  by  our  Lord  and  the  apoe- 


tles;  (2)  the  spiritoal- legał,  or  offidai  imposition  «f 
hands ;  (8)  the  healing  imposition  of  hands.  Christ  łap 
his  hands  on  the  sufTerers,  and  they  are  cmed.  Bot  tłw 
bodily  gifts  he  thus  transmits  are  joined  to  ą>izitinl 
gifts;  he  cures  under  the  condition  of  faith  (Markri, 
5).  The  morę  the  people  beoome  imbned  with  the  ida 
that  the  curatiye  effects  aie  connecCed  with  the  mate- 
riał imposition  of  liands,  the  morę  he  opeiatea  withoat 
it  (Mark  y,  28, 41 ;  yii,  82).  Sometimes  he  healed  onły 
by  a  word.  The  fuli  gprant  of  his  Spiiit  and  of  his  caU- 
ing  he  represented  in  a  real,  but  S3rmbolical  mauner, 
when  he  extended  his  hands  oyer  his  apoatkse  in  bless- 
ing at  the  Mount  of  Oliyes  (Lnke  xxiy,  60).  This  im- 
position of  the  hands  of  the  Lord  on  his  apostles,  in  eon- 
nection  with  the  imparting  of  his  Siurit,  is  tłie  somte 
of  the  aposloUcal  imposition  of  liands.  It  was  ałso 
originałły  a  blending  of  the  symbol  and  ita  foliiłment 
(see  Acts  yiii,  17),  aa  welł  as  of  the  bodily  and  spiiitnal 
imparting  of  life  (Acts  ix,  17).  From  this  generał  im- 
position of  hands,  nnder  which  Christians  receiyed  the 
baptism  of  the  Spińt,  came  the  oiBcial,  apostolic  impo- 
sition of  hands  (Acta  xiii,  8 ;  1  Tim.  iy,  14).  At  the 
same  time,  the  example  of  Comełins  (Acta  x)  showt 
tłiat  the  apostolical  imparting  of  the  Hoły  Spirit  was 
not  resLricted  to  the  forms  of  offidai  or  eyen  goiend  im- 
position of  hands. 

III.  EodeHaaHoal  ITsei. — In  the  early  Church,tbe  im- 
position of  hands  was  praetiaed  in  reoeiying  catechn- 
mens,  in  baptism,  in  confiimation,  and  in  ordinatioa 
Cyprian  deriyes  its  use  from  apostolical  practice  {£f. 
72,  ad  3tqfhan, ;  Ep,  78,  ad  JubaaiL) ;  so  also  does  Aa- 
gustine  {De  Bapt.  iii,  16).  That  the  imposition  of 
hands  in  receiying  catechumena  was  different  from  that 
used  in  baptism,  etc,  is  shown  by  Bingbam  (bk.  x,  eh. 
i).  Its  use  in  baptism  was  generał  aa  early  as  Teitul- 
lian'8  time  (Coleman,  Ancient  Chrisłiamtjf,  eh.  xix,  §  4> 
This  probably  gaye  rise  to  confirmation.  Aftcr  that 
rite  was  introduoed,  imposition  of  hands  became  iti 
chief  ceremony.  It  was  generally  performed  by  the 
bishop,  but  elders  were  authoiized  to  do  it  in  certain 
cases,  in  subordination  to  the  bishop.    See  Cosstsma.- 

TION. 

In  ordination,  the  imposition  of  handa  was  an  eseen- 
tial  part  of  the  ceremony  from  an  early  period,  but  noc 
in  the  ordination  of  any  dass  bełow  deacons.    See  On- 

DINATION. 

In  the  modem  Chnrch,  imposition  of  hands  is  oonad- 
ered  by  the  Komanists  as  an  essential  part  of  the  aaaa- 
ments  of  baptism,  ordination,  and  confirmation  (CanaL 
Trident.  Sess.  xxiii).  "As  in  the  andent  Church  this 
rite  existed  in  two  forma— the  actual  laying  on  of  hands, 
which  was  calłed  chirotheńa;  and  tlie  extending  the 
hand  oyer  or  towards  the  person,  which  was  stykd  dn- 
rottmia — so  in  the  Boman  Catholic  Church  the  former 
is  retained  as  an  essential  part  of  the  sacramenta  of  con- 
firmation and  hoIy  orders ;  the  latter  is  eropłoyed  in  the 
administrati(»i  of  the  priestły  absolution.  Ijoth  fonai 
are  famiłiarly  used  in  blessing.  In  the  ma«,  also,  pie- 
yious  to  the  consecration  of  the  elements  of  bread  and 
winę,  the  priest  extend8  his  hands  oyer  them,  repeatiiig 
at  the  same  time  the  preparatory  prayer  of  btesang" 
(WeŁzer's  Kircken-Lerikom,  iy,  863).  The  Chnrch  of 
England  and  the  Protestant  Episcopal  Church  emploj 
it  as  a  symbolical  act,  in  confinnation  and  ordination; 
the  Methodist  Episcopal,  the  Ftesbyterian,  and  Congie- 
gational  churches  employ  it  only  in  ordination.  Great 
stress  is  also  laid  on  the  performance  of  this  rite  in  tłie 
Greek  Church.  In  the  Russo-Greek  Church  there  cs- 
ist  some  sects  without  priesłs,  "because  in  their  idea  the 
gift  of  consecration  by  laying  on  of  hands,  which  had 
continued  from  the  apostles  down  to  Nicon  (q.  v.),  had 
been  lost  by  the  apostacy  of  Nicon,  and  of  the  iiagy 
seduced  by  him,  and  thus  all  genuine  priesthood  kiad 
beoome  impossible"  (Eckardt,  Modem  Jhtuia,  p.  261  są., 
London,  1870, 8vo).  It  is  paiticułariy  pkastnii^  to  sotioe 
the  many  ingenious  deyices  of  theae  sects  to  proride  for 
a  priesthood  descended  iiom  the  apoatlcsy  in  onkr  to 


mposT 


623 


IMPOTENCY 


enable  at  least  the  performance  of  the  rite  of  marriage, 
which  they  do  not  legalize  unlesti  performed  by  an  ac- 
cepłed  prieau  The  Jews  aasert  that  the  laying  on  of 
hands,  together  with  the  Sanhedrim,  ceased  after  the 
death  of  Kabbi  Uillel,  the  "  prince,"  who  flourished  in  the 
4th  oentury.  See  Herzog,  Becd-Encyldop,  v,  504 ;  Bing- 
ham,  Orig,  EccUs,  bk.  ii,  eh.  xxii ;  bk.  iii,  eh.  i ;  bk.  xii, 
eh.  iii ;  Coleman,  AnciaU  Chriitiamty,  p.  122,  869,  411 ; 
Apott.  CMd  PrimtL  Ch,  (Phila.  1869,  12mo),  p.  185  są. ; 
Augnsti,  Hcutdb,  d,  Archdoloffie,  iii,  222;  Hall,  Works, 
ii,  876 ;  B.  Baur,  in  the  Stud,  und  Krit,  1865,  p.  843  8q. ; 
Kothe,  A  nf3ace  d.  chrisU,  Kirche,  p.  161,  etc  For  mon- 
ographa,  see  Yolbeding,  Itidex,  p.  74, 145.     See  Bene- 

DICTION. 

ImpoBt  (Lat  imponhu)  ia  an  architectural  term  for 
the  horizontal  mouldings  or  capitals  on  the  top  of  a  pi- 
laster,  pillar,  or  pier,  from  which  an  arch  springs.  ^  In 
claaBical  architecture  the  form  yaries  in  the  several  or- 
ders;  sometimes  the  entablature  of  an  order  senres  for 
the  impost  of  an  arch.  In  Middle-Age  architecture  im- 
posts  Tary  according  to  the  style;  on  pillars  and  the 
smali  shafts  in  the  jambs  of  doorways,  windows,  etc, 
they  are  usoally  complete  capUaUr  See  Parker,  Con- 
ciae  Glossartf  of  A  rchiUcturef  p.  128 ;  Wolcott,  Sacred 
Arckaeohgjfj  p.  325. 


Barton  Seagraye,  c!r.  llCO. 

Impoator,  Religious,  a  nime  appropriately  given 
to  soch  as  pretend  to  an  extraor  Jiuary  commission  from 
heaTen,  and  who  terrify  the  people  with  false  denuncia- 
tions  of  judgmenta.  Too  many  of  these  have  abounded 
in  almoat  all  ages.  They  are  punishable  in  some  coun- 
trics  with  fine,  imprisonment,  and  corporeal  punishment. 
^Back,  ThtoL  Dicłionary,  s.  v. 

ImpostorlbuB.     See  Impostors,  The  three. 

Impostors,  The  three  (Jmpoatoi-ibus,  De  tnłms). 
Towards  the  end  of  the  lOth  century  a  rumor  became 
current  that  there  had  appeared  a  book  uuder  the  above 
title,  in  which  the  author  attempted  to  prove  that  the 
world  had  been  groasly  deceived  three  times  (by  the 
foondera  of  the  three  principal  religions).  In  the  latter 
part  of  the  13th  century  this  supposed  work  attracted 
great  attention  among  theologians  and  aacana,  particu- 
lariy  on  account  of  the  mystery  which  shrouded  its  or- 
igin,  \ti  author,  and  even  its  contents,  for  it  was  not  only 
wellnigh  impossible  to  procure  a  copy  of  the  book,  but 
eren  the  contents  were  hardly  known  definitely  to  any- 
body.  Towards  the  close  of  the  16th  century  the  rumors 
ooncemingthisbook  wereagain  set  onfoot.  The  most 
cxtniyagant  ideas  preyailed,  and  the  authorship  of  the 
onknown  work  was  in  tum  attributed  to  the  cmperors 
Frederick  I  and  II,  Ayerrhoes,  Petrus  a  A'inei8,  Alphon- 
80  X,  king  of  Castilc,  Boccaccio,  Poggio,  L,  Aretin,  Pom- 
ponazzio,  Machiayclli,  Erasmus,  P.  Arctino,  Ochinus, 
Senretas,  Rabelais,  Gruetus,  Bamaud,  Muret,  Nachti- 
gall,  Giordano  Bnmo,  Campanella,  Milton,  etc  It  is 
DO  wondcr  that  soon  a  number  of  books,  entirely  differ- 
ent  from  each  other,  madę  their  appearance,  each  claim- 
ing  to  be  the  original  work.  The  four  most  important 
were :  1.  Yincentii  Panurgi  Epistoła  ad  cL  rirum  Joan- 
nem  BoftUtum  Morinum  de  tribus  impostoribus  (Paris, 


1644) ;  2.  De  tribus  Nebuhaibus  (namely,  Thomas  Ani- 
ello,  Oliyer  Cromwell,  Julius  Mazarinus) ;  8.  History  of 
the  three  famous  Impostors  (Lond.  1667) ;  4.  Christiani 
Kortholdi  Liber  de  tribus  mognis  impostoribus  (nempe 
Eduardo  Herbert  de  Cherbury,  Thoma  Hobbes,  et  Ben- 
edicto  de  Spinosa)  (Kiloni,  1680).  In  1716  an  unknown 
person  of  Haag  claimed  to  poesess  the  original  in  his 
library,  and  that  it  was  the  work  of  Petrus  a  Yineis, 
containing  the  thoughts  of  the  emperor  Frederick  II, 
and  written  in  1230.  Seyeral  copies  of  this  work  ap- 
peared soon  after  in  French ;  the  owner  claimed  to  haye 
madę  a  yow  not  to  copy  the  book,  which,  howeyer,  did 
not  preyent  him  from  translating  it.  A  German  cAer- 
alier  d'industrie  named  Ferber  iinally  published  a  work 
under  the  title  of  De  tribus  impostor^us,  des  trois  impos- 
teurs  (Francfort  sur  le  Main,  1721),  but  it  was  found  to 
be  only  the  work  LEsprii  de  Spinozę  (which  had  been 
published  in  MS.  at  the  beginning  of  the  18th  centuiy) 
under  a  new  name.  In  the  mean  time  there  appeaied 
a  Latin  work  of  the  same  title,  the  MS.  of  which  bears 
the  datę  of  1598.  This  may  be  the  original  work, 
though  probably  the  datę  bas  been  altcred,  as  it  bears 
intenial  eyidence  of  haying  been  written  about  1556  or 
1560.  Nothing  is  known  of  its  author,  except  that, 
judging  from  the  bad  Latin  in  which  it  is  written,  he 
could  not  haye  belonged  to  the  educatcd  classes.  Some 
think  that  the  original  title  could  hardly  haye  been  De 
tribus  impostoribus,  as  it  does  not  cali  either  of  the  found- 
ers  of  the  three  religions— Moses,  Christ,  Mohammed— 
outright  impostors,  but  that  the  real  title  must  haye 
been  De  imposturis  reliffionum,  The  existing  MSS.  pre- 
sent  two  different  recensions :  one,  the  shortest,  bears 
the  latter  title ;  the  other,  which  is  bngcr,  and  is  eW- 
dently  an  enlarged  and  altered  edition,  has  the  title  De 
tribus  impostor&us.  Yet,  with  the  exception  of  a  few 
unimportant  passages,  the  two  are  essentially  alike. 

The  author  attacks  the  morality  of  the  Jews  and  of  the 
Christians,  saying  that  Abraham  wished  to  honor  God 
by  offering  up  human  sacrifices,  and  that  the  Christians 
wickedly  pray  for  the  destruption  of  their  enemies;  that 
polygamy  is  permitted  by  Moses,  and  even  by  some  of 
the  passages  of  the  N.  T.,  etc  "  That  twice  two  make 
four  is  so  self-eyident  that  there  is  no  neccssity  of  bring^ 
ing  all  the  mathematicians  together  to  demonstrate  it ; 
but  religions  are  so  diversiiied  that  they  do  not  agree 
either  in  the  premises,  the  arguments,  or  the  conclu- 
sions,  and  any  one  brought  up  in  one  of  them  is  likely 
to  oontinuc  to  belieye  his  own,  whaterer  it  be,  the  only 
true  religion,  to  the  exclusion  of  all  others."  Heńce  the 
author  rejects  equally  the  Jewish,  Christian,  and  Mo- 
hammedan  religions,  and  proposes  that  every  point  of 
belief  should  be  established  by  a  sj-stem  of  witnessea 
and  counter-witnesses,  forming  a  rcgular  processus  in 
infniłum,  See  Rosenkranz,  Der  Zweiftl  am  Glauben 
(Halle,  1830) ;  F.W.  Genthe,  De  impostura  relig,  breve 
compendium  (Lpz.  1883) ;  Prosper  Marchand,  Diet,  Jlis- 
torigue,  i,  812  sq. ;  Farrar,  Crit.  Ilist,  of  Free  Thought, 
p.  212  sq. ;  Mosheim,  Eccles,  Hist,  bk.  iii,  cent.  xiii,  pt. 
i,  ch.  ii,  p.  284,  notę  5 ;  Herzog,  Theol  Encyklop,  vi,  645 ; 
Am,  Presb.  Rev,  Jan.  1862, p.  164  sq.     (J.  H.\V.) 

Impotency,  the  want  of  procreative  power,  is,  ac- 
cording to  the  ecdesiastical  law  of  the  Roman  Catholic 
Church,  a  good  ground  for  either  of  the  two  parties  an- 
nulling  the  marriage,  if  the  impotency  exiflted  at  the 
time  the  contract  was  entered  into  (cap.  2,  8,  4,  X,  De 
friffidisy  4, 15).  But  the  defect  must  not  only  be  proyed 
by  competcnt  medical  adyisers,  but  aiso  prunounccd  by 
them  as  incurable  (cap.  iy,  14,  X,  De  probationibus,  ii, 
19;  cap..  6,  6,  7,  X,  De  frigidis,  iy,  15;  liesolutio  96  to 
Sess,  24  of  the  Tridentine  Council  of  1731, 1732,  in  the 
Leipzig  edition  by  Richter,  p.  258  sq.).  If  any  doubt 
arises  the  marriage  contract  continucs  in  forcc  three 
years  longer,  to  further  test  the  impotency  of  the  person 
so  accused.  At  the  expiration  of  this  additional  term 
of  trial  the  oath  of  one  or  both  of  the  parties  is  neces- 
sary  to  obtain  permisslon  for  separation.  The  oldest 
ecdesiastical  laws  of  the  Fh>te8tanta  follow  in  the  main 


IMPRECATION 


S24 


niPUTATION 


tbese  practioes  (oompare  658chen,  Doctrina  de  mairmo' 
nio,  notę  6,  p.  102-106;  Eichhorn,  KirchmrccJtł,  ii,  848; 
Peimanendcr,  Kirckenreckł,  p.  697;  Walter,  Kirchen^ 
rtdU,  p.  305).  In  Great  Britain  this  practice  ia  sanc- 
tioned  by  the  civil  law  of  the  land  (compare  Chamben, 
Encydop,  v,  627).  See  Herzog,  ReaJrEncyJdop.  iii,  474 
See  alflo  Matrimony.     (J.  H.  W.) 

Impreoatlon,  an  appeal  to  God,  invoking  his  cune 
apon  (1)  either  one^a  aelf  or  (2)  another.  For  die  former, 
see  Oath.  The  latter,  which  occurs  frequently  in  the 
flo-called  <*imprecatory  PsalmB**  (see  Edwarda,  On  the 
Dieine  ImpreoatioiUf  in  the  Bibliotheca  Sacroy  i,  97; 
Pretb.  Ouart,  JRev.  App.  1861 ;  British  and  For,  Ev,  Rev, 
July,  1864;  Heine,  Abiu.  Ps.  «r,  imprec,  Hehnat,  1789), 
ia  JuBtified  partly  by  the  atrocity  of  some  of  the  crimea 
execrated  (e.  g.  that  of  Doeg),  and  partly  by  the  fact 
of  apedal  authority  in  the  act  of  inspiration.    See  Ao 

CUR8ED;  CaNAANITB8,DE8TRUCTIONOP;  PSALMfl. 

ImprlBonment.    SeePRisoN;  Pukishmbmts. 

Improperia  (ŁaU  iaunis),  (1.)  Reproaches  of  Jeaua 
againat  the  Jewish  people.  See  Capernaum  ;  Jerusa- 
LEM.  (2.)  In  the  Roman  Catholic  ritual,  certain  yersea 
which  reproach  the  Jews  with  ingratitude,  and  which, 
while  the  priest  and  other  eodeaiastics  present  kisa  the 
croes,  are  chanted  by  two  singera  pereonifying  Christ,  in 
aach  a  manner  that  after  each  ver8e  one  chonis  repliea 
in  the  Greek  and  another  in  the  Latin,  praiaea  to  God; 
or  the  aocuaation  aa  uttered  by  the  prieata  u  repeated 
on  the  part  of  the  choir.— Pierer,  Unit,  Lex,  viii,  838. 
(J.H.W.) 

Impropriatlon,  in  Great  Britain,  a  panonage  or 
eodeaiastical  Uving,  the  profita  of  which  are  in  the  handa 
of  a  layman ;  in  which  caae  it  stauda  diatinguiahed  from 
appropriaHtm,  which  ia  where  the  profita  of  a  benefice 
are  in  the  handa  of  a  biahop,  ooUege,  etc,  though  the 
terma  are  now  uaed  promiscuoualy  in  England. 

Impnlae.  The  deairea  or  aenaationa  of  the  aoul  are 
manifeated  by  impulaea,  which  tend  either  to  the  reali- 
zation  of  aome  idea,  the  acJ^uirement  of  aomething  ex- 
terior  to  ouraelrea,  or  the  repulaion  of  aomething  diaa- 
greeable  or  hurtful.  The  impulaea  aocompanying  diyera 
thoughta  and  feelinga  roay,  according  to  their  expres- 
aion,  be  corporeal,  spiritual,  or  intellectual  We  naust 
be  careful  how  we  aie  guided  by  impulaea  in  rćligion. 
"Thcre  are  many,*'  aa  one  obeerrea,  "who  freąueiitly 
feel  stngular  impreaaiona  upon  their  minda,  and  are  iri- 
clined«to  pay  a  yery  atrict  regard  unto  them.  Yea, 
aome  carry  thia  point  ao  far  aa  to  make  it  almoat  the 
only  rule  of  their  judgment,  and  will  not  determine  any- 
thing  until  they  find  it  in  their  hearłs  to  do  ił,  aa  their 
phraae  ia.  Othera  take  it  for  granted  that  the  diyine 
mind  is  notified  to  them  by  aweet  or  powerful  imprea- 
aiona of  aome  paaaagea  of  aacred  writ.  There  are  othera 
who  are  determined  by  yisionary  roanifeatationa,  or  by 
the  impreaaiona  madę  in  dreama,  and  the  interpretationa 
they  put  upon  them.  AU  theae  thinga,  being  of  the  aame 
generał  naturę,  may  very  juatly  be  conaidered  together; 
and  it  ia  a  matter  of  doubt  with  many  how  far  theae 
thinga  are  to  be  regarded,  or  attended  to  by  ua,  and  how 
we  may  diadnguiah  any  diyine  impreaaiona  of  thia  kind 
from  the  dcluaiona  gf  the  tempter,  or  of  our  own  evil 
hearta.  But  whoeyer  makea  any  of  theae  thinga  hia 
rule  and  atandard,  foraakea  the  diyine  word ;  and  noth- 
ing  tenda  morę  to  make  persona  unhappy  in  themaelrea, 
unateady  in  their  conduct,  or  morę  dangeroualy  deluded 
in  their  practice,  than  paying  a  random  regard  to  theae 
impulaea,  aa  notificationa  of  the  diyine  will." — Buck,  The- 
oloff,  Dicłionaryy  a.  v. ;  Kant,  Grundlegung  z.  Młtaphysik 
der  Sitłen  (pref.  p.  10, 68) ;  Evang.K%rchenze%tung  (1853, 
No.  15) ;  Erach  u.  Gruber,  EncyUopadie ;  Herzog,  Real- 
Encyhhpadie,  ii,  126.     Sec  Enthusiasm  ;  Proyidence. 

Impurity,  want  of  that  regard  to  decency,  chaatity, 
or  holiness  which  our  duty  requires.  Iropuńty,  in  the 
law  of  Moaea,  ia  any  legał  defilement.  Of  theae  there 
were  aeyeral  aorta:  aome  were  yoluntary,  aa  the  touch- 


ing  a  dead  body,  or  any  animal  that  died  of  itnif ;  or 
any  creature  that  waa  eateemed  unclean ;  or  toocbing 
thinga  holy  by  one  who  waa  not  dean,  or  waa  not  t 
prieat;  the  touching  one  who  had  a  leproay,  ooe  who 
had  a  gonorrhcea,  or  who  waa  poUoted  by  a  dead  ciretH, 
etc  Sometimea  theae  impuritiea  were  inrołuntaiT,  u 
when  any  one  inadvertently  touched  bonea,  or  a  Bepnl- 
chre,  or  anything  polluted ;  or  feli  into  aucli  diseaaee  as 
poUute,  aa  the  leproay,  etc  The  beda,  dotbea,  and  mor- 
ablea  which  had  touched  anythiDg  unclean,  contrscicd 
alao  a  kind  of  impurity,  and  in  aome  caaca  oommanicated 
it  to  othera.  Theae  legał  poUutiona  were  geneially  re- 
moyed  by  bathing,  and  laated  no  longer  than  the  eren- 
ing.  The  peraon  polluted  plunged  orer  head  in  the 
water,  and  either  had  hia  clothea  on  when  he  did  bo,ot 
waahed  himaelf  and  hia  clothea  aeparately.  Other  pol- 
lutiona  continued  aeyen  daya,  aa  that  which  was  con- 
tracted  by  touching  a  dead  body.  Some  impurities  last- 
ed  forty  or  fiffcy  daya,  aa  that  of  women  who  were  lately 
deliyered,  who  were  unclean  forty  daya  after  the  birth  of 
a  boy,  and  fifty  after  the  birth  of  a  girl.  Othera,  again, 
laated  till  the  person  waa  cured.  Many  of  theae  poUu- 
tiona were  expiatcd  by  aacrificca,  and  othera  by  a  ceitain 
water  or  lye  madę  with  the  ashea  of  a  red  heifer  sacri- 
flced  on  the  great  day  of  expiation.  When  the  Icper 
waa  cured,  he  went  to  the  Tempie  and  oifered  a  aacrióce 
of  two  biida,  one  of  which  waa  killed,  and  the  other  set 
at  liberty.  He  who  had  touched  a  dead  body,  oar  had 
been  preaent  at  a  funeral,  waa  to  be  purified  with  the 
water  of  expiation,  and  thia  upon  pain  of  death.  The 
woman  who  had  been  deliyered  offered  a  turtle  and  s 
lamb  for  her  expiation;  or,if  ahe  waa  poor,  two  turtles, 
or  two  young  pigeona.  Theae  impuritiea,  which  the 
law  of  Moaea  haa  expreaaed  with  the  greateat  accuracy 
and  care,  were  only  figurea  of  other  mora  important 
impuritiea,  auch  aa  the  aina  and  iniquitie8  committcd 
againat  God,  or  faulta  committed  againat  our  neighbor. 
The  aainta  and  propheta  of  the  Old  Testament  were  sen- 
aible  of  thia ;  and  our  Sayiour,  in  the  Gospel,  has  atrofogly 
inculcated  that  they  are  not  outward  and  corporeal  pol- 
lutions  which  rendcr  us  unacceptable  to  God,  but  such 
inward  pollutiona  aa  infect  the  soul,  and  are  \'iQlation9  of 
j  ustioe,  truth,  and  charity .— Buck,  ThtoL  Dicdonatyf  &  r. 
See  llNCUSAinncss. 

Imputatlon,  in  the  O.  T.  n^n,  in  the  N.  T.  \oyi' 
Cofiac,  is  employed  in  the  Scriptures  to  deńgnate  any 
action,  word,  or  thing,  aa  aooounted  or  reckoned  to  a 
person ;  and  in  all  these  it  ia  unquestioni^]y  used  with 
referenoe  to  one's  oum  doings,  words,  or  actiona,  and  not 
with  referenoe  to  those  of  a  second  peraon  (cmnp.  G«n. 
xy,  6 ;  Psa.  cy,  81 ;  Numb.  xxv,  6;  xyiu,27 ;  2  Sam.  xix, 
19 ;  Psa.  xxxi,  2 ;  Lev.  "łńi,  18 ;  xyii,  4 ;  Proy.  xxyii,  14 ; 
2  Cor.  y,  19;  2  Tim,  iy,  16;  Kom.  iv,  8-23;  GaL  iii,  6; 
Jas.  ii,  28).  The  word  imjmłation  is,  howeyer,  used  for 
a  certain  theological  theory,  which  teaches  that  (1)  the 
sin  of  Adam  is  so  attributed  to  man  aa  to  be  considered, 
in  the  diyine  cuunsels,  as  his  own,  and  to  render  bim 
guilty  of  it ;  (2)  that,  in  the  Christian  plan  of  salyatioo, 
the  righteousness  of  Christ  is  ao  attributed  to  man  aa  to  ' 
be  conaidered  hia  own,  and  that  he  ia  therefore  juadficd 
by  it.    See  Fall  of  Mak. 

Ł  ''  Whateyer  diyersity  there  may  exist  in  the  opin- 
iona  of  theologiana  respccting  imputation,  when  they 
come  to  expre8s  their  own  yiews  definitely,  they  will 
yet,  for  the  most  part,  agrce  that  the  pbrasc  God  im- 
putes  the  ńn  of  our  progeniłort  to  their  potiinrihf,  means 
that  for  the  eint  committed  hjf  our  proffenitort  Godpia- 
ishes  their  descendanU,  The  term  to  impułe  ia  used  io 
difTerent  senses.  (a.)  It  is  sald  of  a  creditor,  who  chaiges 
something  to  hia  debtor  aa  debt,  e.  g.  Philem.  ver.  18. 
(b.)  It  ia  transferied  to  humanjudffment  when  any  one 
ia  puniahed,  or  declarcd  deserying  of  pnniahmenL  Crime 
ia  regarded  aa  a  debł,  which  muat  be  cancelled  partly  by 
actual  reatitution  and  partly  by  punisbment.  (r.)  This 
now  ia  applied  to  God,  who  imputea  sin  when  be  pro- 
nounoes  men  guilty,  and  tieata  them  accocdingly,  i.  tk, 


DfPUTATION 


525 


mPUTATION 


wben  he  actaally  punishefl  the  sin  of  men  (V*I9  3t7n, 
\oylZta9at  afŁapTiav,  Psa.  xxxii,  2).  The  one  punish- 
ed  is  called  *|i9  KiC3,  in  oppodtion  to  one  to  whom 
nf^^S?  avn,  who  is  rewarded  (Psa.  cyi,  81 ;  Rom.  iy, 
3r(knapp,rA«fo^,§76). 

1.  The  stronghold  of  the  doctrine  of  impatation,  with 
thoae  who  maintain  the  high  Calyinisdc  sense  of  that 
tenet,  is  Rom.  v,  12-19.  **  The  greatest  difficulties  with 
respect  to  this  doctrine  hare  arisen  from  the  fact  that 
many  have  treated  what  is  said  by  Paul  in  the  fifth  of 
Romans— a  paasage  whoUy  poptilafi  and  anything  bat 
formally  exact  and  didactic— in  a  leamed  and  philosoph- 
ical  manner,  and  hare  defined  tenns  used  by  him  in  a 
loose  and  popular  way  by  logical  and  scholastic  distinc- 
tiona.  Paul  shows,  in  substance,  that  all  men  are  re- 
gaidcd  and  ponished  by  €rod  as  ńnners,  and  that  the 
gFound  of  this  lies  in  the  act  of  one  man ;  as,  on  the 
contraiy,  ddireranoe  from  punishment  depends  also 
upon  one  man,  Jesus  Christ.  If  the  words  of  Paul  are 
not  penrerted,  it  most  be  allowed  that  in  Rom.  v,  12-14 
he  thos  reasons:  The  cause  of  the  uniyersal  mortality 
of  the  haman  race  Ues  in  Adamus  tnmsgresńon.  He 
ńnned,  and  so  became  mortaL  Other  men  are  regarded 
and  treated  by  God  as  punishable,  because  they  are  the 
posteńty  of  Adam,  the  fint  transgressor,  and  consequent^ 
ly  they  too  are  mortal.  Should  it  now  be  objected,  that 
the  men  who  liyed  from  Adam  to  Moees  roight  them- 
selyes  hsye  personally  ainnedy  and  so  haye  been  punish- 
ed  with  death  on  their  oMm  account,  it  might  be  an- 
swered  that  thoee  who  liyed  before  the  time  of  Moses 
had  no  espress  and  positiye  law  which  threatened  the 
pnnishment  of  sin,  like  those  who  liyed  after  Moees. 
The  positiye  law  of  Moses  was  not  as  yet  giyen ;  they 
could  not,  oonsequently,  be  panished  on  account  of  their 
own  transgreasions,  as  no  law  was  as  yet  giyen  to  them 
(yer.  14).  Still  they  must  die,  Itke  Adam,  who  trans- 
gressed  a  positiye  law.  Hence  their  mortality  must 
haye  another  cause,  and  this  is  to  be  sought  in  the  im- 
putation  of  Adam*s  transgression.  In  the  same  way,  the 
gnmnd  of  the  justiflcation  of  man  lies  not  in  himself, 
but  in  Christ,  the  second  Adam. 

^  We  find  that  the  passage  in  Rom.  y  was  neyer  un- 
derstood  in  the  ancient  Grecian  Church,  down  to  the  4th 
century,  to  teach  in^nUatkm  in  a  strictly  philosophical 
and  jadicial  sense ;  certainly  Origen,  and  the  writers  im> 
mediately  suoceeding  him,  exhibit  nothing  of  this  opin- 
ion.  They  regard  bodify  death  as  a  cotuequence  of  the 
sin  of  Adam,  and  not  as  ŁpunUhmentj  in  the  strict  and 
pfoper  sense  of  this  term.  Thus  Chrysostom  says,  upon 
Rom.  y,  12,  'EKtivov  irtirwroc  (A8afi),  ical  ou  fiĄ  ^- 
y&trrtę  awó  tov  Ęv\ov,  ytyóvainv  e(  tiuivov  ^njroi. 
Cyril  (Adt,  Anikroponu  c  8)  says,  Ol  ytyovónc  l(  ab- 
Tov  CAJafi),  <i»c  aifh  fOaprot),  f9<ipToi  ytyóvafitv. 

*'The  Lałin  Church,  on  the  other  hand,  was  the  prop- 
er  seat  of  the  strict  doctrine  of  imputation.  There  they 
began  to  interpret  the  words  of  Paul  as  if  he  were  a 
scholastic  and  logical  writer.  One  cause  of  their  mis- 
apprehending  so  entirely  the  spirit  of  this  passage  was, 
that  the  word  imputart  (a  word  in  common  use  among 
óyiliaas  and  in  Jadicial  alfain)  had  been  employed  in 
the  Latin  yeisions  in  rendering  yer.  18  of  Rom.  y ;  and 
that  i^'  (f  (yer.  12)  had  been  translated  tn  guOf  and  could 
refer,  as  they  supposed,  to  nobody  but  Adam.  This 
opinion  was  then  associated  with  some  peculiar  philo- 
sophical ideas  at  that  time  preyalent  in  the  West,  and 
from  the  whole  a  doctrine  de  in^utatione  was  formed,  in 
sense  wholly  unknown  to  the  Hebraws,  to  the  N.  T., 
and  to  the  Grecian  Church.  This  clearly  proyes  that 
the  Grecian  teachers,  e.  g.  those  in  Palestine,  took  sides 
with  Pelagios  against  the  teachers  of  the  African  Church. 

2.  **  Many  haye  inferred  the  Justioe  of  imputation  from 
the  sappoaitioD  that  Adam  was  not  only  the  tuUural  or 
9emi»al,  but  also  the  morał  head  of  the  human  race,  or 
CTen  its  repreteiitaiwe  andfederal  head.  They  suppose, 
aocordingly,  that  the  sin  of  Adam  is  imputed  to  us  on 
» pcindple  on  which  the  doings  of  the  head  of 


a  famOy,  or  of  the  plenipotentiary  of  a  state,  are  irnpa* 
ted  to  his  family  or  state,  although  they  had  no  person* 
al  agency  in  his  doings.  In  the  same  way  they  suppose 
Christ  took  the  pUce  of  all  men,  and  that  what  he  did 
is  inyntUd  to  them.  According  to  this  theory,  God  en- 
tered  into  a  Ua^e  or  awenani  with  Adam,  and  so  Adam 
represented  and  took  the  place  of  the  whole  haman  race. 
This  theory  was  inyented  by  some  schoolmen,  and  has 
been  adopted  by  many  in  the  Romish  and  Protestant 
Chureh  sinee  the  16th  century,  and  was  defended  eyen 
in  the  18th  century  by  some  Lutheimn  theologians,  aa 
Pfaif  of  Tubingen,  by  some  of  the  followers  of  Wolf  (e. 
g.  Carpsoy,  in  his  Comm.  de  ImputaHonefacti  proprii  et 
o/fflM),  and  by  Baumgarten,  in  his  Dogmatik,  and  dis- 
putation  *  de  impuiaHone  peooaH  A  dawuticL*  But  it  was 
more  particularly  fayored  by  the  Reibrmed  theologians, 
especially  by  the  disciples  of  Cocceius,  at  the  end  of  the 
i7th  and  commencemcnt  of  the  18th  century,  e.  g.  by 
Witsius,  in  his  OCconomia  fmderuffu,  They  app^  to 
Hos.  yi,  7,  <  They  transgressed  the  coyenant,  like  Adam,* 
i.  e.  broke  the  diyine  hues.  But  where  is  it  said  that 
Adam  ¥ras  the  federal  head,  and  that  his  transgression 
is  imputed  to  them?  On  thu  text  Morus  justly  ob- 
seryes, '  £st  mera  comparatio  Judnorum  peccantium  cum 
Adamo  peccante.'  Other  texts  are  also  dted  in  behalf 
of  this  opinion. 

**  But,  for  yarious  reasons,  this  theory  cannot  be  cor- 
rect. For  (a.)  the  deacendants  of  Adam  neyer  empow- 
ered  him  to  be  their  representatiye  and  to  act  in  their 
name.  (5.)  It  cannot  be  shown  from  the  Bibie  that 
Adam  was  informed  that  the  fate  of  all  his  posterity 
was  inyolyed  in  his  own.  (c.)  If  the  transgression  of 
Adam  is  impated,  by  right  of  coyenant,  to  all  his  pos- 
terity, then,  in  justioe,  all  their  transgressions  should  be 
again  imputed  to  him  as  the  guilty  cause  of  all  their 
misery  and  sin.  What  a  mass  of  guilt,  then,  would 
come  upon  Adam !  But  of  all  this  nothing  is  said  in 
the  Scriptures.  (d,)  The  imputation  of  the  righteous- 
ness  of  Christ  cannot  be  all^^  in  support  of  this  the- 
ory;  for  this  is  imputed  to  men  only  by  their  own  will 
and  consenL  This  hypothesia  has  been  opposed,  with 
good  reason,  by  John  Taylor,  in  his  work  on  original 
nn." 

8.  ^  Others  endeayor  to  dednoe  the  doctrine  of  impu- 
tation from  the  scieniia  media  of  God,  or  from  his  fore- 
knowledge  of  what  is  conditionally  possible.  The  sin 
of  Adam,  they  say,  is  impated  to  us  because  God  fore- 
saw  that  each  one  of  us  woukl  haye  committed  it  if  he 
had  been  in  Adam*s  stead,  or  plaoed  in  his  drcumstances. 
Eyen  Angustine  says  that  the  sin  of  Adam  is  imputed 
to  us  propłer  coneetuionemj  or  amfeimtm  prmeun^ftum, 
This  theory  has  been  adyanced,  in  modem  times,  by 
Reuaeh,  in  his  Ititroduetio  m  TheoŁogiam  revelatam,  and 
in  Bremąueirs  woric  DU  gute  Sache  Goties,  bet  Zurech- 
nung  dee  FaU$  (Jena,  1749).  But  it  is  a  new  sort  of 
justioe  which  would  allow  os  to  be  punished  for  sins 
which  we  neyer  committed,  or  neyer  designed  to  oom- 
mit,  but  only  might  poesibly  haye  committed  nnder  cer- 
tain  circumstanoes.  Think  a  moment  how  many  sins 
we  all  should  haye  committed  if  God  had  suifered  us  to 
come  into  drcumstances  of  seyere  temptation.  An  In- 
nocent man  might,  by  this  rule,  be  punished  as  a  mur- 
derer  because,  had  he  liyed  at  Pftris  on  St  Bartholo- 
mew*s  night,  in  1672,  he  might,  from  mistaken  zeal, 
haye  killed  a  heretic** 

II.  **  Since  nonę  of  these  hypotheses  satisfactorily  ex- 
plain  the  matter,  the  greater  part  of  the  moderate  and 
Biblical  theologians  of  the  Protestant  Church  are  con- 
tent  with  saying,  what  is  manifestly  the  doctrine  of  the 
Bibie,  that  the  imputation  of  Adam's  sin  consists  in  the 
preyiiling  mortaUbf  of  the  haman  race,  and  that  this  is 
not  to  be  regarded  aa  impuiaiion  in  the  strict  jadicial 
sense,  but  rather  as  the  conseąuence  of  Adam*s  trans- 
gression'* (Knapp,  Theologg,  §  76). 

III.  '*  The  enlightened  adyocates  of  imputation  do  af- 
ter all  disclaim  the  actual  transfer  of  Adam's  sin  to  his 
posterity.    They  aro  well  aware  that  the  haman  mind 


IMPUTATION 


626 


mPUTATIOIf 


cazmot  be  forced  up  to  such  a  point  aa  this.  Bat  they 
do  atill  urgently  contend  for  Uie  idea  that  all  Adam's 
pOBteńty  aie  pufdshed  for  his  sin,  althongh  they  did  not, 
in  fact,  oommit  it ;  and  that  in  thia  aense,  therefore,  thęy 
are  all  gnilty  of  it.  Torretin^a  view  ia,  that  Adam*a  sin 
imputed  is  the  ground  or  cauae  why  men  are  bom  ¥rith 
original  sin  inhisrentj  L  e.  with  natural  deprayity;  and 
thia  is,  in  his  view,  the  punishmaU  inflictcMl  becauae  of 
Adam's  sin  imputed  to  them.  And  with  him  many  oth- 
era  agree.  But  Calvin,  Edwarda,  Stapfer,  and  othera,  re- 
ject  the  doctiine  of  the  real  imputation  of  Adam'a  sin 
to  hia  poaterity,  while  they  maintain  that  native  inher- 
ent  deprayity  is  the  conaequenoe  of  it,which  ia  cbarge- 
able  to  ua  aa  ain.  Thia  Tnrretin  dedarea  to  be  no  tm^ 
putation  at  all,  L  e.  a  real  rejection  of  hia  doctrine.  Re- 
jecting  theae  viewa  of  Tuiretin,  then,  Edwarda,  in  order 
to  aocount  for  it  how  all  men  came  to  be  bom  with  mi- 
kertnt  ain,  labors  to  ahow  that  there  ia  a  phjfHcai  and 
ptychological  unity  between  Adam  and  all  hia  poaterity. 
According  to  him,  thia  would  account  for  the  commence' 
ment  of  native  deprayity,  and  when  commenced  it  ia  im- 
puted to  ua  as  ain,  and  therefore  puniahable,  on  legał 
ground,  with  temporal  and  etemal  evil.  But  Turretin 
makes  all  to  be  pumakment  finom  the  outaet,  and  that  on 
the  ground  of  the  ain  of  Adam,  which  ia  actually  impu- 
ted to  hia  deacendanta**  (Stuart  on  Romans^  y,  19,  p.  592). 
Dr.  H.  B.  Smith,  in  an  article  in  the  Christian  Union, 
takea  the  adyanced  ground  that  while  it  moat  be  eon  - 
oeded  *^  that  there  ia  a  proper  interpretation,"  and  that 
Adam'a  poaterity  do  inherit,  ''by  yirtue  of  their  anion 
with  him,  certain  penal  oonaeąuencea  of  the  great  apos- 
taay,"  man  can  be  "  delioere^^  Jfram  thete  evih  by  "  dicine 
craoe,"  and  *'  tkatfor  original  nn,  tnthout  ojctual  trans- 
gressioTif  no  one  will  be  consigned  to  everiasting  death" 
[italics  are  ours].  In  an  article  in  the  Princeton  Theo- 
logical  Essays  (i,  188  aą.),  a  member  of  the  Preabyterian 
Church  takea  even  morę  liberał  ground.  ''Y/e  know 
that  it  La  often  aaaerted  that  Auguatine  and  hia  follow- 

ers  held  the  peraonal  unity  of  Adam  and  hia  raoe 

Let  it  be  admitted  that  Auguatine  did  giye  thia  expla- 
pation  of  the  ground  of  imputation.  Do  we  reject  the 
doctrine  because  we  reject  the  reaaon  which  he  giyea  to 
juatify  and  explain  it?  .  .  .  .  It  ia  no  apecial  concem  of 
oura  what  Auguatine  held  on  thia  point. ....  Any  man 
who  holda  that  there  ia  auch  an  aacription  of  the  sin  of 
Adara  to  hia  poaterity  aa  to  be  the  ground  of  their  bear- 
ing  the  puniahment  of  that  sin,  holda  the  doctrine  of 
imputation,  whether  he  undertakea  to  juatify  thia  impu- 
tation mcrely  on  the  ground  that  we  are  the  childien  of 
Adam,  or  on  the  principle  of  repreaentation,  or  oftcien- 
Ha  media ;  or  whether  he  chooeea  to  phUoaophize  on  the 
naturę  of  unity  until  he  oonfounda  all  notiona  of  per- 
aonal identity,  aa  Preaident  Edwarda  appeara  to  haye 
done." 

lY.  The  queation  of  the  imputation  of  Chriat^a  actiye 
obedience  to  belieyera  ia  very  akilfuUy  treated  by  Wat- 
aon  (Tkeological  IngtituteSy  pt.  ii,  chap.  X2dii),  himaelf  a 
belieyer  in  the  doctrine  of  imputation  in  a  modiiied  way. 
We  giye  here  a  aummary  of  hia  atatement  of  the  aab- 
ject. 

There  are  three  opiniona  aa  to  imputation. 

(I.)  The  high  Calyinistic,  or  Antinomian  acheme, 
which  is,  that  "•  Chri8t'a  acHve  righteouaneaa  ia  imputed 
anto  ua  aa  oura."  In  anawer  to  thia,  we  aay,  1.  It  ia  no- 
where  stated  in  Scripture.  2.  The  notion  here  attach- 
ed  to  Chrisfa  repretenHng  na  is  wholly  gratuitoua.  8. 
There  ia  no  weight  in  the  argument  that,  ''aa  our  sina 
were  accounted  hia,  ao  hia  righteouaneaa  waa  accounted 
ours;"  for  our  aina  were  neyer  ao  accounted  Chriat^s  aa 
that  he  did  them.  4.  The  doctrine  inyolyea  a  fiction 
and  imposaibility  inoonsiatent  with  the  diyine  attiibutea. 
5.  The  acts  of  Christ  were  of  a  lofUer  character  than 
can  be  aupposed  to  be  capable  of  being  the  acta  of  merę 
creatures.  6.  Finally,  and  fatally,  thia  doctrine  ahifta 
the  meritorious  cause  of  man'8  justificationirom  Chrisfs 
"obedience  unto  death"  to  Chriafa  actiye  obedience  to 
the  preoepts  of  the  law. 


(II.)  The  opinion  of  Calyin  himaelf,  and  many  oflus 
followera,  adopted  aiao  by  aome  Arminiana.    It  difiien 
inm  the  firat  in  not  aeparating  the  actiye  from  the  pia* 
aiye  righteouaneaa  of  Chriat,  for  auch  a  diatinction  wonU 
haye  been  inconaiatent  with  Calyin*a  notion  that  jnati- 
fication  ia  aimply  the  remiaaion  of  aina.     Thia  yiew  ii 
adopted,  with  certain  modifieaHomi  by  Arminiana  aad 
Wealey.    But  there  ia  a  aUght  difference,  which  aiiacs 
from  the  different  aenaea  in  which  the  wowd  tmpKtoKoa 
ia  uaed :  the  Arminian  employing  it  in  the  sense  of  ac> 
ooonting  to  the  belieyer  the  benefit  of  Chiiafs  rigbt- 
eouaneaa;  the  Calyiniat,  in  the  aenae  of  reckooiog  the 
righteouaneaa  of  Christ  aa  oura.    An  esaminatioo  of  the 
foUowing  paaaagea  wiU  ahow  that  thia  latter  notion  hai 
no  foundation  in  Scripture:  Paa.  xxjui,  1 ;  Jer.  xxiii, 6; 
Iaa.xly,24;  Bom.  iu, 21, 22 ;  lCor.i,30;  2Cor.y,21: 
Rom.  y,  18, 19.     In  connectaon  with  thia  laat  text,  it  ii 
aometimea  attempted  to  be  ahown  that,  aa  Adam'a  on  ii 
imputed  to  hia  poaterity,  ao  Chriat^a  obedience  ia  impu- 
ted to  thoae  that  are  aayed ;  but  (Goodwin,  On  Jtut^f- 
cation),  (1.)  The  Scripture  nowhere  affirma  either  the 
imputation  of  Adam'a  ain  to  hia  poaterity,  or  of  the  right- 
eouaneaa of  Chriat  to  thoae  that  belieye.    (2.)  To  impute 
ain,  in  Scripture  phraae,  ia  to  chaige  the  guilt  of  ain 
upon  a  man,  with  a  purpoae  to  puniah  him  for  it.    Aad 
(8.)  aa  to  the  imputation  of  Adamus  tinto  his  posteri/y- 
if  by  it  u  meant  aimply  that  the  guilt  of  Adamka  am  ii 
charged  upon  hia  whole  poaterity,  let  it  paaa;  bat  if  the 
meaning  be  that  all  Adam'a  poaterity  are  madę,  by  thia 
imputation, ybnn<ii/^  ainnera,  then  the  Scripturea  do  not 
juatify  it. 

(III.)  The  impntation  of /aith  for  righteousneea.  (o.) 
Proof  ot  thia  doctrine. —  1.  It  ia  expresaly  taoght  in 
Scripture  (Rom.  iy,  8-24,  etc) ;  nor  hjaith  used  in  theie 
paaaagea  by  metonymy  for  the  object  of  faith,  that  ii, 
the  righteouanesa  of  Chriat.  2.  The  testimony  of  the 
Church  to  thia  doctrine  haa  been  luiiform  from  the  ear- 
lieat  agea— Tertullian,  Origen,  Juatin  Martyr,  etc,  dom 
to  the  16th  oentury. 

(6.)  Erplanaiian  of  the  teima  of  the  proposition  that 
."  faith  ia  imputed  for  righteouaneaa."  1.  Ńiffhteoumm. 
To  be  accounted  righteout  ia,  in  the  atyle  of  the  apoatle 
Pani,  to  bejugtifiedf  where  there  haa  been  penonal  guiłt. 
2.  Faitk.  It  ia  not  faith  generally  oonaidered  that  ia 
imputed  to  ua  for  righteouaneaa,  but  faith  (tniat)  in  an 
atonement  offered  by  another  in  our  behalf.  3.  Impu- 
tation.  The  non-imputatlon  of  sin  to  a  ainner  b  ez- 
preasly  called  "  the  imputation  of  righteouaaesa  withont 
worka ;"  the  imputation  of  righteousnesa  ia,  then,  the 
non-puniahment  or  pardon  of  ain ;  and  by  imputing  (aith 
for  righteouaneaa,  the  apoatle  meana  predaely  the  aime 
thing. 

(r.)  The  ohjections  to  the  doctrine  of  the  impatation 
of  faith  for  righteouaneaa  admit  of  eaay  anawer.  1.  The 
papiata  err  in  taking  the  term  juatilication  to  signify 
the  making  men  morally  juat.  2.  A  aeoond  objectkn  is, 
that  if  belieying  ia  imputed  for  righteouanesa,  then  jna- 
tiflcatiou  ia  by  worka,  or  by  aomewhat  in  ouraelyeiu  In 
thia  objection,  the  teim  worki  ia  oaed  in  an  eqniyocal 
aenae.  8.  A  third  objection  ia,  that  thia  doctrine  giTCi 
occaaion  to  boaating.  But  (1.)  thia  objection  lies  with 
equal  atrength  againat  the  doctrine  of  imputed  rigbt- 
eouaneaa.  (2.)  The  faith  itaelf  ia  the  gift  of  God.  (S.) 
The  bleaainga  which  foUow  faith  are  giyen  in  recpect  to 
the  death  of  Christ.  (4.)  Faul  aaya  that  boaating  ia  ex- 
duded  by  the  law  of  faith. 

(IY.)  The  theologiana  who  aaaert  the  extreiiie  doc- 
trine of  imputation  are  ably  anawered  by  the  doaing 
worda  of  an  article  on  thia  aabject  in  Chamber9*a  Cydih' 
padia,  y,  529 :  "  To  impute  ain  ia  to  deal  with  a  mon  at 
a  sumer,  not  on  aocount  of  hia  own  act,  or  at  least  not 
primarily  on  thia  account,  but  on  acooont  of  the  act  of 
another;  and  to  impute  righteooaneaa  ia  to  deal  with 
man  aa  righteotia,  not  becauae  Aa  u  ao,  but  on  accoant 
of  the  righteouaneaa  of  Christ  rtdsoned  as  his,  and  re- 
ceiyed  by  faith  alone.  The  act  of  another  atanda  in 
both  casea  for  our  own  act,  and  we  are  idjadged — io  tba 


IMRAH 


527 


INABILITY 


ooe  case  oondemned,  in  the  other  acqiiitted — not  for 
whal  we  otmelYes  haye  done,  but  for  what  another  has 
done  for  ua. 

**  This  a  m  fair  illustration  of  the  tyranny  which  tech- 
nical  phraaes  are  apt  to  exerci8e  in  theology  aa  in  other 
thinga.  When  men  ooin  an  imperfect  phraae  to  ex- 
pcesB  a  spiritual  reality,  the  reality  is  apt  to  be  forgot- 
ten  in  the  phraae,  and  men  pUy  with  the  latter  aa  a 
logical  counter,  having  a  foice  and  meaning  of  ita  own. 
ImpntaHon  ofam  and  ńnputoCMm  of  righteouwnui  have 
in  thia  way  oome  to  repreaent  legał  or  pseudo-legal  pro- 
oessea  in  theology,  thiongh  the  working  oat  of  the  merę 
l^al  analogiea  auggestod  by  the  word.  But  the  true 
spiritnal  leality  which  liea  behind  the  phraaea  in  both 
eaaea  is  aimple  enongh.  Jmputation  oj  smis,  and  can 
be  nothing  e]ae  than,  the  ezpreaaion  of  the  apiritnal  uni- 
ty of  Adam  and  his  race.  Adam  'being  the  root  of  all 
mankind,'  the  atock  which  haa  grown  from  thia  root 
most  ahare  in  ita  degenerac}'.  The  hiw  of  apiritual  life, 
of  hiatorical  oontinuity,  impliea  thia,  and  it  requirea  no 
arbitrary  or  kgal  prooeaa,  therefore,  to  acoount  for  the 
ainfolneas  of  mankind  aa  deriyed  from  a  ainful  aource. 
We  are  ainners  becauae  Adam  fell.  The  fountain  hay- 
ing  beoome  poUuted,  the  atream  is  polluted.  We  are 
inyolyed  in  his  guilt,  and  couki  not  help  being  ao  by 
the  conditions  of  our  hiatorical  exiatence ;  but,  neyer- 
thełeaa^  hia  ain  is  not  our  ain,  and  cannot,  in  the  atrict 
aenae,  be  impnted  to  ua,  for  ain  ia  eaaentially  yoluntary 
in  eyery  case — an  act  of  aelf-will,  and  not  a  merę  qual- 
ity  of  naturę;  and  my  ain,  therefore,  cannot  be  anoth- 
eT*8,  nor  another^a  minę.  In  the  aame  manner,  the  high- 
eat  meaning  of  the  imputation  o(  the  righteoaaneas  of 
Christ  liea  in  the  apiritual  unity  of  the  belieyer  with 
Christ,  80  that  he  ia  one  with  Chiiat,  and  Christ  one 
with  him,  and  in  a  true  aenae  he  becomea  a  partaker  of 
tbe  divine  naturę.  The  notion  of  lega!  tranaference  is 
an  after-thonght — ^the  inyention  of  polemical  logie — and 
the  fact  itself  is  deeper  and  truer  than  the  phraae  that 
eoyen  it,  The  race  one  tcith  Adam^  the  believer  one 
leith  Chruty  are  the  ideaa  that  are  really  true  in  the 
phrases  w^ąiulcBtion  of  ńn  and  imputation  of  righteous' 
n€$$m  ^ 

See  Wataon,  InUkutes,  ii,  215, 241 ;  Knapp,  Theoiopy, 
§  76,  115;  Whitby,  De  imputoMone  Peccaii  Adamitici; 
Taylor,  Doctrine  of  OrigmeJ  Sin ;  Wealey,  SermonSf  i, 
171-4 ;  Edwarda,  On  original  Sm ;  Walch,*Z)e  Obedienłia 
CJiruti  AcŁwoa  (Gottingen,  1754, 4to);  Walch,  NeueHe 
ReHgionageschkhUy  iii,  811;  PrinceUm  Rev,  April,  1860; 
Baiid,  The  Fint  and  Second  Adam  (Philadelphia,  1860, 
12aio) ;  Princeton  Rq>ertory,  1880,  p.  425 ;  Whately,  Dif- 
Jieultiee  of  St.  Paui,  Easay  yi ;  Stuart,  On  Romom,  Ex- 
cunos  y,  yi.  See  also  the  artidea  Obedibscis  of 
Chbut;  Justification. 

Im'rall  (Heb.  Yimrah',  h^r7,  refractorinus ;  Sept 
*Itfipa),  one  of  the  aons  of  Zophah,  of  the  tribe  of  Asher 
(1  Chroń,  yii,  86).    B.C.  poet  1612.     See  Hotham. 

Im"!!  (Ueb.  Imri',  '^"0^  etocuent),  the  name  of two 


X.  (Sept.  omits  either  tius  or  the  preoed.  name,  giy- 
ing  only  'Aftpi;  Vulg.  Omrai),  The  aon  of  Bani,  and 
fatber  of  Omri  ot  Judah  (1  Chroń,  ix,  4).  B.C.  much 
antę  536. 

2.  (Sept.  'A^iapi, Vulg.  Amri),  The  "father''  of  Zac- 
cur,  which  latter  repaired  part  of  the  walls  of  Jeruaalem 
after  the  £xile  (Neh.  ui,  2).     aC.  anto  446. 

Ina,  king  of  the  Anglo-Saxon  kingdora  of  We88ex 
from  689  to  729,  celebrated  aa  the  principal  legialator  of 
the  Anglo-Saxona,  deaeryea  mention  here  on  account  of 
his  cnactments  in  fayor  of  religious  obaenrancea.  He 
was  tbe  firat  in  that  portion  of  England  who  madę  the 
lawa  of  Christianity  the  baaia  of  all  ciyil  and  aocial  re- 
lationa.  Particnlar  regard  was  paid  to  the  obseryance 
of  tbe  Sabbath  day ;  the  rite  of  baptism  was  ordered  to 
be  performed  on  infanta  within  thirty  days  afker  their 
faiith,  ttc  Uis  relation  with  the  aee  of  RÓme  was  yery 
iirtiinwte.    He  madę  aereral  Joumeya  to  the  Etemal 


City,  and  oiiginated  in  hia  dominiona  the  payment  of 
the  annual  tribute  of  the  **  Fetor'a  pence."  See  Biddle, 
Hiat.  of  the  Papaąf,  i,  310;  Baxter,  Ch,  llist,  p.  98  aq. 
(J.  H.W.) 

Inabllity,  in  theology,  ia  generally  uaed  to  denote 
want  of  power  to  do  the  will  of  God.  It  is  natural  ina- 
bility  when  the  hiuderance  ia  phyaical;  morcd  inability 
when  the  hinderance  Uea  in  the  will.  Thia  distinctbn 
haa  apecial  promlnence  in  American  theology,  and  haa 
been  the  aubject  of  a  great  deal  of  controyersy  between 
New-achool  and  Old-echool  OiWinists,  and  also  between 
Calyiniats  and  Arminians.  The  New-achool  contend 
that  man  is  natuiałly  able  to  obey  God,  but  morally  un- 
able.  The  Old-echool  deny  both  natural  and  morał 
ability.  The  Arminiana  deny  natural  and  morał,  but 
aaaert  ffraciout  ability  on  the  part  of  man  to  aocept 
CHirist,  and  ao  to  obey  God. 

The  following  paragnpha  preaent  weU  the  Old-school 
yiew  of  the  aubject.  "  It  haa  long  been  a  boast,  in  cer- 
tain  ąuartera,  that  it  ts  the  glory  of  American  theology 
that  it  haa  enabled  us  to  hołd  faat  to  the  doctrine  of  in- 
ability, and  yet  ao  to  explain  it  as  to  make  the  sinner 
inexcusable,  and  to  preyent  him  from  abusing  it  to  pur- 
poses  of  camal  apathy  and  desperation.  Thia  happy 
result,  which  the  Bibie  asoribes  to  the  Holy  Ghoat,  is 
suppoaed  to  be  aocompliahed  by  ahowing  men  that  they 
haye  fuli  natural  ability  to  fuliil  God'a  requirementa ; 
that  they  haye  no  inability,  but  aimply  a  want  of  will, 
or  purpoee,  or  indination,  to  obey  the  Goapel,  which 
they  haye  fuli  power  to  remoye,  if  they  toiU,  While 
thia  language  is  uaed  by  many  in  a  aenae  which,  as  ex- 
pUuned  by  themselyea,  at  all  eyenta  coherea  with  the 
doctrine  that  man  haa  loat  all  ability  of  will  to  any  spir- 
itual good  accompanying  aalyation,  it  ia  uaed  by  othera 
to  exprea8  and  yindieate  the  dogma  that  men  are  per- 
fectly  able  to  make  themaelycs  Christiana  at  pleasuze. 
This  ia  Pelagianism,  without  eyen  a  decent  diaguise. 
Yet  it  is  this  yery  claas  who  make  the  most  of  the  dis- 
tinction  in  ąuestion.  They  think  it  a  conyenient  and 
aafe  ahelter  for  their  doctrinea  that  man  can  make  him- 
aelf  a  new  heart.  Thia  claaa  claim  that  Edwarda  waa 
the  inyentor  of  this  distinction;  that  it  is  the  distin- 
guishing  chaiacteristic  and  apecial  property  of  hia  fol- 
lowera;  that  therefore  they  are  the  true  Edwardeana, 
becauae  they  are  the  patrona  and  inheritora  of  thia  his 
grand  disooyery  in  theology.  It  can  easily  be  ahown, 
howeyer,  1.  That  M'hatever  of  truth  is  connectod  with 
this  distinction  was  familiar  to  theologiana  not  only  be- 
fore  the  time  of  Edwarda,  but  from  the  tlme  when  the 
heiesies  of  Pelagius  fint  occasioned  thorough  diacuaaion 
of  the  aubject  of  ain  and  grace.  2.  That  Edwarda  did 
not  regard  himaelf  as  intioducing  any  noyel  doctrinea 
or  diaooyeriea  on  the  aubject.  A  formerly  diatinguished 
champion  of  New-achool  doctrinea  recently  aaid  in  a 
public  apeech,  with  great  truth,  *  that  the  common  idea 
that  the  power  of  £dwards*8  ayatem  liea  in  the  dbtinc- 
tion  of  natural  and  morał  ability  is  a  fallacy.  Thia  was 
well  underatood  before  hia  day.  It  liea  in  hia  yiewa  of 
apiritual  light,  which  oonatitute  the  key  to  his  whole 
treacise  on  the  Religious  Affectious.'  All  who  haye 
read  this  treatise,  or  hia  aermona  on  the  '  Natural  Blind- 
neaa  of  Men  in  Keligion,'  and  on  *  The  Keality  of  Spirit- 
ual Light,'  must  concede  the  justness  of  this  atatement 
The  great  principle  of  hia  work  on  the  Affectiona  is  that 
*  they  ariae  from  diyine  iUnmination.*  The  amount  of 
truth  contained  in  the  propoaition  that  man  is  naturally 
able,  but  morally  unable,  to  obey  God'8  commanda,  may 
be  thua  atated :  1.  Man  is  really  unable  to  do  things 
apiritualły  good  without  diyine  grace.  But  this  inabil- 
ity is  morał,  becauae  it  pertaina  to  our  morał  naturę.  It 
doea  not  excuae,  becauae  it  is  our  ain;  and  the  grcater  it 
ia,  the  gieater  ia  our  ain.  2.  Thia  corroption  and  inabil- 
ity do  not  destroy  any  of  the  facułtiea  of  will,  afiection, 
or  intelligenoe,  which  are  essentiol  to  humanity,  morał 
agency,  or  responsibility.  They  only  yitiate  the  state 
and  action  of  thoae  faculties  with  reference  to  things 
mend  and  spirituaL    All  power  remains  which  woold 


INABILITY 


628 


DfOANTATION 


t>e  reąniflite  to  the  f olfUment  of  God^s  oommands  if  we 
were  holy.  Any  hinderance,  or  want  of  power  or  op- 
portimity,  which  would  preTont  us  from  fiilillling  any 
command  of  God  if  we  were  morally  good,  excu8e8  the 
Don-perfonnance  of  it,  and  this  alone.  So  far,  then,  as 
the  assertion  that  we  have  natuial  ability  ia  intended 
to  express  the  fact  that  we  have  no  disability  but  onr 
auii  or  that  ia  escuaable,  it  expre8se8  an  important  tnith. 
So  far  as  it  is  used,  or  is  aaapted  to  con^ey  the  idea 
that  we  have  ability  to  remove  our  sinful  ooiruption 
^¥ńthout  the  preyenient  and  efficacioiis  grace  of  God,  or 
that  our  inability,  though  morał,  is  such  that  we  can 
restnne  it  by  the  strength  of  our  own  will,  or  that  it  is 
not  by  naturę,  it  contains  a  dangerous  error.  It  is  not 
only  oontrary  to  Scripture  and  iJl  Christian  experience, 
but  it  is  inoonceivable  that  any  state  or  act  of  the  on- 
regenerate  wUl  of  man  should  make  him  a  hdy  being. 
The  corrupt  tree  cannot  bring  forth  such  good  fruit. 
Nay,  as  all  Christiana  iind  to  their  sorrow,  they  cannot, 
although  pardally  sanctified,  by  any  power  of  their 
wills,  exclude  all  corruption  from  their  soula.  The  flesh 
lusteth  against  the  spirit,  so  that  they  oa$mot  do  the 
things  that  they  wotdd.  When  they  toouid  do  good, 
evil  is  present  with  them.  Though  they  love  the  law 
of  God  after  the  inward  man,  they  haye  a  law  in  their 
members  waning  against  the  law  of  their  minds.  How, 
then,  is  this  indwelling  corruption,  having  the  entire 
mastery  of  the  sintier,  removable  by  hia  will?  And 
does  the  phrase  ^natural  ability,'  acoording  to  its  nat- 
ural  import,  fairly  expre8S,  or,  rather,  does  it  not  express 
morę  than  the  truth,  in  regard  to  the  power  of  the  sin- 
ner?  Is  it  not,  onlees  carefully  explained,  adapted  to 
mislead  him?  That  cannot  properly  be  called  ability 
to  do  things  spiritually  gcod,  to  puiify  our  oorrupt  na- 
tures,  which  is  not  adequate  to  produce  the  resulU  Man 
has  not  such  an  abiliŁy,  whaterer  adjectires  we  aiBx  to 
the  word.  He  has  only  the  faculties  which  would  ena- 
able  him  to  do  his  duty  if  he  were  holy.  Is  it  not  best, 
in  plain  terms,  to  say  so  ?  Haye  we  a  right  to  do  oth- 
erwise  than  speak  the  truth  in  loye?'"— -/Vtnoeton  Bt- 
view,  July,  1854,  No.  x,  p.  512  8q. 

The  Arminian  doctrine  is  (1)  that  the  unregenerate 
haye  complete  ability,  through  the  effident  grace  of 
Christ,  to  comply  with  the  conditions  of  justification  as 
ofTered  under  the  ooyenant  of  grace ;  (2)  that  the  regen- 
erate  have  ability,  through  the  gno^  of  Christ,  to  do 
the  will  of  God,  i.  e.  to  ayoid  yoluntary  transgresaion 
thereof.  The  following  criticism  of  the  Arminian  yiew, 
by  an  eminent  New-England  diyine,  with  a  comment 
on  it,  is  taken  from  the  Christian  Adoocaitj  Dec.  15, 
1859.  The  parts  in  brackets  are  added  by  the  commen- 
tator.  **The  Arminian  theory  of  man'8  inability  or 
want  of  power  is  the  same  [as  the  Calyinisdc],  except^ 
ing  a  Tain  attempt  to  conceal  its  reyolting  aspect  by 
the  still  greater  absurdity  of  what  is  called  a  gracious 
ability.  The  adyocates  of  thb  theory  plainly  subyert 
and  rirtually  deny  the  grace  of  God  in  their  yery  at- 
tempt to  magnify  it;  for  if  man  has  not  ability  or  pow- 
er to  obey  God  withont  grace  [diyine  opeiation,  or  'fa- 
yor  to  sinners'],  then  he  does  not  sin  in  not  obeying, 
sińce  a  being  who  cannot  act  morally  right  cannot  act 
morally  wrong.  Such  a  being  cannot  be  truły  said  to 
reoeiye  or  to  be  capable  of  receiying  grace,  for  grace  is 
fayor  to  sinners.  Besides,  what  does  the  supposed  grace 
of  God  [hcre  eyidently  in  the  sense  of  dwine  ejficiency] 
do?  Does  it  giye  man  power  to  obey  9  then  man  has 
power  to  obey,  as  he  must  haye  before  he  obeys.  But 
eyen  this  is  no  security  that  he  will  obey.  [What 
Arminian  ever  pretcnded  that  it  is?]  Adam  ainned 
with  this  power.  The  grace  [exercise  of  diyine  effi- 
dency],  then,  does  not  meet  the  exigency  of  the  case. 
[Is  inyariable  obedience  essential,  then,  to  a  proper  hu- 
man  ability  ?  In  that  case,  what  would  beoome  of  Dr. 
Taylor'8  own  theory?]  Is  it  said  he  has  power  to  uae 
the  grace  [what  does  the  word  mean  here?]  fumished? 
But  what  power  is  this?  Until  man  has pouer  to  oŁty^ 
U  is  absolutely  inconoeiyable  that  he  should  obey,  for 


the  act  of  obedUence  ia  hu  oton  act,  done  in  tiie  cdecrm 
oihia  own  power  to  obey.    Thus  the  grace  of  God  [the 
Holy  Ghost],  aocording  to  this  scheme,  most,  bjr  a  d»- 
rect  act  of  creadon,  impart  some  new  easential  mental 
faculty  or  power  to  the  soul  of  man  to  qualify  it  to  ict 
morally  right  or  wrong.    Without  the  grace  of  God 
man  has  not  a  human  soul,  for  he  has  not  the  tnie  and 
easential  naturę  of  such  a  soul— the  power  reqmBte  to 
morał  action.     [We  haye  been  wont  to  think  of  *pov- 
et*  as  an  attribute,  not  as  a  'naftere.']    He  cannot  be  a 
sinner,  and  of  oooise  grace  to  him  cannot  be  grace  to  a 
sinner.    Grace  is  no  morę  graoe"  (Taylor,  J^oturu  m 
the  Morał  Gonemment  of  Godj  ii,  128).    The  comment  ii 
as  foUows :  '^  In  the  first  place,  Dr.  Taylor  falsely  Rpn- 
sents  the  Arminian  aa  aaserting  the  gradoos  ability  of 
man,  in  generał  terms,  to  keep  the  diyine  law,  wheras 
we  only  affirm  this  of  the  regenerate.    In  the  seoood 
place,  he  continually  shnfflea  in  his  nae  of  the  tom 
grace,  as  will  be  seen  by  our  bracketed  insertions  of 
equiyalent8,  whereyer  the  context  fixea  the  sense.    In 
the  thiid  place,  we  see  no  poasible  releyancy  in  hit  ar- 
gument against  a  diyinely  imparted  *  power  to  obey,* 
from  the  fact  that  the  posseasion  of  this  power  does  not 
insnre  its  inyariable  exexci8e  any  morę  than  it  did  in 
Adam'a  case.    If  the  profesaor  had  infeiied  the  impos- 
sibility  of  our  theory  of  ability  from  the  oonoeded  £ut 
that  the  earth  reyolyes  upon  ita  axis,  we  ahonki  net 
haye  been  morę  at  losa  to  peroeiye  the  pertinency  or 
logical  force  of  the  reasoning.    Finally,  he  forgets  that 
in  the  economy  of  redemption,  *  abUiiy  to  hm  yrae^  is 
an  *  abUiiy  to  obey»     God's  prime  reqnirement  of  a  sin- 
ner is  repentance  and  return  to  aeryioe;  and  in  the  ar- 
rangements  of  the  remedial  scheme  undcr  which  we 
live,  the  sinner  possesses  a  oompkte,  though  not  a  oon- 
sdtuUonal  and  independent  *  ability  to  obey*  this  re- 
quirement."    For  the  New-£ngland  yiew,  aee  New- 
Engłakd  Thbołooy.    See  also  the  artides  Amos- 
lAKiSM;  Pklagiamism;  G&ace.    For  a  fuli  discnaion 
of  the  New-school  theory,  see  Hodgson,  New  Dkeimtjf 
Ezamined  (N.  Y.  12mo);  PrinceUm  Renew,  July,  185Ł 
See  also  Atner,  PreA,  Rev,  Jan.  1861 ;  Bib,  Sacra,  196^ 
p.  824  sq.,  608  sq. ;  1865,  p.  508 ;  Meth,  Quart,  Ret.  xfiz, 
268;  1868,  p.  610;  Brituh  Qitart. Raf.  Jvly,  1867;  New 
Enfflanderf  1868,  p.  486, 490,  496-9,  511,  553. 

In  antla,  a  tenn  for  a  tempie  which  haa  upon  Uie 
facade  two  oolumns,  detached,  standing  between  tvo 
aate  that  terminate  the  side  walls  of  it.  Spedmens 
are  the  tempłes  at  Rhamnus  and  Suniom. — ^Brande  and 
Cox,  Dict4  of  Science j  Lit,  and  A  rt,  ii,  200. 

Incantatioii  (Łat.  incantatiof  incanto,  to  dumt  a 
magie  formuła,  compound  of  in,  intenaiye,  and  ocnto,  to 
sing)  denotes  "one  of  the  most  powerful  and  awe4D- 
spiring  modes  of  magie  (q.  y.),  yiz.,  that  resting  on  a 
belief  in  the  mysterious  power  of  worda  solemnly  con- 
cdyed  and  passionately  uttered."  **  There  is  in  the  bs- 
man  yoice,  especially  in  its  morę  lofty  tones,  an  actnał 
power  of  a  yery  wonderful  kind  to  stir  men^s  hearta 
When  to  this  we  add  that  poetic  utteranoe  is  a  spedal 
and  exceptional  gift;  that  the  language  of  prindtiye 
nations  is  crude  and  unmanageable,  the  worda  being  as 
difficult  to  weld  together  as  pieces  of  cast  iiun ;  thatit 
is  only  when  the  poet*s  mind  has  risen  to  unusuał  heat 
that  he  can  fuse  them  into  those  rhythmical  8GqneDces 
that  please  the  ear  and  hang  together  in  the  memary; 
that,  in  short^  his  art  is  a  mystery  to  himself~-an  inspi- 
ration— we  need  not  wonder  at  the  feeling  with  whick 
eyeiything  in  the  form  of  yerse  or  metre  was  yicwed. 
The  singing  or  saying  of  such  oompońtions  wbidi  cooli 
thus  stir  the  blood  of  the  heaien  they  knew  itot  how, 
what  otber  eifecte  might  it  not  produce?"  To  the 
power  which  the  snpentitious  belief  of  the  people,  up 
to  and  eyen  through  the  Middle  Agea,  gaye  to  incanta- 
tiona,  especially  when  accompanied,  as  they  gcnerally 
were,  with  the  concocting  of  druga  and  other  magieał 
ritee,  there  is  haidly  any  end.  *^Tbey  oould  heal  or 
kilL  If  they  oould  not  raise  from  the  dead,  they  oould 
make  the  dead  speak,  or  'cali  np  apirita  fiom  tlw  yaaty 


DfCAPACITT 


629 


DfCARNATION 


deep'  in  order  to  unreil  the  futurę.  They  coold  extin- 
guiah  fire ;  darken  the  sun  or  moon ;  make  fetteis  burst, 
a  door  or  a  monntam  fly  open ;  blunt  a  fword;  make  a 
limb  powerlesa;  destroy  a  crop,  or  charm  it  away  into 
another'8  bani.*'  IŁ  ia  eapecially  the  heathenish  nations 
that  in  their  prayerB,  wbether  for  blessings  or  for  cuiseB, 
partake  laigely  of  the  natore  of  magical  incantations. 
"  They  are  not  suppoeed  to  act  as  petitions  addressed  to 
a  free  agent,  but  by  an  inherent  force  which  eyen  the 
goda  cannot  rtmsL  Thia  ia  very  marked  in  Hindniam 
and  Buddhism,  but  it  actually  penradea  all  superBtitious 
woialiip,  tbough  sometimea  quito  diaguised.  *They 
tbink  thęy  ahall  be  heard  for  their  much  speaking.' 
For  almost  ereiy  occasion  or  operation  of  life  there 
were  afypropriate  formulaa  to  be  repeated  in  order  to  ae- 
cnre  aucceaa;  and  many  of  theae,  with  that  reverence 
for  antiquity  and  conaeryatiye  tendency  which  alwaya 
characterize  auperstition,  continue  to  live  in  popular 
memoiy,  although  often  the  worda  are  ao  old  aa  to  be 
nnintelli^ble.  Thua,  among  the  Romana,  in  the  daya 
of  Cato,  incantatłona  were  common  for  curing  dialoca- 
tioRB,  fuli  of  worda  the  mcaning  of  which  had  been  lost. 
A  form  of  worda  uaed  to  this  day  in  Shetland  for  healing 
a  q>ndn  can  be  Łraoed  back  to  the  lOth  centuiy.  In  ita 
earliest  form,  aa  foond  in  an  old  German  manuacript,  it 
nazrates  how  their  native  goda,\Voden  and  Baldur,iid- 
ing  out  to  hunt,  Baldur'8  horae  dialocated  ita  foot,  and 
how  Woden,  naing  charmed  worda,  aet  bonę  to  bonę,  etc., 
and  ao  healed  the  foot,  The  repetition  of  thia  rhymed 
nazTadon  acted  aa  a  charm  to  heal  other  lamed  horaea. 
A  modem  rersion  of  thia  tradition,  current  in  Norway 
eren  in  our  day,  makea  the  accident  happen  to  the 
horae  of  Jesus,  ńód  Jeaua  himaclf  perform  the  cure — in 
Shetland,  also,  the  Lord  (Jeaua)  ia  aubatituted  for  Wo- 
den :  and  the  formuła  ia  applied  to  the  heaUng  of  per- 
aons*  limbs  aa  well  aa  thoae  of  horaea.  The  operation 
ia  thua  described  in  R.  ChambeT8*a  Popular  Rhymes  of 
Scodand:  '  When  a  peraon  haa  received  a  aprain,  it  ia 
cnatomary  to  apply  to  an  iudividual  practiced  in  caat^ 
ing  the  "  wreating-thread."  Thia  ia  a  thread  apun  from 
black  woolyon  which  are  caat  nine  knota,  and  tied  round 
a  aprained  leg  or  arm.  During  the  tune  the  operator  ia 
potting  the  thread  round  the  affected  limb,  he  aaya,  but 
in  aoch  a  tonę  of  voice  aa  not  to  be  heard  by  the  by- 
atandersy  nor  eren  by  the  peraon  operated  upon : 

"'Onr  Lord  rade, 
Hla  foal*a  foot  alade ; 
Down  he  lighted, 
Hla  fDara  foot  righted. 
Bonę  to  bonę, 
Sinew  to  alnew, 
Blood  to  blood, 
Fleah  to  fleah. 
Heal,  la  name  of  the  Father,  Son,  and  Holy  Ghoet'  ** 

— €hambera,  Cyclop,  ▼,  S80-681.    See  Maoic  ;  Witch- 

CRAFT. 

Incapacity,  in  the  ecclcaiaatical  aenae,  ia  abaolute 
unfitneaa  for  oidination.  Thua  women  (Gen.  iii,  16;  1 
Tim.  ii,  12 ;  1  Cor.  xiv,  34,  85)  and  unbaptized  peraona 
aie  mcapaciiated  from  ordination.  Baptism  ia  eaaential 
to  church  memberahip,  and  therefore  the  baaia  of  further 
adTancemcnt  in  the  Church:  **Cum  baptiamua  ait  funda- 
mentum  omnium  aacramentorum  anto  auaceptionem  bap- 
tism! non  susdpiatur  aliud  aacramentom"  (c.  60,  can.  i, 
qu.  i,  Capit.  Theodori  Cantorb.) ;  also  c.  1,  x,  Z>e  pre^- 
tero  non  haptizało  (iii,  43) ;  c  3,  x,  eod.  (Innocent  III  a. 
1206) ;  1 2,  />c  cognatiom  spirituali  in  vi  (iv,  3)  Bonifacii 
Vin.  So  the  carly  Church  declared  that  he  who  has 
not  feceived  in  due  form  the  baptiam  of  wator  is  not  a 
member  of  the  yisible  church,  and  cannot  therefore  be 
ordained.  The  Coundl  of  Nicaea,  A.D.  326,  in  c.  19  (c 
62,  can.  i,  qa.  i),  directa  that  the  dergy  of  the  Paulinlsta 
(who  did  not  perform  baptiam  regularly)  and  of  other 
aecta  were  to  be  rebaptized  and  ordained  on  their  return 
to  the  Catholic  Church,  and  that  snch  peraona  aa  had 
been  prerioualy  ordained,  but  not  baptized,  ahould  at 
ooce  receive  baptism,  and  then  be  reordained  (c  112, 
diaLiv,/>c«)M«r.  [Leoa.468]}c60,can.i,qu.i;  comp.  | 


Ccgni.  lib.  yi,  c.  94,  and  other  quoted  passagea),  althoogbi 
aocording  to  the  dedaion  of  pope  Innocent  II  (c  2,  x,  />0 
presb,  non  hapŁ, ;  c  34, 1 51 ,  diat.  iv,  De  consecr.),  the  auboi^ 
dination  of  a  baptized  prieat  ordained  by  an  unbaptized 
did  not  neceaaarily  follow.  See  Iriusoulabity. 

The  incapacity  of  women  for  ordination  was  believed 
to  be  80  fuUy  authorized  by  the  paaaagea  above  cited 
firom  the  Bibie  that  it  waa  never  que8tioned  by  the 
Church.  God  had  nuule  woman  aubject  to  the  nde  of 
man;  ahe  could  therefore  not  inatruct  a  congregation 
likely  to  be  oompoeed  alao  of  men  (Conc  Carihag.  iv,  a. 
878,c.36inc.29;  diat.  xxiii,  c  20;  diat.  iv,  Z>e  coiuecr.). 
It  ia  from  thia  point  of  view  that  Tertullian  regarda  thia 
question  when  he  aaya  {De  rekmtUs  tirgmSbus,  c  8) : 
^  Non  permittitur  mulieri  in  ecdesia  loqui,  aed  non  do- 
cerę,  nec  tingere,  nec  offerre,  nec  alliua  yirilia  muneria 
nedum  aaceidotalia  offidia  aortom  ubi  vindicare."  In  a 
like  atrain  aigue  Auguatine  (c.  xvii,  can.  xxxiii,  qu.  v) 
and  othera.  The  early  Church  therófore  declared  that 
no  woman  ahould  be  ordained />r««5ytera  (vidua)  (Conc; 
Laodic.  a.  372,  c.  11  in  c  19,  diaL  xxxii),  nor  diacona,  or 
diaooniaaa  (ConciL  Arausicanum  i,  a.  441,  can.  xxvi ; 
£p<wnense,  a.  517,  can.  xxi ;  Aureli€mefis6  ii,  a.  533,  can. 
xviii  [ed.  Brunc.  ii,  126, 170, 187] ;  compare  c.  23,  can. 
xxvii,  qtt.  i,  NoteUa  Justiniań  vi,  cap.  5) ;  though  edu- 
cated  and  pioua,  they  are  not  to  teach  in  the  congrega- 
tiona  (Conc,  CarUutg,  iv,  a.  378,  c.  86  in  c  29,  diat.  xxiii; 
c  20,  diat.  iv.  De  consecr,^.  Abbeaaea  were  not  to  bleaa 
the  nuna,  to  hear  confeeaiona,  or  to  preach  in  public  (c. 
10,  x,Depcemt,  et  renUss.  [v,  38]  Innocent  III  a.  1210)1 

The  £vangelical  Church  teachea  the  neoeasity  of  bap- 
tiam (Augab.  Cont  art.  ix,  etc),  and  alao  that  *^the  fe- 
male  aex  waa  not  ordained  by  God  to  mle,  either  in  the 
Church,  or  in  aecular  poaitiona  where  a  apecially  atrong 
underatanding  and  good  counael  are  requiaite.  But  they 
are  ordered  to  take  care  of  their  houaehold,  and  to  aee 
after  it  diligently**  (Luther,  in  Walch'a  Werke,  ii,  1006). 
The  ground  which  the  Reformers  took  on  thia  que8tioa 
waa  up  to  our  day  approved  by  the  Froteatant  churches 
at  large.  Among  the  Frienda,  however,  no  auch  d]»- 
tinction  haa  ever  been  reoogniaed.  Indeed,  the  ten* 
dency  of  the  preaent  age  ia  to  aboliah  the  rule  alto- 
gether,  and  femalea  in  8everal  inatanoea  have  actually 
been  installed  aa  paatora  in  thia  countiy,  while  in  othor 
casea  their  ability  in  the  pulpit  haa  been  fredy  acknowl- 
edged  even  among  evangelical  denominationa.  Yet  even 
thia  hardly  aatisfiea  the  advocatea  of  "  women*8  righta" 
(q.v.>    See  Herzog, /7ea/-£ficyiUop.  vi,  647.    (J.H.W.) 

Inoardinftrft,  in  the  language  of  the  Church  of  the 
Middle  Agee,  ia  the  appointment  of  any  strtmge  biahop^ 
preabyter,  deacon,  or  a  person  of  aome  other  daaa  of  the 
prieathood,  to  thia  or  that  church,  in  which  he  was  to 
perform  aer^dcea  in  part  or  exclnaivdy,  or  even  the  ap- 
pointment to  one  partacular  church.  •  The  election  of  a 
cardinal  was  alao  called  incardinare, — Fuhrmann,  Hand^ 
wórterbueh  d.  Kirekengesch,  ii,  485. 

Incardlnfitl  cletYol,  fugitive  or  foreign  priests 
appointod  to  a  church,  in  contraat  with  the  appointment 
of  a  native  and  regular  prieat. — ^Herer,  Unhersal  Lex- 
icfMy  viii,  840. 

Incamation  (Lat  tn,  and  caro,  fleah),  the  perma- 
nent  aaaumption  of  a  human  form  by  a  divine  peraonage. 

L  FaUe  or  Prełended  Jncamations  of  Ileatken  Re* 
Hgions. — The  my thologiea  of  most  nations  afTord  tracea, 
although  faint,  of  the  idea  of  incamation.  If,  aa  Yinet 
haa  suggested,  there  can  be  no  rdigion  without  an  in- 
camation, the  paeudo-incamationa  of  false  religions  may 
be  regarded  as  ao  many  gropings  for  the  truth,  <*  if  haply 
they  might  feel  ailer  him"  who  at  aome  time  should  be- 
come  incamate.  These  incamations  expre8s  the  deepest 
nced  of  our  common  nature.  Sin  has  so  isolated  man 
from  God  that  he  feels  there  is  no  hope  of  his  restora- 
tion  except  'Hhe  gods  come  down  in  the  likeness  of 
men.^'  This  idea  confronts  us  from  all  parts  of  the  world, 
whether  m  the  avatars  of  the  Hind(i,  the  election  and 
worship  of  the  Lama  of  Thibet,  the  metamorphoses  of 


INCARNATION 


630 


INCARNATION 


the  Greek  and  Roman  mythologies,  or  tbe  wilder  wor- 
Bhip  ofthe  aborigines  of  America.  The  earlier  Chris- 
tian apologłsU  attribated  these  caricatures  of  the  true 
incamation  to  Satan,  and  alleged  that  "he  inyented 
these  fables  by  imiuting  the  truth.**  Neander  makea 
the  profoand  Buggeation  that  **  at  the  bottom  of  these 
myths  is  the  earnest  deslre,  inseparable  from  man'8  spir- 
it,  for  participation  in  tbe  diyine  naturę  aa  ita  true  life^ 
ita  anxious  longing  to  pass  the  gulf  which  separates  the 
God-deriyed  soul  Arom  its  original  —  its  wish,  even 
though  unconsciouB,  to  secure  that  union  with  God 
which  alone  can  renew  human  naturę,  and  which  Chris- 
tianity-  shows  us  aa  a  liying  reality.  Nor  can  we  be 
astonished  to  find  the  facts  of  Christianity  thus  antici- 
pated  in  poetic  forms  (embodying  in  imaguiative  crea- 
tions  the  innate  yet  indistinct  crayings  of  the  spińt)  in 
the  mythical  elements  of  the  old  religions,  when  we  re- 
member  that  human  naturę  itself,  and  all  the  forms  of 
its  development,  as  well  as  the  whole  oourse  of  human 
history,  were  intended  by  God  to  find  their  fuli  accom- 
pUshment  in  Christ"  (L(/e  o/  Ckritły  chap.  ii,  sec  12). 
The  want  that  thus  expresse8  itself  in  these  fabled  ava^ 
tars  lies  at  the  foundation  of  idolatry.  The  unsati^ed 
naturę  of  man  demands  that  his  Deity  should  be  near 
him — should  dwell  with  him.  It  first  leads  him  to  rep- 
resent  the  Deity  by  the  work  of  his  own  hands,  and 
then  to  worship  it  (see  Tholuck,  Prediffł^Hy  ii,  148).  Or 
we  may  look  upon  these  ayatars  as  so  many  faint  and 
distant  irradiations  of  the  holy  light  that  shone  upon 
the  Garden  through  the  first  promise  giyen  to  man. 
On  the  contrary,  Kitto  denies  **  that  therc  is  in  Eastem 
mythology  any  incamation  in  any  sense  approaching 
that  of  the  Christian,  and  that  least  of  all  is  there  any 
where  it  has  been  most  insisted  on*'  {Daily  Bibie  Illust 
on  John  i,  14).  Cocker,  in  his  late  work  {Christianity 
and  Greek  Pkilosophyy  N.  Y.  1870,  8yo,  p.  512),  adyances 
the  theoiy  that  the  idea  of  ^  a  pure  spiritual  essence, 
without  form  and  without  emotion,  peryading  alł  and 
transcending  aU,  is  too  yague  and  abstract  to  yield  us 
comfort,"  and  that  thcrefore  the  need  of  an  incamation 
''became  consciously  or  unconsdously  *łhe  desire  ofna- 
Hofui' "  by  **  the  education  of  the  race**  and  **  by  the 
dispensation  of  philosophy.  .  .  .  The  idea  of  an  incar- 
nation  was  not  unfamihar  to  human  thought,  it  wat  no 
new  or  słranye  idea  (o  the  heathen  mind.  The  number- 
less  metamorphoses  of  Grecian  mythology,  the  incama- 
tions  of  Brahma,  the  ayatars  of  Yishnu,  and  the  human 
form  of  Krishna,  had  naturalized  the  thought  (Young, 
Christ  of  History,  p.  248)."  See  Domer,  I^hre  v,  der 
Person  Christi,  i,  7  sq. ;  BibUoth,  Sacra,  ix,  250;  Weber, 
Indische  Studien,  ii,  411  sq. 

Among  the  ancient  Egyptians,  Apis  or  Hapi,  "  the 
liying  buli,"  was  esteemed  to  be  the  emblem  and  image 
of  the  soul  of  Osiris,  who,  as  Pliny  and  Cicero  say,  was 
deemed  a  god  by  the  Egyptians.  "  Diodorus  deriyes 
the  worship  of  Apis  from  a  belief  that  the  soul  of  Oairis 
had  migrated  into  this  animal;  and  he  was  thus  sup- 
poeed  to  manifest  himself  to  man  through  successive 
agee;"  while  Strabo  calls  "Apis  the  same  as  Osiris" 
(Wilkinson,  Anc,  Egypt,  abridgm.  i,  290,  291).  "About 
the  time  when  Cambyses  arriyed  at  Memphis,  Apis  ap- 
peared  to  the  Egyptians."  Their  great  rejoicings  led 
that  prinoe  to  examiue  the  ofiicers  who  had  charge  of 
Memphis.  These  responded  "that  one  of  their  gods 
had  appeared  to  them — a  god  who,  at  long  interyals  of 
time,  had  been  accustomed  to  show  himself  in  Egypt" 
(Herod,  iii,  27).  Mneyis,  the  sacred  buli  of  Heliopolb, 
was  also  a  representatiye  of  Osiris,  and  with  Apis,  the 
sacred  buli  of  Memphis,  was  worshipped  as  a  god 
throughout  the  whole  of  Egypt.  Ammianus  says  that 
Mneyis  was  sacred  to  the  sun,  while  Apis  was  sacred  to 
the  moon  (see  Rawlinson^s  Herod,  ii,  354,  Engl.  edition). 
Hardwick,  however,  adduces  "W^ilkinson  as  rcgarding  it 
^  a  merit  of  the  old  Egyptians  that  they  did  not  human^ 
ize  their  gods;  and  yet  he  admits  that  their  fault  was 
rather  the  eleyation  of  animals  and  emblems  to  the 
vank  of  deities."    Hardwick  denies  that  the  idea  of  in- 


camation is  to  be  Ibund  in  the  old  Egyptian  ereed 
{Christ  and  oiher  Mosters,  ii,  351).     See  Afu. 

The  mythology  of  tłie  Hindiis  presents  a  yast  yiiiety 
of  incamatious,  the  inferior  ayatars  that  haye  sppear- 
ed  in  yarious  ages  being  innomerable.     The  obfect  of 
the  ayatar  is  dedared  by  Yishnu  himself,  who,  in  the 
form  of  Krishna,  thus  addresses  Arjuna:  "Both  I  ind 
thou  haye  passed  many  birdis;  minę  are  known  to  me, 
but  thou  knowest  not  thine.    Althongh  I  am  not  in  my 
naturę  subject  to  buth  or  decay,  and  am  tbe  kcd  of  all 
created  beings,  yet,  haying  command  oyer  my  own  na- 
turę, I  am  madę  evident  by  my  own  power ;  and  ss  often 
as  there  is  a  dedine  of  yirtue,  and  an  insurrectioo  of 
yioe  and  injustice  in  the  world,  I  make  mysclf  eTidcnł. 
Thus  I  appear  from  age  to  age  for  the  presenration  of 
the  just,  the  destraction  of  the  wicked,  and  the  estab- 
lishment of  yirtne"  {Bkafforad-Gita,  p.  40).    With  this 
declaration  accord,  for  the  most  part,  the  objects  of  tbe 
ten  morę  conspicuous  ayatars  of  this  deity.  althongh 
the  details  of  them  abound  in  puerilities  and  obscenity. 
In  the  Matsya,  or  Fish  ayatar,  Yishnu  took  the  fonn  (d 
a  human  being  issuing  finom  the  body  of  a  fish,  for  tbe 
recoyery  of  the  sacred  books  which  had  been  stolca 
from  Brahma  by  the  dtemon  Hayagriya.     The  Kurmo^ 
or  Tortoise  ayatar,  snpported  the  earth  sinking  in  the 
waters.    The  prayer  of  Brahma  for  asństance  when  the 
whole  earth  was  coeered  with  teater  called  forth  a  Ibird 
ayatar  of  Yishnu,  that  of  the  Varaka,  or  Boar,  of  wbieh 
Maurioe  says, "  Uńng  the  practical  instinct  of  that  ani- 
mal, he  began  to  smell  around  that  he  might  discover 
the  phioe  where  the  earth  was  submerged.     At  length, 
haying  diyided  the  water  and  arriying  at  the  bottom, 
he  saw  the  earth  lying  a  mighty  and  bairen  stratum; 
then  he  took  up  the  ponderous  globe  (freed  from  the 
water),  and  raised  it  high  on  his  tusk — one  wonld  say 
it  was  a  beautifiil  lotus  blossoming  on  tbe  tip  of  bis 
tusk"  {Hisf,  of  Bindostan,  i,  575  sq.).    There  can  be  bst 
little  doubt  that  these  three  ayatars  are  pen'enions  of  • 
the  Hindd  traditions  of  the  Deluge.    Tbe  next  ineai^ 
nation  burst  forth  from  a  pillar  as  a  man-lion  for  the 
purpose  of  destroying  a  blaspbeming  monarch.    Tbe 
Yamana,  ar  Dwarf,  in  tbe  next  ayatar,  rebuked  the 
pride  of  Maha  Bali,  the  gzeat  Bali.     In  human  forai 
the  diyine  Parasurama,  in  twenty  pitobed  battles,  ex- 
tirpated  tbe  Kcttri  tribe  to  prepare  for  the  Brahmin  tlM 
way  to  empiie.     The  seyenth  was  XQTy  like  that  of  tbe 
preceding, and  for  similar  objects.  Rama  Chandra,\k<3ffK- 
eyer,  was  a  great  reformer  and  legislator.     The  eigfath, 
that  of  Krishna,  represents  the  Deity  in  human  fora 
trampling  on  the  bead  of  a  serpent,  while  the  serpent  is 
biting  his  heel— a  conruption  of  the  promise  to  Ere. 
One  object  of  the  ninth  incamation,  that  of  JSuddka,  is 
generally  admitted  to  haye  been  the  abolition  of  san- 
guinary  sacrifices.    Whateyer  be  the  cause,  "  Buddhiaa 
stands  conspicuous  in  the  midst  of  beathendom  as  a  re- 
ligion  without  sacrificial  cultus."     Upon  the  tenth,  tbe 
Kalki  ayatar,  which  is  yet  to  take  place,  tbe  dcstiuction 
of  the  uniyerse  wiU  ensue  (see  Maurice,  JJisfory  oflliih 
dostań,  passim ;  Hardwick,  i,  278 ;  Neto  J^n^iemder,  iii, 
183-185).     For  the  astonnding  events  connected  with 
the  birth  and  infancy  of  Gotama  (q.  y.),  see  Buddhju 
See  also  Hardy's  Manuał  ofBuddhism,  p.  140  aą.    Ccm- 
pareAyATAR;  Hinduism. 

Lamaism  presents  many  features  in  comroon  witb 
Buddhism,  so  much  so  that  it  may  be  considcred  one  of 
its  outgrowths.  It  "differs  fundamentally  from  Chi- 
nese  Buddhism  in  the  doctrine  of  hcredit«T>'  incaraa- 
tions.  The  great  thought  of  some  intelligence  issuing 
from  the  Buddba  world  assuming  tbe  conditions  of  our 
firail  bumanity,  and  for  a  time  presiding  oycr  some  one 
fayored  group  of  Buddhist  monasteriea,  had  kmg  been 
familiar  to  the  natiycs  of  Tibet."  In  the  latter  half  of 
the  15th  century  arose  the  idea  of  perpetual  incama- 
tions.  "  Then  it  was  that  one  chief  abbot,  the  *  perfeci 
Lama,'  instead  of  passing,  as  he  was  entltled  to  do,  to 
his  ultimate  condition,  determined  for  the  benefit  of 
mankind  to  sojoum  longer  on  tbe  eazth.  and  be  cootin- 


INCARNATION 


631 


INCARNATION 


nooaiy  new-born.  As  soon  aa  he  was  carried  to  his 
gnive  in  1478,  a  search  was  instituted  for  tbe  penonage 
who  bJbd  been  destined  to  sacceed  him.  This  was  found 
to  be  an  infant  who  established  its  title  to  the  honor  by 
appearing  to  remember  various  articles  which  had  been 
the  property  of  the  lama  just  deceased,  or,  rather,  were 
the  infant*s  own  property  i;i  earlier  stages  of  exi8tence. 
.  .  .  So  fasclnating  was  Ihe  theory  of  perpetual  incar- 
nations  that  a  fresh  saccession  of  rival  lamas  (aiso  of  the 
Ydlow  order). aflerwards  took  its  rise  in  Tesbu-lambo, 
while  the  Dalai  lamas  were  enthroned  in  Łhassa;  and 
at  present  every  convent  of  importance,  not  in  Tibet 
oni y,  bat  in  distant  parta  of  Tartaiy,  is  daiming  for  it- 
self  a  like  prerogatire.  .  .  .  The  religion  of  Tibet  is 
from  daj  to  day  aasaming  all  the  characteristics  of 
man-worship"  (Hardwick,  ii,  dS  8q.).  For  the  election 
of  the  suooessor  of  the  lama,  see  aIso  Hac'8  TravtU  in 
Totrtary^  ii,  eh.  ri,  p.  197  8q. 

The  Dotion  that  prevailed  in  Egypt  was  simUar, 
*^%%ve  oniy  that  the  symbolical  boli  was  substitnted  for 
the  literał  man,  and  as  Buddha  is  still  held  to  be  sac- 
oeasirely  bom  in  each  infant  lama,  so  the  god  Osiris 
was  equa]]y  thought  to  be  saccessirely  bom  in  each 
consecrated  Mnevia.  Nor  was  the  doctrine  of  a  kurnan 
incamation  by  any  means  lost  in  that  coantry.  Diod- 
onis  give8  a  curious  account  of  an  iafemt  in  whose  per- 
son 'Ośria  was  thought  to  have  been  bom  into  the  world 
in  order  that  he  might  thus  exhibit  himself  to  mortals ; 
and  what  Herodotus  says  of  the  Eg3rptian  Perseus,  who 
was  the  same  dirinity  with  Oairis,  necessarily  reąuires 
ns  to  Kippose  that  at  certain  intenrals  a  mcm  was 
bronght  forward  by  the  priests  as  an  incamation  of  their 
god**  (Diod.  Sic.  lib.  i,  p.  20 ;  Herod.  Hitt,  ii,  eh.  xci ;  G. 
S.  Faber,  Eiffht  Ditsertations,  i,  61  sq. ;  see  Wilkinson^s 
notę  ad  loc.  cit  in  Rawlinson*s  Herodotus),  On  the 
generał  sabject,  see  also  Faber^s  Oriffin  of  Pagon  Idola- 
tryf  vi,  eh.  vi;  £igkt  DuserłoŁums,  i,  67  sq. 

Under  the  head  of  classical  metamorphoees  it  will  be 
sidScient  to  refer  to  Baur  in  Baumgarten  (on  Art$y  i, 
446,  transL) ;  to  Ovid,  Metamorphoaes,  Baucis  et  Phile- 
mon;  and  the  name  that  Jupiter  borę  ofZti)c  Karafia- 
TT|c  (Biscoe,  O/t  the  A  eUy  p.  205). 

*•  Pauing  over  to  the  American  contincnt,  whethcr 
by  way  of  Iceland  to  Labrador,  or  eastward  from  Asia, 
we  find  the  wilderaess,  from  the  frozen  shores  of  the 
Aretic  Ocean  to  the  Mexican  Gulf,  resounding  with  the 
deeds  of  a  hero-god  corresponding  in  character,  history, 
and  nam»  with  the  Wodin  and  Buddha  of  the  eastem 
eontinenL  .  .  .  His  grandmother  descended  from  the 
moon,  which,  in  the  symbolic  language  of  the  early  tra- 
ditłoos,  always  represcnts  the  Noachian  ark.  The  only 
daughter  of  this  Nokomis,  in  the  bloom  of  her  maidcn- 
bood,  without  the  concurrence  of  mortal  agency,  and  in 
a  mincnbos  manner,  gave  birth  to  a  son,  who  became 
conscioos,  as  he  adranced  to  manhood,  that  he  was  en- 
dowed  with  supematoral  powers  for  the  redemption  of 
the  world  from  eWL  Ali  his  stupendous  exploits  were 
directed  to  that  end.  His  name  in  the  Indian  dialects 
was  Bosko,  BozhOf"*  etc  (Meth,  Qnart.  Rev,  1859,  p.  59C ; 
compare  Schoolcraft*s  Algic  Res,  i,  135;  and  Kingsbor- 
ou5h's  Siex.  Ataią.  yi,  175).  The  remarkable  story  of 
the  birth  of  Hoitzilopochtli  from  a  virgin  mother  is 
giren  by  Sqaier,  Amarican  Arehaological  Res,  p.  196. 
For  the  reputed  incaraations  of  the  highest  god,  Tez- 
eatlipoca,  thought  by  Mr.  Sąuier  to  be  analogous  to 
Buddha,  Zoroaster,  Oairis,  Taut  in  Phoenicia,  Odin  in 
8candinavia,  etc,  see  Hardwick,  ii,  152,  with  his  re- 
markn^Brinton  (Daniel  G.),  ^fyłh8  ofthe  New  World 
(N.  Y.  1868),  12mo),  chap.  ii  and  ir. 

U.  IMfidHon  o/^Incamatwnr  in  the  Christian  Scheme, 
—In  the  evangelical  sense,  incamation  is  that  act  of  grace 
whereby  Jesus  Christ,  the  Son  of  (lod,  took  upon  himself 
the  ntture  of  man.  "  By  taking  only  the  naturę  of  man, 
be  róll  continueth  one  person,  and  changeth  but  the 
"»nner  of  his  subsisting,  which  was  before  in  the  merę 
8^  of  the  Son  of  God,  and  is  now  in  the  habit  of  our 
fcA"  (Hooker,  £kx,  Pol  v,  §  52).    In  the  assumption  of 


omr  naturę  he  became  subject  to  the  oonseąuences  of  sin, 
except  that*he  was  without  the  accident  of  śin  (see 
Ebnird,  in  Herzog,  Real-Encyklop,  s.  v.  Jesus  Christ). 
^  That  Christ  should  have  taken  man's  naturę  shows 
that  corraption  was  not  inherent  in  its  existence  in 
such  wise  that  to  assume  the  naturę  was  to  assume 
the  sin"  (Wilberforce,  Doctrine  ofthe  Incamation^  p.  74). 
The  essential  features  of  the  incamation  are  peculiar  to 
Christianity,  and  when  we  speak  ofthe  incamation,  that 
of  Christianity  is  at  once  understood ;  for  the  incama- 
tion of  Yishnu  as  found  in  Krishna,  which  is  admitted 
to  be  the  most  perfect  of  all  heathen  incamations,  and 
the  only  one  to  be  oompared  with  that  of  Christ  accord- 
ing  to  Hardwick  {Christ  and  other  Masters,  i,  291), 
"  when  purged  from  all  the  lewd  and  Bacchanalian  ad- 
juncts  which  disflgure  and  debase  it,  comea  indefinitely 
short  of  Christianity."  ^  Nothing  can  be  morę  absurd 
than  to  compare  the  incaraations  of  this  Indian  deity 
with  that  of  Christ.  They  are  by  their  multiplidty 
alone  tinctured  with  the  pantheistic  idea.  The  human 
personality  is  desritute  of  reality,  sińce  it  is  taken  up 
and  laid  down  as  a  yeil  or  mask  with  which  the  dirinity 
inyested  himself  for  a  moment  Moreoyer,  the  degra- 
dation  of  the  god  is  carried  too  far^he  descended  to 
eyil,  and  participated  in  human  corraption"  (Pressens^i, 
Rei.  before  Christ,  p.  61).  Although,  therefore,  the  idea 
of  the  union  of  the  divine  and  human  natures  was  not 
foreign  to  heathenism,  yet  that  the  divine  Logos  should 
become  flesh  belonged  to  Christianity  alone.  False  re- 
ligions  teach  an  apotheosis  of  man  rather  than  aproper 
incamation  of  the  Deity.  Judaism  itself  had  never  risen 
to  the  conception  of  an  incarnate  God.  The  antagonism 
between  the  Creator  and  the  creattire  was  too  sharply 
defined  to  admit  such  an  interpretation  ofthe  first  prom- 
ise  as  the  incamation  has  giren.  See  Martensen,  ChrisL 
Dogm,  §  128 ;  Neander,  Church  Ilist,  (Clark),  ii,  200  8q. ; 
Kitto,  Daily  Bibie  lUust,  29th  week,  jBvening. 

The  use  of  the  term  incamation  (later  Latin)  may  be 
traoed  back  to  Irenieus,  A.D.  180,  as  in  the  expre88ion 
*<Incamatio  pro  nostra  salute"  (Contra  Har,  i,  10). 

III.  Theory. — The  doctrine  of  the  incamation  is  fun- 
damental  to  Christianity,  and  is  the  basis  upon  which 
the  entire  fabric  of  rerealed  religion  rests.  It  is  pre- 
sented  to  our  faith  from  the  piane  of  the  miraculous, 
and  is  to  be  considered  as  the  one  all-comprehenslYe 
miracle  of  Christianity.  It  contains  within  itself  essen- 
tially  the  entire  series  of  miracles  as  taught  in  the  Gos- 
peK  These  miracles  are  the  frait,  after  its  kind,  which 
this  divine  tree  brings  forth.  Faith  sees  in  the  fallen 
estate  of  so  noble  a  being  as  man,  and  his  restoration  to 
purity,  immortality,  and  God,  objects  commensurate 
with  the  sacrifice  and  humiliation  that  are  implied  in 
the  incamation,  and  accepts  the  doctrine  as  correspond- 
ing  to  the  wants  and  necessities  of  human  naturę ;  but 
a  dirine  revelation  elerates  our  vision,  and  meets  all  ob- 
Jections  founded  upon  the  comparative  insignificance  of 
our  race  by  indicating  that  in  some  mysterious  manner 
the  influences  of  the  atonement  may  beneficially  afTect 
the  entire  universe.  See  Garbett,  Chritt  as  Prophet,  i, 
12 ;  Kurtz,  A  stron,  and  the  Bibie,  transL  p.  95  Bq. ;  Calvin 
on  CoL  i,  20 ;  OIshausen,  Stier,  and  Harless  on  Eph.  ii,  20. 

The  blending  together  of  two  natures  implied  in  an 
incamation  presupposes  some  element  of  naturę  common 
to  both.  As  far  as  we  can  see,  *'  things  absolutely  dis- 
similar  in  their  naturę  cannot  mingle:  water  cannot 
coalesce  with  fire ;  water  cannot  mix  with  oil"  (F.  W. 
Robertson  on  ^latU  v,  48).  "  Forasmuch  as  there  is  no 
union  of  God  with  man  without  that  mean  between  both 
which  is  both"  (Hooker),  we  see  in  the  incamation,  re- 
flected  as  in  a  mirror,  the  trae  nobility  of  man^s  naturę, 
and  the  secret  of  the  fact  that  the  incamation  took 
place  in  the  seed  of  Abraham  rather  than  in  angels. 
"  For  verily  he  taketh  not  hołd  of  angels,  but  of  the 
seed  of  Abraham  he  taketh  hołd"  (Heb.  ii,  16,  marginal 
rend.).  **  The  most  common  modę  of  presenting  the 
doctrine  is  to  say  that  the  Logos  assumed  our  fallen  hu* 
manity.    But  by  this,  we  are  told,  is  not  to  be  under* 


INCARNATION 


532 


INCARNATION 


stood  that  he  aasumed  an  indiyidoAl  body  and  soul,  80 
that  he  became  a  man,  but  that  he  assumed  generic  hu- 
manity,  8o  that  he  became  ihe  man.  By  generic  hu- 
manity  Ib  to  be  underatood  a  life-power,  that  peculiar 
law  of  life,  coiporeal  and  incoiporeal^which  derelops  it- 
aelf  outwudly  as  a  body,  and  inwardly  as  a  souL  The 
Son,  therefore,  became  incamate  in  humanity  in  that 
objectiye  leality,  entity,  or  substance  in  which  all  hu- 
man  liyes  are  one.  Thus,  too,  Olshausen,  in  his  oom- 
ment  on  John  i,  14,  says,  *  It  could  not  be  said  that  the 
Word  was  madę  man,  which  would  imply  that  thc  Re- 
deemer  was  a  man  by  the  side  of  other  men,  whereas, 
being  the  second  Adam,  he  represented  the  totality  of 
human  naturę  in  his  exalted  oomprehensive  personal- 
ity/  To  the  same  effect  he  says,  in  his  remarks  on 
Bom.  V,  15, '  If  Christ  were  a  man  among  other  men,  it 
would  be  impoesible  to  conoeive  how  his  suffering  and 
obedience  could  haye  an  essential  influence  on  mankind : 
he  could  then  only  operate  as  an  ezample ;  but  he  is  to 
be  regarded,  eyen  apart  from  his  diyine  naturę,  as  the 
man,  L  e.  as  realizing  the  absolute  idea  of  humanity, 
and  including  it  potentially  in  himself  spiritually  as 
Adam  did  corporeally.*  To  this  point  archdeacon  Wil- 
berforce  deyotes  the  third  chapter  of  his  book  on  The 
Incamaiiony  and  represents  the  whole  yalue  of  Christ's 
work  as  depending  upon  it.  If  this  be  denied,  he  sajrs, 
'  the  doctrines  of  atonement  and  sancdfication,  though 
confessed  in  words,  become  a  merę  empty  phraseology.' 
In  fine,  Dr.  Neyin,  of  America,  in  his  Mpsłical  Preaenoe, 
p.  210,  says,  <  The  Word  became  flesh ;  not  a  single  man 
only,  as  one  among  many,  hut  jkah,  or  humanity,  in  its 
uniyersal  conception.  How  else  could  he  be  the  prin- 
ciple  of  a  generał  life,  the  origin  of  a  new  order  of  exist- 
ence  for  the  human  world  as  such  ?"  (Eadie).  This  flne 
distinction,  howeyer,  sayors  too  much  of  transcendental- 
ism  to  be  capable  of  elear  apprehension  or  generał  re- 
oeption.  It  is  sufficient  to  say  that  the  diyine  Logos 
actually  assumed  a  human  body  and  soul,  not  predsely 
auch  as  fallen  men  haye,  but  like  that  of  the  newly-cre- 
ated  Adam,  or  rather  became  himself  the  archetypal 
man  ailer  whom,  as  a  pattem  originally  in  the  mind  of 
Deity,  the  human  race  was  primeyally  fashioned.  See 
Imaob  of  God. 

The  question  whether  there  would  or  could  haye  been 
an  incamation  without  the  fali  of  man  has  especlally 
engaged  the  speculatiye  minds  of  German  diyines,  most 
of  whom  roaintain  the  affirmatiye.  **If,  then,  the  Be- 
deemer  of  the  world  stands  in  an  etemal  relation  to  the 
Father  and  to  humanity — if  his  person  has  not  merely 
a  historical,  not  merely  a  religious  and  ethical,  but  also 
a  metaphysical  signiflcanoe,  sin  alone  cannot  haye  been 
the  ground  of  his  reyelation ;  for  there  was  no  meta- 
physical necessity  for  sin  entering  the  world,  and  Christ 
oould  not  be  our  Redeemer  if  it  had  been  etemally  in- 
yolyed  in  the  idea  that  he  should  be  our  Mediator.  Are 
we  to  suppose  that  what  is  most  glorious  in  the  world 
oould  only  be  reached  through  the  medium  of  sin?  that 
there  would  haye  been  no  room  in  the  human  race  for 
the  glory  of  the  only-begotten  One  but  for  sin?  If  we 
start  with  the  thought  of  humanity  as  destined  to  bear 
the  image  of  God,  with  the  thought  of  a  kingdom  of 
indiyiduals  fUled  with  God,  must  we  not  neoessarily 
ask,  eyen  if  we  for  the  moment  suppose  sin  to  haye  no 
exifitence,  Where  in  this  kingdom  is  the  perfect  Grod- 
man?  No  one  of  the  indiyiduals  by  himself  expre8ses 
morę  than  a  relatiye  union  of  the  diyine  and  human 
natures.  No  one  participates  morę  than  partially  in 
the  "  fubiess  of  him  that  filleth  aU*'  (Eph.  i,  23).  AU, 
therefore,  point  beyond  themselyes  to  a  union  of  God 
and  man,  which  is  not  partial  and  relatiye  {Ik  fŁkpovCt  1 
Cor. xii,  27),  but  perfect  and  complete"  (Martensen,  Chris' 
Han  Dogmaiict,  §  131).  See  also  Muller,  Deutsche  Zeit- 
schri/l,  1853,  No.  43 ;  Philippi,  Kirchliche  Giaubetukhrej 
Einleitung;  Ebrard,  DogmatiJe,  ii,  95 ;  British  and  For- 
eiffn  Ev,  Ree,  in  TheoL  Eckc,  iii,  267. 

lY.  Ohjectums  to  the  Bibie  doctrine  of  the  incama- 
tion worthy  of  consideration  are  morę  easily  resolyed, 


perhaps,  than  those  against  any  other  doctrine  of  Soip* 
turę,  for  they  are  mostly,  if  not  altogether,  to  be  ooib« 
prehended  under  the  head  of  its  deep  mytbeńoaaaem. 
Many  writers,  howeyer,  haye  addoced  as  panllel  the 
mystery  of  creation,  which  is  in  itself  the  embodiment 
of  thought  in  matter,  and  the  existence  of  soch  a  oon- 
pofiite  being  as  man,  not  to  speak  of  mysteries  with 
which  our  entire  economy  is  crowded.  A  priori^  it  is 
not  morę  difficult  to  conoeiye  of  the  union  of  the  diyioe 
with  the  human,  or  the  taking  up  of  the  hmnan  into 
the  diyine,  than  to  oomprehend  the  incamation  of  an 
immaterial  essence  such  as  that  of  the  mind  in  a  mate- 
riał form  like  that  of  the  body.  **  If  eyen  in  oor  tine 
the  idea  of  the  incamation  of  God  sdll  appeais  ao  diffi- 
cult,  the  principal  reason  is,  that  the  fact  itself  is  too 
much  isolated.  It  is  always  the  impulse  of  spuit  to 
embody  itself,  for  oorporeity  is  the  end  of  the  work  of 
Grod ;  in  eyery  phenomenon  an  idea  desoenda  fram  tbe 
world  of  spirit  and  embodies  itself  here  below.  It  mj 
therefore  be  said  that  all  the  nobler  among  men  aie  nys 
of  that  Bun  which  in  Christ  rosę  on  the  fiimameot  of 
humanity.  In  Abraham,  Moses,  and  others,  we  abodr 
discoyer  the  coming  Christ"  (Olshausen  on  John  i,  14). 

The  strictures  of  archbishop  Whately  with  Tsapeet  to 
the  substance  of  Deity,  etc,  may  hołd  good  of  dogms- 
tism  upon  the  incamation :  **  But  as  to  the  tubttanei  of 
the  supremę  Being  and  of  the  human  aool,  many  men 
were  (and  still  are)  confident  in  their  opiniona,  and  dog- 
maticał  m  maintaining  them :  the  morę,  inasnrach  n  ia 
these  subjects  they  could  not  bo  refuted  by  an  appeal 
to  experiment.  .  .  .  Philosophicał  diyines  are  continft- 
ally  prone  to  foiget  that  the  subjects  on  włuch  they 
speculate  are  cmfetsedly  and  by  their  own  aoeonnt  be- 
yond the  reach  of  the  human  facułtiea.  This  is  no  rei- 
son,  indeed,  against  our  belieAńng  anything  dearly  re- 
tealed  in  Scripture ;  but  it  w  a  reason  against  going  be- 
yond Scripture  with  metaphysical  speculations  of  oor 
own,"  etc  (Cydop.  Brit,  i,  517, 8th  ed.).  On  objectioną 
consult  Liddon,  Bampton  Lecture,  lect  y ;  SadJer,  Em- 
manuelj  chaps.  ii,  y ;  Frayssinous,  De/,  of  Chriatiamijff  ii, 
eh.  xxy ;  Thos.  Adams,  MedUatioM  on  Creed,  in  YForb, 
iii,  235 ;  Martensen,  C^ruf.  Dogmat  §  132. 

y.  ffistory  of  Views, — ^The  trae  theory  of  the  natnre 
of  Christ  was  of  graduał  deyelopment  in  the  histoiy  of 
the  Church.  Not  unlike  the  best  and  most  endnring 
growths  of  naturę,  it  sprang  up  and  matured  amid  tbe 
conflicts  of  doubt  and  the  tempests  of  faction.  (See  § 
YIII,  below.)  The  efforts  to  harmonize  the  divine  snd 
human  natures  of  Christ  gaye  rise  to  a  seriea  of  flnctoa- 
tions  of  doubt,  which  illustrate  in  a  signal  manner  tbe 
tendencies  of  the  human  mind  to  reooił  fiom  ooe  ex- 
ireme  to  another.  The  dose  of  the  4th  centoiy  (ADl 
381)  witnessed  the  maturing  of  correct  yiewa  aa  to  tbe 
twofold  naturę  in  the  one  person  of  Cłirist,  and  their 
embodiment  in  the  creed,  which,  aubjected  to  the  test  of 
centuries,  is  still  the  expre8sion  and  symbol  of  the  iaiih 
of  the  Chiurch.  See  Creed,  Nicenk  and  Coksta^ti- 
NOPOLITAN,  yoL  ii,  p.  562. 

**  If  we  would  coirectly  apprehendthe  ancient  Chmdł 
doctrine  of  the  two  natures,  we  must  take  ^wnę  in  the 
abstract  sense  in  which  it  was  nsed.  The  diyine  na- 
turę cousists  in  this,  that  Clirist  is  God,  tbe  pifedicite 
*  Go<t  belongs  to  him ;  the  human  natnre  ia  this,  thst 
the  predicate  *  man^  is  aasigned  to  iL  His  diyine  natnie 
is  the  diyine  essence  which  ntbń$U  in  the  Logos  finom 
eternity,  and  which  in  liis  beooming  man  he  still  rr- 
tained.  His  human  natnre  is  the  man's  natnre  or  modę 
of  being  and  oonstitution,  which /br  ittełfdoa  not  nA- 
titt,  but  which,  as  a  unitertal  atfrUute,  ezista  in  aD 
other  men,  and,  sińce  łiis  incamation,  alao  in  hini-'the 
natura  hominunu  To  haye  human  feeling,  will,  and 
thought,  and  as  a  human  soul  to  animate  a  human  body, 
is  human  naturę.  We  must,  howeyer,  neyer  think  of 
human  naturę  as  a  ttnicretem,  a  subtisteiUf  a  son  of  Maiy, 
with  which  the  Son  of  God  united  himself,  or  nuxed 
himself  up"  (Ebrard,  in  H&zog,Beal''Eneykiop&Be,a,r, 
Jesus  Christ). 


INCARNATION 


633 


INCARNATION 


With  the  esplanation  thua  giyen,  we  prooeed  to  re- 
mark  that  thA  earliest  controyenies  of  the  Church  re- 
Tolyed  aroimd  the  physical  naturę  of  Christ.  The  result 
of  those  contests  established  the  easential  oneness  of 
Chriat*8  bod^  with  oun.  The  pungency  of  the  aigu- 
ments  emplored  may  be  illnstrated  in  tt^e  words  of  Ire- 
ncoB  (ąnoted  by  Uooker,  EccL  Polity,  y,  sec.  53)  :  *^  If 
Chiist  had  not  taken  iłesh  from  the  yery  earth,  he  would 
not  haye  ooyeted  those  earthly  noorishments  wherewith 
bodies  taken  fiom  thence  aie  fed.  This  was  the  naturę 
which  felt  honger  after  long  fasting,  was  desirous  of  rest 
after  trayel,  testified  compaseion  and  loye  by  tears, 
gpoaned  in  heayiness,  and  with  estremity  of  grief  melt- 
ed  away  itseif  into  bloody  sweats."  The  earliest  fa- 
thecB,  with  the  exception  of  Jnstin  Martyr,  held  the 
opinion  that  Christ  assamed  only  a  haman  body,  or,  if 
he  had  a  son],  it  was  animal,  or,  which  was  morę  oom- 
mon,  they  qoite  ignored  the  ąuestion  of  his  human  souL 
The  yiews  of  Jostin,  howeyer,  were  colored  by  the  Pla- 
tonie philoeophy,  which  led  him  to  attribute  to  Christ 
body,  sou],  and  spirit,  bat  in  such  a  modę  of  union  with 
the  Logos  as  to  fumish  the  genns  of  the  futurę  error  of 
ApoUinaiia  the  younger.  Tertullian,  about  the  end  of 
the  2d  oentury,  first  ascribed  to  Christ  a  proper  haman 
soul,  and  thos  met  and  disposed  of  the  difficulties  which 
had  ańsen  from  the  teaching  that  oonnected  the  Logos 
immediately  with  the  body  of  Christ.  The  doctrine  of 
the  human  sool  of  Christ  was  morę  f  ully  deyeloped  and 
iUostrated  by  Origen.  But,  in  comparing  the  connec- 
tion  between  the  Logos  and  the  human  naturę  in  Christ 
to  the  anion  of  belieyers  with  Christ,  he  drew  upon 
himself  the  objection  that  he  madę  Christ  a  merę  man. 
(See  further,  Knapp,  Leetures  on  Christian  Theology^  sec. 
di,  noce  by  the  translator.)  Ambrose  {De  Incamatione^ 
p.  76)  may  morę  pioperly  serve  as  the  connecting  link 
between  Tertullian  and  the  Athanasian  Creed,  the  latter 
letting  forth  the  doctrine  to  which  the  Church  was 
flloiriy  attaining  in  the  following  words:  "Perfectus 
Dena,  perfectos  homo,  ex  anima  rationali  et  liumana 
came  subsistens."  Thus  Ambrose  reasons:  ''Do  we 
aiso  infer  diyision  when  we  affirm  that  he  took  on  him 
a  reaaonable  soul,  and  one  endowed  with  intellectual  ca- 
pacity?  For  God  himself,  the  Word,  was  not  to  the 
flesh  as  the  reasonable  intellectual  soul;  but  God  the 
Word,  taking  upon  him  a  reasonable  intellectual  soul, 
human,  and  of  the  same  subetance  with  our  souls,  the 
flesh  alao  like  our  own,  and  of  the  same  substance  with 
that  of  which  our  flesh  Ls  formed,  was  also  perfect  man, 
but  without  any  taint  of  sin.  .  .  .  Wherefore  his  flesh 
and  his  soul  were  of  the  same  substanoe  with  our  souls 
and  our  flesh.*'  Que8tions  in  connection  with  the  na- 
tore  of  the  human  sool  of  Christ  came  into  greater 
promuwnce  towards  the  close  of  the  4th  ceńtury  than 
ever  befoie  in  the  history  of  the  Church.  Apollinaris 
the  younger  reyiyed  the  opinion  which  extensively  pre- 
yailed  in  the  primitiye  Church,  that  Christ  connected 
himself  only  with  a  human  body  and  an  ammal  soul 
(Elase,  Ch,  Hi»t.  sec.  104).  ''Two  beings  persisting  in 
their  oompletenesB,  he  conceiyed,  could  not  be  united 
into  one  whole.  Out  of  the  union  of  the  perfect  human 
natore  with  the  Deity  one  person  neyer  coidd  proceed; 
and,  moie  particaiariy,  the  rational  soul  of  the  man  could 
not  be  asBomed  into  union  with  the  diyine  Logos  so  as 
to  form  one  peraon**  (Neander,  iv,  119,  Clarke's  edition). 
From  an  early  part  of  the  9th  oentury,  when  the  Adop- 
tian  tenets  sank  into  obliyion,  the  Church  enjoyed  com- 
paratiye  rest.  But,  as  might  haye  been  presumed,  the 
era  of  schoUstic  theology,  which  was  inangurated  at 
tboot  the  eommenoement  of  the  12th  century,  and  eon- 
tinned  into  the  I5th,  although  the  attention  of  the 
achoohnen  was  morę  directed  to  other  snbjects,  did  not 
ptti  by  one  that  so  leadily  admitted  the  exercise  of  di- 
>ltttic  rabdety.  The  nominalism  of  Rosoelinus,  '*  which 
TCgarded  the  appellation  God,  that  is  common  to  the 
<bree  perMns,  aa  a  mer)  name,  i  e.  as  the  abstract  idea 
of  t  genufl!'  (Hagenbach),  had  penrerted  the  true  idea 
of  Fither,  Son,  and  Spirit  into  that  of  three  uidiyiduals 


or  things,  in  contradistinction  to  one  thing  (una  res), 
In  response,  Anselm  argued  that,  as  eyeiy  uniyersal  ia 
a  merę  abstraction,  and  particulars  alone  haye  reality, 
BO  "  if  only  the  essence  of  God  in  the  Trinity  was  called 
una  res,  and  the  three  persons  not  tres  ret,  the  latter 
could  not  be  considered  as  anything  reaL  Only  the  one 
God  would  be  the  recU;  all  besides  would  become  a 
merę  nominał  distinction,  to  which  nothing  real  corre- 
sponded ;  and  so,  therefore,  along  with  the  Son,  the  Fa^ 
ther  and  the  Holy  Ghost  would  also  haye  become  man" 
(Neander,  viii,  92).  '<The  daring  assertions  of  Roecel- 
inus  expo8ed  him  to  the  charge  of  Tritheism,  wfaile 
those  of  Abelard  exposed  him  to  that  of  Sabellianism. 
The  distinction  which  Gilbert  of  Poitiers  drew  between 
the  quo  ett  and  the  guod  ett  gaye  to  his  doctrine  the 
semblance  of  Tetratheism^'  (see  Hagenbach,  Jlistory  of 
Doct.  i,  sec  170).  Though  his  starting-point  was  Real- 
ism,  he  airiyed  at  the  same  goal  as  the  Nominalist  Ros- 
oelinus. "  The  Scholastics  had  much  to  say  of  the  re- 
Isitioa  of  number  to  the  diyine  unity.  Since  Boethius 
had  put  forth  the  canon,  *  Yere  unum  esse,  in  quo  nullus 
sit  numerus,'  Peter  the  Lombard  sought  to  ayoid  the 
difficulty  by  saying  that  number,  in  its  application  to 
God  and  diyine  things,  had  only  a  negatiye  meaning; 
'  these  are  rather  said  to  exclude  what  is  not  in  God 
than  to  assert  what  is'"  {TheoL  Lecf,  by  Dr.  Twesten, 
transL  in  Bib,  Sac.  iii,  770).  ''  Considered  as  an  act, 
according  to  Thomas  Aquinas,  the  incamation  is  the 
work  of  the  whole  Trinity ;  but  in  respect  to  its  terrni* 
nu8,  that  is,  the  personal  union  of  the  diyine  and  human 
naturę,  it  belongs  only  to  the  Son;  sińce,  according  to 
the  doctrine  of  the  Church,  it  is  fiist  and  properly  not 
the  naturę,  but  a  person,  and  that  the  seoond  person, 
which  has  assumed  humanity."  (For  the  accordance 
of  this  with  the  confession  of  faith  of  the  eleyenth 
Council  at  Toledo,  A.D.  675,  see  Bib,  Sac  iy,  50,  notę.) 
''  Duns  Scotus  ascribed  to  the  human  naturę  of  Christ  a 
proper  if  not  an  independent  existence.  This  funda* 
mental  yiew  of  the  Middle  Ages  Luther  also  adopted, 
and  designated  the  diyinity  and  humanity  as  two 
'  parts  ;*  ^^d  upon  this  he  built  his  Łheory  of  the  impar- 
tation  of  the  diyine  attribute  to  the  human''  (Herzog). 
The  age  of  the  Reformation  contributed  nothing  or 
but  little  new  on  the  subject  of  the  incamation.  The 
most  that  it  did  was  to  repeat  some  of  the  morę  pesti- 
lent  errors  of  the  past,  and  in  the  mean  time,  through 
the  conflicts  of  mind,  bring  into  bolder  relief  the  linea- 
ments  of  truth.  *^  Thus  Caspar  Schwenkfield  re^dyed 
the  docetico-monophysitic  doctrine  conceming  the  '^/o- 
riJUd  and  deijied  JUsK  of  Christ  Menno  Simonis,  as 
well  as  other  Anabaptists,  supposed  (like  the  Yalentin- 
ians  in  the  first  period)  that  our  Lord's  birth  was  a  merę 
phantom.  Michael  Seryetus  maintained  that  Christ 
was  a  merę  man,  filled  with  the  diyine  naturę,  and  re- 
jected  all  further  distinctions  between  his  two  natures 
as  unscriptural,  and  founded  upon  scholastic  definitions 
alone.  Fanstus  Socinus  went  so  far  as  to  return  to 
the  yiew  entertained  by  the  Ebionites  and  Nazarenes" 
(Hagenbach,  History  of  Doct,  sec  266).  According  to 
Domer,  ^  Seryetus,  resting  on  a  pantheistic  basis,  could 
say  that  the  flesh  of  Christ  was  consubstantial  with 
Gród,  but  the  same  would  hołd  true  in  reference  to  all 
flesh."  Neyertheless,  he  did  not  say  it  in  reference  to 
all  flesh.  *<  In  his  opinion,  Christ  idone  is  the  Son  of 
God;  nor  is  that  name  to  be  giyen  to  any  one  else" 
(Hagenbach,  sec  265).  The  controyersies  between  Cal- 
yin  and  Seryetus,  in  which  wore  comprehended  the  ei^ 
roneous  yiews  of  the  latter  on  the  subject  of  the  in- 
camation, at  last  culminated  m  his  death  at  the  stake. 
Much,  howeycr,  as  Calyin  was  blamed  for  calling  the 
Son,  considered  in  his  essence,  airridfoc,  still  he  was 
right,  and  is  snpported  by  Lutheran  theologians.  In 
another  point  of  yiew,  that  is,  considered  in  his  personal 
subaistence,  the  Son  cannot  be  called  abro^toc,  but  only 
the  Father,  sińce  he  alone  is  dykwtjroc ;  bat  the  dycy- 
prfffia  of  the  person  is  not  to  be  confounded  with  the 
abac^uteneas  of  the  essence."    (See  further,  Tweaten,  in 


mCARNATION 


534 


INCARNATION 


the  BUk  Sac,  iv,  89.  For  the  differencea,  as  leepecta 
the  incamation,  between  Luther  and  Zwingle,  in  which 
each  failed  to  compiehend  the  stand-point  of  the  other, 
see  Herzog,  Real-JCncyldopadie,  art.  Jesus  Christ.) 

y I.  Theophania^— li  might  ha^e  been  expected,  from 
a  consideration  of  an  event  of  such  moment  to  our  race 
as  the  incamation,  that,  dehtyed  so  long  in  the  history 
of  the  worid,  it  would  not  haye  been  without  its  adum- 
brations,  like  types  in  naturę,  mute  prophecies  of  arche- 
typńl  eaistenoe.  The  first  prophecy  of  the  incaroation 
was  ooeyal  with  the  fali.  In  terms  succinct  and  yet 
elear,  the  acnouncement  was  madę  that  from  the  seed 
of  the  woman  should  rise  the  hope  of  man.  In  analogy 
with  naturę  the  typical  fonn  was  thus  giren,  from  which 
the  grand  archetyphal  idea  should  be  elaborated,  mitil 
in  the  fulness  of  time  that  idea  should  be  permanently 
embodied,  and  God  become  manifest  in  the  flesh.  **  No 
Booner  had  the  fint  Adam  appeared  and  fallen  than  a 
new  school  of  prophecy  began,  in  which  type  and  sym- 
bol were  mingled  with  what  had  now  its  first  existence 
on  the  earth— yerbal  enunciations;  and  all  pointed  to 
the  second  Adam,  *  the  Lord  from  heayen.*  In  him  cr^ 
ation  and  the  Creator  meet  in  reality  and  not  in  sem- 
blance.  On  the  yery  apex  of  the  finished  pyramid  of 
being  sits  the  adorable  Monarch  of  all— 4»  the  Son  of 
Mary,  of  Dayid,  of  the  first  Adam,  the  created  of  God ; 
as  God  and  the  Son  of  God,  the  etemal  Creator  of  the 
uniyerse;  and  these— the  two  Adams— form  the  main 
theme  of  all  prophecy,  natural  and  reyealed.  That  type 
and  symbol  should  haye  been  employed  with  reference 
oot  only  to  the  second,  but,  as  held  by  men  like  Agas- 
siz  and  Owen,  to  the  first  Adam  also,  exemplifies,  we 
are  disposed  to  think,  the  unity  of  the  style  of  Deity, 
and  seryes  to  show  that  it  was  he  who  created  the 
worlds  that  dictated  the  Scńptures*'  (Hugh  Miller,  in 
Fairbaim's  Typology,  yoL  i,  append.  i).  S^  also  Hugh 
Miller,  Test,  of  Rocka^  lecLy;  MKDosh,  Typiail  Fomuj 
Agassiz,  Princ,  qfZoology^  pt.  i. 

During  the  course  of  the  preparatoiy  dispensations, 
the  diyine  Being  disclosed  himself  to  the  morę  pious 
and  fayored  of  our  race  in  the  form  of  man,  and  with 
the  title  x)f  "the  Angel  of  Jehovah"— ninj  r)tóą 
The  first  of  these  appearances  was  to  Hagar  in  her  dis- 
tress.  The  angel  addressed  her  in  the  person  of  God, 
and  she,  in  return,  attributed  to  him  the  name  of  "  Thou, 
God,  seest  me."  The  foremost  of  the  three  angels  with 
whom  Abraham  conyersed  with  respect  to  the  cities  of 
the  plain  (Gen.  xyiii)  is  called  not  fcwer  than  eight 
times  "  Jehoyah,"  and  six  times  "  Lord"  (^3^K).  (See 
Hengstenberg,  CkrUtoL  i,  112,  transL)  In  the  destruc- 
tion  of  the  cities  of  the  plain  an  unmistakable  distinc- 
tion  is  madę  between  two  persons,  each  of  whom  beais 
the  same  diyine  name:  "Then  the  Lord  rained  upon 
Sodom  and  upon  Gomorrah  brimstone  and  fire  firom  the 
Lord  out  of  heayen"  (Gen.  xix,  24).  The  fuli  naturę  of 
the  theophany  to  Jaoob  (Gen.  xxxii,  24-30)  is  madę  man- 
ifest in  Hos.  xii,  8-5.  The  scenę  opens  with  the  yiew 
of  a  man  wrestling  with  Jacob,  and  closes  with  Jacob's 
calling  the  name  of  the  place  "  Peniel,  for  I  haye  seen 
God  foce  to  face,  and  my  life  is  preseryed."  "The 
prophet  Hosea  puts  it  beyond  a  doubt  that  this  was  a 
diyine  person  by  styling  him  not  only  an  angel  and 
God  (Q*^ńbM),  but  Jehovahj  God  of  ho9t»,  Jehovah  it 
hu  memoriał  Whilst,  therefore,  he  was  a  man  and  an 
angel,  or  the  angel  ofthe  wvenant,  he  was  also  the  au' 
preme  Jehotah,  Thcse  titles  and  attiibutes  belong  to 
nonę  other  than  the  second  person  of  the  blessed  Trin- 
ity,  Christ  the  Sayiour"  (Dayidson,  Sacred  Hermeneu- 
tics,  p.  281).  The  "  Angel  of  Jehoyah"  appears  to  Mo- 
ses  in  a  flame  of  fire  from  the  bush,  and  still  takes  to 
himself  the  names  of  Deity,  Elohim,  and  Jehoyah  (£xod. 
iii,  2-7) ;  manifests  himself  to  Manoah  as  man,  and  yet 
is  recognised  and  worshipped  as  God,  while  he  declares 
his  name  to  be  "  Wonderful,"  the  same  as  in  Isa.  ix,  6 ; 
and  at  the  dose  of  the  01d*Te8tament  canon  (MaL  iii, 
1)  he  is  announced  m  the  angel  or  messenger  who 


should  Boddenly  come  to  his  Tempie.  (See  also  Esod. 
xiy,  19;  xyiii,  20;  xxii,  84;  xxiii,  23;  NumU  xx,  16; 
comp.  £xod.  xxiii,  21 ;  xxxiii,  2,  8, 14;  Josh.  yi,  2;  y, 
18-15,22;  Judg.yi,  11-22;  xiii, 6-22;  Isa.  lxiii, 9l) 

As  to  the  naturę  of  this  mysterious  perscmage,  ilnre 
haye  been  those  who  haye  held,  with  Auguadne,  that 
the  theophanies  were  "  not  direct  appearances  of  a  per- 
son in  the  Godhead,  but  self-mauifestatious  of  (xod 
through  a  created  being"  (see  Liddon,  BampUm  LećL  ii, 
87,  notę),  among  the  latest  defenders  of  which  yiew  are 
Hoffman  (in  his  Weiuagung  und  ErftdUng)  and  De- 
lituch  (on  Genesis),  On  the  other  hand,  the  fathen 
of  the  Church  pńor  to  the  Nicene  Council  were  almoet 
unanimous  in  the  opinion  that  the  "angel  of  Jcboyab"* 
is  identical  with  Jehotah  himself,  not  denoting  an  ex- 
istence  apart  from  himself,  but  only  the  modę  of  mani- 
festation  of  the  diyine  Logos,  who  subseąnently  became 
incamate;  and  in  this  yiew  the  Church  has  generally 
acquiesced.  (On  the  subject  of  theophanies,  see  Justin 
Mi^yr,  Apohgy  /  Eusebius,  £ccL  Hist,  i,  eh.  ii;  Kurtz, 
Old  Cov,  i,  181-201,  transL;  an  able  artide  in  the  Stui 
u.  KriL  of  1840  by  Nitzsch ;  E.  H.  Stohl,  DU  Endń- 
nungen  Jehovas  u,  Seiner  Engel  im  A.T^m  £ichlKan*s 
Bib,  Rep,  yii,  156  8q.;  Hanlein,  Ueber  Theo.  u,  Ckń/to- 
phamen,  in  the  N,  Theoi,  Joum,  ii,  1  sq.,  98  są.,  277  sq.) 
See  Theophany. 

YIL  The  Logos. — ^Inthedescriptionoftheiiicamatioii 
giyen  by  the  eyangelist  John  there  appears  the  term 
"  Logos"  Ul  a  sense  new  to  the  Scriptures,  and  among 
New-Testament  writers  peculiar  to  him.  Much  hai 
been  written  on  the  origm  of  this  word.  The  Targums, 
the  best  of  which  are  generally  attributed  to  the  lit 
century,  may  be  regarded  as  embodying  the  sentiments 
of  that  age  (Etheridge,  //e&.  LU,  p.  191).  In  these,  iór 
the  name  of  Deity,  "Jehoyah,"  there  is  employed  tbe 
paraphrase  "  Word  of  the  Lord."  "  On  this  drcam- 
stance  much  argument  has  been  built  Some  have 
maintained  that  it  supplies  an  indubiuUe  ascription  <^ 
perBonal'existence  to  the  Word,  in  some  sense  distincc 
from  the  personal  existence  of  the  supremę  Father; 
that  this  Word  is  the  Logos  of  the  New  Tesument; 
and,  consequently,  that  the  phrase  is  a  proof  of  a  belief 
among  the  ancient  Jews  in  the  pre-exi8Łenoe,  the  per- 
sonal operations,  and  the  deity  of  the  Messiah,  'the 
Word  who  became  fiesh,  and  fixed  his  tabemade  among 
us'"  (J.  Pye  Smith,  Messiah^  bk.  ii,  sec.  11 ;  oompare 
Bertholdt,  Christol,  Jud  p.  180  są.).  Others  haye  re- 
ferred  the  origin  of  the  word  to  PMlo;  but,  as  has  been 
abundantly  shown,  the  Logos  of  Fhilo  has  bat  littk  in 
oommon  with  that  of  the  Gospel  (Tholuck,  Comm,  ad 
loc  p.  61),  and  u  but  a  nucleus  of  diyine  ideas,  which 
lacks  the  essential  element  of  personality.  "  Bliiiding  sf 
the  resemblance  between  many  of  his  ideaa  and  noodei 
of  expre88ion  and  those  of  Chrisdanity  may  be  to  the 
superficial  reader,  yet  the  essential  principle  is  to  iti 
yery  foundation  diyerse.  £yen  that  which  sounds  like 
the  expres8ion8  of  John  has  in  its  entire  ccmnectioo  a 
meaning  altogether  diyerse.  .  .  .  His  system  staiks  by 
the  cradle  of  Christianity  only  as  a  q)ectni  ooonterparL 
It  appears  like  the  floating,  dissolyingyoto  Morgana 
on  the  horizon,  where  Christianity  is  about  to  aiise'' 
(Domer,  Lehre  v,  der  Person  Christi,  ii,  198, 842.  Comp. 
Burton,  BampUm  Lect.  notę  98 ;  KiUer,  Z/uf.  of  PkSk)$, 
transL  iy,  407-478 ;  Liddon,  BampUm  Leeture,  pw  93-108; 
Dollinger,  Heid,  u.  Judenthum,  x,  8 ;  Bib.  JSaera,  yi,  173 ; 
yii,  13,  696-732;  Afeth.  Ouart.  Bec,  1851,  p.  877;  1850, 
p.  110-129).    See  Logos. 

YHL  //ereMM.— The  false  theories  that  haye  gathered 
around  the  doctrine  ofthe  incamation  are  manifold,  and 
deny  (1)  that  Christ  was  truły  God,  (2)  that  he  was 
truły  man,  or  (3)  that  he  is  God-man  in  one  undiyided 
and  indiyisible  person.  (See  Wangemann,  ChrislHehs 
Glauhenslehre,  p.  208 ;  Ffoulkes,  Christendom^s  DiMons, 
2  yols.  8yo.)    Compare  Christolocy,  III. 

1.  Ebionism, — This,  the  first  heresy  of  impottanoe, 
took  its  rise  during  the  lifetime  of  the  apostks,  and  re- 
ceiyed  its  designation,  acoording  to  Oiigen,  from  Y^^ 


INCARNATION 


535 


INCARNATION 


pooTy  thus  signif3ring,  perhaps,  the  meagrenesB  of  their 
reli^ioua  sy^Łem,  or,  morę  properly,  the  poverty  of  its 
foUowen.  They  dcnied  the  divinity  of  Christ,  but  9Mr 
cribed  to  him  a  superior  legał  piety  and  the  elevated 
wisdom  of  a  prophet.  Eusebius  says  {liiat,  EccUs.  iii, 
7),  **T.ie  coaunon  Ebionites  themselyes  suppose  that  a 
higher  power  had  united  itself  with  the  man  Jesus  at 
his  baptisnL"  The  Ebionites,  whose  vlews  are  repre- 
sented  by  the  Ciemeniine  HomUUa^  differed  from  the  for- 
mer  by  aaserting  that  Jesus  had  from  the  beginning 
been  perraded  with  the  same  power ;  in  their  opiniou 
lie  tanks  with  Adam,  Enoch,  and  Moses  (Hagenbach, 
niMt.  ofDocłrinUf  i,  180).  This  error,  which  has  been 
called,  not  improperiy,  the  Socinianism  of  the  age,  re- 
yired  and  embodied  the  sentiments  conceming  the 
Measiah  current  among  the  Jews  during  his  life.  The 
▼iewB  of  the  Nazaratetf  who  are  generally  regarded  as 
a  species  of  Ebionites,  whilo  they  morę  nearly  ap- 
proached  the  orthodox  faith,  agreed  with  them  in  re- 
garding  Christ  as  only  a  superior  man. 

2.  Gnostidam, — The  Ebionitish  hcresy  that  rosę  with- 
in  the  infant  Church,  from  its  necessary  association  with 
Jodaism,  was  paralleled  by  another  (Gnosticism),  which 
sprana  from  a  similar  contact  with  the  pagan  philoso- 
phy  of  the  age.  The  assumption  of  a  superior  capacity 
for  knowledge  implied  in  the  namc  the  Gnostics  borę 
(yv^(C,  1  Cor.  viii,  1 ;  1  Tim.  vi,  20 ;  CoL  ii,  8),  proba- 
biy  self-assumed,  indicated  the  transcendental  specula- 
tions  which  they  ingrafŁed  on  the  tender  plant  of  Chris- 
tianity.  With  respect  to  the  naturę  of  Christ,  they 
held  that  the  Deity  had  exi3ted  from  all  eternity  in  a 
State  of  absolute  ąuiescence,  but  finaUy  he  begat  certain 
beings  or  €Bon»  after  his  own  likcness,  of  whom  Christ 
was  one ;  and  that  he  was  allied  to  the  lower  angels  and 
the  Atifuoupyóc,  Demiurge,  to  whom  this  lower  world 
was  sabject.  Moreover,  he  had  never  in  reality  assumed 
a  materiał  body,  but  became  united  with  the  man  Jesus 
at  his  baptism,  and  abode  with  him  until  the  time  of 
his  death.  (See  Mosheim,  Conuneniaries  on  the  Jirst 
ihree  CaUurieSf  sec  62.)  The  tenets  of  Gnosticism  can 
be  traoed  even  to  the  apostolical  age.  Simon  Magus 
appears  to  have  represented  himself  as  an  incamation 
of  the  demiorgic  power  (Acts  viii,  10).  The  ancient 
fathers  regarded  him  as  the  father  of  the  Gnostics  (Ire- 
OBos,  odo.  Ucsr,  i,  23).  On  the  other  hand,  Tittmann 
(/>e  regiiffut  Gnoaticorujn^  etc.)  holds  that  nothing  was 
known  of  the  Gnostics  until  the  2d  centuiy.  However, 
the  opening  chapter  of  St.  John^s  Gospel  seems  to  be  di- 
recied  agidnst  Gnostical  pervei8ion8  of  the  doctrine  of 
the  incamation,  which  is  not  impoasible  if  we  admit  the 
well-known  tradition  that  Cerinthus  disputed  with  that 
evangelist.  (See  Eusebius,  Eccktiaaticcd  Hisłory^  iii,  eh. 
xxviiL) 

3.  Docetiam. — ^Thls  was  one  of  the  forms  of  Gnosticism 
denying  the  reality  of  Christ's  human  naturę,  and  repre- 
aenting  whatever  appertained  to  his  human  appearance 
to  be  a  merę  phantasm — SÓKfftnę,  Jcrome  teUs  us  that 
whils  the  apostles  were  stiU  Uving  there  were  those  who 
taught  that  his  body  was  no  morę  than  a  phantom. 
This  particulor  form  of  Gnostical  error  was  oensived  by 
Ignatius  in  his  EpuUea,  and  therefore  unąuesdonably 
aroae  carly  in  the  Church.  (See  Lardncr,  iii,  441.)  "  If 
the  Son  of  (vod  (said  the  Docetist)  has  been  crucified 
for  me  merely  in  appearance,  then  am  I  bound  down  by 
the  chains  of  sin  in  appearance ;  but  those  who  speak 
are  themselres  a  mcre  show."  For  modem  Docetism, 
as  iUustrated  in  the  mythical  treatment  of  the  doctrines 
of  sacred  history  by  Schelling,  and  the  Rationalists  gen- 
erally, see  Martensen,  DogmaHct^  p.  244. 

4.  MonarchianUni  (about  A.D.  170),  fŁovapxia,  so 
calied  either  from  its  regard  to  the  doctrine  of  the  di- 
vine  Tuiity,  or  from  a  regard  to  Chrisfs  dignity.  (See 
Haae,  sec.  90.)  According  to  iu  teachings,  Christ  was 
a  merę  man,  but  bom  of  the  Yirgin  by  the  power  of  the 
Holy  Spirit,  and  exalted  to  be  the  Lord  of  the  whole 
Cborch.  A  certain  eillux  from  the  divine  essence  dwelt 
ia  Christ,  and  this  constitated  his  personality,  while  this 


personality  originated  in  the  hypothesis  ol  a  divine 
power.     (See  Keander,  ii,  849,  Ciark's  ed.) 

5.  Sabeilianism  (about  258)  taught  that  the  Father, 
Son,  and  Holy  Ghost  were  one  and  the  same — so  many 
different  ma7t\fe8taiion$  of  the  same  being— three  de- 
nominations  in  one  substance.  (See  Hagenbach,  i,  263.) 
Thus  the  personality  of  the  Son  was  denied.  His  per- 
sonality in  the  flesh  did  not  exi8t  prior  to  the  incama- 
tion, nor  does  it  exist  now,  as  the  divine  ray  which  had 
been  incorporated  in  Christ  has  returaed  to  its  source. 
In  the  words  of  Burtou,  *'  If  we  seek  for  a  difference  be- 
tween  the  theory  of  SabcUius  and  those  of  his  predeces- 
sois,  we  are  perhaps  to  say  that  Noetus  supposed  the 
whole  divinity  of  the  Father  to  be  inherent  in  Jesus 
Christ,  whereas  SabeUius  supposed  it  to  be  only  a  part, 
which  was  put  forth  like  an  emanation,  and  was  ągain 
abfiorbed  in  the  Deity.  Noetus  acknowledged  only  one 
divine  Person ;  Sabellius  divided  this  one  dignity  into 
three ;  but  he  supposed  the  Son  and  the  Holy  Ghost  to 
have  no  distinct  persona!  existence,  except  when  they 
were  put  forth  for  a  time  by  the  Father."  The  views 
of  SabeUius  reappear  in  the  dogmas  of  Schleiermacher 
(who  regarded  the  etemal  and  absolute  Monaa  as  unre- 
realed;  the  Father,  Son,  and  Holy  Spirit  as  God  reoecd- 
ed)j  and  in  a  modified  form  in  the  Discouraea  on  the  In- 
camation and  A  tonement  by  Dr.  BushnelL 

6.  MamchcBism  (circa  A.D.  274). — Mani  or  Manes, 
who  was  probably  educated  in  the  religion  of  Zoroaster, 
upon  his  adoption  of  the  Christian  faith,  transferred  to 
his  Christ  the  Oricntal  views  of  incamation.  In  this 
system  the  dualistic  principle  was  morę  fully  devcloped 
than  iu  Gnosticism.  He  brought  together  as  in  a  ka- 
leidoscope  the  fantasies  of  Parseeism,  Buddhism,  and 
Chaldeeism,  bits  of  philosophy  alike  brilliant  and  alike 
worthless.  "  From  Gnosticism,  or,  rather,  from  univer- 
sal  Orientalism,  he  drew  the  inseparable  admixtuTe  of 
morał  and  physical  notions,  the  etemal  hoetility  between 
mind  and  matter,  the  rejertion  of  Judaism,  and  the 
Identification  of  the  God  of  the  Old  Testament  with  the 
evil  spirit,  the  distinction  between  Jesus  and  the  Christ, 
with  the  Docetism  or  unreal  death  of  the  incorporeal 
Christ."  For  a  further  admirable  summary  of  his  view8, 
see  Miknan's  Laiin  Chritł,  ii,  822  sq.  The  followers  of 
Manes  formed  Łhemselves  into  a  Church  A.D.  274, 
which  possessed  a  hierarchical  form  of  govemmcnt,  and 
consisted  of  two  great  classes,  the  periect  (^ełecti)  and 
catechumens  {auditorts).     (See  Haae,  sec.  82.) 

7.  A  riamsm  (about  818).— The  4th  century  witnessed 
the  rise  of  the  moet  formidable  and  persistent  of  all  the 
forms  of  error  as  to  the  person  of  Christ.  The  teach- 
ings of  Alexander,  bishop  of  Alexandria,  that  the  Son 
was  of  the  same  essence  with  the  Father,  developed  the 
latent  doubts  of  one  of  his  presby  ters,  Arius,  who  rushed 
to  the  other  estreme.  Charging  his  bishop  with  Sa- 
beUianism,  he  maintained  that  the  Son  was  not  the  mwis 
in  substance  (ó/ioouffioc),  but  ńmUar  {6fŁOŁov(rioc).  He 
did  not  hesitate  to  accept  the  logical  consequences  of 
his  dogma— that  Christ,  though  the  noblest  of  creatures, 
must,  like  all  others,  have  been  created  from  nothing. 
This  dednction  contains,  as  in  a  nut^^hell,  the  entire 
heresy. 

8.  ApoUinarianim  (about  A.D.  378).— ApoUinaris  the 
younger  rejected  the  proper  humanity  of  Christ.  He 
adopted  many  of  the  sentiments  of  Noetus  the  Monar- 
chian.  From  the  postulate  that  as  the  person  of  Christ 
was  one,  therefore  his  naturę  must  be  one,  he  reasoned 
that  there  could  be  no  human  intellect  or  will,  but  that 
the  functions  of  soul  and  body  must  be  discharged  by 
the  Logos,  which  so  commingled  with  the  uncreated 
body  of  Christ  that  the  two  distinct  natures  formed  one 
heterogeneous  substance  entirely  suigeneria,  (See  Har- 
vey,  On  the  Creedt,  ii,  645.)  «  Both  Noetus  and  ApoUi- 
naris denied  that  the  Word  was  madę  man  of  the  Yir- 
gin by  the  Holy  Ghost;  the  earlier  heretic  teaching 
that  there  was  no  real  hypostatic  distinction  ia  the  De- 
ity, the  lattcr  supposing  that  the  flesh,  as  an  etemaUy 
uncreated  body,  came  down  from  heaven.    Both  denied 


INCARNATION 


536 


INCARNATION 


for  the  same  reaaon,  the  inseparable  union  of  two  per- 
fect  natores  in  one  person;  both  denied  that  Christ  was 
perfecŁ  man ;  the  Patripanian,  no  less  than  the  ApolU- 
narian,  having  oonsidered  that  the  divine  naturę  sup- 
plied  the  place  of  a  human  soul"  (Haryey,  Crcedsj  ii, 
649). 

9.  NeHoriamtm  (about  428)  fumished  the  knotted 
root  irom  which  sprang  ultimately  the  antagonist  here- 
nee  of  the  Monophysites  and  Monothelites.  To  the 
phrase  ^torÓKoc,  mother  of  God^  applied  to  the  Virgin, 
Mestorius  took  ezception,  maintaining  that  Mary  had 
given  birth  to  Christi  and  not  to  God.  ThuB  arose  the 
long-protracted  oontroyersy  rcspecting  the  two  natures 
of  Christ  (Socrates,  Ecd,  ffist.  vii,  eh.  xxxii).  Nesto- 
rioB  maintained  that  a  diyine  and  human  naturę  dwelt 
in  Christ  as  separate  entities,  but  in  closest  connection — 
awa^iia ;  to  use  the  figurę  of  Wangemann, "  as  boards 
are  glued  together."  His  own  admission,  '*Divido  natu- 
ras  sed  conjungo  reyerentiam,"  justified  the  allegation 
brought  against  his  doctrines  that  Christ  is  r^illy  a 
double  being.  The  humanity  of  Christ  was  the  tempie 
for  the  indwelling  (ipoimiffic)  of  Deity  upon  the  sepa- 
rate basis  of  personality  in  his  human  naturę. 

10.  MonophjfsiHsm  (about  446).— The  doctrine  of  Nes- 
torius,  that  thcre  must  be  two  natures  if  there  be  two 
persons  in  Christ,  led  Eutyches,  by  the  law  of  contrari- 
eties,  to  an  exact  counterpart,  that  there  is  but  one  per- 
son in  Christ,  and  this  one  person  admita  of  but  one  na- 
turę. The  logie  was  the  same  in  both  heresies.  Liddon 
bas  propcrly  said,  '^The  Monophysite  formuła  practical- 
ly  madę  Christ  an  unincamate  God ;"  for,  according  to 
Monophysitism,  the  human  naturę  of  Christ  had  been 
absorbed  in  the  divire.  "  We  get,  as  it  were,  a  Christ 
with  two  heads:  an  image  which  produces  the  impres- 
sion  not  merely  of  the  superhuraan,  but  of  the  mon- 
strous,  and  which  is  incapable  of  producing  any  morał 
effect"  (Martensen,  Christian  DogmaHcs^  sec.  136).  Soon 
after  the  condemnation  of  this  error  by  the  fourth  Gen- 
eral Council  at  Chalcedon,  it  branched  out  into  ten  lead- 
ing  sects,  whence  it  has  been  called  "  the  ten-homed.** 

11.  Monothelititm  (about  625).— The  contro vcrsy  oyer 
the  heresy  of  Monophysitism  was  prolonged  for  centu- 
ries.  In  the  midst  of  the  oontest,  the  idlc  curiosity  of 
the  emperor  Heraclius  led  him  to  propound  the  ąuestion 
to  his  bishops  ^  Whether  Christ,  of  one  person  but  two 
natures,  was  actuated  by  a  single  or  double  will"  (Wad- 
dington,  Ch,  Hitłory^  i,  355).  The  question  met  with  a 
ready  response,  but  it  was  the  response  of  error.  It  was 
said  in  reply  that  a  multiplidty  of  wills  must  of  ncccs- 
aity  imply  a  multiplicity  of  willers.  This  is  the  postu- 
late  of  Monothelitism.  In  maintenance  of  the  unity  of 
Chrisfs  naturę,  they  held  that  in  him  was  only  one  will 
or  energy,  and  that  this  was  a  dirinely  human  will  (^v- 
Łpytia  9iav$gtKri),  (For  a  statement  oi  the  orthodoz 
view  of  the  divine  and  human  will  of  Christ,  see  IJd- 
don'B  Bampton  Lect,  v,  892.)  The  8ixth  General  Coun- 
cil at  Constantinople,  A.D.  680,  decidcd  in  favor  of  the 
Dyothelitic  doctrine,  while  it  anathematized  the  Mono- 
thelites and  their  yiews. 

12.  Adoptianism  (about  787).  — The  incessant  and 
fierce  strife  of  the  early  Church  with  respect  to  the  na- 
turę of  Christ  finally  culminated  in  the  A  daptian  contro- 
yersy.  According  to  the  view8  of  this  sect,  in  his  di- 
yine naturę,  Christ  is  the  true  Son  of  God ;  but  as  re- 
ipects  his  human  naturę,  he  is  the  Son  of  God  only  by 
adopŁion — **his  divinity  according  to  the  former  was 
proper,  but  according  to  the  latter  naturę  nominał  and 
tłtular"  (Herzog,  Encyldop,), 

18.  Socimanism,  Unitarianitmj  andRationaliam  present 
no  new  phase  of  heresy.  They  are  simply  resurrected 
forms  of  error  that  had  again  and  again  been  refuted 
It  may  be  que8tioned  whether  the  inyentive  mind  of 
German  Neology  has  presented  upon  the  incamation 
any  feature  of  error  essentially  new.  The  subtle  minds 
of  Arius,  Sabellius,  and  other  kindred  philosophers  of 
the  early  Church  haye  explored  every  ayenne  of  doabt, 
«nd  left  no  new  openlngs  into  which  heretical  enor  can 


posnbly  thrust  itself.    The  most  that  modem  q)ecii]a* 
tions  haye  done  has  been  to  reyiyify  dead  theońt-s  of 
the  past,  and  clothe  them  with  ^  the  empty  abstractioos 
of  impersonal  idea."     See  Christology,  yoL  ii,  p.  282. 
As  a  fair  illustration  of  the  mystical  speculations  with 
which  the  metaphysical  theology  of  modem  Gennaoy 
has  oyeriaid  the  doctrine  of  the  incamation,  we  qiiote 
from  Hegel  {lieliffionspkilogopkief  ii,  261) :  **■  That  which 
first  existed  was  the  idea  in  its  simple  uniyereality,  the 
Faiher;  the  second  is  the  particular,  the  idea  in  its 
manifestation,  the  Son — ^to  wit,  the  idea  in  its  eztemal 
existence,  so  that  the  extemal  manifestation  is  changed 
into  the  first,  and  known  as  the  diWnc  idea,  the  identity 
of  the  diyine  with  the  human.    The  third  is  this  oon- 
sdousness,  God  as  the  Haiy  Spirit,  and  this  q)irit  in  hit 
exi8tence  is  the  Church."    According  to  Lessing,  **  This 
doctrine  (of  the  Trinity)  will  lead  human  reoson  to  ac- 
knowledge  that  God  cannot  possibly  be  undentood  to 
be  one  by  that  reason  to  which  all  finite  tbings  are  one; 
that  his  unity  must  also  be  a  transcendental  unity  which 
does  not  exclude  a  kind  of  plnraiity."    To  SćheUing 
"  it  is  dear  that  the  idea  of  Trinity  is  absurd,  unkss  it 
be  considered  on  speculatiye  grounds.  ....  The  incar- 
nation  of  God  is  an  etemal  incamation ;"  and  by  Fichte 
the  Son  is  regarded  as  God  ąttaining  to  a  conscioos- 
ncss  of  himself  in  man.     See,  farther,  Hagenbach,  ffitt, 
ofDoctrineSf  ii,  384-420.    Marheineke,  who  in  theolog- 
ical  obscnrities  was  an  apt  disdple  of  his  master  Kegel, 
thus  dis<*our8es  of  the  incamation  {GrtmdUhren  d,  Christ' 
Hehen  Dogmatik^  §  325, 326) :  ^  As  spirit,  by  renoimcing 
indiyiduality,  man  is  in  trath  deyated  abo\'e  himself, 
without  haying  abandoned  the  human  naturę ;  as  spirit 
renouncing  absoluteness,  God  has  lowercd  himself  to  ha- 
man naturę,  without  haying  abandoned  his  existence  as 
diyine  Spirit     The  unity  of  the  diyine  and  human  na- 
turę is  but  the  unity  in  that  Spirit  whose  esistence  is 
the  knowledge  of  the  trath  with  which  the  doing  of 
good  is  identical.    This  spirit,  as  God  in  the  hummn  na- 
turę, and  man  in  the  diyine  naturę,  is  the  God-man. 
The  man  wise  in  diyine  holiness,  and  holy  in  diyine 
wisdom,  is  the  God-man.     As  a  historical  fact,  thu  un- 
ion of  God  with  man  is  manifest  and  rcal  in  the  person 
of  Jesus  Christ ;  in  him  the  diyine  manifesution  has  bc- 
come  perfectly  human.     The  conception  of  the  God- 
man,  in  the  historical  person  of  Jesus  Christ,  containa  in 
itself  two  phases  in  one :  First,  that  God  is  manifest  only 
through  man,  and  in  this  relation  Christ  is  as  yet  placcd 
on  an  eąuality  with  all  other  men ;  hc  is  the  Son  of 
Man,  and  therein  at  first  represents  only  the  possibility 
of  God  bccoming  man ;  secondly,  that  in  this  man,  Je- 
sus Christ,  Grod  is  manifest  as  in  nonę  other;  this  man- 
ifest man  is  the  manifest  God ;  but  the  manifest  God  is 
the  Son  of  God,  and  in  this  relation  Christ  is  God*s  Soo ; 
and  this  is  the  actual  fulfilment  of  the  possibility  or 
proraise ;  it  is  the  reality  of  God  becoming  man."     For 
farther  ąuotations  lVom  German  Rationalists,  see  Man- 
sd,  Limits  ofRtUgious  Thought,  p.  154-163, 378-383. 

While,  as  respects  the  ąnesrion  of  antecedcncy,  the 
propriety  of  introdudng  Swedenborg  in  the  company  of 
Rationalists  might  be  ąuestioned,  we  regard  his  \'iew8 
on  the  incamation  aa  entitling  him  to  conaideration  in 
this  connection.  ^  He  taught  that,  instead  of  a  trinity 
of  persons  (set  forth  in  the  symbols  of  the  Church),  we 
must  hołd  a  trinity  of  the  person,  by  which  he  undei^ 
stood  that  that  which  is  diyine  in  the  naturę  of  Christ 
is  the  Fathery  that  the  diyine  which  is  unitcd  to  the 
human  is  the  Sot^  and  the  diyine  which  procecda  from 
him  is  the  Holy  Spirif,^  etc  (Hagenbach,  Ilist  of  DoeL 
ii,  419).  For  the  literaturę  of  Rationalism  and  its  po- 
lemics,  consult  Hagenbach,  Encydop,  der  Theoloffisdtm 
Wissenchaften,  p.  90-93.  We  cannot  but  suf^gcst  that 
all  speculations  upon  the  incamation,  which  on  the  ons 
hand  rob  Christ  of  his  diyinity  as  the  troe  God,  or  oo 
the  other  of  his  humanity  as  tmly  man,  sabject  them- 
selyes  to  the  seyere  strictures  of  Coleridge  (TTorłs,  Anip 
edit.  y,  652;  comp.  also  y,  447):  <'That  Socinianism  is 
not  a  rdlgion,  but  a  theoiy,  and  that,  too^  a  Tery  pani- 


mCARNATION 


63ł 


INCARNATION 


doiis  theoiyi  or  a  yeiy  unaatiśUtctory  theoiy— perni- 
dotiSy  for  it  exclades  all  our  deep  and  awful  ideas  of  the 
perfect  holineas  of  God,  his  juBtice,  and  bis  mercy,  and 
theseby  makes  the  Yoice  of  conscienoe  a  deliiBion,  as 
haviiig  no  oorrespondent  in  the  character  of  the  legia- 
lator;  ....  unsatiafactory,  for  it  pronuBes  forgivene88 
withoot  any  solation  of  the  difficulty  of  the  compatibil- 
ity  of  this  with  the  joatioe  of  God ;  in  no  way  exp]ain8 
the  fallen  oondition  of  man,  nor  offeis  any  means  for  his 
r^eneration.  *■  If  yoa  wiU  be  good,  you  will  be  happy/ 
it  myn,  *  That  may  be,  but  my  will  is  weak ;  I  sink  in 
the  atmggle."'  We  may  even  addaoe  the  trenchant 
aarcaam  of  Hnme,  '^  To  be  a  philoaophical  soeptic  is  the 
first  step  towaids  beooming  a  sound  belieying  Chris- 
tian,'' which,  interpreted  in  plainer  phiase,  is,  **He  who 
oomes  to  Christ  must  first  belieye  he  is  mot."  (Consolt 
Martensen,  Ihffmatica,  §  137.) 

IX.  AdditioiuU  Textt  iUustrative  o/the  SuhiecL—l, 
Propkeciea  of  Christ  utcamaie^—OeiL  iii,  16,  The  seed 
of  the  woman;  zlyiii,  16,  The  angel;  xlix,  10,  Shiloh; 
Deat.  xviii,  18, 19,  The  prophet  like  unto  Moses ;  Job 
xix,  2a-27,  The  Redeemer  that  liveth;  xxxiii,  23,  The 
Angel  intercesBor;  Psa.  ii,  6,  7,  The  Sonship  declared; 
xvi,  10, 11,  The  Holy  One  free  from  cormption;  xxii, 
The  sufTerings  of  the  Messiah ;  xxiy,  7-10,  Jehovah  of 
glory,  with  1  Cor.  ii,  8;  xlv,  The  perpetuity  and  glory 
of  his  kiogdom ;  lxxii,  xl,  6-10,  A  body  prepared  for  the 
Messiah;  ex,  Messiah  the  LDrd,Priest,Conqaeror;  ex, 
1,  with  Matt.  xxii,  42-45 ;  Prov.  viii,  ix,  HCSn,  Wisdom 
pcnonified;  Isa.  vi,  1^  As  Lord  of  hosts,  John  xii, 41 ; 
Isi.  vii,  14 ;  viii,  10,  The  Yirgin*s  child,  named  Imman- 
nd ;  iz,  5^  6,  Attribates  of  Deity  ascribeid  to  the  child  to 
be  bom;  xi,  1-10,  Messiah  from  the  rootofJease;  xxxii, 
1-&,  The  blessings  of  Chrisfs  kingdom ;  xl,  8,  As  Jeho- 
vah,  with  Matt.  iii,  3;  xlii,  1^,  The  office  of  Christ; 
zliv,  6,  As  Jehovah  the  fint  and  the  hut,  with  Rev.  i, 
17;  Iii,  18-15;  liii,  The  sufTerings,  death,  and  burial  of 
Christ;  Jer.  xxiii,  5,  6;  xxxiii,  15^  16,  The  Lord  our 
righteouBneas^  with  1  Cor.  i,  80 ;  £zek.  i,  26,  The  appeai^ 
anoe  of  a  man  upon  the  throne;  Dan.  yii,  18, 14,  The 
gkny  of  the  Son  of  Man ;  Joel  ii,  28-82,  Christ  the  Sav- 
ionr,  with  Acts  ii,  17, 21 ;  Micah  v,  2-4,  The  birthplace 
of  Christ  foretold ;  Hag.  ii,  6-9,  The  desire  of  all  nations ; 
Zech.iii,8;  vi,  12, 13, The  Branch ;  xii,  10;  xiii,  1, The 
opening  of  a  fonntain  for  sin ;  xiii,  7,  The  shcpherd  to  be 
smitteu;  MaL  iii,  1,  The  Lord  to  come  to  his  Tempie, 
with  Lukę  ii,  27,  etc. ;  Matt.  i,  18-25 ;  Lukę  i,  30-38 ;  ii, 
Circumstances  of  Christ^s  birth ;  xxii,  43,  David  calling 
Christ  Lord;  Luko  xxiv,  19,  44,  Christ  interpreting 
prophecy  conceming  himself. 

2.  The  dUiiaiiy  of  Christ  in  the  New  Test—John  i ;  iii, 
13,31;  V,  17,27,31,86;  vi,  38-63;  viii, 5,  6,58;  x,  24- 
38;  xił, 41 ;  xiv,  1,  6-14,  20;  xvii, 8 ;  xix,  36;  xx,  28; 
Acts  ii, 34;  vii, 59, 60;  x,36;  xx,  28;  xiii, 33;  Rom.  i, 
4;  ix,6;  xi,86;  xiv,10-12;  lCor.ii,8;  vui,6;  xv,47; 
2  Cor.  iv,  4;  GaLiv,4,5;  Eph.i,10,23;  iv,  24;  PhiLii, 
e-8,9-11;  iii, 21;  CoL i, 3, 15-19 ;  ii,9,10;  Ui,  10,11;  1 
Tim.  iii,  16;  Tit.  ii,  13,  with  Hos.  i,  7;  Heb.  i,  2-12;  ii, 
14-18;  iii,  1-5;  iv,  16;  v,  7-9;  ix,  11 ;  x,  20;  xiii,  8; 
JssLii,7;  lPet.iii,18;  2Peti,l;  1  Johni,l-3;  iii,8; 
iv,2,9,14;  v,  19, 20 ;  Jude 4 ;  Rev.i,4r-17;  ii,8;  vii,17; 
xxii,  1, 16, 34^  etc. 

3.  The  humamty  of  Christ^UaU,  i,  18;  ii,  2;  iv,  2; 
Tiii,  20,  24;  xvi,  18;  xxii,  42;  xxvi,  67;  xxvii,  26,  59, 
60;  Markiv,38;  x,47;  xv,46;  Lukei,81;  ii,7,ll,21, 
52;  ui,  23;  xxii,  64;  xxiii,  11 ;  John  i,  14;  iv,  2,  6,  7; 
vii, 27;  xi,  33,85;  xii,  27;  xix,  1,28,80;  xx,  27;  Acts 
ii, 22,31;  iii,  15, 22;  xiii, 23;  Rom. i, 3;  GaLiii,16;  iv, 
4;  PhiLii,7,8;  2Tim.  u,8;  Heb. ii,  14, 17 ;  vii, 26,28; 
1  John  i,  12;  iii,5;  iv,8;  2John7,etc 

X.  Literaturę,  —  Athanasius,  De  Incamatione  Dei 
Ytrhi  et  contra  Arianos,  in  Oj^.  (ed.  PaUvii,  1777),  i, 
695  sq. ;  Tertullian,  Opera  (1696,  foL),  p.  307  Bq. ;  Cyrill. 
HieroaoL  De  Chritto  IncamalOj  in  Opera  (1763,  fol.),  p. 
162  sq. ;  CyrilL  A]exandrinuś,  De  Incamatione  Uni^eniti, 
in  Opera  (1688,  foL),  v,  1 ;  Hilary,  De  Trimtate  (Paris, 
1681),  bk.  ii,  p.  17  8q. ;  Chiysostom,  HomiUa  Q*  In  prin- 


cipio  erat  Yerbum**),  in  OperOf  xii,  571;  Zanchius,  De 
Incamatione  FiUi  Dei,  in  Opera  (1619,  folio),  viii,  1 ; 
Gregory  Nazianzen,  Oratio  in  naiintatem  Chrisłi  (transL 
by  H.  S.  Boyd,  in  The  Fathers  not  PapistSj  1834) ;  G.  F. 
Baor,  Die  Chr.  Lehre  v.  d,  Dreieinigheit  u,  Menschwerd- 
ung  Gottes  (TUbingen,  1841) ;  Johann  Ang.  Emesti,  De 
DignUate  eł  Yeritate  Inoamationis  Filii  Dei,  in  hb 
Optucula  Theologiea  (1792);  Gass,  Geschichte  der  Prot, 
Dogm,  i,  Ul  są.;  A.  Hahn,  Lehrbuch  des  christUf^en 
Glaubens  (1828),  p.  448  są. ;  Duguet,  Prtndpes  de  la  Foi 
Chretiamey  and  responses  to  Renan*s  Vie  de  Jesu,  by  his 
countiymen  Freppel,  Bp.  Plantier,  and  Poujoulat ;  J.  A. 
Domer,  Entwiddungsgeschichte  der  Lehre  Jur  die  Person 
Christie  i,  passim ;  ii,  51  sq.,  432-442, 591  Bq.  (transL  also 
in  Clark*s  Lib,)\  Thomasius,  Christi  Person  und  Werk 
(Erlangen,  1867);  J.  P.  Lange,  Leben  Jesu,  ii,  66  są.; 
Karl  Werner,  Geschichte  der  Apologetischen  und  Polemir 
schen  Literatur  der  ChristUchen  Theologie  (1861),  i,  387 
są.,  566  8q. ;  ii,  176  są. ;  M.  F.  Sadler,  Emmanuel,  or  the 
Incamation  ofthe  Son  ofGod  the  Foundation  ofimmU' 
łabie  Truth  (1867) ;  John  Owen,  XptOTo\oyia,  or  a  DeO" 
laration  ofthe  glorious  M^sfery  ofthe  Person  of  Christ 
God  and  Man  (Lond.  1826),  xii,  1-348 ;  Pearson,  On  the 
Creed;  Bumet,  On  the  89  ArtideSf  Art  ii ;  Archbishop 
Usher,  Imnuamel,  or  the  Mystery  ofthe  Incamation  of 
the  Son  ofGod  (Lond.  1648,  fol.) ;  Thos.  Goodwin,  Christ 
the  Mediator,  in  Works  (1681,  foL),  iii,  1-427 ;  R.  J.  WU- 
berforce,  Doct.  of  the  Incanu  ofour  Lord  Jesus  Christ 
in  its  Belation  to  Mankind  and  (he  Church;  Edward  Ir- 
ving,  The  Doctrine  of  the  Incamation  opened  (in  Ser^ 
mons) ;  Robt  Tumbull,  Theophar^,  or  the  Mam/estation 
of  God  in  Christ  Jesus;  John  Farrer,  Ban^ton  Lecture 
(1803),  p.  59  są. ;  Robert  Fleming,  The  Loganthropos,  or 
a  Discourse  conceming  Christ  as  the  Logos  (Lond.  1705), 
voL  ii  of  Christology ;  Thomas  Bradbury,  Mystery  of 
Godltness  considered  th  61  Sermons  (Edinb.  1796) ;  Wm. 
Sherlock,  Yindication  ofthe  Doctrine  ofthe  Trinity  and 
the  Incamation  ofthe  Son  ofGod  (Lond.  1691) ;  Marcus 
Dods,  On  the  Incamation  ofthe  Etemal  Word,  with  rec* 
notice  by  Dr.  Thomas  Chalmers  (2d  ed.  1849) ;  Bib,  Rep. 
1832,  p.  1 ;  1849,  p.  636  są. ;  Brown8on'8  QuaH.  Ret,  sec 
series,  iv,  106;  v,  187  są.;  vi,  287  są.;  Church  Rev,  iv, 
428  są.;  Biblioth,  Sacra,  xi,  729;  xli,  52;  xxiv,  41  są. 
(an  able  art  on  the  theoiy  of  Incamation,  April,  1854) ; 
Methodist  Quart,  Rev,  1861,  p.  114 ;  1866,  p.  290 ;  Kitto*s 
Journal  of  Sacred  Literaturę,  first  series,  iii,  107-113; 
Thcological  Edectic,  ii,  184 ;  Massillon,  "  Les  caract^res 
de  la  grandeur  dc  Jesus  Christ,"  in  (Eurres  Completes, 
vi,  107 ;  on  1  Cor.  ii,  7, 8 ;  vii,  89 ;  Bp.  StiUingfleet,  Ser- 
mons  (1690),  iii,  836  ;  Boesuet,  three  Sermons,  (Eurres, 
vii,  1 ;  Bp.  Atterbury,  Sermons,  iv,  61 ;  Joseph  Benson, 
Sermons,  ii,  604 ;  Archbp.  Tillotson,  (foL  ed.),  i,  431 ;  Bp. 
Beveridge,  Works,  ii,  564;  Bp.  Home,  Disc  i,  193;  Bp. 
Yan  ^nidert,  Works,  v,  859 ;  J.  H.  Newman,  Sermons,  ii, 
29 ;  C.  Simeon,  Works,  xix,  170 ;  Richard  Duke,  The 
Ditinity  and  Humamty  of  Jesus  Christ  (1730),  p.  29; 
Thomas  Arnold,  Sermon  on  1  Tim.  iii,  16,  at  Rugby 
(1833)  p.  Ul ;  W.  A.  Butler,  The  Mystery  of  the  Holy 
Incamation  (Amer.  ed,),  i,  68 ;  George  Rawlinson,  Ser- 
mon on  John  i,  1 1,  p.  1 ;  Riggenbach,  Sermon  on  the  Per- 
son of  Jesus  Christ,  transL  in  Foundations  ofour  Faith, 
p.  100.  For  other  sermons  on  the  incamation,  see  Dar- 
ling's  Cyclopadia  BibUographica,  col.  1059,  1063, 1004, 
1 546, 1547, 1596-1597 ;  also  Malcolm's  TheoL  Index,  p.  234. 
Compare  Stanley,  East.  Ch.  p.  279, 852 ;  Baptist  Quart. 
1870  (July) ;  A  mer.  Ch.  Rev.  1870,  p.  82 ;  4  m.  Presb,  Rev. 
1869,  p.  824;  Bib,  Sac,  1870,  p.  1 ;  Mercersh,  Ret,  1858, 
p.  419 ;  Brit,  and  For,  Ev,  Rer,  1861  (Jan.,  art  iv) ;  1866  , 
(Jan.) ;  1868  (July) ;  Theol,  Eclect.  iii,  167 ;  BuOet,  TheoL 
1867  (Jan.),  p.  23  są.  See  also  referenccs  to  the  subject, 
morę  or  less  extensive,in  Lives  ofChrigt,hy  Sepp,  Kuhn, 
Baurogarten,  Ewald,  Yan  Osterzee,  Neander,  Jeremy 
Taylor,  Ellicott,  Pressens^,  Young,  Andrews;  Lichten- 
8tein'8  Jesus  Christus,  Abriss  seines  Lebens,  in  Herzog^s 
Real-Encyklop,  voL  vi ;  alao  Bibliography  of  Life  of  Je- 
sus in  Hase^s  Ijd>en  Jesu  (Lpz.  1854) ;  also  literaturę  un- 
der  CuBiSTOLOOY,  voL  ii,  p.  284.    (J.  K.  K) 


INCARTULATI 


0*38 


INCENSE 


Inoartol&ti,  a  tenn  for  tbe  certificates  of  liberation 
given  to  serfs  or  alayes  of  churches  and  monasteries  who 
were  liberated.— Kerer,  Unit,  Lex.  viii,  841. 

IncaatratCkra  (sepulcmm)  ia  a  name  in  Łhe  Roman 
Gatholic  Church  for  a  smali  place  in  the  altar-stones  set 
apartfor  the  storage  of  saints^relics.— Pierer,  Umv.  Lex, 
viii,  841. 

Incensarium  (or  Imcbksorium)  is  the  name  of  tbe 
vaBel  used  in  the  Romish  and  some  of  the  Oriental 
churches  for  containing  the  incense  to  be  bumed.  See 
Incense. 

Incensation  is  the  lighting  and  buming  of  the  in- 
cense.   See  Incbnsb. 

Incense  (fTJ'ł::p,  ketorah%  Deut  zxxiii,  10;  usu- 
ally  r)'nbp,  kHo'rdh,  which  is  once  applied  likewise  to 
tbe/a<  of  rams,being  the  part  always  bumed  in  sacri- 
fice;  onoe  *ięp,  hitter\  Jer.  xliv,  21;  all  forms  of  the 
verb  ^>kdp,  prop.  to  smoke,  hence  to  cause  an  odór  by 
buming,  often  itself  applied  to  the  act  of  buming  in- 
cense; Greelc,  ^vfua^a  and  cognate  terms;  sometimes 
hj'iab,  Ub<mah\  Isa.  xliii,  23;  lx,  6;  lxvi,  8;  Jer.  vi, 
20 ;  xvii,  26 ;  xli,  bj'rankincenaef  as  elsewhere  rendered), 
a  perfume  -which  give8  forth  its  fragrance  by  buming, 
and,  in  particular,  that  perfume  which  was  bumed  upon 
the  Jewish  alŁar  of  incense.  (See  Weimar,  De  sujffUu 
aromatuffiy  Jen.  1678.)  See  Altar.  Indced,  the  bum- 
ing of  incense  secms  to  have  been  considered  among 
the  Ilebrews  so  much  of  an  act  of  worship  or  aacred  of- 
feńng  that  we  read  not  of  any  other  use  of  incense  than 
this  among  them.  Nor  among  the  Egyptians  do  we 
di9cover  any  tracę  of  bumed  perfume  except  in  sacer- 
dotal  use;  but  in  Pcrsian  sculptures  we  see  incense 
bumed  before  the  king.  The  offering  of  incense  bas 
formed  a  part  of  the  religious  ceremonies  of  most  an- 
cient  nations.  The  Egyptians  bumed  resin  in  honor  of 
the  sun  at  its  rising,  myrrh  when  at  its  mcridian,  and 
a  mixture  called  kuphi  at  its  setting  (Wilkinson,  Anc. 
Egypt,  V,  816).  Plutarch  (Z)c  Is,  et  Ot,  c.  lii,  lxxx)  de- 
scribcs  kuphi  os  a  mixture  of  8ixteen  ingrcdients.  "In 
the  tempie  of  Siva  incense  is  offered  to  the  Lingam  six 
times  in  twenty-four  hours"  (Roberta,  Oriental  lUust,  p. 
868).  It  was  aiso  an  element  in  the  idolatrous  worship 
of  the  Israelites  (Jer.  xi,  12,  17;  xlviii,  85;  2  Chroń. 
xxxiv,  25). 

1.  The  incense  employed  in  the  senricc  of  the  Łaber- 
nacle  was  distinguished  as  D^^BOn  Hl^tdpp  (hetóreth 
haasammim  ;  £xod.  xxv,  6,  incense  ofthe  aromas  ;  Sept. 
»/  avv^fvic  TOv  ^yfiiafiaroc ;  Vulg.  thymiamata  boni 
odores ;  A.  V. "  sweet  incense'*).  The  mgredients  of  the 
sacred  incense  are  enumerated  with  great  precision  in 
Exod.  xxx,  84,  35 :  "  Take  unto  thee  sweet  spicea,  stac- 
te  (k|i^3,  nataph)f  and  onycha  (r>bniZ?,  shecheUtK),  and 
galbanum  (ilSabn,  chelbenah) ;  these  sweet  spices  with 
pure  frankincense  (nshb,  lebontik) :  of  each  shall  there 
be  a  like  weight.  And  thon  shalt  make  of  it  a  perfume, 
a  confection  after  the  art  of  the  apothecary,  tempered 
together,  pure  and  holy.**  See  each  of  these  ingredients 
in  its  alphabetical  place.  AU  incense  which  was  not 
madę  of  these  ingrcdients  was  called  H^J  H^iap  (ke- 
tórah  zdrdh)f "  strange  incense,"  Exod.  xxx,  9,  and  was 
forbidden  to  be  offered.  Aocording  to  Rashi  on  Exod. 
zxx,  84,  the  above-mentioned  perfumes  were  mixed  in 
equal  proportions,  seventy  manehs  being  taken  of  each. 
They  were  compounded  by  the  skill  of  the  apothecary, 
to  whoee  use,  according  to  Rabbinical  tradition,  was  de- 
voted  a  portion  of  the  Tempie,  called,  from  the  name  of 
the  family  whose  especial  duty  it  was  to  prepare  the 
incense, "  the  house  of  Abtines."  So  in  the  large  tem- 
ples  of  India  "  is  retained  a  man  whose  chief  business  it 
is  to  distil  sweet  waters  from  flowers,  and  to  extract  oil 
from  wood,  flowers,  and  other  substances**  (Roberts,  Ori- 
ental JUust,  p.  82).  The  priest  or  Levite  to  whose  care 
the  incense  was  intrusted  was  one  of  the  fifteen  D*^31SC 


(fnsmtifiiilm),orpiefectsof  the  Tempie.  CoDsta&twitdi 
was  kept  in  the  house  of  Abtines  that  the  inoenae  mighft 
always  be  in  readiness  (Baxtorf,  Lexieim  Tabn»L  k  t. 
03*^133 X).  In  addition  to  the  four  ingredients  akeady 
mentioned,  Jarchi  ennmerates  seven  others,  thosmaking 
eleven,  which  the  Jewish  doctois  affirm  were  commimi- 
cated  to  Moses  on  Mount  SinaL  Josepbus  ( 1fVzr,  v,  5, 
5)  mentions  thirteen.  The  proportions  of  the  addi- 
tional  spices  are  given  by  Maimonides  (C«fe  hammib' 
dash,  ii,  2,  §  8)  as  foUows:  of  myrrh,  cassia,  spikenard, 
and  saffron,  8ixteen  manehs  each ;  of  costns,  twdre  ma- 
nehs; dnnamon,  nine  manehs;  sweet  bark,  thiee  ma- 
nehs. The  weight  of  the  whole  confection  was  368  ma- 
nehs. To  these  was  added  the  fourth  part  of  a  cab  of 
salt  of  Sodom,  with  amber  of  Jordan,  and  an  heib  calied 
<"  the  smoke-raiser^  C\m  Mbrr,  maóleh  dskdn),  known 
only  to  the  cunning  in  such  mattera,  to  whom  the  secrct 
descended  by  tradition.  In  the  ordinary  daily  serrics 
one  maneh  was  iiaed,  half  in  the  moming  and  half  in 
the  evening.  Allowing,  then,  one  maneh  of  incense  for 
each  day  of  the  solar  year,  the  three  manehs  which  re- 
mained  were  again  pounded,  and  used  by  the  higfa- 
priest  on  the  day  of  atonement  (Lev.  xvi,  12).  A  stora 
of  it  was  constantly  kept  in  the  Tempie  (Joseph.  War, 
vi,  8,  3).  The  further  directións  are  that  this  predou 
compound  should  be  madę  or  broken  np  into  minutę 
partlcks,  and  that  it  should  be  deposlted,  as  a  veiy  holy 
thing,  in  the  tabemacle  "  before  the  tcstimony"  (or  aik). 
As  the  ingredients  are  so  minntely  specified,  there  was 
nothing  to  prevent  weolthy  pcrsons  from  having  a  sim- 
ilar  perfume  for  privateuse:  this,  therefore,  was  for- 
bidden under  pain  of  excommunication :  *^  Ye  shall  not 
make  to  yourseWes  according  to  the  composition  there- 
of :  it  shall  be  unto  thee  holy  for  the  Lord.  Whoeo- 
ever  shall  make  like  unto  that,  to  smeli  thereto^  shsU 
even  be  cut  off  from  his  people"  (ver.  87,  88).  So  ia 
some'  part  of  India,  according  to  Michaclis  {Mosaisehes 
Rechff  art.  249),  it  was  considered  high  treaaon  for  any 
person  to  make  use  of  the  best  sort  of  calambatj  which 
was  for  the  service  of  the  king  alone.  The  word  which 
describes  the  various  ingredients  as  being  ''tempered 
together*'  litendly  means  salted  (M^^r,  memidlaek), 
The  Chaldee  and  Greek  verBions,  however,  have  set  the 
example  of  rendering  it  by  mixed  or  tempered,  as  if  thcir 
idea  was  that  the  difTerent  ingredients  were  to  be  mixed 
together,  just  as  salt  Is  mixed  with  any  substance  over 
which  it  is  sprinkled.  Ainsworth  contends  for  the  lit- 
erał meaning,  inasmuch  as  the  law  (Lev.  ii,  13)  expresB- 
ly  says, ''  With  all  thine  offerings  thou  shalt  offer  salt" 
In  support  of  this  he  dtes  Maimonides,  who  affirma  that 
there  was  not  anything  offered  on  the  altar  withoot 
salt,  except  the  winę  of  the  drink-offcring,  and  the 
blood,  and  the  wood ;  and  of  the  incense  hc  saya,  sdll 
morę  expres8ly,  that  "  they  added  to  it  a  cab  of  sslt." 
In  accordance  yńtYk  this,  it  is  supposed,  our  Savuwr 
says,  "  £very  sacrifice  shall  be  salted  with  salt**  (Msrk 
ix,  49).  Ainsworth  further  remarks :  "  If  our  q)eech  b 
to  be  always  with  grace,  seasoned  with  ailt,  aa  the  apos- 
tle  teaches  (CoL  iv,  6),  how  much  morę  ahould  oor  in- 
cense, our  prayers  unto  God,  be  therewith  seasoned  T 
It  Ib  difficult,  however,  to  see  how  so  anomalous  a  sub- 
stance  as  salt  could  well  be  combined  in  the  prq)in- 
tion ;  and  if  it  was  used,  as  we  indine  to  think  that  it 
was,  it  was  probably  added  in  the  act  of  offering.  See 
Salt.  The  expre8sion  ^33  *ią  (had  bebad),  Exod. 
xxx,  84,  is  interpreted  by  the  Chaldee  "  weight  by 
weight,"  that  is,  an  eqoal  weight  of  each  (oomp.  Jarchi, 
ad  loc) ;  and  this  rendering  is  adopted  by  oor  ve»i<ni. 
Others,  however,  and  among  them  Aben-Ezra  and  Mai- 
monides, consider  it  as  signifjring  that  each  of  the  spices 
was  separately  prepared,  and  that  all  were  afterwards 
mixed. 

2.  Aaron,  as  high-priest,  was  originaDy  appointcd  to 
offer  incense,  but  in  the  daily  8ervice  of  tbe  second  Tem- 
pie the  Office  devolved  upon  the  infeńor  prieats,  fion 
among  whom  one  was  dioaen  by  lot  (Mlshna,roia,  ii, 


INCENSE 


539 


INCENSE 


4;  Łukę  i,  9)  each  monung  and  erening  (AbaiiMmel,  On 
Let*  z,  1).  A  peculiar  bleMing  wat  suppoeed  to  be  at- 
Uched  to  this  sen-ice,  and  in  order  that  all  might  share 
in  it,  the  lot  was  caat  amoog  those  who  were  *'  new  to 
the  incenoe,*"  if  any  remained  (Mbhna,  Ytma^  L  c. ;  Bar- 
tenora,  Oh  Tamid,  v,  2).  Uzziah  was  punished  for  his 
presumption  in  attempting  to  infringe  the  prerogatires 
of  the  descendants  of  Aaron,  who  were  consecrated  to 
bom  incenae  (2  Chroń,  xxvi,  16-21 ;  Joseph.  AfU,iXf  10, 
4).  The  offidating  priest  appointed  another,  whoee  Of- 
fice it  was  to  take  the  fire  fiom  the  braaen  altar.  Ac- 
cording  to  Maimonides  (Tamid  Umus,  ii,  8;  iii,  6),  this 
fire  was  taken  firom  the  second  pile,  which  was  over 
against  the  S.E.  oomer  of  the  altar  of  bumt-offering, 
■nd  was  of  fig-tree  wood.  A  silver  8hovel  (MrifliS, 
maeki^)  was  first  fiUed  with  the  live  coak,  and  after- 
wards  emptied  into  a  golden  one,  smaller  than  the  for- 
mer,  so  that  some  of  the  coals  were  spilled  (Mishna, 
Tmnidj  ▼,  5 ;  Yoma,  iv,  4 ;  corop.  Rev.  viii,  5).  Another 
priest  deared  the  golden  altar  from  the  dndera  which 
had  been  left  at  the  previous  offering  of  incense  (Mish- 
na, Tamidf  iii,  6, 9 ;  vi,  1). 

The  times  of  offering  incense  were  specified  in  the 
instmctions  fłrst  given  to  Mo8e8'(Exod.  xxx,  7, 8).  The 
moming  incense  was  offftred  when  the  lamps  were  trim- 
med  in  the  holy  place,  and  before  the  sacrifice,  when  the 
watohman  Kt  for  the  purpoae  announced  the  break  of 
day  (Mishna,  Yoma,  iii,  1,  5).  When  the  lamps  were 
lighted  "  between  the  evening8,**  afler  the  evening  sac- 
riifioe  and  before  the  drink-offerings  were  offered,  in- 
cense was  again  bumt  on  the  golden  altar  which  **  be- 
longed  to  the  oracie"  (1  Kings  vi,  22),  and  stood  before 
the  veil  which  separated  the  holy  place  from  the  Holy 
of  Holies,  the  throne  of  God  (Rev.  viii,  4;  Philo,  J)e 
Amm.  itlon.  §  3). 

When  the  priest  entered  the  holy  place  with  the  in- 
cense, all  the  people  were  removed  from  th>^  Tempie, 
and  from  between  the  porch  and  the  aitar  (M  uraonides, 
Tamid  Umus,  iii,  8 ;  compaie  Lukę  i,  10).  The  incense 
was  thcn  brougbt  finom  the  house  of  Abtines  in  a  large 
Tessel  of  gold  called  TiS  {caph)^  in  which  was  a  phial 
(^■łTa,  ioziil^properly  "asalver")  c  )ntaining  the  incense 
(Mishna,  Tamidf  v,  4).  The  a.-<ńst-ant  priests  who  at- 
tended  to  the  lamps,  the  clearing  of  the  golden  altar 
from  the  cinders,  and  the  fetohing  fire  from  the  altar  of 
bomt-offering,  perfonned  their  offices  singly,  bowed  to- 
wazda  the  ark  of  the  oovenant,  and  left  the  holy  place 
before  the  priest,  whose  lot  it  was  to  offer  incense,  en- 
tered. Piofound  silence  was  observed  among  the  eon- 
gregation  who  were  praying  without  (comp.  Bev.  viii, 
1),  and  at  a  signal  from  the  prefect  the  priest  cast  the 
incense  on  the  fire  (^liahna,  Tamid,  vi,  3),  and,  bowing 
ieverently  towards  the  Holy  of  Holies,  retired  slowly 
backwards,  not  prolonging  his  prayer  that  he  might  not 
alarm  the  congregation,  or  cause  them  to  fear  that  he 
had  been  strnck  dead  for  offering  unworthily  (Lev«  xvi, 
13;  Lukę  i,  21;  Mishna,  Yoma,  v,  1).  When  ho  came 
oat  he  (MTonoanced  the  blessing  in  Numb.  vi,  24-26,  the 
**  magrephah"  sounded,  and  the  Levite3  burst  forth  into 
song,  accompanied  by  the  fuli  swell  of  the  Tempie  mu- 
sie, the  sound  of  which,  say  the  Rabbins,  could  be  heard 
as  far  as  Jericho  (Mishna,  Tamid,  iii,  8).  It  is  possible 
that  this  may  be  alluded  to  in  Bev.  viii,  6.  The  priest 
then  emptied  the  censer  in  a  clean  place,  and  hung  it 
on  one  of  the  boms  of  the  altar  of  bunit-offering.  See 
Cessrr. 

On  the  day  of  atonement  the  Bervice  was  different. 
The  high-priest,  ailer  eacrificing  the  bullock  as  a  sin- 
oiSering  for  himself  and  his  family,  took  incense  in  his 
left  hand,  and  a  golden  shovel  filled  with  live  coals  from 
the  west  side  of  the  brazen  altar  (Jarchi,  On  Lev,  xvi, 
12)  in  his  right,  and  went  into  the  Holy  of  Holies.  He 
then  placed  the  shovel  upon  the  ark  between  the  two 
bars.  In  the  second  Tempie,  where  there  was  no  ark,  a 
stone  was  snbetitated.  Then,  sprinkling  the  incense 
Opon  the  ooala^  he  stayed  till  the  house  was  filled  with 


smoke,  and,  walking  slowly  backwaids,  came  withoat  tha 
veil,  where  he  prayed  for  a  short  time  (Maimonides, 
Yom  hakkippur,  ąuoted  by  Ainsworth,  ć>nX.«p.  xvi;  Ou« 
tram,  De  Sacńficiis,  i,  8,  §  11).    See  Atonement,  Day 

OK. 

8.  With  regard  to  the  sj^mbolical  meaning  of  incense, 
opinions  have  been  many  and  widely  different.  While 
Maimonides  regarded  it  merely  as  a  perfume  designed 
to  counteract  the  ef&uvia  arising  from  the  beasts  which 
were  slaughtered  for  the  daily  sacrifice,  other  interpreU 
ers  have  allowed  their  imaginations  to  run  riot,  and  vied 
with  the  wildest  speculations  of  the  Midrashim.  Philo 
{Qui$  rer,  dw»  har,  sił.  §  41,  p.  601)  conceives  the  stacte 
and  onycha  to  be  symbolical  of  water  and  earth ;  galba- 
num  and  frankincense  of  air  and  fire.  Joscphus,  follow- 
ing  the  traditions  of  his  time,  believed  that  the  ingredi- 
ents  of  the  incense  were  choaen  firom  the  products  of 
the  sea,  the  inhabited  and  the  uninhabited  parts  of  the 
earth,  to  indicate  that  all  things  are  of  God  and  for  God 
( War,  V,  6,  5).  As  the  Tempie  or  tabemacle  was  the 
palące  of  Jehovah,  the  theocratiG  king  of  Israel,  and  the 
arie  of  the  covenant  his  throne,  so  the  incense,  in  the 
opinion  of  some,  oorresponded  to  the  perfumes  in  which 
the  luxurious  monarchs  of  the  £ast  delighted.  It  may 
mean  all  this,  but  it  must  mean  much  morę.  Grotius, 
on  £xod.  xxx,  1,  says  the  mystical  signification  b  "  sur- 
sum  habenda  corda.**  Comelius  k  Lapide,  on  £xod. 
xxx,  84^  considers  it  as  an  ^t  emblem  of  propitiation, 
and  finds  a  symbolical  meaning  in  the  Beveral  ingredi- 
ents.  Fairbaim  (Tsipoloffy  of  Scripture,  ii,  320),  with 
many  others,  looks  upon  prayer  as  the  reality  of  which 
incense  is  the  83rmbol,  founding  his  conclusion  upon  Psa. 
cxli,  2 ;  Rev.  v,  8 ;  viii,  3, 4.  Btthr  (Symb,  d,  Mos,  Cult. 
voL  i,  c  vi,  §  4)  opposes  this  view  of  the  subject  on  the 
grouad  that  the  chief  thing  in  offering  incense  is  not 
the  producing  of  the  smoke,  which  presses  like  prayer 
towards  heaven,  but  the  spreading  of  the  fragranoe. 
His  own  expo8ition  may  be  summed  up  as  l)Uow8. 
Prayer,  among  all  Oriental  nations,  signifies  calling 
upon  the  name  of  God.  The  oldest  prayers  consisted  in 
the  merę  enumeration  of  the  8everBl  titles  of  God.  The 
Scripturc  places  incense  in  dose  relationship  to  prayer, 
so  that  offering  incense  'iB  synonymous  with  worship. 
Heuce  incense  itself  is  a  symbol  of  the  name  of  God. 
The  ingredients  of  the  incense  coirespond  8everally  to 
the  perfections  of  God,  though  it  Lb  impossible  to  decide 
to  which  of  the  four  names  of  God  each  belongs.  Per- 
haps  stacto  corresponds  to  hlh^  {Jehovah),  onycha  to 
D*^rt^M  {Elóhim),  galbanum  to  ^n  (chat),  and  frankin- 
cense to  IZJi^Tp  (kddósh).  Such  is  Bilhr'8  exposition  of 
the  syrabolism  of  incense,  rather  ingenious  than  logicaL 
Looking  upon  incense  in  connection  with  the  other  cer- 
emoniał ob6ervance8  of  the  Mosaic  ritual,  it  would  rath- 
er seem  to  be  symbolical,  not  of  prayer  itself,  but  of 
that  which  makes  prayer  acceptable,  the  intercession  of 
Christ.  In  Rev.  viii,  8,  4,  the  incense  is  spoken  of  as 
something  distinct  from,  though  offered  wiŁh,  tho  pray- 
ers of  all  the  saints  (comp.  Lukę  i,  10) ;  and  in  Rev.  v,  8 
it  is  the  golden  vialB,  and  not  the  odors  or  incense,  which 
are  said  to  be  the  prayers  of  saints.  Psa.  cxli,  2,  at  first 
sight,  appears  to  militato  against  this  conclusion ;  but  if 
it  be  argued  from  this  passage  that  incense  is  an  em- 
blem of  prayer,  it  must  also  be  allowed  that  the  cven- 
ing  sacrifice  has  the  same  symbolical  meaning. — Kitto; 
Smith.     See  Perfume. 

INCENSE,  Christian.  The  usc  of  incense  in  wor- 
ship was  not  carried  over  from  the  Jewish  to  the  Chris- 
tian Church;  yet  it  is  still  employed,  with  other  super- 
stitious  usages,  in  the  Somish  Church,  and  in  some  of 
the  Oriental  churches.  The  incense  used  is  cithcr  the 
resinous  gum  olibanum,  brought  from  Arabia  or  the 
Elast  Indies,  or  an  imitation  of  it  manufacturod  by  the 
chemists.    The  latter  is  most  common  now. 

1.  It  is  certain  that  incense  was  not  used  in  the  first 
three  ages  of  the  Christian  Church.  Indeed  the  use  of 
it  was  a  mark  of  paganism,  as  is  fully  evinced  by  the 


INCEST 


540 


INCEST 


enactments  of  the  Chriatum  cmperon  a^^net  its  nse. 
"  The  TC17  places  or  tiouses  where  it  could  be  proTed  to 
have  been  done  were,  by  a  law  of  Theodoeiiis,  confis- 
cated  by  the  goyemment"  (comp.  Gothof,  De  Statu  Pa- 
gon, 8ub,  Christ  Imper.  leg.  12).  A  few  grains  of  in- 
oense  thiown  by  a  devotee  upon  a  pagan  altar  conatituted 
an  act  of  worship.  The  apologista  for  Christianity,  Ar- 
Dobios  {Contra  Gerd.  2),  TertuUian  (ApoL  80),  and  Lac- 
tantius  (i,  20),  make  distinct  and  separate  statementa 
that  "Chriatians  do  not  bom  inoenae"  like  pagana  It 
appeais  likely  that  the  use  of  mcenae  waa  first  begun  in 
order  to  purify  the  air  of  the  unwbolesome  chambers, 
cayema,  etc,  in  which  Chriatiana  were  compelled  to 
worship,  juat  as  candles  were  employed  neoeaaarily, 
eyen  by  day,  in  subteiranean  placea.  Eyen  Komaniat 
writers  (e.  g.  Claude  de  Yert)  aasert  thia.  Cardinal 
Bona,  indeed  {Res  LUurgic  i,  25),  aeeka  to  deriye  the 
uae  of  incense  in  worahip  from  apostolical  timea,  but  hia 
argument  is  worthleas.  The  principal  argument  of  the 
Bomanists  rests  upon  Bey.  y,  8 :  ^  Golden  yiala  fuli  of 
odora,  which  are  the  prayers  of  sainta;"  aa  if  anything 
oould  be  argued,  for  practical  worahip,  from  the  highly 
symbolical  language  of  that  beautiful  paaaage.  Cenisera 
are  not  mentioned  among  the  sacred  resada  of  the  first 
four  centuries.  The  firat  dear  proof  of  the  uac  of  in- 
cenae  at  the  communion  occura  in  the  time  of  Gregory 
the  Great,  in  the  latter  part  of  the  6th  century.  After 
that  period  it  became  common  in  the  Latin  Church. 
Ita  mystical  representation  is,  accordlng  to  Boman  Cath- 
olic  authoritiea,  (1)  contridon  (Ecdes.  xly);  (2)  the 
preaehing  of  the  Gospd  (2  Coc.  ii,  14) ;  (8)  the  prayers 
of  the  faithful  (Psa.  cxli,  2;  Rey.  y,  8-24) ;  (4)  the  vir- 
tue  of  aainta  (Cant.  iii,  6).  See  aboye.  Incense  ia 
diiefly  used  in  the  aolemn  (or  high)  maaa,  the  conae- 
cration  of  churchea,  aolemn  conaecrationa  of  objects  in- 
tended  for  uac  in  public  worahip,  and  in  the  burial  of 
the  dead.  Thcre  are,  howeyer,  also,  minor  incenaations, 
and  aome  of  the  monaadc  aasodationa  eyen  differed  in 
ita  uae.  Thua  the  Ciaterdaua  used  incenae  only  on  fea- 
tiyala,while  the  Benedictinea  and  Clngniaca  introduced 
ita  uae  on  moat  public  oocaaiona. 

2.  The  censer  (thuribulum)  \a  a  brazen  pot  holding 
coala  on  which  the  incenae  buma.  The  censer  ia  held 
by  three  chaina,  yarying  in  length,  but  generally  about 
three  feet  long.  Whcn  longer,  the  uae  of  them  by  the 
boya  who  act  aa  cenaer-bearera  becomea  quite  a  feat  of 
gymnastica.  During  the  maaa,  the  incenae  is  thrown 
over  the  altar  and  oyer  the  "  aacrificing  prieats"  by  the 
deacon  who  acryes,  kneeling.  The  Roman  writers  jus- 
tify  thia  incensing  of  the  prieat  on  the  theory  that  he 
represents  Christ,  and  that  therefore  the  homage,  typi- 
fied  by  the  incense,  La  rendered  to  Christ  through  hia 
repreaentatiye  at  the  altar.  A  curioua  rule  with  regard 
to  "incensing"  the  pope  ia,  that  "when  the  pope  ia 
standing,  the  seryitor  who  incenaea  him  muat  atand; 
when  Łhe  pope  is  sitting,  the  incenser  must  kneeL"  No 
symbolical  or  mysdcal  meaning  has  been  found  for  thia 
odd  rule :  the  rcal  one  doubdess  is,  that  when  the  pope 
is  standing,  a  kneding  boy  could  not  ao  manipulate  the 
cenaer  as  to  make  the  incense  rcach  the  pondfTs  noa- 
trils.  After  the  altar  and  oflidating  prieat  are  incenaed, 
the  cenaer  is  thrown  in  the  direction  of  the  other  prieats 
prcsent,  and  last  of  all  towards  the  congregation.  As 
incense  is  a  mark  of  honor,  and  as  "  human  vanity  creepe 
in  cyerywhere"  (Bergier,  s.  y.  Eucens),  kings,  great  men, 
and  public  officials  are  incensed  separatdy,  and  before 
the  mass  of  the  people.  Śee  Bergier,  Bict.  de  Thiolo- 
ffićy  ii,  423 ;  Mignę,  IHct,  de  Liturgie,  p.  535  8q. ;  Bing- 
ham,  Orig,  Ecdes,  book  viii,  eh.  yi,  §  21 ;  Coleman,  An- 
eieni  Chrittianity,  xxi,  12 ;  Walcott,  Sacred  Archaology, 
p.  325  sq.;  Adolphns,  Compendium  Theologicum,  p.  74 ; 
Bioughton,  Bibliołheca  Hist,  Sacra,  i,  527;  Middleton, 
LeUer/ram  Romę,  p.  15 ;  Riddlc,  Christian  Antig,  p.  599 
8q.;  Siegel,  Ilandb,  der  CkristL-Kirchl,  AUerthUmer,  ii, 
441  sq.     See  Censer. 

Incest  (Lat.  in,  not;  castus,  chaste),  the  crtme  of 
•esoal  oommerce  with  a  peraon  within  the  degreea  for- 


bidden  by  the  (Łeyidcal)  law  (aee  Trier,  De  legUmt  Jfo 
scticis  de  incestu,  Frcft.  a.  Oder,  1726).  See  AFFUOTTt 
CoMSAKOunciTT.  **  An  ijistinct  almost  innate  and  nni- 
yeraal,"  aays  Gibbon  {Dedine  and  FaU  of  the  Sma 
Empire,  iv,  851),  "appears  to  prohibit  the  ineestnoos 
coomieroe  of  parents  and  childien  in  the  inlinite  seiin 
of  asoending  and  descending  generadons.  Concenmig 
the  oblique  and  coIUteral  branches,  naturę  is  indifferent, 
reason  mute,  and  custom  yarious  and  arbitrair.  In 
Egypt,  the  marriage  of  brothera  and  siaters  was  admit- 
ted  without  scniple  or  excepdon ;  a  Spaitan  mlght  e»- 
pouse  the  daughter  of  bis  father,  an  Athenian  that  of 
hb  mother;  and  the  nuptials  of  an  unde  with  his  nieoe 
were  applauded  at  Athens  as  a  happy  union  of  the  dear> 
est  reladons.  The  profane  lawgiven  of  Romę  were 
neyer  tempted  by  intereat  or  supersddon  to  muldply 
the  forbidden  degrees;  but  they  inflexibly  condcmned 
the  marriage  of  siaters  and  brothers,  hesitated  whether 
first  oonsins  should  be  touched  by  the  same  interdiet, 
reyered  the  parental  character  of  aunts  and  undes,  and 
treated  affinity  and  adopdon  as  a  just  imitadon  of  the 
des  of  blood.  According  to  the  proud  masims  of  the 
republic,  a  legał  marriage  could  only  be  contracted  by 
free  dtizens ;  an  honorable,  at  least  an  ingcnuoua  biith, 
was  reąuired  for  the  spouae  of  a  aenator;  but  the  blood 
of  kingą  could  neyer  minglc  in  legitimate  nuptials  with 
the  blood  of  a  Roman ;  and  the  name  of '  strangef  de- 
graded  Cleopatra  and  Berenicc  to  live  the  conathinei  of 
Mark  Antony  and  Titus.*'  Yortigem,  king  of  South 
Britain,  equalled,  or,  rather,  exceUed  the  Egyptiana  ani 
Persiana  in  wickedness  by  marrying  his  own  daughteŁ 
The  queen  of  Portugal  was  married  to  her  unde;  and 
the  prince  of  Brazil,  the  aon  of  that  incestnous  mar- 
riage, wedded  hia  aunt.  But  they  had  diapensadona 
for  theae  unnatural  maniages  from  his  holinets.  "In 
order,"  aays  Paley,  '*to  prcaerye  chasdty  in  families, 
and  between  peraona  of  different  Bexe8  brought  up  and 
liying  together  in  a  state  of  unreaeryed  intimacy,  it  ia 
neceaaary,  by  eyery  method  poasiLle,  to  inculcatc  an  ab- 
horrence  of  inceatuoua  conjuncdona;  which  abbarrence 
can  oiily  be  uphdd  by  the  abaolute  reprobadon  of  aU 
conmiercc  of  the  8exca  between  near  rdation&  Upon 
this  prindple  the  marriage,  as  wdl  as  other  cohabita- 
don  of  brothera  and  sisters  of  lineal  kindred,  and  of  aU 
who  usually  liye  in  the  aame  family,  may  be  said  to  be 
forbidden  by  the  law  of  naturę.  Restrictiona  which  cx- 
tend  to  remoter  degrees  of  kindred  than  what  this  rea- 
son makes  it  necessary  to  prohibit  from  intermarriage 
are  founded  in  the  authority  of  the  positiye  law  which 
ordains  them,  and  can  only  be  justified  by  their  tendcn- 
cy  to  diffuse  wealth,  to  connect  families,  or  to  promote 
some  polidcal  adyantage."  The  Roman  law  calls  inoes- 
tuous  connecdon  Incestus  juris  gentium,  while  it  deaig- 
nates  as  Incestus  juris  ciriiis  the  intercourse  between 
other  members  of  the  families  which  it  constdcrs  within 
the  forbidden  degrees.  The  prindpal  law  against  in- 
cest, howeyer,  is  the  Lex  Julia  de  aduUeriis  cn^reeudu 
of  Augustus.  Children  bom  of  incest  {lihcri  incestuost) 
are  by  it  bastardized.  The  canon  law  extended  the  for- 
bidden degrees  yery  far,  thus  giying  a  morę  extended 
signification  to  the  appdladon  of  incest.  By  it  a  dis- 
tincdon  was  madę  between  the  Incestus  juris  diriui,  re- 
ladng  to  such  degrees  of  reladonship  as  were  already 
condemned  by  the  Mosaic  law,  and  the  Incestus  juris 
humani,  relating  only  to  such  degrees  within  which 
marriage  is  foibidden  by  ecdeaiaadcal  lawa.  Bot  as 
in  the  latter  case  dispensationa  can,  in  the  Romish 
Church,  alwajra  be  obtained,  this  form  of  incest  is  mcre- 
ly  considered  an  oifense  against  the  laws  of  the  Church. 
The  penal  statute  of  Charles  Y  conceming  incest  is  based 
on  the  Roman  law,  but  indndes  also  cohabiution  with 
a  daughter-in-law,  a  step-daughter,  and  a  mother-in« 
law.  Conseąuendy  incest,  properly  so  called,  can  only 
take  place  between  ascendants  and  deaoendants,  brothen 
and  sisters,  parents-in-law  and  children-in-law,  step- 
parents  and  step-children.  Prosecudon  for  incest,  how- 
eyer, ia  legał  only  in  cases  where  peraona  haye  had  aez« 


INCHANTMENT 


641 


IN  C(ENA  DOMINI 


ud  interooiine  without  marriage;  it  is  inapplicable 
where  marriage  has  been  contracted  In  good  faith,  and 
only  afterwards  the  contractors  become  aware  of  their 
oonnection  being  incestaons.  Modem  law,  which  in 
the  main  U  tMued  on  the  LeTitical,  and  from  which  the 
role  of  the  Roman  law  differs  yery  little,  prohibits  mar- 
riage between  relationa  within  three  degrees  of  kindred ; 
computing  the  generations  not  from,  bot  throagh  the 
common  ancestor,  and  accounting  affinity  the  same  as 
consangtiinity.  The  issue,  however,  of  such  marriages 
are  not  bastardized  unless  the  parents  be  diyorced  dur- 
ing  their  Ufctime.  Penalties  are  enacted  for  incest  and 
machastity  yarying  from  simple  impriaonment  to  hard 
labor  for  a  term  of  fivo  or  8ix  ycars.  Sexual  intercourse 
between  parties  in  different  degrees  of  the  coUateral 
lines  b  in  many  cases  considered  only  as  pimishable 
by  the  police  regulations.  The  ascendants  are  genendly 
puniahed  morę  sererely  than  the  desoendants.  The 
modem  Jews  permit  the  marriage  of  consins,  and  even 
of  the  uncle  by  a  niecę.  See  Pierer,  Unirersal  Lezi- 
łon,  Tiii,  841 ;  Paley,  Morał  PhUo9ophy,  i,  816  6q. ;  Buck, 
Theohgicfd  Dictionary,  s.  v. 

INCEST,  Spirituał,  an  ideał  crime  oommitted  be- 
tween two  peiaons  who  have  a  q)iritual  aUiance,  by 
means  of  baptism  or  oonfirmatbn.  This  ridiculous  fan- 
cy  was  madę  uae  of  as  an  instrument  of  great  tyranny  in 
times  when  the  power  of  the  pope  was  unlimited,  even 
({ueens  being  somettmea  divoroed  upon  this  pretence. 
Imoui  apiriiual  is  also  understood  of  a  yicar  or  other 
beneficiary  who  holds  two  beneflces,  one  whereof  de- 
penda  upon  the  oollation  of  the  other.  Such  spirituał 
incest  reoders  both  the  one  and  the  other  of  these  bene- 
fioea  Tacant. — ^Uenderson's  Buck. 

Inohantment.    See  Enciiantmeiit. 

Inchofer,  Melchiok,  a  German  Jesuit,  was  bom  at 
Yienna  or  at  Gllnz  (Hungary)  in  1584.  He  entered  the 
Society  of  Jesus  in  1607,  and  studied  philosophy,  math- 
ematics,  and  theology  at  Messina,  where  he  afterwards 
instructed.  In  1636  he  went  to  Romę,  and  became  a 
member  of  the  Congregation  of  the  Index  and  of  the 
Holy  OfHce,  but  was  called  from  thence  to  the  college 
at  Macerata  in  1646.  He  died  in  1648  at  Milan.  His 
principal  works  are  Epistoła  B.  Maria  ad  Messanenses 
teriłoś  rindicała  {IB29):— Historia  aacra  LcUiniiatia 
(1636):  —  Amtales  eccUsiastici  re<pd  Hungaria  (1644) 
(inoomplete).  Under  the  pseudonyme  of  Eugenius  La- 
rande  Nineyensis  he  defended  his  order  and  its  educa- 
tional  system  against  the  attacks  of  Scioppius  (Schopp), 
in  refatation  of  whom  he  wrote  seyeral  pamphlets  (1638- 
1641).  He  was  also  belieyed  to  be  the  author  of  the 
Monarchia  SoUpsorum  (Yenice,  1632 ;  French  transla- 
tion,  Amst.  1722, 12mo) ;  but  Oudin  proyed,  in  an  edition 
of  Niceron,  that  this  work  is  the  production  of  count 
Scotti  of  Piacenza,  who  entered  the  order  in  1616,  but 
became  disoontented,  and  retired  from  it  in  1645.  See 
Niceron,  Mem,pour  serrir,  etc,  xxxy,  322-846 ;  xxxix, 
165-230;  Herzog,  RealrEncyHop,  yi,  648;  Bayle,  Hist, 
/>ict  iii,  563  8q.;  TAeol.  27mr.  Z«r.  i,  405. 

Incineratio  is  a  name  in  the  Romish  Church  for 
the  conaecration  of  a  certain  quantity  of  ashes,  and  the 
sprinkling  of  them  oyer  the  heads  of  the  officiating  cler- 
gy  and  the  worshipping  congregation,  with  the  foUow- 
ing  admonition,  pronounced  by  the  officiating  priest: 
**  Memento  quod  dnis  es,  et  in  cinerem  reyerteris**  (Re- 
membcr  that  dust  thou  art,  and  unto  dust  thou  shalt  re- 
turn). The  cuatom  is  belieyed  to  haye  origmated  with 
Gregoiy  the  Great  (towards  the  close  of  the  6th  cen- 
tary),  but  it  was  not  fully  estabUshed  till  towards  the 
end  of  the  12Łh  century,  when  it  receiyed  the  sanction 
of  pope  Cclcstine  III.  Gregory  the  Great  is  in  all  prob- 
ability  also  the  founder  of  Ash-Wednesday,  which  is 
snpposed  to  deriye  its  name  from  the  aboye  ceremoniał 
ieryice  gencrally  performed  on  that  day.  See  Riddle, 
Christian  Anticuities,  p.  667;  Siegel,  Handb.  d.  Christ. - 
KirtkL  AUerłh,  i,  141 ;  Eadie,  Eccies,  Diet,  p  824.  See 
AaHBs;  Abh-Wkosesdat. 


Inolpientea  (b^fumera)  is  one  of  the  names  by 
which  the  catechumens  of  the  early  Christian  Church 
were  called.    See  Catechumens. 

Inclinatioii  is  the  propensity  of  the  mind  to  any 
particular  object  or  action;  a  kind  of  bias  by  which  it 
is  canied  towards  certain  actions  preyioos  to  the  exer- 
ciae  of  thought  and  reasoning  about  the  naturę  and  con- 
sequences  of  them.  Inclinations  are  of  two  kinds,  nat^ 
urał  or  acquired.  1.  Natural  are  such  as  we  often  see 
in  children,  who  from  their  earliest  years  differ  in  their 
tempers  and  dispositions.  Of  one  we  may  say  he  is 
naturally  reyengeful ;  of  another,  that  he  is  patient  and 
forgiying.  2.  A  cguired  inclinations  are  such  as  are  su- 
perinduced  by  custom,  which  are  called  habits,  and  these 
are  either  good  or  eyil. — Buck,  TheoL  Diet,  See  Hab- 
it; WiLU 

Incluse.    See  Amachobets. 

In  CoBna  Domini  (Lat  at  the  Lord's  Supper,  the 
opening  words  of  the  document)  is  the  name  of  a  oele- 
brated  papai  bulL  **  It  is  not,  as  other  bulls,  the  work 
of  a  single  pope,  but,  with  additions  and  modlficataona 
at  yarious  times,  dates  back  fnm  the  Middle  Agea; 
some  wńters  tracing  it  to  Martin  Y,  others  to  Clement 
y,  and  some  to  Boniface  YIII.  Its  present  form,  how- 
eyer,  it  receiyed  from  the  popes  Julius  II  and  Paul  III, 
and,  finally,  from  Urban  YIII,  in  1627,  from  that  time 
it  oontinued  for  a  century  and  a  half  to  be  published 
annually  on  Holy  Thursday,"  whenoe  its  name;  after- 
wards Easter  Monday  was  substituted.  The  contenta 
of  this  buli  have  been  a  fertiie  subject  of  oontroyersy. 
It  may  be  brieily  described  as  a  summary  of  eccleaiaa- 
tical  censures,  especially  against  all  heretical  aects, 
which  are  cursed  in  it  by  their  seyeral  designations,  their 
excommunication  renewed,  and  the  same  punishment 
threatened  to  all  who  should  be  guilty  of  schisro,  sacri- 
legę,  nsurpation  of  the  rights  of  the  Church  or  of  the 
pope,  forcłble  and  unlawful  seizuie  of  Church  propeity, 
personal  yiolence  against  eccłesiastics,  unlawful  inter- 
ruption  of  the  free  intercourse  of  the  faithful  with  Romc^ 
etc  The  buli,  howeyer,  although,  as  indicated,  mainly 
dealing  with  oflences  against  the  Church,  also  denoun- 
ces,  under  similar  censures,  the  crimes  of  piracy,  pluń- 
der  of  shipwiecked  goods,  forgery,  etc  This  buli,  being 
regarded  by  most  of  the  crowned  heads  of  Europę  as  an 
infringement  of  their  rights,  was  in  the  17th  centory 
opposed  by  nearly  all  the  courts,  eyen  the  moet  Roman 
Catholic ;  and  at  length,  in  1770,  according  to  some  au- 
thorities  (e.  g.  Hase,  History  of  the  Christian  Church), 
Clement  XIY  discontinued  its  pnblication.  Janus 
(Pope  and  Council,  p  887),  howeyer,  sa3rs  that  it  is  still 
treated  in  the  Roman  tribunals  as  haying  legał  force, 
and,  according  to  the  accounts  of  some  eminent  trayd- 
lers  who  haye  yisited  Romę,  it  appears  tłiat  the  sentence 
of  exoommunication  is  still  read,  though  in  a  morę  sim- 
ple form.  Eliza  yon  der  Recke  {Tagduch  einer  JRóte 
durch  ftnen  Theil  Deutschlands  u,  d,  ItaUen,  Berlin,  1817, 
iv,  95),  under  datę  of  April  6, 1806,  relates  that  after  the 
pope  had  blessed  the  people  from  the  balcony  of  the 
church  of  St.  Peter,  "  he  read  out  a  paper,  then  tore  it, 
and  threw  the  fragments  down  among  the  peopłc  A 
great  tumult  then  arose,  eyery  one  striying  to  secure  a 
piece  of  the  paper,  but  I  do  not  know  for  what  purpoee, 
for,  as  I  was  told,  the  paper  contained  notłiing  but  the 
form  of  excommunication  always  pronounced  on  this 
occasion  against  all  who  are  not  Romanists.  This  con- 
duded  the  festiyaL"  This  is  oonfirmed  by  what  chan- 
cellor  Gottling,  of  Jena,  relates  as  haying  seen  in  lus 
joumey  in  1828  (in  Rohr,  Kriłitche  Predifferbibliothekf 
xi,  379  sq.).  It  thus  seems  proyed  that  the  buli  itself, 
whoee  §  xxi  tayn:  ** Yolentes pnesentes  nostros  proces- 
sus  ac  omnia  et  qu8Bcunque  liis  literis  contenta,  quou8- 
que  alii  huiusmodi  processus  a  Nobb  aut  Romano-Pon- 
tifice  pro  tempore  existcnte  fiant  aut  publicentur,  durare 
suoSque  effcctus  omnino  sortiri,"  ia  not  completely  abol- 
ished  yet.  No  pope  has  so  far  substituted  a  new  buli 
for  the  old,  and  its  principles  oonceming  the  < 


INCOMMUNICABLENESS         642 


INDEFECTIBDLITY 


serred  for  the  pope  are  yet  iń  fali  foioe.  In  the  Hu- 
toritdi-potiHseiU  BUUter  of  Phillips  and  Gorres  (Mu- 
nich,  1847,  yoL  xxi)  we  find  it  Btated  that  *^  In  foro 
cofudentioBy  the  buli  is  only  valid  yet  in  so  far  ••  its 
stipulations  have  not  in  other  acts  been  altered  by  the 
Church  henelf."  Its  efficiency  inforo  extemOy  bo  much 
desired  by  Eome,  is  ever3rwhere  oppoeed  in  self-defenfle 
by  the  civil  poweis.  For  the  special  hiBtory  of  this 
buli,  and  proofs  of  ita  preeent  yalidity  in  the  Romish 
Church,  see  Biber,  BuU  in  Ccena  Domini,  transl  (Lond. 
1848) ;  Blber,  Papai  JHpUmacy  and  ths  BuU  in  Ccena 
Domini  (Lond.  1848);  Lebret,  Geachichte  d  BuUe  (Lpz. 
1768,  4  Yols.) ;  Herzog,  Real-Encyldop,  viii,  848 ;  Cham- 
bers,  Cydop.  v,  680 ;  Schrockh,  Kirchengfck,  t.  ik  Rąfor^ 
maiiony  iii,  266, 887 ;  Janus,  Pope  and  Councily  p.  884  8q. ; 
Cardinal  Erskine  to  Sir  J.C.  Hippisie^',  in  Bq>,  o/Comtn, 
ofl/otue  o/Commons  on  the  Latoś  regarding  the  Beguia- 
tiono/theBomanCaih,»ubjecłs {l8lS,ii,2l8),    (J.H.W.) 

InoommunioablenesB  of  God.  The  diyine 
attributes  haye  been  yariously  divided.  One  of  the  di- 
Tisions  sets  the  attributes  of  God  forth  as  communiaMe 
and  incommunictd>le.  Aa  the  fonner  are  regarded  such 
attributes  as  can  be  imparted  from  the  Croitor  to  the 
creature,  e.  g.  goodness,  holiness,  wisdom,  etc.,  and  as  the 
latter  such  are  oounted  as  cannot  be  imparted,  as  inde- 
pendence,  immutabihty,  immensity,  and  eternity.  See 
Domer,  Person  of  Christ,  div.  ii,  i,  188  8q. ;  ii,  198  8q. 
See  also  the  artide  God  (Dogmatical  Treatment  of  the 
Doctrine  of),  voL  iii,  p.  907  sq. 

Incomprehensibllity  of  God.  This  Ib  a  rela- 
tive  term,  and  indicates  a  relation  between  an  objecŁ  and 
a  faculty ;  between  God  and  a  created  understanding : 
so  that  the  meaning  of  it  is  this,  that  no  created  under- 
standing can  comprehend  God ;  that  is,  have  a  perfect 
and  exact  knowlcdge  of  him,  such  a  knowledge  as  is  ad- 
eąuate  to  the  perfection  of  the  object  (Job  xi,  7 ;  Isa.  xl), 

God  is  incomprehensible,  1.  As  to  the  naturę  of  his 
essence ;  2.  The  excellency  of  his  attributes ;  8.  The 
depth  of  his  counsels ;  4.  The  works  of  his  proyidence ; 
6.  The  dispensation  of  his  grace  (Eph.  iii,  8 ;  Job  xxxvii, 
26 ;  Rom.  xi).  The  incomprchensibility  of  God  folio ws, 
1.  From  his  being  a  spirit  endued  with  perfections  great- 
ly  superior  to  our  own.  2.  There  may  be  (for  anything 
we  certainly  know)  attributes  and  perfections  in  God  of 
which  we  haye  not  the  least  idea.  8.  In  those  perfec- 
tions of  the  divine  naturę  of  which  we  bave  some  idea, 
there  are  many  things  to  us  inexplicable,  and  with 
which,  the  morę  deeply  and  attentiyely  we  think  of 
them,  the  morę  we  find  our  thoughts  swallowed  np,  such 
as  his  self-exi8tence,  eternity,  omnipresence,  etc.  This 
should  teach  us,  therefore,  1.  To  admire  and  reyerence 
the  diyine  Being  (Zech.  ix,  17 ;  Neh.  ix,  6) ;  2.  To  be 
huroble  and  modest  (Psa.  viii,  1,  4;  £ocL  y,  2,  8;  Job 
xxxyii,  19) ;  8.  To  be  serious  in  our  addresses,  and  sin- 
cere  in  our  behayior  towards  him.  (Caiy],  On  Job  asmt, 
26;  Tillotson,  Sermons,  sermon  dyi;  Abemethy,  Ber- 
nums,  yoL  ii,  nos.  6,  7 ;  Doddridge,  Lecturts  on  Dirinity, 
lecture  69 ;  Martensen,  Dogmatics,  p.  89 ;  Buck,  Theohg, 
Dictionary,  s.  y.)    See  God. 

Incomprehensible.  This  word,  as  occurring  in 
the  English  Prayer-book,  is  understood,  at  the  present 
day,  in  a  sense  quite  different  from  what  was  designed 
when  it  was  first  introduced  into  the  formularies.  Thus 
when,  in  the  Athanasian  Creed,  it  is  said,  ''The  Father 
incomprehensible,**  etc,  the  meaning  is, "  the  Father  is 
(immensiUf  L  e.)  infinite,"  etc. :  a  Being  not  to  be  com- 
prised  (comprehendendus)  within  the  limits  of  space. — 
Eden,  TheoL  Dictionary,  s.  y. 

Inconvertibility,  the  quality  of  both  natures  in 
Christ,  which  does  not  admit  of  a  change  of  eitfaer  into 
the  other. 

IncOTpoUtns,  a  tiUe  in  monasteries  of  the  priest 
who  bas  the  administration  of  the  convent  estatcs,  the 
collection  of  interest  and  other  moneys  due  the  monas- 
tcry,etc. 

Incorporation.  The  incorporaiion  of  a  church 
benefloe  conaists  in  its  being  Join^  qw>ad  spirituaUa  et 


temporalia  with  a  spiritual  Corporation,  soch,  for  tu- 
Stańce,  as  a  conyent  or  a  monastery.  We  find  mtny 
instances  of  such  incorporations  in  the  9th  centun%  tnd 
they  wero  most  generally  the  result  of  efforts  to  increase 
the  reyennes  of  the  corporations.  The  modus  operandi 
was  to  abolish  the  sepaiate  oiBce  connected  with  a  ben- 
efice,'and  to  giye  the  temporal  adyantages  to  the  Cor- 
poration, which  also  added  the  spiritual  ofŚces  connected 
therewith  to  its  other  duties,  supplying  them  with  min- 
isterial  seryices.  For  instance,  a  regular  pastor  (jmx- 
roehtu  princ^Mdis)  was  appointed,  who  committ^  the 
care  of  souls  to  a  yicar  appointed  by  himself,  nnder 
sanction  of  the  bishop.  This  yicar  then  filled  the  offioe 
of  cura  animarum  aetuałis,  whilst  the  conyent  or  mon- 
astery had  but  a  cura  habitualis,  The  canon  laws  la 
such  cases  soon  preecribed  the  appointmcnt  of  peima- 
nent  yicars  (ricarii  perpetui),  although  in  many  in- 
stances, especially  in  Germany,  many  conycnts  appoint- 
ed only  temporary  yicars,  and  eyen  intrustcd  the  care 
of  souls  to  members  of  their  order  who  did  not  reside  in 
the parish.  Essentially different fhnn  these  ^pUnojurt* 
or  **  utrogue  jurt^  incorporations  were  exclusively  tem- 
poral unions  of  the  reyenues  of  liyings  with  spiritual 
corporations,  which  were  also  often  designated  as  istcor- 
poroHonea  guoad  temporalia,  In  these*  cases  the  in- 
come  only  of  the  liyings  went  to  the  oonyents,  togethcr 
with  all  tlie  reyenues  accruing  therefrom,  they  in  ex- 
change  undertaking  to  giye  to  the  incumbent  minister 
an  adequate  support  {portio  amgrua),  The  spiritual 
oflice,  spiritualkij  remaincd  unaffected  by  this  anange- 
ment,  and  was  filled  by  the  bishop,  according  to  the 
wishes  of  the  conyent  Tlie  numerous  abtises  which 
were  introduced  in  both  these  kinds  of  inoorporadooi 
were  denounoed  by  the  ConncU  of  Trent  (Sen.  7,  c.  7, 
De  rrform,),  The  council  also  fortiade  the  unioo  of 
parish  churches  with  conyents,  monasteries,  hospitala, 
etc  (Sess.  24,  c  18 ;  Sess.  7,  De  reform,  c  6).  In  conse- 
ąuence  of  the  secularization  of  conyents  and  monaster- 
ies, the  whole  organization  has  mostly  fallen  into  dis- 
use;  the  parish  adminlstrators  are  about  the  only  re- 
mains  of  the  incorporation  system.  See  Neller,  Deju- 
rUnis  parochi  primiŁivi  (in  Schmid,  Thesaur.jur,  ecd.  vi, 
441  8q.) ;  Herzog,  ReaUEncyklopadit,  yi,  649. 

Incorporeality  of  God  is  his  being  without  a 
body.  That  God  is  incorporcal  is  evident;  for,  1.  Mate- 
riality  is  incompatible  with  self-exi6tence,  and  God,  be- 
ing Belf-cxistent,  must  be  incoiporeal.  2.  If  God  were 
corporeal,  he  could  not  be  present  in  any  part  of  the 
world  where  body  is;  yet  his  presence  is  necessary  for 
the  support  and  motion  of  body.  8.  A  body  cannot  be 
in  two  places  at  the  same  time ;  yet  he  is  eyerywhere, 
and  fills  heayen  and  earth.  4.  A  body  is  to  be  seen  and 
felt,  but  God  is  invisible  and  impalpable  (John  i,  18V 
See  Chamock, If^ority,  i,  1 17 ;  Gili, Body  ofDirim/y,  i, 45, 
8yo ;  Doddridge,  Lecturts  on  DirinUy,  lect.  47 ;  Buck, 
Theol  Dictionary,  s.  y.    See  God. 

Inoormptlbnea,  an  extreme  sect  of  Eutychians 
(q.  V.),  who  held  that  the  body  of  Christ  was  incorrapt- 
ible,  L  e.  '^  that  from  the  time  that  his  body  was  formed 
it  was  not  Busceptible  of  any  change  or  alteration;  that 
hc  was  not  even  subject  to  Innocent  paasiona  or  appe- 
tites,  such  as  hunger  or  thirst,  but  that  hc  ate  witboot 
any  occasion  both  before  his  death  and  afler  his  resor- 
rection.*^— Farrar,  Eodes,  Diet.    See  Aputiiaktodoce- 

T^;  MOKOPHYSITES. 

IncormptiodlaB.    See  Ikoobbuptibii.b8. 

Inoredullty.    See  iNFiDSLmr;  Ukbełiep. 

Incumbent,  a  clerg}inan  in  the  Clmrch  of  Eng- 
land  who  is  in  present  posscKtion  of  (incumbif,  is  dose  to, 
resfs  upony  as  its  immediafe  occupant)  a  bencfice  (Eden). 
Sir  E.  Coke,  howeyer,  says  that  the  title  mcana  that  the 
clerg^nman  "  in  posscssion  of  a  benefice  ought  diligcntly 
to  bend  all  his  study  to  the  care  of  his  church." 

Indefectibility  of  thb  Chukch.  Thb  sobject 
has  already  been  alluded  to  in  the  artide  Crvrch,  yoL 
ii, p. 826  (3);  but  Mr.Blnnt  {TheoLCycli^  i, 310)  hai 


INDEFECTIBILITY 


643 


INDEPENDENCE 


treated  it  bo  much  at  length  that  we  insert  his  remarks 
on  Łhia  aabject,  which  he  treats  under  the  two  heads  of 
(1)  PerprtuUy,  and  (2)  Inerrcmcy  and  InfaUibUiiy,  The 
formeTi  he  aigues,  frees  the  Church  from  failure  in  buc- 
ceaaon  of  memben;  the  latter  two  free  it  from  failure 
in  holding  and  declaring  the  tmth.  ^  Both  theae  flow 
ftom  the  oonstitttŁion  and  naturę  of  the  mystical  body 
of  Christ.  The  Scriptuies  Which  q[>eak  to  this  point 
are  John  xv;  1  Cor.  vi,  15, 19;  xii,  12;  Eph.  i,28;  iv, 
12 ;  ▼,  30 ;  CoL  i,  18,  and  cannot  be  explained  away  into 
meUphor.  As  Christ'8  natuial  body  was  inoorruptible, 
and  yet  before  the  resurrection  was  liable  to  human  in- 
firmities  (Matt.  viii,  17),  so  his  mystical  body,  yet  un- 
glorified,  is  liable  in  each  one  of  its  many  members  to 
ńn  and  falling  from  grace ;  but  nothing  can  touch  the 
life  of  the  body  itselC  As  also  the  fulness  of  the  Spirit 
dwelt  in  Christ,  and  Christ  was  the  Tmth,  so  the  Spir- 
it, by  virtoe  of  whose  indwelliug  the  body  is  one,  and 
one  with  its  Head,  guides  the  Church  into  all  truth." 

L  PerpełuUy  ofthe  Church,—*^  Plain  promises  of  this 
are  madc  in  Isa.  lxi,  8,  9 ;  Dan.  ii,  44 ;  Matt  xvi,  18 ; 
xxviii,  20 ;  John  xiv,  16, 17.  There  are  also  arguments 
to  be  drawn  for  it  from  the  consideration  of  God's  coun- 
sel  and  puzpose.  The  consummation  of  all  things  is  de- 
layed  only  till  God^s  senrants  are  sealed  (1  Cor.  xv,  28 ; 
Rev.  vi,  9-11).  When  faith  fails  in  the  earth,  the  end 
will  be  (Loke  xviii,  8).  This  is  as  regards  God,  in 
whose  work  we  cannot  suppose  an  interruption.  So, 
too,  as  regards  man.  God  will  have  all  men  to  be  8aved, 
aod  oome  to  the  knowledge  of  the  tmth.  The  Church, 
which  b  the  piUar  and  ground  of  the  tmth,  could  not 
faii  withoiit  a  failure  of  God*s  mercy.  So  long  as  there 
are  men  capable  of  8alvation  (and  all  men  are  capable 
of  ■dvmtion,  sińce  Christ  died  for  all),  so  long  will  the 
Ouiich  be  pre8erved,  that  to  it  may  be  added  both  oi 
0wCó/wvoc  and  ot  9ut9fi9ÓfitPoi,  The  promises  of  God 
are  given  to  the  Chuich  as  a  whole.  Each  branch  of 
the  Church  is  on  its  probation,  as  is  each  individual 
member.  And  the  law  of  probation,  the  law  of  their 
participation  in  the  promise,  is  the  same :  *He  that  hath, 
10  faim  shall  be  given.*  To  argue  that  because  each 
partknlar  church  may  fiul,  therefore  the  whole  may  fail, 
is  not  only  a  fallacy  in  logie,  but  a  denial  of  Chńsfs 
power  to  impart  to  the  whole  that  which  he  does  not 
impart  to  each  particular  member." 

IL  Inerraruy  and  In/aUibUiły  of  (he  Church.-^**  The 
iangoiDg  promises  and  arguments  show  that  the  Church 
will  not  fail  either  by  dying  out  or  by  apostasy.  As 
the  work  of  the  Spirit  will  not  fail  in  bringing  sons  to 
Gody  so  it  will  never  fail  in  providing  that  there  shaU 
always  be  a  body  per8evering  in  the  faith  according  to 
the  ekction  of  grace.  This  is  to  be  considered  morę 
particolarly  as  regards  tmth  of  doctrine.  For  this,  also, 
there  are  promises,  e.  g.  John  xvi,  1 3 ;  1  John  ii,  27.  The 
fpirit  which  dwells  in  the  Church  is  likewise  declared 
to  be  the  spirit  of  knowledge  and  understanding  (Col.  i, 
9 ;  ii,  3 ;  iii,  10).  Less  cannot  be  implied  in  these  words 
than  that  the  Church  shall  always  have  a  tenure  of  the 
tmth  snfficient  for  salvation.  They  show,  further,  that 
any  doctrine  which  can  be  said  to  be  the  delibcrately 
certained  votce  of  the  Church  must  be  from  God,  whose 
Spirit  ia  in  the  Church.  But  they  cannot  be  pressed 
80  far  as  to  prove  that  the  Church  may  not  for  a  time 
faold  auch  an  error  aa  does  not  directiy  deny  the  founda- 
tion  of  faith,  or  does  not  directiy  deny  Christ.  Even 
an  cnor,  which  by  logical  conseąuence  denies  the  foun- 
dation  of  faith,  b  not  to  be  taken  as  such  a  denial.  The 
confleqaence  may  not  be  perceived,  and  if  perceired  the 
premiaea  woold  be  at  once  rejected.  The  case  is  doubt- 
leas  of  great  improbability,  but  its  possibility  must  be 
ooooeded.  When,  then,  can  we  say  that  the  voice  of 
the  Church  ia  sufBciently  ascertained?  This  leads  us 
OD  from  the  inerrancy,or/>a«mV€  infaUibili/y,  to  the  ao 
twe  mJałUbUUyf  or  declaration  of  the  faith.  No  actual 
limito  of  time  can  be  set  for  which,  if  a  doctrine  has 
been  beld,it  must  be  conńdered  as  the  ascertained  dc- 
dwm  of  the  Church.   The  ditwustancea  of  the  Church 


may  not  be  such  as  to  lead  to  inve8tigation.  Ten  yean 
in  one  period  may  cause  morę  sifting  ofthe  tmth  than 
a  hundred  years  of  another  period.  It  is  the  condition 
of  the  Church  militant  to  be  always  under  trial,  some- 
times  by  persecution  from  the  world,  somctimes  by 
blasts  of  contrary  doctrine  within  itself.  In  different 
degrees  these  are  blended,  and  with  very  different  de- 
grees  of  speed  will  the  tmth  emerge.  The  dcgree  of 
holiness  also,  and  above  all,  wiU  regulate  the  di8Covery 
and  reception  of  tmth.  For  knowledge  and  understand- 
ing in  spiritual  things  are  the  flower  and  fmit ;  the  plant 
itself  is  holiness  springiiig  from  the  root  of  faith.  The 
certainty,  then,  of  a  doctrine  enunciated  by  the  Church 
is  a  growing  certainty,  var>'ing  in  amouut  with  the 
time  the  doctrine  has  been  łield,  the  degrce  of  investi- 
gation  to  which  it  has  been  subjccted,  and  the  degree 
of  holiness  in  the  Church.  Thus  the  decrees  of  a  coun- 
cil  which  we  may  believe  to  be  oecumenical  can  only  be 
known  to  be  the  gcnuine  voice  of  the  Church  by  their 
acceptance.  We  may  agree  to  the  abstract  proposition 
that  a  tmly  oecumenical  council  cannot  err;  but  the 
proposition  is  of  little  practical  value  at  the  time  of 
holding  a  council,  for  nonę  can  prove  that  the  council 
has  not  in  some  respects  failed  of  oecumenicity.  The 
authority  of  its  decisions  rests  on  their  acceptance.  For 
the  Spirit  of  God  is  given  to  the  whole  body  of  the 
Church ;  and  that  can  only  be  known  to  be  the  trae 
voice  of  the  Church  which  is  expresscd  by  sufficient  de- 
liberation  of  generation  afler  generation.  In  this  sense 
the  infallibility  of  the  Church  is  a  reasonable  doctrine, 
and  one,  in  fact,  which  it  would  be  unreasonable  for  any 
Christian  to  di8bclieve." 

Indefectible  Grace  is,  according  to  the  Calvin- 
ists,  grace  which  cannot  be  lost,  or  fail  of  its  intended 
purpose,  the  salvation  of  thosc  on  whom  it  is  bestowed, 
i.  e.  the  elect,  and  is  held  to  be  irresistible  by  the  person 
so  elected,  thus  necessarily  securing  his  salration.  See 
Calyinism;  Elbction;  Grace;  Wilu 

Indelible  Character.    See  Ciiaracter,  Indkłp 

IBLE. 

Indemnity  (Latin  indemnifas,  compensation)  is  in 
some  churches  a  pension  paid  to  the  bishop  in  consider- 
ation of  discharging  or  indemnifying  churches,  unitcd 
or  appropriated,  from  the  payment  of  procurations,  or 
by  way  of  recompense  for  the  profits  which  the  bishop 
would  otherwise  have  received  during  the  time  of  the 
yacation  of  such  churches.— Eadie,  !,'«;/«>«.  Diet,  p.  825. 

Independence  of  Churches.  '*Ił  is  an  admit- 
ted  fact,  as  clearly  scttled  as  any  thing  can  be  by  human 
authority,  that  the  primitive  Christians,  in  the  organ- 
ization  of  their  asscmbltes,  formed  them  after  the  model 
of  the  Jewish  s^^nagogue.  .  .  .  They  disowned  the  he- 
reditary  aristocracy  of  the  Levitical  pricsthood,  and 
adopted  the  popular  govemment  of  the  synagogue.  .  . . 
Their  goverament  was  voluntary,  elective,  free,  and  ad- 
minbteied  by  rulers  or  elders  elected  by  the  people. 
The  mler  of  the  synagogue  was  the  moderator  of  the 
college  of  elders,  but  only  primus  interparet,  holding  no 
offidal  rank  above  them.  The  people,  as  Yitringa  {De 
Synagoga^  lib.  iii,  pt.  i,  c.  xv,  p.  828-863)  has  shown,  ap- 
pointed  their  own  officers  to  mle  over  them.  They  ex- 
ercised  the  natural  right  of  freemen  to  enact  and  exe- 
cute  their  own  laws,  to  admit  proselytes,  and  to  exclude 
at  pleasure  unworthy  members  from  their  comraunion. 
Theirs  was  '  a  democratic  form  of  govemment,'  and  is 
so  described  by  one  of  the  mo^t  able  expounders  of  the 
constitution  of  the  primitive  churches  (see  Rothe,  A  n- 
fSnge  d,  Christł.  Kirche^  p.  14).  Like  their  prototype, 
therefore,  the  primitive  churches  also  erobndied  the 
principle  of  a  popular  govemment  and  of  enlightened 
religious  liberty"  (Coleman,  ApostoL  and  Pńmił,  Ck.  p. 
43  sq.).  The  reason,  howev€r,  why  the  primitive  Chris- 
tians had  this  peculiar  organization,  reintroduced  in  the 
modem  Church  by  the  Congregationalists,  and  in  part 
also  by  the  Presbyterians,  ia,  that  the  members  of  the 
early  Christian  Church  mostly  came  fiom  the  Jewish 


INDEPENDENCT 


544 


INDEPENDENTS 


CSiorch,  and  natuiaUy  adopted  methoda  of  worshipi  gov- 
einment,  etc.,  to  which  they  were  accoatomed.  But 
thia  by  no  means  goes  to  prove  Łhat  it  was  the  inten- 
tion  of  tbe  early  Christiana  to  perpetuate  their  modę  of 
gOYemment,  but  rather  that,  engaged  aa  Christ  and  his 
disciples  had  been  in  founding  a  Church,  needing  do 
other  bond  than  his  own  person,  the  mude  of  govem- 
ment  to  which  they  had  been  accustomed  was  chosen 
for  the  time  being,  "  the  disciples  not  having  yet  at- 
tained  to  a  elear  understanding  of  that  cali  which  Christ 
had  ahready  given  them  by  so  many  intimations  to  form 
a  Church  entirely  separated  from  the  exi8ting  Jewish 
econoroy.  .  .  .  We  are  disposed  to  beliere  that  the 
Church  was  at  first  composed  entirely  of  members  stand- 
ing  on  au  equality  with  one  another,  and  that  the  apos- 
tles  alone  held  a  higher  rank,  and  exercised  a  directing 
influence  over  the  whole,  which  aroee  fiom  the  original 
position  in  which  Christ  had  placed  them  in  relation  to 
other  belieyers;  so  that  the  whole  arrangement  and  ad- 
ministration  of  the  affairs  of  the  Church  proceeded  from 
them,  and  they  were  first  induced  by  particular  circum- 
Btances  to  appoint  other  church  officers,  as  in  the  Instance 
of  deacons^'  (Neander,  Apostoł  Kirche^  8d  cdit.  p.  81, 38 ; 
comp.  p.  179, 195 ;  also  Rothe,  Anfange^  p.  146  sq. ;  Acts 
vi,  1 ;  xi,  80).  Christ  also  eyidenUy  did  make  some  pro- 
yision  for  a  goTcmment  of  his  Church  on  earth  indepen- 
dent of  Jewish  and  pagan  customs  by  constituting  apos- 
tles,  who  should  authoritatively  command  and  teach. 
(See  voL  ii,  p.  328  są.)  The  churches  of  the  early  Chris- 
tiana also,  unlike  the  Jewish,  were  independent  one  of  the 
other.  History,  sacred  or  profane,  relating  to  this  pe- 
riod, records  noc  a  single  instance  in  which  one  church 
presumed  to  impose  laws  of  its  own  upon  another.  The 
first  traces  of  associations  between  sereral  churches,  from 
which  CGuncils  can  be  said  to  have  taken  their  origin, 
we  find  in  the  2d  century  (Coleman,  De  Rełnu  Christ. 
sec.  i,  §  48).  Indications  of  this  original  independence 
are  distinctly  manifested  even  after  the  rise  of  the  epis- 
copacy.  £very  bishop  had  the  right  to  form  his  own 
liturgy  and  creed,  and  to  settle  at  pleasure  his  own  time 
and  modę  of  celebrating  the  religious  festivals  (compare 
Greiling,  ApottoHsche  Chruiengemdne,  p.  16).  ^'prian 
Btrongly  asserta  the  right  of  every  bishop  to  make  laws 
for  his  own  church.  Indeed,  it  is  to  this  original  in- 
dependence of  the  churches  from  each  other,  to  the 
want  of  proper  authorities  to  govem  them,  that  Socra- 
tes  (Eccles,  Jlist,  lib.  v,  c  xxii)  ascribes  the  ondless  con- 
troversies  which  agitated  the  Church  in  the  early  ages 
with  regard  to  the  ob6er\''ancc  of  certain  festiyals,  espe- 
cially  Easter.  See,  besides  the  authorities  already  dted, 
Sack,  CommefU,  ad  Thfol.  IrutU.  p.  141 ;  Bunsen,  Hippo- 
lytut  and  his  Agt^  iii,  246 ;  Dr.  Hitchcock,  in  the  Amer, 
Preab,  Rer,  Jan.  1867.  See  also  Episcopacy,  voL  iii, 
p.  263,  264,  266  (iv).     (J.  H.  W.) 

Independency  of  God  is  his  existenoe  in  and  of 
himself,  without  depending  on  any  other  being.  *^  His 
being  and  perfections,**  as  Dr.  Kidgdy  obseryes  {Bodjf  of 
JHcimłi/t  p.  7), "  are  underived,  and  not  communicated  to 
him,  as  all  finite  perfections  are  by  him  to  the  creature. 
Thb  attribute  of  independency  belongs  to  all  his  perfec- 
tions. 1.  He  is  independent  as  to  his  knowledge.  He 
doth  not  receiye  ideas  from  any  object  out  of  himself,  as 
intelligent  creatures  do.     This  is  elegantly  described  by 

,  the  prophet,  Isa.  xl,  18, 14.  2.  He  is  independent  in 
power.    As  he  receiyes  strength  from  no  one,  so  he  doth 

■  not  act  dependently  on  the  will  of  the  creature  (Job 
zxxyi,  23).  8.  He  is  independent  as  to  his  holiness, 
hatlng  sin  necessarily,  and  not  barely  depending  on  some 
reasons  out  of  himself  inducing  him  thereto ;  for  it  is  es- 
sential  to  the  diyine  naturę  to  be  infinitely  opposite  to 
ńn,  and  therefore  to  be  independently  holy.  4.  He  is  in- 
dependent as  to  his  bounty  and  goodness.  He  oommu- 
nicates  blessings  not  by  constraint,  but  according  to  his 
soyereign  will.  Thus  he  gave  being  to  the  world,  and 
all  things  therein,  w^hich  was  the  first  instance  of  bounty 
and  goodness ;  oiid  this  not  by  restraint,  but  by  his  free 
will :  '  for  his  pleasure  they  are  and  were  created,'    In 


like  manner,  whateyer  instanoes  of  mercy  he  exteiidi  ta 
miserable  creatures,  he  acts  independently  and  not  by 
foroe.  He  shows  mercy,  because  it  is  his  pleasure  to  <k» 
so  (Kom.  ix,  18).  That  God  is  independent,  let  it  be  fni^ 
ther  considered,  1.  That  all  things  depend  on  hta  power 
which  brought  them  into  and  presenres  them  in  beło^ 
If,  therefore,  all  things  depend  on  God,  then  it  woold  be 
absurd  to  say  that  God  depeuds  on  anything,  for  thia 
would  be  to  suppoee  the  cause  and  effect  to  be  mutuaUy 
dependent  on  and  derived  from  each  other,  which  in- 
yolyes  a  con^adiction.  2.  If  God  be  infinitely  above  tbe 
highest  creatures,  he  cannot  depend  on  any  of  them,  for 
dependence  aigues  inferiority  (Isa.  x],  15, 17).  3.  If  God 
depend  on  any  creature,  he  does  not  exist  necesaaiily; 
and  if  so,  then  he  might  not  have  been ;  for  the  same 
will  by  which  he  is  supposed  to  exist  might  haye  de- 
termined  that  he  should  not  haye  existed,  which  is  al- 
together  inconsistent  with  the  idea  of  a  God.  Fnmi 
God's  being  independent,  we  infer,  1.  That  we  ought  to 
conclude  that  the  creature  cannot  lay  any  obligation  on 
him,  or  do  anything  that  may  tend  to  make  him  morę 
happy  than  he  is  in  himself  (Rom.  xi,  85;  Job  xxii,  2; 
3).  2.  If  independency  be  a  diyine  perfection,  then  let 
it  not  in  any  instance,  or  by  any  oonseąuence,  be  attrib- 
uted  to  the  creature :  let  us  conclude  that  all  our  aprin|pi 
are  in  him,  and  that  all  we  enjoy  and  hope  for  ia  from 
him,  who  is  the  author  and  finuher  of  our  faith,  and  the 
fountain  of  all  our  blessednesa.**— Buck,  J%eoL  Diciionh 
ary,    See  God. 

Independent  Baptists.    See  Baptists. 

Independenta,  a  name  giyen  to  certain  bodiea  of 
Christiana  who  aasert  that  each  Christian  congregation 
Ib  independent  of  all  othen,  and  from  all  ecdesiastieal 
authority  exoept  its  own.  Some  writera  inaocurately 
use  this  name  as  synonymoua  with  ''Congregationa]- 
ists,"  foigetting  that  the  latter  do  not  daim  the  abaolota 
independence  of  Indiyidual  character.  "  The  chnicbca 
of  New  England  are  congregatUmaL  They  do  not  m^ 
proye  the  name  of '  Independent,'  and  are  abbaneni  of 
such  principles  of  independency  as  wouM  keep  them 
from  giying  an  aooount  of  their  matters  to  ncigfabociog 
churches,  regularly  demanding  it  of  them**  (Matha^ 

See  Co^'GRI£OATIONAL1ST& 

I.  //iffory.— After  the  reformation  of  religiom  in  Eng- 
land, the  greater  body  of  PA)te8tants  adopted  the  £pb- 
copal  form  of  Church  polity,  and  thia  was  finally  estab- 
lished  as  the  religion  of  the  nation.  But  the  amallcr 
body  of  Protestants  opposed  episcopacy  on  the  gnwnd 
that  it  too  nearly  reaembled  the  Roman  Catbolic  foim 
of  Church  polity,  and  these  so-called  Nonoonfonnists 
(q.  y.)  came  to  be  stigmatized  by  the  deriai  ve  name  of 
PuritanSf  which  the  followers  of  Noyatian  had  bona 
in  the  third  century.  To  thia  dass  (i.  e.  NonoomfocD- 
ists)  belong  the  Independents,  who  daim  that  their  sys- 
tem is  substantially  the  same  aa  that  of  the  apostolie 
churches,  which  had  been  cormpted  by  the  tendencks 
that  culminated  in  papacy,  and  that  traces  of  diascnt 
from  the  episcopal  power  may  be  found  in  erery  age 
back  to.  the  4th  century  (see  Punchaid,  UiHory  o/Con- 
gregaiionaliam),  They  are  suppoaed  to  haye  originated 
in  England  about  the  year  1581,  under  the  leaderahip 
of  Robert  Brown,  bearing  thenoe  the  name  of  Brownists 
(q.  y.) ;  but  Richard  Fiu  is  generally  named  aa  the  fint 
pastor  of  the  first  Independent  church  in  England  (oote- 
parę  Skeats,  History  of  tke  Frte  Ckurełies,  p.  23).  The 
persecution  which  they  were  obliged  to  endure  from  tbe 
EstabUshed  Church  soon  neoeeaitated  the  emigration  of 
these  first  Independenta,  and  they  remoyed  to  the  Neth- 
erlands.  Deeerted  by  Brown,  who  conformed,  and  be- 
came  an  adherent  of  the  Church  of  England,  ther  choae 
aa  their  leader  John  Robinson,  to  whom  bekmga  the 
chief  merit  of  a  better  oiganization  of  them.  Btown, 
who,  by  the  persecutions  which,  as  a  Nonconfonniat,  he 
had  to  endure,  had  become  greatly  embitteied,  had,  with 
hardly  less  bigotry  than  his  persecutora,  dedared  a& 
other  forms  of  Church  goyemment  not  oniy  aa  inoonsia- 
ten^  but  denounoed  them  in  the  aeyetest  ternie  eren 


INDEPENDENTS 


546 


INDEPENDENTS 


branding  them  8B  anHchriiHtm.  Bolónflon,  howeTer, 
while  holding  hia  own  to  be  the  most  apostoUcal  form, 
counselled  reoogmtion  of  aU  other  forms  and  Christian 
fellowship,  looking  upon  charitj  as  the  end  of  the  com- 
mandmentai  The  names  also  which  they  had  hitherto 
borne  were  now  exchanged  for  that  of  Independents. 
Bobinaon,  in  his  Apology,  having  affirmed  *^C<£tum 
quemlibet  particularem,  esse  toŁam,  integram,  et  perfec- 
tom ecclesiam  ex  suis  partibus  constantem  immediate  et 
indepaukniem  [quoad  alias  eccL]  sub  ipso  Christo."  In 
1616,  a  friend  and  colaborer  of  Robinson,  Henry  Jacob, 
letamed  to  the  mother  country,  and  organized  an  Inde- 
pendent ChuTch  at  London,  which  has  oftentimes,  though 
incoirectly,  been  termed  "  the  first  Independent  Church 
in  England**  (compare  voL  ii,  p.  476).  "  From  this,  as  a 
nudeua,  Independency  gradoally  spread  through  £ng- 
land,  and,  in  spite  of  the  hanh  measures  of  Laud  and 
the  court,  came,  in  the  middle  of  the  17th  centiuy,  to 
occupy  a  dominant  place  among  the  powers  by  which 
the  destiniea  of  England  were  swayed.*^ 

A  prominent  place  was  occupied  by  the  Independents 
at  the  Westminster  Assembly,  they  taking  an  active 
part  in  the  debates,  especially  on  points  of  Church  or- 
der; "debating  all  things,"  says  Baillie,  "which  came 
within  twenty  miles  of  their  guarters,**  and  ovidently 
astonishing  the  ^churchmen"  by  their  "great  leaming, 
qaickneas,  and  eloąuence,  togethcr  with  their  great 
cottrtesy  and  discretion  in  speaking."  Skeata  {lliatory 
ofihe  Frte  Ckurchet,  p.  52)  asserts  that  at  this  "Assem- 
bly'* the  rspreaentatiyes  of  the  Independents,  some  five 
or  six  in  number,  "prayed  to  be  inducted  into  the  pro- 
posed  National  Church,  the  conditions  being  that  the 
power  of  ordination  should  be  reserred  to  their  own 
oongregatioiis,  and  that  they  might  be  subject,  in 
Church  censures,  to  Parliament,  but  not  to  any  Fresby- 
tery."  As  they  were  unsuccessful  in  this  attempt,  how- 
erer,  it  is  believed  that,  though  few  in  number,  they 
yet  preyented  the  Presbyterians  from  accomplishing  at 
least  their  object,  standing  "in  the  breach  against  the 
adrance  of  a  new  State  Church,  which,  if  better  in  many 
respects  than  the  old  (Episcopal),  would  have  been 
worse  in  other  respects."  But  it  was  only  after  the 
accession  of  01iver  Cromwell  (himself  an  Independent) 
to  the  protectorate  that  the  Independents  gained  the 
ascendency,  and  became  "the  most  powerful  and  im- 
portant  religious  body  in  England"  (compare  Murray, 
Life  of  Samuel  Rutherford,  chap.  viii).  The  greatest 
statesmen  of  England  were  Independents;  the  army 
was  Independent  in  the  main ;  and  Independent  minis- 
tera  held  appointments  as  chaplains,  or  filled  leading 
positions  in  the  uniyersities;  among  them,  most  promi- 
nently,  John  Owen,  Thomas  Goodwin,  Nye,  etc  To 
Btrengthen  the  union  among  themselyes,  an  Assembly 
was  decided  to  be  held  at  the  Savoy.  Ministers  and 
delegates  of  morę  than  a  hundred  congregations  there- 
upon  conyened,  Sept  29, 1658,  and  on  Oct.  12  (a  few 
weeka  before  Oliyer  Cromwell*s  death)  they  adopted 
and  issaed  a  confession  of  faith  and  discipline,  which 
was  named  a  "  Declaration."  Of  this  dcdaration  the 
following  were fundamental  propositions :  "A  particular 
Chnich  consists  of  officers  and  members :  the  Ix>rd  Christ 
ha\ing  given  to  his  called  ones— onited  in  Church  order 
— liberty  and  power  to  choose  persona  fitted  by  the 
Holy  Ghost  to  be  over  them  in  the  Lord.  The  officers 
appointed  by  Christ  to  be  chosen  and  set  apart  by  the 
Church  are  pastora,  teachers,  elders,  and  deacons.  The 
way  appobted  by  Christ  for  the  calling  of  any  person 
nnto  the  office  of  pastor,  teacher,  or  elder  in  a  church  is 
that  he  be  chosen  thereunto  by  the  common  suffirage  of 
the  Church  itself,  and  solemnly  set  apart  by  fasting  and 
pnyer,  with  the  imposition  of  hands  of  the  eldership  of 
that  Church,  if  there  be  any  before  constituted  therein ; 
and  of  a  deacon,  that  he  be  chosen  by  the  like  suffrage, 
and  set  apart  by  prayer,  and  the  like  imposition ;  and 
thoae  who  are  so  choaen,  though  not  set  apart  after  that 
manncr,  are  rightly  constituted  ministers  of  Jesus.  The 
work  of  preaching  is  not  so  peculiarly  confined  to  pas- 
IY^Mm 


tors  and  teachers  bnt  that  others  also,  gifked  and  fitted 
by  the  Holy  Ghost,  and  approyed  by  the  people,  may 
publidy,  ordinarily,  and  constantly  perform  it.  Ordi- 
nation alone,  without  election  or  consent  of  the  Chuich, 
doth  not  constitute  any  person  a  church  officer.  A 
church  funushed  with  officers,  according  to  the  mind  of 
Christ,  hath  fuli  power  to  admiuister  all  his  ordinances; 
and  where  there  is  want  of  any  one  or  morę  officers, 
those  that  are  in  the  Church  may  administer  all  the  or- 
dinances proper  to  thoae  offioers  whom  they  do  not  poe- 
sess;  but  where  there  are  no  teaching  officers  at  all, 
nonę  may  administer  the  seals,  nor  can  the  Church  au- 
thorize  any  so  to  do.  Whereaa  the  Lord  Jesus  Christ 
hath  appointed  and  instituted,  as  a  means  of  cdification, 
that  those  who  walk  not  according  to  the  rules  and  lawa 
appointed  by  him  be  censured  in  his  name  and  authori- 
ty,  every  Church  hath  power  in  itself  to  exerciBe  and 
execute  all  those  censures  appointed  by  him.  The  cen- 
sures appointed  by  Christ  are  admonition  and  excom- 
munication;  and  whereas  some  offenoes  may  be  known 
only  to  some,  those  to  whom  they  are  so  known  must 
first  admonish  the  offender  in  priyate ;  in  public  offences, 
and  in  case  of  non-amendment  upon  priyate  admonition, 
the  oiTence  being  related  to  the  Church,  the  offender  ia 
to  be  duły  admonished,  in  the  name  of  Christ,  by  the 
whole  Church  through  the  elders;  and  if  this  censure 
preyail  not  for  his  repentance,  then  he  is  to  be  cast  out 
by  exoommunication,  with  the  consent  of  the  members." 
Tbese  particulars  respecting  a  dedaration  of  faith  but 
little  known  indicate  the  opinions  entertained  by  the 
Independenta,  not  only  at  the  time  of  the  Restoration, 
but,  with  some  modification,  afterwards;  and  here  it 
may  be  added  that  if,  in  the  theory  of  Presbyterianism, 
the  ministry,  as  to  the  order  of  existence,  precedes  the 
Church,  in  the  theory  of  Congrcgationalism,  the  Church, 
in  that  same  order,  precedes  the  minister;  and  in  tUa 
significant  fact  may  be  found  a  key  to  some  important 
differences  between  the  two  systemSb  Iksides  thoee 
rules  which  had  reference  to  the  intemal  order  of  the 
churches,  there  were  these  three  relative  to  their  dimen- 
sions,  their  co-operation,  and  the  catholicity  of  their 
fellowship.  "For  the  avoiding  of  differenoes,  for  the 
greater  solemnity  in  the  celebration  of  ordinances,  and 
for  the  larger  usefulness  of  the  giils  and  graces  of  the 
Holy  Ghost,  saints,  liying  within  such  distances  that 
they  can  conyeniently  assemble  for  divine  worship, 
ought  rather  to  join  in  one  Church  for  their  mutual 
strengthening  and  edification  than  to  set  up  many  dia- 
tinct  societies.  In  cases  of  difficulties  or  differenoes,  it 
is  according  to  the  mind  of  Christ  that  many  churches 
holding  communion  together  do,  by  their  managera,  meet 
in  a  synod  or  council  to  consider  and  give  adyice ;  how- 
beit,  these  83aiods  are  not  intrusted  with  any  Church 
power,  properly  so  called,  or  with  any  jurisdiction  over 
the  churches.  Such  reforming  churches  as  oonsist  of 
persons  sound  in  the  faith,  and  of  conyersation  becom- 
ing  the  Gosi)el,  ought  not  to  refuse  the  communion  of 
each  other,  so  far  as  may  consist  with  their  omtr  prind- 
ples  rcspectiydy,  though  they  walk  not  in  all  thinga 
according  to  the  same  rules  of  Church  order." 

The  condusions  at  the  Sayoy  mecting  were  not  eo- 
desiastical  canons,  but  simply  united  opinions.  They 
had  no  binding  force.  They  aspired  to  no  higher  char- 
acter  than  that  of  counsel  and  advice.  Lest  this  deda- 
ration should  endanger  their  principles,  the  assembly 
took  the  precaution  not  to  inyest  it  with  binding  sym- 
bolical  authority ;  and,  to  guard  against  the  possibUlty 
of  hicrarchical  schemes,  they  further  enacted  that  no 
one  should  be  ordained  without  haying  a  cali  to  some 
particular  congregation.  Similar  precautions  were  also 
taken  by  them  against  all  poesible  ciyil  interference  in 
ecciesiastical  affairs,  cxcept  cases  in  which  Christian 
societies  had  laid  themsdyes  open  to  inyestigation  by 
the  civil  authorities  for  the  encouragement  of  dvii  dis- 
turbances  (comp.  art.  Congrisgatio^^alists,  voL  ii,  p. 
480,  n,  2).  After  the  restoration  of  Charles  II  in  1660^ 
and  the  re-establiahment  of  epiaoopacy,  the  ludepeo- 


M 


INDEPENDENTS 


546 


INDEPENDENTS 


dents,  like  all  other  iKmooiifonmzig  '^secta,**  tdrered 
from  illiberal  enActments,  espedally  from  the  "Act  cf 
Unifonnity/'  which  was  paased  in  1662.  *<  Indepen- 
denta retired  into  obscuiity  for  a  while  afler  the  Resto- 
TEtion.  The  doon  of  boildings  where  they  had  been 
wont  to  aaaembie  were  nailed  up,  the  paston  were  dziv- 
en  out,  flocks  were  acattered,  the  adminiatration  of  or- 
dinances  could  not  take  place,  and  meetings  could  not  be 
held,  and  oommunities  which  had  been  prosperous  nn- 
der  the  Commonwealth  dimudshed  in  number"  (Stough- 
ton,  Ecdes,  HiOory  of  Englcmd  [Church  ofthe  Restora- 
tion]j  ii,  164).  The  Act  of  Uniformity,  howeyer,  was  the 
most  seyere  of  aU  enactments  against  dissenters.  Some 
2000  of  the  ablest  and  best  of  England^s  deiigy  were 
forced  to  leaye  the  Church.  '*They  included  Presby- 
terians,  Independents,  Baptists,  aud  not  a  few  whom  it 
would  be  difficult  to  reduce  entirely  under  any  of  those 
denominations;  both  Calyinists  and  Arminians,  with 
other  diyines  scarcely  belonging  to  either  of  those 
achools.  In  point  of  leaming,  eloqaence,  reasoning,  and 
imagination  the  men  yaried;  but  under  all  their  pecul- 
iarities  Uy  a  common  faith  of  no  ordinary  character,  a 
fidth  of  that  rare  kind  which  makes  the  confessor.  They 
belieyed  in  God,  in  Christ,  in  tnith,  in  heayen ;  and  in 
the  controyersy  which  they  carried  on  they  regarded 
themselyes  as  fighting  for  a  diyine  cause.  .  .  .  They 
belieyed  that  they  were  acting  in  the  defence  of  the 
GospeL  A  stiong  eyangelical  faith  upheld  their  ecde- 
siastical  opinions  like  the  eyeriasting  rocks  which  form 
the  ribs  and  backbone  of  this  grand  old  world.  The 
Church  of  £ngland  snflered  no  smali  loss  when  she  lost 
such  men"  (Stoughton).  Yet,  in  spite  of  these  perse- 
cutions,  the  Independents  still  continued  to  subsist  un- 
til,  in  1688,  the  Beyolution,  and  in  1689  the  <' Act  of  Tol- 
eration,"  finally  restored  to  them  the  enjoyment  of  liber- 
ty  of  worship. 

Shortly  afler  the  pnblication  of  the  Act  of  Toleration, 
efforts  were  madę  to  bring  about  a  union  between  the 
Fresbyterians  and  the  Independents  (who  by  this  timc 
generally  styled  themselyes  Congregationałists),  and  in 
1691  heads  of  agreement  were  drawn  up  (oompare  Moe- 
heim,  EccL  Hitt,  y,  861-^68).  But  **  within  a  year  from 
the  formation  of  the  union  two  discussions  on  points  of 
doctrine  and  order  arose.  The  first  of  these  was  excited 
by  a  Congregattonal  minister  holding  high  Calyinistic 
or  rather  Antinomian  opinions,  belieying  and  preaching 
that  repentance  is  not  necessary  to  salyation,  that  the 
elect  are  always  without  sin,  and  always  without '  spot 
before  God.' "  The  oontroyeny  which  this  course  pro- 
Toked  ^'threw  eleyen  counties  into  disorder,  and  befora 
a  year  had  passed  away  the  Congregationałists  had  be- 
gun  to  be  weaued  from  the  union"  (Skeats ;  comp.  also 
onr  artide  on  Hoik%  John).  From  the  poation  which 
the  Independents  assumed,  it  is  curious  to  notice  ^  that 
the  Fresbyterians,  at  this  time,  were  moro  moderate 
Calyinists  than  the  Congregationałists,  and  that  the  ep- 
ithet  of '  Baxterians'  was  not  inappropriately  applied  to 
them;  but  as  Baxterianism  included  the  articles  of  the 
Church  of  England,  and  the  confessions  of  Dort  and 
Sayoy,  their  moderation  was  certainly  łimited.  Wliat 
they  did  not  belieye  was  the  doctrine  of  absolute  repro- 
bation,  held  in  the  senae  that  persona  were  condemned 
inespectiye  of  tlieir  character  and  faith.  They  did  not 
belieye  that  sinners  were  pardoned  without  repentance. 
They  did  not  belieye  that  the  Sayiour  so  stood  in  the 
sinner^s  place  that  God  eyer  looked  upon  him  as  a  sin- 
ner.  The  last  point  was  the  point  musŁ  yehemently  de- 
bated  in  this  controyersy.  The  qne8tion  was,  Is  there 
a  change  of  persons,  or  only  of  person,  in  the  redemp- 
tion ;  and  according  as  this  was  answered,  and  the  sense 
in  which  the  answer  was  understood,  the  controyersial- 
ist  was  classed  as  an  Arminian,  or  eyen  Unitarian,  on 
the  one  side,  or  as  an  Antinomian  on  the  other.  Mather 
went  so  far  as  to  state  that  belieycrs  were  as  righteous 
as  Christ  himaelf,  and  the  Congregational  body  snpport- 
ed  Mather." 

After  the  Beyobitloii  the  IndependeDła  greatly  in- 


creaaed  in  nnmbers  and  influence,  espedally  doiing  the 
middle  of  the  last  century,  under  **  the  excraodPdinaiTT»- 
yiyał  of  religious  zeal"  whidi  the  eamest  Ubots  of  Wct- 
ley  and  Whitefield  occasioned.  Many  oonyerts  of  thoe 
emincnt  preachers  Joined  the  Independenta,  iav<iriag 
their  yiews  on  Church  goyenunent.  Since  the  repeał 
of  the  Test  and  Corporation  Acts  in  1828,  by  which  all 
civił  abilities  were  remoyed  from  the  Independents.  and 
their  right  to  social  equality  with  their  fellow-subjects 
was  legally  acknowledged,  they  liayc  especiallr  piw- 
pered,  and  their  accessions  haye  been  so  great  that  they 
haye  beoome  the  largest  dissenting  body  in  England  ex- 
cept  the  Wesleyan  Methodists.  In  1©I  a  "  Congrega- 
tional Union  of  England  and  Wales"  was  formed,  sod 
their  "  Declaration  of  Faith,  Order,  and  Discipline''  vas 
adopted  in  1838.  By  the  census  of  1851  (in  the  ceosuB 
of  1861  religious  statistics  were  not  included),  the  nim»> 
ber  of  their  churehes  in  England  and  Wales  is  gi^^cn  st 
8244,  with  accommodation  for  1,067,760  persons,  and  an 
estimated  attendance  of  798,142.  The .  Independenta 
who  haye  always  eyineed  great  interest  in  educańoo, 
at  present  haye  under  their  control  in  PIngland  ten 
training  colleges,  with  a  ataff  of  twenty-stx  profeseon 

'^"«««'  D.».f  X,.cf 

Fermstlim.      Sladctb 

Western  College,  Plymouth 17&3  16 

Botherham  College 1766  19 

Brecon  Collese 1760  34 

CheshnntCoflege 1766  ST 

Alredale  College,  Bradford 1784  SO 

Hackney  CoUeee 1796  80 

Łaocashire  College 180G  8S 

Spring  Hill,  Blnnlngham 18S8  81 

New  Colleffe.  London 1680  40 

CaveodishTheologieal  College,  Man->  .cm  oe 

chester 7 /  *®®®  ® 

IL  Doctrine»,—*^lvL  support  of  their  scheme  of  CbiK 
gregational  churehes,  the  Independents  obser\'e  that  the 
word  ecjcAi^na,  which  we  transUte  *ckurch,'  is  alwajt 
used  in  Scripture  to  signify  either  a  tin^le  congrtyafw^ 
or  the  place  where  a  single  congregation  meets.  Thas 
that  unhiwfid  assembly  at  Ephesus,  brought  together 
against  Paul  by  the  craftsmen,  is  called  iMxKi\ma,  a 
church  (Acts  xix,  82,  89,  41).  The  word,  howerer,  is 
generally  applied  to  a  more  sacred  use,  but  still  it  signi- 
fies  either  the  body  assembling,  or  the  place  in  which  it 
assemble&  llie  whole  body  of  the  disciples  at  Corinih 
is  called  the  Church,  and  spokeu  of  as  ooming  together 
into  one  place  (1  Cor.  xiy,  23).  The  plaoe  into  whidi 
they  came  together  we  find  likewise  called  a  church: 
*  Wlien  ye  come  together  in  the  church — ^when  ye  come 
together  into  one  phM»*  (1  Cor.  xi,  18, 20).  Wherevff 
there  were  more  congregations  than  one,  there  wa« 
likewise  more  churehes  than  one.  Thua,  *Let  ycnr 
women  keep  silence  in  the  churehes,^  lv  raic  iKK\Mteiaic 
(1  Cor.  xiy,  84).  The  whole  nation  of  Israd  is  indecd 
called  a  church^  but  it  was  no  more  than  a  single  con- 
gregation, for  it  had  but  one  plaoe  of  public  worship, 
namely,  first  the  tabemacle,  and  afterwards  the  tempie. 
The  catholic  Church  of  Christ,  hia  holy  nation  and  king- 
dom,  is  likewise  a  single  congregation,  haying  one  plaoe 
of  worship,  that  is,  heayen,  where  all  the  membeis  as- 
semble  by  faith  and  hołd  communion :  and  in  whicb, 
when  they  shall  all  be  fully  gathered  together,  tbcy 
will  in  fact  be  one  glorious  asaembly.  Accordingly  we 
find  it  called  *  the  generał  assembly  and  church  of  ihe 
fiiBt^bom,  whose  names  are  written  in  heayen.'  Beśdes 
these,  the  Independent  can  find  no  other  deacription  of  a 
church  in  the  New  Testament ;  not  a  traoe  of  a  dioccse 
or  presbyteiy  consisting  of  seyeral  congregations,  all 
subject  to  one  jurisdiction.  The  nnmber  of  disdplo  in 
Jerosalem  was  certainly  great  before  they  were  dis^ 
persed  by  the  peisecution  in  which  Paul  bore  so  actire 
a  part  Yet  they  are  neyer  mentioned  as  forming  dis- 
tinct  assemblies,  but  as  one  assembly,  meeting  with  its 
elders  in  one  plaice--sometime8  in  the  Tempie,  some* 
times  in  Solomon's  porch,  and  sometimes  in  an  npper 
room.  After  the  di^>enton,  the  disciples  who  fled  from 
Jemsaiem,  aa  thęy  oould  no  longer  aaaemUe  in  ona 


INDEPENDENTS 


647 


INDEPENDENTS 


płace-  mn  new  calkd  a  Ghuich  by  Łhemielyes,  or  one 
church,  lut  the  churches  ofJudeBa,  Samaria,  and  Galilee 
(Acta  is,  81 ;  GaL  i,  22).  Hence  the  Independent  con- 
dudes  that  in  Jenuakm  the  woids  ehureh  and  congre- 
ffoUon  were  of  the  same  import;  and  if  such  waa  the 
caae  there,  where  the  Gospel  waa  fint  preached,  he 
thinka  we  may  reaaonahly  espeet  to  flnd  it  bo  in  other 
piacesL  Thus,  when  Paul,  on  his  Jotumey,  calls  the  eld- 
en  of  the  Chnzch  of  Ephesua  to  Miletoa,  he  speake  to 
them  aa  the  joint  o^ezseen  of  a  single  congregadon : 
*Take  heed  to  youiselres,  and  to  aU  the  flock  over  which 
the  Uoly  Ghost  hath  madę  you  oyeneera'  (Acta  xx,  28). 
Had  the  Chnrch  at  Ephesua  conństed  of  difRerent  eon- 
giegatiiOiiSy  united  under  such  a  Jurisdiction  aa  that  of 
a  modem  presbyteiy,  it  would  have  been  natural  to  say, 

*  Take  heed  to  yoonelres,  and  to  the  JlocU  over  which 
the  Holy  Ghoet  hath  madę  you  oreneeis  ;*  but  thu  is  a 
way  of  speaking  of  which  the  Independent  finda  no  in- 
stanoe  in  the  wlwLe  of  the  New  Testament.  The  sacred 
wńteza,  wheii  speaking  of  all  the  Ghriatiaos  in  a  nation 
or  pn>vince^  nerer  cali  them  the  Church  of  such  a  na- 
tion OT  piOTince,  but  *  the  ehurehes  of  Galatia'  (GaL  i,  2), 

*  the  dkurehet  of  Macedonia'  (2  Cor.  viii,  1), '  the  ehureh- 
ۤ  of  Asia*  (1  Cor.  xvi,  19).  On  the  other  hand,  when 
speaking  of  the  disdples  in  a  city  or  town  who  might 
ordlnarily  assemble  in  one  place,  they  uniformly  caU 
them  a  Church;  as,  'the  Church  of  Antioch,'  Hhe 
Churdi  at  Corinth,*  'the  Chuich  of  Ephesua,'  and  the 
like. 

''In  each  of  these  churches  or  congregations  the?e 
were  biahopa»  sometimes  called  'eldera,'  and  deacons; 
and  in  crery  church  there  seema  to  hare  been  morę 
than  one  elder,  and  in  some  a  great  maay, '  who  all  la- 
boied  in  word  and  doctrine.'  Thus  we  read  (Acta  xiv, 
23)  of  Pani  and  Bamabaa  ordńning  elders  (to  be  bish- 
ops  and  deaoons)  in  every  church ;  and  (Acts  xx,  17)  of 
a  company  of  elders  in  the  Church  of  Ephesua,  who  were 
eshoited  to  'feed  the  fiock,  and  to  take  heed  to  them- 
8elve8,  and  to  all  the  flock  over  which  the  Holy  Ghost 
had  madę  them  OYecseers.'  But  of  such  elders  as  are 
foond  in  modem  Presbyterian  churches,  who  neither 
teach  nor  are  fit  to  teach,  the  Independent  finds  no  ves- 
tige  in  the  Scriptures,  nor  in  the  eariiest  uninspired 
wńters  of  the  Christian  Church.  The  mle  or  govem- 
meiit  of  this  presbytery  or  eldership  in  a  church  is  not 
their  own,  but  Chriafs.  They  are  not  brds  over  Gk>d'8 
heritage,  nor  can  they  pretend  to  morę  power  over  the 
diicipfea  than  the  apostles  possessed.  But  when  thd  ad- 
miniatimtion  of  the  apostles  in  the  Chnrch  of  Jerusalem, 
and  other  churches  wheie  they  acted  aa  elders,  is  in- 
quinsd  into  by  an  Independent,  it  does  not  appear  to 
him  that  they  did  anything  of  oommon  concem  to  the 
Choaneh  without  the  oonsent  of  the  multitude ;  nay,  it 
seema  they  thonght  it  necessary  to  judge  and  determine 
in  disdpline,  in  preaence  of  the  whole  Church  (Acts  vi, 
1-6;  XT,  22;  1  Cor.  v,  8,4,  6).  Excommunication  and 
absoliition  weie  in  the  power  of  the  Church  at  Corinth, 
and  not  of  the  elders  aa  dtsCingniahed  fiom  the  congre- 
gacion  (1  Cor.  v ;  2  Cor.  xi).  The  apoetle,  indeed,  speaks 
of  hia  deUvering  some  unto  Satan  (1  Tim.  i,  20) ;  but  it 
is  by  no  means  elear  that  he  did  it  by  himself,  and  not 
after  the  manner  pointed  out  in  1  Cor.  v,  4, 5 ;  evcn  as 
it  doea  not  appear,  from  his  saying,  in  one  epistle. '  that 
the  gilt  was  given  anto  Timothy  by  putting  on  of  his 
hands,'  that  thia  waa  not  done  in  the  pre^tery  of  a 
Church,  aa  in  the  other  epiatle  we  find  it  actually  was. 
The  tiying  and  judging  of  fabe  aposUea  was  a  matter 
ni  the  first  importanoe,  but  it  waa  done  by  the  elders 
with  the  flock  at  Ephcaua  (Rev.  ii,  2 ;  Acta  xx,  28) ;  and 
that  whole  fiock  did,  in  the  days  of  Ignatius,  all  partake 
of  the  Lord's  Supper,  and  pray  together  in  one  place. 
£ven  the  power  of  bindiog  and  loociag,  or  the  power  of 
the  keya,  aa  it  haa  been  called,  was  by  out  Saviour  con- 
ferred,  not  npon  a  particular  order  of  disdples,  but  upon 
the  ChareK  *  If  thy  bfother  shaU  trespass  against  thee, 
go  and  tell  bim  hia  ianlt  between  thee  and  him  alone. 
If  he  ataall  henr  thee,  thoa  hast  gained  thy  brother;  but 


if  he  win  not  hear  thee,  then  take  with  thee  one  or  two 
morę,  that  in  the  mouth  of  two  or  three  witnesses  every 
word  may  be  established.  And  if  he  shall  neglect  to 
hear  them,  tell  it  anto  the  Church ;  but  if  he  neglect  to 
hear  the  Church^  let  him  be  unto  thee  as  a  heathen 
man  and  a  publican.  Yerily  I  say  unto  you,  Whatso- 
ever  ye  shall  bind  on  earth  shall  be  bound  in  heaven/ 
etc  (Matt.  xviii,  15-48).  It  is  not  said,  if  he  shaU  negs 
lect  to  hear  the  one  or  two,  tell  it  to  the  elders  of  the 
Church ;  far  less  can  it  be  meant  that  the  offended  per- 
son shall  tell  the  cause  of  his  offence  to  aU  the  disciplea 
of  a  presbytery  or  diocese  consisting  of  many  congrega- 
tions. But  he  ia  reąuiied  to  tell  it  to  that  partictdar 
Church  or  congregation  to  which  they  both  belong ;  and 
the  sentenoe  of  that  assembly,  pronounoed  by  its  elders, 
is  in  a  veiy  solemn  manner  declared  to  be  finał,  from 
which  there  lies  no  appeal  to  any  jurisdiction  on  earth. 
''With  respect  to  the  constituting  of  elders  in  any 
Church  or  congregation,  the  Independent  reasons  in  the 
following  manner:  The  ofilcers  of  Chrisfs  appointment 
were  either  ordinary  and  permanent  in  the  Church,  or 
they  were  extraordinary,  and  peculiar  to  the  planting 
of  Christianity.  The  extraoidinary  were  those  who 
were  employed  in  laying  the  plan  of  the  Gospel  church- 
es, and  in  publishing  the  New-Testament  revelation. 
Such  were  the  apostles,  the  chosen  witnesses  of  our 
Saviour's  resuirection ;  such  were  the  prophets,  inspired 
by  the  Holy  Ghost  for  explaining  infallibly  the  Old 
Testament  by  the  things  written  in  the  New ;  and  such 
were  the  evangeliBt8,  the  apostles*  ministers.  These  can 
be  succeeded  by  nonę  in  what  was  peculiar  to  them,  be- 
cause  their  work  was  completed  by  them8elve8.  But 
they  are  succeeded  in  all  that  was  not  peculiar  to  them 
by  bishops  and  deacons,  the  only  two  ordinary  and  per- 
manent orders  of  ministers  in  the  Church.  We  have 
already  seen  that  it  belongs  to  the  office  of  a  bishop  to 
feed  the  flock  of  Christ  The  only  que8tion  to  be  set- 
tled,  then,  is,  How  men  are  ordinarily  called  to  that  of- 
fice? for  about  the  oflice  of  the  deacon  there  is  little  or 
no  dispute.  No  man  can  now  pretend  to  be  so  called 
of  God  to  the  ministry  of  the  Word  as  were  the  apostles 
and  other  inspired  elders,  whom  he  chose  to  be  the  pub- 
lishers  of  his  revealed  truth,  and  to  whose  mission  he 
borę  witness  in  an  extraordinary  manner.  But  what 
the  apostles  were  to  tboee  who  had  the  divine  oraclea 
from  their  moaths,  that  their  writings  are  to  us;  and 
therefore,  as  no  man  can  lawfully  pretend  to  a  cali  from 
God  to  make  any  addition  to  those  writings,  so  neither 
can  any  man  pretend  to  be  lawfully  called  to  the  min- 
istry of  the  Word  already  written,  but  in  the  manner 
which  that  word  directs.  Now  there  is  nothing  of 
which  the  New  Testament  speaks  morę  clearly  than  of 
the  characters  of  those  who  should  exerdse  the  office 
of  bishop  in  the  Chnrch,  and  of  the  aetual  exerci8e  of 
that  office.  The  former  are  graphicaUy  drawn  in  the 
cpistles  to  Timothy  and  Titus,  and  the  latter  is  minute- 
ly  described  in  Paiil^s  discourse  to  the  Ephesian  elders, 
in  Peter^s  exhortation  to  elders,  and  our  LoTd's  commis- 
sion  to  those  ministers  with  whom  he  promised  to  be 
always  present,  even  unto  the  end  of  the  world.  It  is 
not  competent  for  any  man  or  body  of  men  to  add  to 
or  take  firom  the  description  of  a  Gospel  minister  given 
in  these  places,  so  as  to  insist  upon  the  neceesity  of  any 
qualification  which  is  not  there  mentioned,  or  to  dis- 
pense  with  any  ąnalification  as  needless  which  is  there 
reąuired.  Neither  has  Jesus  Christ,  the  only  legislator 
to  the  Church,  given  to  any  ministers  or  people  any 
power  or  right  whatever  to  cali,  send,  ełect,  or  ordain  to 
that  office  any  person  who  is  not  ąnalified  according  to 
the  description  given  in  his  law;  nor  haa  he  given  any 
power  or  right  to  reject  the  least  of  them  who  are  so 
qaa]ifled,  and  who  desire  the  office  of  a  bishop  or  elder. 
Let  a  man  have  hands  laid  upon  him  by  such  as  could 
prove  an  unintermpted  descent  by  imposition  of  handa 
from  the  apostles,  let  him  be  set  apart  to  that  office  by 
a  company  of  ministers  tfaemaeWes  the  most  conforma- 
ble  to  the  Scripture  character,  and  let  him  be  choeen  by 


INDEPENDENTS 


648 


INDEPENDENTS 


the  mo«t  holy  people  on  earth,  yet,  if  he  answer  not  the 
New-Testament  description  of  a  minister,  he  is  not  call- 
ed  of  God  to  that  office,  and  iii  no  minister  of  Christ,  bat 
is  indeed  running  unsent.  No  fonn  of  ordination  can 
pretend  to  such  elear  foandation  in  the  New  Testament 
as  the  description  of  the  peraons  who  should  be  elders 
of  the  Church ;  and  the  laying  on  of  hands  is  of  smali 
importance  in  the  mission  of  a  minister  of  Christ;  for 
now,  when  the  power  of  mirades  has  ceased,  it  is  obvi- 
ous  that  such  a  rite,  by  whomaoever  perfonned,  can 
convey  no  powers,  whether  ordinaiy  or  extraordinary. 
Indeed,  it  appeais  to  have  been  sometimes  nsed,  even  in 
the  apostolic  age,  without  any  such  intention.  When 
Paul  and  Bamabas  were  separated  to  the  pardcular  em- 
ployment  of  going  out  to  the  GenŁiles,  the  prophets  and 
teachers  at  Antioch  ^prayed,  and  laid  their  hands  on 
them.'  But  did  this  ceremony  confer  upon  the  apostles 
any  new  power  or  authority  to  act  as  mimsters  of  Christ? 
Did  the  imposition  of  hands  make  those  shining  lights 
of  the  Gospel  one  whit  better  qaalified  than  tbey  were 
before  to  convert  and  baptize  the  nations,  to  feed  the 
flock  of  God,  to  teach,  rebuke,  or  exhort,with  all  long- 
suffering  and  patience?  It  cannot  be  pretended  that 
there  was  any  special  virtae  in  this  ceremony.  Paul 
and  Bamabas  had  undoubtedly  received  the  Holy  Ghost 
before  they  came  to  Antioch ;  and,  as  they  were  apos- 
tles, they  were  of  course  authorized  to  discharge  all  the 
functions  of  the  inferior  and  ordinary  ministers  of  the 
Gospel  As  in  this  instance,  however,  the  imposition 
of  hands  appears  to  haye  been  a  mark  of  recognition  of 
the  parties  as  qualified  for  the  work  to  which  they  were 
appointed,  so  ludependents  usually  impose  the  hands  of 
the  bishops  with  the  same  intent.  In  a  word,  whoever 
in  his  life  and  conrersation  is  conformable  to  the  char- 
acter  which  the  inspiied  writers  give  of  a  bishop,  and 
is  likewise  qualified  by  his  ^mightiness  in  the  Scrip- 
ture'  to  dlBcharge  the  duties  of  that  office,  is  fully  au- 
thorized to  administer  the  sacraments  of  baptism  and 
the  Lord's  Supper,  to  teach,  and  exhort,  and  rebuke, 
with  all  long-suifering,  and  doctrine,  and  has  all  the 
cali  and  mission  which  the  Lord  now  glyes  to  any  man; 
while  he  who  wants  the  ąualifications  mentioned  has 
not  God's  cali,  whateyer  he  may  have,  nor  any  author- 
ity to  preach  the  Gospd  of  Christ,  or  to  dispense  the 
ordinances  of  his  religion.  From  this  view  of  the  In- 
dependent prindples,  which  is  faithfully  taken  from 
their  own  writers,  it  appears  that,  according  to  them, 
even  the  election  of  a  congregation  confers  upon  the  in- 
diyidual  whom  they  may  choose  for  their  pastor  no  new 
powers,  but  only  creates  a  new  rclation  between  him 
and  a  particulat  flock,  giying  him  an  exclusiye  right, 
either  by  himself  or  in  conjunction  with  other  pastors 
constituted  in  the  same  manner,  to  exercise  among  them 
that  authority  which  he  deriyes  immediately  from 
Christ,  and  which,  in  a  greater  or  less  degree,  is  pos- 
sesscd  by  every  sincere  Christian  according  to  his  gifts 
and  abilities*'  {Encyclop,  Briicmnica,  xii,  370-372). 

III.  Scottiśhy  orNew  Independenta.— In  Scotland  Inde- 
pendency  originated  with  John  Glas  (q.v.)»  The  Bap- 
tbts  there,  as  elsewhere,  are  Independenta.  The  regu- 
lar  CongregationaUsts  are  also  numerous.  See  Cokore- 
OATiONALiSTS.  Apart  from  these,  there  is  a  body  called 
"  New  Independenta."  "  In  December,  1797,  Robert  Hal- 
dane  (q.  v.)  formed  a  *  Societyfor  Propagating  the  Gos- 
pel at  Home^^  The  object  of  this  society  was  to  send 
forth  men  to  preach  the  Gospel  in  those  parts  of  Scotland 
where  they  conoeiyed  that  this  blessing  was  not  enjoyed 
in  its  purity,  or  where  it  was  not  regularly  dispensed. 
Adopring  the  opinion  that  it  is  the  duty  of  every  Chris- 
tian who  knows  the  Gospel,  and  is  duły  quaUfied,  to 
preach  it  to  his  fellow-sinners,  James  Haldane,  brother 
of  Robert,  Mr.  Aikman,  and  others,  trayelled  through  the 
greater  part  of  Scotland,  and  preached.  In  a  short  timc 
the  Messrs.  Haldane  separated  from  the  Church  of  Scot- 
land, and  Boon  after  two  other  ministere  of  the  National 
Church,  Innes  and  Ewing,  resigned  their  chaiges,  and 
united  with  the  Haldanes  and  their  associates.    A  dis- 


tinct  society  was  soon  formed,  at  the  head  of  wbich  wa« 
the  Haldanes;  and  hence  its  members  h«ye  been  ako 
called  ffaldanitesj  or  Hcddamte  JnctependeniB,  Large 
plaoes  of  public  worship,  denominated  7Viftfrmicln,  were 
erected,  at  Robert  Haldane*s  expense,  in  the  prinopal 
towns,  where  the  Word  of  God  was  dedared  to  nameroiu 
assemblies,  both  by  these  ministen  and  othen  from  ya- 
rious  denominations  in  England.  At  the  ezpeose  chief- 
ly,  if  not  solely,  of  Robert  Haldane,  academies  were  also 
formed  at  Edinburgh,  Dundee,  and  Glasgow,  for  the  ed- 
ucation  of  yoong  men  for  the  work  of  the  mimstzy,  who, 
when  deemed  qualified  for  preaching  the  Gospd,  were 
to  be  employed  as  itinerants,  under  the  inspection  and 
Gountenance  of  the  *  Societyfor  Propagating  Ike  Goipd 
aJt  Home,*    Thus  a  suoceasion  of  teachers  was  secared. 

**  The  doctrinet  of  t^e  Scottish  Independe&U  are  Cal- 
yinistic,  and  they  reject  all  artides  of  faith  or  crecds  of 
human  composition.  They  say  that  the  Scriptnres  are 
a  diyine  and  infallibłe  standard,  and  that  oonaistent  In- 
dependenta dare  not  adopt  any  other.  They  instst  that 
the  Scriptures  contain  a  foli  and  complete  modd  aad 
system  of  doctrine,  goyemment,  disdpline,  and  worship^ 
and  that  in  them  we  may  find  a  oniyersal  nile  for  the 
direction  of  Chiistians  in  their  assodated  state,  as  well 
as  all  neceasary  instructions  for  the  faith  and  practkc 
of  indiyiduals.  They  require  Scripture  for  ereiything, 
eyen  for  such  things  as  could  not  be  contained  in  Scrip- 
ture. Hence  they  reject  the  authority  of  the  ciril  msg- 
istrate  in  matters  of  rdigion,  and  recdye  the  Scriptures, 
and  nothing  else,  as  binding  in  the  worship  of  Gcd. 
They  conceiye  the  Church  of  Christ,  as  exhibited  in 
Scripture,  to  be  an  association  which  has  no  head  on 
earth,  and  which,  as  a  body,  can  reodye  no  laws  from 
any  one,  except  from  Christ  alone.  They  consider  a 
National  Church  as  'the  yery  esaence  of  AntidirisŁ.' 
They  lay  it  down  as  a  fundamental  principle  that  a 
Christian  Church  ought  to  consist  of  belieyera,  or  of 
thoae  who  giye  eyidence  of  their  knowing  and  belier- 
ing  the  Gosiid,  united  together  on  the  profeadon  of  its 
truths,  and  walking  agreeably  to  them.  They  differ 
from  the  morę  early  Independenta  in  admitting  Chris- 
tiana of  all  religious  denominations  to  communicate  with 
them  in  the  Lord*8  Supper,  proyided  they  haye  reason  ta 
think  them  real  Christiana,  and  in  conddering  all  as60- 
ciation  of  ministers,  for  giying  ooundl  and  adyice  to  the 
churches  in  matters  of  doubt,  as  unneoessary  and  oo- 
scripturaL 

"  As  to  Church  govemmenti  t^cy  belieye  that  the  apos- 
tolical  churches,  according  to  the  modd  of  which  it  b 
their  great  and  professed  object  to  conform,  were  entiidy 
independent,  nonę  of  them  being  subject  to  any  foreign 
jurisdiction,  but  each  one  goyemed  by  ita  own  nikss. 
and  by  no  other  laws  than  those  writtcn  in  the  Word 
of  God.  They  say  that  a  true  Church  of  Christ  is  a  n  - 
dęty  formed  for  the  same  purpose  as  the  churches  plant- 
ed  by  the  apostles,  and  whose  consritution  is  the  same 
as  theira.  A  dcyiation  in  these  particnlars  rendeis  it 
unworthy  of  the  name.  According  to  them,  when  the 
word  Church  in  Scripture,  in  its  rdigious  sense,  does  not 
denote  a  single  congregpatlon  of  saints,  it  alwaya  reien  to 
the  whole  body  or  kingdom  of  Christ,  part  of  which  ic  in 
heayen  and  part  on  earth ;  which  body  does  not  cowii- 
tute  two  churches,  a  yisible  and  an  inyidble,  bot  one 
church  or  family,  oonsisting  of  different  pait&  They 
admit  that  all  churches,  that  is,  oongregationa,  are  con- 
nected  together  as  being  Christ^s  subjects,  but  they  insist 
that  they  are  dependent  only  on  thdr  King,  in  whoee 
hands  the  supremę  authority  rests^  While  they  teach 
that  independent  churches  haye  no  authority  oyer  each 
other,  they  allow  that  they  may  recdye  tho  adyantage 
of  each  other's  opinion  on  any  matter  of  importance. 
They  conodye  that  bishop  and  ekler  were,  in  apoatolic 
times,  synonymous  terms;  that  the  statcd  offioers  in  aU 
the  churches' then  weredders  and  deacon8,and,of  comse, 
that  they  are  the  only  offices  essential  to  a  ChaTch  of 
Christ,  and  that  there  is  no  diiierence,  in  any  lespect, 
between  dder  and  deacon,-except  in  the  dBces  to  whidi 


INDEX 


549 


Dn)EX 


they  are  appointed.  Tbey  mmst  that  oidination  is  not 
repreaented  in  Scripture  aa  conctywg  an  office,  or  giving 
tmj  penon  a  right  to  discharge  that  office;  it  is  only 
the  manner  of  setting  him  apart  to  dischaige  the  duties 
of  his  office.  It  give8  him  no  jiiriadiction  in  any  church 
except  in  that  which  appointed  him ;  and  as  soon  aa  he 
lays  down,  or  ia  removed  fxx>m  hia  office  in  that  church, 
his  ordination  is  at  an  end.  They  contend  that  there 
is  a  diatinction  of  departments  in  the  pastorał  office,  ai«l 
that  teaching  and  ruling  are  different  branches  of  that 
office.  Both  elders  and  deacons  are  ordained  by  impo- 
sition  of  handa;  and  though  oidination  \s  part  of  the 
clder'8  proyince,  yet,  when  churches  are  newly  formed, 
or  in  other  caaea  of  necesaity,  they  allow  that  the  mem- 
bers,  who  haye  always  the  right  of  dection,  may  ordain 
church  officers  for  themaelTea,  or,  at  least,  aet  them  apart 
to  thetr  respectiye  offices. 

*'In  wonhip,  the  Xew  Independenta  do  not  differ 
mach  from  other  non-lituigical  churches.  They  read  a 
large  bat  indefinite  portion  of  the  Scriptures  at  each 
meeting;  in  many  of  their  chapels  they  use  Dr.  Watts^s 
yeision  of  the  Psalms;  and  in  most  of  them  they  stand 
while  ainging.  They  adopt  weekly  commonions;  and, 
as  they  make  no  real  distinction  between  dergy  and 
laity,  the  want  or  absence  of  elders  and  deacons,  on  any 
occasion,  in  any  of  their  chapels,  is  not  thought  a  suffi- 
dent  reason  for  preyenting  the  administration  of  the 
holy  communion  on  the  tirat  day  of  the  week.  They 
contend  that,  by  the  approyed  practice  of  apostolic 
chorches,  it  ia  demonstrated  to  be  the  appointment  of 
Christ  that  his  churches  nuist  obserre  the  Lord's  Supper 
eyery  flrst  day  of  the  week.  A  diyision  has  taken  place 
among  these  Independenta,  chiefly  in  conseąuence  of  the 
adoption  of  Baptist  principlea,  and  the  introduction  of 
Church  diadpline,  and  of  mutual  exhortation  and  pray- 
er  by  the  brethren,  into  the  public  senrice  on  Sunday 
mornings.*'  The  New  Independenta  increased  rapidly, 
and  possessed,  aa  early  as  the  opening  of  our  oentury, 
some  86  churches.  There  are  at  present  some  114 
churches  in  connection  with  the  New  Independenta. 
See  Ualdane,  View  ofSocial  Worsh^ ;  Adams,  ReUgiotu 
Worldf  iii,  260  sq. ;  Robinson,  Tk/eological  Dicłionary,  s. 
y. ;  Kinniburgh,  Higforical  Surtey  of  CongrtgatiomUum 
m  Scoiiamd;  and  the  articles  Halda^b;  Conoreoa- 
TXoxAUSTS.  Some  of  the  Scotch  Independents  have 
embraced  the  Morisonian  doctrine.  See  Morisonians. 
See,  beaides  the  anthorities  aiready  leferred  to,  Fletcher, 
Hittary  of  Indepmdenctf  (Lond.  1847,  4  yols.  12mo) ; 
Yaaghan,  Hisł,  ofEnglish  Noneoitformity  (Lond.  1862) ; 
Neal,  HitL  ofłMe  Puntans  (see  Index) ;  MUner,  Ch.  Iłiif, 
i,444 ;  Bamet,  Iluf.  ofkit  oum  Times  (see  Index) ;  Punch- 
ard,  Hiśtorff  of  Congregationalism,  yoL  i,  ii ;  Bogue  and 
BenneCt,  Hittory  of  DUsefiterSy  i,  171  8q.;  ii,  251,  546; 
Hersog,  Retd-EnofUop,  yi,  658  8q. ;  Bnmde  and  Cox, 
IHet,  of  Science^  Lit^  ONd  ArtjS.  v. ;  Chambers,  Cydop, 
8.y.;  CydopcBdia  BriUamiea,B.y. 

Indez,  the  name  giyen  to  certain  catdogaes  of 
booka  and  authors  either  wholly  prohibited,  or  censured 
and  cofrected,  by  the  Komiah  Oiurch.  An  Index  of  the 
former  kind  ia  oilled  Index  lAbrorum  Prohibitorum  ;  of 
the  latter,  Index  £oepurgatoruts,  An  Index  Prokibił^- 
rum  exi8ta  aiao  in  the  Russo-Greek  Church,  to  which, 
no  doabt,  ia  due  the  weakneas  of  the  Russian  literary 
prodactions  on  theological  subjecta. 

1.  I3(DEX  LiBRÓRUM  Prohibitórum. — 1.  Btfort  the 
RpfonmaiioiL — Prohibitions  of  heretical  or  dangerous 
booka  are  aa  old  aa  the  attempta  of  the  popes  to  usoip 
nniyeraal  supzemacy.  In  fact,  snch  prohibitions  flow 
natnnUly  from  the  theoiy  that  "out  of  the  Church  there 
ia  no  sftlyation."  It  waa  Cyprian  (q.  y.)  who  fint  fully 
Btated  this  theory;  and  eyen  in  his  hands  it  logically 
led  to  the  conclusion  that  all  heretical  opinions  (i.  e. 
soch  aa  diifer  from  those  announced  by  the  Church  au- 
thoritiea)  must  be  punished  and  suppressed,  if  possible. 
Aa  the  daima  of  the  hierarchy  grew  in  magnitude,  it 
became  neoeHaiy  to  pat  down  all  doctzines  that  might 
dimtniah  the  power  of  the  priesthood.    To  do  this  was 


a  proof  of  zeaL  This  zeal  was  at  first  directed  against 
heathen  and  Jewish  writings,  as  it  was  feared  that  the 
reading  of  such  might  eyen  endanger  Christianity.  The 
Council  of  Carthage  (A.D.  400)  forbade  in  Cań.  16  the 
reading  of  heathen  books.  The  Church,  howeyer,  did 
not  remaui  satisfied  with  forbidding  heretical  books, 
it  commanded  them  to  be  bumed.  This  was  first  at- 
tempted  in  connection  with  the  writings  of  Arius,  and 
became  afterwards  one  of  the  practices  of  the  Church. 
Aa  heretical  books,  howeyer,  were  sometimes  published 
under  ecdesiastical  titles,  such  proceeding  was  in  the 
5th  and  6th  centuries  declared  by  the  Apostolic  Canons 
(Can.  60)  to  be  punishable  by  suppresdon  of  the  work. 
The  Synod  of  £Ivira  (818)  dedded  in  the  same  sense 
that  aU  who  drculated  foibidden  books  should  be  anaik' 
ema  {libeUifamosi),  It  eyen  came  to  be  hdd  that  any 
one  who  had  read  a  forbidden  book  was  guilty  of  all  the 
heredes  therein  contained,  and  incapadtated  for  read- 
misdon  into  the  Church  until  the  performance  of  such 
penance  as  the  Church  enjoined.  £specia]1y  did  the 
hierarchy  consider  the  reading  of  iranskttiont  of  the 
Bibie  as  dangerous  for  the  laity.  Thus  Gregory  YII 
(1080)  denounced  the  practice  of  reading  the  Bibie  in 
the  yemacular  in  his  letter  to  the  king  Wratislaw  of 
Bohemia  (in  Mand  S8.  Conciliorum  nora  et  ampliss, 
CollecHo,  XX,  296).  Innocent  III.  it  is  true,  said  (see 
his  EpittolaTTum  libri  x%x,  in  lib.  ii,  ep.  cxli,  p.  1190) 
that  the  searching  of  the  Scripture  is  to  be  commendecl. 
not  forbidden ;  but  added :  "  Tanta  est  diyin»  Scriptur;3 
profunditas  ut  non  solum  dmplices  et  illitcrati,  sed  etiam 
prudentes  et  docti  non  plenc  sufficiant  ad  ipdus  intelli- 
gentiam  indagandam.  Undc  rocte  fuit  olim  in  legę  di- 
yina  statutum,  ut  bestia,  quie  montem  tetigerit,  lapide- 
tur;  ne  yidcUcet  dmplex  aliquis  et  indoctus  pnisumat 
ad  sublimttatem  Scńptuns  sacns  pertingere  yel  etiam 
aliis  pnedicare."  But  the  opposition  to  the  papacy  and 
to  the  Romish  Church  which  immediately  followed  a 
morę  generał  reading  of  the  Bibie,  soon  led  to  pladng 
the  latter  among  the  forbidden  books,  on  a  Ievd  with 
those  condemned  as  heretical.  The  CondL  Tolosanum 
(1229)  forbade  the  laity  (c  14)  to  eyen  posseas  the  O. 
or  N.  T.  (see  Hegelroaier,  Getch.  des  Bibelterbots^  Ulm, 
1788).  When  the  Inąuidtion  became  estabtished  and 
proaperous,  the  enforcing  of  the  rules  relating  to  forbid- 
den books  was  intrusted  to  it,  and  in  the  Conc.  Biterrense 
(1246)  we  find  (c.  86)  a  number  of  theological  works 
mentioned  which  both  the  laity  and  deigy  are  forbid- 
den to  read.  But  the  morę  the  Church  strore  to  render 
its  podtion  secure  by  such  means,  the  morę  did  infiu- 
encea  quite  to  the  contrary  exert  themsdyea  to  secure 
its  oyert-hrow,  particularly  the  precuraors  of  the  Refor- 
mation,  whose  doctrines  and  writings  struck  at  the  most 
yital  parta  of  the  Romish  organization.  A  S3mod  of 
London  (1408)  forbade  the  reading  of  Wycliflfe^s  works 
when  not  preyioudy  approyed,  while  the  works  of  Huss 
were  condemned  aa  thoroughiy  heretical.  The  discoy- 
ery  of  the  art  of  printing  gHvc  a  new  impulse  to  the 
publication  of  dangerous  books,  and  AIexander  VI  com- 
plained  in  his  Decretum  de  Ubris  non  sine  censura  impri- 
mendis  (Raynald,  AnnaL  ad  a.  1501,  no.  86)  that  heret- 
ical dogmas  were  CKtensiydy  promulgated,  especially 
in  the  proyinoes  of  Mayence,  Cologne,  Tńeste,  and  Mag- 
deburg. He  recommended  the  bishops  and  yicars  to 
carefłdly  watch  the  appearancc  of  any  heretical  works, 
and  to  enforce  the  fines  and  excommunications  against 
the  authors.  As  to  the  printers,  he  says :  "  Debent — 
ipd  merito  compesci  opportunis  remediis,  ut  ab  eorum 
impresdone  desistant,  ąuo:  fidd  catholicffi  contraria  fore 
noacuntur  yd  adyersa,  aut  in  mentibus  fidelium  possunt 
yerisimiliter  scanddum  generare."  Popc  Leo  X,  in  the 
tenth  session  of  the  Lateran  Council  (May  4,  1515), 
stated  in  the  decrce  Inter  soUicitudines  that  no  book 
should  be  published  without  the  authorization  of  either 
the  bishop,  his  legate,  or  the  Inąulsition,  under  penalty 
of  excommunication.  Any  book  issued  in  contrayention 
of  this  regulation  was  to  be  seque8tered  and  bumt. 
2.  At  and  ąfter  the  Reformation  and  the  Cottneil  of 


INDEX 


660 


IND£X 


Trent  —  The  Refonnatioii  gaye  riae  to  innamerEble 
wiitings  highly  dangerous  to  the  Romish  Chorch,  «nd, 
in  spite  of  idl  4>Tdez8  to  the  contrary,  they  were  widely 
circulated  and  eageily  read.  In  1546  the  Uniyenity 
of  Lottvain,  by  order  of  Charles  V,  pablished  a  list  (/n- 
dex)  of  all  soch  books  as  were  considered  dangerous  to 
read,  and  oonaeąuently  foihidden;  a  new  edition  of  the 
list  appeared  in  1550,  afler  the  papai  legate  at  Yenioe, 
John  delia  Gasa,  had  published  one  on  his  own  account 
in  1549  (see  Schelhora,  ErgdtzlickkeUm^  ii,  8).  During 
the  suspension  of  the  Council  of  Trent,  pope  Paul  lY 
had  another  list  of  forbidden  works  prepared  in  1557  by 
a  particular  congregation,  and  this  formed  the  first  ac- 
tual  Index  Ubrorum  prokSbitorum  of  the  Romish  Church. 
It  was  republished,  with  additions,  by  fieigerios  in  1559, 
under  the  title  Index  cntctorum  et  Ubirorum^  qui  ianguam 
karełici  atti  tutpecti  autperrerH  ah  Offido  S,  R,  Inqui- 
siHonii  reprobamtur  eł  tn  tatkersa  CkrigHema  repubUca 
iaterdicuntur  (RonuB,  1657).  In  1558,  pope  Paul  for- 
bade  alao  to  the  cleigy  and  students  the  reading  of  such 
heredcal  works  as  had  been  toleratod  for  their  exclusiye 
use  by  his  predecessors  or  by  the  Inquisition.  These 
orders,  howeyer,  did  not  proye  yery  successful  in  Italy, 
and  utterly  failed  in  otfaer  oountries,  though  many  of 
the  works  named  in  the  Index  were  bumt.  The  writ- 
ings  especially  condemned  by  PauUs  Index  were  such 
as  defended  the  ciril  goyemments  against  the  encroach- 
ments  of  the  Church,  such  as  asserted  the  superiority 
of  the  authority  of  oouncils  oyer  that  of  popes  and  bish- 
ops,  or  such  as  attacked  the  theory  and  pracdce  of  the 
Romish  Church  in  generaL  The  Index  diyided  the  au- 
thors  of  forbidden  books  into  three  classes:  1,  those  of 
whom  all  the  works  were  absolutely  condónned;  2, 
those  among  whose  works  some  only  were  condemned; 
d,  the  anthors  of  anonymous  works,  such  as  had  ap- 
peared sińce  1519.  At  the  end  was  appended  a  list  of 
8ixty-two  printers  of  heretical  works.  The  reading  of 
books  named  in  the  Index  was  punishable  by  exoom- 
munication  and  by  degrading  penances. 

The  Council  of  Trent,  in  its  18th  session,  appointed  a 
committee  to  prepare  a  new  Indes.  This  committee 
reported  at  the  twenty-fifth  session  that  they  could  not 
agree  on  acoount  of  the  number  and  diyersity  of  the 
books  to  be  indnded  in  the  Index,  and  reoommended 
that  the  drawing  up  and  enfordng  of  it  should  be  Icft 
to  the  pope,  which  was  agreed  ta  Pius  lY  then  pre- 
pared a  new  Iudex,  an  enlarged  edition  of  Paul  lY^s. 
The  publication  of  this  Index  (which  has  oflen,  but  er- 
roneously,  been  called  Index  Tridentintu)  was  accompa- 
nied  by  the  buli  Domimci  gregis  cusłodia  (March  24, 
1564),  and  by  ten  rutea^  which  haye  been  prefixed  to  all 
official  Indexea  published  sińce  that  period.  As  these 
rules  illustrato  fully  the  whole  spirit  and  tendency  of 
the  Romish  system,  in  its  relation  to  the  freedom  of  lit- 
erary  and  sdentific  progress,  we  giye  them  here  in  fuli. 

*'  <L)  All  books  condcmnsd  by  the  supremę  pontifiiB  or 
General  Coundls  before  the  year  191R,  and  not  comprised 
In  the  present  iudex,  are  neyertheless  to  be  considered  as 
condemned.  (II.)  The  books  of  heresiarcbs,  whether  of 
those  who  broached  or  dissemtnated  tbeir  heresics  prior 
to  the  year  above  mentloned,  or  of  those  who  hare  been, 
or  are,  the  heads  or  leaders  oi  heretics,  as  Łuther,  Zwingli, 
CalvlD,  Baithazar  Pacimontanns,  Swenchfeld,  and  otner 
slmilar  ones,  are  altogether  forbidden,  whatever  roay  be 
their  naroes.  titles,  or  snbjects.  And  tne  books  of  otber 
hereticB,  which  treat  professedly  opon  religion,  are  totally 
condemued ;  but  those  which  do  not  treat  upon  religion 
are  allowed  to  be  read.  after  haTing  been  ezamined  and 
approved  by  Catholic  divinee,  by  order  of  the  blshops  and 
inqn1sltor«.  Those  Catholic  books  are  also  permicted  to 
be  read  which  hare  been  composed  by  anthors  who  have 
afterwards  fallen  Into  heresy.  or  who,  afler  their  fali,  haye 
retnmed  into  the  boeom  of  the  Chnrch.  prov1ded  they 
have  l)een  approved  by  the  theological  lacnlty  of  some 
Catholic  uniyersity,  or  by  the  generał  inanitiitlon.  (III.) 
Translations  of  ecćleslastłcal  writers,  which  have  been 
hitherto  published  by  condemned  aathors,  are  permitted 
to  be  reaa,  if  they  contain  nothlns  contrary  to  sound  doc- 
trine.  Translations  of  the  Old  Testament  may  nlso  be  al- 
lowed, bnt  only  to  leamed  and  pious  men,  at  the  dlscre- 
tion  of  ihe  bi^bop ;  prorided  they  nee  them  merely  as  eln- 
cidatlons  of  ibe  Ynlgate  yersion,  in  order  to  nnaerstand 
the  Holy  Scriptnrea,  and  not  as  the  sacred  text  iteelC  I 


But  tnnslatioDs  of  the  Skw  Teeiemma,  madę  by  asthon 
of  the  flrst  cłass  of  this  index,  are  allowed  to  no  ooie,  aioóa 
little  adyantage,  but  much  danger,  geoerally  arises  from 
reading  them.  If  notes  acoompany  the  Tersions  which 
are  allowed  to  be  read,  or  are  Joined  to  the  Ynłgate  edi> 
tion,  they  may  be  permitted  to  be  read  by  the  same  \  rr- 
sons  as  the  Yersions,  after  the  sospected  places  have  hwa 
ezpnnged  by  the  theological  facuky  of  some  Catholic  nni- 
yersity,  or  by  the  generał  lnqni8itor.  On  the  same  coudi- 
tions,  also,  pious  and  leamed  men  may  be  permitted  lo 
hare  what  us  called  *  Yatablus^s  Bibie.'  or  any  part  of  it. 
But  the  preface  and  Prologomena  of  the  Bibles  published 
by  Isidore  Cłarins  are,  howeTer,  excepted;  and  the  text 
of  his  edl tions  is  not  to  be  oonsidereaas  the  text  ofihe 
Ynlgate  edition.  (IV.)  Inasmnch  as  it  Is  manifest  from 
experience  that  If  the  Holy  Bibie,  translated  into  the  ml- 
gar  tongae,  be  indiscriminately  allowed  to  eyery  one,  the 
temerity  of  men  will  cause  morę  evil  than  good  to  ariee 
from  it,  it  is,  on  this  point,  referred  to  the  jndgment  of 
the  blshops  or  inquisitors,  who  may,  by  the  adTice  of  the 

ftriest  or  confeesor,  permit  the  reading  of  the  Bibie  trans- 
ated  into  the  yulsar  tongue  by  Catholic  anthors,  to  thoM 
persons  whose  fiuth  ana  piety,  they  apprehend,  will  be 
angmented,  and  not  injnred  by  it;  and  this  permission 
they  mnst  have  In  writing.  But  if  any  one  shall  hare  the 
presomption  to  read  or  possess  it  wlthont  such  wriiten 
permission,  he  shall  not  recelre  absolntion  nntil  he  hare 
flrst  deliTered  up  such  Bibie  to  the  ordinaiy.  Bookselters 
who  shall  sell,  or  otfaerwise  dispose  of  Bloles  in  the  Buł- 
gar toncie,  to  any  person  not  baving  snch  permiesion, 
shall  forfeit  the  yalne  of  the  books,  to  be  applled  by  the 
bishop  to  some  pious  nse ;  and  be  snbjected  to  such  other 
penaltles  as  the  bishop  shall  Judge  proper,  accordłngtu 
the  quality  of  the  oflence.  But  regnlars  ehall  neluier 
read  nor  pnrchase  such  Bibles  without  a  spedal  lioense 
nx>m  their  superiora.  (V.)  Books  of  which  heretics  are 
the  editors,  but  which  contain  little  or  nothing  of  iheir 
own,  belng  merę  compilations  fW>m  others,  as  lezioan-s 
concordances  (collections  oO,  apoihegms,  or  similec.  la- 
dezes,  and  others  of  a  simllar  kind,  may  be  allowed  by 
the  bishops  and  inqnisltors,  after  haTing  madę.  with  the 
adyice  of  divlnee,  snch  oorrections  ana  emendations  as 
may  be  deemed  rBquiBite.  (VL)  Books  of  controverBy  be- 
tween  the  Cathollce  and  heretics  of  the  present  time,  writ- 
ten  In  the  Tulgar  tongne.  are  not  to  be  indiscriminately 
allowed,  but  are  to  be  snoject  to  the  same  regnlaifons  as 
Bibles  in  the  yulgar  tongne.  As  to  thoee  works  in  the 
vnlgar  tougue  which  treat  of  morallty,  contemplatkin, 
confcssion,  and  slmilar  snbjects,  and  which  contain  noth- 
ing  contrary  to  sound  doctrlne,  there  Is  no  reason  why 
they  should  be  prohibited ;  the  same  may  be  sald  also  of 
sermons  in  the  Tulgar  tongue,  deslgned  for  the  pcople. 
Aud  if  in  any  kingdom  or  prov1nce  any  books  haye  been 
hitherto  pronibited,  as  containlngthlngs  not  proper  to  be 
indiscriminately  read  by  all  sorts  of  persona,  they  may  be 
allowed  by  the  bishop  and  Inonisitor,  after  ha^ing  car- 
rected  them,  If  written  by  Catholic  anthors.  (VII.)  Books 
professedly  treating  of  lasci^lous  or  obscene  subjects,  or 
narrating  or  teacmng  them,  are  otterly  prohibited,  as 
readily  coiroptlng  both  the  falih  and  manners  of  tbore 


who  peruse  tfiem ;  and  thoee  who  possess  them  shall  be 
severely  punished  by  the  bishop.  Bnt  the  works  of  au> 
tiqnity,  written  by  the  beathens,  are  permitted  to  be  read, 
bcscanse  of  the  efegance  and  propriety  of  the  language ; 
thongh  on  no  account  shall  they  be  suffered  to  be  read  oy 
young  persons.  (VIII.)  Books,  the  priucipnl  snbtiect  of 
which  is  good,  bnt  in  which  some  things  are  occasionaily 
introdnced  tendioff  to  heresy  and  impiety,  diyinatlon,  or 
snperstitlon,  may  l)e  allowed,  after  tner  haye  been  cor- 
rected  by  Catholfc  dWInes,  by  the  authority  of  the  generał 
inquislŁion.  The  same  Jndgment  is  also  formed  of  pref* 
aces,  snmmarles,  or  notea  taken  ftom  condemned  an- 
thors, aud  iuserted  in  the  works  of  anthors  not  con- 
demned ;  bnt  snch  works  mnst  not  be  printed  in  fnturr, 
nntil  they  hAve  been  amended.  (IX.)  All  booka  and  wTit- 
ings  of  geomancy,  hydromancy,  acromancy,  pyromaDcy, 
onomancy,  chiromancy,  and  necromancy,  or  wbtch  treat 
of  sorceries,  polsons,  augnrics,  ansplces,  or  magical  inrao- 
tatlons,  are  utterly  rąjected.  The  bishops  shiul  also  diłi- 
gently  gnard  against  any  persons  reading  or  keeplng  any 
books,  treatlses,  or  indezes  which  treat  of  Judiclal  astrom- 
oey,  or  contain  presnmptuous  predictions  of  the  evcats 
oFrature  contingendes  and  fortnitous  occurrences,  or  of 
those  actions  which  depend  upon  the  will  of  man.  Bot 
they  shall  permit  such  opinions  and  obsenrations  of  nat- 
nral  thines  as  are  written  łn  aid  of  narigation,  agrical- 
tnre,  ana  medicine.  (X.)  In  the  prlnting  of  books  and 
other  wrltings,  the  rules  shall  be  obseryedwhich  were  ar- 
dabied  In  the  tenth  session  of  the  Council  of  Lateran,  nn- 
der  Leo  X.  Tberefore,  if  any  book  is  to  be  printed  in  ibe 
citT  of  Romę,  It  shall  flrst  be  ezamined  by  the  pope*s  Ticar 
ana  the  master  of  the  sacred  palące,  or  other  persons  cho- 
sen  by  onr  most  holy  father  for  that  pnrpose.  In  other 
places.  the  ezamlnanon  of  any  book  or  mannscript  in- 
tended  to  be  printed  shall  be  referred  to  the  bishop,  or 
some  skllfhl  person  whom  he  shall  nominate,  and  the  in- 
quisItor  of  the  city  or  dlocese  In  which  the  Impression  is 


ezccnted,  who  shall  gratnltonsly,  and  wlthont  nelar.  ailŁc 
approbatlon  to  the  work,  in  their  own  handwntlog. 


their 


snldec^  ncTerthelesSt  to  the  paius  aud  censares  coatained 


IND£X 


651 


INDIA 


la  tlie  sald  decree ;  Łhfs  law  and  conditlon  belnff  added. 
that  an  aatheoiłc  copj  of  the  book  to  be  prtntea,  signed 
by  the  anthor  himaelil  ahall  remain  In  Łhe  handa  of  the 
exaiiiiner;  and  It  la  the  Indgment  of  the  CRthera  of  the 

Łreaent  depntatloo,  that  thoae  persona  who  pabllsh  worka 
1  mannacript,  before  they  have  been  examined  and  ap- 
provc  U  ebonld  be  enbject  to  the  same  penaltlea  aa  thoae 
who  lirint  them :  and  that  thoae  who  read  or  posaeas  them 
ahonid  be  consldered  as  the  aoŁhors,  If  the  real  aathora 
of  aach  wrltinga  do  not  arów  themeeires,  The  approba- 
tlon  głren  in  writing  ahall  be  placed  at  the  head  of  the 
bo<dLf,  whether  printed  or  in  manuscript,  that  they  may 
appear  to  be  doły  authorized :  and  this  examination  and 
approbation,  etc,  shall  be  granted  gratoitously.  More- 
oyer,  in  e^ery  dty  and  dłoceae,  the  honae  or  place  where 
the  art  of  printlog  ia  exerciMed,  and  alao  the  ahopa  of 
bookaellera,  shall  be  flreqaently  viaited  by  persona  depnted 
by  the  biahop  or  his  vicar,  conjolutly  with  the  inąufsltor, 
ao  that  notbiDg  that  is  prohlbited  may  be  printed,  kept, 
or  aold.  Booksellers  of  erery  description  ahall  keep  a 
catalogne  of  Łhe  booka  whlch  they  hare  on  sale,  signed 
by  the  aaid  depatiea ;  nor  ahall  they  keep,  or  sell,  nor  iu 
any  way  diapoae  of  any  other  books  wltnont  permiaaion 
firom  the  depotlea,  nnder  pain  of  forfeiting  the  books,  and 
being  Iłable  to  aach  other  penaltiea  aa  uhall  be  Jadged 
proper  by  the  błshop  or  Inamsitor,  who  shall  alao  panish 
the  bnyers,  leader?,  or  printers  of  snch  works.  If  any 
peraon  import  forełgn  booka  into  any  dty,  ther  ahall  be 
obliged  to  annoance  them  to  the  depatiea ;  or  ii  thia  kind 
of  merchandlee  be  expoeed  to  sale  in  any  pnbllc  place,  the 
pnblic  offlcers  of  the  place  shall  signif^'  to  the  said  depn- 
tiea  that  snch  books  have  been  bronght ;  and  no  one  ahall 

Sreanme  to  gire,  to  read,  or  lend,  or  sell  any  book  which 
e  or  any  other  person  haa  bronght  into  the  city,  antll  he 
bas  shown  it  to  the  depatiea,  ana  obtalned  thelr  permis- 
aion,  nnleea  it  be  a  work  well  known  to  be  uniTereally 
•Uowed.  Heirs  and  testamentary  ezecatora  ahall  make 
no  uae  of  the  booka  of  the  deceased,  nor  in  any  way  trana- 
fer  them  to  others,  nntil  they  have  presented  a  catalogne 
of  them  to  the  depatiea,  and  obtained  thelr  license,  nnder 
pain  of  eonflscatłon  of  the  booka,  or  the  Inliiction  of  snch 
otlier  panishment  aa  the  blshop  or  iuąnisltor  shall  deem 
proper,  accordiog  to  the  contamacy  or  quality  of  the  de- 
linanent.  With  regard  to  those  books  whlch  the  fathers 
of  tJie  preaeut  depntation  ahall  ezamine,  or  correct,  or  de- 
liTer  to  be  oorrected,  or  permit  to  be  reprinted  on  certain 
conditiona,  bookaellera  and  others  shall  be  boand  to  ob- 
serre  whaterer  is  ordained  respecting  them.  The  blsh- 
opa  and  generał  inąuisiton  shall,  nererthelesa,  be  at  lib- 
erty.  aooording  to  the  power  they  poasess,  to  prohibit  snch 
booka  aa  may  seem  to  be  permitted  by  these  rales,  if  they 
deem  it  necesaary  for  the  20od  of  the  kingdom,  or  prov- 
inc«,  or  diocese.  And  let  the  secretary  of  these  fhtnera, 
Bccording  to  the  command  of  our  holy  father,  tranamit  to 
the  notary  of  the  generał  inaiUsitor  the  namea  of  the 
booka  that  hare  been  correcteo,  as  well  aa  of  the  persons 
to  whom  the  fathers  hare  granted  the  power  of  ezamina- 
tion.  Finally,  it  ia  eąjoined  on  all  the  fkithfal,  that  no 
ooe  presumo  to  keep  or  read  any  booka  contrary  to  these 
mlea,  or  prohibitedby  thIa  Indez.  Bat  if  any  one  read 
or  keep  any  books  composed  by  heretics,  or  the  writings 
of  any  anthor  snspected  of  hereay  or  false  doctrine,  he 
ahall  Inatantly  incur  the  aentence  of  ezcommanicaUon : 
and  thoae  who  read  or  keep  worka  Interdicted  on  another 
acconnt,  besides  the  mortal  sin  committed,  shall  be  se- 
▼erely  pnnished  at  the  will  of  the  bishopa"  (Labbei  S& 
OM)dl«s,ziT,968-8M). 

Thia  Index  of  Fina  IV  waa  publiahed  at  Romę  by 
Aldoa  ManutiuB  (1664),  and  afterwarda  reyised  and  en- 
laiged  by  Gregoiy  XIII,  Sixta8  Y,  aement  Yin  (1595). 
2.  Index  £xpubgatoriv8.— Pope  Sixtus  Y  intio- 
dnced  a  aeriea  of  works  which,  after  ezpunging  certain 
obnońoua  paaMgea,  conld  be  allowed  to  be  read.  This 
Uat  recelTed  the  name  of  l9idex  Ubrorum  erpurgando- 
rum  or  eaepurgatoruu,  It  was  fiiat  publiahed  by  order 
of  tłłe  duke  Alba,  tmder  Łhe  style  Iiidex  expurgaioriut 
Ubrorum,  gui  koc  taado  prod&erunŁ  (Antwerp,  1751,  and 
lepaUiahed  ainoe).  Other  lista  of  prohibited  booka,  on 
tbe  model  of  that  of  Borne,  were,  however,  pubUahed 
in  other  ooontriea,  eapedally  in  Spain  (most  of  them 
łinder  Philip  II  in  Madrid,  in  1577  and  1584)  and  in 
Italy.  John  Maria  Braaichellen  or  Braaichelli  (prop- 
erly  Wenzel  of  Briaigella)  prepared,  with  the  aid  of  the 
Dominikan  Tomaa  Malrenda,  an  Index  styled  Index 
expurffatoritts  cura  J,  M.  Brasichellani,  Mag.  Palat. 
RonuD  (1007),  but  tbia,  far  from  being  approred  of  at 
head-ąuarters,  waa  itaelf  put  in  the  Komish  Index  libr, 
jprokSk,  The  Spaniah  inqui8itQr  generał,  Antonio  k  So- 
tomajor,  publiahed  a  Norissimiu  librorum  prokibitorum 
et  eajmrffondorum  Intkx  (Madrid,  1648),  which  is  high- 
ly  pniaed  for  ita  oompleteneas.  The  Komish  Index  waa 
republiahed  in  1818,  but  haa  aince  received,  and  is  con- 
stantiy  receiyin&  numezoua  additionai 


The  Congręgałum  o/the  Index  was  originally  estab- 
lished  by  pope  Piua  Y.  It  holda  ita  sittings  at  Romę, 
and  haa  the  right  of  examimng  generally  all  booka 
which  ooncem  faith,  morala,  ecclesiaatical  disdpline,  or 
dvU  society;  on  which  it  passes  judgment,  for  sup- 
preaaing  them  absolutely,  or  directing  them  to  be  cor- 
rected,  or  allowing  them  to  be  read  with  prccaution, 
and  by  certain  persona.  Persona  spedally  deputcd  by 
it  may  give  permiasion  to  Romaniata  throughout  the 
world  to  read  prohibited  books;  and  the  penalty  de- 
nounced  againat  thoae  who  read  or  keep  any  books  sua- 
pected  of  heresy  or  falae  doctrine  ia  the  greater  ex- 
communication ;  and  thoae  who  read  or  keep  worka 
interdicted  on  any  other  aocoant,  beaides  the  mortal  sin 
committed,  are  to  be  seyerdy  puniahed  at  the  will  of 
the  bishopa.  It  is  remarkaMe,  howeyer,  that  the  Index 
ia  hardly  in  force  at  the  present  day,  even  in  the  most 
Romish-indined  countries,  In  Austria  even,  the  faith- 
ful  daughter  of  Romę,  Maria  Theresa  forbade  the  publi- 
cation,  and  it  ia  not  to  be  expected  that  elther  ber  lib- 
erał succeasois  or  the  princea  of  other  Roman  Cathołic 
countriea,  forced  by  the  liberał  spiiit  of  the  people  to 
disobedient  acta  towards  Romę,  shonld  permit  the  pub- 
lication  in  thelr  dominions.  It  can,  therefore,  hardly 
be  said  to  be  any  longer  virtaalły  in  force,  though  in 
some  countriea  ita  pnblication  is  permitted  by  tpecial 
grani  from  the  govemment.  Baudri,  in  an  artide  on 
this  subject  in  Aschbach  {Kirchen-Ler.  iii,  444,  a  Ro- 
man Cathołic  work),  ooncedea  this,  and  says  that  eyen 
the  countriea  bound  by  a  concordat  to  an  enforcement 
of  the  dedaions  of  the  Congrcgation  of  the  Index  fali 
to  do  their  duty,  and  that  lx)ołu  are  constantly  publiah- 
ed without  regard  and  consideration  of  the  agreement 
entered  into  with  Romę  (oomp.  Eckardt,  Modem  Rustia, 
p.  246  są.).  See  Mendham,  LUerary  Policy  ofthe  Church 
o/Homo  (Lond.l830,8yo) ;  Cramp,  Text-book  ofPopery 
(London,  1851,  8yo),  p.  419-428;  Elliott,  Dtlimaiwn,  of 
Popery,  bk.  i ;  Gibbings,  In(fex  Yoticanusy  an  exact  i?e- 
print  of  the  Roman  Index  ErpurgatoriuB  (London,  1887, 
8vo) ;  Peignot,  Dictionnaire  critigtte  lUtiraire  et  biblio- 
graphique  des  principaux  Iwres  condamnis  aufeu,  eup- 
primia  ou  censurh  (Paris,  1806);  Herzog,  Real-Ency' 
Uop,  vi,  661 ;  Eadie,  Ecclegiastical  Encyclopadia^  s.  v. ; 
Buckley,  Canons  and  Decrees  of  Trent,  p.  284.  See  also 
BiBLE,  UsE  op;  CcNSORSHip  op  BooKa 

Iii'dia  (Heb.  Hoddu^  ^"nh,  for  l^pn,  i.  e.  //thrftt, 
of  Sanscrit  ońgin ;  see  Gescniua,  Thesaur,  Heb,  p.  866 ; 
Sept.  *lvŁiKii^  Vulg.  India)f  occurs  in  the  Bibie  only  in 
Eather  i,  1 ;  yiii,  9,  where  tbe  Persian  king  is  described 
aa  reigning  "  from  India  unto  Ethiopia,  oyer  a  hundred 
and  seyen  and  twenty  proyinces;"  the  names  ofthe  two 
countries  are  similarly  connected  by  Herodotus  (yii,  9). 
It  ia  found  again,  howeyer,  in  the  Apociypha  (compare 
Eather  xiii,  1),  where  India  is  mentioned  among  the 
countriea  wluch  the  Romana  took  ttom  Antiochua  and 
gaye  to  Eumenes  (1  Mace  yiii,  8).  It  is  also  with  some 
reaaon  ooncdyed  that  in  the  list  of  fordgn  Jews  present 
at  tłie  Pentecost  (Acta  ii,  9)  we  ahould  read  'Iv^iav,/i>- 
diOf  and  not  'lovSaiav,  Judaa ;  but  the  still  morę  prob- 
able  reading  is  'liovfJLaiav,  Idumota,  if  indeed  the  com- 
mon  reading  ought  to  be  changed  at  all  (see  Kuinol, 
CommenL  ad  łoc>  The  Hebrew  form  "  Iloddu"  is  an 
abbreyiation  of  I/onadUt  which  ia  identical  with  the  in- 
digenoua  names  of  the  riyer  Indus,  "  Hindu,"  or  "  Sin- 
dhu,"  and  again  with  the  ancient  name  of  the  country 
aa  it  appeaiB  in  the  Yendidad,  "  Hapta  Hendu."  The 
natiye  form  "  Sindua"  is  noticed  by  Pliny  (vi,  23).  The 
India  of  the  book  of  Esther  ia  not  the  peninsula  of  Hin- 
dostań,  but  the  country  aurrounding  the  Indus  —  the 
Punjab,  and  perhapa  Scinde — the  India  which  Herodo- 
tus describes  (iii,  98)  as* forming  part  of  the  Persian  em- 
pire under  Dariua,  and  the  India  which  at  a  later  period 
was  conquered  by  Ałexander  the  Great.  The  name  oc- 
curs in  the  inscriptions  of  Persepolis  and  Nokhsh-i- 
Ruatam,  but  not  in  those  of  Behistiin  (RawUnson,  Herod, 
ii,  485).  In  1  Mace.  yiii,  8,  it  is  elear  that  India  proper 
cannot  be  understooU,  inaamuch  as  this  ueyer  belonged 


INDIA 


662 


INDIA 


either  to  Antiochos  or  Eamecea.  At  Łhe  same  time, 
nonę  of  Łhe  explanation8  offered  by  commentators  are 
satisfactory :  Łhe  Eneti  of  Paphlagonia  have  bccn  sug- 
gested,  but  these  people  bad  disappeared  long  before 
(Strabo,  xii,  534) :  the  India  of  Xenophon  {Cyrop,  i,  5, 
8 ;  iii,  2,  25),  which  may  haye  been  above  tbe  Carian 
Btream  named  Indus  (Pliny,  y,  29 ;  probably  the  Calbis), 
is  morę  likely ;  but  the  emendation  "Mysia  and  lonia" 
for  Media  and  India  offers  the  best  solution  of  the  diffl- 
culty.  Sec  Iomia.  A  morę  authentic  notice  of  the 
country  occurs  in  1  Mace  vi,  87,  where  Indiana  are  no- 
ticed  as  the  driyers  of  the  war-elephants  introduced  into 
the  army  of  the  Syrian  king  (see  also  1  Esdras  iii,  2 ; 
Esther  xvi,  1).    See  Elephant. 

But,  though  the  name  of  India  occurs  so  seldom,  the 
people  and  productions  of  that  country  must  have  been 
tolerably  well  kuoyno  to  the  Jews.  There  is  undoubted 
evidence  that  an  active  trade  was  carried  on  between 
India  and  Western  Asia:  the  Tyrians  established  their 
depóts  on  the  shores  of  the  Peraian  Gulf,  and  procured 
"homs  of  ivory  and  ebony,"  '^broidered  work  and  rich 
apparel*'  (Ezek.  xxvii,  15,  24),  by  a  route  which  crossed 
the  Arabian  desert  by  land,  and  then  followcd  the  ooasts 
of  the  Indian  Ocean  by  sea.  The  trade  opened  by  Sol- 
omon  with  Ophir  through  the  Red  Sea  chiefiy  consisted 
of  Indian  articles,  and  some  of  the  names  even  of  the 
articles,  alffummitn,  '<  sandał  wood,"  kophim,  '^apes," 
tukkiim,  "  peacocks,"  are  of  Indian  origin  (Humboldt, 
KotmoSy  ii,  133) ;  to  which  we  may  add  the  Hebrew 
name  of  the  "  topaz,"  pitdahf  derived  from  the  Sanscrit 
pita.  There  is  a  strong  probability  that  productions 
of  yet  greater  utility  were  fumished  by  India  through 
Syria  to  the  shores  of  Europę,  and  that  the  Greeks  de- 
rived  both  the  term  KaatriTtpoc  (compare  the  Sanscrit 
kastira)y  and  the  article  it  represents,  "tin,"  from  the 
coasts  of  India.  The  connection  thus  established  with 
India  led  to  the  opinion  that  the  Indians  were  induded 
under  the  ethnological  title  of  Cush  (Gen.  x,  6),  and 
hence  the  Syriac,  Chaldee,  and  Arabie  yersions  fre- 
quently  render  that  term  by  India  or  Indians,  as  in  2 
Chroń,  xxi,  16 ;  Isa.  xi,  11 ;  xviii,  1 ;  Jer.  xiii,  23 ;  Zeph. 
iii,  10.  For  the  connection  which  some  have  sought 
to  establish  between  India  and  Paradise,  see  Eden. 

The  above  intimations,  and,  indeed,  all  andent  histo- 
ry,  refer  not  to  the  whole  of  Hindostan,  but  chiefiy  to  the 
northem  parts  of  it,  or  the  countries  between  the  Indus 
and  the  Ganges ;  alŁhough  it  is  not  necessary  to  assert 
that  the  rest  of  that  peninsula,  particularły  its  western 
coast,  was  then  altogether  unlmown.  It  was  from  this 
quarter  that  the  Persians  and  Greeks  (to  whoro  we  are 
indebted  for  the  earliest  accounts  of  India)  invaded  the 
country;  and  this  was  oonseąuently  the  region  which 
first  became  generaUy  known.  The  countries  bordering 
on  the  Ganges  continued  to  be  involved  in  obscurity, 
the  great  kingdom  of  the  Prasians  excepŁed,  which,  sit^ 
uated  nearly  above  the  modem  Bengal,  was  dimiy  dia- 
cemible.  The  neorer  we  approach  the  Indus,  the  morę 
dcar  becomes  our  knowledge  of  the  andent  geography 
of  the  country ;  and  it  follows  that  the  districts  of  which 
at  the  present  day  we  know  the  least,  were  anciently 
best  known.  Besidea,  the  western  and  northem  boun- 
daries  were  not  the  same  as  at  present  To  the  west, 
India  was  not  then  bounded  by  the  river  Indus,  but  by 
a  chain  of  mountains  which,  under  the  name  of  Koh 
(whence  the  Grecian  appeUation  of  the  Indian  Cauca- 
sus),  extended  from  Bactria  to  Makran,  or  Gedrosia,  in- 
cloaing  the  kingdoms  of  Candahar  and  Cabul,  the  mod- 
em kingdom  of  Eastem  Persia,  or  Afghanistan.  These 
districts  anciently  formed  part  of  India,  as  well  as,  fuiv 
ther  to  the  south,  the  less  perfe«tly  known  countries  of 
the  Arabi  and  Haurs  (the  Arabitie  and  Oritie  of  Arrian, 
vi,  21),  bordering  on  Gedrosia.  This  western  boundary 
continued  at  all  times  the  same,  and  was  removed  to  the 
Indus  only  in  oonsequence  of  the  yictories  of  Kadir 
Shah.  Towards  the  north,  andent  India  oyerpaased  not 
leas  its  present  limit  It  comprehended  the  whole  of 
the  moontainoua  region  above  Cashmir,  Badakahan, 


Belur  Land,  the  western  boundar>'  mountains  of  liŁtk 
Buchana,  or  little  Thibet,  and  even  the  desert  of  Cobi, 
so  far  aa  it  was  known.  (See  Heeren*3  Uittorieal  R^ 
searches,  i,  c.  i,  §  8,  on  Persian  India ;  and  Kenncirs  Ger 
ography  of  Herodotui,  For  other  oonjectures  respecting 
the  looition  of  the  Scriptural  India,  aee  Winer^a  RtfA- 
tcórterbuchf  s.  v.  Indien.  For  the  history  of  andent  In- 
dia, see  Anthon'8  Cku$,  Diet,  a.  v.) — Smith;  Kittow 

INDIA,  MoDBRN.  The  name  ia  aometimea  used  of 
the  two  peninsulaa  west  and  east  of  the  Ganges  com- 
bined,  to  which  even  occaaionally  the  Indian  Arcfaipol- 
ago  is  added ;  but,  morę  commonły,  It  ia  applied  either 
to  the  peninsula  west  of  the  Ganges  (East  Indiet)f  or  to 
the  aggregatfi  posseaaions  of  the  British  crown  (the  Yia* 
royaUy  of  InAa^  or  the  Itidian  Empire).  Tbe  pireaent 
form  of  goyemment  of  the  Indian  Empire  is  established 
by  the  Act  21  and  22  Yictoria,  cap.  106,  called  an  Act 
for  the  better  Goyemment  of  India,  aanctioned  Ang.  % 
1858.  By  the  terms  of  this  act,  all  the  tenitoriea  hcre- 
tofore  under  the  goyemment  of  the  East  India  Company 
are  yested  in  the  queen,  and  all  ita  poweis  are  ezeicised 
in  her  name;  all  territorial  and  other  reyenuea,  and  all 
tributea  and  other  paymenta,  are  likewise  recciyed  in 
her  name,  and  disposed  of  for  the  purpoecs  of  the  gov- 
emn^ent  of  India  idone,  aubject  to  the  proyisiona  of  this 
act.  One  of  the  queen^  principal  secretaries  of  statc, 
called  the  Secretary  of  State  for  India,  is  inyested  with 
all  the  powers  hitherto  exercised  by  the  company  or  by 
the  Boaid  of  Control.  The  executiye  authority  in  India 
b  yested  in  a  goyemor  generał  or  yioeroy,  appointed  by 
the  crown,  and  acting  under  the  orders  of  the  Secretary 
of  State  for  India.  The  goyemor  generał  haa  power  to 
make  laws  and  regulations  for  all  persona,  whether  Brit- 
ish or  native,  foreignera  or  others,  within  tbe  Indian 
territories  under  the  dominion  of  the  queen,  and  for  aD 
seryants  of  the  goyemment  of  India  within  the  domin- 
ions  of  princea  and  atatea  in  allianoe  with  the  queen. 
The  Secretary  of  State  for  India  is  aided  in  the  adminia- 
tration  by  a  coundl  of  tifteen  members,  of  whom  seyen 
are  elecŁed  by  the  Court  of  Directors  from  tbeir  own 
body,  and  eight  are  nominated  by  the  crown.  The  da- 
ties  of  the  council  of  state  are,  under  the  direction  of 
the  secretary  of  state,  to  oonduct  the  buaineas  transacted 
in  the  united  kingdom  in  relation  to  the  goyemment 
of  and  the  correspondence  with  India. 

The  total  area  and  population  of  British  India  weie, 
according  to  official  retums  of  the  year  1869,  as  foliowa: 


BritUhIndU. 


AraalD 


5g0V 

lu  Coundl.. 
Under  Ihe  lieutenant  govemcr  of  ł 

Bengal j 

Under  tbe  lientenant  goyemor  of  theł 

Nortb-west  Proyiocea j 

Uuder  the  lientenant  goyemor  of  i 

Pnojanb f 

Undor  the  chief  commiaaiouer  of  Ouo 

"       "       "  »'  ofthe) 

Central  Proylnces / 

Under  the  chief  commiaaloner  of  > 

British  Barmah > 

Under  tbe  goyemor  of  Madras 

of  Bombay...... 


48,314 

246,785 

84,982 

100,441 
tt,406 
79,600 

90,070 

141,746 
142,042 


PopaUtioo. 


«»«n,107 

87,«)^fiB9 

SO,016,lt7 

17,093,946 
«,60S,834 
9,104,611 

2,829,813 

26^069,1 
13, 089,106 


Not  belonging  to  Brittah  India,  bat  morę  or  Icaa  imder 
the  control  of  the  Indian  goyemment,  are  a  number  of 
native  atatea,  coyering  an  extent  of  696,790  Bq.  milee, 
with  nearly  48  milliona  of  inhabitanta.     They  are, 


Natira  SUtM. 

AiM  in  Enirl. 
«|.  mitM. 

Popalatiuu 

Id  Bengal 

117,161 
8,468 
108,442 
185,610 
116,126 
66,004 

4,169,928 
9,284,400 
7.164,588 
14,692,5$T 
18,880,929 
6,«fc4.6S8 

••  Nortli-weat  Provincea 

"  Pnnjaub 

"  Central  India 

"  Madrai) 

"  Bombay 

6V6,790 

47,9U»,199 

There  bas  neyer  been  a  regular  cenaua  of  the  whole  of 
India  under  Britiah  adminiatration,  bot  ennmeratioBa, 
morę  or  leas  truatworthy,were  madę  in  the  north-w«8t- 


INDIA 


553 


INDIA 


em  and  in  the  central  pfoyinces  in  the  yeara  1865  and 
1866.  The  census  of  the  north-west  proyinces,  taken 
Jan.  10, 1865,  showed  that  this  division  of  India  had  in- 
cieaaed  in  prosperity  within  the  decennial  period  1856- 
1865,  as  reckoned  hy  the  number  of  hoiues  and  exten- 
Bion  of  cnltivation.  There  were  found  to  be  4.71  per- 
sona to  a  hoiue  or  hut,  and  7.06  to  an  inclosore,  or  fam- 
Qy  dwelling.  The  censua  forther  showed  that  there 
weie  4^  milUons  of  Mussulmans  in  the  north-west  proy- 
inces, or  about  one  serenth  of  the  total  population,  the 
other  six  serenths  bdng  Hindus  of  the  four  chief  castes ; 
namely,  Brahmins,  70  subdiyisions ;  Kshatryas,  175  sub- 
diyisions;  Yaisyas,  65  subdiyisions;  Sftdias,  230  sub- 
diyisions. The  Sftdras  were  found  to  form  the  great 
bolk  of  the  Hindus,  being  18,804,809  in  number;  the 
Yaisyas  numbered  1,091, 250;  the  Kshatryas,  2,827,768 ; 
and  the  Brahmins,  8,451,692.  The  census  of  the  cen- 
tnl  proyinces,  taken  in  1866,  showed  that  their  popula- 
tion consbted  of  6,864,770  Hindus,  1,995,668  Gonds  and 
aboriginal  tribes,  237,962  Mussulmans,  6026  Europeans 
and  Euzasians,  and  90  Parsees.  The  number  of  Mussul- 
mans was  much  lower  than  had  been  expected.  Ali  the 
ennmerations  showed  a  high  proportion  of  children  to 
adolta.  Tbus,  while  the  percentage  of  children  under 
12  years  of  age  was  29  in  England,  it  was  in  many  parts 
of  India  as  high  as  55.  Among  the  reasons  to  account 
for  sach  a  result  are  mentioned  the  custom  of  polygamy, 
and,  in  particular,  the  desire  of  the  Hindus  to  haye 
małe  issue,  which  induces  them  to  marry  as  many  wiyes 
as  they  can  afford  to  keep  until  a  son  is  bom.  The  re- 
ligioiis  statistics  of  the  three  laigest  cities  were,  accord- 
ing  to  the  latest  enumeration,  as  follows :  Calcutta,  to- 
tal  population  in  1866, 377,924 ;  among  whom  were  Hin- 
dus, 239,190;  Muasuhnans,  113,059;  Europeans,  11,224, 
Indo-Eoropeans,  11 ,036 ;  Parsees,  98.  Madras,  total  pop- 
ulation in  1863,  427,771 ;  among  whom  were  825,678 
Hindus;  Mussulmans, 63,886 ;  Europeans,  16,868 ;  Indo- 
Europeans,  21,839.  Bombay,  total  population  in  1864, 
816,562;  among  whom  were  Hindus,  523,974;  Mussul- 
mans, 145^880;  Parsees,  49,000;  natiyeChristians,  19,908; 
Europeans,  8415.  Łeaying  out  of  account  the  natiye 
States,  the  foUowing  is  giyen  as  the  relatiye  proportion  of 
creeds  and  races  in  India :  Hindus,  110,000,000 ;  Mussul- 
mans, 25,000,000 ;  aborigines  or  non-Aryans,  12,000,000 ; 
Buddhists,  3,000,000 ;  Asiatic  Christians,  1,100,000.  The 
English  population  amounted,  according  to  the  census 
of  1861,  to  125,945  persons. 

Chriśtianity  became  known  in  India  at  an  early  pe- 
riod. There  is  an  old  tradition  that  one  of  the  twelye 
apostles,  St,  Thomas,  preached  the  Gospel  to  the  people 
of  India,  but  the  tradition  is  not  supported  by  any  proofs. 
Cosmas  Indicopleustcs,  who  yisited  the  country  in  the 
6th  oentury,  found  a  large  number  of  Christian  congre- 
gations,  with  a  bishop  who  was  ordained  in  Persia.  In 
Gonsequence  of  this  connection  with  Persia,  the  Chris- 
tians  of  India,  who,  after  the  reputed  founder  of  the  In- 
cUan  Church,  were  called  Christians  of  St.  Thomas,  were 
dzawn  into  the  Nestorian  moyement,  and  subseąuently 
recetred  thdr  bishop  from  the  head  of  the  Nestorian 
Cfaoich.  Their  territory  extended  from  the  sonthem 
point  of  the  peninsula  of  Malabar  as  far  as  a  few  miles 
floath  of  Calicnt,  and  from  the  defiles  of  the  Ghats  as 
£[ir  as  the  sea.  An  Armenian  or  Syrian  merchant,  Thom- 
as Canna,  rearranged  in  the  9th  century  the  ecclesias- 
tical  and  politicai  affairs  of  these  Christians.  Through 
his  efforts  they  obtained  from  the  kings  of  Malabar  im- 
portant  priyileges ;  in  particular,  an  exempt  jurisdiction 
in  aU  except  criminal  cases.  Their  rank  was  equal  to 
that  of  the  nobillty  of  Malabar,  and  they  were  in  great 
demand  for  the  armies  of  the  Hindu  princes.  This  final- 
]y  indaced  them  to  attempt  the  establishment  of  a  king- 
dom  of  their  own,  which  was,  howeyer,  of  but  short  du- 
rstion.  Ailer  that  their  position  was  less  fayorable, 
and  the  Portnguese,  who  in  1498  landed,  under  Yasco 
de  Gama,  in  the  port  of  Calicut,  were  conseąuently  re- 
gaided  l^  them  as  their  liberators.  The  first  Portu- 
gneoe  missionaries  were  Frandscan  monks,  who  were 


introduced  in  1500  by  CabraL  Dominican  monks  land* 
ed  in  1508  with  the  two  Albuquerques,  but  they  con- 
flned  themselyes  to  a  few  conyents,  while  the  Franci»< 
cans  were  for  about  forty  years  the  only  Christian  mis- 
sionaries. It  was,  in  particular,  P.  Antonio  de  Porto 
who  in  1585  established  on  the  island  of  Salsette  a 
number  of  oolleges,  churches,  and  conyents.  In  1584 
the  first  Koman  Catholic  bishopric  for  India  was  estab- 
lished at  Goa ;  the  first  bishop,  Albuquerque,  was  a  Fran- 
dscan monk.  But,  although  the  conyents  of  the  Frań- 
ciscans  were  so  numerous  that  they  constituted  two 
proyinces  of  the  order,  they  soon  ceased  to  make  nota- 
ble efibrts  for  the  propagation  of  Chriśtianity,  leaying 
the  missionary  field  whoUy  to  the  new  order  of  the  Jes- 
uits,  who  madę  their  first  appearance  in  India  in  1542. 
Their  number  increased  yery  rapidly,  and  soon  they 
had  in  all  the  Portuguese  colonies  of  India  houses  and 
colleges,  which  were  diWded  into  the  two  proyinces  of 
Goa  and  Cochin.  Their  success  at  first  was  yery  slow, 
but  when  the  Portuguese  yiceroy  Constantine  de  Bra- 
ganza  banbhed  sorae  of  the  most  prominent  Brahraans, 
the  Jesuits  in  1560  succeeded  in  baptizing  nearly  18,000 
persons  in  that  city.  In  1579  seyeral  Jesuits  were  call- 
ed to  the  court  of  the  great  mogul,  Akbar,  who  for  a 
time  showed  an  inclination  to  accept  Chriśtianity.  Sub- 
seąuently,  howeyer,  he  conceiyed  the  plan  of  founding 
a  new  religion  himself,  and  the  Jesuit  mission,  which  at 
first  promised  grand  results,  was  confined  to  the  estab- 
lishment of  a  few  congregations  in  the  empire  of  the 
great  mogul.  The  Jesuits  were  morę  successful  in  their 
endeayors  to  unitę  the  Christians  of  St.  Tliomas  with 
the  Roman  Catholic  Church.  This  union  was  accom- 
plished  in  1599,  at  the  Synod  of  Dramper,  by  the  arch- 
bishop  of  Goa,  Alexius  Menezes.  The  bishopric  of  Goa 
had  in  1557  been  madę  an  archbishopric,  with  two  suf- 
fragan  sees  at  Cochin  and  Malacca,  to  which,  in  1606, 
Meliapur  was  added.  The  Christians  of  St.  Thomas  re- 
oeiyed,  in  1601,  an  episcopal  see  at  Angamala,  which  in 
1601  was  raised  to  the  archbishopric  of  Cranganor.  The 
right  of  patronage  oyer  the  eodesiastical  benefices  was 
left  to  the  king  of  Portugal,  as  he  had  to  defray  most  of 
the  expenses  for  the  support  of  the  churches  and  mis- 
sionaries. A  new  impulse  was  giyen  to  the  miaslons 
when,  in  1606,  the  Jesuit  P.  Robert  de  Nobili,  at  Madu- 
ra,  conceiyed  the  noyel  plan  of  iutrodudng  Chriśtianity 
by  accommodating  his  modę  of  life  entirely  to  the  In- 
dian customa  He  called  himself  a  Roman  aamu/asi  (L 
e.  one  who  resigns  eyerything),  liyed  after  the  manner 
of  the  Brahmans,  dothed  his  preaching  of  the  Gospd  in 
Indian  figures  of  speech,  and  eyen  retained  among  the 
new  conyerts  the  difference  of  caste,  allowing  the  con- 
yerts  to  wear  certain  badges  indicative  of  their  caste. 
But  he  encountered  a  strong  opposition,  eyen  among 
the  members  of  his  order,  and  a  yiolent  controyersy  be- 
gan,  which,  after  thirteen  years,  was  dedded  by  pope 
Gregory  XV  in  favor  of  P.  de  NobDi,  and  the  conyerts 
were  permitted  to  wear  the  badges.  After  this  the  Ro- 
man Catholic  Church  madę  numerous  conyerts.  Accord- 
ing to  statements  of  the  Indian  Christians,  P.  de  Nobili 
is  said  to  haye  baptized  about  100,000  persons  bdonging 
to  all  castes.  The  separation  was  carried  through  eyen 
with  regard  to  churches  and  missionaries ;  the  missiona- 
ries of  the  Brahmans  being  caUed  Sannyasi,  those  of  the 
Pariahs,  Pandaiams.  The  successors  of  Nobili,  who  were 
supported  by  the  French  missionaries  of  PoncUcherj',  en- 
larged  the  missions  and  deyeloped  the  system,  but  be- 
came consequently  inyolyed  in  new  controyersies,  espe- 
cially  with  the  Capuchins  (controyersy  of  accommoda^ 
tion),  which  in  1704,  by  cardinal  Toumon,  who  had  been 
commissioned  to  examine  the  subject,  and  again  by  pope 
Benedict  XIV  in  1744,  by  fthe  buli  "  Omnium  adUicitu- 
dinum"  was  dedded  against  the  Jesuits.  These  deds- 
ions  not  only  put  an  end  to  the  conyendons,  but  the  ma- 
Jority  of  the  Indians  who  had  been  gained  by  the  ac- 
oommodation  theories  of  the  Jesuits  again  retunied  to 
thdr  natiye  religion.  The  suppression  of  the  order  of 
the  Jesuits  still  morę  injured  the  Roman  Catholic  mis- 


INDIA 


654 


INDIA 


ńoDfl,  whichi  moieover,  soffered  seyerely  firom  Łhe  wan 
of  Tippd  Sahib.  Łoog  before  this  time  the  Jesuits  had 
loat  their  missions  among  Łhe  Christiaiis  of  St  Thomas, 
who  in  1653  left  the  commanion  of  Romę,  and  those  in 
the  yicinity  of  Cochin,  aa  the  Datch  from  1660  to  1663 
had  conquer6d  nearly  all  the  Portuguese  poesessions  on 
the  coast  of  Malabar.  The  Christiana  of  Sl  Thomas 
were,  however,  a  second  time  prerailed  apon  to  unitę 
with  Korne  by  Italian  Garmelites ;  and  in  1698,  through 
■the  mediation  of  the  emperor  Leopold  I,  one  bishop  and 
twelve  missionaries  of  this  order  receired  permission  to 
settle  on  the  coast  of  Malabar.  Bot  this  protection  af- 
forded  to  the  Italian  missionaries  led  to  a  serioos  quar- 
rei  between  the  Portuguese  goyemment,  bishop,  and 
missionaries  and  the  Italians,  as  Portugal  declined  to 
forego  its  right  of  patronage,  although  it  was  neither 
able  nor  wiiUng  to  exercise  it.  In  1838,  Gregory  XVI, 
by  the  buli  '^AfuUa  praclare^^  abolishod  the  former  po- 
pal constitutions  for  the  Church  of  India,  and  assigned 
to  the  8everal  vicars  apostolic  their  dioceses.  The  sees 
of  Crangauor,  Cochin,  and  Meliapur  (St  Thomas)  were 
fluppressed.  The  diocesc  of  Meliapur  was  transferred  to 
the  vlcariate  apostolic  of  Madras;  the  territory  of  the 
two  other  bishoprics  to  the  vicańate  of  Malabar,  which 
had  been  erected  in  1659  for  the  Incalceate  Carmelites, 
and  the  see  of  which  is  now  at  Yerapoly.  To  it  were 
alao  assigned  the  United  Christians  of  St.  Thomas,  a  pop- 
ulation  of  abont  200,000,  with  330  priests  and  160  min- 
isters.  The  Portuguese  of  Goa  now  tried  to  make  a 
flchism.  The  archbishop  of  Goa,  Jose  da  Sllra  y  Torres, 
who  had  been  consecrated  in  1843,  ordained,  immedi- 
ately  after  his  arriyal  in  Goa  in  1844,  no  less  than  800 
priests,  chiefly  men  without  any  education,  and  sent 
them  into  the  territories  of  the  yicars  apostolic.  They 
auocecded  in  obtaining  control  of  a  mąjority  of  the 
churches,  and  juńsdiction  oyer  a  population  of  about 
240,000  souls.  A  letter  from  pope  Gregory  XVI  to  the 
archbishop  remained  without  effecL  In  1848  Portugal 
consented  to  the  transfer  of  the  archbishop  from  Goa  to 
Portugal,  where  he  bccame  coadjutor  of  the  archbishop 
of  Braga.  But  the  bishop  of  Macao  coutinued  to  per- 
form  episcopal  functions  in  the  diooeses  of  the  yicars 
apostolic,  denounced  the  latter,  de&ed  the  lettcrs  of  the 
pope,  and  at  Goa  within  seyen  days  ordained  536  priests. 
Whcn  Pius  IX  threatened  the  bishop  of  Macao  with  ec- 
desiastical  censures,  the  Portuguese  chambera  complain- 
ed  of  the  attitude  of  Romę  so  seyerely  that  the  papai  nun- 
cio  was  on  the  point  of  leaying  the  country.  New  negoti- 
ations  between  Korne  and  Portugal  led,howeyer,  in  1859, 
to  another  compromise,  and  the  opposition  of  the  Portu- 
guese priests  in  British  India  to  the  yicars  apostolic  ap- 
pears  to  haye  died  out.  From  the  yicariate  apostolic  for 
Agra  and  Tibet,  which  was  established  in  1808,  the  yi- 
cariate of  Patna  was  scparated  in  1845.  Both  yicariates 
are  administered  by  missionaries  of  the  Ci^)uchin  order. 
The  French  yicariate  of  Pondicherry  was  established  in 
1770 ;  from  it  three  new  yicariates  were  formed  in  1846, 
namely,  Mysore,  Coimbatiir,  and  Madura;  the  two  fur- 
mer  uuder  priests  of  the  Paris  Seminary  of  Foreign  Mis- 
eions,  and  the  latter  under  the  Jesuits,  who  in  1836  had 
reoccupied  this  former  field  of  their  order.  The  yicari- 
ate of  Vizigapatam  was  established  in  1848  for  the  priests 
of  the  Congregation  of  St.  Francis  de  Sales. 

Protestant  missions  began  at  the  commencement  of 
the  18th  ceniury,  when  the  Lutheran  missionary  Zie- 
genbaly  was  sent  to  the  Danish  coast  of  Tranquebar. 
Amidst  the  greatest  difficulties  which  the  foreign  lan- 
guagcs  and  the  officers  of  the  colony  plaoed  in  his  way, 
he  founded  schools,  translated  the  Bibie  and  the  Cate- 
chism  into  the  Tamil  language,  collected  a  congrega- 
tion which  rapidly  increasefl,  and  laid  the  foundatiou  of 
the  £yangelical  Church  of  India.  A  large  portion  of 
the  comicils  eithcr  belonged  to  the  lowest  castes  or  were 
pariahs.  In  the  course  of  the  18th  centurj',  the  mis- 
sionary work  was  carried  on  by  the  Missionary  Sodety 
of  Halle ;  at  first  with  great  zeal,  which,  howeyer,  grad- 
ually  alackened  under  the  influence  of  Rationalism.   The 


laat  great  missionary  who  was  sent  oat  from  Halle  wn 
the  apostolical  Fr.  Schwaiz  (q.  y.),  the  results  of  wlune 
work  can  still  be  tnoed.     Giadually  the  Halle  Sodety 
leaned  on  the  English  Sodety  for  the  Propagation  <rf 
the  Gospel,  which  at  last  took  entire  charge  of  theae 
missionSb    With  regard  to  the  differences  of  castes,  the 
first  missionaries  had  been  eamestly  opposed  to  their 
oontinuance  in  the  Christian  churches;  but  this  poGcy 
was  sub6equently  changed,  and  the  differences  permit- 
ted  to  remain,  on  the  ground  that  they  were  merely  of 
a  social  cfaaracter.     In  1841  the  Lutheran  Missaonaiy 
Sodety  of  Dresden  began  to  gather  up  again  the  scat- 
tered  remnants  of  the  old  missionary  sodeties  in  Tran- 
quebar,  but  in  the  prosecution  of  the  work  became  in- 
yolyed  in  many  difficulties  with  the  other  misdonary 
sodeties  which  had  taken  charge  of  the  Halle  miwonft. 
This  sodety  is  the  only  one  among  the  missionaiy  eo- 
cieties  now  laboring  in  India  which  undertakes  to  yin- 
dicate  the  social,  though  not  the  religious  staoding  of 
the  caste.    The  recent  mission  in  India  begins  with  the 
arriyal  of  the  Baptist  missionary,  W.  Carey,  at  Calcutta 
(Noy.  1793).    He  encountered  from  the  start  the  formi- 
dable  and  entirely  unexp6cted  opposition  of  the  £ast 
India  Company,  w^hich  hoped  for  larger  commercial  prof- 
its  if  it  spared  the  religious  bdief  and  practice  of  the 
Hindus  and  Mohammedans,  and  thereforc  not  only  di»> 
couraged  the  establishment  of  Christian  missions,  but 
supported  and  defended  the  religious  institutioos  of  Ibe 
natiye  religions.     The  few  chapLains  who  were  aent  out 
to  attend  the  spiritual  needs  of  the  English  in  India 
were  like  the  Europeau  residents  in  generał,  drunkaids, 
seryants  of  the  mammon,  and  worldlmgs ;  when,  ther&- 
fore,  the  Rey.  Henry  Martyn,  one  of  the  most  zealoos 
missionaries  of  that  time,  arriyed  in  1806  in  Calcutta, 
and  endeayored  to  kindle  a  missionary  spirit,  he  pro- 
yoked  thereby  such  a  storm  of  indignation  that  he  had 
to  confine  himself  for  some  time  to  the  reading  of  the 
homilies  of  the  Church  of  England.   When  Carey  land- 
ed  in  India,  permission  was  refused  to  him  to  stay  with- 
in the  territory  of  the  British  dominions,  and  he  was 
compelled  to  seek  refuge  in  the  smali  Danish  possessioa 
of  Serampoor  (a  few  miles  from  Calcutta).    Herę  he  was 
hospitably  recdyed  by  the  goyemor,  who  himsdf  was  a 
pupil  of  Schwarz,  and  under  his  auspices  he  began  the 
Baptist  mission,  which  has  become  of  so  grcAt  impoi^ 
tance  for  all  India.     Carey,  who  himself  had  masiered 
morę  than  thirty  Oriental  languages,  and  the  mission- 
aries Marshman  and  Ward,  cauaed  the  trandation  of  the 
Bibie  into  morę  than  twenty  languages  of  India,  the 
compilation  of  grammars,  dictionaries,  school-books,  and 
many  leamed  works  on  the  history,  religions,  and  ca»- 
toms  of  India,  new  editions  of  the  chief  works  of  the  na- 
tiye literatures,  and  thus,  eycn  where  they  did  not  snc- 
ceed  in  forming  new  congregations,  they  smoothed  the 
way  for  8ubsequent  missionary  labors.    In  1803,  the  in- 
defatigable  Cuey,  who  in  1800  łiad  been  appointed  pio- 
fessor  of  Sanscrit  and  other  Oriental  languages  at  Fort 
WUliam  (Calcutta),  was  allowed  to  begin  a  mission  in 
Calcutta,  which  was  at  first  intendcd  only  for  English, 
Portuguese,  and  Armenian  Christiana,  but  was  soon  jdn- 
ed  by  seyeral  oonyerted  Hindus  and  Mohammedans. 
Soon  a  oonyerted  Hindu,  Krishna,  appeared  in  paUic  as 
a  preacher,  and  by  his  impressiye  sermons  organized  the 
fiist  natiye  congregation  in  BengaL    This  success  of 
the  Baptist  mission  enoouraged  a  number  of  the  chap- 
lains  of  the  goyemment  to  labor  for  the  removal  of  the 
obstacles  which  the  East  India  Company  placed  in  tho 
way  of  Christianity.     Dayid  Brown,  Henry  Martyn, 
Thomas  Thomason,  Daniel  Corrie,  and  Claudius  Buchan- 
an, and  many  others,  distinguished  themadres  by  estab- 
lishing  schools  and  seminaries,  by  literary  labors,  by  ap- 
pointing  natiye  preachers  and  teachera,  and,  in  generał, 
by  their  great  zeal  on  the  missionar}'  fidd.     The  trao»- 
lation  of  the  Bibie  by  H.  Martyn,  and  the  labors  of  the 
Mohammedan  Abdul  Messih,  who  was  conyerted  by  him, 
were  cspecially  productiye  of  great  results.     But  morę 
thau  all  his  predecessois,  it  was  the  Rev.  CL  Bnchanan 


INDIA 


566 


INDIA 


who  aoceeedeid  in  overoomiiig  thoee  hindnuioes  which 
had  preyented  the  firee  propagation  of  Christianity 
throughout  India.  After  haying  traveUed  through  a 
large  portion  of  the  country,  and  aoąuired  a  minutę 
knowledge  of  tiie  people,  he  retumed  in  1807  to  £ng^ 
land,  and  by  a  nomber  of  worka  endeayored  to  gain 
poblic  opinion  for  a  radical  change  in  the  administrar 
tion  of  India.  Hia  writings  produced  a  great  effect,  and 
when,  in  1813,  the  charter  of  the  Eaat  India  Company 
was  renewed,  the  English  Parliament  paaaed  reaolutioDs 
which  granted  to  all  Brituh  subjecta  the  right  to  estab- 
lish  schoola  and  miasions  in  Łidia,  and  compelled  the 
company  to  proyide  itseif  schools  and  seminaiiea  for 
Łhe  instruction  of  the  natiyea.  This  was  foUowed  by  a 
nomber  of  other  reforma,  as  the  prohibition  of  bnming 
of  widowa  (1829),  and  of  a  further  pa}anent  of  tempie 
and  pilgiim  taxe8  (1833  and  1840),  and  the  admiasion 
of  naŁive  Christiana  to  the  lower  offices  of  administra- 
tion.  Fuli  liberty  for  missionary  operations  was  flnally 
giyen  in  1833,  when  a  resolution  of  the  Britiah  Parlia- 
ment aUowed  all  foreigners  to  settle  in  British  India, 
md  thos  opened  the  fidd  to  aU  non-Brldsh  nusaionary 
aocieties  of  the  world. 

The  firat  bishopric  of  the  English  Chorch  in  India 
was  esublished  at  Calcutta  in  1814.  The  first  bishop, 
Dr.  Bliddleton,  a  rigid  High-Churchman,  waa  morę  noted 
for  his  qi]anel8  with  the  ministers  of  other  denomin»- 
ttons  than  for  missionary  zeal.  Hb  sucoessor,  Ueber 
(q.  y.),  on  the  oontrary,  though  likewiae  a  High-Church- 
man, was  indefatigable  in  hb  deyotion  to  the  missionary 
cauae,  and  stemly  opposed  the  toleration  of  caste  differ- 
ences  among  the  conyerts.  His  work  was  continued  in 
the  same  way  by  his  suocessor,  Wilson  (died  1858).  In 
1835  other  bishoprics  were  established  at  Bombay  and 
Madras,  and  the  bishop  of  Calcutta  receiyed  the  title  of 
Metropolitan  of  India. 

In  1867  the  General  AssemUy  of  the  Churrh  of  Scot- 
land sent  Dr.  Norman  M^Leod  and  Dr.  Wat -on  to  in- 
qiiije  into  the  working  of  the  miasions  there.  The 
foUowing  facts  are  gleaned  from  their  reports.  The 
miasionaries  of  the  Society  for  the  Propagation  of  the 
Gospel  are  distributed  through  2G  piindpal  stations, 
embracing  about  407  yiUages,  and  are  assisted  by  about 
207  nnordained  agenta.  There  are  in  connection  with 
the  chorches  21,000  baptized  persona,  of  whom  5000  aie 
eommunicants  and  8000  catechumens.  Of  thesc,  4969 
can  read.  Besides,  the  society  bas  247  schoolś  and 
thiee  seminacies,  with  7776  scholara.  One  of  the  semi- 
naries  has  sent  out  18  dergymen.  The  income  of  the 
■chool  was  9000  rupeea  from  feea  and  29,802  rupees 
goyemment  aid.  The  natiye  Christiana  throughout 
the  miaaons  haye  contributed  12,271  rupees  for  yarious 
religioas  objecta.  The  London  Missionary  Society  haye 
at  Madras  a  theologtcal  dass  of  13,  a  central  and  branch 
•choola  of  800  yonng  men  and  boys,  a  girls'  school  of 
850,  and  two  natiye  churches  of  145  members.  In  the 
Caddapah  district  are  800  members,  with  400  scholara; 
in  the  Telugu  country  1200  members ;  756  in  the  Tamil 
coontry,  of  whom  300  are  eommunicants,  and  large 
scdiools  for  boya  and  girls  at  Bangalore.  In  South  Tra- 
yancorc,  which  ia  thia  society^s  prindpal  fidd,  are  8 
£iiropean  miadonariea  and  II  natiye  pastora,  20,000 
professing  Christiana,  and  6300  boys  and  1500  girls  in 
the  achoolfl.  The  natiye  Christiana  haye  contributed 
9680  rupees,  or  nearly  £1000,  to  the  support  of  the  Goa- 
peL  In  all  the  statistics  of  this  society  in  Southern 
India  are  82,100  natiye  Christiana  and  11,848  schokrs. 
The  Church  Missionary  Sodety  haye  fine  congregationa 
at  Matfiraa,  with  600  attendanta,  1  European  missionary, 
and  three  natiye  aesiatanta,  a  female  misdon,  and  12 
schoola.  There  are  ąuite  a  number  of  schoolś  in  the 
Telugu  district,  and  about  700  natlres  in  30  yiUages 
haye  placed  themaelyea  under  Christian  instruction. 
On  the  border  of  Cochin,  near  the  field  of  the  old  Syr- 
lan  Chorch,  aie  10  natiye  dergy,  and  11,000  persona 
under  Christian  instruction.  The  sodety  bas  begun  to 
labm  alao  among  the  ''Hill  Aniana,'*  of  whom  1000  are 


baptized.  The  aodety^s  prindpal  labors  are  in  the  Tin*- 
neyelly  district,  where  it  has  on  its  rolls  24,000  baptized 
and  12,000  not  baptized.  The  contributions  of  thia  body 
were  17,000  rupeea.  Many  of  the  churches  and  schoolś 
are  aelf-supporting,  and  are  themaelves  animated  by  a 
missionary  spirit  Thia  district  is  in  justaposition  with 
the  South  Trayanoore  miasions  of  the  London  Sodety, 
and  with  the  Tinneyelly  miasions  of  the  Propagation 
Sodety.  Add  the  oonyerts  reported  by  these,  and  the 
6000  of  the  American  Board,  and  we  have  8000  TamU 
Christiana  within  160  miles  of  Cape  Comorin.  The 
Wealeyan  Missiraiary  Society  deyotes  but  a  twelflh  of 
its  inoome  to  the  Indian  miadons,  which  are,  of  courae, 
among  ita  smallesL  It  has  stations  at  Madras  and  8ix 
other  pointa  in  the  Tamil  country,  seyen  or  dght  sta- 
tions in  the  Canenere  districta,  465  Churdi  members  in 
all,  5  native  ministers,  besides  aeyeral  candidates,  and 
3500  pupils  in  the  achoola. 

The  following  are  extract8  from  Ute  (1868)  reports 
ofsomeof  the  American  aodetiea.  The  American  Board 
has  in  India  the  "  Mahratta  Miadon"  and  the  "  Madura 
Miadon."*  The  Mahratta  Misdon,  established  in  1811, 
had  9  stations,  42  ont-stationa,  10  miasionaries,  9  femalo 
aaaistant  misaionaries,  10  natiye  pastors,  4  licenscd 
preachers,  and  70  helpers.  Numb^  of  members,  618; 
baptized  children,  544.  Of  the  23  churches,  11  are  un- 
der the  care  of  natiye  pastora.  The  churches  haye  gen- 
erally  agreed  to  deyote  one  tenth  of  the  income  of  the 
membershipe  to  the  support  of  the  Gospel.  There  are 
a  normal  achool,  eonducted  by  this  sodety  in  connec- 
tion with  the  Christian  Yemacnlar  £ducation  Society, 
and  a  girla'  schooL  Fonr  works  haye  been  published. 
The  periodical  of  the  mission  is  in  ita  twenty-8ixth  yol- 
ume.  The  Madun  Miadon,  established  in  1834,  had  14 
stationa,  162  out-stations  (yillage  congregationa),  13  mis- 
sbnariea,  16  female  aasistant  misdonaries,  7  natiye  pas- 
tora, 94  catechiats,  28  readera,  6  teacheia  in  seminary 
and  boarding-Bchool,  67  schoolmaaters,  and  27  school- 
miBtresaea.  Number  of  churches,  80 ;  of  these,  13,  hay- 
ing  550  members,  are  at  the  station  centres,  and  17  are 
\'illage  churches,  with  700  members,  7  of  which  haye 
native  paptors  ordained  oyer  them.  There  haa  been  a 
net  gain  in  the  membenhip  of  70,  making  the  total 
number  of  oommunicanta  1250.  It  is  noticed  both  of 
the  members  and  the  natiye  hdpets  that  they  are  not 
as  steadfiut  aa  would  be  daimed.  There  are  162  Chris- 
tian oongregations  and  255  yillages  where  Christiana 
reside,  with  175  plaoes  where  religioua  senrices  are  held 
eyery  Sunday.  The  number  of  attendants  on  worship 
is  6294.  The  miasionaries  haye  yidted  800  yillages, 
and  trayelled  nearly  10,000  miles.  There  are  93  common 
schoolś,  with  700  schohurs;  6  boarding-aehools,  with  196 
scholara.  The  station  day-echools  are  **  deddedly  proe- 
peroua."  The  medical  department  has  treated  oyer 
10,000  patienta.  There  is  a  **  Madura  Native  Eyangel- 
ical  Sodety,"  fourteen  years  dd,  which  raised  last  year 
565  rupees,  and  haa  raised  from  the  beginning  5400  ru- 
peea. The  « Madura  Widows'  Aid  Society"  has  120 
members  and  about  1500  rupees.  The  I^sbyterian 
Church  sustains  the  Lodiana  and  Furrukhabad  Misdon, 
with  17  stations,  28  American  and  11  native  misdona- 
ries, 80  American  and  120  natiye  teachers,  456  commu- 
nicanta,  and  6194  scholara  in  the  schoolś.  Out-stationa 
are  increadng  in  numbeis.  Toura  into  diiferent  dis- 
tricta haye  been  madę  aa  in  former  years.  Yarious  me- 
las haye  been  attended,  among  which  was  Hardwar. 
The  number  of  people  preaent  at  this  place,  according 
to  goyemment  offidals,  was  almost  3,000,000.  For  days 
some  twenty  preachers,  natiye  and  foreign,  preached  to 
many  thousands.  Freąucntly  many  remained  ailer  the 
service  to  discuss  some  of  the  pointa  set  forth  in  the 
discourse.  Casea  of  self-torture  were  fewer  than  usuaL 
"The  mpre  reyolting  rites  of  Hinduism  are  evidently 
becoming  obaolete."  At  thia  featiyal  the  brethren  were 
<•  particularly  atruck  with  the  marked  increase  in  the 
knowledge  of  Christianity  manifested  by  the  pilgrims." 
The  Sabbath-achool  and  prayer-meeting  are  establiahed 


INDIA 


556 


INDIAN  CASTE 


st  most  of  the  stations,  and  in  the  Lodiaiu  Miseion  the 
natiye  Christiana  haye  contributed  for  religious  and 
charitable  objecta,  during  the  year,  670  rupees.  Nearly 
11,000,000  pages  of  publications  of  yarious  kinds  have 
been  issued.  A  "mcdical  miasion"  is  connected  with 
these  missions,  at  which  1811  patients  have  been  treated. 
The  (Dutch)  Reformed  Church  has  the  Arcot  Mis- 
sion,  organized  in  1854.  The  misaion  occupies  North 
Arcot  District  —  area  6017  8quare  miles,  population 
1,000,716;  and  South  Arcot  District— area  4910  sąuare 
milcs,  population  1,102,184:  churches,  13;  out-stationr, 
84;  numberincongregations,1712;  coramunicants,  488 ; 
Bcholars  in  vemQcular  school,  116;  contributions,  over 
986  rupees,  or  6468.  The  three  schools  (boya',  girls', 
and  preparatory)  have  105  pupila.  Eighteen  toura  have 
been  nuide,  in  which  1889  aermona  have  been  preached 
to  andiencea  of  80,682  persona,  and  2704  copiea  of  booka 
distributed.  Beaidea  thia,  the  erangeliatic  work  muat 
be  taken  into  account  It  conaiata  in  riaiting  the  vil- 
lagea  immediately  around  the  atationa,  which  are  usu- 
ally  in  citiea  and  towna.  In  proaecuting  thia  work, 
1512  localitiea  have  been  preached  in  by  the  miaaiona- 
riea  or  helpers,  60,788  aouls  have  been  addreased,  and 
1775  booka  have  been  diatributeiL  Adding  the  regular 
listeners  at  stationa,  givea  100,000  peraona  to  whom  the 
Goapel  haa  been  preached.  There  ia  a  metUcal  depart- 
ment  connected  with  the  miaaion,  at  which  15,507  pa- 
tients have  been  treated.  The  Rev.  Dr.  Scudder  notes 
the  change  that  haa  taken  place  in  the  attitude  of  the 
nativea  in  the  foUowing  temas:  '*As  to  the  results,  I 
have  to  mention  that  the  temper  of  the  people  has  been 
greatly  mollified.  This  is,  perhaps,  one  of  the  most 
wicked  districts  in  Southern  India.  Its  inhabitants 
used  to  hear  the  preached  Word  with  aouls  fuli  of  ragę 
— ^rage  gleaming  in  their  eyes  and  disfiguring  their 
countenances.  It  does  aeem  to  ua  that  there  has  been 
a  marked  change  within  the  year.  Eamest,  anxious, 
aometimes  longing  looka  are  caat  upon  ua  now  as  we 
repeat  the  sweet  atory  of  the  cross.  Tracts,  Gospel  por- 
tions,  the  smallest  leayes,  are  eagerly  receired,  where 
formerly  rolumea,  or  books  of  poetrj',  or  English  publi- 
cations were  sought  for.  There  are  now  no  refusals, 
where  beforc  friendly  offers  were  fairly  spumed.  There 
are  ąuiet,  calm  inąturies,  where  before  were  angry  op- 
.  positions,  or  worae,  auUen  silence." 

The  mission  of  the  Methodist  Epiacopal  Church  in 
India  was  begun  in  1856.  The  work  is  now  in  the  form 
of  a  regular  Annual  Conference,  and  is  dirided  into 
three  districts,  BareiUy,  Lucknow,  and  Moradabad.  In 
1869  this  mission  contained  291  agents  (of  whom  29 
were  American  missionaries),  783  communicants  (of 
whom  257  were  probationers),  87  school-houaea,  96 
schools,  8716  day-scholars,  800  orphans,  and  Church 
property  to  the  amount  of  $3716.  In  the  district  of 
Bareilly  there  is  a  succesaful  medical  mission,  one  of  the 
missionaries  having  charge  of  three  govemmcnt  hospi- 
tals  in  the  prorince  of  Kumaon,  and  a  medical  class  of 
native  Christian  women  having  been  established  at  Ny 
nee  TaL  The  hospitala,  achools,  and  orphanages  under 
the  care  of  the  missionaries  are  disposing  large  numbers 
of  the  inhabitants  in  favor  of  Christianity. 

"  It  is  easy  to  see,"  says  Bishop  Kingsley,  in  a  letter 
to  the  Christian  Adeocate  and  Journal, "  that  both  Hin- 
du  idolatry  and  Mohammedanism  are  losing  their  hołd 
on  the  minds  of  those  who  still  show  them  an  outward 
deference.  I  have  talked  with  intelligent  Hindus  with 
the  red  paint  on  their  forcheads,  indicating  that  they  had 
iaithfully  attended  to  their  religious  ritea,  who  nerer- 
theless  told  me  they  had  no  faith  in  these  mummeries, 
and  felt  the  heathen  yoke  that  was  upon  them  an  intol 
erable  burden ;  deploring  caste,  and  mouming  over  the 
degradcd  condition  of  their  women.  They  will  do  utter 
yiolencc  to  their  doctrine  of  caste  when  it  can  be  done 
without  expo8ure.  Mohammedans  haye  madę  similar 
oonfessions  to  me,  saying  they  felt  at  liberty,  ao  far  as 
any  conscicntious  scruples  were  concemed,  to  yiolate  the 
reąoirementa  of  that  religion.    Besidea  all  thia^  there 


seems  to  be  a  aort  of  foreboding  in  regard  to  many  pcr- 
ticulara  that  their  ancient  religion  is  about  wom  out 
One  ia,  that  ailer  about  thirty  yeara  morę  the  Sacred 
Ganges  will  loae  ita  ^irtue." 

In  1868  the  atatistics  of  the  Roman  Catholic  Church 
in  British,  Portugueae,  and  French  India  were  as  follows : 


BritUh  Indin. 

Pri«U. 

Ctho- 

C.tbolir 

Cbil- 

1.  Vic  Apoetol.  of  Agra 

81 

14,itUU 

10 

750 

2.    "         "           BengaUt 
Western \ 

S4 

11,000 

18 

1,500' 

8.  Vic.  Apost.  of  Bengal,!. 
Eastem J 

0 

6,710 

7 

250 

4.Vic  Apostoł,  of  Bom-r 
bay,  Wortheni f 

S.  Vic.  ApoBtoL  of  Bom-\ 
bay.Soathem 

) 

81,320 

28 

1,9W 

6.  Yic.  Apoeu  of  Canare) 
orMangalora ' 

84 

45.000 

00 

2,700 

7.  Vic.  Apoatol.  of  Coim-( 
batftr ■ 

17 

17,600 

90 

600 

a  Vlc.  Apost  of  Hydera*) 
bad ' 

8 

6,G45 

7 

300 

9.  Vic  ApoaLof  Madraa 

19 

36,426 

40 

2,210 

10.    •'         "      Madura 

54 

144,222 

16 

1,8«K» 

11.    "         «      Mysorc 

83 

21,600 

86 

l,2cw( 

12.    "         "       Patna 

83 

8«00() 

8 

300 

13.    "        "      Pondichcrry 

67 

112,240 

90 

1,»«»0 

14.    "         "      Onilon 

16.    "         "      Yerapoly,  ) 
InMalabar / 

82 

66,000 

39 

2,236 

295 

238,000 

500 

5,000 

16w  Vic  ApoeL  of  Yizigapa-  \ 

tam j 

17.  Vic  Apoetol.  of  Malacca . 
1&  Arcbbiahopric  of  Goa . . . . 

14 

7,106 

81 

725 

21 

8,500 

14 

1,000 

721 

749,6«# 

1    894 

|)f4.tf>l 

The  atatiatica  of  Proteatantiam  in  India  (indusiye  of 
Burmah,  Siam,  and  Ceylon)  are  reported  in  the  Boston 
Missionary  Herald  for  October,  1870,  as  follows: 


. 

sĄ\k 

• 

1 

i 

1 

11 

Com-  ' 
mnnl-  i 

u 

1 

7L 

0 

c«.u.; 

School*. 

Arnerieati  Sodeties. 

i 

1        1 

American  Board .... 

29 

87 

22 

loc  m 

2,494 

6,262 

Prcsbyterian  Board . 
United  Presbyteriana 
Reform.  Datch  Board 

87 

86 

8 

4 

144 

672 

6,726 

9 

,. 

,, 

7 

8 

16 

64 

634 

66S 

American  Eyangel-) 

Ical  Lutherans../ 

•• 

•• 

•• 

*• 

Methodist  Epiaco-f 

19 

18 

8 

29 

231 

47C 

3,718 

Btiptl^L  Mlłi*.  t  iiłon. 

80 

42 

79 

266 

77 

19,S3S 

4,7r.T 

FrtcWil]  Hn|łttt!i«.. 

7 

9 

.. 

191 

1,078 

pioiinrvSocict(y..  ' 

8 

^ 

8,000 

2.cr. 

8 

.. 

.• 

.. 

Ewropean  Soeieties, 

Engliah  Church    \ 
MiBaioD.Sodety.f 

185 

139 

75 

.. 

1741 

13,016 

38,79(: 

Soc  for  the  Prop- 

agation    of   tbe> 

86 

44 

,, 

600 

4,000 

.. 

Goapel ) 

i 

T^ndonMi88.Sodety 

48 

8S 

875 

.. 

3,894 

1^044l 

We8leyanMl88.Soc. 

32 

.. 

31 

.. 

825 

2,l&« 

8,27n. 

Bnptiet  Miss.  Society 

8S 

48 

6 

162 

.. 

2.00D 

S,3:if 

General  Baptlats.... 
Church  of  Scotland. . 

4 

8 

12 

610 

1.4.v: 

8 

11 

8 

8 

60 

218 

«,S«i 

Free    Church    of) 
Scotland / 

16 

80 

7 

8 

119 

598 

8,661 

Irish  Presbyterians . 
MleelontoHillTribea 

8 

9 

14 

130 

1,150 

2 

, . 

., 

,. 

1 

MoraviaD8 

8 

8 

,. 

Basie  EvaDg.  Misa. 

Society. : 

Leip»ic  JEvangelic\ 

Lnth.  Miss.  Soc../ 

39 

68 

3 

48 

86 

1866 

8,336 

16 

18 

6 

4 

139 

9291 

1.CS4 

Go88uer*8  Mission-) 
ary  Society f 

9 

86 

1 

85 

86 

4700 

1,400 

Hermannsbnng      ) 

5 

Mission.  Society./ 

Danish  Miss.  Society 

Total 

•* 

•• 

•• 

•• 

8 

8 

.. 

4;      1 

180 

60 

68716011319 

110918844 

174,810 

108,767 

Indian  Caste.  The  sodal  distinctions  indicatcd 
by  this  term  are  much  morę  numeitnis,  fixcd,  and  cx- 
clusiye  in  India  than  anywherc  clse.  The  andcnt 
Egyptians  had  similar  ranka,  but  they  were  not  ao  atrict- 
ly  hereditary,  nor  did  they  form  anch  impaasable  bar- 
riera  in  ordbiary  iutercourse.    See  Egypt.     The  Hin- 


INDIAN  CASTE 


557 


INDIAN  CASTE 


doa,  ind«ed,  regaid  Łhese  as  abaolate,  original,  and  per- 
manent  denuurkaŁioiuł  of  race  rather  Łhau  of  merę  poń- 
Łion  or  occupatioiu 

1.  Oriffin,  —  From  a  rerj  early  period  the  Hindu 
writers  have  propounded  a  great  variety  of  speculadons 
regardiiig  the  origin  of  mankind,  and  of  the  classeB  or 
castes  into  which  their  community  ia  dirided.  The 
most  commonly  received  of  these  explanation8  is  that 
contaiued  in  the  andent  story,  of  which  Mr.  Muir  thinks 
DO  tracę  is  found  in  the  Rig  Yeda  (exoepting  one  in 
Purusha  SUkta),  but  which  is  found  in  the  Santi  Par\'a 
of  the  Jłaktibkdraiit,  where  a  converBation  occurs  be- 
tween  riirOraras,  the  son  of  Ilfi,  and  Matariswan,  or 
Yay  u,  the  wind  god.  Purarayas  anks,  **  Whence  was 
the  Brahman,  and  whence  were  the  other  three  castes 
produoed,  aml  whence  is  the  superiority  of  the  first?** 
and  Yay  u  answers,  **The  Brahman  was  created  from 
the  mouth  of  Brahm,  the  Kshattriya  from  his  arms, 
Yaiaya  from  his  thighs,  and  to  serve  these  three  castes 
the  Iburth  caste  was  fashioned,  andso  the  Sudra  sprung 
from  his  feeL**  The  sacred  books  of  the  Hindus,  how- 
eA'cr,  contain  no  uniform  or  consistent  aocount  of  the 
origin  of  castes,  but  offer  **mystical,  mythical,  and  ra- 
tionalistic"  esplanations  of  it,  or  fiuiciful  conjecture  con- 
ceming  it.  In  the  IIarivamta  (sec.  211,  v.  11808  Bq.)- 
Janamijaya  says,  ^  I  have  heard  the  description  of  the 
Brahma  Yug,  the  first  of  the  ages;  I  desire  now  to  be 
accurateiy  informed  about  the  Kshatriya  Age,"  and  he 
receires  the  foUowing  answer :  "  Yishnfl,  sprung  from 
Brahm,  e^alted  above  the  power  of  sense,  and  absorbed 
in  devotion,  becomes  the  patriarch  Daksha,  and  creates 
numerous  human  beings.  The  beautiful  Brahmans 
were  formed  from  an  unchangeable  element  (ahhard)^ 
the  Kshattriyas  from  a  changeable  substance  (kahara), 
the  Yaisyas  from  altcration  (riibdra),  and  the  Sfidras 
from  a  modilication  of  smoke."  Another  account  makes 
the  Brahmans  to  have  been  fashioned  with  white,  red, 
ycUow,  and  bluc  colota.  Thence  creatures  attained  in 
the  world  the  state  of  fourfold  caste,  being  of  one  type, 
but  with  different  duties.  Still  another  aocount  (Santi 
Par\-ati  of  the  MaMdbharata,  sec  188, 189),  aOer  giving 
a  statcment  of  the  creation  of  men,  etc.,  propounds  the 
foUoiring :  *•  Desire,  anger,  fear,  cupidity,  grief,  anxiety, 
hunger,  fatigue,  prerail  in  all;  all  have  bodily  secie- 
tions,  with  phlegm,  bile,  and  Uood;  and  the  bodies  of 
all  decay— by  what,  then,  is  caste  distinguished?  .... 
There  is  no  distinction  of  caste;  the  whole  world  is  form- 
ed of  Brahma;  for,  having  been  formerly  created  by 
him,  it  became  separated  into  castes  by  means  of  works." 
In  the  Bhagarat  Purand  we  icad  that  there  was  for- 
merly only  one  Yeda,  one  God,  one  caste.  Sometimes 
the  diiTerent  castes  are  sald  to  haye  sprung  from  the 
words  Bhfih,  etc;  from  different  Yedas;  from  different 
sets  of  prayers;  from  the  gods;  from  nonentity;  from 
the  imperishable,  the  perishable,  and  other  principles. 
They  are  sometimes  madę  to  be  coeval  with  the  creation, 
and  as  haring  different  attributes  inroWing  different 
morał  ąualities,  while  in  other  places,  as  in  the  Epic 
poeras,  the  creation  of  raankind  is  described  without  the 
least  ałlusion  to  the  separate  production  of  the  progeni- 
ton  of  the  four  castes.  Sometimes  all  men  are  the  off- 
spring  of  Manu.  Thus  it  is  dear  that  the  separate  ori- 
gin of  the  four  castes  could  not  have  been  an  object  of 
belief  among  the  older  Hindus,  while  the  variety  and 
inconsistcncy  o(  these  aocounts  help  us  not  at  all  in  de- 
tennining  its  origin. 

Many  writen  have  daimed  for  caste  a  trans-Hima- 
layan  origin,  while  otheri  have  suppoeed  that  it  origin- 
ated  with  the  suocessire  wayes  of  emigration  within 
the  phuns  of  India.  Professor  Koth  thus  sutes  this 
ricw :  "  When  the  Ycdic  pcople,  driren  by  some  polit- 
łcal  shock,  adranced  from  their  abodes  in  the  Punjaub 
fnrther  and  furthcr  socith,  and  droye  the  aborigines  into 
ihe  hiUs,  and  took  posKSsion  of  the  country  lying  be- 
twcen  the  Ganges,  the  Jumna,  and  tho  Yindhya  Moun- 
>  circumstances  reąuired  and  fayored  such  an  or- 
on  of  society  as  was  tberein  deyeloped.*'    On 


the  other  hand.  Dr.  Haug  says:  *'From  all  we  know, 
the  real  origin  of  caste  appears  to  go  back  to  a  time  an- 
terior  to  the  composition  of  the  Yedic  hymns,  though 
its  deyelopment  into  a  regalar  system  with  insurmount- 
able  barriers  can  be  referred  only  to  the  latest  period  of 
the  Yedic  times." 

2.  iur/0i/.— But,  whateyer  may  haye  been  its  origin, 
it  is  now  a  complex  and  highly  artificial  system,  multi- 
form  in  shape,  and  often  so  blended  with  the  ordinaiy 
usages  of  society  and  the  minutę  diyision  of  labor  to 
which  the  older  dyilizations  tend,  that  it  is  yeiy  dilti- 
cult  to  make  a  complete  or  satisfactory  analysis  of  łt. 
A  close  inspection  of  the  census  retums  to  the  Bńtish 
goyemment  in  the  north-west  proyinccs  of  India  in 
1866  shows  that  it  is  yery  much  morę  yariable  than  was 
formerly  supposed.  Sometimes  the  minnter  diyisions 
into  classes  seems  to  follow  no  other  than  the  lines  of 
the  occupaŁions  of  the  people,  and  they  are  accortlingly 
retnmed  as  belonging  to  the  caste  of  tailors,  or  shop- 
men,  etc,  without  other  discrimination.  This  **Bluc 
boek"  thus  enrolled  morę  than  ikree  hundred  distinct 
castes  within  that  political  diyision.  There  is,  howeyer, 
after  a  generał  fashion,  a  maintenance  of  the  generał 
dassifications,  as  (1)  Brahmmi,  (2)  KihattriyaM,  (8)  Va- 
ishyaSf  and  (4)  Sudra  f  bdow  which  is  a  yet  morę  de- 
based  class,  (5)  known  as  Pariahi,  or  outcasts,  to  be 
found  in  all  portions  of  the  country.  The  four  greater 
castes  aboye  named  answer  to  priestly,  warrior,  agńcul- 
tural,  and  artisan,  or  sen-ant  classes.  We  notę  in  this 
census  return  hereditary  priests,  rope-dancers,  Rweepen, 
dephant-driyers,  turban-winders,  ear-picrcers  and  clcan- 
ers,  charmers,  makers  of  crowns  for  idols,  and  eyen  he- 
reditar>'  beggars  and  common  blackguards. 

3.  i?«/i».— These  castes  are  all  hereditar\',  the  son  al- 
ways  following  tho  occnpation  of  the  father,  howeyer 
oyerburdened  some  departments  of  occnpation  may  be- 
come  by  the  aocidents  of  birth.  No  classes  exoept 
the  highest  Łwo  ero  assumcd  to  intermarn-,  and  all  es- 
chew  contact  with  a  lower  dass.  They  do  not  eat  to- 
gether,  nor  cook  for  nor  senre  food  to  each  other.  This 
difllike  of  contact  exten<ls  to  thdr  yessels  and  other 
utensils.  The  usages,  howeyer,  seem  often  arbitnury. 
Smoking  from  the  bowl  of  another*s  pipę  may  not  be  an 
offeuce  if  one  can  make  a  stem  of  his  iist,  but  the  stem 
or  snake  of  the  pipę  must  not  be  toucheil,  or  it  is  ren- 
dered  worthless  to  all  parties.  It  is  in  accordance  with 
caste  requirement  that  brass  or  copper  utensils  shouM 
be  moyed  from  place  to  place,  but  an  earthen  yessd 
once  used  for  cooked  food  or  water  must  not  be  trans- 
ported  to  another  locality.  Loads  may  be  carrie<l  on 
the  head  by  some  castes,  on  the  back  by  some,  and  not 
at  all  by  others.  The  poorest  Hindu  family  do  not 
wash  their  own  dothes,  yet  the  loin-doth  must  always 
be  washcd  by  the  wearer  of  it,  If  a  Hindu  wero  touch- 
ed  by  a  man  of  an  inferior  caste  while  eating,  be  woidd 
not  only  throw  away  all  the  food  he  had  cooked,  but 
would  eyen  spit  out  what  might  chance  to  be  in  his 
mouth  at  the  instant. 

The  accumulation  of  motiye  for  the  preser\*ation  of 
caste  purity  is  astounding.  The  slightest  yariation 
from  custom  is  at  once  yisited  with  puuishment  or  fines, 
while  the  grayer  offenocs  become  the  ground  of  expul- 
sion  literally  from  all  human  society,  and  of  disabilitics 
in  business  and  disinheritance ;  and,  bdieying  in  anccs- 
tor  worship  as  the  Hindu  does,  and  that  the  happineas 
of  his  departed  relatiyes  is  dependent  on  his  performing 
the  nume8y  the  additional  curse  oomes  upon  him  of  bdng 
disabled  from  performing  these  ceremonics  because  of 
caste  impurity. 

4.  EffecU^—lh»  caste  policy  of  India  checks  genius, 
yet  as  from  the  first  the  indiyidual  knows  what  his  life- 
business  is  to  be,  he  pursues  it,  and  attains  a  skill  in 
handicraft  unequidled.  The  Indian  system  tends  likc- 
wise  to  giye  permanence  to  institutions,  but  it  unfor- 
tunately  perpetuates  e\'ils  also.  It  has  been  the  great 
hinderance  to  all  progress,  ciyil,  political,  rcligious,  or 
Bocial,  and  has  preseutcd  the  greatest  obstades  to  tho 


INDIANS 


558 


INDIANS 


progrose  of  Christianity.  The  niłriMds  and  other  Eu- 
lopean  coDYeniences  haye  by  some  been  looked  upon 
aa  likely  to  make  great  innoyationa  on  castfr-iuage. 
There  is  alieady  a  liuge  and  well^-oiganized  portion  of 
the  popolation  known  as  Brahmiata  who  wh,olly  ignore 
caatea.    See  Hindus,  Modern. 

There  is  much  less  of  caste  obeervanoe  among  what 
is  considered  to  be  an  older  popcdation  than  the  Hindu, 
such  as  the  people  inhabitlng  the  Himalaya  Monntains, 
and  the  **  wild  tribes"  of  Central  India. 

See  Muir'8  SamkrU  TextSj  voL  i  (Lond.  1868) ;  Cole- 
brook's  Misoellaneouś  Et$ayai  Wilson*B  7VafuŁ  Yislmu 
Purdna  ;  Muller,  Chipt,  ii,  295  Bq.    (J.  T.  G.) 

Indiana,  Ambbican.  Under  this  title  may  be  in- 
claded  all  the  semi-^vi]ized  and  wild  tribes  of  North 
and  South  America,  ńnce  the  most  ihonragh  inyeatiga- 
tion  shows  that  they  were  substantially  the  same  peo- 
ple. In  coUating  information  conceming  the  Indian 
thought,  it  is  important  to  distingaish  between  the  forms 
it  assamed  before  and  after  oontact  with  Emopeans. 

1.  Sowces  of  Knowlodge, — Notwithstanding  the  pro- 
yerblal  tacitumity  of  the  North-American  Indiana,  Bome 
Information  has  been  elidted  by  orał  commnnication. 
Many  of  the  tribes,  alao,  haye  a  species  of  records  for 
their  traditiona.  In  iome  instances  these  eeem  to  be  lit- 
tle  moie  than  mnemonio  signs,  madę  on  their  skios,  tents, 
cktthing,  mata,  and  rocks;  but  in  others,  as  in  Mexicoy 
we  find  a  senes  of  symbols  which  are  a  apedes  of  idio- 
graphic  writing,  wherein  signs  stand  for  ideas,  as  the 
Arabie  numerals  do  with  us.  Besides  these  there  most 
haye  existed  in  some  localities  a  phonetic  alphabet  prior 
to  the  coming  of  the  white  man.  The  only  one  knonm, 
howeyer,  is  found  with  the  Mayas,  resident  in  the  pe- 
ninsula  of  Yux:atan.     It  had  **  a  well-understood  alpha- 

•  bet  of  twcnty-seycu  elementary  sounds,  the  letters  of 
which  are  totally  different  from  those  of  any  other  na- 
tion,  and  eyidently  original  with  themselyes." 

2.  Oriffou — Much  has  been  written  on  the  origin  of 
the  Indian  tribes,  and  their  probable  connection  with 
the  people  of  the  Old  World.  Hardwick  says,  "If  no 
ray  of  light  whateyer  coiild  be  throMm  upon  the  ques- 
tions  which  conoem  the  primitiye  populations  of  Amer- 
ica;  if  no  analogy  to  the  case  had  esisted  in  the  spread 
of  the  Malayo-Polynesian  tribes  across  the  islands  of 
the  Easteni  Archipehigo  and  the  Pacific  Ocean ;  if  the 
speech  of  the  Americans  had  abśolutely  no  afiinities 
with  other  human  dial^ts;  if  their  traditiona,  meagre 
as  these  are,  hinted  nothing  of  a  distant  home  and  of  a 
periloos  migration ;  if  insoluble  enigmas  wcre  presented 
by  the  physlcal  structure  of  the  Americans,  or  if  their 
morał  powers  and  mental  capacities  were  soch  as  to  ex- 
clude  them  from  a  place  in  the  great  brotherhood  of 
men ;  if,  lasŁly,  no  resemblanoe  were  found,  I  will  not 
aay  in  primary  articles  of  belief,  but  in  the  memory  of 
specific  incidents,  and  in  those  minor  forms  of  human 
thought  and  culture  which  will  hardly  bear  to  be  ex- 
plained  on  the  hypothems  of  *natural  eyolution.'  we 
might  thcn,  perhaps,  haye  cause  to  hesitate  in  our  deci- 
sion"  (Christ  and  other  Afasterśy  ii,  120  są.).  There  is 
literally  nothing,  according  to  our  ablcst  writers,  eithcr 

•  in  the  bodily  structure  or  psychology  of  the  American 
tribes  to  prove  an  independent  origin,  or  eyen  to  beget 
suspicions  touching  a  plurality  of  races;  while,  accord- 
ing to  Mr.  Sąuier,  of  the  worda  known  to  haye  been  in 
use  in  America  one  hundred  and  four  coincide  with 
words  found  in  the  languages  of  Asia  and  Australia, 
forty-three  with  those  of  Europę,  and  forty  with  those 
of  Africa.  In  addition,  howeyer,  to  the  migration  sug- 
gested  by  the  aboye  ąuotations,  two  circumstances  seera 
to  point  most  clearly  to  a  connection  of  our  aboriginai 
Indians  with  the  Malay.  Mongoł,  or  Tartar  race :  1.  The 
monosyllabic  character  of  their  languages;  and,  2.  The 
obyious  similarity  in  complexion  and  generał  physical 
oonstitution.  Tłie  case  of  the  Aztecs,  moreoyer,  to  say 
nothing  of  the  Mexicans  and  Peroyians,  indicates  a  de- 
generacy  from  an  earlier  clvi]ization,  like  tliat  of  the 
Chinese  and  Japanese. 


8.  Le^endi^— The  Indian  inyths  of  the  creatitm,  tka 
delnge,  the  epochs  of  naturę,  and  the  last  day,  are  na- 
merous  and  elear,  although  it  seems  morę  difficuit  to 
aaoertain  here  what  does  and  wlial^doea  not  antedate 
European  influence.  **  Before  the  creafcioo,"  taid  the 
Mnaoogees,  **a  great  body  of  water  was  alone  yiaibk. 
Two  pigeons  flew  to  and  fro  oyer  its  wayea,  and  at  last 
spied  a  Uade  of  grass  rising  aboye  the  aurfaoe.  Dry 
land  gradually  foltowed,  and  the  tslands  and  continents 
took  their  preaent  shape&" 

Many  of  the  tribes  traee  their  desoent  from  a  Tayeii,% 
**B.  mighty  bird,  whoee  eyes  were  fire,  whoae  glances 
were  lightning,  and  the  dapińng  of  whose  wings  was 
thunder.  On  his  descent  to  the  ocean  the  earth  mstaat- 
ly  rosę,  and  remained  on  the  aurface  of  the  water.  Tbii 
omnipotent  łńrd  then  ealled  forth  all  the  yariety  of  ani- 
mal&'*  The  early  Algonąuin  legenda  do  not  speak  of 
any  famUy  who  escaped  the  deluge,  nor  did  the  Dako- 
tas,  who  firmly  belieyed  the  world  had  been  destrored 
by  water.  Generally,  howeyer,  the  legenda  madę  some 
to  haye  escaped  by  ascending  some  mountain,  on  a  r^ 
or  canoe,  in  a  caye,  or  by  elimbing  a  tree.  The  pyra- 
mids  of  Chołula,  the  mounds  of  the  Mjssłssippi  Yalłey, 
the  yast  and  ełaborate  edifioes  in  the  artificial  hifls  of 
Yucatan,  would  seem  to  haye  direct  leference  to  the 
hiłl  on  which  the  anoestors  of  tliese  people  escaped  in 
past  deluges,  or  from  the  realm  of  raine,  ealled  the  HiB 
of  Heayen.  They  mostly  make  the  last  destruction  of 
the  world  to  haye  been  by  water,  though  some  few  iq^ 
resent  it  to  haye  been  by  fire. 

4.  Reliffioiu  Beliefs.—'lt  is  genendly  beliered  that 
all  appToximations  to  monotheism  obsenred  among  the 
trilws  of  the  New  World  are  little  roore  than  yerbaL 
Their  ''Great  Spirit,"  as  the  phrase  stands  among  £n- 
ropeans,  is  at  best  the  highest  member  of  a  group  of 
spirits.  He  may  be  a  personification  of  the  mighciest 
of  all  natural  energies,  bat  not  a  personality  distinct 
from  naturę,  and  controlling  all  things  by  his  sorereign 
will.  He  is  deyoid  of  almost  eyerything  which  eonsti- 
tutes  the  glory  of  the  God  of  reyełation.  In  sfMCc  of 
whateyer  grandeur,  gooduess,  or  ubiąuity  he  may  be 
endowed  with,  he  exerci8es  no  oontrol  oyer  the  liyes  of 
indiyiduals  or  the  goyemment  of  tlie  worid.  **  There  is 
no  attempt,"  says  itr.  Schoolcraft,'*by  the  hunter-priest- 
hood,  juggteis,  or  powwowa,  which  can  be  gathered  from 
their  orał  tradition,  to  impute  to  the  great,  mercifol 
Spirit  the  attribute  of  jostice,  or  to  make  man  nccount- 
able  to  him  here  or  hereafber  for  abemtioDa  tnm  yirtue, 
good-^vill,  tmth,  or  any  morał  right**  (Red  Baceś). 
Their  ideas  of  God  haye  been  almost  excfaaiyely  found 
to  be  connected  with  some  natural  phenomena,  and  the 
almost  ]x>eŁic  way  in  which  they  look  at  it  anggests 
that  much  of  their  retigious  thotight  receiyed  oompiex- 
ion  from  their  hunter-life.  For  the  most  part,  tłior 
conceptions  of  deity  seem  to  liaye  been  connected  with 
the  phenomena  of  the  meteorołogical  or  atmosplieric 
world,  and  with  their  obaeryations  conceming  ligfat  and 
fire.  The  highest  good  is  generally  symbolised  as  the 
storm-god  or  the  sun-god,  these  being  sometimes  błend- 
ed  and  soroetimes  distinct.  We  may  see  an  illostration 
of  them  as  united  in  their  adoration  of  the  four  cardi- 
nał  pointa  of  the  compass,  and  in  their  notions  of  the 
sacred  four  łńrds,  four  mothers,  or  four  primitiye  brotli- 
en,  the  progenitors  of  the  hnman  fiimiły.  Their  high- 
est deity  is  always  their  highest  ideał  of  oiWlization  and 
of  the  arts  of  peaoe,  and  to  him  they  always  aocord  the 
better  attributes  of  mankind.  The  god  of  light  is  often 
spoken  of  as  the  founder  of  the  natkm,  sometimes  ms  ita 
progcnitor.  or  introducing  arts,  scienoes,  and  lawa,  and 
as  haying  led  them  in  their  eariiest  wanderings.  The 
sun-god  ii  the  dispenserof  all  radionce  and  fertility,  the 
being  by  whose  light  and  heat  all  creatares  were  gener- 
ated  and  sostained,  the  highest  pttchofexoeUenoe;  and 
eyen  when  transformed  into  a  god  of  l>attle,  and  wor- 
shipped  %vith  horrid  and  inoongmoos  ritea,  or  fed  by 
hiunan  hecatomiM,  he  neyer  oeaaed  to  oooupy  the  Ibre- 
most  rank  among  the  good  diyinities^    He  was  ever  the 


INDIAN8 


659 


INDIANS 


''fcŁher,"  ''sostainer,"  MieWyKSer.**  MttOer  mtintains 
that  there  were  ntimeioiis  suborditiAte  hostiłe  deities, 
who  created  disoord,  ńckneas,  death,  and  ereiy  posńble 
fonn  of  cvi],  and  tbat  in  many  caaes  Łhese  ^vere  repnted 
to  be  nnder  the  kadenhip  of  the  moon,  whkh  was  the 
porent  of  miafortone  with  aome,  and  yet  was  the  chief  di- 
rinity  of  other  of  the  waztike  raoes,  sach  aa  the  Garibe. 
The  Jfcmito  or  McaUdo  is  alleged  to  have  no  penonal 
meaning,  but  to  be  eqaivalent  to  *^ spiiit,"  or  ''a  spirit," 
perhaps  aomewhat  akin  to  our  thought  of  a  guardian 
spint.  Schoolciaft  thinks  that,  so  far  as  a  meaning  dis- 
ttnct  from  an  inrisible  existenoe  attaches  to  it  at  all,  the 
tendencr  is  to  &  bad  meaning,  and  that  a  bad  meaning 
is  distińctly  conveyed  in  the  inflection  ath  ot  igh  {Red 
Ra<xMj  p.  214).  In  conaidering  this  belief  in  manUot  it 
is  neceasary  to  lemember  that  the  Indian  conceires  ev- 
ery  department  of  the  unirene  to  be  filled  with  inrisi- 
ble  spirits,  holding  the  same  relation  to  matter  that  the 
soul  does  to  the  body,  and  in  accordąnoe  with  which,  not 
only  eveiy  man,  bat  every  animal,  has  a  soul,  and  is  en- 
dowed  with  &  reasoning  faculty.  Dreams  are  a  means 
of  direct  commnnication  with  the  spiritual  world,  and 
are  generally  regarded  as  the  friendly  wamings  of  their 
penonal  numitos.  Ko  labor  or  enterprise  is  undertaken 
against  their  indications,  whole  armies  being  sometimes 
tnmed  back  by  dreams  of  the  ofHciating  priesL  Under 
the  guidance  of  a  particular  spirit,  iiames  are  commonly 
aopposed  to  be  bestowed.  These  personal  spirits  are 
inroked  to  gire  saccess  in  huntlng.  These  manitos  are, 
howerer,  of  raried  ability,  and  there  is  a  constant  fear 
lest  the  manito  of  a  neighbor  may  prove  morę  powerful 
than  ofie*8  own. 

The  mythological  personages  who  are  the  heroea  of 
Indian  tales,  and  who  are  in  some  way  aseociated  with 
the  highest  good,  as  set  forth  above,  may  be  represented 
by  Jłichabo  or  Manibozho  of  the  Algonąuins,  and  Quet- 
zćUeoatl,  the  god  of  the  air,  the  highest  deity  of  the  Tol- 
teca.  The  same  deity  apfiears  with  morę  or  less  of 
modification  among  all  the  tribes,  thoagh  nnder  yarioos 
names.  It  is  Itokeha  among  the  Iroąuois,  Wasi  among 
the  Cherokees,  Tamoi  with  the  Caribs,  Zanrna  with 
the  Mayas,  Kemcuet^Ki  with  the  Muyscas,  Yiraco- 
cha  among  the  Aymann,  etc.  Among  them  all  he  ap- 
pears  as  the  one  who  taught  them  agriculture,  the  art 
ci  pictore-writing,  the  properties  of  plants,  and  the  se- 
cieCa  of  magie;  who  founded  their  institutions,  estab- 
lisbed  their  religions,  and  taught  them  goremment 

There  were  presentiments  of  a  better  time  to  como 
connected  with  the  return  of  these  heroes  of  their  tales, 
which  it  is  thought  had  much  to  do  with  the  sudden 
coOapse  of  the  great  empires  of  Mcxico  and  Peru,  of  the 
Natchez  and  the  Mayas  before  the  Spaniaids.  Associ- 
ated in  their  legends  with  the  return  of  their  gods  and 
tbe  better  time  was,  in  most  cases,  the  notion  of  the 
ooming  of  a  white  man  of  superior  strength  from  the 
iatber  of  the  sun. 

Sl  Tbe  Soul  and  a  futurę  Life.—The  immortality  of 
the  human  soul  is  unirersally  beliered  by  the  North- 
American  Indian& 

Among  all  the  tribes  soul  is  eąuiralent  to  breath,  or 
tlie  wind.  The  same  person  may  hare  morę  Ihan  one 
aool ;  some  say  four,  and  others  even  morę  than  thls 
nnmber.  Genendly,  howerer,  there  is  some  distinction 
madę  in  these  souls.  One  may  remain  with  the  body, 
being  attached  to  its  earthly  functions,  and  is  abeorbed 
in  the  elements,  while  another  soul  may  pass  away  to 
the  "Happy  Hunting-gronndsf  or,  in  other  cases,  one 
may  watch  the  body,  one  wander  about  the  world,  one 
hoT-er  about  the  yiUage,  and  another  go  to  the  spirit 
land.  According  to  an  author  quoted  by  Mr.  Brinton, 
ceitain  Orcgon  tribes  located  a  spirit  **whenever  they 
eould  detect  a  pulsation,''  the  supremę  one  being  in  the 
heart,  and  which  alone  would  go  to  the  skies  at  death. 

Among  an  the  tribes,  from  the  Arctic  region  to  the 
trofpics,  the  abode  of  the  departed  soul  is  declared  to  be 
where  the  highest  good,  L  e.  where  light  comes  ftom,  or, 
in  olha  wo^  in  the  son-realm.    Henee  the  soul  is 


Tarioody  aaid  to  go  at  death  towards  the  east,  or  to- 
wards  the  west,  the  place  of  the  coming  or  departuro  of 
the  light,  or  among  some  northem  tribes,  to  whom  the 
sun  lay  in  a  southem  direction,  the  soul  is  said  to  go  to- 
wards the  south.  It  is  in  this  realm  of  light  or  sphero 
of  the  sun-god  that  this  permanent  soul  iinds  its  ulti- 
mate  home.  **  Spirituality  is  clogged  with  earthly  ac- 
cidents  eren  in  the  futurę  world.  The  soul  hungers, 
and  food  must  be  deposited  at  the  grave  to  supply  its 
ueed.  It  sufPers  from  oold,  and  the  body  must  be  ^Tap- 
ped  about  with  dothes.  It  is  in  darkness,  and  a  light 
must  be  kindled  at  the  head  of  the  grare.  It  wanders 
through  plains  and  across  streams,  subject  to  the  ricis- 
atudes  of  this  life,  in  quest  of  a  place  of  enjoyment. 
Among  some  northem  tribes  a  dog  was  slain  on  the 
graye,  and  there  are  indications  of  a  like  practice  hav- 
ing  obtained  in  Mexico  and  Peru."  In  other  localities, 
and  where  the  goremment  was  despotic,  not  only  ani- 
mals,  but  men,  women,  and  children  were  often  sacri- 
flced  at  the  tomb  of  the  **  caciąue."  lliere  are  tracea 
of  this  on  the  Lower  Mississłppi.  Among  the  Natchez 
Indians,  when  a  chief  dicd,  "one  or  sereral  of  his  wirea 
and  his  highest  officers  were  knocked  on  the  head,  and 
buried  with  him.**  There  is  the  belief  among  many  of 
them  that  the  soul  needs  light,  particidarly  for  four 
nights  or  days  after  death,  as  it  Ib  either  conilned  in  the 
body,  or  "  wandering  orer  a  gloomr  marsh,*"  or  in  some 
other  perplexiŁy  which  prerents  its  ascending  to  the 
skies.  The  natires  of  the  extreme  south,  of  the  Pampaa 
and  the  Patagonians,  suppose  the  stan  to  be  the  souls 
of  the  departed. 

According  to  some,  there  is  but  little  tracę,  if  any,  of 
a  dcar  conccption  of  a  system  of  rewards  and  punish- 
ments,  as  there  certaitily  do  not  seem  to  hare  been  rery 
elear  distinctions  betwcen  rice  and  ^drtuc,  as  in  anj^^ńse 
related  to  a  futurę  world.  The  difference  Iwtw-ecn  the 
sours  comfort  and  discomfort  in  a  fiiture  life,  in  so  far 
as  it  is  madę  a  matter  of  degree  at  all,  was  madę  to  de- 
pend,  as  in  the  Mexican  mythology,  on  the  modę  of 
death.  Women  dying  in  chiMbirth  were  asBoctsŁcd  in 
the  categoty  of  worth  and  merited  happiness  with  war- 
riors  dying  in  battle.  In  Guatcmala  a  riolent  death 
in  any  shape  was  snfiicient  to  banish,  in  aflcr-life,  from 
the  felicitous  regions.  The  Brazilian  natires  dirided 
the  dead  into  classcs,  making  those  drowned,  or  killed 
by  yiolence,  or  yielding  to  disease,  to  go  into  separate 
regions;  but  there  seems  to  be  no  reason  founded  in 
morals  connected  with  this.  It  is  but  jest  to  say  that 
others  take  a  diiferent  riew  of  this  part  of  the  subject 
from  that  here  set  foith.  The  abbe  Em.  Domenech,  who 
spent  seren  years  among  these  tribes,  gires  traditions 
which  faror  the  doctrine  of  futurę  rewards  and  pua- 
ishmentB  for  the  good  or  bad  dceds  of  this  life  (p.  288). 
Other  tribes,  howerer,  seem  to  know  nothing  ofpumsk- 
ments,  The  Master  of  Life,  or  Merciful  Spirit,  will  be  alike 
merdful  to  all,  irrespectire  of  the  acts  of  this  life,  or  of 
any  degree  of  morał  turpitude.  They  see  nowhere  elear 
conceptions  of  rirtue  and  rice  cren  in  this  world.  Sin, 
they  say,  łs  only  represented  at  worst  as  a  metaphorical 
going  astray,  as  of  one  who  loses  his  path  in  the  woods, 
though  this  may  suggest  much  morę  than  this  class  of 
penons  admit  That  there  is  a  morał  sentiment  is  ad- 
mitted  in  connection  with  their  ciril  and  social  life,  but 
not  as  connected  with  their  futurę  state.  Their  pray- 
ers  are  almoet  wholly  for  tem|)ora],  and  not  for  mond 
blessings;  but  there  may  be  found  an  assumption  of 
morał  ąualities  or  ethical  character  in  connection  with 
their  gods,  as  in  the  case  of  Quetzalcoatl  abore  alluded 
to,  who  is  the  founder  of  their  ciril  codę,  and  who  insti- 
tuted  the  household,  iustilled  patriotism,  etc.  The  Mex- 
icans  had  another  place  for  the  souls  of  those  dying  by 
lightning-stroke,  dropsies,  leprosies,  etc,  who  could  not 
go  to  the  home  of  the  sun,  but  who  must  go  to  the  realm 
of  the  god  of  the  rains  and  watera,  called  Tlalocan. 

There  are  indications  of  the  doctrine  of  metempsyeko- 
siSf  and  alao  of  the  doctrine  of  the  resurrection  of  the 
dead.    The  vast  tumuli,  though  they  were  not  all  eon- 


INDIANS 


560 


INDIANS 


nected  with  foneral  rites,  are  summonod  m  testimony 
of  this  doctrine.  The  custom  of  collecŁing  and  deaiu- 
ing  the  bones — usually  once  in  eight  or  ten  years — of 
those  who  had  died  in  Łhe  tribe,  and  then  burying  Łhem 
in  a  common  sepulchre  ^'lined  with  choice  fura,  and 
marked  with  a  mound  of  wood,  stonce  or  earth,"  was 
common  east  of  the  Mississippi.  This  bas  bcen  sup- 
posed  to  be  connected  with  the  theory  that  a  part  of  the 
soul,  or  one  of  the  souls,  dwelt  in  the  bones,  and  that 
Łhese  seed-souls,  so  to  speak,  would  one  day  germinate 
into  ]iving  human  beings.  Parts  of  their  mythology 
afibrd  support  to  such  a  supposition.  An  Aztec  legend 
is  to  the  effect  that  when  the  human  species  had  been 
destroyed  from  off  the  face  of  the  world,  it  was  restored 
'  by  one  of  the  gods  descending  to  the  reidm  of  the  dead, 
and  bringing  thence  a  bonę  of  the  perished  lace,  which 
they  sprinkled  with  blood,  and  on  the  fourth  day  it  be- 
came  a  youth,  the  father  of  the  present  race. 

6.  Funeral  RUes, — The  mounds  used  for  funeral  ser- 
yices  are  found,  for  the  most  part,  within  walls  of  in- 
trenched  camps  and  fortitied  towns.  On  the  top  of  these 
tumuli  are  altars  of  baked  clay  or  stone,  vaiying  in 
length  from  a  few  inches  to  many  yards.  The  mounds 
are  found  in  very  large  numbers,  and  have  an  average 
beight  of  eight  or  ten  yards,  being  usually  in  the  form 
of  a  simple  cone,  or  of  a  pear  or  cgg.  The  dead  were 
frequently  bunied  before  they  wero  buried,  funeral  ums 
having  often  been  discovere<l,  as  also  beds  of  charcoaL 
With  the  dead  were  gcnerally  interred  the  omamenta, 
arms,  and  other  objects  belonging  to  them  during  life. 
The  mounds  sometimes  contain  silver,  brass,  stone,  or 
bonc,  beads,  shells,  pieces  of  8ilex,  quartz,  gamet,  points 
of  arrows,  fossil  teeth  of  sharks,  sculptures  of  human 
heads,  pottery,  etc  The  customs  observed  in  the  burial 
of  their  dead  diflfer  in  the  different  tribes.  They  all, 
howerer,  paint  the  oorpse  black.  The  feet  of  the  corpees 
are  tumed  to  the  riidng  sun.  The  Omahas  swathe  the 
bodics  with  bandages  madę  of  skins,  and  place  them  on 
the  branches  of  a  tree,  with  a  wooden  vase  filled  with 
dricd  mcat  by  their  side,  which  is  renewed  from  time  to 
time.  The  Sioux  bury  their  dead  on  the  summit  of  a 
hUl  or  mountain,  and  plant  on  the  tomb  a  cedar-tree, 
which  may  be  seen  from  a  distance.  The  Chinooks 
WTap  the  bodies  of  their  dead  in  skins,  bind  their  eyes, 
put  little  shells  in  their  nostrils,  and  dress  them  in  most 
beautiful  clothes,  and  then  place  them  in  a  canoe,  which 
b  allowed  to  drift  on  a  lakę,  or  rivcr,  or  the  Pacific 
Ocean.  The  Shoshones  bum  their  dead,  with  every- 
thing  belonging  to  them.  Among  oŁheic  tribes  of  the 
West  the  warriors  are  buried  on  horseback,  with  bow, 
and  buckler,  and  quiver,  and  pipę,  and  medicine-bag, 
tobacco,  and  dried  meats.  The  Assiniboins  suspend 
their  dead  by  thongs  of  leather  between  the  branches 
of  great  trees,  or  place  them  on  high  scaffoldings,  to 
keep  them  from  wild  animals.  The  Ottawas  sacriflce  a 
horse  on  the  tomb  of  the  dead,  strangling  the  animal  by 
a  noose.  When  a  tribe  emigrate,  they  cany  with  them, 
if  possible,  the  bones  of  their  dead  which  have  been  pre- 
senred,  or  bury  them  in  a  cave,  or  hiU,  or  wood. 

7.  ReUffious  Usctffes,  —  The  Indiana  are  alleged  by 
Domenech  to  have  had  a  few  customs  not  wholly  unlike 
Bome  which  obtained  among  the  Jews.  They  have 
some  feasts  at  which  they  are  obliged  to  eat  all  that 
has  been  prcpared  for  the  banąuet,  They  observe  a 
feast  of  first-fruits,  and  have  some  forbiddeu  meats,  re- 
garding  some  animals  as  impure.  They  obsenre  the 
custom  of  sacrificing  the  first  animal  killed  on  the  open- 
ing  of  great  hunts,  the  animal  being  entirely  eaten. 
They  carry  amulets  under  the  name  of  medicine-bags, 
and  accord  a  subordinate  species  of  worship  to  idols  of 
stone,  wood,  or  baked  clay.  The  amulets,  lucky  Stones, 
and  charms  cxistcd  everywhere,  and  were  a  chief  ob- 
Ject  of  barter.  In  Yucatan  and  Pem  pilgrimages  to  sa- 
cred  shrincs  were  so  common  as  that,  in  some  instances, 
*^  roads  pavcd  with  cut  stones"*  were  constmcted  to  facil- 
itate  the  attcndancc  on  certaiu  temples,  and  houses  of 
oatertainment  constructed  along  the  way. 


The  priesthood  of  the  oonntiy  has  been  ooiuideRd  liy 
those  long  familiar  with  the  subject  to  have  done  mait 
than  any  other  agency  to  keep  these  tribes  from  beoom- 
ing  civilized.  They  are  ofUn  spoken  of  as  medidne- 
men,  and  are  yaiiously  styled  by  the  Algonąuins  and 
Dakotas  'Hhose  knowing  dirine  thinga,**  *^dreaiDen  of 
the  gods;"  in  Mexico,  *^  mastera  or  guaidiana  of  the  di. 
vine  things;**  in  Cherokee  their  title  means  "poseesKd 
of  the  divine  fire ;"  in  Iroquois,  '^keepen  of  the  faiib;* 
in  Quichua,  *'the  leamed;"  in  Maya,  *'the  listenen." 
As  medidne-men,  they  tńed  to  frighten  the  dsmon 
that  possessed  the  patient;  sucked  and  blew  npon  tbe 
diseased  organ,  sprinkled  it  with  water,  lubbed  tbe 
parts  with  their  hands,  and  madę  an  image  lepreaenta- 
tive  of  the  spirit  of  sickneas,  and  knocked  it  to  pieoea. 
They  were  much  skilled  in  tricks  of  legerdemain,  aet- 
ting  fire  to  articles  of  dothing  and  instantly  extingaisb- 
ing  the  flames  by  magie  They  summoned  spiiiu  to 
answer  ąnestions  about  the  futurę,  and  possessed  diir- 
Yoyant  powers;  and  they  were  reputed  to  be  even  abk 
to  raise  the  dead.  They  consecrated  amulets,  intei^ 
preted  dreams,  cast  horoscopes,  rehearsed  legenda,  per- 
formed  sacrifices,  and,  in  short,  constituted  tbe  chkf 
centrę  of  the  intellectual  force  of  the  people.  They  tie 
thus  a  kind  of  priests,  doctors,  and  charlatans,  who  per- 
form  penance,  and  submit  to  mutilation,  iasting,  and 
self-mortification.  They  observe  with  minutę  atienticn 
the  shape  and  color  of  the  douds,  thdr  yolume  and  di- 
rection,  and  their  position  rdatiydy  to  the  sun  and  ho- 
rizon.  Camirorous  birds  are  considered  precunors  of 
war;  their  flight  indicates  the  time  and  place  at  which 
futurę  battles  will  be  fought;  they  go  to  and  fro  cany- 
ing  messages  for  the  spirit  of  battie.  The  pńest  is  par- 
ticulaily  important  in  the  oeremony  which  is  neceasaiy 
to  secure  rain.  The  medicine  lodge  is  used  for  nearly 
all  oeremonies. 

8.  Present  Location  and  Nuwiben* — The  laige  pcopor- 
tion  of  the  Indians  of  the  United  States  are  uow  gath- 
ered  within  the  Indian  Teiritoiy,  on  "Besenratiras'*  as- 
signed  them  by  the  United-States  goyemment.  There 
are  others,  however,  in  Oregou,  Alaska,  New  Mexico, 
etc  Within  the  Indian  Tenitory  they  do  not  "lirę  by 
fishing,  hunting,  and  trapping,  but  culdyate  the  soil,  ara 
settled,  and  faave  attained  a  considerable  degree  and 
shown  a  susceptibility  of  genuine  dWlization." 

From  the  Second  Annual  Report  of  the  Board  of  In- 
dian Comroissioners  (United-States  goyemment),  1870, 
we  collect  the  foUowing  statistics.  There  are  of  tbe 
yańous  tribes  within  the  Indian  Territoiy,  Choctaws, 
16,000;  Cherokeea,  17,000;  Muscogees  or  Creeks,  13,000; 
Seminoles,  2500 ;  Chickasaws,  6000 ;  Osages,  4000 ;  Pe- 
orias,  170;  Ottawas,  175;  Sacs  and  Foxe9,  700;  Qua- 
paws,  286.  Of  the  Apaches  of  Arizona  and  New  Mex- 
ico  there  are  14,349,  and  of  a  group  of  tribes  in  Oi^gon 
837.  No  statistics  of  the  Onddas  in  AYisconsin  are  giv- 
en.  For  the  work  of  the  missionaiy  sodeties  amongst 
these  Indians,  see  Missions. 

9.  Ziteramr^.— Brinton,  M^hs  of  New  World  (N.  Y. 
1868) ;  Waitz,  AnthropologU  der Natur-Yolker  (Ldpzig, 
1862-66) ;  Catlin, N,Ani, Indkau  (Lond.  1841) ;  Mttllcr, 
Gesck,  der  AmerikanUchm  Ur-religionen  (Besel,  1855); 
Sąuier,  The  Serpent  Symbol  of  America  (N.York,  1851); 
Hawking,  Sketch  of  the  Creek  Country  (Georgia  Hu4. 
Soc  1848) ;  Schoolcrail,  Red  Bacet  of  America  (K.  Y. 
1847) ;  Notes  on  the  Iroquai»  (Albany,  1848) ;  //u^.  atd 
Statisł,  Information  prepared  for  the  Indian  Burmm  of 
the  U,  S,  Goremment  (Philad.  1851);  Domenech,  .5^mi 
Years'  Residence  «n  the  great  Deserts  ofNorth  Anmica 
(London,  1860, 2  yols.  8vo) ;  Brainard,  A  Journal  amony 
the  Indians  (PhiladeL);  PreaooU^s  CongueU  ofMexico; 
Copway,  TraditioncU  Ilist,  ąfthe  OjUbway  Nation  (Lond. 
1850) ;  H<Coy,  Hist,  of  the  Bapt,  Indian  Missions ;  Mm 
Eastman,  Leyends  ofthe  Siour;  Bisiory  ofłhe  Catholie 
Missions  amony  the  Indian  Tribes  from  1529  to  1824  (K. 
Y.  1855) ;  Trans.  Am,  Ełhn,  Soc.  (1848) ;  RekUions  de  la 
NouveUe  France  (Quebec,  1858) ;  Mr.  Duponceaaz*s  Re- 
port to  A  mer,  PhUos.  Soc  (1819, 8yo).     (J,  T,  G.) 


INDICTIO  FESTOR.  MOBILIUM    561 


INDIFFERENnSM 


IndiotioFestdnimMobiliiim.   SeeliiDicno 

PASCIIAU& 

Indictlon  (Latin  indicUo,  a  dedaring)  ib  a  term 
which  designates  ''a  cbronological  system,  inclading  a 
drde  of  fifteen  rean :  (1)  the  Ccuarean^  used  loog  in 
France  and  Germany,  beginning  on  Sept.  24 ;  (2)  the 
C(mstanti»opoUUm,  used  in  the  East  from  the  time  of  An- 
Bstasius,  and  beginning  Sept.  1 ;  and  (8)  the  Popala  leck- 
oned  from  Jan.  1, 313.  The  Cooncil  of  Antioch,  841,  first 
gires  a  docmnentaiy  datę,  the  14th  indiction.  The  com- 
putation  prerailed  in  Syria  in  the  filth  centuiy,  and  ia 
mentioDed  by  Ambroee  as  existing  at  Romę.  It  is,  how- 
ever,  aaserted  that  in  the  West,  the  East,  and  Egypt, 
with  the  exception  of  Africa,  the  indictions,  untU  the 
16th  century,  were  reckoned  from  SepL  1, 812,  and  that 
they  commenoed  in  Egypt  in  the  time  of  Constantine." 
— Walcott,  Saertd  Arehaologyj  p.  827 ;  see  also  Gibbon, 
DtcUne  and  Fali  ofthe  Roman  Empire,  ii,  141.   See  Cr- 

CLE. 

Indictio  FaBCh&lis.  It  was  an  old  costom  in 
the  Christian  Church  of  the  early  ages  to  announce  on 
Epiphany  (q.  v.)  the  days  on  which  Easter  would  fali, 
and  this  announcement  was  called  the  Indictio  patekor 
&;  bat  aa  on  the  appointment  of  the  days  on  which 
Easter  shoold  be  obserred  dcpended  the  appointment 
of  the  morable  feaste,  this  announcement  was  called 
the  Indicdo  futorum  mobilium,  The  first  practices  of 
this  kind  we  find  in  the  Alexandrian  Church,  but  it  soon 
became  generał  throughout  the  Christian  Church,  eren 
by  ecclesiastical  enactments.  Thus  the  fourth  Synod 
at  Orleans  (ConciL  Aurtlian,  iv,  c  1)  ordered  its  obsery- 
ance,  and  even  the  fifth  Synod  at  Carthage  (A.D.  401, 
ConciL  Carthag,  v,  can.  7)  ordeied  a  written  announce- 
ment, which  was  called  Epittóla  pasckalis  et  heortastica. 
See  Binghanij  AniiquU,  Eoclesiagt,  ix,  85  8q.;  August!, 
Hcadbuch  der  ChriitL  ArchdoL  i, 544 ;  Riddle,  Christian 
A  ntiguities,  p.  687.     (J.  H.  W.) 

IndifEerenca,  Liberty  of,  a  name  sometimea  gir- 
en,  by  metaphysical  and  theological  writers,  to  the  pow- 
er  in  the  human  mind  of  cboosing  between  opposing 
modres,  or  of  resisting  or  yielding  to  a  given  motire. 
The  upholdera  of  iatalism  oonaider  this  **liberty  of  in- 
differenoe"  aa  a  chimera.  If  we  were  indifferent,  say 
they,  to  the  motives  which  determine  our  actions,  we 
shoold  either  not  act  at  all,  or  we  should  act  without 
motire,  at  hazard,  and  our  actions  would  be  effects  with- 
out cause.  But  this  is  intentionally  confounding  indif- 
ference  and  insensibility.  We  are  necessarily  sensible 
to  a  motire  when  that  motive  induces  us  to  act,  but  the 
question  at  issue  is  whether  there  is  a  neoessary  con- 
nection  between  such  a  motive  and  such  volition;  that 
is,  whether,  when  such  a  motive  induces  us  to  will  any- 
thing,  we  can  or  cannot  wUl  the  contrary  in  spite  of 
that  modre,  or  whether  we  cannot  prefer  another  mo- 
tire  to  that  by  which  we  determine  to  act.  As  soon  as 
it  is  sapposed  that  we  act  from  a  motire,  it  cannot  be 
supposed  that  this  motive  does  not  determine  us  to  act, 
ibr  the  two  supposiUons  would  oontradict  each  other: 
but  it  may  be  asked  whether,  before  any  supposidon,  our 
will  was  oonnected  with  the  modve  in  such  a  manner 
aa  to  render  a  contrary  Yolidon  impossible.  The  advo- 
cates  of  morał  liberty  maintain  that  there  is  no  physical 
OT  neceasaiy  oonnecdon  between  modves  and  voIidon, 
but  only  a  morał  oonnecdon,  wliich  does  not  prevent  our 
resisting;  in  other  words,  that  motiyes  are  the  mond, 
not  the  physical  causes  of  our  actions.  Because  we  are 
said  to  be  determined  by  a  motive,  it  does  not  follow  that 
that  modre  acts,  and  we  remaiii  passire ;  it  is  absurd 
to  sappose  that  an  acdre  faculty  like  rolition  could  be- 
come  passire  under  the  influence  of  a  modre,  or  tliat 
tlus  modre,  wliich  after  all  is  but  an  idea,  a  thonght, 
ooiild  act  upon  us  as  we  act  upon  a  body  we  put  in  mo- 
tioiL  This  metaphysical  quesdon  is  intimately  con- 
nected  with  anotlier  long  discussed  by  theologians, 
namely,  the  modę  of  action  of  grace  on  us,  and  in  whaŁ 
seue  gtaoe  is  to  be  understood  aa  being  the  cause  of 


our  acdons.  Those  who  oonsider  it  as  their  phynoal 
cause  must,  to  be  oonsistent,  suppose  the  same  rdadon 
between  grace  and  the  acdon  to  which  it  led  as  between 
any  physical  cause  and  its  effect.  As,  according  to  nat- 
ural  philosophy,  the  reladon  in  the  latter  case  is  a  nec- 
essary  one,  we  cannot  perceire  how  the  acdon  produced 
under  the  influence  of  grace  can  be  free.  For  this  resr 
son,  other  theologians  look  upon  grace  only  as  the  morał 
coMse  of  our  acdons,  and  admit  between  this  cause  and 
its  effects  only  a  morał  oonnecdon,  such  as  exi8ts  be- 
tween all  fiee  acdon  and  its  modre.  It  is,  indeed,  God 
who  acts  in  us  through  grace,  but  his  operation  is  so 
similar  to  tłuit  of  naturę  tliat  we  are  often  unable  to 
distinguish  between  them.  When  we  perform  a  good 
action  under  the  influence  of  grace — a  supematural  mo- 
tire— we  feel  as  actire,  as  free,  as  well  masters  of  ouz 
acdons  as  when  doing  it  from  a  natural  rootire,  from 
temperament  or  interest.  Why  should  we  try  to  be- 
liere  that  Grod  deoeires  our  consdousness,  acting  upon 
us  as  though  he  leil  us  free,  while  in  rcality  he  does 
not?  Consciousness  testifies  to  us  that  we  can  resist 
grace  as  readily  as  we  resist  our  natural  tastes  and  in- 
dinadons.  Thus  the  testimony  of  oonscience,  that  we 
are  entireły  free  under  the  influence  of  grace,  is  com- 
plete.  Let  us  not  foiget  the  saying  of  St,  Augustine, 
that  grace  was  giren  us,  not  to  destroy,  but  to  restore 
our  free  agency.  The  Pelagians  erred  in  defining  free 
agency  to  be  indiffercnce  towards  good  and  eril;  they 
understood  by  this  an  equał  incłiuadon  to  either,  an 
eąual  faciUty  for  cboosing  right  or  wrong  (St  Augus- 
tine, Op,  in^,  I  3,  n.  109, 110, 117 ;  Letter  of  S,  Prosper, 
n.  4).  They  conduded  from  this  that  if  grace  destroyed 
this  indifference,  it  would  thereby  destroy  free  agency. 
St.  Augustine  correctly  affirms,  in  oppoeition,  that  in 
conseąuence  of  Adamus  sin  noan  is  morę  indined  to  eril 
than  to  good,  and  that  he  needs  grace  to  restore  the 
equilibrium.  Those  who  accused  St.  Augustine  of  dis- 
regarding  free  will  in  maintaining  the  neoessity  of  grace, 
misunderstood  his  doctrine  as  much  as  the  Pelagians. — 
Bergier,  Diet,  de  Tkeologie,  iii,  894  sq.  (Comp.  Barrow, 
Worksy  u,  47;  Palmer,  Church  of  Christ,  i,  262^58,  821 
są.)     See  WiLU 

Zndifferentism  (indUparetUismus),  a  word  much 
used 

I.  By  the  theologians  of  Germany  to  denote  (1.)  that 
State  of  mind  which  looks  upon  all  religions  (e.  g.  Chris- 
tianity  and  Mohammcdanism)  as  alike  raluablc  or  rai- 
ueless  in  proportion  as  they  agree  with  natural  religi 
ion ;  (2.)  that  state  of  mind  which,  carelessly  admitting 
the  truth  of  Chrisdanity,  holds  that  all  discussion  as  to 
its  doctrines  is  unimportanL  An  astonishing  number 
of  books  bas  been  written  upon  this  subject.  See  Bud- 
deus,  Institt,  TheoL  Dogmat,  p.  60;  Bretschneider,  Sys- 
tem. Entwickelung,  p.  18 ;  Schubert,  InstUt,  TheoL  Polem, 
i,  569;  Sack,  Christłiche  Polemik,  p.  65 ;  Herzog,  Beal- 
Encyldop,  ri,  657 ;  and  a  fuli  list  of  books  on  the  subject 
in  Danz,  Umtersal-Wdrterbuch,  p.  449  są*  See  Intoł- 
era»cb;  Latttudinarianism;  Toleration. 

IL  Tae  term  is  used  also  to  denote  that  form  of  infl- 
delity,  or  semi-infidelity,  which  holds  that  man  is  not 
responsible  for  his  beliefs.  '*  Gibbon,  speaking  of  the 
paganism  of  andent  Romę,  says,  'The  rarious  modes  of 
wonhip  which  prerailed  in  the  Boman  world  were  all 
considered  by  the  people  as  eąually  tnie,  by  the  phiłos- 
opher  as  eąually  false,  and  by  the  magistrate  as  eąually 
usefuL*  The  comment  of  some  one  Ls,  *  ARet  eighteen 
centuries  of  the  Gospel,  we  seem  unliappily  to  be  oom- 
ing  back  to  the  same  point.*  A  rery  weakened  sense 
of  responsibilitr,  or  an  actual  denial  of  it,  lies  at  the  bot- 
tom  of  tliat  indifferentism  which  is  so  exten8irdy  prer- 
alent  in  the  present  age.  On  the  Continent,  especially 
in  Germany  and  France,  not  only  are  opinions  destruo- 
tire  of  the  sense  of  responsibility  widdy  diffused  among 
the  masses,  but  in  the  case  of  rast  mnłtitudes,  who 
would  not  wish  to  be  counted  the  foes  of  Christianity, 
there  is  an  utter  absence  of  anything  like  the  religious 
obligation  of  belieC    There  is  also  a  great  deał  of  this 


indifferentism: 


662 


INDRA 


kind  of  infidelity  in  England  and  America.  It  is  stated, 
or  implied,  in  much  of  our  cunent  popular  literaturę, 
that  a  man'8  creed  does  not  depend  upon  himself.  Thb 
dogma  pervades  the  writings  of  Air.  Emerson.  Napo- 
leon, one  of  his  *  representatiye  men,'  of  whom  he  tells 
'  hoirible  anecdotes,'  must  not,  in  his  view,  *  be  set  down 
as  cruel,  but  only  as  one  who  knew  no  impediment  to 
his  will.'  He  depicts  him  as  an  <exorbitant  egotist, 
who  narrowed,  impoverished,  and  abaorbed  the  power 
and  existenoe  of  those  who  8erved  him ;  and  oondudes 
by  saying,  *  it  was  not  Bonaparte'8  faulŁ.*  He  thus  eon- 
demns  and  aoąuits  in  the  same  breath,  sends  forth  from 
the  same  fountain  sweet  water  and  bitter.  Mr.  Theo- 
dore  Parker  makes  each  form  of  religion  that  has  fig- 
nred  in  the  history  of  the  world '  natural  and  indispens- 
able.'  *•  It  could  not  have  been  but  as  it  was.'  And, 
therefore,  he  finds  truth,  or  the  ^absolute  religion,'  in  all 
forms ;  *  all  teuding  towards  one  great  and  beautiful 
cnd'  (Discourse  ofJtdigion,  p.  81).  Of  course,  the  idea 
of  the  religious  obligation  of  belief  resting  upon  the  in- 
diyidual  conscience  is  here  quite  out  of  que8tion.  Mr. 
F.  W.  Newman,  who  is  so  fond  of  parting  off  things  that 
most  men  connect  together,  would  persuade  us  that  there 
may  be  a  true  faith  without  a  tnie  belief,  as  if  the  emo- 
tional  part  of  our  naturę  was  independent  of  the  Intel- 
kctual.  *  Belief,'  says  he,  *  is  one  thing,  and  fdth  an- 
other.'  And  he  complains  of  those  who,  on  religions 
grounds,  are  alienated  from  him  because  he  has  adopted 
*  intellectual  condusions'  different  from  theirs — '  the  dif- 
ference  between  them  and  him'  tuming  merely  *  on  ąues- 
tions  of  leaming,history,  oriticism,  and  abstract  thought' 
{PhoMS  of  Faith,  Preface).  Tbe  philoeophy  is  as  bad 
here  as  the  theology.  In  the  Tiew  of  common  sense 
and  Scripture,  a  living  faith  is  as  the  doctrine  beliered. 
But  Mr.  Newman,  in  common  with  Mr.  Parker  and  oth- 
ers,  can  lay  down  hb  offenaive  weapons  when  he  wiUs, 
and  take  up  a  position  on  the  Iow  ground  of  indi£ference 
as  to  religious  belief.  Then,  creeds  become  matters  of 
merę  moonshine,  and  responsibility  \&  regarded  as  a  iic- 
taon  invented  by  priests.  This  is  part  of  the  bad  theol- 
ogy of  Mr.  Bailey'B  *  Festus.'  The  hero  of  the  poem  is 
madę  to  say, 

" '  Tet  merit  or  demerit  nonę  I  see 
In  naturę,  human  or  materiał. 
In  paseions  or  affections  good  or  bad. 
We  only  know  that  God'B  best  parposes 
Are  ofŁeuest  brought  about  by  dreadest  slns. 
Is  thander  eTil,  or  is  dew  divine? 
Does  virtoe  He  in  sonshlne,  sin  In  stormf 
Is  not  each  natural,  each  needltU,  best  ?* 

The  theory  of  this  infidelity  appears  to  be  that  man  has 
no  control  over  his  belief,  that  he  is  no  morę  responsi- 
ble  for  his  opinions  than  ke  is  for  his  color  or  his  height, 
and  that  an  infidel  or  an  atheist  is  to  be  pitied  but  not 
blamed.  This,  we  are  persuaded,  is  a  piece  of  flimsy 
sophistry  which  no  man  should  utter,  and  w^hich  would 
not  be  Ibtened  to  for  a  moment  in  connection  with  any 
other  subject  than  that  of  religion.  It  would  be  eon* 
demned  in  the  senate  and  at  the  bar,  it  would  be  drown- 
ed  in  the  tumult  of  the  exchange  and  the  market-place. 
Common  seose,  and  a  regard  to  worldly  interests,  would 
rise  up  and  hoot  down  the  traitor.  Ui^ortunately,  how- 
ever,  in  the  provinoe  of  religion,  the  natural  indisposi- 
tion  of  the  mind  to  things  unseen  and  spiritual  allies  it- 
self  ¥rith  the  pleadings  of  the  sophist,  and  receives  his 
doctrine  of  irresponsibility  with  something  like  flattei^ 
ing  unction.  Nothing  morę  than  this  is  requisite  to  un- 
dermine  the  foundation  of  all  religious  belief  and  mor^ 
ais,  to  let  open  the  floodgates  of  immorality,  and  to 
make  the  restraints  of  religion  like  the  britUe  flax  or 
the  yielding  sand.  In  opposition  to  such  latitudinarian- 
ism,  we  maintain  that  man  is  responsible  for  the  dispo- 
sitions  which  he  cherishes,  for  the  opinions  which  he 
holds  and  arows,  and  for  his  habitual  conduct  This 
is  going  the  whole  length  of  Scripture,  but  no  farther, 
which  affirms  that  eveiy  one  of  us  must  give  an  account 
of  himself  unto  God.  And  this  meets  with  a  response 
from  amid  the  elements  of  man's  mond  DAtoiei  which 


sets  its  seal  that  the  thing  is  true"  (Peanon,  iV£se  £1. 
say  on  InfideUty,  eh.  v).  (Comp.  Baumgarten,  Getek,der 
Rdigiom-Partheien,  p.  102  8q.)     See  Respomsibiutt. 

Indł£ferent  things.  (Comp.  Haiłess,  Syttm  ^ 
Christkm  Ethics,  transL  by  Morison  and  Findlay,  Edin- 
burgh,  1868, 8vo.)    See  Aoiaphora. 

IndlgStdfl  (sc.  Dii),  an  epithet  giyen  by  the  Ro- 
mans to  the  particular  gods  of  each  country,  who,  hay- 
ing  been  natives  of  those  oountries,  were  deified  by 
their  countrymen  after  death.  Thus  Romulus  was  one 
of  the  gods  Ifidiffetes  of  the  Romans,  and  was  wonhipped 
under  the  name  Quirinus.  Mneas,  though  not  a  natire 
of  Italy,  yet,  as  founder  of  the  Roman  name,  was  ruiked 
among  the  gods  Tndigetet, — Broughton,  BibUoth,  HuL 
Sac  i,  530. 

Indignation,  a  strong  disapprobation  of  mind,ex- 
dted  by  something  fiagitious  in  the  conduct  of  another. 
It  does  not,  as  Mr.  Cogan  obseryes,  always  suppose  that 
exceas  of  depravity  which  alone  is  capable  of  oommitp 
ting  deeds  of  horror.  Indignation  alwa;'s  refen  to 
culpability  of  conduct,  and  cannot,  like  the  pasaion  of 
horror,  be  extended  to  distress  either  of  body  or  misd. 
It  is  produced  by  acts  of  treachery,  abuse  of  confidoioe, 
base  ingratitude,  etc,  which  we  cannot  contemplate 
without  being  proYoked  to  anger,  and  feeling  a  gena^ 
ous  resentment — Cogan,  On  the  Passions;  Buck,  TheoŁ 
Dicłumarif,  s.  v.     See  Amoer. 

Indra,  one  of  the  Hindu  deities  of  the  Yedlc  period 
of  the  Hindu  religion,  who  also  enjoyed  a  great  legeo- 
dary  popularity  in  the  Epic  and  Puranic  period&  See 
HiKDuiSM.  He  is,  so  to  speak,  the  Hindu  Jupiter.  He 
is  ąuite  freąuently  stylcd  "Lord  of  hearcn"  (divaFptli 
=die8piter),  The  name  itself  is  of  doubtful  origin, 
meaning  either  (1)  <<  blue"  (as  epithet  of  the  firmament), 
or  (2)  "the  illuminator,"  or  (8)  "the  giver  of  lain'' 
(compare  Wuttke,^uc^  des  HddenthumSy  ii,  242).  Max 
Muller  {Scienoe  ofLanguage,  2d  series,  p.449)  says  the 
name  "  admits  of  but  one  etyroology ;  Le.it  must  be  de- 
riv6d  from  the  same  root,  whateyer  that  may  be,  which 
in  Sanscrit  jHelded  indu,  drop,  sap.  It  meant  originally 
the  giver  of  rain,  the  Jupiter  pltoftus,  a  delty  in  India 
morę  oilen  present  to  the  mind  of  the  worshtpper  than 
any  other"  (comp.  Benfey,  Orient  and  Ooadeat,  Ł  49> 
"In  that  claas  of  Rig-Yeda  hymns  which  there  is  reasoo 
to  look  upon  as  the  oldest  portion  of  Yedic  poetry,  the 
character  of  Indra  is  that  of  a  migbty  ruler  of  the  brighi 
firmament,  and  his  principal  feat  is  that  of  conqaering 
the  daemon  Vritra,  a  symbolical  personificatian  of  the 
cloud  which  obetnicts  the  deamess  of  the  sky,  and  with- 
holds  the  fructifying  rain  from  the  earth.  In  his  bat- 
tles  with  Yritra  he  is  theiefore  described  as  *opening 
the  receptacles  of  the  waters,'  as  *cleaTing  the  dood* 
with  his '  far-whirling  thundeibolt,'  as '  casting  the  wa- 
ters down  to  the  earth,'  and  *restoring  the  sun  to  the 
sky.'  He  is,  in  conseąuence,  'the  upholder  of  hearen, 
earth,  and  firmament,'  and  the  god  '  who  has  engender> 
ed  the  sun  and  the  dawn.'  And  sińce  the  atmo^theriei] 
phenomena  personified  in  this  conoeptlon  are  ever  and 
ever  lecnrring,  he  is  *  undeca}'ing*  and  *ever  youthiiiL' 
All  the  wonderful  deeds  of  Indra,  howerer,  are  peifons- 
ed  by  him  merely  for  the  benefit  of  the  good,  which,  in 
the  language  of  the  Yeda,  means  the  ptooa  men  who 
worship  him  in  their  songs,  and  iinrigoiate  him  with 
the  offerings  of  the  juice  of  the  soma  plant.  See  Hcf- 
DUiSM.  He  is,  therefore,  the  *  lord  of  the  Tirtnons,'  and 
the  'disoomfiter  of  those  who  neglect  religious  rites.' 
Many  other  epithets,  which  we  have  not  spaoe  to  eoo- 
merate,  illustrate  the  same  conception.  It  is  on  account 
of  the  paramount  influence  which  the  deeds  of  Indra 
exercise  on  the  materiał  happiness  of  man  that  this  de- 
lty oocupies  a  foremost  rank  in  the  Yedic  worship,  and 
that  a  greater  number  of  iuTOcations  are  addrecaed  to 
him  than  to  any  other  of  the  gods  (oompb  Max  Muller, 
Chips  from  a  German  Workskop,  i,  80-^2.  et  aL>  Bot 
to  understand  the  gradual  expansion  of  his  mythkal 
character,  and  his  uUimate  degiadation  to  an  infeiłor 


INDRA 


663 


INDULGENCES 


poadon  in  the  Hinda  pantheon  of  a  later  period,  łt  is 
neceasBiy  to  beta  in  mind  tbat,  however  much  the  Ye- 
dic  poeta  cali  Indra  the  protector  of  the  pious  and  Tir- 
tnoos,  he  is  io  their  songs  easentially  a  warlike  god,  and 
gradually  endowed  by  imagination  not  only  with  the 
ąualities  of  a  mighty,  but  also  of  a  self-willed  king. 
ł*he  legenda  which  represent  him  in  thia  light  seem,  it 
is  true,  to  belong  to  a  later  daas  of  the  Rig-Yeda 
hymns,  but  they  show  that  the  original  oonception  of 
Indra  excluded  from  hia  natore  thoee  ethical  conaidera- 
tiona  which  in  time  changed  the  pantheon  of  element- 
ary  gods  into  one  of  a  different  stamp.    Whether  the 
idea  of  an  incamation  (q.  v.)  of  the  deity,  which,  at  the 
£ptc  and  Por&nic  perioda,  played  80  important  a  part 
in  the  hiatory  of  Yiahnu,  did  not  exerciBe  ita  influence 
as  eariy  aa  the  compoeition  of  some  of  the  Yedic  hymns 
in  honor  of  Indra,  may  at  least  be  matter  of  doubt.    Ue 
iif  for  instanoe,  frequently  inyoked  as  the  destroyer  of 
dties — of  aeyen,  of  ninety-nine,  eyen  of  a  hundred  cities 
—and  he  ia  not  only  repeatedly  called  the  slayer  of  the 
hostile  Łribea  which  surrounded  the  Aryan  Hindus,  but 
flome  of  the  chiefs  slain  by  him  are  enumerated  by  name. 
The  commentators,  of  courae,  tum  thoee  'robben^  and 
their  *  chiefa'  into  diemona,  and  their  citiea  into  celestial 
abodea;  but  aa  it  is  iroprobable  that  all  these  namea 
bhottld  be  nothing  but  personificationa  of  douds  deatroy- 
ed  by  the  thunder-bolt  of  Indra,  it  is,  to  say  the  least, 
qoestioDabIe  whether  eyents  in  the  early  hbtoiy  of  In- 
dia may  not  have  been  associated  with  the  deeds  of  In- 
dra himaelf,  in  like  manner  aa,  at  the  £pic  period,  mor- 
tal  heroea  were  looked  upon  as  incamations  of  Yishnu, 
and  mortal  deeds  transformed  into  exploita  of  thia  god. 
''The  purely  kingly  character  of  Indra  aasumes  ita 
typical  ahape  in  the  Aitareya-Brdhmanoj  where  his  in- 
ttallation  aa  lord  of  the  inferior  gods  is  described  with 
much  mystical  detail;  and  from  that  time  he  continues 
to  be  the  supremę  lord  of  the  minor  gods,  and  the  tj^pe 
of  a  mortal  king.    During  the  Epic  and  Pur4nic  pe- 
rioda, where  ethical  conceptiona  of  the  divine  powers 
prerail  over  ideas  based  on  elementary  impressions,  In- 
dra ceaaes  to  cnjoy  the  worship  he  faad  acąuired  at  the 
Yedic  time,  and  his  existence  is  chiefly  upheld  by  the 
poets,  who,  in  their  tum,  however,  work  it  out  in  the 
most  fantaatical  detaiL    Of  the  eight  guardiana  of  the 
world,  he  is,  then,  the  one  who  presides'  over  the  east, 
and  he  is  still  the  god  who  sends  rain  and  wields  the 
thunderbolt ;  but  poetry  is  morę  engrossed  by  the  beau- 
ty  of  his  paradise,  Swm-ga,  the  happy  abode  of  the  in- 
ferior gods,  and  of  thoae  pioua  men  who  attain  it  ailer 
death  in  consequence  of  having,  during  life,  properly 
discharged  their  religious  duties;  by  the  charma  of  his 
hearenly  nymphs,  the  Aptarasas,  who  now  and  then 
deacend  to  earth  to  disttub  the  equanimity  of  auatere 
penitents;  by  the  musical  perforroancea  of  his  choris- 
tere,  the  Gemdharrat;  by  the  splendor  of  his  capital, 
A  mardv€Ui ;  by  the  fabuloua  beauty  of  his  garden,  iViafi- 
danoy  etc    A  remarkable  trait  m  this  Icgendary  life  of 
Indra  is  the  series  of  his  conflicta  with  Krishna  (q.  v.),  an 
incamation  of  Yishnu,  which  end,  however,  in  his  becom- 
ing  reoonciled  with  the  more  important  god.    As  the 
god  who  is  emphatically  called  the  god  of  the  hundred 
sacriiiceB  (SataJartUu),  Indra  is  jealous  of  every  mortal 
who  may  hare  the  preaumption  of  aiming  at  the  per- 
fonnance  of  that  number  of  sacrifices,  for  the  accom- 
plishment  of  such  an  intention  would  raise  the  sacrificer 
to  a  nuik  equal  to  that  which  he  occopies.     He  is, 
tke^efine,  erer  at  band  to  disturb  sacrificial  acts  which 
nuij  expo8e  him  to  the  danger  of  haying  hia  power 
abared  by  another  Indra.    According  to  the  Puranas, 
the  reign  of  this  god  Indra,  who  is  frequentły  called  also 
Sakra,  at  the  mighty,  doea  not  last  longer  than  the 
&tt  Manwamtara,  or  mundane  epoch.    Afier  each  suc- 
ccttiye  destmction  of  the  worid,  a  new  Indra  was  cre- 
ated,  together  with  other  gods,  saints,  and  mortal  be- 
iaga.    Thua  the  Indra  of  the  second  Manwantara  is 
V^a$fAii;  of  the  third,  Siuanti;  of  the  fourth,  Swi; 
of  the  fiffch,  Vibhu;  of  the  sitth,  Mancjaca;  and  the 


Indra  of  the  preaent  age  is  Purandara"  (Chambers,  s. 
y.).  In  worka  of  art,  Indra  is  generally  represented  aa 
riding  on  an  elephant.  In  paintings,  his  eyes  are  yeil- 
ed.  See  also  Hardwick,  Christ  and  other  Mastera,  i, 
178. 

Indnction  (Lat  indudio^  from  duco,  I  lead)  is  a  term 
in  ecclesiastical  law  for  the  act  by  which  a  dergyman 
in  the  Church  of  England,  haying  been  presented  to  a 
benefice  by  its  patron,  is  hrought  mi  to  the  possession  of 
the  freehold  of  the  church  and  glebę.  This  is  usually 
done  by  a  mandate,  under  the  seal  of  the  bishop,  ad- 
dressed  to  the  archdeacon,  who  either  in  person  inducta 
the  minister,  or  commissions  some  clergyman  in  hia 
archdeaconiy  to  perform  that  office.  The  archdeacon, 
or  his  deputy,  inducts  the  incumbent,  by  laying  his 
band  on  the  key  of  the  church  as  it  lies  in  the  lock,  and 
using  this  form:  ^ I  induct  you  into  the  real  and  actual 
possession  of  the  rectory  or  yicarage  of  M.,  with  all  ita 
profita  and  appurtenances."  The  church  door  is  then 
opened ;  the  incumbent  enters,  and  generally  toUs  a  beli, 
in  token  of  haying  entered  on  his  spiritual  duties.  In 
Scotland  the  Presbyteiy  induct  the  minister.— Eden, 
TheoU  Didiońary,  s.  y. 

Indulgence  (Lat.  ttufu^^oitia),  in  English  histoiy, 
is  the  title  applied  to  a  proclamation  of  Charles  II  (A.D. 
1662),  and  especially  to  one  of  James  II,  April  4, 1687, 
announcing  religious  toleration  to  all  dasses  of  his  sub- 
jects,  suspending  all  peual  laws  against  nonconformista, 
and  abolishing  religious  testa  as  qualifications  for  ciyil 
office.  The  king'8  object  was  simply  to  fayor  Roman 
Oatholics,  and  therefore  neither  the  EngUsh  Church  nor 
Lhe  grcat  body  of  the  dissenters  recdyed  the  illegal 
stretch  of  prerogatiye  with  fayor,  and  refused  to  belieye 
that  a  *'dispensing  power"  exercised  by  the  king  inde- 
pendently  of  Farliament  could  be  of  any  lasting  adyan- 
tage.  Howe  and  Baxter  maintained  this  opiniom  The 
same  instrument  waa  extended  to  Scotland,  and  diyided 
the  Coyenanters  into  two  parties,  At  first  the  king 
aaked  toleration  for  Fapists  only,  but  the  Scottish  Far- 
liament, usually  yery  obsequious,  would  not  listen.  He 
finally  declared,  as  if  Popery  were  already  in  the  ascend- 
ant,  that  he  would  neyer  use  "  force  or  inyindble  neces- 
sity  against  any  roan  on  account  of  hia  Protestant  faith," 
and  all  this  he  did  "by  his  soyereign  authority,  prerog- 
atiye royal,  and  absolute  power." — Eadie,  EccUs,  Did, 
s.  y. ;  Macaulay,  i/wf.  of  Engl  i,  218 ;  iii,  44  sq. ;  Skeats, 
Uist,  Free  Churches  of  England,  p.  77  sq. ;  Stoughton, 
EccL  Uist,  ofEngL  sińce  the  Restoration,  ii,  296,  et  aL 

IndulgenceB  (Lat.  indulgtntia),  the  name  of  a  pe- 
culiar  institution  in  the  Roman  Church.  The  doctrine 
of  indulgence,  in  its  most  plausible  form,  is  stated  by  a 
Romanist  writer  aa  follows :  '*  It  is  a  releasing,  by  the 
power  of  the  keys  committed  to  the  Cburch,  the  debt 
of  temporal  punishment  which  may  remain  due  upon 
aocount  of  our  sins,  after  the  sins  themselyes,  as  to  the 
guilt  and  etemal  punishment,  haye  been  already  remit^ 
ted  by  repentance  and  confession"  (jGrounds  ofCatholic 
Doctrine,  chap.  x,  qne8t.  1).  The  doctrine  and  practice 
of  indulgence  constitutes  the  yery  centrę  of  the  hier- 
aichical  theory  of  Romanism,  and  was,  probably  for  that 
yery  reason,  the  flrst  object  of  attack  on  the  part  of  Ln- 
ther  in  the  beginning  of  the  Reformation. 

I.  Origin  of  the  System,— TYi^  early  Church  knew 
nothing  of  indulgences.  The  system  seems  to  haye 
originated  in  that  oipenance  (q.  y.),  which,  in  the  handa 
of  the  episoopacy,  began  to  aasume  a  corrupt  form  in 
the  8d  century.  The  immediate  object  of  penance  was 
to  restore  an  ofTender,  not  to  communion  with  God,  but 
to  the  communion  of  the  Church.  When  an  excom- 
municated  person  sought  readmisńon,  the  bishop  as- 
signed  him  a  penitential  diacipline  (q.y.)  of  abatinence, 
mortification,  and  good  worka,  after  which  he  was  taken 
back  into  fellowship  by  certain  regular  modes  of  pro- 
cedurę. The  bishop  had  the  power  to  abridge  the  pe- 
riod of  probation,  or  to  mitigate  the  seyerity  of  the  pen- 
anoe,  and  in  this  power  liea  the  geim  of  the  doctrine  of 


INDULGENCES 


664 


IlfDULGENCES 


indulgence  (see  Canons  of  Council  of  Ancyra^  c  v).  In 
coune  of  timo  penitential  discipline  came  to  be  applied, 
not  merely  to  eKcommimicatod  penons,  but  to  all  delin- 
quents  within  the  pale  of  the  Chorch ;  and  penance 
came  at  last,  in  the  hands  of  the  schoolmen,  to  be  a  «ao- 
ramenlt^  with  its  systematic  theory  nicely  fitting  into 
the  hierarchical  system,  of  which,  Ln  fact,  it  became  the 
very  kcystone.  Nothing  could  so  surely  augment  the 
power  of  the  priesthood  as  the  right  of  fixing  penalties 
for  sin,  and  making  tenns  of  forgiYenesa.  ''  Just  as,  in 
early  times,  the  penances  of  the  exoommunicated  were 
freąaently  mitigated,  so,  in  the  coune  of  the  Middle 
Ages,  an  analogous  mitigation  was  introduced  with  ref- 
erence  to  the  works  of  penance  to  which  delinquents 
were  subjected.  Permiasion  was  given  to  exchange  a 
morę  serere  for  a  gentler  kind  of  penance.  Sometimes, 
in  place  of  doing  penance  himsdf,  the  party  was  allowed 
to  employ  a  substituto.  And  sometimes,  in  fine,  in- 
stead  of  the  actual  penance  prescribed,  somo  seryice  eon- 
ducive  to  the  interest  of  the  Church  and  the  glory  of 
God  was  acceptod.  This  last  was  the  real  basis  of  in- 
dulgence. £  ven  here,  howeyer,  the  process  was  graduaL 
At  first  only  peraonal  acts  performed  for  the  Church  were 
admitted.  Then  pecuniary  gifls  became  morę  and  morę 
common,until  at  last  the  matter  assumed  the  shape  of 
a  merę  money  speculation.  Initiatirely  the  abuse  grew 
up  in  practice.  Then  came  Scholasticism,  and  fumished 
\  it  with  a  theoretical  substratum ;  and  not  until  the  in- 
stitution  had  thus  received  an  ecclesiastical  and  scien- 
tific  basis  was  a  method  of  practice  introduced  which 
oyerstepped  all  limits.  The  first  powerful  impulse  to 
the  introduction  of  indulgences,  properly  so  called,  was 
given  by  the  Cmsades  at  the  great  Synod  of  Clermont 
in  1096.  Urban  II  there  promised  to  all  who  took  part 
in  the  Crusade,  which  he  proposed  as  a  highly  merito- 
rious  ecclesiastical  work,  plenary  indulgence  (indulffen- 
tiaspłenaritu);  and  firom  that  dato  for  a  period  of  two 
hundred  years,  this  grace  of  the  Church  continued  one 
of  the  most  powerful  means  for  renewing  and  eiillvening 
these  expeditions,  aithough  it  was  erident  to  unpreju- 
diced  contemporaries  that  the  adrenturers,  when  they 
croBsed  the  ocean,  did  not  undergo  a  change  of  charac- 
ter  with  the  change  of  climate.  The  same  favor  was 
ere  long  extended  to  the  military  expeditions  set  on  foot 
against  the  heretics  in  Europę,  and  at  last,  by  Boniface 
VIII,  in  1300,  to  the  year  of  the  Roman  Jubilee.  Sub- 
seąuently  to  that  datę,  seyeral  monastic  ordcrs  and  holy 
placcs  likewise  received  from  successiye  popes  special 
priyileges  in  the  matter  of  indulgence**  (Ullmann,  Re- 
/ormers  hefore  the  Rfformation,  i,  236). 

II.  Schoiattic  DoctrtM  of  Indulffence.— The  practice 
of  indulgence  had  been  going  on  for  some  time  when 
the  Scholasdc  theologians  took  it  np,  and  formed  a 
Bpeculatiye  theory  to  justify  it.  Three  great  men  con- 
tributed  to  this  task :  Alexander  de  Hales  (q.  v.),  Al- 
bertus  Magnus  (q.  y.),  and  Thomas  Aquinas  (q.  v.). 
Alexander  de  Halcs  (f  A.D.  1245)  laid  a  firm  founda- 
tion  for  the  theory  in  the  doctrine,  first  fairły  propound- 
ed  by  him,  of  the  Treasure  o/ihe  Churck  (theeaurtu  ec- 
cUsub).  It  runs  as  foUows :  "  The  sufferings  and  death 
of  Christ  not  only  madę  a  sufiicient  satisfaction  for  the 
ains  of  men,  but  also  acquired  a  superabundance  of 
meiit.  This  snperfiuous  merit  of  Christ  is  conjoined 
with  that  of  the  martyis  and  saints,  which  is  similar  in 
kind,  though  smaller  in  degree,  for  they  likewise  per- 
formed morę  than  the  diyine  law  required  of  them.  The 
sum  of  these  supererogatory  merita  and  good  works  forms 
a  ^'ast  treasure,  which  is  disjoined  from  the  penons  who 
won  or  performed  them,  exists  objectiyely,  and,  haying 
been  aocumulated  by  the  Head  and  memben  of  the 
Church,  and  mtended  by  them  for  its  use,  belongs  to 
the  Church,  and  is  necessarily  placed  under  the  admin- 
istration  of  its  representatiyes,  espedally  the  pope,  who 
is  supremę.  It  is  therefore  competont  for  the  pope,  ac- 
oording  to  the  measure  of  his  insight  at  the  time,  to 
draw  from  this  treasure,  and  bestow  upon  those  who 
haye  no  merit  of  their  own  such  supplies  of  it  as  they 


require.  Indulgences  and  lemisuons  are  mad«  from  thft 
supererogatory  merita  of  Christ's  members,  but  most  of 
all  from  the  superabundance  of  Christ'8  owii|  the  two 
oonstituting  the  Chuzch*8  spiritual  treaame.  The  ad- 
ministiation  of  this  treasure  does  not  pertain  to  aH  bot 
to  thoee  only  who  occupy  Christ*8  place,  yiz.  the  bith- 
ope"  (Alex.  Hales,  Summoy  iy,  qu.  xxiii,  art.  ii).  As  re- 
gards  the  extent  of  indulgence,  Alexander  is  of  opinioo 
that  it  reaches  eyen  to  the  souls  in  Purgatory,  under 
the  oondition,  howeyer,  that  there  shall  be  the  power  of 
the  keys  in  the  party  who  dispenses  it;  faith,  loye,  ind 
deyotion  in  the  party  to  whom  it  is  dispensed;  and  a 
competont  reason  and  a  proper  relation  between  the  two 
(I  c.  par.  5).  He  does  not,  howeyer,  suppose  that  in 
soch  cases  indulgence  is  granted  in  the  way  of  judidil 
abflolution  or  bwrter,  but  in  that  of  intercession  (**per 
modum  sufiragii  siye  intorpretationis*^. 

Albert  the  Great  (f  1280),  adopting  the  opinions  of 
his  predecessor,  designatos  indnl^ce  the  remission  of 
some  imposed  punishment  or  penance,  proceeding  from 
the  power  of  the  keys,  and  the  treasure  of  the  siq)erfla- 
ouB  merita  of  the  perfect  With  respect  to  the  efficacy 
of  indulgence,  Albert  proposes  to  steer  a  middle  oonrae 
between  two  extreme8.  Some,  he  aays,  imagine  that 
indulgence  has  no  efficacy  at  all,  and  is  merely  a  pioos 
fraud,  by  which  men  are  enticed  to  the  performance  of 
good  works,  such  as  pilgrimage  and  almsgiying.  These, 
howeyer,  reduce  the  action  of  the  Church  to  duld'8 
play,  and  fali  into  heresy.  Others,  cain-ing  the  eon- 
trary  opinion  further  than  is  necessary,  assert  that  an 
indulgence  at  once  and  unconditionally  accomplishea  all 
that  is  expressed  in  it,  and  thus  make  the  diyine  mercy 
diminisb  the  fear  of  jndgment.  The  true  medium  is 
that  indulgence  has  that  precise  amount  of  efficacy 
which  the  Church  assigns  to  it  (Alb.  Magnus,  SaimU 
lib.  iy,  d.  xx,  art.  16). 

Thomas  Aquinas  deduces  the  efficacy  of  inddgeoce 
directly  from  Christ  The  history  of  the  adulteress 
shows,  he  says,  that  it  is  in  Chri6t*8  power  to  remit  the 
penalty  of  sin  without  satisfaction,  and  so  could  Paul, 
and  so  also  can  the  pope,  whose  power  in  the  Church  is 
not  inferior  to  Paulus.  Beńdes,  the  Church  generał  is 
infallible,  and,  as  it  sanctions  and  practices  indulgence, 
indulgence  must  be  yalid.  This,  Thomas  b  peisuaded, 
all  admit,  bwause  there  would  be  impiety  in  repreaenting 
any  act  of  the  Church  as  fotgatory,  The  rtason  ofitt 
efficacy  i  howeyer,  lies  w  the  oneness  ofłhe  myttical  bodj^ 
within  the  limits  of  which  there  are  many  who>  as  re- 
specta  works  of  penitence,  haye  done  morę  than  ihej 
were  under  obligation  to  do;  for  iustance,  many  who 
haye  patiently  endured  undcseryed  sulTerings  suffiaent 
to  expiate  a  great  amount  of  penalties.  In  fact,  so  nut 
is  the  sum  of  these  merits  that  it  greatly  emedt  the 
measure  of  the  yuilt  of  aU  the  lirwfff  espeatOfy  whon 
augmented  by  the  merit  of  Christ,  which,  aithough  op- 
eratiye  in  the  sacraments,  is  not  in  its  operation  eon- 
fined  to  these,  but,  being  infinite,  extends  far  beyond 
them.  The  measure  of  the  efiicacy  of  indulgence— this 
St.  Thomas  reckons  to  be  the  truth— is  determined  bf 
the  measure  of  its  cause.  The  procuiing  cause  of  the 
remission  of  punishment  in  indulgence  is,  howerer,  solc- 
ly  the  plenitude  of  the  Chuich*s  merits,  not  the  piety, 
labors,  or  gifts  of  the  party  by  whom  it  is  obuiined; 
and  therefore  the  ąuantity  of  the  indulgence  does  not 
need  to  correspond  with  any  of  these,  but  only  with  the 
merits  of  the  Church.  In  respect  to  the  party  who  ott^i 
to  dispense  indulgence,  St.  Thomas  asserts  that  no  merę 
priest  or  pastor,  but  onljf  the  bishop,  is  competent  fiir  the 
duty.  On  the  other  hand,  deaoons  and  other  paities 
not  in  orders,  as,  for  example,  mtncios,  may  grant  indul- 
gence if,  either  in  an  ordinaiy  or  extraoniinary  way, 
they  haye  been  intmsted  with  jurisdiction  for  the  pof^ 
pose.  For  indulgence  does  not,  like  sacramental  acta 
pertain  to  the  power  of  the  keys  inherent  in  the  priai- 
hoodj  but  to  that  power  of  the  ke}'8  which  belongs  to 
jurisdiction  (Aquinas,  Suppiem,  Uipartes  Summa  Theo^ 
loyioe,  qu.  xxy-xxvii). 


INDULGENCES 


665 


INDULGENCES 


UL  OpposUion  to  IncbdffenceM  tcithin  łhe  Ckurch  of 
Borne, — Such  a  doctrine  could  not  fail  to  offend  truły 
pious  sooIb  eren  within  the  Church.  Long  before  the 
Refannation  the  whole  system  was  attacked  by  eminent 
doctots.  One  of  its  most  powerful  opponeuta  was  John 
of  Wesel  (q.  y.)*  ^  ^^^  middle  of  the  15th  centiuy.  A 
fe3tival  of  jnbilee,  with  yast  indulgences,  was  proclaimed 
by  pope  element  YI  in  1450,  and  cardinal  Cusanus  vis- 
ited  Erfurt  as  a  pieacher  of  indulgence.  This  brought 
the  sabject  practically  before  Wesel^s  mind,  and  he  wiote 
a  treatise  against  indulgences  {Advertus  indtUgentiat : 
see  Walch,  Monum.  Afed,  yEtń,  ii,  fasc  i,  1 11-166).  For 
a  foli  acoount  of  it,  see  Ullmann,  Reformers  be/ore  the 
Refo9matioH,  i,  258  8q.  The  Hagrant  aboses  oonnected 
with  the  sale  of  indulgences  began  to  cause  a  reaction 
igainst  the  system  even  in  the  popular  mind.  In  the 
15th  centory,  in  particular,  the  disposal  of  them  had 
beoome  almost  a  common  traific;  and  a  pnblic  sale  of 
them  was  generally  preceded  by  some  specious  pretext ; 
for  instanoe,  the  reductiou  of  the  Greeks  nnder  the  yoke 
of  the  Bomish  Church,  a  war  with  heretics,  or  a  cm- 
sade  against  the  Neapolitans,  etc.  Too  oflen  the  pre- 
tences  for  selling  indulgences  were  in  reality  bloody, 
idolatroua,  or  superstitious.  It  was  one  of  the  charges 
biought  against  John  XXIII  at  the  Council  of  Con- 
stance,  in  1415,  that  he  empowered  his  legates  to  ab- 
eolye  penitents  from  all  sorts  of  crimes  upon  payment 
of  snms  propoartioned  to  their  gnilL  When  .such  indul- 
gences were  to  be  published,  the  disposal  of  them  was 
commonly  farmed  out;  for  the  papai  court  could  not 
always  wait  to  have  the  money  coUected  and  conyeyed 
firom  ereiy  country  of  Europę.  And  there  were  rich 
merchants  at  Genoa,  Milan,  Yenice,  and  Augsburg  who 
purchased  the  indulgences  for  a  particular  proyince,  and 
paki  to  the  papai  chanoeiy  handsome  sums  for  them. 
Thus  both  parties  were  benefited.  The  chanoery  came 
at  once  into  possession  of  large  sums  of  money,  and  the 
larmen  did  not  fail  of  a  good  bargain.  They  were  care- 
fol  to  employ  skUful  hawkers  of  the  indulgences,  persons 
whose  boldness  and  impudence  borę  due  proportion  to 
the  eloqaence  with  which  thęy  imposed  upon  the  sim- 
ple  people.  Yet,  that  this  species  of  traffic  might  haye 
a  religious  aspect,  the  pope  appointed  the  archbishops 
of  the  seyeral  proyinces  to  be  his  oommissaries,  who  in 
his  name  announced  that  indulgences  were  to  be  sold, 
and  genendly  selected  the  persons  to  hawk  them,  and 
for  this  seryice  shared  the  profits  with  the  merchants 
who  farmed  them.  These  papai  hawken  enjoyed  great 
priyilegefl^  and,  howeyer  odious  to  the  dyil  authorities, 
they  were  not  to  be  molested.  Complaints,  indeed, 
were  madę  against  these  contributions,  leyied  ]>y  the 
popea  opon  all  Christian  Europę.  Kings  and  prinoes, 
dógy  and  laity,  tnahopa,  monasteries,  and  oonfessors, 
all  felt  themselyes  aggrieyed  by  them ;  the  kings,  that 
their  conntries  were  impoyerished,  nnder  the  pretext 
of  cmsades  that  were  neyer  undertaken,  and  of  wars 
against  heretics  and  Turks;  and  the  bishops,  that  their 
ktten  of  indulgence  were  rendered  inefficient,  and  the 
people  rdeased  from  eocleaastical  disdpline.  But  at 
Borne  aU  were  deaf  to  these  compUints ;  and  it  was  not 
till  the  reyolution  produoed  by  Luther  that  unhappy 
Europę  obtained  the  desired  relief  (Mosheim,  fbcfef. 
HiaL  cent.  iii,  sec.  i,  chap.  i).  Leo  X,  in  order  to  carry 
on  the  ezpensiye  structure  of  St.  Peter's  Church  at 
Bome,  published  indulgences,  with  a  plenary  remiasion 
to  all  such  aa  should  contribute  towairds  erecdng  that 
magnifioent  fabric.  The  right  of  promulgating  these 
indulgences  in  Germany,  together  with  a  share  in  the 
profits  ariśng  from  the  sale  of  them,  was  granted  to  Al- 
bert, elector  of  Mentz  and  archbishop  of  Magdeburg, 
who  selected  as  his  chief  agent  for  retailing  them  in 
Sazony  John  Tetzel,  a  Dominican  Mar,  of  licentious 
morals,  but  of  an  actlve  and  enterprising  spirit,  and  re- 
markable  for  his  noisy  and  popular  eloquence.  Assisted 
by  the  monks  of  his  order,  he  executed  the  commission 
with  great  zeal  and  sucoess,  but  with  no  less  indecency, 
boasting  that  be  had  aayed  morę  aouls  from  heli  by  his 


indulgences  than  SŁ  Peter  had  oonyerted  by  his  preach- 
ing.  He  assured  the  purchasers  of  them  that  their 
crimes,  howeyer  enormous,  would  be  forgiyen ;  that  the 
efficacy  of  indulgences  was  so  great  that  the  most  hei- 
nous  sins,  eyen  if  one  should  yiolate  (which  was  impos- 
sible)  the  mother  of  God,  would  be  remitted  and  expia- 
ted  by  them,  and  the  person  freed  both  from  pimish- 
ment  and  guilt ;  and  that  this  was  the  unspeakable  gift 
of  God,  in  order  to  reconcile  men  to  himself.  In  the 
usual  form  of  absolution,  written  by  his  own  hand,  he 
said:  "May  our  Lord  Jesus  Christ  haye  mercy  npon 
thee,  and  abeolye  thee  by  the  merits  of  his  most  holy 
passion.  And  I,  by  his  authority,  that  of  his  apostles 
Peter  and  Paul,  and  of  the  most  holy  pope,  granted  and 
committed  to  me  in  these  parta,  do  absolye  thee,  first, 
from  all  ecdesiastical  censures,  in  whateyer  manner 
they  haye  been  incurred ;  then  from  all  thy  sins,  trans- 
gressions,  and  eKcesses,  how  enormous  soeyer  they  may 
be :  eyen  from  such  as  are  reseryed  for  the  cognizance  of 
the  holy  see,  and  as  far  as  the  keys  of  the  holy  Church 
extend.  I  remit  to  thee  all  punishment  which  thon  de- 
senrest  in  Puigatoiy  on  their  account;  and  I  restore  thee 
to  the  holy  sacramentB  of  the  Church,  to  the  unity  of  the 
faithful,  and  to  that  innooence  and  purity  which  thoa 
possessedst  at  bapdsm:  so  that  when  thou  diest  the 
gates  of  piuushment  shall  be  shut,  and  the  gates  of  the 
Paradise  of  delights  shall  be  opened ;  and  if  thon  shalt 
not  die  at  present,  this  grace  shall  remain  in  fuli  force 
when  thou  art  at  the  point  of  death.  In  the  name  of 
the  Father,  the  Son,  and  the  Holy  Ghost."  The  terma 
in  which  the  retailers  of  indulgences  described  their 
benefits,  and  the  necessity  of  purchasing  them,  were  so 
extrayagant  that  they  appear  almost  incredible.  If 
any  man,  said  they,  purchase  letters  of  indulgence,  his 
soul  may  rest  secure  with  respect  to  its  salyation.  The 
souls  confined  in  Purgatoiy,  for  whose  redemption  indul- 
gences are  purchased,  as  soon  as  the  money  tinkles  in 
the  chest,  instantly  escape  from  that  place  of  torment, 
and  ascend  into  heayen.  That  the  cross  erected  by  the 
preachers  of  indulgences  was  eąuaUy  efficacious  with 
the  cross  of  Christ  itself.  **  Lo,"  said  they, "  the  heay- 
ens  are  open :  if  you  enter  not  now,  when  will  you  enter  ? 
For  twelve  pence  you  may  redeem  the  soul  of  your  fa- 
ther  out  of  Puigatory;  and  are  you  so  ungrat^ul  that 
you  will  not  rescue  the  soul  of  your  parent  from  tor- 
ment? If  you  had  but  one  coat,  you  ought  to  strip 
yourself  instantly  and  sell  it,  in  order  to  purchase  such 
benefit"  It  was  these  abuses,  as  much  as  any  other 
one  cause,  which  led  to  the  Lutheran  Reformation,  and 
it  was  against  these  that  Luther  first  directed  his  at- 
tacks.    SeeLuTHEB;  Refobmation. 

lU.  Present  Doctrine  and  Practice  of  InduUfence, — 
The  following  extracts  show  w)iat  has  been,  sińce  the 
Council  of  Trenti  and  is  now,  the  Romish  doctrine  of  in-* 
dulgence.  The  Council  dedared  that "  as  the  power  of 
granting  indulgences  was  giyen  by  Christ  to  the  Church, 
and  she  has  ezercised  it  in  the  most  andent  times,  this 
holy  synod  teaches  and  commands  that  the  use  of  them, 
as  being  greatly  salutaiy  to  the  Christian  people,  and 
approyed  by  the  authority  of  coundls,  shall  be  retained ; 
and  she  anathematizes  those  who  say  they  are  usdess, 
or  deny  to  the  Church  the  power  of  granting  them ;  but 
in  this  grant  the  synod  wishes  that  moderation,  agreea- 
bly  to  the  andent  and  approyed  practice  of  the  Church, 
be  exerdsed,  lest  by  too  great  facility  ecdesiastical  dis- 
dpline be  weakened"  (^Conc,  Trid,  SeM.  xxy.  De  Indulg,), 
Pope  Leo  X,  in  his  buli  De  IndnigentOs,  whose  object  he 
States  to  be  **  that  no  one  in  futurę  may  allege  ignorance 
of  the  doctrine  of  the  Roman  Church  respecting  indul- 
gences and  their  efficacy,"  dedares  "  that  the  Roman 
ponti£f,  yicar  of  Christ  on  earth,  can,  for  reasonable 
causes,  by  the  powers  of  the  keys,  grant  to  the  faithful, 
whether  in  this  life  op  in  Purgatory,  indulgences,  out  of 
the  superabundance  of  the  merits  of  Christ,  and  of  the 
saints  (espressly  called  a  treasure) ;  and  that  those  who 
haye  truły  obtained  these  indulgences  are  rdeased  from 
80  much  of  the  temporal  punishment  dne  for  their  act* 


INDULGENCES 


564 


INDULGENCES 


indulgence  (see  Canons  of  Council  o/Ancp-at  c.  v).  In 
coune  of  time  penitential  discipline  came  to  be  applied, 
not  merely  to  exoommanicatod  persona,  but  to  all  delin- 
qaent8  within  the  pale  of  the  Chiirch;  and  penance 
came  at  last,  in  the  hands  of  the  schoolmen,  to  be  a  t€U>- 
rament,  with  its  systematic  theory  niccly  fitting  into 
the  hienurchical  system,  of  which,  in  fact,  it  became  the 
very  keystone.  Nothuig  could  so  surely  augment  the 
power  of  the  priesthood  as  the  right  of  fixing  penalties 
for  sin,  and  making  terms  of  forgtyeneas.  <<  Just  as,  in 
early  times,  the  penances  of  the  excommunicated  were 
frcqaently  mitigated,  so,  in  the  course  of  the  Middle 
Ages,  an  analogous  mitigation  was  introduced  with  ref- 
erence  to  the  worka  of  penance  to  which  delinąuents 
were  subjected.  Permission  was  giyen  to  exchange  a 
morę  serere  for  a  gentlcr  kind  of  penance.  Sometimes, 
in  place  of  doing  penance  himself,  the  party  was  allowed 
to  employ  a  sabstitute.  And  sometimes,  in  fine,  in- 
Btead  of  the  actual  penance  prescribed,  somc  senrice  oon- 
ducive  to  the  interest  of  the  Church  and  the  glory  of 
Grod  was  accepted.  This  last  was  the  real  bada  of  in- 
dulgence. Evcn  here,  however,  the  process  was  graduaL 
At  first  only  personal  acta  perforraed  for  the  Church  were 
admitted.  Then  pecuniar}'  gifts  became  morę  and  morę 
common,  until  at  last  the  matter  assumed  the  shape  of 
a  merę  money  speculation.  Initiatirely  the  abuse  grew 
up  in  pracdcc.  Then  came  Scholasticism,  and  fumished 
\  it  with  a  theoretical  substratum ;  and  not  until  the  in- 
Btitution  had  thus  reccired  an  ecclesiastical  and  scien- 
tific  basis  waa  a  method  of  practice  introduced  which 
overstepped  all  limits.  The  first  powerful  impulse  to 
the  introduction  of  indulgences,  properly  so  called,  was 
given  by  the  Crusades  at  the  great  Synod  of  Clermont 
in  1096.  Urban  II  there  promised  to  all  who  took  part 
in  the  Crusade,  which  he  proposed  as  a  highly  merito- 
rious  ecclesiastical  work,  plenary  indulgence  {indulffen- 
tiasplenarias)]  and  trom  that  datę  for  a  period  of  two 
hundred  years,  this  grace  of  the  Church  oontinued  one 
of  the  most  powerful  mcans  for  renewing  and  enlivening 
these  expeditions,  although  it  was  e^ńdent  to  unpreju- 
diced  contemporaries  that  the  adrenturers,  when  they 
croBsed  the  ocean,  did  not  undergo  a  change  of  charac- 
ter  with  the  change  of  climate.  The  same  favor  was 
erc  long  extended  to  the  military  expedltion8  set  on  foot 
against  the  heretics  in  Europę,  and  at  last,  by  Boniface 
VIII,  in  1300,  to  the  year  of  the  Roman  Jubilee.  Sub- 
seąuently  to  that  datę,  seyeral  monastic  ordcrs  and  holy 
places  likewiae  received  from  8uccessive  popcs  special 
priyileges  in  the  matter  of  indulgence"  (UUmaim,  lie- 
/ormers  before  the  Reformation,  i,  236). 

II.  SchoUutic  Doctrim  of  Indulfffnce.— The  practice 
of  indulgence  had  been  going  on  for  some  time  when 
the  Scholastic  theologians  took  it  up,  and  formed  a 
apeculatiye  theory  to  justify  iL  Three  great  men  con- 
tributed  to  this  task :  Alexander  de  Hales  (q.  y.),  Al- 
bertus  Magnus  (q.  v.),  and  Thomas  Aąuinas  (q.  y.). 
Alexander  de  Hales  (+  A.D.  1245)  laid  a  firm  founda- 
tion  for  the  theory  in  the  doctrine,  first  fairly  propound- 
ed  by  him,  of  the  Treasure  ofthe  Church  {theaaurus  €C- 
cUfia).  It  runs  as  follows :  "  The  sufferings  and  death 
of  Christ  not  only  madę  a  sufficient  satisfaction  for  the 
sina  of  men,  but  also  acquired  a  superabundance  of 
meriu  This  superfluoua  merit  of  Christ  is  conjoined 
with  that  of  the  martyis  and  saints,  which  is  similar  in 
kind,  though  smaller  in  degree,  for  they  likewise  per- 
formed  morę  than  the  di  vine  law  Tequired  of  them.  The 
sum  of  these  supererogatory  merita  and  good  worka  forms 
a  yast  treasure,  which  ia  diajoined  from  the  persons  who 
won  or  performed  them,  exi8t8  objectiyely,  and,  haying 
been  aocumulated  by  the  Head  and  members  of  the 
Church,  and  mtended  by  them  for  its  use,  belongs  to 
the  Church,  and  is  necessarily  placed  under  the  admin- 
istration  of  ita  representatiyes,  esp^cially  the  pope,  who 
is  supremę.  It  is  therefore  compctent  for  the  pope,  ac- 
cording  to  the  measure  of  hia  insight  at  the  time,  to 
dimw  ftom  thia  treaaore,  and  bestow  upon  thoae  who 
haye  no  merit  of  their  own  soch  suppliea  of  it  as  they 


require.  Indulgences  and  remissiona  are  madę  from  tha 
supererogatory  merita  of  Chriafs  members,  but  most  of 
all  from  the  superabundance  of  Christ*8  own,  the  two 
constituting  the  Church'8  spiritual  treasure.  The  ad- 
miniatiation  of  this  treasure  does  not  pertain  to  aU,  but 
to  thoae  only  who  occnpy  Chrisfs  place,  yiz.  the  bish- 
opa"  (Alex.  Hales,  SummOy  iy,  qu.  xxiii,  art.  ii).  Aa  re- 
gazda  the  extent  of  indulgence,  Alexander  b  of  opinion 
that  it  reaches  eyen  to  the  souls  in  Purgatory,  under 
the  oondition,  howeyer,  that  there  shall  be  the  power  of 
the  keys  in  the  party  who  dispenses  it;  faith,  loye,  and 
deyotion  in  the  party  to  whom  it  is  dispenaed ;  and  a 
oompetent  reaaon  and  a  proper  relation  between  the  two 
(JL  c.  par.  5).  He  doea  not,  howeyer,  suppose  that  in 
auch  cases  indulgence  is  granted  in  the  way  of  judidal 
abaolution  or  barter,  but  in  that  of  intercession  (*'per 
modum  auflragii  siye  interpretationis"). 

Albert  the  Great  (f  1280),  adopting  the  opinions  of 
hia  predeceasor,  designates  indulgence  the  remission  of 
aome  imposed  punishment  or  penance,  proceeding  ftom 
the  power  of  the  keys,  and  the  treasure  of  the  superflu- 
oua merits  of  the  perfect.  With  respect  to  the  dficacy 
of  indulgence,  Albert  proposes  to  steer  a  middle  course 
between  two  extreme8.  Some,  he  BtLySj  imagine  that 
indulgence  has  no  efScacy  at  all,  and  ia  merely  a  pioua 
fraud,  by  which  men  are  enticed  to  the  performance  of 
good  worka,  such  as  pilgrimage  and  almsgiying.  These, 
howeyer,  reduce  the  action  of  the  Church  to  chUd^a 
play,  and  fali  into  heresy.  Others,  carT}ńng  the  eon- 
trary  opinion  further  than  b  necessary,  assert  that  an 
indulgence  at  once  and  unconditionally  accomplishea  all 
that  is  expres8ed  in  it,  and  thus  make  the  diyine  mercy 
diminish  the  fear  of  judgment.  The  troe  medium  ia 
that  indulgence  haa  that  precise  amount  of  efficacy 
which  the  Church  assigns  to  it  (Alb.  Magnus,  Sentent, 
lib.  iy,  d.  xx,  art,  16). 

Thomas  Aquinas  deducea  the  efficacy  of  indulgence 
directly  from  Christ,  The  history  of  the  adulteresa 
ahows,  he  aays,  that  it  is  in  Chri&t*s  power  to  remit  the 
penalty  of  sin  without  satisfaction,  and  so  could  Paul, 
and  80  also  can  the  pope,  whose  power  in  the  Church  is 
not  inferior  to  Paul'8.  Besides,  the  Clmrch  generał  ia 
infallible,  and,  as  it  sanctions  and  practices  indulgence, 
indulgence  must  be  yalid.  This,  Thomas  is  penuaded, 
all  admit,  ftecatiM  (here  tcould  be.  impiety  in  rcpresenting 
any  act  of  the  Church  as  tatgatort/,  The  reason  ofits 
efficacy  y  howeyer,  lie»  in  the  oneness  ofthe  mysłical  body, 
within  the  limits  of  which  therc  are  many  who,  as  re- 
specta  works  of  penitence,  haye  done  moro  than  they 
were  under  obligation  to  do;  for  instAnce,  many  who 
haye  patiently  endured  undeseryed  sufferings  sufficient 
to  expiate  a  great  amount  of  penalties.  In  fact,  8o  rast 
is  the  gum  of  these  merits  that  it  greatly  exceeds  the 
meature  of  the  ffuili  of  aU  the  Hving,  especially  when 
augmented  by  the  merit  of  Christ,  which,  although  op- 
eratiye  in  the  sacraments,  is  not  in  its  operation  con- 
fined  to  these,  but,  being  infinite,  extend8  far  beyond 
them.  The  measure  of  the  efficacy  of  indulgence— thia 
St  Thomas  reckons  to  be  the  truth — ^is  determined  by 
the  measure  of  its  cause.  The  procuiing  cause  of  the 
remission  of  punishment  in  indulgence  is,  howeyer,  sole- 
ly  the  plenitude  of  the  Church's  merita,  not  the  piety, 
labors,  or  gida  of  the  party  by  whom  it  is  obtained; 
and  therefore  the  quantity  of  the  indulgence  does  not 
need  to  corrcapond  with  any  of  these,  but  only  with  the 
merita  of  the  Church.  In  respect  to  the  party  who  oughi 
to  dispense  indulgence,  St  Thomas  asserta  that  no  mera 
priest  or  paator,  but  only  the  bishop,  is  competent  for  the 
duty.  On  the  other  hand,  deacons  and  other  parties 
not  in  orders,  as,  for  example,  nuncioSf  may  grant  indul- 
gence if,  either  in  an  ordinary  or  extraordinary  way, 
they  haye  been  intrusted  with  jurisdiction  for  the  pnr* 
pose.  For  indulgence  does  not,  like  sacramental  acta^ 
pertain  to  the  power  of  the  keys  inherent  in  the  priest" 
hood,  but  to  that  power  of  the  keya  which  belongs  to 
jurisdiction  (Aqttinaa,  Supplem,  iiipartes  Summa  Theo^ 
logice,  qu.  xxy>xxyii). 


DTDULGENCES 


565 


INDULGENCES 


m.  Oppostiion  io  Indulgenoet  witkin  łhe  Ckurch  of 
Jtiome^ — Such  a  doctiine  could  not  faU  to  offend  truły 
piouB  flouls  even  within  the  Chuich.  Long  before  the 
RefonDatłon  the  whole  system  was  attacked  by  eminent 
doctoTs.  One  of  its  most  powerful  opponenta  was  John 
of  Wesel  (q.  v.)}  in  the  middle  of  the  15th  centuiy.  A 
festiyal  of  jubilee,  with  yast  indulgencea,  was  procUdmed 
by  pope  element  YI  in  1450,  and  cardinal  Cusanus  vis- 
iced  £rfi]rt  as  a  pieacher  of  indulgence.  This  bronght 
the  subject  practically  before  Wesel^s  mind,  and  he  wrote 
a  treatise  against  indulgenoes  {Adnersus  indulgentiat : 
see  Walch,  Monum,  Med.  AUtfi,  ii,  fasc  i,  111-166).  For 
a  foli  account  of  it,  see  UUmann,  Refomurt  before  the 
Refowmaiion,  i,  258  sq.  The  flagranc  abuses  oonnected 
with  the  sale  of  indnlgences  be^n  to  caose  a  reaction 
against  the  system  eyen  in  the  popular  mind.  In  the 
15th  century,  in  particular,  the  disposal  of  them  had 
become  almost  a  commou  traffic;  and  a  public  sale  of 
them  was  generally  preceded  by  some  specious  pretezt; 
for  instanoe,  the  reduction  of  the  Greeks  under  the  yoke 
of  the  Bomish  Ghurch,  a  war  with  heretics,  or  a  era- 
sade  against  the  Neapolitans,  etc.  Too  often  the  pre- 
tences  for  selling  indulgences  were  in  reality  bloody, 
idolatrous,  or  superstitious.  It  was  one  of  the  charges 
brought  against  John  XXIII  at  the  Council  of  Con- 
Btance,  in  1415,  that  he  empowered  his  legates  to  ab- 
boIto  penitents  from  all  sorta  of  crimes  npon  payment 
of  sums  proportioned  to  their  gnilL  When  .such  indul- 
gences were  to  be  published,  the  disposal  of  them  was 
Gommonly  farmed  out;  for  the  papai  court  could  not 
always  walt  to  have  the  money  ooUected  and  oonveyed 
firom  eveiy  oountiy  of  Europę.  And  there  were  rich 
merchants  at  Genoa,  Milan,  Yenice,  and  Augsbuig  who 
purchased  the  indnlgences  for  a  particular  province,  and 
paid  to  the  papai  chanceiy  handsome  sums  for  them. 
Thus  both  parties  were  benefited.  The  chanoery  came 
at  once  into  possession  of  laige  sums  of  money,  and  the 
farmers  did  not  fail  of  a  good  bargain.  They  were  care- 
ful  to  employ  skilful  hawkers  of  the  indnlgences,  persona 
whoae  boldness  and  impudence  borę  due  proportion  to 
the  eloquence  with  which  they  imposed  upon  the  sim- 
ple  people.  Yet,  that  this  spedes  of  traffic  might  have 
a  religious  aq)ect,  the  pope  appointed  the  archbishope 
of  the  seyeral  proyinces  to  be  his  oommissaries,  who  in 
hia  name  announced  that  indulgences  were  to  be  sold, 
and  generally  selected  the  persons  to  hawk  them,  and 
for  this  seryice  shared  the  profits  with  the  merchants 
who  farmed  them.  These  papai  iiawken  enjoyed  great 
priyileges,  and,  however  odious  to  the  civil  authorities, 
they  were  not  to  be  molested.  Complaints,  indeed, 
were  madę  against  these  contributions,  leyied  ]l)y  the 
popes  upon  all  Christian  Europę.  Kings  and  princes, 
dógy  and  laity,  bishops,  monasteries,  and  confessors, 
all  felt  themaelves  aggrieved  by  them ;  the  kings,  that 
their  countries  were  imporerished,  under  the  pretext 
of  crusades  that  were  never  undeztaken,  and  of  wars 
against  heretics  and  Turks;  and  the  bishops,  that  their 
letters  of  indulgence  were  rendered  inefficient,  and  the 
people  released  from  ecdesiastical  diadpline.  But  at 
Romę  all  were  deaf  to  these  complaints;  and  it  was  not 
till  the  reyolution  produced  by  Luther  that  unhappy 
Europę  obtained  the  desired  relief  (Mosheim,  Eoclu, 
Hitt.  cent.  iii,  sec.  i,  chap.  i).  Leo  X,  in  order  to  cany 
on  the  expen8ive  structure  of  SU  Peter*s  Church  at 
Romę,  published  indulgences,  with  a  plenary  remiasion 
to  all  such  as  should  contribute  towards  erecting  that 
magnificent  iabric.  The  right  of  promulgating  these 
indulgences  in  Germany,  together  with  a  share  in  the 
profita  ariaing  from  the  sale  of  them,  was  granted  to  Al- 
bert, elector  of  Mentz  and  archbishop  of  Magdeburg, 
who  selected  as  his  chief  agent  for  retailing  them  in 
Saxony  John  Tetzel,  a  Dominican  friar,  of  licentious 
moralB,  but  of  an  actiye  and  enterprising  spirit,  and  re- 
markable  for  his  noisy  and  popular  eloquenc&  Assisted 
by  the  monks  of  hia  order,  he  execnted  the  commission 
with  great  zeal  and  success,  but  with  no  less  indecency, 
boaating  that  he  had  sayed  morę  souls  from  heli  by  his 


indulgences  than  St  Peter  had  conyerted  by  his  preach- 
ing.  He  assured  the  purchasers  of  them  that  their 
crimes,  howeyer  enormous,  would  be  forgiyen ;  that  the 
efficacy  of  indulgences  was  so  great  that  the  most  hei- 
nous  sins,  eyen  if  one  should  yiolate  (which  was  impos- 
sible)  the  mother  of  God,  would  be  remitted  and  expia- 
ted  by  them,  and  the  person  freed  both  from  punish- 
roent  and  guilt ;  and  that  this  was  the  unspeakable  giil 
of  God,  in  order  to  reconcile  men  to  himaelf.  In  the 
uBual  form  of  absolution,  written  by  his  own  hand,  he 
said:  **May  our  Lord  Jesus  Christ  haye  mercy  upon 
thee,  and  absolye  thee  by  the  merits  of  his  most  holy 
passion.  And  I,  by  his  authority,  that  of  his  apostles 
Peter  and  Paul,  and  of  the  most  holy  pope,  granted  and 
oommitted  to  me  in  these  parts,  do  absolye  thee,  first, 
from  all  ecdesiastical  censures,  in  whateyer  manner 
they  haye  been  incurred;  then  from  all  thy  sina,  trans- 
gressions,  and  escesses,  how  enormous  soeyer  they  may 
be :  eyen  from  such  as  are  resenred  for  the  cognizance  of 
the  holy  see,  and  as  far  as  the  keys  of  the  holy  Church 
eztend.  I  remit  to  thee  all  punishment  whidi  thou  de- 
seryest  in  Puigatoiy  on  their  aocount ;  and  I  restore  thee 
to  the  holy  sacraments  of  the  Church,  to  the  unity  of  the 
faithful,  and  to  that  innooenoe  and  purity  which  thou 
possessedst  at  baptism:  so  that  when  thou  diest  the 
gates  of  punishment  shall  be  shut,  and  the  gates  of  the 
Paradise  of  delights  shall  be  opened ;  and  if  thou  shalt 
not  die  at  present,  this  grace  shall  remain  in  fuli  force 
when  thou  art  at  the  point  of  death.  In  the  name  of 
the  Father,  the  Son,  and  the  Holy  Ghost"  The  terms 
in  which  the  retailers  of  indulgences  described  their 
benefits,  and  the  necessity  of  purchasing  them,  were  so 
extrayagant  that  they  appear  almost  incredible.  If 
any  man,  said  they,  purchase  letters  of  indulgence,  his 
soul  may  rest  secure  with  respect  to  its  salyation.  The 
souk  confined  in  Purgatoiy,  for  whose  redemption  indul- 
genoes are  purchased,  as  soon  as  the  money  tinkles  in 
the  chest,  instantly  escape  from  that  place  of  torment, 
and  asoend  into  heayen.  That  the  cross  erected  by  the 
preachers  of  indulgences  was  eąuaUy  efficadous  with 
the  cross  of  Christ  itsdf.  *<  Lo,"  said  they, "  the  heay- 
ens  are  open :  if  you  enter  not  now,  when  will  you  enter  ? 
For  twdye  pence  you  may  redeem  the  soul  of  your  fa- 
ther out  of  Purgatory;  and  are  you  so  ungrat^ful  that 
you  will  not  rescue  the  soul  of  your  parent  from  tor- 
ment?  If  you  had  but  one  coat,  you  ought  to  strip 
youiadf  instantly  and  sdl  it,  in  order  to  purchase  such 
benefit."  It  was  these  abuses,  as  much  as  any  other 
one  cauae,  which  led  to  the  Lntheran  Reformation,  and 
it  was  against  these  that  Luther  first  directed  his  at^ 
tacks.    See  Lutiieb;  Reformation. 

III.  Pre$ent  Doctrwe  and  PrcuAice  of  InduJlgence, — 
The  foUowing  eztracta  show  w)iat  has  been,  sinoe  the 
Council  of  Trent,  and  is  now,  the  Romish  doctrine  of  in«> 
dulgence.  The  Council  declared  that  ^  as  the  power  of 
granting  indulgences  was  giyen  by  Christ  to  the  Church, 
and  she  has  exerdsed  it  in  the  most  andent  times,  this 
holy  synod  teaches  and  commands  that  the  use  of  them, 
as  being  greatly  salutary  to  the  Christian  people,  and 
approyed  by  the  authority  of  conndls,  shall  be  retained ; 
and  she  anathematizes  thoae  who  say  they  are  usdess, 
or  deny  to  the  Church  the  power  of  granting  them ;  but 
in  this  grant  the  synod  wishes  that  moderation,  agreea- 
bly  to  the  andent  and  approyed  practice  of  the  Church, 
be  exercised,  lest  by  too  great  faciUty  ecdesiastical  dis- 
dpline  be  weakened"  (Conc,  Trid.  Sess.  xxy,  De  Indulg.), 
Pope  Leo  X,  in  his  buli  De  Indulgentiis,  whose  object  he 
States  to  be  "  that  no  one  in  futurę  may  allege  ignorance 
of  the  doctrine  of  the  Roman  Church  respecting  indul- 
gences and  their  efficacy,"  dedares  "  that  the  Roman 
pontiff,  yicar  of  Christ  on  earth,  can,  for  reasonable 
causes,  by  the  powers  of  the  keys,  grant  to  the  faithful, 
whether  in  this  life  or  in  Purgatory,  indulgences,  out  of 
the  superabundance  of  the  merits  of  Christ,  and  of  the 
saints  (expre88ly  called  a  treasure) ;  and  that  those  who 
haye  truły  obtained  these  indulgences  are  rdeased  from 
80  much  of  the  temporal  punishment  due  for  their  act* 


INDULGENCES 


666 


INDULGENCES 


tal  sfiu  to  the  divine  jostioe  as  is  eqtiivaleDŁ  to  the  in- 
dulgence  gnmted  and  obtained**  {BuUa  Leon,Xf  adv,  Lu-- 
ther).  element  YI,  in  the  buli  UmgenUuM,  explaii]8  this 
matter  mora  fully :  *' Aa  a  single  drop  of  Chiist's  blood 
woold  have  suffioed  for  the  redemption  of  the  whole  ha- 
man race,"  so  the  rest  was  not  loet,  but "  was  a  treasuie 
which  he  acquired  in  the  militant  Ghurch,  to  be  used 
for  the  benefit  of  his  sons ;  which  treasura  he  would  not 
Buffer  to  be  hid  in  a  napkin,  or  boried  in  the  ground,  but 
committed  it  to  be  dispensed  by  St.  Peter  and  his  suc- 
oessors,  his  own  yicars  upon  earth,  for  proper  and  rea- 
sonable  causes,  for  the  total  or  paitial  reoiission  of  the 
temporal  punishment  due  to  sin ;  and  for  an  augmentar 
tion  of  his  treasure,  the  merita  of  the  blessed  mother  of 
God,  and  of  all  the  elect,  who  ara  known  to  come  in  aid." 
The  reasonable  catues,  on  aocount  of  which  indulgenoes 
aze  given,  are,  where  **the  cauae  be  pious,  that  is,  not  a 
work  which  is  merely  temporal,  or  vain,  or  in  no  respect 
appertaining  to  the  dirine  glory,  but  for  any  work  what- 
8oever  which  tends  to  the  honor  of  God  or  the  senrice 
of  the  Chuich,  an  indulgenoe  will  be  valid."  We  see,  oc- 
casionally,  the  yery  greatest  indulgenoes  giyen  for  the 
▼ery  lightest  causes;  aa  when  a  pknary  indulgence  is 
granted  to  all  who  stand  befoie  the  gates  of  St  Peter, 
whllst  the  pope  giyea  the  solemn  blessing  to  the  people 
on  Easter  day ;  for  '*  indulgenoes  do  not  depend,  for  their 
efficacy,  on  conaideration  of  the  work  enjoined,  but  on 
the  infinite  treasure  of  the  merits  of  Christ  and  the 
saints,  which  is  a  consideration  surpaasing  and  tran- 
scending  eyerything  that  is  granted  by  an  indulgence." 
In  Bome  cases  *'  the  work  enjoined  must  not  ooly  be  pi- 
ous  and  useful,  but  bear  a  certain  proportion  with  the 
indulgence ;  that  is,  the  work  enjoined  must  tend  to  an 
end  mora  pleasing  in  the  sight  of  God  than  the  satisfao- 
tion  remitted,"  *^  although  it  is  not  necessary  that  it  be 
in  itself  yery  meritoiious,  or  satisfactoiy,  or  difficult,  and 
laborious  (though  these  things  ought  to  be  regaided 
too),  but  that  it  be  a  means,  apt  and  useful,  towards  ob- 
taining  the  end  for  which  the  indulgence  is  granted." 
So  **the  large  resort  of  people,"  before  the  gates  of  St. 
Peter,  when  the  pope  giyes  his  solemn  blessing,  **is  a 
means,  apt  and  useful,  to  set  forth  faith  respecting  the 
head  of  the  Church,  and  to  the  honor  of  the  apostolic 
aee,  which  is  the  end  of  the  indulgenoe"  (Bellarmine,  De 
Induigenłut,  Uh.  i,  can.  12).  The  first  General  Lateran 
Coundl  granted  ''ramission  of  sin  to  whoeyer  shall  go 
to  Jerusalem,  and.  eflfectually  help  to  oppose  the  infi- 
dels"  (can.  xi).  The  thiid  and  fourth  Lateran  Coundls 
granted  the  same  indulgence  to  those  who  set  them- 
selyes  to  destroy  heretics,  or  who  shall  take  up  arms 
against  them  (see  Łabbe,  x,  1523).  Boniface  YIII  grant- 
ed not  only  a  fuli  and  larger,  but  the  tnost  fuli  pardon 
of  all  sins  to  all  that  yisit  Some  the  first  year  in  eyeiy 
oentury.  Clement  Y  decreed  that  they  who  should,  at 
the  Jubilee,  yisit  such  and  such  churches,  should  obtain 
*'  a  most  fuli  remiasion  of  all  their  sins ;"  and  he  not  only 
granted  a  "  plenary  absolution  of  all  sins  to  all  who  died 
on  the  road  to  Bome,"  but  ^also  commanded  the  angels 
of  Paradise  to  carry  the  soul  direct  to  heayen."  ^  Sin- 
oere  repentanoe,"  we  aie  told,  *<is  always  enjoined  or 
implied  in  the  grant  of  an  indulgence,  and  is  indispen- 
sably  necessary  for  every  grace"  (Mihier,  End  of  Conr 
irotferty,  p.  d04).  But  as  the  dead  are  ramoyed  from 
the  possibility,  so  are  they  from  the  neceadty  of  repent- 
anoe ;  *<as  the  pope,"  says  Bellarmine,  **  applies  the  sat- 
isfactions  of  Christ  and  the  saints  to  the  dead,  by  means 
of  works  enjoined  on  the  liying,  they  are  applied,  not  in 
the  way  of  judicial  absolution,  but  in  the  way  of  pay- 
ment  (*per  modnm  solutionis').  For  as  when  a  person 
giyes  alms,  or  fasts,  or  makes  a  pilgrimage  on  accoont 
of  the  dead,  the  effecŁ  is,  not  that  he  obtains  absolution 
for  them  from  their  liability  to  punishment-,  but  he  pre- 
sents  to  God  that  particnlar  satisfaction  for  them,  in  or- 
der that  God,  on  receiying  it,  may  liberate  the  dead  from 
the  debt  of  punishment  which  they  had  to  pay.  In 
Uke  manner,  the  pope  does  not  absolve  the  deceased,  but 
offers  to  God,  out  of  the  meaaure  of  satisfaction,  as  mach 


as  is  neoesiaiy  to  free  them"  (/&.).  Their  db$ectis«t» 
aiford  snooor  to  such  as  haye  departed  real  penitenta  in 
the  loye  of  God,  yet  before  they  had  doły  aatiffied,  by 
fruita  worthy  of  penance,  for  ains  of  oommiasioo  snd 
omission,  and  are  now  purifying  in  the  fire  of  Puigit<try, 
that  an  entrance  may  be  opened  for  them  into  that  coun- 
try where  nothing  defiled  is  admitted"  (BuE  Leo  XII). 
"•  We  haye  resolyed,"  says  pope  Leo  XII,  in  his  fauli  of 
indiction  for  the  oniyersal  jnUIee  in  1824,  '^in  yiitue  of 
the  authority  giyen  os  by  heayen,  fiilly  to  unlock  that 
sacred  treasnre,  composed  of  the  meiits,  safTeriDga,  and 
yirtues  of  Christ  our  Lord,  and  of  his  Mrgin  Moiber, 
and  of  all  the  saints  which  the  author  of  haman  aił- 
yation  has  intrusted  to  our  dispensatioiu  During  this 
year  of  the  jubilee,  we  mercifully  giye  and  grant,  in  the 
Lord,  a  plenary  indulgenoe,  remission,  and  paidon  of  all 
their  sins  to  aU  the  faithful  of  Christ,  tnily  penitent,  and 
oonfessing  their  sins,  and  receiying  the  holy  oomnran- 
ion,  who  shall  yisit  the  churches  of  bkesed  Peter  and 
Paul,"  etc.  *<  We  offsr  you,"  says  Ganganelli,  in  his  boli 
Dt  IndulgenUis, "  a  share  of  all  the  riches  of  dtyine  mcr- 
cy  which  haye  been  intrusted  to  ns,  and  chiefly  those 
which  haye  their  origin  in  the  blood  of  ChrisL  We 
will  then  open  to  you  all  the  gatea  of  the  rich  reserroir 
of  atonement,  deriyed  from  the  merita  of  the  Mother  of 
Crod,  the  holy  apoetles,  the  blood  of  the  mart3rrB,  and  tbe 
good  works  of  all  the  saints.  We  inyite  you,  then,  to 
drink  of  this  oyerflowing  stream  of  indulgence,  to  en- 
rich  younelyea  in  the  inexhaustible  treasures  of  tbe 
Chureh,  according  to  the  custom  of  our  ancestoca.  Do 
not,  then,  let  slip  the  present  occasion,  this  fayorabk 
time,  these  salutaiy  days,  employing  them  to  appease 
the  justice  of  God,  and  obtain  your  pudon."  "  Tbe  tem- 
poral punishment  due  to  sin,  by  the  decree  of  God,  when 
its  guilt  and  etemal  punishment  are  remitted,  may  ootw 
sist  either  of  eyil  in  this  life,  or  of  temporal  suffeńng  in 
the  next,  which  temporal  suflfering  in  the  next  life  is 
called  purgatory;  that  the  Church  has  receiyed  power 
from  God  to  remit  both  of  these  inflictions,  and  this  re- 
misdon  is  called  an  indulgenoe"  (But]er*s  Book  o/tAe 
Bonu  Cath,  Ch,  p.  110).  "  It  is  the  receiyed  doctiine  of 
the  Chureh  that  an  indulgence,  when  tmly  gained,  is 
not  barely  a  relaxation  of  the  canonical  penance  enjoin- 
ed by  the  Chureh,  but  also  an  actual  remiasion  br  God 
himself  of  the  whole  or  part  of  the  temporal  punish- 
ment due  to  it  in  his  sight"  (Milner,  End  o/Cotśroetnjff 
p.  805  sq.). 

As  to  the  present/iracfice  of  indulgences,  it  sabsista, 
with  all  its  immoral  tendencies,  in  fuli  fotce  to  this 
day.  It  is  true,  howeyer,  that  the  abuses  connected 
with  the  sale  of  indulgenoes  are  not  so  flagrant  as  in 
former  times,  especially  in  thoee  countries  where  the 
Roman  Chureh  is  destitute  of  political  power.  Where 
it  has,  the  system  is  almost  as  bad  ua  eyer.  It  is  eaid 
that,  as  lately  as  the  year  1800,  a  Spanish  yeasel  was 
captured  near  the  coast  of  South  America,  &eif;hud 
(among  other  things)  with  numeroas  balea  of  indul- 
gences for  yarious  sins,  the  price  of  which,  yaiying  from 
half  a  doUar  to  seyen  doUars,  was  marked  upon  esch. 
They  had  been  bonght  in  Spain,  and  were  intended  for 
sale  in  South  America.  Seymour  tells  os  aa  followt: 
^  This  inscription  is  plaoed  in  that  part  of  the  Choitb 
which  is  of  all  the  most  pnblic.  It  b  plaoed  oyer  the 
holy  water,  to  which  all  persons  must  resort,  on  enterin<; 
the  Chureh,  before  partaking  of  any  of  ita  senrices.  U 
is  as  foUows : '  Indulgenoe, — ^The  image  of  the  most  holy 
Mary,  which  standa  on  the  high  altar,  apoke  to  the  holy 
pope  Gregory,  saying  to  him,  Why  do  you  no  kmger 
salute  me,  in  passing,  ¥dth  the  accustomed  aałntatian? 
The  saint  asked  pardon,  and  granted  to  thoee  who  cełe- 
brate  mass  at  that  altar  the  dellyerancc  of  a  sool  from 
Puigatory,  that  is,  the  spedal  sool  for  which  they  cele- 
brate  the  mass.'  There  is  nothing  more  fieqaent]y  re- 
marked  by  Protestanta,  on  entering  the  churehes  of  Romę, 
than  the  constant  recurrence  of  the  words  ^mitdffenUa 
plenaria^  a  plenary  indulgence  attached  to  the  i 
offered  there;  and  this  u  tantamoant  to  the  < 


INDULGENCES 


66ł 


INDULGENCES 


tion  of  any  aonl  from  Porgatoij,  throngh  a  mass  offeied 
at  thmi  altar.  Instead  of  Uieae  words,  however,  the  same 
tłuDg  ia  more  plainly  ezpressed  in  some  churches.  In 
the  chozch  Suita  Maria  delia  Pace,  so  oelebrated  for 
the  magnificent  fresoo  of  the  Sibyls  by  Raphael,  there  is 
over  OAie  of  the  altars  the  following  inscription :  '  Ogtd 
met9a  celebraia  m  cuesi^  altare  Ubera  un  ammod  aVpur- 
gaiorio^ — ^£veiv  man  celebrated  at  thb  altar  frees  a  soul 
from  Pmgatory.  In  some  churches  this  privilege  ex- 
tenda  thtonghout  the  year,  but  in  others  it  is  limited  to 
those  masses  wbich  are  offered  on  particular  days.  In 
the  cbnrch  of  Sta.  Crooe  di  Gerusalemme  this  privilege 
is  connected  in  an  especial  manner  yńlk  thefourth  Sun- 
day  inLenU  And  this  is  notified  by  a  public  notice  poet- 
ed  in  the  church  cloee  to  the  altar,  setting  forth  that  a 
mass  oelebrated  there  on  that  day  releases  a  soul  from 
Porgatory"  (Seymour,  Ev€ning9  at  Borne), 

Indulgences  are  now  granted  in  the  Komish  Church 
on  u  veiy  ample  scalę,  eapecially  to  all  oontributors  to 
the  erection  of  churches,  and  to  the  funds  of  the  Propa- 
ganda and  other  missionary  societies,  etc  In  fact,  al- 
most  any  act  of  piety  (so-called)  entitles  one  to  an  in- 
dulgenoe :  aa,  for  iDstance,  the  worship  of  relics ;  the  vi8- 
iting  of  churches  or  special  altars;  participation  in  di- 
Tine  w<H8hip  on  great  festivals,  such  as  inauguration  of 
churches,  and,  especially,  taking  part  in  pilgrimages. 
Indnlgenoes  which  apply  either  to  the  whole  Church 
are  called  generał  (mdulg,  generalia),  while  thoee  that 
are  confined  to  particular  localities,  as  a  bishopric,  etc^ 
are  called  particular  (indulg.  parOcularia).  The  most 
geneza!  indulgenoe  is  that  of  the  Roman  Catholic  year 
of  Jubilee  (q.  ¥.)•  The  generał  indulgence  is  always 
madę  out  by  the  pope  hiniself,  while  the  particular  in- 
dnlgenoes,  either  pknaria  or  tnimu  pleaay  are  often 
among  the  privilege8  of  dirers  localities,  either  for  spe- 
dal  occanons  and  yarious  lengths  of  time,  or  occasion- 
ally  foreyer.  The  papai  indulgence  is  to  be  prodaimed 
by  the  bishop  and  two  canons  of  the  diocese  recdying 
it.  "  InduJgences  are  divided  into  pUnary  and  nofirpU- 
nary,  or  partial,  temporary,  wdejiniie,  localj  perpetual, 
rtalf  and  personaL  1.  A  plenary  indulgence  is  that  by 
vhich  is  obtained  a  remiasion  of  all  the  temporal  pun- 
ishment  due  to  ńn,  either  in  this  life  or  in  the  next.  2. 
A  fwnrplaKiry  or  partial  indulgence  is  that  which  re- 
mita  only  a  part  of  the  temporal  punishment  due  to  sin : 
such  are  indulgenoes  for  a  giyen  number  of  days,  weeks, 
or  yeazs.  This  sort  of  indulgence  remits  so  many  days, 
weeks,  or  years  of  penanoe,  which  ought  to  be  obeerved 
agreeably  to  the  ancient  canons  of  the  Church,  for  the 
sina  which  we  hare  committed.  8.  Temporary  indul- 
genoes are  thoee  which  are  granted  for  a  oertain  spęd- 
fied  time,  as  for  seren  or  more  years.  4.  Indejmte  in- 
dulgences  are  those  which  aro  granted  without  any 
limitation  of  time.  5.  Perpetual  indulgences  are  those 
granted  ybrerer,  and  which  do  not  require  to  be  re- 
newed  after  a  given  number  of  years.  6.  A  generał  in- 
dulgence is  one  granted  by  the  pope  to  all  the  faithful 
thronghout  the  world.  7.  A  locai  indulgence  is  attach- 
ed  to  certain  churches,  chapels,  or  other  places;  it  is 
gained  by  actnally  visiting  such  church  or  other  build- 
ing  or  place,  and  by  obeerring  scrupulously  all  the  con- 
ditioDs  reąuircd  by  the  buli  granting  such  indulgence. 
8.  A  real  indulgence  is  attached  to  certain  movable 
things,  as  rosaries,  medals,  etc,  and  is  granted  to  thoee 
who  actually  wear  these  artides  with  deyotion ;  should 
the  fitthion  of  them  cease,  so  that  they  cease  to  be  deem- 
cd  the  same  artides,  the  indulgence  oeases.  So  long, 
howerer,  as  such  artides  oontinue,  and  are  reputed  to 
be  the  same,  the  indulgence  oontinucs  in  force,  notwith- 
standing  any  aoddental  alteration  which  may  be  madę 
in  them,  as  the  affixing  of  a  new  string  or  ribbon  to  a 
ronry.  9.  A  peraonal  indulgence  is  one  which  is  grant- 
ed to  oertain  particular  persons,  or  to  seyeral  persons  in 
oonamon,  as  to  a  confratemity  or  brotherhood.  These 
priyileged  penons  may  gain  such  indulgences  whereyer 
they  may  happen  to  be,  whether  they  are  in  health,  in 
sidaiess,  or  at  the  point  of  death.    10.  Other  indul- 


genoes are  termed  ef^omedpenaneeSfptBmientia  ityunćtm. 
By  them  is  conferred  the  remission  of  so  much  of  the 
punishment  which  is  due  to  sins  at  the  judgment  of 
God  as  the  sinner  would  haye  to  pay  by  canonical  pen- 
anoes,  or  by  penances  enjoined  in  all  their  rigor  by  the 
priest.  An  indulgence  produces  its  effect  at  the  yery 
moment  when  all  the  works  prescribed  in  order  to  ob- 
tain  it  are  performed.  (Richard  et  Giraud,  BibUothegue 
Sacrie,  xiii,  866  sq.)  The  scales  of  payment  are  pecul- 
iar,  being  madę  to  meet  a  yariety  of  cases,  and  they  are 
so>  lenient  that  the  payment  of  them  can  form  no  bar 
against  the  subseąuent  oommission  of  the  crime  for 
which  an  indulgence  has  already  been  receiyed." 

IV.  The  "  Congregation  of  IndulgenceiT  (Congregałio 
Cardmaiiiun  de  indulgentna  et  Sacris  reUqun»)  assists  the 
pope  in  managing  the  department  of  indulgences.  It  is 
one  of  the  functions  of  this  congregation  to  inyestigate 
the  grounds  of  all  applications  on  the  part  of  bishops, 
dioceses,  churches,  etc,  for  indulgences,  and  to  report 
thereon  to  the  pope.    See  Congregation,  yoL  ii,  p.  475. 

y.  Criticum  oftkeHomiahDoctrine  o/ Indulgence. — ^We 
cannot  attempt  to  giye  in  this  place  a  fuli  refutation  of 
the  Romish  doctrine  of  indulgences,  nor  is  it  neoessaiy. 
In  her  22d  Artide,  the  Church  of  England  formally  con- 
demns  the  Romish  doctrine  of  indulgence  as  well  as 
Purgatoiy  (q.  y.).  The  article  was  framed  (1558)  be- 
fore  the  Council  of  Trent,  which  endeayored  to  remedy 
the  woist  abuses  arising  from  the  practice  of  such  a 
doctrine,  but  which  neyertheless  yirtuaUy  sanctioned 
the  principles  naturally  inrolyed  in  the  system.  In  the 
Parker  MS.  of  1562  (the  25Łh  session  of  the  Council  of 
Trent,  which  was  hdd  Dec  8  and  4, 1568)  appears  the 
change  of  terms  from  ScholasHcorum  doctrina  to  Doctri- 
na  Eomanentium  (comp.  Pasey's  Eirenkon^  part  i,  p.  207 ; 
Blunt,  Eist,  ofihe  Reformaiion,  A.D.  1514-1547,  p.  444, 
465).  The  English  theologians  held  "  (1)  that  tem- 
poral paln,  the  fruit  of  sin,  is  in  its  naturę  remedial  and 
disciplinary,  both  to  the  sinner,  and  to  others  that  they 
may  see  and  fear;  and  (2)  tbat  ss  such  it  is  not  remia- 
sible  by  any  sacrament  or  ordinance  intrusted  to  the 
Church."  The  former  propo«ition  they  support  by  Jer. 
ii,  19 ;  Isa.  iii,  9 ;  by  the  examples  of  Moses  and  Dayid ; 
Numb.  XX,  12;  Deut,  i,  37;  2  Sam.  xii,  14.  The  fol- 
lowing ąuotations  coyer,  howeyer,  more  nearly  all  the 
points:  "Yiewed  even  in  its  purest  form,  as  stated  by 
the  most  eminent  doctors,  and  sanctioned  by  papai  buUs, 
the  doctrine  of  indulgence  not  only  introduces  a  contra- 
diction  into  the  Catholic  system,  in  respect  that  works 
of  satisfaction,  which  were  originally  an  integral  part 
of  the  sacrament  of  penitence,  are  entirely  disconnected 
with  it,  and  yiewed  as  a  merę  matter  of  eodesiastical  jn- 
risdiction,  but  it  has  this  further  radical  defect  peryading 
all  its  constituent  parts,  that  morał  and  religious  things, 
which  can  only  be  taken  as  spiritual  magnitudes,  are 
considered  as  materiał  ones,  ąualiły  being  trcated  wholly 
as  quaniity,  and,  con8eqnently,  a  standard  of  extemal 
computation  and  a  sort  of  religious  arithmetic  applied, 
which  inyolyes  contradiction.  £yen  in  order  to  estab- 
lish  the  superabundance  of  the  merit  of  Christ,  it  was 
affirmed  that  though  a  single  drop  of  his  blood  would 
haye  sufficed  for  a  uniyersal  atonement,  yet  the  Sayiour 
had  shed  so  mucht  as  if  it  were  not  the  di\ine  sacrifice 
of  loye  on  the  part  of  the  Son  of  God  and  roan,  and  his 
atoning  death  in  generał,  but  his  seyeral  outward  suffer- 
ings  and  their  ąuantity  in  which  its  yalue  and  impor- 
tance  consisted.  In  like  manner,  on  the  part  of  the 
saints,  it  was  not  their  peculiar  and  more  exalted  morał 
and  religious  character,  but  their  seyeral  works,  and  es- 
pecially the  wlume  rather  than  the  worth  of  these, 
which  was  taken  into  account ;  and  the  whole  was  han- 
dled  as  something  totally  disconnected  with  their  per- 
sons, as  an  objectiye  fund,  a  tum  ofready  money  in  the 
Church*s  hands.  According  to  the  same  category,  the 
imputation  of  the  merits  of  Christ  and  the  saints  was 
described  as  a  purely  extemal  transference  of  a  portion 
of  that  sum  to  one  who  needed  it.  For,  although  a 
penitent  frame  of  mind  was  reąuiied  of  the  sinner,  ttiO 


INDULGENCES 


568 


INDTJSTRIAL  SCHOOLS 


t^  was  notjbr  the  sahe,  wrt  according  to  the  measure  of 
thcUf  that  the  merit  of  Christ  and  the  saints  was  traii»- 
ferred  to  him,  but  8olely  for  the  sake  of  some  senrice 
performed  by  him  for  the  Church,  and  this  perfonnance, 
again,  is  ąiiite  au  extemal  and  isolated  work.    At  the 
same  time,  as  respects  the  merita  of  the  saints,  the  the- 
ory  of  indalgence  lests  on  the  supi)osition  that  a  man, 
who  is  stlll  human,  although  a  saint,  may  not  only  pos- 
sess  a  sufficiency  of  merit  to  answer  his  own  need  before 
God,  but  may  likewise  do  morę  than  the  diyine  law  de- 
mands  of  him,  and  thus  acąuire  a  surplus  of  merit  for 
the  use  of  others.     £ven  this  is  a  monstious  sapposi- 
tion,  but  still  morę  monstroos  perhaps  is  another,  which 
invades  the  religious  domain  and  the  glory  of  God.    In 
point  of  fact,  the  doctrine  and  practice  of  indulgences 
gives  the  Church  a  position  as  an  absolutely  unerring 
and  omniscient  judicial  power.     It  identifies  the  tribu- 
nal  of  the  Church  with  that  of  God,  and  the  tribunal  of 
the  pope  with  that  of  the  Church,  thereby  indirectly 
identifying  ike  pope's  with  GocTSf  so  that  the  pope  is 
raised  to  a  position,  in  virtue  of  which,  as  the  visible 
head  of  the  mysticid  body  of  Christ,  and  as  the  dis- 
penser  of  all  penalties  and  graces,  he  deddes  tho  high- 
est  ąuestions  iuvolying  the  salvation  of  the  liying  and 
the  dead,  acoording  to  his  merc  pleasure.    Granting, 
however,  that  the  whole  doctrine  wero  well  founded, 
the  position  assigned  to  the  pope  would  be  one  ele- 
vated  far  above  the  reach  of  fanc}',  and  could  bo  desig- 
nated  only  as  that  of  a  terrescrial  goid.    What  an  infinitc 
amount  of  obligation  would  it  impose  upon  the  papacy, 
and  with  what  conscientiousness  sharpened  to  thc'ut- 
most  ought  the  popes,  if  they  werc  bold  enough  to  be- 
lieve  that  such  plenitude  of  power  had  actually  been 
lodged  in  the  hands  of  any  child  of  the  dust,  to  have 
dispensed  the  lofty  blessings  committed  to  their  trust ! 
How  carefully  ought  they  to  have  guarded  them  from 
penrersion  and  debasement !    And  yet  what  do  we  see  ? 
Abuse  upon  abnse,  and  profanatiou  upon  profanation,  in 
an  asccnding  scalę,  for  morę  than  two  centuries,  untU 
at  last  morał  indignation  bursts  like  a  tempest  upon 
their  impiety"  (Ullmann,  Reformers  be/ore  the  Refor- 
mation,  i,  246).     "  £ither  the  pope  has  the  power  df 
bringing  souls  out  of  Purgatory,  or  he  has  noL     If  he 
has  not,  the  question  is  decided.    If  he  has,  what  cru- 
elty,  then,  for  him  to  leave  there  whole  millions  of  souls 
whom  he  might  by  a  word  bring  out  of  it !     Without 
going  so  for,  why  this  strange  inequality  in  the  distri- 
bution  of  a  treasure  which  is  deemed  inexhau8tible? 
Why  will  o.  pater  and  an  ave  in  my  parish  church  avail 
only  for  five  or  8ix  days'  indulgenoe,  when  they  avail 
for  forty  days  in  another  church,  before  another  Madon- 
na or  another  cross?    Why  is  the  perfonnance  of  the 
works  paid,  in  such  or  such  a  congregation,  with  a  plen- 
ary  indulgence,  and  m  this  or  that  other  with  a  merę 
indulg^ence  for  a  time?     Why— but  we  should  ncver 
end  with  the  contradictions  yrith  which  this  matter  is 
beset,     Yet  let  us  give  one— just  one  morę.     If  plenary 
indtdgence  be  not  merely  a  lure,  how  comes  it  that  roaases 
continue  to  be  said  for  the  souls  of  those  who  received 
it  when  dymg  ?    Why  that  solemn  de  profundu  repeat^ 
ed  at  Romę  during  the  wliole  reign  of  a  pope  on  the 
annirersary  of  the  death  of  hu  predecessor?     This  is 
what  Luther  said  in  his  theses,  and  the  objection  is  not 
the  less  embarrassing  for  being  old.     The  only  means 
of  getting  out  of  the  difficulty  would  be  to  accept  the 
oonsequcnce8  of  the  system.     You  have  only  to  regaid 
as  well  and  duły  entered  into  heayen  all  who  left  this 
world  with  that  infallible  paasport,  and  to  refuse,  there- 
fore,  to  say  a  mass  for  them.     And  why  is  thia  not 
done?  ^  We  have  no  need  to  explain.    Detween  a  merę 
act  of  inconsistency  added  to  so  many  others  and  the 
drying  up  of  the  very  best  souice  of  her  rerenues,  could 
Romę  ever  hesiute  ?    But  if  there  be  ground  to  ask,  on 
the  one  hand,  why  the  popes  and  the  bishops  have  not, 
at  least,  the  chańty  to  grant  everywhere,  and  to  all,  aa 
many  indulgences  as  they  have  a  right  to  dispense, 
DO  less  reason  have  we  to  be  aatonished  at  the  Iow  prioe 


they  put  upon  them,  and  the  incredible  facilitiei  otkni 
to  such  as  wish  to  aoquire  them.  See,  for  instanoe,  the 
statutes  of  the  biotherhood  (oonfrerie)  well  known  un- 
der  the  name  of  the  Afott  łfoły  and  Immacnlate  Ileart  of 
Mary,  By  a  brief  of  1838,  plenary  indulgenoe  is  ao- 
corded  to  those  who  shall  worthily  confeas  on  the  dsy 
of  their  reception  into  the  brotberłiood;  which  is  u 
much  as  saying  to  people,  *  Come  in  among  uf,  and  tU 
your  previou8  sina  will  be  wiped  out'  Plenaiy  indul- 
gence, moreoyer,  to  such  as  shall  oonfess  themselTe% 
and  communicate  at  certain  epocha  of  the  year,  and 
theee  are  ten  in  number.  Further,  indulgence  of  tire 
hundred  days  to  whoaoerer  shall  deroutly  be  present  at 
the  mass  of  Saturday,  and  shall  pray  for  tho  ooDTeniaD 
of  8inner&  Though  we  should  beliere  in  indulgences^ 
it  strikes  ns  that  we  could  not  but  feel  some  scmpies 
at  seeing  them  Urished  away  in  this  manner.  For  a 
mass  that  shall  have  eost  you  half  an  hour,  to  be  ex- 
empted  from  Purgatory  for  near  a  year  and  a  half!  For 
one  confession,  to  be  ex6mpted  from  it  altogether,  al- 
though you  may  haye  deseryed  a  thoosand  yeazs  of  it! 
If  not  stopped  by  shame,  these  bold  traffickers  in  aalra- 
tion  ought  at  least,  one  would  think,  to  dread  lest  their 
warea  should  suifer  depreciation  in  conseąuence  of  being 
giyen  away  for  so  little.  l>ue,  they  do  not  cost  them 
anything,  and  there  is  no  limit  to  puzchase&  Nobody, 
well  knowing  to  how  many  years  of  Purgatory  he  may 
be  oondemned,  can  rcasonably  stop  in  adding  to  the 
amount  of  indulgences  with  which  he  is  to  appear  at 
tho  bar  of  judgmenL  By  placing  himself  on  the  most 
fayorablc  conditions,  and  taking  care  to  let  no  oceasioo 
be  lost,  a  man  of  sixty  might  without  difficulty  haye 
amassed  them  for  abovo  a  million  of  yeaiB,  oyer  and 
aboye  the  plenary  ones,  each  one  of  which  ought  to  sof- 
fioe,  and  with  which  one  does  not  well  see  what  the  resi 
can  signify"  (Bungener,  Hiat,  ofthe  CautieU  of  Trmt,  p. 
520,  521). 

VI.  For  further  literaturę  and  discussion  of  the  sob- 
ject,  see  Bp.  Philpofs  Letttn  to  J/r.  liuder^  p.  151-168; 
Hales,  Ancdysis  ofChronohgyf  yoL  ii,  pt  ii,  p.  1019-22; 
Mendham,  Spiritual  Ymality  of  Romę  (London,  1836, 
12mo);  Mendham,  Yenal  Indulgences  and  Pardonu  ofthi 
Church  o/Rome  ezemplified  (Lond.  1889, 12mo) ;  FeR»- 
ris,  Biblioiheca  Promia,  s.  v. ;  Elliott,  DeUneaiion  o/Ro- 
manism,  book  ii,  eh.  xiii;  Herzog,  Real-EncyHcp.  i,  67; 
Neander,  History  ofDoctrines,  ii,  594;  Neander,  Chwrt^ 
nistory,  iii,  52, 138;  v,  180,  280;  Mosheim,  Ck,  Bistory^ 
bk.  iy,  cent.  xvi,  §  1,  eh.  i  and  ii;  D'Aubigiie,  Histcty 
of  the  Reformation,  bk.  iii ;  Amort,  De  Origmty  etc,  uk 
dulgentiarum  (Aug.Yind.  1735,  fol);  Hiracher,  Lehre r. 
ANass  (Tubing.  1844) ;  Gieseler,  Church  Ilist,  ii,  §  35, 
81 ;  Hook,  Church  Dictionary^  8.  v. ;  Eadie,  £edetiastieaŁ 
Dictionaryj  s.  v. ;  Cramp,  Text-book  ofPopery^  eh.  xix ; 
Bungener,  Hisł,  ofthe  Council  of  Trenty  p.  518-530 ;  Ull- 
mann, Reformers  before  the  Reformation^  i,  285  sq.;  Ber- 
gier.  Diet.  de  Theologie,  iii,  898. 

Indult  (Latin  tndtdtus,  partidple  of  indidgeo^  I  in- 
dtilge)  signifies  in  ecdesiastical  law  a  peculiar  form  of 
dispensation  granted  by  the  pope  from  the  requirement8 
of  the  ordinary  Uw.  Thus  the  power  of  bestowing  bene- 
fices  is  granted  to  cardinals  or  princes  by  an  wduU  from 
the  pope. 

Indufltiial  Bohools.  In  Germany,  Great  Bńt- 
ain,  France,  and  in  the  United  Sutea,  efibrts  have  nf 
late  years  been  madę  to  combinc  with  the  generał  rvdi- 
mentary  education  of  the  icommon  achool  the  tcaching 
of  tho  mechanical  arts  and  of  agriculture,  and  thus  to 
afford  the  poorer  claases  the  adyantages  of  a  literary  and 
industrial  education  within  a  smaller  limit  than  fomier* 
ly,  thereby  greatly  alleyiating  the  wanta  which  ars  so 
frequent  among  them.  *'  In  elementary  schoołs  for  giiii^ 
industrial  work,  to  the  extent  of  sewing,  shaping,  knit- 
ting,  and  netting,  has  been  almoet  miiyemUy  intro- 
duced,  and  forma  one  of  the  most  important  and  inter- 
esting  features  of  female  primary  education,  morc  espe- 
dally  in  Great  Britain;  bitt  the  attempt  to  ooimect  i^th 


INDWELLING  SCHEME 


569 


INFALLIBILITY 


theae  eobjects  iitsfaruction  in  oooking,  washing,  and  iron- 
ia^ bftB  been  tried  as  yet  only  to  a  Umited  extent,  and 
bas  been  only  pardally  Bucccósfiil.  In  ragged  scboola, 
on  tbe  other  hand,  no  department  of  the  school-woric 
leems  to  thrive  better,  partly  becaiise  it  enten  so  largo- 
]y  into  the  achcme  of  instmction,  partly  becauae  tbe 
children  are  removed  from  the  control  of  parenta.  In 
England  the  ragged  sehoola  are  recognised  by  the  Leg- 
ialacure  as  *  industrial  Bchoola,'  and  may  be  defined  aa 
Bchoob  in  which  the  pupUa  are  fed  and  clothed  (whoUy 
or  paitially),  as  well  as  taugbt  the  elements  of  an  ordi- 
naiy  education,  and  the  pracUce  of  some  trade.  By  a 
ftatate  passed  in  1861,  children  nnder  14  found  vagnmt 
or  b^^ging  or  oonvicted  of  petty  oflences,  may  be  sent 
by  a  magtstrate  to  an  indostrial  achool  that  bas  been 
certified  by  the  home  aecretaiy.  Farents  also,  on  pay- 
ing  for  board  and  lodging  a  smali  sum,  may  plaoe  they 
children  in  industrial  achools  if  they  can  show  that  they 
are  onable  to  controltbem.  The  treaaury  may  contrib- 
nte  to  tbe  maintenance  of  these  achools  on  the  repre- 
sentation  of  the  home  secretary.  If  a  child  abscond 
fiom  the  ichool  before  he  is  15,  the  justices  may  send 
him  back,  or  plaoe  him  in  a  reformatora*  achool  (q.  ▼.)• 
In  1861  there  were  in  England  28,  and  in  Scotland  16 
industrial  schools,  and  the  uumber  of  pupUs  attending 
'Mjs  respectively  1574  in  the  former,  and  1606  in  the  lat- 
ter"  (Chambers,  s.  v.).  In  Germany,  theae  achools  proye 
eren  a  greater  boon  to  the  poorer  clasaes  than  elsewhere, 
capecially  to  orphans.  By  law  every  child  is  obliged  to 
attend  achool  untU  oonfirmation  (about  14  yeara  of  age), 
and  the  acąuirement  of  aome  trade  enables  children  of 
14  to  begin  work  to  adrautage,  and  eam  at  least  their 
own  livelihoodt  if  they  may  not  eyen  aid  in  the  aupport 
of  their  parents  or  other  near  relatiyeai  It  is  to  be 
hoped  that  in  the  United  States  the  generous  spirit  of 
the  diffioent  Christian  societies  will  especially  further 
this  work,  and  make  industrial  schools  numerous  in  all 
oor  laige  cities  at  least     (J.  H.  W.) 

Indwelllng  Soheme,  a  name  nsed  by  aome  Eng- 
lish  theologians  to  denote  a  theoiy  deriyed  from  CoL  ii, 
ix :  "  In  him  dwelleth  all  the  fulness  of  the  Godhead 
bodily;"  which,  aooording  to  some,  asaerts  the  doctrine 
of  Christ*s  consisting  of  two  beings;  one  the  Bclf-exist- 
ent  Creator,  and  the  other  a  creature,  madę  into  one  per- 
son by  an  ineffable  union  and  mdweUinffj  which  renders 
the  aame  attributes  and  honors  equally  applicable  to 
both.    See  Christologt. 

Indwelling  Sin.    See  Six. 

IneffablOia  DeuB.    See  Immacułate  Concbp- 

TION. 

Znerrancy.    See  Indbfectibility. 

Infallibllity  is  the  quality  of  being  incapable 
ótber  of  being  deceired,  or  of  leading  others  astray. 
Bomanists,  while  acknowledging  that  God  alone  is  nat- 
nially  infallible,  maintain  that  he  bas  been  pleased  to 
tranamit  this  qnality,  to  some  undefined  exŁent,  to  the 
Chorch  and  to  the  popcs,  so  that  they  are  infallible  in 
tbeir  decisions  on  aU  points  of  doctrine. 

Ł  Inpallibility  of  the  Ciiurch. — The  following 
19  a  oondensod  yiew  of  the  infallibllity  of  the  Church  of 
Romę,  89  oollected  from  ber  own  authors.  Dens  affirms, 
**  That  the  Church,  in  matters  of  faith  and  manners,  can 
by  no  means  err,  is  an  artide  of  belief.  Moreover,  in- 
falUbility  in  the  Church  may  be  oonsidered  in  a  twofold 
point  of  view :  the  one  actire  and  authoritatiye,  which 
is  called  infallibllity  in  teaching  and  deflning ;  the  other 
pasaiye  or  submiasiye  (obedienUaitM),  which  is  called  in- 
faUibility  in  leaming  and  belieying.  Infallibllity,  consid- 
ered  in  the  first  sense,  refers  to  the  Church  with  respect 
to  the  head  or  chief  pontiff,  and  the  prelates  of  the 
ChoTch;  althougfa  this  infallibllity  would  not  regard 
the  laity  or  inferior  pastora;  for,  aa  a  man  is  said  to  see, 
althongh  his  yision  does  not  apply  to  all  his  membera, 
bat  to  his  e3re8  only,  so  the  Church,  in  like  manner,  is 
said  to  be  infallible,  although  this  infallibllity  refen 
only  to  the  prelates.    But  if  the  Chuich  is  not  oonsid- 


ered with  regaid  to  its  head,  but  as  it  embraces  all  the 
faithful,  or  liUcs,  under  the  obedience  of  the  pope,  it  is 
not  proper  to  say  it  is  infallible  in  teaching  aud  defin- 
iug,  because  its  gift  in  this  respect  is  not  to  teach,  but 
to  leam  and  belieye;  wherefore  the  Church,  in  this  yiew, 
is  said  to  be  ^passibly  infallible,'  or  infallible  in  leam- 
ing, belieying,  practising,  etc  Therefore  it  is  impossi- 
ble  that  the  whole  Cburch,  obedient  to  the  pope,  should 
belieye  any  thing  as  reyealed,  or  practice  any  thing  as 
good  which  is  not  such ;  hence  it  can  be  said  that  the 
sense  of  the  uniyersal  Church  is  always  true,  and  its 
practice  or  usage  always  good"  (Dens,  Theoiy  tom.  ii,  I)e 
EecktiOj  No.80,  De  ItifaUibUitate  Ecclesia),  The  same 
author  affirms  also  that  *^  the  Church  is  an  infallible 
judge  of  controyeraies  of  faith ;  that  this  authority  is 
yeated  in  the  bishops  only,  especially  in  the  pope,  and 
that  lay  peraons,  priests,  doctors,  or  others,  haye  no  part 
in  making  infallible  decisions  in  the  Church.*'  He  says 
the  goyemment  of  the  Church  is  a  monarchy  with  re- 
gard to  its  head,  but,  at  the  same  time,  tempered  with 
an  aristocracy.  A  unanimous  conaent  is  not  necessary 
to  make  a  decińun  infallible;  a  majority  is  suilicient  for 
this  purpose.  He  also  says  that  a  tacit  consent  is  suffi- 
dent  to  make  a  dedsion  infallible;  for  to  be  silent  is  to 
consent.  Hence  he  oondudes  that "  when  the  pope  de- 
fines  anjrthing,  and  the  majority  of  bishops  do  not  object, 
it  is  impossible  that  this  definition  should  embrace  error" 
(Dens,  TheoL  tom.  ii,  No.  82,  Oualis  esse  ddteat  Coruensiu 
Epucoporum),  '*  From  the  aboye  we  collect  four  princi- 
pal  systems  which  ooncem  the  seat  of  infallibllity,  and 
these  contain  a  considerable  number  of  subdiyisions,  the 
chief  of  which  are  expressed  in  the  following  analysis. 
FirH  Syttem:  This  embraces  the  infallibllity  of  the 
whole  Church,  and  indudes  two  cases :  (1.)  Th/B  Church 
diffudcej  that  is,  all  hcr  dergy  as  a  body,  inasmuch  aa 
the  people,  wheneyer  infallibllity  is  concemed,  oompose 
no  part  of  the  Church.  (2.)  The  bishops,  aa  the  repr^ 
tentaiwes  of  the  Church,  though  not  assembled  in  coun- 
ciL  Secomi  System :  A  oouncil  composed  of  all  the  bish- 
ops; and  tbis  also  is  diyided  into  two  cases :  (1.)  The  de- 
dsion of  a  council  when  approyed  by  the  whole  Church. 
(2.)  The  dedsion  of  a  council  when  not  approyed  by  the 
whole  Church.  Third  System:  A  council  and  pope 
united.  There  are  four  cases  of  this:  (1.)  A  coundl 
conyened  by  the  pope.  (2.)  A  council  confirmed  by  the 
pope,  (3.)  A  council  conyened  by  the  pope,  and  whose 
decisions  are  reoeiyed  by  the  whole  Church,  or  the  body 
of  ber  pastors.  (4.)  A  oouncil  confirmed  by  the  pope, 
and  recdved  subaeąuently  by  the  Church.  Fourtk  Sys^ 
tern :  Respects  the  infallibility  of  the  pope  himself.  Thia 
bas  the  four  following  cases:  (1.)  The  pope  himself  de- 
dding  officially.  (2.)  The  pope  and  a  few  bbhops.  (3.) 
The  pope,  when  his  decisions  are  receiyed  by  the  whole 
Church.  (4.)  The  pope  and  a  few  bishops,  whose  de- 
cisions are  receiyed  by  the  whole  Church.  Any  person 
who  will  examine  the  ąuotations  giyen  from  Roman 
Catholic  authors  will  percciye  these  four  distlnct  sys- 
tems, together  with  the  seyeral  cases  nnder  each.  If  we 
also  consider  their  differences  in  regard  to  the  erłent  of 
infallibility  (some  oonftning  it  to  artidea  of  faith  and 
precepta  of  morality,  and  others  making  distinctions  be- 
tween  matters  of  right  emdfacts,  and  then  of  facts  con- 
nected  with  faith,  and  also  that  their  Church  bas  not 
preciady  defined  where  this  infallibility  is  to  be  found), 
then  we  may  safdy  say  that  the  bare  recital  of  their 
endless  divisions  respecting  the  seat  of  infallibility  will 
proye  that  the  thing  is  not  in  eustence"  (EUiott,  On 
Romanism^  p.  66). 

This  infallibility  of  the  Church  Romanists  attempt  to  ' 
proye  (1.)  from  a  supposed  unanimity  of  the  bishops, 
which,  they  argue,  would,  if  considered  as  merę  human 
testimony,  cany  with  it  an  amount  of  morał  certainty 
admitting  of  no  doubt,  and  therefore  equiyalent  to  infal- 
libility; (2.)  from  the  diyinely  appomted  mission  of  a 
dergy  regularly  descended  from  the  apostles,  who  them- 
sdycs  had  the  most  poeitaye  promises  of  Christ  (John 
zz,  21 ;  xy,  15;  Matt.  xxyiii,  19,  20 ;  John  xiy,  IS,  17 1 


INFALLTRTTiTTY 


670 


INFAŁLIBILITY 


Lukę  X,  16).  They  fOso  quote  2  Tim.  i.  U;  ii, 2;  and 
Acts  XX,  28,  to  show  Łhat  Łhe  apostks  daimed  this  priy- 
ilege  for  themselyes,  aa  well  as  the  power  of  transmit- 
ting  it  to  those  they  appointed  oyer  the  churchea. 

The  same  pńyilege  has  alao  been  ascribed  to  the 
pope  aa  saccessor  of  St.  Peter,  and  God'8  only  vicege- 
lent.  The  oltramontanes,  such  as  BeUarmine,  Baroniiis, 
etc^  maiutain  that  whatever  dogmatic  jadgment  or  de- 
dsion  on  a  doctrinal  point  the  pope  addreased  to  the 
whole  church,  is  necessarily  correct.  But  as  it  has  re- 
peatedly  occurred  that  the  Church,  as  represented  in 
oooncils,  has  disagreed  with  the  pope  on  pointa  of  doc- 
trine,  it  foUows  that,  if  both  are  eqixaUy  infallible,  the 
people  are  boond  to  beliere  eąually  two  opposite  doo- 
trinea.  .The  French  Church  settled  the  difficulty  by 
prodaiming  generał  oouncils  superior  to  the  pope  (or 
''morę  infallible") ;  the  assembly  of  the  dergy,  in  1682, 
aaserted  Łhat  ^  in  controyersies  of  faith  the  office  of  the 
pope  is  the  chief,  and  that  his  decrees  pertain  to  all 
churches;  neyerthdess,  that  his  judgment  is  not  irre- 
formibile  unless  it  is  oonfirmed  by  the  consent  of  the 
Church."  Bossuet  sustained  this  principle  with  great 
talent  and  eloquenoe  in  his  DeJenHo  DeektrcU,  Cleri 
(ro^.  ii,  pL  i,  12  8q.  Heproyesbythedecreeaofcoun- 
dls,  by  the  testimony  of  fathers,  doctors,  and  schoolmen, 
by  the  declarations  of  popes  themsdyes,  and  especially 
of  Adrian  YI,  that  the  intSallibility  of  the  pope  waa  a 
new  doctrine,  altogether  unknown  in  the  early  ages  of 
the  Church.  **  He  disproyes  the  infallibility  of  the  pope 
not  merdy  by  negatiye,  but  by  a  long  and  strong  chain 
.  ofpositiyeeyidence;  by  addudng  a  nomberof  instanoes, 
aa  well  as  direct  assertions  of  his  in£fdlibility  ftom  gen- 
eration  afber  generation ;  by  showing,  from  a  laige  induc- 
tion  of  facts,  that  during  a  seriea  of  centuiies  he  was  re- 
garded  and  treated  as  fallible,  and  neyer  as  otherwise 
Łhan  fallible;  and  that,when  another  opinion  began  to 
gain  ground,  it  arose  mainly  from  the  exerci8e  of  that 
authońty  which  belongs  to  a  supremę  power'*  (Harc, 
CotUeti  icith  Rome^  p.  2 1 3) .  Bossuct^s  yiews  were  held  by 
Fleury,  Dupin,  ciudiual  Bausset,  etc  They  were  attack- 
ed  by  De  Maistre  in  his  work  Du  Papę,  A  work  of 
great  interest  on  this  subject  is  the  recently  discoyered 
Rąfułation  ofnllHeresies  ofHippolytus,  which  giyes  ns 
a  dear  idea  of  the  manner  in  which  the  Roman  bishops 
were  considered  in  his  times.  ''In  Germany,  where 
tnith  is  held  the  most  predous  of  all  poaseasions,  eyen 
by  members  of  the  Catholtc  Church,  the  conyiction  of 
the  mischiefs  produced  by  the  doctrine  of  the  infaUibili- 
ty  of  the  pope  is  so  strongly  fdt  by  many,  that  one  of 
Łhe  greatest  philosophers  of  the  last  generation,  Baader, 
who  was  a  zealous  champion  of  the  Christian  truth,  and 
himself  an  eamest  Roman  Catholic,  used  perpetually  to 
repeat  the  pregnant  words  ofSt  Martin, 'Le  Papisme 
est  la  faiblesse  du  Catholicisme ;  et  le  Catholicisme  est 
la  force  du  Papisme' "  (Hare,  ConUtt  tciih  Some,  p.  218). 

As  regards  the  infallibility  of  the  Church,  Dr.  New- 
man himsdf,  in  his  Lecturea  on  Romanism,  p.  61,  said: 
"  In  the  creed  of  pope  Pius  not  a  word  is  said  expre88ly 
about  the  Church'8  infallibility:  it  forma  no  article  of 
faith  there.  Her  interpretation  indeed  of  Soripture  is 
recognised  as  authoritatiye ;  but  so  also  is  *  the  unani- 
mous  consent  of  the  fathers,  whether  as  primitiye  or  eon- 
cordant ;  they  belieye  the  existing  Church  to  be  infalli- 
ble; and,if  ancient  bdief  is  at  yariance  with  it,  which 
of  course  they  do  not  aUow,  but  if  it  is,  then  antiquity 
must  be  mistaken — that  is  alL' " 

*'  That  generał  coundls  are  infallible  is  generally  be- 
UeyedbyRomanists.  Sorae,  howeyer,  maiutain  that  the 
confirmation  of  the  pope  is  neoessary  to  constitote  in- 
fallibility;  and  others,  that  the  dedsions  of  coundls  are 
infallible,  whether  confirmed  by  the  pope  or  not  We 
quote  the  sentiments  of  some  who  contend  that  the  de- 
crees of  a  generał  council,  with  the  confirmation  of  the 
pope,  are  infallible.  Ferraris  says, "  The  definitions  of  a 
generał  coundl  legitimately  assembled,  issued  in  the  ab- 
aence  of  the  pope,  are  not  infallible  without  his  confirma- 
tion" (Ferraris,  BibUoth,  Prompt,  in  ConcUwm,  art.  i,  sect. 


66).  Cardinal  Coaanus,  aa  ąnoted  by  the  former  wiifeer, 
dedares  that "  the  pope  giyea  authoritj  to  the  oogndT 
(Cusanus,  lib.  iii,  cap.  xy,  De  Concord  CaikoL),  Deni 
teaches  that "  generid  oouncils,  without  the  approbatioo 
of  the  pope,  are  fallible,  and  often  err ;  that  the  confiraia- 
tlon  of  the  pope  to  any  particular  decreea  of  a  oouoca 
impart  to  these  decrees  plenary  authońty ;  it  is  an  artick 
of  faith  that  generał  coundls  approyed  by  the  pope  om- 
not  err  in  detining  matters  of  faith  and  morals:  henoe 
they  are  to  be  considered  as  manifest  heredcs  who  ftt- 
sumę  to  cali  in  ąueation  what  is  decreed  by  such  oomi- 
ciłs."  He  also  bdieyes  that  the  dedsions  of  paiticdsr 
coundls,  confirmed  by  the  pope,  are  Ukewiae  infaffiUe, 
and  that  this  is  founded  on  the  infallibility  of  the  pope. 
But  Benedict  XIV.,  to  whom  Dens  refers,  thinks  thst 
the  dedsions  of  such  coundls  are  binding  only  in  their 
own  proyinces  or  diocesea.  Many  Romanist  writcn, 
howeyer,  maintain  strongly  that  the  dedsions  of  gener- 
ał coundls  are  infallible  without  the  pope*s  confirmation. 
It  would  be  an  endlesa  taak  to  qnote  the  authoritieR  oo 
both  sides.  They  are,  for  the  most  part,  howeyer,  agreed 
that  what  they  cali  generał  coundls  are  infallible :  same 
belieye  them  infalliUe  because  they  aie  generał  ODoa* 
ciłs,  while  others,  belieying  the  same,  consider  the  co&- 
finnation  of  the  pope  as  neceesary  to  the  authoritadTe 
character  of  the  assembly. 

"The  discordant  sentiments  of  Romaniats  respecting 
those  characteristics  which  are  neoessary  to  constitote 
infallibility,  form  a  strong  argument  against  the  inei^ 
rancy  of  coundls.  The  four  foUowing  opiniooa  baTe 
been  strongly  hdd  by  the  Church  of  Borne:  (1.)  Some 
haye  aaserted  that  the  diffusiyc,  and  not  the  representa- 
tiye  body  of  the  Church  possessed  infallibility.  Occin, 
Petrus  de  Aliaco,  Cusanus,  Antoninus  of  łlorenoe,  Fa- 
normitan,  Nicholas  de  Clemangis,  Fianciscus  Mirandnls, 
and  others,  were  of  this  opinion.  (2.)  Some  say  that 
oouncils  are  no  farther  infallible  than  as  they  adhere  to 
Scripture  and  uniyersal  tradition.  (8.)  Others,  that  coun- 
dls are  of  themselves  infallible,  whether  the  pope  oonfinn 
them  or  not.  This  was  the  common  opinion  before  the 
Coundl  of  Lateran,  under  Leo  X,  aa  appears  from  the 
Coundls  of  Basil  and  Constance.  (4.)  Many  make  the 
confirmation  of  the  pope  neoessary  to  the  infallibility  of 
a  generał  coundl.  There  is  an  irreoondlable  difference 
between  the  last  two  opinions;  for  those  who  sappoie 
councils  to  be  infallible  without  the  confirmation  of  the 
pope  belieye  them  to  be  aboye  him,  and  that  he  is  Cslli- 
ble ;  while  those  who  are  of  opinion  that  the  confirma- 
tion of  his  hoUness  is  absolutely  neoessary  to  the  infalli- 
bility of  the  coundl  belieye  him  to  be  infallible,  and  ea* 
perior  to  a  coundl." 

See£lliott,^J2ofna}it»ii,bookiii,chap.iii;  andbook 
i,  chap.  iy ;  Buli,  Hfpfy  to  the  BUhop  ofMemtx  (Woria, 
yoL  ii;  Faber,  D^fficultiee  o/  Romanism;  Ouseley,  On 
Papai  NoveUiea ;  Hook,  Ecde8.DieLs.v,;  Cramp^Yesf- 
book  of  Popenfj  p.  66 ;  Hare,  Coniesł  tńih  Rome^  p.  1^ 
210, 223;  Kitto,  Joumaio/Sacred  Liierature,  Oct.  1854. 

IL  Ikfallibiuty  of  the  Pope.— For  many  centu- 
ries  the  popes  haye  demanded,  and,  so  far  as  lay  in 
them,  enforced  an  absolute  submission  to  aU  their  doc- 
trinal dedsions.  They  forbade  appeal  from  their  tńbo- 
nal  to  the  General  Coundl,.  and  eyen  disałlowed  the 
plea  of  the  Jansenists,  Hermesiana,  and  othcr  schoob 
whose  yiews  were  censured,  that  the  popes  censoiiag 
them  had  erred,  not  in  what  they  stated  to  be  the  Cath- 
olic doctrine,  bat  in  understanding  the  right  sense  of 
the  censured  books.  Thus  the  popes  for  many  oentn- 
ries  haye  acted  as  though  they  were  infallible;  and  yet 
it  was  distinctly  taught  within  the  Church  that  the  in- 
fallibility of  the  pope  waa  not  a  recognised  doctrine, 
and  eyen  many  catechisms  and  manuals  of  doctrine  ex- 
plidtly  stated,  with  the  consent  of  many  bishops,  that 
the  infallibility  of  the  pope  was  not  a  doctrine  of  the 
Church.  One  of  the  chief  objects  for  which  the  Vati- 
can  Council  was  called  in  1869  waa  to  make  an  end  of 
this  uncertainty  and  enrol  the  doctrine  of  papai  infalli- 
bility among  the  formal  Church  doctńnea.    As  aoon  aa 


INFALUBILITT 


671 


INPALLIBILITT 


it  became  genendly  known  that  it  waa  intended  to  bring 
this  sabject  before  Łhe  ooancU,  a  number  of  worka  ap- 
peared,  dłBcussing  the  pioposed  innoration  in  every  aa- 
pect  By  far  the  most  important  of  theae  is  the  one 
pabliflhed  in  Germany  under  the  title  Der  Paptt  und 
doi  Concil  (Mentz,  1869 ;  £ngl.  tnuuL  Tho  Pope  and  the 
Council),  which  gives  an  exhaiiative  history  of  the  riews 
of  the  Chuich  conceming  infallibility.  The  aathor  of 
the  work,  who  on  the  title-page  calls  himself  Janos,  was 
8nb9eqnently  found  to  be  profesaor  Huber,  of  the  Unirer- 
stty  of  Munich.  The  bcók  is  a  storehouse  of  immense 
karning,  for  the  author  ąuotes  thoosanda  of  indiyidual 
cases  to  show  that  no  one  can  for  a  moment  believe  in 
this  doctiine  without  falsifying  the  whole  history  of  the 
Church.  "  For  thirteen  oenturies,"  says  our  author,  ^  an 
incomprehensible  silenoe  on  this  fandamental  article 
reigned  thronghoat  the  whole  Chnrch  and  her  literar 
turę.  Nonę  of  the  ancient  confesaions  of  faith,  no  cate- 
chism,  nonę  of  the  patristic  writings  composed  for  the 
instroction  of  the  people,  contain  a  syllable  about  the 
pope,  Btill  leas  any  hint  that  all  certainty  of  faith  and 
doctiine  depends  on  him."  Not  a  single  ąueation  of 
doctrine  for  the  fiist  thousand  yeara  was  finaJly  dedded 
by  the  popes;  in  nóne  of  the  early  contro Yersies  did 
they  take  any  part  at  all;  and  their  interposition,  when 
they  began  to  interpose,  was  often  far  from  felicitous. 
Pope  Zoeimus  commcnded  the  Pelagian  teaching  of  Ce- 
lestioa,  pope  Julian  affirmed  the  OTthodoxy  of  the  Sa- 
bellian  AIu\:e]lus  of  Anc3rra,  pope  Liberius  subscribed  an 
Arian  creed,  pope  Yigilius  contradicted  himself  three 
times  running  on  a  ąuestion  of  faith,  pope  Honorins  lent 
the  whole  weight  of  his  authoiity  to  the  support  of  the 
newly-introduced  Monothelite  heresy,  and  was  solemnJy 
anathematized  by  three  ax;umenical  cooncils  for  doing 
aa  Nor  do  these  ''errors  and  oontradictions  of  the 
popes"  grow  by  any  means  fewer  or  less  important  as 
time  goes  on.  The  blundering  of  successive  popes  about 
the  conditions  of  valid  ordination— on  which,  .icoording 
to  Catholic  theology,  the  whole  saciamental  system, 
and  therefore  the  means  of  salvation,  depend — are  alone 
suffident  to  dispose  forerer  of  their  clsim  to  infallibility. 
Keither,  again,  did  the  Roman  poitlffs  possess,  in  the 
andent  constitution  of  the  Church,  any  ot  those  powers 
which  are  now  held  to  be  inhcrcnt  in  their  sovereign 
Office,  and  which  must  undoubtedly  be  reckoned  among 
the  cssential  attributes  of  absolute  sovereignty.  They 
convoked  nonę  of  the  generał  oouncils,  and  only  pre- 
ńdedf  by  their  legates,  at  three  of  them;  nor  were  the 
canons  enacted  there  held  to  reąuire  their  confirmation. 
They  had  neither  legislative,  administratire,  nor  judi- 
cial  power  in  the  Church,  nor  was  any  further  efficacy 
attńbuted  to  their  excommunication  than  to  that  of 
any  other  bishop.  No  special  prerogatires  were  held  to 
have  been  bequeathed  to  them  by  St.  Peter,  and  the 
only  duty  considered  to  devolve  on  them  in  virtue  of 
their  primacy  was  that  of  watching  over  the  obsenranoe 
of  the  canons.  The  limited  right  of  hearing  appeals, 
gnuited  to  them  by  the  Coundl  of  Sardica  in  847,  was 
arowedly  an  innovaUon,  of  purely  ecclesiastical  origin, 
and,  moreover,  was  never  admitted  or  ezercised  in  Afii- 
ca  or  the  EasL  Many  national  chorches,  like  the  Ax- 
menian,  the  Syro-Persian,  the  Iiish,  and  the  ancient 
British,  were  independent  of  any  influence  of  Bome. 
When  first  something  like  the  papai  system  was  put 
ittto  words  by  an  Eastem  patriarch,  St.  Gregory,  the 
greatest  and  best  of  all  the  early  popes,  repudiated  the 
idea  as  a  wicked  blasphemy.  Not  one  of  the  fiithcrs 
explains  the  paasages  of  the  New  Testament  about  SL 
Peter  in  the  ultramontane  sense;  and  the  Tiidentine 
-  pTofeasion  of  faith  binds  all  the  dergy  to  interpret  Scrip- 
tuie  in  accordance  with  their  unauimous  consent.  **  To 
prore  the  doctrine  of  papai  infallibility,  nothing  leas  is 
ieqiiiied  than  a  complete  falsiflcation  of  Church  history." 

The  following  are  interesting  spedmens  of  cases  in 
which  the  popes  expressly  contradicted  other  popes,  or 
the  doctrine  of  the  Church  as  it  is  now  recogniaed : 

''Innocent  I  and  Gelasius  I,  the  former  writing  to  the 


Cooncil  of  MileTis,  the  la^ter  in  his  epistle  to  the  bish* 
ops  of  Picenum,  declaied  it  te  be  so  indispensable  for  in" 
fanta  to  recdve  communion,  that  those  who  die  without 
it  go  straight  to  heli  {StAuguaLOpp,  ii,  640;  ConeiL 
CołL  [ed.  Labbć ],  iv,  1178).  A  thousand  years  later  th€ 
Councłl  of  Trent  anathematized  this  doctrine. 

''  It  is  the  constant  teaching  of  the  Church  that  ordl' 
nation  reodved  from  a  bishop,  quite  irrespectively  of 
his  personal  worthiness  or  unworthiness,  is  valid  and  in" 
delible.  Putting  aside  baptism,  the  whole  security  of 
the  tacraments  rests  on  this  prindple  of  faith,  and  re' 
ordination  has  always  been  oppoaed  in  the  Church  as  a 
crime  and  a  profanation  of  the  sacrament.  Only  in 
Bome,  during  the  derastation  which  the  endless  wara  of 
Goths  and  Lombards  inflicted  on  Central  Italy,  there 
waa  a  coUapse  of  all  leaming  and  theology,  which  dis- 
turbed  and  distorted  the  dogmatic  tradition.  Since  the 
8th  century,  the  ordinations  of  certain  popes  began  to 
be  annulled,  and  the  bishops  and  priests  ordained  by 
them  were  compelled  to  be  reordaincd.  This  occurred 
first  in  769,  when  Constantine  II,  who  had  got  possea- 
sion  of  the  papai  chair  by  foroe  of  arms,  and  kept  it  for 
thirteen  months,  was  blinded,  and  deposed  at  a  synod, 
and  all  his  ordinations  pronounced  invalid. 

'*  But  the  strongest  case  oocurred  at  the  end  of  the 
9th  century,  after  the  death  of  pope  Formosus,  when  the 
repeated  rejections  of  his  ordinations  threw  the  whole 
Italian  Church  into  the  greatest  confusion,  and  produced 
a  generał  unoertainty  as  to  whether  there  were  any 
yalid  sacraments  in  Italy.  AuxUius,  who  was  a  eon- 
temporary,  said  that  through  this  unirersal  rejection 
and  repetition  of  orders  ('  ordinatio,  exordinatio,  et  su- 
perordinatio*),  matters  had  oome  to  such  a  pass  in  Bome 
that  for  twenty  years  the  Christian  religion  had  been 
interrupted  and  extingui8hed  in  Italy.  Popes  and  syn* 
ods  dedded  in  glaring  contradiction  to  one  another,  now 
for,  now  against  the  validity  of  the  ordinations,  and  it 
was  self-evident  that  in  Bome  all  sure  knowledge  on 
the  doctrine  of  ordination  was  lost  At  the  end  of  his 
seoond  work,  Auxiliu8,  speaking  in  the  name  of  those 
numerous  priests  and  bishops  whoee  ecclesiastical  status 
was  callcd  in  question  by  the  deciaions  of  Stephen  YII 
and  Sergius  III,  demanded  the  strict  inyestigation  of  a 
General  Coundl,  aa  the  only  authority  capable  of  8olv- 
ing  the  complication  introduced  by  the  popes  (Mabillon, 
AtuUecta  [Paris,  1728],  p.  89). 

**  But  the  coundl  never  met,  and  the  dogmatic  uncer- 
tainty  and  confusion  in  Bome  continued.  In  the  mid- 
dle  of  the  Uth  centuiy  the  great  contest  against  si- 
mony,  which  waa  then  thought  equivalent  to  hercsy, 
broke  out,  and  the  ordinations  of  a  simoniacal  bishop 
were  pronounced  inyalid.  Leo  IX  reordained  a  num* 
ber  of  persona  on  this  ground,  as  Peter  Damiani  relatea 
(Petri  Damaini  Opuec  p.  419).  Gregory  YII,  at  his  fillh 
Boman  synod,  madę  the  inralidity  of  all  simoniacal  or- 
dinations a  rule,  and  the  prindple,  confirmed  by  Urban 
II,  that  a  simoniacal  bishop  can  giye  nothing  in  ordina- 
tion, because  he  has  nothing,  paased  into  the  Decretum 
of  Gratian  (Cans.  i,  qu.  7,  c  24). 

*'  In  these  cases  it  is  obWous  that  doctrine  and  prao- 
tioe  were  most  intimatdy  connected.  It  was  only  from 
their  holding  a  false,  and,  in  ita  oonseąuences,  most  in- 
jurious  notion  of  the  force  and  nature  of  this  sacrament, 
that  the  popes  acted  as  they  did,  and  if  they  had  then 
been  generally  considered  infallible,  a  hopeless  confusion 
must  have  been  introduced,  not  only  into  Italy,  but  the 
whole  Church. 

''  In  contrast  to  pope  Pelagius,  who  had  declared,  with 
the  whole  Eastem  and  Western  Church,  the  indispensa- 
ble necessity  of  the  invocation  of  the  Trinity  in  baptism, 
Nicolaa  I  assured  the  Bulgarians  that  baptism  in  the 
name  of  Christ  alone  was  ąuitc  suifident,  and  thua  ex- 
posed  the  Christians  there  to  the  danger  of  an  in^'alid 
baptism.  The  same  pope  declared  confirmation  admin- 
istered  by  priests,  acoording  to  the  Greek  usage  from 
remote  antiąuity,  inyalid,  and  ordered  those  so  confirm- 
ed to  be  confirmed  anew  by  a  bishop,  thereby  denying 


mFALLIBILITT 


572 


mPALLIBILITY 


to  the  whole  Eastem  Church  tlie  posBeańon  of  a 
ment|  and  lajing  the  foundation  of  the  bitter  estrange- 
ment  irhich  led  to  a  pennanent  diyision  {ConeiL  ColL 
[ed.Labb^],vi,548). 

**  Stephen  II  (III)  allowed  mairiage  with  a  daye  giń 
to  be  dis8olved,  and  a  new  one  contracted,  MrhereaB  all 
preYioua  popes  had  pronounced  such  maniages  india- 
soluble  (ib,  vi,  1650).  He  abo  declared  baptlsm,  in  casea 
of  necessity,  yalid  when  administered  with  winę  (ib,  yi, 
1662).       ' 

"  Celestine  III  tried  to  loosen  the  mairiage  tie  by  de- 
claring  it  dimolyed  if  either  party  became  hereticaL 
Innocent  III  annolled  thia  decision,  and  Hadrian  YI 
caUed  Celestine  a  heietic  for  giving  iu  Thia  dedaion 
was  afterwarda  expunged  fiom  the  MS.  coUections  of 
papai  decrees,  but  the  Spanish  theologian  Alphonsus  de 
Castro  had  seen  it  there  (Adv,£for,  [ed.  Paris],  1665; 
oomp.  Melch.  Canus,  p.  240). 

"  The  Capemaite  doctrine,  that  Chrisfs  body  is  sen- 
aibly  (jieruualiter)  touched  by  the  handa  and  broken  by 
the  teeth  in  the  Eacharist — an  error  rejected  by  the 
whole  Church,  and  contradicting  the  impaseibility  of 
his  body— was  afiirmed  by  Nicolas  II  at  the  SyncŃd  of 
Romę  in  1059,  and  Berengar  was  compelled  to  acknowl- 
edge  it.  Lanfranc  reproaches  Berengar  with  afterwards 
wishing  to  make  caidinal  Humbert,  instead  of  the  pope, 
responsible  for  this  doctrine  (Lanfranc,  De  Euch,  c  8 
[ed.  Mignę],  p.  412). 

"  Innocent  III,  in  order  to  exhibit  the  papai  power 
in  the  fullest  splendor  of  its  diyine  omnipotence,  inyent- 
ed  the  new  doctrine  that  the  spiritual  bond  which  unites 
a  biahop  to  his  diocese  is  firmer  and  morę  indissoluble 
than  the  *camal'  bond,  as  he  called  it,  between  man 
and  wife,  and  that  God  alone  can  loose  it,  yiz.  tianalate 
a  bishop  from  one  see  to  another.  But  as  the  pope  is 
the  representatiye  of  the  true  God  on  earth,  he,  and  he 
alone,  can  dlssolye  this  holy  and  indissoluble  bond,  not 
by  human,  but  diyine  authority,  and  it  is  God,  not  man, 
who  looses  it.  (Decretal  *  De  Transl,  EpiaeJ  c  2,  8,  4. 
This  was  to  introduce  a  new  artide  of  faith.  The 
Church  had  not  known  for  centuries  that  resignations, 
depositions,  and  translations  of  bishops  belonged  by  di- 
yine right  to  the  pope.)  The  obyious  and  direct  coiol- 
lary,  that  the  pope  can  also  dissolye  the  less  firm  and 
holy  bond  of  marriage,  Innocent,  as  we  haye  seen,  oyer- 
looked,  for  he  solemnly  oondemned  Celestine  IIPs  decis- 
ion  on  that  point,  and  thus  he  unwittingly  inyolyed  him- 
aelf  in  a  contradiction.  Many  canonists  haye  accepted 
this  as  the  legitimate  conseąuence  of  his  teaching. 

**  Innocent  betrayed  hb  utter  ignorance  of  theology 
when  he  declared  that  the  Fifth  Book  of  Moses,  being 
called  Deuteronomy,  or  the  Second  Book  of  the  Law, 
mukt  bind  the  Christian  Church,  which  is  the  second 
Church  (Decretal  *QuiJUii  nnt  Ugitimi;  c.  18).  Thia 
great  pope  seems  neyer  to  haye  read  Deuteronomy,  or 
he  could  hardly  have  fallen  into  the  blunder  of  suppoe- 
ing,  e.  g.,  that  the  Old-Testament  piohibttions  of  par- 
ticular  kinds  of  food,  the  bumt-ofTerings,  the  harsh  pe- 
;ial  codę  and  bloody  laws  of  war,  the  prohibitions  of 
woollen  and  linen  garments,  etc.,  were  to  be  again  madę 
obligatory  on  Christians.  As  the  Jews  were  aUowed  in 
Deuteronomy  to  put  away  a  wife  who  displeased  them 
«nd  take  another,  Innocent  ran  the  risk  of  falling  himself 
into  a  greater  error  about  marriage  than  Celestine  IIL 

Notable  contradictions  as  to  temporal  priyileges  occur 
In  the  history  of  the  altemate  approbations  and  pene- 
cutions  of  the  Franciscan  order  by  the  popes. 

**One  of  the  most  oomprehensiye,  dogmatic  docn- 
ments  eyer  issued  by  a  pope  is  the  decree  of  Eugenius 
rV  *to  the  Armenians,'  dated  Noyember  22, 1439,  three 
months  after  the  Council  of  Florenoe  was  brought  to  an 
end  by  the  departure  of  the  Greeks.  It  is  a  confession 
of  faith  of  the  Roman  Church,  intended  to  serye  as  a 
rule  of  doctrine  and  practioe  for  the  Armenians  on  thoee 
points  they  had  preyiously  differed  about  The  dogmas 
of  the  Unity  of  the  Diyine  Naturę,  the  Trinity,  the  In- 
caination,  and  the  Seyen  Saciaments,  are  ezpounded. 


and  the  pope,  moreoyer,  aaserts  that  the  decree  tbos  sd- 
emnly  issued  has  receiyed  the  sanction  of  the  coimdl, 
that  is,  of  the  Italian  bishopa  whom  he  had  detained  ia 
Fk>rence. 

"•  If  this  decree  of  the  pope  were  really  a  rule  of  fnth, 
the  Eastem  Church  would  haye  oniy  four  saciaments 
instead  of  seyen ;  the  Western  Church  would  for  at  kast 
eight  centuries  haye  been  depriyed  of  three  sacraments, 
and  of  one,  the  want  of  which  would  noake  all  the  rcst, 
with  one  exception,  inyalid.  Eugenius  lY  detenoiiMS 
in  this  decree  the  form  and  matter,  the  snbstance  of  tbe 
sacraments,  or  of  thoee  things  on  the  presence  or  tb> 
sence  of  which  the  exi8tence  of  the  sacrament  itaelf  de> 
pends,  according  to  the  umyersal  doctrine  of  the  Church. 
He  giyes  a  form  of  confirmation  which  neyer  csisted  in 
one  half  of  the  Church,  and  fint  came  into  use  in  the 
other  after  the  lOth  centuiy.  So,  again,  with  penane& 
What  is  giyen  as  the  eesential  form  of  the  sacrament 
was  unknown  in  the  Western  Church  for  deyen  hon- 
dred  years,  and  neyer  known  in  the  Greek.  And  when 
the  touching  of  the  sacred  yessels,  and  the  words  accom- 
panying  the  rite,  are  giyen  ta  the  form  and  matter  of 
ordination,  it  follows  that  the  Latin  Church  for  a  thoo- 
sand  years  had  ndther  priests  nor  bishops — nay,  like 
the  Greek  Church,  which  neyer  adopted  this  usage,  po»- 
sesses  to  this  hour  ndther  priests  nor  bishops,  and  con- 
seąuently  no  sacraments  except  baptism,  and  perhaps 
marriage.  (Comp.  Denzinger,  Enchirid,  Symbol  et  Def- 
init^f  Wiroeb.  1854,  p.  200  8q.  But  Denzinger,  in  onkr  • 
to  conceal  the  purdy  dogmatic  character  of  this  famons 
decree,  kas  omitied  the  Jirtt  part,  oh  the  Trmity  and  In- 
carnaiion,  which  is  giyen  in  Raynaldu8*s  Aimaltf  1439. 
[The  same  conspicuously  untenable  explanation  wai 
adopted  in  the  DuUm  Retiew  for  January,  1866.— Tb.]) 

"  It  is  noteworthy  that  this  decree— with  which  pa- 
pai infallibility  or  the  whole  hierarchy  and  the  sacra- 
ments of  the  Church  stand  or  fali — is  dted,  rcfuted,  and 
appealed  to  by  all  dogmatic  writers,  but  that  the  adbe- 
rents  of  papai  infallibility  haye  neyer  meddled  with  it 
Ndther  Bdlarmine,  nor  Charlas,  nor  Aguirre,  nor  Oni, 
nor  the  other  apolngists  of  the  Roman  court,  tnmbled 
themsdycs  with  it." 

Into  dogmatic  theology  the  doctrine  of  papai  in&llł- 
bility  was  introduced  by  Thomas  Aąuinas.  On  the 
basis  of  fabrications  inyented  by  a  Dominican  monk, 
including  a  canon  of  the  Council  of  Chalcedon,  giring 
all  bishops  an  unlimited  right  of  appral  to  the  pope,  and 
on  the  forgeries  found  in  Gratian,  Tlioraas  built  up  his 
papai  system,  with  its  two  leading  prindples,  that  tbe 
pope  is  the  first  infallible  teacher  of  the  world,  and  the 
abeolute  ruler  of  the  Church.  The  popes  were  so  well 
pleased  with  the  teachings  of  Thomas  that  John  XXn 
afiirmed  Thomas  had  not  written  without  a  f  pedał  in- 
spiration  of  the  Holy  Ghost,  and  Innocent  YI  said  that 
whoeyer  assailed  his  teaching  incurred  suspidon  of  hcr- 
esy.  The  powerful  mendicant  orders  of  Dominicans  asd 
Frandscans  found  the  papai  system,  with  its  theory  of 
infallibility,  indispensable  for  the  success  of  their  omi 
claims  against  the  bishops  and  uniyeidties,  and  they 
became  the  yiolent  champions  of  the  new  doctrine.  Tbe 
boldest  champions  of  papai  absolutism  admitted,  how- 
eyer,  that  the  popes  could  err,  and  that  thdr  dedsiois 
were  no  oertain  criterion.  But  they  also  held  that  in 
such  cases  a  heretical  pope  ipso/aefo  ceased  to  be  pope, 
without  or  before  any  judidal  sentence,  so  that  coundł^ 
which  are  the  Church's  judicature,  only  attestcd  the 
yacancy  of  the  papai  throne  as  an  accompliahed  fart 
The  contest  between  the  Council  of  Basel  and  pope  Eu- 
genius lY  eyoked  the  work  of  cardinal  Torąucmada, 
whoee  argument,  which  was  held,  up  to  the  time  of  Bd- 
larmine^ to  be  the  most  conclusiye  apology  of  the  papai 
system,  rests  entirdy  on  fabrications  laiter  than  tbe 
peeudo-Isidore,  and  chiefly  on  the  spurioos  passagcs  of 
St  CyriL  Torq«emada  aiso  holda  that  a  pope  can  lapse 
into  heresy  and  propound  false  doctrine,  but  tben  he  ia 
ipso  Jaeto  depoeed  by  God  himself  before  any  sentence 
of  the  Church  has  been  pessed,  so  that  the  Choich  or 


INFALLIBILITY 


613 


INFALLIBIUrr 


ooancil  camiot  jadge  him,  bat  can  only  annonnoe  the 
jadgmenŁ  of  God,  and  thus  one  cannot  properly  aay 
that  a  pope  can  beoome  heretical,  sinoe  he  oeases  to  be 
pope  at  the  moment  of  paasing  from  orthodoxyto  het- 
erodosy.  The  doctrine  entered  on  a  fresh  phaae  of 
derelopment  from  the  time  of  Leo  X.  Its  foiemoet 
defender  at  that  time  was  Thomas  of  Yic  or  Cajetan, 
yet  the  doctrine  was  so  fsr  from  becoming  dominant  at 
Romę  that  the  suocessor  of  Leo  X,  Acbrian  YI,  who,  as 
profeasor  of  Loavain,  had  maintained  in  his  principal 
work  thAt  aeveral  popes  had  been  heretical,  and  that  it 
was  certainly  possible  for  a  pope  to  establish  a  heresy 
by  his  decision  or  decretals,  caused,  as  pope,  his  work 
denying  infaUibility  to  be  reprinted  in  Romę. 

Another  patron  of  the  infaUibility  theory,  who  la- 
bored  haid  to  natoralize  it  in  Belgium,  the  Louvain 
theologian,  Rnard  Tapper,  retomed  in  1552  from  Trent 
cnielly  disillusionized,  and  thought  the  deep^^eated  cor- 
raption  of  the  Church  a  matter  not  to  be  disputed,  but 
to  be  deplored.  The  third  of  the  theological  fathers 
of  papai  infaUibility  in  the  16th  century  was  Tapper'8 
contemporary,  the  Spaniard  Melchior  Canos,  whose  work 
on  theological  prindples  and  eyidences  was,  up  to  Bel- 
laimine*s  time,  the  great  authority  used  by  all  infal- 
Ubilista.  Like  Tapper,  he  became  in  later  years  dis- 
gosted  with  the  effcct  of  the  papai  system  on  the  popes 
and  the  Curia,  and  in  a  report  to  the  king  of  Spain  ex- 
pressed  the  opinion  that  the  whole  administration  of 
the  Church  at  Romę  was  "  converted  into  a  great  trad- 
ing  business,  a  tralfic  forbidden  by  all  laws,  human, 
natural,  and  divine."  Out  of  iŁaly  the  hypothesis  of 
infaUibility  had  but  few  adherenta,  eyen  in  the  16th 
centuiy,  tiU  the  Jesuits  began  to  exercise  a  powerful 
influence. 

The  bishops  and  prominent  scholars  of  France,  Spain, 
Germany,  and  other  countries  were  almost  imanimous 
in  advocating  the  superiority  of  oscumenical  councils 
oyer  the  pope.  The  tuming  of  the  tide  was  chiefiy  due 
to  the  influence  of  the  Jesuits,  who  were  naturaUy  in- 
cUncd  to  fiYor  the  extremest  absolutiam  in  the  Church. 
As  their  representative,  cardinal  Bellamrine  further  de- 
Teloped  the  idcas  of  Cajetan,  iu  which  he  g^eraUy  con- 
cors:  but  he  rejects  dedsirely  Cajetan's  hypothesis  of  a 
heretical  pope  being  deposed  ip§o  facto  by  the  judgment 
of  God.  A  heretical  pope  is  legitimate  so  long  as  the 
Church  has  not  deposed  him.  If  Cajetan  said  the  Church 
was  the  handmaid  of  the  pope,  BeUannine  adds  that 
whaterer  doctrine  it  pleases  the  pope  to  prescribe  the 
Church  mnst  rcceire;  there  can  be  no  question  raised 
about  proving  it ;  she  must  blindly  renounce  aU judgment 
of  her  own,  and  firmly  beUere  that  aU  the  pope  teaches 
is  absolutely  true,  aU  he  commands  absolutdy  good,  and 
aU  he  forbids  simply  evU  and  noxious.  For  the  pope  can 
as  Uttle  err  in  mor^  as  in  dogmatic  qnestions.  Nay,  he 
goes  ao  far  as  to  maintain  that  if  the  pope  were  to  err 
by  prescribing  sins  and  forbidding  virtues,  the  Church 
wotUd  be  bound  to  consider  sina  good  and  rirtues  eyil, 
onlen  she  chose  to  sin  against  conscience;  so  that  if 
the  pope  absolye  the  subjects  of  a  prince  from  their  oath 
of  aUegiance,  which,  according  to  Bellarmine,  he  has  a 
fuli  light  to  do,  the  Church  must  beUeve  that  what  he 
has  done  is  good,  and  every  Christian  must  hołd  it  a  sin 
to  remain  any  lońger  byal  and  obedient  to  his  soyer- 
eign.  Through  the  influence  of  Bellarmine  and  other 
wiitcrs  of  hia  order,  the  infaUibiUty  hypothesis  now 
madę  immense  strides.  One  great  stumbling- błock 
had,  bowevcr,  to  be  removed.  Every  theologian,  on 
ckaer  inspection,  foond  papai  dedsions  which  contra- 
dicted  other  doctrines,  laid  down  by  popes  or  generaUy 
recdred  in  the  Church,  or  which  appeared  to  him 
dottbtful,  and  it  seemed  impossible  to  declare  aU  these 
pHMlucts  of  an  infaUible  authority.  It  became  necessa- 
17,  tberefore,  to  specify  some  distinctiye  marks  by  which 
a  leaUy  infaUible  dedsion  of  a  pope  might  be  recog- 
iuaed,.or  to  flx  certain  oonditions,  in  the  absence  of 
which  the  prononncement  is  not  to  be  regarded  as  in- 
IsUible.    And  thus,  sińce  the  16th  century,  there  grew 


np  the  famous  distinction  of  papai  dedsions  promulgi^ 
ted  ex  cathedra,  and  tberefore  dogmaticaUy,  and  with- 
out  any  possibiUty  of  error.  By  means  of  this  ingen- 
ious  distinction,  some  of  the  most  inconyenient  dedsions 
of  popes,  which  it  was  desirable  to  except  from  the  priy- 
Uege  of  infaUibiUty  generaUy  asserted  in  other  cases, 
could  be  explained  away.  Thus  pope  Honorius,  in  the 
dogmatic  letter  which  was  condemned  as  heretical  by 
the  sixth  (Bcumenical  council,  and  the  decisian  address- 
ed  by  Nicolas  I  to  the  Bulgaurian  Church  that  baptism 
adminiatered  simply  in  the  name  of  Jesus  is  yaUd,  were 
declared  to  be  judgments  giyen  by  the  popes  as  pri- 
yate  persona.  A  number  of  other  limitations  were  pro- 
poeed  by  the  theologians  adyocating  infaUibiUty,  but 
only  two  were  commonly  receiyed,  yiz.  BeUarmiue*s, 
that  the  papai  decree  must  be  addresaed  to  the  whole 
Church ;  and  Cellot'8,  that  he  must  anathematize  all  who 
dissent  from  his  teaching.  According  to  this  doctrine, 
which  is  taught  by  the  most  prominent  dogmatic  writer 
of  the  order  in  the  present  centnry,  Penrone  {PreeUct, 
7%eo2(>^.yiii,497,Louyain,184d),  and  reoeiyed  by  pretty 
nearly  the  whole  order,  the  pope  is  liable  to  err  when 
he  addresses  an  instruction  to  the  French  or  German 
Church  only;  and,  moreoyer,  his  infaUibUity  beoomes 
very  ąuestionable  wheneyer  he  omits  to  denounce  an 
anathema  on  aU  dissentients.  Since  the  time  of  Bellar- 
mine, the  infaUibiUty  hypothesis  has  been  one  of  the 
chief  distinctions  of  the  Jesuits  and  the  most  radical 
portion  of  the  Ultramontane  party  on  the  one  band, 
and  aU  other  schools  within  the  CathoUc  Church  on  the 
other.  A  nnmber  of  synods,  bishops,  and  prominent 
theologians,  and  in  some  instances  the  whole  CathoUc 
Church  of  seyeral  countries,  put  themselyes  on  record 
against  the  doctrine,  for  which,  on  the  other  band,  the 
Jesuits  and  other  Ultramontane  writers  incessantly 
stroye  to  gain  friends  among  bishops,  dergy,  and  laity, 
and,  in  particular,  among  the  soyereigns. 

When  pope  Pius  IX  iutimated  hia  intention  to  oon- 
yoke  a  councU  for  the  defiuition  of  the  doctrine,  a  num- 
ber of  bishops,  especiaUy  in  France  and  Germany,  de- 
clared themselyes  to  be  decidedly  opposed  to  the  doc- 
trine, and  at  least  one  of  tbem,  the  French  bishop  Ma- 
ret  (bishop  of  Sura  m  partibus  infid^  and  dean  of  the 
theological  faculty  of  Paris),  pubUshed  an  elaborate 
work  (On  the  General  Council  ani  the  puhlic  Peace)  to 
refute  it,  and  to  proye  that  it  would  subyert  the  very 
foundation  of  the  Church.  The  substance  of  his  argu- 
ment against  papai  infaUibiUty  is  as  foUows:  Accord- 
ing to  the  holy  Scriptures  the  Church  is  a  Umited  mon- 
archy, which  stands  under  the  common  rule  of  the  pope 
and  the  bishops.  The  hiatory  of  the  ooundls  is  at  least 
as  much  in  fayor  of  the  diyine  right  of  the  biahops  aa 
of  the  snpremacy  of  the  holy  chair.  Freedom  of  dis- 
cussion,  yote  by  majority,  a  juridical  examination  of  the 
apostoUc  decrees,  and  in  certain  caaes  a  right  to  con- 
demn  the  doctrines  and  the  person  of  the  pope — these 
are  rights  which  proye  beyond  aU  donbt  the  partictpa- 
tion  of  the  bishops  in  the  soyereign  powers  of  the  holy 
father.  But  these  rights  do  not  extend  far  enough  to 
giye  the  epiacopal  body  a  snpremacy  oyer  the  pope,  and 
the  latter  tberefore  exercises,  in  generał,  aU  the  priyi- 
leges  of  supremacy.  He  sununons  the  councU,  presides 
oyer  it,  dissolyes  it,  and  sanotions  its  decrees.  In  a 
word,  he  always  remains  the  head  of  the  Church.  If, 
howeyer,  the  changes  desired  by  a  certain  school  are 
madę,  the  Church  wiU  cease  to  be  a  Umited,  and  become 
an  absolute  monarchy.  This  would  be  a  complete  rey- 
olntion ;  bat  what  is  truły  diyine  is  unchangeable,  and, 
oon8equenŁly,  if  the  oonstitution  of  the  Church  is 
clumged,  it  ceases  to  be  diyine.  Pius  IX,  in  liis  buU 
Inejjfabilie  Deiu,  has  himself  said  of  doctrine,  Cretcat  in 
eodemaeniUf  in  eadem  aententia;  but  the  new  dogma 
would  lead  to  a  deyelopment  of  doctrine  in  aUo  sensu,  m 
aKa  senienticu  It  would  tberefore  amount  to  a  denial 
of  the  diyinity  of  the  Church.  **  If  it  were  reałized," 
exclaims  the  bishop,  "what  a  triumph  would  it  be  to 
the  enemiesof  the  Church!    They  would caU  the  1 


INFALLIBILITY 


674 


INFALLIBILITY 


eirations  ckf  centuiies,  and  histoiy  itself,  as  witneases 
against  Catholidsm:  she  woold  be  cnished  hy  the 
weight  of  opposing  testimony;  the  holy  ScriptuieSi  the 
fatheiB,  and  the  councila  would  ńse  in  judgment  against 
her.  They  would  buiy  us  in  oor  shame,  and  firom  the 
deseit  atheism  would  rise  morę  powerful  and  threaten- 
ing  than  cvei"  (ii,  878). 

When  the  councii  met  (Dec  S,  1869)  it  was  soon 
found  that  there  were,  with  regard  to  this  que8tion, 
three  paities  among  the  bishops :  one,  which  regarded 
the  promulgation  of  this  new  doctrine  as  the  b^t  and 
most  uigent  work  the  councii  should  attend  to ;  the  seo- 
ond,  which  petitioned  the  pope  against  this  doctrine, 
which  they  belieyed  would  be  at  least  a  great  stumbling- 
błock  for  all  non-Catholics,  and  even  for  a  great  many 
members  of  the  Catholic  Church ;  the  third,  which  was 
in  favor  of  a  compromise,  would  have  some  regard  for 
the  arguments  adduced  by  the  second  dass,  and  there- 
foie,  instead  of  promulgating  in  unmistakabie  and  bold 
deamess  the  doctrine  of  papai  infallibility ,  would  attain 
the  same  end  in  &  less  offensive  way,  by  incnlcating  the 
duty  of  an  abeolute  submission  to  every  deciaion  of  the 
pope  in  matters  of  faith.  The  majority  of  the  bishops 
sig^ed  a  petition  for  the  promulgation  of  infaUibility, 
which  had  been  drawn  up  by  the  German  bishop  of  Pa- 
derborn, and  receiyed  410  signatures.  The  counter  ad- 
dress  (or,  rather,  counter  addresses)  against  the  infalli- 
bility was  signed  by  162  bishops,  among  whom  were  20 
Americans,  46  Frenchmen,  87  Germans  and  Austrians, 
19  Orientals,  2  Portuguese,  14  Hungaiians,  8  EngUsh- 
men,  and  15  Italians.  The  address  of  the  middle  party, 
which  desired  to  effect  a  compromise,  was  drawn  up  by 
the  archbishop  of  Baltimore.  The  address  against  the 
prodamation  of  the  doctrine  of  infallibility,  drawn  up 
by  the  cardiiial  archbishop  Kanscher,  of  Yienna,  is 
oouched  in  the  most  submissive  espressions,  assures  the 
holy  father  of  the  devotedness  of  aJl  the  bishops  to  the 
apostolical  see,  and  oontinues :  **  It  would  not  be  right 
to  ignore  that  many  difficukies,  aiising  from  exprea- 
sions  or  actions  of  the  Church  fathers  from  the  docu- 
ments  of  histoiy,  and  even  from  the  Catholic  doctrine, 
remain,  which  must  be  thoroughly  explained  before  it 
would  be  admissible  to  lay  this  doctrine  before  the 
Christian  people  ua  one  revealed  by  God.  But  our 
minds  revolt  agiinst  a  controyersial  discussion  of  this 
ąuestion,  and  coniidently  implore  thy  kindness  not  to 
lay  upon  us  the  duty  of  such  a  transaction.  As  we, 
moreoYcr,  esenńse  the  episcopal  functlons  among  great 
Catholic  nations,  we  know  their  condition  from  daily 
intercourse;  hence  we  are  satisfied  that  the  asked-for 
doctrinal  decision  will  ofTer  weapons  to  the  enemies  of 
leligion,  in  order  to  excite  ayersion  to  the  Catholic  re- 
ligion,  even  of  men  of  good  character,  and  we  are  cer- 
tain  that  this  decision  would  offer,  at  least  in  Europę, 
an  opportunity  or  a  pretext  to  the  govemments  of  our 
oountńes  to  make  encroachments  upon  the  rights  which 
haye  remained  to  the  Church.  We  haye  ooncluded  to 
lay  this  before  thy  hoUness,  with  the  sinoerity  which 
we  owe  to  the  father  of  the  faithful,  and  we  ask  thee 
that  the  doctrinal  opinion,  the  sanction  of  which  is  de- 
manded  by  the  address,  be  not  submitted  to  the  councii 
for  consideiation."  Among  the  signers  are,  besides  the 
Cardinal  archbishop  of  Yienna,  nearly  all  the  archbish 
ops  of  Germany  aud  Austria;  in  particular,  the  cardinal 
archbishop  of  Pragnę,  the  archbishops  of  Cologne,  Mu- 
nich,  Bamberg,  and  others.  The  bishops  who  signed 
this  remonstrance  against  the  promulgation  of  papai  in- 
fallibility as  a  doctrine  confined  themselyes  to  urging 
the  inopportuneness.  Only  a  few  plainly  expr^6ed 
themselyes  against  the  dogroa  itself.  But  what  the 
bishops  failed  to  do,  the  catholic  scholars,  especially 
those  of  Germany,  did  so  emphatically  that  their  pro- 
tests  against  the  ultra  papai  theories,  and  against  the 
whole  spńit  preyailing  in  Korne,  madę  a  profound  sen- 
sation  thruughout  the  Christian  world. 

One  of  the  most  leamed  Church  historians  of  tiM  B(v 
maa  Catholic  Chuch,  profeasor  DoUinger,  of  tlie  Uni- 


yersity  of  Mtmich,  in  a  letter  addieased  to  the  Angh 
burger  Zeitungy  and  sinoe  published  as  a  pamphkt  in  m 
enlaiged  fonn  {ErwSgtmgmJur  die  Bitchófe  des  CtmtiU, 
Ratisbon,  1869),  subjected  the  address  of  the  bishops 
who  asked  for  the  promulgation  of  infallibility  to  tbe 
most  crushing  criticism.  Dr.  D5!linger  says  of  tlus 
petition  of  the  championa  of  papai  infaUibility  thst 
henoeforth  '*  one  hundred  and  eigfaty  millions  of  kuman 
beings  are  to  be  foiced,  on  pain  of  eKoommanicatioo, , 
refusal  of  the  sacraments,  and  eyeriasting  damnarion,  to; 
bdieye  and  to  profess  that  which  hitfaeito  the  ChiótlŁ 
has  not  belieyed,  not  taught"  The  prodamation  «f 
this  dogma,  he  says,  would  be  an  ''alteration  in  the 
faith  and  doctrine  of  the  Church  such  as  has  neeer  bem 
heard  of  tmot  ChristianUg  was  firU  founded,"*  Ibe 
whole  foundation  of  the  Church  would  thereby  be  affectp  ■ 
ed.  Dr.  DoUinger  shows  conclusiydy  that  rnitil  the 
16Łh  century  the  doctrine  of  papai  infallibility  was  en- 
tirely  unknown,  and  that,  when  it  was  taken  up  by  csr- 
dinal  Bellarmine,  it  could  only  be  suppoited  by  the  tes- 
timony of  Isidorian  decretals,  which  are  forgedf  and 
those  of  Cyril,  which  are  hjiction. 

The  yiews  of  Dollinger  and  Gratry  receired  the  em- 
phatic  assent  of  the  laige  majority  of  the  Catholic  schol- 
ars of  Grermany  and  France.     The  goyemments  of 
France,  Austria,  Portugal,  Spain,  Bayaria,  and  otber 
Catholic  countries  instructed  their  ministeis  in  Romę  to 
enter  an  eamest  protest  against  a  doctrine  which  woold 
coropd  all  members  of  the  Roman  Catholic  Church  to 
belieye  in  the  right  of  the  pope  to  chooee  kingą  and  re- 
lease  their  subjects  fiom  the  oath  of  allegiance.    £yen 
some  of  the  members  of  the  councii,  in  particular  the 
cardinal  archbishop  Rauschcr  of  Yienna,  and  bishop  He- 
fde  of  Rottenburg,  who  was  regarded  as  the  most  ka^n- 
ed  bishop  of  the  councii,  published  pamphlets  against 
the  dogmatization  of  infallibility  while  it  was  disoiaeed 
by  the  ooundL     But  all  this  opposition  fiuled  to  make 
the  least  impression  upon  the  majority  of  the  bisbopc 
From  the  opening  of  the  councii,  the  infallibiiists  showed 
themsdyes  so  uncompromising  that  they  refused  to  giye 
to  the  minority  eyen  one  single  repreaentatiye  in  the 
important  commission  on  dogmaricfd  questions,  which, 
on  the  other  hand,  embraccd  the  name  of  eycry  bbhop 
who,  by  writings,  influence,  or  otherwise,  had  gained  a 
prominent  position  as  a  defender  of  infallibility :  in  par- 
ticular, archbishop  Manning,of  Westminster;  archbish- 
op Dechamps,  of  Malines ;  archbishop  Spalding,  of  Bal- 
timore ;  bishop  Martin,  of  Paderborn ;  bishop  Pie,  of 
Poitiers ;  the  Armenian  patriarch  Hassun,  of  Constanti- 
nople.     The  discussion  of  the  question  commenced  on 
the  18th  of  May.     The  schema  was  coraprised  in  a  pre- 
amble  and  four  chapters,  and  was  known  to  form  the 
first  part  of  the  dogmatic  constitution  De  Ecciesia  ChriS' 
łi,    The  debatę  is  known  to  haye  been  long  and  ani- 
mated,  many  bishops  entering  a  yery  eamest  protest 
against  the  promulgation  of  such  an  innoyation.    Bish- 
op Strossmayer,  of  Bośnia  and  Sirraiam,  in  Croatia; 
bishop  Dupanloup,  of  Orleans,  in  France;  archbishop 
Darboy,  of  Paris ;  bishop  Hefde,  of  Rottenburg,  in  Wttr- 
tembcrg ;  cardinal  archbishop  Ranscher,  of  Yieniui ;  car- 
dinal archbishop  prince  Schwarzenbeig,  of  Prague,  are 
mentioned  as  those  bishops  who  spoke  with  the  great- 
est  effect  against  the  proposed  doctrine.    The  regola- 
tions  of  the  councii  madę  it  lawful  for  ten  prclates  to 
petition  for  the  doeing  of  a  discussion ;  the  propoeal  be- 
ing  then  put  to  the  yote  of  all  the  fathers,  and  the  ma- 
jority dedding.     T^lien  fifty-five  speeches  had  been 
madę  on  the  schema  in  generał,  one  hundred  and  fifty 
bishops  sent  a  petition  for  dosing  the  generał  discussion, 
which  was  accordingly  done,  to  the  great  disaatisiaction 
of  the  opponenta  of  infallibility,  a  number  of  whom  aór 
dressed  to  the  pope  a  protest  against  the  dosing  of  the 
generał  discussion,  as  it  had  depriyed  the  councii  of  the 
opportunity  to  hear  all  the  aiguuieuCa  agamst  the  new 
doctrine.    The  diaonańon  ef  the  schema  as  regaids  the 
whole  and  the  seyeral  parta  haying  been  oompleted,  a 
▼ote  was  taken  acoording  to  the  regulatknis  in  ft  gencfal 


INFALLIBILITY 


675 


INFALLIBILITY 


rwigregatłon  on  the  ISth  of  July,  on  the  whole  tchema 
by  mune,  with  placet,  or  placet  juźta  modum,  or  non^la- 
ceL  The  lesult  was  as  foliowa :  451  placets^  62  plaeeU 
jnzta  modum,  and  88  nor^plaoett,  Some  of  the  placeto 
jaxta  modam  recommended  the  insertion  of  words  that 
wooid  make  the  decree  dearer  and  stronger.  The  sche- 
ma  was  aocordingly  altered,  and  the  amendments  were 
retained  in  the  generał  oongtegation,  held  Saturday,  July 
16.  The  finał  step  was  then  taken,  in  the  foorth  public 
session  of  the  coundl,  on  the  18th  of  July.  The  roU  of 
the  memben  was  again  called,  when  684  answered  pUtr 
ctL,  2  replied  non^flacet,  and  106  weie  abeent,  some  be- 
canse  sick,  the  fiu*  greater  number  not  willing  to  yote 
faToraUy.  Ab  soon  as  the  result  was  madę  known  of- 
ficiaUy  to  Pius  IX,  he  announced  the  fact  of  all  with 
the  exception  of  two  having  given  a  favorabIe  vote, 
«  WherefoTe,"  he  oondnued, "  by  virtue  of  our  apoetolic 
anthority,  with  the  approval  of  the  sacred  council,  we 
define,  confirm,  and  approre  the  decree  and  canons  just 
Rad.**  The  foUowing  is  a  faithM  tranaiation  of  chap- 
ter  iy  of  the  schema,  which  treats  of  papai  infallibility : 

Oftke  infaUibU  Autharity  ąfthe  Roman  Fontifin  Teaeh- 
Ifw.— Thie  holy  see  hath  ever  held— the  anbroken  cnstom 
or  the  Church  doth  prore— and  the  oecameDlcal  conocils, 
thoee  especially  In  whlch  the  East  jotued  with  the  West 
in  anion  of  faith  and  of  chart  tythaye  declared.  that  In  this 
apoatolic  primacy,  which  the  Koman  pontilr  holds  over 
the  uDiTeraal  Chnrch  as  succeseor  of  Peter,  the  prince  of 
the  uoetles,  there  Is  also  contained  the  supremę  power 
of  aoŁnoritaUTe  teaching.  Thos  the  fathers  of  the  fonrth 
Conncil  of  Constantinople,  followioff  In  the  footstepe  of 
tbeirpredecewors, pot  forth  this sofómn  profession : 

•«The  flrat  law  of  saWatlon  is  to  keep  the  role  of  tme 
&fth.  And  whereas  the  words  of  our  Lord  Jesus  Christ 
cannot  be  nasaed  by,  who  said,  Thoa  art  Peter,  and  upon 
this  rock  I  will  bnild  my  Chnrch  (Matt.  zvi,  18),  these 
words,  whlch  he  spake,  arl  proved  trne  by  facts ;  for  In 
the  apoetolic  see  the  Catholic  rell^on  bas  ever  been  pre- 
serred  nnspotted,  and  the  holy  doctrine  bas  been  an- 
noonced.  Therefore,  wishlng  nerer  to  bo  separated  from 
the  faith  and  teaching  of  this  see,  we  hope  to  be  worthy 
to  abide  in  that  one  communlon  whlch  tne  apostollc  see 
preachee,  in  whlch  Is  the  ftill  and  tme  flrmnees  of  the 
Christian  religion/*  [Formnla  of  St.  Hormlsdas,  pope, 
as  propoeed  by  Hadrian  II  to  the  fathers  of  the  eiehth 
General  Coundl  (Constautinople,  IV),  and  subscribed  by 
them.1 

Bo,  too,  the  Oreeks.  with  the  approTal  of  the  second 
Coundl  o{  ŁYonst  profeflsed  that  the  holv  Roman  Church 
holds  oyer  the  uniYereal  Catholic  Church  a  supremę  and 
Ihll  primacy  and  headship,  which  she  trathAilly  and  hum- 
bly  acknowledgea  that  she  recelyed.  with  ftilness  of  pow- 
er, firom  the  Lord  himaelf  in  blessed  Peter,  the  prince  or 
head  of  the  apoatles,  of  whom  the  Roman  pontiff  is  the 
sncceesor ;  and  as  she,  beyond  the  others,  is  oound  to  de- 
fend  the  tmth  of  the  fiiith.  so,  If  any  ouestlons  arise  con- 
cemlng  fkith,  they  should  be  declded  by  her  jud^ent. 
And,  Imally,  the  Conncil  uf  Florence  deflned  that  the  Ro- 
man pontiff  is  the  trne  vlcar  of  Christ,  and  the  head  of  the 
whole  Church.  and  the  father  and  teacner  of  all  Chrlstlans, 
and  that  to  him,  in  the  blessed  Peter,  was  ciyen  by  our 
Lord  Jesus  Christ  foli  power  of  feeding,  ana  rullng,  and 
goyeming  the  unWersai  Church  (John  zzi,  15-17}. 

In  order  to  ftiltll  this  pastorał  charge,  our  predecessors 
haye  erer  labored  nnwearledly  to  spread  the  aaying  doc- 
trine of  Christ  among  all  the  nations  of  the  eartn,  and 
with  eqoal  care  have  watched  to  preserye  it  pure  and  nn- 
changed  where  It  had  been  recelyed.  Wherefore  the  bish- 
ope  of  the  whole  world,  sometimes  singly,  sometimes  as- 
sembled  in  synods,  following  the  long-established  custoro 
of  the  churches  (St.  Cyril,  Alezand.,  and  St  Ccalest.  Pap.), 
and  the  form  of  andent  rule  (SŁ  Innocent  I  to  Councifs 
of  Cartbage  and  Mlleyl),  referred  to  this  apostollc  see 
thoee  daneers  especially  which  arose  in  matters  of  faith, 
in  order  that  injurles  to  folth  might  best  be  healed  there 
where  the  faith  coold  neyer  fail  (St.  Bernard,  epistU  190). 
And  the  Roman  pontlffs,  wcighing  the  conditlon  of  times 
and  drcomstances,  sometimes  calling  together  generał 
conndla,  or  asking  the  Judgraent  of  the  Church  scattered 
throngh  the  world,  sometimes  consulting  particulnr  syn- 
ods, eometimes  nsing  such  other  ałds  as  diyine  Proyłdence 
soppHed,  deflned  that  thoM  doctrines  should  be  held 
whlch,  by  the  ald  of  Qod,  they  knew  to  be  conformable  to 
the  holy  Scriutures  and  the  apostollc  traditions.  For  the 
Holy  Ohost  Is  not  promised  to  the  snccessors  of  Peter, 
that  they  may  make  known  new  doctrine  reyealed  by 
him,  bnt  that,  throngh  his  assistance,  they  may  sacredly 
guard  and  faithftailly  set  forth  the  reve1ation  deliyered  by 
the  apoetles,  that  is,  the  deposit  of  faith.  And  this  their 
apostollc  teaching  all  the  yenerable  fothers  haye  em- 
brae^d,  and  the  holy  orthodoz  doctors  haye  reyered  and 
foUowed,  knowing  most  certainly  that  this  see  ofSt.  Pe- 
ter eyer  remains  f^e  fW>m  all  error,  accordlng  to  the  di- 
viBe  pnNnlae  of  onr  Lord  and  Sayionr  madę  to  the  prince 


of  the  apostles :  I  haye  prayed  for  thee  that  thy  fiiith  fali 
not,  and  thon,  beins  once  conyerted,  conflrm  thybrethren. 
(Conf.  Su  Agatho,  Ep,  ad  Imp.  a  Cone.  (Ecum,  Ylapprob.) 

Therefore  this  głft  of  truth,  and  of  faith  which  faus  not, 
was  diyinely  bestowed  on  Peter  and  his  snccessors  in  this 
chair,  that  they  should  ezerdse  their  high  office  fur  the 
saWation  of  ali,  that  throngh  them  the  uniyersal  flock  of 
Christ  should  be  tumed  away  firom  the  poisonoiis  food  of 
error  and  should  be  nourlshed  with  the  food  of  heayenhr 
doctrine,  and  that,  the  occasion  of  schism  being  remoyed, 
the  entlre  Church  should  be  preseryed  one,  and,  planted  on 
her  foundation,  should  stand  flrm  agaiust  Łhe  gates  of  heli. 

Neyertheless,  slnce  in  this  preseni  age,  when  the  saying 
eflicacy  of  the  apostollc  offlce  is  ezceedingly  needed,  there 
are  not  a  few  who  carp  at  its  authority,  we  Judge  It  al- 
togethcr  necessary  to  solemniy  declare  the  prerogatlye 
whlch  the  oniy-begotten  Son  of  God  bas  designed  to  unitę 
to  the  supremę  pastoml  offlce. 

Wherefore.  Calthftilly  adhering  to  the  tradition  handed 
down  from  tne  commencement  of  the  Christian  faith,  for 
the  glory  of  God  onr  Sayionr,  the  ezaltatlon  of  the  Catho- 
lic rellgłon,  and  the  saWatlon  of  Christian  peoples,  with 
the  approbation  of  the  sacred  conncil,  we  teach  and  deflne 
it  to  be  a  doctrine  diyinely  reyealed,  that,  when  the  Ro- 
man pontiff  Bpeaks  ex  cathedra,  that  Is,  when  In  the  ezer- 
cise  of  his  offlce  of  pastor  and  teacher  of  all  Christiana, 
and  in  yirtne  of  his  snpreme  apostollc  authority,  he  de- 
flnes  that  a  doctrine  of  faith  or  morals  is  to  be  held  by  the 
uniyersal  Chnrch,  he  possesses,  throu^h  the  divine  assist- 


ance promised  to  hłm  In  the  blessed  l*eter,  that  Infallibil- 
ity with  which  the  diyine  Redeemer  willed  his  Chnrch  to 
be  endowed,  In  defiulng  a  doctrine  of  faith  and  morals; 
and  therefore  that  such  definltlons  of  the  Roman  pontiff 
are  irreformable  of  themseWes,  and  not  by  force  of  the 
consent  of  the  Chnrch  theroto. 

And  if  any  one  ehall  presume.  whidi  God  forbld,  to  con- 
tradlct  this  our  deilnition,  let  him  be  anathema. 

Glyen  in  Romę,  In  the  public  session,  solenmly  celebrat- 
ed  iu  the  Yatican  BasUica,  in  the  year  of  the  Incamation 
of  our  Lord  one  thousand  elght  hundred  and  seyenty,  on 
the  eighteenth  day  of  July,  In  the  twenty-flfth  year  of  onr 
pontiflcate.  Ita  est. 

Joesra,  Bisłiop  of  St.  Poltzk. 

Seeretary  ąf  the  Omtteit  cf  the  Yatiean, 

The  ezpectation  that  some  of  the  bishops  who  op- 
posed  infallibility  at  the  council  would  pcrsist  in  their 
oppofiition,  and  dedine  to  promulgate  the  new  doctrine 
in  their  diooeses,  was  not  fulfilled.  The  bishops  not 
only  submitted  themselyea,  butforced  ako  their  dioceses 
to  submit.  In  Germany  a  number  of  the  most  promi- 
nent theological  scholars  wero  remoyed  from  their  chairs, 
and  sospended  from  their  priestly  functions,  for  refusing 
to  comply  with  the  demands  of  Romę.  Thus  the  creed 
of  the  Roman  Catholic  Church  receiyed  a  new  doctrine 
which,  in  the  oplnion  of  many  theologians  who  up  to 
that  time  had  been  regarded  throughout  the  Church  as 
her  ablest  schohirs,  radically  changes  the  character  of 
the  Church. 

Accordlng  to  the  opinion  of  Dr.  Dollinger,  morę  haa 
been  written  on  this  subject  during  the  last  one  hun- 
dred and  thirty  years  than  on  any  other  point  of 
Church  history  during  fiftecn  hundred  years.  The 
most  important  work  on  the  subject,  thatof  Janus  (Ths 
Pope  and  the  Coundl),  as  well  aa  the  worka  of  Maret, 
D511inger,  Maistre,  and  seyeral  worka  of  former  oentu- 
ries,  haye  already  been  noticed.  Other  important  works 
treating  on  the  subject  are  Ballerini,  De  Vi  ac  Ratione 
Primattu ;  Schrader  (Jesuit),  De  UnUaie  Romana  (yoL 
i,  Frciburg,  1862 ;  voL  ii,  Yienna,  1866) ;  Philipp,  Kirdt- 
enretAt  (voL  y);  Rudis,  Petra  Romana  (Mentz,  1869); 
Deschamps  (archbishop  of  Malines),  VInfalUbUite  du 
Papę  (Malines,  1869) ;  Gratry,  Lettree  sur  rinfaUtbilUi 
du  Papę  (Paria,  1869, 1870) ;  Weninger  (Jesuit),  The  In- 
faUibUity  ofthe  Pope  (Cindnnati,  1869) ;  Hergenrother, 
A  ntv-Janua  (Wurzburg,  1870);  Frohshammer,  Zur  Wur- 
diffunff  der  Unfehlbarieit  des  Papstea  und  d.  Kirche  (Mu- 
nich,  1869) ;  Bickell,  Grirnde  Jur  die  UnfehlbarkeU  det 
Kirchenoberhauptes  (Munster,  1870) ;  Rmischer  (cardi- 
nal  archbishop  of  Yienna),  Obserrałionee  cutedam  de  «n- 
faUibUitaHe  ecctena  eubjecło  (Naples,  1870,  against  the 
dogmatiaation  of  infallibility) ;  Kleutgen  (Jesuit),  De 
Romami  Pontificie  Suprema  potestaie  docendi  (Naples, 
1870);  Schraitz,  let  der  Papst  persdnlich  unfehlbarf 
(Munich,  1870).  The  fullest  account  of  the  proceedings 
of  the  conncil  relatiye  to  the  dogmatization  of  infalli- 
bility is  giyen  in  Quirinus,  Romiti^  Britfe  wm  ConcU 
(Munich,  1870).    (A.J.S.) 


INFANT  BAPnSM 


576 


INFANT  COMMUNION 


Infant  Baptiam.    See  Baptism  ;  P^sdobaptism. 

Infant  Communion.  Notwithstanding  the  apos- 
tle's  direction,  **  Let  a  man  examine  himadf,  and  bo  let 
him  eat  of  that  bread,  and  drink  of  tbat  cup"  (1  Gor.  xi, 
28),  which  80  dearly  pointa  to  a  maturę  age  when  man 
la  capable  of  8elf-€xamination  aa  a  reąuisite  in  thoae 
wbo  approacb  the  Lord^s  table,  we  find  infanta  admit- 
ted  to  holy  communion  as  early  as  in  the  8d  century. 
The  first  instances  of  it  occurred  in  the  North-African 
Church.  Cyprian,  in  his  Tractaiua  de  lapńs  (p.  189,  ed. 
Gersdorf ),  speaks  of  children  wbo  at  their  entrance  into 
the  worid  partook  of  the  body  and  blood  of  the  Lord 
{cibum  etpoculum  dominicum} ;  he  further  gives  the  ex- 
ample  of  a  girl  {puelld)  whom  a  deacon  had  obliged  to 
partake  of  the  cup,  but  wbo  could  not  retain  what  she 
had  taken  because  she  had  preyiously,  by  ber  nur8e's 
fault,  partaken  of  bread  dipped  into  winę,  and  had  madę 
an  offering  to  idola.  This  practice  of  infant  communion 
was  undoubtedly  comiected  with  infant  baptism,  and,  as 
a  reason  for  it,  Augustine  lays  down  the  principle  that, 
unless  we  partake  of  the  Supper  of  the  Lord,  to  which 
no  one  can  be  rcgularly  admitted  wbo  is  not  baptized, 
we  can  havc  no  life  in  us  (John  vi,  53) ;  and  this,  he 
maintains,  applies  as  well  to  children  aa  to  men  {Epist, 
28,  ad  Bon\f. ;  Ep.  106,  contra  duas  epUtoUu  Pdag,  i,  22 ; 
Sermo  vui,  de  verbU  aposloL  de  peccaL  merił.  i,  20).  The 
same  reasons  are  given  by  his  oontemporary,  Iimocent 
I,  bishop  of  Romę  (416),  in  his  letter  to  Augustine  and 
to  the  Council  of  Milcvi:  Aug,  ep.  93,  "Pamilos  leter- 
nsB  yitsB  pnemiis  etiam  sine  baptismatis  gratia  donari 
posse  perfatum  est;  nisi  enim  manducaverint  camem 
Christi  et  biberint  sanguinem  ejus,  non  habcbunt  vitam 
in  se  ipsis.**  From  a  similar  point  of  Tiew,  Gelasius  I, 
pope  of  Romę,  writes  about  A.D.  495,  ^  No  one  should 
yenture  to  ezdude  any  child  from  tliis  sacrament,  with- 
out  which  no  one  can  attain  to  etemal  life.**  But  as 
early  as  the  9th  century,  Fulgentius,  the  Augustine  of 
that  century,  adrocated  the  rite  of  baptism,  only  sug- 
gesting  that  by  it  "children  were  ineorporated  into 
Christ,  and  so  partook  of  his  flesh  and  hiood."  The  cus- 
tom  continucd,  however,  in  the  Western  Church,  to  the 
•  time  of  Charlemagne.  In  the  Sacramentarium  of  Greg- 
oiy  I,  and  in  the  old  Ordo  Homanust  we  find  passages  iu 
which  it  is  expressly  stated.  Thus  the  latter  recom- 
mends  that  after  baptism  children  should  not  be  permit- 
ted  to  taste  food  before  partaking  of  the  Eucharist,  and 
should  not  even  be  noned  except  in  case  of  absolute  ne- 
cessity.  We  find  the  same  in  Alcuin's  De  Affiic,  where 
it  is  expresBly  directed  that,  whenerer  a  bishop  is  pres- 
ent,  baptism  sbomld  be  immediatdy  foUowed  by  oonfir^ 
mation,  and  then  by  communion*  In  the  aynodal  de- 
crees  of  Walter  of  Órleans,  in  the  same  century,  we  fińd 
that  priests  are  always  to  have  the  Eucharist  ready,  ao 
that  if  a  child  should  be  taken  ill  it  should  not  be  in 
danger  of  dying  without  the  fńaHcum,  In  the  9th  cen- 
tury this  ąuestion  of  infant  communion  gaye  rise  to  con- 
troyersies.  Thus  Paschasius  Ratbeztus  maintained  that 
children  dying  before  communion  were  not  therefore  in 
danger,  sinoe  by  baptism  they  had  ahready  entered  into 
communion  with  Christ  Still,  in  the  12th  century,  we 
find  Radulphus  Ardens  saying  (Horn,  in  die  Pae(^  de 
£uchar.  neoesa,)  that  it  is  prescribed  (statutum)  that  chil- 
dren should  receiye  communion,  at  least  with  the  cup, 
soon  after  being  baptized,  so  that  '*  they  might  not  be 
in  danger  of  dying  without  that  neoessary  sacraroent** 
Hugo  of  St.Yictor  also  reconmiends  infant  communion, 
where  it  can  take  place  without  danger,  but  remarks 
that  this  custom  had  already  fallen  into  disuse  in  hia 
time,  the  practice  only  remaining  for  the  priest  to  giye 
the  newly-baptized  child  a  little  ordinary  winę,  instead 
of  the  blood  of  Christ,  which  practice  he  condemns. 
Soon  after  this,  Odo,  bishop  of  Paris,  forbade  giying 
children  unconsecrated  wafers,  and  thus  the  custom  was 
lo6t  in  the  GalUcan  Church.  In  Germany  traoes  are  to 
be  found  of  it  at  a  still  later  period ;  the  thing  ended  in 
a  meie  senseless  superstition.  The  Council  of  Trent 
condemns  the  principle  of  the  necesaity  of  infant  com- 


munion, saying  tbat  the  practioe  aron  in  the  < 
stances  of  the  early  ages,  and  that  the  fathen  had  sidB- 
cient  giounds  for  introdudiog  it  in  their  daya,  without 
its  being  madę  a  necessity  of  salyation;  wheićfore  tbe 
usage  oould  lawfully  be  altered  and  dropped  (Seaa.  xzi). 

In  the  Greek  Church  we  find  paasagea  of  aome  thco- 
logians,  which  in  their  expoaicaon  of  the  doctrine  of  bip- 
tism  would  seem  to  imply  that  they  rejected  thia  neces- 
sity of  infant  communion  baaed  on  John  ti,  53 ;  for  they 
designate  the  formei  sacrament  aa  a  purification  throogh 
the  blood  of  Christ,  a  partaking  of  the  Lamb  of  God, 
etc  Yet  infant  communion  was  one  of  the  early  piao- 
tioes  in  that  church,  as  is  eyident  from  the  foci  that  in 
the  Apostolic  CotutUutioiu  (yiii,  12)  mothens  aze  recom- 
mended  to  bring  their  children  with  them  to  oommmi- 
ion,  and  children  are  oounted  among  those  who  partake 
of  the  Lord*s  Supper  (viii,  18).  (Comp.  Stanley,  HitL  of 
the  Eattem  Church,  p.  118, 119.)  This  custom  is  also  de- 
fended  by  Pseudo-Dionysius  {Hier.  EccL  vii,  11)  againat 
the  profane,  who  considered  it  ridiculoua.  The  Gieek 
Church  still  upholds  infant  communion.  Acoording  to 
Metophanes  Kritopulos  (Conf,  Ecd,  Gr,  c.  9),  children 
Qipifri),  after  they  are  baptized,  should  conmnme  when> 
ever  their  parents  do. 

The  Roman  Church  and  all  Protestant  chorches  now 
agree  in  rejecting  infant  communion.  Neyerthelesa, 
there  haye  been  a  few  adyocates  of  the  practice  even 
among  Protestanta  in  modem  times.  Among  the  most 
prominent  of  them  is  Pierce  (Essay  on  the  EitekarUt^ 
London,  1804),  who  aigues  for  the  practioe  (1)  on  the 
ground  of  primitiye  usage;  (2)  from  Scriptme.  Tbe 
latter  argument  is  "  that  Óuistians  sncceeding  to  tbe 
Jews  as  God's  people,  and  being  grafted  opon  that 
stock,  their  infants  bave  a  right  to  all  the  pri^dleges  of 
which  they  are  capable,  till  forfeited  by  aome  imnoocał- 
ities;  and,  conseąuently,  haye  a  right  to  paitake  of  this 
ordinance,  as  the  Jewish  children  had  to  eat  of  tbe  paia- 
over  and  other  sacrifices;  besides  thia,  he  pleada  thoae 
texts  which  speak  of  the  Lord's  Supper  aa  receiyed  by 
all  Christians.  The  most  obyious  answer  to  ali  thś  ia 
that  which  is  taken  from  the  incapacity  of  infanta  to 
examine  thcmselyes,  and  discem  the  L(vd's  body ;  but 
he  answers  that  this  precept  is  only  giyen  to  persona 
capable  of  understanding  and  complying  wiih  it,  aa 
those  which  require  faith  in  order  to  baptism  are  inter- 
preted  by  the  Paadobaptists.  Aa  for  his  argumoit  firam 
the  Jewish  children  eating  the  sacrifice,  it  ia  to  be  oon- 
sidered  that  this  was  not  required  u  drcnmciaiaa  waa; 
the  males  were  not  neoeasarily  brought  to  the  Tem^ 
till  they  were  twelye  years  old  (Lukę  ii,  42) ;  and  the 
sacrifices  they  ate  of  were  chiefly  peace^fferimgĘ,  which 
became  the  common  food  to  all  that  were  dean  in  the 
family,  and  were  not  looked  upon  as  acts  of  deyotion  to 
such  a  degree  as  our  Euchariat  b;  though,  indeed,  they 
were  a  token  of  their  acknowledging  the  divini^  of 
that  God  to  whom  they  had  been  oflTered  (1  Cor.  x,  18) ; 
and  eyen  the  Passoyer  was  a  commemoration  of  a  tem- 
poral  deliyerance;  nor  is  tbeie  any  reason  to  believe 
that  its  reference  to  the  Messiah  was  geneially  under* 
stood  by  tbe  Jews.  On  the  whole,  it  is  certain  there 
would  be  morę  danger  of  a  contempt  arising  to  the 
Lord*s  Supper  from  the  admiasion  of  infanta,  and  of  oon- 
fusion  and  trouble  to  other  commnnicants ;  so  that,  not 
being  reguired  in  Sciipture,  it  is  much  the  beat  to  omit 
it  When  children  are  grown  up  to  a  capactty  of  be- 
haying  decently,  they  may  aoon  be  inatiucted  in  the 
naturę  and  deaign  of  the  ordinance ;  and  if  they  appear 
to  underatand  it,  and  give  proof  of  love  to  Christ,  it 
wouM  be  adyisable  to  admit  them  to  communion,  tfaon^ 
very  young ;  which,  by  the  way.  might  be  a  good  secu- 
rity against  many  of  the  anaiea  to  which  yonth  are  ex- 
posed."  See  Augusti,  Handbuch  d.  christL  ArdkaoŁ,  ii, 
689  sq.;  Bohmer,  Die  chrittluMdrchUche  AUerthumt^ 
tciaaenachąft,  ii,  865  sq. ;  Herz^ąg,  Jłeat-EncjfhUyKyUj  549 
8q. ;  Zom,  Hittoria  Euchariatia  Infantiwn  (Beriin,  1786, 
8yo) ;  Knapp,  Theotogg,  §  144;  Doddridge,  Lecfmreś  om 
DitinUyj  lect,  ccvii ;  Neander,  Church  iłittory,  i,  Uli, 


INFANTICroE 


577 


INFANTICIDE 


316;  u,dl9;  iii, 496;  8aaXh,AeooufUo/theGr,Chtardk, 
p.  161 ;  BinghonUy  Ong,  EctAet,  bk.  xv,  eh.  iii,  §  7 ;  Cole- 
uaHf  AnciaU  Chrittiamtyf  eh.  xxi,  §  8;  Neauder,  HitU 
ofDogmoB,  p.  242;  Gieseler,  Dogmeagetchichte,  p.  642. 

Inluiticide  is  the  tenn  for  the  act  or  pnu^tice  of 
murdering  infanta,  which  waa  very  geneial  among  the 
andents,  and  which  atill  preTaila  among  rude  nationa. 
The  Greeks  and  Bomana,  with  all  their  high  notiona  of 
civilizaŁion,  were  guilty  of  favoring  this  hoirible  inrao- 
tioe  by  legialadre  enactments,  and  Plato  and  Aristotle 
are  foond  among  ita  aupportera.  Thua,  at  Sparta,  the 
law  reątiired  that  a  chlld,  immediately  after  birth,  was 
to  be  ekhibited  to  the  authorities  for  inapection,  and  if 
ita  look  waa  not  wholeaome,  or  its  limba  crippled,  "it 
was  thrown  into  a  deep  cavem  at  the  foot  of  the  moun- 
tain  Taygetiia;  and  it  waa  aaid  that  thia  law  had  a 
wholesome  effect,  for  it  madę  women  with  child  very 
caieful  as  to  their  eating,  diinking,  and  exerci8e,  and 
heooe  they  proved  excellent  nmnea.  In  the  other  Gie- 
dan  republica  a  aimilar  diaregaid  of  the  life  of  aickly 
iofimta  was  ahown."  Among  the  Bomana  it  aeema  to 
hare  been  the  daty  of  the  father.to  decide  the  fate  of 
his  new-bom  babę.  Among  the  Norae  a  somewhat  aim- 
ilar mle  determined  the  life  of  the  infant  If  weak,  or 
of  the  weaker  8ex,  the  father  not  unfreqaendy  "  diaap- 
prored  of  ita  living,  and  it  waa  expoeed  to  die  by  wild 
beaats  or  the  weather."  Among  the  barbario  tribea, 
child-murder  prerails  moat  extenaively.  Thua  it  is 
generał  thronghout  the  whole  of  the  South-Sea  Islanda, 
and  is  even  a  regolar  aystem  among  the  Fijiana  (q.  v.). 
In  Tanu  Leyu,  we  are  informed  by  a  reoent  authority, 
**the  exteut  of  infantlcide  reachea  nearer  two  thiida 
than  one  half  of  all  the  children  bom."  Among  the 
people  of  India,  eapecially  the  Hindus,  aa  well  aa  the 
Brahmans,  thia  evil  prerailed  to  a  very  great  extent, 
due  no  doubt,  in  a  great  measure,  to  the  national  preju- 
dłce  of  remairiage  of  a  widów  (oompare  Max  Muller, 
Chiptfnm  a  German  Workahopj  ii,  812).  But,  aince 
the  rule  of  the  English,  laws  have  been  enacted  likely 
co  modify  the  practice,  if  not  to  check  it  altogether. 
*'The  Bajputs,  it  is  sald,  destroy  all  the  female  children 
but  the  &rat4)om— a  peculiar  cuatom,  due  to  ita  being  a 
point  of  honor  with  a  Bajput  to  nearly  ruin  himself  in 
the  marriage  feast  and  portion  of  his  daughter,  so  that 
be  could  not  afford  to  have  morę  than  one.  The  Mo- 
hammedans  were  indined  to  the  same  practice,  but  ef- 
fected  their  object  by  meana  of  abortion.  In  New  Hol* 
land  the  natire  women  think  nothiiig  of  destroying  by 
compreasion  the  in£ut  in  the  womb,  to  avoid  the  trouble 
of  rearing  it  aliye.  In  Chlna  infantlcide  ia  auppoaed  to 
be  oommon,  the  chief  cauae  being  aaid  to  be  the  right 
of  periodically  repudiating  their  wirea  which  is  poeaesa- 
ed  by  Chinamen.  Some  statistica,  recentJy  published 
in  the  £*perance  of  Nancy,  indicate  the  fearful  extent 
to  which  life  ia  loat  throngh  thia  practice  preyailing  in 
so  yaat  a  population  aa  that  of  China.^'  Newoomb  (Cy- 
clop,  o/Mitsiotu^  p.  487)  says, "  It  ia  oomputed  from  an- 
thentic  data  that  not  leaa  than  9000  children  are  exposed 
in  the  atreets  of  Peking  every  year,  and  aa  many  morę 
in  the  proyincea,  and  that  it  ia  a  part  of  the  daty  of  the 
police  to  carzy  away  in  carts,  eveiy  moming,  thoee  that 
hare  been  expoBed  at  night,  some  o/wkom  are  yet  aiwe ; 
hut  they  are  ail  carried  to  a  pU  wUhout  the  wailś,  and 
huried  promiiaŁoutbf.^  In  Japan,  porerty  of  the  parent 
is  deemed  an  admissible  excu8e  for  the  destruction  of 
an  infant'8  life,  and  in  Greenland  the  infant  is  buried 
with  the  mother,  if  she  diea  in  or  shortly  after  child- 
binh.  The  South  American  women  commit  the  same 
atrocity  as  the  poor  parenta  of  Japan.  In  Africa  the 
Buahmen  foUow  the  practioea  that  we  detailed  aa  prev- 
aknt  among  the  andent  Greeks  and  Bomana;  and  so 
firequent  bas  been  the  practice  of  feeding  lions  with  in- 
fanta* flesh,  that  *"  it  haa  greatly  increased  the  deeire  of 
the  lion  for  human  fleah."  "  In  Madagasear  the  fate  of 
the  infant  dependa  upon  the  calculation  of  lucky  and 
unlucky  days."*  Among  the  North  American  Indians 
mfanticide  haa  alao  prerailed,  and  does  still  pievail  very 
ly^Oo 


exteD8ively.  The  lower  caatea  of  the  Natchez  Indiana 
on  the  lower  Missiseippi,  Brinton  (Myths  of  the  New 
World  [N.  Y.  1868, 8vo],  p.  239)  says,  deUberately  mm> 
der  their  own  children  on  the  funeral  pyrę  of  a  son  or 
chief  to  gain  admittanoe  to  a  higher  caste.  But  as  a 
piindpal  reaaon  of  the  great  extent  of  uifantidde,  ea- 
pecially of  female  children,  among  sayage  tribes,  Lub- 
bock  {Origin  of  CimUzation,  and PrimUite  Condition  of 
Man  [London,  1870, 8vo].  p.  98)  assigns  the  scarcity  of 
gamę,  and  the  fact  that  fmale  children  aie  only  con- 
8umers,andnotpn>yider8.  ''Undertheaecircumstancea, 
female  children  became  a  aource  of  weakneas  in  «everal 
ways.  They  ate,  and  did  not  bunt;  they  weakened 
their  mothers  when  young,  and  when  growing  up  were 
a  temptation  to  sunounding  tribea."  But  while  these 
reasons,  which  aeem  quite  plausible  at  the  outset,  may 
have  helped  to  aggrayate  and  apread  the  horrid  crime 
of  infantidde,  it  ia  no  doubt  tnie,  after  all,  that  the 
practice  of  chUd-murder  ia  due  to  a  false  oomprehendon 
of  the  dutiea  and  reUUiona  of  man  towarda  his  Maker. 
Peryerted  religioua  teachings  hayę  done  much  to  foster 
thia  great  crime  among  these  ignorant  human  beings, 
whom  Christianity  is  slowly  but  surely  oonyindng  of 
the  error  of  their  ways.  The  benign  effect  of  Christi- 
anity, which  waa  so  marked  on  the  legislation  of  the 
Gneco-Boman  empire  in  the  treatment  of  woman,  and,  aa 
a  natural  conseąuence,  in  the  treatment  likewise  of  ber 
offspring,  is  already  apparent  also  among  these  undyil- 
ized  tribea.  One  of  the  maxim8  of  modem  dvilization, 
or,  rather,  of  Christianity,  is  found  among  the  enact* 
ments  of  the  first  Christian  emperor,  namdy,  Constan- 
tine'a  declaration  that  ^  the  killing  of  a  child  by  its  fa- 
ther, which  the  Pompeian  law  left  unpunished,  is  one 
of  the  greatest  crimes"  (Schaff,  CA,  Uia,  iii,  114).  «'  In- 
stead  of  encouraging  the  destraction  of  life,  modem  dyil- 
ization  abounds  in  eyery  kind  of  machineiy  for  presery- 
ing  it,  howeyer  unsuccesaful  the  attempt.  The  chief 
cause  which,  among  Christian  nations,  leads  to  infanti- 
dde, is  that  of  shame,  which,  howeyer,  operatea  only  in 
the  case  of  the  child  bdng  illegitimate.  The  parenta 
often  incur  the  risk  of  committing  the  crime  of  murder 
to  ayoid  social  disgrace.  In  order,  therefore,  to  appre- 
ciate  the  foroe  of  the  checks  put  by  the  law  on  the  ten- 
dency  to  infantidde,  the  law  of  baatardy,  the  practice 
of  instituting  foundUng  hospitals  (q.  y.),  and  the  kind 
and  degree  of  the  puniahmenta  attending  any  attempt 
morę  or  leaa  direct  to  destroy  the  child,  dther  before  or 
after  birth,  require  to  be  taken  into  account.  The  crim- 
inal  law  deahł  with  the  cognate  offences  which  make  up 
infantlcide  in  the  foUowing  manner,  whether  the  child 
ia  legitimate  or  illegitimate.  As  regards  the  procuring 
of  abortion.  eyeiy  woman  who  takea  poison  or  other 
noxioua  thing,  or  uses  Instruments  or  other  meana  to 
procure  her  miscarriage,  is  guilty  of  felony,  and  liable 
to  penal  seryitude  for  life,  or  not  less  than  three  years; 
and  80  is  any  person  who  administers  poison,  or  usea  in- 
stramenta  upon  the  woman  with  auch  intent  Wh(j- 
eyer  suppliea  druga,  poison,  or  instrumenta  for  the  same 
purpose  ia  guilty  of  a  misdemeanor,  and  liable  to  penal 
seryitude  for  three  years.  The  concealment  of  birth  is 
also  a  criminal  offence.  Whoeyer,  after  a  child  is  bom, 
by  any  aecret  disposition  of  the  body,  endeayors  to  con- 
oeal  ita  birth,  is  guilty  of  a  misdemeanor,  and  liable  to 
imprisomnent  for  two  years.  This  is  the  offence  which, 
perhaps,  is  most  frequently  committed,  or  at  least  roade 
the  aubject  of  proeecution  in  sach  caaes.  aa  the  attempt 
to  eaubliah  the  larger  crime  of  murder  to  the  satiafac^ 
tion  of  a  jury  is  frequently  foiled  by  the  aecret  sympa- 
thy  ahown  towarda  the  mother,  who  ia  preaumed  to 
haye  been  the  yictim  of  seduction,  or  otherwiae  wrong- 
ed"  (Chambers).  But  one  of  the  greatest  difficultiea 
we  are  beginning  to  encounter  in  our  own  day,  in  eey-» 
eral  Christian  lands,  among  which  our  own  is  perhapa 
the  most  prominent,  is  the  practice  of  abortion,  only  an- 
other  form  of  infantidde,  so  generał  among  the  so-called 
higher  classes  of  sodety.  It  is  really  alarming  to  the 
Chriatian  man  to  see  how  extenaiye  thia  great  on  bas 


INF.  JESUS,  DAUGHTERS  OF    578 


INFANT  SALYATION 


beoome  in  this  country,  as  well  bb  in  Engbuid.  We  do 
not  deign  to  speak  of  France,  for  that  country,  in  this 
respect  at  least,  can  scarcely  make  the  profeasion  of  be- 
ing  a  Christian  land.  Houses  for  abortion  are  among  us 
in  the  best  parts  of  the  largest  dties.  They  are  kept 
iirith  the  approval  of  our  citizeiis,  and  are  suffered  to 
further  a  crime  which  must  sooner  or  later  piove  the 
greatest  curse  that  has  yet  befallen  us.  Mr.  Greenwood, 
in  his  Seven  Curse*  of  London,  speaks  of  "  baby  farm- 
ing"  as  "  a  mischief  of  gigantlc  extenL"  Recent  sta- 
tistics,  and,  indeed,  the  unblushing  adrertisements  of 
abortionists,  małe  and  female,  in  the  daily  prints,  pro- 
claim  the  equally  fearful  extent  of  the  crime  of  infanti- 
cide  in  our  own  land.  It  is  high  time  that  the  clergy 
raise  their  %'oice  againat  this  varied  form  of  feficide, 
which  threatens  to  decimate  the  population  in  the 
higher  classes,  and  is  tx>iBoning  the  morał  sense  of  out- 
wardly  respectable  families.    (J.  H.  W.) 

Infant  Jeans,  Danghters  of  the  Conoreoa- 
Tiox  OF  THE,  is  an  order  in  the  Romish  Church  which 
has  its  seat  at  Romę.  It  owes  its  origin  to  Anna  Mo- 
roni,  a  native  of  Lucca,  who,  ha^'ing  come  to  Romę  en- 
tirdy  destitute,  succeeded  by  her  industiy  and  economy 
in  securing  a  competency.  In  morę  advanced  years, 
her  charitable  feelings  prompted  her  to  esUblish  an  in- 
stitution  where  poor  girls  should  be  instructed  in  such 
female  work  as  would  enable  them  to  eam  a  livelihood. 
A  priest,  Cosmus  Berlintani,  and  other  members  of  the 
clergy,  approved  of  her  plan,  and  affbrded  her  much  as- 
fiistance.  By  their  joint  efforts  it  was  finally  establish- 
ed  as  a  regular  institution,  and  in  1673  pope  Clement 
X  acknowlcdged  the  existence  of  the  society,  gave  it  by- 
laws,  and  endowed  it  with  sundry  particular  privileges, 
under  the  appellation  of  **  Daughters  of  the  Infant  Je- 
sus.*' The  number  of  the  **  Daughters*"  allotted  to  each 
conyent  was  fixed  at  38,  in  commemoration  of  the  num- 
ber of  years  Jesus  lived  upon  earth.  The  novitiate 
lasts  three  years;  the  sis- 
tcrs  make  vows  of  povcrty, 
chastity,  and  obedience. 
Such  as  may  wish  to  leave 
the  conrent  are  allowed  to 
do  80  before  taking  the  yows, 
but,  in  that  case,  they  are  to 
leave  to  the  conrent  all  they 
brought  to  it  at  their  admis- 
sion.  Priayers  and  fasts  are 
strictly  enforced.  The  regu- 
lar habit  of  the  order  con- 
sists  of  a  mńde,  dark  brow^n 
dress,  and  a  white  hood. 
There  also  exi8ted  in  former 
times  an  organization  whose 
members  borę  the  name  of 
"  Sisters  of  the  good  Jesus ;" 
these,  in  the  earlier  part  of 
the  15th  centurj-,  were  trans- 
formed  from  a  lay  associa- 
Habit  of  the  Danghtem  of  tion  into  a  regular  order,  and 
the  Sodety  of  the  Infnnt  supported  themselves  by  suit- 
able  arocations.  —  Herzog, 
Real-EncyldopadU,  %-i,  616. 

Infant  Membership.  See  Membership  in  the 
Christian  Church. 
Infant  Regeneration.  See  Regeneration. 
Infant  Salvation.  On  this  ąuestion  most  Chris- 
tiana will  agree  with  the  foUowing  statements:  ^'The 
great  consideration  which  leads  to  a  solution  of  the  case 
of  persona  dying  in  infancy  is  found  in  Rom.  v,  18, 
*Therefore,  as  by  the  offense  of  one,  judgment  came 
upon  all  men  to  condemnation,  even  so,  by  the  right- 
eousness  of  one,  the  free  gifl  came  upon  all  men  unto 
justifłcation  of  life.'  In  these  words,  the  sin  of  Adam 
and  the  merita  of  Christ  are  pronounced  to  be  co-exten- 
8ive ;  the  words  applied  to  both  are  predsely  the  same, 
*judffmaU  came  upon  all  mmi  *  the/rec  fff/l  came  upon 


ctU  men,*  If  the  whole  human  race  be  meant  in  the  fior- 
mer  dause,  the  whole  human  race  is  meant  in  the  latter 
also ;  and  it  follows  that  as  all  are  injured  by  the  offaice 
of  Adam,  so  all  are  benefited  by  the  obedience  of  Chriit 
Whatever,  therefore,  that  benefit  may  be,  all  childrai 
dying  in  infancy  must  partake  of  it,  or  there  woold  be 
a  large  portion  of  the  human  race  upon  whom  the  *frM 
gift,'  the  effects  of  *  the  righteousnees  of  one,*  did  not 
*come,*  which  is  contraiy  to  the  apostles  words"  (Wat- 
son,  InstituteSf  ii,  57). 

**  Theologians  have  pursned  two  different  metbods  in 
treating  of  this  subject.  (a.)  Some  are  content  with 
saying  that  God  will  pardon  and  sare  infants  on  account 
of  the  merita  of  Christ,  which  extend  to  all,  although 
they  may  not  have  bclieved  in  Christ  during  their  lifc- 
time;  and  that  their  bdng  bom  with  natural  depnyitr 
will  not  harm  them,  because  they  them8dves  are  not  u> 
blame  for  it.  These  writers  refer  to  Rom.  v,  15-17  for 
an  analogous  proceeding.  This  is  the  most  aimple  and 
safest  view.  (6.)  Othera,  misunderstanding  the  pasMge 
Mark  xvi,  16,  suppoee  that  faith  in  Christ  ia  an  iDdi»- 
pensable  requisite  for  salration  in  all  men,  and  hare 
therefore  (together  with  some  schoohnen)  embraoed  the 
dóctrine  of  a  faith  ofinfants^  which  they  hare  Tarioudy 
explained  and  described  as  Jideś  pr-tesumpłOj  impHcita, 
per  baptumum  sine  rerbo  (some  say  tme  cwputume)  «- 
Jusa ;  łalis  affecłio  in  infamie  gualis  Deo  placeaf.  The 
schoohnen  describe  it  as  dispodUo  ad  justiUant,  Bot 
nonc  of  them  succeed  in  conveying  any  intelligibk  idea. 
Nothing  LB  said  in  the  N.  T.  about  such  a  faith.  Faith 
always  presuppoeee  knowledge  and  power  to  esercise  the 
understanding.  Now,  sińce  children  have  neither  vf 
these  requisitcs,  faith  cannot  be  ascribed  to  them;  nor, 
indeed,  disbelief  unless  the  word  is  used  very  improper- 
ly.  The  merę  want  of  faith  is  not  danmabUy  but  nube- 
lief  oniy,  or  the  guilty  destitation  of  iaith.  Thoee  who 
hare  adopted  this  riew  hare  thua  been  coropelled  (ai 
appears  from  the  preceding  remarks)  to  rary  the  idta 
which  is  uniformly  attached  to  the  word  faith  where 
adults  are  referred  to,  as  soon  as  they  speak  of  chiktaen, 
and  cali  something  in  them  by  this  name  which  is  no- 
where  else  so  denominated.  The  paseage  Matt.  xriii, 
6,  does  not  boar  upon  this  pouit,  smce  the  diadples  of 
Christ  are  there  meant.  See  Baptism.  From  the 
words  of  Christ,  howerer,  MatL  xix,  14,  *  Of  such  is  the 
kingdom  of  God,*  it  u  elear  that  he  considers  ckildm 
as  belonging  to  his  kingdom.  And  this  is  enough" 
(Knapp,  Theolo4^,iy,  428). 

Calrin,  who  laid  particular  stress  on  infant  baptism 
in  harmony  with  the  other  leading  reformers,  bdd  that 
"  it  is  no  smali  iiijustice  to  the  corenant  of  God  if  we  do 
not  rdy  upon  it  as  suffident  of  itsdf,  sińce  the  fulfilmcnt 
depends  not  on  baptism  or  anything  adrentitious.  It 
is  alleged  there  is  danger  lest  a  child  who  is  sick,  and 
dies  without  baptism,  should  be  deprired  of  the  grace 
of  regeneration.  This  I  can  by  no  roeans  admit.  God 
pronounces  that  he  adopts  our  infants  as  his  chikhen  be- 
fore they  are  bom,  when  he  promises  that  he  will  be  a 
God  to  us,  and  to  our  aeed  after  us.  This  promise  ii>- 
cludes  thdr  salration.  Nor  will  any  dare  to  ofler  soch 
an  insult  to  God  as  to  deny  the  suffidency  of  his  prom- 
ise to  insure  its  own  aocompliahment.  The  receptioo 
of  an  opinion,  that  all  who  happen  to  die  without  bap- 
tism are  lost,  makes  our  condition  worse  than  that  of 
the  andent  Israelitea,  as  though  the  grace  of  God  were 
morę  restricted  now  than  it  was  under  law ;  it  leads  to 
the  condusion  that  Christ  came,  not  to  fulfil  the  prom- 
ises, but  to  abolish  them ;  sińce  the  promise,  which  at 
that  time  was  of  itself  snffidently  efficadous  to  insure 
salration  before  the  eighth  day,  would  hare  no  ralidity 
now  without  the  assistance  of  the  sign.**  What  Calrin 
here  says  is  so  elear,  poeitire,  and  dedded,  and  so  cn- 
tirdy  free  from  the  least  ambiguity,  that  he  cannot  be 
misunderstood. 

Of  late  years  a  controreny  has  aiisen  in  the  '^  Be- 
formed  Church**  as  to  the  docthnes  which  aha  really  pro- 
mulgatea  oa  this  point,  and,  as  a  result,  we  thińk  we 


INFEL 


679 


INTroELITY 


nuty  jrady  send  forih  the  followiDg:  **We  8till  hołd  on 
to  the  old  faith  of  the  Chnrcb,  that  the  sacnunents  aro 
teaHnff  ontiiumoea,  and  feel  as  confident  aa  eTer  that  God 
win  lenuun  trae  to  his  promise,  and  8ave  the  children 
of  the  ooyenant,  though  they  should  die  without  its 
seaL**  Indeed,  it  seems  almost  impossible  for  the  "  Re- 
formed  Church"  to  take  any  other  groimd,  sińce  one  of 
her  fomiden  and  great  theological  teachers,  Uninus, 
held  not  only  in  the  case  of  infauts,  but  also  in  the  case 
of  aU  God*s  reasoning  creatures,  that "  not  all  those  who 
aie  not  baptized  are  exc]uded  from  the  gnu:e  of  Christ ; 
for  not  the  want,  but  the  eontempi  of  baptism,  exclude8 
men  from  the  covenant  of  God,  madę  with  the  faithful 
and  their  children."  (Compare  artides  in  the  Ref.  Ch, 
Mentmgeri  March  4^  1868 ;  March  11, 1868). 

One  of  the  greatest  aiguments  against  the  8alvation 
of  ehildren  not  baptized,  which  has  been  advanced,  is, 
that  the  rite  of  hapUsm  is  essential  to  coyenantship,  pro- 
vided  the  parents  had  not  by  pecnliar  circumstances 
been  pnivented  fiom  attending  to  this  duty.  Bot  this 
point  (loea  not  seem  to  be  well  taken,  for  among  the  Is- 
ndilea  ciroimicision  did  not  admit  their  children  into 
ooTenant  with  God,  as  they  were  in  that  covenant  by 
Urtk,  (Sicimicision  was  merely  the  sign  or  seal  of  the 
oorenant,  without  which  they  ooold  not  be  reoognised 
as  being  of  the  people  of  God.  So  Christian  children  are 
indnded  in  the  covenant  with  Christ;  but  the  rite  of 
baptism  is  their  natnral  sign  and  seal  of  that  covenant, 
and  without  it  they  cannot  be  considered  as  belonging 
to  the  risible  foUowers  of  Christ.  See,  besides  the  au- 
thoritiea  already  referred  to,  Wesley,  Worksy  v,  877 ; 
MereenŁ.  Rat.  1860,  p.  887  są. ;.  Meth.  Quar,  Rev.  1859, 
p.682;  1864,p.617sq.,652sq.;  1866,p.81;  1870,p.290; 
Fairchild,  Are  Infantt  elected  (Tract  of  the  Presb.  Ch. 
No.  229);  McConoughy,  Are  Infctnts  saved  (Presb.  Ch. 
Tiact  No.  182) ;  Chitdren  m  IIeaven  (Phila.  1866,  Presb. 
Board  of  PubL),  p.  862 ;  Christian  Exannner,  iv,  481 ;  v, 
229,310;  Russell,  On  Infant  Salrałum  (London,  1822, 
12mo) ;  Harris,  łfape  for  Sahaiwn  of  all  dymg  m  In- 
faney  (Lond.  1822, 8vo) ;  Doddridge,  Leeture*  on  Dwm- 
i(^,  LecC  168. 

InfeL    See  Imfui^. 

Inferentlal  Theology.  Many  pious  minds  of 
the  Christian  Church  have  eamestly  opposed  the  opin- 
ion  of  the  morę  Uberally  inclined  orthodox  theologians, 
that  the  Christian  theology  is  in  some  respects  **  infei^ 
endaL"  liddon  adroitly  puts  this  ąuestion  in  his  Bamp- 
ton  Leeture  of  1866  {Our  Ijord^s  Dwinity,  p.  441,  442) : 
**•  No  one  would  deny  that  in  aU  ages  of  the  Church  the 
field  of  theology  has  been  the  scenę  of  hasty,  unwar- 
rantable,  and  misleading  inferences.  False  conclusions 
hare  been  drawn  from  true  premises,  and  very  doubtful 
or  lalse  premises  have  been  occasionally  assnmed,  if  not 
asscrted  to  be  tnie.  .  .  .  But  if  this  should  be  adroitted 
it  would  not  follow  that  theology  is  in  no  sense  *  infer- 
cotiaL'  Within  certain  limits,  and  under  due  guidance, 
'inferenoe'  is  the  movement,  it  is  the  life  of  theology. 
The  primal  rccords  of  reveIation  itself,  as  we  iind  them 
in  Scriptnre,  aie  continually  inferential,  and  it  is  at 
least  the  business  of  theology  to  obsenre  and  marshal 
thcse  revealed  inferences,  to  draw  them  out,  and  to 
make  the  most  of  them.  The  illuminated  reason  of  the 
oolleetiye  Chnrch  has  for  ages  been  engaged  in  stndy- 
ing  the  original  materials  of  the  Christian  reyelation. 
It  has  thns  shaped,  rather  than  created,  the  science  of 
tbedogy.  What  is  theology  but  a  continuous  series 
of  obseryed  and  irjrstematized  inferences  respecting  God 
in  his  naturę  and  his  dealings  with  mankind,  drawn 
from  premises  which  rest  upon  God'8  authority?  .  .  . 
If  we  reject  conclusions  drawn  professedly  from  the  sub- 
•tance  of  revelation,  but  really  enlarging  instead  of  ex- 
pUńning  it,  it  does  not  follow  that  we  should  reject  in- 
feRDces  which  are  simply  explanatofy,  or  which  exhibit 
the  bearing  of  one  revealed  trutb  upon  another.  This, 
indeed,  is  the  most  fruitful  and  legitimate  pTovince  of 
inference  in  theological  inquiry.  Such '  in ference'  brings 
•ot  the  meaning  of  the  details  of  revelation.    It  raises 


this  featuie  to  prominence,  it  throws  that  into  the  shade. 
It  plaoes  lang^uage  to  which  a  too  seryile  literalism 
might  have  attributed  the  highest  force  in  the  lower 
rank  of  metaphor  and  symbol;  it  elicits  pregnant  and 
momentous  truths  finom  inddents  which,  in  the  absence 
of  suiBcient  guidance  or  reflectiion,  may  have  been 
thought  to  poesess  only  a  secondary  degree  of  signifi- 
canoe.^ 

Inferior  Clergy,  '<the  seyeral  dasses  of  assistants 
to  the  priesthood  in  the  ancient  churches.  They  were 
distinguished  by  the  title  iLXtiQOT6vnToc  v7njpŁ<ria^  be- 
cause  they  were  appointed  to  their  respectiye  offices 
without  the  imposition  of  hands.  Not  being  ordained 
at  the  altar,  nor  in  ecdesiastical  form,  they  were,  of 
course,  ineligible  for  the  exercise  of  any  of  its  sacerdotal 
functions;  indeed,  so  distinctly  drawn  was  the  llne  be- 
tween  them  and  the  superior  orders,  called  UpwfitPOŁ, 
holy,  that  they  were  strictly  forbidden  to  touch  the  sa- 
cred  yessels,  or  so  much  as  to  enter  the  '  diaconicum^ — 
sanctuary.  The  inferior  deigy  of  the  Church  of  £ng- 
land  indudes  all  those  in  holy  orders  not  distinguished 
by  their  position  and  title  as  dignitaries  o/the  Church, 
The  offices  of  churchwarden,  verger,  sexton,  and  pew- 
opener  in  the  Church  of  England  correspond  in  generał 
to  the  offices  of  the  inferior  dergy  of  andent  times" 
(Eadie,  Ecciet,  Cydopatdia,  s.  v.).  See  Bingham,  Orig, 
Eccki,  book  i,  ch.  L    See  Clergy. 

Infeiidatioii  is  a  term  in  law  for  the  pladng  in 
poBsession  of  a  fee  or  freehold  estate.  It  was  used  in 
ecdesiastical  law  to  designate  the  granting  of  tithes  to 
laymen,  and  the  temporai^"^  possessibn  by  ecdesiastical 
assodations  of  lay  property.  Pope  Urban  VIII,  in  the 
year  1625,  declared  himself  against  all  infeudation,  and 
madę  it  nuli  and  void  if  thercaftcr  contractod*  See 
Aschbach,  Kirchen-LeiUson,  iii,  460. 

Infidel  (dtrurroct  2  Cor.  vi,  15 ;  1  Tim.  v,  18),  an  ur^ 
belieter,  as  elsewhere  rendered. 

Infidellty  etymologically  means  simply  want  of 
belief  By  common  usage  it  has  come  to  mean  (1),  in 
a  restricted  sense,  a  rejection  of  the  Christian  faith ;  and 
(2),  in  a  wider  sense,  the  rejection  of  religion  generally. 
Thus  AtheistB,  who  disbeliere  in  God,  and  Deists,  who 
belieye  in  God,  but  reject  Christianity,  are  alike  called 
infidels. 

I.  Various  Forma  of  Infiddity, — Pearson,  in  his  ex- 
cellent  prize  essay  on  Infidelityf  ifa  AspectSj  Causes,  and 
Agcncies  (Lond.  1860, 8yo),  dassifies  the  forms  of  modem 
infiddity  as  follows:  1.  Atheism,  or  the  denial  of  the 
divine  existence;  2.  Pantheism,  or  the  denial  of  the  di- 
vine  personality;  8.  Naturalism,  or  the  denial  of  the 
dirine  govemment;  4.  Spiritualism,  or  the  denial  of  the 
diyine  redemption.  To  these  may  be  added,  what  be- 
long  morę  properly  to  practical  than  to  thcoretical  in- 
fidellty, 5.  IndifTerentism,  or  the  denial  of  man's  re- 
sponsibility ;  and,  6.  Formalism,  or  the  denial  of  the 
power  of  godliness.  Each  of  these  will  be  found  noticed 
in  this  Cyclopsedia  under  their  proper  heads.  Biddle 
{Bampłon  Leeture  for  1852)  giyes  the  following  suryey 
of  the  yarious  phases  of  infidelity. 

(1.)  RaHonałism, — "Infidelity, scarcdy  fashioned, and 
perhape  hardly  consdous  of  its  own  true  character,  but 
yet  really  exi6ting  and  putting  forth  some  dcgrce  of 
encrjo',  appeara  in  the  form  of  a  rałionalisiic  rejection 
of  Christian  doctrine,  In  this  form,  haylng  reference 
rather  to  the  substance  of  the  Gospel  than  to  its  proofs 
and  eyidences,  infidelity  is  susceptible  of  such  dirersi- 
fied  modifications,  and  assumes  so  many  disguises,  that 
it  may  sometimes  escape  detection,  and  is  often  in  a  dis- 
position  to  repel,  with  logical  corrcctncss,  the  charges 
which  may  be  justly  brought  against  it  by  those  w^ho 
perceiye  its  real  tendency  and  naturę.  The  faintest, 
but  still  dangerous  phase  of  this  rationalistic  spirit  con- 
sists  in  the  habit  of  making  an  arbitrary  choice  and  te- 
lection  of  dogmas  to  be  belieyed  by  those  who  profess- 
edly, and  with  morę  or  less  sincerity,  accept  the  Chris- 
tian reyelation  as  a  whole,    From  this  unhealthy  state 


INFTOELITY 


580 


INFroEUTY 


ormind  the  transition  is  too  easy  to  a  systematic  eUva'- 
tion  ofreaton  above  all  the  noiices  o/reoekUion;  that  ia, 
to  rationaliam  applied  to  the  whole  substance  of  the 
GospeL  This  takes  place  when  men  systematically  re- 
quire  that  revealed  truth  shall  be,  not  only  not  contia- 
dictory  to  sound  reason,  which  is  justly  to  be  expected, 
but  that  it  shall  be  in  accordance  with  the  independent 
notions  of  reason  or  deductions  of  the  understanding."' 
With  the  class  of  thinkers  who  haye  this  tendency  most 
prominently  affiliates  Mr.  Leckey,  who  has  lately  pub- 
lished  a  History  of  RcUionalism  (London,  2  yoIs.  8vo). 
His  aim,  and  that  of  his  schóol,  eridently  is  to  reduce 
Christianity  to  a  system  of  ethics,  and  deprive  it  of  its 
supematural  character,  holding  that  the  contest  be- 
tween  the  championa  and  the  adyersaries  of  religion  is 
no  longer  to  be  fought,  as  it  was  in  the  16th  and  17th 
centuries,  upon  pointa  of  dogmatic  theology,  and  that 
the  dogmatic  forms  of  the  Protestant  churches  are  no 
longer  the  efficient  antagonista  of  the  Church  of  Romę. 
Kor  are  the  free-thinkers  of  the  present  day  to  be  oon- 
founded  with  those  of  the  old  Yoltairean  school  in  France, 
or  with  the  English  Deists  of  the  last  century.  Their 
system  is  no  longer  cxclasiyely  negatiye  and  destruc- 
tive,  but,  on  the  contrary,  intensely  poatiye,  and,  in  its 
mond  aspect,  intensely  Christian.  It  embraces  a  series 
of  essentially  Christian  conceptions — equality,  fratemi- 
ty,  the  suppression  of  war,  the  education  of  the  poor, 
the  abolition  of  slayery,  the  diffusion  of  liberty.  It  re- 
yolyes  around  the  ideał  of  Christianity,  and  represents 
its  spirit  without  ita  dogmatic  system  and  its  supemat- 
ural narratiyea.  From  both  of  these  it  unhesitatingly 
recoils,  while  deriying  all  its  strength  and  nourishment 
from  Christian  ethics.  Hardly  couscious  of  its  own 
character,  as  Mr.  Riddle  teUs  us,  modem  Rationalists  go 
forth  under  such  leadera  as  Leckey,  and  declare  that 
"the  idolatry  of  dogmas  will  pass  away,"  and  that 
"  Christianity,  being  rescned  from  sectarianism  and  in- 
tolerance  that  haye  defaoed  it,  will  shine  by  its  own 
morał  splendor,  and,  sublimated  aboye  all  the  sphere  of 
oontroyersy,  will  assume  its  rightful  position  aa  an  ideał, 
and  not  a  system ;  aa  a  person,  and  not  a  creed."  We 
aee  thb  great  result,  which  Mr.  Leckey  succeeds  in  pic- 
iuring^  in  a  somewhat  modified  fona,  in  the  efforts  of 
the  free-thinkers  of  our  land,  especially  sińce  the  last 
meeting  of  the  "Free  Religious  Association,"  morę  par- 
ticularly  in  the  abolition  of  the  Snnday  lawa  for  certain 
purposes  in  the  city  of  Boston,  inaugurated  first  by  the 
foUowers  of  Theodore  Parker.    See  Rationalism. 

(2.)  Spiritualitm, — ^'  But  while  Rationalism  appears 
to  haye  lost  much  of  its  former  reputation,  there  is  an- 
other  method  of  arriying  at  the  same  end  which  finda 
acceptance  in  the  minds  of  many  persona  at  the  present 
day.  Theae  men  are  not  Rationalists ;  they  are  so-call- 
ed  Spiriłłtalists,  They  do  not  deny  the  great  truths 
which  lie  on  the  yery  surface  of  the  sacred  record;  nor 
do  they  disayow  the  fact  of  a  diyine  reyelation,  and  so 
leaye  man  entirely  to  the  dictates  of  his  reason,  and  the 
conclusions  of  his  underatanding,  with  the  additional 
aid  to  be  deriyed  from  his  fellow-creatures,  all  unin- 
apired  like  himself.  But  their  theory  is  this.  There 
is,  say  they,  a  reyelation  madę  from  God  to  man,  but  it 
is  only  subjectiye,  inward,  to  the  already  existing  spir- 
itual  life,  or  religious  oonsciousness  of  humanity ;  the 
inspiration  by  which  this  life  or  consciousness  is  awak- 
ened  is  common  to  eyery  man  who  will  wait  and  seek 
for  it;  and  as  to  religious  truth,  it  is  simply  that  which 
indiriduals,  or  the  mass  of  humanity,  so  far  as  their 
powers  haye  been  heightened  by  the  diyine  aiHatus,  are 
able  to  apprehend.  Aocording  to  this  system,  we  are 
not  to  suppose  that  the  Gospel  announces  positiye  spir- 
itual  facts,  such,  for  example,  as  that  which  is  usually 
understood  by  the  atonement;  but  it  propounds  ideas 
which  may  be  differently  rcoeiyed  by  differeut  men,  and 
w^ill  poesess  a  power  and  yalue  according  to  the  spirit- 
nal  mould  into  which  they  may  be  cast.  Now,  in  this 
Spiritualism,  let  it  be  obseryed,  there  is  nothing  original 
or  new.    This  system  is,  in  substance,  only  one  of  those 


phaaea  of  onbelief  which  haye  appeazed  and  disappearad 
at  interyals  firom  the  earliest  agea  of  Chiiaftianit^,  bob 
which,  thanks  be  to  God,  haye  neyer  yet  ancceedcd  in 
making  the  Gospel  obsolete,  and  in  robbing  rnimkind  of 
the  knowledge  of  aalyation.  It  ia,  howeyer,  fiaagbt 
with  danger,  and  ita  power  of  mischief  aiiaea,  m  no 
smali  degree,  from  its  capability  of  diaguiae.  It  can  pot 
on  the  semblancc  of  Chiiatian  truth ;  it  can  comply  irith 
any  form  of  woids,  eyen  the  soundest  fonn,  in  creeda 
and  confessiona  diawn  up  with  the  greateat  fidelity  and 
care."  (Comp.  Hardwick,  Ckriai  and  otker  Madenj  i, 
5  sq.)    See  SpuuTUAuaan. 

(3.)  JSTatora/ina.—*' The  mind  that  leyolta  aft  my»- 
tery,  or  religious  truth  which  we  cannot  know  independ- 
ently  of  a  direct  and  ontward  reyelation,  la  aiao  aboc^* 
ed  and  lepelled  by  miracle.  AocoidiDgly  we  find  tbaft 
infidelity  sometimea  assumea  the  form  ^  naturtUimm,  or 
an  assault  upon  the  Bibie  chiefly  with  refcKnoe  to  ita 
supematural  historie  elementa.  According  to  aom^  tfae 
miraclea  of  Scripture  were  leally  wioaght,  and  preaent- 
ed  all  the  appearauces  described  in  the  sacred  ceeocd; 
but  they  were  miraculous  only  to  the  apprehcnaion  of 
ignorant  persons,  who  did  not  undeistand  how  ther  were 
l^onned.  Far  morę  elabonte,  and  periiaps  noore  plan- 
sible,  has  been  an  attempt  of  recent  datę  to  ezhibit  aD 
the  miraculous  and  supematural  featuiea  ofthc  Goapel 
history  under  the  character  of  an  aggregate  of  myiba 
or  legenda.  Such  ia  the  hypotheaia  of  Stnuaa.  See 
Naturalism. 

(4^)  I>eism.—^Th\B  ia  a  claaa  of  anti-Chiistian  piinci- 
pies  well  known  aa  haying  preyailed  in  England  cłiaefly 
in  the  laat  century."  Infidelity  in  thia  form  no  longer  ap- 
peara  aa  merę  philoeophy,  or  speaka  in  the  accenta  of  calm 
or  lofty  speculation.  It  indudes,  indeed,  aome  attempcs 
at  historical  and  yerbal  critidsm,  and  makea  aome  ahow 
of  wisdom  suited  to  the  age  in  which  it  flouriahed ;  bat, 
for  the  moet  part,  it  opena  ita  mouth  in  bla^hemy,  and 
prodaims  aloud  the  sentiments  of  an  eyil  and  ungodlj 
heart.  For,  whether  we  consider  the  ignorant  miaep> 
resentations  of  Paine,  the  sneen  of  Gibbon,  or  the  sooff- 
ings  of  Yoltaire,  it  is  impossible  not  to  peioeive  that 
their  opposition  to  the  Goapel  is  foonded  upon  mocal  re- 
pugnance  and  distaate.  Their  writinga  are  a  dear  echo 
of  that  rebellious  seiitimcnt,  *  We  will  not  baye  thia 
man  to  reign  oyer  us'  (Lukę  zix,  14).  And,  ao  far  aa 
the  school  of  mfidelity  continues  to  subeiat,  we  find  ita 
adherenta,  for  the  most  part,  among  men  of  depcaycd 
morał  habita,  of  Iow  taste  and  uncnltiyated  intelteet,  rer- 
elling  yery  often  in  the  haunta  of  profligacy  and  viee, 
or  filled  with  political  rancor,  and  struggling  against  the 
restraints  of  all  laws,  human  and  diyine."  (Compu  Wa- 
terland,  Worka,  y ,  4  8q. ;  Hardwick,  Chrisi  <md  otktr  Mat^ 
terSf  i,  88  są.)     See  Dkism. 

(5.)  Pantkeiam, — "  Soroe  men  there  are  who,  while 
they  reject  Christianity,  and  know  not  the  true  God, 
yet  retain  the  impression  of  a  presiding  or  uniyeraal  In- 
tellect ;  but,at  the  same  time,  that  which  they  thua  ree- 
ognise  as  mental  eneigy,  or  the  diyine  eaaenoe,  oor  evea 
a  diyine  being,  they  regard  aa  morę  or  kas  identical  with 
naturę,  oonceiying  that,  in  some  way  or  other,  eitber 
God  is  the  uniyerse,  or  the  nniyeise  is  God.  Thia  ia 
Pantheitm  in  ita  twofold  aspect."    See  Pakticeism. 

(6.)  A  theUm* — "  There  appeara  to  be  only  one  atep  Ww- 
er  to  which  eyen  the  boldest  infidelity  can  deacend,  and 
that  is  ilM«i«m,  properiy  ao  called.  TheAthełatiaaoaafr- 
times  satisfied  with  taking  a  merely  negatiye  positioa. 
Without  attempting  to  proye  that  there  ia  no  God,  be 
simply  affimis  that,  to  his  apprehenaion,  there  ia  no  anf- 
ficient  proof  of  his  esistenoe,  or  that  the  eyidencea  of 
his  beiog  and  his  operation,  to  which  many  men  appeal, 
are  to  his  mind  no  eyidence  whateyer,  and  thcrefore  be 
holds  himself  eKcnsed  from  belieying  that  there  ia  a 
God,  and  from  acoepting  the  conaeąuencea  which  moit 
follow  from  such  admission,  reapecting  the.  creation  of 
the  world,  the  reaponsibility  of  man,  aud  the  pzoapeot  of 
immortality  hereafter.  ^t  this  position,  dreaiy  aa  it 
is,  by.  no  means  forma  a  reating-place  of  thia  iofidal  phi- 


EJFIDELITY 


581 


INFINITY 


looopby.  Atheism,  even  in  the  preaent  day,  \s  po8itivc 
and  dogmatic  in  its  teachings.  It  professes  to  account 
for  the  absence  of  a  Deitj,  and  to  piove  that  there  is  no 
God,  or,  at  least,  that  there  ia  nonę  engaged  in  present 
operatioQ  on  the  imiTerae  around  us."     See  Atheism. 

II.  Ctnueg  o/ Injiddity.— The  chief  source  of  infidel- 
ity  is  undoubtedly  a  morał  one.     *'  It  is  eyldent,"  re- 
marks  Pettson  {Modem  Infidelity,  pt.  ii,  eh.  i),  "  that 
unbelief,  generally  speaking,  can  originate  in  only  one 
of  two  flouicea;  either  in  a  defidency  of  eyidence,  or  in 
a  State  of  mind  and  heait  on  which  the  clearest  and 
stroagest  eridence  has  no  power.    The  canses  of  infi- 
delity,  we  are  persuaded,  are  morę  ethical  than  intellect- 
oaL    Thifl  peniiaaion  is  greatly  strengthened  by  the 
penisal  of  some  of  the  prodactiona  of  onr  modem  infidd 
wiitera.'*     "Nothing  can  be  morę  contemptible,"  says 
profeesor  Gaifoett  {Afod.  PkUosoph,  Infidelity, p. 5), "than 
the  argwnentaiive  resources  of  modem  infidelity.     It 
doe*  not  reason,  it  onfypostukUes ;  it  dreams  and  it  dog- 
matize&     Nor  can  it  claim  wweatiofC    This  testimony 
is  tnie.    Indeed,  we  yentuie  to  assert,  that  the  generał 
strain  of  argument  bronght  to  bear  against  Christianity 
by  its  modem  assailants  would  not  be  tolerated  for  a 
moment  within  the  proyince  of  pureiy  literaiy  criticism. 
The  strong  determination  to  withstand  everything  ip 
the  shape  of  reasonable  eridence  contrasts  very  much 
with  the  feeble  argomentation  by  which  many  of  the 
tmths  of  religion  are  set  aside.    Be  it  atheism  or  pan- 
theism,  natiiralism  or  spiritnalismi  indifferentism  or  for- 
malism,  the  will  has  mach  to  do  with  it.     Morał  eri- 
dence is  the  appropriate  proof  of  morał  troth.   Ali  mor- 
ał eridence  is  camulatire;  but,howerer  strong  it  may 
be,  it  is  nerer  irreństibie.    An  indocile  mind  can  ward 
it  ofill    The  esistence  of  God  [see  God]  does  not  admit 
of  demonstration,  but  morał  certainty.    See  ErroENCE. 
So  the  personality  of  God,  though  much  morę  rationał 
than  pantheism,  does  not  admit  of  mathematical  dem- 
oostratłon.     Christianity  is  based  upon  eridence.     The 
reaaon  why  eridence  is  neccssary  is  to  be  found  in  our 
morał  constitution  as  rationał,  discńminating,  account- 
able  agenta;  and  in  the  fact  that, from  the  exiBtence  of 
erił  in  the  world,we  were  otherwise  liable  to  deception 
in  reference  to  our  highest  mterests.    It  could  nerer  be 
a  man*8  duty  to  beliere  in  a  rerelation  daiming  to  it- 
aeif  the  authority  of  hearen,  unless  that  rerelation  borę, 
legibly  on  its  front,  hearen's  signature,  or  was  in  some 
war  attended  with  hearen'8  eridencing  power.    The 
eridence  that  attcsts  the  (Tuth  of  Christianity,  rast,  ra- 
ried,and  of  great  cumulatire  power  though  it  be,  is  not, 
howerer,  irresistible.    No  man  is  warranted  to  expect 
it  to  be  80.    Faith  is  a  morał  act,  and,  while  resting  on 
a  strong  groundwork  of  proof,  it  must  hare  some  diffi- 
colties  orer  włiich  to  triumph.    Origen,  speaking  of  the 
difliculties  in  the  Bibie  rerel&tion,  and  of  those  in  the 
Rreiation  of  naturę,  says :  "  In  both  we  see  a  sdf-con- 
oealing,  adf-revealing  God,  who  makes  himself  known 
ody  to  those  who  eamestly  seek  him ;  in  both  are  found 
sttmtdants  to  faith,  and  occasions  for  unbdief."    **  There 
is  light  enough,"  says  Pascal, "  for  those  who  sincerdy 
wish  to  see,  and  darkness  enough  for  those  of  an  oppo- 
ńte  deacription."    Mr.  Newman  tells  us  it "  supersedes 
the  authoiitatire  force  of  outward  mirades  entirdy"  to 
«y  tliat "  a  reałly  orerpowering  miraculous  proof  would 
hare  deatroyed  the  morał  character  of  faith."    This, 
bowerer,  is  not  argument,  but  a  foolish  dogmatic  asser- 
tion.    The  Christian  miracles  are  of  *<  a  conrincing  and 
atupendoos  character,"  and  yet  not  so  orerpowering  as 
the  axiom  that  a  wbole  is  greater  tlian  its  part ;  and  we 
lack  sagactty  to  peroeire  where  łies  the  contradiction 
between  these  statements.    Eridence  is  obligatoiy  on 
IDU,  not  becaose  it  is  orerpowering  or  irresistible,  but 
bwaase  it  prepondeiate& 

Besidea  the  morał  gronnd,  there  are  oertain  subordi- 
Mte  canaea  oonstantly  operating,  e.  g.  Speculatire  Phi- 
Jowphy  (ą.  r.) ;  corruptions  of  Oiristianity  [see  Chris- 
TiAHirY;  SoxA3ii8x] ;  religious  intolcrance  [see  Toi^ 
ttATiosr];  and,  morę  espedally,  the  connectipn  of 


Church  and  State.  In  our  own  country,  on  the  other 
band,  the  fact  that  religion  is  a  matter  of  prirate  opinion 
has  brought  upon  us  the  charge,  from  the  other  side  of 
the  Atlantic,  that  in  our  corporate  capacity  we,  by  our 
peculiar  position  on  this  point,  permit  the  inference  that 
we  'Mistinctly  affirm  that  no  religion  is  true,  but  that 
all  theological  systems  are  human  speculations  upon  a 
doubtful  matter,  morę  or  less  plausible  in  themselres, 
and  containing  a  greater  or  less  amount  of  truth,  but  no 
one  of  wliich  is  so  probable  that  we  will  act  in  a  mat- 
ter so  important  and  legislate  upon  the  theory  of  its 
truth."  It  is  hdd  by  sceptics  that  it  is  not  possible  to 
ppore  any  other  theoretical  justification  of  toleration,  or 
rdigious  equality,  or  whaterer  else  the/  system  which 
treats  religion  as  a  matter  of  prirate  opinion  is  called, 
than  one  which  is  founded  on  the  prindple  that  religion 
is  matter  of  opinion ;  in  other  woids,  that  the  best  of  all 
religions  is  doubtfuL  The  mcre  non-acceptance  of  the 
Koran  or  of  the  Roman  Catholic  Creed,  after  notice  of 
their  contents,  appears  to  them  to  amount  to  a  denial 
of  the  truth  of  the  claims  of  Mohammed  and  the  pope 
respectirdy.  They  argue  thus  from  the  position  that  a 
nation  cannot  remain  on  neutral  grounds  in  a  matter  in 
which  it  is  theoretically,  and  practically  too,  impoesible 
to  be  neutral,  and  that  the  18th  century  theories  of  gor- 
emment,  which  led  the  founders  of  our  Constitution  to 
think  otherwise,  are  fundamentally  wrong  (7%e  Nation, 
1868,  p.  346).    See  Church. 

For  further  Information,  see  the  different  artides  re- 
ferred  to  abore,  and  also  the  articles  EriDEKCES  of 
Christianity;  Parker;  Positiyism;  Unbelief.  See 
also  Garbett,  Modem  PkHosopkical  InfidelUy ;  Rogers, 
Reason  and  Faith;  Rogers,  EcUpte  o/ Faith;  Riddle, 
Natural  Hisłory  ofInfideUiy  (Bampton  Lect.  for  1852, 
8ro) ;  Thomson,  Aids  to  Faith  (Lond.  1861, 8ro);  Mor- 
gan, Christianity  and  Modem  Injiddity  (London,  1854, 
12mo) ;  Pearson,  Prize  Essay  on  Infidelity  (Lond.  1860, 
21st  edition) ;  ZAmdon  Revieip,  No.  5,  art.  i ;  CA.  ofEng^ 
land  BemeWf  Oct  1864,  art  iii ;  Wharton,  Theism  cmd  the 
Modem  Sceptical  Theories  (Phila.  1859, 12mo) ;  Saintes, 
Ilistory  o/ Ratibnalism  (Lond.  1849, 8ro) ;  Christian  Re- 
view,  iii,  184 ;  North  British  Retiew^  xr,  18 ;  Princeton 
RevietCf  xii,  31 ;  Nelson,  Cattse  and  Cure  of  Infidelity  (N, 
Y.  12mo) ;  Godwin,  PhHosophy  of  Atheism  (Lond.  1853) ; 
Van  Mildcrt,  Boyle  Lectures  on  the  Rise  and  Progress  of 
Infidelity  (Lond.  1820,  2  rols.  8ro) ;  Hurstj^M/.  of  Ra- 
tionalism  (2d  ed.  N.  Y.  1866, 8ro) ;  Hagenbach,  German 
Rationalism  (N.  York,  1865) ;  Farrar,  Crit,  Ilist.  ofFret 
Thought  (N.  Y.  1868, 8ro) ;  Evangel.  Quart.  Rev,  1865,  p. 
162  sq.;  Jl/crce7*«6./?€r.  July,1869;  Meth^Ouart^Retiew, 
1863,  p.  687  sq. ;  1864,  p.  682  sq. 

Infinite.    See  Attributes;  God. 

Infinity,  without  end  or  limit,  the  negation  of  finite : 
(Srcipoi/, "  im-endlich." 

I.  The  Indefniłc—Beades  the  definite  consciousness 
of  which  logie  formulates  the  laws,  there  is  also  an  in- 
definite  consciousness  which  cannot  be  forraulated.  Be- 
sides  ćomplete  thoughts,  and  besides  the  thoughts 
which,  though  incomplete,  admit  of  completion,  there 
are  thoughts  which  it  is  impossible  to  complete,  and 
yet  which  are  real,  in  the  sense  that  they  are  normal 
afTections  of  the  intellect  Positire  knowledge,  how- 
erer  exten8ire  it  may  l)ecome,  does  not  and  nerer  can 
fili  the  whole  region  of  possible  thought.  At  the  utter- 
most  reach  of  discorery  there  arises,  and  must  erer 
arise,  the  question,What  lies  beyond?  Regarding  sci- 
ence as  a  gradually  increaaing  sphere,  we  may  say  that 
erery  addition  to  its  surface  does  but  bring  it  into  wider 
contact  with  surrounding  nescicnce.  There  is  always 
something  which  forms  alike  the  raw  materiał  of  defi- 
nite thought,  and  remains  after  the  definiteness  which 
thinking  gare  to  it  has  been  destroyed  (H.  Spencer, 
First  Principles,  p,  21  są.,  88,  90  są.).  This  rague  ele- 
ment in  thought,  which  is  ineradicable,  Spencer  consid- 
ers  to  be  the  groundwork  of  the  feeling  of  awe,  and  of 
natural  religion.  It  is  the  infinite  in  this  sense,  the  at* 
tempt  to  conceire  which  inrolres  a  contradiction  in 


INFINITY 


582 


INFEOTIT 


tenns;  which  can  only  be  belieyed  to  exi8t,  bat  can 
neyer  become  an  object  to  comKńouaneas.  ^If  all 
thought  IB  limitatioD ;  if  wbatever  we  conceiye  u,  by 
the  Tery  act  of  conoeption,  regarded  as  finite,  the  infi- 
nite,  from  a  human  point  of  yiew,  is  merdy  a  name  for 
the  absence  of  tbose  conditions  uuder  which  thougbt  is 
pofisiblc"  (Maii8ell'8  Bampton  Lecturet,  p.  48 ;  comp.  p. 
80,  63,  80,  118 ;  see  esp.  notes  on  p.  48  and  51,  4th  ed.). 

II.  77*6  InJinUe  as  an  Interminable  Series. — Aristotle 
mentions  five  ways  (JPhyi.  Ausc.  203,  b.  15)  in  which 
the  notion  of  the  dirtictov  is  attained :  (a)  From  the  un- 
limited  duiation  of  time;  (6)  from  the  poseibility  of 
perp^ually  subdiyiding  magnitudes;  (c)  from  the  oon- 
tinuance  of  growth  and  decay  in  naturę;  (d)  from  the 
fact  that  limitation  is  always  relatiye,  and  neyer  abso- 
lute ;  and  (<>),  ^  the  strongest  proof  of  aU,"  from  the  ina- 
bility  to  conceiye  a  limit  to  niunber,  magnitude,  and 
space.  Any  giyen  moment  of  time  is  both  preceded 
and  succecded  by  another,  and  that  by  another  without 
end.  Any  magnitade  admits  of  multiplication  or  divi- 
don,  and  the  multiples  or  parts  are  again  capable  of 
multiplication  or  diyision,  respectiyely,  without  limit. 
Any  effect  in  naturę  is  the  result  of  a  cause  which,  again, 
is  the  effect  of  another  cause  in  an  endless  regreas ;  and, 
conyersely,  eyery  effect  is  itself  the  cause  of  some  other 
efiect,  and  this,  in  its  tum,  is  the  cause  of  another  effect, 
and  80  on  in  an  interminable  progress.  Time,  space, 
and  causatlon  thus  exhibit  iniinity  in  the  form  of  a 
stndght  linę  or  series  of  terms  without  beginning  or 
end.  The  characteristics  of  this  modę  of  the  infinite 
are:  (1)  that  it  is  purely  negatiye,  i.  e.  is  the  merę 
process  of  passing  beyond  Umitations;  (2)  that  it  pos- 
tulates  the  perpetual  recunence  of  Umitations  as  its 
condition ;  and  (3)  that,  as  an  endless  series,  it  is  inca- 
pable  of  being  thought  out,  it  is  always  poesible  and 
neyer  actual,  it  cannot  be  said  to  exist,  but  always  to  be 
in  the  act  of  coming  into  existence. 

It  follows  from  this  that,  if  infinity  is  an  idea  realiza- 
ble  by  the  mind,  it  must  be  conceiyed  in  some  other 
way  than  as  a  linear  series;  it  must  be  capable  of  an 
expres8ion  which  is  at  once  definite,  and  yet  preseryes 
the  true  character  of  infinity.  Mathematical  science 
does  this  by  the  summation  of  an  infinite  series  in  a 
finite  expre88ion,  and  manipulates  both  che  infinite  and 
the  infinitesimal  as  terms  haying  a  definite  meaning  in 
cakulation.  The  poesibility  of  conceiving  the  infinite 
as  complete  may  be  seen  morę  easily  from  the  consider- 
ation  that  any  object  which  we  can  see,  handle,  imag- 
ine,  conceive,  without  any  difliculty,  e.  g.  a  iruit,  ot  a 
stone,  is  reaUy  the  sum  of  an  infinite  number  of  parts 
into  which  it  may  be  diyided,  an  infinite,  therefore, 
which  b  not  merely  coming  into  existence,  but  actually 
exi8ts  here  and  now.  Regarded,  too,  under  the  aspect 
of  a  term  in  the  linę  of  causation,  any  object  in  naturę 
sums  up  an  infinite  series  in  itself.  For,  as  an  effect,  it 
is  the  result  of  all  preyious  causes,  and,  as  a  cause,  the 
germ  of  all  succceding  effects. 

These  summations  of  the  serial  infinite,  whether 
achieyed  by  the  formulie  of  mathematics  or  presented 
as  oomplete,  in  eyeiy  portion  of  space,  in  eyery  period 
of  time,  and  in  eyery  object  in  naturę,  are  anticipations 
of  a  higher  form  of  infinity  which  is  revealed  by  the 
mind  of  man. 

III.  The  Spiriłual  Infinite  (infinitum  rationis,  infini- 
tum  actu,  o\ov  rŁ\iiop)  differs  from  the  former,  not  80 
much  in  excluding  as  including  the  limit  or  boundaiy 
of  which  it  is  the  negation,  i.  e.  as  not  limited  from 
without  and  perpetually  passing  beyond  the  limit,  but 
as  limiting  itself.  As  the  natural  or  mathematical  in- 
finite is  represented  by  the  linę,  so  the  rational  or  spir- 
itual  infinite  finds  its  appropriate  symbol  in  the  circle, 
i.  e.  the  linę  which  is  without  beginning  or  end,  and  at 
the  same  time  is  limited  at  eyery  point  by  itself.  It  is 
thus  at  once  absolutely  imlimited,  and  yet  absolutely 
definite.  The  transition  from  II  to  III  may  be  illus- 
trated  by  the  mathematical  definition  of  a  straight  linę 
as  the  chord  of  an  infinite  circle.    Such  is  the  infinite 


as  exlubited  in  (a)  the  thought  and  (b)  the  roUtiaiL  of 
man. 

(a)  Consciousneas,  and  thought  as  a  modę  of  eon- 
sciousneas,  inyolye  the  oppoaition  of  the  flubject  which 
thmks  and  the  object  about  which  it  thinks.  As  a  cun- 
dition  of  thinking  at  all,  the  mind  must  set  its  thonght 
oyer  against  itself  as  not  itself,  and  oonyeiseiy,  as  the 
condition  of  an  object  being  thought  of  at  all,  it  mim 
be  presented  as  dbtinct  from  the  mind  which  thinks  of 
it.  Here,  then,  b  a  limitation  or  barrier  which  oonsti- 
tutes  what  b  called  **  the  finiteneas**  of  the  hnman  nn- 
derstanding.  The  thinker  b  limited  and  conditioned 
by  hb  thought,  the  thought  b  limited  and  conditioned 
by  the  thinker.  But,  as  it  b  posaible  to  present  aiy 
object  to  thought,  it  is  competent  for  the  thinker  to  pre- 
sent kimsel/aa  the  object  about  which  he  thinks,  L  e.  to 
be  at  once  the  subject  which  thinks  and  the  object 
which  b  thought  about  Thb  capability  of  eelf-coo- 
sdousness,  of  which,  so  far  as  can  be  ascertained,  the 
lower  animals  are  destitute,  constitutes  at  ooce  the  piide 
and  the  degradation  of  man,  b  a  source  at  once  of  his 
best  and  hb  worst  actions.  Here  we  haye  the  analogne 
of  the  linę  retuming,  as  the  drcumference  of  a  ci^ 
into  itself.  The  limitation  of  the  thinker  by  the  object 
thought  of  b  as  real  as  before,  only  it  b  a  limitation  of 
himself  by  himself :  he  b  conditioned,  as  before,  but 
self-conditioned,  i  e.  infinite.    See  Pabsokalty. 

(6)  The  same  infinity  appeais  in  free  wilL  As  fre^ 
a  man  does  an  action  which  originates  absolutely  with 
himself.  But  thb  action  has  a  permanent  effect  on  his 
character,  and  thus  determines  the  ąuality  of  the  next 
action.  Thb  new  action  is  also  originate<l  absolutely 
by  the  free  agent,  but  the  agent  himself  b  modified, 
conditioned,  limited,  by  the  preyions  action.  The  agent 
has  thus  hb  froedom  limited  and  defined,  and  increis- 
ingly  80  with  eyeiy  fresh  action,  but  he  b  limited  bj 
that  of  which  he  b  himself  the  abaolute  originator.  Ue 
b  finite  (limited,  conditioned)  and  at  the  same  time  m^ 
finite  (unUmited,  unconditioned),  because  he  b  self-con* 
ditioned.    See  Libebty. 

It  b  in  thb  sense,  rather  than  in  that  of  infinite  msg^ 
nitude,  that  infinity  b  an  attribute  of  God.     See  The- 

ISM. 

lY.  Helation  to  the  Ftnite^-^It  follows  from  what  has 
been  said  above  (a)  that,  although  the  essence  of  infin- 
ity b  the  transcendenoe  of  eyery  limitation,  yet  that 
the  finite  and  limited,  eyen  when  excluded  (I  and  II), 
b  postulated  as  a  condition  of  infinity,  and  that  in  the 
higher  forms  of  infinity  the  limit  is  induded,  or,  imther, 
imposed  from  within.  £yen  in  the  sense  of  the  indefi- 
nite  residuum  of  thought,  definite  thinking  b  presup- 
poaed  as  the  condition  of  our  becoming  oonacions  of  the 
yague  element  beyond.  The  serial  infinite,  again,  as 
the  merę  process  of  transcending  evezy  given  term,  po«- 
tulates  the  perpetual  recurrence  of  teims  to  transccnd: 
&vtipoVf  says  Arbtotle,  fiiv  ovv  iarip  ov  Kard  ieo9iv 
\afipavovmv^  aut  ri  XafiŁLv  tanv  ilu  {Pkys,Aiac, 
207,  a.  7)—"  The  quantiutiye  infinite  b  that  which  al- 
ways  has  something  outside  it,  i  e.  a  term  *not  ytt 
reached.* "  The  quritual  infinite,  lastly,  as  the  self-de- 
termination  of  thought  and  yolition,  iB,ex  ti  termmi,  a 
process  of  geneiating  at  eyery  step  the  finite  and  limk- 
ed.  {b)  On  the  other  hand,  it  would  be  a  reyenal  of 
the  true  order  to  conceiye  the  infinite  to  be,  as  its  ety- 
mology  suggests,  the  merę  negation  of  the  finite,  and, 
as  such,  a  seoondary  and  deriyed  idea.  On  such  a  sop- 
position  it  becomes  impossible  to  explain  how  we  be- 
come conscious  of  limitation  at  alL  How,  it  may  be 
asked,  do  we  know  that  thought  is  finite  if  we  know 
nothing  first  of  the  infinite  ?  How  b  the  oooscioaneas 
of  limitation  possible  except  as  the  negation  of  what  is 
unlimited  ?  The  infinite  b  thus,  as  the  condition  of  the 
finite,  prior  and  po6itiv^;  the  finite,  as  the  limit  ex- 
cluded,  induded,  self-imposed  by  the  infinite,  posterior 
and  negatiye. 

The  relation  of  God,  as  the  Infinite,  to  the  world  and 
the  soul,  as  finite,  b  considered  elsewhere.    Bi4y  i 


INFIRMERER 


583 


IN6HAM 


(a)  be  borne  in  mind,  Łhe  logical  result  is  deum,  and  if 
(6)  be  neglected,  pontheiBm. 

V.  Infimtif  aa  sifmMized  «•  the  Tmaginatioru-^We  find 
the  attempt  to  picture  the  infinite  to  the  imagination 
amonsc  non-£aropean  natlons  in  the  form  of  a  state  of 
vaca.ioy  immediately  preoeding  creation.  The  oonstit- 
nents  of  the  image  are  genertdly  air  and  water.  The 
image  of  merę  aii  or  merę  water  would  be  no  realizable 
image  at  all,  becauae  involving  no  distinction.  But  in 
the  contiast  of  the  two  we  get  that  minimum  of  defi- 
niteness  which  renders  the  image  posaible.  A  beauti- 
fuUy  pure  reprcsentation  of  the  imagined  infinite  is 
found  in  the  eacred  books  of  the  aborigines  of  Giiate- 
mała  (Max  MOller^s  Chips,  i,  833).  It  is  as  foUows : 
'*There  was  a  time  when  all  that  exist8  in  heaven  and 
earth  was  madę.  AU  was  then  in  suspensę;  all  was 
calm  and  silent.  AU  was  immoTable,  aU  peaceful,  and 
the  vast  space  of  the  heayens  was  empty.  There  was 
no  man,  no  animal,  no  shore,  no  trees;  heaven  alone 
existed.  The  face  of  the  earth  was  not  to  be  seen; 
there  was  only  the  stiU  expanse  of  the  sea  and  the 
heaven  above.  Dirine  beings  were  on  the  waters  Uke 
a  growing  Ught.  Their  voice  was  heard  as  they  medi- 
uted  and  consulted,  and  when  the  dawn  arose  man 
appeared."  Heie  we  hare  as  the  constituents  of  the 
image  "empty  heaven/*  or  space,  and — ^which  is  intro- 
duced  as  if  not  at  aU  oontratlictory  to  the  statement 
that  **heaven  alone  exLsted**—- the  "stiU  expanse  of  the 
aea.'*  [Ck>mpare  this  with  the  account  in  holy  Scrip- 
tnre,  where  the  constituents  of  the  image  are  (1)  "  dark- 
ness  upon  the  face  of  the  abyss,"  and  (2)  the  surface  of 
the  waters,  with  the  Divine  Spirit  hovering  between 
the  two,  and  calling  Ught  into  being.]  In  the  Hindu 
account  the  creative  spirit  is  represented  as  rowing 
aboat  in  a  boat  upon  the  ocean. 

We  have  substantiaUy  the  same  image  of  the  infinite 
lying  at  the  back  of  the  Greek  mind.  But  there  are 
two  differences.  (1)  The  double  image  is  dismembered. 
The  ąymboi  of  Thales  is  water  alone ;  of  Anaximander, 
the  Toid  in  suspensę;  of  Anaximencs,  the  atmosphere; 
of  Xenophane8,  the  globe  of  the  sky.  (2)  The  infinite 
is  not  pictured  as  preceding  the  emei^nce  of  finite 
things,  but  as  underlying  the  process  of  naturę,  as  it  is 
ordinarily  known. 

The  Egyptian  sjrmbol  of  the  serpent  with  his  taU  in 
his  mouth  approaches  the  mathematical  representation 
of  infinite  length.  —  Blunt,  Theol,  Diet.  i,  34G  są.  See 
Journal  ofSpecukUioe  PhUoBophtf,  July,  1870. 

Infirmerer  is  the  name  of  the  person  who  "  had 
the  care  of  the  sick-house,  in  which  Lent  and  fasts  were 
not  obaerved,  had  charge  of  the  burial  of  the  dead,  pro- 
vi<led  phyiBidans  and  attendance,  and  flesh-meat."— 
Waloott,  Sacred  A  rchawło^,  p.  329. 

Infralapsaiians.    See  Sublapsarlins. 

Infl&la  (otherwise  caUed  mitrOf  ark^ayoc,  corona, 
Kt^aptę,  diadema,  and  riapa^  tiara)  is  a  cap  wom,  sińce 
the  16th  century,  by  the  buhops  of  the  Roman  Catholic 
and  Greek  churchcs,  as  one  of  the  insignia  of  their  epis- 
eopal  Office.     See  Mitrs. 

Ingathering,  Feast  of.  See  Festiyals  ;  Tab- 
ERXACLES,  Feast  of. 

Ingelheim  is  the  luune  of  a  place  at  which  a  church 
oonncil  {ConciUum  Ingelenheimeiue)  was  held  June  27. 
&I8,  ander  the  presidency  of  the  Roman  legate  Marinus, 
and  in  the  presence  of  the  German  emperor  Otho  I  and 
king  Louis  Outremer.  The  principal  business  of  the 
council  was  the  punishment  of  Hugo,  oount  of  Paris, 
whom  it  excommunicated.  It  also  decided  that  no  lay- 
man  should  present  a  clerk  to  a  church,  or  dispossess 
him,  without  the  oonaent  of  the  bishop ;  that  the  whole 
of  Easter  week  be  kept  as  a  festiva],  and  the  three  days 
foUowing  AVhitsunday ;  that  St.  Mark*s  day  be  kept 
with  fasting  on  account  of  the  great  Utany,  as  was  done 
on  the  rogation  days  preceding  the  feast  of  the  As- 
cension ;  and  that  aU  differences  as  to  tithe  be  settled 
in  an  ecclestastical  synod,  instead  of  granting  this 


power  to  the  civil  courts.— Landon,  Uamalo/CauncSs, 
p.267. 

Ingen  is  the  name  of  a  deified  Japanese,  who  is  said 
to  have  arrived  abont  1653  in  Japan,  whither  his  zeal 
for  the  reUgion  of  Siaka  had  led  him.  He  was  at  first 
regarded  by  the  Japanese  only  as  a  saint,  but  at  a  sea- 
son  of  an  exce98ive  drought  they  came  to  him  and  be- 
sought  his  prayers  (kitft)  to  avert  the  judgment  of 
heayen ;  and  the  rain  descending  in  mighty  torrents 
shortly  after  the  olfering  up  of  Ingen*s  prayer,  the  peo- 
ple  thought  him  no  longer  earthly,  and  deified  him. — 
Kaempfer,  Hut,  Japan,  Append. ;  Bronghton,  BiUiotke- 
ca  Hut.  Sac  i,  583. 

Ingham,  Benjamix,  was  bom  at  Ossett,  Yorkshire, 
June  11, 1712.  He  received  a  Uberal  education,  first  at 
Batley  school,  and  afterwards  at  Queen's  CoUcge,  Ox- 
ford, where,  in  1733,  he  joined  himself  with  Charles  and 
John  Wesley,  the  founders  of  Methodism.  In  1735  he 
received  episcopal  ordination,  and  in  the  same  year  em- 
barked  with  Mr.  Wesley  for  Georgia.  He  remained  in 
Georgia  about  two  years,  yisited  CaroUna  and  Pennsyl- 
rania,  and  then  retumed  to  England,  where,  soon  after 
his  arriral,  he  accompanied  Wesley  to  Hermhut,  the 
seat  of  the  Morarians,  and  so  strong  became  his  sympa- 
thies  with  this  exceUent  people  that  he  could  not  sacri- 
fice  his  attachment  to  them  when  the  Methodists  revolt- 
ed  from  the  disorders  of  the  Fetter-lane  society.  He 
went  into  Yorkshire,  and  with  incredible  itinerant  la- 
bors,  assisted  by  Mora\Hian  companions,  he  founded  there 
what  may  be  caUed  a  Moraviaii  form  of  Methodism. 
Preaching  stations  were  establlshed  throughout  the 
county  and  in  neighboring  shires.  At  Birstal  he  took 
Nelson  publicly  by  the  band,  and  gave  him  Uberty  to 
speak  in  aU  his  chapels.  The  Wesleys,  Whitefield,  Ma- 
dan,  and  Romaine  oflen  preached  for  his  societies,  and 
they  seem  to  haye  been  generaUy  recognised  by  the 
Methodistic  leaders  as  a  bgitimate  branch  of  the  great 
reyiyal,  notwithstauding  We8ley's  people  in  Yorkshire 
expeTienced  many  yexatiun8  from  the  eccentricities  of 
indindual  preachers,  who  retained  some  of  the  London 
Mora\'ian  foUies.  Within  a  few  years,  the  number  of 
"Inghamite"  societies  reached  eighty-four.  In  1741, 
]VIr.  Ingham  married  Lady  Margaret  Hastings,  sister  to 
the  earl  of  Huntingdon,  on  which  he  remoyed  his  resi- 
dence  from  Ossett  to  Abberford,  where  he  continued  to 
reside  tiU  his  death.  After  forming  this  connection,  he 
was  80  far  from  relaxing  in  his  exertions  to  preach  the 
Gospel  that  he  greatly  extended  the  sphere  of  his  oper- 
ations,  and,  in  process  of  time,  may  be  said  to  haye  eyan* 
gelized  all  the  surrounding  country.  Ingham  was  ad- 
mitted  to  Wesley^s  Conference  in  Leeds,  but  the  precise 
relation  of  his  societies  to  the  WeAeyan  body  was  neyer 
defined.  He  had  his  own  Conferenoes  also,  and  at  one 
of  them  was  elected  a  gmtral  orerseer,  or  bishop.  Lady 
Huntingdon,  who  could  not  approye  aU  the  disciplinaiy 
features  of  his  societies,  attempted  to  promote  a  union 
of  them  with  Wesley,  and  she  sent  Whitefield  to  New- 
castle-upon-Tyne  to  meet  the  Weslej^s  for  consultation 
on  the  subject.  Charles  assented,  but  John  decUned  the 
oyerture,  yery  wisely,  as  eyents  demonstrated.  In  1759, 
Ingham  read  "Sandeman^s  Letters  on  Theron  and  As- 
pasio,"  and  "  Glas^s  Testimony  of  the  King  of  Martyrs." 
These  works  produced  such  an  impression  on  his  mind 
that  he  deputed  two  of  his  preachers  to  Scotland  to  leam 
morę  fuUy  the  views  of  their  authors.  At  Fdinburgh 
they  met  Sandeman,  and  Glas  at  Dundee.  They  re- 
tumed conyerts  to  the  Sandcmanian  principles,  and  im- 
mediately spread  discontent  and  disputes  among  the  so- 
cieties Ingham^B  authority  could  not  control  the  par^ 
tisan  yiolence  which  soon  broke  out.  He  caUed  in  the 
assistance  of  his  friends.  The  conntess  of  Huntingdon 
wrote  them  letters.  ^Vhitefield  used  his  influence  to 
saye  them.  Romaine  hastened  into  Yorkshire,  but  could 
not  restrain  them.  Ingham  attempted  to  excommuni- 
cate  the  disturbers,  but  it  was  an  endless  task.  The 
whole  order  was  wrecked  and  sunk.    Thirteen  societies 


IN6HAMITES 


584 


INHERITANCE 


k 


only  remained  ftom  morę  than  eighty  which  had  fioai- 
ished  with  all  the  evidenceB  of  permanent  prosperity. 
Ingham  eeems  to  have  remained  a  Sandemanian  (q.  y.)i 
and  deyeloped  his  yiews  in  a  TreiUue  on  ike  Faith  and 
Hopeo/theGo9pel(17G2).  He  died  in  1772.  Some  of 
his  societies  came  to  the  Wesleyan  Church ;  others  unit- 
ed  with  the  Daleites  (q- v.),  a  class  of  Sootch  Independ- 
enta. See  Jones,  Christian  Biography^  a.  v.;  Steyena, 
History  o/ MełhocUsm,  i,  890  są. 
Inghamitea.  See  Inoham. 
Inglis,  Charles,  D.D.,  was  bom  in  Ireland  abont 
the  year  1733.  Emigrating  to  America,  he  took  charge 
of  the  Free  School  at  Lancaster,  Pa.,  preyious  to  1759, 
and,  having  decided  to  enter  the  ministry,  he  went  to 
EngUuid  for  ordination.  The  Society  for  the  Propaga- 
tion  of  the  Gospel  appointed  him  their  missionary  at 
Dover,  DeL,  his  field  embracing  the  whole  county  of 
Kent,  including  three  churchea.  In  1765  he  became 
assistant  minister  of  Tiinity,  N.  Y.,  and  catechist  to  the 
negroes.  He  received  the  honorary  degree  of  A.R  from 
King'8  College,  N.  Y.,in  1767,  and  thoee  of  A.M.  and  D.D. 
frbm  Oxford  some  years  later.  In  the  progreas  of  the 
Bevolution  he  took  part  with  the  Tories,  and  in  1776  re- 
plied  to  Pame*s  Common  Sense  by  a  pamphlet  which  was 
so  offensive  to  the  '^  Sona  of  Liberty"  that  they  commit- 
ted  it  to  the  flames.  When  preaching  before  Washing- 
ton, in  the  same  year,  he  refused  to  omit  the  prayer  for 
the  king  and  the  royal  family.  After  the  Dedaration 
of  Independence  he  caused  his  church  to  be  dosed,  and 
took  refuge  in  Flushing,  then  in  possession  of  the  Roy- 
alists.  He  was  chosen  rector  of  Trinity,  N.  Y.,  in  1777, 
In  conBequence  of  many  losses  during  the  Reyolution 
and  political  differences,  he  found  it  nccessary  finally  to 
leaye  the  country.  In  1783  he  sailcd  for  l^oya  Scotia, 
of  which  proyince  he  was  appointed  bishop  in  1787,  as 
the  first  colonial  bishop  of  the  Church  of  England.  He 
icsided  at  Halifax  till  his  death,  Feb.,  1816.  He  pub- 
lished  Two  Sermons;  and  a  Letłer  in  "Hawkins*8  His^ 
torical  Notices."  —  Sprague,  AnnaU,  y,  186;  Allibone, 
J)ict.ofAuthor8,'i,^2, 

IngliB,  John,  D.D.,  a  Scotch  diyine,  was  bom  about 
1763.  He  was  at  one  time  minister  at  the  Grayfriars' 
Church,  Edinburgh.  He  died  in  1834.  Inglis  is  known 
as  the  author  of  a  De/ence  of  EcdesiasHcal  EtiabUshr- 
menłSf  and  a  Yindication  ofthe  Christian  Faith  (Edinb. 
1830,  8yo.)^AlUbone,  Diet.  o/Authors,  i,  932;  Black- 
wooits  Magazine,  xxv,  109. 

Ingraham,  Ira,  a  Congregational  minister,  was  bom 
at  Comwall,yt.,  Dec  1, 1791,  and  educated  at  Middle- 
bury  College,  where  he  graduated  in  1815.  After  teach- 
ing  for  a  time  in  the  Southem  States,  pursuing  also  his 
theological  studies,  he  was  licensed  to  preach  by  the 
Addison  Association,  Addison,  Yt.,  June  8, 1819.  Ma}", 
1820,  the  Congregational  church  in  Oryill  was  offered 
him,  and  he  was  there  ordained  June  20, 1820.  He  left 
this  charge  in  1822,  and  after  supplying  seyeral  pulpits, 
and  acting  for  a  brief  period  as  agent  of  the  "  Presbyte- 
rian  Education  Society,"  he  was  installed  oyer  the  Con- 
gregational church  at  West  Bradford,  Mass.,  Dec  1, 1824. 
In  1830  he  remoyed  to  Brandon,yt.,  and  in  1834  left  that 
place  to  assnme  the  duties  of  secretary  of  the  Yermont 
Domestic  Missionaiy  Society.  In  1839  he  accepted  a 
cali  to  the  Presbyterian  Church  at  Lyons,  N.  Y.  In  1848 
he  retumed  to  the  church  at  Brandon,  but  declined  to 
be  reinstalled,and  fhially  accepted  the  podtion  as  agent 
of  the  "  Society  for  the  promotion  of  CoUegiate  and  The- 
ological Education  at  the  West,"  making  Westem  New 
York  his  field  of  labor.  He  retired  teom  this  and  all 
other  actiye  work  five  years  after,  and  only  preached  at 
interyals.  He  died  Af^  9, 1864.  Ingraham  published 
flye  sermons  (1826, 1848, 1844, 1847,  and  1848).— Con^re- 
ffotional  Ouaiierly,  1864,  p.  800. 

Ingram,  Robert,  an  English  diyine,  was  bom  at 
Beyerlcy,  in  Yorkshire,  March  9, 1726-7.  He  was  edu- 
cated at  Corpus  Christi  College,  Cambridge,  where  he 
obtained  a  fellowship,  and  took  his  degrees  in  arts.   His 


first  preferment  was  to  the  perpetual  curacy  of  Brid- 
huTSt,  in  Kent,  next  the  liring  of  Oraton,  in  Nottiąg- 
hamshire,  and  afterwards  the  yicaniges  of  Wonmsgtoti 
and  Boxted,  in  Essez.  He  died  in  1804.  Mr.  Ingram 
wrote  A  View  ofthe  Great  Events  ofthe  SecaOh  Piague, 
or  Period  when  the  Mystery  ofGodshaU  he  Jbnshed: — 
A  ccounts  ofthe  Ten  Tribes  oflsrael  heing  m  A  meriea  ; 
originally  published  by  Manasseh  ben-Israel:— .4  Con- 
plde  and  Untform  £xplanaHon  ofthe  Prophety  ofthe 
Seven  YiaJa  of  WraiK  See  Hook,  Ecdes.  Bioynspky  ; 
Hoefer,  Nouv.  Biog.  OhUrale,  xxv,  871.     (J.  N.  P.) 

Ingnlphns,  the  celebrated  abbot  of  Croyland,  long 
considered  the  author  of  the  Historia  MonasterU  Croy^ 
landensis,  is  supposed  to  haye  been  bom  at  London  about 
A.D.  1030.  Aocording  to  the  account  of  his  life  in  his 
history,  he  was  educated  at  the  Uniyersity  of  Oxfoid. 
He  was  a  great  fayorite  of  Edgitha,  the  wife  of  Edward 
the  Confessor,  and  yisited  duke  William  of  Normandy 
at  his  own  court  in  1051.  About  1064  he  went  on  a  pil- 
grimage  to  the  Holy  Land.  On  his  retom  he  enU3vd 
the  monastery  of  Fontanelle,  in  Normandy,  and  there 
remained  till  1076,  when  he  was  inyited  to  Engiand  by 
the  Conąueror,  and  madę  abbot  of  Croyland.  He  died 
Dec  17, 1109.  The  Historia  MonasterU  Craylandetasis 
was  printed  by  Sayile  (in  the  coUection  Scripł,)  at  Lon- 
don in  1596,  and  in  a  morę  complete  edition  by  Gale 
(Rer,  Angl  Scripł.  Trf.),  at  Oxford,  in  1684.  An  Eng^ 
lish  translation  of  it  was  fumished  by  Ritey  in  Bohn'8 
Antiquarian  Library.  "  Some  writers,  eyen,  of  the  last 
ccntury  ąuestioned  the  entire  genuineness  of  the  book, 
though  scepticism  did  not  often  proceed  further  than  the 
hj-pothesis  of  interpolations  by  a  later  writer ;  bat  in 
1826,  the  late  Sir  Francis  Palgraye,  in  an  article  in  the 
Quarterly  Benew,  endcayored  to  proye  that  the  whole 
so-called  history  was  little  better  than  a  novel,  and  was 
probably  the  composition  of  a  monk  in  the  13th  or  14th 
centtiry.  His  condusions  haye  been,  on  the  whole, 
almost  uniyersally  adopted."  See  Chambers*s  Encydo^ 
podia,  y,  579 ;  Wetzer  and  WeUe,  Kirchen'Lexikan,  v, 
625  sq. 

Inheiitance  (freąnently  p^^^,  ehe'lek,  a  ^porńon'* 
or  proyidential  bestowment ;  but  properly  and  uaoally 
some  form  of  the  yerbs  ^'^^,yara8h,  to  possess;  ^^3, 
nachalf  to  possess ;  ickfipoPOfŁkut,  to  get  by  loty  God,  as 
the  creator  of  the  earth,  gaye  it  to  man  to  be  held,  col- 
tiyated,  and  enjoyed  ((^en.  i,  28  sq.;  Psa.  cxv,  16;  £o- 
des.  y,  9) ;  not  to  any  fayored  portion  of  oor  race,  but  to 
the  race  itself— to  man  as  represented  by  our  great  pri- 
mogenitor,  to  whom  the  use  of  the  diyine  gift  was  fint 
graciously  youchsafed.  The  impression  wbich  the  orig- 
inal  gift  of  the  earth  was  calculated  to  make  on  men, 
the  Great  Donor  was  pleased,  in  the  case  of  Palestine, 
to  render,  for  his  own  wise  purposes,  more  decided  and 
emphatic  by  an  expre8S  re-donation  to  the  patziarch 
Abraham  (Gen.  xiii,  14  sq.).  Many  years,  howerer, 
elapsed  before  the  promise  was  fulfiUed.  Meanwhilethe 
notioes  which  we  haye  regarding  the  atate  of  property 
in  the  patriarchal  ages  are  few  and  not  yery  delinite. 
The  products  of  the  earth,  howeyer,  were  at  an  eaily  pe- 
riod accumulated  and  held  as  property.  Tiolence  in- 
yaded  the  possession :  opposing  yiolence  recovered  the 
goods.  War  soon  sprang  out  of  the  pasńona  of  the 
human  heart.  The  neoessity  of  civil  goremment  was 
felt.  Consuetudinary  laws  accordingly  deyeloped  t hcm- 
selyes.  The  head  of  the  family  was  sopreme.  Hb  will 
was  law.  The  physical  snperiority  which  ho  posecraed 
gaye  him  this  dorainion.  The  same  influence  wouM  se- 
cure  its  transmission  in  the  małe  rather  than  the  female 
linę.  Hence,  too,  the  rise  of  the  rights  of  primogeni- 
ture.  In  the  early  condition  of  society  which  b  caDcd 
patriarchal,  landed  property  had  its  origin,  indeed,  bat 
could  not  he  held  of  first  importance  by  those  who  led  a 
wandering  life,  shifting  conttnnally,  as  conyeniaioe  sog- 
gested,  from  one  spot  to  another.  Cattlc  were  then  the 
chief  property  (Gen.  xxiy,  85).  But  land,  tf  hdd,  was 
held  on  a  fireehold  tenure;  nor  oould  any  other  taiuit 


INHERWANCE 


585 


INHERITANCE 


1łtve  oome  into  exi8tence  till  moie  oomplez  and  artifi- 
dal  lelatioBS  aroae,  resolting,  in  all  probability,  fiom  tho 
increase  of  popułation  and  the  reUtiY«  inaofficiency  of 
food.  When  Joaeph  went  down  into  Egypt,  he  appean 
to  haTe  foond  the  freehold  tenuze  prevailing,  which, 
howerer,  he  con^erted  into  a  tenancy  at  will,  or,  at  any 
nte,  into  a  oonditional  tenancy.  Other  intimationa  are 
ibond  in  Genesis  which  oonfiim  the  generał  statements 
which  hAve  jost  heen  madę.  Daughtera  do  not  appear 
to  ha^e  had  any  inheńtanoe.  If  there  are  any  excep- 
tioDs  to  thia  nile,  they  only  serye  to  prOye  it  by  the 
tpedal  nuuiner  in  whidi  they  ara  mentioned.  Thus  Job 
is  reooided  (xlii,  15)  to  haye  given  his  daughtera  an  in- 
heńtanoe conjoiatly  with  their  brotheiB.  How  highly 
the  priyileges  conrerred  by  primogenitore  were  yidued 
may  be  leamed  from  the  hisŁory  of  Jacob  and  Eaau.  In 
the  patriarchal  age  doubtleas  these  righta  were  yery 
great.  See  Birthright.  The  eldest  son,  as  being  by 
naiure  the  first  fitted  for  oommand,  assumed  influence 
and  contro],  under  his  father,  oyer  the  family  and  its  de- 
pendenta ;  and  when  the  father  was  remoyed  by  death, 
he  readily,  and  as  if  by  an  act  of  Proyidencc,  took  his 
father^s  place.  Thus  he  succeeded  to  the  property  in 
sacceeding  to  the  headship  of  the  family,  the  elan,  or  the 
tribe.  At  first  the  eldest  son  most  probably  took  exclu- 
Bire  po8se9sion  of  his  father'8  property  and  power;  and 
when,  subseąuently,  a  diyision  became  customary,  he 
would  still  retain  the  laigest  share — a  double  portion, 
if  not  morę  (Gen.  xxvii,  25, 29, 40).  That  in  the  days 
of  Abraham  other  sous  partook  with  the  eldest,  and  that, 
too,  though  they  were  sons  of  concubines,  is  elear  from 
the  story  of  Hagar^s  expulsion :  "  Cast  out  (said  Sarah) 
this  bondwoman  and  her  son ;  for  the  son  of  this  bond- 
woman  shall  not  be  heir  with  my  son,  eyen  with  Isaac" 
(Gen.  xxi,  10).  The  few  notices  left  us  in  Genesis  of 
the  transfer  of  property  from  hand  to  hand  are  interest- 
ing,  and  bear  a  remarkable  similarity  to  what  takes  place 
in  Eastem  countries  eyen  at  this  day  (Gen.  xxi,  22  8q. } 
xxiii,  9  8q.).  The  pnrchase  of  the  Gaye  of  Machpelah 
aa  a  family  burying-place  for  Abraham,  detailed  in  the 
last  passage,  senres  to  show  the  safety  of  property  at 
that  eariy  period,  and  the  facility  with  which  an  inher- 
itance  was  transmitted  eyen  to  sons'  sons  (comp.  Gen. 
xlix,  29).  That  it  was  customary,  during  the  father's 
lifetime,  to  make  a  disposition  of  property,  is  evident 
from  Gen.  xxiv,  35,  where  it  is  said  that  Abraham  had 
giyen  all  he  had  to  Isaac.  This  statement  is  further 
confirmed  by  eh.  xxy,  5, 6,  where  it  is  added  that  Abra- 
ham gave  to  the  sons  of  his  concubines  "gifts,  sending 
them  away  from  Isaac  his  son,  whUe  he  yet  lived,  east- 
ward  unto  the  east  country."  Sometimes,  however,  so 
far  were  the  children  of  unmarried  females  flrom  be- 
ing dismiased  with  a  gift,  that  they  shared,  with  what 
we  should  term  the  legitimate  children,  in  the  father*s 
property  and  rights.  See  Concubinb.  Thus  Dan  and 
Naphtali  were  sons  of  Bilhah,  Kachel's  maid,  whom  she 
gaye  to  her  hnsband,  failing  to  bear  children  herself. 
So  Gad  and  Asher  weie,  under  similar  drcumstances, 
aona  of  Zilpah,  Leah^s  maid  (Gen.  xxx,  2-14).  In  the 
erent  of  the  eldest  son'8  dying  in  the  father*8  lifetime, 
the  next  son  took  his  place ;  and  if  the  eldest  son  lefb  a 
widów,  the  next  son  madę  her  his  wife  (Gen.  xxxyiii,  7 
sq.),  the  oifspring  of  which  union  was  reckoned  to  the 
firat-bom  and  deoeased  son.  Should  the  second  like- 
▼ise  die,  the  third  son  took  his  place  (Gen.  xxxyiii.  U). 
While  the  rights  of  the  first-bom  were  generally  estab- 
lished  and  recognised,  yet  were  they  sometimes  set  aside 
in  favor  of  a  younger  child.  The  bleasing  of  the  father 
or  the  grandsire  seema  to  haye  been  an  act  essential  in 
the  derolution  of  power  and  property — in  its  effects  not 
nnlike  wills  and  testaments  with  ns;  and  instances  are 
not  wanting  in  which  this  (so  to  term  it)  testamientary 
beqiie8t  set  aside  oonsuetudinary  laws,  and  gaye  prece- 
dence  to  a  younger  son  (Gen.  xlyiii,  15  8q.).  Spedal 
dtims  on  the  parental  regarda  were  acknowledged  and 
icwarded  by  special  g^ifla,  as  in  the  case  of  Jacob'8  dona- 
tioo  to  Joseph  (Gen.  xlyiii,  22).    In  a  similar  manner, 


bad  oonduct  on  the  part  of  the  eldest  son  (as  well  as  of 
others)  subjected  him,  if  not  to  the  loes  of  his  rights  of 
property,  yet  to  the  eyii  influence  of  his  father*s  dying 
malediction  (Gen.  xlix,  8) ;  while  the  good  and  fayored, 
though  younger  son,  was  led  by  the  patemal  blessing  to 
anticipate,  and  probably  also  to  reap,  the  richest  inher- 
itance  of  indiyidual  and  social  happiness  (Gen.  xlix,  8^ 
22).    See  Heir;  Adoption. 

The  original  promise  madę  to  Abraham  of  the  land 
of  Palestine  was  solemnly  repeated  to  Isaac  (Gen.  xxyi, 
8),  the  reason  assigned  being  because  ^  Abraham  obeyed 
my  yoice  and  kept  my  charge,  my  commandments,  my 
statutes,  and  my  laws,"  while  it  is  expre86ly  dedared 
that  the.earlier  inhabitants  of  the  country  were  dispos- 
sessed  and  destined  to  extermination  for  the  greatnesa 
of  their  iniqnity.  '^The  posseasion  of  the  promised  land 
was  embraced  by  Isaac  in  his  dying  benediction  to  Ja» 
oob  (Gen.  xxyiii,  8, 4),  to  whom  God  youchsafed  (Gen. 
xxyiii,  15;  see  also  xxxy,  10,  U)  to  giye  a  renewed  as- 
surance  of  the  destined  inheritance.  That  this  dona- 
tion,  howeyer,  was  held  to  be  dependent  for  the  time 
and  manner  of  its  fulfilment  on  the  diviue  will,  appears 
from  Gen.  xxxiii,  18,  where  Jacob,  on  coming  into  the 
land  of  Canaan,  bought  for  a  hundred  pieoes  of  money 
^'  a  parcel  of  a  field,  at  the  hand  of  the  children  of  Ha- 
mor."  Delayed  though  the  execution  of  the  promise 
was,  confidenoe  neyer  deserted  the  family  of  Abraham, 
80  that  Joseph,  dying  in  the  land  of  Egypt,  assured  his 
brothers  that  they  would  be  yisited  by  God  and  placed 
in  posseasion  of  Cianaao,  enjoining  on  them,  in  this  eon- 
yiction,  that,  when  conducted  to  their  possession,  they 
should  carry  his  bones  with  them  out  of  Egypt  (Gen.  1, 
25).  A  promise  thus  given,  thus  repeated,  and  thus  be- 
lieyed,  easily,  and  indeed  unavoidably,  became  the  fun- 
damental  principle  of  that  settlement  of  property  which 
Moees  madę  when  at  length  he  had  effected  the  diyine 
will  in  the  rędemption  of  the  children  of  IsraeL  The 
obeeryances,  and  practices  too,  which  we  have  noticed 
as  preyailing  among  the  patriarchs,  would,  no  doubt, 
have  great  influence  on  the  laws  which  the  Jewish  leg- 
islator originated  or  sanctioned.  The  land  of  Canaan 
was  diyided  among  the  twelye  tribes  descended  through 
Isaac  and  Jacob  from  Abraham.  The  diyision  was  madę 
by  lot  for  an  inheritance  among  the  families  of  the  sona 
of  Israel,  acoording  to  the  tribes,  and  to  the  number  and 
size  of  famUies  in  each  tribe.  The  tribe  of  Levi,  how- 
eyer, had  no  inheritance ;  but  forty-eight  dties  with 
their  suburbe  were  assigned  to  the  Łeyites,  each  tribe 
giying  acoording  to  the  number  of  cities  that  fell  to  ita 
share  (Numb.  xxxiii,  50 ;  xxxiv,  1 ;  xxxy,  1).  The 
inheritance  thus  aoquired  was  neyer  to  leave  the  tribe 
to  which  it  belonged;  eyery  tribe  was  to  keep  strictly 
to  its  own  inheritance.  An  heiress,  ih  conseąuence,  was 
not  allowed  to  many  out  of  her  own  tribe,  lest  property 
should  pass  by  her  marriage  into  another  tribe  (Numb. 
xxxyi,  6-9).  This  restriction  led  to  the  marriage  of 
heiresses  with  their  near  relations :  thus  the  daughtera 
of  Zelophehad  "  were  married  unto  their  fatber'8  broth- 
er's  sons,"  "  and  their  inheritance  remained  in  the  tribe 
of  the  family  of  their  father"  (yer.  11, 12 ;  comp.  Joseph. 
A  nt.  iy,  7, 5).  In  generał  caaes  the  inheritance  went  to 
sons,  the  flrst-bom  receiving  a  double  portion, "  for  he  is 
the  beginning  of  his  father's  strength."  If  a  man  had 
two  wiyes,  one  beloyed,  the  other  hated,  and  if  the  first- 
bom  were  the  son  of  her  who  was  hated,  he  neverthe- 
less  was  to  enjoy  "the  right  of  the  first-bom"  (Deut. 
xxi,  15).  If  a  man  left  no  sons,  the  inheritance  passed 
to  his  daughtera;  if  there  was  no  daughter,  it  went  to 
his  brothen;  in  case  there  were  no  brothers,  it  was  giy-  ' 
en  to  his  father*s  brothera ;  if  his  father  had  no  brothers, 
it  came  ioto  possession  of  the  nearest  kinsman  (Numb. 
xxyii,  8).  The  land  was  Jehovah'8,  and  could  not,  there- 
fore,  be  permanently  alienated.  See  Husbandry.  Ey- 
ery fiftieth  year,  whateyer  land  had  been  sold  retumed 
to  its  former  owner.  The  yalue  and  price  of  land  nat- 
urally  rosę  or  fell  in  proportion  to  the  number  of  yean 
there  were  to  elapse  prior  to  the  ensuing  fiftieth  or  Jubi- 


iNHiBrnoN 


686 


INK 


lee  year.  If  he  who  sold  the  land,  or  a  kinaman,  oould 
redeem  the  land  before  the  year  of  Jubilee,  it  was  to  be 
reatored  to  him  on  his  pa3ring  to  the  porchaser  the  vfdae 
of  the  produce  of  the  yeara  remaining  till  the  jubilee. 
Houses  in  yillages  or  uiiwalled  towns  might  not  be  sold 
forever ;  they  weie  restored  at  the  jubilee,  and  might  at 
any  time  be  redeemed.  If  a  man  sold  a  dwelling^house 
situated  in  a  walled  city,  he  had  the  option  of  redeem- 
ing  it  within  the  space  of  a  fuli  year  after  it  had  been 
•old ;  but  if  it  remained  unredeemed,  it  belonged  to  the 
purchaser,  and  did  not  return  to  him  who  sold  it  even  at 
the  jubilee  (Ley.  xxv,  8, 28).  The  Levites  were  not  al- 
lowed  to  sdl  the  land  in  the  suburbs  of  their  cities, 
though  they  might  dispose  of  the  cities  themselyes, 
which,  however,  were  redeemable  at  any  time,  and  muat 
return  at  the  jubilee  to  their  original  possessors  (Ley. 
zxvii,  16).    See  Land. 

The  regulations  which  the  laws  of  Moses  established 
lendered  wills,  or  a  testamentary  disposition  of  (at  least) 
landed  property,  almost,  if  not  quite  uimecessai}'' ;  we 
accordingly  iind  no  provlsion  for  anything  of  the  kind. 
Some  difficidty  may  have  been  now  and  then  ooeasioned 
when  near  relations  failed ;  but  this  was  met  by  the  tra- 
ditional  law,  which  fumished  minutę  directions  on  the 
point  (Mishna,  Baba  Bathra,  lv,  8,  c.  8,  9).  Personal 
property  would  naturally  foUow  the  land,  or  might  be 
bequeathed  by  word  of  mouth.  At  a  later  period  of  the 
JeMrish  polity  the  mentiou  of  wiUs  is  found,  but  the  idea 
seems  to  have  been  taken  from  foreign  nationa.  In 
princely  families  they  appear  to  have  been  used,  as  we 
ieam  from  Josephus  {Ant  xiii,  16, 1 ;  xvii, 8, 2 ;  War^ ii, 
2, 8);  but  Buch  a  practioe  can  hardly  suffice  to  establish 
the  generał  use  of  wiUs  among  the  people.  In  the  New 
Tesument,  however,  wiUs  are  expreaBly  mentioned  (GaL 
iii,  15 ;  Heb.  ix,  17).  Michaelis  {Commentaries,  i,  481) 
asserts  that  the  phrase  (2  Sam.  xvii,  28 ;  2  Kings  xx,  1) 
**  set  thine  house  in  order**  has  reference  to  a  will  or  tes- 
tament. But  his  grounds  are  by  no  means  suffident, 
the  literał  rendering  of  the  words  being,  '*give  com- 
mands  to  thy  house.**  The  utmoet  which  such  an  ex- 
pressiou  could  infcrentially  be  held  to  oomprise  in  re- 
gard  to  property  is  a  dying  and  finał  distribution  of  per- 
aonal  property ;  and  we  know  that  it  was  not  unusual 
for  fathers  to  make,  whilc  yet  alive,  a  division  of  their 
goods  among  their  children  (Lukę  xv,  12;  RosenmUller, 
MortfmL  v,  197).— Kitto,     See  Hekitage. 

Inbibition  (Lat.  inhtbitioy  from  wiAt^o,  I  restrain) 
is  in  some  churcbes  "a  writ  by  which  an  inferior  is 
coromanded  by  a  superior  ecclesiastical  authority  to  stay 
the  proceedings  in  which  it  is  engaged.  Thus,  if  a 
roerober  of  a  college  appeals  to  the  visitor,  the  visitor 
inhibits  all  proceedings  against  the  appellant  until  the 
appeal  is  determined.  When  the  archbishop  visits,  he 
inhibits  the  bishop  of  the  diocese ;  when  the  bishop  vis- 
its,  he  inhibits  the  archdeacon;  which  inhibitions  con- 
tinue  in  force  until  the  last  parish  is  yisited.  If  a  lapse 
happens  while  the  inbibition  is  in  force  against  the 
bishop,  the  archbishop  must  institute;  institution  by 
the  bishop  would  be  void,  as  his  power  łb  suspended.** — 
Eadie,  Ecdes,  Did.  p.  837. 

Iniquit7  (prop.  "li^,  ci^icia ;  but  represented  in  the 
A.  Ycrs.  by  8everal  oŁher  words)  means  in  Scripture  not 
only  sin,  but,  by  metonymy,  alśo  the  punishment  of  sin, 
and  the  expiation  of  it :  **  Aaron  will  bear  the  iniquities 
of  the  people  ;*^  he  will  atone  for  them  (£xod.  xxviii, 
88).  The  Lord  **  yiaits  the  iniquities  of  the  fathers 
upon  the  children"  (£xod.  xx,  5) ;  he  sometimes  causes 
yisible  cffects  of  his  wrath  to  fali  on  the  children  of 
crirainal  parents.  "  To  bear  inquity"  is  to  endure  the 
punishment  of  it,  to  be  obliged  to  expiate  it.'  The 
priests  bear  the  iniquity  of  the  people;  that  is,  they  are 
charged  with  the  expiation  of  it  (£xod.  xxviii,  88 ; 
Lev.  X,  17).— Calmet.    See  Sra. 

Initiation,  a  common  term  in  the  early  Church 
for  baptism,  having  reference  to  the  fuli  instruction  in 
the  mysteries  of  Christianity  which  was  given  to  the 


baptized,  but  withheld  from  the  onbi^rtised.  The  \m^ 
tized  were  thus  caUed  iniiiati,  ol  fUftvtntivoi,  fotaró^ 
or  i»voTaybrfifTOŁ ;  and  it  is  veiy  oommon  to  Ifaid  the 
fathers  using  the  expre88łon  *'  the  initiated  will  midei^ 
stand"  in  their  preaching  to  mixed  oongtegatioDs,  c»- 
pecially  when  they  were  speaking  of  anything  which 
belonged  to  the  doctrine  of  the  holy  EuchaiiM.  This 
expre8sion  is  said  by  Casaubon  to  oocnr  fifty  timea  in 
the  sermons  of  St.  Chrysoetom  ałone. — Blunt,  TktoUfg* 
Diet.  i,  848.  Several  other  names  weie  given  to  tbese 
persons,  such  as  moroi^fdeks,  fufnZófuwUf  etc.  The 
word  has  sometimes  been  employed  with  refertnee  to 
the  aupposed  duty  of  reterw  in  communicating  diTine 
knowledge,  as  though  the  holy  Scriptnres  jusdfied  the 
withholding  instruction  in  Christianity  from  persons  in 
an  early  stage  of  their  Christian  couise. — ^Bingham,  Orig, 
EccUs.  bk.  i,  eh.  iv,  §  2.    See  Disciplcca  Arcasi. 

Injtiry,  a  viohition  of  the  rights  of  another.  *'  Some,* 
says  Grove,  ^  distinguish  between  injustiiia  and  infuria* 
Injustice  is  opposed  to  justice  in  generał,  whether  ncga- 
tive  or  positive;  an  injnry,  to  negative  justice  alome. 
See  Justice.  An  injury  is  wilfully  doing  to  another 
what  ought  not  to  be  done.  This  is  injustice  too,  bot 
not  the  whole  idea  of  it ;  for  it  is  injustice  also  to  zcfoae 
or  neglect  doing  what  onght  to  be  done.  An  injniy 
must  be  wilfuUy  committed;  whereas  it  is  enough  to 
make  a  thing  unjust  that  it  happens  through  a  cnlpable 
negligenoe.  1.  \Ve  may  injure  a  perton  w  kis  soml  by 
misleading  his  judgment,  by  comipting  the  inmgina- 
tion,  perverting  the  will,  and  wounding  the  soul  with 
gridT.  Persecutors  who  succeed  in  their  compnlsive 
measures,  though  they  cannot  alter  the  real  sentiments 
by  extemał  violence,  yet  sometimes  injure  the  soul  by 
making  the  man  a  hypocrite.  2.  We  may  injure  ok- 
otker  in  his  body  by  homidde,  murder,  preventing  life, 
dismembering  the  body  by  wounds,  blows,  slavery,  and 
imprisonment,  or  any  unjust  restiaint  upon  its  libeity; 
by  robbmg  it  of  its  chastity,  or  prpjudicing  its  healih. 
8.  We  may  injure  another  in  his  name  and  dkaraeter  by 
our  own  false  and  rash  judgments  of  him ;  by  false  wit- 
ness;  by  charging  a  man  to  his  face  with  a  crime  whidi 
either  we  ouiselve8  have  forged,  or  which  we  know  to 
have  been  forged  by  some  other  person ;  by  detractkn 
or  backbiting;  by  reproach,  or  expo6ing  another  for 
some  natural  imb«cility  either  in  bcŃdy  or  mind;  or  for 
some  calamity  into  which  he  is  fallen,  or  some  miscar- 
riage  of  which  he  has  been  guilty;  by  innuendoes,  or 
indirect  accusations  that  are  not  tnie.  Now  if  we  ono- 
sider  the  rałue  of  character,  the  rtsentment  which  the 
injurious  person  has  of  such  treatment  when  it  conses  to 
his  own  tum  to  suffer  it,  the  conse^ence  of  a  nmn's  lo»- 
ing  his  good  name.  and,  finally,  the  difficulty  of  making 
reparation,  we  must  at  once  see  the  injustice  of  lessening 
another's  good  character.  There  are  thesc  two  conad- 
erations  wbich  should  sometimes  restrain  us  firom  speak- 
ing fhe  whole  truth  of  our  neighbor,  when  it  is  to  his 
di9advantage.  (1.)  That  he  may  possibly  livc  to  see 
his  folly,  and  repent  and  grow  better.  (2.)  Admitting 
tłmt  we  speak  the  truth,  yet  it  is  a  thouaand  to  ooe 
but  when  it  is  bandied  ał)out  for  some  time  it  will  con- 
tract  a  deal  of  falsehood.  4.  We  may  injure  a  ptrmm  ta 
his  relations  and  dependencies.  In  his  8ervants,  by  cor- 
rupting  them ;  in  his  children,  by  drawing  them  into 
evil  oourses;  in  his  wife,  by  sowing  strife,  attempting 
to  alienate  ber  affections.  5.  We  may  be  guilty  ofimjur- 
inff  another  in  his  worldly  goods  or  possessians  ;  (1.)  By 
doing  him  a  mischief  without  any  advantage  to  oar- 
selve8,  through  envy  and  malice.  (2.)  By  t^ng  what 
is  another^s,  which  is  theft."  See  Grove,  Mor.  PAiL  eh. 
viii,  p.  2 ;  Watts,  Sermons,  roi  ii,  ser.  88 ;  TiUotsoBi,  Ser- 
monSf  ser.  42 ;  Buck,  Theohgical  Dietiomny,  s.  v. 

Ink  (i*^*^,  deyo',  so  called  from  its  bladbnest,  Jer. 
xxxvi,  18 ;  Gr.  fu\aVf  black^  2  Cor.  iii,  8 ;  2  John  12;  3 
John  18).  The  most  aimple,  and  hence  probably  the 
most  ancient  modę  of  preparing  ink  was  a  miztare  of 
water  with  charooal  powdered,  or  with  soot,  to  which 


INK-HORN 


687 


INN 


gam  was  sdded.  Tbe  Hebrews  madę  use  of  different 
colon  for  writingi  as  did  alao  the  ancient  Egyptians, 
and  some  of  the  books  of  the  fonner  are  stated  by  Joee- 
phus  to  hare  been  written  in  gold.  The  modę  of  writ- 
ing  mentioned  in  Numb.  y,  28,  where  it  Ls  said  that 
*^the  priest  shall  write  the  curses  in  a  book  and  biot 
them  oat  with  the  bitter  water,"  was  with  a  kind  of  ink 
prepared  for  the  porpose,  without  any  calx  of  iron  or 
other  materiał  that  could  make  a  permanent  dye ;  these 
maledictions  were  then  washed  olf  the  parchment  into 
the  water,  which  the  woman  was  obliged  to  drink :  so 
that  she  drank  the  yeiy  words  of  the  execration.  The 
ink  Btill  used  in  the  East  is  almost  all  of  this  kind ;  a 
wet  sponge  wili  completely  obliterate  the  finest  of  their 
writings.  The  ancients  used  sereral  kinds  of  tinctures 
as  ink ;  among  them  that  extracted  from  the  cuttle-fish, 
called  in  Hehrew  rbsP,  łekeleih.  Their  ink  was  not  so 
fluid  as  ours.  Demosthenes  reproaches  iEschines  with 
labońng  in  the  grinding  of  ink,  as  painters  do  in  the 
gńnding  of  their  colon.  The  subetanee  found  in  an 
inkstand  at  llerculaneum  looks  like  a  thick  oil  or  paint, 
with  which  the  manoscripts  had  been  written  in  a  sort 
of  relievo,  viaible  in  the  łetten  when  a  leaf  is  held  to 
the  light  in  a  hońzontal  direction.  Such  vitriolic  ink 
as  has  been  used  on  the  old  parchment  manuscripts 
would  hare  corroded  the  delicate  leares  of  the  pap}Tiis, 
as  it  has  done  the  skins  of  the  most  ancient  manuscripts 
of  Ylrgil  and  Tcrence  in  the  library  of  the  Yatican ;  the 
letten  are  sunk  into  the  parchment,  and  some  hare 
eaten  quite  through  it,  in  consequence  of  the  corrosive 
add  of  the  ritriolic  ink  with  which  they  were  written. 
Sec  WRrriNC. 

Ink-hom  (nOJ?,  he'8eth,  a  round  retsel),  an  ink- 
stand  wom  in  the  giidle  (Ezek.  ix,  2,  8, 11).  This  im- 
plemenŁ  is  one  of  considerable  antiquity ;  it  is  common 
Łhroughout  the  Levant,  and  is  often  seen  in  the  houses 
of  the  Greeks.  To  one  end  of  a  long  brtH**  tubę  for 
holding  pens  is  attached  the  little  case  containing  the 
moistened  sepia  nsed  for  ink,  which  is  closed  with  a  lid 
and  snap,  and  the  whole  stuck  with  much  importance 
in  the  girdle.  This  is,  without  do^bt,  subetantially  the 
instrament  borne  by  the  indiri  Uiai  whom  Ezekiel  men- 
tions  as  **  one  man  clothed  in  linen,  with  a  writer*s  ink- 
hom  by  his  side.*'  We  find  the  Egyptian  scribes  had 
likewise  a  cylindrical  box  for  ink,  which  was  probably 


Modern  Oriental  Writlng  Implements. 

carried  in  a  similar  manner.  Besides  these,  the  modem 
Egyptians  have  a  regular  inkstand  for  morę  extensive 
writing.  The  ancient 
Egyptians  had  writ- 
ing-tablets,  which  are 
sąuare  paUets  of  wood, 


ptlan  Writme-tablet  with  longitudinal 
^tfs  EgyptTan  Mo-groores   to   hołd  the 


Ancient 
(From 

kash  or  smali  reeds 
used  for  writing;  the  well,  for  cok>r,  in  some  is  in  the 
oioal  form  of  an  oval  or  signet ;  towards  the  upper  end 
of  the  pallet  on  othen  is  inscribed  the  name  of  the  own- 
cr.  In  bronze,  there  are  cylindrical  boxes  for  ink,  with 
a  chain  for  the  pen-case,  the  whole  simUar  to  the  hie- 
loglyphical  symbol  for  scribe  or  writing.     The  monu- 


ments  likewise  represent  scribes  with  inkstands  in  their 
left  hands,  containing  two  bottles  for  different  colored 
inkji  (Wilkinson,  ii,  176).    See  Writing. 

Inn  Cp^7*  nudón,  Gen.  xlii,  27 ;  xliii,  21 ;  Exod.  iv, 
24,  a  lodffinff-plaoej  as  elsewhere  rendered ;  iraraXt;/ia, 
Liike  ii,  7,  a  place  for  loosing  the  beasts  of  their  burden, 
rendered  "  guest-chamber,"  Mark  xiv,  14 ;  Lukę  xxiii, 
11 ;  iravSoxitov,  Lukę  x,  34,  a  place  for  recciting  all 
comen).  Inns,  in  our  sense  of  the  term,  were,  as  they 
still  are,  unknown  in  the  East  where  hospitality  is  re- 
ligiously  practised.  The  khans,  or  caravanserais,  are 
the  representatiyes  of  European  inns,  and  these  were 
established  but  gradually.  It  is  donbtful  whether  there 
is  any  allusion  to  them  in  the  Old  Testament.  The 
halting-place  of  a  cararan  was  selected  originally  on  ac- 
count  of  its  proximity  to  water  or  pasture,  by  which 
the  trayellen  pitched  their  tents  and  passed  the  night. 
Such  was  undonbtedly  the  "inn"  at  which  occurred  the 
inddent  in  the  life  of  Moses  narrated  in  Exod.  iv,  24. 
It  was  probably  one  of  the  halting-places  of  the  Ishmael- 
itish  merchants  who  traded  to  Egypt  with  their  camel- 
loads  of  spices.  Moses  was  on  his  joumey  from  the  land 
of  Midian,  and  the  merchants  in  Gen.  xxxvii  are  called 
indiscriminately  Ishmaelites  and  Midiani  tes.  At  one  of 
these  stations,  too,  the  fint  which  they  reached  after 
leaying  the  city,  and  no  doubt  within  a  short  distance 
from  it,  Joseph's  brethren  discovered  that  their  money 
had  been  lepkced  in  their  wallets  (Gen.  xlii,  27). 

Increased  commercial  intercourse,  and,  in  later  times, 
religious  enthusiasra  for  pilgrimages,  gave  rise  to  the 
esUblishment  of  morę  permanent  accommodation  for 
trayellers.  On  the  morę  freąuented  routes,  remote  from 
towns  (Jer.  ix,  2),  caravanserais  were  in  course  of  time 
erected,  often  at  the  expense  of  the  wealthy.  The  fol- 
lowing  description  of  one  of  those  on  the  roail  from  Bag- 
dad to  Babylon  will  suflice  for  all:  *•  It  is  a  large  and 
substantial  sąuare  building,  in  the  distance  resembling 
a  fortresSfbeing  surrounded  with  a  lofty  wali,  and  flank- 
ed  by  round  towen  to  defend  the  inmates  in  case  of  at- 
tack.  Passing  through  a  strong  gateway,  the  guest  en- 
ters  a  large  court,  the  sides  of  which  are  divided  into 
numeruus  arched  compartments,  open  in  iront,  for  the 
accommodation  of  separate  parties  and  for  the  reception 
of  goods.  In  the  centrę  is  a  spacious  raised  platform, 
used  for  sleeping  upon  at  night,  or  for  the  deyotious  of 
the  faithful  during  the  day.    Between  the  outer  wali 

and  the  compart- 
ments are  wide 
yaulted  arcades^ 
extending  round 
the  en  tire  build- 
ing, where  the 
beasts  of  burden 
are  placed.  Upon 
the  roof  of  the  ar- 
cades  is  an  excel- 
lent  terrace,  and 
over  the  gateway 
an  elevated  lower 
containing  two 
rooms,  one  of  which 
is  open  at  the  sides, 
permitting  the  occupants  to  enjoy  every  breath  of  air 
that  passes  across  the  heated  plain.  The  terrace  is  tol- 
erably  clean,  but  the  court  and  stabling  below  are  ankle- 
deep  in  chopped  straw  and  filth"  (Loftus,  Chaldea^  p.  13). 
The  great  khans  established  by  the  Fenian  kings  and 
great  men,  at  intervals  of  about  8ix  miles  on  the  roads 
from  Bagdad  to  the  sacred  places,  are  provided  with 
stables  for  the  horses  of  the  pilgrims.  "  Within  these 
stables,  on  both  sides,  are  other  cells  for  travellere"  (Lay- 
ard,  Nin.  and  Bab.  p.  478,  notę).  The  "  stall"  or  «  mań- 
ger,"  mentioned  in  Lukę  ii,  7,  was  probably  in  a  stable 
of  this  kind.  Such  khans  are  sometimes  situated  near 
running  streams,  or  have  a  supply  of  water  of  some 
kind,  but  the  traveller  must  carry  all  his  proyisions  with 
him  (Ouseląy,  Trav,  in  Pertia,  i,  261,  notę).   At  Dama»- 


INN 


588 


INNER  MSSIONS 


cni  the  khans  are,  many  of  them,  snbetantial  bnildings; 
the  smali  rooms  which  surromid  the  coort,  as  well  aa 
those  above  them  which  are  entered  from  a  galleryy.are 
lued  by  the  mercbants  of  the  city  for  depositing  their 
goods  (Porter'8  DamaKut,  i,  88).  The  tcekdUhs  of  mod- 
em Egypt  are  of  a  simUar  deecription  (Lanc,  Mod,  Eg, 
ii,  10).  In  8ome  parta  of  modem  Syria  a  neaier  ap- 
proach  bas  been  madę  to  the  European  system.  The 
people  of  es-Salt,  according  to  Bmt:khardt,  supportibur 
tarems  {Menzel  or  Medhafe)  at  the  public  expenae.  At 
these  the  trayeller  is  furaished  with  everything  he  may 
require,  so  long  aa  he  chooses  to  remain,  provided  his 
stay  ia  not  mueasonably  protracted.  The  expense8  are 
paid  by  a  tax  on  the  heada  of  families,  and  a  kind  of 
laudlord  superintends  the  establishment  {Trav»  ńi  Syria, 
p.  86).  Usually,  hovrever,  in  Syrian  towns,  where  there 
ia  no  regular  khan,  the  mensoul  or  public  house  is  part 
of  the  sheik^s  establishment,  with  a  keeper  who  makes 
a  moderate  charge  for  catering  to  his  guests  in  addition 
to  the  cost  of  proYisions.    See  Carayasisebai. 


Plan  of  the  Khan  at  Adalia,  In  Asia  Minor. 


"The  house  of  patha"  (Proy.  viii, 2,  iv  oiKtft  Sł6Bwv, 
Fen.  Vers,)y  where  Wisdom  took  her  stand,  is  understood 
by  some  to  refer  appropriately  to  a  khan  built  where 
many  ways  met  and  fteąuented  by  many  trayellers.  A 
umilar  meaning  haa  been  attached  to  BH^S  ni|'nA,^ 
ruth  A^imA^m, "  the  hostel  of  Chimham"  (Jer.  xM,  17)  be- 
side  Bethlehem,  built  by  the  liberality  of  the  son  of 
Barzillai  for  the  beneAt  of  those  who  were  going  down 
to  Egypt  (Stanley,  Sm,  and  Patesł,  p.  168 ;  App.  §  90). 
The  Targum  says,  "which  David  gave  to  Cfaimham, 
son  of  Barzillai  the  GUeadite"  (comp.  2  Sam.  xix,  87, 38). 
With  regard  to  this  passage,  the  andent  yersions  are 
strangely  at  yariance.  The  Sept.  had  evidently  anoth- 
er  reading  with  3  and  A  transposed,  which  they  left  un- 
translated  ya^ripaxafida,  Alexand.  yrifiripw9xafiaafi. 
The  Yulgate,  if  intended  to  be  literał,  must  haye  read 
S3S1  D^*;ia,  pertgrmantea  in  Chanaam,  The  Arabie, 
following  the  Alexandrian  MS.,  read  it  kv  yy  BfiputO- 
Xaftdafi^  "  in  the  land  of  Berothchamaam."  The  Syr- 
iac  bas  fe'«2re,  "in  the  threshing-floors,"  aa  if  r^137??ł 
beffom&th.  Josephus  had  a  reading  difPerent  fiom  all, 
ninnąa,  begidrótk,  "in  the  folds  of*  Chimham;  for  he 
says  the  fugitiyes  went  "to  a  certain  place  called  Man- 
dra"  (Maj/Ąoa  \ŁyófitvoVj  Ant,  x,  9,  5),  and  in  this  he 
was  followed  by  Aąuila  and  the  Hexaplar  Syriac 

The  ifavŁoKiiov  (Lukę  x,  84)  probably  diffcred  from 
the  KaroKufia  (Lukę  ii,  7)  in  haying  a  "  host"  or  "  inn- 
keeper"  {navioKŁvc,  Lukę  x,  35),  who  supplied  some  few 
of  the  necessary  proyisions,  and  attended  to  the  wants 
of  trayellers  left  to  his  charge.  The  word  has  been 
adopted  in  the  later  Hebrew,  and  appears  in  the  Mishna 
(FeftomoiA,  xyi,  7)  under  the  form  pn51B,/mn<fa*,  and 
the  hoat  is  *^pi3'^.B,  pundaM,  The  Jews  were  forbidden 
to  pnt  up  their  beasts  at  establishments  of  this  kind 
kept  by  idolaters  {A  hoda  Zara,  ii,  1).  It  appears  that 
bouses  of  entertainment  were  sometimes,  as  in  Egypt 
(Herod,  ii,  35),  kept  by  women,  whose  character  was 
soch  that  their  eyidence  was  regwded  with  su^idon. 


In  the  Mishna  {Y^tamoth,  xyi,  7)  a  tale  is  told  of  a  oon- 
pany  of  Levites  who  were  trayelling  to  Zoar,  the  dty 
of  Palms,  when  one  of  them  fell  iU  on  the  road  and  waa 
left  by  hia  comrades  at  an  inn,  under  the  charge  of  the 
hostess  (n*^p^a*1&,;7ii»u/etirA=irav^o«fvrpf a).  On  ihdr 
return  to  inąuire  for  their  Mend,  the  hostess  told  tbera 
he  was  dead  and  buried,  but  they  refused  to  beliere  her 
till  she  produced  his  staff,  wallet,  and  roU  of  the  law. 
In  Josh.  ii,  1,  n3^T,  z&nóh,  the  term  applied  to  Kahab,  is 
rendered  in  the  Targum  of  Jonathan  Kn*ipTrc,  pwt- 
dekithd, "  a  woman  who  keepa  an  inn."  So  in  Judg.  xi, 
1,  of  the  mother  of  Jephthah ;  of  Delilah  (Judg.  xvi,  1) 
and  the  two  women  who  appealed  to  Solomon  (t  Kiii|?s 
iii,  16).  The  words,  in  the  opinion  of  Kimchi  on  Joi^h. 
ii,  1,  appear  to  have  been  sjmonymoas^ — Smith,  a.  r. 
See  Khan. 

Inner  (I  e.  Domestic,  or  "//orne")  MlsBlons  b 
the  name  giyen,  in  the  Protestant  chnrchcs  of  Germany, 
to  any  aasodation  of  eyangelical  Christians  for  the  pnr- 
pose  of  reUeying  the  spiritnal  and  temporal  wants  of  the 
community  by  disseminating  the  Goetel  tmth,  and  af- 
fording  help  in  temporal  concems. 

I.  Oriffin  and  Organizatian. — Christianity  cómmands 
that  faith  should  manifest  itself  in  deeds  of  loye;  hence, 
as  early  as  the  apoetolical  times,  we  sec  deaoona  and 
deaconesses  appointed  to  attend  to  the  poor  and  the 
sick,  distńbute  alms,  etc  Thb  was  continued  in  later 
days  by  Origen,  St  Anthony,  etc  AVhcn,  in  the  4ili 
century,  Christianity  became  the  religion  of  the  atate, 
the  dergy  assumed  this  office,  which,  from  the  abun- 
dance  of  means  in  the  Church,  had  beoome  a  yocj  im- 
portant  one  In  subseąuent  times  we  find  Francis  of 
Assisi,  Elizabeth  of  Thuringia,  Francis  of  Salcs,  and  a 
number  of  religious  orders,  hoepitallen,  aisters  of  cfaari- 
ty,  etc,  deyoting  themsdyes  to  the  care  of  the  poor, 
the  aged,  and  the  sick.  Uospitals,  houses  of  refuje,  or- 
phan  asylums,  etc,  were  established  for  these  puiposes. 
The  Ptotestant  Church,  in  oonsequenoe  of  its  snbjection 
to  the  State,  could  exert  itself  but  little  in  that  diree- 
tion,  being  oftentimes  eyen  preyented  by  law  from  the 
care  of  the  poor.  StiU  efTorts  were  madę  by  furiyate 
indiyiduals,  such  as  August  Hermann  Francke,  whoae 
orphan  asylum  at  Halle  became  a  modd  which  wmn  im- 
itated  in  other  places;  Biblical,  missionaiy,  and  traci 
sodeties  were  established  in  Germany,  and  a  number  of 
houses  of  refuge  and  infant  schools  established.  In 
modem  times  a  Aresh  impulse  was  giyen  to  this  eran- 
gelical  moyement  by  England.  The  attempta  of  How- 
ard, Wilberforoe,  and  Buxton  were  continued  on  an  cn- 
larged  scalę  by  lord  Ashley,  the  duke  of  Argylt,  Eliz- 
abeth Fiy,  etc  City  missions,  Magdalen  and  night 
asylums,  Sabbath  and  ragged  schods,  were  eataUiahed. 
Chalmers,  first  in  the  Picsbyterian  and  then  in  the  Fm 
Church  of  Scotland,  restored  the  diacony  and  care  of 
the  poor  on  an  ecdesiastical  basis.  Similar  efibrta  were 
madę  in  France,  among  the  Bomanists,  by  the  Sisteis 
of  StMary  and  St  Joseph,  and  St,Regis. 

IL  Sphere, — ^The  German  inner  missions  endeavor  to 
promote  infant,  secular,  and  Sunday  school  aasociations, 
institutions  of  refuge,  intercourse  with  the  familiea,  etc 
They  at  the  same  time  take  part  in  the  sodal  questioQs 
of  the  day,and  labor  to  systematize  the  aid  given  to  the 
poor,  to  promote  personal  intercourse  between  the  f^rtr 
and  the  receiyer,  the  purification  of  morala;  and  for 
these  puiposes  they  haye  established  female  benero* 
lent  aasociations,  diaoonies,  nurseries,  labor  sodetiea,  etc 
The  influx  of  communistic  ideas  they  seek  to  ooimtcrbal- 
ance  by  establishing  schools  for  apprentices  and  adolts, 
sodeties  for  the  education  of  serrants,  both  małe  and 
female,  and  for  the  piopagation  of  good  booka.  They 
oppose  unchriatian  and  unecdesiaatical  tendencica  t^ 
promoting  the  study  of  the  Scriptoies,  establishing  fam- 
ily  worship,  awakening  religious  feelińgs  in  the  finnifiea, 
organizing  book  and  tzact  sodeties,  sending  out  colpor- 
teurs  and  stzeet  preacheri,  and  opposing  prostitntion, 
drunkennesB,  and  all  other  immoraUty.    They  diaeoim- 


INNER  MISSIONS 


689 


INNOCENT  I 


tenanoe  leYolation  w  8ubYeiBive  of  political  organiza- 
tion,  and  as  the  enemy  of  religion  and  of  morality :  in 
Łhis  department  they  act  thiough  political  speeches  and 
the  preaa,  in  raiaing  the  standard  of  popular  literaturę, 
and  espedally  by  their  influence  over  the  lising  genera- 
tioiu  They  also  attend  to  the  prisuns,  trying  to  promote 
Christian  love  in  the  hearts  of  the  offioers  intrasted  with 
their  charge,  and  forming  persona  for  that  office  in  their 
iiuttituŁioiia.  Aside  from  the  protective  aawdations  for 
culprits  who  haye  finiahed  their  time  of  imprisonment, 
they  endeavor  also  to  eatablish  asylums  for  them. 

IIL  Kxi^nt,— In  Germany  the  inner  miasions  embraoe 
flome  eleren  to  twelre  million  Protestanta,  not  ręgular- 
Ir  connected  with  any  Chuich,  the  floating  population, 
the  workmen^s  associationa,  which  are  oflen  a  prey  to 
atheism  and  commnmsm,  travellers  and  strangers,  etc 
In  ihis  manner  they  become  a  friendly  ally  of  the  gov- 
cnunent,  of  which  all  they  require  is  the  protection  of 
their  aasodationa  and  freedom  of  worship.  With  regard 
to  the  Church,  they  labor  for  the  evangelizing  of  the 
maases  acoording  to  a  truły  Christian  spińt,  but  without 
enteiing  into  any  of  the  disputes  of  the  different  oonfea- 
tioaa,  and  without  seeking  to  gain  proeelytesi  Their 
agenta  are  women  aa  well  as  men;  for  instance,  Eliza- 
beth Fiy,  Sarah  Martin,  Amelia  Sieveking,  etc.  The 
abiolute  necessity  of  such  an  assoctation  waa  shown  by 
atttistical  statements  of  the  wanta  of.  the  population, 
which  were  especially  oollected  by  Wichem.  From  this 
atarting-point  the  institution  in  ąuestion  developed  its 
laborsL  Aside  from  the  organization  of  societies,  which 
were  aoon  propagated  thioughout  the  country,  it  direct- 
cd  its  attention  to  the  eatabliahing  of  houses  of  lefuge,  to 
which  that  established  by  Wichem  at  Horn,  near  Uam- 
bu^.  aerred  as  model,  and  of  which,  in  1858,  there  were 
some  140  in  eicistence  in  Germany.  For  the  care  of 
the  poor  it  was  diificult  to  do  much,  as  the  inner  mia- 
sions could  not  well  associat^e  themselyea  with  the  mu- 
mdpaL  organizations  for  that  purpose,  yet  in  some 
pUciea,  as  at  Erlangen  and  at  Ansbacfa,  the  yoluntary 
a}-atem  of  relief  has  prodnced  good  results.  The  inner 
miasions  also  labor  to  promote  the  obseryance  of  the 
Sabbath,  and  to  tUstribute  Bibles.  Their  moet  impor- 
tant  results,  so  far,  in  Germany,  are  the  establishing  of 
Bibie  depóts,  of  aasociatious  to  meet  the  wanta  of  the 
ignorant,  the  improrement  of  the  prison  systems,  which 
haa  been  adopted  in  a  number  of  oountries,  etc. 

The  iuterest  of  Gennany  in  the  cause  of  inner  mis- 
Ńona  has  of  late  greatly  increased.  The  Congress  for 
Imtr  AfiuioiUf  which  in  1848  was  organized  in  connec- 
tion  with  the  Church  Diei  (JCirchaUag),  haa  eyer  sińce 
held  snnual  or  biennial  genieral  meetings  in  connection 
with  the  aittings  of  the  Church  Diet  At  these  meet- 
ings reports  are  madę  on  the  condition  of  religioua  life 
in  Gennany,  and  the  proper  remediea  for  the  existing 
eTils  are  discrowed.  The  establiahment  of  houses  of 
refuge  and  of  Chiiatian  lodging^houses,  the  care  of  the 
poor  and  of  discharged  prisonera,  the  solution  of  the  so- 
ciał  qoeation,  the  estension  of  Young  Men*s  Christian 
Aasodationa,  and  of  Bibie  and  other  religioua  sodeties, 
are  the  chief  aubjects  which  engage  the  attention  of 
erery  congress.  In  addition  to  the  General  Congress 
for  Łoner  Hiasions,  a  number  of  proyincial  associations 
for  the  same  purpose  haye  been  organized.  Thua  a 
SwtikrwetUrn  Confermoefor  Irmer  MiuUmi  waa  estab- 
lished in  1865 ;  a  central  association  for  the  inner  mia- 
aioa  of  the  Eyangelical  Lutheran  Church  in  the  king- 
(loro  of  Saxony  in  1868.  The  Ceniral  Committee  for 
Iwter  MittionSf  which  is  dected  at  eyeiy  meeting  of  the 
Congress  for  Inner  Missions,  and  is  composed  of  some 
of  the  moet  prominent  dergymen  and  laymen  of  Ger- 
many, endeayors  to  cairy  out  the  resolutions  of  the  con- 
graaaea,  and  to  inyoke  the  proper  legislation  of  the  state 
gorernment  for  the  suppression  of  yioe  and  immorality, 
c^wciaHy  of  proetitution.  Gennany  haa  a  number  of 
papcta  adyocating  the  cause  of  inner  missiona,  the  most 
important  of  which,  the  Fłieffotde  BlaUer  fur  inmtrt 
Mitium,  is  pubUshed  by  Wichem  (eatahliahed  in  1850). 


See  also  Meiz,  A  rmufh  u.  ChristetUhum  (1841) ;  Wichem, 
DemktchHfi  (1849);  Braune,  Funf  Yorkwńgm  (1850) ; 
Buas  (Roman  Catholic),i>te  YoUsamittwnea  (1851);  Pie- 
rer,  Umeertal  Lerikon^  yiii,  919.  For  a  fuller  aocount 
of  the  Bubject,  especially  with  regard  to  America,  Eng- 
land,  and  other  countries,  see  Missions,  Home. 

Innocent  (prop.  *ipa,  d^woc).  The  Hebrews  oon- 
sidered  innocence  as  consisting  chiefly  in  an  exemption 
from  extemal  faulŁs  oommitted  contrary  to  the  law; 
hence  they  often  join  Innocent  with  hands  (Gen.  xxxyii, 
22 ;  Psa.  xxiy,  4).  "  I  will  wash  my  hands  in  innocency" 
(Psa.  xxyi,  6) ;  **  Then  have  I  clcansed  my  heart  in  yain, 
and  washed  my  hands  in  innocency"  (Psa.  lxxiii,  13). 
Josephus  admits  of  no  other  sins  than  those  actiona 
which  are  put  in  execution  {Ant,  xii,  7, 1).  Sins  in 
thought,  in  his  acoount,  are  not  punished  by  God.  This 
is  a  yery  different  standard  of  morality  from  that  of  the 
Gospel  (Matt.  y,  28;  John  iii,  15),  or  eyen  of  the  O.  T. 
(Psa.  li,  6).  To  be  Innocent  is  used  sometimes  for  be- 
ing  exempt  from  punishment.  ^  I  will  not  treat  you  as 
one  Innocent"  (Jer.  xlyi,  28) ;  litenlly,  I  will  not  make 
thee  Innocent;  I  will  chaatise  thee,  but  like  a  kind  Un* 
ther.  Jeremiah  (xlix,  12),  speaking  to  the  Edomites, 
says,  ^  They  who  haye  not  (so  much)  deseryed  to  drink 
of  the  cup  of  my  wrath,  haye  taated  of  it."  Nahum  (i,  • 
8)  declares  that  ^^God  is  ready  to  exercise  yengeance; 
he  will  make  no  one  Innocent;  he  will  spare  no  one;^ 
(Exod.  xxxiy,  7,  Heb.),  "  Thou  ahidt  make  no  one  In- 
nocent;" no  sin  shall  remain  unpunished.  **With  the 
pure  thou  wilt  show  thjrself  pure"  (Psa.  xyiii,  26) ;  thou 
treatest  the  just  as  just,  the  good  as  good ;  thou  neyer 
dost  confound  the  guilty  with  the  Innocent.— 4^!aknet. 

Innocent  I,  St.,  a  natiye  of  Albano,  near  Romę, 
became  pope  April  27,  402,  as  successor  of  Anastasius  I, 
St  Chrysostom  had  just  been  driven  from  Constantino- 
ple  and  exiled  to  Bithynia  in  conseąuence  of  his  zeal 
against  the  Arians,  and  of  his  attacks  against  the  em- 
prees  Eudoxia.  Innocent  I  at  once  actiyely  took  his 
part,  and  sought  to  haye  the  aifiur  referred  to  a  council 
of  the  joint  bishope  of  the  Eastem  and  Western  church- 
es.  Failing  in  this,  he  next  attempted  an  arrangement 
with  the  emperor,  but  his  enyoys  were  ill  treated,  and 
acoomplished  nothing.  St.  Chrysostom  died  in  the 
mean  time,  but  Iimooent  resolyed  to  cease  aU  interoourse 
with  Constantinople  until  justice  was  done  to  his  mem- 
ory.  The  Western  Church  was  Itself  in  a  state  of  great 
disturbance ;  in  Africa  the  Donatists  (q.  y.)  were  giying 
much  trouble,  and  Innocent  finally  caused  them  to  be 
oondemned  by  the  Council  of  Carthage  (405) ;  in  Romę 
Tigilantiua  oppoeed  the  abuses  introduced  into  the 
Church,  such  as  the  celibacy  of  the  priests,  the  worship 
of  images,  and  monastic  life.  At  the  same  time  Alaric 
waa  marching  with  the  Goths  against  Romę :  the  Chris- 
Uans  fled  to  their  churches,  and  Innocent  permitted  the 
heathen  to  offer  up  sacrificea  to  their  gods;  but  prayers 
and  sacriflces  proyed  in  yain,  and  the  pope  waa  obliged 
to  pay  to  Alaric  the  ransom  of  the  dty,  which  was  ney- 
ertheless  Uken  by  the  barbarians  Aug.  24,  410,  and 
sacked.  It  waa  retaken,  but  plundered  the  following 
year  by  Astolf,  Alaric^s  brother-in-law.  Afler  the  Gotha 
had  left  the  neighborhood  of  Romę,  Innocent  I,  who 
had  sought  refuge  with  the  emperor  at  Rayenna,  retum- 
ed  to  the  dty,  and  by  his  efforts  to  restore  its  prosperity 
gained  a  great  many  heathens  to  the  Church.  He 
oommanded  that  Sundays  should  be  considered  fast* 
days  as  well  as  Fridays,  enjoined  celibacy  on  the  priests, 
and  took  repressiye  measures  againat  the  Macedonians. 
Hia  oouise  against  the  Pehigiana  seems  to  haye  been  ya- 
riable.  Schaff  says  that  he  oommended  the  Africans, 
who  had  oondemned  Pelagianism  in  two  s3modB  (Car- 
thage and  Mileye,  now  Melas),  for  haying  addressed 
themselyes  to  the  Church  of  St  Peter  to  obtain  an  ap- 
proyal  for  their  acta,  but  that  he  refrained  from  giying 
judgment  He  died  March  12, 417,  waa  canonized,  and 
ranks  among  the  highest  saints  of  the  Roman  Catholic 
Church.    He  is  commemorated  on  July  28.    His  decro* 


INNOCENT  n 


59a 


INNOCENT  in 


talfl  are  to  be  foond  in  the  coUection  of  DionysiuB  Ex- 
iguus,  and  the  most  oomplete  oollection  of  his  lettera  in 
Śch6nemaxm*sPonHJicumRom.qńttohBgeauuuB,  Labbe, 
ConciL  ii,  1245-1308)  gires  thirty  of  his  letten.  Gen- 
nadio,  in  De  Scriptoribus  EcdeaiaUicis^  eh.  iii,  aacribes  to 
him  the  Ikcretum  occidentalium  et  orientalium  efsckńit 
adfferstu  Pelagianot  daium,  published  during  the  reign 
of  his  sucoessor,  Zozimus  I.  See  Bruys,  Hitt,  dea  Papes 
(1735,  5  yols.  4to),  i,  160 ;  Labbe  and  Cossart,  Sacro- 
ioncta  ConcUta  (1671, 15  vols.  foL),  u,  1241>1558;  Ba- 
ronius,  AnruUeSf  yi,  401-632;  Fleiuy,  Hiti.  EccUnaa^ 
tigue,  V,  eh.  xxi;  Yossius,  Histor,  Pelag,;  H.  de  Noris 
(Norisius),  Hiatoire  da  Pelagianisme ;  Alletz,  Bist,  de$ 
Papea,  i,  95 ;  Anastasius,  Fito  Roman.  Poniificum^  i,  275; 
Ciaconius,  Vit<B  et  rea  geatm  Pontificum  Romanorum,  i, 
63 ;  Heizog,  Real^EncyHop.  vi,  662 ;  Mosheim,  Ch.  Hist. 
cent.  V,  pt,  ii,  ch.  ii ;  Hoefer,  A^our.  Biog,  Generale^  xxv, 
886 ;  Neander,  HiUory  of  the  Christian  Reliffion  and 
Church,  ii,  170, 299, 685, 587 ;  Schaff,  Church  History^  iii, 
797  są.  t 

Innocent  U,  Pope  (Gregorio  Papareichi)^  was 
bora  at  Romę  as  one  of  the  funily  of  the  Guidoni.  He 
became  successiyely  abbot  of  the  Benedictine  convent 
of  SL  Nicholas  at  Romę,  caidinal-deaoon  in  1118,  and 
was  finally  elected  pope  by  one  party  of  the  cardinals  in 
1130,  as  suocessor  of  Honorius  IŁ  The  other  party 
elected  Peter  Leonia,  under  the  name  of  Anadetus  IL 
Innocent  fled  to  France,  where  Bernard  de  Clairvaax 
caused  him  to  be  acknowledged  as  pope  by  Louis  YI 
and  by  the  Council  of  Etampes;  he  was  soon  after  rec- 
ognised  also  by  Henry  II  of  England,  by  Lotharios,  king 
of  Germany,  and  even  by  the  S3mod  of  Pisa  in  1184. 
In  1136  he  returoed  to  Romę  with  the  emperor,  and,  af- 
ter the  death  of  Anadetus  in  1 138,  was  uniyersally  ac- 
knowledged as  pope.  He  drove  Arnold  of  Bresda  out 
of  Italy,  and  put  king  Roger  under  the  ban,  but,  having 
.  taken  the  field  against  the  latter,  he  was  madę  prisoner 
at  Galleccio  in  1139.  He  was  afterwards  relcased  by 
abandoning  Sicily,  ApuUa,  and  Capua  to  Roger.  He 
had  also  some  8evere  oonflicts  with  the  king  of  France, 
and  the  Romans,  having  revolted  against  his  govera- 
ment,  re-established  the  senate,  and  declared  themselves 
independent.  In  the  midst  of  theso  troubles  Innocent 
died,  Sept.  23, 1143.  See  Herzog,  Real-Encyldop.  s.  v. ; 
Fabricius,  BiŚiL  Lat,  med,  et  irf,  at,  iv,  33;  Lannes, 
Pontificat  du  Papę  Innocent  II  (Paris,  1741,  8vo) ;  Mos- 
heim, Ch,  Hitt,  cent  xii,  pt.  ii,  ch.  ii ;  Neander,  History 
ofthe  Christian  ReUgion  and  Church,  iv,  75, 144,  256. 

Innocent  m  (a)  {Lothario  Conti),  by  far  the 
greatest  pope  of  this  name,  was  bora  of  a  noble  family 
of  Romę  at  Anagiii  in  1161.  After  a  conrse  of  much 
distinction  at  Paris,  Bologna,  and  Romę,  he  was  madę 
cardinal;  and  eventually,  in  1198,  was  dected,  at  the 
unprecedentedly  early  age  of  thirty-sereu,  a  sucoessor 
of  pope  Celestine  III.  While  at  the  high  schools  of 
Romę,  Paris,  and  Bologna,  he  had  greatly  distingnished 
himself  in  the  studies  of  philosophy,  theology,  and  the 
canon  law,  and  also  by  8everal  ¥nritten  compositions,  es- 
pecially  by  his  treatise  Be  Miseria  Conditionis  Huma- 
na. "  The  gloomy  ascetic  view8  which  he  took  in  this 
work  of  the  world  and  of  human  naturę  show  a  mind 
filled  with  contempt  for  all  worldly  motives  of  action, 
and  not  likely  to  be  restrained  in  forwarding  what  he 
considered  to  be  his  paramount  duty  by  any  of  the  com- 
mon  feelings  of  leniency,  conciliation,  or  conoession, 
which  to  a  man  in  his  situation  must  have  appeared 
sinful  weaknesses.  His  ambition  and  hanghUness  wcre 
apparently  not  personaL  His  interest  seems  to  have 
been  totally  merged  in  what  he  considered  the  sacred 
right  of  his  see,  *univer8al  supremacy,'  and  the  sincer- 
ity  of  his  conviction  is  shown  by  the  steady,  uncompro- 
mising  tenor  of  his  conduct^  and  by  a  like  uniformity  of 
sentiments  and  tonę  throughout  his  writings,  and  espe- 
cially  his  numerous  letters."  The  exteraal  circum- 
ttances  of  his  time  also  furthered  Innooent^s  view8,  and 
'  enabled  him  to  make  his  pontificate  the  most  marked 


in  the  annals  of  Romę;  the  colminating  point  of  the 
temporal  as  well  as  the  spiritual  supremacy  of  the  Ro- 
man see.    **  The  empeior  Henry  YI,  king  of  Itdy,  nd 
also  of  Sicily,  had  latdy  died,  and  rival  candidateś  were 
dispating  for  the  crown  of  Germany,  while  CoostoM 
of  Sicily,  Henry*s  widów,  was  left  r^ent  of  Sialj  and 
Apulia  in  the  name  of  her  infant  son  Frederick  IL    In- 
nocent, asserting  hu  claim  of  suserainty  over  the  king- 
dom  of  Sidly,  cooflrmed  the  regency  to  Constance,  bot- 
at  the  same  time  obtained  from  her  a  surrender  of  all 
disputed  points  conoerning  the  pontifical  pretenaoos. 
over  those  fiue  territories.    Con^ance  dying  ahortly 
after,  Innocent  himself  aasmned  the  regency  during 
Frederick's  minority.    At  Romę,  availing  himself  of  the 
vacancy  of  the  imperial  throne,  he  bestowed  the  in^-eiti- 
ture  on  the  prefect  of  Romę,  whom  he  madę  to  sweir 
allegiance  to  himself,  thus  putting  an  end  to  the  fonncr, 
though  often  duded  daim  ofthe  imperial  autbońty  ora 
that  dty.    In  like  manner,  being  (ayored  by  the  peopte, 
ever  jealous  ofthe  dominion  of  foreignen^  he  diove  airar 
the  imperial  feudatories,  such  as  Conrad,  dnke  of  Spokd 
and  count  of  Assisi,  and  Marcualdus,  marquis  of  Anoaus, 
and  took  possession  of  those  prorincea  in  the  name  of 
the  Roman  see.    He  likewise  daimed  the  exarchat<  of 
Ravenna;  but  the  archbishop  of  that  dty  aaserted  his 
own  prior  rights,  and  Innocent,  says  the  anonymoos  bi- 
ographer,  *  prudently  deferred  the  enforcement  of  his 
claims  to  a  morę  fitdng  opportunity.'    The  towns  of 
Tuscany,  with  the  excepdon  of  Pisa,  threw  off  their  al- 
legiance to  the  empire,  and  formed  a  league  with  Inno- 
cent for  their  mutual  support.    It  was  on  this  oocasaon 
that  Innocent  wrote  that  famous  letter  in  which  he  as- 
serts  that,  'as  God  created  two  Inminańes,  one  superior 
for  the  day,  and  the  other  inferior  for  the  njght,whidi 
last  owes  its  splendor  entirely  to  the  ifast,  so  he  has  dis- 
poeed  that  the  regal  dignity  should  be  but  a  reflcction 
of  the  splendor  of  the  pt4>al  authorify,  and  entiidy  aub- 
ordinate  to  it' "    It  was  in  the  affairs  of  Gennan>\  faow- 
ever,  that  Innocenta  position  moat  deariy  manifested 
the  greatnesB  of  the  papai  power  tfver  the  deetinies  of 
the  world.     Setdng  himself  up  as  supremę  aibitntfor 
between  the  two  dumants  who  were  contending  for  the 
imperial  crown,  he  decided  (in  1201)  in  faror  of  Otho, 
because  he  desoended  from  ^a  raoe  (well)  derotcd  to 
the  Church,"  with  the  condition  that  the  di^ated  con- 
oession of  the  oountess  Mathilda  be  whoUy  leaigDcd  to 
the  dedsions  of  the  holy  see ;  and,  as  a  natund  conce- 
quence,  heproceeded  at  the  same  time  to  excommunicatfl 
Otho'8  rivd,  Philip.    In  spite  of  a  deterroined  resictance 
of  Philip  and  his  iriends,  which  for  a  time  seemed  ał- 
moet  to  proye  succeasful,  but  which  ihially  ended  in  the 
assassination  of  Philip^  Innocent*s  triumph  in  Gennany 
was  complete,  and  his  rassal  emperor  Otho  was  madę 
temporal  lord  of  the  West.     But  a  further  triumph 
crowned  the  effbrts  of  Innocent  in  Geraiany  only  a  abort 
time  after.    Otho,  incurring  the  dispLeasure  of  the  pope 
by  his  estrangement  from  the  papai  see,  waa  exooDunii- 
nicated  and  deposed  in  1210,  and  Innocent*8  own  ward. 
Frederick  of  Sicily,  was  brought  forward  as  a  candidafi* 
for  the  racated  throne,  and  finally  crowned  cunictcg  at 
Aix-la-ChapeUe,  with  the  approval  ofthe  foortb  Lateias 
Council  (AJ).  1215\     *'For  the  second  time  Irnioorat 
was  triumphant  in  Gemiany.    Twice  he  had  decided 
an  imperial  election.    Against  one  of  the  empcrma 
whom  he  supported  he  had  madę  his  sentenoe  of  ex- 
communication  and  depoeition  valid ;  the  oiher  he  had 
put  forward,  intending  him  to  be  a  merę  puppet  and  i»- 
strament  in  his  own  hands"  (Rdchd).     But^  if  Inno- 
cent proved  himsdf  a  great  stateaman,  it  must  be  coa- 
ceded  also  that  he  was  very  mnch  unlike  many  of  his 
predecesBors,  rery  strict  and  uncompromisinf:  in  hia  no- 
tions  of  disdpline  and  morality.    IrreguUurity  tod  ve- 
nality  were  repressed  everywhere  as  soon  aa  disooroed. 
Thus  he  excommnnicated  Philip  Augostoa  of  France 
because  he  had  repudiated  hia  wUe  Ingerbiii;ga  of  Dea- 
mark,  and  had  married  Agn^s  de  Menmie.     **  The  in- 
terdict  waa  laid  on  France :  the  dead  lay  unburied ;  the 


INNOCENT  ni 


601 


INNOCENT  ra 


lŁTizigweredepfivedoftheserviGe9ofTeligłon.  Against 
an  aittagonist  anned  with  such  weapons,  e^en  Philip 
AiignsŁuii,  bnve  and  firm  though  he  was,  was  not  a 
match.  The  idea  of  the  papai  power  had  too  firmly 
taken  hołd  of  men*s  minds;  the  French  would  gladly 
have  lemained  trae  to  their  king;  they  dared  not  dis- 
obey  the  vicar  of  Christ.  Beddes,  as  in  the  eaae  of 
Nicholas  I's  intenrention  with  Lothair,  Innocent*8  pow- 
er was  exerd8ed  on  behalf  of  morality.  Philip  was 
obliged  to  take  hack  his  divorced  wife,  not  yielding,  as 
ODC  of  his  predeoesBors,  Rohert  I  of  France  (996-1061), 
had  done,  to  a  feeble  saperstition;  not  subdued,  like 
Henrjr  IV,  by  intemal  dissenmons,  but  yanąuished  in 
open  fight  with  an  opponent  stionger  than  himself." 
As  we  haye  already  said,  the  extemal  circumstances  of 
that  day  aeem  to  have  fayored  Innocent,  and  enabled 
him  '*  to  assert  without  concealment  the  idea  of  papai 
theocracy  ;**  that  the  pope  was  "  the  yicegerent  of  God 
npon  caith;*'  that  to  him  "was  intrusted  by  St,  Peter 
the  goyemment  not  only  of  the  whole  Church,  but  of 
the  whole  worid.**  "  Next  to  God,  hc  was  to  be  eo  hon- 
ofed  by  princes  that  their  claim  to  rule  was  lost  if  they 
failed  to  serye  him ;  princes  might  haye  power  on  earth, 
bat  fuńests  had  power  in  heayen;  the  daim  of  princes 
to  nile  rested  *  on  haman  might,  that  of  priests  on  diyine 
oidinance.'  In  short,  all  the  prerogatiyes  which  had  once 
attached  to  the  emperors  were  wrested  from  them,  and 
tranaferred,  with  additions,  to  the  popes"  (Reichel).  The 
same  fate  that  had  befallen  Philip  Angustus  threatened 
king  Leon  of  Spain  for  a  marriage  of  his  own  cousin,  the 
daughter  of  the  king  of  PortugaL  Not  willing  to  sub- 
mit  to  the  pope^s  decińon  against  such  a  maniage,  and 
sopported  in  his  resolution  by  his  father-in-law,  exoom< 
munication  was  first  resorted  to,  foUowed  by  an  interdict 
on  both  kingdoma.  Not  morę  successful,  though  en- 
gaged  in  a  much  better  caose,  was  John,  king  of  England. 
John  haying  appointed  John  de  Gray,  bishop  of  Nor- 
wich,  to  the  yacant  see  of  Canterbiuy,  Innocent  would 
not  approre  the  selection,  and  bestowed  the  canonical 
inyeatiture  upon  Stephen  Langton ;  and  the  monks  of 
Canterbary,  of  coorse,  could  and  would  receiye  no  other 
archbtshop.  In  a  fit  of  ragę,  John  droye  away  the  monks 
and  seized  their  property,  for  which  the  whole  king^om 
was  laid  under  an  interdict;  and,  as  John  continued  re- 
firactory,  the  pope  pronounoed  his  depodtion,  released 
his  yaasals  from  their  oath  of  allegiance,  and  called  upon 
all  Christian  princes  and  barona  to  inyade  England  and 
dethione  the  impious  tjnnant,  promising  them  the  remis- 
sion  of  their  sins.  By  the  consequent  preparation  of 
Philip  Augustus  of  France  to  carry  out  the  pope's  inyi- 
tation,  John  was  not  only  forced  to  yield  the  point  in 
dispute,  agreeing  to  submit  to  the  pope's  will  and  pay 
damages  to  the  banished  clergy,  but  he  eyen  took  an 
oath  of  feaity  to  the  Roman  see,  and  at  the  same  time 
deliyered  to  the  papai  enyoy  a  charter  testifying  that 
he  sorrendered  to  pope  Innocent  and  his  successors  for- 
eyer  the  kingdom  of  England  and  lordship  of  Ireland, 
to  be  held  as  fief^  of  the  holy  see  by  John  and  his  suc- 
cessors, on  condłtion  of  their  paying  an  annual  tribute 
of  700  marks  of  8ilver  for  EngUnd  and  800  for  Ireland. 
Nor  were  England  and  Sicily  the  only  countries  oyer 
which  Innocent  acquired  the  rights  of  a  feudal  suzerain. 
**  In  order  to  make  his  crown  independent  of  his  power- 
ful  yaasals,  and  to  baffle  the  claim  to  supremacy  of  the 
king  of  Castik,  Peter  II  of  Aragon  yolantarily  madę 
hźmself  tributaiy  to  the  pope,  binding  himself  and  his 
sacceasors  to  the  annual  payment  of  200  pieces  of  gold. 
In  fetom,  he  was  crowned  by  Innocent  at  Romę,  and 
took  an  oath  to  the  pope  as  his  feudal  suzerain.  From 
Innocent,  too,  as  his  liege  lord,  John,  duke  of  Bayaria, 
aoeepted  the  kingly  crown.  Denmark  looked  to  him, 
and  obtained  from  him  justice  and  redress  for  the  injury 
inflieted  on  her  royal  danghter;  and  his  legate  was  dis- 
patched  to  Iceiand,  to  wam  the  inhabitants  not  to  sub- 
mit to  the  exoommunicated  and  apostatę  priest  Seyero. 
Pcffhaps  it  was  well  that  in  those  ages  there  should  be 
•OBM  recognised  tribunal  and  fountain  foi  royal  honor; 


and  in  times  of  tuibulenoe  princes  probably  gained  morę 
than  they  lost  by  becoming  the  yassals  of  the  pontiffs. 
Still,  such  power  yested  in  the  hands  of  an  ecdesiastic 
was  a  new  thing  in  the  Church,  and  placed  beyond  dis- 
pute  the  greatness  which  the  papai  power  had  reached" 
(Reichel). 

If,  as  we  haye  seen,  Innocent  III  would  admit  of  no 
compromises  with  immorality  and  irregularity,  he  was 
certainly  stem  and  eyen  morę  unflinching  in  his  deal- 
ings  with  all  those  who  separated  themsdyes  from  the 
body  of  the  Romish  Church.  **To  him,  ereiy  offence 
against  religion  was  a  crime  against  society,  and,  in 
his  ideał  Christian  republic,  every  heresy  was  a  re-> 
bellion  which  it  was  the  duty  of  the  ndere  to  resist  and 
repreas."  To  extirpate  this,  ^  the  deadliest  of  sins,**  he 
sent  two  legates,  with  the  title  of  inąuisitors,  to  France. 
One  of  them,  Castelnau,  haying  become  odious  by  his 
seyerities,  was  murdered  near  Toulouse,  upon  which  In- 
nocent ordered  a  crusade  against  the  Albigenses  (q.  y.), 
excommunicated  Ra3rmond,  count  of  Toulouse,  for  abet- 
ting  them,  and  bestowed  his  domains  on  Simon,  count 
of  Montfort  He  addressed  himself  to  all  the  faithful, 
exhorting  them  **  to  flght  strenuously  against  the  min- 
isters  of  the  old  serpent,**  and  promising  them  tho  king- 
dom of  heayen  in  reward.  He  sent  two  legates  to  at- 
tend  the  crusade,  and  their  letters  or  reports  to  him  are 
oontained  in  the  collection  of  his  **Epistles"  (especially 
Epistoła  108  of  B.  xii,  in  which  the  legate  Ainaldus  re- 
lates  the  taking  of  Beziers,  and  the  massacre  of  80,000 
indiyiduals  of  every  age,  8ex,  and  condition).  Innocent, 
howeyer,  who  did  not  liye  to  see  the  end  of  the  confla* 
gration  he  had  kindled,  can  haidly  be  held  responsible 
for  the  fearful  exoes8es  into  which  it  ran.  In  1216  he 
conyened  a  generał  council  at  the  Lateran,  in  which  he 
inculcated  the  neoessity  of  a  new  crusade,  which  he  re- 
garded  not  merely  as  lawful,  but  eyen  a  most  glorious 
undertaking  in  behalf  of  religion  and  piety.  He  also 
launched  fresh  anathemas  against  heretics,  determined 
seyeral  points  of  doctrine  and  discipline,  especially  con- 
ceming  auricular  confession,  and  sanctioncd  the  es- 
tablishment of  the  two  great  mendicant  monastic  or- 
ders,  the  Dominicans  and  Franciscans,  the  former  to  ex- 
tirpate  hercsj',  and  the  latter  to  preach  sound  doctrinee, 
and  to  assist  the  parochial  clergy  in  the  execution  of 
their  dudea.  For  if  ever  watchfuliiess  was  required  by 
the  clergy,  it  was  at  this  time.  "It  was  in  this  yeiy 
century  that  the  darknoss  of  the  Middle  Ages  began  to 
disappear.  It  was  during  this  yery  reign  of  Innocent 
III  that  the  gray  dawn  of  twilight  gave  the  first  prom- 
ise  of  modem  inteUigcnce  and  modem  independenoe. 
.  .  .  Nothing  oould  be  morę  evident  than  that  this  spir- 
it  of  independenoe,  that  was  eyerywhere  raising  its  men- 
acing  front,  if  not  either  subjugated  or  controUed,  would 
reyolutionize  the  whole  stmcturc  of  society,  both  feudal 
and  ecclesiastical.  To  oontrol  or  subjugate  the  new 
spirit  was  therefore  the  great  problem  presented  to  the 
Church  of  the  18th  century"  (Prof.  C.  K.  Adams,  in  the 
New-Engkmdery  July,  1870,  p.  876).  But  if,  by  estab- 
lishing  these  mendicant  orders,  Innocent  III  had  pro- 
yided  himself  with  willing  minions  to  spread  oyer  Eu- 
ropę, and  to  purify  the  Church  from  *'  modem  intelli- 
gence"  and  "  modem  independence,"  he  had  certainly,  at 
the  same  time,  created  for  himself  an  opposition  which 
afterwards  became  a  still  greater  danger  to  the  hierar- 
chy itself,  by  the  opposition  which  these  mendicant  or- 
ders created  among  the  laity  against  the  parochia!  cler- 
gy (compaie  Reichel,  p.  576  8q.).  It  remains  for  ui» 
only  to  add  one  of  the  greatest  achieyements  of  Inno- 
cent*s  day,  undertaken  by  him,  no  doubt,  that  nothing 
might  be  wanting  to  the  completeness  of  his  author- 
ity  throughout  the  then  known  world,  yiz.  the  estab- 
lishment of  the  Latin  kingdom  at  Jenisalero,  and  the 
Latin  conquest  of  Constantinople,  which  Ffoulkes  (Chris* 
tendom^t  Dimsums^  ii,  226),  while  yet  a  communicant 
of  the  Roman  Catholic  Church,  does  not  hesitato  to 
pronounce  "one  of  the  foulest  acta  eyer  perpetrated 
under  the  garb  of  religion  in  Christian  times ;  a  sony 


INNOCENT  m 


592 


INNOCENT  V 


oooiiection,  unąuestionably,  for  one  of  his  high  pofiition 
and  commanding  abilitleB.**  At  the  veiy  commence- 
ment  of  his  pontificate,  Innocent  began  writing  epistles 
(209  of  R  xi)  to  the  patriarch  of  Constantinople,  and 
other  letters  to  the  emperor  Alexiu8,  with  the  yiew  of 
inducing  the  former  to  acknowledge  the  supremacy  of 
the  see  of  Romę ;  and  although  he  failed  in  thls,  he  had, 
80on  afler,  by  an  unexpected  tum  of  erenta,  the  satis- 
laction  of  consecrating  a  prelate  of  the  Western  Church 
as  patriarch  of  Constantinople ;  but  this  by  no  means 
resulted,  as  Innocent  most  probably  desired,  in  a  reuniou 
of  churches  or  Christiana ;  it  was  only  followed  by  an 
increase  of  Church  revenue&  The  Cnisaders,  whom  In- 
nocent had  sent  forth,  as  he  thought,  for  the  reconąuest 
of  the  Uoly  tanA,  after  taking  Zara  from  the  king  of 
Hungary,  for  which  they  were  sererely  oensured  by  the 
pope,  proceeded  to  attack  Constantinople,  and  overthrew 
the  Greek  empire.  Ali  this  was  done  without  Inno- 
centa sanction ;  but  when  BaUlwin  wrote  to  him,  ao- 
quainting  him  with  the  fuli  suocess  of  the  expedition, 
Innocent,  in  his  answer  to  the  marquis  of  Montferrat, 
forgare  the  Crusaders  in  consideration  of  the  tiiumph 
which  they  had  eecured  to  the  holy  Church  over  the 
Eastem  empire.  Innocent  sent  also  legates  to  Cało  Jo- 
hannes, prince  of  the  Bulgarians,  who  acknowledged  his 
allegiance  to  the  Koman  see  (Innocentii  III  Epistoła). 
One  year  after  the  Lateran  Council,  *'one  of  the  latest 
acts,  and  by  far  the  most  momentous  in  the  pontifkate 
of  Innocent,"  he  was  seized  with  a  fatal  illneas,  and  died 
July  16, 121G,  in  the  very  pńme  of  life,  broken  down  by 
oyerwork,  for  "  the  work  of  the  whole  world  was  upon 
him,  as  may  be  secn  from  his  letters,  not  one  of  which 
exhibits  the  impress  of  any  other  mind  than  his  own.*' 
In  Innocent  III  the  Bomish  Church  lost  one  of  the  most 
extraordinary  characters,  and  in  seyeral  respects  the 
most  illustńous,  as  he  was  certainly  one  of  the  most  am- 
bitłous  she  has  ever  honored  with  the  pontifical  digiuty. 
His  pontificate  may  be  fairly  considercd  to  have  been 
the  period  of  the  highest  power  of  the  Roman  see.  At 
his  death,  **  England  and  France,  Germany  and  Italy, 
Norway  and  Hungary,  all  felt  the  power  of  Innocent ; 
Nayarre,  Castile,  and  Portugal  acknowledged  his  sway ; 
eyen  Constantinople  owned  his  supremacy,  and  owned 
it  to  her  cost*"  (Reichel,  p.  247 ;  compare  Hallam,  Middle 
AffeSf  YoL  ii,  pt.  i,  eh.  vii,  p.  199).  His  wories,  consisting 
principally  of  letters  and  sennons,  and  the  remarkable 
treatise  On  the  Miwry  oftke  Condiiion  o/Man,  above 
alluded  to,  were  published  in  two  yols.  folio  (Par.  1682), 
See  Baroniua,  Afmahs;  Tig^f  Breciarium  Higtor^-^riti- 
cum;  Lannes,  Histoire  du  PorUificat  du  Papę  Iwiac.  Ul 
<Paris,  1741, 12mo) ;  Fabricius,  BibL  LaL  med.  et  urf',  alt. 
iv,  98  sq. ;  Jłisłory  of  the  Christ,  Church,  in  Encydop. 
Metrop.  vol.  iii,  eh.  i ;  Moeheim,  CL  HisL  cent.  xii,  pL  ii, 
chap.  ii ;  Neander,  History  oflhe  Christian  Bdigion  and 
Church,  iv,  43,  75, 178, 199,  207,  268,  269,  270,  272,  806, 
etc ;  Hoefer,  Nouv.  Biog,  Genkr,  xxv,  890 ;  Bohringer, 
Kirche  Christi  in  Biographien,  ii,  2,  321 ;  Reichel,  See 
ofRome  in  the  Middle  Agtt  (Lond.  1870, 8vo),  p.  242  sq. 
Milman,  IM.  Christ,  (see  Index) ;  Bower,  History  ofthe 
Popes,  vi,  188  sq. ;  Weteer  u.  Welte,  Kirchen-Lei,  y,  631 
8q. ;  English  Cycloptedia,  s.  y. ;  Chambers,  Cyciopadia^ 
8.  y. ;  Hurter,  Oeschichte  Itm,  III  u,  seiner  Zeityenossen 
(Hamburg,  1884-42, 4  yols. ;  Sd  cd.  1845  8q.). 

Innocent  HI  (6).  Under  this  name  we  also  find 
an  anti-pope  in  the  Roman  Church.  He  was  a  descend- 
ant  of  the  Frangipani  family,  and  is  distinguished  from 
the  eminent  pope  of  that  name  by  the  sumame  Landus, 
Afler  the  death  of  Hadrian  he  contested  the  succession 
of  Alexander  II,  who  succeeded  in  securing  his  person, 
and  Innocent  was  imprisoned  in  the  monasteiy  Cava. 
Thus  ended  a  scbism  which  had  lasted  twenty  years, 
under  four  successiye  riyals  for  the  papai  throne.  (J. 
IŁ  W.) 

Innocent  ry  (Simbaldo  de'  Fieschi,  of  Genoa)  was 
elected  as  the  8ucce88or  of  Celestine  lY  in  the  year  1248. 
In  the  preceding  bitter  ąuarrels  between  Gregory  IX 
and  the  emperor  Frcdcrick  II,  cardinal  Sinibaldo  had 


shown  himself  rather  iziendly  towaida  the  < 
the  imperial  courtiers,  on  reoeiving  the  news  of  hU  ex- 
altation,  were  rąjoidng  at  it ;  but  the  experieiioed  Frad- 
erick  checked  them  by  remarking,  **I  haye  now  lost  a 
friendly  cardinal,  to  find  another  hoatile  pope:  no  pope 
can  be  a  Ghibelline."  Anxioua,  howeyer,  to  be  leliered 
from  excommunication,  Frederick  madę  adyancea  to  the 
new  pope,  and  offered  oonditions  adyantageous  to  the 
Roman  see;  but  Innocent  remained  inflexible,  and,  aod- 
denly  leaying  Romę,  went  to  Łyons,  and  there  eom- 
moned  a  ooundl  in  1245,  to  which  he  inyited  the  empe- 
ror. Thaddeus  of  Sessa  appeaied  before  the  oouncil  to 
answer  to  the  charges  brought  by  the  pope  againat  Fied- 
erick ;  and,  afler  much  wrangling,  Innocent  ezconunn- 
nicated  and  dethroned  the  emperor,  on  the  groand  of 
peijury,  aacrilege,  heresy,  and  defianoe  of  the  Cbmch, 
commanded  the  German  princes  to  elect  a  new  emp^ 
ror,  and  reseryed  the  dispoaal  of  the  kingdom  of  Sioly 
to  himself.  In  Italy  the  only  conaequence  was  that  the 
war  which  already  raged  between  the  Guelpha  and 
Ghibellinescontinuedfiercer  than  before;  inGennanya 
contemptible  rival  to  Frederick  was  set  np  in  the  per- 
son of  Henry,  landgraye  of  Thuringia,  who  was  defeaied 
by  Conrad,  Frederick'8  eon.  Frederick*s  siidden  death 
in  Apulia,  A.D.  1250,  led  Innocent  to  return  to  Ita^,  and 
to  offer  the  crown  of  Sicily  to  aeyeial  princes,  ooe  of 
whom,  Richard  of  Comwall,  obsenred  that  the  pope*a  of- 
fer ^  was  much  like  making  him  a  present  of  the  moon.** 
Conrad,  the  son  of  Frederick,  who  had  so  yaliantly  and 
so  sttccessfully  defended  his  cause,  was  excommnnicated ; 
but  he  gaye  little  heed  to  this  act  of  Innooenfa,  and 
even  went  into  Italy  in  1252,  and  took  pofinrfwiwi  of 
Apulia  and  Sicily.  Two  yeais  after  he  died,  and  his 
brother  Manfred,  who  became  regent,  in  a  like  manoner 
bafiled  both  the  intrigues  and  the  open  attacka  of  the 
conrt  of  Romę.  Innocent  himself  died  soon  afler,  at  the 
end  of  1254,  at  Romę,  leaving  Italy  and  Germany  in  the 
greatest  confuaion  in  conseąuence  of  his  outrageona  tj* 
ranny,  and  his  unbending  hostility  to  the  whole  hoine 
of  Swabia.  He  was  succeeded  by  A]£xander  IV.  He 
wrote  Apparatus  super  decreiales  (foL,  oflen  repointed) ; 
— Be  Potestaże  Ecdesiasticum  et  Jurisdicdoite  ImperU: — 
Offidum  ta  octavis  fetti  Natiritatia  B.  Marim : — Inter- 
pretaiiones  in  Vetus  Testamentym,  Nineteen  letteia  of 
his  are  giyen  by  Łabbe,  ConaL  xi,  598-682 ;  forty-«ig^ 
by  Ughelli,  ItaUa  Sacra ;  and  fiy e  by  Ducheane,  Historim 
Erancorum  ScriptoreSy  y,  412, 86L  See  Łabbe  and  Coa> 
sart.  Sacrosancta  ConcUia,  xi,  597-716;  Bruya,  ffitł,  dem 
PapeSf  iii,  199 ;  Fleur^',  Histor.  Ecclesiastigue  ;  Muimtaii, 
Rerum,  Iłalicarum  Scriptores,  iii,  589-592;  Ph.  de  Mot> 
nay,  Bisł,  de  la  Papauti,  p.  876-404;  Ciaconius,  Kate  et 
res  gestm  Pontificum  Bomanorum,  ii,  99;  Paolo  Panaa, 
Vita  delgran  Poni^fice  Irmooeneio  Ouarto  (Naplea^  1601, 
4to) ;  Reichel,  See  of  Borne  m  the  Middle  Ayes  (London, 
1870, 8yo),  p.  264  sq. ;  Hoefer, iVbuv.  Biog.  Genłrate,  xxt, 
906 ;  Engl,  Cydop, ;  Mosheim,  CK  Ilisł,  cent.  xiii,  pt.  ii, 
chap.  ii ;  Neander,  Bistory  oftke  Christian  Rt^gum  ani 
Church,  iy,  76, 183 ;  Herzog,  RealrEncyUopSdie,  iri,  668. 
Innocent  V  {Peter  of  Tarantatia,  also  called 
Peter  of  Champayni  or  of  Ckampagniaeo)  waa  bom 
at  Moustier,  in  Savoy,  in  1225.  He  was  eleeted  pope 
January  20, 1276,  as  successor  of  Gregory  X.  He  waa  a 
member  of  the  order  of  Freaching  Friais,  into  which  he 
had  entered  ąuite  young,  and  where  he  had  aoąuiiecl 
a  great  reputation.  He  succeeded  Thomas  Aąninaa  as 
professor  of  theology  in  the  Uniyeisity  of  Pana ;  waa 
madę  archbishop  of  Lyons  in  1272,  and  aftenraids  biahop 
of  Ostia  and  grand  penitentiaiy.  As  sooa  as  he  became 
pope  he  applied  himself  to  the  task  of  restocing  pcAoe 
to  Italy,  which  was  then  diyided  into  two  contendii^ 
factions,  under  the  leadership  of  the  Godphs  and  the 
GhibelUnes  (q.  y.),  and  in  this  he  measunbly  sooeeeifedL 
He  was  also  on  the  eye  of  indadng  the  Greek  cmpcmr, 
Michel  PaUeologus,  to  confirm  the  act  of  union  between 
the  Greek  and  Roman  churches,  drawn  up  in  the  Coob- 
cii  of  Lyons,  when  he  died  June  22, 1276,  haying  < 
pled  the  papai  throne  only  fiyemonths.   He  wrote « 


INNOCENT  VI 


593 


INNOCENT  Vin 


mentarieB  Super  iv  Kbro*  Senteittiarum  (TouIoiiBe,  1652, 
8  YOJflL  foL) : — Super  Pentaieuehum ;  tuper  iMcam;  tu- 
per  Epistcias  Pauli  (Cologne,  1478;  Antw.  1617,  foL); 
and  variou8  treatiaes :  De  Umtate  Forma ;  De  Materia 
C(di:  De  AHienwtate  Forma;  De  InteUeotu  et  Fo/im- 
iate  i  and  some  other  MS.  woika,  the  titlea  of  which  are 
giTeo  by  Qtietif,  Scripiorea  OrdiaU  Pradicaiontm  (Par- 
ią  1719, 2  Yols.  foL).  See  Labbe,  ConciUa^  xi,  1007 ;  Ci»- 
ooniua,  Viim  et  rea  geata  Pout\/icum  Romanorum,  ii,  208 ; 
Fleuiy,  IJigł.  EccUsia$łiquey  L  xviii,  chap.  lxxxvi ;  Du- 
ciwsne,  Uist,  dee  Papeti,  ii,  206 ;  Muratori,  Rerum  Itali- 
carum  Scripioreś,  iii,  605 ;  Bower,  Hitt.  o/ the  PopeSf  vi, 
801,802;  Uerzog.Real-Encyklop,  \ij6e>9;  Hoefer,  A*bi(9. 
Bioffr,  GiniraU,  xxv,  908 ;  Moeheim,  EocUi.  HitU  cent 
xiii,  pt  ii,  eh.  ii. 

Innooent  VI  (^Etiame  d* Albert  or  Auberi)^  a 
Frenchman,  eucoeeded  Clement  YI  in  1352.  He  resided 
at  Avigiioii,  like  hia  immediate  piedecesson ;  bat,  un- 
like  them,  he  put  a  check  to  the  disorden  and  scan- 
dala  of  that  coort,  which  have  been  so  strongly  depicted 
by  Petiazch,  YiHani,  and  other  contemporary  wiiten. 
He  reformed  the  abuses  of  the  reeervationa  of  benefices, 
and  enforoed  the  resideuce  of  biahops  on  their  eees. 
His  immediate  predeceasora  having  lost  their  influence 
in  the  States  of  the  Chorch,  Innocent  VI  detennined  on 
RCDDqaeiing  theee  territories,  and  succenfully  leoccu- 
pied,  with  the  aniatance  of  the  warlike  cardinal  i£gid- 
ius  AlbomoK,  the  variouB  provinoes  of  the  papai  state 
which  had  been  seized  by  petty  tyranta.  He  then  aent 
back  to  Borne  the  former  demagogue  Cola  di  Rienzo, 
who,  being  still  dear  to  the  people,  repressed  the  inao- 
koce  of  the  lawlesa  barona,  but  who,  beooming  himself 
incoxicated  with  his  power,  commiŁted  acta  of  wanton 
crnelty,  upon  which  the  people  roae  and  murdeied  him 
in  1854.  In  1358  the  emperor  Charles  lY  was  crowned 
at  Bome  by  a  legate  deputed  by  pope  Innocent  for  the 
porpoae.  Innocent  died  at  Avignon,  at  an  advanoed 
age,  in  1862.  It  was  during  his  pontificate  that  the 
mendicant  orders  were  peraecuted  in  England,  and  de- 
dared  to  be  an  unchristian  order  by  Richard,  arch- 
bishop  of  Armagh  and  primate  of  Ireland,  in  a  book 
which  he  published  in  defence  of  the  curates  or  parish 
prieats,  entatled  De/ensorium  Curatorum,  Of  course  In- 
nocent rallied  to  the  defenae  of  the  mendicants.  He 
reprimanded  the  archbishop,  and  confirmed  anew  all  the 
prińloges  which  had  been  granted  by  his  predeoessors 
to  men  of  that  order.  A  letter  of  his  is  given  by  Labbe, 
CoMdUa,  xi,  1930;  foor  by  Ughelli,  Italia  Sacra;  and 
two  hundred  and  lifty  by  Martene,  Thesemrue  notms  A  n^ 
ecdotorum,  ii,  843-1072.  See  Duchesne,  IJist.  des  Papee, 
ii,  261 ;  Fleuiy,  UisL  EccUnasUqu€y  L  xx,  chap.  lxxxvi ; 
SisDMmdi,  Hist.  dee  Francait,  il,  897-596 ;  Herzog,  Real- 
Emofldop,  vi,  670;  EngL  Cydop.;  Hoefer,  Nouv,  Biogr, 
Gineraie,  xxv,  910;  Neander,  Iliet,  o/ the  Christian  Re- 
Ugiam  and  Churck,  v,  44;  Mosheim,  Ch.  łlist.  cent.  xiv, 
puii,ch.u;  Schtoflser,  FK(e/^McA.bk.iv,ch.i,408,618; 
Bower,  Hist.  ofthe  Popes,  vi,  482  są. 

Innocent  VII  (cardiual  Cosmo  de  Migliaraii,  of 
Suhnona),  who  had  been  appointed  aichbishop  of  Ka- 
vcnoa  and  bishop  of  fiologna  by  Urban  VI,  was  elected 
by  the  Itaiian  prelates  as  the  soocesaor  of  Boniface  IX 
in  1404.  At  this  time  *"  the  great  Western  schism"  agi- 
tated  the  Romish  Chorch,  the  French  cardinals  support- 
iag  a  iival  pope,  Benedict  XIII  (q.  v.),  who  hekl  his 
oourt  at  Avignon,  acknowledged  by  a  part  of  Europę. 
After  the  election  of  Innocent,  a  tumult  broke  out  in 
Borne,  excited  by  the  Colonna  and  by  Ladislaus,  king 
of  Naples,  which  oUiged  the  pope  to  eacape  to  Viterbo. 
I^slana,  however,  failed  in  his  attempt  upon  Romę ; 
•lyi  Innocent,  having  retomed  to  his  capital,  exoommu- 
nicated  him.  Innooent  died  Nov.  6, 1406,  after  having 
madę  his  peace  with  liadielaua.  Some  think  that  he 
was  poiwned.  He  is  spoken  of  as  a  roan  who  poasesaed 
great  leaming  and  virtne,  and  as  govemed  by  the  purest 
motives  in  all  his  acta;  hostile  to  all  luxury,  avari- 
Cłooanesa,  and  simony— evi]s  which  were  one  and  all 
pOMeaaed  by  his  rival  Benedict,  and  by  his  own  prede- 
IV.— Pp 


ceasor  Bonifaoe  (oomp.  Reichel,  See  qfRome  in  the  MO- 
dle  Ages,  p.  446  są.).  The  chaige  which  some  lay  to 
him  that  he  did  not  keep  the  promise  which  he  gave 
OD  his  accession  to  the  papai  see  that  he  would,  if  his 
iival  should  be  dedared  the  proper  incumbent,  vacate 
the  papai  throne,  aeems  not  well  founded.  It  is  true 
Benedict  proposed  a  conference  for  the  alleged  purpoee 
of  restoring  peace  and  union  to  the  Church  of  Romę, 
which  Innocent  did  not  agree  to,  but  this  was  done  be- 
cause  Innooent  knew  that  Benedict  did  not  eameatly 
desire  it.  He  wrote  Oralio  de  EccksiasUca  Unione; 
Approbatio  reguła  pcUrum  et  sororum  de  pemtentia  or- 
dmis  S.  Domittici;  and  a  letter  of  his  is  published  by 
Ughelli,  ItaKa  Sacra,  i,  1881.  See  Labbe,  Coneilia,  id, 
2082;  Fleuiy,  Hist,  EccUsioMUąue,  L  xx,  ch.  xcix ;  Du- 
chesne,  Hist,  des  Papes,  ii,  299;  Sismondi,  Histoire  des 
Francttis,  xii,  211 ;  Maimbouig,  HisL  du  grand  ScMsme 
d^Occident ;  Bruni  d'Arezzo,  De  Rebus  ItalieiSy  and  Epis' 
tola  Familiares;  Herzog,  Retil-Encgklop,  vi,  671 ;  Mos- 
heim, Ch,  Hist,  cent.  xv,  pt.  ii,  ch.  ii ;  Hefele,  Conei^ioi- 
gesehichłey  vi,  748  są.;  Hoefer,  Nout,  Biog,  GhUr.  xxv, 
911 ;  Neander,  Hist,  qfthe  Chritt,  Religion  and  Church, 
V,  70,  247 ;  Bower,  Hittorg  ofthe  Popes,  yii,  91  aq.  (J. 
H.W.) 

Innooent  VIII  (cardinal  Gumnuu  Battista  Cibo), 
a  Genoeee  of  Greek  deeoent,  waa  during  his  youth  in 
the  aervice  of  Alfonso  of  Aragon,  king  of  Naples,  but 
anbseąuently  entered  the  Church,  Paul  II  giving  him 
the  bishopric  of  Savone.  His  conduct  was  disgracefuUy 
irregular :  he  had  8even  illegitimate  children  by  diiler- 
ent  women,  and  was,  besidee,  married  when  he  took  or- 
ders. At  the  death  of  Sixtu8  IV  serious  troubles  broke 
out  in  Romę.  The  election  was  warmly  contested,  and 
among  the  chief  agitatora  was  chancellor  Borgia,  who 
afterwaids  attained  an  unenviable  oelebrity  as  Alexander 
VI;  but  the  manoBuvTes  in  favor  of  Cibo  proved  at  laat 
aucceasfuL  Innocent  had  bought  the  tiara  by  meana  of 
benefloea,  legationa,  palaces,  and  large  sums  of  money, 
and  was  elected  Aug.  24,  1484.  His  first  undertaklng 
was  to  conciliate  the  Itaiian  princca,  and  to  recondle  to 
the  papai  see  all  thoee  whom  his  predecesaor  had  alien- 
ated.  Frightened^at  the  advanoe  of  Bajazct  with  hia 
Turka,  Innocent  wrote  to  the  Christian  prinoes  for  help 
in  men  or  money  to  resist  the  inva8ion.  Immense  sums 
were  at  once  forwarded  to  Romę  from  divers  countries; 
but  the  pope,  pretending  that  he  could  not  act  withont 
the  assistance  ofthe  German  prinoes  (who  were  then 
divided  by  the  ąuairels  between  Mathias,  king  of  Hun- 
gary,  and  empeior  Frederick,  Albert  of  Brandenburg 
and  Otho  of  Bavaria,  etc.),  used  the  funds  thus  obtained 
to  war  against  Ferdinand  I,  king  of  Naples,  who  refused 
to  pay  him  the  usual  tribute.  The  pope  favored  the  le- 
volted  Neapolitan  barons  against  Ferdinand  I  of  Naples, 
in  conseąuenoe  of  which  the  troops  of  Ferdinand  rav- 
aged  the  territory  of  Romę;  but  through  the  mediation 
of  Lorenzo  de  Medici  and  of  the  dnke  Sforza  of  Milan, 
peaoe  was  re-established  between  the  two  parties.  The 
Turks  were  still  threatening  war.  Jem,  in  order  to 
shun  the  enmity  of  his  brother  Bajazet,  had  fled  to 
Rhodes,  where  he  was  aeized  by  the  grand  master  of 
the  order  of  St.  John,  D*Aubus8on,  and  delivered  np  to 
the  pope  in  exchange  for  the  cardinal*s  hat.  The  pope 
received  Jem  with  greśt  honor,  but  took  care  to  secure 
his  person,  aa  he  would  be  an  important  hostage.  In 
this  he  was  not  mistaken,  for  Bajazet  feared  the  power 
of  his  brother,  and,  to  secure  his  throne,  he  sent  an  am- 
baaaador  to  Romę  to  offer  Innocent  a  large  aum  if  he 
would  keep  Jem  in  pnson.  The  pope  acceptcd  the  dis- 
honorable  bargain,  although  the  sułtan  of  Egypt,  who 
deaired  Jem,  aa  commander  in  chief  of  his  foroes,  to 
march  against  Bajazet,  oflGsred,  on  condition  of  his  re- 
lease,  to  restore  Jerusalem  to  the  Chiistians,  and  was 
even  ready  to  pledge  himself  to  surrender  to  the  pope 
all  the  territory  that  should  be  taken  from  the  Turks. 
Under  Innocent'8  sucoessor,  the  depraved  Alexander  VI. 
Jem  was  poisoned  hy  order  of  the  pope  (oomp.  Reichel 
^ee  of  Romę  in  the  Middk  Ages^  p.  580).    Bajazet.  of 


INNOCENT  IX 


594 


INNOCENT  X 


ooune,  Bhowed  himself  very  generous  towards  his  ac- 
oomplioe,  Innocent  YIIL  On  May  29,  1492,  he  sent 
him  the  iron  of  the  spear  with  which,  he  asBerted, 
Christ  was  pierecd  on  the  cross,  and  which  was  among 
the  booty  taken  by  Mohammed  II  after  the  down&ll 
of  Gonstantinople.  The  relic  (although  receiyed  with 
great  ceremony)  was,  unfortunately,  the  thiid  of  the 
kind  in  Europę,  for  the  emperor  of  Gennany  claimed 
to  haye  the  holy  lance  at  Nuremberg,  and  the  king  of 
Flance  in  the  Holy  Chapel  at  Paris.  Innocent  YIII 
died  July  26,  1492.  Among  the  principal  acts  of  his 
administration  are  the  confirmation,  in  1485,  of  the  or- 
der of  the  Conception,  founded  at  Toledo  by  Beatrix 
of  Sylva ;  the  canonization  of  Leopold  of  Austria  in 
1485;  the  condemnation  of  the  propositions  of  Miian- 
dola  in  1487 ;  the  union  under  the  crown  of  Spain  of  the 
thiee  military  orders  of  Calatrara,  St.  James,  and  Alcan- 
tara,  in  1488 ;  and  the  confirmation  of  the  Brother- 
hood  of  Mercy,  instituted  at  Romę  for  the  benefit  of 
condemned  crimiuals.  Two  letters  of  Innocent  are  pub- 
lished  by  Ughelli, Italia  Sacra,  i,  710;  v,  948.  Roman 
Catholic  writers  endearor  to  free  Innocent  YIII  from 
the  charge  of  gross  immorality  by  asserting  that  he  had 
ofdy  two  illegitimate  children,  and  that  they  were  bom 
before  he  was  madę  pope;  but "  the  sucoess  of  Innocent 
YIII  in  increasing  the  population  of  Romę  was  a  favor- 
ite  topie  with  the  wits  of  the  day'^  (Innocuo  priscos 
SBqnum  est  debere  Quirites.  Progenię  exhaustam  resti- 
tuit  patriam.^ — iSannazarii  Epigram,  llb.  i),  and  he  was 
graced  with  <*the  epitaph  which  dedared  that  filth, 
gluttony,  avarice,  and  sloth  lay  buried  m  his  tomb" 
(Marultus,  Epigram,  lib.  iv).  But  the  conduct  of  Inno- 
cent YIII  can  haidly  compare  with  the  career  of  his 
sucoessor,  Alexander  YI,  *^  the  most  depraved  of  all  the 
popes,  uniting  in  himself  all  the  rices  of  Innocent  YIII 
and  the  unscrupulous  family  ambition  of  Sixtus  lY." 
Indeed,  all  the  latter  half  of  the  16th  centuiy  scarcely 
saw  a  supremę  pontifT  without  the  yisible  eridences  of 
human  frailty  around  him,  the  unblushing  acknowledg- 
ment  of  which  is  the  fittest  commentary  on  the  tonę  of 
derical  morality  (Lea,  Uisł.  of  Sacerdotal  CeUbactfy  p. 
368, 859).  See  Labbe,  ConcUta,  xm,  1465 ;  Fleury,  IJitf, 
.  Ecclmisłiqw,  lib.  xxiii,  eh.  xv;  Duchesne,  Historia 
Francorum  Scripłoretf  ii,  860 ;  Sismondi,  Hist,  de»  Franr 
caia;  Ciaconius,  Yitee  et  rea  gestm  Poniificum  Romano- 
rumy  iii,  90;  F.  Serdonati,  TiTa  e  Faiti  eTImocenzo  VIII 
(Milan,  1829,  8vo) ;  Comines,  Memoires,  lib.  vii,  eh.  i ; 
Herzog,  Reai-Encykhp,  vi,  672 ;  Engl,  Cychp. ;  Hoefer, 
Nouv,  Bioff,  Gauraky  xxv,  912;  Rankę,  Uist,  ofthe  Pa- 
pacy  inthel^h  and  17 th  Centuriea,  i,  48, 296 ;  Mosheim, 
CA,  Hiat,  p.  486 :  Bower,  liigt,  ofthe  PopeSy  vii,  817  sq. ; 
Wetzer  und  Welte,  Kircken-LeK,  v,  641  sq. ;  Aschbach, 
Kirchen-Leańkon,  iii,  460  sq. 

Innocent  IX  {Gioranni  A  nłonio  Facchinetii),  bom 
at  Bologna  in  1519,  had  distinguished  himself  as  papai 
legate  at  Trent,  afterwards  as  the  papai  nuncio  at  Yen- 
ice,  and  as  president  of  the  Inąuisition.  He  was  elected 
pope  after  the  death  of  Gi«goiy  XIY,  in  Oct.  1591.  He 
borę  a  gobd  reputation  for  leaming  and  piety,  but  he  was 
too  old  and  feeble  for  the  papai  chur,  and  constantly 
confined  to  his  bed  by  illness,  and  was  even  obliged  to 
give  his  audiences  there.  Notwithstanding  these  diffi- 
culties,  however,  he  took  an  active  part  in  the  afTairs  of 
France,  favoring  the  party  of  the  League  and  of  Spain, 
as  his  predecessor  Gregory  had  done.  A  letter  of  his  is 
still  extant  (in  Cayet,  Chronologie  novenaire)y  in  which 
he  urges  Alexander  Farnese  to  hastcn  the  equipment  of 
his  troops,  to  invade  France,  and  to  relieve  Rouen,  all 
which  that  generał  forthwith  executed  with  so  much 
Buccess  and  skiUL  He  died  Dec.  80, 1591,  after  a  short 
reign  of  only  two  roonths,  and  was  succeeded  by  Cle- 
mcnt  VIII.  See  Labbe,  Conciliay  xv,  1430 ;  Duchesne, 
Historia  Francorum  ScriptoreSj  ii,  457 ;  Fleurj',  Hist, 
Ecdes,  L  xxvi,  chap.  clxxix ;  Sismondi,  Uist,  des  Fran- 
cais,  xxi,  124 ;  B.  Justiniani,  Oratio  habita  infunere  In- 
nocenta IX  (Rorae,  1592,  4to);  lleTzof^y  Real-Enrykiop, 
vi.  678 ;  English  Cydop, ;  Hoefer,  A  our.  Biog,  Generale, 


xxv,  914;  Rankę,  History  ofthe  Popes  ofthe  IGth  aad 
i7th  Cent,  ii,  281, 282 ;  Mosheim,  Ecdes,  Iłist,  cent.  xTi, 
sec  iii,  pt.  i,  eh.  L  - 

Innocent  X  (cardinal  Gioranni  Bałiisia  PamfS^ 
bom  at  Romę  in  1572,  was  elected  in  Sept.  1644,  after 
the  death  of  Urban  YIII.    He  was  then  seventy-tliice 
years  of  age,  and  wholly  under  the  control  of  his  ńster- 
in-law.  Donna  Olimpia  Maidalchini  Panfili,  wfao  appean 
to  have  been  an  unprincipled  woman,  yeiy  fond  of  mcm- 
ey,  and  anxious  to  aggrandize  her  relatiyes.     Innocent, 
however,  displayed  in  several  instances  much  finnness, 
justice,  and  pmdence,  and  a  wish  to  protect  the  humUe 
and  poor  against  the  oppressions  of  the  great.     He  di- 
minished  the  taxes,  which  had  been  very  heary  under 
his  predecessor,  Urban  YIII,  and  at  the  same  time  cm- 
bellished  Romę.    The  people  of  Fermo,  on  the  Adiiatie, 
revolted  against  their  govemor,  being  excited  by  the 
local  nobility  and  landholders,  who  were  trritated  atgunst 
him  for  having  by  an  edict  of  annona  kept  the  price  of 
com  Iow ;  the  govemQr  and  other  offidal  persona  were 
murdered.     Imiocent  sent  a  commissioner  with  tioopa^ 
and  the  guilty,  without  distinction  of  rtnk,  were  pnn- 
ished,  some  being  executed,  and  others  sent  to  the  gal- 
lęys.    The  district  of  Castro  and  Rondglione,  near  Romę, 
was  still  in  possesaon  of  the  Famese  dukes  of  Pianna, 
notwithstanding  the  efforts  of  Urban  YIII  to  wrest  it 
from  them.     Disputes  about  jurisdiction  were  contino- 
ally  taking  place  between  theofficers  of  the  duke  and 
those  of  the  pope.    Iimoocnt  having  consecrated  a  new 
bishop  of  Castro  who  was  not  acceptable  to  the  duke^ 
the  latter  foihade  his  entering  his  territoriesi,  and  as 
the  bishop  elect  persisted,  he  was  murdereil  on  the  road. 
The  pope  immediately  sent  troops  to  attack  Castns 
which  being  taken,  he  ordered  the  town  to  be  razed  to 
the  foundations,  and  a  pillar  erected  on  the  sitc,  with 
the  inscription  *'Qui  f£i  Castro."    He  showed  the  aame 
resolution  against  the  Baiberini,  who  had  oppoaed  his 
election,  and  was  a  steadfast  enemy  of  cardinal  Mazano, 
the  supporter  of  the  Baiberini.     The  Frencb  prelate, 
however,  outwitted  the  pope,  and  obliged  him  to  yiekł 
by  threatening  to  take  A\-ignon.     Innocent  also  took 
an  active  part  in  the  quarrel  between  the  Jemits  and 
the  Jansenists.    As  early  as  1650,  Hubert,  bisł>op  of 
Yabres,  had  denounced  to  the  pope  five  ]>ropo6itiona 
ascribed  to  Jansenius  (q.  v.),  which,  in  the  prcceding 
year,  had  been  referred  to  the  theological  facolt^*.     In- 
nocent established  a  special  congregation  to  escamine 
them,  April  20, 1651.     De  Saint  Amour  and  sonae  oth- 
er theologians  sent  by  the  Jansenists  were  heartl  JS.wr 
19, 1653,  but  P.  Annat,  a  Jesuit,  informs  us  that  the  af- 
fair  had  already  been  judged  and  decided  in  adrance. 
Finally  a  buli  was  iEsued;  Cum  occasione,  May  90, 1653, 
condemnbig  the  flve  propositions.     It  was  received  in 
France,  and  published  by  order  of  Louis  XIY.    Innocent 
died  soon  after,  Jan.  6,  1654^     His  anxicty  to  furtfaer 
the  interests  of  Romę  throughout  the  world  is  manilest 
by  the  pecuniaiy  assistance  which  he  afforded  the  Vene- 
tians  and  Poles  in  their  wars  against  the  Turka^  by  hia 
opposition  to  the  peace  of  Westphalia,  fearing  that  it 
endangered  the  Romish  tenets,  and  even  the  pootffical 
chair,  and  especially  by  the  assistance  which  he  gare  to 
the  Irish  to  combat  the  English,  and,  if  poseible,  to  re- 
gain  the  English  territory  for  his  Churoh.   In  Germany, 
fUso,  he  secured,  by  his  undaunted  efforts,  the  oon versian 
of  8everal  princes  and  noblemen  of  influence.     Ile  built 
two  beautiful  churehes  in  Romę,  and  left  a  wcU^liUed 
treasury,  which  proved  very  uscful  to  his  saccessor,  Al- 
exander  YII.     See  Brays,  Hist,  des  Popes,  v,  268  ;  Ehi- 
chesne.  Historia  Francorum  Saiptores,  ii,  582;  Ciaeo- 
nius,  Vit€B  et  res  gęsta  Pontifeum  Romanorum,  iv,  €i42; 
Sismondi,  Hist,  des  Francais,  xxiv,  78 ;  Relalion  den  di^ 
liberaHons  du  dergi  de  France  sur  la  Constiiyfion  «4  aar 
le  Brefde  N,  S,P,lepape  Innocent  X  (Paris,  165fi^fol.)  ; 
De  Lalane,  Defense  de  la  Constiiuiion  du  pope  InmoeiaU 
X,  etc.  (1655, 4to) ;  Vie  de  Madame  Olympe  MtMacikisn^ 
qui  a  goutfeme  PEgUse pendetnt  leponiijicat  d*/nnocemt  X. 
(Amst.  1666, 18mo) ;  Mh/ioires  du  Cardinal  de  JMa,  L  iii; 


INNOCENT  XI 


595 


INNOCENT  XI 


L  de  Saint  Amour,  Journal  de  ce  gai  B^eMłfait  a  Romę 
don*  Paffaire  des  cmg  propositiom  (Paris,  1662,  fol.) ;  J. 
CRosBtenscher)  ^iftor»a  Itmoceniii  X  (1676, 4to) ;  Her- 
H)g,  Real-Etuydop.  vi,  673 ;  EngL  Cyciop. ;  Hoefer,  Nouv, 
Bioff,  Ginirak,  xxv,  916 ;  Rankę,  Ilist.  ofthe  Papaey,  i, 
182, 242 ;  Mosheim,  Ch,  Hitt.  cent  xvii,  sec  ii,  pt.  i,  eh.  i ; 
Aflchbach,  Kirchen^LcK.  lii,  462  8q. 

Innocent  XI  (cardinal  Benedetto  OdeKalcht)^  born 
at  Como  in  1611,  sucoeeded  Clement  X  in  1676.    It  is 
said  by  some  that  be  was  a  soldier  in  his  yoimger  days, 
tboogh  this  has  been  denied  by  othera  (Count  Terre 
Rezzooico,  De  Suppoeiłis  MUitaribus  StipendUa  Bene- 
detto Odescalchi).    He  was  a  man  of  great  firmness  and 
oounge,  aoateie  in  his  morals,  and  inflexible  in  his  res- 
oltttioDS,  and  withal  one  ofthe  most  distinguished  popes 
of  the  17th  oentuiy.    He  inaugorated  many  reforms, 
ledaced  veiy  materially  the  pomp  and  luxury  of  the 
papai  oomt,  and  sappressed  varioiiB  aboses.     His  ad- 
ministiation  was  entirely  free  fróm  the  weakness  of 
nepotism  which  had  so  greatly  suUied  the  farne  of  many 
of  the  pondlfs  who  had  preceded  him.    His  own  nephew 
he  obliged  to  live  at  Komę,  under  his  pontificate,  in  a 
pńvate  chaiacter;  and  in  this  respect,  certainly,  he  has 
had  few  equa]a  in  the  pontifical  chair.    Indeed,  his  aus- 
terity  was  so  great  that  it  madę  him  many  enemies, 
and  oftentimes  estranged  even  some  who  would  gladly 
haye  ofifered  him  their  friendship.     His  greatest  ene- 
mies, no  doubt,  were  the  Jesuiticai  order,  which  he  was 
deteimined  to  cruah  out    The  prindpal  event  of  his 
pontificate,  however,  was  his  ąnarrel  with  the  imperious 
Loius  XIV  of  France,  particiilarly  provoked  by  the 
ąoestion  of  the  immunities  enjoyed  by  the  foreign  am- 
baaaadors  at  Romę,  an  eyent  which  exhibit8  morę  elear- 
1y  than  any  other  act  of  his  both  his  own  character 
and  that  of  the  times,  and  deseryes  a  few  words  of 
ezplanation.    By  an  old  nsage  or  prescription,  the  for- 
eign ambaasadors  at  Romę  had  the  right  of  asylum,  not 
ooly  in  their  vast  palaces,  but  also  in  a  certain  district 
or  boundaiy  around  them,  including  sometimes  a  whole 
Btreet  or  sąuare,  which  the  officers  of  Justice  or  police 
cottld  not  enter,  and  where,  conaequently,  malefactors 
and  disBolute  persona  found  a  ready  shelter.     These 
f  ąuartieri,'*  or  free  districts,  were  likewise  places  for  the 
sale  of  oontraband  articles  and  for  defrauding  the  reve- 
nae.    The  abuse  had  become  contagious :  sereral  of  the 
Roman  princes  and  cardinals  claimed  and  enforced  the 
same  rights  and  immunities,  so  that  only  a  smali  part 
of  the  city  was  left  under  the  sway  of  the  magistrates. 
The  clasńcal  advocate8  for  this  abaurd  custom  ąuoted 
the  example  of  Romulns,  who  madę  his  new  town  a 
refuge  for  all  the  lawless  persons  of  the  neighborhood. 
Innocent  determined  to  put  a  stop  to  the  abuse,  and  to 
be  master  in  his  own  capital;  he,  howerer,  proceeded  at 
fint  calmly  and  with  sufficient  caution.    He  would  not 
distorb  the  preaent  possesaors  of  those  immunities,  but 
he  declared  and  madę  it  officially  known  that  in  futurę 
he  would  not  give  audience  to  any  new  ambassador 
who  did  not  renounce  for  himself  and  his  successors 
theie  abQsive  claims.    All  the  great  powers  of  Europę 
took  umbrago  at  this  very  reasonable  determination ; 
but  the  qnestion  was  not  brought  to  a  crisis  untii  the 
death  of  the  marćchal  d'£strees,  the  French  ambassa- 
dor at  Romę.    Just  before  Louis  XIV  had  appointed  the 
new  ambassador,  the  pope  repeated  in  a  buli,  dated  May, 
1687,  his  previou8  resoWe.     In  view  of  this  action  of 
tbe  pope,  which  Louis  was  determined  not  to  obsenre, 
he  ittstmcted  his  minister  ^  to  maintain  at  Romę  the 
rights  and  the  dignity  of  France ;"  and  in  order  to  sup- 
port  this  re8olve,  he  gave  him  a  nnmerous  rednue  of 
military  and  naval  officers,  who  were  to  Irighten  the 
pope  in  his  own  capitaL     Layardin's  entrance  into 
Home  under  soch  an  esoort  resembled  that  of  a  hostile 
coinmander.     He  had  also  been  preceded  by  seyeral 
bnndred  French  nnder-officers,  who  had  entered  Romę 
u  private  tiayeUers,  but  who  took  their  quarters  near 
the  ambassador'8  palące,  ready  for  any  mischief.    Inno- 
tta^h(Owever,  remained  firm ;  he  refuaed  to  receive  the 


new  ambassador,  and  all  the  anger  of  Louis,  who  seized 
upon  Avignon,  and  threatened  to  send  a  fleet  with  troops 
on  the  Roman  coast,  had  no  effect  upon  him.  Lavar- 
din,  having  remained  eighteen  months  at  Romę,  unable 
to  aee  the  pope,  was  obliged  to  return  to  France  with 
his  credentials  unopened.  The  quarrel  was  not  adjust- 
ed  till  the  foUowing  pontificate ;  but  the  distinct  immu- 
nities of  the  foreign  ambaasadors  at  Romę  oontinued, 
after  yarious  modifications,  until  the  beginning  of  the 
19th  oentury.  This  ąuarrel  was,  howeyer,  not  the  ini- 
tiatiye  to  a  misunderstanding  between  the  two  sover- 
eigns.  It  had  been  preyiously  opened  by  the  right 
which  Louis  XIV  claimed  to  possess,  in  virtue  of  the 
Droit  de  Regnej  to  appoint  to  vacant  benefices  in  his 
kingdom,  and  to  coliect  the  reyenues.  This  right  of 
the  French  king  Innocent  XI  disputed.  Loius  XIV 
issued  edict  after  edict,  the  pope  buli  afler  buli  against 
them ;  finally,  the  French  dergy  demanded  that  a  coun- 
cil  should  be  assembled.  This  was  done,  and  on  Feb.  3, 
1682,  the  oouncil  declared  that  the  French  dergy  in- 
dorsed  the  action  of  the  king,  and  that  the  pope  should 
be  notified  of  their  decbion.  WhOe  awaiting  his  an- 
Bwer,  the  assembly  continued  its  sittings,  intending  to 
put  an  end  to  all  further  papai  encroachments  by  estab- 
lishing  firmly  the  doctrines  of  the  Gallican  Church  con- 
ceming  the  temporal  power  of  the  popes,  their  infalli- 
bility,  and  the  independence  of  the  king.  Tbe  result 
of  their  deliberation  was  the  famous  four  propositions 
promulgated  March  16, 1682.  See  Gallican  Church. 
Innocent  XI,  in  a  solemn  consistory,  condemned  the 
propositions  and  the  bishops  who  had  yoted  them,  and 
April  U,  1682,  issued  a  brief  annulling  the  proceedings 
of  the  French  counciL  In  1686  he  also  condemned  the 
doctrines  of  Molinos  (q.  y.),  who  was  obliged  to  make 
a  public  recantation,  September  8, 1687,  besides  suffering 
for  the  remainder  of  his  life  close  confinement  in  the 
prisons  of  the  Inquisition.  At  the  dose  of  1676  limo- 
cent  took  a  threatening  attitnde  towards  the  Jesuits, 
forbidding  them,  among  other  things,  to  receiye  any 
noyices  into  their  order.  They  retorted  by  calling  the 
pope  a  Jansenist,  offered  prayers  for  his  conyersion,  and 
entered  into  an  alliance  with  the  French  king.  Innocent 
XI,  howeyer,  died  only  a  few  years  after,  August  21, 
1689.  It  was  during  his  pontificate  that  James  II  of 
England  became  a  Romanist,  and  endeavored,  by  a  suc- 
cession  of  bold  attempts,  not  only  to  giye  Romanism  tol- 
eration,  but  eyen  make  it  a  Church  establishment  of 
his  country.  (Compare  Fox,  Jamee  ITj  p.  832 ;  Hallam, 
Constit.  Tlist.  ii,  212 ;  Mackintosh,  Iliet,  of  Rerolution, 
eh.  V ;  Stoughton,  Ecdes.  Ji%»U  of  England  [Lond.  1870, 
2  yols.  8yo],  yoL  ii,  chap.  yiiL)  Stoughton  claims  that 
these  efforts  accorded,  howeyer,  only  "with  the  daring 
policy  of  the  Jesuits,  who  were  masters  at  court,  but  not 
with  the  morę  cautious  measures  of  the  papacy."  No 
doubt  this  is  troe  in  a  measure.  Innocent  XI  was  eyi- 
dendy  unwilling  to  become  master  ofthe  English  ecde- 
siaadcal  esublishment  if  to  be  secured  by  the  aid  of  an 
onler  which  he  abhorred,  and  which  he  was  determined 
upon  extinguishing ;  and  this  out  supposition  is  strength- 
ened  by  the  demand  which  James  II  madę  upon  Romę 
for  a  red  bat  for  a  Jesuit  named  Petre.  See  James  H. 
Two  letters  of  this  pope  are  publtshed  by  Ughdli,  Italia 
Sacra,  iy,  618 ;  x,  63.  He  wrote  also  Brere  ad  Frań- 
citcum  epiacopum  Apamiengem  (Paris,  4to)  '.—Decrttnm 
de  mcrcB  commimionis  usu  datum  (Paris,  1679, 4to).  See 
Palatiu8,rir.  Jnnocen/ius  XT,  in  the  5th  vol.  of  the  Gest. 
Pont\f,  Rom,  vita  dJnnocenzo  XJ  (Venet  1690) ;  Bruys, 
Hist,  des  Papee,  y,  860 ;  Sismondi,  Hist.  des  Francats, 
xxy,  311;  J.  A.  CosU  (R,  Simon),  Hist,  de  tOrigine  rf« 
Rereaus  ecclesiastiques  (Francfort,  1684, 12mo) ;  De  Lar- 
roque,  Nouveau  TraiU  dc  la  Regale  (1686, 12mo) ;  Bayle, 
Nourdkt  de  la  R^puUigue  des  Jjeiirts  (1686) ;  Heidegger, 
Historia  Papałus  (Amst  1698,  4to),  pt  ii;  De  La  Lu- 
zeme,  Sur  la  DSdaration  de  Tassernhlee  du  derge  de 
France  en  1682  (Par.  1821, 8yo) ;  F.  Buonamici,  De  Vi(a 
et  Rebus  gesłis  Tnnoceniii  XT  (Romę,  1776, 8vo) ;  Herzog, 
Real-Encgklop,  yi,  676;  Hoefer,  Nouv,  Biogr,  Ginerale^ 


INNOCENT  Xn 


596 


INNOCENTS'  DAY 


zxv,  919 ;  Bankę,  Hitł.  ofthe  Papacy,  i,  278, 279 ;  Moi- 
helm,  Ch.  UisL  cent  xvu,  sec  ii,  pt  i,  cłu  i;  Aachbach, 
KinAenrLez,  iii,  464  Bq. ;  Bower,  UisL  of  the  Popetj  vii, 
486  8q. ;  EngUih  Cycif^cadia,  B.  y. ;  Cłuunbera,  Cyclopm- 
dia,  8.  V. 

Innocent  XII  (cazdinal  Aniomo  PigneUeUt)  was 
bom  at  Naples  March  18, 16 15,  and  sacceeded  Alexan- 
der  yill  in  July,  1691.  He  had  a  seiious  dispute  with 
the  emperoT  Leopold  I,who,  attempting  to  revive  in  It^ 
a\y  the  rights  of  the  empire  orer  the  fonner  imperial 
fiefs,  which  had,  during  the  wars  and  Yiciasitudea  of 
ages,  beoome  emancipated,  publlshed  an  edict  at  Romę  in 
June,  1697,  enjoining  all  the  poeseseors  of  such  territo- 
ries  to  apply  to  the  emperor  for  his  inyestiture  within  a 
fixed  time,  or  they  woold  be  constdered  aa  luiupers  and 
rebela.  This  measure,  ifenforced,  woold  have  affected 
the  greater  part  of  the  landed  property  of  Italy,  and  also 
the  80vereignty  of  its  goyemmenta,  and  of  the  Roman 
aee  among  the  rest.  The  pope  proteated  against  the 
edict,  and  adyised  the  other  Itidian  powers  to  reńat  such 
obsolete  pretensions,  and,  with  the  support  of  France, 
succeeded  in  persuaJding  Leopold  to  deaiat  firom  them. 
He  alao  sacceeded  in  putting  an  end  to  the  difficultiea 
exi8ting  between  France  and  the  aee  of  Romę  on  the 
que6tion  of  inyestiture  [see  bn«ocENT  XI],  and  obtained 
from  the  French  ckrgy  an  addrees  whlch  amonnted  al- 
most  to  a  recantation  of  the  four  artides  of  the  Gallican 
Chorch.  The  ąueetion  of  Quieti8m  then  reappeared. 
Boflsaet  accused  Fenelon  of  fayoring  that  tendency  in 
his  £xpłication  sur  la  vie  inłerieure,  The  book  was  mod' 
eraUly  oondemned  by  the  pope,  in  accordance  with  the 
report  of  the  Congregation  of  the  Index  (q.  y.),  and 
Fenelon  (q.  y.),  as  is  well  known,  submitted  (see  yol.  iii, 
p.  529-680).  Innocent  built  the  harbor  of  Ponto  d'Anzo 
on  the  ruins  of  the  andent  Antium ;  he  constructed  the 
aąueduct  of  Ciyita  Yeochia ;  the  palące  of  the  Monte 
Citorio  at  Romę,  for  the  oourts  of  justice ;  and  the  fine 
linę  of  buildinga  at  Ripagrande,  on  the  north  bank  of 
the  Tiber,  below  the  town,  where  yessels  which  ascend 
the  riyer  load  and  unload.  He  also  built  the  asylum, 
achool,  and  penitentiary  of  San  Michele,  and  other  use- 
ful  works.  Innocent  was  of  regular  hahita,  attentiye  to 
buoneas,  a  loyer  of  justice,  and  ayeise  to  nepotism. 
He  died  Sept  27, 1700,  and  was  succeeded  by  Clement 
XŁ  See  Bruys,  HiaL  des  PapeSj  y,  454 ;  Sismondi,  HisL 
des  Francais,  xxyi,  69 ;  De  Frades,  A  brige  de  FJJistoire 
Ecdesiasticue,  ii,  888 ;  N.  P.  Giannetasio,  Panegynau  m 
ftmere  ItmocentU  XII  (Naples,  1700, 8yo) ;  Herzog,  Beal- 
Encyldop.  vi,  676 ;  English  Cydop, ;  Hoefer,  Nouv,  Biog, 
GitUrak,  xxy,  928 ;  Rankę,  Hisł,  o/ the  Papaey,  i,  281- 
818 ;  Mosheim,  Ch,  Hisł,  cent.  xvii,  sec.  ii,  pt.  i,  chap.  i ; 
Aschbach,  Kircken-Lex.  iii,  466  Bq. 

Innocent  XIII  (cardinal  Michel  Angelo  Conti), 
bom  at  Romę  May  15, 1655,  succeeded  Clement  XI  May 
8,1721.  Hehadpreyioualybeenpapalnundoibrannm- 
ber  of  years  at  different  courts,  and  was  madę  cardinal 
in  1707,  legate  at  Ferrara  in  1709,  and  bishop  of  Yiter^ 
bo  in  1712.  When  he  ascended  the  papai  throne,  the 
discussion  conceming  the  constitution  Umgenitas  was 
in  progreas  with  great  eagemess  on  all  sides.  On 
June  9, 1721,  seyen  French  bishops  wrote  to  Innocent 
to  obtain  its  withdrawaL  Cardinal  Althan  complained 
also,  in  the  emperor*s  uame,  of  the  trouble  it  was  cre- 
ating  in  Germany.  The  pope,  howeycr,  referred  the 
matter  to  the  inąuisiŁors,  who  condemned  the  letter  of 
the  bishops  as  injurions  to  the  memory  of  Clement  Xr, 
and  disrespectful  towards  the  holy  see.  Innocent  XIU 
was  a  man  of  prudence  and  experience  of  the  world,  and 
less  wilful  and  headstrong  than  his  predecessor.  The 
most  discreditable  eyent  of  his  reign  was  his  giying  the 
caidinal'8  bat  to  Dubois  (q.  y.).  He  was  on  the  eye  of 
suppressing  the  order  of  Jesuits  when  he  died,  March  7, 
1724.  Some  think  he  was  poisoned.  See  Bmys,  HiM, 
des  Papes,  y,  489;  Sismondi,  Ilisł.  des  Francais,  xxyii, 
442;  De  Hosseus,  MSmoires  de  la  Regence  du  due  d^Or- 
leans  (1742,  8  yols.  12mo) ;  A.  Tricaud,  Belation  de  la 
Mori  d'Itmocent  XIII  (Nancy,  1724,  12mo) ;  Herzog, 


Beal-Eneyldop,  yi,  677 ;  English  C^^dop, ;  Hoefer,  Nswi, 
Biog.  Gmtirale,  xxy,  925 ;  Mosheim,  Ch.  Hist.  cent.  m, 
p.  485;  Guamaod,  Vit.Po9A\f.  ii,  187  sq.,881  8q.;  Asch- 
bach, KirchenrLex.  iii,  467. 

Innocent,  a  Russian  prelate,  bom  in  1800  at  Słcvsk. 
At  school  he  distinguished  himself  by  his  superior  abfl- 
ity  oyer  his  fellow-^tudents,  especially  displaying  great 
oratorical  talent.  When  twenty-four  years  old,  in  ac- 
cordance with  the  Russian  custom  of  the  better  class  of 
sodety  destined  for  the  seryice  of  the  Churcb,  he  enter- 
ed  the  monastic  order.  Two  years  after,  he  was  called  as 
an  officer  to  the  theological  academy  of  StP^ersburg, 
and  in  1880  was  madę  rector  of  the  high  school  at  Kie! 
After  filling  yarious  pońtions  of  great  eminenoe  in  his 
Church,  he  was  madę  a  member  of  the  **  Holy  Synod**  in 
1856.  He  died  at  Odessa  May  6, 1857.  His  works  are, 
The  last  Days  of  Chrisfs  terresłrial  Life  (1828) : — The 
L\fe  of  the  Aposłle  Patd  (eod.) : — Discourses  and  Ser- 
mons  (1848, 8  yols.)  .—OfSin  and  its  Consecuences  (1844) ; 
etc.— Hoefer,  Nouv.  Biogr.  Ghu  xxy,  927. 

Innocent,  Gizeł,  a  Russian  prelate,  was  bom  in 
Prussian  Poland,  of  Lutheran  parents,  at  the  commence- 
ment  of  the  17th  century.  He  Joined  the  Greek  Church 
while  yet  young,  and  became  a  monk«  Distinguiahed 
for  great  ability  and  leaming,  he  was  sdected  for  a  pro- 
fes8or*s  chalr  at  Kief.  He  died  at  that  place  Feb.  24, 
1684.  He  published  On  the  Peaee  between  God  aml  Man 
(Kief,  1669),  which,  by  a  ukase  of  the  Synod  of  1766, 
was  put  in  the  Index : — Instructions  on  the  Sacrameat 
ofPeniłence  (Kief,  1671) ;  and  left  in  MS.  a  woric  on  The 
true  Faith  (written  in  Polish),  which  aims  to  refute  a 
work  on  the  Supremacy  of  St,  Peter,  and  the  Procession 
of  the  Holy  Spirit.  He  alBo  published  a  s}'nopeis  of  Rus- 
sian histonr,  which  has  been  extenaydy  drculated. — 
Hoefer,  Nouv,  Biog.  Geniraley  xxy,  926. 

Innocentias  Portiui  (gate  ąfinnocence)  la  one  of 
the  names  giyen  to  the  rite  of  baptism,  aiming  morę  di- 
rectly  at  a  deacription  of  its  end  or  efficacy.     See  Bap^ 

TISM. 

Innocentiom  Feetom.  See  Imnocessts'  Dat. 
Innocenta,  MASSACRE  OF,  by  Herod  (Matt  ii, 
16).  It  has  been  thought  strange  that  Josephus  shoold 
not  mention  this  atrocity  (see  Tolborth,  Veram  esse  In- 
faniicidii  Bethlehem,  hist  G^ttingen,  1788) ;  but  it  wsa 
one  only,  and  that  a  local  one,  of  hb  many  acts  of  tp- 
anny  and  crudty.    See  HiutOD  the  Great. 

Innocenta'  Day  (^Festum  Innocentiumf  vf*tpa,  rwy 
ayiup  łS'  xtXia^iiiv  vriviuv),  set  i^>art  by  the  Greek, 
Roman,  and  English  churches  to  oommemorate  tbe 
slaughter  of  the  children  by  Herod  shortly  after  our 
Sayiour*B  birth,  is  celebratcd  in  the  Western  Church  on 
Dec.  28,  and  in  the  Eastem  Church  Dec  29.  Ancient 
ecdesiastical  writers  speak  of  these  children  aa  Christian 
martyrs.  Cyprian  says, "  The  natińty  of  Christ  bcgan" 
(a  martyriis  inf antium)  '*with  the  martyidom  of  those 
infants  that  from  two  years  old  and  under  were  slain  fijr 
his  name"  {Episł.  56,  ad  Thibar.  p.  128>  Augostine 
says,  "  These  infants  died  for  Christ,  not  knowing  it ; 
their  parents  bewailed  them  as  dying  martyrs;  they 
could  not  yet  ^ak,  but,  neyertheless,  they  amfessed 
Christ:  Christ  granted  them  the  honor  to  die  for  his 
name**  {De  Syniol  iii,  4,  p.  808;  De  Lib.  Arbit,  iii,  23). 
So  Prudentius  (Cath.  Hymn.  de  £pq>h.)f 
**  Sal7ete,  flores  martyrnm, 

OnoB  Incis  ipso  in  llmlue 

Christ!  insecntor  snstnlit, 

Ceu  turbo  nascentee  rosas  I 

Vos  prima  Cbristi  yicUma, 

Grex  immolatomm  tener, 

Aram  snb  ipsam  simplices 

Palma  et  corona  Indftis.** 

^  Hail,  ye  flower  oł  martyrs,  whom  the  enemy  of  Christ 
cut  off  in  yonr  yery  entrance  upon  the  light,  aa  the  lem- 
pest  does  roses  in  the  bud!  First  yictims  for  Christ, 
tender  flock  of  sacriflces,  ye  play  innooently  with  yout 
crowns  and  garlands  before  the  yery  altar.'**  It  was  a 
popular  aupeistition  in  the  old  Church  that  Lmooenta* 


INNOYATIO  BENEFICn 


597 


INQUISinON 


Day  (or  Childennasa^  m  it  was  also  called)  i8  rety  nn- 
locky  to  begin  any  work  opon;  and  what  day  8oever 
Łhat  fiUls  00,  whether  on  a  Monday,  Toesday,  or  any 
other,  nothing  miut  be  hegun  on  that  day  throughout 
Łhe  year.  Though  Childermaas  Day  was  reckoned  iin- 
foitimate,  nereitheless  rerek  were  held  on  it,  The  So- 
dety  of  Łinco)n*s  Inn  used  to  cboose  an  oiBcer  at  that 
season  called  the  Kwff  of  the  Codcney^  who  presided 
on  the  day  of  his  appointment  But  in  the  modem 
Chnrch  this  feast  is  obeeryed  as  a  special  holiday  by 
the  young,  and  many  curious  customs.oonnected  with  it 
preTsil  in  Catholic  countries.  Thus,  in  pńvate  families, 
the  children  are  on  this  day  pńrileged  to  wear  the 
cłothes  of  the  elden,  and  in  some  aort  to  exerci8e  aa- 
thority  o^er  the  houaehold  in  their  stead.  So,  alao,  in 
commanities  of  nuna,  the  yoongeat  sister  beoomes  for 
this  day  snperioiess  of  the  house,  and  ezerdses  a  sort 
of  spordre  anthority  even  over  the  real  superior.  In 
Chnrch,  the  priest  celebrating  mass  on  this  day  wears  a 
UwB  gown.  See  Bingham,  Orig.  Ecde»,  bk.  xx,  cap.  vii, 
§  12;  Augusti,  DenkioiŁrdighaŁen  o.  der  ekriHL  A rckSoL 
(Up8.1817),i,d04sq. 

InnoTatio  Benefioil  Ib  the  technical  term  for  any 
eftoi^  to  be  eifected  ta  a  benejice;  it  may  have  regaid 
either  to  the  position  itself,  or  only  to  the  reyenues  ac- 
cnaing  therefrom. 

In  partitlms  Infidelimn  (I  q.  m  heathm  coun- 
ine9\  EFiscx>in7S,  episeopus  titulizrw,  epucopus  suffra- 
gaataiM,  AD  these  ezpressiona,  sometimes  iised  promis- 
caooaly,  have,  when  cloeely  examined,  different  signifl- 
cadona.  As  bishops,  on  account  of  the  great  variety 
and  number  of  duties  devolving  on  them,  are  nnable  to 
perfonn  them  all  in  person,  they  are  allowed  the  lue  of 
aasistants,  such  as  aichdeacons,  coadjutorB,  etc  For 
mch  fonctions,  howerer,  as  can  only  be  performed  by  a 
biahop^  aince  there  can  be  but  one  in  a  diocese  (c.  viii, 
Croc.  Niean,  a.  325),  the  bishop  unable  to  perform  them 
was  fonnerly  obliged  to  całl  in  the  aid  of  a  neighboring 
biahop.  In  afler  times,  the  bishops  driven  out  of  their 
dioceaes  were  especially  intrusted  with  these  functions, 
being  considered  as  still  bebnging  de  jurę  to  their  dio- 
ceae.  The  Roman  Church  was  thus  led  never  to  give 
up,  in  principle,  any  place  where  it  had  oncc  obtained  a 
footing,  even  when  ii  did  loae  it  in  fact ;  and  thus,  when 
its  bishopa  were  driven  from  a  place,  their  connection 
with  their  cathedra  did  not  therefore  cease.  In  the  9th 
century  a  number  of  bishops  were  driven  out  of  Spain 
by  the  Arabs,  and  aonght  refuge  at  Oviedo  (Africa), 
waiting  to  resume  their  aees;  and  when  one  of  them 
died,  another  was  at  once  elected  in  his  stead.  While 
thus  waiting  they  acted  as  asaistants  to  the  bishops  of 
Oriedo,  acoording  to  the  expres8  definition :  "Ut  epis- 
oopi,  qui  ditione  carerent,  Oveten8i  pnesuli  vicariam 
opertm  exhiberent,  cara  in  multoe  partita,  ejnaąue  re- 
ditibua  alerentur'*  (aee  Thomaasin,  Vetua  ac  nova  eecle- 
Ha  due^jtUna  de  benejiciisj  pt.  i,  lib.  i,  cap.  xxyii,  no.  viii ; 
Yinterim,  Die  tarzuffłiehsUn  Denkwurdigkeiten  d.  chritt- 
hak.  Kirehe,  voL  i,  pt  ii,  p.  879,  880).  We  next  find 
inatanees  of  such  vu»-episcopiy  tfices  gerenttM  m  pontifi- 
calibtUy  tiearii  in  ponUficalŚtuB^  in  Germany,  and  they 
grew  morę  numerous  ailer  the  12th  century  in  conse- 
ąnence  of  the  achism  of  the  £astem  Church.  It  then 
became  the  practioe  to  appoint  for  such  diooeses  as 
had  formeriy  been  Christian,  but  had  now  fallen  into 
the  handa  of  infidels  (m  partibnu  infidelium),  bishops 
eaUed  episcopi  tUularet,  who  were  naed  as  aasiatants  to 
other  biahops  in  their  strictly  episoopal  functions.  The 
pnctice  aoon  led  to  abuses,  monks  especially  using  ev- 
ery  exertion  to  obtain  such  appointments.  ClemenŁ  Y 
therefore  decreed  at  Yienna  in  1811  that  no  such  bish- 
ops ahould  thenceforth  be  appointed  withont  the  special 
anthorization  of  the  pope,  and  that  no  monks  oould  be 
nised  to  that  office  withont  the  consent  of  their  snpe* 
non  (cap.  y,  Clement  De  electume).  Other  restrictions 
weie  abo  enacted  at  Bavenna  in  1811, 1814,  etc.,  but  the 
practioe  was  not  aboliahed.  Thus,  at  the  Synod  of 
Gologne  in  1822,  we  find  the  Ushop  of  liege  represent- 


ed  by  a  titular  bishop  (epitcoput  eedetim  Hennenm) 
(Hartzheim,  Concilia  Germamas,  iv,  284).  We  flnd  also 
mention  madę  in  the  S3mod  of  Salzburg,  in  1420,  of  ^)ii- 
copi  Htulares  (Hartzheim,  v,  179),  and  in  that  of  Pas- 
sau,  in  1470  (can.  7,  8),  of  suffraganei,  whose  functions 
were  to  oonsecrate  priests  and  churches.  They  receiyed 
the  name  of  tuffraganei  because  they  were  to  support 
the  bishops  by  deed  and  word  (tuffragio).  Leo  X,  in 
Łhe  fifth  Lateran  Council,  1514  (Sess.  ix),  granted  also  to 
the  cardinals  the  privilege  of  having  vicarn  teu  sufrc^ 
ganeL  The  Council  of  Trent  (Sess.  vi,  cap.  v,  De  ro» 
form,  f  Sess.  xiv,  cap.  ii,  viii,  De  refomu)  sought  to  rem- 
edy  the  still  exi8ting  abuses,  for  sometimes  titular  bish- 
ops endeavored  to  establish  separata  bishoprics  for  them- 
8elves  in  the  diooeses  of  the  biahops  whom  they  were  to 
aseist  On  this  and  8ubsequent  dedsions  (see  Benedict 
XrV,  De  łgnodo  diocuana,  lib.  ii,  cap.  vii ;  lib.  xiii,  cap. 
xiv;  Ferraris,  BibL  Canortica,  s.  v.  Episeopus,  art.  vii, 
nOb  21  sq.)  is  based  the  existing  practice  of  creatiug 
bishops  of  the  title  of  dioceses  which  have  paased  firom 
the  rule  of  the  Romish  Church.  Hence,  in  the  buli  De 
ealute  ammarum  of  1821  to  Pruasia,  it  is  enacted  that 
the  conflrmation  of  exiBting  sufiraganeatus,  as  also  the 
restoration  of  those  of  Treves  and  Cologne,  shall  be  per* 
formed  in  the  usual  manner  (*'  servatis  consuetis  formis 
de  episcopatu  titulari  in  pardbus  iiifidelium").  This 
oonsecration  differs  from  that  of  the  other  bishops  only 
in  making  the  recipient  simply  an  adjunct  of  the  regu- 
larly  located  bishops,  without  separata  jurisdiction. 
When  they  confer  orders  without  tiie  consent  of  their 
bishops,  or  otherwise  oyeratep  their  duUes,  they  are 
punished  by  being  suspended  for  one  year.  The  qn9- 
copi  inpartibuM,  as  simple  titular  bishops,  are  revocable 
papai  delegates.  So  also  when  they  are  miasionary 
bishops.  Suffragan  bishops  are  in  a  morę  secure  posi- 
tion, "  cum  assuetas  congnue  adsignatione  pnmdeatur,** 
as  says  the  buli  De  mUiUc,  See  A.  H..Andreucci,  De 
epucopio  titulari  teu  inpartibus  infidelium  (Rom.  1782); 
Thomassin,  Vetus  ac  nova  eccMa  disciplina  de  beneficiiSf 
pt.  i,  lib.  i,  cap.  xxvii,  xxviii ;  F.  A.  DUrr,  De  tuffraga^ 
neis  seu  ricarOs  in  ponHficalibua  €pi»cop,  German,  (Mo- 
gunt.  1782) ;  J.  H.  Heister,  Suffraganei  Cohmensa  ea> 
traordinarii  tive  de  sacra  Colon,  ecdesia  pro  epitcopU, 
etc  (Mogunt.  1848).— Herzog,  Real-Encykhp,  iv,  103. 

Inqal8ltion  (Inqui8itio  ilbretic^  Sanctum  Of" 
ficiunC^  ia  the  name  given  to  a  tribunal  of  the  Roman 
CathoUc  Church,  whose  function  is  to  seek  out  and  pun- 
ish  heretics  and  unbelieyers.  It  is  a  degenerated  and 
perverse  form  of  the  old  Church  diacipline,  originally  in 
the  hands  of  the  rural  bishops,  on  whom  devolved  the 
duty  of  checking  falae  doctrines,  and  who,  for  the  purpose 
of  spying  out  rising  heresies,  madę  freguent  visits  to  the 
churches  of  their  diocese.  Upon  such  heretics,  when 
discoyered,  they  inflicted  sevmd  punishments,  the  se- 
verest  of  which,  howeyer,  was  only  excommunication. 
Another  punishment  frequently  resorted  to  was  banish- 
ment;  but  capital  punishment  on  account  of  one's  faith 
was  not  inflicted  by  Christiana  until  the  4th  century. 
The  first  instance  of  legally  enforcing  the  death-penalty 
against  Christians  occurr^  under  the  emperor  Theodo- 
sins  the  Great  (882),  who  oppoaed  and  aimed  at  uproot- 
ing  all  heresy,  especially  that  of  Manichieism  (Schaff, 
Ch,  Hist,  ii,  141  sq.).  Under  this  emperor,  and  under 
Justinian,  judges  {inguisitorts)  were  flrst  appointed  to 
examine  heretics  with  a  view  to  enforcing  upon  them 
punishments,  if  found  guilty ;  and,  in  order  to  enable  the 
ecclesiastical  officera  to  execute  their  functions,  the  civil 
authorities  surrendered  for  this  purpose  to  the  bishops 
the  right  of  exercising  the  reąuisite  jurisdiction  in  their 
aeveral  dioceses.  Most  frequently  the  ban  only  was  pro- 
nounoed  by  the  ecclesiastics,  leaving  it  to  the  civil  offl- 
oers  to  add  other  and  morę  seyere  punishments.  In  the 
8jbh  century  the  rights  of  the  ecclesiastics  in  extermina- 
ting  heresy  were  put  on  a  flrmer  basiB  by  synodal  courts, 
but  it  was  not  until  the  12th  centuiy  that  it  became  a 
generał  institution  in  the  Christian  Church. 

EttablishmenŁ  of  the  Inguiiiiion  in  Francc-^At  the 


INQTJISITION 


598 


INQUISinON 


Synod  of  Yerona,  in  1184,  certain  direcdons  were  given 
to  Łhe  bishops  **  conceming  heretics,"  who  at  this  time 
foimed  a  yery  formidable  enemy  of  the  KomiBh  Churchi 
morę  especially  in  the  eouth  of  France.  The  sects  had 
become  eo  numerous  that  aome  of  them,  such  as  the 
Cathari  (q.  y.)t  the  Albigenses  (q.  v.),  and  the  Walden- 
sians  (q.  v.)>  threatened  the  veiy  existence  of  the  papai 
hierarchy,  and  thia  led  Innocent  III  (q.  v.)  in  1198  to 
dispatch  the  Cisteroians  Raineri  and  Guido,  and  in  1206 
Peter  of  Castehiau  and  Raoul,  as  papai  legates  to  France, 
to  assisł  the  bishops  and  the  ciTil  authorities  in  piinish- 
ing  all  heretics  with  the  utmost  rigor.  But,  to  efface 
forever  the  lasŁ  yestige  of  heresy,  Innocent  III  deter- 
mined  to  make  a  perroanent  institution  of  the  Inqiuai' 
tion,  *^  the  most  formidable  of  all  the  formidable  engines 
deyised  by  popery  to  subdue  the  souls  and  bodies,  the 
reason  and  the  consciences  of  men,  to  its  Bovereign  wilL" 
Accordingly,  the  fourth  Lateran  Council  (1215)  madę 
the  persecution  of  heretics  the  chief  business  of  synodal 
courts,  in  the  form  that  eyeiy  archbishop  or  bishop 
should  yisit,  either  personally,  or  through  the  archdear 
eon,  or  some  other  suitable  person,  the  pańsh  in  which, 
according  to  rumor  {in  gua/amafuerił),  there  were  her- 
etics, and  put  under  oath  two  or  three  of  the  inhabitants 
of  irreproachable  character,  or,  if  necessaiy,  aU  the  in- 
habitants, to  point  out  those  who  were  known  as  here- 
tics, or  those  who  held  secret  meetings,  or  departed  from 
the  faithful  in  their  walk  and  conduct.  The  refusal  to 
take  oath  justified  the  suspicion  of  heresy,  hmrtłicoi 
pravUati$;  the  careless  bishop  was  deposed  (comp.Bie- 
ner,  Beiłrage  z.  d,  Gesch,  de*  Inguisiticnuprozesaes  [Lpz. 
1827],  p.  60  8q.).  In  name,  the  bishops  still  conducted 
the  matter,  but  the  legates  had  supenrision  oyer  them, 
and,  in  fact,  conducted  the  persecution  of  heretics.  In 
1229  the  Council  of  Toulouse  confirmed  this  decision  of 
the  fourth  Lateran  Council,  and  published  forty-fiye  de- 
crees  to  complete  the  institution  of  episcopal  inquisition 
(see  Mansi,  xxiii,  192 ;  Planck,  Gesch.  d,  KirchL  GeteU- 
schaJUterfcusung,  iy,  2d  half,  468  sq.).  It  was  dedded 
that  each  bishop  should  appoint  in  each  dbtrict  one 
priest  and  two  or  threc  laymen  in  good  standing,  who 
should  deyote  themselyes  excluBiTely  to  feneting  out 
heretics,  and  then  deliyer  them  up  to  the  archbishops, 
bishops,  or  other  authorities  for  punishment.  £yery 
one  guilty  of  concealing  a  heretic  forfeited  thereby  his 
land  poasessions  or  offices ;  the  house  in  which  a  heretic 
was  found  was  to  be  tom  down.  In  case  of  sickness, 
howeyer  seyere,  no  heretic  or  unbelieyer  was  to  be  al- 
lowed  the  aid  of  a  physician ;  penitents  were  to  leaye 
their  home,  to  wear  a  peculiar  dress,  and  could  hołd  no 
Office  except  by  a  spedal  dispensation  from  the  pope. 
But,  notwithstanding  these  rigid  and  definite  regula- 
tions,  and  notwithstanding  the  great  zeal  of  the  legates 
in  urging  the  execution  of  the  laws  by  the  bishops,  the 
see  of  Romę  did  not  eyen  approach  the  desired  end. 
To  accomplish  this  morę  certainly,  the  affairs  of  the  In- 
quisition  were  taken  from  the  bishops,  and  madę  a  papai 
tjibunal,  and  the  bishops  themselyes  were  subjected  to 
it.  Accordingly,  Gregory  IX  appointed,  in  1232,  in  Ger- 
many, Aragonia,  and  Austria,  in  1238  in  Lombardy  and 
South  France  (see  Beziers,  anno  1233,  in  Mansi,  xxiii, 
269  8q. ;  Raynakl,  AtmaL  a.  1233,  n.  59  Bq.),  the  Domin- 
icans  (q.  y.)  permanent  papai  inquiBitorB  (later  aiso  the 
Franciscans  became  such).  *^The  solitude  and  retire- 
ment  of  which  these  monks  madę  profession,  but  of 
which,  as  it  appeared  in  the  8equel,  they  soon  began,  to 
tire,  afforded  them  leisure  to  attend  incessantly  to  this 
new  calling.  The  meanness  of  their  dress,  the  poyerty 
of  their  monasteries,  and,  aboye  all,  the  public  mendicity 
and  humility  to  which  they  bound  themselyes,  could 
not  fail  to  make  the  office  of  inquisitor8  one  that  flatter- 
ed  any  relic  of  natural  ambition  which  might  yet  lurk 
within  their  minds.  The  generał  renunciation  which 
they  madę,  eyen  of  the  names  of  the  famUies  from  which 
they  sprang,  mnst  haye  goue  a  great  way  towards  sti- 
fling  those  sentiments  which  the  ties  of  kindred  and 
ciyil  connections  generally  inspire.    Besides,  the  auster- 


ity  of  their  rules,  and  the  seyerity  which  they  y 
tinuaUy  practising  upon  themselyes,  were  not  likeły  ta 
allow  them  to  haye  much  feeling  for  othen.  Lastły, 
they  were  zealous,  as  possessors  of  newly  establiahed  re- 
ligions  commonly  are;  and  they  were  leanied,  after  the 
fashion  of  the  times;  that  is  to  say,  well  yersed  in  scho- 
lastic  quibbles  and  in  the  new  canon  law.  Morunres. 
they  had  a  particular  interest  in  the  suppresńon  of  her> 
etics,  who  were  incessantly  dedaiming  against  tbem, 
and  who  spared  no  pains  to  discredit  them  in  the  mioda 
of  the  people.  On  these  monks,  therefore,  the  pope  oon- 
ferred  the  office  of  inąuisitors  of  the  £futh,  and  they  ac- 
quitted  themselyes  in  such  a  manner  as  not  Ło  disap- 
point  his  expectations'*  (Shoberl,  PenecutioM  etfPoperg, 
i,  103, 104).  So  much  eagemesB  did  they  display  in 
hunting  up  and  prosecuting  heretics,  that  a  popii]«r  pan 
changed  the  name  of  Dominicans  into  Dommi  canea  {the 
dogs  of  the  Lord).  To  preserye  the  Chureh,  howeyer, 
from  the  charge  of  blood-guiltiness,  the  ciyil  auihońttei 
were  madę  the  executionerB  of  its  judgments^  and  atdeis 
to  that  effect  were  caused  to  be  iasned  in  1228  by  Louis 
IX  of  France,  in  1233  by  Baymond  of  Touloiifle,'aiid  in 
1234  by  Frederick  U,  the  emperor  of  Germany.  Accord- 
ing to  the  regulations,  the  suspicion  of  heresy  was  suffi- 
dent  cause  for  imprisonment;  accomplices  and  cidpiits 
were  deemed  competent  witnesses ;  the  accused  was  ney- 
er  informed  of  his  accusers,  nor  confronted  with  them; 
confession  was  extorted  by  torturę,  which,  applied  at  fint 
by  the  ciyil  authorities,  was  aflerwards,  for  the  sake  oC 
secrecy,  intrusted  to  the  inqui8itoi8  themselyes.  To  en- 
large  also  the  sphere,  and  last,  but  hardly  least,  to  in- 
crease  the  pecmiiaiy  income  of  the  Inqui8ition,  a  Teiy 
wide  meaning  was  giyen  to  the  word  heresy*  It  was 
not  confined  to  yiews  which  departed  from  tbe  dogmas 
of  the  Church,  or  to  sectarian  tendendes,  but  was  madę 
to  include  usuiy,  fortune-telling  by  tlie  handa,  aigns, 
lots,  etc,  insulting  the  cross,  despising  the  dergy,  pre- 
tended  connection  with  the  leprous,  with  Jewa,  dsanonai 
and  the  deyil,  dsemonolatry,  and  witchcraft.  The  pnn- 
ishments  were  of  three  kinds:  Upon  those  wrbo  recanŁ« 
ed,  besides  penance  in  the  seyerest  form  which  the  couit 
might  enact,  was  freąuently  inflicted  ertn  the  depri* 
yation  of  all  dyil  and  ecclesiastical  rights  and  priyilegc% 
and  the  seque8tration  of  goods ;  upon  those  not  abao- 
lutdy  conyicted,  imprisonment  for  life ;  upon  the  ofasti- 
nate  or  the  relapsed,  the  penalty  of  death—death  at  the 
stake,  death  by  the  secular  arm.  '*  The  Inquifiitioa,  with 
speciouB  hypocrisy,  while  it  prepared  and  dreesed  up  the 
yictim  for  the  buming,  looked  on  with  calm  and  apptoy- 
ing  satififaction,  as  it  had  left  the  sin  of  lightlng  the  fiie 
to  poUuto  other  hands."  As  if  these  horrible  tieatments 
of  fellow-bdngs  were  not  bad  enoagh,pope  Innocent  IT, 
in  a  buli  {De  erłirpanda)  in  the  year  1252,  oidained 
that  accused  persons  should  be  lortured,  not  merely  to 
induce  them  to  confess  their  own  heresy,  bnt  alaó  to 
compd  them  to  accuse  others.  Such  was  the  organtza- 
tion  of  the  Inquisition  in  the  13th  century — **  a  C3ui»- 
tian  codę,  of  which  the  basis  was  a  system  of  ddation 
that  the  worst  of  the  pagan  empeiors  might  haye  shnd- 
dered  at  as  iniquitous;  in  which  the  sole  act  deserring 
of  mercy  might  seem  to  be  the  Judas-like  betmyal  of 
the  dearest  and  most  familiar  friend,  of  the  kiiMJwyfp^^ 
the  parent,  the  child.  ...  No  falsehood  was  too  false, 
no  craft  too  crafty,  no  trick  too  base  for  thia  calm,  sys- 
tematic  morał  torturę,  which  was  to  wring  further  con- 
fession against  the  heretic,  denundation  against  otbeis. 
If  the  rack,  the  pulleys,  the  thumbscrew,  and  the  boou 
were  not  yet  inyented  or  applied,  it  was  not  in  merey. 
.  .  .  Nothing  that  the  stemest  or  most  pasńonate  hir- 
torian  has  reyealed,  nothing  that  the  most  impresBiye 
ronumoe-writer  oould  haye  imagined,  can  suipaaa  tbe 
cold,  systematic  treacheiy  and  crudty  of  theae  so-caBod 
judicial  formularies*'  (Milman,  LaHn  ChriatkrnUf,  ri^  Sj; 
83).  The  exce86iye  cradties,  howeyer,  of  the  lnqiusi- 
tors,  their  knayery  eyen  in  aocusing  the  innocent  and 
robbing  them  of  their  poasessions,  exasperated  the  peo- 
ple, and  they  rosę  up  against  the  inąuisitoiiL    At  Toop 


INQUISinON 


699 


iNQxnsrnoN 


loufle  and  Narbonne  the  inąiiiaton  were  banished  in 
1235,  «nd  four  of  them  killed  in  the  former  city  in  1242, 
and  the  pope  was  finally  obliged  to  suppreae  the  tribu- 
nal  at  the  former  place  altogether.  When  at  laat  re- 
8tored,the  inguisitorial  tribnnal  resamed  its  foimer  cro- 
eltj,  until  Philip  the  Fair  (A.D.  1291)  ordered  the  civil 
officers  to  exerci8e  great  caation  in  acting  on  the  aocu- 
aations  madę  by  the  inąuisiŁorB*  But  what  inauireo- 
tions  and  loyal  edicta  in  France  could  not  acoompliah, 
ecdeaiastico-political  eyenta,  such  aa  the  papai  achiam 
in  the  14th,  and  the  reformatory  oonncils  in  the  15th 
centuy,  were  canaed  to  bring  about.  The  former  crip- 
pled  the  power  of  the  hierarchy  with  the  latter,  and  lim- 
ited  thereby  the  power  of  the  Inąuiaition,  ao  that  it  now 
prooeeded  against  aecret  or  auapected  heretica  only  on 
the  accoaation  of  aorcery  and  connection  with  the  devil 
(compare  the  Breve  of  Nicholaa  Y,  in  Raynald,  a.  14Ó1). 
In  the  16th  century,  the  tim^  of  the  Refoimation,  the 
deigy,  aupported  by  the  Guiaea,  were  able  to  rekindle 
▼ioleat  peraecutiona  againat  the  Huguenota  (q.  v.)}  and 
endeaTored  to  restore  the  Inąnisition  to  ita  former  pow- 
er, bat  it  had  now  loat  ita  territor3\  Paul  lY,  it  iB  true, 
poUished  a  buli  (April  25, 1&57)  to  re-eatabliah  it  (Ray- 
nald, a.  1507,  no.  29),  and  Henry  II  compelled  Parlia- 
ment  to  paas  a  correaponding  edict;  but  Paul,  who  on 
his  death-bed  commended  the  Inąuiaition  aa  the  main 
sopport  of  the  Romish  Cburch  (Schrockh,  Kirchengeach, 
•at  d.  Rtformation,  iii,  248  8q.),  died  in  1559,  and  the 
new  attempt  to  re-eatablish  it  failed ;  ao  that  in  France, 
where  it  took  its  riae  first,  it  was  alao  first  disoontinued, 
in  spite  of  priestcraft  and  Jeauitiam. 

Tke  Inquiskwn  m  Germamf^^But  from  France  the 
Inąuiaition  soon  caat  ita  net  over  neighboring  and  dia- 
tant  countriea,  even  beyond  the  ocean,  by  the  aid  of 
the  Jesuits.  Almoat  immediately  after  ita  firm  ea- 
tablishment  in  France,  the  Inąuiaition  apread  to  Ger- 
many. The  first  inąuiaitor  waa  Conrad  of  Marburg, 
who  oiganized  the  "  holy  ofBce"  with  terrible  aererity 
dniittg  the  years  1231-1238.  The  aentencea  of  death 
which  this  new  tribunal  pronounced  were  not  few  in 
niunber,  and  of  course  they  alwaya  obtained  the  ap- 
pioral  of  ihe  emperor,  Ferdinand  II.  But  there  waa  a 
higher  power  than  that  of  the  reigning  prince,  which 
had  been  loat  aight  of ;  and  thongh  the  people'a  roice 
was  in  thoae  dark  daya  not  quite  ao  powerful  aa  in  our 
own,  it  certainly  aufficed  to  thwart  the  iniqiutou8  de- 
signs  of  these  *'  holy  officera."  So  energetically  did  the 
people  and  the  noblea  oppoae  the  Inąuiaition,  that  it 
oould  cany  out  ita  aentencea  in  a  Tery  few  caaea  only. 
In  1233  the  lower  claaa  of  the  people,  alwaya  ready  to 
ezecute  judgment,  took  the  law  into  their  own  handa, 
and  Conrad  of  Bflarburg  waa  alain  in  the  atreeta  of  Straa- 
burg.  It  waa  not  really  untU  the  14th  century  that  the 
Inąuisition  can  be  aaid  to  have  been  properiy  eatabliah- 
ed  in  Germany.  It  waa  at  thia  time  that  the  Begharda 
(q.  V.)  madę  their  appearance.  To  auppreaa  them,  pope 
Urban  Yappointed  in  1367  two  Dominicana  aa  inąuisi- 
tors,  who  engaged  in  a  regular  cruaade  againat  the  new 
Kct,  and  austained  by  three  different  edicta  of  the  em- 
peror Charlea  lY,  rendered  in  1369,  fąiled  not  to  re- 
peat  in  Germany  the  cruel  practiceaof  the  French 
brethren  of  their  order.  Enoouraged  by  their  auoceaaea 
agai-ist  the  Begharda,  and  by  the,  to  them,  ao  farorable 
attitade  of  the  emperor,  pope  Gregory  XI  increaaed  in 
1372  the  number  of  the  inąuiaitora  to  five,  and  in  1899 
BoniCue  IX  appointed  no  leaa  than  8ix  of  theae  <'holy 
men"  for  auch  "holy"  work  for  the  north  of  Germany 
alone.  But  in  proportion  aa  the  reformatory  tendendea 
gabed  ground  in  Germany,  the  Inquiaition  loat  ita  foot^ 
hołd.  A  deaperate  effort  waa  madę  by  Jacob  Sprenger 
and  Heinrich  Kriimer,  two  inąuiaitora  appointed  by  In- 
nocent YUI,  under  the  plea  of  a  proaecution  of  aorcerera 
and  ińtchea  only.  They  even  influenoed  the  pope  to 
poblish  the  haUlSummis  detiderantes  afectUnu)  in  1484 
(Dec  5)  which  reaffirmed  the  doctrinea  preTiouały  aet 
fonh  conceming  hereay  in  regard  to  aorcery  and  witch- 
craft,  and  the  puniahment  by  the  Inąuiaition  of  thoae 


gnilty  of  auch  crimea.  To  juatify  their  harah  dealinga 
aa  execntor8  of  the  Bomiah  dicta,  and  to  hide  their  in- 
iąuitoua  work  bebind  the  acreen  of  devotion  Ćo  the  cauae 
of  Chriat,  they  pnbliahed  a  codę  called  "  Hexenham- 
mer"  {AfaUeus  maleficorufn)y  in  accordance  with  which 
the  proaecution  waa  to  be  carried  on.  In  this  way  they 
prooeeded  to  condemn  and  execute  a  laige  number  oł 
persona.  The  Reformation  at  laat  oompletely  overthrew 
the  power  of  the  Inąuiaition  in  Germany,  and  the  at- 
tempta  to  re-eetabliah  it,  madę  moatly  by  the  Jeauita, 
with  an  endeavor  to  check  the  progreea  of  eTangelical 
truth,  aa  in  Auatńa,  Bohemia,  and  Bavaria  (where  a 
tribunal  of  the  Inąuiaition  was  formally  eataUiahed  in 
1599),  proyed  ineffectnal,  and  of  ahort  duration. 

In  Itahf  the  Inąuiaition  waa  intioduoed  niider  the  di- 
rection  of  the  Dominicana  in  1224,  but  it  waa  not  nutil 
1235  that  it  waa  firmly  eataUiahed  aa  a  tribunal  by 
pope  Gregory  IX.  Just  here,  it  may  not  be  amisa  to 
atate  that  Łaoordaire,  in  his  Life  of  Dominie  (  Workt,  i, 
95  aq.),  aeeka  to  reiieye  the  memory  of  Dominie,  and 
alao  the  Dominican  order,  of  the  apedal  odium  which 
attachea  to  them  from  their  agency  in  eatabtiahing  and 
condncting  the  Inąuiaition  (compare  Hare,  Contest  with 
Romę,  p.  284-292).  The  Dominicana  certainly  cannot 
be  freed  from  thia  charge,  which  ia  too  well  founded, 
and  the  efforta  of  a  Lacordaire  even  mnat  prove  to  be  in 
yain.  But  to  return  to  the  tribunal  of  Gregory  IX.  It 
waa  at  thia  time  mtended  eapecially  againat  the  Wal- 
denaea,  who  had  fled  from  the  aouth  of  France  to  Pied- 
mont,  and  now  threatened  to  infect  alł  Italy  with  their 
doctrinea.  Later  ita  power  waa  directed  againat  other 
heretica;  but  the  papai  achiam  and  the  political  com- 
motiona  which  agitated  the  country  greatly  weakened 
ita  power.  The  free  atatea  of  which  Italy  waa  then 
oompoaed  neither  oould  nor  would  long  bear  the  ^arbi- 
trary  and  yexatioua  pioceedinga**  of  the  Inąuisition; 
and  "  about  the  middle  of  the  14Łh  century  meaaurea 
were  generaUy  adopted  to  reatrain  ita  exorbitant  power, 
in  apite  of  the  oppoaition  madę  by  Clement  YI,  and  the 
censurea  which  he  fulminated.  The  right  of  the  biah- 
opa  to  take  part  with  the  inąuiaitora  in  the  examination 
of  heretica  waa  recogniaed ;  they  were  reatricted  to  the 
aimple  oognizance  of  the  charge  of  hereay,  and  depriyed 
of  the  power  of  iropriaonment,  confiacation,  flne,  and 
corporal  puniahment,  which  waa  declared  to  belong 
aolely  to  the  aecular  arm"  (MKMe,  Ref,  m  lUdy,  p.  189; 
oomp.  Galluzzi,  I$tor,  dd  GrcmduccUo  di  ToseanOf  i,  142, 
143).  But  auch  a  modę  of  procedurę  the  Church  of 
Romę  found  to  be  ineffectual  for  auppreaaing  free  in- 
ąuiry,  and  maintaining  hierarchical  authority,  ailer  the 
new  opiniona  began  to  apread  in  Italy;  and  aa  in  Ger- 
many and  the  aouth  of  France,  ao  alao  here^  the  biahopa 
in  many  inatanoea  haying  beoome  lukewaim,.8ome  eyen 
dared  to  manifeat  a  humane  feeling  towarda  thoae  who 
choae  to  diifer  from  them  in  religioua  viewa;  the  ac- 
cuaed  often  auffered  only  yery  dight  puniahment,  or 
were  permitted  to  eecape  before  the  neceaaary  orders  for 
their  arreat  were  iaaued.  On  theae  aoeoonta  pope  Paul 
III  finally  reaolyed,  at  the  inatigation  of  cardinal  John 
Peter  Cwraffa,  to  atzengthen  the  power  of  the  inąuiaitors 
by  the  eatabliahment  of  the  "  Congregation  of  the  Holy 
Ofilce"  (1534),  with  cardinal  Carafia  (afterwarda  Paul 
lY)  at  their  head,  which  the  morę  zealoua  of  the  Bo- 
maniata  conaidered  the  only  means  of  preaerying  Italy 
from  bcing  oyerrun  with  hereay.  A  conatitutiou  for  a 
aupreme  and  uniyeraal  Inąuiaition  at  Romę  was  prom- 
ulgated  July  21, 1542,  and  operationa  commenced  under 
it  in  1548.  Six  cardinals  now  receiyed  the  title  and 
righta  of  inąuiaitora  generał,  and  authority  waa  giyen 
them  on  both  aidea  of  the  Alpa  "  to  try  all  cauaea  of  her- 
eay, with  the  power  of  apprehending  and  incarcerating 
auapected  peraons  and  their  abettors,  of  whataoeyer  ea- 
tatę,  rank,  or  order,  of  nominating  officera  under  them, 
and  appointing  inferior  tribunala  in  all  placea,  with  the 
samo  or  with  limited  powers"  (M*Crie,  Brf.  in  Itahf,  p, 
189  aą. ;  comp.  Chandler'8  Limborch,  Hi$L  ofth&  Inguu. 
sitionf  i,  151 ;  Llorente,  Hittoire  de  VInquit,  ii,  78).    Bot 


iNQmsinoN 


600 


iNQUisrnoK 


whOe  the  iiiqiii8iton  were  to  extiipate  heresy  and  pan- 
iah  heretic&  the  vicar  of  Christ  reaerred  for  himself  the 
graces  of  reoonciluition  and  abeolution.  In  the  anx>- 
g^oe  which  Romę  haa  ever  manifested,  the  power 
which  belonged  to  the  judge  waa  withdrawn,  and  the 
power  of  life  and  death  over  the  subjects  of  the  dilTerent 
goyemments  of  the  world  aaeerted  to  belong  to  the  pa- 
pai aee.  Of  oonrae  the  new  cardinal  inąuisitora  madę 
fuli  nae  of  their  powers,  and  soon  became  the  terror  not 
oniy  of  Romę  and  Italy,  bat'of  all  the  countries  orer 
which  they  could  poeńbly  exert  any  influence.  The 
Inquisition  was  especiaUy  seyere  againat  the  press. 
«Bookfl  were  deatroyed,  and  many  morę  disAgured; 
printers  were  forfoidden  to  carry  on  their  business  with- 
out  licenses  from  the  Holy  Office.**  See  Imt>ex.  The 
terror-stricken  people,  howeyer,  soon  gained  their  foot- 
hołd  again,  and  oppositions  against  the  encroachments 
of  Romę  were  eyeiywhere  manifest.  The  greatest  re- 
sistance  to  it  was  cftkmd  in  Yenioe.  The  repnblic  re- 
fused  to  safcnnit  to  an  inquiHtorial  tiibunal  responaible 
solely  to  the  pope,  and,  after  long  negotiations,  permit- 
ted  only  the  establishment  of  an  inąuisitorial  tribunal  on 
oondition  that,  with  the  papai  offlcers,  a  certain  number 
of  magistrates  and  lawyen  should  always  be  associated, 
and  that  the  definitiye  seutenoe  should  not,  at  least  in 
the  case  of  laics,  be  pronounced  before  it  was  submitted 
to  the  senate  (Busdragi  Epistoła:  Scrimum  Antuguar, 
i,  821,  826  sq. ;  Thuani,  Hist,  ad  an.  1548).  In  Naples 
like  difficulties  between  the  goyemment  and  the  pope 
arose  on  the  endeayor  of  the  latter  to  eetablish  the  in- 
quisitorial  tribunaL  Twice  the  Neapolitans  had  suc- 
oessfnlly  resisted  its  establishment  in  their  country  at 
the  beginning  of  the  16th  oentury.  In  1546,  the  em- 
peror  Charles  Y,  with  the  yiew  of  eztirpating  the  Lu- 
theran  heiesy,  renewed  the  attempt,  and  gaye  orders  to 
set  up  that  tribunal  in  Naples,  after  the  same  form  in 
which  it  had  long  been  established  in  Spain.  The 
people  roee  in  arms,  and  although  Romę  would  haye 
been  only  too  glad  to  see  this  formidable  tribunal  estab- 
lished in  Naples,  yet,  nther  than  to  forego  the  intro- 
duction  of  an  inąuisitorial  tribunal  altogether,  she  took 
the  part  of  the  people  against  the  goyemment^  and  en- 
connged  them  in  their  oppoeition  by  telling  them  that 
they  had  reason  for  their  fears,  because  the  Spanish 
Inąuisition  (see  below)  was  extremely  seyere.  Herę 
it  may  be  weU  to  quote  M*Crie  (Rrf.  m  Italy,  p.  258  8q.) 
on  the  truth  of  this  assertion,  which  many  Protestant 
as  well  as  Roman  Catholic  wńters  haye  not  failed  to  re- 
peat  and  urge  in  fayor  of  the  tendency  to  mercy  at 
Romę.  Says  MKMe :  *<  Both  the  statement  of  the'fact 
and  the  reasons  by  which  it  is  usually  accounted  for  re- 
qnire  to  be  qualifled.  One  of  these  reasons  is  the  policy 
with  which  the  Italians,  including  the  popes,  haye  al- 
ways consulted  their  pecuniaiy  interests,  to  which  they 
pottponed  tvery  other  cćntideraHon.  (Compare  the  op- 
poaition  of  the  papacy  to  the  Inqaisition  as  a  state 
institution  in  Portugal,  below.)  The  second  reason  is 
that  the  popes,  being  temponl  pńnces  in  the  States 
of  the  Church,  had  no  occasion  to  employ  the  Inquifd- 
tion  to  undermine  the  rights  of  the  secular  authorities 
in  them,  as  in  other  countries.  This  is  unquestionab]y 
true;  and  it  accounts  for  the  fact  that  the  court  of  the 
Inqui8ition,  long  after  its  opeiations  had  been  suspended 
in  Italy,  continued  to  be  warmly  supported  by  papai  in- 
fluence in  Spain.  But  at  the  time  of  which  I  write, 
and  during  the  remainder  of  the  16th  century,  it  was  in 
foli  and  constant  operation,  and  the  popes  found  that 
it  enabled  them  to  aocomplish  what  would  haye  baffled 
their  power  as  secular  soyereigns.  The  chief  diflcrence 
between  the  Italian  and  Spanish  Inqui8itions  at  that 
period  consisted  in  their  respectiye  lines  of  policy  as  to 
the  modę  of  punishment  The  latter  sought  to  inspire 
terror  by  the  soleron  spectade  of  a  public  act  of  Justice, 
in  which  the  scaiTold  was  crowded  with  criminals.  .  .  . 
The  report  of  the  antoe  da  U  (q.  y.)  of  Seyille  and  YaT- 
Udolid  blazed  at  once  oyer  Europę;  the  executions  of 
Eome  madę  less  noise  in  the  city,  becauae  they  were 


less  splendid  as  well  as  morę  frcquent,  and  the  nimor  of 
them  died  away  befure  itoould  reach  the  ear  of  foreign- 
ers."  But  all  that  Romę  could  accomplish  in  Naples,  in 
spite  of  her  cunning,  was  the  establishment  of  an  inde- 
pendent Inquisition,  snch  as  Yenice  had  permitted.  In 
Sicily,  on  the  other  hand,  Spain  fumished  a  generał  in- 
quisitor,  and,  though  abolished  for  a  time,  the  office  was 
restored  in  1782,  and  remained  in  force  until  Napoleon, 
as  king  of  Italy,  did  away  with  it  throughout  the  realm 
in  1808.  The  fali  of  Napoleon,  of  couree,  at  once  ena- 
bled the  papai  see  to  re-establish  the  Inquisition,  bat, 
though  Pius  YII  improyed  the  opportunity  (in  1814)^ 
it  did  not  spread  far,  and  met  with  great  opposition. 
In  Sardinia,  where  Gregory  XYI  restored  it  in  1888, 
it  waa  not  discontinued  until  the  Reyolution  of  1848 
again  did  away  with  it  **  In  Tuscany  it  was  arranged 
that  three  oommissioners,  elected  by  the  congregation 
at  Romę,  along  with  the  local  inqutsitor,  should  judge 
in  all  causes  of  religion,  and  intimate  their  sentenoe  to 
the  duke,  who  was  bound  to  carry  it  into  execution.  In 
addition,  it  (the  Holy  Office)  was  continually  solidting 
the  local  authorities  to  send  such  as  were  accused,  espe- 
cially  if  they  were  either  eoclesiastical  persons  or  stran- 
gers,  to  be  tried  by  the  Inqui8ition  at  Romę."  Eyery- 
where  within  the  territoiy  persecution  was  let  loose. 
Especially  during  the  political  reactions  of  1849  the  in- 
quisitorial  tribunal  was  perhaps  nowhere  so  actiye  and 
so  seyere  in  its  dealings  as  in  Tuscany  (compare  Rankę, 
Hittory  of  the  Papeteyt  ii»  156  Bq.).  It  is  only  sińce  the 
embodiment  of  that  proyince  with  Italy  (1859)  that  the 
countiy  got  rid  of  this  great  curse,  from  which  all  Italy 
suffered;  and  *'popish  historians"  certainly  *<do  morę 
homage  to  truth  tjian  credit  to  their  cause  when  they 
say  that  the  erection  of  the  Inqui8ition  was  the  salya- 
tion  of  the  Catholic  Church  in  Italy.**  It  certainly  does 
not  yerify  itself  in  our  own  days,  though  the  tribunal 
of  the  Inqai8ttion  still  exist8  at  Romę,  under  the  direc- 
tion  of  a  congregation,  and  though  the  last  oecumenical 
Goundl,  which  the  landless  pope,  Pius  IX,  has  Just  de- 
clared  adjounied  sine  die^  has  but  lately  paśscd  two  can- 
ons  (canon  yi  and  canon  xii,  De  Ecclesia  Chritti)  in  its 
fayor.  Its  action,  by  the  circumstanccs  of  the  day,  is 
mainly  oonfined  to  the  examination  of  books,  and  to  the 
trial  of  ecdesiastical  ofiences  and  questions  of  Church 
law,  as  in  the  late  case  of  the  Jewiah  boy  Mortara; 
and  its  niost  remarkable  prisoner  in  recent  times  was  an 
Oriental  impoetor,  who,  by  means  of  forged  credentials, 
suoceeded  in  obtaining  his  ordination  as  a  bishop. 

The  Inquisition  was  introduced  into  Poland  by  pope 
John  XXII  in  1827,  but  it  did  not  subsist  there  yezy 
long ;  and  all  attempts  of  Romę  to  introduce  it  into  Eng' 
land  were  in  yain. 

Spanuh  Incuitiiion,'-^  The  life  of  eyeiy  deyout  Span- 
iard,*'  says  Milman  (Latin  Christianiły^  y,  239),  *'  was  a 
perpctuid  crusade.  By  temperament  and  by  poeition  he 
was  in  constant  adyenturous  warfare  against  the  ene- 
mies  of  the  Cross :  hatred  of  the  Jew,  of  the  Mohamme- 
dan,  was  the  banner  under  which  he  seryed ;  it  w^as  the 
oath  of  his  chiyalry :  that  hatred,  in  all  its  intensity, 
was  soon  and  eaaily  extended  to  the  heretic**  No  won- 
der,  then,  that  pope  Gregory  IX,  after  the  Inquisit]on 
had  assumed  generał  form  in  France  and  Ciermany,  in- 
troduced it  into  Spain,  and  that  it  proyed  to  be  a  plant 
on  a  most  congenial  soil;  for  it  was  In  Spain  that  *<it 
took  root  at  once,  and  in  times  attained  a  magnitude 
which  it  neyer  reached  in  any  other  country.**  It  waa 
first  introduced  into  Aragon,  where,  in  1242,  the  Coun* 
cil  of  Tarragona  gaye  the  instructions  which  were  to 
serye  the  "  holy  office"  erected  here  as  elsewhere  by  the 
Dominicans.  "■  Accustomed,  in  the  confessional,  to  pen- 
etrate  into  the  secrets  of  conscience,  they  (the  Domini- 
icans)  converted  to  the  destruction  of  the  bodies  of  men 
all  those  arts  which  a  false  zeal  had  taught  them  to  em- 
ploy for  the  saying  of  their  sonls.  Inflamed  with  a  paa- 
sion  for  extirpating  heresy,  and  persuading  themselyea 
that  the  end  sanctified  the  means,  they  not  only  acted 
upon,  but  formally  laid  down,  as  a  rule  for  their  conduc^ 


iNgmsinoN 


601 


mguisinoN 


iwyim«  fonnded  on  the  grotsest  deceit  and  artiflce,  ac> 
oor^ng  to  which  they  songht  in  erery  way  to  enanare 
theii  Yictima,  and  by  meana  of  fialae  atatementa,  deliiaory 
pronuaea,  and  a  tortnoua  oonne  of  examination,  to  b»- 
tray  them  into  oonfeaaionB  which  prored  fatal  to  their 
lirea  and  fortunea.  To  thia  mental  torturę  waa  aoon  af- 
ter  added  the  aae  of  bodily  tortnrea,  together  with  the 
conoeahnent  of  the  namea  of  witneesea"  (MKMe,  Brf,  m 
Spoin,  p.  85  8q.).  The  arm  of  persecution  waa  directed 
with  apedal  seyerity,  in  the  18th  and  14th  centuriea, 
againat  the  Albigenaea  (q.  ▼.),  who,  from  the  proximity 
and  poUtical  reUtiona  of  Aragon  and  Proyence,  had  be- 
oome  nomeroua  in  the  former  kingdom.  Indeed,  the 
peraecutiona  appear  to  have  been  chiefly  oonflned  to  thia 
unfortonate  aect,  ^'and  there  ia  no  eyidence  that  the 
'  holy  office,'  notwithatanding  papai  briefa  to  that  effect, 
waa  ftdly  organized  in  Casdle  before  the  reign  of  laa- 
beUa.  Thia  ia,  perhapa,  imputable  to  the  paocity  of 
heretica  in  that  kingdom.  It  cannot,  at  any  ratę,  be 
charged  to  any  lokewarmneaa  in  ita  aoyereigna,  aince 
they,  firom  the  time  of  St  Ferdinand,  who  heaped  the 
fiigota  on  the  blaaiug  pile  with  hia  own  handa,  down  to 
that  of  John  the  Second,  laabeUa^a  father,  who  himted 
the  unhappy  heretica  of  Biacay,  like  ao  many  wild  beaata, 
among  the  mountaina,  had  eyer  evinced  a  lively  aeal  for 
the  ortbodox  fiiith."  Upon  the  whole,  the  prógreaa  of 
the  Inqaiaition  during  the  14th  oentury  waa  ateady,  and 
ita  yigor  and  energy  conatantly  on  the  increaae.  Ita 
jurisdiction  the  inąuińtora  aucceeded  in  enlarging,  and 
they  aeyerally  multiplied  ita  ramificationa;  autoa  da  fe 
(q.  y.)  were  celebrated  in  a  namber  of  pUuiea,  and  ics 
yictima  were  not  a  few.  <*By  the  middle  of  the  15th 
centoiy  the  Albigenaian  hereay  had  become  nearly  ex- 
tirpated  by  the  Inąoiaition  of  Aragon,  ao  that  thia  in- 
fenial  engine  might  haye  been  suffered  to  aleep  undia- 
torbed  from  want  of  aofficient  fuel  to  keep  it  in  motion, 
when  new  and  ample  materiaU  were  diaooyered  in  the 
unfortunato  race  of  laraeL"  "  The  *  new  Chriatiana/  or 
'oonyerta/  aa  thoae  who  had  renounced  the  faith  of  their 
fathers  were  denominated,  were  occaaionally  preferred  to 
high  ecdesiaatical  dignitiea,  which  they  illuatrated  by 
their  integrity  and  leaming.  They  were  intruated  with 
mnnicipal  officea  in  the  yarioua  dtiea  of  Caatile ;  and  aa 
their  wealth  fumished  an  obyiooa  reaource  for  repairing, 
by  way  of  marriage,  the  decayed  fortunea  of  the  nobil- 
ity,  there  waa  scarcely  a  family  of  rank  in  the  land 
whoae  blood  had  not  been  contaminated  at  aome  pe- 
riod or  other  by  mixtare  with  the  mała  tangre,  aa  it 
came  afterwards  to  be  termed,  of  the  hooae  of  Judah ; 
an  ignominioua  atain  which  no  time  haa  been  deemed 
auffident  whoUy  to  puige/'  Many  of  theae  noble  men, 
of  a  race  that  can  lay  daim  to  the  higheat  nobility  that 
6xiat8  among  men,  felt  that  the  irkaome  taak  of  diaeim- 
iilation  which  they  had  underUken  waa  too  much  below 
the  dignity  of  a  true  Israelite,  and  rather  than  enjoy 
the  fiiyors  of  a  nation  aa  apostates  from  a  religion  which 
they  atill  held  to  be  the  only  true  one  (and  who  would 
expect  that  Komiah  treatment  and  Romish  Chriatian  ex- 
ample  could  inatill  oonfidence  and  produce  impressions 
fayorable  to  the  caiiae  of  Chriat  ?),  preferred  an  open  con- 
feańon  of  the  opiniona  which  they  cheriahed  in  their 
hearta,  eyen  at  the  expen8e  of  loaing  poaitiona  of  promi- 
nence  to  which  they  were  ably  fitted,but  from  which,  as 
ia  too  oflen  the  caae  even  in  our  own  day,  their  religious 
conyictiona,  if  openly  avowed,  not  only  debarred  them, 
but  which  even  endangered  their  very  life.  But  Rom- 
iah  prieata  could  not,  of  course,  be  expected  to  toler- 
ato  heresy  in  any  form,  « eapróially  the  Dominicans, 
who  aeem  to  haye  inherited  the  ąnick  scent  fbr  hereay 
which  diatinguiahed  their  frantic  founder;  they  were 
not  alow  in  sounding  the  alarm,  and  the  superatitions 
popnlace,  eaaily  rouaed  to  acta  of  yiolence  in  the  name 
of  religion,  began  to  exhibit  the  rooat  tumult  uoua  moye- 
menta,  and  actually  maaaacred  the  oonatable  of  Caatile 
in  an  attempt  to  auppreaa  them  at  Jaen,  the  year  pre- 
ceding  the  acoeaaion  of  Isabella"  (Preacott,  Ferdinand 
and Isabeila,  i,  285  aq.).    After  the  union  of  Spain  under 


one  kingdom,  goyemed  by  Ferdinand  and  babella,  to- 
warda  the  doae  of  the  15th  centuiy,  the  Inąuisition  be< 
came  generaL  It  waa  at  thia  time  that  the^inąuińtorial 
tribunal  underwent  **  what  its  frienda  haye  honored  with 
the  name  of  a  reform  f  in  conaeąuenoe  of  which  it  be- 
came  a  mora  terrible  engine  of  persecution  than  before. 
Under  thia  new  form  it  ia  uaoally  called  the  Modem  In- 
quiaition,  though  it  may  with  eąual  propriety  bear  the 
name  of  the  Spaniah,  as  it  originated  in  Spain,  and  haa 
been  oonflned  to  that  country,  including  Portugal,  and 
the  dominiona  aubject  to  the  two  monarchiea.  .  .  .  The 
prindplea  of  the  andent  and  modem  Inąuisition  were 
radically  the  aame,  but  they  aaaumed  a  morę  malignant 
form  under  the  latter  than  under  the  former.  Under 
the  andent  Inąniaition  the  biahopa  alwaya  had  a  certain 
degree  of  control  oyer  ita  proceedings ;  the  law  of  aeore- 
cy  waa  not  ao  rigidly  enforoed  in  practice :  greater  lib- 
erty  waa  allowed  to  the  accuaed  on  their  defence;  and 
in  aome  oountrlea,  aa  in  Aragon,  in  conseąuence  of  the 
dyil  righta  acqui2^  by  the  people,  the  inquiaitora  were 
reatrained  from  aequestniting  the  property  of  thoae 
whom  they  conyicted  of  hereay.  But  the  leading  dif- 
ference  between  the  two  inatitutiona  conaiated  in  the  or- 
ganization  of  the  latter  into  one  great  independent  tri- 
bunal, which,  extending  oyer  the  whole  kingdom,  waa 
goyemed  by  one  oode  of  lawa,  and  yidded  implidt  obe- 
diehce  to  one  head.  The  inquiBitor  generał  poaBeaaed 
an  anthority  acarcdy  inferior  to  that  of  the  king  or  the 
pope;  by  Joining  with  either  of  them,  he  proyed  an 
oyermatoh  for  the  other;  and  when  anpported  by  both, 
hia  power  waa  irreaiatible.  The  andent  Inquiaition  waa 
a  powerful  engine  for  haraaaing  and  rooting  out  a  amall 
bcidy  of  dinidenta;  the  modem  InquiaiŁion  stretehed  ita 
iron  arma  oyer  a  whole  nation,  upon  which  it  lay  like  a 
monatroua  incubua,  paralyzing  ita  exertiona,  cniahing  ita 
energiea,  and  extingui8hing  eyeiy  other  feeling  but  a 
sense  of  weakneaa  and  terror"  (M'Oie,  Hef,  in  Spain,  p. 
86, 108).  Moat  prominent  among  thoae  who  were  ao- 
tjye  in  bringing  about  thia  new  order  of  thuigs  were 
the  arehbiahop  of  Sevilie,  Petro  Gonzalez  de  Mendosa, 
the  Franciscan  (afterwaids  cardinal)  Ximenea,  and  the 
Dominican  prior  Torquemada.  But  to  the  credit  of  la- 
abella  be  it  aaid,  that  it  waa  only  ber  zeal  for  the  cauae 
of  her  Chureh  that  led  ber,  when  miaguided,  to  commit 
the  unfortunato  error;  **an  error  ao  graye  that,  like  a 
yein  in  some  noble  piece  of  statuary,  it  giyea  a  aima- 
ter  expre8aion  to  her  otherwise  unblemished  chaiacter" 
(Presoott).  Indeed,  it  waa  only  after  repeated  importn- 
nitiea  of  the  clergy,  particularly  of  thoae  whom  ahe  be- 
lieyed  to  be  aincere  aa  herself  in  the  zeal  for  the  Rom- 
iah  religion,  and  only  theae  when  seconded  by  the  ta- 
gumenta  of  Ferdinand,  who,  to  hia  shame  be  it  aaid,  fa- 
yored  the  project  becauae  he  belieyed  it  likdy  to  reault 
in  filling  hia  cofftra  by  meana  of  confiscationa,  that  ahe 
conaented  to  aolidt  from  the  pope  a  buli  for  the  estab- 
lishment of  the  "holy  office"  in  Caatile.  " Sixtua  lY, 
who  at  that  time  fllled  the  pontifical  chair,  easily  dia- 
ceming  the  soorcea  of  wealth  and  influence  which  thia 
meaaure  opened  to  the  court  of  Romę,  readily  oomplied 
with  the  petttion  of  the  soyerdgna,  and  expedited  a  buli 
bearing  dato  Noy.  1, 1478,  authorizing  them  to  appoint 
two  or  three  ecclesiastics  inqui8itorB  for  the  detection 
and  auppreaaion  of  hereay  throughout  their  dominiona** 
(Preacott,  i,  248,249).  The  appointment  of  these  offi- 
cers  waa  madę  Sept.  17, 1480,  the  dergy  in  confidence 
with  the  qneen  profesaing  to  haye  failed  in  their  at- 
tempta  **  to  illuminate  the  benighted  Israelites  by  meana 
of  friendly  exhortation  and  a  candid  exposition  of  the 
tme  prindplea  of  Christianity,"  which  laabella  had  ooun- 
selled  before  yiolent  measures  were  rcaorted  to.  Janu- 
ary 2, 1481,  the  new  inqnisitor8  commenced  their  pro- 
ceedings in  the  Dominican  conyent  of  St.  Paul,  at  Se- 
yiUe.  But  the  tribunal  did  not  really  aasume  a  perma- 
nent  form  until  two  years  later,  when  the  Dominican 
monk  Thomaa  de  Torquemada,  the  queen'8  confesaor, 
aubeequently  raiaed  to  the  rank  of  prior  of  Santa  Craz 
in  Segoyia,  waa  pUHMdl(t  1^.  h%Bltm4nquiaitor  generał* 


'  'i   * 


INQUISinON 


600 


iNQUisrnoK 


while  the  inąoiaiton  were  to  extirpate  heresy  and  pan- 
ish  heretic&  the  vicar  of  Christ  refleired  for  himself  the 
graces  of  reconciliation  and  aheolution.  In  the  arro- 
ganoe  which  Romę  has  ever  manifested,  the  power 
which  belonged  to  the  judge  was  withdrawn,  and  the 
power  of  life  and  death  oyer  the  suhjects  of  the  dilTerent 
goyemments  of  the  world  asserted  to  belong  to  the  par 
pal  aee.  Of  conrse  the  new  cardinal  inąuiaitore  madę 
fuli  use  of  their  powers,  and  soon  hecame  the  terror  not 
ooly  of  Romę  and  Italy,  bat'of  all  the  oountries  over 
which  they  could  possibly  exert  any  inflaence.  The 
Inąuisition  was  especially  seyere  agałnst  the  piess. 
«Books  were  destroyed,  and  many  morę  disfigured; 
printere  were  forbidden  to  cany  on  their  business  with- 
out  iicenses  from  the  Holy  CMBce.'*  See  Ikdex.  The 
terror-stricken  people,  howeyer,  soon  gained  their  foot^ 
hołd  again,  and  oppositions  against  the  encroachments 
of  Romę  were  eyerywhere  manifest.  The  greatest  re- 
sistance  to  it  was  offered  in  Yenice.  The  republic  re- 
fosed  to  sabmit  to  an  inquisitorial  tribunal  responsible 
solely  to  the  pope,  and,  after  long  negotiations,  permit- 
ted  only  the  establishment  of  an  inquisitorial  tribunal  on 
oondition  that,  with  the  papai  ofBcersi  a  oertain  number 
of  magistrates  and  lawyen  should  always  be  associated, 
and  that  the  definitiye  sentence  should  not,  at  least  in 
the  case  of  laics,  be  pronounced  before  it  was  submitted 
to  the  senate  (Busdragi  Epistoła:  Scnnium  AtUiquar. 
i,  821,  826  8q. ;  Thuani,  Higł.  ad  an.  1548).  In  Naples 
like  difficulties  between  the  goyemment  and  the  pope 
arose  on  the  endeayor  of  the  latter  to  establish  the  in- 
ąuisitorial  tribunal.  Twice  the  Neapolitans  had  suo- 
oessfully  resisted  its  establishment  in  their  country  at 
the  beginning  of  the  16th  century.  In  1546,  the  em- 
peror  Charles  Y,  with  the  yiew  of  extirpating  the  Lu- 
theran  heresy,  renewed  the  attempt,  and  gaye  orders  to 
set  up  that  tribunal  in  Naples,  after  the  same  form  in 
which  it  had  long  been  establiahed  in  Spain.  The 
people  roee  in  arms,  and  although  Romę  would  haye 
been  only  too  glad  to  see  this  formidable  tribunal  estab- 
liahed in  Naples,  yet,  rather  than  to  forego  the  intro- 
duction  of  an  inquisitorial  tribunal  altogether,  she  took 
the  part  of  the  people  against  the  goyemment,  and  en- 
coonged  them  in  their  opposition  by  telling  them  that 
they  had  reaaon  for  their  fears,  because  the  Spanish 
Inąuisition  (see  below)  was  extremely  seyere.  Here 
it  may  be  well  to  quote  MK>ie  {Rrf.  m  Itcdy,  p.  258  są.) 
on  the  tmth  of  this  assertion,  which  many  Protestant 
as  well  as  Roman  Catholic  writers  haye  not  failed  to  re- 
peat  and  uige  in  fayor  of  the  tendency  to  mercy  at 
Romę.  Says  MOrie :  "  Both  the  statement  of  the  fact 
and  the  reasons  by  which  it  is  usually  aoconnted  for  re- 
ąuire  to  be  ąualified.  One  of  these  reasons  is  the  policy 
with  which  the  Italians,  induding  the  popes,  haye  al- 
ways consulted  their  pecuniary  interestś,  to  tohich  thfy 
pottponed  €very  other  cowideration,  (Compare  the  op- 
position of  the  papacy  to  the  Inquisition  as  a  state 
institution  in  Portugal,  below.)  The  second  reason  is 
that  the  popes,  being  teropońl  princes  in  the  States 
of  the  Chureh,  had  no  occasion  to  employ  the  Inąuisi- 
tion to  undermine  the  rights  of  the  secular  authorides 
in  them,  as  in  other  countries.  This  is  unąuestionably 
true ;  and  it  accounts  for  the  fact  that  the  court  of  the 
Inąuisition,  long  after  its  operations  had  been  suspended 
in  Italy,  oontinned  to  be  warmly  supported  by  papai  in- 
fluence in  Spain.  But  at  the  time  of  which  I  write, 
and  during  the  remainder  of  the  16th  century,  it  was  in 
foli  and  constant  operation,  and  the  popes  found  that 
it  enabled  them  to  aooomplish  what  would  haye  baffled 
their  power  as  secular  soyereigns.  The  chief  differenoe 
between  the  Italian  and  Spanish  Inąuisitions  at  that 
period  consisted  in  their  respectiye  lines  of  policy  as  to 
the  modę  of  pnnishment  The  latter  songht  to  inspire 
terror  by  the  solemn  spectacle  of  a  public  act  of  justice, 
in  which  the  scaflbkl  was  crowded  with  criminals.  .  .  . 
The  report  of  the  autos  da  fe  (q.  y.)  of  Seyille  and  YaT- 
ladolid  blazed  at  onoe  oyer  Europę;  the  executions  of 
Eome  madę  len  noise  in  the  cityi  because  they  were 


less  splendid  as  well  as  moro  frcąuent,  and  the  rumor  of 
them  died  away  befure  it  could  reach  the  ear  of  fareign- 
ers."  But  all  that  Romę  could  accomplish  in  Napiec  in 
spite  of  ber  cunning,  was  the  establishment  of  an  inde- 
pendent Inąnińtion,  such  as  Yenice  had  pennitted.  In 
Sicily,  on  the  other  band,  Spain  fumished  a  gencnl  in- 
ąuisitor,  and,  though  abolished  for  a  time,  the  office  was 
restored  in  1782,  and  remained  in  force  until  Napoleon, 
as  king  of  Italy,  did  away  with  it  throughont  the  reahn 
in  1808.  The  fali  of  Napoleon,  of  oourse,  at  onoe  ena- 
bled the  papai  see  to  re-establish  the  Inąuisition,  bot, 
though  Hus  YII  improyed  the  opportunity  (in  1814)^ 
it  did  not  spread  far,  and  met  with  great  opposition. 
In  Sardinia,  where  Gregory  XYI  restored  it  in  1833, 
it  was  not  discontinued  until  the  Reyolution  of  1848 
again  did  away  with  it  '*  In  Tuscany  it  was  amngeA 
that  three  oommiBsioners,  electcd  by  the  oongregatioo 
at  Romę,  along  with  the  local  inąuisitor,  should  judge 
in  all  causes  of  religion,  and  intimate  their  sentence  to 
the  duke,  who  was  bound  to  carry  it  into  executton.  In 
addition,  it  (the  Holy  Office)  was  oontinuaDy  soliciting 
the  local  authorities  to  send  such  as  were  accuaed,  espe- 
cially if  they  were  either  ecclesiastical  persona  or  stnn- 
gers,  to  be  tried  by  the  Inąuisition  at  Romę."  Kyeiy- 
where  within  the  territoiy  peisecntion  was  let  loose. 
Especially  during  the  polidcal  reacdons  of  1849  the  in- 
ąuisitorial  tribunal  was  perhaps  nowhere  so  actire  and 
so  seyere  in  its  dealings  as  in  Tuscany  (compare  Kanke, 
Hittory  of  the  Papacy^  ii,  166  są.).  It  is  only  aince  the 
embodiment  of  that  proyince  with  Italy  (1859)  that  the 
oountiy  got  rid  of  this  great  curse,  from  which  all  Italy 
suiTered;  and  ^'popish  historians"  cerUinly  ^do  morę 
homage  to  truth  than  credit  to  their  cause  when  they 
say  that  the  erection  of  the  Inąuisition  was  the  aahna- 
tion  of  the  Catholic  Chmrch  in  Italy."  It  certainly  does 
not  yerify  itself  in  our  own  days,  though  the  trtbmial 
of  the  Inąuisidon  still  exi8ts  at  Romę,  under  the  direc- 
tion  of  a  oongregation,  and  though  the  last  (Ecumenical 
council,  which  the  landless  pope,  Pius  IX,  has  just  de- 
clared  adjoumed  ame  die,  has  but  lately  passed  Łwro  can- 
ons  (canon  yi  and  canon  xii,  De  EccUsia  Ckrisft)  in  its 
fayor.  Its  action,  by  the  drcumstances  of  the  dar,  is 
mainly  confined  to  the  examination  of  books,  and  to  tfae 
trial  of  ecdesiastieal  ofSences  and  ąuestions  of  Oiairh 
law,  as  in  the  late  case  of  the  Jewish  boy  Mortara; 
and  its  most  remarkable  prisoner  in  reoeiit  times  was  an 
Oriental  impostor,  who,  by  means  of  foiged  credentiałs, 
sucoeeded  in  obtaining  his  ordination  as  a  bisbo^ 

The  Inąuisition  was  introduced  into  PoUtnd  by  pope 
John  XXII  in  1827,  but  it  did  not  subsist  tbere  Tcry 
long ;  and  all  attempts  of  Romę  to  intioduce  it  into  £a^ 
lami  were  in  yain. 

Spamsh  Incuiniton, — **  The  life  of  eyeiy  deyout  Span- 
iard,"  says  Milman  {L€Um  ChristicmUy,  y,  239),  **  was  a 
perp^tual  crusade.  By  temperament  and  by  poaition  he 
was  in  constant  adyenturous  warfare  against  tfae  ene- 
mies  of  the  Cross :  hatred  of  the  Jew,  of  the  Mohamme- 
dan,  was  the  banner  under  which  he  seryed ;  it  was  the 
oath  of  his  chiyalry :  that  hatred,  in  all  its  inteneśty, 
was  soon  and  eaoily  extended  to  the  heretic."  No  iron- 
der,  then,  that  pope  Gregory  IX,  after  the  Inąuiaitłon 
had  assumed  generał  form  in  France  and  Germany,  in- 
troduced  it  into  Spain,  and  that  it  proyed  to  be  a  plant 
on  a  most  congenial  soil;  for  it  was  in  Spain  that  *^it 
took  root  at  once,  and  in  dmee  attained  a  magmtode 
which  it  neyer  reached  in  any  other  country."  It  was 
first  introdnced  into  Aragon,  where,  in  1242.  the  Conn- 
cii  of  Tarragona  gaye  the  instrucdons  which  were  to 
serye  the  ^  holy  office"  erected  here  as  elsewhcre  by  tfae 
Dominicans.  ^  Accustomed,  in  the  oonfessional,  to  pen- 
etrate  into  the  secrets  of  conscience,  they  (the  Domini- 
icans)  conyerted  to  the  destmcdon  of  the  bodiea  of  men 
all  those  arts  which  a  false  aeal  had  taught  them  to  em- 
ploy for  the  saying  of  their  souls.  Inflijned  with  a  pas- 
sion  for  extirpating  heresy,  and  persuading  thema^reB 
that  the  end  sanctiified  the  means,  they  not  only  acted 
upon,  but  foimally  laid  down,  as  a  nde  for  tfadr  condncl^ 


iNginsmoN 


601 


mguisinoN 


I  foonded  on  the  groesest  deceit  and  artidce,  oo- 
ooiding  to  which  they  wMight  in  every  way  to  ensnare 
their  yictima,  and  by  meana  of  fialae  Btatementa,  delnaory 
promiassi  and  a  tortnous  oooim  of  examination,  to  b»- 
tray  thcm  into  confeańons  which  prored  fatal  to  their 
Ures  and  fortunea.  To  this  mental  torturę  was  soon  af- 
ter  added  the  use  of  bodily  tortnrea,  together  with  the 
oonceabment  of  the  names  of  witneeses"  (M^Grie,  Hrf.  in 
Spaim,  p.  85  sq.).  The  ann  of  penecntion  was  directed 
with  apedal  seyeiity,  in  the  18th  and  14th  oenturies, 
against  the  Albigenaea  (q.  y.\  who,  from  the  proximity 
and  pdiitical  relations  of  Aragon  and  Ployence,  had  be- 
oome  nomeroua  in  the  fonner  kingdom.  Indeed,  the 
persecations  appear  to  have  been  chiefly  oonflned  to  this 
imfortonate  sect,  *^and  there  is  no  eridence  that  the 
'  holy  oflbse,*  notwithstanding  papai  briefs  to  that  effect, 
was  fiiUy  oiganized  in  Castile  before  the  reign  of  Isa- 
beUa.  This  is,  perhapa,  imputable  to  the  paacity  of 
heretifca  in  that  kingdom.  It  cannot,  at  any  rate,  be 
chaiged  to  any  lokewannneas  in  its  sorereigna,  sińce 
they,  from  the  time  of  St.  Ferdinand,  who  heaped  the 
iagots  on  the  blazing  pile  with  his  own  hands,  down  to 
that  of  John  the  Second,  Isabella'8  father,  who  hunted 
the  onhappy  heretics  of  Biseay,  like  so  many  wild  beasts, 
among  the  mountaina,  had  ever  erinced  a  lively  zeal  for 
the  orthodox  faith."  Upon  the  whole,  the  progrees  of 
the  Ixiqttiflition  during  the  Uth  oentnry  was  steady,  and 
iu  Tigpr  and  eneigy  constantly  on  the  increase.  Its 
juiiadicŁion  the  inqaiaitorB  suoceeded  in  enlarging,  and 
they  aeverally  moltiplied  its  ramifications;  autos  da  f^ 
(ą.  y.)  were  celebrated  in  a  number  of  places,  and  its 
yictima  ¥rere  not  a  few.  **  By  the  middle  of  the  Idth 
centoiy  the  Albigensian  heresy  had  beoome  nearly  ex- 
tirpated  by  the  Inqaisition  of  Aragon,  so  that  this  in- 
lemal  cngine  might  lutye  been  suffercŃl  to  sleep  nndis- 
tmbed  finom  want  of  snffident  fuei  to  keep  it  in  motion, 
when  new  and  ample  materiaU  were  disooyered  in  the 
unfortimate  race  of  IsraeL**  ^  The  *  new  Christiana,'  or 
'oooyerta,*  as  thoee  who  had  renounced  the  faith  of  their 
iathers  were  denominated,  were  occasionally  preferred  to 
high  oodesiastical  dignities,  which  they  illustreted  by 
their  integrity  and  leaming.  They  were  intrusted  with 
monicipal  offioea  in  the  yarions  citiea  of  Castile ;  and  as 
their  w«alth  fumiahed  an  obyioos  resooroe  for  repairing, 
by  way  of  mairiage,  the  decayed  fortunea  of  the  nobil- 
ity,  there  was  scarcely  a  Jamily  of  rank  in  the  land 
whoee  blood  had  not  been  contaminated  at  some  pe- 
riod OT  other  by  młxtnre  with  the  mola  tcmgrf,  as  it 
came  aflerwaida  to  be  termed,  of  the  honse  of  Judah ; 
an  ignominioua  stain  which  no  time  haa  been  deemed 
snflicient  whoUy  to  puige."  Many  of  these  noble  men, 
ufa  race  that  can  lay  cUim  to  the  highest  nobility  that 
eziata  among  men,  felt  that  the  irksome  task  of  dissim- 
ulAtion  which  they  had  undertaken  was  too  much  below 
the  dignity  of  a  tnie  Israelite,  and  rather  than  enjoy 
tbe  fiiyoTB  of  a  nation  as  apostates  from  a  religion  which 
they  atill  held  to  be  tbe  only  tnie  one  (and  who  would 
espect  that  Romish  treatment  and  Romish  Christian  ex- 
ample  could  inatill  confldence  and  produce  impressions 
fayozable  to  the  caose  of  Christ?),  preferred  an  open  con- 
fesBon  of  the  opuiions  which  they  cherished  in  their 
hearta,  eyen  at  the  expense  of  kMing  pońtions  of  promi- 
nence  to  which  they  were  ably  fitted,but  from  which,  as 
ia  too  oflen  the  caae  eyen  in  oor  own  day,  their  reiigious 
oooyictiona)  if  openly  ayowed,  not  only  debarred  them, 
but  which  eyen  endangered  their  yery  life.  But  Rom- 
ish priesta  could  not,  of  course,  be  expected  to  toler- 
ate  kemy  in  any  form,  ^especially  the  Dominicans, 
who  aeem  to  haye  inherited  the  ąnick  scent  for  heresy 
which  diitingnished  their  firantic  founder;  they  were 
not  alow  in  sounding  the  alarm,  and  the  superstitioos 
poptilace,  easily  roused  to  acta  of  yiolence  in  the  name 
of  reUgion,  began  to  exhibiŁ  the  most  tnmnltuous  moye- 
menta,  and  actually  maasacred  the  consUble  of  Castile 
in  an  attempt  to  suppresa  them  at  Jaen,  the  year  pre- 
oeding  the  acoesaion  of  Isabella'*  (Preaoott,  Ferdmand 
mid  ItMOa^  i,  235  Bq.).    After  the  anion  of  Spain  under 


one  kingdom,  goyemed  by  Ferdinand  and  Isabella,  to- 
warda  the  doee  of  the  15th  oentury,  the  Inquisition  be- 
came  generaL  It  was  at  this  time  that  the'inqmsitortal 
tribunal  underwent  ^  what  its  friends  haye  honored  with 
the  name  of  a  rrform;  in  conseąuence  of  which  it  be- 
came  a  morę  terrible  eugine  of  persecution  than  before. 
Under  this  new  form  it  is  usnally  called  the  Modem  In- 
ąuisition,  though  it  may  with  eąual  propriety  bear  the 
name  of  the  Spanish,  as  it  originated  in  Spain,  and  haa 
been  oonflned  to  that  country,  induding  Portugal,  and 
the  dominions  subject  to  the  two  monarchies.  .  .  .  The 
prindplea  of  the  andent  and  modem  Inquisition  were 
radically  the  same,  but  they  asaumed  a  morę  malignant 
form  under  the  latter  than  under  the  former.  Under 
the  andent  Inąnisition  the  bishopsalways  had  a  certain 
degree  of  oontrol  oyer  its  proceedings ;  the  law  of  secre- 
cy  was  not  so  rigidly  enforoed  in  practioe ;  greater  lib- 
erty  waa  allowed  to  the  accused  on  their  defenoe;  and 
in  aome  countńes,  as  in  Aragon,  in  conseąuence  of  the 
dyii  lights  acąuii^  by  the  people,  the  inąuisitors  were 
restndned  from  seque8trating  the  property  of  thoee 
whom  they  oonyicted  of  heresy.  But  the  leading  dif- 
ference  between  the  two  institutions  consisted  in  the  or- 
ganization  of  the  latter  into  one  great  independent  tri- 
bunal, which,  extending  oyer  the  whole  kingdom,  waa 
goyemed  by  one  oode  of  lawa,  and  yielded  implidt  obe- 
dienoe  to  one  head.  The  inąuLsitor  generał  poasessed 
an  anthority  scarcdy  infeiior  to  that  of  the  king  or  the 
pope;  by  joining  with  either  of  them,  he  proyed  an 
oyermatoh  for  the  other;  and  when  supported  by  both, 
his  power  was  irresistible.  The  andent  Inąuisition  waa 
a  powerful  engine  for  harassing  and  rooting  out  a  smali 
body  of  diińdents;  the  modem  Inąuisition  stretehed  ita 
iron  arms  oyer  a  whole  nation,  upon  which  it  lay  like  a 
monstroua  incubus,  paralyzing  ita  exertions,  crushing  ita 
energies,  and  extingui8hing  eyery  other  fceling  but  a 
aense  of  weakness  and  terror"  (M^Crie,  Ref.  in  Spain,  p. 
86, 108).  Most  prominent  among  thoee  who  were  ao- 
tiye  in  bringing  about  this  new  order  of  thiugs  were 
the  archbishop  of  Seyille,  Petro  Gonzalez  dc  Mendoza, 
the  FranciBcan  (afterwards  cardinal)  Ximene8,  and  the 
Dominican  prior  Torąuemada.  But  to  the  credit  of  Is- 
abella be  it  said,  that  it  was  only  her  zeal  for  the  canse 
of  her  Church  that  led  her,  when  misguided,  to  commit 
the  unfortunate  enror;  "an  error  so  graye  that,  like  a 
ydn  in  some  noble  piece  of  statuary,  it  giyes  a  sinia- 
ter  expre88ion  to  her  otherwise  nnblemished  character^ 
(PresGott).  Indeed,  it  was  only  after  repeated  importo- 
nitiea  of  the  dergy,  particularly  of  thoee  whom  she  be- 
lieyed  to  be  sincere  as  hersdf  in  the  zeal  for  the  Rom- 
ish religion,  and  only  theae  when  seconded  by  the  ar- 
guments  of  Ferdinand,  who,  to  his  shame  be  it  said,  fa- 
yored  the  proJect  because  he  belieyed  it  likdy  to  result 
in  fiUing  his  ooffera  by  means  of  confiscations,  that  she 
consented  to  solicit  from  the  pope  a  buli  for  the  estab- 
lishment of  the  **  holy  office"  in  Castile.  *'  Sixtus  lY, 
who  at  that  time  fUled  the  pontilical  chair,  easily  dia- 
ceming  the  sources  of  wealth  and  influence  which  thia 
meaaure  opened  to  the  court  of  Romę,  readily  complied 
with  the  petition  of  the  soyereigns,  and  expedited  a  buli 
bearing  datę  Noy.  1, 1478,  authorizing  them  to  appoint 
two  or  three  ecdesiastics  inąuisitors  for  the  detection 
and  suppression  of  heresy  throughout  their  dominions" 
(Fkesoott,  i,  248,249).  The  appointment  of  these  offi- 
cers  waa  madę  Sept.  17, 1480,  tbe  clergy  in  confldence 
with  the  ąneen  profeseing  to  haye  failed  in  their  at- 
tempts  **  to  illnminato  the  beiiighted  Isradites  by  means 
of  friendly  exhortation  and  a  candtd  expo8ition  of  the 
tme  prindples  of  Christianity,"  which  Isabella  had  coun- 
selled  before  yiolent  measures  were  resorted  to.  Janu- 
ary 2, 1481,  the  new  inąuisitors  commenced  their  pro- 
ceedings in  the  Dominican  conyent  of  St.  Paul,  at  Se- 
yille. But  the  tńbunal  did  not  really  assume  a  perma- 
nent  form  until  two  years  later,  when  the  Dominican 
monk  Thomas  de  Torąuemada,  the  ąueen's  confesaor, 
Bubseąuently  raiaed  to  the  rank  of  prior  of  Santa  Cruz 
in  Segoyia,  waa  ploMdntf  T^  helKhaaónąuisitor  genenuL 


INQTJISinON 


602 


DfQuisrnoN 


fint  of  Castile,  and  afterwuds  of  Aragon.  **  This  nuuii 
who  concealed  morę  pride  under  his  monaatic  weeds 
than  might  have  furnished  forth  a  oonrent  of  hifl  order, 
was  one  of  that  dass  with  whom  zeal  pasees  for  reUgion, 
and  who  testify  their  zeal  by  a  fiery  persecution  of  those 
whose  creed  differs  from  their  own;  who  oompenaate 
for  their  abstinence  from  senaual  indulgenoe  by  giving 
scope  to  thoae  deadlier  yices  of  the  heart,  pride,  bigotiy, 
and  intolerance,  which  are  no  leaa  oppoeed  to  rirtue,  and 
are  far  morę  exten8iveiy  mischieyous  to  aodety"  (Pres- 
GOtt,  i,  247).  Torquemada  at  onoe  set  about  his  work, 
appointiug  his  assessors,  and  erecting  suboidinate  tribu- 
nals  in  different  cities  of  the  united  kingdom.  Over 
the  whole  was  placed  the  CouncU  o/ the  Supremę^  con- 
sisting  of  the  inąuisitor  generał  as  president,  and  three 
ootmsellors,  two  of  whom  were  doctors  of  law.  His  next 
employment  was  the  formation  of  a  body  of  laws  for  the 
goyemmeut  of  his  new  tribunaL  This  appeared  in  14M ; 
additions  to  it  followed  from  time  to  time;  and  as  a  di- 
yersity  of  practice  had  crept  into  the  subordinate  oourts, 
the  inąuisitor  generał  Yaldes  in  1561  madę  a  reyisal  of 
the  whole  codę,  which  was  published  in  eighty-one  ar- 
ticles,  and  continues,  with  the  exception  of  a  few  slight 
alterations,  to  be  the  law  to  this  day.  They  are  sub- 
standally  as  foUows:  the  aocused  was  invited  three 
times  edictaUłer  to  appear.  If  be  did  not  come  before 
the  tribunal,  he  was  excommunicated  m  contumadam, 
aud  condemned  to  pay  a  fine,  under  reseryation  of  morę 
seyere  pmiishment  if  the  Inquisition  saw  fit  to  apply 
such.  Seldom  did  any  one  escape,  for  familiars,  the 
holy  Hermandad,  and  the  Congregation  of  the  Cruciada 
tracked  roercilessly  all  who  were  denounced  to  the  Inqiii- 
uUon.  If  the  accused  appeared  before  the  court  he  was 
at  once  seized,  and  from  that  moment  all  his  relations 
and  friends  were  to  abandon  him  as  an  outlaw,  and  he 
was  not  eyen  permitted  to  g^iye  proofs  of  his  innocence. 
The  prisoner  and  his  house  were  now  thoroughly  search- 
ed,  espedally  for  papers  or  books,  a  list  taken  of  all  his 
possessions,  and.  in  generał,  his  goods  seąuestered  ac  once, 
to  proyide  beforehand  for  the  expenses  of  his  triaL  His 
hair  was  cut  to  make  his  recog^nition  morę  certain  in  tase 
he  shoidd  escape,  and  he  was  plaoed  in  a  dark  celL  If 
he  oonfessed  hb  real  or  imputed  sin,  he  did  indeed  es- 
cape with  hb  life,  as  hb  oonfession  was  considered  a 
proof  of  repentance,  but  he  and  all  hb  family  were  dis- 
honored,  and  became  incapaUe  of  holding  any  offioe.  If 
he  aaserted  hb  innocence,  and  there  was  not  snfficient 
proof  against  him  to  condemn  him,  he  was  libented, 
but  carefully  watchcd  by  the^cimt/uiref  as  an  object  of 
suspicion,  and  gonerally  was  soon  arrested  a  second  time. 
Now  commenced  against  him  the  real,  slow  trial  of  the 
Inąuisition,  conducted  after  the  Directorium  Inguititori- 
vm  of  the  grand  inąulsitor  of  Aragon,  Nicolas  Eymeri- 
cus.  When  the  piisoner  refused  to  acknowledge  hb 
fault  at  the  first  interrogatory,  he  was  remanded  to  pris- 
on ;  after  many  months  he  was  again  brought  forth,  and 
asked  to  swear  before  a  crucifix  that  he  would  tell  the 
truth.  If  now  he  did  not  confess,  he  was  immediately 
considered  guilty,  otherwise  he  was  plied  with  leading 
questions  until  thoroughly  bewildered.  The  defensor 
was  not  allowed  to  take  hb  dienfs  part,  but  only  to  in- 
yite  him  to  dedare  the  truth.  Witnesscs  were  not 
named,  and  their  testlmony,  the  truth  of  which  they 
were  not  required  to  proye,  was  only  madę  known  in  dis- 
oonnected  fragments,  and  years  after  it  had  been  giren, 
Any  sort  of  testimony  was  admitted.  Two  witnesses 
who  would  only  testify  of  a  hearsay  were  considered 
eąuiyalent  to  an  eye-witness.  The  accuser  was  exam- 
ined  as  a  witness.  Friends  and  members  of  the  family 
were  also  admitted  to  testify,  but  only  against  the  pris- 
oner, neyer  in  his  fayor.  If  the  aocused  still  persbted 
in  asserting  his  innocence,  he  was  now  tortured  by  the 
whip,  the  water,  and  fire,  under  the  direction  of  the  in- 
ąubitors  and  the  bishop  of  the  diocese.  If  the  prisoner 
then  confessed,  he  was  tortured  a  second  time,  to  make 
him  declare  his  motiyes,  and  afterwards  a  third  time, 
to  make  him  naroe  hb  accomplices;  and  when  the  in- 


ąuisitors  had  obtained  from  him  all  they  wanted,  they 
lefb  him  to  hb  sufTerings,  without  allowing  a  physkian 
to  assbt  him.  After  thb  confeasion  the  priaoiier  was 
considered  penitent,  yet  recantation  was  still  denumded 
of  him  de  Uri;  if  heiesy  or  Judaism  was  hb  crime,  de  «v- 
hementi;  and  when  he  became  reconciled  to  the  Charch, 
infonna,  which  latter  induded  a  free  aseent  to  aU  for- 
ther  punishments  the  InquJaition  might  yet  see  fit  to 
inflict  on  the  penitent  After  that  he  was  genenlly 
condemned  to  imprisonment  for  life,  or  sent  to  the  gal- 
leys,  hb  possessions  Bequestered,  and  hb  family  diahoo- 
ored.  Those  who  oonfessed  and  recanted  at  once  were 
punished  only  by  haying  to  wear  for  a  certain  time  the 
tanbemto  (q.  v.),  a  frock  without  sleeyes,  with  a  red  croas 
of  StAndrew  before  and  behind,  oyer  a  Uack  onder- 
frock  (comp.  Eneydop.  Britan,  xii,  890).  The  penitent 
(sanbatitado)  who  laid  it  aside  before  the  appointed 
time  was  considered  as  unrepenting;  when  he  had  ae- 
complbhed  hb  penanoe,  the  sanbenito  was  hang  up  in 
the  church  with  a  card  bearing  hb  name,  and  a  atate- 
ment  of  hb  offence.  A  relapee  was  punbhed  by  <leath. 
When  the  three  degrees  of  torturo  failed  to  elicit  a  oon- 
fession, the  aocused  was  put  into  a  worse  prison ;  if  thu 
did  not  sucoeed,  the  inquisitoi8  tiied  the  oppoeite  pian : 
they  madę  the  aocused  oomfortable,  allowed  hb  family 
and  friends  to  haye  aooess  to  him,  and  led  him  to  think 
that  a  oonfession  of  hb  fault  and  profession  of  repent- 
anee  would  procure  hb  pardon.  \Vhen  one  soppected 
of  heresy  died,  or  when  soch  suspidon  arose  afber  hia 
death,  the  trial  was  canied  on  notwithstandin^.  If 
forty  yeaiB  had  elapeed  between  the  death  of  the  party 
and  his  accusation,  hb  descendants  were  permitted  to 
remain  in  thdr  possessions,  but  were  dishonored,  and  in- 
capable  of  holding  ofiioe.  If  the  remains  of  the  aocnaed 
could  be  found,  they  were  bumt;  if  not,  then  he  -was 
bumt  in  effigy.  When  a  uumber  of  triab  weie  con- 
duded,  an  auto  da  U  took  place,  L  e.  the  condemned 
were,  with  great  pomp  and  paradę,  puUicly  bumt.  See 
Auto  da  Fi^  A  yery  aUe  arUcle  in  the  GcUaay  (May, 
1870,  p.  647  8q.),  entitled  Ten  Yeart  in  Rome^  the  reader 
would  do  well  to  examine.  It  b  written  bj  one  who 
has  held  high  office  under  the  preaent  Roman  pontil!^ 
and  who  has  enjoyed  peculiar  adyantages  for  an  ex- 
tended  examination  of  the  authentic  souroes  on  the  snb- 
ject  of  the  Inquisition.  The  poeition  of  sabordinate 
member  of  the  Inquisition  {/amiUan)f  whose  dotiea 
consisted  in  arresting  the  accused  and  taking  them  to 
prison,  was  much  sought  after,  eyen  by  memben  of  the 
highest  families,  on  account  of  the  priyileges  and  indnl- 
gences  attached  to  it  The  tribunal  of  Madrid  had 
branches  in  the  proyinoes  and  colonies,  each  compoeed 
of  three  inquisitor8,  three  secretaries,  an  algwaril,  thiee 
reoeiyers  and  assessors,  familiars  and  jaUen.  Eyery  one 
connected  with  the  Inqui8ition  had  to  submtt  to  the 
Casa  lingńa,  i.  e.  to  proye  hb  descent  from  hononble 
and  orthodox  paients,  who  had  neyer  been  wimmoned 
before  the  Inquisition,  and  to  take  the  oath  of  secrecy. 
From  the  detaib  of  the  proceedings  of  the  inąuiaito- 
rial  tribunal  which  we  haye  jnst  enumerated,  it  ckarly 
foUows  that  **  the  Inquisition  possessed  powers  which  en- 
abled  it  effectually  to  anest  the  progress  of  knowledge, 
and  to  crush  ex'ery  attempt  which  might  be  madę  fiar 
the  reformation  of  religion  and  the  Chnroh."  The  ter- 
roiB  which  Torquemada*s  tribunal  spread  by  imprison- 
ment, tortures,  etc,  not  only  caUed  forth  oomplainu 
from  the  Cortea,  but  eyen  proyoked  rebeUiona,  followed 
by  assassinations  of  the  łnquisiton  (Llorente,  i,  187  aą., 
211  sq.) ;  but  it  still  proeecuted  its  bloody  work.  The 
suspidon  of  belonging  to  Judaism  or  Islamism,  of  pn>- 
tecting  Jews  or  Moors.  of  practising  sootluicring,  mag- 
ie, and  blasphemy,  causcd  an  endlMs  nnmber  of  triah. 
Upon  the  inquisitor  general's  adyloe,  all  Jews  who  wocld 
not  become  Christiana  were  compeUed  (1492)  to  emi- 
grate ;  a  ńmilar  fate  befell  the  Hoon  (1601).  The  nnm- 
ber of  yictims,  as  stated  by  Llorente,  the  popular  hiato- 
rian  of  the  Inquisition,  b  positiydy  appalling.  He  a^ 
firms  that  during  the  axteen  years  of  Torqueniada's 


INQTJISinON 


603 


INQUISinON 


tenare  of  oflke  (1483-1498)  nearly  9000  weie  condemned 
to  the  flames,  6500  were  biuned  in  effigy,  and  moro  than 
90,000  were  sabjected  to  yarious  penalties,  besides  a  still 
laiger  namber  who  were  reooncUed;  "a  term  which 
mtut  not  be  misimderstood  by  the  reader  to  signify  any- 
thiog  Uke  a  pardon  or  amneety,  but  only  the  commuta- 
tiun  of  a  capital  sentence  for  inferior  penalties,  as  fines, 
civil  incapacity,  veiy  generally  total  confiacation  of  prop- 
erty,  and  not  anfreqaently  imprisonment  for  life"  (Prea- 
cott,  FerdL  amd  Itab,  i,  253 ;  oomp.  alflo  p.  267).  His  suc- 
cessor,  Diego  Deza,  in  eight  years  (1499-1506),  aooord- 
ing  to  the  same  writer,  put  above  1600  to  a  similar 
death.  Under  the  third  generał  inquisitor,  Francis  Xi- 
menes  de  Cisneros  (1507-17),  2536  persona  were  killed, 
1368  were  bumed  in  effigy,  and  47,263  were  punished  in 
other  ways  (Llorente,  iy,  252).  Not  much  better  are 
the  rocords  of  the  proceedings  of  the  other  suooefl8ive 
inąoisitorB  generaL  M<Crie  {Reform,  in  Spain,  p.  109) 
very  rightly  aaserts  that  cardinal  Ximene8,  morę  than 
any  ocher  inqui8itor  generał,  oontiibuted  towards  riv- 
eting  the  chains  of  poUtical  and  spiritual  despotism 
of  Spain.  **  Poaseased  of  talents  that  enabled  him  to 
foreaee  the  dire  effects  which  the  Inquisition  would  in- 
eyitably  produce,  he  was  called  to  take  part  in  public 
aiHuiB  at  a  time  when  these  effects  had  decidedly  ap- 
peared.  It  was  in  his  power  to  abolish  that  execrable 
tribunal  altogether  as  an  insufferable  nuisance,  or  at 
least  to  impoee  such  checks  upon  its  procedurę  as  would 
have  rendered  It  comparatively  harńfiless.  Vet  he  not 
only  allowed  himself  to  be  placed  at  its  head,  but  em- 
ployed  all  his  influence  and  address  in  defeating  eyery 
attempt  to  reform  its  worst  and  most  glaring  abuses. .  .  . 
Ximenes  had  obtained  the  title  of  a  great  man  from 
foreigneri  as  well  as  natires  of  Spain.  But  in  spito  of 
the  eologiums  passed  upon  him,  I  cannot  heip  being  of 
opinion,  with  a  modem  writer,  that  Ximene8  borę  a 
Btriking  resembhmce  to  Philip  II,  with  this  difference, 
that  the  cardinal  was  possessed  of  higher  talents,  and 
tłiat  bis  proceedings  were  characterized  by  a  certain 
openness  and  impartiality,  the  result  of  tho  unlimited 
oonfidence  which  he  plaoed  in  hia  own  powera.  His 
chaiacter  was  essentially  that  of  a  monk,  in  whom  the 
sererity  of  his  order  was  combined  with  the  impetuos- 
ity  of  blood  which  belongs  to  the  uatiyes  of  the  ^outh" 
(p.  110-112).  Boman  Catholics,  of  course,  loudly  pro- 
test against  the  credibility  of  these  fearful  allegatious, 
assert  that  Uorento  was  a  yiolent  partiaan,  and  allege 
that  in  his  work  on  the  Basque  Proyinces  he  had  al- 
itady  proved  himself  a  yenal  and  unscrupulous  fabrica- 
tor;  but  they  find  it  impoesible  to  disproye  hia  aocura- 
CT,  and  all  that  can  poasibly  be  done  we  aee  clearly  in 
the  efforts  of  one  of  the  C!atholic  critics— Hcfele,  in  hia 
Li/e  of  Cardinal  Xtin«»e«— who  produces  many  exam- 
plea  of  Llorento*s  statements  which  he  allegra  aro  of 
a  contradictory  and  exaggerated  naturę.  Some  Protes- 
tant historians,  of  courae,  fear  that  Uorento  may  haye 
beon  too  aeyere,  as  is  apt  to  be  the  case  with  all  apos- 
Utes,  and  thus  Presoott,  in  hia  Ferdinand  and  Isabella 
fiLi,  467-470),  has  pointed  out  many  instances  similar  to 
thoae  which  Hefele  produces,  and  Rankę  does  not  hesi- 
tate  {FUrtten  und  YóUeer  des  S&dL  £uropcu,  i,  242)  to  im- 
pesch  hia  honesty ;  Presoott  eyen  pronounces  hia  ^  oom- 
putationa  greatly  exagger8ted,"  and  his  **  estimates  most 
improbable"  (iii,  468).  Still,  with  all  the  deductions 
which  it  is  poasible  to  make,  eyen  Roman  Catholics 
most  acknowledge  that  the  working  of  the  Inąuiaition 
in  Spain,  and  in  its  dependencies  in  the  New  World  too» 
involyes  an  amount  of  cnielty  which  it  'u  impoasible  to 
oontemplato  without  honor. 

Bot,  in  spite  of  the  terrora  which  it  spread,  yoioes 
vere  lepeatedly  heard  in  Spain  to  pnmounce  against  it, 
eapeciaUy  when  it  deyeloped  all  its  power  to  crush  out 
(▼angelical  doctiines  during  the  great  Reformation  of 
the  IGth  century.  Hatred  towarda  it  had  spread  itself 
far  thnragh  the  country  (M*Crie,  Rtformation  in  Spauty 
cha|K  v);  and  when  Charles  Y  asoended  the  throne,  the 
Gonea  of  Castile,  Aragon,  and  Catalonia  endeayored  to 


bring  to  pasa  a  raformation  of  the  tribunal  (Llorente,  i, 
876  sq.).  Negotiations  to  accompUsh  this  end  were  en- 
tered  into  with  the  papai  chair,  and  coucessions  were 
madę,  but  they  were  not  carried  out  It  directed  its 
power  now  against  those  who  opeuly  or  secretly  adhered 
to  eyangelkal  doctrines.  It  pubUshed  annually  an  edict 
of  denunciation,  and  conyened  its  chief  tribmials  at  Se- 
yille  and  YalladoUd.  But  it  also  directed  its  power 
against  such  members  of  its  own  Church  as  did  not  ac- 
cept  the  doctrines  of  the  Ck>uncLl  of  Trent  conoeming 
jnstification.  Aa,  howeyer,  they  succeeded  in  entirely 
suppreasing  Ptotestantism  in  Spain  before  the  beginning 
of  the  17th  century,  executions  became  rarer,  and  in  the 
latter  half  of  the  17th  century  the  Inąuisition  abated  ita 
rigor,  and  was  actiye  prindpally  in  suppreasing  books 
and  persecuting  thoee  who  possessed  or  circulated  for- 
bidden  books.  Autos  da  fe  were  hardly  ever  heard  of, 
and,  BB  a  result,  the  tribunal  was  less  feared ;  and,  final- 
ly,  eyen  Charles  III  foibade  firat  the  execution  of  capi- 
tal punishment  without  royal  warrant,  and  afterwards 
also  set  further  limits  to  the  power  of  the  Inąuisition, 
proyenting  it  from  rendering  any  finał  decision  vrithout 
the  aaaent  of  the  king,  and  also  from  making  any  new 
regulations.  In  1762  the  grand  inąuisitor  was  eziled 
into  a  conyent  for  oondemning  a  book  against  the  king*s 
will.  In  1770  his  minister  Aranda  drcumscribed  its 
power  still  further  by  forbidding  the  imprisonment  of 
any  royal  subject,  unless  his  guilt  was  well  substan- 
Łiated;  and  in  1784  followed  the  proyiaion  that  the  pa- 
pers  of  eyery  suit  against  a  grandee,  minister,  or  any 
other  officer  in  the  employ  of  the  king,  should  always 
be  presented  to  the  soyereign  for  inspection  before  judg- 
ment  could  be  pronounoed;  and  although  it  aflerwaida 
r^ained  ground  for  a  while,  public  opinion  proyed  too 
ayerae  to  it  £yen  the  pope  began  to  restrict  its  pow- 
era, and  it  was  finally  abolished  in  Madrid,  Dec  4, 1808, 
by  an  edict  of  Joseph  Napoleon.  Llorente  calculates 
that  from  the  time  of  its  introduction  into  Spain  (1481) 
to  that  date  (1808),  the  Inq|^tion  had  condemned  in 
Spain  alone  341,021  persons.  Of  these,  31,912  persona 
were  bumt  alive,  17,659  in  efiigy,  and  291,456  others 
punished  severely.  When  Ferdinand  VII  regained  the 
throne  of  Spain  in  1814,  one  of  hia  first  acta  was  the  re- 
establishment  of  the  Inąuiaition,  but  also  one  of  the  first 
acts  of  the  Reyolution  of  1820  was  the  destruction  of 
the  palące  of  the  Inąuisition  by  the  people,  and  the  in- 
stitution  was  suppressed  by  the  Cortes.  Yet,  after  the 
restontion,  the  apostolical  party  continued  to  demand 
its  re-establiahment;  an  inąuisitorial  junU  was  oigan- 
ized  in  1825,  and  the  old  tribunal  finally  restored  in 
1826.  The  law  of  July  16, 1834,  again  suspended  the 
Inąuisition,  after  seąuestering  aU  its  poesessions,  and 
the  ConsLitution  of  1855  expre8aly  dedares  that  no  one 
shall  be  madę  to  suffer  for  hia  faith.  Yet  in  1857  the 
Inąuisition  showed  itself  still  yery  yigorous  in  persecu- 
ting all  persons  suspected  of  Protestantism,  and  all  books 
containing  their  doctrines.  Such  as  were  found  with 
heretical  books  in  their  possession,  or  had  read  them, 
were  seyerely  punished.  The  great  political  changes 
which  the  last  few  years  haye  wrought  on  all  the  dvil- 
ized  world  haye  not  been  without  marked  effects  on 
Spain,  and  haye  remoyed  not  only  in  a  measure,  but,  we 
hope,  altogether,  the  deplorable  effects  of  the  Romish 
spińt  of  immitigated  intolerance,  which  has  eyer  been 
praised,  preached,  and  imperatiydy  enjoined  as  one  of 
the  highest  of  Christian  yirtues  by  the  antichristian 
aee  of  Romę.  Indeed  the  Inąuisition,  not  only  in  Romę, 
but  in  eyery  land,  the  papacy  considered  its  master- 
piece, "  the  firmest  and  most  solid  support  of  its  power, 
both  spiritual  and  temporaL  Hence  it  put  all  things 
under  the  feet  of  its  tribunal  in  the  countries  subject  to 
its  authority.  There  the  most  extrayagant  maxima 
were  held  to  be  inoontestable,  and  the  most  unfounded 
pretensions  established  beyond  dispute.  Thus  the  in- 
fallibility  of  the  popes,  their  superiority  to  generał 
coundls,  their  dominion  over  the  poesessions  of  all  the 
churches  in  the  world,  the  power  to  dispose  of  them  aa 


iNQUisrnoN 


604 


iNQUisinojr 


they  pleaaed,  their  pretended  aathority  orer  the  tempo- 
rai  ooncems  of  soyereigns,  the  right  which  they  didm 
of  deposing  them,  of  absolying  their  nibjects  firom  the 
oath  of  allegiance,  and  ginng  away  th&i  dominiona, 
are  maxim8  which  nonę  dared  to  doubt  in  the  ooontries 
of  the  Inąuisition,  much  lees  to  contest  them,  kat  they 
should  expo6e  themselrea  to  ali  the  honora  of  that  de- 
testable  tribunaL  No  wonder  that  the  popea,  in  retum, 
80  warmly  supported  all  its  pretensiona,  and  eamestly 
and  incesaantly  hibored  to  procure  for  it  ao  exten8iye  an 
aathority,  that  it  at  length  became  formidable  to  the 
very  princea  by  whom  it  waa  adopted"  (Shoberl,  Perte- 
cutions  o/Popejyy  i,  1 18  8q.).  These  aaaertiona,  written 
(in  1844)  long  before  the  occurrence  of  the  late  ao  ao- 
apicioiia  e^enta,  deaenre  eapecial  conaideration,  aa  among 
the  first  changea  which  the  downfall  of  the  tempond 
power  of  the  papacy  must  ineyitably  bring  ia  religiona 
freedom  all  over  the  world.  (Gomp.  alao  Gaett^  The 
Papacy  [N.  Y.  1867, 12mo],  Introd.  p.  4  aq.) 

Portugal.— Ftom  Spain  the  Ingniaition  waa  introdaced 
into  the  different  ooontriea  oyer  which  it  held  ita  away. 
ThuB  it  waa  not  really  introdaced  into  Portugal  until 
ita  anion  with  Spain  in  1557,  and  only  then  after  much 
oppoaition.  It  ia  tnie,  under  king  Joan  III  of  Portugal, 
an  effort  waa  madę  to  eatabliah  the  tribunal  againat  the 
New-Chriatiana  of  that  country,  imitating  the  Spaniarda 
in  thia  respect,  and  Henrique,  the  biahop  of  Centa,  a 
former  Franciscan  monk  and  fanatic,  even  took  the  law 
in  hia  own  handa,  and  executcd  five  New-Chriatiana,  to 
haaten  the  eatabliahment  of  the  Inquiaition.  Many  lea- 
aona  awayed  in  favor  to  tolerate  the  Jewa  in  Portugal, 
and  they,  of  course,  wcre  in  that  country  the  firat  againat 
whom  the  tribunal  waa  intended  to  direct  the  bloody 
work.  In  1531  Clement  YII  waa  eren  perauaded  to  ia- 
flue  a  breve  (Dec.  17)  to  introduce  the  Inąuiaition,  but 
already,  in  the  year  foUowing  (Oct  17, 1582),  he  reyoked 
thia  order  (comp.  Herculano,  Origem  da  Inguisicao  em 
Portugal,  i,  276  aq.,  et  aL)^  But  when  the  Inąuiaition, 
under  Spaniah  influence,  waa  at  hiat  introduced,  aa  in 
Spain,  it  became  alao  in  Portugal  a  tribunal  of  the 
crown,  and  it  ia  for  thia  reaaon  Roman  Cathollc  writ- 
era  argue  that  the  aee  of  Romę  cannot  be  held  reapon- 
aible  for  the  horrible  deeda  that  it  enacted  in  theae  two 
countriea  and  in  their  dependendea.  It  ia  tnie,  aome 
of  the  popea  proteated  againat  the  eatabliahment  of  the 
Inąuiaition  om  a  słate  tribunal,  but  it  muat  be  remem- 
bered  that  the  oppoaition  waa  directed  againat  it  (aa  in 
Italy,  above)  not  ao  much  on  account  of  ita  cruel  meaa- 
urea,  but  becauae  it  choae  to  be  independent  of  Romę. 
Indeed  the  popea,  feeling  their  power  inaufficient  to  en- 
force  obedience,  found  themaelrea  oompelled,  firom  mo- 
tiyea  of  prudence,  to  tolerate  what  they  were  powerleaa 
to  auppreas;  L  e.  unablc  to  eatabliah  the  Inquiaition  un- 
der their  own  immediate  control,  with  the  benefita  ac- 
cnung  therefrom  all  flowing  into  their  own  treaaury, 
they  yielded  to  a  atate  tribunal,  that  ga^e  them  at  leaat 
a  part  in  the  proceedinga,  aa  well  aa  a  part  of  the  apoila. 
The  hlghest  tribunal  of  the  Portugueae  Inąuiaidon  was, 
of  course,  at  Lisbon,  the  capital  of  the  country,  and  the 
appointment  of  the  grand  inąuisitor  at  the  pleaaure  of 
the  king,  nominally  alao  aubject  to  the  approval  of  the 
pope.  When,  finally.  Portugal  became  again  indepen- 
dent under  the  duke  of  Braganza  aa  John  IV  (1640), 
an  effort  waa  madę  by  the  Royaliata  to  aboliah  the  In- 
ąuiaition, and  to  depriye  it  of  the  right  of  aeąueatration. 
Bat  John  lY  found  too  atrong  an  oppoaition  in  the 
prieathood,  eapcdally  in  the  eyer-plotting  Jeauita,  and 
he  waa  preyented  from  executing  his  intentiona  aucceaa- 
fuUy.  After  his  death  he  waa  himaelf  put  under  the 
ban,  and  hia  body  waa  only  a  long  time  after  officially 
absolyed  from  this,  one  of  the  groaaeat  aina  a  aon  of 
Romę  could  poaaibly  haye  permitted,  the  attempt  to 
deanae  his  Church  from  the  ain  of  unrighteoosneaa.  In 
the  18th  century  the  Inąuiaition  waa  further  restricted 
in  its  actiyity  and  priyilegea  by  Pedro  II  (1706),  and  a 
Btill  morę  decided  step  was  taken  by  Pombal  under  his 
aon  and  successor,  Joseph  I.    The  Jesoita  were  expeUed , 


from  the  country,  and  the  inąuisitoriai  tribunal  wai 
oommanded  by  law  to  communicate  to  the  ancated  the 
aocuaationa  preaented  againat  him  or  them,  the  Dimo 
of  the  accuaen  and  witneesee,  the  light  of  an  attomey 
to  hołd  Gommunication  with  the  aocuaed,  and  it  waa 
fnrthermore  decreed  that  no  aentenoe  ahould  be  execa« 
ted  without  the  aaaent  of  the  dyil  courta.  At  the  nme 
time,  the  auto  da  fe  waa  alao  forbidden.  After  the  faD 
of  Pombal  and  the  death  of  Joaeph  I  the  deigy  rąniin- 
ed  thdr  power  for  a  aeaaon,  but  the  apirit  of  enligbtai- 
ment  had  madę  too  great  inroada  not  to  conflict  with 
the  inte<ference  of  the  prieata,  and  under  king  John  VI 
(1818-26),  when  'Hhia  great  engine  for  the  coerdcm  of 
the  human  mind,  if  worked  with  the  unacmpnkMia,  im- 
paaaiye  reeolution  of  Machiayellianiam,"  could  no  kmger 
be  madę  to  aocompliah  its  purpoae,  it  breathed  its  last, 
and  the  yery  reoorda  of  ita  proceedinga  were  condemoed 
to  the  damea. 

Netherlattdt,r-^pTQm.  Spain  the  Inąnisitaon  was  alao 
introduced  into  the  Netherlanda  aa  early  aa  the  13tfa 
century,  and  from  thia  time  forward  exeited  in  tbii 
countiy,  next  to  Spain,  her  authority  moet  unacrupo- 
loualy.  Eapecially  actiye  waa  ita  tribunal  doring  the 
Reformation.  After  a  aeyere  edict  by  Charles  V  at 
Worma  againat  the  heretica  (May  8, 1521),  he  appctnt- 
ed  aa  inąuidtora  to  the  Netherlanda  hia  coundllor,  Fraz 
yon  der  Hulat,  and  the  Carmelite  Nioolaa  of  EgmooL 
They  at  once  aet  out  to  do  their  taak,  and  to  inliict  the 
uaoal  penaltiea  on  their  yictima — baniahment,  etc— and 
found  eapecial  hdpmeeta  in  the  regent  of  the  Nether- 
landa, Margaret  of  Austria,  in  connection  with  the  bisb- 
op  of  Arraa,  Granyella.  The  printing,  aale,  and  poesea- 
ńon  of  heretical  books  were  atrictly  forbidden,  and  the 
magistratea  were  reąuired,  under  penalty  of  loes  of  Of- 
fice, to  be  actiye  in  diacoyering  hereticsi,  and  aend  a 
quarterly  report  of  thdr  labora  to  the  regent;  the  in- 
formera  to  receiye  a  conaiderable  reward  for  any  pnwf 
(Raumefa  Brie/e,  i,  164  aq.).  Neyerthdeaa,  the  Belbi^ 
mation  apread,  and  the  Inquidtion  waa  not  eyen  able  to 
preyent  the  rise  of  fanatical  secta,  aa  the  Anabaptista 
(q.  y.),  etc.  But  Charlea,  deterroined  to  iiproot  the  Ref- 
ormation, iaaued  a  new  mandate  for  the  oiganizatioo  of 
the  Inqnisition  after  the  Spaniah  foim  (April  20, 1550) 
(aee  Sleidani  Commentarii,  ed.  chr.  car.  Am  Ende :  Frc£ 
ad  M.  1785,  iii,  208;  Gerdesii  Bist.  Rfformał.  iii,  App. 
p.  122).  But  thia  attempt,  like  the  f<wmer  one.  aho 
failed.  Maria,  the  widowed  queen  of  Hungair,  who  in 
aecret  inclined  to  the  Reformation,  waa  n»w  ngent. 
Deputationa  of  the  dtizena  madę  her  aware  of  the  dan- 
gers  which  threatened  her  on  that  account ;  ehe  went 
immediately  to  Germany  to  Charies,  and  was  succea^- 
ful  in  effecting  a  change  of  the  mandate  in  ao  far  tbat 
in  a  new  form  of  it  (iaaued  September  25,  1550)  the 
worda  '^  InquiBition"  and  *<  inqu]aiton'*  were  omirted. 
But  it  waa  atill  oppoaed,  and  could  only  be  publi^hcd  in 
Antwerp  on  the  oondition  of  the  munidpal  righrs  U  wg 
preaeryed  (Gerdedi,  ut  np.  iii,  216  8q.).  That  the  In- 
qui8ition  waa  yeiy  actiye  up  to  thia  time  in  the  Nether- 
landa ia  certain;  but  the  aooounta  that,  under  Cbarie«  V, 
50,000,  or  eyen  100,000  persona  loat  their  liyes  by  it  in 
that  country  (Sculteti  A  imaUsy  p.  87 ;  Grotii  A  murie*  ft 
Historia  de  rebus  Belgieis,  AmsL  1658,  p.  12),  seems  to  be 
exaggented.  When  the  Netherianda  were  plaeed  un- 
der the  goyemment  of  Philip  II  a  more  aeyere  pdicy 
was  initiated,  determined,  if  poańble,  not  to  modify  the 
exiBting  hereaiea,  but  to  extinguiah  them  altogether. 
The  Inqui8ition  waa  at  once  aet  in  fuli  motion,  and  a 
zeal  waa  manifeated  by  ita  tribunal  wotthy  of  a  better 
cauae.  But  the  cnidtiea  which  followed  a  peopłe  de- 
termined to  worship  their  God  in  the  manner  which 
seemed  to  them  a  plain  daty  oould  exdte  no  fear,  bot 
rather  added  new  fud  to  the  flame  already  eonfined  to 
too  narrow  limita,  and  it  at  laat  biust  foith  in  aU  its 
maddened  fury.  At  first  the  dties  Louyain,  Braaecl^ 
Antwerp,  and  Hrrzogenbuach  united  in  demanding  the 
abolition  of  the  Inquiattion.  Their  exampie  was  im* 
tated,  and  in  Febraary,  1556,  a  league  of  the  oobiłitgr« 


IŃQUISinON 


605 


INSCRIPnONS 


caUed  the  Compromise,  was  formed,  wbich  eneigetically 
but  humbly  madę  the  awne  reąiiest  (Schrćkikh,  Kirchen- 
gesek.  iii,  390  8q.).  Aiter  eome  deky  thia  was  aooom- 
plished  in  1567.  Shortly  after,  however,  the  terrible 
Alba  was  dispatched  to  the  Netherlands  with  unlimited 
power.  Maigaret  was  foioed  to  lesigo  the  legency,  and 
he  now-  piooeeded  with  anheard-of  cnielty  against  thoee 
who  had  becorae  suspected,  or  whose  riches  attracted 
him.  Upon  the  16th  of  February,  1568,  by  a  sentenoe 
of  the  holy  office,  aU  tke  wAitbitantt  of  the  Netherlands 
were  condemned  to  deatk  as  heretica.  **  From  this  uni- 
venal  doom  only  a  few  persons  eq)ecially  named  were 
exoepted.  A  prodamation  of  the  king,  dated  ten  days 
laier,  confirmed  tłus  decree  of  the  Inquisition,  and  or- 
dertd  U  to  he  carried  into  inttcad  execution,  .  .  .  Thiee 
miUions  of  people,  men,  women,  and  children,  were  sen- 
tenced  to  the  tcaifoM  in  three  lines'*  (Motley,  Riae  of 
the  Duich  Republici  ii,  155).  Bat  even  with  these  meas- 
mes  they  fidled  in  uprooting  the  Refonnation  as  a  dan- 
geroos  heresy,  and  in  1678,  when  the  prorinoes  had  al- 
moflt  become  a  waste,  and  depopolated  by  the  emigni- 
tion  of  hundreds  of  thousands  and  the  execution  of 
thonsands  of  its  most  valuable  citisens,  Philip  saw  him- 
self  onder  the  necessity  of  recaUing  the  doke.  The  les- 
son  that  had  been  taught  Spain  was,  however,  insuffi- 
cient  to  incline  her  to  moderadon.  Philip  now,  as 
much  as  ever,  was  determined  to  uproot  heresy  by  force, 
and  these  fuither  attempts  resulted  finally  in  the  inde- 
pendenoe  of  the  northem  provinces  of  the  Netherlands, 
by  a  formidable  union  which  they  formed  at  Utrecht  in 
1579,  and  which  the  peace  of  Westphalia  guaranteed  to 
them.  In  the  sonthem  provinces  the  Jesuits  continued 
to  role  for  a  time,  but  soon  there  also  the  spirit  of  free- 
dom  abrogated  their  power,  and  the  Inqiusition,  **all- 
seetng  as  Providenoe,  inexoTable  as  the  grare;  not  in- 
flicting  punishment  which  the  suiTerer  could  remcmber, 
bat  remorseleasly  killing  outright ;  not  trouMing  itself 
to  ascertaiu  the  merita  of  a  case,  and  giving  rlie  accused 
the  benefits  of  a  doubt,  but  regaiding  suspicion  and  cer^ 
tainty  as  the  same  thing,"  was  driven  from  the  land. 

Couniries  outside  o/ Europę. — The  Inquisition  was 
introduced  into  the  tiansatlantic  cnu.itries  also  by  Por- 
tugal, and  especially  by  Spain,  to  which  "  the  see  of 
Bome,  in  rirtue  of  the  universal  authority  which  it  ar- 
rogated,  had  granted  ali  the  oountries  which  she  might 
di8cover  beyond  the  Atlantic,"  and  the  Spaniards,  re- 
llecting  that  they  had  expelled  the  Jews,  the  hereditary 
and  iuveterate  enemies  of  Christianity,  from  their  coasts, 
and  overtumed  the  Hohammedan  empire  which  had 
been  established  for  ages  in  the  Peninsula,  began  to  oon- 
sider  themselyes  as  the  favorites  of  Heaven,  destined  (o 
propagate  and  defend  the  true  faith,  and  "thus  the 
glory  of  the  Spanish  arms  became  associated  with  the 
extirpation  of  heresy."  In  the  New  World  the  Inqui- 
sition  established  its  power,  especially  in  Mexico.  It 
was  also  terribly  serere  in  Cartfaagena  and  Lima.  By 
the  Portuguese  it  was  taken  to  East  India,  and  had  its 
chief  seat  at  Goa.  Under  John  Y II  of  Portugal  it  was, 
afler  it  had  undergone  sereral  modifications,  wholly 
abolished  both  in  Brazil  and  East  India. 

Literaturę. — Nicol  Eymericus,  Directorium  incutitto- 
rum  (Barcelona,  1503 ;  Komę,  1578,  etc ;  with  commen- 
taries  by  Pegna,yenice,  1607);  Ursini,  Hispan.  incutri- 
tionis  et  carmjicina  secretiora  (Antw.  1611) ;  Łimborch, 
Historia  Ingnisiłumis  (Amst.  1692) ;  PlUm,  Ursprung  u. 
A  bńehtm  d.  I. ;  Mauriąue,  Sammlunff  d.  Ifutntctionen  d. 
SpanUcken  I.  (1630) ;  Cramer,  Briefe  u.  die  I.  (Leipzig, 
1784-85, 2  vols.) ;  ErzdJUwigen  v.  d.  Stiftung,  etc.,-cfer  /. 
(Cologne,  1784) ;  Uorente,  Hist.  critigue  de  VInquińlion 
dEMpagne  (Par.  1815-17, 4  vols.) ;  Ant  Puigblauch,  Die 
entlarrte  L  (Weimar,  1817) ;  Sarpi,  Ditcono  deW  Origine 
dfW  Uffizio  deir  Incuisiłione  (1639),  a  very  able,  though 
short  sketch ;  Kule,  Ilisł.  of  Inąuidtion  (ed.  by  Dr.  Har- 
ris) ;  Griltz,  Getch.  d.  Juden,  riii,  chap.  xii,  xiii ;  ix,  chap. 
rii,  viii ;  x,  99  są. ;  Leckey,  Hisł.  ofRaiionaiism  (see  In- 
dex) ;  M*Crie,  Hist.  ofthe  Rtformatitm  in  Iłalg ;  Hitt.  of 
tke  Bąformaium  tn  Spain ;  Milman,  LaL  Chritt.  (see  In-  i 


dez) ;  Rankę,  Hiit,  ofthe  Papacg  (see  Index) ;  Schobeil, 
PerMCUtiont  ofPoperg^  i,  102  sq. ;  Prescott,  Ferd.  and  /»- 
abeOa  (see  Index) ;  Pkilip  U  (see  Index) ;  Motley,  Hitt. 
ofDutch  BepubUc  (see  Index);  Chambcśrs,  Cyclop.  s.  y. ; 
Herzog,  Real-Enegtiop.  vi,  677  sq. ;  Brockhaus,  Comwr- 
tatwm'LexHoon,  viii,  271  sq. ;  Q!uart.  Rev,  vi,  313  sq. ;  x, 
204  są. ;  Blaekwood^s  Mag.  xx,  70  sq. ;  A'.  A .  JRev.  lxxx, 
504  są. ;  Janus,  Pope  and  the  CouncH,  p.  235  są. ;  English 
Rev,  xi,  488;  Cowtemp.Bee.  July,  1869,  p.  455;  Method. 
Ouart.  Itev.  April,  1870,  p.  809 ;  Weat,  Retf.  1856,  p.  177 ; 
also  Briiieh  Critic  of  1827,  and  Museum  of  Foreign  Lit. 
and  Science  (Pbila.)  ofthe  same  year,  in  which  appeared 
a  critical  survey  of  a  number  of  works  treating  on  the 
Inąuiaition ;  Kule,  The  Brand  of  Dominie,  or  the  Ingui»- 
Hon  at  Borne  supremę  and  unhertal  (Lond.  1852, 12mo) ; 
(Roman  Catholic),  RYicufia  Mackenna,  Francisco  Moy^ 
fli,  or  the  Incuisition  as  it  was  ta  South  A  merica  (Lond. 
1869, 8vo) ;  Balmez,  Catholidsm  and  Protesiantism  eom- 
paredinRekUion  to  doUization ;  Herculano,  Da  origem  e 
estabtecimento  da  inguisicao  em  Portugal  (Lissabon,  1854- 
1856,2 yols.);  Fleury,^i9f.J?cc£».v,266etaL  (J.H.W.) 

Inqiiiaitor.    See  Inquisition. 

I.  N.  R.  J.  are  the  inidals  for  Jesus  Nazarenus  Rex 
JudtBorum  (Jesus  of  Nazareth,  King  of  the  Jews),  fre- 
ąuently  met  with  as  inscriptions.  See  Cross  of  Cubist. 

InsabbatAtl.    See  Waldensians. 

Insacr&ti,  the  name  usually  given  in  the  andent 
canons  to  the  inferior  clergy.  The  superior  clergy  are 
Gommonly  called  the  i<pov/icvot,  holg  or  sacred ;  the  oth- 
ers  insacraiif  miconsecrateid.  Diffeient  ceremonies  were 
obsenred  at  their  ordination:  the  higher  orders  were 
set  apart  at  the  altar  by  the  solenm  imposition  of  hands; 
the  otheis  had  no  imposition  of  hands.  The  superior 
orders  ministered  as  priests,  celebrating  the  sacraments 
and  preaching  in  the  church;  the  inferior  performed 
some  lower  or  onlinary  duties,  and  generally  attended 
upon  the  othen  in  their  sacred  services.— Farrar,  Ecdes. 
Dictionarg.    See  Inferior  Clergy. 

Inscriptioiui  canred  on  stone  have  in  all  ages  been 
regarded  by  cultivated,  and  sometimes  cven  by  rude  na- 
tion.**,  as  the  most  enduring  monuroents  of  remarkable 
events.  Thus  the  early  patriarch  Job  would  have  his 
d>4ng  profession  of  faith  **  graren  with  iron  in  the  rock 
foreYer"  (Job  xix,  24).  Moses  inscribed  the  law  upon 
Stones,  and  set  them  up  pcrmanently  in  Mt.  £bal  (Deut. 
xxvii,  2-8 ;  Josh.  viii,  80).     See  Pillar. 

The  oldest  inscriptions  now  known  to  iis  are  the  Chi- 
nese,  which  profess  to  ascend  to  B.C  2278.  Those  of 
India  datę  only  back  to  B.C.  315,  the  age  of  Sandracot- 
tus;  but  it  has  been  thought  that  the  hierogh^phical  in- 
scriptions of  Central  America  and  of  Mexico  may  prove 
to  be  of  much  older  datę  than  those  of  China  eyen.  The 
Egyptian  inscriptions  are  generally  acknowledged  to  be 
as  old  as  B.C  2000;  next  in  order  come  the  Assyrian 
and  Babylonian,  reaching  nearly  as  high  an  antiąuity, 
and  then  follow  the  Persian,  and  Median,  and  I^oeni- 
cian,  all  of  about  B.C  700,  while  the  Greek  datę  only  to 
RC.  500  and  600,  and  the  Etruscan  and  Roman  to  no  re- 
moter  datę  than  the  Indian,  i.  e.  B.C.  400-300.  The 
most  remarkable  of  all  the  known  inscriptions  are  the 
trilingual  inscription  of  Rosetta,  that  of  Shalmanezer 
on  the  obelisk  of  Nimrud,  and  the  cylinder  of  Sennach- 
erib;  the  trilingual  inscription  of  Darius  I  on  the  rock 
at  Behistun ;  the  Greek  inscription  of  the  soldiers  of 
Psammetichus  at  Ipsamboul,  and  of  the  bronze  helmet 
dedicated  by  Hiero  I  to  the  Olympian  Jupiter ;  the  in- 
scription on  the  coffin  of  the  Cyprian  king  Asmumazer; 
the  Etruscan  inscription  called  the  Eugubine  Tables; 
that  of  Mummius,  the  conąueror  of  Corinth,  at  Romę, 
and  the  will  of  Augustus  at  Ancyra;  the  inscription  of 
the  Ethiopian  monarch  Silco ;  the  old  monument  of  Yo, 
and  the  inscription  of  Se-gan-fu,  recording  the  arrival 
of  Christianity  in  China  (A.D.631);  the  inscriptions  of 
Chandra-gupta  and  Asoka  in  India. 

I.  Egyptian  Hierogiyphics, — These  are  at  once  the 
most  anciont,  the  most  copious,  and  the  most  instmc- 


INSCRIPTIONS 


603 


INSCRIPnONS 


^ve  of  all  relicfl  of  thia  description  extant  The  Egyp- 
tians  used  three  modes  of  writing :  (1)  the  EnchoHcd 
OT  DemotiCf  the  common  language  of  the  ooontiy;  (2) 
the  ffierciHCf  peculiar  to  the  priests ;  and  (3)  the  Hie- 
roglyphic  Hleroglyphics,  agam,  ara  of  three  kinda: 
(L)  PhonełiCf  when  the  hlerogiyphic  stands  for  a  letter ; 
(ii)  Emblemaiic  or  Symholic,  when  it  is  an  emhlem  or 
Bymbol  of  the  thing  repreeented ;  (iu.)  FiguraHce,  when 
it  ia  a  representation  of  the  object  itaelf.  The  annexed 
engraving  will  give  some  idea  of  the  four  different  kinds 
of  £gyptiAn  characten;  by  this  it  will  be  seen  that  in 
some  cases  the  derivation  of  the  demotic  character  ia  to 
be  traoed,  through  ita  rarioua  gradations,  from  the  orig- 


Łat-  Pnra   .  ŁłoMr  Hlantic  D«boU« 

tor.      Hteroglyphk.  Hl«ro|cIyph{e.  Cbanctcr.        Chanetar. 


M 


Uial  pine  hieroglyphic,  while  in  others  the  reaemblance 
ia  utterly  lost.  '  We  illuatrate  thia  aubject  by  a  few 
examples,  pointing  out  the  varioua  meanings  attached 
to  the  Egyptian  charactera  under  different  circum- 
Btancea.  The  namea  of  the  goda  were  in  generał  ex- 
preaaed  by  symbola  and  not  by  lettera;  **in  the  aame 
tnanner,  the  Jcwa  never  wrote  at  fidl  length  the  ineffa- 
ble  name  of  Jehovah,  but  alwaya  expre8sed  it  by  a  ahort 
mark,  which  they  pronounced  Adonai."  Theae  repre- 
lentationa  were  of  two  kinda :  jiffurative,  in  which  the 
tiame  of  the  deity  ia  implied  by  the  form  in  which  he 
waa  repreaented  in  hia  atatue,  and  tymbolk,  in  which  a 
part  of  the  atatue,  or  some  object  having  a  reference  to 
the  deity,  waa  employed,  aa  for  inatance : 


nOUBATITB  M AMKI  OF  OODS. 


SYMaOLIC  KAMBI  Of  OOIM. 


Phrt.      CnoaphlB.  Amon. 


Many  worda  were  alao  expre8aed  by  aymbola,  of  which 
the  following  are  exaniple8 : 

"^^  !□  l/l  m 

Mothar.   Son  or  Child.       T«ople.  G«d.  Goddew. 

Dr.  Young  and  Mr.  Tattam  have  aatiafactorily  ahown 
that  all  that  haa  come  down  to  ua  of  the  language  and 
literature  of  ancient  Egypt  ia  contalned  in  the  Coptic, 
Sahadic,  or  Upper  Country,  and  the  Basmurico-Coptic 
dialecta,  and  in  the  enchorial,  hieratic,  and  hieroglyph- 
ic inacriptiona  and  MSS. ;  and  it  ia  a  point  that  cannot 
be  too  much  insisted  upon,  that  a  previoua  knowledge 
of  the  Coptic  ia  abaolutely  neceaaary  to  a  correct  under- 
atanding  of  the  hicroglyphica.     See  Hieroolyphics. 

Theae  inacriptiona  are  found  abmidantly  on  the  vari- 
oua  monumenta  atill  remaining  in  Egypt,  especially  in 
the  tomba  and  palacea  of  the  aeyeral  kings.  They  are 
found  either  alone,  aa  documentary  recorda,  e.  g.  on  the 
obeliaka  and  columna ;  or  oftener  in  connectton  with  pic- 
torial  repreaentationa  of  public  or  private  acenea;  very 
rarely,  as  in  the  famoua  Rosetta  Stone,  with  interlinear 
tranalationa  in  the  corresponding  Egyptian  or  a  foreign 
language.     See  Egypt. 

II.  Am/rian  Cuneaiic.  —  Theae  charactera,  like  the 
Egyptian  hieroglyphica,  are  iiauaily  inacribed  upon  alaba 
containing  likewiae  pictorial  delineationa  of  martial, 
hunting,  or  other  acenea.  See  Cuneiporm.  The  moat 
noted  placea  where  they  occur  are  at  Behiatun,  Khorso- 


bad,  Konyunjik,  and  Nimrud.  See  cach  in  ita  order. 
All  the  great  halla  of  the  varioua  palacea  are  auiroaoded 
in  the  interior  with  aculptiored  aUba  aet  into  the  waDs, 
and  corered  with  repreaentationa  of  the  great  hifiońcal 
erenta  of  the  reigna  of  the  respectiva  kingą,  soch  as 
battlea,  aiegea  of  citiea,  the  oonąoeata  of  proyinceii.  the 
buUding  of  towna,  and  of  mounda  for  palacea  and  t«iD- 
plea,  proceauona  of  captirea,  caravana  bearing  tiibute 
from  aubjected  nationa,  or  preaenta  from  raaaal  kingF.  or 
taxea  from  the  rarioua  diatricta  of  the  empire,  etc  Ser- 
eral  hundreda  of  theae  haye  been  remored,  taken  down 
the  Euphratea,  and  ahipped  to  England  and  France,  and 
aet  up  Ul  the  Britiah  Huaeum,  and  that  of  the  Lourre 
at  Paria.  Theae  alaba  vary  in  aize  from  three  to  seren 
feet  in  breadth,  and  from  flve  to  eleren  feet  in  heigfat; 
and  a  part  even  reach  thirteen  and  fifieen  feet.  Some 
of  them  have  been  brought  to  our  own  country,  and  pr^ 
aented  to  Amherat  and  other  collegea.  Theae  alabs  be- 
come,  aa  it  were,  leavea  in  the  Aasyrian  hiatory.  Each 
chamber,  in  fact-,  ia  a  yolume;  for  not  only  do  we  hare 
the  aculpturea,  but  alao  inacriptiona  in  a  cuneiform  or 
wedge-form  letter,  which  fumiahea  a  comroentary  on 
the  eyenta  repreaented  by  the  artiat.  Great  progresB 
haa  already  been  madę  in  deciphering  thia  language,  as 
we  hare  atated  elaewhere,  and  we  hare  moat  wonderful 
and  intereatmg  additiona  to  our  knowledge  of  andeot 
Nineyeh  (q.  v.). 

III.  Pkcańcian  Records, — ^Theae  are  yery  fragmenta- 
ry  and  widely  acattered.  They  are  in  charactera  closely 
reaembling  the  old  Hebrew.  Moat  of  them  haye  been 
diligently  collected  and  expounded  by  Geaeniua  in  his 
Monumenta  Pkoeniaa  (Lpz.  1887).  See  Piicenicia.  A 
yery  intereating  inacription  relating  to  the  history  of 
one  of  the  early  Moabitiah  kingą  haa  lately  been  dLscor- 
ered.    See  Mksha. 

IV.  Swaitic  InscripHone.— Wady  Mokatteb,  the  cliffs 
of  which  bear  theae  inacriptiona,  ia  a  ralley  entcring 
wady  Sheik,  and  bordering  on  the  upper  regiona  of  the 
Sinai  Mountaina.  It  extenda  for  about  thrcc  hoors* 
march,  and  in  moat  placea  ita  rocka  present  abrupt  diffs 
twenty  or  thirty  feet  high.  From  theae  clifEs  large 
maaaea  haye  aeparatcd  and  lie  at  the  bottom  in  the  val- 
ley.  The  cliffa  and  rocka  are  thickly  coyered  with  in- 
acriptiona, which  are  continued,  at  inter\'al8  of  a  few 
hundred  pacea  only,  for  at  Icast  the  dislance  of  two 
houra  and  a  half.  Burckhardt  aaya  that  to  copy  all  of 
them  would  occupy  a  akilful  draughtaman  aix  or  eight 
daya.  The  inacriptiona  are  yery  rudely  cxecnted,  some- 
timea  with  large  lettera,  at  others  with  amall,  and  sel- 
dom  with  atraight  linea.  The  characters  appcar  to  be 
ifritten  from  right  to  left;  and,  although  not  out  deep^ 
an  inatrument  of  metal  must  haye  been  required,  as  the 
rock  ia  of  conaiderable  hardncaa.  Some  of  them  are  m 
rocka  at  a  height  of  twelye  or  fifteen  feet,  and  idua 
haye  reąuired  a  ladder  to  aacend  to  them.  The  charac- 
tera were  not  known.  The  auperior  of  the  Franciscim, 
who  yiaited  the  place  in  1722,  obeeryea:  *<  Although  ve 
had  among  ua  men  who  understood  the  Arabian,  Greok. 
Hebrew,  Syriac,  Coptic,  I^tin,  Armcnian,  Turkish,  £ng- 
liah,  niyrian,  German,  and  Biohemian  languages,  tbere 
waa  not  one  of  ua  who  had  the  alightest  knowledge  of 
the  charactera  engrayed  in  theae  hard  rocka  with  grtat 
labor  in  a  country  where  there  ia  nothing  to  be  had 
either  to  eat  or  drink.  Hencc  it  ia  probable  that  tfaese 
charactera  contained  some  profound  secrets,  which,  long 
before  the  birth  of  Jeaua  Chriat,  were  sculptured  in  thc^e 
rocka  by  the  Chaldaeana  or  eome  other  persona.**  Thi.^ 
account  excited  profound  attention  in  Europę;  and  it 
waa  thought  by  many  that  the  inacriptions  might  harc 
been  formed  by  the  Israelitea  during  their  stay  in  this 
region,  and  probabły  contained  iirefragable  cA-idence  for 
the  tnith  of  the  Moaaic  hi8tor\%  Hence  copiea  cf  ihcm 
haye  been  anxiously  songht  and  aecured;  but,  nith  the 
exception  of  a  few  in  Greek,  the  character  and  language 
were  atill  unknown.  "  Before  they  caii  be  sil  deciiAer- 
ed,*'  aaya  Laborde,  **  greater  progreaa  than  haa  yct  beeo 
attained  muat  be  madę  in  the  paleography  and  andeot 


INSCRIPTIONS 


607 


INSCRIPTIONS 


Łuigiiages  of  the  East.  The  most  generał  opinion  is 
tłuiŁ  they  were  the  work  of  pilgrims  wfao  visited  Sinai 
ftbont  the  6th  century.'*  This  aeems  to  us  yery  doubt- 
fuL  The  Greek  inacriptions  and  the  croesea,  on  which 
this  coDcltuiion  chiefly  rests,  may  indeed  hAve  been  of 
that  or  a  later  age ;  but  it  does  not  follow  that  thoae  in 
tbe  unkno¥m  charactere  neceasaiily  were  ao  too. — Kitto, 
Piet.  Btblff  notę  on  Job  xix,  24.  Rev.  Charles  Forster 
contends  that  they  are  records  of  the  Israelites  on  their 
way  from  Egypt  to  Palestine  (Sinai  Photographedj  Lon- 
don, 1862,  foL).  Better  opportunities  than  had  formerly 
been  at  the  command  of  casual  trayellers  were  enjoyed 
by  captain  Palnier,  a  member  of  the  expedition  now 
employed  in  making  a  complete  and  exhau8tive  sanrey 
of  the  physical  features  and  condition  of  the  Sinaitic  re- 
gion. His  collection  of  transcripts  from  wady  Mokat- 
teb  and  other  localities  exceed8  1500  in  number,  and  he 
was  much  aided  in  the  study  of  their  meaning  by  find- 
ing  Beveral  nndoubted  bilingual  inscriptions  where  the 
Greek  and  Sinaitic  charactera  occur  together,  and  ex- 
preas  the  same  meaning.  The  result  of  four  months* 
Bteady  devotion  to  this  object  bas  given  a  complete  al- 
phabet  of  the  lattcr,  so  that  captain  Falmer  can  read 
and  interpret  any  of  the  inscriptions  with  ease.  Both 
Ihe  alphabet  and  language  must  have  been  employed 
by  a  late  Shemitic  people — "  in  all  probability  a  com- 
mercial  community  who  inhabited,  or  at  least  colonized, 
the  Peninsuhi  for  the  first  few  centuries  of  the  Christian 
aera."  That  many  of  the  writers  were  Christians  is 
prored  by  the  numerous  Christian  signs  used  by  them ; 
but  it  is  eąually  elear,  from  intemal  evidence,  that  a 
large  proportion  of  them  were  pagans.  It  is  interesting 
to  notę  that  captain  Palmer's  researches  were  pursued 
without  the  knowledge  of  professor  Beers's  studies, 
though  they  mainly  corroborate  each  other,  and  he 
bears  testimony  to  the  professor*s  acuteness  and  pene- 
tration.  A  writer  in  the  Princeton  Reeiew  (Oct,  1870), 
after  giring  the  history  of  the  disco very  and  decipher- 
ment  of  these  inscriptions,  thus  concludes :  "  It  seems  to 
be  ascertained  that  the  writers  were  natiyes  of  Arabia 
Petnea,  inclQsive  of  the  Sinaitic  peninsula;  and,wheth- 
er  they  were  subjects  of  the  kingdom  centring  in  Petra 
or  not,  they  madę  use  of  the  language  and  the  modę 


of  writing  current  there.  They  were  neither  Jews  nor 
Christiana,  but  worshippers  of  heathen  deities,  and  par- 
ticulariy  of  the  heaven]y  bodies.  They  were  moetly 
pilgrims  on  their  way  to  certain  celebrated  sanctuaries, 
which  were  for  centuries  resorted  to  at  special  seasons 
by  the  pagans  resident  in  this  region.  The  inscriptions 
in  the  old  native  character  belong  to  the  period  imme- 
diately  preceding  and  foUowing  the  Christian  era ;  and 
they  oome  down  to  the  time  when  the  Gospel  and  the 
Christian  Chureh  penetrated  these  localities,  supplanted 
heathenism,  and  suppressed  its  sanctuaries.  They  then 
yield  to  legends  in  Greek  and  Latin,  and  even  more  re- 
cent  tongues,  the  work  of  Christians,  who,  in  imitation 
of  their  heathen  predeceseors,  have  left  the  record  of 
their  pilgrimage  to  hallowed  spots  graren  on  the  same 
imperishable  works."  Hence  we  find  crosses  and  other 
marks  of  Christianity  mingled  in  the  pagan  names  and 
symbols.  Similar  inscriptions  have  been  found  scatter- 
cd,  but  not  so  profusely,  nor  in  such  confusion,  in  yarions 
other  portions  of  the  Sinaitic  peninsula,  and  even  in  the 
outskirts  of  Palestine.  (See  the  literaturę  in  the  Prtnce- 
ton  Reriewy  ut  sup.)     See  Sinal 

INSCRIPTIONS,  Christian.  There  are  but  few 
Christian  inscriptions  that  remain  extant  from  an  early 
datę,  but  these  few  yet  suffice  to  convey  to  us  a  pretty 
accurate  idea  of  the  history  of  the  early  Christian 
Chureh,  and  of  the  customs  and  bclief  of  the  flrst  fol- 
lowers  of  the  Lord  Jesus  Christ.  **  They  express,''  says 
Maitland,  in  his  justly  celebrated  and  now  quite  rare 
work  on  The  Chureh  in  the  Catacombs  (Lond.  1846, 8vo, 
p.  18),  "  the  feelings  of  a  body  of  Christians  whose  lead- 
era alone  are  known  to  us  in  history.  The  fathers  of 
the  Chureh  live  in  their  yoluminous  works ;  the  lower 
orders  aro  only  represented  by  these  simple  records,  from 
which,  with  scarcely  an  exception,  sorrow  and  complaint 
are  banished ;  the  boast  of  suifering,  or  an  appeal  to  the 
reyengeful  passions,  is  nowhere  to  be  found.  One  ex- 
presses  faith,  another  hope,  a  third  cbarity.  The  gen- 
ius  of  primitiye  Christianity, '  to  belieye,  to  loye,  and  to 
suffer,'  has  neyer  been  better  illustrated.  These  '  ser- 
mons  in  atones'  are  addressed  to  the  heart,  and  not  to 
the  head ,  to  the  feelings  rather  than  to  the  taste ;  and 
possess  additional  yalue  from  being  the  work  of  the 


Sngrayed  Bocks  in  Wady  Mokatteb. 


INSCRIPnONS 


608 


INSCRIPnONS 


poTCflt  and  most  influentUl  portion  of  the  <  catholic  and 
apostolic  Charch'  then  in  exi0tence."  In  the  earlj  yean 
of  the  Christian  Charch  the  ioscriptions  werC|  with  few 
exceptionB,  confined  to  the  memory  of  deoeaaed  perBons 
and  to  sacred  object& 

1.  The  cuiłtom  of  tomb-ttone  inacripdons  was  boiiowed 
by  the  early  Christians  from  the  Romans  and  Giecians; 
they  simplified  them,  howeyer,  very  much,  and  indicated 
the  Christian  knowlcdge,  life,  and  rank  of  the  deceased 
partly  by  significant  symbols,  partly  by  written  signs, 
woids,  and  eKpressions.  These  symbols,  as  they  are 
found  in  Italy,  France,  and  the  oountries  on  the  Rhine, 
pertain  partly  to  the  designation  of  the  Redeemer  by 
means  of  pictorial  represeiitations,  partly  to  the  life  after 
death,  hope  for  the  same  through  Christ  and  the  cross. 
The  Jiame  of  Christ,  their  Lord  and  Master,  is,  as  would 
be  expected  of  his  foUowers,  everywhere  the  most  prom- 
inent, and  is  "repeated  in  an  endless  yariety  of  forma, 
and  the  actions  of  his  life  are  figared  in  eyery  degree  of 
radeness  of  execution."  But  remarkable  it  oertainly  is, 
that  in  the  inscriptions  oontained  in  the  Lapidarian  Gal- 
lery,  selectcd  and  arranged  under  papai  superintendence, 
containing  one  of  the  largest,  if  not  the  largest  collec- 
tion  of  Christian  inscriptions,  there  are  no  prayers  for 
the  dead  (unless  the  forms  ^  May  yoa  liye,"  "  May  God 
lefiresh  you,"  be  so  construed) ;  no  addresses  to  the  Yir- 
gin  Mary,  nor  to  the  apostles  or  earlier  saints ;  and,  with 
the  exception  of  "  etemal  sleep,"  **  etemal  home,"  etc, 
no  expressions  contrary  to  the  plain  sensc  of  Scripture. 
Neither  is  the  sccond  person  of  the  Trinity  yiewed  in 
the  Jewish  light  of  a  temporal  Messiah,  nor  b  he  de- 
graded  to  the  Socinian  estimate  of  a  merę  esample,  but 
he  is  eyer  represented  as  inyested  with  all  the  honors 
of  a  Bedeemer.  On  this  subject  there  is  no  nserye,  no 
heathenish  supprcsńon  of  the  distingui^ing  feature  of 
the  Christian  religion  as  professed  by  the  eyangelical 
aects.  On  Stones  innumerable  appears  the  good  Shep- 
herd,  bearing  on  his  shoulders  the  reooycred  sheep,  by 
which  many  an  illiteratc  belierer  expre8sed  his  sense 
of  personal  salyation.  One,  according  to  his  epitaph, 
^  sleeps  in  Christ  ;*'  another  is  buried  with  a  prayer  that 
"  she  may  live  in  the  Lord  JesUs."  But  most  of  all,  the 
cross  in  its  simplest  form  is  employed  to  testify  the  faith 
of  the  deceased ;  and  whateyer  ignorance  may  have  pre- 
yailed  regarding  the  Ictier  of  Holy  Writ,  or  the  morę 
mysterious  doctrines  contained  in  it,  there  seems  to  haye 
been  no  want  of  apprehcnsion  of  that  sacriflce  **  where- 
by  alone  we  obtain  remission  of  our  sins,  and  are  madę 
partakers  of  the  kingdom  of  hecyen*"  (&f  aitland,  Church 
in  the  Catacontbs,  p.  14, 15).  One  of  the  principal  signs 
used  in  refcrring  to  Christ  is  a  monogram  of  the  initial 
letters  of  the  Greek  name  Kpiirróc.  Most  generalia'  ii 
is  found  to  be  composed  of  X  and  p,  the  latter  placed 
in  the  heart  of  the  former.  Strange  to  say,  we  pre- 
serye  in  our  own  language  a  yestige  of  this  figurę  in 
writing  Xm(ts  and  Xtion,  which  can  only  be  explained 
by  supposing  the  first  letter  to  stand  for  the  Greek  X. 
^^^^        ^  This  fac-simUe  of  a  monogram  of 

^*7\  1  )Vrv  A  C**"*^'*  name  is  copied  from  Mait- 
1  \SJ  N/  A  land,  p.  166,  and  was  originally 
/  n^^^^^  taken  from  the  Lapidarian  Gallery. 

L  CTl  pC  ^        The  a  and  w  reyersed  in  this  epi- 
/|  >J/V  *^  *  taph  refer  to  the  well-known  pas- 

Bead:  "Tasaris  [a  «»Ke«  »"  ^^  Apocalypee:  their 
man's  nsmel  —  In  continued  use  proyes  the  generał 
Christ,  the  first  and  reception  of  that  book  as  a  part  of 
the  inspired  canon.  The  a  and 
Ci;  [see  article  on  Aij>ha]  are  men- 
tioned  by  Prudentius  as  well  as  by 
Tertullian,  who  regarded  them  as 
mystcriously  contaming  the  signi- 
fication  that  in  Christ  rest  the  be- 
.  ginning  and  end  of  all  spiritual  life 
{I)e  monoffranuct.).  From  the  ig- 
norance of  the  sculptor,  the  entire 
symbol  was  sometimes  inyerted,  as 
in  the  opposite  figurę  (also  from 


Maitlandf  p.  167).    A  change  was  ailenrarda 
madę  by  the  decuasation  (as  it  is  technically 
termed)  of  the  X,  by  which  the  figurę  of  a       ,. 
cross  was  pioduoed.   Haying  once  arriyed  at  ^^  t 
this  happy  coinddenoe,  the  monogram  re-         ' 
mained  stationaiy.    lu  simpk  outline,  thus 
chiselled  on  a  giaye-atone  (from  the  Lapi- 


darian Gallery),  or 
acoompanied  by  the 
misplaoed  letters. 


or  eyen  conyerted  into  "  Pur,**  as  if  for  Periatoab 
DMN 

EUVj:yASA 


iV&. 


SORICIO. 
Bead :  "  To  our  great  God— Eliosa  to  Soridos,  in  Christ" 

was  in  oourse  of  time  oroamented  with  jewels;  and  the 
monofframma  gemmatum  took  ito  plaoe  as  a  worfc  of  sn 
among  Christiau  bas-reliefs  of  the 
4th  century.  The  beat  specimea 
in  the  Lapidarian  Galleiy  Mait- 
land  asserts  that  he  accurstehf 
copied,  and  it  is  here  rcprodooedt 
the  jewels  are  only  in  marbłe,  bot 
they  represent  the  real  gems  oftea 
layished  upon  the  ancient  croai 
It  is  asserted  by  some  antiqua- 
rians  that  the  monogram  was  not 
used  until  the  time  of  the  empenr 
Constantine,  and  that,  as  is  geo- 
erally  belieyed,  it  was  first  seen 
by  him  in  the  so  greatly  oelebrated  miracukius  yiaoo, 
which  resulted  in  his  conyerńon  to  the  Christian  relig- 
ion. An  epitaph,  such  as  the  subjoined,  disooyered  by 
Bosio,  may  be  well  assigned  to  that  tiDoe,  when  the  moCp 
to  **  In  hoc  yinces"  might  haye  beoome  common  i 
IN  HOC  YINCES 


yfs 


8INF0NIA  ET  FIUIS 
VANXLVIII  M-VD  UU 
"In  this  thoo  shalt  cononer— In  Christ.    Sinfonis,  also 
for  her  sons.    8be  Iived  rorty-eight  years,  five  months, 
and  four  days.** 

The  next  is  contained  in  Oderid : 
IN^VICTR1X 
which  probably  signified, 

"  Yłdriz  [a  woman*s  name],  yictorions  in  Christ* 

But  the  epitaphs  of  Alexander  and  Marius,  maitjn 
under  Adrian  and  Antoninę,  also  exhibit  the  monognm; 
^  and  though,"  says  Maitland,  "  they  do  not  appear  to 
haye  been  executed  at  the  time,  they  contain  strong 
marks  of  belonging  to  a  period  of  yiolent  penccutiun." 
Gaetano  Blarini,  howeyer,  asserts  that  the  eariiest  mno- 
ogram  bdongs  to  the  year  881,  L  e.  8ix  years  afrcr  the 
Coundlof  Nice. 


A  CQt  from  a  stamp  ofBoldettŁ 
The  P  (r)  of  the  mon<»raiB  also 
senres  as  a  p  in  the  woros  9pe»  Deu 
It  Is  to  be  read,  *'My  hope  is  tai 
Ood  Christ" 


The  only  resemblanoe  to  the  moDognm  used  by  the 


mscRipnoNS 


609 


mscRipnoNs 


hetŁhen  was  the  cenumiam  ^kT  t  or  symbol  of  lightoing. 
The  Egypdin  erom  appean  to  be  an  abbreriation  of 
the  NUomeler. 

SIGNY    y^ 

CELIX  •  ET  CEREAUS  •  PATRI  •  BENEM  • 
QVI- VIXIT  •  ANNIS  •  LXXXV  'M  •  VIII  •  D  •  V 

DORMIT  IN  PACEM. 
Tnnilate— "  The  mark  of  Christ.   Cellx  and  Cerealls  to 
their  desenriDg  fathor,**  etc 

For  the  aasertion  that  the  monogram  was  a  B3rmbol 
of  martyrdom,  and  signified  "  for  Christ,"  there  seems  to 
be  not  the  leasŁ  authority.  In  many  inacriptions  we 
lead,  however,  in  ]g ;  ■»  i^ 

IN  ^  AaELVS  D. 
"Asdns  sleeps  [or  is  baried]  in  Christ** 

Pradentitis  infonns  us  that  the  name  of  Christ,  '^writ- 
ten  in  jewelled  gold,  marked  the  purple  labarum,  and 
sparkled  from  the  helmets"  of  the  army  of  Constautine ; 
Imt  this  is,  in  all  probability,  only  a  poetical  fiction  (Li- 
ber i,  contra  Stfmmachum).  Only  in  the  later  inscrip- 
tiona,  as  far  down  as  the  Middle  Ages,  as  in  a  Cologne 
inacription  (Centralm.  100),  are  found  the  words  tmfium 
dfims,  The  monogram  with  the  two  letters  is  there 
Bometimes  surrounded  by  a  drcle  or  a  wreath.  The 
Sfinbola,  howcrer,  were  used  morę  frequently  than  any 
other,and  of  these  the  fiah  ((x^vc)t  which  is  often  found 
in  different  forms  upon  the  same  stone,  was  no  doubt 
saggested  by  the  initials  which  it  contains  of  the  for- 
muła 'Ii;<rovc  Xpt9TÓc,  Qtov  Tióc  Xwrrjp  (Jesus  Christ, 
Son  of  God,  the  Sayiour),  a  sentence  which  had  been 
adopted  from  the  Sibylline  rerses.  "  Moreover,  the  pho- 
netic  sigu  of  this  word,  the  actnal  fish,  was  au  emblem 
whose  meaning  was  entirely  concealed  from  the  uniniti- 
tted— an  important  point  with  thoee  who  were  sur- 
rounded by  foes  ready  to  ridicule  and  blaspheme  what- 
ever  of  Christianity  they  could  detect.  Nor  did  the  ap- 
propiiateneas  of  the  symbol  stop  here.  *  The  first,'  ob- 
8erved  Tertullian, '  seems  a  fit  emblem  of  him  whose 
flpiritual  children  are,  like  the  offspring  of  fishes,  bom  in 
the  water  of  baptism.' "  Sometimes  the  word  ix^C 
was  espreased  at  length,  as  in  the  two  foUowing  (Lap- 
idarian  Galleiy) : 

IKGTC 
BONO  ET  INOCENTI  FILIO 
PASTOR!  •  QV  •  X  •  A  •  N  •  mx 

NNIS-X 

ixeYC 

The  first  contains  the  mistake  of  k  for  %.  At  other 
timcs  the  fish  itself  was  figured,  as  recommended  by  Cle- 
ment  of  Alescandria  (Peedagog,  iii,  106),  who,  besides  the 
fish,  proposed  as  Christian  emblems  for  signets  fisher- 
L,  anchors,  ships,  doyes,  and  lyres. 


This  spedmen  ICaltland  aiso  eopied  fhnn  the  Lapidarian 
Gallery. 

In  a  metiical  Gredan  inscription  at  Antrim,  Christ 
hjmself,  at  the  sapper,  is  called  iy^hc.  Usually,  how- 
erer,  it  is  the  fishennan,who  is  Christ  himself;  he  who 
also  caUed  the  apoetles  to  become  the  fishers  of  men 
(Matt.  ir,  19 ;  Mark  i,  17).  CLement  obsenres  that  it  re- 
feis  to  the  apostle  Peter,  and  the  boirs  who  were  drawn 
oot  of  the  water  (of  baptism).  To  these  the  anchor  is 
•dded,  which,  as  eariy  as  the  ktter  to  the  Hebrews  (yi, 
19),  is  modę  the  symbol  of  hope  resting  in  the  centrę  of 
hotinees  (comp.  Mai,  laaerip,  Ckr.  p.  875, 4;  415, 9 ;  424, 
7 ;  430, 10 ;  449, 4 ;  460, 6).    Less  freqaently  we  find  the 


sailing  ship,  e.  g.  upon  an  inscription  of  Fiimia  Victoiia, 
in  the  porch  of  Maria  in  Trasteyere,  in  Romę,  and  (Mai, 
Intcrip.  Chr,  p.  480, 6)  upon  the  tomb-stone  of  a  oertain 
yirgiu  named  Serenik.  The  same  is  also  found  in  the 
Vatican.  Clement  calls  it  vavc  ovpavo$poiiovoa,  **  the 
ship  hastening  heayenwards."  The  lyre^  as  far  as  we 
know,  does  not  occur  on  tomb-stonea.  The  lyre  is  per- 
haps  an  ideał  pictnre  of  the  harmony  which  reigns  in 
the  Christian  soul,  or  is  uśed  instead  of  Orpheus,  by 
whom  also  Christ  was  represented.  The  dwe^  also  spe- 
cified  by  Clement,  and  the  olive^anchj  are  morę  numer- 
óus,  as  the  signs  of  loye  and  peaoe.  The  word/woee  ii 
added  to  this  faCNsimile  from  the  Lapidarian  Gallery. 


PAX 


The  oUye-branch  which  it  bears  is  borrowed  from  the 
Mstory  of  Noah :  it  was  sometimes  cairied  in  the  daws 
of  the  bird,  as  in  the  copy  below  giyen,  which  is  takea 
from  the  Vatican  library. 


IENVARIE  BIRGINI 
BENEMERENTI  IN 
PACE  BOTIS  DEPOSITA 


"To  Jennaria.  n  yłrglo,  well* 
peace,  with  yowb.** 


deserring.    Baried  In 


The  substitution  of  bołit  and  tńrgmi  for  vcti»  and  9tr* 
gim :  the  b  and  v  are  sometimes  as  absnrdly  reyersed. 


BIB • BEOVENE 
MERENTI 


"ToBIbbeiis.the 
well-deserring.** 


DECEMBER  S  EVIVO  FECIT  SIBI 
BISOJMrVM. 


"In  Christ  Decem- 
ber,  whlle  liying,  madę 
himself  a  Bisomnm." 


Clement,  among  other  things,  forbids  Christians  to 
cany  pitchers  and  swords  upon  their  rings.  The  pkdŁ" 
er,  with  or  without  handle,  does  occur,  howeyer,  fre- 
quently  in  Romę,  Trier,  and  elsewhere,  on  Christian 
grayes,  usually  between  two  doyes.  Whether  this  sym- 
bol refers  to  the  doyes  drinking  from  a  bowl,  or  whether 
it  points  to  the  water  of  life  which  is  to  refreeh  the 
thirsty  soul,  is  not  known.  Instead  of  the  sword,  the 
axe  occurs  a  few  times  on  Christian  tomb-stones :  thus 
in  Romę,  at  the  church  Nereo  ed  Achille,  in  the  Palazzo 
Guilelmi,  seyeral  times  at  Aiinghi,  etc.  They  are  most 
probably  a  oonoealed  representation  of  the  cross,  whoee 
form  they  somewhat  resemble.  The  Christians  oould 
use  this  symbol  morę  readily,  becanse  it  was  also  used 
by  the  heathens  as  dedicatio  tub  ascku  In  addition  to 
these,  we  find  the  8even-armed  candlesHckj  which  occurs 
in  the  cloLster  of  St.  Paola  at  Romę  and  elsewhere  upon 
Jewish  tomb-stones,  but  also  upon  Christian  basilisks  of 
Romę;  not  so  frequently  on  grayes,  e.  g.  Maly/nscripL 
Chr.  p.  408,  4.  The  hmb  occurs  seldom,  e.  g.  Mai,  In* 
tcrijpt,  Chr,  p.  401, 8 ;  the  same,  between  two  doyes,  p. 


DfSCRIPTIONS 


610 


mscRipnoNS 


86S,  5.  The  baianoe  oocim 
twice  at  Aringhi;  and  upon 
private  Baicophagi,  repre- 
Bentations  of  the  góod  shep- 
herd,  Old  and  New  Testa- 
ment hisŁońes,  etc  Besides 
theae,  there  are  also  occa- 
sionally  met  with  the  anchor, 
"undentood  to  ńgnify  the 
doee  of  a  well-spent  life :  the 
'  conduaion  of  a  sucoeesfiil 
Toyage,  when  the  anchor  is  caat.    ThU  supposition  ia 

strengthened  by  the 
fact  Łhat  the  Chtirch 
was  often  represent- 
ed  by  a  ship  sail- 
ing  heayenward :  r/ 
vavc  oupapoipo- 
/ju>v9a  of  element : 
in  later  times  steer- 
ed  by  StB.  Peter  and 
PauL"  This  sym- 
bol may  help  to  ex- 
plain  the  eKpression 
naed  by  Peter,  **  So  shall  an  entrance  be  ministered  unto 
you  abundanily,"  generally  referred  to  the  prosperous 
entrance  of  a  yeasel  into  port  "  The  ignorance  displayed 
by  the  sculptoar  ia  scarcely  to  be  acooimted  for,  exoept^ 
ing  by  the  circumstance  that  the  trafBc  on  the  Tiber 
was  confined  to  barges,  unproyided  with  masta  and  sails, 
and  towed  by  horses.  The  peaoock-is  aaid  to  have 
been  used  as  an  emblem  of  immortality.  This  idea  was 
bonowed  fiom  the  pagans,  who  employed  it  to  signify 
the  apotheosis  of  an  empress :  for  this  purpose  it  was  let 
fly  from  the  funeral  pile  on  which  her  body  was  con- 
sumedL  The  ph(Bnix  was  also  adopted  by  the  Chiis- 
tians  with  the  same  intention ;  so,  also,  the  crowned 
horse,  as  a  sign  of  yictory.**  The  supposed  emblems  of 
martyrdofn,  such  as  a  figurę  praying,  a  cro¥m,  or  a  palm 
Inanch,  which  generally  bdong  to  this  class,  are  bor- 
rowed  fiom  paganism,  with  additional  significance  in 
Christian  cases,  especially  on  aocount  of  the  mention  of 
it  in  the  book  of  Bevelation.  ^  On  the  stiength  of  some 
expre68ions  there  used,  antiąnarians  of  later  times  haye 
taken  it  for  granted  that  the  early  Church  employed 
both  crown  and  palm,  or  either  separatdy,  as  emblems 
of  martyrdom."  This  sapposition,  though  apparently 
reasonable,  has  been  abandoned  from  want  of  proof;  and 
snch  a  fragment  as  the  following,  found  in  the  cemetery 
of  St.  Priscilla  (Lapidarian  Gallery),  is  now  only  suppoeed 
to  belong  to  the  epitaph  of  an  ordinary  Christian : 


Translate, 
yoa  llTe  in  t 


'  ....  na,  may 
i  Lord  Jesas.** 


The  crown  and  palm  conjoined  are  also  met  with :  in  the 
present  example,  from  the  Yatican  libraiy,  they  endrde 
the  monogram,  as  represented  below : 

•  FL  •  lOYINA  •  QVAE  .  VIX 
ANNIS  •  TRIBYS  •  D  •  XXX 
NEOFITA  •  IN  PACE  •  XI  •  K 
"'Flayia  Jovlnar-who  Uyed  three  years  and  thirty  dnys 
— «  neophyte—ln  peace.— (She  died)  the  eleventn  Ka- 
lends  .  .  .  .  " 

The  extTeme  yonth  of  the  neophyte,  while  it  proyes 
the  custom  of  infant  baptism,  makes  the  martyrdom  of 
Joyina  improbaUe.  '*  The  notice  of  death  ia  yarioos  in 
the  heathen  inscriptions.  Occasionally  occors  D.  M.  (dis 
maaubiu) ;  instead  of  that,  also  R  M.,  L  e.  hona  memo- 
ria,    Tht  b^gimiing  formuła  nanally  ia  hk  cuietcU,  ot 


reguietcU  m  pace ;  in  the  Greek,  iy^aBe  Kunu  or  caro- 
Kfirtii  iv  iipfivy ;  the  latter  also  occurs  on  the  Jetrieh 
inscriptions  of  SL  PaoŁa.  Instead  of  this  atands  also  kie 
pauaat  in  pace,  auŁirawrty  iv  tięih^y,  hicpogUa  at^kk 
tepuUusjacełj  recuiescU  in  tomnopaciff  dormii  in  pace,  kh 
cus,Kara^nric  EN  IIAZE  (?  inpace  Giaacized),  (vc/pq- 
vy  KoififjaiCy  róiroc  dvairawr(u»c,  etc ;  or  ńmply  tbe 
name  of  the  deceased  in  the  nominatiye  or  dative,  viih 
and  without  ta /Mice,  ii'  «fpi|vy." 

Qaite  remarkable,  howeyer,  is  the  distinguishingfcat- 
nre  of  Christian  inscriptions  of  the  eariy  ocnturies.  md 
perhaps  one  in  which  morę  than  in  any  othcr  it  diffen 
from  pagan  inscriptions,  yiz.  in  its  use  of  namea.  **  Whik 
the  heathen  name  consbted  of  seyeial  eseential  putą 
all  of  which  were  neoessary  to  distinguish  ito  owner.  tlie 
Christians  in  generał  confined  themselyes  to  that  which 
they  had  recei  ved  in  baptism."  But  as  somc  of  the  con- 
yerts  came  from  Roman  families,  it  was  quitc  nattiral 
for  them  to  retain  their  Gentile  and  other  namcs.  rci, 
genuine  heathen  names,  and  thus  eyen  the  names  of 
heathen  gods  occur,  e.  g.  Azizos,  the  name  of  a  Syiiac 
goddess,  we  fmd  in  Trier  (Centrahnua,  iii,  53)  giveii  as 
the  name  of  a  Syriac  Christian.  Also  Artemia,  Mazti- 
nus,  Mercmilis,  Joyinus,  Yenerosa,  Yenerigina,  Satumi- 
nus,  names  united  with  Sabbatia,  Sabbatius,  Nundints, 
and  Dominica,  taken  in  a  great  measure  from  the  names 
of  the  days  of  the  week.  But  the  deśre  to  ńmpHfy 
names,  and  to  giye  them  an  ethical  signification,  is  nonę 
the  less  noticeable  eyen  among  the  Boman  conrerts;  fcc 
while  it  was  at  that  time  nothing  unusual  in  the  hea- 
then world  for  a  person  to  haye  Bix,  eight,  or  ten  names, 
in  Christian  inscriptions  (the  name  giyen  at  the  Łiaae 
of  baptism  being  always  preferred)  bot  one  or  two  names 
generally  occur.  The  name  was,  as  a  rule,  taken  in  riew 
of  facts  uniyersally  belieyed  to  be  good  or  desinble,  e.  g. 
with  regaid  to  life:  Yitalis,  YiŁalioyyitalinusjYitalisst- 
mus,  Yiyentius,  Zoe,  etc;  in  view  of/orUme:  Felido, 
Fortunio,  Fortunula,  Felidssima,  Faustina.  Pkosper,  Suf-  • 
cessus,  Eutyches,  etc. ;  of  joy :  Gaudcntius,  Gaudi<»is, 
Hilario,  Uilarianus,  Jucunda,  Edone ;  of  rictoiy :  Wctcs, 
Yincentius,  Nike,  Pancratir;  of  słrength:  Mrisńmos, 
Fortissima,Alcimu8,Dynamiola;  oifaiih:  Theophiftut, 
Fidelis ;  of  hope :  Spes,  Helpis,  Elpidia ;  of  love :  FhUe- 
tus,  Ph  (lumena.  Agape,  Agapetus,  Caritosa;  of  ępiritnal 
hUssing:  Dorotheus,  Th^dorus,  Theodota,  Theodnlni, 
Timothea,  Theophila,  and  yarious  other&  The  king- 
dom  of  naturę  has  also  its  part  in  Christian  names,  e.  g. 
months:  Januarius,  Februarius,  Aprilis,  Deoembrina; 
animals,  plants,  employments  of  niral  life,  etc  Of  OM- 
Testament  names  few  are  found,  c  g.  Susanna,  Daninil, 
and  Daniel ;  of  New-Testament  names,  Maria,  Petrus. 
Paulus.  The  consideration  of  national  namea  is  foreigii 
to  our  purpose  Aiter  the  name  of  the  deceased  thde 
is  frequentiy  appended  a  short  sUtement  of  his  Chris- 
tian position,  yiews,  or  habits  which  disŁingaished  him 
in  ciyil  life  He  is  called  a  neophyte  (once  in  alhig\  a 
belieyer  {fidM),  i.c  one  who  is  really  accepted:  map- 
tyr,  diacon,  escordsta,  subdiacon,  etc;  child,  yiipn, 
man,  wife ;  anima  dulds,  minę  innocentiae  anima  or  ex- 
emplum,  dulcis  aptissimus  infans  et  yisograta  et  yoba 
dttlcissima  cunctis,  fllius  innocentissimus,  duteissimna, 
bonus,  sapiens,  omnibus  honorificentissimua  et  lomens, 
deo  fidelis  et  dulcis  marito,  nutrix  familiae,  cunctis  bn- 
milis,  placata  puro  oorde,  amatrix  paupcrum,  abstinens 
se  ab  omni  maligna  re,  etc ;  the  most  common  fona  is 
bene  merens.  Then  follows  the  age,  with  a  qm  vixiC  or 
in  saeculo,  f ^f|<T€v,  (^oac,  either  with  an  aoctiraie  ac- 
oount  of  the  years,  months,  and  days,  or  merely  aboot 
the  time,  with  the  additional  statement  plus  mimis,  rAi- 
ov  i\aTTOv.  Then  the  day  of  burial,  with  a  depoatos 
or  deposito,  not  seldom  thefasH  for  the  year ;  aonetiiiMS, 
also,  the  announcement  of  the  person  who  erected  tbe 
stone  (titttlum  poeuit  or  posuenint),  and  <rf'hi8  aofleriug 
(dolens,  contn  yotnm,  etc).  Of  couiae  this  amogc- 
ment  is  not  always  followed.  Sometimea  we  find  Ibł- 
lowing  the  name  a  motto,  such  as  C^o«r(  ,viyaa  in  Chris- 
to,  in  deo  yiyas,  yiraa  in  domino,  spes  pax  tibi,  accepta 


INSECT 


611 


INSPIRATION 


ab  m  Chriato.  The  langnage  u  laigdy  oorropted,  the 
Latin  degenerating  into  the  Romani  but  for  this  reaaon 
19  Tery  important  in  grammar.  Occasionally  we  find 
Latin  woids  written  in  Greek  letteza,  or  mixed  inacrip> 
tions  in  both  languagea.  Whei  written  in  poetry,  the 
kesameter  or  diatich  measuie  ia  oommonly  lued,  and 
jet  they  aie  rhy  thmical  rather  than  metricaL  In  auch 
rhythmical  inacriptiona  we  find  exten8ion  of  thought 
not  in  the  foregoing.  The  materiał  upon  which  the  in- 
acriptiona were  madę  conaists  of  sina]],  plain  marble 
alaba,  either  laid  upon  the  graye  or  put  into  the  coffin. 
SomeCimes,  to  deaignate  the  death  of  martyrs,  there  oo- 
cor  reseela  of  Uood  and  the  inatrumenta  of  death;  alao 
gUasea^etc 

2.  Beaidea  the  inacriptiona  on  grayea,  wluch  Bettberg 
int  madę  uiseful  to  Church  hiatoiy,  there  are  alao  sar 
oed  inacriptiona,  which  we  find  partly  npon  glaaa,  part^ 
ly  opon  coina,  genu,  lampa,  amuleta,  croaaea,  dishea,  and 
other  worka  of  art.  The  morę  ancient  Christian  inacrip- 
tions  have  not  yet  been  sufficiently  aought  for.  In  the 
eoUectioDS  of  FabretU,  Beinesiua,  Gruter,  Itf  uratori,  Do- 
natifCaatelli,  Spon,  Osann,  Orelli,  etc.,  they  are  badly  in- 
jured.  For  deacriptions  of  them,  oonsult  Franz,  who 
apeaks  of  the  foUowing :  Bosio,  Roma  śotierranea  (Romę, 
1651);  P.  Aringhi,  Roma  tubterranea  notisaima  (Romę, 
1657 ;  Phiia,  1659),  yoIs.  i  and  ii ;  Boldetti,  Ouerraziotd 
topra  i  cimiteri  de'  aon/j  martiri  ed  anticki  chrittiani 
(Komę,  1720) ;  Banduri,  Nttmiamaia  impp,  Rom,  a  Trai- 
ano  Decio  ad  pcUeBoIogos  Attguiiot  (Paria,  1718),  yols.  i, 
ii;  Eddiel, Doctr,  Numm,  voL  viii ;  Bellori,  Lucerna  re- 
tem (GoL  1702) ;  Ficoroni,  Gemma  anL  Utt.  Romę ;  Bu- 
onanioti,  Osaertazioni  sopra  ałcurd  vaH  aniichi  di  tfetro 
(Flrenz.  1716) ;  Seroux  d*Agincourt,  Histoire  de  Fart  par 
U»  momunenU^  etc  (Paria,  1828),  yols.  i-iy ;  Krebs,  Lip- 
ianotkeea  WeUburgen$i»  (1820);  Memoiree  de  tlnstUut 
Roffol  de  France  (1837, 1838),  yoL  iii.  The  foUowing 
are  not  mentioned  by  Franz ;  the  treatiae  of  Fellicia,  De 
re  lapidaria  et  sifflia  oe/.  Christian^  in  his  Christiana 
eccłena  poliUa  (ed.  Braun,  Colonis,  1838),  iii,  111^297 ; 
Kopp,  Palaoffr.  Critic  (Mannhemii,  1829),  vols.  iii  and  iy ; 
Mai,  or  rather- Marini,  InscripHonea  Christiana,  in  Mai, 
8eript.veterum  nopa  coUedio  (Romę,  1831),  voL  y,  a  work 
that  leayes  untreated  much  to  be  wished  for.  £arlier 
mulertalungs  are  q)oken  of  by  Itfai  in  his  introduction, 
pw  viii  to  XV.  For  the  inscriptions  at  Naples,  conault  the 
worka  oonceming  the  Catacomba  there  found;  for  those 
at  Milan,  Givo,La6u«  ui^omo  alcuni  monumenti  epigrafi- 
€x  ehristiam  scoperU  in  MUano  Fanno  MDCCCKIII  nelP 
insigne  hasiHca  di  sani'  A  mbrogio  (Milan,  1824,  foL) ;  and 
the  same,  Intomo  akuni  monumenti  epigrt{fici  gentile- 
ac&t  e  ckristiam  tcoperti  neW  intigne  basUica  di  8,  Sńn- 
pUdano  (in  the  Giomcde  deWJ.  R,  Instifuio  Lombardo 
di  Science,  I^eOere  edArti,  yol.  iii,  Milan,  1842) ;  for  thoee 
at  Verona,  MafieFa  Museum  Yeronenae  (Yeronie,  1749),  p. 
178-184.  For  thoae  at  Autun,  comp.  Franz,  Das  christ^ 
Hehe  Denbncd  (BerL  1841, 8vo),  in  German  and  French. 
For  Trevea,  aee  the  worka  of  Lerach,  especially  his  Cen^ 
troi  Museum  RhekdSndischer  Inschriften  (Bonn,  1842), 
iii, 29-48;  Steiner,  Cod •iMcr^.-i2A«R,Xo. 829-840;  Wyt- 
lenbscb,  Neue  Beitrdge  e.  antiken,  heidnisch,  u,  christL 
Kpigraphik  (Treyea,  1883) ;  and  othera.  For  later  epi- 
graphs  of  the  Middle  Agea,  aee  Otte,  Ahriss  e.  kirchl 
Kmst-Arehaeol  d.  Mittelakers  (Nordhauaen,  1845),  p. 
71-92 ;  Mentae,  in  Didron,  A  nnales  A  rcheohgiąues,  i,  106. 
For  inacriptiona  atill  later,  aee  Galletti,  InscripUoms  Ro- 
sAne  infind  avi  (Romę,  1760), yeła  i-iii;  Morcelli,  Op, 
^^fign^h.  (Patayi^  1829),  vob.  iy  and  y ;  HUpech,  Epi- 
grammaiograpkie  (Cok>gne,  1801),  yoL  ii.  See  Aschbach, 
Kireke^Lex,  iii,  484  8q. ;  Martigny,  Diet.  des  A  nUguites, 
p.315  8q. ;  and  especially  Maitland,  Church  in  the  Cata- 
eom&f  (London,  1846, 8vo),  from  which  we  have  freely 
qaoted. 

Inseot.  The  foUowing  is  a  complete  list  of  all  the 
fpeeimena  of  entomołogy  mentioned  in  the  canonical 
Scriptoiea  (induding  their  producta),  together  with 
their  names  in  the  original  and  in  the  A.y.    See  Zo- 

OŁOOT. 


AkkahUh\ 

"splder," 

spider. 

AkrOb', 

"scorpion," 

scorplon. 

A  kris. 

»Mocn8t," 

locnst 

Arbeh', 

"locust," 

locust 

Ari>b% 

•*8warms," 

gad-fly. 

Ash, 

"  moth," 
;;g«^opper," 

DOth. 

Chagdb,* 
Chanamóff, 

locnst. 

antr  (de8tmctiyeV 

CharaOl', 
ChasU\ 

"locuat," 

locast  (odlble). 
ocnst. 

Debor&h' 

"bee," 

)ee. 

Oazdm\ 
Gib, 

"palmer-worm," 
"focust," 

ocost  (grab), 
iiocnst. 

Of»b, 
Kin, 

;;guiS8Uopper," 
"scarlct," 

locast 

^at. 

cermes  (wonn)* 
fly  (in  wlne). 

KłWlpSm 

MtfshL 
yem&lĄh' 

flnethread. 

ant 

Parósh', 

"flea." 

flea. 

8de, 

"motb," 

moth. 

SefMn, 

"sllk/^ 

silk. 

*•^ 

"moth," 

moth. 

^/irpids. 

"scorplon," 

scorplon. 

SoUtm' 
TmltsóJP, 

"baldlocnst," 
•'locnst," 

]ocn£t  (edible). 
cricket 

mrdh'. 

"honiet," 

homet 

Zsb&V,  "fly,"  fly. 

InjiennentĆB  or  Rćfraotaires,  a  title  of  thoee 
of  the  F|rench  Roman  Catholic  dergy  who  were  disloyal 
to  the  Reyolution.  August  10, 1789,  the  National  As- 
sembly  propoaed  to  appropriate  the  property  of  the 
Church,  which  then  oovered  about  one  fifth  of  the  suz^ 
face  of  France,  yielding  an  annual  reyenue  of  three  hun- 
dred  million  francs,  and  by  an  act  of  Feb.  13, 1790,  thia 
becaroe  a  law.  -Thus  the  great  body  of  the  clergy,  who, 
patriotic  in  their  aspirations,  and  suffering  from  the 
abnses  of  power,  had  hailed  the  advent  of  the  Reyolu- 
tion with  joy,  now  finding  their  dearest  interests  and 
priyileges  assailed,  were  forced  into  the  position  of  re- 
actionaries,  and  aoon  became  the  objccts  of  suspicion 
and  of  persecution.  To  detennine  those  who  opposed 
the  Reyolution,  the  progressiyes  dcyised  a  test-oath  ob- 
Iłgatory  on  aU  ecclesiastics,  and  lists  were  kept  to  dia- 
tinguish  betwecn  loyalists  and  disloyalists.  '^Harmleaa 
as  the  oath  was  in  appearance  when  it  waa  tendered  in 
Dec  1790,  five  sixth8  of  the  clergy  throughout  the  king- 
dom  refused  it  Those  who  yielded  to  the  pressure 
were  termed  assermentds,  the  recusants  insermenles  or 
rifraetairesj  and  the  latter,  of  course,  at  once  became 
the  determined  opponents  of  the  new  regime,  the  morę 
dangerous  becauae  they  were  the  only  infiuential  parti- 
sans  of  reaction  belonging  to  the  people.  To  their  ef- 
forts  were  attributed  the  insurrections  which  in  La  Yenr- 
dde  and  elsewhere  threatened  the  most  fearful  dangers. 
They  were  accordingly  expoeed  to  seyere  legislation. 
A  decree  of  Noy.  29, 1791,  depriyed  them  of  their  sti- 
pends  and  suspended  their  functions ;  another  of  May 
27, 1792,  authorized  the  local  authorities  to  exile  them 
on  the  simple  denunciation  of  twenty  citizcns.  Under 
the  Reign  of  Terror  their  persons  were  exposed  to  fla- 
grant  cruelties,  and  a  prilre  refractaire  was  generally  re- 
garded,  ^so  facto,  as  an  enemy  of  the  Republic"— Lea, 
HisU  of  Sacerdoialism,  p.  647  są.;  Preasensd,  Reign  of 
Terror  (transl  by  Prof.  Lacroix),  p.  60  są. 

InBignia  of  Clergy.    See  Ykstments. 

Inspiration  (Lat  a  breathing  ifUo),  a  term  em- 
ployed  to  deaignate  the  diyine  origin  of  Uoly  Scripture 
(q.y.). 

I.  Defimtum.—!.  The  word  "  inspiration"  "is  some- 
times  used  to  denote  the  excitement  and  action  of  a  fer- 
vent  imagination  in  the  poet  or  orator.  But  eyen  in 
this  case  there  is  generally  a  reference  to  some  supposed 
diyine  influence,  to  which  the  excited  action  ia  owing. 
It  is  once  used  in  Scripture  to  denote  that  diyine  agen- 
cy  by  which  man  is  endued  with  the  faculties  of  an  in- 
teUlgent  being,  when  it  is  said  *  the  inspiration  (H^^d, 
breaih,  as  in  Gen.  ii,  7)  of  the  Almighty  giveth  him  un- 
derstanding  (Job  xxxii,  8).  But  the  inspiration  now  to 
be  considered  is  that  which  belonged  to  those  who  wrote 
the  Scriptures,  and  which  is  particularly  spoken  of  in  2 


INSPIRATION 


C12 


INSPIRATION 


Tim.  iii,  16,  and  in  2  Pet  i,  21  :*  Ali  Scriptura  ia  g^ven 
by  inspiration  of  God  ;*  *  Holy  men  of  God  spake  as  they 
were  moyed  by  the  Holy  Ghost.'  These  paasages  re- 
late  spocially  to  the  Old  Testament,  but  there  is  at  leaat 
equal  rcajson  to  prcdicate  diyine  inspiration  of  the  New 
TesUmenL" 

2.  The  Greek  expreaaion  ^tówtucroc  (2  Tim.  iii,  16) 
signifies  a  divine  action  on  the  perceptions  ("  Nemo  vir 
magnus  sine  aIiquo  aiilata  divino  unąuam  fuit,'*  Cicero, 
pro  A  rchia,  c  8).  The  breath  of  God  is  uaed  as  a  ma- 
teriał expreasion  for  his  power  (as  mi  Swafiic  uyj/iffroy 
for  wptufia  uyiov.  Lukę  i,  3d ;  xxiv,  49).  In  this  sense, 
alsó,  the  classics  speak  of  a  ^tójmuirroc  ffo^iri  (Phocyl- 
idea,  121),  ^eówwirrot  óptipoi  (Plutarch,  De  plac  phi- 
los,  V,  2 ;  comp.  ifiró  iryet/fiaroc  ayiov  ^(>o/icvot  łAoAi;- 
oav  iiyioi  ^iov  dv^pwvoif  2  Pet.  i,  21).  The  neutnd 
form,  in  the  sense  of  ^  God-inspired,"  is  used  by  Nonnus 
(Paraphr.  ev.  Jo,  i,  27),  and  applied  to  Scripture  by  Ori- 
gen  (Horn.  21,  t»  Jerem,  voL  ii,  de  la  Rne :  "  Sacra  volu- 
mina  spiritus  plenitudinem  spirant"). 

8.  A  peychological  definition  of  the  relation  of  this  di- 
yine, consequently  passirely  received  perception  to  hu- 
man  spontaneity,  is  giren  by  Plato  in  his  doctiine  of 
the  divine  fnayia,  the  iv^foc  tlyai.  This  position  Ib 
the  root  of  the  diyinely  implanted  tendency  to  knowl- 
edge  which  has  not  yet  attained  a  elear  consciousness 
(ZeUer,  Griech,  Pkil.  ii,  166,  275 ;  Brandis,  ii,  428).  Of 
this,  in  80  far  as  it  includes  the  idea  in  the  form  of  beau- 
ty,  artists  and  authors  say:  ov  r<xv>f  raira  rd  KaXó, 
\iyovet  iroif)fiaTa,  dXX'  Łv^ioi  ovric  Koi  KaTtx6fJuvot 
{łon.  533).  Ov  yóc  r«x*''?  raura  XiyovcŁyf  óX\d  diic. 
iwdfui  (t&.  p.  534).  This  giyes  rise  to  the  /iam-iKti, 
which  requires  the  irpo^rirtię  for  its  interpreter  {TinuB- 
uSf  72).  This  doctrine  of  Plato  conceming  inspiration 
has  had  great  influence  on  the  Jewish  and  Christian 
doctrine.  Philo  admits  it,  and  deriyes  from  it  the  in- 
compatibility  of  diyine  and  human  knowledge  {Qui8  r»- 
rum  d,  h.  i,  511,  Mang.) ;  or€  /ići/  ó&c  im\afiyj/tŁ  rb  ^ii- 
ov,  fCtrai  ró  ay^pw^ipoy '  ort  S  Uiipo  Sv£if  rour  dvi' 
oxti  Kai  dva rćAAci.  Yet  he  does  not  limit  the  diyine  in- 
fluence to  the  inspiration  of  the  sacred  books,  and  does 
not  hesitate  to  ascribe  to  himself  an  occasional  ^ióKii- 
iTTila^ai  {De  Cherubinie  i,  143).  Some  of  the  Greek  fa- 
thers  alao  describe  the  state  of  inspiration  as  purely  pas- 
Bive  (Justin,  Cohort,  c  8 :  Ourc  y^  ^uoti  ohre  dv^put- 
niifg  iwoic.  ovrfa  fuydka  Kai  iua  ytPUMTKuy  dy^pw- 
sroic  Byparóp,  d\Xd  ry  dpia^ip  iiri  rovc  dyiovc  dv- 
dpac  njyucaura  KaTi\^ov<ry  $upff,  olc  ov  \óytop  iSk- 
ti<re  rixprjc,  dXXd  Ka^apoi>c  iawoifę  ry  rov  ^fiov  irpev- 
Haroc  vapa<rxi^v  ivcpycic,  W  aifrb  ró  ^łiop  iĘ  oupa- 
vov  Karióp  irA^jcrpoy,  wnrtp  ópydpt^f  KL^dpac  ripoc  ij 
\vpac  rotę  ^ucaioic  dpBpdoi  xp<^f^vop^  rrpf  rCJv  ^(iwv 
tffiip  d'7roKa\v^n  ypiaaic,  Athenag.  Legat,  c  9 :  No- 
fii^u}  iifidę  ouK  ajfotjrouc  yiy opkpai  ovti  tov  yiutv<rBioc 
oure  rov  'Etratou  Kai  rup  Konriop  irpoipiiTuiPf  ot  Kar 
iKcraffip  riop  Ip  aitrolc  \oyiaiiutp  KipifcapTOc  aOroitę 
rov  ^Hov  iTPtiffMaroc,  d  iPtjxovvro  kĘi<^u}ptfaaPf  ovy' 
Xprf<rafUP0v  rov  jrPŁVfiaroc,  utati  kuł  avXTirtjc  av\6p 
ffiTTPŁwai),  We  therefore  flnd  at  an  early  time  the 
notion  of  a  literał  inspiration  (Iren.  iii,  16, 2 :  "  Potuerat 
dicere  Matthosus:  Jesu  gencratio  sic  erat.  Sed  pne- 
yidens  Spiritus  S.  deprayatores  et  pnemuniens  contra 
fraudulentiam  eorum,  per  Matthseum  ait :  Christi  gen- 
cratio sic  erat."  Clemens,  Cohorł,  i,  71,  ed.  Pott.:  'EK  wv 
ypa/ifiartop  [he  means  the  Upd  ypafAfiara^  2  Tim.  iii, 
14]  Kai  (nWapCip  rwv  Uputp  rdc  (wyKtifiipac  ypaipdc 
6  auróc  dKo\ov^toc  'A7ro<rro\oc  ^iovpiV(rrovc  roAct. 
Origen,  Horn,  xxi  in  Jer, :  "  Secundum  istiusroodi  expo- 
sitiones  decet  sacras  litteras  credere  nec  unum  ąuidem 
apicem  habere  yacuum  sapientia  Dei*').  Yet  all  thcse  ex- 
pressions  represent  rather  the  generał  religious  impres- 
Sion  than  the  settled  dogma;  hcnce  we  flnd  the  ante-Ki- 
cene  fathers  recognising  some  of  the  heathen  books  as 
inspired,  e.  g.  the  Sibyllian  books  (Theoph.  ad  AutoL  2, 
9),  whilst  at  the  same  time  they  expre8sed  yiews  ex- 
duding  the  idea  of  all  parts  of  Scripture  being  ecualfy 
inspired. 


4.  The  deflnition  which  Dr.  Knapp  girea  of  inspinh 
tion  is  one  which  most  will  readily  adopt.  He  myt: 
"It  may  be  best  defined,  aooording  to  the  represenu- 
tions  of  the  Scriptures  themselyes,  as  a»  eztraordmwf 
dwine  agency  upon  teachers  whUe  gioing  imtmetio^ 
tokether  orał  or  teritten,  bg  wkieh  tMeg  were  tmigkt  vhat 
and  how  they  should  write  or  speak,"  The  natnie,  pcr- 
manenoe,  and  oompleteness  of  this  in^untion  are  mat- 
ters  upon  which  oirthodox  belieyera  have  differed.  (8ee 
below.) 

II.  The  Faat  ofthe  Intpiraiim  o/tke  Bible^Oa  this 
point  we  oondense  the  atgumenta  of  Dr.  Leonard  Woods 
in  Kitto*8  Cgelopadia,  s.  y.,  conflning  ourselyes  chiefly 
to  the  ąuestion  of  the  inspiration  of  the  writtm  worl) 
To  proye  that  the  Scriptures  are  diyinely  inspired,  we 
might  with  propriety  refer  to  the  exceUence  ofthe  doc- 
trines,  precepts,  and  promises,  and  other  instructions 
which  they  contain;  to  the  simplidty  and  majeatyof 
their  style ;  to  the  agreement  of  the  dilTerent  paits,  and 
the  soope  of  the  whole;  espedaUy  to  the  foli  discoroy 
they  make  of  man'B  fallen  and  ruined  state,  aud  the  way 
of  salyation  through  a  Redeemer;  together  with  their 
power  to  enUghten  and  sanctify  the  heart,  and  the  ac- 
companying  witness  of  the  Spirit  in  belieyen.  But  the 
more  direct  and  conclusiye  eyidence  that  the  Scriptures 
were  diyinely  iną>ired  is  found  in  the  tettimoug  of  the 
writers  themaehes,  As  the  writen  did,  by  working  mir- 
acles  and  in  other  ways,  suflSdently  authenticate  their 
diyine  commission,  and  establish  their  authority  and  in- 
fallibility  as  teachers  of  diyine  truth,  their  testimoor, 
in  regard  to  their  0¥ni  inspiration,  is  entitled  to  our  fnłl 
confldence.  For  who  can  donbt  that  they  were  as  com- 
petent  to  judge  and  as  much  disposed  to  speak  the 
truth  on  this  subject  as  on  any  other?  If,  then,we  ad- 
mit  their  diyine  commission  and  aathority,  why  should 
we  not  rely  upon  the  plain  testimony  which  they  giye 
conceming  the  diyine  assistanoe  afibrded  them  in  their 
work  ?  To  reject  their  testimony  in  this  case  woułd  be 
to  impeach  their  yeracity,  and  tbua  to  take  away  the 
foundation  of  the  Christian  religion. 

1.  The  prophets  gcnerally  professed  to  9pttk.  the  wrd 
of  God,  What  they  taught  was  introdaced  and  oon- 
firmcdby  a "Thus  saith  the  Loidf  or ** The  Lord spake 
to  me,  saying.'*  In  one  way  or  another  they  gaye  dear 
proof  that  they  were  diyinely  commisńoned,  and  spoke 
in  the  name  of  God,  or,  as  it  is  expreas6d  in  tbe  New 
Testament,  that  God  ępahe  bg  them, 

2.  The  Lord  Jesus  Christ  poaseseed  the  spirit  of  wis- 
dom  without  measure,  and  came  to  bear  witness  to  the 
truth.  His  works  proyed  that  he  was  what  he  decłared 
himself  to  be— the  Messiah,  the  great  Prophet,  the  io- 
fallible  Teacher.  The  faith  which  rests  on  him  rens 
on  a  rock.  As  soon,  then,  as  we  leam  how  he  reganted 
the  Scriptures,  we  haye  reached  the  end  ofoor  inquiri«& 
His  word  is  truth.  Now  eyeiy  one  who  carefully  st- 
tends  to  the  four  Gospels  will  flnd  that  Christ  eyeir- 
where  spoke  of  that  collection  of  writings  called  the 
Scripture  as  the  word  of  God;  that  he  regaided  the 
whole  in  this  light;  that  he  treated  the  Scripture,  and 
eyery  part  of  it,  as  infallibly  tme,  and  as  dothed  with 
diyine  authority — thus  distinguishing  it  ftv»m  eyenr 
mere  human  production.  Nothing  written  by  man  can 
be  entitled  to  the  respect  which  Christ  showed  to  tbe 
Scriptures.  This,  to  all  Christiana,  is  direct  and  incon- 
troyertible  eyidenoe  of  the  diyine  origin  of  the  Sm^ 
tures,  and  is  by  itself  perfectly  oondudye. 

8.  But  there  is  elear  concuirent  eyidence,  and  eri- 
dence  stiU  more  speciflc,  in  the  writings  of  the  apoaUes. 
Particularly  in  one  paasage  (2  Tim.  iii,  16),  Pani  lays  it 
down  as  the  characteristic  of  "  aU  Scr^ałmre^  that  it  **  u 
given  bg  inspiration  of  Go^  {9idirviwnoc,  "  diyinely 
inspired");  and  from  this  results  its  profitaUenees. 
Some  writers  think  that  the  paasage  should  be  rendeced 
thus:  AU  ditńnelg  inspired  iŚcr^pftcre,  or,  aU  Scnptnrey 
being  dumtelg  inspired,  is  proJitaUe.  According  to  the 
common  rendering,  inspiration  is  predicated  of  aU  Scrip- 
ture.   According  to  the  other,  it  is  preai^posed  as  tha 


INSPIRATION 


613 


INSPIRATION 


itłribate  of  the  snbject.  But  this  rendering  is  liable  to 
inmpenble  objections.  For  9tÓTrviv<rroc  and  ai^ćXf/4oc 
ire  oonnected  by  the  conjunction  Kai,  and  must  both  be 
predicatea,  if  either  of  tbem  is;  and  unlcas  one  of  them 
is  a  predicate  there  is  no  complete  sentence.  Hender- 
son remarks  that  the  modę  of  construction  referred  to 
'^ts  at  rariance  with  a  common  rule  of  Greek  8yntax, 
which  reąuires  that  when  two  adjectiyes  are  closely 
joined,  aa  &io7rvev<rToc  and  i>^\ifŁoc  here  are,  if  there 
be  an  ellipsia  of  the  8ubstantive  verb  ^<rri,  thia  yerb 
must  be  supi^ed  after  the  former  of  the  two,  and  re- 
garded  as  repeated  after  the  latter.  Now  there  exi8ts 
predaely  sach  an  eUipsis  in  the  case  before  us;  and  as 
there  is  nothing  in  the  context  which  woold  lead  to  any 
exception  to  the  role,  we  are  bound  to  yield  to  its  force." 
He  adds  that  ^  the  eridence  in  fkror  of  the  oommon 
radering,  deńved  from  tho  fathera,  and  abnost  all  the 
Tenions,  is  most  dedded."  It  cannot  for  a  moment  be 
admitted  that  the  apostle  meant  to  signify  that  divine 
inspiration  belongs  to  a  part  of  Scripture,  but  not  to  the 
whole;  or  that  he  meant,  as  Semler  sapposes,  to  fumish 
a  criterioD  by  which  to  judge  whether  any  work  is  in- 
spiied  or  not,  namely,  its  tOUity*  ^  That  author  pro- 
ceeds  feadeasly  to  apply  this  cńterion  to  the  books  of 
the  Old  Testament,  and  to  lop  off  eight  of  them  as  not 
pooeasing  the  reąuińte  marks  of  legitimacy.  Many  of 
the  German  diyines  adopt  Semler's  hypothesis.*'  But 
it  is  Tery  manifest  that  such  a  sense  is  not  by  any  means 
suggested  by  the  passage  itself,  and  that  it  is  utterly 
predoded  l^  other  parts  of  the  New  Testament.  For 
neither  Christ  nor  any  one  of  his  apostles  ever  intimates 
a  distinction  between  some  parts  of  Scripture  which  are 
inspired  and  other  parts  which  are  not  inspired.  The 
dodzine  which  is  plainly  asaerted  in  the  text  under 
ooosideration,  and  which  is  fuUy  sustained  by  the  cur- 
lent  language  of  the  New  Testament,  is,  that  all  the 
JtfrUiHffa  denaminaied  the  Scriptures  are  dwinely  intpirtd, 
What  particular  books  have  a  right  to  be  included  un- 
der this  sacred  deaignation  in  the  generał  opinion  of  the 
Cbuich  is  a  question  considered  under  the  article  Can- 
on OF  Scripture. 

IIL  Tke  Manner  of  Inspiration, — TYl^  interior  proceaa 
of  the  Spirit*s  action  upon  the  minds  of  the  speakera  or 
wńten  was  of  course  inacrutable  (John  iii,  8)  even  to 
themselrea.  That  they  were  oofisetotu,  however,  of  such 
an  influence  is  manifest  from  the  authority  with  which 
thęy  put  forth  their  words ;  yet,  when  they  sat  down  to 
write,the  divine  and  the  human  elements  in  their  men- 
tal  action  were  perfectly  harmonious  and  insepaiable 
(LQkei,8). 

As  to  the  outwaid  methód,  "God  operated  on  the 
minda  of  inspired  men  in  a  rariety  of  ways,  sometimes 
by  andible  words,  sometimes  by  direct  inwazd  sugges- 
tions,  sometimes  by  outward  yisible  signs,  sometimes 
by  the  Urim  and  Thommim,  and  sometimes  by  dreams 
and  yisions.  This  Tariety  in  the  modę  of  diyine  influ- 
ence detracted  nothing  from  its  certainty.  God  madę 
known  his  will  eąuaUy  in  different  ways ;  and,  whateyer 
the  modę  of  his  operation,  he  madę  it  manifest  to  his 
seryanta  that  the  things  reyealed  were  from  him."  All 
this,  howeyer,  relates  rather  to  rtrdatUm  than  simple 
insf^ntion,  a  distinction  that  is  ably  madę  by  Fn>f.  Lee 
in  his  work  on  the  subject. 

"Bot  inspiration  was  concemed  not  only  in  making 
known  the  will  of  God  to  prophets  and  apostles,  but  also 
M  gieing  them  direction  in  wriłinff  the  sacred  books,  In 
tbifl,  also,  there  was  a  diyersity  in  the  modę  of  diyine 
influence.  Sometimes  the  Spirit  of  God  moyed  and 
gnided  his  senrants  to  write  things  which  they  could 
not  know  by  natural  means,  such  as  new  doctrines  or 
pnoepts,  orpredictions  of  futurę  eyents.  Sometimes 
he  moyed  and  gnided  them  to  write  the  history  of 
eyents  whicb  were  wholly  or  partly  known  to  them  by 
tiaditioo,  or  by  tbe  testimony  of  their  oontempoiańes, 
or  by  their  own  obseryation  or  ezperience.  In  all  these 
eases  tho  diyine  Spuit  effectoally  preseryed  them  from 
•U  enor,  and  influenced  them  to  write  just  so  much  and 


in  such  a  manner  as  God  saw  to  be  best.  Sometimes 
he  moyed  and  guided  them  to  write  a  summary  record 
of  larger  liistories,  containing  what  his  infinite  wisdom 
saw  to  be  adapted  to  the  end  in  yiew,  that  is,  the  bene- 
fit  of  hiH  people  in  all  ages.  Sometimes  he  influenced 
them  to  make  a  record  of  important  maxim8  in  common 
use,  or  to  write  new  ones,  deriyed  either  from  their  own 
reason  or  experience,  or  from  spedal  diyine  teaching. 
Sometimes  he  influenced  them  to  write  parables  or  aUe- 
gories,  particularly  suited  to  make  a  8alutar>'  impression 
of  diyine  things  on  the  minds  of  men ;  and  sometimes 
to  record  supematural  yisions.  In  thesc  and  all  other 
kinds  of  writing  the  sacred  penmen  manifestly  needed 
special  diyine  guidance,  as  no  man  could  of  himself  at- 
tain  to  infallibility,  and  no  wisdom,  except  that  of  God, 
was  sufficient  to  determine  what  things  ought  to  be 
written  for  permanent  use  in  the  Church,  and  what 
maiuer  of  writing  would  be  best  fitted  to  promote  the 
great  ends  of  reyelation." 

^  Some  writers  speak  of  different  modes  and  different 
kinds,  and  eyen  different  dcgrees  of  inspiration.  If 
their  meaning  is  that  God  influenced  the  minds  of  in- 
spired men  in  different  ways ;  that  he  adopted  a  yariety 
of  modes  in  reyealing  divine  things  to  their  minds ;  that 
he  guided  them  to  giye  instruction  in  prose  and  in  poe- 
try,  and  in  all  the  different  forms  of  composition ;  that 
he  moyed  and  guided  them  to  write  history,  prophecy, 
doctrines,  commands,  promiscs,  reproofs,  and  cxhorta- 
tions,  and  that  he  adapted  his  modę  of  operation  to  each 
of  these  cases — against  this  no  objection  can  be  madę. 
The  Scriptures  do  exhibit  these  different  kinds  of  writ- 
ing and  modes  of  diyine  instruction.  Still  eyeiy  part 
of  what  was  written  was  diyinely  inspired,  and  equally 
so.  It  is  all  the  word  of  God,  and  dothed  with  divine 
authority,  as  much  as  if  it  had  all  been  mado  known 
and  written  in  one  way."  While  this  is  true  of  the 
word  as  written  or  as  originally  uttered,  it  is  not  true 
that  all  the  subject  matter  is  equally  reyealed ;  for  some 
of  the  facts,  doctrines,  and  yiews  were  known  to  the 
writers  in  their  ordinary  intelllgence,  while  others  were 
specially  oommunicated  by  immediate  diyine  afllatus. 
In  other  words,  all  is  inspired^  but  not  all  rerealed, 

TV,  Thtories  of  Inspiration.— The6e  may  be  concisely 
Btated  thus :  (1.)  The  orthodor,  or  generally  accepted 
yiew,  which  contents  itself  with  consideriug  Scripture 
to  be  inspired  in  such  a  sense  as  to  make  it  infallibly 
cerłain  when  apprehended  in  its  legitimate  sense,  and 
of  absolute  authority  in  all  matters  of  faith  and  con- 
science.  This  theory  has  lately  been,  with  great  pro- 
priety,  designated  as  the  dynamicalj  purporting  that  the 
power  or  influence  is  from  God,  while  the  action  is 
human.  (2.)  The  mysticaly  or  extremdy  strict  yiew, 
thought  to  haye  been  held  by  Philo,  Josephus,  and 
some  of  the  primitiye  Christian  fathers  (but  condemn- 
ed  by  the  early  councils  as  sayoring  of  heathenish  fiay^ 
rf  ia),  which  regarded  the  sacred  writers  as  wholly  pos- 
sessed  by  the  Spirit,  and  uttering  its  dicta  in  a  spe- 
cies  of  frenzy.  This,  in  opposition  to  the  former,  has 
justly  been  characterized  as  the  mechamcal  yiew,  de- 
noting  the  paasiyity  of  the  inspired  subject.  (3.)  The 
kuiiiidmarian  yiew,  entertained  by  Rationalists  of  all 
orders,  which  deems  inspiration  but  a  high  style  of  po- 
.etic  or  religious  feryor,  and  not  inconsistent  with  errors 
in  fact  and  sentiment. 

This  last  yiew  is  not  to  be  confoundcd,  howeyer,  with 
that  of  those  who  limit  inspiration  to  such  matters  in 
holy  Scripture  as  directly  pertain  to  the  proper  materiał 
of  reydation,  i.  e.  to  strictiy  reliffious  truth,  whether  of 
doctrine  or  practice.  Among  English  dirines,  those 
who  have  asserted  this  form  of  theory  are  Howe  {Ditine 
Authority  of  Scripture,  lect,  yiii  and  ix).  Bp. Williams 
(Boyle  lACt,  serm.  iy,  p.  Idd),  Bumet  {A  rticle  yi,  p.  157; 
Oxf.  ed.  1814),  Lowth  (Fwidl  oflHu,  Auth,  and  Inspir, 
ofOld  and  Neto  Testament,  p.  45  są.),  Hey  {TheoL  Lect, 
i,  90),  Bp.  Watson  {Tracts,  iv,  446),  Bp.  Law  (Theory  of 
Beliffior^y  Tomline  {Theolory,  i,  21),  Dr.  J.  Barrow  (/>f*- 
serłations,  1819. 4th  diss.),  Dean  Conybeaie  {Theoloyical 


INSPIRATION 


614 


INSPIRATION 


Lecturet,  p.  186),  Bp.  HindB  {Inspiratim  of  Scriplure, 
p.  151),  Bp.  D.  Wilson  (lecttire  xiii  on  Evidenoety  i,  509), 
Parrj  (Jncuiry  mto  the  Naturę  o/the  Itupiration  ofthe 
ApottUst  p.  26,  27),  and  Bp.  Blomfield  {Leeturea  onAcU, 
▼,  88-90).  Others  haye  even  gone  so  far  as  to  arów 
that  the  yalae  of  the  religious  element  in  the  reyeładon 
wotłld  not  be  leaaened  if  errors  were  acknowledged  in 
the  sdentific  and  miaoellaneouB  matter  -which  acoompa^ 
nieś  it.  Among  those  who  hare  held  this  form  of  the 
theory  are  Baxter  (^Method,  TheoŁ  Ckr.  pt  iii,  eh.  xii, 
9,  4),  Tillotson  {Works,  foL  iii,  449,  aermon  168),  Dod- 
dridge  (On  Inspir,'),  Warburton  {Doctr,  of  Graoej  bk.  i, 
eh.  vii),  Bp.  Honley  (serm.  39  on  Eocles.  xii,  7,  Works, 
iii,  175),  Bp.  Randolph  (Rem,  on  MickaeHs'  Inirod,  p.  15, 
16),  Piley  {Evid,  of  ChrigHanity,  pt.  iii,  eh.  ii),  Whate- 
ly  (Ess,  on  Diff,  tn  SUPaul,  ess.  i  and  ix;  Sermons  on 
Festwals,  p.  90;  PecuL  of  ChrisHamty,  p.  288),  Hamp- 
den  (J9amptoni>c/.p.801),Thirlwall  (Schleiermacher^s 
Lukę,  Introd.  p.  15),  Bp.  Heber  {BampL  Lect,  viii,  577), 
Thomas  Scott  {Eaaay  on  Inspir,  p.  8),  Dr.  Pye  Smith 
{Script,  and  GeoL  p.  276,  237,  8d  ed.),  and  Dean  Alford 
(Prokff.  to  Gosp.  ed.  1859,  voL  i,  eh.  i,  §  22).  (For  other 
wiiters  whb  have  held  the  same  viewB,  see  Dr.  David- 
8on'8  FactSf  Statements,  etc,  in  defence  of  his  voL  ii  of 
Honie'8  Introd,  1857.)  The  inadmissibility,  however,  of 
either  of  these  limitations  to  inspiration  is  evident  from 
two  considerations:  Ist,  That  the  sacred  writers  them- 
8elves  make  no  such  discrimination  in  their  pzofeasions 
of  divine  sanction ;  and  it  would,  in  fact,  be  subver8ive 
of  the  above  distinction  between  inspiration  and  revela- 
tion ;  and,  2dly,  The  linę  of  demarcation  between  what 
is  important  to  relig^ion  and  what  is  not  is  too  fine  to  be 
traced  by  any  expoeitor,  so  that  we  would  thus  unsettle 
onr  whole  confidence  in  the  truthfolness  of  the  Scrip- 
tures.  We  therefore  are  compelied  by  the  neceasity  of 
the  case,  no  less  than  the  positive  declarations  of  the 
Bibie  itself,  to  maintain  that  "all  Scripture  is  divinely 
inspired,"  and  not  some  of  its  parts  or  statements  alone. 
At  the  same  time  we  may,  without  inoonsistency — nay, 
we  must,  in  the  light  of  just  criticism— admit  that  the 
phraseology  in  which  these  stotements  is  couched  is 
oflentimes  neither  elegant  nor  exacL  Yet  this  does  not 
impair  their  essential  truth,  as  the  testimony  of  an  ii- 
literate  witness  may  be  scrupolously  truthful,  althoagh 
conftised  in  order  and  unscientific  in  form.  Provided 
the  facts  are  substantially  given,  the  want  of  logical, 
rhetorical,  and  grammatical  precbion  w  oomparatively 
unimportant,  and  forms  no  ground  of  impeachment. 
The  mental  habits  of  the  sacred  writers  must  be  taken 
into  account  in  order  to  aniye  at  their  nuamnff,  and 
this  last,  indeed,  in  the  case  of  any  writer,  is  what  the 
reader  is  in  search  of,  and  of  which  language,  whether 
elear  or  obscure,  is  legitimately  but  the  yehide.  The 
errors  imputed  to  the  Scriptures  by  certain  sdentific 
men  have  accordingly  all  been  expl^ned,  sooner  or  later, 
as  being  mercly  apparent,  and  due  to  the  popular  style 
of  the  sacred  writers.  £ven  the  most  difficult  instances 
of  these,  such  as  the  omissions  and  generał  cnumera- 
tions  in  the  genealog^es  [see  Gkneałooy  of  Christ], 
are  susceptible  of  the  same  exp]anation,  sińce  these 
were  evidently  copied  faUhfuUy  finom  public  registers, 
which,  however  inoorrect  they  may  seem  to  us,  were 
of  unąuestioned  cuirency  at  the  time.  A  nioety  in 
stopping  to  rectify  these  (for,  be  it  obeenred,  no  one  was 
led  into  eiror  by  the  transcription,  sińce  the  writers, 
and,  indeed,  the  whole  public,  were  perfectly  aware  of  the 
discrepancy)  would  have  been  a  far  greater  piece  of 
pedantry  than  for  a  modem  divine  to  pause  in  the  midst 
of  a  quotation  of  Scripture  to  correct  an  unimportant 
mistranslation  in  the  Authorized  Yersion.  Just  so  when 
our  Lord  and  the  apostle  Paul  freely  cite  passages  ac- 
cording  to  the  inexact  rendering  of  the  Septuagint, 
and  sometimes  even  make  them  the  point  of  an  argu- 
ment ;  it  is  no  disparagemcnt  either  to  their  intelligenoe 
or  inspiration,  but  rather  an  evidence  of  their  apprecia- 
tion  of  the  literary  aptitudes  of  those  whom  they  ad- 
dressed.     See  Accommodation. 


On  the  other  hand,  within  the  bomida  of  tha  oithodoz 
view  of  inspiration,  as  above  atated,  there  are  two  cpi- 
thets  currently  employed  which  aeem  to  boider  too  doee* 
ly  apon  the  eztnyagant,  and  are  eąnalŁy  nniwwwafy 
and  inoorrecL 

1.  ^  Plenary  Inspiratitm^  is  a  phraae  nowhere  wa^ 
ranted  by  the  Scripturea  as  predicated  of  themselYeaL 
Christ  alone  was  plenarily  inspired  (John  iii,  34)  of  all 
human  beings.  The  term  plenaiy  autkority  would  be 
far  morę  scriptural  and  definite. 

2.  ^  Verbal  Inspiration"  is  an  expreaBioa  atili  moce 
objectionable  as  applied  to  the  Scriptarea.    For, 

(L)  Yror(b,a8Such,areincapableofinspiratioB.  They 
ara  either  orał,  oonsisting  of  certain  sounds,  or  written, 
consisting  of  certain  marka  on  paper;  botb  materiał 
signs  of  which  a  spirituał  dement  cannot  propeily  be 
predicated.  Thought,  ideaa,  sentimenta  onły  can  be  in- 
spired ;  and  this  is  really  what  the  theoiiata  mean.  It 
is  better  to  say  so  płainly. 

(II.)  The  assumption  by  these  theorista  that  we  think 
only  in  words  is  plentif olly  oontsadicted  by  evexy  iiun'3 
oonsdoosness.  Aa  children,  we  have  conoeptioBS  kmg 
before  we  have  words.  The  dog  tliat  liea  dreaming  of 
the  chase  lias  rapid  trains  of  thcwi^t,  but  not  a  syllAbk 
of  a  word.  We  are  constantly  exercifliiig  peroeptioiM 
of  shades  of  color,  and  shiq>es  of  matter,  for  which  tbeie 
is  no  name.  He  most  have  a  feeUe  power  of  oonaóous- 
nesą  or  a  mighty  power  over  woids,  who  ia  not  often 
poasessed  of  a  thought  for  which  he  panses  for  the  woid. 
We  hołd  the  conception  fast,  waiting  for  ita  ooireUiire 
tenn  to  come.  Who  does  not  often  think  of  a  6iend's 
face  without  bdng  able  to  recalł  liis  name  ?  Worda,  it 
is  true,  enable  us  to  expres8  our  ideaa,  and  generaDy 
that  expres8ion  renders  the  conception  itself  morę  di^ 
tinct  But  surdy  God  is  ahnt  up  to  no  such  neoesaty 
in  oommunicating  łiis  mind  to  men.  His  Spirit  eTcn 
gives  us  thoughts  beyond  the  oompaaa  of  laogoage 
(&\dKfira,  Rom.  viii,  26 ;  ofijnfTa,  2  Cor.  xii,  4). 

(III.)  The  suggestion  of  the  ^pmnma  vóha  to  the 
minds  of  tlie  sacred  writers  is  incompatibłe  with  their 
free  action,  as  evinced  in  the  yarietiea  and  eyen  błem- 
ishes  of  style.  These  are  deariy  the  human  dement, 
partaking  of  the  imperfection  and  divermty  insepaiaUe 
from  man*8  productiona.  To  say  that  God  makes  use 
of  them  is  only  evading  the  point.  He  does  not  di- 
rectly  supply  them  nor  authorize  tliem ;  he  only  soffen 
them.  The  inconaistency  of  statement  by  Ganann  sad 
other  yerbalists  on  thia  head  is  palpable,  and  sbows  the 
untenableness  of  their  podtion  in  the  faoe  of  iofidel  ob- 
jections  and  rationałistic  criticism.  Kqually  inoonclii- 
siA^e  and  self-oontradictory  is  their  method  of  dispoścg 
of  the  objection  tliat  if  the  actual  Greek  and  Uebrer 
words  are  inspired,  no  translationa  can  in  any  oanda- 
tive  sense  be  called  ^  the  word  of  God." 

(lY.)  Nothing  is  gained  by  aaserting  the  yeibal  the- 
ory  that  is  not  equally  aecnred  in  point  of  diviiie  hm* 
tion  and  infallible  truth  by  stmply  daiming  for  tbe  Uoly 
Scriptures  that  their  autements  and  aentimcnU  sub- 
stantially and  in  thdr  essential  import  represent  the 
mind  and  will  of  God;  that  they  oontain  di^ine  thoa)chts 
clothed  in  merely  human  language.  Such  is  tbe  ob^i- 
ous  fact,  reoognised  by  every  deyout  and  jodidoos  in- 
terpreter. Such  a  yiew,  indeed,  giyea  fiu*  more  dignity 
to  the  sacred  yolume  than  the  mechanical  theory  of  a 
mere  amanuensis.  It  ia  the  power  of  God  in  eaitben 
yessds  (2  Cor.  iv,  7). 

(T.)  The  theory  of  yertMd  inspiiation  is  oomparatire- 
ly  recent  in  the  history  of  theology. 

[1.]  There  is  no  soch  theory  stated  in  the  Scripturea. 
Scriptural  authority  would  predude  all  dtation  of  naroes. 
great  or  smali,  among  the  theoLogiana.  The  pasagea 
adduced  in  its  fayor  have  no  peitinenoe. 

[2.  ]  The  fathers  had  no  defimte  theoiy  of  inspiratife 
at  alL  Sometimes,  in  dwelling  upoo  the  peifectiao  of 
Scripture,  they  uaed  atriking  ligures  and  stnmg  ezpres- 
sions,  from  which  we  might  inTer  a  belief  in  reifad  is- 
spiration.    But,  on  the  other  hand,  their  entinaiy  modę 


INSPIRATION 


615 


INSPIRATION 


of  commenting  on  Scńptnre,  of  qiioŁing  it,  and  of  de- 
fending  it,  ia  iuconuBtent  with  such  a  belief. 

(a.)  John,  the  pie8byter,who  is  beUeved  to  hare  been 
<me  of  €ur  Lot^m  duciple$,  speaking  of  Mark'8  Gospel, 
aays  that  Mark  "wrote  it  with  great  accunu^,  as  Pe- 
ters uiteipreter.  .  .  .  He  oommitted  no  mistake  when 
he  wnce  down  thinga  as  he  remembered  tbem.  He 
was  very  caieful  to  omit  nothing  of  what  he  had  heard, 
and  to  say  nothing  false  in  what  he  reUted'*  (Eusebius, 

(6.)  Juatin  Martyr,  after  nsing  the  figurę  of  the  ^  lyre,** 
which  is  80  much  relied  upon  by  the  adyocates  of  ver- 
bal  inapiration,  goea  on  to  limit  his  lemark  to  "thoee 
things  in  Scripture  which  are  necessaiy  for  us  to  know" 
(JfUU  Ad  Grac  §  S), 

(c.)  IreneuB,  in  a  fragment  on  **  the  style  of  StPaul," 
allttdea  to  the  iact  that  his  sentences  were  sometimes 
«  ansyntactic,"  and  aooonnts  for  it  by  the  "rapidity  of 
his  uttennces  {velociUu  »ermomtm\  and  the  impulaive- 
Desa  of  apirit  which  distinguished  hiro." 

(d.)  demens  Alezandrinus  States  that  *'  Peter  haying 
preached  the  Gospel  at  Borne  .  .  .  many  present  ex- 
horted  Mark  to  write  the  things  which  had  been  spoken, 
Since  he  had  long  accompanied  Peter,  and  remembered 
what  he  had  said ;  and  when  he  had-composed  the  Gos- 
pel, he  delivered  it  to  them  who  had  asked  it  of  him" 
(Eusebins,  HitL  Eedes,  vi,  14). 

(e.)  Origen,  speaking  of  the  Epistle  to  the  Ęebiews, 
remarka  that  the  **  thoughts  are  Patd^a,  but  the  language 
beloogs  to  some  one  who  committed  to  writing  what 
the  apofltle  said,  and,  as  itwere,  reduced  to  commenta- 
ńes  the  things  spoken  by  his  master.  But  the  ideas 
are  admirahle,  and  not  inferior  to  the  acknowledged 
writings  of  the  apostle."  Again,  speaking  of  an  appar- 
ent  discrepancy  -  between  John  and  Matthew,.(Mgen 
says,  **  I  belieye  it  to  be  imposeible  for  those  who  upon 
this  aabject  direct  attention  merely  to  the  extemal  his- 
tory,  to  prove  that  this  apparent  contradiction  can  be 
leconciled"  (Origen,  m  Johamu  i,  188). 

(/)  Chrysostom  remarks  on  Acts  xxvi,  6:  *'HercTaul 
speaka  hunanly,  and  does  not  throughout  enjoy  grace, 
but  is  permitted  to  intermix  even  hia  own  roaterials." 

(^.)  Angustine  declares  that  the  etangelists  wrote 
morę  or  less  fully,  *^  according  as  each  remembered,  and 
as  each  had  it  in  his  heart  (ut  qui8que  meminerat,  et  ut 
ciuqae  coidi  erat) ;"  and  asserts  that  the  *'  truth  is  not 
bound  to  the  words,"  and  that  the  1^  language  of  the 
erangelista  might  be  ever  so  different,  proyided  their 
tkongkłs  were  the  same"  (August.  Dt  Coiueruu  £vangeir 
w<.  ii,  12, 28). 

[3.]  The  period  between  the  fathers  and  the  schód- 
men  is  of  ao  little  value  in  the  history  of  theology  that 
it  is  hardly  worth  while  to  refer  to  it.  One  or  two 
writers  of  some  notę  in  this  period  adopted  verbal  in- 
apiration,  but  there  was  no  Teceived  theory  of  the  kind. 
Agobard,  archbishop  of  Lyons,  in  answer  to  Fredegis 
(who  is  cited  by  Piof.  Harris),  asks,  "What  absurdity 
foUows  if  the  nodon  be  adopted  that  the  Holy  Spirit  nut 
only  inspired  the  prophets  and  apostles  with  the  sense 
of  their  teachinga,  but  also  faahioned  on  their  lips  the 
rety  words  themselres,  bodily  and  outwardly  (curporea 
verba  extrinsecus  in  ora  illorum)"  (Agobaid,  Contra 
FredegUwm^  c  12). 

[4.]  By  the  schoolmen,  and  subseąuently  by  the  doc* 
tors  of  the  Church  in  generał,  a  distinction  was  madę 
in  inspiration  between  rereloHo  and  (unstenda, 

[ó.]  Of  the  great  refoimers,  Luther,  Melancthon,  Cal- 
vin,  and  Zwingiius,  not  one  maintained  any  such  doo- 
trine  as  that  of  verbal  inspiration,  while  they  all  speak 
in  the  strongest  possible  language  of  the  divinity,  cced- 
ibility,  and  infallibility  of  the  sacred  writings. 

[6.]  It  was  in  the  17th  oentury  that  the  notion  of 
▼etbal  inspiration,  which  had  before  only  floated  about 
ftam  one  individual  mind  to  another,  took  the  shape  of 
■^  definite  theory,  and  received  a  proper  ecclesiastical 
aanction.  The  subject  was  treated  at  length  by  Calovi- 
v»  C^e  bittcr  opponent  of  Gruttus  and  C!alixtu8),  who 


set  forth  the  verbal  theory  very  fully ;  and  later  writera, 
both  Lutheran  and  Reformed,  carried  it  so  far  as  to  ex- 
tend  inspiration  to  the  yowel-points  and  the  puuctu»- 
tion.  The  Formuła  Contentus  Heltetici  declares  that 
the  Old  Testament  "  is  Otówfwroc,  eąnally  as  regards 
the  consonants,  the  yowels,  and  the  vowel-points,  or  at 
least  their  force." 

y.  LUeraiure^—Eańy  treatises  on  the  subject,  of  a 
generał  character,  are  those  of  Quen8tedt,  Carpzoy,  Weg- 
ner, Lange,  Le  Clerc,  Lowth,  Lamothe,  Ciarkę,  Doddridge, 
etc,  which  rather  belong  to  the  prorince  of  "  Introduc- 
tion"  (q.  V.) ;  morę  explict  are  the  works  of  Bayly,  £9- 
aay  on  Inspiration  (London,  1707, 1708);  Jaquelot,  La 
YtrUe  eł  r Inspiration  des  Uorts  du  V.  et  N.  T.  (Rotterd. 
1715) ;  Cahuny,  Inspiration  ofO.and  N,  Test.  (London, 
1710)  ;  Martenae,  Christiana',  dodrina  de  diriaa  Sacror 
rum  Litterarum  ńuptr.  rindicia  (Jena,  1724) ;  Klemm, 
Theopneust  Sacrorum  Liti,  asserta  (TUb.  1748) ;  Stosch, 
De  dujdici  Apostoli,  theopneustia,  tum  generali  tum  spe- 
eiaU  (Guelpherb.  1754);  Bullstedt,  De  rera  S.  S.  trupi- 
rationis  indoU  (Coburg,  1767  sq.) ;  Teller,  De  inspir.  di- 
vina  Vatum  Sacrorum  (Helmst.  1762);  also  Diss.  de  In- 
spir, Script.  Sacjudicioformando  (Helmst  1764) ;  ToU- 
ner,  Die  Gdttliche  Eing^ng  der  heiligen  Schn/i  unter- 
suckt  (Mittau  and  Leipzig,  1772) ;  Jablonsky,  De  ^coir- 
wiMrrięt  Scriptorum  Sacrorum  N,  T.  [in  his  Opusc,  ed. 
te  Water,  iv,  425-54) ;  Wakefield,  Essay  on  Inspiration 
(Lond.  1781);  Meyer,  De  Inspiratione  S.  S.  (Tr.  ad  Rh. 
1784) ;  Hegelmaier,  De  TkeopneuMtia  ejusgue  słatu  in  rt- 
ris  sanctis  LOb.  Sacc.  auctoribus  (Tub.  1784);  Miller, 
Cum  theopneustia  Apostolorum  nec  omniscieniiam  quasi 
aiiguam,  nec  anamartesiamfuisse  (Gott.  1789) ;  Henck- 
el,  Inspirationem  Ew,  et  Ad,  sine  ullo  religionis  damno 
negari  posse  dubitatum  (Frcft  ad  Y.  1798) :  the  definite 
que8tions  of  the  extent  and  character  of  inspiration, 
however,  are  spedally  discussed  in  the  works  of  Moore, 
Plenary  Inspiration  ofthe  N,  T.  (Lond.  1798) ;  Jesse,  On\ 
the  Learmsig  and  Inspiration  of  the  Apostles  (London, 
1798) ;  Findlay,  The  Dirine  Itupiraiion  of  the  Jewish 
Scr^ftures,  etc  (Lond.  1808) ;  Dick,  £May  on  the  Inspi- 
ration  ofthe  HoUf  Scriptures  (Glasgow,  1800;  4th  edit. 
1840) ;  Sontag,  Doctr.  inspirationis  ejusgue  ratioj  hist.  et 
usus  popularis  (Heidelberg,  1810) ;  Dullo,  Ueber  d.góttL 
Eingebung  des  N.  T.  (Jena,  1816) ;  H.  Planck,  Ueber  Of- 
fenbarung  u.  Inspiration  [opposed  to  Schleiennacher*s 
view8]  (Gutt.  1817);  Rennel,  Proo/i  of  Inspiration  [N. 
T.  compared  with  Apocrypha]  (Lond.  1822) ;  Parry,  /«- 
guiry  into  the  Naturę  andEzłent  ofthe  Inspiration  ofthe 
Writers  ofthe  N.  T.  (2d  edit.  London,  1822) ;  Macleod, 
View  qf  Inspiration  [generał  statement  of  fact]  (Glasg. 
1827) ;  Carson,  Theories  of  Inspiration  [revicw  of  Wil- 
son, Pye  Smith,  and  Dick]  (Edinb.  1880) ;  Haldane,  The 
Books  of  the  O,  and  N,  T.  proted  to  be  canonical,  and 
their  Verbal  Inspiration  maintained  and  estaUished,  etc 
[a  brief  partisan  treatise]  (5th  ed.  Edinb.  1853) ;  Hinds, 
Bp.,  Proof s^  Naturę,  and  Ertent  of  Inspiration  (Oxford, 
1831) ;  Fraser,  Essag  on  the  Plenary  and  Verbal  Inspira- 
tion ofthe  Holy  Scriptures  [a  popular  view]  (in  New 
Family  Library,  voL  ii,  Edinb.  1834) ;  Henderson,  Dirine 
Inspiration  [a  calm  and  judicious  treatise,  endeavoring 
to  reconcile  the  extreme  theories,  and  thcrcfore  some- 
what  inconsistent  with  itself  ]  (London,  1886;  4th  edit. 
1852) ;  Carson,  Divine  Inspiration  [stricturcs  on  Hen- 
derson] (London,  1837);  Gauasen,  Theopnettstie  [a  rhe- 
torical  rather  than  logical  plea  for  the  extreme  view] 
(2d  ed.  1842 ;  translated  into  Euglish,  Edinburgh,  1850; 
Boston,  1860) ;  Jahn,  Ad  guosdam perdnenł promiss.  Sp. 
S.  sec,  N.  Test,  (Basie,  1841) ;  Leblois,  Sur  ^Inspiration 
despremiers  Chretiens  (Strasburg,  1850);  CaTSon,  Inspi- 
ration [violent]  (Dublin,  1854) ;  Ijie,  Inspiration  ofthe 
Holy  Scriptures  [an  excellent  work,  making  many  good 
distinctions,  and  giving  the  history,  but  defective  in 
arrangement  and  exactne8B]  (Dublin,  1857,  2d  edit) ; 
Wordsworth, /»M;Mra<um. o/*  Canon  [apologctic]  (Lon- 
don, 1848, 1851 ;  Philadelphia,  1854) ;  Lord,  Plenary  In- 
spiration ofthe  Scriptures  [an  exŁremist]  (New  York, 
1858) ;  Macnaught,  Inspir,  IrfaU,  and  A  uthor,  of  Scr^ 


INSPIRED 


616 


INSPIRED 


łurei  [apologetić]  (London,  1866) ;  Bannermann,  Truth 
and  A  uthority  ofScripture  [aims  at  orthodoxy,  but  faila 
to  meet  the  controyeny  fully]  (Edinb.  1864) ;  Hannah, 
Dwme  and  Humań  Elements  in  Holy  Scripture  (Bamp- 
ton  Lect.  for  1858 ;  presents  many  pointa  clearly) ;  Rowe, 
Naturę  and  ExtaU  of  Tnspiraiion  [limited  in  plan] 
(London,  1864) ;  Warrington,  InspiraHcny  U»  Limits  and 
Ęffects  [chieflyapologetic]  (London,  1867) ;  Curtis, /Tu- 
man Element  tn  Itupiration  [Radonaliatic]  (N.  Y.  1867). 
See  also  Home,  IntroducHoUt  i\  WitsiuB, MiicdL  S<ie,  i, 
p.  262  Bq. ;  Twesten,  Dogmatiky  i,  eec  23-28 ;  Hill,  Leo- 
tures  on  Dimniły^  bk.  ii,  eh.  i;  Tholuck,  in  the  Jour,  of 
8ac,  Lit,  July,  1854,  p.  331  8q.  [takes  rather  a  Iow  posi- 
Łion  for  orthodoxy]  (from  the  Deuiachś  ZeiUchr.  1860) ; 
Steudel,  in  the  Tubing,  Zeiitchr.  1840  [takea  morę  ad- 
vanced  ground]  (transL  in  the  Brit,  cmd  For,  Ev,  Rev, 
Oct,  1862);  Rudelbach,  in  the  ZeUsehr,  f,  Luth,  Theol 
1860  [mostly  historical]  (tranal.  in  part  in  the  Brit.  and 
For,  Ev,  Rev,  April,  1868) ;  Weetcott,  Introd,  to  the  Gob- 
peU,  p.  5,  383 ;  Donaldaon,  IJisł,  Christ,  Lit,  and  Doctr, 
(see  Theol,  IndeXf  voL  iii) ;  Werner,  Gesck,  d,  apohg,  u, 
polem,  Litter,  d,  ćkristl,  TheoL  v,  346  są. ;  Denziger,  Die 
theoL  Lehre  v,  d,  Inspiration  mit  Beziehtmg  at^mannig- 
faUige  dUere  und  neuere  A  birrungen  v.  richłigen  und  cor- 
recten  Begriffen  (m  the  ReL  Erkldr,  ii,  156-242) ;  Fr.  de 
Rougemont,  Christ  et  ses  temoins  (Pańs,  1856,  2  yola.) 
[opposes  Gaussen  and  the  false  spiritualism  of  the  Stras- 
burg school  of  Scheier  and  others] ;  Lange,  Philosoph, 
Dogm,  p.  540  sq. ;  Pye  Smith,  First  Lines  of  Christiam 
TheoL  (see  Lidex :  "  Scripture") ;  Auberlen,  Div,  Eeve- 
laiionj  p.  204, 233  Bq.,  245 ;  Martensen,  Christian  Dogmat, 
p.  18,  838  są.,  402  są. ;  Farrar,  CriHcal  History  ofFree 
Thought  (see  Index) ;  Donaldson,  Christian  Orthodory^ 
eh.  iii  and  Appendix  v;  Baur,  Dogmengesch.  (see  Index 
to  each  voL  i-iii);  Buli,  Theol  ii,  152;  Delitzsch,  BUd, 
PsychoL  p.  433 ;  Liddon,  Bampt,  Lect,  1866,  p.  45, 219 ;  Au- 
gusti,  Dogmengesch,  i,  ii  (see  Index) ;  MUnscher,  Dogmen- 
gesch, ii,  219;  Kahnis,  The  Church,  p.  116;  Bickersteth, 
Christ,  Stud,  p.  469 ;  ^{(b  to  FaUh,  p.  287  są. ;  Neander, 
Ch,  Dogm.  ii,  433, 442, 607 ;  Hurst,  RaiionaKsm,  p.  200  są., 
546  są.;  Carmichael,  TheoL  and  Metnph,  ofSaHpturcj  i, 
1  sq.;  Maurice,  Theolog.  EssaySj  p.  314;  EngL  Rev,  xii, 
247;  £ond(2uart/Zćp.  1856,  p.  559;  1860,  p.  527;  1865, 
p.  260;  North,  Brit,  Rev,  xxv,  74;  Stud.  u.  Krit.  1869, 
p.  468;  Bib.  SacrOy  1865,  p.  350,  519;  Oct.  1867,  p.  67, 
198 ;  1868,  p.  192  są.,  816, 881 ;  1869,  p.  588;  1870,  p. 33 ; 
Christian  Remembrancer,  1856,  art  i ;  Jan.  1862,  p.  506 ; 
1868,  p.  287;  Christian  Ezaminer,  1865,  p.  255;  Mełh, 
Quart,  Rev.  1850,  p.  500;  1855,  p.  395;  1867  and  1868, 
Dr.  Haven  on  Inspiration ;  1870,  p.  110 ;  New  Englander^ 
1861,  p.  809;  1863,  p.  95;  Oct.  1867;  Westm,  Rev.  1864, 
p.  255,  257;  Am.  Presb.  Rev,  1854,  p.  141 ;  1860,  p.  182; 
1865,  p.  328, 519 ;  Oct.  1866 ;  Princeton  Rep,  1857,  p.  660 ; 
Bapt,  Quart.  Rev.  Jan.  1868. 

Inspired,  the  name  of  a  sect  which  existed  for 
some  150  years  in  Germany,  and  remnants  of  which  are 
still  to  be  found  in  the  United  States.  They  owe  their 
origin  partly  to  the  French  Prophets  [see  Camisards], 
partly  to  the  German  Separatists  (ą.  v.).  Their  name 
they  deriyed  from  the  fact  that,  aside  from  the  inspira- 
tion of  the  Scriptures,  they  abo  believe  in  an  immedi- 
ate  diyine  inspiration,  affecting  the  person  in  such  a 
manner  that  he  becomes  the  instrument  by  which  the 
Holy  Spirit  manifests  iteelf,  and  he  is  therefore  to  be 
obe3'ed  by  the  faithfuL  After  the  unfortunate  condu- 
sion  of  the  religious  war  in  the  Ceyennes,  a  large  num- 
ber  of  these  French  Prophets,  for  the  most  part  honest, 
but  in  whom  bodily  sutTerings  had  exa]ted  the  mind 
until  they  belieyed  themselyes  directly  inspired  by  God, 
went  to  England  and  Scotland.  Most  important  among 
them  at  that  time  were  Elie  Marion,  Durande  Fage, 
Jean  Cayalier,  and  Jean  AUnut.  These  prophets  preach- 
ed  against  France,  and  especially  against  the  papacy, 
which  latter  they  considered  as  the  Anti>Christ  They 
Boon,  howeyer,  became  objects  of  suspicion  on  aocount 
of  their  attempts  at  nusing  the  dead,  and  were  expelled 
from  the  established  Episcopil  Church.   Obliged,  there- 


fore, to  form  a  separate  sect,  Allnnt  and  Marion,  wiłh 
their  adherents,  oonnected  themselyes  for  a  wbiie  witb 
the  French  Beformed  chnrches  of  the  Netheilands,bQt 
they  faiied  also  here  to  aoąuire  any  influence.  On  tlie 
other  band,  they  obtained  great  consideration  amoog 
the  Pietists  and  Separatists  of  Northern  and  Western 
Germany,  and  estabUshed  separate  congregations  at 
HaUe  (1713)  and  Berlin  (1714).  From  Halle  the  ]xio^ 
ciples  of  the  Inspired  were  disseminated  into  the  neigb- 
boring  regions,  and  oommunities,  composed  chi^y  of 
Sepazatist  emigranta  from  France  and  Suabia,  soon 
formed  in  many  plaoea.  Their  chiefs  were  £.  L.  Grn^ 
ber,  at  Himbach,  near  Hanau  (bom  1665,  f  1728);  A. 
Gross,  in  Frankfort;  the  saddler,  J.  F.  Kock,  at  Him- 
bach ;  and  the  hermit,  E.  C  Hochmann,  at  Schwarza 
nau,  near  Berleburg  (bom  1670,  f  1721).  In  1716  they 
took  the  name  of  Truły  Inipired  (see  J.  J.  Winkel,  Cas^ 
tmir,  Bielef.  1860).  Their  organization  was  baaed  on 
the  so-called  twenty-four  rules  of  trae  sanctification  and 
of  holy  conduct,  taken  mainly  from  an  address  of  Johann 
A.  Graber  in  1716.  Up  to  1719  they  counted  iiine  of 
their  members  endowed  with  the  gUt  of  inspiration. 
In  order  to  make  proselytes,  these  trayelled  through  all 
the  neighboiing  districts,  Switzerland  and  Western  Gei^ 
many,  especially  the  Palatinate  and  Alaace,  and  even 
yisited  Sazony  and  Bohemia.  They  established  oom^ 
munities  at  Śchwarzenau,  Homringbauaen,  near  Beiie- 
burg,  Himbach  and  Bergheim,  Nonnebaąc,  Dudelsheini, 
Badingen,  Birstein  in  Wetteraw,  Anwetler  in  the  Palat- 
inate, Goppingen,  Calw,  Stuttgart,  Heilbronn,  Lim, 
Memmingen  in  Wtlrtemberg,  Schaifhaiiaen,  Zmich, 
Beme,  Diesbach,  Amsoldingen  in  Switzeriand.  In  the 
mean  time  the  number  of  inspired  members  did  not  in- 
crease,  and  the  eight  died  out  one  by  one,  until,  in  1719, 
Rock  alone  remained,  and  he  continned  to  be  the  head 
of  the  sect  until  his  death  in  1749.  From  that  time  the 
sect  gradually  lost  its  influence.  A  number  of  Ibimer 
members,  under  the  leadership  of  Gmber,  Gleim,  Mack- 
inet,  and  other  Separatists,  emigrated  to  America,  and 
settled  at  Germantown,  Pa.  In  1730,  when  the  Herm- 
hut  moyement  begnn.  Rock  had  some  difficolties  with 
his  former  friend  Zinzendoif,  which  proyed  fatal  to  the 
interest  of  the  Inspired.  He  also  had  a  kmg  oontrorer- 
sy  with  the  Mystic  Separatist  Johann  Kaiaer,  who  had 
founded  a  Philadelphian  community  at  Stnttgart  in 
1710,  and  founded  an  Inspired  one  in  1717.  In  1745-60 
communities  at  Wetteraw  and  Hennhaag  became  ooih 
yerts  to  the  enthusiasts,  who  eyen  at  that  time  aaoceed- 
ed  in  making  proselytes.  They  were  joined  by  the 
court  preacher  Kiimpf,  of  Bauhl,  in  Alsace,  who  remain- 
ed attached  to  the  cause  until  his  death  in  1753,  and 
the  celebrated  theologians  Ottinger  and  Tonteegen 
themselyes  were  for  a  time  fayorable  to  the  moi-ement. 
After  1816  the  sect  reoeiyed  a  new  impnlse,  and  neor- 
ganized  themselyes  under  the  leadership  of  Micbad 
Krausert,  a  tailor  of  Strasburg,  and  later  under  ChriariaB 
Metz  (bom  at  Neuwied  in  1792),  but,  being  subjected  to 
seyere  oppression  by  the  dyil  aathority,  they  emigra* 
ted,  numbering  about  800,  in  1841,  to  tłds  country,  and 
settled  at  Ebenezer,  near  Bofislo,  in  the  state  of  New 
York.  They  established  a  oommnnity  which  atill  ex- 
ists  at  that  place.  They  support  themselyes  by  mgń- 
culture  and  the  mannfacturing  of  doth.  practłsing  oom- 
munism  to  a  certain  extent;  their  nnmbers  tae  about 
2000.  They  haye  also  established  colonies  in  Caneda 
and  (sinoe  1854)  in  Iowa.  The  Inspired  oocupjr  a 
place  midway  between  the  Separatists  and  the  Herm- 
hutters.  In  their  doctrines  they  are  eyangelicsl,  boi 
they  reject  the  sacraments,  and  disclaim  any  relation  to 
the  EyangcUcal  Church.  They  oonsider  themsd^ea 
soldiers  of  Christ,  and,  as  such,  obliged  to  lead  a  life  of 
renouncement  and  abnegation;  in  their  inactice  they 
follow  the  principles  of  the  Mjrstie  Schwenkfdd,  J, 
Bohm,  Weigel,  etc  Inspiration,  they  belieye,  is  ahrmy^ 
preceded  by  some  materiał  sign  or  physical  sensstioiiy 
such  as  a  buming  in  the  chest,  cessation  of  brcatbing^ 
conyulńye  motions  of  the  arms,  etc,  alter  which,  m  a 


DfSTALLARE 


617         INSTRUMENTAL  MUSIC 


nad  ot  lomiuuiibiilic  state,  the  inspiied  penon  Teeeive8 
and  manifesta  the  diyine  inapuntion :  thia  manifeetation 
oonaiata  aometimea  only  in  convu]aive  motions,  or  in 
hroken  aentencea,  which  Utter  are  generally  invitatioiia 
to  repeotance  and  amendmcnt,  or  denunciationa  of  aome 
adTenaiy.  The  ooDgregationa  are  goyerned  by  a  chief 
and  tiro  eldera,  and  they  hołd  oocaaional  conferencea  to- 
gether.  They  have  no  regular  miniatry,  but  all  mem- 
ben,  of  both  8exea,  are  leąoired  to  contribute  to  the 
oommoh  eciification  by  praying  alond  in  the  aaaembliea ; 
beaidea  thia,  if  an  Inapiied  teacher  ia  preaent,  and  feela 
inspired,  he  preachea ;.  łf  not,  be  reada  aome  paaaagea  of 
Scriptore,  or  the  recoided  utteianoea  of  aome  Inapired 
members.  They  hare  alao  a  particular  coUection  of 
hymna.  Their  principal  featival8  are  lorę-feaata,  at 
which  preaching  ia  generally  part  of  the  order  of  exer- 
daea  of  the  day.  Theae  featirala  are  announced  long 
beiÓRhand,  bat  nonę  take  part  in  them  except  thoae 
who  are  peraonally  invited  to  do  ao  by  the  Inapiied 
leadem  The  week  before  a  loye-feaat  ia  alwaya  a  aear 
aon  of  eapecial  iaating,  penitence,  and  prayer,  and  the 
day  preoeding  it  ia  atlll  morę  atrictly  obaeryed.  Ftay- 
er,  flinging,  propheaying,  and  feet-waahing  alwaya  pre- 
oede  the  loYe-feaat,  at  which  the  peraona  invited  partake 
of  cake  and  winę.  See  M.  Gobel,  Gesch,  d.  wakrm  In- 
tpiratumtgemekiden  wm  1688-1854  (in  the  ZńUehr\fiJUr 
kia,  Tkeoiogie,  1854);  Schrockh,  KirchengeschickU  s.  <L 
JSe/mnmaium,  viii,  401  aq. ;  Schlegel,  Kirchengeśckichte  d, 
18^  Jakrkmideris,  ii,  div.  ii,  1047  aq. ;  Baumgarten,  Ge- 
adUdbe  d,  Rdig,  Partheim,  p.  1048  aq. 

Inatallftrd.    See  Inbtałłation. 

Installatioii  (Low  Lat  in  and  itaUum,  a  aeat)  ia  a 
name  in  aome  churchea  for  the  ceremoniał  act  or  pruoesa 
by  which  an  ordained  miniater  ia  formally  put  into  poe- 
aeaaion  of  hia  office,  and  by  which  he  ia  fully  empowered 
not  alone  to  exerciae  ita  functiona,  but  to  enjoy  ita  hon- 
ore  and  cmolumenta.  The  ceremoniał  fozro,  aa  well  aa 
the  name,  differa  according  to  the  office  which  ia  eon- 
ferred,  aa  tnthronization  for  a  bishop,  induction  for  a  min- 
ister, etc  InsUiUation  in  the  Engliah  Church,  how^erer, 
properly  regarda  only  the  office  of  a  canon  or  prebend- 
aiy.  The  word  ia  alao  uaed  generally  for  a  formal  in- 
trodttction  to  any  office.  "Though  technically  diatin- 
goiahed  in  modem  times  from  the  act  of  ordtoationy  it  ia 
Tirtually  includcd  in  the  *  ordination'  aeryicea  whenever 
the  minister  i^  inducted  into  the  paatoral  office  for  the 
first  time.  But  when,  having  bcen  preriously  ordain- 
ed, he  fonns  aiiothcr  pastorał  connection,  the  public  and 
offidal  induction  is  tcrmcd  aimply  an  '  inatałlation.' " 
See  Charobcra,  Cyclop.  a.  v. ;  Wałcott,  Sacred  A  rchaol 
p.  329  (for  the  uae  of  the  term  aa  used  in  the  Engliah 
Church);  Congreffaf.  Ouarterly,  18C8,  p.  840. 

Instinot,  that  power  which  acta  on  and  impela  any 
cieature  to  a  particular  manncr  of  conduct,  not  by  a 
view  of  the  łjeneiicial  conaeąuencea,  but  merely  from  a 
atrong  impulsc,  auppoeed  to  be  neceaaary  in  ita  effecta, 
and  to  be  givcn  in  order  to  aupply  the  place  of  reaaon. 
—Uenderaon  a  Buck,  TheoL  Diet,  a.  v. 

lostitatio  ia  one  of  the  namea  by  which  the  ad- 
dieaaea  on  the  Catechiam  or  the  catechetieal  inatruction 
W88  deaignatcd  in  the  Chriatian  Church  after  the  time 
of  Chailemagne.    See  Catechism. 

Institntioii,  an  esUbUahed  cnatom  or  law;  a  pre- 
oept,maxim,  or  principle.  Inatitutiona  may  be  conaid- 
cied  aa  poaitiye,  morał,  and  humau.  1 .  Thoae  are  called 
poaiłiet  inatitutiona  or  precepta  which  are  not  founded 
tipon  any  reaanna  known  to  thoae  to  whom  they  are 
giren,  or  dtacoyerable  by  them,  but  which  are  obaeryed 
merely  bccanac  aome  auperior  haa  commanded  them.  2. 
Morai  are  thoae,  the  reaaona  of  which  we  aee,  and  the 
dntiea  of  which  ariae  out  of  the  naturę  of  the  caae  itaelf, 
prior  to  extemal  command.  8.  Humań  are  generally 
appiied  to  thoee  inyentiona  of  men,  or  meana  of  honor- 
ing  God,  which  are  not  appointed  by  him,  and  which 
are  nameroua  in  the  Church  of  Bome,  and  too  many  of 
them  in  Pmteatant  chorchea.    See  Bat]er*a  Analogy,  p. 


214;  Doddridge^a  Lect.  lect.  158;  Robinaon'8  Claudey  i, 
217 ;  ii,  268;  Burrongha,  IHse.  on  Positite  Instiiutiont  f 
Bp.  Hoadłey 'a  Plain  A  ccountj  p.  8 ;  Buck,  TheoL  Diet.  a.  v. 

INSTITUTION,  in  Church  law,  meana  the  finał  and 
authoritatiye  appointment  to  a  church  benefice — ^more 
eapecially  a  biahopric— by  the  peraon  with  whom  auch 
right  of  appointment  ultimately  reata.  Thua,  in  the 
Roman  Catholic  Church— eyen  after  the  election  of  a 
biahop  by  the  chapter,  or  hia  nominaiion  by  the  crown, 
when  that  right  belonga  to  the  crown — IŁ  ia  only  the 
pope  who  eonfera  inttiifitum,  In  Engliah  uaage,  inati- 
tntion  ia  a  oonyeyance  of  the  cure  of  souła  by  the  biah* 
op,  who,  or  whoae  deputy,  reada  the  worda  of  the  inati- 
tution,  while  the  clerk  kneela.  The  institution  ycats 
the  benefice  in  the  clerk,  for  the  purpoae  of  apiritual 
duty,  who  thereupon  becomea  entitlcd  to  the  profita 
thereof.  But  the  title  ia  not  complete  till  induction  (q. 
y.). — Chambera,  Cydopcedia,  a.  y. 

Institution  of  a  ChrlBtian  Man,  alao  called 
The  Bithop^s  Bookf  ia  the  name  of  a  book  containing  an 
expoaition  of  the  Apoetlea'  Creed,  the  Seyen  Sacramenta, 
the  Ten  Commandmenta,  the  Lord'B  Praycr,  the  Aye 
Maria,  Juatification,  and  Purgatoiy,  which  waa  drawn 
up  by  a  committee  of  prełatea  and  diyinea  of  the  Eng- 
liah Church  in  1537, "  for  a  direction  for  the  biahopa  and 
clergy,"  and  to  be  "  an  authoritatiye  explanation  of  the 
doctrine  of  faith  and  mannera,"  and  a  sort  of  atandard 
for  the  deak  and  the  pulpit,  or,  aa  it  ifacif  exprea8ea  it, 
for  the  clergy  "  to  goyem  themaelyes  in  the  instruction 
of  their  flocka  by  thia  rule."  Some  aay  that  Stephen 
Poynet,  biahop  of  Winchcater,  wrote  the  book  himaclf, 
and  that  a  committee  of  prełatea  and  diyinea  gaye  it 
their  aanction.  It  waa  called  forth  at  the  time  of  the 
early  reformatory  eccleaiaatical  moycmenta  in  England 
during  the  reign  of  Henry  VIII.  At  the  time  of  the 
pubłication  of  the  "Inatitution  of  a  Christian  Man"* 
(printed  in  Formularies  of  Faith  pul  forth  hy  auihority 
during  the  Reign  of  Henry  VJJI,  Oxf.  1825),  the  Eng- 
liah Church  had  become  alienatcd  from  the  Church  of 
Romę ;  at  leaat  king  Henr^"  had  laid  claim  to  hia  aoyer- 
eignty  oyer  the  Church  in  hia  dominions,  which  an 
act  of  Parliament  in  1588  had  secured  him,  and,  with 
few  diaaentient  yoicea,  the  clergy  of  the  land  had  acc- 
onded  the  opinion  of  Parliament,  In  1536  a  conyoca- 
tion,  called  "  the  Southern  Conyocation,"  published  a 
manifeato,  entitled  ^^  Articlea  to  ttabiyshe  Christeii  quiet' 
neM,  and  uniłee  amonge  im,  and  to  aroyde  contenłious  opir^ 
ions,'*  which  are  generally  regardcd  aa  the  starting-point 
of  the  Engliah  Reformation.  "  But,  upon  the  whole,  theae 
artidea  breathed  rather  the  animus  of  the  Middle  Agea. 
Thua  they  took,.on  the  doctrine  of  juatification,  a  courae 
roidway  between  the  Romaniata  and  the  Lutherana. 
They  had  alao  paid  reyerence  to  aome  of  the  Romish  au- 
peratitiona,  aa  the  uae  of  imagea,  inyocation  of  saints,  and 
atill  held  to  the  doctrine  of  purgatory,  which  waa  at  thia 
time  beginning  to  encounter  a  determincd  opposition 
from  the  morę  radical  reformcrs.  To  rcpresent  morę 
truły  the  real  deairea  and  opinions  of  the  English  Church, 
the  Biahopa'  Book  waa  launched.  It  discussed  at  Icngth 
the  Romiah  auperatitiona  which  the  Southern  Conyoca- 
tion  had  aanctioned,  and  dcclared  against  a  further  ad- 
herence  to  them  by  the  English  pcople.  They  alao 
held  that  the  fabric  of  the  papai  monarchy  waa  alto- 
gether  human ;  tłuit  ita  growth  was  traccable  partly  to 
the  fayor  and  indulgence  of  the  Koman  empcrorB,  and 
partly  to  ambitioua  artificea  of  the  popcs  thcmselvea; 
that  juat  aa  men  originally  madę  and  sanctioncd  it,  so 
might  they,  if  occaaion  should  arise,  withdraw  from  it 
their  confidence,  and  thua  reoccupy  the  ground  on  which 
all  Chriatiana  must  haye  stood  antcrior  to  the  Middle 
Agea."  See  Hardwick,  7?4^or»i«/ion,  p.  202 ;  Collier,£!^ 
eieg,  Hitt.  of  England^  anno  1537. 

Instmction.    See  Educatiox. 

Znatnunent  plbs,  heW,  oTrAov,  generał  names  fof 
any  implement,  reuely  etc.).    Sec  Musie;  Abmob* 

Znstmmental  Mnaio.    See  Musie 


INSTRUMENTUM  PACIS         618 


INTERCESSION 


InBtrumentam  paoiB.  At  the  pax  tecum  (q.  v.) 
ła  Bacred  mass,  the  celebrant  of  the  maas  giyes  to  the 
deaoon  the  kin  of  peaoe,  which  the  latter  giyes  to  the 
Bubdcaooiii  and  then  it  ia  transmitted  suoceańyely  to  the 
other  inferior  clergy  preaent.  Since  Innocent  IIFb  time 
it  is  customary  to  tise  for  thia  purpose  an  image  of  the 
cmciiied  Christ,  which  is  handed  to  the  different  der- 
gy  for  the  purpose  of  bestowing  upon  it  the  kiss  in  token 
of  brotherly  love  (sach  aie  also  uaed  at  the  ooronation 
of  Roman  Catholic  princes)|  and  the  image  ia  therefore 
called  instrumentum  pacis^  ^  the  instnimeot  of  peaoe." 
See  TheoL  Umv.  Lex.  ii,  410, 

InBufflatiozł.    See  £xobci8t. 

Insalani  (islanderi)  is  an  old  name  by  which  the 
monks  who  belonged  to  the  famoos  monastety  in  the 
ialand  of  Lewis  were  known. 

InBult.  or  such  a  treatment  of  another,  in  word  or 
deed,  as  to  expre8s  eontempt,  ia  not  definitely  taken  oog- 
nizance  of  in  the  Mosaic  law ;  oni}'  the  reviling  of  su- 
periors  is  forbidden  (£xod.  xxii,  28),  yet  without  any 
apedal  penalty  attached.  The  sererity,  howeyer,  with 
which  disrcspect  towards  sacred  persona  was  punished 
appears  from  2  Kings  ii,  22  8q.  There  also  occun  men- 
tion  (Paa.  xxii,  8 ;  xxxviii,  21 ;  Lam.  li,  15 ;  Matt  xxvii, 
89)  of  geatures  of  malicious  mockery  (wagging  the  head, 
'SSJ*"^  C*^?^).  Insult  by  abusiye  worda  (Matt.  v,  22, 
poKĆe ;  see  Raca)  or  stroke  (smiting  on  the  chcek,  Jub 
xyi,10;  MatKv,39;  John  xviii,  22;  xix,  8;  pullingthe 
ears,  spitting  upon,  Matt  xxvii,  80,  etc)  was,  in  later 
law,  punished  by  flne  (Mishna,  Baba  Kammer^  viii,  6; 
oomp.  Matt.  v,  22),  aa  also  in  Roman  law.  For  a  mark- 
ed  public  afiront  which  Herod  Agrippa  I  received  at  Al- 
cxandria,  see  Philo,  ii,  522.— Winer,  i,  161.    See  Coub- 

TESY. 

IntentlOB,  "a  deliberate  notion  of  thc  will  by 
which  it  is  supposed  to  accomplish  a  certain  act :  fint, 
taking  in  merely  the  act;  seoondly,  taking  in  also  the 
con8eqaenoes  of  the  acL  An  action  may  be  done  with 
a  good  intention,  and  may  produoe  bad  results;  or  it ' 
may  be  done  with  a  good  intention,  and  produoe  good  I 
results.  It  may  also  be  done  with  an  evil  intention,  | 
and  yet  good  results  may  follow;  or  with  an  evil  inten- 
tion, producing  evil  results.  As  a  ąueation  of  morala, ' 
therefore,  the  intention  with  which  anything  is  done 
really  determines  the  quality  of  the  action  as  regards 
the  person  who  does  it.  It  is  not  possible  that  it  should 
always  determine  the  course  of  social  policy  in  the  mat- 
ter  of  rewards  or  punishmcnts ;  but  it  may  moetly  de- 
termine the  yerdict  of  conscience  respecting  the  good  or 
eyil  of  an  act,  and  bas  doubtleaa  a  large  place  in  the  di- 
vine  judgment  of  them.  No  intention  can  be  good, 
howeyer,  which  purposes  the  doing  of  an  eyil  action, 
although  with  the  object  of  securing  good  results;  nor 
any  which  does  a  good  action  with  the  object  of  pro- 
ducing evil  results."     See  Ethics;  Mobal  Semsb. 

In  the  Roman  Catholic  Church  the  mtaOion  of  ike 
priest  is  held  to  be  esaential  to  the  yalid  celebration  of 
the  sacraments.  Thia  the  Council  of  Trent  decreed  in 
its  llth  canon  (Sess.  vii) :  « If  any  one  shall  say  that  in 
ministers,  while  they  effect  and  confer  the  sacraments, 
there  is  not  reąuired  the  intention  at  leaat  of  doing  what 
the  Church  does,  let  him  be  anathema."  The  same  prin- 
ciple,  in  the  main,  was  adyocated  and  set  forth  by  popes 
Martin  V  and  Eugenius  IV  in  the  early  part  of  the  last 
century.  So  abuscd  has  this  principle  generaUy  become 
in  the  Roman  Catholic  Church,  that  by  its  consequence8 
it  must  be  declarod  to  be  greatly  detrimental  to  the 
cause  of  the  Christian  religion.  For  inasmuch  as  the 
inaincerity  of  the  actor  reduces  the  act  to  a  mockery 
and  a  sinful  tritiing  with  sacred  things,  the  Church  of 
Romę,  by  thia  decision,  "exposes  the  laity  to  doubt, 
hesitation,  and  insecurity  whenever  they  receive  a  sac- 
rament  at  the  hand  of  a  priest  in  whose  piety  and  sin- 
cerity  they  have  not  fuU  confidence.  If  a  wicked  priest, 
for  instance,  should  baptize  a  child  without  an  inward 
intefUion  to  baptize  hiiUi  it  would  follow  that  the  bap- 


tiam  was  noll  and  yoid  for  want  of  the  intentłon."  Tte 
Church  of  England,  to  repudiate  this  penreise  doctriną 
in  ita  26th  Artide  of  Rdigion,  dedarea,  therdbi^  that 
the  unworthineas  of  miniatera  does  not  hinder  the  eSed 
of  sacramenta,  <*foraamuch  aa  they  do  not  the  saaK  ia 
their  own  name,  but  in  Chriafa,  aod  do  minister  by  bis 
commiasaon,  [and  therefore]  we  may  uae  their  miniitij 
both  in  hearing  the  woid  of  God  and  in  leoeiying  the 
sacraments.  Neither  is  the  effect  of  Chriat^a  ordinanoe 
taken  away  by  their  wickedneas,  nor  the  grace  of  Godit 
gifta  diminished  from  auch  aa  by  faith,  and  lightlr,  do 
reoeiye  the  aacramenta  miniatered  anto  them,  which  be 
effectual  becauae  of  Chiiat'a  institution  and  pramiic,  al- 
though they  be  ministered  by  eyil  men.**  See  Staon- 
ton,  ^cclea.  Diet,  p.  898 ;  Blunt,  TheoL  Dkt,  i,  851 ;  and, 
for  a  modcsate  Roman  aooount  of  Intention^  liebemiaimi 
IntHt.  TheoL  (ed.  1861),  ii,  886  aq. 

Intercalary  Fmits  u  a  term  in  the  Roman  Cath- 
olic Church  for  the  reyenues  of  an  ecdesiaatical  benefioe 
aocruing  during  a  yacancy.  In  the  xxiyth  SesSb  of  the 
Council  of  Trent  (c.  18,  IM  Rrform,;  c.  1  and  8,  X.  Ik 
prttbend,  et  digmttS)  it  was  decreed  that  whaleyer  the 
deceased  eoclesiastic  had  really  eamed  was'a  part  of  tbe 
property  of  the  deceased,  but  that  the  remainder  should 
go  either  to  hia  sucoessor  in  office  or  to  the/cAriea  er- 
ofenioB,  or  to  him  who  is  to  appoint  the  auccesaor,  and  lo 
proyide  in  the  interim.  It  is  frequently  the  case  that 
these  funda  are  transferred  to  societies  of  widows  and 
orphana,  or  are  used  for  some  beneyolent  objects  in  the 
Church.  See  Wetzer  und  Welte,  KircAen-L«x,  y,  679; 
Aachbach,  Kirchat-Lex,  iii,  498;  TheoL  Unie.  La,  ii. 
410. 

Interoalary  Month.    See  Calendab. 

Intercession  (irsa,  tvrtv%ic)  is  the  act  of  mter- 
position  in  behalf  of  another,  to  plead  for  him  (Isa.  liii, 
12 ;  lix,  16 ;  1  Tim.  ii,  1).     See  Advocate. 

INTERCESSION  OF  CHRIST.  This  refere,  in  a 
generał  sense,  to  any  cńd  which  he,  aa  perpctual  Higk- 
priest,  extends  to  those  who  approach  God  confiding  ta 
him  (Heb.  iv,  16 ;  yii,  2&>27).  He  is  also  reprcsentcd 
as  offering  up  the  prayers  and  pnuses  of  his  peoftki, 
which  become  acoeptable  to  God  through  him  (Heh 
xiii,  15 ;  1  Peter  ii,  5 ;  Rey.  yiii,  8).  Of  the  inocroesBon 
of  Christ  we  may  obserye  that  it  is  righteouS)  for  it  is 
founded  upon  justice  and  truth  (Heb.  vii,  26 :  1  John  ui, 
5),  compassionate  (Heb.  ii,  17;  y,  8),  perpctual  (H^ 
vii,  25),  and  efficacious  (1  John  ii,  1).     Sec  Medlatoł 

Intercession,  in  the  sense  of  suppUcation,  was  not  ap> 
propriate  to  the  office  of  the  Hebrew  high-priest;  be 
was  the  presenter  of  sacriiices  on  account  of  ains,  aod 
madę  intercession  or  atonement  by  sprinkling  the  blood 
of  yictims  before  Jehoyah :  this  gaye,  as  it  were,  a  yoice 
to  the  blood.  Hence,  if  we  attach  a  special  idea  to  tbe 
term  ^  intercession,"  aa  applied  to  the  work  of  our  gkń- 
ous  High-priest,  may  we  not  say  that  it  is  eqnivaknt 
to  propitiation  or  atonement?  In  the  holieat  of  aH, 
'*  the  blood  of  Jesus  speaketh**  (Heb.  xii,  24>  The  di^ 
nity  and  merit,  power  and  authoiity  of  the  HesBiah,  in 
his  exalted  state,  im|Jy  a  oontinued  pretenŁaium  of  bis 
obedience  and  saćrifice  aa  eyer  yalid  and  efficadoos  far 
the  pardon  and  aooeptance,  the  perfect  holiness  and 
etemal  happineas,  of  all  who  are  truły  penitent,  bdiey- 
ing,  and  obedient.  Henoe  his  interoesBion,  or  his  acting 
aa  high-prieet  in  the  heayenly  world,  waa  represeotcd 
by  the  Hebrew  high-prieafs  entering  into  the  most 
holy  place,  on  the  annual  day  of  atonement,  with  tbe 
fragrant  incense  buming,  and  with  the  saciifidal  bkiod 
which  he  waa  to  sprinkle  upon  the  mcrcy-eeat,  over  the 
ark  of  the  coyenant,  and  before  the  awful  aymbols  of 
Jehoyah's  preaenoe.    See  Hioh-priest. 

"  The  need  of  an  interoeaaor  aroee  firom  the  kMS  of 
the  right  of  communion  with  Ood,  of  which  Adam  waa 
depriyed  when  he  ainned.  Before  the  fali,  Adam  was 
the  high-prieat  of  all  creation,  and,'a8  auch,  priyikjged  to 
hołd  free  interoourse  with  God;  and  thia  priyikige,  lost 
by  Adam,  waa  reatored  in  Chiiat    UntU  the  fntawM  U 


INTERCESSORES 


610 


INTERDICT 


time  orne  a  temporaiy  proTińon  was  madę  for  man*8 
acceptaooe  with  God  in  the  sacrifices  of  the  patriarcbal 
age,  and  the  ceremonieB  of  the  Moaaic  ritnal;  but  all 
theae  were  shadows  of  the  pńently  function  of  the  Son 
of  (lOd,  wbich  oommenoed  irom  the  time  when  he  of- 
fered  up  himself  as  a  sacrifioe  on  the  cross.  The  inter- 
eession  of  Christ  is  the  exerGiae  of  his  prieetly  office, 
which  is  carried  on  continuaUy  in  heaven  (Rom.  viii, 
34).  He  was  fitced  to  beoome  oor  high-priest  by  the 
anion  of  his  divine  and  human  natures  (Heb.vii,  25; 
Isa.  liii,  12).  His  manhood  enaUes  him  to  piead  on  our 
bebałf  aa  the  representadlye  of  human  naturę,  and  so  to 
sympalhize  with  those  needs  and  those  sorrows  which 
leąuire  his  intcroesBionSy  that  he  offers  them  up  as  one 
most  deeply  interested  in  our  weUare  (Heb.  iv,  15).  His 
pnesthood,  moreover,  require8  an  oiTering,  and  it  is  stiU 
his  human  naturę  which  furnishes  both  the  victim  and 
the  priest.  His  Godhead  renders  that  sacrifice  an  in- 
ralnable  offering,  and  his  intercession  all-effectual  (Heb. 
ix,  14)"  (Blunt,  DicL  s.  v.). 

INTERCESSION  OF  THE  HOLY  GHOST.  Man 
intercedes  with  man,  sometimes  to  piocuie  an  advan> 
tsge  to  himself,  sometimes  as  a  mediator  to  benefit  an- 
otber;  he  may  be  said  to  intercede  for  another  when  he 
puts  words  into  the  supplianfs  mouth,  and  directs  and 
piompts  him  to  say  what  otherwise  he  would  be  unable 
to  say,  or  to  say  in  a  morę  per8ua8ive  manner  what  he 
might  intend  to  say.  The  intjercession  of  the  Holy 
S]HiiŁ  (Rom.  viii,  26)  is  easily  illustrated  by  this  adap- 
tation  of  the  tcnn.    See  Paraclbte  ;  Inyocation. 

INTERCESSION  OF  SAINTS.  In  addition  to  the 
intercessions  of  Christ,  and,  indeed,  that  of  angels  like- 
wiae,  Roman  Catholics  believe  in  the  eflBcacy  of  the  in- 
tercession of  the  Yirgin  and  the  saints,  who,  however,  as 
they  Btote,  do  not  directly  intercede  for  men  with  God, 
bat  with  the  SaYioiu*,  the  sinless  One,  who  alone  has  the 
ear  of  the  King  of  the  unirerse.  See  Inyocation  of 
Saiicts. 

Intercessór^s  or  IntenrentdrdB  was  the  name 
of  officers  peculiar  to  the  African  Church,  who  acted  as 
temporary  incumbents  of  a  vacant  Id.^^hopric,  and  for  the 
time  being  performed  the  episcoji.il  fmictions.  It  was 
their  daty  to  take  measures  for  tho  immediate  appoint- 
ment  of  a  bishop.  To  prevent  abiises,  which  had  be- 
oome preyalent  by  either  choosing  incompetent  success- 
ors  or  by  protracŁing  the  election  of  a  new  prelate,  a 
Council  of  Carthage  in  401  forbade  the  tenure  to  con- 
tinue  longer  than  one  year,  and  also  any  succession  to 
the  temporary  occupant.  See  Farrar,  TheoL  Diet,  s.  v. ; 
Waloott,  Sacrtd  A  rcfueołoffj/,  s.  v. ;  Riddle,  Christ,  A  niiq, 
p.223. 

^  Interdict  (interdictuntj  sc  celebr ationii  divvn  offi- 
eO,  tiprohibiiion  of  religious  ofBoes)  ia  an  ecdesiastical 
oenaure  or  penalty  in  the  Roman  Catholic  Church,  con- 
aisting  in  the  withdrawal  of  the  administration  of  certain 
sacnunents,  of  the  celebration  of  public  worship,  and  of 
the  solemn  burial  senrice.  There  are  three  kinds  of  in- 
terdicts:  local^  which  affect  a  particular  place,  and  thus 
comprehend  all,  without  distinction,  who  reside  therein ; 
personal,  which  only  aflfect  a  person  or  persons,  and 
which  reach  this  person  or  persons,  and  these  alone,  no 
mauer  where  fonnd;  and  mtzet/,  which  aifect  both  a 
place  and  its  inhabitants,  so  that  the  latter  would  be 
bound  by  the  interdict  even  outside  of  its  purely  local 
limita.  But,  as  the  interdict  is  oftentimes  inflicted  on 
the  dergy  alone,  it  is  always  strictly  interpreted,  so 
that  one  imposed  on  a  parish,  etc,  does  not  take  effect 
abo  on  the  clergy,  and  vice  ver8a  (oompare  Ferraris,  art. 
ii,  v),  The  inteniict,  like  the  ban  (q.  v,),  may  be  in- 
flicted by  legał  order  (jaUerdicłum  ajure\  or  procured 
by  ecdesiastical  judges  (ab  homine),  The  reasons  for 
iaflicting  tliia  ecdesiastical  penalty  are  variotis;  most 
generally  they  are  the  abolition  of  Church  immnnities, 
dinespect  towards  ecdesiastical  authority  or  commands, 
sod  the  effecta  are  generally  the  prohibition  of  adminis- 
tering  the  sacnunents,  of  holding  public  worship,  and 


the  denial  of  Christian  burial ;  yet  varioa8  modifications 
have  been  frequent.  Thus  Alexander  III  permitted  in 
1178  the  administratbn  of  the  sacrament  of  baptism  to 
children,  and  that  of  penitence  to  the  dying  (c  11,  X. 
De  tponsaUbus,  iv,  1 ;  eomp.  c.  11,  X.  Depcmit.  et  remiss, 
V,  86 ;  c  24,  />e  tenUtOia  eicomm,  vi ;  v,  11).  Innocent 
Ul  allowed  oonfirmation  and  preaching  (c  43,  X.  /)e 
tent,  ezoomm,  v,  89,  a.  1208),  as  also  penitence,  with  some 
restiictions  (c  11,  X.  DepanU,  v,  88,  a.  1214;  comp.  c. 
24,  De  seMt,  exoomm,  in  vi),  the  silent  burial  of  the  der- 
gy (c  11,  X.  cit.  V,  88),  and  to  oonvents  the  obsenranoe 
of  the  canonical  hours,  without  singing,  and  the  reading 
of  a  Iow  mass,  which  was  in  the  foUowing  year  extend- 
ed  also  to  the  bishops  (c.  25,  X.  De  pricilegUs,  v,  88,  a. 
1215).  But  to  this  was  appended  the  condition  that 
the  parties  under  escommunication  or  interdict  should 
not  be  present,  that  the  doors  of  the  churches  should 
remain  locked,  and  no  bells  be  allowed  to  ring.  Boni- 
face  Vni  went  further,  and  allowed  the  celebration  of 
public  worship  with  open  doors,  ringing  of  bells,  and  in 
the  presence  of  the  exoommunicated  parties  on  the  oc- 
caaions  of  the  Nativity,  Easter,  Pentecost,  and  the  Ab- 
cension  of  the  Yirgin.  Yet  such  of  the  interdicted  and 
eKcommunicated  as  did  not  come  to  the  altar  were  to  be 
exdnded  (c  24,  De  eeni,  ezcomm,  in  vi  [v,  1 1]).  Martin 
V  and  Eugene  lY  extended  this  to  the  whole  octave  of 
the  Corpus  Christi  {Const,  Ineffabile,  an.  1429,  and  Contł, 
EseceUeniiseimumf  an.  1488,  in  BuUar,  Magnum^  1,  808, 
828) ;  and  Leo  X  to  the  octave  of  the  fc8tival  of  the 
Holy  Conception.  There  were,  moreover,  other  spedal 
regulations  madę  for  the  benefit  of  the  Fianciscans  and 
other  orders  of  monks  (Ferraris,  art.  vi,  no.  15).  In  the 
xxvth  Session  of  the  Council  of  Trent  (cap.  12,  De  regru" 
łarilmt)  it  was  dedded  that  the  regulars  generally  were 
to  obsenre  the  interdict,  as  had  already  been  command- 
ed  by  Clement  Y  (c.  1,  Ciem.  De  eent.  ercomm.  v,  10^ 
ConciLTienn.  1811). 

The  right  of  pronouncing  the  interdict  is  ve8ted  in 
the  pope,  the  provincial  s3mod,  the  bishop,  with  the  as- 
sent  of  the  chapter,  and  even  without  it  (c.  2,  X.  De  hi$ 
qwB  funt  a  majori  parte  capitulij  iii,  11,  Coelestin  III, 
an.  1 190 ;  Ciem.  1,  De  eenł^  exc,  dt.  Conc.  Trid.  cit.  See 
Gonzalez  Tellez,  c.  5,  X.  De  WMłtet,  no.  4).  The  intei^ 
diet  can  be  withdrawn  by  any  confessor  when  it  is  par- 
ticular and  personal,  not  re8erved,  bat  applying  to  minor 
points  (c.  29,  X.  De  gent,  exc.  v,  39,  Innocent  III,  anno 
1199);  other  interdicts  are  to  be  withdrawn  by  those 
who  pronounced  them,  their  successors,  delegates,  or 
superiors  (see  Ferraris,  ardde  viii).  The  fundameniai 
principles  of  the  interdict  are  yet  in  vigor  in  the  Roman 
Church  (see  Benedict  XIY,  De  gynod,  dioec.  lib.  x,  cap. 
1,  §  8  sq.),  but  it  has  not  been  exercised  to  its  fuli  ex- 
tent  sińce  the  17th  century.  As  late  as  1606  Paul  Y 
pronounced  it  against  the  Republic  of  Yenice  (see  Rieg- 
ger,  Ditt,  de  pcenUeniOa  et  pcenis  eccL  Yienn.  1772,  §  76 ; 
and  Schmidt,  Thesaurusjuris  eccł.  vii,  172),  and  partie- 
ular  interdicts  are  still  in  freąuent  use,  as,  for  instance, 
the  interdictio  ingreenu  in  ecclesiam^  the  defense  for  lay- 
men  to  enter  the  Church  (c.  48,  X.  De  sent,  ezcomm,  v, 
89,  Innocent  III,  an.  1215;  c  20,  eod, 'm\i;  v,  11,  Bon- 
iface  YIII,  etc).  The  Council  of  Trent  (Sess.  vi,  cap.  1, 
injm,  de  ref.)  pronounced  this  puniehment  against  the 
bishops  and  archbishops  who  neglected  the  command 
to  reside  in  their  diooese.  To  it  belongs  also  the  ceeta'- 
tio  a  dimme,  touching  the  use  of  the  bells  and  organ 
(c  55,  X.  De  appeUat.  ii,  28,  Innocent  III,  an.  1213 ;  c 
18,  §  1,  X.  Z)e  officio  judicie  ord,  i,  81,  Innocent  III,  an. 
1216;  c.  2,  eod,  in  vi,  and  i,  16,  Gregor.  X,  an.  1274 ;  c 
8,  eod,  Bonifac  YIII),  as  a  public  mouming  of  the  Church 
(c  18,  De  sent,  exeomm,  in  vi,  1,  ib.  Bonifac.  YIII). 

Hittory, — The  time  wheix  the  interdict  was  first  in- 
troduced  into  the  Church  is  not  generally  known ;  but 
it  is  usuaHy  traced  to  the  early  discipline  of  public 
penance,  ^  by  which  penitenta  were  for  a  time  debarred 
irom  the  privilege  of  presence  at  the  celebration  of  the 
Eucharist."  Instances  of  it  are  met  with  in  very  early 
times  (see  c  8,  Can.  v,  qu.  vi  \Conc,  Agałh,  anno  506], 


INTEREST 


620 


INTERIM 


^ 


and  10, 11,  Can.  xvii,  qu.  iv  [Pomf.  iZlmn.],  etc  Comp. 
also  Goiizalez  Teliez,  cap.  5,  X.  De  coruuet,  i,  4,  no.  19). 
But  it  waB  not  until  the  Middle  Ages,  the  days  of  Baper- 
Btition,  when  the  mind  was  iu  a  oondition  difficult  for 
OB  of  modem  ideas  fully  to  realise  or  to  undentand,  that 
this  eoclesiastical  punishment  camc  into  generał  use  as 
a  weapon  of  the  Church  againat  all  ecdesiastical  and 
civil  inroadfl.  In  1126  Ivo  of  Chartres  calls  it  yet 
(EpisL  94)  *<  remedium  insolitom,  ob  suam  niminim 
novitatem  ;**  and  at  the  Synod  of  limoges  in  1801,  the 
following  resolution  was  paased  at  the  second  session : 
^'Nisi  de  pace  acquieverint,  ligate  omnem  tenam  Le- 
movicenaem  publica  exoommunicatione :  eo  videlioet 
modo,  ut  nemo,  nisi  dericus,  aut  pauper  mendicans,  aut 
peregrinus  adveniens,  aut  infans  a  bimata  et  infia  in 
toto  Lemovicino  sepeliatur,  nec  in  alium  episoopatum 
ad  sepeliendum  portetur.  Divinum  officium  per  omnes 
eoclesias  latenter  agatur,  et  baptismus  petentibus  tiibu- 
atur.  Circa  horam  tertiam  signa  sonent  in  ecclesiis 
omnibus,  et  omnes  proni  in  faciem  preces  pro  tribolatio- 
ne  et  pace  fundant.  Poanitentia  et  viaticum  in  exitn 
mortis  tribuatur.  Altaria  per  omnes  ecclesias,  sicut  in 
Parasceve,  nudentur;  et  cruoes  et  omamenta  abscon- 
dantur,  quła  sigpnum  luctus  et  tristitia  omnibus  est  Ad 
missas  tantum,  quas  unusąuisąue  saoerdotum  januis  ec- 
clesiarum  obaeratis  feoerit,  altaria  induantur,  et  iterum 
post  missas  nudentur.  Nemo  in  ipsa  exoommunicatione 
axorem  ducat.  Nemo  alteri  osculum  det,  nemo  derico- 
rum  aut  laicorum,  vel  habitantium  vel  transeuntium,  in 
toto  Lemovicino  camem  oomedat,  neąue  alios  cibos, 
quam  illos,  quibus  in  Quadragesima  veaci  Ucitum  est 
Nemo  clericorum  aut  laicorum  tondeatur,  neque  radatur, 
quou8que  districti  principes,  capita  populorum,  per  om- 
nia  sancto  obediant  concilio'*  (Mansi,  ColL  ComsUiorumj 
xix,  641 ;  Du  Fresne,  a  v.  Intenlictum). 

The  most  remarkable  of  the  interdicts  sińce  the  1 1th 
century  were  those  laid  upon  Scotland  in  1180  by  Alcx- 
ander  III  \  on  Poland  by  Gregory  VII,  on  occasion  of 
the  murder  of  Stanislaus  at  the  altar  in  1078 ;  by  Inno- 
cent III  on  France,  under  Philippe  Augustus,  in  1200 ; 
and  on  England  under  John  in  1209.  See  Neander,  Ch, 
Hitt,  iii,  454 ;  Milman,  LcOin  Chrittianity  (see  Index)  { 
Biddle,  History  o/Łhe  Papacyy  ii,  83  sq.,  et  aL;  Janus, 
Pope  and  CouncUj  p.  289;  Herzog,  Real-Encykhp,  vi, 
705  sq.  i  Chambers,  Cydopcedkij  v,  606. 

InteresŁ    See  Usury. 

Interim,  the  name  of  certain  formularies  or  confea- 
sions  of  faith  obtruded  upon  the  Reformers  by  the  em- 
peror  Charles  V.  They  were  so  called  because  they 
were  only  to  Uke  place  in  the  interimy  tiil  a  generał  coun- 
cil  should  decide  all  the  poinŁs  in  que8tion  between  the 
Protestanta  and  Catholics.  There  were  three  of  such  for- 
mularies. 

I.  The  Interim  of  Ratisbon  (Regenabury),  Nu- 
merous  conferenoes  had  been  held  by  both  parties,  i.  e. 
the  Romanists  and  the  Protestants,  after  the  formation  of 
the  '^League  of  Smalkald"  (1581),  to  bring  about  a  rec- 
onciliatlon.  As  a  liberał  Roman  Catholic  writer  of  our 
0¥ni  days  (Janus,  Pope  and  Council,  p.  869)  says,  ^  It 
was  long  before  men  (in  Germany  and  generally  on  this 
ńde  of  the  Alps)  grasped  the  idea  of  the  breach  of  Church 
communion  becoming  permanent.  The  generał  feeling 
was  still  so  far  Church-like  that  a  really  free  oouncil,  tn- 
dependent  of  papai  control,  was  confidently  looked  to  for 
at  once  purifying  and  uniting  the  Church,  though,  of 
oonrse,  view3  difTered  as  to  the  conditions  of  reunion, 
aoconltng  to  personal  position  and  national  sentiroent.*' 
A  conference  was  finally  appointed  and  held  at  Worms, 
under  the  leadership  of  Mdancthon  and  Eckius,  accord- 
ing  to  appointment,  by  Charles  Y,  and  afterwards  re- 
.  moved  to  Katisbon,  where  the  diet  met  (1541).  Herę 
Pflug  and  Gropper  figured  prominently  by  the  side  of 
Eckius  on  the  Roman  Catholic  side,  and  Bucer  and  Pis- 
torius  by  the  side  of  Melancthon.  The  Roman  Catho- 
lics now  conceded  that  the  communion  of  both  kinds 
could  be  administered  to  all ;  that  the  que8tion  of  sacer- 
dolal  oelibacy  was  of  no  vital  importance,  etc ;  but  the 


Protestants  were  nevertheles8  afWud  of  some  hidden  plan, 
and  only  an  appareni  reconciliation  was  effected :  it  r» 
ally  aettled  no  queation  at  all,  aadafied  n«ther  party,  and 
finally,  as  Lnther  had  predicted  before  the  con\*ocatiafl, 
led  only  afterwards  to  much  misundeistanding  and  ma> 
tual  reorimination.  **<Let  them  go  on,^  aaid  Luther, 
referring  to  the  acheroea  of  those  who  thought  that  tbe 
diflferences  between  Roman  Catholics  and  Proteatacti 
might  be  madę  up  by  auch  oonferences,  *  we  shall  not 
envy  the  sucoess  of  their  labora;  they  will  be  the  first 
who  could  ever  convert  the  devil  and  reconcile  him  to 
Christ.  .  .  .  The  aoeptre  of  the  Lord  admita  of  no  bend- 
ing  and  joining,  but  must  remain  atraiicht  and  un- 
changed,  the  rule  of  faith  and  practioe.* "  Charles  V,  de- 
termined  to  aecore  the  ratification  of  the  points  of  agiee- 
ment  entered  into  at  Ratisbon  by  a  national  coimdl, 
forbade  the  Ftotestants  to  argue,  in  the  mean  time,  oo 
the  oontroverted  pointa,  or  to  dispoae  in  any  way  of  the 
property  of  the  churches.  They  proteated,  howerer, 
and  went  on,  regardless  of  the  interim. 

II.  TiiB  Augsburg  Intkrisc  After  the  doke  of 
Alva,  through  the  treachery  of  Maurice  of  Saxoay, 
had  broken  the  powcr  of  the  Protestanta  at  the  battle 
of  MUhlbeiig,  and,  by  the  overthivw  of  the  SmalkaU 
league,  the  emperor  had  brought  them  helpJeas  at  his 
feet,  Charles  V,  seeing  that  the  pope  had  not  actcd 
in  accordance  with  his  wishes  at  the  Coundl  of  Trent, 
decided  to  attempt  by  still  other  conferenoes  to  reunite 
the  two  contending  parties,  orat  least  ^  to  keep  matien 
quiet  until  the  finał  verdict  of  that  cecumenical  coundl 
which  constantly  vaniBhed  in  the  distance.**  For  that 
purpose  he  called  the  three  divines,  viz.  Julius  Pdog, 
bishop  of  Naumburg;  Michael  Helding,  titular  bbhop  of 
Sidon ;  and  the  Protestant  John  Agńoola,  preacher  to 
the  elector  of  Brandenburg,  to  agree  upon  a  series  of  ar- 
ticlea  conceming  the  pointa  of  religion  in  dispute  be- 
tween the  Catholica  and  Proteatants.  The  ooatiT>verted 
points  were,  the  state  of  Adam  before  and  after  his  fali; 
the  redemption  of  mankind  by  Jesus  Christ ;  the  jostifi- 
cation  of  sinners;  charity  and  good  worka,  tbc  cmfi- 
dence  we  ought  to  have  in  God;  that  our  sins  are  re- 
mitted ;  the  Church  and  its  tnie  marks,  its  power,  its 
authority,  and  ministers;  the  pope  and  btahopsj  tbe 
sacraments;  the  mass;  the  commemoration  of  saints; 
their  interceasion,  and  prayers  for  the  dead.  The  resolt 
of  their  discuasions  was  the  agreement  drawn  up  in 
twenty-six  articles.  Theae  the  emperor  submitted  to 
the  pope  for  his  approbation,  and  sent  copies  of  them 
also  to  the  electors  of  Saxony  and  of  Brandenburg,  and 
to  other  evangelical  princes.  But  both  the  pope  and 
the  German  theologiana  refuaed  to  adhere  to  them. 
The  emperor  next  had  them  reviaed  by  two  Dominican 
monka,  who  madę  aevend  alterationa,  and  they  wen 
then  promulgated  aa  an  imperial  constitution,  caUed  the 
'^ Interim,"  wherein  he  dedaied  that  ''it  was  his  iriU 
that  all  his  Catholic  dominions  should,  for  the  futuie,  in- 
violably  obaerve  the  customs,  statutes,  and  ordinanoei 
of  the  univeiaal  Church;  and  that  those  who  had  aep- 
arated  themselves  from  it  should  either  reunit«  thens- 
se]veB  to  it,  or  at  leaat  conform  to  this  constitution;  and 
that  all  should  quietly  expect  the  dedsians  of  the  gen- 
erał coundl ;"  and  it  was  puhłished  in  the  diet  of  Augs- 
burg, May  15, 1648.  To  the  Protestant  dergy  it  grant- 
ed,  for  the  time  being,  the  right  of  the  matrinioaial 
State,  and  to  the  Reformed  łaity  communion  of  both 
kinda  It  was  truły  a  standard  of  faith  put  forth  by  the 
emperor  independent  of  Romę,  as  the  pope  refaaed  to 
sanction  it ;  and  in  the  face  of  the  biUer  complaiots  that 
came  to  him  tłiat  the  power  and  propefty  of  the  Choiteh 
should  be  Inft  in  the  hands  of  its  preaent  poasesBora.  he 
showed  the  pope  that  he  too,  Itke  Henry  Tin,  could 
regulate  the  oonsdenoes  of  his  subjects,  and  preseribe 
their  religious  faith.  The  elector  of  Menta,  qaite  oon- 
trary  to  the  wishes  of  the  other  members  of  the  Diet, 
and  of  the  people  theie  repreaented,  annoonoed  the  ac- 
oeptance  of  the  interim  by  the  atates,  and  it  was  ooose- 
qnently  dedaied  law,  and  printed  in  Łalin  and  in  Gcf^ 


INTERIM 


621 


INTERMEDIATE  STATE 


nan.  fioth  Protestanta  ind  CathoUcs  b^gan,  howerefi 
riolently  to  attack  it ;  the  Romanists  oomplained  of  the 
oonceańona  madę  to  the  Protestanta,  while  the  Protes- 
tant princes  (John  Frederick  of  Saxony,  the  landgrave  ot 
HesK,  the  mazgnve  John  v.  Klłatrin,  the  elector  Wolf- 
gang V.  Zweibrttcken)  dedined  introducing  it  in  their 
8tat«s;  the  oiily  princes  who  submitted  to  it  weie  the 
elector  of  Brandenburg,  the  elector  of  the  Palatinate, 
th€  count  of  Wurtembeig,  and  the  cities  of  Augsburg, 
Ilalłe,  etc  (the  latter  by  oompulaion). 

III.  Thk  Leipzig  Interim. — The  Lutheran  theologi- 
ans  openly  declaied  they  would  not  receive  the  Augsburg 
interim,  aU«ging  that  it  re-established  popery:  some 
chose  lather  to  quit  their  chairs  and  lirings  than  to 
fiubecribe  it,  Cairin  and  seyeral  others  wrote  againat  it. 
On  the  other  aide,  the  emperor  waa  ao  aeyere  against 
those  who  refuaed  to  aocept  it,  that  he  disfranchised  the 
cities  of  Magdebaig  and  Constance  for  their  oppoeition. 
Most  important,  however,  for  the  Protestant  cause,  and 
impoadble  for  Charles  to  pass  unheeded,  was  the  oppo- 
sidon  against  the  Augsburg  interim  by  Maurice  of  Sax- 
ony,  Who  denied  the  right  of  the  elector  of  Mentz  to 
gire  himself  the  approral  to  an  act  that  demanded  the 
coDcurrence  of  the  states  directiy  and  not  indirectly. 
To  fortify  himself  morę  strongly  in  his  position,  Mau- 
rice entered  into  correspondence  with  Melancthon,  and 
caUed  a  coundl  of  state  and  of  prominent  theologians  at 
Leipzig  and  other  cities.  In  the  conference  at  Leipzig 
it  vas  decided,  Sept.2*2, 1548,  that  the  Augsburg  interim 
could  not  be  accepted.  Yet,  for  fear  of  incorring  the 
displeasure  of  the  emperor,  a  compromise  was  effected. 
In  a  series  of  resolutions  which  were  adopted,  they  ad- 
mitted  a  gieat  part  ot  the  Koman  Catholio  ceremoniala, 
and  tacitly  acknowledged  also  the  power  of  the  popes 
and  bishops,  but  yet  well  guarded  (!)  the  creed  of  the 
Reformers.  These  resoKes  of  the  conference  were  pub- 
liahed  ts  the  Leipzig  Interim,  Dec.  22,  1548.  Subse- 
ąuently  it  was  divided  into  a  lesser  and  greater  interim. 
The  fint  waa  baaed  on  resolutions  paased  at  the  confer- 
ence of  Celle,  and  was  published  by  an  edict  of  the  elec- 
tor, and  this  ultimately  became  the  basis  of  the  great^ 
er  Leipsig  Interim,  It  was  prepared  by  Melancthon, 
Kber,  Bugenhagen,  Major,  and  prince  George  of  An- 
halL  It  restored  some  Boman  Catholic  practicea ;  direct- 
ed  that  mass  should  be  celebrated  with  ringing  of  beOs, 
lighted  tapers,  and  a  deoorated  altar,  accompanied  by 
dnging,  and  be  performed  in  Latin  by  priesta  in  canon- 
icals ;  that  the  Horm  canonica  and  pedms  should  be  sung 
accordiog  to  the  custom  of  each  place;  the  old  festiyals 
of  Mary,  etc.,  were  re-esCkbUshed,  and  meat  forbidden  on 
Fridays  and  fast-days,  etc  These  dedsions,  which  were 
promolgated  in  March,  1549,  met  with  much  oppoeition 
in  Sasony,  yet  they  were  strictly  enforoed,  and  snch 
ministerB  as  refused  to  submit  to  the  interim  were  de- 
posed,  as,  for  instance,  Flacins  of  Wittenberg.  The  Ut- 
ter  tben  put  himself  at  the  head  of  the  opposing  party, 
caUed  by  the  partisans  of  the  interim  Adiaphorists.  See 
AniAPiipRic  CoNTROYERSY.  Anothcr  treacherous  ac- 
tion  of  Maurice,  which  secured  his  seryices  anew  to  the 
Reformere,  undid  all  the  work  already  accompUshed  by 
Charles  Y;  ^and  while  Henry  II  was  winning,  at  the 
espense  of  the  empire,  the  delusiye  title  of  oonqueror, 
Charles  found  himself  reduoed  to  the  hard  necessity  of 
Rstoring  all  that  his  crooked  policy  had  for  so  many 
years  been  devoted  to  CKtorting."  In  1552  the  interim 
was  necessarily  reroked,  and,  by  the  transaction  of  Pas- 
san,  August  2, 1552,  fuli  liberty  of  conscience  secured  to 
all  the  Lutheran  states ;  and  Sept.  21, 1555,  at  the  Diet 
of  Augsburg,  was  finally  confirmed  the  right  of  the  states 
and  cities  of  the  Augsburg  Confession  (q.  v.)  <*to  enjoy 
the  piactices  of  their  religion  in  peace."  Compare 
Menśel,  Neue  GeMchichte,  voL  iii ;  Robertson,  Charki  V 
(Harper's  edit.),  bk.  ix,  especially  p.  877  sq. ;  and  see 
^Kcek,  Ueber  d.  Interim  (Leipz.  1727,  8vo) ;  Hirch,  Ueb. 
d.  Interim  (Lpc  1758) ;  Baumgarten,  Geich,  d.  Bel.  Par- 
theien,  p.  1163  sq.;  Schrockh,  KirchmgeteK  s,  d.  Ref.  i, 
^  674  sq^  688, 686  sq. ;  Zeiiachrijlf,  kitt,  iheol.  1868,  p. 


8  Bq. ;  Brit.  and  For.  Evang,  Renew,  1868,  p.  681 ;  Lea, 
Hiti.  o/Sacerdotal  CdSbacyj  p.  432  sq. ;  Hardwick,  R^. 
omuUion  (see  Ind.) ;  Pierer,  Univ.  Lex.  s.  y.    ( J.  H.  W.) 

Intermediate  State,  a  phrase  employed  to  de- 
note  the  state  or  situation  of  disembodied  souls  during 
the  interral  between  death  and  the  resurrection.  There 
haye  been  several  theories  upon  the  subject.  See  Ha- 
des. 

The  condition  of  the  sonl  after  death  cannot  but  be 
a  subject  of  intense  concem  to  eyery  thoughtful  mind. 
Pagan  philosophers  haye  groped  in  the  dark  for  some 
dew  to  guide  their  aspirations  after  immortality,  but 
haye  at  best  attained  only  surmises  and  conjectures, 
Of  all  the  milUons  that  haye  croesed  the  dread  gulf 
which  separates  time  from  eternity,  nonę  haye  eyer  re- 
tumed  to  bring  tidings  of  what  befell  them  the  moment 
after  they  launched  from  the  shores  of  mortality.  Rey- 
elation  alone  haa  cast  a  ray  across  the  mighty  yoid,  and 
its  light  has  gradually  grown  dearer  and  morę  penetra- 
ting,  until  in  the  New  Testament  we  are  no  longer  left 
in  any  measure  to  doubt  whether,  **  if  a  man  die,  he  shall 
liye  again."  We  rest  assured  that  not  only  shall  the 
sonl  suryiye  the  shock  of  diasolution,  but  the  body  also 
shall  eyentually  join  it  in  an  endleas  reunion. 

Still  the  question  recurs,  What  will  be  the  intemal 
state  and  what  the  extemal  drcumstances  of  the  spirit 
during  the  period  between  death  and  the  resurrection  ? 
Respecting  this  little  is  definitely  said  in  the  Scriptures, 
and  it  ia  therefore  left  for  speculation  to  fili  up  the  lack 
of  Information  on  this  interesting  theme,  guided  by 
such  hints  as  are  casnaUy  thrown  out  by  the  sacred 
writers,  and  such  considerations  as  the  ascertained  na- 
turę and  destiny  of  man  aiford. 

I.  The  popular  sentiment  or  belief  of  Christians — ex- 
preesed  rather  in  the  form  of  hope  than  as  a  theory — 
appears  to  be  that  the  righteous  enter  heayen  immedi^ 
atehf  after  they  pass  away  from  this  world.  Snch  pas- 
sages  as  the  Saviour's  declaration  to  the  dying  thief, 
'<  This  day  thou  shalt  be  with  me  in  Paradise,"  and  the 
parable  of  Diyes  and  Lazarus,  are  thought  especially  to 
Bupport  thia  yiew ;  and  hence  belieyers  haye  fearlcaaly 
cast  themselyes  into  the  arms  of  death,  expecting  to 
awake  the  next  moment  in  the  fuU  realities  of  eyerlast* 
ing  glory. 

Now  we  would  not  for  all  the  world  depriye  dying 
saints  of  a  particie  of  the  oonsolation  which  the  Gospel 
is  designed  to  yield,  nor  is  it  any  part  of  our  present 
purpose  to  weaken  andcipations  of  the  futuro  rest  in  the 
boeom  of  any,  howeyer  sanguine  and  impatient.  But 
the  known  tnith  that  a  long— probaUy  immense — ^in- 
teryal  of  time  will  elapse  between  the  decease  of  Chris- 
tiana of  the  present  age— and  certainly  of  past  centuries 
— and  the  reyiyal  of  their  bodiea  at  the  generał  Judg^ 
ment,  ia  sufficient  to  proye  that  they  do  not  instantly 
paaa  from  the  Church  militant  to  the  New  Jerusalem 
aboye.  Let  us  calmly  and  logically  consider  what  may 
be  ascertained  as  to  the  experience  and  surroundings  of 
the  soul  duiing  this  intermediate  period.    See  Immob- 

TALITT. 

The  topie  calls  for  a  yolnme  rather  than  an  essay, 
and,  as  we  must  be  brief,  we  make  but  two  other  pre- 
liminaiy  remarks.  The  flrst  is  that  we  haye  not  space 
here  to  discuss  the  aboye  and  kindred  passages  of  the 
New  Testament;  but  we  direct  the  reader  to  professed 
commentaries  for  their  expo8itlon,  and  the  solution  of 
their  bearing  upon  the  point  in  ąuestion,  contenting 
ourselyes  here  with  simply  obsenring  that  they^aro  figu- 
ratiye  in  their  phraseology,  and  that,  whateyer  they 
may  mean,  they  cannot  be  intended  to  contradict  the 
fact  of  a  real  space  between  death  and  the  resurrection. 
Our  other  prefntory  remark  is,  that  as  this  is  legitimate- 
ly  debatable  ground,  no  essential  item  of  creed  or  or- 
thodoxy  being  inyolyed  in  it,  we  ought  not  to  incur  any 
odium  theologicum  of  unsoundness  in  the  faith  should 
our  discussion  lead  to  new  and  surprising  condusions. 
This  last  remark  is  especially  perttnent  in  yiew  of  the 
fact  that  eyen  orthodox  Christians  in  all  ucea  haye  en* 


INTERMEDIATE  STATE 


622 


INTERMEDIATE  STATE 


tertained  very  dUferent  view8  on  this  sabject,  as  will 
appear  from  the  following  enumenition  of  opinions. 

II.  The  theory  of  a  state  of  deep,  insenńbility,  or  nn- 
oonBdouBiiess.  It  waa  tanght  as  eańy  as  A.D.  248  by 
the  Arabian  Thnetopsychites,  whom  Origen  oombated. 
It  was  thonght  to  be  held  by  pope  John  XXII,  and  was 
disapproyed  by  the  Unirersity  of  Paris  and  pope  Bene- 
dict  XII.  It  was  reviyed  by  the  Swiss  Anabaptists  un- 
der  the  name  of  Psyckopcmn^ckia,  and  ¥ras  opposed  by 
Calvin.  And  in  later  tdmes  it  has  been  started  anew, 
in  a  form  morę  or  less  distinct,  by  John  Heyn,  Wetstein, 
Sulzer,  Reinhaid,  and  Whately,  and  by  a  new  sect  in 
Iowa.  The  defenders  of  a  state  of  unconsciousnees  pro- 
duoe  soch  texts  as  Psa.  xvii,  15;  1  Theaa.  iv,  14.  In 
oppońtion  are  cited  2  Cor.  v,  8 ;  Phil.  i,  28 ;  Matt.  xvii, 
8;  Lukę  xvi,  28 ;  xxiii,  48 ;  Rev.  vi,  9. 

III.  The  theory  of  Purgaiory.  That  Christ  preached 
to  the  souls  detained  in  Hades,  as  the  patriarcha  or  oth- 
ers,  was  held  in  the  2d  and  8d  centories  by  Justin,  Iie- 
MBus,  Tertullian,  and  Ciem.  Alexandrinas.  It  was  sap- 
posed  to  be  warrantcd  by  1  Pet  iii,  19 ;  Acts  ii,  27 ; 
Rom.  X,  7;  Eph.  iv,  9;  Matt  xii,  81.  The  idea  of  a 
purgatorial  iire  is  moie  or  less  obscurely  hinted  in  the 
writings  of  Ciem.  Alexandrinus,  Origen,  and  Angustine. 
But  the  complete  scheme  owes  its  patemity  to  Gregoiy 
the  Great,  who  propounded  it  as  an  article  of  fidth, 
along  with  intercessoiy  raasses  for  the  dead;  finding  a 
sapposed  warrant  in  2  Maoc  xii,  46.  In  oppoeition  to 
the  notion  of  a  Purgatoiy,  it  may  be  said  that  it  is  a 
fiction  boTTOwed  from  paganism ;  that  it  \a  repagnant  to 
reason  and  coramon  sense;  that  it  is  contradictory  to 
expres8  assertions  of  Scripture  (Heb.  xii,  23 ;  Rev.  xiv, 
13;  xxii,  11) ;  that  It  is  sabversive  of  the  cardinal  doc- 
trines  of  the  Gospel,  the  atonement  and  justiflcatiou  by 
faith  in  Christ;  that  it  robs  the  Christian  of  evangel- 
ical  peace  and  consolation ;  and  that  it  was  unknown  to 
the  primitive  Church.  £ven  Augustine,  when  he  pray- 
ed  for  the  increase  of  his  deceased  mothei^s  happinesa, 
denied  the  existence  of  any  middle  plaoe.  (So  also  Ciem. 
Rom.  Ep.  2  ad  Cor,)  The  artide,  **he  descended  into 
heli,'*  was  not  admitted  into  the  Apostles*Creed,nor  thoee 
of  the  £a8t,  until  the  5th  century.  It  appeared  first  in 
the  Creed  of  Ariminam,  A.D.858,  and  in  that  of  Aqnileia, 
A.D.  381  (Rufinus,  De  Symbol),  See  Wilson,  lUuttra- 
Horn  from  Aposł,  Fathers,  p.  108.     Comp.  Pcjboatory. 

lY.  The  scheme  of  a  middle  or  intermediate  place,  or 
place  of  rest  This  is  a  different  idea  from  that  of  an 
intermediate  state,  meaning  by  the  latter  only  an  infe- 
rior  degree  of  happiness  apart  from  the  yet  unraised 
body.  It  is  affiimed  that  judgment  is  not  pronounced 
tiU  the  last  day ;  but  this  is  denied,  a  particular  judg- 
ment passing  on  each  individual,  and  his  place  being 
assigned  him,  upon  his  death  (Acts  i,  25 ;  Lakę  xvi,  28 ; 
xxiii,  48 ;  2  Cor.  xii,  2, 4).  It  is  said  that  no  one  is  per- 
fectly  holy  when  he  dies,  bat  only  such  can  enter  heav- 
en.  In  reply,  it  is  contended,  as  in  the  Westminster 
Catechism,  that  therc  is  a  distinction  madę  between  be- 
ing perfectly  holy  and  perfectly  blessed,  the  fiist  taking 
place  at  death,  the  latter  only  at  the  resurrection  (Heb. 
xii,  28).  It  is  alleged  that  the  Scriptores  favor  the  no- 
tion (John  iii,  13;  xx,  17;  Acts  iii,  84;  Heb.  xi,  89); 
to  which  it  is  replied  that  these  texts  are  dubioua,  and 
nentralized  by  others  positive  and  uneqaivocal  (Isa.  lvii, 
12 ;  2  Kings  ii,  11 ;  Acts  vii,  59 ;  Rev.  xiv,  2-5 ;  vii,  14). 
We  proceed  to  render  this  theory  morę  definite  by  pro- 
posing  our  own  view  of  the  subject 

1.  Li  the  first  place,  we  lay  it  down  as  an  axiom  that 
a  disembodied  or  pure  fipirU  ta  neceMorily/reedJrom  aU 
the  reloHons  o/space  of  which  we  are  terrestrially  cog- 
nizant  The  extemal  senses  are  locked  up,  becaase 
their  physical  organs  are  abeent  Such  a  spirit  may, 
for  aught  we  know — and  perhaps  this  position  is  the 
morę  probable — be  open  to  interooarse  with  other  parę 
spirits;  doubdess  it  is  at  least  accessible  to  the  divine 
Spirit,  from  whose  influence  nothing  materiał  or  imma- 
terial  can  be  veiled;  but  we  are  tmable  to  conceive  of 
any  interoourse  or  connection  between  ic  and  the  prea- 


ent  lelations  of  thinga.  There  is  abaolutely  no  median 
of  communication,  as  far  aa  we  are  aware.  Death  «¥• 
en  the  link  between  the  soul  and  the  body,  and  Umr- 
fore  between  the  soul  and  all  bodies.  What  aew  ca- 
pacities  may  by  that  act  be  developed  witJkin  the  sool, 
what  new  relations  created  with  other  immateiial  be- 
ings,  or  what  realization  of  new  oonoeptiona,  we  of  coone 
know  not;  and,  indeed,  we  have  no  reason  to  aiippose 
any  such ;  but  if  we  wooM  not  ntfeerly  oonfound  min^ 
and  matter,  or  unoonsdously  dothe  the  departed  tpińta 
with  some  ethereal  form  of  body,  we  are  bŃoond  to  on- 
clude,  from  the  total  diverBity  and  even  oontoriety  of 
their  properties  and  attributes,  that  a  dead  man  is  resUy 
dead  to  eveiything  pertaining  to  time  and  sense. 

This  cuts  ap,  root  and  bcanch,  all  thoee  impreaBiops— 
some  have  even  gone  so  fiur  as  to  daim  them  as  sden- 
tific  experience--of  interoommonication  between  liiing 
persona  and  the  spirits  of  their  deceased  friends..  The 
oommon  sense  of  enlightened  Christianity  has  long 
sińce  stamped  all  such  stories  with  the  just  saspidon  crif 
superstitious  imagination.  Severe  zeasoning  oompek  os 
to  set  them  down  as  halloeination  or  impostore.  Those 
who  have  indolged  them8dves  in  these  fandea  have  al- 
ways  diverged  towards  insanity  or  materialism. 

A  disembodied  spirit,  therefore,  prior  to  the  restora- 
tion  of  its  physical  organism,  is  inc^^able  of  any  of  the 
materiał  Joys  which  imagination  is  wont  to  aasodste 
with  the  fuli  idea  of  the  heavenly  atate.  We  most 
carefully  exdttde  from  its  experience  doiing  that  inter- 
val  everything  that  grows  oat  of  our  mundane  notioos 
and  present  extemaUtiea.  That  these,  and  mom  than 
these,  will  be  restored  on  the  consmnmation  of  its  blia 
in  the  new  heavens  and  the  new  earth  of  its  finał  abodą 
we  are  abundantly  assored  by  the  symbola  and  teadn 
ings  of  the  New  Testament ;  but  the  soal  most  wait  for 
these  enjoyments  until  itsbodily  oounterpart  ahaOH  have 
been  raised,  spiritualized,  perfected,  and  immortalized. 

We  may  go  further  than  this,  and  dedare  that  nooe 
of  the  now  known  and  verbaUy  defined  relations  in  point 
of  locaUon  are  predicable  of  the  departed  soul;  in  oibcr 
words,  it  is  not  in  any  particalar  assignable  j^aee  whik 
in  that  state.  The  instant  it  quits  the  body  it  posseases 
no  local  habitation.  Its  position  cannot  be  detemuDcd 
as  to  space,  for  it  has  no  metes  or  boondariea,  no  point 
of  contact  with  visible  objects.  It  can  neitber  be  said 
to  be  somewhere  nor  nowhere,  nor  yet  everywhere.  It 
simply  exiBts — ^like  God,  but  not  infinite.  In  short,  if 
heaven  be  a  łocality  (and  the  existence  in  some  part 
of  the  universe  of  the  Redeemer'8  actual  body,  as  wdl  as 
those  of  Enoch  and  Elijah,  bóides  the  concurrent  fi^ 
ures  of  the  whole  Bibie,  lead  os  to  condude  that  it  is 
such  as  well  as  a  state),  then  certainly  the  disembodied 
spirit  cannot  with  propriety  be  spoken  of  as  being  tkert 
any  morę  than  dsewhere.  This,  we  admit,  is  an  ab- 
straction;  but  we  are  speaking  of  a  merę  abetractioD; 
for  what  can  be  morę  abstiact—more  really  inconoeiva- 
ble  acoording  to  our  earthly  notions — than  a  sool  with- 
out  a  body. 

Bat  let  it  not  be  imagined  that  the  sool  has  thos  lost 
any  of  its  eeaence  or  inherent  powers.  It  remains  in  afl 
these  absolute  and  intact,  a  ventable  entity,  as  tznlf 
such  as  any  sfńritual  being,  or  as  when  unired  to  the 
body,  or  indeed  as  the  body  itsdf ;  but  it  is  shnt  within 
itself,  and  circumscribed  by  the  limits  of  its  own  natme. 
All  that  we  are  now  demanding  is  that  it  shall  no  kmgc' 
be  viewed,  and  treated,  and  spoken  of  under  the  ooodi- 
tions,  and  associations,  and  terms  of  an  abeent  oorporei- 
ty.  These  have  no  meaning  when  applied  to  it,  ezoept 
as  bdonging  to  the  past 

2.  In  the  seoond  place,  it  follows  that  tke  toml  c<m 
hatfe  no  cogmzance  o/thepa$8affe  oftime  while  thos  dis- 
embodied. Time  cónsists  of  the  seqaence  of  evcnta, 
and  all  means  of  knowing  the  tianspiratian  of  theae  aie 
exdttded  by  the  very  supposition  of  the  present  case. 
Time,  moreover,  is  measoied  by  the  altematioos  of  nat- 
ural  objects,  and  these  are  also  abnegat«d  hereL  It  is 
evidently  impoesible  for  the  isolated  spirit  to  be  at  •& 


INTERMEDIATE  STATE 


623 


INTERNUNTIUS 


twtre  of  Łhe  flight  of  hoan,  seasoiiBy  or  ages.  To  it  **tL 
tboofland  vean  are  aa  one  da3r"->both  alike  unapprecia- 
bte.  The  oii]y  change  it  conld  experienoe  would  be  the 
snoceańon  of  its  own  ideas,  and  tbese— if  comparaUe 
for  soch  a  parpoae  with  our  present  aBsociations  of 
thonghtf  which  are  Ilke  choida  played  upon  by  eyery 
paasing  breeze  of  ciicomstance  and  toach  of  physical 
oocidition — ^fnrnish  no  fixed  standard  or  definite  mark  to 
our  own  conscioasness.  How  seldom  do  we  think  of 
the  lapae  of  time  during  our  dreama,  which  afTord  the 
neareit  parallel  to  the  Btate  we  are  conaideiing;  and 
how  wide  of  a  tnie  eatimate  are  we  when  we  chance  to 
ocMopate  the  moments  or  imagmary  houra  in  our  aom- 
nolency.  Some  notable  inatances  aie  on  record  of  the 
egregiims  miacalcnlation  of  time  by  dreaming  persona, 
showing  that  in  aleep  they  have  no  accnrate  means  of 
determimng  it,  but  that  they  protract  or  abbreyiate  it 
to  suit  the  hamoT  of  the  dream.  Much  morę  would 
thit  be  true  with  the  disembodied  soul,  which  haa  even 
less  opportunity  or  occasion  to  review  Its  oourse  of 
thonghts  for  such  a  purpoae,  or,  indeed,  to  take  any  notę 
of  their  rapidity  or  tediousneas  of  succeaaion.  We  con- 
dnde,  therefoie,  that  the  mtermediaie  ttate  wiU  pass  to 
aB  Us  suhfecłs  as  an  instanf,  and  that  nonę  will  be  aware 
of  the  length  of  the  intenraL 

Thia  18  in  acoordance  with  a  remarkable  passage  of 
Sciiptmre— about  the  oiily  one  where  the  subject  is  di- 
lectly  and  literally  touched  upon — and  this  but  inciden> 
taUy,  in  anawer  apparently  to  a  query  that  had  been 
addreaaed  to  an  apoatle  on  aocount  of  certain  curioua  or 
captioaa  persons;  for  the  Scripturea  are  very  chary  of 
information  on  such  abetruae  pointa.  Paul  tells  ua  ex- 
presaly  (1  Theas.  iv,  15, 17),  "We  [or  those]  which  are 
alire  and  remain  unto  the  [finał]  coming  of  the  Lord 
siali  not  precede  [*'prevent"]  them  which  are  aaleep. 
.  .  .  We  [or  those]  which  are  alive  and  remain  shall  be 
canght  up  together  with  them  in  the  douds."  He  is 
speaking,  it  is  tnie,  of  the  lesurrection  of  the  body,  and 
it  is  with  leference  to  this  that  he  says  one  class  of  saints 
shall  not  antidpate  another  in  that  reward ;  but  his  lan- 
guage  impłies  that  nonę  shall  have  any  advantage  in 
point  of  time  over  the  rest,  and  this  would  not  be  true 
if  some  muat  pass  long  oenturies  of  waiting,  while  oth- 
eiB  are  translated  suddenly  from  earth  to  heaven.  No ; 
it  will  all  be  eqnalized :  Noah,  who  died  thousands  of 
years  ago,  shall  not  seem  to  himsełf  to  pass  any  longer 
period  of  expectation  in  the  grave,  or,  rather,  in  the 
apirit  world,  than  the  last  saint  that  is  interred  just  as 
Gabriel*8  trump  shall  reawaken  his  undecayed  oorpee, 
or  than  thoee  who  then  shall  be  living  on  the  globe. 
Thia  theory  meets  and  harmonizea  all  their  cases,  and 
Tindicates  the  divine  impartiality. 

Some  Gonfirmation  of  this  view  may  likewise  be  de- 
rived  from  the  simultaneonsness  of  the  generał  jndg- 
mcnt  We  sarely  are  not  to  suppose  that  any  will  re- 
main cydea  of  agea  in  the  other  world,  whether  happy 
or  miserable,  without  having  their  destiny  aa  yet  fixed, 
and  their  flnal  doom  awarded.  To  each  individual's 
ootudousneas,  doubtless,  will  be  deflnitely  aseigned,  at 
the  instant  he  is  ushered  into  the  presence  of  his  Maker, 
the  awazds  of  hia  inrerocable  fate,  and  this  knowledge 
win  form  the  baais  of  his  joy  or  despair.  The  oniy  ob- 
jeet  after  this  of  a  generał  gatheiing  would  be  to  make 
known  to  the  uniyerse  a  sentence  that  has  already  been 
anddpated  to  the  pardea  chietly  interested.  The  Scrip- 
ttnl  representations  of  the  "last  grand  assize*'  are  eri- 
dently  scenie  in  their  character,  that  is,  pictiues  of  what 
to  those  concemed  shall  seem  to  transpire  substantial- 
I7,  bat  not  necessarily  literally  thns.  See  Judomkmt, 
Gesckrau  Be  that  as  it  may,  on  our  tbeory  alone  a 
ioiivenal  assemblage  would  be  morę  poesible  and  sig- 
nifieant:  to  each  hnman  bdng^the  hour  of  death  is 
practtcally,  although  not  actually,  the  day  of  judgment, 
for  the  two  erents  are  separated  only  by  an  inappreda- 
Ue  bterval;  and  as  the  same  is  true  of  all  his  fellows, 
and  as  their  seTcral  days  of  doom  are  also  separated  by 
a  inappredable  interral,  they  are  all  reduced— to  er- 


ery  man*s  own  apprehensionr— to  the  same  piane  of  time, 
and  conseąuently  may  justly— even  with  reference  to 
indiyiduals— be  depicted  as  j  udged  together.  The  hour 
of  Chri8t's  three  predicted  oomings— in  yengeance  on 
the  Jews— in  the  artide  of  death— in  the  finał  scene^ 
thuB,  although  really  distinct  events,  become  identical 
by  morę  than  a  figurę  of  speech,  and  lie  is  justified  in 
alluding  to  them  all  in  the  same  breath. 

8.  In  the  third  and  laat  place,  howeyer,  as  above  inti- 
mated,  the  wtermediate  staie  wUŁ  not  he  a  period  ofta^ 

isdoumess,  This  might  be  hastiły  infenred  Irom  the 
inaulation  of  the  apirit  from  all  sources  of  extemal 
knowledge  and  impreasion.  But  it  has  still  left  to  it 
the  whole  inner  world  of  thought  and  feełing :  memory 
is  busy  with  the  past,  and  hope  is  actiye  with  anticipa- 
tiona  of  the  futuro;  the  direct  oomforts  of  the  Holy 
Spirit  also  are  by  no  means  denied  during  this  expeo- 
tant  period,  and  nonę  can  tell  how  greatly  these  and  all 
the  foregoing  emotiona  may  be  intensified  by  the  rapt 
State  of  the  disembodied  souL  Example8  Uke  those  of 
Paul  "caught  up  into  the  third  heayens,"  of  Tennent 
in  a  prołonged  fit  of  catalepsy,  and  of  others  in  simUar 
OKtraordinary  states  of  epiritual  elevation,  might  be 
dted  to  abow  how  far  such  an  abreption  of  bodily  func* 
tions  is  calcułated  to  enhance  the  perceptions  of  celestial 
yerities ;  but  these,  it  must  be  borne  in  mind,  were  real* 
ly  experience8  in  the  flesh— although  Paul  seems  doubt- 
ful  whether  he  waa  not  actually  "  out  of  the  body,*'  and 
at  least  intimates  that  such  mental  exaltation  would  be 
poasible  if  he  were  released  from  earth ;  they  are,  there* 
fore,  not  strictly  in  point  as  proof.  On  the  other  hand, 
generał  obeeryation  and  expenment  show  that  all  tem- 
poiary  cdlapee  or  extinction  of  the  bodily  functions — aa 
by  accident  or  disease  affecting*the  brain  or  nenrous 
centres — ia  attended  by  suppression  in  the  same  degree 
of  the  mental  faculties;  but  these,  again,  are  symptoma 
occurring  under  the  joint  relations  of  soul  and  body«  and 
therefore  no  surę  indications  of  what  might  take  place 
in  a  disembodied  state.  Accordingly,  we  fali  back  upon 
the  position  moet  agreeable  to  our  uative  aspirationa, 
and  moat  conformabłe,  as  we  think,  to  the  teachings  of 
reydation,  that  the  soul,  immediately  ailter  paseing  out 
of  the  body,  enters  upon  a  condition  of  consdous  happi- 
ness  or  misery,  according  to  its  preyious  fitness  and  hab- 
ita.  In  a  word,  we  see  no  reason  why,  when  set  frea 
from  connection  with  the  body,  the  spirit  shoułd  do  oth- 
erwise  than  continue  to  excrcise  the  emotions  and  in- 
telłecŁions  which  had  already  become  customary  with 
it.  Until  its  reunion  with  the  body,  howeyer— a  space, 
as  we  haye  seen,  of  practicałły  no  account  to  itsełf,  at 
least  in  point  of  duration— it  can  receiye  no  new  €xpe- 
rienoe,  and  be  subject  to  no  exteniał  influenccs,  unlesa 
they  be  puiely  spirituaL     See  UsAyEN. 

See  Hagenbach,  Hist,  ofDodrines;  Bp.  Law,  Theory 
ofRdigion;  Kees,  Cydopadia,  art.  Słeep  of  Soul;  Tay- 
lor, PAymca/  Theory  0/ another  Li/e;  Tucker,  Light  of 
Naturę;  BtonghtLOi, Natural  Theoloyy ;  Stuaity Essays ; 
Abp.Whately,  On  Futurę  State;  Les  fforizons  Celestes; 
Barrow,  Pearson,  Buli,  Ort  Apostles^  Creed;  Bp.White, 
Lectures  on  the  Cateckism;  Archibald  Campbell,  View 
o/the  Middk  State;  Watts,  World  to  Come;  Watson, 
Theoloy.  Insłitutes;  Hall,  Purgatory  Exarmned;  M*Cul- 
lough.  On  the  Infermediate  State;  Meth.  Quart.  Reriew, 
1852,  p.  240 ;  Baylie,  The  Inłermediate  State  o/the  Bless- 
ed  (Lond.  1864) ;  Shimeall,  The  Unseen  World  (N.York, 
1868) ;  FreewiU  Baptist  Ouarterly,  April,  1861 ;  Presb. 
Ouart,  Ret,  October,  1861 ;  Christian  Rev,  April,  1862; 
Boston  JRev,  Jan.  1864. 

Intennent.    See  Bcriau 

Interna]  Dignitarles  was  the  name  by  which, 
in  the  English  Church,  under  the  "  ołd  foundation,"  the 
dean,  precentor,  chancełłor,  and  treasurer  of  cathedrals 
were  known.     See  Wałcott,  Sac  A  rchteoL  p.  831. 

Intemuntltis  or  Internnncio,  an  enyoy  of  the 
pope,  sent  only  to  smali  states  and  republics,  while  the 
reał  nundo  is  the  representatiye  of  the  papai  see  at  the 
courta  of  emperora  and  kingą. 


INTERPRETATION 


624 


INTERPRETATION 


Interpretatlon,  Biblicał,  or  the  science  of  m- 
cred  Ilermeneutictf  as  it  is  morę  technically  called.  In 
treating  thls,  we  shall  largely  avail  ounelyes  of  the  artl- 
de  on  the  subject  in  Kitto'8  Cydopadia.  For  practical 
rules  of  interpretation,  aee  Hkrmekeutics. 

1.  Defimtum  and  Distinctunu, — 1.  There  is  a  veiy  an- 
cient  and  wide-śpread  belief  that  the  knowledge  of  di- 
>'ine  things  in  generał,  and  of  the  divine  will  in  partic- 
ular,  Is  by  no  means  a  common  property  of  the  whole 
human  race,  but  only  a  prerogative  of  a  few  specially- 
gifted  and  pririleged  indiriduals.  It  has  been  oonsid- 
ered  that  thia  higher  degree  of  knowledge  has  its  eouroe 
in  light  and  instruction  proceeding  directly  from  God, 
and  that  it  can  be  imparted  to  others  by  oommunicating 
to  them  a  key  to  the  aigns  of  the  divine  will.  Since, 
however,  persona  who  in  this  manner  have  been  indi- 
rectly  taught,  are  initiated  into  diyine  secrets,  and  eon- 
oeąuenrly  appear  as  the  confidanta  of  Deity,  they  alao 
eiijoy,  although  instracted  only  through  the  mediom  of 
otliers,  a  morę  intimate  commonion  with  God,  a  morę 
distinct  perception  of  his  thooghts,  and  conaeguently  a 
mediate  consciousneas  of  Delty  itaelf.  It  therefore  fol- 
iowa that  persona  thua  either  immediately  or  meduitely 
iuatnicted  are  auppoaed  to  be  capable,  by  means  of  their 
divine  illumination  and  their  knowledge  of  the  signs  of 
the  dirine  will,  to  impart  to  mankind  the  ardently-de- 
sired  knowledge  of  divine  things  and  of  the  will  of  De- 
lty. They  are  conaidered  to  be  interpretera  or  explain- 
ers  of  the  aigna  of  the  divine  will,  and,  conseąnendy,  to 
be  mediatora  between  God  and  man.  Dlvine  illumina- 
tion, and  a  commonicable  knowledge  of  the  signs  and 
6xpres8ions  of  the  divine  will,  are  thus  suppoaed  to  be 
combined  in  one  and  the  same  person.    Sm  Reyeła- 

TION. 

2.  The  above  generał  idea  is  the  basis  of  the  Hebrew 
l^'^^}fProphet.  llie  prophet  is  a  diTinely-inspired  seer, 
and,  as  such,  he  ia  an  interpreter  and  preacher  of  the 
diyine  wilL  He  may  either  be  directly  called  by  God, 
or  haye  been  prepared  for  hia  ofiice  in  the  achoola  of  the 
prophets  (comp.  Knobel,  Der  Prophetismus  der  Hebraer 
wlUtandig  dargesttUt.  BresL  1837,  i,  102  8q. ;  ii,  45  są.). 
SeeSEER. 

Howeyer,  the  being  filled  with  the  Holy  Ghost  was 
the  most  prominent  feature  in  the  Hebrew  idea  of  a 
prophet.  Thia  is  eyen  implied  in  the  usual  appeUation 
K*^33,  which  means  a  person  in  the  st-ate  of  diyine  in- 
spiration  (not  a  predicter  of  futurę  eyents).  Prophet- 
ism  ceased  altogether  aa  aoon  aa  Jehoyah,  aocording  to 
the  popular  opinion,  ceaaed  to  communicate  his  Spirit, 
See  Prophet. 

8.  The  Hebrew  notion  of  a  K*^!13  appears  among  the 
Grecks  to  have  been  split  into  its  two  constituent  parts 
of  fiavTiCt  from  fŁaivt<r9aŁ,  to  rave  (Plato,  PhadnUj  § 
48,  ed.  Steph.  p.  244,  a.  b.),  and  of  ilnynrńc,  from  Utf- 
ytioBaif  to  erpouncL  Howeyer,  the  ideas  of  futynę  «nd 
of  IKriytirriC  could  be  combined  in  the  same  person. 
Compare  Boissonnade,  Anecdota  GnecOj  i,  96,  Adfivuv 
iCifyiyr^C,  /iavnc  7<ip  r/v  Kai  XP1^t^^i  *{if7«łro  (com- 
pare Scholia  in  Aristophanes,  Nuba,  836),  and  Arrian, 
JKpiciettUf  ii,  7.Tuv  ixdvTiv  tóv  iKijyoitfUPOP rd  atifuia ; 
liato.  De  LegibuSf  ix,  p.871,  c,  M<r'  iĘriyririup  Kai  fidy- 
Tnav ;  Euripides,  Phaońssaf  y.  1018,  'O  fidmę  i^iyy^aa- 
TOf  and  Iphiffcnia  in  AulidCf  L  529.  Plutarch  (Viia 
Numay  cap.  xi)  plaoes  iKriynrńc  and  irpo^riTiic  together ; 
so  also  does  Dionysios  Halicamassensis,  ii,  73.  The  first 
two  of  these  example8  proye  that  i^riytirai  were,  ao- 
cording to  the  Greeka,  persons  who  possessed  the  gili 
of  diacoycring  the  will  of  the  Deity  from  certain  ap- 
pearanccs  and  x>f  interpreting  signs.  JuL  Pollux*  (yiii, 
124)  says,  'EĘrf/tirai  Sk  Uakouyro  ot  rd  irtpi  twv  Sio- 
<rt/u(u*v  Kai  rd  ro>v  oAAwy  itpwv  iiBdoKowtc*  Har- 
pocration  say?,  and  Suidas  repeats  after  him,  'EĘtiytiTtię, 
ó  ŁĘriyoiffiiroc  tu  upd.  Comp.  Becker,  A  necdota  Grce- 
coj  i,  185/£^f7yot;i/rat  ot  »ju9retj>ot.  Creuzer  defines  the 
Ł^fiyfiraiy  in  his  Symbolik  imd  Mytholoffie  der  alten 
VóUoer,  i,  15,  aa  "  persons  whoee  high  yocation  it  was  to 


bring  laymen  into  harmony  with  diyine  thinga.  The« 
^^fiyiyrat  moyed  in  a  religioiia  sphere  (oompare  HeiQd.i, 
78,  and  Xenophon,  Cyropetdia,  yiii,  8, 11).  £y€n  the 
Delphic  Apollo,  replying  to  those  who  sought  hia  <n» 
cles,  is  called  by  FUto  iĘąrrhQ  (Po^'  iv,  448,  b.). 
Platarch  mentiona,  in  Vita  Them,  hatwy  mai  itpmit  U- 
riytfrai ;  oompare  also  the  aboye-ąuoted  pasaage  of  Dio- 
nysiiis  HalicamaaMDsis,  and  especially  Ruhnken  (ad 
rtimmcm  i^esioM,  ed.  Liigd.  Bat.  1789,  p.  1^  Tbe 

Scholiast  on  Sophodes  {Ajaz,  820)  has  iĘirffiimę  »sri 
rwv  0cta»v,  and  the  Scholiast  on  Electia  (426)  has  the 
definltion  lViyn^c  iiaed^tfmc  Oiiwu.  It  is  in  ooimee- 
tion  with  thia  original  sigi^cation  of  the  woid  ^{9711- 
TTię  that  the  expounder8  of  the  law  are  styled  k^^yiyrat ; 
because  the  ancient  law  was  deriyed  from  the  gods^  and 
the  law-language  had  beoome  unintelligible  to  the  mol- 
titude.  (Compare  Lysias,  yi,  10 ;  Diodonis  Siculua,  xiii, 
85;  Ruhnken,  as  quoted  aboye;  the  annotators  00  Foi- 
lux  and  Harpocration ;  and  K.  Fr.  Hermann,  LeMmek 
der  Grieckitekem  StaaU-AUerthumer,  Marboig,  1886,  § 
104,  notę  4).  In  Athensaus  and  Plutarch  there  are  men* 
tioned  books  under  the  title  ^i^yiTrcita,  which  oontained 
introductions  to  the  right  undentanding  of  sacred  aign^ 
(Compare  Y alesiiu,  ad  HarpocraHoRtm  Lezietm^  lipais, 
1824,  u,  462.) 

4.  like  the  Greeks,  the  Romans  also  distingaiaheil 
between  vatet  and  intórpret  (Cicero,  Fragm, ;  Hoitens.) : 
<*Siye  yates  siye  in  sacris  initiisąue  tradendia  diyins 
mentia  interpretes."  Senrius  (ad  Yirgiiii  jEn,  ii,  359) 
quotes  a  passage  from  Cicero  to  this  effect:  ^ The  sd- 
ence  of  diyination  is  twofdld ;  it  is  either  a  sacred  lay- 
ing,  as  in  prophets,  or  an  art,  as  in  soothsayera,  who  le- 
gard  the  intestines  of  sacriiSoes,  or  lightninga,  or  the 
flight  of  birds."  The  anupice»,/u^rilif/ulffmrtttoret, 
and  auguret  belong  to  the  idea  of  tbe  interpreM  deanm. 
Comp.  Cicero,  Pro  domo  nto,  c.41 :  **  I  haye  been  tangfat 
thus,  that  in  undertaking  new  religious  performanoes 
the  chief  thing  seems  to  be  the  interpretation  of  tbe 
will  of  the  immortal  gods.**  Cicero  {De  Dińnatiomt,  i, 
41)  says:  " The  Hetrusci  explain  the  meaning  of  aU  le- 
markable  foreboding  signs  and  portents."  Henoe^in 
Cicero  {De  Legibus,  ii,  27),  the  ezpreaaion  "  intcąireieB 
religionom." 

An  example  of  this  distinction,  osnal  likewiae  among 
the  Greeks,  is  foiind  in  1  Cor.  xii,  4,80.  The  Cocin- 
thians  fiUed  with  the  Holy  Ghost  were  yKtltairatc  Xa- 
\ovvrtc,  tpeaking  m  tongitea,  oonseąnently  they  weie  in 
the  State  of  a  fidwŁc ;  bat  freąaently  they  did  not  cod- 
prehend  the  fuU  impfisrt  of  their  own  inspiratioo,  and 
did  not  understand  how  to  interpret  it  because  they  had 
not  the  ipfjuiytia  ykucowp,  interpretaiion  of  Umgiaa: 
oonsequently  they  were  not  U^yiyrai. 

The  Romans  obtained  the  imterprHaHo  fran  tbe 
Etruscans  (acero,  De  Dimnatione^  i,  2,  and  Ottfried 
Muller,  Die  EtruAer,  ii,  8  sq.);  but  the  aboye  distinc- 
tion was  the  canse  that  the  itUerpretaiio  degenented 
into  a  common  art,  which  was  exercised  without  inspi- 
ratioo,  like  a  oontemptible  soothsaying,  the  rolea  of 
which  were  contained  in  writings.  Cicero  {De  Di9imar- 
łionej  i,  2)  says:  " Supposing  that  diyination  by  laring 
was  especially  contained  in  the  Sibylline  %'eneB,  they 
appointed  ten  public  interpreters  of  the  same." 

The  ideas  of  uUerpret  and  of  inierprelatio  wera  not 
conflned  among  the  Romans  to  sacred  snbjects,  wfaicfa, 
as  we  haye  seen,  was  the  case  among  the  Greeks  with 
the  corresponding  Greek  tenns.  The  words  imierpree 
and  iiUerprelaiio  were  not  only,  as  among  the  Greeka, 
applied  to  the  explanation  of  Uie  laws,  but  also,  in  gen- 
erał, to  the  ezplanation  of  whateyer  was  obscnre,  and 
eyen  to  a  merę  interyention  in  tbe  aettlement  of  aflhin; 
for  instance,  we  find  in  liyy  (xzi,  12)  pode  wterpree, 
denoting  Alorcas,  by  whoee  instmmentdlity  peaoe  waa 
offered.  At  an  ei^er  period  interpreim  meant  ooly 
those  persons  by  means  of  whom  affiurs  between  God 
and  man  were  settled  (comp^  Yiigilt  jEneid,  z,  175^  and 
Seryius  on  this  passage).  The  words  iitlerpretet  and 
oot^eetoret  became  conyeiti&le  tenns;  ''for  which  re*- 


INTERPRETATION 


625 


INTERPRETATION 


son  the  interpretefs  of  dreams  and  omens  are  called  alflo 
amjtcturen^  (OuintiL  InsHt,  iii,  6). 

From  what  we  haye  stated,  it  foliowe  that  iĘtfytfmc 
and  wŁerpr^aHo  were  oiiginally  temiB  conflned  to  the 
unfoldiiig  of  Bopematural  sabjecta,  alŁbongh  in  Latin,  at 
an  eaily  period,  theae  tenna  were  also  applied  t»  profane 
mittere. 

5.  The  ChiistianB  alao  eaily  felt  the  want  of  an  inter- 
preution  of  their  aacred  writings,  which  they  deemed 
to  be  of  dińne  origin ;  conseąuently  they  wanted  inter- 
preters  and  instniction  by  the  aid  of  which  the  tnie 
senaeof  the  aacred  Scriptuiesmight  be  discoTered.  The 
right  onderstanding  of  the  naturę  and  wili  of  God  seem- 
ed,  among  the  Christiana,  aa  well  as  at  an  early  period 
among  the  heathen,  to  depend  upon  a  right  understand- 
ing  of  oertain  extemal  signa;  howerer,  there  was  a 
progreas  from  the  unintelligible  signs  of  naturę  to  morę 
inteifigible  written  signs,  which  was  certainly  an  im- 
portant  progress. 

The  Christiana  retained  about  the  interpretation  of 
thór  aacred  writings  the  same  expre8sions  which  had 
been  cnrrent  in  reference  to  the  interpretation  of  sacred 
Mtbjects  among  the  heathen.  Hence  aroae  the  fact  that 
the  Greek  Christiana  employed  with  predilection  the 
worda  i^ytfoic  and  Uiyyiyr^c  in  reference  to  the  inter- 
pretation of  the  holy  Scripturea.  But  the  circamstance 
that  St.  Paul  employs  the  term  (pfŁtfPtia  yXw<nrwv  for 
the  interpretation  of  the  yXtijaifaic  Xa\tiv  (1  Cor.  xii, 
10;  xiT,  26),  greatly  oontributed  to  the  ose  likewise 
of  words  belonging  to  the  root  ipfirivtvftv,  Accord- 
ing  to  Eosebius  {ffutoria  EecUskuiiea,  iii,  9),  Paulus, 
biahop  of  Hierapolis,  wrote,  as  early  as  about  A.D.  100, 
a  woik  under  the  title  of  \oyiwp  KvpiaKuv  l^iiytfatCt 
▼hich  means  an  interpretation  of  the  discourses  of  Je- 
susa Papias  explained  the  religious  contents  of  these 
discourses,  which  he  had  collected  from  orał  and  written 
tradltions.  Ue  dlstinguished  between  the  meaning  of 
iĘtiyuoBai  and  ipfjuivtvHVf  as  appears  from  his  obeenrar 
tion  (preserred  by  Eusebius  in  the  place  quoted  above), 
in  which  he  Ba3r9  conceming  the  \uyia  of  Matthew, 
written  in  Hebrew,'Ep^^£tMrc  dk  aurd  wc  iivvaro  iKa- 
ffroc, "  Bat  every  one  interpreted  them  according  to  his 
abiUty."  In  the  Greek  Church,  6  iCiry^r^C  And  ^liiyi?- 
rai  Tov  \óyov  were  the  uaual  terms  for  teachers  of 
Christianity.  (See  Eusebius,  Historia  Ecdeiiastica^  yii, 
30,  and  Heinichen  on  this  paseage,  notę  21 ;  Photius, 
BSiliotłu  Cod.  p.  105 ;  Cave,  Ilitt,  Liter,  i,  146).  Origen 
called  his  oommentary  on  the  holy  Scriptures  l^riyflTi- 
ca ;  and  Prooopius  of  Gaza  wrote  a  work  on  sereral 
booka  of  the  BiUe,  entitled  <rxpKai  ItnyiiTtKaL  How- 
ever,  we  find  the  word  Ippofi^tia  employed  as  a  sjmonyme 
of  iUrpiftię,  espedaUy  among  the  inhabitants  of  Anti- 
och.  For  instanoe,  Gregorius  Nyssenus  says  concem- 
ing Ephnem  Syrus,  Vpa^iiv  okriy  itKpi^&c  irpóc  Xć{iv 
tipfutvtv9tv  (see  Gregory  of  Nysaa,  Vita  Ephraimi  Syrij 
in  Opera,  Paria,  ii,  1083).  Theodore  of  Mopsuestia, 
TheMloret,  and  others,  wrote  commentaries  on  the  sacred 
Scripturea  under  the  title  of  kpiitfinia  (oomp.  A.  H.  Nie- 
meyer,  Dt  Itidori  Pdtuiota  Vita,  Seriptisj  et  Doctrina, 
Habe,  1825,  p.  207). 

Among  the  Latin  Christians  the  word  inierpres  had 
a  wider  rangę  than  the  oorreaponding  Greek  term,  and 
the  Latins  had  no  precise  term  for  the  exposition  of  the 
Bibie  which  exactly  corresponded  with  the  Greek.  The 
yiterpretaiio  was  applied  only  in  the  sense  of  occupa- 
■noN  or  ACT  o/  an  expo»itor  o/ the  BUble,  but  not  in  the 
tense  of  coxtekt8  eUcited/rom  BibHcal  passoffes.  The 
varda  tradure,  tractator,  and  tractatut  were  in  prefer- 
ence  empk>yed  with  respect  to  Bihlical  exposition,  and 
the  eenae  which  it  elidted.  Together  with  these  words 
there  occnr  commentarius  and  expositio,  In  reference 
to  the  exegetical  ¥rork  of  St,  Hilary  on  Matthew,  the 
oodices  floctuate  between  commentarius  and  tractatus, 
St  Ai]goBtine's  tradatut  are  well  known;  and  this  fa- 
ther  freqaently  mentions  the  divinarum  tcripturarum 
traatatortB,  Yoi  instance,  Retraetationes,  1.  ^3,  "  Divi- 
I  tnctatores  eloqniorum ;"  Solpicius  Severus,2>Mi/. 
IV.— Bb 


i,  6,"  Origines  .  .  .  qui  tractator  sacrorum  peritissimua 
habebatur."  Yinoentius  lirinensiB  obser^^es  in  his  Com^ 
momtorium  on  1  Cor.  xii,  28 :  *'  In  the  third  place,  teach- 
ers who  are  now  called  tractatoresj  whom  thę  same 
apostle  sometimes  styles  prophets,  because  by  them  the 
mysteries  of  the  prophets  are  opened  to  the  people" 
(comp.  Dufresne,  Glossarium  media  et  ifffinuB  iMtinita- 
tigj  a.  yv.  Tractator,  Tractatus;  and  Baluze,  ad  Serrat. 
LupUMj  p.  479). 

Howerer,  the  oocupation  of  interpreSf  in  the  nobler 
senae  of  this  word,  was  not  unknown  to  St  Jerome,  as 
may  be  seen  ftom  his  Prafatio  ta  Ubrot  Samuelis  {Opera- 
ed. Yallarsi,  ix,  459) :  **  For  whaterer,  by  freąuently  trans- 
lating  and  carófully  oorrecting,  we  have  leamed  and  re- 
tain,  is  our  own.  And  if  yon  have  understood  what  you 
formerly  did  not  know,  conńder  me  to  be  an  expoaitor 
if  you  are  grateful,  or  a  parnphrast  if  you  are  ungrate- 
fuL" 

6.  In  modem  daadficatipn,  Hermeneutics  <*  forms  a 
branch  of  the  same  generał  study  with  £xege8is  (q.  t.), 
and,  indeed,  is  often  oonfounded  with  that  science ;  but 
the  distinction  between  the  two  branches  is  yery  mark- 
ed,  and  is,  perhaps,  sufficiently  indicated  by  the  etymol- 
ogy  of  the  names  themselves.  To  hermeneutics  prop- 
erly  belongs  the  *  interpretation'  of  the  text — that  is,  the 
ditcotery  of  its  trae  meaning;  the  proyince  of  exege8ia 
is  the  'expo8ition*  of  the  meaning  so  discorered,  and  the 
practical  office  of  making  it  inteifigible  to  others  in  its 
various  bearings,  scientific,  literał,  doctrinal,  and  moraL 
Hence,  although  the  laws  of  interpretation  have  many 
things  in  common  with  those  of  exposition,  it  may  be 
laid  down  that  to  the  espedal  prorince  of  hermeneutics 
belongs  all  that  regards  the  text  and  interpretation  of 
the  Holy  Scripture ;  the  signification  of  words,  the  force 
and  aignificance  of  idioms,  the  modification  of  the  sense 
by  the  context,  and  the  other  details  of  philological  and 
grammatical  inąuiry ;  the  condderation  of  the  charac- 
ter  of  the  writer  or  the  persona  whom  he  addressed ;  of 
the  circumstanoes  in  which  he  wrote,  and  the  object  to 
which  his  work  was  directed ;  the  comparison  of  paral- 
lelpassages;  and  other  similar  considerations.  All  these 
inquiries,  although  seemingly  purely  literary,  are  modi- 
iled  by  the  yiews  entertained  as  to  the  text  of  Holy 
Scripture,  and  especially  on  the  question  of  its  inspira- 
tion,  and  the  naturę  and  degree  of  such  inspiratiou'* 
(Chambers,  Cydopcedia), 

II.  Hittory^  Method*^  and  Literaturę,— 1.  From  ancient 
times  the  Church,  or  rather  ecciesiastical  bodies  and  re- 
ligious denominations,  have  taken  the  same  supematu- 
ral  view  with  reference  to  the  Bibie,  as,  before  the  Church, 
the  Jews  did  with  respect  to  the  Old  Testament  The 
Church  and  denominations  haye  supposed  that  in  the 
authors  of  Bihlical  books  there  did  not  exist  a  litera- 
ry actiyity  of  the  same  kind  as  induces  men  to  write 
down  what  they  haye  thought,  but  haye  always  re- 
quired  from  their  foUowers  the  belief  that  the  Bihlical 
authors  wrote  in  a  state  of  inspiration,  that  is  to  say, 
under  a  pecidiar  and  direct  influence  of  the  diyine  Spir- 
it.  Sometimes  the  Bihlical  authors  were  described  to  be 
merely  extemal  and  mechanical  Instruments  of  God's 
reyelation.  But,  howeyer  wide  or  howeyer  narrow  the 
boundaries  were  within  which  the  opcration  of  God 
upon  the  writers  was  conflned  by  ecciesiastical  supposi- 
tion,  the  origin  of  the  Bihlical  books  was  always  sup- 
posed to  be  eseentially  difierent  from  the  origin  of  hu- 
man  compositions ;  and  this  difference  dcmanded  the 
application  of  peculiar  rules  in  order  to  understand  the 
Bibie.  There  were  required  peculiar  arts  and  kinds  of 
Information  in  order  to  discoyer  the  sense  and  contents 
of  books  which,  on  account  of  their  extraordinary  ori- 
gin, were  inaccessible  by  the  ordinary  way  of  logical 
rules,  and  whoee  written  words  were  only  outward  signs, 
behind  which  a  higher  and  diyine  meaning  was  con- 
cealed.  Conseąuently,  the  Church  and  denominations 
reąuired  lĘrfyijTaif  or  interpretera,  of  the  signs  by  means 
of  which  God  had  reyealed  his  wilL  Thns  necessaril y 
aroae  again  in  the  Christian  Church  the  art  of  opening 


INTERPRETATION 


626 


INTERPRETATION 


0^  interpretłng  the  rnipematoral,  which  art  had  aii  ex- 
isteuce  in  earlier  religioiM,  bat  with  Łhis  essentud  difier- 
cnce,  that  the  signs,  by  the  opening  of  which  supemat- 
ural  truth  was  obtained,  were  now  morę  simple,  and  of 
a  morę  intelligible  kind  than  in  earlier  religions.  They 
were  now  written  ugną,  which  belonged  to  the  sphere 
of  speech  and  language,  through  which  aloiie  all  modes 
of  thinking  obtain  cleamess,  and  can  be  readily  commu- 
nicated  to  others.  But  the  hoiy  Scriptures,  in  which 
dlvine  revelation  was  presenred,  differ,by  conyeying  di- 
Tinę  thooghts,  from  common  language  and  writing, 
which  convey  only  human  thoughts.  Hence  it  foUow- 
cd  that  its  sense  was  much  deeper,  and  far  exceeded  the 
usual  sphere  of  human  thoughts,  so  that  the  usual  req- 
uisites  for  the  right  understanding  of  written  documents 
appeared  to  be  insufficient  According  to  this  opinion, 
a  lower  and  a  ku/her  ssnse  of  the  Bibie  were  distin- 
guished.  The  lower  sense  was  that  which  could  be 
elicited  according  to  the  rules  of  grammar;  the  higher 
sense  was  oonsidered  to  oonsist  of  deeper  thoughts  con- 
cealed  under  the  grammatical  meaning  of  the  words. 
These  deeper  thoughts  they  endeayored  to  obtain  in  va- 
rious  wa3rs,  but  not  by  grammatical  research. 

The  Jews,  in  the  days  of  Jesus,  employed  for  this 
purpose  especially  the  typico-allegorical  interpretation. 
The  Jews  of  Palestine  endearored  by  means  of  this 
modę  of  interpretation  especially  to  elicit  the  secrets  of 
futurity,  which  were  said  to  be  fuUy  contained  in  the 
Old  Testament,  (See  WfŁhner,  A  ntiguitaies  Ilfbraorutn, 
Gottingie,  1743,  i,  341  sq. ;  Dopke,  Hermeneutik  der  neu- 
lestamenłlichm  SchriftsteUer,  Leipzig,  1829,  p.  88  sq.,  164 
8q.;  Hirschfeld,  Z)fr  Geist  der  Talmuduchen  Audegung 
der  BibeL  Berlin,  1840 ;  compare  Juyenal,  Sat.  xiv,  103 ; 
flustin  Martyr,  Apol»  i,  p.  52,  61 ;  Bretschneider,  HiaUh- 
rtach-dogmatische  Au^egung  d,  Neiten  TestamenteSf  Leip- 
zig, 1806,  p.  85  8q.) 

.  The  Alexandrine  Jews,  on  the  contrary,  endearored 
to  raise  themselres  from  the  simple  sense  of  the  words 
TO  ^vxiKÓv,  to  a  higher,  morę  generał,  and  spiritual 
sense,  ró  irvtvfiaTu:6v  (see  Dahne,  GesckuAtlicke  Dar- 
stellung  der  JSidisch-A  kx(mdriiu»chen  Reliffunu-PhUoso^ 
pkie,  Halle,  1834,  i,p.  52  sq. ;  ii,  17, 195  sq^  209,228, 241). 
Similar  principles  were  adopted  by  the  authors  of  the 
New  Testament  (see  De  Wette,  Ueber  die  SymboUMch- 
Typische  LehrarŁ  in  Brieft  an  die  IMraer^  in  the  Tke- 
ologische  ZeiischriJ},  by  Schleiermacher  and  De  Wette, 
pt.  iii;  T\\o\uckf  Beilage  zum  Commentar  iiber  den  Brie/ 
an  die  Uthrder,  1840). 

.  These  two  modes  of  interpretation,  the  allegorico-typ- 
ical  and  the  ałlegorioo-mytticalj  are  found  in  the  Chris- 
tian ^nriters  as  early  as  the  first  and  second  centuries ; 
the  latter  as  yy^feic^  the  fonner  as  a  demonstration  that 
all  and  everything,  both  what  had  happened  and  what 
would  come  to  pass,  was  somehow  contained  in  the  sa- 
cred  Scriptures  (see  Justin  Martyr,  ApoL  i,  p.  62,  61,  and 
Tertullian,  Adoereua  Marctonem^  iv,  2,  **^The  preachiug 
of  the  disciples  might  appear  to  be  ąuestionable,  if  it 
was  not  Bupported  by  other  authority*'). 

To  these  allegorical  modes  of  interpretation  was  added 
a  third  modę,  which  necessarily  sprung  up  ailer  the  rise 
of  the  Catholico-apostolical  Churcb,  namely,  the  dogmat- 
ical  or  tkeologico-eccUeiastieaL  The  followers  of  the 
Catholico-apostolical  Church  agreed  that  all  apostles 
and  all  apostolical  writings  had  an  equal  authority,  be- 
cause  they  were  all  under  an  equal  guidance  of  the  Uoly 
Ghost  Hence  it  followed  that  they  could  not  set  forth 
either  contradictory  or  dUferent  doctrines.  A  twofold 
expedieiit  was  adopted  in  order  to  eifect  harmony  of  in- 
terpretation. The  one  was  of  the  apparent  and  relative 
kind,  because  it  referred  to  subjects  which  appear  in- 
comprehensible  only  to  the  oonfined  human  understand- 
ing, but  which  are  in  perfect  harmony  in  the  divine 
thoughts.  Justin  (Dialogus  cum  Trgphone,  c  65)  says : 
**  Bcing  quite  certain  that  no  Scripture  contradicts  the 
other,  I  will  rather  confess  that  I  do  not  understand 
what  is  said  therein."  St.  Chryaostom  restricted  this  as 
follows  (HomiL  iii,  c.4fin  Ep,^  ad  Tketsalordcentea) : 


**  In  the  divine  writings  eyerything  ia  intelligible  and 
plain,  whateyer  is  necessaiy  is  open**  (compare  IfomiL 
iii.  De  Lazaro,  and  Athanasii  OraHo  contra  gewUtj  in 
Operaj  i,  12). 

The  second  expedient  adopted  by  the  Church  was  to 
consider  certain  articles  of  faith  to  be  leading  doctrimt^ 
and  to  regulate  and  define  aocordingly  the  sense  of  the 
Bibie  whereyer  it  appeared  doubtful  and  unoerttin. 
This  led  to  the  theologico-ecdeńoMlical  or  dogmaUcal 
modę  of  interpretation,  which,  when  the  Christians  mn 
diyided  into  seyeral  sects,  proyed  to  be  indispenaahle  to 
the  Church,  but  which  adopted  yarious  forma  in  the  ra- 
rious  sects  by  which  it  was  employed.  Not  only  the 
heretics  of  ancient  times,  but  also  the  foUowen  of  the 
Roman  Catholic,  the  Greek  Catholic,  the  Syrian,  the 
Anglican,  the  Protestant  Church,  etc,  haye  endeayorad 
to  interpret  the  Bibie  in  harmony  with  their  dcigmas. 

Besides  the  three  modes  of  interpretation  which  haye 
been  mcntioned  aboye,  theological  writecs  haye  spoken 
of  typical,  propketical,  emphaUcoi,  phUotopkieaL  tradi- 
tionalj  morał,  or  pracfical  interpretation.  But  all  theee 
are  only  one-sided  deyelopments  of  some  single  featore 
contained  in  the  aboye  three,  aibitrarily  chosen;  and, 
therefore,  they  cannot  be  oonsidered  to  be  aeparate 
modes,  but  are  only  modifications  of  one  or  other  of 
those  three.  The  interpretation  in  which  all  then 
modes  are  brought  into  harmony  has  lateiy  been  called 
the  panharmomcaly  which  word  is  not  yery  hapfńly 
chosen  (F.  H.  Gerraar,  Die  Panharmonitche  Inłerprfta- 
(ton  der  HeUigen  Schr\fl,  Lpz.  1821 ;  and  by  the  same 
author,  Beitrag  tur  AUgemeinen  Hermeneuiiky  Altooą 


The  interpretation  which,  in  spite  of  all  ecclesiasticBl 
opposition,  ought  to  be  adopted  as  being  the  only  tnie  one, 
strictiy  adheres  to  the  demands  of  generał  hermeneutict, 
to  which  it  adds  those  particular  hermeneutical  mks 
which  meet  the  reąuisites  of  particular  case&  This 
has,  in  modem  times,  been  styled  the  hulorieo^gram- 
małical  modę  of  interpretation.  This  appellation  has 
been  chosen  because  the  epithet  grammatical  seems  to 
be  too  naiTow  and  too  much  restricted  to  the  merę  ver- 
bal  sense.  It  might  be  morę  correct  to  style  it  simpk 
the  historical  interpretation,  sinoe  the  word  "•  łustorical'* 
comprehends  eyer^^hing  that  b  requińte  to  be  known 
about  the  language,  the  tum  of  mind,  the  indińdnalitr, 
etc.,  of  an  author  in  order  to  rightly  understand  tds 
book.  This  method,  the  ozigin  of  which  has  been  traced 
to  Semler  {Yorberekung  z,  d,  Iheol,  Hermetmti,  1762),  is 
liable,  however,  to  degenerate  into  Katioiudism  (Farrar, 
Hietorg  of  Free  Thougkt,  p.  22),  unless  guarded  by  the 
spirit  of  eyangelical  piety. 

The  different  modes  of  interpreting  the  Bibie  which 
haye  generally  obtained  are,  according  to  what  we  hare 
stated,  essentially  the  foUowing  three :  the  giłimmati- 
CAL,  the  ALLEGORICAL,  the  DOOMATiCAU  The  gram- 
matical modę  of  interpretation  simply  inyestigates  the 
sense  contained  in  the  words  of  the  Bibie.  The  alle- 
gorical,  according  to  Quintilian*s  sentence,  *' Aliad  ver^ 
bis,  aliud  sensu  ostendo,"  maintains  that  the  woids  of 
the  Bibie  have,  besides  thar  simple  sense,  anotber 
which  is  concealed  as  behind  a  picture,  and  endearots 
to  find  out  this  supposed  figuratiye  sense,  which,  it  is 
said,  was  not  intended  by  the  authors  (we  Olshansen, 
Fin  Wori  iiber  lieferen  SchrifttitWy  Konigafoeig,  1824)l 
The  dogmatical  modę  of  interpretation  endeayon  to  ex- 
plain  the  Bibie  in  harmony  Mrith  the  dogmas  of  the 
Church,  following  the  prindple  of  analogiajideu  Com- 
pare ConcilU  TridenHnij  Session  iy,  decret,  ii :  **■  Lei  no 
one  yenture  to  interpret  the  holy  Scriptures  in  a  eeoae 
contrary  to  that  which  the  holy  roother  Church  has 
held,  and  does  hołd,  and  which  has  the  powcr  of  dccid- 
ing  what  is  the  trae  sense  and  the  right  interpieUtioii 
of  the  holy  Scriptures."  So  also  Rambach.  Inttitmtiomet 
IłermeneuticcB  Sacra  (Jens,  1723):  "The  authority 
which  this  analogy  of  faith  exerci8es  upon  intcrpreUk- 
tion  consists  in  this,  that  it  is  the  foondation  and  |pc&- 
eral  principle  according  to  the  rule  of  which  aU  acrip- 


INTERPRETATION 


627 


INTERPRETATION 


tnral  interpfetaŁioin  are  to  be  tńed  as  by  a  touchstone.^ 
Art.  XX  of  the  Anglican  Church :  '*  It  is  not  lawful  for 
the  Church  to  ordain  anything  that  is  contraiy  to  God'8 
word  written,  neither  maj  it  expoand  one  place  of 
Scriptore  so  as  to  be  repagnant  to  another.**  Scotoh 
Gonfetnon,  art.  xviii :  *'  We  dare  not  admit  any  inter- 
pretation  which  contradicts  any  leading  artide  of  faith, 
or  any  plain  Łext  of  Scriptiire,  or  the  nile  of  charity,'* 
etc 

2.  The  allegorical,  aa  well  as  the  dogmatical  raode  of 
interpretation,  presupposes  the  grammaticalf  which  oon- 
Beqaently  forms  the  basis  of  the  other  two,  so  that 
neither  the  one  nor  the  other  can  exi8t  entirely  without 
it.  Hencc  the  g^rammatacal  modę  of  interpretation  must 
hare  a  historical  precedence  before  the  others.    But 
history  alao  proyes  that  the  Church  has  constantly  en- 
deayored  to  curtail  the  prorince  of  grammatical  inter- 
pretation, to  renounce  it  as  much  as  possible,  and  to  riae 
above  it.     If  we  follow,  with  the  examining  eye  of  a 
historical  inqmrer,  the  conrse  in  which  these  three 
modes  of  interpretation,  in  their  mutual  dependence 
npon  each  other,  have  generally  been  applied,  it  becomes 
erident  that  in  opposition  to  the  grammatical  modę,  the 
allegorical  was  fint  aet  np.     Subseąuently,  the  allegori- 
cal  was  almost  entirely  supplanted  by  the  dogmatical ; 
butit  started  up  with  renewed  vigor  when  the  dogmati- 
cal modę  rigorously  confined  the  spiritual  morement  of 
the  human  intellect,  as  well  as  all  religious  sentiment, 
within  the  too  narrow  bounds  of  dogmatical  despotism. 
The  dogmatical  modę  of  interpretation  could  only  spring 
up  afier  the  Church,  renouncing  the  original  multiplici- 
ty  ofopinionsjhad  agreed  upon  certain  leading  doctrines; 
after  which  time  it  grew,  together  with  the  Church,  into 
a  mighty  tree,  towering  high  abore  every  surrounding 
object,  and  casting  its  shade  over  everything.  The  long- 
ing  desire  for  light  and  warmth,  of  those  who  were  spell- 
bound  nnder  its  »hade,  induced  them  to  cultivato  again 
the  allegorical  and  the  grammatical  interpretation :  but 
they  were  unable  to  bring  the  fruits  of  these  modes  to 
fuli  maturity.     Erery  new  inteUectual  revolution,  and 
CTeiy  spiritual  development  of  nations,  gave  a  new  im- 
pnlse  to  grammatical  interpretation.    This  impuhe  last- 
ed  until  interpretation  was  again  taken  captive  by  the 
6verwhclming  ecdesiastical  power,  whoso  old  formali- 
ties  had  regained  strength.  or  which  had  been  renovated 
nnder  new  forms.     Grammatical  interpretation,  consc- 
qucntly,  goes  hand  in  band  with  the  principlc  of  spiritu- 
al progress,  and  the  dogmatical  with  the  consenratire 
principle.    Finally,  the  allegorical  interpretation  is  as 
an  artificial  aid  8ub8er\'ient  to  the  con9er\-ative  princi- 
ple, when,  by  ita  rigorous  stability,  the  latter  exerci8es  a 
too  unnatund  pressure.     This  is  contirmed  by  the  his- 
tory of  all  times  and  countries,  so  that  we  may  confine 
oarwlves  to  the  following  few  illustrative  obsenrations. 
The  various  tendencies  of  the  flrst  Christian  period 
were  combined  in  the  second  century,  so  that  the  prin- 
ciple of  one  generał  (Catholic)  Church  was  gradually 
•dopted  by  most  parties.     But  now  it  became  rather 
difficult  to  selcct,  from  the  variety  of  doctrines  preralent 
in  various  sects,  those  by  the  application  of  which  to 
Biblical  interpretation  a  perfect  harmońy  and  systemat- 
icil  unity  could  be  effected.     Keyertheless,  the  wants 
of  science  powerfuUy  demanded  a  systematic  arrange- 
mcnt  of  Biblical  doctrines,  even  before  a  generał  agrce- 
ment  npon  dogmatical  principlcs  had  been  effected.  The 
^irants  of  sdence  were  espedally  felt  among  the  Alexan- 
^neChristians;  and  in  AIexandria,  where  the  allegori- 
cal interpretation  had  from  ancient  times  been  practiced, 
it  oiTered  the  desired  expedient  which  met  the  exigency 
of  the  Church.     Hence  it  may  naturally  be  explaincd 
why  the  Alexandrine  theologians  of  the  second  and 
thirtl  century,  particularly  Clemens  Alexandrinus  and 
Origen,  interpreted  aUegorically,  and  why  the  allegori- 
cal interpretation  was  perfccted,  and  in  yogue,  even  be- 
fore the  dogmatical  came  into  existence.     Origen,  es- 
perially  in  his  fourth  book,  De  Principiis,  treats  on  scrip- 
tural  interpretation,  usiDg  the  following  arguraents:  The 


holy  Scriptures,  inspired  by  God,  form  a  harmoniouB 
whole,  perfect  in  itself,  without  any  defccts  and  contra- 
dictions,  and  coutaining  nothing  that  is  insignificant 
and  superfluous.  The  grammatical  interpretation  leads 
to  obstacles  and  objections  which,  according  to  the  ąuali- 
ty  just  stated  of  the  holy  Scriptures,  are  inadmissible 
and  impossible.  Now,  sińce  the  merely  grammatical  in- 
terpretation can  neither  remoye  nor  oycrcome  these  ob- 
jections, we  must  seek  for  an  expedient  beyond  the 
boundaries  of  gnunmatical  interpretation.  The  alle- 
gorical interpretation  offers  this  expedient,  and  conse- 
quently  is  aboye  the  grammatical.  Origen  obsenres 
that  man  con«sts  of  body,  soul,  and  spirit ;  and  he  dis- 
tinguishes  a  triple  senf  c  of  the  holy  Scriptures  analo- 
gous  to  this  diyision  {De  Princip.  iy,  108 ;  comp.  Klausen, 
ffermenaiHk  de*  Neuen  7>s<ameti/f «,  Leipzig,  1841,  p.  104 
sq.). 

Since,  howerer,  allegorical  interpretation  cannot  be 
reduced  to  settled  rules,  but  always  depends  upon  the 
greater  or  less  influence  of  imagination ;  and  sińce  the 
system  of  Christian  doctrines,  which  the  Alexandrine 
theologians  produced  by  means  of  allegorical  interpreta- 
tion, was  in  many  respects  objected  to ;  and  sińce,  in  op- 
position to  these  Alexandrine  theologians,  there  waa 
gradually  established,  and  morę  and  morę  firmly  defined, 
a  system  of  Christian  doctrines  which  formed  a  firm  basis 
for  uniformity  of  interpretation,  in  accordaiice  with  the 
mind  of  the  majority,  there  gradually  sprung  up  a  dog- 
matical modę  of  interpretation  founded  upon  the  inter- 
pretation of  ecdesiastical  teachers,  which  had  been  rec- 
ognised  as  orthodox  in  the  Catholic  Church.  This  dog- 
matical interpretation  has  been  in  perfect  existcnce  sińce 
the  beginning  of  the  fourth  century,  and  thcn  morę  and 
morę  supplanted  the  allegorical,  which  hcnceforward  was 
lefl  to  the  wit  and  ingenuity  of  a  few  indiyiduals.  Thus 
St  Jerome,  about  A.D.  400,  could  say  {Comment,  in  Mal- 
acA. i,  16):  "The  rule  of  Scripture  is,  where  there  is  a 
manifest  prediction  of  futurę  eyents,  not  to  enfceble  that 
which  is  written  by  the  uncertainty  of  allegory."  Dur- 
ing  the  whole  of  the  fourth  centuri',  the  ecclesiastico- 
dogroatical  modę  of  interpretation  was  developed  with 
constant  reference  to  the  grammatical  Evcn  Hilary, 
in  his  book  De  Trimtate,  i,  properly  asserts :  "  He  is  the 
bcst  reader  who  rather  expects  to  obtain  scnse  from  the 
wonls  than  imposes  it  upon  them,  and  who  carries  morę 
away  than  he  has  brought,  nor  forces  that  upon  the 
words  which  he  had  resolyed  to  understand  before  he  b6- 
gan  to  read." 

After  the  commencement  of  the  fiflh  century,  gram- 
matical interpretation  fell  entirely  into  decay;  which 
ruin  was  effected  partly  by  the  fuli  deyelopment  of  the 
ecdesiastical  s^-stem  of  doctrines  dcflned  in  all  their 
parts,  and  by  a  fear  of  deyiating  from  this  system,  partly 
also  by  the  continually  increasing  ignorance  of  the  lan- 
guages  in  which  the  Bibie  was  written.  The  primary 
condition  of  ecdesiastical  or  dogmatical  interpretation 
was  then  most  dearly  expre8sed  by  Yincentius  Lirinen- 
sis  (Commonit.  i) :  "  Since  the  holy  Scriptures,  on  ac- 
cotmt  of  their  depth,  are  not  understood  by  all  in  tho 
same  man  ner,  but  their  sentences  are  understood  differ- 
ently  by  different  persons,  so  that  they  might  secm  to 
admit  as  many  meanings  as  there  are  mon,  we  must  well 
take  care  that  within  the  pale  of  the  Catholic  Church 
we  hołd  fast  what  has  been  believed  eyery  where,  always, 
and  by  all"  (Compare  Cołw«łorrt/.ii,ed.Bremcn8i8, 1688, 
p.  821  sq.).  Henceforward  interpretation  was  confined 
to  the  merę  coUection  of  explanations,  which  had  first 
been  giyen  by  men  whose  ecdesiastical  orthodoxy  was 
unąuestionable.  "It  is  better  not  to  be  imbucd  with  the 
pretended  noyelty,  but  to  be  filled  from  the  fountain 
of  the  ancients"  (Cassidori  Itutfitudones  Dicinae,  Praef. 
Compare  Alcuini  Epistoła  ad  Gislam,  in  Opera,  ed. 
Frobenius,  i,  464 ;  Commeni.  in  Joh,,  Praf.,  ib.  p.  460 ; 
Claudius  Turon.  Prolegomena  in  Commeni,  in  libros  Re- 
gum ;  Haymo,  Historia  Ecdesiasticoj  ix,  8,  etc).  Doubt- 
I  ful  cases  were  dedded  according  to  the  precedents  of  ec- 
I  clesiastical  definitions.    "  In  passages  which  may  be 


INTERPRETATION 


628 


INTERREGNUM 


cither  doubtful  or  obecure,  we  might  know  that  we 
should  follow  that  which  is  found  to  bo  neither  contrary 
to  evangelical  precepts,  nor  opposed  to  the  decrees  of 
holy  men"  (BcnedicŁi  Capihdara,  iii,  58,  in  Pertz,  Mon- 
umenta  Yeteria  German,  Histor,  iv,  2,  p.  107). 

During  the  whole  period  of  the  Middle  Ages  the  al> 
legorical  interpretation  again  prevailed.  The  Middle 
Ages  were  morę  distinguished  by  sentiment  thaa  by 
clearnesa,  and  the  allcgorical  interpretation  gave  satis- 
faction  to  sentiment  and  occupation  to  free  mentalspec- 
ulation.  The  typical  system  of  miracle-plays  (q.  v.) 
and  the  Biblia  Paupenim  exactly  iUusŁrate  the  spińt 
of  allegorical  interpretation  in  the  Middle  Ages.  But 
men  like  bishop  Agobardus  (A.D.  840,  in  Gallandii  BibŁ, 
xiii,  p.  446),  Johannes  Scotus,  Erigena,  Druthmar,  Nico- 
laus  Lyranus,  Roger  Bacon,  and  others,  acknowledged 
the  neceasity  of  grammatical  interpretation,  and  were 
only  wanting  in  the  reąuisite  means,  and  in  knowledge, 
for  putting  it  successfully  into  practice. 

When,  in  the  fifteenth  centuiy,  classical  stadies  had 
reriyed,  they  exercised  also  a  fayorable  inHuence  upon 
Bibiical  interpretation,  and  restored  grammatical  inter- 
pretation to  honor.  It  was  especially  by  grammatical 
interpretation  that  the  domineering  Catholic  Church 
was  combated  at  the  Reformation;  but  as  soon  as  the 
newly-^irisen  Protestant  Church  had  been  dogmatically 
cstablished,  it  began  to  consider  grammatical  interpre- 
tation a  dangerous  adrersary  of  ita  own  dogmas,  and 
opposed  it  as  much  as  did  the  Roman  GathoUcs  them- 
selres.  From  the  middle  of  the  16Łh  to  the  middle  of 
the  18th  centuiy  this  important  ally  of  Protestantism 
was  subjected  to  the  artificial  law  of  a  new  dogmati- 
cal  interpretation,  while  the  Roman  Catholic  Church 
changed  the  principle  of  interpretation  formerly  ad- 
ranced  by  Yincentius  into  an  ecclesiastical  dogma.  In 
conseąuence  of  this  new  oppression,  the  religious  senti- 
ment, which  had  frequently  been  wounded  both  among 
Roman  Catholics  and  Protestants,  took  refuge  in  alle- 
gorical interpretation,  which  then  reappeared  under  the 
forms  of  typical  and  mystical  theology. 

After  the  beginning  of  the  18th  century  grammatical 
interpretation  recoyered  its  authority.  It  was  then  first 
reintroduced  by  the  Arminians,  and,  in  spite  of  constant 
attacks,  towards  the  conclusion  of  that  century,  it  de- 
cidedly  prerailed  among  the  German  Protestanta.  It 
e^ercised  a  yerybeneficial  influence,  although  it  cannot 
be  denied  that  manifold  enors  occurred  in  its  applica- 
Łion.  During  the  last  half  century  both  Protestan  ts  and 
Roman  Catholics  haye  again  curtailed  the  rights  and  in- 
raded  the  proyince  of  grammatical  interpretation  by 
promoting  (according  to  the  generał  reaction  of  oui 
times)  the  opposing  claims  of  dogmatical  and  mystical 
interpretation.  Comp.  J.  RosenmUller,  Historia  Inter- 
pretatwms  Librorum  tacronim  in  Ecdesia  Christiana, 
Lipsiic,  1795-1814, 6  yols. ;  Van  Mildert,  An  Inąuiry  into 
the  General  PrindpUs  of  Scripture  Interpretation,  in^ 
Eight  Sermongf  etc.  (Oxford,  1815);  Meyer,  Geschickte 
der  Schrifterlddrung  seit  der  WiederhergteUuntf  der  Wis- 
senschaften  (Gdttingen,  1802-9, 5  yols.);  Simon, Uiatoire 
CrUiqu.e  des  principaux  Commeniateurs  du  Nouv.  Test, 
(Rotterdam,  1693) ;  E.  F.  K.  RosenmUller,  llandbuchjftir 
die  Literatur  der  Biblitchea  Kiitik  und  £xeffese  (GotU 
1797-1800, 4  yols.). 

3.  In  accordance  with  the  yarious  notions  conceming 
Bibiical  interpretation  which  we  haye  stated,  there  have 
been  produced  Bibiical  hermeneutics  of  yery  different 
kinds ;  for  instaiice,  in  the  earlier  period  we  might  men- 
tion  that  of  the  Donatist  Ticonius,  who  wrote  about  the 
fourth  century  his  Reffula  ad  inrestigandam  et  ńwenien- 
dam  intelligentiam  Scripturarum  septem;  Augustinus, 
De  Doctrina  Christiana,  Uh,  i,  S\  Isidorus  Hispalensia, 
Sentenł,  A19  są.;  Santis  Pagnini  (who  died  in  1541), 
laagoga  ad  mysticos  Sacra  Scripturm  sensus,  libri  odo- 
decitn  (CJolon.  1540) ;  Sixti  Senensis  (who  died  1599), 
Bibłiołheca  Sancta  (Tenetiis,  1566.  Of  this  work, 
which  has  frequently  been  reprinted,  there  belongs  to 
oui  present  subject  only  Liber  tertius,  Artem  exponendi 


Sancła  Scripta  CaihoUcis  £xposHoribus  t^Oisńmit  Htg* 
ulis  et  Exeirq)Us  ostendens,)  At  a  later  period  the  ^ 
man  Catholics  added  to  these  the  worka  of  Goldhageo 
(Mainz,  1765),  Bellarmine,  Martianay,  Calmet,  and,  morę 
recently,  SeemUller'8  Jfermeaeutica  Sacra  (1799) ;  Mayi^i 
Institutio  Interp.Saari  (1789) ;  Jahn*8  Enckiridiou  Ber- 
men,  (Vienna,  1812) ;  Arigler'8  HermeneuHea  Generaiit 
(Yienna,  1813);  Unterkircher*s  HermeneuHca  BibUca 
(1881);  Ranolder,  Herm,  BibL  Principia  Batumalia 
(Funf  Kirchen,  1838) ;  Schnittler,  GrundHmen  der  Ber- 
meneuHk  (Ratisbon,  1844) ;  Glaire'8  Hermeneutioa  Sacra 
(1840). 

On  the  part  of  the  Lutherans  were  added  by  Flado^ 
Clavis  Scriptura  Sacra  (BaólesB^  1537,  and  often  re- 
printed in  two  yolumes) ;  by  Johann  Gerhard,  Tradahu 
de  Legitima  Script,  Sacra  fnierpreiatione  (Jenie,  1610); 
by  Solomon  Glassius^  Phiiołogia  Sacra  Ubri  guinqw 
(Jens,  1623,  and  often  leprinted) ;  by  Jaoob  Ramhach, 
Instituiiones  Hermeneutica  Sacra  (JensB,  1723). 

On  the  part  of  the  Calyinists  there  were  fuznished  by 
Turretin,  I>e  Scriptura  Sacra  Interprełatione  Tractatus 
Biparłitus  (Dordrecht,  1723,  and  ofteu  reprinted).  In 
the  English  Church  were  produced  by  Herbert  Manh 
Lectures  on  the  Criticism  ojnd  Interpretation  o/ the  Bibie 
(Cambridge,  1828). 

Since  the  middle  of  the  last  century  it  haa  been  usual 
to  treat  on  the  Old- Testament  hermeneutica  and  on 
those  of  the  New  Testament  in  separate  works:  for  in- 
staiice, Meyer,  Yersuch  einer  Hermcneutik  des  AUen  Tes- 
tamentes  (Lubeck,  1799) ;  Pareau,  Institutio  Interprttis 
Yeterit  Tesiamenti  (Trajecti,  1822);  Emesti,  Institutio 
Interpretis  Xovi  Testamenii  (Lipsias,  1761,  ed.  5ta^cu- 
rante  Ammon,  1809;  translated  uito  English  by  Tenot, 
Edinbuigh,  1833);  Morus,  Super  Hermeneutica  Aoń 
Testamenii  acroases  acadanica  (ed.  £icbst«Uit,  Lipstie, 
1797-1802,  in  two  yolumes,  but  not  oompleted);  K&l, 
Lehrbuch  der  Hermeneutik  des  Neuen  Testamentes,  naek 
Grundsdtzen  der  grammatisch-historischen  Interpretation 
(Leipzig,  1810;  the  same  work  in  Latin,  Lipeue,  1811); 
Conyb^ure,  The  Bampton  Lectures  for  the  year  1824, 6e- 
ing  an  attempt  to  tracę  the  History  and  to  ascertam  the 
linUts  of  the  seoondary  and  spiritual  Interpretation  of 
Scripture  (Oxford,  1824) ;  Schleiermacher,  Hermeneutik 
und  Kritik  mil  besonderer  Beziehung  aufdas  Keue  Tes- 
tament (edited  by  LUcke,  Berlin,  1838).  The  most  oom- 
plete  is  Klausen,  Hermeneutik  des  Neuen  Testamenles 
(from  the  Danish,  Leipzig,  1841) ;  Wilke,  Die  Herme- 
neutik des  Neuen  Testamenłes  systematisch  dargesieiU 
(Leipzig,  1843);  S.  Dayidson^s  Sacred  Hermeneutics  de- 
veloped  and  appUed;  induding  a  History  ąf  BibUeal 
Interpretation  from  the  earliest  qfthe  Fathera  to  the  Ref- 
ormation (Edinburgh,  1843). 

For  lists  of  other  works  on  the  subject,  seo  Walch,  Bib- 
liotheca  Theologica,  iy,  206  są.;  Danz,  Unirerud  Worter- 
buch,  p.  384  są.;  Append.  p.  46;  Daiiing,  Cyclopadia 
BiUiographica,  ii,  31  są. ;  Malcolm,  Theological  /nfex,pb 
218. 

Interregnuin.  The  interregnum  from  the  time 
of  the  execution  of  Charles  I  to  the  aocession  of  Cluude* 
II  to  the  throne  of  England  b  one  of  the  most  impor- 
tant periods  in  the  ecclesiastical  history  of  that  countiy. 
It  was  during  this  period  that  the  Episcopal  Church, 
**  which  had  been  reared  by  the  wealth  and  power  of 
the  State,  and  cemented  with  the  tean  and  blood  of 
dissentients,"  was  hurled  to  the  ground,  and  Presbyte- 
ńanism,  and  for  a  time  eyen  Congregationalism,  gained 
the  ascendency.  But,  to  the  justice  of  the  laUer,  it 
must  be  said  that  the  Congregationalists,  or,  latber,  the 
Independenta,  neyer  actually  aought  to  establish  their 
religion  as  the  religion  of  the  state,  while  Presbytcrian- 
isna  struggled  hard  to  <mforoe  uniformity  to  her  creed. 
Stoughton  says  (in  his  Ecdes,  Hist,  of  England  tince  the 
liestoration,  i,  49),  "It  was  with  Presbyterianiam  thus 
situated,  rather  than  with  Independency,  or  any  other 
ecclesiastical  systems,  that  Epiacopacy  came  first  into 
competition  and  oonflict  ailer  the  king^s  (Charies  U) 
return."    Some  writers  deny  the  possiUlity  of  an  iater- 


INTERROGATIONES  MARLE    629 


INTOLERANCE 


regnom  in  the  Englishgoyemment  as  it  then  existed, 
becanse,  aay  they,  ^^  there  can  be  legally  no  interregnum 
in  a  herediuuy  monarchy  like  that  of  England,"  and  hołd 
that  Łhe  reign  of  Charles  II  is  ''always  computed  in  le- 
gał language  as  oommencing  at  the  execntion  of  Cluurlcs 
I."  See  BogQ6  and  Bennett,  ffist,  o/Diasmters  (2d  cd. 
Lond.  1839,  i,  68  8q.     See  also  Ekgland,  Churcii  of  ; 

bfDEPENDGNTS;  PrESBYTEBIAKS.       (J.H.W.) 

IntenogatidndB  Mazise,  an  apocryphal  worlL 

See  PSEUDOGRAPH. 

Interstitia  Tempórum.  The  Cooncil  of  Sar- 
£ca  established  the  principle  "Potest  per  has  promo- 
tionea  (L  c.  to  consecrate),  giue  Aa6e6ciitf  utique  prolixum 
tenqftu,  probaii,  qua  fide  sit,  qua  modeatia,  qua  grayi- 
tate  et  verecundia,  et  si  dignus  fuerit  probatua,  divino 
sacerdotio  iUustretiu-y  quia  conreniena  non  est,  nec  ratio 
vel  disciplina  patitur,  ut  temere  et  leviter  ordinetur 
episoopus  aut  presbyter  aut  diacpnua  .  .  .  sed  hi,  guo- 
rumper  loncum  tempuś  examinała  nt  vita  et  merita  fae- 
rint  compr^MiaJ*  Conaeqaentl7  evcry  member  of  the 
cleiKT  was  obliged  to  spend  a  preparatory  interral  (in- 
terstitium)  before  he  could  be  promoted  from  a  lower  to 
a  higher  order  (prdo)  (DisL  69,  c  2).  Tliis  principle 
was  abo  óbeenred  conceming  the  consecration  for  the 
lower  ordcrs  of  the  pńesthood  wliile  special  ecclesiasti- 
cal  fonctions  were  attached  to  them,  but,  as  their  ear- 
lier  choracter  changed,  the  diadpline  alao  t)ecame  morę 
Iax  as  regards  the  time  of  prohation  (see  Dist.  77,  c  2, 
3, 9).  Aiter  the  consecration  to  theae  lower  offices  had 
come  to  be  considered  a  merę  formality  for  the  transi- 
tion  to  higher  ordutts^  the  obseryation  of  these  próba- 
lions  was  also  neglected.  The  Coundl  of  Trent  at- 
tempted  to  restore  the  old  customs  conceming  the  lower 
dcgrces  of  the  pńesthood  (c  17,  Sess.  23,  De  Reform,), 
and  stated  expre88ly  that  "per  tempórum  interstitia, 
nisi  aliuil  episcopo  expedirc  magis  yideretur,  conferan- 
Łur,  nt  .  .  .  in  unoquoquc  munere  juxta  pnescriptum 
episcopi  se  exerceant"  (c.  11,  etc);  yet  this  had  but 
little  or  no  cfiect,  and  it  is  eren  usual  in  some  Roman 
Catholic  countries  to  confer  at  once  the  tonsure  and  all 
the  lower  ordera.  The  Council  of  Trent  decided  also 
that  between  the  lower  consecration  and  the  higher, 
and  between  each  of  these,  therc  should  be  an  intenral 
of  one  year,  "■  nisi  necessitas  aut  ecclesiiB  utilitas  aliud 
ciposcat"  (c.  11, 13, 14,  etc),  but  that  "duo  sacri  wdi- 
nes  non  eodem  die,  etiam  reguloribua,  conferantur,  priv- 
ile^is  ac  indultis  quibusvi8  concessis  non  obstantibus 
qiubu8cunque'*  (c  13,  etc ;  oompare  also  c  18, 15,  X.  De 
temp,  ord.  i,  11 ;  c  2,  X.  i)e  w  guijurtiv,  v,  30).  These 
years  of  inter>'al  are  comput«d,  not  aocordin^  to  the  cal- 
endar,  but  according  to  the  Church  year.  With  rcgard 
to  the  Hght  of  dlspensation  conceded  to  the  bishops  by 
tlie  Council  of  Trent  (c  11,  cit.),  the  Congreffoiio  Con- 
dlii  decided  that  the  simultaneous  administratlon  of  the 
ordines  minoreg  and  the  subdeaconship  is  a  punishable 
ofTence  (No.  1,  ad  c  11,  cit.  in  the  edition  of  Schulte  and 
Richter).  See  Thomaasen,  Veł.  et  nov.  eecL  diacipL  i,  2, 
c  35,  36 ;  Vau  Espen,  Jus  eccL  umcer$,  i,  1,  c  2 ;  ii,  9, 
c  5 ;  PhiUipe,  Kirchmrechł,  i,  648  8q. ;  Herzog,  Seal- 
EaeffHopadie,  vi,  707. 

Interwale.    See  iNTERaiTriA. 

Inter^antOres.    See  Intbrcessores. 

Inthronisatioii  is  the  ceremony  of  inatalling  a 
faialiop  on  the  epiacopal  seat  immediately  after  his  con- 
secration. It  ia  sald  that  in  the  early  times  of  the 
Church  it  uraa  customary  for  the  Ushop,  after  talcing 
poaaeaaion  of  hia  seat,  to  addreee  the  congregation,  and 
thia  addresa  waa  called  the  ItUhromtaHan  sermon.  To 
the  pnmnciala  under  hia  oontrol  he  addressed  instead 
kttera  containing  hia  confession  of  faith,  intended  to 
ralablith  commonicationa  with  them :  tlieae  were  called 
IfUhrcmzaHon  kUerg  (Bingham,  Oriff.  Eeeles,  L  ii,  c.  xi, 
§  10).  Inthnmization  money  is  the  sam  of  money  paid 
l>y  aome  prełatea  for  the  purpoae  of  secaring  their  ordi- 
nation.— Beiigier,  Diet,  ds  TheoL  iii,  488. 

Intiiiotlon  is  a  name  for  one  of  the  three  modes  in 


which  the  sacrament  is  administered  to  the  laity  of  the 
Eastem  Church  (comp.  Neale,  Introd.  East,  Church]  p. 
525),  viz.,by  brcaliing  the  consecrated  bread  into  the 
consecrated  winę,  and  giving  to  each  communicant  the 
two  elements  together  in  a  spoon,  to  prevent  the  possi- 
bility  of  a  loss  of  either  element.  Some  Greelc  litur- 
gical  writeiB  assert  that  the  practice  of  intinction  was 
introduced  by  Chrysostom  himself  (which  Neale  ap- 
proves),  but  the  traditional  evidence  adduced  docs  not 
wełl  support  this  assertion;  and  the  fact,  which  seems  to 
be  prettf  wełl  eatablished,  that  the  two  elements  were 
of  old  adminifitered  by  two  persona,  and  not  by  one  only, 
as  is  done  at  preaent,  malces  it  doubtful  whethcr  their  acl- 
mixtura  for  communion  was  ever  the  ordinary  practice. 
Bona  {Rerum  Liłurg,  II,  xviii,  3),  however,  says  that  it 
was  forbidden  by  Julius  I  (A.D.  387-852),  w^hose  decree, 
as  given  by  Gratian  {Distind,  ii,  c  7),  spealcs  of  it  as  a 
practice  not  warranted  by  the  Gospel,  in  which  Christ  ia 
repreaented  as  giving  first  his  body  and  then  his  blood 
to  the  apostlea ;  and,  if  this  decree  is  authentic,  it  goes 
to  prove  that  the  practice  waa  Icnown  during  (jhrysos- 
tom's  time.  The  third  Council  of  Braga  (A.D.  675)  de- 
creed  against  it  in  their  flrst  canon  in  the  identical  words 
uaed  by  Julius  I :  ^  Illud,  quod  pro  complemcnto  com- 
mmiionia  intinctam  tradunt  eucharistiam  poptdis,  nec 
hoc  probatum  ex  evange]io  testimonium  recipit,  ubi 
apoetolis  corpus  auum  et  sanguinem  commendayit ;  se- 
orsum  enim  panis  et  seonum  calicls  commendatio  me- 
moratur.  Nam  intinctum  panem  aliis  Christum  non 
pnebuiase  legimus  excepto  illo  tantum  disdpulo,  quem 
proditorem  oetenderet."  Micrologus  (c.  xix)  asserts  that 
the  practice  oontiadicted  the  primitive  canon  of  the  Ro- 
man liturgy,  but  this  certainly  cannot  go  to  prove  the 
time  of  its  introduction  into  the  Eastem  Church.  In 
the  llth  centuiyit  was  fort>idden  by  pope  Urban  II 
(A.D.  1088-1099),  except  in  caaea  of  neceasity ;  and  his 
suGceseor,  Pascal  II,  forbade  it  altogether,  and  ordered 
in  caaea  where  difficulty  of  swallowing  the  solid  element 
occunred,  to  administer  the  fluid  element  alone.  Bona, 
however,  qnotes  from  Ivo  of  Chartres  about  this  time  a 
canon  of  a  Council  of  Tours,  in  which  priests  are  order- 
ed to  keep  the  reseryed  oblation  ^  intincta  in  sanguine 
Christi,  ut  yeraciter  Presbyter  possit  dicere  infirmo,  Cor- 
pua,  et  Sanguis  Domini  nostri  Jesu  Christi  proficiat  tibi 
in  remissionem  peccatorum  et  vitam  Kteraam.*'  The 
ConvocaŁion  of  Canterbury  (A.D.  1175)  expre88ed  itself 
oppoaed  to  the  practice  of  intinction  in  the  following 
plain  language :  **  Inhibemua  ne  quis  quasi  pro  comple- 
mcnto cummunionis  intinctam  alicui  Eucharistiam  tra- 
daL"  But  from  the  word  compiementum  the  practice  for- 
bidden seema  to  have  been  as  much  the  consumption  of 
the  superabundant  elements  by  the  laity  (directcd  in 
one  of  the  modem  mbrics  of  the  Church  of  England)  as 
that  of  intinction.  There  can  be  no  doubt,  however, 
that  the  Western  Chureh  always  stood  committed  against 
the  practice,  though  some  think  that  traces  of  it  can  be 
found,  e.  g.  in  the  ancient  Irish  Yisitation  Office,  written 
about  the  8th  century,  and  which  was  published  by  Sir 
William  Bentham  (comp.  Hart,  Acc/ip^.  iSecord!*,  Introd. 
xiv). — Blunt,  Theol.  Diet,  i,  355.     See  Conoomitant. 

Intolerance  is  a  word  chiefiy  used  in  reference  to 
those  persona,  churches,  or  sodeties  who  do  not  allow 
men  to  think  for  themselves,  but  impose  on  them  arti- 
cles,  creeds,  ceremoniea,  etc,  of  their  own  devi8ing.  See 

TOLERATION. 

Nothing  is  more  abhonrent  from  the  genius  of  the 
Christian  religion  than  an  intolerant  spirit  or  an  iutol- 
erant  church.  **  It  has  inspired  its  votarie8  with  a  sar- 
age  ferocity;  has  plunged  the  fatal  dagger  into  inno- 
cent  blood;  dcpopulated  towns  and  kingdoms;  over- 
thrown  states  and  empircs,  and  brought  down  the  right- 
eous  vengeance  of  heaven  upon  a  guilty  world.  The 
pretence  of  superior  knowledge,  sanctity,  and  auŁhority 
for  its  support  b  the  dŁsgrace  of  reason,  the  gricf  of  wis- 
dom,  and  the  parox3r8m  of  folly.  To  fetter  the  con- 
science  is  injustice;  to  insnare  it  is  an  act  of  sacrilege; 
but  to  torture  it  by  an  attempt  to  force  its  feelings  la 


INTORCETTA 


630 


INTRODtrCnON 


bombie  intolenmce;  it  is  Łhe  most  abandoned  riolation 
of  all  the  maxim8  of  religion  and  morality.  Jesus  Christ 
formed  a  kiugdom  purely  spiritual :  the  apostles  exer- 
cLsed  only  a  spińtual  auŁhority  under  the  direction  of 
Jesus  Christ  ^  particular  churches  were  united  only  by 
faith  and  love  ^  in  all  civil  affairs  they  submitted  to  civil 
magislracy ;  and  in  religious  concems  they  were  govem- 
ed  by  the  reasoning,  advicC|  and  exhortations  of  their 
own  officers :  their  censures  were  only  honest  reprools ; 
aud  their  cxcommimications  were  oidy  dedarations  that 
such  ofifeudeis,  being  incorrigible,  were  no  longer  ac- 
counted  members  of  their  communitles." 

Let  it  ever  be  remembered,  therefore,  that  no  man  or 
men  have  any  authorlty  whatever  from  Christ  oyer  the 
coiisciences  of  othersi  or  to  peraecute  the  persona  of  any 
whose  religious  principles  agree  not  with  their  own. 
See  Lowell's  Sermons;  Robinson^s  Ciaude,  ii,  227,  229; 
Saurin^s  Sermont,  voL  iii,  Preface ;  Locke,  Oovernmeni 
and  Tokration;  Memoir  of  Roger  WiUianu. — Buck, 
TheoL  Diet.  s.  v.    See  Jcdoment,  Priyate, 

Intoroatta,  Prosper,  a  Roman  Catholic  Sicilian 
who  went  to  China  as  a  Jesoit  missionary,  was  bom  at 
Piazza  in  1625.  He  had  first  studied  law,  but,  believing 
it  to  be  his  duty  to  serre  the  Church,  he  joined  the  or- 
der of  the  Jesuits,  and  prepared  for  the  missionary  field 
in  Chioa.  Herę  he  enoountered  many  obstacles,  but^ 
notwithstanding,  succeeded  in  making  many  conrerts. 
Persecuted  by  the  Chinese,  he  courageously  poshed  his 
work  forward,  and  became  one  of  the  greatest  of  the 
Jesuitical  missionaries  to  that  country.  He  died  Oct. 
8, 1696.  His  works  evince  a  careful  and  continued  study 
of  the  language  of  the  country  in  which  he  aimed  to  es- 
tablish  his  peculiar  religious  creed;  and  it  might  be 
well  for  Protestant  missionaries  sent  to  Asiatic  and  oth- 
er  heathen  iields  of  missionary  work  to  imitate  the  great 
zeal  which  has  animated  so  many  of  the  missionaries  of 
the  Romish  Church,  and  which  has  secured  them  often- 
times  greater  prominence  than  the  Protestant  laborers. 
He  wrote  TaVuo  (or  "  the  great  study  of  Confucius  and 
of  hisdiscipleTseu-ase"),  edited,with  aLatin  translation, 
by  Father  lgnące  de  Coeta  (1662) : — Tchoutiff-young  (or 
"Inyariability  in  the  intermediate  course") ;  one  of  the 
four  books  of  Confudanism,  preceded  by  a  life  of  Confu> 
cius :  ConfucH  Viia  (Goa,  1669,  smali  fol)  -.-^Lttnyu  ('<  the 
book  of  Confucius's  philóeophical  discnssions")  (without 
place  or  datę,  1  roi.  smali  foL) : — Tettinumium  de  CuUu 
Sinensi  (Lyon,  1700,  8vo) : — Compendiosa  Narrał,  delio 
JStało  delia  Miesione  Cinete^  cominciando  daW  cmno  1581, 
sino  al  1669  (Romę,  1671  or  1672, 8vo).  There  also  re- 
mains  still  in  M&  a  complóte  paraphrase  of  the  four 
books  of  Confudus.  See  Hoefer,  Nouv,  Biog,  Gen,  xxv, 
931. 

Intrepidity  is  a  term  used  to  designate  a  disposi- 
tion  of  mind  unaffected  with  fear  at  the  approach  of 
danger.  Rcsolution  dther  banishes  fear  or  surmounts 
it,  and  is  firm  on  all  occasions.  Courage  is  impatient  to 
attack,  undertakes  boldly,  and  is  not  lessened  by  diffi- 
culty.  Valor  acts  with  vigor,  gives  no  way  to  resist- 
ance,  but  pursues  an  enterprise  in  spite  of  oppodtion. 
Brarery  knows  no  fear ;  it  runs  nobly  into  danger,  and 
prefers  honor  to  life  itself.  Intrepi(Uty  encounters  the 
greatest  perils  with  the  utmost  coolness,  and  dares  even 
present  death.  This  is  especially  the  case  with  the 
martyrs  of  Christianity.  No  persecution,  howerer  great, 
did  they  fear  to  encounter  for  the  sake  of  their  religious 
belief,  and  death  was  wdcomed  as  the  crowning  yictory 
over  error  and  superstition. — Henderson's  Buck,  Theol, 
JMct,  s,y, 

Introduction,  Biblical,  is  now  the  technical  des- 
ignation  for  works  which  aim  to  fumish  a  generał  view 
of  such  subjects  and  questions  as  are  preliminaiy  to  a 
proper  expo8ition  of  the  sacred  books,  the  correspond- 
ing  branch  of  Biblical  science  being  often  styled  "  Isa- 
GOGics,"  in  a  strict  sense.  The  word  "introduction" 
being  of  rather  vague  signification,  there  was  also  for> 
merly  no  definitc  idea  attached  to  the  expression  "Bib- 


lical IntrodueHon."  In  worka  <m  thia  subject  (as  la 
Home's  Introduction)  might  be  found  oontents  beioog- 
ing  to  geography,  antiąuities,  interpretation,  oatnnl 
history,  and  other  branches  of  knowledgei.  Erei  the 
usual  oontents  of  Biblical  introdnctions  were  so  uit- 
connected  that  Schldermacher,  in  hia  Kurtę  Zkintd- 
lung  des  Theologitchm  Studium$j  justly  caUs  it  em  i/oft- 
cherUi;  that  is,  a  fanago  or  omiiium-gafcherum.  Bib- 
lical introduction  was  usually  deacńbed  as  consistinf;  of 
the  yarious  branches  of  preparator>'  kuowledge  reąuiaite 
for  viewing  and  treating  the  Bibie  oorrectly.  It  wu 
distinguished  from  Biblical  history  and  archamlogy  by 
being  less  intimatdy  connected  with  what  is  usually 
called  history.  It  comprised  tieatiscs  on  the  origin  of 
the  Bibie,  on  the  original  huiguagea,  on  the  tFansladoos, 
and  on  the  history  of  the  sacred  text,  and  was  dirided 
into  generał  and  special  introduction.  An  endeavor  to 
remore  this  ragueness  by  fumishing  a  firm  definition 
of  Biblical  introduction  was  madę  by  Dr.  Credner  (in 
his  Einleitung,  noticed  below).  He  defined  Biblical  in- 
troduction to  be  the  history  of  the  Bibie,  and  divided  it 
into  the  following  parto:  1.  The  hbtory  of  the  sepante 
Biblical  books;  2,  the  history  of  the  collection  of  tbeee 
books,  or  of  the  canon ;  8,  the  history  of  the  spread  of 
these  books,  or  of  the  translations  of  it;  4,  the  history 
of  the  presenration  of  the  text ;  5,  the  history  of  the  in- 
terpretation  of  it  l*he  same  hietorical  idea  has  been 
advocated  by  H%vemick  (in  his  Einleił.\  and  morę  ptr- 
ticularly  by  Hupfdd  (Beffrif  u.  Methode  der  bibL  AwŁ 
1844).  This  view,  however,  has  not  generally  been  ao- 
ąuiesced  in  by  Biblical  scholars,  being  ręgarded  as  too 
limited  and  special  a  treatment,  inasmuch  as  the  esd 
in  view  is  to  fumish  a  solution  of  such  questions  as  anse 
upon  the  Bibie  as  a  book,  yet  excluding  aucfa  prepars- 
tory  Sciences  in  generał  as  philology,  arcłuBolog}',  and 
exegesis,  the  first  two  of  which  rather  relate  to  all  an- 
dent  writings,  and  the  last  to  passages  in  detaiL  By 
common  consent,  treatises  on  Bibfical  introduction  bave 
now  usually  oome  to  embrace  the  fidd  covered  by  the 
artides  on  the  several  books  as  giyen  in  this  Cfdopa- 
dia,  and  the  topics  legitimatdy  induded  in  this  depait- 
ment  of  Biblical  science  may  briefly  be  summed  np 
under  the  following  heads,  which  may,  howerer,  some- 
times  reąuire  to  be  differenUy  arranged,  or  eyen  com- 
bined:  1,  Authorsliip ;  2,  datę;  8,  plaoe;  4,  inapiradoa; 
5,  contents;  6,  style;  7,  peculiar  difficulties— of  the  8ev- 
eral  books,  with  the  literaturę  and  commentaries  ap- 
pended.  In  this  way  the  old  diyision  of  generał  and 
special  introduction  is  preseryed  only  so  far  that  wmc 
treatises  are  on  all  the  books  of  the  Old  or  New  Tesu- 
ment  in  order,  while  others  take  up  a  single  book  only 
— the  latter  usually  as  prolegomena  to  a  Bppumte  oom- 
mentaiy;  and  the  wider  topics  formeriy  diacuased  are 
rdegated  to  their  appropriate  and  separate  spheres,  e.  g. 
in  addltion  to  Archajology  (including  Geography,  Chro- 
nology,  Histor}',  and  Antiquities  proper),  Lericologr 
(inducting  radical  and  comparatiye  philology,  and  syno- 
nymes),  and  Grammar  (induding  all  the  peculiańcies 
of  Hebraistic  and  Hellenistic  phraseology,  poetical  modę* 
of  expres8ion,  rhetorical  traits,  etc.)— the  following  morę 
especially :  the  Canon,  Criticism,  bispiration,  and  Intei^ 
pretation  (q.  v.  scyerally).  With  these  prelktoiy  di*- 
tincUons,  we  proceed  to  giye  a  sketch  of  the  histoncal 
deydopment  of  tliis  department  of  Biblical  Sdenoe,  with 
some  critidsms  upon  the  seyeral  works  in  which  it  his 
been  eydyed.  In  these  remarks  we  shall  laigdy  ayail 
ourselyes  of  the  artide  on  the  subject  in  Kitto*s  Osrrfo- 
peedia;  see  also  Bleck'8  IntroŁ  to  tke  O.  r.(Lond.  1«69), 
i,  5  8q. 

The  Greek  word  tltrayarffin  in  the  aense  of  an  mbro- 
duction  to  a  adence,  occnrs  only  in  later  Greek,  and  was 
first  used,  to  denote  an  introduction  to  the  right  nndei^ 
standing  of  the  Bibie,  by  Adrian,  a  Greek  who  probably 
liyed  in  the  5Łh  century  after  Christ.  'Aiptóiwf  hoo' 
ywyiy  rw  ypf^^hc  »  *  S""*!!  *»o*^  *^«  ohjcct  of  which 
is  to  assist  readers  who  are  miaoąaainted  with  Biblical 
phraseology  in  rightly  undemtending  pecnliar  wonla 


INTRODUCTION 


631 


INTRODTJCTION 


and  ezpreniona.  Jt  was  fint  edited  by  Darid  H58chel, 
under  Uie  tiile  of  Adrian!  IwLgogt  m  Sacram  JSeripturttm 
Gnece  cum  SchoHis  (Augustn  Yindobonse,  1602,  4to), 
and  was  reprinted  in  the  Critici  Sacri  (London  ed.  vol. 
yiii ;  Frankfoit  edit.  voL  vi).  Before  Adrian,  the  want 
of  sii^ilar  works  had  already  been  fdt,  and  books  of  a 
eorresponding  tendency  were  in  circidjition,  but  they  did 
not  bear  the  tiUe  of  tinayutyh,,  Melito  of  Sardis,  who 
lived  in  the  hitter  half  of  the  2d  century,  wrote  a  book 
under  the  title  ?)  rAcic,  being  a  kry  both  to  the  Oki  and 
to  the  New  Testament  The  so-called  At^fic,  which 
were  written  at  a  hiter  period,  are  books  of  a  similar  de- 
Bcriptioii.  8onie  of  these  Ać(<fc  have  been  printed  in 
Matth»rs  Sovum  Tetttanentttm  Grmce,  and  in  Boisson- 
ade'8  Antcdoła  Graca  (voL  iii,  Parisiis,  1881).  These 
are  merely  linguistic  introdnctions;  but  there  was  scon 
felt  the  want  of  woiks  which  roight  8olve  other  que8- 
tiona,  sttch  as,  for  instanoe,  what  are  the  prindples 
which  ahould  guide  us  in  BiUical  interpretation  ?  The 
Donatist  Ticonius  ¥nrote,  about  the  year  880,  Reguła  ad 
imtettufamlam  et  mvetdei»dam  Intelligentiam  Scriptura- 
rum  Sepiem.  St.  Augustine,  in  his  work  De  Dodrinu 
CkruHatia  (iii,  802),  says  conceming  these  seren  rules 
that  the  auŁhor*s  intention  was  by  means  of  thcm  to 
open  the  secret  sense  of  Holy  Writ,  *<  as  if  by  a  key." 
There  aroee  also  a  ąuestion  conceming  the  extent'of 
Holy  Writ — ^that  is  to  say,  what  belonged,  and  what  did 
not  belong  to  Holy  Writ;  and  also  respecting  the  con- 
tents  of  the  separate  Biblical  books,  and  the  order  in 
which  they  should  follow  each  other,  etc.  About  A.D. 
650,  Cassiodorus  yrrote  his  InstititHones  Dirina.  He 
mendons  in  this  work,  under  the  nanic  of  Introductores 
Dirnta  Scriptura^  fire  authors  who  had  been  engaged 
in  Biblical  inrestigations,  and  in  his  tenth  chapter 
speaka  of  them  thus:  **Let  us  eagerly  retum  to  the 
guides  to  Holy  Writ;  that  is  to  say,  to  the  Donatist 
Ticonius,  to  St.  Augustine  on  Christian  doctrine,  to  Adri- 
an, Encherius,  and  Junillus,  whoni  I  have  sedulously 
ooUected,  in  order  that  works  of  a  similar  purport  might 
be  oombined  in  one  Tolume."  Henceforward  the  title 
Jntroduetio  in  Scripturam  Sacram  was  established,  and 
remained  current  for  all  works  in  which  were  8olved 
ąufistions  introductoiy  to  the  sludy  of  the  Bibie.  In 
the  Western  or  Latin  Church,  during  a  thousand  years, 
scarody  any  addition  was  roade  to  the  collection  of  Cas- 
ńodorus,  while  in  the  Eastem  or  Greek  Church  only 
two  works  written  during  this  long  period  deserye  tę  be 
mentioned,  both  bearing  the  title  Iwo^i/ic  r^c  ^tiac 
ypa^iic.  One  of  these  works  is  falsely  ascribed  to 
Athanańus,  and  the  other  as  falsely  to  ChTysostom. 

The  Dominican  friar  Santes  Pagninus,  with  the  in- 
tention of  reriewing  the  Biblical  knowledge  of  Jerome 
and  St.  Augustine,  publtshed  his  Isagoge  ad  Sacra»  Lit- 
eroi,  liber  umciu  (CoIoni«,  1640,  foL),  a  work  which,  con- 
aidering  the  time  of  its  appearance,  was  a  great  step  in 
adrance. 

The  work  of  the  Dominican  friar  Sixtu8  of  Sienna, 
BibUotAeea  Sancta  expracipui»  CathoUca  Ecdesia  auc- 
iarOms  coUecta^  et  in  octo  libro*  digeata  (Yenetiis,  1566; 
freąnently  reprinted),  is  of  greater  importance,  although 
it  is  manifeatly  written  under  the  infiuence  of  the  In- 
qaisition,  which  had  just  been  restored,  and  is  percepti- 
bly  shackled  by  the  decrees  of  the  Council  of  Trent ;  but 
Sixtus  fumished  also  a  list  of  books  to  be  used  by  a  true 
Catholic  Christian  for  the  right  undei«tanding  of  Holy 
Writ,  as  well  as  the  prindples  which  should  guide  a  Ko- 
man Catholic  in  criticism  and  interpretation.  The  de- 
crees of  the  Council  of  Trent  prerented  the  Roman  Cath- 
olics  fnnn  moving  fredy  in  the  field  of  Biblical  inyesti- 
gatioD,  while  the  Protestants  sealously  carried  out  their 
researches  in  rarious  directions.  The  Illyrian,  Matthias 
FUcina,  in  his  C/ortf  Scripłura  SacrcCj  »eu  de  Sermone 
Saerarum  Literarum  (Basie,  1567,  in  folio),  fumished  an 
exoeUent  work  on  Biblical  Hermeneutics ;  but  it  was 
surpassed  by  the  Prolegomena  of  Brian  Walton,  which 
bekmg  to  his  celebrated  Bibiia  Sacra  Polffglotla  (Lond. 
1657,  ais  yols.  foL).    These  Prolegomena  contain  much 


that  will  always  be  accounted  yaluable  and  neoeaaary 
for  the  trae  criticism  of  the  sacred  texL  They  hare 
been  published  sepaiately,  with  notes,  by  archdeaoon 
Wrangham  (1528,  2  toIs.  8vo).  Thus  we  haye  seen 
that  excellent  works  were  produced  on  isolated  portions 
of  Biblical  introduction,  but  they  were  not  cqualled  in 
merit  by  the  works  in  which  it  was  attempted  to  fur- 
nish  a  whole  system  of  Biblical  introduction.  The  fol- 
lowing  Biblical  introductions  are  among  the  bcst  of 
thoee  which  were  pubhshed  about  that  period :  Biyetus 
(1627) ;  Michaelis  Wailheri  Officina  BHAica  norifer  ada- 
perta,  etc.  (Lippiw,  first  jmbhshcd  in  1686);  Abrahami 
CaloYLi  CrUicv8  Sacer  Biblicue,  etc  (Yitembergie,  1648) ; 
Hottinger,  Tkesaur,  Pkilologicys,  teu  Claria  Script  Sac, 
(Tiguri,  1649) ;  Hddegger,  Enckiridion  Bibłicum  ttpo- 
fŁVfifiovtKÓv  (Tiguri,  1681) ;  Lensden,  a  Dutchman,  pub- 
lished a  work  entitled  PhUologua  Hehraw,  etc.  (Utrecht, 
1666) ;  and  PhHologut  Uehr.-Grtecut  Gffieralis  (Utrecht, 
1670);  Pfeiffer  (Ultraj.  1704) ;  Van  Til  (1720-22);  Du 
Pin  (1701);  Calmet(1720);  Moldenhauer  (1744);  Bor- 
ner  (1758) ;  Goldhagen  (1766-8) ;  Wagner  (1796).  Most 
of  these  works  have  freąuently  been  reprinted. 

The  dogmatical  zeal  of  the  Protestants  was  greatly 
exdted  by  the  work  of  Louis  Capelle,  a  reformcd  dirine 
and  leamed  profeesor  at  Saumur,  which  appeared  under 
the  title  of  Ludovici  Cappelli  Criiica  Sacra ;  tire  de  ta- 
riis  qua  in  reieris  Teetamenli  Jihris  occurrunt  Ifctionibus 
iibri  sex  (Parisiis,  1660).  A  leamed  Roman  Catholic 
and  priest  of  the  Oratory,  Richard  Simon,  rightly  per- 
ceiyed,  from  the  dogmatical  bile  stirred  up  by  Capelle, 
that  Biblical  criticism  was  the  most  effectiye  wcapon  to 
be  cmployed  against  the  Protestantism  which  had  grown 
cold  and  stiff  in  dogmatics.  He  therefore  deroted  his 
critical  knowledge  of  the  Bibie  to  the  seirice  of  the  Ro- 
man Catholic  Church,  and  endeayored  to  inflict  a  death- 
blow  upon  Protestantism.  The  result,  howe\'er,  was  the 
production  of  Simon's  excellent  work  on  Biblical  criti- 
cism, which  becarae  the  baris  on  which  the  science  of 
Biblical  introduction  was  raised.  Simon  was  the  first 
who  correctly  separatcd  the  criticism  of  the  Old  Testa- 
ment from  that  of  the  Kew.  His  works  on  Biblical  in- 
troduction appeared  under  the  following  titks :  Hiatoire 
Critigue  du  yieux  Tfrtament  (Paris,  1678).  This  work 
was  inaccurately  reprinted  at  Amsterdam  by  Elzerir  in 
1679,  and  subBequently  in  many  other  bad  piratical  edi- 
tions.  Among  these  the  most  complcte  was  that  print- 
ed, togcthcr  with  sevcral  polcmical  trcatiscs  cccosioned 
by  this  work,  at  Rotterdam,  in  lG85,4to  i—Ifigtoire  Cri- 
tigue du  Texie  du  Noureau  Tettamtnt  (Rotterdam,  1689) : 
— Ilistoire  Crifigue  des  Yersions  du  Noureau  Tistamenł 
(Rotterdam,  1690) : —  Histoire  Critigue  dfs  principaux 
Commentateurs  du  Noureau  Testamait  (Rotterd.  1698). 
By  these  excellent  critical  works  Simon  established  a 
claim  upon  the  gratitude  of  all  real  friends  of  truth ;  but 
he  was  thanked  by  nonę  of  the  preyailing  parties  in  tho 
Christian  Church.  The  Protestants  saw  in  Simon  only 
an  enemy  of  their  Church,  not  the  thoroiigh  inrcstiga- 
tor  and  fnend  of  truth.  To  the  Roman  Catholics,  on 
the  other  hand,  Simon^s  works  appeared  to  be  dcstruc- 
tire,  because  they  demonstrated  their  eccleńastical  de- 
crees to  be  arbitrary  and  unhistoricaL  The  Jfistoire 
Critigue  du  Vieux  Testament  was  suppressed  by  the  Ro- 
man Catholics  in  Paris  immediately  afler  its  publica- 
tion,  and  in  Protestant  countries,  also,  it  was  forbidden  to 
be  reprinted.  Neyerthdess,  the  linguistic  and  truły  sci- 
entific  researches  of  Pocock ;  the  Oriental  school  in  the 
Netherlands;  the  unsurpassed  work  of  Humphiy  Hody, 
I)e  Bibliorum  Tertibus  Originalibus  YersionibuSy  etc. 
(Oxoniae,  1706,  folio) ;  the  excellent  criticism  of  MiU,  in 
his  Novum  Testamentum  Gręecum  cum  Lectionibus  Yari- 
antUnts  (Oxoniie,  1707,  folio),  which  was  soon  foUowed 
by  Wetstein's  Novum  Testamentum  Gracum  editionis  re- 
cepta,  cum  lActiombus  Yarianfibus  (Amstelodami,  1751- 
62,  folio),  and  by  which  even  Bengel  was  conyinced,  in 
spite  of  his  ecdesiastical  orthodoxy  (comp.  BengeKi  Ap- 
paratus  Criticus  Nori  Testamenti,  p.  684  są.) ;  the  Bib- 
lical works  by  H.  Michaelis,  espedally  his  Bibiia  Bebro- 


INTRODUCnON 


632 


INTRODUCTION 


ioa  ex  Manuscriptis  et  impresńa  CodicSbus  (Habe,  1720), 
and  Keimicott'8  Vetua  Teitameutum  Hebrcńcum  cum  ta- 
riis  lACłiombtŁS  (Oxoii.  1776),  and  the  leriyal  of  dąsu- 
cal  philology — all  ŁhU  gradually  led  to  reaults  which  co- 
incided  with  Simon*8  criticism,  and  showed  the  enor- 
mou8  difTerenoe  between  historical  truth  and  the  arbi- 
trary  ecclesiastical  opłnions  which  were  still  pievalent 
in  the  worka  on  Biblical  introduction  by  Fritius,  Black- 
wali,  CarpzoY,  Yaii  Til,  Moldenhauer,  and  otheia.  J.  D. 
Mlchaelis  mildly  cndeavored  to  recondle  the  Chtiich 
with  historical  truth,  but  has  been  rewarded  by  the 
anathemas  of  the  ecdeaiaatical  party,  who  have  pro- 
nounced  him  a  heretic.  By  their  ecdesiastical  perse- 
cutors,  Richard  Simon  was  falsely  described  to  be  a  dis- 
ciple  of  the  pantheistical  Spinoza,  and  Mlchaelis  as  a  fol- 
lower  of  both  Simon  and  Spinoza.  Howerer,  the  medi- 
ating  endeavor8  of  Michaelis  gradually  preyailed.  His 
Eudeitung  in  die  GottUchm  Schrifhen  des  Neuen  Bundes 
(Gottingen,  1750, 8 vo)  was  greatly  improyed  in  later  edi- 
tions,  and  the  fourth  (1788,  2  vola.  4to)  was  translated 
and  essentially  augmented  by  Herbert  Manh,  after- 
wards  bishop  of  Peterborough,  under  the  title  Intro- 
duction to  the  Neto  Testament,  etc  (Cambridge,  1791- 
1801, 4  yols.  8vo).  Michaelis  commenced  also  an  intro- 
duction to  the  Oid  Testament,  under  the  title  Einleitung 
in  die  Góttlichen  Schri/ten  des  Alten  Bundes  (Hamburg, 
1787).  £d.  Harwood*8  New  Introduction  to  the  Study 
ondKnowledffe  ofthe  New  Testament  (London,  1767-71 ; 
translated  into  German  by  Schulz,  Halle,  1770-73,  8 
Yols.)  oontains  so  many  heterogeneous  materials  that  it 
scarcely  belongs  to  the  science  of  mtroduction. 

The  study  of  New-Testament  introduction  was  in 
Crermany  especially  promoted  also  by  J.  S.  Semler,  who 
died  at  Halle  in  1791.  It  was  by  Scmier's  influence 
that  the  critical  works  of  Richard  Simon  were  translated 
into  German,  and  the  works  of  Wetstein  re-edited  and 
circulated.  The  original  works  of  Semler  on  Biblical 
introduction  are  his  Apparatus  ad  liberałem  Novi  Tes- 
tamenti  Interpretationem  (Hake,  1767),  and  his  Abhand- 
lung  voafreier  Untersuchung  des  Canons  (Halle,  1771-6, 
4  Yola.).  Semler's  school  produced  J.  J.  GriesbcM^h,  who 
died  at  Jena  in  1812.  Griesbach^s  labors  in  correcting 
the  text  of  the  New  Testament  are  of  great  value.  K. 
A.  H&nlein  published  a  work  called  Ilandbuch  der  Ein^ 
leitunff  in  die  Schrijlen  des  Neuen  Testamentes  (Erlangen, 
1794-1802, 2  rola.),  in  which  he  followed  the  mii^ersity 
lectnres  of  Griesbach.  A  sccond  edition  of  this  work 
appeared  in  1801-9, 3  voK  This  introduction  contains 
excellent  materials,  but  is  wanting  in  decisiye  historical 
crlticism. 

J.  G.  Eichhom,  who  died  at  Gottingen  in  1827,  was 
formed  in  the  school  of  Michaelis  at  Gottingen,  and  was 
inspired  by  Herder*s  poetical  views  of  the  £ast  in  gen- 
erał, and  of  the  literaturę  of  the  ancient  Hebrews  in 
particular.  Eichhom  commenced  his  Introduction  when 
th?  Łimcs  were  iuclined  to  give  up  the  Bibie  altogether 
as  a  production  of  priestcraft  inapplicable  to  the  present 
perio(L  He  endeayored  to  bring  the  oontents  of  the 
Bibie  into  barmony  with  modem  modes  of  thinking,  to 
explain,  and  to  recommend  them.  He  sought,  by  means 
of  hypotheses,  to  fumish  a  elew  to  their  origin,  without 
Bufficiently  regarding  strict  historical  criticism.  Eich- 
hom'8  Eiideitung  m  das  Alte  Testament  was  first  pub- 
lished at  Leipsic  in  1780-83,  in  three  yolumes.  The 
fifth  edition  was  published  at  Gottingen,  1820-24,  in  five 
yolumes.  His  Einleitung  in  das  Neue  Testament  was  firet 
published  at  Leipzig  (1804-27, 6  yols.).  The  earlier  yol- 
umes haye  been  republished.  The  exteraal  treatment 
of  the  materials,  the  style,  aim,  and  many  separate  por^ 
tions  of  both  worka,  are  masterly  and  excellent;  but, 
with  regaid  to  linguistic  and  historical  reaearch,  they 
are  feeble,  and  oyerwhelmed  with  hypotheses. 

Leonhardt  Bertholdt  was  a  yery  diUgent  but  uncrit- 
ical  compiler.  He  madę  a  considerable  step  backwards 
in  the  science  of  introduction,  not  only  by  reuniting  the 
Old  and  New  Testament  into  one  whole,  but  by  eyen 
iDtermixing  the  separate  writings  with  each  ot  ber,  in 


his  work  entitled  Biatorisch-kriHsehe  Einkituiig  m 
sdfnmtUche  kanomsche  und  apocryphische  SekrifUn  da 
Alten  und  Neuen  Testamentes  (Eiiuig.  1812-19,6  yol&> 

Augustrs  Grundriss  einer  hisf.-kHt,  Eitdeit^  ins  A,Z 
(Lpz.  1806, 1827)  contains  liUle  new  or  originaL 

The  Isagoge  Historioo-critica  in  LUrros  Novi  Feederit 
Sacros  (Jena),  1880)  of  H.  A.  Schott  is  marę  distin- 
guished  by  diligence  than  by  penetralion. 

The  Lekrhuch  der  Historisck-kritisehen  Eudeituiiff  i» 
die  Bibel  A.undN.T,  Berlin  (pt.  i,  O.  T.  1817,  and oft- 
en  Since ;  pt.  ii,  1826,  and  later),  by  W.  M.  L.  de  Weite, 
is  distinguished  by  breyity,  precision,  critical  penetri- 
tion,  and  in  some  parta  l^  completeness.  This  book 
contains  an  excellent  suryey  of  the  yarious  opiniom 
preyalent  in  the  sphere  of  Biblical  introduction,  inter- 
spersed  with  original  discussions.  Almoat  eyeir  author 
on  Biblical  critidsm  will  find  that  De  Wette  łias  madę 
use  of  his  labors;  but  in  the  purely  hiatorical  poftion 
the  book  is  feeble,  and  indicates  that  the  author  did  not 
go  to  the  first  sources,  but  adopted  the  opinions  of  oth- 
ers;  consequently  the  work  has  no  intemal  harmonr. 
An  English  translation  of  thb  work,  with  additions  by 
the  translator,  Theodora  Parker,  has  been  published  in 
thia  country  (Boston,  1850).  A  new  (the  8th)t  thoi^ 
oughly  reyised  edition  ofthe  German,  not  only  cmbody- 
ing  all  the  later  results  of  exegetical  researcbes,  but  also 
modifying  many  of  the  views  of  De  Wette,  haa  recently 
been  published  by  Prof.  E.  Schrader  (Beri  toL  i  [O-T.], 
1869). 

K.  A.  Oedner  embodied  the  results  of  hia  method  (see 
aboye)  of  the  critical  cxamination  of  the  booka  of  the 
New  Testament  in  his  woric  Das  Neue  Testament  naA 
seinem  Zweck,  Urspntnge  und  InhaU  (Giessen,  1841-3, 2 
yols.).  His  yiews  are  the  basis  of  Reua's  Geschiehte  der 
IleiUgen  SchriJUn  des  Neuen  Testamentes  (Halle,  1842; 
dd  ed.  1860). 

The  critical  inyestigation  which  preyailed  in  Germa- 
ny after  the  days  of  Michaelis  has  of  late  been  opposed 
by  a  modę  of  treating  Biblical  introduction  not  so  much 
in  the  spirit  of  a  free  search  after  trath  as  in  an  apokn 
getical  and  polemical  style.  This  course^  howeyer,  has 
not  enńched  Biblical  science.  To  this  class  of  booka 
belong  a  number  of  monographs,  or  treatiaes  on  sepa- 
rate subjects;  also  the  Iłimdb.  der  Iłisforiseh4aiiisd^ 
Einleitung  in  das  Alte  Testament  of  H.  A-CHayendck 
(Erlangen,  1837^9,  2  pts.in  3  yola.;  2d  ed.  1854-^6,  by 
Keil,  who  also  edited  pt  i  of  the  first  ed.),  of  which  the 
General  Introduction  and  the  Introduction  to  tke  Penta^ 
teuch  haye  been  translated  into  English  (Edinb.  18d0, 
1852) ;  also  H.  E.  £.  Guericke^s  Einleitung  m  das  Nrue 
Testament  (Halle,  1828),  in  which  too  frequeotly  an 
anathema  agaiust  heretics  seryes  as  a  substitote  fcr 
demonstration.  The  apologetical  tendency  preyails  in 
the  work  of  G.  Hamilton,  entitled  A  General  Introduc- 
tion to  the  Studg  ofthe  Hehrew  Seriptures,  etc  (Dublin, 
1814) ;  in  Thomas  Hartwell  Home's  Introduction  to  tie 
Critical  Studg  and  Knowledge  of  the  Bofy  Scr^ttureSt 
etc.  (Lond.  1818,  4  yols. ;  the  lOth  ed.  of  thia  work  was 
an  entirely  new  production,  and  the  best  hitberto  pro- 
duced in  English,  in  4  yols.  8yo,  1856,  yoL  ii  on  the  O. 
T.  by  Dr.  S.  Dayidson  [sińce  displaced  by  one  by  l^Ir. 
Ayre],  and  yoL  iy  on  the  N.  T.  by  Dr.  S.  P.  Tregiltes) ; 
and  in  J.  Cook's  Inąuiry  into  the  Bookt  ofthe  New  Tea- 
tament  (Edinbuigh,  1824). 

The  Roman  Oatholics  also  haye,  in  modem  timea, 
written  on  Biblical  introduction,  allhough  the  on- 
changeable  decrees  of  the  Cooncil  of  Trent  binder  aU 
free,  critical,  and  scientific  treatment  of  the  aiibjelCt. 
The  Roman  Gatholics  can  treat  Biblical  introduction 
only  in  a  polemical  and  apologetical  manner,  and  aie 
obHged  to  keep  up  the  attention  of  their  readers  by  in- 
troducing  leamed  archaological  reaearches,  which  con- 
ceal  the  want  of  iree  moyement.  Thia  latter  modę  waa 
adopted  by  J.  Jahn  (who  died  at  Yienna  in  1816)  in  hia 
Einleitung  in  die  góttlichen  Bwdner  des  aUen  Bundes  (Yi- 
enna, 1798,  2  yols.,  and  1802,  8  yols.),  and  in  his  Inłn>- 
ductio  itt  lAbros  Saaros  Veterit  Testamenti  «i  epitoma 


INTRODUCnON 


633 


iNTRorr 


reiaaa  (YieniUB,  1805).  Thb  work  has  been  republiBli- 
ed  by  F.  Ackemumn,  in  -what  aie  aaserted  to  be  the  tbird 
and  fourtb  editiona^  under  the  title  of  Introductw  in  Li- 
hrot  Sacrot  Yeteris  Tertitmentij  u»ilnts  aeademicis  aoeom' 
modata  (YieniiK,  1825  and  1889).  Bat  these  ao-called 
new  editions  are  foli  of  alterations  and  mutilationa; 
whicb  reinove  every  free  espreańon  of  Jahn,  who  be- 
lonj^ed  to  the  liberał  period  of  the  emperor  Joeeph.  J. 
L.  Hug'8  Eudńhmg  w  daa  Neue  Tettameni  (Stuttgart 
and  Tubing.  1800, 2  vola.;  4th  ed.  1847)  sarpaaaes  Jahn*s 
work  in  ability,  and  bas  obtained  much  credit  among 
Protestanta  by  ita  leamed  explanation9,  although  theae 
freąuently  swerve  fnm  the  point  in  ąueatiou.  Hug'8 
work  has  been  translated  into  Engiish  by  the  Key.  D. 
G.  Wait,  LL.D. ;  but  thifl  tranalation  la  much  aurpaaBed 
by  that  of  Foedick,  puUiahed  in  the  United  Stat^  and 
enricbed  by  the  addenda  of  Moees  Stuart  The  polem- 
ical  and  apokgetical  style  preyaila  in  the  work  of  J.  6. 
Heibflt,  HitimucMaitUdte  Emkitung  m  die  Schriflm 
dm  Altm  Te$iamentea  (completed  and  edited  after  the 
dcath  of  the  author  by  Welte,  Cariaruhe,  1840) ;  and  in 
Llntrodttdwn  Historique  et  Criiicue  aux  Lierts  de  tAn- 
cim  H  du  Xouveau  Teatamenł,  by  J.  B.  Glaire  (Patia, 
1839,  4  Yola.).  The  work  of  the  excellent  Feilmoeer, 
who  died  in  1881,  Etnleitung  m  die  Biicher  des  Neuen 
Buftdes  (2d  ed.  Tubmgen,  1830),  forsakes  the  poeition 
of  a  tme  Roman  Catholic,  inasmuch  as  it  is  distinguish- 
ed  by  a  noble  ingenuousness  and  candor.  The  same 
remark  in  a  great  measure  appliea  to  the  still  later  work 
of  Schoh,  Am/L  m  dl  heU,  Schriften  d.A.vnd  M  T,  (voL  i 
generał  introd.  Cologne,  1846^  Among  the  beat  Roman 
Catholic  oootńbutiona  to  this  branch  of  BiUical  litera- 
tore  are  the  worka  of  Reusch,  Lehrb.  der  Einleiiunff  m 
da$  A.T.  (Freib.  dd  ed.  1868),  and  Langen,  Grundrise 
der  EiMtunff  in  das  N,  T.  (Freib.  1868). 

In  Great  Britain,  beaidea  the  above  worka  of  Home 
and  Hamilton,  we  may  especially  iiame  the  following  as 
introductory  in  their  character.  Collier'8  Saertd  Inter- 
preter (1746, 2  yola.  8vo)  was  one  of  the  earliest  publi- 
cations  of  thia  kind.  It  went  through  seyeral  editions, 
and  waa  translated  into  German  in  1750.  It  relatea  both 
to  the  Old  and  New  Testament,  and  is  described  by 
bishop  Karsh  aa  *<  a  good  popular  preparation  for  the 
stody  of  the  holy  Scripturni"  Lardner^s  Hitlory  of  Ihe 
Apoełleg  and  Eeangelisłs  (1756-57,  8  yols.  8vo)  is  de- 
scribed liy  the  same  critic  as  an  admirable  introduction 
to  the  New  Testament.  "  It  is  a  stoiehouse  of  literary 
infomiatinn,  coUected  with  equal  industry  and  fidelity." 
From  this  irork,  fmm  the  English  translation  of  Micha- 
eli8'g  Jntrodvrfiott  (1760,  and  frora  Dr.  Owen'8  Obaerta- 
tioiu  m  the  Oofpels  (1764),  Dr.  Perc>',  bishop  of  Dromore, 
compiled  a  useftil  manuał,  called  A  Key  to  Ihe  New  Tet- 
iamenłf  which  has  gone  through  many  editions,  and  is 
much  in  Tequost  among  the  candidates  for  ordinaUon  in 
the  Esublished  Chiurh.  The  Kej^  to  the  Old  Testament 
(1790),  by  Dr.  (iray,  allerwards  bishop  of  Bristol,  was 
written  in  imitation  of  Percy*s  ooropilation;  but  it  is  a 
moch  morę  elaliorate  performance  than  the  Key  ło  the 
New  Testament.  It  is  a  oompilation  from  a  great  yari- 
ety  of  works,  references  to  which  are  giyen  at  the  foot 
of  each  pagc.  Bishop  Marsh  speaks  of  it  as  **a  yery 
nseful  publication  for  students  of  diyinity,  who  wiU  find 
at  one  %*ie^v  what  mnst  otherwise  be  coUected  from 
many  writers.'*  It  is  now,  howeyer,  almost  cnttrely  be- 
hind  the  times.  Dr.  Harwood's  Introduction  to  the  Study 
ondKiunrMffe  o/the  New  Testament  (1767, 1771,2  yols. 
8yo),  although  notcworthy  in  this  connection,  is  not  prop- 
erly  an  introduction  to  the  New  Testament,  in  the  usuial 
and  proper  sense  <if  the  term.  It  doee  not  descńbe  the 
books  of  the  New  Testamenty  but  is  a  collection  of  dis- 
mtations  relatire  partly  to  the  character  of  the  sacred 
writen^  Jewinh  history  and  customs,  and  to  such  parts 
of  beatheit  aiitii^uities  as  haye  reference  to  the  New  Tes- 
tament The  first  yolume  of  bishop  TomIine's  Elements 
of  Christian  Theology  containa  an  introduction  both  to 
tbe  Old  and  to  the  New  Testament,  and  has  been  pub- 
bahed  in  a  leparate  form.    It  ia  auited  to  ita  purpoae  aa 


a  manuał  for  studenta  in  diyinity;  but  the  standard  or 
present  attainment  cannot  be  yery  high  if,  aa  Marsh 
States,  <'  it  may  be  read  with  adyantage  by  the  most  ex- 
perienced  diyine." 

The  latest  and  most  important  worka  in  this  depart- 
ment  are  the  following:  Hengstenberg,  BeitrSge  zur 
Einleitung insA,B.  (Berlin,  1831) ;  Hertwig,  Tabellen  z, 
Einleittmg  ins  N.  T.  [a  useful  compilation]  (Beri.  1849; 
3d  ed.  1865);  Maier  (Roman  Catholic),  Einleitung  in  d, 
Schrifien  des  N.  T.  (Freib.  1852);  Keil,  I^hrbuch  der 
Historisch  Kriiischen  Einleitung  ins  A  Ite  Test,  (Frankf. 
and  Erlang.  1858  [a  highly  judicious  work  in  most  re- 
spects];  translated  in  Clarke's  Library^  Edinb.  1870,  2 
yols.) ;  Dayidson,  Introd.  to  the  O,  Test,  [a  difTorent  work 
from  that  contained  in  Home  aboye,  and  strongly  Ra- 
tionałistic]  (London,  1862-8, 8  yols.  8vo) ;  Dayidson, /n- 
łrod.  to  the  N,  T,  [an  exccl]ent,  though  rather  non-com- 
mittal  work]  (Lond.  1848-50, 8  yols.  8vo ;  last  edit  1868 
[morę  strongly  indining  to  Rationalism]) ;  Scholten 
(deddedly  Rationalistic),  Hist,  Krit,  Einl  ins  N.  T,  (LpŁ 
1868, 1856) ;  Bleek,  Einleitung  in  d,A.T.  (Berlin,  1860 
[moderately  Rationalistic];  translated  into  English, 
Lond.  1869, 2  yols.  8vo) ;  Bleek,  Einleit,  in  d,  N  T,  (Beii 
1862, 1865;  translated  into  English,  Edinburgh,  1870, 
2  yols.  8yo) ;  Weber,  Kurzgef.  Einl,  in  d.  Schrijh  A .  und 
N,  T.  (Nordl.  1867, 8yo).  Less  generally  known  are  the 
following :  Haneberg,  Versuch  e,  Gesch.  d,  bibl,  offenha- 
rung,  ais  Einleittmg  ins  A.  und  N,  T,  (Regensb.  1860) ; 
Prins,  Jlandbook  to  de  Kennis  r.  d,  heil.  Schriften  d.  O,  e, 
U.  Yerbonds  (Rotterd.  1851-52,  2  yoK) ;  Bauer  (G.  L.), 
Entw.  e.  krit,  Einl.  in  d.  Schrijf}.  d.A.T.  (Nlimb.  1794, 
1801, 1806) ;  Ackermann,  Introduct.  in  Libros  Vet.  Foed, 
(Vien.  1825);  Schmidt,  Hist, -krit,  Einleitung  ins  N.  T, 
(Giessen,  1804, 2  yob.) ;  Schncckenburger, /?«/r.  z,  EtnL 
im  N.  T.  (Stuttg.  1832) ;  Ncudecker,  I^hrbuch  d.  hist,- 
Irit.  Einleit.  ins  N,  T,  (Lpz.  1840) ;  Roman  Catholic : 
Reithmayr,  Einl.  i,  d,  kanonisrh.  Biich.  (Regensb.  1862). 
For  other  works,  see  Walch,  Bibliciheca  Theolog.  iii,  81 
sq.;  iy,  196  sq.;  Danz,  Unirersal  Wdrterb.  s.  y.  Bibel; 
Darling,  Cyclopadia  Bibliographica^  i,  U  sq.;  Herzog, 
Real^EncyHop.  s.  y.  Einleittmg ;  Lange^s  Commentary 
(American  ed.),  i,  62 ;  compare  British  and  For,  Evang. 
Beneuff  October,  1861 ;  Deutsche  Zeitsch.f.  christL  Wis- 
sensch,  April,  1861 ;  Berue  Chref.  1869,  p.  745;  Hanek, 
TheoL  Jahresber,  1868,  iy,  759.    See  Scriptubes,  Holy. 

Introlbo  (I  will  go  tfi),the  word  taken  from  the  5th 
yerse  of  the  42d  Psalm  (in  the  Yulgate),  with  which  the 
Roman  Catholic  pricst,  at  the  foot  of  the  altar,  after 
liaying  madę  the  sign  of  the  cross,  begins  the  mass, 
and  to  which  the  servitor  replies  with  the  rest  of  the 
yerse.  llie  whole  psalm  ia  then  recited  altemately  by 
the  pricst  and  the  seryitor.  In  masses  for  the  dead,  and 
during  Passion-week,  the  psalm  is  not  pronounced. 

Introit  (a.)  {Officium  Sarum,  tttroioc,  Eastem ;  /n- 
jTTYMa,  Ambrosian)  is  the  name  (from  the  Latin  introire, 
to  enter)  of  a  pealm  or  hymn,  but  now  properly  the  former, 
sung  in  some  churches  aa  the  priest  goes  up  to  the  altar 
to  celebrate  the  Eucharist  **  Introitum  autem  yocamus 
antiphonam  illam  quam  chorus  cantat  et  sacerdos  ut 
ascendit  ad  altare  legit  cum  yersu  et  gloria"  (Martene, 
De  A  ntig.  Monach.  Bit.  II,  iy,  9).  Accorduig  to  Symeon 
of  Thessalonica,  the  introit  typifies  the  union  of  men 
and  angels.  According  to  Frecman  (Prinr.  of  Dirine 
Serricey  ii,  816),  the  true  introit  consists  of  the  "  Hymn 
of  the  only-begotten  Son"  in  the  East,  and  the  Gloria  in 
Ercelsis  in  the  further  East  and  the  whole  Western 
Church.  Neale  too  remarks  (Introd.  to  the  East.  Ch,  p. 
868)  that  the  "  introits  of  the  liturgies  of  St.Mark,  and 
St  James,  and  the  Armenian  consist  of  the  hymn  'Only- 
begotten  Son.'"  But,  besides  the  mtroit  proper^  there 
are  generał  in  the  Western  Church  a  psalm  or  hymn, 
with  antiphon,  yarying  according  to  the  season ;  and  in 
the  liturgy  of  Chrysostom  we  flnd  no  less  than  three  of 
these.  Walcott  (Sac,Arch<eoLp.381)  says  the  introit 
is  of  two  klnds:  (1.)  regular,  that  sung  daily ;  (2.)  the 
irtegnlari  which  ia  cłianted  on  featiyals.    The  latter  he 


INTRUSION 


634 


INYESTITURE 


deflcribes  as  having  been  of  old  of  a  grand  and  solemn 
character.  *^  In  a  great  church  there  was  a  procesaion 
roand  Łhe  nave  to  the  sound  of  bells,  and  with  incense, 
passing  out  by  the  smali  gate  of  the  sanctuary  and  re- 
entering  by  the  great  doors.  The  deaoon  then  went  up 
with  the  (rospel  elevated  in  both  his  handa,  and  set  it 
on  the  midst  of  the  altar,  so  as  to  be  seen  by  the  people. 
Then  followed  the  introit,  composed  of  several  anthems, 
succeeded  by  prayers  and  the  Trisagion.  The  priest 
and  deacon  intoned  it,  the  choir  and  people  took  it  up, 
and  a  candlestick  with  three  lights,  as  a  symbol  of  the 
Holy  Trinity,  was  lighted."  The  introit  is  believed  to 
have  originated  with  pope  Celestine  (A.D.  422-432),  c 
430  (comp.  Bona,  iii,  48).  Before  that  time  the  mass 
had  immediately  sucoeeded  the  Epistles  of  Paul  and  the 
Gospel.  "  Its  structure  is  that  of  an  antiphon,  followed 
generally  by  a  whole  psalm  or  a  portion  of  a  psalm 
(compare,  however,  Neale,  Es$ay»  on  Liturgy^  p.  138  8q.), 
and  the  Gloria  Patri,  and  then  by  a  repctitiou  of  the 
whole  or  part  of  the  commencing  antiphoiu  In  the  old 
Gregorian  introit  the  antiphon  was  repeated  three  times, 
a  Gustom  found  also  in  the  Sanim  rite ;  this  tńple  reci- 
tation  being  connected  mystically  with  the  three  laws, 
yiz.,  the  Natural,  the  Mosaic,  and  the  £vangelic"  In 
the  English  Church  the  introit  was  intioduced  by  Ed- 
ward VI,  in  his  Prayer-book,  before  every  collect,  epistle, 
and  gospel  It  is  a  psalm  containing  something  proper 
for  the  i>articular  Sunday  or  holiday  to  which  they  were 
applied ;  but  they  were  afterwards  struck  out,  and  the 
choice  of  the  psalm  was  left  to  the  clergyman.  The  in- 
troits  of  each  Sunday  and  holiday  are  given  by  Wheat- 
ley  in  his  Common  Prayer^  p.  205.  See  Blunt,  TheoL  Cy- 
dop,  i,  35d  sq. ;  Eadie,  Ecdes,  Dicł,  s.  v. ;  Augusti,  Hond- 
Imch  d  Christl  A rchdoL  ii,  773 ;  Siegel,  ArchdoL  iii,  378. 
See  also  Mass. 

(A.)  This  word  also  designates  the  yerses  sung  atthe 
entering  of  the  congregation  into  the  church,  a  custom 
as  old  as  the  4th  century,  called  ingretsa  in  the  Ambro- 
sian  RituaL     See  Palmer,  Originea  LU,  ii,  19. 

Intnislon  (LaŁ.i/i/rudb,  I  thrust  upon),  the  unlaw- 
ful  appropriation  or  usurpation  of  a  church  beneflce,  L  e., 
if  doue  without  the  co-operation  of  the  person  who,  ac- 
cording  to  the  canon,  is  entitled  to  the  benefice.  In  the 
Church  of  Scotland,  the  General  Assembly,  in  1736,  pass- 
ed  "an  act  against  intnision  of  ministers  into  %'Ucant 
congregations ;"  and  the  reason  assigned  is  the  principle 
of  the  Church  of  Scotland, "  that  no  minister  shall  be  in- 
truded  into  any  church  contrary  to  the  will  of  the  con- 
gregation ...  80  as  nonę  be  intruded  into  such  parishes, 
as  they  (tlie  General  Assembly)  regard  the  glory  of  Goil 
and  edification  of  the  body  of  Christ."  See  Hethering- 
ton,  llist.  o/lhe  CL  of  Scotland,  ii,  218, 802. 

Intultlon.    See  Illumination;  Instinct;  Spir- 

ITUALISM. 

Intuition  of  God.    See  God. 

Inveiition  of  the  Cross  is  the  name  of  a  festi- 
val  in  the  Latin  and  Greek  churches,  celebrated  May  8, 
in  memory  of  the  invcntion  of  the  cross  said  to  have 
been  miraculously  discorered  at  Jerusalem  by  Helena, 
the  mother  of  the  emperor  Constantine  the  Great.,  in 
82C.  The  legend  of  it  runs  as  follows :  Helena,  being  ad- 
monished  in  a  dream  to  search  for  the  cross  of  Christ  at 
Jerusalem,  took  a  joumey  thither  with  that  intent ;  and 
having  employed  laborers  to  dig  at  Golgotha,  afler  open- 
ing  the  ground  very  deep  (for  vast  heape  of  rubbish  had 
purposely  been  thrown  there  by  the  spiteful  Jews  or 
heathens),  she  found  three  crosees,  which  she  presently 
conduded  were  the  crosses  of  our  Saviour  and  the  two 
thieves  who  were  crucified  with  him.  But,  being  at  a 
loss  to  know  which  was  the  cross  of  Christ,  she  ordercd 
them  all  three  to  be  applied  to  a  dead  person.  Two  of 
them,  the  story  says,  luid  no  effect ;  but  the  third  raised 
the  carcass  to  life,  which  was  an  eyident  sign  to  Helena 
that  that  was  the  cross  she  looked  for.  As  soon  as  this 
was  known,  every  one  was  for  getting  a  piece  of  the 
cross,  insomuch  that  in  Paulinus's  time  (who,  being  a 


scholar  of  St.  Ambrose,  and  bishop  of  Nola,  flouiiaheA 
about  the  year  420)  there  was  much  morę  of  the  rdics 
of  the  cross  than  there  was  of  the  original  wood.  Where> 
upon  that  father  says  "it  was  miraculously  increased; 
it  yery  kindly  afforded  wood  to  men's  importunate  de- 
sires  without  any  loas  of  its  substancc."  Dr.  Schaff 
comments  on  it  thus :  "The  legend  is  at  best  £untly  m- 
plied  in  Eusebius,  in  a  letter  of  Constantine  to  the  bish- 
op  Macarius  of  Jerusalem  (  Viia  Cotut.  iii,  30— a  paaiage 
which  Gieseler  overlooked — thotigh  in  iii,  2^  where  it 
should  be  expected,  it  is  entirdy  nnnoticed,  as  Gieseler 
correctiy  obeenres),  and  does  not  appear  till  sereiml  de- 
cennia  Later,  first  in  Cyril  of  Jerusalem  (whose  Episf,  od 
Constantium  of  851,  howeyer,  is  considered  by  Gieseler 
and  others,  on  critical  and  theological  grounds,  a  mucb 
later  production),  then,  with  good  agreement  as  to  the 
main  fact,  in  Ambrose,  Chrysostom,  Paulinus  of  Nok, 
Socrates,  Sozomen,  Theodoret,  and  other  fathers.  With 
all  these  witnesses  the  fact  is  still  hardly  crcdibic,  and 
has  against  it  particularly  the  foUowing  oonsideimtions: 
(1.)  The  place  of  the  crucifision  was  desecrated  nndo 
the  emperor  Hadrian  by  heathen  temples  and  stat]iea,be- 
sides  being  filled  up  and  defaced  beyond  recognition. 
(2.)  There  is  no  elear  testimony  of  a  contemporary^  (S.) 
The  pilgrim  from  Bordeaux,  who  yisited  Jerusakem  ia 
883,  and  in  a  suU  extant  Uinerctrium  (  Yetera  Rom,  iiw- 
raria^  ed.  P.  Wesseling,  p.  593)  enumerates  all  the  aacred 
things  of  the  holy  city,  knows  nothing  of  the  holy  cross 
or  its  inyentiou  (comp.  Gieseler,  i,  2, 279,  notę  37;  Edinb. 
ed.  ii,  36).  This  miracle  contributed  yery  much  to  tbe 
increase  of  the  superstitious  use  of  crosses  and  cni(afixe& 
Cyril  of  Jerusalem  remarks  that  about  880  the  splinten 
of  the  holy  cross  filled  the  whole  world,  and  yet,  acoord- 
ing  to  the  aocount  of  the  deyout  but  cródulous  Paiilinns 
of  Nola  (£/>is^.81,aL  11)  (whom  we  mendoned  above), 
the  original  remained  in  Jerusalem  undiminished— « 
continual  miracle !"  (Schaff,  Ck,  Hist,  ii,  450 ;  compare 
particularly  the  minutę  inyestigation  of  this  kgend  by 
Isaac  Taylor,  The  Itwention  o/ the  Cross  and  the  Mirades 
iherewith  anmectedyin  Andent  ChristioMty,  ii,  277-315; 
Wheatley,  Common  Prayer,  p^  61  sq. ;  Walcott,  Sacred 
A  rehaoL  p.  351 ).     See  Choss.     ( J.  H.  W.) 

Inve8titure  (Latin  invesHre,  to  put  on  a  Test  or 
coyering),  in  generał,  is  defined  by  medieyal  wńtcfa  as 
"  the  conferring  or  the  giving  of  poesession  of  a  fief  or  a 
property  by  a  suzerain  lord  to  hb  yassal,"  and  was  oso- 
ally  aocompanied  by  a  certain  ceremoniał,  such  as  the 
deliyery  of  a  branch,  a  banner,  or  an  instrument  of  or- 
fice, morę  or  less  designed  to  signify  the  powcr  or  ao- 
thority  which  it  is  suppoaed  to  conyey  (compare  Gott- 
fried,  abbot  of  V«id6me  [Yindodnensis],  Tradabu  de 
ordhuakme  Epiacoporum  H  IncestUura  Laicorum^  in 
Melch.  Goldasti  Apologiee  pro  Henrico  I  V—adr,  Greyo- 
rii  VII,  P.  crimmationes  [Hamb.  1611,  p.  262]). 

The  contest  about  ecdesiastical  inyestitures  is  ao  in- 
terwoyen  with  the  whole  oourse  of  mediaeyal  hiatnry 
that  a  brief  aocount  of  its  origin  and  naturę  is  indis- 
penaable  to  a  right  understanding  of  many  of  the  moet 
important  events  of  that  period. 

1.  By  the  liberality  of  the  northem  nationa,  the 
Church  of  Komę  had  graduaily  attained  coiisidóable 
wealth,  both  personal  and  reaL  "The  Carloringian 
and  Saxon  emperors,  the  kings  of  England  and  Leon, 
had  yied  with  their  predeceasors  in  b^owing  oa  ber 
layish  benefactions,  and  the  clergy  were,  in  oonseąnence, 
no  strangers  to  wealth.  Many  cburchea  possessed  aev- 
en  or  eight  thousand  manses;  one  with  two  thousand 
passed  for  indifferendy  rich  (oomp.  Hallam,  Afiddle  Ayet, 
ii,  pt  i,  eh.  yii,  p.  142,  smali  English  edition).  Of  the 
lands  possessed  by  the  clergy,  the  greater  part  might 
be  of  little  yalue  at  the  time  they  had  been  gtren.  per- 
haps  consisting  of  wild  and  deseited  tracta  of  ooimoy ; 
but  they  were  capable  of  cultiyation  and  impioyement, 
and  as  ciyilization  and  population  increased  they  be- 
came  a  source  of  gain  and  profit."  Nay,  this  accumnls- 
tion  of  lands  in  the  hands  of  the  cler|ry  pfogicsacd  so 
rapidly  that  it  naturally  excited  the  jeatonsj  of  the  •ovi> 


i 


INVESTITURE 


635 


INVESTrnjRE 


ereigna.  Tbese  prorocations  were  stiU  further  sharp- 
encd  by  another  great  source  of  clerical  enrichment,  viz. 
the  i)a>inent  of  tithes,  which  seemB  to  have  received  a 
legał  sanction  in  the  9th  century,  but  which  in  the  12th 
century  had  become  unirersaL  Still  other  revenues  were 
deńred  from  the  free  donalions  and  offerings  of  the  laity. 
"Some  madę  oblations  to  the  Church  before  enteńng  on 
military  expedition8;  beque8t8  were  madę  by  others  in 
the  terrors  of  disaolution.**  Indeed,  it  became  at  last  a 
pious  custom  to  assign  a  portion  of  the  property  of  a  de- 
ceased  person  to  the  clergy  for  their  diatribution  among 
the  poor  and  the  needy.  But  by  degrees  crafty  Rbman- 
ists  leamed  to  rank  their  churches  among  the  poor,  "and 
as  it  was  believed  that  the  deceased  woiUd  regard  them 
with  special  favor,  they  absorbed  the  lion^s  share  of  the 
alms,  until  the  other  poor  were  forgotten  altogether." 
Thus  what  began  as  a  pious  custom  the  Church  gradu- 
ally  80  distorted  nntil  it  all  ilowed  into  her  coffers,  and 
was  finally  madę  a  compulsory  tribute.  But,  as  if  all 
these  soorces  of  income  were  not  yet  sufficient  to  meet 
the  wants  of  an  indolent  clergy,  dependent  whoUy  for 
their  support  upon  a  superstitious  and  ignorant  class,  in 
the  Hiddle  x\ges  as  well  as  in  our  own  day,  the  pen- 
ances  were  ailded,  and,  by  being  madę  canonical,  were 
impoeed  upon  repentant  offenders;  and  acts  of  lawleas- 
ness,  which  it  ought  to  haye  taken  morę  thaii  an  ordi- 
nary  lifetime  to  discharge,  were  allowed  to  be  commit- 
ted  for  raoney  payments.  "  One  day'8  fasting  might  be 
redeemed  with  a  penny;  a  year*s  fasting 'with  thirty 
shillings,  or  with  freeing  a  8lave  that  was  worth  that 
money  (one  of  the  few  good  things  that  the  Church  of 
the  Middle  Ages  is  giiilty  of).  Many,  in  a  glow  of 
zeal,  yowed  to  go  on  a  cruaade,  but,  when  the  iirst  ardor 
had  cooled  down,  were  glad  to  purchase  exemption. 
Many,  to  atone  for  their  sins,  set  out  on  pilgrimages  to 
well-icnown  shrines;  and,  as  the  clergy  had  not  iailed 
to  inculcate  that  no  atonement  could  be  so  acceptable 
to  Hearen  as  liberał  presents,  large  offcring.  were  pre- 
•ented  to  such  churches  by  the  renaorse  of  rt[.entance. 
At  Romę,  in  the  year  of  jubilee,  two  priests  stood  with 
rakes  in  their  hands  sweeping  the  uncounted  gold  and 
silTer  (rom  the  altars."  No  wordj^r,  then,  that  the 
Church  and  her  offioers  the  btsho-^ .%  as  well  as  all  the 
clergy,  with  possessions  so  ya^t,  irnd  resources  so  un- 
bounded  and  fertile,  t>ccame  the  objects  of  suspicion  to 
temporel  princes,  and  objects  of  enyy  to  the  nobles. 

2.  But,  while  the  enjoyment  of  these  large  posses- 
ńons  waa  undoubtedly  the  primary  cauae  that  proYoked 
the  distrust  and  displeasure  of  8overeigns,  the  struggle, 
włiich  at  the  cloee  of  the  llth  and  at  the  l)eginning  of 
tlie  12th  century  waa  especially  iierce  tietweeu  Germany 
and  England  on  the  one  side  and  Bome  on  the  other, 
was  directly  brought  al)out  by  the  symbols  incidental 
to  fendal  tenures.  Jnyestiture  by  the  lord  and  an  oath 
of  fealty  by  the  tenant,  which  were  necessary  in  the 
caae  of  all  lay  liarons,  łiad  ałready,  eren  in  the  ołd 
Frankish  Church,  l)een  required  of  ecclesiastics  before 
they  were  admitted  to  the  temporalities  of  a  see  (Hal- 
lam,  Middle  Ages^  ii,  part  i,  eh.  vii,  p.  181 ;  Reichel,  See 
o/Home  m  the  Middle  Ages^  p.  856),  and  were  claimed 
to  be  the  special  prerogatires  of  the  king.  But,  instead 
of  fealty  and  homage,  to  which  the  lay  ł>arons  were 
subjected,  the  king  used  83rmłK>ls  in  the  inyestiture  of  ec- 
cle^tics.  It  had  l)een  at  first  the  custom  for  the  king 
to  delirer  or  send  to  the  bishops  on  their  installation 
a  ring  or  a  stalT,  the  one  as  a  8ymlx>l  of  the  close  union 
which  was  to  exiat  lietween  the  bishop  and  his  congre- 
gation,  the  other  as  an  emblem  of  his  ofBce  as  guide 
and  »hepherd.  The  dełiyery  of  the  8ymt>ols  was  in  ac- 
cordance  with  the  fundamental  łegal  principle  which 
the  loyereigns  were  anxious  to  imprcss  on  the  ecclesi- 
astics, riz.  that  all  the  possessions  of  the  Church  were 
only  held  by  consent  of  the  king  and  as  loans  (benefi- 
cia),  for  which  reason  it  became  also  the  bi8hop's  duty 
to  accompany  the  army  when  reąuircd  (see  Eichhom, 
Dniache  Staats-  u.  Bechtagesch.  GtitL  1834,  pt.  i,  p.  202, 
^  516;  Sugenheim,  Staattkben  d,  KUrua  •'.  MitUlal- 


ter,  Berlin,  1839,  part  i,  p.  815).  The  bestowing  of  th« 
symlwls  implied  the  installation  into  office,  and  was 
therefore  called  inyestiture.  llie  inyestiture  with  1x>th 
ring  and  staff  was  not  habitual  at  first.  King  Clo- 
yis  I  (608)  employed  only  the  ring  (Bouquet,  Rerum 
GaUie,  scriptor.  iv,  616:  "Quicquid  est  fisci  nostri— 
per  annulum  tradimus**) ;  Cloyis  II  (628),  Louis  of  Ger« 
many,  Amulf,  and  also  Otto  I,  conferred  only  the  staff, 
while  the  empcrors  Henry  II  and  ConrtLd  II  gave  the 
ring  to  the  bishops  merely  as  a  pledge  that  they  would 
afterwards  be  inyested  with  the  staff.  It  was  not  till  after 
these  emperors  that  the  inyestiture  with  both  ring  and 
Staff  became  generał,  and  the  sceptre  was  added  to  them 
still  later.  (See  Mosheim,  Jnatitutumes  hist,  eccles.  p. 
408,  notę  r. ;  Hullmann,  Gesch,  cfc*  Urtprynga  d.  Stdnde 
t.  Deutschlcmd,  Berlin,  1830,  p.  158;  Planck,  Geschichte 
der  christiichen  Kirchl,  GeaelUchąfUterfasgung,  iii,  462.) 
In  the  ninth  century  the  symbols  were  first  interpreted 
as  referring  not  only  to  the  inyestiture  of  the  clergy  into 
their  ofiSce,  but  also  as  an  obligation  answering  to  the 
oath  of  fealty  as  giyen  by  the  lay  l>arons. 

For  nearly  two  centuries  the  practice  had  continued 
without  exciting  scandal  or  re8istance,when  the  Church 
began  tb  ralse  angry  and  freąuent  complaints  against  the 
aaeumption  of  this  right  by  the  lay  suzerains.  "  On  the 
part  of  the  suzerains  it  was  replied  tłiat  they  did  not 
cłaim  to  grant  by  this  rite  the  spiritual  powers  of  the  of* 
fice,  their  function  ł)eing  solely  to  grant  possession  of  its 
temporalities,  and  of  the  temporal  rank  thereto  annexed. 
But  the  Church  party  urged  that  the  ceremoniał  in  it- 
self  inyolyed  the  granting  of  ftpiritual  powers,  insomuch 
that,  in  order  to  pieyent  the  clergy  from  electing  to  a  see 
when  yacant,  it  was  the  practice  of  the  emperors  to  take 
possession  of  the  crosier  and  ring  until  it  should  be  their 
own  pleasure  to  grant  inyestiture  to  their  fayorites."  ' 
The  disfayor  in  which  the  practice  had  long  been  hcld 
by  the  Church  was  first  expres8ed  by  Clement  II  (see 
Stenzeł,  Geach,  Deutschl,  u.  dfrdnkischen  Kaiser,  pt.  i, 
117 ;  ii,  180),  but  its  most  energetic  opponent  it  really 
first  found  in  the  person  of  Gregory  YII,  who,  having  in 
the  year  1074  enacted  most  stringent  measures  for  the 
repressiDn  of  simony,  proceeded,  in  the  bcginning  of  tlie 
year  1075,  to  condemn,  mider  excommunication,  the 
practice  of  inyestiture,  as  almost  necessarily  connected 
with  simony,  or  leading  to  it.  "The  prołiibition  was 
couched  iu  the  most  imperious  and  coroprehensiye  tenns. 
It  alMolutely  deposed  every  bishop,  abbot,^or  inferior  eo 
clesiastic  who  should  receiye  inyestiture  from  any  lay 
person.  It  interdicted  him — whosoeyer  should  be  guilty 
of  this  act  of  ambition  and  reł)ellion  (which  was  the  sin 
of  idołatry),  mitil  he  should  haye  abandoned  the  bene- 
fice  80  obtained — from  all  communion  in  the  favor  of  St. 
Peter,  and  from  admission  into  the  Church.  And  if 
any  emperor,  duke,  marąuis,  count,  or  secular  potentate 
or  person  should  presume  to  grant  such  inyestiture  of 
bishopric  or  inferior  dignity,  he  was  condemned  to  the 
same  sentence.  This  statute  madę  a  reyolution  in  the 
whole  feudał  system  throughout  Europę  as  rcgarded 
the  relation  of  the  Church  uow  dominant  to  the  state. 
In  the  empire  (then  under  Henry  IV)  it  annulled  the 
precarious  power  of  the  soyereign  oyer  almost  half  his 
subjects.  All  the  great  prelates  and  abbots,  who  were 
at  the  same  time  the  princes,  the  nobles,  the  counsellors, 
the  leaders  in  the  diets  and  national  as8em1)ljes,  became. 
to  a  great  degree  independent  of  the  crown ;  the  em- 
peror had  no  concem,  unless  indirectły,  in  their  promo- 
tion,  no  power  oyer  their  degradation.  Their  lands  and 
estates  were  as  inyiolable  as  their  persons.  Where  there 
was  no  fealty  there  could  be  no  treason.  Eyery  bene- 
fice,  on  the  other  hand,  thus  disseyered  from  the  crown 
was  held,  if  not  directly,  yet  at  the  pleasure  of  the  pope. 
For  as  with  liim  was  the  sole  judgment  (the  laity  being 
excluded)  as  to  the  yalidity  of  the  election,  with  him 
was  the  deciaion  by  what  offences  the  dignity  might  be 
forfeited ;  and  as  the  estates  and  cndowmcnts  were  now 
inalienable,  and  were  withdrawn  from  the  national  prop- 
erty, and  became  tliat  of  the  Church  and  of  God.  tho 


INYESTITURE 


636 


INTESTITURE 


popc  might  be,  in  fact,  tbe  liege  lord,  temporal  and  spir- 
itual,  of  half  thc  world"  (^niman,  Laa,  Christiamty,  iii, 
416-417).  These  proceedings  of  the  pope  thc  kings 
could  not,  of  courae,  possibly  permit  without  a  practical 
'  abdication  of  all  their  powers,  and  hence  arose  the  oon- 
flicte  of  inrestiture  which  rcsulted  80  triumphantly  for 
the  papacy,  not  only  in  rising  to  a  supremacy  over  the 
princes  of  the  earth,  but  drawing  into  their  own  hands 
all  ciyil  govemment,  and  which  enabled  some  of  the  in- 
cumbents  of  the  papai  see,  e.  g.  Innocent  III,  to  aspire  to 
be  the  supremę  disposers  of  the  Christian  world,  with  all 
its  belongings  (see  Reichel,  p.  348).  Some  of  the  80ver- 
eigns,  such  as  Philip  of  France  and  William  of  England, 
paid  no  attcntion  whatever  to  the  pope'8  mandate,  and 
the  latter,  satisfied  that  they  would  not  activcly  oppose 
him,  was  ąuite  willing  to  let  them  alone;  but  far  other- 
wise  was  his  conduct  towaids  the  cmperor  Henry  lY, 
whom  he  sought  by  every  poasible  exertion  to  compcl 
to  submit  to  these  decisions.  For  this  the  licentious 
and  ambitious  character  of  Henry  had  given  him  good 
cause.  But  for  a  time  he  failed  to  make  any  impression 
on  the  emperor,  who  paid  no  regard  to  the  threats  of 
Gregory  VII,  but  continued  to  nominate  not  only  to  Ger- 
man, but  also  Italian  bishoprics.  Other  causee  widened 
the  breach  bctween  the  emperor  and  the  pope.  See  the 
artide  Gregory  VII,  yoLiii,  especially  p.  1003,  coL  1. 
After  Hildebrartd*s  (Gregory  YH)  death,  the  rivalry  for 
the  papai  throne  assuaged  for  a  time  the  controYcrsy  on 
investiture;  cach  papai  party,  anxious  to  secure  the 
greatest  niunber  of,  and  most  powerful  adherenta,  will- 
ingly  madę  all  possible  concessions.  But  when  Urban 
II,  elected  and  sup}x>rted  by  the  Hildebrandian  party, 
ascended  the  paj^al  throne,  the  controversy  was  renewed 
by  his  declaration  "  NuUum  jus  laicis  in  clericos  esse  volu- 
mus  et  censcmus,"  and  the  subject  was  even  brought  be- 
fore  the  Council  of  Clermont  (1095).  By  canon  15  of  this 
council  clergymen  Avcre  forbidden  to  accept  any  ecclesi- 
astical  office  from  a  layman ;  thc  16th  canon  applies  this 
especially  to  kings  and  other  civil  authorities ;  canon  17 
forbade  bishops  and  priests  binding  themselres  by  feu- 
dal  oaths  to  either  kings  or  other  laymen;  and  canon  18 
threatened  eyery  one  who,  after  two  wamings,  continued 
in  these  forbidden  relations,  with  deprivation  of  all  office 
and  power.  Yet  Urban  found  morę  difficulty  than  he 
had  expected  in  bringing  the  princes  to  second  him  in 
his  views,  and  he  did  not  suoceed  in  enforcing  these  de- 
cisions even  in  Italy,  where  Roger  of  Sicily  stoutly  de- 
fcndcd  the  rights  of  the  civil  authorities.  Urban,  how- 
*eYer,  eyaded  the  difficulty  by  naming  Roger,  to  whom  he 
was  under  many  obligations,  his  legate  in  Sicily.  The 
death  of  this  pope,  in  1099,  by  no  means  extinguished 
the  opposition,  but,  instead,  the  contest  became  morę  ear- 
nest,  and  continued  during  the  most  of  the  llth  century. 
In  the  beginning  of  the  12th  century  it  assumed  a  new 
form  under  Pascal  II,  whose  name,  of  all  popes,  is  most 
prominently  connected  with  the  question  of  inyestitures 
both  in  England  and  Germany.  Pascal  H  had  ascended 
thc  papai  throne  with  the  intention  of  following  in  the 
footsteps  of  his  predecessors,  but  he  lacked  the  strength 
of  character  necessary  for  determined  action.  "  In  En- 
gland, William  the  Conąueror  had  maintained  his  su- 
premacy  over  thc  Church  with  an  iron  arm.  Thus  no 
one  was  aUowed  to  acknowledge  the  pope,  when  chosen, 
except  by  thc  king^s  permission ;  no  one  might  receive 
lettcrs  from  Romę  unless  they  had  been  previously 
shown  to  him  for  approval.  The  archbishop  was  not 
permitted  to  frame  any  canon,  although  with  the  assist- 
ance  of  the  bishop  olT  the  realm,  unless  it  had  been  pre- 
Yiously  sanctioned  by  the  sorereign.  Nor  was  any  bish- 
op allowed  to  cxcommunicate  a  baron  or  minister  of  the 
crown  on  any  charge,  without  having  first  obtained  the 
king*8  consent.  The  same  policy  was  pursued  by  hb 
son  William  Rufus,  without  any  difficulties  being  raised 
on  the  part  of  the  popes.  They  had  too  many  reasons 
for  conciliating  the  friendship  of  the  Normans  in  Italy  to 
Tcnture  to  oppose  their  wishes  in  England."  Nor  was 
it  otherwise  now  when  archbishop  Anafiln^  came  for- 


ward,  determined  to  exccute  the  papai  deciaom  ooa* 
ceming  the  inyestitures,  and  King  Henry  I  felt  his  pre- 
rogatiyes  inyaded,  and  Anselm  alone  had  to  bear  the 
whole  brunt  of  Heiury*8  indignation.  See  Asselm.  In 
1107,  an  agreement  which  had  been  entered  into  be> 
tween  the  king  and  the  archbishop  was  iinally  prodaim- 
ed  with  great  solemiuty  at  a  synod  conycned  for  thii 
purpose.  *'  By  it  Henry,  whilst  surrendering  an  un- 
necessary  ceremony,  retained  a  substantial  power;  and 
An8elm'8  scruples  were  set  at  rest  by  a  letter  from  Pas- 
chał,  in  which  he  freed  those  who  had  received  lay  in- 
yestitures from  the  penalties  pronounced  by  his  pitde- 
cessor.  ....  Still  morę  fortunate  than  the  Englifh 
kings  were  the  kings  of  Castile,  who,  by  directly  Wcld- 
ing  when  Urban*s  decree  was  tirat  published,  obudned 
from  him  an  absolute  priyilege  of  nomination  to  all  bi^- 
oprics  in  their  dominions — a  priyilege  which  they  have 
sińce  retained  by  yirtue  of  a  particular  indulgence  re- 
newed by  the  pope  for  the  life  of  each  prince**  (Reichel, 
p.  363 ;  see  Hallam,  Middle  A  gett  ii,  pt  i,  eh.  vii,  190). 

But  it  was  in  Germany  that  the  struggle  about  in- 
yestitures was  waged  most  iiercely,  and  that  it  also 
continued  longest  Taking  adyantage  of  the  political 
troubles  which  were  agitating  the  country,  Paschal  used 
eyery  exertion  to  detach  thc  Church  entirely  from  the 
contTol  of  tbe  state.  "Not  only  had  Paachal  II  begun 
his  course  by  denouncing  lay  inyestiture  as  strongly  as 
his  predecessor  Urban  II,  but  he  had  also  followcd  the 
tactics  of  Urban."  He  not  only  put  Henry  IV  a  secood 
time  under  the  ban,  but  eyen  committed  one  of  the  dark- 
est  crimes  in  the  annals  of  history.  He  eatranged  from 
Henry  the  affection  of  those  to  whosc  loye  and  consider- 
ationhe  was  cńtitled  by  the  iiost  sacred  of  lawa.  Two 
of  the  sons  of  Henry  rV  were  incited  to  rebellion  against 
their  own  natural  f^tber  (1101, 1104),  which  brought  the 
emperor  to  an  untimely  graye  of  broken  heart  (1106). 
Paschal  now  thought,  of  courae,  that  he  had  secured  for 
himself  the  obedience  of  Germany,  and  with  pdde  he 
announocd  that  henceforth  tho  Church  would  begin  to 
enjoy  anew  her  liberty  indeed,  for  death  had  remored, 
and  was  fast  remoying,  those  who  opposed  her  soc- 
cess  (Mansi,  /.  c.  p.  1209 ;  Muratori,  Seriptores  mm 
Italie  III,  i,  363) ;  he  eycn  caused  the  la¥r8  cm  inyesti- 
ture to  be  reaaserted  by  the  eouncils  of  Troyes,  Bene- 
yento  (1108),  and  Lateran  (1 100).  But  for  onlćc  Paschal 
II  had  madę  his  reckoning  without  his  bosŁ.  His 
boast,  alas,  how  empty !  ''He  had  not  to  wait  long  be- 
fore  he  discoyered  its  yainness ;  for  Henry  V  was  no 
sooner  in  undisputcd  poeaession  of  the  throne  than  he 
maintained  as  stoutly  as  his  father  had  done  his  own 
right  to  inyest  bishops."  Strengthened  in  hia  opposi- 
tion by  the  example  of  England,  and  of  France  also,  he 
interpreted  the  actions  of  the  councils  as  threats  at  his 
power,  and  after  a  yain  endeayor  to  bring  the  pope  u> 
acknowledge  hb  right  in  a  conference  at  Chalona,  be  re- 
sorted  to  arms.  At  the  head  of  a  yast  army  he  march- 
ed  to  Italy,  and  so  terrified  the  pope  that  he  obtained  a 
yery  fayorable  compact  without  the  least  difficulty  (FeK 
9, 1111).  But  the  bishops  refused  to  comply  with  it, 
and  Henry  hesitated  not  to  force  a  fayurable  condusioo 
by  imprisoning  the  pope  and  his  cardinala.  By  a  aee- 
ond  treatj',  which  was  now  compacted  (April  8, 1111), 
Pascal  II  actually  agreed  to  surrender  all  the  posseaetona 
and  royalties  with  which  the  Church  had  been  endowed, 
and  which  alone  had  formed  the  subject  of  daim  on  the 
part  of  the  emperor.  To  seal  the  compact  morę  lirmly, 
the  pope  diyided  the  host  with  the  emperor,  and,  after 
coronation,  Henry  retumed  to  Germany,  aaiisfied  that 
Romę  had  for  onoe  been  brought  Iow  (see  Stensel,  pt.  i.  p. 
632  są.).  This  treaty,  howeyer,  neyer  had  any  pracdcal 
cffect,  for  the  Hildebrandian  party  disapproyed  of  the 
pope's  concessions,  and  '^uotbing  remauied  for  Paacfaal, 
weak  and  yacillating  Paschal,  but  to  annul  the  grant,  and 
to  assemblc  a  council  in  the  Lateran,  and  to  pkad  befora 
it  that  the  agreement  had  been  conduded  under  the 
pressure  of  circumstanoes,  in  order  to  saye  the  oardinalB 
and  the  city  of  Borne ;  that  it  was  beyond  his  power  u 


INVESTITURE 


637 


INYITATORT 


nrrender  any  of  the  Uberties  and  rigbta  of  the  Chiurch ; 
that  it  was  for  the  assembly  to  exaiDine  the  agreement, 
and  prooounce  Łhereupon ;  but  Łhat  for  himaelf  he  would 
adhere  to  his  oath,  and  undertake  nothing  personally 
■gainst  Henry,"  i.  e.  poor  wretched  Pascho  had  swom 
to  a  compact  which  he  felt  he  could  not  break  himselfi 
but  for  which,  nonę  the  less  determined  to  abrogate,  he 
sought  a  pretext  to  aurrender  his  authority  into  the 
haiub  of  his  inferiors,  that  they  might  execute  the  wish- 
es  uf  his  heart,  which  he  dared  not  openly  eepoose  as  a 
popc  The  action  of  the  pope,  however,  in  accordance 
with  Md  own  wiahes,  was  repudiated  in  a  Lateran  coiin- 
cil  in  1112  (Mansi,  t.  xxi,  p.  49  8q.)«  which  even  put  the 
emperor  again  under  the  ban.  Unfortunately,  Henry 
had  in  the  mean  time  madę  himself  many  enemies  at 
bome  by  his  couise  conceniing  the  inyestiturea,  and  the 
escommonication  still  further  increased  his  difficulties ; 
jet  he  succeeded  in  overcoming  them  all  at  the  time 
when  the  papai  see  least  expected  it,  and  his  whole 
power  was  then  directed  against  the  latter.  Henry  re-en- 
tered  Italy,  seized  Romę,  and  the  pope,  compeUed  to  flee, 
died  at  last  in  banbhment,  as  by  his  policy  he  had  well 
desenred  (1118).  Gelasius  II  was  the  uext  suoceaaor  to 
the  papai  throne;  but  as  he  lived  only  a  short  time 
(1119),  the  glory  of  conduding  the  long-protracted  strug- 
gle  was  reserv^  for  Calixtu8  II,  but  not  before  one  pre- 
Uminary  oontract  had  been  concluded  and  as  soon  vio- 
lated,  nor  before  the  utterance  of  a  sentence  of  excom- 
munication  and  dethronement  on  Henry  V,  at  the  great 
flTood  at  Rheims  (Labbe,  xii).  It  was  now  agreed  that 
eveiy  investiture  should  be  retained,  and  each  bishopric 
restored  to  its  former  incumbent,  but  that  thoae  belong- 
ing  to  the  Church  should  be  govemed  acćording  to  the 
canous,  and  the  secular  ones  by  the  civil  laws  (Slansi,  t. 
xxi,  p.  244;  Stenzel,  p.  690).  Upon  a  second  conaider- 
atiou,  bowerer,  they  relented,  and  the  question  of  the 
oath  soon  created  new  pretexts  for  the  struggle  between 
them,  and,  in  a  synod  of  Rheims  (1119),  CaUxtus  put 
the  emperor  under  the  ban,  and  deposed  him  (Mansi,  L 
r.,  p.  2dO).  In  the  mean  time,  archbishop  Adalbert,  of 
Mentz,  created  troubles  iii  Germany.  Calixtu8  strength- 
eud  his  pońtion  in  Romę,  and  even  succeeded  in  taking 
the  anti-pope,  Gregory  VIII,  whom  the  emperor  had  op- 
posed  to  him,  prisoner ;  yet  the  public  sentiment  of  Ger- 
many was  atrong  enough  to  compel  the  papai  party 
finally  to  adopt  the  courae  which  Ivo  of  Chartres  and 
the  monk  Hugo  of  Fleury  had  commanded.  "It  was 
an  intermediate  course  between  the  extreme  views  of 
the  Gregorian  party  on  the  one  band,  and  the  secular- 
iziog  tendencies  of  their  opponents  on  the  other.  It 
oombated  the  Gregorian  position  that  it  was  a  degra- 
dation  for  the  pńesthood  to  own  itself  subject  to  any 
lay  authority,  and  held  fast  to  the  principle  that  to  God 
must  be  rendered  that  which  is  God^s,  and  to  Cs^sar  that 
which  is  Caesar^s.  It  therefore  maintained  that  the  king 
ought  not  to  inrest  the  candidate  bishop  with  staff  and 
ring,  these  being  the  symbols  of  spiritual  jurisdiction, 
and,  aa  auch,  belonging  to  the  archbishop;  but  it  allow- 
ed  homage  to  be  done  to  the  emperor,  and  the  use  of 
aome  other  symbol  for  bestowing  the  temporalities." 
The  oelebrated  concordat  of  Worms,  Sept.  1122  (Mansi, 
Ł  c.  p.  273  9q.),  finally  aettled  the  que8tion  to  the  satis- 
faction  of  all  parties,  and  the  Lateran  Council  of  1123 
gave  its  fuli  approval  (comp.  Mansi,  Lep.  277).  The 
emperor  agreed  to  giye  up  the  form  of  inrestiture  with 
the  ring  and  pagforal  stajff  to  grant  to  the  clergy  the 
right  of  free  electiona,  and  to  restore  all  the  posaeasions 
of  the  Church  of  Romę  which  had  been  seized  either  by 
himself  or  by  his  iather;  while  the  pope,  on  his  part, 
conaented  that  the  electlons  should  be  beki  in  the  pres- 
ence  of  the  emperor  or  his  ofBcial,  but  with  a  right  of 
appeal  to  the  provincial  synod;  that  inyeatiture  might 
be  gircn  b}'  the  emperor,  but  only  by  the  touch  ofthe 
ioeptrt;  and  that  the  bisbops  and  other  church  digni- 
tariea  should  faithfully  discharge  all  the  feudal  duties 
which  bckmged  to  their  piincipality  (see  Montag.  p.  436 
■q.;  Stenzel,  p.  704).    Ix>thair  lU,  Heiiry'8  succeaeor. 


rendered  these  oonditions  still  morę  adyantageous  to 
the  Roman  aee  by  substituting  a  morę  generał  profes« 
sion  for  the  feudal  oath  (aee  J.  D.  Olenacblager,  Erldu* 
terung  d,  ffiildenen  BuUe,  Frankfort,  1766 ;  Urkimdmhuch, 
p.  19).  Tbis  measure,  to  aome  exteut,  at  least,  allayed 
the  111  will  which  the  bierarchical  party  borę  to  the  Con- 
cordat of  Worms.  The  pope  had  in  reality  secured  but 
few  actual  advantages  by  the  concordat,  yet  the  freedom 
of  election  obtain^  by  it  in  the  place  of  the  influence 
esercised  over  them  by  the  emperor  was  surę  in  due 
time  to  be  of  gieat  adrantage  to  the  papacy.  It  cer« 
tainly  had  oonsiderable  cfTect  in  restraining  one  of  the 
greatest  abuaes  ofthe  Middle  Ages,  if  not  in  eradicating 
altogether  the  real  evil  of  simony  and  corrupt  promo- 
tion  of  unwonby  cimdidates  for' ecclesiastical  officcs; 
and  although,  even  as  kte  as  the  12th  centuiy,  we  find 
instances  of  the  emperofs  interference  in  the  election 
of  German  bisbops,  and  evQi  of  his  direct  appoint* 
ments  to  such  offices  (aee  Sugcnheim,iS^aaf*fcften  d.  Kle- 
rut  im  MittelaUer,  Berlin,  1839,  pt.  i,  p.  153),  theae  in- 
stances are,  after  all,  only  few  in  number,  and  diaappear 
altogether  ailer  the  times  of  Otto  IV  and  Frederick  II. 
Ciyil  interference  in  ecdesiastical  appointments  ceased 
also  in  France,  England,  and  Spain ;  but  in  Naples,  Hun- 
gary,  Denmark,  and  Sweden,  Uie  kings  continued  to  ap' 
point  bishopa  until  the  IStb  oentury  (Sugenhcim,  p.  197). 

For  monographs,  aee  Volbeding,  IndeXf  p.  166.  On  the 
generał  subject,  see  Staudeumaier,  Geschichie  d.Bischofs" 
wahlen  (Tubing.  1830,  p.  249) ;  Reichel,  See  o/ Home  in 
the  Middle  Ages,  pt.  ii,  chap.  xii ;  Gosaelin,  Power  oflhe 
Pop€f  ii,  345 ;  Milman,  Hist.  o/Lat,  Chrisiiani/g,  iii,  415 ; 
iy,  146  Bq. ;  Robertson,  JJist.  of  the  Christian  Church,  p. 
572  8q. ;  Butler,  EccUs,  Hist,  to  ISth  Cent.  p.  474  8q.,  492 
8q. ;  Mosheim,  Kcdes.  IJist,  p.  827,  et  al. ;  Herzog,  Beal" 
Encykiop,  vi,  s.  v. ;  Chambera,  Cyclop.  s.  v.     ( J.  H.  W.) 

Invi8ible  Church.    See  Church. 

InviBibleB  is  the  name  giyen  to  the  school  of  the- 
ologians  who  held  that  the  Church  of  Christ  was  not 
always  yisiblc.  See  Hagenbach,  History  of  Doctrines^ 
i,  354;  ii,  §256. 

Invitatdrds.    See  I^yrrATOBY. 

Invitatoxy  is  a  short  antiphon,  suitable  to  the  oc- 
caaion,  sung  or  recited  before  the  Yenite  KxuUemus  Dom' 
ino,  or  interpolatcd  between  the  verses  of  tbis  paalm  and 
the  Gloria  Patri  also.  The  95Łh  Psalm,  as  an  "  inyita- 
Łion  to  praiae,"  is  auppoeed  to  haye  been  uaed  by  the 
early  Cbristians,  adopted,  no  doubt,  from  the  Tempie 
seryice.  In  the  Greek  as  weU  as  the  Latin  churches  it 
is  still  in  use,  thougb  the  two  churches  differ  somewhat 
in  form.  In  the  Kast  the  foUowing  three  dauscs  only 
areused: 
"  O  come,  let  ns  worybip  God  onr  King ; 

O  come,  let  na  worahip  and  fali  down  before  Christ  onr 
KluR  and  God ; 

O  come,  let  ns  worsbip  before  Christ  himself,  oar  King 
and  God;" 

but  in  the  Western  churches  the  whole  paalm  bas  al- 
ways been  uaed,  accompanied  generally  by  the  inrito' 
tonff  the  latter  yarying,  of  courae,  acćording  to  the  sub- 
ject of  the  ofBce  to  which  they  inyite  thought.  It 
always  consists  of  two  clauaes:  "both  are  said  before 
the  psalm,  and  at  the  end  of  the  second,  aeyentb,  and 
last  yeraes;  the  aecond  dause  only  at  the  end  of  the 
fourth  and  ninth  yeraes.  The  Gloria  Patri  is  foUowed 
first  by  the  aecond  and  then  by  both  clauaes.  The 
Breyiary  of  cardinal  Quignones  restrictcd  the  inyitatory 
to  the  beginning  and  end  of  the  psahns."  The  uinefold 
repetition  of  the  whole  or  a  part  of  the  inyitatory  is  of 
great  antiquity.  Durandus  thus  refera  to  its  myatical 
beańng :  **  The  inyitatory  is  repeated  8ix  timca  at  fuU 
length, because  six  is  the  first  perfect  number;  and  the 
alxfold  repetition,  therefore,  aets  forth  the  i^erfection 
with  which  we  should  endeayor  to  perform  the  aeryice 
of  God.  Three  is  an  imperfect  number,  and  therefore 
the  imperfect  repetition  takes  place  three  times."  On 
the  double /east*  of  the  Western  Church  the  inyitatory 
is  doubled  at  matins,  lauds,  and  yespers.    In  the  £ng* 


INVOCATION  OF  ANGELS       638        INYOCATION  OF  SAINTS 


Ush  Church,  where  the  order  of  daily  pnyer  is  chiefly 
Ukcn  from  tbe  corresponding  offices  of  the  Sarum  Brev- 
iaiy  (of  whlch  the  rubiic  runa  thns  [after  the  Gloria 
and  AUelolia] :  "  Seguatur  inmtcUorium  hoc  modo.  Ecce 
yenit  rex.  Occaiamus  obyiam  Salyatoń  nostro.  Pt. 
Yenite ;  post  i,  iii  et  v,  v«r9.  ptcUmi  repetatur  tottan  tn- 
eitatortum.  Post  ii,  yen.  iv  et  vi,  ver$.p$almi  repeta- 
tur tolum  hac  parSf  Occuramua  £ł  demde  reincipiaiur 
totum  umiłatorittm"),  the  opening  sentenoes  of  matina 
and  eyensong  are  generally  considered  to  be  of  a  aimilar 
character  (compare  Procter,  Common  Prayer^  p.  182; 
Freeman,  Principlea  of  Dirine  8ervi<Xj  i,  152  są.).  Bliint 
(TheoL  Cydop.  i,  856),  however,  aays  that  the  tnie  invi- 
tatory  of  the  English  Church  "  u  in  the  flxed  yerńcle 
'Praise  ye  the  Lord,'  with  its  response,  *The  Lord*8 
name  be  praised.'  The  singing  of  AUelolia  after  the 
Gloria  PcUri,  at  the  commencement  of  matins,  waa  or- 
dered  in  the  Prayer-book  of  1549.  The  response  was 
inserted  in  1661.  The  95th  Psalm,  with  this  yerside  and 
response,  is  to  be  considered  as  an  unvarying  invitatory 
in  the  modem  English  ritc,  except  on  Easter  day,  for 
which  Bpecial  proyision  is  madę."  See  also  Neale,  Li' 
turt/ical  EssaySy  p.  7  sq.,  et  aL ;  Cotnmenł.  on  the  PtcUms, 
i,  43  sq. ;  Walcott,  Sacred  A  rchaology,  p.  882. 

InTOOation  of  Angels,  or  the  act  of  addressing 
prayers  to  angels,  especially  to  the  angel-guardian,  pre- 
yails  in  the  Roman  and  the  Greek  churches,  as  weU  as 
in  all  the  different  Eastem  churches.  They  hołd  that 
angels  are  sharers  of  the  divine  naturę,  though  in  a 
somewhat  subordinate  measure.  In  the  same  manner 
they  also  permiŁ  the  invocation  of  saints  (q.  y.)  eyen, 
and  designate  this  worship  under  the  technical  term  of 
Łov\uay  in  distinction  from  the  worship  of  God  himself, 
which  they  term  \arptia,  See  Hagenbach,  Ilutory  of 
Doctrines,  i,  141, 142,  338  8q.     Compare  Angels  }  Vkn- 

SBATION. 

I]ivocationoftheHolyO]iOBt.  Intheprayer 
of  the  medlseyal  canon,  retained  also  in  the  Scottishof- 
Hce  on  the  consecration  of  the  elements  for  the  Lord^s 
Supper,  the  Holy  Ghost  is  thus  inyoked :  "  Youchsafe 
so  to  bless  and  sanctify  with  thy  word  and  Holy  SpiriŁ 
these  thy  gifls  and  creatures  of  bread  and  winę  that 
they  may  be  unto  us  the  body  and  blood  of  thy  most 
dearly  beloved  Son." 

Iavocation  of  Saints,  a  form  of  idolatry  pre- 
yailing  in  the  Koman,  the  Greek,  and  the  different 
Eastem  churches.  They  ignore  the  doctrine  to  which 
the  Protestants  tenadously  cling,  that  the  rendering  of 
divine  worship  to  one  Infinite  Deing  must  of  necessity 
exclude  the  idea  of  rendering  diyine  worship,  no  matter 
how  modified  and  excused,  to  any  other  bdng,  depend- 
ent upon  and  created  by  the  Supremę  Being.  They 
also  deny  that  the  inyocation  of  the  created,  instead  oif 
the  Creator,  does  in  any  wise  trench  upon  the  honor  due 
only  to  God,  and  that  it  is,  as  we  assert,  irreconcilable 
with  Scripture, «  which  holds  him  forth  as  the  sole  ob- 
ject  of  worship,  and  the  only  fountain  of  mercj'."  They 
cannot,  of  cotirse,  disproyc  these  truths  from  Scripture, 
neither  can  they  fomish  any  authority  from  the  holy 
book  for  a  practice  unknown  to  the  early  Church,  and 
expre88ly  conderaned  by  the  Council  of  Laodicea  (A.D. 
481 )  and  by  the  early  fathers.  The  few  passages  which 
they  frequently  cite  they  themselyes  daim  only  to  m- 
ply  an  intercommunion  of  the  two  worlds  (as  Matt.  xiii, 
8;  Lukę  xiv,  17;  Exod.  xxiii,  18),  and  they  are  there- 
fore  obliged  to  haye  recourse  to  tradition.  To  this  cnd 
they  cite  some  of  the  Church  fathers,  such  as  Origen 
(Opp.  ii,  273),  Cyprian  (Ep.  60,  DodweU*s  edition),  Ba- 
sil  (Opp.  ii,  155),  Gregory  Nazianzen  (Cpp.  i,  288),  Greg- 
ory  of  Nyssa  (ii,  1017),  Ambrose  (ii,  200),  Chrysostom 
(iv,  449),  and  especially  the  liturgies  of  the  different 
ancient  churches  of  Roman,  Greek,  S>Tian,  and  even 
Egyptian  rite.  But,  while  these  testimonies  are  gener- 
ally credited,  it  must  be  remembered  that  they  are  only 
unscriptural  additions,  and  that  they  originated  after 
the  infusion  into  the  CShnrch  system  of  Alezandrian 


Neoplatonism  and  Oriental  Magianinn,  which  fcft  iti 
traces  eyen  in  the  most  orthodox  form  of  Christian  wor- 
ship, and  creed  also,  up  to  the  4th  and  5th  cent1lrie^  a 
period  in  the  history  of  the  Christian  Church  when  hcf^ 
esies  were,  to  use  a  common  phiase,  ahnost  tbe  order  of 
the  day.  Nay,  even  the  Roman  Catholic  Chmcb  ad* 
mits  that  the  worship  of  saints  was  carried  to  an  exoen 
not  only  in  this  age,  but  especially  in  the  medi«val  pe> 
riod.  The  worship  of  saints  and  of  the  Yirgin  Msiy 
then  took  the  place  of  the  worship  of  Christ,  tbe  only 
legał  interoessor  between  God  and  man,  and  thos  riitn- 
ally  ignored  the  mediatorship  of  Christ.  It  is  tme 
some  of  the  morę  enlightened  and  less  bigoted  of  tbe 
Romanists  daim  that  the  saints  are  only  inyoked,*^ not 
for  the  pnrpose  of  obtaining  mercy  or  grace  from  them- 
sdyes  directly,  but  in  order  to  arie  their  prayen  or  in- 
tcrcossion  with  God  on  oor  behalT  (see  Bellannine, 
Contropersia  de  Sanełorum  Beatitudine,  lib.  i,  cap.  xyn\ 
But  as  we  haye  already  stated  In  our  artide  on  tbe  im- 
maculate  conception  of  the  Yirgin  Mary,  we  repeat  also 
here,  that  it  is  not  for  us  to  examine  only  the  intent  of 
the  Romish  liturgy,  but  also  what  her  communicanU 
understand  it  to  mean.  Here  lies  the  greatest  difficol- 
ty,  to  say  the  least,  against  the  introduction  of  a  node 
of  worsUp  whoUy  unanthorized  by  the  woid  inspired 
by  God  to  serye  as  a  guide  in  aU  things.  It  brings 
home  again  not  only  the  question  of  the  immaculate 
conception  of  Mary,  but  eyen  the  infallibility  theoiy  of 
the  yicar  of  Romę.  Protestants  are  unwilling  to  take 
any  authority  except  the  word  of  God;  tbey  refuse  to 
acknowledge  as  infallible  any  one  except  the  Infinite 
Being  hinucUl  It  was  this  yiew  that  inaugurated  tbe 
Reformarion,  howeyer  much  it  may  haye  be^  bastened 
by  the  sale  of  indulgences  (see  Hagenbach,  History  of 
Doctrines,  ii,  §  257).  "The  Church  of  Romę  is  justly 
and  scripturally  charged  with  idolatry  in  the  woabip, 
adoration,  and  inyocation  which  she  addicsses  to  sunts 
and  angels.  Idolatry,  in  the  scriptural  applicatioD  of 
the  term,  is  of  two  sorts,  and  consists  (1)  either  in  gir- 
ing  the  honor  due  to  the  one  tme  God,  as  maker  and 
govemor  of  the  worid,  to  any  subordinate  being,  (i) 
or  in  giying  the  honor  due  to  Christ,  as  the  sole  media- 
tor between  God  and  man,  to  any  subordinate  mediator. 
The  foraier  is  the  idolatry  forbidden  by  the  Jewish  law, 
and  by  that  of  naturę.  The  latter  is  Christian  idolatry, 
properly  so  called,  and  is  the  abomination  oondemned 
in  seyere  terms  by  the  GospeL  This  spedes  of  idołatiy 
is,  without  doubt,  chaigeable  on  any  Christian  Chuirh 
that  shall  adopt,  in  its  rdigious  addressei*,  another  me- 
diator besides  Jesus  Christ,  But  the  Church  of  Romę, 
not  merely  in  the  priyate  writings  of  her  diyinea,  bat  in 
the  solemn  forms  of  her  ritual,  publicly  professes,  and 
by  her  canons  and  councils  authoritatiyely  enjoins,  the 
worship  of  saints  and  angels,  under  the  idea  of  media- 
tors  or  intercessors;  not,  indeed,  in  exduston  of  Cbriit 
as  the  one  or  chief  mediator,  but  intnanifest  defianoe  of 
his  9ole  mediatorship.  This  charge  is  truły  and  jusdy 
brought  against  her,  as  she  now  stands,  and  hath  stood 
for  many  ages,  and  cannot  by  any  subterfiige  be  eyaded. 
Therefore  she  must  be  content  to  haye  the  imputatioa 
of  diemon-worship,  or  and-Christian  idolatry,  still  ad- 
hering  to  her"  (EllioU). 

As  a  regular  doctrine,  the  inyocation  of  saints  is 
taught  in  a  canon  Touckinff  the  Inrocation^  yeneratiim, 
and  on  Relia  of  Saints  and  tacred  Image*,  iasned  by  tbe 
Council  of  Trent  in  its  26th  session.  It  reads  as  foliowi: 
"  The  holy  synod  enjoins  on  all  bishops,  and  otben  su»- 
taining  the  office  and  charge  of  teaching,  that,  aococd- 
ing  to  the  usage  of  the  Catholic  and  Apostolic  Chmcfa. 
recdved  from  the  primitiye  times  (!)  of  the  Christian 
rdigion,  and  acoording  to  the  oonsent  of  the  holy  fa- 
thers, and  to  the  decrees  of  sacred  couudls,  they  espe- 
cially  Instract  the  faithful  diligently  touching  tbe  intcr- 
cession  and  inyocation  of  saints,  tbe  honor  pud  to  rei- 
ics,  and  the  lawful  use  of  imagea:  teadiing  them  that 
the  saints,  who  reign  together  with  Christ,  offer  ap  their 
own  pTa3rer8  to  (jod  for  men;  that  it  is  good  ai  ' 


rNYOCATION  OF  SAINTS       639 


lONA 


80pl|>liantly  to  inyoke  them,  and  to  resort  to  their  pray- 
ers,  ftid^and  help  for  obtaining  benefita  from  God,  through 
his  Son,  Jesus  Christ  our  Lord,  who  alone  is  oar  Ke- 
deemer  and  Savioar;  but  that  they  think  impiously 
who  dcny  that  the  saints,  who  enjoy  etemal  happiness 
in  heaven,  are  to  be  inyoked ;  or  who  assert  either  that 
they  do  not  pray  for  men,  or  that  the  invocation  of 
them  to  pray  for  each  of  us  eren  in  particuhir  is  idohi- 
tiy ;  or  that  it  is  repngnant  to  the  Word  of  God,  and  is 
opposed  to  the  honor  of  the  one  mediator  beheem  God 
ani  men,  Jesus  Christ ;  or  that  it  is  foolish  to  supplicate, 
oially  or  inwardly,  those  who  reign  in  heaven.  Alao, 
thatthe  holy  bodies  of  holy  martyrs,  and  of  others  now 
living  with  Christ,  which  were  the  Iiving  members  of 
Christy  and  the  tempie  ofthe  Holif  Ghosty  and  which  are 
by  him  to  be  raised  anto  etemal  life,  and  to  be  glorified, 
are  to  be  renerated  by  the  faithful;  through  which 
[bodies]  many  benefits  are  bestowed  by  God  on  men; 
80  that  they  who  affirm  that  yeneration  and  honor  are 
not  dne  to  the  relics  of  saints;  or  that  these,  and  other 
sacred  monuments,  are  uselesaly  honored  by  the  faitb- 
ful;  and  that  the  places  dedicated  to  the  memories  of 
the  saints  are  vainly  yisited  for  the  parpoee  of  obtaining 
their  aid,  are  whoUy  to.  be  condemned,  as  the  Church 
has  afaready  long  ance  condemned,  and  doth  now  also 
condemn  them.  Moreorer,  that  the  images  of  Christ, 
of  the  Yirgin  Mother  of  God,  and  of  the  other  saints,  are 
to  be  had  and  retained  particularly  in  temples,  and  that 
dne  honor  and  reneration  are  to  be  awarded  them;  not 
that  any  diyinity  or  virtae  is  believed  to  be  in  them,  on 
acoount  of  which  they  are  to  be  worshipped ;  or  that 
anything  is  to  be  asked  of  them ;  or  that  confldenoe  is 
to  be  reposed  in  images,  as  was  of  old  done  by  the  Gen- 
tiles,  who  placed  their  hope  in  idols ;  but  because  the 
honor  which  is  shown  unto  them  Is  referred  to  the  pro- 
totypes  which  they  represent;  in  such  wise  that  by  the 
images  which  we  kiss,  and  bcfore  which  we  nncover  the 
head  and  prostrate  ourselyes,  we  adore  Christ  and  ven- 
erate  the  saints,  whose  similitude  they  bear.  And  this, 
by  the  decrees  of  coundls,  and  especially  of  the  second 
synod  of  Nicna,  has  been  ordained  agdnst  the  oppo- 
nents  of  images.  And  the  bishops  shali  carefuUy  teach 
this :  that,  by  means  of  the  histories  of  the  mysteries  of 
our  redemption,  depicted  by  paintings  or  other  repre- 
sentations,  the  people  are  instructed,  and  strengthened 
in  remembering  and  continually  reliecting  on  the  arti- 
des  of  faith ;  as  also  that  great  profit  is  derived  from  all 
sacred  images,  not  only  because  the  people  are  thereby 
admonished  of  the  benefits  and  gifts  which  have  been 
bestowed  upon  them  by  Christ,  but  also  because  the 
mirades  of  God  through  the  means  of  the  saints,  and 
their  salutary  example,  are  set  before  the  eyes  of  the 
faithful;  that  so  for  these  things  they  may  give  God 
thanks;  may  order  their  own  life  and  mannen  in  iroi- 
tation  of  the  saints;  and  may  be  exdted  to  adore  and 
lorę  God,  and  to  cultivate  piety.  But  if  any  one  shall 
teach  or  think  contrary  to  these  decrees,  let  him  be 
anathema." 

Most  ńdiculous  is  the  defence  which  Ffoulkes  {Chris- 
t«nd(m's  Dirisionsy  i,  §  86)  adyances  in  behalf  of  this 
species  of  idolatiy,  while  yet  in  communion  with  the 
Romish  Church ;  and  his  iriends  of  the  High-Church 
party  of  England  and  our  own  country  may  do  well  to 
read  it  before  they  carry  much  farther  the  laughable  af- 
feciations  which  they  term  *'  derotions."  Whi  le  defend- 
ing  the  gross  forgeries  of  Pius  Y  in  the  missal  and  bre- 
viary  ofthe  Church,  sometimes  designated  by  Romanists 
as  "  rerisions,"  on  the  inyocation  of  saints  and  of  Mary, 
he  says,  "  They  were  but  the  expres8ions  of  what  had 
been  the  derotional  feelings  of  the  whole  Church.  .  .  . 
His  Holy  Spirit  communing  with  their  spirits,  and  no 
oiher  agent  or  instrument,  had  taught  them  that  the 
saints  reigning  with  Christ,  and  his  blessed  Mother  es- 
pecislly,  could  and  would  intercede  for  them  did  they 
ask  their  prayers;  and  so  one  asked,  and  had  his  peti- 
tions  granted,  and  asked  again. '  Then  he  breathed  the 
secret  (!)  of  his  sucoess  to  his  brother  or  friend,  till  he  in 


tura  was  encouraged  to  ask.  Then  another,  and  an- 
other,  aa  the  secret  was  passed  about  from  house  to 
hamlet,  and  from  hamlet  to  town,  and  from  one  country 
to  another,  tiU  at  length  it  had  spread  oyer  Christen- 
dom."  If  this  was  the  way  in  which  the  inyocation  of 
saints  was  practised,  to  authorize  its  adięission  in  the 
litany  by  Pius  Y  in  the  16th  centuiy,  and  its  afiiimation 
as  a  doctrine  by  the  Council  of  Trent,  then  why  adduce 
the  Church  fathers  of  the  early  age,  and  the  practices 
of  some  Christian  churches  of  an  age  when  the  Church 
of  Christ  was  so  greatly  coirupted  and  oyerrun  by  inno- 
yation  ?  The  Protestanta  also  belieye  in  saints.  They 
belieye  in  imitating  the  noble  character  exemplified  in 
their  life  while  on  earth,  which  is  a  yery  different  thing 
from  inyoking  them  to  intercede  in  Chrisfs  stead  before 
the  throne  of  God  the  Father.  See  Marhdneke,  S^fm- 
Mik,  iii,  489 ;  Freeman,  Claggett,  and  Whitby,  in  Gib- 
son's  Preservativft  yii ;  Dublin  Her.  April,  1853 ;  Pusey, 
Rule  ofFttUh,  p.  65  sq. ;  Huss  (John), De  Mysterio  An- 
tichristiy  c.  28 ;  Schrockh,  Kirchengesch,  xxxir,  614  sq. ; 
Elliott,  DelineaHon  of  Bomanism,  p.  753  sq. ;  Chambers, 
Cyelop,  s.  y. ;  Eadie,  Eccles,  Cyclop,  s.  y.  See  also  Im- 
ages; Saihts,    (J.H.W.) 

InvocatlonB.  About  the  8th  centur^%  says  Proc- 
ter {On  the  Book  ofCommon  Pray  er,  p.  249),  the  twro- 
całums  o/sainfs  (q.  y.)  were  introduced  into  the  church- 
es of  the  West,  and  cidled  the  Litany ,  a  name  given  to 
yarious  other  8er\'ice8.  See  Litany.  (Comp.  Renau- 
dot,  Liturg.  Orient,  i,  356;  Bingham,  Antig,  xy,  i,  §  2; 
Mabillon,  A  nalect.  iii,  669  8q.) 

Invoo&vit,  a  name  sometimes  giyen  to  the  first 
Sunday  in  Lent  on  account  of  the  Introił  (q.  y.),  which 
opens, "  Inyocayit  me  et  exaudiam  eum,"  etc.  (Psa.  xci, 
15>— Riddle,  Christian  Aniicuities,  p.  668. 

łona  (formerly  /oimi),  one  of  the  most  fcmous  ofthe 
Hebrides.  It  b  about  three  miles  long,  and  yaries  in 
breadth  from  a  mile  to  a  mile  and  a  half.  In  1861  it 
had  a  popularion  of  264.  Its  remarkable  fertility  was 
regarded  as  miraculous  in  the  Dark  Ages,  and  no  doubt 
led  to  its  early  occupation.  Dunii,  the  highest  iioint 
on  the  island,  is  380  feet  aboye  the  sea-Ieyel.  Its  lus- 
tory  begins  in  the  year  563,  when  St.  Columba  (q.  y.), 
leaying  the  shores  of  Ireland,  landed  upon  łona  with 
twelye  disciples.  Haying  obtained  a  grant  of  the  isl- 
and, as  well  from  his  kiiisman  Conall,  the  son  of  Com- 
ghall,  king  of  the  Scots,  as  from  Bruidi,  the  son  of  Mel- 
chon,  king  of  the  Picts,  he  built  upon  it  a  monastery, 
which  was  long  regarded  as  the  mother-church  of  the 
Picts,  and  was  yenerated  not  only  among  the  Scots  of 
Britain  and  Ireland,  but  among  the  Angles  of  the  north 
of  England,  who  owed  their  oonyersion  to  the  self-deny- 
ing  missionaries  of  łona.  From  the  6th  to  the  17th 
century,  the  isUmd  was  most  generally  called  /,  Ji,  la, 
lOf  Eo,  Hy,  Hi,  Hii,  liie,  Ilu,  Y,  or  ł't  — that  is,  sim- 
ply, "  the  Island ;"  or  (on  Coluroba'8  accowit)  IcoUnkiU, 
I-Columb-Kille,  or  Iłii-Colum-KiUe^th&t  is,  "  the  Isl- 
and of  Columba  of  the  Church."  From  the  end  of  the 
6th  to  the  end  of  the  8th  centur}'  łona  was  scarcely  sec- 
ond to  any  monastery  in  the  British  I^les ;  but  the  fierce 
and  heathen  Norsemen  bumed  it  in  795,  and  again  in 
802.  Its  "family"  (as  the  monks  were  called)  of  sixty- 
eight  persons  were  mart^Ted  in  806.  A  second  martyr- 
dom,  in  825,  is  the  subject  of  a  contemporary  Latin  poem 
by  Walafridus  Strabus,  abbot  of  the  German  monastery 
of  Reichenau,  in  the  Lakę  of  Constance.  On  the  Christ- 
mas  eyening  of  986  the  island  was  again  wasted  by  the 
Norsemen,  who  siew  the  abbot  and  fifteen  of  his  monks. 
Towards  the  end  ofthe  next  century  the  monastery*  was 
repaired  by  St.  Margaret,  the  ąueen  of  king  Malcolm 
Canmore.  It  was  yisited  in  1097  by  king  Magnus  the 
Barefooted,  of  Korway,  being  at  that  time  a  part  of  that 
kingdom,  and  so  fell  under  the  ecclesiastical  jurisdictlon 
of  the  bishop  of  Man  and  the  archbishop  of  Drontheim. 
In  1208  the  bishops  of  the  north  of  Ireland  disputed  the 
authority  of  the  Manx  bishop,  pulled  down  a  monastery 
which  he  had  begon  to  build  in  the  island,  and  placed 


lONIA 


640 


IRA 


the  ahbey  tinder  the  role  of  an  Iriah  abbot  of  Dory. 
The  Soottish  Chorch  had  long  daimed  jiirudicŁion  in 
łona,  and  before  the  end  of  the  18th  oentuiy  the  ialand 
fell  under  the  nile  of  the  Scottiah  king.  Ita  abbey  was 
now  peopled  by  Clagniac  monka;  and  a  nunnery  of 
Austin  canoneąaes  was  planted  on  its  shoras^  Towaids 
the  end  of  the  15th  century  it  became  the  seat  of  the 
Soottish  biahop  of  the  Isles,  the  abbey  chuicb  being  hU 
cathedral,  and  the  monks  his  chapter.  No  building 
now  remains  on  the  island  which  can  daim  to  have 
sheltered  St  Cohimba  or  his  discipłes.  The  moet  an- 
dent  ruins  are  the  Laithrichean,  or  Foundations,  in  a 
little  bay  to  the  west  of  Port-a-Churraich ;  the  Cobhan 
Cuildich,  or  Culdees'  Celi,  in  a  hollow  between  Dunii 
and  Dunbhuirg;  the  rath  or  hill-fort  of  Dunbhuirg; 
and  the  Gleann-an-Teampull,  or  Glen  of  the  Chorch,  in 
the  middle  of  the  island,  believed  to  be  the  site  of  the 
monastery  which  the  Irish  bishops  destroyed  in  1208. 
St.  Oran'8  Chapel,  now  the  oldest  church  in  the  island, 
may  probably  be  of  the  latter  part  of  the  llth  oentury. 
St.  Mary'8  Nunnery  is  perhaps  a  oentury  later.  The 
Cathednl,  or  Sl  Mary*8  Chuich,  seems  to  have  been 
built  chieiiy  in  the  early  part  of  the  18th  oentuiy.  It 
has  a  choir,  with  a  sacristy  on  the  north  side,  and  chap- 
ds  on  the  south  side ;  north  and  south  transepta ;  a  cen- 
tral tower  about  seventy-five  feet  high,  and  a  nave. 
An  inscrlption  on  one  of  the  columns  of  the  choir  ap- 
pears  to  denote  that  it  was  the  work  of  an  Irish  ecdeai- 
astic  who  died  in  1202.  On  the  north  of  the  cathedral 
are  the  chapter-house  and  other  renuuns  of  the  conven- 
tual  or  monastic  buildings.  In  the  "  Reilig  Oran" — so 
called,  it  is  supposed,  from  St.  Oran,  a  kinsman  of  St. 
Columba,  the  first  who  found  a  grave  in  it — were  buried 
Ecgfrid,  king  of  Northumbria,  in  684 ;  Godred,  king  of 
the  Islcs,  in  1188 ;  and  Haco  Ospac,  king  of  the  Isles,  in 
1228.  No  monumenta  of  these  princea  now  remain. 
The  oldest  of  the  many  tomb-stonee  on  the  island  are 
two  with  Irish  inscriptions,  one  of  them,  it  is  beliered, 
being  the  monument  of  a  bishop  of  Connor  who  died  at 
łona  in  1174. — Chambers,  Cydup,  y,  619;  Duke  of  Ar- 
gyll,  in  Gaod  Words,  SepL  1, 1869,  p.  614  Bq.;  Prwoftoa 
Bqt,  1867,  p.  1-22.     See  also  Columba. 

lonia.  It  has  been  soggested  that  in  1  Mace  yiii, 
8,  for  the  exi8ting  reading  x*><*pav^  rrjp  'IpScKrju  Kai 
MfidtiaVf  "India  and  Media,"  should  be  read  x*  t,  *Iu}- 
vlav  Kai  Mv<riav,  "fonia  and  Mysia,"  on  the  ground 
that  to  include  India  and  Media  within  the  domain  of 
Antiochus  III  is  to  contradict  directly  the  yoice  of  his- 
tory,  which  conflnes  that  monarch^s  possessiona  to  thia 
aide  the  Taurus  rangę  (Livy,  Ifitt.  xxxyii,  56 ;  xxxviii, 
88).  Sce  India.  This  alteration  ia  purely  oonjectural, 
as  there  is  no  MS.  authority  for  it ;  and  it  Łs  not  caay  to 
aee,  supposing  it  to  be  the  correct  reading,  how  the  error 
in  the  text  could  haye  ariaen.  MichaeUs  supposes  that, 
by  a  mlstake  on  the  part  of  the  translator,  1^73  was 
read  for  "^D^,  and  lin  or  lian  for  "^aart,  and  that  the 
nations  intended  are  the  Mysiana  and  the  'Eptroi  (Ho- 
mer, //.  ii,  580)  of  Paphlagonia;  but  thia  ia  atill  morę 
improbable  than  the  former  conjecture;  and,  besidea,  not 
only  was  Paphlagonia  not  within  the  domain  of  Antio- 
chus. but  the  Enetians  did  not  at  the  time  exist  (Strabo, 
Xłi,  8).  Perhaps  the  conjectural  emendation  aboye 
mentioned  may  be  adopted  on  the  ground  of  tta  intemal 
probability,  as  the  only  altematiye  seems  to  be  to  aup- 
pose  gross  geographical  and  hiatorical  ignorance  on  the 
part  of  the  autbor.  It  is  followed  by  Luther  (who  puts 
"lomen"^  in  the  text),  Drusiua,  Grotiua,  Houbigant,  etc 
Adopting  the  reading  lonia,  the  diatrict  refeired  to  is 
that  bordering  on  the  iEgean  Sea  from  Phocsea  to  Mi- 
lotus.  Its  original  inhabitants  were  Greeks,  but  in  later 
times  a  large  Jewish  dement  was  found  in  the  popular 
tion  (Josephus,  AnL  xvi,  2,  3).  lonia,  with  ita  islands, 
was  celebrated  for  its  twelye,  aftcrwards  thirteen  dties; 
flve  of  which  —  Ephesus,  Smynia,  Miletus,  Chios,  and 
Samos — are  conspicuous  in  the  N.  T.  See  Asia  Minob. 
Under  the  Roman  dominion  the  name  lonia  lemained, 


bot  ita  towns  were  distributed  politicaUy  under  oAei 
proyincea.  Ptolemy  ranka  them  in  Aaia  Fkoper,  wUk 
Strabo  (xiy,  681),  Pliny  (if.  N.  v,  81),  and  Mela  O*  17) 
apeak  of  lonia  aa  a  distinct  tenitory.  In  the  aoooant 
which  Joeephua  giyea  {AnL  zyi,  2, 3)  of  the  appeal  of 
the  Jewa  in  lonia  to  Agrippa  for  exemptioo  from  oo^ 
tain  oppreaaiona  to  which  they  were  ezpoaed,  the  an- 
cient  name  of  the  countr>'  ia  retained.  He  apeaka  of 
TToKd  irknOoc  *loviaiuip  aa  inhabiting  ita  dtiea. — Kitto, 
a.  y.  See  alao  Jayam. 
lonio  Order.    See  Abchttbctuiie. 


See  PuiŁOSoraY  (Gbeek). 


łonie  Philosophy. 

I5ta.    See  Jot. 

Zperen,  Josua  vax,  a  not«d  Dntch  theologian,waa 
bom  at  Midddburg,  Feb.  28,  1726w  He  was  deaoendcd 
from  an  old  and  reapectaUe  Flemiah  family.  Hia  atnd- 
iea,  in  which  he  eyinoed  yeiy  superior  meotai  endow- 
menta,  were  pursued  firat  at  Gioningen,  and  afUrwaida 
at  Leyden,  where  he  was  permitted  to  enjoy  the  in- 
structiona  and  friendahip  of  the  celebrated  profeaaon  A. 
Schultena  and  T.  Hematerfauys.  In  1749  he  waa  called 
to  the  paatoral  chaige  of  Lilio.  Herę  he  labored  with 
zeal  and  fidelity  for  aixteen  yeara.  In  1752  he  waa 
madę  doctor  of  philoeophy,  and  in  1766  waa  called  to 
Yeere,  where  he  remained  ten  yeaiSL  Seyeral  of  the 
moat  noted  literary,  adeutiflc,  and  poetic  aodetiea  anc- 
ceaaiydy  dected  him  to  memberahip.  Zealand  alao  ap- 
pointed  him  a  member  of  the  commiadon  to  which  waa 
intruated  the  work  of  preparing  a  new  poetic  yeiaioo  of 
the  Book  of  Pulma.  He  took  an  impcŃtant  part  in  the 
performance  of  this  duty.  The  work  waa  approyed  in 
1778,  and  atill  continuea  in  use  in  the  Reformed  Chmch 
of  Holland.  It  poaaeasee  a  high  degree  of  poetic  merita 
His  income,  both  at  Lilio  and  Yeere,  waa  amall,  whidi, 
with  a  numerona  family  to  aapport,  waa  the  eoozoe  of 
many  triala  and  perplexitiea.  Accepting  an  appoint- 
ment  aa  preacher  in  Batayia,  in  the  Dutch  £ast  India 
poaaeadons,  he  went  thither  in  1778,  aooorapanied  by 
hia  wife  and  fiye  children.  He  waa  cordially  recdred^ 
and  an  agreeable  field  of  labor  waa  opened  to  him.  He 
labored  here  with  redonbled  aeal  and  fidelity,  but  the 
climate  waa  adyerae  to  hia  health,  and  in  1780,  aller 
the  short  ąiace  of  two  years,  he  reeted  from  hia  laboct 
on  earth.  A  philological  eaaay,  dedicated  to  the  Hd- 
land  Sodety  of  Sdencea,  and  published  in  1755^  waa  re- 
gaided  aa  highly  creditable  to  him  in  a  linguistic  point 
of  yiew,  and  alao  aa  eyincing  a  phikwophical  apirit  H  ia 
Hiitory  o/Churck  Ptaltnotfy,  published  in  1777,  ia  aaid 
to  exhibit  extendye  hiatorical  knowledge,  oombincd 
with  good  taste.  He  aeema  to  haye  exoelled  in  yariooa 
departmenta  of  knowledge.  See  B.  Gladoa,  Godpeiterd 
Nederkmdj  ii,  190;  H.  fidnman,  Gt$ekkdemt  der  Gd- 
dertcheSooffetchool,  ii,  190.    (J.P.W.) 

Iphedei^ah  (Heb.  Yiphdeyak\  nj-Jt^,  arf/rw  by 
Jehwah;  SepL  'le^a^ia),  one  of  the  "  aona"  of  Shaahak, 
and  a  chief  of  the  tribe  of  Benjamin  reddent  at  Jcrusa- 
lem  (1  Chron.  yiii,  25).    fi.C.  post  1612  and  antę  58& 

Ir  (Heb.  id,  n*^?,  a  dtys  Sept'Op  y.  r.  'Qpa,Ya]g. 
//tr),  the  father  of  Shuppim  (Shopham)  and  Hnppim 
(Hupham),  of  the  tribe  of  Benjamin  (1  Chron.  yii,  13) ; 
probably  identical  with  one  of  the  aona  of  Benjamin 
(Gen.  xlyi,  21),  and  therefore  not  (aa  often  auppoeed) 
the  aame  with  Iri  (1  Chron.  yii,  7)^  See  Bekjamib  ; 
alao  comp.  Ir-nahasb,  Iii-«HEMBau,  etc. 

I'ra  (Heb.  Ira\  K^^?,  cHizetiy  ot|ierwise  wtac^fnl; 
Sept  'Ipaf,  *lpa,  *Qpal,  E/pa),  the  name  of  three  of  Da- 
vid's  favorite  officers. 

1.  Son  of  Ikkesh,  a  Tekoite,  and  one  of  Dayid's  thirty 
famous  warriors  (2  Sam.  xxiii,  26;  1  Chron.  xi,  28)« 
He  was  aflerwards  placed  in  command  of  the  8ixth  regi- 
ment of  his  troops  (1  Chron.  xx\'ii,  9).    B.C  1046-1014. 

2.  A  Jethrite,  another  of  Dayid^s  thirty  chief  heroea 
(2  Sam.  xxiii,  88;  1  Chron.  xi,  40).     B.a  1046L 

3.  A  Jaiiite  and  pńeat  ('^ns,  A.  Y.  "chief  mler^  i. 


IRAD 


641 


IRELAND 


e.  roral  cfaaplain  (2  Sam.  xx,  26).  B.C.  cir.  1022.  As 
be  was  not  of  the  sacerdotal  fanoily,  the  Rabbins  hołd 
Łhat  he  was  only  one  of  Dayid^s  cabinet.    See  Jair. 

I'nid  (Heh.  Irod',  '''3'^?»  pe'^  rwmer,'  Sept.  Tac- 
caOf  apparently  by  erroneoiisly  reading  1^**!? :  Joseph, 
'lapi^iję,  ^«/.  i,  8,  4 ;  Yulg.  Irad)j  one  of  the  antedilu^ 
rian  patriarchs,  of  the  Cainite  line,  son  of  Enoch  and 
father  of  Mehujael  (Gen.  iv,  18).  B.C.  coiisiderably 
post  4045. 

I'ram  (Hcb.  Irarn^  O^''!?,  citizen,  otherwise  toaich- 
fal;  Sept.  'Hpa/i,  but  Za^taiu  in  Gen.  xxxvi,  43 ;  Yulg. 
Iłiram)^  the  lasŁ-named  of  the  Edomite  phylarchs  in 
Mount  Seir,  apparently  contemporary  with  the  Hońte 
kings  (Gen.  xxxvi,  43;  1  Chion.  i,  51).  B.C.  perhaps 
cir.  1618.    See  lDU3iiE.v. 

Ireland,  the  morę  western  of  the  two  principal  isl- 
ands  of  which  the  kingdom  of  Great  Britain  and  Ireland 
is  composed,  between  lat  51^  25'  and  55^  23'  N.,  and 
loDg.  6^  20'  and  10^  20'  W.    Area,  32,513  8q.  miles. 

At  the  time  when  the  island  became  known  to  the 
Grecka  and  the  Romans  its  iąhabitants  were  Celts.  Of 
Geltic  origin  is  the  original  name  of  Erin,  which  means 
"West  Side,"*  and  was  changed  by  the  Greeks  into 
leme,  and  by  the  Romans,  who  madę  no  endeavoT8  to 
Bubjugaie  the  idand,  into  Hibemia.  During  the  whole 
period  of  the  rule  of  the  Romans  over  Bńttany  the  his- 
toiy  of  Ireland  is  enyeloped  in  profound  obscurity.  Ao- 
cording  to  later  chronicles,  Ireland  is  said  to  haye  had 
in  the  3d  century  five  states,  Momonia,  Gonnacia,  La- 
genia,  Ultonia,  and  Modia  (Meath).  As  the  people 
were  akin  to  the  Celts  of  Scotland,  Ireland  was,  until 
the  4th  century,  often  caUed  Great  Scotland  (Scotia 
major).  Christianity  appeais  to  have  been  brought  to 
Ireland  at  au  early  time,  perhaps  as  early  as  the  2d 
century.  A  reference  to  Ireland  is,  in  particular,  foand 
in  the  words  of  Tertullian,  who  says  that  parts  of  the 
British  lalands  which  had  never  been  yisited  by  the 
Komans  were  subject  to  Christ  In  the  4th  century  a 
nnmber  of  churches  and  schools  are  mentioned,  and  even 
before  the  4th  century  missionaries  went  out  from  Ire- 
land. Ccelestiua,  the  Mend  and  colaborer  of  Pelagius, 
was,  according  to  Jerome,  an  Irishroan,  and  the  son  of 
Chiistian  parents.  That  the  Irish  had  received  their 
Christianity  not  from  Romę,  but  from  the  East,  is  shown 
by  their  avexsion  against  the  institutions  of  the  Church 
(i  Romę.  The  firet  Roman  missionary,  who  about  430 
was  sent  to  Ireland  by  pope  Coelestius,  was  not  well  re- 
ceived,  and  had  soon  to  return  to  Scotland.  Two  years 
later  (432),  the  Scotch  monk  St  Patrick  (q.  v.)  arrived 
in  IrdancL  He  had  spent  his  youth  in  Ireland  as  a 
«lave,  and  had  subseqaently  lived  for  some  time  in  GauL 
With  great  zeal  he  preached  Christianity  throughout 
Ireland,  oonverted  seyeral,  and  was,  in  particular,  actiye 
foT  the  establishment  of  convents,  so  that  Ireland  was 
called  the  island  of  the  Saints.  He  settled  finally  as 
bishop  of  Armagh,  which  see  thns  reoeived  metropolitan 
power  over  all  Ireland.  According  to  some  writers 
(Wiltsch,  KirchL  Statiatik,  ii,  48),  Ireland  was,  however, 
without  its  own  archbishop,  being,  until  the  12Łh  cen- 
tury', subject  to  the  archbishop  of  Canterbury ;  accord- 
ing Ło  othens  pope  Eugene,  as  early  as  625,  appointed 
four  metropolitan  sees  at  Armagh,  Dublin,  Cashel,  and 
Tuaxn.  Certain  it  b  that  the  permanent  division  of 
Ireland  into  the  four  ecdesiastical  province8  of  Armagh, 
Dublin,  Cashel,  and  Tuam  took  place  about  1150  (ac- 
cording to  Moroni  in  1152,  at  the  Council  of  MeUefont; 
according  to  Wiltsch  in  1155).  From  this  time  the 
primacy  of  Armagh  over  all  the  sees  of  Ireland  was  gen- 
erally  recognised.  The  first  bishops  for  a  long  time 
maintained  their  independence  with  regard  to  Romę. 
In  the  7th  century  Romę  endeavored  to  induce  the  Irish 
churches  to  oonform  themselves  with  regard  to  the  cel- 
ebration  of  Easter  to  the  practice  of  the  Roman  Church, 
instead  of  following,  as  heretofore,  the  rite  of  the  Eastr- 
em  churches.  The  Irish  madę  a  long  resistance,  until,  in 
717,  the  monks  in  łona  (q.  v.)  were  on  this  acoount  either 
IV.-S8 


expe]led  or  ooeroed  into  sabmission.  Most  of  the  Irish 
churches  then  sabnutted;  yet,  as  late  as  the  12th  cen- 
tury, some  monks  were  found  who  adhered  to  the  East- 
em  practice  of  oelebrmting  Easter.  In  the  9th  century 
the  Irish  Church  was  considerably  distnrbed  by  the  in- 
vasions  of  the  Northmen,  who  destroyed  many  churches, 
and  bumed  manoscripts  and  conyenta.  These  invauons 
were  followed  by  a  period  of  anarchy,  during  which  the 
morał  condition  of  Uie  Irish  dergy  greatly  degenerate<L 
The  complaints  of  Romę  at  this  time  referred  chieily 
to  the  peculiar  ecdesiastical  practices  of  the  Irish — the 
marriage  of  the  dergy,  the  administration  of  baptism 
without  chrisma,  and  the  use  of  their  own  liturgy.  The 
legates  of  the  popes  finally  succeeded  in  obtaining  the 
entire  submission  of  the  Irish  Church  to  the  Church 
of  Romę  about  the  middle  of  the  12th  century,  which 
until  then  is  believed  to  have  been  without  auricular 
confession,  sacrifice  of  the  mass,  and  indulgences,  and  to 
have  celebrated  the  Lord's  Supper  in  both  kinds.  In 
1155  a  buli  of  pope  Hadrian  IV  allowed  king  Henry  II 
of  England  to  subject  Ireland,  the  king,  in  hb  tum, 
promising  the  pope  to  protect  the  papai  privileges.  In 
1172,  a  synod  at  Cashel  regnlated  the  ecdesiastical  af- 
fairs  in  accordance  wi^  the  wishes  of  Romę.  During 
the  time  of  the  following  kings  of  the  house  of  Plantag- 
enet  the  clergy  were  in  a  deplorable  condition:  the 
bishops  carried  the  sword,  and  lived  with  their  dergy  in 
open  and  secret  ńns.  The  monks,  who  were  very  differ- 
ent  from  what  they  had  been  in  former  times,  traversed 
the  countzy  ms  troublesome  beggars,  molesting  the  priests 
as  well  as  the  laity. 

When  Henry  YIH  undertook  to  make  himself  the 
head  of  the  Church  in  lus  dominions  he  met  in  Ireland 
with  a  yiolent  opposition.  The  opposition  was  the 
morę  popular  as  it  was  intimated  that  henceforth  only 
such  priests  as  nnderstood  the  English  language  would 
be  appointed.  The  Engliahman,  George  Brown,  who' 
was  appointed  bishop  of  Dublin,  met,  therefore,  in  spite 
of  his  eamest  and  incessant  labors  in  behalf  of  the  Ref- 
ormation,  with  but  little  success.  The  English  lituigy 
was  introduced  in  1551,  under  Edward  YI,  but  the  order 
to  hołd  divine  sendce  in  the  English  language  seems 
not  to  have  been  executed.  The  germs  of  Protestant- 
ism  were  wholly  destroyed  under  the  govemment  of 
Mary.  The  peopłe  were  not  prepared  for  the  Reforma- 
tion,  and  the  dergy  were  not  as  oorrupt  as  in  many 
other  oountries.  Moreover,  there  were  among  the  min- 
isters  who  had  been  sent  to  Ireland  as  Protestant  mis- 
sionaries many  adventurers,  who,  by  disreputable  oon- 
duct,  strengthened  the  aversion  of  the  people  to  Protes- 
tantism.  Under  the  govemment  of  Elizabeth,  an  order 
was  issued  in  1560  to  introduoe  the  generał  use  of  the 
English  liturgy  and  of  the  EngUsh  language  at  divine 
senrice.  Some  years  later,  however,  concessions  appear 
to  have  been  madę  in  favor  of  the  old  Irish  language. 
In  1602  the  first  translation  of  the  New  Testament  into 
the  Irish  language  by  William  Danid  appeared,  but  the 
translation  of  the  whole  Bibie  was  not  finished  until 
1665.  The  persistent  endeavors  of  the  English  govem- 
ment  to  extirpate  the  native  language  estabUshed  a 
close  union  between  the  Irish  nationality  and  the 
Church  of  Romę.  The  excitement  against  England 
greatly  increased  when  Elizabeth  showed  a  design  to 
confiscate  the  whole  property  of  the  Roman  Catholic 
Chmpch  in  behalf  of  the  Protestant  dergy.  A  number 
of  revolts  conseąuently  oocurred,  which  found  a  vigor- 
ous  support  on  the  part  of  the  pope  and  the  Spanish 
court.  A  plan  submitted  by  the  English  lord  lieuten- 
ant,  Sir  John  Perrot,  for  thoroughly  Anglidzing  Irdand, 
was  rejected  as  being  too  expensive,  and  thns  England 
was  oompclled  to  maintain  at  a  heavy  expense  a  large 
military  foroe  in  Ireland.  In  1595  the  chieftain  Hugh 
0*Nide,  whom  Elizabeth  had  madę  earl  of  Tyrone, 
plaoed  himself  at  the  head  of  a  powerful  insurrcction, 
which  was  mainly  supported  by  Irish  soldiers  who  had 
retumed  from  military  seryice  in  foreign  countries.  The 
earl  of  £s8ex,  with  an  army  of  22,000  men,  was  unable 


IRELAND 


642 


IRELAND 


to  quell  Łhe  insorrection ;  but  his  successor,  lord  Mount- 
joy,  was  iDore  successful,  and  pacified  the  whole  island. 
In  1601  Łhe  Irish  again  ruse,  aided  by  Spanish  troops 
under  Aquila  and  Ocampo;  but  the  combined  forces  of 
Ocampo  and  0'NłeIe  were,  on  Dec  24, 1601,  totally  de- 
feated  by  Mountjoy  uear  Kinsale.  The  Spaniaids  lefl 
Ireland  in  January,  1602,  and  0*Niele  madę  peace  with 
the  English.  At  the  death  of  Elizabeth  the  whole  of 
Ireland  was  under  English  rule.  As  a  large  number  of 
Irish  had  perished  in  this  conflict,  600,000  acres  of  land 
were  confiscated  in  favor  of  English  colonists.  In  view 
of  the  close  alliance  between  the  Chorch  of  Romę  and 
the  native  Irish,  the  govemment  of  Elizabeth  proceeded 
with  equal  sererity  against  both :  the  public  exerci9e 
of  the  Catholic  religion  was  totally  forbidden,  and  every 
inhabitant,  under  penalty  of  twelve  pence,  was  com- 
manded  to  be  present  at  divine  8er\ńce  celebrated  in  the 
Anglican  churches.  Decrees  like  this  proToked  a  gen- 
erał dissaUsfaction,  which  was  carefully  fomented  by 
the  Jesuits  of  the  Unirersity  of  Douay,  in  the  Nether- 
lands  (now  belonging  to  France).  On  the  accession  of 
James  I  to  the  English  throne  the  papai  party  was  very 
powerful:  it  expelled  the  Protestant  ministers  from 
many  places,  and  re-established  the  senrice  of  the  Cath- 
olic Church.  These  attempts  were  furcibly  suppressed, 
and  new  insurrections  consequently  were  caused,  all  of 
which  proved  of  short  duration.  In  order  to  break  the 
power  of  the  Catholic  chieftains,  the  goremment  of 
James,  foUowing  the  example  of  queen  Elizabeth,  was 
especially  intent  upon  wresttng  from  them  their  landed 
property.  Whoever  was  unable  to  provc,  by  means  of 
a  bill  of  feoffment,  his  title  to  his  property,  lost  it 
ITius,  in  the  northeni  part  of  Ireland  aloiie,  about 
800,000  acres  were  oonfiscated  by  the  crown,  which  sold 
them  to  English  speculators  and  to  Scottish  colonists, 
who  fouuded  the  town  of  Londonderry.  From  this 
time  dates  the  predominance  of  Protestantism  in  Ulster, 
the  northem  provinoe  of  Ireland.  At  the  same  time, 
however,  many  most  beneficent  measures  were  taken 
for  iroproring  the  social  condition  of  the  peoplc.  The 
English  law  supplaiited  the  previous  lawlessness;  all 
inhabitants  were  declared  to  be  free  citizens,  and  the 
country  was  divided  into  parishes.  In  1615  an  Irish 
National  Parliament  was  called  to  sanction  these  meas- 
ures. In  conseąuence  of  the  interference  of  the  govem- 
ment,  there  were  among  the  226  members  of  the  lower 
house  only  101  Catholics,  whiie  the  upper  house,  con- 
sistiug  of  50  members,  consistcd  almost  entirely  of  Prot- 
estanta. The  Catholics  were,  moreover,  excluded  from 
the  public  ofliices,  because  most  of  them  refused  (hence 
their  name  "  Recuaants*")  to  take  the  oath  of  supremacy, 
which  designated  the  king  of  England  as  head  of  the 
Church.  At  the  beginning  of  the  reign  of  Charles  I 
the  Anglican  Church  was  neyertheless  in  a  dcplorable 
condition.  Many  churches  were  destm\'ed,  the  bishop- 
rics  Imporerished,  the  dergy  ignorant,  indolent,  and 
impoYerished.  A  convocation  called  in  1634  adopted 
the  39  articles  of  the  Church  of  England,  and  retained 
the  104  articles  of  the  Irish  Church  which  had  been 
adopted  by  the  Parliament  of  1616.  The  constitution 
of  the  Church  of  Ireland  was  deiined  in  100  canons, 
which  were  of  a  somewhat  roore  liberał  character  than 
the  141  canons  of  the  Church  of  England.  The  Koman 
Catholics  were  generally  allowed  to  celebrate  dinne 
ser\'ice  in  prirate  houses,  and  many  priests  who  had 
flcd  retiuned.  At  the  same  time  the  Irish  nationality 
continued  to  be  persecuted,  and  a  number  of  new  con- 
fiscations  were  added  to  the  old  ones.  On  Oct.  28, 1644. 
a  bloody  insurrection  broke  out  under  the  leadership  of 
Roger  Morę,  0'Neale,  and  lord  Maguire,  the  descendants 
of  former  chieftains.  Within  a  few  days  from  40,000  to 
50,000  Protestant  Englishmen  were  murdered  (accord- 
ing  to  other  acoounts  the  number  of  killed  amounted  to 
only  6000),  and  an  equally  large  number  is  said.  to  have 
perished  while  trying  to  flee.  The  enraged  Parliament 
ordered  the  confiscation  of  two  and  a  half  million  acres 
of  land,  but,  in  conseąuence  of  its  conflict  with  the  king, 


was  unable  to  achieve  anything.    The  king'8  licoten* 
ant,  the  marqais  of  Ormond,  concluded  peace  with  the 
Catholic  Irish,  who  receiyed  the  promise  of  religious 
toleration,  and,  in  return,  fumished  to  the  king  an  anny 
against  the  Parliament.    When,  ailer  the  execotion  of 
the  king,  Ormond  tried  to  gain  the  support  of  the  Cath- 
olic Irish  for  the  prince  of  Wales  as  king  Charka  II,  the 
English  Parliament  sent  an  army  of  10,000  men  under 
Cromwell  to  Ireland,  which  conąuered  the  whole  island 
The  Catholics  were  punished  with  the  utmost  seyeriiy; 
all  their  Umded  property,  about  5,000,000  acres,  oonfisca- 
ted ;  about  20,000  Irish  sold  as  alayes  to  the  West  Indies, 
and  40,000  others  compellcd  to  flee  to  Spain  and  France. 
The  celebration  of  Catholic  seryice  was  forbidden,  and 
all  Catholic  priests  ordered  to  quit  Ireland  within  twenty 
days.     The  restoration  of  royalty  caused  no  important 
changes  in  Łhe  condition  of  the  people.    Religious  per- 
secution  ceased  by  order  of  Charles  II,  but  the  FtoteS' 
tants  remained  in  possession  of  the  confiscated  property. 
The  accession  of  the  Catholic  James  II  fillcd  the  Irish 
Catholics  with  the  greatest  hopes,  and  when,  aftcr  his 
expul8ion,  he  landed,  at  the  beginning  of  1689,  with  a 
French  army  of  5000  men,  he  was  receiyed  by  the  Cath- 
olics with  enthusiasm.    Ilis  army  in  a  short  time  num- 
bered  morę  than  33,000  men,  and  he  suoceeded  in  cap- 
turing  all  the  fortifled  places  except  Enniakillen  and 
Londonderry.     Large  numbers  of  Protestanta  had  to 
leaye  the  country  because  their  liyes  and  property  weie 
no  longer  secure.     Soon,  howeycr,  the  yictories  of  Wil- 
liam III  oyer  the  Catholic  party  on  the  Boioie  Riyer, 
near  Drogheda  (July  1, 1690),  and  ncar  Aughrim  (July 
13,  1691),  completed  the  subjugation  of  Ireland.     The 
peace  concluded  with  the  British  generał  Ginkel  at  the 
surrendcr  of  Limerick  promised  to  the  Irish  the  free  ex- 
ercise  of  their  religion  as  they  had  possessed  it  under 
Charles  IL     While  James  II  had  depriyed  2400  Prot- 
estant landownersof  their  estates,  now  morę  than  12,000 
Irishmen  who  had  fought  for  James  yoluntarily  went 
into  exile.    A  resolution  of  the  English  Parliament  or- 
dered a  new  confiscation  of  1,060,000  acres,  which  wue 
distributed  among  the  Protestanta,  who  bcgan  to  osgan- 
ize  themselyes  into  Orange  societics.    A  number  of  rig- 
orous  and  cruel  penal  laws  were  paased  in  order  to  estir- 
pate  the  national  spirit  and  the  Roman  Cathołie  Church. 
Bishops  and  other  high  dignitaries  were  exi]ed;  the 
priests  were  confined  to  their  own  counties;  all  instnic- 
tion  in  the  Catholic  religion  and  its  public  exeicŁse  were 
forbidden ;  the  Catholic  Irishmen  were  not  allowed  to 
own  horses  of  higher  yalue  than  £b,  or  to  many  Prot- 
estanta, and  were  excluded  from  all  public  offioes^     The 
irritation  produced  by  these  laws  was  still  incressed 
when  the  English  Parliament^  by  imposing  high  duties 
on  the  exports  from  Ireland,  dealt  a  heayy  blow  to  the 
commerce  and  prosperity  of  the  island,  and  when,  in 
1727,  it  depriyed  the  Catholic  Irish  of  the  franchlse. 
These  harsh  measures  soon  led  to  the  cstablishnient  of 
seyeral  secret  societies,  as  the  "  Defenders,"  ihc  "  Wbite- 
boys'*  (about  1760),  so  called  from  the  white  shirts  wbicfa 
they  threw  oyer  their  other  dothea  when  at  niglit  they 
attacked  unpopular  landlords  and  their  officera;  and 
the  "  Hearts  of  Oak"  (about  1768).     During  the  Amer- 
ican War  of  Independence,  the  Irish,  under  the  piietext 
that  the  French  might  ayail  themselyes  of  the  with- 
drawal  of  most  of  the  British  troops  to  inyade  their  i^}- 
and,  formed  a  yolunteer  army,  which,  in  the  oourse  i.4 
two  years,  increased  to  50,000  men.     Monster  petitiona, 
numerously  signed  by  Irish  Protestants  also^  demanded 
the  abolition  of  the  penal  laws,  the  restoration  of  the 
Irish  Parliament,  reform  of  the  rotten  electoral  law,  and 
relief  of  Irish  commerce.    Fear  of  a  generał  iosiirrectiott 
induced  the  Parliament  to  mitigate  the  penal  laws.  and 
to  allow  the  Catholics  to  estabfish  schools,  to  own  land- 
ed property,  and  to  exerci8e  their  religious  woRbipc 
The  onerous  tithes  which  the  Catholics  had  to  pay  t» 
the  Protestant  dergy  soon  led  to  the  estaUishnKnt  of 
another  secret  society,  the  "  Right  Bm^s,**  who,  by  means 
of  oaths  and  threatened  yengeance,  eudeayored  to  in- 


IRELAND 


643 


IRELAND 


timidate  Łhe  Catholics  fVom  paying  tithes.     A  still 

morę  cUmgerous  morement  was  called  forth  by  the  out- 

break  of  the  Fiench  Revolution.    The  leagtie  of  "  United 

Imhmcn,**  which,  in  Korember,  1791,  was  formed  at 

Dublin  by  fonncr  membeis  of  the  volunteer  anny,  en- 

dearored,  in  union  with  the  French  conrent,  to  make 

Ireland  an  independent  republic.    When  the  CathoHcs, 

at  a  meeting  in  Dublin  in  179*2,  demanded  equal  rights 

with  Protestanta,  the  British  Parliament  abolished  sev- 

cnd  penal  laMrs,  and  gave  to  the  Catholics  the  right  of 

becoming  attomeys-at-law  and  of  marrying  Protestants. 

In  1793  the  law  was  abolished  which  fined  the  Catholics 

for  neglecting  to  attend  the  Protestant  Church  on  Sun- 

day;  at  the  same  time  they  were  admitted  to  sereral 

lower  pablic  offices,  and  received  the  right  to  votc.    The 

United  Irishmen,  nerertheless,  assumed  a  thieatening 

attitnde,  and  a  French  corpe  of  25,000  men,  nnder  gen- 

erd  Hoche,  landed  in  Ireland.     The  latter  had,  how- 

e%'er,  to  leave  again  in  December,  1796,  and  a  new  in- 

surrection,  which  broke  out  in  May,  1798,  was  unsuccess- 

fuL    In  1800  the  Irish  Parliament,  bribed  by  the  £ng- 

liflh  Parliament,  consented  to  the  legislative  union  of 

Ireland  with  Great  Britain,  and  in  the  next  year  the 

first  anited  Parliament  of  Great  Britain  and  Ireland  aa- 

scmbled.     The  union  of  the  two  parliaments  involved 

the  miion  of  the  Anglican  churches  in  the  two  coun- 

tries,  which  now  received  the  name  of  the  United  Church 

of  England  and.  Ireland.     Sereral  further  concessions 

were,  howerer,  about  this  time  madę  to  the  Catholics. 

In  1795  a  Catholic  theological  seminary  had  been  estab- 

Ibhed  at  Maynooth,  as  the  British  govemment  hopcd 

that  if  the  Catholic  priests  were  educatcd  upon  British 

territory  they  would  be  less  hostile  to  British  nile.    The 

nilcs  against  conrents  were  aiso  modereted,  and  at  the 

doee  of  the  18th  century  the  Dominican  order  alone  had 

in  Ireland  about  forty^three  convents.     In  1805  the 

"Catholic  Association"*  was  formed  to  secure  the  com- 

plete  political  emancipation  of  the  Catholics.     It  soon 

became  the  centrę  of  all  political  movements  in  Ireland, 

and,  as  the  Orange  lodges  began  likewise  to  be  re\*ived, 

fRqnent  disturbances  bctween  CathoHcs  and  Protestants 

took  place.     In  1825  both  associations  were  dissolyed 

by  the  British  govemment ;  bnt  the  Catholic  association 

was  at  once  reorganized  by  0'Connel1,  and  gained  con- 

siderable  in6uence  upon  the  elections.    The  unccasing 

agitation  of  0*Connell,  aided  by  the  rooral  support  of 

the  Uberal  party  in  England,  finally  succeeded  in  in- 

ducing  the  British  ministry  to  lay  before  Parliament  a 

bill  of  emanciiiation,  which  passed  after  riolent  debates, 

and  was  signed  by  George  IV  on  April  18,  1829.     The 

oath  which  the  members  of  Parliament  had  to  take  was 

eo  changed  that  Catholics  also  could  take  it.    At  the 

same  time  they  obtained  access  to  all  pnblic  offices,  with 

the  only  exception  of  that  of  lord  chancellor.    This  vic- 

tofy  encouraged  the  Catholics  to  demand  further  con- 

cesńons;  in  particular,  the  abolition  of  the  tithes  paid 

to  the  Protestant  clergy,  and  the  repeal  of  the  legisla- 

tive  imion  between  Great  Britain  and  Ireland.    To  that 

end  0'Connell  organized  the  '^  Repeal  Association,**  to 

which  the  ministry  of  earl  Grey  opposed  in  18S3  the 

Irish  Coercion  Bill,  which  authorized  the  lord  lieutenant 

of  Ireland  to  forbid  mass  meetings  and  to  proclaim  mar- 

tial  law.    When  ihe  liberał  ministry  of  Melbourne  re- 

scinded  the  Coercion  Bill  and  began  to  pursue  a  concil- 

iatoiy  poiicy  towards  Ireland,  0'Connell  dissoK-eil  the 

Repeid  Association.     Earl  Mulgrare,  sińce  1885  lord 

lieutenant  of  Ireland,  fiUed  the  most  important  offices 

with  Catholics,  and  in  1886  suppressed  all  the  Orange 

lod^^    In  18S8  the  British  Parliament  adopted  the 

Tithe  BilL    When,  in  August,  1841,  the  govemment 

fell  again  into  the  hacds  of  the  Tories,  0'ConneU  renew- 

ed  the  repeal  agitation  so  violently  that  in  1843  he  was 

anested  and  sentenced  to  one  year*s  imprisonment,  a 

sentenoe  which  was,  however,  annuUed  by  the  Court  of 

Peen.    The  repeal  agitation  ended  suddenly  by  the 

death  of  0*Connell  in  1847,  because  no  competent  suc- 

r  in  the  leadenhip  of  the  party  could  be  found.    It 


was  foUowed  by  the  ascendency  of  the  morę  radical 
Young  Ireland  party,  which  did  not,  like  O^Connell, 
court  an  alliance  with  the  Catholic  Church,  but  preferrcd 
to  it  an  outspoken  sympathy  with  the  radical  Republic- 
ans  of  France,  and  is  on  that  account  not  so  much  inter- 
woren  with  the  ecclcsiastical  hbtory  of  Ireland  as  the 
moyements  of  0'Connell. 

The  ultramontane  doctrines  taught  in  the  seminary 
of  Maynooth  called  forth  an  agiution  in  Protestant 
England  fur  a  repeal  of  the  annual  subsidy  which  that 
seminary  received  from  the  British  goremment.  New 
offence  was  glven  to  the  bishops  and  the  ultramontane 
party  by  the  establishment  of  three  undenominational 
"Queen's  CoUeges."  The  bishops  unanimously  de- 
nounced  the  colleges  as  '*  godless,"  and  wamed  all  Cath- 
olic parents  against  them;  they  could,  howerer,  not 
prerent  that  ever  from  the  beginning  the  majority  of 
the  studenta  in  these  colleges  were  chiltlren  of  Catholic 
parents.  The  disregard  of  the  cpiscopal  orders  showed 
a  decline  of  pricstly  influence  upon  a  considerable  por- 
tion  of  the  Catholic  Irishmen.  This  decline  of  priestly 
influence  became  still  morę  apparent  when,  during  the 
ciril  war  in  the  United  States,  the  Fenian  organization 
was  formed  for  the  expres8  purpose  of  making  Ireland 
an  independent  republic.  As  it  was  chiefly  directed 
against  English  nile  in  Ireland,  the  new  organization, 
like  all  its  predecessors,  had  to  direct  its  attacks  promi- 
nently  against  the  Established  Church  of  Ireland,  and 
thus  appeared  to  have  to  some  extent  an  anti-Protes- 
tant  character;  but,  being  a  secret  society,  it  was  ex- 
comrounicated  by  the  pope,  and  denounced  by  all  the 
Irish  bishops.  The  generał  sympathy  with  which  it 
neyertheless  met  among  the  Catholic  Irishmen  both  of 
Ireland  and  the  United  States  is  thercfore  a  elear  proof 
that  the  Catholics  of  Ireland  no  longer  obey  the  orders 
of  thcir  bishops  as  blindly  as  formerly. 

The  EsUblished  Church  of  Irelaiid,  regarding  itself 
as  the  legirimate  successor  of  the  medieral  Catholic 
Church,  and  taking  possession  of  all  her  dioceses,  par- 
ishes,  and  Church  property,  retained  for  a  long  time  the 
same  diocesan  and  parochial  dirihions  as  the  Roman 
Catholic  Church.  As  late  as  1 833,  the  Church,  notwith- 
standing  its  smali  membership,  had  4  archbishoprics  and 
18  bishoprics :  namely,  Armagh,  with  5  bishoprics ;  Dub- 
lin, with  4  bishoprics;  Tuam,  with  4  bishoprics;  and 
Cashel,  with  5  bishoprics.  The  inoome  of  these  22  arch- 
bishops  and  bishops  was  cstimated  at  from  £130,000  to 
£185,000.  In  1833  the  first  decisive  step  was  taken  to- 
wards rcducing  the  odious  prerogatives  of  the  Estab- 
lished Church.  The  number  of  archbishoprics  was  re- 
duced  to  two,  Armagh  and  Dublin,  and  the  number  of 
bishoprics  to  ten,  fivc  for  each  archbishopric.  As  the 
income  was  ver>'  uneqiuilly  distributed,  all  the  benefices 
yielding  morę  than  £200  had  a  Ux  of  from  ten  to  fifteen 
per  cent  imposed  uix)n  them,  the  proceeds  of  which 
were  employed  for  church  building,  raising  the  income 
of  poor  clerg%-men,  and  other  ecciesiastical  purposcs.  In 
1868,  the  English  House  of  Coromons,  on  motion  of  Mr. 
Gladstone,  resolred  to  disestablish  the  Church  of  Ire- 
land. The  proposition  was  rejected  by  the  House  of 
Lords.  Public  opinion  cxpre8Bed  itself,  howerer,  so 
strongly  against  the  continuance  of  the  pririleges  of  the 
Irish  Church,  that  the  rejx>rt  of  the  royid  commissioners 
on  the  rerenucs  and  condition  of  the  Church  of  Ireland 
(dated  July  27,  1868)  recommended  important  reduc- 
tions  as  to  the  benefices  of  the  Irish  Church.  This  re- 
port, a  rolume  of  morę  than  600  pages,  is  replete  with 
interesting  information,  and  is  one  of  the  bestsources 
of  information  conceniing  the  condition  of  the  Church 
at  this  time.  It  states  that  the  total  rerenue  of  the 
Church  from  all  sources  was  at  this  time  £613,984; 
1319  benefices  had  a  Church  population  of  orer  forty 
persons,  and  extending  to  5000  and  upwarda.  Fotir 
bishoprics  werc  suggested  for  abolition,  namely,  Meath, 
Killaloe,  Cashel,  and  Kilmore.  The  commissioners  were 
in  faror  of  learing  one  archbishopric  only,  that  of  Ai^ 
magh.    All  bishops  were  to  receire  £3000  a  year  in< 


IRELAND 


644 


ffiELAND 


come,  and  an  additbiial  £500  when  attending  Parlia- 
meut.  The  primate  was  to  get  £6000,  and  the  archbish- 
op  of Dublin,  i fcontinued,  £5000.  The  abolitiou  of  all  ca- 
thedrals  and  deaneries  except  eight  was  recommeuded. 
With  a  view  to  rearrangement  of  benefices,  it  was  pro- 
poscd  that  ecclesiastical  commlssioners  should  have  ex- 
tended  poweis  to  suppress  or  unitę  benefices.  All  benefices 
not  having  a  Protestant  population  of  forty  were  to  be 
Buppressed.  The  cstates  of  all  capitular  bodłeś  and  of 
the  blshoprics  abolislied  were  to  be  rested  in  ecclesias- 
tical commissioners,  and  the  surplus  of  all  property  yest- 
ed  in  them  to  be  applicable  at  their  discretion  to  aug- 
mcntation  of  benefices.  The  ecclesiastical  commission 
was  to  be  modificd  by  the  introduction  of  three  unpaid 
la}nnen  and  two  paid  commlssiouersi  one  appointed  by 
the  crown,  the  other  by  the  primate.  The  management 
of  all  lands  was  to  be  taken  out  of  the  hands  of  eccle- 
siastical persons  and  placed  in  those  of  the  ecclesiastical 
commlssioners.  Mr.  Gladstone  having  become,  towards 
the  close  of  the  year  1868,  prime  minister,  introduced  in 
March,  1869,  a  new  bill  for  the  discstablishment  and 
disendowment  of  the  Irish  Church.  It  passed  a  second 
reading  in  the  llouse  of  Commons,  after  a  long  and  ex- 
cited  debatę,  by  a  vote  of  368  to  250,  showing  a  major- 
ity  in  favor  of  the  passage  of  118;  and  in  the  House  of 
Lords  by  a  majority  of  33  in  a  house  of  300  members. 
The  amendments  adoptetl  by  the  House  of  Lords  were 
nearly  all  rejected  by  the  Commons,  and  on  July  26  it 
received  the  royal  assent,  The  biU,  which  contains 
8ixty  clauses,  is  entitled  "A  bill  to  put  an  cnd  to  the  es- 
tablishment of  the  Church  of  Ircland,  and  to  make  pro- 
vision  in  respect  to  the  tcmporalities  thereof,  and  in 
respect  to  the  royal  College  of  Maynooth."  The  discs- 
tablishment was  to  be  total,  but  was  not  to  take  place 
until  Jan.  1, 1870,  when  the  ecclesiastical  courts  were  to 
be  abolishcd,  the  ecclesiastical  laws  to  ccase  to  harc 
any  authority,  the  bishops  to  be  no  longer  peers  of  Par- 
liament,  and  all  ecclesiastical  corporations  in  the  coun- 
try to  be  dissolred.  The  disendowment  was  technically 
and  legaliy  to  be  total  and  immcdiate.  Provision  was 
madę  for  winding  up  the  ecclesiastical  commission,  and 
the  constitution  of  a  new  commission,  composed  of  ten 
members,  in  which  the  whole  property  of  the  Irish 
Church  was  to  be  yested  from  the  day  the  measure  re- 
ceiyed  the  royal  assent  A  distinction  was  madę  be- 
twcen  public  endo>vmenŁs  (valueti  at  £15,500,000),  in- 
cluding  everj'^thing  in  the  naturę  of  a  statc  grant  or 
reyenue,  which  were  to  be  resumed  by  the  state,  and 
priyate  endowments  (yaluetl  at  £500,000),  which  were 
detined  as  money  contńbuted  from  priyate  sources  sińce 
1660,  which  were  to  be  restored  to  the  disestablished 
Church.  Proybion  was  madę  for  compensation  to  yest- 
ed interests,  including  those  connected  with  Maynooth 
College  and  the  Presbyterians  who  were  in  rcceipt  of 
the  regium  donum.  Among  these  interests,  the  largest 
in  the  aggregate  were  those  of  incumbents,  to  each  of 
whom  was  secured  during  his  life,  proridcd  he  contin- 
ued  to  dischargc  the  dutics  of  his  benefice,  the  amount 
to  which  he  was  entitled,  deducting  the  amount  he 
might  haye  paid  for  curates,  or  the  intcrest  might,  un- 
der  certain  circumstances,  be  commuted,  uiwn  his  appli- 
cation  for  a  life  annuity.  Other  personal  interests  pro- 
yided  for  were  those  of  curates,  permanent  and  tempo- 
rar}%  and  lay  compcusations,  including  claims  of  parish 
clerks  and  sexton8.  The  amount  of  the  Maynooth  grant 
and  the  regium  donum  was  to  be  yalue<l  at  fourteen 
years'  purchase,  and  a  capital  sum  equal  to  it  handed 
orer  to  the  respective  reprcscntatiyes  of  the  Presbyte- 
'  rians  and  of  the  Roman  Catholics.  The  aggregate  of 
the  payments  Tvould  amount  to  about  £8,000,000,  leay- 
ing  about  £7,500,000,  placing  an  annual  income  of  about 
£30,000,000  at  the  disposal  of  Parliament,  This  was  to 
be  appropriated  **  mainly  to  the  relief  of  unayoidable 
calamity  and  suffering,  but  in  such  a  way  as  not  to  in- 
terfere  with  the  obligation  imposcd  upon  property  by 
the  poor  laws,"  A  constitution  for  the  disestablished 
Church  was  adopted  by  a  General  Conyention,  held  in 


Dublin  in  1870.  The  Church  will  be  govemed  by  a 
General  Synod,  consLsting  of  a  House  of  Biahops  ami  a 
House  of  Clerical  and  Lay  Delegates.  The  Hooae  of 
Bishops  has  the  right  of  yeto,  and  their  yeto  preyaUs 
also  at  the  next  synod ;  but  seyeu  bishops  must  agiee 
upon  a  yeto  to  make  it  yalid.  The  bishope  will  be 
elected  by  the  Diocesan  Conyention,  but  the  House  of 
Bishops  will  in  all  cases  be  the  court  of  selection  when 
the  Diocesan  Synod  does  not  elect  by  a  majorit}'  of  two 
thirds  of  each  order  a  clergjinan  to  fiU  the  yacant  see. 
The  primate  (archbishop  of  Armagh)  shall  be  elected 
by  the  Bench  of  Bishops  out  of  their  owu  uumber.  The 
property  of  the  Church  is  to  be  yested  iii  ą  "  Representa- 
tiye  Church  Body,"  which  is  to  be  permanent.  It  is  lo 
be  composed  of  three  claasea :  the  ez-officiOf  or  arch- 
bishops  and  bishops;  the  elected  members,  who  are  to 
consist  of  one  clerical  and  two  lay  represeiitatiyes  for 
each  diocese ;  and  the  coopted  members,  who  are  to  con- 
sist of  persons  equal  in  number  to  such  dioceses,  and  to 
be  elected  by  the  er-officio  and  repiescntatiye  members. 
The  elected  members  are  to  retire  in  the  proportion  of 
one  third  by  rotation.  The  Conyention  also  adopted  a 
resolution  against  the  introduction  of  the  ritualistic  prac- 
tices  which  haye  crept  into  the  Established  Church  of 
England. 

The  following  table  shows  the  population  comiected 
with  the  Anglican  Church,  according  to  the  official  cen- 
sus  of  1801,  in  each  of  the  dioceses,  together  with  the 
number  of  Koman  Catholics,  and  the  population  of  other 
religious  denominations  in  each,  as  well  as  the  number 
of  benefices  and  curates.  The  dioceses,  which  are  uow 
united  under  one  bishop  (such  as  Armagh  and  Clogher) 
are  giyen  separately : 


DlOOCM. 

Armagh 

Clogher 

Down 

Connor 

Dromore 

Kilmore 

Blpbin 

Ardagh.: 

Meath 

Tuam 

Klllala 

Achonry 

Derry 

Raphoe 

Artnagh 

Dnblłn \ 

Glaudelach . .  j 

Kildare 

Ossory. 

Fems. 

Lełghllu 

Cashel 

Emly 

Waterford 

Lismore 

Cork 

Cloyue 

Ross 

KUlaloe 

Kilfenora 

Clonfert 

Kilmacdoagh.. 

Limerick 

Ardfert > 

Aghadoe  ....{ 

Dublin 

Joint  total 


PopnUtion— Cgaww  IWl. 


Irbh    I    Romu      OUwrCooi 

Churcb.lCathoUct.     munltiea. 


85,583 
65,195 
28,868 
8U,125 
44,474 
31,(>46 
10,506 
11,044 
16,289 
0,041 
4,724 
3,892 
43,788 
22,213 


234,651 
170,998 

46,451 
108,245 

66.136 
109,886 
189,f508 
124,185 
235,136 
302,367 

81,337 
105,203 
164,475 
126,991 


G6,026 

26,379 

SS,624> 

302,657; 

61,605 

8,182 

1,665 

1,068 

1,929 

1,553 

1,014 

275 

86,083 

90,000 


456,83^  a,  120, 569 
100,S5T 
12,409 
8,«flS 
14,S!ś3 
13,025 
4J21 
1.414 

4,775' 
26J3C 
ll.T4«^ 

4;T4I}| 

12,  rw 

2ni 

8,51*1 

434 

S,e7U 

6,42*' 


566,216 


996,91(1 

^,580 
331, Sti^ 

i3a,flso 

lll,mł6 
]14,S31 
f/ł;70T 
31ł,4I« 
13!>,76» 
2116,918 
202.294 
54,540 
Zll,09e< 
82,  TS* 
61JSn' 
^,S33 

I6a,im 

flC*02S 


16,146 

i,a;^ 

4,".9ł 

l.Ó-Jl  ( 
Til/ 

l,l^li 
617 

l/>ysi 

2i 

4,t9) 

31)' 

IpSl^j 

4S7ł 


,MS  i,a'H4,6!Wl    3H.7i6 
^H7:>5T  4.&ł«5/itó  ?.**&, Vł43~ 


108 

77 

126 


66 

41 
81 
111 
65 

16 
12 
70 
42 

n2 


140 

44 

67 
64 
88 

»5 


7 
19 
28 
17 
7 
8 
40 
15 


2S 


871      806 


1648  \  606 


The  Roman  Catholic  Church  in  Ireland  is  goyemed 
by  four  archbishops,  whose  sees  are  in  Armagh,  Dublin, 
Cashel,  and  Tuam,  and  twenty-four  bishops:  tbey  are 
all  nomuiated  by  the  pope,  generally  out  of  a  list  of 
three  immes  submitted  to  him  by  the  parbh  priests  and 
chapter  of  the  yacant  diocese,  and  reported  on  by  the 
archbishops  and  bishops  of  the  proyince.  In  case  of 
expected  incapacity  from  age  or  iniirmity,  the  biahop 
names  a  coadjutor,  who  is  usually  confirmed  by  the  pope, 
with  the  right  of  succesaion.     In  many  of  the  <** 


IRELAND 


645 


IRELAND 


a  chapter  and  cathedral  corps  havc  been  revived,  the 
dean  being  appointed  by  the  cardinal  protecŁor  at  Romę. 
The  diocesan  dignitaries  are  the  vicars-general,  of  whom 
there  are  one,  two,  or  three,  acconling  to  the  extent  of 
the  diocese,  who  have  special  dlsciplinaiy  and  other 
powera;  vica»-forane,  whose  ftinctions  are  moro  re- 
stricted ;  the  archdeacon,  and  the  parUh  priests  or  in- 
caTnbent&  Ali  of  these,  as  wcU  as  the  curates,  are  ap- 
pointed by  the  bishop.  The  whole  of  the  clergy  are 
nipported  solely  by  the  yoluntary  contributlons  of  their 
flocks.  The  episcopal  emoluments  arise  from  the  men- 
sal  parish  or  two,  the  incumbency  of  which  is  retained 
by  the  bishop,  from  marriage  licenses,  and  from  the  cu- 
th^raticum,  an  annual  sum,  varying  from  £2  to  £10, 
paid  by  cach  incumbent  in  the  diocese.  The  2425  civil 
parishes  in  Ireland  are  amalgamated  into  1073  ecclesi- 
astical  parishes  or  unions,  being  445  livings  less  than  in 
the  Anglican  Church.  The  incomes  of  the  parish  priests 
anse  from  fees  on  roarriages,  baptisms,  and  deaths,  on 
Easter  and  Christmas  dues,  and  from  incidental  volun- 
tary  contribudons  eithcr  in  money  or  labor.  Tlie  num- 
berof  priests  in  Ireland  in  1853  was  2291  (of  whora  1222 
were  educated  at  Maynooth  College);  in  1869  it  was 
aboat  3200.  The  curates  of  the  parish  priests  form  morę 
than  a  half  of  the  whole  clerical  strcngth ;  and  scattered 
through  the  cities  and  towns  are  70  or  80  communities 
of  priests  of  rarioos  religious  ordcrs  or  rules,  hence  call- 
ed  RfffularSf  who  minister  in  their  own  churches,  and, 
though  without  parochial  jurisdiction,  greatly  aid  the 
secular  clergy.  Ali  the  places  of  public  worship  are 
built  by  subscriptions,  legacies,  and  collections.  There 
are  numerous  monasteries  and  conrcnts ;  the  latter  are 
supported  partly  by  sums,  usually  from  £300  to  £500, 
paid  by  those  who  take  the  vow8  in  thcm,  and  partly 
by  the  fees  for  the  cducation  of  the  daughters  of  re- 
spectable  Roman  Catholics.  Various  communities  of 
raonks  and  nuns  also  devote  thcmselvc8  to  the  gratui- 
tous  edacation  of  the  childrcn  of  the  poor.  Candidates 
for  the  priesthood,  formerly  under  the  necessity  of  ob- 
taining  their  cducation  in  contuiental  colleges,  are  now 
educated  at  horoe.  The  principal  dcrical  college  is 
that  of  Maynooth,  which  was  fouuded  in  1795  as  Royal 
College  of  St.  Patrick  at  Maj-nooth.  The  Irish  Parlia- 
ment  madę  to  it  an  anmml  grant  of  £14,000;  the  £ng- 
lish  Parliament  sanctioned  the  grant,  but  reduced  it  to 
£8927,  out  of  which  the  professors  and  480  students 
were  supporte<l.  The  Irish  lord  Dunboyne  foundcd  20 
morę  scholarships.  In  1845,  the  govemment,  under  the 
administration  of  Sir  Robert  Peel,  raised  the  aiuiual 
grant  to  £2G,000;  morc  recently  this  sum  was  again 
raisad  to  £38,000.  In  1869,  when  the  Anglican  Church 
was  diaestablished,  a  capital  sum  equal  to  the  amount 
of  the  Maynooth  grant,  yalued  at  fourteen  years*  pur- 
chase,  was  handed  over  to  the  representatiyes  of  the 
Roman  Catholic  Church.  The  Roman  Catholic  Univer- 
sity  at  Dublin  was  establlshe<l  at  a  synodal  meeting  of 
the  Catholic  bishops  held  on  May  18,  1854.  At  a  con- 
ference  held  in  1863  the  bishops  resolred  to  enlarge  the 
nniyersity,  and  to  erect  a  new  building  at  the  cost  of 
£100,000.  There  are,  besides,  the  Catholic  colleges  of 
St. Patrick, Carlów;  St,  Jarlath, Tuam ;  St. John's, Wa- 
tcrford;  St.  Peter'8,  Wexford;  St.  Colman'8,  Fermoy; 
St.  Patrick*a,  Armagh;  St.  Patrick'8,  Thurles;  St,  Ky- 
ran'8,  Kilkenny ;  St.  Mel,  Longford;  Ali  Hallows  (devo- 
ted  exclnsively  to  prepare  priests  for  foreign  missions), 
and  Clonliffe,  Dublin,  all  supported  by  Yoluntary  con- 
tnbutions. 

There  are  also  for  the  education  of  Irish  priests  two 
colleges  in  Romo,  the  Irish  College  and  the  College  of 
St.  Isidor,  and  one  in  Paris.  The  number  of  religious 
communities  of  men  has  decreased  during  the  last  him- 
dned  years.  llie  Dominicans,  at  the  time  of  Benedict 
Xrv,had  29  houses,  in  1860  only  13  houses,  with  about 
50  monks;  the  Augustines  had  formerly  28,  now  14  con- 
V€nt8;  the  Carmelites  have  81  houses,  formerly  167; 
the  Jesuita  4  colleges,  1  home,  and  80  members;  the 
L«zarists,  Passionists,  and  Redemptorista  2  houses  each ; 


the  brothers  of  the  Christian  Schools  haye  a  laige  num- 
ber of  institutions. 

The  foUowing  is  a  statistical  summaiy  of  the  Roman 
Catholic  Church  in  Ireland  in  1869 : 


Armauli 


Deiry.. 

Clofrnar 

Rapbw 

Duwn  and  Connor.. 

Kilmor* 

AriUgh 

Dromore , 


Armagh  Proflnc*. , 

Dublin 

Kil<Ur*  and  Laighiln 

Oawry 

Farn*. 


Doblin  ProvInce... 

Caahal  aod  Emly. 

Cork 

Killaloa 

Kerry 

Llmarick 

WatarTd  and  Liamora 

Cloyne 

Rom 


Caahel  ProTlnca.. .. 


Tuam 

Clonfcrt 

Achonry 

Klphin 

Kilmacdoagh  and  Kil- 

finora 

GftlwaY 

Kinala' 

TnamProrliłca.... 


Ireland.. 


89 
87 

1«|     i8 
143    466 


314 


68  4i^ 
M 

40  8£ 

18  ir 


1      1901   16C 
»     I07« '9«' 


Hoiuaa  of  Ra- 
llgloua  Ordcn, 
or  Commnni- 
tlaiof 


899|  387    11 
i»97lia4l|"75" 


The  first  Presbytery  in  Ireland  was  formed  at  Car- 
rickfergus  in  1642,  and  gave  rise  to  the  Synod  of  Uhłer, 
The  Presbyierian  Synod  of  Munster  was  formed  about 
1660.  The  Presbytery  of  Anirim  separated  from  the 
S^Tiod  of  Ulster  in  1727,  and  the  Remonairani  Synod  i  a 
1829.  A  number  of  seceders  formed  themselyes  into 
the  Secession  Synod  of  Ireland  about  1780.  In  1840, 
the  General  and  Secession  synods,  haying  united,  as- 
sumed  the  uame  of  the  General  A  ssenibly  ąfthe  Presby- 
łerian  Church  in  Ireland,  comprising  in  1856  510  eon* 
gregations,  arranged  under  37  presbyteries.  The  min- 
istcrs  were  supported  by  yoluntary  contributlons,  the 
rents  of  scats  and  pews,  and  the  interest  of  the  regium 
donunij  or  royal  gift  This  was  first  granted  in  1672  by 
Charles  II,  and  in  1869  26  (first  class)  ministers  receiyed 
from  the  state  £92  6<.  2d,  each,  and  551  (second  class) 
£69  4s.  Sd.  each  per  annum.  As  the  ministers  in  the 
first  class  died,  their  successors  only  receiyed  the  latter 
amount.  The  regium  donunu  as  annual  grant,  was  abol- 
ished  by  the  Irish  Church  Bill,  but  a  capital  sum  equal 
to  the  amount  of  the  donum^  yalued  at  fourteen  years* 
purchase,  was  handed  oyer  to  the  representatiyes  of  the 
Presbyterian  body.  The  total  sum  for  regium  donttm 
yoted  by  Parliament  for  the  year  euding  March  31, 1869, 
was  £40,547.  The  minutes  of  the  General  Assembly 
for  1869  State  that  in  the  year  ending  March  31  there 
were  628  ministers  (besides  51  licentiates  and  ordained 
ministers  without  charge),  560  congregations,  and  262 
manses.  The  seat  rents  produced  £38,011 ;  the  sti- 
pends  paid  to  ministers,  £37,853;  raised  for  building  or 
repairing  churches,  manses,  and  schools,  £17,830 ;  Sab- 
bath  collections,  £13,575;  mission  collections,  £12,124; 
other  chariuble  collections,  £6,835.  The  Congrega- 
tional  Debt  was  £37,167. 

The  l^resbyteriaus  haye  the  General  A88embly'8  Col- 
lege at  Belfast,  and  Magee  College  at  Londonden}'. 
The  latter  was  opened  OcL  10, 1865.  In  the  year  1846, 
Mrs.  Magee,  widów  of  the  late  Rey.  William  Magee, 
Presbyterian  minister  of  Lurgan,  left  £20,000  in  trust 
for  the  erection  and  endowment  of  a  Presbyterian  col- 
lege.    Th  la  sum  was  allowcd  to  accumulate  for  soir.e 


IRELAND 


646 


UiELAND 


yeare,  unttl  erentoally  the  trustees  weie  authorized,  hy 
a  decree  of  the  lord  chancellor,  to  select  a  convenient 
site  at  or  near  the  city  of  Londonderry.  The  citizens 
of  Derry  subscribed  upwards  of  £5000  towards  the  erec- 
tion  of  the  building,  which  coet  about  £10,000.  The 
Irish  Society  have  gran  ted  an  aimual  endowment  of 
£'250  to  the  chair  of  uatural  philoaophy  and  mathemat- 
ics,  and  £250  for  five  years  towaida  the  generał  eKpenses 
of  the  college. 

Remonttrant  Synod  of  UUier.^Thia  Bjmod  was  form- 
ed  in  May,  1830,  in  conseąuenco  of  the  separation  of 
aeyenteen  ministers,  with  their  congregatioiis,  from  the 
General  Syiu)d  of  Ulster,  on  the  ground  that,  contrary 
to  ita  usages  and  codę  of  discipline,  it  required  from  ita 
'  members  in  1827  and  1828  submiauon  to  certain  doc- 
trinal  tests  and  oyertures  of  human  invention«  There 
are  4  presbyteries  and  27  congregations  in  this  Bynod. 

The  Reformed  Pretbffterian  Synod  ofirelandy  consist- 
ing  of  4  presbyterics  and  25  congregationa,  is  uncon- 
nected  with  the  General  Asaembly,  It  did  not  partici- 
pate  in  the  reffium  donum. 

United  Pretbytery  or  Synod  of  Munster, — ^Thia  body 
was  fornied  in  1809  by  the  junction  of  the  Southern 
Prcsbytcry  of  Dublin  with  the  Presbytery  of  Munster, 
and  is  one  of  the  three  non-subscribing  Presbyterian 
bodies  of  Ireland,  the  other  two  bcing  the  Presbytery  of 
Antrim  (now  consisting  of  11  congregations)  and  the 
Remonstrant  Synod  of  Ulster,  A  few  years  ago  these 
three  bodies  united  to  form  the  "^  General  Non-subscrib- 
ing  Presbyterian  Association  of  Ireland,**  for  the  promo- 
tion  of  their  common  principles,  the  right  of  private 
judgment,  and  non-subscription  to  creeds  and  confes- 
sions  of  faith.  The  General  Association  raeets  trienni- 
ally  for  these  objects,  while  the  three  bodies  of  which  it 
is  composed  retain  their  respective  names  and  indepen- 
dent existence,  being  govenied  by  their  own  rulea  and 
regulations. 

Tlie  Irish  Conference  of  the  Wesleyan  Methodist 
Conncction  of  Great  Britain  numberedin  1869  19,659 
members f  627  members  on  trial,  and  174  ministers.  The 
president  of  the  British  Conference  is  also  president  of 
the  Irish  Conference.  The  lMmitive  Methodist  Socie- 
ty (also  called  Church  Methodists)  numbered  in  1869 
8763  members  in  Ireland.  They  regard  thcmselres  as 
belonging  to  the  Angllcan  Church.  According  to  the 
census  of  1861,  the  total  Methodist />opu/a/um  of  Ireland 
Amounted  to  45,399.  There  were  also,  according  to  the 
same  census,  4532  Independenta,  4327  Baptists,  3695 
Friends,  18.798  belonging  to  other  sects,  and  393  Jews. 

The  commissioners  of  public  instruction  and  the  cen- 
sus commissioners  return  the  numbcrs  in  the  principal 
religious  denominations,  and  their  percentage  of  the 
generał  population,  in  1834  and  1861,  as  follows: 


1834. 

1861. 

DecrenM 

tMtween  1834 

■nd  H«I. 

Incr«uebe- 
t«Mnl834 
and  ICI61. 

Nuin- 
tM>r. 

Per 
Cl. 

Mum-    1  Per 
b«r.      1  Cl. 

b«r. 

Per 
Cl. 

18.7 

30.0 
18.7 

Nom- 
b«r. 

Per 
Ct. 

£«ublith«d  i 
Chiirrh...  i 

RofiwnCath-  1 
olir* f 

Pmbvteri«M. 

ProtmUnt  ) 
DiMeoten  f 

J«w« 

ToUl 

853,160 

6,436,060 
•48,058 

10.7 
80.9 
8.1 
0.8 

698,857 

4,505,965 

893,2«1 

76,661 

39^ 

11.9 
77.7 
9.0 
1.4 

159,808 

1,930,795 

119,767 

64,839 

951.8 

1,!i54,H!0 

1(X».<J 

5,7»8.»6:ilW.o|5J.210,365 

V7.1 

54,839 

The  census  commissioners  of  1861,  in  their  report  on 
religion  and  cdiication  (p.  6),  remark  that  "  the  Wesley- 
an Methodists,  by  a  peculiarity  of  their  constltntion,  al- 
though  frequenting  places  of  worship  distinct  from  thosc 
of  the  Established  Church,  very  genendly  declined  to 
be  reckoned  as  dissenters,  and  were  thcrefore  includcd 
(by  the  commissioners  of  public  instruction  of  1834) 
among  the  members  of  the  Established  Church." 

Between  the  years  1834  and  1861  the  Koman  Catholic 
population  shows  a  decline  of  1,930,795  pcreoiiji — the 
difference  between  6,436,060  in  1834  and  4,505,265  in 
1861 — or  nearly  a  third  of  what  was  their  entire  number 
in  1834;  and,'distributing  this  loss  over  the  original 


dioceses  (as  given  in  the  list  of  Angllcan  diocesei),  ai  in 
the  case  of  the  Established  Church,  we  find  that  it  bas 
to  be  diyided  among  thirty  out  of  the  thirty-two,  the 
only  exceptions  being  the  dioceses  of  Dublin  and  Coo- 
nor,  in  both  of  which  the  number  of  Boman  CatboUt^ 
is  something  in  exces8  of  what  it  was  in  1834.  The 
total  Roman  Catholic  population  of  the  thirty  diocefts 
in  which  it  is  found  to  have  declined  was  6,949,509  iii 
1834,  and  4,005,104  in  1861,  showing  a  loos  of  l,944.4^ij. 
or  nearly  a  third  of  the  fonner  popcdation.  In  1834  tl.c 
number  of  Presbyterians  in  Ireland  was  retumed  u 
643,058,  and  in  1861  it  had  fallcn  to  528,291,  ejchibiiing 
a  reduction  of  119,767,  or  rather  less  than  a  fifth  of  their 
number  in  1834.  This  reduction  distributes  itself  ovcx 
ten  of  the  thirty-two  (original  Anglican)  dioceses— 
those,  namely,  of  Achonry,  Armagh,  Clogher,  Coonor, 
Derry,  Down,  Dromore,  Kilfenora,  Kilmorc,  and  Saphoe, 
the  total  Presbyterian  population  of  which  amounted  in 
1834  to  637,784,  and  in  1861  to  505,196,  showing  a  re- 
duction of  132,588,  or  20.8  per  cent.  of  the  original  num- 
bers.  In  twenty-two  dioceses  the  Presbyterians  have 
rery  considerably  incrcased,  their  gross  population  bay- 
ing  been  only  5274  in  1834,  and  18,095  in  1861,  showing 
an  increase  of  243.1  per  cent.  The  proportion  per  anu 
of  the  members  of  the  Established  Church  to  the  gen* 
eral  population  has  risen  sińce  1834  in  twenty-one  out 
of  the  thirty-two  dioceses,  haa  lemained  statiooary  in 
two,  and  faUcn  in  nine. 

In  1831  the  grants  of  public  money  for  the  education 
of  the  poor  were  intnisted  to  the  charge  of  the  lord  licu- 
tenant,  to  be  expended  on  the  instruction  of  the  chiMren 
of  every  religious  denomination,  tmder  the  superinteud- 
ence  of  commissioners  appointed  by  the  crown,  and 
named  '^The  Commissioners  of  National  Education." 
The  principles  on  which  the  commissioners  act  are,  that 
the  schools  shall  be  open  alike  to  Christiana  of  cveiy 
denomination ;  that  no  pupil  shall  be  reąuired  to  atticd 
at  any  religious  exercise,  or  to  reccive  any  religious  in- 
struction which  his  parcnts  or  guardians  do  not  ap- 
prove,  and  that  sufficient  opportuuity  shall  be  affurdcd 
to  the  pupils  of  each  religious  persuasion  to  receire  Mp- 
arately,  at  appointed  times,  such  religious  instmctioo 
as  their  parcnts  or  guardians  think  pzoper.  In  1^5 
the  commissioners  were  incorporatcd  onder  the  name  uf 
"  The  Commissioners  of  National  Education  in  Inlanil" 
with  power  to  hołd  landa  to  the  yearly  value  of  £4CMkh), 
to  purchase  goods  and  chattcls,  to  receive  gifts  aod  be- 
quests  to  that  amount,  to  erect  and  maintain  achwils 
whcre  and  as  many  as  they  shall  think  proper,  to  grant 
Icases  for  three  lives  or  thirty-oue  years,  to  sue  and  to 
be  sued  by  their  corporate  name  in  all  couita,  and  to 
have  a  common  seal,  a  power  being  Teated  in  the  lurd 
lieutenant  to  fili  up  Tacancies,  to  appoint  additional 
members,  proyided  the  total  number  docs  not  escecd 
twenty,  and  to  remove  members  at  his  pleasure. 

The  follo>ving  return  gives  the  number  of  schools  and 
papils  at  differeut  periods,  and  the  amount  of  parliamec- 
tary  grants  annually  voted  for  their  maintenance: 


Y«M. 

ScboeU. 

Pupil.. 

Parilani. 
OninU. 

iv«. 

ScbooU. 

p»n>a^ 

Cml*. 

1(531 -a< 
|x40 
IH45 
1850 

i978 
4.t«l 

łW,6«0 
4S9,(m 
4)W.693 

50.000 

75.<eo 

1S0.C«0 

1  .056 

ifteo 

1865 
|lMW 

5194 
5«St 
6379 
6S»4 

535,905 

»»?.«*4 
»«7>J 

Tlie  religious  denomination  of  the  children  wb<s  oo 
Dec  31, 1868,  were  on  the  rolla  of  the  national  achuuU, 
was  aa  follows : 


EiUblUbcd 
Chnrdi. 

Roma. 

Catbolic 

Prmbj- 
toriao. 

UtUrI 
D<»am.l 

T««l.  ! 

l.ciMBtCT 

Munaier 

Ul»tcr 

6859 

48(i6 

54,9S0 

4494 

9til,H15 
950,639 
174,619 
155.711 

957 
•99 

550 
6«3i 

196    1 

Toul 

70,309 

789.9M 

107,401 

6757    ! 

•«:,4m1 

See  Herzog,  A  Ugem,  Real-Encyldop,  vii,  63 ;  WigRcrs 
Kirchliche  Geogr,  u,  Słaiistik;  Neher,  JTEmU^  Geogr.  it. 
Statistik,  ii,  1  sq.;  Thom,/mA  Ahumac;  Porter,  O  «;». 
A  nnal,  eccl,  Ilib,  (Rom.  1690)  ;  Waneus,  H&erma  Sarrn, 
(DubL1717);  Lanigan,£€dL//Mf.o/"/re/a«/(DttbLlft.'9). 


IRELAND 


647 


IREKrJETJS 


Ireland,  Councit«  of  {ConeUtum  nibemicutn)f  a 
title  of  four  dilTerent  oouncils.  The  first  of  theso  was 
held  about  456.  By  this  council  wcre  publishcd  thirty- 
four  canons  uiider  St.  Patrick'8  name,  aiid  two  othcr  bish- 
opa,  Anxilius  and  Jeaeiinus  (or  Iseńnus).  From  Łhe  6th 
of  tUcje  canons  it  U  erident  that  Łhe  priests,  dcacona, 
and  other  der^  (to  whom  Łhey  arc  addreased)  were  mar- 
ikd  (co^lp.^Vilkins,(7onc.i,  2):  AtioŁher  oouncil  was 
held  about  the  same  time,  or  shortly  after,  aLao  said  to 
have  been  pre^ded  over  by  Sc Patrick;  but  for  this  as- 
aertion  no  eridencc  cxiats,  and  there  is  not  oiily  no  po»- 
sibility  of  dctermiiiiiig  thc  presidiiig  officer,  but  even  thc 
place  and  datę  wherc  and  when  it  convened  are  vcry 
doobtful,  except  that  the  mention  of  a  keathen  popula- 
tkm  in  Canon  2  makes  it  oertain  that  it  cannot  have 
becn  much  later  than  the  council  above  alluded  to.  By 
this  oouncil,  which,  for  conrenienoe  aake^  we  may  cali 
the  2d,  32  canons  were  pnblished,  the  7th  of  which  for- 
bida  "  to  rebaptize  any  who  have  receired  the  outward 
form,  by  whomaoever  administered,  sinoc  the  iiuquity 
of  the  sower  infects  not  the  sced  itscif."  A  thinl  coun- 
cil was  held  in  68:1,  according  to  Mansi,  who  adds  that 
the  canons  of  this  and  othcr  councils  held  about  this 
time  form  together  the  codę  known  as  the  "Irish  Gode** 
(part  of  it  is  grivcn  in  the  SpiciUgiam  of  D'Achery,  i, 
49i).  Another  council  was  held  about  1097,  but  its  en- 
actments  arc  of  but  little  importancc.  Sce  Landon, 
Maimnl  ofCounciU,  p.  267  8q. ;  lAbbc,  x,  613 ;  Wilkins, 
Cunci^:  i,  4, 374.     (J.H.W.) 

Ireland,  John,  D.D.,  an  eminent  English  dirine, 
was  bom  at  Ashburton,  Deronshire,  in  1761.  He  ma- 
triculatetl  at  Oxford  as  Bibie  clerk  of  Oriel  College  in 
1780,'  and  afterwards  becamc  8uocesBively  vicar  of  Cro}'- 
doD,  Surrey,  in  1793,prebeiiilary  of  Westminster  in  1802, 
dean  of  Westminster  and  rector  of  lalip  in  1816.  He 
died  in  1812.  He  was  one  of  the  earlier  writers  for  the 
OiuarUrły  Itecieto,  and  founded  four  scholarshipa,  an  ex- 
bibition,  and  a  profeasorship  at  Oxford.  His  principal 
works  are,  Fiee  Di8C0urses,yńth  notes  (Lon(l.l796,8ro): 
— YiatUcuB  reffUe;  or,  a  defence  of  the  kingly  ofHcc 
(Lond.  2d  ed.  1797, 8vo) : — Nujutia  sacra ;  or,  an  inquiry 
faito  Łhe  scriptural  doctrine  of  marriage  and  dirorce 
(Lond.  1821,  8vo): — Piifftinum  (tad  CkrisHamły  com- 
pared  (LoniL  1809, 8vo)  i^Tke  PUtgue  o/Marseilies  in 
%e  yettr  1720  (LoniL  1834, 4to).— Darling,  Cj/clap.  Bib. 
i,  V. ;  Aliibonc,  DicL  o/ A  uthors,  i,  938. 

Zrenaeus  {Eiprivatoc)f  one  of  the  most  distinguished 
of  the  early  Church  fathers,  standing,  with  his  disciple 
tiippoIytu.s  ''  both  of  Greek  education,  but  both  bdong- 
Ing,  in  their  ecclesiastical  relations  and  labon,  to  the 
^  tVest,"  at  tlie  head  of  the  old  Catholic  controyersial- 
"  ists,  and  callcd  by  Theodorct  ^  the  Ught  of  the  Western 
Church,**  was  bishop  of  Lyoos,  in  France,  during  the  lat- 
ter  half  of  the  2d  century. 

I.  /.i/e.— Of  the  penonal  history  of  Irensus,  especial- 
Ir  in  hii  youth,  but  little  is  known.  The  dates  of  bis 
birth  are  vcry  rariabły  giren  by  differenŁ  critics.  Thus 
Dodwell  plaoes  it  about  A.D.  97,  Giabc  about  108,  Til- 
lemonŁ  about  120,  Du  Pin  about  140.  Most  of  the  lat- 
esŁ  students  of  thc  Church  fathers  incline  to  put  it  be- 
tween  the  years  120  and  140.  The  place  of  his  birth, 
also,  is  not  dofinitely  known.  It  is  probable,  howcver, 
from  his  vcry  early  acquaintance  with  Polycarp,  the 
illustrious  bishop  of  Smyma,  of  which  he  himself  tells 
us  (ni,  3, 4;  comp.  Eusebius,  EccUs,  JJist.  p.  191,  Bohn*s 
edition),  that  he  was  bom  somewhere  in  Asia  Minor ; 
and  some  have  assigned  the  dty  of  Sm3rma  as  his  na- 
tive  place.  llar>-ey,  one  of  the  editois  of  his  works, 
howevcr,  thinks  that  Irenieus  was  bom  in  Syria,  and 
that  he  caroe  to  Smyma  while  yet  very  young ;  was 
ihere  aŁtractctl  by  the  Łeaching  of  bishop  Polycarp, 
and  becamc  at  onoe  one  of  his  mosŁ  ardent  disciples. 
''Through  this  link  ho  still  was  connected  with  the  Jo- 
bannean  age.  The  spirit  of  his  preceptor  passod  over 
to  him.**  Addressing  a  former  fricnd  of  his  own,  Flori- 
nua,  who  hod  iapsed  to  Yalentinianism,  whom  he  eara- 
cstly  endcarored  to  bring  back  to  thc  Church,  he  boars 


witness  to  this  connection  in  thc  following  words: 
^  These  opinions,  Florinus,  that  I  may  speak  in  mild 
terms,  are  not  part  of  sound  doctrine ;  these  opinions  aro 
not  oonsonant  with  the  Church,  and  involve  their  vo- 
taries  in  the  utmost  impiety ;  these  opinions  cven  the 
heretics  be}'ond  the  Church'8  pale  have  nerer  yentured 
to  broach;  these  opinions  thosc  presbyters  who  prc- 
ceded  us,  and  who  were  conrersanŁ  with  thc  apostlcs, 
did  not  band  do^vn  to  thcc.  For,  while  I  was  yet  a  boy, 
I  saw  ihec  in  Lower  Asia  with  Polycarp,  distiuguishiii!; 
thyself  in  thc  royal  court,  and  cndearoring  to  gain  hi  j 
approbation.  For  I  havo  a  morc  vivi(l  recollection  of 
what  occurred  at  tlmt  timc  than  of  recent  ercnŁs  (inas- 
much  as  tho  CKpericnces  of  childhood,  keeping  pace  with 
the  growth  of  the  8oul,becomc  incorporatcd  with  it),  sa 
that  I  can  even  describe  the  place  where  thc  blcascil 
Polycarp  iised  to  sit  and  discouiac — his  gouig  out  and 
his  coming  in — his  generał  modę  of  llfe  and  pensoiial  ap- 
pearance,  together  with  thc  disoourses  which  he  deliv- 
ercd  to  the  peoplc ;  also  how  ho  would  speak  of  his  fa- 
miliar  intercourso  with  John,  and  with  thc  rest  of  thoso 
who  had  scen  thc  Lonl ;  and  how  hc  would  cali  their 
words  to  remembrancc.  .  .  .  What  I  heard  from  him, 
that  >\Tote  I  not  on  paper,  buŁ  in  my  hcart,  and,  by  tha 
graco  of  Grod,  I  oonstantly  bring  it  fresh  to  my  mind." 
It  is  not  known  at  what  timc  Irciueus  remored  to  Gaul, 
but  it  is  supposed  by  some  that  he  accompanicd  Photi- 
ntis  (whom  hc  aftearwanis  succeeded  as  bishop)  on  his 
mlssion  to  Gaul  to  establish  churches  at  Lyons  and  Yi- 
enne.  So  much  is  ccrtain,  Łhat  hc  was  a  prcsbyter  at 
Lyons  under  Marcus  Aurelius,  according  to  Kuscbius  (uŁ 
9up,  p.  171 ;  comparc  p.  157),  and  was  scnt  by  his  peo- 
ple  to  Eleutherus,  bishop  of  Korne  (A.D.  176-192),  as  a 
mediator  in  Łhe  Montanistic  disputes.  While  yet  on 
this  mission  Photinus  suffered  mart}ixlom,  and  Irciueus 
was  elected  tA  his  successor  (about  A.D.  177).  Ho  at 
oncc  retumed  and  zealoualy  deyoted  himself,  by  tongue 
and  pen,  for  thc  upbuilding  of  the  Christian  Church, 
BO  greatly  suffering  at  this  time  in  Further  Gaul  from 
the  persecutions  of  thc  hcatłien  goyemment.  He  ia 
supposed  by  some  to  haye  suffcrod  martyrdom  in  thc 
persecutionj}  under  Septimius  Seyerus,  A.D.  202 ;  but 
the  silencc  of  Tertullian  and  Eusebius,  and  most  of  tho 
early  Church  fathers,  makes  this  point  very  doubtfuL 
*'  Ireiueus  was  the  leading  representatiyc  of  tho  Asiatic 
Johanncsan  school  in  thc  second  half  of  thc  2d  century, 
the  champion  of  catholic  orthodoxy  against  Gnostic 
here8>%  and  thc  mediator  between  the  Eastem  and  West- 
em  churches.  He  united  a  leamed  Greek  education 
and  philosophical  penetration  with  praćtical  wisdom  and 
moderation,  and  a  just  sense  of  the  simple  essentials  in 
Christianity.  Wo  plainly  tracę  in  him  the  influence  of 
the  spirit  of  John.  *  The  tnie  way  to  God,'  says  he,  in 
opposition  to  thc  faise  Gnosis,  'is  We.  It  is  better  to 
be  willing  to  know  nothing  but  Jesus  Christ  the  croci- 
fied,  than  to  fali  into  ungodliness  through  our  curious 
questions  and  paltry  subUeties.'  He  was  an  enemy  of 
fdl  error  and  schism,  and,  on  the  whole,  the  most  ortho- 
dox  of  the  ante-Nicene  fathers,  except  iii  eschatolog^'. 
Herc,  with  Papias  and  most  of  his  contemporaries,  hc 
maintained  the  millenarian  yiews  which  were  subec- 
quently  abandoned  by  the  Catholic  Church"  (Schaff,  Ch, 
lliat,  i,  488, 489).  Iren«us'8  death  b  commemorated  in 
the  Roman  Church,  June  28. 

II.  Writings  of  I  remem. — His  writings,  which  aro 
yery  extended,  coyering,  in  their  translatiou  into  Eng- 
lish,  80  far  as  now  known,  between  six  and  seyen  hun- 
dred  pages  of  the  '<  Ante-Nicene  Library**  of  the  Messrs. 
Clark,  of  Edinburgh,  are  perhaps  the  most  raluable  relic 
of  early  Christian  antiquity.  But  '*  their  preciousness 
bears  no  proportion  to  their  bulk."  "  Indeed,"  says  a 
writer  in  the  BrU,  and  For,  Ecang.  Reif,  (Jan.  1869,  p. 
2), "  it  would  bo  possible  to  ooropress  into  a  very  few 
pages  all  the  statements  of  fact  tliat  can  be  deemed  real- 
ly  yaluable  to  us  at  the  prcsent  day."  Yet  the  same 
writer  adds  (p.  4)  that  the  work  of  Ireneus  is  to  us  '^  in- 
yaluable  for  the  Ught  it  sheds  on  thc  yiews  which  pre- 


IREN-^US 


648 


IREN-aiUS 


railed  in  the  primiŁivo  Church  respecting  many  most 
important  pointa.**  Kspecially  valuable,  and  the  most 
important  of  all  the  wńtings  of  Ireneos,  is  his  work 
'E\iyxoc  Kai  dvarpoirrj  rrjc  \(/ivSovvfŁov  ypiiurtutę,  gen- 
crally  puhlished  under  the  Latin  tltle  De  Befittalione  et 
Kuersione  Falta  ScientuB  ("ARefutadon  and  Subyer- 
sion  of  Knowledge  falsely  so  called"*),  and  morę  com- 
monly  even  under  the  shorter  title  ofAdversus  Nantes 
("  Agaiiist  Heresies").  Thls  work,  which  was  mainly 
(lirected  against  the  Gnostic  error  of  that  day,  was  com- 
liosed  during  the  pontificaŁe  of  Eleutherus,  and  "is  at 
once  the  ]X)lemic  theological  master-piece  of  the  antę- 
Nicene  age,  and  the  richcst  minę  of  information  respect^ 
ing  the  Gnostics,  particularly  the  Yalentinian  heresy, 
and  the  Church  doctrine  of  that  age"  (Schaff).  The 
work  is  diridcd  into  iive  books.  The  first  of  these  con- 
tains  a  minutę  description  of  the  tenets  of  the  yarious 
lierctical  sccts,  with  occasional  brief  remarks  in  illus- 
tration  of  thcir  absurdity,  and  in  confirmation  of  the 
truth  to  which  thcy  wcre  opposed.  In  his  second  book, 
Irentcus  ])roceeds  to  a  morę  complete  demolition  of  thoee 
heresies  which  he  has  ahready  cxplained,- and  argues  at 
great  length  against  them,  on  grounds  principally  of 
reason.  The  throe  remaiiiing  books  set  forth  morę  di- 
lectly  the  tnie  doctrines  of  revelation,  as  being  in  utter 
antagonism  with  the  riews  held  by  the  Gnostic  teach- 
crs.  "  In  the  oourse  of  this  argument  many  passages  of 
Scripture  are  quoted  and  commcnted  on ;  many  inter- 
csting  statemenU  aie  madę,  bearing  on  the  rule  of  faith ; 
and  much  important  light  b  shed  on  the  doctrines  held, 
os  well  as  the  practices  obsenred  by  the  Church  of  the 
2d  ccntur}\"  As  an  introduction  to  the  study  which 
he  describes,  and  with  which  he  manifestly  had  taken 
great  pains  to  make  liimself  familiar,  and  as  an  expoBe 
nnd  rcfutation  of  them,  for  which  the  great  leaming  of 
the  AYriter,  acknowledged  by  nearly  all  his  critics,  for- 
tunatcly  coupled  with  a  firm  grasp  of  the  doctrines  of 
the  Holy  Scriptures,  espccially  fitted  him,  this  work  is 
truły  inyaluable.  And  though  it  must  be  admitted  that 
on  some  points  Irenieus  has  put  forth  very  strange  opin- 
ions,  it  cannot  be  denied  that,  upon  the  whole,  his  i4c2- 
rersus  Ifareses  **  contains  a  vast  amount  of  sound  and 
raluable  exposiŁion  of  Scripture  in  opposition  to  the 
fanciful  systems  of  interpretation  which  prcrailod  in  his 
day."  The  A  detrtus  Iłarese*  was  written  in  Greek,  but 
it  is  unfortunately  now  no  longer  exŁant  in  the  originaL 
The  English  translator  of  it  for  Clark'8  (Edinburgh)  edi- 
tion  says  that  "  it  has  come  down  to  us  oniy  in  an  an- 
cient  Latin  yersion,  with  the  exception  of  the  greater 
part  of  the  first  book,  which  has  been  preserved  in  the 
onginal  Greek,  through  means  of  copious  quotations 
madę  by  Hippolytus  and  Epiphanius."  The  text,  both 
of  the  Latin  and  of  the  Greek,  as  far  as  extant,  is  oflen 
most  uncertain,  and  this  has  madę  it  a  difficult  task  for 
translation  into  English.  In  all  only  three  MSS.  of  it 
are  known  to  exist  at  present;  but  there  is  reason  to 
believe  that  Erasmus,  who  printed  the  first  edition  of  it 
(152G),  had  others  at  hand  in  his  preparation  of  the 
work  for  the  press.  The  Latin  rersion,  spoken  of  aboye 
fis  the  only  complete  yersion  of  it,  was,  according  to 
Dodwell  {IHsgerłt.  Iren,  y,  9, 10),  prepared  in  the  4th  cen- 
tury ;  but  it  is  known  that  Tertullian,  in  his  day,  used 
the  same  yermon,  and  it  is  highly  probable,  thcrefore, 
that  it  was  madę  eyen  as  early  as  the  beginning  of  the 
3d  centnry.  It  Łs  certainly  to  be.deplored  that  the  oth- 
cr  codices  which  Erasmus  must  haye  used  haye  not 
come  down  to  us,  or  that  they  are,  at  least,  not  known 
to  us,  for  they  might,  perhaps,  cnable  us  to  determme 
morc  definitely  his  meaning  in  many  passages  now  quite 
obscure  to  us  in  their  barbarie  Latin.  From  1526,  when 
Erasmus  printed  his  first  edition,  to  1571,  seyeral  edi- 
tions  werc  produced.  But  all  these  had  depended  on 
the  ancicnt  barfoarous  Latin  yersions,  and  were  more- 
oyer  defcctiye  towards  the  end  by  five  entire  chapters. 
These  latter  wcre  first  supplied  in  print  by  Prof.  Fuar- 
dentiu5,  c»f  PariJ*,  in  an  edition  of  1575.  which  was  re- 
printed  in  six  succcssiyc  editiun^     Gallasius,  a  minis- 


ter of  Geneya,  also  had  in  1570  sopplied  the  I^tin  vitli 
the  first  portions  of  the  Greek  text  from  EpIphaniinL 
In  1702,  Grabę,  a  Plruasian,  resident  in  En^ond,  pob- 
lished  an  edition  at  Oxford,  wMch  contained  oooaider- 
able  additions  to  the  Greek  text,  besides  some  ftmgineutiŁ 
But  the  fizBt  really  yaluable  edition  was  that  by  the 
Benedictine  Massuet  (Paria,  1712;  Yenice,  1724,  2  yołs. 
foL),  sinoe  (1857)  added  to  the  Mignę  edition  of  the  fa- 
thers,  of  which,  yery  unfortunately,  all  the  sfcereotype 
platea  haye  Uitely  been  destroyed  by  fire.    AnoŁher  edi- 
tion, containing  the  additions  which  ha^-e  been  nuide 
to  the  Greek  text  from  the  reoently  discoyered  PkUoto^ 
phownena  of  Hippolytus,  and  thirty-two  fragments  of  m 
Syńac  yersion  of  the  Greek  text  of  Iieneua,  culłed  firam 
the  Nitrian  oollection  of  Syiiac  MSS.  in  the  British  Mih 
seum,  all  of  which  in  seyeral  instances  rectify  the  read- 
ings  of  the  barbarous  Latin  yersion,  was  prepared  by 
Wigan  Harycy,  at  Cambridge,  in  1S87,  under  the  title 
S,  Jreruei  Epitcopi  Lugdunatsu  Ubri  qyinque  izdrersoM 
Jlceresesy  and  may  be  considered  the  best  now  extaiiL 
It  is  also  enriched  with  an  introduction  of  great  length, 
which  Bupplies  much  yaluable  information  on  the  souicca 
and  phenomena  of  Gnosticbm,  and  the  life  and  writinga 
of  Irenaeus.    It  furthermore  contains  notes,  which  dis- 
play great  research  and  enidition,  and  are  especially  de- 
serying  of  notice  on  aocount  of  the  hyiiotheids  whieh 
the  writer  seeks  to  establish,  that  Irenaeus  nndcrstood 
Syriac,  and  that  the  yendon  of  the  Scriptures  uwd  by 
him  was  in  the  Syriac    An  attempt  has  also  been  madę 
by  H.  W.  J.  Thiersch  (in  the  Studim  u^Kritiken,  1840) 
to  translate  the  Latin  yersion  of  the  first  Ibur  chap- 
ters of  the  third  book  back  into  the  original,  in  order 
to  lead  to  a  better  understanding  of  Ireneusza  meaning 
Objections  to  the  genuineness  of  this  work  of  Ircraeus 
were  of  course  madę  by  the  so-called  ^Miberal'*  German 
theologians,  as  it  is  one  of  the  ^  historie  links  associaiing 
the  Christianity  of  the  present  day  with  that  of  oar 
Lord*B  apostles  and  disdples,**  and  a  work  on  which  '*  we 
depend  for  satisfactory  eyidence  respecting  the  canon 
of  the  New  Testament*'  (see  below,  under  "  Doctrines  of 
Irenseus,'*'  Froude*s  attack  against  Irenaeus  as  a  witaess 
for  the  Gospels).    They  were  madę  first  by  Semler,  bot 
were  *<  so  thoroughly  refuted,"  says  Dr.  Schaff  (Ck.  Hitt, 
i,  489,  foot-note),  *»  by  Chr.  G.  F.  Walch  {De  A  utkemtia 
libi'orum  Irencń,  1774),  that  Mohler  and  Stieieo  might 
haye  spared  themselyes  the  troublc." 

Besides  Adreratu  HartaeB,  Irenieus  also  wrote,  ac-> 
cording  to  Eusebius,  '*sereral  letters  against  those  who 
at  Romę  conrupted  the  doctrine  of  the  Chnrch :  one  to 
Blastus,  couceming  schism ;  another  to  Florinas  (al- 
ready  alluded  to),  conoeming  the  monarchy,  or  to  prore 
that  God  is  not  the  autbor  of  eyil ;  and  concemin|c  the 
number  eight;*'  but  these  are  all  lost  to  us  with  ths 
exception  of  a  few  fragments.  Eusebius  also  mentaons 
« a  disoourse  of  Irenaeus  against  the  Gentiles,  entided 
TŁci  ImoTiffirtę  (jConceming  Knowledge) ;  another  iit- 
scribed  to  a  brother  named  Marcianus,  being  a  demon- 
stration  of  the  apoetolical  preaching;  and  a  little  book 
of  sundry  disputations;"  but  these,  also,  are  mainhr  loet 
to  us.  PfafT,  in  1715,  discoyered  at  Turin  four  'mora 
Greek  fragments,  which  he  attributed  to  Irenanaa  aa 
their  author.  The  genuineness  of  these  has  been  called 
in  que8tion  by  some  Roman  diyines,  *'  though,"  says  Dr. 
Schaff,  **without  sufficient  reason.**  These  four  Irag^ 
ments  troat  (1)  of  (rue  knowledge  (Jifwtię  aAif^can?), 
"which  consists, not  in  the  true  solution  of  subtle  ąuea- 
tions,  but  in  diWne  wisdom  and  the  imitation  of  Christ  ;"* 
(2)  on  the  Eucharitt;  (8)  on  the  duły  ofioleratitm  oi 
słtboirdmafe  painU  of  differenoe  with  reference  to  the 
EastcrdifBculties;  (4)  on  the  óbjed  oftke  utcarmationf 
*<  which  is  stated  to  be  the  purging  away  of  sin,  and  the 
finał  annihilation  of  all  eviL"  An  edition  containing 
the  Prolegomena  to  the  eailier  editions,  and  also  the 
disputations  of  Maffei  and  Pfaff  on  the  fiagraents  of 
Irenaeus  just  mentioned,  was  puhlished  by  U.  Stieres 
under  the  title  8.  Irtnai  Epiecopi  Lagdun,  fum  tttper^ 
sunŁ  onmia  (Lipa.  1858, 2  yols,). 


nUEN-STJS 


649 


mEN^US 


nŁ  DoctriMś^—We  hRve  alieady  said  tbat  the  wiit- 
ingB  of  IreiueuB  are  iti raluable  to  us  as  an  index  ot  the 
Tiews  which  the  priinitive  Chtunch  of  Christ  held  on 
many  reiy  important  points  that  hare  become  mat- 
tcEB  of  controrersy  between  the  different  branchee  of 
the  Christian  Charch  up  to  our  own  day.  In  this,  of 
ooune,  we  shall  be  mainly  dependent  upon  his  exten- 
BTC  work  against  Heietics,  or  the  Gnostics;  and  though 
some  of  his  riews,  especially  on  the  millennium,  may 
not  haye  oor  approyal,  we  mnst  nonę  the  less  oommend 
the  whole  work  for  the  fenrent  piety  which  oonstantly 
impreases  os  in  the  perusal  of  it. 

1.  God  atut  CreaHon,-~The  doctrine  of  the  unity  of 
God  as  the  etenial,  ahnlghty,  omnipresent,  Just,  and  holy 
creator  and  upholder  of  ali  things,  which  the  Christian 
Church  inherited  firom  Judaism,  was  one  which  the  ear- 
ly  Christian  writers  were  espedally  called  upon  to  rin- 
dicate  against  the  mbsnrd  polytheism  of  the  pagans, 
and  particularly  against  the  dualism  of  the  Gnostics. 
Acooidingiy  we  find  most  of  the  creeds  of  the  first  cen- 
turies,  especially  the  Apostles'  and  the  Nicene,  begin 
with  the  confession  of  faith  in  God,  the  Father  al- 
mighty,  maker  of  hearen  and  earth,  of  the  yisible  and 
the  inTislbl&  In  like  manner,  *<with  the  defense  of 
this  fundamental  doctrine  laid  down  in  the  rery  first 
chapteis  of  the  Bibie,  Irennos  opens  his  refutation  of 
the  Gfloatic  heresies,  saying,  in  the  language  of  Justin 
Martyr,  that  he  woold  not  have  belieyed  the  Lord  him- 
aelf  if  he  had  announced  any  other  God  than  the  Cre- 
ator. He  repodiates  eyeiything  like  an  a  priori  eon- 
Etniction  of  the  idea  of  God,  and  bases  his  knowledge 
whoUy  on  leyelation  and  Christian  expcrience.**  So 
aiso  on  the  doctrine  of  creation,  Irenieus,  and  with  him 
Tertullian,  **  most  firmly  rejected  the  hylozoic  and  demi- 
uigic  yiews  of  paganism  and  Gnoeticism,  and  taoght, 
acoording  to  the  book  of  Genesis  (comp.  Fta.  xxxiii,  9 ; 
cslyiii,  5;  John  i,  8),  that  Giod  madę  the  worid,  includ- 
ing  matter,  not,  of  coune,  out  of  any  materiał,  but  out 
of  nothing,  or,  to  expre8B  it  posidyely,  out  of  his  f^ee, 
almighty  will  by  hb  wonL  This  ftee  will  of  God,  a 
will  of  love,  is  the  supremę,  absolutely  unconditioned, 
and  aUrconditioning  eause  and  finał  reason  of  all  exbt- 
ence,  precluding  eyery  idea  of  physical  foroe  or  of  ema- 
nation.  Eyery  creatnre,  sińce  it  prooeeds  from  the  good 
and  holy  God,  is  in  itself,  as  to  its  essence,  good  (comp. 
Gen.  i,  31).  £yil,  therefore,  is  not  an  original  and  sub- 
stantial  entity,  but  a  oorruption  of  naturę,  and  hence 
can  be  destroyed  by  the  power  of  redemption.  Without 
a  correct  doctrine  of  creation  there  can  be  no  tnie  doc- 
trine of  redemption,  as  all  the  Gnoetic  systems  show.'* 

2.  Person  of  Chri9t.^On  the  lelation  which  Christ 
aostained  to  the  Father  also,  the  yiews  of  Irenieus  are 
important,  becanse  he  is,  after  Polycarp,  *Hhe  most 
faithful  repreaentatiye  of  the  Johannean  schooL"  He 
cotainly  *^  keeps  morę  within  the  limits  of  the  simple 
BłbUcal  statements,"  and  in  the  dmpler  way  of  the 
Western  fathers,  among  whom  he  may  be  counted,  not- 
withstanding  his  eariy  Greek  tndning.  *'  He  yentures  no 
■och  bold  speculationa  as  the  Alexandrians,  but  is  morę 
soond,  and  much  nearer  the  Nicene  standard.  He  like- 
wise  oaes  the  terma  \óyoc  and  Son  of  God  interchangea- 
bly,  and  conoedes  the  distinction,  madę  also  by  the  Yal- 
entinians,  between  the  inward  and  the  ntter^  word,  in 
reference  to  man,  but  contests  the  application  of  it  to 
God,  who  is  aboye  all  antitheses,  absolutely  simple  and 
michangeable,  and  in  whom  before  and  after,  thinking 
and  speaking,  coincide.  He  repudiates  also  eyery  spec- 
nlatiye  or  a  priori  attempt  to  explain  the  deriyation  of 
the  8on  from  the  Father;  this  he  holds  to  be  an  inoom- 
preheosible  mystery.  He  is  oontent  to  define  the  actual 
distinction  between  Father  and  Son  by  saying  that  the 
former  isGod  reyeaUng  himself;  the  latter,  God  reyeal- 
^;  the  one  is  the  ground  of  rerelation,  the  other  is  the 
actual,  appearing  rerelation  itself.  Henoe  he  calls  the 
Father  the  inyiaible  of  the  Son,  and  the  Son  the  yisible 
of  the  Father.  He  discriminates  most  rigidly  the  con- 
ceptioDB  of  generation  and  of  creatioiu    The  Son,  though 


begotten  of  the  Father,  is  still,  like  hlm,  distinguished 
from  the  created  world,  as  increate,  without  beginning, 
and  etemal— all  plainly  showing  that  Iremens  is  much 
nearer  the  Nicene  dogma  of  the  substantial  identity  of 
the  Son  with  the  Father  than  Justin  and  tho  Alexan- 
drians.  If,  as  he  does  in  seyeral  passages,  he  still  sub- 
ordinates  the  Son  to  the  Father,  he  is  certainly  incon- 
sistent,  and  that  for  want  of  an  accurate  distinction 
between  the  etemal  Logos  and  the  actual  Christ.  The 
\óyoc  acapKoc  and  the  \6yoc  tv(tapK0Cy  expre8sion8 
like  *  My  Father  is  greater  than  I,'  which  apply  only 
to  the  Christ  of  history,  he  refers  also,  like  Justin  and 
Origen,  to  the  etemal  Word.  On  the  other  hand,  he 
has  been  charged  with  leaning  in  the  opposite  direction 
towards  the  Sabellian  and  Patripassian  yiews,  but  un- 
justly,  as  Duncker,  in  his  monograph  Die  Chrittologie 
des  heiUg,  Iren&iu  (p.  50  sq.),  has  unanswerably  shown. 
Apait  from  his  frequent  want  of  precision,  he  steers  in 
generał,  with  surę  Biblical  and  churchly  tact,  eąnally 
elear  of  both  extremes,  and  asserts  alike  the  essential 
unity  and  the  etemal  personal  distinction  of  the  Father 
and  the  Son.  The  incamation  of  the  Logos  he  ably 
discusses,  yiewing  it  both  as  a  restoration  and  redemp- 
tion from  sin  and  death,  and  as  the  completion  of  the 
reyelation  of  God  and  of  the  creation  of  man.  In  the 
latter  yiew,  as  iinisher,  Christ  is  the  perfect  Son  of  man, 
in  whom  the  likeness  of  man  to  God,  the  simUttudo  Dei, 
regarded  as  morał  duty,  in  distinction  from  the  imago 
Dei,  as  an  essential  property,  becoraes  for  the  first  time 
fully  reaL  According  to  this,  the  incamation  would  be 
grounded  in  the  original  plan  of  God  for  the  education 
of  mankind,  and  independent  of  tho  fali;  it  would  haye 
taken  place  even  without  the  fali,  though  in  some  othei 
form.  Yet  Irenseus  does  not  expressly  say  this ;  specu- 
lation  on  abstract  poeńbilities  was  foreign  to  his  real- 
istic  cast  of  mmd"  (Dr.  Schaff,  i,  §  77, 78). 

We  now  pass  to  a  consideration  of  Irenicus^s  riews  on 
the  doctrine  of  Christ*s  kumcmily.  Herę,  again,  his  first 
task  is  to  refute  Gnostic  Docetists.  "  Christ,"  he  con- 
tends  against  them, "  must  be  a  man,  like  us,  if  he  woidd 
redeem  us  from  corraption  and  make  us  perfect.  As  sin 
and  death  came  into  the  world  by  a  man,  so  they  could 
be  blotted  out  legitimately  and  to  our  advantage  only 
by  a  man ;  though,  of  course,  not  by  one  who  should  be 
a  merę  descendant  of  Adam,  and  thus  himself  stand  in 
need  of  redemption,  but  by  a  second  Adam,  supematn- 
raUy  begotten,  a  new  progenitor  of  our  race,  as  divine  as 
he  is  human.  A  new  birth  unto  life  must  take  the  place 
of  the  old  birth  unto  death.  As  the  completer,  also, 
Christ  must  enter  into  fellowship  with  us,  to  be  our 
teacher  and  pattem.  He  madę  himself  equal  with 
man,  that  man,  by  his  likeness  to  the  Son,  might  be- 
come precious  in  the  Fathcr's  sight,"  Irenieus  (lo  ąuote 
Dr.  Schaff  still  further)  "  conceived  the  humanity  of 
Christ  not  as  merę  corporeality,  though  he  often  con- 
tends  for  this  alone  against  the  Gnostics,  but  as  true 
humanity,  embracing  body,  soul,  and  spirit.  He  plaoes 
Christ  in  the  same  relation  to  the  regenerate  race 
which  Adam  bears  to  the  natural,  and  regards  him  as 
the  absolute  uniyersal  man,  the  prototype  and  summing 
up  of  the  whole  race.  Connected  with  this  is  his  beau- 
tiful  thought,  found  also  in  Hippolytus  in  the  tenth 
book  of  the  PkUosophoumena,  that  Christ  madę  the  cir- 
cuit  of  all  the  stages  of  human  life,  to  redeem  and  sanc- 
tify  alL  To  apply  this  to  adyanced  age,  he  singularly 
extended  the  liJfe  of  Jesus  to  fifty  years,  and  endeayored 
to  proye  his  yiew  from  the  gospels  against  the  Yalen- 
tinians.  The  fuli  communion  of  Christ  with  men  in- 
Tolyed  his  participation  in  all  their  erils  and  sufferings, 
his  death,  and  his  descent  into  the  abodc  of  the  dead." 
Ałso  on  the  doctrine  of  the  mutual  relation  of  the  divine 
and  the  human  in  Christ,  which  was  neither  specially 
discuased  nor  brought  to  a  finał,  definite  settlement  un- 
til  the  Christological  controyersies  of  the  5th  century, 
Iremeos,  in  a  number  of  passages,  tłtrows  out  łiints 
which  deserye  consideration  ftom  their  importance. 
^  He  teaches  anequiyocaUy  a  tioe  and  indiaaolnble  union 


IREN^IUS 


650 


IREN^US 


of  diTinity  and  humanity  in  Chiist,  and  repela  thc 
Gnostic  idea  of  a  merę  extemal  and  tranaieoŁ  oonneo- 
Łiou  of  Łhe  diTine  S«t;rr/p  with  the  human  Jeana.  The 
foondation  for  that  union  he  perceive8  in  the  creation 
of  the  world  by  theLogoa,  and  in  man'8  original  like- 
neas  to  6od  and  destinatiou  for  permanent  feUowship 
with  him.  In  the  act  of  union,  that  is,  in  the  super- 
natural  generation  and  birth,  the  divine  is  the  active 
principle,  and  the  seat  of  peisonality ;  the  human,  the 
pa88ive  or  receptive ;  as,  in  generał,  man  is  absolutely 
dependent  on  (iod,  and  is  the  ressel  to  receive  the  reve- 
hitions  of  his  wisdom  and  love.  The  medium  and  hond 
of  the  union  is  the  Holy  Ghost  (see  below),  who  took 
the  phice  of  the  masculine  agent  in  the  generation,  and 
overshadowed  the  rirgin  womb  of  Mary  with  the  power 
of  the  Highest.  In  this  conneetion  he  calls  Mary  the 
counterpart  of  Eve,  the  'mother  of  all  liying*  in  a 
higher  sense,  who,  by  her  believing  obedience,  became 
the  cause  of  salyation  both  to  herself  and  to  the  whole 
human  race,  as  £ve,  by  her  disobedience,  induced  the 
apostasy  and  death  of  mankind — a  fruitful  parallel, 
which  was  afterwanls  frequently  pushed  too  far,  and 
tumed,  no  doubt,  contrar>'  to  its  original  sense,  to  favor 
the  idolatroos  worship  of  the  bleased  Yirgin.  Irenaeus 
eeems,  at  least  according  to  Domer  (Christology,  i,  495), 
to  concei\re  the  incamation  as  progressire,  the  two  fao 
tors  reaching  absohite  communion  (but  neither  absorb- 
ing  the  other)  in  the  ascension ;  though  beforc  this,  at 
every  stage  of  hfe,  Christ  was  a  perfect  man,  preaenting 
the  model  of  every  age"  (Schaif,  i,  §  79). 

8.  The  Holy  Ghost, ^On  the  doctrine  of  the  Holy 
Ghost,  Irenftus,  morę  nearly  than  the  Greek  Church  fa- 
thers,  especially  the  Alexandrlan8,  represents  the  dogma 
of  the  perfect,  substantial  identity  of  the  Holy  Spirit 
with  the  Fathcr  aiid  the  Son ;  "  though  his  repeated  fig- 
uratiye  (but  for  this  reason  not  so  definite)  designation 
of  the  Son  and  Spirit  as  the  '  hands'  of  the  FatheT,  by 
which  he  madę  all  things,  implies  a  certain  subordina- 
tion  (see  Irenieus's  yiews  giyen  below  under  "  Trinity"). 
He  differs  from  most  of  the  fathers  in  referring  the 
Wisdom  of  the  book  of  Proyerbs  not  to  the  Logos,  but 
to  the  Spirit,  and  hence  he  must  haye  regarded  him  as 
etemaL  Yet  he  was  far  from  conoeiying  the  Spirit  as 
a  merę  power  or  attribate ;  he  considered  him  an  inde- 
pendent personality,  like  the  Logos.  *  With  God,'  aays 
he  {A  dv,  Ilares,  iy,  20,  §  1), '  are  eyer  the  Word  and  the 
Wisdom,  the  Son  and  the  Spirit,  through  whom  and  in 
whom  he  freely  madę  all  things,  to  whom  he  said,  ^'  Let 
UB  make  man  in  oiur  image,  after  our  likeness.'"  But 
he  speaks  morę  of  thc  opcrations  than  of  the  naturę  of 
the  Holy  Ghost.  The  Spirit  predicted  in  the  prophets 
the  coming  of  Christ ;  has  be«i  near  to  man  in  ajl  di- 
yine  ordinances;  communicates  the  knowledge  of  the 
Father  and  thc  Son ;  giyes  belieyers  the  oonsciousness 
of  sonship;  ha  fellowship  with  Christ,  the  pledge  of  im- 
perishable  life,  and  the  ladder  on  which  we  asoend  to 
God"  (Schaff,  §  80). 

4.  The  Trimty.— On  the  doctrine  of  the  Trinity,  the 
language  of  Iremeus  is  perhaps  pluner  and  morc  incon- 
troyertible  than  that  of  any  other  of  the  early  Church 
fathers,  and  yet  boŁh  Arians  and  Socinians  haye  some- 
times  presumed  to  claim  him  as  a  supporter  of  their  pe- 
culiar  thcories.  But  we  haye  his  0¥m  expre8Bions  mak- 
ing  both  Christ  and  the  Holy  Spirit  parta  of  the  supremę 
diyinity.  Nay,  Christ  is  often  expre88ly  declared  to  be 
God.  Thus,  in  a  passage  in  which  Irenaeus  is  comment- 
ing  on  thc  prophecy  respecting  the  birth  of  Emmanuel 
he  says :  "  Carefully,  then,  has  the  Holy  Ghost  pointed 
out,  by  włiat  has  been  said,  his  birth  from  a  yirgin,  and 
his  essence,  that  he  is  Godj  for  the  name  Emmanuel  in- 
dicates  this"  (iii,  21,  4) ;  and  again,  in  allusion  to  the 
Fathcr :  "  With  him  icere  always  preseni  the  Word  and 
Wigdom^  the  Son  and  the  Spirit,  by  whom  and  in  whom, 
freely  and  spontaneously,  he  madę  aU  things;  to  whom, 
also,  hc  spokc,  saying, '  Let  us  make  man  after  our  im- 
age and  likencss.'*"  Indeed,  Dr.  Schaff  {Ch,  H%$t.  i,  286) 
Bccms  hardly  justified  in  his  statement  that  *'  of  a  supra- . 


mondane  trinity  of  essenoe  Irenmis  betrays  hot  fitint 
indicationa."    He  continually  qaotes  from  Geneaaa,  with 
the  object  of  showing  that  both  Christ  and  the  Hohr 
Spirit  exi8ted  with  the  Father  anterior  to  all  ocation 
(^  antę  omnem  oonstitutionem").    With  a  writer  in  tbe 
Brit,  and  For,  £vattg,  Rev.  (1869,  p.  12),  we  arc  indimd 
to  belieye  that  the  word  ^  hands"  is  used  by  Iraueos 
to  indicate  that  they  are  both  co-worherg  o/ the  FaSker 
rather  than  his  subordinate  workman  (compare  Ebmd, 
Kirchet^  und  Dogmengesck,  i,  1 10  and  111,  notę  8).    **  In 
all  things  and  through  aU  things  there  is  one  Gcd,  the 
Father,  and  one  Word,  and  one  Son,  and  one  Sfuiit,  and 
one  salyation  to  all  that  belieye  in  him."    Anotber  yery 
beautiful  passage  "reyeala  the  doctrine  of  the  Trinity 
as  being,  in  fact,  wrapped  up  in  the  official  title  by  which 
the  Sayiour  is  designated.'*     Says  he :  '*  In  tbe  name  of 
Christ  (iii,  18, 8)  is  implied  he  that  anointa,  be  that  is 
anointed,  and  the  unction  itself  with  which  he  is  anoint- 
ed.    And  it  is  the  Father  who  anointi*,  but  the  Son  who 
is  anointed  by  the  Spirit,  who  is  the  unction,  aa  tbe 
word  declares  by  laaiah,  <  Thc  Spirit  of  the  Lord  is  opon 
me,  because  he  hath  anointed  me,*  thus  pointin^  out  the 
anointing  Father,  the  anointed  Son,  and  the  Unction 
which  is  the  Spirit" — certainly  "a  rich  and  picgnant 
thought,  which  will  bear  much  considcration.     It  is 
yery  striking  and  satisfactoiy  to  find  the  doctrine  of 
the  three  diyine  pertons  thus  deyelopcd  out  of  the  yery 
name  which  the  Sayiour  bear&     Kor  docs  there  Kcm 
anything  fanciful  in  the  leasoning;  for,  aa  we  cannot 
think  of  an  anointed  one  without  neccsśarily  thinking 
alao  of  one  who  anoints,  and  of  the  unction  with  which 
he  is  anointed,  we  are  thus  led  to  concciye,  by  a.  aimpk 
remembrance  of  our  Lord's  official  designation,  of  tbe 
Father,  the  anointer,  the  Son,  the  anointed,  and  the 
Spirit^  the  liying  unction  who  came  do«m,  in  in£niie 
fulnesa,  from  the  Father  on  the  Son— the  ihree-one  God, 
being  by  meana  of  a  single  word  thus  brought  before  us 
as  the  God  of  our  salyation**  (Brit.  attd  For,  Krtmg,  Ber, 
1869,  p.  18).    With  all  these  diiect  testimoniea  stariing  u 
in  the  face,  it  ia  certainly  ridiculous  to  see  the  cfTona  on 
the  part  of  some  Rationalistic  theologians  to  asaert  that 
Irenaeus  was  not  strictly  Trinitarian  in  his  view9  on  this 
subject.    But  morę  than  this :  it  was  this  self-aame  Ire- 
nseus  who  opposed  the  Philonic  doctrine  of  the  Xóyoc^ 
which  other  Church  fatheia,  especially  of  the  Alexan- 
drian  school,  sck^med  so  ready  to  accept,  as  Theophilns 
of  Antiochia,  and  eyen  Tertullian  (comp^  Ebnml,  Kir^ 
chenr  u,  Dogmengesch,  i,  116. 

6.  Redemption, — Of  all  the  Church  fathers,  Iienana 
was  the  first  who  gaye  a  careful  analysis  of  thc  work  of 
redemption,  "  and  his  yiew,**  says  Dr.  Schaff  (CA.  Biet, 
i,  297),  "is  by  far  the  dcepeat  and  aoundest  we  find  in 
the  first  three  centories.  Christ,  he  teaches,  as  tbe  scc^ 
ond  Adam,  repeated  in  himself  the  entire  liie  cf  man. 
from  birth  to  death  and  hades,  from  childhood  to  man- 
hood,  and,  as  it  were,  summed  np  that  life  and  broogfat 
it  under  one  head  (this  is  the  sense  of  hia  frequcnt  ex- 
pression,  'AvaKi^\aiovv^  aMiiff^aAafwcriCt  ieca{ttta- 
lare,  recapitulatio),  with  the  double  purpose  of  rcataring 
humanity  from  its  fali  and  cairying  it  to  peifectioa. 
Kedemption  compriaes  the  taking  away  of  sin  by  the 
perfect  obedience  of  Christ,  the  destruction  of  death  by 
yictory  oyer  the  deyil,  and  the  communicatjon  of  a  new 
diyine  life  to  man.  To  aooompHsh  this  work,  the  Se- 
deemer  muat  unitę  in  himself  the  diyine  and  fauman 
natures;  for  only  aa  God  could  he  do  what  noan  coold 
not,  and  only  as  man  could  hc  do,  in  a  legitimate  way. 
what  man  should.  By  the  yoluntaiy  disobedience  of 
Adam  the  deyil  gained  a  power  oyer  man,  but  in  an  un- 
fair  way,  by  fraud  {dissuasio).  By  the  rolontaiy  obe- 
dience of  Christ  that  power  was  wreated  from  bim  by 
lawful  means  (by  suadela,  persuaaion,  announoemcnt  of 
truth,  not  oyerreaching  or  deception).  This  toók  pl*ce 
first  in  the  temptation,  in  which  Chriat  renewed  or  re- 
capitulated  the  atruggle  of  Adam  with  Satan,  lnu  dc- 
feated  the  seducer,  and  theieby  Hberated  man  fzom  hik 
thialdom.    But  then  the  whole  life  of  Chiiat  waa  a  oon- 


IREN^US 


651 


miN^EUS 


tfnoed  rictońouB  oonflict  with  Satan,  and  a  constant 
obećieofft  to  God.  This  obedience  was  complcted  in 
the  suffeiing  and  death  on  the  tree  of  the  cross,  and  Łhus 
UoŁŁed  out  the  disobedience  which  the  f!i8t  Adam  had 
oommitted  on  the  tree  of  knowledge.  It  ia,  however, 
only  the  negatire  side.  To  this  is  added  the  commu- 
nication  of  a  new  divine  principle  of  life,  and  the  per- 
fecting  of  the  idea  of  homanity  first  effected  by  Christ" 
See  Redemption  ;  Orioen. 

6.  The  Sacramenłs. — On  this  subject,  perhaps  moie 
than  opon  any  other  on  which  Irenieus  has  writtcn,  we 
meet  with  a  yagueness  of  eKpression  which  hardly  ena- 
bies  tu  definitely  to  detennine  what  he  actually  beUeved. 
But  even  "  Komanists  tacitly  admit  that  he  says  noth- 
ing  of  confirmation,  ordination,  mairiage,  or  extreme 
imcdon  favorabłe  to  the  sacramental  character  which 
they  assign  to  these  rites.  And  this  is  a  very  strong 
negaive  testimony  against  the  correctness  of  their  opin- 
ions.  If  such  an  early  writer  as  Iremcus,  in  the  course 
of  a  lengthened  theological  work,  which  naturally  led 
him  to  the  ordinances  as  well  as  doctrines  of  the  Church, 
has  not  a  word  to  say  in  r^aid  to  the  above  so-called 
sacnunenbs  the  inference  Ls  pretty  elear  that  they  were 
not  recognised  as  such  in  his  day.  .  .  .  Massuet  makes 
a  very  hune  attempt  to  proye  from  the  writings  of  Ire- 
raeus  that  the  sacramcnt  oipeaance  was  practised  in  the 
Church  of  his  day.  There  can  be  no  doubt  that  the 
paasages  to  which  he  refers  (i,  6,  3 ;  13,  5)  proye  that 
public  confession  of  flagrant  suis  was  common  in  the 
Church  of  the  2d  centnry.  This  was  called  exomologer 
M,  and  seems  to  haye  been  indispensable  for  the  remoyal 
of  tbc  oensurcs  of  the  Church.  But  there  is  nothing  to 
indicate  its  sacramental  character,  and  not  a  shadow  of 
8upi>ort  can  be  deriyed  from  it  for  the  popish  practice 
of  auricular  confession**  (Brit.  and  For,  Evang,  Rev,  JaiL 
1869,  p.  18).     See  Confession. 

Of  In fatU  Bapłism  the  flist  elear  tracę  is  fuund  in  the 
wńtings  of  our  author,  who  thus  writes  of  the  .  icrament 
of  baptism  (ii,  22, 4) :  "  Christ  came  to  sayo  ail  who  are 
legenerated  by  him,  infanta  and  little  chililren,  and 
boy?,  and  youths,  and  elders."  He  thus  applies  it  to  all 
ages,  Cłirist  having  passed  throu^h  all  the  stages  of 
Ufe  for  this  purpose.  Neand;r  duys  of  this  passagc 
(//irt.  Chrutian  Dogmaa,  i,  230) :  "  If  by  the  phrase  re- 
nagci  in  Deum  (in  the  Latin  transL)  baptism  is  intend- 
ed,  it  contains  a  proof  of  infant  baptism.  Infanies  and 
panmli  are  distinguished;  the  latter  poasess  a  deyel- 
oped  coiisciousness,  hence  to  them  Christ  is  a  pattem 
of  piety,  while  to  the  infanies  he  mcrely  gives  an  objec- 
tive  sanctification :  we  must  thcrefore  understand  the 
Utter  to  mean  quite  little  children."  But  the  statement 
of  IreiuBus  leads  us  to  infer  that  hc  belie<('ed  in  the  doc- 
trine  of  baptismal  regeneration,  which  is  strengthened 
by  another  passage  (iii,  17, 1) :  "  And  again,  giying  to 
the  diseiples  the  power  of  regeneration  unto  God,  he 
aaid  to  them, '  Go  and  teach  aU  nations,  baptizing  them 
in  the  nime  of  Father,  and  of  the  Son,  and  of  the  Holy 
GhoAt."*  (Compare  an  article  on  this  subject  in  the 
American  Preshyterian  Retńew,  April,  1867,  p.  239  są.; 
Schaif,  Church  Hisiory,  i,  402.) 

On  the  Lorcta  Supper,  also,  the  indefinite  statementa 
of  Ireiueus  haye  giyen  rise  to  much  dispute.  Boman- 
ists  stoutly  affirm  that  he  declares  in  fayor  of  their  doc- 
trine  of  transubstantiation,  and  the  real  presence;  but 
thb  ariaes  from  a  yariable  reading  of  one  passage,  of 
which  Neander  says  (p.  238), "  According  to  one  read- 
ing it  Lł  said,  Yerhum  guod  offertur  Deo,  which  must 
mean  the  Logos  which  is  presented  to  God;  therefore, 
the  sacrifice  would  refer  to  the  presentation  of  Christ 
himaeir.  Yet  we  can  hardly  make  up  our  minds  to  ac- 
cept  this  as  the  opinion  of  Ircnaeus,  who  always  says 
that  Christians  most  consecrate  all  to  God  in  Christ's 
ittme;  for  example,  Ecdetia  ojftrtper  Jesum  ChrUtum, 
^Ve  eannot  doubt  that  the  other  reading  is  the  correct 
one,  yerbum  per  cuod  efferłur  Deo,'^  Dr.  Scha£f  also  de- 
clines  to  giye  the  Komanists  a  heariug  on  this  point, 
ud  aigues  further,  that  Iremeus  "  in  another  place  (iy, 


18  and/MiMm)  calls  the  bread  and  winę,  after  consecnh 
tion, '  antitypes,'  implying  the  continued  distincdon  of 
their  substance  from  the  body  and  blood  of  Christ.  This 
expre86ion  in  itself,  indeed,  might  be  understood  as  mere« 
ly  contrasting  here  the  Supper,  as  the  substance,  with 
the  Old-Testament  Passoyer,  its  type;  as  Peter  calla 
baptism  the  antitype  of  the  saying  water  of  the  flood  (1 
Pet.  iii,  20, 21).  But  the  conuection,  and  the  usus  lo- 
cuendi  of  the  earlier  Greek  fathers,  require  us  to  take 
the  term  antitype  in  the  sense  of  type,  or,  morę  precise- 
ly,  as  the  antithesis  of  archetype.  The  bread  and  wme 
represent  and  exhibit  the  body  and  blood  of  Christ  as 
the  archetype,  and  correspond  to  them  as  a  cepy  to  the 
originaL  In  exactly  the  same  sense  it  is'  said  in  lleb. 
ix,  24  (comp.  yiii,  5),  that  the  earthly  sanctuary  is  the 
antitype,  that  is,  the  copy  of  the  heaycnly"  (i,  387). 
We  think  Irenaeus  speaks  morę  definitely  of  this  ordi- 
nance  in  one  of  the  Fragments  (xxxyiii,  Massuet),  from 
which  it  clearly  foUows  that  he  by  no  means  belieyed 
in  tlie  opus  operatum  of  the  Bomanists.  (Comp.  Brił, 
and  For,  Etang,  Beciew,  Jan.  1869,  p.  19, 20.) 

7.  The  Church,— By  the  peculiar  attitude  in  which 
Irensus  placed  himself  when  combating  the  Gnostic 
heresies,  he  became  unconsciously  one  of  the  most  elab- 
orate  writers  on  the  early  Church  that  now  remains  to 
us,  and  the  utterances  of  no  other  of  the  early  Church 
fathers  haye  so  frequently  been  misinterpreted  to  prop 
up  the  claims  of  Romanism  as  those  of  Irenieus.  It  is 
beyond  ąuestion  that  the  Bomanists,  as  well  as  High- 
Church  prelatists,  howeyer  hesitatingly,  misconstnied 
the  statementa  of  Irensaus  in  defence  of  the  Church  of 
Christ  against  Yalcntinus,  Basilides,  Marcion,  and  other 
scliismatics,  who  in  his  timc  threatened  the  yery  life  of 
the  early  Christian  Church,  as  statements  fayoring  the 
doctrine  of  apostoiic  succession  (q.  y.).  Iremeus,  eyident- 
ly  in  defence  of  his  Church,  and  as  an  opponent  of  the 
heretics,  presents  a  "  hisłorical  chain  of  bishops."  Says 
he  (iii,  3, 1),  '^  We  are  in  a  position  to  reckon  up  those 
who  were  by  the  apostles  institutcd  bishops  in  the 
churches,  and  the  successors  of  these  bishops  to  our  own 
timcs.**  But,  in  naming  the  bishops  in  their  hlstorical 
order,  he  "  nevcr  dreams  of  ascribing  to  them  any  sort 
of  spiritual  influence  or  authońty  which  was  propagated 
from  one  to  another.  To  show  that  hc  could  link  his- 
torically  Eleutherius,  who  was  then  head  of  the  Church 
of  Romę,  with  the  apostles,  who  were  supposed  to  haye 
founded  that  Church,  was  the  sole  and  simple  object 
contemplated  by  our  author  in  refercncc  to  the  succes- 
sion." In  his  arguments  with  the  Yalentinians,  Marci- 
onites,  and  others,  he  endeayors  to  proye,  by  constant 
appeals  to  the  Scriptures,  that  their  doctrines  were  not 
in  harmony  with  the  inspired  writings.  "  Had  he  found 
'  the  truth'  among  them,  he  would  haye  had  no  occasion 
to  treat  of  the  succession  at  all,  but  would  ac  once  haye 
owned  them  as  forming  a  part  of  the  Catholic  Church," 
which  he  defined,  not  as  Bomanists  and  High-Church- 
men,  to  be  only  wheie  the  pope's  supremacy  is  acknowl- 
edged,  or  the  Episcopal  Church  doctrines  are  adhered  to, 
but^  he  says,  "  Ubi  ecdesia" — ^putting  the  Church  first, 
in  the  genuine  catholic  spirit  (iii,  24) — "  ibi  et  Spiritus 
Dei;  et  ubi  Spiritus  Dei,  illic  ecclesia  et  omnis  gratia," 
or,  as  Dr.  Schaff  says,  Protestantism  would  put  it  eon- 
yersely:  "Where  the  Spirit  of  God  is,  there  is  the 
Church ;  and  where  the  Church  is,  there  is  the  Spirit  of 
God  and  all  grace." 

8.  The  Millennium,— The  peculiar  millennial  yiews  of 
Iren«us,  which  stamp  him,  by  his  close  adherence  to 
Papias,  as  a  Chiliast,  we  hardly  care  to  touch;  they  are 
certainly  the  weak  spot  in  our  author,  and  deserye  to  be 
passed  not  only  without  comment,  but  eyen  unnoticed. 
They  are  brought  out  specially  near  the  end  of  his  great 
work  (y,  32-36),  declaring  a  futurę  reign  of  the  saints 
on  earth ;  arguing  that  such  promiscs  of  Scripture  as 
those  in  Gen.  xiii,  14;  Matt.  xxyi,  27-29,  etc.,  can  haye 
no  other  interpretation. 

9.  The  Easter  Controuersj/,— The  personal  character 
of  Irenieos,  of  which  we  haye  as  yet  said  but  little^  ia 


IREN^US 


652 


IRENJEUS 


perhaps  best  illiistrated  by  his  condnct  in  the  Ea8t«r 
contTorerey  (q.  v.).  Detennined  to  work  for  a  union  of 
all  Christiana  (iv,  38, 7),  hc  dlsplayed  an  ireiiical  dispo- 
ńtion  in  all  disputes  about  unesaential  outward  thiugs, 
and  morę  especiaUy  in  his  mediadon  between  Yictor, 
then  bishop  of  Romę,  and  the  Asiatic  chuichefli 

10.  Tettimony  (o  the  Scripiures, — ^The  inflaence  which 
Iremeos  exerted  at  this  time,  and  in  other  controTersies 
that  preceded,  adds  additional  interest  to  the  writings  of 
this  Church  father,  and  makes  especiaUy  yaluable  any 
testimony  that  ho  roay  have  left  us  on  the  authenticity 
of  the  sacred  writings.  A  leading  representatire  of  the 
Asiatic  Johpnean  school  of  the  second  half  of  the  2d 
century,  bom  ere  the  apoetle  John  had  departed  this 
life,  and  consequently  caUed  by  Eosebins  "  a  disciple  of 
the  apostles,"  and  by  Jerome  *Hhe  disdple  of  John  the 
apostle,"  he  bears  us  such  direct  testimony  in  behalf  of 
the  Gospels,  or,  as  Eusebius  tenns  them,  the  **  Homolo- 
goumena,"  that  it  becomes  to  us  of  the  very  highest  im- 
portance  among  the  exteroal  proofs  of  their  genuine- 
ness,  morę  especiaUy  at  the  present  moment,  in  face  of 
the  denials  of  this  truth  by  RationaUsts,  and  by  thoee 
*^  who  takc  up  themes  which  lie  outside  of  their  chosen 
studies,  or  with  which  they  are  not  profoundly  conrers- 
ant,"  among  them  iiguring  no  less  a  peraonage  than  the 
distinguished  English  historian  Froude  {Shori  Essays 
on  Grtat  Subjects).  Now  what  does  Irenaeus  say  of 
the  Gospels?  "We  have  not  receiyed,"  he  says,  **the 
knowledge  of  the  way  of  our  salyation  by  any  others 
than  those  by  whom  the  Gospel  has  been  brought  to 
os ;  which  Gospel  they  firet  preached,  and  afterwards  by 
the  wiU  of  God  committed  to  writing,  that  it  might  be 
for  time  to  come  the  foundation  and  pillar  of  the  faith." 
Herę  foUows  a  declaration  that  the  first  Gospel  was 
written  among  the  Jews  by  Matthew;  the  second  by 
Mark,  a  companion  of  Peter ;  the  third  by  Lukę,  a  com- 
panion  of  Paul;  and  the  fourth  by  John,  of  whom  he 
says,  "Ailerwards  John,  the  disciple  of  the  Lord,  who 
also  leaned  u^wn  his  breast,  he  Ukewise  pubUshed  a  gos- 
pel while  he  dwelt  in  Ephesus,  in  Asia.'*  **  Let  us  as- 
eume  now  that  Irensus — between  whom  and  the  apos- 
tles  there  is  only  one  interrening  link — ^was  an  honest 
man  and  an  intelligent  man ;  in  short,  that  he  is  a  com- 
petent  witness.  At  the  time  whcn  he  knew  Polycarp, 
were  the  four  Grospels  extant  and  acknowledged  author- 
ities  in  the  Church  ?  We  wiU  here  confine  the  ąuestion 
to  the  Gospel  of  John  (q.  v.),  which  is  now  so  much  a 
topie  of  controYcrsy.  Was  or  was  not  this  gospel  re- 
ceiyed  as  the  production  of  him  whose  name  it  bears  by 
Polycarp  and  his  contemporaries  at  the  time  to  which 
Ireiueus,  in  his  graphic  reminiscence,  refers?  If  it  was 
thus  receiyed — received  in  the  neighborhood  of  Ephe- 
sus, in  the  very  region  where  John  had  lived  to  so  ad- 
vanced  an  age,  and  where  his  foUowers  and  acquain- 
tances  8ur>'ived — it  wiU  be  very  difBcult  to  disproye  ita 
genuinencss.  But  if  it  was  not  thus  receiyed,  when,  we 
ask,  can  it  be  supposed  to  haye  first  seen  the  Ught? 
Who  contriyed  a  book  of  which  Polycarp  had  known 
nothing,  and  palmed  it  oif  on  him  and  on  the  whole  dr- 
cle  of  Johannean  disciples  and  churches  in  Asia?  How 
is  it  that  Irenieus  knows  nothing  of  the  late  discoyery 
OT  promulgation  of  so  yaluable  a  book?  Why  does  he 
not  mention  the  momentous  fact — if,  indeed,  it  be  a  fact 
— ^that  after  his  intendews  with  Polycarp  there  was 
found  somewhere,  or  put  forth  by  somebody,  this  price- 
less  treasure?  It  is  obyious  that  Irenaius  would  haye 
had  something  to  say  of  the  extraordinary  concealmcnt 
and  finał  appearance  of  this  Gospel  history  had  he  re- 
membercd  a  time  or  known  of  a  time  sińce  John's  death 
when  this  Gospel  had  not  been  a  familiar  and  prized 
possession  of  the  Church.  This  testimony  of  Irenseus 
is  a  tough  piece  of  eyidence.  Here  we  haye  specific 
declarations  as  to  what  he  had  himself  seen  and  heard. 
Yet  the  attempt  is  madę  to  disparage  the  yalue  of  this 
testimony  on  the  ground  of  the  foUowing  passage,  which 
Btands  in  connection  with  his  statements  about  the  com- 
poaition  of  the  seyeral  gospels:  'Nor  can  there  be  morę 


or  fewer  gospels  than  thcsc.  For  as  there  arc  foar  re- 
gions  of  the  world  i  u  which  we  Uve,  and  four  caibolic 
spirits,  and  the  Church  is  spread  aU  oyer  the  eorth,  and 
the  (rospel  is  the  pUlar  and  foundation  of  the  Church, 
and  the  spirit  of  life,  ih  like  manner  was  it  fit  it  should 
haye  four  pillars,  breathing  on  aU  sides  iucomiption 
and  refreshing  mankind.  Whence  it  is  manifest  that 
the  Word,  the  former  of  aU  things,  who  sits  upon  the 
cherubim  and  upholds  aU  things,  haying  appcarcd  to 
men,  has  giren  us  a  Gospel  of  a  fourfold  character,  but 
joined  in  one  spirit.'  (Here  foUows  a  brief  charactcń- 
zation  of  the  scycral  gospels  in  their  relation  to  one  an- 
other.)  That  this  is  a  fanciful  (if  one  will,  a  puerile) 
obseryation  there  is  no  reason  to  deny;  but  how  it  can 
in  the  least  inyalidate  the  credibUity  of  the  authrir*s 
testimony  on  a  matter  of  fact  within  his  cognizance,  it  is 
impossible  to  see.  If  these  analogies  had  exerted  any 
influence  In  determming  Ircnsns'8  acceptance  uf  the 
four  gospels  of  the  canon,  the  case  would  be  different. 
But  Froude  admits  that  such  was  not  the  fact.  He  ac- 
cepta  the  Gospels  on  account  of  the  hiatorical  proof  of 
their  genuineness,  aa  he  repeatedly  affirms,  and  inde- 
I)endently  of  these  supposed  analogies.  It  is  the  cstab- 
lished  and  exclusiye  authority  of  the  four  gospels  that 
sends  him  afler  these  fancied  analogies  and  accoimtfi  for 
the  suggestion  of  them.  The  suggestbn  of  them,  there- 
fore,  strengthens  instead  of  weakens  the  eridence  in  be- 
half of  the  canonical  eyangelists,  because  It  ahows  how 
firm  and  long-settled  must  have  been  the  rcoo^iition  of 
them  in  the  Church.  It  is  e^^en  a  hasty  inference  from 
such  a  passage  that  the  author  was  inteUcctually  wcak. 
If  this  inference  is  to  be  drawn  from  such  an  obserra- 
tion,  the  ablest  of  the  fathers,  as  August  iiie,  most  be 
equaUy  condemncd.  Men  who  are  not  deficient  in  abil- 
ity  may  say  sometimes  rather  foolish  thinga.  ...  On 
the  whole,  Irenseus  is  distinguished  for  the  soundnciss 
and  deamess  of  his  understanding.  (See  Schaff  in  the 
first  part  of  our  article.)  Hc  is  rather  ayerse  to  spccu- 
lation,  being  of  a  pructical  tum,  There  b  hardly  one 
of  the  early  ecclesiastical  writers  who,  in  all  the  qiiaU- 
ties  that  madę  up  a  trostworthy  witness,  is  to  be  set  bt- 
fore  him.  There  is  no  reason  to  doubt  that,  in  liis 
statements  conccming  the  origin  and  authority  of  the 
Gospels,  he  represents  the  Christians  of  his  time.  It  is 
not  the  sentiment  of  an  indiyidual  merely,  but  the  state 
of  things,  the  generał  Judgmeut  of  the  Church,  which 
he  brings  before  us.  No  good  reason  can  be  giyen  for 
this  generał,  exclu8iye  recognition  of  the  Goerpels  now 
included  in  our  canon.  no  eyen  plausible  solucion  of  the 
fact  can  be  rendered,  unless  it  be  granted  that  they  were 
reaUy  handed  down  from  the  days  of  the  apostlcs,  and 
were  thus  known  to  embody  the  testimony  of  eye-^it- 
nesses  and  ear-witnesses  of  the  eyents  which  they  re- 
oord.  Had  Polycarp  known  nothing  of  John^s  Gospel 
— or,  knowing  of  it,  had  he  rcjected  it — it  is  impo^siUe 
that  Irenieus  and  his  contemporaries  should  havc  been 
ignorant  of  the  fact.  It  is  proyed  by  the  most  eon- 
yincing  array  of  circumstantial  eyidence  that  Polycarp, 
a  personal  acquaintance  of  John  the  Apoetle,  an  honor- 
ed  bishop  in  the  neighborhood  where  John  had  labored 
and  died,  considered  the  fourth  gospel  to  be  his  oompo- 
sition"  (Dr.  G.  P.  Fisher,  of  Yale  CoUege,  in  the  /iwfc- 
pendentf  Feb.  4,  1869 ;  comp.  the  rcply  to  Dr.  Da^-idson 
[IntrocL  to  the  N.  Test,  Lond.  1868,  2  yols.  8vo],  in  the 
Brif.  and  For.  Er.  Rev.  Jan.  1869,  p.  4-8).  In  a  simi- 
lar  strain  argues  Mr.  Westcott  {Bisłory  ofthe  -Yetr  7V«/. 
Canon) :  "  In  the  same  Church  where  Ireiueus  was  a 
presbyter — *  zealous  for  the  coyenant  of  Christ' — Photi- 
nus  was  bishop,  already  ninety  years  old.  Like  Poly- 
carp, he  was  associated  with  the  generation  of  St.  John, 
and  must  haye  been  bom  before  the  books  of  the  N.  T. 
were  aU  written.  And  how,  then,  can  it  be  supposed 
with  reason  that  forgeries  came  into  use  in  his  time, 
which  he  must  haye  been  able  to  dctect  by  his  own 
knowledge  ?  that  they  were  receiyed  without  sospidoa 
or  reserye  in  the  church  oyer  which  he  presidcd?  Ii 
is  possible  to  weaken  the  connection  of  facts  by  arbitnrf 


IREN^US 


053 


IREN^US 


hjpotheses;  but,  interpreted  according  to  their  natural 
meaning)  they  tell  of  a  Churcb  onited  by  its  head  with 
the  times  of  Ht,  John,  to  which  the  books  of  tbe  N.  T. 
funiisbed  the  unaffected  language  of  bope,  and  reńgna- 
tion,  and  triumph.  And  the  testimony  of  Irenaeua  is 
the  testimony  of  the  Church.'*  But  not  only  to  the  au- 
thenticity  of  the  Gospels  does  Irenieus  bear  hia  testimo- 
ny. He  aiso  fumbhes  conclu8ive  evidence  in  support 
of  other  N.-T.  books  which  have  becn  que8tioned  (see 
Brił.  and  For.  Kr.  Rev.  1869,  p.  7  są.). 

11.  Canon  ofScnpture.  —  Not  a  little  surprising,  but 
agreeably  ao,  it  must  be  to  the  Christian  of  the  preaent 
day  to  find  that  in  the  days  of  Irenaeus,  even  when  the 
canon  of  Scńpture  could  not  be  expected  to  have  been 
80  accurately  dcfined  as  it  afterwards  was,  we  liiid,  with 
the  exception  of  the  spurious  additions  to  Daniel,  fouud 
in  the  Septuagint,  and  the  books  of  Baruch,  quoted  un- 
der  the  name  of  Jeremiah,  no  wńtiiigs  of  the  O.  T.,  ac- 
knowledged  as  fonning  part  of  the  O.-T.  canon,  which 
Protestants  do  not  include  in  it  at  the  prcscnt  day. 
So  likcwise  of  the  N.  T.,  the  only  book  not  now  accept^ 
ed,  but  to  which  Irenteus  creditcd  canonical  authońty, 
is  the  "  Shepherd  of  Hermas.'*    Altogether, "  with  the 

most  inconsidcrable  exception8 the  canon  of 

both  the  O.  and  N.  T,,  then  acccpted  by  the  Church,  was 
coineident  and  eonterminous  with  our  own."  But  morę 
thah  this,  by  the  language  which  Irenaeus  uses,  we  find 
the  Church  of  his  day  harmonizing  with  and  justifying 
the  very  highest  claims  that  have  ever  l)een  advanced 
in  support  of  the  inspircd  authority  and  infallible  accu- 
raty  of  the  canonical  writings.  The  utterance  which 
Ireiueus  has  madę  on  this  subject  Romanists  have  sought 
to  tton  to  account  in  their  assertions  of  the  authority 
of  tradition  as  co-ordinatc  with  that  of  Scripture.  But 
though,  as  was  natural  in  such  an  early  writer,  Irenieus 
often  refers  to  the  apostolic  traditions  preserred  in  the 
chorches,  he  nerer  ascribes  to  these  an  authority  inde- 
pendent of  Scripture. 

12.  Literaturę. — Bearen,  Li/e  oflremBus  (Lond.  1841) ; 
Schaff,  IrenatUf  in  Der  Deutsche  Kirchenfreund,  vol.  v 
(Mercersh.  1852) ;  Gerraise,  La  Vie  de  S.  IreiUe  (Paris, 
1723, 2  vols.  8vo) ;  Stieren,  art. "  Irenteus,'*  in  Ersch  u. 
Gruber,  EncyHop.  vol.  ii,  sec.  xxiii ;  Massuet,  Disserła- 
tiones  in  Irencei  libros,  prefixed  to  his  edition  of  the  Op- 
era ;  Dcyling,  Irejueus,  ecangelica  veritati8  cor^essor  ac 
toftii  (Lipa.  1721),  against  Massuet ;  Ceiilier,  IlitCffiner. 
des  Aułeurs  sacris  et  EccUs.  i,  495  są. ;  Fabńcius,  Bibl, 
Grttc.  vii,  75  aq. ;  Bohringer,  KirchengescK  in  Bioffra- 
phien^  voL  i;  Mohler,  Patrologie^  vol.  ii;  Ritter,  Gesch, 
der  Pkilos.  i,  345  są. ;  Duncker,  Des  heiL  Iren.  Chrisłol  i. 
Zmammenhange  m,  d,  theoL  und  antkropoU  Grundkkren 
dargesteUt  (1843,  8vo);  Graul,  D.  chrisilich  Kirche  a.  d. 
Schwelie  d.  Iren.  Zeiialters  (Lpz.  18G0),  a  very  valuable 
little  work  of  168  pages,  in  which  "  the  position  of  Ire- 
Ł-eus  is  sketched  with  a  bold  and  firm  hand ;"  Schrockh, 
Kirrhenffesdhichfe,  iii,  192  są. ;  SchaflF,  Church  Historyk 
ToL  i  (see  Index) ;  Neander,  Church  Ilisłory^  vol.  i  (see 
Index) ;  Shedd,  History  of  Doctrines  (see  Index) ;  Har- 
lison,  Whose  are  the  Fathersf  (see  Index) ;  Augusti, 
Dogmengesch.  voL  i  and  ii;  Baumgarten-Crusius,  Dog- 
mengesch.  (see  Index) ;  Buttet.  Theolog.  1869,  Oct.  25,  p. 
319;  Rev.  de  deux  MondeSf  1866,  February  15,  art.  viii; 
Christian  Remembrancer,  July,  1853,  p.  226;"  Herzog, 
Seal-Knerjklopddie,  vii,  46  są.     (J.  H.  W.) 

Irenaeus,  St.,  a  Tuscan  mart>T,  flourished  in  the 
«cond  half  of  the  3d  century.  But  very  little  is  kpown 
of  the  history  of  his  life.  He  suffered  martyrdom  dur- 
ing  the  pcrsccutions  under  the  emperor  Aurelius  (275), 
and  b  commemorated  in  the  Roman  Church  July  8. — 
Tillemont,  Mimoires  Ecdes,  vol.  iv ;  Hoefer,  Nouv,  Biog. 
Generale,  xxv,  948. 

IrenaetiB,  Sr.,  another  martyr,  was  bbhop  of  Sir- 
minm  (now  Sirmish,  a  Hungarian  village),  his  native 
country,  at  the  beginning  of  the  4th  century.  Many 
inducements  were  offered  him  by  the  then  govemor  of 
the  country,  Probus,  who,  no  doubt,  acted  under  instruc- 
tioDs  from  the  emperors  Diodetian  and  Mazimus,  to  re- 


nounce  Christianity,  bat,  all  proying  futile,  he  was  at 
last  beheaded,  afler  having  been  subjected  to  various  tor- 
tures.  Though  but  little  is  known  of  this  Iremeus^s  per- 
sonal  history,  it  is  evident,  from  the  efTorts  of  the  gov« 
emor  to  secure  his  adhesion  to  the  heathen  practioes, 
that  he  was  a  man  of  great  influence.  The  datę  of  his 
death  is  not  accurately  known.  Some  think  it  to  be 
March  25,  the  day  on  which  his  death  is  commemorar 
ted  by  Romanists;  others  put  it  April  6,  A.D.  804. 
See  Hoefer,  Nouv.  Biog.  Generale,  xxv,  948 ;  Ceiilier, 
Bitt.  des  aut.  sacr,  iii,  27 ;  Butler,  Liees  of  the  Sainis, 
iii,  651  są. ;  Reai-Encyklop.f,  d.  KałhoL  Deutschland,  v, 
716  są. 

Irenaans,  biahop  of  Tysk,  flourished  in  the  first  half 
of  the  5tlL  century.  He  was  originally  a  count  of  the 
empire,  and  first  took  part  in  eodesiastical  affairs  at  the 
Council  of  Ephesus,  A.D.431,where  he  represented  the 
emperor  Theodosius  as  assistant  to  Candidius,  to  settle 
the  controyersy  between  Cyril  and  Nestorius,  and  their 
reapectiye  foUowers.  Both  he  and  Candidius  favored 
Nestorius,  and,  failing  to  preyent  his  condemnation  at 
the  council,  did  their  utmost,  on  their  return  to  court,  to 
coonteract  on  the  emperofs  mind  the  influence  and  de- 
dsion  of  the  Cyrillians  against  Nestorius.  For  a  time 
they  suooeeded  well,  as  their  repreaentations  "  borę  on 
their  very  faoe  the  impress  of  truth."  But  the  Cyrillian 
party  predominating,  and  John,  the  secretary  of  C>Ti], 
appearing  himself  at  ooort  to  counteract  the  efforts  of 
Irenens  and  Candidius,  the  feeble  soyereign  was  soon 
tumed  in  favor  of  the  Cyrillian  party,  and  Irenseus  him- 
self was  banished  ińmi  the  court  about  A.D.  435.  He 
at  once  betook  himself  to  his  friends,  the  Oriental  bish- 
ops,  and  by  them  was  raised  to  the  bishopric  of  Tyre  in 
444.  The  emperor  now  issoed  an  edict  oondemning  the 
Nestorians,  and,in  addition,  it  was  ordered  that  Irenaeas 
sbould  be  depoeed  from  the  bbhopric,  and  deprived  of 
his  clerical  character.  In  448  the  sentence  was  flnally 
execated.  After  his  retirement  Irenieus  wrote  a  history 
of  the  Nestorian  struggle,  under  the  title  of  Tragoedia 
seu  CommentarU  de  rdms  in  Synodo  Ephesina  ac  in  Ori- 
cnie  gestis,  The  original,  which  was  written  in  Greek, 
is  loet,  and  only  parta  of  it  remain  to  us  in  a  Latin  trans- 
latiou  published  by  Christian  Lupus,  under  the  inaccu- 
rate  title  of  Yariorum  Patrum  Epistoła  ad  ConcUium 
Ephesinum  pertinenłis  (Łouv.  1682).  See  Mansi,  Sacr. 
ConciL  Nov.  CoUect.  v,  417, 731 ;  Tillemont,  Afem.  EccUs. 
xiv;  Cave, //if/. LtCf . sub. ann. 444 ;  Koeter, Nouv. Biog, 
Gen.  xxv,  949 ;  Neander,  Ch.  Hist.  ii,  468  są. 

IrenaBUB,  a  pseudonym  for  the  celebrated  Church 
historian  Johakn  Karl  Ludwig  Gieseler  (ą.  v.). 

IrenaDUS,  Christoph,  one  of  the  most  zealous  de- 
fendants  of  the  doctrine  of  the  Fladans,  was  bom  at 
Schweidnitz,  near  the  middle  of  the  1 6th  century.  First 
a  deacon  at  Aschersleben,  he  was  afterwards  called  to 
Eialeben  as  regular  pastor,  and  flnally  i4)pointed  court 
preacher  at  Weimar.  Accused  of  favoring  the  view8  of 
Flacius,  a  consistent  though  much  persecuted  foUower 
of  Luther,  he  was,  with  other  prominent  preachers  guilty 
of  the  same  failing,  dismissed  from  his  position  in  1572. 
He  now  removed  to  Austria,  where  he  published  in  1581 
a  pamphlet  against  the  flrst  article  of  the  Concordien- 
formelf  under  the  title  of  Christoph  Irenai  Examen  d, 
ersten  Artikels  u.  d.  Wirbel-Geisłes  i,  d.  neuen  Concordi- 
enbuch  von  der  ErbsUnde.  The  datę  of  his  death  is  not 
known  to  us.  See  Aschbach,  Kirchen~Lex.  ii,  78 1 .  See 
Fi^cius. 

Zrenaeiui,  FalkovBki,  a  leamed  Russian  priest, 
was  bom  May  28, 1762.  He  acąuired  a  good  knowledge 
of  Hebrew,  Latin,  Frencb,  and  German,  then  went  to 
Hungary  to  study  philosophy,  history,  and  mathematics. 
He  was  married,  but  his  great  merita  caused  him  to 
be  appointed  bishop,  although,  according  to  the  gener- 
ał mles  of  the  Greek  Church,  marriage  is  a  bar  to  a 
candidate  for  this  office.  He  died  April  29, 1823.  Ire- 
MBus  wrote  Chronologie  ecdesiastigue  (Mosoow,  1797) : 
— Christiana,  orłhodoza  dogmatico-polemica  Theologia 


IREN^US 


654 


IRENICAL  THEOLOGY 


Compendium  (Moacow,  1802,  2  vola.  8vo),  and  commen- 
taries  on  Paiil's  Epiatles  to  the  Romans  and  to  the  Ga- 
latians  (Kief,  1806,  2  vols.  8vo).  See  Gagarin,  De  la 
TheoL  daru  rźglise  Russe  (Par.  1867),  p.  58.     (J.  N.  P.) 

Irenaeus,  Kleineiitievaki,  a  yeiy  able  Russian 
tfaeologian,  waa  bom  at  Klementief  (Yladimir  district) 
in  1753.  Of  his  early  histoiy  but  little  U  known  to  u& 
He  enjoyed  the  reputation  of  a  great  eavant,  and  held 
the  bishopric  of  Tvar,  and,  later,  the  archbishopric  of 
Pskof,  and  died  at  St.  Petersburg  April  24,  1818.  Of 
course  he  bclonged  to  the  monastic  order  of  the  Russo- 
Greek  Church,  for,  as  is  well  known,  the  higher  ecclesi- 
astical  offices  of  Russia  are  accessible  only  to  monastic 
orders  (compare  Eckardt,  Modem  Ruuia).  Aichbbhop 
Irenseus  wrote  Commentaries  on  the  Ticelve  minor  Proph- 
ets:StPauV8  EpiMle  to  the  Romans  and  to  the  Htr 
breios: — and  also  published  some  of  his  sermons,  delir- 
ered  before  the  royal  household  at  St  Petersburg  (1794). 
He  likewisc  translated  into  Russian  the  writings  of  seT- 
eral  of  the  Church  fathers,  and  cardinal  BeUaimine^s 
Commentart/  on  the  Psalms  (Moacow,  1807,  2  vols.  4to) ; 
and  two  other  works  on  ascetism  by  Bcllarmine.  See 
Hoefer,  Nouc,  Biog.  GhUraley  xxv,  949. 

Ir6nd  (Eip^v}7,  Peace)y  empress  of  Constantinople, 
and  one  of  the  most  extraordinary,  though  conrupt  char- 
acters  of  the  Byzantine  empire,  was  bom  in  Athens 
about  A.D.  725.  An  orphan,  17  years  of  age,  without 
any  fortunę  except  her  beauty  and  talents,  she  exclted 
the  admiration  of  the  then  reigning  emperor,  Leo  lY, 
and  in  A.D.  769  became  his  lawful  wife.  Her  love  for 
power,  it  is  said,  catised  her  t<>  commit  the  crime  of  mur- 
der,  for  her  husband,  who  died  in  780,  is  generally  be- 
lieyed  to  have  been  poisoned  by  her.  During  his  reign 
she  had  aoquired  not  only  the  love,  but  also  the  confi- 
dence  of  the  emperor,  and  in  his  testament  he  declared 
her  **  empress  guardian  of  the  Roman  world,  and  of  their 
son  Constantine  VI,"  who  was,  at  the  deceasc  of  Leo  lY, 
only  ten  ycars  of  age.  Educated  in  the  worship  of  im- 
ages,  she  was  herself  an  ardent  opponent  of  the  icono- 
clasts,  who  held  sway  during  the  reign  of  her  busband, 
and  who,  even  at  one  time,  had  caused  her  banishment 
from  his  court  on  account  of  her  secret  worship  of  images, 
and  her  conspiracies  with  image-worshippeis  against 
iconoclasm.  "  But,  as  soon  as  she  reigned  in  her  own 
name  and  that  of  her  son,  Irenę  most  seriously  under- 
took  the  min  of  the  Iconoclasts,  and  the  first  step  of 
her  futurę  persecution  was  a  generał  edict  for  liberty  of 
conscience.  In  the  restoration  of  the  monks,  a  thou- 
sand  images  were  exposed  to  public  reneration ;  a  thou- 
sand  legends  were  invented  of  their  sufferings  and  mira- 
cles.  As  opportunities  occurred  by  death  or  removal, 
Łhe  episcopal  seata  were  judicially  fUled;  the  most  eager 
competitors  for  earthly  or  celestial  favor  antidpated  and 
flattcred  the  judgment  of  their  soyereign ;  and  the  pro- 
motion  of  her  sccretar}',  Tarasius,  gave  Irenę  the  patri- 
arch  of  Constantinople,  and  the  command  of  the  Ori- 
ental  Church."  But  the  decrees  of  a  generał  council 
could  only  be  rcpcatcd  effcctually  by  a  similar  assembly, 
and  to  this  end  she  convened  a  council  of  bishops  at 
Constantinople,  A.D.  786.  By  this  time,  however,  the 
people  and  the  army  had  leamed  to  abhor  the  worship 
of  images  in  place  of  the  trae  God,  and  the  council  was 
opposed  by  a  mob,  assisted  by  the  troops,  and  even 
driven  frora  the  capital.  This  by  no  means  intimidated 
Irenę  in  her  marked  course.  She  had  detcrmined  on 
the  reintroduction  of  image- worship  and  the  extirpation 
of  all  iconoclasts,  and  well  did  her  zeal  for  the  restora- 
tion of  this  grofis  superstition  desenre  to  be  rewarded  by 
the  Church  (Greek)  with  a  saintship  (which  she  still 
occupics  in  the  Greek  calcndar).  A  second  council  was 
conrened  only  a  ycar  after  the  first  had  been  broken  up, 
but  this  time  at  Nicc.  "  No  morę  than  18  days  were 
allowed  for  the  oonsummation  of  this  important  work; 
the  iconoclasts  appeared  not  as  judges.  but  as  criminals 
or  penitents ;  the  scenę  was  decorated  by  the  legates  of 
pópe  Adrian  and  the  Eastem  patriarchs,  the  decrees 
were  framed  by  the  president  Tarasius,  and  ratified  by 


the  acdamations  and  subscriptiona  of  850  bishopa.  They 
unanimously  pronounoed  that  the  worship  of  imagea  is 
agreeable  to  Scripture  and  reason,  to  the  fathen  and 
councils  of  the  Church ;  but  they  hesitate  whether  that 
worship  be  relative  or  direct ;  whether  the  godhead  and 
the  figurę  of  Christ  be  entitled  to  the  same  modę  of  ado- 
ration.    Of  this  second  Nicene  Council  the  acta  are  sdU 
extant;  a  curious  monument  of  superstition  and  igiio> 
rance,  of  falaehood  and  folly"  (Gibbon,  DeHine  and  FaH 
ofthe  Roman  Empire^  v,  87  są.).     Meanwhile,  howerer, 
the  young  emperor  was  attaining  the  maturity  of  man- 
hood ;  "  the  matemal  yoke  became  morę  grierous ;  and 
he  listened  to  the  fayoritea  of  his  own  age,  who  shared 
his  pleasures,  and  were  ambitions  of  shaiing  his  powet" 
But  Irenę  was  by  no  means  ready  to  conccde  to  her  son 
the  power  which  she  preferred  to  hołd  in  ber  own  hand, 
and,  eyer  yigilant,  she  eoon  penetrated  the  dcńgns  of 
her  son.     As  a  conseąuence,  there  arose  at  court  two 
factions.     The  young  and  the  yigorous  gathered  aitNind 
the  heir  presumptive,  and  in  790  he  actually  succeeded 
in  assuming  himself  the  goyemment  of  affiura.   As  Con- 
stantine VI  he  became  the  lawful  emperor  of  the  Ro- 
mans, and  Irenę  was  dismissed  to  a  life  of  soliiude  and 
repose.     '^  But  her  haughty  spirit  condescended  to  tbe 
arts  of  dissimulation :  dlie  fiattered  tbe  bishopa  and  eu- 
nuchs,  reviyed  the  filial  tendemesa  of  the  prince,  re- 
gained  his  oonfidence,  and  betrayed  his  credulity.     The 
character  of  Constantine  was  not  destitute  of  sense'  or 
spirit;  but  his  education  had  been  studiously  neglected: 
and  the  ambitious  mother  now  expo6ed  to  the  pubłic 
censure  the  rices  which  she  herself  had  nouńshcd,  and 
the  actions  which  she  herself  had  secrptiy  adYised.'* 
Meanwhile  a  powerful  conspiracy  was  also  cancocted 
agunst  Constantine,  and  only  reached  his  eaiB  when 
he  kncw  it  to  be  impossible  for  him  to  successfuDy  n- 
sist.     In  hcste  he  fled  from  the  capital.    But  his  own 
guards  eyen  had  been  bought  in  the  interests  of  Ircne, 
and  the  emperor  was  seized  by  them  on  the  Asiatic 
shore,  and  transported  back  to  Constantinople  to  the 
porphyry  apartment  of  the  palące  wbere  he  had  iirst 
seen  the  light.     "•  In  the  mind  of  Irenę  ambition  had 
stifled  eyery  sentiment  of  humanity  and  naturę;*'  and 
it  was  decrecd,  in  a  bloody  council  which  she  had 
assembled,  that  Constantine  must  by  some  means  be 
foreyer  rendered  incapable  of  assuming  the  goyem- 
ment himself.    While  aaleep  in  his  bed,  the  hirelings  of 
Irenę  entered  the  room  of  the  prince  and  stabbed  thdr 
daggers  with  yiolence  and  precipitation  into  his  eyts, 
depriving  him  not  only  of  his  eyesight,  but  rendering 
his  life  eyen  critical.    As  if  this  crime  were  in  itself  not 
sufiUciently  great,  the  youth  was  cven  deprived  of  his 
liberty  when  it  was  found  that  he  had  sunriyed  the  fa- 
tal  stroke,  and  confined  in  a  dungeon,  where  he  was  kft 
to  pine  away.    Thus  the  unnatural  mother,  giiilty  of  a 
crime  unparalleled  in  the  bistory  of  crimea,  secuied  ić<r 
herself  the  reins  tff  goyemment.     But  srill  Ircne  was 
not  free  from  anxietie8.   Though  the  ponishment  which 
her  crime  deseryed  did  not  immediatdy  follow  the  bkKHiy 
deed,  it  yet  came  surely.    Her  two  fayorit<!s,  Stanracius 
and  iEtius,  whom  she  had  raised,  enricbed,  and  intnx9(ed 
with  the  first  dignities  of  the  empire,  were  consiantly 
embroiled  with  each  other,  and  their  jealouŃes  only 
ceased  with  the  death  of  the  former,  A.I).  800.     In  cr- 
der  to  secure  her  possession  of  the  throne,  she  sought 
a  marriage  with  Charlemagne  -,  but  the  Frank  emperor 
had  eyidently  no  rellsh  for  a  woman  who  had  commit- 
ted  80  many  crimes,  and  the  schcme  proycd  ab(yrti\-e^ 
Two  years  later,  her  treasurer,  Niccphorua,  rebell^d 
against  her,  and,  suddenly  seizing  her  person,  banished 
her  to  the  isle  of  Lesbos,  where  she  was  forced  to  «pin 
for  a  liyelihood.    Herę  she  died  of  grief,  A  J>.  808.    See 
ICONOCTJISM.     (J.  H,  W.) 

Irenical  Theology  is  a  term  (from  ii^v9iype€Kt) 
used  to  designate  the  art  or  science  of  conciliatiąic  any 
dilferences  which  arise  in  religion  and  in  the  Church 
from  one-sided  theories  or  misapprebensian.  Making 
peace  implies  a  preyiooa  warfare,  hence  irenical  thedogy 


IRENICAL  THEOLOGY 


655 


IRENICAL  THEOLOGY 


U  dosely  alUed  to  pokmics  (q.  ▼.),  whicb,  in  its  true 
characteri  should  be  bat  a  §traggle  for  peace.  For  the 
auyinTfioc  Hic  lipłpnic,  or  "bond  of  peace"  (£ph.iv,8); 
embraces  all  Chnstians,  and  the  &\TidŁtfHV  kv  dyairyy 
or  "  speaking  the  truth  in  love"  (Eph.  iv,  16),  contains 
two  commandmenta  wbich  cannot  be  separated.  Hence 
we  find  in  the  Christian  Chorch,  from  her  earliest  days 
up  to  our  own  timea,  attempts  to  secure  peace  and  unity 
by  coDciliating  all  ditTerences  and  by  reuniting  those 
who  had  aeparated  from  each  other.  Such  was  partic- 
ularly  the  case  when  schism  occurred  first  between  the 
Latań  and  the  Greek  churches,  then  between  the  Horn- 
ish  and  the  Protestant,  and,  again,  between  the  Luther- 
an  and  the  Reformed.  Irenical  attempts  accompanied 
each  of  theae  separations,  as  is  evinced  by  the  large 
nmnber  of  works  known  as  Iremcum,  Unio,  Concordia, 
etc  Bat  Łhe  labor  of  dogmatical  peace-makers,  or,  as 
some  cali  them,  the  angels  of  peace  upon  earth,  is  so 
profonndly,  so  ąuietly,  and  unostentatioosly  done,  that 
the  generał  masa  of  professional  theologians  hardly  be- 
come  aware  of  it,  As  a  regular  science,  howerer,  or 
syatematic  theory,  these  etforts  at  peaceful  agreement 
on  the  points  of  diiference  could  only  spring  from  a  well 
deiined  and  developed  state  of  Christian  doctrine,  and 
Christian  life  and  its  theory.  Hence  irenical  theology 
is  comparatiyely  modem,  and  its  system  but  little  de- 
reloped  as  yet.  No  one  can  deny  that  in  the  N.  T.,  in 
the  woiks  of  the  apologists,  apoetles,  and  fathcrs,  and 
down  through  a  long  senes  of  ecclesiasUcal  i^-ritings, 
and  particulariy  in  those  of  the  mystics  and  pious  as- 
oeiics,  there  are  many  pacilicatory  elementa  which 
might  serce  as  materiał  for  an  irenical  system.  After 
the  Reformation  we  flnd  such  fragments  side  by  side 
with  the  most  violent  polemical  works.  We  might 
mention  in  this  connection  Erasmns  {De  amabilt  eccle- 
tia  Concordia),  George  Wicel,  H.  Cassander,  Fr.  Junius, 
besides  Melancthon,  Martin  Bucer,  etc  It  was  against 
one  of  theae  peace-makers,  David  Paneus  (t  1615)  that 
Leonhard  Hutter  wrote  his  Iremcum  vere  Christianum 
(2d  ediL  Rostock,  1619),  in  which,  however,  hc  admits 
that  the  attainmcnt  of  ultimate  unity  and  peace  is  prob- 
lematicaL  Among  the  most  active  in  the  cause  of 
union  we  find,  in  the  Reformed  Church,  Hugo  Grotius 
(t  1W6),  and,  in  the  Lutheran,  George  Calixtu8  (t  1666). 
The  Jesuits,  howerer,  managed  to  interfere  in  all  these 
attempts,  and  to  render  them  abortive  by  proposing  so- 
phistical  and  impossible  bases  of  union.  On  the  other 
band,  untimely  propositions  on  both  sides,  dictated 
eithcr  by  fear  or  woridly  motiyes,  threw  discredit  on 
the  cause  itself.  It  was  now  decried  as  Babelianism, 
Samaritanism,  neutraUsm,  syncretism,  etc.  Still  there 
continued  to  appear  persons  who  believed  in  the  pos- 
sibility  of  union,  and  laborcd  zealously  for  it,  Among 
them  were  John  Fabricius  of  Helmstadt  (t  1729),  a  dis- 
dple  of  Calixtus,  and  the  Scotch  divine,  John  Dury,  or 
Dunnis  (1630-78),  who,  knowing  the  relation  between 
the  Protestant  confessions,  labored  with  a  truły  Chris- 
tian spirit  to  secure  this  end.  His  principal  work,  Iren- 
icorum  iractatuum  Prodromus  (Amstelod.  1662,  8vo),  is 
in  itoelf  a  sort  of  irenical  theory,  as  it  treats  of  the  man- 
ner  of  removing  the  obstacles  to  union,  of  the  grounds 
suilicient  for  erangelical  unity,  of  the  canses  and  means 
of  religious  recondliation,  and  of  the  true  method  of  ac- 
compUshing  that  result  Similar  works,  likc  the  via 
ad  paeem,  etc,  appeared  in  the  Reformed  Church,  and 
also,  though  not  so  numeroualy,  in  the  Lutheran.  Among 
ihe  Romaaists  even,  we  find  some  eamest  peace-makers, 
but  their  efforts  met  with  little  success.  Among  the 
most  prominent  was  the  Spaniaid,  Christopher  Roja  de 
Spinola.  appointed  bishop  in  Austria  in  16G8 ;  he  madę 
great  efforts  towards  recondling  the  churches,  and  was 
eoontenanced  by  the  emperor  Leopold  and  pope  Inno- 
cent XI,  but  was  afterwards  disowned  by  the  latter,  and 
Spener  himself  was  obliged  to  caution  all  against  hold- 
ing aecret  interoouise  with  him.  He  gained  to  his 
▼iews  the  Lutheran  ahbot  Molanus,  of  Lomim,  in  Han- 
mrer,  who,  in  tom,  found  a  zealous  and  distinguished 


adyocate  of  unity  in  Leibnitz.  Correspondence  was  be« 
gun  with  Bossuet  on  this  subject,  and  Leibnitz  wrote 
a  yery  ingenious  Sygtema  Theologitt,  which  was  only 
published  in  1819,  at  Paris,  and  afterwards  in  German 
by  the  Roman  Catholic  Lorenz  Doller  (Mayence,  1820), 
with  a  preface,  in  which  he  asserts  that  Leibnitz  was  at 
heart  a  Romanist.  This  brought  an  answer  of  G.  £. 
Schulze,  Ueber  die  Entdtckung  das  Ltibmłz  ein  KathoUh 
gewesen  (Gotting.  1827).  The  negotiations  in  the  mean 
time  pioyed  unsuccessful,  and  matters  remained  un- 
changed;  but  still  the  irenical  tendency  was  clearly 
gaining  ground.  Soon  after  the  impulse  towanls  a  liy- 
ingfaith  giyen  by  Spener  and  his  school.  there  appeared 
a  large  number  of  works  for  and  against  the  union  of 
the  Protestant  churches,  which  finally  led,  in  Pruesia, 
to  some  practical  results.  These,  howerer,  we  shall  not 
dwell  upon  here,  our  present  objeet  being  only  to  show 
the  deyelopment  of  irenical  theology.  John  Christo- 
pher Kdcher  (f  1772)  published  a  Bibliotheca  Iheołoffim 
irenictB  (Jenąe,  1764),  which,  though  short,  is  yaluable. 
He  defines  irenical  theology  (§  3)  as  being  "  that  part 
of  controrersial  theology  which  inąuires  into  tbe  import 
of  such  doctrines  and  religious  ceremonies  as  either 
whole  ecclesiastical  bodies  or  personal  members  contend 
about,  with  a  yiew  to  presenre  the  peace  and  unity  of 
the  Church  of  God,  or  to  restore  them  to  the  postion 
which  they  fiist  held."  The  tendency  to  unity  now 
giadually  became  transformed  into  a  generał  toleration ; 
nothing  was  done  towards  the  actual  settlement  of  the 
differences,  though  much  preparation  was  madę  in  that 
direction  by  the  humanistic  tendency,  and  the  spirit  of 
inquiry  into  all  religious  systcms.  (On  the  literaturę 
of  the  subject  in  that  period,  see  Winer,  Handbuch  der 
łheoi,  Literaiurff,  i,  866-60.)  Among  the  works  which 
adyocated  a  union  of  the  churches,  but  rather  from  a 
practical  than  a  sdentific  point  of  yiew,  arc  to  be  men- 
tioned  first  those  of  Joseph  Planck  (f  1883)  and  Mar- 
hdneke  (f  1846) ;  then  those  of  J.  A.  Stark  (f  1816) ; 
Theoduls  Gastmahl,  the  crypto  -  catholic  l^testant 
court-preacher  of  Darmstadt  (7th  edit,  1828,  8vo) ;  the 
Chrisfliehe  Henotikon  of  Dr.  C.  F.  Błihmc  (Halle,  1827) ; 
and  Jdeen  u,  d,  innem  Zutammenhang  v.  Glaubentrewd- 
gung  u.  Glauhenseimgung  in  d,  EtangeL  Kirche,  by  Dan- 
iel of  Cologne  (Leipsig,  1823). 

In  Germany,  Marheineke,  who,  in  imitation  of 
Planck,  transformed  symbolice  into  a  comparison  of  the 
different  Chriatum  confessions,  greatly  adyanced  the 
real  scientific  charactcr  of  irenical  theology,  partly  aa 
the  generał  union  of  the  churches,  partly  as  that  of  the 
different  confessions.  The  same  spirit^  though  joined 
to  much  partiality,  perrades  also  the  Roman  Catholic 
Symbolik  of  Adam  Mohler,  and  in  a  morę  liberał  tonę 
Leopold  Schmid's  Geitt  des  Katholicisnms  oder  Grundle- 
gung  der  ckristltchen  Irenik  (1848).  On  the  contrary, 
such  works  as  Dr.  F.  A.  Staudenmaier's  (f  1856)  Zum 
religiósen  Frieden  d,ZukunJl  (1846, 2  yols.  8vo)  disfigure 
Protestantism  to  such  an  cxtent,  and  are  written  in  so 
illiberal  a  tonę,  that,  if  such  were  morę  abundant,  they 
would  kindle  again  the  fiercest  strifc  Yet  the  scientific 
bads  of  religious  and  denominational  peace  has  madę 
much  progress  sińce  Schldermacher  gare  a  scientific 
deydopment  to  polemics  and  apologetics.  This  is  espe- 
cially  eyident  in  J.  Peter  Lange*s  Chrisfliehe  Dogmatik, 
the  third  part  of  which  (Heidelberg,  1852)  contains  a 
cleyer  sketch  of  practical  dogmatics,  or  of  polemics  and 
irenical  theology.  According  to  him,  it  is  the  proyince 
of  irenical  theology  to  bring  out  of  the  different  relig- 
ious opinions  those  which  coincide  with  the  Christian 
dogma,  to  free  them  from  all  errors  and  exce8ses,  and  to 
bring  them  into  the  life  and  consciousness  of  the  Church, 
or  to  submit  them  to  the  Christian  dogmas  (§  5).  It 
has  therefore  to  search  out  the  hidden  efforts  of  truth  in 
all  religious  manifestations.  All  distortions  of  truth  are 
eyidences  of  the  exi8tence  of  an  original  truth.  Irenical  , 
theology  Is  again  dirided  into  elementary,  i.  e.  an  expo- 
sition  of  the  struggles  of  truth  and  of  the  means  of  as- 
sisting  it ;  and  concrete,  i.  e.  an  exposition  of  the  organie 


m-ELi.HERES 


656 


IR-HA-HERES 


liberation  and  development  of  trath  in  hnmanity  until 
the  completion  of  the  Church.  Sin,  however,  will  al- 
ways  remaiii  an  obfitacle  to  absolute  peace  till  it  is  final- 
ly  abolidhed  in  the  kingdom  of  God.  For  this  we  must 
prepare  ourselyes  by  adheiiug  to  Meldenius^s  maxim : 
*^In  necessariis  unitas,  in  non  necefisariia  libertas,  in 
utri8que  caritas."  See  Dr.  F.  J.  LUcke,  Ueber  d.Aker 
dieses  hirchlichen  Friedensspruches  (Gott.  1850). — Her- 
zog, Reul-Encyldopadie,  vii,  60 ;  Ersch  u.  Gruber^a  Ency- 
Idżopddie,  ii,  23. 

Ir-ha-H6rd8,  in  the  A.  Vera.  "The  City  op  Db- 
struction"  (©"inn  "I"*?,  Ir-ha-he^reSi  v.  r.  Ir-korche*- 
rts,  0'jnn  l-ir ;  Sept.  'Axep*C,  Vulg.  CimUu  SoKs), 
the  name  or  appellation  of  a  city  in  Egypt,  nientioned 
only  in  Isa.  xix,  18.  The  reading  Ol^n,  HereSy  is  that 
of  most  MSS.,  the  Syr.,  Aq.,  and  Theod.;  the  other 
readiug,  0*|7n,  Cheres,  is  supported  by  the  SepL,  but 
only  in  form,  by  Symm.,  who  haa  iroKic  rf\iov^  and  the 
Vulg.  Geseniua  (Thesaur,  p.  391,  a;  522)  prefers  the 
latter  reading.  There  are  yaiiona  explańationa ;  we 
ahall  first  take  thoee  that  treat  it  as  a  proper  name,  tben 
those  that  suppose  it  to  be  an  appellation  osed  by  the 
prophet  to  denote  the  futurę  of  the  city. 

1.  "  The  city  ąfthe  Suny""  a  tnuulation  of  the  £gyp- 
tian  sacred  name  of  Heliopolis,  generally  called  in  the 
Bibie  On,  the  Hebrew  form  of  its  civil  name  An  [see 
On],  and  once  Betk-shemeshy  "the  house  of  the  sun" 
(Jer.  xliii,  13),  a  morę  literał  trauslation  thaii  this  sup- 
posed  one  of  the  sacred  name.  See  Betii-shemesh. 
This  explanation,  bowever,  ia  highly  improbable,  for 
ive  find  elsewhcre  both  the  sacred  and  the  civil  names 
of  Heliopolis,  so  that  a  third  name,  merely  a  raiiety  of 
the  Hebrew  rendering  of  the  sacred  name,  is  very  un- 
likely.  The  name  Beikshemesh  is,  moreover,  a  morę 
literał  translation  in  its  first  word  of  the  Egyptian  name 
than  this  supposed  one.  It  may  be  remarked,  howeyer, 
aa  to  the  last  \art  of  the  word,  that  one  of  the  towns  in 
Palestine  called  Beth-shemesh,  a  town  of  the  Levites  on 
the  borders  of  Judah  and  Dan,  waa  not  far  from  a  Mount 

,  Heies,  C^n"*in  (Judg.  i,  35),  so  that  the  two  names, 
as  applied  to  the  sun  as  an  object  of  worship,  migfat 
probably  be  interchangeable.     See  Heres. 

2.  "  The  city  HereSy\&  transcription  in  the  last  part 
of  the  word  of  the  Egyptian  sacred  name  of  Heliopolis, 
Ha-ka,  "  the  abode  (liter. "  house")  of  the  sun."  This 
explanation,  howeyer,  would  necesńtate  the  omission  of 
the  article. 

8.  Jeiome  supposes  D*^n  to  be  eąuiyalent  to  Q9^n, 
"  a  potsherd,"  and  to  be  a  name  of  the  town  called  by 
the  Greeks  Ostracini,  '0(rrpaKLvrj  (*•  carthen").  Akin 
with  this  is  the  view  of  others  (see  Alexander  ad  loc,), 
who  suppose  that  reference  is  madę  to  TahpaneSj  the 
brick-kilns  of  which  are  mentioned  by  Jereiniah  (xliii, 
9). 

4.  ".4  city  preserced^  meaning  that  one  of  the  fiye 
cities  mentioned  shoold  be  preseryed.  Gesenius,  who 
pToposes  this  construction,  if  the  last  half  of  the  word 
be  not  part  of  the  name  of  the  place,  compares  the  Ar- 
abie charasa,  "  he  guarded,  kept,  preseryed,"  etc  It 
may  be  remarked  that  the  word  Heres  or  Hres,  in  an- 
dent  Egyptian,  probably  signifles  "  a  gtuirdian."  This 
rendering  of  Gesenius  is,  howeyer,  merely  oonjectural, 
and  has  hardly  been  adopted  by  any  otlier  leading  in- 
terpreter. 

5.  The  ordinary  rendering, "  a  city  destroyed,"  lit.  "a 
city  of  destruct  ion ;"  in  the  A. V. "  the  city  of  destruction," 
meaning  that  one  of  the  fiye  cities  mentioned  should  be 
destroyed,  according  to  Isaiah*s  idiom.  Some  maintain 
that  the  prophet  refers  to  fiye  great  and  noted  cities  of 
Egypt  when  he  says,  "  In  that  day  shall  five  cities  in 
the  land  of  Egypt  spcak  the  language  of  Canaan ;"  but 
they  cannot  agree  as  to  what  these  cities  are.  Others 
suppose  that  by  Jive  a  round  number  is  meant ;  while 
others  think  that  somc  proportional  number  is  referred 
to— fiye  out  of  20,000,  or  five  out  of  1000.    Calyin  inter- 


preta  the  paaaage  aa  meaning  fiye  out  of  mx."-JiK  yro^ 
fessing  the  true  religion,  and  one  rejecting  it;  and  that 
oue  is  hence  called  "  City  of  destruction,"  which  ia  not 
its  proper  name,  but  a  description  indicatire  of  its  doom. 
Egypt  and  Ethiopia  were  then  either  under  a  joint  ruto 
or  under  an  Ethiopian  soyereign.  We  can,  thereibiie^ 
understand  the  connection  of  the  three  subjects  com- 
prised  in  thb  and  the  adjoining  chaptenL  Chap.  sriii 
is  a  prophecy  against  the  Ethiopianą  xix  is  the  Boiden 
of  Egypt,  and  xx,  deliyered  in  the  year  of  the  captnre 
of  Ashdod  by  Tartan,  the  generał  of  Sargon,  piedicts 
the  leading  captiye  of  the  £g}'ptian8  and  Ethiopums^ 
probably  the  garrison  of  that  great  ationghold,  as  a 
waming  to  the  Israelitea  who  trustcd  in  them  for  aid. 
Chap.  xyiii  ends  with  an  indication  of  the  time  to  which 
it  refers,  speaking  of  the  Ethiopiana— as  we  undeiaUnd 
the  pasaage— as  sending  **  a  present"  *'  to  the  place  of 
the  name  of  the  Lord  of  hoets,  the  Mount  Zioń"  (yer.  7). 
If  this  be  taken  in  a  proper  and  not  a  tropical  sense,  it 
would  refer  to  the  conyeraion  of  Ethiopiana  by  the 
preaching  of  the  law  while  the  Tempie  yet  stood.  That 
such  had  been  the  case  before  the  Gospel  was  preacbed 
is  eyident  from  the  instance  of  the  eunuch  of  qneen 
Candace,  whom  Philip  met  on  his  return  homeward  from 
worshipping  at  Jerusalem,  andconyerted  to  Chiisóanity 
(Acts  yiii,  2(>-39).  The  Burden*  of  Egypt  seems  to  point 
to  the  times  of  the  Persian  and  Greek  dominions  over 
that  country.  The  ciyił  war  agrees  with  the  troables 
of  the  Dodecarchy,  then  we  read  of  a  time  of  bitter  op> 
prcssion  by  "  a  cruel  lord  and  [or  ^  even"  J  a  fierce  king,* 
probably  pointing  to  the  Persian  conquests  and  rule, 
and  specially  to  Cambyses,  or  Carobyaes  and  Ochns,  and 
then  of  the  drying  of  the  sea  (the  Red  Sea;  compare  zi, 
15),  and  the  river,  and  canals,  of  the  destruction  of  the 
water-plants,  and  of  the  misery  of  the  fisheis  and  woik- 
ers  in  linen.  The  princes  and  counsellors  are  to  loae 
their  wisdom  and  the  people  to  be  filled  with  fear,  all 
which  calamities  scem  to  have  begun  in  the  desolation 
of  the  Persian  rule.  It  is  not  easy  to  understand  what 
follows  as  to  the  dread  of  the  land  of  Judah  which  the 
Egyptians  should  feel,  immcdiately  preceding  the  men- 
tion  of  the  subject  of  the  article :  "  In  that  day  ahaU 
fiye  cities  in  the  land  of  Egypt  speak  the  łangtuge  of 
Canaan,  and  swear  to  the  Lord  of  hoets;  one  ahall  be 
called  Ir-ha-herea.  In  that  day  shall  there  be  an  akar 
to  the  Lord  in  the  midst  of  the  land  of  Egypt,  and  a 
pillar  at  the  border  thereof  to  the  Lord.  And  it  ahali 
be  for  a  sign  and  for  a  witness  unto  the  Lord  of  hoata  in 
the  land  of  Egypt ;  for  they  shall  ery  unto  the  Lord  be- 
cause  of  the  oppressors,  and  he  shall  send  tłiem  a  aar- 
iour,  and  a  great  one,  and  he  słiall  deliyer  them"  (xix, 
18-20).  The  partial  or  entire  conyeision  of  Egypt  is 
prophesied  in  the  next  two  yerses  (21,  22).  The  time 
of  the  Greek  dominion,  following  the  Persian  nile,  may 
here  be  pointed  to.  There  was  then  a  great  influx  of 
Jewish  settlers,  and  as  we  know  of  a  Jewish  town,  Onion, 
and  a  great  Jewish  population  at  A]£xandzia,  we  may 
suppose  that  there  were  other  laige  settlementa.  Tbcse 
would  "  speak  the  language  of  Canaan,"  at  fint  literal- 
ly,  afterwards  in  their  retaining  the  religion  and  cii»- 
toms  of  their  fathers.  The  altar  would  well  COTrespond 
to  the  tempie  built  by  Onias;  the  pillar,  to  the  syna- 
gogue  of  Alexandria,  the  latter  on  the  northem  and 
western  borders  of  Egypt.  In  this  caae  Alexander  would 
be  the  deliyerer.  "VVe  do  not  know,  howeyer,  that  at 
this  period  there  was  any  recognition  of  the  tme  God 
on  the  part  of  the  Egyptians.  If  the  prophecy  is  to  be 
understood  in  a  proper  sense,  we  can,  howeyer,  see  co 
other  time  to  which  it  applies,  and  must  suppose  tliat 
Ir-ha-heres  was  one  of  the  cities  partly  or  whoUy  in- 
habited  by  the  Jews  in  Egypt:  of  these,  Onion  was  the 
most  important,  and  to  it  the  rendering,  "  One  shall  be 
called  a  city  of  destruction,"  would  apply,  sińce  it  waa 
destroyed  by  Titus,  while  Alexandria,  and  perfaaps  the 
other  cities,  yet  stand.  If  the  prophecy  ia  to  be  taken 
tropically,  the  best  reading  and  rendering  an  i 
of  yerbal  critidsm.— Smith ;.  Kitto.    See  Isaiah. 


IR-HAM-MELACH 


657 


IRON 


Ir-ham-Mćlaoh  crb^n  ^'^:P,  dfy  of  tke  talty  »o 
caDed  piotk  from  the  salt  rocks  still  focind  in  that  vicin- 
ity;  Sept.  17  wokic  róy  aXCłv,yulig.  cwiUu  scUisy  Auth. 
Yen.  ''City  of  Salt"),  a  city  in  the  Desert  of  Judah, 
mendooed  between  Nibehan  and  En-gedi  (Joeh.  XV|  62) ; 
probaUy  aitnated  near  the  soutb-weatem  part  of  the 
Dead  Sea.  CkHopare  the  *<  Yalley  of  Salt*'  (2  Sam.  viii, 
18;  Psa.  Iz,  2). 

Ir-hat-Temarim  (D^^^^^tjn  i"*?,  city  of  the 
paltfu^  80  called  prób.  from  a  pakn  gn>ve  in  ita  neigh- 
borhood;  Sept.  iroktę  ^oiviKuv,  or  ?)  iró\tc  twv  ^owi- 
c«v,  Vulg.  ciriku  palmarum,  Auth.  Yen, "  city  of  palm- 
trees*^,  a  place  near  or  identical  with  Jericho  (Deut 
xxxir,  8;  Judg.  i,  16;  iii,  18;  2  Chroń.  xxvUi,  15), 
which  now,  however,  ia  utterly  deatitute  of  palm-treea. 

rrl  (Heb.  Iri\  •''1'^5,  cUtzen;  Sept.  Owpi,  Vtdg. 
Uraij^  the  laat-named  of  the  fiye  sona  of  Bela,  son  of 
fienjamin  (1  Chroń,  vii,  7).  KC  between  1856  and 
1658.    SeelR. 

I'RI  also  appeam  in  the  A.yer8.  of  the  Apocrypha  (1 
Esdr.  viii,  62)  aa  tne  name  (Oupia  v.  r.  Oupć,  Vulg. 
Jorus)  of  the  father  of  the  priest  l^Iarmoth ;  evidently 
the  Uriah  (q.  v.)  of  Ezra  viii,  38. 

Iii^jah  (Heb.  Yir^foh',  n-«;«"n%  teen  hy  Jehaoah; 
Sept  Sapouiac,  Yulg.  Jerias),  son  of  Shelemiah,  and  a 
captain  of  the  ward  at  the  gate  of  Benjamin,  who  ar- 
rested  the  prophet  Jeremiah  on  the  pretence  that  he 
▼as  deserting  to  the  Chaldsana  (Jer.  xxxvii,  13, 14). 
RC.  589. 

Iiiflb  C?hiiroh.    See  Irelaio). 

IrmeiiBaiil,  a  statuę  of  unknown  form  and  signifi- 
cance,  which  was  erected  at  Eresbeige,  in  Hessen  or 
Westphalia,  and  worshipped  by  the  ancient  Saxons.  In 
772.  Charlemagne,  having  conąuered  the  country  and 
brought  the  people  under  subjection,  destroyed  it^  to 
discontinue  the  idolatrous  worship.  It  is  said  that  he 
found  in  the  inside  a  great  amount  of  gold  and  siWer. 
In  the  cathedral  of  Hildesheim  they  show  a  column  of 
green  marble  which  is  claimed  to  be  the  column  of  Ir- 
mensauL  See  Grimm,  Irmenstraste  u,  Irmensaule  (Yien- 
na,  1815) ;  Von  der  Uagen,  Irminy  setne  Saule  o,  «.  Wege 
(BresL  l817)^Picrer,  Ufdv,  Lex,  ix,  66.     (J.  N.  P.) 

Ir-na^hash  [many  Ir^naJKuh]  (Heb.  Ir-Nachatk^ 
Ćnj  1*^5,  serpent  dły ;  SepL  iróXic  tfadę,  Vulg.  urbs 
Naas^  Auth.  Yers.  margin,  "  city  of  Nahash"),  a  place 
founded  (rebuilt)  by  Tehinnah,  the  son  of  Eshton,  of 
the  tńbe  of  Judah  (1  Chroń,  iv,  12).  Schwarz  {PaUst, 
p.  116)  thinks  it  the  present  IHr-Nachas,  one  mile  east 
of  Beth-Jibrin ;  prób.  the  same  marked  (perh.  inaccu- 
rately)  Dar-IIakhas  on  Zimmerman's  map,  a  short  dis- 
tance  north-east  of  Beit-Jibrin.  Yan  de  Yelde  likewise 
identifies  it  with  "  Deir^Nakhaz,  a  village  with  ancient 
remains  east  of  Beit-Jibrin"  {Memoiry  p.  322).  See 
Kahash. 

Iron  (in5,5ar2*/';  Chald.bnB,/»ar«e/';  Gr.  olifi- 
poc,  IaI.  ferrunCy,  There  is  not  much  room  to  doubt 
the  identity  of  the  metal  denoted  by  the  above  terms. 
Tubal-Cain  is  the  ^rst-meniioned  smith,  ^  a  forger  of  ev- 
ery  instrument  of  iron"  (Gen.  iv,  22).  As  this  metal  is 
nreiy  found  in  its  native  state,  but  generally  in  combi- 
nation  with  oxygen,  the  knowledge  of  the  art  of  forging 
it,  which  is  attributed  to  Tubal-Cain,  arguea  an  acąuaint- 
ance  with  the  difficultiea  that  attend  the  smelting  of 
this  metaL  Iron  melts  at  a  temperaturę  of  about  8000° 
Fahrenheit,  and  to  prodoce  this.  heat  krge  fumaces  sup- 
plied  by  a  stiong  blast  of  air  are  neceasary.  But,  how- 
ever  difficult  it  may  be  to  imagine  a  knowledge  of  such 
appliances  at  so  eaily  a  period,  it  is  perfectly  certain 
that  the  nse  of  iron  is  of  extreme  antiquity,  and  that 
therefore  some  means  of  overcoming  the  obstacles  in 
ąuestion  must  have  been  discovered.  What  the  process 
may  have  been  is  left  entirely  to  oonjecture;  a  method 
ia  employed  by  the  naŁive8  of  India,  extremely  simple 
and  of  great  antiquity,  which,  though  rude,  is  veiy  effec- 
lY.— T  T 


tive,  and  siiggests  the  poesibility  of  aimilar  knowledge 
in  an  early  stage  of  civilization  (Ure,  JHcL  Arts  ani 
Scienees,  s.  v.  Steel).  The  smelting  fumaces  of  i£tha- 
lia,  described  by  Diodorus  (v,  13),  remains  of  which 
still  exist  in  that  country,  oorrespond  roughly  with  the 
modem  bloomeries  (Napier,  Metcdlurgy  of  the  Bibie  p. 
140).  Malleable  iron  was  in  common  use,  but  it  ia 
doubtful  whether  the  andenta  were  aoąuainted  with 
cast-iron.    See  Mbtał. 

The  minerał  wealth  of  Canaan  is  indicated  by  describ- 
ing  it  as  *^  a  land  whose  Stones  are  iron"  (Deut.  viii,  9),  a 
passage  from  which  it  would  seem  that  in  ancient  timea 
it  was  a  plentiful  production  of  that  vicinity  (compare 
Job  xxviii,  2),  as  it  is  still  in  Syria,  espedally  in  the  re- 
gion of  Lebanon  (Volney'8  Trav,  i,  233).  There  appear 
to  have  been  fumaces  for  smelting  at  an  early  period  in 
Egypt  (Deut.  iv,  20 ;  comp.  Hengstenberg,  Mos,  u,  Aeg, 
p.  19).  Winer,  indeed  {Realw,  s.  v.  Eisen),  understands 
that  the  basalt  which  predominates  in  the  Hauran 
(Burckhardt,  ii,  637)  is  the  materiał  of  which  Og's  bed- 
stead  (Deut.  iii,  11)  was  madę,  as  it  contains  a  large 
percenuge  of  iron.  But  this  is  doubtfuL  Pliny  (xxxvi, 
U),  who  is  ąuoted  as  an  authority,  says,  indeed,  that 
basalt  is  "  ferrei  coloris  atque  duriti«,"  but  does  not  hint 
that  iron  was  ever  extracted  from  it.  The  book  of  Job 
contains  passagea  which  indicate  that  iron  was  a  metal 
well  known.  Of  the  manner  of  procuring  it,  we  leam 
that "  iron  is  taken  from  dust"  (xxviii,  2).  Iron  was  pre- 
pared  in  abundauce  by  David  for  the  building  of  the 
Tempie  (1  Chroń,  xxii,  3),  to  the  amount  of  one  hundred 
thousand  talents  (I  Chroń,  xxix,  7),  or,  rather, "  with- 
out  weight"  (1  Chroń,  xxii,  14).  Working  in  iron  was 
considered  a  calling  (2  Chroń,  ii,  7).  See  Smith.  In 
Ecclus.  xxxviii,  28,  we  have  a  picture  of  the  interior  of 
an  iron-smith*s  (Isa.  xliv,  12)  workshop:  the  smith, 
parched  with  the  smoke  anid  heat  of  the  fumace,  sitting 
beaide  his  anvil,and  contemplating  the  unwrought  iron, 
his  ears  deafened  with  the  din  of  the  heavy  hammer, 
his  eyes  fixed  on  his  model,  and  never  sleeping  till  he 
has  aocomplished  his  task.  The  superior  hardness  and 
strength  of  iron  above  all  other  substancea  is  alluded  to 
in  Dan.  ii,  40;  its  exceeding  utility,  in  Sir.  xxxix,  31. 
It  was  found  among  the  Midianites  (Numb.  xxxi,  22), 
and  was  part  of  the  wealth  distributed  among  the  tribea 
at  their  location  in  the  land  (Josh.  xxii,  8). 

The  nuurket  of  Tyre  was  supplied  with  bright  or  pol- 
ished  iron  by  the  merchants  of  Dan  and  Javan  (Ezek. 
xxvii,  19).  Some,  as  the  SepL  and  Yulg.,  render  this 
"  wrought  iron:"  so  De  Wette  " geschmiedetes  Eisen." 
The  Targum  has  "  bars  of  iron,"  which  would  correspond 
with  the  stricturtB  of  Pliny  (xxxiv,  41).  But  Kimchi 
(Lex,  8.  V.)  expound8  rSw,  ^dshóth,  as  *'pure  and  pol- 
ished"  (=Span.  ojcirOy  steel),  in  which  be  is  sapported 
by  R.  SoL  Parchon,  and  by  Ben-Zeb,  who  give8  "  glftnz- 
end"  as  the  equivalent  (comp.  the  Homeric  aWtay  ińSft- 
poc,  IL  vii,  478).  If  the  Javan  alluded  to  were  Greeoe, 
and  not,  as  Bochart  (Phaleg,  ii,  21)  seema  to  think,  some 
place  in  Arabia,  there  might  be  reference  to  the  iron 
mines  of  Macedonia,  spoken  of  in  the  decree  of  ^milins 
Paulus  (Livy,  xlv,  29) ;  but  Bochart  uiges,  as  a  very 
strong  argument  in  support  of  his  theory,  that,  at  the 
time  of  £zekiel*8  prophecy,  the  Tyrians  did  not  depend 
upon  Greece  for  a  supply  of  caasia  and  cinnamon,  which 
are  associated  with  iron  in  the  merchandise  of  Dan  and 
Javan,  but  that  rather  the  contrary  was  the  case.  Pliny 
(xxxiv,  41)  awards  the  palm  to  the  iron  of  Serica,  that 
of  Parthia  being  next  in  exoellence.  The  Chalybes  of 
the  Pontus  were  celebrated  as  workers  in  iron  in  very 
ancient  timea  (iEach.  Prom,  788).  They  were  identified 
by  Stnbo  with  the  Chaldsei  of  his  day  (xii,  549),  and 
the  mines  which  they  worked  were  in  the  mountaina 
skirting  the  sea-coast  The  produce  of  their  labor  ia 
supposed  to  be  alluded  to  in  Jer.  xv,  12,  as  being  of  su- 
perior quality.  Iron  mines  are  stiU  in  existence  on  the 
same  coast,  and  the  ore  is  found  **  in  smali  nodular  mass- 
es  in  a  dark  yellow  clay  which  overlies  alimestone  rock^ 
(Smith*s  Diet,ofClass,  Geog,  a.  v.  Chalybea). 


moN 


658 


raoN 


From  Łhe  earliest  times  we  meet  with  manufactureB 
in  iron  of  the  utmo«t  yariety  {some  ardcles  of  which 
eeem  to  be  aiiticipetions  of  what  are  commonly  nip- 
posed  to  be  modem  mvention8).  Thus  iron  was  uaed 
for  chisels  (Deut.  xxvii,  5),  or  something  of  the  kind ; 
for  axe8  (Deut  xix,  5;  2  Kinga  yi,  5, 6 ;  Isa.  x,  84 ;  comp. 
Homer,  //.  iv,  485) ;  for  harrows  and  eawB  (2  Sam.  xii, 
81 ;  1  Chroń,  xx,  3) ;  for  nails  (1  Cliron.  xxii,  3),  and  the 
fasteningB  of  the  Tempie ;  for  weapons  of  war  (1  Sam. 
xvii,  7 ;  Job  xx,  24),  and  for  war  chariots  *(Jo8h.  xvii, 
16, 18 ;  Judg.  i,  19 ;  iv,  8, 13).  The  latter  were  plated 
or  Btudded  with  it,  or  perhapa  armed  with  iron  scythes 
at  the  axle8,  like  the  currus  fakati  of  the  ancient  Ro- 
mans. Its  usage  in  defen8ive  armor  is  implied  in  2 
Sam.  xxiii,  7  (compare  Rev.  ix,  9),  and  as  a  Bafeguard 
in  peace  it  appean  in  fetters  (Psa.  cv,  18),  prison  gates 
(Acts  xii,  10),  and  ban  of  gates  or  doors  (Psa.  cvii,  16 ; 
Isa.  xlv,  2),  as  well  as  for  siirgical  purpoecs  (1  Tim.  iv, 
2).  Sheet-iron  was  used  for  cooking  utensils  (Ezek.  iv, 
8 ;  compare  Lev.  vii,  9),  and  bars  of  hammered  iron  are 
mentioned  in  Job  xl,  18  (though  here  the  Sept.  per- 
yersely  renders  mdtjpoc  x^**Cf "  cast-iron").  We  have 
also  mention  of  iron  Instruments  (Kumb.xxxv,7) ;  baib- 
ed  irons,  used  in  hunting  (Job  xli,  7) ;  an  iron  hed- 
ttead  (Deut.  iii,  11) ;  iron  wcights  (shekela)  (1  Sam.  xvii, 
7) ;  iron  tools  (1  Kings  vi,  7:  2  Kings  vi,  5) ;  homs  (for 
symbolical  use,  1  Kuigs  xxii,  11) ;  trees  bound  with 
iron  (Dan.  iv,  16) ;  gods  of  iron  (Dan.  v,  4),  etc  It 
was  used  by  Solomon,  aceording  to  Josephus,  to  ciamp 
the  large  rocka  with  which  he  built  up  the  Tempie 
mount  {A  ta,  xv,  11,  8),  and  by  Hezekiah's  workmen  to 
hew  out  the  conduits  of  Gihon  (Ecdus.  xlviii,  17).  Im- 
ages  were  fastened  in  their  niches  in  later  times  by  iron 
brackets  or  damps  (Wisd.  xiii,  15).  Agricultural  im- 
plements  were  early  madę  of  the  same  materiał.  In  the 
treaty  mado  by  Porsena  was  inserted  a  condition  like 
that  iraposed  on  the  Hebrews  by  the  Philistines,  that 
no  iron  should  be  used  except  for  agricultural  purposes 
(Pliny,  xxxiv,  39),  It  does  not  follow  from  Job  xix, 
24,  that  it  was  used  for  a  writing  implement,  though 
such  may  have  becn  the  case  (comp.  Isa.  xvii,  1),  any 
morę  than  that  adamant  was  employed  for  the  same 
purpose  (Jer.  xvii,  1),  or  that  shoes  were  shod  with  iron 
and  brass  (Deut.  xxxiii,  25).  Indeed,  iron  so  freąuently 
occurs  in  poetic  figures  that  it  is  difficult  to  discriminate 
between  its  literał  and  metaphorical  sense.  In  such  paa- 
sages  as  the  foUowing,  in  which  a  "^oibe  of  iron**  (Deut. 
xxviii,  48)  denotes  hard  senrice;  "a  rod  of  iron"  (Psa. 
ii,  9),  a  Stern  govemment ;  ^*Apillar  of  iron"  (Jer.  i,  18), 
a  strong  support;  "and  thresking  irutrumenis  of  iron" 
(Amos  i,  3),  the  mcans  of  cruel  oppression ;  the  hardness 
and  heaviness  (Ecclus.  xxii,  15)  of  iron  are  so  dearly  the 
prominent  ideas,  that,  though  it  may  have  been  used  for 
the  Instruments  in  ąuestion,  such  usage  is  not  of  neces- 
sity  indicated.  "  The  fumace  of  iron"  (Deut  iv,  28 ;  1 
Kings  viii,  51)  is  a  figurę  which  vividly  eKpresses  hard 
bondage,  as  represented  by  the  severe  labor  which  at- 
tended  the  operation  of  smelting.  Iron  is  alluded  to  in 
the  followłng  instances :  Under  the  same  figurę,  chas- 
tisement  is  denoted  (Ezek.  xxii,  18,  20,  22) ;  reducing 
the  earth  to  total  barrenness  by  tuming  it  into  iron  (Deut 
xxviii,  23) ;  strength,  by  a  bar  of  it  (Job  xl,  18) ;  afi9ic- 
tion,  by  iron  fetters  (Psa.  c\-ii,  10) ;  prosperity,  by  givijig 
8ilver  for  iron  (Isa.  lx,  17) ;  political  strength  (Dan.  ii, 
83) ;  obstinacy,  by  an  iron  sinew  in  the  neck  (Isa.  xlviii, 
4) ;  giving  supematural  fortitude  to  a  prophet,  making 
him  an  iron  pillar  (Jer.  i,  18) ;  destnictive  power  of  em- 
piies,  by  iron  teeth  (Dan.  vii,  7) ;  deterioration  of  char- 
acter,  by  becoming  iron  (Jer.  vi,  28;  Ezek.  xxii,  18), 
which  resembles  the  idea  of  the  iron  age ;  a  tiresome 
buiden,  by  a  mass  of  iron  (Eoclus.  xxii,  15) ;  the  great- 
est  obstades,  by  walls  of  iron  (2  Mace.  xi,  9) ;  the  cer- 
tainty  with  which  a  real  enemy  will  ever  show  his  ha- 
tredjby  the  rust  retuming  upon  iron  (Ecclus.  xii,  10). 
Iron  seems  used,  as  by  the  Hebrew  poets,  mctonymically 
for  the  sword  (Isa.  x,  34),  and  so  the  Sept  understands 
it,/uixaipa.     The  foUowing  \a  selected  as  a  beauttful 


eompariton  madę  to  iioń  (Prov.  xxyii,  17),  ''Iran  (liter* 
ally)  uniteth  iron;  so  a  man  uniteth  the  oounteuance 
of  his  fiiend,"  gives  stability  to  his  appeaiance  by  his 
presence. 

It  was  for  a  long  time  supposed  that  the  Egyptians 
were  ignorant  of  the  use  of  iron,  and  that  the  allosioiu 
in  the  PenUteuch  were  anachronismsy  as  no  tzaces  of  it 
have  been  found  in  their  monuments;  but  in  the  sepol- 
chres  at  Thebes  butchers  are  represented  aa  sharpeniug 
their  knives  on  a  round  bar  of  metal  attached  to  their 
aprons,  which,  from  its  blue  color,  is  presomed  to  be 
steeL    The  steel  weapons  on  the  tomb  of  Kamesea  III 
are  also  painted  blue ;  those  of  bronze  being  red  (Wil- 
kinson,  A  nc.  Eg.  iii,  247).     One  iron  minę  only  has  been 
discovered  in  Egypt,  which  was  worked  by  the  andcnts. 
It  is  at  Hammńmi,  between  the  Nile  and  the  Red  Sea; 
the  iron  found  by  Mr.  Burton  was  in  the  form  of  epccu- 
lar  and  red  ore  (ibid,  iii,  246).    That  no  aitides  of  iron 
should  have  been  found  is  readily  accounted  for  by  the 
fact  that  it  is  casily  destroycd  by  expo6ure  to  the  air 
and  moisture.    Aceording  to  Pliny  (xxxiv,  43),  it  was 
pre8er\^ed  by  a  coating  of  wbite  lead,  gypsum,  and  liqnid 
pitch.     Bitumen  w^as  probably  employed  for  the  same 
purpose  (xxxv,  52).     The  Egyptians  obtained  their 
iron  aknost  cxclusivdy  from  Aseyria  Ptoper  in  the  fonn 
of  bricks  or  pigs  (Layard,  Ninetth^  ii,  415).     Specimcns 
of  Aas}Tian  iron-work  oyerlaid  with  bronze  were  dtscov- 
ered  by  Mr.  Layard,  and  are  now  in  the  British  Masenm 
{Nin.  and  Bab.  p.  191).     Iron  weapons  of  yarioos  kinds 
were  found  at  Nimrftd,  but  fell  to  piecea  on  expo6UR 
to  the  air.     Some  portions  of  shidds  and  arrow-bcads 
(t&  p.  194,  596)  were  rescued,  and  are  now  in  England. 
A  pick  of  the  same  metal  {ib.  p.  194)  was  also  found.  as 
well  as  part  of  a  saw  (p.  195),  and  the  bead  of  an  axe 
(p.  357),  and  rcmains  of  scale-armor  and  helmets  inlaid 
with  copper  {Nineteh,  i,  840).    It  was  used  by  the  Etros- 
cans  for  offensiye  weapons,  as  bronze  for  defen&ive  ar- 
mor.    The  Aasyrians  had  daggers  and  arrow-head3  if 
copper  mixed  with  iron,  and  hardcned  with  an  alloy  of 
tin  (Layard,  Ninereh,  ii,  418).     So  in  the  daya  of  Ho- 
mer war-clubs  were  shod  with  iron  {Ił.  vii,  141);  ar- 
rows  were  tippcd  with  it  (IL  iv,  123) ;  it  was  used  for 
the  axle8  of  chariots  (IL  v,  723),  for  fetten  (Od.  i,  2W\ 
for  axes  and  biiis  (//.  iv,  485 ;  Od.  xxi,  3,  81).     Adzas- 
tus  {IL  vi,  48)  and  Ulyases  {Od.  xxi,  10)  reckcmed  it 
among  their  treasures,  the  iron  weapons  being  kopt  in  a 
chest  in  the  treasury  with  the  gold  and  brifis  (Otf.  xxi, 
61).     In  Od.  i,  184,'Mente8  tells  Tdemachos  that  he  is 
traydling  from  Taphoe  to  Tamcse  to  procure  brass  in 
cxchange  for  iron,  which  Eustathius  sa^-s  was  not  ob- 
tained from  the  mines  of  the  island,  but  was  the  pmduce 
of  piratical  excursion8  (Millin,  Minerał.  Iłom.  p.  115,  2d 
ed.).    Pliny  (xxxiv,  40)  mcntions  iron  aa  used  syinl>ol- 
ically  for  a  statuę  of  Hercules  at  Thebes  (comp.  Dan.  ii, 
33 ;  V,  4),  and  goblcts  of  iron  as  among  the  ofTcruipt  in 
the  terapie  of  Mars  the  Avenger,  at  Romę.     A]yattc>« 
the  Lydian  dedicated  to  the  oracie  at  Delphi  annall 
goblet  of  iron,  the  workmanship  of  Glaucus  of  Chioa.  to 
whom  the  aI<KX>very  of  the  art  of  soldcring  this  metal  Is 
attributed  (H€rod.*i,  26).     The  goblet  is  described  by 
Pauaanias  (x,  16).     From  the  lisct  that  such  offerings 
were  madę  to  the  temples,  and  that  Achilles  gave  as  a 
prize  of  contest  a  nidely-shapod  mass  of  the  same  metal 
(Homer,  //.  xxiii,  826),  it  has  been  aigued  that  in  eaiiy 
times  iron  was  so  little  known  as  to  be  greatly  estcemed 
for  its  rarity.    That  this  was  not  the  case  in  the  time 
of  Lycurgus  is  evident,  and  Homer  attaches  to  it  no  ep- 
itbet  which  would  denote  its  predousness  (MnUn,  p. 
106).     Thcre  is  reason  to  snppose  that  the  discowry  cf 
braas  preccded  that  of  iron  (Lucret.  v,  1292),  though 
little  weight  can  be  attached  to  the  linę  of  Hesiod  often 
quoted  as  decisive  on  this  point  {Op.  et  Die$,  160>.     The 
Dactyli  Idiei  of  Crete  were  snpposed  by  the  ancienta  to 
have  the  merit  of  bdng  the  first  to  disoorer  the  ptoper- 
tics  of  iron  (Pliny,  vii,  57 ;  Diod.  Sic  v,  64),  as  tbe  Cy- 
clopes  were  said  to  have  invented  the  in»-amith*8  tócge 
(PUny,  yii,  57).    Aceording  to  the  Aiundelian  maffalfl^ 


IRON 


659 


IRREGULARITY 


iron  WIS  known  RC.  1370,  whUe  Lsrcher  (Chrmologie 
iłlerod,  p.  570)  asugns  a  stUl  earUer  dafce,  KC.  1587. 
—Smith;  Kitto.    8ee  Stbeu 

I'ron  (Heh.  Yiron',  1i«"|»';*,  place  of  alarm;  Sept 
'Ifpw),  one  of  the  "  fenced"  cities  of  Naphtali,  mention- 
ed  bctween  En-hazor  and  Migdal-el  (Josh.  xix,  88),  De 
Saulcy  {NarraJt.  ii,  882)  thinks  it  may  be  the  Yaroun 
marked  in  Zimmerman'8  map  north-west  of  Safcd,  the 
Yaron  obsenred  by  Dr.  Robinson  (new  ed.  of  Researchet, 
iii,  61, 62^  notes).  Van  dc  Yelde  likewise  rcmarks  that 
it  is  "now  Ycarun,  a  village  of  Belad  Besharah.  On 
the  north-east  rade  of  the  place  are  the  foundations  and 
other  reroains  of  the  ancient  city"  {Memoir^  p,  322). 

Ironaide,  Gilbert,  D.D.,  a  blshop  in  the  Church 
ofEngland  dunng  the  period  of  the  Reatoration.  Of 
his  early  history  but  little  ia  known  to  us.  He  was  the 
rector  of  a  smali  church  in  an  obscure  little  village  in 
Donetshire  when  he  was  promoted  to  the  see  of  Bris- 
tol unmediately  after  the  Bestoratiou.  Wood  {Athen, 
Oion,  iii,  940)  says  of  him  that  he  owed  his  promotion 
to  a  poor  bishopric  solely  to  his  great  wealth.  He  died 
in  1671.  Bishop  Ironńde  is  the  author  of  a  work  en- 
tiUed  The  Sabbath  (Oxford,  1637, 4to).  See  Stoughton, 
Ecda,  History  ofEngland  (Church  ofihe  JUttorałiori), 

Iroquois.    See  Iitdia^s. 

Ir^peSl  (Hebrew  rtrpe?/', ixfi*n7,  restoredh^r  God; 
Sept.  Iip0a^X),  a  city  in  the  tribe  of  Benjamin,  men- 
tioned  bctwccn  Rekem  and  Taralah  (Josh.  xviii,  27). 
The  associated  names  only  affbrd  a  conjectural  position 
somewhere  in  the  district  west  of  Jerusalcm,  possibly  at 
tl-Kuttul  (Lat.  caxUUum),  on  a  conical  liill  about  half 
way  bctween  Kuloniyeh  (Lat,  colonia)  and  Sobą  (Rob- 
inson, HesearcheSf  u,  328). 

Irregularity  is  a  technical  tenn  for  the  want  of 
the  uecessary  canonical  qnalifirat.ions  for  the  acquisition 
and  excrcise  of  an  eodesiastical  offioe.  These  reqiiisite 
qaalificatious  are  set  forth  in  canones  or  reguła  eiuusted 
from  tirae  to  time  by  the  Church  for  that  purpose.  It 
was  based  first  on  the  apostolic  examples  given  in  1  Tim. 
iii,  1  są. ;  v,  22 ;  Tiu  i,  6  sq.;  and,  after  the  notion  of  the 
l^^itiód  priesŁhood  gained  ground  among  the  clcrgy, 
on  the  regolations  of  the  O.  Test,  which  were  explained 
in  a  mythical  sense.  The  ąualifications  themselves  can 
all  be  reduced  to  this,  that  the  party  ordained  shoald  not 
be  in  dtsrepute  for  crime,  or  in  a  state  which  would  ren- 
der  him  unfit  for  and  incapable  of  ordination.  Innocent 
III  (in  c.  14,  X.  Depurgatione  ccmomca  [  v,  88]  an.  1207) 
dlstinguishes  ^'  nota  ddicti"  and  "  nota  d^ectus"  as  **  im- 
pe^enta  ad  sacros  ordines  promovendum ;"  and  subse- 
quent  canonists  have  therefore  divided  the  impediments 
in  a  like  manner.  In  early  times  diyers  expres8ions 
were  roade  use  of  to  designate  these  impediments,  but 
sińce  Innocent  III  irregularitas  has  become  the  techni- 
cal name  of  them  in  canon  law  (c.  83,  X.  De  testUma  [ii, 
20]  an.  1203).     See  Incapacity. 

The  Greek  Churcfi  in  generał  adhered  moie  to  the 
principles  which  had  been  established  during  the  first 
six  centuries  (see  Canonet  Apotłohrum,  Conc,  Neoc€uar. 
an.  314,  can.  9  [c  11,  dist.  xxxiv] ;  ConciL  Niean.  eod. 
an.,  TruUiamm^an.  692,  can.  21),  whilst  the  Kvangelical 
Church  has  8o  far  adopted  also  later  regulations,  which 
wero  in  accordance  with  its  generał  spirit.  The  formu- 
las  of  confession  and  ecclesiastical  discipline  still  oon- 
tinue,  howerer,  to  rcfer  expressly  to  the  above-named 
passages  of  Scripture. 

I.  Irregulariiy  on  Account  of  a  Crp»«.— The  apostle 
demands  that  he  who  is  to  assume  an  office  over  the 
congiegation  should  be  unimpeached.  Church  disci- 
pline has  gradually  defined  the  offenses  which  compose 
inegularlty.  Originally  it  consisted  of  all  offenses  that 
neceańtated  public  penanoe;  after  the  9th  century,  of 
such  as  were  publlcly  known  {delicfum  vutnife$tum^  no- 
torium),  and  all  faults  entailing  dishonor,  in  which  the 
"infamibus  portso  non  pateant  dignitatum"  of  c  87,  tk 


regcdiśjuru,  was  practically  adhered  to  (comp.  c  %  Cod» 
Juit,  *<  de  digniutibus,"  xii,  1,  Constantin.).  There  aie, 
besides,  other  offenses  named  by  the  law  which,  even 
thoogh  secret  (delicta  oecuUa),  constitute  irreguiarity, 
namely,  heresy,  apostasy,  schiam,  simony,  anabaptism, 
subreption  of  the  ordination,  promotion  without  passing 
through  the  regular  hienrchical  degrees,  ministration 
without  conseciation,  performance  of  worship  whilst  un- 
der  excommumGation  or  interdict,  disregard  of  the  nile 
of  oelibacy,  etc  (see  Thomassin,  Vetu$  et  wwa  ecdetics 
ducipUna,  pt.  ii,  lib^  i,  cap.  lvi-lxv ;  Ferraris,  Bibłiotheca 
canonicaf  s.  v.  Irregularitas,  art.  i.  No.  11;  Ersch  und 
Gruber,  Encyklopadi€j  s.  ▼.  Ordination). 

Whilst  the  Greek  Church  generally  adhered  to  these 
regulations,  the  £vangetical  Church  naturally  deviates 
from  them  in  many  particulars,  in  conseąuence  of  the 
abflence  of  an  ecclesiastical  hierarchy,  the  abolition  of 
the  rule  of  celibacy,  etc  That  a  person  who  has  under- 
gone  punishment  for  crime  is  incapable  of  being  ordain- 
ed is  8elf-evident.  If  a  party  is  in  bad  repute,  the  con- 
gregation  has  a  right  to  oppoee  his  appointment,  in  case 
the  imputations  are  well  founded.  This  is  a  law  among 
all  Christian  denominationa. 

The  Romish  Church  suppresses  the  coiueąuences  of 
irreguiarity  on  account  of  crime  by  means  of  a  dispen- 
sation  which  the  bishops  are  empowered  to  give  when 
the  crime  is  not  public,  exoept  in  case  of  premeditated 
murder  (ConcUium  Trident,  Sess.  xxiv,  cap.  6,  "  De  re- 
form. verb. ;"  Sess.  xiv,  cap.  7,  "  De  reform.").  In  this 
case  the  dispensation  can  oome  only  from  the  pope  him- 
self.  So  also  for  public  offences,  except  he  delegates 
special  powers  to  the  bishop  for  that  purpose.  In  the 
Greek  Church,  on  the  oontrary,  the  strict  regulations 
of  old  aze  maintained,  whereby  irreguiarity  for  beavy 
offences  cannot  be  removed  (Thomassin,  Vettu  et  wna 
eccles,  diiciplinay  cap.  lx,  §  12). 

II.  Irreguiarity  caused  by  Want  of  Ouaiyieation,  — 
Irreguiarity  for  offence  constitutes  siso  irreguiarity  far 
want  of  suiBcient  ąualiiication,  aa  it  entails  the  loss  of 
good  repuUtion  (defectus  fanus) ;  to  this  are,however^ 
added  other  causes  ^rhich  are  conaidered  as  defects. 
Among  these  are : 

1.  Drfectua  cBtatia  (want  of  the  canonical  age)^— Tlbe 
age  iq)poi]ited  for  ordination  has  undergone  Tańoas 
changes.  Acoording  to  the  present  canon  law,  the  pri- 
mary  consecration  of  the  Romish  Church  can  be  impart- 
ed  in  the  8eventh  year;  it  is  the  tonsure  (c  4,  IM  tem- 
porib,  ord,  in  vi  [1, 9]  Boniface  VIII ;  Conc.  Trid.  Sess. 
xxiii,  cap.  4, "  De  reform.**).  The  age  demanded  fbrtbe 
other  orders  is :  for  snbdeacons,  the  twenty-eeeond ;  dea- 
cons,  the  twenty-third ;  presbyters,  the  twenty-fifth; 
bishops  must  be  over  thirty  (Conc  TridLSesa.  xxiiiyca^ 
12,  "  De  reform.").  Yet  the  pope  can  grant  dispensa- 
tions.  In  the  Greek  Church,  the  oki  rule  demanding  that 
deacons  should  be  twenty  years  old  when  ordained,  and 
presbyters  thirty,  is  still  retatned  (JVoi;.  Jw^ńk  cxxxvii, 
cap.  1 ;  Conc.  TruUianwn^  can.  xti).  The  evangelical 
churches  generally  rcquire  fuli  majority,  or  twent^^-fire 
years;  in  some  countries  ordination  is  given  at  twenty- 
one.  Dispensations  are  also  grauted  under  certain  cir^ 
cumstances.  The  Church  of  £ngland  reqnire8  candi- 
dates  to  deacons'  orders  to  be  twenty-three,  presbyters 
twenty-four,  and  bishops  thirty. 

2.  DffectUM  natalium  (kg%timorwn)w—Vlegitimmcy  was 
no  obstacle  to  ordination  in  the  ancient  Church  (c  8, 
dist,  lvi,  Hieronymus).  It  has  been  considered  so  sińce 
the  9th  centur}' ;  yet  the  rule  was  not  very  strictly  en- 
forced  (ConcU,  Meldeme,  an.  845  [in  cap.  17,  can.  i,  qu. 
vii] ;  Reguio,  De  discipL  eccL  lib.  i,  c.  416  sq.).  Espe- 
dal  action  was  taken  conceming  the  children  of  ordain- 
ed priests  {ConciL Piclavimse,  an.  1078  [c  1,  X. "  De  ffliis 
presbyterorum  ordinandis  vel  non,"  i,  17  ] ;  Claramontan, 
an.  1095  [comp.  c  14,  dist.  lvi,  Urban  II),  etc ;  J|pVe8pe- 
cially  disU  lvi,  tit.  x,  1, 17 ;  lib.  vi,  1, 11 ;  Conc,  Trid,  Sesa. 
xxv,  cap.  15,  •'  De  reform."),  and  justified  their  laws  by 
Łhe  passagc  of  the  O.  T.,  DeuL  xxiii,  2  (comp.  c  10,  § 
6,  X. "  De  renunciat."  1, 9,  Innocent  lU,  an.  1206).    This 


IRREGULARITY 


660 


IRREGULARITY 


defect,  bowever,  can  be  remedied  (a)  by  recognition  (c. 
6,  X.  *<Qiii  filii  ńnt  legitimi/'  iv,  17,  Alexaoder  Ul) ; 
(6)  by  eotrance  into  a  conyent  or  foundation  of  regnlar 
canoDs  (c  11,  dist.  lvi,  Urban  II ;  c.  1,  X.  '<  De  filiis  prea- 
byteromm,"  etc).  Thia  reguladon,  abolished  by  Six- 
tas  V,  waa  reatored  by  Gregory  XVI  in  1601,  but  with 
this  condition,  that  auch  penona  sbould  be  diaabled  ftom 
preladcal  honon.  (c)  By  diapenaation,  wbich,  for  ordi- 
net  mittoresy  and  for  nu^ons  when  the  defect  ia  not  pab- 
licly  known,  can  be  gFanted  by  the  biahop ;  otherwise, 
for  ordkiM  tnajoret,  and  benefita  connected  with  cure  of 
aoula,  the  dispenaation  can  be  granted  only  by  the  pope 
{c.  1,  ^  De  filiia  preebyterorum,"  in  vi  [i,  11] ;  comp.  c 
20,  25,  X.**De  electione"  [i,  6]).  The  Greek  Church 
doea  not  recogniae  thia  defect  (Thomaasin,  cap.  lxxxi,  § 
4),  neithcr  doea  the  evangelicai  Church,  although  many 
jurists  consider  the  canonical  principia  on  which  it  ia 
baaed  aa  oommon  law  (Wiese,  Kirchenrecht,  pt.  iii,  sec. 
1,  p.  160 ;  Eichhom,  Deutgches  Privatrecht,  §  89 ;  Kirck- 
enrecAtj  i,  p.  704). 

8.  Defechu  corporis, — ^In  imitation  of  the  Moaaic  law 
(Lev.  xxi,  17-20  aq.),  it  waa  at  an  early  time  demanded 
that  the  candidatea  for  orders  ahould  have  no  bodily 
blemiahea  auch  aa  might  render  them  unfit  for  the  dutiea 
of  their  office,  or  a  aubject  of  dialike  to  the  people  (^Con^ 
stit,  Apost.  lib.  vii,  cap.  2,  8 ;  Canonet  Apostolorwn,  cap. 
76,  77).  The  Church  became  aubaeąuently  veiy  strict 
on  thb  point,  and  decŁared  all  bodily  defecta  suffident 
ground  for  irregularity  (cap.  2,  dist.  xxxiii ;  cap.  7,  diat. 
xxxiv ;  c  1,  dist.  xxxvi ;  c.  1, 8,  diat.  lv,  etc),  but  finał- 
ly  retumed  again  to  the  former  rules  (tit.  x,  *<  De  cor- 
por.  vitiati8  ordinandis  vel  non,"  i,  20).  Thus  ordina- 
tion  is  refuaed  to  the  deaf,  dumb,  and  blind  {Con,  Apot' 
toŁ  77,  c  6,  X.  '^  De  clerico  fegroŁante  vel  debilitato,"  iii, 
6) ;  also  to  thoee  who  have  but  one  eye,  eapecially  if  the 
one  wanting  is  the  left  {pcultu  canonis),  aa  in  reading 
masa  the  Missal  is  placed  on  the  left  side  (cap.  13,  dist. 
lv),  the  lamę  (c  10,  dist.  lv ;  c.  56,  diat.  i, "  De  consecr."), 
epileptica  (c.  1,  2,  can.  vii,  qn.  ii ;  c.  21,  X. "  De  eloctio- 
ne,"  i,  6),  lepers  (c.  8,  4,  X.  "De  clerico  legrot,"  iii,  6), 
those  who  bad  mutilated  themaelve8  (c.  21  8q. ;  Aposf. 
c  7  są.,  dist.  lv),  hermaphrodites  (Ferraria,  Bibliotheca 
ccmordcay  s.  v.).  In  some  of  these  casea  there  can  be 
diapensations  granted,  aa,  for  inatance,  for  the  loaa  of  the 
left  eye,  when  the  right  haa  gained  morę  strength  so  as 
to  compensate  for  the  defect  (Feiraris,  s.  v.  Irregularitaa, 
art.  i,  no.  12).  The  Greek  Church  haa  retained  the 
original  prindple,  and  its  application  by  the  £vangelical 
Church  appeais  fully  Justified. 

4.  Df/ectua  amnuB  (wantofspiritualcapadty). — Thus 
madness,  imbecility,  etc,  aie  grounda  of  irregularity  (c 
2-6,  disL  xxxiii). 

6.  Defectus  tcientuB  (the  want  of  adequate  educational 
preparation). — In  accordance  with  various  pasaages  of 
the  O.  T.  (Jer.  i,  9 ;  Hos.  iv,  6 ;  MaL  ii,  7,  etc.) ,  even  the  ear- 
ly Church  demanded  of  its  officers  to  have  enjoyed  spe- 
ciał  educational  advantage8,  which  alone  could  ąualify 
them  to  act  as  teachers  of  the  people  (comp.  dist.  xxxvi- 
xxxviii,  etc),  and  the  civil  laws  also  insisted  on  this 
point  (Novdla,  v.  vi,  cap.  4,  etc,  Capitulares  of  Charle- 
magne;  Rettberg,  Kirdienge»ch,  Deutscklandif  voL  ii,  § 
124).  With  regard  to  the  different  orders  spedal  regu- 
lations  were  gradually  adopted.  The  Council  of  Trent 
prescribes:  "Prima  tonsura  non  inittentur,  qui  sacra- 
mentnm  confirmationis  non  susceperint  et  fidei  mdi- 
menta  edocti  non  fuerint,  quique  legere  et  scribcre  nes- 
ciant  Minores  ordinea  iia  qui  saltem  Latinam  linguam 
intelllgant  .  .  .  conferantur.  Subdiaconi  et  diaconi  or- 
dinentur  .  .  .  in  minoribus  oidinibns  jam  probati,  ac 
libris  et  iis  qu»  ad  ordinem  exercendum  perdnent  in- 
atructL  Qui  ...  ad  ordinem  presbyteratus  aasumun- 
tnr  «  .  .  ad  populum  docenda  ea,  quie  sdre  omnibus 
neceQ{^est  ad  salutem,  ac  ministranda  aacramenta  dili- 
genti  examine  priecedente  idonei  comprobentur.  Qui- 
cunque  poathac  ad  eccleaias  cathedrales  erit  assumendus 
.  •  .  antea  in  universitate  studiorum  magister  sive  doc- 
tor aut  licentiatus  in  sacra  theologia  vel  jurę  canoni- 


co  merito  sit  promotua,  ant  pnblioo  alicafna  i 
teatimonio  idoneua  ad  alioa  docendoa  tendatm^  (ConoŁ 
Trid,  Sesa.  xxiii,  cap.  4, 11, 18, 14,  " De  reform.;*'  Seai. 
xxii,  cap.  2,  "  De  reform.").  No  dispenaationa  can  be 
granted  for  this  caae ;  stiU  the  pope  may  direct  thai  a 
party  be  ordained  without  poesessing  the  necesaaiy  in- 
struction,  but  should  not  act  in  the  office  until  be  bas 
remedied  this  defect.  Otherwise  the  party  thus  or- 
dained is  to  be  deposed  (c  15,  X.*«De  a^Ute"  [i,  14]). 
The  £vangelical  Church  haa  from  the  beginnin^  attach- 
ed  much  importance  to  the  proper  preparation  and  nst- 
ural  attainmenta  of  candidatea.  l*hey  are  therelóie 
generally  subjected  to  examinationa  before  ordinatioo. 
See  LiCEifTiATK;  Ministry;  Tii£OIxx3ICai.  Educa- 
TiOK ;  and  also  tbe  different  articlea  on  Christian  denom- 
inationa. 

'  6.  De/ecłusjidei  (want  of  a  weH-gronnded  faith).^In 
consequence  of  the  prescription  of  the  apoetle  (1  Tim. 
iii,  6 ;  v,  22)  that  no  vt6^vTOC  should  be  ordained,  the 
Church  commanded  that  nonę  should  be  ordained  im- 
mediately  after  converBion  {Canon,  Apotf,  79;  CVmnŁ 
Nicaen.  825,  c  2  [c  1,  dist  xlvii] ;  Gregorius,  anno  599 
[c  2,  eod.]),  and  especially  nonę  who  had  becn  haptir^ 
in  sickness  (cUiaci)  (Conc,  Neocasar.  an.  814,  c,  12  [c  1, 
dist.  lvii]).  Its  original  strictnees  against  the  cfaildren 
and  relatives  of  heretica  waa  8ub6equent]y  relaxed,  and 
even  the  decrees  conceming  new  oonvert8  feil  into  dia- 
use  where  such  showed  that  they  poesessed  a  firm  €uth 
(c  7,  X. "  In  fine  de  rescriptis"  [i,  8]) ;  Gonzalcz  Tełlo, 
Comment,  No.  7;  Lancelot,  Tnstitjur,  eon,  lib.  i,  tit.Ti], 
§  12).  It  was,  however,  always  the  nile  that  no  new 
convert  could  be  raised  at  once  to  high  cfiicea  (c  1  sq., 
dist.  lxi),  and  thia  nile  bas  been  maintauicd  in  tbe 
Greek  Church  (Synod,  i  et  ił,  anno  861,  c  17).  In  the 
Evangelical  Church  it  was  also  forbidden  to  raiae  any 
proselyte  to  oflice,  but  this  is  not  generally  adhered  to 
in  practice. 

7.  Defecłfis  perfeeta  knitaHa  (want  of  mcekncsa).— .  ' 
It  applies  to  thoae  who  have  departed  from  the  princi* 
ple  Ecćksia  non  Hfił  sanffuinem,  Hence,  to  thoee  wht 
have  shed  blood  in  war  {Conc.  Tókt,  i,  anno  400,  c  8  [a 
4,  dist  li] ;  Innocent  I,  anno  404  [c.  1,  cod.] ;  c  24,  X 
*^ De  homicidio"  [v,  12],  Honoriua  III);  also  thoee  who 
have  sat  aa  accuser,  witness,  lawyer,  judge,  or  juryman 
in  a  criminal  court,  and  taken  part  in  a  scntence  of 
death  {ConcU,  Tolft,  iv,  anno  688,  c  81 ;  Omc  Tdeł,  xi, 
anno  675,  c  6  [c.  29,  80,  can.  xxiii,  qu.  viii] ;  c.  5,  9,  X. 
"  In  clerid  vel  monachi  negotiia  secularibua  se  immis- 
ceant,"  iii,  50 ;  comp.  c  xxi,  X.  **  De  homiddio,"  t.  12, 
etc,  especially  the  glossea  to  c  1,  dist.  li, "  Ad.  v.  saoer- 
dotium") ;  also  all  who  had  practtsed  surgeir,  in  ao  far 
aa  cutting  and  cautcrizing  were  concemed  {jqva  ad  «»- 
tionem  rei  incisionem  inducU)  (c  9,  X.  dt  iii,  50). 

8.  Dffechis  sacramenti  (matrimomi)  (want  of  adhe- 
rence  to  the  nile  of  monogamy). — The  apostdic  coid- 
mand  about  the  bisbops  and  deacona  being  the  bariamds 
of  one  wife  (1  Tim.  iii,  2, 12;  Tit  i,  6)  was  by  the  Church. 
considered  aa  forbiddiog  not  only  actual  bigamy  (Aa^o- 
mia  rera  seu  MmuUanea)^  but  alao  second  marnage  (M« 
ffamia  successira)  (dist.  xxvi ;  c.  1, 2,  dist  xxxiii,  tit.  x, 
**  De  bigamb  non  ordinandis,"  i,  21,  etc).  The  idea  of 
bigamy  was  8ub8eqnent]y  extended  to  include  marriage 
with  a  widów  or  a  deflowered  virgin  (higafnia  iatfpr^ 
tatira)  (c  2,  dist.  xxxiii;  c  10,  13,  dist  xxxiv;  c  8, 
dist.  i;  c.*10,  §  6,  X.  "De  rcnundatione,"  1,-9;  c 83,  X. 
"  De  testibus,"  ii,  20;  c  4, 6, 7,  X.  **  De  bigamis  non  ont" 
i,  21 ;  NotelUi  Justimani,  vi,- capu  1,  §  8 ;  cap.  v,  cxxiii; 
cap.  xii) ;  also  the  continuation  of  the  marnage  rdatioB 
ailer  a  woman  had  committed  adultery  (c  11, 1%  diat. 
xxxiv).  Finally,  it  waa  coiuddered  bigamy  for  tliose 
who,  by  a  vow  of  chaatity,  had  been  joined  łn  tpiritial 
maniage  to  the  Church,  like  monks,  or  who  had  attażik- 
ed  high  eodesiaatical  poaitions,  to  many  evcn  aviT]gi]i 
(biffamia  Hmilitudinaria)  (c  24,  can.  xxvii,  qn.  i  [Ccmc 
Ancyr,  an.  814]).  In  this  case  the  irregularity  resulta 
non  propter  mcramenti  drfecłtim,  sed  propfer  afiefum 
inteniumi*  cum  operę  tubtecuto,  aa  Innocent  III  eApiaaely 


\ 


IRRESISTIBLE  GRACE 


661 


IRRIGATION 


dedares  (c  4  and  7.  X. "  De  bigamia  non  ord.*^  Thi» 
cojutituŁea  a  real  offenae,  for  whicb,  however,  the  bish- 
op  can  give  a  dispensation  (c  4,  X.  *'  De  dericis  conju- 
gads,'^  i^)  S;  c.  1,  X.  "Qai  derici  vel  vovenŁe8  matiim. 
oontrahere  posHint,''  iv,  6).  In  cases  of  rcal  bigamy,  the 
dispo.iiation  is  gcanted  by  the  pope  himself  for  higher, 
and  by  the  bishop  for  minor  orders  (see  gloeees  on  c  17, 
dist  xxxiv,  and  on  c  2.  X.  *^  De  bigamia  non  ord."). 
The  Greek  Church  foliowa  the  aame  prindplea,  whilat 
the  £vangelłcal  Church  thinka  there  ia  nothing  repre- 
benałble  in  repeated  roarriagea,  even  with  widoMra  (aee 
Bom.  vii,  2,  3 ;  1  Cor.  vii,  89). 

9.  De/echu /anuB  (a  bad  reputation).— On  the  many 
eaaea  of  thia  kind  which  may  prodoce  irregolarity,  but 
are  diatingoiahed  fiom  thoee  in  which  irregolarity  re« 
aolta  fiom  a  mladeed,  aee  Ferraria,  BibUotheca  canonica, 
a.  V.  Irregularitaa,  art.  i,  no.  12,  a;  £.  Phillipa,  iCtrcAm- 
reckł,  voL  i,  c  68. 

10.  De/eełus  UberiatU  (want  of  liberty).— No  one  who 
ia  not  perfectly  free  to  diapoae  of  himaelf  can  be  ordain- 
ed  until  conaent  haa  been  given  to  it  by  the  party  on 
whom  be  dependa.  Thua  alavea  require  the  aaaent  of 
their  maater  {Canoneg  Apottolorumf  c.  82;  c.  1,  2,  4  8q., 
12,  21,  diat.  liv;  c.  87,  can.  xvii,  qu.  iv,  tit.  x,  **De  aer- 
Tia  non  ordinandia,"  i,  18).  But  on  being  ordained  with 
the  oonaent  of  their  maater  they  become  free;  when 
they  are  ordained  without  hia  oonaent  he  can  reclaim 
them  within  one  year  {NoveUa  Juttimani,  cxxiii,  cap. 
xvii, "  Auth.  ai  Bervu8"  [c  87,  Cod,  de  episcopis  et  cler- 
icM,  i,  3  ]).  Yet  we  find  among  the  clergy  of  the  Mid- 
dle  Agea  aome  who  remained  in  the  dependence  of  their 
lormer  maatera  afler  their  ordination,  though  with  aome 
reatrictiona  (aee  FUrth,  Die  Afinitferialen^  Cologne,  1886, 
§  272,  p.  462^165).  Thoee  who  are  liable  to  civil  or 
military  dutiea  are  to  free  themaeWea  from  auch  obligar 
tiooa  before  ordination  {Cod,  Tkeodos.  tit  '*  De  decuri- 
onibus,*^  xii,  1 ;  c  12,  58,  Cod,  Justm,  ^  De  epiacopia  et 
derióa,'*  i,  3;  Norelła,  cxxiii,  cap.  i,  pr.  §  1;  cap.  xv, 
''Anth.  aed  neque  curialem"  {^Cod,  de  episcopis  et  deri' 
cifj  i,  3]  ;  c.  1-3,  diat.  li;  c.  8,  can.  xxiii,  ątl.  vi,  etc.). 
Those  who  have  acoounta  to  aettle  are  to  do  ao  before 
being  ordained  {Conc,  Carłkag,  anno  848,  c.  8 ;  and  c.  3, 
diat.  liv,  cap.  un.  X.  **De  obligatia  ad  ratiodnia  ordi- 
nandis  vd  non,**  i,  19;  c.  1,  diat.  lv  [Gelaaiua,  494] ;  c. 
1,  diat.  liii  [Gregor,  i,  598]).  Thoae  who  are  married 
reąoire  the  conaent  of  their  wife,  who  La  then  to  take 
the  Tow  of  chaatity  or  to  enter  a  convent  (c  6,  diat. 
xxviii  [ComciL  Arelat,  ii,  461?] ;  c  8,  X.  «De  derida 
conjugatio"  [iii,  3],  Innocent  III,  an.  1207 ;  comp.  c.  5, 
8,  X.  **De  oonverBione  ooDJugatorum"*  [iii,  32],  Alex. 
III;  c  4,**De  tempore  ordinat."  in  vi  [i,  9],  Boniface 
VIII).  Aooording  to  Greek  canon  law  the  preabyter 
may  be  mairied;  and  it  ia  only  in  eaae  he  ahould  be 
madę  biahop  that  hia  wife  ia  obliged  to  enter  a  oonvent 
(Conc,  Tndtian,  an.  692,  c  48).  Children  necd  the  con- 
aent of  their  parenta  until  they 
have  reached  the  age  of  puber- 
ty  (fixed  at  14)  (c.  1,  can.  xx, 
qu.  ii ;  c  5,  diat.  xxviii).  See 
Thomiaaain,  Vdu8  et  nora  ecde- 
tim  diadpUnOf  part  ii,  lib.  i,  cap. 
xii-xdi;  Phillip9,KtrcA«nm5A/, 
*voL  i,  §  46-63.— Herzog,  Real- 
'  Encykhpddie,  vii,  67  aą.     See 

ISABILITY.      (J.  N.  P.) 

Inresistible  Ghraoe.  Aa 
already  atated  in  the  aitide  on 
Gbace,  the  word  grace  ia  the 
hinge  of  three  great  theological 
contToverBie8.  Oneoftheae,on 
the  naturę  of  depravity  and  re- 
generation,  between  the  ortho- 
dox  doctrine  of  the  Church  and 
Pelagianiam,  comprehenda  the 
ąuestion  of  irreaietible  gorące. 
Some  of  the  followen  of  Augna- 
tine,  in  their  attempt  to  oppoae 


Pelagianiam,  aaya  the  Rev.  O.  Adolphua  {Compeadium 
Theolofficum,  p.  144, 3d  ediU  Cambridge,  England,  1865), 
of  the  Church  of  England,  and  himaelf  a  believer  in 
predeatination,  carry  their  viewa  of  the  abeokiie  predes' 
HnałioH  of  a  limited  number  to  the  ultimate  attainment 
of  aalvation,  through  the  induence  of  the  irreaiatible 
grace  of  God  cauaing  their ^rud  pertetferancej  to  auch  an 
extreme  in  their  logical  deductiona  that  there  appeared 
persona  who  charged  the  Auguatinian  ayatem  with  lead- 
ing  to  the  dangeroua  concluaiona  that  human  actiona 
are  immaterial,  and  human  efforta  for  the  conver8ion  of 
the  wickcd  unavailing,  in  the  face  of  God^a  free  gift  of 
grace  in  accordanoe  yrith  hia  »ecret  decrees,  predeter- 
mined  from  everlaating.  For  the  Arminian  argument 
on  the  other  hand,  aee  Armikianism  ;  Electio:^  ;  Prk- 
destination;  Will. 

Irrigation.  Grardena  in  the  Eaat  anciently  were, 
and  atill  are,  when  poaaible,  planted  near  atreama,  which 
afford  the  meana  of  eaay  irrigation.  (See  the  curioua 
acoount  of  ancient  garden  irrigation  in  Pliny,  Hist,  Not, 
XLX,  4.)  Thia  explain8  auch  paaaagea  aa  Gen.  ii,  9  aq., 
and  laa.  i,  80.  But  atreama  were  few  in  Paleatine,  at 
leaat  auch  aa  affbrded  water  in  aummer,  when  alone  wa- 
ter  was  wanted  for  irrigation :  henoe  lain-water,  or  wa- 


Andent  Egyptians  watering  gardcna  by  backeta  carrłed 
on  tbe  aboulder,  and  by  meana  of  the  well-aweep. 

ter  from  the  atreama  which  dried  up  in  aummer,  waa  in 
winter  atored  up  in  reaenroira,  apadoua  enough  to  con- 
tain  all  the  water  likdy  to  be  needed  during  the  dry 
aeaaon.  See  Pool;  Wkll.  In  fact,  many  of  our  0¥m 
large  nuraeriea  are  watered  in  the  aame  manner  from 
reaenroira  of  rain-water.  The  water  waa  diatributed 
through  the  garden  in  numeroua  amall  riUa,  which  trav- 


Modem  Egyptian  ShadĄf, 


m-SHEMESH 


662 


IRVINQ 


ened  it  in  all  directions,  and  which  were  suppUed  either 
by  a  continued  atream  from  the  reaenroir,  or  had  water 
poured  into  them  by  the  gardenens  in  the  manner  shown 
in  the  Egyptian  monuments  (see  Wilkineon,  Anc  Eg. 
abńdgm.  i^  83  8q.).  See  GAitDEX.  These  rillą  being 
tumed  and  directcd  by  the  foot,  gave  rise  to  the  phrase 
"  watering  by  the  foot,"  as  indicattve  of  garden  irriga- 
tion  (Deut.  xi,  10).  Thus  Dr.  Thomson  says  {Ijcmd  and 
Boohy  ii,  279),  ^  I  have  often  watched  the  gardener  at 
this  fatiguing  and  unhealthy  work.  When  one  pLice  is 
sufficiently  eaturated,  he  poshes  ańde  the  sandy  aoil  be- 
tween  it  and  the  next  funow  -with  his  foot,  and  thus 
continues  to  do  until  all  are  watered."  The  reference, 
howeyer,  may  be  to  certain  kinds  of  hydranlic  machines 
tumed  by  the  feet,  such  as  the  smaU  water-wheels  ujed 
on  the  plain  of  Acre  and  elsewhere.  At  Uamath,  Dap 
mascus,  and  other  places  in  Syria,  there  are  large  water- 
wheels,  tumed  by  the  stream,  used  to  raise  water  into 
aąueducts.  But  the  most  oommon  method  of  raising 
water  along  the  Nile  is  the  Shaduf^  or  well-sweep  and 
bucket,  reprcsented  on  the  monuments,  though  not  much 
used  in  Palestine.  (On  the  whole  subject,  see  Kitto, 
Naź,  hist,  ofPal  p,  ocxciii  są.).    See  Wateb. 

Ir-Bhe'meah  (Heb.  id,  t^'^  "T^?,  in  pausc  T^J 
d^l23,  ciły  o/*  the  sun;  Sept.  iroKic  S^ficc,  Yulg.  Jłirte- 
megf  id  est  cicita*  ioLis)^  a  town  on  the  border  of  Dan, 
mentioned  between  Eshtaol  and  Shaalabbin  (Josh.  xix, 
41) ;  probably  the  same  as  the  Beth-shemesh  (q.  v.)  of 
Josh.  XV,  10. 

I'ru  (Hebrew  Iru'^  I*!"'?,  citizm;  Sept.  'Hp^fjYulg. 
/7tr),  the  first-named  of  the  sons  of  Caleb,  the  son  of 
Jephunneh  (1  Chroń,  iv,  16).    B.C.  1618. 

Irvine,  Mathew,  a  minister  of  the  German  Re- 
formed  Cliurch,  was  born  in  Cumberland  Co.,  Pa.,  De- 
cember  22, 1817.  In  early  life  he  was  a  school-teacher. 
On  account  of  his  piety  and  gifls  he  was  madę  an  elder 
in  the  Church.  His  cali  to  the  ministry  then  became 
morc  apparent  to  hiroself  and  to  othcrs,  and  he  began 
the  study  of  theology  privately  with  his  pastor,  and  in 
1843  was  liccnsed  and  ordainciL  He  took  charge  of 
feeble  and  scatteied  German  Reformed  congregations  in 
Bedford  Co.,  Pa.,  where  he  did  the  work  of  a  pioneer  in 
a  truły  apostolic  spiriL  A  number  of  separate  charges 
were  formed  from  time  to  time  out  of  parts  of  his  field. 
His  ministry  was  greatly  blesseil,  and  the  wildemcss 
and  solitary  plaoes  all  around  became  glad.  He  accom- 
plishod  the  work  of  a  long  life  in  a  comparatively  few 
years,  and  dicd  in  peace  AprU  21, 1857. 

Irving,  Edward,  ^Hhe  great  London  preacher,  and 
promoter  uf  a  strange  faiiaticism,  whose  name  thirty 
years  ago  was  in  ever>'^body*s  mouth,  and  whose  career, 
so  strange,  grotesque,  solemn,  and  finally  so  sad,  was 
the  theme  of  the  sneers  of  the  thoughtless  and  of  the 
wonder  of  the  thonghtful,"  was  bom  Aug.  16,  1792,  at 
Annan,  county  of  Dumfries,  Scotland,  where  his  father 
was  a  tanner.  He  was  piously  bronght  iip,  having  bcen 
early  destined  by  his  ambitious  parents  for  the  ministry. 
He  was  educated  at  the  University  of  Edinburgh,  and 
shortly  after  graduation  (1805)  was  appointed  to  supcr- 
intend  the  mathematical  schoul  at  Haddington,  whence 
he  removed  in  1812  to  Kirkcaldy  to  assuroe  the  dnties  of 
a  similar  but  morę  eligible  position.  About  this  time 
he  also  began  his  theological  studies,  and,  in  accordance 
with  the  usage  of  his  alma  muter,  he  entered  as  one  of 
her  students  of  theologj'.  After  a  stay  of  about  seren 
years,  ha>'ing  complete<l  the  pribation  reqnired  by  the 
Church  of  Scotland,  he  attained,by  action  of  the  Pres- 
bytery  of  Annan,  to  "  the  ambiguous  position  of  a  li- 
censed  preacher  and  candidate — a  layman  in  fact,  though 
often  recogniscd  as  a  clcrgyman  by  courtesy ;  and  he 
only  waited  an  opportunity  to  escape  from  his  present 
occupation  to  that  for  which  he  had  bcen  formaUy  des- 
ignated.'^  But  not  finding  an  opcning  immediately,  and 
fired  of  the  occupation  of  teaching,  he  recommenced 
ttudy  at  Edinburgh,  devoting  most  of  his  time  to  the 


writings  of  Bacon,  Hooker,  and  Jeiemy  Taylor.    Al 
last  there  came  an  inritation  to  preach  in  the  heaiing 
of  the  oelebrated  Dr.  Chahnen,  who  was  desirona  ti 
procuring  for  himself  an  assistant  in  the  great  parish  of 
St.  John'8,  Glasgow;  and  shortly  after  Irving  was  chcw 
sen  for  this  position,  and  ao  enabled  to  begin  ''in  eam- 
est  the  great  Ufe-work  for  which  he  had  been  propar- 
ing,  and  which  he  had  anticipated  with  most  painful 
longings.    A  parish  of  10,000  souls,  moatly  the  famiHes 
of  poor  artisans  and  laborers,  composed  the  pastorate  of 
St.  John*s,  Glasgow,  and  Irving  at  oneo  entered  on  its 
varied  duties  with  all  his  energics."    But  as  his  assoct- 
ation  in  this  parish  with  Dr.  Chalmers  only  aflbrded 
him  an  inferior  place,  he  soon  grew  dissatisfied  with  the 
position;  and,  his  preaching  having  secnred  him  quite 
a  favorable  reputation,  he  was  inyited  to  the  great  Eng- 
lish  metropolia  as  minister  of  the  Gaiedonian  Church,  a 
kirk  of  Scotland  in  Cross  Street,  Hatton  Garden.    Early 
in  July,  1822,  he  began  his  labors  in  this  little  out-of- 
the-way  church,  composed  of  only  fifty  members,  ooca- 
sionally  enlarged  by  aome  stńy  Sootchmen  %ósiting  the 
great  city.     In  a  very  few  weeks  he  began  to  attract 
large  congregations;  in  three  months  the  appUcations 
for  seata  had  risen  to  1600;  at  length  it  became  neces- 
sary  to  exclude  the  generał  public,  and  to  admit  onlr 
those  who  were  prorided  with  tickets.     StAtesmen,  or- 
atora, the  noble,  the  wealthy,  the  fashionable,  occupied 
the  seata  of  the  church,  and  their  carriages  thronged 
the  adjoining  streets.     His  abillty  and  succcss  as  a 
preacher  are  thus  stated  by  a  writer  on  "^  Henry  Dnnn- 
mond"  in  the  London  Quarł,  Reriew,  October,  1860,  -p, 
276 :  **  The  preacher^s  great  stature,  his  bushy  black  hjur 
hanging  down  in  ringlets,  his  deep  \'oice,  his  aolemn 
manner,  the  impressireness  of  his  action,  his  broad  Sootch 
dialect,  his  antiquated  yet  forcible  style,  all  combincd  to 
riyet  attention,  and  madę  you  feel  that  you  were  in  the 
presence  of  a  power.    Nor  did  his  matter  belie  the  im- 
pression  which  was  thus  created.    He  was  bent  npon 
accomplishing  the  end  of  the  Gospel  ministry  in  saying 
souls  ftom  death ;  and  at  the  beginning  of  his  oomw, 
before  the  disturbing  infłuencesof  his  position  had  done 
their  fuli  work  upon  him,  he  preached  with  great  fofce 
and  effect."    The  influence  which  Irving  exerted  among 
all  claases  of  society  of  London  was  really  surpriśng. 
Such  an  amount  of  applause  as  was  awarded  to  his  pul- 
pit discourses  has  never  fallen  to  the  lot  of  man  ance  his 
day,  excepting  perhaps  in  the  case  of  Spuigeon.     In 
1824,  a  Yolume  containing  soroe  of  his  discourses  was 
sent  forth,  not  as  sermons,  but  under  the  Utle  of  Ora-' 
tions:   For  tke  Oradet  of  God,  four  Oraiiotu  ;   Fcr 
JudgmimtB  to  come,  an  A  rgumeni  m  nbte  Parts,     The 
author  shared  the  same  popular  favor  as  the  preacher, 
and  three  editions  of  the  book  were  sold  in  less  than 
half  a  year.    ''Aimless,  and  without  a  wide  or  lasting 
intercst,  cnriously  quaint  in  style  and  manner,  whik 
the  matter  generally  bears  upon  the  topics  of  the  pasa- 
ing  hour,  it  contains  many  passages  of  exttBordinarT 
beauty  and  depth,  many  an  outpouiing  of  lofty  dero- 
tion,  and  frequent  bursts  of  the  most  passionate  eło- 
quence"  {Encydop,  Briian.  xii,  626).     But,  as  the  pro- 
duction  of  the  preacher  of  the  little  Hatton  Garden 
chapel,  everybody  who  wishcd  to  be  up  with  the  times 
had  to  read  it,  and  so  it  soon  "  became  the  talk  of  the 
town,  and  was  criticised  by  cach  according  to  his  posi- 
tion and  temper."     The  book  had  many  vulnerable 
pointa,  one  of  which,  not  the  least  perhaps,  was  the 
thrust  in  his  introduction  against  the  erident  iack  of 
success  of  the  ordinary  instnictions  of  the  pulpit,  charg- 
ing  it  all  as  the  result  of  the  defectire  manner  of  preach- 
ing generally  prevalent  in  EngUnd  at  that  time.     Bot 
if  this  arrayed  a  number  of  critics  against  him,  an  ea- 
trangement  of  the  great  body  of  oontemporaiy  erangel- 
ical  Christiana  only  followed  his  courae  of  action  in  1 824. 
In  this  year  he  was  called  upon,  aa  one  of  the  pul|Ht 
celebrities  of^he  great  metropolis,  to  preach  beibre  the 
London  Missionary  Society.    He  had  long  dreamed  of 
a  revival  of  apostolical  misaionS)  and  to  adrance  "  tfaese 


IRYING 


663 


IRYING 


subliffie  fancies"  this  opportimity  afforded  bim  scope. 
'For  three  mortal  hoiin  the  yast  assembly  was  held 
entnułoed  hy  his  gorgeous  oratory  while  he  depicted, 
not  tbe  MTork  of  Łhat  or  any  other  body,  but  a  graiid 
ideał  of  a  misaion  scheme  after  the  model  of  apostolic 
tioma.  DuiiDg  all  this  time  the  managera  sat  in  pain- 
ful  solicitude,  first  for  their  osiud  coUections,  and  ulti- 
mately  for  the  damage  that  such  a  discoorse  must  entail 
apoa  the  cauae  in  which  they  were  engaged.  But  no- 
body  could  suapect  the  preacher  of  a  deaign  to  harm  the 
cause  he  was  odled  to  advocate.  To  his  mind  the  mis- 
sionary  work  was  not  the  same  thing  with  that  contem- 
platcd  by  the  society,  and,  as  he  spoke  from  his  own 
inflamed  fancy  and  fuli  heart,  his  utterances  were  for- 
eign  to  the  subject  as  they  Yiewed  it  But  the  discourse 
was  morę  than  a  blunder;  it  was  a  buming  protest, 
though  undeaigned,  against  the  spirit  of  cowardly  pni- 
dence  in  which  the  work  of  miasions  was,  and,  alas! 
that  it  most  be  said,  stUl  is  prosecuted.  It  unluckily 
struck  precisely  upon  thoae  pointa  which  annnal  reports 
and  platform  oratora  are  usually  careful  to  leave  un- 
touched,  and  by  holding  up  the  bright  ideał  it  con- 
demaedthe  actual**  (Dr.  Curry). 

Uoweyer  candid  may  have  been  his  manner  and  tnie 
the  zeal  for  the  Christian  cause  which  unquestionably 
impelled  Irving  at  this  time,  the  effect  was  to  estrange 
from  him  many  of  his  Christian  friends.  But  the  birth 
of  a  son  for  a  Umc  tumed  hb  attention  from  the  con- 
troyersy  which  his  acta  had  provoked  and  to  him,  so 
fjnd  of  home  life,  atoned  in  a  measure  for  the  loss  of 
frienda.  The  child,  howerer,  aoon  died,  and  this  addi- 
tional  loss  incited  him  to  the  study  of  prophecy.  His 
attention  had  already  been  called  in  this  direction  by 
łlatley  Frere,  "an  earnest  but  one-sided  student  of  the 
prophccied,"  who  was  propounding  about  this  time  a 
new  theory  of  interpretation,  the  especial  object  of  which 
wad  to  establish  the  idea  of  a  personal  reign  of  Christ 
on  earth.  The  study  and  tranalation  of  a  Spanish  work 
on  thi3  subject,  generally  attributed  to  Ben-Ezra,  but 
really  the  production  of  the  Jesuit  Lacunza  (q.  v.)  (pub- 
lished  by  Irving  under  the  title  of  The  Corning  o/ Met- 
siah  ta  Glor^  and  Majesly),  aided  in  "  tuniing  the  bal- 
ance  of  Irving's  mind  the  wrong  way  just  at  the  criais 
of  hi3  intellectuał  fate.  These  prophetical  studies  met 
an  original  bias  in  his  mind,  and  madę  him  a  fatal  prey 
to  religious  delusion."  An  opportunity  soon  oocurred 
to  lay  before  the  public  his  favorite  theory  of  the  mil- 
lennium by  an  inyiution  from  the  Continental  Society 
to  preach  the  annual  sermon  (1825).  like  the  mission- 
ary  sermon  of  the  preyious  year,  it  gave  rise  to  consid- 
erabic  commotion,  morę  especially  among  the  friends 
of  ^  Catholic  Emancipation."  England  at  this  time 
was  decidedly  in  favor  of  bestowing  upon  Roman  Cath- 
olics  unlimiteil  political  power,  which  Irying  yehement- 
ly  opposcd.  A  good  part  of  his  audience  left  their 
Beata  before  the  speaker  had  fiuished  his  disoourae, 
which,  like  the  mldsionaiy  sermon,  occupied  some  *Hhiee 
or  morę  houra  in  the  deliyery."  To  make  a  bad  matter 
still  wone,  Irving  determincd  to  publish  his  discourse, 
enlarged  and  rearranged,  in  book  form,  and  dnring  the 
next  year  sent  it  fonh  under  the  Utle  BahyUm  and  In- 
fdgUiy  ForedoomeĄ  dedicating  it "  to  my  beloyed  friend 
and  brother  in  Christ,  Hatley  Frere,  Esą."  "Irying 
now  threw  himself  unresenredly,"  says  Dr.  Curry, "  into 
the  cujrent  that  swept  him  away  from  his  moorings. 
By  the  strange  fascination  which  oflten  attends  the 
study  of  prophecy  and  the  expectation  of  a  terrestrial 
miUennium,  he  now  came  to  expect  the  speedy  coming 
of  Christ  to  set  up  his  kingdom  on  earth,  and  this 
wrought  in  him  the  usual  restdts  of  excltement  and  spe- 
cialty  of  rcligious  thought  and  conyersation.  He  had 
reached  that  atage  of  mcntal  excitement  in  which  al- 
most  ęyery  eyent  becomea  a  proof  of  the  cherished  ex- 
pectation,  and  the  mind's  own  action  steadily  intensifies 
the  dominant  faacination.  In  this,  too,  he  crayed  the 
sympathy  of  other  minds  inspired  with  the  same  senti- 
zoenid,  and  these  he  readily  obtained ;  a  kind  of  mystic 


cirde,  among  whom  were  Hatley  Frere,  now  relieyed 
of  his  iaolation,  the  celebrated  Rabbin,  Dr.  Wolff,  Ir- 
ying himself,  and  Henry  Drummond,  with  others  less 
distinguished,  afler  numerous  informal  conyersations, 
at  length  came  together  in  a  conference  at  Albury, 
the  hospitable  residence  ofMr.  Drummond,  brought  to- 
gether, as  Irying  dedared,  by  *a  desire  to  compare 
their  yiews  with  respect  to  the  prospects  of  the  Church 
at  this  present  crisis'*'  (comp.art.ix,*'On  Drummond," 
in  the  London  Quart  Revkw,  Oct.  1860).  "Inring  sat 
down  with  his  motley  associates,  a  giant  among  pig- 
mies,  the  most  dodle  of  the  company,  and  quite  ready 
to  yield  his  own  yiews  to  the  superticial  fancies  of  the 
least  distinguished  of  the  body,  and  to  suirender  his 
dearest  intellectuał  oonyictions  to  what  was  styled  the 
answer  to  prayer.  From  such  seseions  the  only  proba- 
ble  results  followed :  the  fanaticism  in  which  they  be- 
gan  waa  heightened  and  confirmed,  especially  in  the 
aingle  mind  capable  of  being  damaged  by  iL" 

The  popularity  of  the  great  preacher,  howeyer,  con- 
tinued  unabated  in  the  midst  of  all  these  difficulties; 
nay,  his  late  meditations  and  yeamings  rather  increased 
his  reputation,  and  soon  a  new  and  morę  oommodious 
church  had  to  be  proyided  for  the  throngs  of  hearers 
that  weekly  came  to  listen  to  him.  The  money  for  the 
building  of  a  new  ediiice  was  easiiy  procured,  and  early 
in  1827  he  was  inatalled  pastor  of  the  newly-built  chuh:h 
in  Regent  Sąuare,  Chalmers  preaching  on  the  occasion. 
'^  The  transition  from  the  little  Caledonian  chapel,  so 
long  thronged  by  a  promiscuous  crowd  of  London  fash- 
ionable  life,  to  the  commodious  National  Sootch  Church 
in  Regent  Sąuare,  with  its  well-ordered  and  well-deiined 
congjilcation,  marks  the  culmination  and  the  beginning 
of  the  descent  of  Irying'8  popularity."  Shortly  after  his 
remoyal  to  the  new  church,  he  again  yentured  before 
the  public  as  an  author  by  the  publication  of  three  yol- 
umes  (1828)  selected  from  his  discourses  preached  sińce 
the  oommencement  of  his  ministry  at  London.  Up  to 
this  time  many  of  the  extrayagance8  of  Irying  had 
morę  or  less  displeased  his  brother  laborers  in  the  min- 
istry, but  no  one  had  yentured  to  attack  him  publicly 
until "  an  idle  cleigyman  called  Cole,"  of  whom  Mr.  Ir- 
ying's  biographer,  Mrs.  OUphant,  can  barely  speak  with 
ciyility,  accnsed  Irying  of  inculcating  heterodox  doe- 
trinea  on  the  IncamcUion  in  the  first  yolume  of  his  ser- 
mons,  which  treats  chiefly  of  the  Trinity ;  first  of  the 
diyine  character,  and  especially  of  the  person  and  work 
of  ChrisL  "  The  perfect  humanity  of  Christ  was  Ir- 
ying's  fayorite  theme.  With  the  utmoet  intensity  he 
clung  to  the  idea  of  the  brotherhood  of  his  Master — an 
idea  he  held  with  perfect  reyerence.  The  first  shock 
of  the  charge  of  heresy,  and  of  heresy,  too,  in  relation 
to  his  adorable  Lord,  utterly  tmmanned  him.  The  last 
thooght  of  his  heart  would  haye  been  to  derogate  from 
the  dignity  of  his  Master,  his  impaasioned  reyerence  for 
whom  had  probably  stimulated  the  teaching  which  now 
borę  the  brand  of  heresy"  (Lond,  Ouari,  Bev.  Oct,  1862, 
p.  193).  It  would  hardly  be  worth  while  to  follow  up 
the  controyersy  incited  by  the  impertinent,  if  not  treach- 
erous  conduct  of  Mr.  Cole  in  exaggerating  "  an  error 
whicb  should  haye  been  the  groundwork  of  a  brotherly 
expo6tulation,"  were  it  not  for  the  fact  that  for  these 
yery  yie¥rs  on  the  incamation  Irying  was,  some  years 
later,  depoaed  from  the  ministry.  As  we  haye  already 
said,  he  was  the  last  of  all  persons  who  could  be  led  to 
belieye  that  the  yiews  which  he  set  forth  on  this  sub- 
ject had  anything  noyel  or  imusual  in  them.  All  that 
he  was  poesibly  guilty  of,  says  Dr.  Curry,  is  that  "  he 
took  in  a  larger  mew  which  corUemplcUed  the  whole 
work  ofthe  incamation  of  the  Word  as  redempiive,  in 
thai  by  ii  the  Godhead  came  into  rital  union  wiih  human- 
ityyfaUen  and  under  the  law,  This  last  thought  carried 
to  his  realistic  modę  of  thinking  the  notion  of  Christ^s 
participation  in  the  fallen  character  of  humanity,  which 
he  designated  by  terms  that  implied  a  real  sinfulness  in 
Christ,  His  attempt  to  get  rid  ofthe  odiousness  of  that 
idea  by  saying  that  this  was  oyerbome  and  at  length 


IRVING 


664 


mviNG 


whoUy  ezpelled  by  the  indwelling  Godhcad  helped  the 
matter  but  little,  and  still  left  him  open  to  giave  cen- 
Bores  for  at  least  an  nnhappy  method  of  statement.  But 
under  all  thiB  there  is  unąuestionably  a  mott  precioos 
Gospel  truth,  and  if  Irying  was  jiutJy  condemned  for 
an  unwarrantable  misstatemeDt  of  certain  doctrines  of 
Christianity,  the  orthodoxy  of  the  age  may  be  juBtly 
called  to  account  for  its  partial  exhtbition  of  those  doc- 
trines. For  oenturies  the  Church  has  been  actirely  oc- 
cupied  in  setling  forth  and  defendiog  the  doctrine  of 
Chiist'8  diyinity,  until  that  of  his  humanity  has  largely 
fallen  out  of  its  thinkings.  It  lb  qaite  time  to  cease 
from  this  oneniidedness  and  to  take  in  a  whole  GospeL 
(  Fallen  humanity  demands  a  sympathizing  no  less  than 
an  almighty  Sarioor;  and  if  indeed  Jesus  is  to  be  that 
Sariour,  he  must  be  apprehended  by  our  faith,  as  *  man 
with  man,'  and  aa  really  and  fully  *  touched  with  a  mum 
of  our  infirmidee.'  The  Church  of  Romę  answera  to  the 
heart'8  yeaming  for  human  sympathy  in  the  Mediator 
by  giying  that  ofRce  to  Maiy;  while  our  misformed 
practical  creeds  remove  Jesus  beyond  our  sympathies, 
and  give  us  no  other  Mediator.  The  Church  awaits 
the  coming  of  a  John,  uprising  from  the  Saviour's  bos- 
om,  to  set  forth  in  all  fulness  the  blcssedness  of  the 
grace  of  Jesus,  the  mcamaie  God,  who  hath  '  borne  our 
griefs  and  carried  our  sorrows.' "  With  thiB  charge  of 
heresy  ulranced  against  him,  Irving  set  out  on  a  visit 
to  his  natiye  land  "  to  wam,  first  his  father's  house  and 
kindred,  and  the  country  side  which  had  still  bo  g^reat  a 
hołd  upon  his  heart,  and  then  uniyersal  Scotland,  of  that 
adyent  which  he  iooked  for  with  undoubting  and  fer- 
yent  expectations;"  and  brilliant  was  the  Buccess  with 
which  he  saw  his  labors  crowned  whereyer  he  «rent 
For  once  he  was  a  prophet  who  reodyed  honors  in  his 
own  country.  Whereyer  he  preached,  not  only  whole 
congregationB  from  neighboring  towns  came  to  swell  his 
already  krge  numbers  of  hearers,  but  oftentimes  eyen 
the  ministers  would  adjoum  their  seryices  and  go  with 
their  flocks  tn  masse  to  hear  Scotiand*s  noble  descend- 
ant.  While  preaching  at  Edinburgh  on  the  Apocalypae, 
the  special  theme  of  study  in  these  later  years,  the  ser- 
yices began  at  8ix  o'clock  A.M.  Of  these  Chalmers 
writes:  "He  is  dniwing  prodigious  crowds.  We  at- 
tempted  this  moming  to  force  our  way  into  St.  Andrew's 
Church,  but  it  was  all  in  yain.  He  changes  to  the  West 
Church,  with  its  three  hideous  galleries,  for  the  accom- 
modation  of  the  public,"  and  eyen  then  there  was  not 
room.  As  in  Edinburgh,  so  was  his  success  at  Glasgow 
and  other  places  that  he  yirited,  and  we  need  not  won- 
der  that  Chalmers  himself  exclaims  **  that  there  must 
haye  been  a  maryellous  power  of  attraction  that  could 
tum  a  whole  population  out  of  their  beds  as  early  as  flye 
in  the  moming." 

As  if  to  augment  the  difficolties  already  in  his  way, 
in  his  candid  and  straightforward  manner,  he  further 
estranged  his  friends  of  the  Scottish  Church  by  extend- 
ing  his  sympathy  to  a  minister  of  his  natiye  Church,  a 
'Mx.  Campbell,  of  Row,  who  was  just  then  under  the  odi- 
um of  teaching  false  notions  on  the  Procrustlan  high- 
Cal\'ini8tic  doctrine  of  the  Atonement  as  set  forth  in  the 
Westmineter  Confeseion. 

But  the  grand  and  finał  diyergence  from  his  mother 
Church  further  resulted,  not  from  the  communication 
of  any  doctrinal  excitement  fiom  the  banks  of  Guirloch, 
but  from  a  yery  Btrange  phenomenon  which  about  this 
time  took  its  rise  along  the  quiet  banks  of  this  riyer. 
For  some  time  Irying  had  been  pondering  on  the  heri- 
tage  of  the  ffi/t  o/łonguet  (q.  y. ;  see  a]so  Giftb),  and 
was  inclined  to  belieye  this  spiritual  gift  to  haye  been 
not  only  possessed  by  the  apostolic  Church,  but  an  act- 
ual  heritage  of  the  Church  of  all  times;  indeed,  a  neces- 
sary  condition  for  the  healthy  state  of  any  Church  of 
Christ  These  thoughts  of  his  became  conyictions  when 
seconded  at  this  jnncture  by  some  remarkable  instances. 
In  the  locality  of  Row,  celebrated  for  the  piety  of  its 
mhabitants,  there  had  Uyed  and  died  a  young  woman, 
tsabella  Campbell  by  name,  of  raie  and  saintly  charac- 


ter.    A  memoir  which  her  mimstef  had  writtcn  of  her 
attzacted  the  attention  of  people  far  and  near,  and  many 
of  thon  came  as  pilgrims  to  ytsat  the  spot  whcre  dw 
had  liyed  and  prayed.     These  yisits  to  the  eartMy 
dwelling^place,  as  well  as  the  nobk  reputacion,  if  loA 
example  of  a  departed  sister,  had  a  wonderful  inflocnce 
on  the  suryiying  sister  Maiy — ^'^gifted  with  the  same 
spiritual  temperament,  with  powers  of  mind  of  no  ordi- 
naty  character,  and,  moreoyer,  with  the  personal  faaci- 
nation  of  beauty."    For  a  long  time  she  had  been  af- 
flicted  with  the  same  disease  which  had  madę  a  prey  of 
her  sister,  and  while  lying,  aa  all  belieyed,  at  the  point 
of  death,  she  piofeased  to  haye  reoeiyed  **  the  gift  of 
Umgaesy"  and,  **as  she  lay  in  her  weaknees,''  the  Hdy 
Ghost,  they  said,  had  come  upon  her  with  mig^hty  pow- 
er, and  '<  constrained  her  to  speak  at  great  length,  and 
with  superhuman  strength,  in  an  unknown  tongue.** 
Similar  cases  occnrred  in  other  neighboring  plates, 
and  the  news  of  the  wondrous  phenomena  eoon  reached 
the  ears  of  Irying.    To  him,  of  course,  these  indicated 
"  an  approaching  realization  of  his  prophetic  dreamsu* 
Not  for  an  instant  was  he  to  hesitate  to  acknowlcdge 
them  as  the  natural  answer  of  his  aspirations  and  pray- 
er;  and  many  of  his  own  flock,  prepared  by  his  pie- 
yious  teachings,  seconded  his  leanings  in  fayor  of  these 
long^lost  ^iritual  gifts.    Manifestations  of  a  similar 
chancter  soon  appeared  in  his  own  Church.  at  first  pci- 
yately,  then  at  the  week-day  matins,  and  finaUy  eyen 
in  the  pubłic  seryice  on  the  Sabbath.    "  The  die**  had 
truły  been  "  cast,  and  from  that  time  the  Regent  Sąnaie 
church  became  a  BabeL"    His  oldest  and  moet  diacreet 
friends  one  by  one  deserted  him,  finding  that  their  conn- 
sel  was  of  no  ayaiL    £yen  a  yisit  of  Chalmers  and 
Coleridge,  both  his  fnends,  could  not  in  the  Icast  staj 
the  current  that  was  fast  hurrying  him  to  a.  most 
irightful  abyas.    A  collision  between  the  pastor  and  his 
flock  was  ineyitable,  thoogh  some  of  his  people  ahared 
his  yiewB.    Against  the  continuation  of  the  **  new  proph- 
ets"  even  his  own  brother^in-Uw  yoted,  and  the  iney* 
itable  result  was  of  course  the  ejectment  of  the  mini^ 
ter  and  his  belieyers  in  the  ''gift  of  tongues**  from  Re» 
gent  Square  Church.    But  it  must  not  be  suppoaed  that 
a  man  of  Irying^s  great  abilities,  though  his  course  was 
now  downward,was  surrounded  only  by  a  few  weak  fol- 
lowers.    Among  those  who  faithfully  followed  their  pas- 
tor were  some  of  London's  most  distinguisbed  chaiac- 
ters^  and  when  on  the  following  Snnday  he  met  his  ad- 
herents  in  the  hall  of  the  great  infidel  Owen,  no  less 
than  800  were  there  to  partake  of  the  Lord^s  Suppei; 
Indeed,  the  place  they  had  temporarily  secmred  iras  far 
too  smali  to  contain  all  that  still  flocked  to  hear  Irring, 
and  they  remoycd  to  a  large  gallery  in  Newman  Street, 
generally  designated  as  West'8  Gallery,  becanse  it  had 
formcrly  belonged  to  West  the  painter.    The  denooe- 
ment  of  the  play  had  now  faińy  begun,  and  it  rapidly 
hastened  to  its  close.     The  **  gifted  ones"  at  Newman 
Street  had  things  in  their  own  hands,  and  evervthing 
proceeded  by  ''yision,"  and  "prophecy,"  and  io   the 
"Spirit;"  to  all  which  Irying  gaye  the  moet  rereieot 
and  obedient  attention.    The  Fresbytery  of  Annan,  by 
which  body  Irying  had  been  first  licńised  to  preach,  bait 
not  ordained, "  by  a  remarkable  strctch  of  power'  con- 
demned him  as  guilty  of  heres}",  and  excommumcated 
him  from  the  Church  of  Scotland.     But  as  if  his  cap  of 
Borrows  was  not  yet  sufficiently  bitter,  to  add  to  the  con- 
demnation  which  he  had  just  receiyed  at  the  hand  of 
his  mother  Church,  which  he  so  deariy  loyed,  he  was, 
on  his  retom  from  Aunan  to  London,  depriyed  even  by 
his  own  adherents  of  the  authority  which  by  reason  of 
his  superiority  had  npiyersally  been  granted  to  him,  and, 
in  accordance  with  a  "reyelation,"  was  interdicted  *^  from 
'exercising  any  priestly  funcdon,  or  administerin^  the 
sacraments,  or  eyen  preaching,  excepting  to  thoae  lesa 
sacred  assemblies  to  which  unbelieyers  were  admitted. 
Astounded,  he  yet  uttered  no  mnnnnr,  but  sat  in  the 
lowest  places  of  the  Church  which  he  himsdf  had  ci«- 
ated,  in  stlent  and  reaigned  homifity."    Mr.  Aodrennni^  m 


ISAAC 


665 


ISAAC 


an  artide  on  Inring  in  the  New  Engkmder  (1868,  p.  816 
tą),  aeeks  to  refute  this  statement,  bo  genenlly  accept- 
ed  as  madę  by  Mn.  Oliphant  in  her  biognphy  of  Mr. 
Inring.  Bat  even  Mr.  Andrews  acknowiedges  that  when 
Mr.  Inring  waa  flnally  leordained  by  th«8e  ^  superior"  of- 
ficers,  who  daimed  to  bave  been  called  by  God  to  high- 
er  diatinctiona^  his  poeition  ^  was  in  some  respeets  less  in- 
dependent than  before,"  and  that  it  oould  not  have  been 
otherwiae  than  **  that  Mr.  Irving  shoold  have  met  with 
trials  and  difficolties  in  the  progress  of  the  work  nn- 
der  his  new  phaae,"  espedally  **a  man  of  his  great 
sŁrength  of  character,  and  gifts  for  leadership,  accus- 
tomed  hitherto  to  be  foremost  in  whateyer  he  engaged 
in"  (p.  821).  But  for  once  fortunę  fayored  Inring.  The 
great  degradation  which  he  was  caUed  upon  to  sufler 
was  to  be  his  last,  and  a  short  one  at  that.  In  the  au- 
timm  of  1834,  the  seyere  task  which  he  had  been  im- 
posing  on  his  mind  and  bociy  beg^n  to  tell  upon  him, 
and  while  on  a  joumey  to  Scotland  for  the  recoyezy  of 
his  failing  health,  he  waa  taken  dangeroosly  ill,  and  died 
at  Glasgow  De&  8, 1884. 

Of  Inring  it  may  truły  be  conceded  that  a  roore  de- 
youŁ  or  eamest  spirit  has  not  appeared  on  the  stage  of 
time  in  the  19th  centuiy.  Destined  to  be  a  Christian 
minister,  *'he  stroye"^  (said  of  him  a  friend  who  knew 
him  well),  '*  with  all  the  foice  that  was  in  him,  to  A«  it. 
He  might  haye  been  so  many  things ;  not  a  speaker 
only,  but  a  doer— the  leader  of  hosts  of  men.  For  his 
head,  when  the  fog  of  Babylon  had  not  yet  obscured  it, 
was  of  sŁrong,  far-reaching  insight.  His  yery  enthusi- 
asm  was  sanguine,  notairabUiar ;  he  was  so  loying,  fuli 
of  hope,  so  simple-hearted,  and  madę  all  that  approach- 
ed  him  hi&  A  giant  form  of  actinty  was  in  the  man ; 
speculation  was  accident,  not  naturę.  There  was  in  him 
a  ODurage  dauntless,  not  pugnacious ;  hardly  6erce,by  no 
poasibility  ferocious ;  as  of  the  generous  war-horse,  gen- 
tk  in  its  strength,  yet  that  laughs  at  the  shaking  of  the 
spear.  But,  aboye  all,  be  he  what  he  might,  t>i  i>e  a  real- 
ity  was  indispensabłe  for  him."  In  anothcr  place  the 
same  friend  exclaims:  ^But  for  Inring  I  had  lieyer 
known  what  the  communion  of  man  with  man  meana. 
His  was  the  freeat,  brotherliest,  brarcst  human  soul  mlne 
eyer  eame  in  contact  with.  I  cali  him,  on  the  whole, 
the  best  man  I  have  eyer,  after  tri  il  enough,  found  in 
this  worki,  or  now  hope  to  find."  Similar  was  the  judg^ 
ment  of  all  Irying*s  friends,  and  eyen  of  most  of  his  op- 
ponents.  '*  All  admired  the  man,  his  many  yirtnes,  his 
matchleas  eloquence;  all  deplored  his  fali,  and  the  golf 
of  separation  which  it  created  between  him  and  hia 
mother  Church."  His  works  haye  been  coUected  by  his 
nephew,  the  Rey.  P.  Carlyle,  who  has  published  them 
nnder  the  title  of  CoUected  WriHngs  of  Edward  Trving 
(Lond.  1864-Ó,  6  yoI&  8yo).  See  Mn.  Oliphant,  Life  ^ 
Edward  Irtnng  (Lond.  1862 ;  N.  Y.  [  Harpera']  1862, 8vo) ; 
Cariyle,  AfisceUaneout  Eesaye  ;  Meth,  <2u.  lUt,  Jan.  1849 ; 
1863;  Jjmd.  Ouart.  Rev,  OcL  1862,  art.  vi;  Edinb.  Rev, 
Oct.  1862,  art. yii;  Encydop*  Britatm,  xii,  s.  v. ;  Baring 
Gould,  Po«l  Mediamal  Preaekert  (oT  England  only);  Lit- 
tell's  Lwing  Age  (on  Inring^s  works),  Feb.  23, 1867,  art 
i ;  and  M.  W.  Andrews  (of  the  CathoUc  Apostolic  Church, 
the  name  now  assumed  by  the  Inringites),  in  the  Nwi 
En^aader,  July,  1863,  art.  i ;  Oct.,  art  vui.     (J.  H.  W.) 

I'Baac (Heb.  YttscKak',  prvi^^, laughter,  in  the  poet 
books sometimes  pri^^^^Yitckdk', Psa.  cy,  9;  Jer. xxxiii, 
26;  Amos  vii,  9, 16,  in  the  last  two  passages  spoken  of 
the  Isneliush  nation ;  Sept  and  N.  T.  'loaoK,  Joseph, 
'Irococ,  >!  irf.  i,  10,  6),  the  only  son  of  Abraham  by  Sa- 
rah, and  the  middle  one  of  the  three  patriaichs  who  axe 
■o  ollen  named  together  as  the  progeniton  of  the  Jew- 
ishnce. 

I.  Pertonal  -Watory.— The  following  are  the  facts 
which  the  Kble  sopplies  of  the  longest-liyed  of  the 
three  patriarchs,  the  least  migratory,  the  least  prolific, 
■ad  the  least  ikyored  with  extraordinary  diyinc  revela- 
twAs.    A  few  eyents  in  this  ąuiet  life  haye  occasioned 


1.  The  pfomise  of  a  son  had  been  madę  to  his  parents 
when  Abraham  was  yisited  by  the  Lord  in  the  plains 
of  Mamre,  and  appeared  so  unlikely  to  be  fulfilled,  see- 
ing  that  both  Abraham  and  Sarah  were  **well  stricken 
in  years,"  that  its  utterance  caused  the  latter  to  laugh 
incredulously  (Gen.  xyiii,  1  8q.).  B.C.  2064.  Being 
reproyed  for  hcr  unbeltef,  she  denied  that  she  had 
laughed.  The  reason  assigned  for  the  special  vbitation 
thus  promised  was,  in  effect,  that  Abraham  was  pious, 
and  would  train  his  oflbpring  in  piety,  so  that  he  woukl 
beoome  the  founder  of  a  great  nation,  and  all  the  nations 
of  the  earth  should  be  blessed  in  him.  See  Abraham. 
In  dne  time  Sarah  gave  birth  to  a  son,  who  receired 
the  name  of  Isaac  (Gen.  xxi,  1-8).  KC.  2068.  This 
eyent  oocurred  at  Gerar.  Isaac  was  thus  emphatically 
the  child  of  promise.  Bom,  as  he  was,  out  of  due  time, 
when  his  father  was  a  hundred  yean  old  and  his  moth- 
er ninety,  the  parents  themselyes  laughed  with  a  kind 
of  incredulous  joy  at  the  thougfat  of  such  a  prodigy 
(Gen.  xyii,  17 ;  xviii,  12),  and  referring  to  the  maryel- 
lousness  of  the  eyent  when  it  had  actually  taken  place, 
Sarah  said  that  not  only  she,  but  all  who  heard  of  it, 
would  be  disposed  to  laugh  (Gen.  xxi,  6).  The  name 
Isaac,  therefore,  was  fitly  chosen  by  God  for  the  child, 
in  commemoration  of  the  extraordinary,  supematural 
naturę  of  the  birth,  and  of  the  laughing  joy  which  it 
occasioned  to  thoee  morę  immediately  interested  in  it 
This  signifłcation  of  Isaac*s  name  is  thrice  alluded  to 
(Greń.  xyii,  17;  xviii,  12;  xxi,  6).  Josephus  {Ant,  i, 
12,  2)  refen  to  the  second  of  thoee  passages  for  the  or^ 
igin  of  the  name;  Jerome  {Queett.  hebr,  in  Getu)  yehe- 
mently  conflnes  it  to  the  fint;  Ewald  {Geach.  i,  425), 
without  assigning  reasons,  giyes  it  as  his  opinion  that 
all  three  passages  haye  been  added  by  diffierent  writera 
to  the  original  reoord.  There  need  be  no  dispute  as  to 
which  of  these  passages  the  import  of  the  name  refen; 
it  includes  a  referenoe  to  them  all,  besides  according 
with  and  expreasing  the  happy,  cheerful  diąKmtion  of 
the  bearer,  and  suggesting  the  relation  in  which  he 
stood,  as  the  seed  of  Abraham,  the  channel  of  the  prom* 
ised  blesaing,  and  the  type  of  him  who  is  pre-eminently 
the  Seed,  whoee  birth  has  put  laughter  into  the  hearts 
of  myriads  of  our  race.  The  pretematural  birth  of  Isaac 
was  a  sign  from  heayen  at  the  outset,  indicating  what 
kind  of  seed  God  expeGted  as  the  fruit  of  the  covenanr, 
and  what  powen  would  be  reąuired  for  its  production— 
that  it  should  be  a  seed  at  once  coming  in  the  courae  of 
naturę,  and  yet  in  some  sense  above  naturę — the  special 
gift  and  oflbpring  of  God.  When  Isaac  was  eight  days 
old  he  received  circumcision,  and  was  thus  received  into 
the  coyenant  madę  with  his  father;  while  his  mother^a 
sceptical  laughter  was  turned  into  triumphant  exulta- 
tion  and  joy  in  God  (Gen.  xxi,  4-7).  (See  De  Wette, 
Krit,  p.  133  sq. ;  Ewald,  Getch.  i,  388 ;  Hartmann,  Ueber 
d.  Pentat,  p.  269 ;  Lengerke,  Ken.  p.  290 ;  Niemeyer,  CAo- 
ract,  u,  160.)     See  Name. 

2.  The  fint  noticeable  circumstance  in  the  life  of 
Isaac  took  place  in  connection  with  his  weaning.  Hia 
precise  age  at  the  time  is  not  given,  but  we  may  sup- 
pose  him  to  have  been  (according  to  Eastem  custom) 
fully  two  years  old.  In  honor  of  the  occasion  Abra- 
ham madę  a  great  feast,  as  an  expre86ion,  no  doubt,  of 
his  joy  that  the  child  had  reached  this  fresh  stage  in 
his  career— was  no  longer  a  suckling,  but  capable  of  self- 
sustenance,  and  a  oertain  measure  of  indei^endent  ac- 
tion.  For  the  parents,  and  those  who  sympathized  with 
them,  it  would  naturally  be  a  feast  of  laughter— the 
laughter  of  mirth  and  joy ;  but  there  was  one  in  the 
family — Ishmael — ^to  whom  it  was  no  occasion  of  glad- 
ness,  who  saw  himself  supplanted  in  the  morę  peculiar 
honon  of  the  house  by  this  younger  brother,  and  who 
mocked  while  othen  laughed— himself,  indee<l,  laughed 
(for  it  is  the  same  word  still,  pnsp,  Gen.  xxi,  9),  but 
with  the  enyious  and  scomful  air  which  betrayed  the 
alien  and  hostile  spirit  that  lurked  in  his  bosom.  He 
must  have  been  a  well-grown  boy  at  the  time ;  and  Sa- 
rah, deaciying  in  the  manifeatations  then  given  the  surę 


ISAAC 


666 


ISAAC 


presage  of  fattire  riyaliy  and  strife,  urged  Abraham  to 
eaat  forth  the  bondmaid  and  her  aon,  sińce  the  one  could 
not  be  a  co-heir  with  the  other.  Abraham,  it  would 
Beem,  hesitated  for  a  time  about  the  matter,  feeling  pain- 
ed  at  the  thought  of  bavmg  Ishroael  separated  from  the 
houaehold,  and  only  complied  when  he  reoeived  an  ex- 
plicit  warrant  and  diiection  from  above.  At  the  same 
time,  he  got  the  promiae,  as  the  ground  of  the  divine 
procedurę, "  For  in  Isaac  shall  thy  seed  be  called,"  that 
is,  in  Isaac  (as  contradistinguished  from  Ishmael,  or  any 
other  son)  shall  the  seed  of  blessing  that  is  to  hołd  of 
thee  as  a  father  have  its  commencement.  It  is  proba- 
ble  that  Abraham  needed  to  have  this  truth  brooght 
aharply  out  to  him,  for  correction  on  the  one  side,  as 
well  as  for  consolation  and  hope  on  the  other,  aa  hu  pa- 
temal  feelings  may  have  kept  him  from  apprehending 
the  fuli  soope  of  former  revelations  conceming  the  son 
of  Hagar.  The  high  purposes  of  God  were  involved  in 
the  matter,  and  the  yeamings  of  natural  affection  must 
give  way,  that  these  might  be  established.  In  the  trans- 
actions  themselyes  the  apostle  Paul  perceired  a  revela- 
tion  of  the  truth  for  all  ttmes— especially  in  regard  to 
the  natural  cnmity  of  the  heart  to  the  things  of  God, 
and  the  certainty  with  which,  even  when  wearing  the 
badge  of  a  religious  profession,  it  may  be  expected  to 
rent  its  malice  and  opposition  towards  the  true  children 
of  God  (Rom.  ix,  7, 10 ;  GaL  iv,  28 ;  Heb.  xi,  18).  The 
seed  of  blessing,  thoee  who  are  supematurally  bom  of 
God,like  Isaac,  and  have  a  special  interest  in  the  riches 
of  his  goodncss,  are  surę  to  be  eyed  with  jealousy,  and, 
in  one  form  or  anothcr,  peraecuted  by  those  who^  with  a 
name  to  Uve,  still  walk  after  the  flesh  (GaL  iv,  21-31). 
See  IsiiMAEL. 

It  has  been  asked,  what  were  the  persecutions  sustain- 
ed  by  Isaac  from  Ishmael  to  which  Paul  refers  (Gal.  iv, 
29)  ?  If,  as  is  generally  suppoecd,  he  refers  to  Gen.  xxi, 
9,  then  the  word  pH^Cp,  irail^ovTa,  may  be  translated 
mockinffy  as  in  the  A,  Y.,  or  inmiłwfff  as  in  xxxix,  14, 
and  in  that  case  the  trial  of  Isaac  was  by  means  of 
**cruel  mockings"  {ifŁiraiyfŁwr),  in  the  language  of  the 
Epistle  to  the  Hebrews  (xi,  36).  Or  the  word  may  in- 
dude  the  signification  paying  idalatroua  trorship^  as  in 
Exod.  xxxii,  6,  or  fffhiwffy  as  in  2  Sara.  ii,  U.  These 
three  significations  are  given  by  Jaichi,  who  relates  a 
Jewish  tradition  (quoted  morc  briefly  by  Wctstein  on 
GaL  iv,  29)  of  Isaac  siilfering  personal  violence  from 
Ishmael,  a  tradition  which,  as  Mr.  Ellicott  thinks,  was 
adopted  by  PauL  The  English  rcader  who  is  content 
with  our  own  yersion,  or  the  scholar  who  may  prefer 
either  of  the  other  renderings  of  Jarchi,  will  be  at  no 
loss  to  connect  GaL  ix,  29  with  Gen,  xxi,  9.  But  Ori- 
gen  (iii  Gen.  Iłom.  "\-ii,  §  3),  and  Augtistine  {Sermo  iii), 
and  apparently  l*rof.  Jowett  (on  GaL  iv,  29),  not  observ- 
ing  that  the  gloss  of  the  Sept.  and  the  Latin  yersions 
**  playing  tcith  her  ton  laaac"  forms  no  part  of  the  sim- 
ple  statement  in  Genesis,  and  that  the  words  pnX73, 
jraiZorrOj  are  not  to  be  confined  to  the  meaning  "  play- 
ing," sccm  to  doubt  (as  Mr.  Ellicott  does  on  other 
grounds)  whether  the  passage  in  (ienesis  bears  the  con- 
struction  apparently  put  upon  it  by  St,  PauL  On  the 
other  hand,  KosenmllUer  (Schol,  in  Gen.  xxi,  9)  even 
goes  so  far  as  to  characterize  icitoice — "  persccuted" — as 
a  very  excellent  interpretation  of  pHS^.  (See  Dnisius 
on  Gen.  xxi,  9,  in  Crif.  Sacr.,  and  Estius  on  GaL  iv,  29.) 

What  eflect  the  companiouship  of  the  wild  and  way- 
ward  Ishmael  might  have  had  on  Isaac  it  is  not  easy  to 
say;  but  his  expulsion  was,  no  doubt,  ordered  by  God 
for  the  good  of  the  child  of  promise,  and  most  probably 
8aved  him  from  many  an  annoyance  and  sorrow.  Freed 
from  such  evil  influence,  the  child  grew  up  under  the 
nurtuńng  care  of  his  fond  parenta,  mild  and  gentk,  lov- 
ing  and  beloved. 

3.  The  next  recorded  event  in  the  life  of  Isaac  is  the 
memorable  one  connected  with  the  command  of  God  to 
offer  him  up  as  a  sacrifice  on  a  mountain  in  the  land  of 
Moriah  (Gen.  xxii).     B.C.  cir.  2047.    Nothing  is  said 


of  his  age  at  the  time  exoept  that  he  is  called  "a  lad** 
(*173),  perhapa  8ixteen  yean  of  age.    Aooording  to  Jo- 
sephus  {A  nf.  i,  1 8, 2) ,  he  was  twenty-iive  years  old.   That 
Isaac  knew  nothing  of  the  relation  in  which  he  pcnwr.- 
ally  stood  to  the  divine  command,  came  afTectingly  out 
in  the  ąuestion  he  put  to  his  father  whiłe  thcy  jouniey* 
ed  together,  **  Bebold  the  fire  and  the  wood,  but  whcre 
is  the  lamb  for  a  bunit-ofTering?**    Evcn  then  the  k- 
cret  was  not  disclosed  to  him ;  and  only,  it  would  ap - 
pear,  when  the  act  itself  was  in  process  of  being  con- 
summated,  did  the  fearful  truth  bunt  opon  his  coid  that 
he  was  himself  to  be  the  victim  on  the  altar.    Yet  the 
sacred  narrative  tells  of  no  remonstrant  stm^rgle  on  the 
part  of  this  child  of  promise,  no  striyings  for  e^cape,  no 
cries  of  agony  or  pleadings  for  deHvcrance :  he  secms  to 
have  surrendered  himself  as  a  willing  sacrifice  to  the 
cali  of  Heaven,  and  to  have  therein  showed  how  thor- 
oughly  in  htm,  as  in  bis  believing  parent,  the  mind  of 
the  flesh  had  become  subordinate  to  the  mind  of  the 
spirit.     To  act  thua  was  fo  prove  himself  the  fitting 
type  of  him  who  had  the  law  of  God  in  his  heart,  and 
came  to  do,  not  his  own  will,  but  the  will  of  him  that 
sent  him.    But  the  death  itself,  which  was  to  prore  the 
life  of  the  world,  it  belonged  to  the  antitypc,  not  to  the 
type,  to  accoroplifeh.     The  ram  prorided  by  God  in  the 
thicket  must  meanwhile  take  the  place  of  the  seed  of 
blessing.    In  the  surrender  by  the  father  of  hia  ^  only 
son,"  the  concurrence  of  the  8on*s  will  with  the  father^s, 
the  sacriflcial  dcath  which  virtually  took  place,  and  ihe 
resurrection  from  the  dead,  whence  Abrahan  rcccived 
his  son  **  in  flgure**  (Heb.  xi,  19),  are  all  pcńnta  of  anal- 
ogy  which  cannot  be  overlooked. 

The  offering  up  of  Isaac  by  Abraham  has  been  view- 
ed  in  vaiious  lights.  It  is  the  eubject  of  flve  difscita- 
tions  by  Frischmuth  in  the  Thef.  TkeoL  Philol,  p.  197 
(attached  to  Crii.  Sacri  ;  originally  Jena,  1662-6,  4to). 
By  bishop  Warburton  {Dir.  I^g.  h.  vi,  §  6)  the  whole 
transaction  was  regaided  as  ^  mcrely  an  informatiun  by 
action  (comp.  Jer.  xxvii,  2;  Ezek.  xii,  8 :  Iloa.  i.  2),  in- 
Btead  of  words,  of  the  great  sacrifice  of  Christ  for  the  re- 
demption  of  mankind,  given  at  the  eaniest  reqacst  %A 
Abraham,  who  longed  impatiently  to  see  Chri»t's  day.* 
This  view  is  adopted  by  dean  Graves  {On  ihe  PtJśO' 
ttuch,  pt.  iii,  §  4),  and  has  become  popular.  But  it  is 
pfonounced  to  be  unsatisfactory  by  Davidsoii  (Pnwtitw 
Sacrificff  pt.  iv,  §  2),  who,  pleading  for  the  progiTsńve 
communication  of  the  knowledge  of  the  Christian  atooe- 
ment,  protests  against  the  aesumptiim  of  a.  contcmpo- 
rary  disclosure  of  the  import  of  the  sacrifice  to  Abra- 
ham, and  points  out  that  no  expiation  or  atoncnaent  was 
joined  with  this  cmblematic  oblation,  which  coneeąuent- 
ly  symbolized  only  the  act,  not  the  powcr  or  rirtue  of 
the  Christian  sacrifice.  Mr.  Manrice  (Pafriarrks  and 
LcnrgieerBj  iv)  draws  attention  to  the  oflćrin|c  of  Ifaac 
as  the  last  and  culminating  point  (compare  Ewald,  Ge- 
tchiehtey  i,  430-4)  in  the  divine  education  of  Abraham, 
that  which  taughthim  the  meaning  and  groiiiKl  of  self- 
sacrifice.  The  same  linę  of  thought  is  followed  up  in  a 
very  in8tructive  and  striking  Fermon  on  the  aacrilice  of 
Abraham  in  Docfrwe  o/ Sacrifice,  iii,  88-48.  Some  Ger- 
man writers  have  spoken  of  the  whole  tranaaction  aa  a 
dream  (Eichhom,  Bibliofh.f.  bibf.  TMer.  i,  45  h|.),  or  a 
myth  (De  Wet  te),  or  as  the  cxplanation  of  a  hier^yph 
(Otman,  in  Henke's  Matfatin,  ii,  617),  and  treat  other 
events  in  Isaac*s  life  as  slips  of  the  pen  of  a  Jewish 
transcriber.  Even  the  merit  of  novclty  cannot  be  claim- 
ed  for  such  Wews,  which  appcar  to  have  been  in  caome 
measure  forestalled  in  the  time  of  Augustine  (Senno  ii. 
De  fenfatione  A  hraha).  Thcy  are,  of  conrae,  irrecon- 
cilable  with  the  dedaration  of  St.  Jamea,  that  it  was  a 
tcork  by  which  Abraham  was  justified.  Eusebioa  {^Prrep. 
Evang,  iv,  16,  and  i,  10)  has  preserred  a  ainicalar  and 
inaccnrate  veTsion  of  the  oflering  of  Isaae  in  an  extiact 
from  the  andent  Phcenidan.  hiatorian  Sancfaoniatbcm ; 
but  it  ia  absurd  to  suppose  that  the  widdy-apread  (aee 
Ewald,  A  khtrth^mer^  p.79,  and  Thomson'a  Bandom  Lec^ 
tureSf  1853,  p.  88)  heathen  piactioe  of  sacrifldn^  hmian 


ISAAC 


667 


KAAC 


beings  (00  Bruiu,  in  Paiili]8'8  Memordb,  yi,  1  Bq.)  re- 
ceived  any  encouragemenŁ  from  a  aacrifice  which  Abra- 
ham waa  forbiddea  to  acoompliah  (see  Waterland,  Worka- 
iv,  203).  Some  wńten  ha^e  foiind  for  Łhis  traiuaction 
a  kind  of  parallel— it  amounU  to  no  moro — in  the  clas- 
sical  legenda  of  Iphigenia  and  PhńKua  (so  Rosenmtdler, 
MorgmL  i,  95%  etc.  (aee  J.  G.  Michaelia,  De  Abr.et  Is, 
a  Gracit  ia  HtfrUum  H  Orionem  coneerHa^  Frcft.  a.  O. 
1721 ;  Zeibich,  I  maci  ortu*  in  fabuła  Orioms  teatiffioj 
Ger.  1776).  The  atory  of  Iphigeiua,  which  inapirod 
the  derout  Athenian  dnunatiat  with  aublime  notiona  of 
the  import  of  aacritice  and  auffering  (i£ach.  Agam,  147, 
et  seq.),  aupplied  the  Roman  tnlidel  oniy  with  a  keen 
umit  against  religion  (Lucret  i,  102),  juat  as  the  graat 
tria]  which  perfected  the  faith  of  Abraham  and  moold- 
6>1  the  character  of  laaac  drawa  from  the  Komanized 
Jew  of  the  firat  oentuiy  a  rhetorical  exhibition  of  his 
own  unacqaaintanoe  with  the  meaning  of  aacrifice  (aee 
Joseph.  AnLifldf  8).  The  generał  aim  of  certain  writ- 
tn  has  been,  aa  they  conaider  it,  to  relieve  the  Bibie 
from  the  odium  which  the  narrated  circumstancea  are 
in  their  opinion  fitted  to  occaaion.  That  the  paaaage  u 
free  from  every  poealble  objection  it  may  be  too  much 
to  anert :  it  ia,  however,  eąuaily  elear  that  many  of  the 
objectiona  taken  to  it  ariae  from  Tiewing  the  facts  from 
a  wrong  position,  or  ander  the  diacoloriiig  medium  of  a 
foregoue  and  adrerse  conduaion.  The  only  proper  way 
u  to  conaider  it  aa  it  ia  repreaented  in  the  aacred  page. 
The  command,  then,  waa  ezpreeely  designated  to  try 
Abraham*a  faith.  Deatined  as  the  patriarch  waa  to  be 
the  father  of  the  faithful,  waa  he  worthy  of  his  high  and 
dignified  poaition  ?  If  hia  own  obedience  waa  weak,  he 
could  aot  train  othera  in  faith,  truat,  and  love :  henoe  a 
tiial  was  neoesaary.  That  he  waa  not  without  holy  dis- 
poaitions  waa  already  known,  and  indeed  recogniaed  in 
the  diyine  favors  of  which  he  had  been  the  object;  but 
was  he  prepared  to  do  and  to  auffer  all  God'a  will?  Ke> 
ligioua  perfection  and  his  poaition  alike  demanded  a  per- 
fect  heart :  hence  the  kind  of  triaL  If  he  wero  willing 
to  aurrender  eyen  hia  only  child,  and  act  himaelf  both 
Mi  offerer  and  prieat  in  the  aacrifice  of  the  required  vic- 
tim,  if  he  ooold  ao  far  oonąuer  hia  natural  affectiona,  ao 
aobdue  the  father  in  hia  heart,  then  there  could  be  no 
doubt  that  his  will  was  wholly  reoonciled  to  God*8,  and 
that  he  was  worthy  of  every  truat,  confidence,  and  honor 
(comp.  Jamea  ii,  21).  The  trial  waa  madę,  the  fact  waa 
aacertaliied,  but  the  victim  waa  not  alain.  What  is  there 
in  thls  to  which  either  religion  or  morality  can  take 
exceptioa?  Thia  view  ia  both  confirmed  and  jiiatifled 
by  the  wurds  of  God  (Gen.  xxii,  16  aq.),  "  Because  Łhou 
hast  not  withheld  thy  only  aon,  in  blessing  I  will  bleaa 
thee,  and  in  multiplying  I  will  multiply  thy  aeed  aa  the 
atara  of  the  heaven,  and  in  thy  aeed  ahall  all  the  nationa 
of  the  earth  be  bleaaed.'*  We  remark,  also,  that  not  a 
part,  out  the  whole  of  the  tranaaction  muat  be  taken  un- 
der  consideratioD,  and  eapecially  the  finał  reeult.  If  we 
dwell  exclusively  on  the  oommencement  of  it,  there  ap- 
pears  to  be  some  aanction  given  to  haman  aacrificea; 
but  the  end,  and  the  concluding  and  eyer-enduring  ihct, 
has  the  directly  opposite  bearing.  Yiewed  as  a  whole, 
the  tranaaction  ia,  in  truth,  an  expre8a  prohibition  of 
human  aacrificea.  Nothing  but  a  elear  command  from 
God  oouli  have  auggested  auch  a  aenrice.  ^  A  craving 
to  pleas?,  or  propitiate,  or  communicate  with  the  powers 
aboye"  by  aurrenderiiig  "  an  object  near  and  dear"  to  one, 
which  canon  Stanicy  erroneoualy  aaya  ia  the  "source 
of  all  sacrifijc/'  and  to  which  he  attributes  Abraham'» 
conduct  in  the  present  case  {Ilittory  of  the  Jewish 
Churck,  i,  47  ),  could  nerer  have  led  to  auch  an  act.  The 
idea  ia  wholly  iroprobable  and  iirational.  Kurtz  main- 
tains  that  the  basia  for  this  trial  of  Abraham  waa  laid  in 
the  atate  of  mind  produced  in  him  by  beholding  the 
Canaanitish  human  sacriflces  around  him.  His  words 
•re:  ^^Theae  Canaanitish  aacrifices  of  children,  and  the 
Kadinem  with  which  the  heathen  around  him  offered 
them,  must  have  excited  in  Abraham  a  contest  of 
thooghta  ....  and  induoed  him  to  examine  himaelf 


whether  he  alao  were  capable  of  auffident  renonciatioo 
and  self-denial  to  do,  if  hia  God  demanded  it,  what  the 
heathen  around  him  were  douig.  But  ifthia  cuesiion 
was  raued  in  the  heart  of  Abraham,  U  musi  also  have 
been  brougkt  to  a  definUe  settUmenŁ  through  some  outward 
fati,  Such  waa  the  hans  for  the  demand  of  God  so  far 
aa  Abraham  was  concemed,  and  such  the  educational 
mo(tve  for  his  trial.  The  obedience  of  Abraham^s  faith 
must,  in  energy  and  entireness,  not  lag  behind  that 
which  the  religion  of  naturo  demanded  and  obtained  . 
from  its  professors.  Abraham  must  be  ready  to  do  fot 
his  God  what  the  nationa  around  him  were  capable  of 
doing  for  their  falae  goda.  In  every  respect  Abraham, 
as  the  hero  of  faith,  ia  to  out-distance  all  others  in  self- 
denial"  {Hitt,  ofthe  O.  Coren,  i,  269).  Objectwely,  the 
transaction  was  intended  to  recognise  the  element  of 
truth  in  human  sacriflces,  while  condemning  the  aacri- 
ficea themadres  (p.  269, 270).     See  Sacrikice. 

4.  laaac  paaeed  hia  early  days  under  the  eye  of  hia 
father,  engaged  in  the  care  of  fiocka  and  herda  up  and 
down  the  plaina  of  Canaan.  At  length  hia  father  wlsh- 
ed  to  aee  him  married.  Abraham  therefore  gave  a  com- 
miaaion  to  hia  oldeat  and  most  truatworthy  aerrant  to 
the  effect  that,  in  order  to  prevent  Isaac  from  taking  a 
wife  from  among  the  daughters  of  the  Canaanites,  he 
should  proceed  into  Meaopotamia,  and,  under  the  divine 
direction,  choose  a  partner  among  hia  own  relatirea  for 
his  beloved  aon.  Rebekah,  in  conaeąuence,  becomea 
Iaaac'8  wife,  when  he  was  furty  yeara  of  age  (Gen. 
xxiv).  B.C.  2028.  In  connection  with  thia  marriage 
an  event  is  recorded  which  displays  the  pecuUar  chai^ 
actor  of  Isaac,  while  it  ia  in  keeping  with  the  generał 
tenor  of  the  aacred  record  regarding  him.  Probably  in 
expectation  of  the  early  retuni  of  his  father^s  mesaenger, 
and  aomewhat  aolidtoua  as  to  the  result  of  the  embaaay, 
he  went  out  to  meditate  in  the  field  at  the  eyentide. 
While  there  engaged  in  tranquU  thought,  he  chanced 
to  raise  his  eyes,  when  lo !  he  beheld  the  retinue  near  at 
band,  and  soon  conducted  his  bride  into  his  mother'8 
tent.  In  unison  with  all  this  is  the  aimple  dedaration 
of  the  histor}',  that  Isaac  "  loyed  her.**  Isaac  was  eyi- 
dently  a  man  of  kind  and  gentle  diaposition,  of  a  calm 
and  reflectiye  turn  of  mind,  simple  in  his  habits,  haying 
few  wants,  good  rather  than  great,  fitted  to  receive  im- 
pressions  and  fullow  a  guide,  not  to  origuiate  important 
influencea,  or  perform  deeda  uf  renown.  If  hia  charac- 
ter did  not  take  a  bent  from  the  erents  connected  with 
his  father'8  readineaa  to  oflfer  him  on  Momit  Moriah, 
certainly  ita  passiyeness  is  in  entiro  agreement  with  the 
whole  tenor  of  his  conduct,  as  set  forth  in  that  narra- 
tiye.     (See  Kitto's  Daily  Bibie  lUust,  ad  loc.) 

Isaac  haying,  in  conjunction  with  his  half-brother 
Ishmael,  buried  Abraham  his  father,  *'  in  a  good  old  age, 
in  the  caye  of  Machpelah,"  touk  up  a  somewhat  perma- 
nent  reddence  **by  the  well  Lahai-roi,"  where,  being 
blessed  of  God,  he  liyed  in  prosperity  and  at  ease  (Gen. 
xxy,  7-11).  B-C.  1988.  One  source  of  regret,  howeyer, 
he  deepl}"  felt.  Rebekah  was  barren.  In  time,  howerer, 
two  sons,  Jacob  and  Esau,  were  granted  to  his  piayers 
(Gen.  xxy,  21-26).  B.C.  2008.  As  the  boys  grew,  Isaac 
gaye  a  preference  to  Esau,  who  seems  to  have  possessed 
those  robust  ąualitics  of  character  in  which  his  father 
was  defectiye,  and  therefore  gratitied  him  by  such  dain- 
ties  as  the  ptirsuits  of  the  chase  enabled  the  youth  to 
offcr;  while  Jacob,  "a  plain  man«  dwelling  in  tents,*'  waa 
an  object  of  spedal  regard  to  Kebekah— a  diyision  of 
feeling  and  a  kind  of  partiality  which  became  the  source 
of  much  domestic  unhappiness,  as  well  as  of  jealousy 
and  hatred  between  the  two  sons  (Gen.  xxv,  27,  28). 
See  Esau. 

5.  The  life  of  Isaac,  moyeoycr,  was  not  passed  wholly 
without  trials  coming  in  from  without,  A  famine  com- 
pels  him  to  seek  food  in  some  foreign  land  (Gen.  xx\i, 
1  sq.).  B.C.  cir.  1985.  At  the  occurrence  uf  this  fam- 
ine Isaac  was  expre88ly  admonished  by  God  not  to  go 
down  into'  £g}i)t,  but  to  abide  within  the  boundarics  of 
the  Promiaed  Land;  and  occasion  waa  taken  to  renew 


ISAAO 


668 


ISAAC 


the  promiBe  to  him  and  łus  aeed,  and  to  eonflrm  in  his 
behalf  the  oath  which  had  been  madę  to  his  father. 
The  Lord  pledged  his  woid  to  be  with  him  and  to  bless 
him  in  the  land — which  he  oertainly  did,  though  Isaac 
did  not  feel  so  secure  of  the  promised  gnardianship  and 
support  as  to  be  able  to  avoid  falling  into  the  snaro 
which  had  also  caught  his  father  Abraham.  When  so- 
jouniing  in  the  neighborhood  of  G«rar,during  the  prey- 
alence  of  the  famine,  and  no  doubt  obserylng  the  wiek- 
edness  of  the  place,  he  had  the  weakness  to  cali  Kebekah 
his  sister,  in  fear  that  the  people  might  kill  him  on 
her  account,  If  they  knew  her  to  be  his  wife«  It  does 
not  appear  that  any  yiolence  was  offeied  to  Rebekah ; 
and  the  Philistine  king,  on  discovering,  as  he  did,  from 
the  familiar  bearing  of  Isaac  towards  Rebekah,  that  she 
must  be  his  wife,  simply  rebuked  him  for  haring,  by 
his  prevarication,  given  occasion  to  a  młBapprehenston 
which  might  have  led  to  serious  oonseąuenoes  (Greń. 
xxvi,  10). 

No  passage  of  his  life  has  produoed  morę  reproach  to 
Isaac^s  character  than  thia.  Abraham's  conduct  while 
in  Egypt  (eh.  xii)  and  in  Gerar  (eh.  xx),  where  he  con- 
cealed  the  closer  connection  between  himself  and  his 
wife,  was  imitated  by  Isaac  in  Gerar.  On  the  one  hand, 
this  has  been  regarded  by  avowcd  adyersaiies  of  Chris- 
tianity  as  involving  the  guilt  of ''lying  and  endeavor- 
ing  to  betray  the  wife^s  chastity,"  and  even  by  Chris- 
tians,  nndoubtedly  zealons  for  tnith  and  right,  as  the 
<H)nduct  of  "  a  very  poor,  paltry  earthworm,  displaying 
cowardice,  seliishness,  readiness  to  put  his  wife  in  a  ter- 
rible hazard  for  his  own  sake."  But,  on  the  other  hand, 
with  morę  rererence,  morę  kindness,  and  quite  as  much 
probability,  Waterland,  who  is  no  indiscriminate  apolo- 
gist  for  the  crrors  of  good  men,  ailer  a  minutę  examina- 
tion  of  the  drcnmstances,  condudes  that  the  patriarch 
did  *' right  to  eyade  the  difficulty  so  long  as  it  could 
lawfully  be  evaded,  and  to  await  and  see  whether  di- 
vine  ProYidence  might  not,  some  way  or  other,  intei^ 
pose  before  the  last  extremity.  The  e\'ent  answered. 
God  did  interpose"  {Sa^ture  Yindioatedf  in  Works,  iy, 
188, 190). 

There  is  no  improbability,  as  has  been  aseerted,  that 
the  same  sort  of  eyent  should  happen  in  rude  times  at 
different  intenrals,  and,  therefore,  no  reason  for  main- 
taining  that  these  eyents  haye  the  same  historical  basis, 
and  are,  in  fact,  the  same  eyent  differently  represented. 
Neither  is  it  an  unfair  assimiption  that  Abimeiech  was 
the  common  title  of  the  kings  of  Grerar,  as  Pharaoh  was 
of  the  kings  of  Egypt,  or  that  it  may  haye  been  the 
proper  name  of  sereral  kings  in  succession,  as  George 
has  been  or  seyeral  English  kings. 

In  all  respects  except  this  incident,  Isaac*8  connection 
with  the  Philistine  territory  was  eyery  way  creditable 
to  himself,  and  marked  with  tokens  of  the  diyine  favor. 
He  cultiyated  a  portion  of  ground,  and  in  the  same  year 
reaped  a  hundred  fold — a  remarkable  increase,  to  en- 
courage  him  to  abide  under  God^s  protection  in  Canaan. 
His  flocks  and  herds  multiplied  exceedingly,  so  that  he 
rosę  to  the  possession  of  yery  great  wealth ;  he  eyen  be- 
came,  on  account  of  it,  an  object  of  envy  to  the  Philis- 
tinea,  who  could  not  rcst  till  they  drove  him  from  their 
territory^  He  rcopened  the  wells  which  his  father  had 
diggcd,  and  which  the  Philistines  had  meanwhile  filled 
np,  and  himself  dug  seyeral  new  ones,  but  they  dl8pute<l 
with  him  the  right  of  possession,  and  obligcd  him  to 
withdraw  from  them  one  after  another.  Finally,  at  a 
greater  distance,  hc  dug  a  well,  which  he  was  allowed 
to  kecp  unmolested ;  and  in  tokcn  of  his  satisfaction  at 
the  peace  he  enjoyed,  he  called  it  Rehoboth  (t-ooto) 
(Gen,  xxv,  22).  Thencc  hc  retumed  to  Beersheba, 
where  the  Lord  again  appeared  to  him,  and  gave  him  a 
fresh  assurance  of  the  coyenant-blessing ;  and  Abime- 
iech, partly  ashamed  of  the  imkind  treatment  Isaac  had 
receivcd,  and  partly  desirous  of  standing  well  with  one 
who  was  so  eyidently  prospering  in  his  course,  sent 
some  of  his  leading  men  to  enter  formally  into  a  cove- 
nant  of  peace  with  him.    Isaac  showed  his  meek  and 


kindly  dispositbn  in  giying  oomtemiB  entertainment  ta 
the  meaaengers,  and  cordialiy  agroed  to  their  prapoad. 

It  was  probably  a  period  oonaiderably  later  still  thaa 
eyen  the  latest  of  these  tzanaactions  to  which  the  nezt 
notice  in  the  life  of  Isaao  must  be  referred.  This  is  the 
marriage  of  Esaa  to  two  of  the  daogliten  of  Canaan 
(Judith  and  Bashemath),  which  is  asstgned  to  the  for- 
tieth  year  of  £sau*8  Ufe,  ooeyal  with  Isaac^s  hundredth. 
These  allisnces  were  far  from  giying  satisfaction  to  the 
aged  patriarch;  on  the  oonUary,  they  were  a  grief  of 
mind  to  him  and  his  wife  Rebekah  (Gen.  xxyi,  86). 

6.  The  last  prominent  eyent  in  the  life  of  Isaac  is  the 
blessing  of  his  sons  (Gen.  xxyii,  1  8q.).  B.C.  1937.  h 
has  been  pUiuibly  suggested  (Browne,  Ordo  Soeth- 
rum,  p.  810)  that  the  forebodings  of  a  speedy  deniw 
(yer.  2)  on  the  pan  of  Isaac,  whose  health  alwars  ap> 
pean  to  haye  been  delicate  (Kitto*s  Daify  Bibie' IBiat, 
ad  loc),  may  haye  arisen  from  the  fact  that  his  brother 
Ishmael  died  at  the  age  he  had  just  now  reached  (Gen. 
xxy,  17),  although  he  himself  sunriyed  this  point  for 
naany  years  (Gen.  xxxy,  28).  When  old  and  dira  of 
sight  (which  lails  much  sooner  in  Eastem  coontiies 
than  with  us),  suppostng  that  the  time  of  his  drpor- 
turę  was  at  hand,  he  called  for  his  beloycd  son  ^n, 
and  sent  him  to  **  take  some  yenison"  for  him,  and  to 
make  his  fayorite  ^  sayory  meat,"  that  he  might  eat 
and  **  bleas"  him  before  his  death.  £sau  prepared  to 
obey  his  father^s  will,  and  set  forth  to  the  fieU;  bot 
through  the  deeeptious  stratagem  of  Rebekah  the  **n- 
yoiy  meat**  was  proyided  before  Esau^s  return ;  and  Js- 
oob»  disguised  so  as  to  lesemble  his  haiiy  brother,  im- 
posed  on  his  father,  and  obtained  the  blessing.  Yet,  on 
the  discoyery  of  the  cheat,  when  Esau  brought  in  to  his 
father  the  dish  he  had  prepared,  Isaac,  remembering  no 
doubt  the  prediction  that  **the  elder  should  aem  the 
ycunger,**  and  conyinced  that  God  intended  the  bkssing 
for  Jacob,  would  not,  perhaps  rather  oould  not,  revene 
the  solemn  words  he  had  uttered,  but  bestowed  an  infe- 
rior  blessing  on  Esau  (oomp.  Heb.  xii,  17).  See  Edom. 
This  patemal  blessing,  if  fuU,  conyeyed,  as  was  usual,  the 
right  of  headship  in  the  family,  togrther  with  the  chief 
possessions.  In  the  blessing  which  the  aged  patriarch 
pronounced  on  Jacob,  it  deseryes  notice  how  entirdy 
the  wished-for  good  is  of  an  earthly  and  temporal  na- 
turę, while  the  imagery  which  is  employed  aeryes  to 
show  the  extent  to  which  the  poetical  element  preyail- 
ed  as  a  constituent  part  of  the  Hebrew  character  (Gen. 
xxyiL,  27  sq.).  Most  natuial,  too,  is  the  extreme  agi- 
tation  of  the  poor  blind  oki  man  on  discoyering  the 
cheat  which  had  been  put  upon  him.  All  the  parties 
to  this  nefarious  transaction  were  sign^y  punisłicd  by 
diyine  Pkoridence  (oomp.  Jaryis,  Ckurck  oftkt  Rtdfrm' 
ed,  p.  47).  The  entirc  passage  is  of  itself  enough  to 
yindicate  the  historical  character  and  entire  credibility 
of  thoee  sketches  of  the  liyes  of  the  patriarchs  which 
Genesis  presenta. 

Yet  Isaac'8  tacit  aoąuiescence  in  the  conduct  of  his 
sons  has  been  brought  into  discnssion.  FaiTiMom  {Tf 
pologif,  i,  884)  seems  scarcely  jnstified  by  facts  in  his 
conclusion  that  the  later  da3rs  of  Isaac  did  not  fulfil  the 
promise  of  his  eaiiier;  that,  instead  of  reaching  to  high 
attainments  in  faith,  he  fell  into  generał  feeblnicas  and 
decay  morał  and  bodily,  and  madę  account  onły  of  the 
natural  element  in  judging  of  his  sons.  The  inezact 
translation  (to  modem  ears)  of  ^7?,  prey  taken  in  hnnt- 
ing,  by  "  yenison"  (Gen.  xxy,  28),  may  haye  contribu- 
ted  to  form,  in  the  minds  of  English  readens  a  kiw 
opinion  of  Isaac.  Nor  can  that  opinion  be  supportcd 
by  a  reference  to  xxyii,  4 ;  for  Isaac'8  desire  at  Fuch  a 
time  for  sayory  meat  may  haye  spning  cither  from  a 
dangerouB  sickness  under  which  he  was  laboring  (Blunt, 
Undetigned  CoincidenceSf  pt  i,  eh.  yi),  or  from  the  same 
kind  of  iropulse  preceding  inspiration  as  prompted  Eli- 
sha  (2  Kings  iii,  15)  to  demand  the  soothuDfc  inHoenoe 
of  musie  before  he  spoke  the  word  of  the  Lord.  For 
sadness  and  grief  are  enumerated  in  the  Gemara  among 
the  impediments  to  the  exercise  of  the  gift  of  piopbecy 


ISAAC 


660 


BAAC 


(Siiiith*8  Sded  I>i$e<mrmty  yi,  246).  The  nader  who 
bean  in  mind  the  peculiarities  of  Isaac^s  chtncter  will 
scuoely  inier  from  thoae  peasages  any  freah  aoceMion 
of  mental  or  monl  feebleiieeSi  Snch  a  longing  in  an 
old  man  was  tnnooent  enoogh,  and  indicated  nothing  of 
a  ipirit  of  Klf-indalgence.  It  was  an  eztnordinary  case, 
too,  and  Kalisch  sets  it  in  its  tnie  Ught :  "  The  vemson 
it  eridently  Uke  a  sacrifioe  offered  by  the  redpient  of 
the  bleasing,  and  latifying  the  proceedings;  and  hence 
Jacob  kilied  and  piepazfd  two  kids  of  the  goats  (yene 
9),  whereas,  for  an  ordinary  meal,  one  would  have  been 
iDore  than  sufBctent;  it  imparted  to  the  oeiemony,  in 
oertain  respects,  the  chaneter  of  a  covenant  (comp.  xxi, 
27-30;  xxTi,  80;  Exod.  xii,  2;  xxxy,  5-11,  etc);  the 
one  party  showed  ready  obedienoe  and  sincere  affection, 
while  the  other  accepted  the  gift,  and  granted  in  letum 
the  whole  storę  of  happiness  he  was  aUe  to  bequeath. 
Thus  the  meal  which  laaac  ieqnired  has  a  double  mean- 
ingf  both  connected  with  the  intemal  organism  of  the 
book"  (Coimn.  on  Gm,  xxvii,  1-4). 

7.  The  stealing,  on  the  part  of  Jaoob,  of  his  father'B 
Uessing  haying  angered  £sau,who  seems  to  have  look- 
ed  forward  to  Isaac^s  death  as  aiTording  an  opportunity 
for  taking  yengeance  on  his  onjast  brother,  the  aged 
patriarch  is  induced,  at  his  wife'B  entreaty,  to  send  Ja- 
eob  into  Mesopotamia,  that,  after  his  own  example,  his 
■on  might  take  a  wife  from  among  his  kindred  and  peo- 
ple,  '^  of  the  danghters  of  Laban,  thy  mother*B  brother" 
(Gen.  xxvii,  41-46).    RC  1 927.    Śee  Jacob. 

This  \s  the  last  important  act  reoorded  of  Isaac  Jar 
oob  having,  agreeably  to  his  father^s  command,  married 
into  Laban's  family,  retumed  after  some  time,  and  found 
the  old  man  at  Mamre,  in  the  city  of  Arbah,  which  is 
Hebron,  where  Abraham  and  Isaac  sojoumcd  (Gen. 
xxxv,  27).  &C.cir.l898.  Herę,  *"  being  old  and  fuU  of 
days"  (180),  Isaac  gave  up  the  ghost,  and  died,  and  was 
gathered  unto  his  people,  and  his  sons  Esau  and  Jacob 
buried  him"  (Gen.  xxxv,  28).     B-C  1888. 

In  the  N.  T.  reference  is  madę  to  the  oflering  of  Isaac 
(Heb.  xi,  17,  and  James  ii,  21)  and  to  his  blessing  his  sons 
(Heb.  xi,  20).  As  the  child  of  the  pronuse,  and  as  the 
progenitor  of  the  children  of  the  promise,  he  is  contrast- 
ed  with  Ishmael  (Rom.  ix,  7,  10 ;  Gal.  iv,  28 ;  Heb.  xi, 
18).  In  OUT  Lord'8  remarkable  argument  with  the  Sad- 
ducees,  his  htstoiy  is  carried  beyond  the  point  at  which 
it  is  left  in  the  O.  T.,  into  and  beyond  the  grave.  Isaac, 
of  whom  it  was  said  (Gen.  xxxv,  29)  that  he  was  gath- 
ered to  his  people,  is  roprcscnted  as  stiU  living  to  Gbd 
(Lttke  XX,  38,  etc.);  and  by  the  same  divine  authority 
he  is  proclaimed  as  an  acknowledged  heir  of  futurę  glory 
(Mattviii,ll,etc.). 

II.  Uiś  Ckaraeter, — Isaac,  the  gentle  and  dutiful  son, 
the  faithful  and  constant  husband  (see  Becker,  De  /ta- 
aco^  etc,  Greifsw.  1^50),  became  the  father  of  a  house 
in  which  order  did  not  reign.  If  there  were  any  very 
prominent  points  in  his  character,  they  were  not  brought 
out  by  the  circumstances  in  which  he  was  placed.  He 
appears  less  as  a  man  of  action  than  as  a  man  of  suffer- 
ing,  from  which  he  is  generally  delivered  without  any 
direct  eifort  of  his  own.  Thus  he  suflers  as  the  object 
of  Irfimael^s  mocking,  of  the  intended  sacrifice  on  Mo- 
rish,  of  the  rapacity  of  the  PhilisŁines,  and  of  Jacob^s 
stratagem.  But  the  thought  of  his  sufferings  is  effaced 
by  the  ever-preaent  tokens  of  God'8  favor ;  and  he  suf- 
fera  with  the  calmness  and  dignity  of  a  conacious  heir 
of  heaven1y  promises,  without  uttering  any  complaint, 
and  generally  without  committing  any  action  by  which 
he  would  forfeit  respect  Free  from  violent  passions,  he 
was  a  man  of  constant,  deep,  and  tender  affections. 
Thos  he  moumed  for  his  mother  till  ber  place  was  filled 
by  his  wife.  His  sons  were  nurtured  at  home  till  a  late 
period  of  their  live8 ;  and  neither  his  grief  for  Esau^s 
■MTriage,  nor  the  anxiety  in  which  he  was  involved  in 
oonsequenoe  of  Jaoob*s  deceit,  estranged  either  of  thcm 
ftom  his  affectionate  care.  His  life  of  aolitary  blame- 
lemeea  mnst  have  been  sostained  by  strong  habitual 
ficty,  snch  aa  showed  itaelf  at  the  time  of  Rebekah*s 


banennen  (Gen.  xxv,  21),  in  his  special  interooam 
with  God  at  Gieiar  and  Beersheba  (xxvi,  2, 28),  in  the 
solemnity  with  which  he  bestows  his  blessing  and  re- 
fuaes  to  change  it.  His  life,  jodged  by  a  worldly  stand- 
ard, might  seem  inactłve,  ignoble,  and  unlruitful ;  but 
the  '^gidleless  years,  prayers,  gracious  acts,  and  daily 
thank-offerings  of  pastorał  life"  are  not  to  be  eo  estecm- 
ed,  although  they  make  no  show  in  history.  Isaac*8 
character  may  not  have  exerci8ed  any  commanding  in- 
fluence upon  either  his  own  or  succceding  generations, 
but  it  was  BuiBciently  marked  and  consistent  to  win  re- 
spect and  envy  from  his  contemporaries.  By  his  poa- 
terity  his  name  is  always  joined  in  equal  honor  with 
those  of  Abraham  and  Jacob,  and  so  it  was  even  used 
as  part  of  the  formuła  which  Eg^-ptian  magicians  in  the 
time  of  Origen  {Contra  Cekum,  i,  22)  employed  as  effi- 
cacions  to  bind  the  dienions  whom  they  adjured  (comp. 
Gen.  xxxi,  42,  68). 

If  Abnham*s  enterpiising,  uneettled  life  foreshadow- 
ed  the  early  history  of  his  descendants ;  if  Jacob  was  a 
type  of  the  careful,  commercial,  unwarlike  character  of 
their  Uter  days,  Isaac  may  represent  the  middle  period, 
in  which  they  lived  apart  from  nations,  and  enjoyed 
poflocflsion  of  the  fertile  Umd  of  promise  (See  Kaliach, 
Gen,  ad  loc) 

III.  The  typical  riew  of  Isaac  is  bardy  referred  to  in 
the  N.  T.,  but  it  is  drawn  out  with  minutę  particularity 
by  Philo  and  those  interpreters  of  Scripture  who  were 
influenced  by  Alexandrian  philosophy.  Thus  in  Philo, 
Isaac  (]aughter=the  most  exquisite  enjoyment=the 
soother  and  cheerer  of  peaoe4oving  souls)  is  foreshad- 
owed  in  the  facts  that  his  father  had  attained  100  yean 
(the  peifect  number)  when  he  was  bom,  and  that  he  is 
specialły  designated  as  given  to  his  parents  by  God. 
His  birth  from  the  mistress  of  Abraham's  household 
symbolizes  happiness  proceeding  from  predominant  wis- 
dom.  His  attachment  to  one  wife  (Rebckah^perse- 
verance)  is  contrasted  with  Abraham'8  multiplied  coiv- 
nections,  and  with  Jacob^s  toil-won  wives,  as  showing  the 
superiority  of  Isaac*s  heaven-boni,  self-sufiicing  wisdom 
to  the  accuroulated  knowledge  of  Abraham  and  the 
painful  experience  of  Jacob.  In  the  intended  sacrifioe 
of  Isaac,  Philo  aees  oniy  a  sign  (laughter=rejoicing  is 
the  prerogative  of  God,  and  is  a  fit  offering  to  him)  that 
God  give8  back  to  obedient  man  as  much  happiness  as 
is  good  for  him.  Clement  of  Romę  (eh.  xxxi),  with 
characteristic  sobemess,  merely  refers  to  Isaac  as  an  ex- 
ample  of  faith  in  God.  In  Tertullian  he  is  a  patteni  of 
monogamy,  and  a  type  of  Christ  bcaring  the  cross.  But 
Clement  of  Alexandria  finds  an  allegorical  meaning  in 
the  inddents  which  connect  Abimelech  with  Isaac  and 
Rebekah  (Gen.  xxvi,  8),  as  well  as  in  the  oiTering  of 
Isaac  In  this  latter  view  he  is  followed  by  Origen,  and 
by  Augustine,  and  by  Christian  cxpo8itorB  generally. 
The  most  minutę  particulars  of  that  transaction  are  in- 
ve8ted  with  a  spiritual  meaning  by  such  HTiters  as  Ra- 
banus  Maurus,  tn  Gtiu  §  iiL  Abraham  is  madę  a  t^^pe 
of  the  first  person  in  the  blessed  Trinity,  Isaac  of  the 
second;  the  two  servants  dismissed  are  the  Jewish  secta 
who  did  not  attain  to  a  perception  of  Christ  in  his  hu- 
miliation ;  the  ass  bearing  the  w^ood  is  the  Jewish  na^ 
tion,  to  whom  were  committed  the  oracles  of  God  which 
they  failed  to  understand;  the  three  days  are  the  Patri- 
archal,  Mosaic,  and  Christian  dispensations;  the  ram  is 
Christ  on  the  cross ;  the  thicket  they  who  placed  him 
there.  Modem  English  writecs  hołd  firmly  the  typical 
significance  of  the  transaction,  without  extending  it  into 
such  detail  (see  Pearson,  On  fhe  Creed,  i,  243,  251,  edit. 
1848 ;  Fairfoaim^s  Typology^  i,  832).  A  recent  writer  (A. 
Jukes,  Typn  ofGenegis)^  who  has  Bhown  much  ingenu- 
ity  in  attaching  a  spiritual  meaning  to  the  characters 
and  incidents  in  the  book  of  (lenesis,  regards  Isaac  as 
representing  the  spirit  of  sonship,  in  a  series  in  which 
Adam  represents  human  naturę,  Cain  the  camal  mind, 
Abel  the  spiritual,  Noah  regeneration,  Abraham  the 
spiiit  of  faith,  Jacob  the  spirit  of  sersńce,  Joseph  suffer- 
ing  or  glory.    With  tłiis  series  may  be  oompared  the 


ISAAC 


670 


ISAAC  ARGTRUS 


riew  of  Ewald  (Gesch,  i,  387^100),  in  which  the  whole 
patriarcha!  family  is  a  prefigurative  group,  compńaing 
twelve  membera  with  8evcn  distinct  modea  of  relation : 
1.  Abraham,  Isaac,  and  Jacob  are  three  fathers,  lespect- 
iv€ly  personifying  active  power,  quiet  enjoymeiit,  suc- 
cesB  aft«r  struggles,  distinguished  from  the  rest  as  Aga- 
memnon,  Achilles,  and  Ulysses  among  the  heroes  of  the 
Iliad,  or  as  the  Trojan  Anchises,  iEneas,  and  Aacaniua, 
and  mutually  related  as  Romulua,  Kemus,  and  Numa ;  2. 
Sarah,  with  Hagar,  as  mother  and  mistress  of  the  house-  | 
hołd ,  8.  Isaac  as  child ;  4.  Isaac  with  Rebekah  as  the  ; 
tj-pe of  wedlock  (comp.  his  AUei-tkumer, p. 233) ;  6.  Leah  | 
and  Rachel  the  plurnlity  of  coeąual  wires;  6.  Deborah  ; 
as  nuree  (oompare  Anna  and  Caieta,  uEn,  iv,  654,  and  ' 
yńi,  1):  7.  Eliezer  as  steward,  whose  oiBce  is  compared  | 
to  that  of  the  messenger  of  the  Olympic  deities. 
IV.  Traditicm»,-^eyi\sAi  legeuds  represent  Isaac  as  an  . 


angel  madę  befure  the  world,  and  descending  to  earth 
in  human  form  (Ońgen,  in  Johatm,  ii,  §  25) ;  as  one  of  | 
the  three  men  in  whom  human  sinfulness  has  no  place, 
as  one  of  the  six.  over  whom  the  angel  of  death  has  no 
power  (EŁseimienger,  Entd,  Jud,  i,  843, 864).  He  is  said 
to  have  bcen  instnicted  in  divine  knowlcdge  by  Shem 
(Jarchi,  on  Gen,  xxv).  The  ordinance  of  cvening  pray- 
er  is  ascribed  to  him  (Gen.  xxiv,  63),  as  that  of  moming 
prayer  to  Abraham  (xix,  27),  and  night  prayer  to  Ja- 
cob  (xxviii,  11)  (Eisenmenger,  Knł.  Jud.  i,  483). 

The  Arabiau  traditions  included  in  the  Koran  repre- 
sent Isaac  as  a  model  of  religion,  a  righteous  person  in- 
spired  with  grace  to  do  good  works,  ob»erve  prayer,  and 
give  alms  (eh.  xxi),  endowed  with  the  divine  gifts  of 
prophecy,  children,  and  wealth  (eh.  xix).  The  prom- 
ise  of  Isaac  and  the  offering  of  Isaac  are  also  mentioned 
(eh.  xi,  38).  Faith  in  a  futurę  resurrection  is  ascribed 
to  Abraham ;  but  it  is  comiected,  not,  as  in  Ileb.  xi,  19, 
with  the  offering  of  Isaac,  but  with  a  fictitious  miracle 
(chap.  ii).  Stanicy  mentions  a  curious  tradition  of  the 
reputed  jealousy  of  Isaac^s  character  that  prevailB  among 
the  inhabitants  of  Hebron  respecting  the  grave  of  Ke- 
bekah  {Jewish  Church,  i,  496  są.).  (On  the  notices  of 
Isaac  in  the  Talmud,  see  Otho'8  I^ex.  Talm.  p.  133 ;  Ham- 
burger, Real-Enct/klop.f.  Bibel  u,  Talmud,  p.  612  są.;  for 
the  notices  in  the  Koran,  see  Hottinger's  hisł.  Orient 
p.  25,  52).— Kitto ;  Smith ;  Fairbaim.  See  Bouchier, 
Iłistory  of  Isaac  (Ixnd,  1864).  For  older  trcatises,  see 
Darling,  Cydop,  Bibliograplu  coL  190. 

Isaac,  bishop  of  Langres,  France,  is  supposed  to 
have  been  prcsent  at  the  Council  of  Kiersy  in  840,  as 
deacon  of  Laon.  Aftcr  the  death  of  Theutbalde,  Wulf- 
ade  seized  tho  bishopric  of  Langres  in  spite  of  all  oppoa- 
ing  canons;  but  Hincmar,  archbishop  of  Rheims,  de- 
clarod  against  him,  and  Charles  the  Bald  compelled 
him  to  fleo.  Hilduin,  lay  abbot  of  St.  Denis,  then  pn>- 
posed  Isaac  as  bishop,  and  by  his  influence  caused  him 
to  be  appointeii.  Isaac  was  ordained  bishop  of  Langres 
about  856.  We  aftenvards  find  his  name  in  the  coun- 
cils  of  Toul  and  Langres  (859),  of  Tousy  (860),  of  Pistes 
(862),  of  Yerberie,  and  of  Soissons  (866)— an  e^ndence 
that  he  had  gauied  great  consideration  and  influence. 
His  mildness  caused  him  to  be  sumamed  homu,  and  the 
martyrolog^'  of  the  Church  of  Dijon  praises  him  highly. 
A  lasting  monument  of  his  cfTorts  to  effect  a  reform 
among  the  raonastic  orders  is  his  work  on  Canont,  pub- 
lished  by  Sirmond,  Concileśy  vol.  iii ;  Labbe,  Concil,  etc. ; 
Baluze,  CapifuUiireSj  voL  ii.  See  GaUia  Christ,  voL  v, 
col.  538 ;  Jlisf.  Litt,  de  la  France,  v,  628 ;  Hoefer,  Nouv, 
Bioff,  Generale^  xxvi,  4.     (J.  N.  P.) 

Isaao  THE  Syrian  (a),  with  the  sumame  of  Doc- 
tor or  .\faffnutf  because  of  his  ability  as  an  ecclesias- 
tical  writer,  who  flourished  in  the  first  half  of  the  6th 
oentur>',  was,  in  all  probability,  a  nativo  of  Syria.  He 
was  atflrst  a  monk  in  a  convent  not  far  from  Gabala,  in 
Phoenicia,  and  arŁenł'artls  bccame  a  priest  at  Antioch. 
He  died  about  456.  He  wrote  8everal  theological  pam- 
phlets  in  Syriac  (and  pcrhaps  also  in  Greek),  directed 
chiefly  against  the  Nestorians  and  Eutychians.    A  work 


on  the  CotUempt  of  the  Worid  would  be  oonndered  « 
his  chief  claim  to  reputation,  bot  the  anthonhip  oftliis 
book  is  not  at  all  weU  established.  It  is  by  aome  snp- 
posed  to  have  been  written  by  the  other  Ibooc  the  Syr- 
ian (see  next  arL).  There  aeem  to  be  better  grounds 
for  considering  him  aa  the  author  of  the  treadae  De 
CogkaHonibusj  the  Greek  text  of  which,  t^gether  with 
a  Latin  translation,  can  be  found  tn  the  Aseetica  of  Pe- 
trus Poesinus.  The  libiary  of  the  Yatican  oontaiiii 
some  other  MS.  worka  of  laaac.  He  ia  honored  as  a 
saint  both  by  the  Maronites  and  Jacobitcs  of  Syria. 
See  (jennadiua,  De  Scripl,  Ecdes, ;  Cave,  fłitt.  Littera- 
ria  {  Fabricius,  Bibiioth.  Graca,  xi,  214 ;  Hoefer,  .Vo«r. 
Biog,  Generale,  xxvi,  3 ;  Jocher,  Gdehi,  Jjex,  ii,  1991. 

Isaao  THE  Syriak  (5),  generally  with  the  minuimf 
of  NvMxita,  aii  eodesiastiad  writer  of  the  6th  centuiy, 
became  bishop  of  Nineveh,  but  afterwarda  reaigned  hia 
ofiioe  to  enter  a  convent,  of  which  he  waa  aubaeąuaitly 
chosen  abbot.  He  died  towarda  the  doae  of  the  6th 
centur>'.  He  is  generally,  and,  as  it  aeema,  juatly  con- 
sidered  as  the  author  of  the  treatise  De  Contemptu  Iłuw- 
di,  de  Operaiione  corporaU  et  mi  A  bJecHone  JJher,  which 
may  be  found  in  the  Orthodoroffraphi  (seoond  edidoo, 
Baale,  1569),  BiUiotheoa  Patntm  (of  Cologne,  ^-oL  vi), 
BibUotkeca  Pałrum  (of  Paria,  voL  v),  Bibliotkeca  nort^ 
sima  (of  Lyons,  voL  xi),  and  in  Galland,  Bibliotkeca  Pa- 
łrum  (vol.  xii).  All  these  coUections  contain  a  Greek 
text  with  a  Latin  translation,  yet  the  former  appean 
itself  to  be  a  translation  from  the  Syriac.  There  are 
twenty-8even  aacetic  sermons  of  hia  in  Greek  <MS&  in 
the  Yienna  library)  and  some  homiliea  (MSŚ.  in  the 
Bodleian  Library).  See  Cave,  Hi$ł,  Liter, ;  Fabridns, 
BibL  Graca,  xi,  215;  Hoefer,  Nouv,  Biog,  Gin.  xxvi  4; 
Jocher,  Gelehrt.  Ijex,  ii,  1991. 

Isaao  Aboab,  a  Spanish  Jew  of  some  distinctkm 
as  a  commentator  and  preacher,  was  bom,  according  to 
Griltz  {Gesch.  d,  Jtit/fn,  viii,  225),  in  1433,  and  sacceeded 
the  celebrated  Isaac  of  Campanton  as  gaon  of  Caatile. 
He  died  in  1498.  Aboab  wrote,  besides  super  oommec- 
taries  to  the  commentaries  of  Rashi  and  Kachnaani, 
*15ll3^nJl  ic  maę,  or  Disserfations  on  a  Part  of  ile 
TcUmudic  TracŁ  Jam-Tob  (Beza),  edited  by  Jedidja  Ga^ 
lante  (Yenice,  1608  ;  Wihneradoif,  1716)  :— 'jiS'*B  V0, 
or  HomiUes,  teith  free  Use  of  tke  Hagadak,  edtted  hf 
Gershom  Soncini  (Constantinople,  1588,  4to ;  Zolkiew, 
1806,  4to).  There  are  a  number  of  other  worka  that 
hkve  frequently  been  attributed  to  the  pen  of  this 
Isaac,  which  Dr.  Zunz  aasigns,  as  Gri&tz  belieTes  ^^crr 
properly,  to  another  Isaac  Aboab,  who  flonriahed  aboot 
1300-1320.  Among  these,  the  most  important,  which 
FUrst  {BibUotkeca  Judaica,  i,  4  aq.)  assigna  to  the  pns- 
ent  Isaac,  is  "liMan  ri^^iSlS,  a  hagadic  or  ethical  trea- 
tise  on  the  Talmud  and  Midrashim,  in  8even  sectiona 
(published  at  Yenice,  1544,  foL,  and  8everal  timee  later; 
also  with  a  Heb.  commentary  by  Frankfurter,  Amsterd. 
1701, 8vo;  and  by  others  with  Spanish,  Hebrew,  German, 
and  High-German  translations  at  different  times  and 
places).     (J.H.W.) 

Isaac  Albalag,  a  Jewish  philosopher  of  aome 
notę,  flourished  in  Spain  during  the  latter  half  of  the 
13th  century.  He  was  a  contcmporary  of  the  oelebra- 
tcd  Falaqucra,  and,  like  him,  well  versed  in  Aiabian 
philosophy.  Albalag  possesacd  greater  natural  cndow- 
ments  than  Falaquera,  but,  wanting  that  indepcndence 
of  mind  which  madę  the  latter  so  justly  celebrated,  he 
fuled  to  take  as  prominent  a  position.  He  <ffed  about 
1294.  About  1292  he  edited  and  impn>ved  Al^hazalia 
Makasid  Alphilsapha,  under  the  title  of  nSy^Sn  'i^JTtS. 
A  part  of  it  has  been  published  by  Schonr  in  CkahLL,  ir 
(1859)  and  vi  (1861).  See  GrUtz,  Gesek.  d,  Jmdat^  vii, 
252  sq.     (J.H.W.) 

Isaac  Arg3mia,  a  Greek  monk  who  flourished  m 
the  Utter  half  of  the  14th  century  at  j&iena,  in  Thrmam, 
wrote  about  1373,  when  he  is  aaid  to  bave  been  st  the 
age  of  Bixty,  Compuhu  Gracorumdeeolemmtatepatcka' 


ISAAC  BEN-ABBA-MARE        671      ISAAC  BEN^ACOB  ALFASI 


iis  cfl^framtij  pablished  in  Greek  and  Ladn  by  J.  Chiist- 
rnano  (Heidelberg,  1611,  4to),  and  inserted  by  Diony- 
sins  Petaviu9  in  hu  i>e  Doctrina  (emporum  (iii,  869). 
He  is  aiso  suppoaed  to  be  Łhe  author  of  a  work  still  in 
MS.  fonn  on  aationomy.  Of  Iaaac*8  penonal  histoiy  but 
Kttle  b  clearly  known. — Jdcher,  Geiehrł,  Lex.  ii,  1984 ; 
>Iosheim.  KecL  IlisL  bk.  iii,  cent  xiv,  pt.  ii,  cb.  ii.  (J. 
H.W.) 

laaac  ben-Abba-Mare,  a  Jewiah  ezponent  of 
thc  Talmud,  was  bom  at  Bourg  des  SL  Gilles,  France, 
in  1139.  His  father  was  an  offioer  under  the  goyern- 
ment  of  the  count  of  Tocdouse,  and  afforded  Inac  ev- 
ery  opportiuiity  for  diatinction,  but  he  early  deyoted 
himself  to  the  study  of  the  Talmud  under  the  celebiated 
Kabbi  Tam  of  Kameni.  When  only  seyenteen  years 
(M  he  prepared  a  compendium  of  certain  ritualistic  laws 
of  the  Jews,  in  which  he  eyinced  thorough  famiHarity 
with  the  Talmud.  He  also  wrote  a  commentaiy  on  one 
of  the  mosŁ  difficult  parts  of  the  Talmud,  and  finally 
coUected  all  his  inyestigations  on  the  Jewłsh  traditions 
under  the  title  of  nsiis^n  (probably  in  1179).  It  was 
incompletely  published  by  Josef  ben-Saruk  (Ven.  1608 ; 
and  sińce  then,  Warsowa,  1801).  See  Griitz,  Gesch,  d, 
Juden,  vi,  244 ;  FUrst,  BtbUoth,  Judaica,  ii,  137.  (J.  H. 
W.) 

Isaao  ben  -  Abraham,  a  distinguished  Jewish 
Rabbi  of  the  Karaitic  sect,  was  bom  at  Trock,  near  Wil- 
na (Lithuania)  about  1533.  He  is  especially  celebrated 
BS  the  author  of  a  work  against  Christianity,  entitled 
n3'.^  p^Hy  Chizzuk  Amunah  (mtfRt/nm^/UIn),  written 
in  1593.  It  is  divided  into  two  parts :  the  first,  contain- 
in^  fifty  chapters,  consists  of  an  apology  for  Judaism, 
and  a  generał  attack  on  the  Christian  faith ;  the  second 
contaius  a  critical  examination  of  a  hundred  passages 
of  the  N.  T.,  intended  by  the  writer  to  refute  the  proofs 
adduced  by  Christiana  from  the  Old  Test.  It  Ls  oonsid- 
ered,  ncxt  to  the  productions  of  Duran  (q.  y.),  the  ablest 
work  evcr  written  by  any  Jew  against  the  Christian  re- 
li^ion.  It  was  first  published  by  Wagenaeil,  with  a  Latin 
translation,  in  the  Tela  ignea  Satanm  (Altdorf,  168*2, 4to), 
from  a  MS.  obtained  from  an  African  Jew,  which,  as 
Griitz  asserts,  was  imperfect.  The  Hebrew  text  was  after- 
wards  repriuted  by  the  Jews  (Amsterdam,  1705, 12mo), 
and  by  (louseet,  with  a  Latin  translation  and  a  refuta- 
tion  (Amst.  1712,  fol.).  Wolf,  in  his  Bibiwtheca  Hebra- 
iau  Kiyes  a  supplement  and  yariation,  said  to  be  derived 
from  a  morę  perfect  MS.  than  the  one  at  Wagen8eil's 
comroand.  Bat  the  best  edition  is  held  to  be  that  of 
Rabbi  Dentsch  (Sohrau,  1865).  It  was  also  translated 
into  German  Hebrew  (Amst.  1717, 8vo);  into  German 
by  Gcbling,  and  into  Spanish  by  Is.  Athia.  Among  the 
vorks  written  in  answer  to  it,  which  deserye  especial 
mention,be8ide8  thoee  named  above,  are  J.MtUler,  Con- 
fułatio  libri  Ckizuk  Emuna  (Hamb.  1644, 4to) ;  Gebhard, 
CaUum  loca  Sovi  TeHamenti  rindicata  achersus  Chizuk 
Emnna  (Greifswald,  1699, 4to) ;  J.  P.  Storr,  Evangel%9che 
aiaubmtUhre  fftgm  d,  Werk  Chissuk  Emma  (TUb.  1708, 
8vo) :  K.  Kidder,  DemonttraL  o/the  Meitiah  (Lond.  1684- 
1700, 3  pts.  8vo).  Isaac  ben-Abraham  died  about  1594. 
See  Kossi,  Dizion,  storioo  degli  A  utori  Ebrei ;  fiartolocci, 
Magna  Bibiio,  Rablntu ;  Griitz,  GtKK  d,  Juden,  ix,  490 
tą. ;  Hoefer,  Xouv.  Biog.  Gener,  xxvi,  10 ;  FUist,  Biblioth, 
/ad  ii,  189.     (J.H.W.) 

Isaao  ben- Abraham  Akiish,  a  Jewish  writer 
of  coiisiderable  notę,  was  bom  about  1489,  in  Spain ;  the 
name  of  the  place  is  not  known  to  us.  He  was  lamę  on 
both  feet,  but  this  maimed  condition  by  no  means  pic- 
yented  him  from  acquiring  great  learaing ;  nay,  he 
eren  trayelled  extensiyely,  and  enjoyed  the  repuUtion 
of  a  great  scholar.  When  yet  a  boy,  the  peraecutions 
of  the  Jews  by  the  Spaniards  obliged  him  to  leaye  his 
oatiye  Und  (1492),  and  he  remoyed  to  Naples.  But 
slso  here  he  and  his  coreligionists  were  sorely  tried  by 
penccution,  and  again  he  fled;  this  time  from  country 
to  country  **wboee  languages  he  did  not  nnderstand, 
ud  whose  inhabiUmta  spai^d  neither  the  aged  nor  the 


yoong,"  nntil  he  finally  found  a  home  in  the  honae  of  a 
banished  ooreligionist  in  far-off  Egjrpt.  Ailer  a  stay  of 
some  ten  years  he  remoyed  to  Palestine,  and  finally  set- 
tled  in  Turkey,  where  he  was  honored  with  the  instruc- 
tion  of  one  of  the  princea  of  the  realm.  He  died  after 
1577.  His  works  are  *^t@^p  bip,  or  on  Jewish  Reign 
during  the  Exik;  containing  (1)  the  correspondcnce  of 
Chasdai  ben-Isaac  with  Jusuf,  the  king  of  the  Chassars ; 
(2)  CIB  p-^a  ni"J  n-^a  >^i??^,  or  History  o/ łhe  I/ouse 
ofDartd  during  the  reign  ofthe  Persitms;  also  the  hi»- 
tory  of  Bastanai,  etc.  (Constant  15  .  ,  8vo;  Basie,  1589, 
8vo;  and  with  a  work  of  Farisaolo,  OfTenb.  1720, 12mo). 
See  Grtttz,  GeacL  d.  Juden,  ix,  10  sq.,  420  8q.    (J.  H.  W.) 

laaao  ben-Calonymos.    See  Nathan. 

laaao  ben-Elia  ben-Samnel,  a  Jewish  com^ 
mentator  who  flouiished  in  the  beginning  of  the  18th 
century,  deserves  our  notice  as  the  author  of  (1 .)  A  Com~ 
merUary  on  the  Ptalnu,  published  at  Dyrhenfurt,  under 
the  title  of  D-^^iao  "^Oipb  D5  D^tbnn,^*  Ptalnu  wUh 
a  rabtttble  ctUena  (1728),  consisting  of  exoerpts  from  the 
celebrated  expo8idons  of  Rashi,  D.  Kimchi,  etc.,  giving 
also  an  abridgment  of  Alsheich  s  commentaiy,  entitled 
bK  niTSTai*^,  and  a  German  explanadon  of  the  diflficult 
words.  (2.)  A  Commentary  on  Pro^erht,  entitled  •^^12313 
0*^*1513  ''aipb  ar,  Prorerbs  toUh  a  valuable  catena 
(W'andsbeck,  1730^1),  compoaed  of  excerpts  from  the 
CKpoeitions  of  Kashi,  D.  Kimchi,  Ibn  Ezra,  Leyi  b.^<]^r- 
shon,  Salomon  b.-Melech,  giying  also  a  German  expla- 
nation  of  the  difficult  espresaions,  and  an  abridgment 
of  Alsheich's  expoeition  called  D*^a*^3B  ai*n ;  and  (3.)  A 
Commeniarg  on  the  Sabbatic  Letson*  from  the  Prophett, 
cntifled  pns*^  ''3B,  the  face  of  Isaac  (^Yandsbeck,  1780), 
which  consists  of  excerpts  from  nine  of  the  most  distin- 
guished commentaton,  yiz.  Rashi,  Ibn  Ezra,  D.  Kimchi, 
Levi  b.-Gershon,  Abrabanel,  Alsheich,  Samuel  b.-Lania- 
do,  J.  Arama,  and  Joseph  Alba  The  works  of  Isaac  b.- 
Elia  are  yeiy  yaluablc,  inasmuch  as  they  enable  the 
Biblical  student  to  see  on  one  page  the  expo6ition8  of 
the  best  and  most  famous  Jewish  commentators  on  ev- 
ery  difficult  passage,  without  being  obliged  to  search  for 
them  in  inaecessible  and  coetly  yolumes.— Kitto,  B^M- 
cal  Cyclopadia,  ii,  410. 

Isaac  ben-Óikatilla.    See  Ibn-Gikatilla. 

Isaao  ben-Jacob  Alfasl  or  Alcalal,  one  of 
the  most  distinguished  Talmudical  scholars  of  the  Mid- 
dle  Ages,  was  bom  at  Cala-Hammad,  near  Fez,  in  Afri- 
ca,  about  1013.  It  had  been  the  cuatom  among  Jewish 
Rabbis  to  follow  in  the  interpretation  ofthe  Talmud  the 
decisions  of  the  Gaonim,  and  thus  direct  inquiry  and  in- 
dependence  of  thought  had  well-nigh  becoroe  not  only 
obaolete,  but  eyen  impossible.  But  when  Alfasi  had  be- 
come  sufficientiy  faroiliar  with  the  Talmudlc  -nTitinga 
to  make  his  yoice  heard  among  his  Jewish  brethren,  he 
e\'inced  such  an  indcpendence  of  thought,  and  a  mind 
of  soch  penetration,  that  he  was  soon  acknowledged  not 
only  on  Africa*8  shore,  but  even  on  the  other  side  of  the 
sea,  by  Spain^a  Jewish  savans,  as  one  of  thc  ablest  in- 
terpreters  of  their  tradition.  A  work  which  he  publish- 
ed at  this  time,  nisbhh  ")BD,  or  the  Ilahchd^s  ofthe 
whoU  Talmud,  intended  as  a  Talmudical  compendium 
(published  at  Craoow,  1597, 8yo ;  Basie,  1602, 8vo),  which 
has  pieaeryed  ita  authority  eyen  to  the  present  day,  still 
further  increased  bis  renown.  During  a  time  of  perse- 
cution  (1088),  being  obliged  to  flee  his  native  country, 
he  sought  refuge  in  Cordoya,  and  there  he  was  reoeiyed 
with  great  honor.  But  his  distinction  as  a  Talmudist, 
and  the  kind  offices  of  his  Spanish  brethren,  seem  to 
haye  annoyed  some  of  the  morę  distinguished  Rabbis 
of  Spain.  A  controyersy,  into  which  he  was  um\'illing- 
ly  drawn,  with  Ibn-Gia  and  Ibn-Albalda,  became  espe- 
cially seyere.  After  the  death  of  Ibn-Gia,  he  remoyed 
to  Lucena,  and  was  there  appointed  the  successor  of  his 
former  opponenL  But  his  controyersy  with  Ibn-Albal- 
da continued  until  the  death  of  Łhe  latter  (1094),  when 


ISAAC  BEN-JEHUDAH 


672 


IBAAG 


Alfaai  adoptod  a  son  of  Ibn-AlbakU,  and  madę  him  one 
of  hia  moBt  faithful  adherenta.  He  died  in  1108.  A 
list  of  the  diiferent  editionB  of  his  works  may  be  foiind 
in  FllTst,  Bibliothecą  Judaica,  i,  84  8q.  See  GrAtz^  Getch. 
d,  Juden,  vi,  76  8q.,  92  sq. ;  Muńk,  Notice  iur  AbouUoaUd, 
p.  4  8q. ;  Pinsker,  Likute  Kadmów^  tezt  Na  210,  and 
notę  X,     (J.  H.  W.) 

Isaac  ben- Jehudah.    See  Ibn-Giath. 

Isaao  ben-Josepli,  called  alao  Ibaao  dk  Cor> 
BEIL,  was  boni  in  Corbeil,  a  city  in  France,  towards  the 
beginning  of  the  ISth  centiiry,  and  died  in  1280  acoord- 
ing  to  Roasi  (Jachia  Ghcdalia  and  Abraham  Zakuth  say, 
the  one  1240,  the  other  1270).  He  ia  the  author  of  the 
celebrated  work  entitled  t^Sl  *^?^'B?f  Ammudey  GoUh 
(Conatantinople,  1510,4to;  Cremona,1557,4to;  andwith 
gloflses  by  Perez  ben-Elia,  and  indicadoua  of  the  pas- 
sages  quoted  from  the  Bibie  and  the  Talmud,  Cracow, 
1696,  4to).  This  work  is  taken  from  the  ni^C  "t&D 
b^ft  (Sepher  MiUwIh  Godot)  of  Moses  of  Coiicy,  and  is 
known  also  by  the  name  of  SemaJs  (from  the  initials  of 
the  three  Hebrew  words  8epher  Mitsvotk  Katon),  It 
contains  a  Bynopsis  of  the  preoepts  of  the  Jewish  relig- 
ion.  It  is  diyided  into  seyen  parta,  each  containing  reg- 
ulations  for  one  day  of  the  week.  Isaac  wrote  it  in  1277, 
at  the  request  of  the  French  Jews,  who  desired  to  have 
a  elear  and  convenient  manuał  to  guide  them  in  matters 
pertaining  to  their  religion.  It  is  also  known  under  the 
Latln  title  of  Columna  capHritatU,  and  still  morę  fre- 
quently  as  the  Liber  Praceptorum  parrus.  Sereral  oth- 
er oopies  of  it  were  madę  by  French  as  well  as  German 
Rabbis.  Jekutiel  Salraon  ben-Hose,  of  Posen,  madę  a 
oompendiam  of  the  work  (Cracow,  1679, 4to).  See  Bar- 
tolocci,  Maffna  Biblioth,  Ralbm, ;  Wolf,  Bibłioih.  He- 
braica ;  Koasi,  Dizion.  storico  degli  A  utori  Ebrti  ;  FUrst, 
Bibłioih,  Judaica,  i,  186 ;  GriLtz,  GescL  d,  Juden,  vii,  181 ; 
Joet,  Ge^cL  d,  Judenthunu,  iii,  88.     (J.  H.  W.) 

Isaac  ben-Juda  (Abrabanel).    See  Abbaba- 

HEU 

Isaao  ben-Łatlf  or  Allatif,  a  Jewish  philoso- 
pher  of  Bome  notę,  was  bom  about  1270,  somewhere  In 
the  southeni  part  of  Spain.  Of  his  early  histoiy  scarce- 
ly  anything  is  now  known.  But  some  of  his  works 
have  been  preseryed,  and  from  notices  of  distlnguished 
contemporaries  we  leam  that  he  was  indined  to  favor 
the  Cabalists  (q.  v.).  He  is  highly  spoken  of  by  the 
Kabbins  of  his  day,  but  evidently,  judging  from  his 
works,  was  rather  two-sided  on  all  cabalistic  pointa,  so 
that  he  may  most  appropriately  be  said  to  have  stood 
'*  with  one  foot  in  philosophy,  and  with  the  other  in  the 
Cabala.**  He  died  some  time  in  the  first  half  of  the  14tli 
century.  Of  his  works  are  printed  rbrip  bs  01*^0, 
a  Commenfary  on  Kohelet  (Conatantinople,  1664,  8vo) : 
—•nian  ^iiS  and  nbirn  r^n-IS,  a  Cosmology  (Vien. 
1862,  edited  by  S.  Stern)  :— D^ClŚn  tro,  a  work  on 
Dogmatics,  Keligious  Philosophy,  and  the  Physical  Sci- 
ences, in  4  parts :— 3^^  Pi^Sin  O.  a  History  of  Man ; 
etc  See  G  riitz,  Gesch,  d.  Juden,  vłi,  220  sq. ;  Jost,  Gesch, 
d,  JudenthunUf  iii,  80 ;  Sachs,  Kertm  Chemed,  viii,  88  sq. ; 
FUrst,  Bibiiotheca  Judaica,  ii,  224.     (J.  H.  W.) 

Isaao  ben-Mo86.    See  Propiat  Duran. 

Isaac  ben-Moses,  also  called  Avojt,  who  flour- 
ished  in  the  lattcr  half  of  the  16th  century,  deseryes  our 
notice  as  the  author  of  (1.)  a  Commentary  on  the  Penta' 
Uuch,  entitled  ix  ni^inan,or  Consolations  o/God  (Sa- 
loniki, 1578  9) ;  and  (2.)  a  Commentary  on  EcdenaMes, 
entitled  rhnp  b"'np"3,  or  the  Gatherer  o/ the  Conffre- 
cation  (ibid.  1597),  which  are  both  yaluable  contribu- 
tions  t-o  the  exegetical  literaturę  of  the  O.-T.  Scriptures. 
See  Kitto,  BiU.  Cydop.  ii,  410 ;  Steinschneider,  CcUoL 
Lib,  Ilebr,  in  Biblioth,  Bod,  coL  1139. 

Isaac  ben-Scbesoheth  (Barfat),  one  of  the 
most  distlnguished  Rabbis  of  the  14th  century,  was  bom 
obout  1810,  at  or  near  Saragossa  (Spain).    He  presided 


over  the  oongrcgatuia  at  Sangona  for  a  nanbcr  of 
years,  and  when,  in  1891,  tbe  persecutioiia  institutod 
againat  the  Jews  madę  it  impoanble  for  him  to  remaiii, 
he  removed  to  Algiers,  where  he  continued  to  hołd  a 
like  position  until  his  death,  about  1444,  and  appointed 
as  his  sttooessor  the  oelebfated  Simon  ben-Simaich  Da- 
ran  (q.  v.).  He  waa  especially  celebnted  for  his  Ukh^ 
ough  acquaintanoe  with  Jewish  tradition.  Not  onhr 
from  all  parts  of  Spain,  but  from  the  diffeient  parts  cif 
Europę,  he  was  constantly  invited  to  expreB  his  opin- 
ion  on  the  meaning  of  obscure  Talmndical  pamgeb 
These  were  coUected,  and  form  a  veiy  impoitant  souioe 
for  the  stttdy  of  the  interpretation  of  the  Talmud,  sad 
convey  at  tbe  same  time  a  pretty  aecuiate  idea  of  the 
State  of  the  Jews  in  his  day,  not  only  in  Spain  and  Al- 
giers,  but  in  France  and  even  other  couptriea  aa  wdL 
His  works  are  ni34V9n^  f^^i^^^*  a  coUection  ofBakh 
choth  (edited  by  Samnd  Levi  in  2  parta,  Conatautinopie, 
1647,  foL  and  often) :— rr*1*!nn  ic  '»,  or  Commentary  <m 
the  Pentateuch,  with  notes  irom  the  Talmud :— C^CIW, 
also  a  work  on  the  Talmud.  The  latter  two,  we  think^ 
stiU  remain  in  MS.  forai.  See  Griitz,  Ge$ch.  d,  Jwdm, 
viii,  88  sq^  109  8q. ;  Jost,  Getck,  d,  Judenłhums,  iii,  87; 
FUTBt,  Biblioth,  Judaica,  ii,  146.    (J.  H.  W.) 

Isaac  ben-Suleiman  {SaJomo)  IsraSIl,  a  Jew- 
ish  philosopher  and  philologian,  was  bora  in  Egypt 
about  845.  He  was  a  physician  by  profesaon,  aod  as 
such  attained  to  very  high  distinction,  senńng  Atom  904 
to  his  death  at  Kairuan,  as  private  physician  to  the 
reigning  prince,  and  celebratcd  as  the  author  of  serer- 
al  medical  works  valuable  even  in  our  day.  But  sbo  as 
philologian  and  philosopher  he  attained  great  notonety, 
morę  particularly  as  the  author  of  a  philosophical  com- 
mentary on  the  first  chapters  of  Genesis,  tmting  of  tbe 
Creation,  of  which,  however,  only  a  part  is  now  exUiit 
It  borę  the  title  of  Se/er  Jezirah,  whence  the  error  that 
he  wrote  a  commentary  on  the  book  Jezirah,  lit  died 
about  940.  See  Griitz,  Getch.  d.  Juden,  v,  282  8q.  (J. 
H.W.) 

Isaac  Blitz.    See  jEKirrinEL  ben-Isaac 

Isaao  Campanton.    See  Kaxpa2«tox. 

Isaao,  Daniel,  a  prominent  Methodist  minister, 
commonly  designated  as  the  Wesleyan  *^Poleinic  IH- 
vine,"  was  bom  at  Caythorpe,  in  the  county  ci  linoob, 
I  England,  July  7, 177&  He  waa  early  deToted  to  hocks, 
and,  on  his  oonverBton  in  his  nineteenth  year,  he  at  osce 
determined  to  devote  his  life  to  the  work  uf  the  Clin»- 
tian  ministry.  In  1800  he  joined  the  ConfcreiKe  on 
probadon,  supplying  at  this  time  a  vacancy  on  Giimibr 
CircuiU  He  soon  rosę  to  great  distinction  among  his 
brethren  in  the  ministiy,  and  was  appointed  to  socne  of 
the  most  prominent  charges  at  the  oommand  of  his  de- 
nomination.  May  20, 1832,  while  in  Manchester  preacta- 
ing  in  behalf  of  the  Sunday-echool  work,  he  was  scind 
with  paralysis,  from  the  eflfects  of  which  he  never  recor- 
ered.  At  the  session  of  the  next  Conference  he  was 
piesent,  and  believed  himself  auffidently  recorered  to 
re-enter  upon  actiye  work,  and  was  appointed  to  Toik 
Circuit,  an  old  and  favorite  circuit^  to  which  he  was  now 
sent  for  the  third  time.  But  he  began  to  fail  fast,and 
died  in  the  midst  of  his  work,  March  21 ,  1884.  Speak- 
ing  of  the  abilities  of  Daniel  Isaac,  the  Kov.  Samnd 
Dunn  sayst  **He  was  an  independent  thitiker,  acate 
reasoner,  formidable  opponent,  dexterous  polemic,  sound 
theologian,  striking,  instructi  ve,  extemponincottS  preacb- 
er,  perspicuous  writer,  generous  benefactor,  faitbfnl 
friend,  and  amiable  Christian.  His  intellect  was  odg- 
inał, subtle,  analogical,  penetrating,  dear,  strong.  His 
manner  was  deliberate,  grave,  oonverBationaL  pointed, 
humorous,  sarcastic,  ironicaL  The  aagadous  Henry 
Moore  remaiked:  'Daniel  Isaac, like  Pani,  leasoncd 
with  his  hearers  out  of  the  Scriptures;  and  he  kept  in 
them,  neyer  went  out  of  them,  and  nevcr  reasoned  him- 
self out  of  them.*  If  at  any  time  he  drew  a  smile  fram 
hishearerB,he wonld maintain the utmoat gtmtj^    B» 


ISAAC  IBN-ALBALIA 


673 


ISAAC  LEYITA 


dispUjed  great  power  in  grappling  with  Łhe  ooiucienoe, 
■nd  in  lińnging  to  light  the  hidden  things  of  darkneM. 
Of  the  ludi<7oii8  he  had  a  maryellous  perception,  and 
could  pieaent  aa  object  in  such  a  Ugbt  as  to  excite  the 
iiidignation  or  the  loathing  of  thoae  who  before  admiied 
iL  Ile  painted  from  life.  ]VIany  hearen  were  disgust^ 
ed  with  their  own  likenees  as  they  saw  it  in  the  elear 
mirror  he  hcld  before  them.  He  was  never  declamatoiy 
or  omate.  In  debatę  he  was  remarkably  cool,  calm, 
coUected,  keen,  argumentatiye,  and  dose.  There  was 
no  trembling  hesitancy,  quibbling,  or  artifice.  He  en- 
giged  in  no  sham  fight;  neyer  brandished  the  sword  at 
a  distance,  but  came  at  onoe  to  dose  qaarters,  grappled 
with  his  oppouent,  pierced  his  ritals,  and  took  from  him 
his  aimor."  But  the  great  strength  of  Daniel  Isaac  lay 
in  his  pen,  and  he  wielded  it  with  especial  ability  in 
mattera  of  controyersy.  His  works  are,  Utdrersal  IU9- 
toratioa  (N.  Y.  1830, 12mo),  in  which  he  meets  the  ob- 
Jections  of  the  Unirersalists  to  the  eternity  of  punish- 
ment  i—Sermons  on  the  Person  ofour  Lord  Jesus  Christ 
(Lond.  1815)  i—Ecdesiastical  Claims  (Lond.  181G),  the 
view8  of  which  his  Conference  dlsapprored,  but  to 
which,  in  a  reply,  he  steadfastly  adhered.  Dr.  George 
Smith  (Jlistory  of  WesteifanMethodism^  iii,  7)  says 
of  this  work  and  the  action  of  the  Conference :  "  In 
many  important  respects  the  work  does  great  credit  to 
the  author^s  industry  and  research.  It  contains  the 
most  oonvincing  proofs,  from  Scripture  and  history,  of 
the  groundlcss  character  aud  the  extravagant  claims 
pat  forth  on  bchalf  of  the  ministerial  order  by  Papists 
and  High-Churchmen,  and  clearly  shows  the  contra- 
diction^s  iropieties,  and  absurdities  to  which  the  admi»- 
sion  of  these  claims  most  inevitably  lead.  But  in  douig 
this,  3Ir.  lsa,vi  went  so  far  as  to  impugn  the  scriptural 
position  of  the  Christian  ministry  as  held  by  Wealey 
and  the  Methodlst  people.  Nor  is  this  the  only  scrious 
defect  in  the  work;  some  passages  therein  are  grossly 
indelicate  and  inreyerent,  if  not,  indeed,  profane  (from 
this  cbaige,  bowevcr,  it  should  be  said,  others  seek  to 
fiee  Mr.  Isaac) ;  while,  as  stated  in  the  resolution  of  the 
Conference,  its  *  generał  spirit  and  style'  are  decidedly 
impropcr. . .  .  The  case  b  greatly  to  be  regretbed.  Mr. 
Isaac^s  ability,  energy,  and  sterling  worth  are  fully  ad- 
mitted,  and  it  is  cqually  elear  to  our  judgment^  from  a 
careful  perusal  of  the  work,  that  the  Conference  were 
not  only  justificd  in  adopting  the  oourse  they  pursued, 
bat  were  oompellcd  to  pursue  it  by  the  circumstances 
of  the  case."  His  next  work  was  published  whilst  he 
wtti  stationed  at  Leicester,  and  on  terms  the  most  fricnd- 
]y  with  Robert  Hall,  the  celehrated  Baptist  minister. 
It  was  entitled  Baptism  Discussed.  This  volume  Hall 
woold  nerer  rcad;  but,  when  urged  to  do  it  by  his 
frienda,  he  remarked,  In  good  temper,  "^  If  he  has  ex- 
posed  our  yiews  of  baptism  as  he  exposed  the  Episoo- 
palians  in  his  Ecdesiasłical  Claims^  the  Lord  have  mercy 
upon  us."  Isaac  also  wrote  pamphlets  against  the  use 
of  instrumental  musie  in  the  house  of  Cod,  and  on  the 
Leeds  organ  diacussions.  He  edited  the  Hfe  of  his  fa- 
ther,  Alemoirs  of  the  Rev»  John  Strawę j  and  published 
sketches  of  the  Lires  of  Robert  Bolton^  John  Corbełt^ 
and  other  old  JHcines.  In  1826  he  began,  at  the  insti- 
galion  of  the  Rev.  Samuel  Dunn,  a  work  on  the  Atone- 
mnł^  which  madę  its  appearance  a  few  years  after.  His 
works  were  edited  afler  his  death  by  the  renerable  John 
Burdsall,  and  )}ublished  at  London  (1828,  in  3  yols.  8vo). 
See  Eyerett,  Polemic  Dimne^  or  Memoirs^  etc.,  of  Rev, 
Don,  Isaac  (I»nd.  1839);  Steyens,  Hist.  of  Methodism^ 
iii,  482  są.     (J.H.W.) 

laaac  Ibn-AlbaLlia,  a  Jewish  writer  of  great  dis- 
tincŁion,  was  bom  at  Conłoya  ab<^ut  1035.  He  mani- 
fested  at  an  early  age  superior  talents  and  great  thirst 
for  leaming.  Bcsides  the  study  of  the  Talmud,  and  of 
philosophy,  he  was  eager  for  the  acąuisition  of  a  thor- 
oogh  knuwledge  of  astronomy  and  the  roathematical 
scieoces,  and  when  thirty  years  old  began  a  commen- 
tary  on  the  most  difficult  parts  of  the  Tahnud,  under  the 
title  Kupai  ha-ItocheUm^hut  it  was  so  extensiye  a  work 
IV.— U  u 


that  he  did  not  liye  long  enough  to  oomplete  it  He 
also  attempted  an  astronomical  work  on  the  principle 
of  the  Jewish  modę  of  calculating  the  calendar,  under 
the  title  libur  (about  1065).  Becoming  a  favońte  of 
the  reigning  prince  of  Spain,  he  was  honored  with  the 
distinguished  position  of  nasi  and  grand  rabbi  of  the 
Jews  of  that  domain.  He  died  about  10d4.  See  Giiltz, 
Gesch,  d,  Juden,  yi,  72.     (J.  H.  W.) 

Isaac  Ibn-Oiat.    See  Ibm-Giat. 

Isaao  Israłlll  ben-Josef^  a  yery  distinguished 
Jewish  writer  who  flourished  at  Toledo  in  the  first  half 
of  the  14th  century  (1800-1840),  deseryes  our  uotice  as 
the  author  of  cbij  *TłD'^,  or  The  Foundation  of  the 
Worldj  a  masterly  production  on  Jewish  chronology, 
induding  also  the  entire  field  of  the  science  of  astrono- 
my, both  theoretically  and  practically  delineated  (Ber- 
lin, 1777, 4to ;  and  a  better  edition,  ibid.  1848, 4to).  This 
work,  of  which  a  part  of  the  MS.  has  been  preseryed, 
was  written  about  1810  at  the  cxpress  wish  of  Isra^li's 
teacher,  Asher  ben-JechiUL  He  also  compiled  tables  of 
Jewiah  chronology  under  the  title  of  nbia)?}!  ^"ID  (Żół- 
kiew, 1805, 8yo,  et  eL).  See  Griltz,  Gesch.  d  Juden,  yii, 
290;  Carmoly,  Itinirairesj  p.  224;  B.  Goldberg,  Isaac 
Israili  (in  the  Lib.  d.  Or,  1845),  c.  488-435 ;  FUrst,  BOf- 
Uoth,  Judaica,  ii,  \bO.    (J.H.W.) 

Isaao  Łevita,  or  Johann  Isaac  LEyi,  as  he  cali- 
ed  himself  after  his  change  from  Judaism,  one  of  the 
most  celebriited  Jewish  sayans  of  the  16th  century,  was 
bom  at  Wetzlar  in  1515.  He  was  thoroughly  prepared 
by  his  friends  for  the  Kabbinical  ofRce,  and  filled  it  for 
years  with  great  distinction ;  but,  becoming  impressed 
with  the  tmthfulness  of  the  Christian  interpretation  of 
the  Messianic  predictions,  he  and  his  son  both,  afler  a 
careful  and  extended  study  of  the  prophecies,  forsook 
the  faith  of  their  forefathers,  and  joined  the  Roman 
Catholic  Chnrch.  Some  Jewish  writers  haye  attributed 
this  oourse  to  a  desire  fbr  promotion  in  literary  circleą 
which  as  a  Jew  were  closed  to  him.  But  there  is  no 
reason  to  belieye  it  other  than  the  result  of  associa- 
tion  with  Christians,  and  the  study  of  the  writings  of 
Christian  commentators  on  the  prophecies,  especially 
of  Isaiah  (morę  particularly  chapter  liii),  which  is  said 
flrst  to  haye  led  him  to  a  study  of  the  Messianic  predic- 
tions. After  his  conyersion  (1546)  he  was  appointed 
professor  of  Hebrew  and  Chaldee  at  the  city  of  Uiwen, 
and  in  1551  was  called  to  a  like  position  in  the  Uniyer- 
sity  of  Cologne.  He  became  a  yigorous  defendant  of 
the  Hebrew  text  of  the  Bibie,  and  replied  to  Lindanus, 
who  had  attacked  it  (in  his  De  optimo  Scripturas  inter- 
pretandi  genert,  Cologne,  1688),  in  a  work  entitled  /)c- 
fensio  Veriłatis  Hebraa  sacrarum  scripturarum  (CoL 
1559).  He  published  also  the  following  works  on  He- 
brew grammar,  which  rank  amońg  the  best  in  that  lan- 
guage:  (1.)  An  Introducłiotk  to  the  Hebrew  Grammar, 
and  to  the  Art  of  Writing  a  pure  JIArew  style,  entitled 
IB©  ^ł^OK  Kiao  (Colon.  1553),  in  which  he  gaye  dif- 
ferent  specimens  of  Hebrew  writing,  dialogues,  and  epŁs- 
tles,  both  from  the  O.  T.  and  other  Hebrew  writings,  as 
well  as  the  books  of  Obadiah  and  Jonah  in  Hebrew, 
with  a  Latin  translation : — (2.)  A  grammatical  treatise 
entitled  Meditationes  Htbraicm  in  A  rłem  Gramm,  per 
infeffrum  libntm  Ruth  erplicatcB ;  adjecfa  sunt  ąuadam 
contra  S>,  f,  Fórsteri  lericon  (Colon.  1558),  which  con- 
SBSts  of  a  useful  analysis  and  exceUent  translation  of  the 
entire  book  of  Kuth :— (3.)  Nota  in  Clenardi  Tabulam, 
etc  (Colon.  1556),  being  annoutions  on  Clenard's  Tar 
bies  of  H.ebrew  Grammar: — (4.)  An  excellent  introduc- 
tion  to  the  edition  of  Elias  Leyiu's  Chaldee  Lexicon,  en- 
titled '•,ra'Tłn73  (Colon.  1560).  He  likewise  translated 
seyeral  scientific  works  written  by  Jews  into  Latin,  and 
was  an  assistant  to  Pagnini  on  his  great  lexicological 
w^ork.  See  Bartolocci,  BibL  Rabb, ;  Jocher,  Gelehrt.  Lex, 
Addenda,  ii,  2332  są. ;  Riyet,  Isagoge  ad  Sacr,  Script, ; 
Hoefer,  Aouv.  Biog.  Genśr.  xxyi,  10 ;  Kitto,  BibL  Cyclop, 
ii,  410. 


KAAC  PULGAR 


674 


KAIAH 


Isaao  Piilgar.    See  Pulgar. 

Isaac  "  the  Bllnd,"  a  Jeińah  wńtet  of  the  18th 
century  (from  1190-1210),  is  noted  as  the  reputed  author 
of  the  modem  cabalistic  sysŁem.  See  Cabal.\.  Some 
writers,  as  is  well  known,  assert  that  the  Cabala  orig- 
inated  with  him,  but  this  is  doabted  by  the  best  author- 
ities,  and  he  is  considered  only  to  have  been  the  first  to 
give  a  new  impulse  to  the  study  of  this  peculiar  philo* 
sophical  system,  to  oppose  the  inroads  of  Maimonides^s 
(q.  7.)  philosophical  interpretation  of  the  Scriptures.  It 
is  certain,  at  least,  that  he  had  much  to  do  with  oue  of 
the  mystical  books  of  the  Cabala,  the  Jezirak.  His 
theories  were  further  developed  after  his  death  by  his 
two  disciples  Ezra  and  Azariel  of  Zerona.  Griitz  (OescA. 
d.  Judertf  vii,  74  sq.,  444  są.)  seems  inclined  to  favor  the 
assertion  of  Joseph  Ibn-Gikatilla,  that  the  Cabala  sys- 
tem was  the  production  of  Isaac  the  Blind,  and  that  nei- 
ther  the  sacrcd  Scriptures  nor  Jewish  tradition  bear  any 
reference  to  prore  its  earlier  existence.     (J.  H-  W.) 

IsaaouB.    See  Isaac  Le\^ta. 

Isabella  of  Castile,  queen  of  Spain,  one  of  the 
most  celebrated  charactera  of  the  15th  century,  desenres 
our  notice  ou  aocount  of  the  part  she  acted  in  the  relig- 
ious  history  of  Spain,  and  those  dominions  subject  to 
her  nile.  Isabella,  bom  April  23, 1541,  was  the  daugh- 
ter  of  John  II,  king  of  CastUo  and  Leon.  In  1469  she 
married  Ferdinand  V,  surnamed  "  the  Catholic,"  king  of 
Aragon.  She  was  not  the  heir-apparent  to  the  throne 
on  the  death  of  her  father  in  1481,  ua  ^hc  had  an  elder 
sister.  But,  assisted  by  the  powerful  armi^s  of  her  hus- 
band,  a  man  of  some  sterling  ąualities,  but  of  very  lit- 
tle  oonscienoe,  she  succeeded  in  asoending  the  throne. 
Mr.  Prescott  and  most  modem  historians  seek  to  re- 
lieve  her  of  the  stigma  that  she  was  responsible  for 
the  cnielties  that  wcre  infiicted  on  those  of  her  sub- 
Jects  who  chose  to  differ  with  the  Church  of  Korne  in 
their  worship  of  their  diWne  Maker.  It  seems  certain 
that  slic  was  deceived  by  the  Jesuits,  and  consented  to 
these  outrages  only  because,  in  her  fervor  for  the  Roman 
Catholic  cause,  she  believed  the  very  existence  of  the 
Church  of  Romę  threatened ;  and,  though  we  pity  her 
weakness  in  the  hour  when  resoluteness  on  her  part  was 
most  needed  to  defend  and  protecŁ  her  subjects,  she  saw 
that)  Spain  once  reformed,  Romanism  would  have  passed 
from  the  world  in  the  16th  century,  instead  of  stiJl  lin- 
gering  in  our  midst  at  this  late  hour.  But  if  we  excuse 
the  conduct  of  queen  Isabeila  of  Castile  on  the  ground 
of  her  piety  and  misled  devotion  to  the  Church  of  Romę, 
quite  otherwise  must  we  treat  the  conduct  of  her  hiis- 
band.  He  it  is  upon  whom  must  fali  the  guilt  of  the 
outrages  committed  in  the  name  of  God  in  Spain  and 
other  lands  under  her  dominion  by  the  "  Holy  League.*' 
It  was  the  dcsire  of  money,  the  longing  for  power,  and 
extension  of  his  goremment  to  the  American  shorc 
that  madę  him  the  docile  fullower  of  the  Jesuits,  and 
brought  ruin  upon  Spain.  But  he  was  well  rewarded 
for  his  Iow  and  parsiraonious  conduct  by  the  disturl)- 
ances  which  followed  the  death  of  Isabella  (Nov.  26, 
150-1)  in  Castile,  and  his  expulsion  from  that  countrj', 
over  which,  by  the  will  of  his  departed  wife,  he  had  been 
appointed  regent.     See  Spain,     (J.  H.  W.) 

Isagogics.    See  Introduction. 

Isai^ah  (prop.  Hcb.  Yeshayah%  fl^5;^%  tared  by 
Jehovah;  bul  this  shorter  form  occurs,  with  reference 
to  this  person,  only  in  the  Rabbinic  title  of  the  book: 
the  test  always  has  the  name  in  the  parsgogic  form 
Ye8haya'hu,  IflJ?^*^,  Sept.,  Josephus,  and  N.  T.  *H<Ta- 
tact  Vulg.  Isaias  ,•  Auth.  Yers.  N.  T.  "  Esaias :"  but  the 
Heb,  name,  both  in  the  simple  and  prolonged  forms, 
occurs  of  other  persons  likewise,  although  difTerently 
AngUcized  in  the  Eng.  Yers. ;  see  Jeshaiah  ;  Jesaiah), 
one  of  the  most  important  of  « the  Greater  Prophets," 
who  gave  title  to  one  of  the  books  of  Scripture. 

I.  Personal  Ilistory  of  the  Proy)*^.— Little  is  known 
respecting  the  circumsunces  of  Isaiah's  life.     Kimchi 


(A.D.  1230)  8a3rB  in  his  oommentaiy  on  laa.  i,  1,  "We 
know  not  his  race^  nor  of  what  tribe  he  was."  His  fa- 
ther's  name  was  Amoz  (i,  1),  whom  the  fathers  of  the 
Church  confound  with  the  propbet  Amoe,  because  thcy 
were  unacquainted  with  Hebrew,  and  in  Greek  the  two 
names  are  spelled  alike  (so  Ciem.  Alex«;  Jeromej  Pnef. 
in  Am.;  August  Civ.  D.  xviii,  27).  See  Amoz.  The 
opinion  of  the  Rabbins  (Gemara,  AfegilUi^  x,  2)  thtt 
Isaiah  was  the  brother  of  king  Amaziah  resta  abo  on  a 
merę  etymological  combination  (see  Carpzoy,  IM  regni 
JetauB  natalibusj  RosU  1785).  Isaiah  resided  at  Jenn 
salem,  not  far  from  the  Tempie  (eh.  vi).  We  leara  fiom 
ch«  vii  and  viii  that  he  was  married.  Twu  of  his  sous 
are  mentioned,  Shearjashub  and  Maher-shalal-h^h- 
baz.  These  sigiiiAcant  names,  which  he  gave  to  hn 
sona,  prove  how  much  Isaiah  lived  in  his  vocation.  He 
did  not  consider  his  children  as  belonging  merely  to  him- 
self,  but  rendered  them  living  admouitions  to  the  pcople. 
In  their  names  were  contained  the  two  chief  poiuu  of 
his  prophetic  utterances :  one  recalled  to  mind  the  se- 
vere  and  inevitable  judgment  wherewith  the  Lo«d  wti 
about  to  visit  the  world,  and  espedally  his  people;  ihe 
other,  which  signifies  **The  remnant  shail  retnm," 
pointed  out  the  mercy  with  which  the  Lord  would  re- 
ceive  the  elect,  and  with  which,  in  the  midst  of  appar- 
ent  destmction,  he  would  takc  care  to  presenre  his  peo- 
ple and  his  kingdom.  Isaiah  calls  his  wile  a  propkdfo. 
This  indicates  that  his  mairiage-life  was  not  only  coo- 
sistcnt  with  his  vocation,  but  that  it  was  intimately  ia- 
terwoven  with  it.  This  name  cannot  mean  the  wifeof 
a  prophet,  but  indicates  that  the  prophetess  of  Isaiah 
had  a  prophetic  gift,  like  Miriam,  Deborah,  and  Huldah. 
The  appellation  here  given  denotes  the  soitabkness  as 
well  as  genuineness  of  their  conjugal  relation. 

Even  the  dress  of  the  prophet  yf9»  8ub8er\'ient  to  his 
vooation.  According  to  xx,  2,  he  wore  a  garment  of 
hair-cloth  or  sackcloth.  This  seems  aLso  to  harc  been 
the  costume  of  Elijah,  according  to  2  Kinga  i,  8;  and  ii 
was  the  dress  of  John  the  Baptist  (Matt.  iii,  4).  Hair}' 
sackcloth  is  in  the  Bibie  the  symbol  of  repentance  (com- 
pare  Isa.  xx,  11,  12,  and  1  Kings  xxi,  27).  This  cos- 
tume of  the  prophets  was  a  tfrmo  propketicns  realifj  a 
];)rophetic  preaching  by  fact,  Before  he  has  opcned  his 
lips  his  extemal  appearance  proclaims  furayonn,  rt- 
pent. 

It  is  held  traditionally  that  Isaiah  suffered  maityr- 
dom  under  the  wicked  Manasseh,  by  being  sawn  in  two 
under  a  mcmorable  tree  long  said  to  have  stood  in  the 
vicinity  of  Jcrusalem  (Gemara,  Jeham.  iv,  13;  compare 
Sanhedr.  f.  108  b,  and  the  Targumites,  in  Asseroani,  Ca- 
łalog.  BihL  Vał.  i,  452 ;  Tiypho,  p.  849 ;  Jerome,  in  Jei. 
ItU;  Origen,  in  Psalm,  xxvii,  in  Matł.  xxiii  f  TeitnDian, 
Patient.  xiv;  Augustiae,  Cip.  Dei,  xviii,  24;  Ckromt. 
Pasch.  p.  155).  The  traditional  spot  of  the  martyrdom 
is  a  very  old  mulberry-tree  which  stands  near  the  Pool 
of  Siloam,  on  the  slopes  of  Ophel,  below  the  swatb-east 
wali  of  Jcrusalem.  A  similar  account  of  his  death  is 
contained  in  the  Ascerution  of  the  Propket  Ittńak,  an 
apocryphal  work,  the  Greek  original  of  which  wis 
known  to  the  eariy  Church  (Epiphan.  Hen:  xl,  2;  Je- 
rome, in  Jes.  xlivj  4,  p.  761,  etc.),  and  of  which  only  re- 
cently  an  Ethiopic  ver8ion  has  boen  found  and  trandated 
by  Dr.  Laurence,  Oxford,  1819  (see  Nitach,  in  the  Stw- 
dien  und  Krit.  1830,  ii,  209;  Engelhardt,  Kirchmffetch. 
Abkandl.  207  8q.).  The  same  fate  of  Isaiah  i^ipeais  to 
be  alluded  to  by  Josephus  (Ant.  x,  8, 1). 

II.  Tirne  ofhaiah.— The  heading  of  this  book  placea 
the  prophet  under  the  reigns  of  Uzziah,  Jotham,  Ahaz, 
and  Hczekiah,  kings  of  Judah ;  and  an  examin«tinn  of 
the  prophecies  therasel%-e8,  independently  of  the  head- 
ing, Icads  us  to  the  same  chronological  restiltSL  Chap- 
ter  vi,  in  which  is  related  the  definite  cali  of  laaiaih  to 
his  prophetic  office,  is  thus  headed :  "  In  the  year  in 
which  king  Uzziah  died  I  saw  the  Lord,"  etc  The 
collection  of  prophecies  is,  therefore,  not  chroDok>gical- 
ly  arranged,  and  the  utterances  in  the  preceding  chap- 
teis  (i  to  vi)  belong,  for  chronological  and  other  i 


ISAIAH 


676 


ISAIAH 


to  Łhe  Ust  jeue  of  the  reign  of  Uzziah,  although  the  ut- 
Łennces  in  chaptere  ii,  iii,  tv,  and  v  have  been  errone- 
oualy  aańgned  to  the  reign  of  Jotham.  Aa,  however, 
the  position  of  afTairs  was  not  materially  changed  under 
the  reign  of  Jotham,  we  may  say  that  the  fin»t  chapter 
was  uttered  during  that  reign.  The  oontinuation  of 
prophetic  authorship,  or  the  writing  down  of  uttered 
propheciea,  depended  upon  the  commenoement  of  new 
historical  development^  ouch  as  took  place  under  the 
reigns  of  Ahaz  and  Hezekiah.  Seyeral  prophecies 
(namely,  vii-x,  4;  i,  5i-81 ;  xvii>  belong  to  the  reign  of 
Ahaz  (xiv,  28-32,  apparently  to  the  occasion  of  his 
death);  and  most  of  the  subśeąuent  prophecies  to  the 
reign  of  Hezekiah.  The  prophetic  ministry  of  Isaiah 
onder  Hezekiah  is  also  described  in  a  historical  section 
oontained  in  chapters  xxxvi-xxxix.  The  data  which 
are  contained  in  this  section  come  down  to  the  fifteenth 
year  of  the  reign  of  Hezekiah ;  conseąuently  we  are  in 
the  posseasion  of  historical  documents  proving  that  the 
prophetic  ministry  of  Isaiah  was  in  operation  during 
about  forty-live  years,  commencing  in  the  year  KC. 
756,  and  extending  to  the  year  B.C.  711.  Of  this  pe- 
riod, at  least  one  year  belongs  to  the  reign  of  Uzziah, 
8ixteen  to  the  reign  of  Jotham,  fourteen  to  the  reign  of 
Ahaz,  and  fourteen  and  upwards  to  the  reign  of  Heze- 
kiah. It  has  been  maintained,  howerer,  by  StSludlin, 
Jahn,  Bertholdt,  Gesenius,  and  others,  that  Isaiah  lived 
to  a  much  later  period,  and  that  his  life  extended  to  the 
reign  of  Manasseh,  the  successor  of  Hezekiah.  For  this 
opinion  the  following  reasons  are  adduoed : 

(1.)  Accoiding  to  2  Chroń,  xxxii,  32,  Isaiah  wrote 
the  life  of  king  Hezekiah.  It  would  hence  appear  that 
he  survived  that  king;  although  it  must  be  admitted 
fhat  in  2  Chroń,  xxxii,  32,  where  Isaiah^s  biography  of 
Hezekiah  is  mentioned,  the  important  words  "  fint  and 
iast**  are  omitted ;  while  in  xxvi,  22,  we  read,  "  Now 
the  rest  of  the  acta  of  Uzziah,  ^r«^  and  Uut,  did  Isaiah, 
the  son  of  Amoz,  write.** 

(2.)  We  find  (as  above  stated)  a  tradition  current  in 
Łhe  Talmud,  in  Łhe  fathers,  and  in  Oriental  literaturę, 
that  Isaiah  suffered  martynlom  in  the  reigii  of  Manas- 
eeh  by  being  sawn  asunder.  It  is  thought  that  an  allu- 
edon  to  thb  tradition  is  found  in  the  Epistle  to  the  He- 
brews  (xi,  87),  in  the  expre8sion  they  were  sawn  asunder 
{irpi(j9ij(rav)i  which  seems  to  harmoiiize  with  2  Kings 
xxi,  16,  **Moreover,  Manasseh  shed  innocent  blood  very 
much." 

(3.)  The  authentiaty  of  the  second  portion  of  the 


prophecies  of  Isaiah  being  admitted  (aee  below),  the 
naturę  of  this  portion  would  seera  to  confirm  the  idea 
that  its  author  had  Uved  under  Manasaeh.  The  styk 
of  the  second  portion,  it  is  asserted,  is  so  different  from 
that  of  the  first  that  both  oould  not  well  have  been 
composed  by  the  same  author,  except  under  the  suppo- 
sidon  that  a  considerable  time  intenrened  between  the 
composition  of  the  first  and  second  portion.  The  oon- 
tents  of  the  latter--such  as  the  complaints  respecting 
groBs  idolatry,  the  sacrifioe  of  children  to  idols,  the 
wickedness  of  rulers,  etc— eeem  to  be  applicable  neither 
to  the  times  of  the  exile,  into  which  the  prcphet  might 
have  transported  himself  in  the  spirit,  nor  to  the  period 
of  the  pious  Hezekiah,  but  are  ąuite  applicable  to  the 
reign  of  Manasseh.  This  last  argument,  howeyer,  is 
too  subjective  in  its  cbaracter  to  be  of  much  weight ; 
the  difference  of  style  referred  to  may  be  morę  readily 
aocounted  for  by  the  dijference  in  the  topics  treated  of, 
and  it  is  a  gratuitous  supposition  that  the  national  sins 
rebuked  in  the  later  prophecies  had  ceased  during  the 
reign  of  Hezekiah.  The  other  arguments  may  be  ad- 
mitted so  far  as  to  allow  a  survivorBhip  on  the  part  of 
the  prophet  beyond  the  sickness  of  Hezekiah,  and  sufH- 
ciently  into  the  reign  of  Bfanasseh  to  have  suffered 
martyrdom  at  the  order  of  the  latter,  but  it  does  not  ap- 
pear that  he  uttered  any  predictions  during  the  fifteen 
added  years  of  Hezekiah ;  at  least  nonę  are  found  ex- 
tant  that  seem  to  belong  to  that  period  (except  eh.  xl 
to  end,  which  may  be  assig^ed  to  the  year  ensuing  Hez- 
ekiah*8  recorery) ;  his  great  age  and  the  absence  of  any 
special  occasion  may  well  acoount  for  his  silence,  and 
he  may  naturally  be  supposed  to  have  occupied  the 
time  in  writing  down  his  former  predictions.  Nor  will 
this  yiew,  which  seems  to  roeet  all  the  requirements  in 
the  case,  require  to  be  extended  a  life-time ;  for  if  Isa- 
iah, like  Jeremiah,  was  called  to  the  prophetical  office  in 
his  youth,  perhaps  at  twenty  years  of  age,  he  would 
haye  been  but  eighty  years  old  at  the  accession  of  Map 
nasseh  (B.C.  G96),  an  age  no  greater  than  that  of  Ho- 
sea,  whose  prophecies  extend  oyer  the  same  period  of 
8ixty  years  (Hos.  i,  1). 

III.  Ilist4)rical  Works  o/ T$aiaIt.-^Beaides  the  collec- 
tion  of  prophecies  which  has  been  presenred  to  us,  Isa- 
iah also  wrote  two  historical  works  (cotnp.  Isa.  xxxyi, 
8,  22).  It  was  part  of  the  yocation  of  the  prophets  to 
writo  the  history  of  the  kingdom  of  God,  to  exhibit  in 
this  history  the  workings  of  Łhe  law  of  retribution,  and 
to  exhort  to  the  true  worship  of  the  Lord  (see  Augusti, 


CHRONOLOGICAŁ  YIEW  OP  I8AIAH'8  PROPHECIEa 


vi:  T;  il,6-«;  lU;  łv,l;  ll,l-«;  iv,  2-6. 

i,«i: 

vł!,  1-1«;  ▼!«,  1-4,  «1, » ;  ix,  1-T ;  viii,  6- 
»;  ix,  8-21 ;  X.  1-4 ;  yU,  17-25. 

xt1L 

xlv,2a^l 

i,  1 ;  zxylil ;  xxiy ;  xxxiii ;  xxv ;  xxrl : 
rxvil;  xL  11-16;  xxxv:  xii;  xxxii,  1- 
8;  ziTtil,  13-24;  xxyiU,  6,  6, 16 ;  xł,  1 
-la 

XV;  XTL 

zz;  ziz;  xviii;  xxx,  1-17;  xxxi,  1-3: 
xxx,  18-33;  xxxi. 4-0;  xxxiv;  xxi,  11- 
IT;  xxliL 

,  zixvl,  1 ;  xxix ;  xxii ;  X,  6-34 ;  xxxvi,  2- 

:    2«;xxxTlL 

I  xiU ;  xiv,  M,  M ;  xxi,  1-10 ;  xly,  1-27. 

xxxviii,  l-6iil,  22, 7-20;  xxxłx. 

Ivn9-12;  ly|I;  x1ylll,22:  lviii;  1{x;  1x111; 

I  lxiv:  1;  xl,  §7-81;  xlviii,  1-21;  x\v\\; 
xlii,  13-17 ;  11 ;  IIK  1-12 ;  xl,  1, 2 ;  xli,  8- 
20;  xlix;  xH,l-7;  xliv,  21-28;  xlv,  1- 

1    IS;  xli,  21-29:  xmi;  xliv.  6-20;  xlv, 

I  14-25:  xlvi ;  xl,  12-28 ;  xlii,  1-12  ?  xl,  Ś 
-U:  m,  1»-16:  mi;  xlii,  18-26;  xUv,  1 

}    -«:lx;lxl;lxli;llv;lv:lvl,l-8;lxv; 

i    lxvt 


JHneipal  7%emu. 


Dlvlne  panlshment  and  nltimate  mer- 

ey  ou  the  nation. 
Rennke  of  the  prevalent  apostasy. 
Rebuke  of  the  popular  want  of  faith 

and  Jttstice,  aud  typiflcation  of  Mes- 

slab. 
Capture  of  Damascus  by  Assyria. 
Againet  the  Phlllstines. 

(  Generally  on  the  fate  of  the  land 
r    and  the  tera  of  Messlah. 

Agalnst  the  Moabites. 

]  Forther  snccess   of  Assyria,  but 
I     check  at  Jerosalem. 

>  Defeat  of  Sennacherlb. 

Chrerthrow  of  Babylon  and  retom  of 

the  Jews. 
Cure  and  reproofof  Hezekiah. 


^  Futurę  of  the  nation  and  person  of 
^    Messlah. 


AoftoUc  Oeeatwm, 


The  prophet'8  Inaugnratlon. 

Accession  of  Ahaz. 
Inyaelon   of  Jemtalem  by 
Rezin  aud  Pekah. 

InyasloD  of  Tlglath-plleser. 
Death  of  Ahaz. 


A  snmmary. 

In  vlew  of  the  Assyrian  con- 
quest. 

! Progress  of  the  Assyrian 
empire. 
Sennachenb*s  inyaaion  of 
Jerasalem. 
Calralnation  of  Assyro-Bab- 

ylonlan  power. 
Hezeklah'8  sickness  and  yan- 
lly. 


Concludlng  summarj. 


B.C. 

dr. 


712 


ISAIAH 


676 


ISAIAH 


Ewleit.  p.  290;  Bertholdt,  Emkit,  iv,  1B49).  Moet  of 
the  hisŁońcal  books  in  the  Old  Testament  have  been 
written  by  prophets.  The  oollecton  of  the  cmnon  plaoed 
most  of  these  books  ander  the  head  prophets ;  hence  it 
appears  that,  even  when  these  histońcal  works  were  re- 
modelled  by  later  editon,  these  editors  were  themselres 
prophets.  The  Chronicles  are  not  placed  among  ^e 
pTophetical.  books  so  called:  we  may  therefore  condude 
that  they  were  not  written  by  a  prophet.  But  their  au- 
thor  constantly  indicates  that  he  composed  his  work 
from  abstracts  taken  verbatim  from  historical  mono- 
graphies  written  by  the  prophets;  consequent]y  the 
books  of  Ruth,  Ezra,  Nehemiah,  and  Esther  are  the  only 
hbtorical  books  of  the  Old  Testament  which  did  not 
originate  from  prophets. 

The  first  historical  work  of  Isaiah  was  a  biography  of 
king  Uzziah  (comp.  2  Chroń.  xxyi,  22), "  Now  the  rest 
of  the  acta  of  Uzziah,  first  and  ]ast,did  Isaiah  the  proph- 
et, the  son  of  Amoz,  write."  The  second  historicfd  work 
of  Isaiah  was  a  biography  of  king  Hezekiah,  which  was 
8ub8equently  inserted  in  the  annals  of  Judah  and  IsraeL 
These  annals  consisted  of  a  series  of  prophetic  mono- 
graphies,  which  were  reoeired  partly  entire,  partly  in 
abstracts,  and  are  the  chief  source  from  which  the  In- 
formation contained  in  the  Chronicles  is  derired.  In 
this  work  of  Isaiah,  although  its  contents  were  chiefly 
historical,  numerous  prophecies  were  inserted.  Hence 
it  is  called  in  2  Chroń,  xxxii,  82,  nn;;5'CJ^  intn,  The 
Vision  of  Isaiah.  In  a  similar  manner,  the  biography 
of  Solomon  by  Ahijah  is  called  in  2  Chroń,  ix,  29, "  the 
prophecy  of  Ahijah."  The  two  histońcal  works  of  Isa- 
iah were  lost,  together  with  the  annals  of  Judah  and  I»- 
rael,  into  which  they  were  embodied.  Whatever  these 
annals  contained  that  was  of  importancc  for  all  ages, 
has  been  preseryed  to  us  by  being  receircd  into  the  his- 
torical books  of  the  Old  Testament,  and  the  predictions 
of  the  most  distinguished  prophets  have  been  formed 
into  separate  collections.  After  this  was  effected,  less 
care  was  taken  to  preserre  the  morę  diffuse  annals, 
which  also  comprehended  many  statements,  of  value 
only  for  particular  times  and  places. 

The  so-called  **A8cension  of  Isaiah'^  is  a  pseudepi- 
graphal  work  of  later  times,  originally  written,  it  would 
seem,  in  Greek  CAvafiaTiKÓv  'R<raiov)y  of  which  only 
an  old  Latin  translation  (Ascensio  IsaicB)  was  known  to 
scholars,  until  Bp.  Laurence  discorered  and  published 
the  Ethiopic  yersion  (Oxford,  1819, 8vo).  It  has  also 
been  edited,  with  notes,  etc.,  by  Dillmann  (Leips.  1877, 
8vo).  See  Carpzov,  Introduct,  iii,  p.  90;  Gesenius, 
Comment,  at  Isa.  i,  3  sq. ;  Knobel,  Prophet,  ii,  176  są. ; 
Stickel,  in  the  lialL Encyldop.  II,  xv,  371  są.;  Stuart'8 
Comment,  on  the  Apocaljfpse^  Introd.;  Whiston,  i4  u^A^m- 
tic  Records,  i,  470 ;  Gieseier,  Yiaio  Jataia  Ulustrata  (Gbtt. 
1832) ;  Gfrdrer,  Propheta  referea  (Stuttg.  1840) ;  Jolo- 
wicz,  Himmelfahrł  u,  Vinon  des  Proph.  Jes.  (Lpz.  1854) ; 
De  heemehaarł  van  den  pro/eet  Jesaja^  in  the  Godge- 
Uerde  Bijdragen  for  1862,  pL  vii,  p.  629-601.    See  Apoo- 

RYPHA;  RjSVELATION8,  SpUBIOCS. 

rV.  Inte{fral  Authetaicity  ofthe  Prophecies  of  Isaiah, 
—The  Jewish  synagogue,  and  the  Christian  Church 
during  oll  ages,  have  considered  it  as  an  undoubted  fact 
that  the  prophecies  which  bear  the  narae  of  Isaiah  real- 
ly  originated  from  that  prophet  Even  Spinoza  did  not 
expre88ly  assert,  in  his  Tractatus  Theologico-Politicus 
(viii,  8),  that  the  book  of  Isaiah  consisted  of  a  collection 
originating  from  a  variety  of  authors,  although  it  is  usu- 
ally  considered  that  he  maintained  this  opinion.  But 
in  the  last  ąuarter  of  the  18Łh  century  this  prevailing 
conviction  appeared  to  some  divines  to  be  inconvenient, 
All  those  who  attack  the  integral  authenticity  of  Isaiah 
agree  hi  considering  the  book  to  be  an  anthology,  or 
gleanings  of  prophecies,  collected  after  the  Babylonian 
exile,  although  they  differ  in  their  opinions  respecting 
the  origin  of  this  collection.  Koppe  gave  gentle  hints 
of  this  view,  which  was  first  explicitly  supported  by 
Eichhom  in  his  Introduction.  Eichhom  advances  the 
hypothesis  that  a  collection  of  Isaian  prophecies  (which 


might  have  been  augmented,  even  before  the  Bahyio- 
niań  exiie,  by  severa]  not  genuine  addidona)  formed  the 
basis  of  the  present  anthology,  and  that  the  oollecton, 
after  the  Babylonian  exile,  considering  that  the  Baon 
on  which  they  were  written  did  not  form  a  Tolume  pro- 
portionate  to  the  size  ofthe  three  other  prophetic  scńlla, 
oontaining  Ezekiel,  Jeremiah,  and  the  minor  prophets, 
annexed  to  the  Isaian  collection  all  other  oracles  at  hand 
whose  authors  were  not  known  to  the  editors.  In  this 
supposition  ofthe  non-identity  of  datę  and  authonfaip, 
many  Grerman  scholars,  and  lately  also  Hitzig  and  Ew- 
ald, followed  Eichhom.  Gesenius,  on  the  contrar^',  main- 
tained, in  his  introduction  to  Isaiah,  that  all  the  wm- 
Isaian  prophecies  extant  in  that  book  originated  fn\m 
one  Buthor,  and  were  of  the  same  datę.  UmtH«it  and 
Koster  on  the  main  point  follow  Gesenius,  conaderii!g 
chaps.  xl  to  lxvi  to  be  a  continuona  whole,  written  by  a 
pseudo-Isaiah  who  livcd  about  the  termination  of  the 
Babylonian  exile.  In  reference  to  other  poitionB  of  the 
book  of  Isaiah,  the  authenticity  of  which  has  been  ques- 
tioned,  Umbreit  exprea8e8  himself  doubtingly,  and  Kd»- 
tor  assigns  them  to  Isaiah.  Gesenius  dedines  to  answer 
the  ąuestion  how  it  happened  that  these  portions  were 
ascribed  to  Isaiah,  but  Hitzig  felt  that  an  answer  to  it 
might  be  expected.  He  accordingly  attempts  to  ex- 
plain  why  such  additions  were  madę  to  Isaiah,  and  not 
to  any  of  the  other  prophetical  books,  by  the  extniordi- 
nary  veneration  in  which  Isaiah  was  held.  He  si}-i 
that  the  great  authority  of  Isaiah  occasioned  im]wrtaitt 
and  distinguished  prophecies  to  be  placed  in  connection 
with  his  name.  But  he  himself  soon  after  destroys  the 
force  of  this  assertion  by  obeerving  that  the  great  ao- 
thority  of  Isaiah  was  eąjecially  owing  to  those  prophe- 
cies which  were  falsely  ascribed  to  him.  A  conriden- 
ble  degree  of  suspicion  must,  howcver,  attaeh  to  the 
boasted  certainty  of  such  critical  inve8tlgations,  if  we 
notice  how  widcly  these  leamcd  men  differ  in  defining 
what  is  of  Isaian  origin  and  what  ia  not,  although  they 
are  all  hnked  together  by  the  same  fundamental  tend- 
ency  and  interest.  There  are  very  few  portions  in  ihe 
whole  collection  whose  authenticity  has  not  been  called 
in  ąuestion  by  some  one  or  other  of  the  various  impugn- 
ers.  Almost  evcry  part  has  been  attacked  eitber  by 
Doderlein,  or  by  Eichhom  (who,  especially  in  a  later 
work  entitled  Die  Hebraischen  Prcpheten,  Gotting.  1816 
I  to  1819,  goes  farther  than  all  the  othcn),  or  by  Jiuti 
(who,  among  the  earlier  adversaries  of  the  integrsl  aa- 
thenticity  of  Isaiah,  uses,  in  his  Venmschte  JSchrijfteB 
[  vols.  i  and  ii],  the  most  oomprehensive  and,  apparently, 
the  best-grounded  arguments),  or  by  Paulus,  Kosenmal- 
ler.  Bauer,  Bertholdt,  I>e  Wette,  Gesenius,  Hitzig.  Ewald, 
Umbreit,  or  others.  The  only  portions  left  to  Isaiah  an 
chaps.  i,  3-9;  xvii,  xx,  xxviii,  xxxi,  and  xxxiii  All  the 
other  chaps.  aro  defended  by  same  and  rejected  by  oth- 
ers ;  they  are  also  referred  to  widely  different  dato.  In 
the  most  modem  criticisra,however,  we  obecnre  an  indi- 
nation  again  to  extend  the  sphere  of  Isaian  authenticity 
as  much  as  the  dogmatic  prindple  and  system  of  the 
critics  will  allow.  Kecent  critics  are  therefore  dispoaed 
to  adroit  the  genuineness  of  chaps.  i  to  xxiii,  Yńth  the 
only  except4on  ofthe  two  prophedes  against  Babykn  in 
chaps.  xiii  and  xiv,  and  in  chap.  xxi,  1-10.  Chapteis 
xxviii-xxxiii  are  idlowed  to  be  Isaian  by  EwaM,  Um- 
breit, and  others. 

Divines  who  were  not  linked  to  these  critics  by  the 
same  dogmatical  interest  undertook  to  defend  the  in- 
tegrity  of  Isaiah,  as  Hensler  (Jesaias  neu  uberteist 
1788),Piper  {Integrii<u  Jesaicf,  1793),  Beckhaus  {.Cther 
die  Integritm  der  Prophetischen  Sckri/ten,  1796),  Jahn, 
in  his  Einleitung,  who  was  the  most  able  among  the  ear- 
lier advocates,  Dereser,  in  his  Bearheihmg  des  Jesaias, 
iv,  1,  and  Greve  {Yatickua  Jesaiee,  Arosteixlam,  1810). 
AU  these  works  have  at  present  only  a  historical  Talne, 
because  they  have  been  surpassed  by  two  reoent  moD- 
ographs.  llie  first  is  by  Jo.  Ulrich  M5Uer  (IM  J«- 
fhenlia  Oraculorum  JesauPj  chap.  xl-xlvi,  Copenhagee, 
1 1825).    Although  thia  work  profeasedly  defenda  oo]y 


ISAIAH 


677 


ISAIAH 


the  latter  portion  of  the  book  of  Isaiah,  there  occur  in 
it  many  aiguments  applicable  also  to  the  fint  portion. 
The  standard  work  on  this  subject  u  that  of  Kleinert 
{Die  AechtheiŁ  des  Jesaias,  vol.  i,  Berlin,  1829).  It  is, 
howerer,  very  diffuse,  and  contains  too  many  hypoth- 
esea.  The  comprehensire  work  of  Schleier  ( [yUrdiffunff 
dtr  Eimcurfe  gegen  die  AUestamentlichm  Wtismyungen 
in  JeiaiaSf  chap.  xiii  and  xiv)  of  course  refers  morę  e»- 
pedally  to  these  chapters,  but  indirectiy  refers  alao  to 
all  the  other  portions  whose  authenticity  bas  been  at- 
tacked.  Since  the  objections  against  the  yarious  parta 
oflsaiah  are  all  of  the  same  character,  it  is  vexy  incon- 
sistent  in  Kost«r,  in  his  work  Die  Propheten  det  alten 
Tegiamfnłeś,  to  defend,  in  page  102,  the  genuineness  of 
chapa.  xiii«  xiv,  and  xxi,  but  neyertheless,  in  pages  117 
and  297,  to  ascribe  chap&  xl-lxvi  to  a  pseudo  Isaiah. 

We  have  space  herc  only  to  indicate  the  foUowing 
reasons  as  establishing  the  integrity  of  the  whole  book, 
ind  as  rindicating  the  authenUcity  of  the  seoond  part : 

1.  ExŁemaUy. — The  unammous  testimony  of  Jewish 
and  Christian  tradition— Ecclua.  xlviii,  24,  25,  which 
manifestly  (in  the  words  irapiKaKifii  ro^c  7rtvBovvTac 
iv  S(iuv  and  yTcHtdii — rd  vir6Kpv<pa  frpiv  ti  irapayi- 
ińoBai  aifrd)  refers  to  this  second  part  The  use  appa- 
rently  madę  of  the  seoond  part  by  Jeremiah  (x,  1-16 ;  v, 
25 ;  xxv,  81 ;  1,  U),  Ezekiel  (xiii,  40, 41),  and  Zephaniah 
(ii,  15 ;  iii,  10).  The  decree  of  Cyrus  in  Erra  i,  2-4, 
which  plainly  is  fotmded  apon  Isa.  xliv,  28 ;  xlv,  1, 18, 
accrediting  Jo0epha8's  statement  {Ant,  xi,  1,  2)  that  the 
Jews  showed  Cyms  Isaiah*s  piedictions  of  him.  The 
inspired  testimony  of  the  N.  T.,  which  often  (Matt  iii, 
3,  and  the  parallel  passages;  Loke  iv,  17;  Acta  viii,  28; 
Bom.  X,  16, 20)  ąootes  with  specification  of  Isaiah'8  name 
prophecies  found  in  the  second  part. 

2.  Intemally.— The  congruity  of  topie  and  sentiment 
in  the  last  twenty-seven  chapters  with  the  preceding 
parta  of  the  book.  The  oneness  of  dicdon  which  per- 
Tades  the  whole  book.  .  The  peculiar  elevation  and 
grandeur  of  style  which,  as  is  univcrBaUy  acknowl- 
edgod,  distingnishes  the  whole  contents  of  the  second 
part  as  mach  as  of  the  first,  and  which  assigns  their 
compotition  to  the  golden  age  of  Hebrew  literaturę. 
The  absenoe  of  any  other  name  than  Isaiah's  claiming 
the  authoiahip.  At  the  time  to  which  the  composition 
is  aasigued,  a  Zechariah  or  a  Malachi  could  gain  a  sep- 
arate  name  and  book ;  how  was  it  that  an  author  of 
such  transcendent  gifts  as  "  the  great  Unnamcd"  who 
wrote  xl-lxvi  oould  gain  nonę  ?  The  claims  which  the 
writer  makes  to  the  ybr«knowledge  of  the  deliverance 
by  Cyrus,  which  daims,  on  the  opposing  view,  must  be 
regaided  as  a  fraudolent  personation  of  an  earlicr  writer. 
Listly,  the  prtdictums  which  it  contains  ofthe  characteTf 
sujparmgsj  death,  and  ffloiification  of  Jesus  Christ :  a  be- 
liever  in  Christ  cannot  fail  to  rcgard  those  predictions 
as  affixing  to  this  second  part  the  broad  seal  of  di- 
viae  inspintion,  whereby  the  chief  ground  of  objection 
against  its  having  been  written  by  Isaiah  is  at  once  an- 


For  a  fuli  yindicatioi  of  the  authenticity  of  Isaiah, 
betides  the  above  worka-  see  professor  Stuart  On  the  Old 
Testom.  Canon,  p.  103  8q.,  and  Dr.  David6on  in  the  new 
edit  of  Home*8  Iniroduction,  ii,  835  8q.,  in  which  latter, 
espedally,  oopious  referencen  are  madc  to  the  latest  lit- 
entore  on  the  subject.  Other  writfjrs  who  have  taken 
the  ssme  side  are  especially  Hengstcnbcrg,  in  his  Chris- 
toloffjff  vol.  ii;  Hllvemick,  Etnleiłung,  voi.  iii  (1849); 
Stier,  in  his  Jesaias  rdcht  Pteudo-Jesaitts  (1860) ;  and 
Keil,  in  hia  EinieUtmg  (1858),  in  which  last  the  reader 
will  find  a  most  satisfactory  compendium  of  the  oontro- 
yenjr,  and  ofthe  gnranda  for  the  generally  received  view. 

V.  OrigiHf  Contents^  and  Style  ofthe  Compiiation,^-'So 
definite  account  respecting  the  method  pursued  in  col- 
lecLing  into  booka  the  ntterances  of  the  prophets  has 
been  handed  down  to  us.  Conceniing  Isaiah  as  well  as 
the  lest,  these  accounts  are  wanting.  We  do  not  cven 
loiow  whether  he  ooUected  his  prophecies  himself.  But 
we  have  no  dedaiye  argument  against  this  opiuion. 


Thofie  critics  who  reject  the  authenticity  of  the  book 
are  compelled  to  invent  other  authors,  and,  of  course, 
dilTerent  theories  with  respect  to  compilers.  Nonę  of 
these  have  proved  satisfactor)'.  (See  the  authorities 
above  referred  to.)  According  to  the  Talmudists,  the 
book  of  Isaiah  was  collectod  hy  the  men  of  Ilezekiah. 
But  this  asBcrtion  rests  merely  upon  Prov.  xxv,  1,  where 
the  men  of  Ilezekiah  are  said  to  have  compiled  the 
Proverbe.  To  us  it  seems  impossible  that  Isaiah  left  it 
to  others  to  collect  his  prophecies  into  a  volume,  because 
we  know  that  he  was  the  author  of  historical  works, 
and  it  is  not  likely  that  a  man  accustomed  to  literary 
occupation  would  have  lefl  to  others  to  do  what  he 
could  do  much  better  himself. 

Chape.  i-v  contain  a  series  of  rebukes,  threatenings, 
and  expo8tuIations  with  the  nation,  especially  Jeruaa- 
lem  its  head,  on  account  of  tne  prevalent  sins,  and  par- 
ticularly  idolatry.  Chap.  vi  descńbes  a  theophany  and 
the  prophefs  own  cali,  in  the  last  year  of  IJzziah  (to 
which  the  preceding  chapters  may  alao  be  assigned,  with 
the  exception  of  chap.  i,  2-31,  which  appears  to  belong 
to  the  first  of  Ahaz).  What  follows  next,  up  to  chap. 
X,  4,  belongs  to  the  reign  of  Ahaz,  and  consists  of  a  sub- 
lime  prediction  of  the  futurę  consolation  of  Israel,  in 
the  first  instance  by  the  deliverance  from  surrounding 
enemies  (especially  Damascus  and  Samaria),  and  event- 
ually  by  the  Messiah,  who  is  prefigured  by  historical 
signs.  The  same  subject  is  treated  in  a  similar  manner 
in  the  succeeding  chapters  (x-xii),  the  deliverance  from 
Assyria  being  there  the  historical  type ;  this  is  the  first 
portion  appertaining  to  the  reign  of  Hezekiah.  Then 
follows  a  series  of  prophecies  against  foreign  nations,  in 
which  the  chronological  arrangement  has  been  departed 
from,  and,  instead  of  it,  an  arrangement  according  to 
contents  has  been  adopted.  In  the  days  of  Hezekiah, 
the  nations  of  Western  Asia,  dwelling  on  the  banks  of 
the  Euphrates  and  Tigris,  morę  and  morę  resembled  a 
threatening  tompesL  The  prophetic  gift  of  Isaiah  was 
morę  fully  unfolded  in  sight  of  the  Assyrian  invasion 
under  the  reign  of  Ilezekiah.  Isaiah,  in  a  series  of  vis- 
ions,  describes  what  Assyria  would  do,  as  a  chastising 
rod  in  the  band  of  the  Lord,  and  what  the  successors  of 
the  Asayrians,  the  Chaldees,  would  perform,  according 
to  the  decree  of  God,  in  order  to  realize  divinc  justice  on 
earth,  as  well  among  Israel  as  among  the  heathen.  The 
prophet  showB  that  mercy  is  hidden  behind  the  clouds 
of  wrath.  This  portion  comprises  chaps.  xiii-xxxv,  the 
8everal  prophecies  of  which  were  uttered  at  various 
times  prior  to  the  Assinrian  invasion,  although  isolated 
portions  appear  to  belong  to  previoua  reigns  (e.  g.  chap. 
xvii  to  the  occasion  of  the  alliance  of  Ahaz  with  Tig- 
lath-pileser;  chap.  xiv,  28-32,  to  the  death  of  Ahaz). 
With  the  termination  of  this  war  terminated  also  the 
puUic  Ufe  of  Isaiah,  who  added  a  historical  section  in 
chaps.  xxxvi-xxxix,  in  order  to  facilitate  the  right  un- 
derstanding  of  the  prophecies  uttered  by  him  during  the 
most  fertile  period  of  his  prophetic  ministry.  Then  fol- 
lows the  conclusion  of  his  work  on  earth  (chaps.  xl  to 
the  end),  compoeed  during  the  peaoeful  residue  of  Hez- 
ekiah's  reign,  and  containing  a  doeely  connected  series 
of  the  most  spiritual  disclosures  touching  the  futurę  his- 
tory  of  the  nation  under  the  Messiah.  This  second  part, 
which  contains  his  prophetic  legacy,  is  addressed  to  the 
smali  congregatiou  of  the  faithful  strictly  so  called ;  it 
is  analc^ous  to  the  last  speeches  of  Moses  in  the  fields 
of  Moab,  and  to  the  last  speeches  of  Christ  m  the  circle 
of  his  disciples,  related  by  John. 

The  proclamation  of  the  Messiah  is  the  inexhaustible 
Bourcc  of  consolation  among  the  prophets.  In  Isaiah 
this  consolation  is  so  elear  that  some  fathers  of  the 
Church  were  inclined  to  style  him  rather  erangelist  than 
prophet,  The  following  are  the  outliues  of  Messianic 
prophecies  in  the  book  of  Isaiah:  A  scion  of  David, 
springing  from  his  family,  aftcr  it  has  fallen  into  a  very 
Iow  estate,  but  being  also  of  divine  naturę,  shall,  at  first 
in  lowliness,  but  as  a  prophet  filled  with  the  spirit  of 
God,  proclaim  the  divłne  doctriue,  develop  the  law  in 


ISAIAH 


6ł8 


ISAIAH 


tnith,  and  render  it  the  animating  principle  of  national  j 
life ;  he  shall,  as  high-pnest,  by  his  ricarioas  sufTering 
and  his  deatb,  remoye  the  guilt  of  his  nation,  and  that 
of  other  nations,  and  finally  nile  as  a  mighty  king,  not 
only  over  the  coyenant-people,  but  over  all  nattons  of 
the  earth  who  will  subject  themselyes  to  his  peaceful 
Bceptre,  not  by  yiolent  compulsioni  but  induced  by  loye 
and  gratitude.  He  will  make  both  the  morał  aud  the. 
physical  oonsequence8  of  sin  to  cease ;  the  whole  earth 
shall  be  iilled  with  the  knowledge  of  the  Lord,  and  all 
enmity,  hatred,  and  destruction  shall  be  removed  eyen 
from  the  brute  creation.  This  is  the  surA^cy  of  the  Mes- 
sianic  preaching  by  Isaiah,  of  which  he  constantly  ren- 
ders  prominent  those  (lortions  which  were  most  calcu- 
lated  to  impress  the  people  under  the  then  existing  cir- 
cumstances.  The  first  part  of  Isaiah  is  directed  to  the 
whole  people,  consequently  the  gloiy  of  the  Messiah  is 
here  dwelt  upon.  llie  fear  lest  the  khigdom  of  God 
sliould  be  oyerwhelmed  by  the  power  of  heathen  na- 
tions  is  remoyed  by  pointing  out  the  glorious  king  to 
come,  who  would  eleyate  the  now  despised  and  appar- 
ently  mean  kingdom  of  God  aboye  all  the  kingdoms  of 
this  world.  In  the  second  part,  which  is  morę  particu- 
larly  adihressed  to  the  ŁK\oy{fj  tht  tUct^  than  to  the  whole 
nation,  the  prophet  exhibits  the  Messiah  raore  as  a  di- 
vinc  teacher  and  higb-pńest  The  prophet  here  pieach- 
es  rigłiteousness  through  the  blood  of  the  seryant  of 
God,  who  will  support  the  weakness  of  sinners,  and  take 
upon  himself  their  sorrows. 

Isaiah  stands  pre-eminent  aboye  all  other  prophets, 
as  wcll  in  the  contents  and  spirit  of  his  predictions,  as 
also  in  their  form  and  style.  Simplicity,  cleamess,  sub- 
limity,  and  freshness,  are  the  neyer-failiiig  characters 
of  his  prophecies.  £yen  Eichhom  roentions,  among  the 
first  merits  of  Isaiah,  the  concinnity  of  his  expre88ions, 
the  beautiful  outline  of  his  imagcs,  and  the  fine  execu- 
tion  of  his  specchcs.  In  refercucc  to  richncss  of  im- 
agery  he  stands  between  Jrremiah  and  EzekieL  S^nm- 
bolic  actions,  which  frcqucntly  occur  in  Jercmiah  and 
Ezekiel,  seldom  occur  in  Isaiah.  The  same  is  the  case 
with  yisions,  strictly  so  called,  of  which  there  is  only 
one,  namely,  that  in  chap.  yi,  and  cyeu  it  is  distinguish- 
ed  by  its  simplicity  and  deaniess  aboye  that  of  the  latcr 
prophets.  But  one  characteristic  of  Isaiah  is,  that  he 
likes  to  giye  signs — that  is,  a  fact  then  present,  or  near 
at  hand — as  a  pledge  for  the  morę  distant  futurity,  and 
that  hc  thus  supports  the  feebleness  of  roan  (comp.  yii, 
20 ;  xxxyii,80 ;  xxxviii,  7  są.).  The  instanccs  in  chaps. 
yii  and  xxxyiii  show  how  much  he  was  conyinced  of 
his  yocation,  and  in  what  intimacy  hc  liycd  with  the 
Lord,  by  whose  aasistancc  alonc  hc  could  effcct  what 
he  ofTers  to  do  in  the  one  passage,  and  what  he  grants 
in  the  other.  The  spiritual  riches  of  the  prophet  are 
scen  in  the  yariety  of  his  style,  which  always  befits  the 
subject  When  he  rcbukcs  and  threatens  it  is  like  a 
storm,  and  when  he  comforts  his  language  is  as  tender 
and  mild  as  (to  use  his  own  words)  that  of  a  mother 
comforting  her  son.  With  regard  to  style,  Isaiah  is 
comprehensiye,  and  the  other  prophets  diyide  his  riches. 

Isaiah  enjoyed  an  authority  proportionate  to  his  gifts. 
We  Icam  from  historj'  how  great  this  authority  was 
during  his  life,  cspcciidly  under  the  reign  of  Hezekiah. 
Seyeral  of  his  most  definite  prophecies  were  fulfilled 
while  he  was  yet  alive ;  for  instance,  the  oyerthrow  of 
the  kingdoms  of  Sjnia  and  Israel;  the  inyasion  of  the 
Assyrians,  and  the  diyine  deliyerance  from  it ;  the  pro- 
longation  of  life  granted  to  Hezekiah ;  and  seyeral  pre- 
dictions against  foreign  nations.  Isaiah  is  honorably 
mcntioned  in  the  liistorical  books.  The  later  proph-  | 
ets,  espedally  Nahum,  Habakkuk,Zephaniah,  Jeremiah, 
Haggai,  Zechariah,  and  Malachi,  dearly  prove  that  his 
book  was  diligently  read,  and  that  his  prophecies  were 
attentiyely  studied.  The  authority  of  the  prophet  great- 
ly  increased  after  the  fulfilment  of  his  prophecies  by  the 
Babylonian  exile,  the  yictories  of  Cyrus,  and  the  deliyer- 
ance of  the  coyenant-people.  Eyen  C>tus  (according  to 
the  account  in  Josephus,  A  ni.  xl,  1, 1  and  2)  was  induced 


to  set  the  Jews  at  liberty  by  the  prophecies  of  Isaiah 
conoeming  himself.  Jesus  Sirach  (xlviii,  22-25)  bestowi 
splendid  praise  upon  Isaiah,  and  both  Philo  and  Josephu 
speak  of  him  with  great  yeneration.  He  attained  the 
highest  degree  of  authority  after  the  times  of  the  Ktw 
TesUment  had  proyed  the  most  important  part  of  his 
prophecies,  namely,  the  MessianiCfto  be  diyine.  Clirist 
and  the  apostles  quote  no  prophecies  ao  freąuently  as 
those  of  Isaiah,  in  order  to  prove  that  be  who  had  ap- 
peared  was  one  and  the  same  with  him  who  had  been 
promised.  The  fathers  of  the  Church  abound  in  proises 
of  Isaiah. — Kitto;  Smith.     SeeMESSŁA.R. 

YI.  The  foUowing  are  expre8B  commentaries  on  the 
whole  of  the  book  of  Isaiah,  the  most  important  bdng 
designated  by  an  asterisk  (*)  prefixed :  Origen,  Frag- 
menła  (in  Opp.  iii,  104) ;  also  Homilia  Cm  Jerome,  Oj^, 
iv,  1097) ;  Eusebius,  Commentarii  (in  Montfaacon's  Col' 
iectio  Novd) ;  Ephrem  Syrus,  Enarratio  (from  the  Srr. 
in  Opp,  I,  ii,  635) ;  Basil,  Enarratio  (Gr.  in  his  Opp.  I,  ii, 
585;  tr.  in  LaL,  Basie,  \bl%  4to) ;  Jerome,  Cotfunti^am 
(in  Opp.  iy,  1);  also  Adbreriatio  (ift.  iy,  1181);  Giiy- 
sostom, Interpretatio  [on  i-yiiij  (Gr.  in  Opp.y\,  1);  C^- 
ril,  Commentarii  (Gr.  in.  Opp.  ii,  1  8q.) ;  Tfacodoret, /«- 
lerpretation  [in  Greek]  (in  Opp.  II,  i) ;  Procopius,  A>i<- 
ome  (Gr.  and  Lat,  Par.  1580,  foL) ;  Bupertua,  lu  Emom 
(in  Opp.  i,  429) ;  Heryeus,  Commentarii  (in  Per,  Tketaur. 
III, i);  S.JaPchi  [I e.**lRBahr']y Commentaries  (fromihe 
Heb.  odit  Breithaupt,  Goth.  1713, 1714,3  yola.  4to);  D. 
Kimchi,  Commentarius  (from  the  Heb.  by  Malamineus, 
Florence,1774,4to);  Abrabanel,  0*1*16  (cd.  UEmpereur, 
Lugd.  B.  1G81, 8yo) ;  Aąuinas,  Commentarii  (Lugd.  lóSl, 
8yo ;  also  in  Opp.  ii) ;  Luther,  Enarrationes  (in  Opp.  iii, 
294);  "bleUncihonyArsntmentum  (in  Opp.  m,S9S);  (Eco- 
lampadius,  Hypomnematon  (BasiL  1525, 1567,  4fo) ;  Zn- 
inglius,  Complanaiio  (Tigur.  1529,  foL;  also  in  Oj^.  iii, 
163) ;  Dietcrich,  A  uaUgung  (Norimb.  1543, 4co) ;  Calyin, 
Commentarii  (Gen.  1561,  1559,  1570,  1688,  1587,  1617, 
fol.;  in  French,  ib.l552,4to;  1572,  foL;  in  English  by 
Colton,  Lond.  1609,  foL ;  by  Pringle,  Edinb.  1850, 4  yok 
8yo) ;  Day,  Erpotition  (London,  1654,  foL) ;  Musculw, 
Commentarius  (BasiL  1557, 1570, 1600,  1628,  foL);  Bor- 
rhasius,  Commentarii  (BasiL  1561,  foL) ;  Dnicania.  Com- 
mentarius (lipsiae,  1568,  foL) ;  Strigel,  Coneiones  (Lipsie, 
1568, 12mo);  Forerius,  Commentaria  (Ycnioe,  1563,  foL; 
Antwerp,  1565, 8yo ;  also  in  the  Criłici  Sacri,  iv);  Sas- 
bouth,  Commentarius  (Argent  1668,  8yo);  Markintus, 
Ejpositio  (Par.  1564 ;  Gen.  1610,  foL) ;  Pintua,  Commm- 
tana  (Lugd.  1561, 1567;  Antw.  1567, 1572,  foL);Gnalthe- 
rus,  Ilomilice  (Tigur.  1567,  folio) ;  Bullinger,  Erposifio 
(Tigur.  1667,  foUo) ;  Sehiecker,  Erkidr.  (LpŁ  1569, 4to); 
Castri,  Commentaria  (Salam.  1570,  folio) ;  I>e  l^idados, 
Dilucidationes  (Salam.  1 572, 8  yola.  foL) ;  Schnepf.  Sdio- 
Ue  (Tub.  1575, 1588,  foL) ;  Osorius,  Parapkrasis  (Bonon. 
1576, 4to ;  CoL  Agr.  1 579, 1584, 8vo) ;  Ursinius  Cornmfn- 
łarius  (in  Opp.  iii) ;  Wigand,  A  dnolafiones  (ErfonL  1581, 
8yo) ;  Guidell,  Commentarius  (Pena.  1598-1600,  2  ydb. 
4to) ;  Montanus,  Commentarii  (Antw.  1599,  2  yola.  4to); 
D.  Alyarez,  Commentarii  (Romę,  1599-1702,  2  yoK  foL; 
Lugd.  1716,  foL) ;  ArcuUuius,  CommentariuM  (ed.  Mcnt- 
zer,  Frankfort,  1607;  Lips.  1658,  8yo);  Arama,  C*^*** 
D'^ąnj  (Ven.  1608, 8yo;  also  in  Frankfurtcr'a  RabUnic 
Bibie);  Sancius,  Commentarius  (Lugd.  1615;  Antwerp 
and  Mogunt  1616,  foL) ;  Heshusius,  Commentarius  (lltIL 
1617,  foL) ;  Forster,  Commentarius  (yitanh*  1620, 16^ 
1674, 1679, 4to) ;  Oleastre,  Commentarii  (Par.  1622, 1G36, 
foL)  ;  k  Lapide,  In  Esaiam  (Antw.  1622,  folio) ;  G.  Alya- 
rez, Exposiiio  (Lugd.  1623,  foL) ;  I>e  Aroonea,  Ebidia- 
łio  (Lugd.  1642, 2  yols.  folio) ;  Di  Marino^  tbiS  y.'^P 
(Yerona,  1652,  4to);  Laisne,  Commentairt  (Pftris,  1664, 
fol.) ;  Laflado,  TB  ''i»  (Vcn.  1667,  foL) ;  Taraiiis,  Com- 
mentarius (Rost  1673, 1708,  4to) ;  Btentios,  Commenta- 
rius  (in  Oj^.  Iy,  TUb.  1675) ;  Jackson,  A  imoiations  (Lon- 
don, 1682,  4to) ;  S.  Schmid,  Commentarius  (ed.  Sandha- 
gen,  Hamb.  1693, 1695, 1702, 1728, 4to) ;  Siberama,  Com- 
Tnenłarius  (Amst  1700, 4to);  Cocoeuia^  Commenfarwa  Q» 


ISATJITES 


679 


ISENBIEHL 


OffP'  "ł  Anwt.  1701);  Dorsche,  CommaUariut  (ed.Fecht,  I 
HAmb.  17U3,4U)) ;  HeUeDbroek,  Arib/aanfi^  (Rotterdam, 
17W,  4  Yola.  4U)) ;  Schmuck,  PraUctwne*  (edit.  VUch,  | 
Dread.  1708, 4to) ;  WhiUs,  Cofwmentury  (Lond.  1709, 4to) ; 
Kortuni,  Untertuchung  (Lp*.  1709, 4to) ;  ♦  Yitringa,  Com- 
mvi:..tia8j  Louv.  1714-20, 1724, 2  yola.  foL;  in  German, 
Herb.  171^22,  2  vol&  fol.;  the  laat  abridged  by  Bu- 
aching,  HaL  1749,  4to) ;  Peteraen,  łJrkldr.  (t  rckft.  1719, 
4to);  Leigb,  Commeniar  (Bruiuw.  1725-34, 6  yoIs.  4to) ; 
Uoheiael,  Ob$ervatvme$  (Gedan.  1729,  8vo);  Le  Clerc, 
CommaUarius  (an  abetiact,  Amsterdam,  1731,  foL);  Wo- 
ken,  Erkidr,  (Lpz.  1732, 8ro) ;  Duguct,  Jixplication  (in 
Fraich,  Paris,  1734, 5  rob.  12mo) ;  Rambach,  Erldarung 
(Ztlr,  1741, 4to) ;  Reicbel,  ^rtóii*.  (Lpz.  and  GorL  1756- 
59, 16  pta.  8vo) ;  Yogel,  UfMchreSbuntj  (HaL  1771, 8vo) ; 
Struenacc,  Ueben,  (Halb.  1773,  8vo);  Cnwiua,  Jlypom- 
nemata  (Lipa.  1778,  8\-o) ;  *Lowth,  Commentary  (Lond. 
1774,  1778,  4to;  and  frequently  sińce  in  many  forms; 
finaily  in  oonnection  with  the  notce  of  Bp.  Patrick  and 
othens  in  4  rola.  8vo,  Lond.  and  Philadelphia) ;  Walther, 
Anmerk\  (HaL  1774, 4to) ;  ♦Doderiein,  Nota  (Altd.  1775, 
1780, 1783, 8vo) ;  Holden,  Parapkraae  (Chelmsf.  1776, 2 
rola.  8vo) ;  Rambach,  i4fwiierł.  [to  tr.  of  Matt,  Henry'8] 
(LpŁ  1777,  8vo);  Sponsel,  ^  6A«nd/«n^  (Nurenb.  1779- 
80.2  ▼oU.4to) ;  Koppe,  Anmerk.  [to  Lowth]  (Lpz.  1779- 
81,4  vo]a.8vo);  Moldenhauer,i4  nmerl:.  (Quedlinb.  1780, 
4to) ;  Weise,  Redan  (Halle,  1780, 8vo) ;  *Seiler,  Erlauł. 
(ErL  1783, 8vo) ;  Cube,  Amnerk.  (BerUn,  1785-6,  2  yols. 
8\'o);  Rieger,^*cAo/»en  (Memming.  1788, 8vo) ;  Henasler, 
Anmerk.  (Hamb.  and  Kieł,  1788,  8vo);  Berthier,  NoU» 
[French]  (Paris,  1789,  5  rola.  12mo) ;  Kocher,  VindicuB 
(Tabing.  1790,  8vo) ;  Dodson,  NoU»  (Lond.  1790,  8vo) ; 
Kragelius,  Bearbeiiung  (Brem.  1790,  8\'o) ;  Maoculloch, 
Lectures  (Lond.  1791-1805,  4  yoIs.  8vo);  Paulus,  Clatiś 
(Jena,  1793, 8vo) ;  Fraser,  Commentary  (Edinburgh,  1800, 
8vo);  Bp.  Stock,  TranOation  (Bath,  1805, 4to) ;  Van  der 
Palm,  Anmerk,  [Dutch]  (Amst,  1805,  2  voU  8vo) ;  Ot- 
tensoBser,  ^si^ą  (FUrth,  1807, 8vo) ;  Dereser,  Erkidrunff 
(Frckft  a.  M.  1808,  8vo) ;  ^Gesenius,  Commeniar  (Lpz. 
1821-9, 3  Yols.  8vo) ;  Horsley,  NofeJt  (in  Biblical  Criłi- 
CMi«,i,229);  Molier,  ^  wiier*.  [Danishl  (Copenh.  1822, 
8vo) ;  De  Liere,  TraducHon  (Paris,  1823,  8vo) ;  Knos, 
Enodatio  (Up8aL1824,8vo);  Jones,  TramUUion  (Oxford, 
1830, 8vo;  1842, 12mo) ;  Jeuour,  Notes  (London,  1830,  2 
vols.8vo);  Hendewerk,£riWa>.  (Konigsł)erg,  1830-44,  2 
vols.8yo) ;  Maller,  Erkidr.  (Brem.  1831, 8vo,  pt  i) ;  Hit- 
zig,  A  tuleyuruf  (Heidelb.  1833, 8vo) ;  Maurer,  Commenfa- 
riits  (Lpz.  1836, 8vo) ;  Bames,  Notes  (BosL  1840, 8  vols. 
8vo;  abridged,  N.  Y.  1848,  2  vols.  12mo);  ♦Henderson, 
Commentary  (London,  1840,  1857,  8vo) ;  Govett,  Notes 
(Lond.  1841, 8 vo);  *Umbreit,  Commeniar  (Hamb.  1841- 
42,2  vols.8vo);  Heinemann,  ©nbna  t<'J]5^  (BerL1842, 
87o);  *KBobe\,Erklarw»g  (LpzllSid.  8vo);  Dreschler, 
Erkiar,  (Stuttg.  1845-9, 8  yoIs.  8vo)  ;  *Alexander,  Com^ 
mtntary  (N.  Y.  1846-7, 1865, 2  yoIs.  8yo  ;  Glasgow,  1848, 
8\ro;  abridged,  N.  York,  1851, 2  yoIs.  12mo) ;  Stier,  Nicht 
Pseudo-Jesaias  (Barmen,  1850,  2  pts.  8vo) ;  Smithson, 
TransUUwn  (Lond.  1860, 8 vo);  Keith,  Commentary  (Lon- 
don, 1850,  8yo)  ;  Meier,  Erkidr.  (pt.  i,  Pforzh.  1850, 8  vo) ; 
WTłiflh,  Paraphrase  (Lond.  1855,  8vo) ;  Williams,  Coto- 
meniary  (Lond.  1857, 8vo) ;  Diedrich,  Erkidr.  (Lpz.  1859, 
8vo);  Renner,  AusUgung  (Stuttg.  1865,  8vu);  Luzatto, 
CommenH  [in  Heb.]  (PadoYa,  1865-7, 2  yoIs.  8yo)  ;  Sec- 
ond,  Commentaire  (GeneY.  1866, 8vo) ;  *Delitzsch,  Con^ 
mentor  (in  Keil  anid  Delitzsch^^series,  Lpz.  1866;  tr.  in 
aarke'8  libnuy,  Edinb.  1867, 2  Yol8.8vo);  Cheyne,  Notes 
(Lond.  1868, 8vo) ;  Ewald,  Commentary  (cbaps.  i-xxxiii, 
tnnsL  from  the  Germ.  by  Gloyer,  London,  1869, 12mo) ; 
Neteler,  Gnindlage  (Munst.  1869,  8yo)  ;  Birks,  Commen- 
tary (Lond.  1871, 8^'o).    See  Prophet. 

Isaultes.    See  Obadiah  (Abu-Isa). 

Ll'cah  (Heb.  Yiskah\  nXD%  spy;  Sept  'U(rxa\  the 
danghter  of  Haran,  and  sister  of  Milcah  and  Lot  (Gen. 
xi,  29 ;  comp.  31 ).  Jewish  tnidition,  as  in  Joeephus  (^4  nt, 
i,  6,  5),  Jerome  {O^eesi.  tn  Genesim),  and  the  Targam 
PaeadoNjoDathao,  identifies  her  with  Sarah  (q.  y.). 


Iscar^lot  (*l0vapuur}|c,  probably  from  Heb.  !d*«BI 
ni^*^p,  man  ofKerioth),  a  sumame  of  Judas  the  trai- 
tor,  to*  distinguish  him  from  others  of  the  same  name 
(Matt.  X,  4,  and  often}.    See  Kerioth  ;  Judas. 

Is^daSl  ('I(r^ai7X,yulg.  Gaddahel),  the  name  of  one 
of  the  heads  of  families  of  "  Solomon's  seryants"  that  re- 
tumcd  from  the  captiyity  (1  Esd.  y,  33) ;  eyidently  the 
GiDDEL  (q.  Y.)  of  the  Heb.  textfl  (Ezra  ii,  56 ;  Neh.  yU, 
58). 

Iselln,  Isaao,  a  German  philosopher  and  philan- 
thropist,  was  bom  at  Bcale  March  27, 1728.  He  was 
educated  at  the  uniYersity  for  the  law  profession,  bot 
much  of  his  time  was  deyoted  to  the  study  of  philoso- 
phy,  and  he  desenrea  our  notice  as  the  author  of  a  Ge~ 
schichte  d,  Mensekheit  (Frkf.  and  Lpz.  1764,  2  yols.  8yo, 
and  oilen),  and  Traiime  eines  Mensckeąfreundes  (ZUrich, 
1758, 8yo,  and  often).  He  was  a  yery  uonspicuoua  help- 
er  of  Basedow  (q.  y.)  in  the  philoeophic  efforta  of  th« 
latter,  foanded  a  *^society  for  the  pubUc  good*'  at  Basie, 
aided  in  founding  the  Helyetic  Society  (1761),  in  which 
Hirzel,  Saraain,  Pfeffel,  and  others  took  part,  and  was, 
in  short,  one  of  the  moet  prominent  leadets  in  the  hu- 
manitarianiam  or  philanthropism  which  flourished  in 
the  second  half  of  last  century  in  Germany,  and  more 
especially  in  Switzerland.  Isaac  Iseliii  died  June  15, 
1782.  See  Hursfs  Hagenbach,  Church  HisL  o/ the  ISth 
and  I9th  Cent.  i,  sect  xiv ;  professor  Yischer,  Programm 
(Basie,  1841, 4to).     (J.U.W.) 

Iselln,  James  Chriatopher,  a  Swiss  Protestant 
theologian  and  philolpgist,  was  bom  at  Bade  June  12, 
1681.  Aftcr  he  had  acąuired  a  good  knowiedge  of  the 
classics,  and  especially  of  Greek,  he  applicd  himself  to 
the  sUidy  of  Hebrew  and  theology.  He  was  ordained 
in  1701,  and  in  1705  was  appointed  professor  of  history 
and  rhetoric  at  Marburg.  In  1707  he  retumed  to  Baale, 
and  became  snocessiyely  professor  of  history,  of  antiąui- 
ties,  and  finally  (1711)  of  thcolngy,  in  the  uniyerBity  of 
that  place.  In  1716  he  yisited  France  (he  had  preyiously 
madę  a  jotuney  there  in  1698),  and  was  warmly  receiyed 
at  Paris  by  chancellor  D'Ague8seau.  In  1717  he  was 
elected  member  of  the  Acadćmie  des  Inscriptions  et 
BellesLettres.  Iselin  died  AprU  14, 1787.  Hehadbeen 
in  relation  with  some  of  the  most  eminent  men  of  hia 
day,  such  as  cardinal  PassioneT,  the  archbishop  of  Can- 
terbuiy,  Wake,  the  marąuis  Beretti  Laudi,  ambassador 
of  Spain,  etc.  He  wrotc  In  Sententiam  Jac.  Bery.  Bot- 
suet  de  Babylone  bestiiscue  et  meretrice  Apocalypseos 
(Basie,  1701, 4to)  -.—Specimen  observationum  atque  con^ 
jecturarum  ad  orientalem  phUologiam  et  criłicen  pertir 
nentium  (Basie,  1704,  4to) :  —  De  Magorum  in  Persia 
Domuiałione  (Marb.  1707, 4to)  -.—Dissertatio  qua  mundi 
cetemitas  argumentis  historicis  oonfutatur  (1709, 4to)  :— 
De  Canone  Nori  Testamenti  (in  Aliscellanea  Groninga- 
noy  YoL  iii),  against  Dodwell :  etc  He  also  contributed 
a  number  of  articles  to  the  Meratre  Suisse  ( 1734-6) j  etc 
See  Beck,  Vita  Iselim  {Tempe  Hehetica,  voL  iii) :  Eloge 
d'Iselm  (Ilist. de  FA caddes  Inscriptions,  yoI.  yi) ;  Schel- 
hom,  Ijebensbeschr.  Iselin's  (Acta  Ilist. Eccles.  yoI. ii;  iii, 
1156;  iy,1160);  Moreri, /)icf. ;  Chauffepie, /Jif^ ;  J.K. 
Iselin,  Laudatio  /M>/tm.— Hoefer,  Now.  Biogr.  Generale, 
xxYi,50     (J.N.P.) 

Isenbiehl,  Johann  Lauresz,  b  German  Roman 
Catholic  theologian,  was  bom  on  the  Eichsfdd  in  1744. 
Of  his  early  history  we  know  nothing,  but  in  1773  we 
find  him  appointe<i  to  the  position  of  professor  of  the 
Oriental  languages  and  exegetica]  literaturę  at  Mentz. 
As  his  first  theme  beforo  the  studenta  oyer  whom  he 
had  been  chosen  to  preside,  he  selected  the  interpreta- 
tion  of  Isa.  vił,  14.  He  adranced  the  opinion  that  it 
was  erroneous  to  attribute  any  connection  to  this  pas- 
sagę  with  Matt.  i,  23,  and  asserted  that  it  did  not  at 
all  refer  to  Iramanuel  the  Christ,  or  to  Mary,  tl\,e  moth- 
cr  of  Christ ;  that  Matthew  only  alluded  to  this  passage 
because  of  its  similarity  with  the  circumstances  of  the 
birth  of  Christ.     Of  ćourse  he  was  at  once  deposed 


KHAM 


080 


ISH-BOSHETH 


from  mg  pońtion,  and,  as  is  ctutomary  among  Roman 
Catholics,  deprivecl  of  his  personal  liberty  on  account  of 
propagating  and  cheriiihing  heretical  opLnions.  He  was 
returned  to  the  theological  semuiaiy  for  further  isutruc- 
(ion,  and  released  two  yeon  after.  In  1778,  howcrer,  he 
appeared  before  the  public,  defending  his  original  opin- 
ion  under  the  title  of  Neuer  Yersuch  trier  d,  WMSć.^n- 
gen  r.  Immanuel  (Coblenz).  He  had  meanwhile  been 
reappointed  to  the  professional  dignity,  and  his  penist- 
ency  in  defending  his  peculiar  interpretations  again  de- 
pńved  him  of  his  podtion,  and  he  was  once  morę  im- 
prisoned  and  put  on  triaL  His  book  was  forbidden  to 
all  good  Roman  Gatholics  by  all  archbi Aope  and  bish- 
ops,  and  in  1779  a  buli  was  issued  against  it  by  the  pope. 
In  the  interim  he  had  madę  his  escape  ftom  prison,  but, 
finding  the  eoclesiastical  authorities  all  opposed  to  him, 
he  recalled  his  former  opinion,  and  was  honored  with 
ecdesiastical  dignity  (1780).  In  1803  his  inoome  was 
reduced  to  a  smali  pension,  and  he  lired  in  want  until 
his  death  in  1818.  Isenbiehl  also  wrote  on  the  diacrit- 
ical  pointa  under  the  title  of  Corptu  dedńonum  dogmat- 
icarum.  See  Walch,  Neueste  RtUg.  Getckichte,  yiii,  9  8q. ; 
Schrockh,  Kirckengeack,  t.  d.  R^,  yii,  208  8q. ;  Henke, 
Kirchenguck,  yii,  199  8q. ;  Fuhnnann,  Homdw,  d  Kir^ 
ehenguck.  u,  607.     (J.  H.  W.) 

laham,  Chebter,  a  Congregational  minister,  was 
bom  in  1798,  and,  after  a  course  of  preparatory  study  at 
the  Latin  Grammar  School  in  Hartford,  Conn^  entered 
Yale  College,  where  he  graduated  in  1820.  Shortly  af- 
terwaids  he  went  to  AndoTcr  Seminary  to  prepare  for 
the  ministry,  upon  which  he  had  decidod  soon  after 
his  conversion  while  at  Yale  College.  In  1824,  on  the 
completion  of  his  theological  coorsc  of  stndy,  he  acoept- 
ed  a  cali  to  a  newly-formed  church  at  Taunton,  where 
he  had  been  preaching  during  the  latter  part  of  the  last 
year  spent  at  Aiidover.  But  the  great  exeition8  which 
the  work  demanded  of  him  were  too  seyere  upon  his 
constitution,  and  the  symptoms  of  consumption  appear- 
ing  shortly  after,  he  went  South  in  the  hope  of  recoyer- 
ing  his  health.  He  continued  failing,  however,  and  re- 
turned to  Borton  April  19th,  to  die  among  his  friends. 
Dr.  Leonard  Bacon,  who  was  a  classmate  of  Chester  Ish- 
am  at  Yale,  speaks  vexy  highly  of  his  attainments  and 
religious  bearing,in  Sprague'8  Atmals  ofthe  American 
Pulpity  ii,  704  8q. 

Ishaneki  (eled  hand)j  a  Russian  sect  which  arose 
in  1666,  under  the  fear  thiat  the  printed  Church  books 
were  tainted  with  crrpr,  sińce  they  differed  from  the  old 
MS.  copies  which  had  been  so  long  in  use.  They  stout- 
ly  adherc  to  the  letter  of  Scripture,  deny  different  ordcrs 
among  the  clergy,  and  any  gradation  of  rank  among 
the  people,  but  under  Alexander  I  obtained  toleration, 
though  they  had  preHously  betn  expo8ed  to  coustant 
pereecution.  —  Eadie,  Eccle»,  Diet,  s.  v.  See  also  Eck- 
azdt,  Modem  Btusia,  s.  v. 

Ish^^bah  (Hebrew  Yuhbach/  n:^^"^,  praiser ;  Sept 
'It<raPa)f  a  desccndant  of  Judah,  and  founder  ("  father") 
of  Eshtemoa  (q.  v.) ;  he  probably  was  a  son  of  Mercd 
by  his  wife  Hodiah  (1  Chroń,  iv,  17).  B.C.  post  1612. 
See  Mrred.  He  is  perhape  the  same  as  Isiii  (q.  v.)  in 
yerse  20,  and  apparently  identicai  with  the  Nahah  (q. 
V.)  of  ver.  19. 

I8h'bak  (Heb.  Yithbak',  paO%2raner;  Sept.  'Ua^ 
pwKy  *l€<r/dór),  one  of  the  sons  of  Abraham  by  Keturah 
(Gen.  xxv,  2 ;  1  Chroń,  i,  S2\  RC.  post  2024.  We  are 
told  that  Abraham  "gave  gifts"  to  the  sons  of  Keturah, 
'<and  sent  them  away  from  Isaac  his  son  eastward,  unto 
the  east  country"  (Gen.  xxv,  1-6).  They  settled  in  the 
region  east  of  the  Anbah,  in  and  near  Mount  Seir,  and 
southward  in  the  peninsula  of  Sinai  (Gen.  xxxvii,  28, 
86 ;  £xod.  iii,  1 ;  Numb.  xxxi,  9, 10).     See  Keturah. 

•The  Mttlements  of  this  people  are  very  obscure,  and 
Poole  (in  Smith's  Diet.  of  the  BiMe^  a.  y.)  suggests  as 
posBible  that  they  may  be  recovered  in  the  name  of  the 
yalley  called  Sabdk,  or,  as  it  is  alao  called,  **iSibdt,  in  the 


Dahna"  {Mardnd,  s.  y.).  The  Heb.  looŁ  precisdy  cor 
responds  to  the  Arabie  (sabaq)  in  etymology  and  sigm- 
fication.  The  Dahna,  in  which  is  situate  Sabak,  is  a 
fertile  and  extensiye  tract  belonging  to  the  Benl-Te- 
mlm,  in  Nejd,  or  the  highland  of  Arabia,  on  the  nartb> 
east  of  it,  and  the  borders  of  the  great  desert^  reacbing 
from  the  rugged  tract  (**  hazn")  of  Yens<i'ah  to  the  aands 
of  Yebrln.  It  contains  much  pasturage,  with  compara- 
tiyely  few  weUs,  and  is  greatly  frequented  by  the  Aiabs 
when  the  yegetation  is  plentiful  {Mnahtarak  and  Ma- 
rdsidf  s.  y.).  There  is,  howeyer,  inother  Dahnk,  ncirer 
to  the  Euphrates  (t&.),  and  some  confusion  may  exist 
regarding  the  tnie  position  of  SabAk ;  but  either  Dabnii 
is  suitable  for  the  settlements  of  Ishbak.  The  fiist-men- 
tioned  DahnJi  lies  in  a  fayorable  portion  of  the  widely- 
stretching  country  known  to  haye  been  peopled  by  the 
Keturahites.  They  extended  from  the  borders  of  Psl- 
estinc  even  to  the  Persian  Gulf,  and  tnu^es  of  thor  set- 
tlements roust  be  looked  for  all  along  the  edge  of  the 
Arabian  peninsula,  where  the  desert.  merges  into  the 
cultiyaUe  land,  or  (itself  a  rocky  nndulating  pUtean) 
rises  to  the  wild,  mountainous  country  of  Nejd.  Ishbsk 
seems  from  his  name  to  haye  preoeded  or  goiie  befoie 
his  brethren :  the  place  suggested  for  his  dweliing  is  lar 
away  towards  the  Persian  Gulf,  and  penetrates  alśo  into 
the  penuisula.  See  Arabia.  There  are  many  plaocs, 
howeyer,  of  an  almost  similar  deriyation  (root  gMabak)^ 
as  ShebekyShibdt,  and  Eah-Shdhah;  the  last  of  which 
has  especially  been  supposed  (as  by  Schwarz,  Pak«t.  pi 
215 ;  Bunsen,  Bibelwerk,  I,  ii,  53)  to  presenre  a  tnce  of 
Ishbak.  It  is  a  fortiess  in  Arabia  Petnea,  and  is  near 
the  well-knowii  fortress  ofthe  Crusaders'  times  called 
El-Karak  This  great  castle  of  Shobek  "  stauda  on  the 
top  of  the  mountain  rangę  which  bounds  the  vaUcy  of 
Arabah  on  the  east,  aod  about  twelve  milcs  north  of  Pe> 
tra,  on  the  crcst  of  a  peak  commanding  a  wide  riew. 
It  was  built  by  Baldwin,  king  of  Jenisalem,  in  AJ).  1115^ 
on  the  site  of  a  much  morę  ancient  fortress  and  city, 
and  it  was  one  of  the  chief  stronghoUłs  of  the  CnifiaderB. 
The  name  they  gaye  it  was  Mon$  Regalis;  but  by  the 
Arabs,  both  before  and  sinee,  it  has  been  unifonnly  call- 
ed Shobek.  It  was  finally  taken  from  the  Fraiiks  ty 
Sakdin  in  A.D.  1188  {Ge»ta  Dei  Per  PrancoSj  p.  426, 
611,  812;  Bohadin,  Yita  Saladiniy  p.  88,  54,  and  Ifidex 
GeograpkicuSf  s.  y.  Sjanbachum).  Tlie  castle  is  still  in 
tolerable  preseryation,  and  a  few  families  of  Arabs  find 
within  its  walls  a  secture  asylum  for  themselyes  and  their 
flocks.  It  contains  an  old  church,  with  a  Latm  insoip' 
tion  of  the  crusading  age  oyer  its  door  (Buickhanlt, 
Trarela  in  Syria^  p.  416 ;  llawl-hook  for  Sgr,  and  PaL 
p.  58;  see  Forster,  Geogr.  ąf  Arabia ,  i,  352;  Robinson, 
Bib.  Bes.  ii,  164)"  (Kitto).    See  Idum^ka. 

I^'bl-be'nob  (Heb.  Yiskbi''Benob\  S:2  -s:??, 
mg  seat  is  at  Nob^  as  in  the  maigin,  for  which  the  text 
has  323  12^%  Yishbo^-Benob',  kiś  seat  is  at  Ncb;  Sept 
'Uff pi  iivb  Ńw/3,Vulg.  Jeski-benob)^  one  of  the  Repha- 
im,  a  gigantic  warrior  who  borę  a  spear  of  300  shekei/ 
weight,  and  came  near  slaying  Dayid  m  a  personal  ren- 
counter,  but  was  slain  by  Abishai  (2  Sam.  xxi,  16).  RC 
cir.  1018.     See  Giast. 

l8h-bo'Bheth  [many  Tsh^-botketh,^  (Heb./«*^'- 
sketh,  nc^a^D^^M,  man  of  shame,  i.  e.  basifut,  other- 
wise  diggraoeful;  Sept  *l<fp6at^  r.  r.  'UpooBi,  Joeepb. 
'UPoff^oCy  Vulg.  IiboMtk)y  the  yoangest  of  Sau]*s  fbor 
sons,  and  his  legitimate  sucoessor,  being  the  only  one 
who  soryiyed  him  (2  Sam.  ii-iy).  His  name  appeais 
(1  Chroń,  viii,  88 ;  ix,  89)  to  have  been  originally  Esh- 
baai^  brą*irM, "  the  man  of  Baal.*'  Whether  this  in- 
dicates  that  Baal  was  used  as  equivalent  to  Jtkorak^ 
or  that  the  reyeience  for  Baal  still  lingered  in  Israelitteh 
families,  is  uncertain ;  but  it  can  hardly  be  donbted  that 
the  name  (Ish-bosheth, "'  the  man  of  Aame^  by  whkli 
he  is  commonly  known  must  haye  been  subetituted  ier 
the  original  word,  ¥rith  a  yiew  of  remoying  the  scandal- 
ous  sound  of  Baal  ftom  the  name  of  an  lanelitish  kiqg 


ISH-BOSHETH 


681 


ISH-BOSHETH 


(Me  Ewald,  hr,  Gesch,  u,  883),  and  supeneding  it  by 
Łhe  oontemptuous  woid  (Bmheth — **8hame")  which 
waa  aometimes  used  as  ita  equivalent  in  later  times  (Jer. 
iii,  24 ;  xi,  13 ;  Hoai  ix,  10).  A  ńmiUur  process  appears 
in  the  alteration  of  Jerabbaal  (Jiidg.  viii,  35)  into  Jernb- 
besheth  (2  Sam.  xi,  21) ;  Meri-baal  (2  Sam.  iv,  4)  into 
Hephiboeheth  (1  Chroń,  viii,  84 ;  ix,  40).  The  Ust  thne 
caaes  all  occur  in  Saal*s  family.  See  8aul.  He  is 
thought  by  some  to  be  the  same  with  Isiiui  O^^?*  1 
xiv,  49),  these  twe  namea  having  considerable  resem- 
blance ;  but  thb  is  forbidden  by  1  Sam.  xxxi,  2,  comp. 
with  1  Chroń,  viii,  33.  See  Abinadab.  Hc  appears 
to  have  been  forty  years  of  age  at  the  time  of  the  battie 
of  Gilboa  (B.C.  lOód),  in  which  he  was  not  himself  pres- 
ent,  but  in  which  his  father  and  three  older  brothers 
perished ;  and  therefore,  according  to  the  law  of  Orien- 
tal,  though  not  of  European  succeasion,  hc  ascended  the 
throne,  as  the  oldest  of  the  royal  family,  rather  than 
Mephibosheth,  son  of  his  elder  biother  Jonathan,  who 
was  a  child  of  five  years  old.  Too  feeble  of  himself  to 
aeize  the  sceptre  which  had  just  fallen  from  the  hands 
of  Saiil,  he  was  immediately  talcen  under  the  care  of 
Abner,  his  powcrful  kinsman,  who  brought  hira  to  the 
ancient  sanctuary  of  Mahanaim,  on  the  east  of  the  Jor- 
dan, beyond  the  reach  of  the  victorioa8  Philistines,  and 
he  was  there  recogniaed  as  king  by  ten  of  the  twelve 
tribes  (2  Sam.  ii,  8,  9).  There  was  a  momentary  doubt 
eren  in  those  remote  tribes  whether  they  shonld  not 
ckMe  with  the  offer  of  David  to  be  their  king  (2  Sara. 
ii,  7;  iii,  17).  Bat  this  was  overraled  in  favor  of  Ish- 
bosheth  by  Abner  (2  Sam.  iii,  17),  who  then  for  five 
jears  slowly  but  effectually  restored  the  dominion  of 
the  house  of  Saul  over  the  trans-Jordanic  territory,  the 
l^ain  of  Esdraelon,  the  central  mountains  of  Ephraim, 
the  frontier  tribe  of  Benjamin,  and  eventually  **  over  all 
Israel*'  (except  the  tribe  of  Jadah,  2  Sam.  iif,  9).  In  2 
Sam.  ii,  10  Ish-bosheth  is  sald  to  have  reigned  two 
years,  which  some  nnderstand  as  the  whole  amomit  of 
his  icign.  As  David  reigned  8even  and  a  half  years 
over  Judah  before  he  became  king  of  all  Israel  apon  the 
death  of  Ish-bosheth,  it  is  oonceived  by  the  Jewish 
chronologer  (Seder  Olom  Rabba,  p.  87),  as  well  as  by 
Kimchi  and  others,  that  there  was  a  vacancy  of  five 
yeara  in  the  throne  of  Israel  It  is  not,  however,  agreed 
hy  those  who  entertain  this  opinion  whether  this  va- 
cancy  took  place  before  or  after  the  reign  of  Ish-bo- 
sheth. Some  think  it  was  before,  it  being  then  a  mat- 
ter  of  dispute  whether  he  or  Mephibosheth,  the  son  of 
Jonathan,  should  be  madę  king;  bat  others  hołd  that 
after  his  death  fire  years  elapsed  before  David  was  gen- 
eraby  recognised  as  king  of  all  IsraeL  If  the  reign  of 
Ish-bosheth  be  limited  to  two  years,  the  latter  is  doubt- 
IcflB  the  best  way  of  accoanting  for  the  other  five,  sińce 
no  ground  of  delay  in  the  snccession  of  Ish-bosheth  is 
anggested  in  Scripture  itself ;  for  the  claim  of  Mephibo- 
sheth, the  son  of  Jonathan,  which  some  have  produced, 
being  that  of  a  lamę  boy  five  years  old,  whose  father 
never  reigned,  against  a  king*s  son  forty  years  of  age, 
woold  have  been  deemed  of  little  weight  in  IsraeL  Be- 
tides,  our  notions  of  Abner  do  not  aUow  us  to  suppoee 
that  under  him  the  question  of  the  snccession  could 
have  remained  five  years  in  abeyance.  But  it  is  the 
morę  ostial,  and  perhaps  the  better  course,  to  settlc  this 
qne8tion  by  supposing  that  the  reigns  of  David  ovcr 
Jodah,  and  of  Ish-bosheth  over  Israel,  were  nearly  con- 
temporaneoua,  namely,  about  8even  years  each;  and 
that  the  two  years  named  are  only  the  first  of  this  pe- 
riod, being  mentioned  as  those  ftom  which  to  datc  the 
oommencement  of  the  ensuing  events  —  namely,  the 
wars  between  the  house  of  Saul  and  that  of  David. 
This  appears  to  be  the  view  taken  by  Josephus  (^Ant. 
rii,  1,  3 ;  comp.  2, 1).  Ish-bosheth  thos  reigned  8even, 
or,  as  some  will  have  it,  two  years — ^if  a  power  so  nn- 
certain  as  his  can  be  called  a  reign.  Even  the  sem- 
blance  of  anthority  which  he  possessed  he  owed  to  the 
will  and  influence  of  Abner,  who  kept  the  real  control 
of  aflkin  in  his  own  hands.    The  wars  and  negotia- 


tions  with  David  were  enttrely  carried  on  by  Abner  (2 
Sam.  ii,  11;  iii,  6,  12).  After  variou8  skirmishes  be- 
tween the  forces  of  the  rival  kings,  a  pitched  battie  was 
fought,  in  which  the  army  of  I)avid  under  Joab  was 
completely  victorious.  Aiter  this  the  interest  of  David 
continually  waxed  stronger,  while  that  of  Ish-bosheth 
decUned  (2  Sam.  iii,  1).  At  length  Ish-bosheth  accused 
Abner  (whether  rigbtly  or  wrongly  does  not  appear)  of 
an  attempt  on  his  father's  concubine,  Kizpah,  which, 
according  to  Oriental  usage,  amounted  to  treason  (2 
Sam.  iii,  7 ;  comp.  1  Kinga  ii,  13 ;  2  Sam.  xvi,  21 ;  xx, 
3).  AIthough  accustomed  to  tremble  before  Abner, 
even  Ish-boeheth*s  temper  was  rouscd  to  resentment  by 
the  discovery  tliat  Abner  had  thus  invaded  the  harem 
of  his  late  father  Saul,  which  was  in  a  peculiar  maimer 
sacred  imder  his  care  as  a  son  and  a  king.  By  this  act 
Abner  exposed  the  king  to  public  contempt,  if  it  did 
not  indeed  leave  himself  open  to  the  suspicion  of  intend- 
ing  to  advance  a  daim  to  the  crown  on  his  own  behalf. 
Abner  resented  this  suspicion  in  a  borst  of  passion, 
which  vented  itself  in  a  solemn  vow  to  transfer  the 
kingdom  from  the  house  of  Saul  to  the  house  of  David, 
a  purpose  which  from  this  time  he  appears  steadily  to 
have  kept  in  view.  Ish-bosheth  was  too  much  cowed 
to  answer;  and  when,  shortly  afterwards,  through  Ab- 
ner's  negotiation,  David  dcmanded  the  restoration  of 
his  former  wife,  Michał,  he  at  once  tore  his  sister  from 
her  reluctant  husband.  and  committed  her  to  Abner'9 
charge  (2  Saro.  iii,  14, 15).  It  is,  perhaps,  right  to  at- 
tribute  this  act  to  his  weakness;  although,  as  Da\id 
allows  that  he  was  a  righteous  man  (2  Sam.  iv,  10),  it 
may  have  been  owing  to  his  sense  of  justice.  This 
trust  seems  to  have  given  Abner  a  convenient  opportur 
nity  to  enter  into  negotiations  with  David ;  but  in  the 
midst  of  them  he  himself  fell  a  victim  to  the  resentment 
of  Joab  for  the  death  of  Abishai.  The  death  of  Abner 
deprived  the  house  of  Saul  of  their  last  remaining  sup- 
port.  See  Abner.  When  Ish-bosheth  heard  of  it,  "his 
hands  were  feeble,  and  all  the  Israelites  were  troubled" 
(2  Sam.  iv,  1).  In  this  extremity  of  weakness  he  fell  a 
victim,  probably,  to  a  revenge  for  a  crime  of  his  father. 
The  guaid  of  Ish-bosheth,  as  of  Saul,  was  taken  from 
their  own  royal  tribe  of  Benjamin  (1  Chroń,  xii,  29). 
But  among  the  sons  of  Benjamin  were  reckoned  the  de- 
scendants  of  the  old  Canaanitish  inhabitants  of  Beeroth, 
one  of  the  dties  in  league  with  Gibeon  (2  Sam.  iv,  2, 3). 
Two  of  those  Beerothites,  Baana  and  Rechab,  in  re- 
membrance,  it  has  been  conjectured,  of  Saul's  slanghter 
of  their  kinsmen  the  Gibeonites,  determined  to  take  ad- 
vantage  of  the  helplessneaa  of  the  royal  house  to  destroy 
the  only  repre8entative  that  was  left,  excepting  the 
child  Mephibosheth  (2  Sam.  iv,  4).  They  were  "chieft 
of  the  marauding  troops"  which  used  from  time  to  time 
to  attack  the  territory  of  Judah  (comp.  2  Sam.  iv,  2 ;  iii, 
22,  where  Łhe  same  word  ^^^Ą  is  used;  \u\g. principeg 
latnmum).  They  knew  the  habits  of  the  king  and 
court,  and  acted  acoordingly.  In  the  stillness  of  an 
Eastem  noon  they  entered  the  palące,  as  if  to  carry  off 
the  wheat  which  was  piled  up  near  the  entrance.  The 
female  slave,  who,  as  usual  in  Eastem  houses,  kept  the 
door,  and  was  heiśelf  sifting  the  wheat,  had,  in  the  heat 
of  the  day,  fallen  asieep  at  her  task  (2  Sam.  iv,  6,  6,  in 
Sept.  and  Vulg.).  They  stole  in,  and  passed  into  the 
royal  bedchamber,  whero  Ish-bosheth  was  asieep  on  his 
cooch  dnring  his  midday  siesta.  They  stabbed  him  in 
the  stomach,  cnt  oiT  his  head,  madę  their  escape,  all 
that  aftemoon,  all  that  nighr,  down  the  valley  of  the 
Jordan  (Arabab,  A.y.  ^'pUiin;'*  2  Sam  iv,  7),  and  pre- 
sented  the  head  to  David  as  a  welcome  present.  B.C. 
1046.  They  met  with  a  stem  reception  from  the  mon- 
arch,  who — as  both  right  feeling  and  good  policy  re- 
quired — testified  the  utmoet  horror  and  concem.  He 
rebuked  them  for  the  cold-blooded  murder  of  an  Inno- 
cent man,  and  ordered  them  to  be  executed ;  their  hands 
and  fect  were  cat  off,  and  their  bodies  suspended  ovc!r 
the  tank  at  Hebron.  The  head  of  Ish-boeheth  was 
caiefully  buried  in  the  sepukhre  of  his  great  1 


ISHI 


682 


ISHMAEL 


Abner,  at  the  same  place  (2  Sam.  vr,  9-12). — Smith; 
Kitto;  Fairbairn.     See  Dayid. 

I'Bhl  (Heb.rMAł','^riC:,»a/»tóry;  Sept.'Ii«i,*Ec, 
'Ie<rei),  the  name  of  four  men. 

1.  The  son  of  Appaim,  and  father  of  Sheshan,  the 
eighth  in  descent  from  Judah  (1  Chroń,  ii,  81).  B.C. 
prób.  post  1C12. 

2.  The  father  of  Zoheth  and  Bcn-zoheth,  a  desoend- 
ant  of  Judah,  but  through  what  Une  does  not  appear  (1 
Chroń,  iv,  20).  The  name  is  possibly  a  corruptlon  for 
the  IsHBAH  of  ver.  17.     B.C.  perh.  cir.  1017. 

3.  Fatlier  (progenitor)  of  sereral  (four  only  are 
named)  Simeonites  who  invaded  Mt.  Seir  and  dispos- 
sessed  the  Amalckites  (1  Chion.  iv,  42).    B.C.  antę  726. 

4.  One  of  the  chiefs  of  Maiiasseh  East,  of  famous  val- 
or  (1  Chroń.  v,  24).    Ił.C.  cir.  720. 

I'SHI  (Heb.  Ml',  "^b^^St,  my  hutband;  Scpt  b  avt)p 
/iov,  Yulg.  Vir  fiieus),  a  metaphorical  name  prescribed 
for  himself  by  Jehovab,  to  be  used  by  the  Jewish  Churcb, 
expre88ive  of  her  futurę  fidelity  and  pTivilege  of  intima- 
cy,  in  oontrast  with  the  spirit  of  legalism  indicated  by 
the  title  iiaali, "  my  master"  (Hos.  ii,  16). 

Ishi^ah  (Hebrew  Yufuhiyah\  nj^*%  once  «injir»,  1 
Chroń.  xłi,  6 ;  lent  by  Jekocah),  the  name  of  8everal  men, 
diiferently  Anglidzcd. 

1.  (Sept.  'leffirt,  Vulg.  JeHOf  Author. Tiers. « Ishiah.") 
The  fiflh  son  of  Uzzi  (grandsou  of  Issachar),  a  raliant 
chieftain  of  his  tribe  (1  Chroń,  vii,  3).  RC.  cir.  1618; 
but  in  vcr.  2  he  is  apparently  madę  nearly  coutemporaiy 
with  David.     See  Uzzi. 

2.  (Sept.  'Itamd  v.  r.  'I<«a,  'I<tio  ;  Y\j]g,Jeńa ;  Auth. 
Tera.  "  Jeuiah,"  "  lashiah.")  The  second  son  of  Uzziel 
(grandson  of  Levi),  and  father  of  Zechariah  (1  Chrou. 
xxiii,  20;  xxiv,  25).  B.C.  cir.  1618;  although  the  con- 
Łext  scems  to  place  this  one  also  in  the  time  of  David. 

3.  (Sept.  'Iiffiaf.YuIg.  ye*ia#,  Auth.Yers.  "lashiah.") 
The  first  of  the  sens  of  Rehabiah,  and  grcat-grandson 
of  Moses  (1  Chroń,  xxiv,  21;  compare  xxiii,  17;  xxvi, 
25,  where  he  is  callcd  Jksuaiah).  KC.  post  1618.  Sec 
Behmuaił 

4.  (Sept  'I«na,  Vulg.  Jeńa^  Author.  Yers.  «  Jcsiah.") 
A  Korhite,  and  one  of  the  brave8  that  joined  David  at 
Ziklag  (I  Chroń,  xii,  6).     RC  1055. 

5.  (Sept.  'Ić(r<Tia,  ViUg.  Josue^  Auth.  Tera.  "  Ishijah.") 
One  of  the  "  sons"^  of  Harim,  who  renounced  his  Gentile 
wife  after  the  captivity  (Ezra  x,  31).     B.C.  459. 

Ishi^jah  (Ezra  x,  31).     See  Ishtah,  5. 

Ish^^ma  (Heb.  ¥ighma\  K^d"^,  desolatiorij  otherwise 
higk ;  SepL  'l£<T/<a),  a  dcsccndant  of  Judah,  apparently 
named  ^with  two  brothcrs  and  a  sister)  as  a  son  of  the 
founder  ("father")  of  £tam  (1  Chroń,  iv,  8).  B.C  prób. 
cir.  1612. 

Ish^maSl  (Heb.  Yuhmael%  b»5^;a%  heard  by  God; 
Sept,  *loiiar)\  Joseph.  'lofiariKoc),  the  name  of  severBl 
men. 

1.  Abraham^s  eldcst  son,  bom  to  him  by  the  concu- 
bine  Hagar  (Gen.  xvi,  15;  xvii,  23).  See  Abraham; 
Hag  AR.  It  may  here  be  remarked  that  the  age  attrib- 
utcd  to  him  in  Gen.  xxi,  14  is  not  inconsistent  with 
Gen.  xvii,  26  (see  Tuch,  Comm.  p.  882).  The  story  of 
his  birth,  as  recorded  in  Gen.  xvi,  is  in  evexy  respect 
characteriHtic  of  Eastem  life  and  morals  in  the  preaent 
age.  The  intensc  dcsire  of  both  Abraham  and  Sarah 
for  children ;  Sarah's  gift  of  Hagar  to  Abraham  as  wife ; 
the  insolence  of  the  slave  when  suddenly  raised  to  a 
place  of  importance;  the  jealousy  and  conseąuent  tyr- 
«nny  of  her  high-spirited  mistress;  Hagar's  Hight,  re- 
turn, and  submission  to  Sarah — for  all  these  incidents 
we  could  easily  find  parallels  in  the  modem  history  of 
ever>'  tribe  in  the  desert  of  Arabia.  The  origin  of  the 
name  Ishmael  is  thus  explained.  When  Hagar  fled 
from  Sarah,  the  angel  of  the  Lord  found  her  by  a  foun- 
tain  of  water  in  the  wildemess  in  the  way  of  Shur  .  .  . 
aml  hc  said, "  Bchold,  thou  art  with  child|  and  shalt  bear 


a  son,  and  shalt  cali  his  name  I$kmad  ('God  hean^ 
because  the  Lord  hath  htcard  thy  afniction"  (Gen.  xn, 
11).  Hagar  had  evidently  intended,  when  she  fled,  to 
return  to  her  native  country.  But  when  the  angel  told 
her  of  the  dignity  in  storę  for  her  as  a  mother,  and  the 
power  to  which  her  child,  as  the  son  of  the  gieat  patii- 
arch,  wottld  attain,  she  re8olved  to  obey  his  voio^  md 
to  submit  herself  to  Sarah  (xvi,  10-13). 

1.  Ishmael  was  bom  at  Mamre,  in  the  eighty-osth 
year  of  Abraham's  age,  eleven  years  after  his  axrival  in 
Canaan,  and  fourteen  beforc  the  birth  of  laaac  (xvi,  3, 
16;  xxi,  5).  B.a  2078.  Ko  partiailars  of  his  early 
life  are  recorded,  except  his  drcumcision  w^hen  thiiteen 
years  of  age  (xvii,  25).  B.C.  2065.  H  is  father  was  eri- 
dently  strongly  attached  to  him ;  for  when  an  heir  was 
promised  through  Sarah,  he  said,  "Oh  that  I&hnucl 
might  live  before  thee !"  (xvii,  18).  Thcn  wcre  renewed 
to  Abraham  in  morę  dcfinite  terms  the  promises  madę 
to  Hagar  regardiug  Ishmael:  ^M  for  Ishmael, I  hare 
heard  thee;  behold,I  have  blessed  him,  and  wiU  make 
him  fmitful,  and  will  multiply  him  exceedingly :  twelve 
prin6e8  shall  he  beget :  and  I  will  make  him  a  great  na- 
tion"  (ver.  20).  Before  this  time  Abraham  scems  to 
have  regarded  his  iirst-bom  child  as  the  heir  of  the 
promise,  his  belief  in  which  was  counted  unŁo  łum  ibr 
righteousness  (xv,  6) ;  and  although  that  faith  shooe 
yet  morę  brightly  after  his  paasing  weakncas  when  Isac 
was  iunst  promised,  his  love  for  Ishmael  is  recorded  ia 
the  narrative  of  Sarah's  expu]sion  of  the  latter:  **And 
the  thing  was  vcTy  grievous  in  Abraham*s  sight  be- 
cause of  his  son"  (xxi,  1 1). 

Ishmael  seems  to  have  remained  in  a  great-  measore 
under  the  charge  of  his  mother,  who,  knowing  his  des- 
tiny,  would  doubtless  have  him  tiained  in  such  exer- 
cises  as  would  fit  him  for  successfully  acting  the  pait  of 
a  desert  prince.  Indulged  in  every  whim .  and  wish  by 
a  fund  father,  encouraged  to  daring  and  adventure  l^ 
the  hardy  nomada  who  fed  and  dcfended  his  father's 
flocks,  and  having  a  fitting  field  on  that  southeni  bar- 
der-land  for  the  play  of  his  uatural  propensiiiea,  I&hmael 
grew  up  a  trae  child  of  the  desert — a  wild  and  waywaid 
boy.  The  perfect  freedom  of  desert  life,  and  łiis  con- 
stant  intercourse  with  thoee  who  looked  up  to  him  with 
minglcd  feelings  of  pride  and  alTectiou  aa  the  eon  aod 
heir-apparent  of  their  great  chief,  tended  to  nuke  him 
impatient  of  rcstraint,  and  overbearing  in  his  temper. 
The  excitement  of  the  chase— ^speeding  across  the  plains 
of  Beersheba  after  the  gazelles,  and  through  the  ruggcd 
mountains  of  Engedi  after  wild  goats,  and  bears,  and 
leopards,  inured  him  to  danger,  and  trained  him  fur  war. 
Ishmael  must  also  have  been  accustomed  from  child- 
hood  to  thosc  feuds  which  raged  almost  incessantly  be- 
tween  the  "  trained  servants"  of  Abraham  and  their  war- 
like  ncighbors  of  Philistia,  as  well  as  to  the  morę  seń- 
ous  iucursions  of  roving  bands  of  freebootcrs  from  the 
distant  East.  Such  was  the  school  in  which  the  great 
demrt  chief  was  trained.  Subeeąuent  e%'ents  8er>*cd  to 
fili  up  and  fashion  the  remaining  features  of  IshmaeTs 
character.  He  had  cvidently  been  treated  by  Abra> 
ham'8  dependenta  as  their  master^s  heir,  and  Abraham 
himself  had  apparently  encouraged  the  belief.  The  un- 
cxpected  birth  of  Isaac,  therefore,  must  have  been  to  hira 
a  ead  and  bitter  disappointment.  And  when  hc  was  af- 
terwards  driven  forth,  with  his  poor  mother,  a  homelecs 
wauderer  in  a  pathless  wildemess;  when,  in  oonj«quence 
of  such  uimatural  harshness,  he  was  brought  to  the  vciy 
brink  of  the  graye,  and  was  only  savcd  from  a  paioful 
death  by  a  miracle;  when,  after  having  been  reaxvd  in 
luxur)',  and  taught  to  look  forward  to  the  pofcscaaon  of 
wealth  and  power,  he  was  suddenly  left  to  win  a  scanty 
and  uncertain  subsistence  by  hia  sword  and  bow^we 
necd  scarcely  wonder  that  his  proud  spirit,  revolting 
against  injtistloe  and  cmelty,  should  make  him  what 
the  angel  had  predicted,  "  a  wild-ass  man ;  his  haad 
against  every  man,  and  every  man*s  band  against  him** 
(xn,32). 

2.  The  first  recorded  outbieak  oi  lahmael^a  nade  and 


ISHMAEL 


683 


ISHMAEL 


wajrward  spirit  oocuned  at  the  weaning  of  lauc  &C. 
2061.  On  that  occaaion  Abraham  madę  a  great  feasŁ 
after  the  ciutom  of  the  country.  In  the  excitement  of 
the  moment,  heightened  probably  by  the  paiuful  con- 
aciottsnen  of  his  owii  bUghted  hopes,  Ishmael  could  not 
restzain  hk  temper,  but  gare  way  to  some  insulting  ex- 
pieasions  or  gestmres  of  mockeiy.  Perhaps  the  very 
name  of  the  child,  Isaac  (^  lauffkter"}^  and  the  exuber- 
ant  joy  of  his  aged  motber,  may  have  fumished  sub- 
jecŁs  ibr  hb  mitimely  aatire.  See  Isaac.  Bethisasit 
may,  Sanh'8  jealous  eye  and  quick  ear  speedtly  detect- 
cd  him ;  and  she  aaid  to  Abraham,  *^  £xpel  this  sLare 
and  her  son ;  for  the  son  of  this  8lave  shall  not  be  heir 
with  my  aon,  with  Isaac"  (xxi,  10).  Now  Abraham 
k)ved  the  boy  who  first,li8ping  the  name  "  father,"  open- 
ed  m  his  heart  the  gushing  fountain  of  patenial  affec- 
tion.  The  bare  mention  of  such  an  unnatural  act  madę 
him  angry  even  with  Sarah,  and  it  was  only  when  in- 
fluenced  by  a  divine  admonition  that  he  yielded.  The 
bńef  account  of  the  departure  of  Hagar,  and  hcr  joumey 
through  the  desert,  is  one  of  the  most  beautiful  and 
touching  pictuies  of  patriarchal  life  which  has  come 
down  to  us :  **  And  Abraham  rosę  early  in  the  moming, 
and  took  bread,  and  a  skin  of  water,  and  gave  it  to  Ha- 
gar, putting  it  on  her  shoulder,  and  the  lad  Olpl^n)^  and 
wnt  her  away ;  and  she  departed,  and  wandęred  in  the 
wilderneas  of  Beersheba.  And  when  the  water  was 
spent  in  the  skin,  she  placed  the  Ud  under  one  of  the 
ahraba.  And  she  went  and  aat  down  oppoute,  at  the 
distance  of  a  bowshot ;  for  she  said,  I  wili  not  see  Łhe 
death  of  the  lad.  And  she  sat  opposite,  and  lifted  up 
her  voice  and  wept'*  (xxi,  14:-16). 

Isaac  was  bom  when  Abraham  was  a  himdred  years 
old  (xxi,  5),  and  as  the  weaning,  according  to  Eastem 
usage,  probably  took  place  when  the  child  wac  about 
three  years  old,  Ishmael  himself  must  have  been  then 
about  8ixteen  years  old.  The  age  of  the  Lister  at  the 
period  of  his  circumcision,  and  at  that  of  hin  «.  xpulsion, 
has  giren  occasion  for  some  literary  speculation.  A  care- 
ful  consideration  of  the  passagcs  referring  to  it  fails,  how- 
erer,  to  show  any  discrepancy  bet^r^en  them.  In  Gen. 
xvii, 25,  it  is  stated  that  he  wa*»  th-.rteen  years  old  when 
he  was  circumcised;  and  in  xxi.  14  (probably  two  or 
three  years  later)  **  Abraham  .  .  .  took  bread,  and  a 
bottle  of  water,  and  gave  [it]  unto  Hagar,  putting  [it] 
on  her  shoulder,  and  the  child,  and  sent  hcr  away." 
Herę  it  b  at  least  unnecessar^'  to  assume  that  the  child 
was  put  on  her  shoulder,  the  construction  of  the  Ilebrew 
(mi»tranaUted  by  the  Sept.,  with  whom  seems  to  rest  the 
ori^in  of  the  que8tion)  not  reąuiring  it;  and  the  sense 
of  the  pasaage  rcndcrs  it  highly  improbable :  Hagar  cer- 
tainly  carried  the  bottle  on  her  i^oulder,  and  perhaps 
the  bread:  she  could  hardly  have  also  thus  carried  a 
child.  A^ain,  these  passages  arc  ąuite  irreconcilablc 
with  ver.  2Ć)  of  the  last  quotcd  chapter,  where  Ishmael  is 
tcrmetl  "l^iJn,  A.  V.  "  lad**  (comp.,  for  uae  of  this  word, 
Gen.  xxxiv,  19;  xxxvii,  2;  xli,  12).  It  may  seem 
st  rangę  to  some  that  the  hardy,  active  boy,  inured  to 
fatigue,  should  have  been  sooner  ovcrcome  by  thirst 
than  his  mother;  but  those  advaiiced  in  life  can  bear 
abstinence  longer  than  the  young,  and,  besides,  Ishmael 
had  probably  exhau8ted  his  strength  in  vain  attempts 
to  gain  a  supply  of  food  by  his  bow.  Again  Hagar  is 
8aved  by  a  mirade :  "  God  heard  the  voice  of  the  lad 
. . .  and  said  unto  her,  What  aileth  thee,  Hagar  ?  Fear 
n«t  .  .  .  And  God  opened  her  eyes,  and  she  saw  a  well 
of  water**  (ver.  17, 19).  And  again  the  cheering  prom- 
Ik  is  renewed  to  her  son, "  I  will  make  of  him  a  great 
nation**  (ver.  18). 

3.  The  wildemesa  of  Paran,  lying  along  the  western 
iide  of  the  Anbah,  between  Canaan  and  the  mountains 
of  Sinai,  now  became  the  home  of  Ishmael  (see  Baum- 
garten,  Comm.  I,  i,  22) :  "  And  God  was  with  him,  and  he 
became  a  great  archer^  (ver.  20).  Some  of  the  border 
tribes  with  which  the  shepherds  of  Abraham  were  wont 
to  meet  and  striye  at  the  wells  of  Gerar,  Beersheba,  and 


En-Mishpat  probably  received  and  welcomed  the  ont- 
cast  to  their  tents.  A  youth  of  his  warlike  training  and 
daring  spirit  would  soon  acąuire  a  name  and  a  high  po- 
sitiou  among  nomada.  (See  Prokesch,  Spec.  Hist.  A  rab, 
p.  46.)  His  relationship  to  Abraham  also  would  add  to 
his  penonal  claims.  It  would  seem  to  have  been  the 
original  intention  of  his  mother  to  return  to  £g3i)t,  to 
which  country  she  belonged;  but  this  being  prerented, 
she  was  content  to  obtain  for  her  son  wiyes  from  thenoe 
(Gen.  xxi,  9-21 ;  on  which  Utter  verse  the  Targum  of 
Jonathan  adds  traditionalły  that  he  dirorced  his  first 
wife  Adisha,  and  then  married  an  Egyptian  Phatima). 
His  mother,  accordingly,  as  soon  as  she  saw  him  settled, 
took  for  him  an  Egyptian  wife — one  of  hcr  own  people, 
and  thus  completely  separated  him  from  his  Shemitio 
connections.  This  wife  of  Ishmael  is  not  clsewhere 
mentioned ;  she  was,  we  must  infer,  an  £g3rptian ;  and 
this  second  infusion  of  Hamitic  blo(>d  into  the  progeni- 
ton  of  the  Arab  nation,  IshmaeFs  sons,  is  a  fact  that  has 
generally  been  oTeilooked.  No  record  is  madę  of  any 
other  wife  of  Ishmael,  and  failing  such  record,  the  Egyp- 
tian was  the  mother  of  his  twelve  sons  and  daughter. 
This  daughter,  howerer,  is  called  the  **  sister  of  Ńeba- 
joth"  (Gen.  xxviii,  9),  and  this  limitation  of  the  parent- 
age  of  the  brother  and  sister  certainly  seems  to  point  to 
a  diiferent  mother  for  IshmaeFs  other  sons.  The  Arabs^ 
probably  borrowing  from  the  above  Rabbinical  tradition, 
assert  that  he  twice  married ;  the  tirst  wife  being  an 
Amalekite,by  whom  he  had  no  issue ;  and  the  second  a 
Joktanite,  of  the  tribe  of  Jurhum  {Afir-ał  ft-Zemón,  MS., 
ąuoting  a  tradi  tion  of  Mohammed  Ibn-Is-hńk) .  Thoagh 
Ishmael  joined  the  native  tribes  of  Arabia,  his  posterity 
did  not  amalgamate  with  them.  The  Joktanites  have 
left  traces  of  their  names  and  settlements  chieily  in  the 
sou  them  and  south-eastcm  parts  of  the  peninsula,  while 
the  Ishmadites  kept  doser  to  the  borders  of  Canaan 
(see  For8ter's  Geography  of  Arabia,  i,  77  sq.). 

4.  AUhough  their  lots  were  cast  apart,  it  does  not  ap- 
pear  that  any  serious  alionation  exi8ted  between  Ish- 
mael and  Isaac ;  for  when  Abraham  dicd,  we  read  that 
"  his  sons  Isaac  and  Ishmael  buried  him  in  the  cave  of 
Maclipelah.**  The  rival  brothers  then  met,  in  the  rale 
of  Mamre,  at  their  father's  tomb  (Gen.  xxv,  9).  RC. 
1989.  (The  Talmud  states  [Baba  Bathra,  16 J  that 
prioT  to  Abraham'8  death  Ishmael  had  forsaken  the  no- 
madic  móde  of  life.)  That  must  have  been  a  strange 
and  deeply  interesting  scenę  at  the  bnrial  of  the  great 
patriarch.  Ali  his  own  old  "trained  seryants,"  with 
Isaac,  the  peaceful  shepherd  chief,  at  their  head,  were 
assembled  there;  w^hile  Ishmael,  surrounded  by  the 
whole  body  of  his  wild  retainers  and  allies,  as  was  and 
still  is  the  custom  of  Bedawy  sheiks,  stood  there  too. 
As  funerals  in  the  EasŁ  take  place  almost  iramcdiately 
after  death,  it  is  evident  that  Ishmael  must  have  been 
called  from  the  desert  to  the  death-bed  of  his  father, 
which  implies  that  relations  of  kindness  and  respect  had 
been  kept  np,  although  the  brevity  of  the  sacred  nar- 
rative  prevents  any  spedal  notice  of  this  circumstance. 
Ishmael  had,  probaUy,  long  before  reoeived  an  endow- 
ment  from  his  father*8  property  similar  to  that  which  had 
been  bestowed  upou  the  sons  of  Keturah  (Gen.  xxv,  6). 

5.  Of  l8hmael'8  peisonal  history  after  this  event  we 
know  nothing.  The  sacred  historian  giyes  us  a  list  of 
his  twelve  sons,  teUs  us  that  Esau  married  his  daughter 
Mahalath,  the  sister  of  Nebajoth  (xxviii,  9),  and  sums 
up  the  brief  simple  sketch  in  these  words :  "  These  are 
the  years  of  the  life  of  Ishmael,  a  hundred  and  thirty- 
seyen  years;  and  he  died,  and  was  gathered  to  his  peo- 
ple" (xxv,  17).  B.C.  1941.  Where  he  died,  or  where 
he  was  buried,  we  know  not. 

6.  It  has  been  shown,  in  the  artide  Arabia,  that 
Ishmael  had  no  claim  to  the  honor,  which  is  usually  a»- 
signed  to  him,  of  being  the  founder  of  the  Arabian  na- 
tion. That  nation  exi8ted  before  he  was  bom.  He 
merely  joined  it,  and  adopte<l  its  habits  of  life  and  char- 
acter;  and  the  tribes  which  sprung  from  him  formed 
eyentually  an  important  section  of  the  tribes  or  which 


ISHMAEŁ 


684 


ISHMAEL 


it  was  Gomposed.  (See  also  Hottinger,  Hut,  OrienL  p. 
210.)  At  this  period  the  Aiabum  desert  appean  to 
have  been  Łhuily  peopled  bj  desoendants  of  Joktan,  the 
son  of  Eber,  *^  whoee  dwelling  was  from  Mesha,  as  thou 
goest  anto  Sephar,  a  mount  of  the  east"  (Gen.  x,  25-80). 
The  Joktanites,  or  Bene-Kaktan^  are  regarded  by  Arab 
historians  as  the  first  and  most  honorable  progenitors  of 
the  Arab  tńbes  (D^Herbelot,  £t&/u>tó«^«  OriaUaky  6.y. 
Arabes).     See  Joktam. 

Ishmael  had  twelve  sons :  Nebajoth,  Kedar,  Abdeel, 
Mibsam,  Mishma,  Dumah,  Kaasa,  Hadiur,  Tema,  Jetur, 
Naphish,  and  Kedemah.  To  the  list  of  them,  the  sa- 
cred  historian  appends  (Gen.  xxv,  16)  an  important  piece 
of  Information :  "  Thesc  are  the  sons  of  Ishmael,  and 
these  are  their  names,  hy  their  cities  (Dn'^'^2Cn,  "forti- 
fied  towns"),  and  their  campt  (p^^y^^) ;  twelye prtnces 
accordwff  to  their  naiions"  (CncK^).  £very  one  of  the 
tweWe  sons  of  Ishmael,  therefore,  like  the  children  of 
Jacob,  was  the  head  of  a  tribe,  and  the  founder  of  a  dis- 
tinct  colony  or  camp.  In  this  respect  the  statements  in 
the  Bibie  exactly  accord  with  the  ancient  traditions  and 
histories  of  the  Arabs  themselTes.  Native  historians 
divide  the  Arabs  into  two  races :  1.  Furę  A  rahs,  de- 
Bcendants  of  Joktan ;  and,  2.  Mixed  A  rabs^  desocndants 
of  IshmaeL  Abulfeda  give8  a  brief  accoimt  of  the  ser- 
eral  tribes  and  nations  which  descended  from  both  these 
original  stocks  (Jiisłoria  A  nteiaiamiccL,  ed.  Fleischer,  p. 
180,  191  sq.).  Some  of  the  tribes  founded  by  sons  of 
Ishmael  retained  the  names  of  their  foundcrs,  and  were 
well  known  in  history.  The  NabathaonSy  who  took  pos- 
eession  of  Idunuea  in  the  4tb  century  B.C.,  and  con- 
Btmcted  the  wonderful  mommients  of  Petra,  were  the 
posterity  of  N^joth,  Ishmaers  eldest  son.  See  Naba- 
THiisANS.  The  descendants  of  Jetur  and  Naphish  dis- 
puted  with  the  Israelites  possession  of  the  country  east 
of  the  Jordan,  and  the  former,  described  by  Strabo  as 
KOKoupyot  vavT£c  (xvi,  2),  gavc  their  name  to  a  smali 
province  south  of  Damascus,  which  it  bears  to  this  day. 
See  iTURfEA.  The  black  tents  of  Kedar  weie  pitched 
in  the  heart  of  the  Arabian  desert,  and  fVom  their  abtm- 
dant  flocks  they  supplied  the  marts  of  Tyre  (Jer.  ii,  10; 
Isa.  lx,  7;  Ezek.  xxvii,  21).  The  district  of  Tema  lay 
south  of  Edom,  and  is  refenred  to  by  both  Job  and  Isai- 
ah  (Job  vi,  19 ;  Isa.  xxi,  14 ;  For8ter'8  Geoffr,  of  A  rabia, 
i,  292 ;  Heeren*s  Ilistorical  Retearches,  ii,  107).  Dumah 
has  left  his  name  to  a  smali  province  of  Arabia.  Sinoe 
the  days  of  Abraham  the  tent«  of  the  Ishmaelites  have 
been  studded  along  the  whole  easteni  confinos  of  Fales- 
tine,  and  they  have  been  scattered  over  Arabia  from  the 
bonlers  of  Efcypt  to  the  banks  of  the  Euphrates.  As 
friends  and  fucs,  as  opprcssors  and  oppressed— but  ever 
as  freemen — the  secd  of  Ishmael  have  ''dwelt  in  the 
prescnce  of  their  brethrcn.*' 

Of  this  last  expres8ion  yarious  explanation8  have 
been  given,  but  the  pUinest  is  the  most  probable ;  which 
is,  that  Ishmael  and  the  tribes  springing  from  him 
should  always  be  located  near  the  kindred  tribes  de- 
scended from  Abraham.  This  was  a  promise  of  benefit 
in  that  age  of  migration,  when  Abraham  himself  had 
oome  from  beyond  the  Euphrates,  and  was  a  stranger 
and  sojoumer  in  the  land  of  Canaaii.  There  was  thus, 
in  fact,  a  relation  of  some  importance  bctween  this 
promise  and  the  promise  of  the  heritage  of  Canaan  to 
another  branch  of  Abraham*s  offspring.  It  had  seem- 
.  ingly  some  suchforoe  as  this— The  heritage  of  Caiuum 
ifi  indeed  destined  for  another  son  of  Abraham ;  but 
still  the  lot  of  Ishmael,  and  of  those  that  spring  from 
him,  shall  never  be  cast  fiir  apart  from  that  of  his  breth- 
len.  This  view  is  confirmed  by  the  circomstance  that 
the  Israelites  did,  in  fact,  oceupy  the  coontry  bordering 
on  that  in  which  the  yarious  tribes  descended  from 
Abraham  or  Terah  had  settled — the  Ishmaelites,  Edom- 
ites,  Midianites,  Moabites,  Ammonites,  etc  Most  in- 
terpretera iind  in  this  passage  a  promise  that  the  de- 
scendants of  Ishmael  should  never  be  subdued.  But 
we  are  uiuible  to  discoyer  this  in  the  text;  and,  more- 


oyer,  such  has  not  been -the  fact,  whether  we  regaid  the 
Ishmaelites  apait  from  the  other  Arabians,  or  consider 
the  promise  madę  to  Ishmael  as  applicable  to  the  wht^e 
Arabian  family.  The  Arabian  tribes  are  in  a  state  of 
Bubjection  at  this  moment;  and  the  great  Wahaby  oon- 
federacy  among  them,  which  not  many  yean  ago  filkd 
Western  Asia  with  alarm,  is  now  no  longer  hrani  of. 

The  prophecy  which  drew  their  character  has  bccn 
fulfilled  with  equal  minuteneas  of  detaiL  **  He  shall  be 
a  wild  ass  o/a  man  (0"JC  K"??) ;  his  hand  against  ev- 
ery  man,  and  every  man'8  hand  against  him."  ll.is 
means,  in  short,  that  he  and  his  descendants  should  ksd 
the  life  of  the  Bedouins  of  the  Arabian  dcscrts;  and 
how  graphically  this  description  portrays  their  habita 
may  be  seen  in  notes  on  these  yerses  in  the  Picforial 
BdUf  and  in  the  works  of  Niebuhr,  Burckhardt,  Lane, 
etc ;  and,  morę  particularly,  in  the  Arabian  romance  of 
Antar,  which  presents  the  most  perfect  picture  of  ital 
Bedouin  manners  now  in  existence.  A  rcccnt  commen- 
tator  on  the  passage  has  illustratcd  the  prophco'  with 
equal  forcc  and  beauty.  "  The  character  of  the  Ishma- 
elites, or  the  Bedouins,  could  not  be  describcd  morę  apt- 
ly  or  morę  powcrfuUy.  Against  thcm  alonc  timc  Fetms 
to  have  no  sickle,  and  the  conqueror*8  sword  no  cdge. 
They  haye  detied  the  softening  influence  cf  ciyilizaticin, 
and  mocked  the  attacks  of  the  inyader.  Ungoyeinabk 
and  roaming,  obeying  no  law  but  their  rpirii  of  advcD- 
ture,  regaiding  all  mankind  as  their  enemics,  whom  they 
must  either  attaćk  with  their  speais  or  elude  with  their 
faithful  steeds,  and  cherishing  their  deserts  as  bcartily 
as  they  despise  the  constraint  of  towns  and  communi- 
ties,  the  Bedouins  are  the  outlaws  among  the  natioiui 
Flunder  is  legitimate  gain,  a  daring  robbcry  is  piaiscd 
as  yalor"  (Kaliach,  ad  loc).     See  IsuMAEUTii:. 

7.  The  notions  of  the  Arabs  respecting  Ishmael  (/#- 
mail)  are  partly  derived  from  the  Bibie,  partly  frum  the 
Jewish  Rabbins,  and  partly  from  native  traditions^  The 
origin  ofmany  of  these  traditions  is  obecure.but  a  gnat 
number  may  be  ascribcd  to  the  fact  of  Mofaammcd^s 
haying,  for  political  rcasons,  claimed  Ishmael  ibr  his 
anccstor,  and  striven  to  make  out  an  impoasible  pedi- 
gree ;  while  both  he  and  his  followers  have,  as  a  coose- 
quence  of  accepting  this  a»umcd  desccut,  sought  to  ex- 
alt  that  ancestor.  Another  rcai«on  may  l>e  safely  foond 
in  IshmaeFs  acknowledged  hcadship  of  the  naturalizcd 
Arabs,  and  this  cause  existed  from  the  very  period  of 
his  settlement.  See  Arabia.  Yct  the  rivaliy  of  the 
Joktanite  kiiigdom  of  Southern  Arabia,  and  its  intcr- 
couise  with  dassical  and  medijcval  Europę,  the  wandcr- 
ing  and  unsettled  habits  of  the  Ishmaelites,  their  bav- 
ing  no  literaturę,  and,  as  far  as  we  know,  only  a  meagre 
orał  tradition,  all  contributed,  till  the  importance  it  ac> 
quired  with  the  promulgation  of  El-Islam,  to  rcnder  our 
knowledge  of  the  Ishmaelitic  portion  of  the  peopk  of 
Arabia,  before  Mohammed,  lamentably  defective.  That 
they  maintained,  and  still  maiutain,  a  patriarcbal  and 
primitive  form  of  life,  is  known  to  u&  Tłicir  religie*), 
at  least  in  the  period  immediately  preceding  Moham- 
med, was  in  Central  Arabia  chicfly  the  grossest  fetish- 
ism,  probably  leamt  from  aboriginal  inhabitants  of  the 
land;  southwards  it  divcrged  to  the  cosmic  wonhip  of 
the  Joktanite  Himyeritcs  (though  thesc  were  far  from 
being  exempt  from  fctishism),  and  nonhwards  (so  at 
least  in  ancient  times)  to  an  approach  to  that  trne  ftith 
which  Ishmael  carried  with  him,  and  his  dcscendacts 
thus  gradually  lost.  This  last  point  is  curiomly  iUoa- 
trated  by  the  nnmbers  who,  in  Arabia,  became  either 
Jews  (Karaites)  or  Christiana  (though  of  a  yeryccorupt 
form  of  Christianity),  and  by  the  movcrocnt  in  aearch 
of  the  faith  of  the  patriarchs  which  had  been  put  lor- 
ward,  not  long  before  tho  birth  of  Mohammed,  by  men 
not  satiafied  with  Judaism  or  the  cormpt  form  of  Cfaiu- 
tianity  with  which  alone  they  were  acąuainted.  Thia 
moyement  first  aroosed  Mohammed,  and  was  aftcrwaids 
the  main  cause  of  his  succeaa. 

The  Arabs  belieye  that  Ishmael  was  the  fint-honi  of 
Abiaham,  and  the  majority  of  their  doctoo  (bat  tha 


ISHMAEL 


685 


ISHMAEL 


point  is  in  dispute)  aasert  that  this  son,  and  not  Isaac, 
was  oflTered  by  Abraham  in  saciifioe.  The  soene  of  this 
saciifice  is  Moant  'Arafat,  near  Mecca,  the  last  holy 
place  YŁsited  by  pilgrims,  it  being  necessary  to  the  oom- 
pletion  of  pilgiimage  to  be  present  at  a  sermon  delivered 
theie  on  the  9th  of  the  Mohammedan  month  Zu-l-Hej- 
jeh,  in  commemoration  of  the  offerin^c,  and  to  aacrifice 
a  yictim  on  the  following  nyening  after  stinset,  in  the 
▼alley  of  Minę.  The  sacrifice  last  mentioned  is  obsenr- 
ed  throughout  the  Mnslim  world,  and  the  day  on  which 
it  is  madę  is  called  *<The  Great  Festival"  (Lane's  Mod, 
£y9pt»  eh.  iii).  Ishmael,  say  the  Arabs,  dwelt  with  his 
mother  at  Mekkeh,  and  both  are  buried  in  the  place 
called  the  "Hejr,"  on  the  uorth-west  (terraed  by  the 
.  Arabs  the  north)  side  of  the  Kaabeh,  and  inclosed  by  a 
car\'ed  wali  called  the  "  Hattm.**  Ishmael  was  visited 
at  Blekkeh  by  Abraham,  and  they  together  rebuilt  the 
tempie,  which  had  been  destroyed  by  a  fiood.  At  Mek- 
keh,  Ishmael  marrlćd  a  daoghter  of  Mudad  or  El-Mu- 
dad,  chief  of  the  Joktanite  tiibe  Jurhum,  and  had  thir- 
teen  children  {Mir-di  ez-Zemditf  MS.),  thus  agreeing 
with  the  Biblical  number,  including  the  daaghter. 

Mohamme<rs  descent  from  Ishmael  is  totally  lost,  for 
an  unknown  number  of  generations,  to  'Adn^n,  of  the 
twenty-first  generation  before  the  prophet:  from  him 
downwards  the  latter'8  descent  is,  if  we  may  beliere  the 
genealoglsts,  fairly  proyod.  Bat  we  have  eyidence  far 
morę  trustworthy  than  that  of  the  genealoglsts;  for, 
while  most  of  the  natiyes  of  Arabia  are  unable  to  tracę 
np  their  pediyreejf,  it  is  scarcely  possible  to  iind  one  who 
is  ignorant  of  his  rcu»t  seeing  that  his  yery  life  olten 
depends  upon  iL  The  law  of  blood-reyenge  necessit-ates 
his  knowing  the  names  of  his  anccstors  for  four  genera- 
tions, but  no  morę ;  and  tłus  law,  extending  from  time 
immemorial,  has  mide  any  confusion  of  race  almost  im- 
posslble.  Tłus  law,  it  should  be  remerabered,  is  not  a 
law  of  Mohammed,  but  an  old  pagan  law  that  he  en- 
deayored  to  suppress,  but  could  noL  In  casting  doubt 
on  the  prophefs  pedigree,  we  roust  add  that  this  cannot 
ailect  the  proofs  of  the  chief  element  of  the  Arab  nation 
being  Ishmaclitish  (and  so,  too,  the  tribe  of  Kureysh,  of 
whum  was  Mohammed).  Although  partly  mixed  with 
Joktanites,  they  are  morę  mixed  with  Keturahites,  etc.; 
the  characteristicsof  the  Joktanites,  as  before  remarked, 
are  widely  difTerent  from  those  of  the  Ishmaelites;  and, 
whaterer  theories  may  be  adduced  to  the  contrary,  we 
believe  that  the  Arabs,  from  physical  characteristics, 
language,  the  concurrence  of  natiye  traditions  {before 
Mohammedanism  madę  them  untrustworthy),  and  the 
testimony  of  the  Bibie,  are  mainly  and  essentially  Ish- 
maelitish. — Kitto;  Smith. 

2.  The  father  (or  ancestor)  of  Zebadiah,  which  latter 
was  "  ruler  of  the  house  of  Judah*'  under  Jehoshaphat 
(2  Chroń,  xix,  11).     B.C.  cir.  900. 

3.  Son  of  Jehohanan,  and  captain  of  a  *•  hundred" 
under  the  regency  of  Jehoiada  (2  Chroń,  xxiii,  1).  B.C. 
877. 

4.  One  of  the  six  sons  of  Azel,  of  the  tribe  of  Benja- 
min (I  Chroń,  viii,  38 ;  ix,  44).     B.C.  antę  588. 

5.  The  son  of  Nethaniah,  whose  treachery  forms  one 
of  the  chief  episodes  of  the  history  of  the  period  imme- 
diately  succeeding  the  first  fali  of  Jernsalem  (Jer.  xl,  7- 
xli,  15,  with  a  short  summary  in  2  Klngs  xxv,  23-25). 
B.C.  587.  His  fuli  description  is  "  Ishmael,  the  son  of 
Nethaniah,  the  son  of  Elishama,  of  the  seed  royar  of 
Jadah  (Jer.  xli,  I ;  2  Kix^  xxv,  25).  Whether  by  this 
is  intended  that  he  was  actually  a  son  of  Zedekiah,  or  of 
one  of  the  later  klngs,  or,  morę  generally,  that  he  had 
royal  blood  in  his  yeins— perhaps  a  descendant  of  Eli- 
shama, the  son  of  Dayid  (2  Sam.  y,  16)— we  cannot  tell. 
Jeiome  {Qu,  Hebr,  on  2  Chroń.  xxyiii,  7)  interprets  this 
exprcfision  as  meaning  **  of  the  seed  of  Molech."  He 
give9  the  same  meaning  to  the  words  **  the  king*s  son" 
apfdied  to  Maaseiah  in  the  aboye  passage.  The  ques- 
tion  ts  an  ihteresting  one,  and  has  recently  been  reviyed 
by  Cieiger  {Urachrifi,  etc.,  p.  807),  who  extends  it  to 
otber  paasages  and  penons.    See  Molbcu.    Jerome  (as 


aboye)  further  says— perhaps  on  the  strength  of  a  tra- 
dition— that  Ishmael  was  the  sou  of  an  Egyptian  slaye, 
Gera :  as  a  reason  why  the  "  seed  royal"  should  bear  the 
meaning  he  giyes  it.  During  the  siege  of  the  city  he 
had,  like  many  others  of  his  countrymeh  (Jer.  xl,  11), 
fled  across  the  Jordan,  where  he  found  a  refuge  at  the 
court  of  Baalis,  then  king  of  the  Bene-Ammon  (Jo- 
sephus.  Ant,  x,  9,  2).  Ammonitish  womeu  were  some- 
times  found  in  the  harems  of  the  klngs  of  Jerusalem  (1 
Kings  xi,  1),  and  Ishmael  may  haye  been  thus  related 
to  the  Ammonitish  court  on  his  mother's  side.  At  any 
ratę,  he  was  instigated  by  Baalis  to  the  designs  which 
he  accomplished  but  too  suocessfully  (Jer.  xl,  14;  Jo- 
sephus,  ^n/i.  X,  9,  3).  Seyeral  bodies  of  Jews  appear  to 
haye  been  lying  under  arms  in  the  pUins  on  the  south- 
east  of  the  Jordan,  during  the  last  days  of  Jerusalem, 
watching  the  progress  of  affairs  in  Western  Palestine, 
commanded  by  "princes**  (0*^^^^),  the  chief  of  whom 
were  Ishmael,  and  two  brothers,  Johanan  and  Jonathan, 
sons  of  Kareah.  Immediately  after  the  departure  of 
the  Chaldsean  army  these  men  moyed  across  the  Jordan 
to  pay  their  respects  to  Gedaliah,  whom  the  king  of 
Babylon  had  lefŁ  sa  superintendent  (*^'^pB)  of  the  proy- 
ince.  Gedaliah  had  taken  up  his  residence  at  Mizpah, 
a  few  miles  ńorth  of  Jerusalem,  on  the  main  road.  where 
Jeremiah  the  prophet  resided  with  him  (xl,  6).  The 
house  would  appear  to  haye  been  isolated  from  the  rest 
of  the  town.  We  can  discem  a  high  inclosed  court- 
yard  and  a  deep  wcU  within  its  precincts.  The  well 
was  certainly  (Jer.  xli,  9 ;  comp.  1  Kings  xy,  22),  and 
the  whole  residence  was  probably,  a  relic  of  the  military 
works  of  Asa,  king  of  Judah.  Ishnuiel  madę  no  secret 
of  his  intention  to  kill  the  superintendent  and  usurp 
hb  position.  Of  this  Gedaliah  was  wamed  in  expres8 
terms  by  Johanan  and  his  companions;  and  Johanan, 
in  a  secret  interyiew,  foreseeing  how  irreparable  a  mis- 
fortunę  Gedaliah's  death  would  be  at  this  juncture  (xl, 
15),  offered  to  remoye  the  danger  by  killing  Ishmael. 
This,  howeyer,  Gedaliah,  a  man  eyidently  of  a  high  and 
unsuspecting  naturę,  would  not  hear  of  (xl,  16;  and  see 
the  amplitication  in  Josephiw,  Ant,  x,  9,  3).  They  all 
aocordingly  took  leaye.  Thirty  days  after  (Josephus, 
Ant,  X,  9,  4),  in  the  seyenth  month  (Jer.  xli,  1),  on  the 
third  day  of  the  month— so  says  the  tradition — Ishmael 
again  appeared  at  Mizpah,  this  time  accompanied  by 
ten  men,  who  were,  according  to  the  Helnrew  text, 
"princes  of  the  king"  (Tj^^łj  *'?'?)»  though  this  is 
omitted  by  the  Sept.  and  by  Josephus.  Gedaliah  en- 
tertained  them  at  a  feast  (xli,  1).  According  to  the 
statement  of  Josephus,  this  was  a  very  lavish  entertain- 
ment,  and  Gedaliah  became  much  intoxicated.  It  must 
haye  been  a  priyate  one,  for  before  its  close  Ishmael  and 
his  followers  had  muidered  Gedaliah  and  all  his  attend- 
ants  with  such  secrecy  that  no  alarm  was  giyen  outsidc 
the  room.  The  same  night  he  killed  all  Gedaliah'8 
establishment,  including  some  Chalduean  soldiers  who 
were  there.  Jeremiah  appears  fortunately  to  havc  been 
absent,  and,  incredible  as  it  seems,  so  well  had  Ishmael 
taken  his  preeautions,  that  for  two  days  the  massacre 
remained  perfectly  unknown  to  the  people  of  the  town. 
On  the  second  day  Ishmael  perceiyed  from  his  eleyated 
position  a  large  party  coraing  southwards  along  the 
main  road  from  Shechem  and  Samaria.  He  went  out 
to  meet  them.  They  proyed  to  be  eighty  deyotecs, 
who,  with  rent  clothes,  and  with  shayen  beards,  muti-  . 
lated  bodies,  and  other  marks  of  heathen  deyotion,  and 
weeping  (Sept.)  as  they  went,  were  bringing  incense  and 
oflerin^  to  the  ruina  of  the  Tempie.  At  bis  invitation 
they  tu/ned  aside  to  the  residence  of  the  superintend- 
ent Herę  Ishmael  put  into  practice  the  same  strata- 
gcm  which,  on  a  larger  scalc,  was  employed  by  Mehe- 
met  AU  in  the  massacre  of  the  Mamelukes  at  Cairo  in 
1806.  As  the  unsuspecting  pilgrims  passed  within  the 
outer  gates  (Sept.  court^ard)  he  closed  the  entrances 
behind  them.  and  there  he  and  his  band  butchered  the 
whole  number:  ten  only  escaped  by  the  offiu:  of  heayy 


ISHMAEL 


686 


KHPAN 


ranflom  for  their  Uvefi.  The  serenty  corpaes  were  then 
thrown  into  the  well,  which  (as  in  the  Sepoy  maasacre 
at  Cawnpoie)  was  within  the  precincts  of  the  house, 
and  which  was  completely  filled  with  the  bodies.  It 
was  the  same  thing  that  had  been  done  by  Jehu — a 
man  in  some  respects  a  prototype  of  Ishmael,  with  the 
bodies  of  the  forty-two  relatires  of  Ahaziah  (2  Hings  x, 
14).  This  done,  he  descended  to  the  town,  surpriaed 
and  carried  oif  the  daughters  of  king  Zedektah,  wUo 
had  been  sent  there  by  Nebuchadnezzar  for  safety,  with 
their  eiuiuchs  and  their  Chaldsan  guard  (Jer.  xli,  10, 
16),  and  aU  the  people  of  the  town,  and  madę  ofT  with 
his  prisoners  to  the  country  of  the  Ammonites.  Which 
road  he  took  is  not  quiŁe  elear;  the  Hebrew  text  and 
Sept.  say  by  Gibeon,  that  is  north ;  but  Joeephus,  by 
Hebron,  round  the  southem  end  of  the  I>ead  Sea.  The 
news  of  the  maasacre  had  by  this  time  got  abroad,  and 
Ishmael  was  qaickly  pursued  by  Johanan  and  his  com- 
panions.  Whether  north  or  south,  they  soon  tracked 
him  and  his  unwieldy  booty,  and  found  them  reposing 
by  some  copious  waters  (Q'^2'^  &??)•  He  was  attack- 
ed,  two  of  his  bravoes  slain,  the  whole  of  the  prey  re- 
corered,  and  Ishmael  himself,  with  the  remaining  eight 
of  his  people,  escaped  to  the  Ammonites,  and  thence- 
forward  passes  into  the  obscuiity  from  which  it  would 
haye  been  well  if  he  had  never  emerged.  Johanan*s 
foreboding  was  fulfiUed.  The  result  of  this  tragedy 
was  an  immediate  panic  The  smali  remnants  of  the 
Jewish  commonwealth— the  captains  of  the  forces,  the 
king's  daughters,  the  two  prophets  Jeremiah  and  Ba- 
ruch,  and  all  the  men,  women,  and  children — at  once 
took  ńight  into  Egypt  (Jer.  xli,  17 ;  xliii,  5-7),  and  all 
hopes  of  a  settlement  were  for  the  time  at  an  end.  The 
remembrancc  of  the  calamity  M*as  perpetuated  by  a  fast 
— the  fast-of  the  seycnth  month  (Zech.  vii,  6;  viii,  19), 
which  id  to  this  day  strictly  kept  b}'-  the  Jews  on  the 
third  of  Tisri.  (See  Rcland,  ^4  n/t^.  iv,  10:  Kimchi  on 
Zech.  vii,  o).  The  part  taken  by  Baalis  in  this  trans- 
action  apparently  brought  upon  hi»  nation  the  denun- 
ciations  both  of  Jeremiah  (xlix,  1-6)  and  the  roore  dis- 
taut  Ezekiel  (xxv,  1-7),  but  we  have  no  record  to  show 
how  these  predictions  were  accomplished.— Smith.  See 
Gedaliah. 

6.  One  of  the  "sons"  of  Pashor,  who  divorced  his 
Gentile  wife  after  the  £xUe  (Ezra  x,  22).    B.a  4ó9. 

Ishmael  (as  a  later  name).    See  Ismael. 

l8h'magUte  (Heb.  Yi»hmeeU\  iist?CTŚ%  1  Chroń, 
ii,  17 ;  xxyiii,  3,  etc.,  plur.  tb'^?^©'^,  usually  Anglicized 
l^lshmcelites,"  q.  v.),  a  descendant  cf  Ishmael,  the  son 
of  Abraham  by  Hagar.  Ishmaelites  carried  on  a  traiRc 
with  Egypt  (Gen.  xxxT]i,  25, 27 ;  xxxix ;  1),  and  livcd 
a  wandering  life  as  nomades  at  the  eastward  of  the  He- 
brews  and  of  Egypt  as  far  as  to  the  Persian  Gulf  and 
Assyria,  i.  e.  Babylonia  (Gen.  xxv,  18),  which  same  lim- 
its  are  elsewhcre  assigned  to  the  Amijekites  (1  Sam.  xv, 
7);  so  alao  the  names  "Ishmaelites"  and  "Midianites" 
appear  to  be  sometimes  applied  to  the  same  people  (Gen. 
xxxvii,  25, 27, 28 ;  Judg.  viił,  22, 24).  In  Gen.  xxv,  18, 
it  is  said,  "  And  they  dwelt  from  Havilah  unto  Shur, 
that  is  before  Egypt,  as  thou  goest  towazds  Assyria: 
and  he  died  in  the  presence  of  all  his  brethren. '*  As 
IshmaeFs  death  had  already  been  mentioned,  and  as  the 
Hebrew  term  ^BJ,  rutphal—T^ndeied  "^  rfiW,"  properly 
hefell — is  seldom  used  in  the  Scrtptures  in  refercnce  to 
"  dying,"  except  in  cases  of  sudden  and  violent  death,  as 
when  one  "  falls"  in  battle,  the  probability  is  that  na- 
phal  here  signifies  that  his  territory  or  pos8ession,/<f^  to 
him  in  the  presence  of  all  his  brethren,  or  immetliately 
contiguous  to  the  borders  of  the  territories  in  which  the 
yarious  tribes  descended  from  Abraham  or  Terah  had 
settled— the  Israelites,  Edomites,  Midianites,  Moabites, 
Ammonites,  etc.  This  interpretation  is  countenanced 
by  the  Sept.  and  Targums,  which  have  dwelt^  and  by  the 
promise  in  (Jen.  xvi,  12  (comp.  the  similar  phraseology 
in  Josh.  xxiii,  4 ;  Psa.  xyi,  6).     «  The  twelye  sons  of 


Ishmael,  somewhat  like  the  twdye  sona  of  Jaoob,  %e- 
came  so  many  heads  of  tribes  (Gen.  xxy,  13-15),  wbich 
implies  that  in  the  ncxt  generation  they  spiead  them- 
selyes  pretty  widely  abroad.  It  appears  (Gen.  xxv,  18) 
that  the  head-ąuarters  of  the  race  lay  in  the  northen 
parts  of  the  Anbian  peninsula ;  but  in  process  of  time 
they  would  naturally  stretch  morę  inland,  eastward  ani 
southward.  That  they  alao  extended  their  jonnieying 
northwards  b  eyident  from  the  fact  that  the  brethroi' 
of  Joseph  espied  <*a  company  of  IsfamaeEtes  comiog 
from  Gilead,  with  their  camels  bearing  spiceiy,  and  bahn, 
and  myrrh,  to  cany  it  down  to  Egypt"  (Gen.  xxxvii, 
25).  The  company  has  aflerwards  the  name  of  Midian- 
ites applied  to  it  (ver.  28),  probably  on  account  of  its 
consisting  of  morę  than  one  clasa  of  people,  Młdianit» 
alBO  in  part;  but  being  first  called  Ishmaelites,  we  can 
haye  no  reasonable  doubt  that  these  formed  a  conskl^r- 
able  portion  of  the  canyan  party.  The  tnde  of  inland 
caniers  between  the  countries  in  the  north  of  Africa  on 
the  one  side,  and  those  in  southem  and  westein  Aiu 
(India,  Penia,  Babylonia,  etc.)  on  the  other,  is  one  in 
which  sections  of  the  Ishmaelitish  race  haye  been  known 
from  the  remoteSt  times  to  take  a  part.  It  suited  their 
migratoiy  and  unsettled  habits;  and  they  became  so 
noted  for  it,  that  others,  who  did  not  belong  to  the  nme 
race,  were  not  unfreąuently  called  Ishmaelites,  merdy 
because  they  followed  the  Ishmaelitic  tniffic  and  man- 
neis.  It  is  impossible  to  say  how  far  the  descendania 
of  Ishmael  penetrated  into  Anbia,  or  acquired  settk- 
ments  in  its  southem  and  morę  productive  regions.  As 
it  is  certain  the  Ishmaelitish  modę  of  life  has  been  ał- 
ways  less  practised  there,  and  a  modified  dyilization  » 
of  old  standing,  the  probability  is  that  the  popdation 
in  those  regions  has  little  in  it  of  Ishmaelitish  bkmd. 
But,  with  all  their  regard  to  genealogies,  tbe  Arabie 
races  haye  for  thousands  of  years  been  8o  transfosed 
into  cach  other,  that  all  distinct  landmarks  are  weOnigh 
lost.  The  circumstance  of  Mohammed  having,  for  pru- 
dential  reasons,  daimed  to  be  a  descendant  of  the  Fon 
of  Abraham,  has  led  to  an  extension  of  the  Ishmaelitish 
circle  far  beyond  what  the  probable  facts  will  bear  out" 
(Fairbaim).    See  Ishmael,  1. 

IfiŁmarah  (Heb.  Yuhmayak',  H^rrę^,  and  in  1 
Chroń,  xxvii,  19  in  the  paragogic  form  Yishmaya'kv, 
^n^:?cd%  htard  by  Jthoiah),  the  name  of  two  of  Da> 
yid'8  officers.     See  Davti>. 

1.  (Sept.  'Zafiatac^  Yulg.  SamajaB,  Auth.  Yers.  ''I*- 
maiah.")  A  Gibeonite,  one  of  the  chiefs  of  thoee  war- 
riora  who  relinąuishcd  the  cause  of  Saul,  the  head  of 
their  tribe,  and  joined  themsdyea  to  David  wben  be 
was  at  Ziklag  (1  Chroń,  xii,  4).  B.C.  104e.  He  is  de- 
scribed  as  "a  hero  (^ibbor)  aroong  the  thirty  and  over 
the  thirty*'  —  i.  e.  David*s  body-guard ;  bnt  his  name 
does  not  appear  in  the  lists  of  the  guard  in  2  Sam.  xxiii 
and  1  Chroń.  xi.  Possibly  he  was  killed  in  »ime  cn- 
oounter  before  David  reached  the  throne. — Smith. 

2.  (Sept.  £CT/jaiac,  Vii]g.  JfmurjaSj  Auth.  Ver&  *•  Ish- 
maiah.")  Son  of  Obadiah,  and  viceroy  of  Zebulon  uih 
der  Dayid  and  Solomon  (1  Chroń,  xxvii,  19).    B.C.  1014^ 

Ish^meSlite  occurs  in  the  A.  V.  at  Gen.  xxxvii,  25, 
27,  28;  xxix,  1,  as  a  generał  name  of  the  Abrahamie 
peoples  of  the  **  east  country"  or  Bkke-Kedem  (o.  v.)  ; 
but  elsewhere  (1  Chroń,  ii,  17)  in  the  strict  senae  d  ibe 
proper  Ishmaelites  (as  Anglicized  in  Judg.  viii.  34 ; 
Psa.  lxxxiii,  6),  with  which  the  Heb.  name  coiTKpoods. 

Ish^merai  (H9h.Yukmeray%  •» j«C?  fot  n^n^, 
preterred  by  Jehorah ;  Septoag.  'ItoafMapi),  cme  of  the 
"  sons"  of  Elpaal,  a  chief  Benjamite  resident  at  Jenm- 
lem  (1  Chroń,  ^iii,  18).    RC.  antę  688. 

I'shod  i(Heb.  Ishhod'y  -liniŚ">K,  man  of  splendor,  I 
e.  in  countenance  or  in  famę;  ^epL  simply  l^o^.Yalg. 
translates  rtr  deconti),  a  son  of  Hammoleketh,  the  sis- 
ter  of  Machir  of  Gilead  (1  Chroń,  vii,  18).    KC.  dr.  1658. 

Ish^pan  (Heb.  Yishpan^  ^W'^,  ptob.  kid,  bot  Ge- 
senius  baldj  FUrst  itrwj^ ;  Sept.  *Ua4aif,Yvlg,  Jf^ham), 


ISHTOB 


687 


ISIDORE 


one  of  the  "  sons**  of  Shashak,  a  Benjamite  chief  resident 
at  Jenisalem  (1  Chroń.  Tiii,  22).     KC.  antę  688. 

Ish'-tob  (Heb.  hh-Tób',  Sia-tJ-^K,  nian  o/Tob  [Le. 
good] ;  Sept.  'Itrrwfi ;  Joeephus  'larutPoc ;  Viilg.  Ittob)y 
apporently  one  of  the  smali  kingdopis  or  states  which 
formed  part  of  the  generał  country  of  Aram,  named  with 
Zobah,  Kehob,  and  Maacah  (2  Sam.  x,  6,  8).  In  the 
paralłcl  account  of  1  Chroń,  xix  Islitob  is  omitted.  By 
Joaephus  {AhL  vii,  6, 1)  the  name  is  given  as  that  of  a 
king.  But  though  in  the  ancient  yersions  the  name  is 
giren  as  one  word,  it  is  probable  that  the  real  significa- 
tion  is  "the  men  of  Tob*'  (q.  v.),  a  district  mentioned 
alao  in  connection  with  Ammon  iu  the  recoids  of  Jeph- 
thah  (Jodg.  xi,  8. 6),  and  again,  perhaps,  under  the  shape 
of  ToisiK  or  TuBiBNi,  in  the  history  of  the  Maccabees 
(1  IMace.  V,  13 ;  2  Mace  xii,  17).— Smitłu 

Ish'tiah  (Heb.  Yiśhvah\  njÓ%  vmform;  Septuag. 
'lt9ovai  but  'Uaaova  in  Gen. ;  Yulg.  Jesua),  the  second 
lULmed  of  the  sons  of  Asher  (Gen.  xlvi,  17 ;  1  Chroń,  vii, 
80,  in  which  bitter  paasage  it  is  Anglicized  ^*  Isuah"). 
B.C.  18Ó6.  He  appeara  to  have  left  no  issae  (compare 
Numb.xxvi,44).  ^ 

lah^nal  (1  Chroń,  vii,  30).    See  Isia%  1. 

I8h'ui  (Heb.  YUhvi%  "^1'^%  uniform),  the  name  of 
iwo- men. 

X.  (Sept,  in  Gen.  xlvi,  17,  'Uv\ ;  Yulg.  Jessui^  Auth. 
Yen. "  Isui ;"  in  Numb.  xxvi,  44,  'UvoVf  Jeimti, "  Jesui ;" 
in  1  Chroń.  vii,80,  'li/trout,  Jttsui, "  Inhuai'*).  The  third 
named  of  the  sons  of  Asher,  and  founder  of  a  family  that 
borę  his  name  {^  Jesuites,'*  Numb.  xxvi,  44).    B.C.  1856. 

2.  (Septuag.  *Utr<rovi^  Josephus  'Itaofjc,  Ant.  vi.  6,  6; 
Yulg.  JeMut,  Auth.  Yers.  **Ishui").  The  second  namcii 
.of  the  three  oldest  sons  of  king  Saul  (i  Sam.  xiv,  49) ; 
probably  the  same  with  Abinadab  (1  Sam.  xxxi,  2 ; 
comp.  1  Chroń,  viii,  83).    See  Ish-bosuetii. 

Isidore  of  Albxani>ria,  St.,  was  bom  in  Egypt 
about  the  year  818,  and  led  for  a  time  the  life  of  a  her- 
mit  in  the  wildemese  of  the  ThebaTd  and  in  the  desert 
of  Kttria.  St,  Athanasius  ordained  him  pricst^  aiid  give 
him  the  charge  of  a  hospital,  whence  Isidore  is  also  call- 
ed  the  HospitaUer,  Aflier  the  death  of  Athanasius,  Isi- 
dore coorageously  defended  his  works  and  his  memory 
against  the  attacks  of  the  Ąrians.  Having  goŁ  into  dif- 
ficnlties  with  Theophilus,  patriaroh  of  Alexandria,  Isi- 
dore was  obliged  to  flee  to  Constantinople,  where  he 
died  in  403.  The  Greek  Church  commemorates  him  on 
the  loth  of  January.  See  Palladiiis,  //w/.  lAjnuiaca ; 
Hoefer,  Nouv.  Biog,  Generale^  xvi,  56.     (J.  N.  P.) 

Isidore,  St.,  bishop  of  Cordova,  and  an  eminent 
Spanish  theologian  and  historian,  who  flourished  in  the 
4th  century,  is  supposcd  to  have  died  about  380.  The 
chronicie  of  Flav.  Dextcr  raentions  him  as  having  con- 
tinned  St.  Jerome*s  Chranicon  to  the  year  380 ;  Sigebert 
de  Gembloux  attributes  to  htm  also  a  Commenłaruu  m 
Orosii  Libros  Regum;  but  Florez  and  Antonio  show 
good  grounds  for  discrcditing  this  assertion.  Antonio 
even  give8  very  strong  reasons  for  considering  this  Isi- 
dore an  imaginary  individual,  as  well  as  anothcr  Isi- 
dore, likewiae  supposed  to  have  been  bishop  of  Cordova 
in  400^180,  whom  Dexter  considcrs  to  be  the  author  of 
a  lM)er  Allegoriarum  and  a  Commentarius  in  Lucam. 
See  Bivarins,  Kotte  ad  Dertrum;  Antonio,  Bibliołheca 
Nitpana  vełus,  i,  249 ;  Fabricius,  Bibl.  Mfd,  et  Injima 
Latbuiaiisf  Hoefer,  A  our.  ^to^.  (rńi«ra/«>,  xxvi,  56.  (J. 
N.P.) 

Isidore  Mercator  (ot  Peccafor),  the  supposed 
name  of  a  compiler  who,  towards  the  middle  of  the  9th 
centmy,  published  the  famous  collection  of  canons 
known  as  the  Pseudo-Isidorian.  See  Canons  ;  Decre- 
tals.  It  is  pretty  generally  concetled  that  this  writer 
lived  in  the  doroinions  of  Charles  the  Bald,  but  his  real 
name  is  a  matter  of  doubt.  As  for  his  collection,  it  is 
eridently  based  on  that  of  Isidore  of  8eville,  numcrous 
copies  of  which  were  at  the  time  oirculating  in  France ; 
bia  it  oontains  besides  a  vast  nomber  of  apocryphal  ad-  | 


ditions.  Some  of  these  pieces  had  already  been  in  cir* 
culation  for  years,  and  they  were  not  all  madę  up  by 
the  Ptettdo-Isidore.  The  collection  of  capitularies  of 
Benedict  Levita,  a  deacon  of  Mayence  (who  has  by 
some  been  considered  as  the  author  of  the  Pseudo^Isido* 
rian  collection),  which  was  written  about  840,  contains 
already  numerons  extract«  of  the  fictitious  documenta 
of  the  work  of  Mercator.  They  circulated  at  first  only 
in  Southern  France.  They  remained  unknown  in  Spain 
until  the  16th  century,  and  in  Germany  and  Italy  but 
few  copies  of  them  are  to  be  found.  They  are  compiled 
from  the  historiea  of  Rufinus  and  Cassiodórus,  the  Liber 
Ponłifiealiś,  the  works  of  the  fathers,  dedsions  of  the 
councils,  regular  decretals,  the  Bibie  (which,  according 
to  Richter,  he  quotes  from  the  Yulgate,  reviscd  by 
Rhabanus  Maurus),  and,  finally,  the  Roman  law,  of 
which  he  poesessed  a  compendium  in  the  Yisigoth  lan- 
guage.  These  two  latter  circurostances  go  far  to  prove 
that  the  writer  must  have  been  either  a  native,  or  at 
leaat,  at  the  time,  a  resident  of  France.  Mayence  has 
sometimes  been  considered  as  the  place  where  the  pseu- 
do-decretals  were  written,  and  Riculf  or  Otgar,  arch- 
bishops  of  that  city,  or  even  Benedict  Levita,  above  al- 
luded  to,  as  their  author;  but  this  seems  unlikely,  the 
more  sińce  Rhabanus  Maurus,  who  suoceeded  Otgar  in 
847,  appears  entirely  unacquainted  with  their  existence. 
It  must  have  been  written  about  the  middle  of  the  9th 
century,  for  it  contains  the  decrees  of  the  council  held 
at  Paris  in  829,  shows  a  knowledge  of  Rhabanus  Mau- 
rus*8  work  against  the  chor^bishops  written  in  847-849, 
and  was  first  madę  public  at  the  Synod  of  Chiersy  in 
857.  The  history  of  this  collection  has  never  been  fully 
traced  out ;  much  may  perhapo  be  done  for  it  by  a  care- 
ftd  coroparison  of  the  numerons  MS.  copies  of  it  which 
are  still  extant.  Among  these  copies,  one  of  the  most 
important  is  the  Coc!ex  Vatic(tnus,  No.  630,  written  in 
858-867.  It  is  thought  that  the  Capitukt  A  ngUramni, 
another  apocryphal  document  of  canon  law,  must  also 
be  considered  as  the  work  of  the  so-called  Isidore  Mei^ 
cator.  See,  besides  the  works  already  referred  to  under 
Decrrtalb,  Centuriatores,  Ecclesiastica  historia.  voL 
vi,  cap.  vii,  and  vol.  iii,  cap.  vit ;  Blondel,  Pgeudo-lsido^ 
ru»  et  Turrianus  rapuiantea ;  Yan  Espen,  De  CoUectto- 
ne  Igidorif  Opera j  vol.  iii ;  Zaccańa,  Antijebronio,  vol.  i, 
diss.  iii;  Spittler,  Gesch,  dea  canoniachen  Rechts,  p.  248; 
Kunstmann,  Fragmewte  Uber  Pseudo^Isidor  (Neue  Sion, 
1855);  Gfrorer,  Untermchunff,  Uber  AUer,  Uraprung  und 
Zweck  d,  Dekretalen  d.falachen  laidorua  (Friburg,  1848) ; 
Same, Geach,d, Carolinger^  i,  71 ;  Roeshirt, Zu  den  Kirch- 
enrechflichen  Q^eUen  u.  z.  den  Paeudo-faidoriachen  DecrC' 
talen  (Heidelberg,  1849) ;  Hoefer,  Nouv.  Biog,  Generale, 
xvi,  71 ;  Milman,  Latin  Chriatiamty,  ii,  370  sq. ;  Herżbg, 
Real-Encyhlop,  xii,  337 ;  Hefele,  in  >Vet2er  und  Welte, 
^trcAen-i>a-.  viii,  859.    (J.H.W.) 

Isidore  of  Moscow,  a  distinguished  Russian  bish- 
op, was  bom  at  Thessalonica  towards  the  close  of  the 
14th  century.  He  becaroe  succc8sively  archimandrite 
of  the  convent  of  St.Demitri  at  Constantinople,  coaJlu- 
tor  of  the  arohbishop  of  Hlyria,  and,  finally  (in  1437). 
metropolitan  bishop  of  Russia.  In  this  caimcity  he  ar- 
tended,  at  the  head  of  a  hundred  Russian  bishops  and 
priests,  the  Council  of  Florence,  at  which  the  union  of 
the  Latin  and  Greek  churches  was  eifected.  See  Flor- 
ence, Council  of.  Isidore  and  Bessarion  played  the 
mo3t  important  part  in  that  council.  In  June,  1439, 
having  fulfilled  his  task,  he  retumed  to  Moscow  to  pro- 
claim  the  news.  But  the  grand  dukc  Yasili,  who  was 
displeased  with  the  residts  of  the  courtcil,  had  him 
thrown  into  prison,  and  conderaned  to  be  biunied  alive ; 
but  on  the  day  appointed  for  the  execution  he  madę  his 
escape,  and  fled  to  Romc,  where  Eugcne  IV  welcomed 
him  as  a  mart}T.  As  the  union  cffectcd  by  the  Council 
of  Florence  in  1439  was  of  very  short  duration,  Isidore 
was  sclected  by  the  Roman  pontiff,  Nicholas  Y,  as  mes- 
senger  to  Constantinople,  to  attempt  again  a  union  of 
the  churches,  but  in  this  mission  he  failed.  Isidore  died 
at  Romę  April  27, 1463.    Having  ^ńtnessed  the  estab* 


isrooRE 


688 


ISIS 


Ibhment  of  labunisin  at  CoDstantinople,  be  gare  an  ac- 
ooimt  of  it  in  two  lettero,  one  of  which  was  published  in 
the  Lettres  Turcues  of  ReisDeri  voL  iv;  the  second,  which 
u  dated  Gandia,  July.7, 1453,  was  neyer  printed,  and  is 
probably  contained  in  the  Riocardini  Libniy  at  Flor- 
ence.  Some  Buasian  annalists,  especiaUy  Nikon,  give 
extract8  of  some  of  his  sermons  and  mandaments.  See 
Nanamnukre  ackoba  Opcoba ;  Dretnaia  Ro^eiskaia  Bib- 
liotecaj  voL  xi ;  Strahl,  Der  Rusnsche  MetropolU  Isidor 
U.  9€%n  Yerwch  d.  rustisch-^p-iechische  Kirche  mit  cURo' 
miach-KiUolischm  zu  reretnen  (TUbiugen,  1823) ;  Glaco- 
nii  et  Oldoini  Vif<B  et  Res  gestm  Poniificum  et  Cardwa- 
Kum  CRoam,  1677),  ii,  903 ;  Statuta  Conctin  Floreniim 
(Florence,  1518);  Maimboorg,  J/istoire  du  Schitme  des 
Grect;  Theiner,  yicissiłudes  de  PEfflue  en  Poioffne  et  en 
Rtusie,  i,  83;  Hoefor,  Xouv,  Biog,  Generale,  xxvi,  78; 
Neale'8  Ilistory  oftke  Council  of  Fhrenoetp,  59 ;  Covel, 
Account  o/ the  Greek  .ChunJi^  p.  117. 

Isidore  QF  Pklusium  (or  Pdunota\  St.,  an  ecde- 
dastical  writer,  was  bom  at  Alexandria  abouŁ  the  year 
870.  He  spent  his  life  in  the  neighborhood  of  Pelusi- 
um,  in  a  monastciy  of  which  he  was  abbot,  and  wheie 
he  practtsed  strict  ascetidam.  He  was  a  great  admirer 
of  St.  Chrysoetom,  of  whom,  according  to  some,  he  was 
a  pupil,  and  whom  he  dcfended  againat  the  attacica  of 
the  patriarcha  of  Alexandria,  Theophiltia  and  CyriL  In 
the  controrersy  waged  by  Cyril  againat  Neatoritia,  lal- 
dorna  Pelusiota  favored  the  Cyrillian  party,  hia  coimaels 
of  moderation  contrasting  greatly  with  the  paaaion  and 
ambition  of  C}Til.  He  was  a  firm  adherent  to  the  doc- 
trinea  of  the  Greek  Church,  and  vigorou8ly  oppoaed  all 
heretical  inroada.  Of  hia  writings,  which  "discuaa, 
with  leaniing;  piety,  judgment,  and  moderation,  nearly 
all  the  theological  and  practlcal  que8tioii8  of  hia  age,*' 
there  remaiu  to  us  yet  a  collection  of  his  letters,  forming 
■five  volume8,  though  they.are  probably  not  all  (there 
9t^  morę  thaii  2000  of  them)  his  own.  These  letters  treat 
almost  all  on  the  interpretation  of  Sciipture.  The  first 
thiee  volume8  were  published,  with  a  Latin  tranalation 
and  notes,  by  J.  de  Billy  (Paria,  1565,  foL),  and  reprint- 
«d,  together  with  the  fourth  volame,  by  Conrad  Ritters- 
hauaen  (Heidelb.  1605,  fol.),  and  the  fifth  by  the  Jesuit 
Schott  (Antw.  1623,  8vo).  A  complete,  though  rather 
Jaulty  edition  was  6nally  published  at  Paiis  in  1638, 
folio,-  and  in  Migne*s  edition  of  the  fathers,  roi.  lviii 
(Paria,  1860).  See  Photius,  BibUotkeca  (cod.  228,  232) ; 
Schrockh,  ĆhristUche  Kirckengeick,  xvii,  620, 529 ;  Heu- 
mann,  Diaaerłatio  de  Itidoro  Peluaiota  eju»que  epUłoUs 
<Gottingen,  1737, 4to);  Fabriciua,  BilUiotAeca  Grmca^  x, 
480,  494 ;  H.  A.  Niemeycr,  De  Jeid,  PeL  vUa,  scriptis  et 
doctrina  (Halle.  1825) ;  Tillemont,  Mim,  EccUnastigueSj 
YClL  XV. ;  Du  Pin,  Nouv,  Bibl.  des  aut.  ecdes,  iv,  5  8q. ; 
Ceillier,  //«/.  des  aut,  sac.  xiii,  600  8q. ;  Neander,  Kirck- 
engesch.  ii,  2, 361  8q. ;  SchaiT,  Ch,  Ilist,  iii,  941 ;  Herzog, 
Real-Encyklop,  vii,  85 ;  Hoefer,  Nouv.  Biogr,  Geniraie^ 
xxvi,  67. 

Isldore  op  Seville,  or  Isidorus  Hispaliensis, 
sumamed  also  '*  the  young^^  to  distinguish  him  from  Isi- 
dore  of  Cordova,  one  of  the  most  distinguiahed  eccleai- 
aatica  of  the  7th  cenŁur\',  waa  bom  at  Ctfthagena  about 
the  year  660  or  670.  He  waa  a  eon  of  Severianua  and 
Theodora,  and  brother  of  St  Leander,  hia  predeceasor  in 
the  biahopric  of  Seville,  and  of  St.  Fulgentioa,  biahop  of 
Carthage.  He  waa  brought  up  by  his  brother  Leander, 
and  it  was  thercfore  natural  that  he  ahould  have  been 
favored  in  the  selection  of  a  auccessor  for  the  biahopric 
of  Sevillc,  but  it  waa  not  principally  oyring  to  hia  rela- 
tionship  to  Leander  that  he  waa  houored  with  this  dis- 
tinguiahed position.  Hia  abilitiea  fully  entitled  him  to 
this  distinction.  Whcn  he  oscended  to  the  bishopric 
the  Goths  had  been  maatcrs  of  Spain  for  a  oentury  and 
a  half.  The  north  and  wcst  of  Europę  were  ahrouded 
in  morał  darkness.  Germany,  occupied  by  a  number  of 
adver8e  tribea,  waa  yet  given  to  idolati^' ;  Sweden,  Nor- 
łray,  Denmark,  Scotland,  were  almost  unknown ;  Eng- 
land  and  Ireland  had  just  rcccived  the  first  faint  glimpae 
of  Christianity ;  France  waa  tom  by  the  diaaeusiona  of 


petty  monarcha,  and  the  Eaat  itaelf  waa  on  the  ere  of 
the  inroada  of  Mohammedaniam.  To  counteract  thesa 
influenoea,  and  to  build  up  the  Christian  faith  amcog 
hia  countrymen,  waa  hia  first  care.  To  thb  end  he  e»- 
tabliahed  achoola  to  properly  train  the  youiig,  entoed 
into  cloeer  relations  with  the  biahop  of  Romc  (Giegmy 
the  Great),  and  madę  every  effort  to  bring  the  doctrical 
and  morał  ayatem  of  Chriatianlty  into  harmony  with  the 
hablta  and  inatitutiona  of  thoee  varioaa  raeea  and  na- 
tionalitiea  which  at  that  time  oompoeed  the  Hiapino- 
Gothic  kingdom ;  and  ao  aucoeaeful  waa  he  in  his  eflbrts 
that  he  ia  considered  one  of  the  brighteat  omamenta  of 
the  Church  of  Spain.  Hia  abilitiea  were  further  recog- 
niaed  by  hia  oontemporariea  in  permitting  him  to  pre> 
aide  over  the  two  Councils— half  ecdeidaatical,  half  civil 
— of  Seville  (619)  and  Toledo  (Dec,  683).  On  both  oc- 
caiaona  he  ahowed  great  zed  for  the  orthodox  aide,  and 
atrict  oppoaition  to  all  heretical  manifestationa;  eape- 
dally,  however,  waa  he  oppoaed  to  Arianiam.  So  aUe 
waa  the  oonduct  of  laidore  at  these  oouncils  that  the 
canons  of  them  may  be  aaid  to  have  aenred  as  a  baaia 
even  for  the  conatitutional  law  of  the  Spaniah  kingdoon, 
both  in  Church  and  State,  down  to  the  time  of  the  great 
conatitutional  changea  of  the  16th  centuiy.  Isidore  of 
Seville  died  at  Seville  April  4,  636,  and  was  canonized 
by  the  Church  aoon  ailer  hia  dcath.  We  have  but  few 
particulara  of  hia  life  from  hia  writinga,  except  that  in 
a  letter,  about  the  authenticity  of  which  there  ia  nrach 
doubt,  he  tnvite8  aome  biahop  to  join  him  in  a  8>*nod  to 
depose  the  biahop  of  Cordova  for  luKuńousneas  and 
woildlineaa.  The  great  reputation  which  laidore  en- 
joyed  among  hia  oolleaguea  may  be  beat  infeired  fvm 
the  fathers  of  the  8th  Council  of  Toledo,  who  cali  him 
Doctor  egregius,  ecdesia  catholica  nońssimum,  deeutt 
pracedentibus  atate  postremus^  doctrwa  comparatiom 
non  infimuSy  ałque,  et  cuod  majus  estyjam  seecu^nim/m- 
torum  doctissimus,  cum  rererenłia  nominandus,  Isidoms, 
According  to  the  teatimony  of  hia  diaciple,  St.Ildefoiue, 
he  waa  a  man  of  wonderful  eloąuence.  The  same  an- 
thority  namea  him  aa  the  author  of  De  Gonerę  Ofid- 
orum  (generally  called  De  OfficHs  ecdesiasticMs),  Uber 
Procmaorum  ;—De  Ortu  et  Ohitu  Pairum  (sanctormn) : 
— Liber  Synonymorum  (8łve  lamentationia) : — De  Natu- 
ra rerum  .•—Liber  Senieniiarum  .--^Liber  Elymclogiantm 
(prigints\  probably  the  laat  work  of  laidoie.  The  first 
edition  of  hia  worka,  which  display  veiy  extiensivc 
leaming,  and  cover  the  vańou8  departmenta  of  liten- 
turę — theological,  aacetical,  liturgical,  acripioral,  his- 
torical,  philoaophical,  and  even  philological — and  thna 
amply  account  for.  the  admiration  of  hia  contemponiies, 
waa  published  by  Michacl  Somniua  (Paiis,  1580,  folio) ; 
another,  very  complete,  waa  taken  principally  from  the 
MSS.  of  Alvar.  Gomez,  and  augmented  bv  notea  bv  J. 
a  Peiez  and  Grial  (Madrid,  1599, 2  vol&  fÓL).  The  edi- 
tion of  Jamea  Dubreuil  (Paria,  1601,  folio)  and  that  of 
Cologne  (1667)  are  taken  from  that  of  Madrid.  The 
lateat,  which  ia  alao  conaidered  the  beat,  ia  due  to  Are- 
voU  (Romę,  1797-1803,  7  vols.  4to).  See  St.  Bdefonae, 
De  Viris  Jllusiribus ;  Sigebert  de  Gembloux,  De  Script, 
EcclesiaU,  (c.  66) ;  Tritheim,  De  Script,  Eodes^ ;  M*Cde, 
Reformation  in  Spain,  p.  52 ;  Hoefer,  J^iwr.i^toy,  Gener, 
xxvi,  57  Bq.;  Charob^  Cyciop.  a.  v. ;  Herzog,  i?ea/-£if- 
dfklop,  vii,  89  aą. ;  Smith,  Diet,  of  Class,  Bioffrapku,  ii, 
627  aq.  (J.H.W.) 
Iflidoms  Hi8PAXj[£NBi8.     See  Isidokb  op  Sb- 

YILLB. 

Isis  Omc),  an  Egyptian  deity,  aiater  and  wife  of 
Oairia  (q.  v.),  ia  called  by  the  Egyptiana  //»,  and  ia  by 
them  aaid  to  have  been  bora  on  the  4th  day  of  the  £{«- 
gomensB,  or  five  days  addcd  to  the  Egyptian  year  of 
860  daya.  llie  hiatory  of  the  worship  of  Isisia  veiy 
obacure,  all  the  Information  we  posaeaa  on  the  sobject 
being  derived  from  Greek  writers.  Tradition  a«ud  that 
ber  brother  Oairia  ha^-ing  married  her,  they  t<i|;«Łher 
imdertook  the  taak  of  civilizing  men,  and  taiuf^t  them 
agriculture ;  tbeir  marriage  produced  Horua.  Their  oth- 
er  brother,  T}7>hon,  being  at  eumity  with  tbem.succccd* 


ISIS 


689 


ISITES 


ed  once  in  surpnaing  OsirU,  mnidered  him,  and  depos- 
ited  t  he  botiy  in  a  box,  which  hc  Łhrew  iuto  the  aea 
(Nile),  lala,  while  wandering  about  in  mourning,  seek- 
ing  Oslris,  heaid  that  Oairis,  before  his  departure,  had 
becn  enamoied  with  her  sister  Nephthys,  who  had  had 
a  son,  now  abandoned  by  the  mother  for  fear  of  Typhon. 
By  the  aid  of  some  dogs  Isia  succeeded  in  discoYeńng 
that  son,  Anubes  by  name ;  ahe  at  once  adopted  him, 
and  brought  him  up,  and  he  became  her  faithful  foUow- 
er.  In  the  niean*tinie,  the  box  containing  Osiris  drifted 
in  the  sea  towards  Bybloa,  in  Fhoenicia,  and  was  arrest- 
e<l  by  a  bush,  which  soon  grew  into  a  tree,  the  box  re- 
maining  inclosed  in  the  wood.  The  king  of  Byblos 
caused  a  coloran  to  be  madę  of  this  tree  for  his  palące. 
Isis  hastened  thither  to  inyestigate  the  nimori  and,  to 
aYoid  recognition,  offered  her  seryices  to  the  queen  as 
ninsc.  At  nightfall  she  put  one  of  the  children  pkced 
onder  her  care  in  the  fire,  to  diyest  it  of  all  that  was 
mortal,  while  she  herself,  in  the  form  of  a  swallow,  flew 
aroond  the  column  which  contained  Osiris.  The  queen, 
seeing  her  child  in  the  fire,  cried  out  loudly,  and  thus 
deprived  him  of  immortality.  The  goddess  now  reveal- 
ed  herself  amidst  thunder  and  lightning,  and  at  one 
blow  broke  down  the  colomn,  out  of  which  the  box  con- 
taining Osiris  felL  This  she  carried  to  her  son  Horus, 
who  had  been  brought  up  in  Butos,  and  he  hid  it  Ty- 
phou,  howeyer,  disG0vered  it,  reoognised  the  body,  and 
tore  it  into  14  piece8.(acoording  to  others,  into  26  or  28 
piecee).  By  means  oif  magie,  lais  succeeded  in  gather- 
ing  all  these  pieces  ¥rith  the  exception  of  the  genitals, 
to  replace  which  she  madę  artificial  ones.  This  is  the 
reason  why  the  Egyptians  considered  the  PhaUus  as  sa- 
cred.  The  body  was  now  interred  at  PhiliB,  which  be- 
came the  principal  burial-place  of  the  Egyptians.  Osi- 
ris, however,  retumed  from  Hades  to  educate  his  son, 
and  Isis  borę  him  again  another  son,  Harpocrates.  As, 
howerer,  she  allowed  Typhon,  who  had  been  captiured 
by  Horua,  and  whom  she  wąs  to.have  klUed,  to  escape, 
Horus  took  the  crown  from  her,  and  in  its  place  Hermes 
placed  buUs'  homs  on  her  head,  sińce  which  Isis  has  gen- 
erally  been  represented  under  the  form  of  a  woman  with 
the  homs  of  a  cow.  Isis  was  originally  for  the  Egyp- 
tian  a  peraonification  of  the  yalley  of  the  Nile,  lecun- 
dated  by  Osiris,  the  god  of  the  Nile.  In  after  times, 
when,  under  the  influence  offoreign  notions,  Osiris  came 
to  be  considered  as  the  god  of  the  sun,  Isis  was  trans- 
formed  into  the  goddess  of  the  moon,  and  consequently 
as  a  friendly  and  life-imparting  delty.  She  was  also 
considered  mb  the  goddess  of  the  lower  world,  of  which 
she  was  said  to  hołd  the  keys,  and  to  be  the  ruler  and 
judge.  She  subseąuently  came  to  be  regarded  as  the 
ruler  of  the  sea,  the  law-giyer  and  protector  of  nuirriage, 
the  support  of  the  state,  the  foundress  of  religion  and 
the  mysteries ;  and  she  finally  obtained  such  importance 
that  she  was  considered  by  the  philosophers  as  the  fun- 
damental  principle  of  the  world,  the  divine  power  which 
is  the  cause  of  all  the  phenomenon  of  naturę,  and  the 
sooroe  of  diyine  and  human  life. 

In  the  monuments  Isis  is  called  the  goddess-mother, 
the  mistress  of  heayen,  sister  and  wife  of  Osiris,  and 
norse  of  Horus,  the  moumer  of  her  brother,  the  eye  of 
the  sun,  and  regent  of  the  gods.  In  her  terrestrial 
character  she  wears  upon  her  head  the  throne  which 
represented  her  name;  in  her  celestial,  the  disc  and 
homs,  or  tali  plumes.  She  is  often  seen  nursing  Horus 
(q.  V.) ;  sometimes  also  with  the  head  of  a  cow  (indi- 
cating  her  identity  with  the  cow  Athor,  the  mother  of 
ihe  aun),  haying  a  bali  between  her  homs,  the  lotus  on 
the  top  of  her  head,  and  the  sistrum  in  her  hand.  She 
mostly  wore  a  cloak  fastened  on  her  bosom  by  a  knot; 
oiher  images  represent  her  with  a  spear,  or,  again,  with 
the  head  of  a  hawk  and  wings,  a  spear  in  her  right 
ha.nd  and  a  snake  in  the  left,  or  with  a  flowing  mantle 
and  spreading  a  sail.  Isis  was  worshipped  throughout 
EgypŁ,  and  especially  at  Memphis.  There  was  an  im- 
a^  of  her  at  Sais  with  the  inscription, "  I  am  the  aU, 
that  has  been,  is,  and  shall  be,  and  my  cloak  has  no 
IV.— Xx 


mortal  lifted  yet"  An  annnal  festiyal  of  ten  da3rs'  dn- 
ration  commcmorated  the  yictory  of  Isis  oyer  Typhon 
by  means  of  the  sistrum :  on  this  occasion  a  solemn  fast 
was  succeeded  by  processions,  in  which  sheayes  of  wheat 
were  carried  about  in  honor  of  Isis,  etc  After  Alexan- 
der  the  Great,  the  worship  of  Isis  was  propagated 
throughout  all  the  countries  inhabited  by  the  Greeks; 
in  Greece  temples  were  erected  to  her  at  Phlius,  Mega- 
ra,  Tithorea,  and  Phocis.  The  worship  of  Isia  was  also 
introduced  into  Bome  in  the  time  of  Sulla  (B.C.  86), 
but  her  temples  were  often  dosed  on  account  of  the  li- 
centiousness  of  her  priests.  (Josephus  tells  a  story  about 
the  demolition  of  her  tempie  at  Romę  by  order  of  the 
emperor  on  account  of  an  intriguc  by  one  Mundus  to  se- 
cure  the  gratification  of  his  passion  for  a  Roman  matron, 
Ant,  xYiii,  3,  4).  Yet,  under  the  emperors,  it  found 
credit,  and  Domitian,  Commodus,  and  Caracalla  were 
themselyes  among  her  priests.  Wńters  of  those  times 
say  that  it  was  in  their  day  stiU  the  custom  of  the  Greeks 
and  Romans  to  carry  a  boat  in  solemn  procession  in 
honor  of  Isis  on  the  opening  of  spring  (March  5th). 
Hence,  in  the  Roman  calendar,  the  dth  of  March  is  des- 
ignated  as  Itidis  namgium.  Aa  similar  processions  were 
lUso  madę  by  some  of  the  German  nations  in  honor  of 
their  deities,  Tacitus  claims  that  they  also  worshipped 
lais ;  yet  her  name  nowhere  appears  among  them,  neither 
is  it  exactly  known  what  goddess  he  thus  designated. 

"  The  myth  of  Isis,  as  giyen  by  Plutarch  {De  Iside)^ 
appears  to  be  a  fusion  of  Egyptian  and  Phoenician  tra- 
ditions,  and  the  esoterical  explanations  offered  by  that 
writer  and  others  show  the  high  antiquity  and  unintel- 
ligibility  of  her  name.  She  was  thought  to  mean  the 
cause  or  seat  of  the  earth,  to  be  the  same  as  the  Egyp- 
tian Neith  or  Minerya,  and  Athor  or  Yenus ;  to  be  the 
Greek  Demeter  or  CÓes,  Hecate,  or  eyen  lo.  Many 
monuments  haye  been  found  of  this  goddess,  and  a  tem- 
pie at  Pompeii,  and  a  hymn  in  her  honor  at  Antioclu 
The  representations  of  her  under  the  Roman  empire  are 
most  namerous,  Isis  haying,  in  the  pantheLatic  spirit  of 
the  age,  been  compared  with  and  figured  as  all  the  prin- 
cipal goddesses  of  the  Pantheon"  (Chambers,  Cyclopa" 
dioj  s.  y.). 

The  fable  was  adopted  and  incorporated  in  the  mysti- 
cism  of  the  Gnostics.  Accordingly,  among  other  repre- 
sentations, we  find  a  gem  containing  a  beetle,  with  Isis 
on  the  opposite  aide,  holding  two  children,  the  emblem 
of  matemal  fecundity.  See  Madonna.  On  another 
gem  the  beetle  is  not  cut  on  the  stone,  but  the  stone  is 
(brmed  into  the  shape  of  the  insect,  and  on  the  conyex 
back  is  represented  Isis,  or  the  Egyptian  Ceres,  reclin- 
ing  beside  the  Nile,  with  two  yases  of  Egyptian  com, 
the  emblem  of  yegetable  prolificness,  naturally  expreaBed 
by  the  emblem  of  the  sun^s  rays  and  the  Nile :  from  the 
head  issues  the  lotus,  and  in  one  hand  is  held  a  nilome- 
ter,  or  perhaps  a  spade.  It  is  the  exact  form  of  the 
same  agricultural  instrument  as  used  at  this  day  in  the 
East.  An  amulet  of  Isis  was  held  in  great  sanctity. 
See  Egypt. 

See  Herod,  ii,  c  69;  Oyid,  Mełam,  ix,  776;  Bunsen, 
Effypfs  Place,  i,  413 ;  Wilkinson,  3farmers  and  Ciut,  iii, 
276;  iy,  366;  Birch,  GalL  ^n/.  p.  31 ;  Reichel,  De  Isis 
apud  Romanos  cuUu  (Berlin,  1849) ;  Pierer,  (Jmeertal 
Lecikon,  ix,  82 ;  Smith,  Did.  of  Clau,  Mythol  a.  y. 


Gnostic  Gem  of  Isis,  on  a  Scarabsos. 

Isites,  the  name  of  a  Mohammedan  sect,  who  de* 
riye  their  name  from  their  founder,  Isa-Ąlerdad.    Thef 


ISLAM 


690 


ISMAEŁ 


hold  that  the  Koran  was  created,  noŁwithstanding  the 
opposition  of  Mohammed  himaelf  against  auch  a  state- 
ment,  for  he  held  that  it  was  etemal,  and  in  hia  day 
anathematized  pJI  who  dared  to  diasent  from  his  aaaer- 
tion.  The  Isites,  however,  reallj  avow  the  same  belief, 
though  they  clothe  it  ia  very  diflbrent  langaage.  They 
say  that  the  copy  of  the  Koran  delivered  by  the  Al- 
mighty  to  his  I^iophet  was  only  a  tranacription  of  the 
original,  and  that  the  reference  of  etemal  oould  not 
therefore  be  to  any  copy  poasessed  by  man.  But  their 
real  heresy  oonsiats  in  their  dedaration  that  the  Koran 
does  not  contain  that  matchlesa  eloquence  which  Mo- 
hammedans  generaliy  claim  as  evidenoe  of  the  inspira- 
tion  of  the  book.  See  Bronghton,  Biblioth,  HiHor.  8ac, 
i,  647. 

Islam  or  Eslam  (Arab.))  the  proper  name  of  the  re- 
ligioii  known  as  Mohammedanism,  designates  complete 
and  entlre  submission  of  body  and  soul  to  God,  his  will 
and  his  sendce,  as  well  as  to  all  those  articles  of  futh, 
coromands,  and  ordinances  Tevealed  to  and  ordained  by 
Mohammed  his  prophet.  Islam,  the  Mohammedans  say, 
was  once  the  religion  of  all  men ;  but  wickedness  and 
idolatry  came  into  the  world  either  after  the  murder  of 
Abel,  or  at  the  time  whieh  resulted  in  the  fk>od,  or  only 
afler  Amru  Ibn-Lohai,  ono  of  the  first  and  greatcst  Ara- 
bian  idolaters.  £very  child,  they  beliere,  is  bom  in  Is- 
lam, or  the  tme  faith,  and  would  continue  faithful  to  the 
end  were  it  not  iniluenced  by  the  wickedness  of  its  par- 
ents,  '*who  misguide  it  early,  and  Icad  it  astray  to  Ma- 
gism  [see  Parsbes],  Judaism,  or  Christianity."— Cham- 
bers,  CtfdopcBdiaf  v,  648.    See  Moha>i>łedani8M. 

Island  or  IbIo  is  the  iuvariable  rendering  in  the 
Auth.  Yers.  of  the  Heb.  word  "^SC  (Sept,  rrjaocYuig.  t»- 
Bula)f  which  occurs  in  the  foUowing  seiises,  chiefly  in 
poetiy :  First,  that  of  dry  or  habitable  land  in  opposi- 
tion to  water;  as,  "I  wiU  make  the  riyers  islands"  (Isa. 
xlii,  15 ;  corop.  xliii,  19 ;  lii,  2).  Especially  is  it  a  mar- 
itime  region  or  aea-coast,  like  the  East-Indian  DtStj 
which  means  both  shore  and  islaiid.  In  Isa.  xx,  6,  the 
isle  of  Ashdod  means  the  country,  and  is  ao  rendered  in 
the  margin,  particularly  as  this  was  a  sear-shore.  In 
Isa.  xxiii,  2,  6,  ^  the  isle"  meana  the  country  of  Tyre, 
and  in  Ezek.  xxvii,  6, 7,  that  of  Chittim  and  Elisha, 
both  being  maritime  regions.  (In  Job  xxii,  80,  "^{^S^^M 
means  the  fion-guiltless.)  In  this  sense  it  is  morę  par- 
ticuUrly  restricted  to  the  shores  of  the  Mediterranean, 
Bometimes  In  the  fuller  expression  "islands  of  the  sca" 
(Isa.  xi,  11),  or  "  isles  of  the  Gentiles"  (Gen.  x,  5 ;  comp. 
Zeph.  ii,  1 1),  and  sometimes  simply  as  *^  isles**  (Psa.  lxxii, 
10;  Ezek.  xxvi,  15, 18;  xxvii,  3, 85;  xxxix,  6;  Dan.xi, 
18) :  an  exception  to  this,  however,  occurs  in  Ezek. 
xxvii,  15,  where  the  shores  of  the  Persian  Gulf  are  in- 
tended.  Secondly,  it  is  used  both  in  Hebrew  and  Eng- 
lish,  acooiding  to  its  geographieal  meaning,  for  an  isl- 
and  proper,  i.  e.  a  country  surrounded  by  water,  as  in 
Jer.  xlvii,  4,  *Hhe  isle  (maigin)  of  Caphtor,'*  which  is 
probably  that  of  Cyprus.  "  The  isles  of  the  sea*'  (Esth. 
X,  1)  are  evidently  put  in  opposition  to  "  the  land"  or 
Gontinent.  Thirdly,  the  word  is  used  by  the  Hebrews 
to  designate  all  those  countries  divided  from  Palestine 
by  water,  as  fully  described  in  Jer.  xxv,  22,  "  the  isles 
which  are  beyond  the  aea,"  which  were  hence  regarded 
as  the  most  remote  regions  of  the  earth  (Isa.  xxiv,  15; 
xlii,  10 ;  lix,  18 ;  oompare  the  expreaBion  in  Isa.  lxvi,  19, 
*Hhe  isles  afar  ofT"),  and  also  as  laige  and  numerous 
(Isa.  xl,  15 ;  Psa.  xcvii,  1).  (See  J.  D.  Michaelis,  Spici- 
legium^  i,  131-142.)  In  Isa.  xi,  11,  after  an  enumeration 
of  countries  lying  on  their  own  oontinent,  the  words 
^  and  the  ialands  of  the  sca**  are  addcd  in  order  to  com- 
prehend  those  situate  beyond  the  ocean.  It  is  obsenrcd 
by  Sir  I.  Newton  {on  Daniel,  p.  276),  "By  the  earth  the 
Jews  undcrstood  the  great  continent  of  all  Asia  and  Af- 
rica,  to  which  they  had  access  by  land ;  and  by  the  isles 
of  the  sea  they  understood  the  places  to  which  they 
aailed  by  sea,  particularly  alł  Europę.  (See  Gesenins, 
rAef.Zfe6.p.88.)— Kitto;  Smith.    Comp.  Wild  Beast. 


Islands  of  the  Blessed  were,  aocording  to  a 
veiy  old  Greek  myth,  certain  happy  isles  aituated  to- 
wards  the  edge  of  the  Western  OoMn,  where  the  laror- 
ites  of  the  gods,  rescued  from  death,  dwelt  in  joy,  and 
poasessed  every thing  in  abundance  that  coold  contzibote 
to  it.->Chambers,  Cydop,  v,  648. 

Islebiane  is  the  name  by  which  the  foUowcTs  of 
John  Agrioola  (q.  v.)  are  designated,  in  distinctioii  fran 
all  other  Antinomians  (q.  v.).  The  name  is  derived 
from  their  master,  who  was  also  knowii  as  the  nuigitłfr 
hkbius,  because  a  native  of  Eisleben,  also  the  birtb- 
plaoe  of  Luther,  witb  whom  he  was  a  contemporaz}-. 
Sometimes  the  Islebians  are  called  Komomacki  (q.  v.). 

Islip,  Simon,  an  English  prelate,  flonrished  in  the 
14th  century.  Bat  little  is  known  of  his  early  bisio- 
ry. He  became  archbishop  in  1849,  having  pievioas- 
ly  been  canon  of  St.  Paulus,  dean  of  the  Arches,  and  a 
member  of  the  privy  coundl  of  the  king.  He  is  espe- 
cially celebrated  aa  the  founder  of  the  college  of  Cim- 
terbury  (now  a  part  of  Christ  Church,  Oxford>  **  He 
built  it,"  says  bishop  Godwin,  in  his  account  of  Islip, 
'*  and  endowed  it  with  good  poesessions,  appropriating 
unto  the  same  the  parsonages  of  Pagham  and  Mayfidd.* 
Perhaps  morc  notewotthy  still  b  his  condnct  towaids 
Wickliffe,  related  by  Neander  {Ch.  Hist.  v,  lS5-€,  wheie 
the  name  is  by  mistake  speUed  Islep,  and  ao  evcn  in  the 
English  tranidation  by  Torrey).  Islip,  says  Neander, 
was  a  firm  friend  of  the  refoimer,  and  in  1363  ahowed 
his  predilections  for  Wickliffe  by  appointing  him  orer- 
seer  over  the  Canterfoury  coUęge,  chaiacterizing  him 
**  as  a  man  in  whoae  circumspeccion,  fidelity,  and  activ- 
ity  he  had  the  utmost  coofldence,  and  to  whom  he  gare 
this  post  on  account  of  his  honorable  deportment  aod 
his  leaming."  CM* ooune,  after  Islip*s  death  in  1366  (Apr. 
26),  Wickliffe  was  deprived  of  his  place  (comp.  Lewis, 
Ltfe  of  Wickliffe,  1820,  p.  9  są.).  See  Hook,  Ecdeńa^' 
(ical  Biography,  vi,  265.     (J.  H.  W.) 

Ismachi^ah  (Heb.  Timnakyah',  but  only  in  the  pro- 
longed  form  Yi8mackya'kUf  ^!n^»^D%  supported  by  Je- 
hotah ;  Sept  Safta^tn),  one  of  the  Levites  chaiged  by 
Hezekiah  with  the  superintendence  of  the  aacred  offer- 
ings  under  the  generał  direction  of  the  high-pńest  and 
others  (2  Chroń,  xxxi,  18).    B.C.  726. 

Is^małSl,  a  Gnecized  form  of  the  name  IsmiAEL  (q. 
V.),  found  in  the  A.  V.  of  the  Apocrypha. 

1.  ('l0/4aiiX.)    The  son  of  Abraham  (Judith  ii,  23). 

2.  (l<FfŁai}\oc.)  One  of  the  priesta  who  relinąuiahed 
their  Gentile  wive8  after  the  Captivity  (1  Esdr.  ix,  22). 

IsmaSl,  the  elder  son  of  Jaafer  Saduk,  the  aixth 
imaum,  in  a  direct  linę,  from  Ali  Ben-Ali  Taleb  (who 
married  Mohammed*s  daughter  Fatima,  and  lounded 
the  Ali  sect,  also  known  as  Fatimites,  and  morę  genenlly 
as  the  ShiiteSf  q.  v.),  was  to  have  been  the  6evcnth  imanm 
of  the  Shiites,  but,  as  he  died  during  his  fathcr^s  lifetime, 
Jaafer  appointed  as  his  successor  his  youngcr  sod  Eaii- 
zim.  This  many  of  the  Shiites  oppwcd,  holding  that, 
as  the  imaum  is  an  incamate  eroanation  of  the  Deity, 
only  a  desoendant  of  the  direct  linę  could  aasume  the 
responsibilities  of  this  high  office,  and  clairoed  the  dia> 
^nction  for  the  sons  of  Ismałil,  who  alone,  of  the  desocnd- 
ants  of  Jaafer,  were  entitled  to  be  imaums.  This  con- 
tention  caused  a  schism  aroong  the  Shiites  aboat  the  91 
century  of  the  Hegira  (8th  century  of  our  seta),  and 
gavc  rise  to  a  new  sect,  under  the  name  of  ISMA£I/> 
ITES,  or  IsMAELiANS.  The  AbbassidaB  (fiienda  and 
foUowers  of  Abbas,  the  unde  of  Mohammed),  wfaose  in- 
tereat  it  was  to  foster  all  divi6ions  between  the  powcr> 
ful  Shiites,  in  order  to  assume  the  goverament  theoi- 
Belves,  sided  with  the  Ismat^lites.  But  the  Persiana, 
aroong  whom  the  Isma^lites  at  first  mainly  pniapeied 
(generaliy  known  as  Talimis,  from  talimi,  **]eaming,* 
because  they  afterwards  held,  cont.rar>'  to  the  orthodox 
Mussulmans,  that  man  can  arrive  at  the  tmtb  of  aoy- 
thing  only  by  continued  study),  soon  comprehended  tbe 
designa  of  the  Abbasaidg»  and  they  warred  alike  i 


ISMAEŁ 


691 


ISMAEL 


the  Abbaaside  caliphs  and  the  other  Miiflsalmanfl.  Mis- 
ńoiiaiies  were  sent  Łhrough  all  the  teiritories  settled  by 
the  IbUowers  of  Mohammed,  at  this  time  tom  in  pieces 
hj  soores  of  sects,  to  advocate  the  claims  of  the  house 
of  lamaKL  They  flomiahed  in  the  9th  and  lOth  oenta- 
riea  under  the  name  of  Karmatians  (q.  v.),  and  consti- 
tnted  a  secret  band,  governed  by  Uws  very  much  like  the 
freemasons,  admitting,  however,  some  very  dangerous 
teneta,  and  advocating  the  extiipation  of  their  enemles 
by  the  swoid.  They  received  additional  stiength  in 
the  llth  centuiy  of  our  tera,  when  a  family  of  chiefa, 
through  the  means  of  aapentition,  established  an  influ- 
ence over  the  minda  of  the  lamaeiians  that  enabled 
them  for  two  centuries  to  control  the  affairs  of  Persia. 
The  fint  of  theae  chiefa  waa  Huaaun  Subah  (from  whoae 
name  the  Isma^litea  of  thia  period  are  often  called  Hus- 
ttmi  or  Ho8»om — a  title,  however,  having  no  connec- 
tion  [aa  haa  been  erroneoualy  aapposed  by  aomej  with 
the  Engliah  woni  aaaaaain,  which  ia  really  equivalent 
to  ''AofAMA-eateis;**  aee  Assassii^s),  who,  afler  many 
yeaia  of  penecution,  aueoeeded  in  obtaining  a  atrong^ 
hołd,  and,  theie  fortifying  himaelf,  foonded  upon  the  la- 
maSlitic  model  a  aect  of  hia  own.  Beaidea  maintaining 
the  prineiplea  of  the  lama^litea  ao  far  aa  regarded  thetr 
righta  of  auoceasion  to  the  office  of  imaum,  he  alao  "  in- 
tzodnoed  many  new  teneta  morę  conformable  to  the 
opinioiia  of  the  Sdflia,  or  philoaophical  deiata,  than  to 
thoM  of  orthodox  Mohammedana.  The  Koran,  he  ad- 
mitted,  waa  a  holy  rolume;  but  he  inaiated  that  ita 
apirit,  and  not  ita  literał  meaning,  waa  to  be  obeeryed. 
He  rejected  the  uaual  modea  of  worahip,  aa  tnte  devo- 
tion,  he  aaid,  waa  aeated  in  the  aoul,  and  prescribed 
fonna  might  distorb,  though  they  could  nevcr  aid,  that 
aecret  and  fervent  adoration  which  it  must  alwajra  offer 
to  ita  Creator  (Malcolm,  from  a  Peraian  MS.).  But 
the  principal  tenet  which  Huaaun  Subah  incidcated  waa 
a  complete  and  abeolute  derotion  to  himself  and  to  hia 
deacendanta.  Hia  diaciplea  were  inatructed  to  conaider 
him  morę  aa  their  apiritual  than  their  worldly  leader. 
The  meana  he  took  to  inatil  thia  fecling  into  their  minda 
muat  have  been  powerful,  from  the  eiTect  which  waa 
produced.  "When  an  enroy  from  Malik  Shah  came  to 
Allahamout,  Huaaun  commanded  one  of  hia  aubjecta  to 
atab  hiraaelf,  and  another  to  caat  himaelf  headlong  from 
a  precipicc.  Both  mandatea  were  inatantly  obeyed! 
'Go,'  aaid  he  to  the  aatonished  enroy,  'and  explain  to 
your  maater  the  character  of  my  followcra' "  (Malcolm, 
Hut.  of  Persia,  i,  899).  One  reaaon  which  may  be  aa- 
Rgned  for  thia  control  of  Huaaun  orer  hia  adherenta  ia 
that  he  formed  them  into  a  aecret  order,  and,  beaidea, 
promiaed  them  adyancement  from  one  degree  to  an- 
other, in  the  higheat  of  which  a  foretaate  of  the  life  that 
ia  to  oome  waa  given  them.  Thia  cxtraordinary  modę 
of  procuring  the  deyotion  of  hia  diaciplea  he  ia  aaid  to 
bave  prodoced  by  druga.  **A  youth  who  waa  deemed 
worthy,  by  hia  atrength  and  reaolution,  to  be  initiated 
into  the  Aaaaaain  aenrice  waa  inyited  to  the  table  and 
oonrenation  of  the  grand  maater,  or  grand  prior;  he 
was  then  intoxicated  with  hathish  (the  hemp-plant), 
and  carried  into  the  garden— a  true  Eaatem  Paradiae— 
where  the  muaic  of  the  harp  waa  mingled  with  the 
aonga  of  birda,  and  the  melodioua  tonea  of  the  female 
aingera  harmonized  with  the  muzmura  of  the  brooka. 
Ererything  breathed  pleaaure,  mpture,  and  aenauali- 
ty,  and  thia,  on  awakening,  he  belieyed  to  be  Paradiae ; 
ererything  aiound  him,  the  houria  in  particular,  con- 
tribated  to  coniirm  hia  deluaion.  After  he  liad  expe- 
rienoed  aa  much  of  the  pleaaurea  of  Paradiae,  which  the 
PKophet  had  promiaed  to  the  bleaaed,  aa  hia  atrength 
woijd  admit--after  quaffing  eneryating  delight  from  the 
eyes  of  the  houria,  and  intoxicating  winę  from  glitter- 
ing  gobleta,  he  aank  into  the  lethargy  produced  by  nar- 
ootic  dnughta,  on  awakening  from  which,  afler  a  few 
houra,  he  again  found  himaelf  by  the  aide  of  hia  aupe- 
rior.  The  latter  endeavored  to  conyince  him  that  cor- 
pofreally  he  had  not  Icft  hia  aide,  but  that  apiritually  he 
had  been  rapt  into  Paradiae.  and  had  theie  enjoyed 


a  foretaate  of  the  bliaa  which  awaita  the  faithful,  who 
deyote  their  liyea  to  the  aeryice  of  the  faith  and  the 
obedience  of  their  chiefa.  Thua  did  theae  infatuated 
youtfaa  blindly  dedicate  themaelyea  aa  the  toola  of  mur- 
der,  and  eagerly  aeek  an  opportnnity  to  aacriflce  their 
liyea,  in  order  to  beoome  partakera  of  a  Paradiae  of  aen- 
aual  pleaaure.  What  Mohammed  had  pionuaed  in  the 
Koran  to  the  Moelem,  but  which  to  many  might  ap- 
pear  a  dream  and  merę  empty  promiaea,  they  had  en- 
joyed in  reality ;  and  the  joya  of  hearen  animated  them 
to  deeda  worthy  of  heli**  (Madden,  Turiish  Empire,  ii, 
186,  baaed  on  Hammer'a  Gesch,  der  Assastinen),  Mal- 
colm thinka  thia  an  improbable  tale,  inyented  by  the 
orthodox  Mohammedana,  who  hołd  the  Aaaaeaina  in 
great  abhorrence,  becauae  "  the  uae  of  winę  waa  atrictly 
forbidden  them,  and  they  were  enjoined  the  moat  tem- 
perate  and  abatemioua  habita."  But  thia  aeema  to  ua 
only  an  additional  reaaon  why  we  ahoułd  belieye  it  to 
be  true ;  for  if  Huaaun  uaed  the  kashish  to  intoxicate  hia 
foUowen  when  their  neryea  needed  atrengthening  for 
aome  atrocioua  deed,  we  could  not  expect  him  to  adyocate 
the  free  lue  of  intoxicating  beyeragea.  Nay,  ita  truth  ' 
ia  further  conflrmed  by  the  rerelationa  which  the  fourth 
aucceeeor  of  Huaaun  aa  grand  maater  madę  of  the  im- 
poature.  The  uae  alao  to  thia  day  at  Conatantinopłe 
and  at  Cairo  of  opium  with  henbane  shows  what  an  in- 
credible  charm  they  exert  on  the  droway  indolence  of 
the  Turk  and  the  flery  imagination  of  the  Arab. 

Huaaun,  on  account  of  aeyeral  hill  forta  which  he 
had  aeized,  "waa  atyled  *Sheik  el-Jebel,'  an  Arabie 
title  which  aignifiea  '  the  chief  of  the  mountaina,'  and 
which  haa  been  literally,  but  erroneoualy,  tranalated 
*  the  ołd  man  of  the  mountain' "  (3fałcolm,  i,  401).  The 
lamai^litea  in  hia  time  apread  exten8ively.  They  flour- 
iahed  not  only  in  Peraia,  but  alao  in  Syria  and  Arabia, 
until  A.D.  1258,  when  their  atrocitiea  became  unbeara- 
ble,  and  a  generał  maaaacre  against  them  waa  inaugu- 
rated.  A  command  waa  iaaued  bj'  the  reigning  prince, 
Mangu  Khan,  in  the  661at  year  of  the  Hrgira, "  to  exter- 
minate  all  the  lamai^litea,  and  not  to  apare  eren  the  in- 
fant at  ita  mother*8  breaat.  .  .  .  Warriora  went  through 
the  proyincea,  and  executed  the  fatal  aentcnce  without 
raercy  or  appeał.  Whererer  they  fotmd  a  diaciple  of 
the  doctrine  of  the  lamal^itea  they  compclłed  him  to 
kneel  down,  and  then  cut  ofT  hia  head.  The  whole  race 
of  Kia  Buaurgomid,  in  whoae  deacendanta  the  grand 
maaterahtp  had  been  hereditar}-,  were  exterminated. . . . 
Twclye  thouaand  of  theae  wretched  creaturea  were 
alaughtercd  without  diatinction  of  age.  .  .  .  The  •  de- 
yoted  to  rourder*  were  not  now  the  yictima  of  the  or^ 
d€r*a  yengeance,  but  that  of  outraged  humanity.  The 
aword  waa  againat  the  dagger  [the  weapon  the  Aasaa- 
aina  moat  generally  uaed  to  murder  their  opponenta], 
the  executioner  deatroyed  the  murderer.  The  aeed 
aowed  for  two  centuriea  waa  now  ripe  for  the  han-eat, 
and  the  field  ploughed  by  the  Aaaaaain^a  dagger  waa 
reaped  by  the  aword  of  the  mogtd.  The  crime  had  been 
terrible,  but  no  leaa  terrible  waa  the  punishment"  (Mad- 
den, ii,  187 ;  comp.  Milman'3  Gibbon  [Harper*a  edition], 
Dedine  and  Fali  o/ the  Roman  Empire,  vi,  216).  But, 
with  all  theae  peraecutiona,  they  atill  atniggled  on  for 
many  yeara,  and  eyen  in  our  oim  day  "  remaina  of  the 
lamaelitea  atill  exiat  both  in  Persia  and  Syria,  but  mcre- 
ly  aa  one  of  the  many  aecta  and  hereaiea  of  hlamism 
[aee  Mohammedantsm],  without  any  claima  to  power, 
without  the  meana  of  retaining  their  former  importance, 
of  which  they  aeem,  in  fact,  to  have  loat  all  remem- 
brance.  The  policy  of  the  secret  atate-aubyerting  doc- 
trine which  animated  the  followera  of  Huaaun,  and  the 
murderona  tactica  of  the  Asaaaeina,  are  eąually  foreign 
to  them.  Their  writings  ore  a  ahapeleaa  mixture  of  la- 
ma^litic  and  Chriatian  traditiona,  gloaaed  oyer  with  the 
raringa  of  a  myatical  theolog>'.  Their  placea  of  abode 
are,  both  in  Peraia  and  Syria,  thoee  of  their  forefathera, 
in  the  mountaina  of  Irak,  and  at  the  foot  of  the  anti- 
Lebanon"  (Madden,  ii,  190, 191).  At  preaent  many  stu- 
denta of  Eaatem  hiatoiy  incUne  to  the  oDinion  that 


ISMAEL 


692 


ISMAEL  BEN-ELKA 


**  tbe  Dnises**  (q.  v.)i  genendly  suppoeed  to  be  the  de- 
BcendanCs  of  the  HiviŁe8|  to  yrhom  they  bear  some  char- 
acterUtic  resemblances  (comp.  Chasseaud  f  a  natiye  of 
Syria,  and  a  very  able  scholar],  Druses  o/ the  Ldfonon, 
p.  361  sq.), "  most  be  looked  upon  aa  the  only  tnie  rep- 
resentadres  in  Syria  of  the  IsmaSlian  sect  of  the  fol- 
loweiB  of  Ali,  from  whom  the  Aasasains  are  deriyed" 
(Madden,  ii,  196).  Some  alao  hołd  to  a  connectioii  of 
the  Aruaricttu  with  the  Aaflaiwina,  espedally  Mr.Walpole 
(TraceU  in  thefurther  Easi  in  1850-51  [London,  2  yola. 
8vo]  ;  compare  also  his  TraceU  in  the  Eastf  iii,  8  8q.)> 
£ven  in  India  the  Isma^lites  are  belieyed  to  have  fol- 
lowers,  and  as  such  "  the  Boraks,  an  industrious  race  of 
men,  whose  pursuits  are  oommercial,  and  who  are  well 
known  in  the  British  settlements  of  India,  who  still 
maintain  that  part  of  the  cieed  of  Huasun  Subah  which 
enjoins  a  oom pieto  devotion  to  the  mandato  of  the  high- 
priest"  (Malcolm,  i,  407, 408),  are  mentioned.  See,  be- 
sides  the  works  already  cited,  J.  F.  Bousaeau,  Memoire 
sur  les  Ismojdis  et  les  Nosalris,  with  notes  by  De  Sacy ; 
the  Kev.  Samuel  Lyde,  The  Ansireeh  and  Ishmaleehf  a 
Visit  to  the  secret  Seds  o/ Northern  Syria  (Lond.  1858, 
8vo) ;  Asiatic  Researches,  xl  43  są.  See  aiao  Moham- 
MEDANS;  Shiites.     (J.  IŁ"vV.) 

Ismael  Haji,  a  Mussulman  reformer,  was  bom  on 
the  28th  of  Shawal,  1196  of  the  Hegira  (Sept.  11, 1781), 
in  the  yillage  of  Pholah,  district  of  DelhL  His  family 
had  fumbhed  quite  a  number  of  distinguished  theolo- 
gians,  and  Isma^l  began  early  to  preach  and  writo 
against  the  superstitious  practioes  which  had  been  in- 
troduced  into  the  Mohammedan  worship  in  Hindustan. 
In  1819  he  became  oonnected  with  Ahmed  Shah,  a  Mo- 
hammedan of  a  family  of  Syeds  of  Bareilly,  in  Upper  In- 
dia, who  was  at  this  time  attracting  a  great  deal  of  at- 
tontion  at  Delhi  by  superior  sanctity,  and  by  his  denun- 
ciations  of  the  corrupt  forms  of  worship  then  preyalenL 
In  18*22,  he  and  another  Mussulman  of  some  leamiug  set 
out  with  Ahmed  Shah  on  a  yisit  to  Arabia  and  Turkey. 
In  all  the  great  cities  large  congregations  gathered  about 
thesc  new  reformers,  who  sought  to  enforce  attention  to 
the  precepts  of  the  Koran  independent  of  the  opinions 
of  the  high  dignitaries  of  the  Moslem  Church.  After 
trayelling  about  for  morę  than  foiir  years  they  retumed 
to  Delhi,  determined  to  estoblish  a  theocratic  form  of 
goyemmcnt  in  India,  and  to  restore  Islamism  to  Its 
original  simplicity.  The  reformers  inaugurated  a  gen- 
erał war  against  the  uubelieying,  and  laying  particu- 
lar  stress  on  the  doctriue  of  the  unity  of  God,  they  soon 
succeeded  in  gaining  conaiderable  power  by  the  great 
number  of  their  adherents.  The  Sikhs  (q.  y.)  became 
their  chief  opponents,  and  with  them  a  protracted  strug- 
gle  ensued.  Driyen  irom  Delhi  by  the  ciyil  authorities, 
they  retired  in  1827  to  Punjtar  (situated  in  the  Eusof- 
zai  hills,  between  Peshawur  and  the  Indus),  where  they 
found  an  ally  in  Omar,  khau  Afghan  of  Punjt&r.  At 
iirst  these  united  forces  were  successful  in  their  wars 
against  the  Sikhs,  but  the  Afghans  soon  grew  weary  of 
these  conąuests  for  strange  alUes,  and  Ahmed  and  I»- 
mal<l  being  lefl  alone,  remoyed  to  the  leli  bank  of  the 
Indus,  and  there,  amid  rugged  mountains,  continued  for 
a  time  the  desultory  warfare.  Early  in  May,  1831,  how- 
ever,  they  were  surprised  at  a  pUce  called  Balakot,  in 
the  mountains  of  Pahkli,  and  sliun.  • 

The  followers  of  Ahmed  and  IsmalU  are  called  Thari- 
cati  Mohammediyat,  and  bear  some  resemblance  in  their 
doctrines  to  the  Sunmtes  (q.  y.).  Ismat^l  composed  for 
the  benefit  of  the  sect,  and  at  the  insdgation  of  Ahmed, 
the  Tuhtia  ul-Imdn,  or  *'  Basis  of  the  Faith,"  in  the 
Urdu,  or  yemacular  language  of  Upper  India,  and  it  was 
printed  at  Calcutta.  "  It  is  diyided  into  two  portions,  of 
which  the  first  only  is  understood  to  be  the  work  of  Is- 
maSl,  the  second  part  (the  Strat  Almosłakim,  published 
in  Peraian  at  Calcutta,  and  transUted  in  the  Journal  of 
the  Asiaiic  Society  of  Bengal)  being  inferior,  and  the 
producŁion  of  another  person.  In  the  preface  Ismael 
deprecates  the  opinion  ^  tliat  the  wise  and  leamed  alone 
can  comprehend  God's  Word.     God  himself  had  said  a 


piophet  had  been  imised  np  among  the  rude  and  igno- 
rant for  their  instmction,  and  that  he,  the  Lord,  had 
rendered  obedience  easy.  There  were  two  things  esacn- 
tial:  a  belief  in  the  unity  of  God,  which  w«s  to  know 
no  other,  and  a  knowledge  of  the  Pn>phet»  which  wh 
obedience  to  the  law.  Many  held  the  sayings  of  the 
sainta  to  be  their  guide,  but  the  Word  of  God  was  akfoe 
to  be  attended  to,  although  the  writings  of  the  pioos 
which  agreed  with  the  Scriptures  migbt  be  read  for  cd- 
ification.'  The  first  chapter  treats  of  the  unity  of  God, 
and  in  it  the  writer  deprecatos  tbe  snpi^cation  of  saints, 
angela,  etc,  as  impious.  Ile  dedaiee  the  reasons  giyen 
for  such  worship  to  be  futile,  and  to  show  an  uŁter  igno- 
rance  of  God*s  Word.  '  The  ancient  idolaters  had  like- 
wise  said  that  the}'  merely  yenerated  powers  and  diyin- 
ities,  and  did  not  regard  them  as  the  equal  of  the  Al- 
mighty ;  but  God  himself  had  answered  these  heatheiu. 
Likewise  the  Chiistians  had  been  admonLshed  for  giy- 
ing  to  dead  monks  and  friars  the  honor  due  to  the  LÓtd. 
God  is  alone,  and  oompanion  he  has  nonę;  prostntico 
and  adoration  are  due. to  him,  and  to  no  other.*  IsaaSA 
proceeds  in  a  slmilar  strain,  but  assumea  some  donbtfnl 
positions,  as  that  Mohammed  says  God  is  one,  and  man 
leams  from  his  parents  that  he  was  bom;  he  belieyet 
his  mother,  and  yet  he  distrusts  the  apostle;  or  that  aa 
eyil-doer  who  has  faith  is  a  better  man  than  the  most 
pious  idolater"  (Cunningham,  Hitfory  of  the  Siths,  pw 
190,  foot-noto  t).  The  work  was  tnnslated  m  the  Joar^ 
nal  ofthe  Hoy  al  Asiatic  Socieły  of  Great  Britain  (1852), 
xiii,  317-367.  See  Garcin  de  Tassy,  Hist,  de  la  Utt.hit^ 
doustane,  i,  251 ;  Hoefer,  Nouv,  Biogr.  Generalej  zsyi,  81. 
(J.H.W.) 

Ismael  ben-Elisa,  Ha-Cohen,  one  of  the  most 
oelebrated  Jewish  Babbis  and  theologians,  was  bom 
about  A.D.  60  in  Upper  Galilee,  and  when  yet  a  child 
was  cairied  as  a  captiyc  to  Romę  on  the  dcstmction  of 
Jemaalem.  While  he  was  oonfined  in  prison  in  the 
Etemal  City,  the  Kabbis  Joshna,  Azzariah,  ancl  Gamalid 
II  had  come  to  Romę  to  implore  mercy  and  pardon  lor 
the  captiye  Jews  of  the  then  reigning  empeior  Diocle^ 
tian  (about  A.D.  83),  and  by  accident  paasin^  the  pris- 
on door  of  this  young  boy,  Rabbi  Joehua  exclaimed  at 
his  door,  *'  Who  gaye  Jacob  for  a  apoil,  and  Israel  to  the 
robbers?*'  (Isa.  xlii,  24)  to  which  lemaSl  ben-Elisa  gave 
this  manly  reply :  "  The  Lord,  against  whom  we  hare 
sinned,  and  would  not  walk  in  his  w^ys,  nor  be  obedient 
unto  his  law"  (ibid.).  This  remarkahle  reply  from  the 
mouth  of  Ismael  so  interested  the  celdmted  Rabbis 
in  his  behalf  that  they  yowed  to  secore  his  liberatka 
before  they  should  quit  the  city.  Ismael  bm-Eliss, 
when  liberated,  placed  himself  under  tbe  instmction 
of  Rabbi  Joshua,  and  also  sŁudied  under  the  oelebcated 
Simon  ben-JochaL  At  a  later  period  we  find  Ismael 
ben-Elisa  in  Southern  Judiea,  not  far  from  the  Idomsean 
boundaries,  at  Kephar-Aziz  (T^^Tfif^BS^  oocupied  ia 
the  cultiyation  and  sale  of  the  gnpe.  But  while  thiis 
employed  he  was  also  engaged  in  the  noble  eflbrt  of 
maintaining  young  Jewish  maidens,  who,  by  the  deaola- 
tions  of  the  war,  had  been  impoyerisbed,  and  were  saf- 
fering  terriUy  from  destitution.  IsmaiJl  ben-Elisa  is 
supposed  to  haye  suifered  martyrdom  during  the  perse- 
cutions  so  frequent  at  that  period  (about  AJ).  121). 
His  espedal  seryice  to  Judaism  was  the  system  of  inter> 
pretation  which  he  inaugurated  in  opposition  to  the 
system  of  Rabbi  Akiba.  The  latter  heU  that  ^eroy 
repetition,  figurę,  paraUeliam,  synonyme,  woni,  letter, 
particie,  pleonasm,  nay,  the  yeiy  shape,  and  eyery  or- 
nament of  a  letter  or  title,  had  a  lecondite  meaning  tn 
the  Scripture, '  just  as  eyery  fibre  of  a  fly^s  wing  or  an 
ant*s  foot  has  its  peculiar  significanoe.*  Uenoe  he  main- 
tained  that  the  partides  DK,  D3,  "]it,  and  p"),  as  wdl 
as  the  construction  ofthe  finito  yerb  with  the  infinitire^ 

e.  g.  laa-^nyn  onrn,  a-^an  aujn,  haxe  a  d<^;nuitic 

sigiiificance,  and  he  therefore  deduoed  points  of  law 
from  them.  Philo  was  of  the  same  opinion  (oomp^  ffa- 
^wc  łiduiCf  on  irtptTTÓy  wo/ta  ovdłv  W^^oty,  inró  rifc 


ISMAEUTES 


693 


ISRAEŁ 


fw  wpayfŁaroKoyilp  ófivdfiTov  ^opac?  Deprofugit^  ed. 
Mugey,  p.  466),  and  he  even  dedaced  from  them  eth- 
iod  and  philoeophical  ma^tms;  and  this  was  alao  the 
<ypinlon  of  the  Greek  trandator  of  Ecclesiastea  in  the 
Septoagint,  as  may  be  seen  from  his  anxiety  to  indicate 
the  Hebrew  particie  rS  by  the  Greek  (tvv,  which  has 
greatly  perplexed  the  commentatorB  who,  being  unac- 
qiiaixited  with  this  fact,  have  been  unable  to  accoiut  for 
this  barbarism  and  yiolation  of  grammatical  propriety" 
(oomp.  Ginsbuig,  Comment,  on  EccUsiastes,  p.  496).  On 
the  other  hand,  Rabbi  Ismafil  ben-Elisa  held  that  the 
Scripturea  (of  conrse  only  the  O.  T.)*  being  a  composi- 
tion  intendwl  for  human  eyes  and  oomprehension,  "  lued 
expre6sions  in  their  common  acceptation,  and  that  many 
of  the  repetitions  and  parallelisms  are  simply  designed 
to  render  the  style  morę  rhetorical  and  powerful,  and 
cannot,  therefore,  without  yiolation  of  the  laws  of  lan- 
goage,  be  addoocd  in  support  of  legał  deductions."  In 
acoordance  with  this  theory,  he  established  thirteen  ex- 
egetical  niles,  which  are  called  ni*lQ  n^U??  tt?btt9 
bKJTSO**  •'3-11,  The  thirteen  RuJea  of  R.  Itmael,  by 
which  akme,  as  he  maintaioed,  the  Scriptnres  are  to  be 
interpreted  (^t\1  rO*^*T5  n*1inniD).  Gomp.  the  very 
yaluable  work  of  Dr.  £.  M.  Finner,  Talmud  Bąbli  (trac- 
tat  Berachoth)  mit  deuUcher  Ue^rtetzung^  etc.  (Berlin, 
1842,  foL),  i,  17-20,  where  Ismal^rs  rules  are  given  with 
lengthy  annotations.  See  alao  the  article  Midrasii. 
Rabbi  Isma^I  is  also  the  reputed  aathor  of  a  number 
of  other  works.  The  moet  important  of  these  are,  an 
allegorical  commentary  on  Exod.  xii-xxiii,  20,  called 
KnbSTS,  treating  of  the  ceremonies  prescribed  by  the 
Toiah.  Nnmerous  editions  of  it  have  been  printed; 
the  fiist  at  Constantinoplc,  1515,  folio;  the  last,  to  our 
knowledge,  at  Wihia,  1844,  folio.  It  has  been  augment- 
ed  by  notes  from  seyeral  other  Jewish  writers,  and  was 
tnmslated  into  Latin  by  Ugolino  {Theaaurus  Antijuitci' 
tumy  voL  xiv)  t— nii3">n  '»;?'JB  (or  'Jjisn  D),  a  work 
oa  myatic  tbeology,  of  which  extniict8  hare  been  pub- 
lished  in  lianb  *inM  (Yenice,  1601, 4to;  Cracow,  1648, 
4to),  and  in  other  works.  It  was  printed  separately  im- 
dcr  the  title  n'ft3''n  '^^'18  dnn  (Venice,  1677,  8vo; 
Zolkiew,  1838, 8vo).  It  was  also  inserted  in  parts  in  the 
edition  of  the  Zohar.  Ismaiil  also  wrote  a  cabalisŁic, 
allegorical  treatisc  on  the  naturę  and  attributes  of  God, 
nnder  the  title  mip  *^ASV\  also  caUed  h^1>n  O. 
A  part  of  it  was  pnblished  in  the  ^M*'^  'd  of  Eleazar 
ben-Jehndah  of  Worms  (Amsterd.  1701,  4to,  and  often). 
Another  smali  cabalistic  treatise  on  the  shape  and  my»- 
tic  valne  of  letters,  under  the  title  of  nS^TSnn  D,  was 
published  with  a  long  commentary  (Konz,  1774.  4to), 
etc  Sec  Fttrst,  BibL  Judaica,  ii,  75  sq. ;  Rossi,  ŹHziotu 
itorico  de^iAutori  Ebrei;  Zunz, Dit  Gołłesdiengilicken 
Yortrage  der  Judat  (Berlin,  1882),  p.  47  8q.;  Gr^tz,  Ge^ 
sekichłe  der  Juden,  ir,  68  8q. ;  Steinschneider,  Catalogus 
Libr,  Ifebr,  in  BiUioih,  Bodlciana,  col.  1160,  etc.;  Ben- 
Chammja  (Szegedin,  1858),  i,  122  8q. 

lomaSlitea.    See  Ismabu 

Zsmai^ah  (I  Chnm.  xii,  4).    See  lamiAiAH,  1. 

Is'pa]Ł  (Heb.  Tishpah',  riBl^:,  prób. hałd;  Septuag. 
*JUr^X  ^'  '*  *^i^^)i  one  of  the  "  sons"  of  Beriah,  a  chief 
Bcnjamite  (originally  from  the  neighborhood  of  Aija- 
km)  leudent  at  Jerusalem  (1  Chroń,  viii,  16).    B.C.  antę 

dOOa 

Is^raSl  [not  Izral]  (Heb.  Tisrair,  i^-niO^;  Sept 
and  N.  T.  'lopaiiW),  the  name  of  the  founder  of  the  Jew- 
ish natioD,  and  of  the  nation  itself,  specially  of  the  king- 
doBł  oomprising  the  ten  northem  tribes  after  the  schism. 

The  name  was  originally  oonferred  by  the  angel-Je- 
hovah  upon  Jaoob  after  the  memorable  prayer-stmggle 
at  Peniel  (Gen.  xxxii,  28) ;  and  the  reason  there  assign- 
ed  is  that  the  patriaich  "  as  a  prince  had  power  (n''^^) 
irith  God  and  man,  and  prerailed"  (eomp.  Gen.  xxxv, 


10;  Hos.  xii,  4).  Tńe  etymology  is  therefore  dearly 
from  the  root  fl^to,  with  the  freąuent  adjunct  bc,  God, 
The  verb  itself  occors  nowhere  eise  than  in  the  above 
passagcs,  where  it  evidently  means  to  atrioe  or  contend 
as  in  battle ;  but  derivatives  are  found,  e.  g.  n'^b,  a 
princets,  and  hence  applied  to  Abraham's  wife  in  ex- 
change  for  her  former  name  SaraL  The  signification 
thus  iy)pean  to  be  that  of  a  '^suocessful  torettler  with 
God^^  a  sense  with  which  all  the  lexicographer8  sub- 
stantially  ooincide;  e.  g.  Geeenius  {HA,  Lex,  s.  v.,  and 
Tkesaur,  p.  1838),/ni^ator,  i.  e.  milea  JM  ;  Winer  {JUh, 
Zer.  p.  1026),  luctaior,  i.  e.pugnator  DHf  FUrst  {Heb. 
Wórterh,  &  v.),  Gott-^Beherrscher, 

1.  Jagob,  whoee  history  will  be  found  under  that 
name.  Although,  as  applied  to  Jaoob  personaUy,  Israel 
is  an  honorable  or  poetical  appellation,  it  is  the  common 
prose  name  of  his  deseendants,  while,  on  the  contrary, 
the  title  Jaoob  is  given  to  them  only  in  poetry.  In  the 
latter  division  of  Isaiah  (after  the  89th  chapter),  many 
instances  occur  of  the  two  names  used  side  by  side,  to 
subeenre  the  parallelism  of  Hebrew  poetry,  as  in  eh.  xl, 
27;  xli, 8, 14, 20, 21;  xlii,24;  xliii,  1, 22, 28, etc. ;  8o,in- 
deed,  in  xiv,  1.  The  modem  Jews,  at  least  in  the  East, 
are  fond  of  being  named  ItraMi  in  preferenoe  to  Yahudif 
as  morę  honorable.— Kitta    See  Jaoob. 

2.  The  IsRAELiTES,  L  e.  the  whole  people  of  Israel, 
the  twelve  tribes;  often  called  the  children  of  Itrad 
(Josh.  iii,  17;  vii,  25;  Judg.  viii,  27;  Jer.  iii,  21);  and 
tke  houae  ofitrael  (Exod.  xvi,  81 ;  x],  88) ;  so  also  tn  /«- 
rad  (i  Sam.  ix,  9) ;  and  lani  ofItraeL,  L  e.  Palestine  (1 
Sam.  xiii,  19 ;  2  Kings  vi,  28).  Sometimes  the  whole 
people  is  represented  ss  one  person :  ^  Israel  is  my  son** 
(Exod.iv,22;  Numb.xx,14;  Isa.xli,8;  xlii, 24;  xliii, 
1,15;  xliv,  1,5).  /«rae/ is  sometimes  put  emphatically 
for  tht  true  Israelites,  the  faithfnl,  those  distingnished 
for  piety  and  virtue,  and  worthy  of  the  name  (Fsa.  lxxiii, 
1;  Isa.xlv,  17;  xlix, 8 ;  John  i, 47 ;  Rom.ix,6;  xi, 26). 
laraditeB  was  the  usual  name  of  the  twelve  tribes,  from 
their  leaving  £g3i>t  until  after  the  death  of  SauL  But 
in  consequence  of  the  diasensions  between  the  ten  tribes 
and  Jndah  from  the  death  of  Saul  onward,  these  ten 
tribes,  among  whom  Ephraim  took  the  lead,  arrogated 
to  them8elve8  this  honorable  name  of  the  whole  nation 
(2  Sam.  ii,  9, 10, 17, 28 ;  iii,  10, 17 ;  xix,  40-48 ;  1  Kings 
xii,  1) ;  and  on  their  separation,  after  the  death  of  Solo- 
mon,  into  an  independent  kingdom,  founded  by  Jero- 
boam,  this  name  was  adopted  for  the  kingdom,  so  that 
thenceforth  the  kings  of.  the  ten  tribes  were  called  Idngs 
oflsraely  and  the  deseendants  of  David,  who  ruled  over 
Judah  and  Benjamin,  were  called  ikm^«  ofJudah,  So 
in  the  prophets  of  that  period  Judah  and  Itrad  are  put 
in  opposition  (Hos.  iv,  15 ;  v,  8, 5;  vi,  10 ;  vii,  1 ;  viii,  2, 
8,6,8;  ix,  1,7;  AmoBi,l;  ii,6;  iii,14;  Mic.i,5;  l8a.v, 
7).  Yet  the  kingdom  of  Jndah  could  still  be  reckoned  as 
a  part  of  Israel j  as  in  Isa.  viii,  14,  the  two  kingdoms  are 
called  the  two  houeee  ofitrael;  and  hence,  after  the  de- 
stmction  of  the  kingdom  of  Israel  at  Samaria,  the  name 
Terael  began  again  to  be  applied  to  the  whole  surviving 
people.— Gesenius.    See  Hebrew;  Israelite;  etc 

8.  It  is  used  in  a  narrower  sense,  excluding  Judah,  in 
1  Sam.  xi,  8.  It  is  so  used  in  the  famous  ery  of  the 
rebels  against  David  (2  Sam.  xx,  1)  and  against  his 
grandson  (1  Kings  xii,  16).  Thenceforth  it  was  assumed 
and  accepted  as  the  name  of  the  northem  kingdom,  in 
which  the  tribes  of  Judah,  Benjamin,  Levi,  Dan,  and 
Simeon  had  no  share.— Smith.    See  Israel,  Kikgdom 

OF. 

4.  After  the  Babylonian  captivity,  the  rctumed  ex- 
iles,  although  they  were  mainly  of  the  kingdom  ofJu- 
dah, resum^  the  name  Israel  as  the  designation  of  their 
nation,  but  as  individuał9  they  are  almost  always  de- 
scribed  as  Jews  in  the  Apocrypha  and  N.  T.  Instances 
occur  in  the  books  of  Chronicles  of  the  application  of 
the  name  Israel  to  Judah  (e.  g.  2  Chroń,  •xi,  8;  xii,  6), 
and  in  Esther  of  the  name  Jews  to  the  whole  people. 
The  name  Israel  is  alao  used  to  denote  laymen  as  dis- 


ISRAEL 


694 


ISRAEL 


linguished  from  priesta,  Leyite8,^imd  other  minUtera 
(Ezra  vi,  16 ;  ix,  1 ;  x,  25 ;  Nefa.  xi,  3,  etc). — Smith. 
The  twelve  tribes  of  Israel  ever  formed  the  ideał  repre- 
sentatton  of  the  whole  stock  (1  Kinga  xyiii,  30, 81 ;  £zra 
vi,  17 ;  Jer.  xxxi,  1,  etc).  Hence  alao  in  the  New  Test 
**  larael"  is  applied  (as  in  No.  2  above)  to  the  trae  peo- 
ple  of  God,  whether  of  Jewish  orGentile  origin  (Rom. 
ix,  6 ;  GaL  vi,  16,  etc),  being,  in  fact,  comprehensive  of 
the  entire  Chinch  of  the  redeemed.— Fairbun.  See 
Jews. 

ISRAEL,  KiNODOM  OF.  The  name  Israd  (q.  v.), 
which  at  fint  had  been  the  national  designadon  of  the 
twelve  tribes  collectively  (Exod  iii,  16,  etc),  waa,  on  the 
divi8ion  of  the  monarchy,  applied  to  the  northem  king- 
dom  (a  uMge,  however,  not  strictly  obseryed,  as  in  2 
Chroń,  xii,  6),  in  contradistinction  to  the  other  portion, 
which  was  termed  the  kingdom  of  Judah.  This  limitap 
tion  of  the  name  Israel  to  oertain  tribes,  at  the  head  of 
which  was  that  of  Ephraim,  which,  acoordingly,  in  some 
of  the  prophetical  writings,  as  e.  g.  Isa.  xyii,  13 ;  Hos.  iv, 
17,  give8  its  own  name  to  the  northem  kingdom,  is  dis- 
cemible  even  at  so  early  a  period  as  the  commenoement 
of  the  reign  of  Saul,  and  aJObrds  evidenoe  of  the  exist- 
ence  of  some  of  the  causes  which  eveiitually  led  to  the 
schism  of  the  nation.  It  indicated  the  existence  of  a 
rivalry,  which  needed  only  time  and  favorable  circum- 
stancej  to  ripen  into  the  reyolt  witneased  after  the  death 
of  Solomon. 

I.  Causea  o/tke  Diputofk— The  prophet  Abijah,  who 
had  been  commissioned  to  announce  to  Jeroboam,  the 
Ephraimite,  the  transference  to  him  of  the  greater  part 
of  the  kingdom  of  Solomon,  dedared  it  to  be  the  pun< 
ishment  of  disobedience  to  the  divine  law,  and  particu- 
larly  of  the  idolatry  so  laigely  promoted  by  Solomon  (1 
Kings  xi,  31-35).  But  while  this  revolt  fróm  the  hoiise 
of  David  is  to  be  thus  viewed  in  its  directly  penal  char- 
acter,  or  as  a  divine  retribution,  this  does  not  preclude 
an  inąuiry  into  those  sacred  causes,  political  and  other- 
wise,  to  which  this  very  iroportant  revolutaon  in  Israel- 
itish  hlBtoiy  is  dearly  referable.  Such  an  inquiry,  in- 
deed,  will  make  It  evident  how  human  passions  and  jeal- 
ousies  were  madę  subeenrient  to  the  divlne  purpose. 

Prophecy  had  eariy  assigned  a  pre-eminent  place  to 
two  of  the  sons  of  Jacob--Judah  and  Joseph — as  the 
fonndera  of  tribes.  In  the  blessing  pronounced  upon 
his  sons  by  the  dying  patriarch,  Joseph  had  the  birth- 
right  oonferred  upon  him,  and  was  promised  in  his  son 
Ephraim  a  numerons  progeny ;  while  to  Judah  promise 
was  madę,  among  other  blessings,  of  nile  or  dominion 
over  his  brethren — "thy  father's  children  shall  bow 
down  before  thee"  (Greń.  xlviu,  19, 22;  xlix,  8, 26;  comp. 
1  Chroń.  v,  1, 2).  These  blessings  were  rcpeated  and  en- 
larged  in  the  blessing  of  Moses  (Deut  xxxiii,  7, 17). 
The  pre-cminence  thus  prophetically  assigned  to  these 
two  tribes  receiyed  a  partial  verification  in  the  fact  that 
at  the  exodus  their  numbers  were  nearly  eąual,  and  far 
in  excess  of  those  of  the  other  tribes ;  and  further,  as  be- 
came  their  position,  they  were  the  first  who  obtained 
their  territories,  which  were  also  assigned  them  in  the 
very  centrę  of  the  land.  It  is  unnecessary  to  advert  to 
the  yarious  other  circumstances  which  contributed  to 
the  growth  and  aggnmdizement  of  these  two  tribes,  and 
which,  from  the  position  these  were  thus  enabled  to  ac- 
ąuire  above  the  rest,  naturally  led  to  their  beooming 
heads  of  parties,  and,  as  such,  the  objects  of  mutual  rival- 
ry  and  contention.  The  Ephrumites,  indeed,  from  the 
;  Tery  first,  gave  nnniistakable  tokens  of  an  exceedingly 
i  haughty  temper,  and  preferred  most  arrogant  daims 
I  over  the  other  tribes  as  regards  questions  of  peace  and 
i  war.  This  may  be  seen  in  their  representation  to  Gideon 
of  the  tribe  of  Manasseh  (Judg.  viii,  1),  and  in  their  eon- 
duet  towards  Jephthah  (Judg.  xii,  1).  Now  if  this  over- 
bearing  people  resented  in  the  case  of  tribes  so  incon- 
siderable  as  that  of  Manasseh  what  they  regarded  as  a 
slight,  it  is  easy  to  conoeive  how  they  must  have  eyed 
fche  proceedings  of  the  tribe  of  Judah,  which  was  morę 
«q)ecially  their  rival    Hence  it  was,  that  while  on  the 


first  establishment  of  the  monarchy  in  the  penon  d. 
Saul,  of  the  tribe  of  Benjamm,  the  Ephndmites,  with 
the  other  northem  tribes  with  whom  they  were  aanci- 
ated,  silently  aoąuiesced,  they  refused  for  aeven  yean  to 
submit  to  his  soocessor  of  the  tribe  of  Judah  (2  Sam.  ii, 
9-11),  and  even  after  their  submission  they  abowed  a 
disposition  on  any  favorable  opportunity  to  raise  the  ery 
of  rerolt :  *"  To  your  tents,  O  larael"  (2  Sam.  xx,  1).  U 
was  this  early,  long-condnued,  and  deep-rooted  feeling, 
strengthened  and  embittered  by  the  schism,  thoug-h  not 
concurring  with  it,  that  gave  point  to  the  language  in 
which  Isaiah  predicted  the  blessed  times  of  Measiah : 
'^  The  envy  also  of  Ephraim  shall  depart,  and  the  adver- 
saries  of  Judah  shall  be  cut  off;  Ephraim  shall  not  emy 
Judah,  and  Judah  shall  not  vex  Ephraim"  (Isa.  xi,  13). 
Indeed,  for  morę  than  400  years,  from  the  time  that 
Joshua  was  the  leader  of  the  Israelitish  hosts,  Ephraim, 
with  the  dependent  tribes  of  Manasseh  and  Benjamin, 
may  be  sald  to  have  exerci8ed  undisputed  pre-eminence 
till  the  acoession  of  David.  Accordingly  it  is  not  sur- 
prising  that  such  a  people  wonld  not  readily  aubmii 
to  an  arrangement  which,  though  dedazed  to  be  of  di- 
vine  appointment,  should  place  them  in  a  subordinate 
condition,  as  when  God  ^  refused  the  tabemade  of  Jo- 
seph, and  chose  not  the  tribe  of  Ephraim,  but  diosc  the 
tribe  of  Judah,  even  the  Mount  Żion  which  be  k>ved^ 
(Psa.  lxxviii,  67, 68).    See  EPHRAUf. 

There  were  thus,  indeed,  two  powerfnl  dements  tei^- 
ing  to  break  up  the  national  unity.  In  addition  to  the 
long-continued  and  growing  jealousy  on  the  part  of  the 
Ephraimites  to  the  tribe  of  Judah,  another  caose  of  dis- 
satisfaction  to  the  dynasty  of  DaWd  in  particnkr  wms 
the  arrangement  just  referred  to,  which  conaisted  in 
the  removal  of  the  civil,  and  morę  particulariy  the  eode- 
siastical  goremment,  to  Jerusakm.  The  Mosaic  ordi- 
nances  were  in  themsdves  exceedingly  oneroos,  and 
this  must  have  been  morę  espedally  fdt  by  soch  as 
were  resident  at  a  distanoe  from  the  aanctuary,  as  it  en- 
tailed  upon  them  long  joumeys,  not  only  when  attend- 
ing  the  stated  fe8tiva]8,  but  also  on  numeroDS  otber  oe- 
casions  prescribed  in  the  law.  This  most  faaT«  been 
fdt  as  a  special  grievance  by  the  Ephndmites,  owiąg 
to  the  fact  that  the  national  sanctuary  had  beói  for  a 
very  long  period  at  Shiloh,  within  their  own  tenitocr; 
and  therefore  its  transference  elsewhere,  it  is  easy  to 
discem,  would  not  be  readily  aoąuiesoed  in  by  a  people 
who  had  proved  themselres  in  other  respecte  ao  jealoos 
of  thdr  rights,  and  not  easily  persnaded  that  this  was 
not  rather  a  poliUcal  expedient  on  the  part  of  the  riv^ 
tribe,  than  as  a  matter  of  divine  choioe  (i  Kiogs  xir, 
21).  Nor  is  it  to  be  overlooked,  in  oonnection  with  thia 
subject,  that  other  provŁBions  of  the  theocradc  eoonomy 
relatł  ve  to  the  annual  feBti\'als  wouM  be  taken  adwntage 
of  by  those  in  whom  there  exi8ted  already  a  spirit  of 
dissatisfactioti.  Even  within  eo  Umited  a  locality  as 
Palestme,  there  must  have  been  ineąualities  of  dimste, 
which  must  have  conaiderably  afiected  the  aeasons,  morę 
particulariy  the  vintage  and  hanrest,  with  which  tfae 
feasts  may  in  some  measure  have  interfered,  and  in  ao 
far  may  have  been  productive  of  discontent  between  the 
northem  and  southem  residents.  That  there  were  iti- 
conveniences  in  both  the  respects  now  mentioned  woold 
indeed  appear  from  the  appeal  madę  by  Jeroboam  to 
his  new  subjects,  when,  for  reasons  of  stale  polic}',  and 
in  order  to  perpetuate  the  schism  by  making  it  retigioas 
as  well  as  political,  he  would  dissuade  them  from  at- 
tendance  on  the  feasts  in  Judah :  **  It  is  too  much  for 
you  to  go  up  to  Jerusalem*"  (1  Kings  xii,  28) ;  and  fiPDm 
the  fact  that  hc  postponed  for  a  whole  month  the  cele- 
bration  of  the  feast  of  tabemades  (ver.  32),  a  change  to 
which  it  is  believed  he  was  indnced,  or  in  the  adop- 
tion  of  which  he  was  at  least  g^reatly  aided,  by  the  cir- 
cumstance  of  the  hairest  being  oonsiderably  later  in  tl»e 
northem  than  In  the  southem  districts  (/^.  Mfe^mte 
on  1  Kings  xii,  82). 

Again,  the  burdensome  exactioos  in  the  fonn  of  aer- 
vice  and  tribute  impooed  ou  his  aubjecta  by  T  ' 


BRAEL 


695 


ISRAEL 


Ibr  his  eztenś^e  bnilttingą  and  the  maintenBoce  of  hU 
splendid  aiid  luxuriou8  court,  musŁ  have  still  further 
deepened  this  disaffection,  which  originated  in  one  or 
other  of  the  cajsea  already  refeired  ta  It  may  indeed 
be  assumed  that  this  grieranoe  was  of  a  character  which 
appc^ed  to  the  malcontents  morę  directly  than  any  oth- 
er; and  that  these  burdens,  reqaired  especially  for  the 
beaiitifying  of  the  capital,  must  have  been  exceeding]y 
fliaagreeable  to  the  inhabitants  of  the  piovince8,  vrho 
did  not  in  any  way  participate  in  the  glories  in  support 
of  which  Mich  onerous  charges  were  required.  The  bur- 
dens thos  impoeed  were  indeed  expre8aly  ststed  to  be 
the  chief  ground  of  complaint  by  the  repreaentatiyes  of 
Isnei  headed  by  Jeroboam,  who^  on  the  occasion  of  the 
coronation  at  Shechem,  waited  on  the  son  of  Solomon 
with  a  view  to  obtain  redress  (1  Kings  xii,  4).  The 
long  smouldering  dissatisfaction  could  no  longer  be  re- 
preseed,  and  a  nitigation  of  their  burdens  was  imperi- 
ously  demanded  by  the  people.  For  this  end  Jeroboam 
had  been  sammoned,  at  the  death  of  Solomon,  from 
£g}'pt,  whose  presenoe  must  have  had  a  marked  influ- 
ence on  the  issue,  although  it  may  be  a  que8tion  wheth- 
er  Jeroboam  should  not  be  regarded  rather  as  an  instru- 
ment called  forth  by  the  occasion  than  as  himself  the 
instigator  of  the  rerolt.  With  this  agrees  the  intima- 
tion  madę  to  him  from  the  Lord  many  yeais  before  by 
Ahijah  the  Shilonite.  The  very  choice  of  Shechem, 
within  the  Łerritories  of  Ephraim,  as  the  coronation 
place  of  Rehoboam,  may  have  had  for  its  object  the  re- 
pression  of  the  rebellious  spirit  in  the  northem  tribes  by 
means  of  so  grand  and  imposing  a  ceremony. 

Iloweyer  this  may  have  been,  or  in  whatever  degree 
the  causes  specified  may  have  seyerally  operated  in 
produdng  the  reyolt,  the  breach  now  madę  was  never 
healed,  God  himself  eacpresaly  forbidding  all  atteropts 
cm  the  part  of  Rehoboam  and  his  counseUors  to  subju- 
gate  the  reToIted  proyinces  with  the  intimation,  **This 
thing  is  from  me"  (1  Kings  xii,  24).  The  subseąuent 
history  of  the  two  kingdoms  was  productiye,  with  but 
alight  exceptions,  of  further  estrangement. 

II.  Extent  and  Resources  of  the  Kingdom  of  IsratiL — 
The  aiea  of  Palestine,  eren  at  its  utmost  extent  under 
Solomon,  was  very  drcumacribed.  In  its  geographical 
relations  it  certainly  borę  no  compariaon  whatever  to 
the  other  great  empires  of  antiquity,  nor  indeed  was 
there  any  proportion  between  its  size  and  the  mighty 
infłnences  which  have  emanated  from  its  soiL  Making 
allowance  for  the  territories  on  the  shore  of  the  Medi- 
terranean  in  the  posseasion  of  the  Phcenicians,  the  area 
of  Palestine  did  not  much  exceed  13,000  8quare  miles. 
This  limited  extent,  it  might  be  shown,  howerer,  did 
the  present  subject  cali  for  it,  rendered  that  land  morę 
Buitable  for  the  purpoees  of  the  theocracy  than  if  it  were 
of  a  iar  larger  area.  What  precise  extent  of  territories 
was  embraced  in  the  kingdom  of  Israel  cannot  be  very 
easily  determined,  but  it  may  be  safely  estimated  as 
morę  than  double  that  of  the  aouthem  kingdom,  or,  ac- 
oording  to  a  morę  exact  ratio,  as  9  to  4.  Nor  is  it  easy 
to  specify  with  exactnefls  the  seyeral  tribes  which  com- 
posed  the  respectiye  kingdoms.  In  the  announcement 
madę  by  Ahijah  to  Jeroboam,  he  is  assured  of  ten  tribes, 
while  <Mily  one  is  reserved  for  the  house  of  David ;  but 
this  must  be  taken  only  in  a  generał  sense,  and  is  to  be 
interpreted  by  1  Kings  xii,  23  (compare  ver.  21) ;  for  it 
wodld  appear  that  Simeon,  part  of  Dan,  and  the  greater 
part  of  Benjamin,  owuig  doubtless  to  the  fact  that  Je- 
rusalem  itaelf  was  situated  within  that  tribe,  formed 
portion  of  the  kingdom  of  Judah  (Ewald,  Geschickłej  iii, 
409).  It  is  to  be  notioed,  howeyer,  that  Judah  was  the 
only  independent  tribe,  and  therefore  it  might  be  spoken 
of  aa  the  one  which  constituted  the  kuigdom  of  the 
houae  of  Darid.  The  ten  tribes  nominally  asńgncd  to 
Israel  were  probably  Joseph  (= Ephraim  and  Manas- 
seh),  Issachar,  Zebulun,  Asher,  Naphtali,  Benjamin,  Dan, 
Simeon,  Gad,  and  Reuben,  Leyi  being  intentionally  omit- 
ted ;  the  ten  actually  embraced  in  it  seem  to  haye  been 
Ephraim,  Manasaeh  (East  and  West),  Issachar,  Zebulon, 


Asher,  Naphtali,  Gad,  Reuben,  and  (in  part)  Dan.  With 
respect  to  the  conquests  of  Dayid,  Moab  appears  to  haye 
been  attached  to  the  kingdom  of  Israel  (2  Kings  iii,  4) ; 
as  much  of  Syria  as  remained  subject  to  Solomon  (see  I 
Kings  xi,  24)  would  probably  be  claimed  by  his  suc- 
oesaor  in  the  northem  kingdom ;  and  Ammon,  though 
connected  with  Rehoboam  as  his  mother^s  natiye  land 
(2  Chroń,  xii,  13),  and  though  aiterwards  tributary  to 
Judah  (2  Chroń.  xxyii,  5),  was  at  one  time  allied  (2 
Chroń.  XX,  1),  we  know  not  how  doeely  or  how  early, 
with  Moab.  The  sea-coast  between  Accho  and  Japho 
remained  in  the  poasession  of  laraeL 

With  regard  to  population,  again,  the  data  are  eren 
morę  defectiye  than  with  respect  to  territorial  extent. 
Acoording  to  the  uncompleted  censos  taken  in  the  reign 
of  Dayid,  about  forty  years  preyious  to  the  schism  of 
the  kingdom,  the  fighting  men  in  Israel  numbered 
800,000,  and  ui  Judah  500,000  (2  Sam.  xxiy,  9) ;  but  in 
1  Chroń,  xxi,  5, 6,  the  numbers  are  differently  stated  at 
1,100,000  and  470,000  respectiyely,  with  the  intimation 
that  Leyi  and  Benjamin  were  not  included  (comp.  xxyii, 
24).  As  bearing  morę  directly  on  this  pomt,  Rehobo- 
am nused  an  army  of  180,000  men  out  of  Judah  and 
Benjamin  to  fight  against  Jeroboam  (1  Kings  xii,  21); 
and  again,  AUjah,  the  son  of  Rehoboam,  with  400,000 
men,  madę  war  on  Jeroboam  at  the  head  of  an  army  of 
800,000  (2  Chroń,  xiii,  8).  Acoording  to  the  generał 
laws  obseryable  in  such  cases,  these  numbers  may  be 
said  to  represent  an  aggregate  population  of  from  Jive 
and  a  hal/ to  six  miUionSf  of  which  about  one  third,  or 
two  millions,  may  be  fairly  arsigned  to  the  kingdom  of 
Judah  at  the  time  of  the  sepaiation. 

Shechem  was  the  first  capital  of  the  new  kingdom  (1 
Kings  xii,  25),  yenerable  for  its  traditions,  and  beanti- 
ful  in  its  situation.  Subeeąuently  Tinsah,  whose  loye- 
liness  had  fixed  the  wandering  gazę  of  Solomon  (Cant 
yi,  4),  became  the  royal  residence,  if  not  the  capital  of 
Jeroboam  (1  Kings  xiy,  17)  and  of  his  successors  (xy, 
33;  xyi,  8,  17,  28).  Afler  the  murder  of  Jeroboam*s 
son,  indeed,  Baasha  seems  to  haye  intendcd  to  flx  his 
capital  at  Ramah,  as  a  conyenient  place  for  annoying 
the  king  of  Judah,  whom  he  looked  on  as  his  only  dan- 
gerous  enemy ;  but  he  was  forced  to  renounoe  this  plan 
(1  Kings  iv,  17,  21).  Samaria,  uniting  in  itself  the 
qualities  of  beauty  and  fertility,  and  a  commanding 
position,  was  chosen  by  Omri  (1  Kings  xyi,  24),  and  re- 
mained the  capital  of  the  kingdom  until  it  had  giyen 
the  last  proof  of  its  strength  by  sustauung  for  three 
years  the  onset  of  the  hosts  of  Assyria.  Jezreel  was 
probably  only  a  royal  residence  of  some  of  the  Isiael- 
itish  kings.  It  may  haye  been  in  awe  of  the  ancient 
holiness  of  Shiloh  that  Jeroboam  forbore  to  poUute  the 
seduded  site  of  the  tabemacle  with  the  golden  calyes. 
He  chose  for  the  religious  capitals  of  his  kingdom  Dan, 
the  old  home  of  northem  schism,  and  Bethel,  a  Benja- 
mite  city  not  far  from  Shiloh,  and  marked  out  by  history 
and  situation  as  the  riyal  of  Jerusalem. 

III.  Połiticał  and  Religious  Relations  ofihe  Kingdom 
o/IsraeL— Bat  whilst,  in  extent  of  tenitory  and  of  pop- 
uJation,  and  it  might  be  shown  aiso  in  yarious  other  re- 
spects,  the  resources  of  the  northem  kingdom  were  at 
the  yery  least  double  those  of  its  southem  riyal,  the 
latter  embraced  elements  of  strength  which  were  en« 
tirely  lacking  in  the  other.  There  was  first  the  geo- 
graphical position  of  the  kingdom  of  Israel,  which  ex- 
posed  its  northem  frontier  to  inyasions  on  the  part  of 
Syria  and  the  Assyrian  hosts.  But  more  than  this,  or 
any  expo8ure  to  attack  from  without,  were  the  dangers 
to  be  apprehended  from  the  polity  on  which  the  king^- 
dom  was  founded.  Jeroboam 's  public  sanction  of  idol- 
atry,  and  his  other  interferences  with  fundamental  prin- 
ciples  of  the  Mosaic  law,  more  especially  in  the  matter 
of  the  priesthood,  at  once  alienated  from  his  goyem- 
ment  all  who  were  well  affectcd  to  that  economy,  and 
who  were  not  ready  to  subordinate  their  religion  to  any 
political  oonsidcrationa.  Of  such  there  were  not  a  few 
within  the  territories  of  the  new  kingdom.    llie  Le* 


ISRAEL 


699 


ISRAEŁ 


yites  m  particalar  fled  the  kingdom,  abandoning  their 
pioperty  and  possossions ;  and  so  did  many  othera  be- 
aides ;  **  such  as  set  their  hearts  to  seek  the  Lord  God 
of  Isńel  came  to  Jcnisalem,  to  sacrifice  tinto  the  Lord 
God  of  their  fathers.  So  they  strengthened  the  king- 
dom  of  Jadah"  (2  Chroń,  xi,  13-3  7).  Not  only  was  one 
great  soorce  of  strength  thus  at  once  dried  up,  but  the 
strongly  conseryating  principies  of  the  law  were  Tio- 
lently  shocked,  and  the  kingdom  morę  than  ever  ex- 
piosed  to  the  encroachments  of  the  heathenism  which 
extended  along  its  frontier. 

One  element  of  weaknesa  in  the  kingdom  of  Israel 
was  the  number  of  tribes  of  which  it  was  composed, 
morę  especially  after  they  had  renoonced  those  princi- 
pies of  the  Mosaic  law  which,  while  presenring  the  in- 
diyidaality  of  the  tribes,  senred  to  bind  them  together 
as  one  people.  Among  other  circumstances  onfarora- 
ble  to  unity  was  the  want  of  a  capital  in  which  all  had 
a  common  interest,  and  wifch  which  they  were  connect- 
ed  by  some  common  tic.  This  want  was  by  no  means 
compensated  by  the  retigions  establishments  at  Bethel 
and  Dan.  But  it  is  in  respect  to  theocratic  and  relig- 
ious  relations  that  the  weakness  of  the  kingdom  of  Is- 
rael specially  appears.  Any  sanction  which  the  usur- 
pation  of  Jeroboam  may  have  derived  at  first  from  the 
announcement  madę  to  him  by  the  prophet  Ahijah,  and 
afterwards  from  the  charge  giyen  to  Rehoboam  and  the 
men  of  Judah  not  to  fight  against  Israel,  because  the 
thing  was  from  the  Lord  (1  Kings  xii,  28),  must  have 
been  completely  taken  away  by  the  denmidations  of 
the  prophet  out  of  Judah  against  the  altar  at  Bethel  (1 
Kings  xiii,  1-10),  and  the  8iibsequent  announcements  of 
Ahijah  himself  to  Jeroboam,  who  failed  to  fulfil  the  con- 
ditions  on  which  the  kingdom  was  giren  htm  (1  Kings 
xiv,  7-1 6).  The  setting  up  of  the  worship  of  the  calyes, 
in  which  may  be  traced  the  influence  of  Jeroboam's  resi- 
dence  in  Egypt,  and  the  oonsecrating  of  priests  who 
could  have  no  mond  weight  with  their  fellow-subjects, 
and  were  chosen  only  for  their  subsenrience  to  the  royal 
will,  were  measures  by  no  means  calculated  to  consoli- 
date  a  power  from  which  the  divine  sanction  had  been 
expressly  withdrawn.  On  the  contraiy,  they  led,  and 
very  speedily,  to  the  alienation  of  many  who  might  at 
the  outset  have  silently  acquiesced  in  the  revolation, 
even  if  they  had  not  fuUy  approyed  of  it,  The  large 
migration  which  ensued  into  Judah  of  all  who  were  fa- 
Torable  to  the  former  institutions  must  still  further  have 
aggravated  the  eyil,  as  all  yigorous  opposition  would 
thenceforth  cease  to  the  downward  and  destmctiye  tend- 
ency  of  the  anti-theocratic  policy.  The  natural  result 
of  the  course  appears  in  the  fact  that  the  step  taken  by 
Jeroboam  was  never  retraced  by  any  of  his  successors, 
one  ailer  another  following  the  example  thus  set  to 
them,  so  that  Jeroboam  is  erophatically  and  frequently 
chaiacterized  in  Scripture  as  the  man  ^*who  madę  Is- 
rael to  sin,"  while  his  successors  arc  described  as  follow- 
ing in  "  the  sin  of  Jeroboam." 

Further,  as  the  calres  of  Jeroboam  are  referable  to 
Egypt,  so  the  worship  of  Baal,  which  was  introduced  by 
Ahab,  the  serenth  of  the  Israelitish  kings,  had  its  origin 
in  the  Tyrian  alliance  formed  by  that  monarch  through 
his  marrifige  with  Jezebel,  daughter  of  Ethbaal,  king  of 
Sidon.  Hitherto  the  national  rcligion  was  ostensibly 
the  worship  of  Jehovah  under  the  representation  of  the 
calyes;  but  under  this  new  reign  every  attempt  was 
madę  to  extirpato  this  worship  entirely  by  the  destruc- 
tion  of  God's  prophets  and  the  subyersion  of  his  altars. 
It  was  to  meet  this  new  phase  of  things  that  the  stren- 
nous  agency  of  Elijah,  ElLsha,  and  their  associates  was 
directed,  and  assumed  a  quite  peciUiar  form  of  prophetic 
ministration,  though  still  the  success  was  but  partial  and 
temporary.    See,  however,  under  Elijah  and  Elisha. 

IV.  Decay  and  Dissolution  oftke  Kingdom  oflsrojel. 
^-The  kingdom  of  Israel  developed  no  new  power.  It 
was  but  a  portion  of  Davtd'8  kingdom  deprived  of  many 
elementa  of  strength.  Its  frontier  was  as  opcn  and  as 
widely  cxtendcd  as  beforc.  but  it  wanted  a  capital  for 


the  seat  of  organized  power.  Its  territoiy  was  as  fer* 
tile  and  as  tempting  to  the  spoiler,  but  its  people  were 
less  united  and  patriotic.  A  oomipt  rdigion  poiaoned 
the  source  of  national  life.  While  less  rererence  attend- 
ed  on  a  new  and  unconsecrated  king,  and  less  respect 
was  felt  for  an  aristocracy  reduced  by  the  retirement  of 
the  Leyites,  the  army  which  David  found  hard  to  con- 
trol  rosę  up  unchecked  in  the  eserdse  of  its  wilfol 
strength ;  and  thus  eight  faooses,  each  nshered  in  by  a 
revolution,  oocupied  the  throne  in  quick  sacceasaon. 
Tyre  ceased  to  be  an  ally  when  the  alliance  was  no  lon- 
ger  profltaUe  to  the  merchant  city.  Moab  and  Ammon 
yielded  tribute  only  while  under  compulsion.  A  pow- 
erful  neighbor,  Damascus,  sat  armed  at  the  gate  of  Is- 
rael; and  beyond  Damascus  might  be  discenied  the 
rising  strengiii  of  the  first  great  monarchy  of  the  world. 

The  history  of  the  kingdom  of  Israel  is  therefore  the 
history  of  its  decay  and  dissolution.  In  no  true  sense 
did  it  manifest  a  principle  of  progress,  saye  only  in 
8werving  morę  and  morę  completely  fh>m  the  oonne 
marked  out  by  Froridence  and  reve1ation  for  the  wed 
of  Abraham ;  and  yet  the  history  is  interesting  as  staow- 
ing  how,  notwithstanding  the  ever-widening  breach  be- 
tween  the  two  great  branches  of  the  one  oommimity, 
the  diyine  purposes  conceming  them  were  accomplish- 
cd.  That  a  polity  constituted  as  was  that  of  the  north- 
em  kingdom  oontained  in  it  potent  elements  of  decay 
must  be  self-eyident,  even  were  the  fact  less  deariy 
marked  on  erery  page  of  its  history. 

There  is  reason  to  believe  that  Jeroboam  carried  back 
with  him  into  Israel  the  good-will,  if  not  the  aubstantial 
assistance  of  Shishak,  and  this  will  aocount  for  his  e»- 
caping  the  storm  from  Egypt  which  swept  over  Reho- 
boam in  his  fifth  year  (2  Ćhron.  xii,  2-d).  During  that 
first  period  Israel  was  far  from  ąuiet  within.  Althocgh 
the  ten  tribes  coUectively  had  dedded  in  faror  of  Jero- 
boam, great  numbers  of  indiriduals  remained  attadied 
to  the  family  of  Da^id  and  to  the  worship  at  Jerusalem, 
and  in  the  three  first  years  of  Rehoboam  migrated  into 
Judah  (2  Chroń,  xi,  16, 17).  Perhaps  it  was  not  mitźl 
this  process  commenced  that  Jeroboam  was  worked  op 
to  the  desperate  measure  of  erectlng  riral  aanctuaries 
with  Tisible  idols  (1  Kings  xii,  27) ;  a  measure  which 
met  the  nsoal  ill-success  of  profane  state-craft,  and  a^ 
grayated  the  evil  which  he  feared.  Jeroboam  had  not 
suiBcient  force  of  character  in  himself  to  make  a  hfldng 
impression  on  his  people.  A  king,  but  not  a  founder  of 
a  dynasty,  he  aimed  at  nothing  beyond  securing  his 
prcsent  elevation.  Without  any  ambidon  to  share  in 
the  commerce  of  Tyre,  or  to  compete  with  the  growing 
power  of  Damascus,  or  cven  to  complete  the  humilia- 
tion  of  the  helpless  monarch  whom  he  had  depriTcd  of 
half  a  kingdom,  Jeroboam  acted  entirely  on  a  defeoare 
policy.  He  attempted  to  gire  his  subjecta  a  cencie 
which  they  wanted  for  their  political  allegiance,  in  Sbfr- 
chem  or  in  Tirzah.  He  sought  to  change  merely  so 
much  of  their  ritual  as  was  inoonsisŁent  with  his  author- 
ity  over  them.  But,  as  soon  as  the  golden  cal^-es  were 
set  up,  the  priests,  and  Leyites,  and  many  religioos  Is- 
raelites  (2  Chroń,  xi,  16)  left  their  comitry,  and  the  dts- 
astrous  emigration  was  not  efiTectually  checked  eren  by 
the  attempt  of  Baasha  to  build  a  fortress  (2  Ghron.  xvi, 
6)  at  Ramah.  A  new  priesthood  was  introdooed  (1 
Kings  xii,  81)  absolutely  dependent  on  the  king  (Amos 
yii,  13) ;  not  forming,  as  under  the  Mosaic  law,  a  landed 
aristocracy,  not  respected  by  the  people,  and  onable 
either  to  withstand  the  oppression  or  to  strengthen  the 
weakness  of  a  king.  A  priesthood  created  and  a  ritual 
deyised  for  secular  purposes  had  no  hołd  whaterer  on 
the  conscience  of  the  people.  To  meet  their  spiritoal 
crayings  a  succesaon  of  prophets  was  raiacd  up,  great  in 
their  poyerty,  their  purity,  their  austerit^',  their  sdf-de- 
pendence,  their  morał  influence,  but  imperfectly  organ- 
ized—a  rod  to  correct  and  chedc  the  dyil  goverament, 
not,  as  they  might  haye  been  nnder  happier  dreom- 
Btances,  a  staff  to  support  it.  The  army  soon  łeamed 
its  power  to  dictate  to  the  isolated  monarch  and  ifiss- 


ISRAEŁ 


697 


ISRAEL 


nited  people.  Althongh  Jeroboam,  the  foander  of  the 
kingdom,  bimaelf  reigned  nearly  twenty-two  years,  yet 
his  mm  and  suoceflsor  Nadab  was  yiolently  cut  off  after 
a  brief  reign  of  leis  than  two  yean,  and  with  him  the 
whole  honse  of  Jeroboam. 

Thiu  apeedily  cloBed  the  fint  dynasty,  and  it  was  but 
a  type  of  those  which  foUowed.  £ight  houaes,  each 
naheied  in  by  a  leyolution,  occupied  the  throne  in  rapid 
aacoession,  the  army  being  freąuently  the  pńme  moven 
in  these  transactions.  Thos  Baasha,  in  the  midst  of 
the  army  at  Gibbethon,  sLew  Nadab,  the  son  of  Jero- 
boam ;  and,  again,  Zimri,  a  captain  of  chariota,  siew 
£lah,  the  son  and  soccessor  of  Baasha,  and  reigned  only 
jewn  day$,  during  which  time,  howerer,  he  smote  idl 
the  posterity  and  kindred  of  his  predecessor,  and  ended 
hia  own  daya  by  suicide  (1  Kings  xyi,  18).  Omri,  the 
captain  of  the  host,  was  chosen  to  pumsh  the  usurper 
Zimri,  and  after  a  civil  war  of  four  years  he  prerailed 
OYer  his  other  rival  Tibni,  the  choice  of  half  the  people. 
Omii,  the  8ixth  in  order  of  the  IsraeliŁish  kings,  found- 
ed  a  morę  bsting  dynasty,  for  it  endured  for  forty-flve 
yeaoy  he  haying  been  sncoeeded  by  his  son  Ahab,  of 
-whom  it  is  recorded  that  he  '*did  morę  to  provoke  the 
Lord  God  of  Israel  to  anger  than  all  the  kings  of  Israel 
that  were  before  him"  (1  Kings  zvi,  88) ;  and  he,  again, 
by  his  son  Ahaziah,  wiio,  afler  a  reign  of  less  than  two 
yeazs^  died  from  the  effects  of  a  fali,  and,  learing  no  son, 
was  snooeeded  by  his  brother  Jehoram,  who  reigned 
twelve  yeais,  until  slain  by  Jehu,  the  captain  of  the 
anny  at  Ramoth-Gilead,  who  also  executed  the  total 
deatmction  of  the  iamfly  of  Ahab,  which  perished  like 
those  of  Jeroboam  and  of  Baasha  (2  Kings  ix,  9). 

Meanwhile  the  relations  between  the  riyal  kingdoms 
were,  aa  might  be  expected,  of  a  rery  onfriendly  char- 
acter.  ''There  was  war  between  Rehoboam  and  Jero- 
boam aU  their  days"  (1  Kings  xiv,  80) ;  so  also  between 
Asa  and  Baasha  (1  Kings  xt,  14, 82).  The  first  men- 
tion  of  peace  was  that  madę  by  Jehodiaphat  with  Ahab 
(1  Kings  xxii,  44),  and  which  was  continued  between 
their  two  successois.  The  princes  of  Omri'8  honse  cul- 
tiTated  an  aUiance  with  the  contemporary  kings  of  Ju- 
dah,  which  was  cemented  by  the  maniage  of  Jehoram 
and  Athaliah,  and  marked  by  the  community  of  names 
among  the  royal  children.  Ahab's  Tyrian  alliance 
atiengthened  him  with  the  oounsels  of  the  masculine 
mind  of  Jezebel,  bnt  faronght  him  no  further  support. 

The  kingdom  of  Israel  soffered  also  from  foreign  ene- 
miea.  In  the  reign  of  Omri  the  Syrians  had  madę 
themaelyes  masters  of  a  portion  of  the  Uind  of  Israel  (1 
Kings  XX,  88),  and  had  proceeded  so  far  as  to  erect 
atreets  for  themselyes  in  Samaria,  which  had  just  been 
madę  the  ciq[>itaL  Further  incursions  were  checked  by 
Ahab^  who  ooncluded  a  peaoe  with  the  Syrians  which 
lasted  three  years  (1  Kings  xxii,  1),  nntil  that  king,  in 
leagne  with  Jehoshaphat,  king  of  Judah.  attempted  to 
wrest  Ramoth-Gilead  out  of  their  hands,  an  act  which 
tost  him  his  life.  The  death  of  Ahab  was  foUowed  by 
the  ievolt  of  the  Moabites  (2  BLings  i,  4),  who  were 
again,  howerer,  subjngated  by  Jehoram,  in  leagne  with 
Jehoshaphat  Again  the  Syrians  renewed  their  inroads 
on  the  kingdom  of  Israel,  and  eren  besieged  Samaria, 
bat  fled  throogh  panic  In  the  reign  of  Jehu  ^  the  Lord 
begmn  to  cut  Israel  short :  and  Haaiel  smote  them  in  all 
the  coaats  of  Israel"  (2  Kings  x,  82).  Their  troubles 
firom  that  qnarter  increased  still  further  during  the  fol- 
lowing  leign,  when  the  Syrians  reduced  them  to  the  ut- 
moet  estremities  (2  Kings  xiii,  7).  To  this  morę  pros- 
peions  days  succeeded,  with  a  rererse  to  Judah,  whose 
king  presumptuously  dechoed  war  against  IsraeL 

Under  Jeroboam  II,  who  reigned  forty-two  years,  the 
afiSuiB  of  the  northem  kingdom  reyiyed.  "  He  restored 
the  coast  of  Israel,  from  the  entering  of  Hamath  unto 
the  sea  of  the  plain;  .  .  .  he  reooyered  Damascus,  and 
Hamath,  which  bekńiged  to  Judah,  for  Israer  (2  Kings 
xiv,  2Bf  28).  Damascus  was  by  this  time  probably 
-wcakened  by  the  advance  of  the  power  of  Assyria. 
Tbia  period  of  prosperity  was  followed  by  another  of  a 


totally  different  character.  Jeroboam's  son  and  suc^ 
cessor  Zachariah,  the  last  of  the  dynasty  of  Jehu,  was 
assassinated,  after  a  reign  of  8ix  months,  by  Shallum, 
who,  after  a  reign  of  only  one  month,  was  slain  by  Men- 
ahem,  whose  own  son  and  successor  Pekahiah  was  in 
tum  murdered  by  Pekah,  one  of  his  captains,  who  was 
himself  smitten  by  Hoshea.  In  the  days  of  Menahem, 
and  afterwards  of  Pekah,  the  Assyrians  are  seen  extend- 
ing  their  power  orer  Israel;  first  under  Pul,  to  whom 
Menahem  paid  a  tribute  of  threescore  talents  of  silrer, 
that  his  hand  might  be  with  him  to  confirm  the  king- 
dom in  his  hand  (2  Kings  xy,  19).  New  the  Assyrians 
are  found  pushing  their  oonąuests  in  eyery  direction; 
at  one  time,  in  the  reign  of  Pekah,  leading  away  into 
captiyity  a  part  of  the  inhabitants  of  Israel  (2  Kings 
xy,  29),  and  again  coming  to  the  assistance  of  Abaz, 
king  of  Judah,  then  besieged  in  Jerusalem  by  the  Isra- 
elites,  in  conjunction  with  the  Syrians,  who  had  some- 
how  reooyered  their  foimer  ascendency.  See  Syria. 
This  interposition  led  to  the  destruction  of  Damascus, 
and  in  the  succeeding  weak  reign  of  Hoshea,  who  had 
formed  some  secret  alliance  with  Egypt  which  was  of- 
fensiye  to  the  Assyrian  monarch,  to  the  destruction  of 
Samaria,  after  a  three-years'  siege,  by  Shalmaneser,  and 
the  remoyal  of  its  inhabitants  to  Assyria;  and  thus  ter- 
minated  the  kingdom  of  Israel,  after  an  exl8tence  of  258 
yeaia.  Some  gleanings  of  the  ten  tribes  yet  remained 
in  the  land  after  so  many  years  of  religious  dedine, 
morał  debasement,  national  degradation,  anarchy,  blood- 
shed,  and  deportation.  £yen  these  were  gathered  up 
by  the  oonąueror  and  carried  to  Assyria,  neyer  again,  as 
a  distinct  people,  to  occupy  their  portion  of  that  goodly 
and  pleasant  land  which  their  forefathers  won  under 
Joshua  from  the  heathen.  (See  Ewald,  EmUitung  tn 
dU  Getchichte  det  Yolkea  Israel,  and  Geschiehłe  des  Yolkes 
Israel  bis  Christus,  Gdtting.  1861;  also  Witsii,  Actca^u- 
Xov,  de  decem  iribubus  Israel^  in  his  jEffyptiaca,  p.  808 
8q.;  J.  G.  Klaiber,  Hitt,  regni  Ephraim^  Stuttg.  1888.) 
— Furbaim;  Kitto;  Smith. 

V.  Cknmohgieal  DifficuUies  ofthe  Iłeigns  as  compared 
tnth  those  of  Judah, — ^These  will  mostly  appear  by  a 
simple  inspection  of  the  annexed  table,  where  the  num- 
bers  giyen  in  the  columns  headed  "nominał"  are  those 
contained  in  the  expre6s  words  of  Scripture.  These 
and  oiher  less  obyious  discrepancies  will  be  found  ex- 
pUined  under  the  titles  of  the  respectiye  kings  in  this 
Cifcłopadiaf  but  it  may  be  well  here  to  rccapitulate  the 
most  prominent  of  them  together. 

1.  The  length  of  Jeroboam'8  reign  is  stated  in  1  Kinga 
xiy,  20  to  haye  been  twenty-two  years,  which  appear 
to  haye  been  reckoned  from  the  same  point  as  Behobo- 
am*8  (L  e.  in  Nisan) ;  whereas  they  were  only  current, 
sińce  Rehoboam's  accession  took  place  soraewhat  prior 
to  that  of  Jeroboam.  This  is  confirmed  by  the  fact 
that  the  reigns  of  Rehoboam  (seyenteen  years,  1  Kings 
xiy,  21),  and  Abijah  (three  years,  1  Kings  xy,  2)  were 
bnt  twenty  years,  and  Nadab  succeeded  Jeroboam  in 
Asa^s  second  year  (yer.  25).  In  like  mauner  Nadab*8 
two  nominał  years  (yer.  25)  are  curreut,  or,  in  reality, 
little  oyer  one  year;  for  Baasha  succeeded  him  m  Asa*s 
third  year  (yerse  28,  88).  So,  again,  Baasha^s  twenty- 
four  years  of  reign  (yerse  83)  must  be  reduced,  for  pur- 
poses  of  continuous  reckoning,  to  twenty-three ;  for 
Elah  succeeded  him  in  Asa's  twenty-8ixth  year  (1  Kings 
xyi,  8).  Once  morę,  £lah*s  two  years  (ver.  8)  must  be 
computed  aa  but  one  fuli  year,  for  Zimri  siew  and  suc- 
ceeded him  in  Asa's  twenty-seycnth  year  (ver.  10, 15). 
The  cause  of  this  snrplusage  in  these  reigns  appears  to 
be  that  at  some  point  during  the  reign  of  Jeroboam  the 
beginning  of  the  calendar  for  the  rcgnal  years  of  the 
Israelitish  reign  was  changed  (see  1  Kings  xii,  82, 83) 
from  the  spring  (the  Hebrew  sacred  year)  to  the  fali 
(their  older  and  secnlar  year),  so  that  they  oyerlap 
those  of  the  kings  of  Judah  by  morę  than  half  a  year. 
The  reigns  ofthe  linę  of  Judah  must  therefore  be  token 
as  the  standard,  and  the  pazallel  linę  of  Israel  adjusted 
by  it.     (The  numbers  thirty-fiye  and  thirty-six  in  2 


ISRAEŁ 


608 


ISRAEŁITE 


COMPARATIVB  TABLE  OP  THB  CHRONOŁOOT  OF  THB  KINGS  OP  JUDAH  AND  ISRABL 

?%^ 

^^ 

KlMM 

^er 

KiaM 

JCDAH. 

^:^ 

Nomi. 
nal. 

RmL 

Noml- 

R«l. 

•r. 

Clln- 
ton. 

Wł- 

Nom. 
Inal. 

Rml. 

Nom- 
lul. 

RmI. 

N«n. 
taid. 

BmU 

22 

21+ 

Jeroboam 

975 

976 

976 

978 

Rehoboam 

41 

41+ 

17 

IT+ 

. 

.. 

Naamah. 

958 

909 

957 

966-6 

AbUali 

,. 

8 

3 

18Łh 

18th 

lf««M»Kaii 

956 

966 

965 

968 

AnT 

^^ 

41 

41 

80Ui 

aOŁh 

M»M^h»h 

2d 

2d 

S 

1 

Nadab 

904 

966 

964 

961 

Sd 

8d 

U 

28 

Baa«ha 

968 

964 

968 

960 

26Łh 

aeth 

2 

1 

Elah 

980 

980 

980 

987 

37th 

27th 

7d. 

7d. 
4 

Zimri 
Tibnl 

989 

990 

988 

996 
996 

3l8t 

8lBt 

12 

T 

Omri 

9W 

960 

9& 

929 

88th 

88th 

28 

80 

Ahab 

918 

919 

918 

916 

914 

915 

914 

018 

Jehoahapbat 

86 

35 

86 

86 

4th 

4th 

AzDbaL 

ITth 

nth 

2 

1 

Ahasfah 

898 

896 

897 

886 

ISŁh 

18th 

12 

12- 

Jehoram 

896 

895 

896 

894 

892 

891 

889 

887-6 

Jehoram 

82 

37 

8 

3 

5tb 

8-9th 

88 

88 

Jeha 

885 

884 

886 

884 

Ahaziah 

(Athallah) 

Jehoaah 

28 

»f 

1 
6 

1 
6 

ISŁb 

llŁh 

Athallah. 

884 

888 

884 

888-8 

878 

877 

878 

877-6 

*7 

l" 

40 

40— 

7th 

7th 

Zibiah. 

83d 

88d 

IT 

17— 

866 

856 

856 

S55-4 

87th 

39th 

16 

1»- 

Jehoash 

841 

889 

840 

838 

889 

837 

888 

887 

Amasiah 

85 

85 

89 

29 

8d 

8d 

16Łh 

16Łh 

41 

41 

Jeroboam  II 

825 

888 

825 

823-8 

810 

808 

800 

806 

Uzzlah 

16 

16 

08 

58 

87th 

lOŁh 

Jecholiah. 

88th 

88th 

Om. 

[11] 
6m. 

aasss'""^ 

778 

771 

778 

788-1 
770 

S9th 

S9lh 

Im. 

Im. 

Shallnm 

772 

770 

771 

770 

89Łh 

8»th 

10 

10+ 

Menahem 

n2 

770 

7n 

770-69 

60th 

60th 

8 

8 

Pekahiah 

761 

750 

760 

768-8 

52d 

sad 

20 

80 

Pekah 

759 

757 

759 

757-6 

756 

766 

758 

756-6 

Jotham 

26 

50 

16 

16+ 

8d 

8d    tjerasha.    1 

742 

741 

741 

740 

Ahaz 

80 

30 

16 

16^ 

17th 

17th 

CS] 

rlnterreenum] 

787-6 

18Łh 

ISth 

9 

8- 

Hoshea 

780 

780 

m 

789-8 

786 

726 

726 

786 

Heiekiałi 

86 

20 

89 

29 

8d 

8d 

Abi. 

6th 

GŁh 

721 

781 

721 

780 

093 

697 

696 

097-6 

Manasseb 

18 

18 

55 

00 

,. 

.. 

HephzRnh. 

648 

648 

641 

642-1 

Amon 

28 

28 

8 

8 

•• 

MeflhnUe- 
meth. 

641 

640 

689 

640-89 

Josiah 

8 

S 

81 

31 

,. 

Jedidah. 

610 

609 

609 

609 

Jehoahas 

83 

a 

3m. 

3m. 

, , 

HamataL 

610 

609 

609 

609-8 

Jehoiakim 

86 

25 

11 

10+ 

.. 

Zebodah. 

699 

698 

608 

698 

Jeholachln 

18 

18 

8m. 

8i^ 

., 

, , 

Nehoahta. 

699 

598 

698 

fiOS 

Zedekiab 

81 

21 

11 

10-ł- 

,, 

HcmntaL 

688 

687 

686 

583 

Jerusalem 
deatroyed. 

Chroń,  xv,  19;  xvi,  1,  arc  evidently  a  transcriber^s  er- 
ror  for  twenty-five  and  twenty-flix ;  see  1  Kinga  xvi,  3). 

2.  Omrrs  reign  ia  atated  in  1  Kinga  xvi,  23  to  have 
lasted  twelve  years,  beginning,  not,  aa  the  text  seema 
to  indicate,  in  Aaa'8  thirty-fiist  year,  but  in  his  twenty- 
8eventh  (for  Zimri  reigned  bat  8even  daya),  aince  Ahab 
succceded  him  in  Ajsa's  thirty-eighth  (ver.  29),  making 
these  really  but  eleven  fuli  years,  oomputed  aa  above. 
The  thuty-first  of  Asa  is  meant  as  the  datę  of  Omri'8 
sole  or  undisputed  reign  on  the  death  of  his  rival  Tibni, 
after  four  years  of  contest.  Hi»  8ix  years  of  reign  in 
Tirzah  (same  ver8e)  are  dated  from  this  latter  point, 
and  are  mentioned  in  opposition  to  his  removal  of  his 
capital  at  the  end  of  this  last  time  to  Samaria  (ver.  24), 
where,  accordingly,  he  reigned  one  fuli  or  two  corrent 
years,  still  oomputed  as  above.  This  laat-named  fact  is 
again  the  key  to  the  discrepancy  in  the  length  of  his 
snccesaor  Ahab's  reign,  which  is  set  down  in  ver.  29  as 
twenty-two  years  "  in  Samaria ;"  for  they  datę  from  the 
change  of  capital  to  that  place  (Ahab  having  probably 
been  at  that  time  appointed  viceroy),  being  in  i«ality 
only  a  smali  fraction  morę  than  twenty  years.  This 
appears  from  the  combination  of  the  residue  of  Aaa's 
reign  (41 —38  =3 ;  comp.  alao  1  Kinga  xxii,  41)  and  the 
seventeenth  of  Jehoshaphat,  when  Ahaziah  succeeded 
Ahab  (1  Kings  xxii,  51).  Ahaziah'8  two  years  (aame 
yerse)  are  to  be  computed  bs  cuirent,  or  one  fuU  year, 
on  the  same  principle  as  above. 

The  other  difficulties  relate  to  minuto  textual  dis- 
cre^>ancie8,  not  important  to  the  chronology ;  some  of 
them  invoIve  the  supposition  of  interregna.  They  will 
all  be  iiund  fully  discussed  under  the  names  of  the  re- 
Bpective  kings  to  whose  reigns  they  bclong.  For  a 
completo  yindication  and  adjustment  of  all  the  textual 
numbers  (sa^^e  two  or  threc  univer8ally  admitted  to  be 
corrupt)  by  means  of  actual  tabuUr  conatruction,  see 


the  3feth.  Quart,  Retiew,  Oct.  1856.    See  alao  Jcdab, 

KiNGDOM  OF. 

The  chronology  of  the  kings  has  been  minutely  in« 
yestigated  by  Usber,  Chronologia  Sacra  (in  his  Warhj 
xii,  95-144) ;  by  Ughtfoot,  Order  ofthe  TexU  ofthe  0. 
T,  (in  Worksy  i,  77-180);  by  Hales,  New  Analgma  of 
Chronology^  ii,  372-447 ;  by  Clinton,  Fastt  IleUnnd,  m, 
Append.  §  5;  by  H. Browne,  Ordo  Saclortan,  chap.  rr\ 
and  by  Wolff,  in  the  Studien  u,  KriL  (1858,  iv.)  See 
Chronology. 

Iflrael  ben-Samuel  Maghrebi,  a  Jewiah  wńi- 
er  of  the  Kaiaitic  sect,  flourished  at  the  opening  of  the 
14th  centory,  at  Kahira.  He  deseryes  our  notioe  as  the 
author  of  worka  on  the  Jewish  lawa  and  traditiom,  in 
which  he  advanced  the  peculiar  theoriea  of  the  Kar»- 
itea.  Thus,  in  his  work  nc'^nd  Hisbn  (wiitten  aboot 
1306),  he  aaserts  that  the  animal,  if  killed  aocording  to 
law,  and  eaton  according  to  preacription,  devebps  it- 
self  in  man  to  a  higber  state  of  bdng.  The  *'  shochet" 
(the  person  killing  the  animal)  must,  however,  be  «  be- 
liever  of  the  migration  of  the  sools  of  animałs  into  the 
souls  of  men,  else  it  can  not  only  not  take  effect,  bat 
makes  the  meat  unfit  for  food.  Bat  it  is  alao  as  the 
interpreter  of  the  matrimonial  lawa  that  he  ranka  high 
among  the  Karaites.  See  Gr&tz,  Getdu  der  Juden,  Tii, 
822.     (J.H.W.) 

Is'raelite  (Heb.  YitrOH',  ^h^^,  2  Sam.  xTii, 
25;  once  [Numb.xxv,  14]  i^^^tS^  lip*«,  «mw  o//jrarf, 
i,  e.  małe  Israelite ;  fem.  n^^i^^j^iCP,  **  Israelitish  wom- 
an,*'  Lev.  xxiv,  10 ;  Sept.  and  New  Test.  'loptnikirąc), « 
desceiidant  of  Jaoob,  and  therefore  a  member  of  the  cbo- 
sen  nation,  for  which,  howeyer,  the  aimple  name  Isjca- 
KL  (q.  V.)  is  oftener  employed  in  a  collective  aeoM^  bot 
with  various  degreea  of  exten8ion  at  different  dmea: 
(I.)  The  twelve  tńbea  deaceoded  from  Jacob's 


ISRAELrnSH 


699 


KSACHAR 


called  Tand**  already  in  Egypt  (£xod.  iii,  16),  and  ao 
thnnighoot  the  PenUteach  And  in  the  books  of  Joshoa, 
Judges,  Samuel,  and  Kinga,  often  with  the  expUciŁ  ad- 
dition  "air  IsraeL  (2.)  The  larger  portion,  or  ten 
northem  tribes,  after  the  death  or  Saul  (2  Sam.  ii,  9, 10, 
17,  28),  a  distinction  that  prerailed  eyen  under  David 
(2  Sam.  xix,  40).  (8.)  Morę  definitely  the  schismatical 
portion  of  the  nation  (oonsinting  of  all  the  tribes  bat 
Judah  [indoding  Simeon]  and  Benjamin),  which  e&- 
tablished  a  separate  monarchy  at  Samaria  afler  the 
death  of  Solomon  (1  Kinga  xii,  19).  Seldom  doea  the 
legitimate  kingdom  of  Judah  appear  in  the  aacred  nar- 
rative  under  thia  appellation  (2  Chroń,  xii,  1 ;  xv,  17). 
^4.)  After  the  £xile,  the  two  branchea  of  the  nation  be- 
came  again  błended,  both  having  been  carried  away  to 
Ihe  same  or  neighboring  regiona,  and  are  therefore  de»- 
ignated  by  the  andent  title  withont  distinction  in  Ezra, 
Nehemiah,  and  1  Maccabeee.  Gradually,  howerer,  the 
name  '^  Jewa**  (q.  v.)  aupplanted  thia  appellation,  eape- 
dally  among  foidgnera.  (5.)  In  the  N.  Teat  the  term 
^  laner  and  "  laraelite"  ia  uaed  of  the  tnie  theocracy  or 
apiritual  people  (2  Cor.  xi,  22).— Winer,  i,  617.    See  Hb- 


IsraSli^^tiflh  (Lev.  xxiv,  10  aą.).    See  Israelite. 

la^saohar,  the  name  of  two  men  in  the  Bibie,  and 
of  the  descendants  of  one  of  them,  and  the  region  inhab- 
ited  by  them. 

1.  The  ninth  aon  of  Jaoob  and  the  fifth  of  Leah ;  the 
linŁ  bom  to  Leah  after  the  intenral  which  occurred  in 
the  births  of  her  children  (Gen.  xxx,  17 ;  comp.  xxix, 
3ó).  He  waa  bom  in  Padan-Aram  early  in  KC.  1914. 
In  Geneaia  he  ia  not  mentioned  after  hia  birth,  and  the 
few  venes  in  Chronidea  deroted  to  the  tribe  contain 
merely  a  brief  list  of  ita  chief  men  and  heroea  in  the 
reign  of  David  (1  Chroń,  vii,  1-5).  At  the  deacent  into 
Egrpt  four  sona  are  ascribcd  to  him,  who  fonnded  the 
four  chief  families  of  the  tribe  (Greń.  xlvi,  :3;  Numb. 
xxvi,  23,  25 ;  1  Chroń,  vii,  1). 

Form  and  Signification  o/ the  Name, — Both  are  pecul- 
uir.  The  form  is  *n3  W*^  [i.  e.  Yisaatkar';  if  pointed 
as  would  be  legnlar,  "iStotS*^]  :  auch  ia  the  invariable 
spdling  of  the  name  in  the  Hcbrcw,  the  Samaritan  Co- 
dex  and  Yernon,  the  Taigums  of  Onkdoa  and  Plseudo- 
Jonathan,  but  the  Masoretea  have  pointed  it  ao  aa  to 
superaede  the  aeoond  S,  ISttJiB^,  Yis9a\_i'\har* ;  Sept 
'I<raaxap,  N.  T.  'I<ra<r^ap,  Josephua  \aaaxapic  {Ant,  v, 
1,  22),  referring  to  the  tribal  territoiy ;  Vulg.  J$ackar, 
(Sec  Geaeniua,  The$,  Ileb.  p.  1831.) 

Ab  ia  the  caae  with  each  of  the  aona  of  Jacob,  the 
name  is  reoorded  aa  beatowed  on  account  of  a  circum- 
stanoe  connected  with  the  birth.  But,  as  may  be  also 
noticed  in  morę  thau  one  of  the  others,  two  explana- 
tions  aeem  to  be  combined  in  the  narnitirc,  which  even 
then  ia  not  in  exact  accordance  with  the  requiremenU 
of  the  name.  "  God  hath  givcn  me  my  hire  C^StS,  *a- 
Idr)  .  .  .  and  ahe  called  hia  name  laaachar,'*  ia  the  rec- 
ord ;  but  in  verse  18  that  "  hire"  is  for  the  aurrender  of 
her  maid  to  her  huaband,  wliilc  in  ycrse  14-17  it  ia  for 
the  diacoyery  and  bestowal  of  the  mandrakea.  Beaidea, 
as  indicated  above,  the  name  in  ita  original  form— laaa- 
kar — rebds  againat  thia  interpretation,  an  iuterpreta- 
tion  which,  to  be  conaiatent,  require8  the  form  aubee- 
quently  impoaed  on  the  word,  Is-aachar.  The  verbal 
aUuaion  is  not  again  brought  forward,  aa  it  ia  with  Dan, 
Aflher,  etc,  in  the  bleaainga  of  Jacob  and  Moeea.  In  the 
former  only  it  ia  perhapa  allowable  to  diacem  a  faint 
echo  of  the  aound  of  "  lasachai^  in  the  word  skikmo— 
**  his  ahoulder'*  (Gen.  xlix,  15).  The  words  occur  again 
almoat  identically  in  2  Chroń,  xv,  7,  and  Jer.  xxxi,  16 : 
natj  d;^="there  ia  a  reward  for;"  A.V.  "ahall  be  re- 
wardetL"  An  expanaion  of  the  atory  of  the  mandrakea, 
with  curioua  detaila,  will  be  fuund  in  the  Teitamentum 
J$achar  (Fabriciua,  Cod,  Pteudepigr,  p.  620-623).  They 
were  ultimately  depodted  "  in  the  houae  of  the  Lord"  (ac- 
oonUng  to  the  same  legend),  whaterer  that  may  mean. 


Tribe  o/ Taachar.—lBaachai^B  place  during  the  Jour- 
ney  to  Canaan  was  on  the  east  of  the  tabemade,  with 
hia  brothera  Judah  and  Zebulun  (Numb.  ii,  5),  the  group 
moving  foremost  in  the  march  (x,  15),  and  having  a 
common  atandard,  which,  aocording  to  the  Babbinical 
tradition,  waa  of  the  three  oolora  of  aardine,  topaz,  and 
carimncle,  inacribed  with  the  namea  of  the  three  tribea, 
and  bearing  the  figurę  of  a  lion*8  whelp  (see  Taigum 
Pseudo-Jon.  on  Numb.  ii,  3).  At  thia  time  the  captain 
of  the  tribe  waa  Nethaned  ben-Zuar  (Numb.  i,  8 ;  ii,  5 ; 
vii,  18;  X,  15).  He  waa  aucceeded  by  Igal  ben-Joseph, 
who  went  aa  repreaentative  of  hia  tribe  among  the  apiea 
(xiii,  7),  and  he  again  by  Paltiel  ben-Azzan,  who  aaaiat- 
ed  Joehua  in  apportioning  the  land  of  Canaan  (xxxiv, 
26).  laaachar  waa  one  of  the  Bix  tribea  who  were  to 
atand  on  Mount  Gerizim  during  the  ceremony  of  bleaa- 
ing  and  curaing  (Deut  xxvii,  12).  He  waa  atill  in  com< 
pany  with  Judah,  Zebulun  being  oppoaite  on  £baL 
The  number  of  the  fighting  men  of  laaachar  when  taken 
in  the  census  at  Sinai  was  54,400.  During  the  joumey 
they  seem  to  have  steadily  increaaed,  and  after  the  mor- 
tality  at  Peor  they  amounted  to  64,800,  being  inferior  to 
nonę  but  Judah  and  Dan— to  the  latter  by  100  aoula 
only.  The  numbers  given  in  1  Chroń,  vii,  2,  4,  5,  prob- 
ably  the  cenaua  of  Joab,  amount  in  all  to  145,600. 

The  Promised  Land  onoe  reached,  the  connection  be- 
tween  laaachar  and  Judah  aeema  to  have  cloeed,  to  be 
renewed  only  on  two  brief  occaaiona,  which  will  be  no- 
ticed in  their  tum.  The  intimate  relation  with  Zebu- 
lun waa,  however,  maintdned.  The  two  brother-tribea 
had  their  portiona  doae  together,  and  more  than  once 
they  are  mentioned  in  company.  The  allotment  of  la- 
aachar lay  above  that  of  Manaaeeh.  The  apecification 
of  ita  boundariea  and  oontenta  ia  contained  in  Joeh.  xix, 
17-28.  But  to  the  towna  there  named  muat  be  added 
Daberath  (a  Levitical  dty,  xxi,  28 :  Jarmuth  here  is 
probably  the  Remeth  of  2dx,  21)  and  Ibleam  (Josh.  xvii, 
1 1).  The  boundary,  in  the  worda  of  Josephua  {A  nt,  v,  1, 
22), "  extended  in  length  from  Carmd  to  the  Jordan,  in 
breadth  to  Mount  Tabor."  In  fact,  it  almoat  exactly 
conaisted  of  the  plain  of  Eadradon  or  JezreeL  The 
aouthcm  boundaiy  we  can  tracę  by  £n-gannim,  the 
modem  Jenln,  on  the  hdghts  which  form  the  aouthem 
endosure  to  the  plain ;  and  then  further  weatward  by 
Taanach  and  Megiddo,  the  authentic  fragmenta  of  which 
stiU  stand  on  the  same  hdghts  as  they  trend  away  to 
the  hump  of  CarmeL  On  the  north  the  territory  nearly 
ceased  with  the  plain,  which  is  there  bounded  by  Tabor, 
the  outpost  of  the  hiUs  of  Zebulun.  East  of  Tabor,  thę 
hill-conntry  continued  ao  as  to  acreen  the  tribe  from  the 
Sea  of  Galilee,  while  a  detour  on  the  S.K  included  a  part 
of  the  plain  within  the  territory  of  Manaaaeh,  near  Beth- 
ahean  and  the  upper  part  of  the  Jordan  valley.  In  a 
central  receaa  of  the  plain  stood  Jezreel,  on  a  Iow  swell, 
attended,  juat  acroaa  the  border,  on  the  one  hand  by  the 
eminence  of  Mount  Gilboa,  and  on  the  other  by  that 
now  called  £d-Duhy,  or  "Little  Hermon,"  the  latter 
having  Shnnem,  Nain,  and  Endor  on  ita  dopea— namea 
which  recall  aome  of  the  most  intereating  and  important 
eventa  in  the  hiatory  of  larael.     See  Tribe. 

The  following  ia  a  list  of  all  the  Biblical  localities  in 
the  tribe,  with  their  approved  or  oonjectural  identifica- 


Abez,  Towu. 
Anaharath,  da 

Anem,  do. 

Aphek,  do. 

Belh-gan,  do. 

Beth-pazzez,  da 

Beth-ahemeah,  do. 

Cheaalloth,  or  ChłdothT       ^. 
Tabor,  f      *<*• 

Dabareh.  or  Daberath,  do. 

En-ffanniro,  da 

En-haddah,  do. 

Gar,  Aacent, 

Hapharaim,  Town, 
Ibleara  da 

Ittoh-kasln,  do. 

Jarmuth,  do. 


UkneiJUtt 
[Meskarah^tr 
See  En-oahnui. 
m-Fuleh]  t 
See  Ek-oanniic. 

Kaukab-el-Hawit 
IkaaL 

Debureh. 
Jenitk 

lAinMahn^t 
iMuk(!ibaeh]t 
[El-Afuleh]  t 
[Jelameh]  t 
{Ke/r  KeniM^t 
See  Ramotu. 


ISSACHAR 


łOO 


ISSACHAR 


Hap  of  Łhe  Tńbe  of  Issachar. 


(Town. 

Jezreel, 

-{PlalD, 
(Foantain, 

Jokmeam,  or 

Jokneam, 

Tovm. 

Kedeab, 

do. 

Kibzaim, 

do. 

KUhioD, 

do. 

Maralah, 

do. 

Heroz, 

do. 

Nain, 

do. 

Nazareth, 

do. 

Babbith, 

do. 

Bamoth,  or  Remeth, 

do. 

Sbahazimah, 

da 

SblboD, 

do. 

Sbanem, 

do. 

Zeritu 

Merj  Ibn-Afner» 

AinmyUeh. 

Jil-Kaimon. 

Kcuhaneht 

See  JoKNSAM. 

See  Kkdrbu. 

[Mujeidil^t 

Ka/rMutrr 

NHn. 

En^yaairah. 

IStmurieh]  f 

![Tell  between  8nn- 
dela  and  Makel- 
bileb]  ? 
[Shani]  T 
lEnh-Shiirah}  r 
Solanu 

Thia  territoiy  was,  as  it  still  is,  among  the  richest 
land  in  Palestine.  Westward  was  the  famous  plaiu 
which  derived  its  name,  the  "  seed-plot  of  God" — such 
is  the  signlfication  of  Jezreel— from  its  fertility,  and  the 
veiy  weeds  of  which  at  thia  day  testify  to  its  enormous 
powers  of  production  (Stanley,  S,  and  P.  p.  848).  See 
EsDRAELON ;  Jezreeu  On  the  north  is  Tabor,  which, 
even  iinder  the  buming  sun  of  that  climate,  is  said  to 
retain  the  glades  and  dells  of  an  English  wood  (ibid,  p. 
850).  On  the  east,  behind  Jezreel,  is  the  opening  which 
conducts  to  the  plain  of  the  Jordan— to  that  Beth-Shean 
which  was  proverbialIy  among  the  Rabbis  the  gate  of 
Paradise  for  its  fruitfiUness.  It  is  this  aspect  of  the 
territory  of  Issachar  which  appears  to  be  alluded  to  in 
the  blessing  of  Jacob.  The  image  of  the  "  sturdy  he- 
ass"  (D'^a  ^bn)— the  large  animal  used  for  burdens  and 
field-work,  not  the  lighter  and  swifter  she-ass  for  riding 
— "couching  down  between  the  two  stalls,"  chewing  the 
fodder  of  stolid  ease  and  quieU-is  very  appUcable,  not 
only  to  the  tendencies  and  habits,  but  to  the  very  size 
and  air  of  a  rural  agrarian  people,  while  the  8equel  of 
the  verse  is  no  less  suggestirc  of  the  certain  result  of 
such  tendencies  when  unrelicvcd  by  any  higher  aspira- 
Łions :  "  He  saw  that  rest  was  good  and  the  land  pleas- 
ant,  and  he  bowed  his  back  to  bear,  and  became  a  slare 
to  tributc" — the  tribute  imposed  on  him  by  the  yarious 
marauiling  tribes  who  were  attracted  to  his  territory  by 
the  richncss  of  the  crops,  The  blessing  of  Moses  com- 
pletes  the  picture.    He  is  not  only  "  in  tents"— in  nom- 


ad  or  semi-nomad  life— bat  "  pejoidng"  in  thcm ;  and  it 
is  perhaps  not  straining  a  point  to  obsenre  that  he  has 
by  this  time  begun  to  lose  his  indiyidaality.  He  and 
Zebulun  are  mentioned  together  as  haring  part  passes- 
sion  in  the  holy  mountain  of  Tabor,  which  was  near  the 
frontier  linę  of  each  (Deut.  xxxiii,  18, 19).  We  pass 
from  this  to  the  time  of  Deborąh :  the  chief  stiuggle  in 
the  great  victory  over  Sisera  took  place  on  the  territory 
of  Issachar,  *^  by  Taanach  at  the  waters  of  Megiddo** 
(Judg.  V,  19) ;  but  the  allusion  to  the  tńbe  in  the  song 
of  tńumph  is  of  the  most  cursory  naturę,  not  oonsistent 
with  its  haying  taken  any  prominent  part  in  the  action. 
One  among  the  judges  of  Israel  was  firom  Issachar-^ 
Tola  (Judg.  X,  1) — ^but  beyond  the  length  of  his  sway 
we  have  only  the  fact  recorded  that  he  resided  oat  of 
the  limits  of  his  own  tńbe — at  Shamir,  in  Mount  Ephra- 
im.  By  Josephus  he  is  omitted  entirely  (see  -4n/,  v,  7, 
6).  The  census  of  the  tńbe  taken  in  the  reign  of  Darid 
has  already  been  alluded  to.  It  is  contained  in  I  Chroń. 
vii,  1-5,  and  an  expres8ion  occnrs  in  it  which  testifies  to 
the  nomadic  tendencies  above  noticed.  Out  of  the 
whole  number  of  the  tńbe  no  less  than  86,000  were  ma- 
rauding  mercenary  troops — "bands"  (D'''!*''^?) — *  *o™ 
applied  to  no  other  tńbe  in  this  enumeration,  thongh 
elsewhere  to  Gad,  and  uniformly  to  the  irregnlar  bodiea 
of  the  Bedouin  nations  round  IsraeL  This  was  proba- 
bly  at  the  close  of  Darid*s  reign.  Thirty  years  before, 
when  two  hundred  of  the  head  men  of  the  tńbe  had 
gone  to  Hebron  to  assist  in  making  David  king  over 
the  entire  realm,  different  ąualifications  are  noted  in 
them — thcy  "had  understanding  of  the  timcs  to  know 
what  Israel  ought  to  do  .  .  .  and  all  their  brethren 
were  at  their  commandment."  To  what  this  **  under- 
standing of  the  times"  was  we  have  no  dew  (see  Dey- 
ling,  Obterr,  i,  160  sq.).  By  the  later  Jewish  interproc- 
ers  it  is  cxplained  as  skill  in  ascertaining  the  periods 
of  the  sun  and  moon,  the  intercalation  of  roonths,  and 
dates  of  solemn  feasts,  and  the  intcrpretation  of  the 
signs  of  the  heavens  (Targnm,  ad  loc ;  Jeroroe,  Omrsl. 
Ileb.),  Josephus  (Ant,  vii,  2,  2)  g^ve8  it  as  ''knowing 
the  things  that  were  to  happcn  ;**  and  he  adds  that  the 
armed  men  who  caroe  with  these  leaders  were  20,0001 
One  of  the  wise  men  of  baachar,  acoording  to  an  oU 


ISSENDORP 


701 


KSUE 


Jewifth  traditlon  presenred  bv  Jerome  (<2«<b<^«  H^  on 
2  Chion.  xvii,  16),  was  Amasiah,  son  of  Zichii,  who, 
with  200,000  men,  ofTered  himself  to  Jehovab  in  the 
senice  of  Jehoshaphat  (2  Chroń,  xvii,  16) ;  but  this  is 
rery  questionablc,  as  the  movement  appean  to  have 
been  confined  to  Judah  and  Benjamin.  The  ruler  of 
the  tńbe  at  this  time  was  bmri,  of  the  great  family  of 
Michael  (1  Chroń,  xxvii,  18 ;  oompare  vii,  8).  May  he 
not  have  been  the  forefather  of  the  king  of  Israel  of  the 
same  name—the  founder  of  the  "  house  of  Omri"  and  of 
the  "<  house  of  Ahab,"  the  builder  of  Samaria,  possibly 
on  the  same  bill  of  Shamir  on  which  the  Issacharite 
judge,  Tola,  had  fonnerly  held  his  court  ?  But,  whether 
this  was  80  or  not,  at  any  late  one  dynasty  of  the  I»- 
raeliiisb  kings  was  Issacharite.  Baasha,  the  son  of  Ahi- 
jah,  of  the  house  of  Issachar,  a  member  of  the  anny 
with  which  Nadab  and  all  Israel  wera  besieging  Gibbe- 
thon,  apparently  not  of  any  standing  in  the  tribe  (oom- 
pare 1  Kings  xvi,  2),  siew  the  king,  and  himself  mount- 
ed  the  throne  (1  Kings  xv,  27,  etc.).  He  was  evidently 
a  fierce  and  warlike  man  (xvi,  29;  1  Chroń,  xvi,  1),  and 
an  idolater  like  Jeroboam.  The  Issacharite  dynasty 
lasted  during  the  twenty-four  years  of  his  reign  and  the 
two  of  his  son  £lah.  At  the  end  of  that  time  it  was 
wrrested  from  him  by  the  same  means  that  his  father 
had  acąnired  it,  and  Zimri,  the  new  king,  commenced 
his  reign  by  a  massacre  of  the  whole  kindred  and  eon- 
oections  of  Baasha— he  left  him  "  not  even  bo  much  as 
a  boy"  (xvi,  11). 

Distant  as  Jezreel  was  from  Jemsalem,  the  inhabi- 
tanu  took  part  in  the  Pa88over  with  which  Hezekiah 
sanctified  the  opening  of  his  reign.  On  that  memoia* 
ble  occasion  a  multitude  of  the  people  from  the  north- 
em  tribes,  and  among  them  from  Issachar,  although  so 
long  estranged  from  the  woiship  of  Jehovah  as  to  have 
foi^tten  how  to  make  the  necessary  purifications,  yet 
by  the  enlightened  piety  of  Hezekiah  were  allowed  to 
keep  the  feast;  and  they  did  keep  it  8even  days  with 
great  gladness — ^with  such  tumultuous  joy  as  had  not 
been  known  sińce  the  time  of  Solomon,  when  the  whole 
land  was  one.  Nor  did  they  sepante  till  the  occasion 
had  been  ńgnalized  by  an  immense  destruction  of  idol- 
atrous  altars  and  symbols,  **  in  Judah  and  Benjamin,  in 
Ephraim  and  Manasseh,'*  up  to  the  very  confines  of  Is- 
8achar*8  own  land— «nd  then  ''all  the  children  of  Israel 
retmned  every  man  to  his.po68es8ion  into  their  own  a\r- 
ies**  (2  Chroń,  xxxi,  1).  Within  five  years  from  this 
datę  Shalmaneser,  king  of  Assyrio,  had  invaded  the 
north  of  Palestine,  and  idter  three  years'  ńege  had  taken 
Samaria,  and,  with  the  rest  of  Israel,  had  camed  Issa- 
char away  to  his  distant  dominion&  The  only  other 
scńptuTBl  allusion  to  the  tribe  is  that,  with  the  rest  of 
their  brethren  of  all  the  tribes  of  the  children  of  Israel 
(Dan  only  excepted),  the  twelve  thousand  of  the  tribe 
of  Issachar  shall  be  sealed  in  their  foreheads  (Bev.  vii, 
7>— Smith. 

2.  A  Korhite  Levite,  one  of  the  door-keepers  (A.  V. 
**  porters")  of  the  house  of  Jehovah,  seventh  son  of 
Obed-Edom  (I  Chroń,  xxvi,  5).    B.C.  1014. 

Issendorp,  Hendbik,  belonged  to  the  Evangelical 
Łutherans  of  Holland.  He  was  called  in  1723  to  the 
charge  of  a  Łutheran  church  at  Purmerend.  In  1787 
bodily  infinnities  rendcred  a  coUeague  necessaiy.  In 
1743  he  resigned  his  charge.  Though  obliged  to  desist 
from  his  ministerial  work,  he  rendered  himself  eminent- 
ly  useful  to  his  denomination  by  presenting  to  the  Dutch 
a  transiation  of  some  three  or  four  hundred  German 
hymns.  See  Glasius,  Godffeleerd  Nederlandy  ii,  196  sq. ; 
■Iso  Geschiedenis  tan  het  godgdienMig  Gezang  bij  de  Lii- 
therMchen  in  de  Nederkmden  door.    (J.P.W.) 

iMerlein,  Isoaeł  bem-Petachya,  a  Jewish  Babbi 
of  gmd,  distinction  among  Jewish  scholars  in  the  15th 
centniy,  and  one  of  the  representatives  of  trały  leam- 
ed  German  synagogal  teachen,  flourished  about  1427- 
1470.  At  fint  he  was  settled  over  a  oongregation  at 
HaKtmg;  later  he  removed  to  Keustadty  near  Yiemuu 


Isseriein  was  a  veiy  liberal-minded  Jew,  and  did  much 
by  his  influence  to  advance  the  standing  of  Jewish 
scholarship  in  his  day.  Morę  particularly  was  his  in- 
fluence fdt  in  the  theological  schools  of  his  Hebiew 
brethren  all  over  Germany.  From  the  most  distant 
parts  of  Europę  students  flocked  to  the  schools  at  Er-' 
furt,  Nuremburg,  Begensburg,  and  Prague,  wbeie  tho 
Talmud  was  expounded  in  a  most  masterly  mannel 
(comp.  Zunz,  Zur  Getch,  u.  lAt.  p.  167  8q.).  Accordingf 
to  Jost  (Ges^  d.  Judenihums  u.  s.  Sekten^  iii,  116),  Isser- 
iein died  obscurely  in  1452,  but  tlus  seems  improbable, 
as  Fttrst  bas  evidence  of  Isserlein^s  activity  in  1457* 
His  works  are  l^^nn  n»nn  nilu,  a  oollection  of  854 
opinions  on  the  different  fields  of  Kabbinism  (Yenioe^ 
1619, 4to;  Fttrth,  1778, 4to) :— D''ąnDJ|  D''pDB,  on  tho 
Halachoth  (Yenice,  15j9,  4to,  and^often;  FUrth,  1778^ 
4to):— n^iPirr  bc  "^d^li  n-^^nsi^ą,  or  Exposition8  ou 
Rashi's  Commentary  to  the  PenUteuch  (Yenice,  1619, 
4to,  and  often) :— »nn  "^nstt?  ob  ft^in-IKą,  or  Com- 
mentary on  the  Book  Sha'are  Dura  of  Isaac  Dtiran  (Yen^* 
ice,  1648, 4to,  and  often) ;  etc.  See  Grfttas,  Geach.  d.  Ju^ 
An,  vui,  220  sq.;  FUrat, -Bi&KotA.  JiidL  ii,  164;  Frankel, 
Itraell8ierlein{Lib.d,Or.lSi7),c.e7b-Je>7S.    (J.H.W.) 

IśserleB,  Mosr  ben-Israel,  a  celebrated  Polish 
Babbi,  was  bom  at  Cracow  in  1620.  The  son  of  a  veiy 
wealthy  man,  and  a  relative  of  the  distinguished  savan 
Melr  Katzenellenbogen  of  Padną,  he  was  afforded  pe* 
Guliar  advantage8  for  thorongh  culture.  Of  these  he 
readily  availed  himself,  and,  in  consequence,  fiUed  veiy 
prominent  positions  at  ąuite  an  early  age.  He  was  dis« 
tinguished,  however,  nther  for  his  early  acąuisitions  and 
extended  knowledge  than  any  great  natund  abilities. 
He  died  in  1678.  The  writings  of  Isserles  are  very  va- 
ried,  covering^the  departments  of  theol<^cal,  exegeti- 
cal,  ecclesiastical,  and  even  historical  and  philosophical 
literaturę.  In  all  of  these  he  was  perfectly  at  hbme. 
His  most  important  works  are  f'^''2?»l  n'^ift  b,  on  Sao- 
rifices  and  other  subjectt  ofJeicith  Antijuities  (Prague, 
1569)-.— 1^;i  "T^TO,  or  Commentary  on  the  Book  ofEi- 
ther  (Cremona,  1659, 4to;  Amsterd.  1769, 8vo).  For  a 
list  of  all  hiB  works,  see  FUrst,  BiłdioikJud,  ii,  156  8q« 
See  ¥iiisikelfMot.b,'l»raelgenamU  Moie  I$»erle$t  in  the 
OrientaLLiteraiurbłatt  (1847),  c  827-80;  GrUtz,  Ge$ch. 
rf./tt(fcn,ix,472  8q.     (J.H.W.) 

l8Bhi'ah  (o,  1  Chroń,  xxiv,  21 ;  6, 1  Chroń.  xxiy, 
26).    See  Ishiah. 

IssTie,  besides  its  ordinazy  sense  of  gomgforth  p|i3, 
ChakL  to  Jlow,  Dan.  vii,  10;  also  ni«^iFl,  exUj  Ł  e. 
source,  Proy.  iv,  23,  freąuently  of  the  direction  or  tezmi- 
nuB  of  a  boundaiy ;  imroptiofiaij  to  go  out,  Rev.  ix,  17, 
18),  and  progeny  (n^bio,  Gen.  xlviii,  6,  elsewhere  **  ifcm- 
dred;'^  ni9'^&]S,«Aoo^,i.e.off8pring,Isa.xxii,24;  ffirlp- 
fm,  seedf  Matt  xxii,  26),  is  the  rendering  employed  by 
our  translatoTB  for  several  terms  expre8Bive  of  a  purulent 
or  unhealthy  discharge,  espedally  from  the  8exual  or- 
gana. The  most  emphatic  of  these  is  IiSt,  from  ^!|t,  to 
Jhto,  both  the  yerb  and  noun  being  freąuently  applied 
to  diseased  or  unusual  secretions,  e.  g.  the  monthly 
courses  or  catamenia  of  women,  and  the  seminal  flix  or 
gonorrhaa  benigna  of  men  (Lev.  xv ;  Numb.  v,  2).  See 
DiSEASE.  A  morę  intense  and  chronić  form  of  this  dis- 
charge was  the  "  issue  of  blood,"  or  uterine  hRmorrhage 
of  the  woman  in  the  Gospels  (pvavc  a'ifŁaToc,  Mark  r, 
26 ;  Lukę  viii,  48, 44 ;  atfioppita^  Matt  ix,  20),  which,  aa 
it  madę  ber  ceremonially  undean,  she  was  so  anxiou8 
to  conceal  when  she  came  in  contact  with  the  multitude 
and  with  Christ.  (See  monographs  in  Yolbeding,  Indez, 
p.  49 ;  Hase,  LAen  Jesu,  p.  141.)  The  term  nc^Jt,  Ezek. 
xxiii,  20,  signiSes  a  pouring,  and  is  applied  to  the  emit' 
sio  iendnit  of  a  stallion,  to  which  the  idolatrous  pan- 
mours  of  Jndsa  are  compared  in  the  strong  language  of 
the  prophet.  See  Adultery.  The  only  other  term  so 
rendered  is  ^*ip^,  ayiramtain,  applied  to  the  womb^or 


ISSUS 


102 


ITALIAN  YERSIONS 


pudenda  fimZte&ra,  aB  the  aonroe  of  the  menstnial  dis- 
chai)!^  (Lev.  xii,  7 ;  xx,  18 ;  comp.  injy^f  Mark  ▼,  29). 
SeeFLUX. 

''ThetextoLev.xv,2,8;  xxit,4;  Numb.T,2  (and  2 
Sam.  iii,  29,  where  the  malady  is  invoked  as  a  curse), 
are  prohably  to  be  interpreted  of  gonorrhcBa.  In  Lev. 
zy,  8  a  distinction  is  introduced,  which  merely  meaiu 
that  the  ceasation  of  the  actual  flux  does  not  constitute 
ceremoniał  deanneas,  bat  that  the  patient  must  bidę  the 
legał  time,  seren  days  (ver.  18),  and  peifonn  the  pre- 
scribed  purifications  and  aacrifice  (rer.  14).  See,  how- 
ever,  SarenhuBias^s  preface  to  the  treatiae  Żabim  of  the 
Mishna,  where  another  interpretation  is  giren.  Aa  re- 
gards  the  specific  yarieties  of  thia  maUdy,  it  la  generał- 
ly  aaserted  that  ita  most  seTere  form  (^on.  vindenta)  is 
modem,  having  first  appeared  in  the  15th  century. 
Cliardin  (Yoyagea  en  Pertę,  ii,  200)  States  tłiat  he  ob- 
terved  that  this  disorder  was  preyalent  in  Persia,  but 
tłiat  ita  effects  were  far  leas  serere  than  in  Western  cli- 
mates.  If  this  be  tnie,  it  would  go  some  way  to  ex- 
plain  the  allęged  abeence  of  the  gon,  viruL  fiom  andent 
noeolog^',  which  found  its  fidd  of  obeervation  in  the 
East,  Greece,  etc,  and  to  confirm  the  suppoaition  tłiat 
the  milder  form  onły  was  the  subject  of  Moeaic  legisła- 
tion.  But,  l)eyond  tłiis,  it  ia  probable  Uiat  diseases  may 
appear,  run  their  coorse,  and  disappear,  and,  for  want  of 
an  accurate  obseryation  of  their  symptoms,  leare  no 
tiace  behind  them.  The  *  bed,'  *  seat,*  etc  (Ley.  xy,  5, 6, 
etc),  are  not  to  he  supposed  to  haye  ł)een  regarded  by 
tliat  ław  as  contagious,  but  the  defilement  extended  to 
them  meieły  to  give  greater  prominence  to  the  ceremo- 
niał strictness  yrith  which  the  case  was  roled.  In  the 
woman^s '  issue,'  (v.  19),  the  ordinaiy  menstruation  seems 
alone  intended,  supposed  to  be  prolonged  (y.  25)  to  a  mor- 
bid  extent.  The  scripturał  liaiidłing  of  the  subject  not 
dealing,  as  in  the  case  of  leprosy,  in  symptoms,  it  seems 
gratttitous  to  detail  them  here :  those  who  desire  such 
knowłedge  will  find  them  in  any  compendium  of  thera- 
peutics.  See  Josephus,  War,  y,  6, 6 ;  yi,  9, 8;  Mishna, 
Chelim.  i,  8,  8 ;  Maimon.  ad  Żabim,  ii,  2 :  whence  we 
leam  ttiat  persons  thus  affected  might  not  ascend  the 
Tempie  mount,  nor  share  in  any  religious  celebration, 
nor  eyen  enter  Jerusalem.  See  also  Michaelis,  Lcncs  of 
Moses,  iy,  282"  (Smith).    See  Umcleanness. 

Ibsub,  or,  rather,  Isus  (^Iffoc),  mentioned  by  Jose- 
phus (Ant,  X,  8,  6)  as  high-priest  between  Joram  and 
Axioramus;  apparently  corresponding  to  the  Jehosha- 
phat  of  the  S«ier  Olom,    See  Hioh-priest. 

Iśtalca^ras.  '^  In  1  Esdr.  yiii,  40,  the  *  son  of  Is- 
talcurus*  (o  tov  'lara\Kovpov)  is  substituted  for  'and 
Zabiiud'  of  the  corresponding  list  in  Ezra  (yiii,  14). 
The  Keri  has  Zikhtr  instead  of  Zabbud,  and  of  this 
there  is  perhaps  some  traoe  in  Istalcurus"  (Smith). 

Iś^^uah  (I  Chroń,  ^-ii,  80).    See  Ishuah. 

Js^td  (Gen.  xlvi,  17).    See  Ishui,  1. 

It&la,  a  name  attributed  to  the  old  Latin  yersion 
which  was  the  foundation  of  Jerome^s  Yulgate.  See 
Italic  Yersion. 

Ital'ian  (ItoKikóc)  occutb  but  once  in  Scripture,  in 
the  mention  of  the  *^  Julian  band,"  L  e.  Roman  cohort, 
to  which  Comelios  bdonged  (Acts  x,  1).  "  This  seems 
to  haye  been  a  cohort  of  Italians  separate  from  the  le- 
gionaiy  soldlers,  and  not  a  cohort  of  the  *  Legio  Italico^* 
of  which  we  read  at  a  later  period  (Tacitus,  /fiti.  i,  59, 
64 ;  ii,  100 ;  iii,  14)  as  being  raised  by  Nero  (Dio  Caas. 
lv,  24 ;  Sueton.  Nero,  19).  (See  Biscoe,  On  the  Acit,  p. 
800  są.)  Wieseler  {Chromi  p.  145)  thinks  they  were 
Italian  yolunteers ;  and  there  is  an  inscription  in  Gruter 
in  which  the  following  words  occur :  *  Cohors  mllitum 
Itałiconiro  yoluntaria,  qtue  est  in  Syria*  (see  Ackerman, 
Nunumnatic  lilusłrations,  p.  84)"  (Conylieare  and  How- 
son,  Sł.  Paul,  i,  113).  There  is  a  monograph  on  the  sub- 
ject :  Schwarz,  I}e  cokorłe  Jtaiica  et  A  tigusta  (Altdorf, 
1720).     See  Cohokt. 

Italian  Sohool  op  Philosophy.    By  the  Italian 


Bchool  is  properly  understood  the  blendiog  of  the  Py- 
thagorean  and  Eleatic  systems  of  philosophy  into  ooe. 
It  is  sometimes,  lioweyer,  uaed  of  the  l^rthagorean  sys- 
tem merdy.  The  reaaon  for  designating  it  as  the  Ital- 
ian schooł  is  because  Pythagozas  is  aaid  to  hare  taught 
in  Italy.    See  Pythagoras. 

Italian  VerBiona  of  the  Scripture&  The  ear- 
liest  translation  of  the  Bibie  into  the  modem  Italian  ib 
said  to  łiaye  been  madę  by  Giaooroo  da  Yiiaggio  ( Jaeo- 
bus  de  Yoragine),  aichbishop  of  Genoa,  in  the  beginniDg 
of  the  I8th  century.  This  reata  exduaiydy  on  the  an- 
thority  of  Sixtu8  Śenensis  {BMiotk,  Sand.  lib.  iv\  and 
there  is  weighty  leason  for  doubting  the  atatemcot. 
That  at  an  early  period,  howeyer,  yenions  of  patta,  if 
not  of  the  whole  of  Scripture  into  Italian  were  madę,  is 
eyinced  by  the  fact  that  there  exist  in  yarioos  libnuies 
MSS.  containing  them.  In  the  Royal  libraiy  at  Paris 
is  an  Italian  Bibie  in  two  yols.  folio,  as  well  as  seyeral 
oodicea  containing  parts  of  the  Bibie  in  that  language; 
in  the  library  at  Upsala  is  a  Codex  containing  a  histocy 
compiled  from  the  first  seyen  books  of  the  O.  T.  in  Ital- 
ian ;  in  the  library  of  Trinity  College,  Dublin,  is  an  Ital- 
ian translation  of  the  N.T.,  with  portions  of  tlie  Old,  and 
in  other  libraries  like  relics  are  preserred  (see  Le  Long, 
JB»6.5occap.yi,§l). 

The  earliest  printed  Italian  Bibie  is  that  of  Nicolo  di 
Malermi  (or  Malherbi).  a  Yenetian  Benedictine  monk  of 
the  order  of  Camaldoli :  it  appeared  under  the  title  of 
Biblia  Yolgart  Higtoriota,  etc  (^^en.  1471.)  The  trana- 
lation  is  from  the  Yulgate,  and  is  prononnced  by  R.  S- 
mon  to  be  executed  in  a  hanh  style  and  cardesaly  (/7ćtf. 
Crit,  du  N.  T,  p.  487).  It  was,  howeyer,  rcpeatedly  re* 
printed;  the  best  editions  are  that  superintended  by 
Marini  (Yen.  1477, 2  yols.  fol.),  and  that  issued  at  Yeniń 
in  1567  (1  yoL  foL).  In  1530  Antonio  Bmcctoli  if«ued 
his  transhition  of  the  N.  T.,  and  in  1582  the  first  editioo 
of  his  translation  of  the  entire  Bibie,  containing  a  n^ 
yised  and  corrected  translation  of  the  N.  T.,  under  the 
title  oTIm  Biblia  che  contiene  Sacri  Ubri  del  recchia  Test- 
amento  (radotto  nuotamenie  de  la  Ilebraica  rerifa  m  /Im- 
c^a  Totcana,  eon  dirini  lUni  delN,  T.  fradofłi  da  Greco 
in  lingua  Tobc,  eon  pririlegio  de  lo  ńtclito  Senato  renetą 
e  kiera  a  Franceeco  /,  Regę  ChriMtianitsimo  (foL  Yenic^ 
ap.  I^nc  Ant.  Juntas).  This  translation  ia  said  by  Simoo 
to  follow  in  the  O.  T.  the  Latin  yerńon  of  Pagniiii  rath- 
er than  to  be  madę  finom  the  original  Hebrew,  and  to 
partake  of  the  rudenese  and  barbarism  of  Pagninis  st3-le. 
It  was  put  in  the  index  of  the  prohibited  books  amóng 
works  of  the  first  class.  Many  editions  of  it,  howeyer, 
appeared,  of  which  the  most  important  is  that  of  Zanetti 
(Yen.  1540, 8  yols.  fol).  Bmcdoli^s  yersion  of  the  O.  T. 
in  a  corrected  fonn  was  printed  at  Geneva  in  1562,  mkmtg 
with  a  new  yersion  of  the  N.  T.  by  Gallars  and  Beza ;  to 
this  notes  are  added,  and  espedally  an  expQ«ition  of  the 
Apocalypee.  The  translation  ofMarmochini,  though 
professedly  original,  is,  in  reality,  only  a  re^ised  edition 
of  that  of  Bmcdoli,  the  design  of  which  was  to  bring  It 
morę  fnlly  into  accordance  with  the  Yulgate.  Se%'cral 
translations  of  the  Plsalms  (some  from  the  Hebiew)  aad 
of  other  parts  of  Scripture  appeared  in  Italy  between 
the  middle  and  end  of  the  16th  centuiy,  and  a  iiew  trans- 
lation of  the  N.  T.,  by  a  Florentine  of  the  name  of  Zacha- 
ria,  appeared  in  8yo  at  Yenice  in  1542,  and  at  Fkrpnce 
in  1506,  copies  of  which  are  now  extremely  rare.  The 
Jew  Dayid  de  Pomb  issued  a  translation  of  Ecdeaiaatea 
with  the  original  Hebrew  (Yen.  1578). 

In  1607  appeared  at  Geneva  the  first  Protestant  Ital- 
ian yersion— that  of  Gioyanni  Diodati  {Im  Biblia :  Cioi 
I  Libri  del  Vecchio  e  del  Nuoro  Tetłamento  [sm.  fołio^). 
To  this  are  appended  brief  marginal  notesL  This  ro^ 
sion  was  madę  directly  from  the  original  text8^  and 
sUnds  in  high  esteem  for  fidelity.  It  bas  been  repeat- 
edly  reprinted.  Being  in  the  plain  Locchese  dialM.  it 
is  especially  adapted  for  drculation  among  the  conionn 
peopłe.     It  is  that  now  adopted  by  the  Bibto  Socictieai 

A  yersion  alTecting  greater  elegance,  but  by  no  meana 
so  faithful,  is  that  of  Antonio  Martini,  aichbisliop  of 


ITALIC  YEKSION 


703 


ITALY 


Ilorence.  The  N.  T.  appearecl  et  Turin  in  1769,  and 
the  O.  T.  in  1779,  both  accomponieil  with  the  text  of 
the  Yulgate,  antl  -with  copioiis  notes,  chiefly  from  the 
fathen.  Thuł  work  recciretl  the  approbation  of  popc 
FiuB  TL  It  is  mado  avowedly  from  the  Yulgate,  and 
ia  in  the  purc  Tuacan  dialect.  Repeated  editiona  havc 
appearod;  one,  printed  at  Liromo  (Leghorn),  and  those 
iasueil  by  the  Hritish  and  Foreign  Bibie  Society  (Lond. 
1818, 1821),  waiit  the  notes,  and  have  conseąuently  been 
plaeed  in  the  iiulex  of  prohibitcd  books.  To  read  and 
circnlate  thia  book,  though  bearing  the  papai  sanction, 
was,  till  lately,  a  gravc  offense,  as  the  well-known  case 
of  the  Madiai  in  Florence  proyes.— Kitto,  s.  y.  Sce 
Yeksions. 

Italie  VerBlon  (Vełu8  Itala),  the  usual  name  of 
the  old  Latin  yersion  of  the  Scriptures,  used  piior  to  the 
days  of  Augustine  and  Jcrome,  and  probably  madę  in 
Northem  Afńca  in  the  2d  centur}%  The  Italie,  howey- 
er,  IS  properiy  a  reyiaion  of  this  old  Latin  yersion,  which 
was  in  use  in  Northem  Italy,  or  aroand  Milan.  Frag- 
mcats  of  it  haye  been  preseryed  by  Blanchini  and  Saba- 
tier  (Eadie,  Eccles,  Diet,  s.  y.).  Portions  containing  the 
books  of  Lcviticus  and  Numbers  haye  been  pablished 
by  Lord  Ashbumham  (London,  1870)  from  an  ancient 
Codex  in  his  librar}%    See  Latin  Ykrsioss. 

If  aly  (*lraXia,  of  unoertain  etymology),  the  name 
of  the  country  of  which  Komę  was  the  capital  (Acta 
zyiii,  2;  xxyii,  1,6;  Heb.  xiii,  24).  This,  like  most 
geoj^raphical  names,  was  differeoUy  applied  at  different 
periods.  In  the  earliest  times  the  name  ^Italt/"  in- 
duded  only  the  little  peninsula  ofCalabrui  (Strabo,  v,  1). 
The  country  now  called  Italy  was  then  inhabited  by  a 
nomber  of  luttions  distinct  in  origin,  language,  and  goy- 
emmeut,  such  as  the  Gauls,  Ligurians,  and  Yeneti  on 
the  north,  and  the  Pelasgi,  Sabines,  Etrurians,  etc,  on 
the  south.  But,  as  the  power  of  Komc  advanced,  these 
nations  were  successiyely  annexed  to  the  great  state, 
and  the  name  ^  Italij"  extended  also,  till  it  came  to  be 
applied  to  the  whole  country  south  of  the  Alps,  and 
Polybius  seems  to  use  it  in  this  sense  (i,  6;  ii,  14).— 
Kitto.  For  the  progress  of  the  history  of  the  word,  see 
Smith*s  Didionary  ofClassical  Geofp-apky,  ».  y.  From 
the  time  of  the  close  of  the  repubUc  it  was  empbyed 
as  we  employ  it  now,  L  e.  in  its  tnie  geographical 
sense,  as  denoting  the  whole  natural  penitisula  be- 
tween  the  Alps  and  the  Straits  of  Messina.  In  the 
New  Tesument  it  occurs  three,  or,  indeetl,  morę  cor- 
rectly  speaking,  four  tiroea.  In  Acta  x,  1,  the  Italian 
cohort  at  Oesarea  (»/  <nrcipa  »)  KdKovfŁkvrf  'lra\iKff, 
A.Y.  **  Italian  band"),  oonaiating,  as  it  doubtless  did,  of 
men  lecruited  in  Italy,  iJIustrates  the  militar}^  relations 
of  the  imperial  penuisula  with  the  proyinces.  See 
Army.  In  Acts  xyiii,  2,  where  we  are  told  of  the  ex- 
pulaion  of  Aquila  and  Priscilla  with  their  compatriots 
*'  fiom  Italy/'  we  are  reminded  of  the  large  Jewish  pop- 
lUation  which  many  authorities  show  that  it  coutained. 
Acta  xxvii,  1,  where  the  begiuning  of  St.  PauUs  voyage 
''to  Italy*  is  mentioned, and  the  whole  subsequent  nar- 
zattye,  illustrate  the  trade  which  subsisted  between  the 
peninsula  and  other  parts  of  the  Medit«rranean.  Lastly, 
the  wonls  in  Heb.  xiii,  24,"They  of  Italy  (o'i  awi  riję 
'irakiac)  salute  you,**  whiteyer  they  may  proye  for  or 
against  this  being  the  region  in  which  the  letter  was 
written  (and  the  matter  has  been  strongly  argued  both 
ways),  are  interesting  as  a  specimen  of  the  progress  of 
Chrbtianity  in  the  West.— Smith.  A  concise  account 
of  the  diyisions  and  history  of  ancient  Italy  may  be 
ĆDund  in  Anthon^s  CIom.  JHct.  s.  y.  Italia.    See  Romę. 

Italy,  MoDKRN,  a  kingtlom  in  Southern  Europę,  with 
an  area  of  112,802  sąiuu-e  miles,  and  a  population  in  1870 
of  26,500,000  inhabicants.  The  name  originally  belonged 
to  the  Southern  point  of  the  Apennine  peninsula  ałone ; 
at  the  time  of  Thucydides  it  erobraced  the  whoIc  south- 
em  const  fn>m  the  riycr  Laus,  on  the  Tyrrhcnian  Sca, 
to  Metapontium,  on  the  Sicilian  Straits;  afccr  the  eon- 
of  Tarentum  by  the  Komaus  it  was  extendcd  to 


all  the  comitry  from  the  Sicilian  Straits  to  the  Arno  or 
Kobioon ;  finall}',  at  the  time  of  AugusŁus,  it  came  to  be 
used  of  tlie  whole  of  the  peninsula.  In  a  still  wider 
sense  it  was,  under  Constantinc,  the  name  of  one  of  the 
four  chief  diyisions  of  the  Koman  Empire,  being  subdi- 
yided  into  three  (according  to  othera  into  four  or  two) 
dinceses — Illyria,  Africa,  and  Italy  Propor.  But  this 
wider  significance  died  out  with  the  dissolution  of  the 
Roman  Empire,  an<l  the  name  has  sińce  been  confined 
to  the  Apennine  peninsula.  It  denoted  a  ccuntrj',  the 
people  of  which  gradually  coalesced  into  one  nation, 
united  by  the  same  language,  literaturę,  and  habits,  but 
which  neyer,  for  any  length  of  time,  constituted  one  po» 
litical  oommonwealth.  Not  until  1859  did  the  national 
aspirations  for  unity  succeed  in  erecting  by  far  the  larger 
portion  of  the  peninsula  into  the  kingdom  of  Italy ;  in 
1866  Yenetia  was  added,  and  in  1870  the  incorporation 
of  Komę  completed  the  structure  of  national  unity. 

I.  Church  History. ^{\,)  The  planting  of  Christianity 
in  Italy  can  be  traced  to  the  first  years  of  the  Christian 
lera.  The  apostle  Peter,  according  to  old  accounts,  yis- 
ited  Romę  as  early  as  A.D.  42,  but  no  satisfactor)'  evl- 
dence  can  be  adduced  for  the  aasertion  of  Roman  theo- 
logians  that  Peter  was  at  any  time  bishop  of  the  Church 
of  Romę,  and  still  less  that  he  held  this  ofliice  for  twen- 
ty-fiye  years.  In  63  the  Christians,  togethcr  with  the 
Jews,  were  expelled  from  Romę  by  onler  of  the  emperor 
Claud^us.  The  Epistle  of  Paul  to  the  Romans  (about 
55)  indicates  that  the  Church  in  Romę  was  at  that  time 
fully  organized.  Under  Nero,  Peter  and  Paul  were  prob- 
ably put  to  death,  together  with  numerous  other  pro- 
fessors  of  Christianity.  Among  those  who  were  put  to 
death  under  Domitian  (81>96)  was  Flayiiis  Clemens,  a 
man  of  consular  dignity,  and  belonging  to  the  imperial 
famil}'.  Many  other  churches  in  Italy,  besidcs  that  of 
Romę,  tracę  their  foundation  to  assistants  <»r  the  apo»- 
tles;  thus  Bamabas  is  said  to  have  established  the 
Church  of  Milan,  Mark  the  Church  of  Aąuilcja,  Apolli- 
naris  the  Church  at  Rayenna.  The  churches  of  Lucca, 
Fiesole,  Bok>gna,  Bari,  Beneyento,  Capua,  Naples,  Paler- 
mo, Syracuse,  Pa\ia,  Urbino,Mantua,  Yeroiui,  IHsa.  Flor- 
ence, and  Sienna  also  claim  to  be  of  apostolic  origin. 
That  many  of  the  churches  were  really  organized  dur- 
ing  the  first  century  is  not  doubted,  but  hardly  any  of 
them  has  a  documentary  history  which  ascends  beyond 
the  beginning  of  the  2d  century.  £ven  the  history  of 
the  Church  of  Romę  is  so  involved  in  obscurity  that  i| 
Ls  not  known  in  which  order  the  first  four  bishops  suc<' 
ceeded  each  other.  From  the  beginning  of  the  2d  cen- 
tury bishoprics  rapidly  increased,  and  down  to  the  year 
311  there  are  enumerated  many  seats  of  bishops  in  all 
the  prorinces.  The  first  epistle  of  the  Roman  bishop 
Soter  (A.D.  175  sq.)  was  written  to  the  bishops  of  Cam- 
pania,  and  his  second  to  the  bishops  of  Italy.  The  Ro- 
man bishop  Zephyrinus  (203-221)  addressed  his  first 
epistle  tó  aU  the  bishops  of  Sicily,  and  Eusebius  liia 
third  to  the  bbhops  of  Tuscia  and  Campania.  A  *'  Pro- 
yincial  Synod  of  Romę,*'  cousLsting  of  twelye  bishops, 
was  presided  oyer  by  Telesphorus  (142-154) ;  it  was  fol- 
lowed  by  a  synod  under  Anicetus  (107-175) ;  anothcr 
in  197,  and  many  morę  in  the  8d  century.  At  the  be- 
ginning of  the  4th  century  Christianity  was  so  firmly 
established  throughout  Italy  that  the  pagans  coukl  make 
no  notable  resistance  when  Christianity  under  Coustan^ 
tine  the  Great  became  the  religion  of  the  state.  The 
apoetasy  of  Julian  retarded  but  little  the  yictory  of 
Christianity,  which  became  oomplete  when,towards  the 
close  of  the  4th  centuiy,  Theodosius  extcrminatcd  pa- 
ganism  by  fire  and  sword.  As  the  bishop  of  Romę  waa 
from  the  earliest  perio<l  of  the  Church  one  of  the  three 
great  bishops  of  the  Christian  Church  (Romę,  Alexan- 
dria.  and  Antioch),  the  churches  of  Italy  became  subor- 
dinate  to  his  superintendence  and  juriscliction ;  only  the 
Church  proyinces  of  the  roetropolitans  of  Milan  and 
Aquileia  lemained  independent  of  the  juriadiction  of 
Romę  for  many  moro  centuries.  The  roore  the  power 
of  the  bishops  of  Romę  rosę,  the  morę  the  Church  hi»- 


ITALT 


ł04 


ITALT 


Uap  of  Ancieat  Itair. 


ITALT 


705 


ITALY 


tocT  of  Italy  u  absorbed  by  the  laatory  of  the  papccy 
and  the  Koman  Chorch.  In  no  other  country  of  £a* 
rojw  was  the  unity  of  faith  better  preaen-ed  and  less  in- 
tcTTupted  than  in  Italy.  The  rule  of  the  Arian  Goths 
(493-ó(w)  l&sted  too  short  a  time  to  cstabliah  Arianiam 
on  a  lirm  foundation,  and  all  the  following  changea  in 
the  seciilar  goremment  of  the  country  recognised  the 
predominont  Church.  The  unity  of  the  Italian  Church 
during  the  Middle  Ages  was  but  little  disturbed  by  he- 
retical  sects;  the  Cathariats  and  Pasagii  never  became 
poweiful,  and  soon  disappeared;  only  the  Waldensea,  in 
the  remote  valleys  of  Piedmont,  Bur>'ived  all  peraecu- 
tion«    See  Papacy. 

(2.)  IJistory  of  the  Jieformatunu— Italy,  likc  other 
oountries,  had  its  forenuiners  of  the  Keformation,  the 
most  prominent  of  whom  was  tlie  Dominican  monk  Sa- 
yoDBTola  (q.  V.)}  who  feaiiesaly  adyocated  a  raiUcal  re- 
form of  the  Church.  The  reyiyal  of  the  classical  stud- 
ies  on  the  one  hand,  and  the  comiption  which  prerailed 
at  the  papai  oourt  on  the  other,  diaposed  at  the  begin- 
ning  of  the  16th  century  many  minda  towards  abandon- 
ing  the  doctrinea  of  liome.  In  generał,  howerer,  the 
teudency  towards  freethinking  was  stionger  among  the 
malcontents  than  the  wish  for  a  religioua  reform.  One 
of  the  moat  important  eiforts  in  the  iatter  direction  was 
madę  in  the  time  of  Leo  X  by  some  twenty  eamest  men, 
who  formed  a  aociety  for  the  purpose  of  rekindling  in 
the  Church  a  apirit  of  piety  in  opposition  to  the  pre- 
Yailing  corruption.  Among  tliem  were  Cajetan,  subse- 
quently  founder  of  the  order  of  the  Theatinea;  Carafia, 
8ubeequent]y  pope  Paul  lY ;  and  Contarini,  subseąuent- 
1t  cardinai.  AU  of  them  desired  to  efiect  a  rcformation 
within  the  Church,  though  some  of  them  strongly  in- 
dined  towards  the  reformatory  doctrine  of  juatification 
by  faith  alonc  To  thia  daaa  of  reformers  belonged  alao 
Bmcduli,  who  published  an  Italian  tranalation  of  the 
Bibie  (1Ó30-1532),  which  paased  through  aeyeral  edi- 
tions.  Among  the  sympathizera  with  thia  moyement 
were  also  Foacarari,  bishop  of  Modena ;  San  Felice,  bish- 
op  of  Caya ;  cardinai  Morone,  Grimani,  patriarch  of 
Aquileia,  and  Folengo,  a  pioua  Bene<lictiue  of  Monte 
Caaitto.  In  con8equence  of  the  frequent  intercourse  of 
Upper  Italy  with  Germany  and  Switzerland,  the  writ- 
ings  of  Luther  and  other  reformers  began  to  circulate  in 
Italy  from  the  beginnuig  of  the  Refonnation.  To  eyade 
the  Inąuisition,  they  wcrc  generally  pubhshed  either 
anonymously,  or  under  the  uame  of  other  authora. 

Yenice  appears  to  haye  been  the  first  city  of  Italy  in 
which  the  Keformation  took  root.  This  was  chiefly  due 
to  its  oonstant  intercouiae  with  Germany,  and  to  the  in- 
dependent poaition  maintaiued  by  that  republic  towards 
the  see  of  Komę.  Aa  early  aa  1520  Luther  reoeiyed 
news  from  Yenice  that  a  great  need  was  felt  there  of 
e%'angelical  preachers  and  books,  and  in  1628  he  was  in- 
formed  that  the  cause  was  making  good  progress.  The 
fact  tliat  Yenice  was  a  refuge  for  all  who  in  other  parts 
of  Italy  were  perseaitcd  for  their  faith  was  likewise  fa- 
yorablc  to  the  progress  of  Protestantism.  The  proceed- 
ings  of  the  Diet  of  Augsburg  (1530)  excited  the  atten- 
tion  of  the  fńends  of  the  Keformation  at  Yenice  to  a 
high  dcgree,  and  Lucio  Paolo  wrote  a  presslng  letter  in 
thcir  namc  to  Mclancthon,  imploring  him  to  resist  to 
the  last.  Kycn  priests  were  found  in  the  eyangelical 
party,  as  Yaldo  Lupetino,  proyincial  of  the  Franciscans, 
who  adyiaed  his  relatiye,  M.  Flacius,  of  Ill^Tia,  al^r- 
wards  one  of  the  championa  of  Protestantism,  to  go  to 
*iennany,where  he  would  leam  a  better  theology  than 
he  wo(dd  find  in  a  conyent  (1537).  Through  such  men, 
who  were  in  penoual  communication  with  the  reform- 
ers, Yenice  remained  regularly  connected  with  Witten- 
jierg.  In  1539  Melancthon  addressed  an  epistle  to  Yen- 
ice which  affbrds  most  yaluable  Information  conceming 
the  poration  of  the  eyangelical  party  in  that  city  at  that 
time.  The  eyangelical  party  increascd  not  oiUy  in  the 
city  of  Yenice,  but  in  the  wholc  territor>'  of  the  repub- 
lic, particularly  at  Yicenza  and  Treyiso,  and  it  does  not 
appear  that  the  goyeinment  eycz  interfercd  with  its 
lY.— Y  Y 


peaoeful  derelopment.  It  is  only  after  1542  that,  at  the 
instigation  of  Romę,  the  Protestanta  of  the  Yenetian 
republic  began  to  experience  serious  difiiculties.  Al- 
though  yery  numerous,  they  had  not  tiU  then  organized 
themselyes  iuto  a  aodety.  They  were  obliged  to  ob- 
senre  the  greatest  caution  and  secrecy.  They  were 
without  a  leAder,  and,  besides,  there  were  diiferences  of 
opinion  diyiding  them«  Balthasar  Altieri,  a  natiye  of 
Aquila,  and  secretary  of  the  English  ambassador,  suc- 
oeeded  in  uniting  them.  He  alao  wrote  to  Luther,  ask^ 
ing  him  to  obtain  for  the  Protestanta,  through  the  in- 
teroession  of  German  Protestant  princes,  permission  fnaa 
the  senate  to  act  according  to  the  dicUtes  of  their  eon- 
science,  at  least  until  the  coundl  should  decide  on  the 
pointa  of  diiference.  He  also  inyoked  the  mediation  of 
Luther  to  allay  the  manifold  diyisiona  which  weakened 
the  Protestanta  of  Yenetia.  As  Italy  had  intercourse 
with  Switzerland  aa  well  aa  with  Germany,  both  the  Ke- 
formed  and  the  Lutheran  reformationa  had  found  their 
adherenta;  and,  in  particular,  disputes  arose  about  the 
doctrine  of  the  Eucharist  Buoer  had  in  yain  endeay- 
ored  to  heal  these  difiiculties,  and  it  waa  now  expected 
that  Luther  would  be  morc  successful.  The  answer  of 
Luther  eipreased,  howeyer,  distrust  towards  the  Swiss 
and  their  doctrinea,  and  wamed  the  people  agaijist  the 
works  of  Bucer.  Melancthon  was  deeply  grie\'ed  at  the 
tonę  of  Luther'8  answer,  as  he  knew  the  Italians  to  be 
only  too  prone  to  indulge  in  diacussions  and  argumenta 
on  disputed  pointa  of  doctrine.  Probably  about  this 
time  secret  societies  began  to  be  formed  for  the  discos- 
sion  of  theological  doctrinea,  principally  conceming  the 
Trinity;  and  those  anti-Trinitarian  schemes  which,  in 
the  following  century,  separated  Italian  Protestantism 
from  that  of  other  countries,  originated  in  them.  About 
1542  the  principles  of  Protestantism  were  introduoed 
into  Istna  by  Paolo  Yergerio,  bishop  of  Gapo  d'  Istria, 
and  for  a  while  madę  rapid  progress,  which,  howeyer, 
waa  soon  interrupted.  Aller  opposing  Protestantism 
for  a  long  while,  particularly  in  Germany,  where  he 
was  for  a  while  ])apal  legate,  and  took  part  as  such  in 
the  Conference  ofWorms,  Yergerio  was,  by  the  reading 
of  Luther's  works,  which  he  had  procured  for  the  pur- 
pose of  refntuig  them,  brought  to  embrace  their  yiews. 
Hia  iirst  conyert  was  his  brother,  the  bishop  of  Pola. 
Both  now  labored  zealously,  and  with  great  success,  to 
eyangelize  their  dioceses,  until  in  1545  the  Inquisition 
fuially  interfered,  and  Yergerio  was  obliged  to  flee. 

Next  to  Yenice,  Ferrarą  became  one  of  the  central 
pointa  of  Protestantism.  It  was  introduced  there  by 
Renata,  wife  of  Hercules  II,  duke  of  Ferrara,  and  the 
danghter  of  Louis  XII,  king  of  France.  She  had  be- 
come  acquainted  with  the  doctrinea  of  the  Reformation 
through  Margaret  of  Nayarre,  and  when  she  came  to 
Ferrara  in  1527,  slie  soon  found  herself  surrounded  by 
persons  holding  the  same  yiews.  Some  were  scholara 
who  held  offices  in  the  uniyersity  or  at  coiirt,  while 
others  were  refugees  who,  persecuted  in  their  own  coun- 
try for  their  Protestant  opinions,  found  there  a  safe  ref- 
uge. Calyin  himself  spent  a  few  months  there  in  1536, 
and  eyer  after  remained  in  actiye  correspondence  with 
the  duchess;  also  Hubert  Languet,  who  distuiguish- 
ed  himself  in  the  history  of  the  French  Rcformation. 
Among  the  Italians  were  Flaminio  and  Calcaguini,  a 
friend  of  Contarini  and  Poole ;  Peter  Martyr  Yermigli, 
Aonio  Paleario,  and  Celio  Secundo  Curione,  who  won 
oyer  Peregrino  Morata,  the  tutor  of  the  duke*8  brother, 
to  Protestantism.  The  leamed  daughter  of  Morata, 
Olympia,  whose  letters  express  a  truły  eyangelical  spir- 
it,  waa  one  of  the  omaments  of  the  court,  and  the  eom- 
panion  of  the  young  daughter  of  Renata. 

From  Ferrara  probably  the  moyement  spread  oyer  to 
Modena,  which  belonged  also  to  the  duke  of  Ferrara. 
Already  in  1580  a  papai  rescript  commanded  the  Inqui- 
sition  to  use  eyer)'  exertioo  to  suppress  the  heretical 
tendency  among  the  monks  of  the  diocese  of  Ferrara. 
Yet  the  moyement  did  not  really  break  out  until  1540, 
when  the  leamed  Sicilian  Paolo  Jticci  came  to  Modena 


ITALY 


M6 


ITALT 


and  established  a  congregation  there.  Ladies  of  high 
rank  protected  the  new  doctrine,  especially  a  certain 
oounteaa  Kangone.  As  a  sign  of  the  epirit  of  opposition 
agaiiist  Romę,  we  may  mention  the  eatires  which  were 
publiflhed,  as,  for  instance,  a  letter  purporting  to  come 
from  Jesus  Christ,  and  worded  in  the  manner  of  the  pa- 
pai mandaments,  announcLng  that  our  Lord  contempla- 
ted  resuming  the  abaolutc  and  immediate  govemment 
of  the  Church  himself.  Cardinal  Morone,  bishop  of 
Modena,  although  evangelically  inclined  himself,  com- 
plained  much  in  his  letters  (1540-1544),  written  during 
his  stay  in  Germany  as  papai  legate,  of  the  progress  of 
Protestantism  in  his  dioceee,  and  said  he  was  told  that 
Modena  had  become  Lutheran.  But  with  the  news  of 
the  progress  of  the  Reformation  came  also  the  infonna- 
tion  that  the  differences  conceming  the  Eucharist  had 
arisen,  and  Bucer  wrote  to  the  Protestanta  of  Modena 
and  Bologna  to  heal  the  breach  (1541).  At  Bologna, 
the  Gerroans  who  came  there  to  attend  the  uniyersity 
gained  many  supportera  to  evangelical  riews;  the  most 
important  among  them  was  Giovanni  Mollio,  a  Minor- 
ite,  who  labored  long  as  a  preacher  and  professor.  The 
presence  of  the  StiĘ/f[k  ambassador,  John  of  Planitz,  who 
came  to  Bologna  with  Charles  Y,  gave  the  Protestants 
an  opportunity  to  present  a  reąuest  in  which  they  asked 
for  the  convocation  of  a  synod,  and  cxpre8sed  their  ven- 
eration  for  the  Grerman  princes  who  had  protected  Prot- 
estantism in  their  states.  They  hoped  by  the  council 
to  get  freed  from  the  yoke  of  Rorae,  and  to  obtain  rdig- 
ious  liberty ;  in  the  mean  time  they  wished  only  per- 
mission  to  use  their  Bibles  without  being  on  that  ac- 
count  considered  as  hereticSk  The  movement  was  prop- 
agated  also  through  other  parta  of  the  Papai  States,  at 
Faenza  and  Imola;  and  in  Romę  itself  there  were  many 
who  privaŁely  approyed  the  doctrines  of  Luther.  In 
Naplcs,  the  principlcs  of  the  Reformation  were  imported 
by  the  German  soldiars  in  1527,  and  they  appear  to  have 
takcn  root,  for  an  imperial  edict  was  issued  in  1536  to 
counteract  the  Protestant  tendencics  by  threatening  the 
sererest  puniahments  against  the  so-called  heretics. 
Yet  in  the  same  year  the  emperor  himself  sent  to  Na- 
ples  the  man  who  was  destined  to  play  the  most  impor- 
tant part  in  the  eyangelization  of  Italy.  Juan  Y^ddcz 
came  to  Naples  as  secretar)'  of  the  viceroy.  Position, 
education,  intelligencc,  and  character  comblned  to  make 
him  influentiaL  A  smali  but  eminent  circle  silently 
formed  around  him  for  reciprocal  ediiication  and  the 
promotion  of  an  inner,  living  Christianity.  Among 
them  were  count  Galeazzo  Caraccioli,  nephew  of  popc 
Paul  lY ;  the  martyr  Piętro  Camesecchi,  Roman  proto- 
notary;  Giulia  Gonzaga,  duchess  of  Trajetto;  Yittoria 
Colonno,  the  widów  of  Pescara;  and  the  noble  confessor 
Isabdla  Mauńca.  Yaldez  only  continued  his  evangel- 
izing  labors  for  four  years:  he  died  in  1540.  But  his 
work  was  continued  by  two  of  his  followera,  Piętro  Mar- 
tyr Yermigli  arid  Bemardino  Occhino.  The  former,  hav- 
uig  becn  sent  as  prior  to  an  Augustinian  conrent  at 
Naples,  read  some  of  Bucer's  and  Zwingle*s  works,  and, 
having  become  converted  to  their  doctrines,  he  began 
workiiig  in  the  same  direction  as  Yaldez.  He  delivered 
lecturcs  on  the  epistles  of  St.Paul,  which  were  attended 
not  only  by  his  own  monks,  but  alao  by  the  most  distin- 
gulshed  members  of  the  dergy  and  the  laity.  In  the 
mean  time  the  Capuchin  Occhino,  confessor  of  Paul  HI, 
generał  of  his  order,  and  one  of  the  most  eminent  men 
of  the  Church  at  the  time,  was  in\ńted  to  preach  the 
Lent  sermons  at  Naples,  first  in  1536,  and  again  in  1539. 
An  attentive  reading  of  the  Bibie  had  already  caused 
him  to  rcgard  faith  as  the  only  means  of  salration ;  his 
intercourse  with  Yaldez  strengthened  him  still  more  in 
his  vie\v8;  he  began  preaching  justification  by  faith, 
and  gained  many  adherenta  by  his  fiery  cloquence.  Al- 
though nonę  of  these  men  thought  as  yet  to  scparate 
from  the  Church  of  Romę,  they  were  soon  looked  upon 
with  suspicion.  The  Thcatine  Cajetan,  friend  of  the 
zealot  CarafTa,  was  the  first  to  cali  attention  to  them. 
Yermigli  was  summoned  to  appear,  and  to  justify  him- 


self, but  was  8aved  from  any  annoyance  thk  time  bj  tbe 
interference  of  sereral  cardinals.  Soon  after,  haviiif; 
been  at  Naples  for  about  three  years,  he  demandfid  IUm 
recall;  and  having  been  appointed  prior  at  Luoca.he 
began  to  labor  for  the  cvangclizaŁion  of  thia  new  field. 
New  persecutions  iinally  decided  him  to  aeparate  openly 
from  the  Church  of  Romę,  and  to  flee  the  country  for 
safety.  Three  of  his  most  intimate  disciples  accompa* 
nied  him :  Paolo  Lacisio,  afterwaids  profenor  at  Stras- 
burg, Theodosio  Trebellio,  and  G  iulio  Terenziana  Eigh- 
teen  others  followed  him  soon  afler;  among  them  Cdso 
Martinengho,  who  died  as  pastor  of  the  Itslian  congre- 
gation  at  Geneva;  Em.  Tremellio,  who,  after  yarious  vi- 
cissitudes,  became  professor  of  Hebrew  at  the  Academy 
of  Sedan,  and  H.  Zanchi,  who  occupied  a  distinguiahed 
place  among  the  most  eminent  theologians  of  Gennany. 
At  Florence  Yermigli  met  with  Occhino,  who,  stimnlated 
by  his  example,  alm  sacrificed  his  poation,  and  lelt  Ita- 
ly. Another  champion  of  the  Reformation,  the  leanied 
Celio  Secmido  Curione,  replaced  for  a  while  Martyr  in 
the  congregation  at  Lucca,  and  afterwards  labored  at 
yarious  places,  until  hc  also  was  obliged  to  eeek  aafety 
in  fłight,  and  went  to  Switzerland. 

Thus  the  moyement  had  become  generał  throagfaoiii 
Italy.    Many  admitted  that  no  reforms  were  to  be  ex- 
pected  from  the  Church  or  ita  hierarchy,  and  aeparatcsd 
from  it,  some  silently,  others  openly ;  the  latter  indined 
more  and  more  to  a  union  with  the  Protestanta  of  Ger- 
many and  Smtzerland.    Still  a  laige  number  letained 
the  hope  that  the  Church  itself  would  make  the  neoee- 
sary  reforma,  dther  by  the  long-wished-for  coimctl,  or 
by  other  conoessions.    The  eyangelical  tendendea  finał- 
ly  acquired  such  influence,  eyen  among  the  deigy,  that 
pope  Paul  III  thought  it  best  to  make  apparently  aome 
concessions;  he  appointed  Contarini,  Sadolet,  Poole,  and 
Frcgoso  (but  at  the  same  time  also  Caraffa),  members 
of  the  college  of  cardinals.    As  a  prdiminary  atcp  to- 
wards  the  com-ocation  of  a  cound],he  fonncd  them,  to- 
gether  with  some  other  prelates,  into  a  congregation, 
with  the  mission  of  drawing  up  a  project  of  the  refonns 
most  needed.     Soon,  howeyer,  the  uncomproraising  op- 
ponents  of  all  reformatory  roeasuies  gained  the  asoend- 
ency  with  the  pope,  and  it  was  resolyed  to  put  down 
the  reformatory  moyement  at  any  price.     A  anpetior 
tribunal  of  the  Inqui8ition  was  established  at  Romc^ 
with  fuli  powQr  of  lite  and  death  in  all  cascs  conoenuog 
religion,  and  acting  with  the  same  aeyerity  against  all, 
without  distinction  of  rank  or  person.     The  buli  esiab- 
lishing  the  new  Congregation  of  the  Holy  Ofilce  was  is- 
sued July  21, 1542.     It  waa  composed  of  six  cardinals, 
with  Carafia  at  their  head.    They  were  authorized  to 
appoint  enyoya,  with  fuli  power  to  act  for  them  in  the 
different  proyinces.    The  popc  alone  had  the  power  of 
pardoning  those  they  had  condemned.     The  new  inad- 
tution  was  soon  adopted  in  Tuacany,  Milan,  and  Napleć; 
all  the  Italian  statea  gaye  it  the  neocssary  aupfMrt. 
Yenicc  itself  was  unable  to  resist  its  introduction,thougli 
here  ky  judges  were  joincd  to  the  inąui^tom    Booki 
were  alw  subjected  to  the  judgment  of  the  Inąaisitioa; 
afler  1543  no  book  was  permitted  to  be  published  with- 
out its  sanction,  and  soon  there  appeared  lista  of  fbrind- 
den  books.    Next  to  the  Inquisition,  the  Council  of 
Trent  proyed  a  hea^y  blow  to  Italian  Protesiaotism. 
Many  who  were  wavering  or  laeked  courage  were  in- 
duced  to  return  to  the  old  fold;  many  others  left  their 
natiye  land  for  safety,  and  a  great  number  became  mar- 
tyrs  to  their  faith  in  dungeons  or  at  the  atake.    Romę 
gaye  the  signal  of  most.  of  the  peraecutions  which  the 
Protestants  suflered  in  Italy.     Caraflfa  had  spies  erery- 
where.   Among  the  first  who  were  obliged  to  seek  safety 
in  flight  were  Occhino  and  Yermigli.   The  congregatioa 
which  had  been  established  by  them  and  Yaldez  at  Na- 
pies  was  subjected  to  aeyere  attacks  as  soon  as  the  lat^ 
ter  was  dead ;  many  of  its  members  gaye  way  imder 
the  persccution,  and  the  others  were  d>liged  to  use  the 
utmost  secrecy.    Gioyanni  Mollio,  of 3IontaIcino,  a  Prua- 
ciscan,  still  officiated  among  them  for  aome  timą  but  lae 


TTALT 


101 


ITALY 


abo  W18  obliged  to  leaye  Naples  in  1643.  An  Augus- 
tinian  from  Sicily,  Lorenzo  Romano,  subflequently  shared 
the  same  fate,  and  finally  became  reconciled  with  Romę. 

The  oongregation  founded  at  Lacca  by  Peter  Yermigli 
met  with  the  same  fate.  Romę  compellcd  the  senate  in 
1545  to  isBoe  serere  cdicts  against  the  Protestanta,  who 
here  alao  submitted  to  outward  cx>nfonnity,  and  by  so 
doing  lost  the  spirit  which  had  animated  them,  so  that 
when  the  Inquińtion  was  really  established  among  them 
the  greater  number  became  reoonciled  to  the  Church. 
Many,  however,  reaisted  to  the  last,  and  a  number  of 
prominent  dtizens  lelt  for  Geneya,  Beme,  Lyon,  and 
other  placea.    See  Inqui8ition. 

The  countess  of  Ferrara  was  no  longer  able  to  protect 
her  fellow-Protestantfl.  A  papai  decree  oommanded  that 
all  auspidous  peisons  should  be  examined;  imprison- 
ment,  baniahment,  death,  or,  at  best,  ilight,  was  the  usual 
fiite  of  the  aocused.  Fannio,  of  Faenza,  fell  a  martyr  to 
his  faith.  Renata  herself  was  much  persecuted  by  her 
husbandfbut  remained  Steadfast,  and  after  her  husband'8 
death  retired  to  France,  where  she  showed  herself  a 
oourageous  protector  of  the  Protestants.  All  Italy  was 
awed  into  obedience  by  the  Inąuisition.  The  prisons 
at  Romę  were  iilled  with  prisoners  brought  from  all 
paits  of  Italy.  MoIHo,  having  retumed  from  Naples  to 
Bologna,  was  taken,  brought  to  Romę,  and  executed. 
The  Gospel  had  madę  great  progress  among  the  Fran- 
ciscans,  cspecially  in  Upper  Italy ;  a  large  number  of 
them  were  imprisoned,  others  escaped,  and  most  of  them 
were  compelled  to  recant.  The  persecutiou  became  still 
morę  riolent  when  Caraffa  himself,  aged  seventy-nine 
years,  ascended  the  papai  throne  in  1555  nnder  the  name 
of  Fani  IV.  To  purify  and  restore  the  Church  was  his 
chief  aim,  and,  in  order  to  attain  thi6,he  was  most  zeal- 
ous  in  the  persecution  of  all  unbelieyers  and  heretics. 
He  spared  nonę — ^not  eyen  the  leaders  of  the  moderate 
reform  party.  The  most  distingnished  of  these  (Con- 
taiini  being  dead),  cardinal  Moronc,  remained  a  prison- 
er  until  (he  pope's  death,  in  the  castle  of  St.  Angelo. 
Bbhop  Foscarari,  of  Modena,  and  San  Fellce,  of  Cava, 
were  also  arrested,  while  cardinal  Poole  was  summoned 
to  come  from  England  to  jnstify  himself.  Among  the 
chief  points  of  acciisation  against  Morone  were  that  he 
dottbted  the  correctness  of  the  decisions  of  the  Council 
of  Trent,  e»peciaUy  in  regard  to  justification ;  that  he 
rejected  the  effidency  of  good  works,  and  adyised  his 
hóiiers  to  trust  only  in  the  redeeming  sacrifice  of  Christ. 
The  first  martyr  in  the  reign  of  Paul  IV  was  Pomponio 
AJgieri,  who  had  labored  faithfully  for  the  propagation 
of  erangelical  views  at  Padua;  he  died  courageously  at 
the  stake.  Under  Pius  IV,  the  Inquisition  did  not  re- 
lent  in  its  work.  He  was  himself  present  at  an  auto- 
cla-fe  at  which  I^doyico  Pascali,  a  minister  of  the  Wal- 
denses  of  Calabria,  was  executed.  When  the  Domini- 
can  Ghislieri,  former  preddent  of  ihe  Inquisition,  and  a 
worthy  disdple  of  Caraifa,  ascended  the  papai  throne  in 
1566,  under  the  name  of  Pius  V,  the  Inąuisition  entered 
a  new  era  of  prosperity.  He  accomplished  the  finał 
supprenion  of  Protestantism  in  Italy.  Prisoners  were 
aent  to  Romę  from  all  parta  of  Italy.  The  duke  of  Flor- 
ence  himself  sent  there,  as  his  peace-ofTering,  the  emi- 
nent  apostolical  protonotary,  Piętro  Camesecchi,  whom 
hia  Icaming,  piety,  and  position  had  hcretofore  protect- 
edf  and  who  now  became  a  martyr.  The  same  fate  be- 
fel  Antonio  del  Pagliarici  (Aonio  Paleario),  who,  as  pro- 
feasor  of  rhetoric  at  Sienna,  Lucca,  and  Milan,  had  ac- 
qaired  uniyersal  reputation,  and  who  is  generally  con- 
aidered  as  the  author  of  the  treatise  Dtł  Bewfcio  di 
Chruto,  a  tnily  eyangelical  work,  which,  by  its  elear 
expodtion  of  the  doctrine  orjustification  by  faith,  gain- 
ed  many  adherenta  to  Protcstantism. 

The  numerous  Protestanta  of  Ycnetia  also  experienced 
tbe  ciTects  of  the  papai  persecution,  althongh  the  rcpnb- 
lic  rensted  the  Inquidtion,  and  sought  to  countcract  it 
by  a  number  of  decrees.  Already,  in  1542,  the  papai 
nundo  Della  Casa  procured  the  arrest  of  a  priest,Giulio 
MiUmeae,  and,  soon  after,  that  of  the  proyincial  of  the 


Minorites,  Baldo  Łupetino.  The  former,  howcyer,  suc- 
ceeded  in  making  good  his  escape.  In  1546  pope  Paul 
III  gaye  a  fresh  impulse  to  the  persecutions,  and  many 
fled  the  countrj',  some  recanted,  and  others  were  im- 
prisoned for  Iłfe.  The  persecution  was  still  more  vio- 
lent  m  the  neighborhood  of  Yenice  than  in  the  city  it- 
self.  The  bisfaop  of  Bergamo  himself,  Soranzo,  was 
obliged  to  go  to  Romę  to  give  an  account  of  his  faith, 
and  was  imprisonecL  A  few  only  succeeded  in  hiding 
themselres  in  the  midst  of  the  greatest  dangers.  Alti- 
eri,  who  had  so  often  obtained  protection  for  the  Italian 
Protestanta  from  the  princes  forming  the  I^ague  of 
Smalcald,  was  at  last  in  danger  himself,  and,  afler  many 
escapes,  died  poor  in  the  neighborhood  of  Brescia  in 
1550.  After  1557,  forcigners  who  yisited  Venice  for 
study  or  commerce  receired,  howerer,  some  degree  of 
protection.  This  encouraged  the  native  Protestanta, 
who  called  a  minister,  and  again  formed  a  congregation 
in  priyate.  They  were  soon  betrayed,  and  most  of  them 
imprisoned.  The  senate  now  for  the  first  time  consent^ 
ed  that  their  offence  should  be  punished  by  death.  They 
were  not  bumt,  howerer,  but  thrown  iiito  the  sea  at 
night  Baldo  Łupetino  was  among  these.  The  de- 
stniction  of  the  little  church  of  the  Waldenses,  who, 
sińce  the  end  of  the  14 th  century,  had  settled  at  St 
Pisto  and  Montalto,  in  Calabria,  is  one  of  the  saddest 
episodes  of  the  sad  history  of  Italian  Protestantism. 
The  other  eyangelical  communities  of  Locamo,  etc.,  met 
with  the  same  fate. 

(8.)  Church  History  from  the  Suppresnon  oftke  Refor- 
małion  untU  the  present  Day, — Throughout  the  16th, 
I7th,  and  18th  centuries  Italy  remained  dismembered 
into  a  number  of  smali  states,  which  preyented  the  peo- 
ple  from  becoming  one  Consolidated  nation.  Its  eccle- 
siastical  history  dnring  this  period  is  as  unimportant 
as  the  political.  Only  once  an  aera  of  ecclesiastical  re- 
forma appearcd  to  dawn,  when  Leopold,  grand-duke  of 
Tuscany,  brother  of  emperor  Joseph  II,  attempted,  by 
the  agcncy  of  Scipio  Ricci,  bishop  of  Pistoia  and  Prato, 
to  reform  the  polity  of  the  Church.  At  a  synod  of  his 
clergy  which  Ricci  asscmbled  at  Pistoia  (1786),  and 
which  was  largely  attended,  the  principles  of  the  Galli- 
can  Church  and  of  the  most  liberał  Jansenism  were 
adopted ;  the  prerogatires  claimed  by  the  popes,  and,  in 
particular,  the  claim  of  infallibility,  were  seyerely  de- 
nounced,  many  superstitious  ceremonies  were  abolished, 
and  it  was  determincd  that  public  worship  should  be 
conducted  in  the  language  of  the  people,  and  that  the 
Scriptures  should  be  circidated  among  them.  But  these 
enactments  were  opposed  by  most  of  the  bishops  of  Tus- 
cany, and  when  Leopold  ascended  the  imperial  throne 
of  Austria,  the  hierarchy  obtained  a  complete  yictory. 
The  temtorial  changes  whićh  the  French  republic  and 
the  first  Napoleon  introduced  in  Italy  were  not  of  long 
duration,  but  the  reyolutionary  ideas  which  during  this 
period  had  been  kindled  in  the  minds  of  many  Italians 
suryiyed.  A  secret  society,  the  Cai-ionari,  which  at 
first  aimed  at  the  introducdon  of  a  uniyersal  republic, 
but  subsequently  had  the  establishment  of  a  national 
union  and  the  introduction  of  liberał  reforms,  and,  in 
particular,  religious  toleration,  for  its  chief  objcct,  spread 
with  great  rapidity  throughout  the  peninsida,  and  be- 
came the  rałlying-point  for  all  the  educated  Italians 
who  wished  to  break  the  omnipotent  influence  of  the 
Church  upon  the  political  and  sociał  afTairs  of  the  peo- 
ple. The  Carhonari  succeeded  in  1821  in  compeUing 
the  goyemment  of  the  Two  Sicilies  to  grant  a  liberał 
con8titution,but  an  armed  interyeution  of  the  Austrians 
soon  restored  the  absolute  power  of  the  king  and  the 
despotic  influence  of  the  Church.  It  was,  howeyer,  ap- 
parent  that  the  educated  classes  of  Italy  only  yielded  to 
brutal  foree,  and  that  the  desire  to  emandpate  the  peo- 
ple from  the  influence  of  the  priests,  and,  in  particular, 
from  the  temporal  nde  of  the  popes,  became  stronger 
every  year.  In  1830  a  new  reyolution  broke  out  in  the 
papai  proyinces,  and  within  a  fortnight  four  fiflhs  of  the 
States  of  the  Church  had  madę  themsełyes  free  from ' 


ITALY 


708 


ITALY 


papai  Tnle,  and  constitated  themselYes  an  independent 
sŁate.  Again  it  required  the  armed  interventłon  of  Aus- 
tria to  arrest  the  succeas  of  the  liberał  and  anti-papal 
movement  throughout  Italy.  The  acceseion  to  the 
throne  of  Sardinia  of  Charles  Albert  in  1831  gaye,  how- 
ever,  to  Italy  one  prince  who  openly  adhered  to  the  pro- 
gramme  of  the  national  liberał  part>%  and  therefore 
awakcned  great  hopes  for  the  futurę.  In  the  same  year 
Mazzini  organized  the  secret  society  Young  Italy,  which 
repcatedly  attempted  insurrections  for  the  purpose  of 
establishing  an  Italian  republic  Ali  these  attempts 
were  unsucoessful,  but  they  greatly  increased  the  breach 
between  the  Italian  people  and  the  Church  of  Romę. 
The  liberał  priest  Y.  Gioberti,  in  his  work  on  the  morał 
and  potitical  primacy  of  the  Italians  (1843),  endeayored 
to  prove  that  a  reconciliation  between  the  national  lib- 
erał party  and  a  reformed  papacy  was  possible,  and  that 
the  bcst  way  for  securing  a  politicał  regeneration  of  It- 
aly was  the  establishment  of  a  confederation  of  the  sey- 
eral  states,  with  a  liberał  pope  at  its  head.  When,  in 
1846,  Gregory  XVI  died,  and  the  new  pope,  Pius  IX, 
seemed  to  adopt  some  of  the  yiews  of  Gioberti,  the  be- 
lief  in  the  practicability  of  the  scheme  found  many  ad- 
herents  among  the  liberał  party,  but  the  large  body  of 
the  ultramontane  party  looked  upon  them  with  distruat, 
and  cven  regarded  many  steps  taken  by  the  new  pope 
as  a  mistaken  policy. 

The  reyolutionary  moyements  of  1848  at  flrst  appear- 
ed  to  have  a  great  influence  upon  the  religious  aJBfairB 
of  the  country.  In  Korne  a  Constituent  Assembly  was 
callcd,  which  on  Feb.  5, 1849,  abolished  the  temporal  pow- 
er  of  the  pope,  and  proclaimed  the  Roman  republic.  The 
greatest  enemies  of  the  papacy  in  Italy,  Mazzini  and 
Garibaldi,  were  at  the  head  of  the  repubUc,  which,  how- 
ever,  only  a  few  months  latcr  (Junc  4),  was  struck  down 
by  the  French  troops,  which  Louis  Napoleon,  the  presi- 
dent  of  the  French  republic,  had  sent  there  for  the  res- 
toration  of  the  temporal  power.  But,  although  the  rev- 
olutionary  roorements,  which,  if  successful,  would  have 
abolished  throughout  Italy  the  prerogatiyes  of  the 
Church  of  Romę,  were  unsuccessfuł,  one  of  the  state 
goyemments,  Sardinia,  remained  fayorable  to  the  cause 
of  national  union  and  of  a  liberał  legislation  in  the  proy- 
ince  of  Church  afifairs.  The  Legislature,  in  1850,  adopted 
liberał  laws,  introduced  by  the  minister  Siccardi  (hence 
called  the  Siccardian  laws),  which  proyided,  1,  that  alł 
civil  suits  must  be  decided  in  ciyił  courts  and  according 
to  the  common  law ;  2,  that  all  priests  in  criminał  casea 
be  subject  to  the  jorisdiction  of  the  state;  8,  that  crim- 
inals  may  be  arrested  in  churches  and  other  sacred 
places.  When  archblshop  Franzoni,  of  Turin,  resisted 
the  new  law  of  the  state,  he  was  prompŁly  arrested ;  and 
when  he  refused  the  sacraments  of  the  Church  to  the 
dying  minister  Santa  Rosa,  he  was  deposed  from  his  of- 
fice  (Sept.  26, 1850)  and  exiłed.  The  archbisbop  of  Cag- 
łiari  shared  liis  fate.  In  the  tłireatening  allocutions  of 
the  pope  (the  first  dated  Noy.  1, 1850),  the  goyemment 
replied  by  seąuestratbig  the  reyenues  of  the  archbishop. 
In  conseąuence  of  the  yiolent  opposition  madę  to  the 
goyemment  by  the  monks,the  ministry  of  Cayour  (1852- 
1858),  the  greatest  Italian  statesman  of  modem  times, 
issued  the  stringent  laws  of  March  2,  1855,  by  which 
the  couycnta  of  aU  monks  who  did  not  deyote  them- 
sclyes  to  preaching,  to  instmction,  or  to  the  nursing  of 
the  sick  were  suppressed  (331  out  of  605).  The  papai 
anathema  against  the  authors  of  these  laws  remained 
without  the  least  eflfcct.  On  the  contrary,  when  the 
king  of  Sardinia,  in  consequence  of  the  war  against  Aus- 
tria and  the  successful  reyolutions  in  central  and  south- 
cro  Italy,  imited  alł  the  proyinces  of  Italy,  w^ith  the  only 
csception  of  a  part  of  the  papai  territoiy  and  of  Yenc- 
Łia,iuto  the  kingdom  of  Italy,  the  liberał  Sardinian  laws 
were  not  only  retaiued,  but  madę  morę  stringent.  No- 
body  seemed  to  care  about  tho  Church  laws  against 
those  who  spoliated  the  patrimony  of  SU  Peter  (the 
States  of  the  Church), and  on  Jan.  1, 1866,  the  obłigatory 
(^yił  mairiage  was  introduced.     The  goyemment  and 


the  Parliament  were  fuHy  agieed  in  the  wish  to  ooiii* 
plete,  as  soon  as  possible,  the  muty  of  Italy,  by  the  an- 
nexation  of  Yenetia  and  the  remainder  of  the  papai  ta- 
ritofy,  inclusiye  of  the  dty  of  Romę.  In  accardanoe 
with  the  plan  of  Cayour,  the  Parliament,  as  eariy  as 
1861,  almost  unanimoualy  dedared  in  fayor  of  making 
Romę  the  capital  of  Italy,  though  thęy  exprened  a  will- 
ingneas  to  giye  to  the  pope  fuli  guarantees  for  the  firee 
and  independent  esercise  of  his  eocłesiastical  functiona. 
The  moyementB  of  Garibaldi  showed  that  the  inhabi- 
tants  of  the  papai  proyinces  alone,  aided  by  yolimteets 
from  other  parts  of  Italy,  would  hare  been  fulły  able  to 
depose  the  papai  goyemment,  and  untte  the  territory 
with  the  kingdom  of  Italy ;  and  it  required  the  presenoe 
of  a  large  French  army  in  Romę  to  maintain  the  de- 
tested  papai  rułe.  Yenetia  was  obtained  as  a  resolc  of 
the  war  of  1866,  but  the  espedition  of  Garibaldi  against 
Romę  in  1867  led  to  a  new  occi^Mtion  of  the  paiMd  ter- 
ritoiy by  a  French  aimy. 

The  wretched  financial  oondłtion  of  Italy,  which  had 
become  morę  threatening  than  ever  by  the  war  of  1866, 
and  the  September  conyention  of  1864,  by  which  the 
goyemment  engaged  to  assume  a  part  of  the  papai  debt, 
compelłed  the  mlmstiy  in  1867  to  bring  in  a  bill  for  the 
confiscation  of  the  property  of  the  Church.  The  aab- 
ject  had  been  under  deliberation  sińce  1865,  when  a  per- 
sonal  ooirespondenoe  took  place  between  the  pope  and 
the  king,  which  uiduoed  the  latter  to  make  to  the 
Church  a  few  concesńons.  Bat  the  sale  of  the  Church 
property,  though  for  a  time  delayed,  was  urgentły  de- 
manded  by  the  Parliament  and  public  opinion  aa  the 
only  cscape  from  a  generał  bankmptcy,  and  the  goyem- 
ment therefore  laid  a  bill  before  the  Parliament  which 
met  on  March  22, 1867 ;  but  the  committee  elected  by 
the  Parliament  rejected  the  project  of  the  goyemment 
as  too  compromising  and  not  sufficiently  radical,  and  in 
the  yery  first  article  of  its  own  draft  demanded  the  ab- 
ołition  of  all  monastic  institutiona,  and  the  confiacatioa 
of  the  whole  property  of  the  Church.  The  goyemment 
yielded  to  the  yiews  of  the  committee,  and,  aiter  serer- 
al  modifications  had  been  agreed  npon  by  the  goyem- 
ment and  the  Parliament,  both  chambers  adopted  the 
bill  for  tho  sale  of  the  Church  property  by  an  immenas 
majority  (the  lower  chamber,  on  July  27,  by  296  yotes 
against  41 ;  the  senate,  on  Aug.  1 2,  by  84  against  29).  The 
actual  sale  began  at  Florence  on  October  26, 1867,  though 
eyen  before  this  drails  on  the  reyenue  to  be  realized  by 
the  sale  had  been  issoed  to  the  amount  of  400  millioa 
francs.  The  new  ezcommunications  pronounoed  against 
all  buyers  of  Church  property  faiłed  to  haye  any  effert; 
the  goyemment  and  the  oyerwhelming  majority  of  both 
chambers  unwayeringly  pernsted  in  caTT^Hng  out  tiie 
new  layrs  conceming  the  Church  and  her  property. 

The  CEk;umenical  Councił  which  was  opened  by  the 
pope  at  Romę  on  Dec.  8, 1869,  was  miable  to  impnire 
the  influence  and  the  prospects  of  the  papacy  amoog 
the  Italians.  The  goyemment,  the  Parliament,  and  the 
people  at  large  repudiated  the  claims  of  the  oornidl 
morę  genendly  than  was  done  in  any  other  purely  Catb- 
ołic  country.  The  nataon  became  morę  impatient  than 
eyer  for  the  oyerthrow  of  the  temporal  soyeretgnty  of 
the  pope,  and  the  incorporation  of  his  statea  with  tbe 
kingdom ;  and  when,  in  1870,  the  Franco-German  war 
cauaed  the  withdrawal  of  the  French  troops  from  Romę, 
and  ułtimately  led  to  the  destraction  of  the  French  Em- 
pire, the  Italian  goyemment  oould  no  longcr  resist  the 
popular  pressure  for  the  annescation  of  the  papai  statea. 
In  September,  1870,  oount  Ponza  di  San  Martino  was 
sent  to  Romę,  and,  in  the  name  of  the  Italian  goyem- 
ment, proposed  to  the  pope  to  renoance  the  temporal 
ruIe  and  to  dissolye  his  army;  he  was,  in  this  case,  to 
retain  the  Leonine  part  of  Romę,  a  ciyil  list,  and  the 
right  of  dipiomatic  representation.  The  goyemment 
aiso  offered  to  guarantee  the  free  exerciae,  by  the  pope, 
the  bishops,  and  the  priests,  of  their  eocłesiastical  jurta- 
diction,  and  the  immnnity  of  all  cardinals  and  ambas- 
sadois.    When  the  pope  lejected  all  theaeoflenofc 


ITALT 


ł09 


ITALY 


promise,  oa  Sept.  11,  tbe  Italian  troops,  in  compliance 
with  nnmerous  petitions  from  the  subjecta  of  tbe  pope, 
entered  the  States  of  the  Church,  and  on  Sept.  20,  by 
the  occupation  of  the  city  of  Romę,  put  an  end  to  the 
temporal  power  of  the  pope.  A  notę  from  cardinal  An- 
tondli,  the  secretar}'  of  state,  to  the  foreign  govem- 
ment,  protested  against  the  act ;  and  the  bishops  and 
the  ultnmontane  party  in  all  the  countries  re-echoed 
the  protest,  and  many  piinces,  both  Catholic  and  Fkot- 
estant,  were  called  upon  to  interfere  and  to  restore  the 
pope  to  hia  throne.  The  pope  iasued  a  new  brief  of 
exoommunication,  in  which  he  said,  **  We  declare  to 
yoo,  venerable  brethren,  and  throagh  you  to  tbe  wbole 
Church,  that  all  those  (in  whatever  notable  dignity  they 
may  ahine)  who  hare  been  guilty  of  the  inyaston,  usur- 
patioD,  occupation  of  any  of  our  proyinces,  or  of  this 
holy  city,  or  of  auything  connected  therewith,  and  like- 
ińse  all  who  haye  commiasioned,  favored,  aided,  ooun- 
aelled,  adhered  to  them,  and  all  othera  who  promote  or 
carry  out  the  things  aforesaid,  onder  any  pretext  wbat- 
eyer,  and  in  any  manner  whateyer,  haye  incurred  the 
greater  €xcommmiication  (exoomnntmcatio  major^  and 
the  other  censures  and  penalties  which  haye  been  pro- 
Tided  in  the  holy  canona  of  the  apostolical  conatitutions 
and  the  decrees  of  the  oecumenical  councils,  in  partico- 
lar  that  of  Trent."*  Nonę  of  all  these  measures  produced 
the  leasŁ  elTecL  When  the  first  Parliament  of  all  Italy 
met,  the  king  declared, "  We  entered  Komę  in  yirtue  of 
tbe  national  right,  in  yirtue  of  the  compact  which  unites 
all  Italiana  to  one  nation.  We  shall  remain  there,  keep- 
ing  the  promises  which  we  haye  solemnly  giyen  to  our- 
aelyea ;  freedom  of  thi  Church,  entire  independence  of 
tbe  pope  in  the  eKercise  of  his  religious  functions,  and 
in  hla  relations  to  the  Catholic  Church."  Kone  of  the 
foieign  goyemments  interrupted  its  amicable  relations 
with  the  Italian  goyemmeut.  In  July,  1871,  the  goy- 
eminent  transferred  its  seat  to  Bome,  where,  in  spite  of 
all  the  papai  excommtmications,  it  reoeiyed  the  enthu- 
siaatic  applanse  of  a  large  majority  of  the  Italian  peo- 
ple,  and  where  it  was  at  onoe  followed  by  the  represent- 
atiyes  of  all  the  foreign  goyemments. 

Although  nearly  all  the  bishops  and  the  oyerwhelm- 
ing  majority  of  the  priests  showed  tbemselyes  as  parti- 
sans  of  the  papacy  in  its  struggle  against  the  goyem- 
ment  and  the  public  opiiiion  of  Italy,  the  idea  of  reform- 
ing  tbe  Church  by  rejecting  all  or  much  of  the  oorrup- 
tiona  which  had  crept  into  it  during  the  Middle  Ages 
and  in  modern  times,  and  by  reconciling  it  with  the 
ctyili2atton  of  the  19th  oentury,  fbund  morę  adherents 
among  the  priests  of  Italy  than  among  those  of  any 
other  country.  In  a  politacal  point  of  yiew,  the  reform- 
ers  desired  the  Church,  in  particular,  to  abandon  the 
temporal  nile  of  the  pope,  to  recognise  the  national 
unity  of  Italy,  and  to  aid  in  carrying  through  a  separ- 
ation  between  Church  and  State.  In  the  proyince  of 
religion  they  all  wished  to  restrict  the  power  of  the 
popes,  to  enlarge  that  of  the  bishops,  and  one  portion 
went  so  far  as  to  enter  into  amicable  relations  with  the 
High-Church  party  of  the  Church  of  England.  They 
had  an  organ,  the  Kxafninat/)re  of  Florence ;  and  as  eyen 
one  of  the  8ix  hundred  bishops  (cardinal  D*Andrea),  and 
the  Jesuit  Passaglia,  who  had  long  been  regarded  by  the 
ttltranontane  party  as  one  of  their  ablest  theologians, 
and  other  men  of  high  prominence,  declared  their  con- 
durenee  with  a  part  or  the  whole  of  the  reformatory 
piojectB,  there  seemed  to  be  good  reason  for  hoping  last- 
Ing  resttlts  from  the  moyement  Morę  recently,  the  re- 
fonnatory  moyement  in  Germany,  headed  by  Dr.  Dol- 
linger,  has  found  the  warmest  sympathy  among  the 
Italian  reformers. 

After  the  suppression  of  the  Reformation  in  tbe  16th 
century,  cruel  la>vs  madę  it  for  morę  than  two  hundred 
years  impossible  for  any  Italian  to  declare  himself  a 
I^otestant;  only  the  Waldenses  (q.  y.),  in  their  remote 
yalleya,  maintaiiied  with  difficulty,  and  amidst  great  per- 
aecations,  their  organization.  At  the  close  of  the  18th 
centoiy  the  yictońoua  French  republic  recognised  the 


human  rights  of  the  Waldenses,  and  proclaimed  relig- 
ious toleration;  but  the  restored  monarchies  reyired 
Bome  of  the  most  intolerant  laws,  and  eyen  the  Wal- 
denses were  placed  in  so  unbearable  a  position  that  it 
required  the  interyention  of  England  and  Prussia  to  se- 
cure  for  them  the  merest  toleration.  At  length  the  lib- 
erał constitution  of  1848  gaye  them  fuli  political  rights 
in  Sardinia;  they  were  allowed  to  step  forward  out  of 
their  seclusion  in  the  yalley,  and,  with  the  most  hearty 
sympathy  of  all  ftiends  of  religious  tolerarion,  opened  a 
chapel  in  the  capital  of  the  kingdom,  Turin.  In  the  re- 
mainder  of  Italy  the  persecution  of  the  Protestanta  con- 
tinued.  The  govemment  of  Tuscany,  though  by  no 
means  the  most  tyrannical  of  the  Italian  goyemments, 
startled  the  whole  ciyilized  world  by  its  cruci  measures 
against  the  Madiai  oouple,  against  count  Guicciaidini 
and  Doroinico  Ceochetti,  and  only  the  most  energetic 
remonstrances  of  the  foreign  powers  preyailed  upon  the 
grand-duke  to  change  the  penalty  of  imprisonment  into 
exile.  Finally,  in  1859,  the  establishment  of  the  king- 
dom of  Italy  gaye  to  the  Waldenses  the  liberty  of  ex- 
tending  their  eyangelistic  labors  to  all  parta  of  the  pe- 
ninsula.  They  soon  occupied  a  number  of  important 
places,  transferred  their  theological  seminary  to  Flor- 
ence, and  had  an  able  representatiye  in  the  Italian  Par- 
liament (the  Turin  banker  Malan).  Many  Itallans, 
howeyer,  who  were  eager  to  embrace  Protestant  yiews, 
did  not  share  all  the  yiews  of  the  Waldenses,  especially 
those  on  the  ministry  and  the  Church,  and,  after  the 
model  of  the  Plymouth  Brethren  in  England,  organized 
free  Christian  organizations.  Of  their  leadera,  professor 
Mazarella  and  count  Guicciardini  arc  the  best  known. 
Moreoyer,  a  number  of  missionaries  were  sent  out  by  tho 
Protestant  churches  of  the  United  States,  Great  Britain, 
and  other  countries,  who  laid  the  foundation  of  sereral 
other  Church  organizations.  Nearly  eyery  town  of  im- 
portance  has  thus  reoeired  the  nucleus  of  a  Protestant 
population.  In  some  places  the  fanaticism  of  the  priests 
caused  riots  against  Protestanta,  nonę  of  which  was  so 
bloody  as  that  in  Barletta  in  1866 ;  but  the  goyemment 
of  Italy,  and  the  immense  majority  of  the  Italian  Par- 
Uaments,  haye  secured  the  complete  triumph  of  the 
cause  of  religious  toleration. 

II.  Statiafics,  —  Nearly  the  whole  population  of  It- 
aly is  nominally  connected  with  the  Boman  Catholic 
Church.  The  total  population  of  the  kingdom  was  es- 
timated  in  1870  at  25.766,000;  of  whom  88,000  were 
Protestanta,  80,000  Jews,  and  2000  members  of  the 
Greek  Church.  PracticaUy  a  large  portion  of  the  pop- 
ulation is  no  longer  in  communion  with  the  Church  of 
Romę,  as  can  easiły  be  proyed  by  the  fact  that  the  goy- 
emment and  Parliament  haye  been  for  years  in  open 
confiict  with  Romę,  and  utterly  disregard  and  set  aside 
the  laws  of  the  Church ;  that  the  claims  of  the  pope 
haye  only  a  few  adyocates  in  the  Parliament,  and  that, 
in  particular.  the  radical  party,  with  men  like  Mazzini 
and  Garibaldi  at  their  head,  haye  openly  and  foimally 
renounced  the  religious  communion  with  Romę. 

According  to  the  Papai  Almanac  (A  ttnuario  Pontifico) 
for  1870,  the  coimtry  had,  exclusiye  of  Romę  and  of  the 
8ix  suburban  sees  (the  sees  of  the  cardinal  bishops),  Os- 
tia, Porto,  Palestrina,  Frascati,  Albano,  and  Sabina,  268 
diooeses,  which  were  distributed  among  the  formcr  Ital- 
ian States  as  follows : 


Areh- 

bbbop- 

rle». 

BUljo^ 

/£^|B>Jo. 

Naples 

States  of  tbe) 
Church.../ 

Sardinia 

Tascany 

86 
T 

6 

4 

80 

6T 
89 
19 

Venetla 

Lombardy.... 

Modena 

Parma 

Total 

2 

1 
1 

7 
4 
8 

47 

821 

Of  these  dioceses,  10  archbishopncs  and  66  bishoprics 
are  immediately  subject  to  the  pope,  and  without  con- 
nection  with  an  ecclesiastical  proyince,  while  87  arch- 
bishops  are  heads  of  ecclesiastical  proyinces,  containing, 
besides  them,  155  suflhigan  bishops.    The  dioceses  of 


FTALY 


710 


TTALY 


lUly,  in  point  of  territorial  extent,  are  smaller  than  in 
any  other  counŁiy ;  and  while  the  (nominally)  Catholic 
population  is  no  morę  than  one  eighth  of  the  Roman 
Catholic  population  of  the  world,  it  haa  morę  than  one 
fourth  of  all  the  diooese&  Thus  the  Italian  bishopa 
have  an  undue  preponderance  at  evexy  oouncil;  and  as 
they  gencrally  hołd  the  moat  ultramontane  view8,  they 
have  considerably  contributed  to  the  succeas  of  ultra 
papai  theories  within  the  Catholic  Church.  The  gov- 
emment  of  Italy  haa  expreaBed  a  wish  to  reduce  the 
number  of  diooeses,  and  a  coiiaiderable  number  has  there- 
fore  been  kept  vacant  sińce  the  establishment  of  the 
kingdom. 

The  secular  clergy  in  1866  had  about  115,000  mem- 
bers,  or  about  1  to  every  246  inhabitants,  showing  a  rel- 
atiyely  larger  number  of  priests  than  in  any  other  coun- 
try of  the  world.  Besides  the  secular  clergy,  Italy  had 
in  18G0  morę  than  60,000  monks  in  2050  establishments, 
and  about  80,000  nuns  in  302  establishments.  The 
most  numerous  among  the  monastic  orders  are  the  Fran- 
ciscan  monks,  with  1227  houaes;  the  Dominicans,  with 
140;  the  Augustinians,  with  138;  the  Carmelites,  with 
125 ;  the  Jesuits,  with  57 ;  the  Brothers  of  Charity,  with 
49 ;  the  Redemptorists,  with  81 ;  the  Franciscaii  nuns, 
with  89 ;  the  SLsters  of  Charity,  with  50.  The  conrents 
were  formerly  very  rich,  but  a  large  portion  of  their 
property  was  confiscated  during  the  French  inyasion  at 
the  end  of  the  18th  and  the  beginning  of  the  19th  cen- 
tur>%  Morę  recently  the  govemment  of  Italy  has  sup- 
pressed  a  large  portion  of  all  the  conyents,  and  confis- 
cated their  property.  In  1866,  the  total  number  of  con- 
yents suppressed  amounted  to  oyer  2000,  with  88,000 
inroatcs ;  of  these,  1252,  with  20,228  inmates,  belonged 
to  the  mcndicant  orders,  and  1162,  with  18,168  inmates, 
were  of  other  orders. 

Popular  instruction,  which  until  recently  was  chiefly 
in  the  hands  of  monks  and  nuns,  is,  aocording  to  official 
accounts,  in  a  very  Iow  condition.  In  1862,  of  the  entire 
małe  population,  only  2,620,269  were  able  to  rearl;  of 
the  female,  only  1,268,186;  17,000,000  persona  were  un- 
able  to  read  and  write.  Of  eyery  1000  persons,  there 
were,  unable  to  read — in  Lombardy,  599 ;  in  Piedmont, 
603 ;  in  Tuscany,  773 ;  in  Modena,  799 ;  in  the  Bomagna, 
802 ;  in  Parma,  818 ;  in  the  Marca,  851 ;  in  Umbria,  858 ; 
in  Naples,  880;  in  Sicily,  902;  in  Sardinia,  911.  Since 
the  establishment  of  the  kingdom  of  Italy  pubMc  in- 
struction has  madę  great  progreas.  From  1860  to  1863 
the  number  of  małe  teachers  increaaed  from  12,475  to 
17,604;  that  of  female  teacheis  from  6631  to  13,817. 
The  number  of  educational  institutions  amounted  in 
1864  to  31,675,  which  were  attended  by  1,681,296  chil- 
dren.  In  the  same  year  Italy  had  452  gymnasia,  with 
22,769  pupils;  123  lycea,  with  864  pupils;  and  344  sem- 
inaries,  with  12,923  pupils.  There  were  20  uniyersities, 
16  of  which  were  state  and  6  free.  Six  haye  been  de- 
dared  by  the  goyemment  to  be  first-class  uniyersiUes : 
Turin,  Payia,  Bologna,  Florence,  Naples,  and  Palermo. 
The  number  of  studenta  had  in  1866  decreased  to  8148, 
from  15,668  in  1862. 

The  Church  of  the  Waldenses  is  the  only  fully  organ- 
ized  Protestant  Church  in  Italy.  It  conaists  of  16  com- 
munities,  with  a  membership  of  22,000.  Its  goyeming 
body  is  called  the  Table.  The  Theological  School  in 
Florence  had  in  1869  3  professors  (Reyel,  Gcymonat,  and 
De  SanctLs)  and  14  studenta,  4  of  whom  were  formerly 
Catholic  priests.  According  to  the  report  madę  to  the 
Waldensian  Synod  in  1866,  eyangelistic  work  was  car- 
ried  on  by  this  Church  at  23  principal  stations,  which 
were  thus  distributed :  7  in  Piedmont,  3  in  Lombardy, 
1  in  Emilia,  3  in  Liguria,  4  in  Tuscany,  1  in  the  dis- 
trict  of  Naples,  1  in  Sicily,  1  in  the  Isle  of  Elba,  and  2  in 
France  for  Italians.  To  work  these  stations  it  employ- 
ed  19  pastors,  11  eyangelists,  and  29  teachers— in  all,  59 
agents.  The  number  of  attendants  upon  public  wor- 
ship  was  reckoned  at  from  2000  to  2600;  that  of  oom- 
municants  at  1095.  At  the  Synod  of  1869  the  number 
of  stations  was  announced  as  amounting  to  36.  with  21 


pastors,  16  eyangelists^  and  58  teachers- -in  aS,  95 
agenta.  During  these  three  yeaia  the  number  of  coo- 
yerts  had  increaaed  900 ;  fayorable  reporta  were,  in  par- 
ticular,  madę  of  the  congregations  in  Pignóol,  Tu- 
rin, Yenice  (in  which  city  the  oongregation  numbcrcd 
239  members),  liTomo,  where  the  school  was  attended 
by  300  children,  and  from  Heasina,  where  the  rapidly 
increasing  number  of  attendants  at  diyine  worabip  mide 
it  neoeasary  for  the  oongregation  to  rent  three  timcs  in 
the  oourse  of  a  single  week  larger  balia.  The  Nioe  For- 
eigners*  Eyangelization  Committee  employed  in  1867 
16  agenta,  who  were  staUoned  at  Barktta,  Conoo,  Milan, 
Fara,  Florence,  Piyerone,  Sardinia,  and  Sondrio.  The 
salaries  of  six  of  the  eyangelists  are  paid  by  the  £van- 
gelical  Continental  Society  of  London.  The  toŁal  re- 
oeipta  of  the  committee,  indoding  the  money  receiyed 
from  the  Eyangelical  Continental  Society,  were  jClSiS; 
the  expenditure8  £1180.  The  American  and  Fnreign 
Christian  Union  supports  morę  than  40  agents  in  Ital?. 
A  Theological  Training  School  has  been  establisbed  by 
the  society  at  Milan,  where  in  1866  the  Rey.  Mr.  Oark, 
assisted  by  4  Italian  professors,  instructed  19  theolofgical 
students,  superintended  churclies  in  8  different  placci, 
and  sustained  from  10  to  20  colpurteiirs  in  North  Italy. 
In  1870  the  training  school  was  transfored  io  the  cait 
of  a  Committee  of  Eyangelization  appointcd  by  the 
Free  Christian  Church  of  Italy.  This  body  was  foi^ 
mally  organized  at  Milan  in  June,  1870,  and  conasts  of 
a  considerable  number  of  eyangelical  charchea,  two 
thirds  of  which  (more  than  20)  reprcscnt  the  reaults  of 
the  preyious  expenditure  and  labor  of  thia  aodety. 
These  churches  and  their  pastors  are  still  sustained  bf 
the  board.  Another  missionary  of  the  aodety  aupeiin- 
tended  at  Sarzana  eyangelistic  operations  in  aome  10 
different  places.  The  Wesleyan  Missionary  Society  had 
in  1867  seyeral  agents  in  Italy  under  the  superintcnd- 
ence  of  the  Rey.  H.  J.  Piggott  at  Padua.  A  Bagged 
School,  supported  by  the  society  in  this  city,  was  regu- 
larly  attended  by  40  lads.  Florence  also  had  prosperoas 
schools ;  there  were  increasing  congregations  at  Cremo- 
na,  Parma,  Mezzano  Inferiore  (15  miles  from  Parma), 
and  at  Naples ;  and  elTorts,  with  some  success,  had  been 
madę  in  other  places.  The  missionaries  and  oihcr 
agents  were  sustained  at  a  cost  of  about  $20,0001  The 
Sootch  Free  Chureh  had  seyeral  ministers  settled  in  ya- 
rious  parta  of  Italy,  who  were  engaged,  in  additSon  to 
their  regular  labors  among  their  countrymen,  in  tupet- 
intending  the  work  of  Bibie  distribution,  In  additioo 
to  these  Protestant  -agendes,  free  eyangelical  Italisn 
churches  were  to  be  found  in  seyeral  parts,  as  in  Genoa, 
Florence,  etc,  all  of  them  being  more  or  leaa  allied  with 
the  Plymouth  Brethren. 

School-work  is  carried  on  in  connection  with  most  of 
the  churches  and  stations.  In  Naples  there  were  in  1868 
4  schools,  with  14  teachers  and  873  children,  undez  tbe 
direction  of  a  special  committee.  There  were  8  Wal- 
densian schools  in  Florence  and  2  in  Leghorn.  Tbe 
Waldensian  schools  in  the  yalleys  numbered  80,  with 
3750  children  in  regular  attendance.  Tbe  **  Italian 
Eyangelical  Publication  Society"  selects  and  tranalates 
religious  books  and  tracts  suitable  for  Italy,  and  prints 
them  at  the  lowest  possible  ratę.  It  prints  the  Ilco  deBa 
VerUa  (weekly)  and  the  Amico  di  Casa  (annoal).  It 
has  published  232  new  worics,  or  new  editions  of  wwks, 
amounting  to  520,000  copies>  and  has  sold  sińce  1862  as 
many  as  390,000  copies.  See  Herzog,  Jleal-EMykii^ 
yiii,  99;  Wetzer  u.  Welte,  Kirchen-Leribm,  y,  583  eq.; 
Wiggers,  KirchL  Statiatik,  ii,  8  sq.;  Neher,  KirM.  Ot- 
ogr,  tu  Staiistikj  i,  4  są. ;  Nippold,  Jlandbuch  der  •»«««- 
ten  Kirchenffesck,  (2d  ed.  Elberf.  1868) ;  CkritHan  Yfor^ 
book  (London,  1867  and  1868);  Ughelli,  JtaHa  Sacra 
(Romę,  1644,  6  yols.);  M^Crie,  IJisł.  ofike  Progrtn  and 
Suppresaion  ofthe  RrformaltUm  in  Italy  (Edinbw  1827); 
Erdmann,  Die  ReformaiUm  u.  ihrt  Afdrłtrer  m  Jiatim 
(BerL  1865) ;  Leopold,  Ueber  die  Urwachen  der  Reforma^ 
tion  und  dereń  VerfaU  in  ItaUen  (in  ZeiischiftJBr  AiiC 
TheoL  1848) ;  Matthea,  KirckL  Chromk    (A.  J.  &} 


rrcH 


łii 


rriNERANCY 


Itch  (C^n,  che'res,  firom  b*?!!,  to  Kraich  and  to 
hum),  an  inliammatoiy  iiritation  of  the  skin,  threatened 
to  the  Israeliies  as  an  infliction  in  case  of  idolatry  (Deut. 
xxviu,  27) ;  probably  some  cataneons  or  eruptive  disor- 
der  on-nołon  in  EgypŁ,  but  of  what  pecoliar  character  is 
unceruiin,  if,  indeed,  aoy  pecoliar  malady  ia  intended. 
See  DiSEASE. 

Ith,  JofiANN,  a  German  theolog^n  and  philosopher 
of  some  notę,  was  bom  at  Beme,  Switzerland,  in  1747. 
In  1781  he  was  appointed  to  the  chair  of  philosophy  at 
the  unirersity  of  his  native  place,  where  he  had  aiao 
pursued  his  studies,  but  in  1796  he  entered  the  ministry, 
and  aettled  at  Siselen,  where  he  Uved  nntil  1799,  whcn 
he  was  eleeted  dean  and  president  of  the  committee  of 
cducation  and  religion  in  the  canton  of  Berne.  He  died 
in  1813.  Besides  a  uumber  of  philosophical,  philolog^ 
ical,  picdogogical,  and  even  homiletical  works,  he  wrote 
Ver$uck  einer  Anthropoloffie  oder  PkUoiophie  der  Men- 
schen  (Benie,  1794-5, 2  vola.;  new  edir,  1803  są.),  which 
is  a  yeiy  yałuable  work : —  Yerhallnisse  d,  Staats  z,  Re- 
Ugion  u.  Kirche  (ibid.  1798,  8vo)  i—SUłeMtre  der  Bra- 
minen  (ibid.  1794,  8vo),  really  a  reproduction  of  his 
tnuislation  of  Bzour-Yiiiam,  an  old Ilindu  work  on  mor- 
als  and  religion.  See  Krug,  PhUas.  WórterbucL  ii,  668. 
CJ.H.W.) 

Itfaacina.    See  Idacius. 

Ith'ai  (1  Chroń,  xi,  31).    Sec  Ittai. 

Ith^amar  (Heb.  Itkamar%  ncPi-^tjtj/ia/m-wfc;  but 
according  to  Fttrst,  not  high,  i.  e.  Uttk;  Sept.  'Iddfiap  ; 
Josephus  'l^a/<apoc,  'Ant.  viii,  1,  3),  the  fourth  and 
youngest  son  of  Aaron  (1  Chroń,  vi,  3).  B.C.  1668.  He 
waa  consecrated  to  the  priesthood  along  with  his  broth- 
crs  (Exod.  vi,  23 ;  Numb.  iii,  2,  3) ;  and  aOer  the  death 
of  Nadab  and  Abihu  (Lev.  x,  1  8q.),  as  they  left  no 
children,  he  and  Eleazar  alone  remained  to  discharge 
the  pricstly  functions  (Lev.  x,  6, 12 ;  Numb.  iii,  4 ;  xxvi, 
60  9q.;  1  Chroń,  xxiv,  2).  Nothing  is  individually  re- 
corded  of  him,  except  that  the  property  of  the  tabema- 
cle  was  placed  under  his  charge  (Exod.  xxxviii,  21), 
and  that  he  superlntended  all  matters  connected  with 
iu  femoval  by  the  Levitical  sections  of  Gershon  and 
Merari  (Numb.  iv,  28).  The  sacred  utensils  and  their 
reoaoyal  were  intrusted  to  his  elder  brother  Eleazar, 
whoee  family  was  iarger  than  that  of  Ithamar  (1  Chroń. 
xxiv,  4).  Ithamar,  with  his  descendants,  occupied  the 
poaition  of  common  priests  till  the  high-priesthood  pass- 
ed  into  his  family  in  the  person  of  Eli,  under  circum- 
Btances  of  which  we  are  ignorant  See  Eli.  Abiathar, 
whom  Solomon  dcposed,  was  the  last  high-priest  of  that 
linę,  and  the  pontiAcate  then  reverted  to  the  elder  linę 
of  Eleazar  hi  the  person  of  Zadok  (1  Kings  ii,  27).  See 
High-priest.  The  traditionaiy  tomb  of  Ithamar  is 
stiU  shown  near  that  of  his  brother  Eleazar  in  the  hill 
of  Phinehas  (Schwarz,  Pak$L  p.  161).  A  priest  by  the 
naroe  of  Daniel,  of  his  posterity,  retumed  from  Babylon 
(Ezim  viii,  2 ;  1  Esdr.  viii,  29). 

Ith'lgl  (Heb.  IthUV,  i»K''n''Sjt,  for  Łs^  ''tnsjt,  God 
ufith  me,  or,  according  to  Fllrst,  the  property  of  God; 
Scpt.  Aj'^i//X,  Vulg.  Etheel;  but  in  Prov.  xxxi,  1,  both 
translate  ot  irKmiowŁc  ^af,  cum  quo  esŁ  Deus  and  Deo 
secum  morante),  the  name  of  two  men. 

1.  A  person  mentioned  along  with  Ucal  in  Prov. 
xxx,  1,  apparently  as  one  to  whom  the  "  words  of  Agur'8 
prophecy"  had  been  addressed.  B.C.  perhaps  cir.  990. 
See  Agur.  Gcsenius  (Thesaur,  Ilth,  p.  88)  thinks  that 
Ithiel  and  Ucal  were  the  chUdren  or  disciples  of  Agur, 
to  whom  he  inscribed  his  aphorisms ;  others  regazd  both 
words  as  appeliatiyes,  and  render  the  whole  clause  as 
follows:  "Thua  spake  the  man:  /  have  toUedfor  God, 
I  have  toiled  for  God,  and  have  ceased"  (see  Stuart's 
Comment.  ad  loc.). 

2.  The  sou  of  Jesaiah  and  fathcr  of  Maaseiah,  a  Ben- 
Jamite,  one  of  whose  posterity  retumed  with  a  party 
from  Babylon  (Neh.  xi,  7).    B.a  long  antę  63a 


Ith'mah  (Heb.  Tiihmah',  hcn^,  orphanage;  Sept 
'It^ifia),  a  Moabite,  and  one  of  I)avid's  supplementary 
body-guard  (I  Chroń,  xi,  46).    BwC.  1046.    See  Dayid. 

Ith^nan  (Heb.  Yithnan%  13 h^,  hestowed,  otherwise 
disłance ;  Sept  'I^vav  [but  the  Yat  MS.  joins  it  to  the 
preceding  word,  'A(roptuivav,  and  the  Alex.  to  the  fol- 
iowing,  'I^va^f0],Viilg.  Jeihnam)^  one  of  the  citiea  in 
the  south  of  Judah,  mentioned  between  Hazor  and  Ziph 
(Josh.  XV,  23) ;  perhaps  lying  along  the  southem  edge 
of  the  highland  district  It  cannot  well  have  been  the 
Jedna  of  the  Onomasticon  ('Ic^va,  the  modem  Idhna), 
for  this  is  in  the  mountains  west  of  Hebron  (see  Keil*s 
Comment.  ad  loc).  The  enumeration  in  ver.  32  reąuires 
us  to  join  this  with  the  following  (there  being  no  copula 
between),  Jthnan-Ziph,  L  e.  Zephath  (q.  v.).  See  Ju- 
dah. 

Ith^ra  (Heb.  YUhra',  K';n%  exceUence;  Sept  'Iś- 
^ep^Yulg.  Jetra),  an  Israelite  (probably  an  enror  of  tran- 
scription  [see  Thenius,  Conunent.  ad  loc.] ;  a  Jezredite^ 
according  to  the  Sept  and  Yulg. ;  but  [morę  correctly] 
an  lihmaełitt,  according  to  1  Chroń,  ii,  17),  and  father 
of  Amaaa  (David's  generał)  by  Abigail,  I>avid*s  sister 
(1  Kings  ii,  6) ;  elsewhere  called  Jbthkr  (2  Sam.  xvii, 
26).     B.C.  antę  1023. 

Ith'ran  (Heb.  YUhr(m%)'^r^'J,  erceOent),  the  name 
ofoneortwo  men. 

1.  (Sept.  'I^pav,  'Ie^pav ;  Yulg.  Jethram,  Jethrcm.) 
One  of  the  sons  of  Dishon,  and  grandson  of  Seir  the 
Horite  (Gen.  xxxvi,  26 ;  1  Chroń,  i,  41).     RC.  cir.  1964. 

2.  (Sept  'le^lp,  Yulg.  Jethran.}  Apparently  one  of 
the  sons  of  Zophah,  the  great-grandson  of  Asher  (I 
ChroiL  vii,  87) :  probably  the  same  as  Jethek  in  v.  68. 
B.aiong  post  1866. 

Ith^reiim  (Ueh.Yithredm'f  fi^^pH^  tuperabundanos 
of  the  peoplef  Sept 'le^cpaa/i, 'I  c^pa/i;  Josephus  Tc- 
ipaa/Aiyc  [Ant.  vii,  i,  4]),  David's  sixth  son,  bom  of 
Eglah  in  Hebron  (2  Sam.  iu,  6 ;  1  Chroń,  iii,  3).  B.C. 
1046.  In  the  ancient  Jewish  traditions  (Jerome,  QucBst. 
Hth.  in  2  Sam.  iii,  6;  v,  28)  Eglah  is  said  to  have  been 
Micha],  and  to  have  died  in  giving  birth  to  Ithream : 
but  this  is  at  variance  with  the  Bibie. 

Ith'rlte,or,ratheT,  Je'thkritk  (Heb.ra*rł',  "^"^n^, 
Sept  'Ir^patoc  and  'l&^epi,  but  AlSrdktift  in  1  Chrón. 
ii,  63 ;  Yulg.  Jethrites  and  Jethraiu  or  Jełhreus)^  the 
posterity  of  some  Jbther  mentioned  as  resldcnt  in  Kir- 
jath-jearim  (A.Y.  "the  Ithrites"  [1  Chroń,  ii,  63]); 
probably  the  descendants  of  Hobab,  the  brother-in-law 
of  Moses  (who  settled  in  this  region,  Judges  i,  16),  and 
so  called  as  being  thus  the  posterity  of  Jethro,  the  fa- 
ther-in-Iaw  of  Moses.  See  Kenite.  Two  of  David's 
famous  warriors,  Ira  and  Gareb,  belonged  to  this  elan 
(2  Sam.  xxiii,  38;  1  Chroń,  xi,  40).  See  David.  Im 
hos  been  supposed  to  be  identical  with  "  Ira  the  Jairite," 
David's  priest  (2  Sam.  xx,  26).  According  to  another 
supposition,  Jether  may  be  oniy  another  form  for  Ithra 
(2  Sam.  xvii,  26),  the  brother-in-law  of  David,  and  it  is 
possible  that  the  "  Ithrites,"  as  a  family,  sprang  from 
him.  According  to  still  another  supposition,  the  two 
Ithrite  heroes  of  David's  guard  may  have  come  from 
Jattir,  in  the  mountains  of  Judah,  one  of  the  places 
which  were  the  "  haunt'*  of  David  and  his  men  in  their 
freebooting  wanderings,  and  where  he  had  "  friends'*  (1 
Sam.  xxx,  27;  comp.  31). 

Itinerancy,  a  word  which  Methodism  has  adopted 
in  its  ecclesiastical  terminology  as  expre8sing  one  of 
the  most  characteristic  fcatures  of  that  religious  denom- 
ination.  Wesley'8  plans  for  the  revival  of  Christian 
life  throughout  the  United  Kingdom  rcndercd  it  neces- 
sary  that  he  should  travel  from  to^n  to  town.  He  did 
80  quite  systeinatically  through  his  long  life.  Yer^' 
early  a  few  talented  la3naaen  were  commissioned  by  him 
to  preach  in  the  societies  which  he  had  organiaed  dur- 
ing  his  owu  abeence,  for  he  usually  staid  but  a  day  or 
two  in  any  one  place.    These  lay  preacbers,  or  *'help- 


rriNERANCY 


712 


rrmERANCY 


en,**  as  he  called  them,  aoon  multiplied  to  soores,  at  laat 
to  hundreds;  but  the  aodeties  demanding  their  labora 
in  the  intervalfl  of  the  great  preacher'B  yisita  multiplied 
still  faster.  Aa  early  as  his  third  Conference  (May,  1746)| 
he  saw  the  neceasity  of  extending  and  methodizing  the 
labors  of  his  "  hdpers"  on  some  plan  of  **  itinerancy.** 
He  appointed  them,  therefore,  to  definitive  ''drcuits*' 
this  year.  The  word  "circuit"  has  ever  sińce  becn  an 
important  technical  term  in  Methodism.  The  **  Min- 
utes,*'  or  joumal  of  this  Conference,  show  that  the  whole 
country  was  mapped  into  seyen  of  these  **  itinerant"  dL»- 
tricts.  Wales  and  Comwall  each  constituted  one ;  New- 
castle and  its  neighboring  towns  another.  That  of  York- 
shire comprised  seren  counties.  London,  Bristol,  and 
£vesham  were  the  head-ąuarters  of  others.  By  1749 
there  were  twenty  of  these  "  rounds**  in  England,  two  in 
Wales,  two  in  Scotland,  and  seven  in  Ircland ;  and  at 
Wesley^s  death  there  were  serenty-two  in  England, 
three  in  Wales,  seren  in  Scotland,  and  twenty-eight  in 
Ireland.  The  circuits  were  long,  eomprising  at  least 
thirty  **  appointments''  for  each  month,  or  about  one  a 
day.  The  preachers  were  changed  at  first  from  one  cir- 
coit  to  another,  usually  every  year,  and  inraiiably  ev- 
ery  two  years;  sometimes  from  England  to  Scotland, 
Ireland,  Wales,  and  back  again. 

The  *' circuit  system"  has  been  retained  in  England 
down  to  our  day ;  even  the  churches  of  the  large  cities 
are  combined  under  a  **  circuit"  pastorate.  In  "  Ameri- 
ca," the  societies  in  cities,  and  also  the  large  societies  in 
the  country,  are  generally  "  stations,"  each  being  siip- 
plied  by  its  own  pastor.  The  "  circuit  system,"  howev- 
er,  is  maintained  among  the  feebler  churches,  and  quite 
generally  in  the  Far  West,  and  nearly  eyerywhere  along 
the  frontier  settlements  of  the  country. 

Two  other  characteristic  features  of  Wesley^s  system 
rendered  the  "  itinerancy"  not  only  possibly,  but  nota- 
bly  effectire.  The  **  local"  ministry — consisting  of  gifb- 
ed  laymen  in  secular  business — supplied  the  pulpits  in 
the  absenoe  of  the  **  regular"  or  itinerant  preachers,  as 
the  latter  could  appear  in  aiiy  given  place  on  their  long 
circuits  but  once  a  fortnight,  in  most  cases  but  once  a 
month,  and  in  others  but  once  in  8ix  wecks.  Thus 
public  ministrations  were  kept  up  every  Sunday.  The 
class-meeting,  eomprising  twelre  '^members,"  under  an 
experienced  ^Meader,"  met  weekly,  and  thus  a  sort  of 
pastorał  supenrision  of  the  whole  membership  was  main- 
tained in  the  absence  of  the  authorized  pastor  or  itin- 
erant    See  Lay  Ministry. 

In  these  facts,  so  co-ordinate  and  co-operative,  we 
have  the  chief  explanation  of  the  remarkable  success  of 
Wesley's  ministerial  system.  Some  of  the  circuits,  in 
our  own  country  especially,  were  five  or  six  hundred 
miles  in  extent,  including  scores  or  hundreds  of  socie- 
ties or  "appointments,"  each  of  which  was  regularly 
visited,  at  inteirals  of  four  or  six  weeks,  by  the  "  circuit 
preacher,"  and  meanwhile  the  *Mocal  preachers"  and 
*<  dass-leaders"  kept  each  fully  supplied  with  Sabbatb, 
and,  indeed,  almost  daily  religious  services.  In  nothing, 
perhaps,  does  the  legialative  genius  of  Wesley,  so  high- 
ly  estimated  by  Southey,  Macaulay,  and  Buckie,  morę 
Btrikingly  appear  than  in  this  combination  of  pastorał 
proYisions. 

If  its  adaptation  to  England  was  eminent,  it  was  pre- 
eminent  in  America,  where  the  customary  local  pastorate 
of  other  denominations  seemed  to  afTord  no  adequate 
provision  for  the  prodigiously  advancing  population  and 
settlement  of  the  country.  *'  Methodism,  with  its  *  lay 
ministiy*  and  its  *  itinerancy,'  could  alone  afTord  the  min- 
istrations of  religion  to  this  oyerflowing  population ;  it 
was  to  lay  the  morał  fcundations  of  many  of  the  great 
States  of  the  West,  The  oldcr  churches  of  the  colonies 
could  nerer  have  supplied  them  with  '  regular*  or  edu- 
cated  pastora  in  any  proportion  to  their  rapid  settlement. 
Methodism  met  thia  necessity  in  a  manner  that  should 
command  the  national  gratitnde.  It  was  to  become  at 
last  the  dominant  popular  iaith  of  the  country,  with  its 
standard  planted  in  eyery  city,  town,  and  almost  every 


yillage  of  the  land.  Moying  in  the  van  of  emigi  «doi\ 
it  ¥ras  to  supply  with  the  means  of  retigioh  tbe  iiNmtieis, 
from  the  Canadas  to  the  Gulf  of  Mexioo,  from  I\iget*s 
Sound  to  the  Gulf  of  Galifoniia.  It  was  to  do  this  in- 
dispeusable  work  by  means  peculiar  to  itaelf ;  by  dis- 
tricting  the  land  into  circuits  which,  from  one  hundred 
to  fiye  hundred  miles  in  extent,  could  each  be  staiedly 
supplied  with  religious  instniction  by  one  or  two  trar- 
elling  evangeUst8,  who,  preaching  daily,  could  thns  hare 
charge  of  parishes  eomprising  hundreds  of  miles  and 
tens  of  thousands  of  souls.  It  was  to  raise  up,  withont 
delay  for  preparatoiy  traiuing,  and  thrust  out  up<Hi  these 
circuits,  thousands  of  such  itinerants,  tens  of  thouaands 
of '  local*  or  lay  preachers  and  *  exhorter8,*  as  auxiliaTy 
and  unpaid  laborers,  with  many  thousands  of  daasr-lead- 
ers,  who  could  maintain  pastorał  supenrision  orer  the 
infant  societies  in  the  absence  of  the  itinerant  preach- 
ers, the  latter  not  ha^'ing  time  to  delay  in  any  locality 
for  much  morę  than  the  public  8er\'ice8  of  the  piilpiL 
Over  alł  these  circuits  it  was  to  maintain  the  watchful 
jurisdiction  of  trarelling  presiding  elders,  and  over  the 
whole  system  the  superuitendcnce  of  trarełłing  bifibo(<a, 
to  whom  the  entire  nation  was  to  be  a  common  diocese* 
(Sterens,  Ilisiory  o/ Methodism),  "  Without  any  dis- 
paragement  of  other  churches,  we  may  easily  see  that 
they  were  not  in  a  state  to  meet  the  pressing  wants  of 
the  country.  The  Episcopal  Church  was  much  shat- 
tered  and  cnfecbled,  was  destitute  of  the  episcopal  or- 
der, had  to  wait  long,  and  urge  her  plea  ardently  upan 
the  attention  of  the  bishops  of  England  before  they 
could  procure  consecrotion  for  any  of  ber  ministen  (and, 
as  is  well  known,  the  non-exi8tence  of  a  bishop  invQlves 
amongst  the  Epiacopalians  the  non-existenoe  of  the 
Church),  so  that  this  oommunity  was  not  in  a  positicn 
to  undertake  to  any  great  ex  tent  an  aggresdre  serrice. 
The  principles  of  the  Independoits,  which  subordinate 
the  cidl  of  a  minister  to  the  roice  of  the  Chorch,  placed 
a  bar  in  the  way  of  their  seeking  the  outlying  popula- 
tion, inasmuch  as  there  were  no  Churches  to  addres  this 
cali ;  and,  though  the  Presbyterian  system  is  not  nec- 
essarily  so  stringent  in  these  matters  as  Independent 
churches  acting  on  their  theories,  yet,  as  they  cannot 
move  without  the  action  of  their  s3modical  bodies,  theie 
was  little  prospect  of  their  doing  much  missionaty  wofk. 
Thus  this  work  fell  very  much  into  the  liands'  of  the 
Methodist  itinerancy.  The  men  were  admirably  fitted 
for  their  task.  Bich  in  religious  enjo>*ment,  fiill  of  faith 
and  love,  zealous  and  energetic,  trained  to  labor  and  ex- 
ertion,  actuated  by  one  single  motive — ^that  of  glońf^in^ 
God,  they  Łhought  not  of  privation,  bot  unhesitatińgly 
foUowed  the  emigrants  and  'squatteis*  in  their  peregri- 
nations  whereyer  they  went.  American  sodecy  was 
thus  imbued  with  Chrbtian  truth  and  prindple,  as  well 
as  accustomed  to  religious  ordinanccs,  in  its  nonnal 
State"  (London  Ouarleritf  Benewy  October,  1854,  p.  125). 

Wesley  started  with  no  **  theory"  of  ministerial  itin- 
erancy. The  expediency  of  the  plan  alone  led  to  its 
adoption ;  but  he  died  beliering  in  it  as  a  tbocny,  as,  in- 
deed, the  apoatolic  plan  of  erangelization.  In  his  esti- 
mation,  it  not  only  had  a  salutary  efTect  on  the  e\-n]gel- 
ists,  by  keeping  Uiem  energetic  and  chiyalrous,  but  it 
had  the  capital  adyantage  of  enabling  one  preacher  to 
minister  che  truth  to  many  places,  and  it  madę  smali 
abilities  ayailable  on  a  large  scalę.  He  says  that  he  be- 
lieyes  he  should  himsdf  preach  eyen  his  congregatioo 
"  asleep"  were  he  to  stay  in  one  place  an  cncire  year. 
Nor  could  he  "belieye  that  it  was  cyer  the  Lord*s  will 
that  any  congregadon  should  haye  one  teacher  (mly.* 
"  We  haye  found,"  he  writes, "  by  long  and  constaut  ex- 
perience,  that  a  firoquent  exchange  of  teacheis  is  best. 
This  preacher  has  one  talent,  that  another.  No  ome 
whom  I  eyer  yet  knew  has  all  the  talents  which  are 
needful  for  bcginning,  continuing,  and  perfecting  the 
work  of  grace  m  a  whole  congregation."     (A.  SL) 

There  can  be  no  ąuestion  that  an  itinerant  minutiy 
has  the  sanction  of  the  highest  scriptural  ejcamplcś. 
Christ  was  an  itinerant    His  ministry  in  the  fleah  was 


mNERANCT 


łl3 


mNERANCT 


not  a  setUed  paatonte;  he  went  abont  doing  good. 
The  tweive  diaciples  weie  itinerants,  both  before  and 
after  the  cnicifixion  and  resunection.  They  went  from 
dty  to  city  preaching  the  Gospel  of  the  kingdom.  And 
the  piophets  before  tbem  were  icinenmts.  Samuel  had 
hifl  cirde  of  appointments;  Elijah,  and,  aiter  him,£ti- 
sha,  bad  no  settled  abode  even,  bat  moved  about  from 
place  to  place.  These  were  all  itinerants.  If  in  the 
etriy  Chriadan  Church,  even  while  the  apostles  were 
yet  at  work,  there  are  eyidencea  that  a  stationary  min- 
iatry  was  occaaonally  introdaced,  it  does  not  appear  to 
have  entered  into  the  original  plan  of  the  Gospel  of  Je- 
ans Christ  ''Is  there  one  word,"  says  Betnchamp 
(Ldters  on  fhe  CaU  OHd  Ottol^fications  ofMimien  of 
tke  Go»pd  [Charleston,  a  C^  1849,  18nio],  page  97), 
perhaps  too  strongly,  **in  the  New  Testament  from 
which  anything  can  be  infeired  in  fayor  of  a  settled 
minisCzy  ?  The  whole  of  this  sacred  book  breathes  the 
spuit  of  itinersncy;  and  all  the  transactions  reoord- 
ed  in  it,  in  referenoe  to  the  ministiy,  agree  with  this 
spirit."  Nay,  it  is  unąuestionably  tme  that  in  the  early 
Christian  Church,  though  many  were  in  fayor  of  a  set- 
tled nainistiy,  and  numerous  the  elforts  to  bring  it  abont, 
most  of  the  Christian  preachers  were  ''itinerants."  In 
the  Latin  Church,  itiuerant  preachers  haye  eyer  been 
employed :  they  form  a  specUl  religious  order— a  class 
of  preaching  monka  (oomp»  D*Aubigne,  Uistoire  de  la 
Rp/ormation,  y,  102).  Thus  Berenger,  in  France,  em- 
ployed itineraiit  ministers  to  spread  his  objections  to  the 
doctrine  of  tranaubstantiation ;  Wydiffe,  in  England, 
introduccd  the  system  of  itinerant  preaching,  and  the 
Swisa  historian  goes  so  far  eyen  as  to  assert  that  the  re- 
formatory  moyements  among  the  Christiana  of  England 
haye  all  been  marked  by  an  eiTort  to  introduce  the  sy^^ 
tem  of  itinerant  preaching.  **This  kind  of  preaching 
always  reappeais  in  England  in  the  grand  epoichs  of  the 
Church''  (ibid.  p.  108).  But  if  Wydiffe  and  the  Keform- 
en  were  first  in  their  efforts  to  introduce  itinerant  preach- 
ing, it  is  to  Wesley,  neyertheless,  that  alone  is  due  the 
credit  of  organizing  *' itinerancy"  as  a  permanent  and 
nniyersal  acheme  of  ministerial  labor  throughout  a  large 
denomination. 

The  itinenuicy  has  always  been  a  featore  cheriahed 
with  jealous  care  ty  the  Methodist  bodies,  and  with  re- 
apect  to  biahops  it  is  hedge<l  about  by  one  of  the  re- 
strictiye  rules  in  the  Meth.£pis.  Church  (aee  their  2>u- 
dplinef  Powers  of  the  General  Conferenoe).  The  length 
of  time  far  which  the  trayelling  preachers  may  remain 
on  the  same  "  charge"  (whether  a  circuit  or  station)  has 
yaried  at  different  times  in  the  Methodist  Episoopal 
Church,  and  is  now  limited  to  three  years.  "  Fresiding 
elders'*  can  remain  only  four  years  on  the  same  **dia- 
trict." 

As  to  the  adrantages  and  duadeaniagea  of  the  itiner- 
ant system,  no  one  has  giyen  a  morę  unbiased  aocount 
of  the  objectious  that  haye  thus  far  been  presented 
againsŁ  the  continuation  of  ^  itinerancy"  than  Dr.  Crane 
{Method,  Quart,  Rev^  Jan.  1866,  p.  73  sq.),  and  we  foUow 
him  in  the  main,  aupplementing  it  only  with  what  eomea 
from  ot^er  churchea. 

1.  ''The  people  are  restricted  in  the  choice  of  their 
pastora.**  If  this  be  tme,  no  other  system  so  aoon  rem- 
ediea  the  difficulty  as  the  itinerancy,  for  it  secures  at 
the  same  time  with  the  pastor  a  further  change  within 
a  shoit  period,  without  inflicting  dishonor  or  injustioe. 

2.  "At  certain  fixed  interyals  it  remoyea  the  pastor 
with  whom  the  people  haye  become  aoquainted,  and 
oubatitutes  a  stranger  in  his  place."  In  return,  it  af- 
fords  each  church  the  benefit  of  the  yaried  endowments 
of  many  ministen,  and,  moreoyer,  keeps  ministers  and 
people  Ul  yigorous  action. 

S»  "Societies  and  congregations  haye  leas  cohesire 
foroe  than  their  owii  good  demands."  This,  of  all  objec- 
tiona,  has  been  the  one  most  ftequently  urged,  and  is, 
perhaps,  the  only  one  that  it  is  hanl  to  deny.  It  ia  with 
a  yiew  to  obyiate  thia  eyil  that  many  haye  adyocated 
1  of  t  hc  term  of  sery ice  to  Aye  or  morę  yeara. 


4k  '*The  change  sometimes  coroes  inopportunely.''  IT 
this  happen  in  some  inatances,  and  they  can,  after  all,  be 
but  few,  much  greater  are  the  adyantages  which  arise 
from  this  system,  as  it  neyer  leayes  a  church  without  a 
pastor,  and  at  the  same  time  also  secures  to  the  minister 
a  pastonte,  so  long  as  he  is  able  to  work  effectiyely  in 
the  -Gospel  field.  The  greatest  problem  for  other  de- 
nominationa  to  aolye  is  ^  unemployed  ministers."  Thus 
a  writer  in  the  IntelUffeneer,  speaking  of  the  trials  re- 
sulting  from  a  want  of  an  itinerant  ministiy  in  the  Re- 
formed  (Dutch)  Church,  aaya  of  Methodiam :  **  No  man 
who  can  work,  and  wants  to  work,  need  be  idle,  with 
fields  appointed  and  the  Church*a  bcnedictions  upon 
those  who  striye  to  till  them,  and  no  man  is  laid  upon 
the  shelf  till  age,  infirmity,  or  misconduct  places  him 
there ;  while,  when  age  and  infirmity  come,  that  Church 
still  supports  and  cherishes  those  who  haye  wom  life 
out  in  her  and  the  Master^s  work.  That  a  Church  thus 
seryed  with  the  whole  life-long  energies  of  her  ministry 
should  thriye  and  grow  under  the  diyine  bleasing,  need 
surpriae  no  one  who  properly  wdghs  the  bearings  of 
cause  and  effect  The  ruling  out  by  our  churches  of 
half  the  aggregate  effectiye  force  of  the  ministry,  which 
a  growing  fostidiousneaa  in  the  matter  of  choosing  and 
settling  preachers  cauaes  to  be  practically  lost  to  the 
Church,  has  a  gloomy  look  for  her  futurę  prosperity. 
The  pTOspect  of  such  a  life-yoyage  is  not  apt  to  be  spe- 
dally  attractiye  to  youth  pondering  whether  or  not  to 
embark;  for,  once  erobarked,  unless  it  be  a  Methodist 
yessel  that  beara  them,  they  may  find  themaelyes  strand- 
ed  high  and  diy,  and  that  from  no  fault  of  theira,  ere  the 
yoyage  ia  half  run.'* 

6.  **The  brief  pastorates  are  liable  to  create  an  unwise 
loye  of  noyelty  and  exdtcmcnt.'*  This,  if  somcwhat 
tnie,  is  not  a  yery  formidable  objection ;  while,  on  the 
other  hand,  the  eyil  of  indifference  and  dissatisfactlon, 
so  liable  to  be  produced  by  a  long  pastorał  term,  is  far 
greater.  The  brief  pastorates  afford  the  minister  time 
and  mental  force  for  the  preparation  of  a  comparatiydy 
smali  number  of  sermons,  and  are  therefore  fayorable  to 
thorougb  preparation  for  the  pulpit.  Says  Dr.  Isaac  Tay- 
lor ( Wesley  andMethodumj  Lond.  1851), "  Any  one  who, 
endowed  with  some  natural  faculty  and  fluency  of  ut- 
terance,  has  madę  the  experiment,  will  haye  found  it  far 
from  difficult  to  acąuire  the  power  of  continuous  and 
pertinent  speaking  upon  familiar  topics,  especially  upon 
rdigious  topics,  and  so  to  hołd  out  for  thirty  or  forty 
minutes  or  morę;  and  if  this  habit  of  speaking  be  wdl 
husbanded,  and  kept  always  within  the  safe  endosures 
of  conyentional  phrases,  and  of  authenticated  modes  of 
thinking,  thb  preacher  may  be  always  ready  to  ascend 
the  pulpit,  in  season  and  out  of  season.  His  sermon,  or 
his  set  of  discouraea,  ia,  in  iact,  the  glib  run  of  the  men- 
tal aasociations  upon  wom  tracks,  this  way  or  that,  as 
the  mind  may  chance  to  take  its  start  from  a  giyen  text. 
This  sort  ofmindlessfadlityof  speaking  proyes  a  aore 
temptation  to  many  a  located  minister,  and  its  conse- 
ąuence  is  to  leaye  many  a  congregation  sitting  from 
year  to  year  deep  in  a  ąuagmire.  Better  than  this,  un- 
doubtedly,  would  be  itinerancy— far  better  is  a  frequent 
shifting  of  monotonies  than  a  flxedne8s  of  the  same." 

But  alao  to  the  **  itinerant"  himself  the  system  sffords 
many  adyantages,  though,  it  ia  tnie,  it  alao  subjecta  him 
to  some  disadyantages.  The  pros  and  cons  of  this  part 
of  the  ąuestion  are  these : 

1.  "  It  restricts  him  in  the  choice  of  hia  fidd  of  labor.** 
But  if  thia  be  a  disadyantage,  it  ia  fully  atoned  for  by 
the  fact  that,  howeyer  rc»tricte<l,  the  field  is  certain. 

2.  *'  It  tends  in  aome  caaea  to  lessen  the  amount  paid 
for  the  aupport  of  the  pastor.**  If  thia  be  tme,  it  can  be 
so  only  measunbly,  for  of  late,  at  least,  the  Methodist 
paator  ia  remunerated  as  well  as  his  brethren  in  the  sis- 
ter  chuTches,  while  the  itinerancy  affords  him  a  greater 
degree  of  independencc,  enabling  him  to  ''apeak  boldly, 
as  he  ought  to  speak.'* 

8.  "  It  depriyes  the  minister  and  hia  family  of  a  per- 
manent place  of  residence.**    This  the  morę  prolonged 


ITTAHKAZIN 


1H 


TTURMA 


0tay  has  measurably  lemediedybat  it  is  a  ąuestion  wheth- 
er  a  still  longer  term  would  not  depiive  the  itinerant  of 
one  of  the  gx«atest  bleesiugs,  health.  It  is  held  by  com- 
petent  judges,  and  the  point  U  also  madę  by  Dr.  Grane, 
that  the  itinerancy  is  condacive  to  health  and  long  life, 
as  the  yital  forces  of  a  pastor  settled  over  a  congrega- 
tion  for  many  years  in  succession  are  neoessarily.sub- 
jected  to  a  fearful  stiain,  and  thus  what  appears  at  first 
a  family  depriyation  tunis  out  really  to  be  a  gieat  bless- 
ing  to  the  entire  household.  See,  besides  the  artides 
and  books  alrcady  referred  to,  Hodgson,  Ecdes.  Polity  of 
Metkodiam  defended^  especially  p.  95-118;  Porter,  Com- 
pendium  ofMethodum, 

It'tali-ka'ałn  (Heb.  Eth-katam',  ^-^SC  T?,  Hmt 
[aocording  to  FUrst, />eqpfc]  of  the  judffe^  only  with 
n  local,  "pSfi^  npl9 ;  Sept  tire  vu\łv  Kairifi  y.  r.  jcara- 
ekfi ;  Yulg.  ThaccLtin),  a  city  near  the  eastem  boundaiy 
of  Zebulun  (but  within  Issachar),  betweeu  Gath-hepher 
and  Remmon-methoar  (Josh.  xix,  18),  therefore  a  very 
short  distance  (east)  from  Sepphoris  (Seffurieh).  It  is, 
perhaps,  idcntical  with  the  K^r  Kenna  usually  regard- 
ed  as  the  site  of  Cana  (q.  v.)  of  the  N.  T. 

Iftai  (Heb.  Ittatf't  *^Fli<,  perh.  near  or  ftW/y,  other- 
wise  posiessor),  the  name  of  two  men. 

1.  (Sept.  'Ko^at)  Son  of  Ribai,  a  Benjamite  of  Gib- 
eah,  one  of  Darid  s  thirty  heroes  (2  Sam.  xxiii,  29),  cali- 
ed  in  the  parallel  paasage  (1  Chroń,  xi,  81)  Ithai  (Heb. 
Iłkay%  '^n^^K,  a  fuUer  form ;  Sept  'H^ow).     B.C.  1046. 

2.  (Sept.  'EBi  [and  so  Josephus]  v.  r.  'EBOii).  "  It- 
TAi  THE  GiTTiTE,"Le.  the  natiye  of  Gath,  a  Fhilistinc 
in  the  army  of  king  Da\4d.  He  appears  only  during 
the  rebellion  of  Absalom,  KC.  cir.  1023.  We  flrst  di»- 
cera  him  on  the  moming  of  Dayid^s  flight,  while  the 
king  was  standing  under  the  olive-tree,  below  the  city, 
Mratching  the  army  and  the  people  defile  past  him.  See 
Dayii).  Last  in  the  procession  came  the  600  heroes 
who  had  formed  Dand'B  band  during  his  wanderings  in 
Judah,  and  who  had  been  with  him  at  Gath  (2  Sam.  xv, 
18;  comp.  1  Sam.  xxiii,  13 ;  xxyii,  2 ;  xxx,  9, 10;  and 
Joeephus,  A  nt.  vii,  9,  2).  Among  these,  apparently  com- 
manding  them,  was  Ittai  the  Giuite  (y.  19).  He  caught 
the  eye  of  the  king,  who  at  once  addressed  him,  and  be- 
aought  him  as  *'  a  stranger  and  an  exile,"  and  as  one 
who  had  but  very  recently  joined  his  ser^ńcc,  not  to  at 
tach  himself  to  a  doubtful  cause,  but  to  return  '*  with  his 
brethren"  and  aUde  with  the  king  (v.  19, 20).  But  Ittai 
is  firm;  he  is  the  king's  slaye  05?*  ^^'  "sen-ant**), 
and  whereyer  his  master  goes  he  vnU.  go.  Accordingly, 
he  is  allowed  by  David  to  prooeed,  and  he  passes  over 
the  Kedron  with  the  king  (xv,  22,  SepL),  with  all  his 
men,  and  "all  the  liŁtle  ones  that  were  with  him.*^ 
These  "little  ones"  (C]ąJn"bc,  "all  the  children")  must 
have  been  the  familics  of  the  band— thcir  "  households" 
(1  Sam.  xxyii,  3).  They  accompanied  them  during 
their  wanderings  in  Judah,  often  at  great  risk  (1  Sam. 
xxx,  6),  and  they  were  not  likely  to  leaye  them  behind 
in  thb  fresh  commencement  of  their  wandering  life. 

When  the  army  was  numbered  and  organized  by  Da- 
yid  at  Mahanaim,  Ittai  again  appears,  now  in  command 
of  a  thicd  part  of  the  forcc,  and  (for  the  time  at  least) 
enjoying  equal  rank  with  Joab  and  Abishai  (2  Sam. 
xviii,  2, 6, 12).  But  here,  on  the  eve  of  the  great  bat- 
tle,  WG  take  leave  of  this  yaliant  and  faithful  stranger ; 
his  conduct  in  the  fight  and  hu  subseąuent  fate  are 
alike  unknon^^n  to  us.  Nor  is  he  mentioned  in  the  lists 
of  Dayid'8  captains  and  of  the  heroes  of  his  body-guard 
(see  2  Sam.  xxiii ;  1  Chroń,  xi),  lists  which  are  possibly 
of  a  datę  pre^nous  to  Ittai*s  arrival  in  Jerusalem. 

An  interesting  tradition  is  related  by  Jerome  (Quassf, 
Hebr.  on  1  Chroń,  xx,  2).  "  Dayid  took  the  crown  oflf 
the  head  of  the  image  of  Milcom  (A.y.  *  their  king'). 
But,  by  the  law,  it  was  forbidden  to  any  Israelite  to 
touch  eithcr  gold  or  silyer  of  an  idoL  Wherefore  they 
•ay  that  Ittai  the  Gittitc,  who  had  como  to  Da>id  from 


the  Philiatines,  was  the  man  who  anatched  the  otnrn 
from  the  head  of  Miloom ;  for  it  was  lawful  for  a  He- 
brew  to  take  it  from  the  hand  of  a  man,  thoogh  not  ten 
the  head  of  the  idoL"  The  main  difficulty  to  the  reoep- 
tion  of  this  legend  lies  in  the  fact  that  if  Ittai  was  €n- 
gaged  in  the  Ammonitish  war,  which  happcned  aeroal 
years  before  AbBalom'8  reyolt,  the  expre88ioo  of  Darid 
(2  Sam.  xy,  20), "  thoa  cameat  but  yesterday,**  loaes  iti 
foroe.  Howeyer,  these  woids  may  be  mcrely  a  itaooą 
metaphor. 

From  the  expreBaion  <^  thy  brethren"  (xy,  20)  we  may 
infer  that  there  were  other  Philistines  beaides  Ittai  in 
the  six  hundred;  but  this  is  onoertain.  Ittai  was  not 
excluBively  a  Philistine  name,  nor  does  ^  Gittite"— as 
in  the  case  of  Obed-edom,  who  was  a  Leyite — necessa- 
rily  imply  Philistine  parentage.  Still  DaWd^a  waidi, 
"  stranger  and  exi]«,"  seem  to  show  that  he  waa  not  an 
Israelite.— Smith.  Others,  howeyer,  haye  hazazded  the 
supposition  that  this  Ittai  is  the  same  as  the  prcceding, 
haying  been  called  a  Gittite  as  a  natiye  of  GiUaiwi,  in 
Benjamin  (2  Sam.  iy,  8),  and  a  "  stnmger  and  an  exik'' 
aa  a  Gibeonite,  who,  haying  fled  from  Beeroth,  a  Gibc- 
onitish  town  (Josh.  ix,  17),  had,  with  his  brethren,  taken 
up  his  reaidenoe  in  Gittaim.  AU  this  is  ver>'  improfaa- 
Ue.    See  Gittite. 

Ittig,  Thomas,  a  German  Luthcnm  diyine,  was  bon 
at  Leipzig  Oct.  81,1 618.  He  studied  at  the  uniyerntiei 
of  Leipzig,  Roetock,  and  Strasburg.  AAer  fiUing  the 
pastorate,  he  became,  in  1698,  profeseor  of  philoeopby  in 
the  uniyerńty  of  his  natiye  city.  In  1691  he  waa  trans- 
ferred  to  the  chair  of  theology.  He  died  April  7, 1710. 
Ittig  was  a  yeiy  able  man,  but  he  lacked  all  tolerance 
towards  those  who  chose  to  dilTcr  from  him,  and  in  some 
of  his  writings  he  is  quite  scycre  against  othcr  religiooi 
bodies  than  Lnthcrans.  He  is  especially  celehratcd  as 
a  coUector  of  the  writings  of  the  apostolical  fathen  (see 
below).  His  principal  works  aro,  Animadrernones  m 
ceTUuramfacultałis  Ikeclogica  Parhientit,  etc.  (Leipzig, 
1685, 4to) ; — De  Heretiarchu  teti  apotfoUci  et  apottoKco 
proximi  (Leipz.  1690  and  1708, 4  to)  '.r—Prołeffomema  ad 
Flarii  Jotephi  opera  Graco-Latina  (Cologne,  I69I,  foL) : 
— Bibliofheca  Pałrum  ąpottoKconm  Grteco-Lafimi,  etŁ 
(Leipz.  1699,  2  yo]s.8yo)  (aboye  aTuded  to): — Operam 
elementu  Alexandrini  Supplemenłttm,  etc  (Leipz.  1700, 
8vo)  : — Exercitationum  Theologicarum  rarii  argHmetńi^ 
etc.  A  ccedunt  dum  orationet  inauguralet,  etc.  (leipzig, 
1702) : — Erercitatio  theolofficątie  nocisfanaficcrttm  c*o- 
rundam  nottrcB  cetatit  purgaforiU  (L^z.  1703, 4to)^— />e 
Synodi  Carenłonensis  a  reformafis  m  GalHa  eedeent 
asmo  1681  celebrata  indulgeńiia  erga  Lutherano*,  etc, 
DUsertatio  theologica.  A  ccedmił  qvałuor  Programmata 
(Lpz.  1705,  4to) : — Historia  tSynodontm  nafumałmm  a 
reformatia  in  GaUia  kabiłarum^  etc.  (Lpz.  1705):— /)to 
Bibliothecit  et  Całenis  Patntm,  etc  (Lpz.  1707,  8yo)  i— 
Historia  eccleńastica  primi  a  Christo  nato  iKtatUttieela 
Capiła  de  tcriptorUmt  et  scriptis  eedenasticis^  etc  (I^iz. 
1709, 4to) : — Schediatma  de  antorUnu  guide  seripioritm 
ecdetiasfieig  egeruni  (Lpz.  1711, 8yo) : — Historia  ConeSu 
Kicani  (Leipz.  1712,  4to) : — OpuAntla  rario,  cdita  coia 
Christiani  Ludoyici  (Leipz.  1714, 8yo).  See  Kem,  Pt 
YitOy  ObitVj  ScryOiague  Th,  Ittigii  epistolica  IHMsertnHo 
(Lpz.  1710) ;  A  eta  Eruditorum  Lipsientia^  p.  221 ;  N]<»> 
ron,  Mimoiretf  xxix,  241-252 ;  Sax,  Ontnnast.  Literar.  y, 
892;  Appendix,  yi,  585;  Ersch.  u.  Gruber,  .4  %.  AWyiK  ,- 
J.  Fabricius,  Hist,  BiNwtheca,  y,  140, 141, 302, 303, 310; 
yi,  456 ;  Hoefer,  Nour,  Biog,  Genłrale,  xxvi,  106 :  Fnhr^ 
mann,  Handwórterbuch  cŁ  Kirekengeackichte.  ii,  515. 

Zturae^a  (lTovpaia)f  a  smali  district  in  the  N.E.  of 
Palestinc,  forming  the  tetrarchy  of  Philip,  in  comiection 
with  the  adjacent  territory  of  Trachonitis  (Lukę  iii,  1), 
The  name  is  supposed  to  haye  originated  with  **'?S*^, 
//nr,  or  Jbtur,  one  of  IshmaeUs  sons  (1  Chroń,  i,  81 ).  In 
1  Chroń,  y,  19,  this  name  is  given  as  that  of  a  tribe  or 
nation  with  which  Beuben  (beyond  the  Jordan)  wanred ; 
and,  from  ita  being  joined  with  the  names  of  otber  oC 
IshmaeFs  sonsyit  is  eyident  that  a  tiibe  desoendedfion 


ITURiEA 


ns 


IVAH 


his  Bon  Jetur  is  intimated.  In  the  Utter  text  the  Sept. 
Ukes  Łhis  vieW|  and  for  *'  with  the  Hagarites,  with  Jetur, 
and  Kephish,  and  Nodab,"  reada  "with  the  Hagarites, 
and  Ituneans,  and  Nephineans,  and  Nadabseans."  The 
old  name  seems  to  be  stUl  preseryed  in  that  of  Jedur, 
which  the  same  region,  or  a  part  of  it,  now  bears.  (Thia, 
however,  has  lately  been  disputed  by  Wetzstein  [i2ewe- 
berickty  pi  88  aq.]  on  the  precarious  groand  of  the  pres- 
ent  dependent  situation  of  the  district)  We  may  thus 
take  the  district  to  haye  been  occupied  by  IshmaeFs  son, 
whose  descendanta  were  disposseased  or  subdued  by  the 
Amorites,  under  whom  it  is  supposed  to  hare  formed 
part  of  the  kingdom  of  Bashan,  and  subseąuently  to  have 
belonged  to  that  half  tribe  of  Manasseh  which  had  its 
posseasiona  east  of  the  Jordan.  From  1  Chroń.  v,  19,  it 
appean  that  the  sons  of  Jetar,  whether  under  tribute  to 
the  Anaorites  (as  sonie  suppose),  and  forming  part  of  the 
kingdom  of  Bashan  or  not,  were  in  actoal  occupation  of 
the  country,  and  were  disposseased  by  the  tribes  beyond 
the  Jordan,  who  now  conquered  and  oolonized  the  little 
proYince  of  Jetur,  which  lay  bctween  Bashan  and  Mount 
Hermon  ("in  Libano  monte"  according  to  Muratori, 
Tke».  Ijucript.  ii,  670).  During  the  £xile  thłs  and  oth- 
er  border  conntrics  were  taken  possession  of  by  yarious 
tribes,  whom,  although  they  are  calied  after  the  original 
names,  as  occupants  of  the  countries  which  had  received 
those  names,  we  are  not  bound  to  regard  as  purely  de- 
scendants  of  the  original  poesessors.  These  new  Ituns- 
ans  were  erentually  subdued  by  king  Aristobulus  (RG. 
106),  who  reconquered  the  provinoe,  then  calied  by  its 
Greek  name  Itunea,  and  gave  the  inhabitanta  their 
choice  of  Judaism  or  banishment  (Joseph.  Ani.  ziii,  11, 
3).  While  some  submitted,  many  retired  to  their  own 
rocky  fastnesses,  and  to  the  defiles  of  Hermon  adjoining. 
NerertbelesB,  the  Itursans  were  still  reoognisable  as  a 
distinct  people  in  the  time  of  Pliny  {Hut.  Nai,  v,  23). 
They  extended  their  incursions  as  far  as  Phienicia,  but 
submitted  to  the  Romans  under  Pompey  (Appian,  MUh- 
rii,  106),  and  appear  to  have  been  allowed  to  retain  their 
natire  princes  as  yaasals.  Itunsa  was  first  formally  an- 
nexed  to  the  province  of  S3Tia  by  Claudius  (Tacitus, 
Ann,  xii,  23, 1 ;  Dio  Cassius,  lix,  12),  having  been  previ- 
ously  included  in  Peraea  as  part  of  the  dominions  of  Her- 
od. (See  F.  MUnter,  De  rebus  Jiuraorum  [Hav.  1824]). 
Ad  already  intimated,  Herod  the  Great,  in  dividing  bis 
dominions  among  his  sons,  bequeathed  Itunea  to  Philip 
as  part  of  a  tetrarchy  oomposed,  according  to  Łukę,  of 
Trachonitis  and  Itunea ;  and  as  Josephus  {A  nt,  xy,  10, 1 ; 
compbXyii,8,  1)  mentions  his  territory  as  compoaed  of 
Auranitis,  Trachonitis,  and  Batanssa,  some  haye  thought 
(Keland,  p.  106 ;  Ughtfoot,  Hor,  ffeb.)  that  the  eyange- 
list  reganled  .4uranitis  and  Paneas  as  oomprehended 
under  Itunea,  a  name  kxwely  applied  by  ancient  writers 
(see  PlJny,  y,  19;  Epiphan.  IJaret,  19;  comp.  Paulus, 
Commenf,  1,311;  Wetstein,  i,  671).  But  it  properly 
dcnoted  a  well-defined  region  distinct  from  Auranitis. 
Pliny  rightly  plaoes  it  north  of  Bashan  and  near  Da- 
mascus  (y.  23),  and  J.  de  Yitry  describes  it  as  adjoining 
Trachonitis,  and  lying  ak>ng  the  base  of  Libanua,  be- 
tween  Tiberias  and  Damascus  {Getta  Dei,  p.  1074 ;  comp. 
p.  771, 1003).  The  districta  mentioned  by  Lukę  and 
Josephus  were  distinct,  but  neither  of  these  htstoiians 
giye  a  fuU  list  of  all  the  little  proyinoes  in  the  tetrar- 
chy of  Philip.  Each  probaUy  gaye  the  names  of  such 
as  were  of  most  importanoe  in  connection  with  the 
eyents  he  was  about  to  relate.  Both  Batamea  and  Au- 
ranitis appear  to  haye  been  included  in  the  "region  of 
Trachonitis"  {Tpax<iiyiTtioc  x^")'i  *nd  as  Josephus 
mentions  a  part  of  the  "  houae  of  Zenodorus**  which  was 
giyen  to  Philip,  it  unquestionably  embraoed  Itunea  (Ant, 
XV,  10, 8).  According  to  Strabo  (xvi,  756  są.),  the  coun- 
try known  to  classical  writers  was  hilly  (comp.  Jac  de 
Yitriaco,  p.  1074),  with  many  rayines  and  hoUows;  the 
inhabitants  were  regarded  as  the  worst  of  barbarians 
(Cicero,  Philip,  ii,  14),  who,  being  depriyed  of  the  re- 
sources  of  agriculture  (ApuL  Florid.  i,  6),  liycd  by  rob- 
bei7  (Stiabo,  xvi,  756),  being  skilful  archeia  (Yirgil, 


(reoyy.  ii,  448 ;  Lncan.  yii,  280, 514).  The  present  Jedni 
probably  comprehends  the  whole  or  greater  part  of  the 
proper  Ituissa.  This  is  described  by  Burckhanit  (Syria, 
p.  286)  as  "lying  sonth  of  Jebelkeseoue,  east  of  Jebel  es- 
Sheik  (Mount  Hermon),  and  west  of  the  Haj  road.**  It 
is  bounded  on  the  east  by  Trachonitis,  on  the  south  by 
Graulanitis,  on  the  west  by  Hermon,  and  on  the  north  by 
the  plain  of  Damascus^  It  is  table-land,  with  an  undu' 
lating  snrface,  and  has  little  oonical  and  cup-shaped 
hills  at  interyalsL  The  sonthem  section  of  it  has  a  rich 
soil,  well  watered  by  numerous  springs,  and  streams  from 
Hermon.  The  greater  part  of  the  northem  section  is 
entirely  difFerent.  The  snr&ce  of  the  ground  is  coyer- 
ed  with  jagged  rocka,  in  some  places  heaped  up  in  huge 
piles,  in  others  sunk  into  deep  pits;  at  one  place  smooth 
and  naked,  at  another  seamed  with  yawning  chasms,  in 
whose  rugged  edges  rank  grass  and  weeds  spring  np. 
The  rock  is  all  basalt,  and  the  formation  similar  to  that 
of  the  Lejah.  See  Argob.  The  molten  laya  seems  to 
haye  issued  from  the  earth  through  innumenUe  pores, 
to  haye  spread  oyer  the  plain,  and  then  to  have  been 
rent  and  shattered  while  cooling  (Porter,  Handbook,  p. 
465).  Jedur  contains  thirty-eight  towns  and  yillages, 
ten  of  which  are  now  entirely  desolate,  and  all  the  rest 
contain  only  a  few  families  of  poor  peasants,  liying  in 
wretched  horels  amid  heaps  of  ruins  (Porter,  Damatcugj 
ii,  272  Bq.).  See  Robinson,  Bib,  Ret,  Appendix,  p.  149; 
Jour,  Sac,  Lit,  July,  1854,  p.811. 

Ztzchaki,  also  calied  Ben-Jatuty  and  by  the  long 
Arabie  name  of  id  bu  Jbrakim  Itaac  Ibn-Kattar  (or  Sah- 
tar)  ben-Jatut,  a  Jewish  philosopher  of  great  oelebrity, 
and  oommentator,  was  bom  A.D.  982  at  Toledo.  Like 
many  other  Jewish  sayans,he  followed  the  medical  pro- 
fession,  and  so  distinguished  himself  that  he  was  ap- 
pointed  physician  to  the  princes  of  Denia  and  Mug*ahid, 
and  to  Alilkbal  Addaula.  He  died  in  1057.  Itzchaki 
wTote  (1)  a  Hebrew  grammar,  calied  D'«B1'^2Sn  ^BD, 
The  Book  of  Syntax;  and  (2)  on  Biblical  criticism, 
ealled  *ypT\':i^  ^BO,  The  Work  ofItzchakL  Neither  of 
these  works  is  now  known  to  us,  but  from  Aben-Ezra, 
who  ąuotes  them,  we  leam  that  Itzchaki  was  one  of  the 
earliest  assailants  of  the  Mosaic  authorship  of  some  por- 
tions  of  the  Pentateuch.  Thus  he  is  sald  to  have  main- 
tained  that  the  portion  in  the  Pentateuch  which  describes 
the  kings  of  Idunuea  (Gen.  xxxvi,  30,  etc)  was  written 
many  centuries  after  Moses  (comp.  Aben-Ezra,  Commenr 
t  ariet  on  Gen,  xxxvi,  30,  31 ;  Numb.  xxiv,  17 ;  I  fos,  i,  1). 
See  GrUtz,  Getcftichte  der  Juden,vi,  53;  ZeUtchriJt  der 
deuUch,  morgmL  Getelitch,  1854,  p.  551 ;  1855,  p.  888. 

Itzchaki,  SoLOMON.    See  Rasiii. 

I Vah  (Heb.  Iwah',  M^5,  for  il^?,  avvah%  an  orer- 
tuming  or  ruin,  as  in  Ezek.  xxi,  32 ;  Sept.  'Aova,  but  in 
Isa.  xxxvii,  13,  unites  with  the  preced.  word  into  'Ava- 
łyyovyava),  a  city  of  Ihe  Assyrians  whence  they  brought 
colonists  to  repeople  Samaria  (2  Kings  Kriu,  34 ;  xix, 
13 ;  Isa.  xxxvii,  13,  where  it  is  mentioned  in  connection 
with  Hena  and  Sepharyaim ;  also  in  the  cognate  form 
"  Ava,"  2  Kings  x\ii,  24,  where  it  stands  in  comiection 
with  Babybn  and  Cuthah).  Sir  H.  KawUnson  thinks 
that  the  site  must  be  sought  in  Babylonia,  and  that  it  is 
probably  idcntical  with  the  modem  Iłit,  which  is  the 'I; 
of  Herodotufl  (i,  179),  a  place  famous  for  bituminous 
springs  (see  Rich,  First  Afemoir  on  BabyUm,  p.  64,  and 
Chesney,  Euphratet  Expedition,  i,  55).  This  town  lay 
on  the  Euphrates,  between  Sippara  (Scphar\-aim)  and 
Anah  (Hena),  with  which  it  seems  to  have  been  politi- 
cally  united  shortly  before  the  time  of  Sennacherib  (2 
Kings  xix,  13).  He  also  regards  it  as  probably  the 
Ahava  (K^riK)  of  Ezra  (viii,  15).  He  believes  the 
name  to  have  been  originally  derived  from  that  of  a 
Babylonian  god,  Iva,  who  represents  the  sky  or  ^ther, 
and  to  whom  the  town  is  supposed  to  have  been  dedi- 
cated  (Rawlinson,  Herodotut,  1 ,  606,  not«).  In  the  Tal^ 
mad  the  name  appears  as  Ihih  (K'^n*^),  whence  might 


IVES 


łl6 


IVORT 


possibly  be  formed  the  Greek 'Ic,  and  tbe  modem  ffU 
(where  the  t  is  merely  tbc  feminine  ending),  if  we  might 
suppose  any  oonnection  between  the  Greek  and  tbe  Tal- 
mud. Isidore  of  Charax  aeena  to  intend  tbe  same  plaoe 
by  his  'A<(-ToXic  (Mam,  Parłh.  p.  6).  Some  hare 
thooght  tbat  it  occurs  as  Ift  in  the  Egyptian  inscrip- 
tions  of  the  time  of  Thothmes  III,  about  KC.  1450 
(Birchy  in  Otta  ACgt/ptiacay  p.  80).  But  theae  conject- 
ures  are  destitute  of  any  great  probability,  as  the  foim 
of  the  Heb.  name  does  not  well  correspond.  See  Aya. 
ZveB,  Levi  Silliman,  D.D.,  LL.D.,  a  theologian  of 
Bome  notę,  morę  especially  on  account  of  his  defection 
from  the  Protestant  Episcopal  Chnrch  to  Romanism, 
was  bom  in  Meriden,  Conn.,  Sept.  16, 1797.  His  paients 
remoyed  to  New  York  State  while  he  was  quite  young, 
and  he  was  prepared  for  college  at  Lewisidlle  Academy. 
At  the  outbreak  of  the  war  in  1812,  he  8erved  his  coun- 
try for  one  year,  and  in  1816  finally  entered  upon  his 
oollegiat«  course  at  Hamilton  College,  pursuing,  at  the 
same  time,  studies  preparatory  for  the  work  of  the  min- 
istiy.  He  had  been  reared  in  the  Presbyterian  Church, 
but  in  1819,  when  impaired  health  obliged  him  to  quit 
the  college,  he  joined  the  Protestant  Episcopal  Church, 
and  contmued  his  theological  education  at  N.  Y.  City 
under  bishop  Hobart,  at  whose  hands  he  receired  dear 
con'8  orders  in  1822,  and  whose  son-in-law  he  became  in 
1825.  His  first  parish  was  Batavia,  N.  Y. ;  but  he  re- 
mained  there  oniy  a  few  months,  as  he  received  a  cali 
in  1823  from  Trinity  Church,  Philadelphia,  which  he  at 
once  accepted,  bishop  White  ordaining  him  to  the  priest- 
hood.  In  1827  he  was  called  to  Christ  Church,  Lancas- 
ter, Pa.,  and  the  year  following  became  assistant  rector 
of  Christ  Church,  N.  Y.  City.  This  connection  he  sev- 
ered  8ix  months  later,  to  assume  the  rectorship  of  St. 
Luke*s  Church,  N.  Y.  In  1831  he  was  honored  with  the 
bishopric  of  North  Carolina,  where  he  became  rery  pop- 
ular, and  for  a  time  wiclded  great  influence ;  but  in  1848 
he  began  to  adrocate  doctrines  inadmissible  by  any 
Protestant  belieyer  of  the  Christian  doctrines,  and  dis- 
tnist  and  alienation  on  the  part  of  his  diocese  led  him 
to  renounce  publicly  his  mistaken  course.  But  so  in- 
clined  had  he  beoome  to  the  Roman  Catholic  i-iew  of 
the  apostoUcal  succession,  and  the  need  of  an  "  infallible" 
interpreter  of  the  Scriptures,  that  he  soon  arowed  bis 
former  opinions,  and  in  1852,  while  in  Europę,  publicly 
submitted  tb  the  authority  of  Romę.  Of  course,  this 
caused  his  deposition  from  the  bishopric  of  N.  Carolina. 
In  defense  of  his  course,  he  published  The  Triah  of  a 
Mind  Ul  its  Progress  to  Catholicism  (Boston,  1854, 8vo), 
in  which  he  sets  forth  the  Roman  Catholic  view  of  the 
divinc  right  of  episcopacy.  Einding  that  the  Protestant 
Epis.  Church  does  not  possess  a  regular  apostolical  suc- 
cession (p.  146-157),  he  fclt  obliged  to  accept  the  Church 
of  Romę  as  the  true  Church.  This  course  was  very 
naturally  pursued  by  bishop  Ive8,  who,  while  yet  in  the 
Episcopal  Church,  had  always  inclined  to  High-Church- 
ism.  "  Sitting  upon  the  pinnacle  of  High-Churchism, 
the  head  eaaily  tums,  or  becomes  so  dizzy  as  to  fali 
down  into  the  abyss  of  Popery."  Ives  fell,  like  Doane, 
and  Wheaton,  and  Markoe,  by  carrying  out  the  High- 
Church  principles  to  their  legitimate  resoltA.  After 
his  change  he  was  employed  as  professor  of  rhetoric  in 
St.  Joscph's  Theological  Seminar}',  and  as  lecturer  on 
rhetoric  and  English  literaturę  in  the  convents  of  the 
Sacred  Ileart  and  the  Sisters  of  Charity.  Ex-bishop 
Ive8  evidently  was  a  mon  of  good  parts  and  noble  in- 
tentions,  for  during  the  last  years  of  his  life  we  find  him 
incessantly  at  work  in  the  establishment  of  an  institu- 
tion  at  ManhattanWlle  for  the  protection  of  destitute 
children :  here  nearly  2000  children  are  now  provided 
for.  He  died  Oct.  13, 1867.  Ires  published  also  a  vol- 
iime  of  sermons  On  the  ApoatM  Doctrine  and  Fellow- 
$hipj  and  another  On  Obedience  ofFaith  (1849, 18mo). 
See  I^eus  EngUmder^  Aug.  1866,  art  iv ;  Princeton  Reriew, 
xvii, 491  (on  his  sermons);  Appletorij  A meriean C^dop, 
annual  of  1867, 411 8q.;  Allibone,  Dictionary  o/Authors, 
1,946.     CJ.H,W.) 


I  vimey ,  Joseph,  the  hiatorian  of  the  En^^  Bap« 
tists,  was  born  in  1773,  puiaaed  his  studies  at  the  Bristol 
Academy,  and  .for  twenty-nine  yean  waa  pastor  of  a 
Baptist  church  in  London.  His  principal  publicatioos 
are,  (1)  an  edition  of  The  PUgrinCt  Progren,  tcith  Koies: 
—(2)  The  Li/e  ofJokn  Bungan  .-—(8)  Trtatise  an  Bap- 
iism  and  Commmtion: — (4)  The  lAfe,  TimeSj  and  Opat' 
umt  o/John  Milton  i—{b)  Bisiory  ofthe  English  Bap- 
tists  (4  yols.  8vo).  The  last,  his  most  important  work, 
is  highly  commended  by  Robert  Hall  for  the  Talue  cf 
its  historical  substance  and  for  the  qiudity  of  the  au- 
thor'8  style.  His  Life  of  Bunyan  continued  to  be  the 
chief  authority  on  the  subject^  until  the  gnrwing  poblic 
appreciation  of  the  *'  ingenious  dreamer^  enlisted  in  the 
illustration  of  his  life  the  dassic  pen  of  Sontbey  and  tbe 
minutę  diligence  of  Mr.  Offor.  Mr.  lyimey^s  death  oc- 
curred  in  1884.  See  G.  Pritdiard,  Memoirs  of  the  Lift 
and  Writings  of  Joseph  Jrimey  (London,  1835, 8vo). 

Zvo,  bishop  of  Chartres  (Camoteiuw).  Little  is 
kiiown  of  the  life  of  this  prelate  beyond  what  we  can 
leam  from  his  workSi  The  exact  datc  of  his  birth  is 
not  ascertained  (it  is  supposed  to  have  been  about  1040\ 
neither  is  his  descent:  some  say  that  he  was  of  Iow  ex- 
tnction  (**  ex  genere  minime  nobili,"  GaJUia  Christiana^ 
viii,  1126),  while  others  give  him  a  noble  parentage  {^  m 
agro  Bellovacensi  natus  nobili  a  sangnine  nobilcm  ani- 
mum  traxit,"  Vifa  B.  Ivonisy  Parłs  ed.  1647).  He  rtnd- 
ied  philosophy  and  rhetoric  at  Paris,  then  theology  on- 
der  LanlVanc  in  the  convent  of  Bec ;  and  in  1078  became 
superior  of  the  convent  of  St.Quaitin,  in  which  office 
he  acąuired  great  reputation  as  a  theologian  and  eanon- 
ist.  In  1090,  upon  the  deposition  of  the  bishop  of  Cfair- 
tres  for  simony,  Ivo  was  appointed  in  hia  place,  yet 
his  predecessor  had  still  such  strong  local  interes t  that 
Ivo  had  to  be  nominated  directly  by  the  pope  (Urban 
II),  and  was  only  installed  in  1092,  at  Capua.  He  it 
one  of  the  prelates  who  contributed  most  to  the  exten- 
sion  of  papai  authority,  yet  he  did  not  hesitate  to  speak 
plainly  against  the  atńise  of  the  system  of  curacy;  in 
the  Paris  edition  of  his  life  he  is  even  piaised  as  one  of 
the  defenders  of  the  Gallican  liberties.  In  the  diffirdty 
about  the  question  of  incestiture  (q.  v.),  raised  by  HiUle- 
brand  and  his  followers,  the  oourse  of  Ivo  was  marked 
by  great  moderation,  arising,  not  from  weakneas,  bot 
from  a  desire  of  conciliatiug  and  meting  jiistice  to  all 
partles.  He  also  endeavored  to  check  the  persecntio^ 
spirit  of  the  hierarchy  when  it  began  to  aocuae  pcf« 
Paschal  II  of  heresy  for  haring  yieldcd  to  empeior  Hen- 
ry y.  His  private  character,  as  well  as  hb  kaniii)|r, 
gave  him  great  influence,  ^ilien  Philip  I  repodiated 
his  legitimate  wife  to  marry  another,  he  alone  had  the 
courage  to  oppose  him,  and  neither  promises  jnat  tfaresN 
could  induce  him  to  sanction  the  misdeed ;  and  by  his 
noble  and  straightforward  course  he  escited  tbe  adau- 
ration  of  the  people  and  nobility,  who  all  took  his  part. 
He  died  in  1115  (according  to  Richter  and  Meyer,  in 
1125),  and  was  canonized  in  1570  for  May  20.  As  a 
writer,  he  is  known  as  the  author  of  a  Pannormia  and 
a  decretwn  [see  Canons  akd  Decretals,  Coijjsc- 
T103C8  of);  also  of  287  Lettera  (Paris,  1584-85, 1610\ 
which  shed  much  light  on  the  history  of  his  time,  and 
show  in  how  high  an  estimation  his  opinions  were  heU; 
24  eccleaiasticai  discounca  on  synods,  festirals,  etc; ;  and, 
finally,  a  short  chronicie  of  the  French  kings.  The  most 
complete  collection  of  his  works  haa  been  published  at 
Paris  in  1647,  foL,  but  it  does  not  contain  the  Pamtor' 
mia,  In  Migne*s  edidon  of  the  fathers  Ivo's  wotks  were 
leprinted  in  1855  (Paris).  See  Bist,  Litt,  de  Frarnr,  x, 
102;  V,  150;  Herzog,  Reai-Ewykiopadie,  rii,  189  eq.; 
Mosheim,  Ecdes.  Bist.  ii,  180  sq. ;  Ceillier,  Bist,  des  A  nt. 
Sac.  xxi,  428  sq. ;  SchrOckh,  Kirehengesch,  xvii,  13  sq. ; 
xxvi,  12  Bq. 

lYOry  (D*^an3T9,  shenhabbim',  elephants  tootk;  see 
A,  Benary,  in  the  Berliner  Lit.  Jahrhdcker,  1831,  Na  96 ; 
1  Kings  X,  22;  2  Chroń,  ix,  21;  and  so  expliiiiied  by 
the  Targum,  ^'W  *;^,  and  Sept.  666vTic  iA<^ayrfi«c> 


IVORY 


łl7 


IVORY 


aiso  aimply  "(O,  a  iooih,  Psa.  xlvy  8 ;  Szek.  xxvii,  15 ; 
Amo8  vi,  4 ;  N.  T.  i\UdvTivoc,  o/wary,  Rev.  xviii,  12), 
It  is  remarkable  that  no  word  in  Biblićal  Hebrew  de- 
notea  an  elephant,  unless  the  latter  portion  of  the  com- 
pound  then-habbim  be  supposed  to  have  this  meaning. 
Gcsenius  deńres  it  from  the  Sanscrit  ibhas,  **an  ele- 
phant  C  Keil  (on  1  Kinga  x,  2*2)  from  the  Coptic  d)oy  ; 
while  Sir  Henry  Rawliniiou  mentions  a  word  hahha, 
which  he  met  with  in  the  Ass^Tian  inscriptions,  and 
which  he  understands  to  mean  "  the  large  animal,"  the 
term  being  applied  both  to  the  elephant  and  the'  camel 
{Joum,  o/ As,  Soc.  xii,  463).  It  is  suggested  in  Gese- 
nlu»*s  Thetaurut  (s.  v.)  that  the  original  reading  may 
have  been  C^aąSl  yś,  "  irorj',  ebony"  (compare  Ezek. 
^ss-ii,  15).  By  some  of  the  ancient  nations  these  tusks 
were  imagined  to  be  homs  (Ezek.  xxvii,  15 ;  Riny,  viii, 
4 :  xviii,  1),  thoiigh  Diodoras  Siculiis  (i,  55)  correctly 
calls  thcm  teeth.  As  thcy  were  first  acquainted  with 
elephants  through  their  ivory,  which  was  an  important 
article  of  commcrce,  the  shape  of  the  tusks,  in  all  prob- 
abUity,  led  thera  into  this  enror.  They  are  genuine 
teeth,  combining  in  themselve9,  and  occupying,  in  the 
upper  jaw,  the  whole  mass  of  secretioiis  which  in  other 
animals  form  the  upper  incisor  and  laniary  teeth.  They 
are  useful  for  defence  and  offcnce,  and  for  holding  down 
green  branches,  or  rooting  up  water-plants;  but  still 
they  are  not  absolutely  necessary,  sińce  there  is  a  varie- 
t y  (łf  elephant  in  the  Indian  forcsts  entirely  destitute  of 
tiuka,  and  the  females  in  most  of  the  races  are  either 
^vithout  them,  or  have  them  vcry  smali;  not  tumed 
downwanls,  as  Bochart  states,  but  rather  straight^  as 
correctly  described  by  Pliny.  Only  two  species  of  ele- 
phants are  recognised — the  African  and  the  Indian — 
easily  distinguished  from  each  other  by  the  size  of  the 
eir,  which  in  the  former  is  much  larger  than  in  the  lat- 
ter. The  tusks  of  the  African  elephant  attain  some- 
tinii'3  a  length  of  8  or  even  10  feet,  and  a  weight  of  100 
tu  120  pounds;  but  those  of  the  Indian  elephant  are 
much  shorter  and  lighter,  while  in  the  females  thcy  of- 
ten  scarcely  project  beyond  the  lips.  "  £lephant's  tooth," 
or  »imply  *'  elephant,**  is  a  common  name  for  ivory,  not 
only  in  ths  Oriental  languages  and  in  Greek,  but  also 
in  the  Western  tongues,  although  in  all  of  them  teeth 
of  other  species  may  be  included.  There  can  be  no 
d  >ubt,  for  example,  that  the  harder  and  morę  acceasi- 
blc  ivory  obtaincd  from  the  hippopotamus  was  known 
Ul  Egypt  at  least  as  carly  as  that  obtained  from  the  ele- 
phant. Ttiis  kind  of  ivory  does  not  split,  and  therefore 
was  aaciently  most  useful  for  military  instruments.    See 

ELKPilANT. 

The  Egyptiana  at  a  very  early  period  madę  use  of 
this  materiał  in  deooration.  The  cover  of  a  smali  ivory 
box  in  the  Egyptian  ooUection  at  the  Lou\'Te  ia  **  in- 
scribed  with  the  pnenomen  Nefer-ka-re,  or  Neper-che- 
res,  adopted  by  a  dynaaty  found  in  the  upper  linę  of  the 
tablet  of  Abydos,  and  attributed  by  M.  Buosen  to  the 
fifth.  .  .  .  In  the  time  of  Thothmes  III  ivory  was  im- 
poncd  in  considcrable  quantitie8  into  Egypt,  either  *  in 
boats  loden  with  ivory  and  ebony'  from  Ethiopia,  or 
elsc  in  tusks  aud  cupa  from  the  Raten-nn.  .  .  .  The  cel- 
ebiated  car  at  Florence  haa  its  linchpins  tipped  with 
ivory"  (Birch,  in  Trtuu,  of  Roy,  Soc  of  JM,  iii,  2d  se- 
nes). The  spccimens  of  Egyptian  ivory  work,  which 
are  Tound  in  the  principal  museums  of  Europę,  are,  most 
of  thcm,  in  the  opinion  of  Mr.  Birch,  of  a  datę  anterior 
to  the  Persian  invasion,  and  some  even  as  old  as  the 
18th  dynasty.  The  practice  of  inUying  or  covering 
the  walls  with  ivory  and  other  valuable  substances  was 
in  very  extensive  uae  among  the  Egyptians,  who  nsed 
it  Ukcwise  for  omamenting  articles  of  fumiture,  as  may 
be  seen  in  the  British  Museum.  Amongst  the  articles 
of  hoasehold  fumiture  there  is  a  seat  with  four  tumed 
legs  inlaid  with  ivory,  brought  from  Thebes;  also  a 
hij^h-backcd  chair  on  lion-footed  legs;  the  back  solid, 
inlaiil  with  panels  of  darker  wood,  with  lotus  ilowers  of 
ivory.    The  ivory  uaed  by  the  Egyptians  was  prind- 


pally  brongbt  from  Ethiopia  (Herod,  iii,  114),  thongh 
their  elephants  were  originally  from  Asia.  The  Ethio- 
pians,  acooiding  to  Diodonis  Sicolus  (i,  55),  brought  to 
Seaostiia  **  ebony  and  gold,  and  the  teeth  of  elephants.*' 
Among  the  tribute  paid  by  them  to  the  Persian  kings 
were  "  twenty  large  tuaks  of ivory"  (Herod,  iii,  97).  The 
processions  of  buman  figures  bearing  presents,  etc*  still 
extant  on  the  walls  of  palaces  and  tombs,  attest,  by  the 
black,  crisp-baiied  bearers  of  huge  teeth,  that  some  of 
these  came  from  Ethiopia  or  Central  Africa;  and  by 
white  men  similarly  laden,  who  also  bring  an  Asiatic 
elephant  and  a  white  bear,  that  otheis  came  from  the 


Tribate  of  Elephants*  Tusks  brought  to  Thothmes  IIL 
(Thebes.) 

EasL  In  the  Periplus  of  the  Red  Sea  (c.  4),  attributed 
to  Arrian,Goloe  (jCaUii)  is  said  to  be  "  the  chief  mart  for 
ivory.*'  It  was  thence  carrieil  down  to  Adouli  {ZuUa, 
or  ThuUd)y  a  port  on  the  Red  Sea,  about  three  daya' 
joumey  from  Coloe,  together  with  the  hides  of  hippo- 
potami,  tortoise-shell,  apes,  and  8laves  (Pliny^  vi,  S4). 
The  elephants  and  rhinoceroscs  from  which  it  was  oh< 
tained  were  killed  further  up  the  countr}',  and  fcw  were 
taken  ncar  the  sea,  or  in  the  neighborhood  of  Adouli. 
At  Ptolemais  Theron  was  found  a  little  ivory  likc  that 
of  Adouli  {Periplus f  c  8).  Ptolemy  Philadelphus  madę 
this  port  the  dćpot  of  the  elephant  trade  (Pliny,  vi,  34). 
According  to  róny  (\'iii,  10),  ivory  was  so  plentiful  on 
the  borders  of  Ethiopia  that  the  iiatives  madę  door- 
posts  of  it,  and  even  fences  and  stalls  for  their  cattle. 
The  author  of  the  Periplus  (c.  IG)  mentious  Rhapta  aa 
another  station  of  the  ivory  trade,  but  the  ivory  brought 
down  to  this  port  is  said  to  have  been  of  an  inferior 
quality,  and  "for  the  most  part  found  in  the  woods, 
damaged  by  rain,  or  collected  from  animals  drowned  by 
the  overflow  of  the  nvers  at  the  equinoxes**  (Smith,  Diet, 
ofClcus,  Geographyf  s.  v.  Rhapta).  The  Egyptian  mer- 
chants  traded  for  ivory  and  onyx  Stones  to  Bar^-^gaza, 
the  port  to  which  was  carried  down  the  commerce  of 
Westem  India  from  Ozene  {Periplus,  c  49). 

The  Assyrians  appear  to  have  carried  on  a  great  traf- 
fic  in  ivory.  Their  early  conąuests  in  India  had  madę 
them  familiar  with  it,  and  (according  to  one  rendering 
of  the  passage)  their  artists  supplied  the  luxuriou8  Tyr- 


jWhh  'p.'r^r^^^v^v■\^^^M'^^^^^^ 


Apes,  Elephant,  and  lyory  as  Tribute.    (From  the  Nim- 
rud  Obelisk.) 


lYORY 


718 


1X0RA 


ians  ¥rith  canrings  in  ivoiy  from  the  isles  of  Chitdm 
(Ecek.  xxvii,  6).  On  the  obelisk  in  the  British  Mufle- 
um  the  captires  or  tńbute-bearere  are  represented  as 
canying  tusks.  Among  the  merchandise  of  Babylon 
enumerated  in  Rev.  xviii,  12  are  included  "all  manner 
ve88eb  of  ivory."  Mr.  Layard  di8covered  8everal  oma- 
ments  roade  fróm  ivory  in  the  Assyrian  mounds  (iVtn«- 
veh,  ii,  15),  but  they  are  of  uncertain  datę,  and  exhibit 
marks  of  Egyptian  workmanship  (t6.  p.  163, 168).  Many 
Bpedmens  of  Assyrian  canring  in  ivory  have  been  found 
in  the  excavaŁioii3  at  Nimrud,  and  among  the  rest  some 
tablets  "richly  inlaid  with  blue  and  opaque  glass,  lapis- 
lazuli,  etc"  (Bouomi,  Ninereh  and  itt  Palaces,  p.  834 ; 
conip.  Cant.  v,  U).  Part  of  an  ivory  staff,  apparently  a 
sceptre,  and  several  entire  elephants*  tusks,  were  discov- 
ered  by  Mr.  Layard  in  the  last  stage  of  decay,  and  it 
was  with  extrenie  difficulty  that  these  interesting  relics 
could  be  restored  OYth.  and  Bab,  p.  195). 

In  the  early  ages  of  Greece  irory  was  frequently  em- 
ployed  for  purposes  of  ornament.  The  trappings  of 
horses  wcre  studded  with  it  (Homer,  JL  v,  584) :  it  was 
used  for  the  handles  of  keys  (Odyssey,  xxi,  7)  and  for  the 
bosses  of  ehields  (Hes.  Sc,  Herc.  141, 142).  The  "  ivory 
house"  of  Ahab  (1  Kings  xxii,  39)  was  probably  a  pal- 
ące, the  walls  of  which  were  panelled  with  ivory,  like 
the  palące  of  Menelaus  described  by  Homer  {Odys,  iv, 
73 ;  compare  Eiu-ip.  Iph,Aul, 583,  {\i<pavToŁkTOi  ^ó/iot. 
Gomp.  also  Amos  iii,  15,  and  Psa.  xlv,  8,  unless  the  **  ivo- 
ry  pidaces"  in  the  latter  passage  were  perfume-boxes 
madę  of  that  materiał,  as  has  been  conjectured).  It  is 
difficult  to  deterroiue  whethcr  the  "  tower  of  ivory**  of 
Cant.  vii,  4  is  merely  a  figurę  of  speech,  or  whether  it 
had  its  original  among  the  things  that  were.  Beds  in- 
laid or  yeneered  with  ivory  were  in  use  among  the  He- 
brews  (Amos  vi,  4;  ccmpare  Homer,  Od,  xxiii,  200),  as 
also  amoug  the  Egyptians  (Wilkinson,  Aw.  Eg.  iii,  169). 
The  practice  of  iiilaying  and  veneering  wood  with  ivory 
and  tortoise-shell  is  described  by  Pliny  (xvi,  84).  By 
the  luxurious  Phoenicians  ivory  was  employed  to  orna- 
ment the  boxwood  rowiug-benches  (or  **hatches**  ac- 
cording  to  some)  of  tlieir  galleys  (Ezek.  xxvii,  6).  The 
skiiled  workmen  of  Hiram,  king  of  Tyre,  fashioned  the 
great  ivory  throne  of  Solomon,  and  overlaid  it  with 
pure  gold  (1  Kings  x,  18;  2  Chroń,  ix,  17).  The  ivory 
thus  employed  was  supplied  by  the  caravan8  of  Dedan 
(Isa.  xxi,  13;  Ezek.  xxvii,  15),  or  was  brought  from  the 
£ast  Indies,  with  apes  and  peacocks,  by  the  navy  of 
Tarshish  (1  Kings  x,  22).  As  an  instance  of  the  super- 
abinidaut  possession  and  barbarian  use  of  elephants* 
teeth  may  be  mentioned  the  octagonal  icoi-y  hunting- 
tower  built  by  Akbar,  about  twenty-four  miles  west  of 
Agra:  it  is  still  staiiding,  and  bristles  with  128  enor- 
mous  tusks  disposed  in  ascending  lines,  sixteen  on  each 
face.  Mr.  Roberts,  remarking  on  the  words  of  Amos 
(vi,  4),  they  "  that  lie  upon  beds  of  irory,  and  stretch 
themselvcs  upon  couches,"  rcfers  the  last  word,  in  con- 
fbrmity  with  the  Tamul  version,  to  swinging  cots,  often 
mentioned  in  the  early  tales  of  India,  and  still  plenti- 
fully  used  by  the  wcalthy.  But  it  does  not  appear  that 
they  were  known  in  Western  Asia,  or  that  flgures  of 
them  occur  on  Eg}'ptian  bas-reliefs.  It  is  morę  likely 
that  paUóea  (those  luxuTious  travelling  litters)  are 
meant,  which  were  borne  on  men's  shoulders,  while  the 
person  withm  was  stretched  at  ease.  They  were  in 
common  use  even  among  the  Romans,  for  Cicero  fell 
into  his  assassin's  hands  whiie  he  was  atteropting  to  es- 
cape  in  one  of  them  towards  Naples.  Among  the  Ro- 
mans, inlaying  with  ivory  seems  to  have  bccome,  at 
length,  rather  a  common  method  of  omamenting  the 
interioTS  of  the  mansions  of  the  wealthy;  for  Horace 
mentions  it  as  an  eridence  of  his  humble  way  of  life 
that  "no  walls  inlaid  with  ivor>'  adomed  his  house." 

Ivy  {Ktaaóc)  is  mentioned  but  once  in  the  Scrip- 
turcs,  and  that  in  the  Apocr>'pha,  namely,.in  2  Jlacc. 
vi,  7,  where  it  is  said  that  the  Jews  Avere  compelled, 
when  the  feast  of  Bacchus  was  kept,  to  go  in  procession 
carrying  ivy  to  this  deity,  to  whom  it  is  well  known  this 


plant  was  sacred.    Ivy,  however,  tbough  not  mentłosea 
by  name,  has  a  peculiar  interest  to  the  Chństito,  u 


Utdera  UtUiz, 


forming  the  "comiptible  crown"  (1  Cor.  ix,  25)  for 
which  the  competitors  at  the  great  Isthmian  games 
contended,  and  which  St.  Paul  so  beautifully  contnsts 
with  the  "  incomiptible  crown"  that  shall  hereafter 
encircle  the  brows  of  those  who  run  wonhily  the  net 
of  this  mortal  life.  In  the  Isthmian  contests  the  \'ic- 
tor*s  garland  was  either  iry  or  phe, — Smith.  Sc« 
Crowx. 

The  term  Ki(f(f6c  or  kittóc  seems  to  have  been  applied 
by  the  Greeks  in  a  generał  sense,  and  to  have  indoded 
many  plants,  and  among  them  some  climbeis,  as  tbe 
conrolwlus,  besides  the  common  ivy  (iledera  heiix\ 
which  was  especially  dedicated  to  Bacchus,  and  which 
was  distinguished  by  the  name  o(  **  Jłedera  poetieu,  Di- 
onysia  aut  BacchicOt  qUod  ex  ea  po^tanim  corome  con- 
suerentur."  It  is  weU  known  that  in  the  DionysU,  or 
festivals  in  honor  of  Dionysus,  and  in  the  procesaons 
called  9ta90iy  with  which  they  wcre  cekbrated,  woroen 
also  took  p«rt,  in  the  disguise  of  Baccha,  Naisde^ 
Nymphae,  etc,  adomed  with  garlands  of  iv>%  etc.  (Orid, 
F(uti,  iii,  766).  Bacchus  is  geneniBy  thougfat  to  hsw 
been  educated  in  India,  and  the  Indian  Bagkt*  bas  been 
suppoflcd  to  be  the  original  of  the  name.  The  fict  of 
Baghes  being  a  oompound  of  two  words  signif>'in|:  tiger 
and  master  or  lord,  would  appear  to  confirro  the  idenii- 
ty,  sińce  Bacchus  is  usoally  represented  as  dnwn  in  his 
diariot  by  a  tiger  and  a  lion,  and  tigers,  etc,  aie  de- 
scribed as  following  him  in  his  Indian  jouniey.  As  the 
ivy,  however,  is  not  a  plant  of  India,  it  might  be  objcct- 
ed  to  its  being  characteristic  of  an  Indian  god.  Bat  in 
the  mountains  which  bound  India  to  the  northboth  tbe 
ivy  and  the  vine  may  be  found,  and  the- Greeks  were 
acquainted  with  the  fact  that  Mount  Mero  is  the  ooly 
part  of  India  whcre  ivy  was  produced.  Indeed,  Akstn- 
der  and  his  oompanions  are  said  to  have  crowned  them- 
selves  with  ivy  in  honor  of  Bacchus.  The  ivy,  Uedtra 
helixy  being  a  native  of  most  parts  of  Europę,  is  too  wcU 
known  to  reąuire  special  notice. — Kit  to.    Sec  Bacchcs, 

Izora,  a  divinity  of  the  East  Indians,  or  the  wor^ 
shippers  of  Brahm.  They  hołd  him  to  be  of  inftnite 
endurance,  and  illustrate  this  belief  by  ssyin^  that 
Brahm  himself,  deairous  of  seeing  Ixora's  bead,  ssoend- 


lYAR 


119 


JAAR&OREGIM 


cd  to  heAven  on  wings,  bat  failed  to  gtan  admittance, 
tbe  power  of  Ixora  prerendng  it.  A  yeiy  aimiUr  deaire 
Yishna  cherished,  but  all  his  attempts  also  to  this  end 
Ixoim  fnutrated.  He  is  said  to  haye  two  wiyes,  one  of 
whom  conatantly  lesides  with  hiin,  and  conceals  henelf 
in  his  hair ;  the  other,  stimngely  enough,  they  say,  diea 
annually,  and  is  by  Ixora  restored  to  life  again.  The 
Brahmios  repiesent  this  idol  standing  on  a  pedestal, 
with  no  less  than  sixteen  anna,  each  of  them  grasping 
amnething  of  yalue,  or  repreeenting  the  natural  ele- 
menta,  or  weapona  indicating  hu  power.  His  head  is 
adomed  with  long  and  beautifui  hair;  his  face  is  white 
and  shining;  he  has  three  eyea,  and  a  crescent  or  half 
moon  upon  YlIa  forehead. — Broughtoo,  Bibiioikeca  liisL 
Sac,  i,  561.    See  Brahminism. 

Zyar  ("^ J'^S|t ;  *Iap,  Joeephus,  A  nt.  viii,  8, 1 ;  the  Ma- 
eedonian  'Aprtfiitnoc)  is  the  late  name  of  that  month 
which  was  the  second  of  the  sacred,  and  the  seyenth  of 
the  ciyil  year  of  the  Jews,  and  which  began  with  the 
new  moon  of  May.  The  few  memorable  days  in  it  are 
the  lOth,  as  a  fast  for  the  death  of  EU ;  the  14th,  as  the 
aeoond  or  lesser  Passoyer  for  those  whom  uncleanness  ox 
abaence  prevented  from  celebrating  the  feast  in  Nisan 
(Nnmb.  ix,  11) ;  the  28d,  as  a  feast  institated  by  Simon 
the  Maccabee  in  memory  of  his  taking  the  citadel  Acra, 
in  Jenisalem  (1  Mace.  xiii,  51,  52)  *,  the  28th,  as  a  fast 
lor  the  death  of  Samuel.     See  Calendar. 

Gesenius  derives  lyar  from  the  Hebrew  loot  "TIK, 
to  skinę ;  but  Benfey  and  Stern,  foUowing  out  their  the- 
ory  of  the  source  from  which  the  Jews  obtained  such 
names,  deduce  it  from  the  assumed  Zend  representative 
of  the  Pcrsian  hahar^  "  springi*  {Afonatmameny  p.  134). 
The  name  lyar  does  not  occur  in  the  O.  T.,  this  month 
being  always  described  as  the  second  month,  except  in 
two  places  in  which  it  is  called  Zif(jL  Kings  vi,  1, 87). 
— Kitto.     See  Zif. 

lyim.    See  Island;  Wild  Beast. 

Is^ehar  (Numb.  iii,  19).    See  Izhab. 

Is^^efaarita  (Numb.  iii,  27).    See  Izhar. 

Ix'har  (Heb.  YUMhar\  -ins%  oU,  as  oftcn ;  Sept 
1ovaapy  'Iffaof ))  the  seoond  son  of  Kohath  (son  of  Levi), 


and  father  of  three  sons  (Exod.  yi,  18,  21 ;  Kumb.  xyi, 
1 ;  1  Chroń,  yi,  2, 18,  88;  xxiii,  12, 18).  In  Numb.  iii, 
19,  his  name  is  Anglicized  **  Izehar."  His  descendanta 
are  called  Izharitbs  (Heb.  YUshari',  ^^y^"^*^, ;  Sept. 
'Itrtraapi,  'Iffcapi,  'Ifftraap  [Numb.  iii,  27 ;  1  Chroń. 
xxiy,  22 ;  xxvi,  23, 29,  in  the  first  of  which  passages  it 
is  Anglicized  **  Izeharites*']).  B.C.  post  1856.  See  also 
ZoiŁiVK.  ^  In  1  Chroń,  vi,  22,  A  mtninadab  is  substituted 
for  Izhar,  as  the  son  of  Kohath  and  father  of  Korah,  in 
the  linę  of  Samuel.  This,  however,  must  be  an  acciden- 
tal  error  of  the  scribe,  as  in  ver.  38,  where  the  same  gen- 
ealogy  is  repeated,  Izhar  appears  again  iu  his  right 
place.  The  Codex  Alex.  in  ver.  22  reads  Izhar  in  place 
of  A  mmmadab,  and  the  Aldine  and  Complut.read  Am- 
minadab  between  Izhar  and  Korę,  making  another  gen- 
eration.  But  these  are  probably  only  corrections  of  the 
texL    (See  Burrington,  GeneaL  o/the  O,  T.)"  (Smith). 

Izrahi'ah  (Heb.  Yizrachyah',  n;n^J%  sprmU  of 
Jehotah  SC  into  the  world),  the  name  of  one  or  two  men. 

1.  (Sept.  'UCpta ;  Vulg.  Itrahia,)  The  "  son"  of  Uzzi, 
and  grandson  of  Tola,  the  son  of  Issachar  (1  Chroń,  yii, 
8).    B.C.  cir.  1014.    See  Obadiah. 

2.  (Sept.  omits,  but  aome  copies  haye  *U^piaCy  others 
*Uopiac ;  Vulg.  Jezraja ;  A.  V. "  Jezrahiah.")  The  su- 
perintendent  of  the  singera  (doubtless  a  Leyite)  who  cel- 
ebrated  the  completion  of  the  walls  of  Jerusalem  after 
the£xile(Neh.xii,42).    B.C.446. 

Iz^rahlte  (Heb.  Yizrach%  ITnr,  only  with  the  art 
rnt^n,  Ihe  uid%genou$,  prób.  by  error  of  transcription  for 
^^rn^nt^  a  Yizrachite  [but  FUrst  makes  it  a  man*s  name 
=Izrahi€A'\i  and  this  again  for  *^n'^t&^,  Ezrachite;  Sept« 
has  *Utpai\  v,  r.  'Ittrpać ;  Vulg.  Jezeriłes\  a  patronymic 
epithet  of  Shamhuth,  one  of  Dayid^s  generals  (1  Chroń. 
xxvii,  8),  prób.  8o  called  as  being  descended  from  Zemhf 
Judah*B  son.    See  Ezraiiite. 

Ia'll  (Heb.  Yittri%  *^'ns%  the  Jezerite,  otherwise  a 
former ;  Sept.  'Itffipi ;  Vulg.  /aan),  the  leader  of  the 
fourth  diyision  of  Le\'itical  singera  under  Dayid  (1 
Chroń.  xxy,  11) ;  prob.  the  same  with  Zeri,  of  the  sona 
of  Jeduthun,  meutioned  in  ver.  8.    B.C.  1014. 


J. 


Ja^Skan  (Heb.  Yaakan\  )^^,  wrtiter;  Sept.  has 
two  names,  *iiaaKav  Kai  OuKdfi,  otber  copies  simply 
Acay  or  'laKift ;  Yulg.  Jaean),  the  last  named  of  the 
aons  of  Ezer,  son  of  Seir  the  Horite  (1  Chroń,  i,  42, 
wbere  it  is  Anglicized  *'Jakan*);  called  in  the  parallel 
pMHige  (Gen.  xxxyi,  27)  by  a  simpler  form  of  the  same 
nsme,  Akan.  B.C.  antę  19t64.  His  descendanta  appear 
to  haye  settled  in  the  northem  part  of  the  Arabah.  He 
WB8  the  forefather  of  the  Bene-Jaakan  (q.  v.),  round 
whoae  wells  the  children  of  Israel  twice  encamped,  once 
alŁer  they  left  Moseroth,  and  just  before  they  went  on 
to  Hor-Hagidgad  (Numb.  xxxiii,  30-32),  and  again  in 
m.  revene  direction  after  they  left  Kadesh-bamea,  and 
belore  they  reached  Mount  Hor  or  Mosera  (Deut.  x,  6). 
See  Bebboth-benk-Jaakan. 

JaSJL^ohah  [some  Joako^bah"]  (Heb.  Yadko'bah, 
nspr^,  a  paragogic  form  of  the  luune  Jacob;  Sept. 
*iwea^dy,  one  of  che  proeperous  descendanta  (a*^K*^ba, 
pńnoes)  of  i>imeon  that  emigrated  to  the  yalley  of  Ge- 
dor  CGcrar]  (1  Chroń,  iv,  36).    B.C.  apparently  cir.  710. 

Ja^SUa  [many  Jad'la]  (Heb.  YaSla\  S<br^,  ibex; 
Sept.  'UaijlK  v.  r.  'IfX^X),  one  of  the  Nethinim  ("ser- 
yantfl  of  Holomon")  whoae  descendanta  (or  perhaps  a 
place  whosc  former  inhabitants)  retumed  from  the  C!ap- 
crńtj  with  Zerubbabcl  (Neh.  vii,  58);  called  in  the  par- 
aHel  passage  (Ezra  ii,  56)  by  the  equivalent  [the  finał 
K  or  n  by  Chaldasism]  name  Jaalah  (nbr^,  Sept.  'U- 
Xa).    3.0,  antę  536. 


Ja^ah  [many  Jad'lah  ]  (Ezra  ii,  56).    See  Jaala. 

Jadałam  [many  Jaa'lam']  (Heb.  Yalam',  d^J^, 
conctaler;  Sept  'leyXóf(),  the  second  named  of  Esau^a 
three  sons  by  Aholibamah  in  Canaan  (Gen.  xxxyi,  5. 
14 ;  1  Chroń.'  i,  35).     RC.  post  1964. 

Jaan.    See  Dan-jaan. 

Ja^ttnai  [some  Jad'nai\  (Hebrew  Yanay\  *^3!p^) 
moumtiry  otherwise,  for  M^35^,  ansttered  by  Jehocah; 
Sept.  *laval  y.  r.  *Iaviv,  Vidg.  Jana\)y  one  of  the  chief 
Gaditea  resident  in  Bashan  (1  Chroń,  y,  12).  B.C.  be- 
tween 1098  and  782. 

Jaaphar  Ibn-Tophail,  a  dbtinguished  Arab  of 
the  12th  century,  deseryes  our  notice  as  the  author  of  a 
philoaophical  treatiae  entitled  the  History  of  Iloi  Iłm- 
Yokdan  (translated  into  Latin  by  Pococke  [Oxf.  1671] 
and  into  English  by  Ockley  [ Oxr.  1708, 8vo]).  It  aims 
to  teach  that  **  the  light  of  naturę  is  sufHcicnt  to  lead 
mankind  to  a  knowledge  of  the  Deity  without  the  aid 
of  reyelation."  Of  Jaaphar's  personal  history  we  know 
scarcely  anything.  He  is  supposcd  to  have  died  about 
1198.     See  Grorton*s  Biographical  Dictionary,  s.  v. 

Ja^^ard-or^^eglm  (Hebrew  Yadrey'  Oregim,\  ^"yS^ 
D'^a'nX;  Sept.  'Apitapyifi,  Vulg.  SaUut  polymitarwi\ 
aocording  to  the  present  text  of  2  Sam.  xxi,  19,  a  Beth- 
lehemitę,  and  the  father  of  Elhanan,  who  siew  Goliath 
(the  woids  "  the  brother  of  are  added  in  the  A  Vers.). 
In  the  parallel  passage  (1  Chroń,  xx,  5),  besides  other 
dilTerencea.  Jaib  is  found  instead  of  Jaare,  and  Oreyim 


JAASAIT 


720 


JAAZER 


is  omitted.  Oregim  is  not  elsewhere  fonnd  as  a  proper 
name,  nor  is  it  a  oommon  word;  and  occurring  as  it 
does  without  doabt  at  the  end  of  the  vene  (Aufch.  Yera. 
^  weavers"))  in  a  sentence  exactly  parallel  to  that  in  1 
Sam.  xvii,  7,  it  19  not  probable  that  it  should  also  occur 
in  the  roiddle  of  the  same.  The  oondosion  of  Kenni- 
cott  (Disserłaiionf  p.  80)  appears  to  be  aj  ust  one — that  in 
the  latter  place  it  has  been  interpolated  from  the  fonner, 
and  that  Jair  or  Jaar  is  the  correct  reading  instead  of 
Jaare.  See  Euianan.  Still  the  agreement  of  the  an- 
cient  yersions  with  the  present  Hebrew  text  affords  a 
certain  corroboration  to  that  text,  and  should  not  be 
orerlooked.  See  Jaiił  The  Peshito,  foUowed  by  the 
Arabie,  substitutes  for  Jaare-Oregim  the  name  "Ma- 
laph  the  tcearer,^  to  the  meaning  of  which  we  have  no 
elew.  The  Targum,  on  the  other  hand,  doubtless  anx- 
ious  to  avoid  any  apparent  contradiction  of  the  narra- 
tive  in  1  Sam.  xvii,  substitutes  David  for  Elhanan,  Jesse 
for  Jaare,  and  is  led  by  the  word  Oregim  to  relate  or 
possibly  to  invent  a  statement  as  to  Jesae^s  calling — 
"And  David,  son  of  Jesse,  weav€r  of  the  reils  of  the 
house  of  the  sanctuaiy,  who  was  of  Bethlehem,  siew 
Goliath  the  Gittite.''  By  Jerome  Jaare  is  literally  trans- 
lated  "damask-weayers*  groye"  (compare  OftcułumU  He- 
hraka  on  both  passages).  In  Josephus^s  account  {Ant. 
vii,  12,  2)  the  Israelitish  champion  is  said  to  have  been 
"Nephan,  the  kinsman  of  David"  (Nc^ayoc  o  avYyivijc 
aifToiJ)]  the  word  kinsman  perhaps  referring  to  the 
Jewish  tradition  of  the  identity  of  Jair  and  Jesse,  or 
simply  ansing  from  the  mention  of  Bethlehem.  In  the 
received  Hebrew  text  Jaare  is  written  with  a  smali  or 
suspended  r,  showing  that  in  the  opinion  of  the  Maso- 
retes  that  letter  is  uncertain. — Smith.  The  Jewish 
Midrashim  generally  identify  David  with  Elhanan,  and 
Ulterpret  Jaare-Oregim  fancifully ;  e.  g.  (1)  as  David*8 
own  name,  '^  becausc  he  was  great  among  the  forest  [of 
thej  Oregim  or  Weaver8  [of  the  Law] ;  Le.  the  Sanhe- 
drim,  who  brought  the  Halachah  (legał  decisions)  be- 
(bre  him  that  he  might  weave  it,'*  as  it  were  (Jalkut  on 
2  Sam.  xxf,  19  8q.) ;  or  (2)  it  is  David'8  name  as  the 
son  of  a  mother  who  "  wove  veils  for  the  sanctuary ;" 
or  (8)  as  an  epithet  of  Jesse.    See  Oregim. 

Ja'asaa  [some  Jaa'9au]  (Heb.  Yad8av%  itoC!;'; 
Sept,  translates  iTcoiąaap  q.  d.  ^t?7^,  but  the  margin  has 
Yaasay',  ^'lOS^f/abricatorf  otherwise  for  ST^iCC!?,  tnade 
hyJehorah,  and  so  Yulg.  Jan),  an  Israelite  of  the  "sons' 
of  Bani,  who  renounced  his  Gentile  wife  after  the  return 
from  Babylon  (Ezra  x,  37).     B.a  459. 

Ja&'8iel  (Heb.  Yacuiil',  ^K^to^,  nuufe  by  Godf 
Sept  'Eatrifjk  and  'A<rc^X ;  Yulg.  Jasiel),  a  Mesobaite,  and 
one  of  David*3  body-guard  (1  Chroń,  xi,  47,  where  the 
name  is  AngUcized  "  Jasiel") ;  probably  the  same  with 
the  son  of  Abner  and  viceroy  over  Benjamin  (1  Chroń. 
xxvii,  21).     B.C.  104<>-1014. 

Jaawuii'ah  (Heb.  Yadzcaafoh',  mvr^,heard  by 
Jehorah;  also  in  the  prolonged  form  Yciazanya'hu^ 
*in^3t?'^  [2  Kings  xxv,  23;  Ezek.  viii,  U];  sometimes 
ia  the  oontracted  form  Yezanyah%  tV^}}\  *^  Jezaniah" 
[Jer.  xlii,  1],  or  Yezanyahu^  ''^7?-*''  "Jezaniah"  [Jer. 
xl,  8]  ;  Scptuag.  'Ie^ov(ac,  but  'A^apiac  in  Jer.  xlii,  1 ; 
Yulg.  JezanUu)^  the  name  of  four  men  about  the  tiqie 
of  the  Captivity. 

1.  The  son  of  Jeremiah,  and  one  of  the  chief  Recha- 
bites  (L  e,  sheik)  whom  the  prophet  tested  with  the  ofTer 
of  winę  (Jer.  xxxv,  3).     RC.  606.     See  Jkhonadab. 

2.  The  son  of  Shaphan,  whom  Ezekiel  in  his  vision 
saw  standing  in  the  midst  of  the  seventy  eldcrs  ofTering 
idolatrous  incenso  in  the  "chambers  of  imagery"  at  Jc- 
ruaalem  (Ezek.  viii,  11).     B.C.  593. 

3.  The  son  of  Ażur,  and  one  of  the  "  princes*'  among 
the  twcuty-five  men  seen  in  vi8ion  by  the  same  prophet 
at  the  east  gate  of  the  Tempie,  and  represcntecl  as  en- 
couraging  the  city  in  its  wicked  pride  CElzck*  xi,  1), 
aa  593 


4.  The  son  of  Hoahaiah,  a  Maachathite,  wbo  MteA 
in  conjunction  with  Johanan,  the  son  of  Kareah,  aftcr 
the  downfall  of  Jeru8alem,iir8t  in  submittiDg  to  the  Bab* 
ylonian  govemor  Gedaliab,  and,  after  his  asaaasiDatkia, 
in  requesting  Jeremiah'8  advice  as  to  the  proper  ooone 
for  the  peoj^  to  puisue  (2  Kinga  xxv,  28;  Jer.  xl,  8; 
xlii,  1).  He  appears  to  have  assisted  in  ieoovetiog  Ish- 
maers  prey  from  his  clutches  (comp.  Jer.  xli,  11).  After 
that  he  probably  went  to  Egypt  with  the  leat  (Jer.  xliii, 
4, 6).  He  is  doubtless  the  same  person  called  a«*wtaw, 
the  son  of  Hoshaiah,  wbo  rejocted  the  divine  coansel 
thus  asked,  and  insisted  on  fleeing  into  Egypt  (Jer.  •^Hii, 
1).    &a  587.    See  Jeremiah. 

Jafi^^zer  (Hebrew  Ya8zeyr\  *1*^J5^,  1  ChrosL  vi,  81 ; 
xxvi,  81 ;  elsewhere  the  morę  abbreviated  form  ■^1?^, 
Yazer%  helper;  Sept,  'la^^p  [2  Sam.  xxiv,  5,'EX<€^qp]  ; 
Auth.  Yers. "  Jaazer"  in  Numb.  xxi,  32 ;  xxxii,  35 ;  elae- 
where  ^  Jazer^,  a  city  on  the  east  of  the  Jordan,  taken 
by  the  Israelites  undcr  Moses  from  the  Amozits  (Nombu 
xxi,  82),  and  assigned,  with  other  neighboring  plaoca  of 
Gilead,  to  the  tribe  of  Gad  (Numb.  xxxiii,  1,3, 85 ;  Joah. 
xiii,  25) ;  also  constituted  a  Levitical  city  (Joeh.  xxi,39  ; 
1  Cluon.  vi,  81).  It  must  have  been  a  place  of  impor- 
tance,  for  it  gave  its  name  to  a  large  section  of  countiy. 
The  "'  Umd  of  Jazer"  was  fertUe,  and  its  rich  pastores  ał- 
tracted  the  attention  of  the  tribes  of  Beuboi,  Gad,  and 
Manasseh  (Numb.  xxxii,  1) .  As  it  is  mentioned  between 
Dibon  and  Nimrah,  it  appears  to  have  stood  on  the  high 
plain  north  of  Heshbon  (Numb.  xxxij,  3).  It  was  allot- 
ted  to  the  Merarite  Levite8  (Josh.  xxi,  89;  1  Chion.  yi, 
81),  but  in  the  time  of  David  it  would  appear  to  have 
been  occupied  by  Hebionites,  L  e.  dcscendants  of  Ko- 
hath  (1  Chroń,  xxvi,  31).'  It  secms  to  have  given  its 
name  to  a  district  of  dependent  or  **daughtei^  towna 
(Numb.  xxi,  82,  A. Y.  «  villages;"  1  »Iacc  v,  8).  It  ia 
mentioned  in  connection  with  the  census  under  David 
(2  Sam.  xxiv,  5;  1  Chroń.  xx\i,  81),  and  was  amoog 
the  Moabitish  places  that  experienoed  the  deaolating 
march  of  the  Chaldiean  invader8  (Isa.  xvi,  8;  Jer.  xlviii, 
32,  in  which  latter  passage  a  "  sca  of  Jazer"  ia  spoken 
of).  In  the  "burdens**  proclaimed  over  Moab  by  the 
prophets,  Jazer  is  mentioned  so  as  to  imply  that  there 
were  vineyards  there,  and  that  the  cultivaŁioii  of  the 
vine  had  extended  thither  from  Stbmah  (Isa.  xvi,  8, 9; 
Jer.  xl\'iii,  82).  After  the  exile  it  remained  in  the 
hands  of  the  Ammonites  (I  Mace  v,  8).  Aoooniing  to 
Eusebius  (t^fłOfiMijf.  sl  v.  *laliig\  it  lay  10  R.  miles  ««« 
(south-west)  of  Philadelphia  (Rabbath-Ammon),  and  15 
from  Heshbon.  Josephus  calla  the  place  Jaicna  (*!«• 
(wpóc,  >1r/.  xii,  8, 1),  and  Ptolemy  Gasonu  (Ta^ittpoCf 
V,  16,  9).  Seetzen  (in  Zach^s  Moaatl.  Correąp.  xTiii, 
429)  thinks  it  is  found  in  the  present  ruina  called  j^or 
Sar  (Burckhardt*s  Trav.  in  Syrioj  p.  855, 857),  bat  thia 
is  too  near  Kabbah  acconling  to  Zimmetman^s  map^ 
which  also  gives  the  village  of  Seir  at  the  head  of  a 
wady  of  the  same  name,  at  about  the  proper  locatioa  to 
correspond  with  that  of  Eusebius.  Raumer  (PaiiA  pL 
254)  thinks  it  is  rather  the  Am  JJazir  (Borekhanłc, 
Trav.  p.  609) ;  but  this  is  in  conseąuence  of  the  stateneat 
of  Eusebius  in  another  place  {Ommatt,  a.  v.  'A^wpX  tl>^ 
it  lay  eight  miles  from  Philadelphia,  oonfoonding  Jaser 
with  Hazor  (see  Keil's  Conunenł.  <m  Josk,  xiii,  25).  As 
to  the  "sea  of  Jazer"  mentioned  by  Jeremiah  (xlviii, 
82),  which  Gesenius  (Commeni,  on  Isa.  xvi,  8)  thinks  an 
error,  while  Relaml  confounda  it  with  the  Jabbok  (/Vi/- 
(Bitina,  p.  825),  and  others  with  other  streams  (BOsdiing, 
Ki-dbaclu  xi,  889) ;  it  is  probably  (see  Hitzig,  Comm,  sn 
Jes,  p.  196)  the  Nahr  Syr  or  the  above-iuuned  wady 
(see  Prof.  Stuart,  in  the  JiibL  Repos,  1836,  p.  157).  ^Ith 
this  identlfication  Schwarz  ooincides  {PaUatmt^  P>2^)« 
Porter  (in  Kitto*s  Cydop,  s.  v.)  suggesta  that  ^  the  land  of 
Jazer"  must  have  extended  to  the  shore  of  the  DeadSea, 
and  that  '*  the  sea  of  Jazer"  may  thcrefore  have  been  90 
called  by  the  inhabitants  of  the  district,  just  u  the 
northem  lakę  took  the  name  of  "  Tiberias^"  and  *<  Gen- 
esazet,"  aod  ^  Chinnereth,"    But  this  ia  mu*t^«,nt>»Ą  |p^ 


JAAZIAH 


721 


JABBOK 


iny  other  pmage.  In  NumU  xzi,'  24,  wheie  tne  pres- 
eot  Hebrew  text  h«s  T9  (A^Y.  '<  atrong")i  tłie  Sept.  has 
pat  'laZńp'  Bnrckhazdt,  in  tnyelling  from  Eft-Salt  to 
HeshboD,  passed  the  las£-iuimed-above  niined  town,  cali- 
ed  Siry  fdtoated  on  the  side  of  a  hiO,  and  immediatel}- 
below  it  was  the  source  of  a  streanT  which  ran  down  to 
the  JaTdan-(7Viffv.  tn  Sifria,  p.  864).  The  ruins  appear 
to  have  been  on  the  left  (east)  of  the  road,  and  below 
them  and  the  road  ia  the  aouioe  of  the  wady  Szir 
(Buickhardt),  or  Jfajtb  e^Stir  (Seetzen),  anawering, 
thou^h  certidnly  in  position,  yet  impeifectly  in  charac- 
ter,  to  the  wora/ióc  fuyurroc  of  Euaebios.  Seetzen  eon- 
jectures  that  the  sea  of  Jazer  may  hare  been  at  the 
aoiiroe  of  thia  brook,  considerable  marshes  or  pook  some- 
times  existing  at  these  spota.  (Gomp.  his  earlier  sug- 
gestion  of  the  aoiiroe  of  the  wady  SerkOt  p,  898.)  Szlr, 
or  Seir,  is  shown  on  the  map  of  Yan  de  Yelde  as  9  Ro- 
man milea  W.  of  Amman,  and  about  12  from  Heshbon. 
There  can  be  liule  doubt  that  this  is  the  Jazer  of  the 
BiUe  (Yan  de  Yelde,  Memoir,  p.  828).  The  prophecies 
of  Scripture  are  fulfiUed.  The  city  and  coantry  are 
alike  deai^te.  The  nneyards  that  once  covered  the 
hiU-aides  are  gone ;  and  the  wild  Bedawln  from  the  east- 
em  desert  make  cultiyation  of  any  kind  impoosible  (Por- 
ter, łlandrboohfor  Syria  and  PaktHne,  p.  298  sq.). 

Jftlizi'ah  (Ileb.  only  in  the  paragogic  form  Yaazir 
ga^hu,  1HJT>]^,  cotiiforŁed  by  JeAtwah ;  Sept.  'O^ia),  ap- 
parently  a  third  son,  or  a  descendant  of  Merari  the  Le- 
vite,  and  the  founder  of  an  independent  house  in  that 
famUy  (1  Chroń,  xxiv,  26, 27)  (Ra  antę  1014) ;  but  nei- 
ther  he  nor  his  descendants  are  mentioned  elsewhere 
(compare  the  lists  in  xxiił,  21-28 ;  £xod.  vi,  19).  The 
woni  Beno  (132),  which  follows  Jaaziah,  shoulri  proba- 
bly  be  translated  «  his  son,**  Ł  e.  the  son  of  Merari.  But. 
the  text  is  in  such  a  sUte  that  it  is  hanl  to  know  in 
what  light  to  r^^ard  the  person  to  whom  it  is  aasigncd. 
Elsewhere  the  only  sons  of  Merari  mentioned  are  Mahli 
and  Mushi  (Exoa.  vi,  10;  Numb.  iii,  83;  1  Chroń,  vi,  4 
£A.V.  19];  xxiii,  21). 

Ja^^ziSl  (Heb.  Yadzier,  isjt^^t??,  am/orłed  by  God  ; 
Sept.  'lriov\  V.  r.  'OCt^A),  a  Levitical  musician  among 
those  of  the  subordinate  part  (I  Chion.  xv,  18);  doubt- 
less  the  same  with  the  Aziel  whcT  was  one  of  those  that 
performed  the  toprano  (ver.  20).     B.C.  1014. 

Jabajahitea  is  the  name  of  a  modem  Mobamme- 
dan  sect  which  teaches  "  that  the  knowledge  of  God  ex- 
tencls  to  all  things,  but  is  perfectetl  by  experience ;  and 
that  he  goyems  the  world  according  to  the  chance  of 
divers  events,  as  not  having  had,  from  eternity,  a  per- 
fect  knowledge  of  all  things  futurę."  Of  course  the  or- 
thodox  Mohammedans  look  upon  this  doctrine  as  heret- 
ical,  and  condemn  the  Jabajahites  as  an  impious  and 
blasphemous  set  See  Broughton,  BiUioth,  Hist,  8ac,  i, 
498.    See  Mohammedanism. 

Ja^bal  (Heb.  Yabal\  ^2;,  a  ttream,  as  m  Isa.  xxx, 
25 ;  xliv, 4 ;  Sept.  'lu/3fiX,  Josephus  'lwl3ti\oc.  Ant,  1,2, 
2),  a  descendant  of  Cain,  son  of  Lamech  and  Adah,  and 
brother  of  Jubal;  described  in  Gen.  iv,  20  as  **  the  father 
of  soch  as  dweU  in  tents,  and  have  cattle."  RC.  cir. 
8500.  This  obviotis]y  means  that  Jabal  was  the  first 
who  adopted  that  nomadic  life  which  is  still  followed  by 
numerous  Arabian  and  Tartar  tribes  in  Asia  (compare 
Buttman,  Mythologus,  i,  164  są.).  Abel  ha<l  long  before 
been  a  keeper  of  sheep  (Gen.  iv,  2) ;  but  Jabal  invented 
soch  poitable  habitations  (formed,  doubtless,  of  skins) 
aa  enabled  a  pastorał  people  to  remove  their  dwellings 
with  them  from  one  place  to  anothcr,  when  they  led 
their  flocks  to  new  pastures.  See  Tent,  Bochart(^M. 
roz,  i,  ii,  c.  44,  near  the  end)  points  out  the  difference 
between  his  modę  of  life  and  Abel^s.  Jabal*s  was  a  mi- 
gratory  life,  and  his  possessions  probably  included  other 
animals  besides  sheep.  The  shepherds  who  were  before 
him  may  have  found  the  land  on  which  they  dwelt  suf- 
ficiently  productive  for  the  coiutant  susteuance  of  their 
IV.-Z  z 


flocka  m  the  netghborbood  of  their  fixed  abodes.  There 
is  no  need  of  supposing  (with  Hartmann,  Ueb,  PerUat,  p. 
895)  any  historical  anticipation  in  G&u  iv,  17. 

Jabalot,  Fkancois  Ferdikasid,  an  Italian  pieach- 
er  of  the  Dominican  order,  was  bom  at  Parma  in  1780, 
and  educated  at  the  uniyersity  in  that  place.  He  paid 
particular  attention  to  the  study  of  Hebrew,  and  gained 
notońety  as  a  preacher  and  student  of  the  Óńental  lan^ 
guages.  He  was  a  distinguished  member  of  the  *^  Con- 
gregation  of  the  Index,'*  and  one  of  the  examiner8  of 
bishope.  He  died  at  Romę,  March  9, 1884.  His  writ^ 
ings  are,  Deyli  Ehni  nel  loro  rapporto  eolU  naziofd  Crit' 
tiane  (Romę,  1825, 12mo)  i^Orańone  funebrtt  m  morte 
del  eonie  A  tUordo  Cerałi  (Parma,  1816, 4to).  Sec  Hoefer, 
Nouv,  Biog,  GhUraUj  xxvi,  141. 

Jabcok  (Heb.  Yahbok',  pi^  according  to  Simo- 
nis,  Onotnast.  p.  815,  a  pouring  out^  by  Chaldaism  from 
pga ;  otherwise,  for  p2K%  a  wreMUng,  from  p2C,  a 
coinddence  that  seems  alliided  to  in  Gen.  xxxiij  24 ; 
SepL  'lajiwK,  but  *lapwx  in  GeiL  xxxii,  22 ;  Josephus 
'la/3aicxoc,  Ant,  iv,  6,  2;  Chald.  X^2^^Ta^g.),  one  of 
the  streams  which  trayerse  the  coantry  east  of  the  Jor- 
dan, and  which,  after  a  courae  nearly  from  east  to  west, 
between  the  distriets  of  Merad  and  Belka  (Seetzen, 
xyiii,  427),  faUs  into  that  riyer  nearly  midway  between 
the  Sea  of  Galilee  and  the  Dead  Sea,  or  about  forty-fiye 
miles  below  the  Lakę  of  Tiberias,  another  outlet  for  the 
water  in  tiroe  of  fresfaets  being  sitnated  a  few  miles 
higher  up  (Lynch,  Erped,  p.  258,  and  Map).  It  seems 
to  rise  in  the  Hauran  mountains,  and  its  whole  course 
^may  be  oomputed  at  sixty-five  miles.  It  is  mentioned 
in  Scripture  as  the  boundiiry  which  separated  the  king- 
dom  of  Sihon,  king  of  the  Amorites,  or  the  territory  of 
the  Ammonites,  from  that  of  Og,  king  of  Bashan  (Josh. 
xii,  1-5;  Numb.  xxi,  24 ;  Deut.  ii,  37 ;  Judg.  xi,  18,  22) ; 
and  it  appeors  aflerwards  to  have  been  the  boundary 
between  the  tribe  of  Reuben  and  the  half  tribe  of  Ma- 
nasseh  (Numb.  xxi,  6;  Deut.  iii,  IC).  The  earliest  no» 
tice  of  it  occurs  in  Gen.  xxxii,  22,  in  the  account  of  Ja* 
cob*8  mysterious  struggle  with  Jehovah  in  its  yicinity 
(south  bank).  According  to  Eusebius  {Onomasł.  a,  \\) 
it  was  between  Gerasa  (Jerash)  and  Philadelphia  (Am- 
man). Origen  (Opera,  ii,  48)  says  it  was  known  in 
his  day  by  the  name  Jambice  {'lafipimj  or  'lafifiÓKii). 

"The  stream  is  important  in  a  geographical  point  of 
yiew,  and  a  knowledge  of  its  topography  heips  us  to 
understand  morę  easily  some  passages  of  Scripture.  It 
was  the  boundary  between  the  Amorites  and  the  Am- 
monites. We  are  told  that  after  the  defeat  of  Sihon, 
king  of  the  Amorites,  at  Jazer,  ^Israel  possessed  his 
land  from  Amon  unto  Jabbok,  even  unto  the  children 
of  Ammon;  for  the  border  of  the  children  of  Ammon 
was  strong*  (Numb.  xxi,  24).  The  Jabbok,  flowing  in 
a  wild  and  deep  ravine  through  the  Gilead  mountains, 
formed  a  strong  natural  frontier  for  the  bordering  prin- 
cipalities.  It  would  seem  that  at  the  £xodu8  the  Am- 
monites possessed  the  country  eastward  and  northward 
of  the  upper  sources  and  branches  of  the  Jabbok,  and 
that  Sihon  and  Og  oocupied  the  whole  region  between 
the  Ammonites  and  the  Jordan,  extending  as  iar  north 
as  the  Sea  of  Galilee  (Josh.  xii,  2-8;  Josephus,  Ant.  iy, 
5,  2  and  8).  The  Israelites  oonquered  Sihon  and  Og, 
and  took  their  kingdoms;  and  the  possessions  of  the 
three  tribes,  thus  acquired,  extended  from  the  Dead  Sea 
to  Hermon ;  but  they  were  not  permitted  to  touch  the 
territory  of  Ammon  (Deut.  ii,  87;  iii,  16).  About  fif- 
teen  miles  from  the  Jordan  the  Jabbok  forks,  one  branch 
ooming  down  from  Jerash  on  the  north,  and  the  other 
from  Rabbath- Amman  on  the  south;  these  branches 
formed  the  western  frontier  of  the  Ammonites,  dividuig 
them  from  the  Amorites,  and  8tib«eqently  from  the  Is- 
raelites (Reland,  PaL  p.  108).  Previous  to  the  £xodu8 
the  territory  of  the  Ammonites  was  much  morę  cxten- 
siye,  embracing  the  whole  region  between  the  Jabbok 
and  the  Amon;  but  the  Amorites  droye  them  out  of 
that  portion,  and  foroed  them  into  the  mountains  around 


JA6ESH 


722 


JABEZ 


Łhe  flouices  of  the  Jabbok)  and  into  the  plaiiu  eastward 
(Judg.  xi,  13  22)"  (Porter  in  Kitto,  s.  y.).  It  is  now 
called  the  Zerka  [or  Wady  Zurha']  (from  it«  «<blue*' 
color,  Robin8on'8  Researches,  iii,  Appendl  p.  326 ;  but,  ac- 
cordiog  to  Schwarz,  Palett.  p.  52,  from  a  fortreaa  of  the 
same  uame  on  the  canivan  route  from  DamaBciu  to 
Mecca).  Ita  sources  are  chiefly  on  the  eastem  side  of 
the  moimtains  of  Gilead,  and  it  also  draina  a  portion 
of  the  high  platean  of  Arabia  beyond.  In  ita  paaaage 
westward  acroes  the  plains  it  roore  than  once  paaaes  un- 
der  gronnd.  The  upper  branches  and  tributaries  are 
merę  winter  streams.  At  the  point  wheie  the  two  main 
branches  from  Jerash  and  Ammon  unitę,  the  stream  be- 
comes  perennial,  and  often,  after  heayy  rain,  is  a  foam- 
ing,  impassable  torrent.  ^  The  ravine  through  which  it 
fiows  is  narrow,  deep,  and  in  places  wild.  Thronghout 
nearly  its  whoie  course  it  is  fringed  by  thicketa  of  cane 
and  oleander,  and  the  large  .dustering  fiowers  of  the  lat- 
ter  give  the  banks  a  gay  and  gorgeoua  appearance  dur- 
ing  the  spring  and  early  summer"  (Porter,  Ifandbook 
for  S,  and  P,  p.  310).  Higher  up,  the  aides  of  the  ra- 
vine  are  dothcd  with  forests  of  erergreen  oak,  pine,  and 
arbutus;  and  the  undulating  forest  glades  are  carpeted 
with  green  grass,  and  strewn  with  innumerable  ¥dld 
flowers.  The  scenery  along  the  banks  of  the  Jabbok 
is  probably  the  most  picture8que  in  Falestine ;  and  the 
ruins  of  town,  and  rillage,  and  fortresa  which  stad  the 
surrounding  momitain  sides  render  the  countiy  as  intei^ 
esting  as  it  is  beautifuL  The  water  is  pleasant,  and, 
the  bed  being  rocky,  the  stream  runs  elear  (Burckhardfs 
Syriay  p.  347 ;  Irby  and  Mangles,  Tratelt,  p.  319;  Buck- 
ingham, Pakstine,  ii,  109 ;  Lindsay,  ii,  123). 

Ja^besh  (Heb.  Yabesh',  m';^  dry,  as  in  Job  xiii,  25; 
£zek.xvii,  24,  etc;  also  written  fully  Yaheyfh',  IŚ^^SJł 
1  Sam.  xi,  1, 3, 5, 10 ;  xxxi,  11 ;  2  Sam.  ii,  4, 5 ;  1  Chroń. 
X,  12,  first  time),  the  name  of  a  place  and  aiso  of  a  man. 

1.  (Sept.  in  Sam.  'Ia/3ic,  in  Chroń.  ra/3«c.)  The 
shorter  form  (1  Sam.  xi,  3,  9, 10;  xx,  12, 18;  1  Chroń. 
X,  12,  only)  of  the  name  of  the  city  elsewhere  called 
Jabesii-Gilead  (q.  v.). 

2.  (Sept.  'lafitię  v.  r.  'A/3((c,  Joseph.  Iaj3i}ffoc>  Ant. 
ix,  11, 1.)  The  father  of  Shallum,  which  latter  usarped 
the  throne  of  Israel  by  the  assassination  of  Zachariah 
(2  Kings  XV,  10, 13, 14).     B.C.  antę  770. 

Ja'be8li-giread  (Heb.  Yabeth'  Gilad%  *i5bft  «n; 
[also  b^^^,  see  Jabesh,  by  which  simple  form  it  is 
eometimes  called];  Sept. 'Ia/3cic  or'Iaj3ic  [in  Chroń. 
Ta^iic]  TaKaiiŁ  or  rf^c  Ta\aadinioc ;  Josephus  'la- 
Pitroc  [.4n/,v,2,  ll],'lai3ic  [i4n/. vi,  6, 1],  and 'Ia/3«T. 
aóc  [.4n/.  vi,  14, 8]),  a  town  beyond  the  Jordan,  in  the 
land  of  Gilead,  distant  a  night^s  joumey  from  Bethshan 
(1  Sam.  xxxi,  U ;  2  Sam.  ii,  4;  xxi,  12).  In  the  sense 
denoted  in  this  jiuctaposition,  Gilead  induded  the  half 
tribe  of  Manasseh  (1  Chroń,  xxvii,  21),  as  well  as  the 
tribes  of  Gad  and  Keuben  (Numb.  xxxii,  1-42)  east  of 
the  Jordan ;  and  of  the  dties  of  Gilead,  Jabesh  was  the 
chief,  lying  within  the  limits  of  the  Kalf  tribe  of  Manas- 
seh east.  It  is  first  mentioned  in  connection  with  the 
cruel  yengeance  taken  upon  its  inhabitants  for  not  com- 
ing  up  to  Mizpeh  on  the  occasion  of  the  fierce  war  be- 
tween  the  children  of  Israel  and  the  tribe  of  Benjamin. 
£very  małe  of  the  city  was  put  to  the  sword,  and  all 
the  viigin8 — ^to  the  number  of  400 — seized  to  be  given 
in  marriage  to  the  600  men  of  Benjamin  that  remained 
(Judg.  xxi,  8-14).  Nevertheless  the  city  survived  the 
loss  of  its  males,  and  is  next  memorable  for  the  siege  it 
sustaincd  from  Ńahash,  king  of  the  Ammonites,  the  rais- 
ing  of  which  formed  the  first  exp]oit  of  the  newly-elect- 
ed  king  SauL  and  procured  his  confirmation  in  the  sov- 
ereignty.  The  inhabitants  had  agreed  to  surrender,  and 
to  have  their  right  eyes  put  out  (to  incapacitate  them 
from  military  scnrice),  but  wcre  alłowed  seren  days  to 
ratify  the  treaty.  In  the  mean  time  Saul  collected  a 
large  army,  and  came  to  their  relief  (I  Sam.  xi).  This 
service  was  gratefuUy  remembered  by  the  Jabeshites, 
and  about  forty  years  afler.  wben  he  and  his  three  sons 


were  slain  by  the  Fhilistines  in  Momt  Gilboa  (1  Son, 
xxxi,  8),  the  men  of  Jabesh-gilead  came  by  nigbt  nul 
took  down  their  corpees  from  the  walls  of  Bethshsn, 
where  they  had  been  expoBed  as  trophiea,  then  bnined 
the  bodies,  and  buried  the  bonea  under  a  tzee  near  the 
dty,  obeendng  a  strict  funeral  fast  for  aercn  days  (ver. 
13).  "  Jabedi-gilead  was  on  the  momitain,  east  of  the 
Jordan,  in  fuli  view  of  Bethshan,  and  these  brave  men 
could  cieep  up  to  the  tell  along  wady  JalAd  withoat  be> 
ing  seen,  while  the  deafening  roar  of  the  brook  woold 
render  it  impossible  for  them  to  be  heard**  (Thomion, 
Land  and  Bookf  ii,  174).  David  doea  not  fosget  to  blesB 
them  for  this  act  of  piety  towaids  his  old  maater,  and  his 
morę  than  brother  (2  Sam.  ii,  15),  though  be  afterwanls 
had  the  remains  tnnslated  to  the  ancestnl  sepukhre 
in  the  tiibe  of  Benjamin  (2  Sam.  xxi,  14).  Jabesh  stili 
existed  aa  a  town  in  the  time  of  Euaebina,  who  places  it 
on  a  hill  Bix  miles  from  Pella,  towards  Gerasa  (Ommtut. 
s.  V.  'Apunód  and  'la/3f cc).  Mr.  Buckingham  thinks  it 
may  be  found  in  a  place  called  Jekaz  or  Jejat,  marked 
by  ruins  upon  a  hUl  in  a  spot  not  far  fhmi  which,  ac- 
cording  to  the  above  indicationa,  Jabesh  muat  have  been 
situated  (Trareltt  ii,  130, 134).  It  was  more  probably 
situated  on  the  present  wady  Jabet,  which  Buickhardt 
(Trat,  in  SyrUty  p.  289)  deacribes  as  entering  the  Jordan 
not  far  bdow  Beisan.  According  to  Schwarz  {Palfst, 
p.  284),  there  is  a  village  of  the  same  name  atill  exi£tiag 
on  this  wady  ten  miles  east  of  Jordan;  but  Dr.  Bobin- 
son,  during  his  last  vi8it  to  this  region,  sought  in  vain 
for  any  village  or  ruins  by  that  name  (which,  he  eays.  b 
applied  exclufflvely  to  the  wady),  but  thtnka  the  atc  of 
Jabesh-gilead  may  be  marked  by  that  of  the  mins  called 
by  the  Arabe  ed^Deir  (the  convent),  high  up  the  wady, 
on  the  south  side,  on  a  hill,  and  contaming  colomw  as 
he  was  iufonned  (new  ed.  of  JUtearchet,  iii,  319).  It  ii 
about  six  miles  from  the  ruins  of  Pella,  near  the  linę  cf 
the  andent  road  to  Gerasa  (Tan  de  Tdde,  7Vorv2s,  ii, 
349-^2 ;  Porter,  Ilandbook/or  Syria  and  Paktł,  p.  317 ; 
Stanley,  Sinai  and  Pal  p.  290). 

Ja'beB  (Heb.  Ydbeit^  7a5^  according  to  1  Chnm. 
iv,  9,  affiiction^  sc  to  his  mother,  apparently  by  tnns- 
position  from  the  root  2^7 ;  Sept.  'lyapiję  and  ro/3^c 
or  ra(3f}c)y  the  name  of  a  man  and  also  of  a  place: 

1.  A  dcscendant  of  Judah  (RC  post  1612),  but  of 
what  particular  family  is  not  apparent,  altbongb  ve 
have  this  remarkable  aocount  of  him  inserted  among  a 
scries  of  bare  pedigrees :  "And  Jabez  was  more  honont- 
ble  than  his  brethren :  and  his  mother  called  his  name 
Jabez,  saying,  Because  I  bare  him  with  soirow  (2S?, 
0'łseb).  And  Jabez  called  on  the  God  of  Israel,  ujin^, 
Oh  that  thou  wouldst  biesa  me  indeed,  and  enlarge  mr 
coast,  and  that  thine  band  might  be  iKńth  me,  and  that 
thou  wouldst  keep  me  from  evil,  that  it  may  not  griere 
me  (*^^2Cr,  olsbi') !  And  God  gruited  him  that  which 
he  reąuested"  (1  Chroń,  iv,  9, 10).  It  is  very  doubtfd 
whether  any  connection  exists  between  this  gcnealof^ 
and  that  in  ii,  50-55.  S€veral  names  appear  in  both^ 
Hur,  Ephratah,  Bethlehem,  Zareathites  (in  A.  V.  iv,  i 
inaccurately  "  Żorathites*'),  Joab,  Caleb ;  and  there  i« 
much  dmilarity  between  others,  as  Rechab  and  Kechah, 
Eshton  and  Eshtaulites;  but  any  po6itive  connection 
seems  undemonstrable.  The  Targum  identifics  Jflbei 
and  Othniel  For  the  traditionary  notices  of  this  per- 
son and  his  character,  see  Clarke's  Commeni,  ad  loc 

2.  A  place  described  as  bdng  inhabited  by  ae%-enl 
families  of  the  scribes  descended  from  the  Kenitco,  and 
allied  to  the  Rechabites  (1  Chroń,  ii,  55).  It  occun  in 
a  notice  of  the  progeny  of  Salma,  who  was  of  Judah, 
and  closely  connected  with  Bethlehem  (ver.  51),  poaa- 
bly  the  father  of  Boaz ;  and  also — ^though  how  is  Dot 
elear — v/ith  Joab.  The  Targum  states  some  cuńoos 
particulars,  which,  however,  do  not  much  eluddate  the 
difficulty,  and  which  are  probably  a  mixture  of  tiust- 
worthy  tradition  and  of  mero  invention  based  od  philo- 
logical  grounds.  Rechab  is  there  identified  with  R<- 
chabiah,  the  son  of  Eliezer,  Moec8*s  younger  son  (L 


k 


JABEZ 


728 


JABŁOŃSKI 


Chroń.  xzyi,  25),  and  Jabez  with  Othniel  the  Kenezite, 
who  borę  the  luune  of  Jabez  ^  becaiue  be  founded  by 
hb  couoael  (nx*^9)  a  school  (K^^^a^nC)  of  disciplM 
called  Tirathites,  Shimeathites,  and  Sacathitefl.**  See 
ako  the  quotations  from  Talmud,  Temurah,  in  Biixtorf s 
Lex,  coL  966,  where  a  aimiUr  derivation  is  given.  Aa 
the  place  appean  to  have  been  situated  within  the  ter- 
ritory  of  Judah,  it  may  have  been  settled  by  the  numer- 
ous  posterity  of  the  above  person  by  the  same  name 
(oomp.  "*  the  men  of  Rechab/'  1  Chroń,  iv,  12).  The  as- 
aociAted  names  would  seem  to  indioate  a  locality  near, 
if  not  identical  witb  Kirjath-jearim  (oomp^  in  the  same 
region  Kirjath-aepher,  or  bool>town<,  implying  the  liter- 
ały avocation  of  ita  inhabitanta),  where  aome  of  the 
same  families  appear  to  have  dwelt  (1  Chroń,  ii,  58),  e.  g. 
the  Ithrite8=Keniie8,  the  Shumathite8=Simeathites. 

JabeSflsaao  bex-Sałomo  bex-Isaac  ben-Jo- 
8EPH,  a  Jewish  oommentator  of  some  notę,  flourished 
in  the  15th  centurf.  Of  his  personal  history  we  are 
uninformed,  but  bis  worka,  of  great  celebrity  in  the 
15tb  century,  itiU  continue  to  be  oonsidered  yaluable 
contńbutions  to  exegetical  literaturę;  and  Frankfurter, 
in  bis  **  Kabbinic  Biblc,^  inserted  the  following,  which 
are,  bowerer,  rather  oompilations  Irom  dilTerent  expo8i- 
tors  Łhan  the  original  productions  of  Jabez :  (1)  nibnn 
njn^,  or  Commadary  on  the  Psalms:—(2)  r^^n'^  '''niDb, 
or  Commmlarff  on  PrwetiM: — (8)  "^^TUJ  nX*1*^,  or  Comr 
wten/ary  <m  Properbs  :—(4)  D''aj*lp  C*1p,  or  Cammen- 
tary  on  the  Song  ofSongt:—{S)  p'^*12C  n«2C,  or  Com- 
matcay  on  Ruth: — (6)  b*fSn  Pp^S,  or  CommoUary 
on  Lamentaiions : — (7)  5*1^  *^*^S^,  or  Commentary  on 
tke  Book  of  EccleńcuteM  :—{S)  &lbtt9  T\'^Xi:f,  or  Com- 
mentary  on  tke  Book  of  Esłker  .'—(9)  D'»1«''  P3*ia,  or 
Commenłary  on  Daniel :— (10)  D^^Oin  ^^^ITS,  or  Cotn- 
menŁary  on  Ezra  and  Nehemiah.  Besides  these,  Jabez 
?rrote  ^12C^  pt^,  or  homiletical  Commentary  on  tke 
HapktaroŁk,  or  Sabbatic  Lessons  from  the  prophets 
(Belvidere,  near  Constantinople,  1598,  folio)  :  —  n^D 
nfWISfl,  or  Commentary  on  the  Pentafeuch,  See  Wolf, 
BtbUofh.  I/dn-cea^  i,  694 ;  iii,  617  są. ;  iv,  886 ;  FUrst,  BUh- 
lioth.  Jud.  ii,  2 ;  Steinschncider,  Cataloyus  Libr,  in  Bib- 
liołh,  BodL  coL  1125 ;  C.  D.  Ginsburg,  in  Kitto,  s.  v. 

Ja^bln  (Ueb.  Yabin',  -pa;,  dueener;  SepL  'la/Jic 
[v.  r.  'laftip,  but  'lafidy  in  Psa.  lxxxiii,  9],  Josephus 
'la^yocy  /in/.  V,  5, 1),  the  name  of  two  kings  of  the  Ca- 
naanitish  city  Uazor.  See  Hazor.  It  was  possibly  a 
myal  title,  like  Agag  among  the  Amalekites,  and  Abim- 
elech  among  the  PhiUstines. 

1.  A  king  of  Hazor,  and  one  of  the  most  powerful  of 
aU  the  prinoes  who  reigned  in  Canaan  wben  it  was  in- 
raded  by  the  Israelites  (Josh.  xi,  1-14).  His  dominion 
secma  to  haye  exteuded  over  all  the  north  part  of  the 
country ;  and  a(ler  the  ruin  of  the  league  formed  against 
the  Hebrews  in  the  south  by  Adonizedek,  king  of  Jeru- 
salem,  he  assembled  his  tribntaries  near  the  wateis  of 
Merom  (the  Lakę  Huleh),  and  called  all  the  people  to 
•rma.  This  coalition  was  destroyed,  as  the  one  In  the 
south  had  been,  and  Jabin  himself  perished  in  the  sack 
of  Hazor,  his  capital,  B.C.  dr,  1615.  This  prince  was 
the  last  powerful  enemy  with  whom  Joshua  combated, 
and  his  overthiow  seems  to  have  been  regarded  as  the 
crowning  act  in  the  conquest  of  the  Promised  Land, 
Ieaving  only  the  Anakim  in  the  mountains  of  Judah 
and  Ephraim  to  be  dLspossessed  in  detail  (Josh.  xi,  21- 
23;  comp.  xiv,  6-15). 

2.  Another  king  of  Hazor,  and  probably  desoended 
from  tlie  pieoeding  (Judg.  iv,  2,  8),  with  whom  some 
(Maurer,  Commeni.  on  Josh.  xi ;  Henrey,  Geneahgietf  p. 
228)  haye  confounded  him  (see  Havemick,  Einleit,  II,  i, 
53 ;  Keil,  on  Jo»hua  xi,  10-15).  It  appears  that  duńng 
one  of  the  senritudes  of  the  Israeiit^  probably  when 
they  lay  under  the  yoke  of  Cushan  or  Kglon,  the  king- 


dom  of  Hazor  was  reoonstnicted.  The  narrative  giyea 
to  this  second  Jabin  eyen  the  title  of  **  king  of  Canaan ;" 
and  this,  with  the  possession  of  900  iron-armed  war^ 
chariots,  implies  nnnsual  powcr  and  extent  of  dominion. 
The  iniquities  of  the  Israelites  haying  lost  them  the  di- 
yine  protection,  Jabin  gained  the  mastery  over  them ; 
and,  stimulated  by  the  memory  of  ancient  hostilities, 
oppreased  them  beayily  for  twenty  yeara,  RC.  1429- 
1409.  From  this  thraldom  they  were  relieyed  by  the 
great  yictoiy  won  by  Barak  in  the  plain  of  Esdraelon, 
oyer  the  hosts  of  Jabin,  oommanded  by  Sisera,  one  of 
the  most  renowned  geneńls  of  thote  times  (Judg.  iv, 
10-16).  SeeSiSKRA.  The  well-compacted  power  of  the 
king  of  Hazor  was  not  yet.,  boweyer,  entirely  broken. 
The  war  was  still  prolonged  for  a  time,  but  ended  in  the 
entire  ruin  of  Jabin,  and  the  subjugation  of  his  terrtto- 
ries  by  the  Israelites  (Judg.  iy,  24).  This  is  the  Jabin 
whose  name  occun  in  Psa.  lxxxiii,  10.    See  Hazor. 

Jabineau,  Henri,  a  French  religious  writer,  bom 
at  Etampes  near  the  opening  of  the  last  ccntur\',  was, 
afler  completing  his  studies  at  Paris,  appointed  profess- 
or  at  the  Vitry-le-Francais  Ckillege  on  his  refusal  to 
subscribe  the  formulary  generally  submittcd  before  a 
candidate  is  permitted  to  enter  the  priesthood.  But  his 
attainments  were  of  such  superior  onler  that  the  arch- 
bishop  of  Chalons-sur-Mame  waived  this  obligation, 
and  Jabineau  was  consecrated  a  priest.  <  He  then  be- 
came  rector  at  the  College  of  Vitry.  But  he  soon  ex- 
changed  the  rostrum  for  the  pulpit,  where,  on  account 
of  his  liberał  views,  he  was  several  times  interdicted. 
In  1768  he  entered  the  lawyer's  profession,  and  during 
the  Reyolution  wrote  a  number  of  yehement  artides 
against  the  French  clerg>'  of  the  Roman  Clatholic  Church. 
He  died  in  July,  1792,  shortly  before  the  publication  of 
the  decree  of  the  National  Assembly  against  priests 
(Aug.  26, 1792).  The  most  important  of  his  writings' 
are,  Compitence  de  la  puissance  iemporelle  reUttitejnent 
a  rirecfii/n  et  a  la  iuppreaaion  dea  tiege*  łpitcopaux  (Par. 
1760, 8vo ;  1790,  and  often) : — Erpotition  dea  principes 
de  la  fot  Całholigue  aur  FEgliae,  recueillie  des  inałrucfions 
famSikrea  de  3/.  JtU>  .  .  .  (published  shortly  aftcr  his 
death.  Par.  1792,  8vo).  See  Hoefer,  Aour.  Bio*/,  Geni- 
raUf  xxvi,  142. 

Jabłoński,  Daniel  Ernst,  a  distinguished  C^- 
man  theologian,  was  bom  at  a  little  vil1age  near  Dant- 
zic  Noy.  26, 1660.  Tbe  name  of  his  father,  a  preacher, 
was  originally  Figulus,  but  he  in  after  life  exchanged  it 
for  Jabłoński,  deriying  the  name  from  that  of  his  na- 
tiye  plaoe,  Jablunka,  a  smali  yillage  in  Silesia.  Young 
Jabłoński  was  educated  at  the  gymnasium  of  Lyssa,  in 
Ptussian  Poland,  and  at  the  Uniyersity  of  Frankfort  on 
the  Oder  (now  constituting  the  Bcarlin  UniyerŃty), 
where  he  applied  himself  to  literaturę  and  philosophy, 
but  morę  especially  to  theology  and  the  Oiiental  Um- 
guages.  In  1680  he  yisited  the  uniyersities  and  libra- 
ries  of  Holland  and  Engiand,  and  spent  oonsiderable 
time  at  Oxford.  On  his  return  in  1688  he  was  appoint- 
ed preacher  at  one  of  the  reformed  churches  of  Magde- 
burg, which  place  he  left  two  years  later  in  order  to  a»- 
sume  the  rectorship  of  the  gymnasium  at  Lyssa.  In 
1690  he  was  madę  court  preiacher  at  Konigsberp^,  and 
in  1693  his  famę  procured  him  the  place  of  preacher  to 
the  king  at  BerUn.  But  still  other  honoraUe  ofTices 
awaited  him.  Thus,  in  1718,  he  was  madę  a  member  of 
the  Consistor}',  in  1729  a  Church  councillor,  and  in  1738 
he  was  electcd  president  of  the  Koyal  Academy  of  Sci- 
ences at  Berlin.  At  the  reąuest  of  the  king,  Frederick 
I,  he  labored  eamestly,  but  unsuccessfully,  to  accomplish 
a  union  of  the  different  Protestant  churches.  He  died 
at  Berlin  May  25,  1741.  The  greater  part  of  his  life 
had  been  devoted  to  seycre  study,  and  he  was  eminently 
successful  as  a  preacher.  Dr.  Hagenbach  (H urst^s  tranal. 
of  Ch,  Hist.  oflSth  and  I9th  Cent,  i,  410,  412)  says  that 
Jabłoński  was  a  btsbop  among  the  Morayians  (1698),  and 
eyen  was  "  the  eldest  of  the  Moravian  bishopft,"  and 
that  he  consecrated  both  Dayid  Nitschmann  (q.  y.>  and 


JABŁOŃSKI 


724 


JABNEH 


ooiuit  Zinzendorf  for  the  epiflcopai  offioe.  At  the  in- 
Btance  of  che  ąueen,  he  was  honored  as  early  as  1706 
.with  the  degree  of  doctx>r  of  divinity.  Jabłoński  trans* 
lAted  into  Ladii  the  eight  discoimes  of  Richard  Bentley 
against  Atheism,  the  treadse  of  Joeeph  Woodward  on 
the  religioos  societies  of  London,  and  that  of  Bumet  on 
predestination  and  grace ;  but  he  is  especially  celebrated 
by  an  edition  of  the  Uebrew  Bibie,  with  notes  and  an 
iutroduction,  published  under  the  titla  of  BUdia  Hebror 
ica  cum  notis  HebrakU  (Berlin,  1699, 2  vo1b.  4to;  2d  «d. 
1712, 12mo).  The  prefaoe  has  sińce  been  printed  in 
other  editions  of  the  Hebrew  Bibie.  Both  editions  have 
a  list,  by  Leusden,  of  2294  aelect  rerses,  in  which  all  the 
words  to  be  found  in  the  Bibie  are  contained.  He  also 
published  an  edition  of  the  Talmud,  and  wiote  a  num- 
ber  of  religious  works,  the  most  important  of  which  is 
Chrittliche  PretUgitm  (Berlin,  1716,  etc^  10  parta,  4to). 
Many  of  Jablonski*s  writings  bear  on  the  atate  of  the 
Church  in  Poland.  One  of  the  most  able  of  them  is 
the  Historia  CorueMua  Sendomiriensit  ittter  wanffeUoos 
reffni  Polotaa  et  LithuanuB  (Berlin,  1781, 4to),  etc  See 
Ersch  u.  Gruber,  A  Uff.  Encyk,  s.  v. ;  Hoefer,  Nouv:  Biog. 
Gen,  jonyij  146 ;  Kitto,  BibL  Cycłop.  s.  v. 

Jabłoński,  Paul  Emat,  a  distinguished  German 
theologian  and  philologist,  and  son  of  the  former  Ja- 
błoński, was  bom  at  Berlin  in  1693.  He  was  educated 
at  the  Unirersity  of  Frankfort  on  the  Oder,  where  he 
acquired  siich  great  proficiency  in  the  Coptie  as  well  as 
other  Oriental  languages  that  the  govemment  of  Prus- 
sia  sent  the  young  man  of  twenty-one  years,  at  the  ex- 
pense  of  the  king  (in  1714),  to  visit  the  principal  libra- 
ries  and  high  schools  of  Europę,  to  perfect  himself  in 
his  knowledge  of  the  Oriental  tongues,  and  decipher  Cop- 
tie and  other  MSS.  For  this  purposc  he  yisited  the 
uniyersities  of  Oxford,  Leyden,  and  Paris.  After  his 
return  home  he  cntered  the  ministry,  and  was  appointed 
pastor  at  Liebenberg  in  1720.  He,  however,  soon  found 
that  his  place  was  in  the  rostrum  rather  than  in  the 
pulpit,  and  in  1721  accepted  the  professorship  of  philos- 
ophy  in  his  alma  mater.  In  1722  hc  was  honored  with 
the  appointment  of  professor  of  theology,  and  diortly 
after  was  elected  a  member  of  the  Royal  Academy  of 
Berlin.  He  died  Decembcr  14,  1557.  Jabłoński  w^as 
one  of  the  most  leanied  of  the  many  who  have  endeay 
ored  to  throw  light  on  the  language,  literaturę,  and  an- 
tiąuities  of  the  Egyptians.  His  Egyptian  Glossary, 
which  makes  the  tirst  vohiroe  of  tho  Oputcula  cuibits 
lingua  et  antięuitas  jEgypUorunk,  etc,  published  by  J.  S. 
te  Water  (Leyden,  1804-10,3  vols.^vo),  is  pronounced  by 
Quatremere  the  most  complete  work  in  that  department. 
Another  work  of  great  yalue  in  this  department,  and 
certainly  one  of  the  best  prodactions  of  Jabłoński,  is  the 
Pantheon  yEffyptiorum  nre  de  diis  eorum  oommentariusy 
cum  proleffomenis  de  religione  et  theologia  jEgyptiorum 
(Berlin,  1750-52,  3  yob.  «vo).  The  other  works  of  e»- 
pecial  yalue,  and  of  interest  to  our  readers,  are,  Diaguisi- 
tio  de  Lingua  Lgcaomea  (Berlin,  1714,  4to;  2d  edition, 
Utrecht,  1724),  an  attempt  to  pmye  that  tlie  language 
of  Lycaonia,  meutioned  in  Acts  xiy,  11,  borę  no  rclation 
to  Greek : — Eiercitatio  historicó-theologica  de  Nestoria- 
ntarnoj  etc  (Berlin,  1724, 4yo;  German  by  Immermaim, 
Magdeburg,  1752, 4to) ;  this  work,  intended  as  a  defence 
of  Nestorianism,  excited  great  oontroyersy  among  the 
German  theo\ogULos:r—Jieii^kany  ^gypHorum  Deus,  ab 
JtraelUu  deterto  cultus  (Fnndbrt  ad  Oder,  1735,  4to) : 
^Disseii,  exeg.'hittor,  de  Serapi  parabolico,  ad  MatU 
xiii,  31  et  32  (Francfort  ad  Oder,  1736,  4to):— />e  uiti- 
inw  Pauli  apostoli  laboribus  a  beało  Luca  pratermisńs 
(Beri.  1746,  4to) : — De  Memnone  Oracorum  et  uEgypłio- 
runh,  huju9que  cekberrima  in  Thebaide  statua,  Syntag- 
mata  III  (Francfort  ad  Oder,  1753,  4to)  :—Instiłutianes 
hisłoriic  Christiana  antiąuioris  (Francfort  ad  Oder,  1753, 
8vo) : — Institutiones  ?Usł,  Christiame  recentioris  (Francf. 
1756, 8vo) ;  the  two  lattcr  works  were  published  togeth- 
er  undcr  the  title  Inst.  Bisł,  Christiana  (Francfort  ad 
Oder,  J  7C6, 1767, 2  v<>la,  8vo ;  rcyised  and  augmentcd  by 
E.  A  Schulze,  id.  1783.  1784.  2  yols.  8vo:  3d  voL  by  E. 


H.  D.  Stosch,  oontaining  the  hiatory  of  tne  18th  centu- 
ry,  idem.  1767,  8yo;  reyised  and  completed  by  A  P.  (■. 
Schickedanz,  id.  1786,  8vo).  See  Ersch  u.  Gruber,  A  %. 
Encyldop,;  Hoefer.  Aoup.  Biog.  Generale,  xxyi,  146  aq.; 
Kitto,  Cgdop,  of  Bib,  IM,  s.  v. ;  Herzog,  liealrEne^kh- 
pddie,  8.  V. 

Jab^neel  (Hebrew  Yabne9l%  ^K33^  óujtt  hy  God; 
Sept  'Ia/3vi|X,  but  'lafitri\  in  Josh.  xix,  83),  the  naroe 
of  two  places. 

1.  A  town  on  the  northem  boundary  of  Jndah,  be- 
tween  Mount  Baalah  and  the  Mediterranean  (Josb.  xr, 
U);  probably  the  same  elsewherc  (2  Chroń.  xxvi.  6) 
called  Jabmeh  (q.  v.)  or  Jamnia  (1  Mace.  iy,  15,  etc). 

2.  A  city  on  the  border  of  Naphtali,  mentioned  be^ 
tween  Kekeb  and  Lakum  (Joeh.  xix,  88).  Schwan 
{Palest,\i,  181, 182)  affirms  that  the  later  name  of  Jab- 
neel  was  Ke/r  Yamah,  "  the  yillagc  b}-  the  sca,"  uid  po 
Talmudical  grounds  (comp.  Reland*s  Pokut,  p.  545, 716) 
locates  it  on  the  southem  shore  of  Lakę  Merom,  lod 
thinks  it  identical  with  the  Jtumnia  or  Janmith  men- 
tioned  by  Joaephus  as  lying  in  this  sectioii  of  Upper 
Galileo  ('lafŁyia,  Li/e,  87;  'lapipi^.  War,  ii,  20,  6). 
This  is  not  improbable,  as  the  boundaiy^line  hcre  de- 
scribed  appears  to  have  extended  from  tlie  nutbeni 
limit  of  Pałestine  along  the  eastem  bounds  of  Naphtali 
to  the  Jordan  proper.  It  is  perhape  the  yiiiage  Jauntk, 
yisited  by  Dr,  Roliinson,  on  the  decliyity  of  the  westtm 
roountain  south  of  Lakę  Huleh,  with  a  wady  containin^ 
a  smali  stream  on  the  south  of  the  yiUagó,  and  a  fcY 
ruins  of  tlie  Jewish  type  {Ixtt€r  Researchet,  p.  361, 36:i). 

Jab'liell  (Heb.  Ycilbmh',  n,33^,  a  Imilding;  llama- 
ker,  Miscell,  Phcen.  p.  256,  oompares  the  Arabie  Yubaay  ; 
Sept.  'lofirip  y.  r.  'la(ivii  and  'lancię,  Vulg.  Jałmtn,  a 
Pliilistine  town  near  the  Mediterranean,  between  Jofpa 
and  Ashdod,  whose  wali  king  Uzziah  demolishcd  [i 
Chroń.  xxyi,  6).  It  is  probably  thb  place  wboee  naine 
many  of  the  copies  of  the  Sept.  insert  in  Josh.  xv.  56 
('Ufjivat,  'Jafivai,  *Ifpvd^,  Cod.Yat.  rtftva).  In  lata 
times  (JoBq)hus,  War,  i,  7,  7;  Stnibo,  xvi,  759;  Pliny, 
y,  14),  under  the  name  ofJamnia  Claftvia,  1  Macr.  iv, 
15;  'ldfAvtta,  1  Mace  y,  58;  x,  69;  2  Mace  xii,  8),  it 
was  inhabited  by  Jews  as  well  as  Gcntiles  (Philn,  Opp. 
ii,  575).  Accorduig  tó  Josephus  (Ant.  xii,  8,  6),  (jur- 
gias  was  goyemor  of  it ;  but  the  text  of  the  MaccaL««i 
(2  Macć  xii,  32)  has  Idumiea.  At  this  time  tłiere  was 
a  harbor  on  the  coast  (see  PtoL  y,  16,  2),  to  which,  and 
the  yessels  łying  there,  Judas  set  fire,  and  tlie  coniU- 
gratton  was  seen  at  Jerusałem,  a  distanoe  of  abcut 
twenty-fiye  miłes  (2  Maoc  xii,  9).  The  harbor  is  abo 
mentioned  b}'  Pliny,  who,  in  consequence,  speaks  of  f Im 
town  as  double— (/tf<e  Jamnes  (see  Iteland,  p.  8*23).  Like 
Ascalon  and  Gaza,  the  harbor  borę  the  title  of  Majuina^ 
perhaps  a  Coptie  word,  meaning  the  "  place  on  tlie  sra" 
(Keiu-ick,  Phamda,  p.  27,  29).  Pompcy  took  the  [dace 
from  the  Jews  and  joined  it  to  the  proyince  of  Syria 
(Josephus,  War,  i,  7,  7).  Its  distance  from  Jenisałpin 
was  240  stadia  (2  Iklaoc  xii,  7),  from  Diospolis  twfht 
Roman  miles  (//tu.  Antoti^,  from  Ascalon  200  stadia 
(Strabo,  xyi,  759).  At  the  time  of  the  fali  of  Jenes- 
lem,  Jabueh  was  one  of  the  most  |M>pulous  places  ofJu- 
daea,  and  contained  a  Jewish  school  of  great  famo,  irl)o« 
leamed  doctors  are  often  mentioned  in  the  Talmud 
(Mishna,  Rosh  Hajtshana,  iy,  1 ;  Scmhrdr.  xi.  4 ;  eorop. 
Otho,  T^x.  Rabb.  p.  285  sq.;  Spcrbach,  Biss.  de  Acadf- 
mia  Jabhnensi  ejvsque  rectoribus,  Yitcb.  1740 ;  Lightfoot, 
A  cadem.  Jabn,  histar.,  in  his  Opp,  ii,  87  sq,).  The  Je« 
called  this  school  their  Sanhedrim,  though  it  oniy  pc^ 
sessed  a  faint  shadow  of  the  authority  of  that  grest 
council  (Milnian,  History  of  the  Jetrs,  iii,  95,  2d  cdiL; 
Lightfoot^  ii,  141-143).  In  this  holy  city,  according  to 
an  early  Jewish  tradition,  was  bnried  the  great  Gsma- 
lieL  His  tomb  was  ińsited  by  Parchi  in  the  14th  cen- 
tury  (Zunz,  in  Asher^s  BenJ,  of  Tudela,  ii,  439, 440;  also 
98).  In  the  time  of  EuselHus,  howeyer,  it  had  dirindksd 
to  a  smali  place  (iroAf^rt}))  merely  reąuiring  camal 
mention  (OnoTnatticon,  s.  y.  'lapytia%    In  tłie  6th  oeiH 


JABRUDA 


725 


JACKAL 


tory.  under  JustinUriy  it  became  the  seat  of  a  Christian 
biahop  (fiptphanius,  adv,  Hter,  lib.  ii,  730).  Under  the 
Cmsaders,  who  thought  it  to  be  the  site  of  Gath,  and 
\7lto  built  a  fortresa  in  it,  it  borę  the  comipted  name  of 
Ihdv*,  and  gave  a  title  to  a  linę  of  counta,  one  of  whoin, 
Jean  albelin,  about  1250,  restored  to  efficieney  the  fa- 
mous  codę  of  the  *' Aasiacs  de  Jerusalem*'  (Gibbon,  chap. 
lviii  ad  fin.).  For  the  history  in  fuli,  see  Keland,' Pa- 
last.  p.  822 ;  RosenmUller,  A  Uerłh.  ii,  2,  p.  366 ;  Raumer, 
PaiasL  p.  200;  comp.  Thomson,  U  and  B,  ii,  312  8q. 

The  name  Ythna  is  atill  borne  by  a  little  yillage 
among  the  ruins  of  the  ancient  site,  upon  a  smali  emi- 
nence  on  the  westeni  side  of  wady  Rubin,  about  one 
hour  from  the  sea  (Irby  and  Mangles,  p.  182;  Corresp, 
dOrieatyy,  p.  373,  374).  According  to  Scholz  (^ReUen, 
p.  146),  there  are  here  the  ruins  of  a  former  churoh,  af- 
tcrwards  a  mosque ;  also,  nearer  the  sea,  the  ruins  of  a 
Boman  bridge  over  the  wady,  with  high  arches,  built 
of  rery  large  Stones.  On  the  eastem  side  of  the  wady, 
on  a  smali  eminence,  is  the  tomb  of  Rubin  (Reuben), 
the  son  of  Jacob,  from  whom  the  wady  takes  its  name ; 
it  is  mentioned  by  Mejr  ed-Din  (1495)  as  having  been 
formerly  a  noted  place  of  pilgrimage  for  Moslems,  as  it 
still  is  in  some  degree  {Fundgr,  des  Orienis^  ii,  188).  It 
is  about  eleven  miles  south  of  Jaffa,  seven  from  Ramleh, 
and  four  from  Akir  (Ekron).  (See  Robinson's  Research- 
es,  iii,  22 ;  Ritter,  Erdk,  xvi,  125.)  It  probably  occu- 
pies  its  ancient  site,  for  some  remains  of  old  buildings 
are  to  be  seen,  possibly  relics  of  the  fortress  which  the 
.Cmsaders  built  there  (Porter,  Handbook^  p.  274). 

This  position  likewise  corresponds  with  that  of  Ja&- 
KEKŁ  (Josh.  XV,  11)  on  the  western  end  of  the  northem 
boundary.of  Judah  (so  Schwarz,  Paiestiney  p.  98;  Keil, 
Camment,  ad  loc.),  which  is  placed  by  Żusebius  and 
Jerome  {Onomcut.  s.  v.  Jamneel)  between  Ashdod  and 
Diospolis.  There  is  no  sign  of  its  ever  having  been 
occupied  by  Judah.  Josephus  (^Ata,  v,  1,  22)  correctly 
attributes  it  to  the  Danites.  There  was  a  constant 
Btruggle  going  on  between  that  tribe  and  the  Philistines 
for  the  poasession  of  all  the  places  in  the  lowland  plain 
[see  Dan],  and  it  is  not  surprising  that  the  next  time 
we  mcet  ¥rith  Jabueel  it  should  be  in  the  hands  of  the 
latŁer  (2  Chroń,  xxvi,  6). 

Jabrada  ('Ia/3pov^a),  a  city  of  Palestine  mention- 
ed by  Ptolemy  (r,  15),  and  as  an  episcopal  city  by  St. 
Paulo  {Geoffr,  Sacr,  p.  294) ;  now  Yebrudj  a  village,  but 
still  the  seat  of  a  bishop;  rather  morę  than  an  hour  to 
the  west  of  the  great  caravaD  road  from  Damascus  to 
łloms,  nearly  midway  between  these  two  cities  (Porter, 
Damascus,  i,  360)^— Yan  deYelde,  Memoir,  p.  823 ;  Rob- 
inson, ImUt  HeseareheSj  p.  556. 

Ja^^ohan  (Heb.  Yakan\  "jS^^,  moumer;  Sept  *Ia- 
Xav  V.  r,  'Iwa^ay),  one  of  seven  chief  Gaditc  "  broth- 
eis"  resident  in  Bashan  (1  Chroń.  v,  13).  B.C.  between 
1093  and  782.     See  also  Akan. 

Ja^chin  (Heb.  Yakin%  ''p3;,/m;  Sept.  'Iax«X 
'Iax(V),  the  name  of  three  men  aud  also  of  a  pillar. 

X.  The  fourth  uamed  of  the  sons  of  Simeon  (Gen. 
aclri,  10  ;  £xod.  vi,  15),  called  Jakib  in  1  Chroń,  iv,  24. 
His  descendauts  are  called  Jachinites  (Heb.  Yakim\ 
'»:'^3;,  Sept,  *laxivi,  Numb.  xxvi,  12).     B.C.  1856. 

2.  The  head  of  the  twenty-first  "course"  of  priests  as 
arranged  by  David  (1  Chroń,  xxiv,  17).     B.C.  1014. 

■  3.  One  of  the  priests  that  retumed  to  Jemsalem  after 
the  Exile  (1  Chroń,  ix,  10;  Neh.  xi,  10).     B.C.  536. 

4.  Jaciiis  (Sept  in  Kings  'la^ow/i,  Alex.  'iaxovv ; 
•but  in  Chroń.  carópOoMnc  in  both  MSS. ;  Josephus  'lo- 
X»V  ;  Vulg.  Jachifkf  Jachim)  and  Boaz  were  the  names 
of  two  coiumns  (the  former  on  the  right  hand  [south], 
the  latter  on  the  left)  set  up  (according  to  Phocnician 
style :  compare  Menander  in  Josephus,  A  nt.  viii,  5, 3 ;  sec 
Vatke'8  BibL  TheoL  p.  824, 826 ;  Mover8,  Phdn,  i,  293)  in 
the  porch  (D^tó)  of  Soloraon's  Tempie  (1  Kings  vii, 
15-22;  2  Chroń,  iii,  17;  corap.  Jer.  lii,  21),  and  doubt- 
less  of  symbolical  import  (Simonis,  Onontasticon,  p.  430, 


460).  See  Architectuke  ;  Tehplb. 
Each  was  eighteen  cubits  high  and  twelve  g 
in  circumference,  or  four  in  diameter.  g^  ( 
They  w^ere  formed  of  brass  (copper  or  &  m 
bronze,  perhaps  some  morę  precious  sl-  .-g, 
loy)  four  fingers  in  thickness  (Jer.  lii,  21).  g  j- 
The  capitals  (quadTangular,  Jer.  lii,  28),  n  | 
also  of  brass,  were  five  cubits  high  (1  c  J 
Kings  vii,  16;  Jer.  lii,  22;  2  Chrpn.  iii,  S^ 
15).  •  The  description  of  the  omaments  "o^ 
(of  the  same  metal,  Jer.  lii,  22)  of  the  ^-^^ 
capitals  (1  Kings  vii,  17  sq.;  campare  2  oj 
Kings  xxv,  17;  2  Chroń,  ii,  15;  iv,  12;  |S 
Jer.  lii,  22)  is  much  confused  and  obscure  £'" 
(Hitzig,  Jerem.  p.  428),  either  on  account  o-§ 
of  the  brevity  or  in  conseąuence  of  some  ^^ 
oomiption  in  the  text,  and  it  is  therefore  H 
no  wonder  that  antiąuarians  (see  Lamy, 
De  Tabem,fa!d.  p.  1043  sq. ;  Meyer,  BUUl.f.  hoh,  Warh. 
i,  18  flq. ;  ix,  81  są. ;  Grttnersen,  In  the  Stuttgart,  Kunstb. 
1831,*  No.  77  sq.;  Keil,  Tempel  Solomo\  p.  95  sq.; 
Schnaase,  Gesch,  der  MUL  Kunste,  i,  245,  280)  and  archi- 
tects  (Schmidt,  ^t6ltc.  Maihem,  p.  258  sq.)  should  have 
varied  greatly  in  their  view8  and  reconstmctions  on  this 
point  (compare  Lamy,  ra5. 18;  Scheuchzer,  Phi/s.  sacr. 
iii,  tab.  448  sq. ;  see  Meyer,  tU  sup,),  It  is  dear,  how- 
ever,  that  the  capitals  were  swelling  at  the  top^  and  lily- 
shaped  (1  Kings  vii,  18,  20;  comp.  Josephus,  Ant.  viii, 
3, 4).  (For  discussions  of  various  points  connected  with 
the  subject,  see  RosenmlUler  on  Jer.  lii,  22;  Meyer's  Bi- 
beldeuł.  p.  257;  Jahn,  iii,  261;  MoYers,  ChroiK  p.  253; 
Hirt,  Gesch.  d.  Bauhmsty  tab.  8,  fig.  20;  Bottcher,  Prób, 
aUtesf.  SchriftausL  p.  385;  Keil,  Conunenł,  on  1  Kings 
vi,  15.  Monographs  on  the  subject  have  been  written 
by  J.  G.  Michaelis,  Frankft.  1788;  Unger,  Ługd.  1738; 
and  Kilchberger,  Beri  1788;  especially  M.  Pjesken,  De 
eolumnis  esneif,  YiteU  1719;  also  in  UgoUni  Thesaurus, 
x;  compare  the  treatises  of  Lightfoot,  Keil,  Hirt,  and 
Baidwell  on  8oUnwm's  7>inp/e.)— Winer,  i,  5*20.    See 

BOAZ;  PiLŁAR. 

Jachini,  Abrah.vm.    See  Lewi  (Sahbaiai), 
Ja^^chinite  (Numb.  xx>i,  12).    See  Jaciiin  L 

Jaointh  (vaKiv2roc^  the  hyaeinth),  properly  a  flower 
of  a  deep  porple  or  reddish  blue  (so  vaKtv^ivoCy  kyacm- 
tkine,  L  e.  hyacinth-colored,  "of  jacinth,"  Rev.  ix,  17); 
hence  a  precious  stone  of  like  color  (Re v.  xxi,  20) .  Con- 
siderable  doubt  prevails  as  to  the  real  minerał  thus  de»> 
ignated,  if  indeed  any  particular  stone  be  intended,  and 
not  rather  ever>'  purplish  or  azure  gem.  According  to 
Dr.  Moore  (Anc  Mineraloga,  p.  169),  it  is  most  nearly 
related  to  the  zircon  of  modem  mineralogists.  The 
hyacinth  or  jacinth  stone  was  of  yarioiis  colors,  from 
white  or  pale  green  to  purple-red.  Pliny  speaks  of  it 
as  shining  with  a  golden  color,  and  in  much  favor  as  an 
amulet  or  charm  against  the  plague  {Hist,  Nat,  xxxvii, 
9).  It  occuTS  in  the  Sept.  for  Ćnri,  Exo(L  xxv,  5 ;  also 
for  rtaPl,  Exotl.  xxvi,  4;  but  is  usually  supposcd  to 
representthe  Heb.  D^b,  "ligure"  (q.  v.)  (RosenmllUer, 
BiU,  A  UerthumsL  IV,i;  p.  38).     See  Gem. 

Jaokal,  the  Persie  shaitlf  Turkish  jakal,  cams  au- 
reus  of  linnasus,  has  been  thought  to  be  denoted  by 
8everal  Hebrew  words  yariously  rendered  in  the  Autłu 
Vers.  See  Fox;  Dragon;  Whei.p,  etc.  It  is  a  wild 
animal  of  the  canine  family  [see  Wolf;  Dog],  which 
in  Persia,  Armenia,  likewise  Arabia  (Niebuhr,  Beschr, 
166),  and  even  in  Sj-ria  (Russel,  Alejypo,  ii,  61)  and  Pal- 
estine (around  Jaifa,  Gaza,  and  in  Galilee,  Hasselquist, 
Trav,  p.  271 ;  among  the  hills  of  JucUoa,  Robinson, ii,  432 ; 
iii,  188),  is  frequently  met  with,  attaining  a  large  size 
(three  and  a  half  feet  in  length),  and  so  closcly  rcsem- 
biing  a  fox  in  color  and  generał  appearanee  as  to  be  at 
iirsŁ  readily  mistaken  fur  that  animal.  But  the  jackal 
has  a  somewhat  ]jecuiiarly  formed  head,  not  greatly  un- 
like  that  of  a  shepherd^s  dog,  about  seyen  incheslong, 
with  a  very  Dointed  muzzle,  and  yellowiah-red  hair. 


JACEAŁ 


726 


JACKSON 


Eastem  Jackals. 


which  reserobles  that  of  the  wolf.  The  color  of  the 
body  is  yellowish-gray  above,  whitish  below ;  the  back 
and  sides  sometimes  of  mixed  gray  and  black;  the 
shoulden,  thighs,  and  legs  uniformly  tawny-yellow. 
The  taił  U  round,  projecting,  and  reaching  hardly  to 
the  heeL  The  eyea  are  large,  with  a  round  pupiL  It 
is  gregarious  in  \ts  habits,  hunting  in  packs  (generally 
preying  upon  smaller  animals  and  potiltry,  but  freąuent- 
ly  attacking  the  largcr  ąnadnipeds),  the  pest  of  the 
countrics  where  it  is  found.  It  burrows  in  the  eaith, 
preferring  foresto  and  cayems,  where  it  usually  lies  hid 
during  the  daytime ;  but  at  night  it  issues  in  companiea 
(sometimes  yery  Urge)  on  predatory  incursions  among 
the  yilbiges,  and  oflen  the  imroediate  yicinity  of  towns. 
Its  fayońte  food  is  fowls  or  carrion,  and  it  will  break 
into  grayea  to  make  a  meal  upon  the  corpse,  and  eyen 
carry  ofF  and  deyour  young  children  if  found  unprotect^ 
ed.  In  a  wild  state,  this  animal  has  an  intolerably  of- 
fensiye  odór.  Colonel  Hamilton  Smith,  in  his  Ccandasy 
States  that  "jackals  form  a  group  of  crepuscular  and 
nocturnal  canines,  neyer  yoluntarily  abroad  before  dark, 
and  then  hunting  for  prey  during  the  whole  night;  en- 
tering  the  streets  of  towns  to  seek  for  offals,  robbing  the 
hen-roosts,  entering  out-houses,  examining  doom  and 
Windows,  feasting  upon  all  dressed  yegetables  and  ill- 
secureil  proyisions,  deyouring  all  the  carrion  they  find 
exposed,  and  digging  their  way  into  sepulchres  that  are 
not  carefully  protccted  against  their  activity  and  yora^ 
ciousncss;  and  in  the  fruit  season,  in  common  with 
foxes,  eeeking  the  \'incyards,  and  fattening  upon  grapes. 
They  congregate  in  grcat  numbers,  sometimes  as  many 
as  two  hundred  being  found  together,  and  they  howl  so 
incessantly  that  the  annoyance  of  their  yoices  is  the 
theme  of  uumerous  apologues  and  tales  in  the  literaturę 
of  Asia.  This  ery  is  a  melancholy  sound,  beginning 
the  instant  the  sun  sets,  and  nevet  ceasing  till  afler  it 
has  arisen.  llie  yoice  is  uttereil  and  responded  to  by 
all  withiii  hearing,  in  an  accent  of  eyery  possible  tonę, 
from  a  short,  hungry  yelp  to  a  prolonged  crescendo  ery, 
rising  octaye  aboye  octaye  in  the  shrillness,  and  mingled 
with  dismal  whinings,  as  of  a  human  being  in  distress." 
Their  nlghtly  howl  has  a  peculiar  wailing  tonę  (Kussel, 
A  leppoj  p.  62;  Russegger,  Reise^  iii,  126),  greatly  resem- 
bling  the  ery  of  a  child.  "  These  sinister,  guilty,  woe- 
begoiic  brutes,  when  pressed  with  hunger,  gather  in 
gangs  among  the  grayes,  and  yell  in  ragę,  and  fight  like 
fiends  oyer  their  midnight  orgies ;  but  on  the  battle- 


field  ia  their  great  carmyil* 
(Thomson,  Lcmd  and  Book,  i, 
184).  (See,  generally,  Bo- 
chart,  Hieroz.  ii,  180  są.,  who 
maintains  that  the  jackal  was 
designated  among  the  Greeks 
and  Komans  by  the  name 
&«uc,  ^atóc,  Kampfer,  A  moen. 
ii,  406  8q. ;  Gmelin,  Reise,  ii, 
81  Bq.  GlUdenstftdt,  in  Xor. 
comnient,  acad,  PetropoL  xx, 
449  sq. ;  Oedmann,  SammL  ii, 
18  8q.) 

This  animal  is  yery  gener- 
ally regarded  as  denoted  by 
the  name  *^K  (i,  the  hotcler,  in 
the  plural,  D*^*K,  lytm', "  wild 
beasts  of  the  islands"),  repre- 
sentcd  as  inhabiting  deserts 
(Isa.  xiii,  22 ;  xxxiy,  14 ;  Jer. 
xl,  39).  It  is  morę  usually 
recognised  as  the  br^tC,  thu- 
aVj  of  Scripture  {a\wTfilj 
"fox"),  especially  in  the  in- 
stance  of  Samson*s  €xploit 
(Judg.  xy,  4 ;  compare  Kosen- 
mllller,  Alterthumst,  IV,  ii, 
156  są.,  and  Scholia  ad  Jtidi- 
cefy  p.  827).  See  Fox.  We 
haye,  howeyer,  no  proof  that  thual'  denotes  exclusiye- 
ly  the  fox,  and  that  iyim\  and  Solomon*s  little  foxes, 
refer  solely  to  jackals;  particularly  as  these  aniraals 
were,  if  really  known,  not  abundant  in  Western  Asia, 
eyen  during  the  first  century  of  the  Koman  empire;  for 
they  are  but  little  noticcd  by  the  Greek  writers  and 
sportsmen  who  resided  where  no  w  they  are  heard  and 
seen  eyery  eyening;  these  authorities  ofTering  no  re- 
mark  on  the  most  prominent  characteiistic  of  the  spe- 
cies,  namely,  the  chorus  of  howlings  lasting  all  night— 
a  habit  so  intolerable  that  it  is  the  inyariable  theme  of 
all  the  Shemitic  writers  sińce  the  Hegira  wheneyer  they 
mention  the  jackal  We  may  thcrefore  infer  that  shuał', 
if  a  generał  denomination,  and  that  tyim',  if  the  etymol- 
ogy  be  just,  is  deriyed  from  bowling  or  barking,  and 
may  designate  the  jackal,  though  morę  probably  it  in- 
cludes  also  those  wild  Canidie  which  haye  a  similar 
habit.  Indeed,  as  Ehrenberg  {Icon.  et  desctipt.  mam- 
mai.  dcc.  2)  has  remarked,  it  is  likely  that  traycllen 
haye  usually  oonfounded  the  jackal  with  the  canis  Syr- 
iacuSf  while  a  thorough  treatife  on  the  canis  aurtut  is 
still  a  desideratum  (see  Wood,  Bibie  Animals,  p.  56). 

There  is  also  another  term  in  the  O.  T.,  in  (tan,  in 
plural  by  Chaldaism,  "pSP,  tannin',  regarded  by  others 
as  the  singular,  whence  a  true  plur.  Ł'^3'^2ri,  łanninim', 
^  dragons*"),  described  as  a  wild  animal  inhabiting  des- 
erts, and  uttering  a  plaintiye  ery  (Job  xxx,  29;  Mic.  i, 
8) ;  often  joined  (in  poetic  parallelism)  with  njr^  "5, 
"  daughter  of  the  ostrich,"  and  D''*»,  rytm'  (Isa.  xiii, 
22 ;  xxxiy,  13 ;  xliii,  20).  The  Syriac  understands  the 
jackal,  and  the  Arabie  the  tro(/'(comp.  Fococke,  Comm. 
in  Mic.  ad  loc. ;  Schnurrer,  Diss.philol.  p.  823  są.).  It  is 
possibly  no  morę  than  the  canis  Syriacus  after  alL  Bo- 
chart  (Hieroz.  iii,  222  8q.)  interprets  it  of  an  enormous 
kind  of  serpent.     See  Dragon. 

Jackson,  Arthur,  an  EngILsh  Nonconformi^t  di- 
yine,  was  bom  in  Suffolk  in  1593.  He  studied  at  Trin- 
ity  College,  Cambridge,  become  lecturer,  and  afterwards 
minister  uf  St.Michael's,  Wood  Street,  London.  Siibse- 
ąuently  he  receiyed  the  living  of  St.  Faith'8,  but  was 
ejected  for  nonconformity  in  1662,  and  died  in  1666. 
His  annoiations  are  still  esteemed.  His  writings  are 
principally  in  the  exegetical  departmeni,  and  are  gener- 
ally considered  yaluable  even  iu  our  day.  Of  these  the 
bcst  are,  A  Help  for  the  undastandinff  of  the  Iloly 
Scripture  (Camb.  1643,  3  yols.  Ato)  \  —  Annoiations  on 


JACKSON 


727 


JACKSON 


ihe  wkole  Bock  ofltaiah  (London,  1682, 4to)^— Darling, 
Cffdop,  BibUog,  8.  v. ;  AlUbone,  Did,  o/Aulhort,  a.  v. 

JackBOn,  C3rril,  a  celebrated  English  dłvine,  was 
bom  in  1742.  He  was  educated  at  Oxford  UniTereity, 
and,  after  holding  sereral  beneOces,  was  appointed  dean 
of  Christ  Church,  Oxford,  which  posttion  he  held  until 
the  time  of  his  death,  April  9, 1819. 

Jackson,  James  B.,  a  minister  of  the  Methodist 
Kpiacopal  Church  South,  was  bom  and  reared  in  Ciarkę 
Coonty,  Ga.  The  datę  of  his  birth  is  not  known  to 
na,  neither  are  we  aware  of  the  datę  of  his  conrersion, 
though  it  appears,  from  the  minutes  of  the  Flońda  Con- 
ference,  of  which  he  was  a  member,  that  it  must  have 
been  about  the  age  of  fuurteen.  He  was  honored  by  his 
associates  in  the  ministry  as  a  man  of  superior  abilities, 
and  held  some  of  the  \xAt  appointments  in  the  Florida 
Omference.  He  was  also'  professor  in  Andrew  Female 
College  for  a  number  of  years.  At  the  time  of  Iiis  death, 
Feb.  18, 1868,  he  was  presiding  elder  of  Jack8onville  Dis- 
tńcL  In  alt,  hc  spent  about  thirty  years  in  the  minis- 
tiy.    See  Minutes  o/A  rm.  Conf.  M.  £,  Ck.  South^  iii,  227. 

Jackson,  John,  an  English  Arian  dirine  and 
great  Hebraist  of  the  last  oentury,  was  bom  at  Lensey, 
in  Yorkshire,  in  1686.  He  studied  at  Doncaster  School 
and  at  Jeans  College,  Cambridge,  where  he  took  his  bach- 
eloi^s  degree,  but  could  not  obtain  that  of  master  of  arts 
on  afcooant  of  his  Arian  principies.  In  1712  the  Corpo- 
ration of  Doncaster  presented  him  with  the  rectory  of 
Rossington,  but  the  chanoellor  of  the  duchy  of  Lancaa- 
ter  bavŁng  madę  him  confrater  of  Wigston^s  Hospital, 
in  Ldceeter,  a  poeition  which  rcquired  no  subscription 
of  him,  he  removed  to  the  hospital,  and  in  1729  siic- 
ceeded  to  its  mastership.  He  died  in  1763.  Jackson 
cairied  on  a  lively  controrersy  with  several  of  £ngland's 
most  distinguished  orthodox  writers  of  divinity,  morę 
especially  with  bishop  Warbarton  (q.  v.) .  He  also  wrote 
a  large  number  of  works,  the  principal  of  which  are, 
The  Duty  of  a  Christian  setforih  and  explaitted  in  mt- 
eral  practical  Diseoursts,  heing  an  Exposition  <j^  ihe 
IjortTs  Praiferj  etc  (Lond.  1728, 12mo) ;— 7%c  £xistence 
and  Uniiy  of  God  projtedfrom  his  Naturę  and  Atłri- 
butesy  heing  a  Yindicaiion  of  Dr,  Clarke^s  Demonstrałion 
ofthe  Bang  and  Attributes  ofGod,  etc.  (London,  1734, 
8vo) : — 7^  Belitfof  a  futurę  State  prored  to  he  afun- 
damental  A  rticie  of  the  Religion  of  the  I/ebrews,  and 
keid  bg  the  Philosophers,  etc.  (Lond,  1745,  8vo)  -.—Chro- 
noŁogieal  Antiguiiies,  etc,  for  the  Spaoe  ofJive  thousand 
Years  (Lond.  1752,3  vols.  4to),  and  many  other  contro- 
Tenial  pamphlets.  See  Dr.  Sutton,  Memoirs  ofthe  Life 
and  Wriiings  ofj.  7.,  etc  (Lond.  1764, 8vo) ;  Chalmers, 
Gesu  Biog.  Dictionary,  a.  v. ;  Hook,  Ecdes.  Biog.  s.  v. ; 
Uoefer,  Nouv,  Biog,  Głnirale,  xxr,  149;  Allibone,  Diet, 
ttfAutkors,  8.  y. ;  Grorton,  Biog,  Diet,  s.  v. 

Jackson,  John  Frellnghuysen.  See  Jack- 
B02C,  William,!. 

Jackson,  Samuel,  a  Wesleyan  minister,  who 
held  the  highest  ofBces  in  the  gift  of  the  Wesleyans, 
and  for  many  years  was  one  of  the  greatest  powers  of 
English  Wesleyanism,  was  bom  towards  the  close  of 
the  last  century.  He  was  particularly  prominent  in  the 
Sabbath-«chool  morement.  '*To  him  alone,"  says  a 
writer  in  the  London  QuarU  Ret,  1863,  p.  261,  <*  must  be 
attributed  the  awakening  among  them  (the  Wesleyans) 
of  that  religious  jealonsy  for  the  younger  members  of 
their  aocieties  and  congregations,  which  of  late  has  so 
much  eleyated  their  system  of  Sunday-school  instruction, 
and  has  thrown  the  hedge  of  a  morę  direct  ministerial 
ovenight  and  training  around  multitndes  of  their  youth, 
who  might  otherwise  have  passed  unguarded  through 
the  perils  that  precede  adutt  age.  For  some  years  be- 
fore  his  death  coneem  for  the  spiritual  welfare  of  the 
young  became  a  passion  with  Mr.  Jackson ;  he  wrote 
and  apoke  of  little  besides."  As  a  preacher,  he  was 
plain  in  langoage,  masculine  in  sentiment,  ever  abound- 
'vag.  in  simple  but  forcible  iilustiation&    Tho  datę  of  his 


death  is  not  known  to  us.  His  brother  Thomas,  anoth- 
er  oelebrated  minister  of  the  Wesleyans,  edited  the  ser^ 
mons  of  Samuel  Jackson,  and  prefaced  them  with  a 
memoir  of  the  author  (London,  1868, 8vo). 

Jackson,  Thomas,  D.D.  an  eminent  English  di- 
vine,  was  bom  at  Willowing,  Durham,  in  1579.  He 
studied  at  Queen*s  College,  Oxford,  and  after  1596  at 
Corpus  Cbristi,  of  which  hc  became  rice-president.  He 
was  afterwards  appointed  successircly  yicar  of  Newcas- 
tle, president  of  his  college  in  1630,  prel)endary  of  Win- 
chester in  1688,  and,  finally,  dean  of  Peterborough  in 
1688.  He  died  in  1640.  l)r.  Thomas  Jackson  eujoyed 
a  great  reputation  for  piety  and  leaming;  he  was  pro- 
foundly  read  in  the  fatbers,  and  possessed  great  depth 
of  Judgment.  His  works  (oommentaries,  among  these 
a  yaluable  commentary  on  the  Apostles'  Creed,  and  ser- 
mons),  which  rank  yery  high,  form  a  magazine  of  theo- 
logical  knowledge,  and  are  remarkable  also  for  elegance 
and  dignity  of  style.  Southey  places  him  among  the 
yery  best  of  English  diyines,  and  George  Herbert  eajrs, 
**  I  błesB  God  for  the  oonflrmation  Dr.  Jackson  has  giyen 
me  in  the  Christian  leligion  against  the  Atheist,  Jew, 
and  Socinian,  and  in  the  Protestant  against  Romę."  A 
new  edition  of  his  works,  with  a  copious  index,  was  pub- 
lished  in  1844  (Oxfonl,  12  vq1s.  8vo).  See  Darling,  Cy- 
dop.  BiUiog.  s.  y. ;  Biograph,  Britamńea,  s.  y. ;  Fuller, 
Worthies ;  Wood,  A  thenct  Oxomenses  (see  Index,  yoL  i) ; 
Hoolc,  Ecdes,  Biog,  s.  y. 

Jackson, 'William  (l),bom  in  1782,  was  one  of 
the  earliest  ministers  of  the  Keformed  (Dutch)  Church 
in  New  Jersey.  He  began  his  studies  for  the  ministry 
with  the  Key.  John  Frelinghuysen,  whose  daughter  he 
married  in  1757.  The  church  at  Bergen,  N.  J.,  which 
was  the  first  orany  denomination  in  the  state,  had  exi8t- 
ed  ninety  years  without  a  pastor,  being  unable  to  procure 
one  from  the  moŁher  country.  In  1753,  in  union  with 
the  Church  on  Staten  Island,  a  cali  was  madę  upon  Mr. 
Jackson  which  bound  him  to  go  to  Holland,  complete 
his  studies,  and  obtain  ordination  from  the  Classis  of 
Amsterdam.  These  churches  were  to  pay  him  £100  for 
his  support  while  abeent.  Four  years  and  three  months 
elapsed  before  his  return  in  1757,  when  he  assumed  fuli 
pastorał  charge,  diyiding  his  seryices  eąually  between 
the  two  congregations.  These  facts  show  both  the 
tenacity  of  Church  life  and  the  deyotion  of  the  people 
to  the  idea  of  a  thoroughly  educated  ministry.  The 
Ccetus  and  Couferentie  troubles,  which  had  so  long  rent 
the  churches,  and  which  grew  out  of  this  yery  qnestion 
of  an  educated  ministry,  were  finally  adjusted  in  1771, 
through  the  great  exertions  of  Dr.  John  H.  Liyingston 
(q.  V.)  and  his  associates,  and  both  Mr.  Jackson  and 
these  churohes  rejoiced  in  the  oonsummation.  See  Re- 
FORMED  Dutch  Chukch.  His  ministry  lasted  thirty- 
two  years  (1757-1789),  when  he  became  insane.  He 
died  in  1813.  Mr.  Jackson^s  literary  and  theological 
attainments  were  attested  by  academic  degrees.confer- 
red  by  Yale,  Columbia,  and  Princeton  colleges.  He  was 
celebrated  as  a  pulpit  orator,  preaching  in  the  Dutch 
language.  His  yoice  was  commanding,  and  his  popu- 
larity  was  such  that  "  in  Middlesex  and  Somerset  coun- 
ties  he  was  estimated  as  a  field-preacher  second  only  to 
Whitefield.  On  one  occaston,  at  the  Baritan  churoh, 
the  assembly  was  so  large  that  he  had  to  leaye  the  pul- 
pit and  take  a  station  at  the  church  door  to  deliyer  his 
sermon,"  and  the  throng  outside  was  greater  than  that 
which  filled  the  building.  His  ministry  was  useful,  ac- 
ceptable,  and  crowned  with  great  and  permanent  bless- 
inga.  One  of  his  five  sons,  the  Rey.  John  Frelinghuy- 
sen Jackson,  was  for  many  years  the  pastor  of  the  Ke- 
formed Dutch  Church  at  Harlem,  New  York,  where  he 
died  in  1836,  at  the  age  of  sixty-eight  years.  He  was 
a  laborious,  faithful,  and  deyoted  minister,  and  distin- 
guished for  his  pecuniary  liberality.— B.  C.  Taylor^s  i4»- 
nals  of  Classis  and  Township  of  Bergen;  Corwin's  Mon' 
ual  ofthe  Reformed  Church,  p.  120.     (W.  J.  R.  T.) 

Jackson,  'William  (2),  an  English  diyine,  brotlr 


JACKSON 


728 


JACOB 


er  of  Cyril  Jackson,  bom  in  1750,  was  educated  at  West* 
miuster  School  and  Cbiist  Chuich,  Oxford.  He  obtain- 
ed  tbe  degree  of  D.D.  in  1799,  and  became,  after  baviiig 
been  preacher  at  Łincobi'8  Inn,  canon  of  Christ  Church, 
regius  professor  of  Greek  in  1811,  and  bishop  of  Oxfurd. 
He  died  in  Noveniber,  1815.  He  published  sozoe  of  bis 
sermons  (1784-1804).  See  Kich,  Biblioiheca  Americana 
Aoro,  i,  317. 

Jackson,  'WilUam,  D.D.  (3),  a  Gongregational 
minister,  was  bom  in  Comwall,  Conn.,  Dec.  14,  1768. 
At  tho  age  of  sizteen,  when  abont  commencing  his  stud- 
ies  preparatory  for  college,  his  mind  became  deeply  im- 
pressed  with  religious  truth,  and  he  at  once  decided  to 
devote  his  life  to  the  ministry,  He  entered  Dartmouth 
College  in  1786,  and  graduated  in  1790.  For  a  time  be 
taught  a  school  in  Wetherafield,  Conn.,  but,  finding  that 
his  seryices  were  needed  in  the  Church,  he  commenced 
finally  the  study  of  theolpgy  under  Drs.  Spring  and 
Emmons.  In  1793  he  was  licensed  to  preach,  and  he 
peifoimed  ministerial  labors  first  near  his  home,  and  af- 
terwards  in  New  Jersey.  A  caU  which  had  been  given 
him  by  the  Congregational  Society  at  Dorset,  Yt.,  in 
1793,  when  feeble  health  obliged  him  to  dedine,  was  re- 
newed  three  yean  afler,  and  this  time  accepted.  He 
was  oidained  Sept.  27, 1796.  In  1887  he  was  obliged  to 
ask  his  people  for  an  assistant;  and  though  his  task  had 
thus  been  madę  easier,  his  health  continued  to  fail  him, 
and  he  died  Oct.  15, 1842.  In  1837  Middlebury  College, 
of  which  he  had  been  a  Corporation  member  for  sereral 
years,  conferred  on  him  the  doctorate  of  diyinity.  Dr. 
Jackson  possessed  a  mind  of  high  order,  sanctified  by 
eamest  devotion  to  the  interests  of  the  Church.  **  Dr. 
Porter,  late  of  Andover,  the  companion  of  his  youth, 
and  particular  friend  in  college,  said  of  him,  *  He  is  tbe 
only  minister  of  his  age  who  bas  kept  up  with  the  times.' 
His  mental  enterpriae  and  pantuig  for  progress  never 
left  him.*' — Dr.  J.  Maltby,  in  Sprague,  Ann,  o/ the  A  mer- 
ican  Pulpity  ii,  340. 

Ja^OOb  (HeU  YaiUcob\  n'psn,«i/;pfan/«r,  from  3^^, 
to  bite  the  heel  [to  which  signification  there  is  allusion 
in  Gen.  xxv,  26 ;  xxvii,  86 ;  Hos.  xii,  8  ] ;  Sept.  and  N.T. 
'Iantf/3;  Josephus  'laraijdoc,  which  latter  is  identical 
with  the  Greek  name  for  "James"),  the  name  of  two 
men  in  the  Bibie. 

1.  The  second-bom  of  the  twin  sons  of  Isaac  by  Re- 
bekah  (B.C.  2004).  In  the  following  account  of  his  his- 
tory,  we  largely  avail  ouTselres  of  the  statements  in  Kit- 
to'8,  Smith's,  and  Fairbaim^s  dictionaries. 

1.  His  conception  is  stated  to  hare  been  supematural 
(Gen.  xxy,  21  8q.).  Led  by  pcculiar  feelings,  Rebekah 
went  to  inquire  of  the  I^ord  (as  some  think,  through  the 
inter\''ention  of  Abraham),  and  was  informcd  that  she 
was  about  to  become  a  mother,  that  ber  ofTspring  should 
be  the  founders  of  two  nations,  and  that  the  elder  should 
senre  the  younger — circumstances  which  oiight  to  be 
borne  in  mind  when  a  judgment  is  pronounced  on  hor 
conduct  in  aiding  Jacob  to  secure  the  priyileges  of  birth- 
right  to  the  excIusion  of  his  elder  brother  Esau.  He 
was  bom  with  Esau,  when  Isaac  was  59  and  Abraham 
159  years  old,  probably  at  the  well  ŁAhai-roL 

As  the  boys  grew,  Jacob  appeared  to  partake  of  the 
gentle,  quiet,  and  retiring  character  of  his  fathcr,  and 
was  accordingly  led  to  prefer  the  tranquil  safety  and 
pleasing  occupations  of  a  shepherd's  life  to  the  bold  and 
daring  cnterprises  of  the  hunter,  for  which  Esau  had  an 
irresistible  predilection.  The  latter  was  his  father^s  fa- 
yoritc,  howeyer,  while  Rebekah  eyinced  a  partiality  for 
Jacob  (Gen.  xxv,  27, 28). 

That  Bclfishncss,  and  a  pmdence  which  approached 
to  cunning,  had  a  seat  in  the  hcart  of  the  youth  Jacob, 
appears  but  too  plainly  in  his  dealing  with  Esau,  when 
he  cxactcd  from  a  famishing  brother  so  large  a  price  for 
a  mess  of  pottage  as  the  surrender  of  his  birthright  (Gen. 
xxv,  29-34).  B.C.  dr.  1985.  (See  Kitto,  Datiy  Bibie 
JlluM.  ad  loc.) 

The  leaning  which  his  mother  had  in  favor  of  Jacob 


wonld  iiaturally  be  aogmented  by  the  conduct  of  Eaut 
in  manying,  doubtleas  contraiy  to  hia  parents'  wishes, 
two  Hittite  women,  who  are  recorded  aa  haviiig  been  a 
grief  of  mind  to  Isaac  and  Rebekah  (Gen.  xjm,  84,  S5). 
B.ai964. 

Circumstances  thus  prepared  the  way  fw  proGming 
the  transfer  of  the  birthright,  when  Isaac,  being  mm 
old,  proceeded  to  take  steps  to  pronounce  the  irreyocaUe 
blessing,  which  acted  with  all  the  force  of  a  modem  tes- 
tamentaiy  beąuest  This  blessing,  then,  it  was  caseo- 
tial  that  Jacob  should  receive  in  preference  to  Esau. 
Herę  Rebekah  appears  as  the  chief  agent;  Jaoob  is  a  merę 
instroment  in  ber  hands.  Isaac  dirccts  Esaa  to  procme 
him  some  yenison.  This  Rebekah  hears,  and  wges  ber 
reluctant  fayorite  to  personate  his  elder  brother.  Jacob 
suggests  difficulties;  they  are  met  by  Rebekah,  who  is 
ready  to  incur  any  personal  danger  so  that  her  object  be 
gained  (see  Thomson,  Lcaid  and  Bock,  ii,  355).  Her 
yoice  is  obeyed,  tbe  food  is  brought,  Jacob  is  eqiiipped 
for  the  deceit;  he  helpa  out  his  fraad  hy  direct  false- 
hood,  and  the  old  man,  whose  senses  are  now  fiuling.  ii 
at  last  with  difBculty  deceiyed  (Gen.  xxyii).  B.C.  1927. 
It  cannot  be  denied  that  this  is  a  most  reprehenaible 
transaction,  and  presents  a  truły  painful  pictuie,  in  which 
a  mother  coni^ires  with  one  son  in  order  to  cheat  her 
aged  husband,  with  a  view  to  deprive  another  son  of  his 
rightful  iuheritance.  Justification  is  here  impoaśble; 
but  it  should  not  be  forgotten,  in  the  estimate  we  furai, 
that  there  was  a  promise  in  fayor  of  Jacob,  that  J«cob*s 
qualities  had  endeaied  him  to  his  mother,  and  tb«c  the 
prospect  to  her  was  dark  and  thraatening  which  aroas 
when  she  saw  the  negligent  Esau  at  the  head  of  the 
house,  and  his  hateful  wives  asaumiug  command  orcr 
herself. 

For  the  sale  of  his  birthright  to  Jacob,  Esau  is  htand- 
ed  in  the  N.  Test  as  a  **  profane  person*"  (Heb.  xii,  16). 
The  following  sacred  and  important  priyiłpgea  hare 
been  mentioned  as  connected  with  primogeniture  in  pa* 
triarchal  times,  and  as  oonstituting  the  object  of  Jacob*i 
desire :  (a)  Superior  rank  in  the  family  (see  Gen.  xlix, 
3, 4).  (6)  A  double  portion  of  the  iather*s  property  (so 
Aben-Ezra)  (see  Deut.  xxi,  17,  and  Gen.  xlvii,  22).  (r) 
The  pricstly  office  in  the  patriarchal  church  (see  Numik 
yiii,  17-19).  In  fayor  of  this,  see  Jerome,  ad  Erang. 
Ep,  lxxxiii,  §  6;  Jarchi,  ta  Gtn,  xxy;  Eatiua,  m  //cłkr. 
xii ;  Shuckford,  Connesion,  bk.  yii ;  Blunt,  Undei.  Comc. 
i,  1,  §  2,  3 ;  and  against  it,  Yitringa,  Obterr.  Sac^  and 
J.  D.  Michaelis,  Motaisch,  Bechł,  ii,  §  64,  dted  by  Roecd- 
mUller  t»  Gen*  xxv.  (d)  A  conditional  promise  or  ad> 
umbration  of  the  heavenly  inheritance  (see  Cartwrigfat 
in  the  Crit,  Sacr,  on  Gen.  xxy).  (e)  The  promise  of 
the  Seed  in  which  all  nations  should  be  blessed,  though 
not  induded  in  the  birthright,  may  have  been  so  regaid- 
ed  by  the  patriarchs,  as  it  was  by  their  descendanti 
(Rom.  ix,  8,  and  Shuckford,  viii).  The  whole  subject 
has  been  treated  in  separate  essays  by  Yitringa  in  his 
ObaenaU  Sacr,  i,  11,  §  2;  also  by  J. H.  Hottinger,  and 
by  J.  J.  Schroder.  See  Eycke,  Be  renditione  primogeni- 
tura  E9avi  (Wlttemb.  1729) ;  Gmelin,  De  benediti.  pet- 
tema  Esaro  a  Jacobo  prartpła  (Tub.  1706);  Heyd^^ 
gcTf  Hitt,  Patriarch,  ii,  14.     See  BtRnuHGHT. 

With  regard  to  Jacob*s  acąuisition  of  his  fjither*s 
blessing  (eh.  xxyii),  few  persons  will  accept  the  cxcnae 
offered  by  St.  Angustine  {Serm.  iv,  §  22, 23)  for  the  de> 
ceit  which  he  practised :  that  it  was  roercly  a  fignrarive 
action,  and  that  his  personation  of  Esau  was  Justified  by 
his  preyious  purchase  of  E8au*8  birthright  It  is  not, 
howeyer,  necessary,  with  the  ińcw  of  cherishing  a  Chris- 
tian hatred  of  sin,  to  heap  opprobrious  epithets  apon  a 
fallible  man  whom  the  choice  of  God  has  rendered  ven- 
erable  in  the  eyes  of  belieyera.  Wateiiand  (iv,  208) 
speaks  of  the  conduct  of  Jacob  in  language  which  is 
neither  wanting  in  reverencc  nor  likely  to  encoorage 
the  extenuation  of  guilt :  *4  do  not  know  whethcr  it  be 
justifiable  in  every  particular;  I  suspect  that  it  is  noc. 
There  were  seyeral  very  good  and  laudable  dmnnstan- 
ces  in  what  Jaoob  and  Rebekah  did,  but  I  do  not  taka 


JACOB 


ł29 


JACOB 


npon  me  to  acąoit  them  of  all  blame.  Blunt  {Unda, 
CowcJ)  obeenres  that  nonę  ^  of  the  patriarcha  can  be  set 
up  as  a  model  of  Christian  morals.  They  Uired  under  a 
oode  of  laws  that  were  not  absolutely  good,  perhaps  not 
so  good  aa  the  lieTitical;  for,  as  this  wras  but  a  preparar 
tion  for  the  morę  peifect  law  of  Christ,  so  possibly  was 
the  patriarchai  but  a  [Heparation  for  the  Ław  of  Mosea." 
The  ciiGumstances  which  led  to  this  unhappy  transao- 
tion,  and  the  retribudon  which  fell  upon  all  parties  eon- 
oenied  in  it,  have  been  carefully  discussed  by  Benson 
{UnUeoH  Lecturet  [1822]  on  Scripturs  DiffieuUie*,  nyiy 
xvii).  See  alao  Woodgate  (Uittorical  SermoM,  ix)  and 
Maurioe  (^Patriardu  aud  LawgiterSf  v).  On  the  iiil- 
filment  of  the  prophecies  conceming  Esau  and  Jaoob, 
and  on  Jaoob's  dying  blessing,  see  bishop  Newton,  Dis- 
teriaiiom  en  the  Prophecie$j  §  3, 4. 

Punishment  soon  ensued  to  all  the  parties  to  this  in- 
iąuitous  traosaction  (aee  Jairis,  CAurcA  ofłhe  Redeemed, 
p.  47).  Fear  seized  the  guilty  Jacob,  who  is  sent  by  his 
father,  at  the  suggestion  of  Kebekah,  to  the  original  seat 
of  the  iamily,  in  order  that  he  might  find  a  wife  among 
hia  Goosins,  the  daughters  of  his  nK>ther's  brother,  Laban 
the  Syrian  (Gen.  xxviii).  Before  he  is  diamissed,  Jacob 
again  receive8  his  father'8  blessing,  the  object  obviously 
being  to  keep  a]ive  in  the  young  man's  mind  the  great 
promise  given  to  Abraham,  and  thus  to  transmit  that 
influence  which,  under  the  aid  of  divine  Providence,  was 
to  endin  placing  the  family  in  poasession  of  the  land  of 
Palescine,  and,  in  so  doing,  to  make  it  *'  a  mułtitude  of 
people."  The  language,  however,  employed  by  the  aged 
father  suggests  the  idea  that  the  religious  light  which 
had  been  kindled  in  the  mind  of  Abraham  had  loet  some- 
what  of  ita  fulness,  if  not  of  its  deamess  aiso,  sińce  "  the 
blessing  of  Abraham,"  which  had  originally  embraced 
all  nations,  ia  now  restricted  to  the  descendants  of  this 
one  patriarchai  family.  And  so  it  appears,  from  the 
language  which  Jacob  employs  (Gen.  xxviii,  16)  in  re- 
latlon  to  the  dream  that  he  had  when  he  cirried  all 
night  upon  a  certain  plain  on  his  joumey  eastward,  that 
hi«  idea  of  the  Deity  was  little  morę  than  that  of  a  local 
god :  *^  Suiely  the  Lord  is  in  this  plaoe,  and  /  knew  it 
m)tJ"  Nor  does  the  language  which  he  immediately 
after  employs  show  that  his  i.leatf  of  the  relations  be- 
tween  God  and  man  were  of  aii  eiudted  and  refined  na- 
turę :  ^  If  God  will  be  with  me,  and  will  keep  me  in  the 
way  that  I  go,  and  will  give  me  bread  to  eat  and  rai- 
ment  to  put  on,  so  that  I  come  again  to  my  father's 
house  in  peace,  then  shall  the  Ix>rd  be  my  God."  The 
viflion,  therefore,  with  which  Jacob  was  favored  was  not 
without  occasion,  nor  could  the  terma  in  which  he  was 
addressed  by  the  Lord  fail  to  enlarge  and  correct  his 
conoeptiona,  and  make  his  religion  at  once  morę  com- 
prehensiye  and  morę  influentiaL  (Jacob's  rision  at 
Bethel  is  consLdered  by  Miegius  in  a  treatise  [Be  Scaid 
Jacobi]  in  the  Thetaurus  novu»  Thtolotfico-PhUologicut, 
i,  195.  See  also  Augnsttne,  Serm.  Gxxii ;  Kurz,  Histoiry 
o/ the  Old  Cooenanł,  i,  309.) 

2.  Jacob,  on  coming  into  the  land  of  the  peopie  of  the 
East,  aocidentally  met  with  Rachel,  Laban'8  daughter, 
to  whom,  with  true  Eastem  simplicity  and  politeneas,  he 
showed  such  courtesy  as  the  duties  of  pastorał  life  sug- 
gest  and  admit  (Gen.  xxix).  Herę  his  gentle  and  af- 
fectionate  naturę  dispUys  itself  under  the  influence  of 
the  bonds  of  kindred  and  the  fair  form  of  the  youthful 
maiden .  "  Jaoob  kiased  Rachel,  and  lifted  up  his  voice 
and  wepL"  It  must  be  borne  in  mind,  however,  that 
Jacob  himself  had  now  reached  the  maturę  age  of  sev- 
enty-seyeu  yeais,  as  appears  from  a  oomparison  of  Jo- 
8eph'8  age  (Gen.  xxx,  26;  xli,  46;  xlv,  2)  with  Jaoob's 
((icn.  xlvii,  9 ;  xxxi,  41).  After  he  had  been  with  his 
unde  the  space  of  a  month,  Laban  inqnires  of  him  what 
rewanl  he  expects  for  his  8er\'ices.  He  aaks  for  the 
''beautiful  and  well-favored  Rachel"  His  reąuest  is 
gnnted  on  oondidon  of  a  seyen  years*  senrioe — a  long 
period,  truły,  but  to  Jacob  "  they  seemed  but  a  few  days 
for  the  love  he  had  to  her."  When  the  time  was  ex- 
pired,  the  crafty  Laban  availed  himself  of  the  customs 


of  the  country  in  order  to  snbetitute  his  elder  and  ^  ten« 
der^yed"  daughter,  Leah.  In  the  moming  Jacob  found 
how  he  had  been  beguiled;  but  Laban  excused  himself, 
saying,  ^  It  must  not  be  done  in  our  country,  to  give  the 
younger  before  the  first-bom."  Another  seren  years* 
serdce  gains  for  Jacob  the  bdoved  Rachel  Leah, 
however,  has  the  oompensatory  privi]ege  of  being  the 
mother  of  the  first-bom,  Reuben;  three  other  sons  suc- 
cesBively  follow,  namely,  Simeon,  Levi,  and  Judah,  sons 
of  Leah.  This  fruitfulnesa  was  a  painful  subject  of  re- 
flection  to  the  barren  Rachel,  who  employed  1  inguage 
on  this  occasion  that  called  forth  a  reply  from  her  hus- 
band  which  shows  that,  mild  as  was  the  character  of  Ja- 
cob, it  was  by  no  means  wanting  in  force  and  energy 
(Gen.  xxx,  2).  An  arrangement,  however,  took  place, 
by  which  Rachel  had  childien  by  means  of  her  maid, 
Bilhah,  of  whom  Dan  and  Naphtali  were  bom.  Two 
other  sons.  Gad  and  Asher,  were  bom  to  Jacob  of  Leah*B 
maid,  Zilpah.  Leah  heiMłf  baie  two.  morę  sons,  name- 
ly, lasachar  and  Zebulun ;  she  also  bare  a  daughter,  Di- 
nah.  At  length  Rachel  herself  bare  a  son,  and  she  call- 
ed his  name  Joseph.  Ab  this  part  of  the  sacred  history 
haa  been  madę  the  subject  of  cavil  on  the  alleged  ground 
of  anachronism  (see  Hengstenberg,  ^u/A.  des  Pentat.  ii, 
851),  it  may  be  well  to  present  here  a  table  showing  the 
chronologłcal  possibility  of  the  birth  of  these  ehildren 
within  the  years  allotted  in  the  nanrative  (Gen.xxłXy 
32;  xxx,  24). 


No. 

&. 

^. 

«a. 

»7f!a. 

B.C. 

Kenben 

Snmmer,    1919 

Simeon 

Spring,       1918 

Levi 

Spring,       191T 

Jadah 

Beglnnlng  191ft 
Spring,       191ft 

Dan 

Naphtali 

Spring,       191* 

Oad 

Sumraer,    1915 

Issachar 

Asher 

Beginnine  1914 
Spring,  1914 
F^ll,           1914 

10 

Zebulon 

11 

Diuah 

Sammer,    1918 

19 

Joffeph 

Fnll,            1913 

Jaoob*8  polygamy  is  an  instance  of  a  patriarchai  prao- 
tice  quite  repugnant  to  Christian  morality,  but  to  be  ac- 
oounted  for  on  the  ground  that  the  time  had  not  then 
come  for  a  fuU  expre8sion  of  the  will  of  God  on  thia  sub- 
ject. The  mutual  lights  of  husband  and  wife  were  rec- 
ognised  in  the  history  of  the  Creation,  but  instanoes  of 
polygamy  are  frequent  among  peisons  mentioned  in  the 
saóed  leoords,  from  Lamech  (Gen.  iv,  19)  to  Herod  (Jo- 
sephus,  Ant, xvii,  1,  2).  In  times  when  frequent  wara 
increased  the  number  of  captives  aud  orphans,  and  re- 
duced  nearly  all  service  to  8lavery,  there  may  have  been 
some  reason  for  extending  the  reoognition  and  proteo- 
tion  of  the  law  to  ooncubines  or  half-wive8,  as  Bilhah 
and  Zilpah.  In  the  case  of  Jacob,  it  is  right  to  bear  in 
mind  that  it  waa  not  his  original  intention  to  marry 
both  the  daughters  of  Laban.  (See,  on  this  subject, 
Augustine,  Contra  FauMtum,  xxii,  47-54.) 

Most  faithfully  and  with  great  success  had  Jacob 
senred  his  unde  for  fourteen  years,  when  he  became  de- 
nrous  of  retuming  to  his  parents.  At  the  lurgent  re- 
ąuest of  Laban,  however,  he  is  induced  to  remain  for  an 
additional  term  of  six  years.  The  language  employed 
upon  this  occasion  (Gen.  xxx,  25  sq.)  shows  that  Ja- 
cob'8  character  had  gained  considerably  duńng  his  ser^ 
vice,  both  in  strength  and  comprehen8ivene88 ;  but  the 
means  which  he  employed  in  onier  to  make  his  bargain 
with  his  uncle  work  so  as  to  enrich  himself,  prove  too 
cleariy  that  hia  morał  feelings  had  not  midcrgone  an 
equal  improvement  (see  Bauingarten,  CummenU  I,  i,  276), 
and  that  the  original  taint  of  prudence,  and  the  sad  les- 
sons  of  his  mother  in  deceit,  had  prodaced  some  of  their 
natural  fruit  in  his  bosom.  (Those  who  may  wish  to 
inquire  into  the  naturę  and  efficacy  of  the  means  which 
Jacob  employed,  may,  in  addition  to  the  original  naiT»> 
tive,  consułt  Michaelis  and  RosenmUller  on  the  subject, 
aa  well  as  the  following:  Jerome,  QmE9t,  in  Gen, ;  PUny, 
BitU  NaL  vii,  10 ;  Oppian,  C^ff,  i,  330  są. ;  Michaeli^ 


JACOB 


730 


JACOB 


Venn,SchriftAjBi  flq.;  Hastfeer,  UAer  Schafzuckt;  Bo- 
chart,  JJieroz,  i,  619 ;  Nitechmann,  De  corylo  JacĆM  in 
Tknaur,  nomu  Theologico-Philolofficutf  i,  201.  Winer 
[Hcmdicdrierb,  b.  v.  Jacob]  gives  a  parallel  passage  firom 
iElian,  Hitł,  Amm,  viii,  21.) 

The  prosperity  of  Jacob  displeased  and  grieyed  Laban, 
80  that  a  separation  seemed  desirable.  His  wiyes  are 
ready  to  acoompany  hitn.  Accordingly,  he  set  out,  with 
his  family  and  his  property,^'  to  go  to  Isaac  his  father  in 
the  land*  of  Ganaan*'  (Gen.  xxxi)  (RC.  1907).  It  was 
not  till  the  third  day  that  Łaban  leamed  that  Jacob  had 
fled,  when  he  inimediately  set  out  in  pursuit  of  his 
uephew,  and,  after  seyen  days' joumey,  overtook  him  in 
Mount  Gilead.  Laban,  however,  b  divinely  wamed  not 
to  hinder  Jacob's  return.  Reproach  and  recrimination 
ensued.  £ven  a  charge  of  Łheft  is  put  forward  by  La- 
ban :  **  Wherefore  hast  thou  stolen  my  gods  ?"  In  truth, 
Rachel  had  carricd  off  certaln  images  which  were  the 
objects  of  worship.  IgnoRUit  of  this  misdeed,  Jacob 
boldly  calledfor  a  search,  adding,  **With  whomsoeyer 
thou  findest  thy  gods,  let  him  not  live."  A  crafty  wom- 
an's  deyemeas  eluded  the  keen  eye  of  Laban.  Rachel, 
by  an  appeal  which  one  of  her  sex  aione  could  make, 
deceiyed  her  father.  Thus  one  sin  begets  another;  su- 
perstition  prompts  to  theft,  and  theft  necessitates  deceit. 
Whateyer  opinion  may  be  formed  of  the  teraphim  (q.v.) 
which  Rachel  stole,  and  which  Laban  was  so  anxiouB  to 
discoyer,  and  whateyer  kind  or  degree  of  worship  may 
in  reality  haye  been  paid  to  them,  their  existenoe  in  the 
family  suffices  of  itself  to  show  how  imperfecUy  instruct- 
ed  regarding  the  Creator  were  at  this  time  thoae  who 
were  among  the  least  ignorant  in  diyine  things.  La- 
ban'8  conduct  on  this  occasion  called  forth  a  reply  from 
Jacob,  from  which  it  appears  that  his  service  had  been 
most  seyere,  and  which  also  proyes  that,  howeyer  this 
seyere  senrice  roight  haye  encouraged  a  oertain  seryili- 
ty,  it  had  not  preyented  the  deyelopment  in  Jacob^s  soul 
of  a  high  and  energetic  spirit,  which,  when  roused, 
oould  assert  its  rights,  and  giye  utterance  to  sentiments 
both  just,  striking,  and  forcible,  and  in  the  most  poetieal 
phraseology.  Peaoe,  howeyer,  being  restored,  Laban  on 
the  ensuing  moming  took  a  friendly,  if  not  an  affection- 
ate  farewell  of  his  daughters  and  their  sons,  and  retum- 
edhome. 

8.  So  far,  things  haye  gone  prosperously  with  Jacob; 
the  word  of  God  to  him  at  Bethel,  promising  protection 
and  blessing,  has  been  wonderfully  yerified,  and,  with  a 
numerous  family  and  large  possessions,  he  has  again 
reached  in  safety  the  borders  of  Canaan.  But  is  there 
still  no  danger  in  front?  Shortly  after  parting  with 
Laban,  he  met,  we  are  told,  troops  of  angels,  apparently 
a  double  band,  and  wearing  somewhat  of  a  warlike  as- 
pect,  for  he  called  the  place  in  honor  of  them  by  the 
name  of  Mahanaim  [iwo  hotts']  (Gen.  xxxii,  1,  2). 
Whether  this  sight  was  presented  to  him  in  yision,  or 
took  place  as  an  occurrenoe  in  the  sphere  of  ordinaiy 
life,  may  be  questioned,  though  the  latter  supposidon 
eeems  best  to  accord  with  the  narratiye;  but  it  is  not  of 
materiał  moment,  for  either  way  the  appearance  was  a 
reality,  and  borę  the  character  of  a  spedfic  reyelation  to 
Jacob,  adapted  to  the  circumstances  in  which  he  was 
placed.  It  formed  a  fitting  counterpart  to  what  he  for- 
merly  had  seen  at  Bethel ;  angels  were  then  employed 
to  indicate  the  peaceful  relation  in  which  he  stood  to 
the  heayenly  world  when  obliged  to  retire  from  Canaan, 
and  now,  on  his  return,  they  are  again  employed  with  a 
like  friendly  intent— to  giye  waming,  indced,  of  a  hos- 
tile  encounter,  but  at  the  same  time  to  assure  him  of  the 
powerful  guardianship  and  support  of  heayen.  The  for- 
mer  part  of  the  design  was  not  long  in  iinding  conlirma- 
tion ;  for,  on  sending  messengers  to  his  brother  £sau  with 
a  friendly  greeting,  and  apprising  him  of  his  safe  return 
afu^  a  long  and  prosperous  sojoiun  in  Mesopotamia,  he 
leamed  that  £sau  was  on  his  way  to  meet  him  with  a 
host  of  400  men.  There  could  be  no  reasonable  doubt, 
especially  after  the  preliminary  intimation  gi ven  through 
the  angelic  bands,  as  to  the  intention  of  Esau  in  adyan- 


dng  towards  his  brother  with  sudi  a  fone.  The  news 
of  Jacob's  reappearance  in  Canaan,  and  that  no  kn^er 
as  a  dependant  upon  others,  but  as  possessed  of  amp-le 
means  and  a  considenible  retinue,  awoke  into  fresh  ao 
tiyity  the  slumbering  reyenge  of  Esau,  and  led  him,  od 
the  spur  of  the  moment,  to  resolye  on  bringing  the  coo- 
troyersy  between  them  to  a  dedsiye  iasue.  lliis  ip- 
pears  from  the  whole  narratiye  to  be  so  plainly  the  tnie 
State  of  matters,  that  it  seems  needkss  to  refer  to  othcr 
yiews  that  haye  been  taken  of  it  But  Jaoob  was  noc 
the  man  at  any  time  to  repel  force  with  force,  and  he 
had  now  leamed,  by  a  yariety  of  experiencefli,  where  the 
real  secret  of  his  safety  and  strength  lay.  His  fau  im- 
pressions,  howeyer,  on  getting  the  tntelligence,  were 
those  of  trembling  anxiety  and  fear ;  but,  on  lecoyeńni; 
himself  a  little,  he  called  to  hu  ud  the  two  great  wetp- 
ons  of  the  belieyer— pains  and  prayer.  He  first  dirklM 
his  people,  with  the  flocks  and  herds,  into  two  coropa- 
nieś,  80  that  if  the  one  were  attacked  the  other  mi^^hi 
escape.  Then  he  threw  himself  in  eamest  prayer  and 
supplication  on  the  coyenant-mercy  and  faithfulness  of 
God,  putting  God  in  mind  of  his  past  lo\-iiig-kindiM!»«e«, 
at  once  great  and  undeseryed;  reminding  him  a]?o  of 
the  express  charge  he  had  c^yen  Jacob  to  return  to  Ca- 
naan, with  the  promise  of  his  gradous  presence,  and  in- 
ploring  him  now  to  establish  the  hopcs  he  had  inspiied 
by  granting  deliyerance  from  the  hands  of  Esau.  So 
ended  the  first  night;  but  on  the  foUowing  day  further 
measurcs  were  resorted  to  by  Jacob,  though  stil]  in  tbe 
same  direction.  Aware  of  the  melting  power  of  kind- 
ness,  and  how  ^  a  gifl  in  secret  pacifieth  anger,"  fae  if- 
solyed  on  giying  from  his  substanoe  a  munificent  pm- 
ent  to  Esau,  placing  each  kind  by  itself,  one  after  the 
other,  in  a  suocession  of  droyes,  so  that  on  hearing, »  he 
passed  droye  after  droyc,  the  touching  words,  ^  A  preeent 
sent  to  my  lord  Esau  from  thy  8er%-ant  Jacob,**  it  migfat 
be  like  the  pouring  of  liye  coals  on  the  head  cf  bis 
wrathful  enemy.  How  could  he  let  his  fury  expłode 
against  a  brother  who  showed  himsdf  so  anxious  to  be 
on  terms  of  peace  with  him  ?  It  could  acarceły  be,  ub- 
less  there  were  still  in  Jacob's  condition  the  gnwnds  of 
a  quarrd  between  him  and  his  God  not  yet  altogether 
settled,  and  imperilling  the  suocess  eyen  of  the  best  cf- 
forts  and  the  most  skilful  preparations. 

That  there  really  was  something  of  ihe  sort  now  sop- 
posed  seems  plain  from  what  ensued.  Jacob  had  insde 
all  his  arrangcments,  and  had  got  his  family  as  weU  ss 
his  substance  transported  oyer  the  Jabbok  (a  brook  thit 
trayerses  the  land  of  Gilead,  and  rans  into  the  Jcfnbn 
about  half  way  between  the  Lakę  of  Gslilee  ind  the 
Dead  Sea),  himself  remaining  behind  for  the  night  It 
is  not  said  for  what  purpose  he  so  remained,  but  thne 
can  be  litde  doubt  it  was  for  close  and  solitary  deaJicg 
with  God.  While  thus  engaged,  one  raddenly  appeand 
in  the  form  of  a  man,  and  in  the  guise  of  an  enemy 
wrestling  with  him  and  coiitending  for  the  mastcrr. 
Esau  was  still  at  some  distance,  but  here  was  an  ad\vi^ 
sary  already  present  with  whom  Jacob  had  to  maintain 
a  seyere  and  perilous  conflict;  and  this  ]>lain)y  an  Ki- 
yersaiy  in  appearance  only  huroan,  but  in  reality*  the 
angel  of  the  Ix>rd's  preeence.  It  was  as  much  as  to  nr, 
**  You  haye  reason  to  be  afraid  of  the  enmity  of  one 
mightier  than  Esau,  and,  if  you  can  only  preraU  in  gel- 
ting  deliyerance  irom  this,  there  is  no  fear  that  mstten 
will  go  well  with  you  otherwise;  right  with  GodjyM 
may  trust  him  to  set  you  right  with  j-cmr  hiwher." 
llie  ground  and  reascm  of  the  matter  lay  in  Jacob^  de- 
ceitful  and  wicked  conduct  before  kaying  the  land  of 
C«naan,  which  had  fearfuUy  compromised  the  chancter 
of  God,  and  brought  disturbance  into  Jacob*s  relation  to 
the  coyenant.  Leaying  the  land  of  Canaan  corered 
with  guilt,  and  liable  to  wrath,  he  must  now  re-eoter  it 
amid  sharp  contending,  such  as  might  lead  to  ptti 
searchings  of  heart,  deep  spiritual  abasement,  and  the 
renunciation  of  all  sinful  and  crooked  deyices  as  utterty 
at  yariance  with  the  childlike  simplidty  and  coniidence 
in  God  which  it  became  him  to  eierdse.    In  the  eif- 


JACOB 


731 


JACOB 


n€8t  conflict,  he  maintained  his  groand,  till  the  hearen- 
ly  combatant  Łouched  the  hollow  of  his  thigh  and  put  it 
oat  of  joint,  in  token  of  the  supernatoral  might  which 
this  mysteTioiu  antagonist  had  at  hia  command,  and 
showing  how  easy  it  had  been  for  him  (if  he  had  so 
pleaaed)  to  gain  the  mastery.  Bat  even  then  Jacob 
wotild  not  qmt  his  hołd ;  nay,  all  the  morę  he  woold  re- 
tain  it,  sińce  now  he  oould  do  nothing  morę,  and  sińce, 
alflo,  it  was  plain  he  had  to  do  with  one  who  had  the 
power  of  life  and  death  in  his  band ;  he  would,  there- 
fore,  not  let  him  go  till  he  obtained  a  blessing.  Faith 
thos  wrought  mightily  oat  of  haman  weakness— strong 
by  reaaon  of  its  clinging  affection,  and  its  beseecbing 
importunity  for  the  favor  of  heaven,  as  espressed  in 
Uoa.  3cii,  4 :  *'  By  his  streiigth  he  had  power  with  God ; 
yea,  he  had  power  over  the  angel,  and  prerailed ;  he 
wept  and  madę  supplication  anto  him."  In  attestation 
of  the  fact,  and  for  a  suitable  commemoration  of  it,  he 
had  his  name  changed  from  Jacob  to  Tsrael  (combatant 
or  wrestler  with  God) ;  "for  as  a  prince," it  was  added, 
by  way  of  expIanation,  ^hast  thoa  power  ¥rith  God  and 
with  men,  and  hast  preirailed.''  Jacob,  in  tum,  asked 
after  the  name  of  the  person  who  had  wrestled  with 
him — ^not  as  if  any  longer  ignorant  who  it  might  be,  but 
wishing  to  have  the  character  or  manifestation  of  God- 
head,  as  this  had  now  appeared  to  him,  embodied  in  a 
rignificant  and  appropriate  name.  H  is  re^uest,  howev- 
er,  was  denied ;  the  divine  wrestler  withdrew,  after  hav- 
in^  blessed  him.  But  Jacob  himself  gave  a  name  to 
the  place,  near  the  Jabbok,  where  the  memorable  trans- 
action  had  occurred:  he  called  it  Peniel  {the  face  of 
God\  " for,"  said  he, "I  have  seen  God  face  to  face,  and 
my  life  is  preserred"  (Gen.  xxxii,  25-31).  The  contest 
iodicated  that  he  had  reason  to  fear  the  rererse ;  but  his 
presenration  was  the  sign  of  reoondliation  and  bleilMng. 

This  mysterioos  wrestling  has  been  a  fruitful  source 
of  difficalty  and  misinterpretation  (see  Hofmann,  VaHa 
Saeroj  185  sq. ;  Heumann,  S^fUog,  diet,  i,  147  sq.).  The 
narrator  did  not,  we  think,  intend  it  for  the  aocount  of  a 
dream  or  illusion  (see  Ziegłer  in  Henke's  Nat  Mag.  ii, 
29  8q. ;  Hengstenberg,  BUeam,  p.  51 ;  Herder,  Geist  der 
HeiK  Poesie,  i,  266 ;  Tuch*8  Gen,  p.  468>  A  literał  inter- 
pretation  may  seem  difficult,  for  it  makes  the  Oronipo- 
tent  va]iqniah  one  of  his  own  creatures,  not  without  a 
long  atmggle,  and  at  last  only  by  a  sort  of  art  or  strata- 
gem  (oompare  similar  aocoants  in  heathen  mythology, 
Bauer,  Ileb.  MythoL  i,  251  sq. ;  Moyers,  Phdnic,  i,  483 ; 
Bohlen,  ImUen,  i,  225).  At  the  same  time  it  must  be 
said  that  the  only  way  to  expound  the  narrative  is  to 
diveet  ourselres  of  our  own  modem  associations,  and  en- 
deavor  to  oontemplate  it  from  the  position  in  which  its 
author  stood  (see  Bush*8  Nołe,  ad  loc.).  Still,  the  qaes- 
taon  recuis,  What  was  the  fact  which  he  has  set  forth 
ia  these  terms?  (see  De  Wette,  Krit,  d,  /«.  Gesch.  p.  182 ; 
Ewald, /sra«/»ten,  i,  405;  RoeenmUller,  ScKoUay  ad  loc.) 
The  design  (says  Wellbeloyed,  ad  loc), "  was  to  encour- 
age  Jacob,  retuming  to  his  natiye  land,  and  fearful  of 
hia  biother'B  resentment,  and  to  confirm  his  faith  in  the 
exi8tence  and  proyidence  of  God.  And  who  will  ven- 
ture  to  aay  that  in  that  eaily  period  any  other  eąuaUy 
efficacions  means  could  haye  been  employed  ?"  (Comp. 
the  language  already  ąuoted  [yer.  28].)  A  yery  obyious 
end  pmrsoed  throagbout  the  histozy  of  Jacob  was  the 
deyelopment  of  his  iełigions  convictions ;  and  the  eyent 
in  ąuestion,  no  less  than  the  altars  he  erected  and  the 
dreama  he  had,  may  haye  materially  conduced  to  so  im- 
pottant  a  lesult.  That  it  had  a  huting  spiritual  effect 
upon  Jacob  is  eyident  from  the  deyout  tenor  of  his  aft<pr 
life.  (For  a  beantiful  exposition  of  this  eyent,  sec 
Charles  Wesley^s  poem  entitled  *<  Wrestling  Jacob." 
Compare  Krmnmacher,  Joooó  WregUmg  [Lond.  1838].) 

After  this  night  of  anxioa8  bat  triamphant  wrestling, 
Jaoob  ruae  from  Peniel  ¥rith  the  san  shining  upon  him 
(an  emblem  of  the  bright  and  radiant  hope  which  now 
illuminated  his  inner  man),  and  went  on  his  way  halt- 
iii^ — weakened  corporeally  by  the  conflict  in  which  he 
had  engaged,  that  he  might  haye  no  confidence  in  the 


flesh,  but  strong  in  the  divine  fayor  and  blessing.  Ao- 
oordingly,  when  Esau  approached  with  his  formidable 
host,  all  hostile  feelings  gave  way ;  the  yictory  had  been 
already  won  in  the  higher  sphere  of  things,  and  he  who 
toraeth  the  hearts  of  kings  like  the  riyers  of  water, 
madę  the  heart  of  Esau  melt  like  wax  before  the  liberał 
gifts,  the  humble  demeanor,  and  eamest  entreaties  of  his 
brother.  They  embraced  each  other  as  brethren,  and 
for  the  present  at  least,  and  for  anything  that  appears 
during  the  remainder  of  their  persona!  lires,  they  main- 
tained  the  most  friendly  relations. 

4.  After*  residing  for  a  little  on  the  farther  side  of 
Jordan,  at  a  place  called  Succoth,  from  Jacob*8  haying 
erected  there  booths  (Hebrew  aukkoth)  for  his  cattle,he 
crossed  the  Jordan,  and  pitched  his  tent  near  Shechem . 
— ^ultimately  the  centrę  of  the  Samaritans.  [In  the  re- 
ceiyed  text,  it  is  said  (Gen.  xxxiii,  18),  "He  caroe  to 
Shalem,  a  city  of  Shechem"— but  some  prefer  the  read- 
ing  Skalom :  »*He  came  in  peace  to  city  of  Shechem."] 
There  he  bought  a  piece  of  ground  from  the  family  of 
Shechem,  and  obtained  a  footing  among  the  people  as  a 
man  of  substance,  whose  friendship  it  was  desirable  to 
caltiyate.  But  ere  long,  haying,  by  the  misconduct  of 
Hamor  the  Hiyite  (see  Dinah)  and  the  hardy  valor  of 
his  sons,  been  inyolyed  in  danger  from  the  natiyes  of 
Shechem  in  Canaan,  Jacob  is  divinely  directed,  and, 
under  the  divine  protection,  prooeeds  to  Bethel,  where 
he  Łb  to  ''make  an  altar  unto  God,  that  appeared  unto 
thee  when  thou  fleddest  from  the  face  of  Esau  thy 
brother"  (Gen.  xxxiy,  xxxy)  (B.C.  cir.  1900).  Obedi- 
ent  to  the  diyine  command,  he  lirst  purifies  his  family 
from  '^strange  gods,"  which  he  hid  under  "the  oak 
which  is  by  Shechem,**  afler  which  God  appeared  to 
him  again/with  the  important  declaration, "  I  am  God 
Almighty,"  and  renewed  the  Abrahamie  coyenant 
While  joumeying  from  Beth-el  to  Ephrath,  his  beloyed 
Rachel  lost  her  life  in  giying  birth  to  her  second  son, 
Benjamin  (Gkn.  xxxv,  16-20)  (B.C.  cir.  1899).  At 
length  Jacob  came  to  his  father  Isaac  at  Mamre,  the 
family  residence,  in  time  to  pay  the  last  attcntions  to 
the  aged  patriarch  (Gen.  xxxv,  27)  (B.C.  1898).  The 
complete  reconciliation  between  Jacob  and  Esau  at 
this  time  is  shown  by  their  uniting  in  the  burial  rites 
of  their  father.  Not  long  after  this  bereayement,  Jaoob 
was  robbed  of  his  beloyed  son,  Joseph,  through  the  jeal- 
oasy  and  bad  faith  of  his  brotbers  ((jrcn.  xxxyii)  (B.C. 
1896).  This  loss  is  the  oocasion  of  showing  us  how 
strong  were  Jacob*s  patemal  feelings;  for,  on  seeing 
what  appeared  to  be  proofs  that  "some  eyil  beast  had 
deyoured  Joseph,**  the  old  man  "  rent  his  clothes,  and 
put  sackcloth  upon  his  loins,  and  moumed  for  his  son 
many  days,  and  refused  to  be  comfortcd"  (Gen.  xxxyii, 
88). 

A  widely  extended  famine  induced  Jaoob  to  send  his 
sons  down  into  Egypt,  where  he  had  heard  there  was 
com,  without  knowing  by  whose  instramentality  (Gen. 
xlii  są.)  (B.C.  1876).  The  patriarch,  however,  retained 
his  youngest  son  Benjamin,  "lest  mischief  should  bcfall 
him,**  as  it  had  befallen  Joseph.  The  young  men  re- 
tomed  with  the  needed  sapplies  of  com.  They  related, 
howeyer,  that  they  had  been  taken  for  spics,  and  that 
there  was  but  one  way  in  which  they  could  disproye 
the  charge,  namely,  by  canying  down  Benjamin  to  '*  the 
lord  of  the  land."  This  Jacob  yehementiy  refused  (Gen. 
xliii,  86).  The  preasure  of  the  famine,  howerer,  at 
length  foiced  Jacob  to  allow  Benjamin  to  accompany 
his  brotbers  on  a  second  visit  to  Egypt;  whence,  in  due 
time,  they  brought  back  to  their  father  the  pleaaing  in- 
telligence, "  Joseph  is  yet  alive,  and  he  is  govemor  oVer 
all  the  land  of  EgjT)!,**  How  naturally  is  the  effect  of 
this  on  Jacob  tolćl— "and  Jacob's  heart  fainted,  for  he 
belieyed  them  not.**  When,  howeyer,  they  had  gone 
into  particulars,  he  added, "  Enough,  Joseph  my  son  is 
yet  alive ;  I  will  go  and  see  him  before  I  die."  Touchea 
of  nature  like  this  sufflce  to  show  the  reality  of  the  his- 
tory  before  us,  and,  sińce  they  are  not  unfrequent  in  the 
book  of  Genesis,  they  will  of  themselyes  ayail  to  sostąin 


JACOB 


782 


JACOB 


its  credibiliŁy  againsŁ  all  thtt  the  enemy  can  do.  The 
passage,  too,  with  others  recently  cited,  sŁrongly  proyes 
how  mach  the  character  of  the  patriarch  had  improved. 
In  the  whole  of  the  latter  part  of  Jacob'8  life  he  seems 
to  have  gradnally  parted  with  many  lem  desuable  qual- 
ities,  and  to  have  become  at  once  morę  truthful,  moie 
energetic,  morę  earnest,  affectionate,  and,  in  the  laigest 
Benae  of  the  word,  religioua.  Encouraged  ^In  the  vi- 
aiona  of  the  night,''  Jacob  goes  down  to  Egypt  (B.G. 
1874),  and  was  affectionately  met  by  Joeeph  (Gen.  xlvi, 
29).  Joseph  proceeded  to  condact  his  father  into  the 
presence  of  the  £g3rptian  monarch,  when  the  man  of 
God,  \^dth  that  self-consciousness  and  dignity  which 
lellgion  give8,  instead  of  offering  slayish  adnlation, 
.  ^blessed  Pharaoh."  Struck  with  the  patriarch^s  vener- 
able  air,  the  kmg  asked,  "  How  old  art  thou?''  What 
compoeure  and  elevation  is  theze  in  the  reply,  *'The 
days  of  the  years  of  my  pilgrimage  are  a  hundred  and 
thiity  years;  few  and  evil  have  the  days  of  the  yean 
of  my  Ufe  been,  and  haye  not  attained  unto  the  days  of 
the  years  of  the  life  of  my  fathers  in  the  days  of  their 
pilgrimage"  (Gen.  xlvii,  8-10).  Jacob,  with  hia  sona, 
now  entered  into  possession  of  some  of  the  best  land  of 
Egypt,  where  they  carried  on  their  pastorał  occupations, 
and  enjoyed  a  very  large  share  of  earthly  prosperity. 
The  aged  patriarch,  after  being  strangely  tossed  about 
on  a  very  rough  ocean,  ibund  at  last  a  tranąuil  harbor, 
where  all  the  best  affections  of  hia  naturę  were  gently 
exerci8ed  and  largely  onfolded  (Gen.  xlviii,  8q.).  After 
«  lapae  of  time,  Joseph,  being  informed  that  his  father 
was  sick,  went  to  him,  when  *^  Israel  stiengthened  him- 
aelf,  and  sat  up  in  his  bed."  He  aoqoainted  Joeeph 
with  the  divine  promise  of  the  land  of  Canaan  which 
yet  remained  to  be  fulfilłed,  and  took  Joseph^s  sons, 
Ephraim  and  Manasseh,  distingoishing  them  by  an 
adoption  equal  to  that  of  Reaben  and  Simeon,  the  oldest 
of  his  own  sons  (Gen.  xlviii,  5).  How  impressiye  is  his 
benediction  in  Joeeph's  family  (Gen.  xlviii,  16,  16): 
'*God,  before  w^horo  my  fathers  Abraham  and  Isaac  did 
walk,  the  God  which  fed  me  all  my  life  long  unto  this 
day,  the  angel  which  redeemed  me  from  all  evil,  bless 
thelads;  and  let  my  name  be  named  on  them,  and  the 
name  of  my  fathers;  and  let  them  grow  into  a  multi- 
tude  in  the  midst  of  the  earth."  "And  larael  said  mito 
Joseph,  Behold,  I  die;  but  God  will  be  with  you,  and 
bring  you  again  unto  the  land  of  3'our  fathers"  (ver.  21). 
Then,  having  oouvened  his  sons,  the  venerable  patri- 
arch pronounced  on  them  also  a  blessing,  which  is  fuli 
of  the  loftieat  thought,  expre8sed  in  the  most  poetical 
diction,  and  adomed  by  the  most  vividly  descriptive 
and  en^^ing  imagery  (see  St&helin,  AnufUidcersioneg 
in  Jacobi  vaHcinium^  Ileidelb.  1827),  showing  how^  deep- 
ly  religious  his  character  had  become,  how  freshly  it 
retained  its  fenror  to  the  last,  and  how  greatly  it  had 
increased  in  strength,  elevation,  and  dignity:  "And 
when  Jacob  had  madę  an  end  of  commanding  his  sons, 
he  gathered  up  his  feet  into  the  bed  [L  e.  knelt  towards 
the  bed*8  head  (see  Delitzsch  on  Heb.xi,  21)  rather  than 
bowed  ovcr  the  top  of  his  staif,  as  Stuar^  ad  loc  (see 
Staff)  ],  and  yielded  up  the  ghost,  and  was  gathered 
unto  his  people"  ((ren.  xlix,  33),  at  the  ripe  age  of  147 
years  (Gen.  xlvii,  28).  B.C.  1857.  His  body  was  em- 
balmed,  carried  with  great  care  and  pomp  into  the  land 
of  Canaan,  and  deposited  with  his  fathers,  and  his  wife 
Leah,  in  the  cave  of  Machpelah.  The  route  pursued  by 
this  funeral  procession  is  ingeniously  supposed  by  I>r. 
Kitto  {Piet  Jłist,  o/Jews^  i,  136)  to  have  been  the  morę 
^ircuitous  one  aflerwards  taken  by  the  Israelites  by  the 
way  of  Mount  Seir  and  across  the  Jordan,  the  object 
being  apparcntly  in  both  cases  the  fear  of  the  Philis- 
tines,  who  lay  in  the  direct  route.  Dr.  Thomson  ob- 
ject* to  this  as  an  nnnecessary  dcviation  {Lojid  and 
JBook,  ii,  385),  urging  that  the  JBethagla,  which  Jerome 
identifies  with  the  Area-Atad  or  Abel-mizraim  (q.  v.), 
as  the  scenę  of  the  mourning  ceremonies,  lay  near  Gaza ; 
but  in  this  case  it  is  certainly  difficult  to  explain  the 
oonstant  statement  that  the  spot  in  que8tion  was  situ- 


ated  "  beyond  the  Jordan,"  as  it  deazly  implies  a  c 
ing  of  the  riyer  by  the  cayalcade. 

In  the  list  of  Jaoob*s  lineal  descendants  given  in  Gciu 
xlvi,  8-27,  as  being  thoae  that  acoompanied  him  od  bis 
removal  to  Egypt,  there  is  evidenoe  that  the  list  w» 
rather  madę  up  to  the  time  of  his  deoease,  or  pecbsps 
even  somewhat  later  (see  Hengetenberg^s  Petttaiack,^ 
290  sq.) ;  for  we  find  mention«i  not  oiily  numeroas  aoos 
(some  of  whom  will  appear  to  be  even  grandsons)  of 
Benjamin,  at  the  datę  of  that  emigration  a  youth  (eee 
xliv,  20,  d0-<84),  but  also  the  children  of  Pharez.  at  thit 
time  a  merę  child  (comp.  xxxviii,  1).  See  Bekjamik. 
There  haa,  moreover,  been  experienced  considerable  dif- 
ficulty  in  making  out  the  total  of  seyenty  persons  there 
stated,  as  well  as  the  sum  of  axty-six  included  in  it, 
and  likewise  the  aggregates  of  the  posterity  of  the  ler- 
eral  wiyes  as  there  computed.  This  difficulty  a  forthcr 
enhanced  by  the  number  seyenty-<ive  assigiied  by  Ste- 
phen (Acts  vii,  14)  to  Jaoob's  family  at  the  same  datę. 
This  last  statement,  howeyer,  cannot  be  disposed  of  in 
the  manner  frequently  adopted  by  including  the  wiv«9 
of  Jacob  and  his  sons  (for  it  does  not  appear  that  they 
are  at  all  referred  to,  and  it  is  probable  that  they  woukl 
haye  swelled  the  number  morę  laigely  if  added),  but  is 
rather  to  be  regarded  as  a  ąuotation  madę  (without  in- 
doTsing  or  caring  to  discuss  its  accuracy)  from  the  Sept., 
which  gives  that  total  in  the  paasagc  in  Gcnesia,  but 
inconsistently  attributes  uine  sons  to  Joseph  in  place  of 
two.  Of  all  the  exp]anations  of  the  other  discrepancies, 
that  of  Dr.  Hales  is  perhaps  the  most  plausible  (Aiiahf 
su  of  Chranołogif,  ii,  159),  but  it  has  the  insuperable  o^ 
jectiona  of  including  Jacob  kiauelf  BTOoag  the  nomber 
of  his  own  posterity,  and  of  not  conforming  to  the  metli- 
od  of  enumeration  in  the  text.  A  comparison  of  Numh 
xxvi,  8,  shows  that  the  name  of  Eliab,  the  son  of  Palla 
and  grandaon  of  Reubeą,  has  been  accidentally  dropped 
from  the  list  m  ąuestion ;  this  restored,  the  whole,  with 
its  parallel  accounts,  may  be  adjusied  with  entire  hsr- 
mony,  as  in  the  table  on  the  following  pagea. 

The  example  of  Jacob  is  quoted  by  the  fint  and  the 
last  of  the  minor  prophets.  Hosea,  in  the  latter  dars 
of  the  kingdom,  seeks  (xii,  3, 4, 12)  to  conveit  the  de- 
scendants of  Jacob  from  their  state  of  alienation  from 
God  by  recalling  to  their  memory  the  repeated  acts  of 
God's  fayor  shown  to  their  anoestor.  Malachi  (i,  3) 
strengthens  the  desponding  hearts  of  the  retomed  ex- 
ileś  by  assuring  them  that  the  love  which  God  bcstoir- 
ed  upon  Jacob  was  not  withheld  from  them.  Beades 
the  frequcnt  mention  of  his  name  in  oonjunction  with 
those  of  the  other  two  patriarchs,  there  are  distinct  rd- 
erences  to  eyents  in  the  life  of  Jacob  in  four  books  of 
the  N.  T.  In  Rom.  ix,  11-13,  Paul  adducps  the  histmy 
of  Jacob*s  birth  to  proye  that  the  favor  of  God  is  inde- 
pendent of  the  order  of  natural  descent.  In  Heh  xii, 
16,  and  xi,  21,  the  transfer  of  the  birthright  and  Jacob's 
dying  benediction  are  referred  ta  His  vision  at  Bethd 
and  his  possession  of  land  at  Shechem,  are  cited  in  John 
i,  51,  and  iv,  5, 12.  Stephen,  in  his  speech  (Acts  viL  11 
16),  mentions  the  famine  which  was  the  means  cif  re- 
storing  Jacob  to  his  lost  son  in  Egypt,  and  the  borial 
of  the  patriarch  in  Shechem. 

In  Jaoob  may  be  traced  a  combination  of  the  quiet 
patience  of  his  father  with  the  acquiaitxvene8B  which 
seems  to  haye  marked  his  mother^s  family ;  and  in  Eaau, 
as  in  Isbmael,  the  migratory  and  independent  character 
of  Abraham  was  deyeloped  into  the  enterprisdng  habits 
of  a  warlike  hunter-chieU  Jacob,  whose  history  occu- 
pies  a  larger  spaoe,  leayea  on  the  reader's  mind  a  less  fii- 
vorable  impression  than  either  of  the  other  patriarchs 
with  whom  he  is  joined  in  equal  honor  in  the  N.  T. 
(Matt.  viii,  11).  But,  in  oonaidering  his  character,  ire 
must  bear  in  mind  that  we  know  not  what  limits  wcre 
set  in  those  days  to  the  knowledge  of  God  and  the  sanc- 
tifying  influence  of  the  Holy  Spirit.  A  timid,  thou^t- 
ful  boy  would  aoquire  no  self-reliance  in  a  seduded 
home.  There  was  litUe  aoope  for  the  exerci8e  of  intd- 
ligence,  wide  sympatfay,  generoeiŁy,  franknesa.   Gnnnag 


JACOB 


ł33 


JACOB 


Motkm. 

CkndnB. 

Grud- 
ehUdran. 

i 

i' 

k™. 

■r  M 

-1 

i 

1 

¥■ 

1 

li 

1. 

h 

6" 

ii 

1 

Reuben 

8 

8 

14 

D 

1 

1 

8 

Hanoch 

9 

14 

6 

8 

8 

Palla 

14 

6 

3 

Reaben 

Palla 

4 
5 
6 

7 

(Phafla) 
Hezron 
Carmi 
ElUb 
Simeon 

9 
9 
9 

10 

8 

14 
14 

16 

0 
6 
8 
18 

1 

8 
8 

8 

9 
10 

Jemuel 

(Nemael) 
Jamin 
Obad 

10 

10 
10 

16 

16 
16 

18 
18 

24 
84 

Slmeon 

11 
IS 
13 

Jacbin 
(Jarib) 

Zobar 
(Zerah) 

Sbaul 

10 
10 
10 

16 
16 
16 

18 

18 
18 

24 

84 
84 

14 

Levi 

11 

8 

16 

67 

1 

Levl          -! 

16 

Gersbom 

16 

(Genbon) 

11 

16 

67 

1 

1« 

Kobatb 

11 

16 

67 

1 

17 

Merari 

11 

16 

67 

1 

Leah    . 

13 

Jiidah 
[Er] 
[Onao] 
Sbelab 

18 
18 
18 

8 

19 
19 
19 

1 
8 
8 

19 

18 

80 

8 

20 

Pbares 

18 

80 

4 

1 

Jadah 

81 

Zerab 
(Zarąb) 

18 

80 

4 

Pharez  i 

88 

88 
84 

Hezron 
Hamnl 
TMoehar 

18 
18 
18 

8 

81 
21 
88 

6 
6 

1 

1 

86 

86 

Tola 
Paab 
(Pbavab) 

18 
18 

88 

1 
1 

Iseachar    ' 

87 
88 

(Poa) 
Jasbnb 

(Job) 
Shimron 

18 
18 

83 
84 

84 

1 

( 

89 
30 

(Sbfmrom) 
Zeindon 
Sered 

14 
14 

8 

56 
86 

1 

1 

Zebnlon     ■< 

81 
88 

Elon 
Jahleel 

14 
14 

26 
26 

88 

Dinahj  fem. 

16 
16 

88 

84 
86 

1 

1 

(7ad 
Zlphion 

16 
16 

4 

16 

8 

86 

1 

16 

16 

16 

« 

37 

1 

Shnni 

16 

16 

38 

'    1 

Ezhon 

16 

Oftd 

1 

(Oznl) 

16 

89 

1 

Erl 

16 

16 

40 

1 

Arod 
(Arodi) 

16 

17 

41 

1 

Areli 

16 

17 

Znpah' 

48 
43 

1 

1 

Aaher 

Jimnab 
(Jimna) 
(Imnab) 

17 
17 

4 

44 
44 

8 

80 

44 

1 

Isbuab 
(Isoah) 

17 

30 

ABher 

46 

'     1 

lani 
aesal) 

17 

44 

(Isbaai) 

46 

1 

Beriab 

17 

44 

80 

47 

1 

Serab,  fem. 
(Sarab) 

17 

46 

80 

Beriah    \ 

48 
49 

Heber 
liakbiel 

17 

17 
18 

46 
46 

31 
81 

16 

60 

Dan 

88 

4 

48 

8 

81 

Dan           j 

61 

Shnham 

48 

81 

(Uasbim) 

88 

68 

Naphtdli 
Jahzeel 

84 

4 

48 

8 

Bilbah. 

68 

84 

48 

(Jabsiel) 

13 

NaphtaU   - 

64 
66 
66 

1      1 

Oani 
Jezer 
Shillem 

84 
84 
84 

48 
48 
48 

13 
13 

^ 

1 

(Sballom) 

85 

13 

7 

57 
68 
69 

1 
1 

1 

1 

Belab    . 

(Bela) 
Ashbel 

(?Jediael) 
Ahiram 

(Abarab) 
(Aher) 

19 
81 

81 
81 

8 

38 

88 
38 

88 

8 

6 
6 

1 
1 

1 

12 

60 

1 

Becber 
(?  Nobab} 
(?Ir) 

81 

6 
18 

8 

61 

1 

ROBh 

81 

JACOB 


?34 


JACOB 


Mother*. 

Cblldrwi. 

Gnuid- 

childrMi. 

1 

i 

1 

NMMt. 

1^ 

i 

i 

ti 

i 

d=2 

P 

6  "^ 

1 

(f  Kaphah) 

1     « 

62 

68 
64 

1 

1 
1 

Ard 

(Addar) 

(??Kzbon) 
Naaman 

(??Uzzi) 
Gera 

(r?UsElel) 

SI 

21 
91 

40 
40 

1 

3 

7 

4 
7 

3 
7 

Bela      • 

[Abiabna] 
(??Jerimoth) 

4 
7 

Bei^amin  • 

[Aboab] 

4 

• 

(Ahiah) 
(MIri) 

I 
7         , 

Rachel- 

Aohbel 
Ahiram 

66 

1 

[Uiza] 
[Abibnd] 
f*Ali(bttd> 

[BilliaiJl 

Shujahrim 
(Hhnppim) 
(?  HtephuphaD) 
(Mmipimł 
(J  *  Zenilrn) 

81 

89 

s! 

10        i 

12 

12! 

8  i 

66 

1 

Hu  oh  lim 
(Huppltnl 

89 

21 

18  1 

a  llurjinO 

1    5 

Becher 

C*  r  Jsiush) 

8  1 

[Elic/.ł-r) 

8 

[Eili^euaiJ 

8 

[Omrl] 

8 

[Jerimotb] 

8 

[Abiah] 

8 

[AnaŁholh] 

6 

[Alametb] 

8 

645 

[Biaachab,  fem.] 
[Benjamin']         ^s- 

Ephralm            ^^ 

^      p 

20 

19 

15 

68 

1 

20 

2S 

8 

Joeeph       \ 

69 

70 

1 
1 

20 
80 

28 

27 

6 

28 
8S 

14 

70 

up  a  stranger  to  the  great  joya  and  great  aorrows  of 
Datural  life — deaths,^uid  wedlock,and  blrths;  inured  to 
caution  and  reatraint  in  the  presence  of  a  morę  vigorous 
brother;  aecretly  atimulated  by  a  belief  that  God  de- 
signed  for  him  sonie  aupeńor  blessing,  Jacob  waa  per- 
haps  in  a  fair  way  to  become  a  nanow,  aelfiah,  deceitful, 
disappointed  man.  But,  after  dwelling  for  morę  than 
half  a  lifetiroe  in  solitudc,  he  is  4ńven  from  home  by 
the  proYoked  hostUity  of  hia  morę  powerful  brother. 
Then,  in  deep  and  bitter  sorrow,  the  outcast  begins  life 
afrcsh  long  after  youth  has  iiaased,  and  finda  himaelf 
brought  first  of  all  unexpectedly  into  that  doae  personal 
communion  with  God  which  eleyates  the  aoul,  and  then 
into  that  enlarged  intercourse  with  men  which  is  capa- 
We  of  drawing  out  all  the  better  feelings  of  human  na- 
turę. An  unseen  world  was  opened.  God  revived  and 
renewed  to  him  that  slumbering  promi8e,over  which  he 
had  brooded  for  thrceacore  years  sińce  he  had  leamed  it 
in  childhood  from  his  mother.  Angels  conrersed  with 
him.  Gradually  he  felt  morę  and  morę  the  watchful 
care  of  an  ever-present  spiritual  Father.  Face  to  face 
he  wrestled  with  the  represcntatiye  of  the  Almighty. 
And  so,  eyen  though  the  morał  conseąuences  of  his  eady 
transgressions  huiig  about  him,  and  saddened  him  with 
a  deep  knowledge  of  all  the  evil  of  treachery  and  domes- 
tic  enyy,  and  partial  judgment,  and  filial  disobedience, 
yet  the  increasing  revelations  of  God  enlightened  the 
old  agc  of  the  patriarch;  and  at  last  the  timid  "sup- 
planter,"  the  man  of  subtle  deyices,  waiting  for  the  sal- 
vation  of  Jehovah,  dies  the  "  soldier  of  God,"  iittering 
the  mes-sages  of  God  to  his  rcmote  postcrity.  (See  Nie- 
meyer,  Charokf.  ii,  2G0  8q. ;  Stanley,  Jeuish  Church,  i,  58 
Bq.)  For  rcflections  on  yarious  incidents  in  Jacob's  life, 
see  Bp.  Hair.*^  Conłemplations,  bk.  iii ;  Blunt,  hisL  0/ Ja- 
cob (Lond.  ia32, 1860). 

Many  Rabbinical  legenda  conceming  Jacob  may  be 
found  iii  Eisenmenger'3  Knł.  JudeiUh.^  and  in  the  Jeruso' 
lem  Targum,  (See  also  Otho,  Ux,  Rabb.  p.  286 ;  Hambur- 


ger, Talmud,  Wdrterb,  s.  v.).  In  the  Koran  he  is  oAea 
mentioned  in  conjunction  yrith  the  other  two  patriaidu 
(chap.  ii,  and  elsewhere).     See  Mohammedamsm. 

JACOB  alao  occura  in  certain  poetical  and  coDven- 
tional  phrasea,  borrowed  from  the  relationa  of  the  pitit- 
arch  to  the  theocracy  and  atate.  **  God  of  Jaook" 
'^p^  '^^^  (Exod.  iu,  6;  iy,  6;  2  Sam.  xxiii,  1 ;  PMl 
XX,  2;  Isa.  ii,  8);  or  simply  **  Jacob**  (Pml  xxiT,  6, 
where  the  term  "^H^M  appeara  to  haye  fallcn  out  of  the 
text);  also  "mighty  One  0/ Jacob;'  npT^  I-^IK  (Psi. 
cxxxii,  2),  are  titles  of  Jehocah  aa  the  natiooal  daty. 
"■  Jacoir  frequent]y  atanda  for  his  posterity  or  the  bn- 
elitish  people;  but  poetically  chiefly,  ^kou$e  0/ Jacob," 
a*p5^  n-^a  (Exod.  xix,  3;  Isa.  ii,  6,  6;  viii,  17;  Anw 
iii,  18;  ix,  8;  Mic  ii,  7;  Obad.  17, 18),  "tteedof  Jacob,* 
Sp?^  5nt  (Isa.  xly,  19;  Jer.  xxxiii,  26),  "«mm  o/Ja- 
cob,*"  ^py;^  "^33  (1  Kinga  xviii,  87;  MaL  iii,  6),  "rwł- 
grcgajticn  of  Jacob^*  ^P^  ^^*7l?  (Deut.  xxxiii,  4), 
and  simply  **Jacoby^  ^P^  (Numb.  xxiii,  7, 10, 21, 23; 
xxiv,  6, 17, 19;  Deut  xxxii,  9;  xxxiii,  10;  Psa.  xiT,7, 
1 1 ;  xliy,  5 ;  Isa.  xxvii,  6, 9 ;  Jer.  x,  25 ;  xxxi,  1 1 ;  Amos 
yi,  8 ;  vii,  2;  viii,  7),  all  put  for  the  house  or  family  of 
Jacob;  whence  the  expre8aion  "in  Jacob,**  SpJ^ą  (Gen. 
xlix,  7 ;  Lam.  ii,  8),  i.  e.  among  the  Jewish  pcople.  Yrrr 
generally  the  name  is  used  for  the  people  aa  an  indirui- 
ual,  and  with  the  epithetA  appropriate  to  their  patiisr- 
chal  progenitor,  e.  g.  '*  Jacob^  my  kenrant"  (Isa.  xliv,  1 ; 
xly,  4;  xlyiii,  20;  Jer.  xxx,  10;  xlvi,  27,  28),  '*  Jacob, 
thy  (Edom's)  brother''  (Obad.  10).  In  like  manncr  with 
the  term  Itrael^ "  Jacob"  is  cven  spoken  of  the  twgfhm 
of  Ephraim,  which  had  arrogated  to  itself  the  title  prop- 
er  only  to  the  entire  nation  (Isa.  ix,  7;  xyii,  4;  Mic.  i, 
5;  Hoe.  x,  11 ;  xii,  8) ;  and,  after  the  deatmctioa  of  tlie 
northem  kingdom,  the  aame  expmsion  is  empfeyed  of 
the  remaining  kingdom  of  Jndah  (Nah.  ii,  8 ;  Oiiad.  18)b 


JACOB 


ł38 


JACOB 


— Gesenius.    See  Isham,  DucrimncUwe  wes  of^  Jaeo6** 
(ani  "  UrauT  (Lond.  1854).     Comp.  Israeu 

JACOBS  WELL  (iniy^  roi)  'Ia«w/3),  on  the  curb 
rf  which  Christ  sat  down  duriug  his  interyiew  with  the 
SamariUui  woman  of  Sychar  (John  iv,  6).  It  was  a 
deep  spring  (ver.  11)  in  the  ricinity  of  Shechem,  near 
the  road  from  Jemsalem,  probably  so  called  from  having 
been  dug  by  the  patriarch  Jacob  (ver.8,28)  when  dwell- 
ing  in  this  neighborhood  (Gen.  xxxiii,  18).  It  is  still 
known  by  the  same  title,  about  half  a  mile  south-east 
of  NablAs  (Robin8on's  EeaearcAeSy  iii,  112),  at  the  foot 
of  Mount  Gerizim  (Arvieux,  ii,  66 ;  Schubert,  iii,  186). 
It  is  bored  through  the  solid  rock,  and  kept  covered 
with  a  stone  by  the  Arabs  (see  Uackett'8  Iltustraiiont, 
p.  199  8q.).  It  is  thus  described  by  Porter  in  Murray*s 
łfandbook  for  Syria^  ii,  340 :  "  Formerly  there  was  a 
8qaare  hole  opening  into  a  carefuUy  built  yaulted  cham- 
ber,  about  ten  feet  Bquare,  in  the  lloor  of  which  was  the 
tnie  mouth  of  the  welL  No  w  a  portion  of  the  yault  has 
tallen  and  completely  ooyered  up  the  mouth.  so  that 
nothing  can  be  seen  but  a  shallow  pit,  half  fUled  with 
Stones  and  rubbish.**  Dr.  Wilson  (Landa  o/ihe  BibU^  ii, 
57)  carefully  measured  the  well,  and  found  it  nine  feet 
in  diameter,  and  seventy-five  feet  deep.  It  was  proba- 
bly much  deeper  in  ancient  times,  as  there  are  signs  of 
considerable  accumulation  of  Stones  and  rubbish  below 
itj  present  bottom ;  and  Maundrell  (March  24)  says  that 
in  his  time  it  was  thirty-five  yards,  or  one  hundred  and 
fire  feet  deep.  It  oontains  at  times  a  few  feet  of  wa- 
ter,  but  at  others  it  is  quite  diy.  Over  the  well  there 
fonnerly  stood  a  large  church,  built  in  the  4th  centuzy, 
but  probably  destroyed  befoie  the  time  of  the  Crusades, 
as  Siewulf  (p.  43)  and  Phocas  do  not  mention  iL  Its 
remains  are  just  above  the  weU,  towards  the  south-west, 
merely  a  shapeicss  mass  of  ruins,  among  which  are  seen 
fragments  of  gray  granite  columns  still  retaining  their 
ancient  polish  (Kobinson^s  BibliccU  RuearcAetj  iii,  182). 
(For  older  descriptions,  see  Hamesveld,  ii,  896  sq.)    See 

SlIKCIIKM. 

2.  Jacob  ClaKwjS)  was  the  name  of  the  father  of  Jo- 
seph, the  husband  of  the  Yirgiu  Mazy  (MatL  i,  15, 18). 
KC.  antę  40.    See  Mary. 

Jacob  op  Edessa  (so  called  after  the  name  of  his 
residence),  one  of  the  most  oelebrated  Syrian  writers 
and  theologians,  fionrished  in  the  second  half  of  the  7th 
century.  He  was  bora  in  the  village  of  Indabii  (in  An- 
tioch),  and  in  early  Ufę  entered  the  monastic  order. 
About  the  year  651  he  was  appointed  bishop  of  Edessa; 
but  his  zeal  for  the  cause  of  the  Church  ofken  led  him 
astray,  and  he  madę  many  enemies  among  the  clergy, 
and  finally  resigned  the  episoopal  dignity,  retiring  to  a 
life  of  scclusion  in  a  monastery  at  Toledo.  He  now  be- 
gan  an  extended  study  of  the  Syriac  Yenńon  of  the  Old 
Testament,  and  madę  many  valuable  corrections  and 
annotationa,  of  which  parta  still  remain  to  us  (compare 
8ylvestre  de  Sacy,  in  Eichhora's  Biblioih,  d.  6iW.  Litter, 
viii,  571  8q.;  Notietis  et  eztraits  de*  M8S.  iv,  648  8q.; 
Eichhorn,  BibL  d,  bibL  Lii,  ii,  270 ;  the  same,  £itU.  in  d. 
A .  T.  ii,  §  260  8q.)*  After  the  decease  of  his  suocesaor 
at  Edessa  he  was  inyited  to  reassume  the  duties  of  the 
bishopric,  but  he  died  while  on  his  jouraey,  June  5, 708. 
Jacob  of  Edessa  was  a  zealous  advocate  of  Monophysi- 
tism,  and  he  is  greatly  revered  by  the  Jacobites  (q.  v.), 
while  he  is  highly  esteemed  also  by  the  Maronites.  He 
was  distinguished  for  his  thorough  knowledge  of  the 
S.yriac,  Hcbrew,  and  Greek,  and  transUted  a  number  of 
Greek  works  into  Syriac,  a  task  which  he  so  ably  dis- 
charged  that  he  was  honored  with  the  suraame  of  "  in- 
terpreter of  the  books*"  (in  the  S>tUc,  tOPiST  K3C»C|?). 
He  wTote  commentaries  and  scholia  on  the  O.  T.  aiid  N, 
T^  of  which  extracts  are  oontained  in  the  works  of 
Ephraem  (comp.  Assemani,  BiUioth,  Orient,  i,  476  sq.). 
See  Httzt^jReal^łJncyldopddie,  yi,S79  8q.;  Iłaile  Ency- 
tt)pa«f,2d8ect.  xiii,  166-167.    (J.H.W.) 

Jacob  OF  HuNOARY,  surnaroed  Ihe  Master,  a  fa- 
natk  and  adventurer,  and  the  chief  of  the  Pa8tonreaux 


or  Shepherds,  is  snpposed  to  havo  been  a  natiye  of 
Hungary,  though  nothing  definite  is  known  as  to  his 
origin.  In  his  yocth  he  joined  the  Cistercian  order, 
but  is  said  to  have  afterwards  embraccd  Islamism  :  tbis, 
however,  is  a  matter  of  doubt,  some  eren  rerersing  the 
order  of  his  oonversion  from  one  faith  to  the  othcr.  He 
was  also  represented  as  having  leamed  the  occult  orts 
from  the  Moors  of  Spain,and  also  as  ha%ing  been  a  traitor 
to  France.  At  any  ratę,  we  find  him  at  Eastcr,  A.D.  1251 , 
heading  a  popnlar  movement  iri  faror  of  king  St.  Louis, 
then  a  prisoner  at  Cassarea.  The  king,  apparcntly  for- 
saken  by  the  nobility  and  cleigy,  was  the  idol  of  the 
people.  Jacob  trarelled  through  the  pro^nces,  prcach- 
ing  a  crusade  in  which  nonę  but  the  poor  and  lowly 
should  take  part,  God  haring  forsaken  the  opulent  and 
the  great  on  aocount  of  their  pridc,  and  the  clcrg}'  on 
account  of  their  Hcentiousness.  He  cUimecl  to  have 
Tisions,  to  have  receired  a  direct  message  from  the  Yir- 
gin,  etc.  **  He  was  an  aged  man,"  says  Milman,  *'  -with 
a  long  beard,  and  pale,  emaciated  face ;  hc  spokc  Latin, 
French,  and  German  with  the  same  flnent  pcrsuasiYC- 
ness;  he  preached  without  authority  of  pope  or  prolatc." 
The  eloquence  of  the  Master  of  Ilungary  stirred  the 
lowest  depths  of  society.  The  shepherds,  the  peasants, 
left  their  ilocks,  their  stalls,  thdr  fields,  their  ploughs; 
in  rain  friends,  parents,  wive8  remonstrated ;  thcy  took 
no  thought  of  sustenance.  So,  drawing  men  aflter  him 
''  aa  the  loadstone  draws  the  iron,**  he  soon  had  a  large 
number  of  followers,  who  received  the  name  of  Pastou- 
rels  or  Pastoureanx,  from  the  fact  that  the  first  and  the 
most  of  his  followers  were  shepherds  or  peasants.  Both 
the  magistrates  and  queen  Blanche,  thinking  they 
might  become  instrumental  in  securing  the  liberation 
of  the  king,  encouraged  them  for  a  time.  Soon,  how- 
ever,  their  ranks  were  swelled  by  a  number  of  Yagrants, 
thieres,  highwaymen,  and  all  the  scum  of  th<f  popula- 
tion,  attiYcted  by  the  prospect  of  spoils.  They  had 
started  from  Flanders  in  the  direction  of  Paris,  and  when 
they  reached  Amiens  they  numbered  80,000.  Thcse 
recruits  wore  daggers,  swords,  battle-axcs,  and  all  the 
implements  of  warfare.  Received  and  cntertained  by 
the  citizens  of  Amiens,  they  gained  new  adherenta,  and 
their  number  swelled  to  50,000,  and  on  their  arrival  at 
the  gates  of  Parts  they  were  a  formidable  band  of  100,000 
armed  men.  Sismondi  says:  *' Their  hatred  of  the 
prieats  was  as  great  as  their  hatred  of  the  infidcK  They 
had  preachers  who  never  had  been  ordained;  their 
teachings  were  far  from  orthodox,  and  they  assumed 
the  right  of  setting  aside  ecdeaiastical  disctptine :  they 
granted  divorces,  and  permitted  marriages  which  the 
priesta  denounoed  as  oontiary  to  the  canons."  They 
were  especially  bitter  against  the  monastic  orders,  and 
a  number  of  monks  were  murdered  by  them.  The  au- 
thoritiea  began  to  regiet  having  encouraged  them ;  yet 
they  were  allowed  to  enter  Paris,  and  Jacob  went  so  far 
as  to  offidate  publicly  in  the  church  of  St.  Eustachę. 
Several  murders  marked  their  stay  in  the  capitaL  Find- 
ing  his  foroea  considerably  increased,  Jacob  diWded 
them  into  8everal  bands,  under  pretense  of  embarking 
them  at  different  pointa  for  the  Holy  Land.  One  of 
these  bands  went  to  Orleans,  where  they  massacred  all 
the  priests  and  monks  they  oould  find ;  and  thence  to 
Bouigea,  where,  the  priests  carefully  keeping  out  of  the 
way,  they  attacked  the  Jews,  demolishing  their  sjnia- 
gogues  and  plundering  their  houses.  Effectire  meas- 
ures  were  at  last  taken  to  put  a  stop  to  these  OKcesses. 
They  were  excommumcated  by  the  Church,  and  the 
authorities  invited  the  people  to  arm  against  and  war 
on  them.  Jacob  was  still  in  the  capitaL  One  day,  by 
order  of  the  queen,  an  executioner  mingled  with  the 
crowd  who  surrounded  him,  and,  while  he  was  preach- 
ing,  cut  oir  his  head  with  a  single  blow  of  the  axe.  At 
the  same  time,  a  number  of  knights  chaiged  on  his  fol- 
lowers, who  were  dispersed.  The  other  bands  met  with 
the  same  fate,  and  an  end  was  put  at  the  same  time  to 
the  depredations  and  to  the  sect.  See  Matthew  Paris, 
Uiat,  Anghm;  GuiUanme  de  Nangis,  Chroń,  in  SpiciLi 


JACOB 


736 


JACOB 


Matthew  of  Westminster,  Historia ;  Chroń,  de  8U  Denyt ; 
Sismoudi,  Hist,  des  Trancaisj  vii,  475  sq. ;  Dufey,  Diet, 
de  la  Conrersation^  article  Pa9tnareaux;  Hoefer,  iVbuv. 
Sioff.  Generale f  xxvi,  167  8q. ;  Milmaiii  Laiin  Christian- 
ity,  vV  67  sq. ;  Semler,  Ver8uch  e.  Kirchengesch,  i,  545  są. 

Jacob  op  JuTERBoCK  (or  Jacobut  Cisierciensitf  etc) 
was  bom  at  Juterbock  abouŁ  1383.  When  yet  quite 
young  he  entered  the  Cisterctau  monastery  De  Parw 
diso,  situated  in  Poland,  and  afberwards  went  to  Graoow 
to  procure  the  doctoraŁe.  Distinguished  for  scholarship 
and  piety,  he  soon  became  the  acknowledged  leader 
amoiig  his  fellow  monks,  and  was  finally  elected  abbot 
of  his  convent.  Some  time  after  he  renioved  to  Prague, 
but,  growing  dissatisiied  with  the  many  failings  of  men 
who  profeased  to  have  ąuitted  the  world  to  seek  an  alli- 
ance  with  God,  but  who,  in  truth,  had  only  entered  the 
monastic  order  because  it  was  the  road  to  distinctlon,  he 
advocated  a  reform  of  the  Church,  and  at  one  time  even 
fostered  the  thought  of  forsaking  the  monastic  life  alto- 
gcther.  He  chang^ed  to  the  Carthusian  order,  Temoved 
to  one  of  thdr  monasteries  at  Erfurt,  wae  berę  also 
greatly  beloved  for  his  superior  abilities,  and  became 
prior  uf  the  monastery.  He  died  in  1645.  Jacob  of  Jtt- 
terbock  may  be  justly  regarded  an  associate  of  the  mys- 
tics  of  the  14th  century,  and  virtua]ly  a  forerunner  of  the 
Beformation — one  of  the  Johns  preparing  the  way  for 
Luther.  Characteristic  of  his  efforts  for  a  reformatory 
movement  are  his  Sermones  notahUes  etformaks  de  tem- 
pore  et  de  sancłit : — Libelli  tres  de  arte  curandi  vitia  (in 
Joh. Wesscli  Opp.,Amat,  1617) : — Liber  de  veritaUdioeih- 
da: — TracL,  de  causis  muUarum passionum  (in  Pezelii 
Biblioth,  asceL  vii) : — De  indulgóuus : — De  negligentia 
Prcelaiorum  (in  Walch,  ^Ifonum.  tned,€ev,  ii,  Fasa  1) : — 
De  sejitęfii  ecclesia  statibtu  opitsculum  (Walch,  Fasc  2). 
Especially  in  the  last  work  he  dedares  that  a  reform 
of  the  Ciiurch  could  only  be  effected  by  subjecting  the 
whołe  clergy,  from  the  pope  downwaid,  to  a  thorough 
change.  He  vehemently  opposed  the  absolute  power  of 
the  papai  chair,  the  right  of  the  pope  to  control  the 
councils,  and  naturally  enough  deiiied  the  infolUbility 
of  the  so-called  "  vicar  of  Christ."  See  UUmann,  Ee- 
Jbrńiers  be/ore  the  Beformaiumy  1,  208,  250;  Trithemii 
CataL  iłlustr,  rirorwn,  i ;  Herzog,  Real-EncyHop,  vi,  880, 
381';  Bibliotheca  Sacra,  i,  434  8q. 

Jacob  OF  London,  a  Jewish  Rabbi  who  flourished 
in  England  at  the  opening  of  the  13th  century,  was  ap- 
pointed  by  king  John,  at  the  commenoement  of  his 
reign,  when  yet  friendly  to  the  Jews,  and  uninfluenced 
by  the  diabolical  exertions  of  the  Roman  prelate  Ste- 
phen Langton,  as  chief  Rabbi  of  England  ("  presbytera- 
tus  omnium  Judteorum  totins  Anglias").  Jacob  was  a 
man  of  great  leaming,  especially  conver8ant  with  Jew- 
ish tradition,  and  held  in  high  esteem  b}**  Jews  and  Gen- 
tiles.  Even  the  king  hesitated  not  to  cali  him  his  dear 
friend  ("  dilectus  et  familiaris  noster").  Unfortunately, 
we  have  no  knowledge  of  any  of  his  literary  produc- 
tions,  which,  by  a  man  of  his  abilities,  must  have  been 
valuable,  especially  as  an  indcx  to  the  history  of  the 
Jews  in  England  under  king  John.  See  GrtttE,  Ges<^  d. 
Jttdm,  vii,  16.     (J.H.W.)  • 

Jacob  OF  MiES  {Jacobus  de  Misa,  also  called,  on 
accoiuit  of  his  smali  stature,  Jacobellus,  L  e.  Jacob  the 
Short),  one  of  the  most  prominent  figures  in  the  polem- 
ical  controyersy  inaugurated  by  Huss,  was  bom  about 
the  second  half  of  the  14th  ccntur>%  at  Misa,  in  Bohe- 
miiB.  He  was  educated  at  the  Uniycraity  of  Prague, 
and  then  became  priest  at  Trina,  and  ultimately  at 
Prague.  At  the  instigation  of  Petms  Dresdensis,  the 
Waldensian,  he  was  led  to  inquire  into  the  antiquity 
of  the  Roman  Catholic  modę  of  administering  the  sac- 
rament,  and,  after  a  careful  study  of  the  writings  of 
the  early  Church,  became  convinced  that  the  Roman 
Church  hod  no  right  or  authority  to  deprive  the  laity  of 
the  cup,  and  by  his  tongue  and  by  his  pen  he  preached 
agunst  the  malpractice,  himself  aJso  deviating  from  the 


usage,  and  administering  the  cap  to  the  bóir.  Ezcom- 
municated  by  the  archbishop  of  Prague,  he  challenged 
the  univer8ity  authorities  to  refiite  his  argamems,  and 
further  defended  his  couise  by  his  pen :  Vin«Hciie  wu 
RepHcati.  contra  Andreas  Brodom,  The  approbation 
which  his  course  received  from  the  people  seemed  rath- 
er  serions  to  the  Conneil  of  Constance,  just  then  in  ses- 
sion, and  every  etfort  was  madę  to  refute  Jacob  of  Mie& 
But  soon  Huss  also  came  forward,  and  dcciared  that  the 
eaily  fathers  had  been  taught  by  the  diadples  thst 
Christ  desired  both  the  winę  and  the  bread  to  be  given 
to  the  laity,  and  when  arraigned  as  a  beretic  before  the 
bar  of  the  council,  he  still  continaed  to  reiterate  his  far- 
mer statements  (compare  Hist.  et  Monum.  J,  Hus  atqae 
Hieron,  Pragensis,  Nortmb.  1715,  i,  52  8q.;  V.  d.  Haidl, 
Magnum  eBcumemaun  Constantiense  ConcUium,  eta,  ir, 
291).  Jacob  of  Mieś,  thus  encomraged  by  the  attitnde 
of  Huss,  a  dassmate  of  his  at  the  murerńty,  morę 
vigorously  than  ever  defended  his  position,  and  soogfat 
further  to  prove  the  aocuracy  of  his  statements  in  Dem- 
onstraiio  per  testimówia  Scripfura  pałntm  afgue  doeto- 
rum  eommumcoHonem  eaticis  in  pMe  Christiana  esse  ne- 
eessarium  (in  Y.  d.  Hanit,  iii,  804  sq.).  Of  course  his 
opponents  could  not  Ikmg  continue  in  silence,  and  they 
naturally,  though  awkwaidly  enongfa,  endeavored  to  ze- 
lute  him  by  proofs  from  the  Bibie  and  the  Cfaureh  fa- 
thers. Perhaps  the  most  able,  i  e.  the  most  ridicakNa 
of  all,  and  the  most  vehement  of  the  opposition  docii- 
ments,  was  an  anonymous  Epistoła  Elmcktica  (in  T.  d. 
Hardt).  There  were  even  some  who  attempted  to  profre 
that  the  deprivation  of  the  cup  had  its  sanction  in  the 
Old-Test  Seripturcs !  Thereupon  the  council  conTcned 
at  Constance  (the  ISth  session,  June  15, 1415)  again  coo- 
demned  the  conrae  of  Jacob  of  Mieś,  although  it  virca- 
ally  admittcd  all  that  he  claimed  for  the  laity  (see  Giese- 
ler,  Kirchen  Gesch,  II,  ii,  227  8q.,  in  the  4th  edit.).  Ja- 
cob again  defended  his  course  by  an  Apologia  pro  am- 
mwtione  plebis,  which  was  replied  to  by  the  celcbrated 
Gerson  in  his  Cone.  pubL  cav*am  J.  de  Misa  et  Boktac- 
rum  gwHid  communionis  łaicalis  sub  utrague  ąpecie  bw*- 
sitatem  uberiut  discutiendu  Notwithstanding  the  fre- 
quent  denuńciations  of  his  course,  he  contintted  to  hoM 
his  parish,  and  cvcn  took  np  his  pen  in  be^alf  of  maiiT 
other  peculiar  doctrines  of  the  Romanistsi  Thus  he 
opposed  the  Waldensians  on  the  doctiine  of  pargatoiy 
and  the  mass,  in  De  purgatorio  anima  post  mtrtm 
(in  Walch,  Momtm,  medU  avi,  i,  fasc.  iii,  p.  1  są.).  He 
also  wrote  De  juramenfo,  de  aniichrisło^  and  prepared 
a  transktion  of  the  works  of  Wydifie.  He  dicd  at 
Prague,  Aug.  9, 1429.  The  result  of  the  rontroTenr  m 
the  cup  resulted,  as  is  well  known,  in  a  iriumph  f<ff  Ja- 
cob of  Mieś  and  for  Huss.  See  Martini,  Diss.  deJ.ie 
Misa,  etc,  primo  Eucharist.  Calids  per  erdes.  J9o4,  r»- 
dice  (Altdorf,  1758, 4to) ;  Spittler,  Gesch,  d,  Keldu  i  hA 
Abemdmahly  p.  49  8q.;  Schrockh,  Kirchengesch,  xxxiii, 
382  sq. ;  Herzog,  Real-EnegOopadie,  vt.  894  aq. ;  GiOett, 
Li/e  o/Huss  (1871, 2  Vol&  8vo).     (J.  H.  W.) 

Jacob  OP  Nisnsis  (often  sumamed  Jaccb  the  Great\ 
the  instructor  of  Ephraem  the  Syrian,  and  a  rdatire  of 
Gregory  the  illumuiator,  flourished  as  bishop  of  Nbibb 
(Zoba)  in  the  flrst  half  of  the  4th  century.  The  httk 
that  is  known  of  him  makes  him  out  to  hare  been  s 
man  "distinguished  for  ascetlc  hoiiness  and  for  mine- 
ulous  works,"  dothed,  of  course,  like  msjiy  of  the  earir 
characters,  in  such  a  mythical  drcss  that  the  chancter 
is  often  placed  in  a  most  ridiculous  light  (comp.  Stan- 
ley, Eastem  Churck,  p.  198).  In  his  eariy  life  he  **  sfeat 
many  years  as  a  hermit  in  forests  and  cave8,  and  fired 
like  a  wild  beast  on  roots  and  leaves,'*  clothed  in  a  roofk 
goat  Vhair  cloak ;  and  thia  diess  and  modę  of  life  he  ii 
said  to  have  oontinued  even  after  he  became  bishop  of 
Nisibia.  That  he  enjoyed  the  confidenoe  and  csteon  of 
his  contemporaries  is  evinced  by  the  fiut  that  he  ww  a 
member  of  the  Council  of  Nicaea  (Aasemani,  BAL  Or.  i, 
169;  iii,  587),  and  by  the  distinction  which  ha  reedred 
at  the  band  of  the  emperor,  who  called  him  one  of  the 
three  piUars  of  the  world  (comp.  Schaff;  CA.  History,  vi 


JACOB 


737 


JACOB 


S69).  He  died  abont  388.  Ab  a  writer,  Jaoob  of  Niai- 
błs  hardly  gained  distinction ;  his  auŁborship  ia  eyen 
ąaestioned  by  many.  A  number  of  worka  are  attributed 
to  him,  but  under  his  name  are  preserved  only  an  Ar- 
menian  tranalation  of  a  letter  to  the  biahopa  of  Seleucia 
and  etghteen  aermona,  of  which  a  copy  was  preparcd  by 
direction  of  Aasemani  for  the  Yatican  {BibL  Or.  i,  667 
Bq.,  632).  An  edition,  with  a  Latin  tranalation  and 
notes,  was  prepared  and  published  by  cazriinal  AntoneUi 
(1766,  folio;  Yenice,  1766;  Const.  1824).  See,  besides 
Schaff  and  Stanley,  Neumann,  Gesch.  Ł  A  rmen,  LiL  p. 
18  8q.;  Biographie  Uniterselley  art.  Jacąues  de  Nisibe; 
llaiogyReaI^Encyklopddie,yi,Bd6.    (J.H.W.) 

Jacob  op  SarOo,  a  oelebrated  writer  and  teacher 
of  the  Syrian  Charch,  was  bom  at  Curtannm,  on  the 
Eaphrates,  in  462.  He  was  mado  a  preabyter  in  603, 
and  attained  the  diatinctioa  of  bishop  in  619.  He 
was  honored  by  the  aumame  of  *' doctor"  (Syr.  Mai- 
pdnd),  and  by  that  of  "the.oidyersal"  (Syr.  TibeUta), 
He  was  the  author  of  an  innomerable  niimber  of  worka. 
Thos  no  less  than  763  homilies  in  verse  aie  attributed 
to  him  (of  which  Barhebnens  had  182),  besides  ezpoai- 
tioDS,  an  anaphora,  a  form  of  baptism,  hymns,  and  let- 
tecs.  But  evidently  many  worka  are  falaely  attributed 
to  him,  as  Aasemani  CBM,  Orient,  ii,  332)  has  proved. 
Many  of  his  writings  are  presenred  in  the  Yatican.  He 
died  at  Sarftg  Nor.  29, 621.  The  Jacobites  and  Maron- 
ites  both  commemorate  him,  and  the  former  hołd  him, 
with  many  other  orthodox  teachers,  in  great  reyerence, 
altbough  it  cannot  be  prored  that  he  in  the  least  devi- 
ated  teom  the  orthodox  course.  He  certainly  reproached 
Kestorius.  His  expo8itions  are  still  used  in  the  Syrian 
churches  at  publie  worship,  and  have  also  been  translated 
into  Arabie.  Several  of  his  hymns  are  contained  in  the 
Bret./erile  Syr.  and  in  the  Offie.  Domin.  (Romę,  1787). 
A  poetic  eulogy  which  he  piononnced  on  Simeon  the  Sty- 
lite  has  been  tranalated  into  German  by  Zingerle  (in  his 
Leben  und  Wirhm  det  heiL  Simeon  StylUet,  Innsbr.  1866, 
8vo,  p.  279-298).  See  Etheridge,  Syr.  Churches  (Lond. 
1846, 12mo),  p.  241  są.;  Herzog,  Real-EncyHopadie,  vi, 
897. 

Jacob  OF  YiTRT  (JacobuB  de  Vitriaco,  or  Jaeobus 
Vitriacus)f  so  named  after  his  native  place,  was  bom  in 
the  second  half  of  the  12Łh  oentury.  He  waa  a  pres- 
brter  at  the  yillage  of  Argenteuil,  near  Paris,  when, 
attracted  by  the  oelebrated  sanctity  of  Maria  of  Og- 
nieś,  he  remoyed  to  her  place  of  residence,  the  diocese 
of  liege.  She  received  him  kindly,  and  influenced  him 
to  take  a  position  in  the  diocese.  At  the  request  of  the 
pope  he  began  preaching  against  the  Albigenses,  and 
finally  deroted  himaelf  to  the  interests  of  the  sacred  tomb 
at  Jerusalem,  travelling  through  France  to  levy  contri- 
butions.  While  thus  engaged  he  was  elected  bishop  of 
Acre,  and  at  the  request  of  pope  Honorius  III  went  to 
the  Holy  Land.  He  there  performed  a  noble  work: 
among  other  things,  he  provided  for  the  children  of  the 
Saracens  whom  the  Christians  had  taken,  baptized 
them,  and  introsted  them  to  the  care  of  pious  Christian 
women.  Aftcr  the  retirement  of  the  Christians  fiom 
Damietta,  he  reaigned  in  1226  the  episcopal  office,  and 
retumed  to  Ognies.  In  1229  pope  Gregory  IX  appoint- 
ed  him  cardinal  and  papai  legate  of  France,  Brabant, 
and  the  Holy  Land.  He  died  at  Rorae  May  1, 1240. 
The  writings  of  Jacob  de  Vitry  are  yaluable.  He  prof- 
ited  greatly  by  his  stay  in  the  Holy  Land,  gathering 
rauch  of  the  materiał  necessary  for  the  preparation  of 
his  principal  work,  the  Historia  Orientalis^  generally  en- 
tiiled  llistory  of  Jerusalem,  published  cntire  as  "Cura 
Andre»  Hoji  Bnigensis"  (1697) ;  also  by  Martene  and  Du- 
rand, Thesaur.  nov.  Anecdotorum,  t  iii  (Par.  1717).  This 
work  of  Jaoob  de  Vitry  is  diyided  into  three  parts.  The 
first  oontains  the  history  (this  as  well  as  the  others  are 
mainly  eoclesiastical)  of  Jerusalem  in  brief ;  the  second, 
a  ahort  reyiew  of  the  history  of  the  West,  paying  par- 
ticular  attention  to  the  history  of  the  different  Church 
ardecs,  and  the  extent  and  yalue  of  pilgrimagea ;  in  the 
IY^Aaa 


third  he  retuma  to  the  East,  and,  beginning  with  tha 
General  Lateran  Council,  doses  with  the  surrender  of 
Damietta.  This  last  part  of  the  work  does  not  seem  to 
be  the  production  of  Jacob,  but,  in  all  probability,  was 
written  by  some  other  hand,  to  add  to  the  oompleteness 
of  the  work.  Ceillier,  however,  attributes  the  whole 
work  to  Jacob,  and  defends  his  yiew  by  stating,  in  com- 
mendation  of  part  third, "  Uauteur  ayait  yu  de  ses  yeux 
oe  qu'il  raoonte"  (in  acoordance  with  the  statement  in 
the  preface  of  the  work,  p.  1048).  This  work  has  been 
tranalated  into  French,  and  inaerted  in  the  CoUeciion  des 
mhnoires  rekU^fs  a  thisUńre  de  France,  tom.  xxiL  His 
letters  are  also  of  great  importauoe  to  the  historian : 
Jacobi  de  Yitriaco  epistoła  missa  m  Lotharinffiam  de 
capiUiomt  Damiatai  (pubUshed  by  Bongarsius  in  the  first 
part  of  the  Gęsta  Deiper  Francos\  and  Kjusdem  epistolm 
quatuQr  ad  Honorium  III  Papam  (in  Martene  and  Du- 
rand*s  aboye-named  work,  and  same  yolume) ;  a  lifo  of 
the  oelebrated  St.Mary  of  Ognies;  and  sermons  on  the 
Goapels  and  Epistles,  of  which  a  portion  was  published 
at  Antwerp  in  1676.  See  Ceillier,  Hist.  des  A  uteurs  So' 
creSf  xiii,  637  8q. ;  Bibliotheca  Belgica,  i,  642 ;  Herzog, 
Beal-Encyklopddie,  yi,  398.     ( J.  II.  W.) 

Jacob  DE  YoRAGiNE,  archbishop  of  Genoa,  and  au- 
thor of  the  Legenda  aurea,  was  bom  at  Yiraggio,  near 
Genoa,  in  1230.  He  joiued  the  preaching  friars  at  Ge- 
noa in  1244,  and  became  proyincial  of  the  order  for  Lom- 
bardy in  1267.  For  seryices  rendered  to  the  Church 
and  to  his  order  in  different  circumstances,  he  was  final- 
ly madę  archbishop  of  Genoa  in  1292,  and  died  in  1298. 
His  reputation  rests  exclusively  on  a  compilation  of  le- 
genda which  he  wrote  under  the  title  of  legenda  Sanc- 
torum,  or  Legenda  aurea  (also  known  as  the  Historia 
LongobardicUf  on  aocount  of  a  short  Lombard  chron- 
icie it  contains,  attached  to  the  life  of  pope  Pelagius). 
The  work  consists  of  a  series  of  fanciful  biographiea, 
some  compiled  fh>m  older  worka,  others  merely  madę  up 
of  the  traditiona  current  among  the  people  and  in  con- 
yenta.  Many  of  the  elements  of  thesc  biographies  are 
taken  from  apocryphal  Goepels,  Acts  of  the  Apostles, 
and  martyrologies,  and  are  to  be  fonnd  in  other  anterior 
and  contemporary  works,  such  as  the  Passional,  the  le- 
gends  of  Mary,  etc  Some  of  them  are  inyentions  bf 
the  Middle  Ages,  and  ahow  how  quickly  fables  become 
mixed  up  with  history :  such  are  the  lives  of  Dominie 
and  of  Francis  of  AssisL  Thcse  legenda  are,  morcdycr, 
entirely  deyoid  of  poetic  beauty,  that  redeeming  fcature 
of  many  works  of  this  kind.  Jacob  was  a  merę  com- 
piler  and  chronicler,without  taste  and  without  talent;  a 
specimen  of  his  coarseness  is  to  be  found  in  what  he  re- 
lates  of  Yespaaian  in  his  life  of  the  apostle  James.  The 
only  original  part  of  the  work  is  the  preface  or  introduc- 
tion  to  the  life  of  each  saint,  in  which  Jacob  attempta 
to  ^ye  an  explanation  of  the  meaning  of  their  names  j 
and  these  explanations  consist  in  wonderful  etymologies 
and  wild  speculations,  such  as  oould  be  expected  from 
an  ignorant  monk  unacąuainted  with  either  Greek  or 
Hebrew.  The  work  was  soon  esteemed  at  its  just  yalue. 
The  superior  of  the  order,  Berengarius  de  Landora,  sub- 
sequently  archbiahop  of  Compostcila  (f  1830),  commis- 
aioned  Bemardus  Guidonia,  afterwards  bishop  of  Lodeye 
(t  1331),  to.yrrite  /  life  of  the  saints  from  authentic 
sources.  Bemardus,  who  was  a  zealous  historian,  set  to 
work  and  prodnoed  a  Specuhim  sanctorum  in  four  vol- 
umea.  This,  howeyer,  did  not  mect  with  much  succesa. 
The  Legenda  of  Jacob  became  t)ie  Legenda  aurea,  and 
gained  in  popularity  not  only  because  it  was  shorter 
than  the  yoluminous  compilation  of  Bemardus,  but  es- 
pecially  on  account  of  its  extrayagant  descriptions  and 
relations  of  miraculous  occurrences,  which  suited  the 
spirit  of  the  Middle  Ages  much  better  than  a  plain, 
truthful  narration  of  facts.  Many  translations  of  it  were 
madę  into  German,  French,  Italian,  Spanisłi,  and  Eng- 
lish,  and  after  the  discoyery  of  printing  many  eiUtiona 
of  it  were  published.  (See  Bmnet,  Manuel  de  Pafnaieur 
de  livres,  iy,  687  są.  The  latest  edition  is  by  Dr.  Griisse, 
librarian  of  the  king  of  Saxony,  Lpz.  1846, 8yo) .    To  ua 


JACOB  BEN-ABBA-MARI 


738 


JACOB  BEN^HAJIM 


the  book  U  yery  important  as  an  index  to  the  Bupenti- 
tioufl  spirit  of  the  Mtddle  Ages.  Among  the  other  works 
of  Jacob  de  Yoragine  we  may  mention  JSermones  de  tern" 
porę  et  cuadrageńmaks  (Faris,  1500;  Yenicc,  1589,  2 
yoIb.)  : — tSemumes  dedominicUper  armum  (Yenice,  1544, 
4to,  and  1566,  foL)  -.—CtiŁadragińmale  et  de  scmctis  (Ven- 
ice,  1602, 2  volfl.  4to)  z^Sermones  de  Sanctis  (Lyon,  1494 ; 
Papue,  1500 ;  YenLce,  1580)  :^Mariale  swe  termones  de 
B.Maria  Yirffine  (Yenice,  1497, 4to ;  Pari8,1503;  May- 
cnce,  1616, 4to).  The  latest  editions  of  hia  coUected  aer- 
mons  appeared  at  Augsburg  (1760, 4  yoIs.  fol.).  Ali  theee 
scrmons  are  merę  sketchcs;  those  on  the  saints  are  fuli 
of  ftblcB,  and  can  be  considered  as  a  sort  of  supplement 
to  the  Legenda  aurea ;  the  160  sermons  on  Mary  treat, 
in  alphabetical  order,  of  the  rirtues,  perfection,  and  mir- 
acles  of  the  Yirgin.  Lentz,  in  his  Getch,  d,  Bamiletik 
(Brunswick,  1889,  i,  257),  gives  a  German  translation  of 
one  of  them  as  a  specimen.  Jacob  also  wrote  in  defense 
of  the  Dominicans,  and  doubtless  against  the  attacks  of 
SLAmour,  a  De/eruorium  contra  impugnantes  Fraires 
PrtedicałoreSf  quod  non  vivQnł-  secundum  rUam  apostoli- 
cam  (Yenice,  1504).  An  abridgment  which  he  prepared 
of  the  Summa  virtutum  et  ritiorum  of  Wm,  Peraldus,  and 
his  De  operibuś  et  opusculu  S.Augusttni  have  never 
been  printed  (Quetif  and  Echard,  i,  458),  His  chroni- 
cie of  Grenoa,  down  to  1297,  has  bŃeen  published  by  Mu- 
ratori,  Scriptorea  rerum  Italie,  ix,  1  są.  The  assertion. 
madę  by  Slxtus  Senensis  (Bibłioth,  Sacroj  lib.  iv),  that 
Jacob  wrote  an  Italian  translation  of  the  Bibie,  appears 
to  be  erroneoos:  no  such  work  has  ever  been  found,  nor 
is  it  mentioned  by  contemporary  writeis;  it  is,  more- 
over,  highiy  improbable  that  the  compiler  of  the  Legen^ 
da  aurea  should  have  considered  it  desirable  or  profita- 
ble  to  give  the  fiction-loying  people  the  Scriptures  in 
the  Yemacular.  See  Herzog,  Real- Encgldopadie^  vi, 
899. 

Jacob  ben-Abba-Mari  ben-Simoh  (Simson), 
generally  known  as  Jacob  Anatoli  (Anatolio),  a 
Jewish  philosopher,  was  lom  iu  Provence  in  the  latter 
half  of  the  12th  oenturj*.  He  was  the  son-in-law  of  the 
celebrated  writer  Samuel  Ibn-Tibbon,  and,  like  him,  be- 
came  an  aident  follower  of  Maimonides.  In  carly  life 
he  acąiured  a  thorough  knowledge  of  the  Arabie  lan- 
guage,  and  this  enabled  liim  to  translate  many  of  the 
philosophical  works  for  the  benefit  of  his  Jewish  breth- 
rcn.  But,  unlike  his  great  master,  he  was  inclined  to 
rationalism  to  such  a  degree  that  he  set  about  attempt- 
ing  to  exp]ain  the  miradcs  of  the  O.-T.  Scriptures  in  a 
natural  way.  His  famę  soon  spread  abroad,  and  when 
the  emperor  Frederick  II,  the  last  of  the  Hohenstanfen, 
looked  about  for  a  translator  of  Aristotle,  his  eyes  fdl 
on  Anatoli,  and  he  was  invited  to  Naples,  and  paid  an 
annuity  from  the  emperor's  priyate  purse  to  perform  the 
arduous  task,  or,  according  to  some,  to  assist  in  the  un- 
dertaking.  He  prepared,  in  conjunction  with  Michael 
Scotus,  a  translation  of  the  Greek  philosopher,  together 
with  the  commentar>'  by  the  Arabian  philosopher  Avcr- 
Toes  (Ibn-Roshd),  into  tlie  Latin  (comp.  Grfttz,  Gesch.  d. 
Juden,  vii,  105,  notc  1 ;  Koger  Bacon,  Opera,  ii,  140 ;  Re- 
nan,  A  verroes  et  VA  rerroiame,  p.  163  sq.).  Jacob  Ana- 
toli died  about  1250.  Sec  Sciiołasticism  ;  Scotus 
(Michael).    (J.H.W.) 

Jacob  ben-Asheri  bkn-Jechtel  den-Uri  brn- 
Eliakih  ben-Jehudak,  also  called  Baal  Ila-Turim, 
after  his  celebrated  ritnal  work,  was  bom  in  Germany 
about  A.D.  1280.  At  the  age  of  eighteen  he  was  an 
eye-witness  of  the  fearful  massacies  of  his  Jewish  |}reth- 
ren,  which  bcgan  in  Bavaria  April  20, 1298,  under  the 
leadership  of  Rindfleisch,  and  soon  spread  over  France 
and  Austria,  and  by  which  morę  than  100,000  pereons 
were  slaughtered  in  less  than  six  months.  The  inse- 
curity  of  the  lives  of  Jews  led  him  to  emigrate  in  1303. 
For  morę  than  two  years  he  and  his  family  moved  from 
town  to  town,  until  they  foimd  a  resting-place  at  Toledo, 
in  Spain.  Though  in  very  straitened  pecuniary  circum- 
ttances,  he  began  at  onoe  literary  labozs,  and  as  the  re- 


sult  we  hayc  (1)  A  Commentary  on  the  Penłateuch  CtV^t 
n^it^n  b?),  the  basifl  of  which  is  Nachnoanidca^s  espo- 
sition.  "He  excluded  from  it  Nachmamdes's  philo* 
sophico-cabalistic  portions,  inserted  in  their  stead  re> 
marks  of  Kashi,  Joseph  Gara,  Samuel  ben-Mcicr,  Abn- 
ham  ben-ChiJa,  K.  Tam,  Aben-Ezra,  Joseph  Kimcht, 
Jehudah  the  Pious,  Simon  ben-Abraham,  Mcier  of  Ro- 
thenbuig,  R.  Asher,  the  father,  and  B.  Jehudah,  tbe 
brother  of  the  author,  as  well  as  gloeses  of  his  own  at 
the  beginning  of  every  Sabbatic  section  {$ee  Haphta- 
rah],  which  chiefiy  consist  of  explanations  of  wcitis  and 
whole  sentences  according  to  the  hermcncutical  nile 
called  K'^iaiS''3i  (Ł  e,  reducing  every  letter  of  a  word  to 
its  numerical  value,  and  explaining  it  by  another  word 
of  the  same  quantity  [see  Midbasu],  and  whidi  he 
calls  niK^&^D,  daintg  tupplemenis),  and  reoondite  rea- 
sons  for  the  critical  remarks  of  the  Masorites  upon  the 
tcxt  (niTlOTSn  '»aro).  Thb  work  is  of  great  impcn 
tance  to  the  understanding  of  the  original  design  of  ihe 
Masorah.  Such  was  the  extr8ordinary  populariiy  cf 
the  Gematrical  portions  of  this  commentary  that  the? 
were  detached  from  the  exeg«dcal  part  and  printed  in 
a  sepaiatc  form  In  Constantinople  in  1514,  in  Yenice  ia 
1544,  and  have  sińce  appeared  not  only  in  the  Ral^iinie 
Bibles  of  Bomberg  (Yenice,  1546-48  and  1668),  of  Bin- 
torf  (Basie,  1617-19),  and  Frankfurter  (Amsterdam, 
1724-27),  under  the  title  of  ''tJin-^n  niS-f^E  T^p 
D'^ni:dn  b:?3,  but  also  in  five  editions  of  the  Bibie  bc- 
tween  1595  and  1653,  and  in  no  less  than  twenty  diifer' 
ent  editions  of  the  Pentateuch  between  tbe  years  15^ 
and  1804 — whereas  the  exegetical  part  was  not  puUi»h- 
ed  till  1805  at  Zolkiew,  and  again  in  1838  at  HanoTcr: 
^2)  W^^^Zi  nra^K,  a  celebrated  religious  codę,  to 
named  becauae  it  consists  of  four  parta  or  rofws,  respec- 
tively  denominated  D'''*n  rniX,  the  tray  o/Kfe;  n*'^ 
ny^T,  the  teacher  of  knowledge  \  "ITJH  "pS,  the  tlone  of 
help;  and  I5S'CT3fl  1tt;n,^A«  breasfplate  ofjustice,'*  It 
treats  of  the  ritual,  morał,  matrimoniaL  civil,  and  serial 
obsenrances  of  the  Jews,  and  is,  upon  the  whole,  a  yciy 
remarkable  work ;  for  a  Umo  it  evcn  supplanted  the  Jod 
Ha-Chezaka  of  the  renowned  Maimonides,  and  bccame 
the  text-book  of  Jc>vish  Rabbins  throughout  the  eniire 
known  world.  It  is  indispcnsable  to  the  student  of 
Jewish  antiquities,  and  we  rcfer  hcre  only  to  the  htst 
editions  that  have  been  published  of  this  work  (Ai^:;s- 
buTg,  1540;  Hanover,  1610).  He  died  in  134a  ^ 
Geiger,  Wistentchafil  Zeitung  IV  (Stuttg.  1889),  p.  Si^ó 
sq. ;  Grłitz,  Gesch.  </.  Juden,  vii,  346  sq. ;  FUrst,  £iUh(h. 
Jud,  ii,  10  8q. ;  Steinschneider,  CataL  Libr,  Ileir,  in  £3.- 
liofh.  Bodkuma,  coL  1181  sq.;  Kitto,  Cyckp.  BUL  Lii. 
ii,  452  sq. 

Jacob  ben-Chajim  brn-Isaac  Ibn-Aboioa. 
a  celebrated  Jewish  writer,  was  bom  at  Tunis  aboot 
1470.  During  the  persecutions  of  the  Jews  in  the  fint 
half  of  the  16th  centuiy  he  was  obliged  to  flee  his  na- 
tive  country,  and  he  went  to  Italy.  Afler  reśding  at 
Romę  and  (lorence  he  removed  to  Yenice,  and  engaged 
as  corrector  of  the  preas  proofs  of  the  celebrated  Boał- 
berg  cdition  of  the  Rabbinic  Bibie.  This  work  be  per- 
formed  with  great  ability,  and  he  ailerwaids  published 
a  second  cdition  of  this  Bibie  in  four  volumes  folio,  caS- 
ed  Bomberg*8  Second  Rabbinic  Bibie  (Yenice,  1524-26\ 
The  first  was  prepared  under  the  supenrision  of  Felir 
Pratensis  (q.  v.).  It  contains  the  Hcbrew  U-xt,  «ith 
the  Masorah,  the  Targums,  the  commcntarśes  of  serenl 
of  the  most  noted  early  Jewish  schoUrs,  and  oopioiu  io- 
troductions,  etc.,  by  the  editor  himsclf.  Jaoob  beiK 
Chajim  dcser\'cs  especial  credit  for  the  able  manner  in 
which  he  laborcd  on  the  Masorah  (q.  y.\  displaying  no 
smali  amount  of crudition,  sagadty,  and  patienoe.  With 
the  greatest  of  carc  he  sifted  the  indiffestible  materiał 
which  had  gathered  in  the  Ist  and  2d  centuiies,  and, 
having  brought  order  out  of  chaos,  he  inserted  it  npca 
the  maigin  of  his  edition  of  the  Babbinic  Bibie.    In  af- 


JACOB  BEN-ELEAZAR 


739 


JACOB  EMDEN 


ter  life  he  embnused  Christianity.  He  died  aboat  Łhe 
middle  of  the  16Łh  centuiy.  See  Kitto,  Joum.  Sac  LU, 
1863,  p.  521 ;  BibL  Cydop,  ii,  458 ;  Rossi,  Dizian.  ttorico 
de^  Auiori  Ehrei,  s.  v.;  FUnt,  BibliotA,  Jud,  ii,  17 
£ichhoni,  Einleit,  m  d  ^4.  T.  §  394.  See  Rabbinical 
BiBLES.      (J.H.W.) 

Jacob  ben-meazar,  a  Jewish  grammarian, 
fiourished  at  Toledo  in  the  fint  half  of  the  12th  oentu- 
ry.  He  distinguished  himself  by  a  work  entitled  ^CD 
Q^?ńl  (Łhe  book  of  oompletion),  which  inyestigates  the 
naturę  of  the  yowel-pointa  of  Hebrew,  and  alao  the  ety- 
molo^  of  pToper  Hebrew  names;  it  was  freely  uaed  by 
Kimchi,  as  la  proyed  by  frequent  citations.  "Jacob  ben- 
Eleazar  was  a  sound  grammarian,  laid  down  some  ex- 
oellent  rules  reapecting  the  Hebrew  Byntax,  and  matę- 
lialły  aided  the  devek>pment  of  philobgy  in  Spain  at  a 
time  when  Biblical  exege8i8  was  much  neglected  and 
the  study  of  the  Talmud  was  paramoant"  (Dr.  Gins- 
borg,  in  Kitto,  a.  v.)>  He  was  also  active  in  the  cor- 
rection  of  the  Hebrew  text  of  the  O.  Test,  and  for  this 
purpose  rdied  on  the  celebrated  Codex  Hillali  or  He- 
lali,  one  of  the  most  ancient  and  celebrated  Hebrew 
oodicea.  It  was  written,  according  to  some,  at  Hilla,  a 
town  built  near  the  ruins  of  the  ancient  Babd,  and 
hence  the  name  by  which  the  MS.  is  designated ;  oth- 
era,  howerer,  hołd  that  it  was  the  production  of  Rabbi 
Moses  ben-UilleL  It  bears  datę  from  the  beginning  of 
the  7th  oentnry,  according  to  Sakkuto,  who  in  his  day 
(circa  1500)  aaw  a  portion  of  the  Codex,  and  pronounced 
it  to  be  900  yeais  old,  and  cites  Kimchi  (Juchassm,  ed. 
Filipowski,  Lond.  1857,  p.  220)  as  saying  in  his  grammar 
on  Numh.  xv,  4,  that  the  Pentateiach  of  this  Codex  was 
in  his  day  extant  at  Toleda  The  probability  is  that  a 
greater  portion  of  it,  if  not  the  whole,  was  destroyed  at 
Leon,  in  Spain,  where  it  was  last  deposited,  during  the 
peraeciitions  of  the  Jews  and  the  destruction  of  all  Jew- 
iah  writuiga  in  1197.  Jacob  ben-£leazar'8  correction  of 
the  text  of  the  O.-T.  Scriptures  by  the  aid  of  this  cele- 
brated Codex  makes  it,  therefore,  doubly  yaluable  for  all 
critical  atudents  of  the  Hebrew  text.  See  Biesenthal 
and  Lebrechfs  Radicum  Liber  (Berlin,  1847),  p.  15,  26 ; 
Geiger,  in  Ozar  Neehmad  II  (Yienna,  1857),  p.  159  8q. ; 
Gracz,  Gesch,  d,  Juden,  yi,  132 ;  Kitto,  s.  v.    See  Manu- 

8CBIFT8,  BiBUCAL. 

Jacob  ben-Maohir  Tibboii.    See  Profiat. 

Jacob  ben-Meier.    See  Tam. 

Jacob  ben-Sheshet  Gbrundi,  a  celebrated 
Cabalist  who  fiourished  about  the  middle  of  the  ISth 
oentnry,  desenres  our  notice  because  of  his  efforts  to 
coonteract  the  influence  which  some  of  the  better  edu- 
cated  and  morę  liberal-minded  Jeyrish  Rabbins  of  the 
ISth  and  14th  centuries  exerted  in  behalf  of  the  intro- 
duction  of  a  philosophical  modę  of  interpretation  inau- 
gurated  by  the  renowned  Maimonides.  like  many 
others  of  his  conseryatiyc  brethren,  he  confronted  the 
liberals  with  harsh  terms  and  Iow  and  yulgar  epithets, 
«n<l  theieby  only  strengthened  the  cause  of  his  adyer- 
saries.  Thus  he  called  the  Maimonidists  ^  heretics  and 
transgressors  of  the  law,"  and  asserted  that  "  they  seek 
only  the  furtherance  of  the  temporal  good,  of  the  earth- 
ly  life,  the  defence  of  life  and  property,  but  deny  all  fu- 
turę rewards  and  punishments,**  etc  These  gross  mis- 
represenutions  are  oontained  in  a  work  which  he  pub- 
lished  in  defence  of  the  cabalistic  modę  of  interpreta- 
tion. See  Grtltz,  GeschichU  der  Judm,  yii,  85 ;  notę 
3,  p.  442-459.  See  Cabala  ;  Maimonides.  (J.  H. 
W.) 

Jacob  Baradsena.    See  Jacobites. 

Jacob  Berab,  a  Jewish  Rabbi,  bom  A.D.  1474  at 
Maqucda,  near  Toledo,  Spain,  was  obliged  by  persecu- 
tion  to  leaye  his  natiye  land  when  only  eighteen  years 
oUL  After  many^  yean  of  trayel  through  Egypt  to  Je- 
rosalem,  and  thence  to  Damascus,  he  at  last  found  a 
KSting-place  in  Safet  (about  1534),    Posaessing  a  laige 


fortunę  and  great  thirat  for  honor,  he  songht  distino- 
tion  among  his  Palestinian  brethren.  Favored  by  the 
Rabbins  of  his  own  iromediate  yicinity,  he  suoceeded 
in  re-establishing  (1588)  the  Sanhedrim  in  the  Holy 
Land,  which,  no  doubt,  he  intended  to  serye  as  the 
starting-point  for  the  re-establishment  of  the  Jewish 
kingdom.  Unfortunately,  howeyer,  for  the  Jewish  cause, 
tbere  was  higher  authority  at  Jerusalem  than  at  Safet; 
and  when  Benb  sought  a  reoonciliation  with  the  chief 
Rabbi,  Leyi  ben-Chabib,  by  appointing  him  next  in  au- 
thority, the  consummation  of  the  project  failed,  to  the 
great  detriment  of  Judaism  all  oyer  the  world.  A  con- 
troyersy  between  the  two  parties  ensued,  which  ended 
with  the  death  of  Berab  (January,  1541) ;  it  completely 
destroyed  the  hope  of  a  re-establishment  of  ordination 
and  of  a  Jewish  state.  See  GrUts,  Ge»ch,  d,  Juden,  ix, 
eh.  ix  and  x ;  Jost,  GettAidUe  cL  JudaUhums,  iii,  128  aą, 
See  Jews.     (J.H.W.) 

Jacob  Emden  Ashkenasi  (shortened  Jabez),  a 
Jewish  Rabbi  of  great  distincUon  among  the  Hebrews 
of  the  last  century,  was  bom  at  Amsterdam  in  1696.  He 
was  the  son  of  Chacham  Zewi,  another  Rabbi  of  the 
celebrated  Zewi  family.  Being  banished  from  their 
homes,  his  father's  family  sought  a  refuge  first  in  Po- 
land,  later  in  Morayia.  Possessed  of  a  considenble 
fortunę,  Jacob  deyoted  most  of  his  time  to  the  study 
of  the  Jewish  traditions,  to  the  excli]sion  of  all  secular 
studies,  which  he  coiisidered  likely  to  be  derogatory  to 
his  firm  belief  in  the  authenticity  of  Rabbinical  wńt- 
ings.  £yen  the  position  of  Rabbi,  which  was  freąuent- 
ly  offered  him,  he  hesitated  to  accept,  lest  it  should  in 
the  least  interfere  with  his  studies.  But,  once  persuaded 
to  assume  the  sacred  duties  at  Emden,  he  was  thereaf- 
ter  always  called  Jacob  Emden,  although  in  the  ofiicial 
papers  of  the  Danish  goyemment  he  is  called  HerscheL 
He  soon  retumed  to  priyate  life,  and  became  a  resi- 
dent  at  Altona  (about  1730),*  near  Hamburg.  But,  if 
Jacob  did  not  retain  an  official  position  in  the  syna- 
gogue,  he  ceirtainly  continued  to  work  actiyely  for  the 
good  of  Israel ;  and  as,  by  his  zeal  for  the  cause  of 
the  Jewish  religlon,  he  oftcn  censured,  both  by  pen  and 
tongue,  those  who  departed  from  the  old  and  wonted 
way,  he  tbjs  madę  it  possible  for  his  adyersarics,  of 
whoro,  like  his  father,  he  had  not  a  few,  to  stigmatize 
him  as  the  Jewish  **  grand  inquisitor,"  etc  If  Jacob 
Emden  eyer  desen^ed  to  be  ciiticised  for  improper  oon- 
duct,  it  is  for  his  relation  towards  Rabbi  EibeschUtz,  who 
was  his  competitor  for  the  rabbiship  of  the  Altona,  Ham- 
burg, and  Wandsbeck  congregations,  which  Jacob  did 
not  care  to  fili,  but  which  he  would  gladly  haye  had  the 
honor  to  decline.  (Gk)mpare  Gratz,  y,  397  sq.)  Em- 
den was  especially  seyere  against  all  the  Cabalists,  and 
many  were  the  books  that  he  issued  to  contradict  their 
teachings.  He  eyen  denied  the  authorship  of  some  of 
the  cabalistic  writings ;  thus  he  pronounced  the  book 
Zohar  to  be  a  spurious  production  of  his  own  century, 
etc.  He  placed  himself  in  a  yery  ridiculous  Ught  by  a 
judgment  which  he  gaye  on  Jewish  traditional  law,  upon 
which  the  adyice  of  Moses  Mendelssohn  had  also  been 
obtained,  and  in  which,  differing  from  this  great  man,  he 
addressed  him  morę  like  a  teacher  than  a  pupil.  Jacob 
Emden  died  in  1776.  One  of  his  pupils  was  the  celebrated 
Samuel  Dubno.  His  writings,  according  to  his  own  state- 
ment,  coyer  no  less  than  34  different  works.  The  most 
important  of  them  are  his  contributions  to  the  history  of 
the  fanatics  of  the  last  centur>',  known  as  the  followers 
ofSabbataiZewi  (q.v.).  They  are,  5ai3  n?*^^  "iJUtp 
'^IS,  taken  from  the  celebrated  polemical  work  by  Ja- 
cob'Sasportas,  on  the  sad  fate  of  Sabbatai  Zewi  (Amst. 
1737,  4to) :— tóiffllśil  O,  the  most  ably  conducted  po- 
lemic  against  Zoharites  and  Sabbatians,  consisting  of 
different  brochures  (Alton.  1758, 4to) :— nisjjjn  n'nin, 
another  collection  against  S.  Zewi  and  his  followers  (Al- 
tona, 1752, 4to) :— i-ią-^ąn  nńiK  by:  nasion,  on  the 
Sabbatians  who  espoused  the  Christian  faith  (Altona, 


JACOB,  HENRY 


740 


JACOBI 


1757, 870).  Ot  his  other  works,  the  most  able  are,  per- 
hapfl)  rnia!^  "^^yC*  ©n  the  Tempie  seryice,  the  sacrifloe, 
etc  (AltOM7l746-69,8vo ;  extnu:t  by  S.Deutach,Pre8b. 
1835,  8vo) :— D"??©  '^tJ^SCi  firat  part  of  a  great  work 
on  the  Jewiah  ńtual  (Altona,  1745, 8vo,  and  often)  :— 
niSM  VC,  the  Mishnic  tract  Abothfi^ith  oommentaries 
by  celebrated  Jewiah  Barana,  etc  (Amst  1751, 4to) ;  etc 
See  GrUtz,  Gewh,  d.  Juden,  x  (Index) ;  Jost,  G^śch,  d,  Ju- 
detuhuffu,  iii,  194, 252, 808 ;  FUnt,  BibUołh,  Jud,  i,  241  są. 
(contains  a  list  of  all  his  writinga) ;  Sam.  Dabno,  ^^M 
T^n*'  (Beri.  1776, 8vo) ;  Fttret,  Jacob  Emdm  \ń  the  Lib, 
d.  Ór.,  1846,  c  442.  See  Luzatto;  Jkwb  (Modebk). 
(J.H.W.) 

Jacob,  Henry,  an  English  Nonconfonnist,  was  bom 
in  the  county  of  Kent  in  the  seoond  half  of  the  16th 
centiuy.  He  was  educated  at  St.  Maxy'8  Hall,  Oxford. 
He  had  secured  the  living  of  Cheńton,  a  place  in  his  na- 
tive  county,  but  appearing  before  the  public  in  print  as 
an  advocate  of  a  reform  of  the  English  Church  ("Rea- 
Bons  proving  the  Necessity  of  Reforming  our  Chnrches 
in  England,"  Lond.  1604),  he  was  deprired  of  his  parish, 
and  even  obliged  to  flee  the  country.  After  residing 
some  time  in  Holland  he  retumed  to  England,  and 
founded  the  first  Independent  (CongregatioiiLl)  church 
in  that  country.  See  Independents.  In  1624  he  em- 
igrated  to  Yirginia,  and  here  he  died  soon  after  his  ar- 
riva].  Henry  Jaoob  was  an  exten8iye  writer,  but  his 
writings  are  almost  without  exception  of  a  polemical 
naturę,  and  at  present  veiy  scarcc  The  most  impor- 
'  tant  are,  a  reply  to  bishop  Bil80n*s  Sermom  on  Redtmp- 
łion  (preached  in  1597,  pubL  1598,  8vo),  entitled  Trea- 
tise  on  the  Sufferwffs  and  Yidory  0/ Christ  (Lond.  1598, 
8vo),  and  Drfence  of  the  same  (1600, 4to).  See  Strype, 
Li/e  of  Whitgift ;  Allibone,  Diet,  of  A  utk,  i,  948 ;  Hook, 
Ikxles,Biog,  viy'27S, 

Jaoob,  Stephen,  a  Methodist  Episcopal  minister, 
was  bom  at  Argyle,  N.  Y.,  Feb.  23, 1789 ;  was  conyerted 
in  Feb.  1810 ;  entered  the  itinerancy  in  June,  1812 ;  was 
superannuated  in  1818 ;  and  died  April  24, 1819.  He 
was  a  zealous,  acceptable,  and  useful  preacher,  and  de- 
YOtedly  plous. — Minutea  of  ConferenceSf  i,  827. 

Jacobi,  Friedrich  Heinrich,  one  of  Germany'» 
most  eminent  philosophers,  was  bom  at  Dusseldorf  Jan- 
uary 25, 1748.  His  father  was  a  wealthy  merchant,  and, 
anxious  to  be  assisted  by  his  son,  he  designed  him  for 
the  mercantile  profession.  When  only  8ixteen  years 
old,  Jacobi  was  sent  to  Frankfort  on  the  Main  to  Icam 
the  business.  But  he  daily  evinced  fondncBs  for  a  lit- 
erary  profession,  and  a  short  time  after,  having  removed 
to  Geneya,  he  was  fiirther  incited  to  study  by  associ- 
ation  with  leamed  men,  among  whom  was  the  great 
mathematician  Le  Sagc  The  death  of  his  father  obliged 
him  to  return  to  Dusseldorf,  to  look  after  the  business 
intercsts  of  the  family.  He,  howerer,  at  the  same 
time,  continued  his  studies,  which  were  now  becoming 
multifarious,  not  to  say  contradictory,  and,  according  to 
one  of  his  biographers,  **  presented  the  strange  appear- 
ance  of  a  philosophical  composite,  including  in  his  sin- 
gle personality  the  quadmple  rariety  of  an  enlightened 
18th  century  man,  a  mystic,  an  athebt,  and  a  theist," 
Appointed  a  member  of  the  Exchequer,  he  had  much 
morę  leisure  afforded  him  than  while  at  the  head  of  his 
father'8  business,  and  he  now  not  only  gave  himself  up 
to  study,  but  also  to  authorship,  to  which  he  had  been 
encouraged  by  his  literary  associates,  among  whom  fig- 
ured  some  of  Germany's  most  noted  names.  His  first 
productions  were  a  collection  of  letters  by  an  imaginary 
person  named  Allwill,  and  a  romance  called  "  Woldemar" 
(1777,  and  often),  which,  like  some  of  the  productions  of 
his  friend  and  present  assodate  Gothe,  incorporated  the 
philosophical  opinions  of  the  writer.  Brought  morę 
prominently  to  the  notice  of  the  govemracnt,  he  was 
houored  with  a  financial  position  in  the  8tate's  service, 
and  he  remored  to  Munich.  But  his  unhesitating  ex- 
posures  of  the  imprudence  and  injurious  tendency  of  the 


Bayarian  sjrstem  of  finanoe  madę  him  many  enemie^^ 
and  he  retired  to  his  estate  at  Pempelf6rt,'iiear  Dtłs- 
sddoTf,  where  his  hospitable  naturę  aoon  gathend  aboiit 
him  *^  celebrated  guests  finom  all  ąnarters  of  the  cnlliva- 
ted  world,"  and  it  was  only  natnral  that  he  should  ww 
continue  his  literary  productions.  Among  other  liter- 
ary enterprises  which  he  yentured  upon  was  a  contro- 
yezsy  with  Mendelssohn  (in  Britfe  Ober  <f.  Lekn  d  Spi- 
noza [BresL  1785,  and  often])  on  the  doctrines  that  had 
been  adyocated  by  the  pantheist  Spinoza,  whoee  phiks- 
ophy  had  at  this  time  been  almost  foiigotten.  This 
he  further  and  most  ably  prosecuted  in  Wider  Mendeb- 
»ohn8  Beschuldiffuagm  (Lpz.  1786) ;  (comp.  Kahnia,  Iliri, 
of  Gemum  Protettcmtism,  p.  156  sq.).  It  was  this  con- 
troyersy  with  Mendelssohn,  which  had  originated  with 
the  discoyery  by  Jacobi  that  the  friend  of  the  forroer, 
Lessing,  the  author  of  Nathan,  was  a  Spinoztft,  which 
Menddssohn  was  detemined  to  refnte,  but  which  actn- 
ally  laid  eyen  the  latter  open  to  the  chaige  of  adroct- 
ting  panthebtical  doctrines,  that  first  brought  deariy  to 
light  the  philosophical  opinions  of  Jacobi,  and  sUmped 
him  as  the  <' philosopher  of  faith."  The  pointa  of  Ji- 
cobi*s  position  are  thus  stated  by  Schwegler  {History  0/ 
PkUoMopky,  transl.  by  Seelye,  p.  272) :  «  (1.)  Spinodsn 
is  fatalism  and  atheism ;  (2.)  Eyeiy  path  of  philoeopbie 
demonstration  leads  to  fatalism  and  atheism ;  (8.)  In  or- 
der that  we  may  not  fali  into  these,  we  most  set  a  limit 
to  demonstrating,  and  recognise  faith  as  the  element  of 
all  metaphysical  knowledge."  Principles  like  the»e,  ad- 
yocated at  a  time  when  atheism  was  enthrcmed  all  orer 
Germany  and  France,  naturally  enough  aitnised  unirend 
oppońtion  in  the  philosophical  world.  **  It  was  charged 
upon  him  that  he  was  an  enemy  of  reason,  a  preacher 
of  blind  faith,  a  despiser  of  science  and  of  philosophr.  a 
fanatic  and  a  papist.*'  To  controyert  thcse  opinions'.  he 
detemiined  to  deyelop  his  principle  of  faith  or  immedi- 
ate  knowledge ;  he  published  DaridJTume  Ubar  d.  Glmt- 
ben,  oder  Idealitmtu  u.  Realigmas  (BresL  1787,  8to).  This 
brought  down  upon  him  the  followera  of  Kant,  and 
shortly  after  he  also  estranged  the  admirers  of  Fichte  by 
hia  Sendtchreiben  an  Fichte  (1799).  His  contrcn-enial 
opponents,  howeyer,  neyer  failed  to  acknowledge  the 
great  abilities  of  Jacobi,  and  the  sincerity  of  his  charac- 
ter  and  opinions.  When  the  troubles  arising  out  of  tbe 
French  Reyolution  extended  to  Germany,  Jacobi  retired 
to  Holstein,  whence  he  remoyed  succeasiyely  to  Wands- 
beck  and  Hamburg;  ftom  tbe  latter  he  wis  ca]kd.ia 
1804,  to  Munich,  to  assist  in  the  formation  of  the  r.cw 
Academy  of  Sciences,  of  which  he  was,  in  1807,  appoint- 
ed president  In  1811  he  further  inyolred  himself  in  a 
controyersy  with  another  philoflophical  school,  that  of 
Schelling,  by  the  publication  of  a  work  Von  d.ff6ttHchen 
Dingen  u.  ihrtr  Offenbarunp  (Lpz.  181 1).  This  time  the 
dispute  was  waged  rather  bitterly ;  but,  notwithetandinf; 
the  unfayorable  estimate  which  Schelling  drew,  in  his 
reply,  of  the  literary  and  philosophical  merits  of  Jacobi, 
the  latter  continued  to  maintain  a  high  nnk  among 
sinccre  and  honest  inąuirers  after  tnith ;  and  even  if 
it  must  be  confessed  that  Jacobi  was  exclDflByeIy  o^• 
cupied  with  detached  speculations,  and  that  he  ńthcr 
prepared  than  established  a  system  of  philosophy,  jtt 
it  remaiiu  undisputed  that  the  profoondness  and  cvi|:- 
inality  of  his  yiews  haye  fumished  roaterials  of  which 
morę  systematic  minds  haye  not  scrapled  to  ayail  them- 
selyes  for  the  constmction  of  their  own  theońei.  Ja- 
cobi died  at  Munich  March  10, 1819.  Besidcs  the  iihO- 
osophical  productions  abeady  mentioned,  be  wnte  Cther 
d.  Untemekmm  d  Kriticismuś  d,  Vennmft  t,  YerttaiA 
zu  bringm  (BresL  1802,  8yo).  All  his  works  were  pub- 
lished collectiyely  at  Leipzig  in  1812.  **  Jacobi  stood  to 
the  philosophy  of  his  day,  as  it  had  flowed  down  froin 
Kant  to  Schelling,  in  a  yery  pecuUar  reladon.  He  wu 
incited  by  each  of  these  systems :  he  leamed  from  rach, 
and  on  each  of  them  he  exerdsed  his  strength.  But  be 
was  not  satisfied  by  either  of  them ;  yet  he  was  most 
strongly  repelled  by  pantheism,  whether  tbe  earUer  pan- 
theism  of  Spinoza,  whom  he  highly  esteemed  as  a  mai^ 


JACOBI 


741 


JACOBITES 


or  its  later  form  in  ScheUing*8  natiiral  philosopby.  .  .  . 
Jaoobi  did  not  despiae  reason;  he  rather  pleaded  for  it; 
bat  reason  was  not  to  him  a  facolty  for  the  creation,  di»- 
CDvery,  or  production  of  truth  from  itself.  By  reason 
be  meant,  acoording  to  tbe  derivation  of  Łbe  word,  that 
wbich  perceiyes,  tbe  inmost  and  original  sense.  He  did 
not  r^ard  reason  and  faitb  as  being  in  conflict  witb  eacb 
otber,  but  as  one.  Faitb  inwardly  suppUes  wbat  knowl- 
edge  cannot  gain.  Herę  Jacobi  united  witb  Kant  in 
acknowledging  tbe  insofficiency  of  our  knowledge  to 
produoe  a  demonstration  of  God  and  divine  tbinga.  .  .  . 
But  tbe  yacant  pbioe  wbicb  Kant  bad  tberefore  left  in 
bis  system  for  divine  tbinga  .  .  .  Jacobi  filled  up  by  tbe 
doctrine  of  faitb"  (Hursfs  Hagenbach,  Ck,  Jlist.  ISth  and 
19/A  Cent,  ii,  238  8q.).  Tbe  wbole  pbilosopby  of  Jaoobi 
13  perbapa  best  stated  tbus :  '^  Ali  demonstrative  systems 
must  necessaiily  lead  to  fataUsm,  wbicb,  boweyer,  is  ir- 
leconcilable  witb  man'8  consciousness  of  tbe  freedom  of 
bis  rational  naturę.  Tbe  generał  system  of  naturę,  in- 
deed,  and  man  bimself,  so  far  as  be  is  a  part  of  tbat  sys- 
tem, is  puie  mecbanism;  but  in  man  tbere  is  unąues- 
tionably  an  energy  wbich  transoends  and  is  superior  to 
sense,  or  tbat  faculty  wbicb  is  bound  up  witb  and  regu- 
lated  by  tbe  laws  of  naturę.  Tbis  bigber  energy  is  lib- 
erty  or  reason,  and  consequently  sense  and  reason  re- 
yeai  to  man  two  distinct  spberes  of  bis  activity — tbe 
sensible  or  yisible  world,  and  tbe  inyisible  or  intelli- 
gible.  Tbe  existence  of  tbeae  worlds  no  morę  admits 
of  demonstratiye  proof  tban  tbat  of  sense  and  reason 
tbemselyes.  Now  sense  and  reason  are  tbe  supremę 
and  ultimate  principles  of  all  intellectual  operations,  and 
as  sucb  legitimize  them,  wbile  tbey  tbemselyes  do  not 
receiye  tbeir  legitimization  from  augbt  else;  and  tbe 
existence  of  sense  and  reason  necessaiily  implies  tbe  ex- 
istence  of  sensible  and  intelligible  objects  about  wbicb 
tbey  are  conyersant.  But  tbis  existing  system  of  tbings 
cannot  baye  originally  proceeded  eitber  from  naturę  or 
ftom  man*s  intellect  or  reason,  for  botb  naturę  and  tbe 
buman  mind  are  finite  and  condidonate,  and  tbere  must 
be  sometbing  infinite  and  unconditionate,  superior  to 
and  independent  botb  of  naturę  and  man,  to  be  tbe 
source  and  principle  of  all  tbings.  Tbis  being  is  God. 
Now  as  man's  liberty  consists  in  bis  personality  or  ab- 
solute  indiyidoality,  for  tbis  constitutes  bis  proper  e»- 
sence,  wbile  tbe  mecbanism  of  naturę  is  bereby  distin- 
guisbed  from  man,  tbat  nonę  of  its  members  are  indi- 
ridual  of  cbaracter,  tberefore  tbat  wbicb  is  superior  botb 
to  naturę  and  to  man  must  be  perfectly  and  supremely 
indi vidual ;  God  conseąuently  is  one  only,  and  strictly 
personaL  Moreoyer,  as  tbe  ground  of  all  subsistence, 
be  cannot  be  witbout  subsistence;  and  as  tbe  principle 
of  reason,  be  cannot  be  irrationaL  Of  tbe  esistence  of 
tbis  diyine  intelligence,  boweyer,  all  direct  proof  is  as 
impoasible  as  a  demonstration  of  existenoe  simply.  Gen- 
erally,  indeed,  notbing  can  be  known  except  upon  testi- 
mony,  and  wbateyer  rests  on  testimony  h  not  certainty, 
hatjaiłhf  and  sucb  a  faitb  or  belief,  wben  its  object  is  the 
exijstence  of  a  good  and  supremę  being,  is  religion."  It 
is  apparent,  then,  tbat  Jacobi  may  appropriately  be  look- 
ed  upon  as  an  adyocate  of  religion,  but  by  no  means  can 
he  be  admitted  to  baye  been  a  ChristUm  pbilosopher ; 
for,  altbougb  be  belieyed  in  a  reyebition  of  God,  he  was 
"far  from  taking  sides  witb  the  belieyers  of  reyelation, 
in  the  ecdesiastical  sense  of  tbe  word."  If  it  is  proper 
to  class  tbe  influence  of  Jacobi^s  pbilosopby  witb  that 
of  Fichte  and  Scbelling,  as  Farrar  {CrUical  Hiatory  of 
Free  Thought,  p.  288)  does,  it  is  well  at  least  to  concede 
that  these  pbilosopbical  systems  aU  together  certainly 
*'formed  one  claas  of  influences,  wbich  were  operating 
about  the  bcginning  of  tbe  18th  centuiy,  and  were  tend- 
ing  to  redcem  alike  German  literaturę  and  tbeology." 
''Their  first  effect  was  to  produce  examination  of  tbe 
primary  principles  of  belief,  and  to  excite  inąuiry ;  and, 
thongb  at  first  only  re-enforcing  tbe  idea  of  morality, 
they  nltimately  drew  men  out  of  tbemselyes  into  aspira- 
tions  afber  the  infinite  spirit,  and  deyeloped  the  sense  of 
dependence,  of  bumility,  of  anselfisbness,  of  spirituality. 


They  produced,  indeed,  eyil  efibcts  in  pantheism  and 
ideology,  but  tbe  results  were  partial,  tbe  good  was  gen- 
erał. The  problem, Wbat  is  truth?  was  througb  tbeir 
means  remitted  to  men  for  reconsideration ;  the  answers 
to  it  elicited  from  the  one  scbool,  It  is  tbat  wbich  I  can 
know ;  from  the  otber,  It  is  tbat  wbicb  I  can  intuitiye- 
ly  feel,  threw  men  upon  those  unalterable  and  infallible 
instincts  wbich  God  bas  set  in  the  buman  breast  as  the 
eyerlasting  landmarks  of  truth,  the  study  of  wbich  lifts 
men  ułtimateły  out  of  error."  One  of  tbe  most  cde- 
brated  adyocates  of  these  .yiews  of  Jacobi  we  find  in 
Scbieiermacber  (compare  Hagenbach,  ii,  832  są.,  839), 
thougb,  of  course,  the  former  only  prepared  the  way  for 
tbe  latter;  and,  indeed,  tbis  ''faitb  pbilosopby,"  "  witb 
some  sligbt  modifications  in  eacb  case,  conseąuent  upon 
tbeir  pbilosopbical  S3rstem,"  is  tbe  theory  not  only  of 
Jacobi  and  of  Scbieiermacber,  but  also  of  Nitzsch,  Man- 
sel  (autbor  of  '^Limits  of  Religioua  Thoaght**),  and 
probably,  also,  of  tbe  Sootch  philosopber  Hamilton 
(compare  Cocker,  ChrittiaaUy  oaid  Greek  PkHosophy, 
p.  70  sq.).  See  Herbst,  Bioffraphie  in  tbe  BibUo^ek 
chrisdicher  Denker  (Leipz.  1830),  i ;  Max  Jacobi,  Brirf'- 
wecheel  zwitchm  Góthe  v.  Fr,  H.  Jaoobi  (Leipz.  1846) ; 
Geryinus,  Geschichte  d.  poeL  Not.  LU.  d.  DetUschen  (8d 
edit.),  iy,  556  8q.;  Chalybnus,  ffist,  Spead.  PhU,  p.  60 
8q.;  Ersch  u.  Gruber,  AUgem.  Encyhlop,;  Englisk  Cy^ 
clop,B,v, 

Jacobites  is  tbe  name  by  wbich  the  different  com- 
munities  in  Syria,  Mesopotamia,  and  Babylonia,  who  hołd 
to  the  Monophysite  doctrine,  łiaye  been  known  sińce 
tbeir  union,  about  tbe  middle  of  the  6tb  century.  See 
EuTYCHiANiSM ;  MoNOPHYsiTES.  Tbc  most  prominent 
party  in  accompliabing  tbe  union  of  these  Monophy- 
sites,  who,  near  the  middle  of  the  6th  century,  were 
yery  weak,  and  threatened  witb  extermination,  was  Ja- 
cob  (or  James)  Albardai,  or  Baradsus  (or  Zanzalus),  a 
zeałous  disciple  of  Seyerus,  a  monk  and  presby ter  of  the 
conyent  of  PhasilŁa,  near  Ńisibis,  and  it  is  after  tbis  Ja- 
cob  tbat  the  united  Monophysites  were  named  after 
tbeir  union,  and  not,  as  some  baye  supposed,  afler 
James,  tbe  brotber  of  Christ,  or  Jacob  tbe  patriarch,  or 
afler  Diosoorus,  who  was  called  Jacob  before  bis  ordina- 
tion.  It  is  true,  boweyer,  that  these  communities  are 
sometimes  designated  as  the  Seyerians,  Dioscorians,  £u- 
tychians,  and  eyen  as  the  Theodosians  (for  tbe  Egyptian 
Monophysites,  see  Copts;  for  the  Armenian,  see  Ar- 
MENiAN  Giiurch:  sud  for  tbe  Abyssinian,  see  Abyssin- 
lAN  Church).  Tbe  sumames  of  Jacob  who  united  tbe 
Monophysites,  boweyer,  baye  no  bearing  on  his  relation 
to  tbe  sects,  but  are  strictly  personal.  Tbus  the  coarse- 
ness  of  tbe  dress  in  wbicb  be  trayelled  througb  the  East 
for  tbe  benefit  of  bis  party  (says  D'Herbelot,  Bibliotheque 
Orientale,  p.  435)  gained  him  tbe  name  of  Baradai  (i.  e. 
a  coarse  borse-^nibe< ;  compare  Aseemani,  ii,  66,  414; 
Makrizi,  Geschichte  der  Kopien,  edited  by  WUstenfeld ; 
Eutychius,  ArmaUSf  ed.  Pococke,  ii,  144,  147).  Jacob 
was  madę  bisbop  of  Edessa  in  541,  and  then,  says  Dr. 
Schaff  (Ch,  Hiatory f  iii,  775), "  tbis  remarkable  man  de- 
yoted  bimself  for  seyen  and  tbirty  years  witb  unwea^ 
ried  zeal  to  the  interests  of  the  persecuted  Monophy- 
sites. '  Łight  footed  as  Asahel'  (2  Sam.  ii,  18),  and  in 
tbe  garb  of  a  beggar,  he  joumeyed  hither  and  tbither 
amid  the  greatest  dangers  and  priyations;  reriyed  the 
patriarchate  of  Antioch ;  ordained  bishops,  priests,  and 
deacons;  organized  churobes;  beałed  divisions;  and 
tbus  sayed  tbe  Monophysite  body  from  impending  ex- 
tinction."    He  died  in  578. 

"The  Jacobitea  baye  always  protested  against  being 
considered  followere  of  Eutyches;  but,  wbile  tbey  pro- 
fesa  to  anathematize  that  beresiarch,  tbey  merely  re- 
ject  some  minor  opinions  of  his,  and  hołd  fast  bis  great 
distingulshing  error  of  tbe  absorption  of  tbe  bumanity 
of  our  Sayiour  in  bis  diyine  naturę.  They  tbink  that 
in  the  incamation,  from  two  natures  tbere  resulted  one. 
In  otber  words,  they  belieye  that  tbe  Redeemer  does 
not  possess  two  natures,  but  one  composed  of  two,  illus- 
trating  tbeir  dogma  in  tbis  way :  *  Glass  is  madę  of  sand ; 


JACOBITES 


742 


JACOBITES 


but  the  whole  u  only  glasa,  no  longer  sand :  thus  the 
dirine  nattue  of  ChrUt  has  abaorbed  the  human,  so  that 
[the  two  have  become  one.' "  A  middle  way  between 
Eutychuinism  and  orthodosy  was  chosen  by  Xenaya8 
(q.  V.)  and  bis  achool,  who  on  the  incarnation  maintain 
*<  the  existence  in  Christ  of  one  naturę,  compoeed  of  the 
divinity  and  humanity,  but  witbout  oonveraion,  confu- 
sion,  or  comniixture.  He  teachea  that  the  Son,  one  of 
the  Trinity,  united  himself  with  a  human  body  and  a 
rational  soul  in  the  womb  of  the  Yirgin.  His  body  had 
no  being  before  this  union.  'In  this  he  was  bom,  in  it 
he  was  nourished,  in  it  he  suffered  and  died.  Yet  the 
divine  naturę  of  the  Son  did  not  suffer  or  die.  Nor  was 
his  human  naturę,  or  his  agency,  or  death,  merely  ris- 
ionary,  as  the  Phantasmists  taught,  but  actual  and  reaL 
Moreover,  the  diyine  naturę  was  not  changed  or  trans- 
muted  into  the  human,  or  commijced  or  confused  there- 
with ;  neither  was  the  human  naturę  conyerted  into  the 
divine,  nor  commixed  or  confused  with  it;  but  an  ad- 
unation  of  the  two  natures  took  place,  of  a  modę  equiv- 
alent  to  that  which,  by  the  union  of  body  and  soul, 
makes  a  human  being;  for  as  the  soul  and  body  are 
united  in  one  human  naturę,  so,  from  the  union  of  the 
Godhead  and  manhood  of  our  Lord  Jesus  Christ,  there 
has  arisen  a  naturę  pecuUar  to  itself,  not  simple,  but  com- 
plex ;  '  one  double  naturę.'  **  Herę  is  evidently  main- 
tained  a  distinction  from  the  Eutychians  that  the  flesh 
ot  Christ  taken  from  the  Yirgin  was  actual  and  real, 
and  united  with  the  divine  in  Christ,  "  without  confu- 
sion,  change,  or  diyision;"  and  from  the  orthodox,  in 
holding  that,  afler  the  union,  the  two  natures  united 
in  one,  losing  their  distinctiyeness.  This  yiew  of  Xe- 
nayas,  says  Etheridge  (Sortem  Churchea^  p.  143),  seems 
to  be  at  present  the  doctrine  of  the  Jacobites ;  but,  as 
the  laity  is  yery  moderatdy  educated,  this  remark  ap- 
plies  only  to  the  clergy.  As  an  indication  tliat  they 
haye  only  an  imperfect  idea  on  this  point,  Etheridge 
cites  thcir  usage  of  "^  making  the  sign  of  the  cross  with 
only  the  middle  finger  of  their  hand,  holding  the  others 
80  as  to  render  them  inyisible,."  eyincing  thereby  that 
the  whole  subject  is  to  them  an  unsolyed  mystery. 

Like  the  Greek  Church,  the  Jacobites,  as  a  rulc,  deny 
the  procession  ofiht  Holy  Ghosł  from  the  Son,  holding, 
howeyer,  to  the  orthodox  doctrine  of  the  personality 
and  deity. 

Sacramenfs.—Jt  is  generally  bdieyed  that  the  Jaco- 
bites, with  the  Boman  Catholics,  hołd  to  the  septenary 
number  on  the  sacraments,  but  Etheridge  says  (p.  144) 
that  "  this  must  be  taken  in  a  ąualilied  sensc,  as  they 
haye  no  distinct  seryice  of  confirmation,  nor  do  they 
use  extreme  unction,  unless  it  be  sometimes  imparted 
to  members  of  the  priesthood.  Auricular  confession, 
too,  is  scarcely  known  among  them.  And  in  the  Eu- 
charist,  while  they  profess  to  recognise  the  real  preaence, 
it  must  not  be  understood  in  the  Papite  sense  of  tran- 
Bubstantiation,  but  the  presence  of  the  Sayiour  which 
accompanies,  in  an  undescribed  manner,  the  elements 
of  the  bread  and  winę :  a  species  of  consubstantiation, 
illustrated  by  Bar  Salib  (in  Matt.  xxyiii,  Codd,  Syr. 
CUment,  Vatic.  16,  foL  29)  under  the  idea  of  iron  in 
union  with  fire,  and  receiying  ftom  it  the  properties  of 
light  and  heat,  while  its  own  naturę  remains  unaltered" 
(comp.  Bar-Hebrseus,  Menoralh  Kudshi,  ot  the  "  Lamp 
of  the  Saints,"  fundam.  yi,  sect  2).  At  the  celebration 
of  the  Eucharist  they  administer  newly-made  unleay- 
ened  bread  (Bodiger,  howeyer,  in  Herzog,  Recd-Ency- 
klopadie,  yi,  400,  asserts  that  they  use  leavened  bread), 
commLxed  with  salt  and  oil,  and  of  both  kinds,  but  gen- 
erally dipping,  like  the  Nestorians,  the  cake  into  the 
winę.  The  sacrament  of  baptism  they  are  said,  but 
yery  improbably,  to  haye  performed  by  imprinting  on 
the  subject  (of  course  infanta),  with  a  buming  iron,  the 
figurę  of  the  cross,  on  some  part  of  the  body,  generally 
the  arm,  sometimes  eyen  the  face. 

The  doctrine  oipurgaiory  they  wholly  ignore,  though 
it  is  true  they  follow  the  Syrian  custom  in  praying  for 
their  dead. 


Desootf.— Their  origin  they  attempt  to  tracę  lineally 
from  the  first  Hebrew  Christiana.  Dr.  Wolff  (J(wnuŻ^ 
1889)  says,  *<  They  cali  themselyes  the  Bnay  Igrad  (tbe 
children  of  Israel),  whose  ancestors  were  conyerted  by 
the  apostle  James;"  and  condnues,  that  ** there  cancut 
be  the  least  doubt  that  their  claim  to  being  the  de- 
scendants  of  the  Jewish  Christians  of  old  is  just.  Tbeir 
physiognomy,  modę  of  wocship,  their  atuchment  to  the 
Mosaic  law,  their  liturgy,  their  tradition,  so  similar  to 
the  Jewish,  the  technical  terma  in  their  theolog}*.  sil 
proye  that  they  are  real  descendants  of  Abraham.'' 
They  certainly  foUowed  the  JewB  at  one  time  in  mb- 
jecting  their  małe  members  to  dreumcision  (comp.  Sa- 
Ugniac,  Itinerancy,  yiii,  c.  i).  One  thing  is  peculiarij 
characteristic  of  the  Jacobites — they  practise  the  adora- 
tion  of  the  sunta,  and  particularly  worahip  the  mother 
of  Christ.  As  teachers  and  saints,  they  reyere  some  of 
the  most  prominent  actors  in  the  Church  History  of  the 
early  centuries,  particularly  Jacob  of  Sarfig,  Jacob  of 
Edesea,  Dioscorus,  Seyerus,  P.  Fullo,  and  Jacob  Bata- 
dseus ;  but  Eutyches  they  ignore.  (Compare  Asscnuini, 
BibL  Orient,  ii,  diss.  de  Monophys.  §  8  and  10;  Bcnau- 
dot,  Higt,  Pairiarch,  A  fer.  p.  138*  sq. ;  id.  IMuiy.  ii,  m\ 

The  Jacobites  also  impose  upon  themselyes  cxeeeaive 
faslM:  ''fiye  annual  lenta,  during  which  both  the  der- 
gy  aud  the  laity  abstain  not  only  from  fleah  or  e^:|*8, 
but  eyen  from  the  taste  of  winę,  of  oil,  and  of  fish"  ((^ib- 
bon,  Dedine  and  FaU  of  the  Boman  Empire^  iy,  551; 
comp.  La  Croze,  Christianisme  de  PEthiopie,  p.  S52). 

Their  dergy  are  consrituted  on  the  model  of  a  perfcct 
hierarchy.  "Extremely  tcnacious  of  their  ecclcsio- 
tical  status  in  this  particular,  they  glory  in  an  apostoi- 
ical  snccession  from  St  Peter  as  the  first  bishop  of  Anti- 
och,  and  exhibit  what  they  hołd  to  be  an  unbmkea 
series  of  morę  than  180  bishops  of  that  see  from  his  óaj 
to  our  own."  This  assertion  they  mtks  in  the  face  of 
the  fact  that  they  only  started  in  the  6th  centuiy  noder 
Jacob,  but  they  certainly  ought  to  enjoy  the  same  priv- 
ileges  with  all  other  churches  that  lay  claim  to  a  dimt 
aposłolie  tuccessum  (q.  y.). 

By  the  side  of  the  patriarch,  who  holds  tlie  highest 
Office  in  the  Church,  there  is  a  seoondary  officer  at  th« 
head  of  the  Eastem  Jacobites,  the  Maphrian  (Srriaf, 
ŁOjnip?,  Ł  e.  the  fructificr),  or  Primas  Orientis,  whc« 
mission  it  is  to  ordain  bishops,  and  ałao  to  oonsecrgte 
the  patriarch  dect  by  the  laying  on  of  handa.  He  oc- 
cupies,  to  a  certain  degree,  the  same  pońtion  as  the 
now  ol)8olete  Katholikos  {CaihoUc)  of  the  Nest^trian 
Church,  and  is  sometimes  designated  by  that  iuiiii& 
He  rcsides  at  Mosul,  and  his  jurisdiction  extends  orer 
the  Jacobites  of  the  East  residuig  beyond  the  Tigiis 
and  a  portion  of  Mesopotamia ;  the  rest  of  Hesopotf 
mia,  Asia  proper,  Phoenicia,  Palestine,  Ciłicia,  and  Ar- 
menia are  under  the  immediate  controł  of  the  patriarch 
of  Aiitioch.  (On  Ordination^  see  Etheridge,  Syr.  Ci.  p. 
147  sq.)  With  the  diocese  of  the  patriarch  there  conw 
in  contact  the  patriarchate  of  the  Copts  (q.  v.),  «<!  of 
late  years  both  churches  haye  sustained  a  bishop  at  Je- 
rusolem. 

The  Jacobites  are  distinguished  for  the  number  of 
their  conrents,  from  which,  as  is  the  custom  in  all  the 
Eastem  churches,  the  higher  officers  of  the  Chaich  are 
an  chosen.  These  institutions  are,  perhaps  for  this  rea- 
son  also,  under  the  superyision  of  the  bishops. 

At  the  time  of  ita  greatest  prosperity  the  Jacobite 
Church  produced  many  men  remarkablc  for  the  pro- 
foundness  of  their  yiews,  their  teachings,  and  their  writ- 
ings.  No  less  than  150  arcbbishops  and  bishop«  hare 
been  counted  in  the  different  ages  of  the  sect,  of  whom 
an  account  is  giyen  in  tlie  second  part  of  J.  G.  Asatma- 
ni's  Bibiiotkeca  Orienfalis,  The  most  emuient  of  them 
are  John,  bishop  of  Asta ;  Thomas  of  Harkel,  who,  in  the 
beginning  of  the  7th  century,  reyiaed  the  Phik)xenian 
translation  of  the  N.  T. ;  Jacob  of  Edeesa ;  the  patriarch 
Dionysius  I,  in  the  first  half  of  the  9th  century,  author 
of  a  Syriac  chronicie,  of  which  Aasemani  bas  mad« 
much  use,  and  of  which  a  part  has  been  published  bf 


JACOBITES 


'^43 


JACgUELOT 


TuIIbeTyc  (Upsala,  1860) ;  John,  bishop  of  Dan,  in  the 
9Łh  centary ;  Moses  Bar-Klpha  (f  913),  whose  treatiBe 
on  Paradiae  was  tranaUted  into  Latin  by  Andr.  Masius ; 
DianysiuB  Bar-Sallbi,  bishop  of  Amid  in  the  12th  cen- 
tury,  author  of  oommentariea  on  the  Bibie  and  other 
theH>lugical  worka  (Assemani,  ii,  156-211) ;  Jacob,  bishop 
of  Tagrit  in  the  13th  century ;  and  especially  Gregorius 
Abulfaragios;  Bar-Hebneiu,  in  the  13th  century,  who 
was  perhaps  the  greatest  and  noblest  man  of  the  £ast- 
em  Church ;  his  death  was  mourned  alike  by  Jacobites 
and  Nestoriana,  by  Greeks  and  Armenians,  all  of  whom 
forgot  the  disputea  which  were  agitating  at  that  time 
the  Eastem  Chorch,  and  gathered  at  his  grave  to  min- 
gle  their  tears  for  the  loss  of  a  truły  virtuous  and  great 
man.  The  work  of  BSblical  criticism  known  as  Recensio 
Karkapkentu  \a  aiso,  as  shown  by  Wiseman  (HorcB  8yr. 
Borne,  1828,8vo,p.206,212),  due  to  the  Jacobite  Church. 

The  presenł  condUion  of  this  sect  is  thus  described  by 
the  Bcv.  George  Percy  Badger  (Nestoriana  and  their 
Eiłualgj  i,  60) :  **  The  present  hierarchy  of  the  Jacobites 
in  Tuikey  consists  of  a  patriarch,  who  daims  the  title 
of  *  Patriarch  of  Antioch  and  snccessor  of  St  Peter,' 
eight  metropolitans,  and  three  bishops.  Of  these,  one 
rcsides  at  Mosul,  one  in  the  conycnt  of  Mar  Biattai,  in 
the  same  district,  one  at  Urfat,  one  at  Diarbekir,  or 
Kharpdt,  one  at  Jerusalem,  one  at  Mardln,  three  in 
Jebel  Tfir,  and  two  are  called  Temehyo,  i.  e.  uniyersal, 
withoat  any  regular  dioceses.  .  .  .  The  bishops  gener- 
ally  are  illiterate  men,  but  little  yersed  in  Scripture, 
and  entirely  ignorant  of  ecclesiastical  history.  They 
acaroely  eyer  preach,  and  their  episcopal  yisitations  are 
confined  to  occasional  ordinations,  and  to  the  collection 
of  tithea  from  their  seyeral  dioceses.  AU  of  them  can, 
of  cooise,  read  the  Syriac  of  their  rituals,  but  few  thor- 
oughly  imderstand  it  .  .  .  As  might  naturally  be  ex- 
pected,  the  k)wer  orders  of  the  S3rńan  clergy  are  gener- 
ally  morę  illiterate  than  the  bishops;  and  how  can  it  be 
otherwise?  .  .  .  Such  being  the  awkwardneas  and  incf- 
ficiency  of  their  clergy,  it  is  not  to  be  wondered  at  that 
religiaus  knowledge  and  yital  godliness  are  at  a  yery 
Iow  ebb  among  the  Syrian  laity.  Notwithstanding 
the  comparatiye  affluence  of  this  community,  I  belieye 
that  there  do  not  exłst  among  them  morę  than  twenty 
smali  schools  in  the  whole  of  Turkey,  where  their  popu- 
lation  amounts  to  something  like  100,000  (Etheridge 
aays  150,000).  The  following  is  a  rough  estimate  in 
yillages  of  the  proportion  of  their  numbers  in  the  difTer- 
ent  districts:  (1)  Jebel  Tftr,  150  yillages;  (2)  district 
of  Urtah  and  Gawar,  50  yillages;  (3)  Kharpdt,  15  yil- 
lages; (4)  Diarbekir,  6  yillages;  (5)  Mosul,  5  yillages; 
(6)  Damascus,  4  yiUages,  making  in  all  230  yillages 
now  inhabited  by  Syriana."  (Comp.  Richard  Pococke, 
Trarels  in  the  East,  II,  i,  208;  Niebuhr,  lieisebeschreib, 
yoL  ii ;  Buckingham,  Trav,  in  Meaopoiainia,  i,  321, 341 ; 
Robinson,  Palesiine,  iii,  460  są.) 

As  early  as  the  14  th  century  the  Boman  Catholic 
Church  used  her  influence  to  effect  a  union  of  the  Jac- 
obite and  Western  churches  under  the  sway  of  Korne. 
But,  alchough  many  accessions  haye  been  obtained  from 
the  Jacobites,  they  haye  not  yielded  entire,  as  did  the 
CopŁs  in  the  lóth  century.  The  first  really  important 
success  the  Romaiiists  achieyed  in  the  17th  century, 
under  Andreas  Achigian,  when  the  conyerts,  at  that 
time  quitc  numerous,  styling  themselyes  '*  Syrian  Cath- 
olics,"  elected  him  as  a  riyal  patriarch.  He  was  follow- 
ed  by  Petrus  (Iguatius,  yoL  xxy),  who  did  not  continue 
long  in  ofBce,  as  the  opposition  party  proycd  too  strong 
for  Komę  (Assemani,  ii,  482).  This,  howeyer,  by  no 
mcans  discouraged  the  Papists,  for  the  underŁaking  was 
resumed  shortly  aflerwards;  and  they  have  for  some 
time  past  siistained  in  Syria  a  patriarch  who  resides  at 
Haleb,  and  they  have  eyen  "Catholic  Jacobite  con- 
yents."  The  inferiority  of  the  Syrian  Catholics  to  the 
Jacobites  has  induced  the  Protestanta  of  Englaud  and 
America  to  esŁablish  miasions  among  them,  and  they 
haye  thus  far  met  with  tolerable  auccess.  See  Aaseroa- 
ni.  BUU.  Or,  ii ;  DtMs,  de  Momphyt,  §  1-10 ;  Neale,  East, 


Church,  iii  (see  Index);  Abudachus,  Htm.,  Jacobitarmn 
(Oxf.  1700) ;  Gibbon,  Deciine  and  Fali  ofihe  Rom,  Emp, 
(Harper*a  ed.),  iy,  551  aq. ;  Mignę,  Did,  des  Ordret  re- 
ligieuT^  ii,  561 ;  Wetaer  und  Welte,  Kirchen-Ler,  s.  y. ; 
Herzog,  Real-Encyldopadie,  yi,  400  są.     (J.  H.  W.) 

Jacobs,  DAyiD,  a  minister  of  the  Lutheran  Church, 
was  bom  in  Franklin  County,  Pa.,  Noy.  22, 1805.  He 
was  educated  at  Jefferson  College,  Canonsburg,  Penn. 
(class  of  1825).  While  at  college  he  was  particularly 
distinguished  as  a  linguist,  and  in  the  absence  of  the 
profeasor  of  languages  was  reąuested  to  hear  the  recita- 
tions  in  Latin  and  Greek.  He  commenced  his  theolog- 
ical  studies  under  the  direction  of  the  Key.  Dr.  B.  Kurtz, 
and  completed  them  in  the  Theobgical  Seminary  at 
(jettysburg  in  1827.  The  same  year  he  took  charge  of 
the  daasical  department  estabUshed  in  connectiou  with 
the  seminary,  from  which  Pennsylyania  College  took 
its  origin.  He  was  yeiy  succeasful  as  a  teacher.  No 
one  eyer  pursued  his  work  morę  nobly,  or  with  an  aim 
morę  exalted.  He  receiyed  license  to  preach  the  Go»« 
pel  in  1829,  but  his  health  was  so  delicate  that  he  aeldom 
officiated  in  the  pulpit.  He  died  Noy.  30, 1830,  in  the 
twenty-fłflh  year  of  his  age,  at  ShepheTdstown,ya.,  as 
he  was  retuming  from  a  trip  to  the  South,  whither  he 
had  gone  in  pursuit  of  health.  In  talent  he  was  aboye 
the  ordinary  standard,  a  ripe  scholar,  and  thoae  who 
were  brought  in  contact  with  him  appreciated  his  ex- 
cellent  character,  and  acknowledged  his  eminent  sei^ 
yiccs. 

Jacomb,  Thomas,  D.D.,  a  pious  Nonconformist  di* 
yine  who  took  a  prominent  part  in  the  ecclesiastical  af* 
fairs  of  England  in  the  17th  century,  was  bom  m  Leice»- 
tershire  in  1622.  He  studied  at  Magdalen  Hali,  Oxfoid, 
and  subeeąuently  became  fellow  of  Trinity  College, 
Cambridge.  During  the  Rebellion  he  obtained  the  liy- 
ing  of  St  Martin,  Ludgate,  but  was  ejected  in  1662,  dur- 
ing the  Bartholomew  ejectment  of  Nonoonformists,  and 
died  March  27,  1687.  Stoughton  {Ecd,  Uitt.  of  Engl 
[  Ch,  ofihe  Restoratun^lf  i,  165)  883^8  that  Jacomb,  whUe 
a  member  of  the  Sayoy  Conference  [aee  Indepen- 
DENTs],  in  which  he  figured  yery  prominently,  "  is  de- 
scribed, as  a  man  of  superior  education,  of  a  staid  mind, 
of  temperate  passions,  moderate  in  his  counaels,  and  in 
the  management  of  affairs,  not  yehement  and  confident, 
not  imposing  and  oyerbearing,  but  receptiye  of  adyioe, 
and  yielding  to  reason.*'  He  was  one  of  the  continua- 
tors  of  Poole's  Atmotationa,  His  works,  which  are  now 
acarce,  are,  A  TreaHte  on  Holy  Dedication  [on  Psa.  xxx] 
(Lond.  1668, 8yo)  '.^Several  Sermont  on  the  riiiłh  Chap- 
ter  of  the  Epigłle  to  the  Romom  [18  on  the  lat,  2d,  8d, 
and  4th  yersesj  (London,  1672, 4to). — Darling,  Cychp, 
Bibliog,  s.  y. ;  Stoughton,  Ecdet,  History  {Ch,  ofthe  Ret' 
toration),  ii,  504,  505. 

Jacqu6lot,  IsAAC,  a  French  Protestant  theologian, 
was  bom  at  Yasay  Dec.  16, 1647.  He  became  a  minis- 
ter in  1668,  and  waa  colleague  of  his  father,  the  pastor 
of  Yassy,  until  obliged  to  leaye  in  consequence  of  the 
reyocation  of  the  Edict  of  Nantes.  He  resided  first  at 
Heidelberg,  then  (1686)  at  La  Haye,  where  he  became 
pastor  of  a  French  congregation.  In  conseąuence  of 
some  trouble  he  had  with  Jurieu,  Benoit,  and  others,  he 
accepted  an  offer  of  the  king  of  Prussia,  who  had  heard 
him  preach,  and  had  leamed  to  esteem  Jaoquelot,  and 
in  1702  he  aettled  at  Berlin  aa  pastor  of  a  French  church. 
He  died  there  Oct  20,  1708.  He  wrote  Disserłations 
tur  tExigtence  de  Dieu  (La  Haye,  1697,  4to;  Par.  1744, 
3  yols.  12mo) : — Diseertatione  sur  le  Messie  (La  Haye, 
1699,  8 vo): — La  Conformite  de  la  Foi  avec  la  Raiaon 
(Amst.  1705,  8yo): — Reponse  aux  Entretiens  composh 
par  M,  Bayle  contrę  kt  Conformite^  etc.  (Amsterd.  1707, 
8yo) : — Traiłi  de  la  terite  ei  de  Tinspiration  du  Vieux 
et  du  Noureau  Testament  (Rotterd.  1715, 8 vo) : — Sermons 
(Gen.  1750,  2  yols.  12mo) ;  and  a  number  of  controyer- 
sial  pamphlets  against  Benoit,  Jurieu,  Werenfels,  etc 
See  Hist,  des  Ouvrage»  des  Saoants  (Dec  1708) ;  Vie  de 
Jacguelot  (in  the  Dissertat,  sur  PEzist,  de  IHeUf  Paris  edL 


JACQUEMIN 


ł44 


JAEL 


1744) ;  Chauffepić,  Dictionaire  /  Nic^ron,  Mimoirea  (voL 
vi) ;  Haog,  La  France  ProletłatUe ;  Hoefer,  N(mv,  Biog, 
Generale^  xxvi,  867.     (J.  N.  P.) 

Jacqueinin,  James  Alexis,  a  French  Roman  Cath- 
oUc  pńest,  was  bom  at  Nancy  Aiig.  4, 1750.  He  enter- 
ed  tbe  Church  in  early  life,  and  was  for  a  time  vicar  in 
a  parish  of  his  native  city.  He  met  with  oonsideTable 
success  in  the  pulpit,  but  wben,  in  1778,  he  was  appoint* 
ed  professor  of  theology  in  the  UniverBity  of  Nancy,  he 
readily  aocepted  this  new  pońtion.  During  the  fint 
years  of  the  French  Revolution  he  was  one  of  the  ed- 
itors  of  the  newspaper  called  Le  Catholigue  de  Nancy, 
In  1791,  refusing  to  adhere  to  the  civil  oonstitution 
of  the  clergy,  he  was  obliged  to  leave  France,  and  he 
settled  in  Germany,  where  he  joined  his  biahop.  De  U 
Farę,  also  an  exile.  The  latter  having  appointed  him 
his  vicar-general,  Jacquemin  retumed  to  France,  though 
expo8ed  to  great  danger,  during  the  ^  Reign  of  Terror." 
He  subseąuently  became  professor  of  philoaophy  in  the 
College  of  Nancy.  In  1823  he  was  madę  bishop  of  St. 
Die,  but  age  and  infinnities  soon  compelled  him  to  re- 
sign  this  ofBce,  and  he  retired  to  Nancy,  where  he  died, 
June  15, 1882.  He  wrote  De  Incamatione  Verbi  Dorni- 
m;  Ahrege  des  memaires  de  TAbU  BarrueŁ,pour  terrir 
a  Phist.  du  Jacobimtme  (Hamburg  [Nancy],  1801 ;  Par. 
1817,  2  vols.  12mo).  See  Henrion,  Annuaire  Biogra- 
pkicue  (1880-84);  Biog,  des  Hommes  vivanis;  Hoefer, 
Nouv.  Biog,  GhUrale,  xxvi,  219.     (J.  N.  P.) 

Jaotitatlon  of  Marriage  is  a  suit  which  was 
formerly  competent  in  the  English  ecdeaiastical  courts, 
and  now  is  competent  in  the  English  Divorce  Court,  to 
settle  a  que8tion  of  disputed  marriage.  If  a  party  boast 
or  profess  that  he  or  she  is  married  to  another,  the  lat- 
ter may  institute  the  suit,  and  cali  upon  the  former  to 
produce  proof  of  the  marriage.  If  this  is  not  done,  then 
a  decree  passes  which  enjoins  the  party  to  perpetual  si- 
lence  on  the  subject  This  remedy  is  now  scarcely  ever 
resorted  to,  for,  in  generał,  sińce  lord  Hardwick*s  Act 
(1766),  there  is  sufficient  certainty  in  the  forms  of  legał 
marriage  in  England  to  prevent  any  one  being  In  igno- 
rance  whether  he  or  she  is  really  married  or  not— a  re- 
proach  which,  however,  is  often  madę  against  the  law 
of  Scotland.  The  Scotch  suit  of  a  dedarator  of  putting 
to  silence,  which  łb  equivalent  to  jactitation  of  mamage, 
is  often  resorted  to,  the  latest  and  most  notorious  in- 
Stańce  of  its  use  being  that  in  the  Yelverton  marriage 
case.— Charobers,  Cyclop<gdicu 

Jaculms  (laKoy^c  v.  r.  'lópffowjSoc,  Vulg.  J  ock- 
bu»),  given  in  the  Apocrypha  (1  Esdr.  ix,  48)  as  the 
name  of  one  of  the  Lcvites  who  snpportcd  Ezra  in  read- 
ing  the  law ;  evidently  the  Akkub  (q.  v.)  of  the  corre- 
■ponding  Heb.  text  (Neh.  viii,  7). 

Ja^da  (Heb.  Yada\  9*1^,  hnotcingf  SepL  *laSak  and 
AoviaL)f  tbe  last  named  of  the  two  sons  of  Onam,  a  de- 
scendantof  Judah  through  Jeiabmeel;  his  two  sons  are 
likewise  mentioned  (1  Chroń,  ii,  28, 82).    RC.  post  1612. 

Ja^dau  (Heb.  Yaddav%  l*^^,  probably  by  erroneous 
transcription  for  1*^^,  Yiddo'^  '*Iddo;*'  rather  tban  for 
''^^j  Yadday^  id.,  as  in  the  margin;  Sept  'ladat  v.  r. 
'A^ca,yulg.  Jeddtt)y  one  of  the  ''sons"  of  Nebo  who  di- 
vorced  their  Grentile  wives  after  the  £xile  (Ezra  x,  48). 
B.C.  459. 

Jaddai.    See  Jadau. 

Jaddes,  a  name  of  tbe  priests  of  the  genii  among 
the  islanders  of  Ceylon.  The  pagodas  or  cbapcls  where 
they  officiate  have  no  revenue,  and  any  pious  person 
who  builds  a  chapel  officiates  in  it  bimself  as  priest 
Tbe  exteriors  of  thcsc  cbapels  are  painted  with  repre- 
sentations  of  balberds,  swords,  arrows,  shields,  and  the 
like.  The  native8  cali  these  cbapels  Jacco,  i.  e.  the 
devirs  tenement,  Jacco  or  Jacca  signifying  dtrU;  tbe 
islanders  of  Ceylon,  like  many  otber  sarage  tribes,  wor- 
shipptng  the  deril  because  of  his  wickedness  and  evil 
propensities  (comp.  Lubbock,  Origin  of  Citńlization,  p. 
169  sq.).    The  Jaddes,  wben  he  cdebrates  the  fe8tival 


of  Jacoo,  shayes  his  head.  See  Knox,  DetenptiM  of 
Ceylon^  pt.  iv,  eh.  v;  Broughton,  BibUotk,  Hut,  Sae,  i, 
499;  Davy,^ocoiitó  o/C«yfon,p.ll8.     (J.H,W.) 

Jad'du&  (Heb.  Yaddu'a,  9^^^  buwn;  Sept.  l^j- 
dova,  'laSoVf  'lSova)f  the  name  of  two  men  after  the 
time  of  tbe  Captivity. 

1.  One  of  tbe  chiefa  of  the  people  who  snbacribed  tbe 
sacred  covenant  drawn  up  by  Nebemiah  (Neh.  z,  21). 
B.a  dr.  410. 

2.  The  son  of  Jonathan,  and  the  last  high-priert 
mentioned  in  the  Oki  Testament  (Neh.  xii,  1 1, 22>  He 
is  doubtleas  the  person  alluded  to  by  Joaepbus  fla^ 
dovc,  Ant.  xi,  8,  3-6)  as  exercising  the  ponttfical  «ffiotf 
at  tbe  time  of  tbe  capture  of  Tyre  by  Alexander  the 
Great  (B.C.  882),  and  as  coming*forth  from  Jenisalem 
at  the  head  of  tbe  priestly  body  to  meet  tbe  adrandng 
oonqueror,  and  tender  him  the  aobnussion  of  the  citr. 
See  Alekander.  In  that  case  his  name  must  hare 
been  insert«d  by  « the  great  Synagogue"  after  tbe  Scrip- 
ture  canon  (q.  v.)  bad  been  madę  up  by  Ezra  (B.C 
dr.  406).  See  Chroktcles.  *<  We  gather  pretty  cer- 
tainly  that  he  was  pńest  in  the  reign  of  the  last  Peisian 
king  Darius,  and  that  he  was  still  high-priest  after  the 
Peraian  dynasty  was  overtbrown,  L  e.  in  the  nagn  of 
Alexander  the  Great.  For  tbe  expTeasion  *  Darius  f& 
PersioH^  (Neh.  xii,  22)  must  have  been  used  after  the 
acoession  of  tbe  Grecian  dynasty;  and,  bad  anoiher 
higb-priest  succeeded,  his  luune  would  most  likely  bare 
been  mentioned.  Thns  far,  then,  tbe  book  of  Nebemiah 
bears  out  tbe  truth  of  Josepbus^s  bistory,  which  makes 
Jaddua  high-prieat  when  Alexander  invaded  Judas, 
But  Josephua^s  story  of  his  intenriew  with  Akzaoder 
is  not,  on  that  account,  necessarily  tme,  nor  bla  aooooiu 
of  the  building  of  tbe  Tempie  on  Mount  Gerizim  dnzing 
Jaddua*s  pontificate,  at  the  insdgation  of  SanbaOat,  both 
of  which,  as  well  as  tbe  acoompanying  drcumstanoe^ 
may  have  been  derived  from  aome  apocryphal  book  of 
Alexandrian  growtb,  eince  lost,  in  which  cbronologT  and 
bistory  gave  way  to  romance  and  Jewish  vanity.  Jo- 
sepbus  seems  to  place  the  death  of  Jaddua  aSta  that  of 
Alexander  (Ant.  xi,  8,  7).  Eusebius  aasigns  twenty 
years  to  Jaddua*s  pontificate"  (Smith).  See  Htmy, 
Genealogg  ofour  Lordj  p.  828  sq. ;  Jarvis,  Ckurdi  o/tkt 
Redeemed,  p.  291.     See  Hioh-priest. 

Ja'don  (Heb.  tadon%  *f\^^,judge;  Sept  bas  Eoa- 
p«av  [but  most  eds.  omit],  Yulg.  Jadon\  a  Bferonotfaite 
who  aasisted  in  reconstructing  tbe  waills  of  Jcmaakm 
after  tbe  return  from  Babylon  (Neh.  iii,  7).    EC.  U6. 

JADON  ClaSwv)  is  tbe  name  attributed  by  Joaephas 
(A  nf.  viii,  8, 5)  to  tbe  man  of  God  from  Judah  who  with* 
stood  Jeroboam  at  the  altar  at  Bethd— probably  intend- 
ing  Iddo  tbe  scer.  By  Jerome  (Qu.  Ifebr,  on  2  Chno. 
ix,  29)  tbe  name  is  given  as  Jaddo. — Smith. 

Ja^Sl  (Heb.  Yadł%  bc^,  a  wild  goat  or  ittar,  as  in 
Paa.  civ,  18;  Job  xxxix,  1 ;  Sept.  'lo^A,  Josephos  'ló- 
\tj)y  tbe  wife  of  Heber  the  Kenite,  and  tbe  alayer  of  the 
oppressor  of  the  Israclltes  (Judg.  iv,  17-22).  RC  1409. 
Heber  was  the  chief  of  a  nomadic  Arab  dan  who  bad 
separated  from  the  rest  of  his  tribc,  and  had  pitched  lat 
tent  under  tbe  oaks,  which  had,  in  conseąuence,  reoeived 
the  name  of  '^  oaks  of  tbe  wanderers"  (A.  Y.  plain  of  Za- 
anaim,  Judg.  iv,  11),  in  tbe  ndghborhood  of  Kedetk- 
NapbthalL  See  Hebrr.  Tbe  tribeof  Heber  had  main- 
tained  the  quiet  enJo>'ment  of  their  pastmes  by  adopting 
a  neutral  position  in  a  troublous  period.  Their  dcacect 
ftom  Jethro  secured  tbem  the  favorable  regard  of  the 
Israelites,  and  they  were  suffidently  important  to  cos- 
clude  a  formal  peace  with  Jabin,  king  of  Hamr.  See 
Kekite. 

In  tbe  headlong  rout  which  followed  the  defeat  of 
the  Canaanites  by  Bank,  Siscra,  abapdoning  hia  char- 
iot  the  morę  easily  to  avoid  notice  (comp.  Homer,  JLv, 
20),  fled  unattended,  and  in  an  opposite  direction  hoa 
that  takon  by  his  army.  On  reaching  tbe  tcnta  of  the 
nomad  chief,  he  remembered  that  thoe  was  peaoe  be- 


JAEŁ 


146 


JAEL 


tween  his  90vereign  and  the  hooBe  of  Heber,  and  Łhere- 
fore  applied  for  the  hospiulity  and  protection  to  which 
he  waa  thos  entitled  (Hanner,  Oiu,  i,  460).  «  The  tent 
of  Jael"*  is  expressly  mentioned  either  becanse  the  ha- 
rem of  Heber  waa  in  a  separate  tent  (RosenmUller,  Mor- 
geitL  iii,  22),  or  because  the  Kenite  himself  was  abeent 
at  the  time.  In  the  sacred  sedosion  of  this  almost  in- 
Yiolable  sanctoary  (Pooocke,  Etut^  ii,  5)  Siaera  might 
well  have  felt  himself  abeolutely  secore  from  the  incur- 
sions  of  the  enemy  (Cahnet,  Frapm,  voL  xxv) ;  and 
althougfa  he  intended  to  take  refuge  among  the  Ke- 
nitea,  he  would  not  haye  yentuied  so  openly  to  vioIate 
all  idea  of  Oriental  propriety  by  entering  a  woroan's 
apartments  (D*Herbdot,  BibUotfigue  Orientale,  s.  v.  Ha- 
ram) had  he  not  receired  JaeFs  espress,  eamest,  and 
respectfiil  entreaty  to  do  so.  See  Harem.  He  accept- 
ed  the  invitation,  and  she  flimg  the  quilt  (ns^^h,  A. 
V.  **  a  mantle;**  eyidently  some  part  of  the  regidar  far- 
nitm^e  of  the  tent)  over  him  as  he  lay  wearily  on  the 
floor.  When  thirst  prerented  sleep,  and  he  asked  for 
water,  she  broaght  him  buttermilk  in  ber  choicest  yes- 
ael,  thus  ratifying  with  the  semblance  of  ofRdous  zeal 
the  sacred  bond  of  Eastem  hospitality.  Winę  woold 
hare  been  less  suitable  to  quench  his  thirst,  and  may 
possibly  have  been  eschewed  by  Heber's  elan  (Jer. 
xxxv,  2).  Curdled  mllk,  accordiug  to  the  ąuotations  in 
Harmer,  is  stiU  a  fayorite  Arab  beyerage,  and  that  this 
is  the  drink  intended  we  infer  from  Judg.  v,  25,  as  well 
as  fitom  the  direct  statement  of  Josephus  (yciAa  duipOo- 
pbc  T/^ij,  Ani.  V,  6,  4),  although  there  is  no  reason  to 
sappose  with  Josephos  and  the  Rabbis  (D.  Kimchi,  Jar- 
chi,  etc)  that  Jael  purposely  used  it  because  of  its  sopo- 
rific  ąualities  (Bochart,  Hieroz,  i,  473).  Bat  anxiety 
atiU  preyented  Sisera  from  composing  himself  to  rest 
nntil  he  had  exacted  a  promise  from  his  protectress  that 
she  woold  faithfully  preserye  the  secret  of  his  conceal- 
ment ;  till  at  last,  with  a  feeling  of  perfect  security,  the 
weaiy  and  onfortunate  generał  resigned  himself  to  the 
deep  sleep  of  misery  and  iatigue.  Then  it  was  that 
Jael  took  in  her  left  hand  one  of  the  great  wooden  pins 
(A.y.  "nail")  which  fastened  down  the  cords  of  the 
tent,  and  in  her  right  hand  the  mallet  (A.y.  "a  ham- 
mer^)  used  to  driye  it  into  the  ground,  and,  aeeping 
np  to  her  sleeping  and  oonfiding  guest,  with  one  teirible 
blow  dashed  it  through  Sisera's  temples  deep  into  the 
earth.  With  one  spasm  of  froitless  agony,  with  one 
contortion  of  sudden  pain,  "  at  her  feet  he  bowed,  he 
fell;  where  he  bowed,  there  he  fell  down  dead"  (Judg. 
V,  27).  She  then  waited  to  meet  the  pursuing  Barak, 
and  led  him  into  her  tent,  that  she  might  in  his  pres- 
ence  claim  the  glory  of  the  deed !    See  Barak. 

liany  have  supposed  that  by  this  act  she  fulfilled  the 
aaying  of  Deborah,  that  God  would  sell  Sisera  into  the 
hand  of  a  woman  (Judg.  iv,  9;  Josephus,  AfU.v,b,  4), 
and  hence  they  have  supposed  that  Jael  was  actuated 
by  some  divine  and  hidden  influence.  But  the  Bibie 
giyes  no  hint  of  such  an  inspiration,  and  it  is  at  least 
equally  probable  that  Deborah  merely  intended  to  inti- 
mate  the  share  of  the  honor  which  would  be  assigned 
by  poaterity  to  her  own  exertion8.  If,  therefore,  we 
eliminate  the  still  morę  monstrous  supposition  of  the 
Babbis  that  Sisera  was  slain  by  Jael  because  he  at- 
tempted  to  offer  her  yiolence — the  murder  will  appear 
in  all  ita  hideous  atrocity.  A  fugitiye  had  asked  and 
leceired  dakhil  (or  protection)  at  her  hands— he  was 
miaerable,  defeated,  weary— he  was  the  ally  of  her  hus- 
band — ^he  was  her  inyited  and  honored  guest — ^he  was 
in  the  sanctuary  ot  the  harem— «boye  all,  he  was  con- 
fiding,  defenceless,  and  asleep ;  yet  she  broke  her  pledged 
faitb,  yiolated  her  solemn  hospitality,  and  murdered  a 
truatful  and  unprotected  slumberer.  Surely  we  leąuire 
the  dearest  and  most  positiye  sUtement  that  Jael  was 
inatigated  to  such  a  murder  by  diyine  snggestion.^ 
Smith.    See  Hospitauty. 

It  does  not  seem  difficult  to  nnderstand,  on  merely 
haman  grounds,  the  object  of  Jad  in  this  painful  trans- 
JKstiotD.    Her  motiyes  seem  to  have  been  entiidy  pru- 


dential;  and  on  pmdential  grounds  the  yery  circum- 
Stańce  which  renders  her  act  the  morę  odious — ^the  peaoe 
subsisting  between  the  nomad  chief  and  the  king  of  Ha- 
zor— must  to  her  haye  seemed  to  make  it  the  morc  ex- 
pedient  She  saw  that  the  Israelites  had  now  the  up- 
per  hand,  and  was  aware  that,  as  being  in  alliance  with 
the  oppressors  of  Israel,  the  camp  might  expect  very 
rough  treatment  from  the  pursuing  force,  which  would 
be  greatly  aggrayated  if  Sisera  were  found  sheltered 
within  it.  This  calamity  she  sought  to  avert,  and  to 
place  the  house  of  Heber  in  a  favorable  position  with 
the  yictorious  party.  She  probably  jnstified  the  act  to 
herself  by  the  consideration  that,  as  Sisera  would  cer- 
tainly  be  taken  and  slain,  she  might  as  well  make  a 
benefit  out  of  his  ineyitable  doom  as  incur  utter  ruin  in 
the  attempt  to  protect  him.  It  is  probable,  howeyer, 
that  at  first  the  woman  was  tńncere  in  her  prolfers  of 
Arab  friendship ;  but  the  quiet  sleep  of  the  warrior  gaye 
her  time  to  retiect  how  easily  eyen  her  arm  might  rid 
her  kindred  people  of  the  oppressor,  and  she  was  thus 
induced  to  plot  against  the  life  of  her  yictim.  It  does 
not  appear  that  she  committed  the  falsehood,  which  she 
was  reąuested  by  him  to  do,  of  denying  the  presence  of 
any  stranger  if  asked  by  a  passer-by.  See  Kitto^s  Daily 
Bihle  lUuitrałions,  ad  loc 

It  is  much  easier  to  explain  the  conduct  of  Jael  than 
to  account  for  the  apparently  culogistic  notice  which  it 
receiyes  in  the  triumphal  ode  of  Deborah  and  Barak ; 
but  the  following  remarks  will  go  far  to  remoye  the  dif- 
ficulty :  There  is  no  doubt  that  Sisera  would  haye  been 
put  to  death  if  he  had  been  taken  aliye  by  the  Israelites. 
The  war-usages  of  the  time  warranted  such  treatment, 
and  there  are  numerous  examples  of  it  They  had, 
therefore,  no  regard  to  her  pri\'ato  motires,  or  to  the 
particular  rdations  between  Heber  and  Jabin,  but  be- 
hdd  her  only  as  the  instrument  of  accomplishing  what 
was  usuaUy  regarded  as  the  finał  and  crowning  act  of  a 
great  yictory.  The  unusual  circumstance  that  this  act 
was  performed  by  a  woman's  hand  was,  according  to  the 
notions  of  the  time,  so  great  a  humiliation  that  it  could 
hardly  fail  to  be  dwelt  upon  in  contrasting  the  rcsult 
with  the  proud  confidence  of  yictory  which  had  at  the 
outset  been  entertained  (Judg.  v,  80).  Without  stop- 
ping  to  ask  when  and  where  Deborah  claims  for  hersdf 
any  infallibility,  or  whether,  in  the  passionate  moment 
of  patriotic  triumph,  she  was  likely  to  pause  in  such 
wild  times  to  scrutinize  the  morał  bearings  of  an  act 
which  had  been  so  splendid  a  benefit  to  herself  and  her 
people,  we  may  question  whether  any  morał  commenda* 
tion  is  direcUy  intended.  What  Deborah  stated  was  a 
fact,  yiz.  tliat  the  wiyes  of  the  nomad  Arabs  would  un- 
doubtedly  regard  Jad  as  a  pubłic  benefactress,  and  praiae 
her  as  a  popular  heroinę.  "She  certainly  was  not 
'  blessed'  as  a  pious  and  upright  person  is  blessed  when 
performing  a  deed  which  embodies  the  noblest  princi- 
ples,  and  włiich  goes  up  as  a  memoriał  before  God,  but 
meriely  as  one  who  acted  a  part  that  accomplished  an 
important  purpose  of  heayen.  In  the  same  sense,  though 
in  the  opposito  direction,  Job  and  Jeremiah  cursed  the 
day  of  their  birth ;  not  that  they  meant  to  make  it  the 
proper  subject  of  blame,  but  that  they  wished  to  mark 
their  deep  sense  of  the  eyił  into  which  it  had  ushered 
them— ^mark  it  as  the  commencement  of  a  łife-heritage 
of  sorrow  and  gloom.  In  like  manner,  and  with  a  doser 
resemblance  to  the  case  before  us,  the  psalmist  pro- 
nounces  happy  or  blessed  those  who  should  dash  the 
little  ones  of  Babylon  against  the  Stones  (Psa.  cxxxyii, 
9),  which  no  one  who  understands  the  spirit  of  Hebrew 
poetiy  would  eyer  dream  of  construing  into  a  proper 
benediction  upon  the  ruthless  murderers  of  Babylon*8 
children,  as  true  heroes  of  righteousness.  It  merely  an- 
nounces,  under  a  strong  indindualizing  trait,  the  com- 
ing  recompense  on  Babylon  for  the  cruelties  she  had 
infiicted  on  Israel ;  her  own  measure  should  be  meted 
back  to  her :  anłl  they  who  should  be  the  instniroents 
of  effecting  it  would  execute  a  purpose  of  Go<l,  whether 
they  might  themselyes  intend  it  or  not.    Let  the  poet- 


JAEŁ 


U6 


JAGER 


ical  exaltation  of  Jad  be  viewed  in  the  light  of  these 
cognate  passages,  and  it  will  be  found  to  oontain  noŁh- 
mg  at  yaiiauoe  with  the  yerdict  which  eyery  impartial 
mind  must  be  disposed  to  pronounce  upon  her  oonduct. 
It  is,  in  reality,  the  work  of  God'8  judgment,  through  her 
instrumentality,  that  is  celebrated,  not  her  modę  of  car- 
lying  it  into  execution;  and  it  might  be  aa  just  to  re- 
gard  the  heathen  Modes  and  Persians  aa  a  truły  pioua 
people  because  they  are  called  God'6  'sanctified  ones*  to 
do  his  work  of  vengeance  on  Babylon  (laa.  xiii,  8),  aa, 
from  what  ia  said  in  Deborah'8  song,  to  conuder  Jael  an 
ezample  of  ńghteouaness*'  (Fairbaiin).     See  Dkborah. 

As  to  the  morality  of  the  act  of  Jael  for  which  she  ia 
thuB  applauded,  although  it  can  not  fairly  be  jostified  by 
the  usages  of  any  time  or  people,  yet  the  considerations 
urged  by  Dr.Kobinson  (Biblical  Bepos.  1831,  p.  607)  are 
of  some  force :  ^  We  must  judge  of  it  by  the  feelings  of 
those  among  whom  the  right  of  avenging  the  blood  of 
a  relatire  was  so  strongly  rooted  that  even  Moses  could 
not  take  it  away.  Jael  was  an  ally  by  blood  of  the  I»- 
raelitish  nation ;  [Sisera,  the  generał  of  ]  thelr  chief  op- 
pressor,  who  had  mightily  oppressed  them  for  the  space 
of  twenty  yeais,  now  lay  defenceless  before  her ;  and  he 
was,  moreoyer,  one  of  those  whom  Israel  was  bound  by 
the  oommand  of  Jehorah  to  extirpate.  Perhaps,  too, 
ahe  felt  called  to  be  the  instrument  of  God  in  working 
out  for  that  nation  a  great  deliverance  by  thus  extcrmi- 
nating  the  chieftain  of  their  heathen  oppressor.  At 
least  Israel  yiewed  it  in  thia  light ;  and,  in  this  view,  we 
can  not  reproach  the  heroinę  with  that  as  a  crime  which 
both  she  and  Israel  felt  to  be  a  deed  performed  in  ao- 
cordance  with  the  maiidate  ot  heayen."  We  must, 
moreoyer,  not  foi^t  the  halo  with  which  military  suc- 
cess  gilds  cvery  act  in  the  popular  eye,  and  that,  in 
Limes  of  war,  many  things  are  held  allowable  and  eyen 
commendable  which  would  be  reprobated  In  peace.  Dr. 
Thomson,  indeed  (Land  and  JSook,  ii,  146  sq.),  justifies 
JaeFs  course  by  the  foUowing  considerations:  1.  Jabin, 
although  nominally  at  peacc  with  the  Kenites,  had 
doubtless  inflicted  much  injury  upon  them  in  common 
with  tlieir  ncighbors  the  Isracdites,  and  may  haye  beeii 
— ^probably  was— specially  obnoxious  to  Jael  herself.  2. 
We  are  not  to  assume  that  Bedouin  laws  w^ere  of  strict 
force  among  the  settled  Kenites.  3.  Jael  must  haye 
known  her  act  would  be  applauded,  or  she  would  not 
haye  yentured  upon  it,  4.  There  is  eyery  reason  to 
belieye  she  was  in  fuli  sympathy  with  the  Israelites, 
not  only  from  friendly,  but  also  religious  grounds ;  and 
the  neutrality  of  the  Kenites  seems  to  be  mentioncd 
mercly  to  account  for  Sisera*s  seeking  her  tent,  although 
he  appears  to  haye  felt  himself  insecure.  Nor  did  her 
promise  of  protection  contain  any  warrant  against  yio- 
lence  at  her  hands,  but  only  of  secretion  from  the  hostile 
army.     See  Siskra. 

The  Jael  mentioned  in  Deborah'8  song  (Judg.  v,  6) — 
'^  In  the  days  of  Shamgar  the  son  of  Anath,  in  the  days 
of  Jael,  the  highways  w^ere  unoocupied,  and  the  trayel- 
lers  walked  through  byways"— bas  been  supposed  by 
some  (e.  g.  Gesenius,  Iax.  b.  y. ;  Dr.  Robinson,  vt  aupra ; 
Fllrst,  and  others)  to  haye  been  a  local  judge  of  the  Is- 
raelites  in  the  inten^al  of  anarchy  between  Shamgar 
and  Jabin.  It  is  not  necessary,  for  this  supposition,  to 
make  Jael  the  uame  of  a  man,  for  the  case  of  Deborah 
shows  that  the  place  of  judge  might  be  occupied  by  a 
female.  The  reasons  for  this  supposition  are,  1.  That 
the  State  of  things  described  in  Judg.  y,  6  as  existing  in 
Jacl'8  da^^s,  is  not  the  state  of  things  existing  in  the 
days  of  Jael,  the  wife  of  Heber,  whose  time  was  famous 
for  the  restoration  of  the  nation  to  a  better.  2.  That 
the  wife  of  a  stranger  would  hanlly  haye  been  named  as 
marking  an  cpoch  in  the  history  of  Israel.  (See  Ber- 
theau  in  the  Exeg€i,  Ilandbuch,  ad  loc.)  But  there  is 
no  cyidcnce  eithcr  of  such  an  interyal  or  of  such  a 
judgeship ;  and  it  is,  therefore,  morę  natural  to  refer  the 
name  to  the  wife  of  Heber  as  the  most  prominent  char- 
acter  of  the  period  referred  to,  the  recollection  of  her 
late  act  giying  her  a  distinction  that  did  not  preyiously 


attach  to  her.  The  circomstance  that  the  name  Jad  is 
nuŁBculułe  in  the  Hebrew  is  of  no  force,  as  it  is  fredy 
used  (literally)  of  the  female  deer  (Ph)y.  v,  19,"jotf7, 
See  JuDGEs. 

Jaffś,  Philtpp,  a  celebrated  modem  Jewish  sdiolar, 
was  bom  at  Schwersenz,  near  the  dty  of  Posen,  in 
Prussian  PoUnd,  about  1820.  Hia  eaily  edacation  be 
receiyed  lirst  at  the  high  school  of  his  natiye  town,  md 
then  under  the  care  of  the  father  of  the  wiiter  of  thii 
article.  After  graduadng  at  the  Gymnaaiom  of  Pbsai, 
he  began  his  uniyeraity  career  by  the  study  of  medi- 
cine,  and  duły  obtained  his  degree.  He  docUned,  hov- 
ever,  to  comply  with  the  wishes  of  his  fńcnds  to  oi- 
ter  the  medical  profession,  and  continued  his  stay  at 
the  uniyerBity,  deyoting  himself  to  his  fayorite  studics^ 
history  and  f^ilology.  In  1843  he  gaye  to  the  world  a 
History  o/łke  German  Empire  under  Lothair  the  Samm, 
and,  owing  to  the  exce]lence  of  this  work,  he  subae- 
quently  became  a  regular  contributor  to  Pertz*s  ifoa- 
umenta  Germania  Jłistorica,  His  artides  and  essayi 
—  the  outgTowth  of  most  laborious  reaearchcs— wen 
read  eagcrly,  and  admired  by  all  scholats  interested  in 
the  history  and  literaturę  of  Germany,  and  Icd  uld- 
mately  to  his  appointment  as  "  extraordinajy"  profeasa 
of  history  at  the  Cniyersity  of  Berlin.  He  was  the  iiist 
Jew  upon  whom  the  honor  of  such  a  distinguisfaed 
appointment  was  conferred  by  the  Pmsaian  goyetn- 
ment.  He  now  further  distinguished  himself  by  a  coa- 
tribution  to  the  hi8tx)ry  of  the  papacy — Regesta  Ponłific 
Roman.  adMCXCVIli  (BeroL1861,4to)— a  work  whicb 
at  once  was  acknowledged  a  masterpiece  in  its  depait- 
ment,  and  will  foreyer  remain  yaluable  for  the  chmno- 
logical  records  of  the  Roman  hierarchy.  In  1868  Jaffe 
cmbraced  Christianity,  eyidently  with  a  design  to  fur- 
ther promotion,  from  which,  by  his  religious  profession, 
he  seemed  to  be  barred.  But  he  soon  repented  of  tbe 
step,  and  so  great  became  the  conilict  in  his  heart  that 
he  committed  suicide  in  the  summer  of  1870.    (J.  IL  W.) 

Jagel,  Abraham,  an  Italian  Rabbi,  flouriisbed  at 
Monselice  in  the  second  half  of  the  ICth  and  the  fir^t 
half  of  the  17th  century.  He  is  distinguishe<l  as  tbe 
author  of  an  able  Jewish  catechism  of  doctrine  and  mor- 
als,  which  he  published  under  the  title  of  ^is  H^^ 
(Tenice,  1587,  8yo,  and  often).  It  was  translatcd  into 
Latin  by  Carpzoy,  Odhel,  Yan  der  Haidt,  and  by  De 
VeiL  the  lattcr  published  it  with  the  Hebrew  test: 
Doctrina  Bona  (London,  1689,  8yo).  It  was  alEO  trans- 
latcd into  German,  cntitlcd  nas  Buch  von  Guten  JUdi- 
sciien  Lehren  (Lpzg.  1694).  Jagd  became  a  conrert  to 
Romanism,  and  was  baptized  under  the  name  of  ComY- 
lo  near  the  beginning  of  the  17th  centun^  and  was  io 
1619  and  1620  Roman  censor  of  all  Hebrew  books.  He 
wTote  also  seyeral  books  on  the  Jent-ish  doctńnes  and 
usages,  of  which  a  complete  list,  with  the  translations 
that  haye  been  madę  of  them,  is  giyen  by  Furst,  Bik^ 
o<A.Jurf.ii,10sq.     (J.H.W.) 

Jagello.    See  Połakd. 

JSger,  Natiian,  a  Lutheran  minister,  bom  in  1823^ 
was  educated  for  the  sacred  ministry  first  at  Gettysbing 
Theological  Seminary,  and,  completing  his  course  witb 
the  Rey.  J.  P.  Hecht,  of  Easton,  was  dedicatcd  to  the  pas- 
torał Office  in  the  summer  of  1845.  His  fiist  charge  va9 
at  Orwigsburg,  whence  he  remoyed  to  Lyken^s  VaBey; 
thence  successiyely  to  Falkner^s  Swamp,  Upper  Mount 
Bethel,  and  Rdglesyille,  Bucks  Count^',  Penn.,  where  be 
died,  Jan.  2, 1864.  He  was  one  of  a  laige  family  of 
Lutheran  ministers,  consisting  of  his  grandfatber,faihei^ 
in-law,  brother-in-law,  and  a  number  of  other  relatiTes 
of  the  same  name.  His  literary  and  theological  attain- 
ments  were  yery  respectable,  acquired  amid  difficultieB 
that  would  haye  disheartened  most  other  men.  He 
studied  when  others  idept,  performing  during  the  day 
the  laborious  duties  of  laige  pastorates,  and  puraning 
his  studies  at  night.  His  theological  knowlei^ge  was 
quite  exten8iye.  He  was  an  eamest  man,  and  aa  ener- 
getic  laborer  in  the  cause  of  Christ 


JA66ER 


141 


JAHATH 


Jagger,  Ezra,  a  Methodist  minister,  was  bora  at 
Soathampton,  Long  Island,  N.  Y^  Feb.  27, 1806.  He  was 
licensed  to  preach  in  189S8,  and  joiiied  tbe  New  York 
Conference  the  year  following,  and  successiyely  filled 
tbe  circuits  of  Huntington,  Hempstead,  Wbite  Plains 
and  Greenbarg,  Westport,  Weston  and  Easton  YiUagei 
Burlington,  Derby,  Sońitbold  and  Cutchogae,  Farming- 
dale,  Smithtown,  and,  at  last,  once  again  Huntington. 
He  died  April  22, 18Ó0.  Jagger  was  a  man  of  strict 
iutegrity,  great  benerolence,  mild  and  unassuming  in 
manner,  and  most  beloyed  where  beat  known.  He  was 
eminently  a  man  of  prayer,  and  deroted  to  his  Master^s 
work^Smith  (W.  C),  Sacred  Memories  (N.  Y.  1870, 
12mo),p.206,207. 

Jaggemaiit,  or  Jaggemaut  Pnri,  or  Pnrl,  is 
the  name  of  a  town  on  the  sea-coast  of  Orisaa  (85°  M' 
kmg.,  and  19<^  46'  lat),  celebrated  aa  one  of  the  chief 
places  of  pilgrima^  of  the  Hindus  in  India.  It  cen- 
tains  a  tempie  erected  to  Yishnu  in  A.D.  1198,  in  which 
stands  an  idol  of  this  Indian  deity,  called  Jaggemaut 
(commonly  Juggemaut),  a  corruption  of  the  Siianscrit 
Jagamtaiha,  t  e.  lord  of  the  world.  **  The  idol  is  a 
canred  błock  of  wood,  with  a  frightful  yiaagc,  painted 
black,  with  a  distended  mouth  of  a  bloody  color.  On 
festiyal  days  the  throne  of  the  idol  is  placed  upon  a 
stupendous  moyable  tower  sixty  feet  high,  resting  on 
wheels,  which  indent  the  ground  deeply  as  they  turn 
slowly  under  the  ponderous  machinę.  Attached  to  it 
are  six  ropes  of  the  length  and  aize  of  a  ship^s  cable,  by 
which  ths  people  draw  it  along.  The  priests  and  at- 
tendanta  are  atationed  around  the  throne,  on  the  car, 
and  occasionolly  addreas  the  wonhippers  in  libidinous 
Bongs  and  gesturea.  Both  the  walls  of  the  tempie  and 
the  sides  of  the  car  are  covered  with  the  most  indecent 
emblems,  in  large  and  durable  sculpture.  Obacenity 
and  blood  are  the  characteristica  of  the  idoFe  worship." 
The  origin  of  thia  idolatrous  worahip  (which  p^ained  ita 
notoriety  especially  by  the  fanaticiam  whi«  Ii  haa  in- 
duoeil,  and  atill  inducea,  thouaanda  of  Hindua  to  aacrifice 
their  liyea,  in  the  hope  of  attaining  etemal  bliaa,  by 
throwing  themaelyea  under  the  wheela  of  the  chariot 
bearing  the  idol)  ia  as  foliowa:  "A  king  deairoua  of 
founding  a  city  aent  a  learned  Brahman  to  pitch  upon 
a  proper  spot.  The  Brahman,  aftor  a  long  aearch,  ar- 
riyed  upon  the  banka  of  the  aea,  and  there  aaw  a  crow 
diying  into  the  water,  and,  haying  waahed  ita  body, 
making  obeiaance  to  the  aea.  Underatanding  the  lan- 
guage  of  the  binla,  he  learned  from  the  crow  that  if  he 
remaincil  there  a  ahort  tiroe  he  would  comprehend  the 
wondera  of  thia  land.  The  king,  apprizcd  of  this  occur- 
rence,  built  on  the  spot  where  the  crow  had  appeared  a 
laige  city,  and  a  place  of  worahip.  The  rajah  one  night 
beard  in  a  dream  a  yoice  aaying, '  On  a  certain  day  caat 
thine  eyea  on  the  aea-ahore,  whcn  there  will  ariae  out 
of  the  water  a  piece  of  wood  fifty-two  inchea  long,  and 
one  and  a  half  cubita  broad ;  this  ia  the  true  form  of  the 
deity;  take  it  up,  and  keep  it  hidden  in  thine  house 
aeven  da}'s ;  and  in  whateyer  ahape  it  ahall  then  appear, 
place  it  in  the  tempie,  and  worahip  iL'  It  happened  aa 
the  rajah  had  drearoed,  and  the  image,  called  by  him 
Jaggannatha,  became  the  object  of  worahip  of  all  ranka 
of  people,  and  performed  many  miraclea."  Another  le- 
gend, howeyer,  relatea  that  "  the  image  ariaing  from  the 
water  waa  an  ayatara,  or  incamation  of  Yiahnu;  it  waa 
fashioned  by  \lawakarman,  the  architect  of  the  goda, 
into  a  fourfold  idol,  which  repreaented  the  auprcme  dei- 
ty, and  the  tempie  itaelf  waa  erected  oyer  it,  and  inau- 
gurated  by  the  god  Brahms  and  hia  diyine  court." 
Thia  may  haye  giyen  nse  to  tbe  auppoaition  that  the 
worahip  of  Jaggernath  (aa  Max  Muller  [C%t/w,  i,  67] 
apells  it)  was  originally  in  honor  of  Yishnu,  See  New- 
comb,  Cyclop,  o/AfitsionSj  p.  495;  Sterling,  Account  of 
Ori$$a  (see  Index) ;  Chambera,  Cyclop,  a.  y. 

Jagnifi  are  the  hermita  of  the  Baniana,  a  aect  in 
East  India.  There  are  three  distinct  claaaea  of  them : 
(1)  the  Van-aphraataa,  (2)  the  San-jaaiia,  and  (3)  the 
Ayadoutaa.    Tbe  Yan-^phroMtoM  liye  in  foresta,  many 


of  them  married  and  haying  children,  feeding  on  the 
herba  and  fruita  that  grow  wild;  but  they  acruple  to 
pluck  up  the  root  of  anything,  conaidering  it  a  atnful 
act,  aa  they  belieye  the  aoul  to  be  contained  in  the  root, 
aupposing  eyerything  to  poaa^  a  spiritual  life ;  and,  of 
oourae,  belieying  alao  the  tranamigration  of  aouls.  The 
Scm-Jastis  affect  greater  abatinence,  oppose  matrimony, 
betel,  and  all  pleaaurea  whatsoeyer.  They  haye  but 
one  daily  meal,  seryed  only  on  earthen-ware,  and  liye 
on  alms.  Their  garments  they  dye  with  red  earth,  and 
always  carry  a  long  bamboo  cane  in  their  hands.  Thia 
dass  is  a  regular  nomad  tribe ;  they  do  not  eycn  stay 
two  nights  in  the  same  place.  They  are  taught  in  their 
sacred  writings  to  look  forward  with  desire  to  the  sepa- 
ration  of  the  soul  from  the  body.  Lust,  anger,  ayarice, 
pride,  reyenge,  and  the  loye  of  this  world  they  consider 
their  most  formidable  enemiea,  and  pray  to  their  goda 
to  deliyer  them  from  one  and  all  of  these  aius.  The 
last-fuimed  class,  the  Aradoutcu^  foraake  their  familiea, 
both  their  wiyea  and  their  offi^ring,  and  anything  that 
would  make  one  of  them  dependent  on  the  other  for 
production.  Thua  they  deny  themselyea  eyen  the  iiso 
of  thoae  thinga  which  the  other  two  claaaea  of  Jagub 
are  wont  to  enjoy.  They  are  habilitated  only  with  a 
amall  piece  of  linen  doth  to  coycr  their  8cx.  Their 
food  they  procure  from  atrangers,  to  whose  houscs  they 
go  when  hungry,  and  eat  anything  that  \s  ofTcred  them. 
These  deyotees  eapecially  frequent  the  banka  of  the  sa- 
cred Hindu  riyers  and  the  neighborhood  of  great  temples, 
both  for  religious  motiycs  and  in  onler  to  obtain  most 
readily  alma  and  food,  particularly  milk  and  fruita.  They 
haye  one  Oriental  custom,  yiz.  rubbing  their  body  with 
ashea,  no  doubt  to  free  themaelyea  from  the  stain  of  sin. 
See  Disteri,  on  the  Religiom^  etc.,  ofthe  Banians,  apud  ^e- 
lig.  Cer,  yoL  iii ;  CnufuTdf  Sketches  ofthe  Ilindooty  i,  235 
sq. ;  Broughton,  Bibłioth.  Uist.  Sac.  i,  499.     (J.  H.  W.) 

Ja^^gur  (Heb.  Yagur\  nsiij,  place  oftojoum;  Sept. 
'layovp  y.  r.  'Aowp),  a  city  on  the  south  or  Idum»an 
border  of  Judah,  mentioned  between  £der  and  Kinah 
(Joah.  xy,  21).  "  Its  name  might  perhaps  indicate  that 
it  was  one  of  the  fortiiied  camping-grounds  of  the  bor- 
der Arabs"  (Kitto).  «The  Jagur,  ąuotcd  by  Schwarz 
{Paiegt,  p.  99)  from  the  Talmud  as  one  of  the  bounda- 
riea  of  the  territory  of  Aahkelon,  muat  have  beeu  fur- 
ther  to  the  north-weat"  (Smith).  The  poeition  of  the 
town  here  considered  can  only  be  conjectured  as  not 
yery  far  from  the  Dead  Sea.  It  is  not  mentioned 
among  the  towns  set  ofT  to  Simeon  (Josh.  xix,  2-8), 
though  it  probably  was  one  of  them.  It  was  poasibly 
situated  in  wady  Jurrah,  which  nuis  into  the  south-weat 
end  of  the  Dead  Sea. 

Jah  (Heb.  Yahf  Jnj,  a  contraction  for  t\iH^y  Jeho^ 
vahj  Psa.  lxviii,  4,  elaewhere  rendered  "Lord").  See 
Jehoyah  ;  Hallblujah.  It  alao  entcra  into  the  com- 
poaition  of  many  Heb.  namea,  aa  Adonijah,  Isaiah,  etc 

Ja^hath  (Hebrew  Yach'ath,  rn^,  prób.  for  nnn^, 
union\  Sept  *Ił'd,  but  'Ui^  in  1  Chroń,  vi, 43,  and  'lya^ 
V.  r.  'la^  in  1  Chroń.  xxiy,  22),  the  name  of  a  deacend- 
ant  of  Judah  and  of  several  Le^dtes. 

1.  A  son  of  Shimei  and  grandson  of  Gershom,  the 
son  of  Leyi  (1  Chroń,  xxiii,  10) ;  yet  no  such  son  ia 
mentioned  in  yer.  9,  where  the  three  sons  of  Shimei  are 
by  some  error  (probably  the  transposition  of  the  latter 
clause)  attributed  to  his  brother  Laadan,  wbile  in  verse 
U  Jahath  is  stated  to  haye  been  **  chief*  (i.  e.  most  nu- 
merous  in  poeterity)  of  the  four  aona  of  ShimeL  A 
aimilar  diaagreement  appeara  in  the  parallel  paasage  (1 
Chroń,  yi),  where  Jahath  (ver.  43)  occura  as  the  son  of 
Gershom  (prób.  by  the  transposition  of  Shimei's  name 
into  the  preceding  verse),  and  again  (vor.  20)  as  a  son 
of  Libfuih  (L  e.  Laadan),  inatead  of  Shimei  (comp.  Zim- 
nah,  the  son  of  Jahath,  yer.  20,  42).  RC.  considerably 
post  1856. 

2.  Son  of  Reaiah  (or  Haroeh),  of  the  posterity  of 
Hezron,  and  father  of  two  aona  (1  Chroń,  iy,  2).  B.C. 
poat  1612. 


JAEAZ 


?48 


JAHN 


3.  One  of  the  sona  of  Shelomoth  (or  SheloiniŁh)i  a 
desoendant  of  Izhar,  of  the  family  of  Kohath,  appointed 
to  a  prominent  place  in  the  sacred  seryioes  by  Dayid  (1 
Chroń,  xxiv,  22).    RC.1014. 

4.  One  of  the  Levitacal  oveneen  of  the  Tempie  re* 
pairs  institated  by  Josiah ;  he  bdonged  to  the  family 
of  Merari  (2  Chroń.  zxxiv,  12).    RC  628. 

Ja^haz  (Heb.  Ya'hats,  yJl^,  trodden  down,  Isa.  xv, 
4;  Jer.  xlviii,  84;  Sept,  'lawa;  alao  with  n  local  and 
in  pause,  ^l3Cri]^  Yah'tsah,  Numb.  xxi,  28,  Sept  lic 
'lama ;  Deut.'  ii,  82,  SepL  ilc  'la<rd ;  and  this  even 
with  a  prefix,  f^Stnuął  Judg.  xi,  20,  Sept.  ilc  'lama ; 
but  Ukewiae  with  H  paragogic,  rtXi1^,  Yah^tsah,  Sept. 
'lama^  Joeh.  xiii,  18;  A.  Yere.  "  Jahaza;"  'Ia<ra,  Jer. 
xlviii,  21, "  Jahazah ;"  'lama,  Joeh.  xxi,  86, "  Jahazah ;" 
'Pf^C  V.  r.  'laoffdf  2  Chroń,  vi,  78, "  Jahzah"),  a  town 
be}'ond  the  Jordan,  where  Sihon  was  defeated,  in  the 
borders  of  Moab  and  the  region  of  the  Ammonites 
(Numb.  xxi,  28 ;  Deut.  ii,  82 ;  Judg.  xi,  20) ;  ńtuated 
in  the  tribe  of  Reuben  (Josh.  xiii,  18),  and  assigned  to 
the  Merarite  Levite8  (Josh.  xxi,  36;  1  Chroń,  vi,  78), 
In  Isa.  XV,  4;  Jer.  xlviii,  21,  it  appeara  aa  one  of  the 
Moabitish  placea  that  8u£fered  from  the  transit  of  the 
Babylonian  conquerors  through  the  "plain  country"*  (i.  c. 
the  Miskor,  the  mod.  Belka).  The  whole  country  east 
of  the  Dead  Sea  had  originally  been  given  to  the  Moab- 
ites  and  Ammonites  (Gen.  xix,  86-88 ;  Deut.  ii,  19-22) ; 
but  the  warlike  Amorites  from  the  west  of  the  Jordan 
oonquercd  them,  and  expelled  them  from  the  region 
north  of  the  river  Amon.  From  the  Amorites  the  Is- 
raelites  took  this  countr}^  but  subeequently  the  Am- 
monites claimed  it  as  theirs  (Judg.  xi,  13),  and  on  the 
declinc  of  Jewish  power  the  Moabites  and  Ammonites 
again  took  poasession  of  it.  Hitzig  (Zu  Jesa,  ad  loc)  re- 
gards  Jahaz  and  Jahzah  as  dilTerent  places  (so  KeU  on 
Josh.  ad  loc,  urging  that  they  are  distinguished  in  the 
passages  of  Jer.) ;  but  this  is  unnecessary  (so  Winer, 
Realw,  8.  V.  Jahaz),  and  at  variance  with  the  philology. 
It  appears  to  have  been  situated  on  the  edge  of  the  des- 
ert  (see  Raumer,  Zug  d.  Igr,  p.  53 ;  Hengstenberg,  BU- 
eam,  p.  239).  See  Ekodus.  From  the  terms  of  the  nar- 
rative  in  Numb.  xxi  and  Deut.  ii  we  should  expect  that 
Jahaz  was  in  the  extreme  south  part  of  the  territoiy  of 
Sihon,  but  yet  north  of  the  River  Amon  (see  Deut.  ii, 
24, 86;  and  the  words  ki  verBe  81,  **begin  to  possess*'), 
and  in  exactly  this  position  a  site  named  Jazaza  is 
mentioned  by  Schwarz  (PaksU  p.  227,  "a  village  to  the 
Bouth-west  of  Dhiban") ;  but  this  lacka  confirmation,  e»- 
pecially  as  Eusebius  and  Jerome  {Onomast,  s.  v.  'Uffud, 
Jassa)  place  it  between  Medeba  (Mtfda/Aiiay)  and  Dibon 
(Ał/3oi;c,  Deblathaim);  and  the  latter  states  that  **  Ja- 
haz lics  oppositc  the  Dead  Sea,  at  the  boundary  of  the 
region  of  Moab."  These  reąuirementa  are  met  by  sup- 
posing  Jahaz  to  have  been  situated  in  the  open  tract  at 
the  head  of  wady  Waleh,  between  Amun  on  the  east, 
and  Jebel  Humeh  on  the  west 

Jaha^za  (Josh.  xiii,  18)  or  Jaha^zah  (Josh.  xxi, 
86 ;  Jer.  xlviii,  21).    See  Jahaz. 

Jahazi^ah  (Heb.  Ya(Azeyah%  H^tn^  behdd  by  Je- 
hovah,'  Sept  'la^iac),  son  of  Tikvah,  apparently  a 
priest,  one  of  those  deputed  by  Ezra  to  asccrtain  which 
of  the  Jews  had  married  Gentile  wive8  ailer  the  return 
Irom  Babylon  (Ezra  x,  15).    RC  459. 

Jaha^zigl  (Hebrew  Yaehaziil\  bK'»Trn,  beheld  by 
God;  Sept  'U^triK  'laZui\j  '0^(4^,  'M^ń^)i  the  name 
of  five  men.    See  also  Jahzeeu 

1.  The  third  "son"  of  Hebron,  the  grandaon  of  Levi 
'  -"ugh  Kohath  (1  Chroń,  xxiii,  19;  xxiv,  88).    RC. 
bly  post  1618,  perhape  1014. 
^e  of  the  Benjamite  warriors  who  joined  David 
Bf  (1  Chroń,  xii,  4>    RC.  1055. 
t  of  the  priesta  who  preceded  the  aacred  ark 
ipeta  on  ito  removal  to  Jemaalem  (1  Chroń. 
\C.  ai.  1048. 


4.  The  son  of  Zechariah,  a  Levite  of  the  lamily  of 
Aaaph,  who  predicted  to  Jehoahaphat  his  triumph  over 
the  ho6t  of  the  Moabites  with  such  decided  assurancea. 
See  Jkhoshaphat.  He  is  nowhere  else  mentioned  in 
Scripture,  but  his  prophecy  on  this  oceasion  is  given  in 
fuli:  "Then  upon  Jahaziel,  the  son  of  Zechariah,  the 
son  of  Benaiah,  the  son  of  Jeiel,  the  son  of  Hattaniah,  a 
Levite  of  the  sona  of  Asaph,  came  the  Spirit  of  the 
Lord  in  the  midst  of  the  congregation ;  and  he  said, 
Hearken  ye,  all  Judah,  and  ye  inhabitants  of  Jemaa- 
lem, and  thou,  king  Jehoahaphat,  thus  saith  the  Lord 
unto  you,  Be  not  aftaid  nor  dismayed  by  reasou  of  this 
great  multitude;  for  the  battle  is  not  yours,  but  God*a. 
To-morrow  go  ye  down  against  them :  behold,  they 
come  up  by  the  dilf  of  Ziz ;  and  ye  shall  find  them  at 
the  end  of  the  brook,  before  thewildemess  of  JeracL 
Ye  shall  not  need  to  fight  in  this  battle :  set  yonr^ 
selve8,  stand  ye  still,  and  see  the  Balvation  of  theLord 
with  you,  O  Judah  and  Jemsalem :  fear  not,  nor  be  dis- 
mayed ;  to-morrow  go  out  against  them,  for  the  Lord 
will  be  with  you"  (2  Chroń,  xx,  14-17).    Ra  cir.  896. 

5.  One  of  the  **  sons"  of  Shechaniah,  whoee  son  (Ben- 
Jahaziel,  but  his  name  is  not  otherwise  given ;  indeed, 
there  is  evidcnt]y  some  confusion  in  the  text ;  comp.  ver. 
8)  is  said  to  have  retumed  from  Babylon  with  800  males 
of  his  retainers  (Ezra  viii,  5).  RC.  antę  459.  See 
Shechaniah. 

Jah^dai  (Heb.  Yahday\  "^^hj,  prob.  ^a<pfr;  Sept 
'la^at),  a  desccndant  apparently  of  Caleb,  of  the  family 
of  Hezron;  his  sons*  names  are  given,  but,  as  his  own 
parcntage  is  not  stated  (1  Chroń,  ii,  47),  it  can  only  be 
conjectured  that  he  was  the  son  of  the  preceding  Gazez, 
the  son  (dilTcrent  ftom  the  brother)  of  Haran  (ver.  46). 
RC.  prob.  post  1612.  Yarious  other  suggestions  re- 
garding  the  name  have  been  madc,  as  that  Gazez,  the 
name  preceding,  should  be  Jahdai  (Houbigant,  ad  loc) ; 
that  Jahdai  was  a  concubinc  of  Caleb  (Gmnenbcig, 
ąuoted  by  Michaelis,  AdnoUt^(\.  loc),  etc ;  but  these  are 
merę  groundleas  suppositions  (see  Burrington,  i,  216; 
Bertheau,  Comment,  ad  loc). 

Jah'diSl  (Heb.  YachdUl',  i^-^^n^  madsjtniful  by 
God;  Sept  'Mir\\\  one  of  the  famous  chieAains  of  the 
tribe  of  Manasseh  resident  in  northem  Baahan  (1  Chroń. 
V,  24).    RC.  apparently  720. 

Jah^do  (Heb.  Yachdo',  i'nn;^,  his  tmion;  otherwise 
for  *|Tnn^,  united;  Sept  'leWai),  son  of  Buz  and  father 
of  Jeshishai,  of  the  dcscendauts  of  Abihail,  resident  in 
Gilead  (1  Chroń.  v,  14).    RC  between  1098  and  782. 

Jahaeel  (Heb.  YackUtil',  ^K^H^  hopmg  in  Godf 
Sept  'Axoi)\\  the  last  named  of  the  three  sons  of  Zeb- 
ulon  (Clen.  xlvi,  14 ;  Numb.  xxvi,  26).  His  descend- 
anta  are  called  Jahleelttes  (Heb.  YaddeiW,  "^^^^^^^i 
Sept  'Axo»yXi,  Numb.  xxvi,  26).    RC.  1856. 

Jah^leSlite  (Numb.  xxvi,  26).    See  Jahleel. 

Jah^mal  (Heb.  Yachmay%  ^W^^  profsctcr ;  Sept 
'ltfAov\  one  of  the  ^  sons"  of  Tola,  grandson  of  Issachar 
(1  Chroń,  vii,  2).    RC.  cir.  1658. 

Jahn,  JoHAKS,  a  distinguished  German  Roman 
Catholic  theologian  and  Orientalist,  was  bom  at  Tas- 
witz,  in  Moravia,  June  18, 1750.  He  studied  at  the  Gym- 
nasium  of  Znaym,  the  Unłverńty  of  OlmUtz,  and  the 
Rom.  Cath.  Theological  Seminary  of  Bmck,  entered  the 
Church,  and  was  for  some  time  a  priest  at  Mislitz.  In 
1782  he  received  the  doctorate  from  OlmUtz,  and,  after 
having  filled  with  great  distinction  the  position  of  pro- 
fessor  of  Oriental  languages  and  Biblical  hermeneutics 
at  Bmck,  he  was,  in  1789,  called  to  the  Univcr8ity  of 
Yienna  as  professor  of  the  Oriental  languages,  dogmat- 
ics,  and  Biblical  archieology.  At  this  high  school  he 
labored  successfuUy  for  8evcnteen  years,  amid  suspiciona 
and  petty  persecutions  from  the  court  of  Borne  which 
pained  łds  ingenuous  spirit  Some  words  in  the  pref- 
ace  of  his  Einlnt,  in  d.  gótil.  BUcher  d,  aiten  Bundes  (Yi- 
enna, 1708, 1802, 1808,  2  vol8. 8vo) ;  the  aasertion  that 


JAHZAH 


149 


JAINAS 


the  books  of  Job,  Jonah,  Judith,  and  Tobtt  ara  didactic 
poema;  and  that  the  daemoniaca  in  the  N.  T.  were  poa- 
aeaaed  with  dangerous  diaeaaes,  not  with  the  devil,  were 
madę  chargea  againat  him.  In  1792  complainta  of  hia 
iinfloandneas  were  laid  before  the  emperor  Francia  II  by 
Cardinal  Migazzi,  which  reaulted  in  the  appointment  g[ 
a  special  commiasion  to  esamine  the  chaigea.  Athough 
it  was  decided  that  Jahn'8  yiews  were  not  heterodoz, 
they  cautioned  him  to  be  morę  careful  in  the  futurę  in 
expres8ing  opiniona  likely  to  lead  to  interpretations 
contrary  to  the  dogmas  of  M«  Churck,  and  even  suggest- 
ed  a  change  of  the  obnoxiou8  paaaagea  (oomp.  Henke, 
Archirf,  d,  neueste  Kirchengetchichte,  ii,  61  8q. ;  P.  J.  S. 
Huth,  Vertuch  einer  Kirchaufuch,  d,  18*«  Jahrh,  ii,  875, 
876).  Though  he  honestly  and  willingly  aubmitted, 
his  detractors  continued  their  machinationa  till  he  was 
(in  1806)  remored  from  the  congenial  duties  of  an  office 
to  which  he  had  dedicated  his  life,  and  was  madę,  merely, 
of  course,  to  prevent  scandal  which  might  have  reaulted 
from  a  deprivation  of  all  dignity,  canon  or  Domherr  in 
the  metropolitan  church  of  St.  Stephen.  £yen  before 
he  was  compelled  to  resign  hb  professorship,  two  of  his 
books,  Iniroductio  in  Ubro»  Bocroa  Yeterit  Testamenti  tn 
eompendium  redacta  (Yienna,  1804),  and  Archaologia 
BMica  in  eompendium  redacta  (Yienna,  1805),  which 
were  then  rery  popular  among  the  uniyersity  students, 
were  condemned  and  placed  on  the  Index,  without  their 
anthor  being  heard  in  his  defence.  Jahn  died  Aug.  16, 
1816.  Besides  the  works  which  we  have  had  occasion 
to  cite,  and  a  series  of  grammars  and  chrestomathiea  on 
the  Hebrew,  Syriac,  Arabie,  and  Chaldee  languages,  he 
wrote,  Biblische  A  rchaohgie  (Yienna,  1797-1805, 5  yoIs.  ; 
Yols.  i  and  ii, 2d  edition,  1817-1825)  '.—Lexioon  Arabico- 
Latinum,  Chrestomaihia  Arabiom  accommodałum  (Vien. 
1802) :  this  work  waa  oonsidered  the  best  of  ita  kind 
until  the  publication  of  a  similar  production  by  Sylres- 
ter  de  Sacy : — Biblia  Ilebraica  digeasit^  et  grariorea  kc- 
tionum  rarietałes  adjedt  (Yien.  1806,  4  ypls.  royal  8vo) : 
— Enchiridinn  Hermeneułica  generalia  (almlarumf  etc 
(Yienna,  1812;  with  an  Appmdix  hermeneut,,  a,  exercir 
iationea  exegełiaE,  Menna,  1813):  —  Yaticinia  Prophe- 
tarum  de  Jeau  Meaaia,  commetUcuriua  criticu*  in  Ubroa 
propheticoa  Vełeria  Teatamenti  (Yien.  1815),  etc  Some 
time  after  his  death  appeared  Nacktrage  zu  JahCa  theo' 
logiachen  Werhen,  published  from  his  MSS.  (Tubingen, 
1821),  which  contained  8ix  interesting  diaeertations  on 
yarious  Biblical  subjects,  and  with  them  some  letters  of 
Jahn'9,  giving  a  elew  to  the  motives  of  the  persecutions 
directed  against  him.  Jahn*s  memory  deserres  to  be 
cherished  by  all  true  lovers  of  Oriental  scholarship.  He 
fumished  text-books  for  the  study  of  those  languages 
superior  to  any  of  his  time,  and,  although  they  are  at 
present  obsolete,  hc  certainly  aided  modem  scholarship 
by  fumishing  superior  tools.  As  a  theological  wiiter  he 
was  elear  and  methodieal,  and  his  numerous  works,  of 
which  sereral  enjoy  an  English  dress,  "diffused  a 
knowledge  of  Biblical  subjects  in  places  and  circles 
where  the  books  of  Protestants  would  scarcely  haye 
been  receiycd.  The  latter,  howeyer,  haye  appreciated 
his  writings  fully  as  much  as  Roman  CathoUca.  He 
was  not  profound  in  any  one  thing,  because  he  scattered 
his  energies  oyer  so  wide  a  field ;  but  he  waa  a  most 
useful  author,  and  one  of  hia  books  (the  A  rchaologg)  is 
still  the  largest  and  best  on  the  subjects  of  which  it 
treats.*'  As  a  theologian  of  the  Romish  Church  be  was 
certainly  exceedingly  liberał,  so  much  so  that  Heng- 
stenberg  (on  the  Pentateuch)  rather  flnds  fault  with 
him.  See  Felder,  Gelehrt.  Lex.  d.  KathoL  Gciatiichkeit, 
1,337;  H.  Doring,  D.geUhrten  Tkeologen  Deutachkmda^ 
ii,  7  sq. ;  Meusel,  Gelehrt,  Deułachianda  (5th  ed.),  iii,  510 ; 
X,  13 ;  xi,  994 ;  xiy,  255 ;  xyiii,  254 ;  xxiii,  18 ;  Ersch 
u.  Gruber,  A  Og,  Encyh, ;  Kitto,  BibL  Cychp,  s.  y. ;  Wer- 
ner, Geach,  d,  KatAoL  TheoL  p.  273  8q. 

Jah'Bah  (1  Chroń,  yi,  78).    See  Jahaz. 

Jah^seSl  (Heb.  YachUeUl', ^K^n%  aUottedhj  God; 
Sept.  'AacjjX),  the  first  named  of  the  sona  of  ^aphtali 


(Gen.  xlyi,  24).  His  deacendants  are  called  JAHZEEbk 
ITE8  (Heb.  Yaeht»eUi%  ''iK^n^  Sept.  'AwijAi,  Numb. 
xxyi,  48).  In  1  Chroń,  yii,  13,  the  name  is  wńtten 
Jahzikl  (iX''Sn'',  Yachtaitl',  id.;  Sept  'laaiiiK),  B. 
C.  1866. 

Jah'xeelite  (Numb.  xxyi,  48).    See  Jahzeel. 

Jah^zerah  (Heb.  Yachse'rah,  ^l'7!^^  retumtr; 
but  Gresenius  prefers  to  read  M^tn^,  i.  e.  Jahaziah; 
Sept.  'le^piac  y.  r.  'E^tpa,  Yulg.  Jezrd)^  son  of  Meshul- 
lam  and  father  of  Adiel,  a  priest  (1  Chroń,  ix,  12).  KC. 
long  antę  636.  He  is  probably  the  same  with  Ahasai, 
the  father  of  Azareel  (Neh.  xi,  13),  sińce  the  preceding 
and  the  following  name  are  alike. 

Jah^slSl  (1  Chroń,  yii,  13).    See  Jahzeeu 

Jallor  {Burfio^itKa^f  guard  o/ a  priaoner^  Acta  xvi, 
28,27,86).    SeePRiaoN. 

Jainas,  the  name  of  a  yery  powerfiil  heterDdox  aect 
of  Hindus  particnlarly  flourishing  in  the  southem  and 
western  parta  of  Hindustan.  Their  name,  Jainaa,  sig> 
nifiea  foUoweni  of  Jma,  the  generic  name  of  deified 
saints ;  but,  as  these  sainta  are  also  called  A  rkat^  the 
sect  is  frequently  called  Arhataa,  The  tenets  of  this 
sect  are  in  seyeral  respects  analogous  to  those  of  the 
Buddhists  [see  Buddhissi],  but  they  resemble  in  others 
thoee  of  the  Biahmanical  Hindus.  like  the  Buddhists, 
they  deny  the  diyine  origin  and  authority  of  the  Yeda 
(which,  howeyer,  they  do  not  hesitate  to  quote  if  the 
doctrines  of  the  latter  are  conformable  to  the  Jaina  ten- 
ets), and  woiship  certain  saints  whom  they  oonsider  su- 
perior to  the  other  beings  of  their  pantheon.  They  dif- 
fer,  indeed,  irom  them  in  regard  to  the  history  of  theae 
personages,  but  the  original  notion  which  preyails  in  thia 
worship  is  the  same.  Like  the  Brahmanieal  Hindus, 
on  the  other  band,  they  admit  the  institution  of  caste, 
and  perform  the  easential  oeremonies  called  Sanakdrcu 
(q.  y.),  and  reoognise  some  of  the  subordinate  deities  of 
the  Uindu  pantheon — at  ieast  apparently,  as  they  do 
not  pay  especial  homage  to  them,  and  as  they  disrcgaid 
completely  all  those  Brahmanieal  ritea  which  inyolye 
the  destruction  of  animal  life.  The  Jainas  haye  their 
own  Puranas  and  other  religioua  books,  which  in  the 
main  oonfine  themselyes  to  a  delineation  of  their  Tor^ 
thankharas,  or  deified  teachers  of  the  sect.  The  Yedas 
of  the  Brahmans  they  supply  by  their  Siddhóntaa  and 
Agetmas, 

Their  pecnliar  doctrinea  are  that  ''all  objects,  mate- 
riał or  jibetract,  are  arranged  under  nine  categoriea,  call- 
ed TaUwaa  (truths  or  principles),  of  which  we  ne^  no- 
tice  only  the  ninth  and  last,  called  Mokaha,  or  liberation 
of  the  yital  spirit  from  the  bonds  of  action,  Le.  finał 
emancipation.  In  refeienoe  to  it  the  Jainas  not  only 
aifirm  that  there  is  such  a  state,  but  they  deflne  the  size 
of  the  emancipated  souls,  the  place  where  they  liye, 
their  tangible  qualitie8,  the  duration  of  their  exiBtence, 
the  distance  at  which  they  are  ftom  one  another,  their 
parta,  natures,  and  numbeia.  Finał  emancipation  b  only 
obtained  'in  a  state  of  manhood  (not  in  that  of  a  good 
demon,  or  bmte),  while  in  possession  of  fiye  senses: 
while  poasessing  a  body  capabłe  of  yoluntary  motion,  in 
a  condition  of  possibility;  while  poseesstng  a  mind» 
through  the  sacrament  of  the  highest  asceticism,  in  that 
path  of  rectitude  in  which  there  is  no  retrogression ; 
Uirough  the  possession  of  perfect  Imowledge  and  yision ; 
and  in  the  practice  of  abetinence.'  Those  who  attain  to 
finał  liberation  do  not  return  to  a  worldly  state,  and 
there  is  no  interruption  to  their  bliss.  They  liaye  per- 
fect yiaion  and  Imowledge,  and  do  not  depend  on  worka 
(see  J.  Steyenson,  The  Kalpa  Sutra  and  Nava  Tałtwd), 
The  principles  of  faith,  as  mentioned  before,  are  common 
to  all  classes  of  Jainas,  but  some  differences  occur  in  the 
practice  of  their  duties,  as  they  are  diyided  into  rełig- 
ious  and  lay  ordera — Yatia  and  Sr&oakas,  Both,  of 
oourae,  must  place  impłicit  belief  in  the  doctrinea  of  tbór 
saints ;  but  the  Yaii  bas  to  lead  a  life  of  abstinenoe^ 
tadtumity,  and  oontinence ;  he  should  wear  a  thia  cloUi 


ł-  I 


,  ry 


JAHAZ 


748 


JAHN 


3.  One  of  the  sons  of  Shdomoth  (or  Shelomith),  a 
deacendant  of  Izhar,  of  the  family  of  Kohath,  appomted 
to  a  prominent  place  in  the  sacred  aeryices  bj  David  (1 
Chroń.  X3dv,  22>     RC.  1014. 

4.  One  of  the  Levitical  oyeneen  of  the  Tempie  re- 
paiiB  institated  by  Joeiah ;  he  belonged  to  the  family 
of  Menuri  (2  Chroń,  xxxiv,  12).     B.a  628. 

Ja^haz  (Heb.  Ya'hais,  yn;?,  trodden  down,  Isa.  xv, 
4;  Jer.  xlviii,  84;  Sept.  'laatrd;  alflo  with  H  local  and 
in  pause,  HXnj  Yah'tsah,  Numb.  xxi,  28,  Sept  lic 
'lawa ;  Deut.'  ii,  82,  SepL  tlę  'laird ;  and  this  even 
with  a  prefix,  rłStnuą,  Judg.  xi,  20,  Sept.  lic  'leunrd ; 
but  Ukewise  with  rt  paragogic,  ^^h^,  Yah't8ah,  Sept. 
'lawa,  Josh.  xiii,  18;  A.  Yere.  "Jahaza;"  'laira,  Jer. 
xlviii,  21, "  Jahazah ;"  'lawa,  Josh.  xxi,  86, "  Jahazah ;" 
*P«0ac  V.  r.  'laffffó,  2  Chroń,  vi,  78, "  Jahzah"),  a  town 
beyond  the  Jordan,  where  Sihon  waa  defeated,  in  the 
borders  of  Moab  and  the  region  of  the  Ammonites 
(Numb.  xxi,  23 ;  DeuU  ii,  82 ;  Judg.  xi,  20) ;  situated 
in  the  tńbe  of  Reuben  (Josh.  xiii,  18),  and  assigned  to 
the  Merarite  Levites  (Josh.  xxi,  86;  1  Chroń,  vi,  78). 
In  Isa.  XV,  4;  Jer.  xlviii,  21,  it  appeara  as  one  of  the 
Moabitish  places  that  suffeied  from  the  transit  of  the 
Babylonian  conąuerors  through  the  "  plain  country^  (L  e. 
the  MUhor,  the  mod.  Belka).  The  whole  country  east 
of  the  Dead  Sea  had  originally  been  given  to  the  Moab- 
ites  and  Ammonites  (Gen.  xix,  86-38 ;  Deut  ii,  19-22) ; 
but  the  warlike  Amorites  from  the  west  of  the  Jordan 
Gonquered  them,  and  expelled  them  from  the  region 
north  of  the  river  Amoiu  From  the  Amorites  the  Is- 
raelites  took  this  country,  but  subeeąuently  the  Am- 
monites claimed  it  as  theirs  (Judg.  xi,  18),  and  on  the 
decUiie  of  Jewish  power  the  Moabites  and  Ammonites 
again  took  possession  of  it  II  itzig  (Zu  Jęta,  ad  loc)  re- 
gards  Jahaz  and  Jahzah  as  different  places  (so  KeU  on 
Josh.  ad  loc,  urging  that  they  are  distinguished  in  the 
passages  of  Jer.) ;  but  this  is  unnecessary  (so  Winer, 
Realw.  8.  V.  Jahaz),  and  at  variance  with  the  philolog;y. 
It  appears  to  have  been  situated  on  the  edge  of  the  des- 
ert  (see  Raumer,  Zug  d,  Iśr,  p.  68 ;  Hengstenberg,  BU- 
eamj  p.  239).  See  Exodus.  From  the  terms  of  the  nar- 
nitive  in  Numb.  xxi  and  Deut  ii  we  ahould  expect  that 
Jahaz  was  in  the  extreme  south  part  of  the  territory  of 
Sihon,  but  yet  north  of  the  River  Amon  (see  Deut  ii, 
24, 86;  and  the  worda  m  yerse  81,  **  begin  to  poesess*^, 
and  in  exactly  this  position  a  site  named  Jazaza  is 
mentioned  by  Schwarz  {Paiest,  p.  227,  "a  village  to  the 
south-west  of  Dhiban**) ;  but  thia  lacks  confirmation,  e»- 
pecially  as  Euaebius  and  Jerome  {Onomast,  s.  v.  'Ictnra, 
Jassa)  place  it  between  Medeba  (MridafŁur)  and  Dibon 
{At^ot/Cf  Deblathaim);  and  the  latter  statea  that  "Ja- 
haz lies  opposite  the  Dead  Sea,  at  the  boundary  of  the 
region  of  Moab."  These  requirement8  are  met  by  sup- 
posing  Jahaz  to  have  been  situated  in  the  open  tract  at 
the  head  of  wady  Waleh,  between  Amun  on  the  east, 
and  Jebel  Huraeh  on  the  west 

Jaha^za  (Josh.  xiii,  18)  or  Jaha^sah  (Josh.  xxi, 
86;  Jer.  xlviii,  21).    See  Jahaz. 

Jahazi^ah  (Heb.  FocŁs^oA',  rtjtn^  hehddhy  Je- 
hovah;  Sept  'la^iac))  K>n  of  Tikvah,  apparently  a 
priest,  one  of  those  deputed  by  Ezra  to  ascertain  whlch 
of  the  Jews  had  married  Gentile  wives  ailer  the  return 
Irom  Babylon  (Ezra  x,  15).     B.C.  459. 

Jaha^ziSl  (Hebrew  locAozirf/',  bc"^?!!^,  bekdd  by 
God;  Sept.  'IeCt^X,  'Ia2^i^X,  'O^c^A,  'A^ćj^A),  the  name 
of  five  men.    See  alao  J  arkeel. 

1.  The  third  "son"  of  Hebron,  the  grandaon  of  Levi 
through  Kohath  (1  Chroń,  xxiii,  19;  xxiv,  88).  B.C. 
probably  post  1618,  perhaps  1014. 

2.  One  of  the  Benjamite  warriors  who  joined  David 
at  Ziklag  (1  Chroń,  xii,  4).     B.C  1055. 

3.  One  of  the  priests  who  preceded  the  sacred  ark 
with  tnunpets  on  its  removal  to  Jenualem  (1  Chroń. 
xvi,  6).    Kadr.  1048. 


4.  The  aon  of  Zechariah,  a  Levite  of  the  tuaSUj  of 
Asaph,  who  predicted  to  Jehoehaphat  his  triumph  over 
the  hoet  of  the  Moabites  with  such  decided  aaninnoes. 
See  Jehoshaphat.  He  ia  nowhere  dse  mentioned  in 
Scńpture,  but  hia  prophecy  on  thia  occańon  is  giren  io 
fuli:  "Then  upon  Jahaziel,  the  aon  of  Zechariah,  the 
son  of  Benaiah,  the  aon  of  Jeiel,  the  aon  of  Mattaniah,  a 
Levite  of  the  aona  of  Aaaph,  came  the  Spirit  of  the 
Lord  in  the  midat  of  the  congregation ;  and  he  said, 
Hearken  ye,  all  Judah,  and  ire  inhabitants  of  Jeran- 
lem,  and  thou,  king  Jeboahaphat,  thna  aaith  the  Lord 
unto  yon,  Be  not  aftaid  nor  diamayed  by  reason  of  this 
great  multitude;  for  the  battle  is  not  yoors,  but  God\ 
To-morrow  go  ye  down  againat  them :  behold,  they 
come  np  by  the  diff  of  Ziz;  and  ye  ahall  find  them  at 
the  end  of  the  brook,  before  thewildemeas  of  JerueL 
Ye  ahall  not  need  to  fight  in  this  battle :  aet  yoniw 
selve8,  stand  ye  atill,  and  aee  the  Balvation  of  theLord 
with  you,  O  Judah  and  Jerusalem :  fear  not,  nor  be  dia- 
mayed ;  to-moTTOW  go  out  againat  them,  for  the  Loid 
will  be  with  you"  (2  Chroń,  xx,  14^17).    KC  dr.  896. 

5.  One  of  the  **  aona"  of  Shcchaniah,  whpse  aon  (Ben- 
Jahaziel,  but  hia  name  is  not  otherwiae  given;  indeed, 
theie  ia  evldcntly  aome  confiuion  in  the  text ;  comp.  ver. 
8)  is  aaid  to  have  retumed  from  Babylon  with  800  males 
of  his  retaineis  (Ezra  viii,  5).  KC  antę  459.  See 
Shbchaniah. 

Jah'^dai  (Heb.  Yahday\  ■»^tt^,prob.^nw5pfr;  Sept 
'la^at),  a  deacendant  apparently  of  Caleb,  of  the  family 
of  Hezron;  hia  sona'  names  are  given,  but,  as  his  own 
parentage  is  not  stated  (1  Chroń,  ii,  47),  it  can  only  be 
conjectured  that  he  was  the  son  of  the  preceding  Gazei, 
the  aon  (dilTerent  fh)m  the  brother)  of  Haran  (ver.  4^. 
B.C  prob.  post  1612.  Yariona  other  suggestions  re- 
gardiiig  the  name  have  been  madę,  aa  that  Gazez,  the 
name  precciUng,  ahould  be  Jahdai  (Houlńgant,  ad  loc) ; 
that  Jahdai  waa  a  concubine  of  Caleb  (Grunenbei^ 
quoted  by  Michadis,  i4c&u)/.'ad  loc.),  etc ;  but  these  are 
merę  groundleaa  auppositiona  (aee  Burrington,  i,  216; 
Bertheau,  Commenł,  ad  loc.). 

Jah'dii§l  (Heb.  Yachdiił',  ^K*'^n^  madejosfMlbf 
God;  Sept  'UStri\),  one  of  the  famoua  chieltains  of  tbe 
tiibe  of  Manaaseh  reddent  in  northera  Baahan  (1  Chnn. 
V,  24).    B.a  apparently  720. 

Jah'do  (Heb.  Yachdo%  i^^,  h\$  tadon\  othennse 
for  Vl'nri^,  united;  Sept  'Ic^^at),  aon  of  Baz  and  father 
of  Jeshiahai,  of  the  deacendanta  of  Abihail,  icsideiit  in 
GUead  (1  Chroń.  v,  14).    KC  between  1093  and  782. 

JahaeSl  (Heb.  YadtMl\  ^^t^^l^  ^^^P^  >»  GfA'* 
Sept  'Axo4X),  the  last  named  of  the  three  sona  of  Zeb- 
ulon  (Gen.  xl\ń,  14;  Numb.  xxvi,  26).  Hia  deacend- 
anta are  called  Jahleelites  (Heb.  YacMeiW,  ^^^^^^ 
Sept  'Axoł;Xi,  Numb.  xxvi,  26).     B.a  1856. 

Jah^^leSlite  (Numb.  xxvi,  26).    See  Jahleel. 

Jah^mai  (Heb.  Yackmay',  '^'Cn^,  prot«tor ;  SepL 
*UfŁov),  one  of  the  **  aona**  of  Tola,  gnndaon  of  laaachar 
(1  Chroń,  vii,  2).     KC  dr.  1658. 

Jahn,  JoHANN,  a  distinguished  German  Roman 
Cathdic  theologian  and  Orientalist,  waa  boni  at  Tas- 
witz,  in  Moravia,  June  18, 1750.  He  studied  at  the  Grut- 
nadum  of  Znaym,  the  Unirerrity  of  OlmOtz,  and  the 
Rom.  Cath.  Theological  Seminary  of  Bmck,  entered  the 
Churoh,  and  was  for  some  time  a  priest  at  Mislitz.  In 
1782  he  received  the  doctorate  from  OhnUtz,  and,  after 
having  fiUed  with  great  distinction  the  podtion  of  pnn 
feaaor  of  Oriental  languages  and  Biblical  hermeneutics 
at  Bruck,  he  waa,  in  1789,  called  to  the  Unirenity  of 
Yienna  as  profeasor  of  the  Oriental  langnagea,  dof^mat- 
ics,  and  Biblical  arduBology.  At  thia  high  sdiool  he 
labored  succeasfully  for  Bcventeen  3rearB,  amid  suąńcioos 
and  petty  persecutions  from  the  oourt  of  Romę  which 
pained  his  ingenuoua  spirit  Some  worda  in  the  pref- 
ace  of  his  EinleiL  in  d,  gótłL  BUeker  d,  aUm  Bmdu  (Yi- 
enna, 1708, 1802, 1808,  2  vola.  8vo);  the  asBertkni  that 


i 


JAHZAH 


749 


JAHfAS 


thd  booka  of  Jol>,  Jonah,  Jadith,  and  Tobit  aro  didactic 
poema;  and  tbat  the  dsemoniacs  in  the  N.  T.  were  poa- 
ocBDcd  with  dangeroua  diaeaaes,  not  with  the  deyil,  were 
madę  chargea  againat  him.  In  1792  oomplaints  of  his 
unaomidncaa  were  laid  before  the  emperor  Francis  II  by 
<»flfdin*i  Migazzi,  which  leaulted  in  the  appointment  of 
a  special  commiasion  to  exaniine  the  charge^  Athough 
it  waa  decided  that  Jahn'8  views  were  not  heterodozi 
they  cautioned  him  to  be  morę  careful  in  the  futurę  in 
ezpreasing  opiniona  likely  to  lead  to  interpretations 
oontraiy  to  the  dogmaa  of  Me  Church,  and  eren  auggeat- 
ed  a  change  of  the  obnosioua  passagea  (comp.  Henke, 
ArtkUff,  d,  fiftieste  Kirchengesckichie,  ii,  51  aq. ;  P.  J.  S. 
Huth,  Yersuek  eiaer  Kirchaiffesch,  d,  !&*•  Jahrh.  ii,  875, 
876).  Though  he  honestly  and  willingly  submitted, 
his  detractors  continued  their  machinationa  till  he  was 
(in  1806)  remoYed  from  the  congenial  duties  of  an  office 
to  which  he  had  dedicated  his  Ufe,  and  was  madę,  merely, 
of  oourse,  to  preyent  scandal  which  might  hare  reaulted 
from  a  depriration  of  all  dignity,  canon  or  Domherr  in 
the  metropolitan  church  of  St.  Stephen.  £ven  before 
be  was  compelled  to  reaign  his  professoiahip,  two  of  his 
booka,  IntroducUo  m  Ubrot  taeroi  YeterU  TeatamtnU  tn 
oompoMliicm  redacta  (Yienna,  1804),  and  A  rchaologia 
BiŃica  in  eompendium  rtdacta  (Yienna,  1805),  which 
were  then  yeiy  popular  among  the  unirersity  students, 
were  condemned  and  placed  on  the  Indes,  without  their 
anthor  being  heard  in  his  defence.  Jahn  died  Aug.  16, 
1816.  Besidea  the  works  which  we  have  had  occasion 
to  dte,  and  a  series  of  grammars  and  chrestomathiea  on 
the  H^rew,  Syriac,  Arabie,  and  Chaldee  languages,  he 
wrote,  BibUsche  A  rtAaologit  (Yienna,  1797-1805, 5  yoIs.  ; 
▼ols.  i  and  ii, 2d  edidon,  1817-1825)  i—Lexieon  Arabieo- 
Latinum,  Chrestomathia  Arabicm  ctecommodatum  (Yien. 
1802) :  thja  work  was  considered  the  best  of  ita  kind 
witil  the  publication  of  a  similar  production  by  Sylves- 
ter  de  Sacy : — Biblia  ITehraica  digeadt^  et  graviores  lec- 
tianum  rarieiates  adjecU  (Yien.  1806,  4  ypls.  royal  8vo) : 
— Enchiridion  Hermeneutica  generalia  tabularum,  etc 
(Yienna,  1812;  with  an  Appm<Ux  hermeneui^  a,  exerci- 
tcUionea  exegetic(B,  Yienna,  1813):  —  Yaiicinia  Prophe- 
tarum  de  Jeau  Meaaiuy  commentariua  criticut  in  Ubroa 
propheiicoa  Yeteria  TeatameiUi  (Vien.  1815),  etc  Some 
time  afcer  his  death  appeared  NadUrSge  zu  JahCa  theth- 
hgischtn  Werhenj  pubUshed  from  his  MSS.  (Tubingen, 
1821),  which  contained  six  interesting  disecrtations  on 
yarious  Biblical  subjects,  and  with  them  some  leŁters  of 
Jahn'9,  giying  a  elew  to  the  motires  of  the  persecutions 
directed  against  him.  Jahn's  memory  deaer>'-e8  to  be 
cherished  by  all  true  loyers  of  Oriental  scholarship.  He 
fumished  text-books  for  the  study  of  those  languages 
superior  to  any  of  his  time,  and,  although  they  are  at 
present  obaolete,  hc  certainly  aided  modem  scholarship 
by  fumishing  superior  tools.  As  a  theological  wiiter  he 
was  elear  and  methodical,  and  his  numerous  works,  of 
which  seyeral  enjoy  an  English  dress,  ^'diffused  a 
knowledge  of  Biblical  subjects  in  places  and  circles 
where  the  books  of  ProŁestants  would  scarcely  haye 
been  receiyed.  The  lattcr,  howeyer,  have  appredated 
his  writings  fully  as  much  as  Roman  Catholica.  He 
was  not  profound  in  any  one  thing,  because  he  scatteied 
his  energies  oyer  so  wide  a  field ;  but  he  was  a  most 
nseful  author,  and  one  of  his  books  (the  A  rchcaology)  is 
stiU  the  largcst  and  best  on  the  subjects  of  which  it 
treats."  As  a  theologian  of  the  Romish  Church  he  was 
certainly  esceedingly  liberał,  so  much  so  that  Heng- 
itenberg  (on  the  Pentateuch)  rather  finds  iault  with 
him.  See  Felder,  Gelthrt,  Lex.  A  KalthoL  GeiaUichJbeit^ 
i,  337 ;  H.  Doring,  D.  gelehrten  Theologen  Deutachkmda, 
ii,  7  8q. ;  Meuael,  Gelehrf.  DeułacManda  (5th  ed.),  iii,  510 ; 
X,  13;  xi,  994;  xiy,  25)5;  xyiii,  254;  xxiii,  18;  Ersch 
n.  Gruber,  AUg,  Encyh ;  Kitto,  BibL  Cydop,  s.  y. ;  Wer- 
ner, GeacK  d,  KathoL  TheoL  p.  273  sq. 

Jah'sah  (1  Chroń,  yi,  78).    See  Jahaz. 

Jah^zełSl  (Heb.  FocAtotó/',  iK?n%  aUotted  by  God; 
Sept.  'Actri\),  the  fiiat  nalned  of  the  soos  of  Naphtali 


(Gen.  xlyi,  24).  His  descendants  are  called  Jahzbel» 
ITES  (Heb.  YacktaeUi^  '^iKSn^  Sept.  'A<r«jX«,  Numb. 
xxyi,  48).  In  1  Chroń,  yii,  13,  the  name  is  written 
Jahzikl  (^K^^Sn^  YachtaUrf  id.;  Sept  'Ia(n^X).  B, 
C.  1856. 

Jah^aeSlite  (Numb.  xxyi,  48).    See  Jahzeel. 

Jah^zerah  (Heb.  Yachze^rah,  O^tn^,  retumer; 
but  Gesenius  prefen  to  read  M^tH]^,  L  e.  Jahaziah; 
Sept.  'li^ptac  y.  r.  'E^tpa,  Yulg.  Jezrd),  son  of  Mcshul- 
lam  and  father  of  Adiel,  a  priest  (1  Chroń,  ix,  12).  B.(X 
k>ng  antę  536.  He  is  probably  the  same  with  Ahasai, 
the  father  of  Azareel  (Neh.  xi,  13),  sińce  the  preceding 
and  the  following  name  are  alike. 

Jah^slSl  (1  Chion.  yii,  13).    See  Jahzeel. 

Jailor  {dt^fM^iiKa^j  guard  of  a  priaaner^  Acts  xyi, 
28,27,36).     SeePRisoN. 

Jainas,  the  name  of  a  yery  powerftd  heterodox  aect 
of  Hindus  particularly  flouiishing  in  the  southem  and 
western  parta  of  Hindustan.  Their  name,  Jainaa,  sig- 
nifies  foUowers  of  Jma,  the  generic  name  of  deiiied 
saints ;  but,  as  these  saints  are  alao  called  A  rhat,  the 
sect  is  frequently  called  Arkataa.  The  tenets  of  thia 
sect  are  in  seyeral  respects  analogous  to  those  of  the 
Buddhists  [see  Buddhism],  but  they  resemble  in  others 
those  of  the  Brahmanical  Hindus.  like  the  Buddhists, 
they  deny  the  diyine  origin  and  authority  of  the  Yeda 
(which,  howeyer,  they  do  not  hesitate  to  quote  if  the 
doctrinea  of  the  latter  are  conformable  to  the  Jaina  ten- 
ets), and  worship  certain  saints  whom  they  consider  su- 
perior to  the  other  beings  of  their  pantheon.  Tliey  dif- 
fer,  indced,  from  them  in  regard  to  the  histor>'  of  these 
personages,  but  the  original  notion  which  prevails  in  thia 
worship  is  the  same.  Like  the  Brahmanical  Hindus, 
on  the  other  band,  they  admit  the  institution  of  caste, 
and  perform  the  essential  ceremonies  called  Sanakdraa 
(q.  y.),  and  reoognise  some  of  the  subordinate  deities  of 
the  Hindtt  pantheon  —  at  least  apparently,  as  they  do 
not  pay  eapedal  homage  to  them,  and  as  they  disrcgaid 
oompletdy  all  those  Brahmanical  ritea  which  inyolye 
the  destruction  of  animal  life.  The  Jainas  haye  their 
own  Puranas  and  other  religious  books,  which  in  the 
main  oonfine  themaelyes  to  a  delineation  of  their  Tor^ 
thankharas,  or  deified  teachers  of  the  sect  The  Yedas 
of  the  Brahmans  they  supply  by  their  Siddhdntcu  and 
Agamas, 

Their  peculiar  doctrinea  are  that  **  all  objecta,  mate- 
riał or  abetract,  are  airanged  under  nine  categories,  call- 
ed TaUwaa  (truths  or  principles),  of  which  we  need  no- 
tioe  only  the  ninth  and  last,  called  Mokahti,  or  liberation 
of  the  yital  spirit  from  the  bonds  of  action,  i.  e.  finał 
emancipation.  In  referenoe  to  it  the  Jainaa  not  only 
affirm  that  there  is  such  a  state,  but  they  define  the  size 
of  the  emancipated  souls,  the  place  where  they  liye, 
their  tangible  ąualities,  the  duration  of  their  existcnce, 
the  distance  at  which  they  are  ficom  one  another,  their 
parta,  natures,  and  numbers.  Finał  emancipation  is  only 
obtained  'in  a  state  of  manhood  (not  in  that  of  a  good 
demon,  or  brute),  while  in  poesession  of  fiye  senses: 
whiłe  possessing  a  body  capable  of  yoluntary  motion,  in 
a  condition  of  possibility;  while  possessing  a  mind, 
through  the  sacrament  of  the  highest  ascetieism,  in  that 
path  of  rectitnde  in  which  there  is  no  retrogression ; 
through  the  poesession  of  perfect  knowledge  and  Wsion ; 
and  in  the  piactioe  of  abstinencc'  Thoee  who  attain  to 
finał  liberation  do  not  retiurn  to  a  worldly  sute,  and 
there  is  no  interruption  to  their  bliss.  They  haye  per- 
fect yision  and  knowledge,  and  do  not  depend  on  worka 
(see  J.  Steyenson,  The  Kalpa  Siitra  and  Nava  Tattwa). 
The  principles  of  faith,  as  mentioned  before,  are  common 
to  all  dassea  of  Jainas,  but  some  differences  oceiir  in  the 
practioe  of  their  duties,  as  they  are  diyided  into  relig- 
ious and  lay  orders — Yatis  and  Srdoakaa,  Both,  of 
courae,  must  place  Implicit  belief  in  the  doctrinea  of  their 
saints ;  but  the  Yaii  has  to  lead  a  life  of  abstinenoe^ 
tadtumity,  and  continence ;  he  shonld  wear  a  thia  etoth 


/' 


:\ 


JAINAS 


ISO 


JAJR 


orer  his  mouth  to  preyent  insects  from  flying  into  ii, 
and  he  should  cany  a  brush  to  sweep  the  place  on  which 
he  ifl  aboiit  to  sit,  to  remove  any  liying  creatuie  ont  of 
tbe  way  of  dangcr ;  but,  in  tum,  he  may  dispense  with 
all  acta  of  worship,  while  the  Srdvaka  has  to  add  to  the 
obsen^ance  of  the  religious  and  morał  duties  the  practi- 
cal  worship  of  the  sainta,  and  a  profound  reverence  for 
his  morę  pious  brethren.  The  secular  Jaina  must,  like 
the  aacetic,  practice  the  four  yirtues— liberality,  gentle- 
ness,  piety,  and  penance ;  he  must  goyem  his  mind, 
tongue,  and  acts ;  abstain  at  certain  seasons  from  salt, 
flowers,  green  fruits,  roota,  honey,  grapes,  tobacco ;  drink 
water  thrice  strained,  and  neyer  leave  a  Iiquid  uncoyer- 
ed,  lest  an  insect  should  be  drowned  in  it ;  it  is  his  duty, 
also,  to  yisit  doiły  a  tempie  where  some  of  the  images  of 
the  Jaina  soints  are  placed,  walk  round  it  three  times, 
make  an  obeisance  to  the  image,  and  make  some  ofifer- 
ings  of  fruits  or  flowers,  while  pronouncing  some  such 
formuła  as  *  Salutation  to  the  Saints,  to  the  Pure  Ezlst- 
ences,  to  the  Sages,  to  the  Teachers,  to  all  the  Deyout  in 
the  world.'  The  reader  in  a  Jaina  tempie  is  a  Yati,  but 
the  ministrant  priest  is  not  seldom  a  Brahman,  sinoe  the 
Jainas  haye  no  priests  of  their  own,  and  the  presence  of 
such  Brabmanical  ministrants  seems  to  haye  introduoed 
seyenil  umoyations  in  their  worship.  In  Upper  India 
the  ritual  in  use  is  often  intermixed  with  formulas  be- 
longing  morę  properly  to  the  Saiya  and  Sókta  wor- 
ship (see  Ilindu  Sects  under  India),  and  images  of  Siva 
and  his  consort  take  their  place  in  Jaina  temples.  In 
the  south  of  India  they  appear,  as  mentioned  before,  to 
obseryc  also  all  the  essential  rites  or  Sanskar^  of  the 
Brabmanical  Hindu.  The  festiyals  of  the  Jainas  are 
especiałly  those  relating  to  eyents  in  the  life  of  their 
deified  saints ;  but  they  obserye,  also,  seyeial  common  to 
other  Hindus,  as  the  spring  festiyal,  the  Sripanchaml, 
and  others"  (Chambers,  Cydopadia^  s.  y.)* 

The  sect  is  diyided  into  two  principal  factions — the 
Digambaras  and  the  Swet&mbaras.  The  name  of  the 
former  signifies  "sky-clad,"  or  naked,  and  designated 
the  ascetics  who  went  uncład ;  but  at  present  they  wear 
colored  garments,  and  dishabilitate  only  at  meal^times. 
The  name  of  the  latter  faction  means  "one  who  wears 
wbite  garments."  But  it  is  not  mainly  in  dress  that 
these  two  factions  are  distinct  from  each  other;  there 
are  said  to  be  no  less  than  seyen  hundred  different  pointa 
upon  which  they  spłit,  84  of  which  are  considered  yital 
by  each  party.  Thus,  e.  g. "  the  Swetftmbaras  deoorate 
the  images  of  their  saints  with  ear-rings,  necklaces,  arm- 
lets,  and  tiaras  of  gold  and  jewels,  whereas  the  Digam- 
baras leaye  their  images  without  omaments.  Again, 
the  Swetambaras  assert  that  there  are  twelye  heayens 
and  8ixty-four  Indras,  whereas  the  Digambaras  main- 
tain  that«there  are  slxteen  heayens  and  100  Indras.  In 
the  south  of  India  the  Jainas  are  diyided  into  two 
castes ;  in  Upper  Hindustan,  howeyer,  they  are  all  of  one 
caste.  It  is  reroarkable  that  amongst  themselyes  they 
recognise  a  number  of  families  between  which  no  inter- 
marriage  can  take  place,  and  that  they  resemble  in  this 
respect  also  the  ancient  Brabmanical  Hindus,  who  estab- 
lished  similar  rcstrictions  in  their  religious  oodes. 

^  As  regaids  the  pantheon  of  the  Jaina  creed,  it  is 
Btill  morę  fantastical  than  that  of  the  Brabmanical  sects 
(whence  it  is  borrowed  to  a  great  extent),  but  without 
any  of  the  poetical  and  philosophtcal  interest  which  in- 
heres  in  the  gods  of  the  Yedic  time.  The  highcst  rank 
amongst  their  numberless  hosts  of  diyine  beings — di- 
yided by  them  into  four  dasses,  with  rarious  subdi- 
yisions — they  assign  to  the  deified  saints,  whom  they 
cali  Jtna,  or  A  rhaf,  or  Tirthakara^  besides  a  yariety  of 
other  gcneric  names.  The  Jainas  enumerate  twenty- 
four  Tirthakaras  of  their  past  age,  twenty-four  of  the 
present^  and  twenty-four  of  the  age  to  come ;  and  they 
inyest  these  holy  personages  with  thirty-six  superhu- 
.  manattributesof  the  most  extrayagantcharacter.  Not- 
withstanding  the  sameness  of  these  attributes,  they  dis- 
tinguish  the  twenty-four  Jinas  of  the  present  age  from 
each  other  in  color,  staturCi  and  longeyity.    Two  of 


them  are  red,  two  wbite,  two  blne,  two  black;  the  reat 
are  of  a  golden  hue,  or  a  yellowish-brown.  The  other 
two  peculiaiities  are  regułated  by  them  with  eąual  pre- 
cision,  and  according  to  a  system  of  deorement,  from 
Rishabha,  the  first  Jina,  who  was  500  poles  in  stature, 
and  liyed  8,400,000  great  yeais,  down  to  Mak&mra,  the 
twenty-fourth,  who  had  degenerated  to  the  size  of  a 
man,  and  was  no  morę  than  forty  yeais  on  eartb — ^the 
age  of  his  predecessor,  Pdrtwandthoy  not  exceeding  100 
years.  The  present  worship  is  almost  restricted  to  tbe 
last  two  Tirthakaras ;  and,  as  the  stature  and  years  of 
these  personages  haye  a  reasonable  poeńbility,  H.  T. 
Colebrooke  inferred  that  they  alone  are  to  be  consider- 
ed as  historical  personages.  As,  moreoyer,  amongst  the 
disciples  of  Mahaylra  there  is  one,  Indrabhfiti,  who  is 
called  Gaułama,  and  as  Gautama  is  also  a  name  of  the 
founder  of  the  Buddha  faith,  the  same  distinguished 
scholar  conduded  that,  if  the  identity  between  these 
names  could  be  assumed,  it  would  lead  to  the  further 
surmise  that  both  these  sects  are  branches  of  the  same 
stock.  But  against  this  yiew,  which  would  assign  to 
the  Jaina  religion  an  antiquity  eyen  higher  than  543 
KC.  (the  datę  which  is  commonly  ascribed  to  the  apo- 
theoeis  of  Gautama  Buddha),  seyeral  reasons  are  alleged 
by  professor  Wilson.  As  to  the  rcal  datę,  howeyer,  of 
the  origin  of  the  Jaina  faith,  as  the  same  scholar  juśtly 
obseryes,  it  is  immcrsed  in  the  same  obscuiity  which  in- 
yests  all  remote  history  amongst  the  Hindus.  We  can 
only  infer  from  the  existing  Jaina  literaturę,  and  from 
the  doctrines  it  inculcates,  that  it  came  later  into  exi8t- 
ence  than  the  Buddhist  sect"  See  Colebrooke,  MisctUa- 
neousEssaya;  Wilson,  Worhyi  (Lond.  1862) ;  Treyor,  In- 
dia, its  Nałtpes  and  Missums,  p.  109  Fq. ;  Chambcrs,  Cy- 
clop(Bdia,B,v.    Comp. India;  Hiia>uiSM. 

Ja'ir  (Hebrew  Yalr%  n-KJ,  enHghtenerf  Sept.  'lofp, 
'lae/p;  but  in  1  Obron,  ii,  22,  some  copies  'At/p;  in 
Esth.  ii,  5,  'latcoc ;  compare  'lacipoc*  Mark  y,  22 ;  Joae- 
phus.  War,  n,  1,  8),  the  name  of  three  men,  also  of  one 
other  of  dififerent  form  in  the  Hebrew. 

1.  The  son  of  Scgub,  which  latter  was  of  the  tribe  of 
Manasseh  on  his  mother's  side  [see  Aix>ption],  but  of 
Judah  on  his  father^s  (1  Chroń,  ii,  22) ;  but  Jair  is  reck- 
oned  as  bclonging  to  Manasseh  (Numb.  xxxii,  41 ;  Dcnt, 
iii,  14;  1  Kings  iy,  13),  probably  on  account  of  his  ex- 
ploits  and  possessions  in  Gilead,  where  he  appears  to 
haye  been  brought  up  with  his  motber  (comp.  1  Chroń, 
ii,  21),  being  perhaps  an  illegitimate  chiłd  (see  Raumer 
in  Tholuck's  Liter,  Am,  1836,  p.  1 1),  or,  at  all  eyents,  her 
heir  (Schwarz,  Palest,  p.  185),  although  his  possessions 
might  strictly  be  daimed  as  an  appanagc  to  the  tribe 
of  Judah  (Josh.  xix,  34).  See  Judah  lton  Jordan. 
He  distinguished  himself  in  an  expedition  against  the 
kingdom  of  Bashan,  the  time  of  which  is  disputcd,  but 
may  probably  be  referred  to  the  last  year  of  the  life  of 
Moses  (B.C  1618),  and  which  seems  to  haye  formed  part 
of  the  operations  connected  with  the  conqucst  of  the  coun- 
try east  of  the  Jordan  (1  Chroń,  iii,  28 ;  Numb.  xxxiii, 
41 ;  Deut,  iii,  14).  He  settled  in  the  part  of  Argob 
bordering  on  Gilead,  where  we  find  the  smali  towns  thos 
taken  (retaken)  by  him  named  collectiyely  Hayoth- 
jair,  or  "  Jair's  yillages"  (Numb.  xxxii,  41 ;  DeuL  iii, 
14 ;  Josh.  xiii,  80 ;  1  Kings  iy,  13 ;  1  Chroń,  ii,  22).  See 
HAyoTH-jAiR.  These  are  yariously  stated  to  haye 
been  hcenty-ihree  (1  Chroń,  ii,  22),  thirły  (Judg.  x,  4), 
and  sixty  in  number  (1  Chroń,  ii,  23 ;  Josh.  xiii,  80 ;  1 
Kings  iy,  13,  in  which  last  passage  they  are  said  to 
haye  been  "great  cities,  with  waUs  and  brazen  bais"). 
The  discrepancy  may  easily  be  reconciled  by  the  sup- 
poeition  (warranted  by  Numb.  xxxii,  89, 40)  that  al- 
though Jair,  in  conjunction  with  his  rclativcs,  capturcd 
the  wholc  8ixty  cities  composing  the  Gileadite  district 
of  the  kingdom  of  Og  in  Bashan  (Deut.  iii,  4),  only 
twenty-three  of  these  were  specially  assigned  to  him ; 
whereas,  at  a  later  datę,  bis  portion  may  haye  recdved 
some  accessions;  or  the  number  attributed  to  his  de- 
scendant  of  the  same  name  may  be  only  a  round  or  ap- 
piosimate  estimate,  as  being  aboui  one  half  the  enUre 


JAmiTE 


161 


JAMAICA 


nomber.    (For  other  methods  of  adjoBtment,  see  Wi- 
nei^s  Bealwdrterbuch,  8.  v.  Jair.) 

2.  The  eighth  Judge  of  Israel,  a  native  of  GUead,  in 
Manasseb  (Josephus,  AfU,Vf  7,  6,  'laticnjc),  beyoAd  Łhe 
Jordan,  and  therefore  probably  deaoended  from  the  pre- 
ceding,  with  whom,  indeed,  he  is  sometimes  confound- 
ed.  He  ruled  twenty-two  years  (aa  1296-1274),  and 
hia  opulence  is  indicated  in  a  nianner  characteristic  of 
the  age  in  which  be  lived ;  '*  He  had  Łhirty  sona,  that 
rode  on  thirty  ass-colts  (D*''1J5),  and  they  bad  tbirty 
cities  (Di^^S[  again),  which  are  called  Havoth-jair,  in 
the  land  of  Gilead**  (Judg.  x,  8,  4).  A  young  ass  was 
the  most  valuable  beast  for  riding  then  known  to  the 
Hebrews;  and  ŁhaŁ  Jair  had  so  many  of  them,  and  was 
ablfi  to  assign  a  village  to  every  one  of  his  tbirty  sons, 
is  very  striking  evidence  of  his  wealth  (see  Kitto*8  Dai- 
hf  BibU  JUustrat.  or  Judg.  v,  6-10).  The  twenty-three 
yillages  of  the  morę  ancient  Jair  were  probably  among 
the  thirty  which  this  Jair  possessed.  His  barial-place 
was  Camon,  doubtless  in  Łhe  same  region  (Judg.  x,  5). 
It  is  probably  one  of  his  desceudants  (so  numerous)  that 
Is  called  a  Jairite  (Heb.  Yalri\  '^'}^^':,  Sept.  'lapt,  2 
Sam.xx,2C).  Possibly,  howerer,  the  genoine  reading 
was  "t^lH"),  the  Jathrite,    See  Ira. 

3.  A  Benjamite,  son  of  Shimei  and  father  of  Morde- 
cai,  £sther's  unde  (Esth.  ii,  5).    B.C.  antę  698. 

4.  (Heb.  Yalr%  n-^rj  marg.,  but  text  Yadr\  "lijj; 
perh.  awa^e;  Sept. 'lacip, Yulg.  comipUy  «aZ^i/f.)  The 
father  of  Elhanan,  which  latter  siew  the  brother  of  Go- 
liath  (1  Chroń,  xx,  5).  In  the  parallel  passage  (2  Sam. 
xxi,  19)  we  find,  instead  of  Jair, "  Jaare-**  C!??!'?  ^P- 
parently  the  plur.  of  the  other  woni,  q.  d.  "I?^,  Kjfbrtst; 
Sept.  'lapćyYulg.  again  aaltus),  with  the  addition  *'0r- 
egim"  (Ca^ljt,  weaver»;  Sept  v^aiVovrfff,Yulg.|7o/y- 
miłarius)f  which  bas  probably  been  erroneously  taken 
by  transcribers  from  the  latter  part  of  Łhe  same  rerse 
(see  Kennicott^s  Diss,  on  the  Ilebrew  Tex(f  i,  78).  B.C. 
antę  1018.     See  Elhanan. 

Ja^irite  (2  Sam.  xx,  26).    See  Jatr,  2. 

Jai'ru8  (laiipoCf  see  Jair),  an  otherwise  unknown 
nder  of  the  synagogue  at  Capemaum,  whose  only 
daughter  Jesus  restored  to  life  (Mark  r,  22;  Lukę  yiii, 
41 ;  comp.  Matt.  ix,  18).  A.D.  27.  Some  haye  wrong- 
ly  inferred  from  our  Saviour'8  words,  **The  maid  is  not 
dead,  but  sleepeth"  (Rautenberg,  in  the  HcumóT,  Bei- 
trag.  z.  Nuiz,  u.  Vergmg,  1761,  p.  88 ;  Olshausen,  Cotn- 
ment.  i,  821),  that  the  girl  was  only  in  a  swoon  (see  Ne- 
ander,  Lehen  JesUj  p.  847). 

JAI^RUS  (laiipoc)  also  occurs  in  the  Apociypha 
(Esth.  xi,  2)  as  a  Gnecized  form  of  the  name  of  Jair 
(q.  V.),  the  father  of  Mordecai  (Esth.  ii,  5). 

Ja^kan  (1  Chroń,  i,  42).    See  Jaakak. 

Ja^keh  (Heb.  Yakeh',  nj^'^,pioiu;  Sept.  d(2^dfUV0C 
[reading  hnp],  Vulg.roOT«w  [reading  KjJJ]),  a  name 
glyen  as  that  of  the  father  of  Agur,  the  author  of  the 
apothegms  in  Proy.  xxx,  1  sq.  Interpreters  greatly 
differ  as  to  the  person  intended.  See  Agur.  The  tra- 
ditional  yiew  is  that  which  giyes  the  word  a  figuratiye 
import  (q.  d.  rtn;?7,  obedience,  sc.  to  God);  and  it  will 
then  become  an  epithet  of  Dayid,  the  father  of  Solomon, 
a  term  appropriate  to  his  character,  and  especially  so  as 
apf  iied  to  him  by  a  son.  Others  understand  a  real 
name  of  some  unknown  Israelite;  and,  in  that  case,  the 
most  probable  supposition  is  that  it  denotes  the  father 
of  the  author  of  some  popular  maxims  selected  by  "the 
men  of  Hezekiah"  (perhaps  composed  by  them,  or  in 
their  time),  and  thus  incorporated  with  the  proyerbs  of 
Solomon.  But  the  allusion  to  tbese  latter  compilers  in 
Proy.  xxy,  1,  appears  only  to  relate  to  an  edUing  on 
their  part  of  Uterary  effusions  (in  part,  perhaps,  retained 
in  the  memory  by  orał  recitation)  which  are  expre8sly 
assigned  to  Solomon  as  their  author.  See  PRoyEKBS. 
Pimf.  Stuart  {fiomment,  ad  be.)  adopts  the  suggestion  of 


Hitzig  (in  Zeller^s  Theol  Yakrb.  1844,  p.  288),  assented  to 
by  Bertbeau  {Kurzgef,  Exeg.  Handb.  ad  loc),  and  renders 
the  dause  thus :  '*  The  words  of  Agur,  the  son  of  ber 
who  was  obeyed  (reading  >n}^p7)  in  Massa;**  and  in  an 
extended  comparison  with  the  pandlel  passage  (xxi,  1), 
defends  and  illustrates  this  intcrpretation,  makiiig  Ja- 
keb  to  haye  been  the  son  and  successor  of  a  certain 
ąueen  of  Arabia  Petnea,  chiefly  on  the  ground  that  the 
phraae  &<'»Cp  '?^b^  bcici  '^''in'n  will  bear  no  other 
translation  than  The  words  of  I^emuel,  king  of  Massa, 
But  if  the  construction  be  thus  rendered  morę  facile  in 
this  passage,  it  is  morę  difiicult  in  the  other,  where 
M^fin  np'^~"łą  cannot  be  brought  nearer  his  yersion 
than  The  son  ofJakeh  of  Massa,  £yen  this  rendering 
yiolates  in  both  passages  the  Atasoretic  punctuation, 
which  is  oorrectly  followed  in  the  Autb.Yers.;  and  the 
interpretation  proposed,  aftcr  all,  attributes  both  names 
(Agur  and  Lemuel)  to  the  same  person,  without  so  good 
reason  for  auch  yariation  as  there  would  be  if  they  were 
ascribed  as  epithets  to  Solomon.    See  Ithiel. 

Jaldm  (Heb.  Yakim\  D^^pJ,  establisher),  the  name 
of  two  men.    See  also  Jeuoiakim. 

1,  (Sept,  'EAtaicH/i  v.  r.  loicifi,  Yulg.  Jacim,)  The 
head  of  the  twelfth  diyision  of  the  sacerdotal  order  as 
arranged  by  Dayid  (1  Chroń.  xxiy,  12).     RC.  1014. 

2.  (Sept  'laKtifi  y.  r.  ^laKifA,  Yulg.  Jacim,)  One  of 
the  **8on8"  of  Shimhi,  a  Benjamite  resident  at  Jerusa- 
lem  (1  Chroń,  yiii,  19).     B.C.  apparently  cir.  588. 

JaktiBl,  the  Japanese  diyinity  of  pbysic.  ^  His  idol 
is  placed  in  a  smali  tempie  richly  adomed,  standing  up- 
right  on  a  gilt  tarate  flower,  ot  faba  Algyptiaca^  under 
one  half  of  a  laige  cockle-shell  extended  oyer  his  head, 
which  is  encircled  with  a  crown  of  rays.  He  bas  a 
sceptre  in  his  lefŁ  band,  and  in  bis  right  hand  something 
unknown.  The  idol  is  gilt  all  oyer.  The  Japanese,  as 
they  pass  by,  never  fail  to  pay  their  reycrcnce  to  this 
golden  idol,  approacbing  the  tempie  with  a  Iow  bow,  and 
bareheadetl,  when  they  ring  a  little  bcU  hung  up  at  the 
entrance,  and  then,^  holding  both  their  hands  to  their 
foreheads,  repeat  a  prayer.  The  Japanese  relate  that 
this  tempie  was  erccted  to  Jakusi  by  a  pious  but  poor 
man,  who,  haying  discoyered  an  cxcellent  medidnal 
power,  gained  so  much  money  by  it  as  to  be  able  to  giye 
this  testimony  of  his  gratitude  to  the  God  of  pbysic" — 
Broughton,  BibUoth.  IJisł,  Sac.  i,  499. 

Jakut.    See  Siberia. 

Ja'lon  (Heb.  Yalon',  "ji^J,  lodger;  Sept  '\a\iav  v.  r, 
'Iafi(óv)f  the  last-named  of  the  four  sons  of  Ezra,  of  the 
tribe  of  Judah,  and  apparently  of  a  family  kindred  with 
that  of  Caleb  (1  Chroń,  iy,  17).     B.C.  prób.  cir.  1618. 

Jamabo.    See  Yamabo. 

Jamaica,  one  of  the  largest  islands  of  the  West  In- 
dies,  was  discoyered  by  Columbus  in  1494,  and  receiyed 
in  1514  the  name  Isla  de  San  Jago,  In  1560  the  natiye 
population  had  become  nearly  extinct  For  a  time  Ja- 
maica remained  under  the  administration  of  the  de- 
scendants  of  Diego,  the  son  of  Columbus ;  8ubsequently 
it  fell  by  inheritance  to  the  house  of  Braganza ;  in  1655 
it  was  occupied  by  the  Englisb,  and  in  1070  formally 
ceded  to  England,  which  bas  ever  sińce  retaineil  iMsses- 
sion  of  it  The  importation  of  slaves  ceased  in  1807, 
and  in  1888  the  slayes  obtained  their  entire  freedom. 
The  negro  population  increaaed  yerj'  rapidly,  and,  ac- 
cording  to  a  census  taken  in  1861,  there  were,  in  a  total 
population  of  441,264,  only  18,816  whites,  mostly  Englisb, 
against  846,874  negroes  and  81,065  mnlattoes.  The  col- 
ored  population  bas  always  complaincd  of  being  oppress- 
ed  and  ill-treated  by  the  former  slayeholders,  who  own 
nearly  the  whole  of  the  landcd  property,  and  a  large 
number  of  them  have  withdrawn  from  the  towns  and 
plantations  into  the  interior  of  the  island,  where  they 
haye  formed  a  number  of  new  settlements.  In  October, 
1865,  a  negro  insurrection  broke  out,  in  the  course  of 
which  seyeral  goyemment  buildings  were  stormed  by 


JAMBLICHUS 


ł62 


JAMBLICHUS 


the  insingents,  and  a  number  of  plantations  plondered. 
The  English  goYemor,  Eyre,  suppressed  the  insurrection 
with  a  seyeńty  which  caused  his  suspension  from  office, 
and  the  appointment  ofa  special  commission  of  inyesti- 
gation.  The  ktter  had,  howerer,  no  practical  result, 
and  the  Queen's  Bench,  to  which  the  case  of  goveraor 
Eyre  had  been  referred  by  the  jury,  declined  to  insti- 
tutę  a  trial. 

Before  the  abolition  of  slavery  the  planters  were  in 
generał  opposed  to  the  religious  instniction  of  the  slares. 
In  1754  the  Moravian  Brethren  commenced  a  mission 
in  Jamaica,  encouraged  by  seyeral  of  the  pknters,  ^ho 
presented  them  an  estate  called  Carmel.  Their  progres 
was  but  slow.  From  the  beginning  of  the  mission  to 
1804  the  number  of  negroes  baptized  was  938.  Fiom 
1838,  when  complete  liberty  was  granted  to  the  negroes, 
the  Moravian  mission  prospered  greatly;  and  in  1850, 
the  number  of  souls  under  the  care  of  the  mission  at  the 
seyeral  stations  was  estimated  at  1300.  In  1842  an  in- 
stitution  for  training  native  teachers  was  eetablished. 
In  1867  the  mission  numbered  14  churches  and  chapels, 
with  11,850  sittings,  9350  attcndants  at  diyine  worship, 
and  4460  members.  The  number  of  schools  was  17,  and 
of  scholara  30.  The  mission  of  English  Wesleyans  was 
commenced  by  Dr.  Coke  in  1787.  It  soon  met  with  yi- 
olent  opposition,  and  the  Legislatiye  Assembly  of  the 
island  and  the  town  council  of  Kingston  repeatedly 
passed  stringent  kws  for  cutting  off  the  slaye  popula- 
tion  from  the  attendance  of  the  Weslcyan  meetings,  and 
for  putting  a  stop  to  the  labors  of  the  missionaries. 
From  1807  to  1815  the  roissionary  work  was  acoordingly 
intemipted,  and  it  was  only  due  to  the  hiterference  of 
the  home  goyemment  and  the  EngUsh  goyemors  of  Ja- 
maica  that  it  could  be  resumed.  But  eyery  iusurreo- 
tionaiy  moyement  among  the  negroes  led  to  a  new  out- 
ery  against  the  missionaries,  in  particular  the  Wealeyan, 
againsŁ  whom,  at  different  times,  special  laws  were  i»- 
Bued.  A  great  changc,  howeyer,  took  place  in  public 
opinion  after  the  abolition  of  slayery,  when  the  House 
of  Assembly  of  the  island  and  the  Common  Council  of 
Kingston  madę  grants  to  aid  in  the  erection  of  Weslcyan 
chapels  and  schools.  In  1846  the  number  of  Church 
members  in  connection  w^ith  the  Wesleyan  mission 
amomited  to  26,585 ;  but  from  that  time  it  began  to  de- 
crease,  and  in  1858  had  declined  to  19,478.  In  1867  the 
Wesleyans  had  75  churches  and  chapels,  with  34,105 
sittings,  24,210  attendants  of  public  worship,  26  minis- 
ters,  14,661  members,  5107  Sunday-scholars,  and  86  day- 
schools,  with  2563  scholars.  The  English  Baptists  en- 
tered  upon  their  mission  in  Jamaica  in  1814.  It  soon 
becarae  yery  prosperous:  in  1839  it  numbered  21,000, 
and  in  1841, 27,706  members.  Since  then  it  has  like- 
wise  declinpd,  and,  according  to  the  retums  of  1867,  the 
number  of  members  has  been  reduced  to  18,947.  The 
mission  has  87  churches  and  chapels,  with  51,320  sit- 
tings, 34,200  attendants  of  public  worship,  33  mimsters, 
1  college,  and  14  students.  The  statistics  of  other  re- 
ligious bodies  and  societies  in  1867  were  as  foUows : 


Cburchct  and 
Chapeli. 

Attondmoto  of 
pub.wonhip. 

MiaUtan. 

Memban. 

Ch.  of  Ensland. . 
London  Mission- 

ST 

8»,T10 

88 

arySoclety.... 
UnUed  Presbyt'8 

88 

6610 

8 

2160 

26 

7955 

IS 

4684 

United  Free  Ch. 

Methodlsts. . . . 

0 

,, 

Roman  CathoUcs 

8 

im 

ii 

im 

Amer.  Mission... 

6 

760 

Ch.of  Scotland.. 

1 

450 

Altogethcr,  the  number  of  persons  under  religious 
instruction  was  estimated  in  1867  at  154,000,  and  the 
churches  and  chapels  together  could  seat  174,000  per- 
sona. Formerly  the  Church  of  England  was  the  State 
church,  and  was  supported  by  the  local  Legislature,  but 
in  1868  the  state  grant  was  abolished.  The  island  is  the 
see  of  an  An  j>:lican  bishop  and  of  a  Ronum  Catholic  yicar 
apostolic.     (A.  J,  S.) 

JambUchuB,  or  Iamblichus  ('Ia/i/3Xixoff)»  a  cele- 


brated  NeopLatonic  philoaopher  of  the  4th  oentmy,  w 
bom  at  Chalcis,  in  Ccele-Syria.  WhaŁ  littlc  we  koow 
of  his  Ufe  is  deriyed  from  the  works  of  Eonapiua,  a  Soph- 
ist,  whose  loye  of  the  manreloas  renders  his  testimooy 
doubtful  authority.  He  seems,  howeyer,  to  haye  stodied 
under  Anatolius  and  Porphyry ,  and  resided  in  Syiia  un- 
til  his  death,  which  oocurred  during  the  reign  of  Cod- 
stantine  the  Great,  and  probably  iMfore  A.D.S33  (Soi- 
dasy  s.  y.  'lafi^x*^  i  Eunapius,  lanMidu),  He  was 
deeply  yersed  in  the  philosophical  system  of  Plato  and 
Pythagoras,  as  well  as  in  the  theology  and  philoaophy 
of  the  Egyptians  and  Chaldseans,  and  enjoyed  gieat  rep- 
uUtion,  being  by  some  of  his  contemporaiiea  conaideied 
eyen  the  eąual  of  Plato.  In  his  life  of  Pythagoras  he 
appears  as  a  Syncretist,  or  oompiler  of  different  systema^ 
but  without  critical  talent.  So  far  as  can  be  gatheied 
from  fragments  in  his  works  in  Prodos^s  oonunentaij 
on  the  Yimseus,  he  went  eyen  further  than  his  teacheii 
in  Bttbtlety  of  argnments,  subdiyiding  Plotinus^s  trinity, 
and  deriying  therefrom  a  series  of  triada.  **  lamblichas 
distinguishes  first  three  purely  uU^igSble  tziads,  then 
three  intellectual  ones,  thus  forming  the  voriTfiv  enueati- 
cal  series,  and  the  voipav.  By  the  side  of  the  great 
triad  he  places  inferior  ones,  yiot  irifiiovpyoŁf  whose  mis- 
sion it  is  to  transmit  the  action  of  the  fonner.  He  is 
also  distinguished  from  Plotinus  and  Porphyry  by  an  al- 
most  superstitious  regard  for  numeiical  fonnulaa.  AU 
the  principles  of  his  theology  can  be  represented  by 
numbers :  the  monad,  the  supremę  unit,  principle  of  all 
unity,  as  well  as  of  all  diyersity ;  two,  the  intellect,  the 
first  manifcstation  or  deyelopment  of  unity ;  three,  the 
soul,  or  iivifiiovpyoif  the  principle  which  bringa  all  pn>- 
gressiye  beings  back  to  onity ;  four,  the  principle  of  oni- 
yersal  harmony,  which  comprises  the  cansea  of  all  things; 
eight,  the  souice  of  motion  Ot^^mc))  taking  all  be- 
ings away  from  the  supremę  principle  to  dispene  them 
through  the  world ;  ninc,  the  principle  of  all  identity 
and  of  all  perfcction ;  and  finally,  ten,  the  result  of  all  the 
emanations  of  the  ró  'Ev.  Neither  Plotinus  nor  Por- 
phyr}',  whateyer  their  regard  for  P>'thagoras*s  doctrine% 
eyer  went  to  such  an  extent  in  redudng  their  prindptes 
to  numerical  abatractions*'  (Yacherot, //tif.  Critigfae  de 
rŹcok  ^A  łercmdrie,  yoL  ii).  Jamblichus  did  not  acąoi- 
esce  in  the  doctrine  of  the  earlier  Neoplatoniata,  but 
thought  that  man  could  be  brought  into  direct  oommn- 
nication  with  the  Deity  through  the  medium  of  thcoigie 
rites  and  ceremonies,  and  thus  attached  great  importance 
to  mysteries,  initiations,  etc  He  UTote  a  nnmbcr  of 
works,  the  most  important  of  which  are :  1.  Hcpc  Tlv9a^ 
yópou  cupkffiułę,  intended  as  a  preparation  for  the  stnćy 
of  Plato,  and  consisting  originally  of  ten  booka,  fire  of 
which  are  now  lost.  The  prindiud  extant  are  Iltpl  nA 
UuOayoptKoy  fiiov  (publislied  fint  by  J.  Aroerius  Tbeo- 
doretus,  Franeker^  1598,  4to;  beat  ed.  L.  Kustcr,  Am^ 
1707,  4to;  and  Th.  Kiessling,  Lpz.  1815^  2  rola.  8yo); 
— UporpcnTuroi  kóyoi  tlę  ^iKo90^v  (Th.  Kiessling^ 
Lpz.  1813, 8yo); — Htpi  coiv^  fiaBfifJUiTuaic  iTTuniifaic 
(YiUoison,  A  necdota  Graca,  ii,  188  sq. ;  J.  6.  Fries,  Cc^ien- 
hagen,  1790,40)*.— T<ł  dio\oyovfuya  riic  aptŚpifndię 
(Ch.  Wechel,  Paria,  1548,  4to;  Tr.  Ast,  LpŁ  1817, 8yo). 
2.  The  Ilepi  /ivirrripiutVt  in  one  book,  in  which  a  pńeat 
named  Abammon  is  introduced  as  replying  to  a  lettfir 
of  PorphyriuB.  He  endeayors  to  yindicate  the  troih, 
purity,  and  diyine  origin  of  Egyptian  and  Cbaldee  tbe- 
ology,  and  maintains  that  man,  through  theuigic  ńtca, 
may  commune  with  the  Deity.  There  has  been  ioom 
oontroyersy  conoeming  the  authenticity  of  this  wock, 
but  Tennemann  and  other  eminent  critics  think  thcre  are 
no  good  reaaons  why  the  authorship  shoold  be  denied  to 
lamblichus.  It  was  published  by  Ficinus  (Tenioe,  1483^ 
4to,  with  a  Latin  transL);  N.  ScuteUins  (Home,  1556^ 
4to),  and  Th.  Gale  (Oxf.  1678,  foL,  with  a  Latin  tianaL), 
etc.  See  Eunapiua,  Viia  SopkUt, ;  Julian,  OraL  iy,  146; 
EpisL  40  ;  Dodwell,  Excercit,  de  jEtate  Pythag,  1704; 
Hebenstreit,  Dueeriaiio  de  JamabUd  Dodrma,  LaipK. 
1704, 4to ;  Brucker,  Bittoria  critka  PkUotopkitt,  ii»  2GQ^ 
431 ;  Tillemont^  HitU  des  Ewgtereun,  xi,  246{  Teone- 


JAMBRES 


ł68 


JAMES 


mann,  Ge$eh^  der  Philosophie,  yi,2i6 ;  Ritter,  Gtach,  der 
PhUtmtpkie,  iv,  647;  FabriduB^  Bibliotheca  GrcBca,  yoL 
i\%  pt.  iii,  p.  60 ;  "Hedmann,  Geist  der  Spekulai,  PhUoto- 
pkU,  iii,  453 ;  Jules  Simon,  Hittoire  de  tŹcole  SA  lexan- 
drie,  ii,  187-265.— Smith,  DicU  of  Greek  and  Roman  Bi- 
offraphtff  ii,  549 ;  Hoefer,  Nouv.  Biog,  Ginerale,  xxvi,  805 
8q.;  Larilner,  Ił^orfo,  voL  viii ;  Butler,  Hut,  A  nc,  Philos, 
i,  76, 77 ;  ii,  321, 320.     See  Neoplatonism. 

Jam^brds  ('Ia/i/3pi}c,  probb  of  Egyptian  etymolo- 
1^-),  a  penon  mentioned  as  one  of  Łhose  who  oppoeed 
Mooe8(2Tira.iii,8).    Rai658.    See  JAsniES. 

Jasa^hri,  Shoitiy  after  the  death  of  Jadas  Macca- 
b«is  (RC.  161),  **the  children  of  Jambri'*  are  said  to 
have  maile  a  predatory  attack  on  a  detachment  of  the 
łlaocabflcan  forces,  and  to  have  suffered  reprisals  (1  Mace. 
ix,  36-4 1 ).  The  name  does  not  occur  elsewhere,  and  the 
vańety  of  readings  18  considenibłe:  'lafjjSpi, 'Iaft/3p<tv, 
U/i/3pot,  'Afifipi ;  S3rT.  A  mbrei,  Josephtis  (ii  nt,  xiii,  1, 2) 
lead  oć  *Afiapmou  iratitę,  and  it  seems  almost  certain 
that  the  tnie  reading  is  'A/ipi  (-ti),  a  fonn  which  oocun 
elaewhere  (1  Kings  xvi,  22;  Joseph.  i4fł/.viii,12,5,  'Afia- 
fHvoc  ;  1  Chroń,  xxvii,  18,  Heb.  '^'1T2^,Vulg.  Amri;  1 
Chroń,  ix,  4,  'Afippaift,  i.  e.  Amońtes. 

It  has  been  conjectared  (Dnisiua,  Michaelis,  Grimm,  1 
Mace  ix,  36)  that  the  original  text  wa»  "^-naS  ''3^, 
*'  the  sons  of  the  Amońtes,"  and  that  the  reference  is  to 
a  family  of  the  Amorites  who  had  in  early  times  occu- 
pied  the  town  Medeba  (ver.  36),  on  the  boideia  of  Rea- 
ben  (Numb.  xxi,  30, 31).— Smith. 

James,  or  rather  Jacobus  ('Iaic&>/3oc,  the  Grocized 
fonn  of  the  name  Jacob),  the  name  of  two  or  three  per- 
aons  mcntioned  in  the  New  Test. 

1.  JAJMfris,  THK  SON  OF  Zebkdee  (loKtafioc  ó  roi> 
Z</3c^aioi/),  and  dder  brothcr  of  the  evangelist  John,  by 
one  or  the  oŁher  of  which  relationships  he  is  almost  al- 
wa^^s  designated.  Their  occupation  was  that  of  fisher- 
men,  probably  at  Bethsaida,  in  partncrship  with  Simon 
Peter  (Loke  v,  10).  On  comparing  the  account  givcn 
in  Matt.  iv,  21,  Mark  i,  19,  with  that  in  John  i,  it  would 
appear  that  James  and  John  had  been  acquainted  with 
our  Lont,  and  had  received  him  as  the  Messiah,  some 
time  before  he  called  them  to  attend  upon  him  statedly 
— a  cali  with  which  they  immediately  complied.  A.I). 
27.  Their  mother'8  name  was  Salome  (Matt  xx,  20; 
xxvii,  56 ;  oomp.  with  Mark  xv,  40 ;  xvi,  1).  We  find 
James,  John,  and  Peter  associated  on  8everal  interesting 
occasions  in  the  Saviour'8  life.  They  alone  were  pres- 
ent  at  the  transfiguration  (MatL  xvii,  1 ;  Mark  ix,  2 ; 
Lukę  ix,  28) ;  at  the  restoration  to  life  of  Jainis*sdaugh- 
ter  (Mark  v,  42 ;  Lakę  viii,  51) ;  and  in  the  ganlen  of 
Gctliscraanc  diiring  the  agony  (Mark  xiv,  33 ;  Matt. 
xxvi,  37 ;  Lukę  xxi,  37).  With  Andrew  they  listened 
in  private  to  our  Lord's  discourse  on  the  fali  of  Jentsa- 
lem  (Mark  xiii,  3).  James  and  his  brother  appear  to 
hare  indulged  in  false  notions  of  the  kingdom  of  the 
Messiah,  and  were  led  by  ambitious  views  to  join  in  the 
reąuest  madę  to  Jesus  by  their  mother  (Matt.  xx,  20-23; 
Mark  x,  35).  From  Lukę  ix,  52,  we  may  infer  that  their 
temperament  was  warm  and  impetuous.  On  account, 
probably,  of  their  boldness  and  energy  in  discharging 
their  apostleship,  they  received  from  their  Lord  the  ap- 
pcllatiim  of  lloanerges  (q.  v.),  or  Son»  of  Thunder  (for 
the  various  cxplanations  of  this  title  given  by  the  fa- 
thcTB,  8ce  Suiccri  Thes.  IJcdee,  s.  v.  Bpovr^,  and  LUcke*8 
Cot/tmenłnr,  Bonn,  1840,  Einleitung,  c.  i,  §  2,  p.  17).  See 
JoiiM.  James  was  the  first  martyr  among  the  apostles 
(Acta  xłi,  1 ),  A. D.  44.  Clemcnt  of  Alexandria,  in  a  frag- 
ment presenred  by  Eusebius  (Hist,Ecck9,\^%  reports 
that  the  oflicer  who  conducted  James  to  the  tribunal  was 
so  influenccd  by  the  bold  decłaration  of  his  faith  as  to 
embrace  the  Gospel  and  avow  himself  also  a  Christian ; 
in  oonacąuence  of  which,  he  was  beheaded  at  the  same 
time. — Kitto. 

For  Ic^nda  respecting  his  death  and  his  oonnection 
with  Spain,  aee  the  Roman  Breviary  (th  Feeł,  S,  Jac,  Ap.), 
in  which  the  healing  of  a  paralytic  and  the  oonveision 
IV.— B  B  B 


of  Hennogenes  are  attributed  to  him,  and  where  it  is  as- 
serted  that  he  preached  the  Gospel  in  Spain,  and  that 
his  remains  were'  translated  to  Ćompostella.  See  also 
the  fourth  book  of  the  Apostolical  History  written  by 
Abdias,  the  (pseudo)  iiist  bishop  of  Babylon  (Abdias, 
Be  historia  certaminia  Apostolicij  Paris,  1566);  Isi- 
dore,  De  vitd  et  obUu  8S,  utriuegue  Testom.  No.  LXXIU 
(HagonoflB,  1529) ;  Pope  Calixtus  IPs  four  sermons  on 
St.  James  the  Apostle  {BibL  Patr.  Magn,  xv,  324) ;  Ma- 
riana, Be  A  dcentu  JacM  Apostoli  Mcyoris  in  Hispamam 
(CoL  Agripp.  1609) ;  Baronius,  Afartyroiogium  Bomanum 
ad  JuL  25,  p.  325  (Antwerp,  1589) ;  Bollandus,  A  eta  Sanc^ 
torutn  ad  JuL  25,  vi,  1-124  (Antwerp,  1729) ;  £stius,Com7R. 
tu  A  ci.  Ap.  c.  xii ;  Annot.  in  dijficiliora  loca  St  Script, 
(CoL  Agripp.  1622) ;  Tillemont,  Mhnoires  pour  servir 
a  FNistoire  Ecdesiastigue  des  six  premierę  siickSf  i,  899 
(Brussels,  1706).  As  there  is  no  shadow  of  foundation 
for  any  of  the  legends  here  referred  to,  we  pass  them  by 
without  further  notioe.  £ven  Baronius  shows  himself 
ashamed  of  them;  Estins  give8  them  up  as  hopeless; 
and  Tillemont  rejects  them  with  as  much  contempt  as 
his  position  woidd  allow  him  to  show.  Epiphanius, 
without  giving,  or  probably  having  any  authority  for 
or  against  his  statement,  reports  that  St.  James  died  un- 
married  (S.  Epiph.  A  dv,  U€er,  ii,  4,  p.  491,  Pans,  1622), 
and  that,  like  his  namesake,  he  lived  the  life  of  a  Naza- 
rite  (ibid,  iii,  2, 13,  p.  1045)«..Smith. 

2.  JaMKS,TUB  *'80N"  of  AlPHAUS  (lÓKuPoc  6  T0V 

'AA^ctiot;),  one  of  the  twelve  apostles  (&Iark  iii,  18 ;  Matt. 
X,  8 ;  Lukę  vi,  15 ;  Acts  i,  13).  A.D.  27-29.  His  moth- 
er*s  name  was  Mary  (Matt.  xxvi,  56 ;  Mark  xv,  40) ;  in 
the  latter  passage  he  is  called  James  the  Less  (ó  fcitcpóc, 
the  Liłtle),  either  as  being  younger  than  James,  the  son 
of  Zebedee,  or  on  account  or  his  Iow  stature  (Mark  xvi, 
1 ;  Lukę  xxiv,  10).  There  has  been  much  dispute  as 
to  whether  this  is  the  samo  with  <<  James,  the  Lord*8 
brother*'  (GaLi,19);  but  the  expre88  title  of  Apostle 
given  to  him  in  this  last  passage,  as  well  as  in  1  Cor. 
XV,  7  (comp.  also  Acts  ix,  27),  seems  decisive  as  to  their 
identity — no  other  James  being  mentioned  among  the 
Twelve  except  '*  James,  the  brother  of  John,"  who  was 
no  near  relative  of  Christ.  Another  question  is  whether 
he  was  the  same  with  the  James  mentioned  along  with 
Joses,  Simon,  and  Judas,  as  Christ^s  brethien  (Matt.  xiii, 
55 ;  Mark  vi,  3).  This  depends  upon  the  answer  to  two 
other  que8tions:  Ist.  Is  the  term  *' brother"  {acŁ\<f>6c) 
to  be  tiiken  in  the  proper  sense,  or  in  the  generał  signifi- 
cation  of  lansman,  in  these  texts  ?  The  use  of  the  title 
in  the  last  two  paasages,  as  well  as  in  John  ii,  12 ;  Matt. 
xii,  46-50 ;  Mark  iii,  31-35 ;  Lukę  viii,  19-21 ;  Acts  i,  14, 
in  explicit  connection  with  his  mother,  and  in  relations 
which  imply  that  they  were  members  of  his  immediate 
family,  most  naturally  requires  it  to  be  taken  in  its  lit- 
erał sense,  especially  as  no  intimation  is  elsewhere  con- 
veyed  to  the  oontiary.  See  Bhotheii.  Nor  can  the 
term  "  sisters"  (&SfX^i)f  employed  in  the  same  connec- 
tion (Matt.  xiii,  56;  Mark  vi,  3),  be  referred  to  other  than 
uterine  relatives.  This  inference  is  sustained  by  the 
striking  coincidenoe  in  the  names  of  the  brothers  in  the 
list  of  the  apostles  (namely,  James,  Judas,  and  apparcnt^ 
ly  Simon,  Lukę  vi,  15, 16;  Actsi,  13)  with  those  in  the 
reference  to  Christ's  brothers  (namely,  James,  Judas,  Si- 
mon, and  Joses,  Matt  xiii,  55;  Mark  vi,  3),  and  also  by 
the  fact  that  '*  James  the  Less  and  Joses"  are  said  to  \k 
the  sons  of  the  same  Mary  who  was  "  the  wife  of  Cleo- 
phas"  (Mark  xv,  40;  and  Matt  xXA'ii,  56;  comp.  with 
John  xix,  25).  2d.  Who  is  this  "  Mary,  the  wife  of  Cleo- 
phas?"  In  the  same  ver8c  (John  xix,  25)  she  is  called 
"his  [Chrisfs]  mother*s  sister"  (i)  fitirrip  avrov  Kai  »/ 
dSiK^t)  rfic  /ii|rpoc  airoy^  Mapia  >/  tov  KXiuira,  Kai  ») 
MaydaXf}vn) ;  and,  although  some  interpreters  distin- 
guish  between  these  appellations,  thus  roaking  four  fe- 
males  in  the  enumeration  instead  of  three,  yet  the  inser- 
tion  of  the  distinctive  particie  cai, "  and,"  between  each 
of  the  other  terms,  and  its  omission  between  these,  must 
be  understood  to  denote  their  identity.  It  is  manifest, 
however,  that  no  two  sisters  german  wonld  ever  hare 


JAMES 


764 


JAMES 


tfae  same  name  given  to  them,  an  unpreoedented  orer- 
sight  that  would  produce  continual  confusion  in  the  fam- 
ily ;  besidea,  the  law  did  not  allow  a  man  to  be  married 
to  two  sistera  at  the  same  time  (Lev.  xvui,  18),  as  Jo- 
seph in  that  case  would  have  been ;  nor  would  either  of 
these  objections  be  obviated  by  supposing  the  two  Marys 
to  have  been  half-sistera.  The  only  plausible  conjecture 
is  that  they  are  called  sisters  (i.  e.  sisten-in-law),  be- 
cause  of  their  marriage  to  two  brothere,  Cleophas  and  Jo- 
seph ;  a  supposition  that  is  strcngthened  by  their  ap- 
parent  intimacy  with  each  other,  and  their  similar  con- 
nection  with  Jesus  intimated  in  John  xijc,  25.  Cleophas 
(or  Alplueus)  secms  to  have  been  an  elder  brother  of 
Joseph,  and  dying  without  issue,  Joseph  married  his 
wife  (probably  before  his  marriage  with  the  Virgin,  as 
he  secms  to  have  been  much  older  than  she)  according 
to  the  Leyirate  law  (Deut.  xxv,  5) ;  on  which  account 
his  oldest  son  by  that  marriage  is  styled  the  (lega!)  son 
of  Cleophas,  as  well  as  (reputed  half-)  brother  of  Jesus. 
See  ALPiiiKUS;  Mary.  This  arrangement  meets  all 
the  statements  of  Scripture  in  the  case,  and  is  confirmed 
by  the  declarations  of  early  Christian  writers.  (See  No. 
8,  below.)  The  only  objection  of  any  force  against  such 
an  a<.ijustment  is  the  statement,  occurring  towaids  the 
latter  part  of  our  Saviour's  ministry,  that  **  neither  did 
his  brethren  beliere  on  him"  (John  vii,  5),  whereas  two 
of  them,  ar.  least,  are  in  this  way  included  araong  his  dia- 
ciples  (namely,  James  and  Jude,  if  not  Simon) ;  and,  al- 
though  they  are  mentioned  in  Acts  i,  14  as  subseąuent- 
ly  yiclding  to  his  daims,  yet  the  language  in  John  vii, 
7  secms  too  decisiye  to  admit  the  supposition  that  thosc 
there  refcrred  to  sustained  so  prominent  a  position  as 
apostles  among  his  conyerts.  A  morę  likely  modę  of 
reconciling  these  two  passages  is  to  suppose  that  there 
were  still  other  brothers  l>eside8  those  choeen  as  apos- 
tles, not  mentioned  particularly  anywhere  (perhaps  only 
Joses  and  one  younger),  who  did  not  believe  on  him  un- 
tłl  a  very  late  period,  being  possibly  convinoed  only  by 
his  re»urrection.  Indeed,  if  thrce  of  these  brethren  were 
apostles,  the  language  in  Acta  i,  18, 14,  requires  such  a 
supposition ;  for,  after  enumerating  the  eleven  (includ- 
ing,  as  usual,  James,  Simon,  and  Jude),  that  passage 
adds, "  and  with  his  brethren,^  Whether  these  mention- 
ed brothers  (as  indeed  may  also  be  said  of  the  sisters,  and 
perhaps  of  Simon)  were  the  children  of  Marj*,  Cleophas'8 
widów,  or  ofthe  Virgin  Mary,  is  uncertain;  yet  in  the 
expreasion  "her/r«/-bom  son,"  applied  to  Jesus  (Lukę 
ii,  7),  as  well  as  in  the  intimation  of  temporary  absti- 
ncncc  only  in  Matt  i,  25,  there  seems  to  be  implied  a 
refcrence  to  other  children  (see  Yirgi:;)  ;  but,  be  that 
as  it  may,  there  can  be  no  good  reason  given  why  such 
should  not  have  been  the  case ;  we  may  therefore  con- 
jecture that  while  James,  Simon,  Jude,  and  Joses  were 
Joscph'fl  children  by  Cleophas's  widów,  and  the  first  three 
were  of  sufKcicnt  agc  to  be  chosen  apostles,  all  the  oth- 
ers  were  by  the  Yirgiu  Mary,  and  among  them  only 
some  sisters  were  of  inifficient  age  and  notoriety  at 
Christ*s  second  Wsit  to  Nazarcth  to  be  specifled  bj'  his 
townsmen  (Matt.  xiii,  55;  Mark  vi,  8),  Joses  and  the 
children  of  the  Yirgiu  generally  being  the  "  brethren" 
that  did  not  believe  in  Jesus  till  late  (John  vii,  5;  Acts 
i,  14).  See  Judk.  To  the  objection  that  if  the  Virgin 
had  had  other  children,  especially  sons  (and  still  morę, 
a  half-son,  James,  older  than  any  of  them),  she  would 
not  have  gone  to  liye  with  the  apostle  John,  a  compara- 
tive  stranger,  it  may  be  replied  that  they  may  have  been 
still  too  young  (exoept  James,  who  was  already  charged 
with  the  care  of  his  own  mother),  or  otherwise  not  suit- 
ably  circumst-anoed  to  support  her;  and  if  it  had  been 
otherwise,  sdfl  the  expre8s  direction  of  Jesus,  her  eldest 
son, would  have  decided  her  residence  with  "the  be- 
loved  discipłe,*'  who  was  eminenrly  fitted,  as  Chrisfs  fa- 
vorito,  no  less  than  by  his  amiable  manners  and  com- 
parative  affluencc,  to  discharge  that  duty.  See  John. 
(See  Meih,  Quart,  Rev,  OcL  1851,  p.  670-^72.)  See  on 
the  No.  8,  below. 
,    There  bave  been  three  principal  theories  on  the  aub- 


ject :  1.  For  the  identity  of  James,  the  Lord*8  brotbo; 
with  James  the  apoatle,  the  son  of  Alphieus,  we  find  (see 
Routh,  RtUq.  Sacr,  i,  16, 48, 280  [Oxon.  1846])  Clement 
of  Alexandria  {/fypotyposeiSf  hk.vn,  apud  Eusebiua,/?. 
K  i,  12 ;  ii,  1)  and  Chn'S09tom  (ta  GaL  i,  19).  This  hy- 
pothesis,  being  warmly  defended  by  St.  Jerome  (ta  Matl, 
xii,  49)  and  supporteil  by  St.  Augustine  (Contra  Fansl. 
xxii,  Śóf  etc),  became  the  recognised  belief  of  tfae  West- 
ern Churcli.  2.  Parallel  yrith  this  opinion,  there  exi8t- 
ed  another  in  favor  of  the  hypoihesis  that  James  wu 
the  son  of  Joseph  by  a  former  marriage,  and  tberefoie 
not  identical  with  the  son  of  Alphssus.  This  b  fint 
found  in  the  apocT>*phal  Gospel  of  Peter  (see  Origen,ćs 
McUt  xiii,  55),  in  the  Proterangelium  of  James,  sod  Łbe 
Pseudo-Apostolical  (^onstitution  of  the  3d  century  (Thi- 
lo.  Cod,  Apocr,  i,  228 ;  Consł.  Apot,  vi,  12).  It  is  adopt- 
ed  by  Eusebius  (Comm.ui  £aat.x\ai,0;  //.A*. i,  12;  ii, 
1).  Perhaps  it  is  Origen*s  opinion  (see  Comn.tB  JoL 
ii,  12).  SL  Epiphanius,  St.  Hilan',  and  St.  Ambrose  we 
have  already  mentioned  as  being  on  the  same  side.  So 
are  Yictorinus  (Yict,  Phil.  in  GaL  apud  Maii  Script,vei, 
nov.  colL  [Romie,  1828])  and  Gregoiy  Nyaseii  {Opp/u, 
844,  D.  [Paiis  ed.  1618)],  and  it  became  the  recognisetl 
belief  of  the  Greek  Church.  8.  The  Hdvi(Uan  h}-potlK- 
sis,  put  forward  at  iirst  by  Bonosus,  Helvidiiu,  and  Jo- 
vinian,  and  rcvivcd  by  Herder  and  Strauss  in  (icrmiuir, 
is  that  James,  Joses,  Jude,  Simon,  and  rhe  sisters  were 
all  children  of  Joseph  and  3Iaiy,  while  James  the  apos- 
tle and  James  the  son  of  Alplueus  (whether  one  or  tvo 
persons)  were  different  from,  and  uot  akin  with  the« 
"  brothers  and  sisters'"  of  our  Lord.  English  ihcologi- 
cal  writers  have  been  divided  between  the  first  and  s»s 
ond  of  these  viewa,  with,  however,  a  prefercnce  on  iht 
whole  for  the  iirst  hypothesis.  See,  e.  g.  Lanlncr.  vi, 
495  (London,  1788) ;  Pearson,  3finor  H'<w-Jb»,  i,  350  (Oxt 
1844),  and  On  the  Creed,  i,  808;  ii,  224  (Oxf«rd,  18SS); 
Thomdike,  i,  6  (Oxf.  1844) ;  Home's  Jnłrod.  fo  //.Air, 
427  (Lond.  1834),  etc  On  the  same  side  are  Ughtfoot, 
Witsius,  Lampe,  Daumgarten,  Semlcr,  (iabler.  Eichhom, 
Hug,  Rertholdt,  Gueiicke,  SchneckcnlMirgcr,  Meicr,  Stei- 
ger,  (Heseler,  Theile.  Lange,  Ta vlor  (Op.  v,  20  [  liiintlan, 
1849]),  Wilson  (Op.  vi,  678  [Oxf*  1859]),  and  Cave  (Ufe 
o^Sł,  James)  maintain  the  second  hypothesis  with  V«- 
sius,  Baanagc,  Yalesius,  etc.  The  thinl  is  hdd  by  Dr. 
Davidson  (fnh-od,  Xew  Test,  \-ol.  iii)  and  by  Dean  Ałfard 
(Greek  Test,  iv,  87).  Our  own  position.  it  will  be  per- 
ceived,  combines  parta  of  each  of  these  view8,  maintain- 
ing  with  (1)  the  identity  of  the  two  Jamcses,  with  (i) 
the  Levirate  marriage  of  Joseph  and  the  widów  of  Al- 
phieus, and  with  (3)  that  these  were  all  the  children  of 
Joseph  and  in  part  of  Mary.  See  James,  ErisTLE  of 
(below). 

3.  Jamrs,  the  brother  of  the  Loro  (ó  ałi\^ 
TOv  Kvpiov  [Gal.  i,  19]).     Whether  this  James  is  ulcn- 
tical  with  the  son  of  Alphseus  is  a  qfue8tion  whieh  Dr. 
Neandcr  pronounces  to  be  the  most  difficuU  in  the  apoa* 
tolic  histor^' ;  it  may  be  well,  therefore,  to  oouadcrniaie 
particularly  under  this  faead  the  arguments  that  hare 
been  urged  in  support  of  the  negativc.    We  rtail  in 
Matt.  xiti,  55,  *<  Is  not  his  mother  called  Mari',  and  bfi 
brethren  James,  and  Joses,  and  Simon,  and  Judas?"and 
in  Mark  vi,  8, "  Is  not  this  the  carpenter,  the  son  of  Mart , 
and  brother  of  James  and  Joees,  and  of  Juda  and  Simon? 
and  are  not  his  sisters  here  wiih  us?"    Those  criticj 
who  suppose  the  terms  of  afiinity  in  thc^e  and  iMuraUd 
passages  to  be  used  in  the  lax€r  sense  of  near  rrlatipa. 
have  remarked  that  in  Mark  xv,  40  mention  umaAsi 
"  Mary,  the  mother  of  James  the  Less  and  of  Joscjft*  cal 
that  in  John  xix,  25  it  is  said  **  there  stnod  bv^y^?  (tes 
of  Jesus  his  mother  and  his  mother^s  s^8tr^|jjj^i.j|tiT.ifcc 
wife  of  Cleophas,  and  "Mary  Magdalenę ;"  -jjjj^  ttfertbai^ 
infer  that  the  wife  of  Geophas  is  the  sam%^  j^j^t^  f^^ 
of  the  mother  of  Jesus,  and  conseqnentl}^^  ;Ł»t  Jcao 
(supposing  Cleophas  and  Alphsus  to  be  thiA^i^igr  sfiK, 
the  former  according  to  the  Hebrew,  the  laU  |^  icti^ 
ing  to  the  Greek  orthography)  fras  tifirgt  r^  f^j^m^^^ 
liord,  and  on  that  account  termed  his  broth-^     «,|jg|  tM 


JAMES 


755 


JAMES 


tbe  oŁher  indiyiduals  called  the  brethren  of  Jesas  sŁood 
in  the  same  reUtioOi  It  is  also  urged  that  in  the  Acta, 
after  the  death  of  James,  the  aon  of  Zebedee,  we  read 
only  of  one  James ;  and,  moreoyer,  that  it  is  improbable 
that  our  Lord  wouid  have  committed  his  mother  to  the 
care  of  the  belored  disciple  had  there  been  sons  of  Jo- 
seph livtiig,  whether  the  oflTspring  of  Mary  or  of  a  for- 
mer  maniage.  Against  this  view  it  has  been  alleged 
that  in  seyenl  early  Christian  writers,  James,  the  broth- 
er  of  the  Lord,  is  distinguished  from  the  son  of  Alphasua, 
that  the  identlty  of  the  names  Alphseus  and  Cleophas  is 
aomewhat  uncertainj  and  Łhat  it  is  doubtful  whether  the 
words  "  his  mother^s  sister,"  in  John  xix,  25,  are  to  be 
onnsidered  in  apposition  with  those  immediately  foUow- 
ing— *'Mazy,  the  wife  of  Cleophas,"  or  intended  to  desig- 
nate  a  different  indiTidiial,  sińce  it  is  highly  improba- 
ble that  two  siaters  should  have  had  the  same  name. 
Wieseler  {Słudien  und  KriłUen,  1840,  iii,  648)  mainUins 
that  not  three,  but  four  persona  are  mentioned  in  this 
paasage;  and  that,  sińce  in  Matt  xxyii,  56,  and  Mark 
xvy  40,  besides  Mary  of  Magdala,  and  Mary,  the  mother 
of  James  and  Joses,  Salome  also  (or  the  mother  of  the 
aons  of  Zebedee)  is  named  as  present  at  the  Crucifłxion, 
it  foUows  that  she  must  have  been  the  sister  of  our 
Lord^s  mother.  But,  even  allowing  that  the  aons  of  Al- 
phsBus  were  related  to  our  Lord,  the  narrative  in  the 
Erangeliats  and  the  Acts  preaents  some  reasons  for  sua- 
pecting  that  the3'  were  not  the  persona  described  as  ^  the 
brethren  of  Jesus."  (1.)  The  brethren  of  Jesus  are  asso- 
ciated  with  his  mother  in  a  manner  that  strongly  indi- 
catea  their  standing  in  the  filial  relation  to  her  (Matt. 
xii,  46 ;  Mark  iii,  81 ;  Lukę  yiii,  19 ;  Matt,  xiii,  56,  where 
"  aistera"  are  also  mentioned) ;  they  appear  constantly 
together  as  forming  one  family  (John  ii,  12):  '*After 
this  he  went  down  to  Capemaum,  he,  and  his  mother, 
and  his  brethren,  and  his  diaciples*'  (Kuinoeł,  Commenł, 
in  M(Ut.  xii,  46).  (2.)  It  is  explicitly  stated  that  at  a 
period  posterior  to  the  appointment  of  the  twelve  apos- 
tlea,  among  whom  we  find  **  the  aon  of  Alphaiua,**  "  nei- 
their  did  his  brethren  beUeve  in  him"  (John  vii,  5 ; 
LUcke*8  Comment,\  Attempts,  indeed,  have  been  madę 
by  Grotius  and  Uirdner  to  diiute  the  force  of  thia  lan- 
guage,  as  if  it  meant  merely  that  their  faith  was  imper- 
fect  or  wayering — "'  that  they  did  not  beliere  as  they 
ahould;'*  but  the  language  of  Jesus  is  decisire:  ^'My 
time  is  not  yet  come,  but  your  time  is  always  ready; 
the  world  cannot  hate  you,  but  me  it  hateth"  (corapare 
this  with  John  xv,  18, 19 :  "  If  the  world  bat©  you,"  etc). 
As  to  the  supposition  that  what  is  afllirmed  in  John's 
Gospel  might  apply  to  only  some  of  his  brethren,  it  is 
evident  that,  admitting  the  identity,  only  one  brother  of 
Jeans  would  be  left  out  of  the  "  company  of  the  apos- 
tles.**  (8.)  Luke*s  language  in  Acts  i,  13, 14,  is  oppoeed 
to  the  identity  in  ąueation ;  for,  after  enumerating  the 
a;Ki.<(tles,  among  whom,  aa  usual,  is  "  James,  the  aon  of 
Alpbaeus,"  he  ailds,  "•  they  all  continued  with  one  accord 
in  prayer  and  supplication  with  the  women,  and  Mary, 
the  mother  of  Jeaua,  and  \citk  hit  brethren"  From  thia 
passage,  however,  we  leam  that  by  this  time  his  breth- 
ren had  receive<l  him  aa  the  Messiah.  That  after  the 
death  of  the  son  of  Zebedee  we  find  only  one  James 
mentioned,  may  eaaily  be  accounted  for  on  the  ground 
that  probably  only  one, "  the  brother  of  the  Lord,"  re- 
mainetl  at  Jerusalem ;  and,  under  such  circumstances, 
the  silence  of  the  historian  respecting  the  son  of  Alphie- 
ua  is  not  morę  strange  than  respecting  8everal  of  the 
other  apostles,  whose  names  never  occur  afler  the  cata- 
lo|cae  in  i,  13.  PauUs  langtuige  in  GaL  i,  19  has  been 
addaced  to  prove  the  identity  of  the  Lord's  brother  with 
the  son  of  Alphjeus  by  its  ranking  hlm  among  the  apos- 
tles, but  others  contend  that  it  is  bj'  no  means  decisiye 
(Winer,  GrammaHk,  4th  edit.,.p.  517 ;  Neander,  łlittory 
ofike  PlanŁingy  etc,  ii,  5  [EngL  translation]).  Dr.  Nie- 
meyer  {Charakterittik  der  Bibel,  i,  399  [HaUe,  1880]) 
enameratea  not  less  than  five  persona  of  this  mnne,  by 
distinn^ishing  the  son  oC  Alphiras  fh)m  James  the  Less, 
r  that  the  James  Ust  mentioned  in  Acts  i, 


18  was  not  the  brother,  but  the  father  of  Jtidas.  ^mldst 
this  great  disagreement  of  views  (see  in  Winer's  Realieór. 
s.  V.  Jacobus ;  David8on's  Introd.  to  the  N,  T.  iii,  302  sq. ; 
Home's  Introduction^  new  ed.  iv,  591,  n. ;  Princeton  Ae- 
riewy  Jan.  1865),  the  most  probable  solution  of  the  main 
ąuestion  is  that  given  above  (No.  2),  identifying  James, 
the  son  of  Alphseua  or  Cleophas  with  one  of  the  apostles, 
the  literał  brother  of  our  Lord,  and  the  son  of  Mar}',  the 
aister-in-Iaw  of  the  Yirgin  by  virtue  of  the  marriage  of 
both  with  Joseph  (but  see  Alford,  Prolegg.  to  yoU  iv,  pt< 
1  of  his  Comment,  p.  88  8q.).  This  Levirate  exphiuation 
is  summarily  dismiaaed  by  Andrewa  {Life  ofour  Ijtrdt 
p.  108)  and  Mombert  (in  the  Am.  edit.  of  Lange's  Com- 
mertfartfy  introd.  to  epist.  of  James,  p.  19)  as  "  needing  no 
refutation ;"  but,  aithough  conjectural,  it  is  the  only  one 
that  makes  it  possible  for  James  to  have  been  atonoe 
Chritft  brother  and  yet  the  ton  ofA  Iphaut.  If  he  was 
likewise  the  same  Mrith  the  ton  o/Mary^  the  wife  ofCleo- 
phat,  the  theory  may  be  aaid  to  be  demonstrated.  Oth- 
er treatises  on  the  subject  are  Dr.  Mill's  Accounts  ofour 
luor^s  Brethren  Vindićated  (Cambridge,  1843) ;  Schaff, 
Das  Verhdlfnits  det  Jacohut,  Brudert  det  Hermj  vnd  Ja^ 
cobut  AlphSi  (Berlin,  1842) ;  Gabler,  De  Jacobo,  epistoła 
eidem  cucriptis  auctori  (Altorf,  1787).  For  other  mono- 
graphs,  see  Yolbeding,  Index  Programmatumj  p.  31. 

If  we  examine  the  early  Christian  writers,  we  shall 
roeet  with  a  variety  of  opinions  on  this  subject.  £use- 
bius  (^Ilist,  £ccłet,  ii,  1)  says  that  James,  the  first  bishóp 
of  Jerusalem,  brother  of  the  Lord,  son  of  Joseph,  the  hu»- 
band  of  Mary,  was  sumamed  the  Just  by  the  andenta 
on  account  of  his  eminent  virtue.  He  uses  similar  lan- 
guage in  his  £vanffelical  Demonttrałton  (iii,  5).  In  his 
oommentary  on  Isaiah  hc  reckons  fourteen  apostles,  yis. 
the  twelve,  Paul,  and  James,  the  brother  ofour  Lord.  A 
similar  enumeratlon  is  madę  in  the  **Apottolic  ContiUu" 
tiont"  (vi,  14).  Epiphanius,  Chiysostoro,  and  Theophy- 
lact  speak  of  James,  the  Lord's  brother,  as  being  the  same 
as  the  aon  of  Cleophaa.  They  auppoae  that  Joseph  and 
Cleophas  were  brothers,  and  that  the  latter  d3ring  without 
isBue,  Joseph  married  his  widów  for  his  firat  wife,  accord- 
ing  to  the  Jewish  custom,  and  that  James  and  his  breth- 
ren were  the  offspring  of  this  marriage  (Lardner's  Cred- 
ibUity,  łi,  118;  Workt,  iv,  548 ;  i,  163 ;  v,  160 ;  Hitt.  of 
Ileretictt  eh.  xi,  §  1 1 ;  Works,  Yiii,  527 ;  Supplement  to  the 
CredSbiliiff,  eh.  xvii ,  Wąrkt,  vi,  188).  A  paasage  from 
Josephus  is  quoted  by  Eusebius  {Hist,  Ecdet.  ii,  23),  in 
which  James,  the  brother  of  "  him  who  is  called  Christ," 
is  mentioned  (Ani,  xx,  9, 1) ;  but  in  the  opinion  of  Dr. 
Lardner  and  other  eminent  critics,  this  dause  is  an  in- 
terpolation  (Lardnef  3  Jewish  Te8timomes,chAy;  Works, 
vi,  496).  That  James  was  formally  appointed  bishop  of 
Jerusalem  by  the  Lord  himsdf,  as  reported  by  Epipha^* 
nius  (ffceret.  lxxviii),  Chrysostom  (ffom.  xi  in  1  Cor. 
vii)j  Produs  of  Constantinople  (De  Trąd,  Div,  Liturg.), 
and  Photius  {Ep,  157),  is  not  likely.  Eusebius  foiloia-s 
this  account  in  a  pasaage  of  his  history,  but  says  else- 
where  that  he  was  appointed  by  the  apostles  (//.  Ecd, 
ii,  23).  Clcment  of  Alexandria  is  the  first  author  who 
speaks  of  his  episoopate  {Hypotyposds,  bk.  vi,  apud  Eu- 
sebius, liist,  JCcc.  ii,  1),  and  he  ałludes  to  it  as  a  thing  of 
which  the  chief  apostles,  Peter,  James,  and  John,  might 
well  have  been  ambitious.  The  same  Clcment  rcports 
that  the  Lord,  after  his  resurrection,  delivered  the  gift 
of  knowledge  to  James  the  Just,  to  John,  and  Peter,  who 
delivered  it  to  the  reat  of  the  apostles,  and  they  to  the 
seyenty.  These  yiews  of  the  leadersbip  of  James  in 
the  college  of  the  apostles  agree  with  the  account  inf 
Acts  (ix,  27 ;  xii,  17 ;  xv,  18, 19).  According  to  Hege- 
sippus  (a  conyerted  Jew  of  the  2d  ccntury)  James,  the 
brother  of  the  Lord,  undertook  the  govenmient  of  the 
Church  along  with  the  apostles  (fitrd  twv  &iroaT6\iav), 
He  describes  him  as  leading  a  life  of  ascetic  strietnesa, 
and  as  held  in  the  highest  yeneration  by  the  Jews  (ap. 
Euseb.  I/ist.  Ecdes.  ii,  23).  But  in  the  account  he  gives 
of  his  martyrdom  some  cimmutances  are  highly  im-« 
probable  (see  Routh,  ReUąuim  Sacra,  i,  228),  aithougk 
the  eveut  itself  is  quite  credible  (A.D.  62).    In  the  apoc 


JAMES 


156 


JAM£S 


nrphal  (Gospel  according  to  the  Hebrews,  he  is  satd  to 
have  been  precipitated  from  a  pinnacle  of  the  Tempie, 
then  assanlted  with  Stones,  and  at  last  dispatehed  by  a 
blow  on  the  head  with  a  fuller's  pole  (Lardner's  Sttppk- 
menty  eh.  xvi,  Worksy  vi,  174 ;  Neander,  Planting,  eto.,  ii, 
9, 22).  Epiphanios  gires  the  same  accotuit  that  Hege- 
aippus  does,  in  somewhat  different  words,  having  evi- 
dently  copied  it  for  the  most  part  from  him.  He  adds 
a  few  particulars  which  are  piobably  merę  assertions  or 
concluaions  of  his  own  {flares,  xxix,  4;  lxxviii,  13). 
He  calculates  that  James  most  have  been  ninety-Bix 
years  old  at  the  time  of  his  death,  and  adds  (on  the  au- 
thority,  as  he  says,  of  Eusebius,  Clement,  and  others) 
that  he  wore  the  Trkrakoy  on  his  forehead,  in  which  he 
probably  oonfounds  him  with  St.  John  (1'olycr.  apud 
Eusebius,  Histor,  Ecdes.  v,  24.  But  see  Cotta,  De  lam. 
pont.  App,  JoatL  Jac.  et  Marci  [Tnb.  1755]).  Gregory 
of  Tours  reports  that  he  was  buried,  not  where  he  fell, 
but  on  the  Mount  of  01ive8,  in  a  tomb  in  which  he  had 
already  buried  Zacharias  and  Simon  {De  ffłor,  marł,  i, 
27).  The  monument— part  excavation,  part  edifiee — 
which  is  now  comraonly  known  as  the  "  Torob  of  St. 
James,"  is  on  the  east  side  of  the  so-calledYalley  of  Je- 
boshaphat.  The  tradition  about  the  monument  in  que»- 
tion  is  that  SL  James  took  refuge  there  afler  the  capture 
6f  Christ,  and  remained,  eating  and  drinking  nothing, 
until  our  liord  appeared  to  him  on  the  day  of  his  resur- 
rection  (see  Quaresmius,  eto.,  quoted  in  Tobler,  SUoahy 
etc,  p.  299).  The  legend  of  his  death  there  seems  to  be 
first  mentioned  by  Maundeville  (A.D.  1320 :  see  EaHy 
Trav.  p.  176).  By  the  old  travellers  it  is  oftcn  called 
the  "  Church  of  SL  James."  Eusebius  tella  us  that  his 
chair  was  pre8erved  down  to  his  time  (on  which  see 
Heinichen'8  Excursus  [Axc.  »,  ad  Euseh,  Hisł.  Ecdes, 
▼ii,  19,  vol.  iv,  p.  967,  ed.  Burton]).  We  must  afld  a 
strange  Talmudic  legend  which  appears  to  rclate  to 
James.  It  is  found  in  the  Midrash  Kohelethy  or  Com- 
mentary  on  Ecclesiastes,  and  also  in  the  Tract  Abodah 
Zarak  of  the  Jenisalem  Talmud.  It  is  as  foUows :  *'  R 
Eliezer,  the  son  of  Dama,  was  bitton  by  a  serpent,  and 
there  came  to  him  Jacob,  a  man  of  Caphar  Secama,  to 
heal  him  by  the  name  of  Jesu,  the  son  of  Pandera;  but 
K.  Ismael  sulfered  him  not,  saying, '  That  is  not  allowed 
thee,  son  of  Dama.'  He  answered,  *  Suffer  me,  and  I 
will  produce  an  authority  against  thee  that  is  lawful ,' 
but  he  could  not  produce  the  authority  before  he  ex- 
pired.  And  what  was  the  authority?  This:  *  Which 
if  a  man  do,  he  shall  live  in  them*  (Lev.  x\'iii,  5).  But 
it  is  not  sald  that  he  shall  die  in  them.'*  The  son  of 
Pandera  is  the  name  that  the  Jews  have  always  given 
to  our  Lord  when  rq)resenting  him  as  a  magician.  The 
same  name  is  given  in  Epiphanius  {Htereś,  lxxviii)  to 
the  grandfather  of  Joseph,  and  by  John  Damascene  {De 
Fide  Orłh,  iv,  15)  to  the  grandfather  of  Joachim,  the 
supposed  father  of  the  Yirgin  Mary.  For  the  Identifi- 
cation of  James  of  Secama  (a  place  in  Upper  Galilee) 
with  James  the  Just,  see  Mili  {Historie,  Criticism  oftke 
Gospely  p.  818,  Camb.  1840).— Kitto;  Smith.  For  the 
apocryphal  works  attńbuted  to  James,  see  Jakieś,  Spu- 

RIOUS  WitITINOS  OF. 

JAMES,  EPISTLE  OF;  said,  according  to  Eusebius 
{Hisł,  Eccies.  ii,  23),  to  bo  the  first  of  the  so-called  Cath- 
olic  epistles  (icadoAiKai),  as  being  addressed  to  classes 
of  Christians  rather  than  to  individua]s  or  particular 
communities.     See  Epi^les,  Catholic. 

I.  A  utkorship. — As  the  writer  simply  styles  himself 
**  James,  a  aerrant  of  God  and  ofthe  Lord  Jesus  Christ,^ 
ihe  que8tion  as  to  whom  thts  may  designate  has  been  a 
sobject  of  keen  and  prolonged  controver8y,  sinoe,  as  Eu- 
sebius has  again  remarked,  there  were  Beveral  of  this 
name.  James  the  Great,  or  the  son  of  Zebedee,  was 
put  to  death  under  Herod  Agrippa  about  the  year  44, 
and,  therefore,  the  authorship  cannot  with  any  proprie- 
ty  be  ascńbed  to  him,  though  a  Syriac  MS.,  published 
by  Widmandstadt,  and  an  old  Latin  ver8ion,  published 
by  Martianay  and  Sabatier,  make  the  assertion.  The 
■nthorship  bas  been  assigned  by  not  a  few  to  James 


the  Leas,  6  fwcpócj  the  son  of  AlphsMis  or  Cleophaa,  and 
by  others  to  James,  the  Lord*8  brother.  Many,  bow- 
ever,  maintain  that  the  two  names  were  borne  by  the 
same  individual,  James  being  called  the  Loid*s  bńithcr 
either  as  beiog  a  oonan  or  adoptive  brother  of  Jeci>s 
(Lange,  art.  Jacobus  in  Henog's  EnegkiopSdie),  or  as  a 
son  of  Joseph  by  a  Levirate  connection  with  the  widów 
of  Geophas— the  opinion  of  Epiphanius  and  Theopliy- 
lact ;  or  as  a  son  of  Joseph  by  a  former  marriage— the 
view  of  St.  Chrysostom,  Hilar}*,  Cave,  and  Basnage.  On 
the  other  hand,  it  is  beld  by  some  that  James,  son  of 
Alphsus,  and  James,  brother  of  our  Lord,  were  distinct 
persons,  the  latter  being  a  uterine  brolher  of  Jesus,  and 
standing,  according  to  the  lepreaentation  of  the  Cośpels, 
in  the  same  relation  with  him  to  their  coromon  mother 
Mary— 4IS  in  Matt.  xii,  47;  xiii,  55;  Mark  vt,  3:  John 
ii,  12 ;  Acts  i,  14.  On  the  whole,  we  are  inclined  to  ihe 
former  hypothesis,  but  we  cannot  enter  into  the  ques- 
tion,  referring  the  reader  to  the  previou8  artide,  and  to 
that  on  Brothers  of  our  Ix>rd.  There  are  also  three 
exoellent  monographs  on  the  subject:  Blom,  TkeoL  IHs- 
tert,  de  rotę  Aot\^olc  Kvpiov  (Lugd.  BaL  1839) ;  SchaU; 
Dos  Verkaltniss  des  Jacobus  Bruden  des  J/erm  (Berlin, 
1842) ;  Wijbelingh,  Q^  est  epistoła  Jacubi  Sariptor^ 
(Groningen,  1854).  For  the  other  side,  see  Mili  on  the 
Mfihical  Inłerpretałiosi  of  the  GospelSy  p.  219,  ed.  sec, 
1861.  Dr.  Mili  held  the  perpetual  virginity  of  Mary, 
or  that  she  wa8,in  ecclesiastical  language,  auwap^ffoc, 
and  thus  virtually  foredoses  the  eutire  investigation. 
It  senrcs  little  purpose  to  sneer  at  those  wfao  hołd  the 
opposite  theory  as  having  their  prototypea  in  the  Anti- 
dicomarianites  or  Helvidians  of  rhe  4th  century. 

According  to  our  \ńew,  the  author  of  this  q>istle  wai 
the  Lord's  brother,  and  an  apostlc,  or  one  of  the  twelre. 
In  GaL  ii,  9,  Paul  classes  him  with  Peter  and  John,  all 
three  being  pillars  (<rri)Xoi).  Ile  is  said  by  Hogcńppns 
(Eusebius,  Iłist,  ii,  23)  to  faave  receive(l  the  govemment 
of  the  Church,  /utA  ruiv  diro9TÓ\utVj  not  post  {fpasfw 
loSy  as  Jerome  wrongly  renders  it,  but  aUmg  urilk  the 
apostles — as  the  natural  rendering  is — or  was  receired 
by  them  into  a  collegiate  relation.  In  the  pseudo-Ocm- 
entines,  and  in  the  Apostolical  Constitutions,  howerer, 
he  is  traditionally  separated  Irom  the  apostles.  Ii  is 
quito  groundless  on  the  part  of  Wieseler  (Stvdien  vnd 
Kritikeny  1842),  Stter,  and  Davidson  to  argue  that  the 
James  mentioned  in  the  first  chapter  of  Galatians  is  a 
different  person  from  the  James  referred  to  in  the  sec- 
ond  chaptor.  Again,  we  have  Paul  distinctly  acknowl- 
edging  the  high  position  of  the  brethren  of  the  Lonł 
when  he  ranges  them  between  "other  apostles**  and 
"  Cephas*'  in  1  Cor.  ix,  5.  By  univer8al  consent  James 
was  called  o  dtKaiocy  and,  being  mart^ied,  was  succeed- 
ed  by  a  cousin,  Symeon,  second  of  the  consins  of  the 
Lord,  and  a  son  of  Alplueus  (oiTa  &vt^itv  tov  Kvptov 
SeifTtpop).  Thus  James  was  the  superintendent  of  the 
Church  at  Jenisalem,  and,  probably  on  account  of  eon- 
tinuous  residence,  poesessed  of  higher  influence  there 
than  Peter,  the  apostle  of  the  circumcision,  who  coułd 
oniy  be  an  occasional  visitor.  *'Certain  from  James* 
(nWc  Atrd  *Iorw)3ow)  went  down  to  Antioch,  befoie 
whom  Peter  prevaricated,  as  if  he  had  stood  in  are  of 
the  Btricter  Judaic  principles  of  James  and  his  party 
(Acts  xv;  Galii).  It  seems,  therefore,  vcry  natural 
that  one  occupying  this  position  in  the  theocratic  me- 
tropolia should  writo  to  his  believing  brethren  cf  the 
Dispersion.  He  sympathized  so  strongly  with  the  myr- 
iads  of  the  Jews  who  bclieved  and  yet  were  zeakns  of 
the  law— ^i)X«ara<  roii  vófiov — that  for  their  aakta,  and 
to  ward  off  their  hostility,  he  advised  the  apostle  Paal 
to  submit  to  an  act  of  conforroity.  This  conserratiTe 
spirit,  this  zeal  for  the  law  at  least  as  the  morał  nde  of 
life,  and  this  profeasion  of  Christianity  akmg  with  uni- 
form obedience  to  the  "customs,"  seem  to  us  chaneto^ 
istic  elements  of  the  epistle  before  us. 

The  opinion  that  the  author  of  this  epistle  was  diflćay 
ent  from  James,  the  son  of  Alplueu^  and  not  an  apo«l^ 
is  held  by  dement,  Herder,  De  Wettc,  Neander,  KeiBi 


JAMES 


767 


JAMES 


Schaff,  Winer,  Stier,  Kothe,  and  Alford.  Davidson, 
while  holding  the  opinion  that  the  Loitl'0  brother  and 
James  the  apoetle  are  different  persons,  ascńbeB  the 
epifltle  to  the  latter.  But  the  theory  eeems  to  viohite 
all  the  probabilities  that  may  be  gathered  from  the  early 
fathen  and  historiana.  That  James,  the  Lord's  brother, 
ia  James  the  apostle,  is  an  opinion  maintained  by  Baro- 
nios,  Lardner,  Peanon,  Gabler,  Eichhorn,  Hug,  Gueiickei 
Meier,  Gieseler,  Theile,  and  the  most  of  other  wńters. 

II.  Canomcal  Authority, — The  epistle  is  found  in  the 
Syriac  Peshito  in  the  2<l  oentury,  a  rersion  which  cir- 
culated  in  the  neighborhood  of  that  oooutry  to  which 
James  and  his  readers  belonged,  and  the  translator  and 
his  coadjutors  most  havc  had  special  historical  reasuns 
for  inserting  James  in  their  canon,  as  they  exclade  the 
Second  and  Third  Eplstles  of  John,  the  Epistle  of  Jude, 
and  the  Apocalypse.  There  are  clauses  in  Clement  of 
Bome  (.4</  <7or.  xxxii)  and  in  Hermas  {Mandat,  xii,  15) 
which  probably  may  refer  to  correspondent  portions  of 
this  epistle,  thougb,  perhaps,  they  may  only  allude  di> 
rectly  to  the  Septuagint.  The  qiiotatiou  from  the  Latin 
yersion  of  Irenseos  (."I  deers.  Ifares.  iv,  16)  appears  to  be 
morę  direct  in  the  phrasc  "et  amicus  Dei  Yocatua  cst." 
But  this  phraae,  found  also  in  Clement,  seems  to  have 
been  a  current  one,  and  Philo  calls  Abraham  by  the 
same  appellation.  We  cannot,  therefore,  lay  such  im- 
roediate  stress  on  theae  passages  as  is  done  by  Kem, 
Wieslnger,  and  others,  though  there  is  a  presumption 
in  favor  of  the  opinion  that  passages  in  the  apostolical 
iathers,  bearing  any  likeness  of  style  or  thought  to  the 
apostolical  writings,  were  borrowed  from  them,  as  either 
direct  imitations  or  unconscious  reproductions.  This 
epistle  is  qaoted  by  Origen  {fnJoan^in  Opera,  11^,806) ; 
and  the  Latin  veruon  of  Kufinuś  uses  the  phrase  Jaoh- 
bus  apostolas  as  a  preface  to  a  quotation.  This  father 
quotes  the  epistle  ako  as  ascribed  to  James — iv  Ty  ^t- 
pofuyjf  'lacftf/3ov  kmtrroky;  though,  as  Kem  remarks, 
Origen  says  that  the  doctrine  *<  faith  without  works  is 
dead**  is  not  reoeived  by  all — ov  <Tvyxt»tptiOtv.  Clement 
of  Alexandria  does  not  qaote  it,  but  Eusebius  says  that 
he  expounded.all  the  catholic  episdes,  including,  how- 
ever,  iu  the  rangę  of  his  comments  the  Epistle  of  Bar- 
nabas  and  the  so-called  Apocaljrpae  of  Peter.  TertuUian 
socms  to  make  no  reference  to  it,  though  Credner  sup- 
poses  an  allusion  to  ii,  23  in  the  second  book  A  dcersu* 
Juikeos  (Opera,  ed.  Oehler,  ii,  704).  Eusebius  places  it 
among  the  Antilegomena  (Histor,  Eccles.  ii,  23 ;  iii,  25), 
saying  of  the  epistle,  under  the  tirst  reference,  aiter  he 
hail  jusŁ  spoken  of  its  author's  death,  l<rrtov  Śt  utę  vo- 
Btifirat  ftiu,  etc^  ^'It  is  reckoned  spurious — ^not  many 
of  the  ancients  have  mentioned  it;"  subjoining,  how- 
ever,  that  it  and  Jude  were  used  in  most  of  the  church- 
ea.  In  other  places  Eusebius  quotes  James  without 
hesitation,  calling  the  epistle  by  the  sacred  title  of 
ypa^^,  and  its  author  u  itpbc  dir6oTo\o£,  Jerome  is 
very  explicit,  saying  that  James  wrote  one  epistle, 
which  some  assertcd  had  been  published  by  another  in 
his  narae,  but  that  by  degrees  and  in  process  of  time 
(^'  paullatim  tempore  procedente")  it  obtained  authority. 
Jerome"*  assertion  may  anse  from  the  fact  that  there 
were  sereral  persona  named  James,  and  that  confusion 
on  thia  point  was  one  roeans  of  throwing  doubt  on  the 
epistle.  There  seems  to  be  also  an  allusion  in  Uippoly- 
tos  (ecL  Lagarde,  p.  122)  to  ii,  13,  in  the  words  ^  ydp 
Kpiatę  dvL\nóc  tari  rtf  ftt)  iroifiomyri  iktoc,  It  was  at 
length  received  by  the  Council  of  Carthage  in  397,  and 
in  that  oentury  it  seems  to  have  been  all  but  uniyersally 
acknowledged,  both  by  the  Eastera  and  Western  church- 
es — ^Theodorc  of  Mopsuestia  being  a  marked  exception, 
because  of  the  allusion  in  it  (r,  11)  to  the  book  of  Job. 
At  the  period  of  the  Reformation  its  genuineness  was 
agiin  called  in  question.  Luther,  in  his  preface  to  the 
N.  T.  in  1522,  comparing  it  *'  with  the  best  books  of  the 
N.  T.,*'  stigmatized  it  as  "a  right  strawy  epistle  (eiae 
rwA/  słroheme  Kpistet)^  being  destitote  of  an  evangelic 
character."  Cyril  Lucar  had  a  simihur  objection,  that 
Chiiat's  name  was  coldly  mentioned,  and  that  only  once 


or  twice,  and  that  it  treated  merely  of  moraUty— ("sola 
a  la  moralita  attende'* — LeHret  A  neodoies,  p.  85,  Amster- 
dam, 1718).  Erasmus  had  doubts  about  it,  and  so  had 
caidinal  Cajetan,  Flacius,  and  the  Magdeburg  centuria- 
tors.  Grotius  and  Wetstein  shared  in  these  doubts,  and 
they  are  followed  by  Scłdeiermacher,  Schott,  De  Wette, 
Reuss,  the  Tubingen  critics  Baur  and  Schwegler,  and 
Ritschl  in  his  EtUttehung  der  Alt-katJtoL  Kirc&e,  p.  150. 
These  recent  critics  deny  its  apostolic  source,  and  some 
of  them  place  it  in  the  2d  century,  from  its  resemblance 
in  some  parts  to  the  Clementine  homilies.  But  it  is 
plain  that  the  objections  of  almost  all  these  opponents 
spring  mainly  ftom  doctrinal  and  not  from  critical  y-iews, 
being  rather  originated  and  sustained  by  the  notion  form- 
ed  of  the  contents  of  the  epistle  than  resting  on  any  prop- 
er  historical  foundation.  We  have  not  spaoe  to  go  over 
the  0everal  objections,  such  as  the  absence  of  the  term 
apoetle  from  the  inscription,  though  this  is  likewtee  not 
found  in  sereral  of  Paulus  epistles;  the  want  of  individ- 
uality  in  the  document,  though  this  may  easily  be  ac- 
counted  for  by  the  ciicumstanoes  of  the  author  in  rela- 
tion  to  his  readers;  and  the  apparent  antagonism  to  the 
Pauline  doctrine  of  justification  by  faith,  which  we  shall 
afterwards  consider.  It  is  of  no  arail  to  object,  with 
Wetstein  and  Theile,  that  James  refers  to  the  apocry- 
phal  writingS)  a  practice  unknown  till  a  later  period,  for 
Theile^s  array  of  passages  {Prolegomena,  p.  46)  does  not 
prove  the  statement,  as  Huther*s  reply  to  this  and  other 
aimilar  objections  has  shown  at  length,  and  step  by 
step.  Nor,  lastly,  can  it  be  said  that  the  Greek  style  of 
the  epistle  betrays  a  culture  which  the  author  oould  not 
poesesB.  The  style  is  nervous,  indeed,  and  is  morę  He- 
bnustic  in  its  generał  stracture  than  in  its  indiridual 
phrases,  as  in  its  short  and  pithy  clauses,  the  absence 
of  logical  formuUe,  the  want  of  elaborate  oonstructions, 
its  oratoiical  fervor,  and  the  simple  and  direct  outHow 
of  thoughts  in  brief  and  oflen  parallelistic  dausesL  In* 
teroourse  with  foreigu  Jews  must  have  been  frequent  in 
those  days,  and  there  are  always  minds  which,  from  nat- 
ural  propensity,  are  morę  apt  than  others  to  acquire  a 
tasteful  facility  in  the  use  of  a  tongue  which  has  not 
been  their  vemacular.  Taking  all  these  things  into 
aocount,  we  have  every  reason  to  acoept  the  canonical 
authority  óf  this  epistle,  the  trial  it  has  passod  through 
giving  us  fuller  confidence  in  it,  sinoe  the  prindpal  ob- 
jections are  the  of&pring  either  of  polemiod  prejudice, 
or  of  a  subjective  criticism  based  morę  on  assthetic  ten- 
denciea  than  historical  results.  Rauch  has  faintly  ob- 
jected  to  the  integrity  of  the  epistle,  asserting  that  the 
oondusion  of  y,  12-20,  may  be  an  interpolation,  because 
it  is  not  in  logicąl  harmony  with  what  precedes ;  but 
he  has  had  no  foUowers,  and  Kem,  Theile,  Schnecken- 
burgcr,  and  others  have  refuted  him~-logical  8equence 
being  a  form  of  critical  argument  wholly  inapplicable  to 
this  epistle.  (See  Davidson,  Introd  to  N,  T,  iii,  881  8q.) 
See  Antilegomena. 

III.  The  Persont/or  whom  the  Epistle  ia  intended, — 
The  salutatiou  is  addressed  "to  the  Twelve  Tribes 
which  are  scattered  abroad"  (ralc  Siitofiea  ^v\aXc  ratę 
iv  rj  iiaoTTopf).  They  were  Je>v8,  a^cA^oi — brethren 
or  believing  Jews,  and  they  lived  beyond  Palestine,  or 
in  the  Dispersion.  Such  are  the  plidn  characteristics, 
national  and  religious,  of  the  persons  addressed.  There 
are,  however,  two  extremes  of  religious  opinion  about 
them.  Some,  as  Lardner,  Macknight,  Theile,  Credner, 
and  Hug,  imagine  that  the  epistle  is  meant  for  all  Jeies, 
But  the  inscription  forbids  such  a  supposition.  The 
tonę  of  the  epistle  implies  that  '^  the  servant  of  the  Lord 
Jesus  Christ"  addressed  fellow-belierers — "  brethren" — 
"bcgotten"  along  with  himself  (t/pac)  "by  the  word  of 
trutb,"  and  all  of  them  bearing  the  "  good  name"  (Ka\ov 
6vofjM),  The  first  rerse  of  the  second  chapter  implies 
also  that  they  held  "  the  faith  of  our  Lord  Jesus  Christ, 
the  Lord  of  Glory,"  and  they  are  exhorted  not  to  hołd  it 
inconsistently,  along  with  manifest  respect  of  persons,  or 
showing  unfounded  social  preferences.  They  are  told 
besides,  in  y,  7,  to  exercise  patienoe,  e«ac  r^c  W€tpov* 


JAM£S 


768 


JAMES 


ffiac  Tov  KvpŁOVf  till  the  public  promised  advent  of  the 
Lord  Łheir  Sayiour.  The  rich  men  denounced  in  v,  1 
*may  not  have  belonged  to  the  Church  in  realit>%bat 
this  startling  denunciation  carried  in  it  warning  to  them 
and  comfort  to  the  poor  and  persecuted.  May  there  not 
be,  in  a  letter  to  a  church,  holy  inrectiye  against  those 
without  it,  yrho  anno}'  and  oppress  its  unresisting  mem- 
bers?  Dean  Alfurd,  afler  Huther,  inclines  to  include  in 
the  haairopd  Jews  also  in  Palestine — Judna  being  re- 
garded  as  the  centrę.  He  refers  to  the  phrase,  Acts  viii, 
1  (vavTic  Sk  SiKnrapfitraif  Kard.  rag  X'**P^S  ''^C  'low^n- 
iac  Kai  ^fŁapdac).  But  the  use  of  the  rerb  here  in 
its  generał  sense  and  in  an  easy  narrative  cannot  modi- 
fy  the  popular  meaning  of  Starnropa  as  the  technical  or 
geographic  titlc  of  Jews  beyond  Palestine. 

On  the  other  hand,  it  has  been  maintained  by  Koster 
(Siudim  «.  Kritikeny  1831),  Kem,  Neudecker,  and  De 
Wette,  that  the  title  in  the  inscription  is  a  8;^'mboUc  one, 
and  signifies  simply  Christiana  out  of  Palestine,  as  the 
true  Israel  of  God.  A  modification  of  this  view  is  held 
by  others,  yiz.,  that  while  the  epistle  is  addresscd  to  be- 
liering  Jews,  believing  heathen  and  unconverted  Jews 
are  not  excluded.  But  the  phrase  in  the  inscription,  as 
in  Acts  xxvi,  7,  is  to  be  taken  in  its  natural  sense,  and 
with  no  spiritualized  meaning  or  referencc.  The  entire 
tonę  and  aspect  also  are  Jewish.  The  place  of  ecdesi- 
astical  meeting  is  awayioyfi ;  the  law,  vó/ioCy  is  of  su- 
premę authority.  The  divine  unity  is  a  pńmary  and 
disLinctive  article  of  faith,  the  ordinary  terms  of  Jewish 
obtestation  are  introduced,  as  is  also  the  prophetic  epi- 
thet  symbolizing  spiritual  unfaithfulnesSjfioi^aAi^fc  (iv, 
4).  Anointing  with  oil  is  mentioned,  and  the  special  re- 
gard  to  be  [)aid  (i,  27)  to  orphans  and  widows  iinds  its 
basis  in  repeated  statutes  of  the  Mosaic  law.  The  errors 
rcfutcd  also  are  such  as  naturally  arose  out  of  Pharisaic 
pride  and  formalism,  and  the  acceptanco  of  the  promised 
Christ  in  a  spirit  of  traditional  camality.  The  fact  that 
the  Di&ipcrsion  was  found  principally  in  the  £ast— that 
is,in  Syria  and  adjacent  countries — countenances  the 
presumption  that  this  epistle  is  found  in  the  Peshito  at 
80  early  a  (leriod  because  it  had  immediate  circulation 
in  that  region,  and  there  had  proved  the  fitness  and  use- 
fulness  of  its  counsels  and  warning.  Josephus  says  of 
the  Dispersion,  that  the  Jews  were  scatt«red  everywhere, 
fr\ntrTov  H  ry  'S,vpiq,  avafAffuyfŁkyov  (Warj  vii,  3,  8). 
The  persons  addressed  were  poor ;  the  rich  were  their 
persccutors,  their  own  partialities  and  preferences  were 
w^orldly  and  inconsistent ;  they  wanted  perfect  cońfidence 
in  God,  and  stumbled  at  the  divine  dispensations ;  sins 
of  the  tongue  were  common,  eagerness  to  be  public 
teachers  was  an  epidemie  among  them;  they  spoke 
rashly  and  hardly  of  one  another ;  and  they  felt  not  the 
connection  between  a  living  faith  and  a  holy  life.  So- 
cięty  was  under  a  process  of  apparent  disintegration, 
wars  and  fightings  were  frequent,  with  loss  of  life  and 
property.  Its  extremes  were  the  rich  and  the  poor, 
with  no  middle  class  between ;  for,  though  tradings  and 
joumcyings  quite  in  Jewish  style  are  referred  to  (iv,  13, 
14),  the  principal  occupation  was  husbandry,  with  no 
social  grade  between  those  who  owned  and  those  who 
reaped  the  fields.     See  Dispebsion. 

IV.  Time  and  place  ofwriting  the  Epistle, — ^The  place 
most  probably  was  Jerusalem,  where  James  had  his  res- 
idence.  Many  allusions  in  the  epistle,  while  they  apply 
to  almost  any  £ast«m  locality,  carry  in  them  a  pre- 
sumption in  favor  of  that  comitrj',  in  the  metropolis  of 
which  James  is  known  to  have  lived  and  labored.  These 
allusions  are  to  such  natural  phenomena  as  parching 
winds,  ver.  1-11 ;  long  drought,  v,  17, 18 ;  the  early  and 
latter  rain,  v,  7 ;  salinę  spńngs,  iii,  12 ;  proximity  to  the 
sea,  i,  G;  iii,  4  (llug's  Einleiłttnffj  ii,  439).  Naturally 
from  the  holy  capital  of  Judiea  goes  forth  from  the 
"  8cr\'ant  of  the  Lord  Jesus  Christ"  a  solemn  circidar  to 
all  the  believing  brethren  in  the  Disiicrsion — for  to 
them  James  was  a  living  authority  to  which  they  bow- 
ed,  and  Jenuialcm  a  holy  centrę  that  stirred  a  thousand 
loyal  associations  within  them. 


It  is  not  80  easy  to  determine  the  time  at  whicti  um 
epistle  was  written.  Many  place  the  datę  about  the 
year  60 — close  on  the  martyrdom  of  James  tbe  Joet,  or 
not  long  before  the  destniction  of  Jerusalem — as  Michae- 
lis,  Pearson,  Mili,  Guericke,  Burton,  Macknight,  I^^<.tk 
(JCinleif.  p.  547, 1862),  and  the  older  comroentator^  gcn- 
erally.  Hug  and  De  Wette  place  it  aftc r  the  Episilc  to 
the  Hebrews,  to  which  they  imagine  it  contains  ^me 
allusions — Hug  holding  that  it  was  written  (nberic^) 
on  set  purpose  against  Paul  and  his  doctrine  of  justiiica- 
tion  by  faith.  So  also  Baur  {PauluMf  p.  677).  But  thece 
reasons  are  by  no  means  conc]usive.  The  great  aigu- 
ment  that  the  Epistle  of  James  was  written  to  oppow 
either  the  doctrine  or  counteract  the  abuses  of  the  doc- 
trine of  justiiication  by  faith  has,  as  we  shall  sec.  im 
foundation.  The  notion  that  this  epistle  is  in  soroe 
sense  corrective  in  its  tonę  and  purpose  appean  pUiua- 
ble  to  us,  as  Paul  is  so  usually  read  b}'  us  before  Jaroe* 
that  we  gain  an  earlier  acąuaintance  with  him,  whik 
James  occupies  also  a  later  place  in  the  ordinaiy  ar- 
rangeroent  of  the  books  of  the  New  Testament. 

But  it  is  claimed  by  many  that  the  state  of  the  Ju- 
dieo-Christians  addressed  in  the  epistle  is  not  that  which 
we  know  to  have  exist«d  at  and  before  the  year  GO. 
There  is  no  allusion  to  the  fierce  dispntations  as  to  the 
value  and  permanence  of  circumcision,  the  authority 
and  meaning  of  the  ceremoniał  law,  or  the  conditions 
on  which  Gentile  converts  should  be  admitted  into  the 
Chiu^ch— the  questions  discusaed  at  the  Council  of  Jeru- 
salem. ControveTsies  on  these  pointa,  it  is  asserted.  eat- 
urated  the  Chnrch  during  many  years  before  the  fali  of 
Jerusalem,  and  no  one  could  address  Jewish  converts  at 
any  length  without  some  allusion  to  them.  The  m^-ri- 
ads  who  believed,  as  James  said,  were  "aH  zealon^  of 
the  law"  (Acts  xxi,  20) ;  and  that  zeal  assumed  so  manr 
false  shapes,  threw  up  so  many  barriers  in  the  way  of 
ecclesiastic^  relationship,  nay,  occasionally  to  infrinj^ed 
on  the  unconditioneil  freeness  of  the  Gospel  as  to  mb  it 
of  its  simplicity  and  power,  that  no  Jew  addressing  Jeir- 
ish  believer8  with  the  authority  and  from  the  posititn 
of  James  could  fail  to  dwell  on  those  distnrbuig  aiid  cd- 
groasing  peculiarities.  Tlie  inference,  therefore,  on  the 
part  of  many  critics,  is,  that  the  epistle  was  written  prior 
to  those  keen  and  univcT8al  discussions,  and  to  that  state 
of  the  Church  which  gave  them  origin  and  continu- 
ance;  prior,  therefore,  also  to  the  time  when  thelabon 
of  the  apostle  Paul  among  the  Gentiles  called  soch  at- 
tention  to  their  success  that  *'  certain  from  James  caroe 
down"  to  Antioch  to  examine  for  themsckes  and  canr 
back  a  report  to  the  mother  Church  in  Jerusakm  (Acts 
XV ;  GaL  ii).  The  epistle,  on  this  view,  might  be  tnit- 
ten  shortly  before  the  Council  of  Jerusalem— probably 
about  the  year  45.  Such  is  the  opinion  of  Neandcr, 
Schneckenburger,  Tlieile,  Thiersch,  Huther,  Daridton, 
and  Alford. 

On  the  other  hand,  Wiesinger  and  Bleek  justly  object 
that  the  inten^al  supposed  is  too  limited  for  such  a 
growth  of  Christianity  as  this  epistle  implies.  Młtp- 
over,  although  the  argument  in  favor  of  an  eady  datę, 
drawn  from  the  supposed  design  of  counteracting  the 
misinterpretation  of  some  of  PauFs  doctrines  (comp.  2 
Pet  iii,  16),  is  scarcely  tenable,  yet  the  epistle  manifwt- 
ly  presupposes  such  a  generał  intelligence  of  <lo$pel 
terms  and  truth  as  could  hardly  have  obtained,  c«pcóal- 
ly  abroad,  so  early  asftrior  to  the  firat  council  at  Jensa- 
lem  (Acts  xv).  Indeed,  many  of  the  above  arpuments  in 
favor  of  this  very  early  datę  are  self-contradictory;  for 
it  was  precisely  at  this  period  that  the  disputes  and  ccn- 
tro\'ersies  in  ąuestion  raged  mosit  fiercely,  not  hsTUig  yet 
been  authoritatively  determined  by  any  ecckMSi^tieal 
considtation  (comp.  PauFs  stiong  contention  with  Ptter 
and  Bamabas) ;  whereas  the  official  edict  of  that  coun- 
cil precluded  any  further  public  discossion.  In  this  re- 
spect  the  Epistle  of  James  will  fairiy  compare  with  tłiat 
to  the  Hebrews,  written  about  the  same  time.  Tb« 
reasoning,  however,  may  be  allowed  to  hołd  good  agsiost 
so  łatę  a  datę  as  immediately  pieceding  JenisaIeD*i 


JAMES 


ł69 


JAMES 


fan  (ao  Macknight  infen  fiom  v,  1) ;  for  at  that  time 
the  old  controveray  appean  to  have  been  soroewhat  re- 
▼iTed.  De  Wette  addaoes  the  alluńon  to  the  name 
"  Christiana"  in  ii,  7,  as  an  evidence  in  lavor  of  the  late 
datę:  bat  thia  wonld  only  reąuire  a  datę  later  than  that 
of  Acu  xi,  26.  On  the  whole,  the  evidence  decidedly 
preponderates  in  favor  of  the  interval  between  Paiil'8 
two  imprisonmeota  at  Romę,  or  about  A.D.  62. 

V.  Obfect  of  Writwg,— The  main  design  of  the  epis- 
de  ia  not  to  teach  doctrine,  but  to  improre  morality. 
James  ts  the  morał  teacher  of  the  N.  TesL ;  not  in  such 
■ense  a  morał  teacher  aa  not  to  be  at  the  same  time  a 
maintainer  and  teacher  of  Christian  doctrine,  bot  yet 
mainly  in  this  epistle  a  morai  teacher.  There  are  two 
ways  of  exp]aining  thts  characteristic  of  the  epistle. 
Some  commentators  and  writers  see  in  James  a  man 
-who  had  not  zealized  the  easential  priuciples  and  pecul- 
iarities  of  Christianity,  but  was  in  a  transitlon  state, 
half  Jew  and  half  Christian.  Schneckenburger  Łhinks 
that  Christianity  had  not  penetnted  his  spiritual  life. 
Neander  is  of  much  the  same  opinion  {Pftanzung  und 
LeUuitg,  p.  579).  The  same  notion  may  perhaps  be 
traoed  in  Prof.  Stanley  and  dean  Alford.  But  there  is 
anoŁher  and  much  morę  natoral  way  of  accounting  for 
the  fact.  James  was  writing  for  a  special  cUus  of  per- 
aons,  and  knew  what  that  claas  especially  needed ;  and 
therefore,  under  the  guidance  of  God'8  Spirif,  he  adapt- 
ed  his  instructions  to  their  capacities  and  wants.  Those 
for  whom  he  wrote  were,  as  we  have  said,  the  Jewish 
Christiana,  whether  in  Jenisalem  or  abroad.  James, 
liring  in  the  centrę  of  Judaism,  saw  what  were  the 
chief  sina  and  vices  of  his  countrymen,  and,  fearing 
that  Ilia  flock  might  share  in  them,  he  Ufted  up  his  voice 
to  wam  them  agaiiist  the  contagion  from  which  they 
not  only  might,  but  did  in  part  sufler.  This  was  his 
raain  object ;  but  there  is  another  closely  connected  with 
it.  As  Christians,  his  readers  were  expo8ed  to  trials 
which  they  did  not  bear  with  the  patience  and  faith 
that  would  have  become  them.  Herę,  then,  are  the  two 
objects  of  the  epistle:  1.  To  wam  against  the  sins  to 
which,  as  Jews,  they  were  most  liable.  2.  To  console 
and  exhort  them  under  the  suiferings  to  which,  as 
Christiana,  they  were  most  exp08ed.  The  waraings 
and  conaolations  are  mixed  together,  for  the  writer  does 
not  seem  to  have  set  himself  down  to  compose  an  essay 
or  a  letter  of  which  he  had  preyiously  arranged  the 
heads;  but,  Uke  one  of  the  old  prophets,  to  have  poured 
out  what  was  uppermost  in  his  thoughts,  or  closest  to 
his  heart,  without  waiting  to  connect  his  roattcr,  or  to 
throw  bridges  across  from  subject  to  subject.  ^Vhilc, 
in  the  puńty  of  his  Greek  and  the  vigor  of  his  thoughts, 
we  mark  a  man  of  education,  in  the  abruptness  of  his 
transitions  and  the  unpolished  roughneae  of  his  style 
we  may  tracę  one  of  the  family  of  the  Davidean8,  who 
diaarmed  Doraitian  by  the  simplicity  of  their  minds, 
and  by  exhibiting  their  hands  hard  with  toil  (Hcgesip- 
pas  apud  Euttb,  iii,  20. 

The  Jewish  vices  against  which  he  wams  them  are — 
formalism,  which  raade  the  senrice  {9[»tifsi:iia)  of  God 
consbt  in  washings  and  outward  ccremonics,  whereas 
he  reminds  them  (i,  27)  that  it  consists  rather  in  active 
love  and  purity  (see  Coleridge^s  A  ids  to  Rffledion,  Aph. 
23;  notę  also  actire  love=Bp.Butler*s '*benevolence," 
and  purity  =  Bp.  Butler's  "  temperance*") ;  fanaticism, 
which,  under  the  cloak  of  religious  zeal,  was  tearing  Je- 
nisalem to  pieces  (i,  20) ;  fatalism,  which  threw  its  sins 
on  God  (i,  13) ;  meanness,  which  crouched  before  the 
lich  (ii,  2) ;  falaehood,  which  had  madę  words  and  oaths 
playthings  (iii,  2-12) ;  partisanship  (iii,  14) ;  evil  speak- 
ing  (ir,  11);  boasting  (iv,  16) ;  oppression  (v,  4).  The 
great  lesson  which  he  teaches  them,  as  Christians,  is 
patience — ^patience  in  trial  (i,  2) ;  patience  in  good  works 
(i,  22-25) ;  patience  under  provocations  (iii,  17) ;  pa- 
tience under  oppression  (v,  7);  patience  under  persecu- 
tion  (t,  10) ;  and  the  ground  of  their  patience  is,  that 
che  coming  of  the  Lord  draweth  nigh,  which  is  to  right 
ali  wrongs  (v,  8;« 


YI.  There  are  two  points  in  the  epistle  which  de« 
mand  a  somewhat  morę  lengthened  notice.  These  are, 
(a)  ii,  14-26,  which  has  been  repreaented  as  a  formal 
oppoeition  to  Paul*s  doctrine  of  justification  by  faith; 
and  (6)  y,  14, 15,  which  is  qooted  as  the  authority  for 
the  sacrament  of  extreme  unction. 

(a)  Justification  being  an  act,  not  of  man,  but  of  God, 
both  the  phrases  *'Justification  by  faith"  and  *^justiii- 
cation  by  works"  are  inexact.  Justification  most  either 
be  by  gnce  or  of  reward.  Therefore  our  question  is, 
Did  or  did  not  James  hołd  justification  by  grace?  If 
he  did,  there  is  no  contradiction  between  the  apostles. 
Now  there  is  not  one  word  in  James  to  the  effect  that  a 
man  can  eam  his  justification  by  works ;  and  this  would 
be  necessary  in  order  to  prore  that  he  held  justification 
of  reward.  Still  Paul  does  use  the  expre8sion  **  justi- 
fied  by  faith"  (Rom.  y,  1),  and  James  the  expres8ion 
'*justified  by  worka,  not  by  faith  only."  Herę  is  an 
apparent  opposition.  But,  if  we  oonsider  the  meaning 
of  the  two  apostles,  we  see  at  once  that  there  is  no  con- 
tradiction either  intended  or  possible.  Pall  was  oppos- 
ing  the  Judaizing  party,  which  claimed  to  eam  accept- 
ance  by  good  works,  whether  the  works  of  the  Moeaic 
law,  or  works  of  piety  done  by  themselres.  In  opposi- 
tion to  these,  Paul  lays  down  the  great  trath  that  ac- 
ceptanoe  cannot  be  earaed  by  man  at  all,  but  is  the  free 
giil  of  God  to  the  Christian  man,  for  thi  sake  of  the 
merita  of  Jesus  Christ,  appropriated  by  each  individual, 
and  madę  his  own  by  the  instrumentality  of  faith. 
James,  on  the  other  hand,  was  opposing  the  old  Jewish 
tenet  that  to  be  a  child  of  Abraham  was  all  in  all ;  that 
godliness  was  not  necessaiy,  if  but  the  belief  was  cor- 
rect. This  presumptuous  confidence  had  transferred  it- 
self,  with  perhaps  double  force,  to  the  Christianized 
Jews.  They  had  said,  ''Lord,  Lord,'*  and  that  was 
enough,  without  doing  his  Father^s  wilL  They  had  rec- 
ognised  the  Messiah:  what  morę  was  wanted?  They 
had  faith :  what  morę  was  required  of  them  ?  It  is 
plain  that  their  ''faith*'  was  a  totally  dilTerent  thing 
fnim  the  "  faith"  of  PauL  Paul  tells  us  again  and  again 
that  his  "  faith"  is  a  "  faith  that  worketh  by  love ;"  but 
the  very  characteristic  of  the  "  faith"  which  James  is 
attackuig,  and  the  veiy  reason  why  he  attacked  it,  was 
that  it  did  not  work  by  love,  but  was  a  bare  assent  of 
the  head,  not  inflnencing  the  heart;  a  faith  such  fis 
deyils  can  have,  and  tremble.  James  teUs  us  that 
^^JUUs  informu"  is  not  sufScient  on  the  part  of  man  for 
justification ;  Paul  tells  us  that  "Jides  formatu^'  is  sufii- 
cient :  and  the  reason  yfhy ^fides  informis  will  not  justify 
us  is,  according  to  James,  because  it  lacka  that  epecial 
ąuality,  the  addition  of  which  constitntes  lis  Juksfor^ 
mata,  See,  on  this  subject,  Bull*s  Harmonia  AposłoUea 
et  Examai  Ceruurce ;  Taylor's  Sermon  on  "Faith  icork- 
iiiff  by  ZoTf ,"  yiii,  284  (Lond.  18ó0) ;  and,  as  a  correctiye 
of  Bull*8  yiew,  Laurence'8  Bampton  Ltciures,  iv,  v,  vL 
Other  discussions  may  be  found  in  Knapp,  ScriptOf  p. 
511 ;  Reuss,  Theologie,  ii,  524;  Hofmann,  Śchriftbeiceitf 
i,  639;  WartUaw's  Sermom;  Wood's  Theoloffy,  iL  408; 
Wat8on's  Insiiłutes,  ii,  614;  Lechler,  Das  Apostoł,  und 
nachapottolische  ZeitaUer,  p.  163.  For  raonographs,  see 
Walch,  BibOsche  Theologie,  iv,  941 ;  Danz,  WOrterbuch, 
s.y.Jacobus.    See  Justificatiom;  Faith. 

(6)  With  respect  to  v,  14, 15,  it  is  enough  to  Eay  that 
the  ceremony  of  extreme  imction  and  the  ceremony  de- 
scribed  by  James  differ  both  in  their  subject  and  in  their 
object.  The  subject  of  extreme  unction  is  a  sick  man 
who  is  about  to  die,  and  its  object  ia  not  his  cure.  The 
subject  of  the  ceremony  described  by  James  is  a  sick 
man  who  is  not  about  to  die,  and  its  objecŁ  is  his  cure, 
together  with  the  spiritual  benefit  of  absolution.  James 
is  plainly  giving  directions  with  respect  to  the  manner 
of  administering  one  of  those  extraonUnar>'  gifts  of  the 
Spirit  with  which  the  Church  was  endowed  only  in  the 
apostolic  age  and  the  age  immediately  sucoeeding  the 
apostles. 

VII.  Conłenif. — The  errors  and  sins  against  which 
James  wams  his  readers  are  euch  as  arose  out  of  their 


JAMES 


760 


JAMES 


sitnAtion.  Per/Mfjon— r<Xiiort|c  Łb  a  prominent  idea, 
and  riknoc  is  a  fiequent  epithet— the  "perfect  woik" 
of  patience,  Łbe  '<  perfect"  gift  of  God,  the  **  perfect  law" 
of  liberty  or  the  new  oovenant,  faith  ^  madę  peifect," 
and  the  tongue-goveming  man  ia  a  ^  perfect  man."  He 
writes  from  a  knowledge  of  their  circumstanoes,  does 
not  set  before  them  an  ethical  83r8tem  fur  their  leiaurely 
study,  but  lelects  the  rioes  of  opinion  and  life  to  whidi 
their  circumstances  so  markedly  and  bo  natnially  ex- 
posed  them.  Patience  is  a  primary  inculcation,  it  being 
esBcntial  to  that  perfection  which  is  his  central  thoughL 
Trials  deyelop  patience,  and  sach  eyils  as  produce  trials 
are  not  to  be  ascńbed  in  a  spirit  of  fataiism  to  God. 
Spiritual  life  is  enjoyed  by  belieyers,  and  is  foetered  by 
the  reception,  and  specially  by  the  doing  of  the  word; 
and  true  religious  seryice  is  unworldly  and  dińnterested 
beneRcence.  Partial  preferenoes  are  forbidden  by  the 
royal  law— faith  without  works  is  dead— tongue  and 
temper  are  to  be  under  special  guard,  and  mider  the  con- 
trol  of  wisdom— the  deceits  of  casuistry  are  to  be  ea- 
chewed — contentious  ooyetoiuiness  is  to  be  avoided  as 
one  of  the  works  of  the  devil,  along  with  oensorions 
pride.  Kich  oppreasora  are  denounced,  and  patience  is 
enjoined  on  all ;  the  fitting  exercises  in  times  of  glad- 
ness  and  of  sickncss  are  prescribed ;  the  efficacy  of  prayer 
is  extoUcd  and  exemplified;  while  the  oonclusion  ani- 
mates  his  readers  to  do  for  others  what  he  has  been  do- 
ing for  them— to  conrert  them  "from  the  error  of  their 
way'*  (see  Stanley'8  Sermotu  andEtsayt  on  theApottoŁic 
^yc,p.297). 

The  epistle  oontains  no  allasion  to  the  cardinal  doc- 
trines  of  Ohristianity,  though  they  are  implied.  It  was 
not  the  writer's  object  either  to  discuss  or  defend  them. 
It  would  be  unwarranted,  on  that  account,  to  say  that 
Christiaiiity  had  not  penetrated  his  own  spiritual  life,  or 
that  he  was  only  in  a  transidon  state  bctween  Judaism 
and  Christianity.  He  might  not,  indeed,  have  the  firee 
and  unnational  yiews  of  Paul  in  presenting  the  Gospel 
But  a  true  Christianity  is  implied,  and  his  immediate 
work  lay  in  enforcing  certain  Christian  duties,  which  he 
does  in  the  style  of  the  Master  himself. 

YIII.  Style  and  Languctge, — The  similarity  of  this 
epbŁle  in  tonę  and  form  to  the  Sermon  on  the  Mount 
has  often  been  remarked.  In  the  spirit  of  the  Great 
Teacher,  he  sharply  reprobates  all  extemalism,  all  self- 
ishness,  inconsistency,  worldliness,  ostentation,  self-de- 
ception,  and  h3q)ocri8y.  Thus  in  the  first  chapter  as 
a  sample .  corap.  i,  2,  Matt.  v,  10-12 ;  i,  4,  Matt  v,  48 ; 
i,  6,  Matt,  vii,  1\  i,  9,  Matt.  v,  8 ;  i,  20,  Matt  v,  22,  etc 
The  epistle,  in  short,  is  a  long  and  eamest  illustration 
of  the  Hual  waming  given  by  our  Lord  in  the  figures  of 
building  on  the  rock  and  building  on  the  sand.  The 
oompositlon  is  the  abrupt  and  stem  utterance  of  an  ear- 
nest,  practical  soul— a  rapid  series  of  oensures  and  coun- 
sels— not  entirely  disconnected,  but  generally  suggested 
by  some  inner  link  of  association.  Oflen  a  generał  law 
is  epigrammatically  laid  down,  while  a  peculiar  sin  is 
reprobated  or  a  peculiar  rirtue  enforced— or  a  principle 
is  announced  in  the  application  of  it.  The  style  is  vig- 
orous— fuli  of  imperatives  so  solemn  and  categorical  as 
to  dispel  all  idea  of  resistance  or  comproroise,  and  of  in- 
terrogations  so  pointed  that  they  carry  their  answer 
with  them.  It  is  alao  marked  by  epithets  so  bold  and 
forcible  that  they  give  freshness  and  color  to  the  dic- 
tion.  The  clauses  have  a  rhetorical  beauty  and  power, 
and  as  in  men  of  fenrcnt  oratorical  temperament,  the 
words  often  fali  into  rhythmical  order,  while  the  thoughts 
occasionally  blossom  into  poetiy.  An  acddental  hex- 
ameter  is  found  in  i,  17  [provided  it  be  lawful  to  make 
the  last  syllable  of  ^ómc  long  ]. 

The  Greek  is  rcmarkably  pure,  and  it  is  difficult  to 
account  for  thls  comparative  purity.  Hegesippus,  as 
quoted  by  Eusebius,  says  that  Jaraes'8  bclieving  breth- 
ren  dcsired  him  to  address  the  crowds  assembled  at  the 
Paasoyer;  for  there  were  brought  together  ♦'all  the 
hibes,  with  also  the  Gentiles" — Traocu  ai  <pv\ai  purd 
Koi  tQv  i9yktv ;  and  Greek  must  haye  been  the  las- 


gnage  employed.  It  iatherefime  qaite  prepoatcRyuf  on 
the  part  of  Bolten,  Bethokłt,  and  Schott  to  snapect  thtt 
the  Greek  of  this  epistle  is  a  tianslation  fiom  an  Aii- 
nuoan  originaL 

Resemblanoes  haye  sometimea  been  traoed  between 
this  epistle  and  the  first  Epistle  of  Peter,  and  these  may 
be  accounted  for  by  the  fact  that  both  aathon  were  BCRBe> 
what  similarly  ciicumstanoed  in  lelation  to  their  read- 
ers. But  Hug*s  and  Bieek*8  inferenoe  ia  a  raah  ooe— 
that  Peter  must  haye  read  the  epistle  of  James. 

In  a  word,  the  Epistle  of  James  ia  a  noble  protest 
against  laxity  ofmorals  against  supine  and  easy  aoqui- 
escenoe  in  the  truths  of  the  Gospel  withottt  fieding  their 
power  or  acting  under  their  influence,  while  it  presenis 
such  ethical  lessons  as  the  Church,  plaćed  in  multiple  re- 
lations  to  a  world  of  sense  and  tria],  has  eyer  need  of  to 
animate  and  sustain  it  in  ita  progreai  towarda  perfecuo& 
— Kitto;  Smith. 

IX.  Conunentaries* — ^The  following  are  the  exegećcal 
tieatasea  expre8Bly  on  the  whole  epi^;  to  a  few  of  the 
moet  important  we  prelix  an  astorisk  (*) :  Dtdymus  Al- 
exandrinu8,  In  Ep.  Jaeobi  (in  Bibl^  Max,  PcUr.  y,820) ; 
Althamer,  Autieffung  (Aig.  1527,  8yo);  Zuingle,  A^ku- 
tationea  (Tigur.  1688, 8yo ;  also  in  Opp,  iy,  534) ;  Foleug, 
Commentaritu  (Lugdun.  1555, 8yo) ;  Logenhagen,  ^cAw- 
tationei  (Antw.  1571, 8yo ;  1572, 12mo) ;  Heminge,  Cim- 
mentary  (London,  1577,  4to);  Feuardent,  CommoUarin 
(Paris,  1599,  8yo);  Rung,  CommeRtoriaw  (Wittenb.  1600, 
8yo) ;  Bracche,  Commeatarius  (Paris,  liiOó,  4to) ;  Tara- 
bull,  Lectureś  (Łond.  1606,  4to) ;  Winckehnann,  EscpHea- 
tio  (Giess.  1608,  8yo);  Steuart,  Commentarius  (Ingobt. 
1610,  4to);  Paez,  Commentaria  (Antwerp,  1617,  1623; 
Lugd.  1620,  4to);  Loiin,  CommmtariuM  [inchuL  Jude] 
(Mogunt.  1622;  Colon.  1638,  foL);  Wolzogen,.4iMofo/i- 
onu  (in  Opp,) ;  Laurent,  Commadariiu  (Amst.  1635, 1662, 
4to) ;  Kemer,  Prediglm  (Uhm,  1689,  8yo) ;  Mayer,  Ex^ 
pasition  (London,  1689, 4to) ;  Price,  Ćommaitom  (Lood. 
1646,  foL;  also  in  the  Crit,Sacri)i  *Mmitaa,  Commaataj 
(London,  1658,  4to;  1840, 1842, 1844, 8yo) ;  Brochmand, 
ComtnentariuM  (Hafn.  1641, 1706, 4to;  Frankfurt,  1658, 
foL) ;  Schmidt,  Ditpuiaiiones  [indud.  Ephesu  etc]  (Ar- 
gent  1685, 1699,  4to) ;  Creid,  Pndifften  (Fnnkfl  169i 
8yo) ;  Smith,  YUhradmg  (Amst  1698, 4to) ;  Cieygbton, 
Fisribfaarm^  [indud.  John*s  ep.]  (Fianedc.  1704, 4to); 
Griebner,  PridUften  (Lpz.  1720,  8yo);  Gramrolicb,  A»- 
merle  (Stuttgard,  1721, 8yo) ;  Michadis,  IntroAuHo  (HaL 
1722, 4to);  Benson,  Paraphram  (Lond.  1788,4to;  with 
the  other  cath.  ep.  ib.  1749, 1756, 4to;  in  Latin,  HaL  1747, 
4to);  Heisen,  Du»erłationet  (Brem.  17S9,  4to);  Janson, 
Yerklaar,  (Gron.  1742, 4to) ;  I>amm,  A  mnerL  (BerL  1747, 
8yo) ;  Baumgarten,  A  udegmig  (HaL  1750, 4to) ;  Semkr, 
ParaphraHa  (Hal.  1781;  in  Germ.  Pbtsd.  1789);  Stoo^ 
Disaertationea  (TUb.  1784,  4to;  also  in  his  Optue,  Aead 
ii,  1-74) ;  £.  F.  K.  RosenmUller,  A  nmerk,  (Leipog,  1787, 
8yo) ;  Morus,  Prtelectiona  [including  Pet.]  (Lipa  179A, 
8yo);  Goltz,  Verklaarwff  (Amster.  1798,  4to);  Sdienr, 
Erkldr,  (yoL  i,  Marb.  1799,  8yo) ;  Antonio,  Verklaanagt 
(Leyd.  1799, 4to) ,-  Hender,  ErliUtt.  (Hamb.  1801, 8ro) ; 
Clarisse,  Bearbeid,  (Amst  1802,  8yo) ;  Stuart,  yfrUaar, 
(Amst.  1806, 8yo) ;  Yan  Kosten,  VerUaaring  (Amst.  1821, 
8vo) ;  •Schulthees,  CommetUar.  (Turici,  1824,  8to)  ;  Geb- 
ser,  ErlUSr,  (BerL  1828, 8yo) ;  *Schneckenbuiger,  A  nnot, 
(SUittg.  1832,  8yo) ;  '^hdle,  CommaUar,  (Lipsi«,  1833, 
8yo) ;  Jaoobi,  Predigtm  (BerL  1835,  8yo;  tr.  by  Ryland, 
Ix>ndon,  1838,  8yo) ;  Kem,  ErUdrung  (TuK  1838, 8yo) ; 
Scharling,  CommeniariM*  [Induding  Jnde]  (Ham.  1840, 
8yo);  *Stier,  Audegung  (Barmen,  1845, 8yo) ;  Celleiitf, 
Commenłaire  (Par.  1850, 8yo) ;  Stanley,  Sermau  (m  Ser- 
mom  and  EstagSy  p.  291) ;  «Neander,  ErłdMłer,  (Berlm, 
1850, 8yo,  being  yoL  yi  of  his  ed.  of  the  IleUige  Sekri/}.  ; 
tr.  by  Mrs.  Conant,  N.  Y.  1852, 12mo) ;  Driłaeke./V«/»y- 
ten  (Lpz.  1851, 8yo) ;  Patterson,  CcmmoUary  (in  the  Jmr, 
ofSac.  LU,  Oct.  1851,  p.  250  aą.) ;  ^Wiodnger,  Cmmm- 
tar  (Kdnigs.  1854, 8yo,  bdng  yoL  yi  of  OlahaQ8en'8  Gam- 
mentar}')  {  Yiedebrandt,  BibeUhmden  (Beri.  18ó9,8vo); 
Porubsżky,  Prtdigłm  (Yienna,  1861, 8vo) ;  Wardlaw,  /.to- 
tures  (London,  1862, 12mo);  Hermann  [edit.  Booman], 


JAMES 


761 


JAMES  I 


Commenianus  (Tr.  ad  Rh.  1865, 8vo) ;  *AdAm»  Ducourtei 
(Edinb.  1867,  8vo);  Ewald,  KrlOSrung  [inclui  Heb.] 
(Gott  1870, 8vo).     See  Epistle. 

JAKIEŚ,  SPURIOUS  WRITINGS  OF.— The  foBow- 
ing  pseudepigraphal  works  have  been  attributcd  to  the 
a{M0tle  James :  1.  The  ProtercmgeHum.  2.  Iłittoria  de 
Naiwiiate  Maria,  8.  De  nwraculu  infaniia  Domini 
notłri,  etc.  Of  these,  the  Protetangelium  is  worth  a 
pasańng  nottce,  not  for  it3  contents,  which  are  a  merę 
parody  on  the  early  chaptcrs  of  Lukę,  transferring  the 
event8  which  occuired  at  <Mir  Lord^s  birth  to  the  birth 
of  Mary  his  mother,  but  becauae  it  appears  to  have  been 
early  known  in  the  Church.  It  is  poasible  that  Jus- 
tin  Martyr  (DiaL  cum  Trypk.  c.  lxxviii)  and  Clement 
of  Alexańdiia  {StromatOy  lib.  yiii)  refer  to  it  Origen 
apeaka  of  it  (wi  Matł,  xiii,  56) ;  Gregoiy  Nyssen  {O^yp, 
p.  346,  edit  Paris),  Epiphaniua  {Flar,  lxxix),  John  Da- 
mascene  (^Orat,  i,  ii,  t»  Natit.  Maria),  Photius  (Orat. 
in  NaHv.  Maria),  and  others,  allude  to  it.  It  was  first 
puhliahed  in  Latiain.1552,  in  Greek  in  1364.  The  old- 
est  MS.  of  it  now  exi8ting  is  of  the  lOth  centuiy.  (See 
Thilo'a  Codex  Apocryphua  Novi  Testamenii,  i,'  45,  108, 
159,  337,  Lipa^  1852.>--Smith.     See  Afocbypiia. 

James,  St.  (of  Compostella),  CHURCH  OF.  a 
verT  famoua  church  in  Spain,  dedicated  to  St  James 
Major,  the  patron  saint  of  the  kingdom.  A  wooden 
bust  of  the  saint,  with  tapers  ever  buming  before  it, 
haa  atood  on  the  high  altar  for  nine  hundred  years, 
and  the  church  is  the  resort  of  numerous  pilgrims,  who 
kiaa  the  image.  Mirades  are  ascribed  to  St  James, 
nch  as  appearing  on  a  white  horse  defeating  the  Moors. 
— Eadie,  Eedes.  Diet,  a.  v.    See  Compobtella. 

James^s,  8Ł,  DAY,  is  a  festiral  in  some  cburches, 
falling  in  the  Western  chorches  on  the  25th  of  July, 
and  in  the  Eastem  on  the  28d  of  October,  and  oommem- 
oiating  St  James  the  Elder,  son  of  Zebedee,  and  brother 
of  St.  John.  No  tracę  of  this  festiyal  at  an  early  period 
can  be  found  in  any  country  bat  Spain.  James  was  the 
first  of  the  apoetks  that  suffered  martyrdom.  This  par^ 
ticular  day  was  choaen  for  the  commcmoration,  not  with 
leferenoe  to  the  dato  of  the  apoede^s  death,  which  took 
place  probably  a  little  before  Easter,  but  in  oonnection 
with  the  legend  of  a  miraculoua  translation  of  the  relic 
of  the  apoeUe  firom  Palestine  to  Compostella,  in  Spain. 
See  Farrar,  Eode»,  Diet.  s.  y. 

James,  St.  (the  Less),  FESTJYAŁ  OF.  See  St. 
Pmup. 

James,  8Ł,  LITITRGY  OF,  a  form  of  seryice  which 
was  very  carly  nsed  in  the  patriarchato  of  Antioch ;  the 
Monophysites  uaing  it  in  Syriac  and  the  orthodox  in 
Greek,  this  last  haying  in  it  many  interpolations  from 
the  liturgies  of  other  places.  Palmer,  in  his  Origines 
Liturtfiea,  with  which  Neale  {Introd.  East,  Ck,  p.  818) 
agreea,  aay  s,  *^  There  are  satisfactory  means  of  ascertain- 
ing  the  order,  substance,  and  gencrally  the  espressions 
of  the  solemn  Uturgy  uaed  all  through  the  patriarchato 
of  Antioch  and  Jerusalem  before  the  year  451 ;  that  the 
litmgy  thus  ascertained  coincides  with  the  notices  which 
the  fkthers  of  that  country  giye  conceming  their  liturgy 
doiing  the  5th  and  4th  centnries ;  that  this  liturgy  was 
uaed  in  the  whole  patriarchato  of  Antioch  in  the  4th 
oentury  with  little  yariety;  that  it  preyailed  there  in 
the  3d  century,  and  eyen  in  the  2d.  The  liturgy  of  St. 
James  may  therefore  be  oonsidered  to  have  originated 
near  the  time  of  the  birth  of  Christianity ;  at  least  in 
the  first  century  of  our  sera"  (comp.  Neale,  TrUrod,  Eatt. 
CA,  hk.  iii,  eh.  i,  especially  p.  319).— Eadie,  Ecdes,  Diet. 
s.v. 

James  op  Edbssa,  etc.   See  Jagob  of  Edessa,  etc 

James  I  op  Erolaicd  and  TI  op  Scotland  was 
the  only  ofbpring  of  Mary,  qaeen  of  Scots,  by  her  sec- 
ond  hnsband.  Henry  Stuart,  lord  Damley,  who,  through 
his  father,  Matthew  Stuart,  earl  of  Leiinox,  being  de- 
scended  firom  a  daughtor  of  James  II,  had  some  preten- 
aioDS  to  the  soccession  of  the  Soottish  throne  in  case 


of  Mary  dying  withont  issue.  He  was  the  grandson, 
as  Mary  was  the  granddaughter,  of  Margaret  Tudor, 
through  whom  the  Scottish  linę  daimed  and  eyentually 
obtained  the  inheritance  of  the  crown  of  England  afler 
the  failure  of  the  desoendants  of  Henry  YIII.  The  son 
of  Mary  and  Damley  (or  king  Henry,  as  he  was  called 
after  his  marriage)  was  bom  in  the  castle  of  Edinburgh 
June  19, 1566,  and  was  bapdzed  according  to  the  Koman 
CathoHc  ritual  in  Stiriing  Castle  December  17  following, 
by  the  names  of  Charles  James.  The  rourder  of  Dam- 
ley took  place  Feb.  18, 1567,  and  was  followed  by  Mary^s 
marriage  with  Bothwell  on  May  15  of  the  same  year; 
her  capture  by  the  insurgeiit  nobles,  or  Lords  of  theCon- 
gregation  as  they  called  themselres,  at  Carberry,  on 
June  14 ;  her  consignment  as  a  prisoner  to  the  castle  of 
Lochleyen  on  the  17th,  and  her  forced  resignation  of 
the  crown  on  July  24,  in  fayor  of  her  son,  who  was 
crowned  at  Stiriing  on  the  28th  as  James  YI,  being  then 
an  infant  of  a  Kttle  morę  than  a  year  old.  It  was  at 
this  time  that  the  flnal  straggie  was  raging  in  Scotland 
between  the  two  great  interests  of  the  old  and  the  new 
religion,  which,  beddes  their  intrinsic  importance,  were 
respectiyely  identified  with  the  French  and  the  English 
alliancc,  and  which,  together  with  the  old  and  the  new 
distribution  of  the  property  of  the  kingdom,  madę  the 
minority  of  James  stormy  beyond  eyen  the  ordinary 
experience  of  Scottish  minorities.  Before  his  mother's 
marriage  with  Bothwell  he  had  been  committcd  by  her 
to  the  care  of  the  earl  of  Mar;  and  James^s  education 
was  mainly  intrusted  to  Mar^s  brother,  Alexander  Ers- 
kine,  and  other  distinguished  Scotoh  scholars,  aroong 
whom  fignred  most  prominently  the  Protestant  George 
Buchanan,  a  zealous  adherent  of  the  Presbyterian  Church. 
During  the  minority  of  the  yonng  king,  the  earl  of  Mor- 
ton  had  been  assigned  the  regency ;  but  Jamcs*s  guar- 
dians  being  anxiou8  to  control  themselyes  the  affairs  of 
State,  in  1578  Morton  was  driyen  from  power,  and  James 
nominally  assnmed  the  direction  of  affairs.  Morton, 
howeyer,  soon  succeeded  in  re-establishing  himself,  and 
held  the  goyerament  for  another  short  period,  whon  he 
was  flnally  deposed,  and  the  young  king  again  obtained 
the  control  of  state  aflkirs.  He  was  at  this  time  only 
twelye  years  of  age,  and  was  assisted  by  a  council  of 
twelye  nobles.  Once  morę  great  rejoicings  were  mani- 
fest throughout  the  land.  AU  parties  hailed  the  ercnt 
as  the  inangnration  of  a  new  fera,  and  to  all  it  seemed 
to  bring  the  prospects  of  power  and  prosperity.  Pres- 
byterians  relied  on  the  early  training  of  the  prince ;  Ko- 
manists  on  the  descendency  of  the  young  ruler,  and,  re- 
gaiding  his  mother  as  in  some  sense  a  martyr  to  their 
cause,  snppoeed  that  it  would  naturally  enough  influ- 
ence James  to  incUne  to,  if  not  openly  espouse  Roman- 
iam.  The  pope  wrote  pleasant  letters  to  the  yonng 
monarch,  and  Jesnits  were  dispatched  with  all  hastę  to 
serye,  in  the  garb  of  Puritans,  the  cause  of  Romę.  The 
greater,  then,  was  the  discontent  among  his  Roman 
Catholic  snbjects  when  James  showed  pTe<Iilcctions  for 
the  Presbyterian  Church.  Sbortly  after  his  accession, 
the  "Book  of  Policy,"  which  up  to  our  day  remains 
the  guide  of  the  Scottish  Church  in  ecclesiastical  gov- 
emment  and  other  alfairs  of  a  similar  naturę,  was  issued. 
Another  yery  important  step  taken  was  the  publication 
of  a  confession  of  faith  by  the  General  Assembly,  which 
the  king  approyed  and  swore  to  (comp.  Sack,  Church  of 
Scotland,  ii,  5  sq.).  New  presbyteries  were  established 
throughout  the  realm,  and  it  seemed  as  if  tlic  Puritans 
were  to  be  the  only  fayorites,  when,  on  a  sudden,  by  a 
successful  conspiracy  of  a  party  of  nobles,  James  was 
imprisoned,  with  the  endearor  to  forcc  him  to  morę  fa- 
yorable  actions  in  behalf  of  his  Roman  Catholic  sub- 
jects.  The  whole  affair  is  known  in  English  history 
as  the  "  Raid  of  Ruthyen."  A  counterplot  m  1583  se- 
cured  the  freedom  of  the  monarch,  but  from  henceforth 
a  new  policy  was  inaugurated,  in  which  he  was  wholly 
controlled  by  the  nobles  of  his  court.  In  1584  flyc 
resolutions  were  published,  known  as  the  "  black  resolu- 
tion%'*  which  aimed  at  the  total  abiogation  of  the  Pies- 


JAM£S  I 


162 


JAMES  I 


byterian  Chorch.  Seyere  peraecudons  followcd,  and  it 
seemed  for  a  time  as  if  James  had  actually  turned  to 
Bomanism.  After  the  death  of  his  moŁher,  Elizabeth 
court«d  the  favor  of  James,  and  a  treaty  was  finally 
ooncluded  between  them.  by  which  the  two  kingdoms 
bound  themselves  to  an  offensive  and  defensiye  alliance 
against  all  foreign  po  wers  w  ho  should  invade  their  ter- 
ritories,  or  attempt  to  disturb  the  reformed  religious  es- 
tablishments  of  either.  This  action,  of  course,  at  once 
favored  the  Protestant  subjects  of  James;  for  his  serer- 
ity  assumed  towards  them  prerious  to  this  alliance  was 
due,  no  doubt,  to  his  endeayor  to  secure,  in  view  of  the 
persecution  of  his  mother  by  Elizabeth,  an  alliance  with 
Spain,  a  strong  Koman  Catholic  power.  It  was  sup- 
posed  that  the  executiou  of  his  mother  would  naturally 
drive  him  to  an  alliance  with  Spain  ^  but  James,  al- 
though  "  he  blustered  at  first  under  the  sting  of  the  in- 
suit  that  had  bcen  olTered  him,'*  was  soon  paciHed,  retiect- 
ing  upon  the  necessity  of  a  friendly  relation  with  Eliz- 
abeth if  he  would  roaiiitain  his  chance  for  the  English 
throne.  Accordingly,  James  lent  his  assistanoe  to  Eliz- 
abeth in  the  preparations  to  rcpel  the  attack  of  the  Span- 
ish  armada.  Still  morę  gracious  seemed  the  attitude  of 
James  towards  the  Puritans  on  his  return  from  Norway 
(1589),  whither  he  had  gone  to  espouse  princess  Annę, 
the  second  daughter  of  Frederick  II,  king  of  Denmark. 
At  the  meeting  of  the  General  Assembly  of  the  Presby- 
terians  in  1590  he  attended  and  spoke  highly  of  their  es- 
tablishment, and  in  1592  he  caused,  by  an  aet  of  Parlia- 
ment,  the  establishment  of  the  Presbyterian  Church  as 
a  natioual  form  of  religion.  This  action  the  Scottish 
Church  regarded  as  their  tnie  charter,  but  they  soon 
learned  that  James  łuid  only  favored  them  because  out- 
ward  circumstances  had  necessitated  this  course,  and 
that  inwardly  he  had  changed  to  an  avowed  admirer 
of  episcopacy,  and  iuclined  even  towards  popery ;  "  so 
that  the  alliance  of  Church  and  State  in  this  case  was 
one  of  a  very  frangible  naturę.**  To  make  matters 
worse,  both  partics  cberished  the  loftiest  opinions  of 
their  powers  anJ  righta.  Yaiious  misuccessful  trcason- 
able  attempts  against  the  govemment  had  kept  the 
people  in  a  high  pressure  of  excitement,  and  when  it 
was  ascertained  that  these  attempts  were  supported, 
if  not  instigated,  by  the  court  and  nobility  of  Spain, 
hayiiig  for  their  especial  object  the  intiroidation  of  the 
irresolute  monarch,  and  the  re-estabUshment  of  Roman- 
ism,  iii-at  ia  Scotland,  aiid  finaUy  in  England  also,  the 
people  desired  the  8evere  punishment  of  the  traitors. 
James,  howeycr,  infiicted  only  a  yery  mild  punishment, 
and  the  dissatisticd  multitudc  begau  loudly  to  condemn 
the  poUcy  of  their  king.  The  Church  also  criticised 
James's  courae,  and  a  contest  ensued  that  assumed  yer}' 
much  the  appearance  of  the  commencement  of  a  ciyil 
war.  Nearly  all  the  aristocracy  and  the  upper  classes, 
howeyer,  were  with  the  king;  and  by  an  unusual  exer- 
tiun  of  yigor  and  firmness,  yery  seldom  manifested  in 
his  personal  histor}',  James  was  enabled  not  only  oom- 
pletely  to  crush  the  insurrection,  but  to  tum  the  occa- 
sion  to  account  in  bringing  the  Church  into  fuli  subjec- 
tion  to  the  ciyil  authority.  In  the  course  of  the  follow- 
ing  year,  1598,  the  substance  of  episcopacy,  which 
James  by  this  time  had  come  to  espouse  openly,  and  in 
which  he  was  goyemed  by  the  maxim  "  No  bishop,  no 
king/'  was  restored,  in  a  political  sense,  by  seats  m 
Parliament  being  giyen  to  about  fifty  ecclesiastics  on 
the  royal  nomination.  Eyen  the  General  Assembly  was 
gained  oycr  to  acąuiesce  in  this  great  constitutional 
change. 

By  the  death  of  Elizabeth  in  1603  James  finally 
reached  the  object  for  which  he  had  striyen  for  many 
ycars,  and  which  had  induced  him  eyen  to  court  the 
favor  of  the  murdcrer  of  his  own  mother.  On  March 
24  hc  succeeded  to  the  throne  of  England,  and  by  yir- 
tue  of  tłiis  act  became  spiritual  head  of  the  Church  of 
England.  "  That  Church  had  already  enjoyed  the  honor 
of  having  the  grossest  of  yoluptuaries  for  its  supremę 
head;  it  was  no  w  to  enjoy  the  honor  of  haying  the 


greatest  liar,  and  one  of  the  greatest  dnmkaids  of  his 
age,  in  the  same  potation"  (Skeats).  As  in  the  Chureh 
of  Scotland  the  contest  had  been  waged  between  Ro- 
manists  and  Protestanta  for  the  fayor  of  the  throne, » 
in  England  the  Established  Church,  the  Eiuscopal,  and 
the  Puritans  were  arrayed  against  each  other,  and 
James  was  called  upon  to  settk  the  dispute.  Biased  in 
fayor  of  the  episcopacy,  James,  howeyer,  decided  on  a 
conference  of  the  two  parties,  auxious  to  display  bis 
"  proficiency  in  theology,**  and  "  determined  on  gi\'ini; 
both  sides  an  opportunity  of  applauding  his  polónical 
skill,  and  making  his  chosen  linę  of  conduct  at  lesst  ap- 
pear  to  result  from  partial  inąuiry"  (Baxtcr,  £ji^  Ck, 
Uistoiy^  p.  550).  As  yet  no  separation  had  taken  place, 
neither  had  the  Puritans  eyen  renounced  episcopact, 
nor  did  thej'  question  regal  supremacy ;  they  only  cb- 
jected  to  being  bound  against  the  dictatcs  of  their  eon- 
science  to  the  obseryance  of  ccrtain  performances;  they 
desired  purity  of  doctrine,  good  piastora,  a  refonn  in 
Church  goyemmeut  and  in  the  Book  of  C-ommon  Play- 
er; in  short,  a  remoyal  of  all  usagcs  which  savored  of 
Bomanism.  A  conference  (q.  y.)  was  oonsequcntly  aa- 
sembled  at  Haropton  Court  in  January,  lG(>ł,  and  the 
points  of  differenoe  discussed  in  James*s  presenoc,  be 
himself  taking,  as  might  haye  been  expected,  a  coa- 
BpicuouB  and  most  undignified  part  **  Church  writeis, 
in  dealing  with  this  subject,  haye  felt  compelled  to  eat- 
ploy  language  of  shame  and  indignation  at  the  conduct 
of  the  king  and  the  bishops  of  this  period,  which  a  Non- 
conformist  would  almost  heaitate  to  uae**  (Skeats).  On 
the  episcopal  side  appeared  archbishop  Whitgiit,  aarist- 
ed  by  bishops  Bancrofl,  Biison,  and  others ;  on  the  side 
of  the  Puritans  appeared  four  diyinea,  headed  by  the 
celebrated  Dr.  Reynolds,  at  that  time  president  of  Cor- 
pus  Christi  College,  Oxford.  "  It  is  obyious,  from  the 
wbole  proceedings,  that  the  conference  was  sammcoed 
for  a  purpose  opposed  to  its  ostenaible  aim.  It  was  not 
intended  to  bring  the  two  parties  in  the  Church  into  bar- 
raoiiy,  but  to  giye  oocaaion  for  casting  out  one  of  them^ 
(Skeiats).  The  attitude  of  the  king  pleased  the  church 
men,  and  '*  the  prelates  aocepted  him  with  deront  grat- 
itude.  The  morę  his  character  became  reyealed  to 
them,  the  greater  was  their  satiafaction.  When  he  al- 
most swore  at  the  Puritans,  Whitgift  declared  that  his 
majesty  spoke  by  the  especial  assistanoe  of  God*8  Spiiit 
(comp.  Baxter,  Ch.  Nisł,  o/Kn^nd,  |).  559),  and  Bancnft 
that  he  was  melted  with  joy,  for  that,  sińce  Chrift'^ 
time,  such  a  king  had  not  been.  When  he  drireDcd 
they  held  up  their  hands  in  amaze  at  hb  wisdi^m.'* 
Indeed,  it  seems  that  "  the  two  parties  fully  nnderstood 
each  other.  James  had  quite  sufficient  ctmning  to  de- 
tect  the  ambitious  designs  of  the  prelates,  and  the  pieł- 
ates  had  sufficient  leaming,  and  suificient  knowlcdge  of 
the  theory  of  morfds,  to  know  that  they  were  dcafiog 
with  a  dissembler  and  a  fooL  But  it  seri-ed  their  por- 
poses  to  play  into  each  other^s  hands.  The  king  couU 
put  down  PnriUnism  in  the  Church,  and  ^hany'  all 
Brownists  and  Anabaptists  out  of  the  land,  and  the  bish- 
ops, in  their  tum,  could  exalt  the  supremacy  of  ihe 
monarch"  (Skeats).  But,  as  if  the  ungenerous  and  nn- 
gracious  action  of  the  king  had  not  yet  reached  the  cli- 
max,  the  Hampton  Court  Conference  Conyocation  met 
in  the  year  following,  and  framed  a  new  set  of  canorn 
to  insure  conformity.  "  These  laws— laws  so  far  as  the 
clergy  are  concemed— still  deface  the  constitution  and 
character  of  the  English  Episcopalian  Church. . . .  They 
are  now  Uttle  clse  than  monuments  of  a  past  age  of  in- 
tolerance,  and  of  the  combined  immobility  and  timidity 
of  the  ecclesiastlcal  establiahmcnts  of  the  present  day. 
Old  bloodhounds  of  the  Church,  with  their  teeth  drawn 
and  their  force  exhau8ted,  they  are  gazed  at  with  as 
much  contempt  as  they  once  excited  fear**  (Skeats). 
Baxter  (p.  563)  says  of  these  laws, «  Somc  of  them  hare 
become  obeolete,  others  inoperative  tlirough  coimter  feg- 
islation;  but  no  consistent  clergyman  can  forget  thal 
they  constitttte  the  rule  of  his  pledged  obedience.  al- 
though  tkere  may  be  cases  in  which  atlentioo  to  tha 


JAMES  I 


IM 


JAMES  I 


spirit  rather  Łhan  the  lefcter  will  best  insure  the  object 
of  their  enactmeut,*'  But  aoroe  good  sprang  also  firom 
the  Hampton  Court  Conference;  results  wbich  nonę 
probaUly  had  anticipated.  "  Reynolds,  the  Puńtan,  had 
snggested  a  new  tranalation  of  the  Bibie  by  his  majes- 
ty's  special  sauction  and  authońty.  The  ranity  of  the 
king  -was  touched,  and  the  great  work  was  ordered  to 
be  executed."  See  English  Ykrsions.  But  what, 
perłiaps,  decided  him  in  his  courae,  if  decision  could 
ever  become  manifest  in  the  actions  of  James  I,  to  iden- 
tify  himself  wholly  with  the  Episcopalians,  was  the 
ffunpoirder  plot  (q.  v.),  which  was  maturing  about  this 
time  (1G04-5).  It  esteiminated  in  James  the  last  yes- 
tiges  of  faror  for  Komanism  when  he  found  that  from 
Romę  he  never  could  expect  any  thing  but  a  death-war- 
rant  unless  the  English  Church  changed  to  a  Roman 
Catholic  State  Church.  And  if  James  had  declared  in 
Parliament  in  1604  "that  he  had  never  any  intention 
of  granting  toleration  to  the  Catholics,*'  he  could  now 
be  justified  in  adding  ''that  he  would  drive  ercry  one 
ofthem  fiom  the  land,"  as  he  did  threaten  to  do  towards 
all  Nonconformists.  As  if  the  conspiracy)  which  had 
fortunately  failed,  was  not  worthy  the  censure  even  of 
Romę,  but  deser\'cd  commendation,  one  of  the  principal 
leadera,  the  Jcsuit  Gamet,  was  even  canonized  by  the 
Roman  court,  of  course  not  openly  on  the  strcngth  of 
his  assistance  in  the  diabolical  project,  but  ^  on  the  faith 
of  a,  pretended  miracley  his  face  haring,  it  teas  said.  beeti 
seen  in  a  straw  sprinkled  with  his  blood."  Thus  Romę 
"  did  its  very  best  to  identify,  or  at  kast  to  confound, 
one  of  the  most  diabohcal  projects  ever  conceived,  with 
the  evidcncc8  of  transcendent  sanctity"  (BBxter,  p.  565), 
and  for  Rome'8  treachery  the  honest  Puritans  of  Eng- 
land  were  madę  to  suffer.  The  policy  of  the  king  (who 
by  this  time  had  assumed  the  title  of  king  of  Great 
Britain)  was,  however,  not  to  be  conflned  to  England. 
In  Scotland  also  the  power  of  the  Puritans  was  to  be 
utterly  brokcn,  and  the  episcopate  to  be  re-trtnblished. 
In  August,  1606,  a  Parliament  was  held  at  Perth  which 
had  this  object  in  view,  and  the  decision  arrived  at,  by 
a  union  of  the  nobility  and  the  ])relatical  faction,  to 
erect  screnteen  bishoprics,  and  to  Itestow  on  these  new- 
ly-created  prelates  the  bcneficc^,  honors,  and  privileges 
hcrctofore  awarded  to  those  of  ihe  Roman  Catholic 
Church.  After  having  properly  disposcd  of  the  leadcrs 
of  the  Scottish  Church,  a  General  Assembly  was  uncon- 
stitutionally  convened  at  linlithgow  on  Dec.  10, 1606. 
As  most  of  the  synods  opposcd  its  acts,  new  persecutions 
were  the  issuc.  Feb.  16, 1610,  the  king  established  two 
ecclesiaKtical  tribunals,  to  be  presided  over  by  the  two 
archbishops,  and  dcsignated  these  tribunals  as  '*  Courts 
of  Ilij?h  Commission,**  uniting  the  two  shortly  after 
their  establishment.  This  ecclesiastical  tribunal,  a  sort 
of  Inquisition,  combined  the  attributes  of  a  temporal 
and  ^iritual  tribunal;  but  it  was  bound  to  no  definite 
laws,  and  was  armed  with  the  united  terrors  of  civil  and 
ecclesiastical  despotism.  On  June  8,  1610,  a  meeting 
was  iinally  held  at  Glasgow,  and  there,  by  means  of 
bribes,  which  are  said  to  have  reached  the  not  inconsid- 
erable  sura  of  X300,000  sterling,  the  prelatical  measurcs 
were  carried,  and  all  opposition  nominally  overcome. 
But  the  peoplc  by  no  means  seemed  ready  to  coincide 
with  the  opinion  of  the  king,  and  many  were  the  dis- 
turbances  that  prevailed  throughout  the  land.  What- 
c\*er  work  had  to  be  done  to  further  the  royal  schemes 
was  done  quietly,  and  no  General  Assembly  met  until 
Augusta  1616,  this  time  held  at  Aberdeen,and  especial- 
ly  cclebrated  iu  the  history  of  Scotland  by  the  issue 
of  a  new  confcssion  of  faith  pmjected  by  the  prelatical 
party,  and  which,  although  tolerably  orthodox,  was  re- 
roarkably  at  rariance  with  the  discipline  of  the  Estab- 
lished Church.  Aifairs  assumed  another  and  morę  seri- 
ous  tum  in  the  summer  of  1617,  when  James,  on  a  visit 
which  he  paid  to  Scotland,  succeedcd,  though  not  with- 
out  great  difficolty,  in  securing  from  Parliament,  which 
he  had  newly  summoned,  as  well  as  from  the  General 
Assembly,  the  approbation  of  such  regulations  as,  along 


I  with  other  innoyations  prerioosly  madę  sińce  his  aooe»- 
I  sion  to  the  throne  of  England,  brought  the  Scottish 
Church— Ul  govenunent,  in  ceremonies,  and  in  its  posi- 
tion  in  relation  to  the  civil  power — yery  nearly  to  the 
model  of  the  ecclesiastical  establishment  of  England. 
Change,  howerer,  as  the  king  might,  the  constitution 
and  ordinances,  almost  without  number,  published  agam 
and  again,  public  opinion  by  no  means  altered  even  for 
a  moment,  and  the  19th  century  still  iinds  Scotland  truć 
to  her  Pnritanic  notions  of  the  16th  century.  The  king 
had  succeeded  in  securing  the  adoption  of  the  ^  five  arti  • 
des  of  Perth**  (q.v.);  he  had  succeeded  in  suppressing 
the  Scotch  Presbyterian  Church,  but  he  failed  to  oon- 
quer  it 

In  England,  also,  the  shortsighted  policy  of  James 
now  brought  distrust  and  discredit.  The  execution  of 
Raleigh  and  the  denial  of  assistance  to  the  Protestant 
Bohemians,  both  sacrifices  to  the  court  of  Spain,  the 
latter  even  at  the  expen8e  of  his  son-in-law,  whom  the 
Bohemians  had  chosen  for  their  king,  hardly  justify 
Baxter  in  the  statement  that  king  Jame8'B  object  was 
the  consolidation  of  the  Protestant  interests,  and  that 
"  his  treatment  of  the  Pnritans  was  marked  by  a  lenien- 
cy  strongly  contrasting  with  the  morę  yigorous  course 
adopted  by  his  predeccssors,  and  naturally  occaaioning 
a  dliTerence  of  opinion  as  to  its  wisdom  and  propriety'* 
(p.  568).  If  toleration  was  the  policy  of  James  I,  it  did 
not  manifest  itsclf  against  the  Independents,  who, "  after 
repeated  and  fruitless  applications  for  toleration"  (Bax- 
ter,  p.  572),  were  obliged  to  go  to  distant  lands  to  find  a 
place  where  they  could  foliow  the  dictates  of  their  con- 
science.  Certainly  the  state  did  not  pay  the  expenses 
of  these  pilgrim  fathers  in  1619  because  they  were  Pu> 
ritans,  but  simply  because  they  were  likely  to  settle  and 
to  cultivate  land  otherwise  almost  worthless.  In  1624 
James  was  iinally  driren,  both  by  the  opposition  of  Par- 
liament to  his  policy  in  seeking  a  closer  alliance  with 
Spain  and  by  the  clamor  of  tlie  people  for  a  war  with 
that  country,  to  dis^patch  an  army  into  Germany  to  rci- 
cover  his  Ron-in-law's  pos8e^sions.  But,  as  if  his  meas- 
ure  of  tribulation  was  not  yet  fuli,  this  cnterprise  prored 
a  totcl  failure,  and  brought  discredit  upon  the  English 
narae.  The  king  also  assumed  a  ridiculous  attitude  on 
the  que8tion  of  the  obser\'ance  of  the  Sabbath.  Roman 
Catholicism  is  wont  to  look  upon  Sunday  as  a  holiday ; 
the  Puritans,  howcyer.  desired  it  observed  as  a  Christian 
day  of  rest.  To  countcract  these  efforts,  James  publish- 
ed a  ^  Book  of  Sports,"  advising  the  people  that  Sunday 
was  not  to  be  a  day  mainly  for  religioua  rest  and  wop- 
ship,  but  of  gamcs  and  revels  (Skeats,  p.  47).  Sec  Sab- 
isATARiAN  CosrrRO^^ERSY.  This  reign,  so  detrimental 
to  the  interests  of  the  English  and  Scottish  State  and 
the  Church  of  Christ,  were  finaliy  brought  to  a  terminal 
tion  by  the  death  of  James,  March  27,  1625.  Severe  as 
may  have  been  some  of  thehistorians  who  have  writtcn 
the  fate  of  this  king,  nonę  can  be  said  to  have  exagger- 
ated  the  many  despicable  features  of  his  character ;  and 
we  need  not  wonder  that  his  yacillating  course  towards 
his  subjects,  favoring  first  the  Puritans,  then  the  Epis- 
copalians ;  tightening  first  the  reins,  and  then  loosening 
them  against  the  Romanists — all  inspired,  not  by  the 
tnie  spirit  of  toleration,  but  by  artful  design?,  well  ena- 
ble  us  to  repeat  of  him  Macau]ay's  judgment,  that  James 
I  was  "  madę  up  of  two  men — ^a  witty,  well-read  scholar, 
who  wrote,  disputed,  and  harangucd,  and  a  ncr\'ous, 
drivelling  idiot  who  acted.** 

James  I  was  a  Yoluminous  wńter,  and,  though  he 
was  far  from  deserring  the  sumame  which  the  flattery 
of  his  contemporaries  accorded  him,  "  Solomon  the  Sec- 
ond,"  he  was  certainly  not  wholly  dcstitnte  of  litcrary 
ability,  and,  had  he  pursued  a  literary  life  instcad  of 
goyeming  a  state,  it  is  barely  possiblc  that  he  might 
haye  eamed  a  much  highcr  position  among  his  fellow- 
beings.  It  brings  to  mind  the  prophetic  utterance  of 
his  tutor,  that  James  was  better  fitted  to  be  a  scholar 
than  a  luler.  The  writings  of  James  which  desenne 
mention  hcre  are,  Fruiłful  Meditatwn  upon  a  part  of 


JAMES  n 


764 


JAMES  n 


ihe  Reveliition  of  St  John  (Lond.  1588)  i^Dojnonoloffia, 
a  dialogue  in  three  books  in  defence  of  tke  belief  in 
Wiłckes  (Lond.  1597, 4to) ;  and yet  tbe  king  withalhes- 
itated  not  to  punish  his  subjects  for  a  like  faith  * — Ba- 
(TłAccóy  Aiipoy;  instructions  to  his  son  Henry  (who 
died  Nov.  6, 1612),  in  which  James  laid  down  bis  optn- 
ions  on  the  power  of  the  throne  over  tbe  State  and 
Churcb,  and  which,  for  the  doctrines  it  contained  on 
Church  goyemment,  was  oensured  aa  Ubellous  by  the 
Synod  of  SL  Andpew'8  (Lond.  1599)  i—TripUci  Nodo  Trir 
plex  Cttneuśf  an  apology  for  the  oath  of  allegiance  that 
James  exacted  of  his  Roman  Catholic  subjects,  which 
was  answered  by  cardinal  Bellarmine,  and  produoed  a 
long  controYersy  and  many  other  publications  on  both 
aides,  for  an  account  of  which,  see  a  notę  by  Dr.  Birch 
in  the  Appendix  to  Harris^s  Life  of  James : — Prołetta- 
iio  A  ntirorsHay  in  gua  rex  attam  eacponit  aenŁentiam  de 
confaderaiorum  ordinum  effectu  et  acłis  in  causa  Yorstii 
(London,  1612),  the  successor  of  Arminius  as  professor  of 
dirinity  at  the  Unirersity  of  Leyden,  whom  be  aocused 
of  hercsy  [see  Yorstius],  etc  A  complete  edition  of 
his  works  was  published  in  folio  (London,  1616),  and  a 
Latin  translation  by  biąhop  Mountague  in  1619.  A 
morę  complete  edition  was  pnblished  at  Frankfor^Hm- 
the-Main  in  folio  in  1689.  He  is  alao  said  to  have  writ- 
ten  a  metrical  rersion  of  the  Psalms,  oompleted  np  to 
the  8l8t  Psalm  (Oxf.  1631 ,  12mo).  See  James  Welwood, 
Memoirs  o/the  mott  materiał  Transactions  in  Engkmd 
for  the  lasŁ  100  Year$  preceding  the  Rerolution  (London, 
1700,  8vo);  Peyton,  IHtńne  Catastrophe  of  the  kingfy 
Family  ofthe  Ifouse  of  Stuart  (1781, 8vo) ;  S^iiaon,  Life 
and  Reiffn  of  King  Jam/et  I  (1653,  foL,  and  reprinted  in 
Bp.  Kennet*s  Complete  History^  yol.  ii) ;  Lingard,  Uistory 
ofEnfflandy  yoIs.  viii  and  ix ;  Baxter,  Ch.  Hist.  eh.  xiii; 
CoUier,  Ecclea.^IIist. ;  Hallaro,  Conttit.  Ifisf.  (see  Index) ; 
Raamer,  Geach,  r.  Europę,  vol.  v;  Kudloff,  Gesch.  d,  Re- 
formałion in  Schottiand,  voL  i;  Soame,  EUzabethean  Hit' 
tory^  p.  615  sq.;  Skeats,  History  ofthe  Free  Churches  of 
England,  p.  85  sq. ;  Hunt  (the  Rev.  John),  ReUgious 
Thought  in  England  (Lond.  1870, 8vo),  roi.  i,  ch.  ii  and  iii ; 
English  Cydop,  s.  v. ;  Herzog,  Real-Eneyldop.  vi,  881  8q. 
See  Enolanii  (Ciiurch  of);  Puritans.     (J.  H.  W.) 

James  II  of  Enoland  and  YII  of  Scotland,  son 
of  Charles  I  and  Henrietta  Maria,  was  bom  October  15, 
1683.  In  1643  he  was  created  duke  of  York.  In  1648, 
during  the  civil  war,  which  resulted  in  the  decapita- 
tion  of  his  father,  be  madę  his  escape  to  HoUand,  and 
thence  to  France,  where  his  mother  resided.  The  early 
education  of  the  duke  of  York  had,  by  the  Yrish  of  his 
fdthcr,  becn  intnisted  to  Protestanta,  bat  his  mother,  a 
bigoted  Romanist,  now  improved  ber  opportunity,  and 
the  yoiing  prince  was  surrounded  by  Roman  Catholic 
iniiuenccs,  and,  to  be  morę  readily  inclined  to  Popery, 
was  assured  that  the  unfortuiiate  end  of  his  father  was 
due  ouly  to  his  strict  adherenoe  to  Protestantism,  and 
that  no  prince  could  hołd  the  reins  of  govemment  sno- 
cessfuUy  who  was  not  supported  by  Romę.  In  1652  he 
entered  the  French  army  under  generał  Turenne,  and 
aenred  in  it  until  the  peace  ooncluded  with  Cromwell  (Oo- 
tober,  1655)  obliged  James  to  quit  the  territory  of  Louis 
XIV.  He  was  then  offered  a  posidon  in  the  army  of 
Spain,  which  he  aocepted.  At  the  Restoration  (May, 
1660)  he  rctumed  to  England,  and  was  immediately 
made  lord  high  admirał  of  England.  In  tbe  ensuing 
wars  with  Holland  (1664-1672),  which  are  generally 
supposed  to  have  been  instigated  by  this  prince  and  his 
brother  for  the  especial  purpose  of  crushing  the  Datoh 
as  a  Protestant  people,  and  to  disable  thero  from  inter- 
fering  with  the  rc-establishment  of  popery  in  England, 
to  which  they  them9elves  inclined,  he  twice  commandcd 
the  English  fleet.  and  was  eminently  successfuL  In 
1660  he  roarricd  Annę,  daughter  of  lord  chancełlor  Hyde, 
and  the  reason  generally  aasigned  for  this  act  is  tłiat  the 
lady  was  far  gone  with  child  when  tbe  marriage  wa^ 
contractcd.  But  she  lived  only  a  fcw  years  (she  died 
March  31, 1671),  suflfering,  it  is  supposed,  from  neglect, 
tf  not  the  po8itive  iil-usage  of  ber  husband,  who,  not- 


withstanding  his  ptofessions  of  ceal  for  religion,  io- 
dulged  in  a  large  słiare  of  tbe  reigning  lioentiouBłegs, 
and  kept  a  mistress  almost  from  the  datę  of  his  mar- 
riage. A  few  montbs  before  ber  deatb  tbe  ducheas  łtad 
signed  a  dedaration  of  ber  reoonciliation  to  the  andent 
religion  (Romanism,  of  course),  and  sbortly  afterward 
the  duke  also  publidy  avowed  his  conveiBion  to  popety, 
an  act  which,  although  łiis  concealed  indinatioos  lud 
been  long  suspected,  did  not  fail  to  create  a  great  seri- 
sation,  espeeially  as,  from  his  brother  s  want  of  i«Mie, 
he  was  now  looked  upon  as  CharWs  probable  succes- 
sor to  the  throne  of  England.  On  the  passage,  in  the 
beginning  of  1678,  of  the  Test  Act,  which  reąuired  all 
offioers,  civił  and  military,  to  receive  tbe  sacrament 
according  to  the  usage  of  tbe  Established  Cbmch, 
the  duke  was,  of  course,  obliged  to  icaign  tlie  cum- 
mand  of  the  fleet  and  tbe  office  of  lord  high  adminL 
These  duties  were,  bowever,  aasigned  to  a  board  of  com- 
missioners,  consisting  of  his  friends  and  dependants,  so 
that  he  still  virtually  remained  at  the  bead  of  the  na\-al 
aflairs.  On  Nov.  21, 1678,  be  married  again ;  this  Łime 
a  Roman  Catholic  prinoess,  Mary  Beatrix  Eleancn, 
daughter  of  Alpbonao  IV,  duke  of  Modena,  a  lady  then 
only  in  ber  iifŁecnth  year. 

During  the  great  irritatlon  against  tbe  Roman  Cath- 
oHcs  which  followed  the  publication  of  tbe  Titus  Oates 
(q.  V.)  popish  plot  in  1678-79,  tbe  duke  of  York,  by  the 
'advice  of  king  Ctiarlee  II,  quttted  England  and  took  op 
his  residence  on  the  Contiiient.  While  be  was  atseot 
efforts  were  madę  to  exclude  bim  ftom  the  thione,  which 
would  have  been  successful  had  not  Parliament  suddenly 
been  prorogued  (May  27, 1679).  In  1680  he  leUnneil 
again  to  England,  but  so  great  was  the  opposition  to- 
wards  bim  that  Charles  was  obliged  to  send  bim  doim 
to  govem  Scotland.  Tbe  odium  in  which  the  duke  <£ 
York  now  stood  among  the  English  was  further  mani* 
fest  by  a  second  attempt  to  pass  in  Parliament  a  bill 
excluding  bim  from  the  right  of  succesaion  to  tbe  throne, 
which  again  failed  by  anotber  prorogation  ofthe  coun- 
cil  of  the  nation.  This  time,  no  doubt,  the  effort  was 
mainly  the  result  of  the  discreditabłe  relation  which  the 
prince  sustaiued  towanls  the  Meal-tub  Plot,  an  attempt 
on  the  part  of  his  co-religionists  to  counteiact— and  in 
this  they  were  grievously  disappointed— the  eflect  of 
the  Titus  Oates  plot  di8coverie«.  In  1682,  when  Charies 
was  involvcd  in  difficulties  with  his  ooncubine,  the  dnke 
of  York  was  invited  over,  and  he  lmproved  the  opportu- 
nity, and  knew  so  welł  tiow  to  make  bimself  an  tndb- 
pensable  oounselłor  of  hb  brother,  that,  in  spite  of  the 
Test  Act,  he  bccame  (much  morę  than  Charles  himaelO 
"•  the  mainspring  and  director  of  tbe  conduct  of  puUic 
alfiurs."  On  the  deatb  of  Chariea  II,  Feb.  6, 1685.  be 
succeeded  to  the  throne,  strangcly  enough,  withooi  the 
leaat  oppdeition.  His  płedge  to  the  people  was,  ^  I  shaU 
make  it  my  endeavor  to  presen*e  tliis  goveroment  boch 
in  Chnroh  and  State,  as  it  is  now  by  law  established."  a 
dedaration  which  seemed  rather  neceasary  from  adiaci- 
ple  of  popery.  It  must,  bowever,  also  be  acknowledged 
that  Jamee  II  *'  began  his  reign  with  a  frank  and  opca 
profession  of  bis  rdigion,  for  the  first  Sunday  after  hb 
aocession  be  went  publidy  to  mass,  and  obliged  &ther 
Huddleston,  who  attended  bis  brother  in  )us  h»t  hoora. 
to  declare  to  tbe  worki  that  he  died  a  Roman  Catholic*' 
(Neale,  Puritans,  Harper^s  edition,  ii,  815).  But  if  tbe 
people,  though  besitatingly,  yet  tadtly,  siibmitted  to 
the  freedom  of  tbe  king  to  worship  acooiding  to  tbe 
dictates  of  his  consdence,  and  evcn  suffered  Romai>- 
ism,  the  \'ery  name  of  which,  just  at  this  time,  was  de- 
spised  by  nearly  evcry  English  aubject,  to  daim  tbeir 
ruler  for  ita  convert,  yet  his  diaplay  of  ttie  theorr  that 
a  king  was  not  aubject  to  the  critidams  of  bii  peo- 
ple— in  short,  his  theory  of  abtobtte  ntpremacy  aoott 
aronaed  the  nation  from  thdr  lethargy,  thongh  it  did 
not  at  onoe  appear  that  tbe  community  would  erer  seek 
to  relieve  itself  from  the  calamity  which  it  had  jus:  in« 
curred.  Gieater  still  became  the  anxiety  ofthe  natioa 
when  it  appeared  that,  **  in  i^te  of  bis  own  solenm  en- 


JAMES  n 


łes 


JAMES  n 


gBgemenU  to  govern  coiutitutionally,  and  heedless  of 
ominous  intimations  wbich  leached  hiin,  in  the  shape 
of  addreases,  that  the  religion  of  his  sabjecta  was  dearer 
to  ih^m  than  their  livea,  he  proceeded  to  cany  out  his 
projecu  wiih  a  recklessness  amounting  to  infatuation" 
(Iiaxter,  Ch.  Ilirt,  p*  637).  Kight  in  his  flrst  measureą 
king  James  showed,  says  Hume  (//&»/.  ofEngUmdy  Har- 
p«r't»  edition^  vi,  280), "  that  either  he  was  not  sincere  in 
hL«  professions  of  attachment  to  the  laws,  or  that  he  en- 
tertaincd  so  lofty  an  idea  of  his  own  legał  power  that 
even  his  utmost  sineerity  would  tend  very  little  to  se- 
cure  the  libeities  of  the  people."  Not  satisfied  with  his 
arowed  confeasion  of  Komanism,  he  even  madę  unneces- 
san'  and  offensive  displays  of  his  religious  principles. 
and  thereby  greatly  woonded  the  pńde  of  his  subjects. 
The  mass  was  openly  oelebrated  with  great  pomp  at 
Westminster  in  Passion  Week  of  this  year  (1685) ;  an 
agent  was  sent  to  Korne  to  announoe  the  king's  submis- 
siun  to  the  so-calledricarof  Christ;  a  close  alliance  was 
enteied  into  with  France;  and  it  was  even  generally 
hinted  that  "  the  Chuich  of  Engkmd  was  in  principle 
so  cloeely  allied  to  the  Roman  Catholic  that  it  would  not 
be  difScult  to  prepare  the  way  for  the  readmission  of  the 
£nglish  into  the  bosom  of  the  Roman  Catholic  Church" 
(compi.  Sir  John  Daln-mple,  Menwirs  of  Great  BrUcoHj 
Appejid.  pt,  i,  p.  100-118;  Fox,  Hiet,  of  early  Part  of 
the  Hfign  of  Jamę*  II)»  Ali  this,  too,  was  done  at  a 
time  when  "  there  was  among  the  EngUsh  a  strong  con- 
riction  that  the  Roman  Catholic,  where  the  interests  of 
his  religion  were  concemed,  thought  himself  free  from 
all  the  ordinary  rulea  of  morality ;  nay,  that  he  thought 
it  raeritorious  to  violate  those  rules,  if  by  so  doing  he 
could  avert  injury  or  reproach  from  the  Church  of  which 
Łc  was  a  member ;"  at  a  time  when  **  Roman  Catholic 
casuists  of  great  eminenoe  had  wńtten  in  defence  of 
equivocauon,  of  mental  resenration,  of  per|ur}%  and  even 
of  aasassination,"  and  the  fruits  of  this  odious  school  of 
sophista  were  seen  in  the  roassacre  of  SuBartholomew, 
tłie  munlor  of  the  firat  William  of  Orange,  the  murder 
of  Henry  III  of  France,  the  numerous  conspiracies  which 
had  becii  forroed  against  the  life  of  Elizabeth,  and,  above 
all,  the  (sunpowder  Plot,  and  when  all  these  could  eon- 
stantly  be  cited  ''as  instances  of  the  close  conncction 
between  yicious  theory  and  vicious  practice" — a  series 
of  cnmes  which,  it  was  alleged,  had  every  one  of  thcm 
been  pmmpted  or  applauded  by  Roman  Catholic  priests 
(comp.  Macaulay,  Hitt,  of  Etufland,  Harper's  edit,  ii,  5 
8q.).  It  was  certainly  sheer  madness  (and  we  need  not 
wondcr  that  the  so-claimed  successor  of  Peter  even  so 
deciared  it)  to  still  further  aggrarate  the  opposition  of 
his  subjects  by  peraecution  for  religious  belief.  Him« 
self  anx.iouB  to  obtaiu  for  the  members  of  his  own  con- 
feasion complcte  toleration,  which,  after  all,  was  only 
*'natural  and  right,"  it  seems  simply  preposteroos  to 
iind  hina  pcrsecuting  the  Puritans.  Almost  immediate- 
ly  after  his  aocession  to  the  throne  James  II  convoked 
the  Parliameut  of  Scotland,  whcre  the  majority  of  the 
population  was  firmly  attached  to  the  Presbyterian  dis- 
cipline,  and  where  prelacy  was  abhorred  "  as  an  unscrip- 
tural  and  as  a  foreign  institution,*'  and  demanded  new 
laws  against  the  unruly  Presbyterians,  wlio  already 
<*cIosely  associated  the  episoopal  polity  with  all  the 
e\'ils  produced  by  twenty-five  years  of  corrupt  and  cruel 
maladministration."  In  a  slayish  spirit,  the  Scottish 
Parliament  complied  with  the  royal  request,  forbidding 
onder  tho  death  penalty  preaching  in  any  Presbyterian 
conrenticle  whatcrer,  and  even  attendance  on  such  a 
eon reuticle  Jn  the  open  air  (lVIay  8, 1685).  A  short 
time  after,  the  Parliament  of  England  ako  was  oon- 
Tokeci  (3ilay  Id),  which,  as  readiiy  as  the  Scottish, 
oompiied  with  the  demands  of  the  king,  but,  to  his 
great  sorrow,  neyerthelees  evinced  the  possibility  of 
opposition  to  popery,  for  which  he  was  anxiottS  to  se^ 
cuie  conoessions.  But  while  both  Parliaments  were  thus 
slayishly  submltting  to  the  wishes  of  the  absolutist, 
the  countries  were  invaded,  and  this  afforded  the  king 
a  faroiaUe  pretext  for  tho  introdiiction  of  Romanists 


into  the  ranks  of  the  army,  in  spite  of  the  legał  test  of 
oonformity-to  the  Established  Church  which  was  re- 
quired  to  be  taken  by  every  person  fiUing  any  public 
office;  and  when,  after  a  successful  suppression  of  the 
insurrectionar>'  attempts,  the  king  reassembled  Parlia- 
ment in  November,  he  not  only  stated  that  these  Roman 
(^holics  would  now  be  continued,  but  reąuested  extra 
supplies  for  the  increase  of  the  army,  eyidently  for  the 
purpose  of  addiug  largely  men  of  his  own  confession 
to  the  rank  and  iile  of  the  army;  and  when  the  people 
seemed  unwilUng  to  grant  this  request,  the  king  per- 
emptorily  prorogued  Parliament,  after  it  had  sat  a  little 
morę  than  a  week.  James,  howerer,  was  detennined 
to  continue  the  policy  initiated,  and  ordered  patents  to 
be  madę  óut  under  the  great  seal  for  every  Roman  Cath- 
olic officer  that  he  had  appointed,  and  upon  the  same 
principle  continued  the  benefices  of  some  Protestant  di- 
vines  who  claimed  to  have  been  conyerted  to  Roman- 
ism.  Quite  dliferent  continued  to  be  his  dealings  with 
the  dissentors.  Erery  where  they  were  madę  to  feel "  the 
weight  of  the  arm  of  the  conqueror,"  especially  in  the 
proYlnces  that  had  lately  been  subjcct  to  inyasion.  to 
which  the  Papists,  as  well  as  High-Churcfamen,  claim- 
ed that  dissenters  had  lent  their  aid.  **  Thus  were  the 
Nonconformists  ground  between  the  Papists  on  the  one 
hand  and  the  High-Church  dergy  on  the  other,  while 
the  former  madę  their  adyantage  of  the  latter,  conclud- 
ing  that  when  the  dissenters  were  destroyed,  or  thor- 
oughly  exa8perated,  and  the  dergy  divided  among  them- 
selyes,  they  should  be  a  match  for  the  hierarchy,  and  ca- 
pable  of  establishing  that  religion  which  they  had  been 
80  long  aiming  to  introduoe"  (Neale,  Puritansy  ii,  819). 
Roman  Catholic  churches  were  eyeiywhere  opened,  Jes- 
uits  and  regular  priests  came  in  numbers  from  abroad, 
schools  were  opened  under  their  oontrol  in  the  English 
roetropolis  eyen,  men  were  forbidden  to  speak  disre- 
spectfuUy  of  the  king's  religion,  and  all  seemed  tuming 
in  fayor  of  Romę,  when  at  length  the  eyes  of  the  dergy 
of  the  State  Church  were  opened,  and  they  deemcd  it 
high  time  to  preach  against  the  dangerous  tendencica. 
An  open  rupŁure  with  the  State  Church  had  become  iney- 
itable ;  for  the  king,  hayiug  been  madę  acquainted  with 
the  position  which  the  dergy  of  the  Church  of  England 
had  taken  to  recoyer  the  people,  who  were  deserting 
their  churches  in  numbers,  and  to  rescne  the  Protestant 
religion  from  the  danger  into  which  it  had  fallen,  sent 
circular  letters  to  the  bishops,  accompanying  them  with 
an  order  to  prohibit  the  infeńor  clergy  from  preaching 
on  the  controyerted  p<Mnt8  of  religion.  It  could  not  be 
otherwiM  than  that  these  perseyering  attempts  of  his 
against  the  established  religion,  as  well  aa  upon  tho  law 
of  the  land,  should  eyentually  inyolye  him  in  a  dispute 
with  the  Episcopalians,  to  be  productiye  of  the  most  im- 
ponant  conseąuencea.  Finding  that  to  carry  his  schemes 
in  iayor  of  Romanism  he  must  strengthen  himsdf  by 
the  opponents  of  the  State  Church,  he  suddenly,  in  the 
b^nning  of  April,  1687,  published  the  famous  Declara^ 
tion  of  Indulgence,  a  paper  at  once  suspending  and  dis- 
pensing  with  all  the  penal  lawa  against  dissenters,  and 
all  tcste,  induding  eyen  the  oaths  of  allegiance  and  su- 
premacy,  heretofore  required  of  persons  appointed  to  of- 
fices  ciyil  or  military ;  but  at  the  same  time  he  repeatod 
his  promise,  ^  already  often  rapcated  and  often  yiolatcd, 
that  he  would  protect  the  Established  Church  in  the 
enjoyment  of  her  legał  rights.**  At  first  the  dissenters 
hailed  the  seeming  approach  of  a  new  sra,  and  great 
were  the  lejoidngs  in  behalf  of  a  declaration  which  se- 
cured  them  liberty  of  conscience,  and  threw  open  the 
doors  of  the  prison  that  had  so  long  barred  Łbem ;  and 
the  king  felt  not  a  little  encouraged  in  his  new-choeen 
conrse  when  addresaes  came  to  him  from  some  of  the 
dissenters  (though  they  afterwards  proyed  to  haye  rep- 
resented  only  a  smali  faction ;  comp.  Neale,  Puritans,  ii» 
328).  Emboldened,  he  immediately  showed  his  predi- 
lections  for  his  own  Church.  In  Ireland,  all  placcs  of 
power  under  the  crown  were  put  into  the  hands  of  Ro- 
maiusts.    The  earl  of  Castlemaine  was  at  the  same  time 


JAMES  n 


766 


JAMES  n 


publidy  sent  as  embassador  estraordinary  to  Romę  to 
expre88  the  \ang*8  obeisance  to  the  pope,  and  to  effect 
the  reconcUemeiit  of  the  kingdoin  with  the  ^  holy  aee.** 
In  return  the  pope  sent  a  nando  to  England,  who  re- 
sided  openly  in  London  during  the  remainder  of  the 
reign,  and  was  solemnly  received  at  coiirt,  in  the  face 
of  the  act  of  Parliament  declaring  any  oommiinication 
with  the  pope  to  be  high  treason.  Foor  Roman  Cath- 
olic  bishops  were  conaecrated  in  the  king^s  chapel,  and 
sent  to  exercŁae  the  episcopal  function,  each  in  his  par- 
ticiilar  diocese.  In  Scotland  and  England,  as  well  as 
in  Ifeland,  offices  of  all  kinds,  both  in  the  army  and 
in  the  state,  were  now  fiUed  with  Roman  Catholics; 
even  those  of  the  ministers  and  others  who  had  shown 
themselres  tUsposed  to  go  furthest  along  with  the  king 
were  dismissed,  or  yisibly  lost  his  favor,  if  they  refused 
to  oonform  to  the  andent  rdigion.  At  last  James^s 
''eye  was  delighted  with  the  aspect  of  catholidty  im- 
parted  to  his  metropolia  by  the  spectacle  of  monks  trav- 
ereing  its  streets  in  the  habits  of  their  respectiye  orders, 
he  was  gratified  by  the  presence  of  an  Italian  prelate, 
D'Adda,  as  nuncio  from  the  pope ;  and  he  entertained  a 
sanguine  hope  of  obtaining  a  Parliament  elected  under 
the  new  Corporation  charters,  which  should  fumish  a 
majority  of  his  adherenta,  while  the  lords  were  to  be 
Bwaroped  by  a  creation  of  peers  compliant  with  his 
wishes.  The  Nonconformists,  he  calculated,  would  sup- 
port  his  yiews  as  long  as  their  support  would  be  impor- 
tant,  and  he  was  weak  enough  to  imagine  that  his  dec- 
laration  of  indtUgenoe  placed  him  in  farorable  oontrast 
with  the  French  monarch,  to  whose  exiled  Protestant 
Bubjects,  sińce  the  rerocation  of  the  Edict  of  Nantes 
(1684),  England  was  affording  its  hoBpitalit>%  not  aware 
that  his  suhjects  were  suffidently  acquainted  with  the 
genius  and  Łactics  of  his  religion  to  know  that  indul- 
gence  and  (Kraccution  were  but  indifierent  Instruments 
ibr  its  propogatiou,  adapted  to  the  different  circum- 
stances  of  an  ascendant  or  a  declining  Protcstantism — 
one  and  the  same  spirit  actoating  the  sovereigns  of 
France  and  of  Great  Britain,  in  pursuance  of  oommon 
religions,  in  sub6ervience  to  similar  political  objects" 
(Baxtcr,  Ch,  Hut.  p*  639).  The  dissenters,  in  particu- 
lar,  soon  Icamed  to  comprehend  the  reality  of  the  situa- 
tion — that  a  league  of  the  oourt  and  Romanism  was  de- 
pendent on  their  assistanoe  for  its  success  to  orerawe 
the  Episcopalians  and  secore  yictory  to  popery;  and 
when  they  dld  comprehend  the  scheme, "  notwithstand- 
ing  the  renewed  suffbrings  to  which  they  raight  be  ex- 
poscd,  they  took  part  against  it.  .  .  .  Independenta, 
Baptists,  and  Quaker8  vied  with  each  other  in  showing 
tlicm  (the  E^iiscopal  clergy)  their  sympathy.  . . .  Nonę 
of  them— not  even  Penn  (q.  r.) — ^was  in  favor  of  the  tol- 
eration  of  Roman  Catholidsm.  No  man  who  ralued 
the  civil  liberties  of  England  dreamed  of  giring  a  foot- 
hołd  to  the  professors  of  that  intolerant  creed.  Three 
generations  had  not  snfficed  to  wipe  out  the  memory  of 
its  curse  on  England.  Thousands  still  living  oould  rec^ 
ollect  the  Yaudois  massacres,  and  the  streets  of  London 
were  at  that  moment  crowded  with  sufferers  from  the 
rerocation  of  the  Edict  of  Nantes"  (Skeata,  p.  83).  The 
Nonconformists,  almost  as  a  body,  refused  to  recognise 
the  Icgolity  of  the  indulgence,  mainly,  of  course,  be- 
cause  they  saw  in  the  encroachment  against  the  law  a 
prerogative  which,  if  not  resisted,  might  lead  ultimate- 
ly  to  the  establishment  of  popery  as  the  religion  of  the 
State.  But,  whaterer  were  the  reasons  of  the  dissent- 
ers,  the  attempt  of  the  king  to  gain  their  support  evi- 
dently  failed,  and  it  became  daily  morę  apparent  that 
the  war  which  the  king  had  opene<l  with  the  Church 
must  soon  reach  a  climax.  An  attempt  had  already 
been  madę  to  compel  the  Unirersity  of  Cambridge  to 
confer  a  degree  of  master  of  arts  on  a  Benodictinc  monk. 
This  was  not  penievered  in ;  but  soon  aftcr,  a  racancy 
having  happened  in  Łhe  presidency  of  MagtUlen  Col- 
lege, Oxf()rd,  the  vice-president  and  fellows  were  onler- 
ed  by  royal  mandate  to  iill  it  up  by  the  election  of  a  per- 
son named  Farmer,  a  late  conyert  to  popeiy  (fot  whom 


was  atterwarUs  substituted  Parker,  bishop  of  Chiord, 
who  arowed  himself  a  Romanist  at  heart),  and  on  their 
refusal  were  dted  before  an  ecdesiastical  commiaŃnii 
and  expelied.  See  Hough,  John  (1).  DetermiiKd,  if 
possible,  to  gain  over  the  Nonoooformista,  whose  aid  hc 
evidently  needed  to  carry  out  soooessfully  his  pnijecti^ 
James  pubUshed,  April  27,  1688,  a  second  declantion  of 
indulgence  to  dissenters,  and  commanded  it  to  be  read 
by  the  clergy  immediately  after  divine  serrioe  in  sil  the 
churches  of  England.  On  this,  Sancroft^,  archbishop  o( 
Canterbury,  and  six  bishops — ^Lloyd  of  St.  Asaph,  Ren 
of  Bath  and  Wells,  Turner  of  Ely,  Lakę  of  Chichester, 
White  of  Peterboroogh,  and  TrelaMmey  of  Bristol— met 
in  the  archbiahop^a  palące  at  Lambeth,  Iklay  1^,  and 
drew  up  a  petition  to  the  king,  representing  their  aver- 
sion  to  obey  the  order,  for  many  reasons,  and  especiaUr 
because  the  dedaration  was  founded  upon  soch  a  <lts- 
pensing  power  as  Parliament  had  often  dedared  ille^siL 
For  this  they  were  all,  June  8,  sent  to  the  Tower,  on 
the  charge  of  publishing  a  false,  fictitious,  roalicious, 
pemidous,  and  seditious  libeL  The  history  of  the  triiL 
and  the  verdict  of  Not  guUty  by  the  jur>',  June  29, 16*i, 
which  the  nation  approved,  and  which  was  haileti  br 
the  whole  kingdom  as  a  great  national  triumph,  fonB§ 
one  of  the  most  giowing  passages  in  the  splendid  nana- 
tive  of  Alacaulay  (ii,  293).  This  defeat,  howerer,  in  co 
degree  checkedfor  a  moment  the  iniatuated  king.  To 
quote  the  summar}'  of  Hume,  "  He  stmck  out  two  of 
the  judges,  Powd  and  HoUoway,  who  had  appeared  tn 
favor  the  bishops ;  he  issued  orders  to  proeecuie  all  tbc«e 
derg}nnen  who  had  not  read  his  dedaration,  that  is,tbe 
whole  Chupch  of  England,  two  hundred  except€d:  he 
sent  a  mandate  to  the  new  fdlows  whom  he  had  ob- 
truded  on  Magdalen  Coil^;e  to  dect  for  presidenł,  ia 
the  room  or  Parker,  lately  deceased,  one  GiiTord,  a  doc- 
tor of  the  Surbonne,  and  titidar  bishop  of  Madaun;  and 
he  is  even  said  to  ha\-e  nominated  the  same  person  to 
the  see  of  Oxford."  It  was  in  the  midst  of  this  f<;7Cflt 
contest  with  the  Church  And  the  nation  thst,  June  IQ,  a 
son  was  claimcd  to  have  been  bom  to  Jame^  rpcci\-ed, 
howerer,  by  the  people  with  a  strong  suspidor  chat  the 
child  was  suppodtitious,  and  that  the  qneen  had  nevcr 
been  ddivcred  or  been  pregnant  at  alL  For  thb  notioo, 
however,  it  is  now  generally  admitted  that  there  was 
no  good  ground.  But  the  fact  that  a  direct  faeir  had 
been  bom,  who,  in  all  probability,  would  restore  poperr, 
in  which,  no  doubt,  he  would  be  instructed  from  earE»t 
infanc>',  tumed  the  ProtestAnts'  eyes  towanls  Jamcss 
son-in-law,  the  prince  of  Orange,  **  for  the  deliyennce 
of  their  country  from  the  perils  with  which  it  »i8 
threatened ;  and  James,  before  the  end  of  Sęptember, 
Icamed  with  constemation  that  his  own  son-in-Uw.  ii 
obedience  to  their  cali,  was  preparing  to  land  upon  hi» 
coasts.*'  On  the  night  of  the  same  day  on  which  the 
seyen  prdates  of  the  English  Church  had  been  pro- 
nounced  not  ffnUty^  an  in\'itation  was  dispatdied  to  Wil- 
liam, prince  of  Orange,  signed  by  seren  of  the  lewłin^ 
English  politicians,  to  comc  over  to  EngUmd  and  ocoi- 
py  the  throne.  No\'ember  5,  William  landed  at  ToAay 
with  14,000  men.  Yainly  did  James  now  attenin  to 
regain  his  subjects'  confidence  by  retracing  h»  fteps; 
no  one  would  tmst  his  promises,  madę  in  the  hour  of 
roisfortune,  and,  finding  himself  descrtod  not  oniy  by 
the  nation,  but  even  by  his  own  children,  he  recireil  to 
France,  where  he  was  hospitably  received  by  his  co-łe- 
ligionist  and  royal  friend,  Louis  Xr\^  and  obli^  to 
live  upon  a  pension  settled  upon  him  by  the  king  rf  the 
French  until  his  death,  Sept.  6,  1701*.  F<ir  EiusUnd 
his  exłt  "  effectcd  a  revohition  (Norember,  Ifrf*)  which 
has  deser\'ed  the  epithet  of  glorions,  not  less  !hnMi|;h  it? 
bloodlese  character  than  from  its  identilkation  with 
those  dvłl  and  religious  liberties  which  it  secured  to 
every  dass  of  Engtishmen.*'  See,  besides  the  authori- 
ties  cited  under  James  I,  Hetherington,  Ck,  o/Scothnd, 
ii,  146  są.;  Stoughton,  Ecdetiattical  Hitł.o/KnffUnd 
(see  Index) ;  Macaulav,  //m^.  o/  England,  voL  i  and  ii; 
Ciarkę, Life  ofJanifs  II  fLond.  1816.2  volB.4to);  Dc- 


JAMES 


767 


JA3IIN 


baiy,  TliMi,  ofthe  Church  of  Eng^andfram  Janut  IT  łó 
1717  (Lond.  1860,  8vo),  chap.  i-v ;  Maq>henoii,  Hitt,  of 
Great  Briiam^  i,  450  flq.;  Bumet,  Reign  of  Jamet  II 
(ed.  1852).  See  Presbyterians;  Scotlahd;  Ireland; 
Enolasi*.    (J.H.W.) 

James,  John,  a  minister  of  thc  Methodist  Epiaco- 
pal  Church  South,  was  bom  in  Buckingham  County,ya., 
Au|in*Bt  1, 178*2.  He  entered  the  Kentucky  Conference 
in  18'20,  and  6uccessively  "fiUed  aome  of  the  most  im- 
portant  and  responuble  appointmenta  aoceptably  and 
succeasfully.**  He  was  an  aident  worker  in  the  yineyard 
of  the  Lord,  and  espoused  the  canse  of  his  Master  amid 
penecutions  and  heav>'  loss  of  property :  his  father-in- 
law,  a  wealthy  man,  disinherited  his  daughter  (the  wife 
of  John  James)  because  her  busband  was  a  Methodist 
pieacher.  Mr.  James  died,  after  a  serrice  of  half  a  cen- 
tury  in  the  Church,  in  1860.  As  a  preacher,  his  ability 
was  superior,  but  his  sermons  were  niore  of  a  hortatory 
naturę  than  8ev'ere  logical  doctrinal  discussions.  "  Dur^ 
ini;  his  ministerial  life  he  won  many  souls  to  Christ,  and 
was  re^nled  in  his  old  age  as  a  father  ui  IsraeL  He 
Ioved  his  work  to  the  last,  and  may  be  said  to  have  de- 
scended  fnim  his  horsc  to  the  grare."— A/tn.  -4mi.  Conf. 

James,  John  Angell,  an  eminent  Congregational 
minister,  boni  at  Blandford,  Dorsetshire,  June  6,  1785, 
was  educated  at  the  college  at  Gosport,  and  enteied  the 
ministry  when  onjy  serenteen  years  old,  He  was  a  very 
popular  preacher,  and,  before  twenty,  was  settlcd  as  pas- 
tor of  the  ''Church  Meeting  in  Curr*s  Lane,*'  Birming- 
ham, where  he  remained  tiU  liis  death,  Octobor  1, 1859. 
"  In  thc  oourse  of  years  Angell  James  came  to  be  consid- 
ered  the  most  important  and  influential  public  roan  in 
oonnection  with  his  own  denominatiou,  and  on  account 
of  his  eyangelical  yiews  of  religion,  he  was  also  much 
esteemed  both  by  the  Low-Church  party  in  the  English 
Establishment,  and  by  Dissenters  generally  in  Scotland 
and  America."  Mr.  James  published,  bcsidcs  a  multi- 
tude  of  sermons,  tracts,  addresses,  a  number  of  smali  rc- 
ligious  volumes,the  best  known  being  the  Anrious  In^ 
quirerj  Chi-Utian  FeUowshipf  and  Christian  Profeggor^ 
which  had,  and  still  have,  a  rast  circulation  both  in  En- 
gland  and  in  this  country.  See  Dale'8  Life  andJ^tttn 
ofjokn  Angell  Janie*  (London,  1862) ;  Pen-Pictures  of 
popular  English  Preachers  (London,  1853,  p.  274  8q.) ; 
Kew  York  LUerary  and  TheologiccU  JieneiCy  i,  695.  (J. 
H.W.) 

James,  John  Thomas,  an  English  prelate,  bom 
in  1786,  was  educate<i  at  Christ  Church,  Oxford.  He 
was  appointed  bishop  of  Calcutta  in  1727,  and  died  in 
1829.  He  published  eereral  works  of  Łrarels  in  the 
iMirthem  and  eastem  portions  of  Europę.^ — Allibone,  Diet, 
qfAuthors,]},9b2, 

James,  Peter,  a  minister  of  the  Methodist  Episco- 
pal  Church  South,  was  bom  in  Pennsylvania  in  1789, 
and  removed  toMrginia  in  1799,  and  from  thence,  a  year 
later,  to  MissisHippi.  In  1812  he  joined  the  Misaissippi 
Conference.  He  filled  screral  prominen  t  posit  ions  with- 
in  the  liroits  of  his  Conference,  and  was  for  a  time  pre- 
siding  elder.  The  Memphis  Conference  being  formed 
out  of  a  part  of  the  Mississippi,  he  was  invited  to  join 
the  latter,  which  he  did ;  but  his  health  declining,  he  be- 
caroe  a  superannuatc.  He  died  March  18, 1869.  "  Peter 
Jannes  possessed  but  limited  literary  attainments ;  but, 
b}'  dint  of  application,  he  became  an  abłe  minister  of  the 
(lospel.  In  all  the  relations  of  life  he  roaintained  his  in- 
teicrity  as  a  Christian,  and  excmplified  the  rirtues  and 
graces  of  our  holy  religion.** — Min,  Autu  Covf,  M,  E,  Ch, 
S.  iii,  840. 

James,  Thomas,  D.D.  (1),  a  leamed  divine  and  an 
able  critłc,  was  bom  at  Ne¥rport,  Isle  of  Wight,  in  1671. 
He  studicd  at  Winchester  School  and  New  College,  Ox- 
ford, of  which  he  liecame  fellow  in  1593.  He  was  ap- 
pointed keepcr  of  thc  Bodleian  Librari'^  at  its  fonndation 
in  1602,  and  aftcrwards  subdean  of  Wells,  and  rector  of 
Moogeham,  Kent.    He  died  in  1629.    Dr.  James,  it  is 


said,  was  one  of  the  most  leamed  critics  of  his  day.  His 
prindpal  works  are,  Bellum  Papale,  sine  corcordia  di^- 
cors  Sixti  V  ad  CUmenłis  VI I J,  circa  Ilieronymianam 
editionem,  etc  (Lond.  1600, 4to;  1841 ,  12mo) :— .4  Treatise 
ofthe  Cormpłion  of  Scriptitre,  Councils,  and  FatherSy  by 
the  PrelateSf  PattorSy  and  PUlars  ofthe  Church  ofPome 
for  Maintenance  of  Poperg  and  Irreligion  (Lond.  1612, 
4to ;  reprinted  1688, 1848).— Allibone,  Diet.  ofA  uthors,  i, 
952. 

James,  Thomas  (2),  a  minister  of  the  ^fethodist 
Episcopal  Church  South,  was  bom  in  I^Iadison  County, 
Tenn.,  October  19, 1882.  He  joined  the  Chuich  at  thir- 
teeu  years  of  age,  was  admitted  to  the  St.  Louis  Confei^ 
ence  in  1852,  and  appointed  to  Carthage  arcuit  He 
then  removed  first  to  Mount  Yemon  Circuit^  next  to  Os- 
ceola  Circuit,  then  to  Fredericktown,  and  finally  to 
Ozark  Circuit.  He  died  in  the  midst  of  thc  work  in 
the  fali  of  lSb7.—Afin.  Am,  Conf  Methodist  Episcopal 
Church  South,  ii,  14. 

Jameson,  Mrs.  Anna,  an  English  authoress,  de- 
seryes  our  notice  as  the  writer  of  a  series  of  works  on 
Christian  art  and  archseology  of  most  superior  order. 
She  was  bom  in  Dublin  May  19, 1797,  and  was  married 
in  1827  to  Mr.  Jameson,  a  barrister,  but  soon  after  sep- 
arated  from  her  husband,  and  dcvoted  herself  to  litera- 
turę. She  died  March  17, 1860.  Her  works  of  interest 
to  us  are,  Sacred  and  Legendary  A  ri  (Lond.  1848,  8yo) : 
—Ugends  ofthe  Monastic  Orders  {1850)  i^Legends  of 
the  Madonna  {I8b2):—Scnptural  and  Legendary  His» 
f^nf  ofour  Lordy  etc,  as  rtpresented  in  ChrUtian  Artt 
(1860). 

Jami  is  a  Turkish  name  for  the  temples  in  which 
worship  is  performed  on  Fridays  (the  worship  itaelf 
bearing  the  name  oi  Jema-namuzi),  it  being  unlawful  to 
use  the  leseer  temples  (mosąucs)  on  that  dsy.  The  flrst 
Jami,  called  Selalyn  (i.  e.  royal),  being  foundetl  by  a  sul« 
tan,  was  built  by  Orkhan  the  Second,  sułtan  ofthe  Turk?, 
who  began  his  reign  in  1826.— Broughton,  Lib.  Uist.  Sac, 
i,50L 

Jamleson,  Johk,  D.D.,  a  diyine  and  phtlologist, 
was  bom  at  GUsgow  March  8, 1759.  He  became  min* 
ister  of  the  Anti-Burgher  Secession  Church  in  Scotland, 
and  was  stationed  first  at  Forfar  (ui  1781),  and  aftcr^ 
wards  (1797)  for  forty-three  years  at  Edinbuiigh.  Ile 
died  in  1888.  His  principal  works  a:re,  A  Ymdication 
ofthe  Doctrines  ofScripture  and  ofthe  Primitire  Faith 
concermng  the  Deityof  Christ  (Edinb.  1794, 2  yuls.  6vo) : 
"  a  yery  able  and  leamed  reply  to  Priestly^s  histor}'  of 
early  opinions :" — A  u  A  larm  to  Briiain,  or  an  Jnguiry 
into  the  Causes  ofthe  rapid Progiess  oflnfdtliiy  (Pcrth, 
1795, 12mo)  i— Sermons  on  the  Heurt  (Edinb.  1789-90, 2 
vols.8vo): — The  Use  of  Sacred  IliMory^cotfa-ming  the 
Doctrine  of  Rerelation  (Edinb.  1802, 2  yols.  8vo) :— .4n 
f/istorical  Account  ofthe  ancient  Culdees  ofloua^  and  of 
their  Setłlement  in  England,  Scotland ^  and  I rdand  (Edir.b. 
1811,  4to),  etc.  His  reputation,  howerer,  rests  chicfly 
on  his  Efymological  Dictionary  ofthe  Scottish  Language 
(1808-1809),  of  which  he  published  an  abridgmcnt  in 
1818,  and  to  which  he  added  a  supplcment  in  1825.  See 
Darling,  Cyclop.  Bibliog.  s.  v. ;  Allibone,  Diet.  ofA  ufhorSf 

8.  V. 

Jaśmin  (Hebrew  lamin',  ']'^rj,  lit.  the  righł  hand, 
henoe  łuck,  as  often ;  i.  q.  Felix;  Sept  'laptip  and  la- 
fiivy  but  y.  r.  'In/t3(iv  in  1  Chroń,  ii,  27,  and  omits  in 
Neh.  yiii,  7),  the  name  of  three  men.  See  also  Benja- 
min. 

1.  The  second  named  of  the  sons  of  Simeon  (Gen. 
xlyi,  11;  Exod.  yi,  15;  Numb.  xxyi,  12;  1  Chroń,  iy, 
24).  KC.  1856.  His  descendants  were  called  Jamini 
ITES  (Heb.  Fosuiw',  '^3'^S'^,  Sept.  'la/iii/i,  Numb.  xxvi, 
12). 

2.  The  second  named  of  the  three  sons  of  Ram,  the 
foorth  in  descent  from  Judah  (1  Chroń,  ii,  26).  B.C. 
dr.  1658. 

3.  One  of  the  priests  that  interpreted  the  law  to  the 


JAMINITE 


768 


JANKES 


people  after  the  return  from  Babylon  (Neh.  viii,  7).  B. 
G  cif.  410. 

Ja^minite  (Nomb.  zxvi,  12).    See  Jamin,  1. 

Jamlech  (Heb.  Yamtek',  r^^  kingfy;  SepŁ  'A;ł- 
aXr}x  V.  r.  'Afxa\riKy  1ifŁo\óx't  Vulg.  JenUech),  a  chief- 
tain  (K*^b3)  of  the  tribe  of  Simeon,  apparently  one  of 
those  whosc  family  increased  ao  greatly  that  they  iiiraded 
the  valley  of  Godor  in  the  time  of  Hezekiah,  and  dis- 
poBsessed  the  Hamites  (1  Chroń,  iv,  34).    &C.  cir.  711. 

Jam^nia  Ciafipia  y.  r.  'la/jiviia),  a  Gnecized  or 
later  farm  of  the  name  of  the  city  Jabnebł  (q.T.)?  ^^^ 
in  the  Apocrypha  (1  Mace.  iV|  15 ;  v,  58 ;  x,  69 ;  xv,  40), 
and  Josephus  (^AnU  Yj  1,  22 ;  xiv,  4,  4 ;  War,  i,  7,  7). 

Jam^nite  (u  Łv  *lafŁvtia,  o  lafŁviTric\  an  inhabit- 
ant  of  Jamnia  (2  Mace  xii,  8, 9, 40)  or  jASitEEL  (q.  v.). 

Janduno.    Sec  John  of  jANDUNa 

Jane'way,  Jacob  J.,  D.D.,  a  Presbyterian  minis- 
ter of  some  notę,  was  bom  in  the  city  of  New- York  in 
1774,  and  graduated  at  Columbia  College  in  1794.  He 
joined  the  Presbyterians,  but  aiso  seryed  the  (Dutch) 
Reformed  Church  for  some  time  with  great  distinction. 
The  infirmities  of  age  obliged  him  to  retire  from  the 
pastorale,  and  he  resided  the  last  years  of  his  life  at 
New  Brunswick,  N.  J.,  where  he  died  in  1858.  Mr.  Jane- 
way  wrote  quitc  extensively.  His  most  important  con- 
tributions  are  commentaries  on  Romans,  Hebrewsy  and 
Acts  (Philadcl  8  rols.  18mo)  -^Intemal  Evidence  ofthe 
Hohf  Bibie ; — Retiero  o/Dr.  Schaff  on  ProtestantUm,  etc. 
See  (Pha.)  Presh,  Mag,  May,  1853. 

Janeway,  James,  an  English  divine,  was  born  in 
Hertfordshire,  and  educatcd  at  Christ  Church,  Oxford. 
In  1652  he  left  the  State  Church  and  set  up  a  dissenting 
oongregation  (Presbyterian)  at  Rotherhithe.  Ile  died 
in  1674.  Besides  a  life  of  his  brother  John  (q.  v.)  and 
his  sermons,  he  pubUshed  The  SaitWt  Encouraffement 
(1675, 8vo)  z—Token/or  Children  (1676, 8vo,  and  often) : 
•^llearen  npon  Earth  (1677,  8vo).  See  Allibone,  DicL 
o/AuthorSy  i,  954;  Hook,  Ecdea,  Biog,  vi,  276. 

Janeway,  John,  a  very  pious  and  promising 
young  man,  was  bom  at  Lilly,  Hertfordshire,  in  1633,  of 
religious  parents,  entered  Cambridge  at  serenteen,  and 
at  eightecn  was  converted,  in  part  by  means  of  Ikater^s 
Saint*  Rest,  He  now  glowed  for  the  salyation  of  souls, 
espccially  of  those  nearly  related  to  him ;  secret  prayer 
became  his  element  On  leaving  college,  his  father  be- 
ing  dead,  he  went  to  Uve  in  the  family  of  Dr.  Cox,  whcre 
his  health  sank  undcr  his  studics  and  laboni,  and  he  fin- 
ished  his  short  course  suddenly  in  June,  1657.  His  dy- 
ing  bed  was  a  scenę  of  triumph.->Middleton,  Works,  iii, 
862. 

Jangling,  yain  (jutTaio\oyia,frivolou8  or  empty 
talk). 

Janltdrdo,  persons  appointed  to  take  care  of  the 
doors  of  the  churches  in  time  of  divine  scrvice,  and  to 
make  a  distinction  between  the  faithful  and  the  cate- 
chumens,  and  excommunicaŁed  persons,  and  others  not 
entitled  to  admission.    See  Doortkeepeks. 

Janizariea  (Jeni^tsheriy  *'  new  soldiers"),  a  Turkish 
military  force  which  was  for  some  time  recmited  from 
Christian  prisoners  taken  by  the  Torks,  morę  especially 
during  the  Cntsadcs.  They  were  originated  by  the 
Osmanli  Emir  Orchan,  abont  1880,  of  young  Christian 
prisoners,  which,  after  having  been  distributed  among 
the  Turkish  husbandmen  m  Asia,  there  to  leam  the 
Turkish  language,  religion,  and  manners,  were  com- 
pelled  to  embracc  Mohammedanism.  This  treatment 
of  Christian  prisoners  sprang  from  the  Mohammedan 
doctrine  that  *"  all  children  at  their  birth  are  naturally 
disposcd  to  Islamism,"  and  they  reasoned  that,  by  en- 
forcing  the  conyersion  of  the  young  capdyes  to  the  true 
Ikith,  and  enrolling  them  in  the  ranks  of  the  army  of 
the  faithful,  they  were  serying  both  their  temporal  and 
etemal  interests.  But  after  a  time  the  recruiting  of 
the  Janizaries  was  aIso  undertakcn  among  the  Chris- 


tian Bubjecta  <tf  the  Mohammedans,  and  the  ex£catioo 
of  this  terrible  scheme  inspired  terror  and  conatemitioii 
among  the  vanquiBhed  Christian  populationa  of  Asia 
Minor,  Thraoe,  and  Anatolia,  where  the  new  tax  of 
ilesh  and  blood  on  families  seyered  tho  neaiest  aml 
dearest  ties.  For  a  period  of  300  years  it  waa  the  cuft- 
tom  to  raise  annually  for  this  bianch  of  the  Turkish 
army  no  less  than  1000  Christian  youths;  and  it  ja  esd- 
mated  by  Von  Hammer  that  no  less  than  500,000  yoong 
Christiana  were  thus  conyerted  inio  Mohammedan  Turk- 
ish soldiers  (compare  Creaay,  Hist,  Ottoman  Turks,  i,  21 
sq.).  In  the  second  half  of  the  17th  century  the  old 
system  of  (illing  the  ranks  of  the  Janizaries  exclusiTdy 
\vith  compulsory  conscripts  from  the  Christian  subjects 
of  the  Turk  was  flnally  abandoned,  as  the  many  priri- 
leges  which  these  aoltUers  enjoyed  as  body-guard  ofthe 
siUtan,  etc.,  induced  many  young  Turks  to  scek  admis- 
sion to  their  hoAy,  There  were  two  clasocs  of  Janiza- 
ries, one  regularly  oiganized,  dwelling  in  barradu  in 
Constantinople  and  a  f^w  other  towns,  and  whoee  nuin- 
ber  at  one  time  amounted  to  no  less  than  60,000,  af- 
terwards,  howeyer,  reduced  to  25,000;  and  the  other 
composed  of  irregular  troops,  called  Jamaks,  scattered 
throughout  all  the  towns  of  the  empire,  and  amounting 
in  number  to  300,000  or  400,000.  At  the  head  of  the 
whole  Janizary  force  was  the  Aga,  who  held  his  ap- 
pointment  for  life,  and  whose  power  was  almost  with- 
out  limit.  In  times  of  peace  they  acted  aa  a  police 
force ;  in  war  they  generally  formed  the  reseryc  of  the 
Turkish  army,  and  were  noted  for  the  wild  impetw«ty 
of  their  attack.  But  the  many  priyilegcs  which  were 
bestowed  on  them  soon  began  to  make  them  yery  unra- 
ly ;  and  their  history  abounds  in  couspirccics,  assasnna- 
tions  of  sultans,  yizicrs,  agas,  etc^  and  atrodties  of 
cyery  kind;  so  that^  by  degrees,  they  became  morę 
dangerous  to  the  country  than  any  foreign  enemieiL 
AttempŁs  to  reform  or  dissolye  them  were  always  on- 
successful,  till  sułtan  Mahmoud  II,  in  1826,  being  op- 
posed  in  some  of  his  measures  by  them  in  Constantino- 
ple, displayed  the  flag  of  the  Prophet,  and  succceded  in 
arousing  on  his  own  behalf  the  fanatical  zeal  of  other 
portions  of  his  troops.  Their  o^'n  aga  deserted  then^ 
they  were  defcated,  and  their  barracks  bumed,  when 
8000  of  them  perished  in  the  flames.  June  17, 18*26,  a 
prodamation  aimounced  the  Janizaries  foreycr  aboliah- 
ed.  Eyerywhere  in  the  empire  they  were  persecuted 
until  "  upwards  of  40,000  of  these  troops  were  anoihi- 
lated,  and  an  equal  number  driyen  into  exile.*'  See  Fm- 
zer  (the  Rey.  R.  W.),  Turkey,  A  ncietd  and  Modem  (Lon- 
don, 1854, 8vo),  p.  406 ;  Creasy,  Jlitt.  of  Ottoman  Titrk$, 
chieHy  founded  on  Ton  Hammer  (London,  1858, 3  voI& 
8vo),  YoL  ii;  Knolles,  Turkish  History,  i,  132  8q.;  Mad- 
den  (R.  R.),  Turkish  Empire  (Lond.  1862,  8yo),ch.  xiii; 
Macfarland,  Constantinople  in  1828. 

Janina  (lawa,  prób.  for  Heb.  MJ^,  yamah^fomr- 
ishing,  although  no  corresponding  name  occurs  in  the 
O.  T.),  the  father  of  Melchi  and  son  of  Joseph,  named 
as  the  sixth  in  ascent  from  Christ  on  his  mother^s  side 
(Lukę  iii,  24).  BwC.  cir.  200.  See  Gekralcwt  op 
Christ. 

Jannasaa.    See  Alexa!cdeb  Jakk^kus. 

Jan^nds  (law^c,  probably  of  Egyptian  etynology 
[see  below]).  Jannes  and  Jambres  are  tbought  to  bsTe 
been  two  of  the  Egyptian  raagidans  who  attempted  by 
their  enchantments  (0*^13^,  £xod.  rii,  22,  etc.;  or 
D*^I3nb,  Exod.  yił,  11,  secret  arłt)  to  counteract  the  in* 
iiuence  on  Pharaoh^s  mind  of  the  mirades  wrooght  by 
Moses  (see  Exod.  yii,  yiii).  Their  names  oocur  nowbere 
in  the  Hebrew  Scripturea,  and  only  once  in  the  Kew 
Testament  (2  Tim.  iii,  8),  where  Pani  says  no  moie  than 
that  they  '^withstood  Moses,"  and  that  their  foUy  in 
doing  so  became  manifest  (2  Tim.  iii,  8, 9).  He  beoune 
aoquainted  with  them,  most  probably,  from  an  andeot 
Jewish  tradition,  or,  as  Theodoret  expresBes  it,  ''iroD 
the  unwritten  teaching  of  the  Jews.**  They  an  fouid 
ireąuently  in  the  Talmudical  and  Babbinical  writii^^ 


JANNING 


769 


JANOAH 


bat  with  some  rariations.  Thus,  for  Jannes  we  meet 
with  Wnr,  •^Dn'ł%  ■'3Xn%  D^^1^  C^r.  Of  theee,  the 
bist  three  are  forma  of  the  Hebrew  "iSm*^,  which  haa  led 
to  the  supposition  that  *law!ic  is  a  contracted  form  of 
the  Greek  'Iiuawiyc*  Some  critics  (Pfeiffer,  Dub,  vex, 
i,  253)  consider  these  names  to  be  of  Egyptian  origin, 
and  in  that  caae  the  Jewish  writers  must  have  been 
misled  by  a  similarity  of  sound  to  adopt  the  forms 
abore  mentioned,  as  the  Mishna  {Sanhedr.  98,  b;  Chol. 
19,  a)  has  done  in  the  caae  of  other  unknown  proper 
nsmes  (Majua,  Obtereat,  sacr,  ii,  42).  For  Jambres  we 
find  e'»ia'a'',  Ol-^ari*^,  ^nn^a,  "^n^^,  and  in  the  Shal- 
sAeleth  Thikkabala  (xiii,  2)  the  two  names  are  given 
rs-^ir-^in-S^I  *^:X^^  i.  e.  Johannes  and  Ambrosiiis! 
The  Tan^m  of  Jonathan  inserts  them  in  £xod.  vii,  11. 
The  same  writer  alao  gives  as  a  reason  for  Pharaoh^s 
edict  for  the  destruction  of  the  Israelitish  małe  chiidren 
that  "  this  monarch  had  a  dream  in  which  the  land  of 
£|rypt  appeared  in  one  scalę  and  a  lamb  in  another; 
that  on  awakening  he  sought  for  its  interpretation  from 
his  wide  men;  whereapon  Jannes  and  Jambres  (0*^3*^ 
0^"ła'a^1)  said,  "A  son  is  to  be  bom  in  the  congrega- 
Uon  of  Israel  who  will  desolate  the  whole  land  of 
Egypt,"  Scveral  of  the  Jewish  writers  speak  of  Jannes 
and  Jambres  as  the  two  sons  of  Balaam  (Talmud,  Jal- 
hti  Bubeti,  lxxxi,  8),  and  assert  that  they  were  the 
Touths  (n*^*^??,  Auth.  Yersion  serrcmts)  who  went  with 
him  to  the  king  of  Moab  (Numb.  xxii,  22).  Arabian 
tradition  assigns  them  a  place  in  £g\i)tian  history  (see 
the  Adatic  Journal,  1843,  No.  7,  p.  78).  Their  graves 
were  located  in  Egypt  (Pallad.  Lautiac,  20).  The  Pyth- 
agorean  philosopher  Numenius  mentions  these  persons 
in  a  passage  presenred  by  Eusebius  {Pr<eparatio  £vang, 
ix,  8),  and  by  Origen  {c,  Cels,  iv,  p.  198,  ed.  Spencer) ; 
also  Pliny  (i7w/.  NcU.  xxx,  1),  and  apparently  Apuleius 
ApoL  p.  94).  The  Arabs  mention  the  names  of  several 
magicians  who  opposed  Moses;  among  them  is  nonę 
resembling  Jannes  and  Jambres  (Dllerbelot,  s.  v.  Moos- 
sa  Ben  Amran).  There  was  an  ancicnt  apocr^'phal 
writing  entitled  Jatmet  and  Mambres,  which  is  referred 
to  by  Origen  (♦»  Mott,  Comment,  §  117;  Opera-  v,  29), 
and  by  Ambrosiaster,  or  Hilary  the  Deacon :  it  was  con- 
demned  by  pope  Gelasius. — Ritto. 

Jannes  appears  to  be  a  transcription  of  the  Eg3rptian 
name  Aan,  probably  pronounccd  Jan.  It  was  the  no- 
men of  two  kings:  one  of  the  eieventh  dynasty,  the 
father  or  ancestor  of  Sescrtcsen  I  of  the  twelflh ;  the 
other,  according  to  our  iarrangemcnt,  fourth  or  fiflh  king 
of  the  fiflecnth  dynasty,  called  by  Manetho  'Idwac  or 
^aviac  (Josephus),  or  Żraai'  (Africanus).  See  Poole, 
Jlora  Algyptiacaj  p.  174  8q.  There  is  also  a  king  bear- 
ing  the  name  Annu,  whom  we  assign  to  the  second  dy- 
nasty {Ilor,  jEg,  p.  101).  The  significations  of  Aan  is 
doabtful:  the  cognate  word  Ailnt  means  a  valley  or 
plain.  The  earlier  king  Aiin  may  be  aasigned  to  the 
21st  century  B.C. ;  the  later  one  is  thought  to  have  been 
the  second  predcceasor  of  Joeeph*s  Pharaoh .  This  shows 
that  a  name  which  may  be  reasonably  supposed  to  be 
the  original  of  Jannes  was  in  use  at  or  near  the  period 
of  the  sojoum  in  Egypt.  The  names  of  the  ancieńt 
Egyptians  were  extrcmely  numerous,  and  very  fluctua- 
ting  in  use;  generally,  the  most  prevalcnt  at  any  time 
were  those  of  kings  then  reigning  or  not  loug  dead. — 
Smith. 

Sec  Wetatenii  Nov,  Test,  Grac,  ii,  862;  Buxtorf,  Lex, 
Talitu  Rahh.  coL  946 ;  Lightfoot'8  Sermon  on  Jcames  and 
Jambres  (in  Works,  vii,  89) ;  Erubhin,  or  MiscellameSj 
eh-  xxiv  (in  Works,  iv,  83) ;  Lardner*s  CredibtlUy,  pU  ii, 
eh.  xxxv  (in  Works,  vii,  381) ;  Fabric  Pseudepigr,  V,  T. 
i,  813 ;  Thilo,  Cod,  Apocryph,  i,  553 ;  the  diaaertations 
I>e  Jamte  et  Jarnbre  of  Zentgrav  (Argent,  1699) ;  Gro- 
tias  (Ilafn.  1707) ;  Michaelis  (HaL  1747) ;  and  Hermaim, 
/>e  pseudoihatunaturgio  Pharaonis  (Jen.  1745). 

TannlDg,  Conrad,  a  Dutch  theoiogian,  was  bom  at 
Groningen  Nov.  16, 1650.    He  received  his  early  edu- 

rv.— Ccc 


cation  from  his  unde,  J.  Tinga,  a  pastor  at  Groningen. 
As  his  parents  were  devoted  Komanists,  they  were  un« 
willing  to  have  him  educated  at  the  Protestant  univer- 
sity  of  his  native  city.  He  was  therefore  sent  to  a  Jes- 
uit  College  in  Westphalia,  and  afterwards  to  Antwerp. 
In  1679  he  was  associated  with  the  BoUandists  in  the 
gigantic  labor  of  preparing  the  Ada  Sanctorum,  In 
16i61  he  vi8ited  Romę,  where  he  completed  his  theolog- 
ical  studies,  and  was  consecrated  to  the  priesthood.  In 
Romę  and  throughout  Italy,  and  on  his  whole  route,  he 
collected  materials  for  the  above-named  work.  He  re- 
tumed  to  Antwerp  in  1686»  but  soon  madę  another  tour, 
visiting  dilTerent  parts  of  Germany  and  Bohemia  in 
quest  of  further  materials.  In  1697  he  again  went  to 
Romę,  and  rendered  important  ser\'ice  in  the  work  to 
which  his  life  was  devoted.  To  his  indefatigable  labors 
this  stupendous  task  is  under  very  great  obligations,  as 
thirteen  volumes  are  ascribed  to  his  pen.  Different 
judgments  may  be  formed  of  this  work.  Prof.  H.  Dc 
Groot,  of  the  Groningen  University,  a  man  of  eminent 
attainments  in  Church  History,  and  distinguished  by  his 
writings  in  this  department,'  thus  speaks  of  the  work 
of  the  BoUandists :  "  With  many  fables  and  worthlesa 
legends,  they  communicate  a  great  number  of  important 
biographies,  elucidated  generally  with  great  leaming, 
and  in  the  earlier  portions,  for  the  most  part,  also  with 
impartiality.  For  a  knowledge  of  Church  History  in 
the  primitive  times,  and,  above  all,  in  the  Middle  Ages, 
both  the  lives  and  the  elucidations  are  oflen  of  inesti- 
mable  value.**  Janniug  died  August  18, 1728.  See  & 
GUsius,  Godgeleerd  Nederland,  ii,  159  są.;  Geschiedenis 
der  Chrigłelijke  Kerk,  door  Profs.  De  Groot,  Ter  Haar, 
Kist,  Moll,  etc.,  v,  34.     (J.  P.  W.) 

Jano'lkh  (Heb.  Tano'Sch,  ntij,  rest;  2  Kings  xv, 
29 ;  Sept  'Avwx  v.  r.  'Iavi!tx ;  but  in  Josh.  xvi,  6, 7  with 
rt  local,  Yano'chah,  Hnńaj;",  to  Janoah ;  Sept,  'lavux^ 
V.  r.  'lapiaKd  and  'lavw,  or  even  'Max(^;  Vulg.  Janoe; 
A.  y. "  Janohah"),  the  name  probably  of  two  places. 

1.  A  town  on  the  N.E.  border  of  Ephraim  (see  Keil 
and  Delitzsch,  Comment.  on  Joshua,  etc.,  p.  177,  Clarke*8 
ed.),  and  conseąuently  in  or  near  the  Jordan  valley  (Josh. 
xvi,  6, 7).  Euseb.  and  Jerome  state  that  in  their  time 
it  was  still  a  WUage  in  the  district  of  Acrabatine,  twelve 
miles  east  of  Neapolis,  the  ancient  Sichem  (Onomastieon 
8.  V.  'lavw,  Janon).  About  three  and  a  half  hours  (12 
miles)  east  by  south  of  Nablus  stands  the  little  vi]lage 
of  yafit2n,  situated  in  a  vale  which  descends  the  eastem 
slope  of  the  mountains  of  Ephraim  to  the  Jordan.  The 
village  is  now  mostly  in  ruins,  but  it  has  a  few  housea 
inhabited,  and  its  ancient  reroains  "  are  extensive  and 
interesting.  Entire  houses  and  walls  are  still  exi8ting, 
but  covercd  with  immense  heaps  of  earth  and  mbbish. 
The  dwellings  of  the  present  inhabitants  are  built  upon 
and  between  the  dwellings  of  the  ancient  Janohah**  (Van 
de  Yelde,  Trarels,  ii,  808).  Janohah  being  situated  on 
the  side  of  the  mountain  rangę,  the  border  "  went  down" 
to  Ataroth,  which  lay  in  the  valley  of  the  Jordan.' 
About  a  mile  up  the  vale  of  Janohah  is  a  little  fountain, 
and  on  a  bill  above  it  the  prostrate  rains  of  another  an- 
cient town  which  is  now  called  Kkirbet  Yamn  ("mined 
Yanun")  (Robinson,  B,  R,  iii,  297).— Kitto. 

2.  A  town  of  Northern  Palestine,  situated  apparently 
between  Abel-beth-Maachah  and  Kedesh,  and  within 
the  boundaries  of  Naphtali.  It  was  taken,  with  8everal 
other  cities,  on  the  first  invasion  of  Palestine  by  Tiglath- 
Pileser,  king  of  Assyria  (2  Kings  xv,  29).  It  is  mention- 
ed  by  Eusebius  and  Jerome,  bnt  they  strangely  con- 
found  itwith  Janohah,  a  town  of  Ephraim  {Onomastieon, 
s.  V.  Janon),  and  m  this  they  are  foUowed  by  Reland 
{Palcestina,  p.  826),  Gesenius  (  Thesaurus,  a  v.),*  Schwarz 
Palest,  p.  147),  and  others.  The  modem  village  of  //«- 
nin,  which  stands  on  the  brow  of  a  mountain  between 
Abel  and  Kedesh,  and  which  contains  the  mas8ive  ruins 
of  a  large  and  strong  casŁle,would  answer  to  the  situa- 
tion,  and  the  names  have  some  slight  radical  affinity. 
For  a  description  of  Huntn,  see  Porter,  UcavSlbookfot 


JANOHAH 


110 


JANSEN 


Syria  and  Pakstmej  p.  444.— Kitto,  a  y.  A  rmn  callcd 
Yanuhj  on  a  hill  S.W.  of  HaddaU  (Robinwm,  Lafer  Re- 
tearcheSf  p.68),  seems  by  its  name  to  haye  morę  corre- 
spondence  to  Janoah  than  Hunnln ;  but  it  lies  in  the 
centro  of  Gentile  Galilee,  and  TiglAth-Pile8er's  march 
seems  rather  to  haye  foUowed  the  hills  along  the  Huleh 
plaim— Van  de  Y elde,  Memoir,  p.  824. 

Jano'ha]l  (Josh.  xyi,  6, 7).    See  Janoah,  1. 

JanO'W,  Matthias  ton,  one  of  the  most  celebrated 
refonnera  before  the  Befonnation,  and  one  of  the  three 
distinguished  forenmnere  of  Huss  [see  Waij>hauser 
and  Milicz], on  whose  teachings  in  Łheir  day,  morę  than 
on  all  the  tcrritorial  aggrałidizements  of  the  German 
empire,  the  most  important  results  of  the  latter  half  of 
the  14th  century  were  staked  (Gillett,  Husa^  i,  87),  was 
the  son  of  a  Bohemian  knight  Of  the  eariy  history  of 
Matthias  we  know  but  yery  little.  He  was  educated  at 
the  Uni yersity  of  Prague,  where  he  was  a  zealous  disciple 
of  Milicz  (q.  y.),  and  he  is  oflen  called  Magitter  Pariń- 
ensiSyhecauae  he  spent  ax  years  at  the  Uniyersity  of  Par- 
is,  and  obtained  his  ma8ter*s  degree  there.  He  trayelled 
extensiyely,  and  no  doubt  had  attained  great  popolarity 
as  a  scholar  and  divine  when  quite  young.  He  was 
ambitious  to  secare  some  prominent  position,  and  suc- 
oeeded,  on  a  yisit  to  Romę  in  1380,  in  obtaining  the  ap- 
pointment  of  prebendaty  at  Pragnę,  and  confessor  of 
Charles  lY.  He  entered  npon  the  daties  of  this  offlce 
Oct.  12,  1881,  and  oontinued  therein  until  bis  death, 
Noy.  80, 1394.  Itfatthias  of  Janów  does  not  seem  to 
haye  been  a  yery  eloąuent  preacher,  but  hc  was  certain- 
ly  a  man  of  yery  eamest  and  deep  piety,  zealous  for  hb 
Master*s  cause,  anxious  to  purify  the  Ćhurch  from  the 
eyils  and  corruptions  which  then  threatened  the  extir- 
pation  of  all  religious  feeling ;  and  howeyer  smali  may 
have  been  his  influence  in  the  pulpit, "  it  was  morę 
than  oompensated  by  the  influence  which  he  exerted 
through  his  writings,  and  by  his  scientiflc  expo8ition  of 
princtples.  In  his  works  we  may  flnd  not  only  the  rc- 
formatory  ideas  which  passed  over  from  him  to  Huss, 
but  also  the  incipient  germ  of  those  Christian  principles 
which  at  a  later  period  were  unfolded  in  Germany  by 
Łuther,  although  the  latter  neyer  came  under  the  influ- 
ence of  Matthias  of  Janów"  (Neander,  Ck,  ffisł.  y,  192). 
In  his  earlier  period  of  life,  disgusted  with  that  spiritual 
pride  and  conterapt  of  the  laity  which  charactcrized  the 
priests  in  the  14th  and  15th  centuries,  he  was  impressed 
by  Milicz*s  ideas  of  the  uniyersal  priesthood  of  all  Chris- 
tians,  morę  especially  after  he  had  been  placed  in  the 
confeasional,  where  he  had  great  opportunity  to  inform 
himself  morę  minutely  of  the  good  or  bad  m  all  classes 
of  society,  and  of  the  religious  wants  of  the  peoplc.  This 
raay  be  clearly  seen  not  only  from  his  own  narration  of 
the  cbange  which  he  experienced  (see  Neander,  Ch.  UisL 
V,  194  sq.;  Gillett,  Husa,  i,  28  sq.),  but  also  from  his 
writings,  collected  under  the  title  of  De  regulis  Yelerig 
et  Novi  TeatamerUi,  of  which,  unfortunately,  the  greater 
part  still  reinains  in  MS.  form  (for  extract8,  see  Jor- 
dan, YorłSufer  d  fluaitenikuma  in  Bohmm  [Lpz.  1846]). 
Pressel,  in  Herzog  (a.  v.),  says  that  the  work  might 
morę  appropriately  haye  been  entitled  Tngułriea  concem- 
wg  true  and  fałat  Christianity.  ♦*  It  is  chiefly  taken  up 
with  refledions  on  the  history  of  the  times,  and  hints 
conoeming  the  futurę,  based  on  the  rules  of  the  Old  and 
New  Testaments,  on  the  prophetical  elements  which 
they  eontain.  Although  there  is  a  great  deal  in  the  de- 
tails  which  is  arbitrary,  particularly  in  the  apocalyptic 
calcuhttions,  yet  grand  prophetic  glanccs  into  the  futurę 
are  also  to  be  found.  He  portra3rs  the  utter  corruption 
of  the  Chnrch  in  all  its  parts,  and  explains  the  caiises 
of  Łt^  (Neander).  The  main  object  of  the  work,  how- 
feyer,  was  the  rejection  of  the  authority  of  human  tradi- 
tions  and  popish  decretals,  and  the  substitution  in  their 
stead  of  the  supremę  authority  of  the  diyine  Word. 
He  tries  eyeiything  by  this  test  The  conduct  of  the 
bishops  and  the  priests  is  seyerely  arraigncd.  The 
antichristi  he  asserts,  haa  already  come.    He  is  nei- 


ther  Jew,  Pagan,  Saraoen,  nor  worldly  tjmnt  pernea- 
ting  Christendom,  but  the  man  who  opposes  Chiiatim 
truth  and  the  Christian  life  in  the  way  of  deoepdon; 
he  is  and  will  be  the  most  wicked  Chrisdan,  falsely 
styUng  himself  by  that  name,  aasuming  the  higbest  eta- 
tion  in  the  Church,  and  poasessing  the  highest  caiuider- 
ation,  arrogating  dominion  oyer  all  ecdesiastica  and  lay- 
men ;  one  who,  by  the  working  of  Saun,  knows  bow  to 
make  subsenrient  to  his  own  ends  and  to  his  own  «iU 
the  corporations  of  the  rich  and  wise  in  the  entiie 
Church;  one  who  has  the  preponderance  in  hooon  and 
in  riches,  but  who  especially  misapproprijitea  the  goods 
of  Christ,  the  Holy  Scriptures,  the  sacraments,  and  all 
that  bdongs  to  the  hopes  of  religion,  to  his  own  ag- 
grandizement  and  to  the  gratiflcation  of  his  own  pas^ 
sions;  deceitAiUy 'peryertuig  spiritual  things  to  carnal 
ends,  and  in  a  crai^  aud  subtle  manner  employing  what 
was  designed  for  the  sałyation  of  a  Christian  pec^Ie,  as 
means  to  lead  them  astray  from  the  truth  and  power  of 
Christ  (Neander,  y,  196  8q. ;  Gillett,  p.  80  sq.>.  It  is  ap- 
parent,from  the  tenor  of  Janow*s  n-ritings,  that  he  took 
higher  gronnd  than  the  other  Hossice  foreruiuierCfWałd- 
hausen  and  MUicz — ^the  earliest  Bohemian  leforaiers— 
and  that  he  was,  in  truth,  the  Wickliffe  of  the  Boheoi- 
an  Church.  The  efforts  of  his  predecessorB  were  aimidr 
toward  a  reform  in  roorals  and  in  doctrine,  but  the  ef- 
forts of  Janów  were  directed  to  a  refoimation  of  ihe  cor- 
rupt  Latin  system,  with  a  yiew  to  remoye  whoDy  the 
yoke  of  that  system.  He  stroye  not  simply  to  derate 
the  morał  and  religious  condition  of  the  piiest  and  the 
layman,  but  demanded  alike  priyileges  for  both.  Noc 
to  the  priesthood  only,  but  to  the  laity  also  bekufied 
the  communion  of  both  kinds ;  not  to  the  popes  onk, 
who  had  haughtily  exalted  themselyes,  bdonged  the 
ńght  to  goyem,  but  all  bishops  should  share  the  sinw 
priyileges;  in  short,  his  idea  was  that  the  organism  of 
the  Church  is  one  in  which  all  the  members  sboukl  be 
connected  according  to  their  seyeral  ranka,  and  co*oper- 
ate  together  like  the  head  and  members  in  the  humaa 
body  (comp.  Beichel,  See  ofRome  in  the  Middk  Aga,'^ 
600).  We  nccd  not  wonder  that  Janów,  although  he 
did  not  Buffer  the  punishment  of  a  heretic,  was  noc  fcng 
permitted  to  cast  abroad  seeds  which  must  rcsult  in  the 
oycrthrow  of  the  papai  hierarchy,  and  the  remoyal  of 
many  sdnong  barriers  which  protected  the  priesthood  in 
these  da}^  of  darkness  and  of  sin.  Haying  uiged  upon 
the  emperor  the  need  of  a  ooundl,  the  pope  dedued 
Janów  guilty  of  disseminating  heretical  opinions,  and 
he  was  obliged  to  leaye  Prague.  It  is  said  that  he  rt- 
canted  in  1389  before  the  Synod  of  Prague,  which  had 
arraigned  him,  but  it  is  eyident  from  his  writings  that 
he  neyer  changed  his  opmions.  for  one  of  his  last  deds- 
rations  was,  **  All  that  remains  for  us  is  to  desiie  a  ref- 
ormation  by  the  oyerthrow  of  the  antichrist  himself,  to 
lifl  up  our  hcads  and  see  our  redemption  near."  Six- 
teen  years  ailer  his  death  (1410),  his  writings,  it  is  gen- 
erally  admitted,  were  committed  to  the  flames,  together 
with  those  of  Wickliffe.  See  Palacky,  Geachickte  ten 
Bohmm,  III,  i,  178  sq.;  Neander,  Church  Iłistory,  t, 
192  sq.;  Gillett,  I/uaa  and  hia  Tmtea,  i,  26  sq.  (J.E 
W.) 

Janaen  or  Jansenius,  Comelius  (l),  a  disdn- 
guished  Belgian  theologian,  was  born  at  Hulśt  in  1510. 
He  studied  theology  at  the  Unirersity  of  Lourain,sfid 
acąuired  at  the  same  time  a  thorough  knowledge  of 
Greek  and  Hebrew.  In  1588  he  went  to  Tongeiioo  is 
professor  of  theology,  and  became  successiyely  cunte  of 
St.  Martin  at  Courtray  in  1550,  dean  of  the  theokigical 
faculty  of  Louyain  in  1562,  and  M'as  soon  after  sent  by 
Philip  II  to  the  Council  of  Trent  On  his  return  to  the 
Netherlands  he  was  madę  bishop  of  Ghcnt  in  1568.  He 
died  April  10,  1576.  Hb  works  on  Scripture  enjojed 
great  reputation.  He  wrote  Concordia  Etangdica  tt 
ejiudem  Concordia  rałio  (Louyain,  1549,  8yo)  '.^Paro' 
phraaia  in  omnea  Paalmoa  Daridicoa  (Lour.  18*9, 4to). 
— Commentariiin  Concordiam  ac  łołam  Historiom  Etan* 
gdicam  (Lom^ain,  1572, 1577,  and  1617,  foL;  Lyon,  1597 


JANSEN 


771 


JANSEN 


and  1606^  folio;  often  reprinted  at  Antwerp  and  Yenice 
[this  is  his  chief  work])  : — Atmotationes  in  librum  Sa- 
pientia  Sahmonis  (Antwerp,  1589, 4to) : — Commentarii 
in  ProrerHa  Salomonu  et  JCccletiasHoam,  etc  See  Si- 
monis,  Orałio  mfuttere  JansenU ;  Gallia  Christiana  (vol. 
vi)  ;  Sander,  De  iltustribus  GawKa ;  Genebraidus,  Chroń- 
icon;  Foppens,  BibL  Bdgiea;  Minoiu,  De  Scripłoribus 
Saculi  xvi ;  Pope-Blount,  Censura  A  iŁłorum  ;  Fabiicius, 
Nisł.  BibUoth.—HoefeT,  Noutf^le  Biog.  Genirale,  xxvi, 
ał4.     (J.N.P.) 

Jan8en(iaB)  Comelius  (2),  a  celebrated  Dutch 
divine  and  founder  of  tbe  Jansenists,  bom  at  Accoy, 
near  Leerdam,  in  Northern  Holland,  Oct.28. 1585,  was  a 
nephew  of  the  above  Comelius  Jansen,  the  Bp.  of  Ghent 
He  rec8ived  his  early  edacation  at  Utrecht,  and  in  1602 
enteied  the  iiniver8ity  at  Louvaiii  as  a  student  of  phi- 
loflophy  and  theology.  While  at  this  high-school  he 
seems  to  have  formed  an  acąuaintance  with  the  French- 
man,  Jean  Baptiste  Duvergier  (q.  v.)  de  Haunume,  gen- 
erally  known  by  the  name  of  Su  Cyran.  ^  Both  he  (i.  e. 
Cyran)  and  Janaenius  were  there  brought  into  oontact 
with  8ome  who  in  secret  cherished  the  doctńnes  of  grace 
although  in  the  commanion  of  Romę,  and  thus  they  re- 
oeived  many  principles  of  truth  utterly  opposed  to  those 
ordinańly  hekl  iu  the  Chnrch.  There  also  they  both 
saw  and  felt  the  evil  workings  of  the  Jesuits ;  they 
marked  the  inroads  which  that  system  was  making  on 
all  doctrinal  truth  and  practical  rooiality."  Bat  Jan- 
seiiiu5's  severe  industry  brought  on  sickneas,  and  he  was 
obliged  to  quit  the  university,  and  for  a  time  the  two 
bosom-friends  were  separated.  Advised  to  aeek  a  change 
of  air,  he  undertook  a  joumey  through  France,  and  flnal- 
ly  stopped  at  Paris  to  prosecute  his  studies  anew.  Again 
the  two  friends  met,  and  together  they  removed  to  Ba- 
yonne,  and  speut  another  series  of  years  in  eamest 
study  and  meditatlon,  particularly  on  the  writings  of  the 
Church  fathers,  of  whom  Augustine  became  their  spe- 
ciał  favorite.  So  interested  became  Jansenius  in  the 
writings  of  Augustine,  that  from  henceforth  he  deter- 
mined  to  make  ithis  life-business  to  arrange  andmethod- 
ize  eveiythłng  in  the  productions  of  this  Church  father 
treating  on  the  subjects  of  the  grace  of  God,  the  condl- 
tion  of  man  as  fallen,  free-will  and  human  impotence, 
original  sin,  election,  efficacious  grace,  faith,  and  other 
points  of  like  importance,  with  a  view  to  a  reformatory 
movement  in  the  Church  to  which  he  belonged,  by  com- 
bating  the  incrcasing  Pelagianism  of  the  Jesuits.  In 
1617  the  two  friends  again  parted,  Jansenius  retuming 
to  Loavain  to  obtain  the  doctorate  and  to  assume  the  du- 
ties  of  an  extraordinary  professorship  in  the  univer8ity. 
In  a  controversy  which  ensued  between  this  high-achool 
and  the  Jesuits  Jansenius  greatly  distinguishcd  himself, 
and  was  twice  sent  to  Spain  (1624  and  1625)  in  the  in- 
terest  of  the  univerBity,  Holland  being,  at  that  time,  de- 
pendent on  Spain.  In  1621,  Jansenius  and  C3nran,  who 
had  beoome  convinced  of  the  neoessity  of  a  reform  with- 
iii  the  pale  of  the  Roman  Catholic  communion,  met  again 
at  Louvain  with  a  view  to  bringing  about  such  a 
change.  They  dirided  the  work  among  them8elve8, 
Jansenius  taking  the  fidd  of  doctrine,  Duvei^er  that  of 
organization  and  life.  At  the  same  time,  they  entered 
into  intiroate  oonnections  with  distinguished  priests  in 
Ireland  and  with  some  of  the  leaders  of  the  Congregation 
of  the  Oratory  (q.  v.).  The  Spanish  Inąuisit  ion  seems 
to  iuive  had  wind  of  this  great  and  daring  undertaking 
of  the  two  noble  spirits,  and  whcn,  in  1680,  Jansenius  was 
nominated  for  the  regular  professorship  of  sacred  litera- 
turę at  Loavain,  a  great  eflfort  was  madę  to  prevent  the 
appointmenL  But  Jansenius  was  madę  the  recipient  of 
this  honorable  distinction  in  spite  of  the  Jesuits  and  the 
"  Holy  Office."  He  further  secured  the  favor  of  the 
Spanish  court  by  his  opposition  to  France  and  its  alli- 
ances  with  Protestant  powers,  to  which  course  he  seems 
to  have  been  mainly  incited  by  the  tardiness  of  Riche- 
Keu  to  enter  into  an  alUance  with  Jansenius  and  Duver- 
gier  in  the  intended  reformatory  movement.  He  se- 
rerely  attacked  the  pretensions  of  France»  which  at  this 


time,  by  her  attittide,was  threatening  the  Spanish  prov- 
inces  of  the  Netherlands,  in  a  work  entitled  Mars  Gai- 
Ucus,  the  publication  of  which  occasioned  the  imprison- 
ment  of  Duvergier,  who  was  known  to  have  been  in  eon- 
sUnt  epistolary  intercourse  with  Jansenius,  while  to  the 
latter  it  secured  the  see  of  Ypres  (1686).  In  this  city 
he  died  of  the  plague  May  6, 1688,  just  as  he  had  flnish- 
ed  his  A  ugustiaus,  a  work  embodying  the  result  of  22 
years*  study  of  the  writings  of  St.  Augustine,  and  which, 
according  to  his  own  statement,  he  had  read,  pen  in 
hand,  at  least  ten  times,  and  the  portions  relating  to  sin 
and  grace  no  less  than  thirty  times,  determined  to  ex- 
hibit,  expound,  and  illustrate,  not  his  own  view8,  but  the 
exact  views  of  the  celebrated  Church  father  (compare 
A  ugustinuSf  ii,  Prooem.  xxix,  65). 

Jansenius  was  a  leamed  theologian,  but  a  plain,  retir- 
ing  man,  who  spent  most  of  his  life  in  his  study,  and  was 
hardly  known  in  his  day  beyond  the  immecUate  drcle 
surrounding  him.  It  is  thought  likely  that  the  impulse 
oommunicated  by  Baius  (q.  v.)  to  the  achool  of  Louvain 
raay  have  influenced  Jansenius  in  giving  this  directton 
to  his  studies,  as  Comelius  Jansen,  the  bishop  of  Ghent, 
who  was  one  of  the  instructors  ofour  Jansen  at  Louvain, 
was  himself  a  pupil  of  Baius,  and  that  through  him  he 
had  imbibed  a  strong  dislike  to  the  lax  views  of  theolo* 
gy  and  morality  advocated  by  the  Jesuits.  Jansenius 
took  the  ground,  in  opposing  the  Jesuits,  that  life  stands 
in  the  dosest  relation  to  practical  doctrinal  precepts. 
He  thought  it  impossible  to  attain  trae  spiritual  and 
Christian  life  without  the  fullest  faith  in  this  doctrine, 
which  alone  inculcates  trae  humility.  On  the  ground 
that  pride  was  the  cause  of  the  fali,  he  sought  to  de- 
stroy  all  feeling  of  indiridual  power,  giving  up  human 
free  agency  to  divine  grace,  and  declaring  human  naturę 
to  be  thoroughły  corrapt,  and  unable  by  itself  to  do  any 
good.  While  he  believed  these  to  have  been  the  doc- 
trines  of  Augustine  himself,  yet,  as  an  obedient  son 
of  the  Church  of  Romę,  which,  while  he  was  anxious  to 
purge  her  from  the  Pelagianism  of  the  Jesuits,  he  dearly 
loved,  he  in  his  will,  written  half  an  hour  before  his 
death,  said  of  his  yet  unpublished  A  ugustinus^  "  I  feel 
that  it  would  be  difficult  to  make  any  changes  in  it : 
yet,  should  the  Holy  See  require  such,  remember  that  I 
am  an  obedient  son,  and  willing  to  submit  to  the  Church 
in  which  I  have  lived  till  death."  He  willed  the  MS.  to 
Lamę,  Fromond,  and  Calenus,  who  published  it  undcr 
the  title  A  uguftinus  .  . .  seu  (hdrina  sancH  A  ugitstim  de 
hunumce  natura  scmctitate,  <effriłudinej  medicinOj  adcersus 
Pflagianos  et  Massilienses  (Louvain,  1640,  folio). 

The  Auffusiinus  is  divided  into  three  parta.  In  the 
first  Jansenius  gives  a  bistorical  account  of  Pelagianism, 
which  heresy  exalted  the  power  of  free-agency,  and  dc- 
nied  the  original  depravity  of  human  naturę,  and,  conse- 
quently,  original  sin.  In  the  seoond  part  the  writer  sets 
forth  the  views  of  St.  Augustine  on  human  naturę,  both 
in  its  State  of  primitive  purity  and  in  its  state  of  degra- 
dation  after  the  fali.  In  the  third  part,  finally,  he  pre- 
sents  the  ideas  of  St.  Augustine  touching  grace,  by  which 
Christ  redeems  us  from  our  fallen  state,  also  the  pre- 
destination  of  men  and  angels.  The  fundamental  propo- 
sition  of  the  work  is  that,  "  sińce  the  fali  of  Adam,  free- 
agency  exists  no  longcr  in  man,  pure  works  are  a  merę 
gratuitous  gift  of  God,  and  the  predestination  of  the  elect 
is  not  an  effect  of  his  prescience  of  our  works,  but  of  his 
free  volition."  This,  it  will  be  perceived,  is  a  dose  re- 
production  of  the  riews  presented  by  Calvin  in  the  pre- 
ceding  century.  Such  principles  were,  of  course,  in  di- 
rect  opposition  with  those  advocated  in  Spain  and  Hol- 
land by  the  Jesuits  Molina  and  Lessius,  who  wished  to 
conciliate  the  doctrine  of  salvation  by  grace  with  a  cer- 
tain  amount  of  human  free-agency.  Jansenius,  besides, 
had  personally  incurred  the  hatrecl  of  the  "  Order  of  Je- 
sus" by  causing  the  Jesuits  to  be  excluded  as  professors 
from  the  Uniyersity  of  Louvain ;  and,  though  the  work 
had  failed  to  exdte  much  attention,  the  Jesuits  were 
determined  now  to  be  rerenged  on  their  enemy.  The 
Auffustinus  thus  became  the  occasloa  of  a  theotogical 


JANSEN 


Vł2 


JANSEN 


controverey  by  far  the  most  important  in  its  clootńnal, 
sodal,  and  even  political  results  which  bas  agitated  the 
Roman  Catbolic  Cburch  sińce  the  great  Reformation  of 
the  16th  century.  The  whole  weight  of  the  order  of 
the  Jesuits  haying  been  brought  into  play  to  cause  the 
oondemnation  of  the  work  at  Romę,  it  was  accordingly 
and  speedily  done  by  pope  Urban  YIII,  in  his  buli  In  em- 
inenii,  March  6, 1642.  "  So  decisiyc  a  point  would  not 
have  been  gained  by  the  Jesuits  had  they  not  succeeded 
in  directing  the  attention  of  the  papai  oourt  to  a  passage 
in  which  Jansenius  brought  forwaid  a  statement  of  St. 
Augustine  as  authoritatire,  although  the  same  point 
(without  referenoe,  of  coiitse,  to  that  father)  had  been 
condemned  at  Borne.  This  toaa  an  mroad  on  papai  i»- 
fallibility^ and tkia coMsed the rejection o/the work"  But 
if  the  book  of  Jansenius  had  failed  to  excite  much  at- 
tention, the  iasiung  of  a  bidl  against  its  use,  and  all  this 
at  the  instigation  of  the  Jesuits,  proToked  no  littie  in- 
terest.  Especially  strong  was  the  opposition  against 
the  buli  in  Belgium  and  in  France,  and  many  were  the 
partisans  thus  secured  for  the  Augmtmmy  a  number  of 
whom— perhaps  eyen  the  most— were  animated,  in  all 
likelihood,  less  by  doctrinal  predilection  than  by  an  au- 
tipathy  to  the  laxity  of  the  raoral  teachings  of  the  Jes- 
uits, with  which  the  opposition  to  the  Augustimu  was, 
of  course,  always  identified.  The  very  strongest  of  the 
partisans  of  the  Augustimu  were  the  recluses  of  Port- 
Boyal  (q.  v.),  a  celebrated  association  of  scholars  and  di- 
yines,  among  whom  iigureiTsome  of  the  brightest  names 
in  the  Church  of  France  of  the  17th  centur>%  One  of 
these,  Antoine  Araauld  (q.  \\\  m  1643  publlshed  his  De 
la  freguenłe  Communion,  based  on  the  predestination 
doctrine  of  Augustine  and  Jansenius,  and  thereby  heap- 
ed  morę  live  coals  on  the  heads  of  the  now  already  much- 
distracted  Jesuits.  £ven  the  Dominicans  in  different 
countries  divided  in  opinion,  those  of  Spain  and  Italy 
enlisting  on  the  side  of  the  Jansenists  (as  the  adyocates 
of  the  A  ugusłimu  came  by  this  time  to  be  called),  those 
of  France  sidiiig  with  the  Jesuits.  £ven  the  Sorbonne, 
of  whom  Amauld  was  a  member,  was  divided ;  and, 
afler  an  eamest  strife  between  the  contending  parties 
had  waged  in  France  for  some  time,  both  decided  in  1651 
to  carry  it  to  Romę,  and  plead  their  cause  before  the  in- 
faUible  (!)  judge.  In  1649,  Comet  Syndic,  of  the  theo- 
logical  faculty  at  Paris,  at  the  instigations  of  the  Jesu- 
its, had  drawn  up,  in  connection  with  some  of  them,  five 
propositions,  and  had  submitted  them  to  the  Sorbonne 
08  forming  the  substance  of  Jansenius^s  work.  These 
the  Jesuits  now  presented  at  Romc,  satisiied  that  if  they 
could  only  once  obtain  the  condemnadon  of  these  as 
hcrctical,  the  fali  of  Jansenism  was  of  course  secured. 
On  May  81, 1653,  the  Jesuits  finally  secured  their  end, 
and  Innocent  X,  in  his  buli  Cum  occasione^  at  the  insti- 
gation of  his  cardinal  Chtgi,  condemned  the  five  propo- 
sitions, which  had  been  ^  mostly  couched  in  somewhat 
ambiguous  language,  so  as  to  admit  of  very  differcnt 
explanations,'^  the  object  of  the  Jesuits  being  ^  to  pro- 
cure  their  condcmnatlon  in  any  sense  or  in  any  form." 
They  are  as  follows :  (1.)  That  there  are  dirine  com- 
mands  which  rirtuous  and  pious  persons,  though  they 
would  gladly  perform  the  same,  cannot  possibly  obey, 
because  God  has  not  given  them  that  measure  of  grace 
which  is  absolutely  necesaary  to  enablc  them  to  render 
8uch  obedience.  (2.)  That  no  one  in  this  depraved  state 
of  naturę  can  resist  the  influence  of  dirine  grace  when  it 
operates  on  the  heart  (3.)  That,  in  order  to  make  the 
lactions  of  men  meritorious,  it  is  not  necessary  that  they 
be  free  from  necessity,  but  only  from  restraint.  (4.) 
That  the  scmi-Pelagians  greatly  crr  when  they  afiirm 
that  the  will  of  man  has  power  to  receive  or  to  re»ist  the 
influence  of  prerenient  grace.  (5.)  That  they  are  semi- 
Pelagians  who  assert  that  Jesus  Christ,  by  his  passion 
and  death,  madę  an  atoncment  for  the  sins  of  all  men. 
The  pope  pronounccd  the  tirst  and  the  last  proposition 
presumptuons,  impious,  and  blasphemous,  but  the  other 
three  simply  heretical.  The  fricnds  and  adherenta  of 
Jansenius  admitted  the  propriety  and  justice  of  cou- 


demning  these  propońtiona,  but  maintamed  that  tliey 
were  not  found  in  the  work  of  Jansenius. 

France  was  at  this  time  at  enmity  with  Romę,  and 
cardinal  Mazarin,  though  bot  littie  interested  in  these 
theological  ąuestions,  beliered  this  a  favorable  opporto- 
nity  to  re-establish  amicable  relations  with  Romę,  of- 
fended  with  him  on  account  of  his  anrest  of  cardinal 
Retz  (q.  V.).  He  held  an  aasemhly  at  the  Lourre, 
March  26, 1654,  in  which  thirty-eight  bishops  took  psit, 
and  which  declared  that  the  pope^s  decision  should  be 
oonsidered  as  applying  poeitirely  to  Janscnins^s  doc- 
trine, and  that  all  who  held  in  any  way  the  five  con- 
demned propositions  should  be  dealt  with  aa  heretics. 
This  decision  was  communicatcd  to  the  heada  of  all  the 
dioceses  throughout  France,  and  approyed  by  the  pope 
September  29.  In  January,  1656,  the  Sorbonne  abo 
took  direct  action  against  the  Jansenists  by  condemn- 
ing  two  leturs  of  Amaidd,  in  which  the  lattcr  dcdared 
that  he  could  not  find  the  ftye  condemned  propositions 
m  Jansenius*s  writings.  He  also  hit  upon  an  expedient 
which  not  only  rendered  the  buU  for  a  time  hannless, 
but  which  initiated  a  new  movement  against  the  doc- 
trine of  papai  infallibility.  "Truć,'*  he  sald,  "the  see 
of  Romę  has  aothority  to  docide  with  rcspect  to  doc^ 
trine,  and  every  good  Catholic  must  submit  to  ite  de- 
cree ;  but  the  Holy  See  may  misapprehend  fad  (as  in 
the  papai  condemnation  of  Galileo*s  theory  of  planctary 
moYcment),  whether  a  book  contains  certain  statements 
or  no :  the  meaning  also  of  a  writer  may  be  misunder- 
stood.  Let  the  flve  propositions  be  heretical,  yet,  nich 
the  exception  of  the  flrst,  they  are  to  be  found  neitfaer 
in  letter  nor  in  spirit  in  the  writings  of  Jansen."  Thus 
arose  the  celebrated  distinction  of  de  facto  and  de  jare. 
The  Sorbonne  now  demanded  of  Amauld  that  he  slioald 
discontinue  his  opposition  and  submit  to  her  dedsicms. 
He,  and  sixty  others  with  him,  still  refusing  to  submit, 
they  were  expelled  from  the  theological  faculty.  A 
generał  assembly  of  the  clei^'  was  abo  conrcned  in 
Septomber  of  this  year,  and  the  foUowing  formuła  was 
adopted  on  the  motion  of  De  Marca,  archbishop  of  Tnu- 
louse:  "I  condemn  with  heart  and  lips  the  doctrine  <ń 
the  fire  propositions  of  Comelius  Jansenius,  contained 
in  his  book  entitled  A  ygmttnuty  and  which  the  pope  and 
bishops  have  condemned,  said  doctrine  not  being  ibat 
of  St.  Augustine,  whom  Jansenius  has  esplaincd  wn^og- 
ly,  agaiiifit  the  real  meaning  of  that  holy  doctor."  A 
buU  of  Alexander  VII,  October  16,  indorsed  the  d«ń- 
sions  of  the  assembly,  and  afllrmed  that  the  condemned 
propositions  were  a  part  of  the  doctrints  of  Jansenius. 
The  signiug  of  the  above  formuła,  which  y^-SB  rcąnimi 
of  all  French  prict-ts  and  mcmbere  of  rcligious  ordrni. 
was  everywhere  opposed.  Louis  IsAYt  confounding  the 
Jansenists  with  the  Frondo,  gavc  the  Church  the  łiflp 
of  the  civil  authorities.  But  the  membcrsi  of  Port-Ki«YcI 
continued  in  their  oppomtion,  thinking  it  pcijury  fi>r 
them  to  sign  it,  Another  royal  edict  of  April  29. 1664, 
was  now  issued,  which  was  morę  modcrate  in  its  dt- 
mands.  It  merely  reqttired  the  signing  as  a  matter  of 
form.  but  at  the  same  time  threatened  8uch  as  rerused 
with  seizure  of  their  incomc.  and  even  with  excommunł- 
cation.  The  opposition  still  continuing,  headed  by  Port- 
Royal,  persecution  now  commenced  in  eamest.  The 
dungeons  of  the  Bastile  weic  crowded  with  those  vbo 
refused  to  \iolate  their  conseiences  by  subscribiog  a  for- 
muła which  they  did  not  beliere  to  set  forth  their  \ictrB. 
The  very  passages  of  the  fortress  were  occupied  by  pri*- 
oncrs.  Among  those  who  were  thus  treated  was  Le- 
raattre  de  Sacy,  spiritual  director  of  the  nuns  of  Fon- 
Koyal,  who,  accused  of  inciting  them  to  resist,  was  in»- 
pńsoned  in  the  Bastile  in  1666.  As  for  Durergiff  de 
Hauranne,  he  had  already  been  sent  to  Yinccnncs  thirt^' 
years  l)efore. 

The  goremment  and  the  Jesaits,  determined  to  rap- 
prcss  the  rebellious  spirit  of  Port-Royal  (q.  t.),  now  i^ed 
evcry  cffort  that  could  be  devised  to  gain  their  (od. 
Two  months  had  elapsed  sińce  the  expulMon  of  Amauld 
from  the  Sorbonne,  when  tłie  civil  aathoriiies  ordered 


JANSEN 


773 


JANSEN 


tfajit  eyery  novloe  and  scholar  should  be  remoTed  from 
Port-RojaL  This  shaipened  the  pen  of  Pascal,  and  forth 
came  the  eighteen  famoua  Pronndal  Lettera  {Lettrea  a 
improrindal),  *^  In  Łhese  remarkable  letten  the  author 
showed  with  eztraordinaiy  force  how  narrow  the  que»> 
tłon  retJly  was — ^whether  five  propositions  ara  Ln  the 
A  ufftuHmts  or  not,  when  no  one  had  there  pointed  them 
out;  he  showed  by  what  unworthy  compromises  the 
condemnation  of  Dr.  Amauld  had  been  obtained ;  and, 
besides  touching  on  doctiinal  points  which  were  in- 
volved,  he  firmly  and  manfully  attacked  the  shameless 
casuistry  of  the  Jesuits.  These  letters  had  a  wouderful 
efficiency,  for  their  power  was  felt  even  by  thoee  who 
had  no  apprehension  of  the  present  subject  of  controver- 
sy.**  Ycitaire  has  said  that  in  wit  the  earlier  of  them 
were  not  excelled  by  the  oomediea  of  Moli^re,  while  the 
latter  rivalled  the  prodactions  of  Boesuet  in  eloquence ; 
in  fact,  that  they  constitated  an  epoch  in  French  litera- 
turę. Sa}*?  Hallam  {Introd,  Literatura  ofEuropef  Har- 
per^s  edition,  ii,  835) :  "  These  letters  did  morę  to  ruin 
the  name  of  Jesuit  than  all  the  controrersies  of  Prote»- 
tantLsro,  or  all  the  fulminations  of  the  Parliament  of 
Paris.**  »*  All  Europę,"  says  Macaulay  (IlUtory  of  Eng- 
kmd,  ii,  46),  "read,  admired,  and  laughed."  But  not 
only  the  Jesuits  felt  this  heayy  blow;  even  the  incum- 
bent  of  Sl  Petersa  chair  staggered  and  reeled  under  the 
sodden  attack,  and,  as  a  set-off  for  it,  cardinal  Chigi, 
now  Alexander  VII,  not  only  confirmed  the  position  of 
his  predeccssor,  and  again  declared  that  the  five  propo- 
sitions were  contained  defactc  in  A  uguslinus,  but,  imi- 
tating  the  French  authorities,  accompanied  it  by  the 
reąuisition  that  erery  one  holding  a  spiritual  offioe  in 
the  Church  of  Romę  should  abjure  these  errors  by  sub- 
scribing  a  formuła  prasciibed  for  that  purpose.  This 
injodicious  and  oppressire  act  subjected  the  Jansenists 
to  stiU  sererer  persecutions,  and  continued  the  heated 
controTersy,  in  which  the  ablest  pens  on  both  sides  were 
enlisted.  A  great  point  was  madę  by  the  Jesuits  of  the 
łnfallibility  ąuestion.  Seo  Infallibiuty.  But,  as  the 
controrersy  continued,  it  took  a  wider  rangę,  and  came 
to  embrace  such  topics  as  the  rights  of  the  bishops  as 
contradistinguished  from  thoee  of  the  pope;  the  Jesuits 
ical  yiews  of  theology  and  morality,  so  ably  censured 
by  Pascal,  as  we  haye  already  seen ;  the  rast  and  alarm- 
ing  power  of  the  Jesuits,  and  even  many  usages  of  the 
Church  of  Romę.  The  oppodtion,  which  thus  far  had 
seemed  to  come  maitdy  from  Port-Royal  recluses,  was 
found  to  have  spread  even  among  high  dignitaries  of 
the  Church :  four  bishops  refused  to  sign  the  fonnulary 
which  Romę  dictated,  and  many  others  of  this  high  po- 
sition in  France  took  the  ground  of  "  respectfol  silence." 
In  1668  king  Louis  succeeded  in  obtaining  the  sanction 
of  Romę  for  a  oompiomise,  substantially  on  the  basis  of 
Aman]d*8  distinction  of  de  facto  and  de  jurę,  and  of  re- 
gpedful  ntence, 

**  Jansenistic  principles  now  became  far  morę  wide- 
ly  diffused.  The  authorities  of  the  Church  of  Romę 
thought  a  Jansenist  was  not  necessarily  a  heretic ;  the 
schoola  of  Port-Royal  flourished  even  morę  than  befora 
the  persecution  and  imprisonment ;"  the  leamed  TiUe- 
mont  became  one  of  ber  recluses,  and  Racine  one  of  her 
studenta.  The  incumbents  of  the  papai  chair  even  be- 
came the  friends  of  Port-Royal,  and  obtained  no  little 
aid  from  it  in  their  opposition  to  the  Jesuits,  which  In- 
nocent XI  morę  especially  manifested.  This,  of  oourse, 
exaaperated  the  Jesuits  morę  than  ever,  and  |he  great 
friend  and  protector  of  Jansenism  at  court,  the  duch- 
eas  of  Longueyille,  having  died,  they  succeeded  in  gain- 
ing  orer  Louis  XIV,  who,  it  is  said, "  abhorring  Jansen- 
ism quito  as  much  as  he  abhoired  Protestantism,  and 
rery  much  morę  than  he  abhorred  atheism,"  had  ab- 
stained  fiom  open  yiolence  only  at  the  instance  of  the 
ducheas  of  Longueyille.  An  ^ct  was  issued  forbid- 
ding  the  admission  of  new  members  to  Port-Royal,  and 
the  redusea  were  ordered  to  **quit  the  yalley  of  Port- 
Royal  ait  onee  and  foreoer  /*  while  Dr.  Aniauld,  .the 
principal  aupport  of  Jansenism,  was  obliged  to  flee  fiom 


France,  and  to  seek  a  refuge  in  the  Low  Countries,  where 
he  died  in  1694.  Another  and  last  peisonal  disciple  of 
Cyran  died  in  1695.  In  the  same  and  the  following  year 
passed  away  also  the  other  great  supports  of  Jansenism, 
and  it  was  already  whispered  among  the  Jesuits  and  at 
the  French  court  that  the  heretical  moyement  had  been 
successfuUy  eradicated,  when  suddeuly  the  crippled  Jan- 
senism receiyed  a  fresh  start  A  priest  of  the  Oratory 
of  Paris,  P.  Quesnel,  a  man  of  leaming,  zeal,  and  spirit- 
uality  of  mind,  had  published  the  New  Testament  with 
annotations  which  were  of  a  practical  and  edifying  char- 
acter,  but  strongly  tinged  with  Jansenistic  doctrines. 
It  had  been  published  in  succesed^e  portions  from  1671 
to  1687.  It  had  met  at  iirst  with  a  most  fayorable  re- 
oeption.  The  Sorbonne  had  approyed  it ;  pope  Clement 
XI  had  commeuded  it;  Francois  Harle,  archbishop  of 
Paris,  an  ayowed  enemy  of  the  Jansenists^  had  expre9»- 
ed  his  approbation  of  it;  Louis  Antoine  de  Noailles, 
bishop  of  Chalons,  8ub8equently  archbishop  of  Paris, 
and  finaUy  a  cardinal,  who  was  then  a  zealous  advocato 
of  the  Jansenistic  doctrines,  had  eyen  taken  the  work 
under  his  spedal  protection,  and  enjoined  its  perusal 
in  his  diocese.  It  had  been  and  still  was  eagerly  read, 
and  had  already  passed  through  many  editions.  An- 
other edition  had  just  (1702)  become  necessary,  which 
was  published  under  the  title  of  Le  noureau  Testament 
en  Francois^  avec  des  reJlexions  morales  sur  ckaque  ver» 
«e,  pour  en  rendre  la  lecłure  plus  utile,  et  la  meditafion 
plus  aUee.  The  author  had  neyer  signed  the  fiye  prop- 
ositions, and  his  confessor  now  put  the  que8tion  to  the 
Sorbonne  "whether  he  might  admit  to  communion  a 
spiritual  person  who  had  done  no  more  than  maintain 
the  'rcyerential  silence,*  as  some  of  the  bishops  had 
done,"  and  the  reply  from  the  Sorbonne  came  that,  with 
regard  to  points  of  fact,  respectful  obedience  was  suifi- 
cient  obedience.  But  hardly  had  the  cos  de  conscience, 
as  it  is  technically  termed,  become  known  at  Romę, 
when  pope  Clement  XI  condemned  it  in  the  most  seyere 
terma  (Feb.  12,  1708),  and  oompLained  to  the  king  of 
those  who  so  thoughtlessly  stirreid  up  the  old  controrer- 
sy.  Finally,  the  buli  Vineam  Domini  (July  15,  1705) 
confirmed  and  renewed  all  preoeding  condemnations  of 
the  fiye  propositions.  This  buli  was  accepted  by  the 
assembly  of  the  clergy,  and  registered  in  Parliament. 
But  with  it  the  Jesuits  were  by  no  means  quieted. 
They  desired  completo  yictory.  Another  edition  of 
Que8nel*s  Refiexions  moraks  haying  become  necessary, 
and  it  being  the  production  of  a  decided  Jansenist,  pop- 
ularizing  the  Port-Royalists,  who  madę  it  one  of  their 
duties  to  distributo  it  freely  among  the  people,  they  de- 
termined  that  it  also  should  be  suppressed.  They  per- 
sisted  in  their  eflbrta  to  secure  the  condemnation  of  the 
work  by  the  papai  see  until  al  last  success  crowned  their 
undertaking.  In  1708  Clement  XI  pronounced  against 
it,  and  in  1712  it  was  prohibited  by  a  papai  edict  as  <*a 
text-book  of  undisguised  Jansenism."  By  this  time  the 
king  of  France  (Louis  XIV)  and  the  Jesuits  were  in 
league  together,  and  we  need  not  wondcr  that  the  Jan- 
senists, as  upponents  of  the  Jesuits,  were  seyerely  dealt 
with.  Indeeid,  it  is  asserted  that  thia  buli,  as  well  aa 
many  others  that  were  issued  about  tnis  time  in  Romę, 
and  aiming  at  the  French  Chureh,  were  one  and  all  dic- 
tated in  Paris.  Sa>'8  Tregelles  (Jansenists^  p.  88),  *< The 
king  and  the  Jesuits  procured  whateyer  bulla  they  want- 
ed  from  the  pope,  and  when  they  did  not  sufficiently 
set  forth  the  Jansenist  heresy.  they  were  retumcd  from 
Paris  to  Romę  with  corrections  and  alterations,  to  which 
the  pope  acceded."  No  wonder,  then,  that  the  buli  of 
1712  was  in  1713  followed  by  another  still  seyerer,  fa- 
mous  as  the  buli  Uniffeniłus,  by  which  were  condemned 
all  of  the  writings  of  Quesnel,  and  all  that  had  eyer  been 
or  might  eyer  be  written  in  their  defence.  It  also  sin- 
gled  out  101  propositions  from  the  works  of  Que8ncl 
**  as  false,  captious,  evil  sounding,  ofTensiye  to  pious  (!) 
ears,  scandalous,  pemicious,  rash,  and  injurious  to  the 
Church  and  its  customs;  contumelious,  not  against  tho 
Church  merely,  but  also  against  the  secular  authorities,* 


JANSEN 


1U 


JANSEN 


seditious,  impioufl,  bUsphemoua,  suspected  of  heresy, 
and  also  sayoring  of  heresy  itself ;  also  favoiiii{^  here- 
tics;  bereńes,  and  schism,  erroneousi  nearly  aUied  to 
heresy,  often  condemned;  and,  furthennore,  alao  heret^ 
ical;  and  sundry  herestet^  espedally  those  contained  in 
tbe  well-known  propositiona  of  JanBenius,  and  that,  too, 
in  the  sense  in  which  thoae  wero  condemned."  The 
buli  did  not  specify  tckich  of  tbe  propositiona  belonged 
8everally  to  each  of  Łhese  beads  of  oondemnation.  '*  lliis 
was  tbe  tiiumph  of  doctrinal  Jeauitism :  Le  TeUier,  the 
king*8  Jcsait  confefiaor,  arranged  tbe  terms  of  the  bulL 
It  seemed  as  if  every  feeling  of  piety  towards  God,  and 
ever}^  apprebeusion  of  bis  grace,  was  to  be  cstingaishcd 
tbrougbout  tbe  Papai  Cbiirch->4U  if  all  who  adhered  at 
all  to  many  doctrines  that  had  been  regaided  as  ortho- 
dox  were  \o  have  tbeir  feelings  and  their  eonaciences 
outraged."  But  tbe  Gallican  dergy  was  by  no  means 
agreed  as  to  tbe  acceptance  of  tbe  buU,  althougb  the 
Jesuits  eamestly  preesed  iL  Some  were  in  favor  of  its 
unconditional  acceptance,  otheni  desired  to  make  a  qual- 
ifying  declaration,  and  stili  others  wished  the  qualifica- 
tion  to  be  madę  by  tbe  pope  himself.  After  much  dis- 
putation,  tbe  king  himself  decided  the  matter  by  making 
submission  to  tbe  buU  binding  in  Church  and  State. 
From  three  to  four  thousand  rolumes,  indoding  pam- 
pblets,  relating  to  the  controrersy  which  tbis  iamous 
buli  pioToked,  are  found  in  tbe  great  Parisian  library. 

Tbe  death  of  Louis  XIV  left  the  fate  of  Jansenism 
still  unsettled,  while  it  also  caused  m.  relaxation  of  the 
repressiye  measures.  The  regent,  duke  of  Orleans,  was 
urged  to  refer  the  whole  controyersy  to  a  national  coun- 
cil,  and  the  leadera  of  tbe  Jansenist  party  appealed  to  a 
generał  coimciL  The  Jansenist  party  thus  formed,  which 
numbered  four  bishopa  and  many  inferior  ecclesiastics, 
were  called,  from  tbis  cixx:umstanoe,  tbe  AppeUants  (q. 
V.).  The  firmness  of  the  pope,  and  a  change  in  tbe  pol- 
icy  of  tbe  regent,  brought  the  Appellaiita  into  disfayor. 
Eren  tbe  Parliament  of  Paris  was  forced  to  submit,  and 
registered  tbe  papai  buli  m  ł  lU  de  jiutice  (June  4, 
1720),  althougb  with  a  resenration  in  fayor  of  the  liber- 
ties  of  the  Gallican  Church.  The  AppeUants  for  the 
most  part  submitted,  the  recusants  being  yisited  with 
seyere  penalties ;  and,  on  the  accession  of  the  new  king, 
Louis  XV,  tbe  unoonditional  acceptance  of  the  buli  was 
at  leugth  foimally  aooomplished,  so  far  as  tbe  generał 
public  were  conoemed.  From  tbis  time  forward  the 
Jansenlsts  were  rigoroualy  repressed,  and  their  great 
stronghold,  Port^Hoyal,  haying  been  aiready,  in  1709- 
11,  destroyed  by  conuiyances  of  tbe  king  and  the  Jesuits, 
a  large  number  emigrated  to  the  Nethcrlands,  wheie  thcy 
formed  a  community,  with  Utrecht  as  a  centrę.  (See 
bdow,  Jansenists  in  Holland.) 

'<  Duńng  the  ]8tb  century  Jansenism  degenerated  in 
France.  In  1727  Francois  de  Paris  died,  and  was  buried 
in  the  cemetery  of  St,  Medard,  in  Paris.  He  was  of  an 
honorable  family,  and  had  early  shown  a  religioua  tum 
of  mind.  His  patrimony  he  bestowed  upon  the  poor, 
and  eamed  bis  liyelibood  by  weaving  boee.  In  1720,  at 
tbe  age  of  thirty,  he  was  madę  deacon  of  St.  Medard. 
Cardinal  de  Noailles  would  gladly  haye  inyested  him 
with  a  higber  office,  but  he  declined.  In  1722  he  re- 
signed  bis  deaoonship,  and  retired  to  a  wildemess.  He 
soon  retumed  to  Paris,  where  he  liyed  in  scclusiou  and 
poyerty,  denying  himself  the  ordinaiy  comforts  of  life, 
and  shortening  his  days  by  self-inflicted  torments.  A 
mngnificent  monument  was  erected  to  his  memory  by 
his  brotber,  a  member  of  the  French  Parliament,  who 
Bubseąuently  renounced  his  worldly  position  and  prop- 
erty,  and  lived  a  life  of  sedusion  and  asceticism.  To 
the  grayc  of  Francis  de  Paris  multitudes  flocked.  There, 
in  yarious  ways,  they  t«stified  tbeir  superstitions  regard 
and  yeucradon,  and  there  maryellous  cures  were  claimed 
to  l^  wrought  and  miracles  said  to  be  performed.  Strong 
religlous  emotions  were  manifested,  and  some  were  seized 
with  conyulsions.  Some  were  fayored  with  the  spirit 
of  prophecy,  and  predicted  tbe  oyerthrow  of  Church 
ond  State.    Such  predictioua  were  beazd  uutil  within  a 


short  time  preyioua  to,  and  eren  dming  the  reyolQt]o& 
of  1789.  As  late  as  1840  multitudes  of  rdigions  pilgrims 
still  resorted  to  the  spot,  on  the  anniyersary  of  his  death, 
and  crowned  with  garisiids  the  graye  of  De  Paris.  The 
superstition  and  fimatadsm  which  preyailed  at  his  gT4ve 
soon  after  his  death  were  not  whoUy  oonfined  to  the 
common  people,  but  were  sbaied  by  a  cmudderable  sum- 
ber  of  men  of  leaming  and  rank.  Tboee  of  tbe  latter 
dass  who  madę  themselyes  most  oonspicaoua  were  Hie- 
ronymus  N.  de  Paris,  tbe  parliamentary  member  jost  sl- 
luded  to ;  C.  Folard,  widdy  and  fayoraUy  known  by  hia 
obeenrations  on  the  history  of  Polybius;  and  Louis  Ba- 
silius  Cart^  de  Montgeroo,  a  member  of  Parliament,  who 
ezperienced  a  wonderful  conyetsion  at  the  graye  of  this 
yenerated  saint,  and  who  aubeeąuently  narrated  the  rosr- 
yellouspbenomena  there  witncssed,  and  rindicated  thdr 
supematund  and  diyine  character.  These  supentitious 
and  fiuiatical  esoesees,  combined  with  the  austerities 
and  eyen  inhuman  mortifications  piacticed  by  many  of 
the  morę  zealous  Jansenists,  tended  to  prejudicethe 
morę  enlightened  against  their  cause,  and  greatly  wetk^ 
ened  its  morał  power.  Petitpied,  Asyeld,  RoUin,  ind 
others,  attempted  in  yain  to  stem  the  tide  of  supcrstiticn 
and  fanaticism.  These  exceS8es  ruined  tbe  cause  of  the 
Jansenists— at  least  in  France,  or,  in  the  words  of  Tol^ 
tairc,  <  tbe  graye  ofSt.  Francis  of  Paris  becamo  the  grare 
of  Jansenism,"  for  thenceforth  the  whole  ecclesiastical 
authority  loet  its  importanoe*^  (Hurst^s  Ifaffenbcch,  ii, 
426).  Yet  men  were  slow  to  giye  it  up :  they  dung  to 
it  eyen  in  its  death-houra,  Such  as  were  desirous  of  a 
reformation  of  the  Roman  Catholic  Cbnrch  secretly  ot 
openly  espoused  the  cause  of  the  Jansenists.  Those 
who  desired  to  sce  the  arrogance  of  the  pope  checked 
and  his  power  rcstrained  fayored  the  Jansenistic  ctose. 
All  who  were  oppoeed  to  the  Jesuits  were  regardcd  ss 
Jansenists.  Enlightened  men  eyerywhere  s>iDpathized 
with  the  Jansenists  in  their  efTorts  to  restrict  papai  en- 
croachments  and  the  demoralizing  influence  of  Jesutt- 
ism ;  and,  when  its  sun  went  down  in  France,  tbe  friends 
of  reform  in  the  Roman  Catholic  Church  tumed  towards 
Holland,  and  hopcd  that  from  it  would  go  out  a  cjent 
power  for  good.  The  most  distinguished  theologisns 
of  Italy,  such  as  Zola,  Tamburini,  and  othera,  bdd  a  ng- 
ular  epistolary  conespondcnce  with  the  Jansenists  st 
Utrecht     (See  bdow.) 

Had  the  Roman  Catholic  Church  been  aosceptible  of 
a  thorongh  reformation,  it  is  reasonable  to  think  that  it 
would  hare  been  effectcd  by  the  enlightened,  zetkraa, 
self-sacrificing,  and  perseyering  effbrts  of  the  Jansenists. 
They  were  true  sons  of  the  Church — they  sincerdr  de- 
sired its  inwaid  and  outwaid  prosperity — ^they  cberiah- 
ed  an  almoet  seryile  deyotion  to  it  Though  thdr  ^--s- 
tem  of  faith  and  morals  was  eseentially  Angustinisn, 
and  thus  in  substantial  agreement  with  that  of  the  Re- 
formers,  yet  thcy  had  no  s^-mpathy  with  the  Refomwn, 
and  their  roinds  were  filled  with  prejudicc  against  them. 
But  they  madę  common  cause  with  these  in  their  appre- 
ciadon  of  the  New-Testament  Scriptnrea,  in  their  cffoits 
to  promote  their  use  among  the  people,  and  in  their  in- 
culcation  of  holiness  of  beart  and  life.  To  tbeir  pnL«e 
it  sbould  be  mentioned  that  a  Bibie  Sodety  was  estsb- 
lished  by  the  Jansenists  of  France  as  eariy  as  1726,  which 
flourished  for  thirty  yeara.  Though  the  Jansenistic 
moyement  was  unsuooessful  in  reforming  the  Romish 
Church,  yet  it  did  good  seryice  to  the  cause  of  Christ 
by  countecactSng  the  preyalent  spirit  of  comiption,  and 
by  promotihg  a  spirit  of  dnoere  piety.  The  piety  which 
it  fostered  was  neyer,  it  is  true,  as  enlightened  as  ihst 
which  preyailed  in  the  Protestant  Church :  the  piety 
of  eyen  its  most  enlightened  adyocates  was  not  whoily 
free  from  certain  admixtures  of  superstition,  fanatidfm, 
mysticism,  and  asceticism.  We  add,  in  condosion.  that 
Gallicanism,  as  reyiyed  and  formulated  in  the  foor  fii- 
mous  propositions  adopted  by  the  Cooncil  of  French 
Clergy  in  1682,  was  also  under  great  obligatioos  to  the 
Jansenists. 

Jcutsemtti  in  ifottmd  ^AlŁhough  the  fanaticil  ez- 


JANSEN 


775 


JANSEN 


cesaes  to  which  Jansenism  had  gone  in  France  for  a 
Łime  darkened  its  proepects  of  nltimate  succeas,  it  most 
be  oonceded,  even  by  Koman  CathoUcs  of  the  most  ul- 
tramontane  claas,  that  Janaenista  in  the  18th  and  19th 
ceutuiies  **preserved  a  doee  association  with  greater 
puńc/  of  morala  and  a  deeper  laith"  than  their  oppo- 
nenta  the  Jesuita,  who  for  the  laat  200  years  have  ap- 
peared  in  behalf  of  the  infaUibility  of  the  pope  only  to 
strengthen  and  to  preserye  their  own  existence  as  an 
order.  It  was  this  characteristic  feature  of  the  Jan- 
aenista  that  "ereiywhere  smoothed  the  way  for  them." 
When  peraecution  had  driven  them  from  France,  "we 
find  traces  of  them  in  Yienna  and  in  Bmssels,  in  Spain 
and  in  Portugal,  and  in  every  part  of  Italy"  (Rankę, 
Ui$t,  Papacy,  London,  1861,  ii,  293).  Eveiywhere  they 
now  diaaeminated  their  doctrines,  but  it  is  especially 
In  Protestant  Holland  that  the  sect  has  been  most  suo- 
cessful,  and  has  maintained  itself  to  our  own  day.  In 
the  days  of  Philip  II  of  Spain,  Utrecht  had  been  raised 
to  the  dignity  of  an  archiepiscopal  see  (A.D.  1557). 
The  other  United  Provinces,  on  throwing  oflf  the  Span- 
ish  shacklea,  became  Calvinist8,  but  Utrecht  and  Haar- 
lem  Goutinued  faithful  to  the  Roman  hierarchy.  To 
this  part  of  a  country,  where  the  evangelical  life  had 
tat:^ht  eyen  the  Roman  Catholic  communist  a  spirit  of 
toleration,  the  Janaenists  directed  their  steps,  and  it  is 
here  alone  that  they  still  appear  as  a  dcfiiuŁe,  tangible 
body.  Their  organization  in  Holland  dates  partly  from 
the  foroed  emigration  of  the  French  Janaenists  imder 
king  LouLb  Xiy,  and  partly  from  the  oontroyersy  about 
Queanel  at  the  opening  of  the  last  century ;  but  their 
auccess  as  an  independent  sect  (if  we  may  thus  style 
adherents  of  the  Koman  Catholic  communion,  but  de- 
fendeis  of  the  evangelical  doctrine)  dates  from  the  day 
when  the  vicar  apostolic,  Peter  Codde,  an  intimate  friend 
of  Amauld,  was  suspended  by  Clement  XI  in  1702  from 
his  pońtion  on  account  of  his  firm  adherence  to  Jan- 
senistic  principles,  was  allured  to  Komę,  treacherously 
detained  there  for  three  years  in  defiance  of  all  canon-* 
ical  regtUations,  and  a  certain  Theodore  de  Cock,  a 
Jriend  of  the  Jesuits  (so  a  Jesuit  sometimes  designates 
himselO,  appointed  in  his  stead.  The  chapter  of 
Utrecht,  thus  deprived  of  the  man  of  their  choice,  re- 
fused  to  acknowledge  the  new  vicar  named  in  Codde's 
place,  and  angrily  joined  themselyes  to  the  AppeUant 
party  in  France,  many  of  whom  had  come  thither.  The 
goremment  of  Holland  also  interfered  in  1703,  suspend- 
ed the  operation  of  the  papai  buli,  and  deprived  De  Cock 
of  the  archbishopric.  Codde,  on  his  return,  did  all  that 
he  could  to  repair  the  injuries  sustained  by  the  Jansen- 
ists  dttiing  the  incumbency  of  De  Cock,  who  had  madę 
many  changea,  had  depriyed  many  priests,  some  even 
of  thirty  years*  standing,  of  their  lirings,  and  had  ap- 
pointed his  Jesuitical  friends  instead.  At  length,  in 
1723,  they  elected  an  archbishop,  Coroelius  Steenhoyen, 
for  whom  the  form  of  episcopal  consecration  was  obtain- 
ed  from  the  French  bishop  Yorlet  (titular  of  Babylon), 
who  had  been  suspended  for  Jansenistic  opinions.  A 
later  Jansenist  archbishop  of  Utrecht,  Meindarts,  estab- 
liahed  in  1742  Haarlem  and  in  1758  Deyenter  as  his  suf- 
fragan  sces ;  and  in  1763  a  synod  was  held,  which  sent 
its  acta  to  Romę,  in  recognition  of  the  primacy  oT  that 
secy  which  the  Church  of  Utrecht  professes  to  acknowl- 
edge. Since  that  time  the  formal  succession  has  been 
maintained,  each  bishop,  on  being  appointed,  notifying 
the  pope  of  his  election,  and  craving  confirmation.  The 
popes,  howeycr,  haye  uniformly  rejected  all  adyancea, 
except  on  the  condition  of  the  acceptanoe  of  the  buli 
Umgerdtus,  But  the  Jansenists  haye  steadfastly  re- 
fuaed  to  comply  with  this  demand,  and  haye  eyen  refused 
to  be  hought  oyer  to  the  Church  of  Korne,  as  was  at- 
tempted  in  1823.  The  recent  act  of  the  Koman  see  in 
defining  as  of  catholic  faith  the  dogma  of  the  immacu- 
Ute  conception  of  the  bleaaed  Yirgin  Mary  has  been  the 
occasion  of  a  new  protest.  Their  language  \b  firm  and 
explicit :  "  We  owe  it  to  oorselyes,  to  the  Catholic  faith," 
aay  they,  *<and  to  the  defence  of  the  truth,  to  reject 


holdbf  the  new  andfalae  dogma  ofthe  ttnmaculate  eoneq>m 
tion.  We  should  therefore  fail  in  our  duty  if  we  kq>t 
silence  any  longer.  . . .  Our  Church  (the  Jansenist  sect) 
has  often  appealed  to  an  oecumenical  council  to  be  law- 
fully  appointed.  We  renew  this  appeaL  .  .  .  We  make 
our  appeal  at  this  time  and  place  because  of  the  yiola- 
tion  done  to  the  faith,  and  the  injury  which  the  bish- 
ops  haye  suffered,  sińce  they  were  not  consulted  when 
the  doctrine  ofthe  immaculate  conception  ofthe  blessed 
Yirgin  Mary,  mother  of  our  Sayiour,  was  set  up  as  of 
diyine  anthorit}'.  May  the  Father  of  lights  enlighten 
us,  and  work  his  will  in  u&  We  sign  ourselyes,  with 
yeneration,  yery  holy  father,  the  humble  8er>'ants  of 
your  holineas."  Then  follow  the  signatures  of  the  me- 
tropolitan  archbishop  and  the  two  bishops.  This  letter, 
dated  Sept.  6, 1856,  is  accompanied  by  a  pastorał  exhor- 
tation  addreśsed  to  the  faithful.  The  Komish  court 
replied  by  a  formal  anathema  dated  Dec  4,  of  which 
the  following  is  an  extract :  *'  The  sacred  congregation 
of  the  most  eminent  and  most  reyerend  cardinals  of  the 
holy  Komish  Church,  inąuisitors  generał  throughout 
the  Christian  republic  against  heretical  peryersity,  hay- 
ing  heard  the  report  of  the  committee  acting  in  the 
name  of  our  holy  father,  pope  Pius  IX,  do  now  condemn 
the  yiews  published  by  the  three /aUe,  schumatical  biah' 
opt  oftheprorinoe  of  Utrecht.  .  .  .  The  sacred  congre- 
gation forbid  all  persons,  of  eyery  state  and  condition, 
in  any  way,  and  under  any  pretext,  to  print  the  said 
document  containing  these  yiews,  to  keep  it  in  their 
house,  or  read  it ;  eyery  one  musŁ  instantly  giye  it  up 
to  the  bishops  or  to  the  inąuisitors."  The  JansenisU 
are  genuine  Koman  Catholics,  but  they  refuse  a  ser>'ile 
obedience  to  Komę.  They  haye  also  come  to  deny  the 
infaUibility  of  the  pope  altogether,  and  recognise  him 
only  as  the  ^  head  of  the  bishops,"  placing  the  highest 
authority  of  the  Church  in  a  generał  council.  They  cir- 
culate  the  Scriptures,  and  insiat  on  inward  piety.  They 
denominate  themselyes  Ronum  Catholics  of  the  episoo- 
pcU  cUrgy,  They  still  number  about  5000  souls,  and 
are  diyided  oyer  twenty-fiye  parishes  in  the  dioceses  of 
Utrecht  and  Haarlem.  Their  clergy  are  about  thirty 
in  number,  with  a  seminary  at  Amersfoort,  which  was 
founded  in  1726.  The  name  of  their  present  archbish- 
op is  Yan  Santen,  whom  Komę  has  again  and  again 
yainly  endeayored  to  induce,  by  the  basest  of  means,  to 
sign  the  prescribcd  formulary  (comp.  Tregelles,  Jansen- 
ittSf  p.  80  sq.).  bo  far  as  they  can  be  said  to  posscss  a  . 
theological  system,  it  may  be  descńbed  as  a  compound 
of  Jansenist  and  ultra-GaUican  principles. 

Other  Works  o/*  Jan*cmi«.— Besides  the  work  which 
gaye  rise  to  the  schismatical  moyement  in  the  Roman 
Catholic  Church,  he  wrote  also  Oratio  de  interioris  hom' 
mis  Re/ormatione  (1627 ;  translated  into  French  by  Ar- 
nauld  d'Andilly)  :—A  leripharmacum  pro  citibus  Silcce 
DucensUmSj  adverrjs  minisirorum  suorum  Jhseintan,  sive 
Responsio  brems  ad  HbeUum  eorum  provocatorium  (Lou- 
yain,  1680): — Spongia  notarum,  guibus  Alexipharma' 
cum  aspersit  Gisbertus  Ycetius  (Louyain,  163!,  8yo) : — 
TetraieuchttSf  sive  commetUarius  in  guatuor  Kcangelia 
(Louyain,  1639, 4to) : — Pentaieuchus,  sice  commeniarius 
ta  guinąue  Ubros  Moysis  (Louyain,  1641, 4to) : — Analec- 
ta  m  Proterbioj  Ecclesiasien,  Sapientiam,  Jlabacum  et 
Sophomam  (Louyain,  1644,  4to): ->-J/ar«  GailicuSj  seu 
de  justitia  annorum  et  fotderum  regia  GaUias,  lAbri  II 
(1683).  See  Foppens,  BiU,  Belgica;  Bayle,  IHcł.  Cri- 
tigue ;  Dumas,  liisł,  des  cinq  Propositions ;  Leydecker, 
Historia  Jansemsmi  (Utrecht,  1095,  8yo) ;  Frick,  U^>er- 
setzung  der  Bulla  UnigenituSf  etc.  (Ulra,  1717,  4to);  Ge- 
schiedenis  van  de  Christelijke  Kerk  in  de  IS''*  eeuw,  door 
A.  Ijpeij,  xii,  335-887 ;  Harenberg,  Geschichte  der  Jesu- 
iten ;  Fontaine,  Mim,p,  senńr  a  tłlistoire  du  Port-Rog- 
al  (1738) ;  Dirers  ecrits  touchant  la  signature  duformU' 
laire  (1706) ;  Hulseroannus,  De  ausciliis  gratia ;  Nicuw- 
lands,  YertnaaJdijkheden  uU  de  Kerkgeschiedenis ;  La 
Constitution  Uttif/enilus  avec  des  Remarąues  (Utrecht) ; 
Walchii  BibL  Theohg,;  Henke'8  Kirchengeschichte  des 
IS**"  Jahrhtuiderts !  Iai  Yeriti  des  Miracks,  operes  par 


JANSEN 


116 


JANSSENS 


riniercesrion  de  Afr,  de  Parit  (1787,  1745;  written  by 
Montgerou) ;  Reuchlin,  Getck.  wm  Port-Roycd  (łiamb. 
1889, 1844) ;  Traki  doffmaticue  aur  les  mirades  du  tempt 
(1787) ;  Geschiedenis  der  Ckrisłelijke  Kerk,  door  Profa. 
l)e  Groot,  Ter  Uaar,  Kist,  Moll,  Nieuwenhuia,  etc.,  yoL 
y  (AmsteidAm,  1859) ;  ColoniA,  IHct,  des  Upres  JanU- 
nUte»f  etc ;  Ste.  Beuve,  Port  Royal^  voL  i  and  ii;  Tre- 
gelles,  in  Kitto'8  Jourtu  Sac,  Lit.  Jan.  1851,  and  eince 
in  separate  and  enlarged  form,  The  Jantenutt  (London, 
1851,  12mo);  Mrs.  Schimmelpenninck,  Select  Memoira 
ofPort-Roycd ;  DecŁaration  des  Eveque8  de  IloUcmde,  etc 
(Paris,  1827);  GerberoD,  Hist  de  Jcaueniem;  Yoltaiie, 
Sikck  de  IjouU  XI V,  ii,  264 ;  Rapin  (Jesuit),  Hutoire  de 
Janeetdsme^  edit.  by  Domenech  (Paris,  1861, 8vo) ;  Am, 
Bib,  Jiep,  3d aer.  iii,  689  6q. ;  Am.  TheoL  Reo,  1860,  Aug. 
YoLiL    See  Jesuits;  PoBT-RoTAU 

Jansen,  miert,  an  Anabaptist  mtcctyr^  snffered 
during  the  perBCcations  of  the  Auabaptists  near  the  mid- 
dle  of  the  16t:h  oentury  in  the  Łow  Countries,  then  un- 
der  the  govemment  of  Charles .V.  In  the  year  1649  he 
was  imprisoned  at  Amsterdam,  with  nineteen  other  An- 
abaptists.  He  was  a  tailor  by  trade,  but  his  mental  ca- 
padty  and  force  of  character  designated  him  as  a  man 
well  qualified  even  for  one  of  the  leamed  professions. 
While  his  other  friends  escaped  from  prison,  he  reroainctl 
behind,  determined  to  profess  openly  his  peculiar  Chris- 
tian view8,  or  die  in  defence  of  them.  March  20,  1549, 
he  finally  suffered  the  so  much  coveted  martyrdom  by 
buming.     See  Brown,  Baptist  Marł,  p.  67. 

Jansenism.    See  Jansknius,  2. 

Jansse,  Lucas,  a  distinguished  French  Protestant 
theologian  and  writer,  was  bom  at  Rouen  about  1605. 
He  studied  theology  at  the  Huguenot  seminaiy  situated 
at  the  lately  celebrated  Sedan,  and  was  pastor  at  Rouen 
from  1632  to  1682,  when  age  and  infirmities  obliged  him 
to  resign.  At  the  reyocation  of  the  Edict  of  Nantes  he 
retired  to  Rotterdam,  where  he  died  April  24th,  1686. 
Jansse  was  a  man  of  solid  leaming  and  iively  imagina- 
tion.  Ile  madę  himself  especially  conspicuous  by  a  pam- 
phlet — IjG  Messę  trouvee  dana  PEcriture  (Yillefranche 
[Rouen],  1647, 12mo) — in  which  he  ridiculed  Yeron  for 
łiaying,  in  an  edition  of  the  Louyain  Bibie  puUished 
at  Paris  in  1646,  translated  the  beginuing  of  Acts  xiii,  2 
by  "As  they  said  mass  unto  the  Lord.''  In  order  to 
ayoid  persecution,  Jansse  destroyed  a  large  number  of 
copies;  but  it  was  often  reprinted,  as  in  RecueU  de  plu- 
sieurs  pieces  curieuses  (YUlefranche  [Holland J,  1678, 
12mo),  and  alone  uuder  the  title  Le  Mirach  du  P,  Veron 
sur  la  Messę  (Lond.  1699, 12mo).  He  wrote,  also.  Traki 
de  ia  Fin  du  Monde  (Rouen  and  Queyilly,  1656, 8vo)  :— 
Le  Chritim  au  Pied  de  la  Croia  (Rouen,  1688, 8yo),  etc 
See  ChaufTepie,  Diet,  Jlisł. ;  Haag,  La  France  Protest.; 
Hoefer,  Nouc.  Bioy.  Ginirale,  xxvi,  854.     (J.  N.  P.) 

Janssenboy,  the  family  name  of  several  Dutch 
theologians  quite  distinguished  in  the  Roman  jCatholic 
Church,  mostly  as  misslonaries  of  the  Dominican  order. 

1.  CoRNELius,  bom  near  the  beginning  of  the  pres- 
ent  oentury,  was  educated  at  Louyain,  then  went  to  Ita- 
ly,  and,  after  preaching  and  teaching  for  some  tamę,  the 
Congregation  of  the  Propaganda  sent  him  in  1628  to 
the  northem  proyinoes  on  mission  work,  and,  as  his  es- 
pecial  field,  Saxony  was  designated.  Failing,  howeyer, 
to  make  many  conyerts  in  this  country,  the  yery  cradle 
cf  Pr*testantism,  he  was  ordered  to  remoye  to  Flandcrs. 
On  his  return  to  Italy  in  1687,  he  was  lost  at  sea  (Oct. 
1 1).  He  wrote  seyeral  works  of  some  notę,  mostly  of  a 
polemical  naturę,  amongst  which,  of  especial  interest  to 
us,  his  Difmse  de  la  Fot  Caiholicue. 

2.  DoMiNicus,  brother  of  the  former,  bom  at  Amster- 
dam l^Iarch  14, 1647,  was  also  dispatched  to  the  north- 
em pmyinces  at  the  same  time  as  his  brother  Comelius. 
He  resided  at  Hamburg,  but  the  opposition  he  here  en- 
countered  by  imprudeiit  conduct  finally  resulted  in  his 
expulsion  from  the  city;  and  although  the  order  was 
af&erwards  reyoked,by  reason  of  his  pledges  to  be  morę 
considerate  aud  fair  in  his  representations  of  the  Reform- 


ers,  he  ąuitted  Hamburg  ui  1684  and  retired  to  a  Domitf. 
ican  conyent  at  Cologne.  In  1643  his  superiors  sent  him 
to  Amsterdam,  where  he  died  March  14, 1647.  While 
at  Cologne,  Dominicns  published  seyeral  works  in  dc^ 
fence  of  the  doctiines  and  usages  of  the  Roman  CathoGc 
Church,  but  they  are  rather  of  an  inferior  order. 

3.  Nicholas  was  bom  at  Zierickzee,  on  the  island  of 
Schonwcn,  Zealand,  in  the  second  half  of  the  16th  cen- 
tury.  After  haying  taken  the  Dominican  garb  at  An- 
yers,  he  was  appointed  regent  and  then  superior  of  the 
college  at  lire,  in  Brabant,  and  afterwards  professor  o( 
theology  at  Louyain.  His  superior  ability  pointcd  him 
out  as  one  of  the  ablest  men  for  misuonaiy  labor  amonc 
the  Lutherans  of  Denmark,  and  he  was  intnisted  with 
this  work.  After  a  sUy  of  seyeral  yeare  in  Holstcin, 
Norway,  and  other  northem  proyinces,  he  went  to  Roroc 
to  giye  an  accoant  of  his  labors,  and  to  propose  the 
measures  necessary  to  re-establish  Romaninn  in  those 
countries.  In  1628  he  was  again  dispatched  to  ihe 
same  countries,  this  time  reinforced  by  his  brothen 
aboye  mentioned.  He  failed,  howerer,  in  nuiking  much 
of  an  impression  on  the  Protestant  s,who  hadheaid  and 
seen  enough  of  Romanism  and  its  workings  to  be  sat- 
isfied  that  salyation  did  not  flow  through  that  channeL 
While  he  was  treated  with  the  utmoet  liberaiity  by  both 
the  goyemment  and  the  people  among  whom  he  came 
to  prodaim  the  doctrines  of  the  Roman  Catholic  relig- 
ion,  the  conyerts  for  his  religion  werc  few,  if  any.  But 
it  must  be  oonceded  that  Romę  had  wclI  chósen  the 
man  who  was  likely  to  make  conyerts  for  poperi»%  if  sach 
a  thing  had  been  possible.  Nicholas  was  oertainly  a 
man  of  great  eradition,  and  well  ąualificd  to  f^ain  eyen 
the  admiration  of  his  opponents.  He  died  Koyember 
21, 1634.  His  works  are,  Panet^yricue  de  St.  Thomas 
d*Aquw  (Louyain,  1621, 8yo)' — Vie  de  Sf.  Domimcae 
(Anyers,  1622,  8vo)  -.—Defensw  Fidti  CathoŁ  (Anyen, 
1681, 8yo),  etc  See  Touron,  Ifommes  iUusłre*  de  rordre 
de  Sł. lhtnmique  ;  Hoefer,  Nouv.  Bioff.  Gen.  xxvi,  355  sq. 
(J.H.W.) 

Janasens,  Erasmus  (Lat  Erasmus  Johak^css),  a 
Dutch  Unitarian  thc(»logian,  was  bom  about  154(X  He 
was  rector  of  the  College  of  Antwcrp,  but  his  adyocacy 
of  Socinianism  obliged  him  to  resign  that  office  in  1576. 
He  was  next  rector  of  the  College  of  Embden  (Oo«t 
Frize),  but,  in  oonseąucnce  of  new  persecations,  he  went 
in  1579  to  Frankfort,  and  thence  to  Poland,  where  he  sct- 
tled  at  Craooyia  in  1584.  Here  he  asked  to  be  permit- 
led  publidy  to  dcfcnd  his  opinions.  The  demand  was 
granted,  and  the  renowned  Faustus  Socuiius  was  his  op- 
ponent  Their  conference  lasted  two  days  (29ili  and 
dOth  of  Noyembcr,  1584),  and  paased  ofT  calroh-;  but, 
both  haying  subseąuently  published  an  aocount  of  the 
proceedings,  they  accused  each  other  of  incorrectnesBi 
Janssens,  howeyer,  on  being  offered  the  pa8t4irBbip  of  a 
Unitarian  oongregation  at  Clausembm^,  in  Transylya- 
nia,  retnicted  his  former  principles,  and  adopted  those 
of  Socinius  (q.  v.),  who,  as  is  well  knovm,  by  his  gmt 
ability  not  only  silenced  aU  the  anti-Trinitaiians  that 
differed  from  his  yiews,  but  finally  eyen  guned  them  all 
oyer  to  his  side  (comp.  Krasiński,  Reformatkm  in  Poland 
[Lond.  1840, 2  yols.  8yo],  ii,  866).  Janssens  is  supposed 
to  haye  died  near  the  cloee  of  the  16th  century.  His 
principal  works  were,  Clara  Demonttratw  A  ntichristm 
immedkUe  post  mortem  aposłohrum  ccepiase  regnare  im 
Fcdesia  Christi  (1584, 12mo)  [this  work  gaye  rise  to  the 
persecutions  which  obliged  Janssens  to  retire  to  Poland] : 
— A  ntUhesis  doctnme  ChrisH  et  A  itff-C%mft  de  v»o  vero 
Deo  (anon.  1585,  12mo;  with  a  refutation  by  Jenn&e 
Zanchio,  Neustadt,  1586,  4to)  i — Scriptmn  quo  eausas 
propfer  qvas  vka  atema  conHngat  compkditur,  etc 
(1589) : — Epistoła  ad  Fauiłitm  Socinym^  with  an  answer 
of  the  latter  dated  April  the  20tb,  1590 :  —  De  Unipemti 
FiHi  Dei  erisłentia,  sice  dieputatio  inter  Erasit^um  Jo^ 
hamiem  et  Faustum  SodnuMf  etc  (Cracoy.  1595, 12mo): 
— De  Ottofuor  Monarchns  :-^ommenłaruis  in  Apoeo' 
lypsin,  He  published,  also^  the  BUtliorum  Pars  I T,  uf 
est  Libri  Prcpheticit  Laiina  reoenaio  er  Uebnta  Jada, 


JANSSON 


111 


JANTTARIUS 


hretHnugne  ickoiiit  tUustrata  ab  Immamtele  TfemeUio  et 
Frane.  Jwdo  (Fnuicf.  1579).  See  Dierck8eii'8  A  ntuerpia 
CkrUto  noMcenSf  etc.,  p.  678;  Yriemoet,  Athen,  Friś,  p. 
182 ;  FaoBte  Socin,  EpisU  III  ad  Matth.  Radeciumj  p. 
S86, 437) ;  Sandius,  BibL  A  ntitrmit.  p.  72, 84, 87, 88, 105 ; 
Paquot,  Mem,  pour  termr  a  Fhist,  des  Pays-Bas,  vii.  328- 
833.— Uoefer,  Now,  Biog.  Gener,  xxvi,  357.  (J.  N.  P.) 
Janason,  Hans  Hendrick,  a  Dutch  thoologian, 
bom  at  Siddebuien  Sept.  3, 1701,  was  educated  at  the 
Univenity  of  Groningen.  Hb  theological  instracton 
there  were  Otto  Yerbrugge  and  Antonias  Dńessen.  At» 
txacted  bj  the  spirlt  and  famę  of  Yitringa,  he  resorted 
Ło  the  Fnneker  University,  and  imbibed  the  spirit  of 
that  celebrated  divine.  After  beooming  a  candidate  for 
the  ministry,  he  repaired  to  Utrecht  to  eiijoy  the  in- 
structions  of  the  distinguished  Lampe.  He  was  settled 
8iłcce8sively  at  Dirkaland  (1728-31),  Embden  (1731-^5), 
Finsterwolde  (1745-48),  Yeendam  (1748-52),  and  Gro- 
ningen  (1752-80).  His  fint  work,  by  which  he  madę 
himself  kbown  as  a  worthy  disciple  of  Yitiinga,  was  an 
expoation  of  the  Epistle  of  James.  It  was  commended 
by  competent  theologians  of  his  day  as  being  of  ster- 
ling  merit.  He  occupics  in  this  work  high  evangelical 
giound,  insisting  not  on  a  heathenish  morality,  bat  on 
practical  piety.  In  1750  he  gave  to  the  public  an  ex- 
pońtion  of  the  Epistle  of  Jude.  In  this  work  he  op- 
poses  the  enthosiasm  and  mysticism  which  preyailed 
AFound  him,  and  which  tended  to  subyert  vital  godli- 
ness.  His  next  work  was  on  the  third  chapter  of  the 
Prophecy  of  Zcchariah.  These  were  all  quarto  vol- 
ume&  Sereral  smaller  volumes  of  an  experimental  and 
practical  character  were  also  published  by  him.  He 
enjoyed  in  a  very  high  degree  the  love  and  esteem  of 
the  congregations  which  he  succeasiyely  seryed.  He 
^ed  March  1, 1780,  unirersally  lamented.  See  B.  Gla- 
siua,  Godgdeerd  Nederhmd^  ii,  169  sq.     (J.  P.  W.) 

Jansson,  Hillebrand,  a  Dutch  theologian,  was 
bom  at  Zandeweer  April  20, 1718.  He  was  fitted  for 
the  unirersity  by  his  father,  who  was  also  named  Hille- 
brandy  and  who  was  successiyely  settled  at  Scbaldebu- 
ren,  Noordhora,  and  Zandeweer.  The  yoonger  Hille- 
brand  first  settled  at  Noordhom,  where  he  remained 
from  1741-50 ;  then  removed  to  Kropswolde,  where  he 
labored  till  1753,  when  he  accepted  a  cali  to  Yeendam. 
Thia  was  at  the  time  one  of  the  largest  and  most  popu- 
lous  parishes  of  Holland.  Herę  he  labored  for  nearly 
half  a  century  with  zeal  and  fidelity.  He  dted  Oct.  12, 
1789.  His  name  is  famous  in  the  histoiy  of  the  Re- 
formed  Church  of  Holland  by  reason  of  the  conspicuous 
part  he  took  in  the  controyersy  on  the  sacrament  of  the 
Lord*8  Supper.  Francis  Gomar,  noted  as  the  oppo- 
nent  of  Arminius,  was  one  of  the  first  to  give  a  latitudi- 
narian  interpretation  to  what  is  sald  on  this  point  in  the 
Confession  of  Faith  (Article  35),  and  in  the  Heidelberg 
Catechism  (81st  Q.  and  A.).  Aocording  to  him,  every 
one  who  openly  acknowledged  the  Christian  leli^on 
mi^bt  come  to  the  table  of  the  Lord  irrespectire  of  per- 
fMHial  piety.  This  view  was  adopted  by  many,  and 
from  time  to  time  found  public  adrocates.  In  1764  £, 
Van  Eerde  defended  it  against  J.  K.  Appelius.  He  ap- 
pealed  to  the  standarda,  and  he  is  said  to  hare  nąain- 
tained  his  yiews  with  decided  ability.  Jansson  entered 
the  lista  on  the  side  of  Yan  Eerde,  and  henceforth  be- 
came  the  principal  combatant.  The  position  he  took 
was  this:  "Eyery  one  who  bas  a  historical  faith  oon- 
fcssea  the  same,  and  deports  himself  inoflfenmyely  and 
exemplarily,  and  in  aocordance  with  his  confession  not 
ooly  may,  but  also  most  come  to  the  Supper;  and  in  so 
far  aa  he  does  it  in  obedienoe  to  Chńsfs  command,  in 
espectation  of  his  blessing,  promised  in  oonnection  with 
tbe  administration  of  the  Word  ańd  the  seals  of  the 
oorenant,  he  does  not  sin  in  the  thing  itself,  although 
he  always  does  it  ill  as  to  the  manner  so  long  as  he  does 
not  ćo  it  spiritnally.''  He  seems  to  haye  placed  the  ob- 
aenranoe  of  this  ordinance  on  the  same  footing  with  that 
of  hearing  the  Word  preached  and  other  acts  of  diyine 
woffship,  Buch  as  singing  and  prayer,    Appelius,  on  the 


oontrary,  maintained  '^that  the  Supper  wfts,  according 
to  the  teaching  of  the  Scriptures  and  that  of  the  Ke- 
formed  Church,  instituted  for  the  regenerate,  who  pos* 
sess  spiritual  life  and  its  attributes."  This  controyersy 
greatly  agitated  the  Church,  and  its  elfect  was  in  some 
places  to  restrain  men  from  a  public  profession  of  theii 
faith,  and  to  deter  those  who  had  already  madę  a  pro- 
fession from  coming  to  the  communion.  A  somewhat 
intermediate  view,  presented  and  advocated  by  the  ac* 
complished  P.  Bosyeld,  seryed  to  allay  the  agitation, 
and  finally  preyailed  in  the  Church.  His  yiew  is  sub- 
stantially  this:  All  who  haye  madę  a  public  profession 
of  their  faith,  whether  they  possess  the  intemal  cvi- 
dence  of  haWng  been  truły  couyerted  or  not,  must  be 
regarded  as  belieyers,  and,  as  such,  entitled  to  and  bouud 
to  obserye  this  ordinance;  and  the  minister  must  inyite 
dl  such  to  come  to  the  communion,  as  being  their  priv- 
ilege  and  duty.  This  yiew  is  substantially  in  hamiony 
with  the  theory  and  practice  of  most  eyangelical  denom* 
inations  in  this  country.  See  Gtackiedam  ran  de  Ckris^ 
teUjke  Kerk  in  de  18^^  eeuw,  door  A.  Ijpeij,  yii,  401  sq. ; 
Geschiedenia  der  Nederlandache  IIervo}'mde  Kerk,  door 
A.  Ijpeij  en  J.  Dermout,  iii,  612  sq. ;  Glasius,  Godff^ 
ieerd  Nederland,  ii,  175  są.     (J.  P.  W.) 

JanuariiiB  is  a  name  under  which  some  fourteen 
martyiB  are  honored  in  the  Roman  Catholic  Church.  A 
gent  Januariaf  or  family  of  that  name,  is  found  among 
the  old  inscriptions.  There  is  a  monument  in  Turin  to 
the  memory  of  a  certain  Januarios  Yintius.  The  name 
seems  to  haye  belonged  especially  to  Africa  and  South* 
em  Italy.  Its  popnlarity  is  proyed  by  the  large  num- 
ber  of  martyrs  bearing  it,  which  is  surpassed  by  fcw 
othcrs  (perhape  Alcxandcr,  Felix,  John,  etc).  The  best 
known  among  them  is  St.  Januarius,  bishop  of  Bene 
yento,  who  was  beheaded  in  the  early  part  of  the  4th 
century  (according  to  the  Neapolitan  tradition,  at  Poz- 
zuoli,  where  many  Christians  suifcred  a  like  fatc,  in  305). 
The  sainfs  day  is  Sept.  19.  Januarius  is  the  patron 
saint  of  Naplcs.  His  head  and  blood,  preser\'ed  in  yials 
and  looked  upon  as  holy  relics,  are  kept  in  the  chapel 
El  Tesoro,  m  the  cathcdral  of  Naples,  where  they  were 
placed  Jan.  13,  1497.  According  to  tradition,  a  pious 
woman  gathered  at  the  place  of  his  cxecution  two  bot- 
tles  of  his  blood,  and  presented  them  to  bishop  Sbycrus 
of  Naplcs.  On  three  festlrals  each  year,  the  chief  of 
which  is  the  day  of  the  martyrdom,  Sept.  19,  and  on 
occasions  of  public  dangcr  or  calamity,  as  earthquakcs 
or  eruptions,  the  head  and  the  phials  of  the  blood  are 
carriecl  in  solemn  procesńon  to  the  high  altar  of  the  ca- 
thedral,  or  of  the  church  of  St.  Clare,  where,  after  praycr 
of  greater  or  less  duration,  the  blood,  on  the  phials  being 
brought  into  contact  with  the  head,  is  bclieyed  to  Iique- 
fy,  and  in  this  condition  is  presented  for  the  yeneration 
of  the  people,  or  for  the  conyiction  of  the  doubter.  It 
occasionally  happens  that  a  considerable  time  elapses 
before  the  liquefaction  takes  place,  and  sometimes  it  al- 
together  failk  The  latter  is  regarded  as  an  omen  of 
the  worst  import ;  and  on  those  occasions  when  the  mir- 
acle  is  delayed  beyond  the  ordlnary  time,  the  alarm  and 
excitement  of  the  congregation  rise  to  the  highest  pitch, 
as  it  is  represented  in  such  a  case  to  be  an  evil  sign  for 
the  city  and  the  people.  The  blood  is  exposed  threo 
times  eyery  year,  particularly  on  the  first  Sunday  in  May, 
and  in  cases  of  especial  public  afiliction.  The  proceas  of 
the  performance  of  this  so-called  miracle  is  kept  secret 
by  the  clergy  of  Naples.  Of  late  years  the  liquefaction 
of  the  blood  was  interpreted  as  a  sign  of  the  sainfs  good- 
will  towards  the  goyernment;  but  it  bas  done  so  for 
Ferdinand  II,  for  Garibaldi,  and  for  Yictor  Emanuel  with 
equal  ease,  which  would  seem  to  indicate  that  the  saint 
is  indifTerent  to  the  political  fate  at  least  of  his  dcvout 
worshippers.  Addison,  in  his  Traveh,  speaks  of  the 
performance  (in  his  notices  of  Naples)  thus:  "I  had 
twioe  an  opportunity  of  seeing  the  operation  of  this  pre- 
tended  miraele,  and  must  confess  that,  so  far  from  think- 
ing  it  a  real  miracle,  I  look  upon  it  aa  one  of  the  mosi 
bungling  tricks  I  ever  «ato»" 


JANTJM 


118 


JAO 


Another  Januańa8,«aid  toluiye  snfliered  under  Fdix, 
has  Jsn.  7  ossigned  to  him  in  the  Martyrologium  of  the 
Bomtah  Chnrch.  Still  another,  said  to  have  suffered 
mart3rrdom  in  Africa  with  Paul  and  Gerontiua,  has  Jan. 
19.  Yeda  names  April  8  for  a  Januarius  of  Airica,  ak>ng 
with  Macaria  and  Maxima.  Julj  10  ia  kept  in  honor 
of  two  saints  of  like  name,  one  of  which  bekKiged  to  the 
aeren  sona  of  Felicitas,  who  are  said  to  have  been  put  to 
death  fowards  the  end  of  the  2d  century  at  Ronie;  the 
other  suffered  martjrrdom  in  Africa  with  Felix  and  Na- 
bór. Their  remaina  were  tranafenred  to  Milan.  July 
11  is  sacred  to  a  Januarius  who  died  at  Nioopolis.  An- 
other suffered  martyrdom  at  Carthage,  together  with 
Philippus,  CatnlinuB,  etc,  July  15.  A  Januarius,  togeth- 
er with  Felicissimus  and  Agapetus,  fell  a  mart3T  under 
Decius  at  Romę,  and  the  Church  obserres  Aug.  6  in  his 
memory.  Ck:tober  18  is  the  anniverBary  of  the  Spanish 
martNnY  FauAtus  and  Januarius,  who  suffered  at  CSordova. 
On  Oct.  24  there  is  mention  madę  of  a  Januarius  who, 
after  being  long  persecuted,  was,  together  with  Felix, 
Audactus,  etc,  put  to  death  and  buried  near  Carthage. 
The  island  of  Sardinia  has  also  a  Januarius,  in  whoee 
honor  they  keep  Oct.  25.  On  Dec  2  we  find  a  Janua- 
rius, with  Sererus,  etc;  and  another  in  Africa  Dec  15. 
See  Herzog,  ReaU-Encjfldopddie,  vi,  488  8q. ;  Pierer,  Unie. 
Zea;.s.v.;  Wetzer  und  Welte, /r»rcA«i»-/^«r.  v,  500 ;  Zell, 
SófHudte  Epigraphik^  ii,  88 ;  Monumenta  Taurinensiaj  ii, 
119 ;  J.  G.  Keysler,  Neuette  Reum  (Hanov.  1751) ;  A  eta 
SanctOy  voL  vi;  Chambers,  CydopeeeL  a,  v.;  Broughton, 
BibliotK  Hut.  Sac,  i,  502. 

Ja^nnoi  (Heb.  Yamtm%  Q!)3^,  dujnbery  othcrwise  for 
*\^V^j  propagaiion  /  Septuag.  'lavovfi  v.  r.  'If^ati/,  Vulg. 
Janun),  a  town  in  the  mountains  of  Judah,  mentioned 
between  Eshcan  and  Bcth-tappuah  (Josh.  xv,  58).  The 
Heb.  text  has  D^S^  (as  if  Yamm\  &'^?^)  by  a  manifest 
error,  which  is  corrected  in  the  Masoretic  maig. ;  many 
copies  have  Yanus'^  DISJ^j/igrA/,  as  in  the  Eng.  margin 
''Janus."  Tlie  Syriac  yersion  has  Yalum.  Eusebius 
(Onomasł.  s.  v.  'lavova)  mentions  a  place,  Jaftua,  three 
miles  south  of  Legio,  but  admits  that  it  cannot  be  the 
locality  in  ąuestioii.  M.  de  Saulcy  {Nar,  i,  487)  thinks 
the  8i;,e  may  i^ssibly  l)e  marked  by  the  ruius  ofJenheh, 
at  the  foot  of  a  hill  nearly  south  of  Hebron ;  but,  accord- 
ing  to  Dr.  Robinson,  the  remains  are  little  morę  than 
those  of  cavc8  {Btb,  Jies,  ii,  472).  The  associated  names 
appcar  to  indicate  a  district  iramediately  north-wesŁ  of 
Hebron  (Keil,  Comm«nł,  on  Josh,  ad  loc).  The  position 
corresponds  with  that  of  a  ruincd  site,  RasJabreliy  mark- 
ed on  the  iirst  edition  of  Yan  de  Yelde^s  map  immedi- 
ately  on  the  west  of  the  road  directly  north  from  He- 
bron to  Jcrusalem,  and  adjoining  Khurbet  en-Nasara; 
but  the  second  edition  of  the  map  omits  both  these  sites, 
though  the  latter  is  explicitly  mentioned  in  the  Afemoir 
(p.  247)  as  '*  a  ruincd  rillage"  >'isited  by  him  as  well  as 
by  Dr.  Robinson  {liesearchesj  i,  317). 

Janus.    See  Janum. 

JanuB,  a  very  old  Roman  divinity,  whorn  name  is 
merely  a  different  form  of  Dianus  (probably  the  sun). 
The  worship  of  this  diyinity  held  a  high  place  in  the 
regards  of  the  Romans.  "In  every  undertaking  his 
name  was  first  inyoked,  even  before  that  of  Jupit4!r, 
which  is  the  morę  singiilar,  as  Jupiter  was  unque8tiona- 
bly  the  greatest  of  the  Roman  gods.  Perhaps  it  may 
be  taken  as  a  verification  of  the  tradition  that  Janus 
was  the  oldest  of  them,  and  ruled  in  Italy  before  any  of 
the  otheiB  came  thithcr.  (See  below,  our  rcference  to 
Romulus.)  He  presided  n«t  only  over  the  beginning 
of  the  year,  but  over  the  beginning  of  each  month,  each 
day,  and  the  commencement  of  all  enterprises.  On  New 
Year^s  day  pcople  madę  each  other  presents  of  iigs,  dates, 
honcy-cakes,  swcctmcats,  etc ;  wore  a  holiday-dress,  sa- 
luteil  each  other  kindly,  etc  The  pious  Romans  pniyed 
to  him  every  moming,  whence  his  name  ofMatutńau 
Pater  (Father  of  the  Moming)."  Janus  is  represented 
with  a  sceptre  in  his  right  haud  and  a  key  in  his  lefl,  sit- 


tingon  a  beamingtbrone  (probably  a  rdicof  the  origitts^ 
or  at  least  very  old  wonhip  of  Janus  as  the  aon).  He 
has  also  two  (and  aometimes  even  thiee)  faoes  (wbenoe 
the  expres8ion,  applied  to  a  deoeitfui  penon,  ''Jaints- 
faoed"  [compare  Ovid,  Fatti,  i,  185]),  one  youthfoi  and 
the  other  aged;  the  one  looking  ibrwaid,  and  the  otbcr 
backward,  in  which  some  have  profeaaed  to  see  a  sym- 
bol of  the  wisdom  of  the  god,  who  beholda  both  the 
past  and  the  futurę,  and  otłiera  simply  of  the  retiun  of 
the  year.  Although  it  is  related  ihat  Romulus  himseif 
erected  a  tempie  to  Janus  in 
Romę,  it  seems  that  a  spe- 
dal  impulse  to  the  cultus  of 
this  god  was  first  acąuired 
by  the  action  in  his  favor  of 
Numa,  who  dedicated  to  him 
the  passagCjdose  by  the  Fo- 
rum, on  the  road  connecting 
the  Quirinal  with  the  Pala- 
Une.  This  passage  (enrene- 
ously  caUed  a  tempie,  but 

which  was  merdy  a  sacred    ^  ,      ...  .      ,    - , 

^  .  .  .  .        Coln  with  head  of  Jaau. 

gateway  containmg  a  statuę  «w»«-«Hfc 

of  Janus)  was  open  in  timea  of  war,  and  doaed  in  times 

of  peace.    The  speculations  as  to  the  origin  of  this  I«tia 

ddty  has  been  very  extended  and  varied :  thna  some 

have  even  supposed  Janus  of  the  Romana  the  paiaSel 

of  Noah  of  the  Hebrewrs,  deriving  his  name  from  y^^ 

tpme,  because  Noah  was  the  first  planter  of  rinea,  and  be- 

cause  of  his  two  faces,  the  one  representing  his  Mght  of 

the  world  before,  the  other  his  sight  of  the  world  after 

the  Dduge !    See  Chambers,  Cydoptedioj  a.  v. ;  YoUmer, 

Wdrterb.  dtr  MyłhoL  p.  918  sq.;  Smith,  Diet.  ofCIau. 

Biog. 

Janvler,  ŁotI,  D.D.,  a  Presbyterian  minister,  bora 
at  Pittsgrove,  N.  J.,  April  25, 1816,  gradnated  at  Prince- 
ton College  with  the  highest  honors  of  his  class  in  1^ 
and  then  pursued  a  theological  course  of  study  at  Piinoe- 
ton  Semuiaiy,  teaching  at  the  same  time  in  Latayetie 
College,  where  he  so  ably  discharged  his  duties  that  he 
was  urgcd  to  accept  a  piofessorshipu  But  Janrier  pre- 
ferred  the  missionaiy  work,  and  he  was  licensed  and  or- 
dained  by  the  West  Jersey  Presby tery,  his  father,  ako  a 
minister,  preaching  on  the  occasion.  He  went  to  Indii, 
and  theiie  was  for  several  yeam  snperintendent  of  tbe 
mission  press ;  he  also  prepared  a  tranalation  of  the  Pen- 
tateuch  and  Psalms  into  Punjabi,  and  aidcd  in  the  prq>- 
aration  of  a  Punjabi  dictionary  and  other  works  in  this 
department  Impaired  health  obliged  him  to  seek  rec- 
reation,  and  he  came  on  a  vińt  to  his  native  couotrr  ia 
1859.  In  1860  he  retumcd  again  to  the  miaBooary 
work,  but  he  continued  only  a  short  time  to  strre  hb 
Master  here  on  earth :  March  25, 1804,  he  was  muidoed 
by  a  Sikh  at  Anandpore,  India.  ^  He  was  a  miFŚonaiy 
of  a  high  order ;  leamed,  wise,  gentle^  humble,  wuming; 
whoee  lo\*ing,  benerolent  life  preached  most  touchingly 
the  Gospd  of  his  Master,"  was  the  testimony  of  one  oJT 
the  papers  of  India  after  the  assassination  of  Mr.  JanvieŁ 
Another  colaborer  (the  Rev.  J.  T.  Gracey)  wTute  to  the 
Mełhodutf  New  York,  in  April,  1864,  that  '^grcat  exctte- 
ment  prevailed  among  the  ijeople,'"  and  that  Jan\-ier  • 
funeral  '<  was  attended,  with  marked  reipect,  by  thon- 
sands  of  uatives."  See  Wilson,  Pretb.  I/ist.  A  lm^VS6i&,  pw 
117  sq.    (J.H.W.) 

Jaavier,  Rexi6-Ambroi8e,  a  French  Benedic- 
tine  monk,  was  bom  at  Sainte-Osmane,  on  the  Main,  in 
1618.  He  was  one  of  the  most  distinguisbed  Hebno^ts 
of  the  17th  century,  and  ia  celebrated  for  his  Latin  tnins- 
lations  of  several  Jewish  commentaries,  among  which 
are  a  transUtion  of  Kimchi*s  oommentary  on  the  Plsalms 
entitled i?. Dae. Kimeki  Commentetru  mPsabnof  (Puis, 
1666, 4to).  He  died  atParia  April  25, 1682.  SeeHoeler. 
A  our.  Bioff.  Gin.  xxvi,  868 ;  Haureau,  JlisL  Uitirtdrt  At 
Mam,  ii,  115;  llitt. Mir, de  la  Cangttg,  de  St, Mamr^  bu 
101. 

Jao.    See  Jkhovah  ;  YAuamKiAKisaŁ 


JAPAN 


119 


JAPAN 


Japan,  a  countty  in  Ewtem  Asia,  oonsisting  of  a 
great  number  (about  3850)  of  large  aud  smali  islandą 
which  are  situated  betweeu  3(F  10'  and  54^  24'  N.  lat, 
and  between  147^  34'  and  164°  30'  £.  Icniłg.  IŁ  is  di- 
yided  into  Japan  proper,  which  embraces  the  large  ial- 
ands  Japan  or  Nipon  (with  Sado,  Oki,  and  Awadń), 
Sitkok^  and  Kiońu  (wifch  a  number  of  adjaoent  ialanda), 
and  the  dependencies,  to  which  belong  Jeso,  with  adja- 
cent  islanda,  the  174  Kuriles^  the  less  known  (89)  Bomie, 
and  the  Lieu  Kieu  Islanda.  The  popolation  is  gener- 
ally  estimated  at  from  35  to  40  millions*,  ita  area  at 
about  150,000  sąuare  miles. 

The  history  of  Japan,  aocording  to  the  traditiona  of 
the  country,  begins  with  the  dynasty  of  the  hearenly 
gods,  consisting  of  seyen  generations,  and  reigning  from 
four  to  ńye  miUion  years.  It  was  foUowed  by  the  dy- 
nasty of  the  earthly  gods,  consisting  of  fire  generations, 
and  reigning  2,342,167  years.  The  natire  population 
(the  Ainos)  was  at  a  very  early  period  (according  to 
some  as  early  as  B.C.  1240)  pushed  back  by  the  immi- 
grants  from  China.  Probably  Simnu  (the  dirine  wai^ 
ńor),  the  founder  of  the  Japanese  empire,  with  whom 
the  authenticated  history  of  the  country  begins,  was 
also  a  Chinese.  He  first  conqaered  Kiusiu  (about  B.O. 
667),  sabsequently  Nipon,  where  he  ereoted  a  paladous 
tempie  (Dairi)  to  the  sun  goddess  (Miako),  and  oonsti- 
tuted  himself  ruler,  onder  the  honorary  tide  of  Mikada 
When  he  died  he  was  regarded  as  a  national  hero.  His 
successors  were  called  Mikado  or  Kin  Rey  (emperor) ; 
also  Ten  Oo  (Heayenly  Prince)  or  Ten  Zin  (Heavenly 
Child).  In  the  century  before  Christ  the  dignity  of  the 
four  commanders-in-chief  (Djogoon)  was  created  in  the 
war  agaiiist  the  Ainoe.  As  chiefs  of  the  army,  they 
concentrated  the  executive  power  in  their  hands,  stead- 
ily  enlarged  it,  and,  under  the  reign  of  a  weak  Mikado, 
sticceeded  in  making  it  hereditary  in  their  families. 
Thii)  was,  in  particular,  the  case  with  the  RuIm  (crown 
generał)  Yoritimo,  who  had  rescued  the  country  from  a 
periloiis  situation  during  the  admimstration  of  the  Mi- 
kado Koeyei  (1141^55) ;  he  added  to  his  title  Kubo  the 
word  Sama  (lord).  Henceforth  he  and  his  successors 
resided  in  Yeddo,  while  Miako  rem&iaed  the  residence 
of  the  Mikados;  his  dynasty  w  is  in  1334  supplanted  by 
anotber,  but  the  separation  of  the  ecdesiastical  and  seo- 
tilar  authority  remained  unchanged. 

In  the  middle  of  the  16th  century  the  first  Europeans 
visited  Japan,  which,  up  to  this  time,  had  been  only 
known  to  them  from  Arabiaii  geographers,  and  from  the 
accounts  given  in  the  13th  century  by  the  trareller 
Marco  Polo,  afler  his  return  from  China.  Through  the 
efforts  of  three  runaway  Portugoese  sailors,  who  in  1545 
had  found  a  refuge  on  board  a  Chinese  merchautman, 
and  who,  having  by  storms  been  driren  to  the  Japanese 
ialand  Yanega,  had  found  a  kind  reception  at  the  resi- 
dence of  the  prince  of  Bungo,  in  Kiiuiu,  a  lively  com- 
mercial  intercourse  arose  with  Portugal,  which  soon 
proved  to  be  of  immense  value  to  the  latter  country.  In 
1»49,  the  celebrated  Jesuit  missionary  Francis  Xavier, 
-who  had  conyerted  a  Japanese  at  Goa,  arrived  in  Japan. 
Zhiriiig  a  stay  of  two  years  he  visited  the  territories  of 
sereral  princes  and  founded  missions,  which  he  con- 
fided  to  zealous  priests  of  his  order*  The  Roman  Cath- 
olic  futh  spread  rapidly,  and  soon  the  Catholic  Church 
numbered  about  250  churches  and  13  seminaries.  The 
Buddhiat  priests  madę  a  desperate  resistance  to  the 
pfogresa  of  Christianity,  but  a  number  of  the  Daimios 
£ivored  it,  as  they  expected  from  the  success  of  Chris- 
tianity great  oommercial  adyantages.  In  1562  the 
prinoe  of  Omura,  and  soon  after  the  princes  of  Bungo  and 
Arima,  embraced  Christianity,  and  sent  a  splendid  em- 
bassy  (embracing  also  thiee  princes),  with  rich  presents^ 
to  pope  Gregory  XIII  and  to  king  Philip  II  of  Spain. 
Bat  when  the  suspicion  arose  that  the  Daimios  who  had 
enabraced  Christianity  intended,  with  the  aid  of  foreign 
Christian  goyemments  and  of  the  natiye  Christian  pop- 
ulation, to  establish  their  entire  independence,  the  Kubo 
Sama  flde  Yose,  an  npetait  who,  being  of  Iow  birth,  had 


in  1585  usurped  the  dignity  of  Kubo  Sama,  curtailed 
the  rights  of  the  subordinato  princes,  took  from  the  Mi- 
kado eyerything  except  the  administration  of  the  eo- 
desiastical  aflkirs,  and  issued  a  stiingent  edict  against 
Christianity,  which  had  been  fayored  by  his  predecessor 
Nabunanga.  The  edict  proyided  for  the  exLle  of  all 
the  missionaries  and  the  destmction  of  the  churches. 
It  was  not  executed  at  once,  but  in  1596  a  real  persecu- 
tion  of  the  Christiana  began,  the  beginniog  of  a  relig- 
ious  and  ciyil  war  which  lasted  for  forty  years.  Fide 
Yoee  died  in  1598,  while  preparing  for  the  inyasion  and 
conqueBt  of  China;  and  he  was  succeeded  by  the  guar- 
dian  of  his  minor  son,  Yie  Yazoo,  prinoe  of  Mikaya, 
whoee  descendants  haye  reigned  at  Yeddo  until  the  prea- 
ent  day.  Yie  Yazoo  madę  the  dignity  of  Kubo  hered- 
itary in  the  three  houses  founded  by  his  sons,  shut  the 
Mikado  np  in  his  palące  at  Miaco,  and  gaye  to  the  coun- 
try a  legiałation  and  constitution  tmder  which  it  remain- 
ed at  peace  for  morę  than  two  hundred  years. 

In  the  mean  while  the  Duteh  had  gained  a  footing  in 
Japan,  and,  from  commercial  jealousy  against  the  Por- 
toguese,  aided  and  enoonraged  the  Kubo  Sama  in  his 
proceedings  against  the  Christiaus.  With  their  aid,  at 
the  dose  of  tho  16th  century,  70,000  Christians  who  had 
intrenched  themselyes  on  the  peninsula  Simabora  were 
crushed.  Since  then  the  Roman  Catholic  faith  became 
gradually  extinct.  The  number  of  Christians  put  to 
death  has  been  estimated  at  neariy  two  millious,  and 
the  annals  of  the  Jesuits,  Franciscans^  and  Dominicans 
are  filled  with  narratiyes  of  the  deaths  of  members  of 
their  orders  in  Japan.  Besides  Xayier,  the  greatest 
missionaries  were  Y alignani,  father  John  Baptist,  a  Span- 
ish  Franciscan,  Philip  of  Jesus,  a  Mexican  Franciscan, 
both  crucified  at  Nagasaki,  father  Charles  Spinola,  etc 
The  last  Catholic  priest  who  entered  Japan  was  Sedotti, 
who  in  1709  found  means  to  land,  but  was  neyer  again 
heardof. 

The  hatred  of  Christianity,  the  religion  of  the  detest- 
ed  foreigners,  induced  the  nilers  of  Japan  to  break  off 
all  intercourse  with  Christian  nations.  £yen  the  aUied 
Dutoh  had  soon  to  suffer  from  this  isolation.  They  had 
to  glye  up  in  1641  the  island  of  Firando  (north  of  Na- 
gasaki), which  in  1609  had  been  asaigned  to  them  as  a 
trading  station,  and  to  remove  to  the  island  of  Desima, 
where  their  offioers  were  subjected  to  a  yery  rigoroiis 
superintendence.  They  were  only  allowed  to  export 
annually  goods  to  the  yalue  of  750,000  fiorins  (the  Chi- 
nese 1,000,000)  in  two  ships  (the  Chinese  in  ten) ;  more- 
oyer,  they  had  to  send  for  a  long  time  annually,  and 
sińce  1790  every  fourth  year,  tribute  to  Yeddo.  AU  the 
eflforts  madę  by  the  goyemments  of  Christian  nations 
(the  English  from  1618  to  1623,  and  in  1803,  the  Rus- 
sians  in  1792  and  1804,  and  the  North  Americans  in 
1887)  to  re-establish  oommercial  relations  were  unsuo- 
cessful.  When  China  was  partly  opened  to  the  Chris- 
tian nations  in  yirtue  of  the  treaty  of  Nanking  (1842), 
king  William  II  of  the  Netherlands  (by  a  lettcr  dated 
Feb.  15, 1844)  madę  another  attempt  to  preyail  upon 
the  Japanese  goyemment  to  open  seyeral  ports  and  to 
allow  commercial  intercoune,  but  again  his  request  was 
declined,  as  was  also  that  of  the  American  commodore 
Biddle,  who  in  1846  appeared  in  the  bay  of  Yeddo,  and 
proposed  the  conduaion  of  a  oommercial  treaty.  Morę 
sucoessfui,  howeyer,  was  the  American  commodore  Per- 
ry,  who,  towards  the  dose  of  1852,  was  sent  with  a  flo- 
tilla  to  Yeddo.  Afler  long-protracted  and  most  difficulŁ 
negotiations,  he  conduded  on  March  31, 1853,  at  Kana- 
gaya,  a  treaty  of  peace  and  friendship,  by  which  the 
American  yessels  recdved  access  to  the  ports  of  Simoda 
and  Hakodade,  to  the  former  immediatdy,  to  the  latter 
from  March  31,  1855,  in  order  to  take  in  fuel,  water, 
proyisions,  and  other  necessaries.  The  long  isolation 
of  Japan  from  the  Christian  world  ha\-ing  thus  come  to 
an  end,  treaties  with  other  Christian  nations  soon  fol- 
lowed.  Thus  England  obtuned  the  conclusion  of  a 
treaty  similar  to  the  American  on  Oct  14, 1854 ;  Russia 
on  Feb.  7, 1855 ;  the  Netherlands  on  Noy.  9, 1855.    The 


JAPAN 


780 


JAPAN 


Uftt-named  tteaty  abrogated  the  disgraceful  stipnktions 
concerniug  ChriatUnity  to  which  the  Dutch  had  fonDer- 
ly  been  compelled  to  Bubinit,  and  an  additional  stipular 
tion  of  Jan.  30,  1866,  allowed  them  to  celebrate  divine 
wonhip  in  the  opened  porta.  In.  1857  and  1858  new 
treaties  madę  further  concesaionB  to  the  ibor  treaty 
powen,  and  the  same  righta  were,  by  a  treaty  of  Oct.  9, 
1858,  extended  to  France.  From  Jan.  1, 1859,  the  porta 
of  Nagasaki,  Hakodade,  and  Kanagara;  from  Jan.  1, 
1860,  the  port  of  Negato,  and  another  port  on  the  west^ 
em  coast  of  Nipon ;  and  on  Jan.  1, 1863,  Hiogo,  the  port 
of  Osaca,  were  opened.  Foreigners  were  allowed  to  re- 
side  in  these  placea,  to  purchase  landed  property,  to 
boild  houses  and  caurchea,  and  to  celebrate  their  divine 
worship;  from  Jan.  1,  1862,  they  were  alao  permitted 
to  reside  in  Yeddo.  Gradually  other  Christian  nations, 
as  Portagal,  Prossia,  Spaln,  and  Austria,  likewise  sent 
eKpeditions  to  Japan,  which  reąuested  and  obtained  the 
conclosion  of  similar  treaties. 

The  firat  step  towards  opening  intercourae  with  for- 
eign  uations  was  soon  followed  by  othersL  In  1860  a 
Japanese  embasay  was  aent  to  the  United  States;  an- 
other yisited  in  1862  the  London  £xhibition,  as  well  as 
courts  of  Europę.  At  the  Paris  Exhibition  of  1867  even 
the  brother  of  the  Tycoon  appeared  with  a  numerous 
retinue.  A  number  of  young  Japanese,  including  many 
Bons  of  princes,  were  sent  to  the  schools  of  forcign  coun- 
tries,  in  particular  those  of  the  United  States;  sereral 
distinguished  foreigners  were  called  to  high  offices  in 
Japan,  and  a  Japanese  consul  generał  was  appointed  for 
San  Francisco  in  1869. 

The  great  change  which,  duiing  the  period  from  1854 
to  1870,  took  place  in  the  relation  of  Japan  to  the  world 
abroad,  was  not  completed  without  producing  many  vi- 
olent  commotions,  and  eifecting  important  transforma- 
tions  at  home.  The  policy  pursued  by  the  Tycoon  at 
Yeddo  was  bitterly  opposed  and  resisted  by  many  of  the 
most  influential  Daimios,  and  a  lai^  portion  of  the 
Japanese  people  at  large.  On  this  occasion  it  was 
found  out  that  the  European  govemments  which  had 
ooncluded  treaties  with  the  Tycoon  had  been  greatly 
mistakeu  conceming  the  true  naturo  of  the  oiiSce  of 
Tycoon.  They  had  regaided  him  as  being  the  abaolute 
ruler  of  Japan ;  whereas,  in  fact,  the  Mikado,  ałthough 
actually  confined  to  the  exercise  of  his  religious  func- 
tions,  was  still  uniyersally  looked  upon  as  the  head  of 
the  stote,  and  the  highesŁ  arbiter  in  all  ąuanrels  between 
the  Tycoon  and  the  Daimios.  In  union  with  the  Dai- 
mios, the  Mikado  now  asserted  his  8overcignty  with 
considerable  success.  When  aome  of  the  Daimios  com- 
mitted  outragcs  against  the  foreigners,  the  Tycoon  con- 
fessed  his  inability  to  bring  them  to  pnnishment,  and  the 
European  powers  had  themselves  to  enforce  their  claims 
against  the  princes  of  Satsuma  and  Negato.  Ultimate- 
ly  a  fieroe  civil  war  broke  out  between  the  Tycoon 
and  a  number  of  the  northem  Daimios  on  the  one  hand, 
and  the  Mikado  and  the  majority  of  the  Daimios  on  the 
other,  which  resulted  in  the  abolition  of  the  ofBcc  of  the 
Tycoon  (1868),  and  the  restoration  of  the  Mikado  to 
the  fuli  power  of  actual  ruler.  The  successful  Mikado, 
howerer,  did  not,  as  many  expected,  change  the  foreign 
policy,  but  showed  himself  eager  to  cultirate  the  most 
friendly  relations  with  foreigners,  and  to  elerate  the 
country  to  a  lerel  with  the  most  civilized  nations  of 
Europę  and  America.  In  May,  1869,  a  large  congress 
of  Daimios  was  held  at  Yeddo,  and  from  that  time  to 
the  middle  of  the  year  1871  many  important  reforma  in 
the  administration  have  partly  been  carried  through, 
partly  begun. 

The  authorization  given  by  the  Japanese  govemment 
to  foreign  residents  of  a  Iree  exeroise  of  the  Christian 
religion  in  the  open  ports  was,  of  course,  eagerly  em- 
braced  by  both  the  Protestant  and  the  Roman  Catholic 
churchcs.  Missionaries  of  both  establishcd  themselres 
in  sereral  of  the  porta,  attending  both  to  the  religious 
wanta  of  the  foreign  reaidenta,  and  prepańng  for  mis- 
aionary  operations  among  the  natires.    The  appearanco 


of  Roman  Catholic  missionaries  at  Nagasaki  brought  to 
light  the  fact  that  a  number  of  the  deBcendants  of  for- 
mer  Christians  in  Japan  still  secretly  adhered  to  tbe 
Roman  Catholic  faith,  and  now  hoped  for  permisaion  to 
exereiBe  it  pnblicly.  The  Japanese  goremment,  how- 
ever,  did  not  give  the  expected  permission,  but  in  1807 
arrested  and  imprisoned  some  twenty  of  the  natire 
Christiana.  After  an  imprisonment  of  Słx  montha,  tbc 
French  chargć  d'afiaires  obtained  in  December  their 
liberation.  In  the  following  year,  howcrer,  the  peree- 
cution  was  renewed  with  great  cruelty.  The  following 
Ls  one  of  the  official  decrees  published  by  the  gc>rcm- 
ment:  "As  the  abominable  religion  of  the  Chriatians  is 
strictly  prohibited,  every  one  shall  be  bound  to  denoimce 
to  the  proper  authorities  such  persons  aB  appear  nispi- 
cious  to  him,  and  a  reward  shaU  be  gircn  to  him  for  so 
doing.  Ałthough  the  sect  of  the  Christians  has  been 
many  centuries  ago  persecuted  most  rigoiously  by  tbe 
Rankfu  goremment,  ita  cntire  exteTmination  had  cot 
been  arrivcd  at.  Aa,  howerer,  the  number  of  the  fol- 
lowers  of  the  Christian  doctiine  has  lately  considenbly 
augmented  in  the  \'illage  of  Urakami,  near  Nagasaki, 
whose  peasants  secretly  adhere  to  it,  after  matiu%  coo- 
sideration  it  has  been  ordered  by  the  highcst  authoiity 
that  Christians  shall  be  taken  into  castod\',  arrording 
to  the  rules  laid  down  in  tho  annexed  document>  'As 
the  Christian  doctrine  has  been  prohibited  in  this  coun- 
try sińce  the  oldest  timcs,  this  matter  ought  not  to  lie 
lightly  treated.  Those  to  whose  cnstody  Cbriatians 
shall  be  confided  shall  therefore  instruct  them  of  what 
ia  right,  with  lenicncy  and  humanity^and  shall  do  their 
beat  to  again  make  good  men  of  them.  But  if  fome 
ahould  not  repent  and  acknowledge  their  eiron,  thef 
shall  be  most  sererely  punished  without  any  mercr. 
Those  whom  it  concems  shall  keep  this  well  in  mind, 
and  denounce  to  the  proper  authorities  every  one  wbo 
shall  prove  incorrigiblc.  Those  men  (Christians),  uutn 
they  have  repented,  shall  not  be  allowed  to  hare  any 
intercourse  with  the  inhabitanta  of  the  places  whcre 
they  are  consigned.  They  shall  be  used  to  elear  land, 
or  to  work  in  the  lime-pita,  or  the  gold  and  coal  mines, 
or  for  any  work  their  officers  may  think  fit  to  empłoy 
them  on.  They  shall  livc  in  the  raountains  and  for- 
ests.  One  portion  of  rice  shall  be  allowed  per  head  to 
the  respective  Daimios  for  the  spaoe  of  threc  yea^^  to 
commence  from  a  day  to  be  determined  hereafter.  They 
shall  be  brought  in  smali  detachments  to  the  places  mcn- 
tioned  below.  The  Daimios  shall,  as  soon  as  thej  re- 
oeive  the  Information  of  the  arrival  of  the  persons  aUot- 
ted  to  them,  send  soldiers  to  take  them  orer.  Tbe 
above  imperial  orders  are  hereby  published  itff  obscrr- 
ance.  The  following  Daimios  shall  take  over  tbe 
Christiana  allotted  to  them  at  their  respective  palaces 
at  Osaca.' "  Thb  decree  was  followed  by  a  list  of  thir- 
ty-four  Daimios  who  had  Christian  prisoners  aDotted 
to  them,  in  numbers  varying  from  80  to  250  each.  The 
following  decree  was  posted  at  the  gates  of  Yokobama: 
"  The  Christian  religion  being  still  forbidden  in  the  time 
manner  as  formerly,  is  strictly  interdicted.  The  deril- 
ish  sect  is  strictly  prohibited.** 

On  the  7th  of  July  114  natire  Christians,  chiefly  men 
and  heads  of  famUies,  were  put  on  board  the  Japanese 
steamer  Sir  U.  Parkes  at  Nagasaki,  and  cairied  away 
to  the  mines  of  the  north  for  penal  senritude.  The  pro- 
test of  the  constds  at  Nagasaki  and  the  mintsteR  at 
Yeddo  were  of  no  avaiL  The  Congresa  of  Dainuos 
which  met  in  1869  showed  itaelf  likewise  verj-  bortite 
to  Christianity.  Only  one  roember  dared  to  defend  it, 
while  210  voted  for  a  resolution  dedaring  Christianity 
to  be  opposed  to  the  state.  Another  resolution  to  inffirC 
serere  penalties  for  bringing  back  the  apostates  to  one 
of  the  religions  of  the  country  was  negatired  br  176 
against  44  yotes. 

Japan  has  long  had  many  religiotis  Bccts  which  hare 
lived  peaceably  together.  The  three  prindpal  serta 
are  the  Sinto  religion,  Buddhiam,  and  the  sect  of  Sio. 
The  original  and  most  andent  ia  the  Sinio  or  Sissyw 


JAPAN 


781 


JAPAN 


aect,  which  b  founded  on  the  worship  of  spińts,  called 
in  the  Japanese  language  KAini,  in  thc  Chtneee  Sin, 
who  control  the  actions  of  men,  and  all  \isible  and  in- 
Tuibte  thinga.  Tbe  chief  of  these  spirits  19  Yen  Zio 
Dai  Sin,  which  means  Great  Spirit  of  the  Hearenly 
Light,  who  receives  the  highest  honora  from  all  religious 
parties.  Bestdes  this  sun-goddess,  thousands  of  inferior 
Kamis  reoeire  dirine  honors.  Most  of  these  are  the 
spinta  of  distinguished  men,  who  were  canonizcd  on  ac> 
count  of  their  meńta.  Their  number  Is  not  limited,  but 
the  31ikado  still  poseesses  the  right  to  canonize  promi- 
nent men,  and  thus  to  elevate  them  to  the  dign&ty  of  a 
Kami.  The  Sinto  religion  has  five  commandments :  1. 
Preseiration  of  thc  pure  fire  as  on  emblcm  of  puńty  and 
a  means  of  purification ;  2.  Puńty  of  the  soul,  of  the 
heart,  and  the  body;  3.  Observation  of  festivals •,  4.  Pil- 
grima^^;  6.  Worrtiip  of  the  Kami  in  the  temples  and 
at  home.  The  numerous  temples  (Mya)  contain  no 
idola,  but  large  metal  miirors  and  packets  of  wbite  pa- 
per  scraps,  aa  symbols  of  pu|ity«  The  priests  are  called 
Kaminnsi,  or  keepers  of  the  gods.  They  Uve  near  the 
temples,  and  derive  their  income  chiefly  from  the  money 
offerings  roade  on  feast-days.  Among  the  twenty-two 
places  of  pilgrimage,  the  tempie  Nykoo,  in  the  province 
of  Jsyay,  which  is  sacred  to  the  sun-goddess,  is  the  most 
prominent,  and  evcry  one  is  bound  to  v!sit  it  at  least 
onoc  in  the  course  of  his  llfe.  The  second  reiigton  is 
Buddhism,  which  was  introduced  about  532  from  Corea, 
but  rec8ived  many  modifications  in  Japan,  and  gradual- 
ly  became  the  religion  of  the  vast  majority  of  Japanese. 
The  sect  known  aa  Siuto,  or  the  achool  of  philosophers, 
comprises  the  foUoweTS  of  Coufucius,  and  includes  the 
people  of  the  best  education. 

The  great  political  rerolution  through  which  Japan 
pasaed  in  18C8,  by  the  abolition  of  the  office  of  the  Ty- 
coon  and  the  re-establishment  of  the  supremę  power  of 
the  Mikado,  was  accompanied  by  an  eflbrt  to  effect  a 
complete  change  in  the  state  religion  of  ihe  country. 
Au  American  missionary  writes  on  this  subject,  under 
datę  of  Dec.  26, 1868,  as  follows :  *'  Herę  tbe  Buddhist 
religion  i»,  or  was,  the  established  religion,  and  tbe 
priests  have  a  monopoly  of  bur>'ing  people,  and  pray- 
ing  for  them  afterwards.  The  aboriginal  Sinto  religion 
has  fallcn  into  disuse,  poverty,  and  conseąuent  disfavor 
and  disgracc.  This  state  of  things  comroenced  about 
three  hundred  ^'ears  ago  under  Y'ie  Yazoo,  the  founder  of 
tbe  Tycoon  dynasty.  In  the  wars  which  he  waged  he 
was  oflen  beaten,  and  in  his  Hight,  and  in  other  times 
of  calamity,  he  and  his  adhercnts  fouud  sheHer  and  s>in- 
pathy  in  many  a  Buddhist  monastery.  At  last,  when 
he  reached  the  throne,  he  liberally  rewanied  all  those 
priests  who  had  befriended  hlm  in  his  adyersity,  payuig 
them  a  lixed  sum  out  of  the  public  treasury.  and  be- 
stowing  grants  of  land  to  be  held  as  tempie  grounds, 
the  revenue  from  which  was  devoted  to  the  support  of 
the  tempie.  From  that  time  Buddhism  flourished  in 
Japan,  and  Sintoism  decayed.  The  nation  foUowed  the 
exaixipłe  of  thc  yictorious  Tycoon,  and  thus  Buddh- 
ism became  established  and  popular.  Still,  as  tbe  Ty- 
coon did  not  ignore  the  Mikado,  but  allowed  him  to  be 
thc  nominał  head  of  Japan,  and  cven  paid  some  outward 
respect  to  him,  in  the  same  way  Buddhism  did  not  ig- 
nore or  displace  Sintoism,  of  which  the  Mikado  is  pon- 
tifex  maximus.  Where  the  aboriginal  Sinto  gods  were 
worshipped  before,  the  Buddhist  divinities  did  not  re- 
place  or  supersedc  them,  but  were  added  to  them,  and 
thuA,  in  mauy  places,  a  singular  union  was  cffected. 
Baddhism  and  SinŁo  divinities  are  worshipped  togelh- 
er,  eaid  the  priests  of  both  divisions  oflen  residc  in  the 
same  tempie.  When  this  is  the  case  such  temples  are 
calleil  Ryoby,  i.  e.  *  union  temples.'  Thus  there  are 
pure  Buddhist,  pure  Sinto,  and  the  mixcd  or  union 
temples.  During  the  rccent  reyolution  a  great  effort 
has  been  madę  by  the  adherents  of  the  Mikado  to  re- 
vive  the  andent  faith,  and  cast  off  whatever  is  of  for- 
eign  origin,  whether  derived  from  China  or  India.  £f- 
IbrŁs  are  madę  to  eliminate  thc  whole  mass  of  Chinese 


characters  from  the  language  and  literaturę  of  the  land, 
and  to  return  to  the  ancient,  simple,  and  alphabetical 
manner  of  writing.  The  same  prindple  is  at  work  in 
the  reaction  against  the  established  religion,  which  is 
of  foreign  origin,  introduced  from  China  and  India  1500 
years  ago.  Since  the  Mikado's  govemment  has  been 
established,  it  has  decreed  that,  where  Buddhist  and 
Sinto  divinities  are  worshipped  in  the  same  tempie, 
the  former  are  to  be  set  aside,  and  the  lattcr  alone  rer- 
erenced.  The  priests  of  the  former  religion  aro  uiged 
to  embrace  the  ancestral  and  national  faith,  in  which 
case  they  may  continue  to  hołd  their  places.  At  vari- 
ous  points  over  the  empire  tbcre  are  deserted  Sinto 
temples.  The  ancient  god  holds  his  place,  but,  not  be- 
ing  a  popular  god,  his  shrine  is  forsaken  by  officiating 
priests  and  worshippers.  The  present  goveniment  has 
madę  inspection,  and  found  that  in  many  cases  these 
shrines,  so  sadly  neglected,  are  the  shrines  of  the  true 
and  ancient  gods.  These  are  to  be  re-erected,  and  en- 
dowed  with  govemment  support.  What  has  been  taken 
from  the  disendowed  Buddhlsts  will,  no  doubt,  most  of 
it  be  given  to  the  Sintos.  Now,  when  one  of  these  old 
temples  is  re-erected  and  endowed,  the  office  of  pricst  in 
it  becomes  desirable.  Not  only  has  it  a  rerenue  from 
govemment,  but  the  people  suddenly  wake  up  to  a 
knowledge  of  the  fact  that  this  same  forgotten  god,  in 
the  olden  time,  worked  wonders.  The  early  history  of 
the  divinity  is  involved  in  obscurity,  and  on  thc  princi- 
ple  'Omne  ignotum  pro  magnifico,*  it  is  magnified,- 
worshippers  bring  their  offerings,  new  votive  tablets 
are  set  up,  and  the  revenue  hence  accruing,  added  to 
what  is  bestowed  by  goyemment,  makes  a  priesfs  office 
a  desirable  one,  cspedally  as  he  is  exempt  from  all  mil- 
itar>'  seryice.  Many,  therefore,  now  seek  to  obtain  this 
position;  but,  on  presenting  their  petitions  at  the  seat 
of  goyemment,  it  is  generally  decided  that  it  is  desira- 
ble to  haye  these  places  filled  by  adherents  of  thc  Mi- 
kado from  the  south."  In  1870  the  Buddhist  priests 
were  compelled  to  pay  to  the  Mikado  the  sum  of  8,000,000 
rios,  or  $10,000,000,  for  the  priyilege  of  remaining  in 
possesśion  of  their  temples  and  monuments,  and  of  ob- 
serying  their  religious  rites  and  customs  without  restric- 
tion« 

The  reports  on  the  number  of  natiyes  who  desire  to 
reconnect  thcmselyes  with  the  Roman  Catholic  Church 
great  ty  yary,  According  to  a  recent  (1870)  report  of 
the  Japanese  goyemment  their  number  amounts  to  3C00, 
of  whom  2000  were  at  Urakami,  near  Nagasaki,  100  at 
Omnra,  and  1500  at  Fubahori.  Besides,  there  were 
Christians  in  Shimaliara,  Amakusa,  Hirado,  and  other 
places,  but  their  numl)er  could  not  be  accitfately  statcd. 
There  is  a  strong  force  of  French  Jesuits  at  Kanagawa. 
They  haye  lately  opened  a  school  for  young  men,  for 
the  purpose  of  teaching  the  French  language  and  liter- 
aturę, and  the  sciences.  The  pope  has  erected  Japan 
into  a  yicariatc  apostolic.  The  Roman  Catholic  mis- 
sionaries  assćrt  that  at  least  100,000  Japanese  would 
openly  join  their  Chiuch  if  religious  toleration  should 
be  established. 

Protestant  missions  were  in  1870  snpported  in  Japan 
by  three  Amencan  denominations :  the  Presbyteńan 
Church,  the  Dutch  Reformed  Church,  and  the  Protes- 
tant Episcopal  Church.  Seyeral  missionaries  teach  sec- 
ular  branches  in  the  goyemment  schools.  Progress  has 
been  madę  with  the  translation  of  the  Bibie  into  Japan- 
ese, and  Bible-classes  haye  been  formcd,  but  up  to  1871 
but  few  of  the  natiyes  had  madę  a  profession  of  Chris- 
tianity.  The  Presbyterian  missionaries,  who  had  sta- 
tions  at  Yokohama  (begun  in  1859)  and  Yeddo  (bcgun 
in  1869),  had,  according  to  their  report  of  1870,  baptized 
three  natiyes.  The  iS^testant  Episcopal  Church  snp- 
ported one  mlssionary  bishop  and  one  missionary.  See 
Charleroix  et  Crasset,  HUtoire  dt  Japan  (Paris,  1754) ; 
Sir  Rutherford  Alcock,  The  Capital  oftht  Tyayon  (Lond. 
1868) ;  Siebold,  Nipon ;  A  rchiv  tur  Beschreibung  von 
Japan  (Leyd.  1832-51);  American  Afmual  Cyclopedia, 
1868,1870."  (A.J.S.) 


JAPHA 


»82 


JAPHLET 


Japha.    See  Japhia,  S. 

Ja^phetłl  (Heb.  Ye'pheth,  nc^,  in  p«ue  ra^phtth, 
T\V\,  yńde-^preadinff  [comp.  Greń.  ix,  27],  although  Bome 
make  it  signify^atr,  referring  to  the  light  complenon 
of  tbe  Japhethites ;  Sept  'Id^e^ ;  Josephos  *la^i^acy 
A  ta,  i,  4, 1),  one  of  the  three  sons  of  Noah,  mentioued 
laat  in  order  (Gen.  v,d2;  vi,  10;  vii,  18;  ix,  18;  x,  1 ;  1 
Chroń,  i,  4),  although  it  appears  from  Gen.  x,  21  (comp. 
ix,  24)  that  he  was  the  eldeat  of  Noah's  sona,  bom  one 
hundred  years  before  the  tiood  (MichaeUs,  SpiciL  ii,  66). 
B.C.  2616.  He  and  his  wife  were  two  of  the  eight  per- 
sons  (1  Pet  iii,  20)  presenred  in  the  ark  (Gen.  vii,  7). 
In  Gen.  x,  2  są.  he  is  called  the  progenitor  of  the  exten- 
Bive  tribes  in  the  west  (of  Europę)  and  north  (of  Asia)— 
of  the  Armenians,  Medes,  Greeks,  Thracians,  etc  (comp. 
Syncellus,  Chroń,  p.  49 ;  Mała,  Chronogr,  p.  16 ;  see  Tuch 
on  ver.  27).  See  Ethnography.  De  Wette  (Kriłikj  p. 
72)  justiy  repudiates  the  opinion  of  the  Targundm,  both 
Jonathan  and  Hieros.,  who  make  Japheth  the  progeni- 
tor of  the  African  tribes  also.  The  Arabian  traditions 
(D'Herbelot,  Biblioth,  Orient,)  aUńbute  to  Japheth  won- 
derful  powers  (Weil,  BibUsche  I^genden,  viii,  46),  and 
enumcrate  eleven  of  his  sons,  the  progenitors  of  as  many 
Asiatic  nations,  viz.  Gin  or  Dshin  (Chinese),  Scklah 
(SlaYonians),  Manshuge,  Cromari,  Turk  (Turks),  Kha- 
lage,  Khozar,  Ros  (Russians),  Sussan,  Gaz,  and  Torage. 
In  these  traditions  he  is  called  AbouUierk  (Hottingcr, 
Jlist.  Orient,  p.  37).  To  the  8even  sons  of  Japheth  men- 
tioned  in  Gen.  x,  2  and  1  Chroń,  i,  5,  the  Sept.  and  Euse- 
bios  add  an  eighth,  Elisha,  though  not  found  in  the  text. 
Some  (Buttmann,  Mytholog,  i,  222 ;  Bochart,  Pkal.  iii,  1 ; 
and  Hassc,  Entdeckung,  ii,  131)  identify  Japheth  with  the 
'IdwiToc  of  Greek  fable,  the  depository  of  many  ethno- 
graphical  traditions  (see  Smith'8  Diet,  ofCIauic  Biogr, 
8.  V.  Japetus),  while  others,  again,  connect  him  with  He- 
reas,  mentioned  by  the  ancient  historian  Sanchoniathon. 
His  act  of  fiUal  piety,  In  conjunction  with  Shem,  as  re- 
Uted  in  Gen.  ix,  20-27  (where  some  understand  the 
clauae,  *^  He  shall  dwell  in  the  tents  of  Shem,"  to  refer 
to  God,  and  not  to  Japheth),  became  the  occasion  of  the 
prophecy  of  the  exteasion  of  his  posterity  (see  Heng- 
stenberg's  Chistology^  i,  42).     See  Shem. 

Japheth  ben -Ali  ]ia-Levi  (called  in  Arabie 
Ahu^Ali  Ilassan  ben^Ali  al-Levi  al-Bozrii),  a  very  able 
Karaite  grammarian  and  commentator  on  the  Old  Test., 
flourishcd  at  Bassra,  in  Arabia,  during  the  latter  half 
of  the  lOth  century.  He  is  reputed  to  have  written  a 
history  of  the  Karaitcs  (q,  v.),  of  which  traces  still  re- 
main  (see  Rule,  KaraiłeSj  p.  106),  and  commentaries 
which  cover  twenty  MS.  volume8  pre8erved  in  Paris 
and  Leyden.  He  distinguiahed  himsclf  by  his  literary 
labors,  and  obtaiiied  the  honorable  appellation  of  ^73^^n 
?1*15i1,  ihegreat  teacher,  and  a  place  among  those  who  are 
mentioned  in  the  Karaite  Prayer-book.  The  late  emi- 
nent  OrientalŁst  Munk  bn)ught,iu  1841,  from  Egypt  to 
the  royallibrary  at  Paris,  eleven  volume8  of  this  commen- 
tary,  Hve  of  which  are  on  Genesis  and  many  sections  of 
Exodu9,  Leyiticiis,  and  Numbers;  two  volumes  aie  on 
the  Psalms,  one  is  on  Provcrbe,  and  one  on  the  Fivc  Me- 
giUoth.  They  are  written  in  Arabie,  preceded  by  the 
Hebrew  text  and  an  Arabie  translation.  The  indefiiti- 
gable  Pinsker  has  examined  the  entire  twenty  volumes, 
and  madę  extract8  from  them.  This  work,  of  such  gi- 
gantic  magnitudc,  although  it  has  exerci8ed  great  in- 
fluence on  the  development  of  Biblical  exege8is  (as  roav 
be  concluded  from  the  fact  that  Aben-Ezra  hadtliem  con- 
stantly  before  him  when  writing  his  expMitions  of  the 
O.  T.,  and  tliat  he  ąuotes  them  with  the  groatest  re- 
spect),  has  not  as  yet  been  published,  and  we  have  still 
only  the  fragments  which  Aben-Ezra  gives  us.  Japheth 
was  also  an  cxten8ive  polemical  writer,  and  engaged  in 
controrersies  with  tłie  disciples  of  Saadia  (q.  v.) ;  but 
for  polemics  he  does  not  seem  to  have  possessed  the 
propcr  re<iuLsites.  See  Ginsburg  in  Kitto,  s.  v.;  Jost, 
Israelitische  Annalen  (Frankfort-on-the-Main,  1841),  p.  I 
76 ;  Barges,  Rabbi  Japket  ben^Ueli  Bassorensis  Karaitis  \ 


M  Psal  CommaUarH  Pr^aHo  (1846) ;  PSnaker,  UOm^ 
Kadmomot  (Ylenna,  1863),  p.  169;  Supplement,  p.181, 
etc;  GiAtŁ,Gt$ckidU€derJudeH,\,^Ą!L 

JapheUi  ben-8aid,  a  descendant  of  the  abore, 
and  another  great  Karaite,  in  aU  piobabiUty  abo  bom 
at  Bassra,  flourished  about  1160-1200.  Beades  the  cel- 
ebrated  work  in  defenoe  of  Kaniam  entitled  Ha-Atakat 
ha-Tortty  which  he  is  supposed  to  have  written  aboat 
1167,  he  wrote  commentaries  on  the  Pentateach  ud 
other  books  of  the  O.  T.  Pinsker  fitnciea,  and  not  witb- 
out  reason,  that  this  is  the  Japheth  whom  the  Karaitcs 
describe  as  the  instnictor  of  Aben-£zia,and  asseits  that 
£zra*s  quotationB  from  the  oommentary  on  £xod.  iv.  2U; 
viii,  13 ;  ix,  16 ;  x,  6, 21,  belong  to  this' Japheth,  and  not 
to  the  former.  His  commentaries  are  still  in  BiS^,  both 
in  the  Paiis  and  Leyden  libnries.  See  Pinsker,  Likiatf 
Kadmomot,  p.  222  sq.  and  185  aq.,  Supplement ;  Griitz, 
Geschichte  der  Juden,  vi,  805  są.;  Kitto,  BSfL  CycL,}i, a. 
V.    See  KARAiTEa. 

Japhi^a  (Heb.  Yaphi^a,  r^B^,  tplmUd;  Sept  la- 
^U  V.  r.  'la^yai  and  ^ayyai,  but  'If  ^  in  2  Sam.  r, 
15),  the  name  of  two  men,  and  also  of  a  plaoe. 

1.  The  king  of  Lachish,  who  joined  the  confederarr 
at  the  instancc  of  Adoni-zedek  against  Joahua,  but  was 
defeated  and  slain  after  confinement  in  the  cave  of  Mak- 
keiUh  (Josh.  x,  3  sq.).     B.C.  1618. 

2.  One  of  the  sons  of  David  (q.  v.)  by  some  one  of 
his  fuli  wives  whose  name  is  not  given,  bom  at  Jemsa- 
lem  (2  Sam.  v,  15;  1  Chroń,  iii,  7;  xiv,  6).  RC  pust 
1046. 

3.  A  town  on  the  eastem  part  of  the  soathem  bonn- 
dary  of  Zebulon,  situated  on  high  ground  between  Dt- 
berath  and  Gath-hepher  on  the  north  (Josh.  xix.  \f\, 
Reland  {Palnst.  p.  82is)  thinks  it  is  the  town  Sycamiumm 
(i)  2vKafjuvnc  or  2(;ca/iiV(tfi',  Steph.  Byz.  '£vKaiiivcv\ 
on  the  Mcditerranean,  oppositc  Carmcl,  between  Ptole- 
mais  and  Ciesarea  (PUny,  v,  15, 5),  acooitting  to  the  łtiu, 
A nton,  twenty  Itoman  miles  from  the  latter;  caUed  //^ 
pha  (H^ó)  in  the  time  of  Eusebius  {Ortotu,  s.  v.  'la^c\ 
and  still  extant  (Golii  Not.  ad  A  Ifrag,  p.  132)  under  the 
name  of  Haifa  (Robinson*s  Beaearchet,  iii,  194\  H« 
also  regards  it  as  the  Jebba  of  Pliny  (v,  18),  which  Cie- 
jenius,  however  {Tketaur.  p.  618),  shows  is  diBttn|«nł»h- 
ed  from  Sycaminnm.  This  position  does  not  agrce  with 
the  requirements  of  the  text.  The  place  bas  been  iden* 
tified  by  Dr.  Robinson  {Researches,  iii,  200)  with  the 
modem  viUage  Yafa,  about  a  mile  and  a  half  mith- 
west  of  Nazareth  (Schubert,  Rei»c,  iii,  203),  whcrp  tbe 
Italian  monks  fix  the  residence  of  the  apostle  James 
(Raumcr,  PaUut.  p.  127).  See  Qua^eflmiu^  Eluńdafio, 
ii,  843 ;  and  Early  TrateU,  p.  186 :  Blaimderille  cali:'  it 
the  "Castle  of  SaflRra.*'  So,  too,  Von  Harff,  A.D.  H* 
{PU{ierfakrł^  p.  195).  Although  situated  in  a  rallfr. 
the  tribal  linę  must  have  croesed  (^  went  up,"  text  of 
Joshua)  the  hills  on  the  south  of  it  (Keil,  Commenł.  ad 
loc.).  It  contains  about  thirty  houses,  with  the  remaiiii 
of  a  church,  and  has  a  few  single  palm-treea.  Eusebius 
and  Jeromc  doubtless  refer  to  this  place,  as  **  Japbet,  ia 
the  tribn  of  Zebulon,  still  called  Jophe,  or  the  ascent  of 
Japho"  {Ottoni,  s.  v.  Japhic).  The  Japha  (la^  foiti- 
fied  by  Josephus  {Life^  87,  45)  was  probably  the  same, 
a  large  and  sLrong  village  of  Galilee,  aflenranb  cap- 
tured  by  Trajan  and  Titus,  under  the  onlcrs  of  V«pa- 
sian.  In  the  storm  and  sack  of  the  place,  acoiinliu;r  to 
the  same  writer,  15,000  of  the  inhabitants  were  put  to 
the  sword,  and  2130  madę  captive8  {War,  ii,  20, 6:  iii, 
7,  81).  With  this  location  De  Saulcy  {\urrat.  i,  TS) 
and  Schwarz  {Palestiwy  p.  170)  coindde,  as  also  Van  de 
Velde  (MeTnoir,  p.  821)  and  Porter  {/famOook,  p.  385). 

Japhnet  (Heb.  YaphU\  abB^  deUterer;  SopU 
'Ia^aX^r),  a  son  of  Heber  and  great-grandsoa  of  .\»b€T; 
several  of  his  sons  are  also  named  (1  Chroń,  vii,  32,  o^), 
B.C.  between  1856  and  1658.  It  appean  to  hare  lieen 
a  bnuich  of  his  desoendants  {JapidetiieB,  '^S^B^  H«^ 
Yaphleti\  Sept.  'la^AirŃ  Vulg:  JephŁuiy  Aath.  Ven»on 
<'  Japhleti*)  that  are  mentioned  in  Josh.  xri,  3  as  bar- 


JAPHLETI 


783 


JARIB 


iag  BetUed  along  the  boider  between  Ephiaim  and  Dan, 
near  (north  oO  the  present  Jaifa  load,  apparently  east 
of  BeŁh-horon,  poasibly  at  the  present  Beit  Unia.  Oth- 
eiBi  however,  regard  the  name  in  thia  locality  as  a  traoe 
of  one  of  the  petty  tribes  of  aborigiiial  Canaamtes  (oom- 
parę  the  Arehite,  *^  Archi,"  in  the  vene  preoeding,  and  in 
2  Sam.  XV,  82;  the  Ophnite,  **  Ophni,"  Joeh.  xviii,  24> 

Japhleti  (Joeh.  xvi,  8).    See  Japhlet. 
Ja'pho  (Josh.  xix,  46).    See  Joppa. 
Jaqixelot.    See  jAcąuBiiOT. 
Ja^rah  (1  Chion.  ix,  42).    See  Jehoadah. 
JarchL    See  Rashi. 

Jard,  Fbancois,  a  veiy  celebrated  Fiench  Jamenist 
preachcr,  bom  at  BoUene,  near  Avignon,  March  8, 1675, 
was  one  of  the  appellants  against  the  buli  Unigenitua. 
He  died  April  10, 1768.  B^des  his  sennona,  he  pub- 
lished  La  religion  Chrettetmc  midUie  dcuu  le  teritable 
eęprit  de  ses  marimet  (PariB,  1743, 1763,  6  vols.  12mo; 
new  ed.  Lyons,  1819, 6  vola.  i2mo).  See  Uoefer,  Nouv. 
Biog.  GeMrale,  xxvi,  872. 

Ja^reb  (Heb.  Foreft',  a^J,  L  q.  a-^^nj,  contentious, 
L  e.  an  advenaiy)  occnn  as  a  proper  name  in  the  Auth. 
Vera.  of  Hos.  v,  18  j  x,  6,  where  a  "  king  Jaieb"  (T]b« 
a^^,  Sept.  ^affcAc^c  lapt i/i,  Vulg.  rex  uUor)  is  spoken 
of  as  the  falae  rcfuge  and  finał  subjugator  of  the  king- 
dom  of  IsraeL  It  probably  is  a  figurative  titlo  of  the 
king  of  Ass^Tia  (mentioned  in  the  same  connection), 
who,  like  the  Persian  monarchs,  affected  the  title  of 
^  the  great  king**  (Michaelis,  SuppUnuy  actually  denves 
it  from  the  S^iiac  tr^, "  to  be  great")  ;  here  spoken  in 
irany  towards  the  faithless  nation  as  their  greatest 
BcouTge  (Gesenius,  Thes.  Hth,  p.  1286).  Had  Jareb  been 
the  proper  name  of  the  king  of  Assyria,  as  it  woald  be 
if  this  rendering  were  correct,  the  word  preceding  (T|??^, 
meUk^  "  king")  would  have  reąuired  the  article.  That 
it  is  rather  to  be  applied  to  the  country  than  to  the 
king  may  be  inferred  from  its  standing  in  parallelism 
with  Asshur.  Such  is  the  opinion  of  FUrst  {Hcmdw.  s. 
V.),  who  illustrates  the  symboUcal  usage  by  a  oompań- 
son  with  Rahab  aa  applied  to  Egypt.  At  the  same 
time  he  hazards  a  conjecture  that  it  may  have  been  an 
oltl  Aas^Tian  woni,  adopted  into  the  Hebrew  language, 
and  BO  modi6ed  as  to  expre88  an  intelligible  idea,  while 
retaiiiing  something  of  its  original  form.  The  clause  in 
which  it  occurs  is  supposed  by  many  to  refer  to  Judah, 
in  order  to  make  the  paralldism  complete;  and,  with 
this  in  view,  Jarchi  interprets  it  of  Ahaz,  who  sent  to 
Tiglath-Pileser  (2  Kings  xvi,  8)  to  aid  him  against  the 
combined  forces  of  Syria  and  IsraeL  But  there  is  no 
leason  to  suppoae  that  the  two  dauses  do  not  buth  refer 
to  Ephnim,  and  the  allusion  would  then  be,  as  explain- 
e<l  by  Jerome,  to  Pul,  who  was  subsidized  by  Menahem 
(2  Kings  XV,  19),  and  Juilah  would  be  indirectly  included. 
Otlier  interpretations  of  the  most  fanciful  character  have 
been  givcn  (Glass,  PhiL  Sacr,  iv,  3, 17,  p.  644). 

Ja^red  (Heb.  Ye'red,  ^l^JJ,  in  paose  Ya'red,  *TJ%  cfc- 
Mcemkr;  Sept.  'Iap<^,  N.  T.  'lapid,  Joscphus  'lapiSfic)^ 
the  name  of  two  men. 

1.  The  fourth  antediluvian  patriarch  in  descent  from 
Seth,  son  of  Mahalaleel  and  father  of  Enoch ;  bom  B.C. 
8712,  died  B.C.  2750,  aged  962  ycars;  162  years  old  at 
the  birth  of  his  heir  (Gen.  v,  15-20;  1  Chroiu  i,  2,  "  Je- 
red;'*Lukciii,87). 

2.  A  am  apparently  of  Ezra,  of  the  tribe  of  Judah, 
by  his  wife  Jehiidijah,  although  in  the  latter  part  of  the 
same  vcr9e  a  different  parentage  is  spoken  of;  he  is 
named  as  the  ^  father**  (L  e.  founder)  of  Gedor  (1  Chroń. 
IV,  18,  where  the  name  is  Anglidzed  "Jered").  RC. 
cir.  1612.  The  I^bbins,  howcver,  give  an  allegorical 
interpretAtion  to  the  pas8a;::c,  and  trcat  this  and  other 
names  theiein  as  titlca  of  Moscs — Jered  becauae  he 
cauacd  the  manna  to  deacend. 

Jarentoou  a  odebrated  abbot  of  St  Benigne,  at  Di- 


jon, France,  bom  at  Yienna  towards  the  year  1045,  was 
educated  in  the  monastery  at  Clugny.  After  leading  for 
some  time  a  life  of  dissipation,  he  retired  in  1074  to  the 
little  monastery  of  La  Chaise-Dieu,  of  which  he  soon 
became  the  prior,  distinguishing  himself  among  his  mo- 
naatic  assodates  by  a  display  of  brilliant  abilitics  and 
great  eradition.  In  1082  he  was,  after  iilling  varioua 
other  positions  of  trust,  dispatched  on  a  very  important 
mission  by  the  French  papai  legate.  In  1084  he  went 
to  Romę  to  report  the  success  of  his  mission  to  pope 
Gregory  VII,  at  that  time  confined  by  the  cmperor  in  the 
castle  of  Sant-Angelos,  and  he  e£f«cted  the  pope's  liber- 
ation  by  enoouraging  the  papai  legions  to  ofTer  resist^ 
ance  to  the  imperial  troops.  We  need  not  wonder  that 
such  service  was  wcIl  repaid  by  the  papai  court,  and 
that  hereafter  Jarenton  figurti»  prominently  in  the  Bo- 
man  Catholic  Church.  In  1097  he  retired  to  his  abbey, 
which  he  leil  only  to  attend,  in  1 100,  the  Council  of  Ya- 
lencia.  He  died,  apparently,  Feb.  10, 1113.  He  is  sup- 
posed to  have  written  exten8ive]y,  but  only  a  letter  to 
Thierry,  the  abbot  of  St.  Hubert,  is  now  known.  See 
Hoefer,  Nouv.  Biog,  G«MraU,  xxvi,  375. 

Jareai^^ałl  (Heb.  Yaareshyah',  rijd^?^,  nourished 
by  Jehovah;  Sept  *Iaapaoia)j  one  of  the  "sons"  of  Je- 
roham,  a  chief  Benjamite  resident  at  Jerusalem  (1  Chroń* 
viii,  27).     B.C.  apparently  antę  588. 

Jar^^ha  (Heb.  Yarcka'f  Sn'^^,  etjrmology  unknown, 
but  probably  Egyptian ;  Sept.  'I(i;x^X,  Yulg.  Jaraa),  the 
Eg\-ptian  slave  of  a  Hebrew  named  Sheshan,  who  mai- 
ried  the  daughter  of  his  master,  and  was,  of  course, 
madę  free.  As  Sheshan  had  no  sons,  his  posterity  is 
traced  through  this  connection  (1  Chion.  ii,  34-41), 
which  is  the  only  one  of  the  kind  mentioned  in  Scrip- 
ture.  Jarha  thus  became  the  founder  of  a  chief  house 
of  the  Jerahmeelites,  which  continued  at  least  to  the 
time  of  king  Hezekiah,  and  from  which  sprang  9everal 
illustrions  persons,  such  as  Zabad  in  the  reign  of  David, 
and  Azariah  in  the  reign  of  Joash  (I  Chroń,  ii,  31  sq)« 
B.C.  prob.  antę  1658«— Kitto.  It  is  supposed  by  some 
that  the  name  of  Sheshan*s  daughter  whom  Jarha  mar- 
ried  was  Ahlai,  from  the  statement  in  ver.  31,  compared 
with  that  in  ver.  84;  but  the  masculine  form  of  the 
word,  and  the  use  of  Ahlai  elsewhere  (1  Chroń,  xi,  41) 
for  a  man,  is  adver8e  to  this  concliision.  As  Sheshan's 
oldest  grandson  by  this  marriago  was  called  Attai,  and 
as  the  genealogy  would  run  through  him,  it  is  supposed 
by  otheiB  that  Ahlai  is  a  clerical  error  for  Attai ;  while 
others  think  Ahlai  C^^HK,  ditjoinery  from  ^HK)  was  a 
name  given  to  Jarha  on  his  incorporation  into  the  fnm- 
ily  of  Sheshan.  Others  conjecture  that  Ahlai  was  a 
son  of  Sheshan,  bom  after  the  marriage  of  his  daughter. 
At  what  time  this  marriage  occurred  we  cannot  cer- 
tainly  determine,  but  as  Sheshan  was  the  seventh  in 
descent  from  Hezron,  the  grandson  of  Judah,  it  could 
not  well  have  been  much  later  than  the  settlement  in 
Canaan  (B.C.  1612),  and  on  the  presumption  that  thero 
are  no  lacunsB  in  the  pedigree,  it  would  naturally  fali 
much  prior  to  the  £xode  (B.C.  1658).  In  1  Sam.  xxx, 
13,mention  u  madę  of  an  Egyptian  who  was  servant  to 
an  Amalekite,  and  there  is  no  reason  why  it  should 
seem  strange  that  an  Egyptian  should  also  be  found  in 
the  family  of  a  Hebrew,  especially  as,  bcing  a  Jerah- 
meelite,  he  had  (supposing  the  event  to  have  occurred 
in  Palestine)  his  posseseions  in  the  same  district  ba  the 
Amalekitcs,  in  the  south  of  Judah,  nearest  to  Egypt  (1 
Sam.  xxvii,  10;  compu  2  Sam.  xxiii,  20,  21 ;  Josh.  xv, 
21;  1  Chroń,  xv,  18).  See  Burrington'8  GenenL,-  Bees- 
ton,  Genealogy ;  Hervey*8  Geneal.  p.  34 ;  Berthcau  on  1 
Chroń,  ii,  24,  etc).     See  Sheshan. 

Ja''Tib  (Heb.  Yarib%  3'^'IJ,  an  adrersaryy  as  in  Psa. 
xxxv,  1,  etc;  Sept.  'IcrpcijS,  'lapii3)t  the  name  of  thrce 
or  four  men.     See  olso  Jareb. 

1.  A  son  of  Simeon  (1  Chroń,  iv,  24);  elsewhere 
(Gen.  xlvi,  10,  eto.)  called  Jacihn  (q.  v.). 

2.  One  of  tlie  popular  chiefa  dispatched  by  Ezra  to 


JARIMOTH 


784 


JARYIS 


procure  the  company  of  priests  in  the  retom  to  Jenua- 
lem  (Ezra  viii,  16).     RG.  459. 

3.  One  of  the  priests  of  the  kindred  of  Jeshua  that 
diyorced  their  Geutile  wive8  after  the  £xile  (Ezra  x, 
18).     B.C.459. 

4.  A  Gneclzod  or  oomipt  form  (1  Maoc.  xiy,  29 ;  com- 
paie  ii,  1)  of  Joiakib  (q.v.). 

Jar^imoth  Clapifiut^),  a  Gnecized  fonn  (1  Esd.  ix, 
28)  of  the  Heb.  name  (Ezra  x,  27)  Jeroiotii  (q.  v.). 

JarkoiL    See  Me-jarron. 

Jarlath  is  the  name  of  the  second  succeasor  of  St 
Patrick  to  the  see  of  Armagh,  Ireland,  near  the  middle 
of  the  6th  centiiiy,  Scarcely  anything  is  known  of  his 
personal  history.     See  Ireland. 

Jarmoch  (Relaud,  PaUBstma,  p.  283)  or  Jarmuk 
(Schwarz,  PalesK  p.  53),  a  river  of  Palestlne  (11^*1*^) 
inentioned  in  the  Talmud  {Parah,  viii,  10 ;  Balni  Ba- 
ikrOf  746)  as  emptying  into  the  Jordan ;  the  Ilieromaz 
(q.  V.)  of  the  Greek  and  Roman  writers,  and  the  modem 
Yarmuk, 

Jar^milth  (Heb.  Yarmuth\  rsiO^p^  heighł;  Sept. 
*li(nfiov^)f  the  name  of  two  places. 

1.  A  town  in  the  plain  of  Judah  (Josh.  xv,  35),  in- 
habited  after  the  Babylonian  captivity  (Nch.  xi,  29) ; 
originally  the  seat  of  one  of  the  Canaanitish  kings  [see 
Piram]  defeatcd  by  Joshua  (Joah.  x,  8,  5,  23;  xii,  U ; 
XV,  35).  Eusebius  (Onomcuł,  s,  v.  'IcfM/ioDc,  also  'Up- 
fŁOX^c)  seta  down  Jiumucka  or  Jermus  as  ten  Roman 
roiles  from  Eleutheropolis  towards  Jeruaalem,  but  else- 
where  Jarmuth  (s.  v.  'Icpi^iou^,  doubtldss  the  same 
place)  less  cor^ectly  at  four  miles'  distauce,  although  in 
Łhe  neighborhood  of  Eshtaol,  which  is  ten  miles  from 
Eleutheropolis.  Dr.  Robinson  (Eesearches,  ii,  344)  iden- 
tified  the  site  as  that  of  Yarnmk,  a  yillage  about  seven 
miles  north-east  of  Beit-tlibrin  (Schwarz,  PaUsf,  p.  85). 
As  the  name  implies,  it  is  situated  on  a  ridge  (tell  £>- 
mud  or  A  rmuthj  a  differeut  pronunciation  for  Yarmuth : 
Van  de  Velde,  Alr/rn/Zwr,  ii,  193).  U  is  a  smali  tod 
poor  place,  but  contains  a  few  traces,  in  its  hewn  Stones 
and  ruins,  of  former  strsugth  and  greatness  (Porter, 
J/andbook,  p.  2«1 ;  Van  de  Velde,  Memmr,  p.  324;  Tob- 
ler,  Dritte  Wandtrung,  p.  120,  462). 

2.  A  Lcvitical  city  in  the  tribc  of  Issachar  (Josh.  xxi, 
29),  elsewhere  called  Reliktu  (Josh.  xix,  21)  and  Ra- 
MOTii  (1  Chroń,  vi,  73).  Schwarz  {Paleał.  p.  157)  sup- 
poses  it  was  the  llamah  of  Samuel  (1  Sam.  xix,  22), 
which  he  identifies  with  the  modern  village  of  Ramehj 
north-west  of  Shcchem ;  but  this  place  lies  within  the 
tcrritory  of  Manas^ch.  The  associated  namcs  seera  to 
indicaie  a  locallty  on  the  eastern  edge  of  the  plain  of 
Esdraelon.     See  Remetii. 

Jaro'ali  (Ileb.  Yaro'ach^  ^"'"•Jł  perhape  bom  under 
the  new  moon;  Sept.  has  'A^ai  v.  r.  'I^ni,Vulg.  Jara)^ 
Bon  of  Gilead  and  father  of  Huri,  of  the  Gadites  resident 
in  Bashan  (1  (.'hron.  v,  14).     B.C.  long  antę  782. 

Jarque  or  Xarque,  D.  Franctsco,  a  South  Amer- 
ican Jesuit,  flouridhed  in  the  17th  century.  He  is  dis- 
tingubhed  as  the  author  of  Estado  presente  de  las  Mis- 
tiones  en  el  Tuniman,  Paragitay  e  Rio  de.  la  Plata  (1687, 
4to),  for  which  his  intimate  knowledge  of  the  native  el- 
ement eminently  tittcd  him.  It  is  remarkable  how  the 
Jesuits  have  succeeded  in  acąuiring  foreign  languages, 
and  how  thorough  and  accurate  is  their  knowledge  of 
the  nations  with  whom  they  are  brought  in  contact. 
(J.H.W.) 

Jarratt,  Dk\t:reux,  an  carly  Protestant  Episoo- 
pal  minister,  was  bom  in  the  county  of  New  Kent,  Va., 
Jan.  6  (O.  S.),  1732-33.  His  early  education  was  neg- 
lected,  and  he  had  fuw  opportunities  of  receiving  in- 
struction  iii  youth ;  but  he  so  far  improved  himself  as  \o 
Dc  able,  at  the  age  of  ninetccn,  to  take  charge  of  a  neigh- 
borinj^  schooL  Soon  after,  he  entered  a  family,  in  which 
one  part  of  his  cUilics  was  to  read  a  sermon  of  Flaver8 
cvcry  uight— a  i^^k  włiich  he  performed  at  tiret  with 


reloctance.  The  cflect  of  Łheee  discoones  was  to  oon* 
vince  him  of  sin.  He  now  penised  Ri]8BeIl's  Sennoos 
and  Burketfs  £xpoflitioii  of  the  N.T. ;  but,  bóng  sab- 
jected  to  many  temptationa,  he  relapeed  into  bis  foniier 
State.  He  was  finally  relieved  by  a  passage  in  laiah 
(lxii,  12),  and  re8olved  to  enter  the  miniatiy,  for  which 
purpose  he  went  to  England  in  1762.  On  his  retom  he 
senred  at  Bath,Ya.,  where  he  was  eminently  suocesafol 
afler  some  time,  although  at  firat  hu  labors  appesr  to 
have  been  disnegarded.  He  died  January  29, 1801.  He 
was  the  aothor  of  rhree  volume«  of  iS^rmonc,  md  A  Seńn 
ofijetterą  to  a  Friend^  repuUishcd  in  1806  in  coimectii)n 
with  his  Autobiographtf. — Spraguc,  Atm,  v,  214;  Metir 
odut  Ouarierly  Reeiew,  1855,  p.  502. 

Jarrlge,  Pierre,  a  French  Jesuit,  who  was  bom  at 
Tulle  in  1605,  is  celebrated  in  history  by  his  desertion 
from  and  8evere  attacks  upon  the  Jesuitical  order.  He 
was  a  very  popular  teacher  and  preacher  at  the  time, 
when  he  joined  the  Calvinists  in  1647 ;  but,  meetłng 
with  great  opposition  in  France,  and  his  life  even  being 
threatened,  he  went  to  Leyden,  HolL,  where  he  preached 
under  the  auspices  of  the  State  Church.  Meanwhile 
the  Jesuitical  order  oondemned  him  to  suflfer  death,fint 
by  hanging,  then  by  buming.  This  pioroked  the  so 
celebrated  work  of  his,  Lea  Jisuites  mU  sur  Cidu/fauś 
(Leyden,  1649, 12mo,  and  often),  in  which  he  thoroughly 
expoacd  the  workings  of  that  nefarious  clerical  order. 
A  controvcrsy  ensu^,  which  finally  resulted  iu  the  re- 
turn of  Janigc,  in  1650,  to  the  Jesuits — due,  no  doubt, 
morę  to  the  thrcats  against  his  life  than  any  thing  elsp. 
He  certainly  tumed  the  table  like  a  zealous  Jesuit,  aad 
now  again  coudemned  as  heretics  the  very  C^hristłans 
with  whom  he  had  so  lately  associated,  and  whoie 
cause  he  had  professed  to  have  embraced.  He  dted 
Sept.  20, 1660.  See  Hoefer,  Nouv,  Biog,  Gen,  xxvi,  383 
sq. ;  Bayle,  Uisłorical  IHctionary,  s.  v. 

Jany,  Pierre-Francois  ThiSophtle,  a  French  Ro- 
man Catholic  religious  writer,  wta  bom  at  St.  Pieire, 
Normandy,  in  March,  1764.  Afcer  compleCing  his  siud- 
ics  at  Paris,  he  was  appointed  curate  at  Escots;  bat,re- 
fusing  to  sign  the  clerical  obligation  demanded  by  the 
revoiutiotiists,  he  was  obliged  to  leave  the  country  in 
1791.  In  1798  the  bishop  of  AuxeTre  met  Jany  in  Ger- 
many, and  appointed  him  grand-vicaT,  and  a  shart  time 
aflter  the  exiled  Pius  YI  appointed  him  archdeaoon  and 
canon  of  Liege,  Belgium.  Prevcnted,  however,  from  as- 
suraing  the  functions  of  this  position,  he  resided  atMun' 
ster,  where  he  was  instrumental  in  the  conversion  of 
coimt  Stolberg  (q.  v.).  After  the  Rcstoration,  he  re- 
tired  to  Falaise.  He  died  at  Li8ieux  Ang.  31,  \S^ 
Jarry  wrote  quite  extensively,  especially  against  the 
usurpations  of  the  RevoIutionists  of  France.  His  tUco- 
logical  works  of  notę  are,  Dwerł.  sur  tepifcopai  de  St, 
IHerre  a  Anfioche,  arec  la  de/etue  de  rauthefdiciti  dn 
ecriłs  des  Sainłs  Peres  (Paris,  1807,  8vo) :  —  Kxaw:^ 
(Fune  Dissert,  (of  the  abbot  Emery)  sur  la  mitigatitm  Ja 
peines  des  damnis  (Leipz.  1810, 8vo).  See  Hoefer,  -^  oirr. 
Biographie  Genirale,  xxvi,  386. 

Janris,  Abraham,  D.D.,  a  bishop  of  the  Protem 
tant  Episcopal  Church,  was  bom  in  Nom-alk,  Conn, 
May  6  (O.  S.)  1739.  He  passed  A,R  in  Yale  Coll€ff?  in 
I  1761,  and  bccame  a  lay  reader  at  Middleiownn,  wbere, 
,  two  years  after,  he  settled  as  rector,  having  prenm^iy 
received  ordination  in  England.  In  1776  he  presidcil  at 
a  convention  of  the  Episcopal  dergy  heU  at  Xcw  Wir 
ven,  when  it  was  resolved  to  suspend  all  rdigious  ntir- 
ship.  In  1797  he  was  elected  bishop.  He  subseąm-mly 
removed  to  Cheshire,  N.  H.,  and  died  May  3, 1811  His 
style  of  preaching  is  6ald  to  have  resembled  that  of  Tił- 
lotson  and  Sherlock.  He  published  Ttco  SertMns.  Sec 
Sprague,  A  nnals,  v,  287. 

JanrlB,  Samnel  Farmar,  D.D.,  LŁ.D.,  was  bom 
at  Middletown,  Conn.,  Jan.  20, 178G,  and  passed  AU  st 
Yale  College  in  1805.  In  1811  ho  took  chai^re  ofSt. 
Michaers  Church,  Bloomingdale,  and  in  1813  becane 
rector  of  SU  James'^^  N.  Y.    He  afCerwards  became  pro- 


JASAEL 


785 


JASHER 


fesBor  of  BiblicalUteiatuTe  in  the  Gen.  TheoL  Seminary, 
N.  Y.  In  1819  Łhe  doctorate  of  divinity  was  conferred 
on  him  by  the  Unirersity  of  Pcnnsylyania,  and  Łhe  de- 
gree  of  LL.D.  in  1837,  by  Trinity  College,  Hartford. 
When  rector  of  StPaurs,  Boston,  in  182G,  be  embarked 
far  Euiope  to  proctire  materials  for  a  work  on  Church 
history.  During  an  absence  of  nine  years,  hc  exaniined 
all  the  important  libraries  of  Europę  on  the  subject  to 
which  his  attention  was  directed,  and,  on  his  return, 
commencedi4  Compiełe  IJistory  ofthe  Christian  Church 
[portions  of  it  were  published  in  1844  and  1850],  which 
remiuns  unGnished.  He  was  appointed  historiographer 
of  Łhe  Church,  and  occupicd  rarious  posts  of  honor  in 
Łhe  diocese  of  ConnccŁicut.  He  died  in  1851.  A  list 
of  his  writings  is  given  by  Allibone,  DicL  ofAuih,  i,  956. 

Jas^ael  (laaaiiKoc  v.  r.  'AaaijAoc))  a  Gnecized,  or, 
mther,  corrupt  form  (1  Esdr.  ix,  30)  of  the  Hebrew  name 
(£zra  X,  29)  She.\l  (q.  v.). 

Ja'słien  (Heb.  Ycuhen\  V«Ś|^f  sleeping^  as  in  Cant.  vii, 
10,  etc. ;  Septuag.  *iamv  v.  r.  'A<rav),  a  person,  sereral  of 
whose  ^  sona"  are  named  as  aniong  Darid^s  famoiis  body- 
gnard  (2  Sam.  xxiii,  82),  called  in  the  parallel  passage 
Hashkm  the  Gizonite  (1  Chroń,  xi,  34).  Other  discrep- 
ancies  aiso  occur  between  the  two  passages:  the  former 
names  three,  while  the  latter  makes  the  first  (Jonathan) 
son  ofthe  next,  and  both  (with  slight  verbal  yariations) 
aasign  special  patronymics  to  the  last  two.  Perhaps 
the  two  accounts  may  besŁ  be  reconciled  by  understand- 
ing  the  two  brares  referred  to  as  being  Jonathan  Ben- 
Shammah  (or  Ben-Shageh),  and  Ahiam  Ben-Sharar  (or 
Ben-Sacar),  grandsons  of  Jaahen  (or  Uashem)  of  Gizon, 
in  the  inountains  of  Judah  —  hence  called  Hararites. 
BbC.  considerable  antę  1046.  This  name  Kennioott  be- 
lieves  (Dissertation,  i,  201-3)  lies  concealed  in  the  word 
lendered  ''  the  Gizonite**  in  Chronides,  and  accoidingly 
proposes  to  read  in  both  places  *'  Gouni,  of  the  Bons  of 
Hashem;  Jonathan,  the  son  of  Shamha  the  Hararite)'* 
his  Yiew  being  supported  by  the  Alex.  copy  of  the  Sept., 
which  reads  vioi  'Airdft  6  ViaVyi  'lwva^av  vi6c  £ayi)  o 
'Apapi.  However,  the  want  of  the  73  before  *^93,  and  the 
ii  pTefixed  to  the  name  read  by  him  as  Gouni,  are  objec- 
tions  to  thls  view,  and  Bertheau  may  probably  be  right 
(JOhromk.  p.  134),  that  ^^'^  is  due  Ło  a  repetition  of  Łhe 
lasŁ  Łhrec  leŁteis  of  the  prcceding  word, "  the  Shaalbon- 
ite''  C^ahbrdin),  and  Łhat  we  should  simply  read  Ha- 
shem the  Gieonite.  In  the  list  given  by  Jerome,  in  his 
OiuEgtioma  Ilebraica,  Jashen  and  Jonathan  are  both 
omitted.    See  Da^id. 

Ja'aher  (Heb.  Yashar^  *1^J,  uprigM),  A  volume 
by  this  title  (*^Ujn  "^Łb,  the  book  ofthe  upright  man ; 
Auth.  Vcrs. "  book  of  Jasher*^  appears  anciently  to  have 
existed  among  the  Hebrews,  containing  the  recoids  of 
honored  men,  or  other  praiseworthy  transactions.  The 
work  is  no  bnger  extant,  but  is  cited  in  two  passages  of 
the  O.  T.  in  the  foliowing  manner :  "  And  the  sun  stood 
fitill,  and  the  moon  stayed,  until  the  peoplc  had  avenged 
tkemsc]ves  upon  their  enemies.  Is  not  this  >vritten  in 
the  book  ofjfuher  f  So  Łhe  sun  stood  still  in  the  midst 
of  heaven,  and  hasted  not  to  go  do^vn  abouŁ  a  whole 
day,"  etc.  (Josh.  x,  13).  The  other  passage  is  2  Sam.  i, 
17,  18:  **And  David  laroented  with  this  lamentation 
orer  Saul  and  over  Jonathan  his  son  (also  he  bade  them 
teach  the  children  of  Judah  [the  use  of]  the  bow:  be- 
hold,  it  is  ^yrittcn  in  the  book  o/Jasher),'*  After  this 
foliowa  the  lamentation  of  David. 

I.  Ftrtcł  o/ the  Incident  in  Joshua*9  Career. — The 
book  of  Jasher  has  attracted  attention  because  it  is  ap- 
pealed  to  in  connection  with  the  account  of  the  sun  and 
moon  standing  stilL  The  compiler  of  Łhe  book  of  Joshua 
refers  to  it  as  containing  a  record  ofthe  miracle  in  ques- 
tion.  It  is  therefore  impossible  to  do  justice  to  our 
subject  without  entering  into  an  interpretaiion  of  the 
Wonderful  phenomenon  on  which  so  much  ingenuity  has 
been  wasted.  The  misspent  time  which  has  becn  de- 
^oted  to  the  passage  in  Josliua  makes  a  critic  sad  in- 

IV.— D  D  D 


deed.  Instead  of  looking  at  the  words  in  their  naturo 
and  obrious  sense,  men  have  been  led  away  by  their 
adherence  to  the  letŁer  into  reoondlŁe,  foolish,  and  ab- 
surd conjectures.  One  thing  is  a  key  to  the  righŁ  in- 
terpretation,  viz.  that  the  passage  recording  the  miracle 
is  a  quotation  from  the  poetical  book  of  Jasher.  The 
only  difficulty  is  to  discover  where  the  quoŁation  begins 
and  where  it  ends.  But,  whatever  difference  of  opinion 
Łherc  may  be  as  to  this  point,  it  is  elear  that  a  strictly 
literał  signiiication  of  the  langiuige  ought  not  to  be 
pressed  upon  a  sŁatement  profesaedly  exŁracted  from  a 
popular  poetical  work 

1.  The  most  obvious  and  andent  interpretation  of  this 
difficiilt  passage  is  Łhe  literał  onei  At  first  it  was  eon- 
Łended  that  the  sun  itself,  which  was  then  bclicved  to 
have  rcvolved  round  Łhe  earth,  stayed  his  course  for  a 
day.  Those  who  take  this  view  argue  that  the  theory 
of  the  diumal  mołion  ofthe  earthj  which  has  been  the 
generally  received  one  sińce  the  time  of  Galileo  and  Co- 
peniicus,  is  inconsistent  with  the  ScripŁure  narniŁive. 
Notwithstanding  the  generał  reception  of  the  Copemi- 
can  system  of  Łhe  unirerse,  this  view  continued  to  be 
held  by  many  diyines,  ProtesŁanŁ  n&  well  as  Koman  Cath- 
olic,  and  was  strenuously  maintained  by  Buddeus  {UiaU 
Eccles,  r.  T,  HaUe,  1715,  1744,  p.  828  sq.)  and  others  in  . 
the  last  century. 

But  in  morę  recent  times  the  miracle  has  been  ex- 
plained  so  as  to  make  it  aoconl  with  the  no  w  recdved 
opinion  respecting  Łhe  earth's  motion,  and  the  ScripŁure 
narraŁive  supposed  lo  contain  rather  an  optical  and  pop- 
ular Łhan  a  literał  account  of  what  took  place  on  this 
occasiou;  so  Łhat  iŁ  was  in  reality  Łhe  earth,  and  not 
the  sun,  which  stood  still  at  the  command  of  Joshua 
(Clarke's  CommetUartfy  tui  loc). 

2.  Another  opinion  is  that  first  suggested  by  Spinoza 
(Tract,  Theolog,'Politic.  c  ii,  p.  22,  and  c  vi)  and  after- 
wards  maintained  by  Le  Clerc  (jCommeni,  ad  loc.),  Łhat 
the  miracle  was  produced  by  refracŁion  only,  causing 
the  sun  to  appear  above  Łhe  horizon  after  its  seŁting,  or 
by  8ome  other  atmospherical  phenomena,  which  pro- 
duced sufficient  light  to  enable  Joshua  to  pursue  and 
discomfit  his  enemies.  This  seems  to  be  the  only  view 
which  grants  the  reality  ofthe  miracle,  without  encum- 
bering  it  with  unnecessaiy  difficultiea. 

3.  The  last  opinion  we  shall  mention  is  that  of  Łhe 
leamed  Jew  Maimonides  {Morę  Nebochim^  ii,  c.  liii), 
viz.  thaŁ  Joshua  only  asked  of  the  Almigbty  to  grant 
ŁhaŁ  he  might  defeat  his  enemies  before  the  going  down 
of  the  sun,  and  that  God  heard  his  prayer,  inasmuch  aa 
before  Łhe  close  of  the  day  the  five  kings,  with  their  ar- 
mies,  were  cut  in  pieces.  This  opinion  is  favored  by 
Yatablus,  in  the  marginal  notę  to  this  passage  (see  Rob- 
ert Stephens^s  editiou  of  the  Bibie,  folio  1557),  **  Lord, 
permit  that  Łhe  lighŁ  of  the  sun  and  moon  fail  us  not 
before  our  enemies  are  dcfeated.*^  Grotius,  while  he 
admiŁŁed  that  there  was  no  difficulty  in  the  Almighty's 
arresting  the  course  of  the  sun,  or  making  it  reappear 
by  refraction,  approyed  of  ihe  explanaŁion  of  Maimoni- 
des, which  has  been  sińce  ŁhaŁ  period  adopted  by  many 
diyines,  including  Jahn  among  the  Koman  Catholics 
(who  explains  the  whole  as  a  sublime  poetical  trope, 
Tnłrod,  p.  ii,  §  30),  and,  among  orthodpx  Protestants,  by 
a  writer  in  the  Berlin  Erangelische  Kirchffizeitung^  Noy. 
1832,  supposed  to  be  the  editor,  the  late  pnifessor  Heng- 
stenberg  (Kobin8on'8  Biblical  J^tpository^  1833,  iii,  791 
6q.  See  Seiler*s  Biblical  f/ermeneu/icSf  Knglish  transla 
tor's  noŁe,  p.  175,  176).     See  Joshua. 

II.  Opinions  as  ło  łhe  Characłer  ofthe  Book  itself -^ 
As  Łhe  word  Jasher  signitiesyt/^^  or  ypright^  by  which 
term  it  is  rendercd  in  Łhe  margiu  of  our  Bibles,  Łbis 
book  has  generally  been  considered  to  have  been  so  en- 
Łitled  as  conŁaining  a  history  oijiist  men,  The  formef 
of  the  above  passages  in  which  the  book  is  ciŁed  in 
ScripŁure  b  omitŁed  by  Łhe  SepŁ.,  while  in  the  lattei 
the  expression  is  rendered  j3il.i\iov  toU  iv6ovc:  the 
Vulg.  has  liber  jusłorum  in  both  instances.  The  Peshito 
Syriac  in  Joshua  has  *Hhe  book  ofpraises  or  hymns,* 


JASHEB 


186 


JASHER 


reading  ^*^l^n  for  *^t3^il,  and  a  similar  transpoaitioii 
will  aocoimt  for  the  rendering  of  the  aame  yerńon  in 
Sam.,  "  the  book  of  Ashir."  The  Targum  interprets  it 
"  the  book  of  the  law,"  and  this  is  foUowed  by  Jarchi, 
who  giyes,  as  the  passage  alluded  to  in  Joehaa,  the 
prophecy  of  Jaoob  with  regard  to  the  futurę  greatnesB 
of  Ephraim  (Gen.  xlviii,  19),  which  was  fulfilled  when 
the  9un  stood  still  at  Joshua^s  bidding.  The  same  Rabbi, 
in  his  commentaiy  on  Samuel,  refers  to  Genesis,  '*  the 
book  of  the  upright,  Abraham,  Isaac,  and  Jaoob,"  to 
explain  the  allusion  to  the  book  of  Jasher ;  and  Jerome, 
while  discussing  the  "etymology  of  Israel,"  which  he 
interprets  as  "rectus  Dci,"  incidentaUy  mentions  the 
foct  that  Genesis  was  called  '*the  book  of  the  just"  (li- 
ber Genesis  appellatur  iv9'navj  id  est,  justorum),  from 
its  containing  the  histońes  of  Abraham,  Isaac,  and  Is- 
rael  {Comm.  in  Jes,  xliv,  2).  The  Talmudists  attribute 
this  tradition  to  K.  Johanan.  R.  Eliezer  thought  that 
by  the  book  of  Jasher  was  signified  the  book  of  Deuter- 
onomy  from  the  eKpressions  in  Deut.  vi,  18 ;  xxxiii,  7, 
the  latter  being  ąaoted  in  proof  of  the  skill  of  the  He- 
brews  in  archery.  In  the  opinion  of  Rabbi  Samuel  ben- 
Nachman,  the  book  of  Judges  was  alluded  to  as  the 
book  of  Jasher  {A  bodą  ZarOf  c  ii) ;  and  that  it  was  the 
book  of  the  twelve  minor  prophets  was  held  by  some 
Hebrew  writers,  quoted  withont  name  by  Sixtus  Senen- 
sis  (BiN.  Sonat,  lib.  ii).  R.  Levi  ben-Gershom  recog- 
niscs,  though  he  does  not  follow,  the  tradition  given  by 
Jarchi,  while  Kimchi  and  Abarbanel  adopt  the  render- 
ing of  the  Targum.  This  dlyersity  of  opinions  proves, 
if  it  proves  nothing  morę,  that  no  book  was  known  to 
have  survived  which  could  lay  daim  to  the  title  of  the 
book  of  Jasher. 

Josephus,  in  relating  the  miracle  nairated  in  Josh.  x, 
appeals  for  oonfirmation  of  his  account  to  certain  docu- 
ments  deposited  in  the  Tempie  {Ant,  v,  1, 17),  and  his 
words  are  supposed  to  contain  a  covert  allusion  to  the 
book  of  Jasher  as  the  source  of  his  authority.  But  in 
his  treatise  against  Apion  he  says  the  Jews  did  not 
possess  myriads  of  books,  discordant  and  contradictory, 
but  twenty-two  only;  ^om  which  Abicht  concludes 
that  the  books  of  Scripture  were  the  sacred  books  hint- 
ed  at  in  the  former  passage,  while  Masius  understood  by 
the  same  the  Annals  which  were  ¥rritten  by  the  proph- 
ets or  by  the  royal  scribes.  Theodoret  {Quast,  xiv  in 
Jesum  Nave)  explain8  the  words  in  Josh.  x,  13,  which 
he  ąuotes  as  ró  ptp\iov  ró  ivctQkv  (prób.  an  error  for 
eudeC)  as  he  has  in  Ouas^,  iv  in  2  Reg,)^  as  referring  to 
the  ancient  reoord  from  which  the  compiler  of  the  book 
of  Joshua  derived  the  mateńals  of  his  histoiy,  and  ap- 
plies  the  passage  in  2  Sam.  ii,  18  to  prove  that  other 
docnments,  written  by  the  prophets,  were  madę  use  of 
in  the  composition  of  the  historical  books.  Jerome,  or, 
rather,  the  author  of  the  Quautiones  Ilebraicay  under- 
stood by  the  book  of  Jasher  the  books  of  Samuel  them- 
selyes,  inasmuch  as  they  contained  the  histoiy-  of  the 
just  prophets,  Samuel,  Gad,  and  Nathan.  Another  opin- 
ion, quoted  by  Sixtus  Senensis,  but  on  no  authority,  that 
it  was  the  book  of  etemal  predestination,  is  scajrcely 
worth  morę  than  the  bare  mention. 

That  the  book  of  Jasher  was  one  of  the  writings 
which  perished  in  the  Captivity  was  held  by  R.  Levi 
ben-Gershom,  though  he  giyes  the  traditional  explana- 
tion  above  mentioned.  His  opinion  has  been  adopted 
by  Junius,  Hottinger  (Thes.  Phil.  ii,  2,  §  2),  and  many 
other  modem  writers  (Wolfii  BibL  Heb,  ii,  223). 

What  the  naturę  of  the  book  may  have  been  can  only 
be  inferred  from  the  two  passages  in  which  it  is  men- 
tioned and  their  context,  and,  this  being  the  case,  there 
is  clearly  wide  room  for  conjecture.  The  theory  of  Ma- 
sius (quoted  by  Abicht)  was,  that  in  ancient  times,  what^ 
ever  was  worthy  of  being  recorded  for  the  instruction  of 
posterity  was  written  in  the  form  of  annals  by  leamed 
men,  and  that  among  these  annals  or  records  was  the 
book  of  Jasher,  so  called  from  the  trustworthiness  and 
methodical  arrangement  of  the  narrative,  or  because  it 
contained  the  relation  of  the  deeds  of  the  people  of  Is- 


rad,  who  are  elsewhere  spoken  of  mider  the  syniboiical 
name  Jeshurun.  Of  the  latter  hypothesis  Fttrgt  tp> 
proyes  {Uandw,  &  v.).  Sanctius  (Comment,  ad  2  Reg.  1) 
conjectured  that  it  was  a  coUection  of  pioiis  h^-mos, 
written  by  different  authors,  and  sung  on  rarious  occa- 
sions,  and  that  from  this  collection  the  Pfealter  was  com- 
piled.  That  it  was  written  in  yerse  may  reasonablybe 
inferred  from  the  only  specimens  extant,  which  exhibit 
anmistakable  signs  of  metrical  rhythm ;  bat  that  it  took 
its  name  from  this  circumstance  is  not  suppartcdby 
etymology.  Lowth,  indeed  (PraL  p.  306-7),  imagined 
that  it  was  a  collection  of  national  songs,  so  called  be- 
cause it  probably  commenced  with  *1*C^  TX,  az  yaskir, 
"  then  sang,"  etc.,  like  the  song  of  Moses  in  Kxod.  xv,  I ; 
his  view  of  the  ąuestion  was  that  of  the  Syriac  and  Ar- 
abie translators,  and  was  adopted  by  Herder.  But, 
granting  that  the  fonn  of  the  bc>ok  was  poetical,  a  (Uffi- 
ctdty  still  remains  as  to  its  subject.  That  the  book  of 
Jasher  contained  the  deeds  of  national  heroea  of  all  ages 
embalmed  in  yerse,  among  which  David*8  lament  orer 
Saul  and  Jonathan  had  an  appropriate  place,  was  tbc 
opinion  of  Galovius.  A  fragment  of  a  aimilar  kind  v 
thooght  to  appear  in  Numb.  xxi,  14^  Gesenius  conjee- 
tuied  that  it  was  an  antholpgy  of  andent  songs,  whidi 
acąujred  its  name,  "  the  book  of  the  just  or  uprighC 
from  being  written  in  praiae  of  upright  men*  He  ątuaiea, 
but  does  not  ^pprove,  the  theory  of  lUgen,  that,  likc  tbe 
Hamasa  of  the  Arabs,  it  cdebimtcd  the  achierements  <tf 
illustrious  warriors,  and  finom  this  derired  the  titk  of 
**  the  book  of  yalor."  But  the  idea  of  warlike  rakr  is 
entirdy  fordgn  to  the  root  yashar.  Dupin  oontended, 
from  2  Sam.  i,  18,  that  the  contents  of  the  book  were  of 
a  military  naturę;  bat  Montanus,  regaidiiig  rather  tke 
etymology,  oonsidered  it  a  collection  of  politicd  and 
morał  precepts.  Abicht,  taking  the  lament  of  Darid  as 
a  sample  of  the  whole,  maintained  that  the  fragment 
quoted  in  the  book  of  Joshua  was  part  of  a  funerd  ode 
compoeed  upon  the  death  of  that  hero,  and  nanating  his 
achievements.  At  the  same  time,  he  does  not  conceiTe 
it  necessary  to  suppose  that  one  book  only  is  dludcd  t» 
in  bolh  instanoes.  It  must  be  admitted,  howerer.  that 
there  is  very  dight  ground  for  any  condudon  bejrood 
that  which  affects  the  form,  and  that  nothing  can  be 
confidently  aaserted  with  regard  to  the  cont«nt& 

From  the  passage  above  referred  to  (2  Sam.  i,  18— 
<*Also  he  bade  them  teach  the  children  of  Israd  [the 
use  of  ]  the  bow"),  it  has  been  snpposed  by  some  (see  Dr. 
Adam  0]arke'B  CommenL  ad  loc,  and  Home*s  Ifitnd.v6i 
i)  that  the  book  of  Jasher  contained  a  treatise  oo  anb- 
ery ;  but  it  has  been  obsenred  (see  Parker^s  tnndatMm 
of  De  Wette's  Introd,  i,  801)  that,  acoording  to  tfae  an- 
dent modę  of  citation,  which  consisted  in  refemng  to 
some  particular  word  in  the  document, "  the  bow^^wbich 
the  children  of  Israd  were  to  be  taught  indicated  the 
poeticd  passage  from  the  book  of  Jasher  in  whieh  the 
**  bow  of  Jonathan"  is  mentioned  (2  Sam.  i,  22).  Oae 
writer  (Rev.  T.  M.  Hopkins,  in  the  Biblieal  RfpoiiUfrf, 
1845,  p.  97  sq.)  rashly  proposes  to  reject  both  idereocei 
to  the  book  in  question  as  spurious,  and  even  the  wbale 
account  of  the  miracle  in  Joshua. 

De  Wettc  {EinUituttfff  §  169)  endeavon  to  dedacean 
argument  in  favor  of  the  late  composition  of  the  book  of 
Joshua  from  the  circumstance  of  its  dting  a  work  {dt. 
the  book  of  Jasher)  which  '*points  to  the  time  of  Dańd, 
inasmuch  as  his  laimentation  over  Saul  and  J<HMŁhanis 
contdned  in  it."  But  it  has  been  supposed  by  othen 
(although  the  American  translator  of  De  Wette^s/B/rwA 
looks  upon  this  as  ąuite  improbable)  that  the  book  luayi 
as  a  collection  of  poems,  have  received  acoessioiu  at  ra- 
rious  periods,  and,  neverthdeas,  been  still  qttoted  by  ita 
original  name.  Dr.  Palfrey,  who  adopts  Uiis  view  of 
the  book  of  Jasher  in  his  I^ectures,  still  refers  the  compo- 
sition of  Joshtui  to  the  time  of  SauL 

III.  Ałtempted  Beproductiotu  of  the  Worh-\.  Al- 
though conjecture  might  almost  be  thought  to  harc  ex- 
hausted  itself  on  a  subject  so  barren  of  premises,  a  schol- 
ar of  OUT  own  day  has  not  despaired  of  being  able  not 


JASHER 


181 


JASHER 


oafy  to  dedde  what  the  book  of  Jasher  was  in  itselfi  but 
of  reoonstnictiiig  it  from  the  fragments  which,  accord- 
ing  to  his  theory,  he  tnces  throughout  the  seyeral  books 
of  the  Old  Test.  In  the  preface  to  hia  JicuAar,  or  Frag- 
maśta  Arcketypa  Carmkium  Hebraicorum  m  Mcuoreth- 
ico  Veteri$  Testcmenti  textu  passim  tessettata  (London, 
1854, 1860,  8vo),  Dr.  Donaldaon  adrances  a  scheme  for 
the  reatoration  of  this  ancient  record  in  accordanoe  with 
hia  own  idea  of  ita  scope  and  oontenta.  Asauming  that, 
diiiing  the  tranąiul  and  proeperoos  reign  of  Solomon,  an 
unwonted  impnlae  waa  gircn  to  Hebrew  literaturę,  and 
that  the  worshippers  of  Jehovah  were  desirous  of  poe- 
sesaing  aomething  on  which  their  faith  might  rest,  the 
book  of  **  Jaahar,"  or  **  aprightness,"  he  aaserts,  waa  writ- 
ten,  or,  rather,  oompiled  to  meet  this  want.  Ita  object 
waa  to  show  that  in  the  beginning  man  waa  upright, 
but  hadyby  camal  wiadom,  forsaken  the  spiritual  law ; 
that  the  laraelites  had  been  choaen  to  prcserye  and  trans- 
mit  this  law  of  uprightness ;  that  David  had  been  madę 
Idng  for  his  religiotia  integrity,  leaving  the  kingdom  to 
his  son  Solomon,  in  whose  reign,  after  the  dedication  of 
the  Tempie,  the  prosperity  of  the  chosen  people  reach- 
ed  its  ctdminating  point.  The  compiler  of  the  book  was 
probably  Nathan  the  prophet,  assisted,  perhaps,  by  Gad 
the  seer.  It  waa  thus  ^the  first  offspring  of  the  pro- 
phetic  schools,  and  minlstered  spiritual  food  to  the  great- 
er  propheta."  Rejecting,  therefore,  the  authority  of  the 
MABoretic  text,  as  founded  entirdy  on  tradition,  and  ad- 
hering  to  his  own  theoiy  of  the  origin  and  subject  of  the 
book  of  Jasher,  Dr.  Donaldson  proceeda  to  show  that  it 
contAins  the  religious  marrow  of  holy  Soripture.  In 
such  a  case,  of  course,  abaolute  proof  ia  not  to  be  looked 
for,  and  it  would  be  impossible  here  to  discoss  what 
measore  of  probabillty  should  be  assigned  to  a  scheme 
elaborated  with  considerable  ingenuity.  Whateyer  an- 
cient fragments  in  the  sacred  books  of  the  Hebrews  ex- 
hibit  the  naturę  of  uprightness,  celebrate  the  rictories  of 
the  tnie  Isnielites,  predict  their  prosperity,  or  promise 
futurę  blessedness,  have,  according  to  this  thcory,  a  claim 
to  be  oonsidered  among  the  relics  of  the  book  of  Jasher. 
FoUowing  such  a  principle  of  selection,  the  fragments 
lali  into  8evcn  groupe.  The  first  part,  the  object  of 
which  ia  to  ahow  that  man  waa  created  upright  n*>Ś^, 
yashar)j  but  fell  into  sin  by  camal  wisdoro,  contains  two 
fragments— an  Elohistic  and  a  Jehoristic,  both  poetical, 
the  latter  being  the  morę  fulL  The  first  of  these  in- 
dudea  Gen.  i,  27, 28 ;  vi,  1, 2, 4, 5 ;  yiii,  21 ;  yi,  6, 8 ;  the 
other  IB  madę  up  of  Gen.  ii,  7-9. 15>18, 25;  iii,  1-19, 21, 
23, 24.  The  second  part,  oonsisting  of  fonr  fragments, 
ahowa  how  the  descendanta  of  Abraham,  aa  being  up- 
right (D^*i;Ś%  yfshdrim)j  were  adopted  by  God,  while 
the  neighboring  nations  were  rejected.  Fragment  1, 
Gen.  LX,  18-27 ;  fragment  2,  Gen.  iy,  2-8, 8-16 ;  ftagment 
8,  Gen.  xyi,  1-4,  16, 16 ;  xvU,  9-16, 18-26 ;  xxi,  1-14, 20, 
21 ;  fragment  4,  Gen.  xxy,  20-34 ;  xxyii,  1-10, 14, 18-20, 
25-10;  iy,18,19;  xxyi,34;  xxxyi,2;  iv,  23, 24;  xxxvi, 
8 ;  xxviii,  9 ;  xxvi,  35 ;  xxvii,  46 ;  xxviii,  1-4,  11-19 ; 
xxix,  1,  etc.,  24, 29 ;  xxxy,  22-26 ;  xxiv,  25-29 ;  xxxv, 
9-14, 15;  xxxii,  81.  Iil  the  third  part  is  related,  under 
the  figurę  of  the  Deluge,  how  the  Israelites  escapedfrom 
Egypt,  wandered  forty  years  in  the  wildemess,  and  final- 
ly,  iu  the  reign  of  Solomon,  bnilt  a  tempie  to  Jehoyah. 
The  passages  in  which  this  is  found  are  Gen.  vi,  5-14 ; 
vii, 6, 11, 12;  yiii, 6, 7, 8, 12 ;  y,29;  viii, 4;  1  Kings  vi; 
yiii,  43;  Deut.yi,  18;  Psa.  y,  8.  The  thrcc  fragments 
of  the  fonrth  part  contain  the  divine  laws  to  be  obseryed 
by  the  upright  people,  and  are  found  in  (1)  Deut,  y,  1-22 ; 
(2)  yi,  1-5;  Lev.  xix,  18;  Deut,  x,  12-21 ;  xi,  1-6,  7-9; 
and  (3)  yiii,  1-3 ;  yi,  6-18, 20-25.  The  blessings  of  the 
upright^  and  their  adraonitions,  are  the  subject  of  the 
fifth  pait,  which  contains  the  songs  of  Jacob  (Gen.  xlix), 
Balaam  (Numb.  xxiii,  xxiv),  and  Moses  (Deut.  xxxii, 
xxxiii).  The  wonderful  yictories  and  dcliverances  of 
Israel  are  cclebrated  in  the  sisth  part,  in  the  trium- 
phal  aongs  of  Moses  and  Miriam  (£xod.  xv,  1-19),  of 
Joafatui  (Josh.  X,  12, 13),  and  of  Deborah  (Judg.  v,  1-20). 


The  seyenth  is  a  collection  of  yarious  hymns  composed 
in  the  reigns  of  David  and  Solomon,  and  contains  Da- 
vid*8  song  of  triumph  oyer  Goliath  (!)  (1  Sam.  ii,  1-10) ; 
his  lament  for  Saul  and  Jonathan  (2  Sam.  i,  19-27),  and 
for  Abner  (2  Sam.  iii,  33, 34) ;  his  psalm  of  thanksgiying 
(Psa.  xviii ;  2  Sam.  xxii) ;  his  triumphal  ode  on  the  con- 
quest  of  the  Edomites  (Psa.  lx),  and  his  prophecy  of 
Messiah^s  kingdom  (2  Sam.  xxiii,  1-7),  together  with 
Solomon'8  Epithalamium  (Psa.  xlv),  and  the  hymn  sung 
at  the  dedication  of  the  Tempie  (Psa.  lxyiii). 

It  cannot  be  denied  that  the  critic  has  shown  great 
ingenuity  and  constructive  skill  in  elaborating  his  the- 
ory.  His  commentaries  on  the  indiyidual  fragments 
composing  the  parta  often  exhibit  striking  and  j ust  re- 
marks,  with  a  right  perception  of  the  geniua  of  some 
portions  of  the  O.  T.  Yet  we  must  pronounce  the  at- 
tempt  a  failure.  The  leading  positions  are  untenable. 
Donaldson's  arguments  are  often  weak  and  baselesa. 
Most  of  the  contenta  which  he  assigns  to  the  book  ol 
Jashar  never  belonged  to  it,  such  as  the  pieces  of  Gen- 
esis which  he  selects,  etc  But  it  is  needless  to  enter 
into  a  refutation  of  the  hypotheais,  ingeniously  set  forth 
in  elegant  Latin,  and  supported  with  considerable  acute- 
nesa.  Most  of  the  book  of  Jashar  cited  in  Joshua  and  2d 
Samuel  is  lost.  It  is  yery  improbable  that  laws  such  aa 
those  in  Deut.  vi,  x,  xi,  or  historical  pieces  like  Gen.  xvi, 
1-4,  eyer  belonged  to  it.  It  is  also  a  most  unfortunate 
ooniectuie  that  ti^^^p,  in  Gen.  xlix,  10,  ia  abridged  from 
nti?lś ;  or,  eyen  if  it  were,  that  it  fomishes  a  proof  of 
the  poem  being  written  while  Solomon  waa  king  (p.  27). 
We  are  persuaded  that  the  critic  giyes  great  extension 
of  meaning  to  the  Hebrew  word  "łd*^,  in  making  it  al- 
most,  if  not  altogether,  an  appellation  of  the  IsraelitiBh 
people.  When  he  assumes  that  it  ia  contained  in  bK*^iZ97) 
the  notion  is  erroneons  (p.23). 

Among  the  many  atrenge  reaulta  of  Donaldson*s  ar- 
rangement,  Shero,  Ham,  and  Japhcth  are  no  longer  the 
sons  of  Noah,  who  ia  Israel  under  a  figurę,  but  of  Adam ; 
and  the  circnmstances  of  Noah's  life  related  in  Greń.  ix, 
18-27  are  transferred  to  the  latter.  Cain  and  Abel  are 
.the  sons  of  Shem,  Abraham  ia  the  son  of  Abel,  and  Esan 
becomea  Lamech,  the  son  of  Bf  ethtiselah. 

2  and  3.  There  are  also  extant,  under  the  title  of "  the 
book  of  Jasher,"  two  Rabbinical  works,  one  a  morał  trea- 
tise,  written  in  A.D.  1394  by  R.  Shabbatai  Caimaz  Leyi- 
ta,  of  which  a  oopy  in  MS.  exist8  in  the  Yatican  Ubrary ; 
the  other  waa  written  by  Jacob  ben-Meir,  or  R.  Tam, 
who  died  in  1171,  and  contains  a  treatise  on  Jewish  rit- 
ual  ąuestions.  It  was  publtshed  at  Cracow  in  1586, 4to, 
and  again  at  Yienna  in  18 1 1 ,  but  incorrectly.  No  trana- 
lation  of  either  was  eyer  madę. — Kitto ;  Smith. 

4.  An  anonymoua  work  under  the  same  name  waa 
publiahed  at  Yenice  in  1625,  at  Cracow  in  1628,  and  at 
Prague  in  1668.  It  containa  the  histories  of  the  Penta- 
teoch,  Joahua,  and  Judgea,  and  intermixes  many  fabu- 
lous  thinga.  It  gives  (lxxxyiii,  64)  the  account  of 
Joahna*s  mirade  nearly  in  the  words  of  Scripture,  mak- 
ing the  snn  to  stand  still "  thirty-six  times**  (Q*^rtr),  i.e. 
hours ;  but  does  not  bring  the  histoTy  down  later  than 
the  conque8t  of  Canaan.  The  preface  itself  states  that 
it  was  disooyered  at  the  destruction  of  Jerusalem  by 
Sidrus.  one  of  the  officers  of  Titus,  who,  while  searching 
a  house  for  the  purpose  of  plunder,  found  in  a  secret 
chamber  a  yessel  containing  the  books  of  the  law,  the 
prophets,  and  Hagiographa,  with  many  othera,  which  a 
yenerable  man  was  reading.  Sidrus  took  the  old  man 
under  his  protection,  and  built  for  him  a  house  at  Se- 
yille,  where  the  books  were  safely  deposited,  and  thence 
this  one  was  convcyed  to  Naplcs,  where  it  was  printed. 
T*he  book  in  qup8tion  is  probably  the  production  of  a 
Spanish  Jew  of  the  13th  century  (Abicht,  De  libr.  Bedi, 
in  Thes,  Aor.  TheoL  PhU.  i,  626-i4).  A  German  yersion 
of  it,  with  additions,  was  published  by  R  Jacob  at  Frank- 
fort-on-the-Main  (1674, 8vo),  with  the  title  IttJJ"!  DR,  < 
perfect  and  right.    A  stereotyped  tranalation  of  this 


JASHOBEAM 


788 


JASHUBI-LEHEM 


work  was  published  iii  New  York  in  1840,  nnder  the  di- 
rection  of  M.  M.  Noah,  with  certilicates  of  its  fidelity  to 
thc  original  by  eminent  Ilebrew  scholara  who  had  ex- 
amined  it 

5.  The  above  works  must  not  be  oonfounded  with  the 
Tarious  editions  of  a  fabrication  which  was  fiist  secretly 
printed  at  Bristol,  and  published  in  London  in  1751  (4to), 
by  an  infidel  t^^pe-foandcr  of  Bristol  named  Jacob  Ilire, 
who  was  its  real  author.  It  was  entitled  "  The  Booh  of 
JasherfWiłh  Tettimomea  and  Notes  explanatory  oftke 
Text :  to  wkick  ispr^fixed  Variou8  Readinga :  translated 
into  EngHsh  from  the  Hebrew  by  Alcuin  of  Britain,  who 
went  a  pilgrimage  into  the  Holy  Land."  This  book  was 
noticed  in  the  Monthly  Remew  for  December,  1761,  which 
descńbes  it  as  "  a  palpable  piece  of  oontrivance,  intend- 
ed  to  impose  upon  the  creduloos  and  ignorant,  to  sap  the 
credit  of  the  books  of  Moses,  and  to  blacken  the  chiurac- 
ter  of  Moses  himself."  The  preface,  purporting  to  be 
written  by  Alcuin,  oontains  an  aocount  of  the  finding  of 
the  book  in  MS.  at  Gazna,  in  Persia,  and  the  way  in 
which  it  was  translated.  Having  bronght  it  to  England, 
Alcuin  says  that  he  left  it,  among  other  papers,  with  a 
dergyman  in  Yorkshire.  After  two  pages  of  various 
readings,  the  book  itself  follows,  divided  into  thirty- 
seren  chapters.  Testimonies  and  notes  are  appended. 
The  editor  sutes,  in  a  dedication  at  the  beginning,  that 
he  bought  the  MS.  at  an  auction  in  the  north  of  Eng- 
land, and  affirms  that  Wickliffe  had  written  on  the  out- 
side,  **  I  have  lead  the  book  of  Jasher  twioe  over,  and  I 
much  approve  of  it  as  a  piece  of  great  antiquity  and  cu- 
riosity,  but  I  cannot  assent  that  it  should  be  madę  a  part 
of  the  canon  of  Scripture."  This  dumsy  forgery  was 
repriuted  at  Bristol  in  1827,  and  published  in  London  in 
1829  (4to),  as  a  new  discoyery  of  the  book  of  Jasher.  A 
prospectus  of  a  second  edition  of  this  reprint  was  issued 
In  1838  by  the  editor,  who  therein  styles  himself  the 
Rev,  C.  R.  Bond.  This  literary  fraud  has  obtained  a 
notoriety  far  beyond  its  merits  in  conseąaence  of  the 
able  critique8  to  which  it  gave  rise,  haring  been  again 
expo8ed  in  the  Dublin  Christian  £xaminer  for  1831,  and 
elaborately  refuted  by  Home  in  hi&lntroduetian  (nt  sup. ; 
new  edition,  iv,  741-6). 

See,  besides  the  literaturę  abore  referred  to,  Hilliger, 
De  Libro  Recti  (lips.  1714) ;  Nolte,  De  Libro  Justorum 
(Helmst.  1719) ;  Wolf,Z)e  Lilnv  Rectorum  (Lips.  1742); 
Steger,  De  rocdbuh  1UJ  (Kid,  1808) ;  Anon.  Jasher  re- 
Jerred  to  in  Joah.  and  iSam,  (London,  1842) ;  Hopkins, 
PlumUins  Papers  (Aubum,  1862,  eh.  vii) ;  and  the  peri- 
odicals  cited  by  Poole,  /ncfor,  s.  v.    Compare  Josiiua. 

Jasho^be&n  (Heb.  Yashobam',  fi^^llś;;,  dwdUr 
among  the  people^  or  reiumer  to  the  peopie,  otherwise, 
to  whom  th^peopk  retums,  or  a  retuming  peopłe ;  Sept 
in  1  Chroń,  xi,  11,  'Upadfi  v.  r.  *UoajiaSd ;  in  1  Chroń. 
xii,  Q,'l€<r(Śadfi  v.  r.  2o/3o#caf» ;  in  1  Chroń,  xxvii,  2, 
'lafioafjt  V.  r.  'lofioaZ  j  Vulg.  Jesbaanty  but  Jesboam  in 
1  Chroń,  xxvii,  2),  the  name  of  sereral  of  David*8  fńr 
Yorite  officers. 

1.  One  of  the  Korhites,  or  Levite  of  the  family  of 
Korah  (and  therefore  probably  not  identical  with  the 
foUowing),  who  joined  David'8  band  at  Ziklag  (1  Chroń. 
xii,  6).     RC.  1053. 

2.  "  Son"  of  Hachmoni,  one  of  David'8  worthies,  and 
the  iirst  named  in  the  two  lists  which  are  given  of  them 
(2  Sam.  xxiii,  8 ;  1  Chroń,  xi,  11).  One  of  these  texts 
is  hcld  to  have  sufiered  through  the  neghgence  of  copy- 
ists,  and,  as  Jashobcam  is  not  otherwise  histońcally 
known,  coraroentators  have  been  much  embarrassed  in 
comparing  thcm.  The  former  passage  attributes  to  him 
the  defeat  of  800,  the  latter  of  300  Fhilistines;  and  the 
ąuestion  has  been  whether  there  is  a  mistake  of  figures 
in  one  of  these  accounts,  or  whether  two  diffcrent  ex' 
ploits  are  recorded.  Further  difficulties  win  appear  in 
comparkig  the  two  text8.  We  have  assumed  Jashobe- 
am  to  be  intended  in  both,  but  this  is  open  to  ąuestion. 
In  Chronicles  we  read,  "  Jashobeam,  the  Hachmonitc., 
chief  of  the  captains:  ho  lifted  up  his  spear  against  300 


men,  slain  by  him  at  one  time;"  but  in  Samuel  [mar- 
gin  ] , "  Josheb-bassebet  the  Tachmonite,  chief  among  the 
three,  Adino,  of  Ezni,  who  lifted  up  his  spear  agunat 
800  men,  whom  he  siew."  That  Jashobeam  the  ilacn- 
monite  and  Jo8heb-baah-«hebeth  the  Tachmonite  are  the 
same  person,  is  elear ;  but  may  not  Adino  of  Ezni,  wbose 
name  forms  the  immediate  anteoedent  of  the  exploit, 
which,  as  related  here,  oonstitutes  the  sole  discrepancy 
between  the  two  text8,  be  another  person?  Many  so 
explain  it,  and  thus  obtain  a  solution  of  the  difficulty. 
But  a  further  oomparison  of  the  two  yersea  will  again 
suggest  that  the  whole  of  the  yerse  last  dted  most  be- 
long  to  Jashobeam ;  for  not  only  is  the  paialld  incom- 
plete  if  we  take  the  last  dause  from  him  and  asadgn  it 
to  another,  but  in  douig  this  we  leave  the  "  chief  amoog 
the  captains"  without  an  exploit,  in  a  list  which  reoords 
some  feat  of  every  bero.  We  indine,  therefore,  to  the 
opinion  of  those  who  suppose  that  Jashobeam,  or  Jo- 
sheb-bash-fihebeth,  was  the  name  or  title  of  the  chi«f, 
Adino  and  Eznite  being  de8criptive  epitheta,  and  Hach- 
monite  the  patronymic  of  the  same  person ;  and  the 
remaining  discrepancy  we  account  for,  not  on  the  sap- 
position  of  different  exploit8,  but  of  one  of  thoae  coirup- 
tions  of  numbers  of  which  seyeral  will  be  found  in  cooł- 
paring  the  books  of  Chronicles  with  those  of  Samud  and 
Kings.    B.C.  1014.    See  Adino;  Da\id;  Ezihte. 

The  exploit  of  breaking  through  thc  bost  of  the  Fhi- 
listines to  procure  David  a  draught  of  water  from  the 
well  of  Bethlehem  is  ascribed  to  the  three  chief  herocs, 
and  therefore  to  Jashobeam,  who  was  the  fint  of  the 
three  (2  Sam.  xxiii,  18-17;  1  Chroń,  id,  15-19).  &C. 
1045. 

3.  We  also  find  a  Jashobeam  who  commanded  24^000, 
and  did  duty  in  David*s  court  in  the  month  Kiaan  (i 
Chroń.  xxvLi,  2).  He  was  the  son  of  Zabdid ;  if,  there- 
fore, he  was  the  same  aoi  the  foregoing  Jashobeam,  his 
patronymic  of  ''the  Hachmonite"  must  be  refened  to 
his  race  or  office  rather  than  to  his  immediate  fiuher. 
See  Hacumoni. 

Ja^shub  [or  Jash^tó]  (Heb.  YashA',  n^ir^,  rt- 
tumer;  once  by  error,  !ł''CJ,  Vaskib\  in  text  1  Chioo. 
vii,  1;  Samar.  Pent.  in  Ńumb.  i'osheb\  n*^*!*^;  Sept. 
'la<rovp>)i  the  name  of  two  men,  or,  perhaps,  the  last  is 
rather  a  pUicc.    See  also  Si[e.ui-jashu& 

1.  The  third  named  of  the  four  sons  of  Isaaclur  (I 
Chroń,  vii,  1;  Numb.  xxvi,  24) :  called  Job  (perhaps  by 
contraction  or  corruption  [or  possibly  only  by  sabstitii- 
tion,  both  having  the  same  meaning,  one  fiom  3^0,  aod 
the  other  from  S^li^])  in  the  paralld  passage  (Gen. 
xlvi,  13).  B.a  1856.  His  desccndants  wcre  called 
Jashubites  (Hebrew  Yashubi',  *^3C3^,  SepL  'laow^j 
Numb.  xxvi,  24). 

2.  One  of  the  "  sons"  (?  former  residcnts)  of  Bani, 
who  divorced  his  Gentile  wife  after  the  Fxile  (Ezra  s, 
29>     Ra  459. 

Jash^ubi-leliem  (Heb.  Yashu^U-Wchai^  ^yr 
^r?^  ["^  pause**  La^chem,  DH^])  retuming  home  fnna 
baJtUe  or  for  food;  SepL  d7ri<rrpt^iv  avTovc  v.  t,  dri- 
aTpt}l/av  łic  Atifi ;  Yulg.  receni  sunŁ  in  L€ihem\  sppar- 
ently  a  person  named  as  a  descendant  of  Shelah,  toe  son 
of  Judah  (1  Chroń,  iv,  22).  RCperhaps  cir.  995,  ance 
it  added  at  the  end  of  the  list,  *^.4nd  these  are  andent 
things.  These  were  the  potters,  and  those  that  dwdc 
among  plants  and  hedges;  there  th^y  dwdt  with  the 
king  [?  Solomon ;  but,  according  to  ao*ne,  Pharaoh,  dur- 
ing  the  residence  in  £g>i>t]  for  his  work.'^  PiossiblT, 
howcver,  "  it  is  a  place,  and  we  should  infer  from  its 
oonnection  with  Maresha  and  Chozeba-~<f  Choiebt  be 
Chezib  or  Achzib — that  it  lay  on  the  western  side  of  the 
tribe,  in  or  near  the  Shephdah  or  '  plain.'  The  Jeińsh 
explanation8,  as  seen  in  Jerome*s  Quasł,  Ileb^.  co  this 
passage,  and,  in  a  slightly  different  form,  in  the  Targum 
on  the  Chronicles  (ed.  Wilkins,  p.  29,  30^  mention  of 
Moab  as  the  kęy  to  the  whole.  Chozeba  is  Elimckch; 
Joash  and  Saraph  are  Mahlon  and  Chiiion,  who  'had 


JASHUBITB 


789 


JASPER 


the  dominioił  in  Hoab*  from  n]axT3ring  the  two  Moabite 
danuelft:  Jashubi-Lehem  is  Naomi  and  Ruth,  who  re- 
tamed  (Jashubi)  to  bread,  or  to  Beth4eA«iM,  after  the 
famine:  and  the  ^ancient  words*  point  to  the  book  of 
Bath  as  the  aoorce  of  the  whole*'  (Smith). 

Jaah'ubite  (Numb.  xxvi,  24),    See  Jashub,  1. 

JasideaDB.    See  YsziDis. 

Ja^BlSl  (1  Chroń,  xi,  46).    See  Jaasieu 

Ja'aon  Clćunay,  he  (kat  will  cure^  originally  the 
name  of  the  leader  of  the  Argonauta),  a  common  Greek 
name,  which  was  frequently  adopted  by  Hellenizing 
Jew8  as  the  equivalent  otJesuSy  Joskua  C\riaovc ;  comp. 
Josephns,  Ant, xii,  6, 1 ;  Aristeas,  HitL  apud  Hody,  p.  7), 
probably  with  some  referenoe  to  its  sappoecd  connection 
with  Idcdai  (u  e.  the  healer),  A  parallel  change  occuis 
in  Aleimus  (Elialdm),  while  NicolauSj  Dontheits,  3fene- 
łautj  etc,  were  direct  translations  of  Hebrew  names.  It 
OCCUIS  with  reference  to  sereral  men  in  the  Apocrypha, 
and  one  in  the  New  Testament. 

1.  Jason,  the  son  of  Eleazer  (comp.  Ecclus.  1, 27, 
'Ii|tfovc  vióc  £^Mzx  'BXfaZaCf  Codex  A),  was  one  of  the 
conimissioners  sent  by  Judas  Maccabesus,  in  conjunction 
with  Eupolemus,  to  condude  a  treaty  of  amity  and  mu- 
tnal  support  with  the  Komana,  B.C.  161  (1  Mace.  viii, 
17 ;  Josephus,  Ani. xii,  10, 6). 

2.  Jason,  the  father  of  Axtipater,  who  was  an 
envoy  to  Romę  to  renew  the  treaty,  at  a  later  period, 
nnder  Jonathan  Maccabenis,  in  conjunction  with  Nume- 
nios,  the  son  of  Antiochus  (1  Mace  xii,  16 ;  xiv,  22^,  is 
probably  the  same  person  as  No.  1. 

3.  Jason  of  Ctrene,  in  Africa,  was  a  Hellenizing 
Jew  of  the  race  of  those  whom  Ptolemy  Soter  sent  into 
Egypt  (2  Mace  i ;  Josephus,  Ant  xii,  1 ;  Prideaux,  Con- 
nectiottf  ii,  176).  He  wiote  in  five  books  the  history  of 
Judas  Maccabeos  and  his  brethren,  and  the  principal 
tranaactions  of  the  Jews  during  the  reigns  of  Seleucus 
rv  Philopator,  Antiochus  IV  Epiphanes,  and  Antiochus 
y  Eupator  (KC.  187-162),  from  which  five  books  most 
of  the  second  book  of  Maccabees  (q.  v.)  is  abridged.  In 
an  probability  it  was  written  in  Greek,  and,  from  the 
fiui  of  its  including  the  wars  under  Antiochus  Y  Eupa- 
tor, it  must  have  been  written  after  RC.  162.  The 
soarces  from  which  Jason  obtained  his  information  arc 
miknown,  and  it  is  not  certain  when  eithcr  he  or  his 
epitomizer  lived.  AU  that  we  know  of  his  history  is 
oontained  in  the  few  ver8es  of  the  2d  Mace  ii,  19-28. 

4.  Jasok,  the  high-priest,  was  the  second  son  of 
Simon  II,  and  the  brother  of  Onias  III.  His  proper 
name  was  Jesus,  but  he  had  changed  it  to  that  of  Jason 
('Iiyfforc  'Ia<Tova  tavTOv  funapófiaffty  [Josephus,  ^irf. 
xii,  5, 1]).  Shortly  afler  the  accession  of  Antiochus  TV 
Epiphanes,  Jason  offered  to  the  king  440  talents  ofyearly 
tribute  if  he  would  invest  him  nńth  the  high-priesthood, 
to  the  excIasion  of  his  dder  brother  (4  Mace.  iv,  17)  (RC. 
dr.  175).  Josephus  says  that  Onias  III  was  dead  on  the 
acoession  of  Jason  to  the  high-priesthood,  and  that  Jason 
reoeived  this  post  in  consequence  of  his  nephew,  Onias 
rV,  the  son  of  Onias  III,  being  as  yet  an  infant  {A  ni.  xii, 
5, 1).  Jason  also  oiTered  a  further  150  talents  for  the 
license  '^  to  set  him  up  a  place  of  exercise,  and  for  the 
training  up  of  youth  in  the  fashions  of  the  heathcn"  (2 
Mace.  iv,  7-9 ;  Josephus,  A  nt.  xii,  6, 1).  This  offer  was 
immediatdy  accepted  by  Antiochus,  and  Jason  built  a 
gymnaainm  at  Jerusalem.  The  effect  of  this  innovation 
was  to  produce  a  stronger  tendency  than  ever  for  Greek 
faaluons  and  heathenish  manners,  and  they  so  iucreascd 
under  the  superintendenoe  of  the  wicked  Jaaon  that  the 
priests  despised  the  Tempie,  and  '^hastened  to  be  par- 
takers  of  the  unlawful  allowance  in  the  place  of  exerci9C, 
after  the  gamę  of  Dtacus  (q.  v.)  callccl  them  forth"  (2 
Mace.  iv,  14).  Some  of  the  Jews  even  '*  madę  them- 
8elves  uncircurocised,"  that  they  might  appear  to  be 
Greeks  when  they  were  naked  (1  Mace.  i,  15 ;  Josephus, 
Ani,  xii, 5, 1).  At  last,  as  was  the  custom  of  the  dties 
who  osed  to  send  embassies  to  Tyre  in  honor  of  Hercules 
(CurUtis,  iv,  2 ;  Polybius,  ReUą,  xxxi,  20, 12),  Jason  sent 


special  messengers  (dr(i>poi;c)  from  Jerusalem,  who  were 
the  newly-elected  dtizens  of  Antioch  ('Avnox"C  ovrac; 
comp.  2  Mace  iv,  9),  to  carry  300  drachoue  of  8ilver  to 
the  sacrifice  of  that  god.  See  Hercules.  The  money, 
however,  contrary  to  the  wish  of  the  sender,  was  not 
used  for  the  sacrifice  of  Hercules,  but  re8er\'ed  for  mak- 
ing  triremcs,  because  the  bearers  of  it  did  not  think  it 
proper  {hó.  rb  fiĄ  Ka^riKiiv)  to  employ  it  for  the  sacri- 
fice (2  Mace  iv,  19, 20).  In  RC.  172  Jason  also  gave  a 
festival  to  Antiochus  when  he  vi8ited  Jerusalem,  Jason 
and  the  dtizens  leading  him  in  by  torch-light  and  with 
great  shoutings  (2  Mace  iv,  22).  Josephus  mentions 
this  visit,  but  says  that  it  was  an  expedition  agaimt  Je- 
rusalem, and  that  Antiochus,  upon  obtaining  possession 
of  the  dty,  siew  many  of  the  Jews,  and  plundered  it  of 
a  great  deal  of  money  {AtU,  xii,  5, 8).  The  crafty  Ja- 
son, however,  soon  found  a  yet  morę  cunning  kinsman, 
who  removed  him  from  his  office  in  much  the  same 
manner  as  he  had  done  with  his  brother,  Onias  III. 
Menelaus,  the  son  of  Simon  (Josephus,  Ant,  xii,  6, 1 ;  Si- 
mon*s  brother,  2  Mace  iv,  28),  govemor  of  the  Tempie, 
having  been  aent  by  Jason  to  Antiochus,  knew  how, 
through  flattery  and  by  oiTering  800  talents  morę  than 
Jason,  to  gain  the  favor  of  the  king.  Antiochus  imme- 
diately  gave  him  the  office  of  high-priest,  and  Jason  was 
forced  to  flee  into  the  country  of  the  Ammonites  (2 
Mace  iv,  26).  See  Menelaus.  In  RC.  170,  Antiochus 
having  undertaken  his  second  expedition  into  Egypt, 
there  was  a  rumor  that  he  was  dead,  and  Jason  madę  an 
attack  upon  Jerusalem  and  committed  many  atrocities. 
Ue  was,  however,  foroed  again  to  flee  into  the  country 
of  the  Ammonites  (2  Mace  v,  5-7).  At  Icngth,  being 
accused  before  Aretas,  king  of  the  Arabians,  hc  was  com- 
pelled  ^  to  flee  from  city  to  dty,  pursued  of  all  men,  and 
being  held  in  abomination  as  an  open  enemy  of  his 
country  and  oountrymen,"  and  eventaally  retired  into 
Egypt  (2  Mace  y,  8).  He  afterwards  retired  to  take 
refuge  among  the  Laoedsmonians,  '*  thinking  there  to 
find  sucoor  by  reaaon  of  his  kindred*'  (2  Mace  v,  9; 
compare  1  Mace  xii,  7, 21 ;  Josephus,  A  nt.  xii,  4, 10 ;  see 
Prideaux,  Conneet.  ii,  140;  Frankel,  Afonatschn/t,  1858, 
p.  456),  and  perished  miserably  "  in  a  strange  land** 
(comp.  Dan.  xii,  80  sq. ;  Mace  i,  12  sq.).  His  body  re- 
mained  without  burial,  and  he  had  "  nonę  to  moum  for 
him"  (2  Mace  v,  9, 10).     See  High-priest. 

5.  Jason  of  Thessalonica  was  the  host  of  Paul 
and  Silas  at  that  dty.  In  oonseąuence,  his  house  was 
assaulted  by  the  Jews  in  order  to  seize  the  apostle.  but, 
not  finding  him,  they  dragged  Jason  and  other  brethren 
before  the  ruler  of  the  city,  who  releaaed  them  on  secu- 
rity (Acta  xvii,  5-9).  A.D.  48.  He  appears  to  have 
been  the  same  as  the  Jason  mentioned  in  Rom.  xvi,  21 
as  one  of  the  kinsmen  of  Paul,  and  probably  accompa- 
nied  him  from  Thessalonica  to  Corinth  (A.i>.  54).  He 
was  not  one  of  those  who  accompanied  the  apostle  into 
Asia,  though  Lightfoot  conjecturcs  that  Jason  and  Se- 
cundus  were  the  same  person  (Acta  xx,  4).  Alford  says 
Secundus  is  altogether  unknown  (Acts,  1.  e).  Accoid- 
ing  to  tradition,  Jason  was  bishop  of  Tarsus  (Fabńdus, 
Lux  Evangdii,  p.  91, 92). 

Jasper  (y^ĘÓ^^yyoshfpheh'^  proh, połi»hed  or  gUtier^ 
mg,  latnrię),  a  gem  of  variou8  colors,  as  purple,  cerulean, 
but  mostly  green  like  the  emerald,  alŁhough  duller  in 
hne  (Pliny,  Soi.  Hitł,  xxxvii,  8, 9 ;  Epiphanius,  De  Gem- 
mity  §  6 ;  Braun,  De  Vegf,  Sacerdot  ii,  19).  **  It  was  the 
last  of  the  twelve  inserted  in  the  high-priest's  breast^ 
plate  (Exod.  xxviii,  20;  xxxix,  18),  and  the  first  of  the 
twdvo  used  in  the  foundation  of  the  new  Jerusalem 
(Rev.  xxi,  19) :  the  difference  in  the  order  secms  to  show 
that  no  emblematical  importance  was  attached  to  that 
feature  It  was  the  stone  employcd  in  the  supcrstruct- 
ure  {IrdófŁTitrtę)  of  the  wali  of  the  new  Jerusalem  (Rev. 
xxi,  18).  It  further  appears  among  the  Stones  which 
adomed  the  king  of  Tyre  (Ezek.  xxviii,  13).  Lastly,  it 
is  the  emblematical  image  of  the  glory  of  the  divine 
Being  (Rev.  iv,  3).  The  characteristics  of  the  stone,  as 
far  as  they  are  specified  in  Scripture  (Rev.  xxi,  11),  are 


JASPIS 


990 


JAVA 


that  it  was  *  most  precious,'  and  *  like  ciystal'  (KpyffTaK- 
\Łi^utv) ;  not  exactly  '  elear  as  ciystal,'  as  in  the  A.  Y., 
but  of  a  crystal  hue :  the  term  is  applied  to  it  in  this 
scnse  by  Dioacorides  (v.  160 :  Xł9oc  idoirię  6  jjLiv  ric 
i<TTi.  afiapaydii^iifVf  o  Sk  icpuoroW^Jiic).  We  may  also 
inier  from  Rer.  iv,  3  that  it  was  a  stone  of  brilliaut 
and  transparent  light"  (Smith).  The  ancient  Jasper 
thus  appears  to  haye  been  freąuenUy  translucenti  but 
the  modem  is  opaquc  A  brown  variety  exist(Kl  in 
Egypt.  The  Jasper  of  the  ancients,  therefore,  compre- 
hended  yarious  precious  Stones  not  readily  identifiable 
(KoscnmUller,  BibL  AUhertkum.  IV,  i,  42 ;  Moore's  Anc 
Min.  p.  163).  What  is  now  properly  called  jasper  by 
mineralogists  is  a  sub-species  of  rhomboidal  quartz,  of 
seyeral  yarieties,  mosŁly  the  cammotif  the  £ffyptian,  and 
the  stHped;  of  different  colors— whidsh,  yellow,  green, 
reddish,  etc,  sometimes  spotted  or  banded ;  occurring 
cither  in  masses  or  loose  crystals,  and  susceptible  of  a 
fine  polish  (see  the  Lond,  Encycłopadia,  s.  y.).    See  Ge^ł 

Jaspis,  GoTTFRiED  SiEGMUMD,  a  GreTTOan  theolo- 
gian,  was  bom  at  Meiasen  April  8, 1766.  He  was  edu- 
cated  at  the  Uniyersity  of  Leipzig,  and  entered  the 
ministry  in  1792  as  pastor  at  PUchAu.  In  1814  he  was 
called  to  the  Nicolai  church  at  Leipzig,  where  he  died, 
Feb.  la,  1828.  While  he  distinguished  himself  greatly 
as  a  pzeacher,  it  is  particularly  as  a  writer  in  Biblical 
literaturę  tliat  Jaapis's  name  desenres  to  be  mentioned 
here.  He  published  an  excellent  Latin  translation  of 
the  apostolic  epistles  (Lips.  1793-95;  new  ed.  1821, 8yo). 
His  polemical  and  homiletical  works  are  now  no  longer 
legarded  as  of  any  yalue.  *^  He  was  a  man  of  pure 
«ims  and  cheerful  piety,  and  a  good  scholar  and  preach- 
erJ'— Kitto,  Cifdop,  a.  v. ;  Adelung'8  Addenda  to  Jocher, 
Gelehrten  Lacikon,  s.  y. 

JaSBasa,  Al  (or  the  Sp^)f  a  Mohammedan  name  for 
«  beast  which  is  to  be  one  of  their  signs  of  the  approach 
of  the  day  of  judgment :  When  the  tentence  thali  be  ready 
to  fali  upon  thańj  tpe  wiU  catue  a  beatt  to  come  forth 
unto  ihem  out  ofthe  ettrth,  which  $haU  tpeak  tinto  them, 
It  is  sapposed  by  them  that  it  wiU  appear  first  in  the 
tempie  of  Mecca,  or  on  Mount  Safa,  or  in  the  territory 
of  Tayef.  She  is  to  be  a  monster  in  size,  and  so  swifl 
that  no  human  being  shall  be  able  to  porsue  her  in  her 
fapid  flight  through  this  worid,  marking  the  belieyers 
from  the  unbelieyers,  ^  that  every  person  may  be  known 
at  the  day  of  judgment  for  what  he  really  is."  See 
Sale,  Prelim,  Diuert,  to  the  Koran,  p.  79 ;  Broughton, 
BiUioth.  JiisL  JSac  i,  506. 

Jasu^bna  {'laffoUpoc),  the  Gnedzed  form  (1  Esd. 
iz,  80)  of  the  Heb.  name  (Ezra  x,  29)  Jashub  (q.  y.). 

Jataka  (literally  relating  to  birth)  is  the  name  of 
a  Buddhistic  work  conslsting  of  a  series  of  books  which 
contain  an  accotmt  of  550  preyious  births  of  Sakya  Mu- 
ni,  or  the  Buddha.  Seyeral  tales  that  pass  under  the 
name  of  iEsop'8  fablcs  are  to  be  found  in  this  coUoction 
of  legenda.    See  Buddhism. 

Ja'tal  ('Arap  v.  r.  'laroA),  a  cormpt  Greek  form  (1 
Esd.  y,  28)  of  the  Heb.  name  (Ezra  ii,  42 ;  Neh.  yii,  45) 
Ater  (q.  V.). 

Jat2l'iiiel  (Heb.  Tathniel',  i>H'^ąn:,  given  by  God, 
otherwise  praiter  of  God;  Sept,  Ńaiav<i  v.  r.  Nada- 
va^X,  'Iadava4X)»  the  fourth  son  of  Meshelemiah,  one 
of  the  Leyitical  (Korhite)  gate-keepers  of  the  Tempie 
(1  Chroń.  xxyi,  2).     B.C.  1014. 

Jaftir  (Heb.  YatHr',  ^-^PJ^  [in  Josh.  xy,  48,  elae- 
whcrc  " defectiyely"  ^t)^^  pre-eminefd ;  Sept 'Icdip  or 
'Ifdfp),  a  city  in  the  mountains  of  Judah  (Josh.  xy,  48, 
where  it  is  namcd  betwcen  Shamir  and  Socoh)  assigued 
to  the  priests  (Josh.  xxi,  14;  1  Chroń,  yi,  57).  It  was 
one  of  the  places  in  the  south  where  Dayid  used  to 
haunt  in  his  freebooting  days,  and  to  his  friends  in  which 
he  sent  gifts  from  the  spoil  of  the  enemies  of  Jchoyah 
(1  Sam.  xxx,  27).  The  two  Ithrite  heroes  of  David'8 
guard  (2  Sam.  xxiii,  38;  1  Chroń,  xi,  40)  were  possibly 
from  Jattir,  liying  memorials  to  him  of  his  early  diffi- 


culties.  Aocoiding  to  Eosebins  and  Jeionie  {OwmoMt, 
s.  y.  Jether),  it  y/as  in  their  day  a  yery  large  hamlet  in- 
habited  by  Christiana,  twenty  Roman  miles  fiom  Deo- 
theiopolis,  in  the  district  of  the  Daroma,  near  Molatha 
(Keland,  Palatt.  p.  885).  It  is  named  by  Hap-Par^bi, 
the  Jewish  trayeller;  but  the  passage  is  defcctire,  aod 
little  can  be  gathered  from  it  (Zunz,  in  Asher^s  Btnj,of 
Tudela,  ii,  442).  The  required  position  answeis  nearly 
to  that  of  the  modern  yillage  of  Mf/tr,  disooyeredby 
Dr.  Robinson  (ResearcheSf  ii,  194,  625)  in  this  region, 
"  marked  by  cayes  upon  a  hill"  (oomp.  Wilson,  Lainb  c/ 
Bibley  i,  353),  and  situated  fifteen  miles  south  of  He- 
bron, and  fiye  north  of  Moladiah  (Schwarz,  Pałtgłin^,  pi 
105).  It  contains  exten8iyc  ruins  (Tristram,  Land  itj 
Israel,  p.  388). 

Jauffret,  Gaspard  Sejch  Andr^  Joseph,  a  French 
Roman  Catholic  theologian,  was  bom  at  La  Roque-Bnł»- 
aane,  Proyence,  Dec  13, 1759.  He  was  educated  at  Too- 
lon  and  Aix,  then  entered  the  Church,  and  was  madę 
canon  of  Aulp.  He  subseąuently  went  to  Paii8,vherc 
he  continued  his  theok^cal  studies  under  the  priests  of 
St.  Roch  and  St  Sulpice,  and  in  1791  establlshed  the  pe- 
riodical  AimaUs  de  la  Rdigion  et  du  Sentimenf,  aimed 
against  the  ciyil  constitution  of  the  clei^gy.  He  after- 
wards  became  one  of  the  editors  of  the  Atmides  Rtlic' 
ietues,  About  1801  he  acted  as  yicar-general  of  cazdioil 
Fesch,  at  Lyon,  during  the  latter^s  cmbassy  to  Romę,  and 
he  here  labored  with  the  people  to  reconcile  them  to  the 
Concordat.  Cardinal  Fesch  subseąuently  called  him  to 
Paris,  where  Jaufiret  establlshed  a  number  of  religicns 
societies,  and  obtained  many  priyileges  for  diyers  ooih 
gregations  of  raonks  and  nuus  through  the  uiiluenoe  of 
his  patron.  Madę  chaplain  of  the  emperor,  he  wu  in 
July,  1806,  appouited  bishop  of  Metz,  and  consecrated 
Dec  3  of  the  same  year,  still  retaining  his  imperial  chap- 
laincy.  This  position  he  improyed  by  establishlDg  a 
number  of  seminarics  and  Roman  Catholic  schools  of  all 
kinds.  In  1810  he  was  one  of  the  persona  sent  to  meet 
the  archduchess  Maria  Louisa,  and  subseąuently  became 
her  confeasor,  In  1811  he  was  rewarded  for  his  zeal  in 
promoting  the  diyorce  of  Napoleon  from  his  firet  wife  bf 
the  archbiahopiic  of  Aix ;  but  he  neyer  leally  heki  tfa^ 
position,  on  aocount  of  the  difficulties  between  the  pope 
and  the  emperor,  and  finally  felt  constrained  to  leiioaoce 
it.  He  died  at  Paris  May  13, 1823.  He  wrote  Ik  h 
ReUgion  a  VA»aembUe  Natumale  (1790-1, 8yo;  often  ny 
printed  under  diyers  titles)  ^— Du  CuUe  publie  (1795,  i 
yola,  8yo ;  3d  ed.  1815) : — Mimoirepour  $ertir  a  VHia, 
de  la  ReUgion  et  de  la  Phihtophie  (Anon.  Paris,  IK^S,  3 
yols.8yo),  besides  a  number  of  controyersial  and  practi- 
cal  works.  See  A  mi  de  la  ReUgion  et  du.  Roij  xxx^i 
65-74 ;  Chronigue  ReUgieuse^  yi,  289-^5 ;  Qnćraid,  La 
France  Litłeraire, — ^Hoefer,  Nouv,Biog,  Generale,  lari 
410  8q.     (J.  N.  P.) 

Java,  an  ishmd  in  the  Malay  archipdago,  and,  aft«f 
Sumatra  and  Borneo,  the  largest  in  the  Sunda  gmup,  b 
the  prindpal  seat  of  the  Dutch  power  in  the  East  Tbe 
island  is  630  miles  bng,  by  35  to  120  miles  broad,  and 
has  an  area  of  49,730  square  mile&  The  popolatiao  hu 
yery  rapidly  increased  sińce  the  beginniiig  of  the  I9ih 
century.  While  in  1812  it  amounted  only  to  4.500,0U0 
inhabitants,  it  numbered  in  1845  9,560,000  (of  wtwm 
106,038  were  Chinese,  31,216  Arabs,  16,308  Europeans 
and  their  descendants,  and  5111  dayes) ;  in  l^ 
13,649,680  (26,460  Europeans,  and  156,390  Chin^ei; 
and  in  1869,  15,573,000  (Europeans,  29,139;  Chincee. 
172,280).  The  natiyes  beloug  to  the  Malay  race,  bat  to 
two  different  nations — ^the  Jayaneae  in  the  east,  and  the 
less  numerous  Sundanese  in  the  west.  The  Jaranese  an 
a  peaceable,  frugal,  and  industzious  people,  who  bare 
madę  gieater  progress  in  agriculture  than  any  ath« 
people  of  Asia  except  the  Chinese  and  JapancK.  la 
1327  Jaya  was  inyaded  by  the  Araba,  who  subjiH^ 
ted  the  whole  island,  and  estabUshed  in  it  the  Mohaai- 
medan  religion  and  customs.  Only  in  the  remote  moun- 
tains a  few  thousand  worshippers  of  Boddha  and  Biah- 
ma  remain.    The  ruins  of  many  temples,  imagest  aod 


JAVAN 


791 


JAVAN 


toinlM  pTorc,  howcrer,  that  at  an  early  period  Brah- 
nuuiism  stiuck  deep  root  among  the  people.  The 
Porttiguese,  who  came  to  Jara  in  1679,  as  weU  as 
iho  English  who  amved  later,  were  espelled  by  the 
Datch,  who  eatablished  themaelTes  in  Java  in  1594, 
and  b^cadily  adranced  in  the  oonqaest  of  the  iidand 
until  only  two  native  states  were  left — Soerakarta,  or 
Solo,  with  690,000  inhabitanta,  and  Djodjkarta,  with 
340,000  inhahitant&  From  1811  to  1816  the  ialand  was 
rnider  the  rule  of  the  Bńtiah,  who  had  oonqaered  it,  but 
in  1816  it  was  restored  to  the  Dutch.  In  oonseąuence 
of  the  bad  administration  a  number  of  oatbreaks  took 
place,  among  which,  in  particular,  that  of  Djepo  Negoro, 
in  1825,  was  rery  dangerooa,  until  at  length  the  gov- 
emon,  Van  der  Capellen  and  Jan  ran  den  Bosch,  suc- 
ceeded,  by  enooonging  agricnltore,  and  by  other  meas- 
uresjin  derelopingthe  productivity  and  prosperity  of  the 
island  Ło  a  high  degree.  In  acoordanoe  with  a  decree 
of  Jan.  1, 1860,  slayeiy  was  abolished  in  Jaya,  as  well 
as  in  all  the  Dutch  colonies.  During  the  rule  of  the 
PorUiguese  the  Catholic  missionaries  formed  some  na- 
tire  congregations,  of  which  only  a  few  remnants  aie 
left  at  Bataria  and  Depok.  The  Dutch  govemment 
was  deddedly  opposed  to  misraonary  labor,  and  Protes- 
tant misaions  were  not  begun  until  the  island  passed,  in 
1811,  under  the  rule  of  England.  The  first  society  in 
the  field  was  the  London  Miańonaiy  (sińce  1818),  which 
was  soon  followed  by  the  English  Baptists.  But  both 
societies  conflned  their  elTorts  chiefly  to  the  Ghinese  and 
the  lialays.  Their  missionaries  were  allowed  to  remain 
afler  the  restoration  of  the  Dutch  administration,  but 
they  had  to  submit  to  many  restrictions,  until,  in  184i?, 
all  non-Dutch  missionaries  in  the  Dutch  colonies  were 
forbidden  to  perform  any  missionary  labors.  Thus  only 
the  Rotterdam  MiasionaTy  Society,  which  had  begun  its 
operationa  in  Batavia  and  the  neighborhood  in  1820, 
was  able  to  continue  the  missionary  work.  A  new  im- 
pnlse  was  given  to  the  labors  of  this  society  by  a  joumey 
of  Tisitation  on  the  part  of  its  inspector.  A  mission  sta- 
tion  was  establiahed  at  Samarang,  and  a  sccond  very 
promising  field  opened  in  the  prorince  of  Surabaya,  with 
Modjo  Warno  as  centrę,  whence  the  mission  extended 
to  Kediri  and  Malang.  The  society,  in  1866,  supported 
in  Java  three  missionaries  and  8everal  native  agenta. 
In  18Ó1  a  society  for  home  and  foreign  missions  was 
formied  at  Batavia,  with  which  the  Dutch  section  of  the 
Jara  Committee  at  Amsterdam  associated  itsclf.  The 
society  labored  in  Batavia  and  the  neighborhood,  in 
particular  among  the  Malays  and  Chinese,  and  took  sey- 
eral  brethren  of  the  Society  of  Gossner  into  its  S€r>'ice. 
In  1854  the  Mennonite  Missionary  Society  at  Amster- 
dam (Doopgezinde  Yereeniging)  began  its  operations  at 
Djapara,  while  the  Nederland  Zendings  Yereeniging, 
which  was  established  in  1858,  opened  missions  among 
the  Sundanese,  to  whom  it  bas  also  undertaken  to  give 
a  tnmslation  of  the  Bibie.  It  employed  in  1866  fire 
missionaries,  and  had  four  stations.  The  NederL  Crere- 
formeerde  Zendings  Yereeniging  bas  also. established 
sereral  miasions  (in  1866  three  missionaries)  in  Java, 
and  the  Utrecht  Missionaiy  Society  has  begun  mission- 
ary operations  on  the  neighboring  island  of  Bali,  whcre 
Buddhism  is  still  prevalent.  The  Dutch  goremment 
coutinues  to  be  anything  but  fayorable  to  the  miasions, 
but  patronizes  the  diffusion  of  education,  and  has  re- 
cently  estabUshed  for  that  purpose  a  native  normal 
school  at  Bandong.  The  Roman  Catholic  Chureh  has 
a  vicar  apostoUc  in  the  city  of  Batavia.  The  govem- 
meat  pays  the  salaries  of  eight  priesta.  The  Catholic 
population  consists  almoet  exclusively  of  Dutch  soldiers 
and  Indo-Portugoese.— Newcomb,  Cychpctdia  o/Afis- 
nons;  Orundemaniiy  Musiont- A  tku  f  Wetzcr  u.Welte, 
Kirchm^Lexikon,  xii,  569,  591.     (A.  J.  S.) 

Ja^an  (Hebrew  Yavan%  IJ^,  of  foreign  origin),  the 
name  of  a  person  (borrowed  from  that  of  his  desccnd- 
ants)  and  also  of  a  city. 

'    1.  (Sept.  *lavav  in  Gen.  x,  2, 4 ;  '\avav  in  1  Chroń,  i, 
'  5, 7 ;  4  "BAAac  in  Isa.  lxvi,  19  and  £zek.  xxvii,  18 ;  else- 


where  ol  *'£XX};i/f  c*)  "^^  fonrth  son  of  Japheth,  and 
the  father  of  Elishah,  Tarshish,  Kittim,  and  Dodanim 
(Gen.  X,  2, 4 ;  1  Chroń,  i,  5, 7).  B.C.  post  2514.  Hence 
for  the  conntiy  settled  by  his  posterity,  supposed  to  be 
GreecefLt,Ioma  (whence  the  Heb.  name),  which  prov- 
ince,  settled  by  oolonists  from  the  mother  country,  was 
better  known  to  the  Orientals,  as  lying  nearer  to  them, 
than  Hellas  itself  (see  Gesenius,  Tkes,  Beb.  p.  587).  It 
ia  mentioned  among  the  places  where  the  Syrians  ob- 
tained  artides  of  trafiic  (comp.  Bochart,  Phaleg^  iii,  8), 
namely,  brass  and  slayes  (Ezek.  xxvii,  13) ;  as  a  distant 
country  among  the  ^  isles  of  the  sea"  (Isa.  lxvi,  19). 
Alexander  the  Great  is  styled  king  of  Jayan  ('^  (iroecia,*' 
Dan.  viii,  21 ;  x,  20 ;  comp.  xi,  2 ;  Zcch.  ix,  13).  In  Joel 
iii,  6,  the  patronymic  occurs  D''3J^n"'»3ą,  sous  of  "  the 
Gnecians,'^  like  the  poetic  vlic  *A.xanav.  See  Ethnoi> 
OGY.  This  name,  or  its  analogue,  is  found  as  a  designa- 
tion  of  Greece  not  only  in  all  the  Shemitic  dialects,  but 
also  in  the  Sanscrit,  the  Old  Persie,  and  the  Egyptian 
(Knobel,  V6Ucerta/el,  p.  78  są.),  and  the  form  'Iaovec  ap- 
pears  in  Homer  as  the  designation  of  the  early  inhabi- 
tants  of  Attica  {Iliad,  xiii,  685),  while  iEschylus  and 
Aristophanes  make  their  Persian  interlocutors  cali  the 
Greeks  'lawic  (iEschylus,  Pert,  174, 555, 911,  etc ;  Aris- 
toph.  A  cham.  104, 106),  and  the  Scholiast  on  the  latter  of 
these  passages  from  Aristophanes  expre8sly  says,  IIav- 
rac  Toi*c  "EWrfyac  'laorac  ot  ftapfiaf>oi  iKa\ovv. 
"  The  occurrence  of  the  name  in  the  cuneiform  inscrip- 
tions  of  the  time  of  Sargon  (aboot  B.C.  709),  in  the  form 
of  Yavnan  or  Yunanf  as  descriptiyc  of  the  isle  of  Cyprus, 
where  the  Ass3rrian8  first  came  in  contact  with  the  pow- 
er  of  the  Greeks,  further  shows  that  its  use  was  not  con- 
flned to  the  Hebrews,  but  was  widely  spread  throughout 
the  East  The  name  was  probably  introduced  into  Asia 
by  the  Phoenicians,  to  whom  the  lonians  were  naturally 
better  known  than  any  other  of  the  Hellenie  raoes  on 
account  of  their  commercial  acrivity  and  the  high  pros- 
perit}*- of  their  towns  on  the  western  coast  of  Asia  Mi- 
nor. The  exten8ion  of  the  name  westward  to  the  gen- 
erał body  of  the  Greeks,  as  the>'  became  known  to  the 
Hebrews  through  the  Phoenicians,  was  but  a  natural 
process,  analogous  to  that  which  we  have  ałready  had 
to  notice  in  the  caae  of  Chittim.  It  can  hardly  be  im- 
agined  that  the  early  Hebrews  themselves  had  any  act- 
ual  acquaintance  with  the  Greeks;  it  is,  however,  worth 
raentioning,  as  illustratiye  of  the  communication  which 
exi8ted  between  the  Greeks  and  the  East,  that,  amongst 
the  artists  who  contributed  to  the  omamenution  of 
Esarhaddon'8  palaces,  the  names  of  several  Greek  artista 
appear  in  one  of  the  inscriptions  (Rawlinson's  Herod,  i, 
483).  At  a  later  period  the  Hebrews  must  have  gained 
considerable  knowledge  of  the  Greeks  through  the  Egyp- 
tians.  Psammetichus  (B.C.  664-610)  employed  lonians 
and  Carians  as  mercenaries,  and  showed  them  so  much 
favor  that  the  war-caste  of  Egypt  forsook  him  in  a  body : 
the  Greeks  were  settled  ncar  Bubastis,  in  a  part,  of  the 
country  with  which  the  Jews  were  familiar  (Herod,  ii, 
154).  The  same  policy  was  folloWed  by  the  sncceeding 
monarehs,cspecially  Amasis  (RC.  57 1-525),  who  gavethe 
Greeks  Kaucratis  as  a  commercial  emporium.  It  is  tol- 
erably  certain  that  any  Information  which  tłie  Hebrews 
acquired  in  relation  to  the  Greeks  must  have  been 
through  the  indirect  mcans  to  which  we  have  ad  verted ; 
the  Greeks  theroselyes  were  vcry  slightly  acquainted 
with  the  southem  coast  of  Syria  until  the  invasion  of 
Alexander  the  Great.  The  earliest  notices  of  Palestine 
occur  in  the  works  of  Hecatseus  (B.C.  694-486),  who 
mentions  only  the  two  towns  Canytis  and  Cardytiis ; 
the  next  are  in  Herodotus,  who  describcs  the  country  as 
Sjnria  Palastina,  and  notices  incidentally  the  towns  As- 
calon,  Azotus,  Ecbatana  (Bataniea?),  and  Cadytis,  the 
same  as  the  Canytis  of  Hecaticus,  probably  (>aza.  Theae 
tovn\s  were  on  the  border  of  Egypt,  with  the  cxception 
of  the  uncertain  Ecbatana,  and  it  is  therefore  highly 
probable  that  no  Greek  had,  down  to  this  late  period, 
trarelled  through  Palestine"  (Smith).  See  Greeck. 
2.  (Sept.  oivoc  V,  r.  'lutrar,  *laovav,)     A  region  or 


JAYELDT 


992 


JEALOUBY 


town  of  Arabia  Felix,  wbence  the  Syrians  procured 
maniifactares  of  iron,  cassia,  and  calamos  (Ezek.  xxvii, 
19) ;  probably  the  Javan  mendoned  in  the  Camm  (p. 
1817)  as  **  a  town  of  Ycmen,"  and  **  a  port  of  Ispahan." 
Some  confound  this  with  the  preceding  name  (Ciedner 
and  Hitzig,  on  Joel  iii,  6 ;  see  Meier  on  Jod,  p.  166),  but 
Tuch  (on  Gen,  p.  210)  suggeets  that  it  may  have  been  so 
named  as  having  been  founded  by  a  colony  of  Greeks. 
By  a  change  of  reading  (see  Httvemick,  ad  loc.)  in  an 
asaociated  word  (in»p,/rowł  Utaly  forb|siX13,  «pun,t  e. 
.thread),  some  critics  have  thought  they  flnd  another 
place  mentioued  in  the  same  yicinity  (see  Bochart,  Pha- 
leg,  I,  ii,  21 ;  RoseumUUer,  Bibl.  Geaff,  iii,  296-306). 

JaveUil  is  the  rendering  in  the  Auth.Yers.  of  two 
Heb.  terms:  H^^an  (chanUh',  so  called  from  itsfexibili- 
ty),  a  lance  (1  Sam.  xviii,  10, 11;  xix,  9,  10;  xx,  83; 
elsewhere  "spear");  and  npH  (ro'macA,  from  its  pier- 
dng),  a  lance  for  heavy-armed  troops  (Namb.  xxv,  7 ; 
"lancet,"  i  e.  speai^head,  1  Kings  xviii,  28;  "buckler," 
inoorrectly,  1  Chroń,  xii,  8;  elsewhere  "spear").  See 
Armor. 

Ja"W  (usually  and  properly  '^nb,  lechi',  rendered  also 
"jaw-bone;"  once  O^^nip^B,  malkochim^  "jaws,"  Psa. 
xxii,  15,  elsewhere  "  prey ;"  also  PiisŁn^,  methalleoth'" 
"jaws,"  Job  xxix,  17;  "jaw  teeth/'  Prov.  xxx,  14; 
"  cheek  teeth,"  Jod  i,  6).  The  denuded  jaw-bone  of  an 
ass  afforded  Samson  (q.v.)  a  not  unsuitable  weapon 
(see  Seifferheld,  De  maxiUa  asim,  TUbing.  1716)  for  the 
great  camage  w^hich  he  once  effected  (Judg.  xv,  15). 
See  Leiii. 

Jay,  William,  a  very  distinguished  English  Inde- 
pendent minister,  was  bom  at  Tisbury,  county  of  Wilts, 
in  1769.  He  was  the  son  of  a  poor  stone-cutter,  and  ob- 
tained  his  education  by  the  influence  and  charity  of 
friends  he  madę  as  a  youth,  distinguishing  himself  even 
■then  by  great  natural  abilities  and  ready  acąuisition. 
When  not  quite  8ixteen  years  of  age  he  began  preach- 
ing,  and  before  he  had  passed  his  nilnority  he  is  said  to 
havo  delivered  no  less  than  1000  sermons.  Like  Wes- 
ley,  he  often  preached  out-doors ;  and  he  himself  relates 
the  history  of  his  early  life  thus :  "  In  the  milder  sea- 
sons  which  would  allow  of  it,  we  often  addressed  large 
numbers  out  of  doors ;  and  many  a  elear  and  calm  even- 
ing  I  have  preached  down  the  day  on  the  comer  of  a 
comraon,  or  upon  the  green  turf  before  the  cottage  door. 
These  neighborhoods  were  supplied  somctimes  weekly 
and  sometimes  fortnightly,  both  on  the  week-days  and 
on  the  Sabbaths.  We  always  on  the  Sabbaths  avoid- 
ed,  if  possible,  the  church  hours;  and  on  week-days  we 
oommonly  omitted  the  services  during  the  hay  and  com 
harvest,  that  we  might  not  give  reasonable  ofFence  to 
the  farmers,  or  entice  the  peasants  away  from  their  la- 
bor  before  their  usual  time.  I  would  also  remark  that 
we  did  not  always,  in  these  efforts,  enoounter  much  op- 
poution;  indeed,  I  remember  only  a  few  instances  in 
which  we  suffered  peraecution  from  violenoe  or  rude- 
ness."  Jan.  81,  1791,  he  was  madę  preacher  of  Aigyle 
Ghapel,  Bath,  and  here  he  labored  for  Bixty-two  years 
with  great  distinction.  Jay  was  not  excelled  even  by  the 
greatest  of  pulpit  orators  for  which  England  has  been  so 
justly  celcbrated  within  the  last  100  years.  John  Foster 
calls  him  the  "prince  of  preachers;"  Sheridan  pro- 
nounced  him  "the  most  natural  orator"  he  had  ever 
.  heard ;  Dr.  James  Hamilton  as  a  preacher  who  iilled 
him  "with  wonder  and  delight;"  and  Beckford  as  pos- 
sessing  a  mind  like  "  a  elear,  transparent  stream,  flow- 
ing  so  freely  as  to  impress  us  with  the  idea  of  its  being 
inexhaustible."  He  died  in  December,  1853, "  beloved 
and  trusted  by  rcligious  professors  of  all  sects"  (lxmdon 
AthenauiUj  Sept.  30, 1851).  " Mr.  Jay  was  not  only  a  pi- 
ous  and  eroinentl}'  suooessful  preacher,  but  a  veTy  genial 
and  interesting  man ;  a  sagacious  observer,  yet  of  child- 
like  simplicity  in  taste  and  disposition;  poesessed  of  a 
fine,  though  sometimes  quaint  humor;  a  most  instruc- 
tive  and  pleasant  compąnion,  rich  in  anecdote  and  remi- 


niscence,  and  able,  from  penonal  knowle^e,  to  pre 
living  sketches  of  most  of  the  eminent  men  who  had 
appeared  in  the  religions  world,  high-flying  bigots  ex- 
oepted,  during  the  latter  part  of  the  18th  and  the  eariier 
part  of  the  present  oentujy.  ....  He  was  not  a  atńct 
Calvinist,  for  he  did  not  believe  in  the  'excliiaive'  part 
of  the  Calviiiistic  creed  in  any  form.  He  believed  in 
*  two  grand  truths'— '  that  if  we  are  8aved,  it  is  entireb 
of  God*s  grace ;  and  if  we  are  lost,  it  will  be  cntii^ 
from  ouT8elves.'  He  held  to  these  firmiy,  thougfa  be 
might  not  see  the  connection  between  them.  *'rhe 
connection,*  he  says,  *  is  like  a  chain  acron  the  ńver;  I 
can  see  the  two  ends,  but  not  the  middle;  not  because 
there  is  no  real  union,  but  becauae  it  is  under  waicr.' 
As  to  Church  polit\%  Mr.  Jay  inclined,  on  the  whole,  to 
Pre8b3rteTianism,  with  a  special  leaning,  perhaps,  on  one 
point--that  of  mutual  ministerial  over8ight  and  respoa- 
sibility— to  Wesleyan  Methodism.  But  he  did  not  be 
lieve  any  particular/brm  of  pdity  to  be  of  divine  ao- 
thority"  {London  Quart,  Jłeview,  1854,  p.  5SS  sq.).  Best 
known  of  his  varied  and  extensive  writings  are  Mornag 
and  Evemng  Exercises  (vol.  i-iv  of  the  coUective  editiin 
of  his  Worka,  ed.  of  1842) :— 7%«  Chrutian  coritemplaitd 
(yol.  vi  of  his  Worka)  i-^Mormnga  vfHk  Jeatu  (1854, 
8vo).  His  Worka  were  published  enUre  (Bath,  l»łl44, 
12  vols.  8vo ;  New  Yoik,  8  vols.  8vo).  See  A  utobiogn- 
phy  oftka  Bev,  WUliam  Jay,  wiik  Remaniaceneea  o/aoma 
dUtUupdahed  Coniemporariea,  Sdeeiiona  from  kia  Com- 
apondence,  etc.  edited  by  Geoige  Bedford,  D.D.,  LLD^ 
and  John  Angeil  James  (Lond.  1854,  8vo;  8d  ed.  1855); 
Wilson,  Memoir  o/ Jay  (1864, 8vo) ;  Wallaoe,  PortroU' 
ure  o/ Jay  (1852, 12mo);  AUibone,  Did.  ofAiakara,i, 
857;  Prince<mlieview,\'yde&mi.',  Meth,  Ottart  Beeiet, 
V,  885.     (J.  H.  W.) 

Jayadćva,  a  odebrated  Hindu  poet,  who,  aocoid- 
ing  to  some,  lived  about  the  middle  of  the  llth.  accoid- 
ing  to  othcrs  about  the  middle  of  the  16th  centoiy  aiter 
Christ.  His  most  renowncd  work  is  the  GitagońnSa, 
an  erotic  poem  in  honor  oTthe  Hindu  deity  Kiishna  (an 
incamation  of  Yishnu)  and  his  wife  Radha.  It  is  inter- 
preted  both  in  a  literał  and  a  mystical  sense.— Cbam- 
bers,  Cychpadia,  s.  v. 

Jayne,  Peter,  a  pioneer  Methodist  Episoopal  min- 
ister, bom  at  Marblehead,  Mass.,  in  1778,  cntered  the 
itinerancy  in  1797,  and  in  1805^  was  stationed  in  Bos- 
ton, where  he  died  Sept.  6, 1806.  lir.  Jayne  was  a  man 
of  great  piomise  and  rare  abilitieSb  His  style  was  tene 
and  vigorous,  his  piety  consistent,  and  his  mauneis  io- 
genuous.  His  early  death  was  deplored  by  his  brethrea 
as  the  edipse  of  a  moming  star.  See  Minaiea  o/Coa- 
ferencea,  i,  146 ;  Stevens,  Memoriala  ąfMetiiwHan^  i,  cL 
xxvi.     (G.L.T.) 

Ja'sar  (ii  'la^^p  v.  r.  *lal^riv),  a  Gnedzed  fonn  (I 
Mace.  V,  8)  of  Jaazer  (q.  v.). 

Ja'8er  (Numb.  xxxii,  1,  8;  Josb.  xxi,  89;  2  Sbb. 
xxiv,  5;  1  Chroń,  vi,  81 ;  xxvi,  81 ;  Isa.  xvi,  8, 9;  Jcl 
xlviii,  32).    Sec  Jaazer. 

Ja'zis  (Heb.  Yaziz',  1'^)';, promaneni ;  Sept*lv^ll 
V.  r.  ,'Ia^iOł  a  Hagarite  over8eer  of  David's  flocks  (1 
Chroń,  xxvii,  81),  which  were  probably  pastured  on  tbe 
east  of  Jordan,  in  the  nomad  country  where  the  foit- 
fathers  of  Jaziz  had  for  agcs  roamed  (oomp.  v,  19-23}. 
B.C.  1014.    See  Hagarite. 

Jealousy  (nKpp,  IrjiKoc),  properly  the  feeliag  of 
suspicion  of  a  wife's  pnrity  (Nurab.  v,  14);  often  osed 
of  Jehovah's  sen8itive  legard  for  the  tme  faith  of  his 
Church  (Exod.  xx,  5,  etc;  2  Cor.  xi,  2).  See  Mak- 
RiAGK.  The  same  term  is  sometimes  uaed  for  acger  or 
indignation,  or  an  intense  interest  for  the  honor  and 
prosperity  of  another  (Fsa.  lxxix,  5;  1  Cor.  x,  22;  2«cb. 
i,  14 ;  \ńii,  2).  Conjugal  jealousy  is  one  of  che  attongest 
passions  of  our  naturę  (Prov. vi,84  ;.Cant.  viii,6).  Wbcn 
God  is  said  to  be  tLJealoua  God,  or  to  be  mo^-ed  tojeal- 
ouay,  or  when  the  atiU  stronger  expre8Bion  is  used.  **Je' 
horahj  whoae  name  ia  JeabmaT  C£xod.  xxiv,  14),  we  are 


JEALOUST 


793 


JEARIM 


to  imdentand  this  Ungiiag«  as  employed  to  illustratei 
rather  than  to  represent,  the  emotions  of  the  divine 
mind.  Tbe  same  cauaes  operating  npon  the  human 
mind  would  produce  what  we  cali  anger,  jealousy,  re- 
pentance,  grief,  etc. ;  and  therefore,  when  these  emotions 
■re  asciibed  to  the  mind  of  God,  this  language  is  tised 
becanae  such  emotions  can  be  represented  to  us  by  no 
other.  Thus  God  is  Tepiesented  to  us  as  a  husband,  le- 
]ated  to  his  Church  by  a  mamage  ooTecant  that  binds 
her  to  be  whoUy  for  him,  and  not  for  another.  The 
morę  sincere  and  oonstant  the  love,  the  morę  8ensitive 
is  the  heart  to  the  approach  of  a  rival ;  and  the  thought 
of  such  affection  being  alienated  or  oorrupted  fills  the 
aonl  with  grief  and  incUgnation.  So  God  commends  the 
purity,  the  fenrency,  and  the  sincerity  of  his  love  to  his 
Chiuch  by  the  most  terrific  expre88ions  of  jealousy.  See 
Idołatry. 

JEALOUSY,  IMAGE  OF  (ncjl^n  iw,  Sept,  «'- 
Kwv  Tov  ^^ot/c,  Vulg.  idolum  »el%)y  an  idolatrous  object 
seen  by  the  prophet  in  that  remarkable  yision  which 
portimyed  to  him  the  abominations  that  called  down  the 
diyine  yengeance  on  Jerusalem  (Ezek.  yiii,  8,  5).  See 
IscAOERY,  Chamber  OF.  It  stood  upon  apedestal  (ItS^iTS, 
''seat"*)  within  the  inner  or  priests'  court  of  the  Tempie, 
adjoining  the  great  altar,  and  seems  to  have  becn  iden> 
tiod  with  the  statuę  of  Astarte,  which  Manasseh  had 
the  audacious  effrontery  to  erect  within  the  sacred  pre- 
cincts  (2  Kings  xxi,  7).  See  Ashtoreth.  This  idol, 
arresting  the  attention  of  all  who  came  to  worship  just 
as  they  entered,  claimed,  as  the  riral  of  Jehorah,  their 
adoration,  and  thus  was  peculiarly  offensire  to  the  God 
of  heaven  (see  Henderson,  Commenlary^  ad  loc. ;  Bieder- 
rnann.  De  idolo  żeli,  Freib.  1757).     See  Idol. 

JEALOUSY-OFFERING  (niM3|p  nnpp,  Septuag. 
3vaia  CfyXoTViriac,  Yulgate  oblatio  zelołypia)  was  the 
name  of  a  '^  meat-offering"  which  a  husband  was  to 
bring  when  he  subjected  his  wife,  under  charge  of  adul- 
tery,  before  the  priest,  to  the  ordeal  of  the  bitter  waters 
(Numb.  y,  11  8q.).  It  oonsisted  of  a  tenth  of  an  ephah 
of  bariey-meal,  without  oil  or  fnmkincense.  The  priest 
most  waye  it  (yer.  25),  and  bum  a  handfid  on  the  altar 
(yer.  26).  The  Mishna  giyes  morę  minuto  direcUons 
{Satah,  ii,  1 ;  iii,  1, 6).  See  Adułtery.  Barley,  as  an 
inferior  grain  to  wheat  (Phsdrus,  ii,  8, 9),  was  sjrmboli- 
cal  of  the  suspected  condition  of  the  wife  (Philo,  Opp,  ii, 
307).  Oil  and  incenae,  as  emblems  of  joy  and  piety, 
wera  obyioosly  unsnitable  to  tbe  occasion. — Winer,  i, 
807.     See  Offer»o. 

JEALOUSY,  WATERS  OF  (d-^^l-^CTan  D-^^lfin  ^TO, 
Numb.  y.  19,  bitter  waters  that  curte,  Sept  rb  idutp  tov 
i\ey/iOv  Tov  iinKara(MiffŁivoVf  Yulg.  <iqute  ist^a  amaria- 
simcB  m  quas  fnakdicta  congeui,  A.y. "  this  bitter  water 
that  causeth  the  curse**)'  (See  Acoluthi,  De  acuia  amarit 
makdictionem  in/ereniUnu  [Lips.  1862]).  When  a  He- 
brew  wife  was  suspected  of  adulteiy,  her  husband  brought 
her  first  before  the  judges,  and,  if  she  still  asserted  her 
ionocence,  he  required  that  she  should  drink  the  toaters 
ofjealotujfj  that  God  might,  by  these  means,  discoyer 
what  she  attempted  to  oonoeal  (Numb.  y,  12,  etc.).  The 
further  details  are  thus  described  by  Dr.  Ciarkę  {Canu  ad 
loc)  from  the  rabbinical  authońties  (comp.Wagenseil'8 
SatOf  pass.) :  **  The  man  then  produced  his  witnesses,  and 
they  were  heard.  After  this,  both  the  man  and  the  wom- 
an  were  oonyeyed  to  Jerusalem,  and  placed  before  the  San- 
bedrim ;  and  if  she  persisted  in  denjring  the  fact,  she  was 
led  to  the  eastem  gate  of  the  court  of  Israel,  stripped  of 
her  own  dothes,  and  dressed  in  black,  before  great  num- 
ben  of  her  own  sex.  The  priest  then  told  her  that,  if 
she  waa  really  mnocent,  she  had  nothing  to  fear ;  but  if 
guilty,  she  might  exp6ct  to  sufFer  all  that  the  law  had 
denounced  against  her,  to  which  she  answered  'Amen, 
amen.'  The  priest  then  wrote  the  tenns  of  the  law  in 
this  form :  '  If  a  stnmge  man  hath  not  come  near  you, 
and  3rou  are  not  poUuted  by  forsaking  the  bed  of  your 
hnaband,  these  bitter  waten,  which  I  haye  cuised,  will 


not  hurt  you ;  but  if  you  have  polluted  yourself  by  com- 
ing  near  to  another  man,  and  gone  astray  from  your  hus- 
band, may  you  be  accursed  of  the  Lord,  and  become  an 
example  for  all  his  people ;  may  your  thigh  rot,  and 
your  belly  sweU  till  it  burst;  may  these  cursed  waters 
enter  into  your  belly,  and,  being  swelled  therewith,  may 
your  thighs  putrefy.'  After  this,  the  priest  fiUed  a 
pitcher  out  of  the  brazen  yessel  near  the  altar  of  bumt- 
offerings,  cast  some  dust  of  the  payement  into  it,  min- 
gled  something  with  it  as  bitter  as  wormwood,  and  then 
rcad  the  curses,  and  receiyed  her  answer  of  Amen.  An- 
other priest  in  the  mean  tiroe  tore  offher  clothes  as  Iow 
as  her  bosom,  madę  her  head  bare,  iintied  the  trcsscs  of 
her  hair,  fastened  her  clothes  (which  were  thus  tom) 
with  a  girdle  under  her  breast,  and  then  presented  her 
with  the  tenth  part  of  an  ephah,  or  about  three  pints  of 
barley-meaL  The  other  priest  then  gaye  her  the  waters 
of  jealousy  or  bittemess  to  drink,  and,  as  soon  as  the 
woman  had  swallowed  them,  he  gaye  her  the  meal,  in  a 
yessel  like  a  fiying-pan,  into  her  band.  This  was  stir- 
red  before  the  Lord,  and  part  of  it  thrown  into  the  fire 
of  the  altar.  If  the  wife  was  innocent,  she  retumed 
¥rith  her  husband,  and  the  waters,  so  far  from  injuring 
her,  increased  her  health,  and  madę  her  morę  fruitful; 
but  if  she  was  guilty,  she  grew  pale  immediately,  her 
eyes  swelled,  and,  lest  she  should  pollute  the  Tempie,  she 
was  instantly  carried  out  with  these  symptoms  upon 
her,  and  died  immediately,  with  all  the  ignominious  cir- 
cumstances  related  in  the  curses." 

This  ordeal  appears  to  have  containcd  the  essence  of 
an  oath  yaried  for  the  purpose  of  peculiar  solemnity,  so 
that  a  woman  would  naturally  hesitate  to  take  such  ah 
oath,  understood  to  be  an  appeal  to  heayen  of  the  most 
solemn  kind,  and  also  to  be  accompanied,  in  case  of  pcr- 
jury,  by  most  painful  and  fatal  effects.  The  drinking 
appears  to  haye  becn  a  symbolical  action.  When  "  the 
priest  wrote  the  curses  in  a  book,"  and  waehed  those 
curses  into  the  water  which  was  to  be  drunk,  the  water 
was  understood  to  be  impregnated  as  it  were,  or  to  be 
Łinctured  with  the  cune,  the  acrimony  of  which  it  re- 
ceiyed ;  so  that  now  it  was  metaphorically  bitter,  con- 
taining  the  curse  in  it.  The  drinking  of  this  curse, 
though  conditionally  efTcctiye  or  non-effectiye,  could  not 
but  haye  a  great  efFect  on  the  woman's  mind,  and  an  an- 
swerable  effect  on  the  husband^s  jealousy,  which  it  was 
designed  to  cure  and  to  dissipate.  We  read  cf  no  in- 
stance  in  which  the  trial  took  place ;  and,  if  the  admin- 
istration  of  the  ordeal  were  really  infTequent,  we  may 
regard  that  as  an  eyidence  of  its  practical  utility,  for  it 
would  seem  that  the  trial  and  its  result  were  so  dreadful 
that  the  guilty  rather  confessed  their  criroe,  as  they  were 
eamestly  exhorted  to  do,  than  go  through  it.  The  rab- 
bins  say  that  a  woman  who  confessed  in  such  circum- 
stances  was  not  put  to  death,  but  only  diyoroed  without 
dowiy.  It  bas  been  well  remarked  that  this  spccies  of 
ordeal  could  not  injure  the  innocent  at  all,  or  punish  the 
guilty  except  by  a  mirade,  whereas  in  the  ordeals  by 
fire,  etc,  in  the  Dark  Agcs,  the  innocent  could  scarcely 
escape  except  by  a  miracle.    See  Adultery. 

Jeanes,  Henry,  an  English  diyine,  was  bom  at  Al- 
lensay,  county  of  Somerset,  in  1611,  and  was  educated 
at  Oxford  Uniyersity.  He  held  first  the  rectory  of 
Beercrocomb  and  Capland,  and,  after  Walter  Ralcigh*s 
expulsion,  the  rectory  of  Chedzoy.  He  died  in  1662. 
Jeanes  wrote  seyeral  theological  treatiscs:  (1)  Absti^' 
nence  from  Evil: — (2)  Jndijference  of  Human  A  ctions : 
— (8)  Oriffinal  Jiiffhteousness ;  bcsides  seyeral  polcmical 
tracts  in  a  contioyersy  which  he  wagcd  against  Dr. 
Hammond,  Jeremy  Taylor,  Goodwin,  etc.  An  answer 
to  Milton's  Iconockufs,  entitled  The  Image  Unbrokettf 
was  generally  belieyed  to  be  written  by  Jeanes,  but 
Watt  ascribes  the  work  to  Joseph  Jane  (sec  Allibone, 
Diet,  ofAuthorSy  p.  957).— Hook,  Eccles,  Biogr,  vi,  280. 

Je^arim  (Heb.  Ye&rim\  D'i*i5%/orB»/«;  Sept  'la- 
ptifi)y  the  naroe  of  a  mountain  on  the  border  of  Judah, 
between  Mount  Seir  and  Beth-shemesh  (Joeh.  xy,  10); 


JEATERAI 


794 


JEBUSI 


Btated  to  be  Łbe  ńte  of  Chesalon  (q.  v.).  Keda  stand% 
8even  miles  due  west  of  Jenisalem,  **  on  a  high  point  on 
the  norŁh  alope  of  the  lofty  lidge  between  wady  Ghorab 
and  wady  IsmaiL  The  latter.  of  these  ia  the  south- 
western  oontinuation  of  wady  Beit-Hanina,  and  the  for- 
mer  runa  parallel  to  and  northward  of  it,  and  they  are 
separated  by  this  ridge,  which  is  probably  Mount  Jea- 
rim"  (Robinson,  Neto  Jiesearches,  p.  164).  ForettSf  in 
OUT  seuse  of  the  word,  there  are  nonę ;  but  we  haye  the 
testimony  of  the  hitest  traveller  that  *^such  thorougb 
woods,  both  for  loneliness  and  obscurity,  he  had  not  seen 
lunce  he  left  German/'  (Tobler,  Wanderungf  1857,  p. 
178)^— Smith.  Perhaps  the  bill  behind  Kuryet  el-Enab 
may  be  Mount  Seir ;  from  it  the  border  "  passed  over 
(wady  Ghurab)  to  the  shoulder  CjPia-bK  ^351)  of 
Mount  Jearim  ....  and  then  went  down  to  Beth>she- 
mesh."  It  may  be  that  a  considerable  diatrict  of  the 
roountains  in  this  locality  was  caUed  Jearim,  for  Baalah 
is  called  Kirjath-Jeartm  ("the  town  of  Jearim");  and 
if  80,  then  we  can  see  the  reason  why  the  explanatory 
phrase  is  added,  "Mount  Jearim,  which  is  CheaaUm,*'  to 
limit  the  morę  generał  appeDative  to  the  narrow  ńdge 
between  the  two  wadys  (see  Keil  on  Joshua,  ad  loc.; 
Porter,  Iłcmdbookfor  S,  and  PaL  p.  285).— Kitto.     See 

KiRJATH-JEABIM. 

Jeaferal  (Heb.  Yedtkeray',  ^^T\^*^,  perhaps  for 
•ł^n?;*,  rich;  Sept  If^pi,  Vulg.  Jethrai),  son  of  Zerah, 
a  Leyite  of  the  family  of  Gershom  (1  Chroń,  vi,  21) ; 
apparently  the  same  called  Ethni  in  ver.  41. 

Jebb,  John  (l),  M.D.,  FJi.S.,  a  Socinian  writer, 
was  bom  in  London  in  1736.  He  studied  at  Trinity 
College,  Dublin,  and  Peterhouse,  Cambridge,  of  which 
latter  he  became  fellow.  He  was  madę  rector  of  Ov- 
inglon,  Norfolk,  in  1764,  but,  having  changed  from  or- 
thodoxy  to  Socinianism,  he  declined  any  longer  8erv> 
ing  the  Church,  and  resigned  in  1775,  to  apply  himself 
to  the  study  of  medicine.  He  died  at  London  in  1786. 
His  writings  have  l)een  published  entire,  entitled  Worksj 
Theolofficat,  Mediculj  etc,  with  memoirs  by  John  Disney, 
D.D.  (London,  1787,  3  vols.  8vo).  See  A  LeUer  to  ihe 
Bev,  Mr.  Jebb  with  Relation  to  his  Sentiments,  etc  (Lond. 
1778,  8vo) ;  Resignation  no  Proof ^  a  LetUr  to  Mr,  Jd)b, 
by  a  member  of  the  Unirersity  of  Cambridge  (London, 
1776,  8vo) ;  A  iMłer  to  the  Ret,  John  Jebb^  M,A,,  etc 
(Lond.  1776,  8vo) ;  Atkins,  General  Biography ;  Hoefer, 
Nouc,  Biogr.  Generale^  xxvi,  609 ;  AUibone,  Dictionai-y 
ofAuthorSj  i,  957. 

Jebb,  John  (2),  bishop  of  Limerick,  an  eminent 
Irish  thcologian,  was  bom  at  Drogheda  Sept.  27, 1775. 
He  studied  at  Dublin  University,  where  his  proficiency 
attracted  the  notice  of  Brodeńck,  bishop  of  Kiimore, 
.  who  madę  him  curate  of  Swanlibar.  When  Broderick 
became  archbishop  of  Cashel,  he  gave  Jebb  the  Uving 
of  Abington,  one  of  the  richest  in  Ireland.  He  was 
finally  madę  bishop  of  Limerick  in  1823.  A  Protestant 
bishop  in  a  disŁrict  chiefly  inhabited  by  Roman  Catho- 
lics,  he  overcame  the  prejudices  of  the  people  by  his  lib- 
era! spirit,  and  staunchly  defended  their  ńghts.  He 
died  at  Limerick  Dec  7, 1833.  His  principal  works  are 
Sermans  on  Subjects  chiefij/  practicalj  etc  (Lond.  1815, 
8vo,  and  often)  i—Practical  Theology  (Lond.  1830,  and 
again  1837,  2  vols.  8vo) : — Pastorał  InstructUms  on  the 
Characłer  o/ the  Church  ofEngkind  (London,  1831  [new 
ed.  1844],  sm.  8vo)  :—Thirty  Tears'  Correspo.idence  icUh 
A  lexander  Knox,  E«q,  (London,  1834, 2  vols.  8vo).  But 
by  far  his  most  important  work  is  his  Sacred  Literaturę 
(London,  1820,  8vo,  and  often),  intcnded  cbicfly  as  a  re- 
view  of  the  works  of  Lowth  on  Hebrew  poetry  and  Isai- 
ah.  "Bishop  Jebb  undcrtakcs  to  controvert  some  of 
the  priaciples  of  Dr.  Lowth,  and  to  show  that  the  crite- 
rla  by  which  the  latter  would  determine  what  is  poetry 
in  Hebrew  are  to  be  found  in  the  New  Testament  as 
wcll  as  the  Old.  Aside  from  this  oontrover8y  with 
Lowth,  the  work  contains  many  illustrations  and  expla- 
nations  of  difficult  or  obscure  passages,  valuable  to  the 
Biblical  scholar.     *No  book  of  criticism  bas  lately  ap- 


peazed  morę  wortfay  the  attention  of  the  student  of  the 
Bibie.' "  See  Life  of  Bishop  JdA^  with  a  seleaion  from 
his  letters,  by  Hev.  Charles  Fonter  (2d  ed.  Lond.  1837, 
8vo) ;  AUibone,  JHctionary  ofAuthors^  &  v.  (J.  H. W.) 
Jebereohi^ah  (Heb.  Yeberdcgak%  only  m  the  pai^ 
agogic  form  Yeberekya*hu^  4rn3']^2%  bUssed  by  Jeho- 
vah ;  Sept.  Bapaxiac),  the  father  of  Zechańah,  whicb 
latter  Isaiah  took  as  one  of  the  witnesses  of  his  mairiige 
with  "  the  prophetess"  (Isa.  viii,  2).  RC.  dr.  739.  Both 
the  Sept  and  the  Tulg.  give  the  name  in  its  ordinaiy 
form,  Barachiahj  and,  as  we  do  not  find  it  elsewfaere^ 
the  initial  ^  is  probably  an  error,  which  may  be  accuunt- 
ed  for  by  supposing  the  preceding  word  "fi  to  have  been 
originaUy  pluial,  *^33,  the  t¥ro  witnessea  bcing  both  sooi 
of  Barachiah,  and  the  finał  letter,  by  a  mistake  of  tbe 
copyist,  to  have  been  prefixed  to  the  following  word. 
The  same  pair  of  names  seems  to  have  been  of  no  on- 
lrequent  occurrence  in  the  priestly  houses.  Zechańah 
the  prophet  was  son  of  Berechiah  (Zcch.  i,  1),  and  we 
have  "  Zacharias,  son  of  Barachias"  (Matt.  xxiii,  3, 5). 
Josephus  also  (  War,  iv,  5,  4)  mcntions  anoiher  Zacha- 
rias, son  of  Bamch. — Kitto.     See  Zkchariah. 

Je^bus  (Heb.  Yebtts%  013^,  trodden  bard,  i.  e.  perh. 
fasinessf  Sept,  *lifiovc\  the  name  of  the  ancient  C»- 
naanitish  city  which  stood  on  Mount  Zioń,  one  of  the 
hills  on  which  Jemsalem  was  built  (Jebusi,  Josh.  xv.  8; 
xviii,  16, 28).  In  Judg.  xix,  10  it  is  identified  with  Je- 
msalem, and  in  1  Chroń,  xi,  4,  5,  the  only  othcr  passage 
in  which  the  name  occurs,  it  is  identilied  with  the  ca9- 
tle  of  Zioń,  subsequently  called  the  ca&tle  or  ciiy  of  Da> 
vid.  The  sides  of  Zioń  descended  precipitoii^Iy  on  the 
west  and  south  into  the  deep  valley  of  Ilinuom,  and  on 
the  east  into  the  T>Topoeon,  which  separated  it  from 
Moiiah.  On  the  north  side  a  branch  ^-allcy,  the  npper 
part  of  the  TjTopoeon,  swept  round  it ;  and  here  was  a 
ledge  of  rock  on  which  a  ma8sive  tower  was  eftenranh 
founded,  perhaps  on  the  sito  of  an  older  one.  Reoeot 
excavations  on  the  sito  remarkably  oonoboiate  theae 
facta.  See  Jbrusalbm.  Jebus  was  thus  natnially  a 
place  of  great  strength ;  and,  being  atrongly  fortified 
besides,  it  is  not  strange  that  the  Jebosites  shoold  harc 
gloried  in  it  as  impregnable  (see  Roae,  Preemium  Jebu- 
sasorum  castri  erpugnati,  AlL  1729),  and  that  the  csp- 
ture  of  it  by  David  should  have  been  considered  one  of 
bis  most  brilliant  achievement8  (2  Sam.  v,  8).  £veo 
afler  Jebus  waa  captured,  and  Jemsalem  founded  and 
madę  the  capital  of  Isiael,  Zioń  was  separately  fortified. 
It  seems  that  in  addition  to  the  ^^  caatle**  on  the  sommit 
of  tlie  bill  there  was  a  lower  city  or  suburb,  perhaps 
lying  in  the  bottom  of  the  adjoining  ł-alleys ;  for  we 
read  that  the  children  of  Judah  had  captured  and  bom- 
ed  Jemsalem  (Judg.  i,  7,  8),  while  afterwards  it  is  said 
"  the  Benjamites  did  not  drivc  out  the  Jebusites  that 
inhabited  Jemsalem"  (ver.  21).  The  Jebudtes  still  hcld 
the  "  castle,"  which  was  within  the  allotted  tenitory  of 
Benjamin,  but  the  children  of  Judah  drove  them  out  of 
the  lower  town,  which  was  situated  within  thcir  U*- 
ders.  This  is,  in  substancc,  the  explanation  giren  by 
Josephus  {A  nf,  v,  2,  2  and  5).— Kitta     See  Jebusite. 

Jeb^UBi  (Heb.  Yebusi'),  a  word  used  in  the  origiail 
of  a  place  and  its  inhabitants. 

1.  "Jebuai"  {'^p%'2^ri=theJebuśite;  Sept  ItjSowwi, 
le/3ovc,  'V'ulg.  J^msans),  the  name  employed  (m  the 
city  of  Jebus,  only  in  the  ancient  doeument  describiog 
the  landmarks  and  the  towns  of  the  allotment  of  Judah 
and  Benjamin  ( JobIl  xv,  8 ;  xviii,  16,  28).  In  the  fim 
and  last  pUice,  the  explanatorT  words,  •*  which  is  Jerwa- 
lem,"  are  added.  In  the  flrst,  however,  our  translaton 
have  given  it  as  ^'Łhe  Jebuaite."  A  parallel  to  this 
modę  of  designating  the  town  by  its  inhabitants  is 
found  in  this  very  list  in  Zemaraim  (xviii,  22),  Avim 
(ver.  23),  Ophni  (vdr.  24),  and  Japhletite  (xvi,  3),  etc. 
—Smith. 

2.  "  Jebusito"  or  <<  Jebusitea,'*  forms  indiscriminately 
employed  in  the  A-Yers.,  although  in  the  ongioal  ihe 


JEBUSITE 


796 


JEDAIAH 


immei  wbetber  apptied  to  indiyiduals  or  to  the  mition, 
is  never  found  in  the  plural ;  always  singular.  The  fuli 
fonn  is  "^D^S^n ;  but  in  a  few  places— viz.  2  Sam.  v,  6 ; 
xxiv,  16,  i8;'l  Chion.  xxi,  18  only— it  ia  ** defectively'' 
written  •'Da^*^.  Without  the  article,  ''0'ia;^,  it  occure 
in  2  Sam.  v,  8 ;  1  Chroń,  xi,  6 ;  Zech.  ix,  7.  In  the  fint 
two  of  these  the  force  ia  mach  increased  by  removing 
the  artide  intioduced  in  the  A.  Yen.,  and  reading  ^  and 
smitetb  a  Jebuaite." — Smith.    See  Jebusitk. 

Jeb^nsite  (Heb.  Yebusi%  '^Oia;«,  Sept,  'lifiwoaioc, 
but  'Ufiouc  in  Josb.  xy,8 ;  xvtii,  28,  or  'lipoyc  in  Judg. 
xix,  11 ;  1  Chroń,  xi,  4 ;  also  'Ufiov9ai  in  Josh.  xviii, 
16,  and  'Upowi  in  £zm  ix,  1;  A-Y.  ^^Jebosi"  in  Josh. 
xviii,  16,  28),  the  name  of  the  original  inhabitants  of 
Jebuś,  frequent]y  mentioned  (usually  last  in  the  list) 
amongst  the  8even  Canaanitish  nations  doomed  to  de- 
struction  (Gen.  x,  16;  xv,  21 ;  £xod.  iii,  8, 17. ;  xiii,  5 ; 
xxiii,  28;  xxxiii,  2;  xxxiv,  11 ;  Numb.  xiii,  29;  Deut. 
vii,  1 ;  XX,  17 ;  Josh.  iii,  10 ;  ix,  1 ;  xi,  3 ;  xii,  8 ;  xxiv, 
11 ;  Judg. iii,5;  1  Kings  ix, 20 ;  1  Chion.  i,  14;  2  Chroń. 
viii,  7 ;  Kzra  ix,  1 ;  Neh.  ix,  8).  They  appear  to  have 
descended  from  a  grandson  of  Ham  (Gen.  x,  16).  *<  His 
place  in  the  list  18  between  Heth  and  the  Amorites  (Gen. 
X,  16;  1  Chroń,  i,  14),  a  position  which  the  tribe  main- 
tained  long  ailer  (Numb.  xiii,  29 ;  Josh.  xi,  8) ;  and  the 
aame  connection  is  traoeable  in  the  words  of  Ezekiel 
(xvi,  3, 45),  who  addresses  Jemsalem  as  the  fruit  of  the 
union  of  an  Amorite  with  a  Hittite"*  (Smith).  At  the 
time  of  the  arrival  of  the  Israelites  (see  Jour,  Sac,  Lit. 
Oct,  1851,  p.  167)  they  were  foond  to  be  a  considerable 
tjibe  on  the  west  of  Jordan  (Josh.  ix,  1),  seated  on  one 
of  the  hiUs  of  Judah  (some  have  wrongly  inferred  Mo- 
liah  from  2  Chroń,  iii,  1,  but  in  2  Sam.  v,  9  it  is  clearly 
identified  with  Zioń),  near  the  Hittites  and  Amorites. 
(Numb.  xiii,  30 ;  Josh.  xi,  3),  where  they  had  founded  a 
city  called  Jebus  (Josh.  xviii,  28;  comp.  xix,  10),  prob- 
ably  after  the  name  of  their  progenitoc,  and  i  c^tablished 
a  royal  form  of  goveniment,  being  then  ruled  by  Adoni- 
zedek  (Josh.  x,  1, 28).  See  Salebi.  They  seem  to  have 
been  a  warlike  tribe;  and,  although  they  were  defeated 
with  much  slaughter,  and  Adoni-zodtU,  their  king,  dain 
by  Joshua  (Josh.  x),  and  though  a  part  of  their  city 
seems  to  have  been  afterwards  taken,  sacked,  and  bum- 
ed  by  the  warriors  of  Judah  (Judg.  i,  8),  yet  they  were 
not  whoUy  subdued,bnŁ  were  able  to  retain  at  least  their 
acropolis  (Judg.  i,  21),  and  were  not  entirely  dispossessed 
of  it  till  the  time  of  I>avid  (2  Sam.  v).  Being  situated 
on  the  border  (Josh.  xv,  8 ;  xviii,  16),  between  Judah 
and  Benjamin,  to  either  of  which  it  is  indifferently  as- 
aigned  (Josh.  xv,  63 ;  xviii,  28 ;  Judg.  i,  21),  it  was  only 
at  this  late  datę  secured  to  the  actual  territoiy  of  Da- 
Tid^s  tribe  (1  Chroń.  xi).  He  madę  it  the  capital  of  his 
kingdom  instead  of  Hebron  (Ewald,  Isr.  Gcsch,  ii,  583), 
but  did  not  whoUy  expel  the  natiyes  (1  Kings  ix,  20). 
By  that  time  the  inveteracy  of  the  enmity  between  the 
Hebrews  and  such  of  the  original  inhabitants  as  re- 
mained  in  the  land  had  much  abatcd,  and  the  rights  of 
priva(6  property  were  respected  by  the  conąuerors. 
Tbis  we  di9Cover  from  the  fact  that  the  site  on  which 
the  Tempie  afterwards  stood  belonged  to  a  Jebusite 
named  Araonah,  from  whom  it  was  purchased  by  king 
David,  who  declined  to  accept  it  as  a  free  gift  from  the 
owner  (2  Sam.  xxiv ;  1  Chroń.  xxi).  This  afterwards 
became  the  site  of  Solomon's  Tempie  (2  Chroń,  iii,  1). 
It  appears  that  the  Jebusites  subsisted  under  his  reign 
in  the  state  of  tributaries  or  slaves  (2  Chroiu  ^'iii,  7), 
and  even  ao  continued  to  the  times  of  the  return  from 
Babyion  (Ezra  ix,  1).    See  Jeritsalem. 

The  name  "Jebusite"  is  sometimes  put  for  the  city 
itself  inhabited  by  them  (i.  q.  **city  of  the  Jebusites," 
Judg.  xix,  11),  as  in  Josh.  xv,  8;  xviii,  16;  also  poetical- 
ly,  in  later  times,  for  its  suocessor,  Jerusalem  (Zech.  ix, 
7).     See  Jebusi. 

"  In  the  apocryphal  Acts  of  the  Apostles,  the  ashes 
of  Bamabas,  after  his  martyrdom  in  Cypnis,  are  said  to 
łuive  been  buried  in  a  cave  where  the  race  of  the  Jebur 


sites  formerly  dwelt,  and  pTevions  to  this  is  mentioned 
the  arrival  in  the  i^and  of  a  pious  Jebusite,  a  kinsman 
of  Nero  (ile/.  Apoat.  Apocr.  p.  72, 73,  ed  Tisch.)"  (Smith). 

Jecami^ah  (1  Chroń,  ui,  18).    See  Jekamiah. 

Jechiel  ben-Joseph,  of  Paris,  a  Rabbi,  flourish- 
ed  in  the  13th  century.  He  was  a  disciple  of  the  cele- 
brated  Jehudah  Sir-Leon  (q.  v.).  But  little  is  know^ 
of  the  early  histoiy  of  his  life.  In  the  prime  of  life  M-e 
find  him  in  Paris,  at  the  head  of  a  theological  school, 
and  an  officiating  Rabbi  in  the  capital  of  France.  Dur- 
ing  the  reign  of  Louis  IX  the  Romanists  madę  erery 
eifort  to  cause  the  expulsion  of  the  Jews  from  France, 
where  they  were  enjoying  at  thŁ§  time  special  favors. 
They  accused  the  Jews  of  manifold  crimes,  and  assert^d 
that  the  Tahnud  contained  disrespectful  language  to- 
wards  Jesus,  etc;  and  though  the  king  hesitated  to 
believe  this,  he  was  finally  persuaded  to  appoint  a  oom- 
mission  of  both  CThiistians  and  Jews  to  search  the 
Talmud  for  obnoxious  passages.  Of  the  four  Rabbis 
appointed,  Jechiel  ben-Joseph  headed  the  Jewish  com- 
mission,  and  he  alone,  in  the  main,  cairied  on  the  dis- 
putation,  which  resulted  unfavorably  to  the  Jews.  In 
the  dijq}ute  Jechiel  displayed  great  ability  and  learning, 
but  it  is  to  be  deplored  that  he  injured  his  cause  in  the 
eyes  of  the  historian  by  the  asserlion  which  he  madę 
that  the  name  of  Jesus  occurring  in  the  Tahnud  does 
not  refer  to  Jesus  the  Christ  See  Jetcs  in  France; 
Wagenseil,  Tela  ignea  Satanm  (2  vol8.  4to);  GrUtz,  C"e- 
schichtt  der  Juden,  vii,  115  są.     (J.  H.  W.) 

JechoU'a]i  (2  Kings  xv,  2).    See  Jecoliah. 

Jechoni^as  ClŁxoviac)f  a  Grsecized  form  of  two 
Hebrew  names  occurring  in  the  Apocrypha  and  N.  T. 

1.  In  £sth.  xi,  4 ;  Bar.  i,  8, 9 ;  Matt.*i,  11, 12,  for  king 
Jehoiakim  (q.v.). 

2.  In  1  Esd.  viii,  92  for  Shechasiah  (q.  v.),  who  en- 
couraged  Ezra  in  the  matter  of  divorciDg  the  Gentile 
wives  (Ezra  x,  2). 

Jecoli^ah  (Heb.  Fdbo/yoA',  nj^S^,  2  C^iron.  xxvi, 
3,  where  the  text  erroneously  bas  ri^^*'^'^ ;  Auth.  Yers. 
"  Jecholiah ;"  in  2  Kings  xv,  2,  the  paragogtc  form  Ye- 
hoiya'hu,  Jinjbs^,a6fe  through  Jthorah ;  Sept.  *lf xi><ia ; 
Joeephus  'A^mAac,  A  nt,  ix,  10, 1 ;  Vulg.  Jechelia)y  a  fe- 
male  of  Jerusalem,  mothcr  of  king  ITzziah,  and  conse- 
quently  wife  of  king  Amaziah,  whom  she  appears  to 
have  survived :  ber  character  may  be  infcrred  from  the 
generał  piety  of  her  son.    RC.  824-807. 

Jeconl^ah  (l  Cniron.iii,  16, 17 ;  Jer.  xxiv,  1 ;  xxvii, 
20 ;  xxviii,  4 ;  xxix,  1 ;  Esth.  ii,  6).     See  Jeiioiaciiik. 

Jeconi^as  ('I*xoviac),  a  Gnecizcd  form  (1  Esd.  i, 
9)  of  the  name  elsewhere  given  (2  Chroń,  xxxv,  9)  as 
(ioNAKiAK  (q.  V.). 

Jed89'a8  (Ic^aloc),  a  less  correct  form  (1  Esd.  ix, 
30)  of  the  Hebrew  name  (Ezra  x,  29)  Adaiah  (q.  v.). 

Jedai^ah  (Heb.  Yedayah'),  the  name  of  seycral  men, 
of  different  form  in  the  originaL 

!•  e^J^^  imfóker  o/Jehorah ;  Sept.  'E^ia  v.  r.  If  ^ł« 
and  Ithata.)  Son  of  Shimń  and  father  of  Allon,  of  the 
ancestors  of  Ziza,  a  chief  Simeonite  who  migrated  to  the 
valley  of  Gedor  (1  Chroń,  iv,  87).     B,C.  long  antę  711. 

2.  (Same  Hebrew  name  as  preceding ;  Sept.  'le^aia.) 
Son  of  Hanimaph,  and  one  of  those  that  repaired  the 
wolls  of  Jerusalem  after  the  exilc  (Neh.  iii,  10).  RC 
446. 

3.  (HJ?^^,  huneinff  Jehotah ;  Sept.  Icila.)  The 
chief  of  the  second  division  of  pricsts  as  arrangcd  by  Da- 
vid  (1  Chroń,  xxiv,  7).    B.C.  1014. 

4.  (Same  Heb.  name  as  preceding ;  Sept.  lai(Tai,  'Ic^- 
dinióf  'laSia,  'l^itoc,  'Q^ov»CTC,*E^ioc,  'ItccVou,  AicHov.) 
A  priest  who  officiated  in  Jerusalem  after  the  exilc  (1 
Chroń,  ix,  10 ;  Neh.  xi,  10 ;  in  which  latter  passage,  how- 
ever,  he  is  styled  the  son  of  Joiarib,  e^idently  the  same 
as  the  Jehoiarib  with  whom  he  is  merely  as»x:iated  in 
the  former  possoge).     From  Ezra  ii,  36;  Neh.  vii,  39, 


JEDDTJ 


796 


JEGAR-SAHADTJTHA 


he  appean  to  haye  belonged  to  the  family  of  Jesbua 
(973  of  his  relatires  haviiig  returned  with  him  irom  Bab- 
ylon)|  80  that  he  is  probably  the  same  with  the  priest 
Jedaiah  enumerated  (Neb.  xii,  6)  amongst  the  oontem- 
poraries  of  Jeshua  who  retumed  with  Zeiubbabel  (the 
name  apparently  being  repeated  in  yene  7 ;  oomp.  ver. 
19,  21,  where  the  same  repetition  occun,  alŁhough  with 
the  mention  of  different  sons),  and  probably  also  identi- 
cal  with  the  Jedaiah  whom  the  prophet  was  diiected  to 
crown  with  the  symbolical  wreath  (Zech.  vi,  10, 14). 
B.a  536-520. 

Jed''dn  (lŁdSov),  a  corrupt  form  (1  Esd.  v,24)  for 
the  Hebrew  name  (Ezra  ii,  36)  Jedaiah  (q.  v.). 

Jedla'Sl  [most  Jedi'aiQ  (Heb.  Yediail%  ^KąC*^*??, 
Icnaum  by  God;  Sept.  *ladŁijX,'Adtri\f  le5«4\),  the  name 
of  at  least  three  men. 

1.  One  of  the  sons  of  Benjamin  (1  Chroń,  vii,  6),  whose 
sons  (ver.  10)  and  descendants  are  enumerated  as  being 
17,200  warriors  in  David*s  oensiis  (ver.  11).  He  is,  per- 
haps,  the  same  elsewhere  called  Asiibel  (1  Chroń,  viii, 
1).     See  Benjamin  ;  Jacob. 

2.  A  Shimrite  (q.  v.) ;  one  of  David's  famous  body- 
guard  (1  Chroń,  xi,  45) ;  probably  the  Manassite  of  the 
same  name  who  joined  David*s  troop  at  Ziklag  (1  Chroń. 
xii,  20).     B.C.  1058-1046. 

3.  A  Korhite  of  the  Leritical  family  of  Ebiasaph,  sec- 
ond  son  of  Meshelemiah,  and  one  of  the  gate-keepera  to 
the  tabernacle  or  Tempie  (1  Chroń,  xxvi,  2).     B.C.  1014. 

Jedi'dah  (Heb.  Yedidah',  ^'^'^'^ybeloued;  Septuag. 
*USdiSa ;  Josephus  Ic^^,  A  nt.  xi,  4, 1 ),  daughter  of  Adai- 
ah  of  Boskath  and  mother  of  king  Josiah,  conseąuently 
wife  of  king  Amon,  whom  she  appears  to  have  sun'ived 
(2  Kiiigs  xxii,  1).  Her  character  may  be  infened  from 
the  piety  of  her  son.     RC.  648-639. 

Jedidi^ah  (Heb.  Yedideyah',  njn-^n^  heUwed  by 
JeIiovah ;  Sept.  Ic^i^a),  the  name  specially  given  by  the 
Lord  to  SoijOMON  (q.  v.)  at  his  birth,  through  Nathan, 
in  token  of  the  divine  favor  purposed  towards  him  (2 
Sam.  xii,  25). 

Jedithnn.    See  Jeduthun. 

Jedna  Clt^va),  a  town  mentioned  by  Eusebius  and 
Jerome  {Onomast,  s.  v.)  as  lying  "  in  the  desert,  six  miles 
irom  Eleutheropolis  towards  Hebron,"  precisely  in  which 
location  stands  the  modem  village  Idhna  (Robinson,  Jie- 
searches,  ii,  404). 

Jed'utliim  (Hebrew  Yeduthm',  )HT\'H^'^  or  "jsini^ ; 
also  lin-^np,  Yedithua^  in  1  Chroń,  xvi,  88;  Neh.  xi, 
17 ;  Psa.  xxx  and  lxxvii,  tilles ;  lauder ;  Sept.  'I^c&owy, 
but  'I(?i^wv  in  1  Chroń,  ix,  16),  a  Levite  of  Merari*s  fami- 
ly, and  one  of  the  four  great  masters  of  the  Tempie  musie 
appointed  by  David  (1  Chroń,  xvi,  41, 42;  xxv,  1,  etc). 
B.C.  1014.  From  a  comparison  of  1  Chroń,  xv,  17, 19,  with 
xvi,  41,  42;  xxv,  1,  8,  6;  2  Chroń,  xxxv,  15,  some  infer 
that  he  was  identical  with  Ethan  (q.  v.).  In  2  Chroń. 
xxxv,  15,  he  bears  the  title  of  "the  king's  seer."  His 
sons  sometimes  appear  as  exercising  the  same  oflSoe  (1 
Chroń,  xxv,  1, 8),  at  others  as  dooi^keepers  of  the  sacred 
ediiice  (1  Chroń,  xvi,  42).  His  name  ia  also  put  for  his 
descendants  (Jedutkumiea,  "sons  of  Jeduthun"),  who 
occur  later  as  singers  and  players  on  instruments  (2 
Chroń,  xxxv,  15;  Neh.  xi,  17). '  In  the  latter  signifłca- 
tion  it  occuis  in  the  superscriptions  to  Psa.  xxxix,  lxii, 
lxxvii ;  but  Aben-Ezra  supposes  it  to  denote  here  a  spe- 
cies  of  song,  and  Jarchi  a  musical  instrument.  The 
form  of  the  phrase  (l^inn;'  hy,  "upon  Jeduthun")  fa- 
vors  the  latter  interpretation  (Gesenius,  Thes.  Heb,  p. 
569).  indicating  a  kind  of  instrumental  musie,  or  per- 
haps  a  style  or  tłinc  of  performance  (Ewald,  lieb,  Poesie, 
p.  176)  invented  or  introduced  by  Jeduthun;  a  conclu- 
sion  strcngthened  by  finding  a  phrase  indicative  of  au- 
thorship  Csin^n-^b,  "to  Jeduthun,"  Ł  e.  composed  6y 
him),  ascribed  in  a  similsr  connection  (PtaL  xxxix,  ti- 
tle), sińce  he  is  elsewhere  recognised  as  an  inspired 
character  (2  Chroń,  xxxv,  15).     See  Musician. 


Jeejeebhoy,  Sir  Jamsetjee,  a  Panee  merclunt 
prince  and  great  philanthropist,  who  was  bom  of  poor 
parents  at  Bombay,  July  15, 1788,  and  at  the  age  of 
twenty  had  already  amassed  a  fortunę  which  seciued 
him  the  umver8al  acknowledgment  as  the  ''fint  mei^ 
chant  in  the  Eaat,"  spent  a  good  portion  of  his  fortunę 
in  the  endowment  of  schools  and  hospitals.  From  18^22 
to  1858  he  is  reported  to  have  spent "  upwards  of  a  quar- 
ter  of  a  million  pounds  sterling  in  founding,  endowing, 
or  supporting  undertakings  of  a  purely  benevolent  char- 
acter;" but  what  is  more  noteworthy  still  is  that  thii 
Parsee  merchant  by  no  means  confined  his  charitsble 
efforts  to  his  own  confession:  Christian,  Hinda,  and 
Mossulman  also  shared  the  beneftts  of  his  magnanimoia 
acts.  In  1857  qtteen  Yictoria  conferred  on  him  tbe 
honor  of  knighthood— the  first  occasion  on  which  that 
dignity  was  bestowed  on  an  Eastem.  He  died  Apiil 
15, 1859.    See  Chambera,  Cydop.  s.  v. 

JeS^li  ('Ici|Xi'  V.  r.  'UtrjkŁi),  a  corrapt  Gnccizcd  fbna 
(1  Esd.  V.  83)  of  the  Heb.  name  (Ezza  ii,  56)  Jaalah 
(q.v.). 

Jee^TiB  Clći|Xoc  V.  r.  Ic^A),  a  Grccized  foim  (1 
Esd.  viii,  92)  of  the  Heb.  name  (Ezra  x,  2)  JsifiEL  (q.T.). 

Je'6'zer  (Hebrew  I^zer,  '^T5*^»,  abridged  for  AUe- 
zer;  Sept.  'A^^tś^cp),  a  son  of  Gilead  of  Manasseh  (XumK 
xxvi,  80) ;  elsewhere  (Josh.  x\'ii,  2,  etc)  callc<l  Abiezeb 
(q.  V.).  The  patronymic  Jeezerites  C'^t^''X,  Ikt. 
Iezeri\  Sept.  'AxttKipO  is  in  like  manner  applied  to  hii 
descendants  (Numb.  xxvi,  30),  elsewhere  called  Abiez- 
BiTES  (Judg.  vi,  11,  etc). 

JeS^serite  (Numb.  xxvi,  80).    See  Jbbzer. 

Jeffery,  John,  an  English  theologian,  was  bom  at 
Ipswich  in  1647.  He  studied  at  Catharine  Hall,  Cam- 
bridge, entered  the  Church,  and  was  appointcd  rector 
of  Dennington,  SuiTolk ;  then  of  a  parish  in  Norwich. 
His  exemplary  conduct,  sound  teachinga,  and  great  era- 
dition  rendered  him  very  popular.  In  1687  he  obtain^ 
the  livings  of  Kirton  and  Falkenham,  and  in  1694,  Til- 
lotson,  with  whom  he  was  intimately  acquainted,  madę 
htm  arehdeacon  of  Norwich.  He  died  in  1720.  Jcffciy 
was  much  opposed  to  religious  oontrovcisic8,  holding 
that  they  generated  "  more  heat  than  light."  flc  pub- 
Usbed  Sir  Thomas  Browne^s  Christian  Moralt;  MmA 
and  Reiiffiovs  Aphorisnutj  taken  from  Dr.  WichoDŁe's  pa- 
pers.  A  complete  collection  of  his  own  Senaoiu  anŁ 
Tracts  was  published  (London,  1753,  2  vols.  8vo).  See 
Memoirs  prefixed  to  the  collection ;  Hoefer,  A  otcr.  Btri. 
GhUrale,  xxvi,  682 ;  Allibone,  Dictionary  o/ A  ulkffnj  i, 
959. 

Jeffrles,  Gborge,  an  English  lawyer  of  the  cnmii, 
bom  about  1640,  was  chief  justice  of  the  Ring's  Bench 
during  the  reign  of  James  II,  and  is  exccratc<I  in  ecele- 
siastical  histoiy  for  his  conduct  towards  Ilaxter  (q.v.) 
and  Fairfax  (q.  v.).  He  seems  to  havc  bccn  a  inaii  of 
Iow  inclinations,  and  a  ready  tool  in  the  hands  of  the 
court.  In  the  year  1688,  after  the  flight  of  king  Jamei, 
he  was  reoogmsed  at  Loiulon  during  the  riots  by  tbe 
rabble,  and,  after  "  having  sufTered  far  more  than  the 
bittemess  of  death,  he  was  safely  lodged  in  the  fortreas 
(the  Tower  of  London),  where  some  of  his  mosi  ifloftri* 
ous  victims  had  passed  their  last  da\'s,  and  where  bi« 
own  life  was  destined  to  cloae  in  unapeaikahLc  ignominj 
and  horror/'  He  died  April  18, 1689.  No  one  haa  bet- 
ter  deUneated  his  character  than  MacanUiy  (ffutorj/  of 
Enffkmd,  vo].  ii),  and  wci  refer  our  readeis  to  this  able 
master  for  further  details.  See  also  Ncalc,  IłUtory  of 
tht  PuritanSf  ii,  317  sq.,  341. 

Je^gar-Bahadu^^tha  (ChaUL  Yegar''8akaAa]M', 
KlJ^nnb  *15%  pile  of  the  leMtimomf ;  Sept  ^mc  m 
fia(>n;piac*Vulgate  tumulus  testie),  the  Annuean  name 
given  by  Laban  as  a  Syrian  to  the  mound  of  atones 
erected  as  a  memoriał  of  his  league  with  JacoU  \rheFe- 
as  the  ktter  styled  it  (Gen.  xxxi,  47)  by  the  cqairaleot 
Hebrew  name  of  Gał-E£d  {ą.  r.). 


JEHAŁEŁE£Ł 


797 


JEHOAHAZ 


JehaleaeSl  [many  Jehal^eial]  (Heb.  YehaUdd', 
h^\ty^y  praiter  ofGod)j  the  name  of  Łwo  men. 

i.' (Sepu  'IoXX«X^X»Vulg.  Jaldeel)  A  desoendant 
of  Judah,  seyeral  of  whose  eona  are  enaroerated,  although 
his  own  immediate  parentage  is  not  mentioned  (1  Chroń. 
iv,  16).    aa  appaienUy  cir.  16ia 

2.  (Sepu  'IaXA^X,yulg.  Jalaled,  Aath.  Yen.  "  Jeha- 
leleL'')  A  Levite  of  the  family  of  Merari,  whoae  eon 
Azariah  aided  in  restoring  the  Tempie  seirioes  under 
Uezekiah  (2  Chion.  xxix,  12).     KC  antę  726. 

Jehal^elel  (2  Chroń,  xxix,  12).  Sec  Jehaleleel,  2. 

Jehdei'ah  [womtJehde'iak  QrJ€hdei'ah]  (Hebrew 
Yeckdeifak'^  only  in  the  paragogic  foiro  ^^"1111^,  ł«*- 
deya'ku,  rtjoieer  mJthtnah  ;  SepU  *\aiatay  'ladiac)^  the 
name  of  two  men. 

1.  A  deaoendant  of  Shnbael  or  Shebuel,  of  the  family 
of  Genhom,  who  appean  to  have  been  head  of  a  dirińon 
of  the  Leritical  Tempie  attendants  aa  arranged  by  Dar 
vid  (1  Cliron.  xxiv,  20 ;  comp.  xxiii,  16).     RC.  1014. 

2.  A  Meionothite,  and  hcrdaman  of  the  royal  asses 
under  Darid  and  Solomon  (1  Chroń,  xxvii,  80).  B.C. 
1014. 

Jehes^ekel  (1  Chroń,  xxiv,  16).    See  Ezekiet^  1. 

Jehi^ah  (Hebrew  Yecfujfah',  Hjn^,  Jehwah^s  lirmg 
one ;  Sept.  l«aia),a  Levite  assodated  with  Obed-edom 
as  door-keeper  of  the  sacred  ark  whcn  brought  by  David 
to  Jerusalero  (1  Chroń,  xv,  24) ;  elsewhere  (ver.  18)  called 

j£IIIEL  (q.  V.). 

Jehi^el  (Heb.  Ye<Aiil\  bs^^H J,  GoePs  iwwff  one),  the 
name  of  9everal  men. 

1.  (1  Chroń,  ix,  36.)     See  Jeiel,  1. 

2.  (1  Chroń,  xi,  44.)     See  Jeiel,  2. 

3.  (Sept.  Ififik  or  'Iufi\,  but  v.  r.  'Ia3iri\  in  1  Chroń. 
xvi,  5.)  One  of  the  Levite8  "  of  the  second  degree"  ap- 
pointecl  by  David  to  execute  the  musie  on  the  occasion 
of  the  removal  of  the  ark  to  Jeruaalem  (1  Chroń,  xv,  18, 
20,  in  which  łatter  paaaage  they  are  seid  to  have  per- 
forme<l  **  wtth  pealteries  on  Alamoth").  He  is  apparent- 
iy  the  same  with  the  penon  mentioned  (veT8e  24)  by  the 
synonymoiis  name  Jehiah,  although,  from  the  similar 
coDocation  of  names,  others  havo  confounded  this  with 
the  Jeiei<  of  eh.  xvi,  5,  a  name  of  dilTerent  signification. 
He  is  probaUy  identical  with  the  one  named  as  chief 
amongst  the  three  descendants  of  Laadan  (L  e.  libni) 
anaiigcd  by  David  in  charge  of  the  Tempie  porters  (1 
Chroń,  xxiii,  8),  and  hence  likewise  with  the  Genhonite 
with  whom  were  deposited  the  gems  offered  by  the  peo- 
ple  for  the  sacred  stnictures  and  utensib  (1  Chroń,  xxix, 
8).  RC.  1043-1014.  IŁ  is  doubtless  his  descendants 
who  wcrc  caUed  Jehieutes  (Hebrew  Yechiili,  *'VC'^ł7*^, 
Sept.  'Ia4>,  A  V.  «  Jehieli,"  1  Chroń,  xxvi,  21, 22)". 

4.  (Sepu  l/pt^\  V.  r.  1»/X,  Vulg.  Jahid.)  A  Hach- 
monite  (-"  son  of  Hachmoni^Ó  ^bo  appears  to  have  been 
tutor  in  the  royal  family  towards  the  close  of  David'8 
rcłgii  (1  Chron.*xxvii,  82).  B.C.  cir.  1030.  «  The  men- 
tiou  of  Ahithophel  (vcr.  83)  seems  to  fix  the  datę  of  this 
list  as  before  the  revolt.  In  Jerome's  Qu€ett,  Uebraica 
on  this  passage,  Jchiel  is  said  to  be  David*s  son  Chileab 
or  Daniel ;  and  '  Achamoni,'  interpreted  as  Sapientisti- 
mus,  is  takcn  as  an  alias  of  David  himselP  (Smith). 

5.  (.Sept.  'Ijf  ^X.)  The  second-named  of  the  six  sons 
of  king  Jehoshaphat  (2  Chroń,  xxi,  2),  exclnsive  of  his 
first-bom  and  heir,  Jehorom,  who,  on  his  accession,  mur- 
dercd  oll  his  brothcrs  (verse  4).     KC.  887. 

6.  (Sepu  'ItV4X.)  A  descendant  of  Heman,  and  one 
of  the  Levites  who  assisted  Hezekiah  in  his  reformation 
of  the  public  rcligion  (2  Clhron.  xxix,  14,  where  the  He- 
brew text  has  b^^n^,  YechuH')^  and  who  eventually  was 
appoanted  one  of  the  superintendents  of  the  sacred  olTer- 
ingB  (xxxi,  13).     B.C.  726. 

7.  (Sept.  'Ic(4X.)  One  of  those  who  contributed  lib- 
erally  to  the  renewal  of  the  Tempie  sacrifioes  under  Jo- 
siah ;  statcd  to  have  been  a  "  prince"  or  coortier,  and,  at 
the  same  time.  a  '^niler  of  the  house  of  God,"  which  im- 


pliea  Bome  union  of  civil  and  religious  functiona  (2  Chroń. 
xxxv,  8).     B.a623. 

8.  (SepU 'l£H^X  V.  r.  lcV4X.)  Thefather  ofObadiah, 
which  latter  retumed  with  his  relatives  of  the  sons  of 
Joab,  218  males,  from  Babylon  with  £zra  (Ezra  viii,  9). 
B.C.  antę  459. 

9.  (SepU  'Ic^X  V.  r.  l<(t^X,  also  *laiiiK  v.  r.  Aua/X.) 
One  of  the  "  sons**  of  £lam  (?  Persian)  who  divorced  his 
Gentile  wife  ailer  the  exile  (Ezra  x,  26) ;  probably  the 
same  with  the  father  of  Shechauiah,  who  proposed  that 
measure  (ver8e  2).    B.C.  459. 

10.  (Sepu  lci^X  V.  r.  *ltr\K^  One  of  the  pricsts, 
"  sons"  of  Harim,  who  divorced  his  Gentile  wife  after 
the  captivity  (Ezra  x,  21).     B.C.  459. 

Jehi'eU  (1  Chroń,  xxvi,  21 ,  22).    See  Jehieł,  1 . 

Jehiski^ah  (Heb.  Yeddzki^ak\  only  in  the  para- 
gogic form  YechizHya^hu,  ''*^JPyr'*'»  i*  q«  Hezekiah  ; 
SepU  'E^cjc/ai;),  son  of  Shallum,  one  of  the  Ephraimitish 
leadera  who,  at  the  instance  of  the  prophet  Odcd  (q.  v.), 
insisted  upon  the  liberation  and  humane  trcatment  of 
the  captives  takcn  and  brought  to  Samaria  in  the  incur- 
sion  of  Pekah  upon  the  kingdom  of  Judah  (2  Chroń. 
xxviii,  12 ;  comp.  8, 18, 16).     RC.  cir.  788. 

Jeho^adah  (Heb.  Yehoaddah',  n^l^in^,  Jehotah 
is  his  ornament ;  SepU  *lunaŁa  v.  r.  lala),  son  of  Ahaz, 
and  father  of  Alemeth  and  others  of  the  descendants  of 
Saul  throagh  Mephibosheth  (1  Chroń,  viii,  86),  called 
Jarah  (n'n9^,  Yarah\  droppmg  of  honey,  as  in  1  Sam. 
xiv,  27,  otherwise  woodsmanf  but  morę  probably  a  cur- 
rupt  rcading  for  Hl?^,  Yakda%  i.  q.  Jehoadah ;  Sept. 
la^a,  Vulg.  Jara^  in  the  parallel  passage  (1  Chroń,  ix, 
42).     RC.  considerably  post  1037. 

Jelioftd'dan  (Heb.  Yehodddan',  '{'jrin^  L  q.  Jf Ao- 
adah;  SepU  IcMi^iy),  a  female  of  Jeruaalem,  roothcr  of 
king  Amaziah,  and  conseąuently  wife  of  king  Jehoaab, 
whom  she  appears  to  have  survived  (1  Kings  xiv,  2 ;  2 
Chroń,  xxv,  1 ;  in  the  former  of  which  passagcs  the  text 
has  1''??'iłT^,  Yehoaddin').  Her  charactcr  may  per- 
haps  be  inferred  from  the  partially  good  conduct  of  her 
son.     RC.  862-887. 

Jeho^Shaz  (Heb.  YehoSdiaz'^  m^in'^,  Jehotah  ia 
his  kołder,  i.  c.  sustainer ;  Sept.  Twa^^o^ ;  writtcn  also  in 
the  eontracted  form  YnKI*^,  Yodehaz',  2  Kings  xiv,  1 ;  2 
Chroń,  xxxvi,  2,  4 ;  SepUlwa^aC;  A.  V.  *♦  Jehoahaz"), 
the  name  of  three  kings.     See  also  Joahaz. 

1.  One  of  the  names  of  the  youngest  son  of  Jehoram 
of  Judah  (2  Chroń,  xxi,  17,  Sept.  'Ovo^iac),  and  father 
of  Josiah  (2  Chroń,  xxv,  28,  SepU  Itua^^rO ;  usually 
caUed  Ahaziah  (q.v.). 

2.  The  son  and  succeasor  of  Jchu,  the  twelfth  sepa- 
rate  king  of  Israel  (2  Kings  x,  85).  He  reigncd  seven- 
teen  years,  RC.  855-888  (Josephus  'Ia>a^or,  A  nł,  ix,  8, 
5).  As  he  followed  the  evil  courses  of  the  house  of  Jer- 
oboam,  the  Syrians,  under  Hazael  and  Benhadad,  wcra 
suffered  to  pre>''ail  over  him ;  so  that  at  length  he  had 
only  left,  of  all  his  forces,  6fty  horsemen,  ten  chariots, 
and  10,000  fooU  Overwhelmed  by  his  calaroities,  Jeho- 
ahaz at  length  acknowledged  the  authority  of  Jehovah 
over  Israel,  and  humbled  himself  before  him,  in  consid* 
eration  of  which  a  dcliverer  was  raised  up  for  Israel  in 
the  person  of  Jehoash,  this  king^s  son  (B.C.  841,  whcnce 
the  latter's  viceroyship  is  dated,  2  Kings  xiii,  10),  who 
was  enabled  to  expel  the  Syrians  and  re-establish  the 
aifairs  of  the  kingdom  (2  Kings  xiii,  1-9, 25).     See  Is- 

BAEl^  KINGDOM  OP. 

3.  The  third  of  the  four  sons  of  Josiah  by  Hamutal, 
bom  RC  682,  originally  called  Shallum,  seventeenth 
separate  king  over  Judah  for  three  months  only,  RC. 
609  (Josephus  'lum^a^oc.  Ant,  x,  5, 2).  After  his  father 
had  been  slain  in  reasting  the  progress  of  Pharaoh-ne- 
cho,  Jehoahaz,  who  was  then  twenty-three  years  of  age, 
was  raised  to  the  throne  by  the  people  in  preference  to 
his  dder  brother  Jehoiakim  (2  Kings  xxiii,  31, 86),  and 
reccived  at  Jeruaalem  the  regal  anointing,  which  aeems' 


JEHOASH 


798 


JEHOASH 


to  haye  been  usually  omitted  in  times  of  order  and  of 
regular  succeasion  (the  oldest  biother,  Johanan  [1  Chroń, 
iii,  15],  having  apparently  died  without  issue,  and  Zede- 
kiah  being  yet  too  yoiing  [2  Obron,  xxvi,  11]).  He 
found  the  land  fuli  of  tiouble,  but  tree  from  idolatry. 
Instead,  however,  of  following  the  exceUent  exaniple  of 
his  father,  Jehoahaz  fell  into  the  aocustomed  crimes  of 
his  predecessors,  and,  under  the  encouragcments  which 
his  example  or  indifference  ofFered,  the  idols  soon  reap- 
peared.  He  is  therefore  described  by  his  contempora- 
ries  as  an  evil-doer  (2  Kings  xxiii,  82)  and  an  oppressor 
(Ezek.  xix,  3),  and  such  is  his  traditional  character  in 
Josephus  (Ant,  x,  5, 2) ;  but  his  deposition  seems  to  have 
been  lamented  by  the  people  (Jer.  xxii,  10 ;  Ezek.  xix, 
1).  Pharaoh-necho,  on  his  yictorioos  return  from  the 
Euphrates,  thinking  it  politic  to  reject  a  king  not  nom- 
inated  by  himself,  removed  him  from  the  throne,  and 
set  thereon  his  brother  Jehoiakim.  The  deposed  king 
was  at  first  taken  as  a  prisoner  to  Riblah,  in  Syria,  but 
was  eyentually  carried  to  Egypt,  where  he  died  (2  Kings 
xxiii,  80-35 ;  2  Chroń,  xxxvi,  1-4;  1  Chroń,  iii,  15 ;  Jer. 
xxii,  10, 12).  See  Prideaux,  Cannectwn,  an.  610 ;  Ewald, 
Gesch,  Isr,  iii,  719 ;  RosenmUller,  SchoU  in  Jer,  xxii,  11. 

See  JUDAH,  KIKODOM  OF. 

Jeho^Ush  (Heb.  Yehod»h\  19K''!n%  Jehotah-ffipen ; 
in  most  of  the  passages  in  2  Kings  only ;  morę  usually  in 
the  contracted  form  YoStk',  ÓKi*^,  *'  Joash,"  SepU  'lutac, 
Josephus  l(^a(roc)«  the  name  of  two  kings.    See  aiso 

JOASH. 

1.  The  son  of  king  Ahaziah  by  Libnah  of  Beersheba, 
was  bom  B.C.  884 ;  madę  king  at  the  age  of  8even  years, 
and  reigned  eighth  over  the  separated  kingdom  of  Ju- 
dah  forty  years,  RC.  877-887.  Jehoash,  when  an  in- 
fant, was  sccrctly  8aved  by  his  aunt  Jehoshebath,  who 
was  married  to  the  high-priest  Jehoiada,  from  the  gen- 
oral  maasacre  of  the  family  by  Athaliah,  who  had  osurp- 
ed  the  throne.  See  Jehoiada.  Jehoram  having  him- 
self killed  all  his  own  brethren,  and  all  his  sona,  except 
Ahaziah,  having  been  killed  by  the  irruption  of  the 
Philistines  and  Arabians,  and  all  Ahaziah*s  remoter  re- 
lations  having  been  slain  by  Jehu,  and  now  all  his  sons 
being  puŁ  to  death  by  Athaliah  (2  Chroń,  xxi,  4, 17 ; 
xxii,  1, 8, 9, 10),  the  house  of  David  was  reduced  to  the 
lowest  ebb,  and  Jehoash  appears  to  have  been  the  only 
8arviving  descendant  of  Solomon.  By  the  high-priest 
and  his  wife  the  child  was  privately  brought  up  in  the 
chambers  oonnected  wtth  the  Tempie  till  he  was  in  his 
eightli  year,  when  Jehoiada  deemed  that  the  state  of 
affairs  required  him  to  produce  the  youthfol  hdr  of  the 
throne  to  the  people,  and  claim  for  him  the  crown  which 
his  grandmother  had  so  unrighteously  usurped.  Find- 
ing  the  influential  penons  wbom  he  consulted  favorable 
to  the  design,  everything  was  secretly  bat  admirably 
arranged  for  producing  Jehoash,  and  investing  him  with 
the  regalia,  in  such  a  manner  thai  Athaliah  oould  have 
no  suspicion  of  the  event  till  it  actually  occurred.  On 
the  day  appointed,  the  sole  sarviving  scion  of  David's 
illustrious  house  appeared  in  the  place  of  the  kings,  by 
a  particular  pillar  in  the  Tempie  oourt,  and  was  crowned 
and  anointed  with  the  usual  ceremonies.  The  high* 
wrought  enthusiasm  of  the  spectators  then  found  vent 
in  clapping  of  hands  and  exulting  shouts  of  "  Long  live 
the  king !"  The  joyful  uproar  was  heard  even  in  the 
palące,  and  brought  Athaliah  to  the  Tempie,  finom  which, 
at  a  word  from  Jehoiada,  she  was  led  to  ber  death.  See 
Athaliah. 

Jehoash  behaved  well  during  his  rainority,  and  so 
long  after  as  he  remained  under  the  influence  of  the 
high-priest.  £xcepting  that  the  high-places  were  still 
resorted  to  for  inoense  and  sacrifioe,  pure  religion  was 
restored,  large  contributions  were  madę  for  the  repair 
of  the  Tempie,  which  was  accordingly  restored,  and  the 
countr}'  seems  to  have  been  frec  from  foreign  invaBion 
and  domestic  disturbanoe.  But  when  this  venerable 
adYiser  died  the  king  seems  to  have  felt  himself  reliev- 
ed  from  a  yoke,  and,  to  manifest  his  freedom,  began  to 


take  the  oontrary  coorse  to  that  which  he  had  foIloved 
while  under  pupilage.  Gradoally  the  persona  who  hal 
poisened  influence  formerly,  when  the  houae  of  Dańd 
was  contaminated  by  ita  allianoe  with  the  house  of 
Ahab^  insinuated  them8elves  into  his  ooonclls,  and  en 
long  the  worship  of  Jehorah  and  the  obienranccs  of  tbe 
law  were  neglected,  and  the  land  was  defiled  with  idol- 
atriesandidolatroususages.  The  propheto  then  aUeicd 
their  wamings,  but  were  not  heard ;  and  the  infatuated 
king  had  tho  atrocious  ingratitode  to  put  to  death 
Zechariah,  the  son  and  suooessor  of  his  beoefactor  Je- 
hoiada. For  these  deeds  Jehoash  was  madę  an  example 
of  the  divine  judgments.  He  saw  his  realm  dersstated 
by  the  Syrians  under  Hazad;  his  armiea  weie  cut  in 
pieces  by  an  enemy  of  inferior  numben;  and  he  was 
even  besięged  in  Jerusalem,  and  only  preserred  his  rap- 
ital  and  crown  by  giving  up  the  tieasores  of  the  Tem- 
pie. Besidea  this,  a  painful  malady  embitteied  all  his 
latter  days,  and  at  length  he  became  ao  odious  that  his 
own  8ervants  oonspired  against  him,  and  sŁew  him  on 
his  bed.  They  are  said  to  have  done  this  to  avenge 
the  blood  of  Zechariah,  who  at  his  death  had  ciicd, 
"The  Lord  look  upon  it  and  reqaire  it;**  and  it  is  hencc 
probable  that  public  opinion  ascribed  all  the  calamitiet 
of  his  life  and  reign  to  that  infamous  deed.  See  ZF£ii- 
ARIAH.  Jehoash  was  buried  in  the  city  of  David.  bot 
a  place  in  the  sepulchre  of  the  kings  waa  denied  io  his 
remains  (2  Kings  xi;  xii;  2  Chion.  xxiv).  He  is  one 
of  the  three  kii^^  (Ahaziah,  Jehoash,  Amaziah)  omit- 
ted by  Matthew  in  the  genealogy  of  Christ  (Matt  i  8). 

With  regaid  to  the  dilferent  acoounta  of  the  Syńsa 
inva8ion  given  in  2  Kings  and  in  2  Chroa.,  which  btve 
led  some  (as  Thenius  and  many  other  commentaton) 
to  imagine  two  distinct  Syiian  iuYaaions,  and  othen  to 
see  a  direct  contradiction,  or  at  least  a  stiange  incom- 
pleteness  in  the  iiamtiveB,  as  Winer,  the  difficult}*  ex- 
Lstssolelyinthemindsofthecritics.  See  Syria.  The 
narrative  given  above,  which  is  alao  that  of  Keil  and  E. 
Bertheau  (^Exf9»  handiK  z,  ^4 .  T.)  as  well  as  of  Josepha 
{AnL  ix,  8, 4),  perfectly  suits  the  two  aooounts,  which 
are  merely  different  abridgmento  of  tbe  one  fuller  so- 
count  contained  in  the  original  chronides  of  the  kij^ 
dom«— Kitto ;  Smith.    See  Judah,  Kinodom  of. 

2.  The  son  and  suocessor  of  Jehoahaz,  king  of  Isnd; 
reigned  thirteenth  over  the  separate  kingdom  siitecn 
(nominał)  years,  B.C.  888-828,  and  for  aixNit  one  tc« 
contemporaneously  with  his  namesakc  of  Jodah  {i  Kings 
xiv,  1 ;  comp.  with  xii,  1,  xiii,  10).  When  he  sueceed- 
ed  to  the  crown  the  kingdom  was  in  a  deplorable  stste 
from  the  devastations  of  Haaael  and  Benhadad,  kinp 
of  Syria,  of  whoee  power  at  this  time  we  had  sko  eri- 
dence  in  the  preceding  articlc.  Jehoash,  it  is  tnie,  foł- 
lowed  the  example  of  his  predeceasors  in  the  polic}*  of 
keeping  up  the  worship  of  the  golden  calves;  but^sput 
from  this,  he  bears  a  fair  character,  and  had  inten-ak, 
at  least,  of  sincere  piety  and  tnie  derotion  to  tbe  (lod 
of  his  fatherB  (comp.  Josephus,  A  nL  ix,  8,  G).  Indeed, 
custom  and  long  habit  had  so  established  the  views  (^ 
political  expediency  on  which  the  schismatical  estab- 
lishments  at  Dan  and  Bethel  were  founded,  that  st 
length  the  reprehension  which  regulariy  lecurs  in  the 
record  of  each  king's  reign  seems  rather  to  apply  to  it 
as  a  mark  of  the  continuanoe  of  a  public  crime  than  ss 
indicative  of  the  character  or  disposition  ofthe  reiipiing 
pńnce,  which  is  to  be  sought  in  the  morę  detailed  ac- 
counts  of  his  own  conduct.  These  accounts  are  fsTi>n- 
ble  with  respect  to  Jehoash.  He  held  the  prophet  Kii- 
sha  in  high  honor,  looking  up  to  him  as  a  father.  When 
he  heard  of  his  last  illness  he  repaired  to  the  bedśde  of 
the  dying  prophet,  wept  over  his  face,  and  addreased 
him  aa  ^  the  chariot  of  Israel  and  the  horseroen  tbere- 
of.**  The  prophet  promised  him  deltvennce  fitan  tbe 
S}'rian  yoke  in  Aphek,  the  soene  of  Ahab'8  great  riccmr 
over  a  former  Benhadad  (1  Kings  xx,  26-80)l  He  then 
bid  him  amite  upon  the  groond,  and  the  king  smote 
thrice  and  then  suyed.  The  prophet  reboked  him  fo 
staying,  and  limited  to  three  his  victoriea  over  9patk 


JEHOHANAN 


799 


JEHOIACHIN 


These  promises  were  oooomplished  aiter  the  prophet^s 
death.  God  took  compasńon  upon  the  e.xtreine  misery 
of  Israel,  and,  iu  remembnuice  of  his  covenant  with 
Abraham,  laaac,  and  Jacob,  interposed  to  8ave  them 
from  entire  destruction.  In  three  ńgnal  and  successiYe 
Yictoriefl  Jehoash  oyercame  the  Syrians,  and  retook 
from  them  the  to^ipoa  which  Hazael  had  rent  from  Is> 
racL  Theae  adrantages  rendered  the  kingdom  of  Israel 
morę  potent  than  that  of  Judah.  Jehoash,  howerer, 
Bcmght  no  quarrel  with  that  kingdom,  but  he  neverthe- 
leas  became  inyolyed  in  a  war  with  Amańah,  king  of 
Judah.  The  groonds  of  this  war  are  given  fully  in  2 
Chrom.  xxv.  Seo  Amaziah.  The  hiring  of  100,000 
men  of  Israel  for  100  talents  of  silyer  by  Amaziah  ia  the 
only  mstance  on  record  of  soch  a  transaction,  and  im- 
plies  that  at  that  time  the  kingdom  of  Israel  was  free 
lirom  all  fear  of  the  Syrians.  These  mercenary  soldiers, 
haying  been  dismiaeed  by  Amaziah,  at  the  instigation 
of  a  prophet,  vrithont  being  allowed  to  take  part  in  the 
Edomitish  expedition,  retumed  in  great  wrath  to  their 
c»wn  country,  and  sacked  and  plundered  the  cities  of 
Judah  in  reyenge  for  the  slight  put  upon  them,  and  alao 
to  indemnify  themselyes  for  the  loes  of  their  share  of 
the  pinnder.  It  was  to  ayenge  this  injury  that  Amazi- 
ah, on  his  return  from  his  triumph  over  the  Edomites, 
dedared  war  agrinst  Jehoash,  in  spite  of  the  waming 
of  the  prophet;  but  Jehoash,  when  he  received  the  de- 
fiance  from  Amaziah,  answered  with  beooming  spirit  in 
a  parable  (q.  y.),  which  by  its  images  calls  to  mind  that 
of  Jotham;  the  oool  diadain  of  the  answer  must  haye 
been,  and  in  fact  was,  exceedingly  galling  to  Amaziah 
"  The  thiatle  that  was  in  Lebanon  sent  to  the  cedar  that 
was  in  Lebanon,  sajdng,  Giye  thy  danghter  to  my  son 
to  wife;  and  there  came  by  a  wild  beast  that  was  in 
Lebanon  and  trod  down  the  thistle.*'  This  was  admiia- 
Ue;  nor  was  the  application  less  so:  ^Thou  hast  in- 
deed  amitten  £dom,  and  thine  heart  hath  lifted  thee  up : 
glory  of  this,  and  tany  at  home;  for  why  shouldest 
Łhou  meddle  to  thy  hurt,  that  thou  shouldest  fali,  even 
thou,  and  Judah  with  thee."  In  the  war,  or,  rather,  ao- 
Łion  which  followed,  Jehoash  was  yictoriouSi  Having 
defeated  Amaziah  at  Beth-shemesh,  in  Judah,  he  ad' 
▼anoed  to  Jerusalem,  broke  down  the  wali  to  the  extent 
of  400  cubits,  and  canried  away  the  treasures  both  of  the 
Tempie  and  the  palące,  together  with  hostages  for  the 
foture  good  behayior  of  the  crestiallen  Amaziah.  Je- 
hoash himself  did  not  long  suryiye  this  yictory ;  he  died 
in  peaoe,  and  was  bnried  in  Samaria  (2  Kings  xiy,  1-17). 
— ^Kitto;  Smith.    See  Israel,  kingdom  of. 

Jelio''hanan  (Heb.  Tehochanan^y  ISnin^,  Jtkotahr 
0xtnted,  q.  d.  Of  o^dłpoc),  the  name  of  sereral  men.  See 
also  JoiiANAN ;  John,  etc. 

1.  (SepL  lta;vav.)  A  Korhite,  and  head  of  the  nixth 
diriaion  of  Łeyitical  Tempie  porters  (1  Chroń.  xxyi,  8). 
B.ai014. 

2.  (Sept 'liifai/av.)  Jehoshaphat^s  second  "  captain,' 
in  command  of  280,000  (?)  men  (2  Chroń.  xyii,  16) ; 
probably  the  same  whose  son  Ishmael  supported  Jehoi- 
ada  in  his  restoration  of  prince  Jehoash  (2  Chrou.  xxiii, 
1>     B.C.  cir.  910. 

3.  (SepL  'Ifa>avav,  Auth.  Yers.  "  Johanan.")  The  far 
ther  of  Azariah,  which  latter  was  one  of  the  Ephraimite 
chiefs  who  insisted  upon  the  return  of  the  captiyes  from 
the  rival  kiugdom  (2  Chroń.  xxyiii,  12).   RC.  antę  738. 

4.  (Sept.  'I(i>avav,  A  Yers.  "Johanan.")  A  priest, 
the  "son"  of  Eliashib,  into  whose  chamber  Ezra  retired 
to  bewail  the  profligacy  of  his  countrymen  in  marrying 
Gentile  wiyes  (Ezra  x,  6) ;  doubtleas  the  same  elsewhere 
called  JoHANAN  in  the  original  (Neh.  xii,  22,  23),  and 
perhaps  identical  with  No.  7  below. 

3.  (Sept.  'lu}avav.)  One  of  the  *'  sons**  of  Bebai,  who 
divorced  his  Gentile  wife  after  the  Babylonian  exile 
(Ezra  X,  28).     RC.  459. 

6.  (Sept.  Titf ya^av  y.  r.  Tao^ay,  Auth. Yers.  "Joha- 
nan.") Son  of  Tobiah,  the  Samaritan  enemy  of  the 
Jews,  and  son-in-hiw  of  MeshuUam  (Neh.  vi,  18).  B.C. 
446. 


7.  (Sept.  leavav.)  One  of  the  priests  who  celebra- 
ted  with  musie  the  reparation  of  the  waUs  of  Jerusalem 
(Neh.  xii,  42).  B.C.  446.  He  was  perhaps  the  samo 
with  No.  4  or  No.  8. 

8w  (Sept.  'I<iiavav.)  A  leading  priest,  the  ^  9oxC  of 
Amariah,  and  oontemporary  with  Joiakim  (Neh.  xii,  13). 
RC.  cir.  406.  He  may  have  been  identical  with  the 
preceding. 

Jehoi^achln  (Heb.  Yeh6yakm',  ')''ą;'in%  Jehovah' 
appointed;  Sept.  1ioaxifJi  in  2  Kings  xxiv,  6,  8, 12, 15; 
xxy,  27 ;  *l€Xoviac  in  2  Chroń,  xxxvi,  8, 9 ;  'luniKiifjk  in 
Jer.  lii,  31;  Josephus  'IutdxiftoCf  i4n/.  x,  6,  3;  7, 1;  N. 
Test  Ic^oyiof, "  Jechonias,"  MatL  i,  11, 12;  contracted 
once  T'3;i%  Yoydlan',  Ezek.  1 2,  Sept.  T(iia«6i>,  Auth. 
Vers,  "  Jehoiachin"),  also  in  the  contracted  forms  Jkc- 
ONiAH  (njpaj,  Yekcngah^  Sept.  'l(xovioc  in  Jer.  xxvii, 
20;  xxyiii,  4;  xxix,  2;  1  Chroń,  iii,  16, 17;  but  omits 
in  Esth.  ii,  6 ;  likewise  paragogic  !)M^33%  Yehonya'hUy 
Jer.  xxiy.  1,  Sept  l.ixoviac\  and  Coniah  (Konyah\ 
only  paragogic  ^H^pS,  Konya'hu^  Jer.  xxii,  24,  28; 
xxxvii,  1,  Sept  *ltxoviac),  son  of  Jehoiakim,  king  of 
Judah,  by  Nehushta,  daughter  of  Elnathan  of  Jerusa- 
lem ;  he  succeeded  his  father  as  the  nineteenth  monarch 
of  that  separate  kingdom,  but  only  for  three  months  and 
ten  days,  RC.  598.  He  was  then  eighteen  years  of  age 
aocording  to  2  Kings  xxiv,  8,  but  only  eight  according 
to  2  Chroń,  xxxvi,  9.  Many  attempts  have  been  madę 
to  reconcile  these  dates  (see  J.  D.  Muller,  De  reb.  duar, 
tribuum  reffiń  Jud.  adtersis,  lipsite,  1745;  Oeder,  Freie 
Unterntch,  Uber  emige  A  Iłtest.-Bucher,  p.  214 ;  Offerhaus, 
Spicileff,  p.  193),  the  most  usual  solution  being  that  he 
had  reigned  ten  years  in  conjunction  with  his  father,  so 
that  he  was  eight  when  he  began  his  joint  reign,  but 
eighteen  when  he  began  to  reign  alone.  There  are, 
howeyer,  difSculties  in  this  view  which,  perhaps,  leave 
it  the  safest  course  to  condude  that  "  eight"  in  2  Chroń. 
xxxvi,  9,  is  a  comiption  of  the  text,  such  as  might 
easily  occur  from  the  relation  of  the  numbcrs  eight  and 
eighteen.  (All  the  yersions  read  eighteen  in  Kings, 
and  so  the  Yulg.  and  many  MSS.  of  the  Sept  in  Chron.,* 
as  well  as  at  1  £sd.  i,  43.  Among  recent  commentators, 
Keil,  Thenius,  and  Hitzig  favor  the  readiug  eighteen, 
while  Bertheau  prefers  eight  The  language  in  Jer. 
xxii,  24-30  is  not  dccLsive,  for  the  epithets  there  applied 
to  Jechoniah  do  not  neccssarily  imply  adult  age,  al- 
though  tbey  morę  naturally  agree  with  it  The  same 
remark  applies  to  the  allusion  in  Ezek.  xix,  5-9.  The 
decided  reprobation,  howeyer,  in  2  Kings  xxiv,  9,  and  in 
2  Chroń,  xxxvi,  9,  would  hardly  be  used  of  a  merę  child. 
The  mention  of  his  mother  in  2  Kings  xxiv,  12  does  not 
imply  his  minority,  for  the  ąueen-dowager  was  a  very 
important  member  of  the  royal  family.  The  numb<^ 
eight,  indeed,  would  bring  Jchoiachin'8  birth  in  the  year 
of  the  beginning  of  the  captiyity  by  Ncbuchadnezzar's 
invaaion,  and  thus  exactly  agree  with  the  language  in 
Matt  i,  11 ;  but  the  cxpre88ion  **and  his  brcthren"  add- 
ed  there,  as  well  as  the  language  of  the  foUowing  yerse, 
ogrees  better  with  a  less  precise  correspondcuce,  as  like- 
wise the  ąualifying  **about"  indicates.  The  argument 
drawn  from  his  father^s  age  at  death,  thirty-six  [2  Kinga 
xxiii,  36],  is  favorable  to  Jehoiachin^s  maturity  at  the 
time,  for  most  of  these  kings  became  fathers  vcry  early, 
Josiah,  e.  g.,  at  filteen  [2  Kings  xxii,  1,  comp.  with  xxiii, 
86].)     He  was,  therefore,  bom  in  RC.  616. 

Jehoiachin  foUowed  the  evil  courses  which  had  al- 
ready  brought  so  much  disaster  upon  the  royal  house 
of  Dayid,  and  upon  the  peoplc  undcr  its  sway.  He 
seems  to  have  yery  speedily  indicated  a  political  bias 
adyerse  to  the  interests  of  the  Chaldsan  empire,  for  in 
three  months  after  his  accession  we  find  the  generała  of 
Nebuchadnezzar  again  laying  siege  to  Jerusalem,  ac- 
cording to  the  predictions  of  Jeremiah  (xxii,  24-30). 
Jehoiachin  had  oome  to  the  throne  at  a  time  when 
Egypt  was  still  prostrate  in  conseąuence  of  the  yic- 
tory at  Carchemish,  and  when  the  Jews  had  been  for 
I  three  or  four  years  harassed  and  distressed  by  the  ih- 


JEHOIACHIN 


800 


JEHOIADA 


roads  of  the  anned  bands  of  Chaldjeans,  Ammonites, 
and  Moabites,  sent  against  them  by  Nebuchadnezzar  iii 
conseąuence  or  Jehoiakim'8  rebelUoii.  See  Jehoiakim. 
Jerusalem  at  thU  time,  therefore,  was  quite  defenceleas, 
and  unable  to  offer  any  resbtance  to  the  regular  army 
wbich  Ncbucbadnczzar  sent  to  beaiege  it  in  tbe  eigbth 
year  of  bis  reign,  and  which  be  seema  to  bave  joined  in 
person  after  tbe  siege  was  commenccd  (2  Kings  xxiv, 
10, 1 1).  In  a  yery  sbort  time,  apparently,  and  witboat 
any  losscs  from  faminc  or  figbting  wbich  would  indicate 
a  serious  resistance,  Jcboiachin  surrendered  at  discre- 
tion ;  and  be,  and  tbe  queen-motber,  and  all  his  senrants, 
captains,  and  offlcers,  came  out  and  gave  tbemselYes  up 
to  Nebuchadnezzar,  wbo  treated  them,  with  the  harem 
and  the  eunuchs,  as  prisoners  of  war  (Jer.  xxix,  2 ;  Ezek. 
xvii,  12 ;  xix.  9).  He  was  sent  away  as  a  captive  to 
Babylon,  with  his  mother,  his  generals,  and  his  troops, 
together  with  tbe  artificers  and  other  inhabitants  of  Je- 
rusalem, to  tbe  number  of  ten  thousand.  (This  number, 
found  in  2  Kings  xxiv,  14,  is  probably  a  rouud  number, 
madę  up  of  the  7000  soldiers  of  ver.  16,  and  the  3023 
nobles  of  Jer.  lii,  28,  exclusive  of  the  1000  artificers  men- 
tioned  in  2  Kings  xxiv,  16;  see  Brown*s  Ordo  Sadonim, 
p.  186.)  Among  thcse  was  the  prophet  EzekieL  Few 
were  left  but  the  poorer  sort  of  people  and  the  unskiUed 
laborers ;  few,  indeed,  wbose  presence  could  be  useful  in 
Babylon  or  dangeroiis  in  Palestine.  See  Captiytty. 
Neither  did  the  Babylonian  king  neglect  to  remove  the 
treasures  wbich  could  yet  be  gleancd  from  the  palące  or 
the  Tempie,  and  be  now  madę  spoil  of  thoee  sacred  ve8- 
sels  of  gold  wbich  had  been  spared  on  former  occasiona. 
These  were  cut  up  for  present  use  of  the  metal  or 
for  morę  convcnient  transport,  whereas  those  formerly 
taken  had  been  sent  to  Babylon  en  tire,  and  there  laid 
up  as  trophies  of  victory.  If  the  Chaldiean  king  had 
then  put  an  end  to  the  show  of  a  monarchy  and  annex- 
ed  the  country  to  his  own  dominions,  tbe  event  would 
probably  bave  been  less  unhappy  for  the  nation ;  but, 
still  adhering  to  his  former  poUcy,  be  placed  on  the 
throne  Mattaniab,  tbe  only  surviving  son  of  Josiab, 
whose  name  be  cbange<l  to  Zedekiah  (2  Kings  xxiv,  11- 
16;  2  Chroń,  xxxvi,  9, 10;  Jer.  xxxvii,  1).  See  Neb- 
uchadnezzar. 

Jehoiachin  remained  a  captive  at  Babylon— actually  in 
prison  (^<^3  ^*^^))  <^^  wcaring  prison-garments  (Jer. 
lii,  31, 33)— for  thirty-six  years,  viz.  during  the  lifetime 
óf  Nebuchadnezzar;  but,  when  that  prince  died,  his  son, 
£vU-merodacb,  not  unly  released  hiro,  but  gave  him  an 
honorable  seat  at  his  own  table,  with  precedence  over 
oll  the  other  dethroncd  kings  wbo  were  kept  at  Bab- 
ylon, and  an  allowance  for  the  support  of  bis  rank  (2 
Kings  xxv,  27-30 ;  Jer.  lii,  31-34).  RC.  661.  To  what 
he  owed  this  favor  we  are  not  told,  but  tbe  Jewish  com- 
mcntatora  allege  that  Evil-merodach  had  himself  been 
put  into  prison  by  his  father  during  the  last  years  of  his 
reign,  and  had  there  contracted  an  intimato  friendsbip 
with  tbe  deposed  king  of  Judah.  We  leam  from  Jer. 
xxviii,  4  that,  four  years  afler  Jehoiachin  had  gone  to 
Babylon,  there  was  a  great  expectation  at  Jerusalem  of 
his  return,  but  it  does  not  appear  whether  Jehoiachin 
himself  shared  this  bu})e  at  Babylon.  The  tenor  of  Jer- 
emiah'8  letter  to  tbe  elders  of  tbe  captivity  (chap.  xxix) 
would,  however,  indicate  that  there  was  a  party  among 
the  captiviŁy,  encouraged  by  false  pro;)hets,  wbo  were  at 
this  time  looking  for^<^ard  to  Nebuchadnezzar^s  over- 
throw  and  Jehoiachiifs  return;  and  perhaps  the  fearful 
death  of  Ab  ab,  tbe  son  of  Kolaiah  (verse  22),  and  the 
close  coniincment  of  Jehoiachin  through  Nebucbadnez- 
zar'8  reign,  may  have  been  the  result  of  some  disposi- 
tion  to  conspire  against  Nebuchadnezzar  on  tbe  part  of  i 
A  portion  of  the  captivity.  But  neither  Daniel  or  Eze-  j 
kici,  wbo  were  Jchoiachiu's  fellow-captives,  make  any  ' 
furtber  allusion  to  him,  except  that  Ezekiel  dates  his 
ptophecies  by  the  year  **of  king  Jehoiachin*s  captivity" 
(1,2 ;  viii,  1 ;  xxiv,  1,  etc) ;  the  latest  datę  being  "the 
twenty-seventh  year"  (xxix,  17 ;  xl,  1).  We  also  leam 
from  Estb.  ii,  G  that  Kish,  tbe  ancestor  of  Mordecai,  was 


Jehoiachin'8  fellow-captive.  But  the  apociTpbalboob 
are  morę  communicative.  Thus  the  author  of  the  book 
of  Baruch  (i,  3)  introduoea  '*  Jechoniaa,  the  son  of  Jehoi- 
akim,  king  of  Judah,"  into  hia  namtive,  and  reptcsentt 
Bamch  as  reading  his  prophecy  in  his  eara  and  in  the 
ears  of  the  king*s  sons,  and  the  noblea,  and  elders,  and 
people^  at  Babylon.  At  the  hearing  of  Baruch^a  wordN 
it  is  added,  they  wepfc,  and  fasted,  and  prayed,  and  sent 
a  collection  of  siWer  to  Jerusalem,  to  Joiakim,  the  eon 
of  Hilkiah,  the  son  of  Shallum  the  high-prieet,  ińth 
which  to  purchase  burat-offerings,  and  sacrificea,  and  in- 
cense,  bidding  them  pray  for  the  proq>erity  of  Neba- 
chadnezzar,  and  Belshazzar  his  aon.  The  hiatoiy  t'f 
Susanna  and  the  elders  alao  apparently  makes  Jehoi- 
achin an  important  perBonage,  for,  aooording  to  tbe  an- 
thor,  the  husband  of  Susanna  was  Joiakim,  a  man  of 
great  wealth,  and  tbe  chief  person  among  tbe  captires, 
to  whose  house  all  the  people  resorted  for  judgnieDt-« 
description  which  suits  Jehoiachin.  Africaiiua  {Ep,  ad 
Oriff, ;  Routh,  ReL  £lac  ii,  113)  eipressly  calls  Susanna^s 
husband  king,  and  says  that  the  king  of  Babylon  bad 
madę  him  hia  royal  companion  (<rvv3fK>voc).  He  '» 
also  mentioned  in  1  Esd.  v,  5,  but  the  tcxt  aeems  to  be 
coimpt.  That  Zedekiah,  who  in  1  Chroń,  iii,  16  is  call- 
ed  "  his  son,"  is  the  same  as  Zedekiah  hia  unde  (call- 
ed  "  hiB  brotber"  in  2  Chroo.  xxxvi,  10),  who  was  his 
successor  on  the  thione,  seems  certain.  But  it  is  pcob- 
able  that  "Assir"  (nOM  =  captire),  who  is  reckoned 
amongst  the  family  of  Jeooniah  in  1  Chroń,  iii,  17,  mar 
really  hav6  been  only  an  appellative  of  Jeooniah  him- 
self (see  Bertheau  on  1  Chnm.  iii,  16).  See  Aasot.  In 
the  genealogy  of  Christ  (Matt  i,  11)  be  is  named  in  the 
received  text  as  the  **  son  of  Josias"  hia  grandfather,  tbe 
name  of  Jehoiakim  having  probably  been  omitted  by  er- 
roneous  transcription.  See  Gekealogy.  In  the  dark 
portiait  of  his  early  character  by  the  prophet  (Jer.  rsii, 
30),  the  expression  **  Write  ye  this  man  childkss"  refcn 
to  his  having  no  itteoeasor  on  the  throne,  for  he  had 
chUdren  (see  MetiL  Quar.  Retfiew,  OcL,  1862,  p.  602-4). 
See  Salathikl.  Joaephus,  howercr  {A  ta.  x,  7,  !>  give8 
him  a  fair  character  (see  Keil,  Commentary  an  Kiągtt^ 
602).  The  oompiler  of  1  Esd.  gives  the  name  of  Jeeho- 
nias  to  Jehoahaz,  the  son  of  Joaiah,  who  reigned  thne 
montbs  after  Joaiah^s  death,  and  was  depoeed  and  car- 
ried  to  Eg^i>t  by  Pharaoh-necho  (1  Ead.  1,34:  2  Kiogi 
xxiii,  80).  He  is  followed  in  this  blunder  by  Epiphani- 
us  (i,  21),  who  says  *<  Joaiah  begat  Jechoniah,  wbo  is 
also  called  Shallum.  This  Jechoniah  begat  Jechoniah 
who  is  called  Zedekiah  and  Joakim."  It  bas  its  ongio, 
doubtless,  in  the  oonfuńon  of  the  names  when  wiitten  in 
Greek  by  writers  ignorant  of  Uebrew. — Kitto ;  Smith. 
See  Judah,  kinodom  of. 

Jehoi^ada  (Hebrew  Yehdyada%  T^r^irr^,  Jekrnsik- 
knawn  ;  Sept.  'Iwiaia,  'Icaca^i,  'luicu),  the  name  of  t«o 
or  morę  priests. 

1.  The  father  of  Bcnaiah,  which  latter  was  one  ef 
David's  chief  warriors  (2  Sam.  viii,  18;  xx,  23;  xxiii» 
•20,  22 ;  1  Kings  i,  8, 26,  32,  86, 88,  44 ;  ii,  25. 29, 34, 85. 
46 ;  iv,  4 ;  1  Chroń,  xi,  22, 24 ;  xviii,  17 ;  xxvii,  6).  B.C 
antę  1046.  He  is  probably  the  same  mentioned  as  is- 
sisting  David  at  Hebron  as  leader  (Ti^S)  of  8700  anned 
Aaronites  (1  Chroń,  xii,  27) ;  Josephua,  who  calls  him 
*lu^^a^lo^,  says  4700  Le\ites  (.4  nł.  vu,  2, 3).  In  1  Chroo. 
xxvii,  34,  his  name  aeems  to  have  been  cironeoosiy 
transposed  with  that  of  his  son. 

2.  The  high-priest  at  the  time  of  Athaliah'8  usorpa- 
tion  of  the  throne  of  Judah  (RC  888-877),  and  during 
the  most  of  the  reign  of  Jehoash.  It  does  not  appear 
when  he  first  became  high-priest,  bnt  it  may  have  been 
as  early  as  the  latter  part  of  Jeboeh^hat*s  reign.  He 
married  Jehosheba  or  Jehoshabeath,  daughter  of  king 
Jehoram,  and  sister  of  king  Ahaziah  (2  Chroń,  xxii,  11) ; 
and  when  Athaliah  siew  all  the  royal  family  of  Jadah 
after  Ahaziah  had  been  put  to  death  by  Jebu,  he  and  his 
wife  stole  Jehoash  from  amongst  the  king*s  sons  and  bid 
him  for  8ix  years  in  the  Tempie,  and  eyentually  replioed 


JEHOIADA 


801 


JEHOIAKm 


him  on  the  throne  of  his  ancestora.  See  Athałiah. 
In  effecdng  thia  happy  revolution,  by  which  both  the 
throne  of  Dayid  and  the  worship  of  the  trae  God  acoord- 
ing  to  the  law  of  Moees  were  rescued  from  imminent 
danger  of  destmction,  Jehoiada  displayed  great  ability 
and  prudence.  Waiting  patiently  till  the  tyranny  of 
Athałiah — and,  we  may  presume,  her  foreign  practices 
and  preferences— had  produced  d^śgiiat  in  the  land,  he  at 
length,  in  the  7th  year  of  her  reign,  entered  into  secret 
alliance  with  all  the  chief  partisans  of  the  hotue  of  Da- 
vid  and  of  the  tnie  religion.  He  also  collected  at  Jem- 
salem  the  Lerites  from  the  different  cities  of  Judah  and 
larael,  probably  onder  oorer  of  providing  for  the  Tem- 
pie senrices,  and  then  concentrated  a  large  and  conceal- 
ed  foice  in  the  Tempie  by  the  expedient  of  not  dismiss- 
ing  the  old  conrses  of  piieats  and  Lerites  when  their 
sacceaaors  came  to  relieve  them  on  the  Sabbath.  By 
meana  of  the  oonaecrated  shields  and  spears  which  Da- 
T-id  had  taken  in  his  wara,  and  which  were  pTeserved  in 
the  treasory  of  the  Tempie  (comp.  1  Chroń,  xviii,  7-11 ; 
xxvi,  20-28 ;  1  Kings  xiv,  26, 27),  he  supplied  the  cap- 
tains  of  hundreds  with  arms  for  their  men.  Having 
then  dlvided  the  priests  and  Levites  into  three  bands, 
which  were  posted  at  the  prindpal  eutrances,  and  filled 
the  courts  with  people  favorabIe  to  the  cause,  he  pro- 
duced the  young  king  beforc  the  whole  assembly,  and 
crowned  and  anointed  him,  and  presented  to  him  a 
copy  of  the  Law  aocording  to  Deut.  xvii,  18-20.  See 
HiLKiAH.  The  excitement  of  the  moment  did  not 
make  him  forget  the  sanctity  of  God's  house.  Nonę 
but  the  priests  and  ministering  Levites  were  permitted 
by  him  to  enter  the  Tempie,  and  he  gave  strict  orders 
that  Athałiah  should  be  cairied  without  its  precincts 
before  she  was  puŁ  to  death.  In  the  same  spirit  he  in- 
augurated  the  new  reign  by  a  solemn  covenant  between 
himself  as  high-priest,  and  the  people  and  the  king,  to 
renouDce  the  Baal-worship  which  had  been  introduoed 
by  the  honae  of  Ahab,  and  to  senre  Jehovah«  This  was 
followed  up  by  the  immediate  destruction  of  the  altar 
and  tempie  of  Baal,  and  the  death  of  Mattan,  his  priest. 
He  then  gave  oideń  for  the  due  celebration  of  the  Tem- 
pie senrice,  and,  at  the  same  time,  for  the  perfect  re- 
establishment  of  the  monarchy,  all  which  seems  to  have 
been  eifected  with  great  yigor  and  success,  and  without 
any  cnielty  or  yiolence.  The  yoong  king  himself,  un- 
der  tbis  wise  and  virtaous  oounsellor,  ruled  his  kingdom 
weU  and  prosperously,  and  was  forward  in  works  of  piety 
dariDg  the  lifetime  of  Jehoiada.  The  reparation  of  the 
Tempie,  in  the  23d  year  of  his  leign,  of  which  a  fuli  and 
interesting  accoont  ia  given  in  2  KJngs  xii  and  2  Chroń. 
xxiv,  was  one  of  the  most  important  works  at  this  pe- 
riod. At  length,  however,  Jehoiada  died,  and  for  his 
signal  seryices  to  his  God,  his  king,  and  his  country, 
which  haye  eamcd  him  a  place  amongst  the  very  fore- 
most  well-doers  in  Israel,  he  had  the  uiiique  honor  of 
buiial  amongst  the  kings  of  Judah  in  the  city  of  David. 
— Smith.  His  decease,  though  at  an  advanced  age,  yet 
occorred  too  soon  for  the  welfare  of  the  nation  and  of 
Jehoash,  who  thereupon  immediately  fell  into  idolatry, 
and  was  even  guilty  of  the  most  cruel  ingratitude  to- 
wards  the  family  of  Jehoiada.  See  Jehoash,  1.  His 
age  at  his  death  is  stated  (2  Chroń,  xxiv,  15)  to  have 
been  180  years,  which  Hervey  (jGenealogy  ofour  Lord, 
p.  304)  proposes  to  change  to  103,  in  order  to  lessen  the 
presumed  disparity  between  Jehoiada's  age  and  that  of 
his  wife,  as  well  as  on  the  ground  that  a  man  of  90  could 
hardly  have  exhibited  such  eneigy  as  he  displayed  in 
diaplacing  Athałiah ;  but  the  change  is  wholly  arbitrary 
and  unnecessaiy.  Josephus,  in  his  hlstory  {AnL  ix,  7, 
1,  where  he  Gnedzes  the  name,  *l(ódaoc)j  foUows  the 
Bibie  account;  but  in  his  Ust  of  the  high-priests  {Ant. 
X,  8, 6),  the  corresponding  name  seems  to  be  ^  xioraMus 
(^AtŁiapafioCf  pethapa  by  corruption  for  '*  Joram").  In 
the  Jewish  chronicie  (Seder  Ohm),  however,  it  correct- 
1y  appcars  as  Jehoiadah,  and  with  a  datę  tolerably  an- 
aweńng  to  the  scriptural  reąuirements.  In  both  au- 
Ihorities,  many  of  the  adjoining  names  are  additional  to 

nr.— Eke 


those  mentioned  in  the  O.  T.  See  Hioh-priest.  It  is 
probably  this  Jehoiada  who  is  alluded  to  in  Jer.  xxix, 
26  as  a  pre-eminent  incumbent  of  the  office  (see  Rosen- 
mUller  and  Hitzig,  ad  loc.),  and  he  is  donbtless  the  same 
with  the  Bereghiah  (Bapaxiac)  of  Matt.  xxiii,  2& 
See  Zedekiah. 

3.  (Neh.  iii,  6).    See  Joiada. 

Jehofakim  (Heb.  TMyakm%  Q*^|?^in^,  Jeho- 
v€Łh-estaNisked ;  Sept  'liaaKifi,  oftener  'lutaKtifi,  Jose- 
phus 'Idiojcc/ioc ;  compare  JoiAKUf,  Jokim),  the  second 
son  of  Josiah  by  Zebudah,  daughter  of  Pedaiah  of  Ku- 
mah  (probably  the  Dumah  of  Josh.  xv,  52) ;  bom  RC. 
634,  and  eighteenth  king  of  the  separate  throne  of  Ju- 
dah for  a  period  of  eleyen  years,  B.C  609-598.  He  is 
mentioned  in  2  Kings  xxiii,  84,  86,  86 ;  xxiv,  1,  6,  6, 
19;  1  Chroń,  iii,  15, 16;  2  Chroń,  xxxvi,  4,  5,  8;  Jer.  i, 
8;  xxii,  18,  24;  xxiv,  1;  xxv,  1;  xxvi,  1,  21,  22,  28; 
xxvii,  1, 20 ;  xxviii,  4 ;  xxxv,  1 ;  xxxvi,  1, 9, 28, 29, 80, 
82;  xxxvii,  1 ;  xlv,  1 ;  xlvi, 2;  lii, 2;  Dan. i,  1,  2.  His 
original  name  was  Eliakim  (q.  v.),  but  the  equivalent 
name  of  Jehoiakim  was  given  him  by  the  Egyptian 
king  who  set  him  on  his  father^s  throne  (2  Kings  xxiii, 
84).  This  change  is  significant  of  his  dependence  and 
loss  of  liberty,  as  heathen  kings  were  accustomed  to 
give  new  names  to  those  who  entered  their  service 
(Gen.  xli,  45 ;  Ezra  v,  14 ;  Dan.  i,  7),  usuaUy  after  their 
gods.  In  this  case,  as  the  new  name  \b  Israełitish,  it  is 
probable  that  Pharaoh-necho  gave  it  at  the  reąuest  of 
Eliakim  himself,  whom  Hengstenberg  supposes  to  have 
been  influenced  by  a  desire  to  place  His  name  in  doser 
oonnection  with  the  promise  (2  Sam.  vii,  12),  where  not 
£/,but  Jehotah  is  the  promiser;  and  to  have  done  this 
out  of  opposition  to  the  sentence  of  the  prophets  re^ 
specting  the  impending  fali  of  the  house  of  David  {Chr%»^ 
toL  ii,  401,  Eng.  trans.).  There  exists  the  most  striking 
contrast  between  his  beautiful  name  and  his  miserable 
fate  (Jer.  xxii,  19).  (See  Eckhird,  Vom  JEselt-Beffrdb- 
ntM,  Lpz.  1716.)     See  Name. 

Jehoiakim's  younger  brother  Jehoahaz,  or  Shallum, 
as  he  is  called  Jer.  xxii,  11,  had  been  in  the  first  instanoe 
madę  king  by  the  people  of  the  land  on  the  death  of  his 
father  Josiah,  probably  with  the  intention  of  foUowing 
up  Joeiah's  policy,  which  was  to  side  with  Nebuchad- 
nezzar  against  Egypt,  being,  as  Prideaux  thinks,  bound 
by  oath  to  the  kings  of  Babylon  (i,  50).  See  Jeho- 
ahaz. Pharaoh-necho,  therdbre,  having  bomc  down 
all  resistance  with  his  victorioiis  army,  immediately  de- 
poeed  Jehoahaz,  and  had  him  brought  in  chains  to  Kib- 
lah,  where,  it  seems,  he  was  on  his  way  to  Carchemish 
(2  Kmgs  xxiii,  83,  84 ;  Jer.  xxii,  10-12).  f^ee  Nbcho. 
He  then  set  Eliakim,  his  elder  brother,  upon  the  throne 
— changed  his  name  to  Jehoiakim  (see  above) — ^and, 
having  charged  him  with  the  task  of  ooUecting  a  trib- 
ute  of  100  talents  of  silver  and  one  talent  of  gold= 
nearly  $200,000,  in  which  he  mulcted  the  land  for  the 
part  Josiah  had  taken  in  the  war  with  Babylon,  he 
eventuaUy  retumed  to  Egypt,  taking  Jehoahaz  with 
him,  who  died  there  in  captivity  (2  Kings  xxiii,  84; 
Jer.  xxii,  10-12 ;  Ezek.  xix,  4).  Pharaoh-necho  also 
himself  returaed  no  morę  to  Jerusakm ;  for,  after  his 
great  defeat  at  Carchemish  in  the  fourth  year  of  Jehoi- 
akim, he  lost  all  his  Syrian  posseesions  (2  Kings  xxiv, 
7 ;  Jer.  xlvi,  2),  and  his  suocessor  Psammis  (Herod,  ii, 
clxi)  madę  no  attempt  to  recover  them.  Egypt,  there- 
fore,  played  no  part  in  Jewish  politics  duńng  the  aeyen 
or  eight  years  of  Jehoiakim*8  reign.  After  the  battle 
of  Carchemish  Nebuchadnezzar  came  into  Palestine  as 
one  of  the  Egyptian  tributary  kingdoms,  the  capture  of 
which  was  the  natural  fmit  of  his  victory  over  Necho. 
He  found  Jehoiakim  quite  powerless.  Afler  a  short 
siege  he  entered  Jerusalem,  took  the  king  prisoner, 
bound  him  in  fetters  to  carry  him  to  Babylon  (2  Chroń. 
xxxvi,  6,  7),  and  took  also  some  of  the  precious  yessels 
of  the  Tempie  and  carried  them  to  the  land  of  Shinar, 
to  the  tempie  of  Bel  his  god.  It  was  at  this  time,  in 
the  fourth,  or,  as  Daniel  reckons,  in  the  third  year  of 


JEHOIAKIM 


802 


JEHOIAKIM 


hjB  reign  [see  Nebuchadnezzar],  that  Daniel  and 
Hananiah,  Misbael  and  Azariah,  were  taken  captires 
to  Babylon  (Dan.  i,  1, 2) ;  but  Nebuchadnezzar  seems  to 
have  changcd  his  purpose  as  regarded  JehoiAkim,  and 
to  have  accepted  his  submission,  and  reinstated  him  on 
the  throne,  perhaps  in  remembrance  of  the  fidelity  of 
his  father  Josiah  (q.  v.).  The  year  foUowing  the  Egyp- 
tians  were  defeated  upon  the  Euphiates  (Jer.  xlvi,  2), 
and  Jehoiakim,  when  he  saw  the  remains  of  the  defeated 
anny  pass  by  his  t^^toiy,  could  not  but  perceive  how 
vain  hieul  been  that  rcliance  upon  Egypt  against  which 
he  had  been  constantly  cautioned  by  Jeremiah  (Jer. 
xxxi,  1 ;  xlv,  1).  In  the  same  year  the  prophet  caused 
a  collection  of  his  prophecies  to  be  written  out  by  his 
faithful  Baruch,  and  to  be  read  publicly  by  him  in  the 
oourt  of  the  Tempie.  This  coming  to  the  knowledge 
of  the  king,  he  sent  for  it,  and  had  it  read  before  him. 
But  he  heard  not  much  of  the  bitter  denunciations  with 
which  it  was  charged  before  he  took  the  roli  from  the 
reader,  and,  after  cutting  it  in  pieces,  threw  it  into  the 
bnizicr  which,  it  being  winter,  was  burning  before  him 
in  the  halL  The  counsel  of  God  against  him,  however, 
Btood  surę;  a  fresh  roli  was  written,  with  the  addition 
of  a  further  and  most  awful  denunciation  against  the 
king,  occasioned  by  this  foolish  and  sacrilegious  act. 
*'  He  shall  have  nonę  to  sit  upon  the  throne  of  David : 
and  his  dead  body  shall  be  cast  out  in  the  day  to  the 
heat  and  in  the  night  to  the  frost"  (Jer.  xxxvi).  Ali 
this,  however,  appears  to  have  madę  little  impression 
upon  Jehoiakim,  who  still  walked  in  his  old  paths.  See 
Jeremiah. 

Afler  three  years  of  subjection,  Jehoiakim,  deluded 
by  the  Eg^^ptian  party  in  his  court  (compare  Josephus, 
Ant,  X,  6,  2),  ventured  to  withhold  his  tribute,  and 
thereby  to  throw  off  the  Chaldaean  yoke  (2  Kings  xxiv, 
1).  This  step,  taken  contrary  to  the  eamest  remon- 
strances  of  Jeremiah,  and  in  vioktion  of  his  oath  of  al- 
legiance,  was  the  ruin  of  Jehoiakim.  What  moved  or 
encouraged  Jehoiakim  to  this  rebcllion  it  is  difficult  to 
say,  unless  it  were  the  restless  turbulenoe  of  his  own 
bad  disposition  and  the  dislike  of  paying  the  tribute  to 
the  king  of  Babylon,  which  he  would  have  rather  lav- 
ished  upon  his  own  luxuiy  and  pride  (Jer.  xxii,  18-17), 
for  there  was  really  nothing  in  the  attitude  of  Egypt  at 
this  time  to  account  for  such  a  step.  It  seems  roore 
probable  that,  sceing  Egypt  entirely  8evered  from  the 
afiairs  of  S>Tia  sińce  the  bkttle  of  Carchemish,  and  the 
king  of  Babylon  wholly  occupied  with  distant  wars,  he 
hoped  to  make  łiimself  independent.  Though  Nebu- 
chadnezzar was  not  able  at  that  time  to  come  in  person 
to  chastise  his  rebellious  Yassal,  he  sent  against  him  nu- 
merous  bands  of  Chaldceans,  with  Syrians,  Moabites, 
and  Ammonites,  who  were  all  now  subject  to  Babylon 
(2  Kings  xxiv,  7),  and  who  cruelly  harassed  the  whole 
country,  being  for  the  most  part  actuated  by  a  fierce 
hatred  against  the  Jewish  name  and  nation.  It  was 
perhaps  at  this  time  that  the  great  dronght  occurred 
described  in  Jer.  xiv  (compare  Jer.  xv,  4  with  2  Kings 
xxiT,  2,  3).  The  closing  years  of  this  reign  must  have 
been  a  time  of  extreme  miser}'.  The  Ammonites  ap- 
pear  to  have  ovemin  the  hmd  of  Gad  (Jer.  xlix,  1),  and 
the  othcr  neighboring  nations  to  have  taken  advantage 
of  the  helplessncss  of  Israel  to  ravage  their  land  to  the 
utmost  (Ezek.  xxv).  There  was  no  rest  or  safety  out 
of  the  walled  cities.  We  are  not  acquainted  with  the 
details  of  the  close  of  the  reign.  Probably,  as  the  time 
approached  for  Nebuchadnezzar  himself  to  come  against 
Judaea,  the  desultory  attacks  and  invasions  of  his  troops 
became  morę  concentrated.  Either  in  an  engagement 
with  some  of  these  forces,  or  else  by  the  hand  of  his  own 
oppressed  subjects,  who  thought  to  conciliate  the  Baby- 
lonians  by  the  murder  of  their  king,  Jehoiakim  seems 
to  have  come  to  a  violent  end  in  the  eleventh  year  of 
his  reign.  His  body,  as  predicted,  appears  to  have  been 
cast  out  ignominiously  on  the  ground ;  perhaps  thrown 
over  the  walls  to  convince  the  enemy  that  he  was 
dead;  and  then,  after  being^  leli  expo8ed  for  some  time^ 


to  have  been  dragged  away  and  bnried  "  with  the  borial 
of  an  ass,"  without  pomp  or  kmentation,  "  be3'oi]d  tbe 
gates  of  Jerusalem"  (Jer.  xxii,  18, 19;  xxxvi,  30:  see  I 
Chroń,  iii,  1 5 ;  2  Kings  xxiii,  84-37 ;  xxiv,  1-7 ;  2  Chion. 
xxxvi,  4-8).  Yet  it  was  not  the  object  of  Nebuchad- 
nezzar to  destroy  altogether  a  power  which,  as  tiibataij 
to  him,  formed  a  8erviceable  outpost  towards  Egypt, 
which  seems  to  have  been  the  great  finał  object  of  «11 
his  designs  in  this  quarter.  He  therefore  still  maiii- 
tained  the  throne  of  Judah,  and  placed  on  it  Jehoiachin, 
the  son  of  the  hite  king.  Nor  does  he  appear  to  have 
Temoved  any  considerable  number  of  the  inhahitsau 
until  provoked  by  the  spoedy  revolt  of  this  last  ap- 
pointee.    See  Jehoiachin. 

The  expre8Bion  in  Jer.  xxxvi,  80,  « He  shall  hire 
nonę  to  sit  upon  the  throne  of  David,"  b  not  to  be  taken 
strictly;  and  yet,  as  the  reign  of  Jehoiachin  was  for 
only  thirteen  weeks,  Jehoiakim  may  be  said  to  hsTC 
been  comparatively  without  a  successor,  sińce  his  sod 
scarcely  sat  down  upon  his  throne  before  he  was  de- 
posed.  The  same  explanation  applies  to  2  Kings  xxiii, 
84,  where  Eliakim  or  Jehoiakim  is  said  to  have  8w> 
ceeded  his  father  Josiah,  whercas  the  reign  of  Jehoahaz 
intervened.  This  was  alao  so  short,  howerer,  as  not  lo 
be  reckoned  in  the  suoeession.  In  Matu  i,  3 1,  in  the  le- 
ceived  text,  the  name  of  Jehoiakim  (luaKtifi,  '-Jakim") 
is  omitted,  making  Jehoiachin  appear  as  the  son  of  Jo- 
siah ;  but  in  some  good  MSS.  it  is  supplied,  as  in  the 
margin  (see  Strong^s  Greek  Hormony  o/the  Gospełs,  notę 
on  §  9).    See  Gekeałogt. 

Josephus's  history  of  Jehoiakim*s  reign  is  consistent 
neither  with  Scripture  nor  with  itsdf.  His  account  of 
Jehoiakim's  death  and  Jehoiachin'8  succession  appem 
to  be  oniy  his  own  inference  from  the  Scripture  nana- 
tive.  According  to  Josephus  (Ant.  x,  6),  Nebuchad- 
nezzar came  against  Judsea  in  the  8th  year  of  Jehoia- 
kim's  reign,  and  compelled  him  to  pay  tribute,  which  he 
did  for  three  years,  and  thcn  revolted,  in  the  llth  year, 
on  hearing  that  the  king  of  Babylon  had  gone  to  inrade 
Egypt.  Such  a  campaign  at  this  time  is  extn:melr 
improbable,  as  Nebuchadnezzar  was  fully  occupied  cls^- 
where;  it  is  possible,  howerer,  that  such  a  mroor  may 
have  been  set  ailoat  by  interested  parties.  Jon^hus 
then  inserts  the  account  of  Jehoiakim*s  burning  Jcremi- 
ah*s  prophecy  in  his  flfth  year,  and  condudes  by  Mjing 
that  a  littlc  time  afterwards  the  king  of  Babylon  madę 
an  expedition  against  Jehoiakim,  who  admitted  Nebu- 
chadnezzar into  the  dty  upon  certain  conditions.  which 
Nebuchadnezzar  immediately  broke ;  that  he  (kw  Je- 
hoiakim and  the  flower  of  the  citizens,  and  sent  3000 
captivcs  to  Babylon,  and  set  up  Jehoiachin  for  king,  Utt 
almost  immediately  afterwards  was  seized  with  fear  kat 
the  young  king  should  avenge  his  father*s  death.  and  so 
sent  back  his  army  to  besiege  Jerusałem ;  that  Jeboia* 
chin,  being  a  man  of  just  and  gcntle  disposition,  did  not 
like  to  expo8e  the  city  to  dangcr  on  his  oirn  account, 
and  therefore  surrendered  himself,  his  mother,and  kin> 
dred  to  the  king  of  Babylon*s  officers  on  condition  of 
the  city  suffering  no  harm,  but  that  Nebuchadnezzar,  in 
direct  riolation  of  the  conditions,  took  10,832  prisonen 
and  madę  Zedekiah  king  in  the  room  of  Jehoiachin, 
whom  he  kept  in  custody.     Sec  Jupah,  kikgdom  of. 

All  the  accoimts  we  have  of  Jehoiakim  concur  in  as* 
cribing  to  him  a  vicious  and  irreligious  chancter.  Tbe 
writer  of  2  Kings  xxiii,  87  tells  us  that  "he  did  tbal 
which  was  evil  in  the  sight  of  Jehovah,"  a  statenKnt 
which  is  repeated  in  eh.  xxiv,  9,  and  2  Chroń.  xxxri,5t 
The  latter  writer  uses  the  yet  stronger  exprG!ańon  '*th» 
acts  of  Jehoialdm,  and  the  abominations  which  he  did* 
(ver.  8).  But  it  is  in  the  wiitings  of  Jeremiah  that  w« 
have  the  fullest  portraiture  of  him.  If,  as  is  probable 
the  19th  chapter  of  Jeremiah  belongs  to  this  reign,  we 
have  a  detail  of  the  abominations  of  idolatiy  practiced 
at  Jemsalem  under  the  king*s  sanction,  with  which  Eae* 
kieFs  vision  of  what  was  going  on  8ix  years  later.  witbin 
the  veTy  precincts  of  the  Tempie,  exactiy  agrees :  incenae 
oflfered  up  to  ^^  abominable  bóuts,**  **  wómen  weeping  for 


JEHOIARIB 


803 


JEHONADAB 


Thmumniz,"  and  men  in  the  inner  coort  of  the  Tempie, 
**with  their  backs  towards  tbe  tempie  of  the  Lord/' 
wonhipping  ^  the  son  towards  the  east"  (Esek.  vm). 
The  yindictiTe  pmmiit  and  mnrder  of  Urijah,  the  son  of 
Shemaiah,  and  the  indignitics  offered  to  his  ooipee  by 
the  king^s  oommand,  in  revenge  for  his  faithfol  prophe- 
Byiag  of  evil  against  Jenualem  and  Jadah,  aro  samples 
of  his  irreligion  and  tyranny  oombined.  Jeremiah  but 
nairowly  eftcaped  the  same  fate  (Jer.  xxvi,  20-24).  The 
cmiotis  notioe  of  him  in  1  £8d.  i,  88— that  he  put  his 
nobles  in  chains,  and  caaght  Zaraces,  his  brother,  in 
Egypt,  and  brought  him  up  thence  to  Jemsalem — also 
pointa  to  his  cmelty.  His  daring  impiety  in  cutting  up 
and  boming  the  roli  containing  Jeremiah*s  prophecy,  at 
the  yeiy  moment  when  the  national  fast  was  being  cel- 
ebrated,  has  been  noticed  above  (see  also  Stanley,  Jewi^ 
Ckmrckj  ii,  697  8q.).  His  oppression,  injustice,  ooiretons- 
ness,  laxniy,  and  tyranny  are  most  sererely  rebnked 
(Jer.  xxii,  18-17) ;  and  it  has  frequently  been  obsenred, 
aa  indicating  his  thorough  selfishness  and  indifference 
to  the  snfferings  of  his  people,  that,  at  a  time  when  the 
land  was  so  impoyerished  by  the  heary  tributes  laid 
npcA  it  by  Egypt  and  Babylon  in  tum,  he  should  hare 
aąnandered  large  sums  in  building  luxurious  palaces  for 
bimaelf  (Jer.  xxii,  14, 15). — Smith ;  Kitto.    See  Imaob- 

BT,  ChAMBBBS  OP. 

J'ehoi''arib  (Hebrew  Yehóyarib',  a^^^l^in;',  whoee 
cause  Jehtmah  dtfendś;  SepU  'iafapci/3  or  'laptifi  y,  r. 
*Iwap</i;  1  Chroń,  ix,  10;  xxiv,  7  only ;  elsewhere,  both 
in  Heb.  and  A-Y.,  the  name  is  abbreviated  to  Joiakib), 
a  distinguished  priest  at  Jerusalem  (1  Chroń,  ix,  10),  head 
of  the  first  of  the  twenty-four  sacerdotal  "courses"  (1 
Chroń,  xxiv,  7).  RC.  1014.  Of  these  courses,  only  four 
are  mentioned  as  having  retumed  from  Babylon — those 
of  Jedaiahfimmer,  Pashur,  and  Harim  (Ezra  ii,  86-89; 
Neh.  vii,  39-42) ;  and  Jewbh  tradidon  sa3rs  that  each  of 
these  was  divided  into  8ix,  so  as  to  pre8er\'e  the  original 
number  with  the  original  names  (Talm.  HierosL  Taankh, 
eh.  iv,  p.  68,  coL  1  in  ed.  Bomberg).  This  might  acoount 
for  our  finding,  at  a  later  period,  Mattathias  described  as 
of  the  course  of  Joarib  (1  Mace  ii,  l),eveu  though  this 
course  did  not  return  from  Babylon  (Prideaux,  CotmeO' 
tion,  i,  136, 8th  ed.).  We  find,  however,  that  some  of 
the  descendants  of  Jehoiarib  did  return  from  Babylon  (1 
Chroń,  ix,  10 ;  Neb.  xi,  10 ;  see  Jedaiah)  ;  we  find,  also, 
that  in  subseąucnt  lists  other  of  the  priestly  oourses  are 
mentioned  as  returning,  and  in  one  of  these  that  of  Je- 
hoiarib 18  expre8aly  mentioned  (Neh.  x,  2-8 ;  xii,  1-7), 
and  mention  is  madę  of  Mattenai  as  chief  of  the  house 
of  Joiarib  in  the  days  of  Jeshua  (xii,  19).  The  próba- 
billty,  therefore,  is,  that  the  course  of  Jehoiarib  did  go 
up,  but  at  a  later  datę,  perhaps,  than  those  four  men- 
tioned in  Ezra  ii,  36-39,  and  Neh.  vii,  39-42.  To  the 
couise  of  Joiarib  Josephus  teUs  us  he  belonged  (^n^.  xi, 
6, 1 ;  Life,  §  1).— Kitto.     See  Prikst. 

Jahon^adab  (Heb.  Yehonadab%  379'in]*,  to  whom 
Jehorah  is  Kbercd,  2  Sam.  xiii,  5;  2  Kings  x,  15,  23; 
Jer.  xxxr,  8, 14, 16, 18;  Sept.  'IwraSóp,  Autb.Ver8ion 
**  Jonadab,"  except  in  2  Kings  x,  15,  23),  also  in  the 
eontracted  form  Jonadab  (3131%  Yonadab\  2  Sam. 
xiii,  8,  32,  35;  Jer.  xxxv,  6,  10,  19;  SepU  'I«vaJa/3), 
the  name  of  two  men. 

1.  A  son  of  Shimeah  and  nephew  of  David,  a  yery 
crafty  person  (IK^  DSH;  the  word  is  that  usually 
tranalated  *<  wise,"  as  in  the  case  of  Solomon,  2  Sam. 
xiii,  3),  i.  e.  apparently  one  of  those  characters  who,  in 
tbe  midst  of  great  or  loyal  families,  pride  them8elves, 
and  are  renowned,  for  being  aoquainted  with  the  secrets 
of  the  whole  circle  in  which  they  move.  His  age  nat- 
nzaUy  madę  him  the  Mend  of  his  oousin  Amnon,  heir  to 
the  thione  (2  Sam.  xii],  3).  He  peroeived  finom  the 
piiiioe'8  alteied  appeannce  that  there  was  some  nn- 
known  grief— '*  Why  art  ihou,  the  king's  son,  so  lean?" 
— and,  when  he  had  wooned  it  out,  he  gave  him  the 
latał  advioe  for  ensnaring  his  aiater  Tamar  (ver.  5, 6). 


B.C.  cir.  1088.  See  Asingn.  Again,  when,  in  a  later 
stage  of  the  same  tragedy,  Amnon  was  murdered  by 
Absalom,  and  the  exaggerated  report  reached  I>avid 
that  all  the  princes  were  slaughtered,  Jonadab  was  al- 
ready  aware  of  the  real  state  of  the  case.  He  was  with 
the  king,  and  was  able  at  once  to  reassure  him  (2  Sanu 
xiii,  82, 88).— Smith.    See  Absalom. 

2.  A  son  OT  desoendant  of  Rechab,  tbe  progenitor  of 
a  peculiar  tribe,  who  held  themseWes  bound  by  a  vow 
to  abstain  from  winę,  and  never  to  relinquish  the  no- 
madic  life  (Jer.  xxxv,  6-19).  See  Rechab.  It  appears 
firom  1  Chroń,  ii,  55  that  his  father  or  ancestor  Rechab 
(<*the  rider")  belonged  to  a  branch  of  the  Ketutes,  the 
Anbian  tribe  which  entered  Palestine  with  the  Israel- 
ites.  One  settlement  of  them  was  to  be  found  in  the 
extreme  north,  imder  the  chieftainship  of  Heber  (Judg. 
iv,  11),  retaining  their  Bedouin  customs  under  the  oidc 
which  derived  its  name  from  their  nomadic  habits. 
The  main  settlement  was  in  the  south.  Of  these,  one 
branch  had  nestled  in  the  clifTs  of  Engedi  (Judg.  i,  16 ; 
Numb.  xxiv,  21).  Another  had  retumed  to  the  frontier 
of  their  native  wildemess  on  the  south  of  Judah  (Judg. 
i,  16).  A  third  was  established,  under  a  fourfold  divi- 
ńon,  at  or  near  the  town  of  Jabez,  in  Judah  (1  Chroń. 
ii,  55).  See  Kenite.  To  which  of  these  branches  Re- 
chab and  his  son  Jehonadab  belonged  is  micertain ;  he 
was  evidently,  however,  the  chieftain  of  an  important 
family,  if  not  the  geneńlly  acknowledged  head  of  the 
entire  elan.  The  Bedouin  habits,  which  were  kept  up 
by  the  variou8  branches  of  the  Kenite  tribe  (see  Judg. 
i,  16;  iv,  11),  were  inculcated  by  Jehonadab  with  the 
utmoet  minuteness  on  his  descendants  or  retainers;  the 
morę  so,  perhaps,  from  their  being  brought  into  closer 
oonnection  with  the  inhabitants  of  the  settled  districts. 
The  vow  or  rule  which  he  prescribed  to  them  is  pre- 
senred  to  us:  **  Ye  shall  drink  no  winc,  neither  ye  nor 
your  sons  forever.  Neither  shall  ye  build  houses,  nor 
sow  seed,  nor  plant  vineyard,  nor  have  any:  but  all 
your  days  ye  shall  dwell  in  tents;  that  ye  may  live 
many  days  in  the  land  where  ye  be  strangers"  (Jer. 
xxxv,  6, 7).  This  life,  partly  roonastic,  partly  Bedouin, 
"was  obser\'ed  with  the  teuacity  with  which,  from  gen- 
eration  to  generation,  such  customs  are  continued  in 
Arab  tribcs ;  and  when,  many  years  after  the  death  of 
Jehoiuulab,  the  Rechabites  (as  thoy  were  callcd  from  his 
father)  were  forced  to  take  refnge  from  the  Chaidiean 
inva8ion  ¥rithin  the  walls  of  Jerusalem,  nothing  would 
induce  them  to  transgress  the  rule  of  their  ancestor, 
and,  in  consequence,  a  blessing  was  pronounced  upon  him 
and  them  by  the  prophet  Jeremiah  (xxxv,  19) :  "  Jon- 
adab, the  son  of  Rechab,  shall  not  want  a  man  to  stand 
before  me  forever."    See  Reciiabite. 

Bearing  in  mind  this  generał  character  of  Jehonadab 
as  an  Arab  chief,  and  the  founder  of  a  half-religious 
sect,  perhaps  in  connection  with  the  austere  Elijah,  and 
the  Nazarites  mentioned  in  Amos  ii,  11  (see  Ewald,  A  I- 
łerthUmerf  p.  92,  98),  we  are  the  better  able  to  undei^ 
stand  the  single  oocasion  on  which  he  appears  before  us 
in  the  historical  narrative  (2  Kings  x,  15  są.).  B.C 
883.  Jehu  was  advancing,  after  the  slaughter  of  Beth- 
eked,  on  the  city  of  Samaria,  when  he  suddenly  met  the 
austere  Bedouin  coming  towards  him  (2  Kings  x,  15). 
It  seems  that  they  were  already  known  to  each  other 
(Josephus,  A  nt,  ix,  6, 6).  The  king  was  in  his  chariot ; 
the  Arab  was  on  foot.  It  is  not  altogether  certain  which 
was  the  flrst  to  speak.  The  Hebrew  text— foUowed  by 
the  AY.— implics  that  the  king  blessed  (AYers.  "sa- 
luted")  Jehonadab.  The  Sept  and  Josephus  (Ant.  ix, 
6,  6)  imply  that  Jehonadab  blessed  the  king.  Each 
¥rould  have  its  peculiu'  appropriatencss.  The  king 
then  proposed  their  closc  union.  "  Is  thy  heart  right, 
as  my  heart  is  with  thy  heart  ?"  The  answer  of  Jehon- 
adab is  slightly  vaiied.  In  the  Hebrew  text  he  vehe- 
mently  replies,  **It  is,  it  is:  give  me  thine  hand."  In 
the  Sept  and  in  the  A  V.,  he  replies  simply,  "It  is;" 
and  Jehu  then  rejoins,  "  If  it  is,  give  mc  thine  hand." 
The  hand,  whether  of  Jehonadab  or  Jehu,  was  offered 


JEHONATHAN 


804 


JEHORAM 


and  grasped.  The  king  Ufted  him  up  to  Łhe  edge  of 
the  chańot,  apparently  that  he  might  whiaper  hia  Be- 
cret  into  his  ear,  and  aaid,  *'  Come  with  me,  and  see  my 
seal  for  Jehoyah."  IŁ  was  the  first  indication  of  Jeha'8 
design  upon  the  worship  of  Baal,  for  which  he  perceiyed 
that  the  stem  zealot  woold  be  a  fit  coadjutor.  Having 
intrusted  him  with  the  secret,  he  (Sept.)  or  his  attend- 
ants  (Heb.  and  A.Y.)  caused  Jehonadab  to  proceed  with 
him  to  Samaria  in  the  royal  chariot.  Jehonadab  was 
evidently  held  in  great  respect  among  the  Israelites 
generally ;  and  Jehu  was  alive  to  the  importance  of  ob- 
taining  the  coontenance  and  sanction  of  such  a  man  to 
his  proceedings;  and  as  it  is  expres8ly  said  that  Jehon- 
adab went  out  to  meet  Jehu,  it  seems  probable  that  the 
people  of  Samaria,  alarmed  at  the  menadng  letter  which 
they  had  reoeiyed  from  Jehu,  had  induced  Jehonadab  to 
go  to  meet  and  appease  him  on  the  road.  His  yener- 
ated  character,  his  rank  as  the  head  of  a  tribe,  and  his 
neutral  poaition,  well  qualified  him  for  this  misaion ;  and 
it  was  quite  as  much  the  interest  of  Jehonadab  to  concil- 
iate  the  new  dynasty,  in  whose  founder  he  beheld  the 
minister  of  the  divine  decrees,  as  it  was  that  of  Jehu  to 
obtain  his  concurrence  and  support  in  proceedings  which 
he  could  not  but  know  were  likely  to  render  him  odious 
to  the  people.  So  completely  had  the  worship  of  Baal 
become  the  national  reUgion,  that  eyen  Jehonadab  was 
aUe  to  conceal  his  purpose  under  the  mask  of  conformi- 
ty.  No  doubt  he  acted  in  ooncert  with  Jehu  throughout ; 
but  the  only  occasion  on  which  he  is  expres8ly  men* 
tioned  is  when  (probably  from  his  preyious  knowledge 
of  the  secret  worshippera  of  Jehoyah)  he  went  with 
Jehu  through  the  tempie  of  Baal  to  tum  out  any  that 
there  might  happen  to  be  in  the  mass  of  pagan  wor- 
shippera (2  Kinga  2C,  23).— Smith ;  Kitto.     See  Jkhu. 

Jehon^^athanCHeb.  Tehonaihan'^  yr^iTT^yJehopak- 
gwmj  Sept 'Iftfya^ai'),  the  fuU  form  ofthe  name  of  four 
men. 

1.  The  oldest  son  of  king  Saul  (1  Sam.  xiy,  6, 8, 21 ; 
xyiii,  1, 8, 4 ;  xix,  2, 4, 6, 7 ;  xx  throughout,  and  all  later 
passages  except  1  Chroń.  x,  2,  in  all  which  the  A.y.  has 
**  Jonathan"  [q.  v.],  as  the  Hebrew  likewise  elsewhere 
has). 

2.  Son  of  Uzziah,  and  superintendent  of  certain  of 
king  Dayid*s  storehouses  (Hl^sk,  the  word  rendered 
<<  treasures"  earlier  in  the  yerse,  and  in  27, 28  ^'  oellars*') 
(1  Chroń.  xxyii,  25).     B.a  1014. 

3.  One  of  the  Leyitea  who  were  sent  by  Jehoahapbat 
through  Łhe  dties  of  Judah,  with  a  book  of  the  Law,  to 
teach  the  people  (2  Chroń.  xyu,  8).     aa  910. 

4.  A  priest  (Neh.  xii,  18),  and  the  representatiye  of 
the  faraUy  of  Shemaiah  (yerso  6)  when  Joiakim  was 
high-priest — that  is,  in  the  next  generation  after  the  re- 
turn from  Babylon  under  Zerubbabel  and  Jeshua.  B.C 
post  536. 

Jeho^ram  (Heb.  Yehoram%  ta^JlfT^,  Jehotfah-eraU' 
ed,  1  Kings  xxii,  50;  2  Rings  i,  17 ;  iii,  1, 6;  yiii,  16, 25, 
29;  ix,  15, 17,  21,  22,  28,  24;  xii,  18;  2  Chroń.  xyii,  8; 
xxi,  1, 3, 4, 5, 9, 16 ;  xxii,  1, 5, 6, 7, 11 ;  Scptuag.  l(upa/i, 
A.  V. «  Joram"  in  2  Kings  ix,  15, 17, 21, 22, 28),  also  in 
the  contractcd  form  Joram  (fiTi'',  Toram',  2  Sam.  yiii, 
10 ;  2  Kings  yiii,  16, 21, 23, 24, 25, 28, 29 ;  ix,  14, 16, 29 ; 
xi,  2;  1  Chroń,  iii.  U;  xxyi,  25;  2  Chroń,  xxii,  5,  7; 
Sept.  'Iwpa/i,  but  'UdŚovpdfA  in  2  Sam.  yiii,  10),  the 
name  of  fiye  men. 

1.  Son  of  Toi,  king  of  Hamath,  sent  by  his  father  to 
oongratulate  Dayid  upon  his  yictory  oyer  Hadadezer  (2 
Sam.  yiii,  10 ;  Ueb.  and  A.  V.  */  Joram") ;  elsewhere  cali- 
ed  Haxx>ram  (1  Chroń.  xyiii|  10). 

2.  A  Leyite  of  the  family  of  Gershom,  employed  with 
his  relatiyes  in  special  sacred  scryices  connected  with 
the  Tempie  treasury  (1  Chroń.  xxyi,  25 ;  Heb.  and  A-Y. 
"Joram").     B.C.1014. 

3.  One  of  the  priests  sent  by  Jehoshaphat  to  instruct 
the  people  in  the  Law  throughout  the  land  (2  Chroń. 
xyii,  8).    BwC.  910. 


4.  (JoaephuB  'Iwpa/ioc,  Ant.  ix,  2, 2.)  The  son  of 
Ahab  and  Jezebel,  and  aucceasor  to  his  dder  bnrtha 
Ahaziah,  who  died  chikUeH.  He  was  the  tenth  kii^ 
on  the  separate  throno  of  Inael,  and  idgned  12  ycin, 
aa  894-888  (2  Kings  i,  17;  iu,  1).  The  datę  of  bb 
accession,  in  the  second  year  of  the  reiga  of  Jefaonm  of 
Judah  (2  Kings  i,  17),  must  be  oomputed  from  a  yice- 
royship  of  the  latter  during  his  faUter  Jeho6luqihat'i 
war  at  Ramoth-gilead  (1  Kinga  xxii,  2  aq.>  *  The  leck- 
oning  in  2  Kings  ix,  29  is.aooordiug  to  Jehoiam^a  actnił 
reign ;  that  in  2  Kings  yiii,  25,  aocording  to  the  yean 
of  his  reign  as  beginning  pndepticaliy  with  the  Isnel- 
itish  calendar  or  regnal  point, Le.  the  autimm, aa  thoie 
of  Judah  do  in  the  spring.    See  Israkł,  kikgdom  of. 

The  Moabitea  had  be^  tributaiy  to  the  crown  of  b- 
rael sinoe the aeparation ofthe twokingdome;  bat kin^ 
Mesha  deemed  the  defeat  and  death  of  Ahab  ao  beary  a 
blow  to  the  power  of  Israel  that  he  might  aafeły  aaslnt 
his  independenoe.  He  aocordingly  did  so,  by  withhoU- 
ing  hia  tribnte  of  "  100,000  lamba  and  100,000  rama,  witk 
the  wool."  The  short  reign  of  Ahaziah  had  affonied  no 
opportonity  for  any  operations  againat  the  icrolten, 
but  the  new  king  hastened  to  reduoe  them  again  uoder 
the  yoke  they  had  cast  off.  The  good  king  of  Jodah, 
Jehoshaphat,  was  too  eaaily  indooed  to  take  a  part  ia 
the  war.  He  perhi^w  feared  that  the  exam|ile  of  Moab^ 
if  allowed  to  be  succesaful,  might  seduce  into  a  aimilar 
course  his  own  tiibutaiy,  the  king  of  Edom,  whom  be 
now  sunraioned  to  join  in  this  expedition.  Aocordingly, 
the  three  kings  of  Israel,  Judah,  and  Edom  marcbed 
through  the  wildemeas  of  Edom  to  attack  Mesha.  The 
three  aimiea  were  in  the  utmost  danger  of  pcriafaing  for 
want  of  water.  The  piety  of  Jehoshaphat  suggested  aa 
inquiry  of  some  prophet  of  Jehoyah,  and  Elisha,  the  son 
of  Shaphat,  at  that  time,  and  sińce  the  latter  pazt  of 
Ahab's  reign,  £lijah's  atiendant  (2  Kings  iii,  11 ;  1  Kings 
xix,  19-21),  was  found  with  the  host.  From  him  Jebo- 
lam  recdyed  a  seyere  rebuke,  and  waa  bid  to  mąnire  of 
the  propheta  of  bis  father  and  mother— the  prophets  of 
BaaL  Neyertheless,  for  Jehoshaphafa  sake,  Elieba  in- 
quired  of  Jehoyah,  and  receiyed  the  promise  of  an  abmi- 
dant  supply  of  water.  and  of  a  great  yictoiy  orer  Um 
Hoabitcś,  a  promise  which  was  immediately  folfilled. 
The  same  water  which,  filling  the  yalky,  and  the  trencfa* 
ea  dug  by  the  bneliteś,  anp^ied  the  wholc  anny  and  all 
their  cattle  with  drink,  appeared  to  the  Hoabite8,who 
were  adyandng,  like  blood  when  the  momtng  son  sbooe 
upon  it.  Conclnding  that  the  allies  had  fa&n  out  and 
slain  each  other,  they  marched  incantiously  to  the  at- 
tack, and  Mrere  put  to  the  rout  The  allies  poisiied  tbem 
with  great  sUughter  into  their  own  land,  which  ther  a* 
terly  rayaged  and  destioyod,  with  all  ita  citiea.  Kirhar- 
aseth  alone  remained,  and  there  the  king  of  Moab  madę 
his  laat  stand.  An  atteropt  to  break  through  the  bc> 
aieging  army  haying  failed,  he  resorted  to  the  despcnte 
expedient  of  offering  up  his  eldest  aon,  the  heir  to  his 
throne,  as  a  bumtFoffering  upon  the  wali  ofthe  city,in 
the  sight  of  the  enemy.  Upon  this,  the  Isnefites  r- 
tired  and  retumed  to  their  own  land  (2  Kings  iii).  EC 
dl,  890.    See  Mesha. 

It  was,  perhaps,  in  conaeąnence  of  £ltBha*8  reboke, 
and  of  the  aboye  remarkable  deliyeranoe  granted  to  the 
allied  armies  acooiding  to  his  woid,  that  Jehonm,  oo 
his  return  to  Samaiia,  put  away  the  image  of  Baal  whidi 
Ahab,  his  father,  had  madę  (2  Kings  iii,  2) ;  for  in  2 
Kings  iy  we  haye  an  eyidence  of  Elisfaa's  being  oo 
fnendly  terms  with  Jehoram  in  the  offer  madę  by  him  to 
speak  to  the  king  in  iayor  of  the  ShanammitcH.  (He 
is  highly  spoken  of  in  the  Tahnod  [JBerackołk,  10] ;  bat 
he  did  not  remoye  the  golden  calyea  introdneed  by  Jo^ 
oboam.)  The  impreaaion  on  the  king^a  mind  was  proba- 
bly stiengthened  by  the  aubse^nent  inddent  of  Naaman^s 
cure,  and  the  temporaiy  ceasation  of  the  inroads  of  the 
Syrians,  which  doabtlesa  resulted  from  it  (2  Kings  y). 
SeeNAAMAN.  Aocordingly,  when,  a  little  later,  war  again 
broke  out  between  Syria  and  larael,  we  find  Efiaha  be> 
friending  Jehoram.    The  king  waa  madę  acąuaioted  hf 


JEHORAM 


805 


JEHOSHAPHAT 


tfae  prophet  with  the  secret  oomuels  of  the  king  of  Syria, 
and  was  thoa  enabled  to  defeat  them ;  and,  on  the  other 
hand,  when  Eliaha  bad  led  a  laige  band  of  Syrian  sol- 
difin,  whom  God  had  blinded,  into  the  midst  of  Samaria, 
Jeboiam  reyerentially  asked  bim,  **  My  father,  sball  I 
■mite  them  ?"  and,  at  the  prophet*8  bidding,  not  only  for- 
bore  to  kill  them,  but  madę  a  feast  for  them,  and  then  sent 
them  home  mihnrt.  This  procured  anotber  cessation 
firoift  the  Syrian  inyaaiona  for  the  Ismelites  (2  Kings  vi, 
23).  See  Bem-hadad.  What  happened  after  this  to 
change  the  lelationa  between  the  king  and  the  prophet 
we  can  ooly  oonjectoze.  But,  putting  together  the  gen- 
erał bad  chaiacter  given  of  Jehoram  (2  Kings  iii,  2, 8) 
with  the  Uuet  of  the  preralenoe  of  Baal-worship  at  the 
end  of  his  leign  (2  Kings  x,  21-28),  it  seems  probable 
that  when  the  Syrian  inroads  ceased,  and  be  felt  less  de- 
pendent upon  the  aid  of  the  prophet,  he  relapsed  into 
idolatiy,  and  was  rebuked  by  Elisba,  and  threatened 
with  a  retom  of  the  calamities  from  which  he  had  es- 
Gsped.  Befusing  to  repent,  aftesh  inrasion  by  the  Syp- 
ians  and  a  doee  siege  of  Samaria  actually  came  to  pass, 
aocoiding  piobably  to  the  word  of  the  prophet.  Henoe, 
when  the  terrible  inddent  arose,  in  conseqaence  of  the 
famine,  of  a  woman  boiling  and  eatang  ber  own  child, 
the  king  iramediately  attribnted  the  eril  to  EUsha,  the 
son  of  Shaphat,  and  determined  to  take  away  his  life. 
The  message  which  he  sent  by  the  messenger  wbom  be 
commissioned  to  cut  off  the  prophefs  head,  **  Behold,  this 
evil  is  irom  JehoTah,  why  sbould  I  wait  for  Jehoyah 
any  longer?"  coupled  with  the  fact  of  his  haring  on 
sackcloth  at  the  limę  (2  Kings  yi,  80, 88),  also  indicates 
that  many  remonstrances  and  wamings,  similar  to  those 
giren  by  Jeremiah  to  the  kings  of  his  day,  had  passed 
between  the  prophet  and  the  weak  and  unstable  son  of 
Ahab.  The  providential  interposition  by  which  both 
£lt8ba'8  life  was  saved  and  the  city  delirered  is  narrated 
in  2  Kings  vii,  and  Jehoram  appears  to  haye  retnmed 
to  friendly  feelings  towards  Elisha  (2  Kings  viti,  4). 
B.C  cir.  888-884.    See  Eusha. 

It  waa  very  soon  after  the  above  erents  that  Elisba 
went  to  Damascos,  and  predicted  the  revolt  of  Hazael, 
and  hia  aeeeasion  to  the  thnme  of  Syria  in  the  room  of 
Ben-hadad;  and  it  was  doring  Eli8ba's  absence,  proba- 
bly,  that  the  conyersation  between  Jehoram  and  Gehazi, 
and  the  return  of  the  Shunammitess  from  the  land  of 
the  Philiatines,  reoorded  in  2  Kings  viii,  took  place.  Je- 
honun  seems  to  haye  thought  the  reyoluŁion  in  Syria, 
which  imraediately  followed  £Usha'8  prediction,  a  good 
opportunity  to  pnrsae  bis  father^s  fayorite  project  of  re- 
ooyering  Ramoth-gilead  from  the  Syrians.  He  accord- 
ingly  madę  an  alliance  with  his  nephew,  Ahaziah,  who 
had  joat  snoceeded  Jehoram  on  the  throne  of  Judah,  and 
the  two  kings  proceeded  to  strengthen  the  eastem  fron- 
tier  against  the  Syrians  by  fortifying  Ramoth-gilead, 
which  had  fallen  into  Jehonun'8  hands,  and  which  his 
father  had  periahed  in  the  attempt  to  reooyer  from  the 
Syriana.  This  strong  fbrtress  thenceforth  became  the 
head-ąoaiteis  of  the  operations  besrond  the  riyer.  Ha- 
zael was  aeaicely  settled  on  the  throne  before  he  took 
arms  and  marched  against  Ramoth,  in  the  enyirons  of 
which  the  Ismelites  snstained  a  defeat.  Jehoram  was 
wouoded  in  the  battle,  and  obliged  to  return  to  Jezreel 
to  be  heakd  of  his  wounds  (2  Khigs  yiii,29 ;  ix,  14, 15), 
leaying  his  army  in  the  charge  of  Jehu,  one  of  his  ablest 
and  most  actiye  generała,  to  hołd  Ramoth-gilead  against 
HazaeL  Jehu,  howeyer,  in  this  interyal  was  anointed 
king  of  larael  by  the  mesienger  of  Elisba,  and  immedi- 
at/tky  he  and  the  army  under  his  oommand  reyolted  from 
tbeir  aUegianoe  to  Jehoram  (2  Kings  ix),  and  Jehu, 
baaCily  marehing  to  Jezreel,  surprised  Jehoram,  wonnd- 
ed  and  defenoeleas  aa  he  was.  Jehoram,  going  out  to 
meei  him,  fell  pieroed  by  an  arrow  from  Jebu^  bow  on 
the  yery  piat  of  ground  which  Ahab  had  wrested  from 
Naboth  the  JezreeUte,  thns  fulfilling  to  the  letter  the 
prophecy  of  Elijah  (1  Kings  xxi,  21>29).  B.a  888.>- 
Smith ;  Kitto.    See  Jbhu. 

5.  (Joaephiis  l«ipa/iof ,  AnL  ix,  6, 1.)    The  eldest 


son  and  snccessor  of  Jeboehaphat,  and  fifth  king  on  the 
separata  throne  of  Judah,  who  began  to  reign  (alone)  at 
the  age  of  thirty-six  yeais,  and  reigned  three  years,  B.C 
887-884.  It  is  indeed  said  in  the  generał  acoount  (2 
Chroń,  xxi,  6,  20;  2  Kings  yiii,  16)  that  he  began  to 
reign  at  the  age  of  thirty-two,  and  that  he  reigned 
eigbt  yeais;  but  the  conclusions  deducible  from  the  fact 
that  his  reign  began  in  the  fifth  year  of  Jehoram,  king 
of  Isrsel  (2  Kings  yiii,  16),  show  that  the  reign  thus 
stated  dates  back  three  years  into  the  reign  of  bis  fa- 
ther, who  from  this  is  seen  to  haye  associated  his  eldest 
son  with  him  in  the  later  years  of  his  reign,  as,  indeed, 
is  expre88ly  stated  in  this  last  cited  passage  (see  Keil's 
Com,  on  2  Kings  i,  17 ;  Reime,  Harmoru  v%ta  JoMphat, 
Jen.  1718,  and  Diaa,  de  num.  annor,  regni  Josaph.,  ib.). 
This  appears  to  haye  been  on  the  occasion  of  Jehosha- 
phat^s  absence  in  the  oonfiict  with  confederate  inyaders, 
the  Moabites,  Ammonites,  and  Edomites  (2  Chroń,  xx) ; 
and  must  be  distinguished  finom  a  still  earlier  copartner- 
ship  (2  Kings  i,  17),  apparently  during  the  allied  attack 
upon  the  Sjrrians  at  Ramoth-gilead,  in  which  Ahab  lost 
his  lifcf  See  Jehoskaphat.  Jehoram*s  daughter  Je- 
hosheba  was  married  to  the  high-priest  Jehoiada  (q.  y.). 
He  had  himself  unhappily  been  married  to  Athaliab, 
the  daughter  of  Ahab  and  Jezebel,  and  ber  influence 
seems  to  haye  neutralized  all  the  good  be  migbt  baye 
deriyed  from  the  example  of  his  father.  One  of  the 
first  acts  of  his  reign  was  to  pnt  his  six  brothers  to  death 
and  seize  the  yaluable  appanages  which  tbeir  father  bad 
in  his  lifetime  bestowed  upon  them.  After  this  we  are 
not  surprised  to  find  him  giying  way  to  the  gross  idola- 
tries  of  that  new  and  strange  kind— the  Phoenician— 
which  had  been  brought  into  Israeł  by  Jezebel,  and  into 
Judah  by  ber  daughter  Athaliab.  For  these  atrocities 
the  Lord  let  forth  his  anger  against  Jehoram  and  his 
kingdom.  The  Edomites  reyolted,  and,  according  to 
old  prophecies  (Gen.  xxvii,  40),  established  their  penna- 
nent  independence.  It  was  as  much  as  Jehoram  could 
do,  by  a  night^-attack  with  all  his  forces,  to  extricate 
himself  from  tbeir  army,  which  bad  surrounded  him. 
Next  Libnab,  the  city  of  the  priests  (Josh.  xxi,  13),  one 
of  the  strongest  fortified  dties  in  Judah  (2  Kings  xix, 
8),  and  perhaps  one  of  those  **fenced  cities"  (2  Chroń. 
xxi,  3)  which  Jehoshaphat  had  gtven  to  his  other  sons, 
renounced  allegiance  to  Jehoram  because  he  had  for- 
saken  Jehoyah,  the  God  of  his  fathers.  But  this  seem- 
ed  only  to  sdmulate  him  to  enforce  the  practice  of  idol- 
atry  by  pereecution.  He  had  early  in  his  reign  received 
a  writing  from  Elijah  the  prophet  admonishing  him  of 
the  dreadful  calamities  which  he  was  bringing  on  him- 
self by  his  wicked  conduct,  but  eyen  this  failed  to  effect 
a  reformation  in  Jehoram.  See  Elijah.  At  lengtb 
the  Philistines  on  one  side,  and  the  Arabians  and  Cush- 
ites  on  the  other,  grew  bold  against  a  king  forsaken  of 
God,  and  in  repeated  inyasions  spoiled  the  land  of  all  its 
substance;  they  eyen  rayaged  the  royal  pslaces,  and 
took  away  the  wiyes  and  children  of  the  king,  leaying 
him  only  one  son,  Ahaziah.  Nor  was  this  all :  Jehoram 
was  in  his  last  days  afflicted  with  a  frightful  disease  in 
his  bowels,  which,  from  the  terms  employed  in  describ- 
ing  it,  appears  to  haye  been  malignant  dysentery  in  its 
most  shocking  and  tormenting  form  (see  R.  Mead,  BibL 
Krańkk,  44 ;  but  comp.  Bartholtn.  Morh,  BibL  c  12 ;  6. 
Detharding,  De  morho  rfff,  Joramit  Rostock,  1781 ).  See 
Disease.  After  a  disgraceful  reign  and  a  most  painful 
death,  public  opinion  inflicted  the  poethumous  dishonor 
of  refusing  bim  a  place  in  the  sepulchre  of  the  kings. 
Jehoram  was  by  far  the  most  impious  and  cruel  tyrant 
that  had  as  yet  occupied  the  throne  of  Judah,  thougb 
he  was  rivalled  or  surpassed  by  some  of  his  successors 
(2  Kings  yiii,  16-24 ;  2  Chroń.  xxi).  His  name  ap- 
pears,'howeyer,  in  the  royal  gcnealogy  of  our  Sayiour 
('Iitfpa/i,  **  Joram,"  Matt.  i,  8).    See  Judah,  kinoix>m  of. 

Jehoflhab^eUth  (2  Chroń,  xxii,  U).     See  Je^ 

H08HEBA. 

J6łloirii'apliat  (Heb.  Yehoekapkaf,  ts&l^im,  /«• 


JEHOSHAPHAT 


806 


JEHOSHAPHAT 


hwahrjudgedf  L  e.  yindicated ;  SepŁ.  'Ii^ra^ar),  some- 
times  iii  the  contracted  form  Joshaphat  (Id&D'!'^,  Fo- 
shaphał',  1  Chroń,  xi,  43;  xv,  24;  'Ici^a^ar,  A.yerB. 
in  the  latter  pasaage  ^  Jehoehaphat;"  N.T.  'Iwra^r, 
"  Josaphat,"  Matt.  i,  8 ;  JosephuB  'luura^roc),  the  name 
of  8ix  men. 

1.  A  Mithnite,  one  of  David*8  famons  hody-guard  (1 
Chroń,  xi,  43;  Heb.  and  A-Y.  ^  Joaaphat**).  "B.a  1046. 

2.  One  of  the  pńests  appointed  to  blow  the  trumpets 
before  the  ark  on  its  removal  to  Jerusalem  (1  Chroń. 
XV,  24 ;  Heb. "  Josaphat").    RC.  cir.  1043. 

3.  Son  of  Ahilad,  and  royal  chronider  (q.  v.)  under 
David  and  Sobmon  (2  Sam.  viii,  16;  xx,  24;  1  Kings 
iv,  3 ;  1  Chroń,  xviii,  15).    RC.  1014. 

4.  Son  of  Paruah,  and  Solomon^s  ponreyor  (q.  v.)  in 
Issachar  (1  Kings  iv,  17).    RC.  cir.  995.    See  Soix>- 

5.  The  fooith  separate  king  of  Jndah  ("Israer  in  2 
Chroń,  xxi,  2,  last  dauae,  ia  either  a  tranacriber^a  erior 
or  a  generał  title),  being  son  of  Asa  (by  Azubah,  the 
daughter  of  Shilhi),  whom  he  succeeded  at  the  age  of 
thirty-iive,  and  reigned  twenty-five  years,  RC.  912-887 
(1  Kings  xxii,  41 ,  42 ;  2  Chroń,  xx,  31).  He  commenced 
his  reign  by  fortifying  his  kingdom  against  Israel  (2 
Chroń,  xvii,  1,  2) ;  and,  having  thus  secured  himself 
against  surprise  from  the  quarter  which  gave  moet  dis- 
turbance  to  him,  he  proceeded  to  deanse  the  land  from 
the  idolatries  and  idolatrous  monuments  by  which  it 
was  still  tainted  (1  Kings  xxii,  43).  £ven  the  high- 
places  and  groves  which  former  well-disposed  kings  had 
suffered  to  remain  were  by  the  zeal  of  Jehoshaphat  in  a 
great  measure  destroyed  (2  Chroń,  xvii,  6),  althoogh  not 
altogether  (2  Chroń,  xx,  83).  In  the  third  year  of  his 
reign,  chiefa,  with  priests  and  Levitea,  proceeded  from 
town  to  town,  with  the  book  of  the  Law  in  their  hands, 
instructing  the  people,  andcalling  back  their  wandering 
affections  to  the  rdigion  of  their  fatkers  (2  Chroń,  xvii, 
7-9).  The  results  of  this  fidelity  to  the  principles  of 
the  theocracy  were,  that  at  home  he  enjoyed  peace  and 
abundance,  and  abroad  security  and  honor.  His  treas- 
uries  were  filled  with  the  "  presenta"  which  the  blessing 
of  God  upon  the  people,  *^'m  thdr  baaket  and  their  storę," 
enabled  them  to  bring.  His  renown  extended  into  the 
neighboring  nations,  and  the  Philistines,  as  well  as  the 
adjoining  Arabian  tribes,  paid  him  rich  tributes  in  sil- 
ver  and  in  cattle.  He  was  thus  enabled  to  put  all  his 
towns  in  good  condition,  to  erect  fortresses,  to  oiganize  a 
powerful  army,  and  to  raise  hia  kingdom  to  a  degree  of 
importance  and  splendor  which  it  had  not  enjoyed  aince 
the  revolt  of  the  ten  tribes  (2  Chroń,  xvii,  10-19). 

The  weak  and  impious  Ahab  at  that  time  oocupied 
the  throne  of  Israel;  and  Jehoehaphat,  after  a  time, 
havmg  nothing  to  fear  from  his  power,  sought,  or  at 
least  did  not  repd,  an  allianoe  with  him.  This  is  al- 
leged  to  have  been  the  grand  mistake  of  his  reign,  and 
that  it  was  such  is  proved  by  the  conseąuences.  Ahab 
might  be  benefited  by  the  connection,  but  under  no  cir- 
cumstancea  could  it  be  of  8ervice  to  Jehoshaphat  or  his 
kingdom,  and  it  might,  aa  it  actually  did,  involve  him 
in  much  disgrace  and  disaster,  and  bring  bloodshed  and 
troubie  into  his  house.  Jehoehaphat*8  eldest  son  Jeho- 
ram  married  Athaliah,  the  daughter  of  Ahab  and  Jeże- 
beL  It  does  not  appear  how  far  Jehoshaphat  encour- 
aged  that  ill-«tarred  union.  The  doseness  of  the  allianoe 
'  between  the  two  kings  is  shown  by  many  circumstances : 
£lłjah*8  rductanoe  when  in  exi]e  to  set  foot  within  the 
territory  of  Judah  (Bhmt,  Und,  Comc  ii,  §  19,  p.  199) ; 
the  identity  of  names  given  to  the  children  of  the  two 
royal  families ;  the  admission  of  names  compounded  with 
the  name  of  Jehovah  into  the  family  of  Jezebel,  the 
zealous  worshipper  of  Baal;  and  the  alacrity  with  which 
Jehoshaphat  accompanied  Ahab  to  the  field  of  battle. 
Accordingly,  we  next  find  him  on  a  vi8it  to  Ahab  in  Sa- 
maria, being  the  first  time  any  of  the  kings  of  Israel  and 
Judah  had  met  in  peace.  He  here  cxperienoed  a  recep- 
tion  worthy  of  his  greatness ;  but  Ahab  iailed  not  to 


take  advantage  of  the  occasion,  and  so  worked  npon  the 
weak  pointa  of  his  character  aa  to  preyail  npoo  him  to 
take  arms  with  him  against  the  Syriana,  with  whoan, 
hitherto,  the  kingdom  of  Judah  never  had  had  any  war 
or  occasion  of  ąuarrel.  However,  Jehoebapliat  was  uot 
so  far  infatuated  as  to  prooeed  to  the  war  withoat  con- 
sulting God,  who,  acoording  to  the  principles  of  the  tbe- 
ocratic  govemnient,  was  the  finał  arbiter  of  war  and 
peace.  The  false  prophets  of  Ahab  poored  forth  ampłe 
promises  of  success,  and  one  of  them,  named  Zedekiah^ 
resorting  to  materiał  symbols,  madę  him  homs  of  iron, 
saying,  ''Thus  saith  the  Lord,  with  these  sihalt  thoa 
smite  the  Syrians  till  they  be  consumed."  Still  Jehosh- 
aphat was  not  aatiafied;  and  the  answer  to  hia  fnnher 
inquirie8  extorted  ftom  him  a  rebuke  «f  the  rcluctance 
which  Ahab  manifested  to  cali  Hicah  "the  prophet  of 
the  Lord."  The  fearless  words  of  this  prophet  did  not 
make  the  impresaion  upon  the  king  of  Judah  which 
might  have  been  expected;  or,  probably,  he  then  f«lŁ 
himself  too  deeply  bound  in  hcmor  to  recede.  He  went 
to  the  fatal  battle  of  Ramoth-gilead,  and  there  nearir 
became  the  victim  of  a  plan  which  Ahab  had  laid  for 
his  own  safety  at  the  expense  of  his  too-confiding  aHy. 
He  persuaded  Jehoahaphat  to  appear  as  king,  while  he 
himself  went  disguised  to  the  battle.  This  brought  the 
heat  of  the  oontest  aromid  him,  as  the  Syriana  took  him 
for  Ahab;  and,  if  they  had  not  in  time  diacovered  their 
mistake,  he  would  oertainly  have  been  slain  (1  Kin^? 
xxii,  1-88).  Ahab  was  kiUed,  and  the  battle  lost;  bat 
Jehoshaphat  escaped,  and  retumed  to  Jeniaatem  (2 
Chroń,  xviii).    RC  895.    See  Aha& 

On  his  return  from  this  imprudent  expcdition  he  vas 
met  by  the  just  reproaches  of  the  prophet  Jeho  (2 
Chroń,  xix,  1-3).  The  best  atonement  he  oould  make 
for  this  enror  was  by  the  oonrae  he  actually  took.  He 
resumed  his  labors  in  the  further  extirpaŁion  of  idolt- 
try,  in  the  instruction  of  the  people,  and  the  improre- 
ment  of  his  realm.  He  now  madę  a  tour  of  his  kingdom 
in  person, "  from  Beersheba  to  Mount  Ephiaim,"  that  he 
might  aee  the  ordinances  of  God  duły  entiiWishfd,  and 
witness  the  due  execatłon  of  his  intentions  leipectiBg 
the  instruction  of  the  people  in  the  divine  law.  This 
tour  enabled  him  to  discem  many  defecta  in  the  k«al 
administration  of  juatice,  which  he  then  applied  him- 
self to  remedy  (see  Selden,  De  Synedr,  u,  cb.8,  §  4). 
He  appointed  magiatrates  in  every  dty  for  the  deter- 
mination  of  causes  dvii  and  eodesiaatical ;  and  the  na- 
turę of  the  abuses  to  which  the  administration  of  jntioe 
waa  in  thoee  days  expoeed  may  be  gathered  from  bis 
excellent  cliarge  to  them :  ^  Take  heed  włiat  ye  da  for 
ye  Judge  not  for  man,  but  for  the  Lord,  who  is  with  too 
in  the  jndgment.  Wherefore  now  łet  the  fear  of  the 
Lord  be  upon  yon^  take  heed  and  do  it;  for  there  b  no 
iniquity  with  the  Lord  oor  God,  nor  respect  of  pereoiu, 
nor  taking  of  gifts."  Then  he  established  a  supieme 
council  of  justice  at  Jeruaalem,  oomposed  of  prieita.  Le- 
vites,  and  "  the  chiefs  of  the  iathers,"  to  whidi  dilficult 
cases  were  leferred,  and  appeals  hrought  from  the  pro- 
vincial  tribunala.  This  tiibimal  also  waa  indncted  h^  a 
weighty  but  short  cliarge  from  the  king,  whoae  conduct 
in  thia  and  other  matten  placea  him  at  the  vefT  hcad 
of  the  monarcha  who  reigned  over  Judah  aa  a  aeparste 
Idngdom  (2  Chnm.  xix,  4-11). 

The  activity  of  Jehoahaphat*s  mind  waa  next  toroed 
towards  the  revival  of  that  maritime  commeroe  which 
had  been  established  by  Solomon.  The  land  of  £d(0 
and  the  ports  of  the  Elanitic  Gulf  were  still  under  the 
power  of  Judah,  and  in  them  the  king  prepared  a  flect 
for  Ute  voyage  to  Ophir.  Unhappiły,  howercr.  he 
yidded  to  the  wish  of  the  king  of  IsnieL  and  aOowed 
him  to  take  part  in  the  enterprise.  For  thb  the  cxpe- 
dition  waa^doomed  of  God,  and  the  yessels  weie  witcked 
alroost  aa  soon  as  they  quitted  poiu  Inatructed  by  £łi- 
ezer,  the  prophet,  aa  to  the  canse  of  thia  disaattf.  Je- 
hoshaphat equipped  a  new  fleet,  and,  haviiig  this  time 
dedined  the  oo-operation  of  the  king  of  Iscad,  the  vot- 
age  proepered.    The  trade,  however,  waa  not  pnseeuted 


JEHOSHAPHAT 


807     JEHOSHAPHAT,  VALLET  OF 


with  any  zeal,  and  was  aoon  abandoned  (2  Chfon.  xx, 
86^7;  i  Kinga  xxii,  48,  49).    B.a  895.     See  Com- 

MERCE. 

Afber  the  death  of  Abaziah,  king  of  larael,  Jehoram, 
hia  aiicceaaor,  penuaded  Jehoahaphat  to  join  him  in  an 
expeuiuon  against  Moab.  B.C.  dr.  891.  Tbia  alliance 
waa,  however,  on  poUtical  grounda,  morę  excuaable  than 
the  two  former,  as  the  Moabitea,  who  were  under  tribute 
to  lane],  might  dnw  into  their  cauae  the  Edomitea, 
who  were  tributary  to  Judah.  Beaidea,  Moab  could  be 
inraded  with  most  advantage  from  the  aouth,  round  by 
tbe  end  of  the  Dead  Sea;  and  the  king  of  laracl  ooold 
not  gain  aoceaa  to  them  in  that  qaaiter  but  by  marching 
UkTough  the  temtoriea  of  Jehoahaphat.  The  latter  not 
oniy  joined  Jehoiam  with  his  own  anny,  but  requiied 
hia  tributary,  the  king  of  Edom,  to  bńng  hia  forcea  into 
the  Qeld.  During  the  aeven  daya'  march  through  the 
wiktemeaa  of  Edom  the  army  ai^ered  much  from  want 
of  water,  and  by  the  time  the  alliea  came  in  aight  of 
the  army  of  Moab  they  were  leady  to  periah  from  thiraL 
In  thia  emergency,  the  pious  Jehoahaphat  thought,  aa 
usual,  of  ooniNilting  the  Lorrl,  and,  hearing  that  the 
prophet  Eliaha  waa  in  the  camp,  the  three  kingą  pro- 
ceeded  to  hia  tent  For  the  aake  of  Jehoahaphat,  and 
for  hia  aake  only,  deliyerance  waa  promiaed,  and  it  came 
during  the  enauing  night  in  the  ahape  of  an  abundant 
aapply  of  water,  which  rulled  down  the  exhauated  war 
d}'B,  and  filled  the  poola  and  hollow  grounda.  Afler^ 
warda  Jehoahaphat  took  hia  fuli  part  in  the  operationa 
of  the  campaign  tUl  the  armiea  were  imluced  to  with- 
draw  in  horror  by  witneaaing  the  dreadfol  act  of  Meaha, 
king  of  Moab,  in  offering  up  hia  eldeat  aon  in  aacrifice 
npon  the  wali  of  the  town  in  which  he  waa  abnt  up  (2 
Kinga  iii,  4-27).     See  Jehoram. 

This  war  kindled  auother  much  morę  dangeroua  to 
Jehoshaphat.  The  Moabitea,  belng  highly  exaaperated 
at  the  part  he  took  against  them,  tumed  idl  their  wrath 
upon  him.  They  induced  their  kindred,  the  Ammon- 
ites,  to  join  them,  obtained  anxiliariea  from  the  Syriana, 
and  even  drew  over  the  Edomitea,  eo  that  the  atrength 
of  all  the  neighboring  nationa  may  be  aaid  to  haye  been 
nnited  for  thia  great  enterpriae.  The  allied  forcea  en- 
tered  the  Uuid  of  Judah  and  encamped  at  Engedi,  near 
the  western  border  of  the  Dead  Sea.  In  thia  extremity 
Jehoahaphat  felt  that  all  his  defence  lay  with  God.  A 
Bolemn  fast  was  hekl,  and  the  people  repaired  from  the 
towna  to  Jerusalem  to  seek  help  of  the  Lord.  In  the 
preaence  of  the  aaaembled  multitude,  the  king,  in  the 
oourt  of  the  Tempie,  offered  up  a  fenrent  prayer  to  God, 
ooncluding  wilh, "  O  our  God,  wilt  thou  not  judge  them, 
for  tee  have  no  might  agaiiiat  thia  great  company  that 
oometh  againat  us,  neither  know  we  what  to  do;  but 
our  eyea  are  upon  thee."  He  oeased ;  and  in  the  midst 
of  the  silenoe  which  ensned,  a  voice  was  raiaed  pronoun- 
cing  deliyerance  in  the  name  of  tbe  Lonl,  and  telling 
them  to  go  out  on  the  morrow  to  the  diffa  oyerlooking 
the  camp  of  the  enemy,  and  see  them  all  oyerthrown 
without  a  blow  from  them.  The  yoioe  waa  that  of  Ja- 
haziel,  one  of  the  Leritea.  His  worda  came  to  paaa. 
The  alliea  ąuarrelled  among  themaelyea,  and  destroyed 
each  other;  so  that  when  the  Judahites  came  the  next 
day  they  found  their  dreaded  enemies  all  dead,  and  noth- 
ing  was  led  for  them  but  to  take  the  rich  apoila  of  the 
slain.  This  done,  they  retumed  with  triumphal  aonga 
to  Jemaalem.  Thia  great  eyent  waa  reoogniaed  eyen 
by  the  neighboring  nationa  aa  the  act  of  God;  and  ao 
atrong  waa  the  impreaaion  which  it  madę  upon  them, 
that  the  lemainder  of  Jehoahaphat'a  reign  waa  pasaed 
in  ąuiet  (2  Chroń.  xx).  Ra  890.  His  death,  how- 
ever,  took  place  not  very  long  after  thia,  at  the  age  of 
■ixty,  ailer  haying  reigned  twenty-fiye  yeara,  KC.  887. 
He  left  the  kingdom  in  a  proeperoua  condition  to  his 
eldeat  aon  Jehoram,  whom  he  had  in  the  laat  yeara  of 
hia  Ufe  aaaociated  with  him  in  the  goyeniment.  See 
Jehoram,  5. 

^Jehoahaphat,  who  aonght  the  Lord  with  all  hia 
heart,"  was  the  character  giyen  to  this  king  by  Jehn, 


when,  on  that  aooount,  he  gaye  to  his  grandson  an  hon- 
oraUe  graye  (2  Chroń,  xxii,  9).  This,  in  fact,  was  the 
sum  and  subatance  of  his  character.  The  Hebrew  an- 
nals  offer  the  example  of  no  king  who  morę  carefully 
8quared  all  his  conduct  by  the  principles  of  the  theoc- 
racy.  He  kept  the  Lord  always  before  his  eyes,  and 
was  in  all  things  obedient  to  his  will  when  madc  kiiown 
to  him  by  the  prophcts.  Few  of  the  kings  of  Judah 
manifested  so  much  zeal  for  the  real  welfare  of  his  peo- 
ple, or  took  mcasures  so  judicious  to  promote  iu  His 
good  talents,  the  beneyolence  of  his  disposition,  and  his 
generally  sound  judgment,  are  shown  not  only  in  the 
great  measures  of  domestic  policy  which  distinguished 
his  reign,  but  by  the  manner  in  which  they  were  exe- 
cuted.  No  tracę  can  be  found  in  him  of  that  pride 
which  dbhonored  aome  and  ruined  othcrs  of  the  kings 
who  preceded  and  followed  him.  Moet  of  hia  errora 
aroae  from  that  dangerous  facility  of  temper  which  some- 
times  led  him  to  act  against  the  dictates  of  his  naturally 
sound  judgment,  or  preyented  that  judgment  from  being 
fairly  exercised.  The  kingdom  of  Judah  was  neyer 
happier  or  morę  proeperoua  than  under  his  reign ;  and 
thia,  perhape,  ia  the  higheat  pnuae  that  can  be  giyen  to 
any  king.  His  name  ('loKra^ar, "  Josaphat")  occura  in 
the  list  of  our  SayiouPs  ancestors  (MatL  i,  8). — Kitto. 
See  Judah,  kucodom  of. 

6.  The  son  of  Nimshi,  and  father  of  king  Jehu  of  Is- 
rael  (2  Kings  ix,  2, 14).    B.C.  antę  888. 

JEHOSHAPHAT,  YALLEY  OF  (atl$in:ł  pp?, 
Sept.  KoŁ\dc  'loMfa^ar,  Vulg.  VaUu  Jotaphat)^  a  yaUey 
mentioned  in  Scripturc  by  the  prophet  Joel  only,  as  the 
spot  in  which,  after  the  return  of  Judah  and  Jerusalem 
from  captiyity,  Jehoyah  would  gather  all  the  heathen 
(Joel  iii,  2  [iv,  2J),  and  would  there  sit  to  judge  them 
for  their  misdeeds  to  Israel  (Joel  iii,  12  [y,  4]).  The 
nations  referred  to  seem  to  be  thoee  who  apecially  op< 
pressed  Israel  and  aided  in  their  oyerthrow,  particu- 
larly  the  Sidonians,  Tyrians,  and  PhoDnicians  generally 
(ver.  4).  The  passage  is  one  of  great  boldness,  abound- 
ing  in  the  yerbal  tums  in  which  Hebrew  poetr\'  so  much 
delights;  and,  in  particidar,  there  is  a  play  between  the 
name  giyen  to  the  spot — Jehoshaphat,  Le.  **  Jehovah'8 
judgment"  —  and  the  "judgment**  there  to  be  pro- 
nounced.  Tłie  Hebrew  prophets  oflen  refcr  to  the  an- 
cient  glories  of  their  nation :  thus  Isaiah  speaks  of  the 
*'day  of  Midian,"  and  of  the  triumphs  of  Dayid  and  of 
Joahua  in  **  Mount  Perazim"*  and  in  the  "  valley  of  Gib- 
eon,"  and  in  like  manner  Joel,  in  announcing  the  yen- 
geanoe  to  be  taken  on  the  atrangeis  who  were  annoying 
his  country  (iii,  14),  seems  to  haye  glanced  back  to  that 
triumphant  day  when  king  Jehoshaphat — the  greateat 
king  the  nation  had  aeen  sińce  Solomon,  and  the  gieat^ 
est  champion  of  Jehoyah— led  out  his  people  to  a  yalley 
in  the  wildemess  of  Tekoah,  and  was  there  blessed  with 
such  a  yictory  over  the  hordes  of  his  enemies  as  was 
without  a  parallel  in  the  national  records  (2  Chroń,  xx : 
see  J.  E.  Gerhardt,  Disserł,  r.  d,  Ciiatwn  ins  Thal  Jota- 
phcU  [Bayreuth,  1775]),    Sec  Joeu 

But,  though  such  a  reference  to  Jehoshaphat  is  both 
natural  and  characteristic,  it  is  not  ccrtain  that  it  is  in- 
tended.  The  name  may  be  only  an  imaginary  one,  con- 
ferred  on  a  spot  which  existed  nowhere  but  in  the  vis- 
ion  of  the  prophet.  Such  was  the  yiew  of  some  of  the 
ancient  Łninslators.  Thus  Theodotion  renders  it  x<^pa 
Kpitrtutę,  and  so  the  Targum  of  Jonathan— "  the  plain  of 
the  diyision  of  judgment."  Michaelis  {Bihtljur  Unge- 
lehrte,  Remarks  on  Joel)  takes  a  similar  view,  and  oon- 
siders  the  passage  to  be  a  prediction  of  the  Maccabiean 
yictories.  By  others,  however,  the  prophet  has  been 
supposed  to  have  had  the  end  of  the  world  in  view  (see 
Henderson,  Keil,  etc,  ad  loc). 

The  name  ^  Yalley  of  Jehoshaphat"  (generally  simply 
eUJós^  morę  fuUy  wady  Jiuafat^  ako  wady  ShafaŁ  or 
Fctrawii)^  in  modem  times,  is  attached  to  the  deep  ra- 
vine  which  separates  Jerusalem  from  the  Mount  of 
Oliyes,  through  which  at  one  time  the  Kedron  forced 


JEHOSHAPHAT,VALŁET  OF     808    JEHOSHAPHAT,  YALLET  OF 


its  stream.  At  what  period  the  name  was  fint  applied 
to  this  spot  is  not  known.  Tbere  is  no  tracę  of  it  in 
the  Bibie  or  in  Josephus.  In  both  the  only  name  used 
for  this  gotge  ia  Kidron  (N.  T.  "  CfEDRON").  We  first 
encounter  its  new  title  in  the  middle  of  the  4th  ccntury, 
in  the  OmnuuHcon  of  Eusebius  and  Jerome  (s.  y.  CGelas), 
and  in  the  commentary  of  the  latter  father  on  Jocd. 
Since  that  time  the  name  has  been  recognised  and 
adopted  by  trayellers  of  all  ages  and  ali  faiths.  It  ia 
used  by  Christians— as  Aiculf,  in  700  {Early  Trav,  p.4) ; 
the  author  of  the  Citez  de  Jhenualem,  in  1187 ;  and 
Maundrell,  in  1697  (Early  Trav,  p.  469)— and  by  Jcws, 
as  Benjamin  of  Tudela,  aboat  1170  (Asher  i,  71 ;  see  Ro- 
land, PalaaL  p.  866).  By  the  Moslems  it  is  still  said  to 
be  ódled  by  the  traditional  name  (Seetzen,  ii,  28,26), 
though  the  name  usually  given  to  the  yalley  is  wady 
SUH-Maryam.  Both  Moslems  and  Jews  beliere  that 
the  last  judgment  is  to  take  place  there.  To  find  a 
grave  there  is  a  frequent  wish  of  the  latter  (Briggs, 
JSeathm  and  Holy  Landa,  p.  290),  and  the  fonner  show 
— as  they  have  shown  for  certainly  two  oenturies— the 
place  on  which  Mohammed  is  to  be  seated  at  the  last 
judgment :  a  stone  jutting  out  from  the  east  wali  of  the 
Haram  area,  near  the  south  comer— one  of  the  pillars 
which  once  adomed  the  churches  of  Helena  or  Justin- 
ian,  and  of  which  multitudes  are  now  irobedded  in  the 
mde  masoniy  of  the  morę  modem  waUs  of  Jerusalem. 
This  pillar  is  said  to  be  called  et-Tarik,  *<  the  road"  (De 
Satdcy,  Voyage,  ii,  199).  From  it  will  spring  the  bridge 
o^As-Sirał,  the  croasing  of  which  is  to  test  the  true  be- 
lieyera.  Those  who  canuot  stand  the  test  will  drop  off 
into  the  abyss  of  Gehenna,  in  the  depths  of  the  yalley 
(Ali  Bey,  p.  224, 5 ;  Mejr  ed-Dln  in  Bobinson^s  Research. 
i,  269).  The  steep  sides  of  the  rayine,  wheieyer  a  leyel 
strip  affords  the  opportunity,  are  crowded— in  places  al- 
most  payed— by  the  sepulchres  of  the  Moelems,  or  the 
simpler  slabs  of  the  Jewish  tombs,  alike  awaiting  the 
assembly  of  the  last  judgment  (For  a  fuli  description 
of  this  yalley,  see  Robinson,  BibL  Researches,  i,  842, 355, 
896-402;  u,  249.) 

So  narrow  and  predpitous  a  glen  is  quite  unsuited  to 
the  Biblical  eyent,  but  this  inconsistency  does  not  appear 
to  have  distorbed  thoee  who  framed  or  those  who  hołd 
the  tradition.  It  is,  howeyer,  implied  in  the  Heb.  tenns 
employed  in  the  two  cases.  That  by  Joel  is  emek  (p^C)i 
a  word  applied  to  spadous  yalleys  such  as  those  of  Es- 
draelon  or  Gibeon  (Stanley,  Syria  and  Paletf,,  Appendix, 
§  1).  On  the  other  hand,  the  rayine  of  the  Kidron  is 
inyariably  designated  by  ndehal  (blią),  answering  to  the 
modern  Arabie  toady.  There  is  no  instance  in  the  O.  T. 
of  these  two  tenns  being  conyertible,  and  this  fact  alone 
would  warrant  the  inference  that  the  tradition  of  the 
identity  of  the  emek  of  Jehoehaphat  and  the  nńchal 
Kidron  did  not  arise  until  Hebrew  had  begun  to  become 
a  dead  Uinguage.  The  grounds-  on  which  it  did  arise 
were  probably  these : 

1.  The  frequent  mention  throughout  this  passage  of 
Joel  of  Mount  Zioń,  Jerusalem,  and  the  Tempie  (ii,  32 ; 
iii,  1, 6, 16, 17, 18)  may  haye  led  to  the  belief  that  the 
locality  of  the  great  judgment  would  be  in  the  immedi- 
ate  neighborhood.  This  would  be  asaisted  by  the  men- 
tion of  the  Mount  of  Oliyes  in  the  somewhat  similar 
passage  in  Zechariah  (xiy,  3, 4). 

2.  The  belief  that  Christ  would  reappear  in  judgment 
on  the  Mount  of  Oliyes,  from  which  he  had  ascended. 
This  was  at  one  time  a  receiyed  artide  of  Christian  be- 
lief, and  was  grounded  on  the  words  of  the  angels,  *^  He 
shall  80  come  in  like  manner  as  ye  haye  scen  him  go 
into  heaven"  (Adrichomius,  Theałr,  Terrm  Sancta,  s.  v. 
Jerusalem,  §  192 ;  Com.  k  Lapide  on  Acts  i).  Sir  John 
Maundeyille  giyes  a  different  reason  for  the  same. 
**Very  near  this"— the  place  where  Christ  wept  oyer 
Jerusalem — ^**i9  the  stone  on  which  our  Lord  sat  when 
he  preached;  and  on  that  same  stone  shall  he  sit  on  the 
day  of  doom,  right  as  he  said  himself."  Bernard  the 
Wiae,  in  the  8th  century,  speaks  of  the  church  of  St. 


Leon,  in  the  yalley,  **  where  oor  Lord  will  oome  to  judg- 
ment" {Early  Travels,  p.  28> 

3.  There  is  the  altematiye  that  the  yalley  of  Jehosh- 
aphat  was  really  an  andent  name  of  the  yalley  of  the 
Kidron,  and  that,  from  the  name,  the  connectkm  with 
Joel'8  prophecy  and  the  belief  in  its  bdng  the  scenę  of 
Jehoyah*s  last  judgment  haye  followed.  Thia  may  be 
80,  but  then  we  should  ezpect  to  find  aome  trmoe  of  the 
existence  of  the  name  before  the  fturth  century  after 
Christ  It  was  certainly  used  aa  a  baiying-|Jaoe  as 
early  as  the  reign  of  Joeiah  (2  Kings  xxiii,  6),  but  no 
inference  can  fairly  be  drawn  firom  thi& 

But,  whateyer  originated  the  tradition,  it  has  bdd  its 
ground  most  firmly,  as  is  eyinoed  by  seyeral  localdicmn- 
stances.  (a)  In  the  yalley  itsdf,  one  of  the  four  remaik- 
able  monuments  which  exist  at  the  foot  of  Oliyet  wss 
at  a  yery  early  datę  connected  with  Jchoshaphat  At 
Arculfs  yisit  (about  700)  the  name  appears  to  hare 
been  borne  by  that  now  called  *<  Absalom^a  tomb,**  bot 
then  the  ^  tower  of  Jehoshaphai"  {Earfy  Travd*j  p.  4> 
In  the  time  of  Maundrell,  the  ''tomb  of  JefaoBhaphat" 
was  what  it  still  i»— «n  excayation,  with  an  architectn- 
ral  front,  in  the  face  of  the  rock  behind  **AbaakHn's 
tomb."  A  tolerable  yiew  of  this  is  giyen  in  plate  83  of 
Munk's  Pakstine  ;  and  a  photograph  by  tSalmtann,  with 
a  description,  in  the  T€Xie  (p^  31)  to  the  same.  Tbe 
name  may,  as  already  obeenred,  rńlly  point  to  Jehosht- 
phat  himself,  though  not  to  his  tomb,  as  he  was  boried, 
like  the  other  kings,  in  the  dty  of  Dayid  (2  Chion.  xxi, 
1).  See  Ab8alom*8  Toica  (6)  One  of  the  gatcs  of  the 
dty  in  the  east  wali,  opening  on  the  yalley,  borę  the 
same  name.  This  is  plain  from  the  Ciiez  de  Jhniaakm, 
where  the  Porte  de  loeąfat  is  said  to  haye  been  a  *  pos- 
tem" close  to  the  golden  gate-way  (Porfez  Oiris),  and#o 
the  9ou1k  of  that  gate  {pars  deeers  mkUf  §  4).  It  was, 
therefore,  at  or  near  the  smali  walłcd-up  door-way,  to 
which  M.  de  Saulcy  has  restored  the  name  of  the  Pó" 
teme  de  Josaphai,  and  which  is  bat  a  few  feet  to  the 
south  of  the  golden  gate-way.  Howeyer  this  may  be, 
this  "  postem"  is  eyidently  of  later  datę  tbaii  the  waH 
in  which  it  occurs,  as  some  of  the  enormoos  atones  of 
the  wali  haye  been  cut  through  to  admit  it,  and  in  so 
far,  therefore,  it  is  a  witness  to  the  datę  of  tbe  tradition 
being  subseąuent  to  the  time  of  Herod,  by  whom  this 
wali  was  buUt  It  is  probably  the  **little  gate  leaifing 
down  by  8teps  to  the  yalley"  of  which  Arculf  ą)eakŁ 
Benjamin  of  Tndda  (1163)  also  mentions  the  gate  of 
Jehoshaphat,  but  withont  any  nearer  indication  of  its 
podtion  than  that  it  led  to  the  yalky  and  the  meon- 
ments  (Asher,  i,  71).  («)  Lastly,  leading  to  this  gate 
was  a  Street  called  the  street  of  Jehoshapbst  (Jdiez  de 
Jheruscdem,  §  7). — Smith. 

If  the  "king's  dale"  (or  yalley  of  Shayeb)  of  Gen. 
xiy,  17,  and  of  2  Sam.  xyiii,  18,  be  the  same,  and  if  the 
commonly  recdyed  location  of  thera  be  correct,  then  we 
haye  the  yalley  of  Jehoehaphat  identified  with  that  of 
Melchizedek,  and  its  history  carriea  us  back  to  Salem'8 
earliest  days.  But  at  what  time  it  became  a  cemetoy 
we  are  not  informed.    See  Shaveii. 

Cyril,  in  the  4th  centnry,  mentions  it  in  a  way  whieh 
indicates  that  in  his  day  tradition  had  altered,  or  that 
the  yalley  was  supposed  to  embrace  a  wider  swecp  cf 
country  than  now,  for  he  speaks  of  it  as  some  foricogt 
east  of  Jerusalem — as  bare,  and  fitted  for  eąuestrian  ex- 
erdses  (Reland,  Pakułma,  p.  355).  Some  old  trayeDeis 
say  that  it  was  ''three  miles  in  length,  reaching  from 
the  yale  of  Jehinnon  to  a  place  withont  the  dty  which 
they  cali  the  sepulchres  of  the  kings"  (TrateUofTwo 
Englishmen  two  oenturies  ago).  Some  of  the  oki  trar- 
ellers — Buch  as  Felix  Fabri,  in  the  I5th  oentury— cali  it 
Celfy  from  the  Koilaa  of  Eusebius  and  the  CoelaB  of  Je- 
rome ;  and  they  cali  that  part  of  the  Kidron  whidi  is 
connected  with  it  Crmariats  or  Krinarius— the  place  of 
judgment  (Evag.  i,  871).  We  may  add  that  these  old 
writers  extend  thb  yalley  oondderably  npwards,  piadng 
Gethsemane  and  the  traditional  tomb  of  the  Va^  in 
it    They  seem  to  haye  diyided  the  Kidron  bed  into 


i 


JEHOSHEBA 


809 


JEHOYAH 


two  parte :  the  lower,  called  the  yalley  of  Siloam  or  Si- 
loe ;  the  upper,  the  yalley  of  Jehoshaphat,  from  which 
the  eastem  gate  of  the  city  in  early  times  was  called,  not, 
aa  DOW,  St  Stephen'e,  bat  **  the  gate  of  the  ralley  of  Je- 
hoahaphat.'' 

The  present  ralley  of  Jehoehaphat  occupies  the  Kid- 
roa  hoUow  and  the  adjoining  aodtyities  on  both  sides. 
Ita  limita  have  not  been  defined,  but  it  ia  suppoeed  to 
begin  a  little  aboTe  the  fountain  of  the  Yirgin  (Um  ed- 
Doaj),  and  to  extend  to  the  bend  of  the  lUdion,  under 
Scopua.  The  aocUvity  to  the  eastem  wali  of  Jerusalem 
.  ifl — at  least  towaida  the  top — a  Turkish  burying-ground ; 
and  the  white  tomba,  with  the  Koran  (in  stone)  at  the 
one  end,  and  a  turban  at  the  other,  look  picturesąue  as 
they  dot  for  sereral  hnndred  yarda  the  npper  part  of  the 
alope.  The  other  aodiyity,  aacending  the  steep  between 
OUvet  and  the  Mount  of  Corruption,  is  crowded  all  over 
with  flat  Jewiah  tombą  each  with  the  Hebrew  inscrip- 
tion,  and  specUed  here  and  there  with  bushy  olive- 
treea.  Thus  Moalenis  and  Je¥r8  occupy  the  valley  of 
Jehodiaphat  between  them,  with  their  dead  looking 


was  a  proyidential  circumstance — '^for  she  was  the  si^ 
ter  of  Ahaziah'*  (2  Chroń,  xxii,  11) — as  inducing  and 
probably  enabling  ber  to  rescue  the  infant  Jehoash  ftt)m 
the  massacre  of  his  brothers.  By  her  he  and  his  nurae 
were  concealed  in  the  palące,  and  ailerwards  in  the  Tem- 
pie (2  Kings  xi,  2, 8 ;  2  Chroń,  xxii,  U),  where  he  was 
brought  up  probably  with  her  sons  (2  Chroń,  xxiii,  11), 
who  asaiated  at  his  coronation.  One  of  these  was  Zech- 
ariah,  who  succeeded  her  husband  in  his  office,  and 
was  afterwards  murdered  (2  Chroń,  xxiv,  20). — Smith, 
Needless  doubt  has  been  thrown  upon  her  marriage 
with  Jehoiada  (Newman,  //e6.  Mcnarch,  p.  195),  which 
is  not  expre88ly  mentioned  in  Kings,  as  *^  a  fiction  of  the 
chionicler  to  glorify  his  greatness."  This,  howe^-er,  is 
certainly  assumed  in  2  Kings  xi,  8,  and  is  accepted  by 
Ewald  (Oeschichte,  iii,  576)  as  perfectly  authentic— Kit^ 
to.    See  Jehoiada. 

JehoBh'a&  (Numb.  xiii,  16),  or  Jehoflh^uah  (1 
Clhron.  vii,  27).    See  Joshua. 

Jeho'vałl  (n|!>^^»  Tehovah\  Sept.  usually  o  KvpŁOCf 
Auth.yer8. usually  "the  Lord"),  the 
name  by  which  God  was  pleased  to 
make  himself  known,  under  the  cov» 
enant,  to  the  ancient  Hebrews  (Exod. 
vi,  2, 8),  although  it  was  doubtless  in 
use  among  the  patriarcha,  as  it  oo- 
curs  even  in  the  history  of  the  cre- 
ation  (Greń.  ii,  4).  The  theoiy  of 
Schwind  {Semitische  DenJm,  1792), 
that  the  record  is  of  later  origin  than 
the  Mosaic  age,  is  based  upon  the  false 
assumption  that  the  Hehrews  had 
Crg  preyiously  been  polytheistic.  See 
'^  Genesis;  God. 

I.  Modem  Prommciation  of  (he 
Name. — Although  ever  sińce  the  time 
of  Galatinus,  a  writer  of  the  16th  cen- 
tury  (De  arcanii  catholicm  rerUatia, 
lib.  8)  — not,  as  according  to  othera^ 
sińce  Raymund  Martin  (see  Gusset. 

^ Lex.  p.  883)— it  has  been  the  almost 

The  Vallev  of  Jeho^bnphat  from  tbe  8. W.,  with  the  so-r.jiTlBd  Tombs  of  Ab- «niversal  custom  to  pronounce  the 
sakm  Jehoj.łiapba[,  jind  Zectiamh;  x\w  J^wjah  Buml-plot  la  tke  fore-name  m>P  (in  those  copies  where  it 
grouiid,  and  ihe  Mt.  of  01ivea  in  Ihe  backgrcmucL  .•."','.. 

is  fumished  with  yowels),  Jehorah, 


aerom  the  Kidron  into  each  others*  laces,  and  laid  there 
in  the  common  belief  that  it  was  no  ordinary  pńvilege 
to  die  in  Jeruaalem  and  be  boried  in  such  a  spot.  The 
vaUey  of  the  present  day  presents  nothing  remarkable. 
It  is  rough  to  the  feet  and  barren  to  the  eye.  It  is  stiD, 
moreover,  frequently  a  solitude,  with  nothing  to  break 
the  kmeliness  but  perhapa  a  passing  shepherd  with  a 
few  aheep,  or  a  traveller  on  his  way  to  An&ta,  or  some 
inhabitant  of  Silwin  or  Bethany  going  into  the  city  by 
the  gate  of  St.  Stephen.  Tomba,  and  oliyes,  and  rough, 
TerdoreksB  ateepa  are  all  that  meet  the  eye  on  either 
aide.^ — Fairbaim.    See  Jerusałem. 

Jehoah^eba  (Heb.  Yehothe'bay  9ndirr,  Jehocah- 
swearing ;  Septuag.  'Iwrafiti,  Joeephus  ioMra/^ć^i?),  the 
daoghter  of  Jehoram,  sister  of  Ahaziah,  and  aunt  of  Jo- 
ash,  kings  of  Judah.  The  last  of  these  owed  his  life  to 
her,  and  his  crown  to  her  husband,  the  high-priest  Je- 
hoiada (2  Kings  xi,  2).  In  the  parallel  passage  (2 
Chroń,  xxii,  U)  the  name  is  written  Jbhoshabbatm 
(ncawin^,  YehMhabcUh';  Sept.  lunrapio).  B.C.  882. 
See  Jehoash,  ł.  Her  name  thus  exactly  corresponds 
in  meaning  to  that  of  the  only  two  other  wives  of  Jew- 
iah  prieats  who  are  known  to  us,  viz.  Eusheba,  the  wife 
of  Aaron  (Exod.  vi,  28),  and  Elirabeth,  the  wife  of 
Zechariah  (Lukę  i,  7).  Aa  she  is  called  (2  Kings  xi,  2) 
**  the  daughter  ciJoram^  siater  of  Ahaaiah,"  it  has  been 
oonjectured  that  she  was  the  daughter,  not  of  Athaliah, 
but  of  Joram  by  another  wife  (comp.  Josephus,  Ant,  ix, 
7,  1,  'OxoZic  ofŁOjrarpioc  iStkfri).  She  is  the  only 
recorded  instance  of  the  marriage  of  a  prinoesa  of  the 
loyal  hoose  with  a  high-priest.    On  this  occasion  it 


yet,  at  the  present  day,  most  scholars  agree  that  this 
pointing  is  not  the  original  and  genuine  one,  but  that 
these  vowels  are  derived  from  those  of  *'pfiC,  AdonaL 
For  the  later  Hebrews,  even  before  the  time  of  the  Sept 
yersion,  either  foUowing  some  old  superstltion  (compare 
Herod,  ii,  86 ;  Cicero,  De  nat,  deor,  iii,  56)  or  deceived  by 
a  false  interpretation  of  a  certain  Mosaic  preoept  (Lev. 
xziv,  16),  have  always  regarded  this  name  as  too  sacred 
even  to  be  pronounoed  (Fhilo,  De  viL  Mosia,  iii,  519, 529, 
ed.  Colon.;  Joseph.  i4fł/.  ii,  12, 4 ;  Talmud,  Satóied,  ii,  90, 
a;  Maimonides  in  Jad,  Ckataha,  xiv,  10 ;  aiso  in  Morę 
NAockim,  i,  61 ;  Theodoret,  QiubH,  18  in  Exod.;  Euse- 
bius,  PrtBp,  Enangel.  ii,  805).  Wherever,  therefore,  this 
inefhUe  name  is  read  in  the  sacred  books,  they  pro- 
nounced  ''i^łH,  Mdwiay,"  Lord,  in  its  stead ;  and  hence, 
when  the  Masoretic  text  came  to  be  supplied  with  the 
yowels,  the  four  letters  niH^  were  pointed  with  the 
vowels  of  this  word,  the  initial  *^  Łaking,  as  usual,  a  sim- 
ple  instead  of  a  compound  Sheva.  This  derivation  of  the 
vowels  is  evident  from  the  peculiar  pointing  afler  the 
pre(ixe8,  and  from  the  use  of  the  Dagesh  after  it,  in  both 
which  particulars  it  exactly  imitates  the  peculiaritiea 
of  *^3Sk,  and  likewise  from  the  varied  pointing  when 
foUowing  *'5'1S,  in  which  casc  it  b  written  T^'^^^  and 
pronounced  D^rt^K,  **Elohim,^  God,  the  yowels  of  which 
it  then  borrows,  to  prevent  the  repetition  of  the  sound 
Adonay,  That  a  similar  law  or  notion  preyailed  even 
before  the  Christian  sra  may  be  inferred  from  the  fact 
that  the  Septuag.  renders  Hin*^  by  6  Kypioc,  like  *^3*1K ; 


JEHOYAH 


610 


JEHOYAH 


i 


tmd  eyen  Łhe  Samaritans  obaeryed  the  same  costom,  for 
they  used  to  pTonounce  Mlil'^  by  the  woid  KC*^lp}  SkimOf 
i  e.  THB  NAMB  (Reland,  De  SamaritamSy  p.  12;  Hunt- 
ington, Letiers,  p.  33).  (See,  on  this  sabject  generally, 
Hadr.  Keland,  JJecas  exerciiaiumum  pkUoL  de  verapron, 
nominis  Jehova  [Traj.  ad  Rhen.  1707]). 

II.  Trw  Pointing  of  the  fTordL— Maimonides  (Afore 
Nebochim,  i,  62)  giyes  an  obscure  acoount  of  the  tradi- 
tionAl  and  aecret  method  of  teaching  its  true  pronunda- 
tion  to  the  prLests,  but  avera  that  it  was  unknown  from 
its  form.  Many  adduce  the  statements  of  Greek  wiit^- 
ers,  as  well  pro£uie  as  Church  fathers,  that  the  deity  of 
the  Hebrews  was  called  JfiOj  lAO  (a  few  Itwa,  laov)y 
Theodoret  alone  adding  that  the  Samaritan  pronuncia- 
tion  was  lABE  (Diod.  Sic.  i,  94;  Porph3rry  in  Eusebius, 
Prcep,  Ev,x,n;  Tzetases,  Ckiliad,  vii,  126;  Heaychins 
often ;  Clemens  Alex.  Strom,  v,  p.  666,  Oxon. ;  Origen, 
in  Dan,  yoL  ii,  p.  45 ;  Irenaeus,  Hares.  ii,  66 ;  Jerome,  in 
Pscu  viii;  Theodoret,  Qua8t.  15  in  £xod.;  Epiphanius, 
Ifar.  xx).  The  Gnostics  clasaed  law,  as  the  Hebrew 
diyinity,  among  their  sacred  emanations  (Irenaeus,  i,  34; 
Epiph.  Hor,  26),  along  with  seyeral  of  his  appellations 
(see  Mather,  Uisłoire  du  GnosUcisme^  tab.  8-10;  Beller- 
mann,  U^Aer  die  Getnmen  der  Alten  nUt  dem  Abrcu- 
atbiide,  fasc.  i,  ii,  Berlin,  1817, 1818) ;  and  that  famous 
oracie  of  Apollo,  quoted  by  Macrobius  {Sat.  i,  18),  as- 
cribing  this  name  ('law)  to  the  sun,  appeais  to  haye 
been  of  Gnostic  origin  (Jabłoński,  PcintJu  jEgypt,  i,  250 

Hence  many  recent  writers  haye  followed  the  opinion 
of  those  who  think  that  the  word  in  ąuestion  was  orig- 
inally  pronounced  nin^,  Yahvoh'f  conesponding  to  the 
Greek  'law.  But  this  yiew,  as  well  as  that  which 
maintains  the  correctness  of  the  common  pointing  hin*^ 
(Michaelis,  Supplem,  p.  524;  Meyer,  Bldtter/Ur  hóhere 
Wahrheiły  xi,  p.  806),  is  opposed  to  the  fact  that  yerbs 
of  the  class  (rfb)  from  which  this  word  appears  to  be 
deriyed  do  not  admit  such  a  pointing  (Cholem)  with 
their  second  radicaL  Moreoyer,  the  simple  letters  rT^n^ 
would  naturally  be  pronounced  Jao  by  a  Greek  without 
juiy  special  pointing.  Those,  tberefore,  appear  to  have 
the  bcst  reason  who  prefer  the  pointing  t^^ty^i  Yahveh' 
(not  •1'liT^,  Yahaveh\  for  the  first  n  being  a  mappik-ke 
[as  seen  in  the  form  M^,  kindred  sum,  etse]  does  not 
take  the  compound  Sheva),  as  being  at  once  agreeable 
to  the  laws  of  Hebrew  yocalization,  and  a  form  from 
which  all  the  Greek  modes  of  writing  (including  the 
Samaritan,  as  cited  by  Theodoret)  may  naturally  haye 
sprung  p=/,  1  =0  as  a  "  mater  lectionis,"  and  tl  being 
silent ;  thus  Icaying  a  as  the  representatiye  of  the  first 
Yowel).  From  this,  too,  the  apocapated  fonns  ^h*^  and 
)?^  may  most  readily  be  deriyed ;  and  it  is  further  oor- 
loborated  by  the  etymology.  Ewald  was  the  first  who 
used  in  o//  his  writings,  especially  in  his  translations 
from  the  O.-T.  Scriptures,  the  form  Jahve^  although  in 
his  youth  he  had  taken  ground  in  fayor  of  Je/uwah 
(comp.  his  Ueber  d,  Composition  der  Genetie,  Brunswick, 
1823).  Another  defender  ofJahteh  was  Hengstenberg 
(Beitroffe  zur  Einkit.  uieA.T,  Berlin,  1831-39,  yoL  ii). 
Strongest  in  defence  of  Jehovah  is,  among  prominent 
German  theologians,  Holemann,  Bibdstudien  (Leipzig, 
1859-60),  yoL  i. 

III.  Proper  Sigmjication  ofthe  Term.—A  dew  to  the 
real  import  of  this  name  appears  to  be  designedly  fur- 
nished  in  the  passage  where  it  is  most  distinctiydy  as- 
cribed  to  the  God  of  the  Hebrews,  £xod.  iii,  14:  **And 
God  said  to  Moses,  /  shall  he  tokat  I  shall  he  (^^^K 
rrjriK  "łl^K);  and  he  said,  Thus  shalt  thou  say  to  the 
children  of  Isracl,  The  1  siiałl  be  hae  senł  me  to  you" 
(where  the  Sept.  and  later  yersions  attempt  to  render 
the  spirit  of  the  Hebrew  fT^MX  by  6  wv,  the  Yenetian 
Greek  barbarously  97  óyrwn^c,  Yulg.  qm  eum,  A^Yers. 
*'I  am").    Herę  the  Almighty  makes  known  his  un- 


changeable  character,  implied  in  his  etemal  aelf-eziit- 
enoe,  as  the  g^nnd  of  oonfidenoe  for  the  oppicsaed  lan- 
elites  to  trust  in  his  piomises  of  deUyerance  and  can 
respecting  them.  The  same  idea  is  elsewhere  alludcd 
to  in  the  Old  Test,  e.  g.  Mai.  iii,  6,  **  I  am  Jehovah;  I 
change  not;**  Hos.  xii,  6,  "  Jehoyah  is  his  mementa" 
The  same  attribute  is  referred  to  in  the  deacriptiMi  cf 
the  diyine  Redeemer  in  the  Apocalypae  (Rer.  i,  4,  ^ 
o  &v  Kai  6  t)v  Kat  6  Ipyó/uyoc,  a  pbrase  used  indedh 
nably,  with  designed  Identification  with  Jehorah,  see 
Stuart,  Commentary,  ad  loc.),  with  which  bas  been  aptly 
oompared  the  famous  inscription  on  the  Saitic  tempie 
of  Isis  ('Eyw  fifu  to  yiyopoc  Kai  w  Kai  iaófuvov,  Fln- 
tarch,  De  IHd,  et  OHr,  9),  and  yarious  paraUel  titles  of 
heathen  mythology,  especially  among  Eastem  iiauai]& 
Those,  howeyer,  who  compare  the  Greek  and  Roman  de- 
ities,  Jupiter,  Jove,  Aióc,  etc,  or  who  seek  an  Egyptiaa 
origin  for  the  name,  are  entirely  in  error  (aee  Tholock  j 
treatise  transl  in  the  Bib.  Repo$,  1834,  p.  89  8q.;  Heng- 
stenberg, CrcnutneneM  ofthe  Pentateuch,  i,  213 ;  for  other 
Shemitic  etymologies,  see  Fnrst,  s.  y.).  Nor  are  those 
(as  A.  M<Whorter,  in  the  BHUiotheca  Sacra,  Jan.  1^7. 
who  appears  to  haye  borrowed  his  idea  from  tbe  Jottra. 
ofSac,  Ut,  Jan.  1854,  p.  898  są. ;  see  Tyler,  Jehopah  the 
Redeemer,  Łond.  1861)  entirely  correct  (see  FUrst  s  //c& 
Wdrterb,B,Y.)  who  regard  M^n^  as=n*rr,  and  this  ai 
the  actual  fut.  Kai  of  the  yerb  mil=il^n,  and  so  ren- 
der  it  directly  he  shall  he,  i.  e.  Iłe  that  shall  be ;  stnoe 
this  form,  if  a  yerb  at  all,  would  be  in  the  Hiphil  (see 
Koppe  ad  Exod.  loc.,  in  Pottii  Syll.  iv,  p.  59 ;  Bohleo, 
a<f  (;«fi.  p.  103;  Yatke,  Theolog,  BibL  p.  671)  and  wonki 
signify  he  thai  shaU  cause  to  6f ,  t  e.  the  Creator ;  for  the 
real  fut.  Kai  is  n^H^,  Yihyeh*,  sa  freąuently  occnn. 
It  is  rather  a  denominatiye,  L  e.  noun  or  adj.,  formed  br 
the  prepositiye  *^  prefixed  to  the  yerb-root,  and  pointed 
like  n32|^  and  other  nouns  of  amilar  formation  (Nord- 
heimer*s  Hebr,  Gram,  §  512;  Lee*s  Hebr.  CPrasi.  §  159). 
The  word  will  thus  signify  the  Eiistent,  and  designate 
one  of  the  most  important  attiibutes  of  Deity,  one  that 
i^pears  to  include  all  other  esaential  ideas. — Geeenias. 

lY.  Application  of  the  Title.  —  The  supremę  Deity 
and  national  God  of  the  Hebrews  ia  called  in  the  O.  f  . 
by  his  own  name  Jehoyah,  and  by  the  appeliatire  £u>- 
HiM,  L  e.  God,  either  promiscuously,  or  so  that  one  or 
the  other  predominates  according  to  the  naturę  of  the 
context  or  the  custom  of  the  writer.  Jehorah  Elokia, 
commonly  rendered  the  ''Lord  God,**  is  used  by  appoei- 
tion,  and  not,  as  some  would  haye  it,  Jehorah  of  gods, 
L  e.  chief  or  prince  of  gods.  This  is  the  customaiy  «p- 
pellation  of  Jehoyah  in  Gen.  ii  and  iii ;  £xod.  ix.  ^ 
etc.  Far  morę  frcquent  is  the  compounded  form  wben 
followed  by  a  genitiyc,  as  "Jehoyah  God  of  Isnutl" 
(Jo8h.yii,  13;  yiii,  30);  "Jehoyah  God  of  tby  fatberi" 
(Deut,  i,  21 ;  yi,  8);  "Jehoyah  God,  tby  God"  (DeoL  i, 
31 ;  ii,  7);  "Jehoyah  of  hosts,"  L  e.  of  the  cekstial  ar- 
mieś.    See  Host. 

It  will  be  eyident  to  the  attentiye  reader  that  tbe 
term  lA)rd,  so  freąuently  applied  to  Christ  in  the  N.  T^ 
is  generally  synonymous  with  Jehorah  in  the  Old  Tcsł 
As  Christ  is  called  "The  Alpha  and  Omega,  tbe  be- 
ginning  and  the  ending,  which  is,  and  which  was  sihI 
which  is  to  come,  the  Almighty;**  and  also,  ^of  him  h 
is  said,  Jesus  Christ,  the  same  yesterday,  to-day,  sad 
foreyer;"  he  must  be  Jehorah,  the  etenally  exi£tiBfr 
and  supremę  God  (Fatu  di,  25-27;  Heb.  i,  10-12;  xiii. 
8 ;  Rey.  i,  4,  8).  See  L0GO&  Jah  (A^,  Yah,  Sept.  Ki- 
pioc,  Auth.  Yers.  "  Lord,"  exoept  in  Psa.  lxyiii,  4)  i»  a 
poetic  form  abbreyiated  from  Jehotah,  or  pcrhaps  ftom 
the  morę  andent  pronundation  Jahrth,  It  is  cfaiefly 
employed  in  certain  customary  formulas  or  lefrains  (as 
a  proper  tide  in  l^Ba.lxxxix,9;  xciy,7, 12;  Isa.xxxnii. 
11 ;  Exod.  xy,  2 ;  Psa.  cxyiii,  4;  Isa.  xii,  2;  IVa.  bcnii, 
5 ;  Isa.  xxyi,  4).  This,  as  well  as  a  modification  of  Jc- 
HoyAii,  freąuently  occurs  in  proper  namcsb    See  Hai^ 

LEŁUJAU. 


JEHOYAH-JIREH 


811 


JEHU 


It  shoold  be  remembered  that  Łhe  Hebrew  name  Je- 
hoeah  is  generally  rendered,  in  the  English  yenion,  by 
tbe  word  Lord  (sometimes  God),  and  printed  in  smali 
capitala,  to  distingubh  it  from  the  rendering  of  "^J^M 
and  Kupcoc  by  the  same  word;  it  is  rendered  *' Jeho- 
vah"  only  in  £xod.  yi,  8;  Psa.  lxxxiii,  18;  Isa.  xii,  2; 
xxvi,  4,  and  in  the  oompound  proper  names  following. 

YI.  LUerature,—¥ot  a  fuli  discussion  of  the  ąuestions 
eonnected  with  this  sacred  name,  see,  in  addition  to  the 
above-cited  works,  Gataker,  De  nom.  Dti  tetracram^  in 
his  Opp.  Crił.  (Traj.  ad  Rhen.  1698) ;  Meier,  Ledio  nom, 
tetroffram,  exam.  CViterbo,  1725) ;  Capellus,  Or,  de  nom, 
JekorOf  in  his  Critiea  Sae.  p.  690 ;  Crusios,  Comment,  de 
nominis  tetroffram.  ńgnif.  (lips.  1758);  Malani,  De  Dei 
%om.Juxla  Heb,  eomment,  criL  (Laocs,  1767) ;  Koppe,  In- 
t€rpreiat,formHUg,  etc  (Gdttingen,  1783),  and  in  Pott'8 
S9Uoffe,iyyfA-^\  Eichhom,Bi&;M>M.v, 556-560;  Wahl, 
/>.  Namm  Gottes  Jehora^  excun.  i  to  his  Hahbakuk ;  J.  D. 
Michaelifl,  De  Jehova  ab  jEgjfptiiM  culło,  etc,  in  his  Zersf, 
Id,  Sckrift,  (Jena,  1795) ;  Brendel,  War  Jehota  bei  den 
Heb.  Uo$$  em  Nałionalgottf  (Landsb.  1821)  [see  TheoL 
A  mtaL  for  1822,  p.  384] ;  R.  Abr.  ben-Ezra,  Sepher  Hat- 
sJkem,  nut  Comm,  by  Lippmann  (Fulda,  1834) ;  Landauer, 
Jekoca  u.  Elohim  (Stuttg.  1886) ;  Gambier,  TUlee  ofJe- 
hovah  (London,  1858) ;  De  Buigos,  De  nomtne  tetragram- 
maio  (Fnmkt  1604 ;  Amsteni  1634) ;  Fischer,  id,  (TUb. 
1717) ;  Jahn,  De  mn*^  (Wittenb.  1755) ;  Rafael  ben- 
David,  niiasłbrn  (Yemce,  1662) ;  Reinecciua,  De  n^n*^ 
(Leipz.  1695-6) ;  Snoilshik,  id.  Ó^ittenb.  1621) ;  Ste- 
phani,  id,  (Leips.  1677) ;  Sylburg,  De  Jehora  (Strasburg, 
1643) ;  Yolkmar,  De  nommibue  dirinie  (Wittenb.  1679) ; 
Kochler,  Deprommciatione  eł  vi  tV\T\'^  (Erlangen,  1867) ; 
Kurtz,  Ilisł,  of  the  Old  Covenanł,  i,  18  8q. ;  ii,  98,  215. 
See  Elohim. 

Jeho'vałl-jrreh  (Hebrew  Yehovah'  Yireh%  niri'; 
n»^%  Jehotah  willeee,  L  c  proyide ;  Scpt  K*'  uoc  «Wfv, 
Tiilg.  DomkwM  9idet)y  the  symbotical  epithet  given  by 
Abraham  to  the  sccne  of  his  offering  of  the  ram  provi- 
dentially  supplied  in  place  of  his  son  (Gen.  xxii,  14), 
evidenŁly  with  allusion  to  his  owii  reply  to  Isaac^s  in- 
qiiiry  (yerse  8).    See  Moriah. 

J'eho''vah-liia'ai  (Hebrew  Yehoeah'  Nisn%  mn^ 
*fC9,  Jekorah  is  my  basmer;  Septuag.  K^pio^  Karai^uyfi 
poVf  Yulg.  Dominu*  erahatio  mea^  the  symbolical  title 
bestowed  by  Moses  upon  the  altar  which  he  erected  on 
the  hill  where  his  uplifted  hands  in  prayer  had  caused 
Israel  to  preyail,  stated  in  the  text  to  have  been  intend- 
ed  as  a  memento  of  God's  purpose  to  exterminate  the 
Amalekites  (Exod.  xvii,  15).  See  Rephidim.  The 
phraseology  in  the  original  is  peculiar :  "  For  [the  J  hand 
[is]  on  [Łhe]  throne  (D3,  ?  read  D3,  banner)  of  Jah," 
which  the  A.  Y.  glcsses,  **  Because  the  Lord  hath  swom," 
q.  d.  lifted  up  his  hand.  See  Oath  ;  Hand.  ^  The 
signilicanoe  of  the  name  is  probably  contained  in  the 
alluńou  to  the  staff  which  Moses  held  in  his  hand  as  a 
banner  during  the  engagement,  and  the  raising  or  low- 
ering  of  which  tumed  the  fortunę  of  battle  in  fayor  of 
Łhe  laraelites  or  their  enemies.  God  is  thos  recognised 
in  the  memorial-altar  as  the  deliyerer  of  his  people,  who 
leads  them  to  victory,  and  is  their  rallying-point  in  time 
of  periL  On  the  figuratiye  ose  of  *  banner,'  see  Psa.  lx, 
4;  Isa.  xi,  10"  (Smith).    See  Baniter. 

Jeho^Yah-Bha^lom  (Hebrew  ¥ehovah*  Skalom', 
Cfb^  nin^,  Jekorah  giycApeace,  Ł  c.  prosperity ;  SepL 
Eipritni  Kvpiov,  Yulgate  Domini  pax\  the  appellation 
given  by  Gideon  to  an  altar  erected  by  him  on  the  spot 
where  the  divine  angel  appeared  to  him  and  wrought 
the  miracles  which  confirmed  his  mission ;  in  commem- 
oration  of  the  success  thus  betokened  to  him  {^  Peace 
be  unto  thee*^ ;  stated  to  have  been  extant  at  a  late  day 
in  Ophrah  (Judg.  vi,  24).  (See  CrUici  Sacri,  ii,  949; 
Balthasar,  De  A  Iłari  Gideonit,  Gryph.  1746.)     See  Gid- 

BOS. 

Jeho'Tah-8liain''małi  (Heb.  Yehotah'  3kam'mahf 


na^  rńn"^,  Jehavah  is  there;  Scpt,  Kiptoc  ^««,Yulg. 
Dominus  ibidem,  Auth.YerB.  "The  Lord  is  there"),  the 
symbolical  title  conferred  by  Ezekiel  upon  the  spiritual 
representation  of  Jerusalam  seen  by  him  in  his  yision 
(Ezek.  xlviii,  85) ;  under  a  figurę  evidently  of  like  im- 
port with  the  description  of  the  new  Jenisalem  in  the 
Apocal3rpse  (Rey.  xxi,  8 ;  xxii,  3).  In  the  Old-Test. 
prophecy  it  appears  to  haye  been  a  type  of  the  Gospel 
Church  (oomp.  Immanuel),  probably  through  a  prima- 
ry  referenoe  to  the  restoration  of  the  Jewish  metropolia 
ailer  the  £xile,  and  perhaps  of  the  recoyery  of  the  Jews 
to  Ghristianity,  whereas  the  N.-T.  seer  carries  forward 
the  symbol  to  the  heavenly  abode  of  the  saints  (oomp. 
Jer.  xxxiii,  16). 

Jeho''vałl-t8id'kenu  (Heb.  Yekovak'  Tsidhe'nu, 
^3{^^S  Mih*^,  Jekovak  is  our  rigkteoumetiy  i.  e.  deliyer- 
er, see  G^enins,  Tkee.  HA,  p.  1151,  b;  SepL  Kvp(oc  ^c- 
KauHwyri  vi*^9  ^^  KvpŁoc'  'luoidiK  in  Jer.  xxiii,  6 ; 
Yulg.  Dominus  jtutui  nosłer ;  Auth.  Yers. "  The  Lord  oor 
righteousness"),  an  epithet  applied  by  the  prophet  to 
the  Meesiah  (Jer.  xxiii,  6),  and  likewise  to  Jenisalem 
(Jer.  xxiii,  16),  as  sjrmbolical  of  the  spiritual  prosperity 
of  God's  people  in  the  Christian  dispensation.  (See 
Clarke'8  Comment,  on  the  passages.)  By  some,  the  epi- 
thet in  the  former  passage,  at  least,  is  regarded  as  a»- 
cribing  to  the  Messiah  the  name  Jehoyah,  and  assert- 
ing  that  he  is  or  brings  righteousness  to  man  (Smith*8 
Scripture  Tettimony  to  the  Meesiah,  i,  271, 4th  ed. ;  Hen- 
der8on*s  noto  on  the  passage;  Alexander*s  Comnection 
and  Hormony  o/the  O.  andN,T.p.  287,  2d  ed.) ;  whUe 
others  think  that  the  appellation  here  giyen  to  the  Mes- 
siah is,  like  that  giyen  by  Moses  to  the  altar  he  erected, 
and  which  he  called  Jehoyah- nissi,  simply  a  ooncise 
utterance  of  the  faith  of  Israel,  that  by  means  of  the 
Messiah  God  will  caose  righteousness  to  flourish  (Heng- 
stenbexg's  Christology,  ii,  417).  The  strongest  aiga- 
meot  in  foyor  of  the  latter  is  deriyed  from  Jer.  xxxiii, 
16,  where  the  same  name  is  giyen  to  the  city  of  Jenisa- 
lem, and  where  it  can  only  receiye  snch  an  explanation. 

Jehoz^abad  (Heb.  Yehozabad%  'larirtj,  Jehopoh- 
gicen;  Sept.  'lioZapad,  but  *luf^api8  in  2  Chroń.  xxiy, 
26),  the  name  of  three  men.     See  aiso  Jozabad. 

1.  The  seoond  son  of  Obed-edom  (q.  y.),  the  Levitical 
gate-keeper  of  the  Tempie  (1  Chroń.  xxyi,  4).  KC 
1014. 

2.  The  last-named  of  Jehoshaphat^s  generals  (Jose- 
phus  *Ox6fiaToc,  Ant,  yiii,  16,  2)  in  oommand  of  (?) 
180,000  troops  (2  Chroń.  xyii,  18).     B.C.  cir.  910. 

3.  Son  of  Shomer  (or  Shimrith,  a  Moabitess),  one  of 
the  two  senrants  who  assaasinated  king  Jehoash  of  Ju- 
dah  in  that  part  of  the  city  of  Jenisalem  called  MiUo  (2 
Kings  xii,  21 ;  2  Chroń.  xxiy,  26).     B.C.  837. 

Jehos'adak  (Heb.  Yehotsadak',  p^Sin^  Jeho- 
vah-justifie)d;  Sept.  'liooiŁU',  Auth.  Yers.  "jósedech" 
in  Hag.  and  Zech.),  also  in  the  contracted  form  Joza- 
DAK  (P73C*i%  Yotsadak',  in  Ezra  and  Neh.;  Sept.  'Iii»- 
oidtK),  the  son  of  the  high-priest  Seraiah  at  the  time 
of  the  Babylonian  captiyity  (1  Chroń,  yi,  14, 15).  Al- 
though  he  suoceeded  to  the  high-priesthood  after  the 
slaughter  of  his  father  at  Riblah  (2  Kings  xxy,  18-21), 
he  had  no  opportunity  of  performing  the  functions  of 
his  Office  (Selden,  De  success,  in  Pont.  in  Opp,  ii,  104). 
He  was  cairied  into  captiyity  by  Neduchadnezzar  (1 
Chroń,  yi,  15),  and  evidently  died  in  exile,  as,  on  the 
return  from  the  captivity,  his  son  Joshua  was  the  first 
high-priest  who  ófficiated  (Hag.  i,  1,  12,  14;  ii,  2,  4; 
Zech.  yi,  11 ;  Ezra  iii,  2,  8;  y,  2;  x,  18;  Neh.  xii,  26). 
B.C.  588.    See  Hioh-priest. 

Je^U  (Heb.  Yeku',  SW]^,  according  to  Gresenius  for 
K1rt*'n^,  i  q.  Klrtirt^,  Jehorah  is  He ;  but  according 
to  FUrst  from  K|in =M'^ny  to  live,  q.  d.  the  living;  Sept. 
'lou,  'Ii|o^,  but  'lou^a  in  Hos.  i,  4),  the  name  of  fiye 
men. 


JEHU 


812 


JEHIT 


1.  Son  of  Obed  and  fatber  of  Azariah,  of  the  tribe  of 
Judah  (1  Chroń,  ii,  88).     KC.  post  1612. 

2.  An  Antothite,  one  of  the  Benjamite  dingen  that 
joined  Dayid'8  band  at  Ziklag  (1  Chroń,  xii,  8).  B.a 
1055. 

3.  The  son  of  Hanani,  a  prophet  (Joeephus  'IiiouCt 
AfU,  viii,  12, 8)  of  Judah,  but  whoee  ministrations  were 
chiefly  diiected  to  IsraeL  His  father  was  probably  the 
seer  who  suffered  for  having  lebuked  Asa  (2  Chroń. 
xvi,  7).  He  must  have  begon  his  career  as  a  prophet 
wben  veiy  young.  He  fint  denounced  upon  Baasha, 
king  of  Isiael,  and  his  house  the  same  awful  doom  which 
had  l)een  aiready  executed  opon  the  house  of  Jeroboam 
(1  Kings  xvi,  1,7);  a  sentence  which  was  literaliy  ful- 
filled  (ver.  12).  The  same  prophet  was,  many  years 
after,  oommissioned  to  reprove  Jehoshaphat  for  his  dan- 
gerous  connection  with  the  house  of  Ahab  (2  Chroń. 
xix,  2).  He  appears  to  havc  been  the  public  chronider 
during  the  entire  reign  of  Jehoshaphat,  and  a  volame 
of  his  rocords  is  expreBBly  referred  to  (2  Chroń,  xx,  84). 
RC.  928-886. 

4.  The  eleventh  king  of  the  separate  throne  of  Israel 
(Josephus  'IiyoSc,  Ant,  viii,  13,  7),  and  founder  of  its 
fourth  dynasty;  he  reigned  twenty-eight  years,  RC. 
888-855  (2  Kings  ix,  x;  2  Chroń,  xxii,  7-9).  His  hi»- 
tory  was  told  in  the  lost  **  Chronides  of  the  Kings  of 
Israel"  (2  Kings  x,  84).  His  father's  name  was  Jehosh- 
aphat (2  Kings  ix,  2) ;  his  grandfather^s  (which,  as  be- 
ing  better  known,  was  soroetimes  affixed  to  his  own — 2 
Kings  ix)  was  NimshL  In  his  youth  he  had  been  one 
of  the  goards  of  Ahab.  His  first  appearance  in  history 
is  when,  with  a  comrade  in  arms,  Bidkar,  or  Bar-Dakar 
(Ephraem  Syrus,  Opp.  iv,  540),  he  rode  (either  in  a  sep- 
arate chariot,  SepL,  or  on  the  same  seat,  Josephus)  be- 
hind  Ahab  on  the  fatal  joumey  from  Samaria  to  Jea- 
reel,  and  hcard,  and  laid  up  in  his  heart,  the  warning 
of  Elijah  against  the  murderer  of  Naboth  (2  Kings  ix, 
25).  But  he  had  already,  as  it  would  seem,  been  known 
to  Elijah  as  a  youth  of  promise,  and,  accordingly,  in  the 
yision  at  Horeb  he  is  mentioned  as  the  futurę  king  of 
Israel,  whoro  Elijah  is  to  anoint  as  the  minister  of  ven- 
geance  on  Israel  (1  Kings  xix,  16, 17).  This  injnnction, 
for  reasons  unknown  to  us,  Elijah  never  fulfiUed.  It 
was  resenred  long  aflerwazds  for  his  suoceasor  Elisha. 
See  Ahab. 

Jehu  meantime,  in  the  reigns  of  Ahaziah  and  Jeho- 
ram,  had  ńsen  to  importance.  The  same  activity  and 
vehemence  which  had  fitted  him  for  his  earlier  distinc- 
tions  stiU  continned,  and  he  was  known  far  and  wide  as 
a  charioteer  whose  rapid  driving,  as  if  of  a  madman  (2 
Kings  ix,  21),  cotdd  be  distinguished  even  from  a  dis- 
tance.  Accordingly,  in  the  reign  of  Jehoram,  Jehu 
hdd  a  command  in  the  Israelitish  army  posted  at  Ra- 
moth-^ead  to  hołd  in  check  the  Syrians,  who  of  late 
years  had  madę  strenuous  efforts  to  extend  their  fron- 
tier  to  the  Jordan,  and  had  possessed  themsdyes  of 
much  of  the  territory  of  the  Israelites  east  of  that  river. 
The  contest  was,  in  fact^  stiU  carried  on  which  had  begun 
many  years  before  in  the  reign  of  Ahab,  Jehoram's  &- 
ther,  who  had  lost  his  life  in  battle  before  this  very  Ra- 
moth-gilead.  Ahaziah,  king  of  Judah,  had  taken  part 
with  Jehoram,  king  of  Israd,  in  this  war;  and  as  the 
latter  had  been  severely  wounded  in  a  recent  action, 
and  had  gone  to  Jezreel  to  be  healed  of  his  wounds, 
Ahaziah  had  also  gone  thither  on  a  yisit  of  sympathy  to 
him  (2  Kings  viii,  28,  29).  RC.  888.  According  to 
Ephraem  Syrus  (who  omłts  the  words  "saith  the  Lord" 
in  2  Kings  ix,  26,  and  makes  ^  P  refer  to  Jehu),  he  had, 
in  a  dream  the  night  before,  seen  the  blood  of  Naboth 
and  his  sons  (Ephr.  Syr.  Opp.  iv,  540).  In  this  state  of 
affairs,  a  council  of  war  was  held  among  the  miliury 
oommanders  in  camp,  when,  veiy  unexpectedly,  a  youth 
of  wild  appearance  (2  Kings  ix,  11),  known  by  his  garb 
to  be  one  of  the  disdples  of  the  prophets,  appeared  at 
the  door  of  the  tent,  and  called  forth  Jehu,  dedaring 
that  he  had  a  message  to  ddiver  to  him  (2  Kings  ix,  1- 
5).    They  retired  into  a  secret  chamber.    The  yonth 


nnoorered  a  vial  of  the  aacred  oil  ( Joaephus,  vi  nf.  ix,  6, 
1)  which  he  had  brought  with  him,  poured  it  over 
Jehu's  head,  and  after  announdng  to  łiim  the  message 
from  Elisha,  that  he  was  iq>pointed  to  be  king  of  Israd 
and  destroyer  of  the  house  of  Ahab,  mahed  out  of  the 
house  and  disappeared  (2  Kinga  ix,  7, 8).  Suiprising 
as  this  message  most  have  been,  and  awful  the  daty 
whidi  it  imposed,  Jehu  was  fblly  eąoal  to  the  task  and 
theoccasion.  He  retumed  to  the  oooncil,  probably  with 
an  altered  air,  for  he  was  asked  what  had  been  the  com- 
munication  of  the  3roung  prophet  to  him.  He  tiied  at 
fiist  to  evade  their  ąuestions,  but  then  ievealed  the  sit- 
uation  in  which  he  had  fonnd  himadf  pUiced  by  the 
prophetic  calL  In  a  moment  the  enthusiasm  of  the 
aimy  took  fire.  They  threw  their  gaiments— the  laige 
8quare  bęgedf  similar  to  a  wnpper  or  pUud — under  his 
feet,  80  as  to  form  a  loogh  carpet  of  state,  placed  him 
on  the  top  of  the  stairs  (q.  v.),  as  on  an  extempore 
throne,  blew  the  royal  salute  on  their  trmnpets,  and 
thus  ordained  him  king  (2  Kings  tx,  11-14).  Jehu  was 
not  a  man  to  lose  any  advantage  through  rentuasnesŁ 
He  immediatdy  cut  off  all  communication  between  Ra- 
moth-gilead  and  Jezred,  and  then  set  off  at  fuli  apeed 
with  his  andent  oomrade  Bidkar,  whom  he  madę  captain 
of  the  host  in  his  place,  and  a  band  of  horsemen.  From 
the  tower  of  Jezred  a  watchman  saw  the  doud  of  dust 
nused  by  the  advandng  party,  and  aimounced  his  com- 
ing  (2  Kings  ix,  17).  The  messengers  that  werc  reut 
out  to  him  he  detained,  on  tlie  same  piinciple  of  aocrtcy 
which  had  guided  all  his  movements.  It  was  not  lill 
he  had  almost  reached  the  dty,  and  was  identified  by 
the  watchman,  that  apprehension  was  fdt.  But  eren 
then  it  seems  as  if  the  two  kings  in  Jezreel  antidpated 
news  from  the  Syiian  war  rather  than  a  TevolQtion  at 
home.  Jehoram  went  forth  himself  to  meet  him.  and 
was  aooompanied  by  the  king  of  Judah.  They  met  in 
the  fieU  of  Naboth,  so  fatal  to  the  house  of  Ahab.  The 
king  saluted  him  with  the  question,  **Is  it  peaoe,  Jeho?* 
and  recdved  the  answer,  ^  What  peace,  so  loog  as  the 
whoredoms  (idolatries)  of  thy  mother  Jezebel  and  her 
witchcrafts  aro  so  many  ?"  This  completely  opened  the 
eyes  of  Jehoram,  who  exclaimed  to  the  king  of  Judah, 
^  There  b  treacheiy,  O  Ahaziah  T  and  tumed  to  flee. 
But  Jehu  fdt  no  infirmity  of  purpose,  and  knew  that 
the  slightest  wavering  might  be  fatal  to  him.  He 
therefore  seized  his  opportunity,  and  taking  fuli  aira  at 
Jehoram,  with  the  bow  which,  as  captain  of  the  bort, 
was  ałways  with  him,  shot  him  through  the  heart  (2 
Kings  ix,  24).  Jehu  caused  the  body  to  be  thrown 
back  into  the  fidd  of  Naboth,  out  of  which  he  had  pa»- 
ed  in  his  attempt  at  flight,  and  grimly  remarked  to 
Bidkar,  his  captain,  ^Remember  how  that,  when  I  and 
thon  rode  together  after  Ahab  his  father,  the  Lord  Isid 
this  burden  upon  him."  The  king  of  Judah  endearorał 
to  escape,  but  Jehu's  soldiers  pursned  and  inflicted  npoo 
him  at  Beth-gan  (A.y.  **the  garden-house^Tr  probabfy 
Engannim,  a  wound  of  which  he  afterwards  dicd  at 
Megiddo.  See  Ahaziah.  Jehu  himsdf  entered  tlie 
dty,  whither  the  news  of  this  transaction  had  already 
preosded  him.  As  he  passed  under  the  walls  of  the  pa^ 
aoe,  Jezebd  herself,  studiously  arrayed  for  effect,  appesr- 
ed  at  one  of  the  Windows,  and  saluted  him  with  a  qoe*- 
tion  such  as  might  have  shaken  a  man  of  weaker  nerres, 
*<Had  Zimri  peace,  who  dew  his  master?**  But  Jcba 
was  unmoved,  and,  instead  of  answering  her,  callcd  out, 
"Who  is  on  my  ride— who?"  when  sereral  erniucht 
madę  their  appearance  at  the  window,  to  whom  be 
cried,  **  Throw  her  down  !**  and  immediatdy  this  proad 
and  guilty  woman  lay  a  blood-etained  corpse  in  the 
road,  and  was  trodden  under  foot  by  the  horaes.  See 
Jezebeu  Jehu  then  went  in  and  took  poasesion  of  the 
palące  (2  Kings  ix,  16-87).  He  waa  now  master  of 
Jezred,  which  was,  next  to  Samaria,  the  chief  town  of 
the  kingdom;  but  he  could  not  fed  eecure  whik  the 
capital  itsdf  was  in  the  hands  of  the  ro^-al  famOy,  and 
of  thoee  who  might  be  suppoeed  to  fed  strong  atiadi- 
ment  to  the  house  of  Ahab^    The  force  oftfae  Uow 


JEHTJ 


813 


JEHU 


which  he  had  stnick  waa,  howeyer,  felt  even  in  Sama- 
ria. When,  therefore,  he  wrote  to  the  peraons  in  au- 
ttiority  there  the  somewhat  ironical  but  deaignedly  in- 
timidating  oomuel,  to  set  up  one  of  the  young  prinoes 
in  Samaria  as  king  and  fight  out  the  matter  which  lay 
between  them,  they  sent  a  yery  submissire  answer,  giv- 
ing  in  their  adhesion,  and  professing  their  readiness  to 
obey  in  all  things  his  commands.  A  second  letter  firom 
Jehu  tested  this  profession  in  a  truły  horrid  and  ex- 
ceedingly  Oriental  manner,  requiiing  them  to  appear 
before  him  on  the  morrow,  biinging  with  them  the 
heads  of  all  the  royal  prinoes  in  Samaria.  A  fallen 
house  meets  with  little  pity  in  the  East;  and  when  the 
new  king  left  his  palaoe  the  next  moming,  he  found 
serenty  human  heads  piled  up  in  two  heaps  at  hia  gate. 
There,  in  the  aight  of  these  heapa,  Jehu  took  occasion 
to  explain  his  conduct,  declaring  that  he  must  be  re- 
garded  as  the  appointed  minister  of  the  diviue  decrees, 
pronounoed  long  sinoe  against  the  house  of  Ahab  by  the 
prophets,  not  one  of  whose  words  should  fali  to  the 
ground.  He  then  continued  his  proscriptions  by  exter- 
minating  in  Jezreel  not  only  all  in  whoee  veius  the  bk)od 
of  the  condemned  race  flowed,  but  also — ^by  a  considera- 
ble  stretch  of  his  commission— <those  offioers,  mimstera^ 
and  creatures  of  the  late  govemment  who,  if  suffered 
to  li  ve,  would  most  likely  be  disturbers  of  his  own  reign. 
He  next  proceeded  to  Samaria.  So  rapid  had  been 
these  proceedings,  that  on  his  way,  at  ^  the  shearing- 
house"  (or  Betheked),  he  encountered  forty-two  sons  or 
nephews  (2  Chroń,  xx,  8)  of  the  late  king  of  Judah, 
and  therefore  connected  by  marriage  with  Ahab,  on  a 
risit  of  compUmeut  to  their  relatires,  of  whose  fali, 
seemingly,  they  had  not  heaid.  These  also  were  put 
to  the  sword  at  the  fatal  well,  as,  in  the  later  history, 
of  Mizpah,  and,  in  our  own  days,  of  Cawnpore  (2  Kings 
X,  14).  (See  Kitto'8  Daiiy  Bibie  lUutt,  ad  loc)  As  he 
drove  on  he  encountered  a  strange  figurę,  such  as  might 
hare  reminded  him  of  the  gieat  Elijah.  It  was  Jehon- 
adab,  the  austeie  Arab  sectary,  the  son  of  Rechab.  In 
him  his  keen  eye  diacoyered  a  ready  ally.  The  austere 
virtue  and  respected  character  of  the  Rechabite  would, 
as  he  felt,  go  far  to  hallów  his  proceedings  in  the  eyes 
of  the  multitude.  He  took  him  into  his  chariot,  and 
they  concocted  their  schemes  as  they  entered  Samaria 
(2  Kings  X,  15, 16).  See  Jbhomadab.  In  that  capital 
Jehu  continued  the  extirpation  of  the  persona  mors  in- 
timately  connected  with  the  late  goremment.  This, 
far  firom  being  in  any  way  singular,  is  a  common  clr- 
ciunstance  in  Eastem  revolutions.  But  the  great  stroke 
waa  yet  to  oome ;  and  it  was  conceived  and  execnted 
with  that  union  of  intrepid  daring  and  profound  secrecy 
which  marks  the  whole  career  of  Jehu.  His  main  oh- 
jecŁ  was  to  extenninate  the  ministers  and  morę  deyoted 
adherenta  of  Baal,  who  had  been  so  much  encounged 
by  JezebeL  There  was  even  a  tempie  to  this  idol  in 
Samaria;  and  Jehu,  never  scrupulous  about  the  means 
of  reaching  objects  which  he  beliered  to  be  good,  laid  a 
anare  by  which  he  hoped  to  cut  off  the  main  body  of 
Baal*s  ministers  at  one  blow.  He  professed  to  be  a 
morę  zealous  senrant  of  Baal  than  Ahab  had  been,  and 
proclaimed  a  great  festival  in  his  honor,  at  which  nonę 
but  his  true  senrants  were  to  be  present.  The  proph- 
eta,  priests,  and  officers  of  Baal  assembled  from  aU  parts 
for  this  great  sacrifice,  and  sacerdotal  restments  were 
giren  to  them,  that  nonę  of  JehoTah'8  worshippers 
might  be  taken  for  them.  Soldiers  were  posted  so  that 
nonę  might  escape,  The  yast  tempie  at  Samaria  raised 
b>'  Ahab  (1  Kings  xri,  82;  Joeephus,  A  ta.  x,  7,  6)  was 
CTOwded  from  end  to  end.  The  chief  sacrifice  was  of- 
fercd,  as  if  in  the  exce88  of  his  zeal,  by  Jehu  himself. 
Jehonadab  Joined  in  the  deception.  There  was  some 
apprehcnsion  lest  worshippeis  of  Jehoyah  might  be 
found  in  the  tempie ;  such,  it  seems,  had  been  the  inter- 
mixture  of  the  two  religions.  As  soon,  howeyer,  as  it 
was  asccrtained  that  all,  and  nonę  but  the  idolateis  were 
there,  the  signal  was  gi^en  to  eighty  trusted  guards, 
and  a  sweeping  massacre  remoyed  at  one  blow  the  whole 


heathen  population  of  the  kingdom  of  Israel.  The  in* 
nermost  sanctuary  of  the  tempie  (translated  in  the  A« 
y.  "  the  city  of  the  houae  of  Baal")  was  stormed,  the 
great  stone  statuę  of  Baal  was  demolished,  the  wooden 
figures  of  the  inferior  diyinities  sitting  round  him  were 
tom  from  their  plaoes  and  bumt  (Ewald,  Gtsch,  iii,  526), 
and  the  site  of  the  sanctuary  itaelf  became  the  public 
resort  of  the  inhabitants  of  the  city  for  the  basest  uses 
(2  Kings  X). 

Notwithstanding  this  zeal  of  Jehu  in  extenninating 
the  grosser  idolatries  which  had  grown  up  under  his 
immediate  predecessors,  he  was  not  prepared  to  subyert 
the  policy  which  had  led  Jeroboam  and  his  successois 
to  maintain  the  schismatic  establishment  of  the  golden 
calyes  in  Dan  and  Beth-el.  See  Jeroboam.  This  was, 
howeyer,  a  crime  in  him — ^the  worship  rendered  to  the 
golden  calyes  being  plainly  contrary  to  the  law ;  and  he 
should  haye  felt  that  he  who  had  appointed  him  to  the 
throne  would  haye  maintained  him  in  it,  notwithstand- 
ing the  apparent  dangers  which  might  seem  likely  to 
ensue  from  permitting  his  subjects  to  repair  at  the  great 
festiyals  to  the  metropolia  of  the  rival  kingdom,  which 
was  the  centrę  of  the  tbeocratical  worship  and  of  sacer- 
dotal senrice.  Herc  Jehu  fell  short :  and  this  yery  pol- 
icy, apparently  so  prudent  and  far-sighted,  by  which  he 
hoped  to  secure  the  stability  and  independence  of  his 
kingdom,  was  that  on  accouiit  of  which  the  term  of  rule 
gpranted  to  his  dynasty  was  shortened.  For  this  it  was 
foretold  that  his  dyiuttty  should  extend  only  to  four 
generations ;  and  for  this  the  diyine  aid  was  withheld 
from  him  in  his  wais  with  the  Syrians  under  Hazael  on 
the  eastem  frontier.  Hence  the  war  was  disastrous  to 
him,  and  the  Syrians  were  able  to  maintain  themselyes 
in  the  possession  of  a  great  part  of  his  territories  beyond 
the  Jordan  (2  Kings  x,  29-83).  He  died  in  quieŁ,  and 
was  buried  in  Samaria,  leaying  the  throne  to  hb  son 
Jehoahaz  (2  Kings  x,  34-86).  B.a  855.  His  name  is 
thoughtto  be  the  first  of  the  Israelitish  kings  which  ap- 
pears  in  the  Assyrian  monuments.  It  seems  to  be  found 
on  the  black  obelisk  diacoyered  at  Nimrdd  (Layard, 
yinweh,  i,  396),  and  now  in  the  British  Museum,  among 
the  names  of  kings  who  are  bringing  tribute  (in  this 
case  gold  and  silyer,  aad  artides  manufactured  in  gold) 
to  Shalmaneser  I.  His  name  is  giyen  as  ^'Jehu'*  (or 
**  Yahua"),  "the  son  of  Khumri"  (Omri).  This  subsd- 
tution  of  the  name  of  Omri  for  that  of  his  own  father 
may  be  accounted  for  either  by  the  importance  which 
Omri  had  assumed  as  the  second  founder  of  the  north- 
era  kingdom,  or  by  the  name  of  ^  Beth-Khumri,"  only 
giyen  to  Samaria  in  these  monuments  as  ^  the  House  or 
Capital  of  Omri"  (Layard,  Nmeveh  and  BabyUmt  p.  643 ; 
Rawlinson*s  Herodot,  i,  465). 

There  is  nothing  diificult  to  undcrstand  in  the  char^ 
acter  of  Jehu.  He  was  one  of  those  decisiye,  terrible, 
and  ambitious,  yet  prudent,  calculating,  and  passionless 
men  whom  God  from  time  to  time  raises  up  to  change 
the  fate  of  empires  and  execute  his  judgments  on  the 
earth.  He  boasted  of  hia  zeal—*'  Come  and  see  my  zeal 
for  the  Lord"— but  at  the  bottom  it  was  zeal  for  Jehu. 
His  zeal  was  great  so  long  as  it  led  to  acts  which  squared 
with  his  own  interests,  but  it  oooled  maryellously  when 
required  to  take  a  direction  in  his  judgment  less  fayor- 
able  to  them.  £yen  his  zeal  in  extirpating  the  idolatry 
of  Baal  is  not  free  from  suspidon.  The  altar  of  Baal 
was  that  which  Ahab  had  associated  with  his  throne, 
and  in  overtuming  the  latter  he  could  not  pmdently  let 
the  former  stand,  surrounded  as  it  was  by  attached  ad- 
herenta of  the  house  which  he  had  extirpated.  He 
must  be  regarded,  like  many  others  in  history,  as  an  in- 
strument for  acoomplishlng  great  purposes  rather  than 
aa  great  or  good  in  himsd£  In  the  long  period  during 
which  his  destiny — though  known  to  otliers  and  per- 
haps  to  himself— lay  dormant;  in  the  suddenness  of  his 
rise  to  power;  in  the  mthlesaness  with  which  he  car- 
ried  out  his  purposes;  in  the  union  of  profound  silence 
and  dissimulation  with  a  stem,  fanatic,  wayward  zeal, 
he  has  not  been  without  hia  likenesfles  in  modem  times* 


JEHUBBA 


814 


JEHUDA 


The  Scripture  narratire,  although  it  iixe8  our  attention 
on  Łhe  senrioes  which  be  rendeied  to  the  cause  of  rdig- 
ion  by  the  extenniiiatioii  of  a  wortbless  dynasty  and  a 
degrading  worship,  yet,  on  the  whole,  leares  the  aense 
Łhat  it  was  a  reign  barren  in  great  reaiilta.  HiB  dynasty, 
indeed,  was  firmly  seated  on  the  throne  longer  than  any 
other  royal  hoose  of  Israel  (2  Kings  x),  and  under  Jero- 
boam  II  it  acquired  a  high  name  among  the  Oricntal 
nations.  Bat  Elisha,  who  had  raised  him  to  power,  as  far 
as  we  know,  never  saw  him.  In  other  respects  it  was  a 
failure;  the  original  sin  of  Jeroboam'8  worship  oontin- 
ued ;  and  in  the  prophet  Hoaea  there  seems  to  be  a  ret- 
ribution  exacted  for  the  bloodshed  by  which  he  had 
mounted  the  throne:  "I  will  ayenge  the  blood  of  Jez- 
red  upon  the  house  of  Jehu"  (Hos.  i,  4),  as  in  the  sinai- 
lar  condemnation  of  Baasha  (1  Kings  xvi,  2).  See  a 
striking  poem  to  this  cfFect  on  the  character  of  Jehu  in 
the  Lyra  Apottolica,  —  Kitto;  Smith.  See  Israel, 
ki3;gix>m  of. 

5.  Son  of  Josibiah,  apparently  one  of  the  chief  Sim- 
eonites  who  migrated  to  the  ralley  of  Gedor  in  quest  of 
pasturage  during  the  reign  of  liezekiah,  and  expelled 
the  aboriginal  Hagarites  (1  Chroń,  iy,  85).  B.G.  cir.  711. 

Jehub'bah  (Heb.  Yechubbah^  Han^  for  which  the 
margin  has  Sl^l,  re-Chubbah^  L  e.  and  UtMah,  as  if 
the  proper  form  were  nSM,  Chubbah'^  i  e.  hidden ;  Sept. 
'P/3a  Y.  r.  la/3a,yulg.  Haba),  one  of  the  sons  of  Sha- 
mer,  or  Shomer,  of  the  tribe  of  Asher  (1  Chroń,  vii,  34). 
RC.  perhaps  dr.  1618. 

Jehu'cal  (Heb.  Yehukcd',  b?!in;»,  aJHU;  ScpL  'Iw- 
axaX),  son  of  Shelemiah,  one  of  two  persons  sent  by 
king  Zedekiah  to  the  prophet  Jeremiah  to  reąaest  his 
prayers  on  beholf  of  the  kingdom ;  but  who  joined  with 
his  associates  on  his  return  in  demanding  the  prophet*s 
death  on  account  of  his  unfavorable  response  (Jer. 
xxxvii,  8).  In  Jer.  xxxviii,  1  his  name  is  written  in 
the  contracted  form  Jucał  (^ss^l*^,  Yukal%  Sept.  *Iwa- 
XaX),  and  in  yerse  4  he  is  styled  one  of  "  the  prinoes." 
RC.  689. 

Je''liud  (Heb.  Ythud',  *Tnj,  apocopated  from  Ju- 
DAH,  as  in  Dan.  ii,  25,  etc. ;  SepŁ  *Iov^  v.  r.  'lou^  and 
'A2^wp),  a  town  on  the  border  of  Dan,  named  between 
Baalah  and  Bene-barak  (Josh.  xix,  45).  It  is  perhaps 
the  present  yillage  ^l-Yehudiyeh,  seyen  and  a  half  milcs 
Bouth  of  east  from  Jaffa  (Bobinson's  Reaearches,  iii,  45 ; 
new  ed.  iii,  140, 141,  notes;  Schwarz,  PaUst,  p.  141). 

Jehudah  (ha-Levi)  de  Modena.    See  Modssa. 

Jehudah  ben-Balaam.    See  Ib^^-Balaam. 

Jehudah  ben-David.    See  Chajuo. 

Jehudah  ben-Koreiah.    See  Ibn-Koreisk. 

Jehudah  (ha-Levi)  ben-Samuel  (called  in  Ar- 
abie Abułhassan)  a  distinguished  Spanish  Jew,  great 
alike  as  lingubt,  phUosopher,  and  poet,  one  of  the  great- 
est  lights  in  Jewish  literaturę,  was  bom  in  Castile  about 
1086  according  to  Griitz,  or  1105  according  to  Rappo- 
port.  But  little  is  known  of  the  early  history  of  his 
life;  when  a  youth  of  fifteen  he  was  already  celebrat^d 
as  a  promising  poetical  genius.  In  the  yigor  of  man- 
hood  we  find  Jehudah  endeayoring  to  spread  a  knowl- 
edge  of  Rabbinical  and  Arabian  literaturę,  both  by  po- 
etical productions  and  by  disciples  whom  he  gathered 
about  him  at  Toledo,  where  he  founded  a  college.  About 
1141  he  is  supposed  to  have  completed  his  Kozari 
C^lf.S),  generally  called  Cusarif  the  best  work  ever 
written  in  defence  of  the  Jewish  religion,  and  aiming  to 
«  rcfute  the  objections  urged  against  Judaism  by  Chris- 
tians,  Mohammedaits,  philosophical  infidels,  and  that 
sect  of  the  Jews  known  to  be  bittcrly  opi^osed  to  the 
recognition  of  the  authority  of  tradition — the  Karaites. 
Many  cminent  critics,  among  whom  ranks  Bartolocci, 
have  long  discredited  the  supposition  that  it  is  the  pro- 
duction  of  Jehudah,  but  of  late  all  seem  agreed  that  he 
was  really  the  author  of  the  work,  which  is  entitled 


{The  Book  o/Eridence  andArffumenl  in  Apologyfort}» 
detpued  JUUgion,  L  e.  Judaism).    In  style,  this  uroik  ia 
an  imitation  of  Flato*s  dialogues  on  the  immortality  of 
the  souL    According  to  Griitz  (Ge$ekichte'der  Jadm^ 
y,  214  8q.;  vi,  146  sq.),  the  Khozan,  a  tribe  of  tbe 
Finns,  which  was  akin  to  the  Bulgarians,  Avarians,  and 
Uguriana,  or  Hungariaus,  had  settled  on  the  borden 
of  Asia  and  Europę,  and  founded  a  dominion  on  the 
mouth  of  the  Yolga  and  the  Caspian  Sea,  veiT  near 
Astrachan.    After  the  destruction  of  the  Persian  em- 
pire, this  Finnish  tribe  inyaded  the  Caucasus,  madę  in- 
roads  into  Armenia,  conquered  the  Crinea,  exacted 
tiibute  from  the  Byzantine  emperors,  madę  yassils  of 
the  Bulgarians,  etc,  and  compelled  the  Rusńans  to  seod 
annually  to  their  kings  a  sword  and  a  oostly  fur.    like 
their  neighbon,  the  Bulgarians  and  Rosflijuis,  they  woe 
idolaten,  and  gave  themselyes  up  to  groes  sensualitj 
and  licentiousness,  until  they  became  aoquainted  ińth. 
Christianity  and  Mohammedanism  through  oommerdal 
interoourse  with  tbe  Gzeeks  and  Araba,  and  wUh  Juda- 
ism through  the  Greek  Jews  who  fled  from  the  retigions 
persecutions  of  the  Byzantine  emperar  Leo  (A.D.  72S). 
Of  these  strangers  called  Khozarians  the  Jews  gained 
the  greater  admiration,  as  they  especially  distinguished 
themselyes  as  merchanta,  physicians,  and  coundlkws  of 
State ;  and  the  Khozars  came  to  contnist  the  Jewish  re- 
ligion with  the  then  corrupt  Christianity  and  Moham- 
medanism.    King  Bulan,  the  officials  of  state,  and  the 
majority  of  the  people,  who  had  determiued  to  fonake 
their  idolatrous  worship,  cmbraced  Judaism,  A.D.  731. 
This  important  item  of  Jewish  histoiy,  which  is  rigidhf 
contended  for  as  authentic  by  some  of  the  best  etudenti 
of  Ofiental  history  (compare  Vivien  de  St.  Martin,  La 
Khazarsy  memoire  lu  a  rAeademie  des  InaeripHaiu  et  da 
Bettes-Lettres  [Paris,  1851] :  Carmoly,  Itineraim  de  la 
Terre  Sainte  [Bnucelles,  1847],  p.  1-104;  Gnitz.6>«>Jl.d 
Juden,  y,  210  Bq.),  throws  light  upon  Eldad  Ha-Dants 
description  of  the  lost  tribes ;  the  references  in  the  Chsl- 
dee  paraphiBse  on  Chroń,  i,  5,  26 ;  the  allosioii  in  Jońp- 
pon  ben-Gorion,  eh.  x,  ed.  Breithaupt;  and  many  oiber 
theories  about  the  whereabouts  of  the  ten  tribek    See 
Rbstoration.     It  is  this  item  of  Eastem  hif^ory  that 
fumished  Jehudah  a  baais  for  his  woik.     In  his  A'asan 
he  represents  Bulan  as  determined  to  forsake  idolatir, 
and  eamestly  deeirons  to  find  the  tnie  religioii.    To  tlia 
end  he  sends  for  two  philosophers,  a  Christian  and  a  Mo* 
hammedan,  listens  to  the  exposiuons  of  their  respectire 
creeds,  and,  as  they  all  refer  to  the  Jews  as  the  fmiotsiD- 
head,  he  at  last  sends  for  an  Israelite,  one  Rabbi  Isaae 
of  Sanger,  probably  a  Bithynian,  to  propound  his  re- 
ligious  tenets,  becomes  conyinoed  of  their  diyine  origin, 
and  embraces  the  Jewish  religion.    The  Tea\  importaDce 
of  this  work,  howeyer,  rests  on  tbe  discussions  into  whkh 
it  enters  on  many  subjects  bearing  upon  the  espccition  of 
the  Hebrew  Scriptures,  Jewish  literaturę,  histoiy,  philos- 
ophy,  etc,  all  of  which  are  in  tum  reyiewed.     Thos,  for 
instance,  synagogual  seryice,  feasts,  fasta,  sacrificcs.  the 
Sanhedrim,  the  developroent  of  the  Talmud,  the  Maso- 
rah,  the  yowel-points,  the  Karaites,  etc,  are  all  roinote^ 
discussed  in  this  work,  which  De  Sacy  (see  BioyrajAk 
Unmertelle,  xxii,  101  eq.)  has  pronounced  to  be  one  of 
the  most  yaluable  and  beautiful  productions  of  the  Jew- 
ish pen.    Aben-Ezra  and  Dayid  Kimchi  (reąuentlr  re- 
fer to  it,  the  former  in  his  Commentaiy,  the  latter  in  his 
Lexicon.    A  Hebrew  tranailation  of  Koutri  was  pre- 
pared  by  Jehudah  Ibn-Tibbon,  who  named  it  **C9 
^nT'^=n  (The  BookofKozart)j  after  the  heroes  of  it,  aod 
it  was  first  published  at  Fano  in  1506,  then  at  Tenice  in 
1547,  with  an  introduction  and  commentary  by  MuKSto 
(Yenice,  1594) ;  with  a  Latin  tnmslation  and  disseita- 
tions  by  Jo.  Buxtorf,  fil.  (Basie,  1660) ;  a  Spanish  trans- 
lation  of  it  was  madę  by  Abendana  ^ithout  the  Hehrew 
text  (Amsterd.  1608).    The  work  has  morę  lately  beca 
published  ^lith  a  commentary  by  Satorow  (BerL  1795); 
with  a  commentary,  yarious  readinga^  iDdex,  etc,  by  G 


JEHUDAH 


815 


JEKUTHIEL 


Brecher  (Pragnę,  1888-40) ;  and  the  very  latest,  with  a 
German  tninalAtton,  expliuiatoiy  notes,  etc.,  by  Dr.  Da- 
vid  Cassel  (Leipzig,  1858),  which  U  geneially  oonsidered 
the  most  useful  edition«  Jehudah,  like  many  othćr  em- 
inent  Jewish  literat  i  of  his  day,  seems  to  have  practised 
medicine  to  secure  to  himself  a  suificient  income,  which 
his  licerary  labors  eyidently  failed  to  proytde  for  him. 
Afler  the  complction  of  his  Kozari  he  dctermined  to 
emigrace  to  the  Holy  Land,  and  die  and  be  buried  in  the 
land  of  his  forefathers.  Tradition  says  that  he  was 
miirdered  by  an  Arab  (aboat  1142)  while  he  was  lying 
on  his  face  under  the  waUs  of  Jerusalem,  overcome  by 
his  oonteropUtions  at  the  niins  of  Zioń,  of  "  the  depop- 
nlation  of  a  region  once  so  densely  inhabited,  the  wU- 
demesB  and  desolation  of  a  land  formerly  teeming  with 
kucnriance^' — a  gift  which  God  had  giyen  unto  his  fore- 
fathers, who  had  failed  to  appreciate  the  goodness  of 
their  Lord.  He  is  said  to  be  buried  at  Kephar  KabuL 
See  Geiger,  Wissengchajtliche  Zeitschriff,  i,  168  8q.;  ii, 
867  są. ;  Cassel,  Das  Buch  Kusari  (Leipzig,  1863),  p.  v- 
xxxv ;  Grfttz,  Geachichłe  der  Judm,  vi,  140-167 ;  Stein- 
schneider,  Catało^m  Libr,  H^.  in  Bibliotkeca  Bodleia- 
na,  coL  1888-1342;  Sachs,  /2e%.  Poe$ie  der  Juden  m 
SpanieHy  p.  287 ;  Turner,  Jewish  BabbiSf  p.  22  8q. ;  Kitto, 
BAL  Cydop.  8.  V. ;  Rule,  Karaites  (London,  1870),  p.  80 
8q. ;  Fttrst,  BiUioth,  Jud,  ii,  85  8q. 

Jehudah  (Arjk-Loeb)  ben-Zebi  (Hirsh),  a  Jew- 
ish wiiter  of  some  noto,  was  bom  at  Krotoschin  (Polish 
Pnissia)  about  1680.  He  afterwards  became  rabbi  at 
Carpentras  and  A\'ignon.  His  works  are:  (1)  A  He- 
brew  Lexicon,entitled  m^rn  *'^nc  {The  Tents  o/Ju- 
dah)  (Jesnitz,  1719,  4to),  consisting  of  two  parts;  the 
fiiBt  part,  thi:^  WĆ  (the  ererlastmff  name),  confines  it^ 
Klf  mainly  to  proper  names;  the  second  part,  DW1  *1J 
(place  and  name)^  supplies  the  words  omitted  in  the 
first  part  Thia  work  partakes  of  the  naturę  of  a  con- 
ooidśnce  as  well  as  of  a  Iexicon,  inasmuch  as  it  givc8 
the  places  in  Scripture  in  which  every  word  is  to  be 
found: — (2)  A  Hebrew  Grammar,  called  rt^TSin^  pl?H 
(The  Portion  ofjudah) ;  of  this  work,  the  introduction 
only,  ©Tipn  lirb  mo-^  (Th»  Foundation  of  the  Sa^ 
cred  Lanffuage)^  was  ever  pubUshed  (Wilmersdorf,  1721, 
4to) ;  it  oontains  fifteen  canons  and  paradigms,  with  a 
German  tnuialation:— and  (3)  a  Concordance,  entitled 
rnsinp  yja  (The  Stem  ofJudah)tyr\Ac\L  only  goes  as  far 
8s\he  poot  C]3S  (Offenbach,  1782,  4to).— Kitto,  BibUc 
Cydop.  8.  V. ;  Steinachneider,  Libri  Htbrai  in  BibUoth, 
Bodleicma,  coL  1378;  BiUioyr,  Handb,f,  Hebr,  Sprach- 
bauk  (Leipzig,  1869),  p.  70;  FUrst,  Biblioih,  Jud,  i,  145 
są. 

Jehudah,  ha-Eodeah,  etc.  See  Judah,  etc 
Jehu^di  (Hebrew  Yehudi',  '^*l5łrt%  a  Jew,  as  often; 
Sept.  'Iov^elv  v,  r.  'Jot;^iV,  *Ioi;^«,  'IovSii)  son  of  Neth- 
aniah,  sent  by  the  princes  to  invite  Barach  to  read  Jer- 
emiah^s  roli  to  them,  and  who  afterwards  read  it  to  the 
king  himself  (Jer.  xxxvi,  14,  21).     B.C.  605. 

Jehudi^jah  (Heb.  Yehudiyah\  hj^isin;'  fwith  the 
art^  Łhe^  JewesSy  as  in  the  EngL  margin;  Sept.  'idia  v. 
'A^łtt,  Vulg.  Judaja)^  a  female  named  as  the  second  wife 
apiMirently  of  Mered,  and  mother  of  8everal  founders  of 
cicies  in  Judah  (1  Chroń,  iv,  18) ;  probably  the  same 
with  HoDiAH  in  the  ensuing  verse,  mentioned  as  the 
siater  of  Naham,  etc  The  latter  name  is  poeeibly  by  a 
ooTTuption  of  ha-Yehitdiyah,  See  Mbred.  RC.  cir. 
1612. 

Je^huBh  (C^hron.  viii,  89).    See  Jbush. 

Jerel  (Heb.  Fefe/',  bK'»:?%  matched&WAy  by  God), 
the  name  of  several  men.    See  a]so  Jbhiel;  Jbueu 

1.  (Text  bK15;'  [L  c  Jeuel],  Sept  'l«cĄX  v.  r.  'I«4X, 
Vulg.  Jehiel,  Auth.  Yersion  "  JehieL")  A  descendant  of 
Benjamin,  apparently  named  as  the  founder  of  and  resi- 
dent  at  Gibeon,  the  husband  of  Maachah,  and  the  father 


of  a  large  family  (1  CJhron.  ix,  85 ;  comp.  viii,  29).   B.CL 
prób.  cir.  1618. 

2.  (Text  ^5X^5^  [i.  c  Jeuel],  Sept,  *U'iii\  or  'I«jjX, 
Vulg,  Jediel,  Auth.yeT8.  "JehieL")  An  Aroerite,  son 
of  Hothan,  and  brother  of  Shama,  one  of  David*8  supple- 
mentary  heroes  (1  Chroń,  xi,  44).     RC.  1046. 

3.  (Sept.  'IcVi7X,yulg.  Jehiel,  but  Jahiel  in  the  first 
occurrence  in  1  Chroń,  xvi,  5.)  One  of  the  Lerites  ap- 
pointed  by  David  to  celebrate  the  divine  praises  before 
the  ark  on  its  removal  to  Jerusalem  (1  Chroń,  xvi,  6) ; 
apparently  the  same  mentioned  again  in  the  latter  part 
of  the  same  verse  as  a  performer  on  "psalterics  and 
harps;"  named  elsewhere  in  like  comiection  with  Obed- 
edom,  either  as  a  gate-warden  of  the  Tempie  (1  Chroń. 
XV,  18,  21),  or  as  one  of  the  sacred  musicians  "with 
harpa  on  the  Sheminith  to  excer  (1  Chroń,  xv,  21). 
RC.  1048.    See  JBHlB^  1. 

4.  (Sept.  'EXc^X  V.  r.  'BKiif}\,  'EXn4X,  also  'Iufi\ 
Yolg.  JehieL)  A  Levite,  son  of  Mattaniah  and  father 
of  Benaiah,  great-grandfather  of  Jahaziel,  who  predicted 
sucoess  to  Jehoshaphat  against  the  Ammonites  and  Mo- 
abites  (2  CSiron.  xx,  14).    RC  oonsiderably  antę  890. 

5.  (Text  bKI?-  [L  e.  J^tie/],  SepL  'I«łj^X,  Vulg.  Je- 
hieL)  A  scribe  charged,  in  oonnection  with  others,  with 
keeping  the  account  of  Uzziah's  troops  (2  Clhron.  xzvi, 
11).     RC.  808. 

6.  (Sepu  'iu;4X,yu]g.  Jehiel.)  A  chief  Beubenite  at 
the  time  of  the  taking  of  some  census,  apparently  -on  the 
deportation  of  the  tnuA-Jordanic  tribes  by  Tilgath-pil- 
neser  (1  Chroń.  v,  7).     RC.  782. 

7.  (Text  iKI?!"  f  L  e.  Jeuel],  Sept.  'l€7^X,  Vulg.  Ja- 
Ate^)  A  Levite  of  the  "sons"  of  Elizaphan,  one  of 
those  who  assisted  in  expurgatlng  the  Tempie  in  the 
reign  of  Hezekiah  (2  Chroń,  xxix,  13).    RC.  726. 

8.  (Sept.  'Ici^X,yulg.  JehitL)  One  of  the  chief  Le- 
vites  who  madę  an  offering  fcr  the  restonition  of  thą 
Pa88over  by  Josiah  (2  Chroń,  xxxv,  9).     RC.  623. 

9.  (Text  bKl?7  [i.  c  JcueT],  Sept  'Uii\  v.  r.  'Eł4X, 
yulg.  Jehiel.)  One  of  the  "  last  sons**  of  Adonikam,  a 
leading  Israelite,  who,  with  8eventy  males,  retumed 
from  Babybn  with  Ezra  (Ezra  viii,  13).    B.a  459. 

10.  (Sept  'lttifi\  V.  r.  'Ia^X,yulg.  JehieL)  An  Is- 
raelite, one  of  the  "sons"  of  Nebo,  who  divorced  his 
Gentile  wife  afler  the  £xile  (Ezra  x,  43).    RC.  469. 

Jeins.    See  Jains. 

Jeish.    See  Jbush. 

Jejunia  quatuor  tempórum  is  the  original 
name  for  the  &Bts  of  the  four  scasons  of  the  year,  which 
are  now  comroouly  called  Ember  Weeks  (q.  v.).  See 
Bingham,  Antiq,qfihe  Christian  Church,  p.  155,  1190. 

Jejunlum.    See  Fasting. 

Jekab'zcSl  (Heb.  Yekabiseel',  ^K^ąp^,  ffathered 
by  God;  Sept  Ka/3(Tcr/^,yulg.  Cabseel),  the  name  of  a 
place  in  the  tribe  of  Judah  (Neh.  xi,  25) ;  elsewhere 
(Josłu  XV,  21)  called  by  the  equivalent  but  shorter 
name  Rabzbbl  (q.  v.). 

Jekame^am  (Heb.  Yekamam%  ti^l3|?%  gaihercr 
of  the  peopie ;  Sept  'ItKifiiac,  'IfCE/im),  the  fourth  in 
rank  of  the  "  sons"  of  Hebron  in  the  Levitical  arrange- 
ment  established  by  David  (1  Chroń,  xxiii,  19 ;  xxiv, 
23).     RC.  1014. 

Jekami^ah  (Heb.  Yekamyah\  n;;T3|3%  yathered  by 
Jehovah),  the  name  of  two  men. 

1.  (Sept.  'IłKOfjiiac  v.  r.  'Ic^f^iac,  yulg.  Icamia,) 
Son  of  Shallum,  and  father  of  EUshama,  of  the  dcscend- 
ants  of  Sheshan  of  Judah  (1  Chroń,  ii,  41).  RC.  proh. 
cir.  688.  * 

2.  (Sept  'I(fcfvia  v.  r.  'Ici:f^ia,yulg.  Jecenwi,  Auth. 
yersion  "  Jecamiah.")  The  fifth  named  of  the  sons  of 
king  Jeconiah  (1  Chroń,  iii,  18),  bom  to  him  during  the 
Babylonian  exile,  and,  according  to  tradition,  by  Susan« 
na.    See  Jbhoiachin.    RC.  post  598. 

Jeku'thidl  (Heb.  YekutkUŁ',  i^-^n^p;',  reverm» 


JEKUTHIEL 


816 


JENKS 


ofGodi  Sept  'Uis^iik  y.  r.  o  Xi'nii\\  ^faUiei"  of  Za- 
noah,  and  one  of  the  sonii  apparently  of  Mered  by  his 
seoond  wife  Hodiah,  or  Jehudijah  (1  Chroń,  ir,  18). 
B.C.  cir.  1618.    See  Mered. 

*^  In  the  comment  of  Rabbi  Joseph,  Jered  is  interpreted 
to  mean  Moses,  and  each  of  the  names  foliowing  are 
taken  as  titles  borne  by  him.  Jekuthiel — 'trust  in 
God'— is  so  applied  <  becanse  in  his  days  the  Israelites 
tnisted  in  the  God  of  heaven  for  forty  yeais  in  the  wil- 
demess.'  In  a  remarkable  prayer  used  by  the  Spanish 
and  Portupruese  Jews  in  the  condnding  sernce  of  the 
Sabbath,  Elijah  is  inyokcd  as  having  had  '  tidings  of 
peaoe  delivered  to  him  by  the  hand  of  JekuthieL'  This 
is  explained  to  refer  to  some  transaction  in  the  life  of 
Phineas,  with  whom  Elijah  is,  in  the  traditions  of  the 
Jews,  belicved  to  be  identical  (see  AUen,  Modem  Judor 
itm,  p.  229)."— Smith. 

JekuthieL    See  LuzArra 

Jekathiel  ben-Isaao  Blitz,  also  called  by  his 
&ther's  namei,  Isaae  BiUz,  was  oorrector  of  the  press  at 
the  printing  establishment  of  Uri  Febes  Levi  at  Am- 
sterdam, and  was  the  fiist  Jew  who  tnnslated  the  whole 
O.  T.  into  German  (in  Hebrew  type).  It  was  published 
nnder  the  title  t33»M  "jliob^  "^  an  {Tke  four-and^ 
twenty  Books  translated  into  German),  with  (n*l*^b9*tn 

TaawK  '(iTuba  a  abnn)  Raibag*s  ni-^bsin,  or  Usus  on 

Joshoa,  Judges,  and  Samnel,  and  a  threefold  introduc- 
tion,  viz.  a  Hebrew  introduction  by  the  translator,  a 
Łatin  diploma  from  tlie  Polish  king,  John  Sobieski  III, 
a  Jndso-German  introduction  by  the  pablisher,  and  a 
German  introduction  by  the  translator  (Amsterd.  1676- 
78).  A  specimen  of  this  translatton  is  giyen  by  Wolf, 
Bibliołheca  IlebraOj  iv,  183*187.  Comp.  also  ii,  454  of 
the  same  work ;  Steinschneider,  CattUogut  Libr,  Hebr, 
in  BibUotheca  Bodteiana,  col  175 ;  GrStz,  Getchichte  der 
Juden,  X,  829  8q. ;  FUrst,  BibUoth,  Jud.  i,  120  8q. 

Jekuttiiel  ben-Jehudah  Cohen  (also  called 
Salman  Nakoon,  i,  o.  the  PunctucOor,  and  by  contrac- 
tion  Iehabi),  a  distinguished  Masorite  and  editor  of  the 
Hebrew  Scriptures,  flourished  in  Prague  in  the  latter 
half  of  the  13ch  century.  He  edited  a  very  correct  text 
of  the  Pentateuch  (published  for  the  first  time  by  Hei- 
denheim  in  his  edition  of  the  Pentateuch  called  ^'•HTa 
D*'^?  [Rodelheim,  1818-21])  and  the  book  of  Ksther 
(also  published  by  Heidenheim  in  his  0*^*11011  *^Q*^  ^^D 
[Rodelheim,  1825]),  with  the  rowels  and  accents,  for 
the  preparation  of  which  he  consulted  8ix  old  Spanish 
codices,  which  he  denominates  K H,  p  M,  n*M,  DSK, 
t'm,  al^  and  which  Heidenheim  explains  to  mean 

^iriK  lip'^r,  -pTanp,  ai»n,  ht^iioo,  ipt,  mo,  the 

prefix  M  denoting  Spain  (comp.  K^lpil  "pa?  on  Numb, 
xxxiv,  28).  The  results  of  his  critical  labors  he  further 
embodied  in  a  work  entitle<l  VrC\p  "p^  {The  Eye  o/ the 
Reader),  and  makes  frequent  quotations  from  the  writ- 
ings  of  many  distinguished  Jcwish  oommentators  of  his 
and  the  preceding  age.  An  appendix  to  the  work  eon- 
tains  a  grammatical  treatise  entitled  ^Ipsn  "^3*1^,  or 
^*\p^}n  "^bbs  (The  Law*  of  the  Vowel  PoinU),  Comp. 
Zunz,  Zur  Geschichte  und  Literatur  (Beri  1845),  p.  115 ; 
FUrst,  BibUotheca  Judaica,  ii,  53 ;  Geiger,  Wiaaenacha/l- 
liche  Zeitschriflf.  Judische  Theołoffie,  y,  418-420 ;  Stein- 
schneider, CataloffUi  Libr.  ITeh.  in  BibUotheca  Bodleiana, 
CoL  1381.— Kitto,  Cydop,  BibL  Lit,  s.  v. 

Jemi^ma  (Heb.  Yemimah',  M73*^Q*^,  dove,  from  the 
Arab. ;  Sept.  'Hftćpa.Yulg.  Dies,  both  mistaking  the  der- 
*  iiration  as  if  from  Di*^,  day),  the  name  of  the  first  of 
Job*8  three  daughters  bom  after  his  trial  (Job  xlii,  14). 
RC.  dr.  2200.  "The  Rcv.  C.  Forster  (Hittorical  Ge- 
Offraphy  of  Arabia^  ii,  67),  in  tracing  the  posterity  ot 
Job  in  Arabia,  thinks  that  the  name  of  Jemima  sur- 
vive8  in  Jemarna,  the  central  proyince  of  the  Arabian 
peniosula,  which,  according  to  an  Arabian  tnulition  (see 


Bochart,  Phaleg,  ii,  §  26),  was  called  after  Jemoma,  an 
ancient  queen  of  the  Arabians"  (Smith). 

Jeminl    See  Besjaioic. 

Jem'naan  (Ufivaay,  Ynlg.  omits),  a  place  nen- 
tioned  in  the  Apocrypha  (Judith  ii,  20)  amoog  those 
on  the  sea-coast  of  Palestine  to  which  the  panic  of  the 
incurńon  of  Holofemes  eitended,  no  douht  Jabsbel  or 
Jamnia  (q.  V.). 

Jemu^dl  (Heb.  TemuiV,  h^^V^,  d^light  of  Godł 
Sept.  'U/Łovii\f  Tulg.  Ja$nuel),  the'  first-named  of  the  ' 
sons  of  Simeon  (Gen.  xlvi,  10 ;  £xod.  vi,  15) ;  elsewboe 
(Numb.  xxvi,  12)  called  Nemcel  (^Kisą,  NemMit; 
Sept  Nafiov4X,yulg.  Namud),  apparently  by  an  cnor 
of  copyists,  and  his  descendants  Nesi ueutes  (Hebrew 
NemuiU,  *^bK^Qą,  Sept.  Na^vi|Xi,  Tulg.  NamueHia, 
Numb.  xxvi,  12)1     B.a  1866. 

Jeniflch,  Daioeł,  a  German  theologian  of  iobk 
notę,  was  bom  at  Heiligenbeil,  in  East  Pnuaia,  April  2, 
1762,  and  educated  at  the  Univerńty  of  Konigabog. 
In  1786  he  became  pastor  at  the  Mary  Church,  and  tS- 
terwards  at  the  Nicholas  Church.  Endowed  with  grest 
natoral  abilities,  and  a  veiy  eamest  woiker,  Jeniscfa 
aoon  secored  for  himself  one  of  the  foremost  plaoea  ai  a 
theologian  and  a  philosophical  writer.  Bat  too  doee 
application  to  stody  resulted  in  a  derangement  of  hii 
mental  powers,  and  he  is  suppoeed  to  have  violently  eod- 
ed  his  life  Feb.  9, 1804.  His  works  of  interest  to  us  are 
Ueber  Grund  u.  Wertk  d  Entdedtungen  Kanfs  m  der 
Metaphfsik,  Morał,  u.  Aeathetik  (BerL  1796,  luge  %^) : 
— 8<dUe  Rdigian  dem  Mentehenjanait  entbekrłidk  weriat 
(ibid.  1797, 8vo).  Beaides  these,  he  published,  after  his 
mind  began  to  be  seiioualy  afTected,  Ueber  GcttetnrAr' 
unff  II.  KirchUdie  Rtformen  (ibid.  1802, 8vo),  rather  the 
work  of  a  soeptical  Christian,  if  we  may  use  the  expres- 
sion,  though  it  contains  also  many  just  criticisms  oo 
the  liturgy  and  homiletics  of  the  Latheran  Church  of 
his  day ;  and  KHHk  des  dogmatiseh-ideaUscheu  te  ktfper- 
ideaUschen  Beliffionś'  u.  Moralsyttenu  (Lpz.  1804,  8ro), 
which  was  the  last  work  of  Jenisch.  See  Doring,  (re> 
lehrte  Theologen  DeufKhlandi,  ii,  20  8q.    ( J.  H.  W.) 

Jenkin,  Robert,  an  English  theologtan,  was  bon 
at  Minster,  Thanet,  in  1656.  He  studied  at  CanteiboT 
and  Cambridge,  of  which  he  became  fellow.  He  va3 
suocessiyely  appointed  rector  of  St.  John's  College,  pio- 
fessor  of  theology,  and  chaplain  to  Dr.  Łake,  bisbop  of 
Chichester.  In  1688  be  refiiaed  to  take  the  oath  re- 
quired  of  all  holding  benefices,  and  retired  to  private  life. 
He  died  in  1727.  His  prindpal  work  is  The  BeoMma- 
bleneis  ofthe  Christian  ReUffion  (8ix  editions;  the  beit 
1784,  2  vol8. 8vo).  He  wrote  also  JSramrnafMW  ofike 
Authority  of  General  Councilt  (Lood.  1688,  4to)  '^De- 
fentio  sancti  Augustud  rertut  J,  Pherepomtm  (Londoo, 
1707,  8vó)i^Remaris  vpon  four  Book*  jutt  jmUisked 
(on  Ba8nage's  Hittory  ąf  the  Jew*,  Lake'8  Parapknut 
ofSt,  PauT*  Epietle,  Le  Clerc*s  BibUtMąue  choi*ie,  etc> 
He  also  trandated  into  English  TUlonont  s  Life  ef 
ApoUonius  of  Tyana.  See  Goiton,  General  Biograph. 
Diet,  s.  V.;  Hoefer,  Nouc.  Biogr,  Ginirale,  xxvi,  650; 
Allibone,  DicL  of  A  uthor*,  i,  962.     (J.  N.  P.) 

Jenkin, 'WiUlam.    SeeJEnTK. 

JenkB,  Benjamin,  an  English  divine,  was  bom 
in  1646.  Of  his  early  histoiy  but  little  is  known.  He 
was  at  first  rector  at  Hariey,  then  at  Keoky,  and  after> 
wards  chaplain  to  the  earl  of  Biadford.  He  died  at 
Harley  in  1724.  He  published  Prayer*  ani  Ofee*  ff 
Detotionfor  Familie*,  and  for  particular  Permm*  i^nni 
mott  Occasion*  (London,  1697, 8vo;  of  which  the  27th 
edition  was  published  in  1810  by  the  Rev.  Charles  Sim- 
eon, fellow  of  King^s  College,  Cambridge,  with  altera- 
tions  and  amendments  in  style;  there  is  also  an  edition 
by  Bames,  12mo,  and  an  abridgment,  12nio)*.— <SirM*- 
*ion  to  the  Righieouenm  of  God  (1700, 8vo ;  4cb  ed.  1755, 
12mo)  i^Meditaiion*,  with  thort  Prayer*  annmd  (1701, 
8vo;  2d  edit  1756, 2  yoIb.  8vqw  with  a  i 


JENKS 


817 


JENYNS 


Prefacc  by  Mr.  Henrey) : — Ouranographtf,  or  IJeaoen 
Optiml  (1710,  8vo) : — THe  Poor  Man'8  Compamony  a 
hsstr  Praytr-book  for  FamUies  <m  common  Daya  and 
othtr  Occasiotu  (ŁoncL  1713,  8vo),  besides  a  number  of 
sermons  on  rańous  topics.  See  Allibone,  Dictionary  of 
w4tfMo;-«,  i,  963. 

Jenks,  Henrey,  a  Baptist  minUter,  was  bom  at 
BrooklieUl,  Maas.,  Jime  16,  1787,  and  was  edacated  at 
Brown  UniTeraity.  Afber  teaching  a  short  time  at  the 
academy  at  that  time  connected  with  the  uniyeisity,  he 
enterc<l  the  ministry,  and  was  8ucceflsively  pastor  at 
West  Stockbridge,  Alass.,  and  Hudson,  N.  Y.;  then  at 
Hudson  olone ;  next  at  Beverly,  Mass.,  whence  he  again 
returncd  to  Hudson.  He  died  July  15, 1814.  He  was 
a  young  man  ofgreat  promise,  and,  though  he  was  only 
tweut y-eight  years  old  when  he  died,  his  abilities  had 
already  been  geneially  reoognised.—Sprague,  ii  tma^f  of 
iht  A  uterican  Pulpił,  vi,  587  8q. 

Jenks,  'William,  D.D.,  a  Congregational  minis- 
ter of  great  abiiity  and  distinction,  was  bom  at  Newton, 
Mass.,  in  1778,  but  when  only  four  years  of  age  his  fa- 
ther  removed  to  Boston.  He  was  educated  at  Harvard 
College,  where  he  graduated  in  1797.  He  was  first  settled 
in  the  ministry  over  the  Congregational  Church  in  Bath, 
Me.,  where  he  remained  twelve  years;  he  next  fiilcd  the 
profeasorship  of  Oriental  and  English  literaturę  in  Bow- 
doin  College  three  years;  then  he  went  to  Boston,  and 
was  Ycry  active  in  originating  plans  to  secnre  religioos 
and  social  privileges  for  seamen,  till  that  time  a  neg- 
lected  class  of  men.  Some  of  the  morę  prominent  in- 
stitutions  for  the  benefit  of  sailors  now  existing  in  that 
dty  owe  their  origin  to  him.  He  was  pastor  at  the 
same  time  of  the  Green  Street  church,  which  he  senred 
for  twenty-five  years.  He  died  Nov.  18,  1866.  Dr. 
Jenks  was  one  of  the  chief  founders  of  the  American 
Oriental  Society,  and  a  prominent  member  of  the  Mas- 
sachusetts Historical  Society.  He  was  particularly  dis- 
tinguisheil  as  an  Orientalist,  and  edited  the  Compre- 
keaśiee  CommaUary  on  the  Hoiy  Bibłe  (Brattleborough, 
1834,  5  vols.  roy.  8vo;  Snpplem.  1  voL  roy.  8\-o),  which 
**  still  stands  without  a  ńvtd  for  the  purpose  for  which  it 
was  intendetl"  He  also  published  an  Erplanatory  Bi- 
bie Atlas  cmd  ScripŁure  Gazetieer  (1819, 4to).  See  Alli- 
bone, IHcf,  ofAuthort,  i,  963;  Appleton,  ATner.  Atmual 
Ctfclop.  1866,  p.  420.     (J.  H.  W.) 

Jenkyn,  Robert.    See  Jenkin. 

Jenkyn,  'WilUam,  an  English  Nonconformist  di- 
vine,  was  bom  at  Sudbury,  Suffblk,  in  1612,  and  eda- 
cated at  St.  John'8  College,  Cambridge.  He  first  be- 
came  lecturer  of  St.  Nicholas  Acons,  London,  and  in  1641 
miiiiatcr  of  Christ  Church,  Newgate  Street,  and  lecturer 
of  SL  Ann*s,  Blackfriars.  Refusing  to  obsen-^e  (in  1662) 
the  public  thanksgiving  appointed  by  Parliament  on 
occasion  of  the  destmction  of  the  monarchy,  he  was 
ejected  for  nonconformity.  Soon  after  he  was  sent  to 
the  Tower  for  participation  in  Love's  plot,  but,  upon  pe- 
tition,  was  pardoned,  and  restored  to  the  ministry.  Mr. 
Feak,  who  had  in  the  interim  become  minister  of  Christ 
Church,  was  removed,  and  Mr.  Jenkyn  reinstated.  Upon 
this  he  devoted  himself  with  zeal  to  his  work.  On  the 
passage  of  the  Oxfonl  Act  he  refused  to  take  the  oath, 
and  retired  from  London  to  Hertfordshire,  where  be 
preached  privately.  After  the  Act  of  Indulgence  in 
1G71,  he  retumed  again  to  London;  but  when,  in  1682, 
the  tempcst  broke  out  against  the  Nonoonformists,  he 
fell  into  the  hands  of  his  enemies,  and  was  sent  to  New- 
gate under  the  Conventicle  Act,  where  he  died,  from  the 
air  and  infcction  of  the  prison,  in  1685.  Jenkyn  enjoy- 
ed  a  yery  cnviable  rcputation  among  his  contempora- 
ries  for  Christian  piety  and  great  abiiity.  Richard  Bax- 
ter  pronounced  him  "  a  sententious  and  elegant  preach- 
er.'*  He  published  A  n  ExposUion  ofthe  EpuUle  ofJude 
(London,  1652-54, 4to ;  another  ed.,  reyised  by  the  Rev. 
James  Sherman,  with  memoir  of  the  author,  London, 
1839,  imp.  8vo,  and  often).  See  Allibone,  Diet,  of  Au- 
thorSf  i,  963 ;  Ńonconformista^  Memoriał;  Calamy,  J/ih- 
IV.— F  F  F 


isten  ejeeted  (1728) ;  Hoefer,  Nouv,  Biogrctph»  Generak, 
xxvi,  649. 

Jennings,  David,  D.D.,  an  eminent  Independ<T4t 
minister,  was  bom  at  Kibworth,  Leicesterehire,  in  169L 
In  1718  he  became  pastor  of  a  congregation  vo.  Oid 
Gra  vel  Lane,  Wapping,  where  he  remained  for  forty, 
four  years.  In  1744  he  went  as  divinity  tutor  to  Cow 
ard'a  Academy,  and  died  Sept  16, 1762.  His  prindpak 
works  are,  Jewish  Antijuilies,  with  a  Dissertation  on 
the  Hebrew  Language  (London,  1766;  lOth  edition, 
1839, 8vo) ;  a  work  which  "has  long  held  a  distinguish-  ' 
ed  character  for  its  accuracy  and  leaming,"  and  certain- 
ly  one  of  the  best  works  of  the  kind  in  the  EngUsh  lan- 
guage : — Tke  Beauty  and  Ben^  of  early  Piety  (Lond. 
1731, 18mo) : — A  Yindicałion  of  the  Scriptwre  Doctrine 
of  Original  Sin  [Anonym.]  (London,  1740, 8vo) : — An 
Appeal  to  Reason  and  Common  Sense  (1755, 12mo) : — 
Senwma  to  the  Yomg  (1743,  12mo),  etc  See  Orton, 
Life  ofDoddridffef  p.  16,  243;  Protestant  DiasenL  Mag, 
vol  V ;  Hoefer,  Nouv,  Biogr,  Genh-ale,  xxvi,  660  j  Alli- 
bone, Dicłionary  ofAtUhort,  i,  964. 

JenningB,  John,  an  English  dissenting  minister, 
brother  of  David  Jennings  (see  above),  became,  after 
preaching  for  some  time,  a  theological  tutor  at  Kib- 
worth. He  was  also  tutor  to  Dr.  Doddridge.  He  died 
in  1723.  He  wrote  Two  IHscourtet  on  Preaching  (Lon- 
don, 1754, 12mo;  also  in  E.  Williams's  Preacher'8  A  i" 
sittant),  etc.  See  Wilson,  Ilisf.  of  IHssenters ;  Hoefer, 
Nouv,  Biog,  Ghierale,  xxvi,  660 ;  Allibone,  Didionary 
ofAuthors/ifd&i. 

Jennings,  Samuel  Kennedy,  a  Protestant 
Methodist  lay  minister  of  great  abiiity  and  distinction, 
was  bom  in  E8aex  County,  N.  J.,  June  6, 1771.  He  was 
educated  at  Rutgers  (then  Queens)  College.  After  tho 
completion  of  his  coUegiate  couzse  he  studied  medicine, 
and  for  a  time  even  practiced  as  a  physician.  In  his 
youth  he  was  a  decided  infidel,  although  he  sprang  from 
a  family  of  ministers  and  zealous  Christian  workers. 
In  1794  he  was  oonverted,  and  two  3'earB  after  he  enter- 
ed  the  lay  ministr>',  and  8er\'ed  his  Church  very  ably. 
In  1805  bishop  Asbury  ordained  him  a  deacon,  aud  in 
1814  bishop  M'Kendree  madę  him  an  elder.  In  1817 
he  took  up  his  residence  at  Baltimore,  after  having  lill- 
ed  in  variou8  places  the  position  of  physican  and  minis- 
ter, and  in  this  city  also  he  madę  many  friends  by  his 
Christian  kindness  and  liberality.  He  was  one  of  the 
prime  mover8  for  the  introduction  of  lay  representation 
in  the  Conferences  of  the  Methodist  Episcopal  Church, 
and  was  one  of  those  who  were  expelled  from  the  Meth- 
odist Episcopal  Church,  and  finally  organized  the  ^  Meth- 
odist Protestant  Church."  See  Lay  Dbleoation.  He 
died  Oct.  19,  1854^  See  Sprague,  Annals  qf  the  Amer. 
Pulpit,  vii,  279 ;  Steven8,  HisL  MeŁh,  £pi»c.  Church,  (J. 
H.W.) 

Jenyns,  Soame,  an  English  polidcian,  and  a  writer 
on  theological  subjects,  bom  at  London  in  1704,  was 
educated  at  St.  John*s  College,  Cambridge.  He  was  in 
his  early  years  a  well-known  infidel,  but  extended  Bib- 
lical  studies  caused  his  oonverBion,  and  he  at  once  en- 
tered  the  lists  in  active  defence  of  the  Gospel  traths. 
His  ablest  work,  and  one  which  has  given  rise  to  the 
supposition  on  the  part  of  some  that  Jenyns  published  it 
only  with  intent  to  injure  the  Christian  cause,  now  gen- 
erally  refuted  on  good  grounds,  is,  V'iew  ofthe  Intemal 
Emdence  of  the  Christian  Reliffion  (1776,  12mo;  lOlh 
ed.  1798, 8vo,  and  often  sińce).  Baxter  (CA.  Ilistory^  p. 
659)  says  that  the  work  "  brought  out  the  intemal  evi- 
dence  to  the  tmth  ofChristianity  ansing  from  its  pecul- 
iar  and  exalted  morality,"  and  points  to  it  as  one  of  the 
efforts  by  which  "  iufidelity,  if  not  convinced,  was  si- 
lenced.*'  (See,  for  the  pamphlets  on  the  contn)versy 
which  this  work  elicited,  Chalmers,  Biog,  Diet,  xviii, 
520,  notę  8).  He  also  wrote  A  free  Inguiry  into  the 
Naturę  ani  Origin  ofKcU  (1756, 8 vo,  and  often),  which 
was  rather  a  failure  as  a  theological  treatise,  and  was 
very  8evcrely  criticised  by  Dr.  Johnson  (see  Boswell^s 


jephthak 


818 


JEPHTHAH 


Johnson,  year  1766).  The  entire  writings  of  Jenyns  are 
ooUected  iii  4  Yob.  8vo  (Lond.  1790-93),  together  with 
his  biography  by  Charles  Nelson  Cole.  Jenyns  died 
Dec  18, 1787.  See  Allibone,  DicL  of  A  uUufrs,  i,  965 ; 
Enffluh  CjfclopatHoj  &  v.    ( J.  H.  W.) 

Jeph^thae  (Heb.  xi,  82).    See  Jkphthah. 
Jeph^thah  (Heb.  Yiphtach^f  ^CB%  opened  cnr  apen^ 
er),  Łhe  luune  of  a  man  and  also  of  a  place.    See  aiso 

JlPHTHAH-EL. 

1.  (SepŁ.  'U^a  V.  r.  'U^cti  and  'le^ac,  Josephns 
'l£^C,  Vulg.  Jephte,  N.  T.  'It^de,  « JephthaC"),  the 
ninth  judge  of  the  Israelites  for  a  period  of  8ix  years, 
RC.  1256-1250.  He  belonged  to  the  tribe  of  Manaseeh 
east,  and  was  the  son  of  a  person  named  Gilead  by  a 
concubine,  or  perhaps  harlot.  After  the  death  of  his 
fiither  he  was  expe]led  from  his  home  by  the  en\'y  of 
his  brothers,  who,  taunting  him  with  illegitimacy,  re- 
fused  him  any  share  of  the  heritage,  and  he  withdrew 
to  the  land  of  Tob,  beyond  the  frontier  of  the  Hebrew 
territories.  It  is  dear  that  he  had  before  this  distin- 
goished  himself  by  his  daring  character  and  skill  in 
arms;  for  no  sooner  was  his  withdrawal  known  than 
a  great  number  of  men  of  desperate  fortunes  repaired  to 
him,  and  he  became  their  chief.  His  position  was  now 
very  similar  to  that  of  David  when  he  withdrew  from 
the  coart  of  SauL  To  maintain  the  people  who  had 
thus  linked  their  fortunes  with  hia,  there  was  no  other 
resource  than  that  sort  of  brigandage  which  is  aocount- 
ed  honorable  in  the  East,  so  long  as  it  is  CKercLsed 
against  public  or  priyate  enemies,  and  is  not  marked  by 
needleas  cruelty  or  outrage.  So  Jephthah  confined  his 
aggressions  to  the  borders  of  the  smali  neighboring  na- 
tions,  who  w^ere  in  some  sort  regarded  as  the  natural 
enemies  of  Israel,  even  when  there  was  no  actual  war 
hetween  them  (Judg.  xi,  1-3). 

The  tribes  beyond  the  Jordan  having  resolred  to  op- 
pose  the  Ammonites,  to  whom  the  Israelites  had  fallen 
under  subjection  after  the  death  of  Jair,  in  consequence 
of  relapsing  into  idolatr}',  Jephthah  seems  to  haye  occur- 
red  to  evexy  one  as  the  most  fitting  leader.  A  deputation 
was  aocordingly  sent  to  inyite  him  to  take  the  command. 
After  some  demur,  on  acoonnt  of  the  treatment  he  had 
formerly  receiyed,  he  oonsented  to  become  their  captain 
on  the  condition— solemnly  ratified  before  the  Lord  in 
Mizpeh— that,  in  the  eyent  of  his  success  against  Am- 
mon,  he  should  still  rcmiun  as  their  acknowledged  head. 
The  rude  hero  oommenced  his  operations  with  a  degree 
of  diplomatic  consideration  and  dignity  for  which  we 
are  not  prepared.  The  Ammonites  being  assembled  in 
force  for  one  of  those  rayaging  incursions  by  which  thęy 
had  rcpcatedly  deaolated  the  land,  he  sent  to  their  camp 
a  formal  complaint  of  the  inyasion,  and  a  demand  of  the 
gromid  of  their  procceding.  This  is  highly  interesting, 
because  it  shows  that,  eyen  in  that  age,  a  cause  for  war 
was  jadged  necessary,  no  one  being  suppoeed  to  war 
without  proyocation;  and,  in  this  case,  Jephthah  de- 
manded  what  cause  the  Ammonites  alleged  to  justify 
their  aggressiye  operations.  Their  answer  was,  that  the 
landofthelsraelitesbeyond  the  Jordan  was  theirs.  It 
had  originally  belonged  to  them,  from  whom  it  had  been 
taken  by  the  Amorites,  who  had  been  dispossessed  by 
the  Israelites,  and  on  thia  ground  they  daimed  the  res- 
titution  of  these  landa.  Jephthah's  reply  laid  down  the 
just  principle  which  has  been  followed  out  in  the  prao- 
tioe  of  cirilized  nations,  and  Is  maintained  by  aU  the 
great  writers.on  the  law  of  nations.  The  land  belonged 
to  the  Israelites  by  right  of  conąuest  from  the  actual 
poflsessors,  and  they  could  not  be  expected  to  recognise 
any  antecedent  daim  of  former  possessors,  for  whom 
they  had  not  acted,  who  had  rendered  them  no  assist- 
ance,  and  who  had  themselyes  displayed  hoetility  against 
the  Israelites.  It  was  not  to  be  expected  that  they 
would  conquer  the  country  from  the  powerful  kings 
who  had  it  in  possession,  for  the  merę  purpoee  of  restor- 
ing  it  to  the  ancient  occupants,  of  whom  they  had  no 
fiiyorable  knowledge,  and  of  whose  preyious  claims  they 


were  scazcely  cognizant.  But  the  Ammonites  leasiat- 
ed  their  former  yiews,  and  on  this  issne  they  Łook  the 
field.  Animated  by  a  oonsdousness  of  diyine  aid,  Jeph- 
thah bastened  to  meet  them,  defeated  them  in  serenl 
pitched  battles,  followed  them  with  great  slaughter, 
and  utterly  broke  their  dominion  oyer  the  easteni  Israel- 
ites  (Judg.  xi,  4-88).  See  Pagenstecher,  Jepklet  (Lem- 
go,1746). 

The  yictory  oyer  the  Ammonites  was  followed  by  a 
quarrel  with  the  proud  and  powerful  Ephiaimites  on 
the  west  side  of  the  Jordan.  This  tribe  was  displeased 
at  haying  had  no  share  in  the  glory  of  the  lecent  \kto- 
ry,  and  a  large  body  of  men  belonging  to  it,  who  had 
crossed  the  riyer  to  shaie  in  the  action,  used  reiy  high 
and  threatening  language  when  they  found  their  serv- 
ices  were  not  required.  Jephthah,  finding  his  remoo- 
stianoes  had  no  effect,  reaasembled  some  of  his  disband- 
ed  troops  and  gaye  the  Ephraimitca  battle,  when  tbe^ 
were  defeated  with  immenae  Uw,  The  yictors  teized 
the  fords  of  the  Jordan,  and,  when  any  one  came  to  pa» 
oyer,  they  madę  him  pronounce  the  word  **  Shibboleth'' 
(an  ear  of  corn)\  but  if  he  oould  not  giye  the  aspiia- 
tion,  and  pronounced  the  word  as  "  Sibboleth,"*  they 
knew  him  for  an  Ephnimite,  and  siew  him  on  the  spot 
(Judg.  xii,  1-6). 

The  remainder  of  Jephthah'8  nile  waa  peacefol,  and, 
at  his  death,  he  left  the  country  quiet  to  his  suooeasor 
Ibzan.  He  was  buried  in  his  natiye  region,  in  one  of 
the  dties  of  Gilead  (Judg.  xii,  7). 

Jephthah's  Yow*— When  Jephthah  set  forth  agaimt 
the  Ammonites,  he  solemnly  yowed  to  the  Lord,  ''If 
thou  shalt  without  fail  deliyer  the  children  of  Ammoa 
into  my  handa,  then  it  shall  be  that  whataoerer  cometk 
forth  [L  e.  first]  of  the  doors  of  my  house  to  meei  me^ 
when  I  return  in  peace  from  the  children  of  Ammoo, 
shall  surdy  be  the  Lord's,  and  I  will  olTer  it  up  for  a 
bumt^ffering'*  (Judg.  xi,  80, 31).  He  wa$  yictoiioos: 
the  Anunonites  sustuned  a  terrible  oyerthrow.  He  M 
return  in  peace  to  his  house  in  Mizpeh.  As  he  drew 
nigh  his  house,  the  one  that  came  forth  to  meet  him 
was  his  own  daughter — his  only  child,  in  whom  his 
heart  was  bound  up.  She,  with  her  fair  compankos, 
came  to  greet  the  triumphant  hero  "with  timbrds  and 
with  dancca."  But  he  no  sooner  saw  her  than  be  lut 
his  robes,  and  cried,  *'Alas!  my  daughter,  thou  hast 
brought  me  yery  Iow ....  for  I  have  opened  my  moath 
unto  the  Lord,  and  cannot  go  back.*^  Nor  did  she  sak 
it.  She  replied,  "My  father,  if  thou  hast  opened  thy 
mouth  mito  the  Lord,  do  to  me  according  to  that  which 
has  proceeded  out  of  thy  mouth,  forasmuch  as  the  Lord 
hath  taken  yengeance  for  thec  of  thine  enemies*  the 
children  of  Ammon."  But,  after  a  pause,  she  added. 
"  Let  this  thing  be  done  for  me :  let  me  alone  two 
months,  that  I  may  go  up  and  down  upon  the  mouo- 
tains  and  bewail  my  yirginity,  I  and  my  fellows.*^  Her 
father,  of  course,  assented,  and  when  the  time  espired 
she  retumed,  and,  we  are  told, "  he  did  with  her  acoocd- 
ing  to  his  yow."  It  is  then  added  that  it  became  ''a 
custom  in  Israd  that  the  daughters  of  Israd  went  Tes^ 
ly  to  lament  the  daughter  of  Jephthah  the  Gileadite 
three  days  in  the  year"  (Judg.  xi,  34-40). 

Yolumes  haye  been  written  on  the  snbject  of  "  Jcpb- 
thah*s  rash  yow,**  the  qnestion  being  whether,  in  ddag 
to  his  daughter  "  aocording  to  his  yow,**  he  really  did 
ofTer  her  in  sacrifice,  or  whether  she  was  merdy  doooed 
to  perpetual  celibacy. 

That  the  daughter  of  Jephthah  was  really  oilered  np 
to  OroĆL  in  sacrifice— alain  by  the  hand  of  her  falher  ani 
thenbumed— is  a  horrible  condudon,  but  one  which  it 
seems  impossible  to  ayoid.  This  was  undeistood  to  be 
the  meaning  of  the  text  by  Jonathan  the  paraphrut, 
and  Raahi,  by  Joeephus  {AwL  y, 7, 10),  and  by  perhaps 
all  the  early  Christian  fathers,  as  Origen  (w  Joamtem^ 
tom.  yi,  cap.  86),  Chiysostom  (iłom.  ad  pop.  Antiockuif 
xiy,  8 ;  Opp,  ii,  145),  Theodoret  {Ouastionet  «n  JtuSeei, 
xx),  Jerome  (Ep,  ad  Jul  118 ;  ^pp.  i,  791,  etc),  An- 
guśtino  {Ożuastionea  m  Jud,  ylii,  49;  Opp.  iii,  1|  610); 


JEPHTHAH 


819 


JEPHTHAH 


8o  aiso  in  the  Talmud  {Tanchuma  to  Beehu-Kothai,  p. 
171)  and  Midrash  (R.  1,  §  71),  in  both  of  which  great 
aatonishment  is  expre88ed  with  the  dealings  of  the  high- 
pńeat.  For  the  fint  eleven  centuries  of  the  Christian  era 
tbia  was  the  carrent,  perhaps  the  uniyersal  opinion  of 
Jewa  and  Christiana.  Yet  nonę  of  them  extenuate8  the 
act  of  Jephthah.  Josephus  calls  it  neither  lawful  nor 
pleasing  to  God.  Jewish  writers  say  that  he  ought  to 
hare  referred  it  to  the  high-priest,  but  either  he  failed 
to  do  80,  ar  the  high-priest  culpably  omitted  to  prevent 
the  nsh  act  Origen  stnctiy  oonfincs  his  praise  to  the 
bemisni  of  Jephthah*s  daughter. 

The  other  interpretation  was  suggested  by  Joseph 
KirachL  He  supposed  that,  instead  of  being  sacńficed, 
ahe  was  shut  up  in  a  honse  which  her  father  built  for 
the  porpose,  and  that  she  was  there  yisited  by  the 
daughtera  of  Israel  four  da}'8  in  each  year  as  long  as  shc 
liyed.  This  interpretation  has  been  adoptcd  by  many 
eminent  men  —  as  by  Lev{  ben  -  Gcrmn  and  Bechai 
amongst  the  Jews,  and  by  Drusius,  Grotius,  Estius,  De 
Dieu,  bishop  Hall,  Waterland,  Dr.  Hales,  and  others. 
More  names  of  the  same  period,  and  of  not  less  author- 
ity,  might,  however,  be  adduced  on  the  other  side. 
lightfoot  once  thought  {Erubhin,  §  16)  that  Jephthah 
did  not  slay  his  daughter,  but,  upon  more  maturę  reflec- 
tion,  he  came  to  the  opposite  oonclusion  {Harmony,  etc ; 
Jadges  xi,  fTorJb,  i,  61). 

1.  The  advocates  for  the  actual  death  of  the  maiden 
oontend  that  to  Uv€  unmanied  was  reqnired  by  no  law, 
cnstom,  or  deyotement  amongst  the  Jews :  no  one  had  a 
right  to  tmpose  so  odious  a  oondition  on  another,  nor  is 
any  snch  oondition  implied  or  expre8Bed  in  the  yow 
which  Jephthah  uttered.  It  is  certain  that  hnman 
aacrilioe  was  deemed  meńtonous  and  propitiatoiy  by 
the  netghboring  nations  [see  Sacripice]  i  and,  oonsid- 
eniig  the  manner  of  life  the  hero  had  led,  the  recent 
idolatries  in  which  the  people  had  been  plunged,  and 
the  pcculiariy  yague  nodons  of  the  tribes  beyond  the 
Jordan,  it  is  htghly  probable  that  he  contemplated  Arom 
the  firsŁ  a  human  sacriiice,  as  the  most  costly  ofTering  to 
Gotl  known  to  him  (oomp.  the  well-known  story  of  the 
immolation  of  Iphigenia,  Iliad,  ix,  144  sq.).  It  is  diffi- 
cult  to  conceiye  that  he  could  expect  any  other  creatnre 
than  a  human  being  to  come  forth  out  ofiht  door  o/his 
kouse  to  meet  him  on  his  return.  His  afftiction  when 
his  daughter  actually  came  forth  is  quite  compatible 
with  the  idea  that  he  had  not  eyen  exempted  her  firom 
the  sacredness  of  his  promise,  and  the  depth  of  that  af- 
fliction  is  scarcely  reconcilable  with  any  other  altema- 
ttye  than  the  actual  sacriiice.  In  that  case,  the  circum- 
Stańce  that  she  ^  knew  no  man**  is  added  as  setting  in  a 
acrongerUght  the  rashneM  of  Jephthah  and  the  heroism 
of  his  daughter.  If  we  look  at  the  text,  Jephthah  yows 
that  whatsoeyer  came  forth  firom  the  door  of  his  house 
to  meet  him  ''shall  surely  be  the  Lord's,  and  [Kimchi*8 
rendering  <  or'  is  a  rare  and  harsh  one]  I  will  offer  it  up 
for  a  burut-oflering,"  which,  in  fact,  was  the  reguhur 
way  of  making  a  thing  wholly  the  Lord^s.  Afterwards 
we  are  told  that  ^  he  did  with  her  according  to  his  vow," 
that  is,  according  to  thć  płain  meaning  of  plain  words, 
offered  her  for  a  bunit-offering.  (This  dicumlocntory 
phrase,  and  the  omiasion  of  any  direct  term  expre88iye 
of  death,  are  attńbuted  to  enphemistic  motiyes.)  Then 
follows  the  intimation  that  the  daughters  of  Israel  la- 
mented  her  four  days  eyery  year.  People  lament  the 
dead,  not  the  liying.  The  whole  story  is  consistent  and 
intelligible  while  the  sacriflce  is  understood  to  haye 
taken  plaoe,  but  becomes  perplexed  and  difficult  as  soon 
as  we  begin  to  tum  aside  ttom  this  obyious  meaning  in 
search  of  recondite  explanations.  The  Jewish  com- 
mentators  themselyes  gencrally  admit  that  Jephthah 
really  saeriflccd  his  daughter,  and  eyen  go  so  far  as  to 
allege  that  the  change  in  the  pontiflcal  dynasty  ftom 
the  house  of  Eleazar  to  that  of  Ithamar  was  caused  by 
the  high-priest  of  the  time  haying  suffered  this  trans- 
action  to  take  place.  It  is  tme,  human  sacri/ices  were 
farfoidden  by  the  law ;  but  in  the  rude  and  unsettled  age 


in  which  the  judges  liyed,  when  the  Israelites  had  adopt- 
ed  a  yast  number  of  erroneous  notions  and  practices  from 
their  heathen  neighbors  (seo  2  Kings  iii,  27),  many 
things  were  done,  eyen  by  good  men,  which  the  law  for- 
bade  quite  as  positiyely  as  human  sacńfice.  Such,  for 
instance,  was  the  setting  up  of  the  altar  by  Gideon  at 
his  natiye  Ophrah  (Judg.  yiii,  27),  in  direct  but  unde- 
signed  opposition  to  one  of  the  most  stringent  enact- 
ments  (Deut.  yii)  of  the  Mosaical  codę. — Kitto ;  Smith. 
(See  Kitto's  Daiiy  BtUe  likułraHorUy  ad  loc) 

2.  On  the  other  hand,  it  has  been  well  replied  that 
the  text  expre8sly,  and  in  yaried  terms,  alludes  to  the 
obligation  of  the  girl  to  lead  a  life  of  perpetual  yirginity 
(ver.  37, 88, 89).  Such  a  state  was  generally  oonsidered 
a  calamity  by  the  Israelitish  women,  probably  on  ac- 
count  of  the  early  prophecy  of  the  incamation  (Gen.  iii, 
15).  See  B.1IIRENNBS8.  But,  besides  this,  the  celiba- 
cy  of  Jephthah*s  daughter  inyolyed  the  extinction  of 
his  whole  house  as  well  as  dynasty,  and  rcmoyed  from 
him  his  only  child,  the  sole  prop  and  solące  of  his  de- 
clining  years.  For  it  was  her  duty,  as  the  Lord's  prop- 
erty,  to  dwell  separatcly  at  Shiloh,  in  oonstant  attend- 
ance  on  the  seryice  of  the  sanctnary  (oompaie  Lukę  iii, 
87 ;  1  Cor.  yii,  84),  far  from  her  father,  the  companlons 
of  her  youth,  and  the  beloyed  haunts  of  her  childhood; 
all  this  was  sufficient  cause  for  lamentation.  But  the 
idea  that  shc  was  put  to  death  by  her  father  as  a  con- 
seąnenoe  of  his  yow  shocks  all  the  feelings  of  human- 
ity,  could  only  haye  horrified  her  as  well  as  all  other 
parties  concemed,  xs  inconsistent  with  the  flrst  princi- 
pies  of  the  Mosaic  law,  and  was  impossible  from  the 
yery  naturę  of  its  requi8itions  in  seyeral  pointa.  For 
instance,  human  sacńfices  were  among  the  abominations 
for  which  the  idolatrous  nations  of  Canaan  were  deyoted 
to  destruction  (Deut.  xyiii,  9>14);  and  the  Israelites 
were  expTes6ly  forbidden  to  act  like  them  in  sacrificing 
their  sons  and  daughters  by  fire  (Deut.  xii,  29-31). 
Again,  for  the  redemption  of  any  person  deyoted  to  God 
(Exod.  Xlii,  11-13),  and  eyen  for  the  yery  case  of  Jeph- 
thah's  singular  yow,  if  understood  to  refer  to  his  daugh- 
ter'8  immolation;  proyision  was  expre68ly  madę  (Lev. 
xxyii,  2-5),  so  that  he  might,  with  a  safe  conscieuce, 
haye  redeemed  her  from  death  by  a  smali  payment  of 
money.  It  must  be  remembered,  too,  that  by  the  law 
he  could  not  offer  any  yictim  as  a  bumt-sacrifice  except 
where  the  Lord  had  chosen  to  place  his  name  (Deut. 
xyi,  2,  6, 11, 16;  compare  with  Ley.  i,  2-18 ;  xyii,  3-9), 
that  is,  in  the  tabemacle  at  Shiloh :  moreoyer,  nonę  but 
a  Leyite  could  klll,  and  nonę  but  a  priest  could  offer 
any  yictim;  and  the  statement  of  the  Chaldee  para- 
phirast  (ad  loc.)  that  the  sacriflce  took  place  through  a 
neglect  to  consult  Phinehas,  the  high-priest,  besides  in- 
yolying  an  anachronism,  is  utterly  at  yanance  with  all 
the  known  conditions  of  the  case.  Moreoyer,  nonę  but 
a  małe  yictim  cotild  be  presented  in  sacriflce  in  any 
case.  It  is  tnie  that  if  Jephthah  had  been  an  idolater 
he  might  haye  offered  his  daughter  in  any  of  the  high- 
places  to  a  false  god ;  but  he  was  eyidently  madę  the 
deliyerer  of  his  people  from  the  yoke  of  Ammon  because 
he  was  not  an  idolater  (see  Judg.  xi,  29-36 ;  comp.  Ley. 
XX,  1-5) ;  and  his  whole  conduct  is  commended  by  an 
inspired  apostle  (Heb.  xi,  82:  comp.  1  Sam.  xii,  11)  as 
an  act  of  faith  in  the  tnie  God.  Such  sanction  is  yery 
different  from  the  expreft  oondemnation  of  the  irregu- 
lar  and  mischieyous  proceeding  on  the  part  of  Gideon 
(Judg.  yiii,  27),  for  there  is  nowhere  the  least  intima- 
tion that  Jephthah's  conduct  was  other  than  entirely 
praiseworthy,  altbough  his  yow  is  eyidently  recorded  as 
a  waming  against  inconsiderate  oatbs  (Jar\i8'8  Church 
o/łhe  Redeemed,  p.  115-117).  Indeed,  it  is  yery  doubt- 
ful  whether  he  had  the  power  to  sacriflce  his  daughter, 
and  it  is  incredible  that  she  shoiild  haye  been  the  flrat 
to  claim  the  fulfllment  of  such  a  yow,  as  well  as  incon- 
ceiyable  how  she  should  haye  so  readily  inferred  so  un- 
usiud  an  import  from  the  brief  terms  in  which  he  flrst 
intimated  to  her  his  fatal  pledge  (yer.  85,  36) ;  whereas 
it  is  altogether  llkely  that  (with  her  prompt  consent)  he 


JEPHUNNE 


820 


JEREMIAH 


had  the  right  of  dooming  her  to  perpetual  singlenesa  of 
Ufe  and  religious  secluńon  (compare  1  Cor.  vii,  86-88). 
See  Nazakitk.  It  ia  also  worthy  of  notę  that  the 
term  eroployed  to  cxpre88  hia  promiae  of  devotement 
in  this  case  ia  *^i^3,  ne'der.  a  cotuecrałion,  and  not  ti^in, 
che'rt/n,  dertruction,  See  Yow;  Anathema.  Nor  can 
we  supiKwe  (witb  Prof.  Buah,  ad  loc)  that  during  the 
two  montha'  reapite  he  obtained  better  infonnation, 
in  conseąuence  of  which  the  immolation  waa  avoided 
by  a  ransom-phce;  for  it  is  stated  that  he  literally  fol- 
iiUed  his  vow,  whatever  it  was  (yer.  39).  The  word 
reudered  "  lament"  in  yerse  40  ia  not  the  common  one 
(nsn)  transUted  ^^bewail"  in  rerse  87, 38,  but  the  lare 
expre8Bion  (nsn)  rendered  *<rehear8e"  in  eh.  v,  11,  and 
meaning  to  celebratef  as  implying  joy  rather  than  grief. 

For  a  fuli  discussion  of  the  ąuestion,  see  the  notes  of 
the  Pidorial  Bibie,  and  Bnsh^s  Notes  on  Judgeg,  ad  loc ; 
oomp.  Calmet'8  DissertaHon  sur  k  Vau  de  Jephte,  in  his 
Comtnent.  Litteral,  tom.  ii;  Dresde,  Vołum  Jephtha  ex 
ArUiq,  Judaica  iUustr,  (Upe.  1767, 1778)  \  Randolf,  Er- 
Wtrung  d.  (ielubdes  Jephtha,  in  £ichhom's  Repertorium, 
viii,  18  i  Lightfoot^s  Hormony,  under  Judg.  xi,  Eruhhin, 
cap.  xvi,  Sermon  on  Judg.  xi,  89  -,  Bp.  Russell's  Counec- 
tion  ofSacred  and  Prof  one  Ilistory,  i,  479-492 ;  Hales^s 
Analysis  of  Chronology,  ii,  288-292;  Gleig's  edition  of 
Stackhouse,ii,97;  Clarke's  ComffMR^ar^,  ad  loc. :  Rosen- 
mUller,  ad  loc. ;  Hengstenberg^s  Pentat.  ii,  129 ;  Markii 
Disserł.phiL  theoL  p.  580 ;  Michaelis,  Mos,  Recht,  iii,  80 ; 
Ziegler,  Theolog,  AhhandL  i,  337;  Paulus,  Conservat.  ii, 
197 ;  Yatke,  Bibl,  Theoioff,  p.  275;  Capelliis,  De  roto  Jeph. 
(Salmur.  1683) ;  Dathe  in  DćMerlein^s  Theoloff,  Bibl,  iii, 
827;  Jahn,  łJinieit,  ii,  198;  Eckermann,  Theohg,  Beiir, 
V,  i,  62;  Kcland,  Ankg,  sacr,  iii,  10,  6,  p.  863;  Vogel  in 
Biedennann'8  Acf,  scholast,  ii,  250;  Georgi,  De  roto 
JephttB  (Viteb.  1761) ;  Heumann,  Aor.  stfUoge  dissert.  ii, 
476;  Bemhold,  De  roto  per  Jiphtach,  nuncupato  (Altd. 
1740) ;  Schudt,  Vita  Jepht.  (Groning.  1763),  ii,  77;  Bru- 
no in  £ichhom'8  Reperłor.  viu,  43 ;  Buddsei  Ilist,  V.  T. 
i,  898 ;  Hess,  Gesch,  Jo$.  u,  der  Ueeifuhrer,  ii,  156 ;  Nie- 
roeyer,  Charakt,  iii,  496;  Ewald,  Isr,  Geschichte,  ii,  397 ; 
Selden,  Jus  nat.  et  gent,  i,  11 ;  Anton,  Comparat,  Ubror. 
V,  T.  cet,  pt  ii,  iii ;  F.  Spanheim,  De  roto  Jephtha,  in  his 
Dissert,  theoL  hisł.  p.  135-211;  H.  Benzel,  De  roto  Jepth. 
incruento  (Lond- 1732) ;  Rathlefs  TheoL  for  1755,  p.  414  { 
Seiler,  GemeimtUtz.  Beitr.  1779,  p.  386;  Hasche,  Ueber 
Jeph,  u, s.  GelUbde  (Dresd.  1778 ;  see  in  the  Dresden  An- 
zeig,  1787) ;  l*feiifer,  De  roto  Jephtha,  in  his  Opp,  p.  591 ; 
TierofT,  xd.  (Jena,  1657) ;  Munch,  id,  (Altd.  1740);  Bib, 
Repos.  Jan.  1843,  p.  143  sq.;  Meth,  Quart.Rev,  October, 
1856,  p.  558  8q. ;  Unirersalist  Rerieir,  Jan.  1861 ;  Eranr- 
gelical  Rer.  July,  1861 ;  Cassel,  in  Herzog's  Encyld,  s.  v. ; 
also  the  wurks  cit«d  by  Darling,  Cydop,  coL  284. 

2.  See  JiPiiTAH. 

Jephun^^ne  (U^wn),  a  Grecized  form  (Ecdua. 
zlvi,  7)  for  the  Hebrew  name  Jkphunneh  (q.  v.). 

Jephun^^neh  (Heb.  Yephwmeh',  n!B%  mmMs),  the 
name  of  two  men. 

1.  (Sept.  'Itrowi),  alao  'Ic^yj;  and  'I(^w^.)  The 
father  of  Caleb  (q.  v.),  the  faithful  fellow-explorcr  of  Ca- 
naan  with  Joshua,  in  which  patemal  oonnection  alone 
his  name  occurs  (Numb.  xiii,  6 ;  xiv,  6,  80,  88 ;  xxvi, 
65;  xxxii,  12;  xxxiv,  19;  Deut.  i,  36;  Josh.  xiv,  6, 13, 
14 ;  XV,  13 ;  xxi,  12 ;  1  Chroń.  iv,  15 ;  vi,  66).    B.C.  1698. 

2.  (Scpt.  'If0iva.)  One  of  the  sons  of  Jether  or  Ith- 
ran,  of  the  dcscendanta  of  Asher  (1  Chroń,  vii,  88).  B.C. 
prób.  antę  1017. 

Je'rali  (Heb.  Wrach,  n*ij,  in  pause  n;^^,  Ya'rach, 
the  moon,  as  oftcn ;  Sept,  'lapax,  but  omits  in  1  Chroo. 
i,  20,  wliere,  however,  some  copies  have  'lac^p ;  Vulg. 
Jarv),  the  fuurth  in  order  of  the  sons  of  Joktan,  appar- 
ently  the  fuunder  of  an  Arab  tribe,  who  probahly  had 
their  settleroent  near  Hazarmaveth  and  Hadoram,  be- 
tween  which  the  name  occurs  (Gen.  x,  26),  the  generał 
location  of  all  the  Joktanida*  being  given  in  Yerse  80  as 
exUnding  from  Mesha  eastward  to  Mount  Sephar«    Bo- 


chart  (Phaleg,  u,  19)  thinka  the  woid  ia  Hebiew,  but  i 
translatiou  of  an  equivalent  AiaUc  name,  and  undcr- 
stands  the  Alalai  to  be  meant,  a  tribe  inhaUting  the 
auriferous  region  on  the  Red  Sea  (Agatharch.  49;  Stia- 
bo,  xvi,  p.  277 ;  Diod.  Sic.  iii,  44),  and  oonjeotmes  that 
their  truo  name  waa  Benay  BetUa,  **  Sona  q[  the  Moon,'* 
on  account  of  their  worahip  of  that  laminaty  ander  the 
title  A  liloŁ  (Herodotus,  iii,  8).  He  alao  obecrrea  thtt  a 
tribe  exists  near  Mecca  with  the  title  eona  oftks  mwm, 
probably  the  IlUalUes  mentioned  by  Kiebuhr  {Deacrip- 
tion  ofA  rałńa,  p.  270).  That  the  Alilsi,  however,  woe 
wonhippers  of  Alilat  ia  an  assumption  unsoppotted  by 
facts;  but,  whatever  may  be  aaid  in  its  favor,  tbe  peopłe 
in  que8tion  are  not  the  Bene-HilAl,  who  take  their 
name  fVom  a  kinsman  of  Mohammed,  in  the  fifth  gen- 
eration  before  him,  of  the  well-known  atock  of  Keji 
(Causain,  Essai,  Tab.  X  a  ;  Abu-1-Fidś,  Hirt,  asUtisL  ed. 
Fleischer,  p.  194).  The  connection  renders  tbe  opinioB 
of  J.  D.  liichaeiia  morę  probable,  who  {Spicileg,  ii,  60, 
161)  refen  the  name  to  the  Moon-cooMt,  or  J/oamf  <iftkt 
Moon,  in  the  neighborhood  of  Hadmnaut  (Hazanna- 
veth),  not  far  from  Shorma  (Edriń,  p.  26, 27).  Fococke 
has  some  remarka  on  the  aubject  of  ElrL^tt,  which  the 
reader  may  conault  {Spec,  Uist.  A  rai.  p.  90) ;  and  ak> 
Sir  G.  Wilkinson,  in  hia  notes  to  Uerodotna  (ed.  Rawlin- 
soo,  ii,  402,  foot-note,  and  Esaay  i  to  bk.  iii) :  he  aeens 
to  be  wrong,  however,  in  saying  that  the  Arabie  **  *  awel,' 
'  firsŁ' "  [conectly,  •'awwaT],  is  « lelated  to"  hut,  or  Al- 
lah,  etc,  and  that  Alitta  and  Mylitta  are  Shemitk 
names  derived  from  *^weled,  lealada,  *to  bear  chikSien*" 
{Essay  i,  p.  587).  The  compariaon  of  Alitta  and  My- 
litta is  also  extremc]y  doubtful;  and  probably  Herodo- 
tus aasimilatcd  the  former  name  to  the  latter.  Indeed, 
Jerah  has  not  becn  satisfactorily  identiikd  with  tbe 
name  of  any  Arabian  place  or  tribe,  thongh  a  fomes 
(and  probably  an  old  town,  like  the  nameroos  fbrtified 
places  in  the  Yemen,  of  the  old  Himyerite  kiogdom) 
named  Yerdlch  b  mentioned  as  belonging  to  the  district 
of  the  Nijjad  {Mardsid,  a.  v.  Yerńkh),  which  is  in  Mab- 
reh,  at  the  extremity  of  the  Yemen  {KdmAs),—Gest- 
nius;  Smith.    See  Ababia. 

Jerah'inełSl  (Heb.  YerachmełV,  ic^H^J,  fo«v 
God  or  belored  by  Go^,  the  name  of  three  men. 

1.  (Sept.  'Ipa/icrjX  and  *Icpcfłf^X  v.  r.  'l€pa^fr.X.) 
First-bom  of  Hezron,  brother  of  Caleb,  and  father  of 
Ram  (not  Aram),  of  the  tribe  of  Judah  (1  Chroń,  ii,  9, 
25,  26,  27,  33,  42>  KC.  antę  1658.  Hia  descendants 
were  called  Jer^huieeutes  (Hebrew  YtradunetW, 
^^Wy^,  Sept.  'UptpiiiK  and  'IcfMfuqX  r.  r.  'Icpf^toi^, 
1  Sam.'  xxvii,  10;  xxx,  29). 

2.  (Sept.  'lpapaii\  v.  r.  'Icpa^et/X.)  Son  of  Kiah,  a 
Levite  whoee  rehitionship  ia  nndelmed  otherwiie  (i 
Chroń,  xxiv,  29>    B.a  appaiently  1014. 

3.  (Sept  'lipifuii\  V.  r.  'Icpf^ł^.)  Son  of  Hanase- 
lech  (q.  V.),  one  of  the  two  persona  oommanded  by  Je- 
hoiakim  to  apprehend  Jeremiah  and  Banich,  who  pior- 
identially  eseapcd  (Jer.  xxxvi,  26).     KC  60& 

Jerah^meSUte  (l  Sam.  xxvii,  10;  xxx,  29>  See 
Jbrahmebi^  1. 

Jer^echna  (l(pex'K)i  >  Greedzed  fonn  (1  Eadtr, 
22)  of  the  name  of  the  city  of  Jericiio  (q.  v.). 

Je^red  (a,  1  Chroń,  i,  2;  5, 1  Chroń,  iv,  18>    See 

J^UIED. 

Jer^emai  (Hebrew  Yeremay%  '<C^%  dweDiąf  ia 
heiffhts;  Sept.  'Uptfu  v.  r.  "ItpapĆ),  oneof  the  «iOB«" 
of  Hashum,  who  divoTcod  hia  Genttle  wife  after  the  le- 
tuni  from  Babykm  (Ezn  x,  88).    B.a  459. 

Jeremi^ah  (Heb.  Yirmeyah',  f^^7^  "'**"  "*  *** 
paragogic  form  ^in^^^"^,  Yirmeya^hu,  espedally  in  tbe 
book  of  Jeremiah;  ratsed  up  [i.  e.  appointed]  by  Jtho- 
rah ;  Sept  and  N.  T.  'ItpffŁiac ;  '*  Jeremiaa,**  Matt.  sri, 
14;  "  Jeremy,"  Matt  ii,  17;  xxvii,  9;  bot  m  this  lut 
passage  it  probably  occurs  only  by  ernw  of  copyiata;  fM 
Zech.  xi,  12, 13),  the  name  of  eigfat  or  nina  men. 


JEREMIAH 


821 


JEREMIAH 


1.  The  ftfth  in  rank  of  the  Gadite  brares  who  joined 
Dmvid*8  tToop  in  the  wildemeae  (1  Chroń,  xii,  10).  B.C. 
1061. 

2.  The  tenth  of  the  same  band  of  adrenturers  (1 
Chion.  xii,  13).     B.C.  1061. 

3.  One  of  the  Benjamite  bowmen  and  slingera  who 
repaired  to  David  while  at  ZlMag  (1  Chroń,  xii,  4).  B. 
a  1058. 

4.  A  chief  of  the  tribe  of  Manaaseh  eaat,  apparently 
about  the  time  of  the  deportation  by  the  A88}Tian3  (1 
Chroń.  v,  24).    B.C.  782. 

5.  A  natLve  of  Libnah,  the  father  of  Hamutal,  wife 
of  Josiah,  and  mother  of  Jehoahaz  and  Zedekiah  (2 
Kinga  xxiii,  81 ;  xxiv,  18).     B.C.  antę  632. 

6.  Son  of  Habaziniah,  and  father  of  Jaazaniah,  which 
last  waa  one  of  the  Rechabites  whom  the  prophet  tested 
with  the  oifer  of  winę  (Jer.  xxxv,  8).     B.C.  antę  606. 

7.  The  Becond  of  the  "  greater  prophets"  of  the  O.  T., 
a  son  of  Hilkiah,  a  priest  of  Anathoth,  in  the  tribe  of 
Benjamin  (i,  1 ;  comp.  xxxii,  6).  The  following  brief 
accoiint  of  the  prophefs  career,  which  is  fully  detailed 
in  his  own  book,  ia  chieily  from  Kitto^s  Cydopadia, 

\,  Rdatires  of  Jertmiah,  —  Many  (among  andent 
writera,  Clement  AIex.,  Jerome;  among  moderna,  Eich- 
hom,  Oidoviii8,  Maldonattu,  Von  Bohlen,  etc.)  have  sup- 
poeed  that  hia  father  was  the  high-prieat  of  the  same 
name  (2  Kinga  xxii,  8),  who  foiuid  the  book  of  the  law 
in  the  eighteenth  year  of  Josiah  (Umbreit,  Praktiseher 
Commentar  Uber  den  Jeremia,  p.  x).  This,  howerer, 
aeema  improbable  on  8everal  grounds  (see  Carpzov,  In- 
łrwL  iii,  130 ;  alao  Keil,  Ewald,  etc) :  fint,  therc  is  noth- 
ing  in  the  writinga  of  Jeremiah  to  lead  us  to  think  that 
hia  father  waa  morę  than  an  ordinaiy  priest  ("  Hilkiah 
[one]  of  the  priests,"*  Jer.  i,  1);  again,  the  name  Hil- 
kiah waa  oommon  among  the  Jews  (see  2  Kings  xviii, 
13 ;  1  Chroń,  vi,  45 ;  xxvi,  1 1 ;  Neh.  viii,  4 ;  Jer.  xxix,  8) ; 
and,  lastly,  his  reaidence  at  Anathoth  is  evidence  that 
he  belonged  to  the  linę  of  Abiathar  (1  Kings  ii,  26-85), 
who  waa  deposed  from  the  high-priesfs  office  by  Solo- 
mon :  after  which  time  the  office  appears  to  have  re- 
mained  in  the  linę  of  Zadok. 

2.  /listory. — Jeremiah  was  vefy  young  when  the 
word  of  the  Lord  first  came  to  him  (i,  6).  This  event 
took  place  in  the  thirteenth  year  of  Josiah  (B.C.  628), 
whilc  ths  youthful  prophet  stUl  lived  at  Anathoth.  It 
would  seem  that  he  remained  in  his  native  city  several 
yeara;  but  at  length,  in  order  to  escapethe  persecution 
of  hia  fellow-townsmen  (xi,  21),  and  even  of  his  own 
family  (xii,  6),  as  well  as  to  have  a  widcr  field  fur  his 
exertiona,  he  lefl  Anathoth  and  took  up  his  residence  at 
Jenisalem.  The  finding  of  the  book  of  the  Law,  five 
reaia  ailer  the  oommencement  of  his  predictions,  must 
have  produced  a  powerful  influence  on  the  mind  of  Jere- 
miah, and  king  Josiah  no  doubt  found  him  an  important 
ally  in  carrying  into  effcct  the  reforroation  of  religious 
worahip  (2  Kings  xxiii,  1-25).  B.C.  623.  During  the 
reign  of  thn  monaich,  we  may  readily  believe  that  Jer- 
emiah would  be  in  no  way  molested  in  his  work ;  and 
that  from  the  time  of  his  quitting  Anathoth  to  the 
eighteenth  year  of  his  ministry,  he  probably  uttered  his 
waniinga  without  interruption,  though  with  little  suc- 
cesB  (see  eh.  xi).  Indeed,  the  reformation  itself  was 
nothing  morę  than  the  forcible  repression  of  idolatrous 
and  heathen  rites,  and  the  re-establishment  of  the  ex- 
temal  8ervicc  of  God,  by  the  command  of  the  king.  No 
sooner,  therefore,  was  the  influence  of  the  court  on  be- 
half  of  the  true  religion  withdrawn,  than  it  was  evident 
that  no  real  improvement  had  taken  place  in  the  minds 
of  the  people.  Jeremiah,  who  hitherto  was  at  Icast 
protectcd  by  the  influence  of  the  pious  king  Josiah,  soon 
becaroe  the  object  of  attack,  as  he  must  doubtless  have 
long  been  the  object  of  dislike  to  those  whose  interests 
were  identified  with  the  comiptions  of  religion.  The 
death  of  this  prince  was  bewailed  by  the  prophet  as  the 
precaraor  of  the  divine  judgments  for  the  national  sins 
(2  Chroń,  xxxv,  25).     B.C  609.     See  Lamentations. 

We  hear  nothing  of  the  prophet  during  the  three 


months  which  constituted  the  short  reign  of  Jehoahaz; 
but ''  in  the  begimiing  of  the  reign  of  Jehoiakim"  (B.C. 
607)  the  prophet  was  interrupted  in  his  ministry  by 
"  the  prieste  and  the  prophets,"  who,  with  the  populace, 
brought  him  before  the  civil  authorities,  urging  that 
capital  punishment  should  be  inflicted  on  him  for  his 
threatenings  of  evil  on  the  city  unless  the  people  amend- 
ed  their  ways  (eh.  xxvi).  The  princes  seem  to  have 
been  in  some  degree  aware  of  the  results  which  the  gen- 
erał comiption  was  bringing  on  the  state,  and  if  they 
did  not  themselves  yield  to  the  exhortation8  of  the 
prophet,  they  acknowledged  that  he  spoke  ui  the  name 
of  the  Lord,  and  were  quite  aver8e  from  so  openly  re- 
nouncing  his  authority  as  to  put  his  messenger  to  death. 
It  appears,  however,  that  it  was  rather  owiiig  to  the 
pcrsonal  influence  of  one  or  two,  especially  Ahikam, 
than  to  any  generał  feeling  favorablc  to  Jeremiah,  that 
his  life  was  presenred ;  and  it  would  seem  that  he  was 
then  either  pUced  mider  restraint,  or  clse  was  in  so 
much  danger  from  the  animosity  of  his  adver8arie8  as 
to  make  it  prudent  for  him  not  to  ap|iear  in  public.  In 
the  fourth  year  of  Jehoiakim  (B.C.  605)  he  was  com- 
manded  to  write  the  predictions  which  had  been  given 
through  him,  and  to  read  them  to  the  people.  From 
the  cause,  probably,  which  we  have  intimated  above,  he 
was,  as  he  says,  "shut  up,"  and  could  not  hiroself  go 
into  the  house  of  the  Lord  (xxxvi,  5).  He  therefore 
deputed  Baruch  to  write  the  predictions  after  him,  and 
to  read  them  publicly  on  the  fast-day.  Thesc  threat- 
enings being  thus  anew  madę  public,  Baruch  was  sum- 
moned  before  the  princes  to  give  an  account  of  the  man- 
ner  in  which  the  roli  containing  them  had  oome  into 
his  poasession.  The  princes,  who,  without  strength  of 
principle  to  oppose  the  wickedness  of  the  king,  had  suf- 
ficient  respect  for  religion,  as  well  as  sagacity  enough  to 
diaccm  the  importance  of  Ustening  to  the  voice  of  God^s 
prophet,  advised  both  Baruch  and  Jeremiah  to  conccal 
themseh-es,  while  they  endeavored  to  influence  the 
mind  of  the  king  by  reading  the  roli  to  him.  The  re- 
sult  showed  that  their  precautions  were  not  needlcso. 
In  his  bold  self-will  and  reckless  daring  the  monarch 
refused  to  listen  to  any  advice,  even  though  coming 
with  the  professed  sanction  of  the  Most  High.  Having 
read  three  or  four  leave8, "  he  cut  the  roli  with  the  pen- 
knife  and  cast  it  into  the  fire  that  was  on  the  hearth, 
until  all  the  roli  was  consumed,"  aiid  gave  immediate 
ortlers  for  the  apprehension  of  Jeremiah  and  Baruch, 
who,  howeyer,  were  both  preserred  from  the  vindictive 
monarch.  At  the  command  of  God  the  prophet  pro- 
cured  another  roli,  in  which  he  wrote  all  that  .was  in  the 
roU  destroyed  by  the  king,  ^'and  added  besides  unto 
them  many  like  words"  (xxxvi,  82).     See  Baruch. 

Near  the  dose  of  the  reign  of  Jehoiakim  (RC.  599), 
and  during  the  short  reign  of  his  successor  Jehoiachin 
or  Jeooniah  (B.C  598),  we  find  him  still  uttering  his 
voice  of  waming  (see  eh.  xiii,  18 ;  comp.  2  Kings  xxiv, 
12,  and  Jer.  xxii,  24-80),  though  without  effect;  and, 
after  witnessing  the  downfall  of  the  monarchs  which  he 
had  himself  predicted,  he  sent  a  letter  of  condolence  and 
hope  to  those  who  shared  the  captinty  of  the  royal  fam- 
ily (eh.  xxix-xxxi).  It  was  not  till  the  latter  part  of 
the  reign  of  Zedekiah  that  he  was  put  in  confinement, 
as  we  find  that  *Hhey  had  not  put  him  into  prison'' 
when  the  army  of  Nebuchadnezzar  commenced  the 
siege  of  Jerusalcm  (xxxvii,  4,  5)  (B.C.  589).  On  the 
inyestment  of  the  city,  the  prophet  had  sent  a  message 
to  the  king  declaring  what  would  be  the  fatal  issue, 
but  this  had  so  little  effect  that  the  slayes  who  had 
been  liberated  were  again  reduced  to  bondage  by  their 
fellow-citizens  (eh.  xxxiv).  Jeremiah  himself  was  in- 
carcerated  in  the  court  of  the  prison  adjoining  the  palące, 
where  he  predicted  the  certain  return  from  the  impend- 
ing  captiyity  (xxxij,  83).  The  Chaldnans  drew  olf 
their  army  for  a  time  on  the  report  of  help  coming  from 
Egrpt  to  the  besieged  city,  and  now,  feeling  the  danger 
to  be  imminent,  and  yet  a  ray  of  hope  brightening  their 
prospects,  the  king  eutreated  Jeremiah  to  pray  to  the 


JEREMIAH 


822 


JEREMIAH 


Lord  for  them.  The  hopes  of  the  king  were  not  re- 
sponded  to  in  the  message  which  JeremUh  reoeired 
from  God.  He  was  aasured  that  the  Egyptian  army 
would  return  to  their  own  land,  that  the  Chaldsans 
would  come  again,  and  that  they  would  take  the  city 
and  bum  it  with  fire  (xxxyli,  1,  8).  The  princes,  ap- 
parently  irritated  by  a  meaaage  so  contrary  to  their 
wiAhes,  madę  the  departure  of  Jeremiah  from  the  city 
(for  he  appears  to  have  been  at  this  time  released  from 
confinement),  during  the  short  respite,  the  pretext  for 
accusing  him  of  deserting  to  the  Chaldsans,  and  he  was 
forthwith  cast  into  prinon,  where  he  might  have  perish- 
ed  but  for  the  humanity  of  one  of  the  ruyal  eunucha 
(xxxvii,  12-xxxviii,  13).  The  king  seems  to  have 
been  throughout  indined  to  favor  the  prophet,  and 
sought  to  know  from  him  the  word  of  the  Lord;  but  he 
was  whoUy  under  the  influence  of  the  princes,  and  dared 
not  communicate  with  him  except  in  secret  (xxxviii, 
14-28),  much  less  could  he  follow  ad  vice  so  obnoxious 
to  their  yiews  as  that  which  the  prophet  gave.  Jere- 
miah, therefore,  morę  from  the  hostility  of  the  princes 
than  the  inclination  of  the  king,  was  stiU  in  conftnement 
wlien  the  city  was  taken,  B.C.  588.  Nebnchadnezzar 
formed  a  morę  just  estimate  of  his  character  and  of  the 
value  of  his  oounsds,  and  gave  a  special  charge  to  his 
captain,  Kcbuzar-adan,  not  only  to  proAide  for  him, 
but  to  follow  his  advice  (xxxix,  12).  He  was  accord- 
ingly  taken  from  the  prison  and  allowed  free  choice 
either  to  go  to  Babylon,  where  doubtless  he  would  have 
been  held  in  honor  in  the  royal  court,  or  to  remain  n^ith 
his  own  people  (B.C.  587).  With  characteristic  patriot- 
ism  he  went  to  Mizpah  with  Gedaliah,  whom  the  Bab- 
ylonian  monarch  had  appointed  govemor  of  Judsea,  and, 
aftcr  his  murder,  sought  to  persuade  Johanan,  who  was 
thcn  the  recognised  leader  of  the  people,  to  remain  in 
the  land,  assuring  him  and  the  people,  by  a  message 
from  God  in  answer  to  their  inquiries,  that,  if  they  did 
so,  the  Lord  would  build  them  up,  but  if  they  went  to 
Egypt,  the  evils  which  they  aought  to  escape  should 
come  upon  them  there  (eh.  xlii).  The  people  refused 
to  attend  to  the  divine  message,  and,  under  the  oom- 
maiid  of  Johanan,  went  into  Egypt,  taking  Jeremiah 
and  Baruch  along  with  them  (xliii,  6).  In  Egypt  the 
prophet  still  sought  to  tum  the  people  to  the  Lord, 
from  whom  they  had  so  long  and  so  decply  revolted  (eh. 
xliv),  but  his  writings  give  us  no  8ubsequent  informa- 
tion  respecting  his  peraonal  histor}'.  Ancient  traditions 
assert  that  he  spent  the  remainder  of  his  life  in  Eg^-pt 
Aocording  to  the  pseudo-Epiphanius,  he  was  stoned  by 
the  people  at  Taphnaa  (iv  Ta^i/aic),  the  same  as  Tah- 
panhes,  where  the  Jews  were  settled  {De  Yitia  Prophet. 
ii,  239,  quoted  by  Fabricius,  Codex  Psmdepigraphu$  V. 
Tu  i,  1110).  It  is  said  that  his  bones  were  removcd  by 
Alexander  the  Grcat  to  Alexandria  (Carpzov,  ItUrod,  pt. 
iii,  p.  138,  where  other  traditions  respecting  him  may  be 
fouiul). 

JEREMIAH,  BooK  of.  Jeremiah  was  oontempo- 
rary  with  Zephaniah,  Habakkuk,  Ezekiel,  and  DanieL 
No  one  who  compares  them  can  fail  to  perceive  that 
the  mind  of  Jeremiah  was  of  a  softer  and  morę  delicate 
texture  than  that  of  his  illustrious  contemporary  Eze- 
kiel, with  whose  writings  his  are  most  nearly  paralleL 
His  whole  history  con\'inces  us  that  he  was  by  naturę 
mild  and  retiring  (Ewald,  Propheten  des  A  U,  Bund.  p.  2), 
highly  susceptible  and  sensitive,  especially  to  sorrow- 
fid  emotions,  and  rather  inclined,  as  we  should  imagine, 
to  shriuk  from  dangcr  than  to  bTave  it.  Yet,  with  this 
acute  perception  of  injury,  and  natural  repugnance  from 
being  "  a  mau  of  strife,"  he  never  in  the  least  degree 
shrinks  from  publicity;  nor  is  he  at  all  intimidated  by 
reproach  or  iiisult,  or  even  by  actual  punishment  and 
threatcned  death,  when  he  has  the  message  of  GM  to 
deliver. 

1.  The  style  of  Jeremiah  corresponds  with  this  view  of 
the  character  of  his  mind :  though  not  deficient  in  pow- 
er,  it  is  peculiarly  roarked  by  pathos.  He  delights  in 
the  esprcssion  of  the  tender  emotions,  and  employs  all 


the  lesouroes  of  his  imaginationto  excit6  oorrespondiBg 
feelings  in  his  readers.  He  has  an  irresistible  sympa- 
thy  with  the  miserable,  which  finds  utteranoe  in  the 
most  touching  descriptions  of  their  oondition. 

The  style  of  Jeremiah  is  marked  by  the  pecoliarities 
which  belong  to  the  later  Hebrew,  and  by  the  introdue- 
tion  of  Aramaic  forms  (Eichhoro,  Emleitystg,  iii,  123; 
Gesenius,  Geschickte  der  Htb,  Sprache^  p.  35).  It  wta, 
we  imagine,  on  this  accouut  that  Jerome  complained  of 
a  certain  rusticity  in  Jeremiah's  style.  Lowth,  hower- 
er,  says  he  can  discover  no  traces  of  it,  and  regarda  Jer- 
emiah as  nearly  eąual  in  sublimity  in  many  parta  to 
Isaiah  {De  Sacra  Poesi  HA,  p.  426). 

2.  The  canomcity  of  the  writings  of  Jeremiah  in  gen- 
erał aie  established  both  by  the  testimony  of  ancient 
writers,  and  by  quotations  and  referencea  which  oceor 
in  the  New  Testament  Thus  the  son  of  Sirach  refers 
to  him  as  a  prophet  oonsecrated  from  the  womb,  and 
ąuotes  from  Jer.  i,  10  the  oommission  with  which  he 
was  intrusted  (Ecdus.  xlix,  7).  In  2  Mace  ii,  1-8,  there 
is  a  tradition  respecting  his  hiduig  the  tabemade  and 
the  ark  in  a  rock,  in  which  he  is  called  "Jeremiah  the 
propheC  Philo  speaks  of  him  under  ńmilar  titka, 
as  xpo^]7n/c,  /itźcrnic,  iepo^ayri^Ci  >Qd  calls  a  paasage 
which  he  ąuotes  from  Jer.  iii,  4  an  oiade — xptionóv 
(Eichhom,  Etnlettung^  i,  95).  Joeephus  refers  to  him 
by  name  as  the  prophet  who  predicted  the  evils  which 
were  coming  on  the  city,  and  speaks  of  him  as  the  au- 
thor  of  Lamentations  (jiikoc  ^prttnjTiKÓ^)  which  are 
still  existing  (Ani.  x,  5, 1).  His  writings  are  included 
in  the  list  of  canonical  books  givcn  by  Melito,  Origcn 
(whose  words  are  remarkable :  'iiptftiac  <r^  Srprjpoic 
Kai  rj  kVŁ(rTo\y  Łv  ći^O,  Jerome,  and  the  Talmud  (Eich- 
hom, Etnleitung^  iii,  184).  In  the  New  Testament  Jere- 
miah is  refeiied  to  by  name  in  Matt.  ii,  17,  where  a  psfr- 
sage  is  ąuoted  from  Jer.  xxxi,  15,  and  in  >Iatt.  xvi,  14; 
in  Heb.  viii,  8-12,  a  passage  is  ąuoted  from  Jer.  xxxi, 
31-^  There  is  one  other  place  in  which  the  name  of 
Jeremiah  occurs — Matt.  xxvii,  9 — which  has  occadoncd 
considerable  difficulty,  because  the  passage  ihere  ąnoted 
is  not  found  in  the  extant  writings  of  the  prophet  (Ke 
Kuindl,  Com^  ad  loc).  Jeiome  affirms  that  he  found 
the  exact  passage  in  a  Hebrew  apocryphal  book  (Fabri- 
cius, Codex  Pseudepigraphus,  i,  1103),  but  there  is  no 
proof  that  that  book  was  in  exi8tence  before  the  time 
of  Christ  It  is  probable  that  the  passage  intended  by 
Matthew  is  Zech.  xi,  12, 13,  which  m  part  corresponds 
with  the  ąuotation  he  give8,  and  that  the  name  is  a 
gloes  which  lias  found  its  way  into  the  text  (see  Ols- 
hausen,  Cotnmeniar  iiber  d.  X.  Test,  ii,  493). 

8.  The  genuineness  of  some  portious  of  the  book  has 
of  late  been  disputed  by  German  critics.  Moverv  whose 
view8  have  been  adoptcd  by  Dc  Wette  and  Hitzig,  at- 
tributes  X,  1-16,  and  eh.  xxx,  xxxi,  and  xxxiii  to  the 
author  of  the  conduding  portion  of  the  book  of  laaiah. 
His  fundamental  argument  against  the  last-namcd  por- 
tion is,  that  the  prophet  Zechariah  (viii,  7, 8)  ąuotes 
from  Jer.  xxxi,  7, 8, 83,  and  in  verae  9  speaks  of  the  ao- 
thor  as  one  who  lived  "  in  the  day  that  the  foundatkm 
of  the  house  of  the  Lord  of  hosts  was  laid."  But  theic 
is  nothing  in  ver.  7  and  8  of  Zechariah  to  pn>ve  that  it 
is  intended  to  be  a  ąuotation  from  any  written  prophe- 
cy,  much  less  from  this  portion  of  Jeremiah.  Hence 
Hitzig  (Jeremiaf  p.  230)  givca  up  the  extemal  evidcnoe 
on  which  Morers  had  rdiod.  The  intemal  evidenoe 
arising  from  the  examination  of  particular  words  and 
phrases  is  so  slight,  especially  when  the  authenticity 
of  the  Utter  portion  of  Isaiah  is  maintuned,  that  ercn 
Ewald  agrees  that  the  chapten  in  ąuestton,  as  well  as 
the  other  passage  mentioned  (x,  1-16),  are  the  woik  of 
Jeremiah.  It  seems,  however,  not  improbable  thai  the 
Chaldee  of  verBe  11  is  a  gloss  which  has  crept  into  the 
text,  both  because  it  is  (apparently  without  reason)  in 
another  language,  and  because  it  seems  to  interrapc  the 
progress  of  though  t  The  predicticms  against  Babylon 
in  eh.  1  and  li  are  objected  to  by  MoverB,  De  Wette,  and 
others  on  the  ground  that  they  contain  many  interpol»- 


JEREMIAH 


823 


JEREMIAH 


ŁtonsL  Ewild  attributes  them  to  sonie  nnknown  proph- 
et,  who  imiuted  the  style  of  JeremUh.  Their  authen- 
tidty  is  maintained  by  Uitzig  (p.  891)  and  by  Umbreit 
(t>.  290-293),  to  whom  we  most  lefer  for  an  anawrer  to 
the  objectioDB  madę  againat  them.  The  last  chapter  U 
gencr  .Uy  regarded  as  an  appendix  added  by  some  later 
author.  It  is  ahnost  yerbidly  the  same  as  the  aooount 
in  2  Kinga  ksIy,  18 ;  xxV|  30,  and  it  camea  the  hiatoiy 
down  to  a  later  period,  probably,  than  that  of  the  death 
of  Jercmlah.  That  it  ia  not  his  work  aeems  to  be  indi- 
cated  in  the  last  verse  of  eh.  li.  (See  generally  HRver- 
nick*9  Einleiiunfff  ii,  232,  etc.) 

4.  Much  difficulty  haa  arisen  with  reapect  to  the  writ- 
inga  of  Jeiemiah  from  the  apparent  diaorder  in  which  i  aectiona  picturing  the  hopea  of  brighter  timea :  1.  eh. 
they  stand  in  our  preaent  copiea,  and  from  the  many  I  xxx,  xxxi;  and  2.  oh.  xxxii,  xxxiii;  to  which,  as  in  the 
diaagreementa  between  the  Hebrew  text  and  that  found  laat  book,  b  added  a  historical  appendix  in  three  aectiona : 
in  the  Septuagint  yeraion,  and  many  conjecttires  have  \  1.  eh.  xxxiv,  1-7;  2.  eh.  xxxiv,  8-22;  8.  eh.  xxxv.  Y. 
been  hazarded  reapecting  the  occaaion  of  thia  diaorder.  j  The  oondiiBion, in  two  aectiona;  l.ch.  xxxvi;  2.  eh.  xlv. 
The  foUowing  are  the  principal  dlyersitiea  between  the   Ali  this,  he  aupposea,  waa  arranged  in  Paleatine  during 


again  divided  into  atiophes  of  from  aeven  to  nine  ycnea, 
firequently  diatingoiahed  by  aach  a  phraae  aa  *'The 
Lord  aaid  alao  unto  me,"  Theae  aepurate  aectiona  are 
arranged  by  Ewald  ao  as  to  form  five  diatinct  booka :  I. 
The  introduction,  eh.  i.  IL  Keproofa  of  the  sina  of  the 
Jewa,  eh.  ii-xxiv,  oonaiating  of  aeven  aectiona,  viz.  1.  eh. 
ii ;  2.  eh.  iti-vi ;  8.  eh.  vii-x ;  4.  eh.  xi-xiii ;  5.  eh.  xiv- 
xvii,  18 ;  $.  eh.  xvii,  19-xx ;  7.  eh.  xxi-xxiv.  III.  A 
generał  review  of  all  nationa,  the  heathen  aa  well  aa  the 
people  of  larael,  oonaiating  of  two  aectiona :  1.  eh.  xlvi- 
x1łx  (which  be  thinka  have  been  transpoaed) ;  2.  chap. 
xxv,  and  a  historical  appendix  of  three  aectiona :  1.  eh. 
xxvi;  2.  eh.  xxvii ;  and  8.  eh.  xxviii,  xxix.     lY.  Two 


two  texta 

(o.)  The  chaptera  oontaining  propheciea  against  for- 
eign  nationa  are  placed  in  a  different  part  of  the  book, 
and  the  prophedes  themaelyea  arranged  in  a  different 
order,  aa  in  the  following  table : 


AU  natlooe,  zxv,  14-88. 
Egypt,  xliii,  8-13. 

"      xliv,  1-80. 

"      xlvi,  1-88. 
PhlliaUnea.  xlvii,  1-7. 
Moab,  xlviii,  1^7. 
Ammon,  xlix,  !-<(. 
Bdom,  xlix,  7-22. 
Damascna,  xlix,  88-27. 
Kedar,  xHx.  28-38. 
Elam,  xlix,  34-89. 
Babylon,  M^M. 
»•       ll,l-«. 


Saptugtnt. 


Błam,  xxv,  end  (xlix,  84-39). 
~       t,  xxvi,  entlre  (xlvi,  1-28). 


Babylon,  xxvii,  entire  (1, 1-M). 
^*       xxviii,  entlre  (II,  1-64). 

Phillatlnea,  xxix,  bttrin.  (xlvii,  1-7). 

Eduro,  xxix,  end  (xflx,  7-22). 

AmmoD,  xxx,  begin.  (xlix,  1-5). 

Kedar,  xxz,  mlddle  (xlix,  28-38). 

Damaacaa,  xxx,  end  (xlix,  28-87). 

Moab,  xxxi,  eotire  (xlviii,  1-44). 

All  nationa,  xxxii,  entire  (xxv,  15-88). 

The  other  chapa.  (xxxill-lj)  folio  w  Id 
the  aame  order  as  the  Heb.  (xxvi- 
xlv). 


CbroDological. 


Egypt,  xlvi,  1-12. 

Sarroanding  na^ 
tiona,  xxv. 

Moab,  Ammon, 
Bdom,  Damaa- 
CD^  Kedar,  and 
Elam,     xlviii, 

XliŁ 

Babylon,  1,  li. 
PhlUBUnee,  xlvii. 
Bgrpt,  xliii,  6-18, 
xlW,xlvi,18-2& 


B.C.  607. 
««  607. 


096. 
094. 


687. 


(&)  Tariooa  passages  which  exist  in  the  Hebrew  are 
not  found  in  the  Greek  copies  (e.  g.  xxvii,  19-22 ;  xxxiii, 
14-26 ;  xxxix,  4-14 ;  xlviii,  45-^7).  Braides  these  dis- 
crepandea,  there  are  numeraus  omiasiona  and  frequent 
variationa  of  single  worda  and  phraaea  (MoverB,  De  utri-' 
usgne  Yoticimorum  Jertmia  rtoenaUmu  indole  et  origine, 
p.  8-32).  To  explain  these  diver8ities,  reoouiae  has 
been  had  to  the  hypotheaia  of  a  double  reoenaion,  a 
hypothesis  which,  with  various  modifications,  ia  hdd 
by  most  modem  critica  (Movers,  ut  mpra;  De  Wette, 
J^rhuck  der  Iłut,'Cnt,  EinUU,  m  d.  AU,  Test,  p.  808; 
Ewald,  Propheten  des  AU,  Bund,  ii,  28;  Keil,  Eudeit,  p. 
800  8q. ;  Wichelhaua,  De  Jeremia  rers,  Aiex.  HaL  1847). 

Yarioua  attempta  have  been  madę  to  account  for  the 
preaent  (apparently)  diaordered  arrangement  of  Jere- 
miah*8  predictions.  Bejecting  thoae  that  procecd  upon 
the  asaumption  of  accidcnt  (Blayney,  XoieSy  p.  8)  or  the 
caprice  of  an  amanuenaia  (Eichhom,  EinL  iii,  184),  we 
notice  that  of  Ewald  (with  which  Umbreit  aubatantially 
a^ecs,  Praktisch,  Comment,  Uber  den  Jeremia,  p.  xxvii), 
who  finds  that  varioua  portiona  aie  prefaced  by  the 
same  formuła,  *'The  word  which  came  to  Jeremiah 
from  the  Lord"  (vii,  2 ;  xi,  1 ;  xviii,  1 ;  xxi,  1 ;  xxv,  1 ; 
xxx,  1 ;  xxxii,  1 ;  xxxiv,  1,  8 ;  xxxv,  1 ;  xl,  1 ;  xliv,  1), 
or  by  the  very  similar  expre8aion,  "The  word  of  the 
Lord  which  came  to  Jeremiah*^  (xiv,  1 ;  xlvi,  1 ;  xlvii, 
1 ;  xlix,  34).  The  noticea  of  time  distinctly  mark  some 
other  divisions  which  are  morę  or  less  hiatorical  (xxvi, 
1 ;  xxvii,  1 ;  xxxvi,  1 ;  xxxvii,  1).  Two  other  portiona 
are  in  themselve8  auffidently  distinct  without  auch  in- 
dication  (xxix,  1 ;  xlv,  1),  while  the  generał  introduc- 
tion to  the  book  aenrea  for  the  section  oontained  in  eh.  i. 
There  are  left  two  sections  (chap.  ii,  iii),  the  former  of 
which  has  only  the  shorter  introduction,  which  gener- 
ally designates  the  oommencement  of  a  strophe;  while 
the  latter,  as  it  now  stands,  seems  to  be  imperfect,  hav- 
ing  as  an  introduction  merely  the  word  **  saying."  Thus 
tbe  book  is  divided  into  twenty-three  separate  and  in- 
dependent sections,  which,  in  the  poetical  parta,  are 


the  ahort  intenral  of  rest  between  the  taking  of  the  dty 
and  the  departure  of  Jeremiah  with  the  remnant  of  the 
Jewa  to  Egypt.  In  Egypt,  after  aome  intenral,  Jere- 
miah added  three  aectiona,  viz.  eh.  xxxvii,  xxxix,  xl- 
xliii,  and  xliv.  At  the  aame  time,  probably,  he  added 
xlvi,  18-26,  to  the  pre- 
viou8  prophecy  reapect^ 
ing  Egypt,  and,  perhape, 
madę  aome  additiona  to 
other  parta  previouBly 
written. 

For  a  pnrdy  topical 

analyaia  of  the  book,  aee 

Dr.  Davidaon,  in  Home*a 

Introd,  new  ed.  ii,  870  aq. 

The  exact  chronok)gical 

poeition  of  aome  of  the 

prophedes  ia  exceeding* 

iy  difficult  to  determine. 

The  principal  predictiona  relating  to  the  Measiah  are 

found  in  chapter  xxiii,  1-8;  xxx,  81-40;  xxxiii,  14-26 

(Heng8tenbe]K'8  Chnstologk,  111,495-619).— Kitto. 

5.  The  following  are  the  special  exegetical  woika  on 
the  whole  of  Jeremiah'a  prophedea,  to  a  few  of  the  moat 
important  of  which  we  preflx  an  aateńak  [*] :  Origen, 
Homitim  (in  Opp,  iii,  125) ;  alao  Selecła  {ibid,  iii,  287); 
Ephiaem  Syros,  Erplanatio  (Syriac  and  Lat  in  Opp.  v, 
98) ;  Jerome,  In  Jer,  (in  Opp,  iv,  838) ;  Theodoret,  Inter- 
pretatio  (Greek,  in  Opp.  II,  i) ;  Babanua  Maurus,  Com- 
mentarH  (in  Opp.) ;  Bupertus  Tuitiensis,  In  flierem,  (in 
Opp,  i,  466) ;  Thomas  Aąuinas,  CommentarH  (in  Opp,  ii) ; 
Melancthon,  A  rgumenium  (in  Opp,  ii) ;  Arama,  Q'^*^^K, 
etc  [includ.  Isa.]  (Yen.  1608, 4to;  also  in  FrankAlrter^a 
Rabb.  Bibie);  Zuingle,  CompkmaHo  (Tiguri,  1581,  fol; 
alao  in  Opp,  iii);  CEcolampadiua,  Commenturii  [includ. 
Lam.]  (Argent.  1533,  4to);  Bngenhagen,  Adnołationes 
(Yitemb.  1546,  4to) ;  De  Caatro,  Cotrimenłarius  [indud. 
Lam.  and  Baruch]  (Par.  1559,  Mogont  1616,  fol);  Zi- 
chemiua,  Enarrationes  (Colon.  1559, 8vo) ;  Pintua,  Cam- 
mentarius  [indud.  laa.  and  Lam.]  (Lugdun.  1561, 1584, 
1590,  Salmant.  1581,  fol) ;  Galvin,  Pneiectiones  (Genev. 
1568, 1576, 1589,  fol;  in  French,  ib.  1565,  foL;  trana.  in 
Engliah  by  Owen,  Edinburgh,  1850, 5  vola.  8vo) ;  Strigd, 
Conciones  (Lipa.  1566,  8vo) ;  Sehiecker,  A  uslegung  (Lpz. 
1566,  4to) ;  Buliinger,  Conciones  (Tigurini,  1575,  folio) ; 
Taillepied,  Commenlarius  (Par.  1583, 4to) ;  Heilbrunner, 
Quastiones  (Lauing.  1586,  8vo) ;  Capella,  Commentaria 
(Tanraoon.  1586, 4to);  Figuiero,  Paraphrasis  (Lugdun. 
1596,  8vo) ;  Brenz,  Commentaria  (in  Opp,  iv) ;  Brougb- 
ton,  CommentariiŁs  [includ.  Lam.]  ((ieneva,  1606, 4to)  ; 
Polan,  Commentarius  [includ.  Lam.]  (BaaiL  1608,  8vo) ; 
Sanctiua,  Commentarius  [includ.  Lam.]  (Lugdun.  1618, 
fol.) ;  A  Lapide,  In  Jerem,  etc  (Antw.  1621,  fol.) ;  Ghis- 
ler,  Commentarius  (Lngd.  1633, 8  vola.  foL);  De  Beiia, 
Considerationes  (Olyaaip.  1633,  foL) ;  Hulaemann,  Com^- 
mentarius  [includ.  Lam.]  (Rndolphop.  1663,  Lipa.  1696, 
4to) ;  Forater,  Commentarius  (Yitemb.  1672, 1699, 4to); 


JEREMIAH 


824 


JEREMIAH  n 


Alting,  Cammentarius  (Amst  1688,  folio;  also  In  Opp,  i, 
649);  *Seb.  Schmidt,  Commeniariut  (Ar^nt.  1685,  Fr. 
ad  M.  1697, 1706,  2  vo1b.  4to) ;  De  Sacy,  EacplicaHon  (in 
French,  Paiis,  1691,  12mo)  ;  Noordbeek,  YHUgginge 
(Franek.  1701, 4to) ;  'Lowlb,  Commentary  [indud.  Lam.] 
(Lond.  1718, 4to ;  also  in  the  "  Commentary  of  Patrick," 
etc.) ;  Petersen,  Zmgniss  (Francf.  1719, 4to) ;  Rapel,  Pre- 
difften  (Lunenb.  1720, 1755,  2  Yola.  4to) ;  Ittig,  Predigtm 
(Dre6den,1722,4to);  Michaelis,  Obsenationes  [on  parta, 
indud.  Lam.]  (Gotting.  1748,  4to) ;  Burscher,  Erlaitter- 
ung  (Leipzig,  1756, 8vo) ;  Yenema,  Cofnmentarius  (Leov. 
1766, 2  voK  4to) ;  ♦Blayney,  Notes  [indud.  Lam.]  (Oxf. 
1784, 4to;  8d  ed.  Lond.*  1886, 8vo);  Schnurrer,  Obsenfa- 
tumes  [on  parta]  (Tub.  1798-4,  4  pts.  4to;  also  in  Velt- 
husen  et  cet  Comment,  ii-iv) ;  Leiate,  Obiertatume*  [on 
parts]  (Gotting.  1794, 8vo,  and  also  in  Pott.  et  oet  Com- 
iMfit,  ii) ;  Spohn,  Nola  (Lipa.  1794-1824.  2  vola.  8vo) ; 
Yolborth,  Anmerkungm  (Celle,  1795,  8vo) ;  Uhrich,  De 
Vafib.  aacris  (Dteaden,  1797, 4to) ;  Schulz,  SchoUa  (No- 
rirobnrg,  1797,  8vo) ;  Hensler,  Bemerkungm  [on  parta] 
(Lpz.  1805,  8vo);  Dereser,  ErHarung  [includ.  Lam.  and 
Baruch]  (F.  ad  M.  1809,  8vo);  Shalom-Kohen,  Ueber- 
sttzung  [with  Hebrew  commentary]  (FUrth,  1810, 8vo) ; 
♦Horeler,  Notes  [induding  Lam.]  (in  BibU  Crił.  ii,  1); 
Gaab,  Eridarung  [on  parts]  (TUb.  1824,  8vo) ;  Roorda, 
Commentaria  [on  parts]  (Groning.  1824, 8vo) ;  ♦Dahler, 
Notes  (in  French,  Strasb.  1825-80, 2  yoIs.  8vo)  ;  ^Rosen- 
mUUer,  Scholia  [induding  Lam.]  (Łips.  1826-7,  2  rola. 
8vo) ;  Moyers,  Recenaiones  Jerenu  (Hamb.  1827,  8vo) ; 
Knobel,  De  Jerem,  Ckaldaizanłe  (VraŁislav.  1831,  4to) ; 
Kuper,  JeremitB  (tOerpres  (Berlin,  1887, 8vo) ;  ♦Hitzig, 
Erklarufłff  (Leipzig,  1841,  8vo) ;  *Umbrdt,  Commentar 
(Hamb.  1842,  8vo) ;  ^Henderson,  Commentary  [indud. 
Lam.]  (London,  1851, 12mo);  Neuroann, ^ tw^lp^n^  [in- 
duding Lam.]  (Lpz.  1856,  8vo);  Graf,  ErHarung  (Lpz, 
1862,  2  Yols.  8vo) ;  Cowles,  Notes  (N.  York,  1869, 12mo). 
See  Propiibts. 

JEREMIAH,  Epistle  of,  one  of  the  opocryphal 
writings,  purporting  io  proceed  ftorn  the  pen  of  the 
prophet  Jeremiah  (q.  v.). 

1.  TUla  and  Poróton.— This  apocryphal  piece,  which 
derires  ita  title,  iTrunoKłl  'UptfŁioy  (Sept.,  Yulg.,  Syiiac, 
etc),  from  purporting  to  be  an  epistle  sent  by  the  proph- 
et Jeremiah  "  to  them  which  were  to  be  led  captive  to 
Babylon,"  haa  different  positions  in  the  different  MSS. 
Ił  is  placed  after  the  Lamentations  in  Origen'8  Hexa- 
plaa,  according  to  the  S^nriac  Uexapla  codex  in  the  Am- 
brosian  Library  at  Milan,  in  the  Cod.'Alex.,  the  Arabie 
yersions,  etc ;  in  some  editions  of  the  Sept,  in  the  Lat- 
in,  and  the  Syriac,  which  was  foUowed  by  Luther,  the 
Zurich  Bible,'and  the  A-Yers.  {"Epistle  ofJtremy"\  it 
constitutcs  the  8ixth  chapter  of  the  apoaypha]  book  of 
Baruch,  while  Theodoret,  Hilary  of  Poitiers,  and  sereral 
MSS.  of  the  Sept  entirely  omit  it,  It  is,  however,  an 
independent  production,  and  has  nothing  to  do  with 
Baruch.    See  Baruch,  Book  of. 

2.  Design  and  Contents, — The  deńgn  of  thia  epistle  ia 
to  admonish  the  Jews  who  were  going  into  captivity 
with  the  king  to  beware  of  the  idolatry  which  they 
wonld  see  in  Babylon.  It  tells  the  people  of  God  not  to 
become  idolaters  like  the  strangers,  but  to  serre  their 
own  God,  whose  angel  is  with  them  (yerse  1-7),  and  it 
expoBes  in  a  rhetorical  dedamation  the  foUy  of  idolatiy 
(yerse  8-72),  concluding  every  group  of  yerses,  which 
contains  a  fresh  proof  ofits  foUy,  with  the  reiterated  re- 
marks,  "  Seeing  that  they  are  no  gods,  fear  them  not" 
(ver.  16, 28,  29, 66), "  How  can  a  man  think  that  they 
are  gods?"  (ver.  40, 44, 56, 64, 69), "  How  can  a  man  not 
see  that  they  are  not  gods?"  (ver.  49,  58). 

8.  A  ittJiory  Datę,  original  lAmgttage^  Canomcityf  etc. — 
The  inscripdon  claims  the  authorship  of  thts  epistle  for 
Jeremiah,  who,  it  is  said,  wrote  it  just  as  the  Jews  were 
going  to  Babylon,  which  is  genendly  reckoned  to  be  the 
first  year  of  Nebuchadnezzar  the  Great,  or  B.C.  606. 
This  is  the  generał  opinion  of  the  Roman  Church,  which, 
aa  a  matter  of  course,  regards  it  as  canonical.  But  mo9- 
em  critics,  both  Jewish  and  Christian,  who  deny  the 


power  to  any  Church  to  oyerride  intemal  eridence,  and 
defy  the  laws  of  critidam,  have  shown  satisfactorily  that 
ita  original  language  is  Greek,  and  that  it  was  written 
by  Helleniatic  Jews  in  imitation  of  Jeremiah,  eh.  x  md 
xxix.  This  is  corroborated  by  the  fact  that  this  epistle 
doea  not  exist  In  the  Hebrcw,  was  never  included  in  tbc 
Jewish  canon,i3  designated  by  Jerome,  who  knew  morę 
than  any  father  what  the  Jewish  canon  contained,  u 
"^rmyStrriypa^oc  {Proem.  Commentar,  m  liierom.'),  vu 
marked  with  obeli  by  Origen  in  hia  Hexapla,  a»  is  eń- 
dent  from  the  notę  of  Cbd.  Chislianua  (Bapovx  °^^ 
af/3ćAi9roŁ  Kard  robę  ó),  and  was  pasaed  over  by  The- 
odoret, though  he  explained  the  book  of  Banichl  Tbe 
datę  of  this  epistle  cannot  be  definitely  acttled.  It  is 
generally  supposed  that  2  Mace  ii,  2  alludes  to  this  epis- 
tle, and  that  it  must,  therefore,  be  older  than  this  book 
of  Maccabees.  Herzfdd  (Geschichłe  d,  K.  Isratl  vor  dn 
Zerstdrung  des  ersłen  Tempds,  Brunsni^ick,  1847,  p.  316) 
infers  from  it  the  rery  rererse,  namely,  that  this  epistle 
was  written  a/ter  the  passage  in  2  Mace,  while  Fritzschc 
and  Dayidson  are  utterly  unable  to  sec  the  appmpriate- 
ness  of  the  supposed  rcfercnce.  It  is  most  probable  that 
the  writer  lired  towards  the  cnd  of  the  Maccabsean  pe- 
riod. 

4.  Literaturę, — Amald,  A  Crilkal  Commentary  tm  the 
Apocryphal  Boohs,  being  a  Conlinuation  of  Patrick  cad 
LoKtk ;  Eichhom,  Einleitung  ui  die  apokryph,  Schrijitn 
des  Alten  Testaments  (Lpz.  1795),  p.  890  8q. ;  De  Wette, 
Einleit,  ind.Alłe  Testament,  sec  824;  Fritzsche,  Kurz- 
ge/asstes  ezegetisches  Nandbueh  z,  d.  A  pokr.  d.  A  Ifen  Tta- 
tamenteSj  part  i  (Lpzg.  1851),  p.  205  8q. ;  Keil,  EUdeitung 
m  das  AUe  Testament  (1859),  p.  781  sq.;  Darideon,  The 
Text  o/ the  Old  Testament  considered  (London,  1856),  p. 
1088 ;  also  in  Home*s  fntroduction  (London,  1856),  ii, 
1038, 1039.— Kitta    See  Apocrypha. 

JEREMIAH,  Lamkmtatio:i(S  of.  See  hAMKSTM 
TioNs  OF  Jeremiah. 

8.  A  priest  who  accompanied  Zerubbabd  fiom  Babr- 
lon  to  Jenisalem  (Neh.  xu,  1).     B.C.  536. 

9.  One  of  those  who  foUowed  the  princes  in  the  Cir- 
cuit of  the  ncwly-repaired  walls  with  the  sound  of  tnun- 
pets  (yerse  84) ;  apparently  the  same  with  one  of  the 
priesta  who  subscribed  the  sacred  corenant  along  with 
Nehemiah  (Neh.  x,  2).  B.C.  446-cir.  410.  He  wu  pos- 
sibly  identical  with  No.  8. 

Jeremiah  U,  patriarch  of  Owstastisople,  wm 
bom  in  1586.  He  was  dected  patriarch  Blay  5, 1572; 
in  1579  he  was  dri\'en  from  his  see,  but  after  the  death 
of  Metrophanes  (1 580)  he  regaincd  his  podtion.  Short- 
ly  afler  he  was  imprisoned  by  order  of  the  sułtan  on  i 
charge  of  high  treason.  libented  throngh  the  inter- 
ycntion  of  the  ambaasadors  of  France  and  Yenice,  he 
was  again  exiled  to  Rhodea  in  1585.  Finally,  in  1587, 
he  waa  again  rcinstated  in  the  patriarchate  by  ptying 
500  dncata  yearly  to  the  party  who  had  hekl  it  during 
his  exile.  The  Church  funda  had  been  so  reduced  in 
conaeąuence  of  all  thcse  strugglea  that  there  was  no 
money  to  meet  the  expen8eB  for  worship.  Under  then 
circumstanoes,  Jeremiah  was  obligcd  to  seek  help  from 
the  czar,  in  return  for  which  he  was  obliged  to  create 
the  metropolitan  of  Moeoow  a  patriarch.  This  was  ac- 
cordingly  done;  but,  Jeremiah  haring  stopped  at  Kief 
on  his  return  to  Moacow,  a  number  of  bishops,  who  had 
accompanied  him  on  his  Joumey,  and  who  had  rehe- 
mently  opposed  his  courra,  left  him,  and  joined  the 
Church  of  Romc  Some  writers  say  that  Jeremiah  was 
persecuted  for  attempting  to  unitę  the  Greek  and  the 
Latin  churches.  He  waa  the  patriarch  with  whom  the 
Tttbingen  theologians  entered  into  a  corrcspoodenee  in 
1578,  with  the  intention  to  bring  over  the  Greek  Choreh 
to  the  Reformcrs,  and  which  resulted,  as  is  well  known, 
in  the  rejection  of  Luther^s  doctrinca  by  the  Greek 
Church.  (See  Chr. F.  Schnurrer,  Oratumes  acad.ki$lo- 
riam  liter,  Hhtstrantes,  ed.  H.  E.  G.  Paulus,  Tub.  1828,  pt 
1 18  sq.).  Jeremiah  IX  died  in  1 594.  See  Acta  et  Scrip- 
ta  Theologorum  Wirłembergensium  et  Patriarcha  Con- 
stantincpoliiani  D,  HieremuB  (Wirtembeig,  1584);  AOa 


k 


JEREMI  AH 


825 


JERICHO 


OriadaUt  Eccksia  contra  Lutheri  herennif  fnomimenfUj 
nołis  ac  dinertatiombut  iłluatrata  (Romę,  1789).  See 
also  Sobrtuue  Gotoudant,  Gramcfj  toI.  ii ;  Haigold,  Bei- 
lagen  zttm  newerUnderfm  Runitmd  (Riga,  1769),  vpL  i ; 
Leveflque,  Hisf,  de  RuMte,  iii,  1 17 ;  Yicissitudea  de  CEgUae 
des  deuxerites  en  Poioffne  et  en  RuMsiej  i,  47) ;  Document 
reiaitf  au  Patriarcat  Mo»covUe  (Paiifl,  1857) ;  Hoefer, 
JVbtt9.  Biog,  Generale,  xxTi,  668.  See  Greek  Church. 
Jeremiall,  arcbbi8hq)  of  Sess,  floiuished  in  the 
latter  half  of  the  8th  and  the  early  part  of  the  9th  cen- 
Łury.  But  litUe  is  known  of  his  penonal  hiatory.  He 
was  the  successor  of  Magnus  in  818  to  the  ecdesiastical 
Office,  and  is  suppoaed  to  have  died  in  827.  Seo  Hoefer, 
JVbur.  Bioff.  Generale,  xxy,  667. 

Jeremi''a8  ('Icpe/uac),  a  Gnecized  form  of  the 
same  of  two  men. 

1.  Jeremiaii  (q.  v.)  the  prophet  (Ecdus.  xlix,  6; 
2  Mace.  XV,  U;  Matt.  xvi,  14). 

2.  (1  Esdr.  ix,  84.)    See  Jebemai. 
Jer^emoth  (Heb.  Yermfmo(h%  mn^ł-n;*,  or  Terę- 

motk% niia'^^, heigklt),  the  name  of  sererelmen.    See 
also  Jerimoth. 

1.  (Sept.  'lapf/ifó^.)  The  last  named  of  the  three 
sona  of  Mushi,  gnindson  of  Levi  (1  Chroń,  xxiii,  28) ; 
called  Jerimoth  in  1  Chroń,  xxiv,  80.    B.C.  post  1856. 

2.  (Sept.  *lt(Ufiii^  V.  r.  'I«pi/łov^,Vulg.  Jerimoth,  A. 
V.  «  Jerimoth.")  One  of  the  "  sons"  of  Becher,  son  of 
Benjamin  (1  Chroń,  vii,  8).    B.C.  apparently  1017. 

3.  (Sept,  'Icpc|icó^.)  A  Lerite,  chief  of  the  fiftcenth 
diyision  of  Tempie  mustcians  as  arranged  by  Da\ńd  (1 
Chroń,  xxv,  22) ;  probably  the  same  called  JERtMOTH 
in  xet,  4.    RC.  1014. 

4.  (Sept  'lapifiutd  v.  r.  'Apifiw^.)  One  of  the  "  sons" 
of  Beriab,  a  Benjamite  (1  C^ron.  viii,  14),  B.C.  appar. 
cir.  688.    Probably  the  same  with  Jeroham  in  ver.  27. 

5.  (Sept  'Ifpc/Mrfd  r.  r.  'lapifiutd.)  An  Israelite,  one 
of  the  **  sons'*  (?  inhabitants)  of  Elam,  who  diyorced  his 
Gentile  wife  afler  the.exile  (Ezra  x,  26).     B.C.  459. 

6.  (lapftu^  V.  r.  'Apfuad,  Vulg.  Jerimuth,)  Another 
Isnetite,  one  of  the  **  sons**  (?  inhabitants)  of  Zattu,  who 
likewiae  divoroed  his  Gentile  wife  after  the  captivity 
(Ezfmx,27).    B.a469. 

7.  (Eara  x,  29,  "  and  Ramoth.")     See  Ramoth. 
Jer^emy,  a  famUiar  form  (1  Esdr.  i,  28,  82,  47,  57 ; 

ii,  1;  2  Esdr.  ii,  18;  Baruch  vi,  title ;  2  Mace  ii,  1, 5, 7 ; 
Matt  ii,  17 ;  xxvii,  9)  of  the  name  of  the  prophet  Jer- 

EMIAH  (q.  V.). 

J£R£MY,Epistłbof.    See  Jersmiah,  Epibtlb  of. 

Jeil^ah  (Heb.  Yeriyak',  tV*^':Jounded  by  JekopoA, 
othsTwhae  fearer  o/Jehotah,  1  Ćhron.  xxvi,  81;  Sept 
'Itupiac  V.  r.  'lovpiac, Yulg.  Jena,  A,Yen.  " Jerijah;" 
also  in  the  paiagogic  form  Yeriya'hu,  m^'^'^ ;  Sept  'U- 
fHd  in  1  Chroń,  xxiii,  19,  but  'USiou  in  1  Ćhron.  xxiv, 
23;  Ynlgate  Jeriau,  Auth. Tera.  "Jeriah*'),  the  first  in 
TBnk  of  the  "  sons"  of  Hebron  in  the  Levitical  arrange- 
menta  instituted  by  David  (1  Chroń,  ut  sup.).  Ra  1014. 

Jer^ibai  (Heb.  Yeribay',  '^^^^'^,  conientiouef  Sept 
"lapt^ai  V.  r.  'laptfii),  a  son  of  Ehiaam,  and  (together 
with  his  brother  Joehaviah)  one  of  David'8  famoua  body- 
guard  (1  Chroń,  xi,  46).    B.C.  1046. 

Jer^ioho  (Śeb.  Yericho',  im^l^  place  of ft^^ranee, 
prob.  from  balsamoos  herbs  growińg  there;  Josh.  ii,  1, 
2,8;  iii,  16;  iv,18,19;  v,10,18;  vi,  1, 2, 26, 26 ;  vii,2; 
viu,  2;  ix,  8;  x,  1,  28,  80;  xii,  9;  xiu,  82;  xvi,  1,  7; 
xvui,12,21;  xx,  8;  xxiv,  11;  2  Kings  ii,4,15,18;  also 
written  'ln^%  Yerecho',  Numb,  xxii,  1;  xxvi,  8,  63; 
X3cxi,  12;  xxxiii,  48,  50;  xxxiv,  15;  xxxv,  1;  xxxvi. 
13;  Deut  xxxii,  49;  xxxiv,l,8;  2Sam.x,5;  2  Kings 
xxv,  5;  1  Chroń,  vi,  78;  xix,  5;  2  Chroń,  xxviii,  15; 
Ezra  ii,  34;  Neh.  iii,  2;  vii,  86;  Jer.  xxxix,  5;  Ui,  8; 
onoe  nn'^'1%  Yerichoh',  1  Kings  xvi,  84;  Sept  and  N. 
T.  'Itptyc^,  Josephus  'Itptxovc  [Gen.  -ovvroc];  Strabo, 
xvi,  2, 41,  'Icpucouc  J  Ptolem.  v,  16, 7 ;  'Icpeucoiźc ;  Vulg. 


Jeri^f  Justin.  Hiendkus),  a  city  sitnated  in  a  plain 
traver8ed  by  the  Jordan,  and  exactly  over  against  whete 
that  river  was  crossed  by  the  Israelites  under  Joehua 
(Josh.  iii,  16).  It  is  firśt  mentioned  in  connection  with 
their  approach  to  Palestine ;  they  ^  pitched  in  the  plains 
of  Moab,  on  this  side  Jordan  by  Jericho"  (Numb.  xxii, 
1).  It  was  then  a  large  and  strong  city,  and  must  have 
exi8ted  for  a  long  period.  The  probability  is  that  on 
the  destruction  of  the  cities  of  the  plain  by  fire  from 
heaven  Jericho  was  fonnded,  and  perhaps  by  some  who 
had  resided  neaier  the  soene  of  the  catastrophe.  but  who 
abandoned  their  hooses  in  fear.  Had  the  city  existed 
in  the  time  of  Abraham  and  Lot,  it  would  scarćely  have 
escaped  notice  when  the  latter  looked  down  on  the  plain 
of  Jordan  Arom  the  heights  of  Bethel  (Gen.  xiii).  From 
the  manner  in  which  it  is  referred  to,  and  the  freąuency 
with  which  it  is  mentioned,  it  was  evidentiy  the  most 
important  dty  in  the  Jordan  valley  at  the  time  of  the 
Exodu8  (Numb.  xxxiv,  15;  xxxi,  12;  xxxv,  1,  etc.). 
Such  was  either  its  vicinity  or  the  extent  of  its  territoiy 
that  Gilgal,  which  formed  their  primary  encampment, 
stood  in  its  east  border  (Josh.  iv,  19).  That  it  had  a 
king  is  a  very  seoondary  consideration,  for  almost  every 
smali  town  had  one  (xii,  ^24) ;  in  fact,  monarchy  was 
the  only  form  of  goveniment  known  to  those  primirive 
times — the  govemment  of  the  pcopie  of  God  presenting 
a  marked  exception  to  prevailing  usage.  But  Jericho 
was  further  indosed  by  walls— a  fenced  city— its  waUs 
were  so  oonsiderable  that  at  least  one  person  (Rahab) 
had  a  house  upon  them  (ii,  15),  and  its  gates  were  shut, 
as  thronghout  the  East  still,  "  when  it  was  dark"  (v,  5). 
Again,  the  spoil  that  was  found  in  it  betokened  its  af- 
fluence— Ai,  Makkedah,  Ubnah,  Lachish,  Eglon,  He- 
bron, Debir,  and  even  Hazor,  eridently  oontained  noth- 
ing  worth  mentioning  in  oomparison  —  besides  sheep, 
oxen,  and  asses,  we  hear  of  vesse]s  of  brass  and  iron. 
These  poasibly  may  have  been  the  first-fruits  of  those 
brass  foundriea  *'in  the  plain  of  Jordan"  of  which  Solo- 
mon  afberwBids  so  largely  availed  himself  (2  Chroń,  iv, 
17).  Silver  and  gold  were  found  in  such  abundance 
that  one  man  (Achan)  oould  appropriate  stealthily  200 
shekels  (100  oc  avoird.;  see  Lewis,  Heb,  Rep,  vi,  57)  of 
the  former,  and  **  a  wedge  of  gold  of  50  shekels  (25  oz.) 
weight;"  ^  a  goodly  Babylonish  gannent,"  purloined  in 
the  same  dishonesty,  may  be  adduced  as  evidence  of  a 
then  exi8ting  commerce  between  Jericho  and  the  far 
East  (Joah.  vi,  24;  vii,  21).  In  fact,  its  situation  alone 
— in  80  noble  a  plain,  and  oontiguous  to  so  prolific  a 
river— would  bespeak  its  importance  in  a  country  where 
these  natuial  advantages  have  always  been  so  highly 
prized,  and  in  an  age  when  people  depended  so  much 
morę  upon  the  indigenous  lesources  of  naturę  than  they 
are  oompeDed  to  do  now.  Jericho  was  the  city  to 
which  the  two  spiea  were  sent  by  Joehua  from  Shirtim : 
they  were  lodged  in  the  house  of  Rahab  the  harlot  upon 
the  wali,  and  departed,  having  first  promised  to  8ave  her 
and  all  that  were  found  in  her  house  from  destruction 
(Joah.  ii,  1-21).  Tk3  aoconnt  which  the  spies  received 
ftom  their  hoetess  tended  much  to  enconrage  the  subse- 
quent  operations  of  the  Israelites,  as  it  showed  that  the 
inhabitants  of  the  country  were  greatly  alarmed  at  their 
advanoe,  and  the  signal  mirscles  which  had  marked 
their  course  from  the  Nile  to  the  Jordan.  The  strange 
manner  in  which  Jericho  itself  was  taken  (see  Hac^ 
De  ruina  nmronm  Hieriehuntiorum,  Jena,  1690)  must 
have  atrengthened  this  impression  in  the  country,  and 
appears,  indeed,  to  have  been  designed  for  that  effect 
The  town  was  ntterly  destroyed  by  the  Israelites,  who 
pronounced  an  awiiil  curae  upon  whoever  should  rebuild 
it;  and  all  the  inhabitants  were  put  to  the  sword,  ex- 
cept  Rahab  and  her  lamily  (Josh.  vi).  Her  house  was 
recognised  by  the  scarlet  linę  bound  in  the  window  from 
which  the  spiea  were  let  down,  and  she  and  her  relative8 
were  taken  out  of  it,  and  "  lodged  without  the  carop;** 
but  it  is  nowhere  sald  or  implied  that  her  house  escapad 
the  genend  conflagration.  That  she  ^  dwelt  in  Israel** 
for  the  futurę;  that  she  mairied  Salmon,  son  of  Naaa- 


JERICHO 


826 


JERICHO 


son,  "  prince  of  tbe  chiidien  of  Jad«h,"  and  had  by  him 
Boas,  tlie  huabond  of  Buth  and  progenitor  of  David  and 
of  OUT  Lord;  and,  lastly,  that  hen  is  the  fint  and  onlj 
Gentite  name  that  appean  m  the  Uat  of  the  faithful  of 
the  O.  T.  given  by  Paul  (Joeh.  vi,  26;  1  Chroń,  ii,  10; 
Matt.  i,  5 ;  Heb.  xt,  dl>— all  theee  facto  aurely  indicate 
that  she  did  not  continue  to  inhabit  the  aoconed  aite ; 
and,  if  so,  and  in  the  abeence  of  all  diiect  eyidence  ftom 
ficripture,  how  could  it  erer  have  been  inf<Qrred  that  ber 
houM  was  left  standing?  (See  HoflEmann,  Rahabt 
Erettung,  Beri.  1861.)     See  IUha& 

Such  as  it  had  been  leit  by  Joehoa,  such  it  was  be- 
stowed  by  him  upon  the  tribe  of  Benjamin  (Joeh.  xyiii, 
21 ;  it  lay  also  on  the  border  of  Ephiaim  [Joeh.  xvi,  7]), 
and  from  this  time  a  long  interyal  elapses  befoie  Jeri- 
cho  appean  again  upon  the  soene.  It  is  only  inddent- 
ally  mentioned  iu  the  life  of  David  ia  connection  with 
his  embassy  to  the  Ammonitish  king  (2  Sam.  x,  6).  The 
aolemn  manner  in  which  its  second  foundation  under 
Hiel  the  BetheliŁe  is  reoorded— upon  whom  the  cune 
of  Joehua  is  said  to  have  desoended  in  fuli  fotce  (I  Kings 
xn,  34>— would  certainly  seem  to  imply  that  up  to  that 
time  ito  site  had  been  uninhabited.  It  is  tme,  mention 
of  *U  city  of  palm-tiees"  (Judg.  i,  16,  and  iii. 


18)  in  exi8tence  apiiarently  at  the  time  when  spoken  o^ 
and  Jericho  is  twice — once  hefore  its  first  overthrow, 
and  once  ajier  ito  second  foundation— designated  by 
that  name  (see  DeuL  xxxiv,  8,  and  2  Chroń.  xxvŁii,  15) ; 
but  these  designatlons  must  be  understood  to  apply  only 
to  the  ńUj  in  whatever  oondition  at  the  time.  (On  the 
presence  of  thcse  trees,  see  below.)  However,  once  act^ 
ually  rebuilt,  Jericho  rosę  again  slowly  in  importanoe. 
In  ito  imroediate  yicinity  the  sons  of  the  propheto  sought 
retirement  from  the  world,  and  Elisha  ^  healed  the  spring 
of  the  waters  ;**  and  over  and  against  it,  beyond  Jordan, 
Elijah  *'  went  up  by  a  whirlwind  into  heaven"  (2  Kings 
ii,  1-22).  In  ito  plains  Zedekiah  fell  into  the  hands  of 
the  Cbaldieans  (2  Kings  xxv,  6 ;  Jer.  xxxix,  5).  By 
wfaat  may  be  callcd  a  retrospective  aocount  of  it,  we 
may  infer  that  HieFs  restoration  had  not  utterly  failed, 
for  in  the  return  under  Zenibbabel  the  "  children  of  Jei^ 
icho,"  845  in  nnmber,  are  comprised  (Ezia  iii,  84 ;  Neh. 
vii,  d6)\  and  it  is  even  iroplied  that  they  Temoved 
thither  again,  for  the  men  of  Jericho  assisted  Nehemiah 
in  rebuilding  that  part  of  the  wali  of  Jerusalem  which 
was  next  to  the  sheep-gate  (Neh.  iii,  2).  It  was  event- 
ually  fortified  by  the  Syrian  geneial  Bacchides  (1  Maoc 
ix,  50 ;  Josephus,  A  nt,  xiii,  1, 8). 

The  Jericho  of  the  days  of  Josephus  was  distant  150 
fltadia  from  Jerusalem,  and  sixty  from  the  Jordan.  It 
lay  in  a  plain  oyerhung  by  a  barren  mountoin,  whoee 
rooto  ran  northward  towards  Scjrthopolis,  and  south- 
ward  in  the  direction  of  Sodom  and  the  Dead  Sea. 
These  formed  tbe  western  boundariea  of  the  plain. 
Eastward,  ito  barriera  were  the  mountains  of  Moab, 
which  ran  parallel  to  the  former.  In  the  midst  of  the 
plain— the  great  plain,  as  it  was  called— flowed  the  Joi^ 
dan,  and  at  the  top  and  bottom  of  it  were  two  lakes : 
Tiberias,  proverbial  for  ito  sweetness,  and  Asphaltites  for 
ito  bittemess.  Away  from  the  Jordan,  it  was  parched 
and  unhealthy  during  summer;  but  during  winter,  even 
when  it  siiowcd  at  Jerusalem,  the  inhabitanto  hera  wora 
linen  gaiments.  Kard  by  Jericho,  bursting  forth  cktse 
to  the  site  of  the  old  city  which  Joehua  took  on  his  en- 
trance  into  Canaan,  was  a  moet  exubenmt  foontain, 
whose  waten,  before  noted  for  their  contraiy  proper- 
ties,  had  received  (proceeds  Josephus)  through  £lisha's 
prayen  their  then  wonderfuUy  salutaiy  and  prolific  effi- 
cac>'.  Within  ito  rangę— seventy  stadia  (Strabo  says 
100)  by  twenty— the  fertility  of  the  soil  was  nnexam- 
pled.  Palras  of  various  names  and  properties— eome 
that  produced  honcy  scarcely  inferior  to  that  of  the 
neighborhood;  opobalsamuro,  the  choicestof  indigenous 
fruito;  cyprus  (Arabie  **  el-henna"),  and  m3rrobalanam 
("zukkum")  throve  there  beautifully,  and  thickly  dot- 
ted  about  the  pleasure-grounds  ( War,  iv,  8, 8).  These 
and  other  aromatic  shrube  were  here  of  peóuliar  fim- 


granoe  (Justin;  xxXTi,  8;  Joeephns,  Ani.  iv,  6;  1;  xir, 
4^1;  XV,  4,2;  ITar,  i,  6,6;  i,  18,ó>  Wisdmn  hendf 
did  not  disdain  oomparison  with  **  the  xoee>plaiits  d 
Jeiicho"  (Ecchia.  xxiv,  14).  Weil  might  Stnbo  {G«e^ 
xvi,  2,  §  41,  ed.  Muller)  oondude  that  ito  ievenaeB  woe 
conńderable.  The  peculiar  prodnctions  mentiaocd,  ia 
addition  to  those  notioed  above,  weie  honey  (Cedien.pi 
104)  and,  in  later  times,  tbe  sugar-cane  (see  Robuisoa'i 
Researchea,  ii,  290  sq.).    See  Roes  of  Jbucho. 

By  the  Bomana,  Jericho  was  fint  vi8ited  under  Poo* 
pey.  He  encamped  there  for  a  single  night,  and  aabse- 
quently  destroyed  two  forts— Threx  and  Taurus— ihai 
commanded  ito  approaches  (Strabo,  Ceoffr,  §  40).  Da- 
gon  (Josephus,  War,  i,  2, 8)  or  Docua  (I  Mace  xvi,  15; 
oomp.  ix,  50),  where  Ptolemy  aasassinated  his  father-in- 
law,  Simon  the  Maccabee,  may  have  been  one  of  these 
stronghoUs,  which  were  afterwards  infeated  by  faaodittŁ 
Galńidus,  in  his  resettlement  of  Judea,  madę  Jeridio  one 
of  the  five  seato  of  assembly  (Josephus,  War,  i,  8, 5). 
With  Herod  the  Great  it  rosę  to  still  greatcr  promi* 
nence :  it  had  been  found  fuli  of  treasure  of  all  kinda ; 
as  in  the  time  of  Joshua,  so  by  his  Roman  allies  wbo 
sacked  ic  {ibid,  i,  15, 6) ;  and  its  revenues  were  eagcily 
sought  and  rented  by  the  wiły  tyrant  from  Cleopatra, 
to  whom  Antony  had  aasigned  tbem  {Ani,  xv,  4, 2). 
Not  long  afterwards  he  built  a  fort  therp,  which  be  csfl- 
ed  "  C3rprus,"  in  honor  of  his  mother  (śbu/.  xvi,  5);  a 
tower,  which  he  called,  in  honor  of  his  brother,  **  Pkaóne- 
lis  f  and  a  number  of  new  palaces,  superior  in  their 
construction  to  those  which  had  exiBted  there  previoii9- 
ly,  which  he  named  afler  his  frienda.  He  even  fonnded 
a  new  town  higher  up  the  plain,  which  he  called,  like 
the  tower,  Phaaaelis  (  War,  i,  21 , 9).  If  he  did  not  make 
Jericho  his  habitual  reaidence,  he  at  least  retircd  thif  1h 
er  to  die— and  to  be  moumed,  if  he  could  have  got  ha 
plan  carried  out;  and  it  was  in  the  amphitheatre  of 
Jericho  that  the  news  of  his  death  was  announced  to 
the  assembled  soldien  and  people  by  Salome  (  War,  i, 
38, 8).  Soon  afterwards  the  place  was  buined  and  tbe 
town  plundered  by  one  Simon,  a  Rvolntionary  that  bad 
been  slave  to  Herod  (Ani,  xvii,  10, 6);  bat  Aicbelans 
rebuilt  the  former  sumptnously,  Ibunded  a  new  town  ia 
the  plain,  that  bore  hb  owu  name,  and,  moet  important  of 
all,diverted  water  from  a  vi]lageca]led  Neseraioini^te 
the  plain,  which  he  had  planted  with  palms  (AnL  rrii, 
18, 1).  Thus  Jericho  was  onoe  more  "a  city  of  palau* 
when  our  Lord  vi8ited  iL  As  the  dty  that  had  so  oc- 
ceptionally  contributed  to  his  own  ancestry— «s  the  city 
which  had  been  the  first  to  fali,  amidst  so  much  ccre- 
mony,  before  '^the  captain  of  the  Loxd*s  hoet  and  bis 
aenrant  Joahna" — we  may  well  suppose  that  his  tya 
surveyed  it  with  unwonted  interest.  It  is  supposed  to 
have  been  on  the  rocky  heighto  overhanging  it  (beaoe 
called  by  tradition  the  Quarentana)  that  he  was  sawl- 
ed  by  the  tempter ;  and  over  against  it,  accoidiog  to 
tradition  likewise,  he  had  been  preńously  baptised  m 
the  Jordan.  Here  he  restorcd  sight  to  the  Uind  (rRx> 
certainly,  perhaps  three  [Matt.  xx,  80 ;  Marie  x,  46] : 
thb  was  in  karing  Jericho ;  Lukę  says  "  as  he  wss  opne 
nigh  unio  Jericho,"  etc  [xviił,  85]).  Here  the  descendr 
ant  of  Rahab  did  not  disdain  the  hospitality  of  Zaochs- 
us  the  publican— an  ofiSce  which  was  likely  to  be  lucnip 
tive  enough  in  so  rich  a  dty.  Finally,  between  Jcnas- 
lem  and  Jericho  was  laid  the  acene  of  his  story  of  tbe 
good  Samaritan,  which,  if  it  is  not  to  be  regaided  ss  t 
real  occurrence  throughout,  at  least  derives  interest 
from  the  fact  that  robben  have  ever  been  the  temr  <tf 
that  predpitous  road  (oomp.  Phocasi,  ch.20;  eee  ScbiH 
bert,  iii,  72) ;  and  so  formidable  had  they  proved  ciiły 
just  before  the  Christian  sera,  that  Pompej'  had  been  ios 
duoed  to  undertake  the  destruction  of  thdr  strongbokto 
(Strabo,  as  before,  xvi,  2,  §  40 ;  comp.  Joseph.  Ant.xi,B, 
1  są.).  The  way  from  Jerusalem  to  Jericho  is  still  de- 
scribed  by  tnvellen  as  the  moet  dangerons  sboaŁ  Pil- 
eetine.  (See  Hacketfs  Ilbuira,  ofScripi,  p.  S06.)  hi 
Utely  as  1820,  an  English  tnvel]er.  Sir  Fredcrick  Hen- 
niker,  was  attacked  on  this  road  by  the  Arabs  with  fiie- 


JERICHO 


827 


JEKICHO 


arms,  who  stripped  him  naked  and  left  him  seyeiely 
wounded. 

PosŁerLor  to  Łbe  Gospels,  Yespasian  fonnd  it  one  of  the 
toparchies  of  Judsa  (^War^  iii,  3,  5),  but  desertedby  its 
inbabitants  in  a  great  meawire  when  be  encamped  tbere 
(ibid.  iv',  8, 2).  He  left  a  garrison  on  bis  departure  (not 
necessarily  Uie  lOth  legion,  wbicb  ia  only  stated  to  bave 
marched  through  Jericbo)  wbicb  was  still  tbere  wben 
Titus  advanoed  upon  Jerosalem.  Is  it  asked  bow  Jeri- 
cho  was  de8tro3red?  £vidently  by  Yespaaian;  for  Jo- 
aepbus,  rigbtly  undentood,  is  not  ao  silent  as  Dr.  Robin- 
aon  {BibL  Res.  i,  566, 2d  ed.)  tbinks.  Tbe  city  pillaged 
and  burnt  in  Josepbus  {War  iy,  9, 1)  was  cleariy  Jeri- 
cbo, witb  its  a^jaoeat  rillages,  and  not  Gerasa,  as  may 
be  seen  at  onoe  by  comparing  the  language  tbere  widi 
tbat  of  8,  2,  and  tbe  agent  was  Yespaaian.  Eosebins 
and  Jerome  (OaomasL  s.  v.)  say  tbat  it  was  destroyed 
wben  Jerusalem  was  besieged  by  tbe  Romans,  Tbey 
further  add  tbat  it  was  afterwards  rebuilt — tbey  do  not 
say  by  wbom— and  stiU  existed  in  their  day ;  nor  bad  tbe 
ruina  of  tbe  two  precedlng  cities  been  obliterated.  Gould 
Hadńan  possibly  bave  planted  a  colony  tbere  wben  be 
passed  tbrougb  Judea  and  founded  i£lia?  (Dion  Cass. 
IJisł,  lxix,  c.  1 1,  ed.  Sturz ;  morę  at  laige  CAroru  PcuckaL 
p.  251,  ed.  Du  Fresne.)  The  discoyeiy  wbicb  Origen 
madę  tbere  of  a  yeision  of  tbe  O.  T.  (tbe  5tb  in  his  Hex- 
apla),  togetber  witb  sundry  MSS.,  Greek  and  Hebrew, 
aaggests  tbat  it  oould  not  baye  been  wbolly  without  in- 
babitants (Euaeb.  £.  H,  yi,  16 ;  Epipban.  Lib,  de  Pond.  et 
Mensur.  circa  med.) ;  or  again,  as  is  perbaps  morę  prób- 
able,  did  a  Christian  settlement  arise  tbere  under  Con- 
stantine,  when  baptisms  in  tbe  Jordan  began  to  be  tbe 
nge  ?  That  Jericbo  became  an  episcopal  see  about  tbat 
time  under  Jerusalem  appears  from  morę  tban  one  ancient 
Notitia  {Geoffraph.S.a,  Carolo  Paulo,  p.  806,  and  the  Par- 
eignn  appcnded  to  it;  comp. William  of  T3rre,  Ilisł.  lib. 
xxii2,  ad  f.)<  Its  bishops  subacribed  to  yariou^  oouncils 
in  tbe  4th,  ath,  and  Gth  centuries  {ibid^  and  Lj  Quien'8 
Oriens  Christian,  iii,  654).  Justinian,  we  are  told,  re- 
stored  a  bosplce  tbere,  and  likewise  a  church  dedicated 
to  the  Yirgin  (Procop.  De  tedi/.  y,  9).  As  early  as  A.D. 
837,  wben  tbe  Bordeau^  pilgrim  (el  Wesscling)  yisited 
it,  a  house  e^isted  tbere  wbicb  w  js  pointed  out,  after  the 
manuer  of  those  days,  as  the  hou:ie  ofKahab.  Tbis  was 
roofless  when  Arculfus  saw  it ;  and  not  only  so,  but  the 
third-city  was  likewise  in  ruins  (Adamn.  De  IjOcis  S,  ap. 
3Iignc,  Pairohg,  C.  lxxxviii,  799).  Had  Jericbo  beai 
yiśsited  by  an  earthquake,  as  Antoninus  reports  (ap.  Ugo- 
lini  Thesaur,  yii,  p.  mccxtii,  and  notę  to  c  3),  and  as  Syria 
certainly  was,  in  the  27 th  year  of  Justinian,  A.D.  653  ? 
If  so,  we  can  well  understand  tbe  restoratioiis  already  re- 
ferreJ  to;  and  when  Antoninus  adtis  that  the  house  of 
Sahab  bad  now  become  a  hospice  and  oratory,  we  might 
almost  pronounce  that  tbis  was  the  yery  hospice  wluch 
had  been  restored  by  that  emperor.  Again,  it  may  be 
asked,  dld  Christian  Jericbo  receive  no  injury  from  the 
Persian  Romizan,  the  ferocious  generał  of  Chosroes  II, 
A.D.  614?  (Bar-Hebrrei  Chroń.  p.  99,  LaL  v.,  ed.  Kirsch). 
It  would  rather  seem  that  there  were  morę  religious  edi- 
fices  in  the  7th  than  in  the  Gth  century  round  about  it. 
According  to  Arculfus,  one  church  marked  the  site  of  GU- 
gal ;  anotber  the  spot  wbcre  our  Lord  was  supposed  to 
baye  depositedbis  garments  preyiously  to  his  baptism; 
a  third  ^tithin  the  precincts  of  a  vast  monastery  dedica- 
ted to  John,  situated  upon  some  rbing  ground  oyerlook- 
ing  the  Jordan.  Jericbo  meanwhile  had  disappeared 
as  a  town  to  rise  no  morę.  Cburcbes  and  monasteries 
sprung  up  around  it  on  all  sides,  but  only  to  moulder 
away  in  their  tum.  Tbe  anchorite  cayes  in  tbe  rocky 
flanks  of  the  Quarentana  are  tbe  most  striking  memoriał 
that  rcmains  of  early  or  mcdiieyal  enthusiasm.  Arculf- 
us speaks  of  a  diminutiye  race — Canaanites  be  calls  thcm 
— that  inhabited  the  plain  in  great  numbers  in  his  day. 
Tbey  baye  retained  possession  of  those  fairy  meadow- 
lands  ever  sińce,  and  haye  madę  their  bead-ąuarteis  for 
some  centuries  round  the  "  sąiure  tower  or  castle"  first 
mentioned  by  WiUebrand  (ap.  Leon.  Allat.  2v/i/i(jcr.  p. 


151)  in  AJ>.  1211,  when  it  was  inhabited  by  the  Saracens, 
wbose  work  it  may  be  supposed  to  baye  been,  though  it 
bas  sińce  been  dignified  by  the  name  of  tbe  house  of  Zac- 
cbseus.  Their  yillage  is  by  Brocardus  (ap.  Canis.  Thesaur, 
iy,  16),  in  A.D.  1230,  styled  "a  \Tle  place;"  by  Sir  J. 
Maundeyille,  in  A.D.  1322,  "  a  little  yillage ;"  and  by 
Henry  Maundrell,  in  A.D.  1697,  "a  poor, nasty  yiUage;" 
in  wbicb  yerdict  all  modem  trayellers  that  baye  ever 
yisited  it  must  concur.  (See  Early  Travel»  in  Pal,  by 
Wright,  p.  177  and  451.)  Tbey  are  looked  upon  by  the 
Arabs  as  a  debased  race,  and  are  probably  notbing  moro 
or  less  tban  yeritable  Gipsies,  who  are  still  to  be  met  witb 
in  the  neighborbood  of  the  Frank  mountain  near  Jerusa- 
lem, and  on  the  beigbts  round  the  yillage  and  conyent  of 
St.  John  in  the  desert,  and  are  still  called  ^*  Scomuucati'* 
by  the  natiye  Christiana— one  of  the  names  applied  to 
them  wben  tbey  first  attracted  notice  in  Europę  in  tbe 
15th  centuiy  (i.  e.  from  feigning  tbemselyes^penitents" 
and  under  censure  of  tbe  pope.  See  Hoyland'8  Hisłorical 
Survey  of  the  Gipneiy  p.  18 ;  also  The  Gipsy,  a  poem  by 
A.  P.  Stanley). 

Jericbo  does  not  seem  to  baye  eyer  been  restored  as  a 
town  by  the  Crusaders;  but  its  plauis  had  not  ceased  to 
be  proUfic,  and  were  exten8iveiy  cultivated  and  laid  out 
in  yineyaids  and  gardens  by  tbe  monks  (Phocas  ap.  Leon. 
Allat.  Źu^^ucr.  [c.  20],  p.  31).  lliey  seem  to  have  been 
included  in  the  domains  of  the  patriarchatc  of  Jerusalem^ 
and,  as  such,  were  bestowed  by  Aniulf  upon  his  niecę  aa 
a^dowry  (William  of  Tjnre,  Hist,  xi,  15).  Twenty-fiye 
years  afteirwards  we  find  Melisendis,  wife  of  king  Fulco, 
assigning  them  to  the  conyent  of  Bethany,  wbicb  she  had 
founded  A.D.  1137. 

The  site  of  ancient  (tbe  first)  Jericbo  is  witb  reason 
placed  by  Dr.  Robinson  {BibL  Res.  i,  552-568)  in  tbe  im- 
mediate  neighborbood  of  the  fountain  ofElisha ;  and  tbat 
of  the  second  (tbe  city  of  the  New  Test.  and  of  Josepbus) 
at  the  opening  of  tbe  wady  Kelt  (Chcrith),  balf  an  bour 
from  tbe  fbuntain.  The  ancient,  and,  indeed,  the  only 
practicable  road  from  Jenisalcm  zigzags  down  the  mg- 
ged  and  bare  mountain  sidc,  doae  to  tbe  south  bank  of 
wady  el-Kelt,  one  of  tbe  most  sublime  rayines  in  Pales- 
tinc.  In  the  plain,  balf  a  mile  from  tbe  foot  of  the  pass, 
and  a  short  distance  south  of  tbe  present  road,  is  an  im- 
mense  reseryoir,  now  dry,  and  round  it  are  extensiye 
ruins,  consisting  of  mounds  of  rubbisb  and  ancient  foun- 
dations.  Riding  nortbward,  similar  remains  were  seen 
on  both  sides  of  wady  el-Kelt.  Ualf  a  mile  farthcr  north 
we  enter  cultiyated  ground,  interspersed  witb  clumps  of 
thomy  nvbk  {^  lote-tree*')  and  other  shrabs ;  anotber  half 
mile  brings  us  to  Ain  es-Sultan,  a  large  fountain  burst- 
ing  forth  from  tbe  foot  of  a  mound.  The  water,  though 
warm,  is  sweet,  and  is  extensiyely  used  in  the  irrigation 
of  the  sunx)unding  plain.  The  whole  plain  immediately 
around  the  fountain  is  strewn  witb  ancient  ruins  and 
beaps  of  mbbish. 

The  yillage  traditionally  identified  witb  Jericbo  now 
bears  tbe  name  of  Riha  (in  Arabie  er-Riha)  and  is  situ- 
ated about  the  middle  of  the  plain,  six  miles  west  from 
tbe  Jordan,  in  N.  UiL  34^  57',  and  E.  long.  35°  33'.  Dr. 
Olin  describes  tbe  present  yillage  as  "  the  meanest  and 
foulest  of  Palestuie."  It  may  perhaps  contain  forty 
dwellings,  with  some  two  hundred  inbabitants.  The 
houscs  consist  of  rough  walls  of  old  building-stones, 
roofed  witb  straw  and  brushwood.  Each  bas  in  front 
of  it  an  inclosure  for  cattle,  fenced  with  branches  of  the 
thoniy  nubk ;  and  a  stronger  fenoe  of  the  same  materi- 
ał sunounds  the  whole  yillage,  forming  a  mde  barrier 
agauist  tbe  raids  of  the  Bedawin.  Not  far  from  the  yil- 
lage is  a  little  square  castle  or  tower,  eyidently  of  Sara- 
cenic  origiu,  but  now  dignified  by  tbe  title  of  "  tbe  house 
of  Zacchnus."  This  yiUage,  though  it  bears  tbe  name 
of  Jericbo,  is  about  a  mile  and  a  balf  distant  both  from 
tbe  Jericbo  of  tbe  prophets  and  tbat  of  tbe  eyangelista. 
Yery  probably  it  may  occupy  tbe  site  of  Gilgal  (q.  y.). 
The  ruinous  state  of  the  modem  houses  is  in  part  owing 
to  a  comparatively  reoent  eyent.  Ibrahim  Pasha,  on  bia 
retreat  from  Damascua^  near  the  dosc  of  1840,  baying 


JERIEŁ 


828 


JEROBOAM 


been  attacked  hj  the  Anbs  in  croflmng  thc  Jordan,  sent 
a  detachment  of  hia  army  and  razed  Jericho  to  the  ground. 

The  8oU  of  the  plain  ia  unsurpassed  in  fertility ;  there 
ia  abundaoce  of  water  for  inigation,  and  roany  of  the  old 
aqtieducts  are  almost  perfect ;  yet  nearly  the  whole  plain 
ifl  waste  and  desolate.  The  grove  mipplied  by  the  fonn- 
tain  is  in  the  diatance.  The  few  fields  of  wheat  and  In- 
dian com,  and  the  few  orcharda  of  figs,  are  euough  to 
ahow  what  the  place  might  beoome  under  proper  cuM- 
yation.  But  the  people  are  now  few  in  number,  indolent, 
and  licentiooa.  The  palma  which  gave  the  ancient  dty 
a  diatinctire  appellation  are  gone;  eyen  that  '<  single 
aolitary  pabn**  which  Dr.  Robinson  saw  exi8t8  no  morę. 
The  climatc  of  Jericho  is  exceedingly  hot  and  unhealthy. 
Thia  is  accounted  for  by  the  depression  of  the  plain,  which 
is  about  1200  feet  6^^010  the  level  of  the  sea.  The  reflec- 
tion  of  the  sun*a  rays  from  the  bare  white  cliffił  and  moan- 
tain  ranges  which  shut  in  the  plain,  and  the  noisome  ex- 
haladons  firom  the  lake,  and  from  the  numerous  salt- 
aprings  around  it,  are  enough  to  poiaon  the  atmosphere. 
—Smith;  Kitto. 

For  further  details  reapecting  Jericho,  see  Reland's  Pa-- 
I(r4/.p.883,829sq.;  Lightfoot,^or.//e6.p.85sq.;  Otho'8 
I.ex.  Rahb,  p.  296  8q. ;  Bachiene,  ii,  3,  §  224  sq. ;  Hamea- 
yeld,  ii,  291  8q. ;  Cellar.  Noiit,  ii,  552  sq. ;  Kobinson^s  Re- 
«earcA<>«,ii,267  8q.;  Olin'8  7Vaptf/^,ii,195  8q.;  Thomson, 
Land  and  Book,  ii,  489  sq. 

Jeri'Sl  (Heb.  Yeriil%  ix'^'^7,/«arer  of  God,  or  L  9. 
Jeruel;  Sept  'Ifpu/X),  one  of  the  sons  of  Tola,  the  son 
of  lasachar,  mentioned  as  a  yaliant  chief  of  hia  tribe, 
which  wcre  cnrollcd  in  the  time  of  David  (1  Chroń,  yii, 
2).     B.C.  post  1856. 

Jeri^Jah  (1  Chroń,  xxvi,  81).    See  Jeriak. 
Jer'lmoth  (Heb.  Yeriinolh^  ni^"»'i;',  heiffhts,  i.  q. 
Jeremoth),  the  name  of  8evend  men.    See  aiao  Jeris- 

MOTH. 

1.  (Sept,  lfpi/iov^.)  One  of  thc  flve  sons  of  Bela, 
son  of  Benjamin,  a  yaliant  chief  of  hb  tribe  (1  Chroń. 
vii,  7).     RC.  post  1856. 

2.  (Sept  IfptfjLw^.)  The  last  named  of  the  three 
aona  of  Mushi,  grandaon  of  Leyi  (1  Chroń.  xxiy,  80) ; 
elscwhcre  (I  Chroń,  xxiii,  28)  called  Jeremoth  (q.  v.). 

3.  (Sept.  'lapifioif^  v.  r.  'Apt/uó^.)  One  of  the  fa- 
mous  Benjamite  archers  and  slingers  that  joined  David'8 
band  at  Ziklag  (1  Chroń.  xu,  5).     RC.  1055. 

4.  (Sept.  'lfCŁ/jLov^  y.  r.  Icpi^wd.)  One  of  the  four- 
teen  sons  of  Heman,  and  appointed  a  Levitical  musician 
mider  his  father  in  the  arrangement  of  the  sacred  ser- 
yiccs  by  David  (1  Chroń,  xxv,  4) ;  probably  the  same 
elsewhere  (ver.  22)  called  Jeremoth. 

5.  (Sept  lŁpifiovd  V.  r.  lepi/iió^.)  Son  of  Azriel, 
and  *'captain"  of  Naphtali  under  Dayid  and  Solomon  (1 
Chroń,  xxvii,  19).     RC.  1014. 

6.  (Sept  'Epfjtou^  V.  r.  *I<p<^ov^.)  A  son  of  Dayid, 
whosc  daughter  Mahalath  waa  Rehoboam's  first  wife  (2 
Chroń,  xi,  18).  RC.  antę  973.  He  appears  to  have 
been  different  from  any  of  David's  sons  elsewhere  enu- 
merated  (2  Sam.  iii,  2-5 ;  1  Chroń,  xiv,  4-7),  haying, 
perhaps,  been  bora  of  a  ooncubine  (compare  2  Sam.  xvi, 
21).  See  Da\id.  ^  Thia,  in  fact,  is  the  Jewish  tradi- 
tion  respecting  his  maternity  (Jcrome,  Ouastionetf  ad 
loc.).  It  is,  howeyer,  somewhat  ąuestionable  whether 
Behoboam  would  have  married  the  grandchild  of  a  eon- 
cubinc  even  of  the  great  David.  The  passage  2  Chroń. 
xi,  18  is  not  quite  elear,  sińce  the  woril  *  daughter'  is  a 
corrcction  of  the  Keri:  the  original  text  liad  "p,  i.  e. 
*  son' "  (Smith). 

7.  (Sept  'Upi/M^,)  A  Leyite,  one  of  the  oyerseers 
of  the  Tempie  offerings  in  the  time  of  Hezekiah  (2  Chroń. 
xxxi,  13).     Ra  726. 

JeMoth  (Heb.  Yerioih%  niJ'''^^,  timidity,  other- 
wise  curłains;  Icpciw^),  a  person  apparentty  named  aa 
the  latter  of  the  first  two  wives  of  Caleb,  son  of  Hezron, 
seycral  children  being  mentioned  as  the  fmit  of  the  mar- 
riage  with  one  or  the  other  (1  Chroń,  ii,  18).    RC.  post 


1856.  The  Ynlgate  renders  Uiis  aa  the  son  of  Caleb  by 
the  flrst-mentioned  wife,  and  father  of  the  sons  named ; 
but  contrary  to  the  Heb.  text,  which  ia  doeely  followed 
by  the  Sept  There  is  probably  some  corraption ;  po»- 
sibly  the  name  in  ąuestion  is  an  interpolation :  compare 
ver.  19 ;  or  perhaps  we  should  render  the  conncctiye  1 
by  even,  thus  making  Jerioth  but  another  name  for 
AKubah. 

Jerment,  Georoe,  D.D.,  a  miniater  of  the  Secession 
Churoh  of  Scotland,  waa  bom  in  1759  at  Peebles,  Soot- 
land,  where  hia  father  waa  at  the  time  pastor  of  a 
church  of  that  branch  of  the  Seoesńon  Church  denom- 
inated  before  their  union  in  1819  aa  Anti-burgher.  On 
the  completion  of  hia  coUegiate  course  he  entered  the 
diyinity  hall  of  hia  denomination,  sitnated  at  AUoa,  and, 
while  a  atndent  there,  took  a  high  standing  in  his  da^s. 
After  preaching  a  short  time  in  Scotland  he  went  to 
London,  to  become  the  colleague  of  Mr.  Wilson,  at  the 
Secesaion  Church  in  Bow  Lane,  Cheapaide,  and  waa  or^ 
dained  in  the  laat  week  of  Sept  1782.  In  the  English 
metropolis  Jerment  waa  well  receiyed,  and  he  labored 
there  for  the  spaoe  of  thirty-five  years,  his  preaching 
attracting  large  and  respectable  congrpgations  from  the 
Scottish  residents  of  London.  He  died  Mcy  23, 1819. 
"  His  cbaracter  stood  very  high  in  the  estimate  of  all 
who  knew  him,  aa  a  man  of  sense,  leaniing,  pnidence, 
and  exalted  piety."  He  waa  one  of  the  fin^t  directors 
of  the  London  Miasionary  Sodety,  and  greatly  encour- 
aged  the  enterprise.  The  writings  of  Jerment  intmsted 
to  the  preas  are  mainly  public  lectnrea  and  sermona 
(London,  1791>1818).  Among  these  his  ^rly  Piety,  U' 
lustrated  and  recammmdtd  tn  tereral  Duamrges ;  and 
ReUgioHy  a  Monitor  to  tke  Middk^gtd  and  (he  Glory  of 
old  Men,  deserye  to  occupy  a  conspicuous  place.  See 
Morison,  Fathert  and  Foundert  ofLond.  Mis*,  Society^  pi. 
506  są.     (J.H.W.) 

Jerobo^Mm  (Heb.  Yarobam*,  ttSą";;;,  increate  of 
the  peopU;  Sept  'UpofioafŁ,  Joeephus  'Iepo/3ća/ioc), 
the  name  of  two  of  the  kings  of  the  separate  kuigdom 
of  Israel. 

1.  The  son  of  Nebat  (by  which  title  he  ia  oaually  dis- 
tinguished  in  the  record  of  his  infamy)  by  a  woman 
named  Zemah,  of  the  tribe  of  Ephraim  (1  Kings  xi,  26). 
He  was  the  founder  of  the  schismatical  northern  king- 
dom,  consisting  of  the  ten  tńbes,  over  which  he  reigned 
twenty-two  (current)  years,  RC.  978-951.  At  the  time 
he  fint  appears  in  the  sacród  histoiy  his  mother  was  a 
widów,  and  he  had  already  been  noticcd  by  Solomon  as 
a  clever  and  actiye  young  man,  and  appointed  one  of 
the  Buperintendenta  of  the  works  which  that  magnifi- 
cent  king  was  carrying  on  at  Jerusalem,  having  spedal 
charge  of  the  ser^ńces  reąuired  of  the  leading  tribe  of 
Ephraim  (1  Kings  xi,  26-28;  eomp.  JoBephu8,^fi/.viii, 
7,  7).  RC.  1010-998.  This  appointment,  the  reward 
of  his  roerits,  might  haye  satisfied  his  ambition  had  not 
the  declaration  of  the  prophet  Ahijah  given  him  higher 
hopes.  When  informed  that,  by  the  divine  appoint- 
ment, he  was  to  become  king  over  the  ten  tribcs  about 
to  be  rent  from  the  house  of  David,  he  was  not  contcnt 
to  wait  patiently  for  the  death  of  Solomon,  but  began  to 
form  plota  and  conspiracies,  the  dłscoycry  of  which  con- 
strained  him  to  flee  to  Egypt  to  escape  condign  punish- 
ment,  RC.  cir.  980.  Theking  of  that  countiy  was  but 
too  ready  to  encourage  one  whose  success  must  neces- 
sarily  weaken  thc  kingdom  which  had  become  great 
and  formidablc  under  Dayid  and  Solomon,  and  which 
had  already  pushed  its  frontier  to  the  Bed  Sea  (1  Kings 
xi,  29-40). 

When  Solomon  died,  the  ten  tribea  sent  to  cali  Jero- 
boam  from  Eg}'pt;  and  he  appears  to  have  headed  the 
deputation  that  came  before  the  aon  of  Solomon  with 
a  demand  of  new  sccurities  for  the  rights  which  the 
measures  of  the  late  king  had  compromised.  It  may 
somewhat  excuse  the  harsh  aiiswer  of  Rehoboam  that 
the  demand  waa  urged  by  a  body  of  men  headed  by  one 
whose  pretensions  were  so  well  known  and  so  odions  to 


JEROBOAM 


829 


JEROHAM 


thc  house  of  David.  It  cannot  be  denied  that,  in  making 
tbeir  appUcations  Łhus  offenairely,  they  śtruck  the  first 
blow,  alŁhougb  it  is  pofnible  tbat  they,  iii  the  fint  iu- 
Stańce,  intended  to  lue  the  presence  of  Jeroboam  for  no 
other  purpose  tban  to  frighten  the  king  into  compliauce. 
The  imprudent  answer  of  Rehoboam  renderetl  a  revoIu- 
tion  ineyitable,  and  Jeroboam  yraa  then  called  to  reign 
over  the  ten  tribes  by  the  Btyle  of  "  King  of  Israer  (1 
Kings  xii,  1-20).  Autamn,  B.C.  973.  See  Rkhoboam. 
(For  the  generał  course  of  his  conduct  on  the  throne,  see 
the  article  Israel,  Kingdom  of.)  The  leading  object 
of  his  policy  was  to  widen  the  breach  between  the  two 
kingdoms,  and  to  rend  asimder  thoee  common  interests 
among  all  the  descendants  of  Jacob,  which  it  was  one 
great  object  of  the  law  to  combine  and  interlace.  To 
this  end  he  scrupled  not  to  sacrifice  the  most  aacred  and 
inviolablc  interests  and  obligaŁions  of  thc  covenant  peo- 
plc  by  forbidding  his  subjects  to  resort  to  the  one  tem- 
pie and  altar  of  Jehovah  at  Jerusalem,  and  by  establish- 
ing  shrines  at  Dan  and  Beth-el— the  extremitie8  of  his 
kingdom— where  "golden  calyes"  wcre  set  up  as  the 
symbola  of  Jehorah,  to  which  the  people  were  enjoincd 
to  resort  and  bring  their  offcrings.  See  Calf,  Gold- 
en. The  pontilicate  of  the  new  establishment  he  united 
to  his  crown,  in  imitation  of  the  Eg>'ptian  kings  (1  Kings 
xii,  26-33).  I le  was  officiating  in  that  capacity  at  Beth- 
el,  offcring  incense,  whcn  a  prophet  (Josephua,  A  nt.  viii, 
8,  5,  calls  him  Jadon,  i.  e.  probably  Iddo;  compare  Ant, 
viii,  15,  4;  Jerome,  Qu(Bsi,  Ihbr,  on  2  Chroń.  x,  4)  ap- 
peared,  and  in  the  name  of  the  Lord  announceil  a  coming 
time,  as  yet  far  ofT,  in  which  a  king  of  the  hoiise  of  Da- 
vid,  Jcsiah  by  name,  should  bum  upon  that  unholy  altar 
thc  bones  of  its  ministers.  He  was  then  preparing  to 
vcrify,by  a  commissioned  prodigy,  the  tnith  of  the  ora- 
cie he  had  dclivered,  when  the  king  attemptetl  to  arrest 
him,  but  was  sroitten  with  palsy  in  the  arm  he  stretched 
forth.  At  the  same  time  the  threatened  prodig>'  took 
place— the  altar  was  rent  asunder,  and  the  ashes  strewed 
far  around.  Awe-struck  at  this  twofold  miracle,  the 
king  bojcged  the  prophet  to  intercetle  with  God  for  the 
restoration  of  his  hand,  which  was  accordingly  healed 
(1  Kings  xiii,  1-6).  B.C.  973.  This  measure  had,  how- 
ever,  no  abiding  eflTect.  The  policy  on  which  he  acted 
lay  too  deep  in  whaŁ  he  deemed  the  vttal  interesu  of 
his  separate  kingdom  to  be  even  thus  abandoned;  and 
thc  force  of  the  considerations  which  determined  his 
conduct  may  in  part  be  appreciated  from  the  fact  that 
no  8ubsequcnt  king  of  Israel,  howevcr  well  disposed  in 
otlicr  respects,  ever  ventured  to  lay  a  finger  on  this  schis- 
matical  establishment  (1  Kings  xiii,  33,  34).  Hence 
''the  sin  of  Jeroboam,' the  aon  of  Nebat,  wherewith  be 
sinncti  and  madę  Israel  to  sin,**  became  a  standing 
phra<}c  in  describing  that  iuiquity  from  which  no  king 
of  Israel  departed.     See  Idolatry. 

The  contumacy  of  Jeroboam  eventually  brought  upon 
him  thc  doom  which  he  probably  dreaded  beyond  all 
other:^— the  speedy  extincŁion  of  the  dynasty  which  he 
had  Łakcn  so  much  pains  and  incurred  so  much  guilt  to 
establish  on  firm  foumlations.  His  son  Abijah  being 
sick,  he  sent  his  wife,  disguised,  to  consult  the  prophet 
Ahijah,  who  had  predicted  that  he  should  be  king  of 
Israel.  The  prophet,  although  he  had  become  blind 
with  agc,  knew  the  queen,  and  saluted  her  with,  "Come 
in,  thou  wife  of  Jeroboam,  for  I  am  sent  to  thee  with 
heavy  tidings."  These  were  not  merely  that  the  son 
should  dic— for  that  was  intended  in  mercy  to  one  who 
alon3,  of  all  the  house  of  Jeroboam,  had  remained  faith- 
ful  to  his  God,  and  was  the  only  one  who  should  obtaiii 
aii  honored  grav&— but  that  his  race  should  be  violent]y 
and  utterly  extinguished :  "  I  will  take  away  the  rem- 
nant  of  the  house  of  Jeroboam  as  a  man  taketh  away 
dung,  tiU  it  be  aU  gone"  (1  Kings  xiv,  1-18).  The  son 
died  as  soon  as  the  mother  croseed  the  threshold  on  her 
return ;  and,  as  the  death  of  Jeroboam  himsclf  is  the 
next  event  recorded,  it  would  seem  that  he  did  not  long 
sur^-ive  his  son  (1  Kings  xiv,  20).  RC.  early  in  951.— 
Kit  to.     (Sec  Kitto'8  Daily  Bibk  lUuttratiom,  ad  k)c) 


''Jeroboam  was  at  constant  war  with  the  house  of 
Judah,  but  the  only  act  distinctly  recorded  is  a  battle 
with  Abijah,  son  of  Rehoboam,  in  which,  in  spite  of  a 
skilful  ambush  madę  by  Jeroboam,  and  of  much  supe- 
rior force,  he  was  defeated,  and  for  the  time  lost  three 
important  citiea— Beth-el,  Jeshanah,  and  Ephraim.  The 
Targum  on  Ruth  iv,  20  mentions  Jeroboam's  having 
stationed  guards  on  the  roads,  which  guards  had  been 
slain  by  the  people  of  Netophah ;  but  what  is  hcre  al- 
luded  to,  or  when  it  took  place,  we  have  at  prcsent  no 
dew  to**  (Smith).  The  Sept.  has  a  long  addition  to  the 
Biblical  cccount  (at  1  Kings  xii,  24),  evidently  taken 
from  some  apociyphal  source.  Joseph  as  simply  folio  ws 
the  Ilebrew  text.  (See  Cassel,  Komg  Jeroboam^  Erfurt, 
1857.) 

2.  The  son  and  successor  of  Jehoash,  and  the  four- 
teenth  kuig  of  Israel,  for  a  period  of  forty-one  years,  B.C. 
823-^782  (2  Kings  xiv,  23).  He  foUowed  the  examplo 
of  the  first  Jeroboam  in  keeping  up  the  idolatry  of  the 
golden  calves  (2  Kings  xiv,  24).  Neverthele88,  the  Lord 
had  pity  upon  Israel  (2  Kings  xiv,  26),  the  time  of  its 
ruin  had  not  yet  come,  and  this  reign  was  long  and 
fiourishing,  being  contemporary  with  those  of  Amaziah 
(2  Kings  xiv,  23)  and  Uzziah  (2  Kings  xv,  1)  over  Ju- 
dah. Jeroboam  brought  to  a  Buocessful  result  thc  wara 
which  his  father  had  undertaken,  and  was  always  vic- 
torious  over  the  Syrians  (comp.  2  Kings  xiii,  4 ;  xiv,  26, 
27).  He  even  took  their  chief  cities  of  Damascus  (2 
Kings  xiv,  28;  Amos  i,  3-5)  and  Hamath,  which  had 
formerly  been  subject  to  the  sceptre  of  David,  and  re- 
stored  to  the  realm  of  larael  the  ancient  eastcm  limits 
from  Lebanon  to  the  Dead  Sea  (2  Kings  xiv,  25;  Amos 
vi,  14).  Ammon  and  Moab  were  reconquered  (Amos  i, 
13 ;  ii,  1-3) ;  the  Transjordanic  tribes  were  restored  to 
their  territory  (2  Kings  xiii,  5 ;  1  Chroń.  v,  17-22).  But 
it  was  merely  an  outward  restoration.  The  sanctuary  at 
Beth-el  was  kept  up  in  royal  state  (Amos  vii,  13),  whilo 
druiUcenness,  liccntiousncsa,  and  oppression  prevailed  in 
the  country  (Amos  ii,  6-8;  iv,  1 ;  vi,  6;  Hos.  iv,  12-14 ; 
i,  2),  and  idolatry  was  united  with  the  worship  of  Jcho- 
vah  (Ho&  iv,  13 ;  xiii,  6).  During  this  reign  lived  thc 
prophets  Hosea  (Hos.  i,  1),  Joel  (comp.  Joel  iii,  16  with 
Amos  i,  12),  Amos  (Amos  i,  1),  and  Jonah  (2  Kings  xłv, 
25).  In  Amos  vii,  1 1 ,  Amaziah,  the  high-priest  of  Beth- 
el,  in  reporting  what  he  called  the  conspiracy  of  Amos 
against  Jeroboam,  represents  the  prophet  as  declaring 
that  Jeroboam  should  dic  by  the  sword ;  and  some  would 
regard  thb  as  a  prophccy  Ihat  had  failed  of  its  fulfil- 
ment,  as  there  is  no  evidence  that  his  death  was  other 
thau  natund,  for  he  was  buried  with  his  ancestors  in 
State  (2  Kings  xivL29),  although  the  interregnum  of 
eleven  years  which  inter\'ened  before  the  accession  of 
his  son  Zechariah  (2  Kings  xiv,  28,  comp.  with  xv,  8) 
argues  some  political  disorder  at  the  time  of  hb  death 
(sec  the  Studien  und  Kritiken,  1847,  iii,  648).  But  the 
probability  rather  is  that  the  high-priest,  who  displayed 
the  tnie  spirit  of  a  persecutor,  gave  an  unduly  specific 
and  offensive  tum  to  the  wortls  of  Amos,  in  order  to  in- 
flame  Jeroboam  the  morę  against  him.  Thc  only  pas- 
sages  of  Scripture  where  his  name  occurs  are  2  Kings 
xiii,  18 ;  xiv,  16, 23, 27, 28, 29 ;  xv,  1,  8 ;  1  Chroń.  v,  17 ; 
Hos.  i,  1 ;  Amoe  i,  1 ;  vii,  9, 10, 11 ;  in  idl  others  the  for- 
mer  Jeroboam  is  intended.    See  Israei^  ki>'gdom  ok. 

Jeroliam  (Heb.  Yerockam%  D^P^i  cherished),  the 
name  of  several  men. 

1.  (Sept.  'hpefuri\f  'Iepo/?oó/<,  'lipiófi.)  The  son 
of  Elihu  (Eliab,  Eliel),  and  father  of  Elkanah,  Samuers 
father  (1  Sam.  i,  1 ;  1  Chroń,  vi,  27, 34).    B.C.  antę  1142. 

2.  (Sept.  'hpoófi  V.  r.  'I,ooa^.)  An  inhabitant  of 
Gedor,  and  father  of  Joclah  and  Zebadiah,  two  of  the 
Benjamite  archcrs  who  joincd  David's  band  at  Ziklag 
(1  Chroń,  xii,  7).     B.C.  antę  1055. 

3.  (Sept.  *lwpafi  V.  r.  Ipiua/S.)  The  father  of  Aza- 
rcel,  which  latter  was  "  captain**  of  the  tribe  of  Dan  un- 
der  Darid  and  Solomon  (1  Chroń,  xxvii,  22).  B.C 
aute  1017. 


JERIEŁ 


828 


JEROBOAM 


becn  attacked  by  the  Anbs  in  cioaang  thc  Jordan,  sent 
a  detachment  of  his  anny  and  razed  Jeiicho  to  the  ground. 

The  soil  of  the  plain  is  unsoipassed  in  fertility ;  there 
ifl  abundance  of  water  for  irrigation,  and  many  of  the  old 
aqueducts  are  almost  perfect ;  yet  nearly  the  whole  plain 
18  waste  and  desolate.  The  grove  supplied  by  the  foun- 
tain  is  in  the  distance.  The  few  fields  of  wheat  and  In- 
dian com,  and  the  few  orchards  of  figa,  are  enough  to 
show  what  the  plaoe  might  become  under  proper  culti- 
vation.  But  the  people  are  now  few  in  number,  indolent, 
and  licentious.  The  palms  which  gave  the  ancient  city 
a  distinctive  appellation  are  gone;  even  that  *' single 
solitary  palm**  which  Dr.  Robinson  saw  exists  no  morę. 
The  cUmate  of  Jericho  is  exceedingly  hot  and  unhealthy. 
This  is  accounted  for  by  the  depression  of  the  plain,  which 
is  about  1200  feet  behw  the  level  of  the  sea.  Thc  reilec- 
tion  of  the  sun*s  rays  from  the  bare  white  clif&  and  moun- 
tain  ranges  which  shut  in  the  plain,  and  the  noisome  ex- 
halations  from  the  lakę,  and  from  the  numerous  salt- 
springs  around  it,  are  enough  to  poison  the  atmosphere. 
— Smith;  Kitto. 

For  further  detaila  lespectlng  Jericho,  see  Reland's  Pa- 
fa«^.p.883,829  8q.;  Lightfoot,^or./7e&p.85sq.;  Otho*6 
Ijex.  RaJbb.  p.  298  8q. ;  Bachiene,  ii,  8,  §  224  są. ;  Hames- 
veld,  ii,  291  8q. ;  CcJlar.  Notit.  ii,  552  8q. ;  Kobin8on*s  Re- 
tearchegj  ii,  267  8q.;  01in's  TraveU,  ii,  195  8q.;  Thomson, 
Land  and  Book^  ii,  439  8q. 

Jeri'Sl  (Heb.  Yeriil\  iK^^^I^./earer  of  God,  or  L  9. 
Jeruel;  Sept  'Ifpi>/X),  one  of  the  sons  of  Tola,  the  son 
of  Issachar,  mentioned  as  a  yaliant  chief  of  his  tribe, 
which  wcre  enroUed  in  the  time  of  David  (1  Chroń.  v'ii, 
2).     B.a  post  1856. 

Jeri'jah  (1  Chroń.  xxYi,  31).    See  Jeriak. 
Jer^imoth  (Heb.  Yerimoth',  ni^^^^l^,  heigkU,  i.  q. 
Jeremoth),  the  name  of  seyeral  men.     See  also  Jerb- 

MOTH. 

1.  (Sept  l<p(/iou&.)  One  of  the  five  sons  of  Bela, 
son  of  Benjamin,  a  yaliant  chief  of  his  tribe  (1  Chroń. 
Tii,  7).     B.C.  post  1856. 

2.  (Sept  Ifciijua^.)  The  last  named  of  the  three 
sons  of  Mushi,  grandson  of  Leyi  (1  Chroń.  xxiy,  30) ; 
elsewhcre  (1  Chroń,  xxiii,  28)  called  Jeremoth  (q.  v.). 

3.  (Sept  Tapi/iou^  v.  r.  'Apifui^.)  One  of  the  fa- 
mous  Benjamite  archers  and  slingers  that  joined  Dayid's 
band  at  Ziklag  (1  Chroń,  xii,  6).     Ra  1055. 

4.  (Sept  'ItpifŁoif^  V.  r.  Icpi/iiód.)  One  of  the  four- 
teen  sons  of  Heman,  and  appointed  a  Leyitical  musidan 
under  his  father  in  the  arrangement  of  the  sacred  ser- 
yices  by  David  (1  Chroń.  xxy,  4) ;  probably  the  same 
elsewhere  (ver.  22)  called  Jeremoth. 

5.  (Sept  'UptfŁoi/d  V.  r.  'hpifiw^.)  Son  of  Azriel, 
and  "captain"  of  Naphtali  under  Dayid  and  Solomon  (1 
Chroń.  xxvu,  19).     RC.  1014. 

6.  (Sept  'Epftoud  y.  r.  'I«pt/iow^.)  A  son  of  Dayid, 
whose  daughter  Mahalath  was  Rehoboam's  first  wife  (2 
Chroń,  xi,  18).  B.C.  antę  973.  He  appears  to  haye 
been  different  from  any  of  Dayid's  sons  elsewhere  enu- 
merated  (2  Sam.  iii,  2-5 ;  1  Chroń,  xiv,  4-7),  having, 
perhaps,  bccn  bom  of  a  concubine  (compare  2  Sam.  xyi, 
21).  See  Da viD.  "  This,  in  fact,  is  the  Jewish  tradi- 
tion  respecting  his  matemity  (Jerome,  OucutioneSf  ad 
loc).  It  is,  howeycr,  somewhat  questionable  whether 
Rehoboam  would  have  married  the  grandchild  of  a  con- 
cubine even  of  the  great  David.  The  passage  2  Chroń. 
xi,  18  is  not  ąuite  elear,  sińce  the  word  *  daughter'  is  a 
correction  of  the  Keri:  the  original  text  had  "p,  i.  e. 
*  son' "(Smith). 

7.  (Sept  'UpifM^,)  A  Leyite,  one  of  the  oyerseers 
of  the  Tempie  offerings  in  the  time  of  Hezekiah  (2  Chroń. 
xxxi,  13).     RC.  726. 

JeMoth  (Heb.  Yerioth^  niJ-^^i;*,  twnidUy,  other- 
wise  curłainsj  Icptió^),  a  person  apparently  named  as 
the  latter  of  the  firet  two  wiyes  of  Caleb,  son  of  Hezron, 
seyeral  children  being  mentioned  as  the  fruit  of  the  mai^ 
riage  with  one  or  the  other  (I  Chroń,  ii,  18).     B.C.  post 


1856.  The  Yiilgate  renders  this  as  the  son  of  Caleb  hy 
the  first-mentioned  wife,  and  father  of  tbe  sons  named; 
but  contrary  to  the  Heb.  text  which  is  doaely  folknred 
by  the  Sept  There  is  probably  some  comiption;  poe- 
sibly  the  name  in  que8tion  is  an  iuterpolation ;  compare 
yer.  19 ;  or  perhaps  we  should  reiider  tbe  connecti>-e  1 
by  eren,  thus  making  Jerioth  but  another  name  ki 
Azubah. 

Jerment,  Gboroe,  D.D.,  a  minister  of  the  Secesńoo 
Churoh  of  Scotland,  was  bom  in  1759  at  Peeble»,  Scot- 
land, where  his  father  was  at  the  time  pastor  of  t 
church  of  that  branch  of  the  Secesńon  Church  denom- 
inated  before  their  union  in  1819  as  Anti-burgher.  On 
the  completion  of  his  coUegiate  oouise  he  enterad  the 
diyinity  hall  of  his  denomination,  sitnated  at  Alloa,  and, 
while  a  student  there,  took  a  high  standing  in  his  dm. 
After  preaching  a  short  time  in  Scotland  he  went  to 
London,  to  become  the  colleague  of  Mr.  WiUon,  at  the 
Secession  Church  in  Bow  Lane,  Cheapside,  and  was  or- 
daiued  in  the  last  week  of  Sept  1782.  In  the  English 
metropolia  Jerment  was  weU  receiyed,  and  he  labond 
there  for  the  space  of  thirty-fiye  yeais,  his  preaching 
attracting  large  and  respectable  congrcgations  from  the 
Soottish  residents  of  London.  He  died  Sfry  23. 1819. 
"His  cbaracter  stood  yery  high  in  the  estimate  of  eD 
who  knew  him,  as  a  man  of  sense,  leaming,  pmdence, 
and  exalted  piety."  He  was  one  of  the  first  direeton 
of  the  London  Missionary  Society,  and  greatiy  encour- 
aged  the  enteipnse.  The  writings  of  Jerment' intruflted 
to  the  prcss  are  mainly  public  lectures  and  sermaiH 
(London,  1791-1813).  Among  these  his  £ariy  Piety,  ti- 
Itutratćd  and  reconunended  th  teteral  Ditcour9e$ ;  sod 
Religiony  a  Monitor  to  tke  Middle^ffed  and  the  Ghry  of 
old  Meny  desenre  to  occupy  a  conspicnous  place.  See 
Morison,  Fatkers  and  Founden  ofLond,Mu$,  Soekty,^ 
506  sq.    (J.H.W.) 

Jezobo^gm  (Heb.  Yarobam%  Wy^^^  memue  of 
the  people;  Sept  ^Itpopoófij  Joeephus  'Upo^ćafioc), 
the  name  of  two  of  the  kings  of  the  separate  kingdom 
of  Israel. 

1.  The  son  of  Nebat  (by  which  title  he  is  usoslly  di»- 
tinguished  in  the  record  of  his  infamy)  by  a  woosan 
named  Zeruah,  of  the  tribe  of  Ephraim  (1  Kings  xi,  2S). 
He  was  the  founder  of  the  schismatical  northero  kiz^- 
dom,  consisting  of  the  ten  tribes,  oyer  which  he  ndgned 
twenty-two  (current)  years,  RC  973-961.  At  the  ńmi 
he  first  appears  in  the  sacred  history  his  mother  was  a 
widów,  and  he  had  already  been  noticed  by  Solomon  as 
a  deyer  and  actiye  yonng  man,  and  appointed  one  o( 
the  superintendents  of  the  works  which  that  magnifi- 
cent  king  was  carrying  on  at  Jerusalem,  hartng  fpedal 
charge  of  the  senrices  reqniied  of  the  leading  tribe  of 
Ephraim  (1  Kings  xi,  26-28;  comp.  Jo6ephus,.4itf.\-iii, 
7,  7).  RC.  1010-998.  This  appointmeut,  thc  rewiid 
of  his  merita,  might  haye  satisfied  his  ambition  badnot 
the  dedaration  of  the  prophet  Ahijah  giren  him  higher 
hopes.  When  informed  that,  by  the  diyine  appoint- 
ment,  he  was  to  become  king  oyer  the  ten  tribes  about 
to  be  rent  from  the  house  of  Dayid,  he  was  not  oonieot 
to  wait  patiently  for  the  death  of  Solomon,  but  begin  to 
form  plots  and  conspirades,  the  discoyery  of  which  coo- 
strained  him  to  flee  to  Egypt  to  escape  condign  panish- 
ment,  B.C  cir.  980.  The  kuig  of  that  country  was  bvt 
too  ready  to  encourage  one  whose  success  must  nece»> 
sarily  weaken  the  kingdom  which  had  become  great 
and  formidable  under  Dayid  and  Soicmon,  and  which 
had  ahready  pnshed  its  frantier  to  the  Bed  Sea  (1  Kings 
xi,  29-40). 

When  Solomon  died,  the  ten  tribes  sent  to  cali  Jero- 
boam  from  £g}*pt;  and  he  appears  to  haye  headed  the 
deputation  that  came  before  the  son  of  Solomon  with 
a  demand  of  new  securities  for  the  rights  which  ihe 
measures  of  the  late  king  had  compromised.  It  may 
somewhat  excuse  the  hanh  aitswer  of  Rehoboam  that 
the  demand  was  urged  by  a  body  of  men  headed  by  one 
whose  pretensions  w^e  so  well  known  and  so  odioos  to 


JEROBOAM 


829 


JEROHAM 


thc  house  of  David.  It  cannot  be  dcnied  that,  in  making 
thcir  applications  thus  offensirely,  they  struck  the  firet 
Uow,  alŁhough  it  la  possibte  that  they,  in  tbe  first  in- 
Stańce,  intendecl  to  use  tbe  presence  of  Jeroboam  for  no 
other  purpoee  tban  to  frigbten  tbe  king  into  compliance. 
Tbe  imprudent  answer  of  Rehoboam  rendered  a  revolu- 
tion  ineyitable,  and  Jeroboam  was  tben  called  to  reign 
over  tbe  ten  tribes  by  tbe  style  of  "  King  of  Israer  (1 
Kinga  xii,  1-20).  Autumn,  B.C.  973.  See  Rkhoboam. 
(For  the  generał  course  of  his  conduct  on  tbe  throne,  see 
tbe  aniele  Israel,  Kingdom  of.)  The  leading  object 
of  his  policy  was  to  widen  tbe  breach  between  the  two 
kingdoms,  and  to  rend  asunder  those  oommon  interests 
among  all  the  descendants  of  Jacob,  wbich  it  was  one 
great  object  of  the  law  to  combine  and  interlace.  To 
tbis  end  be  scrupled  not  to  sacrifice  tbe  most  aacred  and 
inviolablc  interests  and  obligations  of  thc  covenant  peo- 
pic  by  forbidding  his  subjects  to  resort  to  the  one  tem- 
pie and  altar  of  Jebovah  at  Jerusalem,  and  by  establisb- 
ing  shrines  at  Dan  and  Betb-el — the  extremities  of  his 
kingdom — where  "golden  calves"  were  set  up  as  tbe 
s\'mboIs  of  Jchovah,  to  wbich  the  people  were  enjoincd 
to  resort  and  bring  their  offcrings.  See  Calf,  Gold- 
EN.  Tbe  pontificate  of  the  new  establishment  be  united 
to  bis  crown,  in  imitation  of  the  Egyptian  kings  (1  Kings 
xii,  26-33).  He  was  oflSciating  in  that  capacity  at  Beth- 
el,  oflforing  incense,  whcn  a  propbet  (Joseplms,  A  nt,  viii, 
8,  5,  calls  him  Jadon,  L  e.  probably  Iddo;  compare  Ant. 
viii,  15,  4;  Jerome,  Oucegt.  Ilebr,  on  2  Chroń.  x,  4)  ap- 
peared,  and  in  tbe  name  of  the  Lord  announced  a  coming 
time,  as  yet  far  ofT,  in  wbich  a  king  of  the  boiise  of  Da- 
vid,  Jo«iah  by  name,  should  bum  upon  that  unholy  altar 
the  boncs  of  its  ministers.  He  was  tben  preparing  to 
vcrif\',  by  a  commissioned  prodigy,  the  tnitb  of  the  ora- 
cie be  had  deliyered,  when  the  king  attempted  to  arrest 
him,  but  was  smitten  with  palsy  in  tbe  arm  be  stretcbeil 
fortb.  At  the  same  time  tbe  threatened  prodigy  took 
place — the  altar  was  rent  asunder,  and  the  asbes  strewed 
far  around.  Awe-struck  at  this  twofold  miracle,  the 
king  begged  tbe  prophet  to  intercede  with  God  for  the 
restoration  of  his  band,  wbich  was  accordingly  healed 
(1  Kings  xiii,  1-6).  B.C.  973.  This  measure  had,  how- 
ever,  no  abiding  effect.  The  polic>'  on  wbich  be  acted 
lay  too  deep  in  what  be  deemed  the  vital  interests  of 
hijs  separate  kingdom  to  be  even  thus  abandoned ;  and 
thc  force  of  tbe  considerations  wbich  determined  his 
conduct  may  in  part  be  appreciated  from  tbe  fact  that 
no  subsequent  king  of  Israel,  bowever  well  disposed  in 
other  respects.  ever  ventured  to  lay  a  finger  on  thb  schis- 
inatical  establishment  (1  Kings  xiii,  33,  34).  Hence 
"  the  sin  of  Jeroboam,'  the  son  of  Nebat,  wherewith  be 
sinncd  and  madę  Israel  to  sin,"*  became  a  standing 
phrase  in  describing  that  iiuquity  from  wbich  no  king 
of  Israel  departed.     See  Idolatry. 

Thc  contumacy  of  Jeroboam  eventually  brought  upon 
him  the  doom  wbich  be  probably  dreaded  beyond  all 
other^f — tbe  speedy  extinction  of  the  dynasty  wbich  be 
had  taken  bo  much  pains  and  incurred  so  much  guilt  to 
establisb  on  firm  foundations.  His  son  Abijah  being 
sick,  he  sent  his  wife,  disguised,  to  consult  the  prophet 
Ahijab,  w  bo  had  predicted  that  he  should  be  king  of 
Israel.  The  prophet,  although  be  had  become  blind 
with  age,  knew  the  queen,  and  saluted  ber  with,  "Come 
in,  thou  wife  of  Jeroboam,  for  I  am  sent  to  thee  with 
hcavy  tidings."  These  were  not  merely  that  the  son 
should  die — for  that  was  intended  m  mercy  to  one  who 
alon?,  of  all  tbe  bouse  of  Jeroboam,  had  remained  faith- 
ful  to  his  God,  and  was  the  only  one  who  shoukl  obtain 
an  honored  grav&^but  that  his  race  should  be  yiolently 
and  uturly  extłnguished :  ^*  I  will  take  away  the  rem- 
nant  of  tbe  bouse  of  Jeroboam  as  a  man  taketh  away 
dung,  till  it  be  all  gone**  (1  Kings  xiy,  1-18).  The  sou 
died  as  soon  as  the  motber  croseed  tbe  tbresbold  on  ber 
zetum ;  and,  as  tbe  death  of  Jeroboam  bimself  is  the 
iiext  event  recorded,  it  would  seem  that  he  did  not  long 
8un'łvc  his  son  (1  Kings  xiv,  20).  B.C.  early  in  951. — 
Kitto.     (Sec  Kitto^B  Daily  Bibie  lUustradonSs  ad  ioc) 


''Jeroboam  was  at  oonstant  war  with  the  bouse  of 
Judab,  but  the  only  act  distinctly  recorded  is  a  battle 
with  Abijah,  son  of  Rehoboam,  in  which,  in  spite  of  a 
skilful  ambush  madę  by  Jeroboam,  and  of  much  supe- 
rior force,  be  was  defeated,  and  for  the  time  lost  tbree 
important  cities — Beth-eL  Jeshanah,  and  Epbraim.  The 
Targum  on  Ruth  iv,  20  mentions  Jeroboam'8  having 
stationed  guards  on  thc  roads,  which  guards  had  been 
slain  by  the  people  of  Netophab ;  but  what  is  here  al- 
luded  to,  or  when  it  took  place,  we  have  at  present  no 
dew  to*'  (Smith).  Tbe  Sept.  bas  a  long  additlon  to  tbe 
Biblical  cccount  (at  1  Kings  xii,  24),  eyidently  taken 
from  aome  apociyphal  source.  Josephus  simply  follows 
the  Hebrew  text.  (See  (Kassel,  Kom//  Jeroboam^  Erfurt, 
1857.) 

2.  The  son  and  succcssor  of  Jeboash,  and  thc  four- 
teentb  king  of  Israel,  for  a  period  of  forty-one  years,  I).C. 
823-782  (2  Kings  xiv,  23).  He  followed  tbe  examplo 
of  the  first  Jeroboam  in  keeping  up  the  idolatry  of  tbe 
golden  calves  (2  Kings  xiv,  24).  Neverthele88,  thc  Lord 
had  pity  upon  Israel  (2  Kings  xiv,  26),  tbe  time  of  its 
ruin  had  not  yet  come,  and  this  reign  was  long  and 
flourishing,  being  contemporary  with  those  of  Amaziah 
(2  Kings  xiv,  23)  and  Uzziah  (2  Kings  xv,  1)  over  Ju- 
dab. Jeroboam  brought  to  a  successful  result  thc  wara 
which  his  fatber  had  undertaken,  and  was  always  vic- 
torious  over  thc  Syrians  (comp.  2  Kings  xiii,  4 ;  xiv,  26, 
27).  He  even  took  their  chief  cities  of  Damascus  (2 
Kuigs  xiv,  28;  Amos  i,  3-5)  and  Hamath,  which  had 
formerly  been  subject  to  the  sceptre  of  David,  and  re- 
stored  to  the  realm  of  Israel  tbe  ancient  eastcni  limits 
from  Lebanon  to  tbe  Dead  Sea  (2  Kings  xiv,  25 ;  Amos 
vi,  14).  Ammon  and  Moab  were  reconąuered  (Amos  i, 
13;  ii,  1-3);  the  Transjonlanic  tribes  were  rcstored  to 
their  tcrritory  (2  Kings  xiii,  5 ;  1  CHiron.  v,  17-22).  But 
it  was  merely  an  outward  restoration.  The  sauctuar}'  at 
Betb-el  was  kept  up  in  royal  stete  (Amos  vii,  13),  while 
drunkenness,  liccntiousncss,  and  oppression  prevaUed  in 
tbe  country  (Amos  ii,  6-8 ;  iv,  1 ;  vi,  6 ;  Hos.  iv,  12-14 ; 
i,  2),  and  idolatry  was  united  with  tbe  worsbip  of  Jcbo- 
vab  (Ho&  iv,  13 ;  xiii,  6).  During  thb  reign  lived  the 
prophets  Hosea  (Ilos.  i,  1),  Joel  (comp.  Joel  iii,  16  with 
Amos  i,  12),  Amos  (Amos  i,  1),  and  Jonah  (2  Kings  xiv, 
25) .  In  Amos  vii,  1 1 ,  Amaziah,  tbe  high-priest  of  Beth- 
cl,  in  reporting  what  he  called  the  conspiracy  of  Amos 
against  Jeroboam,  represents  the  prophet  as  declaring 
that  Jeroboam  should  die  by  tbe  sword ;  and  some  would 
regard  this  as  a  prophecy  tłłat  had  failed  of  its  fulfil- 
ment,  as  there  is  no  evidence  that  his  death  was  other 
thau  natural,  for  he  was  buried  with  his  ancestors  in 
State  (2  Kings  xiv^29),  although  the  intcrregnum  of 
eleveii  years  wbich  inter%'ened  before  tbe  accession  of 
his  son  Zechariah  (2  Kings  xiv,  23,  comp.  with  xv,  8) 
argues  Bome  political  disorder  at  tbe  time  of  his  death 
(see  tbe  Studien  und  Kritiken,  1847,  iii,  648).  But  the 
probability  rather  is  that  the  high-priest,  who  displayed 
the  true  spirit  of  a  persecutor,  gave  an  unduly  specifio 
and  offen8ive  tum  to  tbe  words  of  Amos,  in  order  to  in- 
flame  Jeroboam  the  morę  against  him.  The  only  pas- 
sages  of  Scripture  where  his  name  occurs  are  2  Kings 
xiii,  13 ;  xiv,  16, 23, 27, 28, 29 ;  xv,  1,  8 ;  1  Chroń.  v,  17 ; 
Hos.  i,  1 ;  Amos  i,  1 ;  vii,  9, 10, 11 ;  in  all  others  the  for- 
mer  Jeroboam  is  intended.    See  Israkl,  ku^gdom  of. 

Jero^ham  (Heb.  Yerocham^t  O^^^i  cherished)^  the 
name  of  8everal  men. 

1.  (Sept.  'Ucnfuri\  *hpof3oafŁ^  'Iipeófi.)  The  son 
of  Elibu  (Eliab,  Eliel),  and  fatber  of  Elkanab,  Samucrs 
fatber  (1  Sam.  i,  1 ;  1  Chroń,  vi,  27, 34).    B.C.  antę  1 142. 

2.  (Sept.  'Itpodfi  V.  r.  Ipoa/i.)  An  iuhabitant  of 
Gedor,  and  fatber  of  Joclab  and  Zebadiah,  two  of  the 
Benjamite  archers  who  joined  David'8  band  at  Ziklag 
(1  Chroń,  xii,  7).     B.C.  antę  1055. 

3.  (Sept.  *lwpafi  V.  r.  'Ipiiia/3.)  The  father  of  iVza- 
rcel,  wbich  latter  was  "  captain"  of  the  tribe  of  Dan  un- 
der  David  and  Solomon  (1  Chroń,  xxvii,  22).  B.C> 
antę  1017. 


JEROME 


830 


JEROME 


4.  (Sept.  loipa/i.)  Father  of  Azariah,  which  latter 
is  the  firet  mentioned  of  the  two  of  Łhat  name  among 
the  "  captains  of  hiuidreda**  with  whom  Jchoiada  plan- 
ned  the  restoration  of  prince  Jehoash  to  the  throne  (2 
Chroń,  xxiii,  1).     RC.  antę  876. 

5.  (Sept.  'lepoa/i  v.  r.  'ipoofu)  The  father  of  aereral 
Benjamite  chiefa  resident  at  Jeruaalem  (1  Chroń,  vii,  27). 
B.C.  appar.  antę  588.    See  No.  6 ;  alao  Jeremotii ,  4. 

6.  (Sept  'Icpoa/i  Y.  r.  Upofiodfi.)  The  father  of  Ib- 
neiah,  which  latter  was  one  of  the  Benjamite  chiefa  res- 
ident at  Jemsalem  (1  Chroń,  ix,  8).  KC.  apparently 
antę  636.    Poasibly  identical  with  the  preoeding. 

7.  (Sept.  'Upad/l  v.  r.  'Ipadfi.)  The  son  of  Pashar, 
and  father  of  Adaiah,  which  last  was  one  of  the  chief 
priests  resident  at  Jemsalem  (1  Chroń,  ix,  12).  RC 
apparently  antę  536. 

8.  (Sept.  Icpoa/i.)  The  son  of  Pelaliah,  and  father 
of  Adaiah,  which  last  was  one  of  the  chief  priests  resi- 
dent at  Jerusalem  after  the  Exile  (Neh.  xi,  12).  B.G. 
antę  440.  Perhaps,  howcver,  this  Jeioham  was  the 
same  with  No.  7. 

Jerome  (fully  Latinized  Sophronius  Eusdnus  nie- 
ronymtu),  generally  known  as  Saint  Jerome,  one  of 
the  most  leamed  and  able  among  the  fatheis  of  the 
Western  Church,  was  bom  at  Stridon,  a  town  on  the 
oonfines  of  Dalmatia  and  Pannonia  (but  whoee  site  is 
now  unkno¥m,  as  the  place  was  destrored  by  the  Goths 
in  A.D.  377),  at  some  period  between  881  and  845 — ao- 
oording  to  Schaff,  it  probably  occurred  near  845.  His 
parents  were  both  Christians.  His  early  edocation  was 
superintended  by  his  father,  afler  which  he  studied 
Greek  and  Latin  rhetoric  and  philosophy  under  iElius 
Donatus  at  Romę.  While  a  resident  in  this  Christian 
city  he  was  adroitted  to  the  rite  of  baptism,  and  decided 
to  derote  his  life,  in  rigid  abstincnce,  to  the  seryice  of 
his  Master.  Tt  seems  uncertain  whether  a  visit  which 
he  madę  to  Gaul  was  uudertaken  before  or  after  this 
important  cvcnt.  At  any  rato,  about  870  we  find  him 
at  Treves  and  at  Aquilcia,  busy  in  transcribing  the  com- 
mentaries  of  Hilarius  on  the  Psalms,  and  a  work  on  the 
synods  by  the  same  auŁhor;  and  in  composing  his  first 
theological  essay,  J)e  muliere  aeptiea  percussa,  the  letter 
to  Innoccntius.  In  873  he  set  out  on  a  joumey  to  the 
East,  in  company  with  his  friends  Innocentius,  Eragri- 
us,  and  Heliodoms,  and  finally  settled  for  a  time  at  An- 
tioch.  Diuring  his  resideuce  at  this  place  he  was  seized 
with  a  severe  fcrcr,  and  in  a  dream  which  he  had  in 
this  sickness  he  fancied  himself  called  before  the  judg- 
ment  bar  of  God,  and  as  a  heathen  Ciceronian  (he  had 
hitherto  given  much  of  his  time  to  the  study  of  the 
classicol  writers)  so  scrercly  reprimanded  and  scourged 
that  cvcn  the  angcls  interceded  for  him  from  sympathy 
w^ith  his  youth,  and  he  himself  was  led  to  take  the  sol- 
emn  vow  hercafler  to  forsake  the  study  and  reading  of 
worldly  books,  a  pledge  which,  however,  he  did  not  ad- 
hcrc  to  in  after  life.  A  marked  rcligious  feiror  thcnce- 
forth  animated  Jerome;  a  dcvotion  to  monastic  hab- 
its  became  the  niling  principle,  we  might  say  the 
niling  passion  of  his  life  he  rctired  to  the  desert  of 
Chalcia  in  374,  and  there  spcnt  four  years  in  penitential 
exercise8  and  in  study,  paying  particular  attention  to 
the  acquirement  of  the  Hcbrew  tongue.  But  his  active 
ahd  rcdtless  spirit  soon  brought  him  again  upon  the 
public  stage,  and  involyed  him  in  all  the  doctrinal  and 
ecdesiastical  controyerńes  of  those  controversial  times. 
See  MELiirrius.  In  879  he  was  ordained  a  presbyter  by 
bishop  Paulinus  in  Antioch,  without  rcceiring  charge 
of  a  congregation,  as  he  prcferred  the  itinerant  life  of 
a  monk  and  student  to  a  iixcd  office.  About  380  he 
jouraeyed  to  Constantinople,  where,  although  past  a 
student'8  age,  he  was  not  ashamed  to  take  his  seat  at 
the  feet  of  the  celebrated  Gregory  Nazianzen,  and  to 
listen  to  the  anti-Arian  sermons  of  this  leanied  father 
of  the  Church.  Indeed,  the  pupil  and  instructor  aoon 
bccarae  great  friends ;  and  therc  resultcd  from  his  study 
of  the  Greek  lauguage  and  literaturę,  to  which  much  of 
his  time  and  attention  was  here  deyoted,  seyeral  trans- 


lations  fkom  the  writings  of  the  eariy  Greek  fathen^ 
among  which  the  most  important  are  the  Chronicie  of 
Eosebius,  and  the  homilies  of  Origen  on  Jeremiah  and 
EzekieL  It  oost  Jerome  no  smali  sacrifice  to  tear  him- 
self away  from  his  ftiend  and  instructor  to  retora  in  88S 
to  Romę  as  mediator  in  the  Meletian  schism,  which 
greatly  agitated  the  Church  of  Antioch  at  this  time. 
In  a  council  which  was  convened  at  Romę  Joome  tock 
a  prominent  part,  and  afterwards  acted  as  secretary  to 
the  Roman  pontiff.  By  his  adherence  to  Damasus,  a 
dose  friendship  sprang  up  between  these  two  grat 
men,  which  was  broken  only  by  the  death  of  the  pon- 
tiff. Some  writen  haye  critidsed  the  conduct  of  Je- 
rome against  the  Eastem  churches,  and  beliere  that 
Damasus  pnrchaaed  the  influence  of  Jerome  for  hit 
party ;  but  for  this  opinion,  as  well  as  for  that  of  othens 
that  the  domineering  roanner  of  Damasus  roade  Jerome 
pliant  and  seryile,  there  are  no  good  grounds;  incecd, 
Jerome  was  too  independent  and  determined  in  chai^ 
acter  eyer  to  be  swayed  in  his  opinion  by  the  will  of 
others.  It  is  morę  likely  that  the  flatteryM-hich  Dam- 
asus bestowed  on  Jerome  by  recognising  his  abUities  as 
superior,  and  urging  him  to  undertake  those  vast  ex- 
egetical  labors  which  finally  resulted  in  pre^enting  the 
Church  with  a  reyised  Latin  yerńon  of  the  Bibie  (see 
below  on  the  Yultfale)^  was  what  drew  Jerome  to  Dam- 
asus, and  madę  him  one  of  the  bishop*s  moait  faithful 
adherents. 

Jerome's  famę  as  a  nan  of  eIoqaence,lcaming,  and 
sanctity  was  at  this  period  in  its  zenith,  and  he  im- 
proyed  his  adyantages  to  further  the  iiiterests  of  mo- 
nastidsm.  Eyei^nyhere  he  extoUcd  the  mcrit  of  that 
modę  of  life,  though  it  had  hitherto  fowid  few  ad- 
yocates  at  Romę,  and  the  clergy  had  even  Tiolendr 
opposcd  it.  He  commendcd  monastic  seclusion  erca 
against  the  will  of  parents,  interpreting  the  woni  of 
the  Lord  about  foruking  father  and  mother  a»  if  mo- 
nasticism  and  Christianity  were  the  same.  *<Tłiough 
thy  mother,  with  flowing  hair  and  rent  gamtient^,  shotild 
show  thee  the  breasts  which  haye  nourishcd  thee; 
though  thy  father  should  lie  upon  the  threshold ;  ret 
depart  thou,  tieading  oyer  thy  father,  and  fly  with  drr 
eyes  to  the  standard  of  the  crosa^  .  .  .  The  lorc  of 
God  and  the  fear  of  heli  easily  reud  the  bonds  of 
the  houschold  asundcr.  The  holy  Scripture  indred 
enjoins  obedience  to  parents,  but  he  who  lores  thnn 
roore  than  Christ  loees  his  souL  ...  O  de^rt,  where 
the  flowers  of  Christ  are  blooming !  O  solitndc,  where 
the  Stones  for  the  new  Jerusalem  are  prepared !  O  re- 
treat,  which  rejoiccs  in  the  friendship  of  God!  What 
doest  thou  in  the  world,  my  brother,  with  thy  sool 
greater  than  the  world?  How  long  wilt  thou  renudn 
in  the  shadow  of  roofs,  and  in  the  smoky  dungeon  of 
citics?  Belieye  me,  I  see  herc  morę  of  the  light**  (E|v 
xiy).  Many  pious  persons  placed  theroselres  under  his 
spiritual  direction;  ''eycn  the  senator  Pammachinj, 
son-in-law  to  Paula  (one  of  Jerome*8  most  celebrated 
fcmale  conyerts),  and  heir  to  a  fortunę,  gare  his  goods 
to  the  poor,  exchangcd  the  purple  for  the  cowl,  expoeed 
himself  to  the  mockcry  of  his  coUeagues,  and  became, 
in  the  flattering  language  of  Jerome,  the  gcneral-in- 
chief  of  Roman  monkś,  the  first  of  monks  in  the  first  of 
cities''  (Schaff,  ii,  211).  His  conyerts  for  the  nranastic 
life  were,  howeyer,  mainly  of  the  female  8ex,  and  rooetly 
daughters  and  widows  of  the  most  wealthy  and  honon- 
ble  classes  of  Romę.  These  patrician  convcrts  '^he 
gathered  as  a  select  circle  around  him ;  he  expoondcd 
to  them  the  holy  Scriptures,  in  which  some  of  those 
Roman  ladies  were  yery  well  read ;  he  answered  thar 
questions  of  consdence ;  he  incited  them  to  celibate  fiie, 
layish  bencticence,  and  enthusiastic  ascetidsm ;  and  flat- 
tered  their  spirituid  yanity  by  extnyagant  pralsea.  Ue 
was  the  oracie,  biographer,  admirer,  and  culo^t  of 
these  holy  women,  who  constituted  the  spiritual  nolŃfity 
of  Cathoiic  Romę."  .  .  .  But  "  his  intiraacy  with  these 
distinguished  women,  whom  he  admired  morę,  perhapa, 
than  they  admired  him,  together  with  his  unsparing  at- 


JEROME 


831 


JEROME 


tacka  opon  the  immoralities  of  the  Boman  clergy  and 
of  the  higher  classes,  drew  upon  him  much  unjust  cen- 
sore  and  groundless  calumny,  which  he  met  rather  with 
indignant  scom  and  satire  than  with  quiet  dignity  and 
ChńsŁian  meekness;"  and  when  his  patron  Damasos 
died,  in  A.D.  384,  he  found  it  necessary,  or,  at  least, 
thought  it  the  morę  pradent  coune,  to  quit  Borne,  and  to 
aeek  a  home  in  the  East.  As  "■  the  aolitudes  of  Europę 
-  were  not  yet  sufficientły  aanctified  to  satisfy  a  passion 
for  holy  seclusion,"  by  which  Jerome  was  now  wholly 
oontroUed,  and  *'  as  the  oelebrity  attending  on  asoetic 
priyations  was  still  chiefly  confined  to  the  Eastern 
world,  Jerome  bade  adieu  to  his  nadye  hiUs,  to  his  he- 
redittty  property,  to  pontiflcal  Borne  herself,*'  and,  after 
touchiiig  at  Bhegium  and  CypniSy  where  he  enjoyed  a 
visiŁ  with  Epiphanius,  bishop  of  Salamis,  and  a  short 
Btay  at  Antioch,  he  continued  his  jouniey  to  the  Holy 
Land,  and  finally  settled  iu  886  at  Bethlehem.  ''In  a 
retreat  so  well  qiuilified  to  nourish  religi  ous  emotion 
even  in  the  most  torpid  heart,  the  zeal  of  Jerome  did 
not  ałumber,  but  rather  seemed  to  catch  fresh  fire  from  the 
objęcia  and  the  recollections  which  surrounded  him. . . . 
In  that  peaceful,  pure,  and  pious  solitude,  where  it  was 
natural  enough  that  he  should  exaggerate  the  mer- 
ita of  mortification,  and  fasting,  and  celibacy,  and  pil- 
grimage,  and  disparage  the  substantial  Yirtucs,  which 
he  conld  rarely  witneas,  and  which  he  could  never  prac- 
tice,^*  he  gave  himself  up  wholly  to  the  further  study  of 
the  aacred  language,  and  here  completed  the  great  lit- 
erary  labor  of  his  life,  the  translation  of  the  Scriptures. 
He  was  followed  to  this  place  by  sereral  of  his  lady 
fnends,  one  of  whom,  Paula  (q.  v.),  founded  here  four  oon- 
Tents — three  for  nuns,  one  for  monks — the  last  of  which 
ahe  placcd  under  the  care  of  Jerome.  But  his  life,  even 
in  this  retreat,  was  by  no  means  a  quiet  or  peaceful  one : 
wild  and  awful  as  the  abode  was,  Lt  did  not  deter  him 
Irom  sending  forth  from  theae  solitudes  fiery  and  vche- 
tnent  invectives  not  only  against  the  opponents  of 
Church  orthodoxy,  like  Helyidius  (against  whom  he 
had  appeared  before  in  884),  Jovlnian  (q.  v.),  Yigilan- 
tius  (q.  y.),  and  the  Pelagians  (q.  y.),  but  he  engaged  in 
oontroyersies  eyen  with  his  formsr  Mend  Bufinus  (q.  y.; 
see  also  OBicE^nsTic  (^ontroyersy),  and  in  a  moider- 
ate  form  eyen  with  St.  Augustine  (see  Mohler,  Vermi8chie 
Stkrijten,  i,  1  8q.;  Hieron.  Opera,  ed.  YaU.  i,  632  8q.) 
By  his  controyersy  with  the  Pelagians  he  had  endan- 
gered  his  life,  and  he  was  obliged  to  flee  from  Bethle- 
hem,  and  to  liye  in  concealment  for  oyer  two  years.  In 
418  he  retumed  again  to  his  monastery  at  Bethlehem, 
wora  out  in  body  and  mind  by  unceasing  toil,  priyations, 
and  anxietie8,  and,  seized  by  sickness,  his  feeble  frame 
aoon  gaye  way,  and  he  died  in  419  or  420  (some  say 
Sept.  30,  420). 

The  influence  which  Jerome  exerted  on  his  contem- 
poraries,  the  prominence  which  they  assigned  him,  and 
the  regard  which  the  Christian  Church  has  eyer  sińce 
bestowed  upon  him,  may  be  justified  in  yiew  of  the 
cnstoms  of  the  period  in  which  he  liyed.  It  is  by 
oonsidering  both  the  sunny  and  shadowy  side,  not 
only  of  his  own  life,  but  also  of  the  Christian  Church  iu 
the  4th  century,  that  we  can  accord  to  him  a  place 
among  the  great  teachers  and  holy  men  of  the  early 
Church,  and  can  afford  to  oyerlook  the  glaring  incou- 
sbtencies  and  yiolent  passions  which  distigure  him  so 
greatly,  and  which  haye  inclined  Protestant  writers  not 
unfrequently  to  cali  him  "  a  Church  father  of  doubtful 
character."  We  think  Dr.  Yilmar  {JahrbUcher  deuUch- 
er  TheoL  x,  746)  has  best  delineated  Jerome's  character 
when  he  says,  "  Jerome  yielded  to  the  spirit  which  an- 
imated  the  Church  in  his  day,  and  willi ngly  intrusted 
his  spiritual  deyelopment  to  her  care  in  so  fiir  as  he 
lacked  independent  judgment.  And  it  is  in  this  that 
his  greatness  consists,  in  his  ability  well  to  discem  the 
tnie  wants  and  opinions  of  his  day  from  the  yacillating 
▼iews  of  the  masses,  and  the  capridous  inclinations  of 
the  men  of  momentary  power.  No  opposition  could 
moye  him  from  the  defenoe  of  any  thing  when  once  dis- 


oemed  by  him  as  a  truth.  .  .  .  Where  he  judged  him- 
self to  be  in  the  right,  he  manifestcd  the  energy  worthy 
of  a  Boman,  eyen  though  the  world  was  against  him.'' 
Thus  he  hesitated  not  to  encounter  the  opposition  of  all 
Bome  when  once  he  belieyed  it  to  be  his  duty  to  come 
foTward  as  a  piomoter  of  monasticism  *'  in  a  country 
where  it  was  as  yet  but  little  loyed,  in  the  great  capital, 
where  the  rigidly  ascetic  tendency  came  into  collision 
with  the  propensities  and  interests  of  many,"  and  where 
*<he  could  not  fail,  eyen  on  this  score,  to  incur  the  ha- 
tred  of  numbers,  both  of  the  cleigy  and  laity"  (Keander, 
ii,  683),  Still,  to  his  praise  be  it  sald,  that  howeyer 
greatly  we  regret  this  attitude  of  Jerome  in  behalf  of 
monachism,  which,  at  this  early  period  of  the  life  of  the 
Christian  Church,  may  be  pardoned  on  the  ground  that 
such  great  personal  sacrifices  and  priyations  were  the 
only  proofs  which  the  young  conycrt  oould  bring  to 
eyiuce  his  earnestness  and  zeal  for  the  cause  of  his  Mas- 
ter, yet  **  no  one  has  denounced,  no  one  has  branded  moie 
cnergetically  than  he  the  faise  monks,  the  false  penitents, 
tho  false  widows  and  yirgius.  He  points  out  with  a 
bold  hand  all  the  faults  and  dangers  of  the  institution," 
so  for,  of  ooune,  as  an  adyocatc  of  monasticism  could 
haye  yentured  to  do  it  at  all  (compare  Montalembcrt, 
Monks  o/the  Wetty  i,  406  sq.;  Lea,  Cdibacy^  p.  72  8q.). 
Jerome,  in  short,  was  in  the  scryice  of  the  popular  opin- 
ion,  and  yet  neyer  yielded  to  the  opinion  of  the  day. 
In  the  opinion  of  Neander,  Jerome'8  "better  qualitie8 
were  obecured  by  the  great  defects  of  his  character,  by 
his  mean  passions,  his  easily  offendcd  yanity,  his  loye 
of  controyersy  and  of  rnle,  his  pride,  so  oilen  concealed 
under  the  garb  of  humility.*'  Much  milder  is  the  judg- 
ment of  Dr.  Schaff,  who  pronoimces  Jerome  **  indeed 
an  accomplished  and  most  seryiceable  scholar,  ani  a 
zealous  enthusiast  for  all  which  his  age  comiied  koly 
.  .  . .  and  that  he  reflected  with  the  yirtues  the  faU- 
ings  also  of  his  age  and  of  the  monastic  system,"  adding 
in  a  foob-note  tliat  *' among  later  Protestant  historians 
opinion  has  become  somewhat  morę  fayorable,"  though 
he  again  modiiies  this  statement  by  saying  that  this 
has  reference  *' rather  to  his  leaming  than  to  his  morał 
character." 

The  Vulgate. — Jerome  gaye  also  great  olTence  to  his 
contempoRiries  by  his  attempt  to  correct  the  Latin  yer- 
siou  of  the  Bibie,  then  *'  become  greatly  distorted  by  the 
blending  together  of  different  translations,  the  mixing  up 
with  each  other  of  the  different  Gospels,  and  the  igno- 
rance  of  transcribers."  This  he  successfully  completed, 
and  it  is  regarded  hy  all  Biblical  scholars  as  "by  far  the 
most  important  and  yaluable"  work  of  Jerome,  in  it^ 
self  constituting  ^  an  immortal  senrice"  to  the  Christian 
Church.  "Aboye  all  his  contemporaries,  and  eyen  all 
his  successors  down  to  the  IGth  ceiituiy,  Jerome,  by  his 
Unguistic  knowledge,  his  Oriental  trayel,  and  his  entire 
culture,  was  best  fitteid,  and,  in  fact,  the  only  man  to  un- 
dertake  and  successfully  execute  so  gigantic  a  task — 
a  task  which  just  then,  with  the  approaching  separa- 
tion  of  East  and  West,  and  the  decay  of  the  knowledge 
of  the  original  languages  of  the  Bibie  in  Latin  Christen- 
dom,  was  of  the  highest  necessity.  Here,  as  so  often 
in  histoiy,  we  plainly  discem  the  hand  of  diyine  Proy- 
idence"  (Schaff).  He  had  been  uiged  to  uiidertake 
this  work  by  bishop  Damasus,  and  it  was  oommenced, 
as  alieady  noted,  while  Jerome  was  yet  a  resident  at 
Bome,  and  had  there  amended  the  translation  of  the 
Gospels  and  the  Psalms.  In  his  retreat  at  Bethlehem 
he  extended  this  work  to  the  whole  Bibie,  supported  in 
his  task,  it  is  generally  belieyed,  by  the  Hexapla  of  Or^ 
igen,  which  he  is  supposed  to  haye  obtaincd  from  the 
library  at  Ceesarea.  "  Eyen  this  was  a  bold  undertak- 
ing,  by  which  he  must  expose  himself  to  being  loaded 
with  reproaches  on  the  part  of  those  who,  in  their  igno- 
rance,  which  they  identified  with  a  pious  simplicłty,  were 
wont  to  condemn  cyery  deviation  from  the  traditional 
text,  howeyer  necessaiy  or  salutary  it  might  be.  They 
were  yery  ready  to  see,  in  any  change  of  the  only  text 
which  was  known  to  them,  a  falsification,  without  in- 


JEROME 


832 


JEROME 


ąuiring  any  further  into  the  reason  of  the  altemtion. 
Yet  here  he  had  in  his  favor  the  authońty  of  a  Roman 
bishop,  as  well  as  the  fact  that  in  this  case  it  was  im- 
possible  to  oppose  to  him  a  translation  established  and 
transmitted  by  ecclesiasŁical  authority,  or  a  divine  in- 
spiration  of  the  texthitherto  received.  . .  .  Buthe  must 
have  given  far  greater  offence  by  another  useful  under- 
taking,  viz.  a  new  version  of  the  Old  Testament,  not 
according  to  the  Alexandrian  translation,  which  before 
this  had  alone  been  acceptcd,  but  according  to  the  He> 
brew.  This  appeared  to  many,  even  of  those  who  did 
not  belong  to  the  chiss  of  ignorant  persons,  a  great  piece 
of  impiety— to  pretend  to  understand  the  Old  Testament 
better  than  the  seventy  inspired  interpreters — better 
than  the  apostles  who  had  foUowed  this  translation,  and 
who  would  have  given  another  translation  if  they  had 
considered  it  to  be  neccssary — to  allow  one*3  self  to  be 
BO  misled  by  Je^-^  as  for  their  accommodation  to  falsify 
the  writings  of  the  Old  Testament !"  (Neander,  Church 
Jliałory,  ii,  684  sq.)  But  with  the  opposition  there  came 
aiso  friends,  and  among  his  supporters  he  counted  evcn 
Augustinc,  until  gradually  it  was  introduced  in  all  the 
churches  of  the  West  Of  this  great  work,  as  a  whole, 
Dr.  Schaff  thus  speaks  (CA.  Ilistoryj  iii,  975  sq.)  :  **  The 
Yulgate  takes  the  lirst  place  among  the  Bibie  yersions 
of  the  ancient  Church.  It  exerted  the  same  influence 
upon  Latin  Chństendom  as  the  Septuagint  upon  Greek, 
and  it  is  directly  or  indirectly  the  motber  of  most  of  the 
earlier  yersions  in  the  European  yemaculars.  It  is 
madc  immediately  from  the  original  lauguages,  though 
with  the  use  of  all  accessible  helps,  and  is  as  much  supe- 
rior to  the  Itala  as  Luther'8  Bibie  is  to  the  older  German 
yersions.  From  the  present  stage  of  Biblical  philology 
and  exegesis  the  Yulgate  can  be  chaiged,  indeed,  with 
innumerable  faults,  inaccuracies,  inconsbtencies,  and  ar- 
bitrary  dealing  in  particulan;  but,  notwithstanding 
these,  it  descn-es,  as  a  whole,  the  highest  praise  for  the 
boldness  with  which  it  went  back  from  the  half-dcUied 
Septuagint  directly  to  the  original  Hcbrew;  for  its 
union  of  ńdelity  and  freedom ;  and  for  the  dignity, 
cleamess,  and  gracefulness  of  its  style.  Accordingly, 
after  the  extinction  of  the  knowledge  of  Greek,  it  yery 
naturally  became  the  cłerical  Bibie  of  Western  Chńs- 
tendom, and  so  continued  to  be  till  the  genius  of  the 
Reformation  in  Germany,  Switzerland,  Holland,  and 
England,  retuming  to  the  original  text,  and  still  fur- 
ther penetrathig  the  spirit  of  the  Scriptures,  though 
with  the  contluual  help  of  the  Yulgate,  produced  a 
number  of  popular  Bibles,  which  were  the  same  to  the 
ęyangelical  laity  that  the  Yulgate  had  been  for  many 
centuries  to  the  Catholic  dergy.  This  high  place  the 
Yulgate  holds  even  to  this  day  in  the  Roman  Church, 
where  it  is  unwarrantably  and  pemiciously  placed  on 
an  eąuality  Avith  the  original."    See  Yulgate. 

Jeromes  ołker  Writittgs, — ^As  the  result  of  his  crit- 
ical  labors  on  the  Iloly  Scriptures,  we  haye  also  com- 
mentarics  on  Genesis,  the  major  and  minor  prophets, 
Ecclesiastes,  Job,  on  some  of  the  Psalms,  the  Gospel  of 
Matthew,  and  the  epistles  to  the  Galatians,  Ephesians, 
Titus,  and  Philemon,  besides  translations  of  different 
parts  of  the  Old  and  New  Testaments.  All  these  pro- 
ductions  Dr.  Schaff  pronounces  "  the  most  instructiye 
we  haye  from  the  Latin  Church  of  that  day,  not  except^ 
ing  eyen  thosc  of  Augustine,  which  otherwise  greatly 
surpass  them  in  theological  depth  and  spiritual  unction." 
Alban  Butler  thus  speaks  of  Jerome*B  exegetical  labors : 
*'  Nothiiig  has  rendered  St.  Jerome  so  famous  as  his  crit- 
ical  labors  on  the  holy  Scriptures.  For  this  the  Church 
acknowledges  him  to  haye  been  raiscd  by  God  through 
a  special  providćnce,  aud  particularly  assisted  from 
aboye,  and  slic  styles  him  the  greatest  of  all  her  doc- 
tors  in  cxpounding  the  di\Tne  oracles."  To  works  of 
an  exegctical  charactcr  in  a  wider  sense  belong  also  his 
Liber  de  inferprełafione  nominum  Hebraicorunij  or  De 
noniitubus  Ilcbr.  (jOpera^  iii,  1-120),  the  book  On  the  In- 
terprełation  of  the  Hebrew  Nameji^  an  etymological  lex- 
icon  of  the  proper  Names  of  the  Old  and  New  Testa- 


ments, uaeful  for  its  time,  but  in  many  respecta  ddeo- 
tiye,  and  now  worthless;  and  Liber  de  situ  et  nowńmlmt 
hoorum  Jlebraicorum^  usually  cited  under  the  titie  £v- 
iebii  Onomasticon  (urbium  et  locorum .  S.  ScriptuEs) 
(Opera,  iii,  121-290),  a  free  translation  of  the  Onomas^ 
ticon  of  Eusebius,  a  sort  of  Biblical  topology  in  alpha- 
betical  order,  stiU  considered  yaluable  to  antiquarian 
scholarship. 

Yet  the  busy  life  which  Jerome  led,  and  the  cootio- 
yersies  w^hich  he  waged  in  behalf  of  rigid  orthodaxy  in 
Christian  belief,  proye  that,  so  far  from  confining  hinuelf 
to  the  production  of  exegetical  worka,  he  waa  employcd 
on  almost  eyeiy  subject —  biography,  histoi>%  and  the 
yast  field  of  theology,  and  in  all  he  wielded  the  pen  of 
a  schobir,  in  a  (Latin)  style  acknowledged  by  all  to  be 
both  pure  and  tcrse.  "The  phraseology  of  Jerome," 
says  Prof.  W.  Ramsay  (Smith,  Did,  of  Greek  and  Roman 
Bwg,  8.  y.),  *'  is  cxccedingly  pure,  bearing  ample  hetń." 
mony  to  the  diligence  with  which  he  must  haye  sŁudied 
the  choicest  models.  No  one  can  read  the  Yulgate 
without  being  struck  by  the  contrast  which  it  preaenta 
in  the  classic  simplicity  of  its  language  to  the  degener- 
ate  affectation  of  Apuleius,  and  the  barbarous  obscuiity 
of  Ammianus,  to  say  nothing  of  the  ecclesiastical  wiit- 
crs.**  We  lack  the  space  to  go  into  further  detAils  on 
his  yaried  productions,  and  are  obliged  to  refer  for  m 
morę  detailed  statement  to  Smith,  Dicl.  of  Greek  cmdRth' 
mon  Bioff,  (Lond.  1859,  roy.  8yo),  ii,  461  są.,  and  Hoefer, 
Nouv.  Biog.  Gśnirale,  xxyi,  681  8q.  In  shurt,  **  Jerome 
excelled''  (says  Dr.  Eadie,  in  Appleton^s  Cydop.  Biogr.) 
"a\\  his  contemporaries  in  erudition.  He  wantcd  the 
glowing  fancy  of  Chi^^sostom,  and  the  serene  tempu 
aud  s^^mmctńcal  intellect  of  Augustine,  but  he  was  be- 
yond  them  both  in  critical  skill  and  taste.  Ili^  faults 
lic  upon  the  surface— «  hot  and  hasty  disposition,  which 
so  rcsented  eyery  opposition,  and  magiiified  trillcs^  that, 
in  his  towering  passion,  he  heaped  upon  opponents  op- 
probńous  epithets  and  coarse  inyectiye.  Hastę,  cager- 
ness,  and  acerbity  appeai  also  in  his  ktters  and  ezposi- 
tions.  His  modę  of  life  must  haye  greatly  aggraratcd 
this  touchiness  and  irascibility,  as  it  depriyed  him  of 
the  moUifying  influence  of  society  and  frieudship.  IHs 
heart  was  estranged  from  human  s}'mpathies;  and,  sare 
when  lighted  up  by  the  ardors  of  his  indignant  psasion, 
it  was,  like  his  own  celi,  cold,  gloomy,  aud  uninritinip. 
The  works  of  Jerome  will  always  maintain  for  him  the 
esteem  of  Chństendom.  There  is  in  them  a  great  deal 
that  is  baseless,  fanciful,  and  one-dded,  but  yery  much 
that  is  useful  and  instructiye  in  exegc8is  and  theolegy.** 
A  still  greater,  and  to  us  nearer  authority.  Dr.  Scb&ff 
(CA.  IHttory^  iii,  987  sq.),  thus  sums  up  the  poeition  and 
work  of  Jerome  in  the  Christian  Church:  '^Orthodos 
in  theology  and  Christology,  semi-Pelagian  in  anthro- 
pology,  Romanizing  in  the  doctrine  of  the  Church  and 
tradition,  anti-chiliastic  in  eschatology,  Icgalistic  and 
ascetic  in  ethics,  a  yiolent  fighter  of  all  hcresies,  a  fii- 
natical  apologist  of  all  monkish  extrayagance8,  Jerome 
was  reyered  throughout  the  Catholic  middle  age  as  the 
patron  saint  of  Christian  and  ecclesiastical  leaming, 
and,  ncxt  to  Augustine,  as  fnaxim,u*  doctor  ecćkńte  ;  but 
by  his  enthusl&stic  loye  for  the  holy  Scriptures,  his  re- 
course  to  the  original  languages,  his  classic  transUtioa 
of  the  Bibie,  and  his  maiiifold  exegetical  merits,  he  also 
played  materially  into  the  hands  of  the  Reformation, 
and  as  a  scholar  and  an  author  still  takes  the  flr^t  rank, 
and  as  an  influential  theologian  the  second  (ailer  Au- 
gustine), among  the  Latin  fathers." 

Of  the  yarious  editions  of  Jerome*s  works  a  detail- 
ed account  is  giyen  by  Schonemann  {BibUotheca  Pa- 
trum  Latinorumf  i,  c.  4,  §  3).  Parts  of  them  were 
early  published,  but  the  firśt  critical  edition  of  hia 
writings  collectiyely  was  giyen  to  the  public  in  1516. 
It  was  superintended  by  Erasmus,  with  tbe  mm^^hio^ 
of  Gilcolampadius  (Basie,  9  yols.  foL ;  reprinted  in  1526 
and  1537,  the  last  edition  being  the  best;  and  also  «t 
Lyons,  1530,  in  8  yols.  fol.).  Another  critical  ediŁioił 
was  prepared  by  Marianus  Yictorinus  (Romę,  1566-?4 


JEROME 


888 


JEROME 


9  Tols.  foL;  reprinted  it  Paris,  1578, 1608, 4  yola^  and 
in  1643,  9  vola.).  The  Protestant  Adam  Tribbechoirius 
piepaied  an  edition  which  was  publiahed  at  Frankfort- 
on-the-Main  and  at  Leipsic,  1684, 12  yoIs.  fol. ;  then  ap- 
peared  the  Benedictine  edition  prepared  by  John  Mar- 
tianay  and  Anton  Pouget  (Pwis,  1693-1706, 5  yoIs.  foL), 
which  waa,  howeyer,  far  inferior  to,  and  was  whoUy  su- 
peraeded  by,  the  last  and  best  of  all,  prepared  by  Do- 
minicus  Yallarsi  and  Scipio  Maffei  (Yerona,  1734-42, 11 
vola.  foL;  reprinted,  with  impTovement8,yen.  1766-72). 
The  edition  of  Mignę,  Paiis  (Petit^Montrooge),  1845- 
46,  also  in  11  vols.  (tom.  xxii-xxx  of  the  Patrologia 
LaL),  ^notwithstanding  the  boastful  title,  is  only  an 
imcritical  reprint  of  the  edition  of  Yallarń,  with  mies- 
aential  changes  in  the  order  of  amuigement;  the  VUa 
Bienmymi  and  the  Tettimonia  de  Hkrongmo  bcing  traii»- 
ferred  from  the  eleventh  to  the  first  yolume,  which  is 
morę  conrenient"  (Dr.  Schaff).  The  so-called  Com/t» 
of  Hieronymus  {JJSbtr  Comiti*  Lectionaruui)^  a  work  of 
great  value  for  the  Mstory  of  liturgies,  is  falsely  attrih- 
ated  to  Jerome,  and  belongs  to  a  later  period;  likewise 
hia  Martyrologium^  and  some  of  the  epistlesi 

See  Da  Pin,  Nourelle  Biblio-  des  auteurt  EccUs.  iii, 
100-140 ;  Tillemont,  Mem.  EecUs,  xii,  1-356 ;  Martianay, 
La  Vie  de  SL  Jerome  (Paris,  1706) ;  Joh.  StUting,  in  the 
A  eta  Sandorumy  S^  viu,  418-688  (Antw.  1762) ;  But^ 
ler,  Licet  oftke  SaitUs  (sub.  Sept.  80);  YaUaisi  (in  Op, 
Bieroiu  xi,  1-240) ;  Schrockh,  Kirckei^each,  viii,  859  8q., 
and  especially  xi,  3-254 ;  Neander,  Ch,  Hi»t,  ii,  682  8q. ; 
Schaff,  Ch,  J/ittory,  ii,  §  41 ;  iii,  §  177;  Sebastian  Dolci, 
Maiinuu  Ilierongmus  Vitc»  stue  Scriptor,  (Ancon.  1750, 
4io) ;  Engelstoft,  Jlieron,  Stridonensity  interpre$y  criti^ 
cus,  €xegeta,  apologeta,  historicus,  doctor,  monackuś 
(Havn.  1798);  Ersch  und  Gruber'8  EficycL  sect.  ii,  vol. 
▼iii ;  Col]ombet,//tftotre  de  SL  Jerome  (Lyons,  1844) ;  O. 
Zockler,  Hierongmus,  tein  LAen  und  Wirhóu  (Gotha, 
1865,  8vo) ;  Aemie  det  Dews  Mondet  (1865,  July  1).  (J. 
IŁW.) 

Jerome  of  Pbaoub,  one  of  the  earUest  and  aUest 
of  the  reformen  before  the  Reformation,  a  brave  defend- 
er  of  the  truth,  and  a  most  devoted  friend  and  foUower 
of  John  Hoss,  was  a  descendant  of  a  noUe  Bohemian 
family,  whose  real  name  was  Faułfitck.  Of  his  eady 
history  all  data  are  wanting,  but  he  appears  to  hare 
been  bom  about  1375,  as  he  is  known  to  hare  been 
somewhat  younger  thau  his  friend  Huss,  who  was  bom 
in  1369  (comp.  Neander,  Cłu  Iłitt.  v,  246).  Afker  stud- 
ying  for  seyeral  years  at  the  uniyersity  of  his  native 
place,  ^  Jerome,  fuil  of  life  and  ardor,  of  an  enterprising 
spirit,  not  disposed  to  remain  still  and  ąuiet  a  long  time 
in  one  place,"  continued  his  studies  at  the  unirersities 
of  Paris,  Cologne,  Heidelberg,  and  Oxford,  from  each 
of  which  he  reoeived  the  doctorate  of  divinity  (about 
1398-1400).  Endowed  with  great  natural  ability,  Je- 
rome obtained  from  such  an  extended  oourse  of  study 
adyantages  which  soon  gave  him  great  reputation  for 
leaniing,  especially  as  he  was  one  of  the  few  knights 
in  Bohcmia  who  had  manifested  any  zeal  for  science 
and  literary  culture.  But  if,  by  a  careful  coltiyation  of 
his  superior  natural  abililies,  he  secured  for  himself  the 
admiration  and  homage  of  the  men  of  letters,  it  is  un- 
ąuestionable  that  his  attachment  to  the  cause  of  the 
great  ante-reformer  was  due,  in  the  main,  to  hia  stay  at 
Oxford,  where  he  became  acquainted  with  the  writings 
of  Wickliffe  (q.  y.),  and  at  once  enlisted  with  great  en- 
thusiasm  in  defence  of  the  doctrines  of  the  English  re- 
former.  «  Until  now,"  he  is  reported  to  have  said  when 
he  commenced  his  oopy  of  the  Dialogut  et  Triaiogut, 
<*we  had  nothing  but  the  shell  of  science;  Wickliffe 
first  laid  open  the  kemeL"  It  is  thought  poańble  by 
•ome  that  Jerome  had  read  these  worka  before  he  went 
to  OiLford,  and  that  his  esteem  for  the  writer,  whom  he 
oould  conoeive  only  as  a  man  of  a  noble,  acute,  and  re- 
markable  mind,  had  attncted  him  to  Oxford  (compare 
Bóhringer,  Kirche  Chritti  te.  d,  Zeugen,  p.  611) ;  but,  be 
this  9s  it  may,  so  much  is  certain,  that,  on  his  return  to 
Fngae»  Jercme  "professed  himself  an  open  iayorer  of 
IV*— G  Q  o 


him  (Wickliffe),  and,  finding  his  dodsrines  had  madę 
oonsiderable  progrees  in  Bohemia,  and  that  Huss  was  at 
the  head  of  that  party  which  had  espoused  them,  he 
attached  himaelf  to  that  leader"  (Gilpin,  L%vet,  p.  234; 
compare,  howeyer,  Gillett,  lĄfe  ąfUutt^  i,  69).    May  28, 

1408,  the  Uniyeraity  of  P^ague,  at  the  instigalion  of  the 
archiepisoopal  offidals  and  the  cathedral  chapter  of 
Prague^  publidy  oondemned  the  writings  of  John  Wick- 
liffe as  heretical,  in  spite  of  a  strong  opposition,  headed 
by  John  Huss,  Jerome,  and  Master  Nicholas  of  Ldto- 
mysi  (q.  y.).  For  some  time  past  there  had  been  grow- 
ing  a  disoontent  between  the  natiye  and  foreign  element 
represented  at  the  unirersity.  When  that  institution 
of  leaming  was  fonnded,  Pmgne  was  the  residence  of 
the  German  emperor,  but  that  city  was  alao  the  capital 
of  Bohemia,  a  country  which  **  seemed  fitted  by  loca- 
tion  and  generał  features  to  beoome  one  of  the  foremost 
States  of  Europę,"  and  the  people,  aware  of  their  great 
natural  resouroes,  were  unwilling  to  submit  to  the  policy 
of  the  mlers  to  make  their  country  a  proyince  of  Ger* 
many.  A  strong  feeling  of  nationdity,  such  as  is  again 
witneoed  in  our  day,  deyeloped  itseif  in  eyery  Slayic 
heart,  and  gmdnally  Bohemian  litenture,  a  nation^s 
strength,  which  had  before  soocombed  to  the  German, 
began  to  reyiye,  and  with  it  there  came  a  longing  dfr- 
sire  to  force  from  the  Geraians  the  oontrol  of  the  uni- 
yeraity, in  which  the  natiye  Bohemians  saw  themselyes 
outyoted  by  strangersu  The  Germans  were  Nominal- 
ists,  Wickliffe  a  Realist ;  no  wonder,  then,  that  his  wriu 
inga  were  oondemned,  eyen  thoogh  the  Bohemians  were 
in  fayor  of  the  Englishman  (see  Reichel,  <9e0  ofRomt 
m  the  Middle  Aget,  p.  602  sc}.;  Studien  und  Kritiken^ 
1871,  ii,  297  sq.).  Herę,  then,  came  an  opportunity  for 
Huss  and  his  friends  to  strike  not  only  in  behalf  of  the 
religions  intereets  of  their  countrymen,  but  to  becoroe 
championa  of  their  nation^s  rights,  '*and  on  this  side 
they  might  oount  on  receiying  the  support  of  many  who 
did  not  agree  with  them  in  rdigious  and  doctriiial  maU 
ters."  They  could  count  on  the  most  influential  of  the 
nobility;  eyen  king  Wenzel  himself  was  won  for  their 
cause.  He  was  induced  to  change  the  relation  of  yotes 
at  the  Uniyenity  at  Prague  in  such  a  manner  that  the 
Bohemians  oould  gain  the  asoendency,  and,  this  onca 
done,  the  election  of  Huss  to  the  rectorate  of  the  uniyerw 
sity  followed.  The  Grermans,  of  oourm,  were  unwilling 
to  submit  readily  to  soch  changes,  and  left  Prague  in 
large  numben,  to  found  a  nniyersity  at  LeipKig.  They 
also  circnlated  the  most  injurious  reports  re^iecting  the 
Hnssitea  (as  we  will  hereafter  cali  the  adherents  of  Huss 
and  Jerome  for  oonyenienoe  sake).  In  the  mean  time 
alao,  **  by  the  eipress  admonition  of  the  pope,"  the  arch- 
Ińahop  of  Prague,  Zybneck,  had  issued  (in  1406)  a  de- 
cree  *'that  henceforth  no  one,  under  seyere  penalty, 
should  hołd,  teach,  or,  for  purpoaes  of  academic  debatę, 
argue  in  fayor  of  Wickliffe's  doctrines.**  This  same 
Zybneck  was  the  legate  of  Gregoiy  XII.  To  this  last 
pope  the  king  of  B^emia  adhered  at  this  time,  but  in 

1409,  when  the  Council  of  Pisa  renounoed  the  riyal 
popes,  Gregory  Xn  and  Benedict  XIII,  and  declaied 
Alexander  V  the  legitimate  incumbent  of  the  papai 
chair,  Huas  indined  to  fieiyor  the  action  of  the  Council 
of  Pisa,  and  won  also  the  king  oyer  to  his  aide,  through 
the  influence  of  Jerome,  who  seems  to  haye  been  a  fa-> 
yorite  at  ooort.  This  brought  about  an  open  ruptura 
with  Zybneck,  who  had  hitherto  hesitated  openly  to  aU 
tack  Huss  and  Jerome.  Now  there  was  no  longer  any 
need  for  delaying  the  decisiye  conflict.  **  He  issued  an 
ordinance  forbidding  all  teachers  of  the  rndyersity  who 
had  joined  the  party  of  the  fiardinals  (who  oontrolled 
the  Council  of  Pisa)  against  the  schismatic  popes,  and 
had  thna  abandoned  the  cause  of  Gregory,  to  discharg* 
any  priestly  duties  within  his  diooese."  The  Bohemi- 
ans refused  to  obey  the  mandate;  the  archbishop  then 
oomplained  to  the  king,  and  found  that  he  was  powei^ 
less  to  enforce  obedience  to  his  decrees;  neither  was  hia 
master,  Gregory  XU,  able  to  do  iL  Determined  to  cod* 
quer,  the  archbishop  now  audtely  espoused  the  eauaa. 


JEROME 


834 


JEROME 


of  the  stronger  riyal  in  the  papacj,  and  appealed  to  Al- 
exAnder  Y  for  his  decisioii  in  the  conflict  with  the  Bo- 
hemiana.  A  papai  buli  was  secured  condemning  the 
articles  of  Wickliffe,  forbidding  preaching  in  private 
chapels,  and  authorizing  the  archbishop  to  appoint  a 
commission  to  enforce  the  meastires  adopted  by  him  for 
the  extirpation  of  the  spreading  heresy.  In  additbn  to 
a  renewal  of  his  former  decrees,  the  archbishop  now 
ooudemned  not  only  the  writiugs  of  Wickliffe,  but  also 
thoae  of  Huss  and  Jerome,  as  well  aa  those  of  their  pie- 
deceseors  Milicz  and  Janów,  and  caused  them  to  be 
publicly  bumed.  **The  deed  was  done.  The  books 
werc  bumed.  The  ban  of  the  CHiurch  rested  on  thoae 
who  had  daied  to  object.  Doubtless  the  archbishop 
felt  that  he  had  secured  a  triumph.  He  had  executed 
the  jMipal  sentence,  and  prored  himself  an  able  instru- 
ment of  the  ChuTch  party  who  liad  instigated  him  to 
the  boki  deed.  But  it  proyoked  morę  than  it  oyerawed. 
The  king,  the  court,  and  a  large  proportion  of  the  citi- 
zens  of  Prague  were  enraged  and  embittered  by  it.  A 
ery  of  indignation  ran  throughout  Bohemia"  (GiUett, 
H\ŁS$y  i,  157).  Acts  of  yiolence  foUowed,  and,  as  is  too 
apt  to  be  the  case,  exces8es  were  committed  by  maraud- 
ers,  and  the  crimo  charged  to  the  reformers.  The  king 
and  the  people  siding  with  the  Husaites,  it  remained  for 
the  papai  party  to  adopt  seyerer  measures;  these  were 
floon  found  in  the  prodamation  of  an  iuterdict  on  the 
city  of  Prague,  and  the  excommunication  of  the  leadera. 
Huss  left  the  city  to  ayoid  an  open  conflict  between  his 
countrymen,  and  Jerome  also  soon  quitted  the  place,  and 
went  to  Oren  (1410).  But  Zybneck  was  unwiUing  to  see 
his  opponent  abroad  proclaiming  eyerywhere  the  doc- 
trines  of  Wickliffe,  and  denouncing  eyen  popery.  Je- 
rome dared  to  propose  eyen  such  questions  as  these 
Whether  the  pope  possessed  morę  power  than  another 
priest,  and  whether  the  bread  in  the  Eucharist  or  the 
body  of  Christ  poasessed  morę  yirtue  in  the  mass  of  the 
Boman  pontiff  than  in  that  of  any  other  officiating  ec- 
clesiastic.  Nay,  one  day,  while  in  an  open  sąuare,  sur- 
romided  by  seyeral  of  his  friends  and  adherenta,  he  ex- 
posed  two  sketches,  in  one  of  which  Chrisfs  disciplea, 
on  one  side,  following,  with  naked  feet,  their  Master 
mounted  on  an  ass;  while  on  the  other  the  pope  and 
the  cardinals  were  represented  in  great  state  on  superb 
hoTses,  and  preceded,  as  usual,  with  drums  and  trumpeta. 
Zybneck  caused  the  arrest  of  Jerome  by  the  archbbhop 
of  Grau,  who^  recognising  the  superior  abilities  and 
great  influence  of  Jerome,  dismissed  him  fiye  days  after. 
Morę  yehement  and  serious  became  Jerome'8  opposition 
to  the  papai  party  in  1412,  after  the  publication  of  the 
papai  buli  granting  plenary  indnlgence  (q.  y.)  to  all  who 
should  engage  in  "  holy  warfare"  against  king  Ladis- 
laus  (q.  y.)  of  Naples.  Huss,  who  had  retumed  to 
Prague,  and  who  now  was  excommunicated,  simply 
preached  with  all  his  i)ower  against  this  buli,  but  Je- 
rome, urged  on  by  his  impulsive  naturę,  was  carried 
far  beyond  the  limits  of  prudcnce  and  of  deoenc>'.  He 
caused  (if  he  did  not  head  the  moyement  he  undoubt- 
edly  inspired  it)  the  buli  to  be  carried  about  the  streets 
by  two  lewd  women,  heading  a  long  procession  of  stu- 
dents,  and,  after  displaying  it  in  this  manner  for  some 
time,  it  was  publicly  bumt,  with  some  indulgence  briefs, 
at  the  pillory  of  the  new  town.  "•  That  similar  scenes 
not  uufrequent]y  occurred  is  most  probable.  Among 
the  charges  brought  against  Jerome  at  the  Coundl  of 
Gonstance  are  some  which  imply  that  his  conduct  in 
this  respccŁ  had  been  far  from  uncxceptionabIe.  Some 
of  these  are  denied ;  but  the  eyidenoe  is  strong,  if  not 
decisiye,  in  regard  to  his  course  on  the  reception  of  the 
papai  bulls  for  the  Crusade.  On  another  occasion  he  is 
said  to  have  thrown  a  priest  into  the  Moldau,  who,  but 
for  timely  aid,  would  haye  been  drowned.  But  such 
yiolence  was  bitterly  proyoked.  The  buming  of  the 
books  by  Sbynco  (Zybaeck),  the  execution  of  three  men 
for  asserting  the  falsehood  of  the  indulgences,  the  ex- 
communication  of  Huss,  to  say  nothing  of  the  course 
pinsoed  by  his  aasaiUnts,  had  ezdted  a  strong  feeling 


against  the  patrona  of  papai  fraud  and  ef<4<«iwtifnl  oor* 
mption.  We  are  only  suiprised  that  the  deep  reacnt- 
ment  felt  was  confhied  in  its  exprea8ion  withtn  anck 
limits"  (Gillett,  i,  267).  Both  he  and  Husa  were  obliged 
to  flee  from  Prague,  aa  the  safety  of  thdr  liyes  was 
threatened.  Husa  (q.  y.)  retired  to  the  caade  of  Koś 
Hradek,  while  Jerome  went  to  Poland  and  lithoatnia. 
But  the  seed  which  they  had  widdy  aown  apnng  np 
quickly,  and  a  council  which  had  in  the  mean  time 
oonyened  at  Constanoe  cited  Huss  for  a  defenoe  of  his 
course.  When  the  tidings  of  the  imprisonment  of  his 
friend  reached  Jerome  he  determined  to  go  to  Constance 
himself.  He  went  there  at  first  incognito  and  aecretiy 
(April  4, 1415),  but,  feaiing  danger  for  himself  withoot 
the  poBsibility  of  affording  relief  to  his  Mend,  be  kft 
for  a  town  four  miles  distant,  and  thenoe  demanded  of 
the  emperor  a  safe-conduct  to  Gonstance,  that  be  migfat 
publicly  answer  before  any  one  to  eyeiy  charge  of  here- 
sy  that  might  be  brought  against  him.  Not  being  afale 
to  obtain  such  a  aafe-conduct,  he  caused  to  be  affijced 
the  next  day,  on  the  gates  of  the  emperar's  palące,  on 
the  doors  of  the  principal  churchea,  the  reaidenoea  of  the 
cardinals,  and  other  eminent  prelates,  a  notice  in  the 
Bohemian,  Latin,  and  German  langnages,  wherein  he 
declared  himself  ready,  proyided  only  he  ahould  haye 
fuli  liberty  and  security  to  oome  to  Constanoe  and  to 
leaye  it  again,  to  defend  himself  in  publie  before  the 
council  against  eyery  accusation  madę  against  his  faith. 
Not  obtaining  what  he  demanded,  he  procured  a  oertifi- 
cate  to  be  drawn  up  to  that  efTect  by  the  Bohemian 
knights  resident  in  Constance  and  sealed  with  their 
seals,  and  with  this  to  scrye  as  a  yindication  of  himself 
to  his  friends,  he  prepared  to  tum  his  face  towaids  Bo- 
hemia.  The  papists  determining  to  secure  bis  attend- 
ance  at  the  council,  a  passport  was  now  sent  him  fram 
the  coundl,  guarantedng  his  safety  from  yiolence,  but 
not  from  punishment,  if  he  were  adjndged  guiłty  of  tbe 
heresy  charged  against  him;  but  this  Jerome — ^Hiias 
haying  been  already  sent  to  prison->deemed  insuffident, 
and  he  prooeeded  on  his  joumey.  But  his  enemies  sus 
ceeded  in  waylaying  him,  and  on  the  road  be  was  ar- 
rested  near  Hirschau,  a  smali  town  in  Sualńa,  April  ?5t, 
1415,  and  deliyered  oyer  into  the  power  of  the  council 
May  23.  He  was  immediately  brought  before  a  puUic 
oonyocation  of  that  body.  A  dtation  was  sent  to  him, 
which,  it  was  sald,  had  been  poeted  np  in  Constance  in 
reply  to  his  declańtions  to  the  ooundL  He  denied  to 
haye  seen  them  before  he  left  the  yidnity  of  Constance, 
where  he  had  waited  sufficiently  long  to  be  reached  by 
any  reply  madę  within  a  reasonablc  limit  of  time,  and 
that  he  would  haye  oomplied  yńih  the  summons  bad  it 
reached  him  eyen  on  the  confines  of  Bohemia.  Bot 
this  dedaration  rather  aggrayated,  if  anything^  tbe 
members  of  the  council,  so  eager  to  find  a  plea  to  eon- 
demn  the  prisoner.  Many  members  of  this  comidl 
came  from  the  uniyersitiea  of  Paiis,  Heiddberi;,  and 
Cologne,  and  recollecting  him,  thcy  desired  to  triumph 
oyer  the  man  who  had  always  far  outstripped  them. 
*' Accordingly  one  after  another  addreased  him,  and  re- 
minded  him  of  the  propositions  which  he  had  set  forth. 
The  first  among  these  was  the  learaed  chanoellor  Gei^ 
son,  who  captiously  chaiged  him  with  wishing  to  set 
hinósdf  up  as  an  angel  of  eloquence,  and  with  exdttng 
great  oommotions  at  Paris  by  maintaining  the  leality 
of  generał  conceptions.  We  may  obsenre  here,  as  we& 
as  in  other  like  examp]es,  the  strong  propeniity  which 
now  preyailed  to  mix  up  together  philosophical  and 
theological  disputes.  But  Jerome  distinguisbed  one 
from  the  other,  and  declared  that  he,  as  a  unirenity 
master,  had  maintained  such  philosophical  doctrines  as 
had  no  oonoem  with  faith.  In  reference  to  all  that  had 
been  objected  to  him  by  different  parties,  he  held  him- 
self ready  to  recant  as  soon  as  he  was  tanght  aoytbing 
better.  Amid  the  noisy  shouts  was  heard  the  ery,  'Je- 
rome mnst  be  bnmt.'  He  answered  with  ootdneas, 
'Weil,  if  yon  wish  my  death,  leC  it  oome,  in  God^ 
name!"*   WiBercoun8e]s,howeTer,preydkdattiieiiMK 


^ 


JEROME 


835 


JERUBBESHETH 


ment,  and  Jerome  was  remitted  to  prison,  where  he  was 
bouud  to  a  stake,  with  his  bands^  feet,  and  neck  ao  that 
he  Gould  scarcely  move  his  head.  Thus  he  lay  two 
da}'8,  with  nothing  to  eat  but  biead  and  water.  Then 
fur  the  fiist  time  he  obtained,  through  the  mediation  of 
Peter  Maldonisuritz,  who  had  been  told  of  his  situation 
by  his  keepers,  other  means  of  subsistence.  This  se- 
vere  imprisonment  thiew  him  into  a  violent  fit  of  sick- 
ness*  He  denuuided  a  oonfessor,  which  was  at  first  re- 
fuaed,  and  then  granted  with  difficulty.  After  he  had 
spent  8evend  months  in  this  severe  oonfinement,  he 
beard  of  the  martyrdom  of  his  friend,  whose  death  and 
the  imprisonment  of  Jerome  produccd  the  greatest  ex- 
asperation  of  feeling  among  the  knights  in  Bohemia 
and  Moravia.  On  the  2d  of  September  they  put  forth 
a  letter  to  the  oouncil,  in  which  they  expreflBed  their 
indignation,  declared  that  they  had  known  Husa  but  as 
a  pious  man,  zealous  for  the  doctrines  of  the  Gospel ; 
and  that  he  had  fallen  a  victim  only  to  his  enemies  and 
the  enemies  of  his  country.  They  entered  a  bitter  com- 
plaint  against  the  capti^ńty  of  the  innocent  Jerome, 
who  had  madę  himself  famous  by  his  brilliant  gifU; 
perhaps  he,  too,  had  already  been  murdered  like  Husa. 
Tłiey  declared  themselyes  resolyed  to  contend,  eren  to 
the  shedding  of  their  blood,  in  defcnce  of  the  law  of 
Christ  and  of  his  faithful  senrants"  (Neander,  Ck.  Higł, 
V,  375).  This  dedded  stand  of  Jerome'8  friends  forced 
the  cooncil  to  milder  terms,  and  they  determined,  if 
poflsible,  to  induce  him  to  recant  of  his  heretical  opin- 
ions,  a  point  which  the  effect  of  Jen>me*s  dose  oonfine- 
ment, and  the  aufferings  that  he  had  endored  for  the 
past  SLX  montha,  madę  them  beliere  might  be  carried 
without  much  difficulty.  They  mainly  pressed  him  to 
recant  his  opinion  on  the  doctrine  of  transubstantiation ; 
and  on  the  third  examination,  SepL  11, 1415,  Jerome, 
by  this  time  wom  out  both  in  body  and  mind,  madę  a 
public  and  unqualifled  recantation  of  the  Hussite  state- 
ment  of  the  eucharistic  theory.  Herę  the  disreputable 
conduct  of  the  Roroanists  might  well  have  rested,  and 
Jerome  have  been  permitted  to  return  to  his  native  land. 
But  there  were  men  in  the  council  who  well  understood 
that  Jerome  had  been  induced  to  recant  only  because  he 
saw  no  other  door  to  lead  from  the  prison,  and  that,  his 
Uberty  once  regained,  he  would  return  to  his  friends,  to 
preach  anew  the  truth  as  he  had  heard  it  from  the  lips 
of  Husa,  and  as  he  had  received  it  from  the  writings  of 
Wickliffe.  Indeed,  they  had  reasons  to  fear  that  if  he 
crer  escaped  with  his  life,  it  would  be  given  to  the  canse 
in  which  Huss  had  jnst  falkn.  On  the  other  band,  there 
were  men  of  honor  in  the  council — men  who,  thoogh 
they  had  narrowed  themselyes  down  until  they  could  see 
Christ  exemplified  only  in  those  who  bowed  submissi^e- 
ly  before  the  papai  chair,  yet  would  not  make  pledges 
only  to  break  them  tm  soon  tm  they  found  it  to  their  in- 
terest  to  do  so.  One  of  these  was  the  cardinal  of  Cam- 
bray,  who  iuaisted  that  Jerome  onght  now  to  be  liber- 
ated,  as  had  been  promised  him  bc^ore  his  recantation. 
The  counsel  of  the  morę  cunning,  howeyer,  prevailed, 
and  Jerome  was  dctained  to  answer  other  and  morę  se- 
rious  accusations.  Tired  of  the  crooked  ways  of  these 
so-called  defenders  of  the  Christian  faith,  Jerome  finally 
declined  Ło  be  any  longer  subjected  to  priyate  esuun- 
inations,  and  declared  that  publidy  only  would  he  be 
ready  to  answer  the  calumnies  of  his  accusers.  May  28, 
1416,  he  finally  succecded  in  obtaining  a  public  hear- 
ing.  On  this  day,  and  on  the  26th,  he  spent  from  8ix 
in  the  moming  until  one  in  the  afiernoon  in  replying  to 
the  different  accusations  madę  against  him,  and  dosed, 
to  the  surprise  of  all  the  council,  by  passionately  dis- 
claiming  his  former  cowardly  recantation.  **  Of  all  the 
sins,"  he  exclaimed  now,  with  great  feeling,  ^  that  I 
haye  oommitted  sińce  my  youth,  nonę  weigh  so  heayily 
on  my  mind  and  cause  me  such  poignant  remarse  as 
that  which  I  committed  in  this  fatal  place  when  I  ap- 
proyed  of  the  iniquitous  sentence  rendered  against  Wick- 
liffe and  against  the  holy  martyr  John  Huss,  my  master 
imd  friend.**    If  his  dafenoe  had  been  dełiyered  with 


soch  preaence  of  mind,  with  so  much  eloqnence  and 
wit  as  to  excite  uniyersal  admiration  and  to  indine  his 
judges  to  mercy,  the  dosing  declaration  against  his  for- 
mer recantation  certainly  s^ed  his  own  death-wanrant, 
and  left  not  the  least  hope  for  escape  from  martyrdom. 
Yet  there  were  some  among  his  judges  in  whom  he  had 
exdted  so  deep  a  sympatby  that  they  would  not  de- 
clare  against  him ;  there  were  also  some  who  dared  not, 
by  this  new  martyrdom,  proyoke  still  frirther  the  angry 
feelings  of  the  Bohemians.  He  was  granted  a  respite 
of  forty  days  for  reflection,  and  an  opportunity  was  af- 
forded  to  those  who  still  wayered  in  condemning  the  her* 
etic  to  influence  him  poesibly  to  recant  of  this  decided 
opposition  to  the  Church.  But  Jerome  remained  stead- 
fast  this  time.  If  he  had  seen  a  period  when,  like  Cran- 
mer's,  his  faith  faltered,  it  had  passed,  and  he  was  now 
ready  to  die  rather  than  again  deny  that  he  thought 
and  fdt  as  a  Hussite.  May  80  had  been  appointed  to 
pass  finał  judgment  He  still  reAising  to  recant,  the 
council  pronounced  against  him,  and  he  was  handed 
oyer  for  execution  to  the  secular  authorities.  The  whole 
trial  and  his  last  hours  are  yiyidly  pictured  by  a  Roman 
Catholic  eye-witnesa,  Poggio,  a  Florentine,  who  is  freeiy 
dted  by  Neander  (Ch.  Hitt,  y,  878  8q.),  and  is  giyen  in 
fuU  by  Gilpin  {Lwea,  p.  255  sq.).  Of  his  last  hours  Pog- 
gio relates  as  foUows:  **With  cheerful  looks  he  went 
readily  and  willingly  to  his  death;  he  feared  neither 
death  nor  the  fire  and  its  torturę.  No  stoic  eyer  suffer- 
ed  death  with  so  firm  a  soul  as  that  with  which  he 
seemed  to  demand  it.  Jerome  cndured  the  torments  of 
the  fire  with  morę  tranquillity  than  Socrates  displayed 
in  drinking  his  cup  of  hemlock.**  Jerome  was  bumed 
like  his  friend  and  master  Huss,  and  his  ashes  likewiae 
thrown  into  the  Rhine.  **  Historians,  [Roman]  Catholic 
and  Protestant  alike,  yie  with  each  other  in  paying 
homage  to  the  heroic  oourage  and  apostolic  resignation 
with  which  Jerome  met  his  doom.  Poeterity  bas  oon- 
firmed  their  yerdict,  and  reyeres  him  as  a  martyr  to  the 
truth,  who,  unwearied  in  Ufe  and  noble  in  death,  has  ao- 
quired  an  immortal  renown  for  his  share  in  the  Refor- 
mation."  Indeed  we  ąuestion  whether  to  Jerome  and 
Huss  suffident  credit  is  giyen  for  their  share  in  the  Ref- 
ormation  of  the  16th  oentury.  We  fear  that  it  is 
through  neglect  alone  that  to  Hoss  and  Jerome  is 
denied  a  place  by  the  side  of  Luther  and  Calyin,  to 
which,  as  Gillett  (/7u«  and  hit  Titnet^  Prefaoe)  rightly 
says,  they  are  justly  entitled.  "  It  is  true,  indieed,  that 
the  great  reform  moyemcnt,  of  which  Huss  was  the 
leader,  was,  to  human  Wew,  after  a  most  desperate  and 
prolonged  struggle,  enished  out ;  not,  howeyer,  withont 
leaying  behind  it  most  important  resólts."  See  Gilłett, 
Hust  and  hit  Times  (2  yok.  8yo,  new  edit  1871) ;  Nean- 
der, CfturcA  HiMory,  yol.  y  (see  Index) ;  Tischer,  LAen 
d,  Hieran.  v,  Prag.  (Lpa.  1835);  Helfert,  Hut  u.  Hieron, 
(Ptag.  1858,  p.  151  8q.,  208  sq. ;  perhape  the  most  impot<* 
tant,  thongh  rather  partial) ;  Czerwenka,  Gett^  der  evan^ 
geL  Kirche  in  Bdhmen  (Bidef.  1869),  toL  i;  Bdhringer, 
Die  Kirche  ChritU,  ii,  4,  608  są. ;  Kmmmel,  Gesch,  der 
bóhm.  Reformaiion  (Gotha,  1867,  8yo);  Palacky,  Gttch, 
V.  Bóhnu  yoL  iii  and  iy.    See  Huss.     (J.  H.  W.) 

Jeromites.    See  Hiebonymities. 

Jerubb'a&l  (Heb.  Yerubba'al,  i?ą'l%  cantender 
with  Baal;  comp.  Isiibaal;  Sept  'Icpo/3aaX),  a  sur- 
name  of  Gideon  (q.  y.),  the  judge  of  Israel,  giyen  him 
in  conseąuence  of  his  oyerthrow  of  the  idol  (Judg.  yi^ 
32;  yu,  1;  yiii,  29,  85;  ix,  1,  2,  6,  16, 19,  24,  28,  57;  1 
Sam.  XŁi,  11).  ^'The  name  Jerubbaal  appears  in  the 
GraBcized  form  of  Ilierombal  f  l«pófi/3aXoc)  in  a  fragment 
of  Philo-Byblius  presenred  by  Eusebius  (Prcejt.  Evang* 
i,  9) ;  but  the  identity  of  name  does  not  authorize  us  to 
condude  that  it  is  Gideon  who  is  there  referred  to.  In 
the  Palmyrene  inscriptions,  *\apifio\oc  appears  as  the 
name  of  a  deity  (Gesenlus,  Monum,  Phcemc  p.  229 ;  Mo- 
yers,  Phanicier^  i,  434)"  (Kitto).  Josephus  omita  all  ref- 
erence  to  the  incident  {A  nt,  y,  6).    See  Jebubbksuetu. 

Jenib^besheth  (Heb.  YerMe^theth,  nt^a*;;!,  omk 


JERUEL 


836 


JERITSAŁEM 


tender  with  the  śhame,  Ł  e.  uM;  oonpare  IsRBOSRem; 
Sept.  *Icpoj3aaX),  a  simuune  (probdbly  to  avołd  men- 
tioning  the  luiine  of  a  fabe  god,  EkocL  xxiii,  18)  of  GiD- 
EON  (q.  V.))  the  Isnelitish  judge,  acquired  on  aocount 
of  hifl  oontest  with  the  idolatry  of  Baal  (2  Sam.  xi,  21). 
See  Jerubbaau 

Jeni'81  (Hebw  Tenal%  hl^^^^founded  by  God,  oth- 
erwiae  y«ar  ofGod;  compare  Jkribl;  Sept.  'Upc^X),  a 
desert  0^*7^1  ^  ^  op<^  oommon)  menti<med  in  the  pre- 
diction  by  Jahaziel  of  Jehoahaphat*8  rictory  oyer  the 
Moabites  and  Amroonitea,  where  it  is  deecribed  as  being 
situated  on  the  ascent  from  the  ralley  of  the  Dead  Sea 
towarda  Jertualem,  at  the  foot  of  the  valley  leading  to- 
wards  the  cliff  Ziz  (1  Chroń,  xx,  16).  The  "•  desert"  was 
probably  so  called  as  adjoining  some  town  or  yillage  of 
the  same  name.  From  the  context  it  appears  to  hare 
lain  beyond  the  wilderness  of  Tekoa  (rer.  20),  in  the  di- 
lection  of  Engedi  (ver.  2),  near  a  oertain  watch-tower 
oyerlooking  the  pass  (ver.  24).  It  appeais  to  oorre- 
spond  to  the  tract  el^Hustasah,  sloping  from  Tekoa  to 
the  precipice  of  Ain-Jidy,  described  by  Dr.  Robinson  as 
fertile  in  the  north-westem  part  (Researchet,  ii,  212),  but 
aterile  as  it  approaches  the  Ghor  (p.  248),  and  forming 
part  of  the  Desert  of  Judsa.  The  inrading  tribes,  h&r- 
ing  marched  round  the  south  of  the  Dead  Sea,  had  en- 
camped  at  Engedi.  The  road  thence  to  Jemsalem  aa- 
oends  from  the  shore  by  a  steep  and*' terrible  pass" 
(WalcoUy  Bib,  Sac  1,69),  and  thence  leads  northward, 
passing  below  Tekoa  (Robinson,  BUk  Re*,  i,  601,  606). 
The  yalley  (*»  biook,"  ver.  16),  at  the  end  of  which  the 
enemy  were  to  be  found,  was  probaUy  the  wady  Jehar, 
which,  with  its  oontinuation  wady  el-Ghar,  tiayerses 
the  southem  part  of  this  phiteau  (Robinson's  Res,  ii, 
185) ;  and  its  upper  end  appears  to  haye  been  the  same 
thiough  which  the  tiiumphant  host  passed  on  their  re- 
turn, and  named  it  Bbrachah  (q.  y.),  i.  e.  UsMtn^,  in 
oommemoration  of  the  yictory  (yer.  26). 

Jeru'8alem  (Heb.  ta^r  l'^;',  Yerushala'lm,  fully  [in 
1  Chroń,  iii,  5 ;  2  Chroń.  xxy,  1 ;  Esth.  it,  6 ;  Jer.  xxyi, 
18]  D"»b»!inj,  Yenuhala'yim  [with  finał  n  diiecdye, 
nnil»n%  l  Klngs  x,  2;  fully  TO^^^Ón^,  2  Chroń. 
joaii  9] ;  Chald.  Dbl^n;«  or  toiij'^^,  YertuheUm' ; 
SjT,  Urishlem;  Gr.  'lipowraXjjfJi  or  Ito]  'Itpotro\vfui 
[Gen.  'i/fiuip] ;  Latin  Hierotolyma),  poetically  also  Sa- 
lem (P^V,  Shalem'),  and  once  Ariel  (q.  y.) ;  original- 
ly  Jkbus  (q.  y.) ;  in  sacred  themes  the  **  City  of  God," 
or  the  "  Holy  City"  (Neh.  xi,  1, 16 ;  Matt  iv,  6),  as  in 
the  modem  Arab.  name  d-Khudt^  the  Holy  (oomp.  Upó- 
xoXcc,  Philo,  Opp,  ii,  624) ;  onoe  (2  Chroń.  xxy,  28)  the 
''dty  of  Judah."  The  Hebw  name  is  a  dual  form  (see 
Gesenius,  Lehrg,  p.  589  8q. ;  Ewald,  Krit,  Gramm,  p.  882), 
and  is  of  disputed  etymology  (see  Gesenius,  Thee.  Hd>, 
p.  628;  RosenmUller,  AUherth,  II,  ii,  202;  Ewald,  Isr, 
Geack,  ii,  584),  but  probably  signifies  poeseaswm  ofpectoe 
(q.  d.  Dbó-»sinj  [rather  than  db)b  n^,  Ł  e.founda- 
łion  ofpeace,  as  preferred  by  Gesenius  and  Fttrst]),  the 
dual  referring  to  the  two  chief  mountains  (Zioń  and  Mo- 
liah)  on  which  it  was  built,  or  the  two  main  parts  (the 
Upper  and  the  Lower  City,  i  e.  Zioń  and  Acra).  It  has 
been  known  under  the  aboye  titles  in  all  ages  as  the 
Jewish  capital  of  Palestuie. 

I.  IJisłory, — ^This  is  so  largely  madę  up  of  the  history 
of  Palestine  itself  in  different  ages,  and  of  its  suooessiye 
mlers,  that  for  minutę  details  we  refer  to  these  (see  es- 
pecially  Judala)  ;  we  here  present  only  a  generał  sur- 
yey,  chiefly  condensed  from  the  account  in  Kitto*s  Cg- 
dopadia, 

1.  This  city  is  mentioned  yery  early  in  Scripture,  be- 
ing usually  supposed  to  be  the  Salem  of  which  Mel- 
chizedek was  king  (Gen.  xiy,  18).  Racir.2080.  Such 
was  the  opinion  of  the  Jews  themselyes;  for  Josephus, 
who  calU  Mekhizedek  king  of  Solyma  (£óXti/ui),  ob- 
senres  that  this  name  was  aflerwards  changed  into  Hi- 
eroBolyma  (AnL  i,  10, 8).   AU  the  fathen  of  the  Church, 


Jerome  exoepted,  agree  with  Josephus,  and  andenCanC 
Jemsalem  and  Salem  to  indicate  the  same  plaoe.  The 
PSalmist  also  says  (lxxyi,2),  ^In  Sakm  is  his  taber- 
nade,  and  his  dwelling-plaoe  in  Zioń."    See  Salesł 

The  mountain  of  the  land  of  Moriah,  which  Abraham 
(Gen.  xxii,  2)  reacbed  on  the  thiid  day  from  Becrahefa^ 
there  to  ofler  Isaac  (B.C  cir.  2047),  ii,  acoording  to  Jo- 
sephus (Anł,  i,  18, 2),  the  mountain  on  which  SokiBioB 
aflerwards  built  the  Tempie  (2  Chroń,  iii,  1).  See  Mo- 
riah. 

The  que8tion  of  the  identity  of  Jemsalem  with  <■  Ca- 
dytis,  a  large  dtyof  Syria," ''ahnost  aslaige  asSaitfis,* 
which  is  mentioned  by  Herodotos  (ii,  169 ;  iii,  5)  as  hsr- 
ing  been  taken  by  Pharaoh-Necho,  need  not  be  inyesti* 
gated  in  this  place.  It  is  interesting,  and,  if  dedded  in 
the  affirmatiye,  so  far  important  as  couflrming  the  Scrip- 
ture narratiye,  but  does  not  in  any  way  add  to  oar 
knowledge  of  the  history  of  the  dty.  The  reader  wifl 
find  it  fully  examined  in  Rafdinson"s  Herodohts,  ii,  246: 
Blakesley^s  fferodotiu—Excumt»  on  Bk,  iii,  eh.  r  (both 
against  Identification);  and  in  Kenrick^s  J^>fSfpr,  ii^^MS, 
and  JHci,  of  Gk,  and  Rom,  Geogr,  it,  17  (both  for  it). 

Nor  need  we  do  morę  than  refer  to  the  traditionś— if 
traditions  they  are,  and  not  merę  indiyidoal  specnla- 
tiona--of  Tacitus  {HieL  y,  2)  and  Plntarch  (/«.  H  Omr, 
eh.  xxxi)  of  the  foundation  of  the  dty  by  a  certain  Hi- 
erosolymus,  a  son  of  the  Typhon  (see  Winer*8  notę,  i, 
546).  All  the  certain  Information  to  be  obtained  as  to 
the  early  history  of  Jemsalem  must  be  gatbered  fron 
the  books  of  the  Jewish  histonans  alcme. 

2.  The  name  Jerasdem  first  occws  in  Josh.  x,  1 ,  wbers 
Adonizedek  (q.  y.),  king  of  Jemsalem,  is  n»entioned  as 
haying  entered  into  an  allianoe  with  other  kings  againat 
Joehua,  by  whom  they  were  all  oyercorae  (oomp.  Josh. 
xii,  10).    KC 1618.    See  Joshca. 

In  drawing  the  northem  border  of  Jndah,  we  find  Je- 
msalem again  mentioned  (Josh.  xy,  8;  compare  Jodu 
xyiii,  16).  This  border  ran  through  the  yalley  of  Bcd- 
Hinnom ;  the  country  on  the  south  of  it,  as  Bethldiem, 
bdonged  to  Judah ;  but  the  mountain  of  Zioń,  foraiing 
the  northem  wali  of  the  yalley,  and  oocupled  by  the 
Jebusites,  appertained  to  Benjamin.  Among  the  dties 
of  Benjamin,  therefore,  is  also  mentioned  (Josh.  xTiii, 
28)  '^  Jebus,  which  is  Jemsalem"  (comp.  Judg.  xix,  10; 
1  Chroń,  xi,  4).  At  a  later  datę,  howeyer,  owing  to  the 
oonque8t  of  Jebos  by  Dayid,  the  linę  ran  on  the  north- 
em side  of  Zioń,  ieaying  the  dty  equany  dirided  be> 
tween  the  two  tribes.  See  Tribe.  There  is  a  laUmd- 
cal  traditaon  that  part  of  the  Tempie  was  in  the  lot  of 
Judah,  and  part  of  it  in  that  of  Boijamin  (Łigfatfoo^  i, 
1050,  Lond.  1684).     SeeTBMPŁC. 

After  the  death  of  Joshna,  when  there  lemained  far 
the  chiMren  of  Israeł  much  to  conqner  in  Canaan,  the 
Lord  directed  Judah  to  fight  against  the  Canaanites; 
and  they  took  Jemsalem,  smote  it  with  the  edge  of  the 
sword,  and  set  it  on  fire  (Judg.  i,  1-4),  RCL  cir.  1590. 
After  that,  the  Judahites  and  the  Benjamitesdwelt  wilh 
the  Jebusites  at  Jemsalem ;  for  it  is  recocded  (Josh.  xy, 
68)  that  the  children  of  Judah  could  not  driye  out  the 
Jebusites  inhabiting  Jemsalem ;  and  we  sre  faither  in- 
formed  (Judg.  i,  21)  that  the  children  of  Benjamin  did 
not  expel  tbem  from  Jemsalem  (comp.  Ju4g.  xix^  10- 
12).  Ftobably  the  Jebusites  were  rcmoyed  by  Jndah 
only  from  the  lower  city,  but  kept  poBscssiou  of  the 
mountain  of  Zioń,  which  Dayid  conquered  at  a  latcr  pe- 
riod. This  is  the  exp]anation  of  Josephus  (.4  nr.  t,  2,  f). 
See  Jebus.  Jemsalem  is  not  again  mentioned  tSl  the 
time  of  Sani,  when  it  is  stated  (1  Sam.  xyii,  64)  that  Da- 
yid took  the  head  of  Goliath  and  bronght  it  to  Jemsa- 
lem, B.a  dr.  1068.  When  Dayid,  who  had  preyiouly 
reif^ied  oyer  Judah  alone  in  Hebron,  was  called  to  nile 
oyer  all  Israel,  he  led  his  foroes  against  the  Jebositeą 
and  conquered  the  castle  of  Zioń  which  Joab  fiiBt  sealed 
(1  Sam.  y,  6-9;  1  Chnm.  xii,  4-^).  He  tben  fixed  his 
abode  on  this  mountain,  and  called  it  ''the  dty  of  Da- 
yid," B.C  dr.  1044.  He  stiengthened  its  fortifiaitioos 
[see  MiŁLo],  bot  does  not  appear  to  haye  enla;iged  kL 


JERUSALEM 


837 


JERUSALEM 


m'HMM:^^mryyyMiń'A 


JERUSALEM 


838 


JERUSAŁEM 


Thither  he  carried  the  ark  of  the  coyeiuuit;  and  theze 
he  built  to  the  Lord  an  altar  in  the  threshiiig-floor  of 
Araunah  the  Jebuaite,  on  the  place  where  the  angel 
stood  who  threatened  Jeniaalem  with  pestilence  (2  Sam. 
xxiy,  15-25).  But  David  oould  not  build  a  house  for 
the  name  of  the  Lord  his  God  on  account  of  the  wara 
which  were  about  him  on  every  slde  (2  Sanu  yii,  18 ;  1 
Kinga  v,  8-5).  Still  the  Lord  announced  to  him,  throngh 
the  prophet  Natban  (2  Sam.  yii,  10), "  I  will  appoint  a 
pkce  for  my  people  Israel,  and  wUl  plant  them,  that 
they  may  dwdl  in  a  place  of  their  own  and  move  no 
morę,"  KC.  cir.  1048.  From  thiB  it  would  seem  that 
even  David  had,  then  at  least,  no  assurance  that  Jeniaa- 
lem in  particular  was  to  be  the  place  which  had  so  of- 
ten  been  spoken  of  as  that  which  Grod  would  chooee  for 
the  central  aeat  of  the  theocratical  monarchy,  and  which 
it  became  after  Solomon'8  Tempie  had  been  built.  See 
Temple. 

8.  The  reasons  which  led  David  to  fix  upon  Jerusalem 
as  the  metropohs  of  his  kingdom  are  noticed  elsewhere 
[see  Dayid],  being,  chiefly,  that  it  was  in  his  own  tribe 
of  Judah,  in  which  his  influence  was  the  stzongest,  while 
it  was  the  nearest  to  the  other  tribes  of  any  site  he  could 
haye  chosen  in  Judah.  The  peculiar  strength  also  of 
the  situation,  indosed  on  three  sides  by  a  natural  trench 
of  yalleys,  could  not  be  without  weight  Its  great 
strength,  aocording  to  the  mi^tary  notions  of  that  age, 
is  shown  by  the  length  of  time  the  Jebusites  were  able 
to  keep  possession  of  it  against  the  force  of  all  IsraeL 
David  was  doubtless  the  b^  judge  of  his  own  interests 
in  this  matter ;  but  if  thoee  interests  had  not  come  into 
play,  and  if  he  had  only  considered  the  best  situation 
for  a  metropolia  of  the  whole  kingdom,  it  is  doubtfnl 
whether  a  morę  central  situation  with  respect  to  cdi 
the  tribes  would  not  haye  been  far  preferable,  especially 
as  the  law  required  all  the  adult  males  of  Israd  to  re- 
pair  three  times  in  the  year  to  the  place  of  the  diyine 
presence.  Indeed,  the  burdensome  cbaracter  of  this  ob- 
ligation  to  the  morę  distant  tribes  seems  to  haye  been 
one  of  the  excuse8  for  the  revoIt  of  the  ten  tribes,  as  it 
certainly  was  for  the  establishment  of  schismatic  altars 
in  Dan  and  Beth-el  (1  Kings  xii,  28).  Many  trayellers 
haye  suggested  that  Samaria,  which  afterwards  became 
the  metropolia  of  the  separated  kingdom,  was  far  prefer- 
able to  Jerusalem  for  the  site  of  a  capital  city ;  and  its 
central  situation  would  also  haye  been  in  its  fayor  as  a 
metropolia  for  all  the  tribes.  But  as  the  choice  of  Da- 
yid was  8ub9equently  conlirmed  by  the  diyine  appoint- 
ment,  which  madę  Mount  Moriah  the  site  of  the  Tem- 
pie, we  are  bound  to  consider  the  choice  as  haying  been 
providentially  ordered  with  refcrence  to  the  contingen- 
cies  that  afterwards  arose,  by  which  Jerusalem  was 
madę  the  capital  of  the  separate  kingdom  of  Judah,  for 
which  it  was  well  adapted.    See  Judah. 

The  promise  madę  to  Dayid  receiyed  its  accomplish- 
ment  when  Solomon  built  his  Tempie  upon  Mount  Mo- 
riah, B.C.  1010.  He  also  added  towers  to  the  waUs,  and 
otherwise  greatly  adorned  the  city.  By  him  and  his 
father  Jerusalem  had  been  madę  the  imperial  residence 
of  the  king  of  all  Israel ;  and  the  Tempie,  oflen  called 
**  the  house  of  Jchoyah,"  oonstituted  at  the  same  time 
the  residence  of  the  King  of  kings,  the  supremę  head 
of  the  theocratical  state,  wbose  yicegerents  the  human 
kings  were  taught  to  regard  themselyes.  It  now  be- 
longed,  even  less  than  a  to^ii  of  the  Levites,  to  a  par- 
ticular tribe :  it  was  the  centrę  of  all  ci\ńl  and  religious 
affairs,  the  yery  place  of  which  Moses  spoke,  Deut.  xii, 
6 :  "  The  place  which  the  Lord  your  God  shall  chooee 
out  of  all  your  tribes  to  put  his  name  there,  cyen  unto 
his  habitation  shall  ye  seek,  and  thither  thou  shalt  come" 
(comp.  ix,  6 ;  xiii,  14 ;  xiy,  23 ;  xyi,  1 1-16 ;  Psa.  cxxii). 
See  Solomon. 

Jerusalem  was  not,  indeed,  politically  important :  it 
was  not  the  capital  of  a  powerful  empire  directing  the 
affairs  of  other  states,  but  it  stood  high  in  the  bright 
prospects  foretold  by  Dayid  when  declaring  his  faith  in 
the  coming  of  a  Messiah  (Psa.  ii,  6;  1,2;  lxxxvii;  cii. 


16-22;  ex,  2).  In  aU  these  paasagea  the  name  ZIod  u 
used,  whidi,  although  properiy  apj^ed  to  the  aoutheni- 
most  part  of  the  site  of  Jerusalem,  is  often  in  Scriptore 
put  poetically  for  Jerusalem  genórally,  and  aometiaMi 
for  Mount  Moriah  and  its  Tempie.    See  Ziox. 

The  importance  and  splendor  of  Jerusalem  were  cm- 
siderably  lessened  after  the  death  of  Solomon,  unda 
whose  son  Rehoboam  ten  of  the  tribes  lebelled,  Judab 
and  Benjamin  only  remaining  in  their  allegiance,  KO, 
978.  Jerusalem  was  then  only  the  c^ital  of  the  veiy 
smali  State  of  Judah.  When  Jeroboam  institoted  the 
worship  of  golden  calyes  in  Beth-el  and  Dan,  the  ten 
tribes  went  no  longer  up  to  Jerusalem  to  woiBbip  and 
sacrifice  in  the  house  of  the  Lord  (1  Kings  xii,  26-30)^ 

See  ISBARL,  KDIGDOM  OF. 

After  this  time  the  history  of  Jerusalem  is  continued 
in  the  histoiy  of  Judah,  for  which  the  second  book  of 
the  Kings  and  of  the  Chrónides  are  the  principal  sonios 
of  Information.  After  the  time  of  Solomon,  the  king- 
dom of  Judah  was  almost  altemately  ruled  by  good 
kings,  ^  who  did  that  which  was  right  in  the  sight  of 
the  Lord,"  and  by  such  aa  were  idolatroua  and  eyil-dis- 
poaed ;  and  the  reign  of  the  same  king  oftea  yaricd,  asd 
was  by  tums  good  or  eyil.  The  conditlon  of  the  king- 
dom, and  of  Jerusalem  in  particular  as  its  metropolia, 
was  yery  much  affected  by  these  mntationa.  Under 
good  kings  the  city  flourished,  and  under  bad  kings  it 
suffered  greatly.  Under  Rehoboam  (q.  y.)  it  was  con- 
ąuered  t^  Shishak  (q.  y.),  king  of  Egypt,  who  pillaged 
the  treasures  of  the  Tempie  (2  Chroń,  xii,  9),  RG  970. 
Under  Amaziah  (q.  y.)  it  was  taken  by  Jehoosh,  king  of 
Israel,  who  broke  down  four  hundred  cubits  of  the  wali 
of  the  city,  and  took  all  the  gold  and  silyer,  and  all  the 
yessels  that  were  found  in  the  Tempie  (2  Kings  xiv,  13, 
14),  KC  cir.  880.  Uzziah  (q.  y.),  son  of  Amaziah.  who 
at  first  reigned  well,  built  towers  in  Jerusalem  at  the 
comer-gate,  at  the  yalley-gate,  and  at  the  toraing  of 
the  waU,  and  fortified  them  (2  Chroń.  xxyi,  9),  RCcir. 
807.  His  son,  Jotham  (q.  y.),  built  the  high  gate  of  the 
Tempie,  and  reared  up  many  other  structurea  (2  Onoa, 
xxyu,  8,  4),  B.C.  cir.  755.  Hezekiah  (q.  v.)  added  to 
the  other  honors  of  his  reign  that  of  an  improyer  of  Je- 
rusalem (2  Chroń,  xxix,  8),  B.C.  726.  At  a  later  datę, 
howeyer,  he  despoiled  the  Tempie  in  some  degree  in  or- 
der to  pay  the  leyy  impoeed  by  the  kiag  of  Aseyria  (3 
Kings  KY-iii,  15, 16),  KC  718.  But  in  the  latter  pot 
of  the  same  year  he  performed  his  most  emincnt  aorrice 
for  the  city  by  stopping  the  upjier  course  of  Gihon,  and 
bringing  f ts  waters  by  a  subterraneous  aquedact  to  the 
west  side  jof  the  city  (2  Chroń,  xxxii,  80).  This  work 
is  inferred,  from  2  Kings  xx,  to  haye  been  of  gmt  im- 
portance to  Jerusalem,  as  it  cut  off  a  supply  of  witer 
from  any  besieging  enemy,  and  bestowed  it  upon  the  in- 
habitants  of  the  city.  The  immediatc  oocasion  was  the 
threatened  inyasion  by  the  Assyrianai  See  SfoniACiiE- 
RiB.  Hezekiah^s  son,  Manaaaeh  (q.  y.) ,  was  ponished  by 
a  capture  of  the  city  in  consequenoe  of  his  idblatniaB 
desecration  of  the  Tempie  (2  Chroń,  xxxiii,  11),  KC  dr. 
690 ;  but  in  his  later  and  best  years  he  buik  a  stropg 
and  yery  high  wali  on  the  west  side  of  Jerusalem  (3 
Chroń,  xxxiii,  14).  The  works  in  the  city  connected 
with  the  names  of  the  succeeding  kings  of  Judah  weie, 
80  far  as  recorded,  confined  to  the  defileroent  of  the  house 
of  the  Lord  by  bad  kings,  and  its  puigation  by  gwd 
kings,  the  most  important  of  the  latter  being  the  repair- 
ing  of  the  Tempie  by  Josiah  (2  Kings  xx,  xxiii),  B.C 
628,  till  for  the  abounding  iniquities  of  the  nation  the  city 
and  Tempie  were  abandoned  to  destruction,  after  serenl 
preliminary  spoliations  by  the  Eg^'ptian8  (2  Kings  xxiii, 
88-35),  KC  609,  and  Bi^ylonians  (2  Kings  xxiy,  14),  K 
C  606,  and  again  (2  Kings  xxiy,  18),  KC  598.  Fmally, 
after  a  siege  of  three  years,  Jeruńlem  was  taken  by 
Nebuchadnezzar,  who  razed  its  waUs,  and  deetrored  its 
Tempie  and  palaces  with  fire  (2  Kings  xxy ;  2  Chnau 
XXXVI ;  Jer.  xxxix),  KC  588.  Thus  was  Jewsaleai 
smitten  with  the  calsimity  which  Moses  had  propbesSed 
would  befall  it  if  the  people  would  noc  keep  the  oobd- 


JEBUSAŁEM 


839 


JERUSALEM 


Andent  AMyrIan  dellneation  of  a  hostile  city  resembliog  JeroBalem  In  eltnation. 


mandments  of  the  Lord)  but  broke  his  coTenant  (Lev. 
xxvi,  14 ;  Deut  xxviii).  The  finishing  Btxx>ke  to  thia 
deaolatioD  was  put  by  the  retreat  of  the  principal  Jews, 
on  the  maasacre  of  Gedaliah,  into  Egypt,  KC  587,  where 
they  were  eventuaUy  involved  in  the  conąuest  of  that 
country  by  the  Babylonians  (Jer.  xl-xliv).  Meanwhile 
the  feeble  remnant  of  the  lower  classes,  who  had  dung 
to  their  native  soil  amid  all  these  rever8e8,  were  swept 
away  by  a  finał  deportation  to  Babylon,  which  left  the 
land  literally  without  an  inhabitant  (Jer.  lii,  30).  B.C. 
682.     See  Nebuchadnezzak. 

Moses  had  long  before  predicted  that  if,  in  the  hmd  of 
their  captivity,  his  afllicted  countrymen  repented  of  their 
evil,  they  should  be  brought  back  again  to  the  land  out 
of  wfaich  they  had  been  cast  (Deut.  xxx,  1-5 ;  comp^  1 
Kinga  viii,  4&-63 ;  Neh.  i,  8, 9).  The  Lord  also,  through 
laaiah,  condescended  to  point  out  the  agency  through 
which  the  restoration  of  the  holy  city  was  to  bo  acoom- 
plished,  and  even  named,  long  before  his  birth,  the  very 
person,  Cyrus,  under  whose  orders  this  was  to  be  effect- 
ed  (Isa.  3dlv,  28 ;  comp.  Jer.  iii,  2,  7, 8 ;  xxiii,  3 ;  xxxi, 
10;  xxxii,  36, 37).  Among  the  remarkably  precise  in- 
dications  should  be  mentioned  that  in  which  Jeremiah 
(xxv,  9-12)  limits  the  duration  of  Judah'8  captivity  to 
8eventy  years.  See  CArmoTY.  These  encourage- 
ments  were  continued  through  the  prophets,  who  them- 
telves  shared  the  captivity.  Of  this  number  was  Daniel, 
to  whom  it  was  revealed,  while  yet  praying  for  the  res- 
toration of  his  people  (Dan.  ix,  16, 19),  that  the  streets 
and  the  walls  of  Jerusalem  should  be  built  again,  even 
in  troublous  times  (ver.  25).     See  Seyenty  Weeks. 

4.  Daniel  lived  to  see  the  relgn  of  Cyrus,  king  of  Per- 
ńa  (Dan.  x,  1),  and  the  fulfilment  of  his  prayer.  It  was 
in  the  year  KC.  536, "  in  the  first  year  of  Cyrus,*"  that,  in 
accomplishment  of  the  prophecy  of  Jeremiah,  the  Lord 
Btined  up  the  spirit  of  this  prince,  who  madę  a  proda^ 
mation  throughout  all  his  kingdom,  cxpres8ed  in  these 
remarkable  words:  '*  The  Lord  God  of  heaven  hath  given 
me  all  the  kingdoms  of  the  earth,  and  he  luu  charged  me 
to  build  him  a  house  at  JeruscUem,  takich  is  in  Judah. 
Who  is  there  among  you  of  all  his  people?  his  God  be 
-with  him,  and  let  him  go  up  to  Jerusalem,  and  build  the 
hoose  of  the  Lord  God  of  Israel"  (Ezra  i,  2, 3).  This 
important  cali  was  answered  by  a  considerable  number 
of  persons,  particularly  priests  and  Levites;  and  the 
many  who  declined  to  quit  thdr  houses  and  possesdons 
in  Babylonia  committed  valuable  gills  to  the  hands  of 
their  morę  zealous  brethren.  Cyrus  also  caused  the  sar 
cred  Yessels  of  gold  and  8ilver  which  Nebuchadnezzar 
liad  taken  from  the  Tempie  to  be  restored  to  Sheshbaz- 
zar,  the  prince  of  Judah,  who  took  them  to  Jerusalem, 
fbUowed  by  42,360  people,  besides  theii  servant8,of  whom 
there  were  7337  (Ezra  i,  5-11). 

On  their  arrival  at  Jerusalem  they  contributed,  ac- 
cording  to  thdr  ability,  to  rebuild  the  Tempie;  Jeshua 
tbe  priest,  and  Zerubbabd,  reared  up  an  oltar  to  o£fer 
tHimt-offerings  thereon;  ahd  when,  in  the  following 
year,  the  foundation  was  laid  of  the  new  house  of  God, 


»*the  people  shouted  forjoy, 
,  but  many  of  the  LeviŁe8 
who  had  seen  the  first  Tem- 
pie wept  with  a  loud  yoice" 
(Ezra  iii,  2, 12).  When  the 
Samaritans  ezpressed  a 
wish  to  share  in  the  pious 
labor,  Zerubbabd  declined 
the  offer,  and  in  reyenge,  the 
Samaritans  sent  a  deputa- 
tion  to  king  Artaxerxc8  of 
Persia,  cairying  a  present- 
ment  in  which  Jerusalem 
was  described  as  a  rebel- 
lious  dty  of  old  time,  which, 
if  rebuilt,  and  its  walls  set 
up  again,  would  not  pay 
toll,  tribute,  and  custom, 
and  would  thus  endamage 


the  public  revenue.  The  deputation  succceded,  and 
Artaxerxes  ordered  that  the  building  of  the  Tempie 
should  cease.  The  interruption  thus  caused  lasted  to 
the  second  year  of  the  rdgn  of  Darius  (Ezra  iv,  24), 
when  Zerubbabd  and  Jeshua,  supported  by  the  proph- 
ets Haggai  and  Zechariah,  again  resumed  the  work,  and 
would  not  cease  though  cautioned  by  the  Persian  gov- 
emor  of  Judiea,  B.C  520.  On  the  matter  coming  be- 
fore Darius  Hystaspis,  and  the  Jcws  reminding  him 
of  the  permission  given  by  Cjtus,  he  decided  in  their 
favor,  and  also  ordered  that  the  expenses  of  the  work 
should  be  defrayed  out  of  the  public  revenue  (Ezra  vi, 
8).  In  the  8ixth  year  of  the  reign  of  Darius  the  Tem- 
pie was  finished,  when  they  kept  the  dedicatory  festi- 
val  with  great  joy,  and  next  cdebrated  the  Passoyer 
(Ezra  vi,  16, 16, 19),  RC.  616.  Afterwards,  in  the  8ev- 
euth  year  of  the  second  Artaxcrxes  (Longimanus),  Ezra, 
a  desoendant  of  Aaron,  came  up  to  Jerusalem,  accompa- 
nied  by  a  large  number  of  Jews  who  had  remained  in 
Babylon,  RC  459.  He  was  highly  patronized  by  the 
king,  who  not  only  madę  him  a  large  present  in  gold 
and  silyer,  but  publisbed  a  decree  enjoining  all  treas- 
urers  of  Judsea  speedily  to  do  whatever  Ezra  should  re- 
quire  of  them ;  allowing  him  to  coUect  money  through- 
out the  whole  proWnoe  of  Babylon  for  the  wants  of  the 
Tempie  at  Jerusalem,  and  also  giving  him  fuli  power 
to  appoint  magistrates  in  his  country  to  judge  the  peo- 
ple (Ezra  vii,'  viii).  At  a  later  period,  in  the  twentieth 
year  of  king  ArtaxeTxe8,  Nehemiah,  who  was  his  cup- 
bearer,  obtained  permission  to  proceed  to  Jerusalem,  and 
to  complete  the  rebuilding  of  the  city  and  its  wali,  which 
he  happily  accomplished,  in  spite  of  all  the  opposition 
which  he  received  from  the  enemies  of  Israel  (Neh.  i,  ii, 
iv,  vi),  RC  446.  The  city  was  then  capadous  and  large, 
but  the  people  in  it  were  few,  and  many  houses  still  hiy 
in  ruins  (Neh.  vii,  4).  At  Jerusalem  dwdt  the  rulers 
of  the  people  and  "  certain  of  the  children  of  Judah  and 
of  the  children  of  Benjamin ;"  but  it  was  now  determined 
that  the  rest  of  the  people  should  cast  lots  to  bring  one 
of  ten  to  the  capital  (Neh.  xi,  1^),  RC.  cir.  440.  On 
Nehemiah*8  return,  after  8everd  years'  absence  to  court, 
all  strangers,  Samaritans,Ammonites,  Moabites,  etc.,  were 
removed,  to  keep  the  chosen  people  from  poUution;  min- 
isters  were  appointed  to  the  Tempie,  and  tbe  8er\'ice  was 
performed  according  to  the  law  of  Moses  (Ezra  x ;  Neh. 
viii,  X,  xii,  xiii),  RC.  cir.  410.  Of  the  Jerusalem  thus  by 
such  great  and  long-continued  exertions  restored,  very 
splendid  prophedes  were  uttered  by  those  prophets  who 
fiourished  afier  the  exile ;  the  generał  purport  of  which 
was  to  describe  the  Tempie  and  city  as  destined  to  be 
glorified  far  beyond  the  former,  by  the  advenŁ  of  the 
long  and  eagerly-expected  Messiah,  "  the  desire  of  all 
nations"  (Zech.  ix,  9 ;  xii,  10 ;  xiii,  3 ;  Hagg.  ii,  6,  7 ; 
MaL  iii,  11).     See  Ezra;  Nehemiah. 

6.  For  the  subseąuent  history  of  Jerusalem  (which  is 
dosdy  connected  with  that  of  Palestine  in  generał), 
down  to  its  destruction  by  the  Bomans,  we  must  draw 
chiefly  upon  Josephus  and  the  books  of  the  Maccabees. 


JERUSALEM 


840 


JERUSALEM 


It  IB  said  by  Joflephns  (Ant,  xi,  8)  thAt  when  the  do- 
minion  of  this  part  of  the  world  passed  from  the  Per- 
sians  to  the  Greeks,  Alexander  the  Great  advanoed 
againsŁ  Jeiuaalem  to  pirnish  it  for  the  fidelity  to  the 
Persians  which  it  had  manifested  while  he  was  engaged 
in  the  siege  of  Tyre.  His  hostile  purposes,  however, 
were  averted  by  the  appearance  of  the  high-priest  Jad- 
dua  at  the  head  of  a  train  of  priests  in  thelr  sacred  yest- 
ments.  Alexander  recognised  in  him  the  figurę  which 
in  a  dream  had  encooraged  him  to  undertake  the  eon- 
quest  of  Asia.  He  therefore  treated  him  with  respect 
and  reyerence,  spared  the  city  against  which  his  wrath 
had  been  kindled,  and  granted  to  the  Jews  high  and  im- 
portant  priyileges.  The  historian  adds  that  the  high- 
priest  failed  not  to  apprise  the  conąucror  of  those  proph- 
ecies  in  Daniel  by  which  his  successes  had  been  piedict- 
ed.  The  whole  of  this  story  is,  howeyer,  liable  to  sus- 
pidon,  from  the  absence  of  any  notice  of  the  drcum- 
stance  in  the  histories  of  this  campaign  which  we  pos- 
sess.    See  Ałekander  the  Great. 

Afler  the  death  of  Alenmder  at  Babylon  (RG.  324), 
Ptolemy  surprised  Jerusalem  on  the  Sabbath  day,  when 
the  Jewi  would  not  fight,  plondered  the  city,  and  car- 
ried  away  a  great  nmnber  of  the  inhabitants  to  Egypt, 
where,  howeyer,  from  the  estimation  in  which  the  Jews 
of  this  period  were  hdd  as  dtizens,  important  priyileges 
were  bestowed  upon  them  (Joseph.  Ant,  xii,  1).  In  the 
contests  which  afterwards  foUowed  for  the  poesesińon  of 
Syna  (inclading  Palestine),  Jemsałem  does  not  appear 
to  haye  been  directly  injored,  and  was  eyen  spared  when 
Ptolemy  gave  up  Samaria,  Acco,  Joppa,  and  Gaza  to  pil- 
lage.  The  oontest  was  ended  by  the  treaty  in  B.C.  302, 
which  annexed  the  whole  of  Palestine,  together  with 
Arabia  Petrsea  and  Coele-Syria  to  Eg}^t.  Under  easy 
subjection  to  the  Ptolemies,  the  Jews  remained  in  mach 
tranquillity  for  morę  than  a  hnndred  years,  in  which 
the  principal  inddent,  as  regaitis  Jerusalem  itself,  was 
the  yisit  which  was  p:ud  to  it,  in  B.C.  245,  by  Ptolemy 
Euergetes,  on  his  return  from  his  yictories  in  the  East 
He  offered  many  sacrifices,  and  madę  magnifioent  prcs- 
ents  to  the  Tempie*  In  the  wars  between  Antiochus 
the  Great  and  the  kings  of  Egypt,  from  B.C.  221  to  197, 
Judaea  could  not  fali  to  suffer  seyerely;  bat  we  are  not 
acquunted  with  any  inddent  in  which  Jerusalem  was 
principally  ooncemed  tiU  the  alleged  yisit  of  Ptolemy 
Philopator  in  B.C.  211.  He  offered  sacrifices,  and  gaye 
rich  gifls  to  the  Tempie,  but,  yenturing  to  enter  the 
sanctuary  in  spite  of  the  remonstrances  of  the  high- 
priest,  he  was  sdzed  with  a  snpematural  dread,  and  fled 
in  terror  from  the  place.  It  is  sald  that  on  his  return  to 
Egypt  he  yented  his  ragę  on  the  Jews  of  Alexandria  in 
a  very  barbarous  manner.  See  Alexa?idria.  But  the 
whole  story  of  his  yisit  and  its  results  rests  upon  the  sole 
authority  of  the  third  book  of  Maccabees  (chaps.  i  and 
iii),  and  is  therefore  not  entitlcd  to  implidt  credit.  To- 
wards  the  end  of  this  war  the  Jews  seemed  to  fayor  the 
cause  of  Antiochus ;  and  after  he  had  subdued  the  neigh- 
boring  country,' they  yoluntarily  tendered  their  submis- 
ńon,  and  rendered  their  assistance  in  expelling  the  Egyp- 
tian  garrison  from  Dtlount  Zioń.  For  this  conduct  they 
were  rewarded  by  many  important  priyileges  by  Anti- 
ochus. He  issued  decrees  dlrecting,  among  other  things, 
that  the  outworks  of  the  Tempie  should  be  completed, 
and  that  all  the  materials  for  needful  repairs  should  be 
exempted  from  taxe8.  The  peculiar  sanctity  of  the 
Tempie  was  also  to  be  respected.  No  foreigner  was  to 
.  pass  the  sacred  waUs,  and  the  city  itsdf  was  to  be  pro- 
tected  from  pollution;  it  bdng  strictly  forbidden  that 
the  ftesh  or  skins  of  any  beasts  which  the  Jews  account- 
ed  unclean  should  be  brought  into  it  (Joseph.  A  nt.  xii,  3, 
8).  These  were  yery  liberał  concessions  to  what  the 
king  himself  must  haye  regarded  as  the  prejudices  of 
the  Jewish  people. 

Under  their  new  masters  the  Jews  enjoyed  for  a  time 
nearly  as  much  tranquillity  as  under  the  gcnerally  be- 
nign  and  liberał  goyemment  of  the  Ptolemies.  But  in 
B.C.  176,  Sdeucus  Philopator,  hearing  that  great  treas- 


ures  were  hoaided  up  in  the  Tempie,  and  beang  distmsi 
ed  for  money  to  carry  on  his  wais,  sent  his  tieaaiiRr, 
Heliodorus,  to  bring  away  these  treasorea.  But  Um 
personage  is  reported  to  haye  been  so  frightened  and 
stricken  by  an  appańtion  that  he  relingniahed  the  at- 
tempt,  and  Sdeucus  left  the  Jews  in  the  undistinbed 
enjoyment  of  their  rights  (2  Biaoc.  iii,  4^^ ;  Joseph.  AnL 
xii,  8, 8).  HiB  brother  and  suooeaaor,  Antiochus  Epipk- 
ancs,  howeyer,  was  of  another  mind.  He  to(^  up  the 
design  of  reducing  them  to  a  conformity  of  mamien  and 
rehgion  with  other  nations ;  or,  in  other  words,  of  afaol- 
ishing  those  distinctiye  features  which  madę  the  Jews  a 
peculiar  people,  socially  separated  frcmi  all  othen.  Thii 
design  was  odious  to  the  great  body  of  the  people,  al- 
though  there  were  many  among  the  higher  dasecs  who 
regarded  it  with  fayor.  Of  thia  way  of  thinking  wm 
Menelaus,  whom  Antiochus  had  madę  high-priest,  and 
who  was  expeUed  by  the  orthodox  Jews  with  ignominy, 
in  KC.  169,  when  they  heaid  the  joyful  news  that  Anti- 
ochus had  been  slain  in  Egypt.  The  rumor  pioyed  ińi- 
true,  and  Antiochus,  on  his  reUain,  ptmiabed  them  bf 
plundering  and  profaning  the  Tempie.  Wone  eyils  be- 
feU  them  two  years  after;  for  Antiochus,  oat  of  hmnar 
at  bdng  oompelled  by  the  Romans  to  abandon  his  de- 
signs  upon  Egypt,  sent  his  chief  coUector  of  tribute, 
ApoUonius,  with  a  detachment  of  22,000  noen,  to  yent 
his  ragę  on  Jerusalem.  This  person  plnndered  the  óty 
and  f^ed  its  walls,  with  the  Stones  of  which  be  buHt  a 
dtadel  that  oommanded  the  Tempie  Mount  A  sutoe 
of  Jupiter  was  set  up  in  the  Tempie ;  the  peculiar  ob- 
seryances  of  the  Jewish  law  were  abolished,  and  a  per- 
secution  was  commenced  against  all  who  adhered  to 
these  obsenrances,  and  refused  to  sacrifioe  to  idab.  Je- 
rusalem was  deserted  by  priests  and  people,  and  the  daily 
sacrifice  at  the  altar  was  entirdy  diacontinued  (1  Mmc. 
i,  29-40;  2  Mace.  V,  24-26;  Joseph.  ^frt.xą  6, 4).  See 
AsTiocHUS  Epiphanes. 

This  led  to  the  cdebrated  reyolt  of  the  3Iaocabee% 
who,  after  an  ardnoos  and  sanguinary  stroggle,  obtain- 
ed  poaseasion  of  Jerusalem  (B.G.  168),  and  repaii«d  and 
pnrifled  the  Tempie,  which  was  then  diilapidaud  and  de- 
serted. New  ntensils  were  proyided  for  the  sacred  ser- 
yices:  the  old  altar,  which  had  been  poUuted  by  heatba 
abominations,  was  taken  away,  and  a  new  one  erected. 
The  sacrifices  were  then  recommenoed,  exactly  thne 
yean  after  the  Tempie  had  been  dedicated  to  Jupiter 
Olympius.  The  castle,  howeyer,  remained  in  the  bands 
of  the  Syrians,  and  long  proyed  a  sore  annoyanoe  to  the 
Jews,  although  Judas  Maccabceus  surroonded  the  Tem- 
pie with  a  high  and  strong  wali,  famished  with  Umea, 
in  which  soldiers  were  stationed  to  protect  the  woiship- 
pers  fh>m  the  Syrian  garrison  (1  Mace.  i,  86, 87;  JoeefA. 
AfU,  vii,  7).  Eyentually  the  annoyance  grew  so  iniol- 
erable  that  Judas  laid  siege  to  the  ństle.  This  attempt 
brought  a  powerful  aimy  into  the  country  mider  the 
command  of  the  regent  Lysias,  who,  howerer,  bdi^ 
constrained  to  tum  his  arms  elsewhere,  madę  peaoe 
with  the  Jews;  but  when  he  was  admitted  into  the 
dty,  and  obeenred  the  strength  of  the  place,  he  threw 
down  the  walls  in  yiolation  of  the  treaty  (1  Mace  ti, 
48-65).  In  the  ensuing  wiar  with  Baoehidea,  the  gen- 
erał of  Demetrius  Soter,  in  which  Jadas  was  dain,  the 
SjTians  strengthened  their  dtadel,  and  płaeed  in  it  the 
sons  of  the  prindpal  Jewish  families  as  hostagei  (1 
Maoc.  ix,  62, 58 ;  Joseph.  Ant,  xiii,  1, 8).  The  ycar  af- 
ter (B.C.  159)  the  temporizing  high-priest  Akinns  di- 
rected  the  wali  which  separated  the  oourt  of  brael  fhn 
that  of  the  Gentiles  to  be  cast  down,  to  aflbfd  the  lattcr 
liee  aocess  to  the  Tempie ;  but  he  was  scized  with  ptłsy 
as  soon  as  the  work  commenced,  and  died  in  great  a^ 
ny  (I  Mace  ix,  61-67).  When,  a  fcw  years  after,  De- 
metrius and  Alexander  Balaa  sought  to  ootbid  eadi  oth- 
er for  the  support  of  Jonathan,  the  hoetages  in  the  cai- 
tle  were  released ;  and  subsequently  aH  the  Syrian  far- 
risons  in  Judaea  were  eyaci^^tcd,  exeepting  thoee  «f  Je- 
rusalem and  Bethzur,  which  were  chiefiy  occspicd  bf 
apostatę  Jews,  who  were  aftaid  to  ]eave  thdr  piwes  of 


JERUSAŁEM 


841 


JERUSAŁEM 


Rfiige.  Jonathan  then  nboiłt  fhe  waUs  of  Jeniaalem, 
and  lepaired  the  bnildiogs  of  the  city,  be&des  erecting 
a  palaoe  for  his  own  rasidenoe  (1  Mace. x,  2-4;  Jowph. 
A  nL  xiii,  2, 1).  The  particular  histoiy  of  Jenualem  for 
■eyenl  y  ears  foUowing  ia  little  mure  than  an  aooount  of 
the  efRnts  of  the  MacoUMean  princes  to  obtain  poeseeńon 
of  the  castle,  and  of  the  Syriau  kingą  to  retainitintheir 
handa.  At  length,  in  B.C.  142,  the  gairiaon  waa  forced 
to  amrender  by  Simon,  who  demoliahed  it  altogether, 
that  it  might  not  again  be  uaed  againat  the  Jewa  by 
cheir  enemieab  Simon  then  atrengtibened  the  fortiflca- 
tions  of  the  moantain  on  which  the  Tempie  atood,  and 
tmilt  there  a  palące  for  himaelf  (1  Mace  xiii,  48-52; 
Joaeph.  Ata.  xiii,  6, 6).  Thia  buUding  -waa  afterwarda 
tumed  into  a  regular  fortreaa  by  John  Hyicanua  (q.  t.), 
mnd  waa  erer  afker  the  reaidenoe  of  the  Maccabnan 
princes  (Joseph.  ^4  itf.  xv,  1! ,  4).  It  is  called  by  Joaephna 
**  the  casde  of  Baria,"  in  his  hiatoiy  of  the  Jewa;  till  it 
was  streDgthened  and  enlarged  by  Herod  the  Great, 
who  caUed  it  the  caatle  of  Antonia,  under  which  name 
it  makea  a  oonapicuoua  flgun  in  the  Jewiah  wara  of  the 
Romana.    See  Maccabrks. 

6,  Of  Jeniaalem  itaelf  we  ftnd  no  notioe  of  oonaeąnence 
in  the  next  period  Uli  it  waB  taken  by  Pompey  (q.  v.) 
is  the  sommer  of  B.C  68,  and  on  the  very  day  obaiBryed 
by  the  Jewa  aa  one  of  lamentation  and  fiuting,  in  com- 
memoration  of  the  oonqueat  of  Jeniaalem  by  Nebnchad- 
nezzar.  Twelve  thooaand  Jewa  were  maasacred  in  the 
Tempie  courta,  including  many  prieata,  who  died  at  the 
Tery  altar  rather  than  auapend  the  aaered  rites  (Joaeph. 
A  ni,  xiv,  1-4).  On  thia  occaaion,  Pompey,  attended  by 
Ma  generała,  went  into  the  Tempk  and  viewed  the  sano- 
tuaiy ;  but  he  leit  untouched  all  its  treasurea  and  aaered 
thinga,  while  the  walla  of  the  city  itaelf  were  demoliah- 
ed. From  thia  time  the  Jewa  are  to  be  oonaidered  as 
mider  the  dominion  of  the  Romana  (Joseph,  ^ftf.  xiv, 
4,  5).  The  treasures  whioh  Fbmpey  had  spared  were 
seized  a  few  years  after  (B.G.  51)  by  Crassos.  In  the 
year  B.C.  43,  the  walls  of  the  city,  which  Pompey  had 
demoliahed,  were  reboilt  by  Antipater,  the  father  of  that 
Herod  the  Great  under  whom  Jeniaalem  was  destined 
to  assume  the  new  and  morę  mapiificent  aspect  which 
it  borę  in  the  time  of  Christ,  and  which  conatituted  the 
Jeniaalem  which  Josephnsdescribes.  See  Herod.  Un- 
der the  foUowing  reign  the  city  was  improved  with  mag- 
niflcent  taste  and  profnae  expenditure;  and  even  the 
Tempie,  which  alwaya  fonned  the  great  arehitectural 
glory  of  Jenisalem,  waa  taken  down  and  rebuilt  by 
Herod  the  Great,  with  a  aplendor  exceeding  that  of  Sol- 
omon'a  (Mark  xiii,  1 ;  John  ii,  20).  See  Templb.  Ił 
waa  in  the  courta  of  the  Tempie  aa  thna  rebuilt,  and  in 
the  streeta  of  the  city  aa  thna  iroproved,  that  the  Sav- 
iour  of  men  walked  up  and  down.  Herę  he  taught, 
here  he  wrought  miradea,  here  he  snffered ;  and  this 
was  the  Tempie  whose  **  góodly  Stones"  the  apostle  ad- 
mired  CSlaik  xiii,  1),  and  of  which  he  foretold  that  ere 
the  exi8ting  generation  had  paseed  away  not  one  stone 
shoold  be  left  upon  another.  Nor  was  the  city  in  this 
State  admired  by  Jews  oniy.  PHny  calls  it  **  longe  da- 
risaimam  nibium  orientis,  noo  JudasBB  modo**  (HitL  Nat, 
V,  16). 

Jeniaalem  aeems  to  have  been  ndaed  to  this  greatnesa 
as  if  to  cnhance  the  miseiy  of  ita  overthrow.  As  soon 
as  the  Jews  had  aet  the  aeal  to  their  formal  rejection  of 
Christ  by  putting  him  to  death,  and  invoking  the  re- 
Bponaibitity'  of  his  blood  upon  the  heada  of  them8elvea 
and  of  their  children  (Matt  xxvii,  25),  ita  doom  went 
forth.  After  haring  been  the  acene  of  honron  without 
example,  during  a  memorable  siege,  the  process  of 
which  is  nairated  by  Josephus  in  fuli  detail,  it  was,  in 
A«D.  70,  captured  to  the  Romans,  who  razed  the  city 
and  Tempie  to  the  ground,  leaving  onIy  three  of  the 
towers  and  a  part  of  the  western  wali  to  show  how 
strang  a  plaoe  the  Roman  anns  hod  overthrown  (Joseph. 
WoTy  vii,  1, 1).  Since  then  the  holy  dty  has  lain  at 
the  merey  of  the  Gentiles,  and  will  ao  remain  *^  until  the 
timea  of  the  Gentilea  aze  fulMed." 


The  deatmetlon  of  Jeniaalem  by  the  Romana  did  not 
caiiae  the  aite  to  be  ntterly  foraaken.  Titua  (q.  v.)  left 
there  in  gazriaon  the  whole  of  the  tenth  legion,  beaides 
aevend  aqnadnma  of  cavaliy  and  cohorta  of  foot.  For 
theae  troopa,  and  for  those  who  ministered  to  t^eir 
wanta,  there  muat  have  been  dwellinga ;  and  there  ia  no 
reaaon  to  auppoae  that  auch  Jewa  or  Christiana  aa  ap- 
peaied  to  have  taken  no  part  in  the  war  were  forbidden 
to  make  their  abode  among  the  ruina,  and  building  them 
up  80  far  aa  their  neceańtiea  might  reqiiire.  But  noth* 
ing  like  a  reatoration  of  the  dty  could  have  ariaen  from 
thia,  aa  it  waa  not  likdy  that  any  but  poor  people,  who 
foond  an  intereat  in  auppl3ring  the  wants  of  the  garrison, 
were  likdy  to  resort  to  the  ruina  under  auch  circumstan- 
oea.  However,  we  leam  ftom  Jerome  that  for  fifty  yeara 
after  ita  deatruction,  until  the  time  of  Hadrian,  there  atill 
esisted  remnants  of  the  dty.  But  during  all  this  period 
there  ia  no  mention  of  it  in  history . 

Up  to  A.D.  181  the  Jews  remained  tolerably  quiet, 
although  apparently  awaiting  any  favorable  opportnni- 
ty  of  shaking  off  the  Roman  yoke.  The  then  emperor, 
Hadrian  (q.  v*),  seems  to  have  been  aware  of  this  sUte 
of  feeling,  and,  among  other  measures  of  precaution,  oiv 
dered  Jenisalem  to  be  rebuilt  as  a  fortificd  place  where^ 
with  to  keep  in  check  the  whole  Jewiah  population. 
The  works  had  madę  some  progreas  when  the  Jews,  un- 
able  to  endure  the  idea  that  thdr  holy  city  ahould  be 
occupied  by  foreigners,  and  that  strange  goda  ahould  be 
aet  up  within  it,  broke  out  into  open  rebellion  under  the 
notoriooa  Baichochebaa  (q.  v.),  who  claimcd  to  be  the 
Meaaiah.  Hia  aucoeaa  waa  at  firat  very  great,  but  he 
waa  crushed  before  the  tremendous  power  of  the  Ro- 
mana, ao  aoon  aa  it  oould  be  brought  to  bear  upon  him; 
and  a  war  acarcdy  inferior  in  horror  to  that  under  Yes- 
pasian  and  Titua  waa,  like  it,  brought  to  a  cloae  by  the 
capture  of  Jeniaalem,  of  which  the  Jewa  had  obtained 
poeeesaion.  Thia  waa  in  A.D.  185,  from  which  period 
the  finał  dispersion  of  the  Jewa  haa  oflen  bccn  dated. 
The  Romana  then  finiahed  the  city  according  to  their 
firat  intention.  It  waa  roade  a  Roman  colony,  inhabited 
wholly  by  foreignera,  the  Jews  being  forbidden  to  ap- 
proach  it  on  pain  of  death :  a  tempie  to  Jupiter  Capito- 
linua  waa  erected  on  Mount  Moriah,  and  the  old  name 
of  Jeruaalem  waa  aonght  to  be  aupplanted  by  that  of 
^lia  Capitolma,  conferred  upon  it  in  honor  of  the  em* 
peior  ^Uua  Hadrianua  and  Jupiter  Capitolinua.  By 
thia  name  waa  the  city  known  tUl  the  time  of  Constan* 
tu)e»  when  that  of  Jeniaalem  again  became  cuirent, 
although  .£lia  was  atill  ita  public  dedgnation,  and  re- 
mained auch  ao  late  aa  A.D.  586,  when  it  appeara  in  the 
acta  of  a  aynod  held  there.  Thia  name  even  pasaed  to 
the  Mohammedana,  by  whom  it  waa  long  retained ;  and 
it  waa  not  till  after  they  recovered  the  dty  from  the 
Cruaadera  that  it  became  generally  known  among  them 
by  the  name  ot  Ml-Khttda—^^the  holy*"— which  it  atill 
bears. 

7.  From  the  rebnilding  by  Hadrian  the  history  of  Je- 
niaalem is  almost  a  blank  till  the  time  of  Constantine, 
when  ita  histoiy,  as  a  place  of  extreme  solidtude  and 
interest  to  the  Christian  Church,  properly  bcgins.  Pil- 
grimages  to  the  Holy  City  now  became  common  and 
popular.  Snch  a  pilgrimage  was  undertaken  in  A.D. 
826  by  the  empenn^s  mother  Helena,  then  in  the  eighti- 
eth  year  of  her  age,  who  built  churches  on  the  allegcd 
dte  of  the  nativity  at  Bethlehem,  and  of  the  resurrec- 
tion  on  the  Mount  of  01ive8.  This  example  may  prob- 
ably  have  exdted  her  son  to  the  diacorcry  of  the  dte 
of  the  holy  sepulchre,  and  to  the  erection  of  a  church 
thereon.  He  removed  the  tempie  of  Yenus,  with  which, 
in  studied  insult,  the  dte  had  been  encumbcrcd.  The 
holy  sepulchre  was  then  purified,  and  a  roagnificent 
church  was,  by  his  order,  built  ovcr  and  around  the  sa- 
cred  spot.  This  tempie  was  corapleted  and  dedicated 
with  great  solemnity  in  AD.  885.  There  is  no  doubt 
that  the  spot  thus  singled  out  is  the  same  that  has 
ever  dnce  been  regarded  as  the  place  in  which  Chriat 
waa  entombed;  but  the  correctneaa  of  the  Identification 


JERUSAŁEM 


842 


JERUSAŁEM 


then  madę  has  of  Ute  yean  been  much  dispated,  on 
grounds  which  have  been  examined  in  the  artide  Gol- 
OOTHA.  The  veiy  croas  on  which  our  Lord  suffered 
was  also,  in  the  oourse  of  these  exploration8,  believed  to 
haye  been  diBcovered,  under  the  circomstances  which 
haye  elsewhere  been  described.    See  Csosa. 

By  Constantine  the  edict  exclading  the  Jews  6om 
the  city  of  their  fathen'  sepulchrea  was  so  far  repealed 
that  they  were  allowed  to  enter  it  once  a  year  to  wail 
orer  the  desolation  of  ^'  the  holy  and  beautiful  houae**  in 
which  their  fathers  worshipped  Grod.  When  the  neph- 
ew  of  Constantine,  the  emperor  Julian  (q.y.)t  abandoned 
Ghristianity  for  the  old  Paganism,  he  endeayored,  as  a 
matter  of  policy,  to  conciliate  the  Jews.  He  allowed 
them  free  access  to  the  city,  and  permitted  them  to  re- 
build  their  Tempie.  They  accocdingly  began  to  lay  the 
foondations  in  A.D.  362 ;  but  the  speedy  death  of  the 
emperor  probably  occasioned  that  abandonment  of  the 
attempt  which  contemporaiy  writers  ascribe  to  super- 
natural  hinderances.  The  edicts  seem  then  to  haye 
been  renewed  which  excluded  the  Jews  from  the  dty, 
except  on  the  anniyeraary  of  its  capture,  when  they 
were  allowed  to  enter  the' city  and  weep  oyer  it.  Their 
appointed  wailing-place  remains,  and  their  practice  of 
wailing  there  continues  to  the  present  day.    From  St. 


The  Jews  "  Wailine-Place,"  In  the  western  waU  of  the 
Maram  indosore. 

James,  the  first  bishop,  to  Jude  II,  who  died  A.D.  136, 
there  had  been  a  series  of  fifteen  bishops  of  Jewish  de- 
Bcent;  and  from  Blarcus,  who  succeeded  Simeon,  to  Ma- 
carius,  who  presided  over  the  Church  of  Jerusalem  un- 
der Constantine,  there  was  a  series  of  twenty-three  bish- 
ops  of  Gentile  descent,  but,  beyond  a  bare  list  of  their 
names,  little  is  known  of  the  Church  or  of  the  dty  of 
Jerusalem  during  the  whole  of  this  latter  period. 

In  the  centuries  ensuing  the  conyeraion  of  Constan- 
tine, the  roads  to  Zioń  were  thronged  with  pilgrims 
from  all  parts  of  Christendom,  and  the  land  abounded  in 
monasteries,  occupied  by  persona  who  wished  to  lead  a 
religious  life  amid  the  scenes  which  had  been  sanctified 
by  the  Saviour'8  presence.  Aller  much  struggle  of  con- 
flicting  dignities,  Jerusalem  was,  in  A.D.  451,  declared  a 
patriarchate  by  the  Council  of  Chalcedon.  See  Patri- 
ABCHATE  OF  Jeuusalem.  In  the  theological  contro- 
yersies  which  followed  the  dedsion  of  that  council  with 
reganl  to  the  two  natures  of  Christ,  Jerusalem  borę  its 
share  with  other  Oriental  chiu-ches,  and  two  of  its  bish- 
ops  were  dcposed  by  Monophysite  fanatics.  The  Synod 
of  Jerusalem  in  A.D.  636  coiifirmed  the  decree  of  the 


Synod  ofConstantuiopljeagainst  the  MonophyBite&  Ses 
Jerusalem,  Coim cilb  of.  In  the  same  century  it  fi>and 
a  second  Constantine  in  Justinian,  who  ascended  the 
throne  A.D.  527.  He  repaired  and  enriched  the  iormcr 
structures,  and  boilt  upon  Mount  Moriah  a  magnificent 
church  to  the  Yiigin,  as  a  memoriał  of  the  perBecotioo 
of  Jesus  in  the  Tempie.  He  also  founded  ten  or  eleroi 
conyents  in  and  about  Jerusalem  and  Jericho,  and  estab- 
lished  a  hospital  for  pilgrims  in  each  of  thoae  dtiet. 

In  the  foUowing  centaiy,  the  Persians,  who  had  kmf 
harassed  the  empire  of  the  East,  penetrated  into  Syria, 
and  in  A.D.  614,  under  Chosroes  II,  alter  defcating  th« 
forces  of  the  emperor  Heradins,  took  Jerusalem  by 
storm.  Many  thousands  of  the  inhabitanta  were  sUiii, 
and  much  of  the  dty,  induding  the  fineat  cfaurcbes^ 
that  of  the  Holy  Sepulchre  among  them— was  desuoy- 
ed.  When  the  conqueror8  withdrew  they  took  away 
the  prindpal  inhabitants,  the  patriarch,  and  the  true 
cross;  but  when,  the  year  after,  peaoe  waa  condaded, 
theae  were  reetored,  and  the  emperor  Heradiua  enteied 
Jerusalem  in  solenm  state,  bearing  the  cniaa  upon  his 
shoulders. 

The  damage  occasioned  by  the  Persians  was  speedily 
repaired.  But  Arabia  aoon  fumished  a  mote  fonnida- 
ble  enemy  in  the  khalif  Omar,  whose  troops  appeared 
before  the  dty  in  A.D.  636,  Arabia,  Syria,  and  Egypi 
haying  already  been  brought  under  tbe  Moalem  yóke. 
After  a  long  siege  the  austere  khalif  himself  came  to 
the  camp,  and  the  dty  was  at  length  surrendered  to  him 
in  A.D.  637.  The  conqueror  of  mighty  kings  entered 
the  holy  city  in  his  garment  of  camd's  hair,  and  eoo- 
ducted  himself  with  much  discretion  and  geneioas  ioi^ 
bearance.  By  his  orders  the  magnificent  moaąoc  whidi 
still  bears  his  name  was  built  upon  Mount  Moriah,  upon 
the  site  of  the  Jewish  Tempie. 

8.  Jerusalem  remained  in  posseesion  of  the  Aiabianą 
and  was  oocasionally  yisited  by  Christian  lulgrims  from 
Europę  till  towards  the  year  1000,  when  a  generał  belief 
that  the  aecond  coming  of  the  Sayiour  was  near  at  band 
drew  pilgrims  in  unwonted  crowds  to  the  Holy  Land, 
and  created  an  impulse  for  pilgrimages  thithcr  which 
ceased  not  to  act  after  the  first  exdting  canse  had  been 
forgotten.  The  Moalem  goyemment,  in  order  to  derire 
some  profit  from  this  enthusiaam,  impoeed  the  tńbote 
of  a  piece  of  gold  as  the  prioe  of  entrance  into  the  holy 
dty.  The  sight,  by  such  laige  numbers,  of  the  hdy 
pUce  in  the  hands  of  infidels,  the  exaction  of  tributc^ 
and  the  insults  to  which  the  pUgrims,  often  of  the  higb- 
est  rank,  were  expo6ed  from  the  Moslem  rabUe,  exdted 
an  extraordinary  ferment  in  Europę,  and  led  to  those 
remarkable  expeditions  for  recoyering  the  Holy  Sepal- 
chre  from  the  Mohammedans  which,  under  the  name  of 
the  Crusades,  will  always  fili  a  most  important  and  cs- 
rious  chapter  in  the  history  of  the  world.  (See  Gib- 
bon'8  HUtory  ofthe  DecUfte  cmd  Fali  o/ the  Romtm  iA- 
pire,)    See  Crubadiss. 

The  dominion  oyer  Palestine  had  paased  in  A.D.  960 
from  the  khaUfs  of  Bagdad  to  the  Fatimite  khalift  of 
Egypt,  and  thesc  in  their  tum  were  dispoesessed  in  AIX 
1073  by  the  Turkomans,  who  had  usurped  the  powcts  of 
the  Eastem  khalifat.  The  seyerities  ererdsed  by  tboe 
morę  fieroe  and  undyilized  Moslems  upon  both  the  nt- 
tiye  Christiana  and  the  European  pilgrims  anpplied  Um 
immediate  impulse  to  the  first  Eastem  ezpeditioa  But 
by  the  time  the  Crusaders,  under  Godfrey  of  Booilkn, 
appeared  before  Jerusalem,  on  the  17th  of  Jonę,  lOSd, 
the  Egyptian  khalifs  had  recoyered  poaseasioo  of  Paks- 
tine,  and  driyen  the  Turkomans  beyond  the  Eophnta. 

Ailer  a  siege  of  forty  dajr^s  the  "holy  dty  was  takee 
by  storm  on  the  15th  day  oi  July,  and  a  dreadful  mas- 
sacre  of  the  Moslem  inhabitants'  foUowed,  withoot  di»- 
tinction  of  age  or  sez.  Aa  soon  as  order  was  reatored, 
and  tbe  dty  deared  of  the  dead,  a  regular  goyerament 
was  eatablished  by  the  election  of  Godfiey  as  king  of 
Jerusalem.  One  of  the  first  cares  of  tbe  new  mooareh 
was  to  dedicate  anew  to  the  Lord  the  plaoe  wbere  faii 
presence  had  onoe  abode,  and  the  Mosąue  of  Omar  be* 


JERUSAŁEM 


843 


JERUSAŁEM 


i  a  ChriatUn  cathedra!,  whicli  the  histońans  of  the 
time  diatinguMh  as  **  the  Tempie  of  the  Lord"  {Tempium 
Dammi).  The  Christiana  kept  possesńon  of  Jeniaalem 
eighty-cight  yean.  See  below,  Jerusałem,  Kmiouts 
OP.  Duiing  this  long  period  they  appear  to  haye  erect- 
ed  aereral  chiirchea  and  many  conventa.  Of  the  Utter, 
few,  if  any,  tracea  remain;  and  of  the  former,  sare  one 
OT  two  ruina,  the  Charch  of  the  Holy  Sepulchre,  which 
they  rebuilt,  ia  the  only  memoriał  that  attesta  the  ex- 
istence  of  the  Christiankingdom  of  Jeniaalem.  In  A.D. 
1187  the  holy  city  waa  wreated  from  the  handa  of  the 
Chiiatiana  by  the  sułtan  Saladin,  and  the  order  of  things 
was  then  rcyeiaed.  The  croaa  waa  rcmored  with  igno- 
miny  trom  the  aacred  dome,  the  holy  placea  were  puri- 
fied  from  Christian  stain  with  roae-water  brought  from 
Damaacna,  and  the  cali  to  prayer  by  the  muezzin  onoe 


morę  aomided  oyer  the  dty.  From  that  time  to  the 
preaent  day  the  holy  dty  haa  remained,  with  alight  in- 
termption,  in  the  handa  of  the  Moalema.  On  the  threat- 
ened  aięge  by  Richard  of  England  in  1192,  Saladin  took 
gpreat  paina  in  atrengthening  ita  defences.  New  walla 
and  bulwarka  were  erected,  and  deep  trenchea  cut,  and 
in  8ix  montha  the  town  waa  stronger  than  it  ever  had 
been,  and  the  worka  had  the  firmneaa  and  aolidity  of  a 
rock.  But  in  A.D.  1219,  the  aoltan  Melek  el-Moaddin 
of  Damaacna,  who  then  had  posaeaaion  of  Jerusalem,  or- 
dered  all  the  walla  and  towera  to  be  demoliahed,  except 
the  citadel  and  the  indoanre  of  the  mo6que,  lest  the 
Franka  ahould  again  beoome  mastera  of  the  city  and 
find  it  a  place  of  stiength.  In  this  defenoeleaa  state  J&- 
maalem  oontinued  till  it  waa  delivered  over  to  the  Chńa- 
tiana  in  oonaeąuence  of  a  treaty  with  the  emperor  Fred- 
erick  II,  in  A.D.  1229,  with  the  understanding  that  the 
walla  ahould  not  be  lebuilt  Yet  ten  yeara  later  (A.D. 
1289)  the  barona  and  knighta  of  Jeruaalem  beg^  to 
boild  the  walla  anew,  and  to  erect  a  strong  fortreaa  on 
the  weat  of  the  dty.  But  the  worka  were  intemipted 
by  the  emir  Dayid  of  Kerek,  who  acized  the  dty,  atran- 
gled  the  Chriatian  inhabitanta,  and  cast  down  the  new- 
ly  erected  walla  and  fortress.  Four  yeara  after,  howev- 
er  (A.D.  1243),  Jeruaalem  waa  again  madę  ovcr  to  the 
Christiana  without  any  reatriction,  and  the  worka  ap- 
pear to  haye  been  restored  and  completed ;  for  they  are 
mentioned  aa  exiating  when  the  city  was  stormed  by 
the  wild  Khariamian  hordes  in  the  follovring  year,  ahort- 
ly  after  which  the  dty  reyerted  for  the  last  time  into 
the  handa  of  ita  Kohammedan  masters,  who  have  sub- 
stantially  kept  it  to  the  preaent  day,  although  in  1277 
Jerusalem  waa  nominally  annexed  to  the  kingdom  bf 
Sicily. 

9.  From  thia  time  Jerusalem  appears  to  haye  sunk 
yery  much  in  political  and  military  importance,  and  it 
is  scarcely  named  in  the  history  of  the  Mamduke  suł- 
tana who  reigned  oyer  £g>'pt  and  the  greater  part  of 
Syria  in  the  14th  and  15th  centuiie&  At  length,  with 
the  reat  of  Syria  and  Egypt,  it  passed  under  the  sway 
of  the  Turkish  sułtan  Selim  I  in  1517,  who  paid  a  hasty 
yisit  to  the  holy  dty  from  Damascus  afler  his  return 
from  Egypt.  From  that  time  Jerusalem  haa  fonned  a 
part  of  the  Ottoman  Empire,  and  during  thia  period  haa 
been  subject  to  few  yicisaitudea;  its  history  is  aooord- 
ingly  barren  of  incident.  The  present  walls  of  the  city 
were  erected  by  Sułeiman  the  Magnificent,  the  succeaaor 
of  Sdim,  in  A.D.  1542,  as  is  attcsted  by  an  inacriptiou 
oyer  the  Jaffa  gate.  As  lately  as  A.D.  1808,  the  Church 
of  the  Holy  Sepulchre  was  partiałly  consumcd  by  flre; 
but  the  damage  was  repaired  with  great  labor  and  ex- 
pense  by  September,  1810,  and  tAe  traycller  now  finds 
in  thia  impoeing  fabric  no  tracea  of  that  calamity. 

In  A.D.  1832  Jeruaalem  became  subject  to  Moham- 
med  Ali,  the  paaha  of  Egypt,  the  holy  dty  opening  ita 
gatea  to  him  without  a  siege.  During  the  great  in- 
surrection  in  the  districts  of  Jerusalem  and  Nablfts  in 
1884,  the  insurgenta  aeized  upon  Jerusalem,  and  held 
poaseaaion  of  it  for  a  time ;  but  by  the  yigoroua  opera- 
tiona  of  the  goyemment  order  waa  soon  restored,  and 
the  dty  reyerted  quietly  to  its  allegiance  on  the  ap- 
proach  of  Ibrahim  Pasba  with  his  troops.  In  1841  Mo- 
hammed  Ali  was  depnyed  of  all  his  Syrian  posscssiona 
by  European  interference,  and  Jerusalem  was  again  sub- 
jected  to  the  Turkish  goyemment,  under  which  it  now 
remaina. 

In  the  same  year  took  place  the  establishment  of  a 
Protestant  bishopric  at  Jerusalem  by  the  English  and 
Prussian  goyemments,  and  the  ercction  ui)on  Alount 
Zioń  of  a  church  calculatcd  to  hołd  500  persons,  for  the 
celebration  of  diyine  worsłiip  according  to  the  rituał  of 
the  English  Church.    See  Jerusalem,  See  of  (bełow). 

In  1850  a  dispute  about  the  guardianship  of  the  holy 
places  between  the  roonks  of  the  Greek  and  Latin 
churches,  in  which  Nicholas,  emperor  of  Russia,  sided 
with  the  Greeks,  and  Louis  Napoleon,  emperor  of  the 
French,  with  the  Latins,  led  to  a  decision  of  the  question 


JERUSALEM 


844 


JERUSALEM 


by  the  Porte,  which  was  uosatiiifactoty  to  Ruasia,  and 
which  resulted  in  a  war  of  conaiderable  maguitudey 
known  as  "the  Crimean  War,"  between  that  country  on 
the  one  side,  and  the  allied  forces  of  England  and  France 
on  the  other.  This  war  has  led  to  greater  liberties  of 
all  classes  of  dtizens  in  the  enjoyment  of  their  religioos 
faith,  and  to  a  partial  adjustment  of  the  riral  daims  of 
the  Greek  and  Łatin  monks  to  certain  portions  of  the 
holy  places;  it  has  also  resulted  in  much  morę  freedom 
towards  Frank  trayellers  in  yisiting  the  dty,  so  that 
even  Udies  have  been  allowed  to  enter  the  mo8que  in- 
closure;  but  it  has  cauacd  no  materiał  alteration  in  the 
city  or  in  its  political  relations. 

.  For  details,  see  Witsius,  HisL  HierosoUfnuBi  in  his  Mii- 
ceU,  Sacr.  ii,  187  sq. ;  Spalding,  Gesch,  d,  ChristL  Ko- 
fdgsreichs  JeruscUem  (Berlin,  1803) ;  Devling,^VuB  Ca- 
pUolina  Origg,  et  Historia  (Lips.  1743);  Wagnitz,  Ueb. 
d,  Phdnomane  vor  d.  Zerstorung  Jer,  (Halle,  1780) ;  B. 


Bessoie,  Storia  delia  Batiliea  diP,  Croce  in  Genu.  (Bonę, 
1750) ;  C.  Cellarius,  De  jEUa  Capiloltnaj  ettu,  in  his  iVo. 
grammaia,  p.  441  8q. ;  Poujoulat,  Histoire  de  Jiruntkm 
(&ux.ld42);  F.MUnter'8  treatise  on  the  Jetciak  Wm 
under  Iladrian,  transL  in  the  BibUoih,  Sacra  for  184^ 
p.  893  są.;  Raumer^s  Paldstwa;  Bobin8on*8  Bib.  Ret, 
m  Palestine;  and  espedally  Williams,  ł/olg  City,  toL  I 

II.  Ancient  Topography. — This  has  been  a  snbject  of 
no  little  dispute  among  antiqaaxian  geographers.  We 
prefer  here  bricfly  to  state  our  own  iiklependent  coDckł- 
sions,  with  the  authority  on  which  each  point  rests,  aod 
we  shall  therefore  but  incidentally  notice  the  oontrover« 
sies,  which  will  be  found  discussed  under  the  serenl 
heads  elsewhere  in  this  C^^clopiedia. 

1.  Natural  Featuret, — These,  of  oonrse,  are  moady 
the  same  in  all  ages,  as  the  surface  of  the  region  where 
Jerusalem  is  situated  is  generaUy  limeetooe  rock.  Yet 
the  wear  of  the  elements  has  no  doubt  canaed  sonie 


A 


Map  of  Ancient  Jerusalem. 


S. 


JERUSALEM 


845 


JERUSALEM 


minor  changM,  and  the  demolition  of  laige  bnildings 
BUGoeflayely  hu  effected  very  oonsidenble  diffeiencefl 
of  level  by  the  accnmaktion  of  rubbish  in  the  hoUows, 
miid  eren  on  some  of  the  hills;  while  in  aome  cases  high 
■pot«  were  andently  cut  awaj,  yalleys  partially  filled, 
and  artificial  platforma  and  temcee  fonned,  and  in  oth- 
en  deep  tzenchea  or  maflsiye  stroctures  have  left  their 
tncea  to  thia  day. 

(A.)  //t^— (1.)  Mount  Zioń,  fireąuently  mentioned  in 
the  Oid  Testament,  onlj  once  in  the  New  (Rev.  xiv,  1), 
called  by  Joeephas  **  the  Upper  City"  (  War,  v,  4, 1),  was 
divided  by  a  valley  (TyropoBon)  fiom  another  hill  oppo- 
aite  (Acra),  than  which  it  was  **  higher,  and  in  length 
morę  diiect"  (ibid.).  It  is  ahnott  univenaUy  asaigned, 
in  modem  times,  as  the  aonth-westem  hill  of  the  eity. 
See  Zio^f. 

(2.)  Mount  Moriak,  mentioned  in  2  Chroń,  iii,  1,  as 
the  siteof  the  Tempie,  isanmistakableinallages.  Orig- 
inally,  aoeording  to  Joeephus  (  War,  v,  6,  i),  the  summit 
was  smali,  and  the  platform  was  enlarged  by  Solomon, 
who  built  op  a  high  stone  temce  waU  on  thiee  sides 
(east,  sonth,  and  west),  leaving  a  tremendoos  precipice 
at  the  (soath-eastem)  comer  {AnL  xv,  11,  8  and  5). 
JSome  of  the  lower  oourses  of  these  Stones  are  still  stand- 
ing.    See  Moriah. 

^.)  The  hill  ^cra  is  so  caDed by  Josephns,  who  says 
it  **  snwtained  the  Lower  City,  and  was  of  the  shape  of  a 
moon  when  she  Lb  homed,"  or  a  crescent  (  War,  v,  4, 1). 
It  was  separated  from  another  hill  (Bezetha)  by  a  broad 
Talley,  which  the  Asmonnans  partly  filled  ap  ¥rith  earth 
taken  from  the  top  of  Acra,  so  that  it  might  be  madę 
lower  than  the  Tempie  (ibid.),  Conoeming  the  poei- 
tion  of  this  hill  there  is  much  dispute,  which  can  only 
be  settled  by  the  location  of  the  yalleys  on  either  side 
of  it  (see  Caspari,  in  the  Stud.  und  KriL  ii,  1864).  See 
Acra. 

(4.)  The  hill  Bezetha,  interpreted  by  Josephus  as 
meaning  **  New  City,"  pUu»d  by  him  oppoeite  Acra,  and 
stated  to  be  originally  lower  than  it,  Ib  said  by  him  also 
to  lie  over  against  the  tower  Antonia,  from  which  it  was 
separated  by  a  deep  fosse  (War,  y,  4, 1  and  2).  See 
Bkzetha. 

(Ł)  Ophel  is  referred  to  by  Nehemiah  (iii,  26, 27),  as 
well  as  by  Josephns  (War,  v, 4, 2),  in  such  connection 
with  the  walls  as  to  show  that  nonę  other  can  be  in- 
tended  than  the  ridge  of  ground  sloping  to  a  point 
Mothward  firom  the  Tempie  area.    See  Opheu 


Probable  contour  of  the  Hill  Ophel.  (From  Lientenant 
Warren*B  Sketch,  Feb.  ].  1809,  hi Tracings  of  ihe  "  Pales- 
tine  Ezploratlon  Fnnd/*) 

(6.)  Cahary,  or  morę  properly  Golgotha,  was  a  smali 
eminence,  mentioned  by  the  eyangelists  as  the  place  of 
the  crucifixion.  Modern  tradition  assigns  it  to  the  site 
of  the  Church  of  the  Holy  Sepulchre,  but  this  is  greatly 
oontested ;  the  ąuestton  tums  chiefly  upon  the  courae 
of  the  second  wali,  outaide  of  which  the  crucifixion  un- 
doubtedly  took  place  (John  xix,  17).    See  Calvary. 

(7.)  The  Mount  qf  Olives  is  so  oflen  referred  to  by 
Josephus,  as  well  as  in  the  Bibie,  that  it  can  bo  taken 
for  no  other  than  that  which  now  passes  under  the  same 
See  Olivkt. 


(8.)  Seopus  is  the  name  assigned  by  Josephus  to  an 
elevated  plain  about  seven  furlongs  distant  from  the 
city  wali  in  a  northerly  direction  (  War,  ii,  19, 4 ;  v,  2, 
8),  an  intenral  that  was  leveled  by  Titus  on  his  ap- 
pioach  from  Samaria  (ibid,  iii,  2).  By  this  can  there^ 
fora  be  meant  netther  the  rocky  prominenoes  on  the 
southem,  nor  those  on  the  northem  edge  of  that  part 
of  the  valley  of  Jehoshaphat  which  sweeps  around  the 
city  on  the  north,  for  the  formcr  are  too  near,  and  the 
latter  inteicepted  by  the  yalley ;  but  rather  the  gentle 
slope  on  the  north-west  of  the  city. 

Besides  these,  there  is  mentioned  in  Jer.  xxxi,  39, 
^  the  hill  Gareb,"  apparently  somewhere  on  the  north- 
west  of  the  dty,  and  Goath,  possibly  an  eminence  on  the 
west.  "  Mount  Gihon,"  so  confidently  laid  down  on  cer- 
tain  maps  of  the  ancient  dty,  is  a  modem  invention. 

(B.)  ViaflSey«.— (1.)  The  principal  of  these  was  the  one 
termed  by  Josephus  that  of  the  Tyropacn,  or  Cheese- 
makers,  running  between  Zioń  and  Acra,  down  as  far  as 
SikMim  (  War,  v,  4, 1).  The  southem  part  of  this  is  still 
clearly  to  be  traced,  although  much  choked  up  by  the 
aconmuhited  rabbish  of  ages ;  but  as  to  the  northem 
part  thero  Ls  oonsiderable  discrepancy.    Some  (as  Dr. 


•OU1H  wili  tranMAM  mka 


Sectlon  of  the  Tyropceon  Yalley  and  Mt.  Moriah,  ehowing 
the  present  as  well  as  the  ortginal  surface.  (From  Lt. 
Warren*a  Sketch,  OcL  21,  in  Tracings  of  the  '^Palestine 
Bzploration  Fund.") 

Robinson)  make  it  bend  around  the  northem  brow  of 
Zioń,  and  so  end  in  the  shallow  depression  between  that 
hill  and  the  eminence  of  the  Holy  Sepulchre ;  while  oth- 
ers  (Williams,  with  whose  yicws  in  this  particular  we 
coincide)  carry  it  directly  north,  through  the  depression 
along  the  western  side  of  the  mo8que  area,  and  east^ 
ward  of  the  church,  in  the  directiou  of  the  Damascoa 
Gate.    See  Tyropceon. 

(2.)  The  only  other  conaiderable  yalley  within  the 
dty  was  that  above  referred  to  as  lying  between  Acra 
and  Bezetha.  The  language  of  Josephus,  in  the  paa- 
sage  whera  he  mentions  this  valley  (War,  v,  4, 1),  has 
been  understood  by  some  as  only  applicable  to  the  up- 
per portion  of  that  which  is  above  regarded  as  the  Ty- 
ropoeon,  because  he  calls  it  ^  a  broad  Yalley,*^  and  this  is 
the  broadest  in  that  vidnity.  But  the  Jewish  historian 
only  says  that  the  hills  Acra  and  Bezetha  "were^bi^ 
merbf  diyided  by  a  broad  yalley;  but  in  those  times 
when  the  Asmonieans  reigned,  they  filled  up  that  yalley 
with  earth,  and  had  a  mind  to  jolu  the  city  to  the  Tem- 
pie :  they  then  took  off  a  part  of  the  height  of  Acra, 
and  reduced  it  to  a  less  deyation  than  it  was  before, 
that  the  Tempie  might  be  superior  to  it."  From  this  it 
is  elear  that  in  the  times  of  Josephus  this  yalley  was 
not  so  distinct  as  formerly,  so  that  we  must  not  look  for 
it  in  the  plain  and  apparently  unchanged  depression 
west  of  the  Tempie,  but  rather  in  the  choked  and  ob- 
scure  one  running  northward  from  the  middle  of  the 
northem  aide  of  the  present  mosąue  indosure.  The 
union  of  the  city  and  Tempie  across  this  yalley  is  also 
moro  explicable  on  this  ground,  because  it  not  only  im- 
plies  a  nearly  levd  passagc  effected  between  the  Tempie 
area  and  that  part  of  the  city  thero  intcnded — which  is 
tme  only  on  the  northem  side,  but  it  also  intiraates  that 
there  had  proyiously  been  no  spedal  passage-way  there — 
whereas  on  the  west  the  Tempie  was  connected  with 
Zioń  by  a  bridge  or  causeway,  besides  at  least  two  other 
easy  ayenues  to  the  parts  of  the  city  in  that  direction. 

(3.)  The  longest  and  deepest  of  the  yalleys  outside 
the  walls  was  the  YaUey  of  Jehoshaphat,  which  ran 
along  the  entire  eastem  and  north-eastem  side,  forming 
the  bed  of  the  brook  Kedron.  Kespecting  the  identity 
of  this,  the  modem  name  leaves  no  room  for  dispute. 
See  Jehoshaphat,  Yalley  of. 

(4.)  Cn  the  south  side  ran  the  YaUey  benrHumom  Cu 


JERUSALEM 


846 


JERUSALEM 


e.  "0on  of  Hinnom"),  corrupted  in  our  SaYioai'8  time 
into  Gehenna,  and  anciently  styled  Tophet,  Of  thia 
ałso  the  modem  name  ia  etill  the  same.    See  Gehenna. 

(5.)  On  the  west,  fonning  the  northem  oontinuation 
of  the  last,  was  what  has  acquired  the  appellation  of  the 
Yalietf  of  Gihouy  from  the  poola  of  that  name  situated 
in  it.    See  Giuon. 

(C)  Streama, — Of  these  nonę  were  perennial,  bat  only 
brooks  formed  hy  the  winter  raina  that  collected  'm  the 
yalleys  and  ran  off  at  the  south-eastem  oonier  towaids 
the  Dead  Sea.  The  brook  Kedron  was  the  principal 
of  these,  and  is  mentioned  in  both  the  Old  and  New 
Testaments  (2  Sam.  xv,  23 ;  John  xviii,  1),  and  by  Jo- 
sephus  (  Wary  v,  2, 3),  as  lying  between  the  city  and  the 
Mount  of  01ive8.    See  Kedron. 

(D.)  Foimtains,  —  (I.)  En-rogdy  firat  mentioned  in 
Josh.  xy,  7, 8,  as  a  point  in  the  boundaiy-line  of  Judah, 
on  the  soath  aide  of  the  hill  Zioń.  It  is  genenDy  iden- 
tified  with  the  deep  well  still  foand  at  ^e  junction  of 
the  yalleys  of  Hinuom  and  Jehoahaphat,  and  cunently 
known  as  the  well  of  Joab  or  Nehemiah.  It  is  evidently 
the  same  as  that  called  by  Josephus  "  the  fountain  in 
the  king's  garden"  {Ara,  vii,  14, 4).  Ita  water  is  pecul- 
iar,  but  no  underground  connection  has  been  traced  with 
any  other  of  the  fountains.    See  En-rooel. 

(2.)  Siloam  or  SkUoah  is  mentioned  in  the  Old  and 
New  Testaments,  as  well  as  by  Josephus,  and  the  last 
indicates  its  site  at  the  mouth  of  the  Yalley  of  Tyropoe- 
on  {Wary  v,  4, 1).  It  is  identical  with  the  modem 
fount  of  Sdwan.    See  Siix>am. 

(3.)  The  only  remaining  one  of  the  three  natnral 
springs  about  Jerusalem  is  that  now  known  as  the  Foun- 
tain of  the  Yiirgin  (Urn  ed-Deraj,  '*  the  mother  of  8tepe**)i 
above  the  Fool  of  Siloam.  It  is  intermittent,  the  over- 
flow  apparently  of  the  Tempie  supply;  and  it  b  eon- 
nected  by  a  passage  through  the  rock  with  the  Pool  of 
Siloam  (Robinson,  ResearcheSy  i,  502  8q.).  It  is  appar- 
ently the  same  with  the  "  king'8  pool"  (Neh.ii,  14 ;  comp. 
iii,  16)  and  "  Solomon'8  PooP  (Josephus,  War,  v,  4,  2). 
This  we  are  indined  (with  Lightfoot  and  Robinson)  to 
identify  with  the  'Tool  o/Betheada:'  in  John  v,  2.  See 
Bethesda. 

There  are  several  other  wells  adjoining  the  Tempie 
area  which  have  the  peculiar  taste  of  Siloam,  but  wheth- 
er  they  proceed  from  a  living  spring  under  Moriah,  or 
are  conducted  thither  by  the  aąueduct  from  Bethlehem, 
or  come  from  some  distant  source,  futurę  explorations 
can  alone  determine,  Some  such  well  has,  howerer, 
lately  been  dJscovered,  but  how  far  it  supplies  these  va- 
rious  fountains  has  not  yet  been  fully  determined  (Jour. 
Sac,  Lit,  April,  18G4),    See  Solomon^s  Pool. 

(E.)  Reserroirsy  Tanks,  ete.— (1.)  The  Upper  Pool  of 
Gihony  mentioned  in  Isa.  vii,  3 ;  2  Chroń,  xxxii,  30,  etc., 
can  be  no  other  than  that  now  found  in  the  northem 
part  of  the  valley  at  the  west  of  the  city.  This  is  prob- 
ably  what  is  called  the  "  Dragon  WelT  by  Nehemiah 
(ii,  13),  lying  in  that  direction.  Josephus  also  indden- 
tally  mentions  a  "^SerpetWs  Pool"  as  lying  on  the  north- 
westem  side  of  the  city  OVar,  y,  3,  2),  which  the  simi- 
larity  of  name  and  position  seems  to  identify  with  this. 
See  Giiio^!. 

(2.)  The  Loieer  Pool  (of  Gihon),  referred  to  in  Isa. 
xxii,  9,  is  also  probably  that  situated  in  the  southem 
part  of  the  same  valley.    See  Poou 

(3.)  There  still  cxists  on  the  western  tóde  of  the  dty 
another  pool,  which  is  frequently  termed  the  Pool  of 
Ifezekiahf  on  the  supposition  tliat  it  is  the  one  intended 
to  hołd  the  water  which  that  king  is  said  (2  Kings  xx, 
20 ;  2  Chroń,  xxii,  30)  to  have  brought  down  to  the  dty 
by  a  conduit  from  the  upper  pooL  It  is  to  this  day  so 
connected  by  an  aqucduct,  which  renders  the  Identifica- 
tion probable.  But  it  does  not  foUow  (as  some  argue) 
that  this  pool  was  within  the  second  wali  in  the  time 
of  Christ,  if,  indeed,  it  ever  lay  strictly  within  the  city ; 
the  statcments  above  referred  to  only  show  that  it  was 
designed  as  a  resenroir  for  supplying  the  inhabitants, 
especially  on  Mount  Zioń,  ^vithin  the  bounds  of  which 


it  ooold  neyer  haye  been  embnoed.  This  pool  is  pev- 
hape  also  the  same  as  one  mentioned  by  Joaephus,  nader 
the  title  of  Amygdahnf  as  oppoeite  the  thiid  of  the 
''  banks"  raiaed  by  Titos  (  War^  y,  11, 4).  He  there  lo- 
cates  it  *^a  great  way  ofT  ttóm  Antonia,  yet  ''on  the 
north  ąnaiter**  of  the  dty;  and  a  morę  soitabłe  plsoe 
for  an  assault  could  not  haye  been  selected,  as  it  was  in 
the  ooraer  where  the  three  walls  joined,  bein^  eyidemfy 
within  the  onter  one,  and  in  front  of  the  imier  one  (jet 
to  be  taken),  but  not  neoesaarily  within  the  middk  waU 
(which  had  been  taken  and  demoUshed).  See  Ubzb- 
KiAu'8  Pool. 

(4.)  Josephus  also  mentions  a  deep  trandk  which  was 
dug  on  the  north  of  the  tower  Antonia  for  ita  deftnoe 
(  War,  y,  4, 2).  The  western  part  of  this  aeems  to  hare 
been  filled  up  during  the  siege,  in  order  to  pcepare  a 
way  for  the  approach  of  the  Koman  en^es  fiiat  to  the 
tower  and  aftmraids  to  the  Tempie  wtR  (IFar,T,  11« 
4;  yii,  2, 7).  The  eastem  portion  still  eiiata,  and  ip- 
pears  to  haye  been  wider  and  deeper  than  elaewhae 
(being  unindosed  by  the  wali),  forming,  indeed,  quite  a 
reoeptacle  for  rain-water.  This  pit  we  aie  indined  to 
identify  with  the  pool  Stnttkms,  which  Josephus  locata 
at  this  spot  (irar,y,  11, 4).  In  modem  times  it  bat 
often  been  assigned  as  the  site  of  the  Pool  of  BeUiesda, 
but  Uus  can  luudly  be  correct.  What  is  now  known  as 
the  pod  of  Bethesda  is  perhaps  a  reseryoir  boilt  in  the 
pit  from  which  Herod  ąuairied  the  etone  for  iecoDstnict> 
ing  the  Tempie. 

(5.)  Of  aqueducts,  besides  the  two  already  mentioned 
as  supplying  respectiydy  the  poola  of  Siloam  and  Heae> 
kiah,  there  still  exitta  a  long  subtenanean  amdui  thst 
brings  water  from  the  poob  of  Bethlehem  (attnbuted  to 
Solomon);  which,  passing  along  the  south-westem  lide 
of  the  Yalley  of  Hinnom,  then  crossing  it  aboyethe  low- 
er  pool,  and  winding  around  the  northem  brow  of  Zioo, 
at  last  supplies  one  or  morę  wells  in  the  western  side  of 
the  mosąue  indosure.  This  is  undonbtedly  an  andait 
work,  and  can  be  no  other  than  the  aqiieduct  which  the 
Talmud  speaks  of  (as  we  shall  see)  aa  fuznishing  the 
Tempie  with  an  abundance  of  water.  It  was  proJbaMy 
reconstracted  by  Pilate,  aa  Josephus  speaka  of  ^aqae- 
ducts  whereby  he  brought  water  from  the  distince  of 
400  [other  editions  read  300,  and  eyen  200]  fuikng^ 
{War,  ii,  9,  4).  (See  below,  water  supply  of  moden 
Jerusalem.) 

2.  Respecting  the  andent  walbf  with  ihaigata  ud 
totcersy  our  prindpal  authority  most  be  the  descripdoa 
of  andent  Jerusalem  fumished  by  Josephus  (War,  v, 4, 
2),  to  which  allusion  has  so  often  been  madę.  The  odf 
other  acoount  of  any  oonsidentble  fulness  is  contaioed  h 
Nehemiah*s  statement  of  the  portiona  repaired  under  hii 
superintendenoe  (eh.  iii).  Besides  these,  and  some  in- 
cidental  notices  scattered  in  other  parts  of  these  autbon 
and  in  the  Bibie  generally,  there  are  left  us  a'few  raia> 
in  particular  places,  which  we  may  oombine  with  tbs 
natural  pointa  determined  above  in  making  out  the  d^ 
cuit  and  fortifications  of  the  dty.  (See  bdow,  fortifia- 
tions  of  the  city.) 

(F.)  Tke  First  or  Old  ITa/Z^-Josephas^s  account  of 
this  is  as  follows:  '^Beginning  on  the  nocth  from  tbe 
tower  Hippicus  (so  called),  and  extending  to  the  XT8tni 
(so  called),  thence  touching  the  coundl-[house],  it  jońn- 
ed  the  western  doister  of  the  Tempie ;  but  in  the  otha 
direction,  on  the  west,  beginning  from  the  same  tower, 
and  extending  through  the  pla^  Bethso  (so  called)  to 
the  gate  of  the  Essenes,  and  thence  on  the  soutb  om- 
ing  above  the  fountain  Siloam,  and  thence  again  bend- 
ing  on  the  east  to  the  Pool  of  Solomon,  and  leaching  aa 
far  as  a  oertain  place  which  they  cali  Ophla,  it  jdoed 
the  eastward  doister  of  the  Tempie."  It  was  ddeoded 
by  8ixty  towers  {ibid,  §  8),  probaibly  at  eąual  distanoeą 
and  of  the  same  average  dimensions  (but  probably  soaae- 
what  smaller  than  those  of  the  ooter  waU),  excbBT« 
of  tbe  three  towers  q)edally  descńbed. 

(1.)  On  the  north  aide  it  began  at  the  Tower  ofJjip' 
picut,    This  has  been  with  great  piobability  ideotified 


JERUSALEM 


847 


JERUSALEM 


with  the  ńte  of  the  present  dtadel  or  Castle  of  David, 
at  the  noith-westem  comer  of  Zioń.  This  tower  U 
Btated  by  Josephus  to  have  been  25  cubtts  (about  45 
feet  square),  and  solid  to  the  height  of  80  cubits  {War, 
V,  4, 3).  At  the  north-wettem  corner  of  the  modem 
dtadel  is  a  tower  45  feet  8quare,  cut  on  three  sides  to  a 
great  height  out  of  the  solid  rock,  which  (with  Mr. Wil- 
liams) we  think  can  be  no  other  than  Hippicua.  This 
ifl  pn^bly  the  tower  at  theYalley  Grate  mentioned  in  2 
Chroń,  xxvi,  9.     See  Hippicus. 

(2.)  Not  far  from  Hippicus,  on  the  same  wali,  Josephus 
places  the  Totoer  ofPhaaailus,  with  a  solid  base  of  40 
cabits  (about  73  feet)  8quare  as  well  as  high  (t^.).  To 
this  the  tower  on  the  north-eastem  comer  of  the  modem 
dtadel  so  nearly  corresponds  (its  length  being  70  feet, 
and  its  breadth  now  shortened  to  56  feet,  the  rest  hav- 
ing  probably  been  masonry),  that  they  cannot  well  be 
regarded  as  other  than  identicaL 

(3.)  Not  far  from  this  again,  Josephus  locates  the 
Tower  of  Marianme,  20  cubits  (about  86  feet)  square 
and  high  (ibid,).  This  we  indine  (with  Mr.  Williams) 
to  plaoe  about  the  same  distance  east  of  Phasa^lus. 

(4.)  The  Gate  Gttmath  (i.  e.  '^garden'*),  distinctly  stated 
by  Joeephus  as  belonging  to  the  first  wali  (  War,  v,  4, 2), 
apparently  not  fai  east  of  Mariamne.  The  arch  now 
known  by  this  name,  near  the  south  end  of  the  bazaars, 
eTidently  is  comparativdy  recent.    See  GEmf ath. 


Modem  **Gate  of  Gennath,*'  ezplored  by  Llentenant  War- 
ren In  his  ezcavation8  at  Jemealem.  (From  Tnicing  of 
Feb.  1, 1867,  of  the  "  Palestine  Ezploration  Fund.**) 

(5.)  There  is  another  "  obtcure  gate"  referred  to  by 
Joeephus,  as  lying  near  Hippicus,  through  which  the 
Jews  noade  a  sally  upon  the  Romans  (  War,  v,  6 ;  vi,  5). 
This  conld  not  have  been  on  the  north  side,  owing  to 
the  predpice.  It  must  be  the  same  as  that  through 
which  he  says  elsewhere  (ibid,  vii,  8)  water  was  brought 
to  the  tower  Hippicus,  evidcntly  from  the  Upper  and 
Lower  Pools,  or  from  Siloanu  It  can  therefore  only  be 
located  just  south  of  Hippicus.  It  appears  to  be  iden- 
tical  with  that  mentioned  in  the  Old  Testament  as  the 
ValUy  Gate  (Neh.  iii,  18;  compare  2  Chroń,  xxvi,  9; 
xKxixi,  14). 

(6.)  On  the  southem  side  of  this  wali  we  next  come 
(omitting  **  Bethso"  for  the  present)  to  Joeephus'8  **Gałe 
ofthe  E»aene»r  Thb  we  should  naturally  expect  to 
find  oppoeite  the  modem  Zioń  Gate;  but  as  the  ancient 
city  took  in  morę  of  thb  hill  than  the  modem  (for  the 
Tomb  of  Da\dd  is  now  outside),  we  must  look  for  it 
along  the  brow  of  Zioń  at  the  south-west  comer.  Herę, 
accordingly,  the  Dwng-gate  is  mentioned  in  Neh-  ii,  18, 
and  iii,  18,  as  lying  next  to  theYalley-gate;  and  in  this 
latter  passage  it  is  placed  at  1000  cubits  (1820  feet)  from 
it— the  accordanoe  of  the  modem  distance  with  which 
may  be  considered  as  a  strong  verification  of  the  cor- 
lectness  ofthe  position  of both  these  gates.  The  Dung- 
gate  ii  also  refened  to  in  Neh.zii,  81,  as  the  first  (after 


theYalley-gate,  out  of  which  the  company  appear  to 
have  emerged)  toward  the  right  (I  e.  south)  from  the 
north-west  comer  of  the  city  (i.  e.  facing  the  wali  on  the 
outside). 

From  this  point,  the  escarpments  still  found  in  the 
rock  indicate  the  linę  of  the  wali  as  passing  along  the 
southem  brow  of  Zioń,  as  Josephus  evidently  means. 
Beyond  this,  he  says  it  passed  above  tlie  fountain  Si- 
loam,  as  indeed  the  tum  in  the  edge  of  Zioń  here  re- 
quire8. 

(7.)  At  this  south-east  comer  of  Zioń  probably  stood 
the  Pottery-ffcUe,  mentioned  (Jer.  xix,  2,  where  it  is  mis- 
transkted  *<  east^gate")  as  leading  into  the  Yalley  of 
Hinnom ;  and  it  apparently  derived  its  name  from  the 
"  Potter*s  Fidd,"  lying  oppoeite.    See  Potter^s  Field. 

Beyond  this,  it  becomes  morę  difficult  to  tracę  the 
linę  indicated  by  Josephus.  His  language  plainly  im- 
plies  that  in  skirdng  the  southem  brow  of  Zioń  it  cunred 
suffidently  to  exdude  the  Pool  of  Siloam,  although  it 
bas  been  sŁrongly  contended  by  some  that  this  fountain 
must  have  been  within  the  dty. 

(8.)  At  the  mouth  of  the  TyropcBon  we  should  natu- 
rally look  for  a  gate,  and  accordingly  we  find  mention  of 
a  FounUtin-^/aie  along  theYalley  of  Hinnom  beyond  the 
Dung-gate  (Neh.  ii,  14 ;  xii,  87),  and  adjoining  the  Pool 
of  Siloah  (Neh.  iii,  15),  which  seems  to  fix  its  i^osition 
with  great  certainty.  The  next  bend  beyond  Siloam 
would  naturally  be  at  the  termination  ofthe  ridge  com- 
ing  down  from  the  Tempie.  From  this  point,  accorduig 
to  Josephus,  it  cunred  so  as  to  face  the  east,  and  extend- 
cd  to  the  Fountain  of  the  Yirgin  (Solomon'8  Pool),  thus 
passing  along  the  verge  of  OpheL  If  this  fountain  re- 
ally  be  the  Pool  of  Bethesda,  we  must  locate  here 

(9.)  The  Sheep-gate,  which,  on  the  whole,  we  are  in- 
dined  to  fix  in  this  vicinity  (Neh.  xii,  89;  iii,  1,82; 
John  V,  2). 

The  linę  of  the  wali,  after  this,  according  to  Josephus, 
ran  morę  definitely  upon  the  edge  of  Ophel  (thus  imply- 
ing  a  slight  bend  to  the  east),  and  contmued  along  it 
till  it  reached  the  Tempie.  We  are  not  compellcd,  by 
his  language,  to  carry  it  out  to  the  extreme  south-east- 
em  oomer  of  the  Tempie  area,  because  of  the  deep  preo- 
ipice  which  lay  there  (Ant,  xv,  11,  4).  Just  so,  the 
modem  wali  comes  up  nearly  in  the  middle  of  the  south 
side  of  this  area.  The  ancient  point  of  intersection  haa 
been  discovered  by  the  recent  excavations  of  the  Eng- 
ILsh  engineers.     (See  the  sketch  of  Ophd  above.) 

From  this  account  of  the  first  wali,  we  should  natu- 
rally condude  that  Josephus^s  Upper  City  included  the 
Tyropceon  as  well  as  Ophel ;  but  from  other  passages  it 
is  certain  that  Zioń  had  a  sepanite  wali  of  its  own  on 
its  eastem  brow,  and  that  Josephus  here  only  means 
to  speak  of  the  outer  wali  arotmd  the  west,  south,  and 
east,  Thus  he  states  (  War,  vi,  7, 2)  that,  after  the  de- 
stmction  of  the  Tempie,  the  Romans,  having  seized  and 
bumed  the  whole  Lower  City  as  far  as  Siloam,  were  still 
compelled  to  make  special  efibrts  to  dislodge  the  Jews 
from  the  Upper  City;  and  from  his  account  of  the  banks 
raised  for  this  purpose  between  the  Xystus  and  the 
bridge  (jSAd,  8, 1),  it  is  even  dear  that  this  wali  extend- 
ed  around.the  north-eastem  brow  of  Zioń  quite  to  the 
north  part  of  the  old  wali,  leaving  a  space  between  the 
Upper  City  and  the  Tempie.  He  also  speaks  (ibid,  6, 
2)  of  the  bridge  as  parting  the  tyrants  in  the  Upper  City 
(bom  Titus  in  the  westem  cloister  of  the  Tempie.  This 
part  of  the  Tyropceon  was  therefore  indosed  by  barriers 
on  all  its  four  sides,  namdy,  by  the  wali  on  the  west 
and  north,  by  the  Tempie  on  the  east,  and  by  the  bridge 
on  the  south.  The  same  conclusion  of  a  branch  from 
the  outer  wali,  running  up  the  westem  side  ofthe  Tyro- 
poeon,  results  from  a  careful  inspection  of  the  account  of 
the  repaiis  in  Neh.  iiL  The  historian  there  states  that 
adjoining  (^  after  him*0  the  part  repaired  around  the 
Fouiitain-gate  at  Siloah  (ver8e  15)  lay  a  portion  ex- 
tending  opposite  the  "  sepulchres  of  David"  (verse  16). 
By  these  can  only  be  meant  the  tomb  of  David,  still  ex- 
tant  on  the  crown  of  Zioń,  to  which  Peter  alludes  (Acta 


JERUSALEM 


848 


JERUSALEM 


ii,  29)  as  existing  in  his  day  within  the  city.  Bot  we 
cannot  suppoee  Nehemiah  to  be  here  retumiiig  along 
the  wali  in  a  westerly  direction,  and  deacribing  repain 
which  he  bad  just  attńbated  to  cthers  (yenea  14  and 
15) ;  nor  can  be  be  speaking  of  the  wali  eastwaid  of  Si- 
loam,  which  woold  in  no  senae  be  oppoeite  David'8  tomb,' 
bat  actually  intercepted  from  it  by  the  terminatioa  of 
Ophel:  the  only  concliision  therefore  ia,  that  he  is  now 
proceeding  along  thia  branch  wali  northward,  lying  op- 
poeite David'8  tomb  on  the  eaat  By  "  the  pool  that 
was  madę,"  meutioned  aa  aituated  here  (vene  16)|  can- 
not therefore  be  meant  either  Siloam,  or  the  Lower  Pool, 
or  eyen  the  Yirgin^s  Foantain,  but  aome  tank  in  the  yal* 
ley,  sińce  filled  np,  probably  the  aaose  with  the  "ditch 
madę  between  the  two  walla  for  the  water  of  the  old 
poor  (Isa.  xxii,  11),  which  might  easily  be  conducted 
(from  either  of  the  pools  of  Gihon)  to  this  spot,  along  the 
Une  of  the  present  aqueduct  from  Bethlehem.  More- 
over,  it  was  eyidently  along  this  branch  wali  Q*  the  go- 
ing  ap  of  the  wali'*)  that  one  party  of  the  prieata  in 
Keh.  xii,  87  ascended  to  meet  the  other.  Thb  double 
linę  of  wali  is  alao  confirmed,  not  only  by  this  paesage, 
but  likewise  by  the  escape  of  Zedekiah  **  by  the  way  of 
the  [Fountain-]  Gate  between  the  two  walls,  which  is 
by  the  king*8  garden"  (L  e.  around  Siloam),  in  the  direc- 
tion  of  the  plain  leading  to  Jericho  (2  KbigB  xxv,  4, 5; 
Jer.  xxix,  4 ;  lii,  7).  From  3  Chroń.  xxyii,  8 ;  and  xxiii, 
14,  it  is  also  evident  that  Ophel  was  inclosed  by  a  sep- 
arate  walL  We  will  now  endeayor  to  traoe  this  branch 
wali  around  to  the  Tempie  and  to  the  gate  Gennath  as 
definitely  as  the  intńcate  account  in  Nehemiah,  togeth- 
er  with  other  scattered  notices,  will  allow. 

We  may  take  it  for  granted  that  this  part  of  the  wali 
would  leaye  the  other  at  the  south-eastem  comer  of 
Zioń,  near  the  Potteiy-gate,  where  the  hillis  steep^  and 
keep  along  the  declivity  throughout  its  whole  extent, 
for  the  sake  of  moro  perfect  defence.  There  were  głairt 
in  this  wali  just  above  the  wali  that  oontinued  to  the 
Fountain-gate  (Neh.  xii,  87;  iii,  15),  which  imply  at 
least  a  smali  gate  there,  as  they  led  into  the  Upper  City. 
They  would  naturally  be  placed  within  the  outer  wtdl 
for  the  sake  of  security,  and  at  the  eastem  side  of  this 
comer  of  Zioń,  where  the  rock  is  still  precipitous  (al- 
though  the  stairs  hare  disappearod),  so  that  they  afford 
additional  confirmation  to  the  wali  in  que8tion. 

(10.)  Above  the  Sepulchre  of  David,  and beyond ''the 
pool  that  was  madę,"*  Nehemiah  (chap.  iii,  16)  places 
''the  house  of  the  mighty,"  apparently  a  GianW  Tower, 
to  defend  the  wali.  Immediately  north  of  this  we  may 
conjecture  would  be  a  gale,  oocurring  opposite  the  mod- 
em Zion-gate,  and  over  against  the  ancient  Sheep-gate, 
although  the  steepness  of  the  bill  would  preyent  its  gen- 
erał use. 

Farther  north  is  apparently  mentioned  (Neh.  iii,  19) 
another  minor  entrance, "  the  going  up  to  the  armory  at 
the  turoiiig  of  the  wali,"  meaning  probably  the  bend  in 
the  brow  of  Zioń  opposite  the  south-westem  comer  of 
the  Tempie,  near  where  the  bridge  connected  them. 

Farther  on,  another  "  tuming  of  the  wali,  eyen  unto 
the  comer,"  is  mentioned  (Neh.  iii,  24),  but  in  what  di- 
lection,  and  how  far  off,  cannot  be  determined  with  any 
degree  of  certainty.  It  may  mean  the  junction  with 
the  wali  of  the  bridge. 

From  this  point  it  becomes  impossible  to  tiace  the  or- 
der pursued  b>  Nehemiah  in  the  rest  of  the  third  chap- 
ter,  as  he  does  not  describe  the  wali  from  point  to  point, 
but  moetly  refers  to  certain  objects  opposite  which  they 
lay,  and  frequently  omits  the  sign  of  oontinuity  ("after 
him").  AU  that  can  be  definitely  gathcred  as  to  the 
consecutiye  course  of  the  wali  is  that,  by  yarious  tums 
on  different  sides^  its  respectiye  parts  fkced  certain  flxed 
pointa,  especially  **  the  tower  lying  out"  (yerses  26, 26, 
27) ;  that  it  contained  three  g^tes  (the  "  Water-gate," 
yerse  26;  the  "  Horse-gate,"  yerse  28;  and  the  gate 
'^Miphkad,"  yerae  81) ;  that  it  adjoined  Ophel  (yerse  27) ; 
and  that  it  completed  the  cirouit  of  walls  in  this  direc- 
tion  (yerse  82).    It  needs  but  a  glance  to  see  that  all 


this  fltrikingly  agrees^  in  geneial,  with  the  aboYMncn* 
tioned  indosure  in  the  vaUey  of  the  lyropaeon  jiat 
aboye  the  bridge,  which  eertainly  embraoed  all  the  sb* 
jects  leferred  to  by  Nehemiah,  aa  we  rtuUI  aee;  aadthif 
£BCt  of  the  ąnadrilateral  form  (rf*  theee  poitiooa  of  tiie 
wali  will  beat  account  for  the  appazent  oonfiiaion  of  thii 
part  of  his  atatement  (aa  onr  total  ignoranoe  of  many  of 
the  elementa  ofelncidation  makes  it  now  aeem),  aswefl 
as  hia  repeated  uae  of  the  peculiar  modę  of  descriptioo, 
"oyer  againat."  Our  beat  coorae  is  to  foUow  the  pi»- 
aumed  linę,  which  the  natoie  of  the  groand  aeems  to  n- 
qiupe,  and  identify  the  pointa  as  they  oocur,  tnisting  to 
the  naturalness  with  wluch  they  may  faU  in  with  oar 
scheme  for  its  yindication. 

After  leaying  the  bend  at  the  jnndton  with  th» 
bridge,  we  ahonld  therefore  indicate  the  ooane  of  ths 
wali  as  foUowing  the  natnial  dediyity  on  the  north-eitt 
edge  of  Zioń  in  a  gentle  ciurye,  till  it  joined  the  north* 
em  linę  of  the  old  wali,  abont  half  way  between  the 
gate  Gennath  and  the  Tempie.  Indeed,  the  langnage 
of  Nehemiah  (sdi,  87)  implies  that  *'  the  going  ap  of  tka 
[branch]  wali"  extended  ''aboye  the  hooae  of  Darid* 
(t  e.  the  "  kłng^s  house"),  and  thenoe  bent  '^eyen  nau 
the  Water-gate  eaatward." 

(1 1.)  On  this  part  of  the  wali,  at  ito  junction  with  the 
bridge,  we  think  muat  be  placed  the  Hone-^aie  (2  Kiiigs 
xi,  16;  2  Chroń,  xxiii,  15;  Neh.  iii,  28;  Jer.  xxxi, 88- 
40). 

(12.)  Not  far  to  the  north  of  this  nrast  be  pJaoed  "the 
Tower  fyu^  ouT  (Neh.  iii,  25, 26, 27). 

(18.)  On  the  north  side  of  the  apace  indnded  by  the 
parts  of  this  wali  we  place  the  Water-gate  (Neh.  iii,  28; 
xii,87 ;  comp.  Neh.  yiii,  1, 3, 16) ;  probably  the  same  witk 
the  Middle-ifate  (Jer.  xxxix,  8;  compare  2,4,5). 

(14.)  The  only  remaining  gate  in  this  part  of  the 
walls  is  the  Prison-gate,  in  the  middle  of  the  bridge  op- 
posite the  Water-gate  (Neh.  xii,  80-40) ;  probably  the 
same  with  the  gate  Miphkad,  referred  to  by  Nehóniah 
as  lying  between  the  Horse^gate  and  the  Sheep-gate 
(chap.  iii,  28, 81, 82),  an  identity  which  the  name  faxQa 
— being  literally  Gate  of  rerteipmy,  perhaps  firam  the 
oensus  being  taken  at  this  place  of  concourse,  or  (with 
the  Yulgate)  Gate  ofjudffSnent,  from  its  proximicy  to 
theprison. 

(G.)  The  Seeond  or  MideOe  TraflL-^oaephaa^s  stałe- 
ment  of  the  oourse  of  this  wali  is  in  these  words:  *^  But 
the  seeond  [waU]  had  (fint)  its  beginning  from  the 
gate  which  they  called  Gennath,  belonging  to  the  fint 
wali,  and  then,  enciicling  the  northem  slope  only,  wat 
up  [or,  retumed]  aa  far  as  Antonia"  ( War,  y,  4, 2).  It 
had  forty  towers  (ibid,  8),  probably  of  the  same  geoend 
size  as  thoee  of  the  outer  walL  If  we  haye  ooneotly 
identified  Acra,  it  must  be  this  hill  that  JoaephoB  caDs 
"  the  northem  slope;"  and  the  direetion  of  this  will  le- 
quiie  that  the  wali,  afber  leaving  Gennath,  shoukl  flidit 
the  lowest  edge  of  Golgotha  in  nearly  a  atnught  lioe 
till  it  reached  the  upper  end  of  the  Tj-roposon,  oppoata 
the  western  edge  of  Acra.  This  direct  course  Mgnet 
with  the  abeenoe  of  any  spedal  remark  in  Josephas  le- 
specting  its  linę  between  these  two  pointa.  Neither  is 
there  mention  of  any  gate  or  tower  along  it,  near  G«s- 
nath  nor  opposite  Golgotha;  ao  that, 

(1.)  The  first  point  of  notę  in  this  direetion  a  the 
Tower  o/Fumaces,  which  may  be  located  on  the  north- 
eastem  dope  of  the  eleyation  aasomed  to  be  that  ofGol- 
gotha  (Neh.  iii,  8, 11, 18 ;  xii,  38 ;  comp.  2  Chnm.  xxTi, 
9) ;  and  (2.)  on  the  western  bank  of  this  entiance  of  the 
TyropoBon  would  be  aituated  the  Comer-gaU  (oompan 
Jer.  xxxi,  88). 

From  this  point  the  wali  wonM  ran  directiy  acms 
the  broad  beginning  of  the  Tyroposon,  to  meet  the  noitb- 
westem  brow  of  Aoa,  which  Joeephus  intimates  it  oolf 
sen^ed  to  indude.  This  part  spanning  the  yaDęy  mait 
be  the  Broad  WaU,  refened  to  in  Neh.  iii,  8;  xii,  8^  as 
lying  here.  A  atronger  wali  would  be  needed  her^  « 
there  waa  no  natnral  breastwork  of  rock,  and  it  waa  oo 
this  aide  that  Inyaderaalwayaappioached  the  ci^.  ^ 


JERUSALEM 


849 


JERUSALEM 


rordingly,  this  strengthening  of  the  wali  in  this  part  by 
aii  atUlttiuiial  thickness  was  fint  efTectecl  by  Manasseh 
(2  Chroń.  xxxui,  14) ;  and  having  been  broken  down  in 
Hezekiah'8  time,  it  was  rebuilt  by  him  as  a  defence 
against  the  Assjnrians  (2  Chroń,  xxxii,  6),  and  again 
broken  down  by  the  riyal  Jehoasb,  oa  his  capture  of  the 
city  (2  Rings  xiv,  18). 

(3.)  On  the  eastem  slope  of  this  depression,  we  think, 
must  be  placed  the  Ephraim-ffałe  (Nch.  iii,  38,  89 ;  2 
Kings  xiv,  13;  comp.Keh.viii,16),  corresponding  to  the 
modem  "  Damascos-gate,"  and  probably  identicid  with 
the  Benjamiargaie  i^et.  xxx%'ii,  12, 13 ;  comp.  xxxviii, 
7 ;  see  Zech.xiv,  10),  but  diffprent  from  the  ^  High  gate 
of  Benjamin,  that  was  by  the  hoose  of  the  Lord"  (Jer. 
XX,  2).  The  character  of  the  masonry  at  the  present 
Damascus-gate,  and  the  rooms  on  each  side  of  it,  indi- 
cate  this  as  one  of  the  ancient  entrances  (Robinson, 
Besearchef,  i,  463, 464). 

From  this  point  the  wali  probably  ran  in  a  circular 
north-east  course  along  the  northem  declivity  of  Acra, 
about  where  the  modem  wali  does,  until  it  reached, 

(4.)  The  OUI-ffołe,  which  appears  to  have  stood  at  the 
nonh-east  comer  of  Acra  (Neh.  iii,  3, 6, 8 ;  xii,  39) ;  ap- 
parently  the  same  as  the  First-gate  (Zech.  xiv,  10). 

Herę,  we  conceive,  the  wali  took  a  bend  to  the  south, 
following  the  steep  eastem  ridge  of  Acra;  for  Joeephos 
States  that  it  *^only  inclosed'*  this  hill,  and  then  joined 
the  tower  Antonia.  For  this  latter  reason,  also,  it  must 
have  passed  along  the  edge  of  the  valley  which  eon- 
nects  this  point  with  the  western  end  of  the  pseudo- 
Bethesda  (e^idently  the  valley  separating  Acra  and 
Bezetha) ;  and  this  will  give  one  hom  of  the  "  crescent^ 
shape**  attributed  by  him  to  the  Upper  City,  including 
the  Tempie  in  the  middle,  and  Ophel  as  the  othcr  hom. 
\Vc  should  therefore  indicate  for  the  linę  of  the  rest  of 
this  wali  a  very  slight  outwartl  curve  from  near  Her- 
od^s  Gate  to  about  the  middle  of  the  northem  side  of 
the  mosąue  area. 

(5.)  The  only  remaining  gate  expressly  referred  to  as 
lying  in  this  wali  is  the  Fish-gatty  which  stood  not  very 
far  from  the  junction  with  Antonia  (Neh.  iii,  1,8,6;  xii, 
39 ;  comp.  2  Chroń,  xxxiii,  14 ;  Zeph.  i,  10). 

(C.)  The  Tower  Antonia,  at  which  we  thus  arrive, 
was  sitnated  (aocording  to  Josephus,  War,  v,  5, 8)  at  the 
comer  of  the  Tempie  coiirt  where  the  northem  and 
westem  cloisters  met.  This  shows  that  it  did  not  cov- 
er  the  whole  of  the  platform  north  of  the  Tempie,  but 
only  had  "  courts  and  broad  spaces"  occupying  this  en- 
tire  area,  with  a  tower  at  each  of  the  four  coroers  (ibid,). 
Of  these  latter  the  proper  Antonia  seems  to  have  been 
one,  and  they  were  all  doubtless  connected  by  porticoes 
and  passages.  They  were  all  on  a  precipitous  rock,  tifty 
cubits  high,  the  proper  tower  Antonia  being  forty  cubits 
above  this,  the  south-eastem  tower  8eventy,  and  the  oth- 
ers  fifly  cubits  (t&»<i).  It  was  originally  built  by  the 
Asmomean  princes  for  the  safe  keeping  of  the  high- 
priesfs  ve8tment8,  and  called  by  them  Baris  (ibid,.  Ant, 
xv,  II,  4).  It  was  '*the  castle"  into  which  Paul  was 
taken  from  the  mob  (Acts  xxi,  34, 37).    See  Antonia. 

(7.)  That  one  of  these  four  towers  which  oocupied 
the  north-east  comer  of  the  court  of  Antonia  we  are  in- 
clined  to  identify  with  the  ancient  Tower  of  Hanoneel, 
between  the  tower  of  Meah  and  the  Fish-gate  (Neh.  iii, 
1,3;  xii,  39),  and  at  the  most  north-eastem  point  of  the 
city  (Jer.  xxxi,  88,  compared  with  Zech.  xiv,  10). 

(8.)  The  south-east  one  of  these  towers,  again,  we 
take  to  be  the  ancient  Tower  of  Meah,  referred  to  in 
the  above  passages  of  Nehemiah. 

I^erotti  has  found  a  subterraneous  passage  extending 
from  the  Golden-gate  in  a  north-westerly  direction  ( Je- 
rusalem  Erphred,  i,  64).  He  could  not  tracę  it  com- 
pletely;  oni)'  in  two  unconnected  fragments,  one  130 
feet  long,  and  another  150  feet.  This  may  be  the  se- 
cret  passage  (Kpwrr^  Sitópy^  which  Herod  excayated 
from  Antonia  to  the  eastem  gate,  where  he  raised  a 
tower,  from  which  he  might  watch  any  seditious  move- 
ment  of  the  people ;  thus  establishing  a  priyate  commu- 
IV.— Hhh 


nication  with  Antonia,  throngh  which  he  might  ponr 
soldiers  into  the  heart  of  the  Tempie  area  as  need  re- 
quired  (Josephus,  ^  n/.  xv,  11, 7). 

This  will  make  out  the  circuit  of  the  generał  tower 
of  Antonia,  the  proper  castle  standing  on  the  south-west 
comer,  and  thence  extending  a  wuig  to  reach  the  tower 
on  the  north-west  comer ;  and  the  two  towers  on  the 
east  side  being  built  up  on  the  basis  of  the  ancient  ones. 
It  had  gates  doubtless  on  all  sides,  but,  besidcs  that  on 
the  south  (which  will  be  considered  under  the  Tempie), 
there  is  distinct  cvidence  of  nonę  except, 

(9.)  The  Goiden-gate,  so  called  in  modem  time&  It 
is  a  double-arched  passage  in  the  onter  wali  of  the  Ha- 
ram, now  closed  up,  but  evidently  a  work  of  antiquity, 
from  its  Roman  style  of  architectiue,  which  would  nat- 
uraUy  rcfer  it  to  this  time  of  Herod^s  enlargement  of 
Antonia.  Its  position,  as  we  shall  see,  is  such  as  to 
make  it  a  conyenient  cntrance  to  this  inclosure.  Sec 
Fenced  City. 

The  eastem  wali  of  the  Tempie  area,  which  evident^ 
ly  served  for  that  of  the  city,  and  connects  Josephus^s 
flrst  and  second  walls  on  this  part,  we  re8erve  for  consid- 
eration  under  the  head  Temi^le. 

(H.)  The  Third  or  Oułer  łTai/.  — This  was  not  j^et 
built  in  the  time  of  Christ,  having  been  begun  by  Her- 
od Agrippa  I  about  A.D.  43.  Josephus'8  account  of  its 
course  is  in  the  following  words  {War,  v,4,2):  "The 
starting- point  of  the  third  [wali],  however,  was  the 
tower  Hippicus,  whence  strctching  as  far  as  the  north- 
em slope  to  the  tower  Psephinos,  thence  reaching  op- 
posite  the  monuments  of  Helena,  .  .  .  and  prolonged 
through  [the]  royal  vaults,  it  bent  in  the  first  place  with 
a  comer  tower  to  the  (so-styled)  Fuller^s  monument, 
and  then  joining  the  old  circuit  [i.  e.  the  former  wali], 
ended  at  the  (so-called)  valley  Kedron."  It  inclosed 
that  part  of  the  town  called  Bezetha,  or  the  ^  New  Cit>'," 
and  was  (in  parts  at  least)  ten  cubits  thick  and  twenty- 
five  high  (iWrf.).  It  was  defended  by  ninety  towers 
twenty  cubits  8quare  and  high,  two  hundred  cubits 
apart  {wbid,  3). 

(1.)  The  first  mark,  then,  after  leaving  Hippicus,  was 
the  Toicer  Psephinos,  described  (f6«/.)  as  being  an  octa- 
gon,  8eventy  cubits  high,  at  the  north-west  comer  of 
the  city,  opposite  Hippicus.  It  was  situated  quite  off 
the  direct  road  by  which  Titus  approached  the  city  from 
the  north  {ibid,  ii,  2),  and  lay  at  a  bend  in  the  northem 
wali  at  its  westem  limit  (ibid,  iii,  5).  All  these  partic- 
ulars  agree  in  identifying  it  with  the  foundations  of 
some  ancient  stmcture  still  clearly  traceable  on  the 
north-westem  side  of  the  modem  city,  opposite  the  Up- 
per PooL  Indced,  the  ruins  scattered  along  the  whole 
distance  between  this  point  and  the  present  Jalfa-gate 
suffice  to  indicate  the  course  of  this  part  of  the  third 
wali  along  the  rocky  edge  of  the  Yalley  of  Gihon.  We 
therefore  locate  Psephinos  opposite  the  southemmost 
two  of  four  sąuarc  foundations  (apparently  the  towers  at 
intenrals)  which  we  lind  markedonMr.Williams'sPlan,* 
and  indicatiug  a  salient  point  in  the  wali  here,  which 
\R  traceable  on  either  side  by  a  linę  of  old  foundations. 
These  we  take  to  be  remnants  of  that  part  of  this  outer 
wali  which  Josephus  says  was  begun  with  enormous 
stAnes,  but  was  finishcd  in  an  inferior  manner  on  account 
of  the  emperor^s  jealousy  (  Wur,  ut  sup.).  Although  no 
gate  is  referred  to  along  this  part  of  the  wali,  yet  there 
probably  was  one  not  far  below  Psephinos,  where  the 
path  comcs  down  at  the  north-west  comer  of  the  pres- 
ent city  wali. 

(2.)  Between  the  tower  Psephinos  and  the  gate  lead- 
ing  to  the  north-west  were  the  Women$  Towtra,  where 
a  sallying  party  came  near  intercepting  Titus  (Joseph. 
War,  V,  2 ;  compare  3, 8).  They  appear  to  haTe  issued 
from  the  gate  and  followed  him  to  the  towers. 

(3.)  Not  very  far  beyond  this,  therefore,  was  the  gate 
throngh  which  the  above  party  emerged.  This  could 
have  been  nonę  other  than  one  along  the  present  public 
road  in  this  direction,  a  continuation  of  that  leading 
thzough  the  Ephiaim-gate  up  the  head  of  the  T)nx>p(»« 


JERUSALEM 


8S0 


JERUSALEM 


Street  in  moderu  Jonisalem. 

on.    It  appears  that  the  gates  in  this  oufcr  wali  had  no 
specitic  nanieś. 

(4.)  The  langiiage  of  Joseplius  im- 
plies  that  after  the  sweep  of  the  wali 
(in  its  generał  northcm  couree)  at  the 
tower  Psephinos,  it  took,  on  the  whole, 
a  pretty  clirect  linę  till  it  passed  east 
of  the  MonumenU  of  Helena.  It  should 
therefore  be  drawn  with  a  slif^ht  cunre 
from  the  old  foundations  above  refer- 
red  to  (north-east  of  Psephinos)  to  the 
base  of  a  rocky  eminence  j ust  to  the 
north  of  the  pTesent  north-west  road, 
opon  which,  we  think,  must  be  placed 
the  monuments  in  question  (Jose- 
phus,  A  ni,  xx,  4, 8). 

(5.)  The  next  point  referred  to  by 
Josephus  is  the  Royal  YauUs^  which 
have  been  with  most  probability  iden- 
tified  with  the  niins  still  found  on  the 
north  of  the  city  at  and  aiound  the 
**  Tombs  of  the  Kings." 

(6.)  Next  in  Josephus^s  description 
comes  the  Comer  TWer,  at  which 
the  wali  bent  In  a  very  marked  man- 
ner  (hcnce  doubtless  the  name),  evidently  on  mceting 
the  Valley  of  Jehoshaphat. 

For  the  rest  of  the  way  the  wali  therefore  must  have 
followed  the  ridge  of  theYalley  of  Jehoshaphat,  and  our 
only  task  is  to  identify  points  of  interest  along  it. 

(7.)  A  little  to  the  east  of  this  corner  tower,  in  the 
retreating  angle  of  the  wali,  which  accommodatea  a 
smali  ravinc  setting  up  southward  from  the  Yalley  of 
Jehoshaphat,  we  locate  the  gate  which  Titus  was  ap- 
proaching  when  he  met  the  above-mentioned  sally. 

(8.)  The  last  point  mentioned  by  Josephus  is  the 
Fuller^a  Monunient^  which  we  locate  on  the  eminence  not 
very  far  east  of  the  above  gate,  and  it  woidd  thus  be  the 
north-east  comer  of  the  outer  walL     Amid  the  numer- 


failed  to  be  one  at  the  notch  opposite  the  north-east  cor- 
ner of  the  present  city.  Below  this  spot  the  ancient  and 
modem  walls  would  ooincide  in  poaition. 

8.  As  to  the  inUmal  gubdititions  of  the  city,  few  datf 
remain  beyond  the  arrangement  necessarily  resulting 
from  the  position  of  the  hills  and  the  course  of  the  walls. 
Little  is  positively  known  respecting  the  streets  of  an- 
cient Jerusalem.  Josephus  says  (IKar,  v,  4, 1)  ihat  the 
corresponding  rows  of  houses  on  Zioń  and  Acra  termi- 
nated  at  the  Tyropceon,  which  implies  that  there  were 
streets  running  across  it ;  but  we  must  not  think  here 
of  wide  thoToughfares  like  thdae  of  our  cities,  but  of 
covered  alleyty  which  constitute  the  streets  of  Oriental 
cities,  and  this  is  the  generał  character  of  those  of  mod- 
em Jerusalem.  The  same  remark  will  apply  to  the 
"narrow  streets  leading  obliqaely  to  the  [second]  wali" 
on  the  inside,  seyeral  times  refeired  to  in  the  accoimt  of 
the  capture  of  the  city  ( War^  v,  8, 1).  The  principal 
thoroughfares  must  be  gathered  from  the  position  of  the 
gates  and  the  naturę  of  the  ground,  with  what  fcw  hints 
are  supplied  iu  ancient  authors.  In  determining  their 
position,  the  course  of  the  modem  roads  or  paths  around 
the  city  is  of  great  assLstance,  as  eyen  a  mule-track  in 
the  East  is  remarkably  permanent. 

We  must  not,  howerer,  in  thia  connection,  fail  to  no- 
tice  the  famous  bridge  mentioned  by  Josephus  (.4  nł.  xir, 
4, 2 ;  War,  i,  7, 2 ;  ii,  16, 3 ;  vi,  6,  2 ;  vi,  8,  1)  as  having 
anciently  connected  the  hill  Zioń  with  the  Tempie  near 
its  south-west  angle.  Dr.  Robinson  (who  was  in  Pal- 
estine  in  1838,  and  published  his  book  in  1841)  claims 
to  have  disooyered  this  {Retearckes,  i,  425  8q.)  in  tha 


ous  sepulchral  caves,  however,  with  which  the  whole 
face  of  the  hill  is  perforated,  it  is  impossible  to  identify 
any  one  i  u  partiadar. 

From  this  point  the  wali  natorally  retumed  in  a  dis- 
Unctly  Southern  course,  along  the  edgc  of  fhc  valley, 
until  it  joined  the  ramparts  of  the  court  of  Antonia,  at 
the  tower  of  Hananei^L  Although  there  is  no  allusion 
to  anyffote  along  this  part,  yet  there  oould  scarcely  have 


Kemaius  of  Arch  of  Bridge  at  the  suuŁb-west  angle  of  lh«  Tempie  Area. 

three  ranges  of  immense  stones  still  jutting  out  from 
the  Haram  wali  at  this  point ;  whereas  Dr.  Olin  (who 
visited  Palestine  in  1840,  and  published  in  1843)  asserts 
that  this  relic  had  hitherto  been  unmentioned  by  any 
traveller,  although  well  known  to  the  citizcns  of  Jcrasa- 
lem  (^Travels,  ii,  26).  The  controyersy  which  aroee  on 
the  subject  was  closed  by  a  letter  from  the  Rev.  H.  A. 
Homes,  of  Constantinople,  stating  that  the  existcnoe 
and  probable  character  of  the  remains  in  que8tion  were 
suggested  in  his  presence  to  Dr.R^ibinson  by  the  mis- 
sionaries  then  resident  at  Jerusalem.  The  excavations 
of  the  English  cngineen  on  the  spot  bave  demonstrated 
the  truth  of  the  Identification  thus  proposed.    See  Tkm- 

PLK. 

Doubtless  Jerasalem  ancientlv,  like  all  other  cit- 


ies, hatl  definit«  cuarters  or  districts  where  particular 
classes  of  citizens  especially  resided,  but  there  was  not 
the  same  difference  i  u  religion  which  constitute  such 
marked  dirisions  within  the  bounds  of  the  modem  city. 
It  is  elear,  however,  aa  well  from  the  great  antiąuity  of 
the  Upper  City,  as  from  its  being  occupied  in  part  by 
palaces,  that  it  was  the  special  abode  of  the  nobility  («o 


JERUSkLEM 


851 


JERUSALEM 


mfUtrtmWAKA 


i2m.r*ABAV^ 


Becovery  of  the  Pler  of  the  anelent  Arch  across  the  Tjro- 
pceon  at  the  Boath-west  coriier  of  the  Tempie.  (From 
LieutenaDt  Warren*s  Skcich,  Aiiguet  22, 1868,  in  Tracings 
of  ihe  "Palestine  Ezploration  Fnud.") 

to  speak),  induding  perhaps  the  higher  order  of  the 
priesthood  Ophel  appeara  (from  Neh.  iii,  26 ;  x,  21)  to 
ha^e  been  the  generał  residence  of  the  Leyites  andlow- 
er  officers  connęcted  with  the  Tempie.  The  Lower  City, 
or  Acra,  would  therofore  constitute  the  chief  seat  of  busi- 
ness, and  coiuiequently  of  trade8inen*8  and  mechauics' 
residence,  while  Bezetha  would  be  inhabited  by  a  mis- 
cellaneous  population.  There  are,  besides  these  generał 
sections,  but  three  particular  disŁricts,  the  names  of 
which  have  come  down  to  us;  these  are: 

(1.)  Betfuoy  which  is  named  by  Josephus  as  lying 
along  the  western  side  of  the  first  wali;  but  we  are  ig- 
norant of  its  extent  or  special  appropriation. 

(2.)  Milio  is  mentioned  in  sereral  placcs  in  the  Old 
Testament  (2  Sam.  v,  9;  1  Kings  ix,  16,24;  xi, 27;  2 
Kings  xij,  20)  in  such  conuections  as  to  imply  th&t  it 
was  the  name  of  some  tract  adjoining  Zioń  in  the  inte- 
rior of  the  city,  and  we  have  therefore  ventured  to 
identify  it  with  the  space  so  singularly  inclosed  by  the 
walis  on  the  north  side  of  the  bridge.     See  Millo. 

(3.)  The  Suburbs  mentioned  by  Josephus  (Ani,  xv, 
16, 5)  as  the  quarter  to  which  the  middlo  two  of  the  four 
western  Temple-gates  led,  we  think,  must  be  not  simply 
Bezetha  in  generał  (which  was  separated  from  the  Tem- 
pie by  the  interv'ening  Lower  City),  but  rather  the  Iow 
ground  (naturallj',  therefore,  indifferently  inhabited)  ly- 
ing iromediately  north  of  Zioń  and  in  the  uppcr  expan- 
ńon  of  the  T^Topccon,  iucluding  a  tract  on  both  sides  of 
the  begiuning  of  the  seooud  wali. 

Ł  It  remains  to  iudicate  the  location  of  other  pubłic 


out  OaUBtEmSSASE    -L^*^'"' 

Boable-TanltedPassagehelow  the  Mos qne  el-Aksa.  (From 
Lientenant  Warren'8  Sketch,  Dec  SI,  1S67,  in  Tracinga of 
the  "  Paleatine  Exploratiou  Fund.*') 


buildinffs  and  objects  of  notę  connected  with  the  ancient 
city.  The  topography  of  the  Tempus  will  be  cousider- 
ed  in  detail  under  that  articie. 

(a.)  Within  the  Upper  City— Zmwł— (1.)  HerocTs  Pal- 
ące. This,  Josephus  States  (  War^  v,  4, 4),  adjoined  the 
towers  Hippicus,  etc,  on  the  north  side  of  the  old  wali, 
being  "  entirely  walled  about  to  the  height  of  80  cubits, 
with  towers  at  equal  distances.^'  Its  precise  dimensions 
in  all  are  not  given,  but  it  mu&t  have  covercd  a  largc 
area  with  its  "  innumerable  rooms,*'  its  "  many  portjcoes" 
and  "  courts,"  with  "  sereral  grovcs  of  trees,  and  long 
walks  through  them,  with  deep  canals  and  cistems." 
Similar  descriptions  are  also  given  in  A  nł,  xv,  9, 3 ;  War^ 
i,  21, 1.  We  do  not  rcgard  it,  however,  as  identical  with 
the  dhńng-hall  built  by  Herod  Agrippa  on  Zioń  {Ant. 
xx,  8, 11),  for  that  was  only  a  wing  to  the  former  palące 
of  the  Asmomeans  (apparently  a  reconstrucUon  of  the 
ancient  *^king*8  housc"),  and  lay  nearer  the  Tempie 
( War,  ii,  16, 3)— the  adjoining  **  portico"  or  "  gallery" 
mentioned  in  these  passages  being  probably  a  covered 
portion  of  the  Xystua.  One  of  the  ground  apartmęnts 
of  this  building  appears  to  bave  been  the  procurator*s 
prcetoriunif  mentioned  in  the  aocount  of  Christ'8  trial 
before  Pilate  (John  xviii,  28, 33;  xix,  9 ;  Mark  xv,  16), 
as  Josephus  informs  us  ( ir<ar,  ii,  14, 8)  that  the  Roman 
govemor3  took  up  their  ąuarters  in  the  palące,  and  set 
up  their  tribunal  (compare  Matt,  xxvii,  19)  in  front  (i.  e. 
at  the  eastcm  entrance)  of  it  (namely,  on  the  ^^Paue^ 
merU"  of  John  xix,  18). 

(2.)  There  is  no  reason  to  suppose  that  DarieTs  Tomb 
occupied  any  other  position  than  that  now  shown  as  his 
burial-place  on  Mount  Zioń.  It  was  within  the  pre- 
cincts  of  the  old  city  (1  Kings  ii,  10);  Kehemiah  men- 
tions  it  as  8urviving  the  first  overthrow  of  the  city  (Neh. 
iii,  16):  Peter  refers  to  it  as  extant  at  Jerusalem  in  his 
time  (Acts  ii,  29) ;  and  Josephus  alludes  to  it  as  a  costly 
and  noble  vault  of  sepulture  {A  ni.  xiii,  8, 4 ;  xvi,  7, 1). 
The  present  edifice,  however,  is  doubtless  a  compara- 
tivcly  modem  structure,  erected  over  the  site  of  the  an- 
cient monument,  now  buricd  by  the  accumulated  rubbish 
ofages. 

(3.)  The  Armory  referred  to  in  Neh.  iii,  19,  has  al- 
ready  been  locatcd  at  the  bend  of  the  branch  wali  from 
a  north-east  to  a  north-west  direction,  a  little  below  the 
bridge.  Its  place  was  probably  representcd  in  our  Sav- 
ioufs  time  by  an  improved  building  for  some  similar 
public  purpose. 

(4.)  The  Kinff*s  House,  so  often  mentioned  in  the  Old 
Testament,  has  also  been  sufHciently  noticed  above,  and 
its  probable  identity  with  Herod  Agrippa'8  *'dining-hail" 
pointed  out. 

(b.)  Within  the  Lower  City— ^ era  and  OpheL^{l.) 
Josephus  informs  us  (IKar,  vi,  6,3)  that  "Queen  Hele- 
na^s  Pałace  was  in  the  raiddle  of  Acra,"  apparently  upon 
the  summit  of  that  hill,  near  the  modem  site  of  the  tra- 
ditionary  *'  palące  of  Herod.*'  It  is  also  mentioned  as 
the  (north-east)  limit  of  Simon's  occupancy  in  the  Low- 
er City  ( IFar,  v,  6, 1). 

(2.)  There  were  doubtless  Bazaars  in  ancient  as  in 
modem  Jemsalem,  but  of  these  we  havc  no  account  ex- 
cept  in  two  or  three  instances.  Josephus  mentions  "  a 
place  where  were  the  merchants  of  wool,  the  braziera, 
and  the  market  for  cloth,"  just  inside  the  second  wali, 
not  far  from  its  junction  with  the  first  (l^Kor,  v,8, 1). 
It  would  also  seera  from  Neh.  viii,  1, 16,  that  there  was 
some  such  place  of  generał  resort  at  the  head  of  the  Ty- 
ropceon.  A  "  baker'8  street"  or  row  of  shops  is  referred 
to  in  Jer.  xxxvii,  21,  but  its  position  is  not  indicated,  al- 
rhough  it  appears  to  have  been  in  some  central  part  of 
the  city.  See  also  Makthish.  Perhaps  bazaars  were 
Btretched  along  the  Iow  tract  between  the  Ephraim-gate 
and  the  northeni  brow  of  Zioń. 

(3.)  The  Xyttu8  is  frequently  mentioned  by  Josephus 
as  a  place  of  popular  assemblage  between  Zioń  and  the 
Tempie,  and  between  the  bridge  and  the  old  wali  ( War, 
V,  4, 2 ;  vi,  3, 2 ;  6, 2 ;  8, 1).  We  have' therefore  thought 
that  it  would  scarcely  be  induded  within  the  Upper 


JERUSALEM 


862 


JERUSALEM 


L 


City,  the  abode  of  the  aristocracy,  where, 
moreover,  it  would  not  be  so  generally  ac- 
cessible. 

(4.)  The  Prison,  so  often  referred  to  in  the 
Old  Testament  (Neh.  iii,  24,  25 ;  Jer.  xxxii, 
2;  xxxviii,  6),  must  have  been  situated  in 
the  north-west  comer  of  the.inclosure  which 
we  have  designated  as  "Millo,"  near  the 
"Prison-gate"  (Neh.  xii,  39),  and  Peter'8 
"  iron  gate"  (Acts  xii,  10).     See  Prison. 

(5.)  On  the  ridge  of  Ophel,  not  far  from 
the  "Fountain  of  the  Virgin,"  appears  to 
have  stood  the  Palące  of  Monobaztu,  other- 
wise  stvled  that  of  Grapti  (Josephus,  War^ 
V,  6,1;' 4, 2;  iv,  9, 11;  vi,  7,1). 

(6.)  Josephus  States  {Ant,  xv,  8,1)  that 
Herod  "  built  a  theatre  at  Jerusalem,  as  also 
a  very  great  amphitheatre  in  the  plain;" 
but  this  notice  is  too  indefinite  to  enablc  os 
to  fix  the  site  of  these  buildings.  He  also 
speaks  elsewhere  (^  n/.  xvii,  10,  2)  of  a  hip- 
jiodrome  somewhere  near  the  Tempie,  but 
whether  it  was  the  same  as  the  amphithea- 
tre is  impossible  to  determine ;  the  purposes 
of  the  three  edifices,  however,  would  appear 
to  have  been  different. 

(r.)  Within  the  New  City— ^eze^Aa.— (1.)  The  Mim- 
umenis  o/*king  .4  lexander,  referred  to  by  Josephus  ( IFar, 
V,  7, 3)  were  on  the  south-west  edge  of  the  proper  hill 
Bezetha,  nearly  opposite  the  Fish-gate,  as  the  circum- 
stances  there  narrated  seem  to  require.  This  will  also 
agree  with  the  subseąuent  erection  of  the  second  engine 
by  the  Romans  (evidently  by  the  same  party  of  be- 
siegers  operating  on  this  ąiiarter, "  a  great  way  oflf "  from 
the  other),  which  was  reared  at  20  cubits^  distance  from 
the  pool  Struthius  {ibid,  xi,  4),  being  just  south  of  this 
monument. 

(2.)  The  Sepulchre  of  Christ  was  not  far  from  the 
place  of  the  Cnicifixion  (John  xix,  42) ;  if,  therefore, 
the  modem  church  ocaipy  the  tnie  Calvary,  we  see  no 
good  reaaon  to  dispute  the  identity  of  the  site  of  the 
tomb  stiU  shown  in  the  middle  of  the  west  rotunda  of 
that  building.     See  Golgotił\. 

(3.)  The  Camp  of  the  Assyrians  was  on  the  north- 
west  side  of  the  city  (Isa.xxvi,2;  2  Kings  xviii,  17), 
identical  with  the  site  of  Titus's  second  camp  within  the 
outer  wali,  but  sufliiciently  outside  the  second  wali  to  be 
beyond  the  reach  of  darts  from  it  (Josephus,  War^  v,  7, 
3 ;  12, 2),  so  that  we  can  well  refer  it  only  to  the  western 
part  of  the  generał  swell  which  terminates  in  the  knoll 
of  Calvary. 

(4.)  The  Monument  o/* the  high-priest  John  is  to  be  lo- 
catetł  near  the  bottom  of  the  north  edge  of  Zioń,  a  little 
east  of  the  tower  Mariamne  (Josephus,  War^  v,  11, 4 ;  6, 
2;  9.2;  7,8). 

{d.)  In  the  Enuirons  of  the  city.— (1.)  Herod^s  Monu- 
menis  we  incline  to  locate  on  the  brow  of  the  ridge  south 
of  the  "  upper  pool  of  Gihon"  (see  Josephus,  War,  v,  3, 
2;  12,2). 

(2.)  The  YiUage  ofthe  Erebinthi  is  mentioned  by  Jo- 
sephus {ibid.)  as  lying  along  this  linę  of  blockade  south 
of  Herod'8  Monuments,  and  therefore  probably  on  the 
western  edge  of  Gihon,  near  the  modern  hamlet  of  Abu- 
\Va'ir. 

(3.)  The  Fułkrs'  Fieldwe  take  to  be  the  broad Yalley 
of  Gihon,  espccially  between  the  two  pools  of  that  name; 
for  not  only  its  designation,  but  all  the  notices  respect- 
ing  it  (Isa.  vii,  3 ;  xxxvi,  2 ;  2  Kings  xviii,  17),  indicate 
its  proximity  to  these  waters.     See  Fulleus'  Fiku>. 

(4.)  Pompey^s  Camp  is  placed  by  Josephus  ( War,  v, 
12, 2)  on  a  mountain,  which  can  be  no  other  than  a  low- 
er  spur  of  the  modem  "  Hill  of  Evil  Counsel."  This 
must  have  been  that  generaUs  preliminary  camp,  for, 
when  he  captured  the  city, "  hc  pitched  his  camp  with- 
in [his  own  linę  of  circumvallation,  the  outer  wali  being 
then  unbuilt],  on  the  north  side  of  the  Tempie"  {Ant, 
2av,  4, 2). 


Jerusalem  from  "the  Well  of  Joah." 

(5.)  There  is  no  good  ground  to  dispnte  the  tradi- 
tionary  site  of  Aceldama  or  the  Potter  s  Field  (Malt 
xxvii,  7, 8),  in  the  face  of  the  south  brow  of  the  Yalley 
of  Hinnom.     See  Aceldam.v. 

(6.)  The  Monument  o/ Ananus  [ue.Anna8  or  Hana- 
niah  ],  the  high-priest,  mentioned  by  Josephus  (  War,  r, 
12, 2),  must  have  been  just  above  the  site  of  Aceklama. 

(7.)  The  King's  Garden  (Neh.  iii,  15)  could  have  been 
no  other  than  the  well-watered  plot  of  ground  aronnd 
the  well  of  En-Rogcl,  whcre  were  also  the  ttnjfs  irńie- 
pj-esses  (Zech.  xiv,  10). 

(8.)  The  rock  Periatereon  (literally  "pigeon-holes*^ 
referred  to  by  him  in  the  same  connection,  has  been  noc 
inaptly  identified  with  the  perforated  face  of  theTalley 
of  Jehoshaphat  at  the  foot  ofthe  Mount  of  Oli  ves,where 
modem  tradition  assignsthe  grayes  of  Jehoshaphat,  Ab- 
salom,  James,  and  Zechariah. 

(9.)  The  second  of  these  mins  from  the  north  is  prob- 
ably the  yeritable  Pillar  ofAhsdiom,  referred  to  in  tbe 
Scriptures  (2  Sam.  xviii,  18),  and  by  Joeephns  as  if  ex- 
t4int  in  his  day  ("  a  marble  pillar  in  the  kiug^s  dak  [the 
Yalley  of  Jehoshaphat,  which  led  to  *  the  king's  gar- 
dens'],  two  furUmgs  diatarU  from  JerutalewT  {Ant,  vii, 
10, 3).     See  Absalom's  Tomł 

(10.)  The  last  and  most  interesting  spot  in  this  sff- 
vey  is  the  garden  of  Getksemane,  which  tradition  has  so 
consistently  located  that  nearly  every  traveller  has  »• 
knowledged  ita  generał  identity.  Respecting  its  ««, 
however,  we  know  very  little ;  but  we  are  unable  to  per- 
ceive  the  propriety  of  supposing  a  village  of  tbe  same 
name  to  have  been  locatetl  near  it,     See  Gkthsemant. 

(1 1.)  Finalły,  we  may  briefly  recapitulate  the  differ- 
ent points  in  the  Romans'  waU  of  circunwaUatkfk,  dur- 
ing  the  siege  by  Titus,  as  given  by  Joeephus  ( War,  x, 
12,  2),  at  the  same  time  indicating  their  identity  as 
above  determined:  *^  Titus  bcgan  the  wali  from  tlte 
camp  of  the  Ass}Tians,  where  his  own  camp  was  pitch- 
ed [i.  e.,  near  the  north-west  angle  of  the  modem  city 
wali],  and  drew  it  [in  a  north-east  curve]  down  to  tbe 
lower  parts  of  the  New  City  [following  the  geoenl  di- 
rection  ofthe  present  north  wali] ;  theuce  it  in-ent  [aouth- 
easterly]  along  [the  eastem  bank  of]  theTalley  of  Ke- 
dron  to  the  Mount  of  01ives;  it  then  bent  [directly]  to- 
wards  the  south,  and  encompassed  the  [western  atepe  of 
that]  mountain  as  far  the  rock  Peristereon  [the  tombs 
of  Jehoshaphat,  etc],  and  [of]  that  other  hill  [the  Mount 
of  Offence]  which  lies  next  it  [on  the  south  ],and  [which] 
is  over  [  i.  e.  east  of]  the  Yalley  [  of  Jehoshaphat]  which 
reaches  to  Siloam ;  whence  it  bent  again  to  the  wcst,  and 
went  down  [the  hill]  to  the  Yalley  of  the  Fountain  [the 
wady  En-Nar],  beyond  which  it  went  up  again  at  the 
monument  of  Ananus  the  high-priest  [above  Acektania], 


JERUSALEM 


853 


JERUSALEM 


and  cncompassing  that  moantain  where  Pompey  had 
fonnerly  pitched  his  camp  [the  exŁreDiiŁy  of  the  Uill  of 
Evil  CounselJ,  it  retumed  to  [i.  e.  towards]  the  north 
aide  of  the  city,  aiid  was  carried  [along  the  south^west- 
em  bank  of  (ilhon  Yalley]  as  far  as  a  certain  village 
called  the  house  of  the  Erebmthi  [at  Abu-Wa*ir] ;  after 
which  it  encompassed  [the  foot  of  the  erainencć  on  which 
stoodj  Hcrod'8  monument  [south  of  Upi^er  Gihon],  and 
theie  on  the  cast  [end]  was  joined  to  Titus^s  own  camp, 
whcre  it  bcgan.  Now  the  leiigth  of  this  wali  was  forty 
iitrlongs  less  one."  Along  the  Une  thus  indicated  it 
would  be  precisely  this  length ;  it  would  make  no  sharp 
Łums  nor  derious  projections,  and  would  keep  on  com- 
maiiding  emincnces,  following  the  walls  at  a  convenient 
distance  so  as  to  be  out  of  the  leach  of  missiles. 

For  a  further  discussion  of  the  yarious  points  connect- 
ed  w^ith  the  ancient  topography  of  Jerusalem,  see  YlUal- 
pandi,  Apparatus  wbU  JlieroaoL  in  pt  3  of  l^adi  and 
Yillalp.  Jixplanat  in  Ezech,  (Romę,  1604) ;  Lamy,  De 
T(tb,fced,  sonet,  cic.  etc,  vii  (Paris,  1720),  bk.  iv,  p.  552- 
687 ;  Keland,  Paltest.  p.  832  sq. ;  Offcnhaus,  Desaipt,  ret, 
Iliero9oL  (Daventr.  1714) ;  Faber,  A  rchaol,  i,  273  są. ; 
]Iame8^'eld,  ii,  2  8q. ;  RosenmllUer,  A  Ueiih,  II,  ii,  202  są. ; 
Robinson,  Researckes^  i,  408-516;  Williams,  Holy  City, 
ii,  13-64;  Bibliotheca  Sacra,  1843,  p.  154  są.;  1846,  p. 
413  są., 605  są.;  1848, p. 92  są.;  KeisneTy lerusalem  Te- 
tmstisfima  Descripła  (Francof.  1563);  Olshausen,  Zur 
Topographie  d.  aUen  Jerusalem  (Kieł,  1833) ;  Adricho- 
mius,  IJierusalem  ńcut  Chrisłi  tempore  JiontU  (Colon. 
1593) ;  Chrysanthi  (Beat  Patr.  Hierosolymonim)  I/tsto- 
rifi  el  Descriptio  Teiire  Sancta,  Urbiscue  Sanctm  llieru- 
talem  (Yenet.  1728)  [this  work  is  in  Greek] ;  D'Anville, 
DisMert.sur  CKiendue  de  tAncienne  Jemsaletn  (Paris, 
1747) ;  Thrupp,  A  ncient  Jerusalem  (Lond.  1855) ;  Strong*s 
Hormony  and  Expos,  of  the  Gospels,  Append.  li ;  Sepp, 
Jerusalem  (Milnich,  1863);  Barclay,  City  of  the  Great 
King  (Phila.  1858) ;  Fergusson,  Ancient  Topography  of 
Jerusalem  [altogether  astray]  (Lond.  1847);  Lewin,  Je- 
rusalem  (London,  1861) ;  Pierotti,  Jerusalem  Explored 
(London,  1864) ;  Unruh,  Das  alte  Jei-usalem  (Laugens. 
1860 ;  Scholz,  De  Ilierosolyma  situ  (Bonn,  1835). 

IIL  Modem  City.—h  Situation,— The  following  able 
sketch  of  the  generał  position  of  Jerusalem  is  extracted 
from  Dr.  Robinson^s  Researches  (1,380-384):  "Jerusa- 
lem lics  near  the  summit  of  a  broad  mountain-ridge, 
extending  without  interruption  from  the  plain  of  Es- 
draelon  to  a  linę  drawn  between  the  south  end  of  the 
Dead  Sea  and  the  south-east  comer  of  the  Mediterrane- 
aii ;  or,  morę  properly,  perhaps,  it  may  be  regarded  as 
extendiiig  as  far  south  as  to  Jebel  Arnif,  in  the  Desert, 
where  it  sinks  down  at  once  to  the  level  of  the  great 
western  plateau.  This  tract,  which  \b  eyerjnirhere  not 
less  than  from  20  to  25  geographical  miles  in  breadth, 
is,  in  fact,  high,  uneven  tablć-laud.  It  everywhcre  forms 
the  precipitous  western  wali  of  the  great  valley  of  the 
Jordieui  and  the  Dead  Sea,  while  towards  the  west  it 
sinks  down  by  an  oflBset  into  a  rangę  of  lower  hills, 
which  lie  between  it  and  the  great  plain  along  the  coast 
of  the  Mediterranean.  The  surface  of  this  upper  region 
is  eyerywhere  rocky,  uneven,  and  mountainous,  and  is, 
moreover,  cut  up  by  dcep  yalleys  which  run  cast  or 
west  on  either  side  towards  the  Jordan  or  the  Mediter- 
ranean. The  linę  of  diyision,  or  water-shed,  between 
the  watcrs  of  thcse  valleys — a  temi  which  here  applies 
almost  exclusively  to  the  waters  of  the  rainy  season — 
foUows  for  the  most  part  the  height  of  land  along  the 
ridge,  yet  not  so  but  that  the  lieads  of  tlie  yalleys, 
which  run  off  in  difTerent  directions,  oftcn  interlap  for 
a  considerable  distance.  Thus,  for  example,  a  yalley 
which  descends  to  the  Jordan  oflen  has  its  hcad  a  mile 
or  two  westwanl  of  the  commeucement  of  other  yalleys 
which  run  to  the  western  sea. 

''From  tlie  great  plain  of  Esdraelon  onwards  towards 
the  south,  the  mountainous  country  riscs  gradually, 
forrning  the  tract  ancien tly  known  as  the  mountains  of 
Ephraim  and  Judah,  until,  in  the  yicinity  of  Hebron,  it 
attaius  au  eleyatiou  of  nearly  3000  Paris  feet  above  the 


leyel  of  the  Mediterranean  Sea.  Further  north.  on  a 
linę  drawn  from  the  north  end  of  the  Dead  Sea  towards 
the  true  west,  the  ridge  has  an  eleyation  of  only  about 
2500  Paris  feet,  and  here,  close  upon  the  water-shed,  lles 
the  city  of  Jerusalem.  Its  mean  geographical  position 
is  in  lat.  31© 46'  43"  N.,  aud  long.  35^  13'  E.  from  Green- 
wich. 

*•'  Six  or  seyen  miles  north  and  north-west  of  the  city 
is  spread  out  the  open  plain  or  basin  round  about  el-Jib 
(Gibeon),  extending  also  towards  cl-Blreh  (Beeroth), 
the  waters  of  which  iiow  off  at  its  south-east  part 
through  the  deep  yalley  here  called  by  the  Arabs  wady 
Beit  llanina,  but  to  which  the  monks  and  trayellers 
have  usually  giyen  the  name  of  the  *  Yalley  of  Turpen- 
tine,'  or  of  the  Terebinth,  on  the  mistaken  suppositiou 
tliat  it  is  the  ancient  Yalley  of  Elah.  This  great  yalley 
passes  along  in  a  south-west  direction  an  hour  or  morę 
west  of  Jerusalem,  and  finally  opens  out  from  the  moun- 
tains into  the  western  plain,  at  the  distance  of  8ix  or 
eight  hours  south-west  from  the  city,  under  the  name 
of  wady  es-Siirar.  The  trayeller,  on  his  way  from  Ram- 
leh  to  Jerusalem^  descends  into  and  crosses  this  deep  yal- 
ley at'the  yillage  of  Kulónieh,on  its  western  side,  au 
hour  and  a  half  from  the  latter  cit}'.  On  again  reach- 
ing  the  high  ground  on  its  eastem  side,  he  enters  upon 
an  open  tract  sloping  gradually  downward  towards  the 
east,  and  sees  before  him,  at  the  distance  of  about  two 
miles,  the  walls  and  domes  of  the  holy  city,  and  beyond 
them  the  higher  ridge  or  summit  of  the  Mount  of  01- 
iyes.  The  trayeller  now  descends  gradually  towards 
the  city  along  a  broad  swell  of  ground,  having  at  some 
distance  on  his  left  the  shallow  northem  part  of  the  Yal- 
ley of  Jehoshaphat ;  close  at  band,  on  his  right,  the  ba- 
sin which  forms  the  beginning  of  the  Yalley  of  Hin- 
nom.  Farther  down  both  these  yalleys  become  deep, 
narrow,  and  precipitous ;  that  of  Hinnom  bends  south 
and  again  cast  nearly  at  right  angles,  and  unites  with 
the  othcr,  wliich  theu  coiitinues  its  course  to  the  Dead 
Sea.  Upon  the  broad  and  eleyated  promontory  within 
the  fork  of  these  two  yalleys  lies  the  holy  city.  Ali 
around  are  higher  hills ;  on  the  east,  the  Mount  of  01- 
iyes;  on  the  south,  the  Ilill  of  £yil  Counsel,  so  called, 
rising  directly  from  the  Yale  of  Hinnom ;  on  the  west 
the  ground  rises  gently,  as  aboye  descńbed,  to  the  bor- 
ders  of  the  great  wady ;  while  on  the  north,  a  bend  of 
the  ridge,  connccted  with  the  Mount  of  Oliyes,  bounds 
the  prospect  at  the  distance  of  morę  than  a  mile.  To- 
wards the  south-west  the  view  is  somewluit  morę  open, 
for  here  lies  the  plain  of  Rephaim,  commencing  just  at 
the  southem  brijik  of  the  Yalley  of  Hinnom,  and  stretch- 
ing  off  south-west,  where  it  runs  to  the  western  sea.  In 
the  north-west,  too,  the  eye  reaches  up  along  the  upper 
part  of  the  Yalley  of  Jehoshaphat,  and  from  many  \mx\tA 
can  discem  the  Mosąue  of  Neby  Samwll,  situated  on  a 
lofty  ridge  beyond  the  great  wady,  at  the  distance  of 
two  hours. 

"The  surface  of  the  eleyated  promontory  itself,  on 
which  the  city  stands,  slopes  somewhat  steeply  towards 
the  east,  terminating  on  the  brink  of  the  Yalley  of  Je- 
hoshaphat From  the  northem  part,  near  the  present 
Damascus-gate,  a  depression  or  shallow  wad}'  runs  in  a 
southem  direction,  and  is  joined  by  anothcr  depression 
or  shallow  wady  (still  easy  to  be  traced)  coming  doi^^ 
from  near  the  Jaffa-gate.  It  then  continues  obliąuely 
doHii  the  slope,  but  with  a  deeper  bed,  in  a  southem  di- 
rection, ąuite  to  the  Pool  of  Siloam  and  the  Yalley  of 
Jehoshaphat  This  is  the  ancient  Tyropax)n.  West  of 
its  lower  part  Zioń  rises  loflily,  lying  mostly  ¥rithout 
the  modern  city ;  while  on  the  east  of  the  Tyropoeon  lie 
Bezetłui,  Moriah,  and  0{)hel,  the  last  a  long  and  com- 
paratiyely  narrow  ridge,  also  outside  of  the  modem  city, 
and  terminating  in  a  rocky  point  oyer  the  Pool  of  Silo- 
am. These  last  three  hills  may  strictly  be  taken  as 
only  parts  of  one  and  the  same  ridge.  The  breadth  cf 
the  whole  site  of  Jerusalem,  from  the  brow  of  the  Yalley 
of  Hinnom,  near  the  Jaffa-gate,  to  the  brink  of  the  Yal- 
ley of  Jehoshaphat,  is  about  1020  yarda,  or  nearly  half  a 


JERtJŚALEM 


854 


JERUSALEM 


» 


-6  >J 


Seal«>T 


U<K44rfirHAL  mirt, ' 


Map  of  the  EaTirona  of  Jerosalem. 


JERUSALEM 


855 


JERUSALEM 


gcof^phicd  mile,  of  which  distanoe  818  yaicls  are  oo- 
cupiecl  by  the  area  of  the  great  mosąwe  el-Haram  esh- 
Sherlf.  North  of  the  Jaffa-^te  the  city  wali  sweepe 
ruund  morę  to  the  west,  and  increaaes  the  breadth  of  the 
city  in  that  part. 

**  The  country  around  Jeruulem  is  all  of  limestone 
formation,  and  not  particularly  fertile.  The  rocka  ev- 
erywherc  come  out  above  the  surfacc,  which  in  many 
parts  is  alao  thickly  stiewed  with  loose  Stones,  and  the 
aspect  of  the  whole  region  is  barren  and  dreary ;  yet  the 
olive  thriycs  here  abundantly,  and  fields  of  graiii  are 
seen  in  the  yalleys  and  lerel  places,  but  they  are  less 
pToductive  than  in  the  region  of  Hebron  and  NabKis. 
Neithcr  vineyards  nor  fig-trees  fiourish  on  the  high 
gnnind  around  the  city,  though  the  latter  are  found  in 
the  gardens  below  Siloam,  and  rery  frequently  in  the 
vicinity  of  Bethlehem."* 

^The  elevation  of  Jerusalem  is  a  subject  of  constant 
reference  and  exu]tation  by  the  JewUh  writera.  Their 
ferrid  poetry  abounds  w^ith  allusions  to  its  height,  to 
the  ascent  thithcr  of  the  tribes  from  all  parts  of  the 
coantr>'.  It  was  the  habitation  of  Jehovah,  from  which 
*  fae  looked  upon  all  the  inhabitants  of  the  world'  (Psa. 
xxxiii,  14) :  its  kings  were  *  higher  than  the  kings  of 
the  earth'  (Psa.  lxxxix,  27).  In  the  later  Jewish  litera- 
turę of  narratiye  and  description  this  poetry  is  reduced 
to  prose,  and  in  the  most  exaggerated  form.  Jerusalem 
was  so  high  that  the  flames  of  Jamnia  were  risible  from 
it  (2  Mace.  xii,  9).  From  the  tower  of  Psephinus,  out- 
slde  the  walls,  conld  be  disoemed  on  the  one  hand  the 
Mediterranean  Sea,  on  the  other  the  country  of  Arabia 
(JosephuS)  War,  v,  4, 3).  Hebron  coidd  be  seen  from  the 
roofs  of  the  Tempie  (Lightfoot,  Chor,  Cent,  xlix).  The 
same  thing  can  be  traced  in  Josephus*s  account  of  the  en- 
Tiions  of  the  city,in  which  he  has  exaggerated  what  is, 
in  truth,  a  remairkable  ravine  [and  has,  by  late  excaya- 
tions,  been  proyed  to  have  been  much  greater  ancient- 
ly],  to  a  depth  so  enormous  that  the  head  swam  and  the 
eyes  failed  in  gazing  into  its  recesscs  {Ant.  xv,  11,  6)" 
(Smith). 

The  heights  of  the  principal  poiuts  in  and  round  the 
city,  aboye  the  Mediterranean  Sea,  as  given  by  lieuten- 
ant  Van  de  Velde,  in  the  Memoir  (p.  179, 180)  accom- 
panying  his  Map,  1858,  are  as  follow :  ^^^ 

North.wost  comer  of  the  dty  {,Ka»r  Jalttd) 2610 

Mount  Zioń  (CotnaciUum) 2087 

Mount  Moriah  {Haram  etth-Sheri/) 2429 

Bridge  over  the  Kedrou,  near  Getascinane 2*281 

Pool  of  Siloam 21 14 

Bir-Byub,  at  the  conflaence  of  Hinuom  and  Kedron.  1906 
Mount  of  Oliyes,  Church  of  Ascension  on  sammit. . .  2T24 

A  table  of  leyels  differing  aomewhat  from  these  will  be 
foand  in  Barclay's  City  ifthe  Great  King,  p,  103  sq. 

2.  Bespecting  the  supply  of  the  city  with  water,  we 
leam  from  Strabo^s  account  of  the  siege  of  Jerusalem  by 
Pumpey  that  the  town  was  well  proyided  with  water 
within  the  walls,  but  that  there  was  nonę  in  the  enyi- 
rons  {Geog.  xvi,  2,  40).  Probably  the  Roman  troope 
then  suffered  from  want  of  water,  as  did  other  arraies 
-which  laid  siege  to  Jerusalem.  In  the  narratiyes  of  all 
sueh  sieges  we  neyer  read  of  the  besieged  suffering  from 
thirst,  although  dńyen  to  the  most  dreadful  extremitie8 
and  resources  by  hunger,  while  the  besiegers  are  fre- 
ąuently  described  as  sufTering  greatly  from  want  of  wa^ 
ter,  and  as  bcing  obliged  to  fetch  it  from  a  great  dis- 
tanoe.  The  agonies  of  thirst  sustained  by  the  fint  Cru- 
aaders  in  their  siege  of  Jerusalem  will  be  remembered 
by  most  readers  from  the  yivid  picture  drawn  by  Tasao, 
if  not  from  the  account  fumished  by  William  of  Tyrc. 
Yet  whcn  the  town  was  taken  plenty  of  water  was  found 
within  it.  This  is  a  vexy  singular  circumstance,  and  is 
perhaps  only  in  part  explainecLby  reference  to  the  sys- 
tem of  preser^-ing  water  in  cistems,  as  at  this  <lay  in 
Jerusalem.  Solomon*s  aqueduct  near  Bethlehem  to  Je- 
rusalem could  haye  been  no  dependence,  as  its  waters 
might  easily  have  been  cut  off  by  the  besiegers.  All 
the  wells,  aiso,  are  now  outside  the  town,  and  no  interi- 
or fountain  is  mentioned  saye  that  of  Hezekiah,  which 


is  scaroely  fit  for  drinking.  At  the  ńege  by  Titus  the 
well  of  Siloam  may  haye  been  in  possession  of  the  Jews, 
i.  e.  within  the  walls;  but  at  the  siege  by  the  Crusaders 
it  was  certainly  held  by  the  besieging  Franks,  and  yet 
the  latter  perished  from  thirst,  while  the  besieged  had 
*'  ingentes  oopias  aąun.**  We  cannot  here  go  through 
the  eyidence  which  by  combination  and  comparison 
might  throw  some  light  on  this  remarkable  ąuestion. 
There  is,  howeyer,  good  ground  to  condudc  that  from 
yery  ancient  times  there  has  been  under  the  Tempie  an 
unfalling  sourcc  of  water,  deriyed  by  secret  and  subter- 
raneous  channels  from  springs  to  the  west  of  the  town, 
and  communicating  by  other  subterranean  passages  with 
the  Pool  of  Siloam  and  the  Fomitain  of  the  Yirgin  in  the 
east  of  the  town,  whether  they  were  within  or  without 
the  walls  of  the  town. 

The  existence  of  a  perennial  source  of  water  below 
the  Tempie  has  always  been  admitted*  Tacitus  knew 
of  it  {Hist,  V,  12) ;  and  Aristeas,  in  describing  the  an- 
cient Tempie,  informs  us  that  "  the  supply  of  water  was 
unfalling,  inasmuch  as  there  was  an  abundant  natural 
fountain  flowing  in  the  interior,  and  reseryoirs  of  admi- 
rable  construction  under  ground,  extending  five  stadia 
round  the  Tempie,  with  pipes  and  conduits  unknown  to 
all  except  those  to  whom  the  ser\'ioe  was  intrusted,  by 
which  the  water  was  brought  to  yarious  parts  of  the 
Tempie  and  again  conducted  off."  The  Moslems  also 
haye  constantly  afiirmed  the  exi8tence  of  this  fountain 
or  cistem ;  but  a  reseryc  has  always  been  kept  up  as  to 
the  means  by  which  it  Ib  supplied.  This  reseryc  seems 
to  haye  been  maintained  by  the  successiye  occupants  of 
Jerusalem  as  a  point  of  ciyic  honor;  and  this  fact  alone 
intimates  that  there  was  danger  to  the  town  in  its  be- 
coming  known,  and  pointa  to  the  fact  that  the  supply 
came  from  without  the  city  by  secret  channels,  which  it 
was  of  importance  not  to  disclose.  Yet  we  are  plainly 
Łold  in  the  Bibie  that  Hezekiah  ^'stopped  the  upper 
water-course  of  Gihon,  and  brought  it  down  to  the  west 
side  of  the  city  of  Dayid"  (1  Kings  i,  83,  38);  from  2 
Chroń,  xxxii,  30,  it  seems  that  all  the  neighboring  foun- 
tains  were  thus  "stoppcd"  or  ooyered,  and  the  brook 
which  they  had  formed  diyerted  by  subterraneous  chan- 
nels into  the  town,  for  the  express  purpoee  of  preyenting 
besiegers  from  finding  the  "  much  water**  which  pieyi- 
ously  existed  outside  the  walls  (comp.  also  Ecclus.  xlyiii, 
17).  Perhaps,  likewise,  the  prophet  Ezekiel  (xlyii,  1^ 
12)  alludes  to  this  secret  fountain  under  the  Tempie 
when  he  speaks  of  waters  issuing  from  the  threshold  of 
the  Tempie  towanls  the  east,  and  fiowing  down  towards 
the  desert  as  an  abundant  and  beautiful  stream.  This 
figurę  may  be  drawn  from  the  waters  of  the  inner  source 
under  the  Tempie,  being  at  the  time  of  oyerfiow  dis- 
charged  by  the  outlets  at  Siloam  into  the  Kidron,  which 
takes  the  eastward  coune  thus  described. 

There  are  certainly  wells,  or  rather  shafts,  in  and 
near  the  Tempie  area,  which  are  said  to  deriyc  their 
waters  through  a  paasage  of  masonry  four  or  fiye  feet 
high,  from  a  chamber  or  resenroir  cut  in  the  solid  rock 
under  the  grand  mosąue,  in  which  the  water  is  said  to 
rise  from  the  rock  into  a  basin  at  the  bottom.  The  ex- 
istence  of  this  reseryoir  and  source  of  water  is  affirmed 
by  the  citizens,  and  coincides  with  the  preyious  intima- 
tions,  but  it  must  be  left  for  futurę  explorers  to  elear  up 
all  the  obscurities  in  which  the  matter  is  inyolyed. 
£ven  Dr.  Barclay,  who  gaye  great  attention  to  this  sub- 
ject, was  unable  fuUy  to  elear  it  up  {City  ofthe  Great 
King,  p.  293). 

The  pools  and  tanks  of  ancient  Jerusalem  were  yery 
abundant,  and,  each  house  being  proyided  with  what 
w^e  may  cali  a  bottle-necked  cistem  for  rain-watcr, 
drought  within  the  city  was  rare;  and  history  shows  us 
that  it  was  the  besiegers,  not  the  besieged,  that  gener- 
ally  suffered  fhwn  want  of  water  (Gul.  Tyr.  bk.  yiii,  p.  7 ; 
De  Waha,  Ltibores  Godfredi,  p.  421),  though  occasion- 
ally  this  was  reyersed  (Josephus,  War,  v,  9,  4).  Yet 
neither  in  ancient  nor  modem  times  coukl  the  netgh- 
borhood  of  Jeiusalem  be  called  '<  waterlesi^"  as  Stnibo 


JERUSALEM 


856 


JERUSALEM 


deflcribes  it  (Geogr,  xvi,  2,  86).  In  summer  the  fields 
and  hills  around  are  verdureless  and  gray,  scorched  with 
months  of  drought,  yet  within  a  radius  of  seyen  miles 
thcre  are  some  thirty  or  forty  natural  spńngs  (Barclay 's 
City  ofthe  Great  /Twigr,  p.  295).  The  artiUcial  provbion 
for  a  supply  of  water  in  Jenisalem  iii  ancien  t  times  was 
perhaps  the  most  complete  and  extensive  ever  imdei^ 
taken  fur  a  city.  Till  lately  this  was  not  fully  credited ; 
but  Barclay'8,  and,  morę  recently,\Vhitty'8  and  Pierot- 
ti's  subterraneous  excavations  have  proved  it.  The 
aąueduct  of  Solomon  (winding  along  for  twclre  miles 
and  a  quarter)  pours  the  waters  of  the  three  immense 
pools  into  the  enormoiis  Tempie  wells,  cut  out  like  cav- 
ems  in  the  rock ;  and  the  pools,  which  surround  the  city 
in  all  directions,  supply  to  a  great  extent  the  want  of  a 
river  or  a  lakę  (Traill'8  Josephus,  vol.  i ;  Append.  p.  57, 
60).  For  a  description  of  these,  see  Thomson,  Land  and 
Bookf  ii,  523  są. 

The  ordinary  means  taken  by  the  inhabitants  to  se- 
cure  a  supply  of  water  bave  beeu  described  under  the 
article  Cistern;  for  interesting  detaila,  see  Raumer^s 
Palaslina,  p.  329-838;  Robin8on's  HesearcheSf  i,  479- 
616;  OIin*s  TrareUj  ii,  168-181;  and  Williams^s  Jloly 
City,  ii,  453-502. 

8.  We  present  in  this  connection  some  additional  re- 
marks  on  \.\\^fortification»  of  the  city.  Dr.  Kobinson 
thinks  that  the  wali  ofthe  new  city,  the ^lia  of  Hadri- 
an,  nearly  coincided  with  that  of  the  present  Jenisalem ; 
and  the  portion  of  Mount  Zioń  which  now  lies  outside 
would  seem  then  also  to  have  been  excluded ;  for  Euse- 
bius  and  C3nril,  in  the  4th  century,  speak  of  the  denun- 
ciation  of  the  prophet  being  fulfilled,  which  describes 
Zioń  as  "  a  ploughed  field"  (>lic.  iii,  2). 

In  the  Middle  Ages  there  appear  to  have  been  two 
gates  on  cach  side  of  the  city,  making  cight  in  all;  a 
number  not  greatly  short  of  that  assigned  in  the  aboye 
esUmate  to  the  ancient  Jenisalem,  and  probably  occu- 
pying  nearly  the  places  of  the  most  important  of  the 
ancient  ones. 

On  the  west  side  were  two  gates,  of  which  the  prin- 
cipal  was  the  Porta  Darid,  gate  of  David,  often  men- 
tioued  by  the  writers  on  the  Crusades.  It  was  called 
by  the  Arabs  Bab  el-Mihraby  and  corresponds  to  the 
present  Jaffa-gate,  or  Bab  el-KhuUi,  The  other  was 
the  gate  of  the  FiUler's  Field  {Porta  Villa  FuUonis),  so 
called  from  Isa.  vii,  3.  This  seems  to  be  the  same  which 
others  cali  Porta  JudiciariOf  and  which  is  described  as 
being  in  the  wali  over  against  the  church  of  the  Holy 
Sepulchre,  leading  to  Siło  (Neby  SamwU)  and  Gibeon. 
This  seems  to  be  that  which  the  Arabian  writers  cali 
Serb,    There  is  no  tracę  of  it  in  the  present  walL 

On  the  north  there  were  alao  two  gates,  and  all  the 
Middle-Age  writers  speak  of  the  principal  of  them  as 
the  gate  of  St.  Stephen,  from  the  notion  that  the  death 
of  the  protomart^T  took  place  near  it,  This  was  also 
called  the  gate  of  Ephraim,  in  reference  to  its  probable 
ancient  name.  Arabie  writers  called  it  Bab  M  mttd  el- 
Ghurab,  of  which  the  present  name.  Bab  ei-*Amudj  is 
only  a  contraction.  The  present  gate  ofSt.  Stephen  is 
on  the  east  of  the  city,  and  the  scenę  of  the  martyrdom 
is  now  placed  ncar  it;  but  there  is  no  account  of  the 
change.  Fiuther  east  w^as  the  gate  of  Benjamin  {Porta 
Benjamiftis),  corresponding  apparently  to  what  is  now 
called  the  gate  of  Herod. 

On  the  east  there  seem  to  hare  been  at  least  two 
gates.  The  northemmost  is  described  by  Adamnanus 
as  a  smali  portal  leading  down  to  the  Valley  of  Jchosh- 
aphat.  It  was  called  the  gate  of  Jehoshaphat  from  the 
valley  to  which  it  led.  It  seems  to  be  represented  by 
the  present  gate  of  St.  Stephen.  The  Aral)ian  writers 
cali  it  Bab  el-Usbat,  gate  of  the  Tribes,  being  another 
form  of  the  modem  Arabie  name  Bab  es-Subat,  The 
present  gate  of  St.  Stephen  has  four  lions  sculptured 
over  it  on  the  outside,  which,  as  well  as  the  architec- 
ture,  show  that  it  exi8ted  before  the  present  walls.  Dr. 
Robinson  suggests  that  the  original  **  smali  portal"  was 
rebuilt  on  a  larger  scalę  by  the  Franks  when  they  built 


ap  the  walls  of  the  city,  either  in  A.D.  1178  or  1289. 
The  other  gate  is  the  famous  Golden  Gate  (Porta  aurta) 


Interior  of  the  "  Golden  Gate.*' 
in  the  eastem  wali  of  the  Tempie  area.  It  is  now  called 
by  the  Arabs  Bab  ed-DahariyeJi,  but  formerly  Bab  tr- 
Ramehj "  Gate  of  Mercy."  The  name  Golden  Gate  ap- 
pears  to  have  come  from  a  suppoeed  connection  with 
one  of  the  ancient  gates  of  the  Tempie,  which  are  sald 
to  have  been  corercd  with  gold ;  but  this  name  cannot 
be  traoed  back  beyond  the  historians  of  the  Ousades. 
This  gate  is,  from  its  architecture,  obyiously  of  Roman 
origin,  and  is  conjectured  to  have  belongcd  to  the  indo- 
surę  of  the  tempie  of  Jupiter  which  was  built  by  Hadrian 
upon  Mount  Moriah.  The  exterior  is  now  wallcd  up; 
but,  being  double,  the  interior  forms  itithin  the  area  a 
recess,  which  is  uscd  for  prayer  by  the  Mosulem  wonhip- 
per.  Different  reasons  are  given  for  the  closing  of  this 
gate.  It  was  probably  because  it  was  found  inconven- 
ient  that  a  gate  to  the  mo8que  should  be  open  in  tlic 
exterior  walL  Although  not  wallcd  up,  it  was  kcpt 
dosed  even  when  tlie  Crusaders  were  in  possession  of 
the  city,  and  only  opened  once  a  year,  on  Palm  Sunday, 
in  cdebration  of  our  Lord^s  supposed  triumphal  entry 
through  it  to  the  Tempie. 

Of  all  the  towers  with  which  the  city  was  anciently 
adomed  and  defended,  the  most  important  is  that  of 
Hippicus,  which  Josephus,  as  we  have  already  seen,  as- 
sumed  as  the  starting-point  in  his  description  of  all  the 
walls  of  the  city.  Ilerod  gave  to  it  the  name  of  a 
friend  who  was  alain  in  battle.  It  was  a  quadrangu]ar 
structure,  twent3r^five  cubits  on  each  side,  and  built  up 
entirely  solid  to  the  height  of  thirty  cubits.  Above 
this  solid  part  was  a  cistern  twenty  cubits;  and  then, 
for  twenty-five  cubits  morę,  were  chambers  of  variona 
kinds,  with  a  breastwork  of  two  cubits,  and  battlcments 
of  three  cubits  upon  the  top.  The  altitudc  ofthe  whole 
tower  was  conseąuently  eighty  cubits.  The  Stones  of 
which  it  was  built  were  very  large,  twenty  cubits  locg 
by  ten  broad  and  five  high,  and  (probably  in  the  upper 
part)  were  of  white  marble.  Dr.  Robinson  has  shown 
that  this  tower  shoiUd  be  sought  at  the  north-wcst  cor^ 
ner  of  the  uppcr  city,  or  Mount  Zioń.  This  part,  a  lit- 
tle  to  the  south  of  the  Jaffa-gate,  ia  now  occupied  by 
the  dtadd.  It  is  an  irregular  assemblage  of  6quare 
towers,  surrounded  on  the  innor  side  towards  the  dty 
by  a  Iow  walU  and  having  on  the  outer  or  west  aide  a 
deep  fosse.  The  towers  which  rise  fVt)m  the  brink  of 
the  foFse  are  protected  on  that  side  by  a  Iow  slopirg 
bulwark  or  buttress,  which  rises  from  the  bottom  ofthe 
trench  at  an  angle  of  forty-five  drgrccs.  This  part 
bears  evident  marks  of  antiquity,  and  Dr.  Robinson  is 
inclined  to  ascribe  these  massiye  outwoiks  to  the  time 
of  the  rcbuilding  and  fortifying  of  the  city  by  Hadrian. 
This  fortress  is  described  by  the  Middle-Age  historians 
as  the  tower  or  dudd  of  David.  Within  it,  as  the 
trareller  enters  the  city  by  the  Jaffa-gate,  the  north- 
castom  tower  attracts  his  notice  as  bearing  evident 
marks  of  higher  antiąuity  than  any  of  the  others.    The 


JERUSALEM 


867 


JERUSALEM 


npper  part  ib,  indeed,  modem,  bat  the  lower  part  is  boilt 
of  hurger  stoneB,  bevelled  at  the  edges,  and  appaiently 
Btill  occupiring  their  original  placcs.  This  tower  has 
been  singled  out  by  the  Franka,  and  bears  among  them 
the  name  of  the  tower  of  David,  whUe  they  Bometimes 
give  to  the  whole  fortress  the  name  of  the  castle  of  Da- 
vid.  Taking  all  the  circumatances  into  accoimt,  Dr. 
Robinson  thinks  that  the  antiąue  lower  portiou  of  this 
tower  is  in  all  probability  a  remnaut  of  the  tower  of 
Hippicos,  which,  as  Josephus  states,  was  left  standing 
by  Titus  when  be  destroyed  the  city.  This  discorery, 
howerer,  b  not  new,  the  identity  having  been  advoca- 
ted  by  Raumer  and  othera  before  Dr.  Robinson  trayelled. 
This  view  has  been  somewhat  modified  by  Mr.  Williams, 
who  shows  that  the  north-weśtem  angle  of  the  present 
dtadel  exactly  corresponds  in  size  and  position  to  the 
description  of  Josephus,  whileother  portions  of  the  same 
generał  structure  have  been  rebuilt  upon  the  old  foun- 
dations  of  the  adjoining  towers  of  Mariamne  and  Pha- 
saelus  (//o/y  Cih/,  ii,  14-16). 


The  "CiisTlGOf  Dli  viii.' 
The  present  Damascus-gate  in  particular,  from  its 
massire  style  and  other  circumstances,  seems  to  have 
occupied  a  prominent  point  along  the  ancient  "  second 
wali"  of  the  city,  Ck>nnected  with  its  structures  are  the 
immense  underground  quarries,  on  which,  as  well  as  out 


t^ 


n 


cL^" 


rtn 


JPlan  of  ^uarrles  ander  Jerosalem. 


(/whioh,  the  city  may  be  said  to  be  boilt.  From  them 
have  been  hewn,  in  past  ages,  the  massiye  limetone 
blocks  which  appear  in  the  walls  and  elsewhere.  In 
these  dark  chamben  one  may,  with  the  help  of  torches, 
wander  for  houra,  scrambling  over  mounds  of  rubbbh ; 
now  climbing  into  one  chamber,  now  descending  into 
another,  noting  the  various  cuttings,  grooYes,  clearages 
and  hammer-marks;  and  wondering  at  the  diflferent 
ahapes — bars  here,  slices  there,  boulders  there,  thrown 
op  together  in  utter  confusion.  Only  in  one  corner  do 
we  find  a  few  drippings  of  water  and  a  tiny  spring ;  for 
these  singular  excavation8,  like  the  great  limestone  caye 
at  Khureitun  (beyond  Bethlehem,  probably  AduUam), 
are  entirely  ftee  finom  damp ;  and  though  the  only  bit 
of  interoourse  with  the  upper  air  is  by  the  smali  twenty- 
inch  hole  at  the  Damascus-gate,  through  which  the  en- 
terprising  traveller  wriggles  into  them  like  a  serpent, 
yet  the  air  is  fresh  and  somewhat  warm  (Stewart's  Tent 
and  Khatif  p.  263-266).  These  are  no  doubt  the  subter- 
ranean  retreats  referred  to  by  Josephus  as  occupied  by 
the  despairing  Jews  in  the  last 
days  of  Jerusalem  (  War^  yi/7, 
8 ;  vi,  8, 4) ;  and  to  which  Tas- 
so  alludes  when  relating  the 
wizard's  promise  to  conduct 
the  "Soldau"  through  God- 
frey^s  leaguer  into  the  heart 
of  the  city  {Gei-us.  Liber.  x,  29). 
The  native  name  for  the  quar- 
ries  is  Magharet  eUKottoti,  the 
Cotton  Cave,  For  a  fuli  de- 
scription of  these  cavema,  see 
Barclay,  City  ofthe  Great  King^ 
p.460  8q. ;  Thomson,  Land  and 
J?ooi',  ii,  491  sq. ;  Wilson  in  the 
Ordnance  Surrey  (1865,  p.  68). 
4.  The  foUowing  description 
of  the  present  city  is  cbiefly 
abridged  from  the  excellent 
account  of  Dr.  Olin  {Trarels, 
YoL  ii,  chap.  iv).  The  generał 
view  of  the  city  from  the  Mt. 
of  Oliyes  is  mentioned  morę  or  less  by  all  travellers  as 
that  ftom  which  they  derive  their  most  distinct  and 
abiding  impression  of  Jerusalem. 

The  summit  of  the  Mount  of  Oliyes  Ła  about  half  a 
mile  east  from  the  dty,  which  it  completely  oyerlooks, 

^        eyery  considerable  edifice  and  al- 

most  eyery  house  being  yisible. 
The  city,  seen  from  this  point,  ap- 
pears  to  be  a  regular  inclined  plaui, 
sloping  gently  and  uniformly  from 
west  to  east,  or  towards  the  ob- 
seryer,  and  indented  by  a  slight 
depression  or  shallow  yale,  run- 
ning  nearly  through  the  centrę  in 
the  same  direction.  The  south- 
east  corner  of  the  quadrangle— for 
that  may  be  aasumed  as  the  figurę 
formed  by  the  rocks— that  which 
ia  nearest  to  the  obseryer,  is  occu- 
pied by  the  mosąue  of  Omar  and  ita 
extensiye  and  beautiful  grounds. 
This  is  Mount  Moriah,  the  site  of 
Solomon's  Tempie ;  and  the  ground 
embraced  in  this  inclosure  occo- 
pies  about  an  eighth  of  the  whole 
modern  city.  It  is  coyered  with 
greenswanl,and  planted  sparingly 
with  olive,  cypress,  and  other  trees, 
and  it  is  certainly  the  most  loyely 
feature  of  the  towi,  whether  we 
haye  reference  to  the  splcndid 
structures  or  the  beautiful  lawn 
spread  out  around  them. 

The  south-west  ąuarter,  era- 
bradng  that  part  of  Mount  Zioń 


JERUŚALEM 


868 


JEBUSAŁEM 


Map  of  Modern  JeruBalem. 


which  is  within  thc  modem  town,  is  to  a  great  ex- 
tent  oocupiod  by  thc  Armenian  convent,  an  enorraoiis 
edifice,  which  is  the  only  conspicuous  object  in  this 
reighlx»rhood.  The  north-west  is  largely  occupied  by 
thc  Lntin  conrent,  another  veiy  ext€nsive  establish- 
ment. Aboiit  midway  betwcen  these  two  convents  is 
the  castle  or  citadcl,  close  to  the  Bethlehem-gate,  al- 
ready  mentłoned.  The  north-east  ąuarter  of  Jerusalem 
is  but  partially  built  iip,  and  it  has  more  the  aspect  of  a 
rambling  agricidtiiral  village  than  that  of  a  crowded 
city.  The  vacant  H]łots  here  are  green  with  gardcns 
and  olive-trees.  Thcre  is  anotheT  large  vacant  tract 
along  the  southem  wali,  and  west  of  the  Haram,  also 
ccvcred  with  rerdure.  Ncar  the  centrę  of  the  city  also 
appear  two  or  three  green  spots,  which  are  smali  gar- 
dens.  The  Chiirch  of  the  Holy  Sepulchre  is  the  only 
conspicuoiis  edifice  in  this  vicinity,  and  ita  domes  are 
Btriking  objects.     There  are  no  buildings  which,  either 


from  their  size  or  beauty,  are  likely  to  engage  the  at- 
tention.  Eight  or  ten  minarets  mark  the  positioo  ot  «o 
many  mosąues  in  different  parts  of  the  town,  but  they 
are  only  noticed  because  of  their  eleTation  above  ihe 
siuTOunding  edifices.  Upon  the  same  principle  tbe  eye 
resta  for  a  moment  upon  a  great  number  of  Iow  drtices, 
which  form  the  roofs  of  the  prindpal  dwellings.  ind  rp- 
lieve  the  heaYT"  uniformity  of  the  flat  plastered  rooii 
which  cover  the  greater  mass  of  more  humble  haluu- 
tiona.  Many  ruinous  piles  and  a  thoiisand  disgusiizn; 
objects  are  concealed  or  disguised  by  the  distance.  Many 
ineqaalities  of  surface,  which  exist  to  so  great  an  ext«it 
that  there  is  not  a  lerel  stieet  of  any  length  b  Jerusa- 
lem, are  also  unperceived. 

From  the  same  commanding  point  of  view  a  fer  (^ 
ive  and  fig  trees  ar©  aeen  in  the  lower  pan  of  the  Talley 
of  Jehoabaphat,  and  scattered  over  tbe  side  of  Ołi\trC 
from  ita  base  to  the  aummit.    They  are  ąniukled  yet 


JERUSAŁEM 


859 


JTERUSALEM 


more  sparuigly  on  the  Boathem  ńde  Af  the  city  on 
BIoodŁs  Zioń  and  OpheL  North  of  Jerusalem  the  olive 
plaiitations  appear  more  numerous  as  well  as  thriving, 
and  thas  ofier  a  grateful  oontrast  to  the  sunbumt  flekls 
and  bare  rocks  which  predominate  in  this  landscape. 
The  region  wesŁ  of  the  city  appears  to  be  destitiite  of 
trees.  Fields  of  stunted  wheat,  yellow  with  the  drought 
rather  than  white  for  the  har^est,  are  seen  on  all  sides 
of  the  town. 

Within  the  gates,  however,  the  city  is  fidl  of  inequal* 
it  iesL  The  passenger  is  always  ascending  or  descending. 
Therc  are  no  level  streets,  and  littłe  skill  or  labor  haa  been 
employcd  to  remoye  or  diminish  the  inequalities  which 
naturę  or  time  has  produced.  Houses  are  buile  upon 
mountains  of  rubbish,  which  aro  probably  twenty,  thir- 
ty,  or  tifcy  feet  above  the  natural  lerel,  and  the  streets 
are  constnicted  with  the  same  disregard  to  conven- 
lence,  with  thb  dijference,  that  some  sUglit  attention  is 
paid  to  the  possibility  of  carrying  off  surplus  water. 
The  streets  are,  without  esception,  narrow,  seldom  ex- 
ceeding  eight  or  ten  feet  in  breadth.  The  houses  often 
meet,  and  in  some  instances  a  building  occupies  both 
sides  of  the  street,  which  runs  under  a  succcssion  of 
arches  barely  high  enough  to  permit  an  eąuestrian  to 
pass  under  thens.  A  canopy  of  old  mats  or  of  plank  is 
stispended  orer  the  principal  streets  when  not  arched. 
This  custom  had  its  origin,  no  doubt,  in  the  heat  of  the 
climate,  which  is  yery  intense  in  summer,  and  it  gives 
a  gloomy  aspect  to  all  the  most  thronged  and  busy 
parta  of  the  city.  These  covered  ways  are  often  per- 
vaded  by  ctmrents  of  air  when  a  perfect  calm  preyailis  in 
other  places.  The  prinoipal  streets  of  Jerusalem  run 
neariy  at  right  angles  to  each  other.  Yeiy  few,  if  any 
of  them,  bear  names  among  the  native  populatlon.  They 
are  badly  paved,  being  merely  laid  irregularly  with  raised 
Stones,  with  a  deep  8quare  channel  for  beasts  of  bunlen 
in  the  middle;  but  the  steepness  of  the  gronnd  contrib- 
utes  to  keep  them  deaner  than  in  most  (hien (al  citics. 

The  houses  of  Jerusalem  are  subsUntially  biiilt  of  the 
limestone  of  which  the  whole  of  this  part  of  Palestine  is 
composed:  not  usaally  hewn,  but  broken  into  regular 
forms,  and  roaking  a  solid  wali  of  rcry  respcctable  ap- 
pearance.  For  the  most  part,  tl;?re  are  no  windows 
next  to  the  strcet,  and  the  few  which  exist  for  the  pur- 
poses  of  light  or  ventłlation  are  oompletely  masked  by 
casements  and  lattice-work.  The  apartments  receire 
their  light  from  the  open  courts  within.  The  ground 
plot  is  usually  surronnded  by  a  high  inclosure,  common- 
1y  forming  the  walls  of  the  house  only,  but  sometimes 
embracing  a  smali  garden  and  some  racant  ground. 
The  rain-water  which  falls  upon  the  pavement  is  care- 
fułly  conducted,  by  raeans  of  gutters,  into  cistems,  where 
it  is  preserred  far  domestic  uses.  The  people  of  Jerusa- 
lem rely  chiefly  upon  theso  reserroirs  for  their  supply 
of  this  mdispensable  article.  £very  house  has  its  cis^ 
tern.  and  the  laiiger  habitations  are  provided  with  a 
considerable  number  of  them,  which  occtipy  the  ground 
story  or  cells  f(»rraed  for  the  purpoee  below  it.  Stone  is 
employed  in  building  for  all  the  purposes  to  which  it 
can  possibly  be  appłied,  and  Jerusalem  is  hardly  more 
esposed  to  accidenta  by  fire  than  a  qaarry  or  subterra- 
iteaii  careni.  Thb  floora,  stairs,  etc.,  are  of  stone,  and 
th2  ceiling  is  usually  formed  by  a  coat  of  plaster  laid 
upon  the  stonea,  which  at  the  same  time  form  the  roof 
and  the  yaulted  top  of  the  roora.  Doors,  sashes,  and  a 
few  other  appurtenanoes,  are  all  that  can  usually  be  af- 
forded  of  a  materiał  so  expensive  as  wooil.  The  little 
timber  which  is  used  is  mostly  brought  from  Mount 
Lebonon,  as  in  the  time  of  Holomon.  A  rough,  crooked 
Btick  of  the  fig-tree,  or  some  gnarled,  twisted  planks 
madę  of  the  olive— the  growth  of  Palestine,  are  occa- 
aionally  seen.  In  other  respects,  the  description  in  the 
article  House  will  afTord  a  suflicient  notion  of  ihose  in 
Jerusalem.  A  large  nnmber  of  houses  in  Jerusalem  are 
in  a  dilapidated  and  ruinous  state.  Nobody  seems  to 
make  repairs  w>  long  as  his  dweUing  does  not  absolutely 
refuae  him  shełter  and  safety.    If  one  room  tumbles 


aboat  his  «an  he  rsnnyyes  into  another,  and  permits 
rubbish  and  rermin  to  accumulate  as  they  will  in  the 
deserted  halls.  Tottering  staircases  are  [jropped  to  pre- 
%'ent  their  fali;  and,  when  the  editice  becomes  untena- 
ble,  the  oecupant  seeks  another  a  little  less  ruinous,  lear- 
ing  the  wreck  to  a  smaller  or  more  wretched  family,  or, 
more  probably,  to  a  goatherd  and  his  Hock.  Habita* 
Uons  whkh  have  a  very  respectable  appearance  aa  seen 
from  the  street,  are  often  found,  upon  entering  them,  to 
be  little  better  than  heaps  of  ruins. 

Nothing  of  this  would  be  suspected  from  the  generał 
appearance  of  the  city  as  seen  fkt>m  the  rarious  com- 
mauding  points  without  the  walls,  nor  from  anything 
that  meets  the  eye  in  the  streets.  Few  towns  in  tha 
East  offer  a  more  imposing  spectacle  to  the  A-iew  of  the 
approaching  stranger.  He  is  struck  with  the  height 
and  masaiyeness  of  the  walls,  which  are  kept  in  perfect 
repair,  and  naturally  produce  a  farorable  opinion  of  the 
wealth  and  comfort  which  they  are  designed  to  protect. 
Upon  entering  the  gates,  he  is  apt,  after  all  that  has 
been  published  about  the  solitnde  that  reigns  in  the 
streets,  to  be  surprised  at  mecting  large  numbers  of  peo- 
ple in  the  chief  thoroughfarcs,  almost  without  excep^ 
tion  decently  clad.  A  longer  and  more  intimate  ao- 
ąuaintance  with  Jerusalem,  howerer,  does  not  fail  to  cor- 
rect this  too  farorable  impression,  and  demonstrate  the 
existcnce  and  generał  preralence  of  the  po\'erty  and 
eren  wretchedness  which  must  result  m  every  country 
from  oppression,  from  the  absence  of  trade,  and  the  ut- 
ter  stagnatłon  of  all  branches  of  industry.  Considerable 
activity  is  displayed  in  the  bazaars,  which  are  supplied 
scantily,  like  thoae  of  other  Eastem  towns,  with  pro\-is- 
ions,  tobacco,  coarse  cottons,  and  other  articlcs  of  prime 
necessity.  A  considerable  business  is  still  done  in  beads, 
crosses,  and  other  sacred  trinkets,  which  are  purchased 
to  a  vast  amount  by  the  pilgrims  who  annually  throng 
the  holy  city.  The  support  and  even  the  existence  of 
the  considerable  population  of  Jerusalem  dei)end  upon 
this  transient  patronage  —  a  circumstance  to  which  a 
great  part  of  the  prevailing  poverty  and  degradation  is 
justly  aocribed.  The  worthlcss  articles  employed  in 
this  pitifid  trade  are,  almost  without  exception,  brought 
from  other  places,  especially  Hebron  «nd  Bethlehem^ 
the  former  celebrated  for  its  baubles  of  glass,  the  latter 
chiefly  for  rosaries,  crucifixes,  and  other  toys  madę  of 
motheiw>f-pearl,  olive-wood,  black  Stones  from  the  Dead 
Sea,  etc.  These  are  eagerly  bought  up  by  the  ignorant 
pilgrims,  sprinkled  with  holy  water  by  the  priests,  or 
consecrated  by  some  other  religious  mummeiy,  and  car- 
ried  off  in  trinmph  and  wom  as  omaments  to  charm 
away  disease  and  misfortune,  and  probably  to  be  bnried 
with  the  deluded  enthusiast  in  his  cołlin,  as  a  surę  pasa- 
port  to  ctemal  blessedness.  With  the  departure  of  th0 
swarms  of  pilgnms,however,  even  this  poor  semblance 
of  active  industry  and  prosperity  deserts  che  city.  With 
the  exoeption  of  some  establishments  for  soap-making,  a 
tanner}%  and  a  very  few  weavers  of  coarse  cottons,  there 
do  not  appear  to  be  any  manufacturers  properly  belong- 
ing  to  the  place.  Agriculture  is  almost  equally  wretch- 
e<l,  and  can  oniy  give  employment  to  a  few  hundred 
people.  The  masses  really  seem  to  be  without  any  reg- 
ular employment  A  considerable  number,  especially 
of  the  Jews,  professedly  live  on  charity.  Many  Chris- 
tian pilgrims  annually  find  their  way  hither  on  simUar 
resources,  and  the  approaches  to  the  holy  places  are 
thronged  with  beggars,  who  in  piteous  tones  demand 
alms  in  the  name  of  Christ  and  the  blessed  Yirgin.  The 
generał  oondition  of  the  population  is  that  of  abject  poy- 
erty.  A  few  Turkish  officials,  ecclesiastical,  civil,  and 
miiitary ;  some  remains  of  the  old  Mohammcdan  aria- 
tocracy — once  powerful  and  rich,  but  now  much  impoy- 
erished  and  neariy  extinct ;  together  with  a  few  trades- 
men  in  easy  circumstances,  form  almost  the  only  excep- 
tions  to  the  preyailing  indigence.  There  is  not  a  sin- 
gle broker  among  the  whole  population,  and  not  the 
smallest  sum  can  be  obtained  on  tlie  best  bills  of  ex- 
change  short  of  Jaffa  or  Beirftt. 


JERUSALEM 


860 


JERUSALEM 


.  S.  The  population  of  Jeniaalem  has  been  rariottdy 
estimated  by  dlflerent  trayellers,  some  making  it  as 
high  as  80,000,  others  aa  Iow  as  12,000.  An  average 
of  thcse  esŁimates  would  make  it  aomewhere  between 
12,000  and  15,000;  but  the  £gyptian  system  of  taxa- 
tion  and  of  militaiy  conscńption  iu  Syria  has  lately  fur- 
nished  morę  accurate  data  than  had  preriously  been  ob- 
taiuable,  and  on  these  Dr.  Kobinson  estimates  the  popu- 
lation at  not  raore  than  1 1,500,  distributed  thus : 

Mohammedaus 4,600 

JcM-s 8,(KiO 

Christiana 8,500 

11,000 
If  to  this  be  added  something  for  poańble  omissiona, 
and  the  inmates  of  the  conrents,  the  standing  popula- 
tion, exclusive  of  the  garrison,  would  not  exceed  ]  1,500. 
Dr.  Barclay  is  vcry  minutę  in  regani  to  the  Christian 
sects,  and  liis  details  show  that  Robinson  greatly  under- 
estimated  them  when  he  gave  their  number  as  8500. 
BarcUy  shows  them  to  be  in  all  4518  (p.  588).  The 
latest  estimate  of  the  population  is  that  of  Pierotti,  who 
gires  the  entire  sum  as  20,330,  subdiyided  as  foUows : 
Christian  sects,  5068;  Moslems  (Arabs  and  Turks),  7556 ; 
Jews,  7706. 

.  The  language  most  generally  spoken  among  all  claas- 
ea  of  the  inhabitants  is  the  Aiabic.  Schools  are  rare, 
and  conseąuently  facility  in  reading  is  not  often  met 
with.  The  generał  condition  of  the  inhabitants  has  al- 
leady  been  indicated. 

The  Turkish  govcmor  of  the  town  holds  the  rank  of 
pasha,  but  is  rcsponsible  to  the  pasha  of  BeiKit.  The 
goremment  is  somewhat  railder  than  before  the  i)eriod 
of  the  Kgyptian  dominion ;  but  it  is  sald  that  the  Jew- 
ish  and  Christian  inhabitants  at  least  havc  ample  cause 
to  regret  the  change  of  mastcrs,  and  the  American  mis> 
sionaries  lament  that  change  without  reserve  (.4  m.  Bib. 
Repos.  for  1813).  Yct  the  Moslcms  reverence  the  same 
spots  which  the  Jews  and  Christiana  account  lioly,  the 
holy  sepulchre  only  cxccptcd ;  and  this  exception  arises 
from  their  disbclief  that  Christ  was  crucified,  or  buried, 
OT  pose  again.  Formerly  there  were  in  Palestine  monks 
of  the  Benedictine  and  Augustine  orders,  and  of  those 
of  St,  Basil  and  St.  Anthony ;  but  sińce  1304  there  have 
been  nonę  but  Franciscans,  who  have  charge  of  the  Lat- 
in  convent  and  the  holy  places.  They  resided  on  Mount 
Zioń  till  A.D.  1561,  when  the  Turks  altowcd  them  the 
monastery  of  St.  Salvador,  which  they  now  occupy. 
They  hail  formerly  a  handsome  rerenue  out  of  all  Ko- 
man Catholic  countries,  but  these  sources  have  fallcn 
off  sińce  the  French  Kevolution,  and  the  establishment 
is  said  to  be  poor  and  deeply  in  debt.  The  expen8e8 
anse  from  the  duty  impose<l  upon  the  convent  of*enter- 
taining  pilgrims^  and  the  cost  of  maintaining  the  twen- 
ty  convents  belonging  to  the  establishment  of  the  Terra 
Santa  is  estimated  at  40,000  Spanish  dollani  a  year. 
Formerly  it  was  much  higher,  in  conseąucnce  of  the 
heavy  exactions  of  the  Turkish  goremment.  Burck- 
hanlt  sa^n}  that  the  brotherhood  paid  annually  £12,000 
to  the  pasha  of  Damascus.  But  the  Egyptian  govem- 
ment  reliered  them  from  these  heavy  chargea,  and  im- 
posed  uistead  a  regular  tax  on  the  property  possessed. 
For  the  buildings  and  lands  in  and  aruund  Jerusalem 
the  annual  tax  was  iixed  at  7000  piastres,  or  850  Span- 
ish dullars.  It  is  probable  that  the  restoreil  Turkish 
goyemmcnt  has  not  yet,  in  this  respect,  recurred  to  its 
old  opprcssions.  The  convent  contaius  fifty  mpnks,  half 
Italiaus  and  half  Spaniards.  In  it  resides  the  intendant 
or  the  principal  of  all  the  conrenU,  with  the  rank  of  ab- 
bot,  and  the  titlc  of  guardian  of  Momit  Zioń  and  custos 
of  the  Iloly  Land.  Ile  is  always  an  Italian,  and  has 
charge  of  all  the  spiritual  alfairs  of  the  Koman  Catho- 
lics  in  the  Holy  Land.  There  is  also  a  prcsident  or  vi- 
car,  who  takes  the  place  of  the  guardian  in  case  of  ab- 
sence  or  death :  he  was  formerly  a  Frenchman,  but  is 
now  either  an  Italian  or  Spaniard.  The  procurator, 
who  roanagcs  their  tcmporal  affairs,  is  always  a  Span- 
iard.   A  council,  callcd  Discretorium,  composed  of  these 


officials  and  tbree  other  monks,  has  the  generał  man- 
agement  of  boŁh  spiritual  and  temponl  mattera.  Much 
of  the  attention  of  the  order  is  occupied,  and  much  of 
its  eKpense  incurred,  in  entertaining  pUgrims  and  in  the 
distribution  of  alms.  The  natire  Koman  CAtholics  lire 
around  the  convent,  on  which  they  are  wholly  dcpend- 
ant.  They  are  native  Arabs,  and  are  faid  to  be  de* 
scended  from  conrerts  in  the  timcs  of  the  Crusades. 

There  is  a  Greek  patriarch  of  Jerusalem,  bot  he  u«d> 
aUy  resides  at  Constantinople,  and  is  repre; ented  in  the 
holy  city  by  one  or  morę  yicais,  who  are  bbbops  nivdc 
ing  in  the  great  conrent  near  the  church  of  the  Holy 
Sepulchre.  At  present  the  yicars  are  the  bishops  of 
Lydda,  Nazareth,  and  Kerek  (Petra),  assisted  by  the 
other  bishops  resident  in  the  conrent.  In  addition  to 
thirteen  monasteries  in  Jerusalem,  they  po»scss  the  cun- 
vent  of  the  Holy  Cross,  ncar  Jerusalem ;  that  of  St.  He- 
leną,  between  Jerusalem  and  Bethlehem ;  and  that  of 
Su  John,  between  Jerusalem  and  the  Dead  Sca.  .\11 
the  monks  of  the  conrents  are  foreigners.  The  Chńs> 
tians  of  the  Greek  rite  who  are  not  monks  are  all  native 
Arabs,  yńih  their  natire  priests,  who  are  allowcd  to  prr- 
form  the  Church  Serrices  in  their  mother  tongue— (he 
Arabie. 

The  Armenians  in  Jerusalem  have  a  patriarch,  isiih 
three  conrents  and  100  monks.  They  hare  also  con- 
yenta  at  Bethlehem,  Kamleh,  and  Jafla.  Few  of  the 
Armenians  are  natires :  they  are  mostly  merchants  simI 
among  the  wealthicst  inhabitants  of  the  place,  and  their 
conrent  in  Jerusalem  is  deemed  the  richest  in  the  Lp- 
vanL  Their  church  of  St.  James,  upon  Mount  Zioń,  t3 
\ery  showy  in  its  decorations,  but  roid  of  taste.  The 
Coptic  Christiaiis  at  Jerusalem  are  only  some  monki:  re- 
siding  in  the  conrent  of  es-Sultan,  on  the  north  sidc  d 
the  pool  of  Hezekiah.  There  is  also  a  conrent  of  the 
Ab}'8Binians,  and  one  belonging  to  the  Jacobite  Syriam. 

llie  estimate  of  the  number  of  the  Jews  in  Jeau^nn 
at  8000  is  giren  by  Dr.  Kobinson  on  the  authority  of 
Mr.  Kicola\'son,  the  resident  miesionary  to  the  Jews; 
yetin  the  foUowing  year  (1839)  th2  Scottis^h  deputatiuo 
set  them  down  at  six  o.*  eeren  thouaand  on  the  same 
authority.  (See  Dr.  Barclay 's  estimate  abore.)  They 
inhabit  a  distinct  quartcr  of  the  town,  between  Mount 
Zioń  and  Mount  Moriah.  This  is  the  worst  and  dirtic»t 
part  of  the  holy  city,  and  that  in  which  the  plague  ue^tr 
iails  to  make  its  ńrst  appearance.  Few  of  tłie  Jerusakm 
Jews  are  natires,  and  most  of  them  come  from  forcie 
parts  to  die  in  the  city  of  their  fathers"  sepulchres.  Tbe 
greater  proportion  of  them  are  from  different  parta  of 
the  Lerant,  and  appear  to  be  mostly  of  Spanish  and 
Polish  origin.  Few  are  from  Germany,  or  undostand 
the  German  language.  They  are,  for  the  nłoet  pirt, 
wretchedly  poor.  and  dcpend  in  a  great  degree  for  their 
subsistence  upon  the  contributions  of  their  brechirn  in 
different  countries.  These  contributions  raiy  coi  siii- 
erably  in  amount  in  different  yeare,  and  often  wca* 
sion  much  dissatisfaction  in  their  distribution  (see  the 
Narratire  of  the  Scottish  deputat ion,  p.  148).  An  ef- 
fort,  howerer,  is  now  making  in  Fluropc  for  the  pmmo- 
tion  of  Jewish  agriculture  in  Palestine,  and  a  society 
formed  for  that  purpose,  under  whose  aus^uces  seicnl 
Jewish  families  hare  emigrated  to  their  sacrrd  father* 
land,  and  are  engaged  in  the  culture  of  the  productioos 
for  which  the  soil  was  anciently  ao  famous.  Pnaninent 
among  these  philanthropic  esertiona  are  those  of  Sir 
Moses  Montefiore,  of  London,  who  has  established  a  farm 
in  the  ricinity  of  Jerusalem  for  the  bencfit  of  his  Je«i«h 
brethren  (Benjamin,  Kight  Years  in  Atia  and  Africa, 
p.  84).  Under  the  reforma  and  religions  toleratioii  in- 
troduced  by  the  present  sułtan  an  amelioration  of  tbs 
condition  of  the  Jewish  and  Clirislian  inhabitants  of  Je- 
rusalem may  be  expected.  It  should  also  be  added  that 
European  enterprise  haa  projected  a  railway  from  Jafb 
to  Jerusalem  as  one  of  the  fruita  of  the  allianoe  during 
the  late  war,  and  on  Ita  oompletion  an  additional  impuls 
will  doubtlese  be  giren  to  this  ancicnt  roecropolisby  tbe 
facilities  of  trarel  and  tran^wrtation  thus  afforded. 


JERUSALEM,  COUNCILS  OF     861 


JERUSALEM,  NEW 


6.  The  most  recent  and  complete  worfcs  on  modem  Je- 
Tosalem  are  Dr.  Titua  Toblert  Zwei  Bucher  Topoffrapkie 
von  Jerutalem  und  setne  Umgdmngen  (Beri.  1853,  et  seq.), 
wbich  contains  (voL  i,  p.  xi-civ)  a  nearly  fuli  list  of  all 
works  by*  ŁniveUera  and  othera  on  the  subjcct^  with  bńef 
criticisms  (continued  in  an  appendix  to  his  Dritte  Wan- 
derwtffy  Gotha,  1859,  and  greatly  enlarged  in  his  Biblio- 
ffraphia  Geoffraphka  PaUutince,  Lpz,  1867),  and  Prof. 
Sepp*8  JenuaUm  und  das  HeUige  iMnd  (MUnchen,  1864, 
2  vols.),  which  almost  exhaiisŁively  treats  the  sacred 
topo<;raphy  from  the  Roman  Cathollc  point  of  view.  The 
city  bas  Iwen  morę  or  less  described  by  nearly  all  who 
have  risited  the  Holy  Land;  sec  especially  Bartlett*s 
Wttlks  about  Jerusalem  (Łond.  1842).  The  map  of  Yan 
de  Yeldc  (Gotha,  1858),  with  a  memoir  by  Tobler,  has 
remained  the  most  exact  one  of  the  present  city  till  the 
publication  of  the  Enghsh  Onbumee  Surrey  (London, 
1864^,  1866;  K.  Y.,  1871),  which  contains  minutę  de- 
tails.  The  most  perfect  pictorial  representation  is  the 
Panorama  of  Jerusalenif  titken  from  the  Mount  of  Ol- 
KTit,  in  three  large  aqaatint  cnjirrarings,  with  a  key,  pub- 
lished  in  Germany  (Manich,  1850).  Many  new  and  in- 
teresting  details  have  been  fumished  by  the  scientiflc 
sarreys  and  subterranean  explorations  of  the  engineers 
lately  employed  under  the  auspices  of  the  '^Palestine 
£xpioration  Fund**  of  EngUnd,  the  results  of  which  are 
deuiłed  in  their  succcsslre  Quarttrly  SłatemeniSy  and 
popularly  summed  up  in  their  volume  entitled  Jerusalem 
Riicocered  (Lond.  and  N.  Y.  1871 ,  8vo).    See  Palestise. 

JERUSALEM,  COUNCII^S  OF  (ConcUia  Hieroio- 
lymUana),  Much  depends,  in  detcrmining  the  number 
of  couaciU  held,  on  the  agniticance  of  the  name.  See 
the  article  Council.  We  have  room  here  only  for  the 
principal  councils  held  at  Jerusalem.  They  are,  L  The 
firsł  eccleńastical  council  mentioned  in  Acts  xv,  which 
9s  believed  to  have  b^n  held  during  the  year  47,  under 
James  the  Less,  bbhop  of  Jerusalem,  in  consequence  of 
the  dispute  in  the  Church  of  Antioch  on  the  propriety 
of  dispensing  with  circumcision  (probably  proyoked  by 
Judaizers).  By  the  decisions  of  this  coundl,  the  faith- 
ful  were  commanded  to  abstain  (1)  from  meats  which 
had  been  oflTered  to  idols  (so  as  not  eren  to  appear  to 
countenance  the  worship  of  the  heathen),  (2)  from  blood 
and  strangled  things  (probably  to  avoid  gi\nng  olTence 
to  the  prejudices  of  the  Jewish  converts),  and  (8)  from 
fomication  (the  prevailing  yice  of  the  Gentiles).  See 
CouNCiT^  Apostolical,  AT  Jerusale^l  IL  In  835, 
when  many  bishope  had  met  in  the  sacred  city  to  con- 
secrate  the  church  of  the  Holy  Sepulchre,  Constantine 
directed  that  an  effort  should  be  madę  to  heal  the  divi- 
sions  of  the  Church.  It  was  by  this  council  that  Arius 
was  restored  to  fellowship,  and  allowed  to  return  to  Al- 
exandria.  Eosebius  ( V%L  Const.  iv,  47)  pronounces  it  the 
largest  he  knew  next  to  the  Council  of  Nice,  with  which 
he  even  corapares  it.  IIL  One  in  849,  by  Maximus, 
bishop  of  Jerusalem,  and  some  sixty  bishops.  upon  the 
return  of  Athanasius  (q.v.)  to  Alexandria,  after  the  death 
of  Gregory.  They  rescinded  the  decree  which  had  been 
published  agatnst  him,  and  drew  up  a  S}'nodal  letter 
to  the  Church  in  Alexandria.  lY.  Held  in  899,  in  con- 
seąuenoe  of  a  synodal  letter  from  Theophilus  of  Alexan- 
dria  on  the  decrees  passed  in  council  against  the  Origen- 
ists.  They  concurred  in  the  judgment,  and  stated  their 
resolution  not  to  hołd  communion  with  any  who  denied 
the  equality  of  the  Son  and  the  Father.  See  Origbn  ; 
Tbinity.  Y.  In  453,  on  Juvenars  restoration,  by  the 
emperor  Marcian,  to  the  bishopric  of  Jerusalem  (from 
which  he  had  been  deposed  on  account  of  his  concur- 
rence  in  the  oppression  of  Fiarianus  in  the  Latrocinium 
at  Ephesus),  and  the  expulsion  of  Theodosius,  a  Euty- 
cbian  heretic,  who  had  become  bishop  by  prejudicing 
the  empress  £udoxia  and  the  monks  against  Jnvenal  (q. 
V.).  YL  Held  in  518,  under  the  patriarch  John  III, 
and  composed  of  thirt3*-three  bishope.  They  addressed 
a  synodal  letter  to  John  of  Constantinople  indorsing 
the  decisions  of  the  council  of  that  city,  and  condemned 
the  Severians  ard  Eutychians.    YII.  About  586,  under  | 


patriarch  Peter,  attcnded  by  forty-five  bishops.  They 
indorsed  the  acts  of  the  Council  of  Constantinople  (58<^ 
conceming  the  deposition  of  the  Monothelite  patriarch 
Anthymus  and  the  election  of  Mena!  in  his  stead.  The 
Acephalists  were  aJso  condemned  by  them.  YIII.  Held 
in  558,  where  the  acts  of  the  fifth  cecumenical  council  of 
Constantinople  were  received  by  all  the  bishops  of  Pal- 
cstine  with  the  exception  of  Alexander  of  Abilene,  who 
was  therefor  deposed.  IX.  In  684.  In  this  council  the 
patriarch  Sophronius  addreseed  a  synodal  letter  to  the 
different  patriarcha,  informing  them  of  his  election,  and 
urging  them  to  oppoee  the  Monothelites.  X.  In  1448, 
under  Arsenius  of  Caesarea,  ordering  that  no  ordination 
of  a  clerk  should  be  considered  valid  if  perfurmed  by  a 
bishop  in  communion  with  Rome,unle88  the  clerk  proved 
to  the  orthodox  bishops  his  adhesion  to  the  faith  of  the 
Greek  Church.  XI.  By  far  the  most  important  council 
held  there  was  that  of  1672.  It  was  convened  by  Dosi- 
theus,  at  that  time  patriarch  of  Jerusalem.  There  were 
present  fifty-three  prelates  of  his  diocese,  including  the 
ex-patriarch  Nectarius;  six  metropolitans,  archiman- 
drates,  presbyters,  deacons,  and  monks.  The  council  call- 
ed  itself  ómrię  ip^odo^iac  ri  diro\oyia,  Its  main  ob- 
ject  was  to  eradicate  Calvinism,  which  threatened  to  find 
many  adherenta  amongst  this  branch  of  the  Eastem 
Church,  into  which  it  had  been  introduced  by  CyriUua 
Lucaris.  The  declarations  of  belief  put  forth  by  this 
council  gave  rise  to  considerable  trouble  in  the  Eastem 
Church.  Many  charged  it  with  Romanistic  tendencies, 
especially  because  it  avoided  all  utterance  on  points  of 
difference  between  the  two  churches ;  and  it  was  daim- 
ed,  also,  that  their  confession  directly  opposed  the  con- 
fession  of  Cyril.  (Consult  Harduin,  xi,  179 ;  Kimmel, 
Libri  Sifmbolici  eccles.  Orient.)  See  Mansi,  SuppL  i,  colL 
271 ;  Baronius,  iv,  Conc.  p.  1588 ;  v,  Conc  p.  275,  739; 
Mansi,  notę  to  Raynaldus,  ix,  420;  Landon,  Man.  Coun- 
cilSf  p.  271  sq. ;  Herzog,  Reai-Encyklopadief  vi,  501  sq. 

JERUSALEM  CREED.  The  early  churches  of  the 
sacred  city  are  now  generally  acknowledged  to  have 
had  a  creed  of  their  own,  which  some  believe  to  have 
been  the  production  of  C}Til  of  Jerusalem,  while  others 
claim  that  it  originated  before  his  time.  It  has  been 
presenred  in  the  catechetical  disoourses  of  C}Til,  and 
reads  as  foUows :  **  I  belleve  in  one  God,  the  Father  Al- 
mighty,  maker  of  heaven  and  earth,  and  of  all  things 
visible  and  invisible;  and  in  one  Lord  Jesus  Christ,  the 
only-begotten  Son  of  God,  begotten  ofthe  Father  before 
all  worlds;  very  God  by  whom  all  things  were  madę, 
who  was  incamate  and  madę  man,  crucified  and  buried, 
and  the  third  day  ascended  into  the  heavens,  and  sat 
down  at  the  right  hand  of  the  Father,  and  is  coming  to 
judge  quick  and  dead.  And  in  the  Holy  Ghost,  the 
Paraclete,  who  spake  by  the  prophets ;  and  in  one  holy 
catholic  Church ;  and  resuirection  of  the  flesh ;  and  in 
life  everlasting."  See  Library  oftke  Fathera  (Oxfoid 
transL  1838),  ii,  52  sq. ;  Mignę,  Patrologia  Graca,  xxxiii, 
505  sq. ;  Riddle,  Christian  A  ntiguitieSf  p.  474. 

JERUSALEM,  FRIENDS  OF,  is  the  name  of  a  f«- 
natical  sect  in  WUrtemberg  who  claim  it  to  be  the  duty 
of  the  believers  of  the  Bibie  to  rebuild  the  Tempie  at 
Jerusalem,  and  to  oongregate  there,  acoording  to  Ezek. 
xl  and  sq. 

JERUSALEM,  KNIGHTS  OF.  The  possession  of 
Jerusalem  by  a  Christian  power  during  the  period  of 
the  Latin  kings  (see  above,  history  of  Jerusaleni),  gave 
birth  to  the  two  great  orders  of  knighthood,  that  of  the 
Tempie,  and  that  of  St  John  of  Jerusalem ;  the  former 
of  which  was  distributed  throughout  Europę,  and  the 
latter— known  aJso  under  the  name  of  Knights  Hospi- 
tallers  (q.  v.)^flrBt  fixed  themse]ves  at  Rhodes,  and  af- 
terwards  dwindled  down  into  the  little  society  of  the 
Knights  of  Malta  (q.  v.).  The  Teutonic  order  sprung 
up  at  Acre  in  1191,  and  its  grand  masters,  who  became 
hereditary,  were  the  ancestors  of  the  house  of  Branden- 
burg and  the  kings  of  Prussia.     See  Templars. 

JERUSALEM,  NEW,  the  symbolic  name  ofthe  Chris- 
tian Church;  also  called  "the  Bride,  the  LBmb'8  wife" 


JERUSALEM 


862 


JERUSALEM 


(ReT.  xzi,  2^21 ;  iii,  12).  The  apottle,  irom  the 
mit  of  a  high  mountain,  beheld,  in  a  pictorial  symbol 
or  scenie  representation,  a  city  reaplendent  with  ce)ea- 
tial  brightoess,  which  aeemed  to  deacend  from  the  heav- 
ens  to  the  earth.  It  was  built  npon  tomoes,  one  rising 
abore  another,  each  terrace  having  its  distinct  wali  sup- 
porttng  or  encirciing  it ;  and  thus,  aithoagh  each  wali 
was  only  144  cubit3=252  feet  high,  the  height  of  the 
whole  city  was  equal  to  its  diameter.  This  was  stated 
to  be  a  sąuare  of  about  400  milea;  or  12,000  stadia = 
about  1600  miies  in  clrcumfeieoce— of  oourae  a  mysdcal 
number,  denoting  that  the  city  was  capable  of  holding 
almost  countless  myriads  of  inhabitants.  In  its  generał 
form,  the  symbolic  city  presents  a  atriking  resemblance 
to  that  of  the  new  city  in  Ezek.  xl-xlviiL  The  picto- 
rial symbol  roust  be  regarded  as  the  repreaentation  not 
of  a  place  or  state,  but  of  the  Church  as  a  aodely,  the 
**  body  of  Christ"  (Eph.  v,  23-80 ;  GaL  iv,  26).  Ab  Je- 
Tusalem  and  Zioń  are  often  used  for  the  inhabitants  and 
faithful  worshippers,  so  the  new  Jerusalem  is  emblemat- 
ical  of  the  Church  of  God,  part  on  earth  and  part  in 
hearen.  To  suppose  the  inrisible  world  to  be  excla- 
siyely  referred  to  would  deprive  the  contrast  between 
the  Law  and  the  Gospel  economy,  Sinai  and  Zioń,  of  its 
appositeneas  and  force.  Moreover,  the  distinction  be- 
tween "  the  generał  assembly  of  the  enroUed  citizens," 
and  **  the  spirits  of  the  just  madę  perfect**  (Heb.  xii,  22- 
24),  can  be  explained  only  by  interpreting  the  former 
of  the  Church  militant,  or  the  body  of  Christ  on  earth, 
and  the  latter  of  the  Church  triumphant  in  heaven. 
Thus  we  see  why  the  New  Jerusalem  was  beheld,  like 
Jaoob*s  ladder,  extending  from  earth  to  heayen.  See 
ZiON. 
JKRUSALEM,  NEW,  CHURCH.    See  New^rru- 

SALEM  ChURCII. 

JERUSALEM,  PATRIARCHATE  OF,   SeePATW- 

ABCHATI::  OF  JkRUSALEM. 

JERUSALEM,  Tire  nftw  SEE  of  St.  James  i3f.  The 
city,  sacred  alike  to  the  Jcw,  the  Gentile,  and  the  Turk, 
nerer  felt  the  influence  of  l^testant  teachings  until  the 
opening  of  the  present  {era,  and,  stnuige  to  say,  the  des- 
titute  condition  of  the  Jews  first  caused  the  appoint^ 
ment  of  two  missionaries  to  Palestine.  These  wcre  sent 
in  1818  by  the  North  American  MLssionary  Society,  of 
Boston.  In  Europę,  no  action  was  taken  until  1882 :  in 
this  year  the  London  Jewish  Miasionary  Society  aiao 
entered  the  fiehL  In  1840,  at  Ust^  the  expedition  of 
the  great  Enropean  Powers  to  the  East  gave  rise  to  the 
hope  that,  though  Protestantism  might  not  immediate- 
ly  secure  a  strong  foothold,  the  power  of  the  Moham- 
medana  at  least  would  be  broken,  and  an  opening  be 
madę  for  Christian  influences  on  the  inhabitants  of  the 
sacred  land.  The  great  ambition  of  king  Frederick 
William  IV.  of  Prussia  was  to  establish  a  Protestant 
bishopric  in  the  holy  city ;  and  when,  at  the  ratińcation 
(July  15, 1840)  of  the  treaty  between  the  Christian  and 
Mussulman  Powers,  he  failed  to  obtain  the  desired  sup- 
port  for  his  proposition  in  favor  of  entire  religious  liber- 
ty  for  Eastem  Christians,  he  dispatched  a  special  embas- 
ąy  to  the  queen  of  England,  the  archbishop  of  Canter- 
buiy,  and  the  biahop  of  London  (recognising  in  them 
the  aplritnal  heads  of  the  English  Church),  and  pio- 
poaed  a  plan  for  these  two  great  Protestant  nations— 
Prussia  and  England — to  establish  and  snpport  in  com- 
mon  a  Protestant  bishopric  in  Jerusalem,  which  should 
be  eąually  shared  in  (i.  e.  altematdy)  by  both  the  Ger- 
man Evangelical  and  the  Anglicanchurchea.  « It  was 
anticipated,"  says  Dr.  Hagenbach  (Church  Hisł.  l%Łh  and 
\%th  Cent,  ii,  397  sq.),  "that  by  this  means  l^rotestant- 
ism  would  be  roore  tirmly  established,  and  an  impoitant 
centrę  formed  for  miasionary  hibors.  While  Pruańa  had 
formaUy  united  with  Enghuul  in  the  attaimnent  of 
great  ecclesiastical  ends,  it  now  aeemed  that  England, 
by  the  position  which  Providence  had  given  her,  waa 
adaptcd  to  the  reolization  of  this  plan;  and  the  influ- 
ence which  she  had  gained  as  a  European  Power  in  the 
Eaat  and  in  Jerusalem,  encoumged  Uie  hope  witbout* 


while  It  was  mwaidły  stieogtbffMd  Vy  the  fixed  foims 
of  her  ecclesiastical  chaiacter,  and  by  the  halo  of  ber 
epiaoopal  dignity,"  Of  courae,  people  diffeced  in  thór 
opinion  conoeraing  the  proposition.  Thcre  were  maay 
eminent  German  theoktgiaas  who  donbted  the  wiadom 
of  affiliating  with  the  Engliah  Chuch,  which  they  <fe. 
crted  as  one  of  eicterior  formalism,  etc,  while,  amoug^t 
the  English,  many  heaitated  to  cast  in  their  lot  with 
German  Fatbnalistic  dlTJbea.  But  the  plan  was,  aller 
all,  adopted  by  the  higher  deigy  of  EngUnd,  as  well  it 
might  be,  for  it  aecured  ko  them  not  only  the  first  ae-- 
lection,  but  Pruasia  alao  stipulated  that  the  bbhopric  to 
be  formed  at  the  Church  of  St.  James,  in  Jermalem, 
should  be  after  the  plan  of  the  Established  Church  in 
England,  and  that  the  atationed  bishof),  thoogh  he  be  a 
German,  should  recewe  kii  appropriate  eotttecratiou  at 
łke  handt  ofthe  primale  o/ the  Anffticam,  Chnreh  (the 
archbishop  of  Ganteibuiy),  <mi  $ubtenbe  to  tke  39  arU- 
des  ofthe  £stabluhmmt.  The  plea  which  the  Engliek 
dergy  madę  on  its  adoption  was  that  it  gaye  rise  to  the 
hope  of  bringing  about  by  this  means  a  reoonciliatioB 
between  the  two  denominations!  the  archtnshop  evea 
expieaaed,  on  the  oocasioo,  the  hope  that  this  wonld  kad 
to  '^  a  nnity  o/discipUm  as  well  as  qfdoctrme  betweea 
oar  own  Church  and  (hs  hu  perfeetfy  constibOed  of  the 
Protestant  churches  of  Europę."  The  endowment  of 
the  bishopric  was  fixed  at  £80,000  sterling,  to  inaure  the 
biahop  a  yearly  inoome  of  £1200.  The  bishc^)  wsb  to 
be  named  alteniately  by  England  and  Pniesia,  the  pii- 
mate  of  England,  however,  having  the  rigfat  to  Teto  tbe 
nomination  of  the  latter.  Tbe  protectlon  to  be  afionkd 
to  the  German  Erangelists  is  proyided  for  by  the  onii> 
nanoes  of  1841-2,  oontaitting  the  foUowing  apecificatioM: 
lat  .The  biahop  will  take  the  German  ceośregatioa  un- 
der  his  protection,  and  afford  them  all  the  assastance  ta 
his  power.  2d.  He  will  be  aaaisted  by  competent  Ga- 
man  ministers,  ordained  aocording  to  the  ritual  of  ihs 
Church  of  England,  and  required  to  yidd  him  obedi- 
enoe.  8d.  The  lifcuigy  is  to  be  taken  fiom  tbe  reoeired 
liturgies  of  the  Pruasian  Church,  carefully  leriaed  by 
the  primate.  4th.  The  rite  of  confirmatipa  is  to  be  ad- 
ministered  acoording  to  the  form  of  the  Engliah  Church. 
In  the  mean  while,  an  oct  of  Parliament,  under  dste  of 
OcL  5, 1841,  dedded  that  peraons  oould  be  oooaecfaied 
bishops  of  the  Church  of  EngUmd  in  forógn  ooontiies 
without  theieby  beoaming  snbjecta  of  the  crown,  bot 
that  such  would  also  take  the  oath  of  aUegianoe  to  the 
archbishopy  in  order  that  they,  and  such  deaoons  aod 
ministors  as  they  might  ordain,  may  have  the  right  t» 
fulfU  the  same  functions  in  England  and  Iielsnd.  In 
conseąuence.  Dr.  M*Canl,  of  Ireland,  having  dediocd  the 
appoinCmentfDr.  Michael  Salomon  Alexander«  profesor 
of  Hebrew  and  Babbinical  literaturę  at  Qirist's  CoOege, 
London,  a  converted  Jew,  and  formerly  a  Fmsatan  nb- 
ject  (having  been  bom  in.PoIiah  Phiasia  in  1799Xvad 
madę  first  incnmbent  of  the  aew  bisbopria  ile  dud 
Not.  28, 1845,  near  Gairo.  Hia  suooeaaor  was  Samoel 
Gobat,  of  Cremine,  canton  Beme,  a  atudent  of  the  Barie 
Miasion  House,  nominated  by  Pruaaia,  and  esperienced 
for  missionary  labois  by  his  resideooe  in  AbyaBnia- 
Sinoe  then,  the  newa  from  Jemsalem  has  beea  gnafy- 
ing.  Jan.  21, 1849,  a  newly-created  Erangelical  chor^ 
called  Chriat  Chuich,  aituated  on  Mount  Zioń,  was  dedi- 
cated.  The  Gospel  is  preached  there  in  Hebrew,  £a- 
gliah,  German,  French,  Spanish,  and  Aralnc.  Bdoi^ia; 
to  it  are  a  burial*igronnd;  a  acbool  attended  bj'  tbe  chil- 
dren  of  Jews,  Mohammedans,  and  diiferent  ChristiaB 
denominations ;  a  hoepital  for  the  Jews,  in  which  Uwy 
have  an  opportunity  of  hearing  the  Scriptniet;  a  hoe- 
pital for  proeelytes,  etc.,  which  is  attended  to  by  deacaa- 
eases;  a  houae  of  induatry  for  proselytea,  and  an  tndiS' 
tri^  school  for  Je¥rish  femalea.  The  number  of  Jewiih 
conyerts  averagea  Irom  aeven  to  nine  annually.  In  eoo- 
aeqnenoe  of  the  firman  granting  to  Pkoteatanta  the  aaiae 
rights  as  are  poaaesaed  by  other  churches,  they  hare  et- 
tabtished  smali  achools  in  Bethldiem,  Jaila,  NabUb,snl 
Nazareth. 


JERUSALEM 


863 


JESHOHAIAH 


For  aoennte  accoimt8,«!e  Henog,  Rta^Ene^Uop,  vi, 
503  8q. ;  Abeken,  Das  etangelische  Bitihum  tu  Jenualem 
(Berlin,  1842).     (J.H.W.) 

JeroBalem,  Johakn  Friicdrigh  Wilhelm,  a  Ger- 
man Łheologian— one  of  the  best  apologetic  and  practi- 
cal  tboologiana  of  the  Ust  oentury,  was  bom  at  Oana- 
brłlck  Nov.  22, 1709,  and  was  educated  at  the  Uniyersities 
of  Leipńg  and  Wittenberg;  at  the  latter  he  took  his  mas- 
ter'a  de^ee.  Diainclined  to  enter  the  ministry,  for  which 
he  had  prepared  himself,  and  too  young  to  enter  the 
ranks  of  academical  instructors,  he  went  to  the  Low 
Countries,  and  studied  at  Leyden,  where  he  enjoyed  the 
counsets  of  snch  men  as  Albert  Schultens,  Peter  Bur- 
man,  etc.  He  sought  and  secured  the  Mendship  of  the 
leading  minds  of  the  difierent  Christian  denominations 
of  Holland,  and  leamed  to  appreciate  men  out  of  the 
pale  of  his  own  band.  Afber  his  return  to  his  natire 
place,  still  only  twenty-foor  years  old,  he  received  the 
most  flattering  oflRers,  one  of  which  was  a  position  at  the 
newly-created  UniYersity  of  Gottingen,  which  he  in- 
dined  to  aooept.  Fearing  that  he  might  not  be  thor^ 
onghly  prepared,  he  again  set  oat  on  a  joomey,  this  time 
to  spend  a  year  of  f urther  preparatory  study  in  England, 
morę  espedalły  at  London.  He  tbere  became  aoquaint- 
ed  with  the  master  theok)gians  of  that  age  and  country. 
Thomas  Sherlock,  Daniel  Waterland,  Samuel  Ciarkę  ffee> 
]y  admitted  the  yoang  scholar  to  tbeir  studies,  and  so 
inteiested  became  he  in  English  theology  that  he  re- 
mained  there  three  years  and  declined  to  go  u>  Gottin- 
gen. In  1740  he  retumed  to  Germany,  and  was  appoint- 
od  tutor  and  preacfaer  of  prince  Charles  William  Ferdi- 
nand  of  Brunswick.  In  1743  he  was  appointed  proyost 
of  the  monasteries  of  St  Crucis  and  /Bgidi;  in  1749  he 
was  madę  abbot  of  Marienthal,  and  in  1752  abbot  of  the 
oonvcnt  of  Rlddagshausen,  a  theological  training-achool 
of  the  Brunswick  minbtry,  with  which  he  rcmained  as- 
aociated  for  two  soores  of  years,  and  in  which  he  labored 
eamestly  to  promote  espedalły  the  religious  spiritof  the 
yoong  pieacherk  Indeed,  so  well  were  his  labon  per- 
formed,  that  a  late  biographer  of  Jerusalem  is  found  to 
aay  that  in  no  smali  measure  the  religious  spirit  of 
Brunswick  of  our  day  is  due  to  the  work  which  he  per- 
formed  at  this  institution.  In  1771  he  became  vice- 
president  of  the  consistory  of  WolfcnbUtteL  In  the  lat- 
ter part  of  his  life  he  was  aeyerely  aiflicted  by  the  suicide 
of  his  son  (1775),  who  had  gone  to  Wetzlar  to  practice 
law.  Jerusalem  died  Sept.  2, 1789.  His  most  important 
work,  BetrcŁchtunffen  v.  Łfomehmsten  Warkeiten  der  Re- 
fiĘ^um,  wńtten  for  the  instruction  of  the  herediury  prince 
of  Brunswick  (Braunsch.  1768-79, 1785, 1795,  2  vols.), 
haa  been  translated  into  most  European  languages.  Of 
his  other  works,  we  notioe  two  collections  of  sermons 
(Braunsch.  1745-^,  1788<^9) ;  for  a  fuU  list,  see  Doiing'8 
£>,  deuUchen  Kcmzelredner  <2. 18  u.  19  JahrhtutderU ;  Je- 
rusaienu  Sdbstbioffrapkie  (Braun.  1791). — Herzog,  HecU^ 
Eneyhlop,  s.  v.;  Jocher,  Óekhrt.  /.er.  (Adelung^s  Adden- 
da),  B.  r. ;  Domer,  Ge»chichie  der  Protest,  Theolog,  bk.  ii, 
diris.  iii,  §  1 ;  Tholuck,  Getch.  des  RationalismuSy  pt.  i ; 
Hurst*s  Hagenbach,  Ch.  IJist.  iSth  and  19M  Cent,  i  (see 
Index) ;  Zeitsckr.  htst.  Tkeoł.  1869,  p.  680  8q.    (J.  H.  W.) 

Jem^Bha  (Heb.  Yerusha^  KU1")7,/MWW«wn/  Sept. 
*Iepov<ra),  the  daughter  of  Zadok,  ańd  mother  of  king 
Jothan,  conseąuently  wife  of  Uzziah,  whom  shc  appean 
to  have  survived  (2  Kings  xv,  33) ;  written  Jkkusuah 
(n'^!ł1%  Yeruskah\  id,;  Sept.'lfpovfra)  in  the  parallcl 
passage  (2  Chroń,  xxvii,  1).     B.C.  806. 

Jeru^shah  (2  Chroń,  xxvii,  1).    See  Jebusha. 

Jesai^ab  [many  Je9ai'ah']  (a,  Neh.  xi,  7 ,  5, 1  Chroń, 
iii,  21).     See  jESHALiH. 

Jesliai^all  [many  Jeshai^ah]  (Hebrew  Yethayah\ 
fTj?n^,  deUrerance  o/Jehovah  ;  1  Chrou.  iii,  21 ;  Ezra 
viii,  7, 19 ;  Neh.  xi,  7 ;  elsewhere  in  the  paragogic  form 
^ri^^D*^,  Y€shaya'hu)j  the  name  of  8everal  men. 

1.  (iiiept.  'Oiraiac  v.  n  'luaiac,  Yulg.  Isajtu,  Author. 
TezB.^^Jeahaiah.")    Son  of  Bebabiah,andfatber  ofJo- 


lam,  of  the  Leritical  family  of  EUezer  (1  Chroń.  zXTi, 
25).    B.C.  considerably  antę  1014. 

2.  (Sept,  'Uda  v.  r.  'lakac ;  'Itriac  v.  r.  'luł^ia ;  Yulg. 
Jesejasj  AutlLYers.  *' Jeshaiah.")  One  of  the  sons  of 
Jeduthun,  appointed  under  him  among  the  sacred  harp- 
ers  (1  Chroń,  xxv,  8),  at  the  head  of  the  eighth  divi8- 
ion  of  Levitical  musicians  (ver.  15).     B.C.  1014. 

3.  SeelsAiAH. 

4.  (Septuag.  'Uatrtta  v.  r.  'Ita/a,  Yulg.  Isaja,  Auth. 
Yers. "  Jesaiah.")  Father  of  Ithiel,  a  Benjamite,  whose 
descendant  Sallu  resided  in  Jerusalem  ailer  the  exile 
(Neh.  ix,  7).    B.C.  long  antę  539. 

5.  (Septuagint  'Ittnia  v.  r.  'Ittriac,  Yulgate  JesejcUy 
Auth.  Yers.  "  Jesaiah.")  The  second  of  the  three  eons 
of  Hananiah,  son  of  Zerubbabel  (1  Chroń,  iii,  21 ;  see 
Strong'8  Harmony  and  Earpos,  o/ the  Gosp,  p.  17).  RC 
post  536. 

6.  (Septuag.  'Haaia  v.  r.  'leraiac,  Yulg.  Isajas,  Auth, 
Yers.  "  Jeshaiah.")  Son  of  Athaliah,  of  the  "  sons"  of 
Elam,  who  retumed  with  70  małe  relatives  from  Baby- 
lon  (Ezra  viii,  7).     B.a  459. 

7.  (Sept.  'Iffata,  Yulg.  hajas,  Author.  Yers.  "  Jeshai- 
ah.")  A  Levite  of  the  family  of  Merari,  who  accom- 
panied  Hashabiah  to  the  river  Ahava,  on  the  way  from 
Babylon  to  Palestine  (Ezra  viii,  19).     RC.  459. 

JeBha^nah  [many  Jesh'awih]  (Heb.  Yeshanah\ 
H3IŚ%  oldy  q.  d.  Tla\aióiro\ic ;  Sept.  'Ucwd  v.  r.  'Aya), 
a  dty  of  the  kingdom  of  Israel,  taken  with  its  subnrbs 
from  Jeroboam  by  Abijah,  and  mentioned  as  situated 
near  Bethel  and  Ephraim  (2  Chroń,  xiii,  19).  It  ap- 
pears  to  be  the  "  yillage  Isanas"  Cltrarac),  mentioned 
by  Josephns  aa  the  scenę  of  Herod*s  enoounter  with 
Pappus,  the  generał  of  Antigonus,  in  Samaria  (Anf.  xiY, 
15, 12 ;  compare  'laapa,  A nł.  viii,  11,3).  It  is  not  men- 
tioned by  Jerome  in  the  Onomasłicon,  nnless  we  acoept 
the  conjectnre  of  Reland  (Palasł,  p.  861),  that "  Jethaba, 
uihs  antiąua  Judasas"  is  at  onco  a  corruption  and  a  tiana- 
httion  of  the  name  Jeshana.  Aocording  to  Schwaiz 
(P«fe«fw,  p.  158),  it  is  the  modem  ^411age  al-Sanm,  two 
miles  west  of  Bediel ;  but  no  such  name  appears  on  Zim- 
mermann^s  map,  unless  it  be  Ain  Sinia,  a  village  stir^ 
rounded  by  vineyards  and  fruit-trees,  with  vcgetable 
gaidens  watered  from  a  well,  situated  at  a  fork  of  the 
valley  about  a  mile  N.E.  of  Jufna  (Robinson^s  Research' 
es,  iii,  80). 

Jeshar^elah  [some  Jeshare^lah]  (Heb.  Yeshare'' 
laki  njS^id'',  upright  tmcards  God;  some  copies  read 
nbK*jiC%  Ye8ttre'lah ;  Septuag.  'lffptriXd  v.  r,  'Iaepifi\; 
Yulg.  Isreela^j  the  head  of  the  seventh  division  of  Łe- 
yitical  musicians  (1  Chroń,  xxv,  14) ;  elsewhere  called 
by  the  equivalent  name  Asarblah  (ver.  2).    B.C.  1014. 

JeBheb'6&b  (Heb.  Yeshebab',  SCąÓ^  seat  o/hłs 
/atker ;  Sept  'Iffflaók  v.  r.  'Ua^aaK,  Yiilg.  Ishhaah), 
the  head  of  the  fourtcenth  diyision  of  priesta  as  ar- 
ranged  by  David  (1  Chroń,  xxiv,  13).     RC.  1014. 

JeBher  (Heb.  Ye'sker,  ^l^\  upright;  Sept.  'lataaap 
V.  r.  latrap),  the  firsŁ  named  of  the  three  sons  of  CSaleb 
(son  of  Hezron)  by  his  flrst  wife  Azubah  (1  Chroń,  ii, 
18).     B.a  antę  1658.    See  Jerioth. 

Jeah^łmon  is  the  rendering  in  the  Auth.  Ycrsion 
(Numb.  xxi,  20;  xxiii,  28;  1  Sam.  xxiii,  19,  24;  xxvi, 
1,8)  of  ')'i73'^Ó'^  (yeshiman'),  which  simply  denotes  a 
wiklemesSf  aa  in  the  margin  (so  the  Sept.),  and  else- 
where in  the  text  (Deut.  xxxii,  10 ;  Psa.  lxviii,  7 ;  "  de»- 
ert,*'  Psa.  lxxviii,  40;  cvi,  14;  Isa.  xliii,  19,  20,  "soli- 
tary"  way,  Psa.  cvii,  4).    See  Desebt. 

Jeałiimotb.    See  Bbth-jeshimotk. 

Jesh^isliai  [many  Jeshi$h'al,  some  Jeshi8ha'f\ 
(Heb.  Yeshishay*,  ^ló'^^,  grayiskf  perh.  q.  d.  bom  of  an 
old  man ;  Sept.  'Jtatrat  v.  r.  'U(Tai)j  the  son  of  Jahdo 
and  father  of  Michael,  of  the  ancestry  of  AbihaiJ,  a  Gad- 
ite  chief  in  Bashan  (1  Chroń.  v,  14).  RC.  long  antę  7821 

JeńhóhaX's^^^^'^noch4iff^',  ^i^nia;*, 


JESHUA 


864 


JESSE 


shipper  ofJehovah;  Sept.  'laaouia),  a  chief  Simeonita, 
apparently  one  of  thofle  who  migrated  to  the  valley  of 
Gedor  (I  Chroii,  iv,  3C).     RC  prób.  cir.  711. 

Jesh'^ua  (Heb.  Ye8hu'a^  C^^-^J^,  a  contiacted  fonn 
of  JosiiUA,  i.  q.  Jesus;  Sept,  'liicovc),  thc  name  of 
seycral  men,  also  of  a  place. 

1.  (Neh.  viii,  17.)     See  Joshua. 

2.  The  head  of  thc  ninth  sacerdotal  ^  class*'  as  ar- 
ranged  by  David  (1  Chrou.  xxiv,  11,  where  the  name 
ia  Anglicized  "  Jcshuah").  RC.  1014.  He  ia  thought 
by  soroe  to  be  the  Jeshua  of  £zra  ii,  36.    But  aee  No.  6. 

3.  One  of  the  Leyites  appointed  by  Hezekiah  to  dia- 
tńbute  thc  sacred  ofTeńngs  in  the  sacerdotal  cities  (2 
Chroń,  xxxi,  15).     B.C.  726. 

4.  A  descendant  (or  nativc)  of  Pahath-moab  (q.  v.) 
raentioned  along  with  Joab  as  one  whose  posterity,  to 
thc  number  of  2812  (2818),  retumed  from  Babylon  (£zra 
ii,  6 ;  Neh.  vii,  1 1).     RC.  antę  536. 

5.  A  Łle^ńte  naroed  along  with  Kadmiel  as  one  whose 
descendants  (called  "childrcn**  [?  inhabitants]  of  Hoda- 
viah  or  IIodeviah),  to  the  number  of  74,  retumed  from 
Babylon  (Ezra  ii,  40 ;  Neh.  vii,  43).  RC.  antę  536.  See 
Nos.  9  and  10. 

6.  Jeshua  (or  Joshua  as  he  is  called  in  Hag.  i,  1, 12 ; 
ii,  2,  4;  Zech.  iii,  1,  3,  6,  8,  9),  the  "son"  of  Jozadak  or 
Jozedcch,  and  high-priest  of  the  Jews  when  they  re- 
tumed, under  Zembbabel,  from  the  Babylonlan  exi]e 
(Neh,  vii,  7 ;  xii,  1,  7,  10,  26;  Ezra  ii,  2;  x,  18).  B.C. 
536.  He  was  doubtless  bom  during  the  exile.  His 
presence  and  exhortations  greatly  promoted  the  rebuild- 
ing  of  the  city  and  Tomple  (Ezra  v,  2).  B.C.  520-446. 
The  altar  of  the  latter  being  iirst  erected  enabled  him  to 
aanctify  their  labor  by  the  religious  ceremonies  and  of- 
ferings  which  the  law  required  (Ezra  iii,  2, 8, 9).  Jeshua 
joined  with  Zembbal)el  in  opposing  the  machinations 
of  thc  Samaritans  (Ezra  iv,  3) ;  and  hc  was  not  found 
wanting  in  zcal  (comp.  Eoclus.  xlix,  12)  when  the  works, 
after  having  becn  intermpted,  were  resumed  in  the  sec- 
ond  year  of  Darius  Hystaspis  (Ezra  v,  2 ;  Hagg.  i,  12). 
Several  of  the  prophet  Haggai*s  utterances  are  address- 
ed  to  Jeshua  (Hagg.  i,  1 ;  ii,  2),  and  his  name  occurs  in 
two  of  the  symboiical  prophecies  of  Zechariah  (iii,  1-10 ; 
Ti,  11-15).  In  the  first  of  these  passages,  Jeshua,  as 
pontiiT,  represents  the  Jewish  people  covered  at  first 
with  the  garb  of  slaves,  and  afterwards  with  the  new 
and  glorious  ve8tures  of  deliveranoe.  In  the  second  he 
wears  for  a  moment  crowns  of  8ilver  and  gold,  as  sym- 
bola  of  thc  sacerdotal  and  regal  crowns  of  Israel,  M'hich 
were  to  be  unitcd  on  the  head  of  the  Messiah.— Kitto. 
See  HiGH-pRiK»T.  He  is  probably  the  person  alluded 
to  in  Ezra  ii,  36 ;  Neh.  ^ii,  89.    See  Jbdaiah. 

7.  Father  of  Jozabad,  which  latter  was  one  of  the 
Levite8  appointed  by  Ezra  to  take  charge  of  the  offer- 
ings  for  the  sacred  services  (Ezra  viii,  83).  RC.  aute 
459. 

8.  The  father  of  Ezer,  which  latter  is  mentioned  as 
"  the  ruler  of  Mizpah''  who  repaired  part  of  the  walls  of 
Jerusalem  after  the  exile  (Neh.  iii,  19).     RC.  antę  446. 

9.  A  Levite,  son  of  Azaniah  (Neh,  x,  9),  who  actively 
co-operated  in  the  reformation  instituted  bv  Nehemiah 
(Neh.  viii,  7;  ix,  4,  5;  xii,  8).  B.C.  cir.  410.  He  was 
possibly  identicaJ  with  No.  6. 

10.  Son  of  Kadmiel,  one  of  the  Levites  in  the  Tem- 
pie on  ite  restoration  after  the  captivity,  in  the  time  of 
Eliashib  (Neh.  xii,  24).  B.C.  cir.  406.  PerhaiM,  how- 
ever,  "son"  is  here  a  tran9criber's  error  for  "and;"  so 
that  this  Jeshua  will  be  the  same  as  No.  5. 

11.  A  city  of  Judah  inhabited  after  the  captivity, 
mentioned  in  connection  with  Jekabzeel,  Moladah,  and 
other  towns  in  the  lowlands  of  Judah  (Neh.  xi,  26). 
According  to  Schwarz  {Palest.  p.  116),  it  is  the  village 
Yesuky  iiear  Khulda,  five  English  miles  east  of  Ekron ; 
doubtless  tlie  village  Yeshita  [locally  pronounced  Esh- 
tca]  seen  by  Dr.  Robinson  (new  edit  o(  Researches,  iii, 
154, 155),  and  laid  down  on  Yan  dc  Velde*8  Map  on  wady 
Ghurab,  betwecn  Zorah  and  Chesalon. 


Jeah^nah  (1  Chion.  xxiv,  11).    See  Jeshua,  2. 

Jeah^anm  (Heb.  Yeskunm\  ^41197),  a  poetical  ip- 
pellation  of  the  people  of  Israel,  used  in  token  of  affee^ 
tion  and  tendemess,  occurring  foor  times  (Deot.  xxxii, 
15,  Sept.  'Iair<u/3,yulg.  dilechu ;  Dent.  xxxiii,  5, 26,  tni 
Isa.  xliv,  2  [A-Yers.  in  this  latter  passage  **  Jesurun"]; 
Sept  TfyairrifuvoCf  Yulgate  rectissimus).  The  tena  ii 
(according  to  Mercer  in  Pagnini,  The»,  i,  p.  1 105;  Mich. 
in  Suppi^  and  otbcis)  a  diminutive  (after  the  fomi  of 
Zebulun,  Jeduthun,  etc)  from  *i!!^  L  q.  HO''  (ooiEpsn  ^ 
D!|^;9  and  D^^),  q.  d.  rectulus,  a  '*  righUing,*'  L  e.  the 
dcar  upright  people,  Aquila,  S^nmmachus,  and  Theo- 
dotion  have  iu  Isaiah  tu^c^  elsewhere  fv3ń-aroc; 
Kimchi  says,  *'  Israel  is  so  called  aa  being  Jiu<  among  the 
nations;'*  so  also  Aben-Ezra  and  Saadias  (in  the  Pe^C) 
interpiet  Otbers,  as  Grotius,  underatand  the  word  as 
a  diminutive  from  "  Israer  itself,  and  so  apparently  the 
(Dhald.,  Syriac,  and  Saadias  (iu  Isaiah),  but  against  the 
analogy  of  derivation.  Ugeii  (Z>e  it^bre  lap^iea,  |k  2Ó, 
and  in  Paulus,  MemorabiL  vi,  p.  157)  give8  a  far-fetched 
derivation  from  the  Arabie,  and  other  fanciful  explana- 
tions  may  be  seen  in  Jo.  01piu8'a  Di$$,  de  1'\'^TS'^  (pn- 
side  Theod.  Hasno,  Brema,  1780).  The  pęnages  wboe 
it  is  employed  seem  to  exprefls  the  idea  that  in  the  chv- 
acter  of  rigkteous  Jehovah  lecogiiised  his  people  in  coo- 
sideration  of  their  coyenant  relation  to  him,  wherebr, 
while  they  ohaenred  the  tenna  of  that  oorenant,  tber 
Btood  legally  justified  before  him  and  dean  in  his  aight 
It  is  in  this  senne  that  the  pious  kings  are  said  to  hsre 
done  IlDJSl,  **  that  which  was  right"  in  the  eyes  of  Je- 
hovah,  i  e.  what  God  approved  (1  Kings  xi,  S4,  etc).— 
Gesenius;  Kitto. 

Je8i''ah  (a,  1  Chroń,  xii,  6;  ^  1  Chroń,  xxiii,  30). 
See  IsiiiAii,  2,  4. 

Jeslm^ifil  (Heb.  YetmUl',  bK*^r*'iD%  <qjpoiiśtd  of 
God;  Sept  'I<r;ia^X),  apparently  one  of  the  chief  Sim- 
eonites  who  migrated  to  the  yalley  of  Gedor  in  seudi 
of  pastore  (1  Chroń,  iv,  86).     KC  dr.  71 1. 

JessaBans.  According  to  Epiphanius,  the  fint  dit- 
tinctive  appellation  of  Chiistians  was  '!« mratoi,  Jesw- 
ans,  but  it  is  doubtful  from  whom  the  titk  wn  derived, 
or  in  what  sense  it  was  appKed.  Some  snppose  it  wu 
from  Jesse,  the  father  of  David ;  othera  (and  with  fu 
greater  probability  of  accuracy)  traoe  it  to  the  nime  of 
the  Lord  Jesus.  Phłlo  is  known  to  have  written  a  work 
on  the  first  Church  of  St.  Mark  at  A]exandria,  which  he 
himself  entitled  mpi  'Uatratuy,  which  is  now  estsot 
under  the  title  of  irtpl  fiiov  ^ttofnirucov  (of  the  cantem- 
plative  life),  and  so  is  dted  by  Eosebius  even :  JeraBe, 
however,  knew  the  work  intimately,  and  for  this  reano 
gave  Philo  a  place  in  his  list  of  ecdesiasdcal  witteni 
Eusebius  also  mentions  the  name  Jetgceans  as  a  diidoc^ 
tive  appellation  of  the  early  Christians.  Comp  Bio^ 
ham,  A nłic.  bk.  i,  eh.  i,  §  1 ;  Riddle,  Ckristitm  Attapt- 
Hes,  p.  181. 

JeB'Bh  (Heb.  Yishay',  "^D^,  perhape/nn,otherwise 
linttff ;  onoe  "^'iŚM,  Ishay'^  dther  by  proethesis,  or  monlf, 
1  Chroń,  ii,  18;  Sept  and  N.T.  *Ua9ai\  Josephus  'If9- 
<ra(oc.  Ant,  vi,  8, 1),  a  son  (or  descendant)  of  ()bed,the 
son  of  Boaz  and  Ruth  (Ruth  iv,  17,  22;  Matu  1 5, 6; 
Lukę  iii,  32;  1  Chroń,  ii,  12>  He  was  the  father  of 
eight  sons  (1  Sam.  xvii,  12),  from  the  youngestof  wbon, 
David,  is  reflected  all  the  diatinctiwi  which  bdonf^s 
to  the  name,  although  the  latter,  as  betng  of  homUe 
birth,  was  often  reproached  by  his  enemiea  with  thii  pe* 
rentage  (1  Sam.  xx,  27, 80, 81 ;  xxii,  7, 8 ;  xxt,  10;  2 
Sam.  XX,  1 ;  1  Kings  xii,  16;  2  Chroń.  x,  16).  ^^Skm  of 
Jta»e'  is  used  poetically  for  the  iamily  of  David  (Isi.  xi, 
1),  and  ^''Rooi  [L  e.  loot-ehoot,  or  sproot  from  the  ttimp, 
i.  q.  9cion\  ofjtu^  for  the  Messlah  (Isa.  xi,  10;  Rev.  t, 
5 ;  comp  xxii,  16).  He  seems  to  have  been  a  pcnoo  of 
some  notę  and  substance  at  Bethkhem,  his  property  be- 
ing chiefly  in  sheep  (1  Sam.  xvi,  1,  II ;  xvii, SO;  oomp 
Psa.  lzxviii|  71).    It  would  seem  fhHn  1  Sam.  xvi,  1(^ 


JESSE 


885 


jEsurrs 


thAt  he  muBt  haye  been  awsra  of  the  high  destinies 
wbich  awaited  hia  son,  but  it  is  doubtful  if  he  everlived 
to  Bce  them  realized  (see  1  Sam.  xvu,  12).  The  last 
hbtońcal  mention  of  Jease  U  in  relation  to  the  asylum 
which  Dayid  procoied  for  him  with  the  kmg  of  Moab  (1 
Sam.  xxii,  8>    B.a  dr.  1068-106 1.     See  Dayid. 

'^  According  to  an  andent  Jewish  tradition,  reoorded 
in  the  Targuni  on  2  Sam.  xxi.  19.  Jesse  was  a  weaver  of 
the  raiła  of  the  eanctuaiy ;  but  as  there  is  no  contradic- 
tion,  so  there  is  no  corroboration  of  this  in  the  Bibie,  and 
it  is  poesible  that  it  was  suggested  by  the  occurrence  of 
the  word  oregimy  *  weayers,"  in  oonnection  with  a  member 
of  his  family.  See  Jaarb-Orboim.  Who  the  wife 
of  Jease  was  we  are  not  told.  The  family  contained,  in 
addition  to  the  sons,  two  female  membeis— Zeruiah  and 
Abigail ;  but  it  is  uncertain  whether  these  were  Je8Be's 
daughtera,  for,  though  they  are  called  the  sisters  of  his 
sons  (1  Chroń,  ii,  16),  yet  Abigail  is  sald  to  have  been 
the  daughter  of  Nahadi  (2  Sam.  xvii,  25).  Of  this,  two 
explaiiati(mi  have  been  proposed.  (1.)  The  Jewish: 
that  Nahash  was  another  name  for  Jesse  ( Jcrome,  QtUBSt, 
I/ebr,  on  2  Sam.  xvii,  25,  and  the  Targum  on  Ruth  iv, 
22).  (2.)  Prof.  Stanley'8 :  that  Jesse^s  wife  had  formerly 
been  wife  or  concubine  to  Kaliash,  possibly  the  king  of 
the  Ammonites  (Jewish  Churehf  ii,  50, 51)"  (Smith).  See 
Nailish. 

Jesse,  Tree  op,  in  ecclesiastical  architecture,  is  a 
representation  of  the  genealogy  of  Christ  on  scrolls  of 
foliage  so  arranged  as  to  represent  a  tree,  and  was  quite 
a  common  subject  for  sculpture,  painting,  and  embroid- 
ery.  In  ancient  churches,  the  candlesticks  often  took 
this  form,  and  was  thercfore  called  a  Jesse.  See  Parker, 
Gioss.  A  rcMt.  s.  v. ;  Walcott,  Sacred  A  rchcsolot/tf,  p.  888. 

Jes^saS  (U9<rovk  v.  r.  'lriirovi  and  'Iticouc,  1  Esdr. 
T,  26),  or  Je^^BU  (IriffouCt  1  Esdr.  riii,  68),  corrupt  forms 
(see  Ezra  ii,  40 ;  viii,  38)  of  the  name  of  Jesiiua  (q.  v.). 

JESU  is  likewise  used  in  modem  poetry  for  the  name 
of  Jesus,  our  Savionr,  espedally  aa  a  vocative  or  gcni- 
tive. 

Jesaates,  a  monastic  order,  so  called  bccause  its 
membcrs  frequent]y  pronounced  the  name  of  Jesus.  The 
founders  were  John  of  Colombml,  gonfalonifere,  and  Fran- 
cis Mino  Yincentini  of  Sienna.  This  institution  was 
confirmed  by  Urban  Y  in  the  year  1368,  and  continuod 
till  the  serenteenth  century,  when  it  was  suppressed  by 
element  IX.  The  persons  belonging  to  it  profcssed 
poverty,  and  adhered  to  the  institute  of  Augustine. 
They  were  not,  however,  admittcd  to  holy  orders,  but 
profeased  to  assist  the  poor  with  their  prayers  andother 
offices,  and  prepared  medicine  for  them,  which  they  dis- 
tributed  gratuitously :  we  find  them,  for  that  reason,  call- 
ed sometimes  Apoatolic  Clerkt,  They  were  also  known 
as  the  CongregaHon  of  Saint  Hieronymus^  their  patron. 
IIaving  become  largcly  interested  in  the  distillery  of 
brandies,  etc,  they  were  by  the  people  called  Padri  deil 
aqua  rita,  A  female  order  of  the  same  name,  and  a 
branch  of  the  roale  order,  was  fonnded  by  Catharina 
Colombina.  They  stiU  oontinue  to  exiBt  in  Italy  as  a 
branch  organization  of  the  Augustinian  order.  See  Her- 
Eog,  Real- Ency klop,  s.  v. ;  Farrar,  EccUHast.  Diet,  p.  840 ; 
Uel^^ot,  Gesckichie  d,  KlJster  und  Ritterorden^  iii,  484  są. 

Jes^m,  Jes^uite  (Numb.  xxvi,  44).    See  Isiiui,  1. 

Jesnits,  or  the  Sodety  ofJetu*  (Societas  Jem),  the 
noost  celebrated  among  the  monastic  institutions  of  the 
Roman  Cathulic  Chuich. 

I.  Foundation  of  the  Order, — It  was  fonnded  by  the 
Spanish  nobleman  Don  Ifiigo  (Ignatius)  of  Loyola  (q. 
▼.).  Thirst  for  glory  caused  him  at  an  early  age  to  en- 
ter  the  army.  Having  been  wonnded,  May  20,  1521, 
during  the  siege  of  Pamplona  by  the  French,  he  tumed 
during  the  slow  progress  of  his  recovery  from  his  former 
farorite  reading  of  knights'  norels  to  the  study  of  the 
life  of  Jesus  and  the  saints.  His  heated  imagination 
aoggested  to  him  an  arena  in  which  even  greater  dis- 
tinction  coald  be  won  than  in  military  life,  and  he  re- 
aolred  henceforth  to  devot«  his  life  to  the  serrice  of 
IV.-1 1 1 


God  and  of  the  Chnrch.  Having  reoorered,  he  first 
went  to  the  Benedictine  abbey  of  Montserrat,  where, 
after  a  generał  confesńon,  he  took  the  vow  of  chastity, 
hung  up  his  sword  and  dagger  on  the  altar,  and  then 
proceeded  to  Manresa,  where,  after  a  short  stay  in  the 
hoepital,  he  hid  himself  in  a  rocky  cavem  near  the 
town,  in  order  to  devote  himself  wholly  to  prayer  and 
aacetic  exerciBes.  Herę  he  is  believed  to  have  madę 
his  first  draft  of  the  ^  SpLritual  £xerci8es"  (Erercitia 
8piriiualia)f  a  work  which  in  1548  a  brief  of  pope  Paul 
III  warmly  commended  to  all  the  faithful,  and  to  which 
the  thorough  soldier-like  discipline  that  chaiacterizes 
the  order  of  the  Jesuits,  and  the  ultra  papai  system  of 
which  they  have  been  the  pioneers,  are  greatly  due.  Aa 
Ignatius  himself  subeequently  states,  the  idea  of  a  new 
rdigious  order  which  was  to  take  a  front  rank  nnder 
the  banner  of  Christ  in  the  combat  against  the  prinoe 
of  darknesB  likewise  originated  with  him  at  this  time. 
During  a  brief  pilgrimage  which  Ignatius  madę  in  1528 
to  Palestine,  he  became  aware  that  he  utteriy  lacked 
the  neoessary  literary  ąualification  for  canring  out  the 
plans  which  he  had  oonceived.  Accordingly,  when  he 
had  retumed  to  Spain,  he  entered  a  grammar-school  at 
Baicdona,  and  subseąuently  visited  the  universities  of 
Alcala  and  Salamanca,  and  at  last  went  to  Paris,  where 
he  studied  from  1528  to  1585,  and  in  1538  acąuired  the 
title  of  doctor  of  philosophy.  In  Paris  Ignatius  gradu- 
ally  gathered  around  himself  the  first  members  of  the 
order  he  intended  to  found.  His  first  associates  weie 
Lefevre  (Petrus  Faber),  from  Savoy,  Francis  of  Xavier, 
from  Navarre,  and  the  Spaniards  Jacob  Lainez,  AUbus 
Salmeron,  Nicolaus  Bobadilla,  and  Simon  Rodrigiiec 
They  were  for  the  first  time  called  together  by  Ignatius 
in  July,  1584,  and  soon  after,  on  August  15,  the  festival  of 
the  AŚramption  of  Mary,  they  took  the  vow8  of  poverty, 
chastity,  and  of  making  a  pilgrimage  to  Jerusalem,  in 
order  to  labor  in  the  Holy  Land  for  the  oonver9ion  of 
the  infidels.  In  case  they  shonld  be  unable  to  carry 
out  this  project  within  one  year  after  their  arrival  in 
Yenice,  they  would  go  to  Romę  and  place  theroseWes 
at  the  disposal  of  the  pope.  On  Jan.  6,  1537,  Ignatius 
was  joined  in  Yenice  by  all  of  his  disdples  and  three 
morę  Frenchmen— Le  Jay,  Codure,  and  Brouct  All 
took,  two  raonths  later,  holy  orders,  but  their  plan  to  go 
to  Jerusalem  they  could  not  execute,  as  the  republic  of 
Yenice  was  at  war  with  sułtan  Soleiman  II.  They  oon- 
sequently  went  to  Romę  to  await  the  orders  of  the  pope. 
Paul  III  received  them  kindly,  gave  to  Faber  and  Lai- 
nez chairs  in  the  Sapienza,  and  reque8ted  Ignatius  to 
labor  as  a  dty  misńonary  for  the  improvement  of  the 
religiotts  life.  In  March,  1588,  the  other  associates  also 
arrived  in  Romę,  and  it  was  now  formally  re8olved  to 
establish  a  new  religious  order.  Ignatius  was  dected 
to  submit  their  plan  to  the  pope,  and  to  obtain  his  sanc- 
tion.  This  was  given  on  Sept  27,  1540,  in  the  buli 
Reffimini  MiHtanU*  eedeaiaty  which,  however,  restricted 
the  number  o{  professi  to  forty.  Three  years  later 
(March  14,  1548),  another  buU,  Injunctum  NobiSj  re- 
moved  this  restriction.  Rductantly  Ignatius  accepted 
the  dignity  of  the  first  generał  of  the  order,  to  which  he 
had  been  unanimously  dected.  He  entered  upon  hia 
Office  on  April  17, 1541 ;  and  soon  after,  in  acoordanoe 
with  the  reqnest  of  Paul  III,  the  draft  of  the  constitu- 
tion  of  the  new  order  was  madę  by  him  (not,  as  is  often. 
maintained,  by  Lainez ;  see  Genelli,  L^ben  des  heiL  Ig^ 
nałiuSy  p.  212).  Before  bdng  finally  sanctioned,  the  con- 
stitution  was  to  undcrgo  several  revisions;  but  before 
these  were  madę,  Ignatius  died,  July  81, 1556. 

II.  ConstUution  aud  Form  of  Gorenunent, — The  laws 
regulating  the  order  are  contained  in  the  so-called  Insti- 
tutum  (official  edition,  Prague,  1757,  2  vols. ;  new  edit. 
Avignon,  1827-^).  The  work  opens  with  a  collection 
of  all  the  bulls  and  decrees  of  the  apostolic  see  concem- 
ing  the  new  society.  This  is  foUowed  by  a  list  of  the 
pri\'ilegcs  which  have  been  granted  to  the  order,  and 
by  the  General  £xamination,  which  senres  as  an  intiO' 
duction  to  the  constitutions,  and  is  laid  before  evei7  ap« 


jEsurrs 


866 


JESUITS 


plicant  for  admiBńon.  The  most  impottant  pordon  of 
the  codę,  the  oonstitutions,  consists  of  ten  chaptera,  to 
each  of  which  are  added  explaiiatioiia  {Dedarałumei), 
which,  acoording  to  the  intentions  of  the  founder,  aie  to 
be  eqiull7  vaUd  as  the  constitutiona.  Nezt  follow  the 
decrees  and  canona  of  the  generał  oongregations;  the 
plan  of  studies  (JRatio  SŁu^rum)f  which,  howerer,  in 
1832  was  considerably  changed  by  the  generał  John 
,  Roothahn;  the  decrees  of  the  generals  {OrdmcUicmeg 
Generalium)f  as  they  were  revised  by  the  eighth  Gen- 
eral Congregation  in  1615;  and,  in  conclusion,  by  three 
asoetic  writings — the  IndtułruB  ad  eurandos  amauB 
morboB  of  generał  Claudius  Aquaviva,  the  Spiritual  Ex- 
ercises  of  Ignatius,  and  the  ŹHrectoriufn,  an  official  in- 
Btruction  for  the  right  use  of  these  exercise8.  At  the 
head  of  the  order  is  a  generał  (Praposiłtu  Generalu)^ 
who  is  eiected  for  łife,  must  reside  at  Bome,  and  ia  onły 
sabject  to  the  pope.  His  power  is  anlimited,  as  the 
Conucil  of  Assistants  has  only  a  deliberatire  vote.  He 
is,  however,  bound  to  the  constitutions,  which  he  can 
neither  chaiige  nor  eet  aside.  The  constitution  proyidos 
for  the  doposition  of  a  generał  in  particular  cases  by  the 
General  Congregation,  but  the  case  has  not  yet  occunred. 
For  the  administraUon  of  the  proyinces  into  which  the 
order  is  divided  the  generał  appoints  proYincials  for 
the  term  of  three  years.  Seyerał  proyinces  are  unitod 
into  an  asnsf^rUia,  which  is  represented  in  the  council 
of  the  generał  by  an  assistant.  There  were  in  1871  fiye 
assistants  for  Italy,  France,  Spain,  England,  and  Ger- 
many. The  assistants  are  appointed  by  the  General 
Congregation,  but  in  case  of  the  death  or  a  long  absence 
of  an  assistant  the  generał  can  substitute  another,  with 
the  oonsent  of  the  majority  of  the  proyinciałs.  Subor- 
dinate  to  the  proyincial  are  the  pnepositi,  who  goyem 
the  houses  of  the  professed,  and  the  rectozs,  who  goyem 
the  colieges  and  the  noyitiates,  They  are  liltewise  ap- 
pointed by  the  generaL  At  the  head  of  the  minor  es- 
tablishments  (retiderUia)  are  "superiors."  Each  of 
these  officers  has  by  his  sidc  a  consultor  to  adyise,  and 
a  monitor  to  watch  and  admonish  łum.  As  in  eyery 
rełigious  order,  the  members  are  diyided  into  priests  and 
lay  brothers  (JOoadjutortt  iemporaks),  The  latter  take 
the  simple  yows  after  a  two-years'  noyitiate,  and  the 
solemn  yows  ailer  haying  been  in  the  order  for  at  least 
ten  years.  Those  candidates  who,  on  entering  the  or- 
der, łeaye  their  futurę  employment  entirely  to  the  dis- 
position  of  their  superiors,  are  calłed  ItuUfferentei ;  but, 
according  to  a  decree  of  the  Generał  Congregation,  their 
finał  destination  must  l)e  assigned  to  them  at  least  with- 
in  t^'o  years.  The  candidates  for  the  priesthood  are, 
during  the  first  two  years,  NovkU  schokutici;  then, 
after  binding  themselyes  to  the  order  by  talcing  simple 
yows,  they  become  Scholasłici  approbati,  deyote  them- 
selyes for  seyerał  years  to  dassicał  and  philosophical 
studies,  and  are  for  some  time  empłoyed  as  teacheis  or 
educators  in  the  coUeges,  before  they  begin  the  study 
of  theołogy,  włuch  lasts  for  four  years.  After  the  com- 
pletion  of  the  theologicał  course  they  are  ordained 
priests,  and  now  ent«r  into  a  tłiird  noyitiate,  the  sole 
object  of  which  is  to  increase  their  zeal.  At  the  end  of 
this  noyitiate  the  candidate  Ib  admitted  to  the  solemn 
piofession  of  the  yows,  and  enrollcd  either  in  the  class 
of  the  prdeesed  or  that  of  the  spiritual  coadjutora.  Onły 
the  former  dass,  the  professed,  who  take  the  fourth  yow 
of  an  unconditionał  obedience  to  the  pope,  poesess  the 
fuli  rights  of  membere  of  the  society.  The  professed  of 
a  proyince  eyery  third  year  meet  in  a  proyincial  con- 
gregation, and  out  of  their  midst  choose  a  procurator, 
who  has  to  make  a  report  on  the  a£fairs  and  condition 
of  the  proyince  to  the  generaL  On  the  death  of  a  gen- 
erał the  Proyincial  Congregation  elects  two  deputies, 
who,  together  with  the  proyinciałs,  constitute  the  Gen- 
eral Congregation,  which  elects  the  new  generał.  In 
this  General  Congregation  the  supremę  legisUtire  power 
ia  ycsted;  it  can  be  calłed  together  on  extraordinary 
occasions  by  the  generał,  and,  in  case  the  latter  neglects 
his  duty,  by  the  assistants.    Thus  the  order  bears  the 


aspect  of  military  azistocracy,  and  meTcr,  during  tbs 
whole  history  of  the  Church  of  iComc,  łiaye  tlte  popea 
had  in  their  seryice  a  body  of  men  ao  tłunoughly  dis- 
cipłined.  ^  Before  any  ono  coułd  become  a  member.  ht 
was  seyerely  and  appn^riateły  tested  in  the  noi.'iuat& 
Of  the  actuał  membcórs,  only  a  few  clraice  apirits  leached 
the  perfect  dignity  of  the  professed,  firom  whom  alooe 
were  choeen  the  prinópał  officons,  the  superiors  and  the 
proyinciałs,  oonstituting  a  well-oiganized  tndn  oi  atf 
thorities  up  to  the  generaL  Eyery  indiyidual  was  ponr- 
erful  in  his  appropriate  sphere,  bot  in  erery  act  he  vu  . 
cloeeły  watched  and  guarded  lest  be  should  traosccud 
his  proper  limits.  So  perfect  was  the  obedience  incol- 
cated  by  a  long  courae  of  disdpline,  and  strengthencd 
by  eyery  spińtnal  ineans,  that  a  single  azbitraiy  bat  ^- 
flexible  will  controUed  eyery  moyement  of  the' order  in 
all  parta  of  the  wórłd.  -  Ałthough  eyer>'  indiyidual  poa- 
sessed  no  morę  wiU  of  his  0¥m  Łhan  the  particular  mem* 
bers  of  the  human  body,  he  expected  to  lie  płaced  in 
precisely  that  pońtion  in  włiich  his  talents  wouM  be 
beet  deyeloped  for  the  common  benefit:  in  eserddea  of 
monastic  deyotion,  in  literary  and  sdentafic  poisuits,  in 
the  secolar  life  of  courts,  or  in  strange  adrenturcs  and 
eminent  offioes  among  sayage  nations^  (Hase,  Ckurtk 
ffistory,  §  888> 

HL  Historyfrom  1540  to  1750.— On  the  death  of  Ig- 
natius  the  General  Congregation  could  not  meet  iimne* 
diately,  as  the  Spaniards,  who  were  at  war  with  tbe 
pope,  blocked  up  the  roads  to  Eome.  On  June  19, 1557, 
Jaoob  Lainez,  the  most  gifted  member  of  the  order,  %u 
ełected  the  second  generał  of  the  order.  Tbe  oou^tiUł- 
tions  were  once  morę  reyised,  and  unanimously  adopted; 
but  the  pope  (Paul  IV)  disliked  seyerał  of  its  pro\'i»ianj, 
and  in  particular  wished  to  haye  the  generał  clected  fijt 
a  term  of  only  three  years,  and  an  obsenrance  of  the 
canonicał  hours.  The  Jesuits  had  to  submit  in  tbe  lat- 
ter points,  but  when  the  aged  pope  soon  after  died  tbej 
retumed  to  their  originał  practice.  The  society  spread  ' 
rapidly,  and  numbered  at  the  death  of  Lainez  (Jan.  19^ 
1565)  eighteen  proyinces  and  130  houseSb  During  tbe 
administration  of  the  two  folłowing  generała,  the  Span^ 
iard  Francis  Borgia  (1565-72)  and  the  Belgian  Mcitu- 
rian  (1572-80),  the  order  was  greatly  fayorcd  by  the 
popes,  and  new  proyinces  were  organized  in  Peni/Mex- 
ico,  and  Poland.  The  fourth  Generał  Congregation,  oa 
Feb.  19,  1581,  ełected  as  generał  the  Ncapolitan  Óat- 
dius  Aquayiya  (1581-1615),  a  maii  of  rare  adminisaa' 
tiye  genius,  who  successfully  carricd  the  sodety  throo^h 
the  onły  intemal  commotion  of  importance  tliroagb 
which  it  has  passed,  and  who,  next  to  its  foundcr,  has 
done  morę  tban  any  other  generał  m  moulding  its  cbar^ 
acter.  The  leadbg  Spanbh  Jesuits,  mortified  at  eedng 
the  gcneralship,  which  they  had  begun  to  regard  as  a 
domain  of  their  nationality,  pass  into  the  hands  of  an 
Italian,  meditated  an  entirc  decentralization  of  tbe  or- 
der and  the  hegemony  of  the  Spaniards  at  the  Gxpecae 
of  the  unity  and  the  monarchical  principle.  The  pian 
met  with  the  approyai  of  Philip  II:  but  the  enei^^of 
pope  Sixtus  Y,  who  took  sides  with  Aquaviya,  foiled 
it  Under  Clement  YIII  the  Spaniards  renewed  their 
scheme,  and  the  commotion  produced  by  them  became 
BO  great  that  in  1593  the  fifth  Generai  Congrepitjcio 
(the  first  extraordinary  one)  was  conroked.  The  Span- 
iards hoped  that  Aquayiya  woułd  be  remoyed,  but  agiin 
tłieir  designs  were  defeated,  and  the  centialistic  admin- 
istration of  the  generał  sustained.  The  administntire 
crisis  was  followed  by  yiolent  doctrinał  contn>yerEie& 
The  book  of  the  Portuguese  Jesuit  Malina  inyolyed  the 
order  in  a  quarrel  with  the  Dominicans,  and  a  work 
(published  in  1599)  in  wliich  tbe  Spacish  Jesuit  Mari- 
ana justified  tyrannicide  raised  a  stonn  of  indignatioo 
against  the  society  throughout  Europę,  ałthough  Aqaa- 
yiya,  in  1614,  strictły  forbade  all  members  of  tbe  onkr 
to  adyance  this  doctrinc.  During  the  administiatioD 
of  Aquayiya  (about  1680)  the  order  numbered  27  pnA'- 
inces,  21  houses  of  professed,  287  colłegcs,  33  noyitiatei^ 
96  reśłdences,  and  10^1  membeza.    Duruig  tlie  admin* 


JESUITS 


867 


JESUTTS 


istrmtion  of  the  Roman  Mutius  Yitelleschi  (1615-45)  the 
order  celebrated  its  first  centemury  (1640).  The  dghth 
GenermI  Congregation,  on  Jan.  7,  1646,  elected  as  gen- 
erał the  Neapolitan  Yincenz  Caraffa.  On  January  1  of 
this  year  pope  Innocent  X  had  issued  a  brief,  acoording 
to  which  a  General  Congrcgation  waa  to  be  held  eyeiy 
ninth  year,  and  the  administration  of  the  saperiors  vaa 
limited  to  Łhree  yeara.  The  latter  proriston  was  re- 
pealed  by  Alexander  YII  (Jan.  1, 1668) ;  the  former  did 
not  take  effect  until  1661,  as  the  short  administration 
of  the  generals  Yincenz  Caraflfa  (f  June  8, 1649),  Francis 
•  Piccolomini  (f  June  17, 1661),  and  Aloys  Gottifredi  had 
practically  suspended  it  On  March  17, 1652,  the  Gen- 
eral Ck)ngregation  for  the  first  time  elected  as  generał  a 
German,  Groswin  Nickel,  of  Julich,  to  whom,  on  account 
of  his  great  age,  the  eleventh  Congregation,  on  June  7, 
1661,  gave  Paul  Olira  as  ooadjutor,  with  the  right  of 
succesaion.  Olira  was  generał  for  morę  than  serenteen 
years,  and  was  succeeded  by  the  Belgian  Noyelle  (1682- 
86)  and  the  Spaniard  Thyraus  Gonzalez  (1687-1705). 
Pope  Innocent  XI  was  unfavorable  to  the  order,  and  in 
1684  the  Congregation  of  the  Propaganda  forbade  it  to 
receive  any  morę  norices;  but  in  1686  this  decree  was 
cancelled  by  Innocent  hlmself.  Gonzalez  caused  con- 
siderable  excitement  by  publishing  a  work  against  the 
doctrine  of  Probabilism,  which  had  been  generally  taught 
bv  the  theologians  of  the  society.  He  was  succeeded 
by  the  generals  Tamburini  (1706-80),  Retz  (1780-60), 
Yiaconti  (1761-55),  Centurione  (1755-67),  Ricd  (1758- 
73) ;  under  the  latter  the  order  was  suppressed  (1778). 
The  order  during  all  this  time  had  steadily,  though  not 
rapidly  increased  in  strength.  It  numbered  in  1720  5 
aasistanta,  87  provinces,  24  houses  of  professed,  612  col- 
legcs,  59  noyitiates,  840  residences,  157  seminaries,  200 
missions,  and  19,998  membcrs,  among  whom  were  9967 
pricsts.  In  1762  the  order  had  increased  to  89  proy- 
inces,  639  coUeges,  61  Jioyitiates,  176  seminaries,  885  res- 
idences, 223  missions,  and  22,787  members,  among  whom 
were  11,010  priests. 

Soon  after  the  establishment  of  the  order,  the  pope, 
the  bi:iho[)S,  and  those  monarchs  who  were  opposed  to 
the  Rcformation  recognised  the  Jesuits  as  the  most  effi- 
dent  organization  for  saying  the  old  Church.^  Thus 
the  spread  of  the  order  was  rapid.  At  the  CouncU  of 
Trent  the  Spanish  ambassadors  declared  that  their  king, 
Philip  II,  knew  only  two  ways  to  stay  the  adyance  of 
the  Reformation,  the  education  of  good  preachers,  and 
the  Jesuits.  Calls  were  consequGntly  recdyed  from  ya- 
rious  countries  for  members  of  the  order;  but,  as  they 
not  only  opposed  Protestantism,  but  defeuded  the  most 
exceasiye  claims  of  the  popes  with  regard  to  secular 
goyemments,  they  soon  encountered  a  yiolent  resistanoe 
on  the  part  of  those  goyemments  which  refused  a  ser- 
yile  submission  to  the  dictatcs  of  the  papacy.  In  many 
cases  the  bishops  sided  against  them,  as  the  Jesuits 
were  found  to  be  always  ready  to  extend  the  papai  at 
the  cost  of  the  episcopal  authority.  This  was  especial- 
ly  the  case  in  the  republic  of  Yenice,  where  the  patri- 
arch  Treyisani  showed  himself  their  decided  opponent 
Sab0equently,  when  they  defended  the  interdict  which 
Paul  V  had  pronounced  against  Yenice,  they  were  ex- 
pelled  (in  1606),  and  not  until  1656  did  pope  Alexander 
YII  succeed  in  obtaining  from  the  republic  a  reluctant 
oonsent  to  their  return.  At  the  beginning  of  the  18th 
oentury  the  Piedmontese  yiceroy  in  Sicily,  Maifei,  ex- 
pelled  them  from  that  island,  because  they  were  again 
the  most  eager  among  the  dergy  to  enforce  a  papai  in- 
terdict Nowhere  did  the  order  rcnder  to  the  Church 
of  Romę  so  great  ser%'ices  as  in  Germany  and  the  north- 
em  countries  of  Europę,  where  Protestantism  had  be- 
come  predominanL  While  taking  part  in  all  the  efforts 
against  the  spread  of  Protestantism,  they  labored  with 
particular  zeal  for  the  establishment  of  educational  in- 
stitutions,  and  for  gaining  the  confidence  of  the  princes. 
In  both  respects  they  met  with  considerable  success. 
Thdr  colleges  at  Ingolstadt,  Munich,  Yienna,  Prague, 
Cologne,  Treyes,  Mentz,  Augsburg,  Ellwangen,  and  other 


places  became  highly  prosperous,  and  attracted  a  large 
number  of  pupils,  especially  from  the  aristocratic  fami- 
lies,  most  of  whom  remained  throughout  life  warm  sup- 
porters  of  all  the  schemes  of  the  order.  Under  emperor 
Rudolph  II  the  Jesuits  established  themselyes  in  all 
parts  of  Germany.  At  most  of  the  courts  Jesuits  were 
confessors  of  the  reigning  princes,  and  inyariably  used 
the  inńuence  thus  gained  for  the  adoption  of  forcible 
measures  against  Protestantism.  At  the  instigation  of 
the  Jesuits  a  counter-reformation  was  forcibly  carried 
through  in  a  number  of  proyinces  in  which  Protestant- 
ism, befoie  their  arriyal,  appeaied  to  be  surę  of  success. 
Thus,  in  particular,  Austria,  Styria,  Bayaria,  or  Baden, 
were  dther  gained  back  by  them  or  presenred  for  the 
Church  of  Romę,  and  from  1648  to  1748  they  are  said 
to  haye  persuaded  no  less  than  fort^-iiye  princes  of  the 
empire  to  join  the  Roman  Catholic  Church.  As  adyi- 
sors  of  the  princes,  they  became  to  so  high  a  degree  in- 
yolyed  in  political  affiurs  that  freąuently  eyen  the  gen- 
erals of  the  order  and  the  popes  deemed  it  necessary  to 
reoommend  to  them  a  greater  caution.  They  were  call- 
ed  into  Hungary  by  the  archbishop  of  Gran  as  early  aa 
1561,  but  there,  as  well  as  in  Transylyania,  the  yicisd- 
tudes  of  the  religious  wars  for  a  long  time  preyented 
them  from  gaining  a  firm  footing.  When,  howeyer,  the 
policy  of  the  Austiian  goyemment  finally  succeeded  in 
breaking  the  strength  of  the  Protestant  party,  the  Jes- 
uits became  all-powerfuL  In  1767  they  had  in  thesi; 
two  countries  18  colleges,  20  residences,  U  missionaiy 
stations,  and  990  members.  In  Poland,  Petrus  Canisiua 
appeared  in  1558  at  the  Diet  of  Petrikau ;  about  twenty 
years  later  the  fayor  of  king  Stephen  Bathori  empower*> 
ed  the  Jesuits  to  found  a  number  of  colleges,  and  to  se- 
cure  the  education  of  nearly  the  whole  aristocracy.  John 
Casimir,  the  brother  of  Yladislay  lY,  eyen  entered  the 
order  on  Sept.  25, 1643,  and,  although  not  yet  ordained 
priest,was  appointed  cardinal  in  1647;  yet,  after  the 
death  of  his  brother,  he  became  king  of  Poland  (1648- 
68).  The  Jesuit  Poaseyin  was  in  1581  sent  as  embassa- 
dor  of  Gregory  XIII  to  Ivan  lY  of  Russia,  and  subee- 
ąuently  the  Jesuit  Yota  madę  a  fruitless  attempt  to 
unitę  the  Greek  with  the  Roman  Catholic  Church.  Pe- 
ter the  Great,  in  1714,  expelled  the  few  Jesuits  who  at 
that  time  were  laboring  in  his  dominions.  In  Sweden, 
in  1578,  the  Jesuits  induced  the  king,  John  III,  to  make 
secretly  a  profession  of  the  Roman  Catholic  faith ;  and 
queen  Christina,  the  daughter  of  Gustavus  Adolphus, 
was  likcwise  preyailed  upon  in  1654,  by  the  Jesuits  Ma* 
cedo  and  Casati,  to  join  the  Church  of  Romę ;  but,  with 
regard  to  the  people  at  lai^ce,  the  efforts  of  the  Jesuits 
were  entirely  fruitless.  To  England,  Salmeron  and 
Brouet  were  sent  by  Ignatius.  They  were  unable  to 
preyent  the  separation  of  the  English  Church  from 
Romę,  but  they  oonfirmed  James  Y  of  Scotland  in  tha 
Roman  Catholic  faith,  encouraged  the  people  of  Ireland 
in  their  opposition  to  the  EngUsh  king  and  the  Angli- 
can  reformation,  and,  haying  retumed  to  the  Continent, 
established  seyeral  colleges  for  the  education  of  Roman 
Catholic  priests  for  England.  Elizabeth  expe]led  all 
the  Jesuits  from  her  dominions,  and  forbade  them,  upon 
penalty  of  death,  to  return.  During  her  rdgn  the  Jes- 
uit Campion  was  put  to  death.  In  1605  father  Gamet 
was  executed,  ha\ńng  been  charged  with  compUcity  in 
the  Gunpowder  Plot,  which  had  been  communicated  to 
him  in  the  confessionaL  In  1678  the  Jesuits  were  ao- 
cused  by  Titus  Oates  of  haying  entered  into  a  conspira-. 
cy  against  Charles  II  and  the  state,  in  consequence  of 
which  8ix  members  of  the  order  were  put  to  death.  The 
first  Jesuits  who  were  brought  to  the  Netherlands  were 
some  Spanish  members  of  the  order,  who,  during  the 
war  between  France  and  Charles  Y,  were  ordered  to 
leaye  France.  The  bishops  showed  them,  on  the  whole, 
less  fayor  than  in  the  other  countries,  and  the  magis- 
trates  in  the  cities,  on  whose  consent  the  authorization 
to  establish  colleges  was  madę  contingent,  generally 
opposed  them ;  but  they  oyercame  the  opposition,  and 
in  the  southem  proyinces  (Belgium)  soon  became  morę 


jEsurrs 


868 


JESUITS 


numerons  and  influendal  tban  in  most  of  tbe  other  Euio- 
pean  countries.  They  attracted  great  attention  by  their 
aLtacks  upon  Bajua  and  the  Jansenista,  both  of  whom 
were  condemned  at  Korne  at  their  instigation.  In  the 
noTthem  provinces  (Holland)  Btringent  lawa  were  re- 
peatedly  passed  againat  them,  and  they  were  chai^ed 
with  the  assassination  of  William  of  Onmge,  as  well  as 
with  the  attempt  against  the  life  of  Mauńce  of  Nassau, 
but  both  charges  were  indignantly  denied  by  the  order. 
In  France,  where  the  Jesuits  established  a  novitiate  at 
Paris  as  early  as  1540,  they  cncountered  from  the  begin- 
ning  the  most  determined  opposition  of  the  Unirersity 
and  the  Parliament,  and  the  biahop  of  Paris  forbade 
them  to  exercise  any  priestly  functions.  In  1550  the 
Cardinal  of  Lorraine  obtained  for  them  a  favorable  patent 
from  Henry  II,  but  the  Parliament  refused  to  record  it, 
In  1561  Lainez  recsiyed  from  the  Synod  of  Poiasy  the 
concession  that  the  Jesuits  should  be  permitted  to  estab- 
lish  themselyes  at  Paris  under  the  name  of  "  Fathers  of 
the  College  of  Clermont."  Thb  college,  which  was  sanc- 
tłoned  by  Charles  IX  in  1565,  and  by  Henry  III  in  1580, 
attained  a  high  degree  of  prosperity,  and  in  the  middle 
of  the  17th  century  numbered  upwards  of  2000  pupils. 
In  the  south  of  France  the  Jesuits  gained  a  greater  in- 
fluence than  in  the  north,  and  were  geuerally  regarded 
as  the  leaders  in  the  yiolent  struggle  of  the  Catholic 
party  for  the  arrest  and  suppression  of  Calyinbm.  They 
were  closely  allicd  with  the  Ligue,  but  generał  Aquaviva 
disapproved  the  openness  of  this  alliance,  and  removed 
fathers  Matthieu  and  Sommier,  who  had  been  chiefly 
instrumental  in  bringing  about  the  alliance,  to  Italy 
and  Belgium.  The  Jesuit  Toletus  brought  about  the 
reconciiiation  between  the  Ligue  and  Henry  rv,  who 
remained  a  warm  protector  of  the  order.  Keyertheless, 
Jesuits  were  charged  with  the  attempts  madę  upon  the 
life  of  Henry  by  Chastel  (1594)  and  Ravaillac  (1610),  as 
they  had  before  been  charged  with  complicity  in  the 
plot  of  aement  (1589)  against  Henry  III.  The  Parlia- 
ment of  Paris  instituted,  accordingly,  proceedings  against 
the  Jesuit  Guignard,  who  had  been  the  instructor  of 
Chastel,  sentenced  him  to  death,  deprived  the  Jesuits 
of  their  goods,  and  exLled  them  from  France.  Henry 
IV  was,  however.  prerailed  upon  to  recall  them,  contin- 
ued  to  be  their  protector,  and  again  chose  a  Jesuit  as 
his  confessor.  The  same  office  was  filled  by  members 
of  the  order  during  nearly  the  whole  reigns  of  Louis 
XIII,  Louis  Xn'',  and  Louis  Xy,  and  through  the  royal 
confessors  the  order  therefore  did  not  cease  to  exeTcise  a 
very  conspicuous  influence  upon  the  policy  of  the  kings 
both  at  home  and  abroad.  The  connirance  of  these 
confessors  with  the  scandalous  liyes  of  the  kings  did 
morę  than  anything  else  to  undermine  the  respect  for 
the  Roman  Catholic  Church,  and  for  religion  in  generał, 
among  the  educated  classes.  To  Korne,  however,  they 
rendered  invaluable  seryices  by  heading  the  opposition 
against  Louis  Xiy  and  the  bishops  when  the  latter  con- 
jointly  tried  to  enforce  throughout  the  Catholic  Church 
of  France  submission  to  the  four  Gallican  articles,  and 
after  effecting  a  fuli  reconciiiation  between  Bome  and 
Louis,  by  securing  the  aid  of  the  secular  arm  for  arrest- 
ing  the  progress  and  ayerting  a  yictory  of  Jansenism, 
which  had  obtained  fuli  contrul  of  the  best  intellects  in 
the  Church  of  France.  In  Spain,  which  had  been  the 
cradle  of  the  order,  its  success  was  remarkably  rapid. 
As  early  as  1554  three  proyinces  of  the  order  (Castile, 
Aragon,  and  Andalusia)  had  been  organized.  They 
were,  howeyer,  opposed  by  the  leamed  Melchior  Canus ; 
in  Saragossa  they  were  expelled  by  the  archbishop,  and 
the  Inquisition  repeatedly  drew  them  before  their  tri- 
bunal  as  suspected  of  heresy.  But  the  royal  favor  of 
the  three  Philips  (Philip  H,  III,  and  lY)  kept  their  in- 
^uence  unimpaired.  In  Portugal,  Francis  Xavier  and 
Simon  Bodriguez  yisited  lisbon  on  their  way  to  India. 
They  were  well  receiyed  by  the  king,  and  Bodriguez 
was  induced  to  remain,  and  became  the  founder  of  a 
proyince,  which  soon  belonged  to  the  most  prospeious 
of  the  order. 


lY.  Suppresnon  ofłhe  Order  (1750-78)^— In  tlie  mid- 
dle of  the  18th  century  the  order  was  at  the  zenith  of 
its  power.  As  confessors  of  most  of  the  reigning  prinoes 
and  a  large  number  of  the  first  aristocratic  fandUa,  ud 
as  the  instructors  and  educatois  of  the  childreD,  they 
wielded  a  controlling  influence  on  the  deatinies  of  most 
of  the  Catholic  states.  At  the  same  Łime  tbey  hsd 
amassed  great  wealth,  which  they  tried  to  increaie  by 
boldcommercialspeculations.  Both  influence  and  weilib 
they  used  with  untiring  energy,  and  with  a  oonsistency 
of  which  the  history  of  the  world  hardly  knows  a  per- 
allel,  for  the  deyelopment  of  their  ultra  papai  ey&tem. 
In  point  of  doctrine,  extermination  of  Proteatantism, 
and  eyery  form  of  belief  opposed  to  the  Church  of  Ronie, 
and  within  the  Church  blind  and  immediate  submtsaoD 
to  the  doctrinal  decision  of  the  infallible  pope;  in  pobt 
of  ecclesiastical  polity,  the  weakeniog  of  the  episcopai 
for  the  benefit  of  the  papai  authońty,  the  d«fence  of  the 
most  exorbitanŁ  daims  of  the  popes  with  regard  to  sec- 
ular goyeniment,  and  a  controlling  influence  upc»n  the 
popes  by  the  order — these  were  the  prominent  featurs 
of  the  Jesuit  system.  Aa  the  Jesnita  were  anxioiffi  to 
crush  out  eyerything  opposed  to  the  Roman  CaŁholie 
system,  as  they  understciod  it,  it  waa  natural  that  aU 
these  elements  should,  in  self-defence,  combine  for  plan- 
ning  the  destruction  of  so  formidaUe  an  antagonisL  As 
the  Jesuits  had  attained  their  influential  pońtion  chief- 
ly through  the  fayor  of  the  princes,  the  same  m^thod 
was  adopted  for  crushing  them.  The  first  great  rictofy 
was  won  against  them  in  PortugaL  Sebastian  Joee 
Calyalho,  better  known  mider  the  title  (which  he  re- 
ceiyed in  1770)  of  maiąuis  of  Pombal,  prubably  the 
greatest  statesman  which  Portugal  bas  ever  had,  wa 
fully  conyinced  that  commerce  and  industiy,  and  all  tbe 
materiał  interests  of  the  country,  could  be  succcsafully 
deyeloped  only  when  the  monarchy  and  the  nation  were 
withdrawn  from  the  depressing  oonnection  with  the  hi- 
erarchy and  the  nobility,  and  that  the  flrst  step  towards 
effecting  such  a  reyolution  was  the  remoyal  of  the  Jes- 
uits. Opportunities  for  disposing  the  king  against  the 
order  soon  offered.  In  Paraguay,  a  portion  of  wLicfa 
had  in  1758  been  ceded  by  Spain  to  Portugal,  an  imor- 
rection  of  the  natiyes  broke  out  against  the  new  rak, 
The  Jesuits,  according  to  their  own  accounts,  had  estib- 
lished  in  Paraguay  a  theocratic  form  of  gorenunent, 
which  gaye  them  the  most  absolute  power  over  tite 
minds  of  the  natiyes.  They  were  therefore  opposed  to 
the  cession  of  a  portion  of  this  territoiy  to  Portugal,  and 
spared  no  efforts  to  preyent  it.  When,  therefore,  the 
natiyes  rosę  generally  in  insurrection,  it  was  tbe  gen- 
erał opinion  that  an  insurrection  in  a  countn'  like  Par- 
aguay was  impossible  without  at  least  the  conniTance 
of  the  order.  The  Jesuits  themselyes  denied,  howo-er, 
all  participation  in  the  insurrection,  and  asserted  that 
the  proyindal  of  the  order  in  Paraguay,  Barreda.  in 
loyal  compliance  with  the  order  of  the  generał,  Ytscooii, 
had  endeayored  to  induce  the  natiyes  to  submit  to  the 
partition  of  the  country.  Pope  Benedict  XIY  was  pre 
yailed  upon  to  forbid  the  Jesuits  to  engage  in  conunei^ 
ciał  transactions  (1758),  and  the  patriarch  of  \aAx^ 
who  was  commissioned  by  the  pope  to  refono  tlieio, 
withdrew  from  them  all  priestly  functions^  An  atteicpt 
to  assassinate  the  king  (Sept.  3, 1758)  supplied  an  occa- 
sion  for  impeaching  them  of  high  treason,  as  the  doke 
of  Ayeiro,  when  tortured,  named  two  Jesuits  as  his  ac- 
compłices.  The  two  accused  denied  the  guilt,  and  tbe 
writers  of  the  order  generally  represcnt  the  whole  afliir 
as  arranged  by  Pombał  in  order  to  giye  him  a  new  pre- 
text  for  criminal  proceedings  againat  the  order.  On 
Sept.  8, 1759,  a  royal  decree  foreyeT  excladed  the  oidec 
from  Portugal  and  confiacated  its  property.  Moet  of  the 
members  were,  on  boaid  of  goyemment  ships,  sent  to 
Italy;  and  one  of  their  prominent  mcmben,  Malagrida, 
was  in  1761  bumed  at  the  stake.  The  pope,  in  rain, 
had  interceded  for  them ;  the  nnncio  had  to  leare  the 
country  in  1760,  and  all  connection  with  Bome  was 
broken  ofU 


jEsurrs 


869 


JESUTTS 


In  France  the  numerous  enemies  of  the  order  found  a 
welcome  opportunity  for  arousing  pablic  opinion  againsŁ 
it  in  the  commercial  speculations  of  the  Jesuit  Lava- 
lette,  the  superior  of  the  mission  of  Martinique.  When, 
in  the  war  between  France  and  EngUnd,  his  ships  were 
captuied,  his  creditors  applicd  for  payment  to  father  De 
Sacy,  the  procurator-general  of  all  the  Jesuit  missions 
in  Paris.  He  aatisfied  them,  and  instructed  Laralette 
to  abstain  from  speculations  in  futurę.  When  Lavalette 
disregarded  these  instrucdons,  and  when^  con8equently, 
new  loases  occurred,  amounting  to  2,400,000  liyres,  Sacy 
refuaed  to  hołd  himself  responsible.  The  creditors  ap- 
plied  to  the  Parliament,  whose  jurisdiction  was  (1760) 
recognised  by  the  Jesuits.  The  Parliament  demanded 
a  copy  of  the  constitution  of  the  order  for  examination. 
On  April  18, 1761,  a  decree  of  Parliament  sappressed  the 
oongregadons  of  the  Jesuits ;  on  May  8  the  whole  order 
was  declared  to  be  responsible  for  the  debt  of  Laralette ; 
on  August  6  the  constitution  of  the  order  was  declared 
to  be  an  encroachment  upon  Church  and  State,  twenty- 
foar  works  of  Jesuit  authors  were  bumed  as  heretical  and 
dangerous  to  good  morals,  and  the  order  was  excluded 
from  educational  institutions.  A  protest  from  the  king 
(Aug.  29, 1761),  who  annulled  these  decrees  of  the  Par- 
liament for  one  year,  was  as  nnavailing  as  the  interces- 
sion  of  the  majority  of  the  French  bishops  and  of  pope 
element  XIIL  Other  Parliaments  of  France  follo\ml 
the  example  given  by  the  Paris  Parliament :  on  April 
1, 1762,  eighty  colleges  of  the  order  were  closed ;  and  on 
August  6  a  decree  of  the  Parliament  of  Paris  declared 
the  constitution  of  the  Jesuits  to  be  godless,  sacrilegious, 
and  injurious  to  Church  and  State,  and  the  yows  of  the 
order  to  be  nuli  and  void.  In  the  beginning  of  1764  all 
the  members  were  ordered  to  forswear  their  yows,  and 
to  dedare  that  their  constitution  was  punishable,  abom- 
inable,  and  injurious.  Only  five  complied  with  this 
order;  among  them  father Cerutti,who  two  years  before 
had  written  the  best  apology  of  the  order.  On  Nov.  26, 
1764,  Choiseul  obtained  the  sanction  of  the  king  for  a 
decree  which  banished  the  Jesuits  from  France  as  dan- 
gerous to  the  State.  Clement  XIII,  the  steadfast  friend 
of  the  order,  replied  to  the  royal  decree  on  Jan.  8, 1765, 
by  the  buli  AposlolieaTo,  in  which  he  again  approred 
the  order  and  its  constitution. 

In  Spaln,  Aranda,  the  minister  of  Charles  III,  was  as 
successful  as  Pombal  in  Portugal  and  Choiseul  in  France. 
During  the  night  from  Sept.  2  to  Sept  3,  1768,  all  the 
Jesuits  of  the  kingdom,  about  6000  in  number,  were 
seized  and  transported  to  the  papai  territory.  When 
the  pope  refused  to  receiye  them,  they  were  landed  in 
Corsica,  where  they  remained  a  few  months,  until,  in 
1768,  that  island  was  annexed  to  France.  They  were 
then  again  expelled,  and  this  time  found  refuge  in  the 
papai  territory.  In  Naples  from  8000  to  4000  Jesuits 
were  seized  in  the  night  from  Nov.  3  to  4, 1767,  by  order 
of  the  regent  Tanucci,  the  gtiardian  of  the  minor  Ferdi- 
nand  IV,  and  likewise  transported  to  the  States  of  the 
Church.  The  govemment  of  Parma  seized  the  Jesuits 
on  Fcb.  7,  1768,  because  the  pope,  daiming  to  be  the 
feadal  80vereign  of  Parma,  had  issued  a  bricf  declaring 
an  order  of  the  Parmese  govemment  (the  Pragmatic 
Sanction  of  Jan.  16,  1768)  nuli  and  void,  and  excom- 
municating  its  authors.  All  the  Bourbon  courts  took 
sidcs  in  this  ąuestion  with  Parma,  forbadc  the  publica- 
tion  of  the  papai  brief,  and  when  Clement  Xni  refused 
to  repeal  it,  France  occupied  Avignon,  and  the  goveni- 
ment  of  Naples  Benevent  and  Pontecor^'o.  At  the  same 
time,  the  grand  master  of  the  Kntghts  of  St  John,  Fon- 
seca,  was  induced  to  seize  the  Jesuits  of  Malta  and 
transport  them  to  the  Papai  States.  When  Clement 
XIII,  who  had  steadfastly  refused  the  demand  of  the 
Bourbons  to  abolish  the  order  of  the  Jesuits  for  the 
whole  Chorch,  died,  on  Feb.  2, 1769,  there  was  a  serere 
stniggle  in  the  conclare  between  the  fricnds  (Zelanti) 
and  the  enemies  of  the  Jesuits.  The  demands  of  the 
French  and  Spanish  ambassadors  to  pledge  the  new  pope 
that  he  would  abolish  the  order  were  firmly  repelled  by 


the  College  of  Cardinals;  but,  on  the  other  hand,  the 
ambassadors  succeedcd  in  securing  the  election  of  car- 
dinal  Ganganelli  (Clement  XIV),  who,  while  before  the 
election  he  was  rcgarded  by  both  parties  as  a  friend, 
soon  disclosed  an  intention  to  sacrifice  the  hated  order 
to  the  combined  demands  and  threats  of  the  Bourbon 
courts.  The  reconciliation  with  the  courts  of  Pdrtugal 
and  Parma  was  obtained  by  making  to  them  great  con- 
cessions ;  the  brother  of  Pombal  was  appointed  cardinal ; 
the  generał  of  the  Jesuits,  Bicci,  was  alone,  among  all 
the  generals  of  religious  ordcrs,  excluded  from  the  usual 
embrace ;  and  when  he  soUdted  the  &vor  of  an  audience 
he  was  twice  refused.  Papai  letters  to  Louis  XV  (Sept. 
30, 1769)  and  Charles  III  (Nov.  20)  admitted  the  giult  • 
of  the  Jesuits  and  the  necessity  of  abolishing  the  order, 
but  asked  for  delay.  When,  on  July  4, 1772,  the  mild 
Azpura  had  been  succeeded  as  ambassador  of  Spain  by 
the  morę  energetic  Joseph  Monino  (snbsequently  count 
of  Florida  Blanca),  other  measures  against  the  order  fol- 
lowed  in  morę  rapid  succession.  In  September  the  Ro- 
man college  was  closed,  in  Noyember  the  college  at 
FrascatL  At  last  the  brief  Dominua  ac  Redemptor  not' 
ter  (which  had  been  signed  on  July  21,  at  three  o'clock 
in  the  moming)  announced  on  August  16  to  the  whole 
world  the  abolition  of  the  order,  on  the  giound  that  the 
peace  of  the  Church  required  such  a  step. 

IV.  From  the  AbolUion  oftkt  Order  tmtilits  Rettora- 
tion,  1773-1814.— The  suppression  of  the  order  in  the 
city  of  Romę  was  carried  through  with  particular  serer- 
ity  by  a  committee  of  l!ve  cardinals  and  two  prehttes, 
aU  of  them  yiolent  enemies  of  the  order.  The  generał, 
Ricd,  his  fiye  assistants,  and  seycral  other  Jesuits,  were 
thrown  into  prison,  where  they  had  to  remain  for  seyeral 
years.  Pius  VI  confirmed  the  decree  of  abolition,  and 
did  not  dare  to  release  the  imprisoned  Jesuits;  when, 
finally,  they  were  rdeased,  they  had  to  promise  to  ob- 
senre  sUenoe  with  regard  to  their  triaL  Some  of  them 
took  the  demanded  oath,  but  others  refused.  The  gen- 
erał, Ricci,  had  preyiously  died,  Noy.  24, 1775,  emphat- 
icaliy  asserting  his  own  and  the  order's  innocence.  The 
brief  of  abolition  was  received  with  great  satisfaction  in 
Portugal.  Spain  and  Naples  were  dissatisfied  because 
they  wished  a  buli  of  excomroimication  (as  a  morę 
weighty  expre8sion  of  the  papai  sentence)  instead  of  a 
brief.  In  Germany,  where  the  empress  Maria  Theresa 
had  long  opposcd  the  alx)lition  of  the  order,  the  brief 
was  promulgated,  but  the  Jesuits,  after  laying  dovm  the 
habit  of  the  order,  were  allowed  to  live  together  in  their 
former  colleges  as  societies  of  secular  priests.  In  France 
the  brief  was  not  officially  promulgated,  and  the  Jesuits, 
otherwise  so  ultra  papai  in  their  ^'iews  of  the  yalidity 
of  papai  briefs,  now  inferred  from  this  circumstance  that 
the  order  had  not  been  abollshed  in  France  at  all.  In 
Prussia  Frederick  II  forbade  the  promulgation  of  the 
brief,  and  in  1775  obtained  permission  from  Pius  VI  to 
leaye  the  Jesuits  undLsturbed.  Soon,  however,  to  please 
the  Bourbon  courts,  the  Prussian  Jesuits  were  reque8ted 
to  lay  aside  the  dress  of  the  order,  and  Frederick  Wil- 
liam II  abołished  all  thdr  houscs.  In  Russia  Catha- 
rine  II  also  forbade  the  promulgation  of  the  brief,  and 
ordered  the  Jesuits  to  continue  their  organization.  The 
Jesuits  reasoned  that,  sińce  the  brief  in  Romc  itself 
had  not  tteen  publishcd  in  due  form,  they  had  a  right  to 
comply  with  the  imperial  request  until  the  brief  should 
be  communicated  to  them  by  the  bishops  of  the  dio- 
ceses.  This  offidal  communication  was  ncyer  madc, 
and  Clement  XrV  himsdf,  in  a  secret  letter  to  the  em- 
press, permitted  the  continuation  of  the  Jesuit  colleges 
in  Russia.  When  the  archbishop  of  Mohiley,  in  1779, 
authorized  the  Jesuits  to  open  a  noyitiate,  Pius  VI  was 
preyailed  upon  by  the  Bourbon  courts  to  rcpresent  the 
step  taken  by  the  Russian  bishop  as  unauthorizcd ; 
orally,  howeyer,  as  the  Jesuits  maintain,  he  repoatedly 
confirmed  what  officially  he  had  disowned.  Thus  the 
Jesuits  attempt  to  elear  themselyes  from  the  charge  of 
hayiiig  disobeyed  the  pope,  by  charging  the  latter  with 
deliberate  duplicity.    The  Russian  Jesuits  were  placed 


jESurrs 


870 


JESTJITS 


under  the  vice-geiienla  Czerniewicz  (1782-85),  lienkie- 
wicz  (1785-96),  and  Careu  (1799-1802).  The  brief  of 
Clement  XIV  was  in  1801  npealed  by  Pius  YII,  so  far 
as  Russia  was  concemed,  and  the  next  superior  of  the 
Russian  Jesuits,  Gabriel  Gruber  (1802-5),  assumed  the 
title  of  a  generał  for  Russia^  and  sinoe  July  81,  1804^ 
also  far  Naplea.  The  successor  of  Gruber,  Brzozowski 
(1805-20),  Uved  to  see  the  restoration  of  the  order  by 
the  pope.  Soon  after  (1815)  the  persecution  of  the  or- 
der began  in  Russia;  Dec.  20, 1815,  they  were  expe]led 
from  St.  Petersburg,  in  1820  from  all  Russia.  In  other 
oountńes  of  Europo  the  ex-Je8uits  had  formed  societies 
which  were  to  8erv-e  as  substitutes  of  the  abolished  or^ 
.  der.  In  Belgium  the  ex-Jesuits  De  Broglie  and  Tour- 
nćly  established  in  1794  the  Socieiy  ofthe  Sacred  ffeart 
o/'JeftM,  which,  after  its  expul8ion  from  Belgium,  estab- 
lished its  centrę  in  Austria.  In  aocordance  with  the 
wish  of  the  pope,  and  through  the  mediation  of  arch- 
bishop  Migazzi,  of  Yienna,  this  society,  under  the  suc- 
oessor  of  Toum^ly  (f  1797),  father  Yarin,  united,  on 
Apńl  8, 1799,  with  the  Baccanarists  (q.  v.),  or  Fathera 
ofthe  Fcuth  o/JetuM,  Under  this  name  Baccanari  (or 
Paccanari),  a  layman  of  Trent,  had,  in  union  with  Bev- 
eral  ex-Jesuits,  established  in  1798  a  society  in  Italy, 
which,  after  the  union  with  the  Society  of  the  Sacred 
Heart  of  Jesus,  madę  conaiderable  progress  in  Italy, 
France,  Germany,  and  England.  Most  of  the  members 
hoped  gradualiy  to  smooth  the  way  for  a  reunion  with 
the  Jesuits  in  Russia;  but  as  Baccanari,  who  in  the 
mean  while  had  bocome  a  priest,  did  not  appear  to  be 
in  sincere  sjrmpathy  with  this  project,  he  was  abandon- 
ed  by  many  members  and  by  whoie  houses.  In  1807 
he  was  eyen  arrested  by  order  of  Pius  VII,  but  the 
French  liberated  him  in  1809,  sińce  which  year  he  en- 
tirely  disappears.  The  last  house  of  the  society,  that 
of  Su  Sylvester,  in  Romę,  joined  tho  restored  Jesuits  in 
1814. 

V.  Iliatory  ofthe  Order  from  its  RettoraHon  in  1814 
to  1871. — Soon  after  his  return  from  the  French  captiv- 
ity,  Pius  VII  promulgated  (Aug.  7, 1814)  the  buli  Sol- 
Ucitudo  ommum  eccUŚiarumj  by  which  he  restored  the 
order  of  the  Jesuits  fur  the  whole  earth.  Father  Paniz- 
zone,  in  the  name  of  the  generał  of  the  order,  Brozow- 
ski,  who  resided  in  Russia,  received  back  from  the  pope 
the  church  Al  Gesu,  in  Romę.  When  Brozowski  died, 
the  order  had  to  pass  through  a  serere  triaL  The  yicifr- 
general,  father  Petruoci,  in  union  with  father  Pietroboni, 
tried  to  curtail  the  electoral  freedom  ofthe  Greneral  Ck>n- 
gregation,  and  his  plans  were  supported  by  cardinal 
Della  Genga;  but  the  other  members  invoked  the  inter- 
Tention  of  the  pope,  and,  freedom  of  election  having 
been  secured,  elected  as  generał  father  Fortis,  of  Yerona 
(1820-29),  who  was  succeeded  by  father  Roothan,  of 
Amsterdam  (1829-53),  and  father  Becks,  a  Belgian  (elect- 
ed July  2, 1853).  Within  a  few  years  after  the  resto- 
ration the  order  had  again  established  itself  in  all  parts 
of  Italy.  Ferdinand  III,  in  1815,  called  them  to  Mode- 
na;  and  the  ex-king  of  Sardinia,  Emanuel  IV,  entered 
the  order  in  1815;  he  died  in  1819.  The  fear  which 
the  election  of  cardinal  Della  Genga  as  pope  In  1823 
caused  to  the  order  proved  to  be  ungrounded,  for  the 
new  pope  (Leo  XII)  was  henceforth  the  warm  patron 
of  the  Jesuits,  and  restored  to  them  the  Roman  coUege 
(1824) .  They  were  expelled  from  Naples  and  Piedmont 
in  consequence  of  the  reyolutionary  moyeroents  in  1820 
i  and  1821,  but  were  soon  restored.  In  1836  they  were  ad- 
mltted  to  the  Lombardo- Venetian  kiugdom,  and  in  Ye- 
rona cardinal  Odescalchi  in  1838  entered  the  novitiate, 
but  died  in  1841.  General  Roothan  witnessed  the  expul- 
sion  of  the  Jesuits  from  all  Italy,  and  even  from  Romę, 
in  1848,  but  he  liyed  to  see  their  restoration  in  Naples 
and  Romę  in  1850.  The  war  of  1859  again  destroyed 
the  proyinces  of  Naples  and  Sicily ;  in  1866  also  Yenice, 
In  Spain,  Ferdinand  VII,  by  decree  of  May  15, 1815,  de- 
clared  the  charges  which  former  Spanish  govemments 
had  madę  a^inst  the  Jesuits  false.  The  rerolution  of 
1820  droye  them  from  their  houses,  and  on  Nov.  17, 


1822,  twenty^^ye  of  them  were  kiUed;  bat  when  tba 
insurrection  was  in  1824  subdued  by  the  French,  tho 
Jesuits  retumed.     In  the  ciyil  war  of  1884  they  wera 
again  expelled;  in  Madrid  a  fcarful  ńot  was  esciifd 
against  them  by  the  report  that  they  had  poisoned  !he 
wells,  and  fourteen  were  massacred.     On  July  7,  \i^, 
the  order  was  abolished  in  the  Spanish  domiiiion.^  br  a 
decree  of  the  Gorte&    Since  1848  they  bc^an  ńkntly 
to  return,  but  the  law,  which  had  not  been  repealeti,  iru 
again  enforoed  against  them  by  the  reyidution  of  l^^^H 
Only  in  Cuba  they  remsined  undisturbed.    To  Poitu^ 
the  Jesuits  were  recalled  by  Dom  Miguel  in  1829,  uid 
in  1832  they  receiyed  tho  college  of  Coimbrs,  whcre 
they  numbered  the  great-grandaon  of  Pombal  amon^ 
their  pupils.    After  the  oyerthrow  of  Dom  Miguel  lite 
laws  of  Pombal  were  again  enforoed  against  them  l<y 
Dom  Pedro,  and  eyer  sińce  they  haye  been  exduded 
from  Portugal.     In  France  a  number  of  blshopa  ex- 
pressed,  immcdiately  after  the  restoration  of  the  onier, 
a  desire  to  place  the  bo}'8'  seminaries  under  their  char;;e. 
and  Talleyrand  dedared  himself  in  fayor  of  their  ki;al 
restoration,  but  the  king  did  not  oonsent.     Nerenhe- 
less,  the  number  and  the  influence  of  the  Jesuits  8tesd- 
ily  increased,  and  they  labored  yńih  particular  zcal  Tir 
the  restoration  of  the  Church  of  Romę  by  means  t4 
holding  "  missioua."     They  re-established  the  *'  coni^r^- 
gations"  aroong  the  laymen,  and  other  religions  aj^nu  ia- 
tions.     In  1826  they  had  two  noyiriates,  two  rcsidcnoe^, 
and  eight  coUeges,  the  most  celebrat«d  of  which  was  Su 
AcheuL     La  Mennais  in  yain  cndeayored  to  gnin  ibe 
Jesuits  for  his  reyolutionary  ideas.     As  all  the  likral 
parties,  and  eyen  many  Legitimists,  like  count  Mofiik^ 
sier,  united  for  combating  the  Jesuits,  ro3'al  ordinan^^ 
of  July  16,  1828,  took  from  the  Jesuits  all  their  fchuo]s, 
and  limited  the  number  of  pupils  in  the  boys*  Fcmioa- 
ries  to  20,000.     The  reyolution  of  July,  1830,  dissolred 
all  the  houses  of  the  order,  and  droye  all  the  nemben 
out  of  France ;  but  gradualiy  many  retumed,  and  Ra- 
yignan,  in  Paris,  gained  the  reputation  of  being  one  of 
the  first  pulpit  orators  of  his  country.    On  motion  of 
Thieis,  the  Chamber  of  Deputies,  in  1845,  requc»ted  the 
goyemment  to  abolish  the  order  in  France;  but  the 
govemment  preferred  to  send  a  special  ambsKsaddr 
(Roesi)  to  Romę  in  order  to  obtain  the  supprcs^ion  cif 
the  Jesuits  from  the  pope.    Gregoiy  X\l  dcclined  to 
make  any  direct  concessions,  but  the  generał  of  the  cc- 
der  deemed  it  best  to  reduce  the  number  of  members  in 
France  in  order  to  eyade  the  storm  rising  against  the 
order.     The  reyolution  of  1848,  the  goyeniroeot  of 
Louis  Napoleon,  and  the  reyolution  of  1870,  left  them 
undisturbed,  and  they  were  allowed  to  erect  a  ocuLsider- 
able  number  of  oolleges  in  the  four  pioyinces  into  wblch 
France  ia  diyided.     In  England  the  Jesuits  ooiitinued, 
after  the  abolition  of  the  order,  to  liye  in  comroon.    In 
1790  they  receiyed  from  Thomas  Wold  the  castk  (f 
Stonyhurst,  which  soon  became  one  of  the  most  pjpular 
educational  institutions  ofthe  English  Roman  Cathofi& 
In  1803  they  were  allowed  to  join  the  Roaaian  brancli 
of  tho  order.    In  Belgium  the  Fathers  of  the  Faiih 
joined  in  1814  the  restored  order.     The  Dutch  goyem- 
ment expelled  the  Jesuits,  but  they  retumed  after  thd 
Belgian  reyolution  of  1830,  and  soon  became  yeiy  no- 
meroua.    The  Jesuits  who  in  1820  had  been  expelkd 
from  Russia,  came  to  Gallicia,  and  opened  collcg<M  at 
Tarnopol  and  Lembcrg.     Othcis  were  called  to  Hun- 
gary  by  the  archbishop  of  Colocza,  and  father  LaDdei 
madę  his  appearance  in  Yieima.     As  they  secorM  the 
special  patronage  of  the  emperor  and  the  imperial  fam- 
ily,  they  gained  a  great  influence,  and  were,  as  in  all 
other  countries,  regarded  by  the  Liberał  psrty  as  the 
most  dangerous  enemies  of  religious  and  ciyil  libcrtr. 
They  were  therefore  expe]led  by  the  reyolution  of  1^ 
but  retumed  again  when  the  reyolutionary  uwnoent 
was  subdued,  and  reccived  from  the  Austrian  gorem- 
mcnt  in  1857  the  theological  faculty  of  the  Unirerśty 
of  Innsprack.     To  Switzerland  eight  Fathers  of  the 
Faith  were  in  1805  called  from  Romę  by  the  goren- 


jESurrs 


871 


jEsurrs 


nent  of  Yalaisi.  They  soon  broke  ofT  the  oonnection 
with  Baocanari,  and  in  1810  were  incorporated  with  the 
societ7  in  Knwia.  Ailer  the  restoration  of  the  order, 
they  soon  estabUshed  coUeges  in  other  CathoUc  cantons, 
paiticularly  in  Freiborg,  Luoeme,  and  Schwy tz.  When 
the  goyeniment  of  the  canton  of  Lucernę,  on  Oct.  24, 
1844,  resolyed  to  place  the  episcopal  seminaiy  of  the 
city  of  Laceme  onder  the  charge  of  the  Jesuits,  two 
Tolnnteer  ezpeditiona  (Dec  1844,  and  March,  1845) 
were  nndertaken  for  the  purpoee  of  oyerthrowing  the 
gorerment  of  Lucernę,  but  both  were  unsucoesefuL  Aa 
moet  of  the  Protestant  cantons  demanded  the  ezpulsion 
of  the  Jesuits  from  the  whole  of  Switaerland,  thoee  can- 
tons which  either  had  called  Jesuita  to  cantonal  institn- 
tiona  or  which  patronized  them  (namely.  Lucernę,  Uri, 
Schwytz,  Unterwalden,  Zug,  Freiburg,  and  Yalais) 
Btrengthened  a  separate  alliance  (the  **  Sonderbnnd**), 
which  had  already  been  formed  in  1848,  and  appointed 
a  oouncil  of  war  for  the  emergency  of  a  ciTil  conflict. 
In  September,  1847,  the  Federal  Diet  decreed  the  diaso- 
lution  of  the  Sonderbund  and  the  expul8ion  of  the  Jes- 
uits, and  when  the  seven  cantons  refused  submission,  the 
Sonderbund  war  broke  out,  which,  in  November,  1847, 
ended  in  the  defeat  of  the  Sonderbund  ond  the  expul- 
ńon  of  the  Jesuits.  The  reyised  federal  oonstitution 
of  Switzerland  forbida  the  establishment  of  any  Jesuit 
settlement  From  the  German  States,  with  the  excep- 
tion  of  Austria,  the  Jesuita  remained  excluded  until  the 
rerolutionary  morements  of  1848  established  the  prin- 
ciple  of  religious  liberty,  and  gained  for  them  admission 
to  all  the  States,  in  particular  to  Prussia,  where  they  ea- 
tablished  in  rapid  succeasion  houses  in  Munster,  Padei^ 
bom,  Aix-la-ChapeUe,  Cologne,  Bonn,  Coblentz,  Treves, 
•nd  other  cities.  They  gained  a  considerable  influence 
on  the  CathoUc  population  in  particular  by  holding 
nomeroua  misaions  in  all  parts  of  Germany. 

The  membeiBhip  of  the  order,  during  the  period  from 
1841  to  1866,  increased  from  8666  to  8155.  At  the  be- 
ginning  of  1867  the  numerical  strength  of  the  order  was 
aa  foUows : 


AMbUnt'!  DbtrłcL 

ProTlnos. 

M«nbn. 

Pri«U. 

1.  IŁttly 

1,    Komet  ,»r»..rTi t 

48» 
85S 
288 

998 
823 
448 
M8 
186 
608 
8«8 
666 
660 
708 
646 
498 
708 
18 
818 
167 
283 
2(V4 

846 
194 
141 
178 
188 
160 
260 

70 
S60 

96 
284 
806 
816 
871 
144 
183 

10 
161 

n 

80 
76 

{.Germany 

Ł  France. 

Ł  Spaln 

^Naple8(8cattered).. 
3.S!cil7(scattered)... 
4.Turiu(8cattered)... 
6.Venice(8catt6red).. 
1.  Austria 

Ł  Belfflum 

8.Gamcia 

A.  Germany ........  r . 

5.  Holland". 

1.  Champagne. 

2.  Paris:... 

3.  Lyons. 

4.  Toniouse .......... 

1.  Aragon  (scattered). 
%.  Casule  (scattered). 
a.  Mexico  (scattered). 
1.  Bnirlanć 

&Bngland 

2  Ireland 

3.  Maryland 

4.  Missouri 

Total,  21  prorinces,  8331  members  (8563  priests,  2332 
Bcholaatics,  and  2436  brothers). 

VL  The  Labort  o/ the  Order  in  the  Misnonary  Field, 
^From  the  bcginning  of  the  order,  the  extension  of  the 
Church  of  Romę  in  pagan  countries  constituted  one  of 
'  the  chief  aims  of  the  Jesuits,  whose  zeal  in  this  field 
was  aU  the  greater,  as  they  hoped  that  hcre  the  loeses 
inflicted  upon  the  Church  by  Protcstantism  would  be 
morę  than  balanced  by  new  gains.  The  energy  which 
they  have  displayed  as  foreign  missionaries  is  recognised 
on  all  sides;  the  spirit  of  derotion  and  self-sacriiice  of 
many  of  their  members,  which  is  illustrated  by  the 
martyidom  of  about  800  of  the  order,  has  also  met  with 
deserred  recognition  even  among  Protostants.  On  the 
other  band,  within  their  own  Church,  chargcs  were 
bronght  against  Jesuit  roissions,  as  a  rlass,  that  they 
received  candidatea  for  baptism  too  easily,  and  without 
having  suffideut  proofs  of  their  real  oonrersion,  and 


that  they  were  too  accommodatuig  to  pagan  yiews  ana 
customs.  These  chaiges  led  to  long  controyersies  be- 
tween  the  Jesuits  and  other  monastic  orders,  and  to 
seyeral  decisions  of  the  popes  against  them.  In  India, 
the  first  missionary  ground  occupied  by  the  Jesuits, 
Xayier  and  his  oompanions,  Camero  and  Mansilla,  in-  ' 
duced  a  large  number  of  natiyes  to  join  the  Church  of 
Romę.  In  Trayancore  forty  churches  had  to  be  built 
for  the  conyerts,  and  Francis  Xayier  is  reported  to  hayc  ^ 
baptized  10,000  pagans  within  one  month.  As  it  was 
soon  discoyered  that  the  chief  obstacle  to  the  roission 
was  the  rigid  castc  system,  the  Jesuits  conduded  to  let 
some members  of theorder  adopt the  modo  of  lifc  of  tho 
Brahmins,  and  others  that  of  other  castcs.  According- 
ly,  the  Jesuits  Fcmandez,  De  Nobili,  and  others  bcgan 
to  practice  the  painful  penances  of  the  Brahmins,  en- 
deayored  eyen  to  outdo  them  in  the  ligor  of  thcse  pen- 
ances, and  thns,  making  the  people  beUere  that  they 
were  Brahmins,  or  Indiana  of  other  casŁes,  they  madę  in 
some  districts  considerable  ptogress.  The  CathoUc  eon- 
gregations  in  Madura,  Camate,  Mogar,  and  Ceylon  are 
said  to  haye  numbered  a  native  population  of  upwarda 
of  150,000.  Japan  was  also  yisited  by  Francis  Xavier, 
who  arriyed  there  with  two  other  missionaries  in  1549. 
They  gained  the  fayor  of  several  Daimios,  and,  with 
their  efBcient  aid,  madę  considerable  progrcss.  In  1575 
the  number  of  Roman  Catholics  was  estimated  at  40;000 ; 
in  1582  three  Christian  Daimios  sent  ambassadors  to 
pope  Gregory  XIII ;  in  1618  they  had  houses  of  pro- 
fessed  at  Nagasaki,  Miaco,  and  Fakata,  collegcs  at  Na- 
gasaki and  Arima,  and  lesidences  at  Oasaca  and  seyen 
other  plaoes.  During  the  persecution  which  broke  out 
in  the  17th  ccntury  and  extirpated  CJhristianity,  morę 
than  a  hundred  members  of  the  order  perished,  togcther 
with  morę  than  a  million  of  natiye  Christians.  The 
first  Catholic  missionaries  in  China  were  the  Jesuita 
Roger  and  Ricci.  The  latter  and  seyeral  of  his  success- 
ors,  in  particular  father  Adam  Schall,  gained  considera- 
ble influence  upon  the  emperors  by  mcaiis  of  their 
knowledge  of  astronomy  and  Chincse  literaturę,  and  the 
number  of  those  whom  they  admitted  to  the  Church 
was  estimated  as  early  as  1C63  at  800,000.  They  show- 
ed,  howeycr,  so  great  an  accommodation  with  rcgard  to 
the  pagan  customs  that  they  were  denounced  in  Romę 
by  other  missionaries,  and  seyeral  popes,  in  particukr 
Bcnedict  XIV,  oondemned  their  practiccs.  In  Cochin 
China  the  first  Jesuits  arriyed  in  1614,  in  Tunkin  in 
1627.  lu  both  countries  they  succeeded,  in  spite  of 
cruel  persecutions,  in  establishing  a  number  of  congre- 
gations  which  suryiyed  the  downfall  of  the  order.  They 
met  with  an  equal  success  in  the  Fhilippine  Islands,  and 
in  the  Marianas;  but  their  labors  on  the  Caroline  Isl- 
ands were  a  failure.  Their  labora  in  Abyssinia,  Moroo- 
co,  and  other  parts  of  Africa,  likewise,  did  not  produce 
any  lasting  results.  Congo  and  Angola  were  nominally 
conyerted  to  Christianity  by  Jesuit  and  other  missiona- 
ries, but  eyen  Roman  Catholic  writers  must  admit  that 
the  religion  of  the  mass  of  the  population  diflered  but 
little  from  paganism,  into  which  they  easily  relapsed  as 
soon  aa  they  found  themselyes  without  Europcan  mis- 
sionaries. In  1549,  Ignatius  Loyola,  at  the  rcquest  of 
king  Jolm  III  of  Portugal,  sent  Emanuel  de  Nobrega  ' 
and  four  other  Jesuits  to  Brazil,  where  they  gathered 
many  man-eating  Indians  in  ^illages,  and  cirilized  ' 
them.  Among  the  many  Jesuits  who  foUowed  these 
pioneer  missionaries,  Joseph  de  Anchieta  (f  1597)  and 
the  celebrated  pulpit  orator  Anthony  Tieira  (about  the* 
middle  of  the  1 7th  century)  are  the  most  noted.  Among 
the  Jesuits  who  labored  in  the  American  proyinces  of 
Spain  was  Peter  Clayer,  who  is  said  to  haye  baptized 
morę  than  300,000  nogroes,  and  is  called  the  apostle  cf 
the  negroes.  In  1586  they  were  called  by  the  bishop 
of  Tucuman  to  Paragtuiy,  which  soon  became  the  most 
prosperous  of  all  their  missions.  The  Christian  tribes 
were  gathered  by  the  missionaries  into  the  f>o-caI1od 
missions,  and  in  1736  the  tribe  of  the  Guaranis  alone 
numbered  in  thirty-two  towns  from  80.000  to  40^00(1 


JESUTTS 


872 


jEsurrs 


families.  When,  in  1763,  the  Spaniaids  ceded  aeyen 
reductions  to  Portugal,  and  30,000  Indiana  were  ordered 
to  leave  their  Yillages,  an  insurrection  broke  out,  which 
led  to  the  expalsion  of  the  Jesuits  by  the  Spanish  goy- 
ernment.  In  MexiGO  the  Jeauits  joined  in  1572  the 
other  monastic  oiders  in  the  roissiouazy  work.  They 
directcd  their  attention  chiefly  to  the  unsubdaed  tribeś, 
and  in  1680  nambered  500  miBsionaries  in  70  miaeionaiy 
stations.  The  Jesuit  Salyatierra  and  his  oompanion 
Pacolo  in  1697  gained  firm  footing  in  Califomia,  where 
they  gradually  established  8ixtecn  stations.  In  New 
Califomia,  which  was  first  discoyered  by  the  Jesuit 
KUhn,  they  encountered  morę  than  usual  obstades,  but 
gradually  the  number  of  their  stations  rosę  to  fourteen. 
In  Florida  they  met  with  hardly  any  success.  In  New 
France,  where  the  first  Jesuit  missionaiy  appeared  in 
1611,  fathcr  Brebeuf  became  the  first  apostle  of  the  Hu- 
rons.  The  Abenakis  were  fully  Christianized  in  1689; 
subsequently  nearly  the  whole  tribe  of  the  Illuiois,  on 
the  Mississippi,  was  baptized.  In  Eastem  Europę  and 
in  Asia  Minor  the  Jesuits  succeeded  in  inducing  a  num- 
ber of  Greeks  and  Armenians  to  recognise  the  suprem- 
acy  of  the  pope.  Ailer  the  restoration  of  the  order  the 
Jesuits  resumed  their  missionary  labors  yrith  great  zeal. 
VIL  The  Work  ot  //oto*,— While  abroad  the  order 
was  endeayoring  to  extend  the  tenitory  of  the  Church, 
their  task  at  home  was  to  check  the  further  progress  of 
Protestantism,  and  eyery  other  form  of  opposition  to  the 
Church  of  Romę,  and  to  become  within  the  Church  the 
most  powerful  organization.  They  regarded  the  pulpit 
as  one  of  the  best  means  to  establish  an  influence  oyer  the 
mass  of  the  Catholic  people,  and  many  members  gained 
oonfflderable  reputation  as  pulpit  oratora.  Bourdaloue, 
Rayignan,  and  Felix  in  France,  Segneri  in  Italy,  Tolet 
in  Spain,  Yieyra  in  Portugal,  were  regarded  as  among 
the  best  pulpit  orators  in  those  countries;  but,  on  the 
whole,  the  effect  of  their  preaching  was  morę  sensational 
than  lasting.  In  order  to  train  the  youth  in  the  princi- 
pies  of  rigid  ultiamontanism,  the  constitution  of  the  order 
enjoined  upon  the  members  to  cultivate  with  particular 
zeal  catechetica.  A  large  number  of  catechisms  were  ac- 
oordingly  compiled  by  Jesuit  authors,  among  which  those 
of  Candsius  and  cardinal  BelUrmine  gained  the  greatest 
reputation  and  the  widest  circulation.  In  modem  times 
the  gradual  introduction  of  the  catccfaism  of  the  Jesuit 
Deharbe  by  the  ultramontane  bishops  is  bclieyed  to 
haye  been  one  of  the  chief  instmments  in  the  reyiyal 
of  ultramontane  principles  among  the  German  people. 
As  confessors,  the  Jesuits  were  famous  for  their  indul- 
gent  and  lax  conduct  not  only  towards  licentious  princes, 
but  towards  all  who,  in  their  opinion,  might  be  expcct- 
ed  to  benefit  the  order.  In  their  works  on  morał  theol- 
ogy  they  deyeloped  a  comparatirely  new  branch,  cas- 
uistry;  and  many  of  their  writers  deyeloped  on  the 
theory  of  ProbabUism  (q.  y.)  ideas  which  a  large  portion 
of  the  Church  indignantly  repudiated  as  dangerous  iu- 
noyations,  and  which,  in  some  instances,  eyen  the  popes 
deemed  it  neccssary  to  censure.  In  order  to  effect  among 
their  adherents  as  strict  an  organization  as  the  order 
itself  possessed,  so-called  "  congregations"  were  formed 
among  their  students,  and  among  all  classes  of  society, 
who  obeycd  the  directions  of  the  order  as  absolutely  as 
Its  own  members.  Whereyer  there  were  or  are  houses 
of  Jesuits,  there  is  a  Jesuitic  party  among  the  laity 
which  piursucs  the  same  aims  as  the  order.  Thus  the 
Jesuits  haye  become  a  power  whereyer  they  haye  estab- 
lished  themselyes,  while,  on  the  other  hand,  the  fanati- 
dsm  inyariably  connected  with  their  moyements  has 
always  and  naturally  produced  against  them  a  spirit  of 
bittemess  and  hatred  which  has  neyer  manifested  itself 
to  the  same  degree  against  any  other  insŁitution  of  the 
Roman  Catholic  Church.  The  importance  of  schools 
for  guning  an  influence  upon  society  was  appreciated 
by  the  Jesuits  morę  highly  than  had  eyer  before  been 
the  case  in  the  Roman  Catholic  Church.  The  most  fa- 
mous of  thoir  cducational  institutions  was  the  Roman 
College  (jCoUegium  Romanum),    Paul  lY  conferred  upon 


it  in  1556  the  rank  and  priyileges  of  a  uniyerńty ;  Gngh 
ory  XIII,  in  1581,  a  prinoely  dotation.  In  1584  it  num- 
bered  2107  pupila.  Kight  of  its  pu]ńls  (Urbsn  YIII, 
Innocent  X,  Clement  IX,  Clement  X,  Innocent  xn, 
element  XI,  Innocent  XIII,  and  Clement  XII)  ascended 
the  papai  throne ;  seyeral  otbers  ( Aloysius  of  Gonzaga, 
Camillus  of  Lellls,  Leonardo  of  Porto  liaarizio)  wcr 
enroUed  among  the  canonized  saints.  In  1710  the  Jes- 
uits conferred  the  academical  dcgrees  at  24  nmyenitiei 
and  612  coUeges,  and  157  boarding-schools  were  und«r 
their  management  Afler  the  restoration  of  the  onler 
the  Jesuits  displayed  the  same  zeal  in  cstaUiahicg 
schools  and  colleges,  and  haye  reyiyed  their  rcputaticti 
of  strict  disciplinarians,  who  know  how  to  curb  the  im* 
petuosity  and  passions  of  youth ;  but  neither  in  the  iw- 
mer  nor  in  the  present  period  of  their  histoiy  haye  they 
been  able  to  raise  one  of  their  schools  to  that  degree  of 
eminence  which,  as  in  the  case  of  some  of  the  Grensan 
uniyersities,  must  be  admitted  by  friend  and  foe.  Tbe 
number  of  writers  which  the  order  bas  produced  is  im- 
jnense.  As  early  as  1608  Ribadeneyra  published  a  cat- 
alogue  of  the  writers  of  the  order  containing  167  psgcs. 
Alegambe  (1643)  and  Southwell  (1675)  extended  it  into 
a  laige  yolume  in  folia  Morę  recently  the  Belpan 
Jesuits  Augustine  and  Aloys  de  Backer  began  a  bibling- 
raphy  of  the  order,  which,  though  not  yet  oompłeted, 
numbered  in  1870  seyeu  yolumes  (ąuarto).  A  new  edi- 
tion  of  this  work,  to  be  published  in  three  yclumes  (ia 
folio),  is  in  the  course  of  preparation.  The  foUowing 
writers  of  the  order  belong  among  thoee  who  aie  best 
known :  Bellarmine,  Leas,  Molina,  Petayius,  Suarez,  To- 
let, Yaaąuez,  Maldonat,  Salmeron,  Coroelius  k  Lapide, 
Hardouin,  Labbe,  Siimond,  the  Bollcndists,  Maricoa, 
Perrone,  Passaglia,  Gury,  Secchi  (astronomer).  Qm{e 
recently  the  order  has  also  attempted  to  establish  its  ows 
organs  in  the  proyince  of  periodical  literaturę.  FUUiei- 
tions  of  this  kind  are  the  semi-monthly  Cirilta  Cattołita 
of  Romę,  which  is  generally  regarded  as  the  most  daiing 
expoundcr  of  the  principles  of  the  most  adyanoed  ultra- 
montane school ;  Etudes  kUtoricueg  of  France,  The  MonOk 
in  England,  and  the  Stimmen  ron  Maria  Laack  (a  montb- 
ly  published  by  the  Jesuits  of  Maria  Laach  sińce  August, 
1871)  in  Germany. 

YIII.  Some  Krrort  conceming  the  Jesuits^— As  the 
Jesuits,  by  their  systematic  fanaticism,  proyoked  a  rio- 
lent  opposition  on  the  part  of  all  opponents  of  ultra- 
montane Catholidsm,  it  is  not  to  be  wondcred  at  thtt 
occasionally  groundless  charges  were  brought  againic 
them,  and  that  some  of  these  were  readily  bcBered. 
Among  the  erroneous  charges  which  at  one  time  hare 
had  a  wide  circulation,  but  from  which  the  best  histo- 
rians  now  acquit  them,  are  the  foUowing:  1.  That  thfjr 
are  responsible  for  the  sentimcnts  contained  in  the  fa- 
mous yolume  MonUa  Secreta  (ql  v.).  This  woik  was 
not  written  by  a  Jesuit,  but  is  a  satire,  the  authar  of 
which  was,  howeyer,  as  familiar  with  the  moyemeots 
of  the  Jesuits  as  with  their  histoiy  (see  Gieseler,  KirTk" 
engesch,  iii,  2,  656  sq.).  2.  That  the  superior  of  the  or- 
der has  the  power  to  order  a  member  to  commit  a  an. 
It  is  now  generally  admitted  that  the  paasage  of  the 
constitution  on  which  the  chaige  is  based  (risirm  nt  imk 
5u  tmlias  constitutumet  declaraiiimet  rei  ordnem  uSim 
rwendi  posae  obligationem  ad  peocatum  induoere,  ud 
Superior  eujuheret)  has  been  misunderstood.  8.  That 
the  order  holds  to  the  maxim  that "  the  end  justifiesthe 
means."  Although  many  works  of  Jesuits  (in  particu- 
lar those  on  tyrannicide)  were  well  calculated  to  instfl 
such  an  opinion  into  the  minds  of  the  reader,  the  order 
has  neyer  expre88ly  taught  it 

IX.  Litera/urp.— The  number  of  works  on  the  Jesuits 
is  legion.  The  titles  of  most  ma^'  be  found  in  Carayon, 
BibUographie  hisf,  de  la  Comp,  de  Jestu  (Paris,  1864> 
The  most  important  work  in  fayor  of  the  Jesuits  is  O^ 
tincau-Joly,  iliat.  de  la  Comp*  de  Jesus  (3d  cd.  Par.  1859, 
6  yols.).  The  best  that  has  been  written  on  the  rabject 
are  the  chapten  conceming  the  Jesuits  in  Ranke'8  ińofc 
on  the  Roman  popes.    (A.  J.  SJ) 


JESURUN 

Jeo^tmm  (laa.  xliv,  2).    See  Jesrusuk. 


873 


JESUS  CHRIST 


Je'8tlB  (ItfooiJCt  Greń.,  Dat,  andYoc.  -out  Acc  'Ovv; 
bata  the  Heb.  CSIC^  Yethu'ay  «  Jeahua"  or  "  Joahua;" 
Syr.  Ye*hu)f  the  name  of  seyeral  penons  (beaides  our 
SaYiour)  in  the  New  Testament,  the  Apocrypha,  and  Jo- 
aephus.  For  a  ducuasion  of  the  ftill  import  and  applica- 
tkm  of  the  name,  see  Jesus  Christ. 

1.  JosHUA  (q.  V.)  the  son  of  Nun  (2  Esdr.  vii,  87 ; 
Eodus.  xlvi,  1 ;  1  Maoc.  ii, 55;  Acts  vii, 45;  Ueb. iv, 8; 
80  alao  JosephuB,  passim). 

2.  JosHUA,  or  Jeshua  (q.  v.)  the  priest,  the  son  of 
Jehozadak(l£8dr.v,5,8,24,48,56,68,70;  vi,2;  ix,  19; 
Eodus.  xlix,  12 ;  so  also  Josephus,  Ani,  xi, 8, 10  sq.). 

3.  Jbshua  (q.  V.)  the  Levite  (1  Esdr.  v,  58;  ix,  48). 

4.  JESUS,  THE  SON  OF  SIRACH  ('Iiycroiżc  vl6c 
£Eipax;  Yulgate  JenuJUiut  Strach),  is  described  in  the 
text  of  Ecclesiastiens  (},  27)  as  the  author  of  that  book, 
which  in  the  Sept.,  and  generally  in  the  Eastem  Church, 
is  called  by  his  name— the  Wiadom  o/JenUj  the  Son  of 
Strach,  or  simply  the  Wisdom  of  Strach,  but  in  tlje 
Western  churches,  after  the  Yulgate,  the  Book  ofEcde^ 
siasHcus,  The  same  passage  speaks  of  him  as  a  native 
of  Jerusalem,  and  the  internal  character  of  the  book  eon- 
firma  its  Palestinian  origin.  The  name  Jbsus  was  of 
fireąnent  occurrence  (sec  above),  and  was  often  repre- 
aented  by  the  Greek  Jaaon  (see  Josephos,  Ant.  xii,  5, 1). 
In  the  apoayphal  list  of  the  seventy«two  commissioners 
sent  by  Eleazar  to  Ptolemy  it  occurs  twice  (Aristophanes, 
ffitL  ap.  Hody,  De  Text,  p.  vii),  but  there  is  not  the  slight- 
€st  ground  for  connecting  the  author  of  Eccleaiasticus 
with  either  of  the  penons  there  mentioned.  The  vari- 
ons  conjectures  which  have  been  madę  as  to  the  posi- 
tion  of  the  son  of  Sinch  from  the  contents  of  his  book— 
as,  for  instance,  that  he  was  a  priest  (from  vii,  29  są. ; 
xlv;  xlix,l),  or  a  phyńcian  (from  xxxviii,  1  są.)— are 
equally  unfounded.  The  evidences  of  a  datę  B.C  dr. 
810-270,  are  as  foUows :  1.  In  eh.  xliv,  1-1, 21,  the  praises 
of  the  andent  worthies  are  extolled  down  to  the  lime 
of  Simon,  who  is  doubtless  Simon  I,  or  **  the  Just**  (B.C. 
870-^00).  2.  The  Tahnud  moet  distinctly  describes  the 
wotk  of  Ben-Sira  aa  the  oldest  of  the  apocrj^phal  books 
(oomp.  Totrfoth  Idaim,  eh.  ii).  8.  It  had  a  generał  cur- 
rency,  and  was  ąnoted  at  least  as  early  as  the  2d  centu- 
ry  &C.  (comp.  A  bothy  i,  5 ;  Jenualem  Nazier,  v,  8),  wh  ich 
ahows  that  it  mnst  have  exi8ted  a  conńderable  period  to 
liave  obtained  such  drcnlation  and  respect;  and,  4.  In  the 
deacription  of  these  great  men,  and  throughout  the  whole 
of  the  book,  there  is  not  the  śUghtest  tracę  of  those  Ha- 
gadic  legenda  about  the  national  worthies  which  were 
80  rife  and  nnmerous  in  the  second  centuiy  before  Christ. 
On  the  other  hand,  the  mention  of  the  **dSth.  year  of 
king  Eneigetes"  (tranalator's  prologue)  arguea  a  later 
datę.    See  Ecclesiacticus. 

Amoog  the  later  Jews  the  ^  Son  of  Sirach**  was  cele- 
brated  under  the  name  of  Ben-Sira  as  a  writer  of  prov- 
erba,  and  some  of  those  which  have  been  preserved  offer 
a  doee  resemblanoe  to  passages  in  Ecdesiasticus;  but 
in  the  courae  of  time  a  later  compilation  was  substituted 
lor  the  original  work  of  Ben-Sira  (Zunz). 

Acoording  to  the  first  prologue  to  the  book  of  Eccle- 
aiaaticus,  taken  ftom  the  Synopsis  of  the  Fteudo-Atha- 
naaiua  (iv,  877,  ed.  Mignę),  the  translator  of  the  book 
borę  the  same  name  as  the  author  of  it  If  this  conjec- 
tnre  were  tnie,  a  genealogy  of  the  following  fonn  would 
lesult :  1.  Sirach.  2.  Jesus,  son  (father)  of  Sirach  {au- 
thor of  the  book).  8.  Sirach.  4.  Jesus,  son  of  Sirach 
(łrantkUor  of  the  book).  It  is,  ho¥rever,  moet  likdy 
that  the  last  chapter, ''  The  prayer  of  Jesus,  the  Son  of 
Strachy"  gave  occasion  to  this  conjecture.  The  prayer 
was  attribttted  to  the  translator,  and  then  the  table  of 
•ncoesaion  followed  necessarily  from  the  tiUe  attached 
toit. 

As  to  the  hiatory  and  personal  character  of  Ben-Sin, 
ihifl  must  be  gathered  fiom  his  book,  as  it  is  the  only 
souroe  of  information  which  we  posscas  upon  the  sub- 
ject    like  all  his  co-religionists,  he  was  trained  from 


his  early  life  to  fear  and  love  the  God  of  his  fathers; 
He  travell6d  much  both  by  land  and  sea  when  he  grew 
up,  and  was  in  frequent  perils  (Ecclus.  xxxiv,  11, 12). 
Beiiig  a  diligent  student,  and  having  acqnired  much 
practical  knowledge  from  his  extenBive  tr4vels,  he  was 
intrusted  with  some  office  at  court,  and  his  cnemies*  who 
were  jealous  of  him,  maligned  him  before  the  king, 
which  nearly  cost  him  his  life  (li,  6, 7).  To  us,  hbwev- 
er,  his  religious  life  and  sentiments  are  of  the  utmost  im- 
portance,  inasmuch  as  they  descńbe  the  opinions  of  the 
Jews  during  the  period  ela{)sing  between  the  O.  and  N. 
Test,  Though  deeply  penetrated  with  the  fear  of  God, 
which  he  decUred  was  the  only  glorj-  of  man,  rich,  no- 
ble, or  poor  (x,  22-24),  still  the  whole  of  Ben-Sira*8  te- 
nets  may  be  described  as  limiŁe<l,  and  are  as  fullows : 
Redgnation  to  the  dealings  of  Proridcnce  (xi,  21-25) ; 
to  seek  truth  at  the  cost  of  life  (iv,  28) ;  not  to  usc  much 
babbling  in  prayer  (vii,  14) ;  absolute  obedience  to  par- 
ents,  which  in  the  dght  of  God  atones  for  sins  (iii,  1-16 ; 
vu,27,28);  humUity  (iii,  17-19 ;  x,  7-18, 28);  kindness 
to  domestics  (iv,  80;  vii,  20, 21 ;  xxxiii,  80, 81) ;  to  re- 
lieve  the  poor  (iv,  1-9) ;  to  act  as  a  father  to  the  father- 
less,  and  a  husband  to  the  widów  (iv,  10);  to  vi8it  the 
dek  (vii,  86) ;  to  weep  with  them  that  weep  (vii,  84) ; 
not  to  rejoioe  over  the  death  of  even  the  greatest  ene- 
my (\*ii,  7),  and  to  forgive  sins  as  we  would  be  forgiven 
(xxviii,  2, 3).  He  has  nothing  in  the  whole  of  his  book 
about  the  immortality  of  the  soul,  a  futurę  judgraent, 
the  existenoe  of  spirits,  or  the  expectation  of  a  Messiah. 
— Smith ;  Kitto.    See  Sikach. 

5.  See  Barabbas. 

6.  (CoL  iv,  11).    See  Justus. 

JESUS  is  also  the  name  of  8everal  persons  mention- 
ed by  Josephus,  especially  in  the  pontilical  ronks.    See 

HlOH-PRlKST. 

1.  A  high-priest  displaced  by  Antiochus  Epiphanes 
to  make  room  for  Onias  (Ant,  xii,  5, 1 ;  xv,  8, 1). 

2.  The  son  of  Phabct,  deprived  by  Herod  of  the  high- 
priesthood  in  order  to  make  way  for  his  own  father-in- 
law  Simon  (Ant,  xv,  9, 4). 

8.  Son  of  Sie,  snocessor  of  Eleazar  (Ant.  xvii,  13, 1). 

4.  The  son  of  Damnsnia,  madę  high-priest  by  Agrip- 
pa  in  place  of  Ananus  (Ant.  xx,  9, 1). 

5.  The  son  of  Gamaliel,  and  successor  of  the  preceding 
in  the  high-priesthood  (Ant.  xx,  9, 4;  compare  War,  iv, 
4,8). 

6.  Son  of  Ananus,  a  plebeian,  and  the  utterer  of  the 
remaikable  doom  against  Jerusalem,  which  was  fulfilled 
during  the  last  dege  simultaneoudy  with  his  own  death 
(H^ar,vi,5,8). 

7.  A  priest,  son  of  Thebuthus,  who  surrendered  to  Ti- 
tus  the  sacred  ntensUs  of  the  Tempie  (  War,  vi,  8, 8). 

8.  Son  of  Sepphias,  one  of  the  chief  priests  and  gov- 
emor  of  Tiberias  ( War,  ii,  20, 4). 

9.  Son  of  Saphat,  a  ringleader  of  the  Sicarii  during 
the  last  war  with  the  Romans  ( War,  iii,  9, 7). 

Jeans  Chriat  (Ifitroyc  Xpurróc,  'Itfoouc  6  Xpte' 
TÓc ;  sometimes  by  Paul  in  the  reverse  order  "  Christ 
Jesus'*),  the  ordinaiy  dedgnation  of  the  incamate  Son 
of  God  and  Saviour  of  mankind.  This  double  designa- 
tion  is  not,  like  Simon  Peter,  John  Mark,  Joses  Barna- 
bas,  oompoeed  of  a  name  and  a  sumame,  but,  like  John 
the  Bapttst,  Simon  Magus,  Bar-Jesus  Elymas,  of  a  prop- 
er  name  and  an  official  title.  Jksus  was  our  Lord*8 
proper  name,  j  ust  as  Peter,  James,  and  John  were  the 
proper  names  of  three  of  his  disdples.  To  distinguish 
our  Lord  iirom  others  bearing  the  name,  he  was  termed 
Jesus  of  Nazareth  (John  xviii,  7,  etc,  strictiy  J^sus  the 
Nazarene,  *liioovc  6  'Salupaioc),  and  Jesus  the  son  of 
Joseph  (John  vi,  42,  etc.). 

I.  Import  ofthe  name^— There  can  be  no  doubt  that 
Jesus  is  the  Greek  form  of  a  Hcbrew  name,  which  had 
been  borne  by  two  illustrious  indiyiduals  in  former  pe- 
riods  of  the  Jewish  histoiy — the  successor  of  Moses  and 
introduccr  of  Israel  into  the  promised  land  (Exod.  xxiv, 
18),  and  the  high-priest  who,  olong  with  Zerubbabd 
(Zech.  iii,  1),  took  so  active  a  part  in  the  re-establish* 


JESUS  CHRIST 


874 


JESUS  CHRIST 


ment  of  the  ciril  and  religioos  poUty  of  Łhe  Jews  on 
their  letom  from  the  Babyloniah  captirity.  Its  orig- 
inal  and  fuU  form  is  Jehoahua  (Numb.  xiii,  16).  By 
contraction  it  became  JoahuOf  or  Jeshua;  and  when 
transferred  into  Greek,  by  Uking  the  termination  char- 
acteristic  of  that  language,  it  anumed  the  fonn  Jemu. 
It  is  thus  that  the  names  of  the  illostńous  indi^idaals 
referred  to  are  uniformly  written  in  the  Sept.,  and  the 
fint  of  them  ib  twice  mentioned  in  the  New  Testament 
by  this  iiame  (Acta  vii,  45 ;  Heb.  iv,  8). 

The  original  name  of  Joehua  was  Hothea  (ClCin, 
$avinff)t  as  appears  m  Namb.  xiii,  8,  16,  which  was 
changed  by  Moses  into  Jehoahua  (ClZJIn^  JieAoraA  is  his 
salvaHoń)f  as  appears  in  Numb.  xiiL,  16 ;  1  Chroń,  vii,  27, 
being  elsewhere  Anglicized  **  Joshua."  After  the  exile 
he  is  called  by  the  abridged  form  of  this  name,  Jeshua 
(T^'Ć'^j  uŁ),  whence  Łhe  Greek  name  'lriaovc,  by  which 
this  is  always  represented  in  the  Sept  This  last  Heb. 
form  differs  little  from  the  abstract  noun  from  the  same 
root,  n9^d%  yeshuah',  delwerancef  and  seems  to  have 
been  understood  as  cqaivalent  in  import  (see  Matt  i,  22 ; 
oomp.  Ecclus.  xlvi,  1). 

The  "  name  of  Jesus"  (PhiL  ii,  10)  is  not  the  name  Je- 
sus, but  **  the  name  above  every  name"  (ver.  9) ;  L  e.  the 
supremę  dignity  and  authority  witb  which  the  Father 
has  invested  Jesus  Christ  as  the  reward  of  his  diainter- 
ested  exertions  in  the  cause  of  the  divine  glory  and  hu- 
man  happiness;  and  the  bowing  iv  rtf  ópófiart  'lri<rov 
is  obviously  not  an  extemal  mark  of  homage  when  the 
name  Jesus  is  pronounced,  but  Lhe  inward  sense  of  awe 
and  submission  to  him  who  is  raised  to  a  station  so  ex- 
altc(i. 

The  ^onferring  of  this  name  on  our  Lord  was  not  the 
result  of  accident,  er  of  the  ordinary  course  of  things, 
but  was  the  effect  of  a  direct  divine  order  (Lukę  i,  31 ; 
ii,  21),  as  indicative  of  his  saving  function  (Matt,  i,  21). 
Like  the  other  name  Tmmanuel  (q.  v.),  it  does  not  neces- 
sarily  import  the  divinc  character  of  the  wearer.  This, 
howevcr,  clearly  results  from  the  attributes  given  in  the 
same  connection,  and  is  plainly  taught  in  numerous  pas- 
sages  (see  especially  Kom.  i,  8, 4;  ix,  5). 

For  the  import  and  application  of  the  name  Christ, 
aee  Messiah. 

For  a  fuli  discussion  of  the  name  Jesns,  induding 
many  fanciful  etymologies  and  explanations,  with  their 
refutation,  see  Gresenius,  The»,  //«6.  ii,  &82 ;  Simon.  Ononu 
V,  T.  p.  519  sq. ;  Fritzsche,  De  nonune  Jesu  (Freiburg, 
1705) ;  Clodius,  De  ftom.  Chr,  ei  Marim  A  rabicu  (Lips. 
1724) ;  Hottinger,  HisL  Orient,  p.  153, 157 ;  Seelen,  Med- 
itaU  exeg,  ii,  413 ;  Thiess,  KriL  Commenł,  ii,  395 ;  A.  Pfeif- 
fer, De  nomine  Jesu,  in  his  treatise  De  Tałmude  JudcBO- 
rum,  p.  177  są. ;  Baumgarten,  Betrachł.  d.  Kamena  Jesu 
(Halle,  1736) ;  Chrysander,  De  rera  forma  atgne  «f»- 
phasi  nominis  Jesu  (KinteL  1751) ;  Osiander,  Harmonia 
£oangelica  (Basil.  1561),lib.  i,  c.  6 ;  Chemnitius,  De  nom" 
ine  Jesu,  in  the  Thes.  TheoL  PhUol  (Amst  1702),  voL  ii, 
p.  62 ;  Canini,  Disąuis.  in  loc  aUg.  N,  7*.,  in  the  Crit.  Sac 
ix;  Gaas,  De  utroque  J,  C,  nomine,  DetJUH  et  nomims 
(YratistL  1840) ;  and  other  monographs  dted  in  Yolbe- 
ding*s  Index,  p.  6, 7 ;  and  in  Hase's  Leiben  Jesu,  p.  51. 

II.  Personal  Circumstances  of  our  LonL — (In  this 
branch  of  our  subject  we  largely  translate  from  Winer, 
i,  556  sq.)— 1.  General  Ktcto.— The  foUowing  is  a  naked 
etatemcnt  of  the  facts  of  his  career  as  they  may  be  gath- 
ered  from  the  evangelical  narratives,  suppoaing  them  to 
be  entitled  simply  to  the  credit  due  to  profane  history. 
(For  literaturę,  see  Yolbeding,  p.  56 ;  Hase,  p.  8.)  The 
foimder  of  the  Christian  religion  was  bom  (B.C.  6)  at 
Bethlehem,  near  Jerusalem,  under  the  reign  of  the  em- 
peror  Augustus,  of  Mary,  at  the  time  betrothed  to  the 
caipenter  {riicTwy)  Joseph,  and  descended  from  the 
royal  house  of  David  (Matt.  i,  1  sq. ;  Lufce  iii,  28  sq. ; 
comp.  John  vii,  42).  Soon  after  his  birth  he  was  com- 
pelled  to  cscape  from  the  murderous  designs  of  Herod 
the  Great  by  a  hasty  ilight  into  the  adjacent  parts  of 
^yv^  (llatt  ii,  13  sq.  i  according  to  the  tradition  at 


Matarea,  see  EtangeL  infant.  Arab.  c.  S4;  appaieoaya 
place  near  old  Heliopolui,  wheie  is  still  shown  a  roy 
old  mulbeny-tree  under  which  Mary  is  said  to  harc 
rested  with  the  babę,  see  Prosp.  Alpin,  Rer.  jEg,  i,  5,  pk 
24;  Paulus,  Sammi.  iii,  256  sq.;  Tischendorf,  Reiteń,  i, 
141  sq. ;  comp.  generally  Hartmann,  JCrdhesekr.  r.  Afri- 
fXŁ,  i,  878  sq.).    See  Egypt  ;  Hkhod.    But  immediate- 
ly  after  the  death  of  this  king  his  parentB  retomed  to 
their  own  country,  and  settled  again  (Lukę  i,  26)  in 
Nazareth  (q.  v.),  in  Lower  Galilee  (Matt.  ii,  28;  coaipk 
Lukę  iv,  16;  John  i,  46,  etc.),  where  the  youthful  Jesus 
so  rapidly  matured  (Lukę  ii,  40, 52),  that  in  his  twelfUi 
year  the  boy  evinced  at  the  metropolia  traita  of  an  im- 
common  religious  intelligenoe,  which  excited  astoiiiflb> 
ment  in  all  the  apectatois  (Lukę  ii,  41  są.).     With  this 
event  the  history  of  his  youth  condudes  in  the  canon- 
ical  goepels,  and  we  next  find  him,  about  the  thiitieth 
year  of  his  age  (A.D.  25),  in  the  neighborhood  of  the 
Dead  Sea,  at  the  Jordan,  where  he  suffered  bimself  to 
be  oonsecrated  for  the  iutroductijn  of  the  new  divioe 
diapensation  (fiaaiktia  rov  6fov)  by  the  symbol  of  «»- 
ter  baptism  at  the  hands  of  John  the  Baptist  (Matt  iii, 
13  8q. ;  Mark  i,  9  sq. ;  Lukę  iii,  21  sq.;  John  i,  82  tą). 
He  now  began,  after  a  forty-days*  fast  (comp.  1  Kingt 
xix,  8)  spent  in  the  wildemess  of  Judssa  (Matt.  iv,  1-11; 
Maik  i,  12  8q. ;  Lukę  iv,  1-18)  in  qtuet  meditation  opoo 
his  miasion,  to  publish  openly  in  penon  this  "kingdom 
of  God,"  by  eamestly  aommoning  his  countrymen  to  ie> 
pentanoe,  L  e.  a  fundamental  reformation  of  thdr  send- 
ments  and  oniduct,  throngh  a  new  biith  from  the  Holy 
Spirit  (John  iii,  8  Bq.).     He  repeatedly  annoonoed  hin»- 
self  as  the  mediator  of  this  diapensation,  and  in  panu- 
auce  of  this  character,  in  correction  of  the  sensoal  ex- 
pectations  of  the  people  with  reference  to  the  long- 
hoped-for  Redeemer  (comp.  Lukę  iv,  21),  he  cbose  from 
among  his  eaily  associates  and  Galilasan  countrymen  a 
smali  number  of  fiuthful  disdples  (MatL  x),  aiil  with 
them  travelled,  especially  at  the  time  of  the  Piaschal 
feHtival  and  during  the  auminer  months,  in  Tańoos  di- 
rections  through  Palestine,  seizing  every  opportonity 
to  impress  pure  and  fniitful  religious  sentimente  upoo 
the  populace  or  bis  immediate  diariples,  and  to  eniigbt- 
en  them  conoeming  his  oivin  dignity  as  God^s  Ifg^ 
(vibc  Tov  0eov),  who  should  abolish  the  sacrifidal  sep- 
vice,  and  teach  a  worship  of  God,  as  the  oommon  Father 
of  mankind,  in  spirit  and  in  truth  (John  iv,  24).    With 
these  expoeitions  of  doctrine,  which  all  fareathe  the  no- 
hlest  practical  spirit,  and  were  so  carefully  adapted  to 
the  capadty  and  apprehension  of  the  bearers  that  in 
reepect  to  deamess,  simplidty,  and  dignificd  foice  they 
are  still  a  paltem  of  tme  instmction,  he  coupled,  in  tbś 
spirit  of  the  Oki-Testament  prophets,  and  as  his  sfse 
expected  fiom  the  Meanah,  wonderfnl  deeds,  especially 
charitable  cures  of  certain  diaeascs  at  that  time  Tcrf 
prevalent  and  regarded  aa  incoiable,  but  to  these  he 
bimself  appears  to  have  attributed  a  subordinate  vahie^ 
By  this  means  he  gathered  about  him  a  canstdeiafale 
company  of  true  adherenta  and  thankful  disdpłtay  chief* 
ly  from  the  middle  daas  of  the  people  (John  vii,  49; 
and  even  from  the  despicaUe  poblicans,  MatL  ix,  9  si).; 
Lukę  V,  27  są.) ;  for  the  eminent  and  leamed  were  re- 
pelled  by  the  serere  reproofe  which  he  uttered  agaiait 
thdr  coirupt  maxims  (Mark  xii,  88  sq.),  thdr  sanctiaift* 
nious  (Lukę  xii,  1 ;  xviii,  9  aq.)  and  hypocritical  pandil- 
iousness  (Lukę  xi,  89  sq.;  xviii,  9  aq.),  and  agaiost  their 
prejudices,  as  being  subversiTe  of  all  tiue  rdigion  (Jofaa 
viii,  83 ;  ix,  16),  as  wdl  as  by  the  slight  regaid  whk^ 
(in  eomparison  with  their  statutea)  he  paid  to  the  Sal^ 
bath  (John  v,  16) ;  and  aa  he  in  no  respert  cornspond- 
ed  to  their  expectationa  of  the  Messiah,  fnll  of  ammoś- 
ty,  they  madę  lepeated  attempta  to  aeize  his  penoa 
(Mark  xi,  18 ;  John  vii,  80, 44).     At  last  they  sooeeed- 
ed,  by  the  assistanoe  of  the  tndtor  Judas,  in  takiog-  hiffl 
prisoner  in  the  very  capital,  where  he  had  jost  partri^en 
of  a  parting  meal  in  the  familiar  cirde  of  his  fnends 
(the  Passover),  upon  which  he  engrafted  the  imiiatoiy 
ńte  of  a  new  covenant;  and  thoa,  without  exdtiDg  anj 


JESUS  CHRIST 


875 


JESUS  CHRIST 


parpnBe  on  hia  part,  in  sunendeiing  bim  into  the  handa 
of  the  Roman  authorilks  aa  ł  popular  iiisuirecŁionist. 
He  was  sentenced  to  death  by  cniciflxioD,  aa  be  had 
often  dedared  to  bis  diaciples  would  be  bis  fate,  and  suf- 
fered  blmself,  witb  cabn  resignation,  to  be  led  to  the 
place  of  execution  between  two  malefactors  (on  their 
tzaditional  names,  see  Tbilo,  Apoayph,  i,  580  8q. ;  oomp. 
Evang,  infant,  A  rab.  c  28) ;  but  be  arose  alive  on  the 
tbird  day  from  the  graTe  wbich  a  grateful  diaciple  had 
prepared  for  bim,  and  after  tarryuig  forty  days  in  the 
midst  of  his  disdples,  during  whicb  be  coniidently  in- 
trusted  the  prosecution  of  the  great  work  into  their 
hands,  and  promised  them  the  dirine  help  of  a  Paraclete 
(irap(icXi}roc)>  be  finally,  acooiduig  to  one  of  the  narra- 
tora, soared  away  yisibly  into  the  sky  (A.D.  29).  (See 
Yolbeding,  p.  6.) 

2.  Sourcea  of  Information. — The  only  trostworthy 
aoooonts  respecting  Jesas  are  to  be  derived  from  the 
erangelistii.  (See  Yolbeding,  p.  5.)  See  Gospels,  Spu- 
Bioua.  Tbey  exbibit,  it  is  true,  many  chasms  (Cansse, 
De  ratumibuM  ob  gugs  nonplura  guam  gua  eaełetrU  ad  J. 
C.  ritum  ptrtinentia  ab  Evang.  iiteri$  ńnt  contigtiataj 
Fnuickf.  1766),  but  tbey  wear  the  aspect  of  a  true,  plain, 
liyely  narratiye.  Only  two  of  these  deiive  their  mate- 
rials  from  older  traditions,  doubtless  from  the  apostles 
and  companions  of  Jesus ;  but  tbey  were  all  first  written 
down  ft  long  time  after  the  occuirences:  bence  it  bas 
oflen  been  aaserted  that  the  bistorical  matter  was  eyen 
ftt  that  time  no  longer  extant  in  an  entirely  pure  state 
(oinoe  the  objeGtive  and  the  subjectiye,  botb  in  views 
and  opinions,  are  readily  interchanged  in  an  unscien- 
tiiically  formed  style);  but  that  after  Jesus  had  been  so 
;^loriously  proved  to  be  the  Messias,  the  incidents  were 
improred  into  prodigies,  especially  through  a  considera- 
tion  of  the  Old-Testament  prophecies  (Kaiser,  £ibL 
Tbeol.  i,  199  8q.).  Yet  in  the  synoptical  gospels  this 
could  only  be  shown  in  the  compońtion  and  <onnection 
of  single  transactions ;  the  facts  tbemselyes  in  the  re- 
spectiye  accounts  agree  too  well  in  time  and  drcum- 
stanoes,  and  the  narratora  confine  themseh'es  too  eyi- 
dently  to  the  position  of  writers  of  nirmoirB^  to  allow  the 
Sttj^KiMtion  of  a  (conscious)  transforraation  of  the  eyents 
or  any  soch  deyelopments  from  Old-Testament  prophe- 
cy:  moreoyer,  if  tmth  and  pious  poetry  had  already 
become  mingled  in  the  yeibal  tradiiionary  reports,  the 
eye->witneases  Mattbew  and  John  would  haye  known 
well,  in  a  fresh  nairation,  bow  to  distinguisb  between 
each  of  these  elements  witb  regard  to  scenes  wbich  tbey 
had  themselyes  passed  through  (for  memory  and  imag- 
ination  were  generally  morę  liydy  and  rigorous  among 
the  ancients  than  witb  us)  (Br.  itb.  RoHonaUsmut,  p.  248 
8q. ;  compare  Ileydenreich,  Ueb.  Umtddstiffheit  d.  fnyłh. 
AuffoBSung  dea  Histor.  im  N.  T.  umi  im  Ckrittenth,  Her- 
bom, 1831-5 ;  see  Uase,  p.  9).  Sooner  would  we  sup- 
poee  that  the  fertile-minded  John,  wbo  wrote  latest,  bas 
aei  beibre  us,  not  the  pure  bistorical  Christ,  but  one 
apprebended  by  faith  and  confonnded  witb  his  own 
apiritual  oonceptions  {Br.  Ober  BationaL  p.  852).  But 
while  it  is  altogetber  probable  that  eyen  be,  by  reason 
of  his  indiyiduality  and  spiritual  sympathy  vdth  Jesus, 
appiehended  and  leHected  the  depth  and  spiritnality  of 
his  Master  morę  truły  than  the  B3moptical  eyangeUsts, 
I  wbo  depict  rather  the  exterior  phenomena  of  his  char- 
acter,  at  the  same  time  there  is  actually  notbing  con- 
tained  in  the  doctrinal  discourses  of  Jesus  in  John,  either 
in  substance  or  form,  that  is  incompatible  with  the 
Christ  of  the  iirst  three  eyangelists  (see  Heydenreich,  in 
hia  Zdtackr.fur  Prediffermiss.  i,  pt.  1  and  2) ;  yet  these 
lauer  represent  Jesus  as  speakiug  oomparatiyely  seldom, 
and  that  in  morę  generał  terms,  of  his  cxaltation,  dig- 
nity,  and  relation  with  the  Father,  whereas  that  Christ 
would  haye  exp]ained  himself  much  morę  definitely 
and  fully  upon  a  point  that  could  not  haye  remained 
iindiscusaed,is  ofitself  probable  (see  Hase,  p.  10).  Henoe 
alao^  altbougb  we  cannot  belieye  that  in  such  represen- 
tations  we  are  to  understand  the  identical  words  of 
Christ  to  be  giyen  (for  while  the  retention  of  all  these 


extended  disoomses  in  the  memory  is  improbabley  od 
the  other  band  a  writing  of  them  down  is  repugnant  to 
the  Jewish  custom),  yet  the  actual  sentiments  of  Jesus 
are  certainly  tbus  reported.  (See  furtber,  Bauer,  BibL 
TkeoL  K  T.  ii,  278  są.;  K  Crusius,  BibL  Tkeol.  p.  81 ; 
Fleck,  Oiittm.  theolog.  Lips.  1831 ;  and  generally  Krum- 
macher,  Ueber  den  Gtui  und  die  Form  der  etang.  Gesch. 
Lpz.1805;  Eichbom,  JttnZor.  i,  689  8q.;  on  the  mythi- 
cism  of  the  eyangelists,  see  Gabler,  Neuett.  ifuoL  Joum, 
yii,  896;  Bertholdt,  Theol.  Joum,  y,  285  sq.) 

In  the  Church  fathers,  we  find  yery  little  that  appears 
to  haye  been  deriyed  from  dearly  historical  tradition, 
but  the  apocryphal  gospels  breatlie  a  spirit  entirely  for- 
eign  to  bistorical  truth,  and  are  filled  with  accounts  of 
petty  miracles  (Tboluck,  Glaubwiirdiffkeit,  p.  406  8q. ; 
Ammon,  Jjeb.  Jesu,  i,  90  sq. ;  compare  Schmidt,  Eitd.  int 
iv:  r.  ii,  234  sq.,  and  Bibiioth.f.  Krił.  u.  Exege»ey  ii,  481 
8q.).  The  pasaage  of  Josephus  (Ant,  xyiii,  8,  8;  see 
Gieseler,  Ecdes.  łiitt.  §  24),  wbich  Eusebius  (I/isł.  £ccL 
i,  11 ;  Denwnttr.  Ev.  iii,  7)  was  the  fint  among  Christian 
writen  to  make  use  of,  bas  been  shown  (see  Uase,  p.  12), 
altbougb  some  haye  ingeniously  striyen  to  dcfeiid  it 
(see,  among  the  latest,  Bretschneider,  in  his  Disg.  capiła 
theoloff.  Jud,  dogmat,  e  Joiepho  coUect.  lips.  1812 ;  Bob- 
mert,  Uebtr  det  Joa.  Zeugnisa  von  Chriaio,  Leipz.  1828 ; 
Scbodel,  FL  Joaeph.  de  J.  Chr.  teatatua,  lips.  1840),  to  be 
partly,  but  not  entirely  spurious  (see  Eichstildt,  Fiaviani^ 
de  Jeau  Chriato  teatimonii  ai^iwia  quo  jurę  nuper  rurtua' 
drfenaa  aił,  Jena,  1818 ;  also  bis  6  Progr.  m.  einem  audar. 
1841 ;  Paulus,  in  the  Heidelberg  Jakrb.  1818,  i,  269  8q. ; 
Tbeile,  in  the  N.  kritiach.  Joum.  d,  theolog.  Lit.  ii,  97  8q. ; 
Heinichen,  Exc.  1  zu  Euad>.  //.  E,  iii,  331  8q. ;  also  SuppU 
nołariua  ad  Euaebiunij  p.  73  8q. ;  Ammon,  I^eben  Jeau^  i, 
120  8q.).  See  Josephus.  (See  Yolbeding,  p.  5.)  The 
Koran  (q.  y.)  contains  only  palpable  fables  conceming 
Jesus  (Hottinger,  Jiiator.  Or.  105  sq.;  Schmidt,  in  his 
B%bl.f  Krit.  u.  Exegeae,  i,  110  8q. ;  D'Herbelot,  Biblioth. 
Orientakf  ii,  349  8q. ;  compare  Augusti,  Chriafologia  Ko^ 
rtmUneam.  Jena,  1799),  and  the  Jewish  Hiatory  ofJeaua 
(9i|d;;<  ń^^'in,edit.Huldrici,Liigd.  Bat  1703;  andin 
Wagenseil,  fda  ign.  Satan.  AM^orfy  1681)  bctrays  itself 
as  an  alortiye  fabrication  of  Jewish  calumny,  destitute 
of  any  bistorical  yalue  (see  Ammon,  BiJU.  Theol  ii,  263), 
while  the  allusions  to  Jesus  in  the  Talmud  and  the  Bab- 
bins  haye  only  a  polemioal  aim  (see  MeelAlhrer,  Je«v«  in 
Talmude,  Altdorf,  1699,  ii,  4 ;  Werner,  Jeana  in  Taimude, 
Stadle,  1781 ;  comp.  Bynasus,  De  naiaU  J.  C.  ii,  4).  (See 
Yolbeding,  p.  &)  The  genuine  Acta  of  PUate  ("Acta 
Pilati,"  Eusebius,  Chroń.  Arm.  ii,  267 ;  compare  Henke, 
Opuac  Pb  199  sq.)  are  no  longer  extant  [see  Pilatb]  ; 
what  we  now  possess  under  this  title  is  a  later  fabrica- 
tion (see  Ammon,  i,  102  sq.).  In  the  Greek  and  Koman 
profane  autbors,  Jesus  is  only  inddentally  namcd  (Taci- 
tus,  A  mud.  xy,  44, 8 ;  Pliny,  Epist.  x,  97*;  Lamprid.  Vit. 
A  lex.  8ev.  c.  29, 48 ;  Porphyry,  De  philoaoph.  ex.  orać  in 
Eusebw  Demonatr.  Ev€mg.  iii,  7 ;  Liban,  in  Socr.  Hiat.  Ev. 
iii,  23 ;  Ludan,  Mora  peregr.  c  1 1 ,  18).  On  Suidas,  s.  v. 
'Ii7<roi/c«  >oe  Walter,  Codex  in  Suida  mendax  de  Jeau 
(Lips.  1724).  Whetber  by  Chreatua  in  Suetonius  (Cloud, 
p.  25)  is  to  be  understood  Christ,  is  doubted  by  some 
(oomp.  Emesti  and  Wolf,  ad  loc ;  see  Claudius),  but 
the  unusual  name  Chriatua  might  easily  undergo  this 
change  (see  also  Philostr.  Soph.  ii,  11)  in  popular  refer- 
ence  (see  generally  Eckbard,A^ofi-ĆArt«f uinor.  de  Chriato 
ieatimonioi  Quedlińb.  1737 ;  Koecher,  Iliat,  Jeau  Chriato  ex 
acriptorib.  profan.  erutOy  Jena,  1726 ;  Meyer,  Yersuch  e, 
Yertheid.  «.  ErlduL  der  Geachichte  Jeau  u.  d,  ApoatoL  a, 
griech.  tu  rdm.  Profanaerib.  Hannoy.  1805;  FronmUller, 
in  the  Słudien  der  tnirtemb.  GeiatL  x,  1.  On  the  Jesus 
of  the  book  of  Sirach,  xliii,  25,  see  Seelen,  De  Jeau  in  Jeau 
Siracfruatra  guaaiio,  Lubec  1724 ;  alśo  in  his  Med&L 
exeg.  i,  207  8q.). 

,  8.  The  scientific  treatment  of  the  life  of  Jesus  bdonge 
to  the  modem  period  of  theological  criticism.  Among 
earlier  oontributions  of  a  critioo-chronological  character 
is  that  of  Offerhans  {De  vita  J.  C.  prirata  etpublica,  in 
his  SpiciL  hiałor,  dironoL  Groningeu,  1789).     Greiling 


JESUS  CHRIST 


876 


JESUS  CHRIST 


(Halle,  1818)  ilrat  undertook  the  adjustment,  in  a  liyely 
narratiye,  of  the  reoent  (rationaliatic)  exp08iŁion  that 
has  rcsulted,  to  the  actiud  career  of  Christ.  An  indepen- 
dent bttt,  on  the  whole,  unsatisfactory  treatiae  is  that  of 
Planck  {Geach,  d,  Chrigtenth,  in  der  Periode  seiaer  enten 
Ewfuhr.  m  die  Weit  durch  Jetum  u.  die  Aposłel,  GóŁtin- 
gen,  1818).  Kaiser  has  attempted  an  analysis  {Bild. 
TheoL  i,  230  8q.).  Still  morę  seyere  in  his  method  of 
criticLsm  is  Paulus  {Dcu  Leben  Jem  ais  Grundlage  einer 
reinen  Gesch,  d  Urchruteatk,  Heidelb.  1828),  and  bold  to 
a  degree  that  has  alarmed  the  theological  world  is  D.  F. 
Strauss  (//«^  J,  hit.  bearbeit,  Tubing.  1835,  and  sińce). 
The  hitter  anew  reduced  the  evangelical  histories  (with 
the  exception  of  a  few  plain  transactions)  to  a  mythical 
Gomposition  springing  out  of  the  Old-Test.  prophecies 
and  the  expectations  of  the  Messiah  in  the  comrounity, 
and,  in  his  criticism  upon  single  pointa,  generally  stands 
npon  the  shoulders  of  the  preceding  writeis.  In  oppo- 
sition  to  him,  numerous  men  of  leaming  and  courage 
rosę  up  to  dcfend  the  "  historical  Christ,"  some  of  them 
iiisisting  upon  the  strictly  supematural  interpretation 
(Lange ;  Harless ;  Tholuck,  GlauhwurdiyheU  der  etangel, 
Gesch,  Hamb.  1838 ;  Krabbe,  Yorlet.  iiber  das  Leben  Jestif 
Uamb.  1839),  while  others  concede  or  pass  over  single 
pointo  in  the  history  (Neander,  I.,eben  J.  Chr,  Hamburg, 
1837).  Into  this  controyersy,  which  grew  highly  per- 
sonal,  a  philosophical  writer  (Weisse,  A'p«n^.  6r«ctócAte 
Kiit,  u,  philosoph,  Bearbeituwf,  Leipz.  1840)  became  in- 
volved,  and  attempted,  by  an  ingenious  but  decidedly 
presumpŁuous  criticism,  to  distinguish  the  historical  and 
the  unhistorical  element  in  the  evangelical  account  At 
the  same  time,  Theile  (Zur  Biographie  Jesu,  Leipzig, 
1837)  gave  a  careful  and  conciliatory  summary  of  the 
materials  of  the  discussion,  but  Hase  has  published  (in 
the  4th  ed.  of  his  Ae6en  J«>#u,  Leipz.  1840)  a  masterly  re- 
yiew,  showing  the  gradual  rejection  of  the  extravagance6 
of  criticism  sińce  1829.  The  substance  of  the  Ufe  of 
Jesus  has  thus  no  w  become  established  in  generał  belief 
as  historical  truth ;  yet  Bauer  (Krit.  der  erangeL  Gesck, 
d.  Stfnoptiker,  Leipz.  1841),  affcer  an  analysis  of  the  gos- 
pels  as  literary  productions,  calls  the  original  nanmtive 
conceming  Jesus  "■  a  purc  creation  of  the  Christian  eon- 
sciousness,"  and  he  pronounces  the  evangelical  history 
generally  to  be  "  8olved."  Thenius  has  met  him  with  a 
proof  of  the  evangelical  history,  drawn  from  the  N.-Test. 
epistles,  in  a  few  but  striking  remarks  {Dat  Evang.  ohne 
die  Ecantjelim,  Leipz.  1843),  but  A.  Ebrard  ( \Vis$.  Krit, 
d,  euanff.  Gesch,  Frankf.  1842)  has  fully  refuted  him  in  a 
leanied  but  not  unprejudiced  work  (see  also  Weisse,  in 
the  Jeru  LiL-Zeit,  1843,  No. 7>9, 13-15).  But  this  heart- 
less  and  also  peculiarly  insipid  criticism  of  Bauer — 
which,  indeed,  often  degenerates  into  the  ridiculous — 
appears  to  have  left  no  impression  upon  the  literary 
world,  and  may  therefore  be  dismissed  without  further 
consideration  (comp.  generally  Grimm,  Glaubwurdiffkeit 
d,  ecangeL  GescL  in  Bezug  auf  Strauss  und  Bauer ^  Jena, 
1845).  Lately,  Von  Ammon  {Gesch.  d.  Leb.  Jesu,  Leipz. 
1842)  undertook,  in  his  style  of  combination,  carefully 
Bteering  bctween  the  CKtremes,  a  uarratlye  of  the  life  of 
Jesus  fuli  of  striking  obseryations.  Whateyer  elae  has 
been  done  in  this  dcpartment  (Gfrdrer,  Geschichte  des 
Urchristenlk.  Stuttg.  1838;  Salyador,  Jesus  Christ  et  sa 
doctrine,  Par.  1838)  belongs  rather  to  the  origin  of  Chris- 
tianity  than  to  the  data  of  the  life  of  Jesus.  In  Catho- 
lic  literaturę  little  has  appeared  on  this  subject  (Kuhn, 
Leben  Jesu  wissensch.  bearbeitety  Mainz,  1838 ;  of  a  morę 
generał  character  are  the  works  of  Francke,  Leipz.  1838, 
and  Storch,  Leipz.  1841).  (On  the  bearing  of  subjective 
yiews  upon  the  treatment  of  the  Gospel  history,  there 
are  the  monographs  cited  in  Yolbeding,  p.  6.)  See  lit- 
eraturę below,  and  compare  the  art  Ciiristology. 

4.  Chronological  Data, — o.  The  year  of  Christ^s  birth 
(for  the  generał  condition  of  the  age,  see  Knapp,  De  staiu 
temp.  nato  Christo,  Hol.  1757;  and  the  Church  histories  of 
Gicsclcr,  Neander,  etc ;  on  a  special  point,  see  Masson, 
Jani  tempł.  Christo  nascente  reseratum^  Rotterdam,  1700) 
ooanot,  as  all  iuyestigations  on  this  point  haye  proyed 


(Fabridi  BSbL  antiguar.  p.  187  są.,  843  sq. ;  Thieis,  KriU 
Comment.  ii,  839  Bq. ;  comp.  espedally  S.  van  Tilde,  l)e 
anno,  mensę  et  die  noH  Chr.  Lugd.  Bat.  1700,  pnef.  J.  G. 
Walch,  Jena,  1740;  K.  Michaeles,  Ueber  das  Geburts-  a. 
Sttrbtjahr  J.  C.  Wien,  1796,  ii,  8),  be  determined  with 
fuli  certainty  (Reccanl,  Pr.  m  rationes  et  Utmtes  ineerH- 
tudśms  circa  temp.  nai.  Christie  Reg.  1768) ;  yet  it  is  now 
pretty  generally  agreed  that  the  yulgar  aera  (Hamber- 
ger,  De  epockcs  Dionyt.  ortu  et  auctore,  Jen.  1704;  also 
in  Martini  Tkes.  Dias.  III,  i,  841  są.),  of  which  the  lim 
year  corresponds  to  4714  of  the  Julian  Period,  or  "ibi 
(and  latter  part  of  763 ;  see  Janris,  Introd.  to  Uist,  o/ike 
Church,  p.  54,  610)  of  Romę  (Sandemente,  De  ruig,  ara 
emendał.  Rom.  1798 ;  Ideler,  ChronoL  ii,  383  aq.),  has  as- 
signed  it  a  datę  too  late  by  a  few  years  (see  Stning's 
Harm.  and  Expos.  Append.  i),  siooe  the  death  of  Herud 
the  Great  CAatt.  ii,  1  8q.),  aooording  to  Joaephus  [Ani. 
xyii,  8, 1 ;  comp.  xiy,  14,  5 ;  xyii,  9,  3),  must  have  oc- 
curred  before  Easter  in  B.C.  4  (see  Browne*8  Ordo  Sa- 
doTum,  p.  27  8q.).  Hence  Jesus  may  haye  been  boro  in 
the  beginning  of  the  year  of  Romę  750,  four  yean  befure 
the  epoch  of  our  aera,  or  eyen  earlier  (Uhland,  Christnm 
anno  antę  ar.  vulg.  4  exewiŁe  natum  ^se,  Tubing.  1775; 
so  Bengel,  Anger,  Wieseler,  Jaryis),  but  in  no  case  later 
(comp.  also  OlTerhaus,  Spicileg.  p.  422  8q. ;  Paulus,  Cam- 
menL  i,  20C  sq.;  Yogel,  in  Gabler'8  Jounuf.  auserL  the- 
oiog.  Lit,  i,  244  sq. ;  and  in  the  Sfudien  der  tcurłemberg. 
Geistlichk.  I,  i,  60  sq.).  A  few  paasages  (as  Lukę  iii.  1, 
23 ;  Matu  ii,  2  8q.)  afTord  a  doser  determination  [aee 
Cyrenius]  ;  the  latter  gaye  oocasion  to  the  cełebrated 
Kepler  to  connect  the  star  of  the  Magi  with  a  plauetary 
conjunction  (of  Jupiter  and  Saturn),  and  morę  recent 
wńters  haye  followed  this  suggestion  (Wurm,  m  Ben- 
geFs  A  rckir.  II,  i,  261  sq. ;  Ideler,  Ilandb,  d.  Chromd,  ii, 
899  sq.,  and  Lehrb.  d.  ChronoL  p.  428  sq.;  compare  also 
MUnter,  Stern  der  Weiaen,  Copenh.  1827;  Klein^  Oiipo- 
siłiansschr.Y,  i,  90  sq.;  Schubert,  Lehrb.  ^^^emhtmk, 
p.  226  8q.),  lixing  upon  B.C.  6  as  thpjt^e  year  of  the 
natiyity.  See  N.vr|XiZ3u — Bufc-^latt.  ii,  16  scems  to 
State  that  the  Magi,  who  must  haye  arriyed  at  Jenisa- 
lem  soon  after  the  birth  of  Jesus,  had  indicated  the  tirst 
appearance  of  the  phenomenon  aa  haying  occorred  a 
long  time  preyiously  (probably  not  exactly  two  yean 
before),  and  on  that  yiew  Jesus  might  haye  been  bom 
earlier  than  B.C  6,  the  morę  so  inasmnch  as  the  acce»- 
sion  of  Mars  to  the  same  conjunction,  occurring  in  tbe 
spring  of  B.C.  6,  according  to  Kepler,  may  haye  fint 
excited  the  fuli  attentiou  of  the  Magi.  Lately  Wlc^ie- 
ler  {Chronolog.  Synopse,  p.  67  6q.)  has  brought  óowa  the 
natiyity  to  the  year  B.  C.  4,  aud  in  additional  ooofinna- 
t  ion  of  this  datę  holds  that  a  comet,  which,  according  to 
Chinese  astrouomical  tables,  was  yisiUe  for  morę  thjn 
two  months  in  this  year,  was  identical  with  tbe  star  uf 
the  wiae  men,  at  the  same  time  adducing  Lukę  ii,  I  »q.; 
iii,  23,  as  pointing  to  the  same  year.  But  if  the  >Is^ 
had  first  been  incited  to  their  joumey  by  the  appearance 
of  that  comet,  they  could  not  well  haye  designated  to 
Herod  as  the  Alessianic  star  the  planetary  conjunction  of 
A.U.C  747  or  748,  then  almost  two  years  ago.  seeing  this 
was  an  entirely  distinct  phenomenon.  Under  this  eop- 
position,  too,  Herod  would  haye  madę  morę  surę  of  his 
purpoBe  if  he  had  put  to  death  children  three  yeais  okL 
According  to  this  yiew,  then,  we  should  place  Christ  • 
birth  lather  in  B.C  7  than  B.C.  4.  Some  uncertainty, 
howeyer,  most  always  attend  the  use  of  tbeae  astronouH 
ical  data.  See  Star  in  the  £1ast.  Aa  an  element  in 
determining  the  year  of  the  nati\-ity.  Lukę  iii,  1,  compc 
23,  must  also  be  taken  into  the  aocount.  Jesus  is  there 
poeitiyely  sŁated  to  haye  entered  upon  his  puUic  min- 
istry  at  thirty  years  of  age,  and  indeed  soon  after  John 
the  Baptist,  whose  missioii  began  in  the  iiAeenth  resr 
of  the  reign  of  Tiberius,  so  that  by  reckoning  back 
about  thirty  years  from  this  latter  datę  (August,  781,  to 
August,  782,  of  Romę,  A.D.  28-29),  we  arri%-e  at  about 
B.C.  3  as  the  year  of  Christ^s  birth,  which  cnnespomli 
to  the  Btatements  of  Irenieus  (Ifeeret.  iii,  2.5),  TerfAllian 
{Adc,  Jud,  8),  aud  £usebius  {Hitt^  Et,  i,  5),  that  Jesot 


JESUS  CHRIST 


611 


JESUS  CHRIST 


was  bom  in  the  year  41  (42)  of  the  reign  of  Augustus, 
i.  e.  751  of  Romę,  or  B.C.  3  (Ideler,  ChronoŁog,  li,  385). 
As  Luke*8  languago  in  that  paaaago  is  somewhat  indefi- 
nite  ("  about,"  utati),  we  may  presumc  that  Christ  was 
ratber  over  than  under  thirty  years  of  age ;  and  this 
will  agree  with  the  computation  of  the  fourth  year  be- 
fore  the  Dionysian  sera,  u  e.  750  of  Home.  If,  however, 
we  snppose  (but  see  Browne,  Ordo  Sadorum,  p.  67)  the 
joint  reign  of  Tiberius  with  Augnstus,  i.  e.  his  associar- 
tion  with  him  in  the  goremment  especially  of  the  pror- 
inces  (Yell.  Paterc  IJist,  Ram,  ii,  121 ;  Sueton.  iii,  20, 21 ; 
Tacitus,  AfmaL  i,  3 ;  Dlo  Cass.  Htst.  Rom,  ii,  108),  threc 
and  a  half  years  before  his  fuU  reign  (Jar\'is,  Mrod.  p. 
228-239),  to  be  meaiit,  we  shall  again  be  broaght  to 
about  lic.  6,  or  possibly  7,  as  the  year  of  the  nativity. 
The  latest  conclnsion  of  Błock  (J)a8  leahre  Geburłsjahr 
Chrisłi,  BerL  1843),  that  Jesus  was  bom  in  the  year  735 
of  Romę,  or  niueteen  years  before  the  beginning  of  the 
rulgar  sera,  based  upon  the  authority  of  the  later  Rab- 
bins,  does  not  cali  for  special  exammadon  (yet  see  Wiese- 
ler,  ChronoL  Synoptff  p.  132).     See  Adyent. 

The  month  and  day  of  the  birth  of  Christ  cannot  be 
determined  with  a  like  degree  of  approximation,  but  it 
could  not,  at  all  events,  have  fallen  in  Decerober  or  Jan- 
uary', sińce  at  this  time  of  the  year  the  tlocks  are  not 
found  in  the  open  fields  during  the  night  (Lukę  ii,  8),  but 
in  pens  ("  the  first  rain  descends  the  17th  of  the  month 
Marchesran  [November],  and  then  the  cattle  retumed 
home ;  nor  did  the  shepherds  any  longer  lodge  in  huts 
in  the  fields,*'  Gemara,  Nedar.  G3) ;  moreoyer,  a  census 
(an-oypa^),  which  madę  travelUng  necessary  (Lukę  ii, 
2  sq.),  woul<l  not  have  been  ordered  at  this  season.  We 
may  naturally  suppose  that  the  month  of  March  is  the 
timc  for  dńringout  cattle  to  pasture,  atleast  in  Southern 
Palestine  (Sllskind,  in  Bengers  A  rchiv,  i,  215 ;  comp.  A. 
J.  u.  d.  Hardt,  De  nunnenfu  guibusd.  hist,  et  chroń,  ad  de- 
termiii.  Chr,  diem  nuiaL  Helmst.  1754 ;  Romer,  De  die  na- 
tali  Serratoru^  Lips.  1778;  Funck,  De  die  Serrat,  natali, 
Rint.  1735 ;  also  in  his  Ditseii,  A  cad.  p.  149  8q. ;  MUnter, 
Sttm  der  Weisen,  Copenh.  1827,  p.  110  sq.).  If  we  can 
rcly  upon  a  statemcnt  of  the  Jewish  Rabbins,  that  the 
first  of  the  twenty-four  coiirses  of  priests  cntered  upon 
their  duties  in  the  regular  cycle  the  very  week  in  which 
the  Tempie  was  destroyed  by  the  Romans  (Mishna,  iii, 
2d8, 3),  we  are  fumiahed  with  the  means,  by  comparison 
with  the  time  of  the  seirice  of  Zacfaariah  (Lukę  i,  5, 8), 
who  bclonged  to  the  eighth  divL«iion  (1  Chroń,  xxiv,  10), 
of  detcrmining  with  considcrable  certainty  (Browne's 
Oreb  Sadorum,  p.  33  8q.)  the  datę  of  the  natiyity  as 
occurring,  if  in  B.C.  6,  about  the  month  of  August 
(Strong'8  I/arm,  and  Expot.  Append.  i,  p.  23).  The  at- 
tcmpts  of  Scaliger  and  Bengel  to  determine  the  month 
of  the  nativity  from  this  element  (compare  Maurit.  De 
tortit,  p.  334  8q.)  are  unsatisfactory  (see  Yan  TU,  tU  tup. 
p.  75  8q. ;  Allix,  DicUr,  de  anno  et  mensę  J.  C.  nat,  p.  44 
8q. ;  Paulus,  Comment,  i,  36  sq.).  Lately  Jarris  (Inłrod, 
p.  535  6q.)  has  endeavored  to  maintain  the  traditionary 
datę  of  Christmas  of  the  Latin  Church ;  and  Seyffiirth 
has  anew  adopted  the  conclusion  {Chronolog,  Sacra, 
p.  97  sq.)  that  John  the  Baptist  was  bom  on  the  24th 
of  June,  and  consequently  Jesus  on  the  25th  (22d  in  his 
Summary  of  recetU  Discoveries  in  Chronology,  N.  York, 
1857,  p.  236)  of  December,  based  on  the  supposition  that 
the  Israelites  reckoned  by  solar  roonths :  this  pays  no 
regard  to  Lukę  ii,  8  (see  Hase,  p.  67).  See  Christuab. 
h,  The  year  of  Christ^s  crucijizion  is  no  less  disputed 
(oomp.  Paulus,  Comment,  iii,  784  8q.).  The  two  extreme 
limits  of  the  datę  are  the  above-mentioned  15th  year  of 
Tiberius,  in  which  John  the  Baptist  began  his  career 
(Lukę  iii,  1),  i.  e.  Aug.  781  to  Aug.  782  of  Romę  (A.D. 
28-29),  and  the  year  of  the  death  of  that  emperor,  790  of 
Romę  (A.D.  37),  in  which  Pikte  had  already  left  the 
piovinoe  of  Judsea.  Jesus  appears  to  have  begun  his 
puUic  teachingsoon  after  John's  entrance  upon  his  mis- 
sion ;  for  the  message  of  the  Sanhedrim  to  John,  which 
is  placed  in  immediate  connection  with  the  bep^nning 
of  Christ*s  public  ministry  (John  i,  19;  comp.  zxixyd5; 


ii,  1),  and  comes  ui  just  before  the  PassoYer  (John  ii,  12 
sq.),  must  have  been  within  a  year  after  John'8  public 
appearance.  This  being  assumed,  a  further  approxima- 
tion  would  depend  upon  the  determination  of  the  num- 
'ber  of  Pas8overs  which  Jesus  celebrated  during  his  min- 
istry ;  but  this  itself  is  quite  a  difficult  que6tlon  (see  un- 
der Na  5,  below).  It  is  now  generally  oonoeded  that 
he  could  not  well  have  passed  less  than  thrce  Paschal 
festivals,  and  probably  not  morę  than  four  (i.  e.  one  at 
the  beginning  of  each  of  Christ^s  tfaree  years,  and  a 
fourth  at  the  close  of  the  last) ;  thiis  we  ascertain  as  the 
terminus  a  quo  of  these  festiyals  the  year  A.D.  28,  and 
as  the  probable  terminu$  ad  guem  the  year  A.D.  32 ;  or, 
on  the  supposition  (as  above)  that  the  joint  reign  of  Ti- 
berius is  meant,  we  have  as  the  limits  of  the  Passorers 
of  Jesus  A.D.  25-29.  This  result  would  be  rendered 
morę  definite  and  certain  if  we  could  ascertain  wheth- 
er  in  the  last  of  these  series  of  years  ( A.D.  29  or  82)  the 
Jewish  Passoyer  fell  on  a  Friday  (Thursday  evcning 
and  the  ensuing  day),  as  this  was  the  week-day  on 
which  the  death  of  Christ  is  generally  held  to  have 
taken  place.  There  haye  been  yarious  calculations  by 
means  of  lunar  tables  (Linbrunn,  in  the  Abhandlmg  der 
bayenchen  Akademie  der  Wiss,  yoLyi;  Wurm,  in  Ben- 
gel's  Arekir,  II,  i,  292  są.;  Anger,i>e  iemporum  in  A  et, 
Apoat,  ratione  dits,  i,  IJps.  1880,  p.  80  8q. ;  Browne,  Ordo 
Sadorum,  Lond.  1844,p.  504),  to  determine  during  which 
of  the  years  of  this  period  the  Paschal  day  must  haye  oc- 
curred  on  Friday  (see  Strong's  Iłarm,  and  £rposit,  Ap- 
pend. i,  p.  8  8q.) ;  but  the  inexactness  of  the  Jewish  cal- 
endar  makes  eyery  such  computation  uncertain  (Wurm, 
ut  sup,  p.  294  sq.).  Yet  it  is  worthy  of  notice  that  the 
two  most  reoent  inyestigations  of  Wurm  and  Anger  both 
make  the  year  A.D.  81,  or  784  of  Romę,  to  be  such  a  cal- 
endar  year  as  we  reąuire.  Wicseler,  ChronoL  Synopa, 
p.  479),  on  the  other  band,  protests  against  the  forego- 
ing  computations,  and  insists  that  in  A.D.  30  alone  the 
Paschal  day  fell  on  Friday.  According  to  other  calcu- 
lations, A.D.  29  and  33  are  the  only  years  of  this  period 
in  which  the  Pascha!  eye  fell  on  Thursday  (see  Browne, 
Ordo  Sadorum,  p.  55),  while  so  great  di8crei>ancy  pre- 
yails  between  other  compuutions  (see  Townsend*8  Chro^ 
nological  N,  T,  p.  *159)  that  little  or  no  rcliance  can  be 
placed  upon  this  argument  (see  Strong*s  Hami,  andEz- 
połit,  Append.  i,  p.  8  sq.).  See  Passoyer.  ■  The  opin- 
ion  of  some  of  the  ancient  writers  (Irenieus,  ii,  22, 5), 
that  Jesus  died  at  40  or  50  years  of  age  (compare  John 
yui,57),  is  altogether  improbable  (sec  Fi8an8ki,i>e  er^ 
rore  Irenai  in  determinanda  cetate  Chritti,  Reglom.  1777). 
The  most  of  the  Church  fathers  (TertulL  A  dv.  Jud,  8; 
Lactantius,  InstUut,  iy,  10 ;  Augustine,  Civ,  dei,  xviii,  54 ; 
Ciem.  Alex.  Strom,  i,  p.  147,  etc)  aasign  but  a  single  year 
as  the  duration  of  Christ's  ministry,  and  place  his  death 
in  the  consułship  of  the  two  Gemini  (YIII  Cal.  ApriL 
Co68»  C  Rubellio  Gemino  et  C.  Rufio  Gemino),  L  e.  782 
of  Romę,  A.D.  29,  the  15th  year  of  Tiberius's  reign, 
which  Ideler  {Chronology,  ii,  418  8q.)  has  lately  (so  also 
Browne,  Ordo  Sadorum,  p.  80  sq.)  attempted  to  recon- 
cile  with  Lukę  iii,  1  (but  see  SeylTarth,  ChronoL  Sacra, 
p.  115  sq. ;  Eusebius,  in  his  Chroń.  Armen,  ii,  p.  264, 
places  the  death  of  Jesus  in  the  19th  year  of  Tiberius, 
which  Jerome,  in  bis  Latin  translation,  calls  the  18th; 
on  the  above  reckoning  of  the  fathers,  see  PetayiuSy^nt' 
madcers,  p.  146  sq. ;  Thilo,  Cod,  Apocr,  i,  497  sq.).  Op 
the  obseryation  of  the  sun  at  the  cracifixion  (Matt« 
xxvii,  45;  Mark  xy,  33;  Lukę  xxiii,  44),  see  Ecupsib 
(On  the  chronological  elements  of  the  life  of  Jesus,  see 
generally  Hottinger,  Pentus  dissertał,  bibl.-chronoL  p.  218 
sq. ;  Yoss,  De  a$mis  Christi  disseriat,  Amst.  1643 ;  Łupi, 
De  notis  chronolog,  anni  mortis  et  naiit.  J.  C,  disseriat, 
Rom.  1744 ;  Horix,  Ohsertat,  hiat,  chronol,  de  amtis  Chr, 
Mogunt  1789;  compare  Yolbeding,  p.  20;  Hase,  p.  52.) 
See  Chronoixk3Y. 

5.  The  two  family  registers  of  Jesus  (Matt.  i  and  Lukę 
iii),  of  which  the  first  is  descending  and  the  latter  as- 
cending,  yary  considerably  from  each  other;  inasmuch 
as  not  only  entiiely  different  names  of  ancestois  are  giy- 


JESUS  CHRIST 


878 


JESUS  CHRIST 


en  from  Joseph  apwards  to  Zerabbabel  and  Salathiel 
(Matt  i,  12  8q. ;  Lukę  iii,  27),  but  alao  Matthew  carries 
back  Jo8eph'0  lineage  to  David's  eon  Solomon  (ver.  € 
8q.)}  wbile  Lukę  refen  it  io  another  son  Nathan  (▼er. 
81).  Moreoyer,  Matthew  onl^  goes  back  as  far  as  Abra- 
ham (as  he  wrote  for  Jewish  readers),  bat  Lakę  (in 
agreement  with  the  generał  scope  of  hu  gospel)  as  far 
as  Adam  (God).  Thia  disagreement  eaily  engaged  the 
attention  of  the  Church  fathers  (see  Euaebios,  Uist,  Ev. 
i,  7),  and  later  interpretera  hare  adopted  yarious  hy- 
pothescs  for  the  recondlement  of  the  two  evangeli«ts 
(see  especially  Surenhus.  Bf/dXoc  KaTayXtvfiCy  p.  320 
są. ;  Rus,  Hormon,  eccmg.  i,  65  8q. ;  Thiess,  KriL  Com- 
mentary  ii,  271  8q. ;  Kuinol,  ProUff.  m  Matt.  §  4).  There 
are  properiy  only  two  generał  representations  possible. 
For  the  history  of  Christie  parenta,  see  Joseph;  Mart. 

(a)  Matthew  tiaces  the  lineage  through  Joseph,  Lukę 
giyes  the  matemcd  descent  (comp.  alao  Neander,  p.  21) ; 
80  that  the  person  called  Eli  in  Lukę  iii,  28,  appears  to 
ha>'e  been  the  father  of  Mary  (eee  espedaUy  Helricus, 
in  Crenii  Exerciłat,  phiioL  hiat.  iii,  p.  382  8q. ;  Spanheim, 
Dubiti  evanff.  i,  13  8q. ;  Bengel,  Heumann,  Paulaa,  Kui- 
nol, in  their  CommaUariea;  Wieseler,  in  the  Studien  te. 
Krit,  1815,  p.  861  sq.;  on  the  oontrary,  Bleek,  Beitrape 
z,  Eoangelienkrit,  p.  101  są.).  But,  in  the  fint  place,  in 
that  case  Lukę  would  hardly  have  written  so  espressly 
<'  the  son  of  Eli*"  {tov  'H\ć),  sińce  we  most  undentand 
all  the  following  genitiyes  to  refer  to  the  actual  ^afA^rt 
and  not  to  the  fathers-in-law  (the  appeal  to  Ruth  i,  11 
są.,  for  the  purpose  of  showing  that  a  daughter-in-law 
oould  be  called  daughter  among  the  Hebrews,  is  una- 
▼ailing  for  the  distinction  in  ąuestion) ;  although,  in  the 
second  place,  we  need  not  understand  the  Salathiel  and 
Zerubbabel  named  in  one  genealogy  to  have  been  both 
differeiit  pcrsons  from  thoae  mentioned  in  the  other 
(Paulus,  Comment.  i,  243  są. ;  Robinson,  Gr,  Harmony, 
p.  186),  which  is  a  yery  ąuestionable  expedicnt  (see 
especiolly  Hug,  Einkiiung,  ii,  266 ;  MethodiU  Quarłerly 
lieview,  Óct.  1852,  p.  602  sq.).  Aside  from  the  fact  that 
Lukę  does  not  even  mention  the  mother  of  Jesus  (but 
only  Matt,  i,  16),  and  from  the  further  fact  that  the  Jews 
were  not  at  all  accustomed  to  record  the  genealogies  of 
women  {Baba  Bathra,  f.  110, "The  father'8  family,  not 
the  mother's,  is  accounted  the  tnie  lineage;"  oompare 
Wetstcin,  i,  231),  we  might  make  an  exoeption  in  the 
case  of  the  Messiah,  who  was  to  be  descended  from  a 
rirffin  (compare  also  Paulus,  Leben  J,  i,  90).  A  still  dif- 
ferent  explaaation  (Yoss,  uŁ  sup, ;  comp.  also  Schleyer, 
in  the  TheoL  QuartaUchr.  1836,  p.  403  sq.,  539  aą.),  name- 
ly,  that  Eli,  although  the  father  of  Mary,  is  here  intro- 
duced  as  being  the  grandfather  of  Joseph  (according  to 
the  supposition  that  Mary  was  an  heiress,  Numb.  KK^Hi, 
8),  procccds  upon  an  entirely  untenable  interprctation 
(see  Paulus,  Comment,  i,  243, 261).  Notwithstanding  the 
foregoing  objection  to  the  view  under  consideration,  it 
mects,  ])erhaps  better  thau  any  other,  the  difficulties  of 
the  subject.     See  Geneau>oy. 

(6)  Some  assume  that  the  proper  father  of  Joseph 
was  Eli :  he,  as  a  brother,  or  (as  the  dilference  of  the 
names  up  to  Salathiel  necessitates)  as  the  nearest  rela- 
tive  (half-brotherV),  had  married  Maiy,  the  wife  of  the 
deceascd  childless  Jacob,  and  according  to  the  Levirate 
law  (q.  V.)  Joseph  would  appear  as  the  son  of  Jacob,  and 
would,  in  fact,  have  two  fathers  (so  Ambrosius) ;  or  con- 
yersely,  we  may  suppoae  that  Jacob  was  the  proper  fa- 
ther of  Joseph,  and  Eli  his  chikiless  deceased  uncle 
(comp.  Juliua  Afric  in  Eusebius,  Hirt,  Ev.  i,  7;  Calix- 
tus,  Clericus).  This  hypothesis,  which  still  conflicts 
with  the  Leyirate  rule  that  only  the  deceased  is  called 
father  of  the  posthumous  son  (Deut  xxv,  6),  Hug  {EinL 
ii,  2()8  8q.),  has  been  so  moditied  as  to  presume  a  I>evirate 
marriage  as  far  back  as  Salathiel,  by  which  the  mention 
of  Salathiel  and  Zerubbabel  in  both  lists  would  be  ex- 
plaincd ;  and  Hug  also  introduces  such  a  marriage  be- 
twecn  the  parents  of  Joseph,  and  still  another  among 
morę  distant  relatiros.  This  is  ingenious,  but  too  com- 
plicated  (see  generally  Paulus,  uŁ  wp.  p.  260).     If  a  di- 


reet  desoent  of  Jesos  coold  hare  been  laid  down  firaa 
Dayid,  there  remains  no  reason  why,  when  the  natonl 
extraction  of  the  Messiah  straight  from  Darid  was  ao 
important,  the  very  evange]ist  who  wrote  immediately 
for  Jewish  readen  shoold  haye  traoed  the  indirect  line- 
age. But  if  so  many  as  three  Leyirate  martiages  hal 
oocorred  together  (as  Hug  thinks),  we  should  suppoae 
that  Matthew,  on  account  of  the  infreąoency  of  eucb  a 
case,  would  have  giyen  his  readers  some  hint,  or  at  least 
not  haye  written  (yer.  16)  "  begat"*  {iyiwritrt)  in  a  man- 
ner  ąuite  calculated  to  mialead.  Moreoyer,  this  hypotb- 
esis  of  Hug  rests  upon  an  interpretation  of  1  Chroń,  iii, 
18  są.,  which  that  scholar  himself  could  only  haye  cho- 
sen  in  a  genealogical  diflSculty.     See  Leyirate  Lwf. 

(c)  If  both  the  foregoing  explanation8  be  reject^ 
there  remains  no  other  oourse  than  to  renounce  the  at> 
tempt  to  recondle  the  two  iamily  lines  of  Jesus,  and 
frankly  acknowledge  a  discrepancy  between  the  eran- 
gelists,  as  some  haye  done  (Stroth,  in  Eichhom^s  lie- 
peri,  ix,  181  są.;  Ammon,  BM,  TheoL  ii,  266;  Thiess, 
Krit,  Comment,  ii,  271  są.;  Fritzsche,  ad  Matt,  p.  35; 
Strauss,  i,  105  są. ;  De  Wette,  B.  Crusius,  Alford,  on  Lukę 
iii).    In  the  decayed  family  of  Joseph  it  might  not  hare 
been  possible,  especially  after  so  much  misfortonc  as  be- 
fell  the  country  and  people,  to  recover  any  wiitten  cle* 
ments  for  the  constniction  of  a  family  register  back  to 
Dayid.     Were  the  account  of  Julius  Africanus  (in  Eu- 
sebius, i,  7 ;  compare  Schottgen,  Hor,  Hihr,  pi  885),  that 
king  Herod  had  caused  the  family  records  uf  the  Jews 
to  be  bumed,  correct,  the  want  of  such  information 
would  be  still  morę  eyident  (but  see  Wetstein,  i,  p.  232; 
Wieseler,  in  the  Shid,  u,  Kritik,  1845,  p.  8C9).     In  thst 
case,  after  the  need  of  such  registers  had  arisen.  peraoos 
would  natorally  haye  set  themselyes  to  oompiling  ihem 
from  tradłtional  recollections,  and  the  yariations  of  these 
may  readily  haye  resulted  in  a  double  lineage.    Bot 
eyen  on  this  yiew  it  has  been  insisted  that  both  lines 
present  the  descent  of  Joseph  and  not  of  Blary,  sińce  it 
was  onusual  to  exhibit  the  matemal  lineage,  and  the 
Jews  would  not  haye  regardcd  such  an  extz«ction  from 
Dayid  as  the  genuine  one.    There  aie,  at  all  eycnta.  tjut 
two  poaitions  possible :  either  the  supematural  genera- 
tion  of  Jesus  by  the  Holy  Spirit  was.admitted,  or  Jesus 
was  considered  a  son  of  Joseph  (Lukę  iii,  38).    In  the 
latter  case  a  family  record  of  Joseph  entirely  sufficed  for 
the  appltcadon  of  the  O.-T.  oradcs  to  Jesus ;  in  the  for- 
mer  case  it  has  been  conceiyed  that  such  a  regucer 
would  haye  been  deemed  superfluous,  and  eyer>'  n^uial 
lineage  of  Jesus  from  Dayid  (Kom.  i,  3)  would  hare 
thrown  his  diyine  origin  into  the  background.    This 
has  been  alleged  as  the  reason  why  John  giyes  no  gen- 
ealogy at  all,  and  generally  sa\'8  nothing  of  the  extrac- 
tiou  of  Jesus  from  the  famUy  of  Dayid  (see  Von  Ammon, 
Ld»,  Je»,  i,  179  są.).    The  force  of  these  arguments,  hoir- 
ever,  is  greatly  lessened  by  the  consideration  that  the 
early  Christiana,  in  meeting  the  Jews,  wouM  be  rety 
anxious,  if  possible,  to  proye  Christ's  positiye  descent 
from  Dayid  through  both  his  reputed  and  his  real  par- 
ent;  the  morę  so,  as  the  former  was  ayowed  to  be  only 
nominally  such,  leaying  the  whole  actual  lineage  to  be 
madę  out  on  the  mother*s  side.    (See  generally  Baom- 
garten,  De  genealogia  Chr,  HaL  1749;  DUrr,  Geneaingia 
Jeeu,  Gott.  1778 ;  BUsching*s  Hormon,  d,  Erang.  pi  187 
są.,  264  są.)     See  Genealoot  of  Christ. 

6.  The  wonderful  birth  of  Jesus  through  the  tnter- 
yention  of  the  Holy  Spirit,  which  only  the  synopcical 
gospcls  relate  (Lukę  i,  26  są. ;  Matt.  i,  18  są. ;  the  apoc- 
ryphal  gospels,  in  order  to  remoye  all  idea  of  the  ooo- 
ception  of  Mary  by  Joseph,  make  him  to  haye  been 
absent  a  long  time  from  home  at  work,  Hiator.  Josepki^ 
c.  5 ;  Hist  de  Natir,  Mariee,  c.  10),  has  been  imagincd 
by  many  recent  interpretera  (Ammon,  Btbtic.  TheoL  ii, 
251  są.,  and  Comtn,  m  narrationum  de  prvnordiit  J,  €• 
JbnieSf  incrementa  et  nexnm  e.  reL  Chr.  Gott.  1798;  abo 
in  his  Nor,  Oputc,  p.  25  są.;  Bauer,  TheoL  y,  T.  1 310 
są. ;  Brie/e  vber  RationaUśmtts,  p.  229  są.;  Kaiser,  BAL 
Theolog,  i,  231  są.;  Greiling,  p.  24  są.)  to  haye  been  a 


JESUS  CHRIST 


879 


JESUS  CHRIST 


myth  suggested  by  tbe  0.-Te8t.  prophecies  (In.  vii,  14), 
and  thcy  have  held  Joseph  to  l>e  the  proper  father  of 
Jesus  (as  it  is  węll  known  that  many  in  the  earliest 
Church,  and  individuals  later,  from  time  to  time,  have 
done,  Utuchuld.  Nachr,  1711,  p.  622  9q. ;  Waither,  Ver«. 
tines  Mchr^fbnass.  BewtiBse  dąsa  Joseph  der  wahre  Vaier 
Chrigtiteif  BerL  1791 ;  on  the  oontrar}',  Oertel,  ^nft/Me^ 
phtMuu  oder  Kriiik  det  Schr\ftm,  Bew^  etc.,  Germ. 
1793;  Haase,  Josephum  rerum  patrem  e  JScriptura  non 
Juisse^  Reg.  1792;  Ludewig,  Histor,  Unitrsuck.  iiber  dU 
rertch.  Afeinwagm  9.  d.  Abkunji  /et.  WolfenbUttel,  1831 ; 
oomp.al80  Korb,  Anlicanu  oder  kistor.-krit. BekudUung 
der  Schrift;  ^  Die  naturL  Geburi  Jem  u. «.  to."  Leipzig, 
1831)  on  the  foUowing  noways  decisire  groands:  (a) 
''John,  who  stands  in  so  near  a  relation  to  Jesus,  and 
must  haye  known  the  £unily  aflairs,  relates  nothing  at 
all  of  this  wonderful  birth,  although  it  was  very  appo- 
ate  to  his  design.'*  But  this  evangeli8t  shoYrs  the  high 
dignity  of  Jesus  only  from  his  disooursss,  the  others 
fitom  public  evidences  and  a  few  astomshing  mirades; 
moreoyer,  his  prologue  (i,  1-18)  declares  dogmatically 
pfretty  much  the  same  thing  as  the  synoptical  gospek 
do  historically  in  this  respect.  (Compare  also  the  de- 
portment  of  Mary,  John  ii,  3  sq.;  see  Keander,  p.  16 
8q.)  (i)  "Neither  Jesus  nor  an  apostle  ever  appeak 
in  any  discourse  to  this  circumstance.  Paul  always 
aays  simply  that  Jesus  was  bom  'of  the  seed  of  David' 
(Rom.  i,  3 ;  2  Tun.  ii,  8) ;  once  (GaL  iv,  4),  morę  defi- 
nitely, '  of  a  woman*  (te  ywawóc^  not  vac!dkvov),"  It 
must  be  admitted,  however,  that  an  appeal  to  a  fact 
which  only  one  individual  could  positively  know  by  ex- 
perience  would  be  very  ineffectnal;  and  an  apostle 
would  be  very  likely  to  subject  himself  to  the  charge  of 
irreleyancy  if  he  resorted  to  such  an  appeal  (comp.  Nie- 
meyer,  Pr,  ad  iUuetrand.  plurimor.  N.  T.  scriptorum  ń- 
leniium  deprmordus  vita  J.  C,  Halle,  1790).  But  thb 
would  be  laying  as  impioper  an  emphasis  npon  the  woni 
ymffi  (GaL  iv,  4)  as  that  of  the  older  theologians  upon 
TvAy  (Isa.  vii,  14).  (c)  "Maiy  calls  Joseph,  without 
ąualifkation,  the  fałher  ofJetu*  (Lukę  ii,  48),  and  also 
aroong  the  Jews  Jesus  was  generally  called  Joeeph*s 
son  (Matt.  xiii,  55;  Mark  vi,  3;  Lukę  iii,  28;  iv,  22; 
John  i,  46 ;  vi,  42)."  Thb  last  argument  is  whoUy  de»- 
titute  of  force ;  but  Mary  might  naturally,  in  common 
parlance,  cali  Joseph  Jesas*» /ather,  just  as,  in  modem 
phrase,  a  fostei^father  is  generally  styled  father  when 
definiteness  of  expre88ion  is  not  requisite.  (d)  "  The 
brothers  of  Jesus  did  not  believe  in  him  as  the  Messiah 
(John  vii,  6),  which  would  bo  inexplicable  if  the  Deity 
had  already  indicated  him  as  the  Messiah  from  his  very 
birth."  Yet  these  brothers  had  not  themselves  person- 
aUy  known  the  fact ;  and  it  is,  moreoyer,  not  uncommon 
that  one  son  in  a  family  who  is  a  generał  favorite  ex- 
cites  the  ill-will  of  the  others  to  such  a  degree  that  they 
even  deny  his  evident  superiority,  or  that  brothers  fali 
to  appreciate  and  esteem  a  mentally  distinguished  broth- 
er.  (e)  "  History  shows  in  a  multitude  of  examples 
that  the  birth  of  illustrious  men  has  been  embellished 
with  fables  (Wetstein,  iV:  7*.  i,  p.  236);  especially  is  the 
notion  of  a  birth  without  connection  with  a  man  (Trap- 
^tvoyivfic)  wide  spread  in  the  ancient  world  (Georgi, 
A^fhabeL  Tibeł,  Rom.  1762, p.  55  8q.,d69  są.),  and  among 
the  Indians  and  Cbinese  it  is  eyen  applied  to  the  found- 
ers  of  religion  (PauL  a  Bartholom.  System,  Brahman,  p. 
158;  Du  Halde,  Beschr.  d.  Chinea,  Reichs,  iii,  26)."  In 
case  it  u  meant  by  this  that  a  wonderful  generation  of 
a  holy  man,  effected  immediately  by  the  Spirit  of  God, 
was  embraced  in  the  circle  of  (Mental  belief  (Roaen- 
mtUler,  in  Gabler's  Joum,/.  aueserL  theoL  Liter,  ii,  263 
8q.),  this  argument  might  make  tbe  purely  historical 
chazBcter  of  the  doctrine  in  question  dubious,  were  it 
capable  of  proof  that  such  an  idea  also  harmonizes  with 
the  princiides  of  the  Israelitish  monotheism,  or  could  it 
be  madę  probable  (Weisse,  L^ten  Jeeu,  i,  176  sq.)  that 
this  account  of  the  birth  of  Jesus  is  a  heathen  produc- 
tion  (see,  on  the  contrary,  Neander,  p.  12  sq.).  On  the 
•therWid,  howeyer,  this  statement  stands  so  isolated 


in  the  Christian  tiadition,  and  so  surpasses  the  rangę  of 
the  profane  conceptions,  that  we  caii  hardly  reject  the 
idea  that  it  must  have  operated  to  enhance  the  estimate 
of  Christ^s  dignity.  It  has  been  suggested  as  possible 
(Paulus,  Leben  Jesu,  i,  97  sq.)  that  the  hope  had  already 
formed  itself  in  the  soul  of  Maiy  that  she  would  become 
the  mother  of  the  Messiah  (which,  howeyer,  is  contiap 
dicted  by  ber  evident  surprise  and  difficulty  at  the  an- 
nouncement.  Lukę  i,  29, 34),  and  that  this  had  drawn 
nourishroent  from  a  vision  in  a  dream,  as  the  angelio 
annundation  (Luko  i,  26  sq.)  has  been  (but  with  the 
greatest  yiolence)  interpreted  (see,  howeyer,  Yan  Oos- 
terzee,  Be  Jem  e  Kwytn*  noto,  Utr.  1840).    See  Cosckf- 

TION. 

Bethlehem,  too  (Wagner,  De  loco  nał,  J.  Chr,  Colon. 
Brandenb.  1673),  as  the  place  of  Christ^s  birth,  has  been 
deemed  to  belong  to  the  mythical  dress  of  the  narratiye 
(comp.  Mic.  V,  1 ;  see  Thiess,  Krił.  Comment,  ii,  414),  and 
it  has  therefore  been  inferrcd  that  Jesus  was  not  only 
begotten  in  Nazareth,but  also  bom  there  (Kaiser,  BM 
TheoL  i,  230)— which,  neyertheless,  does  not  follow  from 
John  i,  46.  That  Jesus  was  bom  in  Bethlehem  is  stated 
in  two  of  the  eyangelical  accounts  (Matt.  ii,  1 ;  Lukę  ii, 
4),  as  may  also  be  elsewhere  gathered  from  the  events 
which  follow  his  birth.  But  a  moro  direct  discropancy 
between  Matthew  and  Lukę  (Hasc,  p.  44),  respecting  Jo« 
seph*s  belonging  to  Bethlehem  (Matt  ii,  22, 23 ;  Lukę  i, 
26 ;  ii,  4),  cannot  be  substantiated  (compare  generally 
Gelpe,  JugendgeecK  d,  ffenuj  Beme,  1841.)  See  Beth- 
lehem. 

7.  Among  the  rdaiitet  of  Jesus,  the  following  are 
named  in  the  N.Test. :  (a)  Mary^  Je8us's  mother^s  sistet 
(John  xix,  25).  According  to  the  usual  apprehension 
of  this  passage  [see  Salome],  she  was  married  to  one 
Clopas  or  Alphseus  (q.  v.),  and  had  as  sons  James  (q.  v.) 
the  younger  (Acts  i,  18)  and  Joses  (Matt.  xxvii,  56 ; 
Mark  xv,  40).  See  Mary.  (6)  Elizabeth^  who  is  cfiUed 
the  relatiye  (fruyynńjCj "  cousin")  of  Marj-  (Lukę  i,  36). 
Respecting  the  degree  of  relationsliip,  nothiug  can  be 
determined :  it  has  been  ąuestioned  (Paulus,  Ćomment, 
i,  78)  whether  she  was  of  the  tribe  of  Levi,  but  this  ap- 
pears  certain  from  Lukę  i,  5.  In  a  fragment  of  Hippol- 
ytus  of  Thebes  (in  Fabricii  Pseudepigr.  ii,  290)  she  is 
called  Sid)ef  the  daughter  of  MaT>''8  mothefs  sister.  She 
was  married  to  the  pricst  Zacharias,  and  boro  to  him 
John  the  Baptist  (Lukę  i,  57  8q.).  See  Elizabeth. 
(c)  Brethren  of  Jesus  (rf^tX0of,  Matt  xii,  46,  and  paral- 
lel  passages;  John  ii,  12;  yii,  3, 5, 10;  Acts  i,  14 ;  d^cX- 
0OC  roi;  Kvpiov,  1  Cor.  ix,  5),  by  the  name  of  Jsmes, 
Joses  (q.  V.),  Simon,  and  Judas  (Matt.  xiii,  55,  and  the 
parallel  passage,  Mark  vi,  3).  (On  these  see  Clemen,  in 
the  Zeiteehr.f,  wist.  TheoL  iii,  329  sq. ;  A.  H.  Bloom,  De 
rotę  a^e\^ic  et  raic  AdŁ\^.  tov  KvpioVf  Lugd.  Bat. 
1839;  Wieseler,  in  the  Słudien  u.  Kritik,  1842,  i,  71  są. ; 
Schaff,  Dos  YerhdJttn,  des  Jacob,  Brud,  d.  Herm  zu  Jacot. 
A  Iphdi,  BerL  1842,  p.  11  sq.,  34  są. ;  Grimm,  in  the  I/alL 
Encyd,  2,  sect.  xxiii,  p.  80  są. ;  Method,  Quar,  Ber.  Oct 
1851,  p.  670-672 ;  on  their  descendants,  Euseb.  Ilist.  Ev. 
iii,  20, 33 ;  see  Kdmer,  De  propincuor.  Serratoris  perse- 
cutionej  Lips.  1782.)  In  the  passages  Matt.  xii,  46 ;  xiii, 
55;  John  ii,  12;  Acts  i,  14,  are  unąuestionably  to  be  un- 
derstood  proper  brothers,  as  they  are  all  together  named 
conjointly  with  the  mother  of  Jesus  (and  with  Joseph, 
Matt  xiii,  55) ;  tbe  same  is  the  uatural  inference  from 
the  statement  (John  vii,  5)  that  the  brethren  (a^tA^oO 
of  Jesus  had  not  belieyed  in  him  as  the  Messiah.  On 
*' James,  the  brother  of  the  Lord"  ('Iacw/3oc  u  adcX^c 
KvpioVf  GaL  i,  19),  see  James.  These  brethren  were 
re^utled  as  mere  relatiyes,  or,  more  exactly,  cousina 
(namely,  sons  of  Mary,  Jesus's  mothcr'8  sister),  by  the 
Church  fathers  (especially  Jerome,  ad  Matt.  xii,  46) ; 
also  lately  by  Jessieu  {Authentic.  epist.  Jud.  p.  36  są.), 
Schneckenbuiger  {Ep.  Jac.  p.  144  są.),  OIshausen  (Cow- 
meat.  i,  465  sq.),  Glodder  {Erang.  i,  407),  Kuhn  (Jahrb» 
/.  TheoL.  und  chrisłL  Pkilos.  1834,  iii,  pt,  i),  and  others, 
partly  on  the  ground  that  the  names  James  and  Joses 
appear  among  the  sons  of  the  other  Mary  (Matt.  zxvii. 


JESUS  CHRIST 


880 


JESUS  CHRIST 


56),  partly  that  it  is  not  certain  that  Mary,  after  her  first 
concepdon  by  the  Holy  Spirit,  ever  became  the  mother 
of  other  children  by  her  husband  (see  Origen,  in  MaiU 
lii,  463,  ed.  de  la  Rue ;  comp.  Eusebius,  Hist.  EccL  ii,  1). 
The  latter  argument  is  of  no  force  (aee  Schaff,  p.  29) ;  on 
the  former,  see  below.  But  the  term  *<  brethren"  (adcX- 
^i),  sińce  it  docs  of  itself  indicate  blood  relatires,  can- 
not  without  utter  confusion  be  used  of  merę  cousins  in 
Immediate  connection  witb  the  mother.  And  if  it  de- 
notes  proper  brothers,  as  aiso  Błoom  and  Wieseler  sup- 
pose,  the  question  still  remains  whether  these  had  both 
liarents  the  same  with  Jesus  (L  e.  were  his  fuli  brothers), 
or  were  the  sons  of  Joseph  by  a  former  marriage  (half- 
brothers;  compare  TheophyL  ad  1  Cor,  9).  The  latter 
opinion  [see  Joskph],  which  is  based  upon  an  old  (£bi- 
onitic)  tradition  (see  Fabricius,  Pseudepigr.  i,  291 ;  Thilo, 
Cod,  Apocr,  i,  109,  208,  362  są.),  is  held  as  probable  by 
Grotius  {ad  Jac.  i,  1),  Yorstius  {De  Ilebr.  Nov.  Test,  ed. 
Fischer,  p.  71  sq.),  Paulus  (jComment,  i,  6113),  Bertholdt 
{Einleii.yj  65C  sq.),  and  others;  the  former  by  Herder 
(Brie/e  zweener  Bruder  J.  p.  7  są.),  Pott  (Proieff,  in  Ep. 
Jac.  p.  90),  Araraon  {BibL  TheoL  ii,  259),  Eichhom  (AW. 
«u  N,  T.  iii,  570  są.),  Kuinol  (tid  Matt,  xii,  46),  Clement 
(ut  sup.\  Bcngcl  (in  his  N,  A  rckic,  ii,  9  są.),  Stier  (-4  n- 
devJt,  i,  404  są.),  Fritzsche  {ad  Mott,  481),  Neander  {lAh, 
Jesuy  p.  39  są.),  Wieseler  and  Schaff  (ut  8up.)f  and  oth- 
ers, An  intimation  that  farors  this  last  view  is  oon- 
tained  in  the  expression  "  first-bom"  (Alatt.  i,  25 ;  Lukę 
ii,  7),  which  is  further  corroborated  by  the  statement  of 
abstinencc  from  matrimoniai  intercOurse  unłU  the  birth 
of  Jesus  (Matt.  i,  25 ;  but  see  Olshausen,  ad  loc),  which 
scems  to  imply  that  the  brothers  in  ąuestiun  were  later 
sons  of  Joseph  and  Mary.  The  circumstance  that  the 
sister  of  Jesus's  mother  had  two  sons  similarly  named — 
James  and  Joses  (or  threc,  if  we  understand  'loudac  'la- 
Kii)flov  [Luko  vi,  16]  to  mean  *^brother  of  James"  [see 
JuDAs])— is  not  conclusive  against  this  yiew,  sińce  in 
two  nearly-related  families  it  is  not  even  now  unusual 
to  find  children  of  the  same  name,  especially  if,  as  in  the 
present  case,  these  names  were  in  common  use.  £ich- 
hom's  explanation  {uł  sup,  p.  571)  is  based  upon  a  long 
sińce  cxploiled  hypothesis,  and  reąuires  no  refutation. 
John  xix,  26,  contains  no  valid  counter-argument :  the 
brothers  of  Jesus  may  have  become  convinced  by  his 
resurrection  (Matt  xxviii,  10),  and,  even  had  they  been 
BO  at  his  death,  yet  perhaps  the  older  and  morę  spiritu- 
ally-kindred  John  may  have  seemed  to  Jesus  morę  suit- 
able  to  carry  oiit  his  last  wishes  than  even  his  natural 
brothers  (see  Pott,  ut  sup,  p.  76  są. ;  Clement,  uł  aup.  p. 
860  sq.).  At  all  events,  the  brothers  of  Jesus  are  not 
only  expressed  as  having  become  at  length  believers  in 
him,  but  they  even  appear  somewhat  later  among  the 
publishers  of  the  Gospel  (Acts  i,  14;  1  Cor.  lx,  5).  See 
Bkotiikks.  ((/)  Sit(ej'9  of  Jesus  are  mentioned  in  Matt. 
xiii,  56 ;  Mark  vi,  3  (in  3Iark  iii,  82,  the  words  rai  ai 
dSikt^ai  are  of  very  doubtful  authenticity).  Their 
names  are  not  giveii.  That  we  are  to  understand  own 
sisters  is  plain  from  the  foregoing  remarks  respecting 
his  brothers.  (e)  Finally,  an  ecdesiastical  tradition 
makes  Salome,  the  wife  of  Zebedee,  and  mother  of  the 
apostles  James  and  John  (Mark  xv,  40;  xvi,  1,  etc),  to 
have  been  a  relative  of  Jesus.  (See  Hase,  p.  55.)  See 
Salome. 

8.  Jesus  was  educated  at  Nazareth  (Hase,  p.  57;  Weisse, 
De  J,  C,  educationej  Helmst.  1698;  Lange,  Depro/ecftb. 
Christi  adolesc,  Altdorf,  1699),  but  attended  no  (Rabbin- 
ical)  schools  (John  vii,  15).  He  appears,  acconling  to 
the  custom  of  the  times,  to  have  leamed  the  trade  of  his 
adopted  father  (J  ustin  Mart.  c.  TiypL  88,  p.  316,  ed.  Col. ; 
comp.  Theodor.  Jlisł,  Ecd,  iii,  23 ;  Sozomen,  vi,  2,  etc), 
but  this  he  did  not  contiime  to  practice  at  the  same  time 
with  his  carecr  of  teaching,  as  was  usual  with  all  the 
Kabbins  (compare  Neander,  p.  54).  By  this  means  he 
may  in  part  have  acąuired  his  subsistence  (comp.  Mark 
vi,  3 ;  but  Oripen,  Contra  CeUum,  6,  p.  299,  denies  this 
statement,  and  Tischendorf  omits  6  rticrtoy),  Besides, 
his  foUowers  supplied  him  with  liberał  presents,  and,  on 


his  jonmeys,  the  Oriental  usages  of  hospitality  (John  y, 
45 ;  xii,  2)  senred  him  in  good  stead  (see  Kau,  Unde  Je*, 
alimenta  rita  acceperitj  Eriang.  1794).  See  HosprrAi/- 
ITY.  A  number  of  grateful  women  also  aocompanied 
him  for  a  considerable  time,  who  caml  for  his  mainten- 
ance  (Lukę  viii,  2;  Mark  xv,  41).  He  had  a  common 
travelling-purBe  with  the  apostles  (John  xii,  O ;  xiii,  29), 
from  which  the  stock  of  pzoyisions  for  the  joumer  was 
provided  (Lukę  ix,  13 ;  Matt  xiv,  17  są.,  etc).  We 
certainly  cannot  regard  Jesus  aa  pmperly  poor  in  tbe 
sense  of  indigent  (see  Walch,  MUctU,  Saer,  pi  866  «{.\ 
for  this  appears  (Henke's  J/im.  ii,  610  są.)  neither  fitca 
Matt.  vui,  20  (see  Lunze,Z)e  Chriatidiritiujei paupertfttt, 
Lips.  1784),  nor  yet  from  2  Qor.  viii,  9  (see  lieHra^  r. 
rtrnUnfiiffen  DenJk.  iv,  160  są.),  and  John  xix,  23,Tather 
shows  the  contrar>'  (comp.  Biar-Hebneus,  Ckron.  pt  251) ; 
yet  his  parents  were  by  no  means  in  opulent  circum- 
stances  (see  Lukę  ii,  24 ;  comp.  Lev.  xii,  8),  and  he  him- 
self  possessed  (Matt  viii,  20)  at  least  no  rad  estate  whst- 
ever  (see  generaUy  Kau,  De  causia  atr  J.  C,  paupertati 
se  mbjecerit  prmcipuis,  Eriang.  1787 ;  Siebenhaar,  in  the 
Sachs,  eget,  Stud  ii,  168  są.).  See  Humiuatiok.  Dur- 
ing  his  public  career  of  teaching,  Jesus  (when  not  tnv- 
elling)  staid  chiefly  and  of  choice  at  Capemaum  (Matt. 
iv,  13),  and  only  on  one  or  two  occaaions  (Lnke  iv,  IG; 
Mark  vi,  1)  visited  Nazareth  (see  Kiesling,  De  J,  Naztir, 
inffrata  patria  exuJe,  Lips.  1741).  In  exterior  he  coo- 
stantly  ob6erved  the  customs  of  his  peopie  (see  A.  Ge- 
senius,  Christ,  decoro  genHs  sua  se  accommodasse,  Helmst. 
1734 ;  Gude,  De  Christa  eŁ  disdpuUs  ejua  derori  gfudiosig, 
in  the  Noe,  misoeUan,  Lips,  iii,  563  są.),  and,  far  from 
wishing  to  attract  attention  by  singularity  or  austeritr, 
he  took  part  in  the  pleasures  of  social  life  (John  ii,  1  są.; 
Lukę  \'ii,  31  są.;  Matt  xi,  16  są.;  compare  ix,  14  k).). 
Nevertheless,  he  never  married  (compare  Ciem.  Akix. 
Sfronu  iii,  191  są. ;  see  Schleiermacher,  Der  ChristHcke 
Glauhe,  Ist  ed.  ii,  526),  for  the  suppodtion  of  Schulthess 
{Neutest,  łheohg,  Nachr,  1826,  i,  20  sq. ;  1828,  i,  102  sq.) 
that  Jesus  was  married  according  to  Jewish  usage,  with 
the  addition  that  his  wife  (and,  perhaps,  8eveial  children 
by  her)  had  died  before  his  entrance  upon  pubUc  life,  is 
a  pure  hypothesis  that  at  least  desenres  no  counteoance 
from  the  silence  in  the  N.T.  as  to  any  mich  occuirenoes; 
and  the  stupendous  design  alieady  in  the  mind  of  ihe 
youthful  Jesus  afforded  no  motive  for  maiiiage,  aod,in- 
deed,  did  not  admit  (compare  Matt  xix,  12)  such  a  cud- 
finement  to  a  narrower  drcle  (see  Weisse,  Ltbm  Jentj  i, 
249  są. ;  comp.  Hase,  p.  109).  Additional  literaturę  msy 
be  seen  in  Yolbeding,  p.  17, 18 ;  Hase,  p,  59.    See  Naza- 

RENE. 

9.  The  length  of  Jesos^s  pablic  ministry  (beginniog 
about  the  80th  year  of  his  age,  Lukę  iii,  24 ;  see  Rnech, 
in  the  Brem,  «.  Verd,  BUfUofh,  iii,  818  8q.)t  as  well  is 
the  chronological  seąuence  of  the  single  events  relat«d 
in  the  Gospels,  is  very  Yarioosly  estimated.  (See  Hk«, 
p.  17.)  The  fint  three  evangeli8tB  give,  as  the  acent 
of  their  transactions  (after  his  temptation  and  the  im- 
prisonment  of  the  Baptist,  Matt  iv,  1-13),  almost  exdn- 
8ively  Galilee  (De  GaUJUta  opportuno  Serrtitorit  imror- 
ulor,  theairo,  Gott.  1775),  inasmuch  as  Jesus  had  his  n«- 
idence  then  in  the  city  Capemaom,  especially  in  tbe 
winter  months  (Matt  iv,  13 ;  viii,  5;  xvii,  24 ;  Marie  i, 
21 ;  ii,  1 ,  etc).  For  the  most  part,  we  fiml  him  tn  the  n>- 
mantic  and  thickly  settled  neighborhood  of  the  Sca  of 
Tiberias,  or  upon  its  surface  (Matt  viii,  33  są. ;  xiii,  1 
są.;  xiv,  13;  Lukę  viii,  22),  idso  on  the  other  side  in 
Penea  (Matt  viii,  28 ;  Lukę  viii,  26 ;  Mark  \-ii,  31>  Once 
he  went  as  far  as  within  the  Phcenician  boundarics 
(Matt  XV,  21 ;  Mark  vii,  24  są.).  But  in  the  in-nopacal 
gospels  he  only  appears  once  to  have  visited  Jemadem, 
at  the  time  of  the  last  Pa8sover  (Matt.  xxi  sq.;  Maik 
xi  sq. ;  Lukę  xix  są.).  According  to  this,  the  doratioa 
of  his  teaching  might  be  limited  to  a  wtgle  year  (Eosebi 
iii,  24),  and  many  (appeaUng  to  Lukę  iv,  19:  comp.Iiai 
lxi,  1  są. ;  see  Origen,  Horn,  32 ;  comp.  TertuU.  A  dr.  Jud, 
c  8 ;  but  see  K3mer,  p.  4)  already  in  the  ancient  Churth 
(Ciem.  Ależ.  Stroni,  i,  p.  147 ;  Origen,  Priitcip,  iv,  5)  mify 


JESUS  CHRIST 


881 


JESUS  CHRIST 


allow  this  space  to  his  public  mission  (oompare  Mann, 
Thrw  Yeara  ofihe  Birth  and  Death  of  Christ,  p.  161; 
Pńestly,  Ilarmony  ofthe  £vangeligtt,  London,  1774,  ii,  4 ; 
Browne,  Ordo  Saclorum,  p.  G84  8q.) ;  although,  inde- 
pendently  of  all  the  othen,  Luko  vi,  1  (seeond^rsi  Sab- 
bath)  affords  indication  of  a  second  Passorer  which  Je- 
sus oelebrated  during  bis  public  career.     See  Sabbath. 
On  the  other  hand,  John^s  Gospel  shows  (comp.  Jaco- 
bi,  Zur  CkronoL  d,  I^bmt  J.  im  Kvang,  Jok,  in  the  Stvd, 
u.  Krii.  1838,  iv,  845  8q.)  tbat  Jesus  was  not  only  often- 
er,  but  generally  in  Judtea  (whencc  he  once  traveUed 
through  Samaria  to  Galilee,  John  iv,  4 ;  oompare  his  rc> 
tum,  Lukę  xvii,  11),  namely,  in  the  holy  city  Jerusalem 
(but  this  difference  agrees  with  the  reBpective  designs 
ofthe  several  gospels;  see  Neander,  p.  885  sq.),  and  in- 
forma  us  of^r«  Jewish  festivalB  which  Jesus  oelebrated 
at  Jerusalem.    The  first,  occurring  soon  after  the  bap- 
tism  of  Jesus  (John  ii,  18),  is  a  Pa88over;  the  second 
(John  V,  1)  is  called  indefinitely  "  a  feast  of  the  Jews'' 
{iopTTf  rwv  *lovoaiup) ;  the  third  was  the  Fe8tival  of 
Tabemaclcs  (John  vii,  2) ;  the  fourth  the  Feast  of  Ded- 
ication  (John  x,  22) ;  and,  lastly,  the  fifth  (John  xii, 
xiii)  again  a  Paa8over:  mention  \s  also  madę  (John  vi, 
4)  of  siill  another  Paa8over  which  Jesus  spent  in  Galilee. 
Ilence  it  woukl  seem  tbat  Jesus  was  engaged  somo  three 
years  (Origen,  Contra  Celtumy  ii,p.67)  as  a  public  teach- 
er;  and  if  by  the  ''feast"  of  John  v,  1  we  are  also  to 
understand  a  Passover  (Paulus,  Comm,  i,  901  8q. ;  SUs- 
kind,  in  Bengcrs  A  rckiv,  i,  182  sq. ;  R  Crusius,  ad  loc ; 
Seyflarth,  Chronol.  Sacra,  p,  114 ;  Robinson,  Ilarmomf, 
p.  198),  which,  however,  is  not  certain  (LUcke,ad  loc; 
Anger,  l)e  temp,  in  Ad,  A  post,  ratione,  i,  24  sq. ;  Jacobi, 
uł  sup,  p.  864  8q.),  we  must  assign  a  period  of  three  and 
a  half  years  (Euaeblus,  i,  10, 8),  as  lately  Seyffarth  has 
done  {Summary  of  recmt  Uiscoveries  in  CkronoL  N.  Y. 
1857,  p.  183),  although  on  the  most  singular  growids 
(see  Alford,  Commeniary  on  John  v,  1).     Otherwise  the 
evangelist8  hardly  afford  more  than  two  years  and  a  few 
months  (see  Anger,  »f  sitp,  p.  28 ;  liase,  p.  17  sq.)  to  the 
public  labors  of  Jesus  (see  gcneraUy  Laurbeck,  De  an- 
ms  mimsterii  Chr,,  Altdorf,  1700 ;  Komer,  Quot  Pasckata 
Christus  post  baptism,  celebrarerił,  Lips.  1779 ;  Pries,  De 
numero  Pasckatum  Christi,  Rostock,  1789;  Lahode,  De 
die  et  amo  ulL  Pasch,  Chr.  IlaL  1749 ;  Marsh*s  remarks 
in  Michaelis's  Inirod,  ii,  46  sq.).    Again,  as  the  apostles 
were  not  nninterruptedly  in  company  with  Jesus,  the 
time  of  their  proper  associattoń  with  him  might  be  still 
further  reduced  somewhat,  although  we  can  not  (with 
Uaulein,  De  temporis,  quo  J,  C,  cum  Apostoł,  rersatus  est, 
duratione,  ErL  1796)  assuroe  it  to  have  been  barely  some 
nine  months.    Under  these  three  (or  four)  Paschal  fes- 
tivals  writers  have  repeatedly  endeavored,  for  historical 
and  parlicularly  apologetic  purpoees,  to  arrange  all  the 
single  occimnences  which  the  first  evangelists  mention 
without  chronological  seąuencc,  and  so  to  obtain  a  com- 
plcte  chronological  view  of  Jesus^s  entire  joumeys  and 
teaching.    Yet,  notwithstanding  so  great  a  degree  of 
ingenuity  bas  been  expended  upon  this  subject,  nonę  of 
the  G«spel  Harmonies  hitherto  constructed  can  be  re- 
garded  as  more  than  a  series  of  historical  conjectures, 
sińce  the  narrative  of  the  first  three  evangelists  presents 
but  little  tbat  can  guide  to  a  measurably  certain  con- 
dusion  in  such  an  arrangement,  and  John  himself  does 
not  appear  to  relate  the  incideiits  in  strictly  chronolog- 
ical unler  according  to  these  PassoverB  (see  generally 
Eichhom,  £inl,  ins  N,  T,  i,  692  sq.).     The  most  impor- 
tant  of  these  attempts  are,  Lightfoot,CAroRtc/e  ofthe  O, 
and  N,  T,  Lond.  1655 ;  Doddridge,  EtrposUor  ofthe  N,  T, 
London,  1789;  Kas,  Ilatynoma  Euanfftlistar,  Jen.  1727; 
Macknight, /^armoR^  ofthe  four  Gospels,  London,  1756, 
Latine  fedt  notasąue  adjecit  Rtlckersfelder,  Brem.  1772 ; 
Bengel,  Richt,  Harmonie  der  4  Ev<mgeLM  edit.  Tubing. 
1766;.  Newcome,  Hormony  ofthe  Gospels,  DuUin,  1778 ; 
Paulus,  Comment,  i,  446  sq. ;  ii,  1  8q.,  384  sq. ;  iii,  82  są. ; 
Kaiser,  Ueb.  die  synopt.  ZusammensłelL  der  4  Etany,  Nu- 
remb.  1828;  CUusen,  Quat,evanyeLtabuia  synopt,  sec,  ra- 
Hanan  tempor,  Copenhagen,  1829 ;  Wieaeler,  Chronolog, 


Synopse  der  4  Evang,  Hamb.  1848 ;  Town8end's  dironoL 
A  rrang.  of  t/ie  iV,  Test,  Lond.  1821 ,  Bost.  1837 ;  Greswell, 
Harmonia  Evang,  Lond.  1830 ;  Riobinson,  Harmony  of 
the  Gospels  (Greek),  Bost.  1845  (EngL  id.) ;  Tischendorf, 
Synopsis  EranyeL  Leipz.  1851 ;  Strong,  Harmony  ofthe 
GospeU  (English),  N.  Y.  1852  (Greek),  ib.  1854 ;  Stroud, 
Greek  Harmony,  Lond.  1853.     See  Harmonies. 

10.  Besides  the  twelve  apostles  (q.  v.),  Jesus  also  chose 
ieventy  (q.  v.)  persons  as  a  second  more  private  order 
(Lukę  X,  1  sq.),  who  have  been  supposed  by  some  to 
correspond  to  some  Jewish  notion  of  the  8eventy  nations 
of  the  world,  inasmuch  as  Lukę  shows  a  tcndency  to 
such  generalization ;  but  this  numbcr  was  probably  se- 
lected  (see  Kuinol,  ad  loc.)  with  reference  to  the  8even- 
ty  elders  of  the  Jews  (Numb.  xi,  16  sq.),  composing  the 
Sanhedrim,  just  as  the  twelve  apostles  representcd  the 
twehre  tribes  of  Isracl  (comparc  generally  Burmann,  Ar- 
em/. Acad.  ii,  95  są.;  Heumnnn,  De  70  Chritti  legaiis^ 
Gotting.  1748).  Their  traditional  names  (see  Assemani, 
Bibłioth,  Or,  III,  i,  819  sq. ;  Fabric.  Lux,  p.  115  są.),  some 
of  which  are  citcd  by  Eusebius  (i,  12),  might  have  some 
historical  ground  but  for  the  manifest  endearor  to  place 
in  the  illustrioiis  rank  of  the  seventy  every  conspicuoua 
individual  of  the  apostolical  age,  conceming  whom  noth- 
ing  positive  was  known  to  the  contraiy.  The  account 
of  Lukę  himself  has  eometimes  been  called  in  ąuestion 
as  unhistorical  (Strauss,  i,  566  sq. ;  Schwegler,  Nach-' 
apost.  Zeitalter,  ii,  45;  see,  on  the  other  hand,  Neander, 
p.  541  sq.). 

Respecting  the  characteristics  of  Jesus^s  teaching  (see 
especially  Winkler,  Ueber  J,  Lehrfahigkeit  und  Lehrart, 
Loipz.  1797 ;  Behn,  Ueb,  die  Lehrart  Jesu  u,  seiner  ApoS' 
tel,  LUbeck,  1791 ;  Hauff,  Bemerkunyen  uber  die  Lehrart 
Jesu,  Offenbach,  1788 ;  H.  Ballauf,  Die  lehrart  Jesu  ais 
rortrejlidi  gezeiył,  Hannov.  1817 ;  H.  N.  la  Cld,  De  Jesu 
Ch,  instituendi  methodo  hom,  ingenia  ercolente,  Groning. 
1835 ;  Ammon,  BiU.  Theol,  ii,  828  sq. ;  Planck,  Geschichle 
d.  Christenth,  i,  161  sq. ;  Hase,  /.eben  Jes,  p.  123  są. ;  Ne- 
ander, p.  151  są. ;  Wcisse,  i,  376  sq.),  we  may  remark 
tbat  all  his  discourses,  which  were  delivered  sometimea 
in  the  synagogues  (MatL  xiii,  54 ;  Lukę  iv,  22,  etc), 
sometimes  in  public  places,  and  evcn  in  the  open  lield, 
sometimes  in  the  Tempie  court,  were  suggested  on  the 
occasion  (John  iv,  82  są. ;  vii,  87  są.),  either  by  some 
transaction  or  nalural  phenomenon,  or  else  by  some  re- 
cital (Lukę  xiii,  1),  or  expre8sion  of  others  (Matt.Ańii, 
10).  He  loved  especially  to  clothe  his  sentiments  in 
comparisons  (see  Greillng,  p.  201  są.),  parables  (Matt. 
xiii,  11  są.,  84  są.)  (for  these  are  pre-eminently  dlstin- 
gulshed  for  simplicity,  conciscness,  natural  beauŁy,  in- 
telligibleness,  and  dignity ;  see  especially  Unger,  De  par-' 
abolar,  Jesu  natura,  irUeiprełatione,  usu,  Leipz.  1828),  al- 
legories  (John  vi,  32  sq. ;  x ;  xv) ,  and  apothegms  (Matt. 
v),  sometimes  also  paradoxe8  (John  ii,  19;  vi,  53;  viii,' 
58),  which  exactly  suited  the  comprehension  of  his  au- 
diencc  (Mark  iv,  83 ;  Lukę  xiii,  15  są. ;  xiv,  5  są.) ;  and 
he  even  adapted  the  novelty  and  peculiarity  of  his  doo- 
trines  to  familiar  Jewish  forms,  which  in  his  mouth  lose 
tbat  ruggedness  and  unrestbetic  character  in  which  they 
have  come  down  to  us  in  the  Talmud  (comp.  Wcisse,  De 
more  Domini  acceptos  a  magisłris  Jud.  loguendi  ac  diS" 
serendi  modos  sapienier  em€ndandi,y\teb,  1 792).  See  Ai^ 
LEGORY ;  Parable.  In  Gontestii  with  leamed  Jews,  Je- 
sus knew  how,  by  simple  cleamess  of  intellect,  to  defeat 
their  arrogant  dialectics,  and  yet  was  able  to  pursue 
their  own  method  of  inferential  argument  (Matt.  xii, 
25).  When  they  propojłcd  to  him  captious  ąuestions,  he 
brought  them,  not  unfreąuently  by  similar  ąuestions, 
mostly  in  the  form  of  a  dilemma  (Matt.  xxi,  24 ;  xxii, 
20 ;  Lukę  x,  29  są. ;  xx,  3  »ą,),  or  by  appeal  to  the  ex- 
plicit  written  law  or  to  their  sacred  histor>'  (^latt.  ix, 
13 ;  xii,  8  są. ;  xix,  4  są. ;  Lukę  vi,  2  są. ;  x,  26  są. ;  xx, 
28  są.),  or  by  analogies  from  ordinary  life  (Matt,  xii,  10 
są.),  to  maintain  silence,  or  put  them  to  embarrassmcnt 
with  all  their  sagacity  and  Icgal  zeal  (lVratt.  xxii,  42  są.  i 
John  viii,  8  są.) ;  sometimes  he  disarmed  them  by  the 
eserdse  of  his  miiaculous  power  (Lukę  v,  24).   With  a 


JESUS  CHRIST 


882 


JESUS  CHRISt 


L 


fcw  exception8,  John  alone  assigiis  Umger  speeches  of  a 
dogmatic  charact«r  to  Jesus;  nor  is  it  any  matter  of 
surprbc  that  the  Wisdom  which  deUvere(l  itself  to  the 
populace  in  maxini8  and  similes  should  permit  itself  to 
be  understood,  in  the  circle  of  the  priests  and  those  eru- 
dite  in  the  law,  connectedly  and  mystically  on  topics  of 
the  higher  gnosia,  althoufch  even  in  John,  of  course,  we 
can  not  expect  the  ipsissima  verba,  In  a  formal  tieat- 
nient,  moreover,  his  representations,  especially  those  ad- 
dre8se<l  to  the  people,  could  not  be  free  from  accommoda" 
tion  (P.  yan  Hemert,  Ueb.  A  ccommod,  im  X,  T,  Dortmund 
and  Leipz.  1797) ;  but  whether  he  madę  uae  of  the  ma- 
teria! (not  mercly  negativc)  species  of  accommodation 
is  not  a  historical^but  a  dogmatic  ąuestion  (comp.t)iere- 
on  Brctschneider,  łłnndb,d.  Dogm,  i,  420  8q.;  Wegschnei- 
der,  Inttitui.  p.  119  sq.;  De  Wette,  SifienleAre,  iii,  131 
9q.;  Neander,p.216  8q.)>  See  Accommodation.  Like 
the  O.-T.  prophets,  he  somctimes  also  employed  symbol- 
ical  acts  (John  xiii,  1  8q.,  20, 22;  comp.  Lukę  ix,  47  8q.). 
A  digniflcd  expres6ion,  a  keen  but  a^ectionate  look,  a 
gesticulation  reflecting  the  inward  inspiration  (Hege- 
meister,  Chrisium  gettus  pro  concione  usurpas»ef  Senrest. 
1774),  may  hare  contributed  not  a  little  to  the  force  of 
bis  words,  and  gained  for  him,  in  opposiug  the  Pliari- 
aees  and  lawyers,  the  eulogium  of  eloquence  (compare 
John  vii,  46;  xviii,  6;  Matt.  vii,  28  Bq.)>  The  tuition 
which  Jesus  imparted  to  the  apostles  (comp.  Greiling,  p. 
218  są.)}  was  apparently  private  (Matt*  xiii,  II  8q.;  see 
Colln,  Bifłl,  TheoL  ii,  14).  See  Apostle.  Fii^ally,  Jesus 
commonly  spoke  Syro-Chaldee  (comp.  e.  g.  Mark  iii,  17 ; 
y,  41 ;  vii,  34;  Matt.  xxvii, 47;  see  Malała,  Chronograpk, 
p.  13),  like  the  Patcstinian  Jews  generally  [see  La^- 
ouagk],  not  Greek  (Diodati,  De  Chrisło  Grace  loąuente, 
Neap.  1767,  translate<l  in  the  .4  m.  BibL  Repos,  Jan.  1844, 
p,  180  są. ;  comp.  on  the  contrary,  Emesti,  Neuetłe  tkeoL 
BibL  i,  269  są.),  although  he  might  have  undcrstood  the 
latter  language,  or  even  Latin  (Wemsdorf,  De  Chrigto 
Latine  lofitiente,  Yiteb. ;  see  generally  Keiske,  De  lingua 
hertL  J.  C.  Jen.  1670 ;  Bh.  de  Rossi,  Della  linffua  propria 
di  CAm^o,Parm.  1773 ;  Zeibich,  De  lingua  Judttor,  temp. 
Chrisłi  et,  .4;)o«/.  Yitebsk,  1791 ;  Wisemann,  in  his  Hor, 
Syriuc.  Rohl  1828).  No  wrUings  of  his  are  cxtant  (the 
spuriousness  of  the  so-called  letter  to  the  king  of  Edessa, 
given  by  Eusebius,  i,  13,  is  evident;  comp.  also  Ruhr's 
Krif,  PreJiger-bibliotJi,  i,  161  są.  [see  Ano  ar]  :  the  al- 
leged  written  productions  of  Jesus  may  be  seen  in  Fa- 
bricii  Cod.  Apocr,  i,  303  są.),  nor  was  there  need  of  any, 
ftincc  he  had  provided  for  the  immediate  dissemination 
of  his  doctrines  through  the  apostles,  and  he  wished 
even  to  tum  away  attention  from  the  literaturę  of  the 
age  to  the  spirit  and  life  of  a  thorough  piety  (compare 
Ilauflf,  Brie/h  d.  Werth  der  schrifiL  ReL-Urkund.  betref- 
fend,  i,  94  są. ;  Sartorius,  Cur  Ckrisius  scripti  nUiil  re- 
liquerił,  Leipz.  1815 ;  Witting,  Warum  J.  mchis  SchriJtL 
hinterlojuteft,  Bschw.  1822 ;  Giesecke,  Warum  hot  J.  C. 
Uber  sich  u.  s.  Relig.  nichts  SchrifiL  hinterhuseny  LUneb. 
1823 ;  B.  Crusius,  Bibl.  Theol  p.  22  są. ;  Neander,  p.  150 ; 
comp.  Haae,  p.  1 1).  Jesus  has  bcen  improperly  entitled 
a  Rabbi,  or  high  rank  of  religious  teacher  C^a^,  pa/3/30, 
in  the  sense  of  the  Jewish  schools,  as  having  been  thus 
etyled  not  only  by  the  populace  (Mark  x,  51 ;  John  xx, 
16),  or  his  disciples  (John  i,  39, 50;  iv,  31 ;  ix,  2 ;  xi,  8 ; 
Matr.  xxvi,  25,  etc),  but  also  by  Nicodemus  (John  iii,  2), 
and  evcn  his  enemies  (vi,  25)  themselyes  (\^itringa,  Sy- 
nag.  ref.  p.  706 ;  Paulus,  I^ben  Jes,  i,  122  są. ;  see,  on  the 
Gontrao%  C.  E.  Schmid,  De  promotione  acad,  Christo  ęjus- 
qu€  discipulis  perperam  tributa,  Ups.  1740).  In  the  time 
of  Jesus  persons  had  no  occasion  to  aspiie  to  the  formal- 
ity  of  leamed  honors,  as  in  later  ages  (Neander,  p.  50), 
and  Jesus  had  little  sympathy  with  such  an  ostentatious 
spirit  (John  vii,  15).  See  Rabbi.  (Additional  litera- 
turę may  be  seen  in  Yolbeding,  p.  25.)  See  Prophbt. 
11.  The  Jews  expected  miracles  of  the  Messiah  (John 
vii,  81 ;  4  Esdr.  xiii,  50;  comp.  Matt,  viii,  17 ;  John  xx, 
80  są. ;  see  liertholdt,  ChriMologia  Judceor.  p.  168  są.), 
such  as  Jesus  performed  (rśpara,  trripiia^  Łwatiiic). 
These  all  had  a  morał  tendency,  and  aimed  at  beneficent  i 


reaulta  (on  Matt.  viii,  28  są.,  soe  Paulus,  ad  loa ;  Brei- 
Schneider,  Handb.  d.  Dogm,  i,  807  są. ;  Uase,  Ijtbeu  Jtnt^ 
p.  184 ;  on  Matt. xxi,  18  są., see Fleck. YertAeid. d. Chru- 
tenth.  p.  188  są.),  in  which  req>ects  they  are  in  scrik- 
ing  contrast  with  the  silly  thaumaturg\*  of  the  apoci}*- 
phal  gospels  (see  Tholuck,  Gkmbwurdigk.dLerang. (Jesck 
p.  406  są.),  consisting  moetly  of  raisiug  the  dead  and 
the  cure  (Mark  vi,  56)  of  such  maladies  as  had  bafiłcd 
all  scientific  remedies  (insanity,  epilepsy,  palsy,  lepn^y, 
bliudness,  etc).     He  aaked  no  rewani  (comp.  MatL  x, 
8),  and  performed  no  miracles  to  gratify  curiońty  (^Mati. 
xvi,  1  są.;  Mark  viii,  11  są.),  or  to  excite  the  astoaiisb> 
ment  of  a  sensuous  populace;  rather  he  repcatedly  for- 
bade  the  public  report  of  his  extraorduiary  deeds  (Matt 
ix,  80;  Mark  i,  44:  vii,  36;  viii,  26;  Lukę  v,  14;  >iii, 
56;  Plitt,  in  the  Hess.  Hebopfer,  1850,  p.  890  są.,  taka 
an  enoneous  view  of  Mark  v,  19,  for  in  veree  20  Jesus 
bids  the  man  relate  his  euro  to  his  reitUites  only),  and 
he  avoided  the  popular  outbursts  of  joy,  which  would 
have  swelled  loudly  at  his  particularly  succeasTul  achiev- 
ments  (John  v,  13),  only  suffSering  these  miracles  to  be 
acknowledged  to  the  honor  of  God  (Lukę  viii,  39  sq.; 
xvii,  16  są.).    In  effecting  cnres  he  someiimes  madę  use 
of  some  means  (Mark  vii,  38;  viii,  23;  John  ix,  6  są.; 
comp.  Spinoza,  Tract.  theoL  poL  c  6,  p.  244,  ed.  PauL; 
Med.'herm.  Uniersuch.  p.  835  są. ;  Paulus,  Leben,  Jestt.  i, 
223),  but  in  generał  he  employed  simply  a  word  (Matt. 
viii,  1  są. ;  John  v,  8,  etc),  even  at  a  distance  (Matt 
viii,  5  sq.;  Lukę  vii,  6  są.;  John  iv,  50),  or  mcrely  a 
touch  of  the  invalid  (Matt.  viii,  3, 15)  or  the  aflłicted 
member  (blind  eyes,  Matt.  ix,  29 ;  xx,  84 ;  see  Seiler, 
Christ,  an  in  operibus  mirabilib.  arcanis  umus  sil  remtdns, 
Erlang.  1795 ;  also,  Jesus  an  miracula  suis  ipsius  vinbia 
ediderif,  ib.  1799) ;  on  the  other  hand,  likewise,  a  cure 
was  experienced  when  the  infirm  touched  his  ganneat 
(Matt.  ix,  20  są. ;  xiv,  36),  but  in  such  a  caae  always  oa 
the  presumption  of  a  firm  faith  (Matt.  ix,  28;  compars  . 
John  V,  6),  80  that  when  this  failed  the  minculous 
power  was  not  exanńsed  (Matt.  xLii,  58 ;  Mark  xi,  3)l 
Oa  this  very  account  some  rnodems  have  asserted  (Gata- 
muŁh,  2>aM. (2e  Christa  Afed.  Jen.  1812  [on  the  opposite^ 
Ammou*s  Theolog.  Joum.  i,  177  są.] ;  Knnemoser,  J/ci^ 
netisnu  p.  473  są. ;  Kieaer,  8ysi.  des  Tellurism.  ii,  502  są.; 
Meyer,  Naturanalogien  od.  die  Erscheni.  d.  oram.  Mag- 
net.  mit  IJins.  auf  TheoL  Hamb.  1839;  compi  Weisse,  i, 
349  są.)  that  these  curea  were  principally  effected  by 
Jesus  through  the  agency  of  animal  maguetism  (comp^ 
Lukę  viii,  48 ;  see  geneńUy  Pfau,  De  Christo  aeadem, 
iV.  T.  medieo  primario,  Erlang.  1743 ;  Schulthess,  io  the 
Neueit.  theol.  Nachr.  1829,  p.  360  są.).     Sec  Hi^ALcra. 
That  the  Jewish  Rabbis  and  the  Easenes  perfonned,  er 
perhaps  only  pretended  to  peiform,  similar  curea,  at  Inst 
upon  daemoniacs,  q>pearB  from  Matt.  xii,  27 ;  Liike  xi, 
19 ;  Mark  ix,  38  są. ;  comp.  Josephus,  War^  ii, 8, 6 ;  JiA 
viii,  2,  5).     The  sentiments  of  Jesus  himsclf  as  to  the 
value  and  tendency  of  his  miracles  are  undeniable;  he 
disapproyed  that  eagemess  for  wonders  displayed  by  bis 
oontemporariea  (Matt.  xvi,  1 ;  John  ii,  18)  which  apnmg 
from  sensuous  curiosity  or  from  pure  malerolence  (Malt. 
xii,  39;  xvi,  4;  Mark  viii,  U  są.),  or  else  had  a  thank- 
less  regard  merely  to  their  own  advaiitage  (John  ir,48: 
vi,  24),  but  which  ever  deńred  miracles  meiely  ss  soch, 
while  he  regarded  them  as  a  natioiial  method  for  at- 
taining  his  purpose  of  awakening  and  calling  forth  iaith 
(John  xi,  42 ;  comp.  Matt.  xi,  4  są. ;  Lukę  vii,  21  sq.X 
and  hence  often  lamented  their  ineffectualneas  (Matt 
xi,  20  sq. ;  Lukę  x,  18 ;  see  especially  Nitzach,  QiuMtmm 
ChristUM  nuraculis  f ri^i^rif,  Yiteb.  1796;  SchoU,  Opase. 
i,  111  są.;  Lehuerdt,  De  nomwUis  Chr,  ejiiłis  unde  ipss 
quid  quantumq.  łribuerit  miraculis  cognoscetur.  Region. 
1833 ;  comp.  Paulus,  in  the  Xeu.  theoL  Joum.  ix,  842  są., 
418  są. ;  Storr,  in  FlaU*s  Magaz.  iv,  178  są. ;  Eiseln,  in 
the  KirchetMdtter  Jur  das  BistK  Hottenburg,  i,  161  sq.( 
De  Wette,  Biblisch,  Dogm.  p.  196  sq. ;  Suauas,  daubins* 
Uhrey  i,  86  są.).    As  an  undeniaUy  efTectiye  mesne  of 
introducing  Christianity,  these  miracles  have  ever  r^ 
tained  a  profoond  wignificance,  of  which  they  canoot  be 


JESUS  CHRIST 


883 


JESUS  CHRIST 


depriyed  by  any  efforts  to  explAin  them  on  natural  prin- 
ciples  (^Br,  iib.  Raiionaiismus,  p.  215  8q.)y  or  to  ascribe 
them  to  tzaditional  exaggenitLon ;  for  all  investigation8 
of  this  chancter  have  aa  yet  generally  resulted.  only  in 
a  contorted  exegeń8,  and  are  oflentimes  morę  difficult 
of  belief  than  the  miraculous  incidejits  themselres  (see 
on  the  subject  generally  Koster,  Immanutl  oder  Characf, 
eler  neutest.  Wundererzahlungen,  Lpz.  1821 ;  Johannsen, 
in  Schroter  and  Klein'8  Opj)osiłionschr.  v,  571  aq. ;  vi,  31 
aą. ;  Muller,  De  mrąc.  J,  Ch.  naU  et  neeess.  Marburg  and 
UaL  1839 ;  Neander,  p.  256  8q.).    See  Miracle. 

12.  Sereral  of  the  circumstanoea  of  Christ^s  paańon 
.  (q.  V.)  are  explained  under  BiiOouY  S^vkat,  Cross,  Li- 
TłiosTROTON,  PiLATB,  EcLiPSE,  etc.  (compare  Merillii 
Nota  mpasnott,  J.  Chr.  Par.  1622,  Frcf.  and  Lipa.  1740; 
Waliher,  JurtMł.^-kistor,  Betradtt,  uh,  (k  Geachichte  u.  d. 
Lad.  u.  Sterh,  Chritti,  Breslau,  1788, 1774;  DU  Leideru- 
ffetcA,  Jesu  ezeffełitch  und  archaolog,  bearbeitety  Stuttg. 
1809 ;  Hug,  in  the  ZeUschr.f,  d.  Ertbiath.  Freitmrg,  v, 
1  8q.;  Friedlieb,  ArehdoL  d,  LeideMffeach,  Bonn,  1843). 
The  qaestion  of  the  legality  or  iilegality  of  the  sentence 
of  death  pronounced  upon  Jesus  by  the  Sanhedrim  and 
procurator  haa  of  late  been  warmly  discussed  (see,  for 
the  former  view,  Salvador,  J/istoire  des  ttutituttom  de 
MoiMtj  BnuceL  1822,  ii,  c.  8 ;  alao,  JUom  ChriH  eŁ  sa  doc 
trme.  Par.  1838 ;  Hase,  A«60i  Jeś,  p.  197  Bq. ;  on  the  op- 
poaite,  Dupin,  L^aine  Jesus  devant  Caiphe  et  PUate^  Par. 
1829 ;  Ammon,  ForthiUL  i,  341  8q. ;  B.  Crusius,  Opusc,  p. 
149  8q.;  Neander,  p.  683  8q.;  comp.  also  Daumer,  Syst, 
der  specuL  PkUos,  p.  41  8q. ;  and  Neubig,  Isi  J,  mit  voU. 
Rechte  den  Tod  emes  Yerhrechers  ffestarbenf  £rL1836). 
The  Sanhedrim  condemned  Jesus  as  a  blasphemer  of 
God  (Matt.  xxvi,  65  8q.;  Mark  xiv,  64;  compare  John 
xix,  7),  for  which  the  Law  prescribed  capital  punish- 
ment  (Lev.  xxiv,  16) ;  but  he  would  havc  been  guilty 
of  this  crime  if  he  had  falaely  daimed  (Matu  xxvi,  63 
Bq. ;  Lukę  xxii,  67  8q.)  to  be  the  Messiah  (Son  of  God), 
and  the  fact  of  this  profession  was  substantiated  indi- 
rectly  by  witnesses  (Matt  xxvi,  60  8q. ;  Mark  xiv,  57 
8q.),  and  directly  by  Jesns^s  own  declaration  (Blatt, 
xxvi,  63  sq. ;  Mark  xiv,  61  sq.).  So'  far  the  transaction 
miglit  seem  to  be  toierabły  regular,  excepŁ  that  swear- 
inp^  the  prisoner  as  to  his  own  crime  is  an  unheard- 
of  prooess  in  law.  Moreover,  there  was  morę  than  a 
single  superiicial  examination  of  witnesses  (Matt.  xxvi, 
60),  and  Jesus  had  really  uŁtered  (John  ii,  19)  what 
the  deponenta  averred.  But  that  Jesus  could  not  be 
the  Messiah  was  presupposed  by  the  Sanhedrim  on  the 
groond  of  thetr  Christological  yiews;  and  heze  were 
they  chiefly  to  blame.  Morę  exact  inquiric8  concem- 
ing  the  teachings  and  acta  of  Jesus  would  have  surę- 
ly  corrected  their  iropression  that  Jesus  was  a  blas^ 
phemer,  and  perhaps  led  them  to  a  rectifkation  of  their 
expecUtion8  respecting  the  Messiah.  Another  point  is 
entitled  to  consideration  in  estimating  their  judicial  ac- 
tion.  The  Sanhedrim'8  broader  denunciation  of  Jesus 
before  Pilate  as  a  usurper  of  royal  power,  and  their 
cfaarging  him  with  treason  (crimen  loRSte  majestatis) 
(Matt.  ^xvii,  U ;  Mark  xv,  2 ;  Luko  xxiii,  2 ;  John  xviii, 
33),  is  explained  by  the  fact  that  the  Messiah  was  to  be 
a  theocratic  king,  and  that  the  populace  for  a  few  days 
saluted  Jesus  with  huzzas  as  the  Son  of  David  (Matt. 
xxi ;  John  xii).  Jesus  certainly  did  not  aspire  to  roy- 
alty  in  the  political  sense,  as  he  decUtred  before  Pilate 
(John  xviit,  86  8q.) :  this  the  Sanhedrim,  if  they  had 
been  dispassionate  judges,  must  have  been  assured  of, 
even  if  they  had  not  previously  inąuired  or  asoerUined 
how  far  Jesus  was  from  pretensions  to  political  author- 
ity.  The  sentenoe  itself  is  therefore  less  to  be  rppro- 
bated  than  that  the  high  oourt  did  not,  as  would  have 
been  worthy  itself,  become  better  informed  respecting 
the  charges;  their  indecorous  hastę  evinoes  an  eagemess 
to  condcmn  the  prisoner  at  all  hazards,  and  their  vindic- 
tire  manner  clearly  betrayi  their  personal  malice  against 
him.  That  Pilate  passed  and  executed  the  sentence  of 
death  contrary  to  hu  better  Judgment  as  a  civil  officer 
is  beyond  all  doubt.    See  Pilatk. 


That  Jesus  passed  through  a  merely  apparent  death 
has  been  supposed  by  many  (see  cspecially  Bahrdt, 
Zwecke  Jesu^  x,  174  sq.;  Paulus,  Comment,  iii,  810  sq., 
and  Ld>en  Jesu,  I,  ii.  281  sq. ;  ou  the  contrar}\  sec  Kich- 
ter.  De  morte  Hetratoris  in  crucCj  GÓtU  1757,  also  in  his 
Diss,  4  tned,  p.  1  sq. ;  Gruner,  De  Jes.  C.  morte  vera^  non 
simuUttaj  Jena,  1805 ;  Schmidtmann,  Medic.-philos.  Be- 
iceis,  dass  J,  nach  s,  Kreuziffung  nicht  von  einer  todtaknL 
Ohnmachl  be/aUen  gewesen,  Osnabr.  1830).  The  pierc- 
ing  of  the  side  of  Jesus  by  the  lance  of  a  Roman  soldier 
(John  xix,  34 ;  his  name  is  traditionally  given  as  Ijmgi' 
nuSf  see  Thilo,  Apocr,  p.  586)  has  been  regarded  as  the 
chief  circumstance  upon  which  eveTything  here  dq)ends 
(Triller,  De  miranda  iałeris  cordiscue  Ckrisfi  rulnere^  in 
Gruner*8  Tract,  de  dmnoniacis,  Jena,  1775 ;  Eschenbach, 
Scripta  med.-łńU.  p.  82  są. ;  Bartholini,  De  latere  Chrisłi 
apertOy  Lugd.  Bat.  1646),  inasmuch  as  before  this  puno- 
turę  the  above  cited  physicians  assume  but  a  torpor  and 
SKoony  which  might  seem  the  morę  probable  because 
crucifixion  could  hardly  have  caused  death  in  so  short  a 
time  (Mark  xv,  44).  See  Crucify.  But  the  account 
of  the  wound  in  the  side  is  not  such  as  to  allow  the 
ąuestion  to  be  by  that  means  fuUy  and  absolutely  de- 
termined  (see  Brie/e  liber  Bationalismus,  p.  236  8q.),  sińce 
the  evangelist  does  not  state  which  side  {v\tvpa)  was 
pierced,  nor  where,  nor  hmo  deeply.  U  is  therefore  sure- 
ly  a  precańoos  argument  to  presume  the  left  side  (al- 
though  the  poeition  of  the  soldier,  holding  the  spear  in 
his  right  hand  and  thrusting  it  opposite  him,  would 
strongly  countenance  this  supposition),  and  equally  so 
to  assume  a  very  deep  incision,  penetrating  the  pericar- 
dium  and  heart,  thus  changing  a  swoon  into  actual 
death ;  nevertheles8,  comp.  John  xx,  25,  26,  in  favor  of 
this  last  particular.  The  purpose  of  the  stab— to  ascer- 
tain  whether  the  crucifled  person  was  still  alive — also 
demanded  a  forcible  thrust,  and  the  issue  of  blood  and 
water  vouchcd  for  by  the  evangelist  (^(^X3fv  ti^vc 
alfjLa  Kai  ySdtp,  perhaps  a  hcndiadys  for  bloody  water) 
would  certainly  point  to  real  death  as  immediately  re- 
sulting.  By  this  we  must  undcrstand  the  clotted  blood 
(cruor)  in  connection  with  the  watery  portion  (serum\ 
which  both  fiow  together  from  punctures  of  the  larger 
blood-ves8els  (reitis)  of  bodies  just  dead  (from  the  art&- 
ries  of  the  breast,  as  supposed  by  Hase  [Leb,  JesUy  2d  ed. 
p.  193],  no  blood  would  issue,  for  thcse  are  usually  empty 
in  a  corpse),  and  the  piercing  of  the  side  would  therefore 
not  cause,  but  only  indicate  death.  See  BijOod  and 
Water.  In  finc,  the  expre88  assertion  of  the  evangel- 
ists,  that  Jesus  breathed  his  last  (»C»irvei;<rc  [Mark  xv, 
37;  Lukę  xxiii,  46],  a  term  exactly  equivalent  to  the 
Latin  esepirarił,  he  eipired^  and  so  doubUess  to  be  under- 
stood  in  its  oommon  acceptance  of  death),  admits  no  oth- 
cr  hypothesis  than  that  of  actual  and  complete  dissolu- 
tion.     Sec  Aoony. 

The  fact  of  the  return  of  Jesus  a]ive  from  the  grave 
(comp.  Ammon,  De  rera  J,  C,  reviviseentia,  Erlang.  1808 ; 
Griesbach,  De/ontib,  unde  EtangeL  suas  de  resurrectione 
Domini  narrationes  hauserint,  Jena,  1783 ;  Friedrich,  in 
£ichhom's  BibUołh,  vii,  204  sq. ;  Doderl.  De  J.CinriL 
reditu,  Utr.  1841)  is  not  invalidated  by  Strauss*s  ingeni- 
ous  hypotheses  (ii,  645;  see  Hase,  p.  212;  Theilo,  p.  105 
sq. ;  comp.  Kuhn,  Wie  ging  Ch,  durch  des  Grabes  Thur, 
Strals.  1888) ;  but  if  Jesus  had  been  merely  dead  in  ap- 
])earance,  so  delicate  a  oonstitution,  already  exhausted 
by  sufferings  before  cmcifixion,  would  certainly  not  hare 
revived  without  special— that  is,  medical— assistance 
(Neander,  p.  708) :  in  the  cold  rock-vault,  in  an  atmo- 
spliere  loaded  with  the  odór  of  aromatics,  bound  hand 
and  foot  with  gTave-clothes,  in  utter  prostration,  he 
would,  in  the  ordinarg  coune  of  thingis  have  rather 
been  killed  than  resuscitated.  His  return  to  life  must 
therefore  be  regarded  as  a  tnie  miraclp.  See  Kesur- 
rection.     On  the  grave  of  Jesus,  see  Golgotha. 

After  he  had  risen  (he  lay  some  thirty-six  hours  in 
the  grave ;  not  three  foli  days,  as  asserted  by  Seyflarth, 
Summarg  ofChronol.  Diseor.  N.  Y.  1867,  p.  i88),  he  first 
showed  himself  to  Mary  Magdalenę  (Matt.  xxviii,  9; 


JESUS  CHRIST 


884 


JESUS  CHRIST 


Mark  xvi,  9 ;  John  xx,  14 ;  but  about  Łhe  aame  hour  to 
the  other  women,  see  Strong'8  Greek  Harmony,  p.  864), 
then  to  his  apostles  in  yańoas  placea  in  and  about  Jeru- 
Salem  (Lukę  xxiv,  18  5q.,  86  8q.;  John  xx,  19  8q.),  and 
was  recognised  by  them— not  immediately,  it  is  tnie  (for 
the  few  past  days  of  suffcring  may  have  considerably 
disfigured  hlm  bodily),  but  yet  unequivoca]ly — as  their 
crucitied  teacher  (Neander,  p.715  są.),  and  even  handled, 
although  with  some  resenre  (Lukę  xxiv,  87;  John  xxi, 
12).  He  did  not  appear  in  public ;  had  he  done  so,  his 
enemies  would  have  found  opportunity  to  remove  him 
a  second  time  out  of  the  way,  or  to  represent  him  to  the 
people  as  a  sham  Jesus:  his  resurrection  could  have  its 
tnie  significance  to  his  belieyers  only  (see  generally 
Jahn,  Nachtrage,  p.  1  są.).  After  a  stay  of  40  days,  he 
was  Yisibly  carried  up  into  the  sk}'  before  the  eyes  of 
his  disciples  (Lukę  xxiv,  61 ;  Acts  i,  9.  Mark  xvi,  19,  is 
of  doubtful  authenticity).  Of  this,  three  evangelical 
witnesses  (Matthcw,  Mark,  and  John)  relate  nothing 
(for.yery  improbable  reasons  of  this,  see  Fhitt'8  Magaz. 
viii,  55  sq.),  although  the  last  implies  it  in  the  words  of 
Jesus, "  I  asoend  to  my  Father,"  and  doses  his  Gospel 
with  the  last  iiitenriew  of  Jesus  in  Galilee,  at  the  Sea  of 
Tiberias  (John  xxi ;  compare  Matt  xxviii,  16).  The 
apostles,  in  the  doctrinal  expo8itions,  occasionally  allude 
to  this  asccnsion  {avaXf\Ąfic)  of  Jesus  (Acts  iii,  21 ;  1  Tim. 
iii,  16 ;  Rev.  xii,  6),  and  often  speak  (Acts  ii,  38 ;  v,  31 ; 
yii,  55, 56 ;  Rom.  viii,  84 ;  £ph.  i,  20 ;  CoL  iii,  1)  of  Christ 
as  seated  at  the  right  hand  of  God  (see  Grie^ch,  Syl- 
hge  locor.  N»  T,  ad  adtcens,  Ckristi  in  caL  apectaniium. 
Jena,  1793 ;  also  in  his  OpuscuL  ii,  471  są. ;  B.  Crusius, 
Bibl,  Theol  p.  400).  Over  the  final  disposal  of  the  body 
of  Christ  ailer  its  ascension  from  the  earth,  an  impene- 
trable  veil  must  ever  rest  The  account  of  the  ascen- 
sion (see  Stud,  undKrU.  1841,  iii,  597  sq.)  is  still  treated 
by  many  of  the  critical  theologians  (comp.  Ammon,  A  8- 
censut  J.  C.  in  coeL  histor.  BibL  Grotting.  1800,  also  in  his 
Nov,  o/nuc.  tkeoL;  Horst,  in  Hom'8  GołHng.  Muaeum  f, 
TheoL  I,  ii,  8  sq. ;  Br,  Uber  RationaL  p.  238  sq. ;  Strauss, 
ii,  672  są. ;  Hase,  p.  220)  as  one  of  the  myths  (moulded 
on  the  well-known  O.-T.  examples,  Gen.  v,  24 ;  2  Kings 
ii,  11,  and  senring  as  a  basis  of  the  expectation  of  his 
yisible  return  from  heaven,  Acts  i,  11 ;  for,  that  the  Jews 
of  that  day  believed  in  an  ascension  of  the  Messiah  to 
heaven  [comp.  John  vi,  62],  appears  from  the  book  Zo~ 
kar  [Schóttgen,  HortK  nd)r,  ii,  696]  :  the  comparisons 
with  heathen  apotheoses  are  not  in  point  [  B.  Hassę,  //m- 
iorim  de  Chr,  tn  vitum  et  cceL  redeunte  ex  narrat.  Lit,  de 
Romulo  iUiutroHoj  Regiom.  1805 ;  Gfrorer,  Urchristenth. 
I,  ii,  374  są.],  and  the  theories  of  Bauer  in  Flatt'8  Mag, 
xvi,  173  są.,  Seiler,  Weichert,  and  Himly  [see  Bret- 
schneider,  Sytt.  EntwicheL  p.  689 ;  Otterbein,  De  adsoen- 
ńone  in  cadum  adspectcbili  modofacUij  Duisb.  1802;  or 
Fogtmann,  Comm,  de  in  ccelwn  adscennij  Havn.  1826]  are. 
as  iittle  to  the  purpose)  that  originated  among  the  Chris- 
tians,  or  were  even  inveuted  by  the  apostles  (Gramberg, 
Rdigiormd,  ii,  461)  —  a  view  that  is  forbidden  by  the 
close  proximity  of  the  incident  in  point  of  time  {London 
[  Wesleyan  ]  RemeWf  July,  1861).  It  can,  therefore,  only 
be  regarded  as  a  pretematural  occuirence  (Neander,  p. 
726).    See  Ascension. 

13.  Respecting  the  personal  appearanee  of  Jesus  we 
know  nothing  with  certainty.  According  to  Eusebius 
{Hisł.  £ccL  vii,  18),  the  woman  who  was  cured  of  her 
hnmorrhage  (Matt.  ix,  20)  had  erected  from  thankful- 
neK)  a  brazen  statuę  (see  Hastei  Dissertat,  syllogej  p.  814 
sq. ;  comp.  Hcinichen,  Exc,  10  ad  Eutebius,  iii,  397  sq. ; 
Thilo,  Cod,  apocr,  i,  562  są.)  of  Jesus  at  Paneas  (C«sa- 
rea-Philippi),  which  was  destroyed  (Sozom.  Hi^,  Eccl, 
V,  21)  at  the  command  of  the  emperor  Julian  (compare 
Niceph.  Hist,  Ecd,  vi,  15).  Jesus  himself,  according  to 
several  ancient  (but  scarcely  trustworthy)  statements 
(Evagr.  iv,  27 ;  Niceph.  ii,  7),  sent  his  likeness  to  Ab- 
garus  (q.  v.)  at  Edessa  (comp.  Bar-Hebr.  Chroń,  p.  118), 
where  was  also  said  to  have  been  found  the  handker- 
chief  of  Christ  with  an  imprint  of  his  countenance  (Ce- 
drenus,  HitU  p.  176 ;  Bar-Hebnens,  Chroń,  p.  168).     StiU 


another  figurę  of  Jesus  is  also  menUoned  (Nicephoras,  uf 
8upr,;  this  credulous  historian  names  the  evazigelist 
Lukę  as  the  painter  siicoeasively  of  Jesus,  Mary,  ind 
several  apostles),  and  a  oertain  Publius  Lentulus,  a  Ro- 
man officer  (according  to  one  MS.  a  proconmt)  is  repoit- 
ed  to  have  oomposed  a  description  of  Christ^s  penonil 
appearanee,  which  (with  great  variation  of  the  text)  is 
still  exhibited  as  extant  (comp.  Fabridi  Cod»  apocr.  K 
TesL  i,  301  są. ;  Paeudolentidi,  Joa.  Damasc  et  Xiofpi, 
IHist,  Ecdes,  i,  40]  prosopograpk.  J,  C.  cdiL  Carpzov, 
Hdmst  1774).  This  last,  according  to  the  text  of  Gab- 
ler  (in  Latin),  reads  as  foUows:  ^*A  man  of  tali  sUturc, 
good  appearanee,  and  a  venerable  countenance,  soch  as 
to  inspire  beholders  both  with  bve  and  awe.  His  hsir, 
wom  in  a  drcular  form  and  curled,  rather  dark  and  shin- 
ing,  flowiiig  ovcr  the  shouldera,  and  parted  in  the  mid- 
dle  of  the  head,  aft«r  the  siyle  of  the  Nazarenesi  His 
forehead,  smooth  and  perfectly  serene,  with  a  face  free 
from  wrinkle  or  spot,  and  beautified  with  a  moderate 
ruddiness,  and  a  faultless  nose  and  mouth.  His  beard 
fuli,  of  an  aubum  oolor  like  his  hair,  not  long,  but  part- 
ed. His  eyes  ąuick  and  dear.  His  aspect  terrible  io 
rebuke,  placid  and  amiable  in  admonition,  cheeiful  with- 
out  losing  its  gravity :  a  person  never  seen  to  laugh,  but 
often  to  weep,"  etc.  (compare  Niceph.  i,  40).  (See  Vol- 
beding,  p^  6.)  The  description  given  by  Epiphaniiis 
{Monach,  p.  29,  ed.  Dreasd)  has  latdy  been  discoverpd 
by  Tischeudorf  {Cod,  Ven,  cl  i,  cod.  3,  No.  12,000)  io  a 
somewhat  different  and  pcrhaps  morę  origtnal  fonn  (in 
Greek),  as  foUows:  "But  my  Christ  and  God  was  ex- 
ceedingly  beautiful  in  countenance.  His  stature  was 
fully  developed,  his  faeight  being  8ix  feet.  He  had  an- 
bum  hair,  ąuit«  abundant,  and  flowing  down  mosdy 
over  his  whole  person.  His  eyebroiK's  were  black,  and 
not  highly  arched;  his  eyes  brown,  and  bnght.  He 
had  a  family  likeness,  in  his  finc  eyes,  prominent  ncne, 
and  good  color,  to  his  anccstor  David,  who  is  sńd  to 
havc  had  beautiful  eyes  and  a  ruddy  oon]plexioo.  He 
wore  his  hair  long,  for  a  razor  never  touched  it;  nor 
was  it  cut  by  any  peraon,  except  by  his  mother  in  hb 
childhood.  His  neck  indined  forward  a  Iittle,  so  that 
the  posturę  of  his  body  was  not  too  upright  or  stift  His 
face  was  fuli,  but  not  ąuite  so  ronnd  as  his  motbers; 
tinged  with  suflSdent  color  to  make  it  handsome  and 
natural;  mild  in  expres8ion,  like  the  blandness  in  the 
above  description  of  liis  moth<!r,  whose  features  h»  oira 
strongly  resembled."  This  production  bears  erident 
marks  of  being  a  later  fabrication  (sec  GaUer,  2  Pm/fr. 
in  autheniiam  epist,  Lenttdi,  etc,  Jen.  1819, 1822;  also  in 
his  Opusc.  ii,  638  są.).  There  is  still  another  notice  of 
a  similar  kind  (see  the  Jen,  Li/,-Zeii.  1821,  sheet  40), 
and  also  an  account  of  the  figurę  of  Jesus,  which  the 
emperor  Alexander  Severus  is  said  to  hare  had  in  hii 
lararium  or  household  shrine  (see  Zdbich  in  the  Aor. 
MiscelL  Lips,  iii,  42  są.).    See  Christ,  Imagks  of. 

From  the  New  TesL  the  following  panicolais  ooly 
may  be  gathered:  Jesus  was  free  from  bodily  defecti 
(for  so  much  is  implied  in  the  type  of  an  imblemidied 
victim  imder  the  law,  and  otherwiae  the  people  wmild 
not  have  recognised  in  him  a  prophet,  while  the  Phań- 
sees  would  have  been  surę  to  throw  any  physical  drfor- 
mity  in  his  teeth),  but  his  exterior  could  have  presentfd 
nothing  remarkable,  sińce  Mary  Magdalenę  mistook  kim 
for  the  ganlener  (John  xx,  15),  and  the  two  discśpies 
on  the  way  to  Emmaus  (Lukę  xxiv,  16),  as  well  as  tbe 
apostles  at  his  last  appearanee  by  the  Sea  of  Gennesareth 
(John  xxi,  4  są.),  did  not  at  first  recognise  him ;  bat  his 
form  then  probably  borę  many  permanent  marks  of  his 
severe  sufferings.  The  whole  erangelical  namtire  in- 
dicates  sound  and  vigorous  bodily  healtli.  In  kiok  and 
voice  he  must  have  had  something  wx>nd«rful  (John 
xviii,  6),  but  at  the  same  time  engaging  and  benevQknt: 
his  outward  air  was  the  expreaBion  of  the  high,  noble, 
and  free  spiiit  dwelling  within  him.  The  asaemoaB  of 
the  Church  fathers  (Cłem.  Alex.  Pigdag,  iii,  92;  Strom. 
vi,  93 ;  Origen,  CeU,  vi,  827,  ed.  Spaic.)  that  Christ  had 
an  uuprepoasesaing  appearanee  are  of  no  anthoń^r,  bdqg 


^ 


JESUS  CHRIST 


886 


JESUS  CHRIST 


eridently  conformed  to  Iso.  liii  (but  see  Piiartii  Asteriio 
de  sinffulari  J.  Ch.  pulchritudine.  Par.  1651;  see  gene> 
ally,  in  addition  to  the  above  authorities,  F.  Vavaa8or, 
JJejforma  Ckriati,  Paris,  16-19 ;  on  the  portraits  of  Jesus, 
Keiske,  De  imaffitUbus  ChrUti,  Jena,  1685;  Jablonsky, 
Ć7/><i«c.  ediU  Te  Watcr,  iii,  377;  Junker,  Ueber  Christus- 
tO/ife,  ia  Meusers  MiacelU  artisL  Inh.  pt.  25,  p.  28  sq. ; 
Ammon,  Ueb,  Christuakópfe,  iu  his  Magazm,/.  chrUiL 
J*r€<L  I,  ii,  315  8q.;  Tholuck,  Liłerar,  Anzeig,  1834,  No. 
71 ;  Grimm,  Die  Sagę  und  Ursprung  der  Chrutusbilder, 
Beri  1843 ;  Mrs.  Jameson,  Ilist.  ofour  Lord  ezempłtfied 
t»  Works  o/Arł  [Lond.  1865]).  (See  further  in  Vol- 
beding,  p.  19;  Hase,  p.  65;  Afeth,  Quart.  Rev.  Oct.  1862, 
p.679.) 

14.  It  might  be  an  inteiesting  question,  had  we  the 
meaiis  of  accurately  determining,  how  and  by  what  in- 
strumentalitics  Jesus,  In  a  human  point  of  view,  attained 
his  spiritual  power,  or  to  what  iniluenoe  (aside  from  di- 
vine  inspiration)  he  owed  his  inteUectual  formation  as 
A  founder  of  reiigion  (Ammon,  BibL  Theoiog,  i,  234  8q. ; 
JlandbiŁch  der  christL  SiUenlehre,  i,  43  sq. ;  Kaiser,  BibL 
Theoiog.  i,  234  sq. ;  De  Wette,  BibL  Dogm.  p.  185  8q. ; 
Colln,  BiU.  Theoiog,  ii,  8  8q. ;  Hase,  pw  56  8q. ;  compare 
Rau,  Be  momaUtM  iis  qua  ad  Jea.  dimnar.  rerum  scientia 
unbuendum  viri  heUmUse^  tndeanturf  Erlang.  1796;  Grei- 
ling,  Leben  Jemi,  p.  58  8q. ;  Planck,  i,  23  sq. ;  Briefe  Uber 
RaJtumaL  p.  154  8q.).  But  wliile  there  has  evidently 
been  on  the  one  side  a  generał  tendency  to  exaggerate 
the  difficulties  which  the  natural  improrement  of  Jesus 
łiad  to  overoome  (Reinhard,  Plan  Jesu^  p.  485  8q.),  yet 
noiie  of  the  hypotheses  proposed  for  the  solution  of  the 
question  has  satistied  the  conditions  of  the  problem,  or 
been  free  from  elear  historical  diificulties.  Many,  for 
instance,  suppose  that  Jesus  had  his  reiigious  education 
in  the  order  of  the  Essenes  (q.  v.),  and  they  thuik  that 
iu  the  Christian  morals  they  cspecially  find  many  points 
of  coincidence  with  the  doctrines  of  that  Jewish  sect 
(Heim,  Christus  und  die  Yemut^,  p.  668  8q. ;  St^udlein, 
Geśch,  d.  Sittenlehre  JeśUy  i,  570  sq. ;  see,  on  the  coutrary, 
Ltlderwald,  in  Henke'8  Magaz.  iv,  378  8q. ;  Bengel,  in 
F]Att*s  Magaz,  vii,  126  sq. ;  J.  H.  DorfmUUer,  De  dispari 
Je$u,  E8saorumque  ^eiplitia^\xańAxL  1803 ;  Wegnem, 
in  IlJgen^s  ZeiUchr,  1841,  pt.  2 ;  comp.  Heubner,  5th  Ap- 
pend.  to  his  edit.  of  IŁeinbard's  PUm  Jem),  Others  at- 
tribute  the  culture  of  Jesus  to  the  Alexandrio-Jewish 
reiigious  philosophy  (Bahrdt,  Brie/e  Ober  die  Bibd  im 
YoUe^onj  i,  376  sq.;  Gfrorer,  In  the  Geech,  des  Urchria- 
tenihJ).  Still  others  imagine  that  Sadducseisro  [see  Sad- 
duceb]  ,  or  a  comparison  of  this  with  Phariaeism  [see 
Piiabisee],  was  the  source  of  the  pure  reiigious  views 
of  Jesus  (Henke,  Magaz,  v,  426  8q. ;  Des  Gótee,  Schutz- 
schr,Jur  Jeaus  von  Nazareih,  p.  128  8q.).  Although 
single  points  in  the  teaching  and  acts  of  Jesus  might  be 
illoatrated  by  each  of  these  theories  (as  could  not  fail  to 
be  the  case  with  respect  to  one  who  threw  himself  into 
the  midst  of  the  reiigious  efTorts  of  the  age,  and  oom- 
bined  efficiency  with  right  aims),  yet  the  whole  of  his 
spiritual  life  and  deeds,  the  high  cleamess  of  under- 
standing,  the  purity  of  seutiment,  and,  above  all,  the 
independenoo  of  spirit  and  matchless  morał  power  which 
atamp  each  particular  with  a  sigiiificance  that  was  his 
alcme,  cannot  be  thus  explained  (Thomson,  Land  and 
Bookf  ii,  86  sq.).  A  richly-endowed  and  profound  mind 
18,  rooTeover,  presupposed  in  all  such  hypotheses  (comp. 
Paulus,  Leb.  Jesu,  i,  89).  Our  object  is  simply  to  inves- 
tigate  the  influenoes  that  aroused  these  spiritual  facul- 
ties,  uufolded  them,  and  directed  them  in  that  path. 
And  in  determining  these,  it  is  elear  at  the  outset  that 
a  powerful  impulae  must  have  been  given  to  the  natural 
dcvelopment  of  Jesus^s  mind  (Lukę  ii,  52)  by  a  diligent 
study  of  the  Uoly  Scńptures,  especially  in  the  prophet- 
ical  books  (Isaiah  and  the  Psalms,  Paulus,  Leben  JesUy  i, 
119  sq.),  which  contained  the  germs  of  an  improved 
monotbeism,  and  are,  for  the  most  part,  free  from  Jew- 
ish niceties.  He  would  also  derive  assistance  from  a 
comparison  of  the  Pharisaical  statutes,  which  were  un- 
questaonably  known  to  Jesut^  and  particularly  of  the 


Jewish  Heltenism  (Alexandriani8m ;  see  Albxan-dria2I 
School),  with  those  simple  doctrines  of  the  old  Mosa- 
ism,  especially  as  spiritualized  by  the  prophets.  How 
much  may  have  been  deriyed  from  outward  circum- 
stances  we  do  not  know;  that  the  matemal  trainii\g, 
and  even  the  open  (Lukę  iv,  29)  and  romantic  situation 
of  Nazareth,  had  a  beneticial  inAuence  in  unfolduig  and 
cnltivating  his  mind  (Greiling,  Ldt,  Jesuy'^.  48),  scarcely 
admtts  a  donbt,  nor  that  the  ncighborhood  of  Gcntile 
inhabitants  in  the  entire  vicinity  might  have  already 
weakened  and  repressed  iu  the  youthful  soul  of  Jesus 
the  old  Jewish  uarrow-roiudedness.  The  age  also  af- 
forded  a  criais  for  briuging  out  and  determining  the 
beut  of  his  genius.  Leanied  instruction  (see  Xo.  6 
above)  Jesus  had  not  enjoyed  (MalU  xiii,  54  są. ;  John 
vii,  15),  although  the  Jewish  fablcs  {Toiedoth  Jesu,  p. 
5)  assign  him  a  youthful  teacher  named  Elhanan 
CidnbK),  and  Christian  tradition  {/lisłoria  Josepki^  c. 
48  sq.)  attribntes  to  him  wonderful  aptness  in  leaming 
(see  generally  Paulus,  I^eben  Jesu,  i,  121  Bq.).  In  addi- 
tion to  all  these  natural  iniiuences  operating  upon  his 
human  spirit,  there  was,  above  all,  the  plenary  inspirar 
tion  (John  iii,  34)  which  he  enjoyed  from  the  intercom- 
munication  of  the  divine  naturę;  for  the  bare  facts  of 
his  career,  even  on  the  lowest  view  that  can  be  taken 
of  the  documents  attesting  these,  are  incapable  of  a  ra- 
tional  ezplanation  on  the  ground  of  his  merę  humanity 
(see  J.  Young,  Christ  of  Bisiory ^  Lond  1855,  N.  Y.  1857). 
See  Christ.  (For  additional  literaturę,  see  Yolbeding, 
p.  36  8q.)  His  prediction  of  futurę  events  would  not  of 
itseif  be  an  evidence  of  a  higher  character  thau  that  of 
other  prophets.    See  PKOPiifEcr. 

15.  Respccting  the  enterprise  on  behalf  of  mankind 
which  Jesus  had  conceived,  and  which  he  ui^deviating^ 
ly  kept  in  view  (see  especially  Reinhard,  Yei^such.  Hb,  d. 
Plan  den  der  Stjfter  der  chr,  ReL  zum  Besten  der  Mensch, 
eniwar/j  6th  edit.  by  Heubner,  Wittemb.  1880  [compare 
the  Neues  łheoi  Joum,  xiv,  24  8q.] ;  Der  Zweck  Jesu  ge- 
schichtL  u,  seelkundL  dargesteUł,  Leipz.  1816 ;  Planck,  i,  7 
są.,  86  sq. ;  Greiling,  p.  120  sq. ;  Strauss,  i,  463  sq. ;  Ne- 
ander,  p.  115  8q.;  Weisse,  i,  117  sq.),a  few  obser\'ations 
only  can  here  be  indulged.  See  Kkdemption.  That 
Jesus  Bought  not  simply  to  be  a  reformer  of  Judaism 
(John  iv,  22;  Matt.  xv,  24 ;  compare  Matt.  v,  17)  [see 
Law],  much  less  the  founder  of  a  secret  association 
(Klotzsch,  De  Christo  ab  insłituenda  societaie  cUmdestina 
alienOf  Yiteb.  1786),  but  to  unitę  all  mankind  in  one 
great  sacred  family,  is  vouched  for  by  his  own  declara- 
tions  (John  iv,  23 ;  x,  16),  by  the  whole  tendency  of  his 
teaching,  by  his  constant  expre8sion  of  the  deepest  sym- 
pathy  with  humanity  in  generał,  and  Anally  by  the  se- 
lection  of  the  apostles  to  continue  his  work ;  only  he 
wished  to  confine  himself  personally  to  the  bomidaries 
of  Judna  in  the  publication  of  the  łdngdom  of  God 
(MatL  XV,  24),  whereas  his  disciples,  led  by  the  Holy 
Spirit,  should  eventually  traver8e  the  worłd  as  heralds 
of  the  truth  (Matt  xxviii,  19  aq.).  It  is  evident  that 
to  Jesus  liimself  the  outline  of  hJs  design  was  always 
clearly  defined  in  the  course  of  his  labors,  but,  on  ac^ 
count  of  the  dogmatic  conformity  of  the  delineations  in 
John*s  Gospel,  and  the  loose,  uuchronological  develoi>- 
ment  of  it  in  the  synoptical  gospels,  it  is  impossible  ae- 
cuntely  to  show  historically  the  graduał  realization  of 
this  8ubjective  scheme.  But  that  Jesus  at  any  moment 
of  his  life  whatever  had  sUted  the  poliŁical  element  o^ 
the  theocracy  as  being  blended  with  his  spiritual  emoł« 
uments  (Hase,  LA,  Jesu,  p.  86  są.,  2d  edit)  is  an  uuwar- 
rantabłe  position  (comp.  Heubner,.  in  Reinhard,  vt  sup. 
p.  394  są. ;  LUcke,  Pr,  examinajtur  sentenHa  de  mufato 
per  eventa  adeoque  sensim  emendato  Christi  eonsUio,  Gótt 
1881 ;  Neander,  p.  121  są.).  The  reason  why  he  did  not 
directly  announce  himself  to  the  popular  masses  as  tho 
expected  Messiah  (indeed,  he  even  evaded  the  ąuestion, 
Lukę  XX,  1  są.,  and  forbade  the  spread  of  this  report, 
Matt  xvi,  20)  unąuestionably  was,  that  the  minds  of 
the  Jews  were  incapable  of  separating  their  camal  an" 
ticipations  irom  the  tnie  idea  of  the  Messiah  (q.  v.).   He 


JESUS  CHRIST 


886 


JESUS  CHRIST 


stroye,  therefore,  on  eveiy  occasion  to  set  this  idea  itself 
in  a  right  poaition  before  them,  and  occaBionally  sug- 
gesŁcd  the  identLtication  of  his  person  with  thc  Messiah, 
partly  by  the  epithet "  Son  of  Man,"  which  be  applied 
to  himself  (see  especially  Matu  xii^),  partly  by  expUc- 
it  statements  (Matt,  xLii,  16  8q. ;  Lukę  iv,  21).  Henoe 
it  19  not  surprising  that  the  opinion  of  the  people  re- 
specting  him  declined,  and  the  majority  regarded  him 
only  as  a  great  prophet,  chiefiy  interesting  for  his  won- 
der-working.  }Ie  decidedly  announced  himself  as  the 
Measiah  only  to  individual  susceptible  hearts  (John  iv, 
20 ;  ix,  30  aą,\  and  also  to  the  high-priest  at  the  oonclu- 
sion  of  his  career  (Matt,  xxvi,  64).  The  disciples  re- 
quired  it  merely  for  the  confirmation  of  the  faith  they 
had  alrcady  attained  (Matt.  xvi,  13  8q. ;  Lukę  ix,  20). 
See  KiNGDOM  of  Heliyen. 

The  morał  and  religious  character  of  Jesns  (humanly 
considered),  which  even  in  thc  synoptical  goepels,  that 
are  certainly  chargeable  with  no  embellishment,  appears 
in  a  high  ideality,  bas  never  yet  been  depicted  with  ac- 
curate  ])sychological  skill  (see  Yolbeding,  p.  85),  but  usu- 
ally  as  a  model  of  virtue  in  genend  (yet  see  Jerusalem, 
NachgeloM.  Schr^ft^  i,  76  8q. ;  Greiling,  p.  9  sq. ;  £.  G. 
Winckler,Ffr«.  e.  Psyckocographit  Jem,  Lpz.  1826 ;  Ull- 
roann,  SundUmgk,  Jea.  p.  35  8q. ;  Aromon,  lAb.  Jies.  i,  240 
6q. ;  Thiele,  in  the  Darmtt,  KircL-Zeit,  1844,  No.  92-94). 
(Comp.  Hase,  p.  62, 64.)  On  the  (choicric)  temperament 
of  Jesus,  see  J.  G.  Walch,  De  temperamerUo  Christi  hom. 
Jen.  1753.  Deep  humility  before  God  (Lukę  xviii,  19), 
and  ardent  love  towards  men  in  view  of  the  deterraincd 
sacrifice  (John  x,  18),  were  the  distinguishing  traits  of 
his  noble  devotion,  while  the  divine  zeal  that  stirred 
his  great  soul  conccntrated  ali  his  rirtues  upon  his  one 
grand  design.  Jesus  appears  as  the  harmonious  com- 
plete  embodiment  of  religious  resignation ;  but  this  was 
so  far  from  being  a  result  of  innate  weakncss  (although 
Jesus  might  have  had  a  slender  physical  constitution), 
that  his  natural  force  of  character  subsided  iiito  it  (for 
examples  ol  high  energy  in  feeling  and  act,  see  John  ii, 
16  8q. ;  viii,  44  sq. ;  Matu  xvi,  23 ;  xxiii,  6,  etc).  Ev- 
ery  where  to  this  deep  devouon  was  joined  a  elear,  pru- 
dent  understanding  —  a  combination  which  alone  can 
preser\'e  a  man  of  seiisibdity  and  activity  from  the  dan- 
ger  of  beooming  a  reckless  enthusiast  or  a  weak  senti- 
mentalist.  This  is  most  unmistakably  exhibited  in  the 
account  of  his  passion  and  death.  Ńeither  do  we  find 
in  Jesus  any  tiaco  of  the  austerity  and  gloomy  stem- 
ness  of  other  founders  of  religion,  or  even  of  his  contem- 
porary  the  BaptisŁ  (MatU  xi,  18  sq.).  In  the  midst  of 
eager  listeners  in  the  public  streets  or  in  the  Tempie,  he 
spoke  with  the  high  dignity  of  a  messenger  of  God ; 
yet  how  affectionately  sympathetic  (John  xi,  35),  how 
solicitous,  how  self-sacrilicing  did  he  exhibit  himself  in 
tbe  bosom  of  the  family,  in  the  dear  cirde  of  his  friends ! 
What  tender  sympathy  expres8ed  itself  in  him  on  every 
occasion  (Lukę  yii,13;  >IatU  ix,  36:  xiv,  14;  xxx,  34). 
He  was  both  (compare  Kom.  xii,  15)  tearful  among  the 
tearful  (John  xi,  35),  and  cheerful  amoug  the  cheerful 
(John  li,  1  są. ;  Lukę  vii,  34).  On  this  very  account  the 
chaiacter  of  Jesus  has  at  all  times  so  irresistibly  won 
the  hearts  of  the  good  and  noble  of  cdi  people,  sinoe  it 
cyinces  not  merely  the  raresc  magnanimity,  siich  as  to 
causc  amazement,  but  at  the  same  time  the' purest,  most 
disinterested  humanity,  and  thus  prescnts  to  the  ob- 
8erver  not  simply  an  object  of  esteem,  but  also  of  love. 
The  history  of  Jesus's  lUe  is  equally  interesting  to  the 
chiid  and  the  full-grown  man,  and  certainly  his  exam- 
ple  has  efiected  at  all  times  not  less  than  his  precepts. 
Iii  accordance  with  this  unmistakable  sum  of  his  char- 
acter, ccrtain  single  passages  of  the  (vospels  (e.  g.  Matt. 
xii,  46  sq. ;  xv,  21  8q. ;  John  ii,  4),  which,  verbally  ap- 
prehcuded  [see  Cana],  might  perplex  us  conceniing  Je- 
8US  (comp.  J,  F.Yolbeding,  Utrum  Christus  matrem  ffeniis- 
gue  suum  dissimularerit  el  de«pexcri^, Yiteb.  1784;  K.  J. 
Kleinra,  Be  necesititudine  J,  Christo  c.  contnnffuinńs  tn- 
terrcdente,  Li|)8. 1H4G),  may  be  morę  correctly  explained 
{^e  Ammon,  Leb,  Jesu,  i,  243  8q.),  and  may  be  placed  in 


harmony  with  othen  (e.  g.  Loke  ii,  51 ;  compoie  Lui|>e, 
De  tubjectwne  Chr.  sub  paraUib,  Lips.  1738).     See  £s- 

SAMFLE. 

The  task  of  the  world*s  redemption,  actinc  as  aa 
ever-present  burden  upon  the  Saviour's  mind,  produ«.\d 
that  penBivene88,  not  to  say  saduess,  which  was  a  mark- 
ed  characteristic  of  all  his  deportmeiiu  liarely  did  hi^ 
eąuanimity  rise  to  exuberant  joy,  and  that  only  in  ci>n- 
nection  with  the  great  ruling  object  of  hb  life  (Lukę  x. 
21) ;  oftener  did  it  experience  dejection  of  spirit  ( J»»iin 
xii,  27),  at  times  to  the  depths  of  mental  anguish  (Mark 
xiv,  34).  See  Aoony.  It  was  this  inteiiur  pre»^urc 
that  so  frequently  horst  forth  in  sighs  and  tesars  (J4»hii 
xi,  33;  Lukę  xix,  41),  and  madc  Jesus  the  ready  sym- 
pathizer  with  human  affliction  (John  xi,  35).  It  is  Micb 
spiritual  and  unseliish  trials  that  ripen  evcry  truły  gitit 
morał  character,  and  it  was  accordingly  needful  thai 
God, "  in  bringing  many  sons  unto  glory,  should  maLe 
the  Captain  of  their  8alvation  perfect  thiough  sofler- 
ings."  The  fact  that  Jesus  was  emphatically  *'  a  maa 
of  sorrows  and  acquauited  with  grief,*'  is  the  real  kry 
to  the  Bubdued  and  self-oollectod  tonę  of  his  entirc  de- 
meanor.    See  Kekosis. 

For  an  adeąuate  explanation  of  the  astonishing  powcr 
which  our  Saviour  exerci8ed  over  his  auditora,  and.  inr 
deed,  exerted  over  all  who  came  within  his  drclc  of  in- 
fluence, we  are  doubtlcss  to  look  to  two  or  three  lacti 
which  have  never  yet  been  cxhibited,  at  least  in  an- 
nection,with  such  graphic  portraiture  as  to  make  hu 
life  stand  out  to  the  modem  reader  in  ita  tnie  morał 
grandeur,  force,  and  vividne83.  These  eleinents  are  pan- 
ly  suggested  in  the  evangeli8t'8  statement  tliai  tbnee 
who  fliBt  hung  iipon  the  Kedeemer's  lipa  found  in  his 
discourses  a  new  end  divine  assurance:  *^lle  tauirh: 
them  OM  one  haring  aulkorUy,  and  not  om  the  Bcrió^s" 
(Matu  vii,  29). 

(1.)  His  doctrines  were  novel  to  his  heaiers.  It  was 
not  so  much  because  he  announced  to  them  the  usher- 
ing  in  of  a  new  dispensation,  for  upon  this  he  merely 
touched  in  liis  introductory  addresses  and  by  way  cif  ar- 
resting  their  attention ;  all  deUils  rcspeeting  that  f^^4l 
»ra  which  oould  gratify  curiosity,  or  even  awaken  iuh^ 
sedulously  avoided,  and  he  seemed  anxiou8  to  dirert  tlie 
popular  expectatłon  from  himself  as  the  central  %ure 
in  the  coming  scenea.  It  was  the  spiritual  tiulhs  be 
commnnicated  that  bume<l  apon  the  hearts  of  the  lisi- 
cning  populaoe  with  a  strange  intensity.  Tnie,  the  <«- 
sential  features  of  a  rełigions  life  had  been  illustrated  in 
their  saered  books  for  centuries  by  holy  men  of  oltl,  and 
the  most  vital  doctrines  of  the  Gospel  may  be  said  u> 
have  been  anticipated  in  the  Mosaic  oode  and  the  pn>- 
phetical  comments;  nay,  li ving  example8  were  not  want- 
ing  to  confirm  the  substantial  identity  of  religious  ex- 
perience  under  whatever  outward  economy.  VcU  ai  ihc 
time  of  our  Loid's  advent,  thc  fundamenta!  prindpkjs 
of  aound  piety  seem  to  have  l)een  forgotten  or  orerkwk- 
ed,  especially  by  the  Pharisees.  whose  vie>v8  and  prac- 
tices  were  regarded  as  the  models  by  the  nat4on  at  larec. 
When,  therefore,  our  Lord  broughi  back  the  popular  at- 
tention to  the  simple  doctrines  of  love  to  God  and  man, 
not  only  as  łying  at  the  foundation  of  the  O.-T.  ethin, 
but  as  oomprising  the  whole  duty  of  man.  the  sinipiin- 
ty,  pertinence,  and  truthfulness  of  the  sentiment  came 
¥rith  an  irresistible  freshness  of  oonviction  to  the  miads 
of  the  humblest  hearers.  For  this.  too,  they  had  al- 
ready  been  prepared  by  the  sad  contrast  bctwecn  the 
precepts  and  the  conduct  of  the  highest  sectaiics  of  tbe 
day,  by  the  tediotis  burden  of  the  Moaaic  rituaL  and, 
above  all,  by  the  bitter  yeamingn  after  religious  libert y 
in  their  own  souls,  which  the  current  system  of  brlief 
failed  to  supply.  Sin  yet  lay  as  a  load  of  anguL«b  up<^n 
their  hearts,  and  they  eagerly  embraeed  thc  gentle  in- 
vitations  of  the  Redecmer  to  the  bosom  of  their  offend- 
ed  heavenly  Father.  It  was  precisely  the  resunvcti«iQ 
of  these  again  obscured  teachings  that  gave  such  power 
to  the  prcaching  of  Luther,  Whitefield,  Wcsley,  Edwanfak 
and  others  in  fl«ibflequeot  tima,  and  which  eoa.vtttt4 


JESUS  CHRIST 


887 


JESUS  CHRIST 


the  morał  desert  of  their  da^  into  a  spiritiial  Eden.  But 
there  was  thia  to  enhance  tbe  cflTect  in  the  Saviour'8 
promulgations,  that  they  awakened  tbe  expectaŁion  of 
A  millennial  reign;  an*  idea  miaconstraed,  inileed,  by 
many  of  tbe  Jews  into  tbat  of  a  temporal  dominion,  but 
on  tlut  very  account  prodiictive  of  a  mofe  boundless 
and  extraYagant  entbusiasm.  Tbe  national  spińt  was 
loiued,  and  Jesus  even  found  it  necessary  to  repress  and 
avoid  tbe  fanatical  and  disloyal  manifestations  to  wbicb 
it  was  instantly  prone.  Yet  in  tbose  beaits  wbicb  bet^ 
ter  understood  "  tbe  kingdom  of  heaven,"  tbere  arose 
the  dawn  of  tbat  Sabbatic  day  of  wbicb  tbe  Pentecostal 
eifosion  brougbt  tbe  meridian  glory.  (For  tbe  best  elu- 
cidation  of  this  diflerence  betweenCbrisfs  and  bb  pre- 
decesson',  as  well  as  ńvals'  teacbing,  sec  Stier'8  Worda 
ofJestUt  passim.) 

(2.)  He  spoke  as  God.  Łater  preachers  and  reform- 
ers  haye  felt  a  beroic  boldness,  and  baye  realized  a  mar- 
relous  effect  in  their  ntterances,  when  fully  impressed 
witb  the  conyiction  of  the  diyinity  of  their  mission  and 
the  sacred  character  of  their  commmiications ;  but  Jesus 
frta  no  merę  ambassador  from  the  court  of  beayen ;  be 
was  tbe  Word  of  tbe  Lord  bimself.  Ancient  prophets 
had  madę  their  cffata  by  an  inspired  impulse,  and  cor- 
roborated  them  by  out^-ard  miracles  tbat  enfbrced  re- 
spect,  if  they  did  not  command  obedience;  but  Jesus 
poescssed  no  restricted  measure  of  tbe  Spirit,  and  wrought 
wondcrs  in  no  other's  name ;  in  bim  dwelt  aU  tbe  ful- 
ness  of  tbe  Godhead  bodily,  and  the  Shekinah  stood  re- 
Tealed  in  his  every  act,  look,  and  breath.  "  Never  man 
spakc  like  this,"  was  tbe  significant  confession  extorted 
from  bis  very  foes.  He  wbo  came  from  the  bosom  of 
the  Fathcr  told  but  tbe  tbings  be  had  seen  and  known 
when  be  unveiled  etemal  rerities  to  men.  His  daily 
demeanor,  too,  undcr  whateyer  exigency,  or  temptation, 
or  proYocation,  was  a  most  pungent  and  irrefragable 
oomment  on  all  be  said— a  faultless  examplc  reflecting 
a  perfect  doctrine.  Unprece<lented  as  were  bis  mira- 
cles, his  life  itself  was  tbe  greatest  wondcr  of  alL  Tbe 
manner,  it  is  oftcn  truły  ob8er\'ed,  is  quite  as  importont 
in  tbe  pubbc  speaker  as  tbe  matter;  and,  we  may  add, 
|its  peraonal  associations  with  bis  bearers  are  often  moro 
influential  with  them  than  either.  In  all  these  partie- 
ulars  Christ  bas  no  parallel— be  had  no  defect  (See 
this  argument  admirably  treated  iii  Bushnell*8  Naturę 
and  the  Supematural,  chap.  x.) 

(3.)  The  autbor  of  Eece  Homo  (a  work  wbicb  admira- 
bly illttstrates  tbe  bumaii  sidc  of  Christ  and  bis  religion, 
altbougb  it  lomentably  ignores  tbe  dirine  element  in 
botb)  forcibly  pomts  (chap.  y)  to  tbe  fact  tbat  tbe  bare 
włiracles  of  Jesus,  altbougb  they  were  so  public  and  so 
Btupendous  as  to  compel  the  credit  and  awe  of  all,  were 
in  tbemselyes  not  sufficient  to  command  eyen  reverence, 
much  less  a  loying  trust;  nay,  tbat,  had  they  been  too 
frecly  nsed,  they  were  eyen  calculated  to  repel  men  in 
afTright  (comp.  Lukę  y,8)  and  constemation  (see  Lukc 
viii,  37).  It  was  tbe  sclf-restraint  wbicb  the  Posaessor 
of  diyine  powcr  eWdently  impoee<l  upon  bimself  in  this 
rcspect,  and  cspecially  his  persistent  refusal  to  employ 
his  snpematnral  gift  either  for  bis  own  personal  relief 
and  comfort,  or  for  the  direct  promotion  of  his  kingdom 
by  way  of  a  yiolent  assault  upon  bostile  powers,  tbat 
intensified  the  astonished  regard  of  his  followers  to  tbe 
utmost  pitcb  of  deyoted  yeneration.  This  penetrating 
sense  of  attacbment  to  one  to  wbom  they  owed  eyery- 
thing,  and  wbo  seemed  to  be  independent  of  their  aid, 
and  eyen  indifferent  to  his  own  protection  wbile  senring 
others,  culmiiuited  at  the  l^n^  tragedy,  wbicb  achieyed 
a  world*8  redemption  at  bis  own  expense.  ^  It  was  tbe 
combination  of  greatness  and  self-sacrifioe  wbicb  won 
iheir  beans,  tbe  mighty  powers  held  under  a  mighty 
control,  tbe  unspeakable  oondescension,  the  Cross  oj* 
Christ  (p.  67)— a  topie  that  eyer  called  fortb  tbe  fuli 
entbuńasm  of  PauFs  beart,  and  that  tired  it  with  a  be- 
nńc  xeal  to  emuUte  bis  Master. 

III.  Narratice  ofour  Saviovr^»  L\fe  ani  Mimsiry, — 
(For  the  furtber  literaturę  of  each  topie,  aee  the  artides. 


referred  to  at  each.)  See  Gospkia  About  four  hun- 
dred  years  had  elapsed  sińce  Malacbi,  tbe  last  of  tbe 
prophets,  had  foretold  tbe  coming  of  tbe  Mes8iah's  fore- 
runner,  and  nearly  the  same  inter\'al  had  transpiied 
sińce  Ezra  doeed  tbe  sacred  canon,  and  composcd  tbe 
ooncluding  psalm  (cxix) ;  a  still  greater  number  of  years 
had  interycned  sińce  tbe  latest  miracle  of  tbe  OldTest 
had  been  pcrformed,  and  men  not  only  in  Palestine,  but 
tbrougbout  tbe  entire  ł^ast,  were  in  generał  cxpectation 
of  the  adyent  of  the  uniyersal  Prince  (Suetonius,  Yegp. 
4;  Tacitus,  //trt.y,  13)— an  event  wbicb  tbe  Jews  knew, 
from  their  Scriptures  (Dan.  ix,  25),  was  now  dose  at 
band  (see  Lukę  ii,  26, 88).  See  Ad^-ent.  It  was  un- 
der such  circumstances,  at  a  time  when  tbe  Koman  em- 
pire, of  wbicb  Judsea  then  formed  a  part,  was  in  a  state 
of  profound  and  uniyersal  peace  (Oroeius,  Hist,  vi,^.)ł 
under  tbe  nile  of  Augustus  (Lukę  ii,  1),  tbat  an  incident 
occurred  wbicb,  altbougb  apparently  personal  and  incon- 
siderable,  broke  like  a  new  oracie  tbe  silence  of  ages 
(comp.  2  Pet.  iii,  4),  and  proyed  tbe  dawn  of  tbe  long- 
looked-for  day  of  Israd^s  glory  (see  Lukę  i,  78).  A  priest 
naroed  Zachariah  was  performing  the  regubir  functions 
of  bis  Office  within  tbe  boly  place  of  tbe  Tempie  at  Je- 
rusalem,  when  an  angel  appeared  to  bim  witb  the  an- 
nouncement  tbat  bis  bitberto  cbildless  and  now  aged 
wife,  Elisabetb,  sbould  bear  bim  a  son,  wbo  was  to  be 
tbe  barbinger  of  tbe  promised  Redeemer  (Lukę  i,  5-25). 
See  Zaoiiarias.  To  punisb  and  at  tbe  same  time  re- 
moye  bis  doubts,  tbe  ])ower  of  ardculate  utterauce  was 
miraculously  taken  from  bim  until  tbe  yeritication  of 
tbe  prediction  (probably  May,  B.C.  7).  See  John  tiie 
Baptist.  Nearly  balf  a  year  after  this  yision,  a  stiU 
morę  remarkable  aimnnciation  (q.  y.)  was  madę  by  tbe 
same  means  to  a  maiden  of  tbe  now  obscure  lineage  of 
Dayid,  resident  at  Nazareth,  and  betrotbed  to  Joseph,  a 
descemlant  of  the  same  once-royal  family  [see  Gemeal- 
ooy]  :  namely,  that  she  was  tbe  indiyidual  selected  to 
become  the  mother  of  tbe  Messiah  wbo  had  boen  ex- 
pected  in  all  prcyious  agcs  (Lukę  i,  26-88).  Sec  Mary. 
Her  scruplcs  haying  been  obyiatcd  by  tbe  assurance  of 
a  diyine  patemity  [see  Iscarnation],  she  Aajuiesced 
in  tbe  proyidence,  altbougb  she  could  not  bave  falled  to 
foresee  the  iguominy  to  wliich  it  would  expose  ber  [see 
Adultbry],  and  eyen  Joined  ber  relatiye  Elizabeth  in 
praising  God  for  so  high  an  honor  (Lukę  i,  39-56).  As 
soon  as  ber  condition  became  known  [  see  Conceition], 
Joseph  was  diyinely  apprised,  tbrougb  a  drcam,  of  bis 
intended  wife*s  innocence,  and  directed  to  name  ber 
cbild  Jesus  (sec  aboyc),  thus  adopting  it  as  his  oikii 
(Matt  i,  18-25 ;  probably  April,  B,C.  6).  See  Joseph. 
Altbougb  tbe  parents  rcsided  in  Galilee,  they  had  oo- 
casion  just  at  this  time  to  yisit  Betblehem  (q.  y.)  in  order 
to  be  enrolled  along  witb  their  relatiyes  in  a  census  now 
in  progress  by  order  of  tbe  Koman  antborities  [see  Cy- 
RENius],  and  thus  Jesus  was  bom,  during  tbeir  stay  in 
tbe  exterior  buildings  of  tbe  public  khan  [see  Cara- 
yA^SKRAi],  at  that  place  (Lukę  ii,  1-7),  in  fullilment  of 
an  express  prediction  of  Scripture  (Mic.  y,  2),  prób.  Aug. 
B.C.  6.  See  NATiyiTY.  The  auspicious  eyent  was  ber- 
alded  on  tbe  same  night  by  angels  to  a  com[}any  of 
shcpberds  on  tbe  adjacent  plains.  and  was  recognised  by 
two  aged  saints at  Jenisalem  [see  Sisieon ;  Anna  ], where 
the  mother  presented  tbe  babę  at  tbe  usual  time  for  the 
customary  offerings  at  tbe  Tempie,  tbe  ritc  of  circumcis- 
ion  (q.  y.)  haying  been  meanwbile  duły  performcd  (Lukę 
ii,  8-39 ;  prób.  Sept,  B.C.  6).  Public  notice,  boweycr, 
was  not  attracted  to  tbe  eyent  tiłl,  on  tbe  arriyal  at  the 
capital  of  a  party  of  Eastera  philosopbers  [see  Magi], 
wbo  had  been  directed  to  Palestine  by  astronomical 
pbenomena  as  tbe  birtbplace  of  some  noted  infant  [see 
Star  of  the  Wise  MenJ,  tbe  intelligence  of  tbeir  in- 
ąuiries  rcachcd  tbe  jealous  ears  of  Herod  (q.  y.),  wbo 
thereupon — first  ascertaining  from  the  assembi?d  Śanbe- 
drim  tbe  predicted  locality — sent  tbe  strangers  to  Betb- 
lehem, where  the  boly  family  appear  to  bave  continued, 
pretending  tbat  be  wisbed  bimself  to  do  tbe  ilhistrioi-s 
babę  reyeieuce,  but  really  only  to  rcnder  bimcelf  morę 


JESUS  CHRIST 


888 


JESUS  CHRIST 


surę  of  his  destniction  (MatL  ii,  1-12).  This  attempt 
was  foiled  by  the  return  of  the  Magi  borne  by  another 
route,  tbrough  divinc  intimation,  and  the  child  was  pre- 
8erved  from  the  murderous  ragę  of  Herod  by  a  pre- 
cipitous  ilight  of  the  parents  (who  were  in  like  manner 
wamed  of  the  danger)  into  Egypt  [see  Ai.£Xaiidria] 
under  a  like  direction  (prub.  July,  B.C.  5).  Herę  they 
remained  [see  Egypt]  uncil,  on  the  death  of  the  tyrant, 
at  the  divine  suggestion,  they  retumed  to  Palestine;  but, 
avoiding  JucUea,  where  Archelaus,  who  resembled  his 
father,  had  succeeded  to  the  throne,  they  settled  at  their 
former  place  of  residence,  Nazareth,  within  the  territory 
of  the  milder  Antipas  (Matt,  ii,  19-23 ;  prob.  April,  B.C. 
4).  Sec  Nazarkne.  The  evangeli8ts  pass  over  the  boy- 
hood  of  Jesus  with  the  simple  remark  that  his  obedience, 
intelligcnce,  and  piety  won  the  affections  of  all  who  knew 
him  (Lukę  ii,  40, 51, 52).  A  single  incident  is  recorded 
in  illustration  of  these  traits,  which  occurred  when  he 
had  complcted  his  twelflh  year — an  age  at  which  the 
Jewish  males  were  expected  to  take  upon  them  the  re> 
sponsibility  of  attaching  themselyes  to  the  public  wor- 
ship,  as  haying  arrived  at  years  of  discretion  (Lukę  ii, 
41-^ ;  sec  Lightfoot  and  Wetstein,  ad  loc.).  Haying 
accompanied  his  parents,  on  this  occasion,  to  the  Pass- 
oyer  at  Jcrusalem,  the  lad  tarried  behind  at  the  close  of 
the  festal  weck,  and  was  discoyered  by  them,  as  they 
tumed  back  to  the  capital  from  thcir  homeward  joumey, 
after  comuderable  search,  sitting  in  the  midst  of  the  Rab- 
bis  in  one  of  the  anterooms  of  the  sacred  edifice,  seek- 
ing  information  from  them  on  sacred  themes  (or  próba- 
bly  rather  imparting  than  eliciting  truth,  afler  the  man- 
ner of  the  Socratic  questionings)  with  a  cleamess  and 
profundity  so  far  beyond  his  ycars  and  opportunities  as 
to  excite  the  liyeliest  astonishment  in  all  beholders 
.(April,  A.D.  8).  His  pointed  reply  to  his  mother^s  ex- 
postulation  for  his  seemuig  neglect  of  filial  duty  eyinces 
a  comprehension  already  of  his  divine  character  and 
work :  '*  Knew  ye  not  that  I  must  be  at  my  Fathefs  ?" 
(tv  TÓic  Tov  Uarpuc  fiov). 

1.  Iniroductoty  Year,—Soon  after  John  the  Baptist 
had  opcned  his  remarkable  mission  at  the  Jordan,  among 
the  thousands  of  all  classes  who  flocked  to  his  preacbing 
and  baptism  (q.  y.),  Jesus,  then  thirty  years  old,  pre- 
sented  himself  for  the  same  initiatory  rite  at  his  hands 
aa  the  oniy  acknowledged  prophet  extant  who  was  em- 
powered  to  administer  what  should  be  equiyalent  to  the 
holy  anointiiig  oil  of  the  kingly  and  priestly  offices 
(Matt.  iii,  13-17 ;  Lukc  iii,  1-18, 23 ;  and  parallels).  See 
Messiah.  John  did  not  at  once  recognise  Jesus  as  the 
Messiah,  although  he  had  just  declared  to  the  people 
the  near  ai>proach  of  his  own  Superior ;  yet,  being  doubt- 
less  personally  well  acquainted  with  his  relatiye,  in 
whom  he  must  haye  perceiyed  the  tokens  of  an  eztraor- 
dinary  religious  persouage,  he  modestly  declined  to  per- 
form  a  ccremony  that  seemed  to  imply  his  own  pre-em- 
inencc;  but  upon  his  compliance  with  the  request  of 
Jesus,  on  the  ground  of  the  propriety  of  this  prelimina- 
ry  ordinance,  a  diyine  attestation,  both  in  a  yisible  [see 
Doye]  and  an  audible  [see  Batu-kol]  form,  was  pub- 
licly  glyen  as  to  the  sacred  character  of  Jesus,  and  in 
such  elear  conformity  to  a  criterion  which  John  him- 
self had  already  receiyed  by  the  inward  reyelation,  that 
he  at  once  began  to  proclaim  the  adyent  of  the  Messiah 
in  his  person  (prob,  August,  A.D.  25).  See  John  the 
Baptist.  After  this  inauguration  of  his  public  career, 
Jesus  immediately  retired  into  the  desert  of  Judsea, 
where,  during  a  fast  of  forty  days,  he  endured  those  in- 
terior temptations  of  Satan  which  should  suf/ice  to  proye 
the  suiieriority  of  his  rirtue  to  that  power  to  which 
Adam  had  succumbed;  and  at  its  close  he  successfully 
resisted  three  special  attempts  of  the  deyil  iji  a  personal 
form  to  move  him  first  to  doubt  and  then  to  presume 
upon  th3  divine  care,  and  tinally  to  bribe  him  to  such 
barefacod  itldlatry  that  Jesus  indignantly  repelled  him 
from  his  prcHcnce  (Matt,  iv,  1-11,  and  parallels).  See 
TKiiPTATioN.  The  effect  of  John's  open  testimony  to 
the  character  of  Jesus,  as  łie  began  his  preaching  afresh 


Map  of  oat  Lord*s  Jonmeya  dm-ing  the  introdnctoiy  Tear 
of  his  Ministry. 

N.B.— Th0  Atamw  llnct  on  lh«  H«p  Indicato  thoM  parto  oi  Um  ro«i«  tkog 
whicb  Jmu  UkewiM  ratamsd. 

the  neKt  season  on  the  other  side  of  the  Jordan,  was  soch 
as  not  only  to  lead  to  a  deputation  of  inąuiry  to  him 
from  the  Sanhedrim  on  the  sobject,  but  alao  to  indnoe 
two  of  the  Baptist's  disciples  to  attach  themselros  ta 
Christ,  one  of  whom  immediately  introduccd  his  own 
brother  to  his  newly-found  Master,  and  to  these,  ai  be 
was  departing  for  Galilee,  were  added  two  others  of  their 
acquaintance  (John  i,  1^-36).  On  arriying  at  dna 
(q.y.),whiŁher  he  had  been  inrited  ¥rith  his  rdativ« 
and  friends  to  a  wedding  festiyal,  Jesus  pcfformed  his 
first  miracle  by  changing  water  into  winę  for  the  supply 
of  the  guests  (John  ii,  1-11 ;  prob.  March,  A.D.  26). 

2.  First  morepubiic  Year. — After  a  short  yisit  at  Ca- 
pemaum,  Jesus  retumed  to  Judsea  in  order  to  attend  the 
Passoyer;  and  finding  the  entnmce  to  the  Tempie 
choked  with  yarious  kinds  of  meichant-staila,  hc  f«ircł- 
bly  expelled  their  sacrilegious  occupanta,  and  vindłcat«d 
his  authority  by  a  prediction  of  hia  reaurrection,  which 
was  at  the  time  misunderstood  (John  ii,  12-22).    Uis 


k 


JESUS  CHRIST 


889 


JESUS  CHRIST 


Hap  of  our  Savioar*8  Trarels  during  the  flrsŁ  morę  public 
Year  of  his  Ministry. 

miiBcles  duiing  the  Paschal  week  eonfinned  the  popular 
impreasion  conceming  his  prophetic  chancter,  and  even 
indaoed  a  member  of  the  Sanhedrim  to  seek  a  priyate 
inteiriew  with  him  [see  Nicodemus]  ;  but  hU  doctrine 
of  the  necessity  of  a  spiritual  change  m  his  disciples 
[see  Rkgeneration],  and  his  statement  of  his  own 
passion  [see  Atonement],  weie  neither  intelligible  nor 
agreeable  to  the  worldly  minds  of  the  people  (John  ii, 
23-25;  iii,  1-21).  Jesus  now  piooeeded  to  the  Jordan, 
and  by  the  instrumentality  of  his  disciples  continued 
the  inangural  baptism  of  the  people  instituted  by  John, 
-who  had  meanwhile  removed  further  up  the  river, 
where,  so  far  from  being  jeak>us  of  Jesus^s  increasing 
celebrity,  he  gave  still  stronger  testimony  to  the  supe- 
rior destiny  of  Jesus  (John  iii,  22-86);  but  the  impris- 
onment  of  John  not  long  aiterwards  by  order  of  Herod 
(Katt.  xiv,  8  8q. ;  Mark  vi,  17  8q. ;  Lukę  iii,  19)  ren- 
dered  it  expedient  (Matt.  iv,  12 ;  Mark  i,  14),  in  oon- 
nection  wUh  the  odium  excited  by  the  hierarchy  (John 
iv,  1-3),  that  Jesus  should  retire  into  Galilee  (Lukę  iv, 
14).    On  hu  way  thither,  his  oonverBation  with  a  Sa- 


maritan  female  at  the  well  of  Jacob  (q.  v.)»  near  She- 
chem,  on  the  spiritual  blessings  of  God's  tnie  worship- 
pers,  led  to  her  conyersion,  with  a  large  number  of  her 
fellow-citizens,  aroong  whom  he  tarricd  two  days  (John 
iv,  4-42 ;  prób.  December,  A.D.  26).  On  his  arriyal  in 
Galilee  he  was  received  with  great  respect  (John  iv,  48- 
45),  and  his  public  announcements  of  the  advent  of  the 
Messianic  age  (Matt.  iv,  17;  Mark  i,  14, 15)  in  all  the 
synagogues  of  that  country  spread  his  famę  still  morę 
widely  (Lukę  iv,  14, 15).  In  this  course  of  preaching 
he  revisited  Cana,  and  there,  by  a  word,  cured  the  son 
of  one  of  Herod's  courtiers  that  lay  at  the  point  of  death 
at  Capemaum  (John  iv,  46-54).  Arriving  at  Nazaretb, 
he  was  invited  by  his  townsmen  to  read  the  Scripture 
leason  (Isa.  lxi,  1,  2)  in  the  synagogue,  but  they  took 
such  olTenoe  at  his  application  of  it  to  htmsclf,  and  still 
morę  at  his  comments  upon  it,  that  they  hurried  hiin 
tumultnously  to  the  brink  of  a  precipice,  and  would 
have  thrown  him  ofT  had  be  not  escaped  from  their 
hands  (Lukę  iv,  16-30).  Thenceforward  he  fixed  upon 
Capemaum  (q.  y.)  as  his  generał  pkce  of  residenoe 


Rulusof  ihc  "Synagogue"  lU  TulMIucn  mrobubly  Caper- 
nanm).  (From  Photograph  54  of  the  '*  Palestine  Ezplo- 
ration  Fund.") 

(Matt.  iv,  13-16).  In  one  of  his  excursion8  in  this 
neighborhood,  after  addressing  the  people  on  the  lakę 
shore  from  a  boat  on  the  water,  he  directed  the  oi^^ners 
of  the  boat  to  a  spot  further  out  from  the  shore,  where 
they  caught  so  evidently  miraculous  a  draught  of  fłsh 
as  to  convince  both  them  and  their  partners  of  his  su- 
perhuman  character,  and  then  inviŁed  all  four  of  the 
fishermen  to  become  his  disciples,  a  cali  which  they 
promptly  obeyed  (Lukę  v,  1-10 ;  Matt,  iv,  19-22 :  and 
parallels).  On  his  return  to  (japemaum  he  rcstorcd  a 
dsemoniac  among  the  assembly  whom  he  addrcssed  in  the 
s3magogue,  to  the  astonishment  of  the  audience  and  vi- 
cinity  (Mark  i,  21-29,  and  parallels),  and,  retiring  to  the 
house  of  one  of  these  lately  chosen  foIlowers,he  crared  his 
mother-in-law  of  a  fever,  as  weU  aa  variou8  descriptions 
of  invalids  and  deranged  persons,  at  smiset  of  the  same 
day  (Mark  i,  29-34 ;  Matt,  viii,  17 ;  and  parallels).  Kis- 
ing  the  next  moming  for  solitary  prayer  before  any  of 
the  family  were  stirring,  he  set  out,  notwithstandiiig 
the  remonstrances  of  his  host  as  soon  as  hc  had  discov- 
ered  him,  to  make  a  generał  tour  of  Galilee,  preaching 
to  multitudes  who  flocked  to  hear  him  from  all  direc- 
tions,  and  supporting  hLs  doctrines  by  miraculous  cures 
of  every  species  of  physical  and  mental  disease  (Mark  i, 
35-38 ;  Matt  iv,  23-25 ;  and  parallels ;  prob.  February, 
A.D.  27).  One  of  these  cases  was  a  leper,  whose  resto- 
ration  to  purity  caused  such  crowds  to  resort  to  Jesus  as 
compelled  him  to  avoid  public  thoroughfares  (Mark  i, 
40-45,  and  parallels).  On  his  return  to  Capemaum  his 
door  was  soon  thronged  with  listeners  to  his  preaching, 
including  many  of  the  leamed  Pharisees  from  Jemsa- 
lem ;  and  the  cavils  of  these  latter  at  liis  pronouncing 
spiritual  absolution  upon  a  paralytic  whom  camest 
friends  had  been  at  great  pains  to  let  down  at  the  fect 
of  Jesus  by  remo^-ing  the  balcony  roof  above  him,  he 
refuled  by  instantly  enabling  the  helpless  man  to  walk 


JESUS  CHRIST? 


890 


JESUS  CHRIST 


home,  canying  his  conch  (Lukę  y,  17-26,  and  paral- 
lela ;  prób.  March,  A.D.  27).  On  anoŁher  exctinion  by 
the  lakę  shore,  after  preaching  to  the  people,  be  sum- 
moned  as  a  disciple  the  collector  of  the  Roman  imposts 
(Mark  ii,  13, 14,  and  parallels ;  probably  April,  AJ>.  27). 
See  Matthew. 

8.  Second  morę  puhlic  Year, — ^The  Passorer  now  drew 
near,  which  Jesus,  like  the  devout  Jews  generally,  was 
careful  to  attend  at  Jerusalem  (Saturday,  April  12,  A.D. 
27).  See  Passo ver.  As  he  passed  by  the  pentago- 
nal  pool  of  Bethesda,  near  the  sheep-gate  of  the  city, 
he  observed  in  one  of  its  porches  an  mvalid  await- 
ing  the  intermittent  influx  of  the  water,  to  which 
the  populacc  had  attributed  a  miraculously  curatiye 
power  to  the  first  bather  thereafter;  but,  leaming  that 
he  had  been  thus  infirm  for  thirty-eight  years,  and  as- 
certaining  from  him  that  he  was  even  too  helpleas  to 
reach  the  water  in  tirae  to  experience  its  yirtue,  he  im- 
mediately  restored  him  to  vigor  by  a  word.  See  Be- 
thesda. Thia,  happening  to  occur  on  the  Sabbath,  so 
incensed  the  hierarchy  that  they  charged  the  author  of 


Map  oi  ónr  i?;i\lii-iij'i^  Inni";-  duriuL'  tLe  bucoud  moza 
public  Year  of  bis  Idinutry. 


the  cure  with  a  profanadon  of  the  day,  and  thus  di^ 
from  Jesus  a  public  Tindication  of  his  mission  and  an 
expo6ure  of  their  inconsistency  (John  v,  1^7).  As  he 
was  preparing  to  return  to  Galilee,  on  the  Sabbath  enso- 
ing  the  Paschal  week  (Saturday,  April  19,  A.D.  27),  his 
disciples  chanced  to  pluck,  as  strangers  were  privileged 
to  do  (Deut.  xxiii,  25),  a  few  of  the  ripc  heads  from  the 
standing  barley,  through  which  they  werc  at  the  time 
passing,  in  order  to  allay  their  hunger ;  and  this  beir^ 
captiously  alleged  by  some  Pharisee  by-standers  as  a 
fresh  Yiolation  of  the  sacred  day,  Jesus  took  occsAion  to 
rebuke  their  oyer-scrupulousness  as  being  confated  by 
the  example  of  David  (1  Sam.  xxi,  1-6),  the  praciice  of 
the  priesta  them8elves  (Numb.  xxyiii,  9-19),  and  the 
tenor  of  Scripture  (Hoa.  \'i,  6 ;  compare  1  Sam.  xv,  22), 
and,  at  the  same  time,  to  point  out  the  true  de»ign  of 
the  Sabbath  (q.  v.),  namely,  man*s  own  beneiit  (MaiU 
xii,  1-8,  and  parallels).  On  an  ensuing  Sabbath  (prób. 
Saturday,  April  26,  A.D.  27),  entering  the  6\'nagugtte 
(apparently  of  Capemaum),  he  once  morę  cxcited  the 
same  odium  by  curing  a  man  whose  right  hand  was 
palsied ;  but  his  opponcnts,  who  had  been  watching  the 
opportunity,  were  silenced  by  hb  appcal  to  the  philan- 
thropy  of  the  act,  yet  they  thenceforth  began  to  plot  his 
destruction  (Mark  iii,  1-6,  and  parallelsr).  Ketiiiiig  to 
the  Sea  of  Galilee,  he  addressed  the  multitudes  who 
thronged  here  from  all  ąuarters,  and  cured  the  sick  and 
diemoniacs  among  them  (Mark  iii,  7-12 ;  Matt.  xii,  17- 
21,  and  parallels).  After  a  night  spent  in  prayer  on  a 
mountun  in  the  yicinity,  he  now  chosc  twelre  person* 
from  among  his  foUowers  to  be  his  constant  attendam^ 
and  future  witnesses  to  his  career  (Lukc  vi,  12-16, 8n>i 
parallels).  See  Aih>stle.  Then,  descending  to  a  psr- 
tial  plain,  he  cured  the  diseased  among  the  assecibled 
multitude  (Lukę  ^^,  17-19),  and,  seating  himself  upcm  an 
eminence,  he  proceedcd  to  delirer  hb  mcmorable  sermcn 
exhibiting  the  spińtualit}'  of  the  Gospel  in  oppositioo 
to  the  formalism  of  the  preyalent  theologj-  (>latt.  r,  1- 
12;  Lukę  vi,  24-26;  Matt  y,  17-24,  27-4JO,  3S-4»;  vi, 
1-8, 16-18 ;  \'ii,  1-6, 12, 15-18, 20, 21, 24-27 ;  ^^ii,  1,  and 
parallel  passages ;  prób.  May,  A.D.  27).  Soc  Sei^mon 
ON  THK  Mount.  On  hb  return  to  Capemaum,  Jcsua, 
at  the  instance  of  the  Jewbh  elders,  curcnl  the  son  ofa 
I  modest  and  pious  centurion,  who,  although  a  Gentile, 
I  had  built  the  yillage  synagogue,  and  who8c  faith  in  the 
power  of  Jesus  to  restore  by  hb  mcrc  word  the  di^tajit 
invalid  excited  the  liydiest  interest  in  the  rcind  of  Je- 
sus himself  (Lukę  vii,  1-10,  and  parallel).  Tlie  ensiiin^ 
day,  passing  near  Nain,  he  met  a  large  proce»ion  l^a- 
ing  from  the  village  for  the  interment  of  the  only  son  ci 
a  widów,  and,  commiserating  her  double  bereavement. 
he  restored  the  youth  instantly  to  life,  to  the  astont^h- 
ment  of  the  beholders  (Lukę  vii,  11-17).  John  the  Ikp- 
tist,  hearing  while  in  pńson  of  these  miracles,  sent  ttro 
messengers  to  Jesus  to  obtain  more  explicit  assurance 
from  hb  own  lips  as  to  the  MessUh,  which  he  seemcd 
80  slow  plainly  to  avow ;  but,  instead  of  retuming  a  di- 
rect  ans^'er,  Jesus  proceeded  to  perform  additional  mira- 
cles  in  their  presence,  and  then  referred  them  to  the 
Scripture  prophecies  (Isa.  lxi,  1 ;  xxxv,  5, 6)  of  these  dis- 
tinctive  marks  of  the  Messianic  age;  but  as  soon  as  the 
messengers  had  departed,  he  eidogized  the  character  of 
John,  although  the  introducer  of  an  a»ra  less  ferored 
than  the  period  of  Jesus  himself,  and  concluded  by  se 
vere  denunciations  of  the  cities  (especially  Capemauni, 
Chorazin,  and  Bethsaida)  which  had  continuc-d  iropeni- 
tent  under  hb  own  preaching  (Lukę  \-ii,  18-35;  Marr. 
xi,  20-24 ;  and  parallels).  About  this  time,  a  Phari^e 
inyited  him  one  day  to  dine  with  him,  but,  while  he  was 
reclining  at  the  table,  a  female  notorious  for  her  imroo- 
rality  came  penitently  behind  him  and  bodewed  with 
her  tears  his  unsandaled  feet  extended  beyond  the  cooch, 
then  wiped  them  with  her  hair,  and  finally  affcctionate- 
ly  anointed  them  with  ointment  brought  for  that  por- 
pose,  while  the  host  scarcely  restrainecl  his  surprise  that 
Jesus  should  suffer  thb  familbrity;  but,  in  a  poinied 
parable  of  two  debtors  released  from  disRimilar  amoimta, 


JESUS  CHRIST 


891 


JESUS  CHRIST 


Bufns  of  the  "  Syna^i^gue"  at  Kerazeh  (ChoraziD).    (From 
Photograph  51  of  the  "PalesUne  Ezploration  Fuud.") 

Jesus  at  once  justified  the  love  of  the  woman  and  re- 
buked  the  sordidneas  of  the  host,  who  had  neglected 
these  offices  of  lespect,  and  then  confirmed  the  woman^s 
trembling  hopes  of  pardon  for  her  past  sins  (Lakę  vii, 
86-Ó0).  Ile  next  set  out  on  hb  second  tour  of  Galilee 
(summer  of  A.D.  27),  accompanied  by  8everal  grateful 
females  who  borę  his  expeiise8  (Lukę  viii,  1-3).  No 
sooner  had  he  rctumed  to  Capemaum  (prób.  Oct.  A.D. 
27)  than  such  crowds  reasaembled  at  his  house  that  his 
friends  sought  to  restrain  what  they  deemed  his  exces- 
8ive  enthusiasm  to  address  them,  while  the  jealous  hi- 
erarchy from  Jerusalem,  who  were  present,  scrupled  not 
to  attribute  to  collusion  with  Satan  the  cure  of  a  blind 
and  dumb  diemoniac  which  he  wrought.  But,  refuting 
this  absurd  cavil  (sińce  his  act  was  directly  in  opposi- 
tion  to  diabolical  influences),  he  denounced  it  as  an  un- 
pardonable  crime  against  the  Holy  Spirit,  who  was  the 
agent,  and  procceded  to  characterize  the  ran^or  of  heart 
that  had  prompted  if ;  then,  afler  refusing  to  ^^ratify  the 
curiosity  of  one  of  his  enemies,  who  interruptetl  him  by 
demanding  somc  celestial  portent  in  condnnation  of  his 
claims  (for  he  declared  no  further  miracle  should  be 
granted  to  them  except  his  evcntnal  resurrection,  which 
he  compared  to  the  restoration  oi  Jonah  from  the  maw 
of  the  fish),  he  contrasted  the  obduracy  of  the  genera- 
tion  that  heaid  him  with  the  penitcnce  of  the  Ninevites 
and  the  eagemess  of  the  queen  of  Sheba  to  listen  to  far 
inferior  wisdom,  and  closed  by  comparing  their  aggra- 
rated  condition  to  that  of  a  relapsed  daemoniac  (Mark 
iii,  19-21 ;  Matt.  xii,  22-45;  and  parallels).  A  woman 
prcsent  pronounced  his  mother  happy  in  having  such  a 
son,  but  he  declared  those  rather  happy  who  obeyed  his 
teaching  (Cukc  xi,  27).  At  that  momenty  being  inform- 
ed  of  the  approach  of  his  relatives,  and  their  inability  to 
reach  him  through  the  crowd,  he  avowed  his  faithful 
followers  to  be  dearer  than  his  earthly  kindred  (Matt. 
xii,  4(j-50,  and  parallels).  A  Pharisee  (q.  v.)  present  in- 
^*ited  him  to  dinner,  bul,  on  his  evincing  surprise  that 
his  gnest  did  not  perform  the  ablutions  customary  before 
eating,  Jesus  inveighed  against  the  absurd  and  hypocrit- 
ical  zeal  of  the  sect  conceming  extemals,  while  they 
neglected  the  essentials  of  piety ;  and  when  a  devotee 
of  the  law  [see  Lawykr]  complained  of  the  sweeping 
character  of  these  charges,  he  denounced  the  selfish  and 
ruinous  casuistry  of  this  dass  likewisc  with  such  severi- 
ty  that  the  whole  party  determined  to  entrap  him,  if 
possible,  into  some  unguarded  exprcs8ion  against  the 
religious  or  ci\'il  power  (Lukę  xi,  37-42,  44-46,  52-54, 
and  parallcl).  See  Scribk.  On  his  way  home  he  con- 
tiiiued  to  address  the  imraense  concourse,  first  against 
the  hypocńsy  which  he  had  j  ust  witnessed,  and  then — 
taking  occasion  from  the  dcmand  of  a  person  present 
that  he  would  use  his  authority  to  compel  his  brother 
to  setŁle  their  fathers  estate  with  him,  which  he  refused 
on  the  ground  of  its  irrelevancy  to  his  sacred  functions 
— he  proceeded  to  discourse  on  the  necessity  and  pro- 
priety  of  trust  in  divine  Providence  for  our  temporal 
wants,  iUustrating  this  duty  by  the  parablc  of  the  sud- 


dcn  death  of  a  rich  worldling,  by  a  comparison  with 
various  natural  objects,  by  contrast  with  the  heathen, 
and  by  the  higher  importaiice  of  a  preparation  for 
heaven  (Lukę  xii,  1,  6,  7, 13-31,  33,  34,  and  parallels). 
Being  informed  of  a  recent  atrocity  of  Herod  against 
some  Galileans,  he  declared  that  an  equally  awful  fate 
awaited  the  impenitent  among  his  hearers,  and  enforced 
the  admonition  by  the  parable  of  the  delay  in  cutting 
down  a  fruitless  tree  (Lukę  xiii,  1-9).  Again  lea^'ing 
his  home  the  same  day,  he  delivered,  while  sittiug  in  a 
boat,  to  a  large  audience  upon  the  lake-shore,  the  ser^- 
eral  parables  of  the  diflFerent  fate  of  variou8  portions  of 
seed  in  a  field,  the  true  and  false  wheat  growing  togeth- 
er  tiU  hanrest,  the  gradual  but  spontaneous  develop- 
ment  of  a  plant  of  grain,  the  remarkable  growth  of  the 
mustard-shrub  from  a  very  smali  seed,  and  the  dissem- 
uiation  of  leaveu  throughout  a  large  mass  of  dough 
(Matt.  xiii,  1-9, 24-30;  Mark  iv,  2G-29;  Matt.  xiii,  31- 
36 ;  and  parallels) ;  but  it  was  only  to  the  privileged 
disciplea  (as  he  informed  them)  in  private  that  he  ex*> 
plained,  at  their  own  reąuest,  the  variou8  elements  of 
the  first  of  these  parables  as  referring  to  the  difierent 
degrees  of  improvement  madę  by  the  corresponding 
classe^  of  his  own  hearers,  adding  various  admonitions 
(by  comparisons  with  common  life)  to  diligencc  on  the 
part  of  the  apoetles,  and  then,  after  explaiiiing  the  par- 
able of  the  false  wheat  as  referring  to  the  divine  for- 
bearance  to  eradicate  the  wicked  in  this  scenę  of  próba- 
tion,  he  added  the  parable  of  the  assortment  of  a  hete- 
rogeneous  draught  of  fish  in  a  common  net,  indicative  of 
the  finał  discrimination  of  the  foregoiug  characters,  with 
two  minor  parables  iUustrating  the  paramount  value  of 
piety,  and  closed  with  an  exhortation  to  combine  nov- 
elty  with  orthodoxy  in  religious  preaching,  like  the  va- 
ried  stores  of  a  skilful  housekeeper  (Matt,  xiii,  10,  Ił, 
13-23;  V,  14-16;  vi,  22,  23;  x,  26,  27;  xiii,  12,  86-48, 
47-50,  44-46, 51-53;  and  parallels).  See  Parable.  As 
Jesus  was  setting  out,  towards  evenuig  of  the  same  day, 
to  cross  the  lakę,  a  scńbe  proposed  to  become  his  con- 
stant  disciple,  but  was  repelled  by  being  reminded  by 
Jesus  of  the  hardships  to  which  he  would  exił08e  him- 
self  in  his  company;  two  others  of  his  attendants  were 
refused  a  temporary  leave  of  absence  to  arrange  their 
domestic  affairs,  Icst  it  might  wean  them  altogether 
from  his  sen'ice  (Matt.  viii,  18-22 ;  Lukę  xi,  61, 62 ;  and 
parallels).  While  the  party  were  crossing  the  lakę,  Je- 
sus, overoome  with  the  labors  of  the  day,  had  fallen 
asleep  on  the  stem  bench  of  the  boat,  when  so  vioIent  a 
sąuall  took  them  that,  in  the  utmost  constemation,  they 
appealed  to  him  for  preservation,  and,  rebuking  their 
distrust  of  his  defending  presence,  he  calmed  the  tern- 
pest  with  a  word  (Matt.  viii,  23>27,  and  parallels).  See 
Galilee,  Sea  of.  On  reaching  the  eastem  shore,  they 
were  met  by  two  frantic  dicmoniacs,  roaming  in  the  de- 
serted  catacombs  of  Gadara,  who  prostrated  themseWes 
before  Jesus,  and  implored  his  forbearance ;  but  the  Sa- 
tanic  influence  that  possessed  them,  on  being  expelled 
by  him,  with  his  permission  seized  upon  a  large  herd  of 
swine  feeding  near  (probably  raised,  contrary  to  the  law, 
for  supplying  the  market  of  the  Greek-imitating  Jews), 
and  caused  them  to  rush  headlong  into  the  lakę,  where 
they  were  drowned  [see  D^moniac]  ;  and  this  loss  so 
offended  the  worldly-minded  owners  of  the  swine  that 
the  neighbors  generally  reque8ted  Jesus  to  return  home, 
which  he  immediately  did,  leaving  the  late  maniacs  to 
fili  the  country  with  the  remarkable  tidings  of  their 
cure  (Mark  v,  1-21,  and  parallels).  Not  long  afterwards, 
on  occasion  of  a  large  entertainment  madę  for  Jesus  by 
Matthew,  the  Pharisees  found  fault  with  the  disciples 
because  their  Master  had  condescended  to  associate  with 
the  tax-gatherers  and  other  disreputable  persons  that 
were  guests;  but  Jesus  declared  that  such  had  most 
need  of  his  intercourse,  his  mission  being  to  recłaim  sin- 
ners  (Matt.  ix,  10-13,  and  paraUels).  At  the  same  time 
he  explained  to  an  inquirer  why  he  did  not  enjoin  sea- 
sons  of  fasting  like  the  Baptist,  that  his  presence  as  yet 
should  rather  be  a  cause  of  gladness  to  his  foUowcią 


JESUS  CHRIST 


892 


JESUS  CHRIST 


and  hc  illastrated  the  impropriety  of  sucb  aevere  re- 
quiTements  prematurely  by  the  festiyity  of  a  mairiage 
week,  and  by  the  parables  of  a  new  patch  on  an  old  gar- 
ment,  and  new  winę  in  old  skin-bottles  (Matu  ix,  14-17, 
and  parallels).  In  the  midst  of  these  remarks  be  was 
entreated  by  a  leading  citizen  named  Jalrua  (q.  v.)  to 
yisit  his  daughter,  who  lay  at  the  point  of  death ;  and 
while  going  for  that  purpoae  he  cured  a  female  among 
the  crowd  of  a  chronić  hffimorrhage  (q.  v.)  by  her  aecret^ 
ly  toaching  the  edge  of  his  dreas,  which  led  to  her  dis- 
covefy  and  acknowledgment  on  the  spot;  but  in  the 
meantime  information  arrived  of  the  death  of  the  sick 
girl:  neyerthelesa, encouraging  the  father'8  faith,he pro- 
ceeded  to  the  house  where  her  funeral  had  already  be- 
gun,  and,  enteńng  the  rooni  with  her  parents  and  three 
disciples  only,  restored  her  to  life  and  health  by  a  aim- 
ple  touch  and  word,  to  the  amazement  of  all  the  vicin- 
ity  (Mark  v,  23-43,  and  parallels).  As  he  was  leaving 
Jairus'8  house  two  blind  men  followed  him,  whose  re- 
que9t  that  he  would  restore  their  sight  he  granted  by  a 
touch ;  and  on  his  return  borne  he  cured  a  dumb  daemo- 
niac,  upon  which  the  Pharisees  repeated  their  calumny 
of  his  collusion  with  Satan  (Matt.  ix,  27-34).  Yisiting 
Nazareth  again  shortly  afterwards,  his  acquaintances 
were  ostonished  at  his  eloquence  in  the  synagogue  on 
the  Sabbath,  but  wcre  so  prejudiced  against  his  obacure 
family  that  but  few  had  sufficient  faith  to  warraiit  the 
exertion  of  his  miraculous  power  in  cures  (Mark  vi,  1-6, 
and  parallel).  About  this  time  (probably  Jan.  and  Feb. 
A.D.  28),  commiserating  tlie  morał  destitution  of  the 
oommunity,  Jesus  sent  out  the  apostles  in  pairs  on  a  gen- 
erał toiir  of  preaching  and  miracle-working  in  different 
directions  (but  avoiding  the  Gentiles  and  Samaritans), 
with  special  iostructions,  while  he  madę  his  third  cir- 
cuit  of  Galilee  for  a  like  purpose  (Matt.  ix,  35-38 ;  x, 
1,  5-14,  40^2;  xi,  1 ;  Mark  vi,  12, 13;  and  parallels). 
Upon  their  return,  Jesus,  being  apprized  of  the  execu- 
tion  of  John  the  Baptist  by  Herod  (Mark  vi,  21-29 ; 
probably  March,  A.D.  28),  and  of  the  tetrarch'8  yiews  of 
himself  (Mark  vi,  14-16 ;  sec  John  the  Baptist),  re- 
tired  with  them  across  the  lakę,  followed  by  crowds  of 
men,  with  their  familics,  whom  at  evening  he  miracu- 
lously  fed  with  a  few  pTovisions  at  band  (Mark  vi,  80- 
44,  and  parallels),  an  act  that  excited  such  enthusiasm 
among  them  as  to  lead  them  to  form  the  plan  of  forci- 
bly  proclaiming  him  their  political  king  (John  vi,  14, 
15) ;  this  design  Jesus  defeated  by  dismissing  the  mul- 
titude,  and  sending  away  the  disciples  by  themselyes  in 
a  boat  across  the  lakę,  while  he  spent  most  of  the  night 
alone  in  prayer  on  a  ncighboring  hiU ;  but  towards  day- 
light  he  rejoined  them,  by  walking  on  the  water  to  them 
as  they  were  toiling  at  the  oars  against  the  wind  and 
tempestuous  waves,  and  suddenly  calming  the  sea, 
brought  them  to  the  shore,  to  their  great  amazement ; 
thcn,  as  he  proceeded  through  the  plain  of  Gennesareth, 
the  whole  country  brought  their  sick  to  him  to  be  cured 
(Matt.  xiv,  22-36,  and  parallels),  the  populace  whom  he 
had  left  on  the  eastem  shore  meanwhile  missing  him, 
retumed  by  boats  to  Capemaum  (John  vi,  22-24 ;  prob. 
Thursd.  and  Friday,  March  25  and  26,  A.D.  28).  Meet- 
ing  them  in  their  scarch  next  day  in  the  synagogue,  he 
took  occasion,  in  alluding  to  the  recent  miracle,  to  pro- 
claim  himself  to  them  at  large  as  the  celestial  "  man- 
na" for  the  soul,  but  cooled  their  political  ambition  by 
waming  them  that  the  benefits  of  his  mission  could 
only  be  received  through  a  participation  by  faith  in  the 
atoniiig  sacrifice  shortly  to  be  madę  in  his  own  person ; 
a  doctrine  that  soon  discouraged  their  adhcrence  to  him, 
but  proved  no  stumbling-block  to  the  steadfast  faith  of 
eleyen  of  his  apostles  (John  vi,  25-71 ;  prob.  Saturday, 
March  27,  A.D.  28). 

4.  Third  morę  puhlic  Year. — ^Avoiding  the  malicious 
plots  of  the  hierarchy  at  Jerusalem  by  remaining  at 
Capemaum  during  the  Passoyer  (John  vii,  1 ;  probably 
Sunday,  March  28,  A.D.  28),  Jesus  took  occasion,  from 
the  fault  found  by  some  Pharisees  from  the  capital 
agaitist  his  disciples  for  eating  with  unwashed  hands 


Map  of  onr  Sadnnr^  Trftvc1^  diirin?  tbe  third  mor«  poił- 
lic  Year  of  hi*  Miiili^lry. 

^1'*'  Ani.mnN:].  In  n  huko  lLcit  Iradiliłłiml  s<:nipult>UC- 
ness  as  8ubversive  of  the  true  intent  of  the  Law,  and  to 
expound  to  his  disciples  the  true  cause  of  morał  ddile- 
ment,  as  consisting  in  the  corrupt  affections  of  the  beart 
(Mark  vii,  1-16;  Matt.  xv,  12-20;  and  parallels).  Kc- 
tiring  to  the  borders  of  Phoenida,  he  was  besought  with 
such  importunity  by  a  Gentile  woman  to  cure  ber  dc- 
moniac  daughter,  that,  afler  orercoming  with  the  mo^ 
touching  arguments  his  assumed  indiflFerence,  her  faith 
gained  his  assent,  and  on  reaching  borne  she  found  her 
daughter  restored  (MatL  xv,  21-28,  and  paralkl;  pn^h. 
May,  A.D.  28).  Thence  retuming  through  the  D6cai»- 
olis,  publidy  teaching  on  the  way,  he  cured  a  dcaf  and 
dumb  person,  with  many  other  invalid8,  and,  mirtru- 
lously  feeding  the  great  multitude  that  foUowed  hun, 
he  sailed  across  to  the  western  shore  of  the  lakę  (Mark 
vii,  31-37 ;  Matt,  xv,  80-89;  and  parallels),  where  he  re- 
buked  the  Pharisees'  demand  of  some  celestial  prodigr  by 
referring  them  to  the  tokens  of  the  exłstłng  wa,  which 
were  bb  evident  as  signs  of  the  weather,  and  adroooiab- 
ing  them  of  the  oomiąg  retribution  (Matt.  xvi,  1-3;  r. 


JESUS  CHRIST 


893 


JESUS  CHRIST 


25, 26),  and,  again  hinting  at  the  crowning  miracle  of 
his  resunrection,  he  retumed  to  the  eastern  ńde  of  the 
lakę,  yraniing  his  disciples  on  the  way  of  the  pcmicious 
doctńne  of  the  sectaries,  which  he  compared  to  ieavm 
(Matt.  xvi,  4-12,  and  paialiels).  Proceeding  to  Beth- 
aaida  (in  Penea),  he  cured  a  blind  man  in  a  gradnal 
mstner  by  succeniye  toaches  of  his  eyes  (Mark  viii, 
22-26),  and  on  his  way  through  the  environs  of  Ceesa- 
rea-Philippi,  aiter  piirate  devotion,  he  elicited  from  the 
disciples  a  profession  of  their  faith  in  him  as  the  Mes- 
Biah,  and  conferred  upon  them  the  right  of  legislating 
for  his  futurę  Church,  but  rebuked  Peter  for  demurring 
at  his  prediction  of  his  own  approaching  passion,  and 
enjoined  the  strictest  self-deniid  upon  his  foUoirers,  in 
yiew  of  the  eyentual  retribution  shortly  to  be  foieshad- 
owed  by  the  oyerthiow  of  the  Jewish  nation  (Matt.  xyi, 
13-28,  and  parallels;  prób.  May,  A.D.  28).  A  week  af- 
terwards,  taking  thiee  disciples  oniy  with  hini,  he  as- 
cended  alofty  moontain  in  the  yicinity  (prób.  Hermon), 
where  his  person  experienced  a  remarkable  luminous- 
ncss  [sec  Transfiouration],  with  other  prodigies,  that 
at  first  alarmed  the  disciples;  and,  on  descending  the 
mountain,  he  exp]ained  the  allusion  (Mai.  iv,  5,  6)  to 
Elijah  (who,  with  Moses,  had  just  conyersed  with  him 
in  a  glorified  state)  as  meaning  John  the  Baptist,  lately 
put  to  death  (Matt.  XTii,  1-18,  and  parallels).  On  his 
retom  to  the  rest  of  the  disciples,  he  found  them  dis- 
pnting  with  the  Jewish  sectaries  conceming  a  dsmoniac 
deaf-mute  child  whom  the  former  had  vainly  endeavor- 
ed  to  cure ;  the  father  now  eamestiy  entreating  Jesus  to 
exerci8e  his  power  over  the  malady,  although  of  long 
duration,  he  immediatcly  restored  the  lad  to  perfect 
soundncsB,  and  privately  explained  to  the  disciples  the 
cause  of  their  failure  as  lying  in  their  want  of  faith 
(Mark  ix,  14-28,  and  parallels),  which  would  have  len- 
dcred  them  compctent  to  any  reąuisite  miracle  (Lukę 
xvii,  5,  6,  and  parallel)  if  coupled  with  devout  humility 
(Mark  ix,  29,  and  parallel).  Thence  passing  over  into 
Galilee,  he  again  foretold  his  ignominious  crucifixion 
and  speedy  resurrection  to  his  disciples,  who  stiU  failed 
to  apprehend  his  meaning  (Mark  ix,  SO-82,  and  paral- 
lels). On  the  return  of  the  party  to  Capemaum,  the 
collector  of  the  Temple-tax  waited  upon  Peter  for  pay- 
mcnt  from  his  Master,  who,  although  stating  his  excmp- 
tion  by  rirtue  of  his  high  character,  yet,  for  the  sake  of 
peacc,  directed  Peter  to  catch  a  fish,  which  would  be 
found  to  have  swaUowed  a  piece  of  raoney  sufficient  to 
pay  for  them  both  (Matt  xvii,  24-27;  prób.  June,  A.D. 
28).  About  this  time  Jesus  rebuked  the  disciples  for  a 
strife  into  which  they  had  fallen  for  the  highest  honors 
under  their  MasŁer^s  reign  by  placing  a  child  in  their 
midst  as  a  symbol  of  artless  innocence ;  and  upon  John'8 
remarking  that  they  had  lately  silenced  an  unknown  per- 
son acting  in  his  name,  he  reprimanded  such  bigotry, 
cniarging  by  yarious  similes  upon  the  duty  of  tenderly 
dcaling  with  new  converts,  and  closing  with  rules  for 
the  cxpulsion  of  aii  unworthy  member  from  their  socie- 
ty,  adding  the  parable  of  the  unmerciful  senrant  to  en- 
forcc  the  doctrine  of  leniency  (Mark  ix,  88-40,  42,  49, 
50;  Matt.  xviii,  10, 15-35;  and  parallels).  Some  time 
afterwards  (prób.  September,  AJ).  28)  Jesus  sent  8even- 
ty  of  the  most  trusty  among  his  foUowers,  in  pairs, 
through  the  region  which  he  intended  shortly  to  yisit, 
with  instructions  similar  to  those  before  given  to  the 
apostlcs,  but  indicatire  of  the  opposition  they  would  be 
likely  to  meet  with  (Lukę  x,  1-8 ;  Matt  vii,  6 ;  x,  28- 
26;  and  parallels) ;  and  then,  after  declining  to  accom- 
pany  his  worldly-minded  brothers  to  the  approaching 
fesŁival  of  Tabemacles  at  Jerusalem,  to  which  they 
urged  him  as  a  favorable  opportnnity  for  exhibiting  his 
wonderful  powers,  near  the  dose  of  the  festal-week  he 
went  thither  privately  (John  vii,  2-10),  experiencing 
on  the  way  the  inhospitality  of  the  Samaiitans  with  a 
paticnce  that  rebuked  the  indignation  of  one  of  his  dis- 
ciples (Lukę  ix,  51-56),  and  receiving  the  grateful  ac- 
knowledgments  of  a  single  Samaritan  among  ten  lepers 
whom  he  cured  (Lukę  xvii,  11-19), 


5.  Leut  halfYear, — On  the  opening  of  the  festiyal  at 
Jerusalem  (Sunday,  Sept  21,  A.D.  28),  the  hierarchy: 
eagerly  inquired  for  Jesus  among  the  populace,  who 
hcdd  disoordant  opinions  conceming  him ;  but,  on  his 
arrival,  he  boldly  taught  in  the  Tempie,  vindicating  his 
course  and  claims  so  eloquently  that  the  very  officers 
sent  by  his  enemies  to  arrest  him  retumed  abashed, 
while  the  people  continued  divided  in  their  sentiments, 
being  inclined  to  accept  his  cordial  inyitations  (Matt. 
xi,  28-80),  but  deterred  by  the  spedous  objections  of  the 
hierarchy  (John  vii,  11-68).  Next  moming,  retuming 
from  the  Mt  of  0Uve8  (prób.  the  residence  of  Lazarus 
at  Bethany),  in  the  midst  of  his  teaching  in  the  Tem- 
pie he  dismiflsed,  with  merely  an  admonition,  a  female 
brought  to  him  as  an  adulteress  (q.  v.),  with  a  view  to 
embarrass  him  in  the  dispoeal  of  the  case,  nonę  of  his 
consdence-stricken  accusers  daring  to  be  the  first  in  ex- 
ecuting  the  penalty  of  the  law  when  aUowed  to  do  so 
by  Jesus  (John  viii,  1-11).  He  then  continued  his  ex- 
postulations  with  his  captious  hcarers  respectmg  his  own 
character,  until  at  length,  on  his  avowing  his  diyine 
pre-exi8tence,  they  atteropted  to  stone  him  as  guilty 
of  blasphcmy,  but  he  withdrew  from  their  midst  (John 
viii,  12-59).  The  8eventy  meseengers  retuming  shortly 
afterwards  (prób.  Oct  A.D.  28)  with  a  report  of  great 
succcss,  Jesus  expre6sed  his  exultation  in  thanks  to  God 
for  the  hurable  instrumentality  divinely  chosen  for  the 
propagation  of  the  Gospel  (Lukę  x,  17-21,  and  paralld). 
Being  asked  by  a  Jewish  sectary  the  most  certain  meth- 
od  of  securing  heaven,  he  referred  him  to  the  dut>',  ex- 
presscd  in  the  law  (Dent  vi,  5;  Lev.  xix,  8),  of  supremę 
iove  to  God  and  cordial  philanthropy,  and,  in  answer  to 
the  other*s  que8tion  respecting  the  extent  of  the  latter 
obligation,  he  illustrated  it  by  the  parable  of  the  benev- 
olent  Samaritan  (Lukę  x,  25-87).  Ketuming  at  even- 
ing  to  the  homc  of  Lazams,  he  gently  reprored  the  im- 
patient  zeal  of  the  kind  Martha  in  prcparing  for  him  a 
meal,  and  defcnded  Mary  for  being  abeorbed  in  his  in- 
stractions  (Lnkc  x,  88-42).  After  a  season  ofprirate 
praycr  (prób.  in  Gethsemane,  on  his  way  to  Jcnipalcm, 
next  moming),  he  dictated  a  model  of  praycr  to  his  dis- 
ciples at  their  reque8t,  stating  the  indispensableness  of 
a  placable  spirit  towatds  otliers  in  order  to  our  o^-n  for- 
giyeness  by  God,  and  adding  the  parable  of  the  guest  at 
midnight  to  enforce  the  neceesity  of  urgency  in  prayer, 
with  assnrances  that  God  is  morę  willing  to  grant  his 
children*s  petitions  for  spiritual  blessings  than  carthly 
parents  are  to  to  supply  their  children's  temporal  wanta 
(Lukę  xi,  1-13,  and  parallels).  As  he  entered  the  city, 
Jesus  noticed  a  man  whom  he  ascertained  to  have  been 
blind  fmm  his  birth,  and  to  the  disciples'  inąuiry  for 
'  whose  sin  the  blindness  was  a  punishment,  he  answcred 
that  it  was  pro\ńdentiaUy  designed  for  the  divine  gloryj 
namely,  in  his  cure,  as  a  raeans  to  which  he  moistcned 
a  little  clay  with  spittle,  touched  the  man's  eyes  with  it, 
and  directed  him  to  wash  them  in  the  Pool  of  Siloam 
(Satułday,  Nov.  28,  A.D.  28) ;  but  the  hierarchy,  leam- 
ing  the  cure  from  the  neighbors,  brought  the  man  before 
them,  because  the  transaction  had  taken  place  on  the 
Sabbath,  and  disputed  the  fact  until  testified  to  by  his 
parents,  and  then  alleging  that  the  author  of  the  act, 
whose  name  was  yet  unknown  even  to  the  man  himself, 
must  have  been  a  sinner,  because  a  violator  of  the  sa- 
cred  day,  they  were  met  with  so  spirited  a  defence  of 
Jesus  by  the  man  himself,  that,  becoming  enraged,  they 
immediately  excommunicated  him.  Jesus,  however, 
meeting  him  shortly  after,  disclosed  to  his  ready  faith 
his  own  Messianic  character,  and  then  discoursed  to  his 
captious  enemies  conceming  the  immunities  of  tme  be- 
lieycrs  in  him  under  the  simile  of  a  fold  of  shccp  (John 
ix ;  X,  1-21).  The  same  flgure  he  again  took  up  at  the 
ensuing  Festival  of  Dedication,  upon  the  inąuiry  of  the 
Jewish  sectaries  directly  put  to  him  in  Soloroon^s  por- 
tico  of  the  Tempie,  as  to  his  Messiahship,  and  spoke  so 
pointedly  of  his  unity  with  God  that  his  auditors  would 
have  stoned  him  for  blasphemy  had  he  not  hastily  with- 
drawn  from  the  place  (cir.  Dec.  1,  A.D.  28),  and  retired 


JESUS  CHRIST 


894 


JESUS  CHRIST 


to  the  Jordan,  wbere  be  gained  many  adherenta  (John 
X,  22-42).  Lazaras  at  this  time  falUng  sick,  his  sisten 
sent  to  Jesus,  desiring  his  presenoe  at  Bethany ;  but  af- 
ter  waitmg  sereial  days,  until  Lazarus  was  dead,he  in- 
fonned  his  disciples  of  the  fact  (which  he  assured  them 
woulcLturn  out  to  the  divine  glory),  and  propoaed  to  go 
thither.  On  their  amval,  he  was  met  fint  by  Maitha, 
and  then  by  Mary,  with  tearful  expre8sions  of  regret  for 
his  absence,  which  he  checked  by  assurances  (not  elear- 
ly  apprehended  by  them)  of  their  brother's  restoration 
to  life ;  then  causing  the  tomb  to  be  opened  (afber  over- 
Tuling  Martha's  objection),  he  summoned  the  dead  Laz- 
arus fbrth  to  life,  to  the  amazement  of  the  spectators 
(John  xi,  1-46 ;  probably  Jan.  A.D.  29).  See  Lazarus. 
This  miracle  aroused  afresh  the  enmity  of  the  Saiihe- 
drim,  who,  after  consultation,  at  the  haughty  advice  of 
Caiaphas,  determined  to  accomplish  his  death,  thus  un- 
wittiugly  fulfilling  the  destined  purpose  of  his  mission 
(John  xi,  47-53).  Withdrawing  in  conseąuence  to  the 
city  of  £phron  (John  xi,  54),  and  aflerwarils  to  Per^ 
Jesus  continued  his  teaching  and  miracles  to  crowds 
that  gathered  about  him  (Mark  x,  1,  and  parallel).  As 
he  was  preaching  in  one  of  the  synagogues  of  this  vi- 
cinity  one  Sabbath,  he  cured  a  woman  of  chronić  paraly- 
ais  of  the  back,  and  refuted  the  churlish  cavil  of  one  of 
the  hierarchy  present  at  the  day  on  which  this  was 
done,  by  a  reference  to  ordinary  acts  of  mercy  even  to 
«nimals  on  the  Sabbath  (Lukę  xiii,  10-17 ;  prób.  Feb. 
A.D.  29).  Jesus  no  w  tumed  his  steps  towards  Jerusa- 
lem,  teaching  on  the  way  the  necessity  of  a  personal 
preparation  for  heaven,  without  trusting  to  any  exter- 
nal  recommendations  (Lukę  xiii,  22-30) ;  and  replying 
to  the  Płiarisees'  insidious  waming  of  danger  from  Her- 
od, that  Jerusalem  alone  was  tb  z  destined  place  of  peril 
for  him  (Lukę  xiii,  31-33).  On  one  Sabbath,  while  eat- 
ing  at  the  house  of  an  eminent  Phańsee,  he  cured  a  man 
pf  the  dropsy,  and  silenced  all  objections  by  agiin  ap- 
pealing  to  the  usual  care  of  domestic  animals  on  that 
day;  he  then  took  occasion,  ft)m  the  anxiety  of  the 
guests  to  secure  the  chief  places  of  honor  at  the  table, 
to  disoourae  to  the  company  on  the  ailvantjŁges  of  mod- 
ęsty  and  charity,  closing  by  an  admonition  to  prompt 
oompliance  with  the  offers  of  the  Gospel  in  the  parable 
of  the  marriage-feast  and  the  wedding-garment  (Lukę 
?civ,  1-15;  Matt,  xxii,  1-14,  and  parallel;  proh.March, 
A.D.  29).  To  the  multitudes  attending  him  he  pre- 
Bcribed  resolute  sdf-denial  as  essential  to  tnie  disciple- 
ship  (Lukę  xv,  25, 26,  and  parallel),  under  various  fig- 
ures  (Lukę  xiv,  28-33) ;  while  he  corrected  the  jealousy 
of  the  Jewish  sectaries  at  his  intercourse  with  the  lower 
dasses  (Lukę  xv,  1, 2),  by  teaching  the  divine  interest 
in  penitent  wandercrs  from  him  (Lukę  xix,  10,  and  par- 
allel), under  the  parables  of  stray  sheep  (Lukę  xv,  8-7, 
and  parallel),  the  lost  piece  of  money,  and  the  prodigal 
son  (Lukę  xv,  8-32).  At  the  same  time,  he  iUustrated 
the  prudence  of  securing  the  divine  favor  by  a  prudent 
use  of  the  blessings  of  this  life  in  the  parable  of  the 
fraudulent  steward  (Lukę  xvi,  1-12),  showing  the  in- 
compatibility  of  worldUness  with  devotion  (Lukę  xW, 
13,  and  parallel) ;  and  the  self-sufficiency  of  the  Phań- 
sees  he  rebuked  in  the  parable  of  tlie  rich  man  and  Laz- 
arus (Lukę  xvi,  14, 16,  19-31),  declańng  to  them  that 
the  kingdom  of  the  Messiah  had  already  come  unob- 
senrcd  (Lukę  xvii,  20,  21).  He  impressed  upon  both 
dasses  of  his  hearers  the  importance  of  perseverance, 
and  yet  humility,  in  prayer,  by  the  parables  of  the  im- 
portunate  widów  before  the  unjust  judge,  and  the  peni- 
tent publican  in  contrast  with  the  self-righteous  Phari- 
see  (Lukę  xviii,  1-14).  To  the  insidious  queBtions  of 
the  Jewish  sectaries  conceming  divorce,  he  replied  that 
it  was  inconsistent  with  the  original  design  of  marriage, 
being  only  suffered  by  Moses  (with  restrictions)  on  ac- 
count  of  the  inveterate  customs  of  the  nation,  but  really 
justifiable  only  in  cases  of  adultery;  but  at  the  same 
time  explained  privately  to  the  disciples  that  the  oppo- 
site  extreme  of  celibacy  was  to  be  voluntary  only  (Matt. 
aux,  3-12,  and  parallelś).     He  welcomed  infants  to  his 


arms  and  bleańng,  as  being  a  83rmbol  of  the  innoceiice 
required  by  the  Gospel  (Mark  x,  13-16,  and  paiallel8\. 
A  rich  and  honorable  young  man  yisiting  him  with 
que8tiona  conceming  the  way  of  8alvation,  Jesus  was 
pleased  with  his  frankness,  but  propoaed  terms  eo  bom- 
bling  to  his  worldly  attachments  that  he  retired  with« 
out  accepting  them,  which  fumished  Jesus  an  opp»r. 
tunity  of  discoursing  to  his  followers  on  the  prejndicial 
influence  of  wealth  on  piety,  and  (in  reply  to  a  remark 
of  Peter)  of  illustrating  the  rewards  of  self-denying  ex- 
ertion  in  religious  duty  by  the  parables  of  the  8ervant  at 
meals  after  a  day's  work,  and  the  laborers  in  the  vine- 
yard  (Mark  x,  17-29;  Matt.  xix,  28,29;  Lukę  xvii,  7- 
10;  Matt.  XX,  1-16;  and  parallelś).  As  they  had  now 
arrived  at  the  Jordan  opposite  Jerusalem,  Jesus  ooce 
morę  wamed  the  timid  disdples  of  the  fate  awaiting 
him  there  (Mark  x,  32-34);  but  they  so  little  under- 
stood  him  (Lukę  xvii,  34),  that  the  mother  of  James 
and  John  ambitiously  reąuested  of  him  a  prominent 
post  for  ber  sons  under  his  administration,  they  aiso  ig- 
norantly  professing  their  willingness  to  share  his  sufler- 
ings,  until  Jesus  checked  rivaliy  between  them  and  their 
fellow-disciples  by  enjoining  upon  them  all  a  muiual 
deference  in  imitation  of  his  self -  sacrifidng  mi:ili^ioa 
(MatL  XX,  20-28).  As  they  were  passing  through  Jer- 
icho,  two  blind  men  implored  of  him  to  restorc  their 
sight,  and,  although  rebuked  by  the  by-standers,  they 
urged  their  reque8t  so  importunatdy  as  at  length  to 
gain  the  ear  of  Jesus,  who  called  them,  and  with  a  umch 
enabled  them  to  see  (Mark  x,  46-52,  and  paralleks). 
Passing  along,  he  obsenred  a  chief  publican,  iiamed  Zao 
chaus  (q.  v.),  who  had  run  in  advance  and  dimbed  a 
tree  to  get  a  sight  of  Jesus,  but  w^ho  now,  at  Jesus's  $ug^ 
gestion,  gladly  recdved  him  to  his  house,  and  there  vin- 
dicated  himself  from  the  calumniea  of  the  iuńdious  hi- 
erarchy by  <levoting  one  half  his  property  to  chaiity, 
an  act  that  secured  his  commendation  by  Jesus  (Lukę 
xix,  2-9),  who  took  occasion  to  illustrate  the  duty  of 
fidelity  in  improving  religious  privil^es  by  the  parable 
of  the  "  talents"  or  "•  pounds""  (Lukę  xix,  1 1-28,  and  par- 
allel). Reaching  Bethany  a  week  before  the  Paseover, 
whcn  the  Sanhedrim  were  planning  to  seize  him,  Jesus 
was  entertained  at  the  house  of  Lazarus,  and  yindicated 
Mary's  act  in  anointing  (q.  v.)  his  head  with  a  Hask  of 
prccious  ointment,  from  the  parsimonious  objcctioni  of 
Judas,  declaring  that  it  should  ever  be  to  ber  pnifc  aa 
highly  significant  in  view  of  his  approaching  buiial 
(John  xi,  55-57 ;  xii,  1-1 1 ;  and  parallelś). 

6.  PasaioH  Week, — The  entrance  of  Jesus  into  Jeru- 
salem next  moming  (Monday,  March  14,  A.D.  29)  was 
a  triumphal  one,  the  disdples  having  moonted  him 
upon  a  young  ass,  which,  by  his  direction,  they  foand  ia 
the  environs  of  the  city,  and  spread  thdr  garmaits  and 
green  branches  along  the  road,  while  the  multitude  ee- 
corting  him  proclaimed  him  as  the  expected  descendant 
of  David,  to  the  chagrin  of  the  hierarchy,  who  yainly 
endeavored  to  check  the  popular  dedamations  [«ce  Ho- 
sanna] ;  Jesus  meanwhile  vr88  abeorbed  in  grief  at  the 
ruin  awaiting  the  impenitent  metropolia  (Matt.  xxt,  1- 
9 ;  John  xii,  16, 17, 19;  Lukę  xix,  39-44 ;  and  parallelś). 
Arriying  at  the  Tempie  amid  thb  generał  cxdtement, 
he  again  cleared  the  Tempie  courts  of  the  profane  tmdes- 
roen,  while  the  sick  resorted  to  him  for  cure,  and  the 
children  prolonged  his  praise  till  evening,  when  he  re- 
tumed  to  Bethany  for  the  night  (l^iatt.  xxi,  10-17,  and 
parallelś).  On  his  way  again  to  the  dty,  early  in  the 
moming,  he  pronounced  a  curse  upon  a  green  but  fruit- 
Icss  fig-tree  (q.  y.)  (to  which  he  had  gone,  not  ha\ńng 
yet  breakfasted,  as  if  in  hopes  of  flnding  on  it  soroe  of 
last  yeai^lB  late  figs),  as  a  symbol  of  the  unproductive 
Jewish  nation,  the  day  bdng  occupied  in  teaching  at 
the  Tempie  (where  the  multitude  of  his  hearers  pre- 
yented  the  execution  of  the  hierarchal  designs  ai^ainsŁ 
him),  and  the  night,  aa  usual,  at  Bethany.  On  the  en- 
suing  moming  the  fig-tree  was  found  withered  to  the 
very  root,  which  led  Jesus  to  impress  upon  the  disct{ile8 
the  efficacy  of  faith,  ęspecially  in  their  public  fuiictions 


\ 


JESUS  CHRIST 


895 


JESUS  CHRIST 


f£ĄSJ    ĄJ   BiTMf. 


Map  of  oar  BaTlour'8  Jonrneys  on  the  flrst  Day  of  Passion  Week. 

X.B.— Tb«  localltin  of  JertiMlem  on  tht«  Map  iire  in  accorduco  wlth  the  vlew«  of  Dr.  Robinaon.    For  inorv  exiict  identificaUciu,  s«c  Um 
mrt.  JBBCtALBM.    For  tbe  •rgammtt  nnigiiing  onr  Lord**  triomphal  eniry  into  tba  city  to  Jfon^ajr,  s«c  Palu  Scnpay. 


f^ĄC^i^ą  A  fi  O  CiJm^if^ 


JESUS  CHRIST 


896 


JESUS  CHRIST 


(Maitt  xxi,  18, 19 ;  Lukę  xxi,  87, 38 ;  xix,  47, 48 ;  Matt 
xxi,  20-22).  ThiJa,  the  last  day  of  Jemu^s  intercoune 
with  the  public,  was  filled  with  vaiiou8  diacusaions  (Wed- 
nesday,  March  16,  A.D.  29).  The  hierarchy,  demanding 
the  authority  for  his  public  conduct,  were  perplexed  by 
his  counter-ąuestion  as  to  the  authority  of  the  Bapti8t'8 
mission,  and  he  seized  the  oocasion  to  depict  their  inooib* 
sistency  and  criminality  by  the  parables  of  the  two  sona 
sent  by  their  father  to  work,  and  the  murderous  garden- 
ers,  with  so  vivid  a  personal  reference  as  to  cover  tfaem 
with  confusion  (MatL  xxi,  23^46,  and  parallels).  The 
mooted  question  of  the  lawfuhiess  of  tribute  to  a  Gentile 
power,  being  insidiously  proposed  to  him  by  a  coalition 
of  the  Pharisees  and  Uerodiana,  was  so  readiily  solyed  by 
him  by  an  appeal  to  the  very  coin  paid  in  tribute,  that 
they  again  retired,  unable  to  make  it  a  ground  for  pub- 
lic charges  against  him  (Matt.  xxii,  15-22,  and  parallels). 
The  case  of  seven  brothers  successiyely  married  (under 
the  Leyirate  law)  to  the  same  woman  being  next  sup- 
posed  by  the  Sudducees,  he  as  easily  disposed  of  the  im< 
aginary  difficulty  conceming  her  proper  husband  in  the 
other  world  by  declaring  the  non-existence  of  such  re- 
lations  there,  aod  refuted  their  infidelity  as  to  the  futurę 
life  by  cidng  a  passage  of  Scripture  (Matt.  xxii,  28-88, 
and  parallels).  Seeing  the  Sadducees  so  oompletely  si- 
lenced,  one  of  the  Pharisaical  party  undertook  to  puzzle 
Jesus  by  raising  that  disputed  point,  What  Moaaic  in- 
junction  is  the  most  important?  but  Jesus  ci  ted  the  du- 
ties  of  supremę  deyotion  to  God  and  generał  beneyolence 
to  man  as  comprlsing  all  other  morał  enactments,  to 
which  the  other  so  cordially  aseented  as  to  draw  a  oom- 
mendation  from  Jesus  on  his  hopeful  sentiments  (Mark 
xii,  28-34,  and  parallel).  Jesus  now  tumed  the  tables 
upon  his  opponents  by  asking  them,  Whose  descendant 
the  Messiah  should  be  ?  and  on  their  replying,  Dayid'8, 
of  course,  he  then  asked  how  (as  in  Psa.  ex,  1)  he  coułd 
still  be  Dayid's  Lord  f  which  so  embarrassed  his  ene- 
mies  that  they  desisted  from  this  modę  of  attack  (Matt. 
xxii,  41-46).  Jesus  then  in  plain  terms  denounced  be- 
fore  the  concourse  the  hypocrisy  and  ostentation  of  the 
hierarchy,  cspecially  their  priestcraft,  their  sanctimony, 
their  ambition,  their  extortion,  thdr  casuistry,  and  their 
intolerance,  and  bewailed  the  Impending  fate  of  the 
city  (M&IU  xxiii,  1-12, 14-21 ,  29-39,  and  piradlels).  Ob- 
serying  a  poor  widów  drop  a  few  of  the  smallest  ooins 
into  the  cont.ribution-box  in  the  Tempie,  he  declared 
that  she  had  shown  morę  tnie  liberality  than  wealthier 
donors,  because  she  had  giyen  morę  in  proportion  to  her 
means,  and  with  greater  self-denial  (Mark  xii,  41^44, 
and  parallel).  A  number  of  proselytes  [see  Helenist] 
requcsting  through  Philip  an  intenriew  with  Jesus,  he 
met  them  with  intimations  of  his  approaching  passion, 
while  a  celestial  yoice  announced  the  glory  that  should 
thereby  accrue  to  God,  and  he  then  retired  from  the  un- 
belieying  public  with  an  admonition  to  improve  their 
present  spiritual  priyileges  (John  xii,  20-^).  As  he 
was  Crossing  the  Mount  of  Oliyes,  his  disciples  calling 
his  attention  to  the  noble  structure  of  the  Tempie  oppo- 
site,  he  declared  its  spcedy  demolition,  and  on  their  ask- 
ing the  time  and  tokens  of  this  catastrophe,  he  discouned 
to  them  at  length,  first  on  the  coming  downfall  of  the 
city  and  nation  (waming  them  to  escape  betimes  from 
the  catastrophe),  and  then  (by  a  gradual  transition,  in 
which,  under  yaried  imageiy,  he  represented  both  eyents 
morę  or  less  blended)  he  passed  to  the  scenes  of  the  finał 
judgment  (described  as  a  forensic  tribunal),  interspers- 
ing  constant  admonitions  (especially  in  the  parable  of 
the  t«n  yiigins)  to  preparation  for  an  eyent  the  datę  of 
which  was  so  uncertain  (MatL  xxiy,  1-8 ;  x,  17-20, 34- 
36 ;  xxiv,  9, 10 ;  x,  28 ;  xxiy,  13-37 ;  Lukę  xxi,  34-86 ; 
Matt  xxiv,  43,44;  Lukę  xii,  41, 42;  Mark  xiii,  81, 34; 
Matt.  xxiv,  45-61 ;  Lukę  xii,  47, 48 ;  Matt.  xxiy,42 ;  xxy, 
1-12;  Lukę  xii,  35-38;  Matt,  xxv,  13,31-46).  As  the 
Passover  was  now  approaching,  the  Sanhedrim  held  a  se- 
cret  mceting  at  the  house  of  the  high-priest,  where  they 
reaolyed  to  gct  posscssion,  but  by  private  means,  of  the 
person  of  Jesus  (Thursday,  March  17,  A.D.  29),  and  Ju- 


das  Iscariot,  learning  their  desire,  went  and  engaged  to 
betiay  his  Master  into  their  hands,  on  the  firsl  opporto- 
nity,  for  a  fixed  reward  (Matt.  xxyi,  1-5, 14-16,  and  pai^ 
allels). 

The  same  day  Jesus  sent  two  of  his  disciples  ioto  the 
city,  with  directions  where  to  prepare  the  Pasaoyer  meal 
(Lulce  xxii,  7-18),  and  at  eyening,  repairing  thither  to 
partake  of  it  with  the  whole  number  of  his  apostles  [see 
Lord'8  Supprb],  he  affectionately  reminded  them  of 
the  interest  gathering  about  this  last  repast  with  them; 
then,  while  it  was  progreasing,  he  waahed  their  feet  to  *" 
reproye  their  mutual  riyalry  and  enforce  condcacension 
to  one  another  by  his  own  example  [see  Washtsg  thb 
Feet],  and  immediately  declared  his  own  betrayal  by 
one  of  their  number,  fixing  the  indiyidual  (by  a  agn 
recognised  by  him  alone)  among  the  amazed  disciples 
(Lukę  xxii,  14^17,  24 ;  John  xiii,  1-15;  Lukę  xxii,  25- 
30;  John  xiii,  17-19,  21,  22;  Matt  xxvi  22-24;  John 
xiii,  23-26;  Matt  xxyi,  25;  and  parallels).     Judas  im- 
mediately withdrew,  fuli  of  resentment,  but  w^thout  the 
rest  suspecting  his  purpoee;  rdieyed  of  las  preaence. 
Jesus  now  began  to  speak  of  his  approaching  fate,  whea 
he  was  intemipted  by  the  surprised  inquińes  of  his  c^ 
dples,  who  produced  their  weapons  as  ready  for  his  de- 
fence,  while  Peter  stoutly  maintained  his  steadfastnes^ 
although  wamed  of  his  speedy  dcfection  (John  xiii,  27- 
83,  86-88;  Matt  xxyi,  81-38;  Łukę  xxii,  81-38;  and 
parallels);  then,  closing  the  meal  by  instituting  the 
Eucharist  (q.  y.)  (Matt  xxvi,  26-29,  and  parallpls),  Je- 
sus lingeied  to  discoursc  at  length  to  his  disciples  (whose 
queBtions  showed  how  lit  tle  they  comprehended  him) 
on  his  departure  at  hand,  and  the  gift  (in  conaequaice) 
of  the  Holy  Spirit,  with  exhortations  to  religious  acciT- 
ity  and  mntual  love,  and,  afler  a  prayer  for  tlie  dirine 
saifeguard  upon  them  (John  xiv,  l-xy,  17;  XLii,  84, 36; 
xy,  18-xyii,  26),  he  retired  with  them  to  the  Mount  of 
Oliyes  (John  xyiii,  1,  and  parallels).     Herę,  entciing 
the  garden  of  Gethsemane,  he  withdrew,  with  three  of 
the  disciples,  a  short  distance  from  the  rest,  and,  while 
they  fell  asleep,  he  three  times  prayed,  in  an  agony  (q. 
y.)  that  foroed  blood-tinged  sweat  from  the  pores  of  his 
forehead,  for  relief  from  the  horror-stiicken  anguish  of 
his  soul  [see  Bloody  S^-eat],  and  was  partially  re- 
lieyed  by  an  angelic  message ;  but  Judaa,  soon  appear- 
ing  with  a  force  of  Tempie  guards  and  oihers  whom  he 
conducted  to  this  frequent  place  of  his  Mastcr^s  retire- 
ment,  Indicated  him  to  them  by  a  kiss  (q.  v.);  Jesus 
then  presentcd  himself  to  them  with  snch  a  majestie 
mień  as  to  cause  them  to  fali  back  in  dłsmay,  but  while 
Peter  sought  to  defend  him  by  striking  off  with  his 
8iK'ord  the  ear  of  one  of  the  assailants  (which  Jesus  im- 
roediately  cured  with  a  touch,  at  the  same  time  rcbuk- 
ing  his  disciple'8  impetuosity),  Jesus,  after  a  short  n^- 
monstianofe  upon  the  tumultoous  and  furtiye  manner 
of  his  pursuers'  approach,  and  a  stipulation  for  hb  dis^ 
ciples'  security,  suffered  himself  to  be  taken  prisaoer, 
with  scarcely  one  of  his  friends  remaining  to  protect 
him  (Matt  xxyi,  86-50;  John  xyiii,  4-9;  Lukę  xxn, 
49 ;  Matt  xxyi,  51-^;  Mark  xiv,  51, 52;  and  parallels). 
See  Betrayal.     He  was  first  led  away  to  the  palące 
of  the  ex-pontiir  Annas,  who,  after  yainly  endca^-wiog 
to  extiact  from  him  some  confession  respecting  himseif 
or  his  disciples  (while  Peter,  who,  with  John,  had  fol- 
lowed  after,  three  times  denied  any  connection  witb  him 
[see  Peter],  when  que8tioned  by  the  yarious  serrants 
in  the  court-yard,  bat  was  brought  to  pungcnt  peniteoce 
by  a  look  from  his  Master  within  the  hotne),  sent  him 
for  further  examination  to  the  acting  high-priest  Cai- 
aphas  (John  xyiii,  18-16, 18, 17,  25, 19-23, 26,27;  Loke 
xxii,  61, 62 ;  John  xxiii,  24 ;  and  parallels).    This  func- 
tionary,  assembling  the  Sanhedrim  at  daylight  (Triday, 
March  18,  A.D.  29),  at  length,  with  great  difficulty,  pn>- 
cured  two  witneases  who  testified  to  Jeaos^s  threat  of 
destroying  the  Tempie  (see  John  ii,  19),  but  with  sudi 
discrepancy  between  themaelyes  that  Caiaphas  broke  tlM 
silence  of  Jesus  by  adjuring  him  respecting  his  Meeś- 
anie  claims,  and  on  hla  ayowal  of  his  chancter  mado 


JESUS  CHRIST 


89^ 


JESUS  CHRIST 


Ma|>  uf  our  baviuar'a  Juuroey  ou  tbe  \&6t  Day  uf  his  Life. 
IV_Lli- 


JESUS  CHRIST 


896 


JESUS  CHRIST 


nse  of  this  admission  to  cliarge  him  with  blaspbemy,  to 
which  Łhe  Sanhedńm  present  aasented  with  a  eentence 
of  death ;  the  ofiicers  who  held  JeBUB  thereupon  indcdged 
in  Łhe  yilest  insolta  upon  his  penon  (MatL  xxvi,  57, 59- 
63 ;  Lakę  xxii,  67-71, 63-65 ;  and  parallels).  See  Caia- 
PHAS.  After  a  formal  vote  of  the  fuli  Sanhediim  (q.  v.) 
early  in  the  forenoon,  Jesos  was  aext  led  to  the  procu- 
lator  Pilate*s  mansion  for  his  legał  sanction  upon  the 
determination  of  the  leligious  court,  where  the  hierar- 
chy sought  to  overoome  hia  reluctanoe  to  inyolye  him- 
self  in  the  matter  (which  was  increased  by  his  exami- 
nation  of  Jesus  himself,  who  simply  replied  to  their 
allegations  by  giying  Fihite  to  understand  that  his 
claims  did  not  relate  to  temporal  things)  by  charging 
him  with  sedition,  especially  in  Galilee,  an  intimation 
that  Pilate  seized  upon  to  remand  the  whole  tiial  to 
Herod  (who  chanced  to  be  in  Jerusalem  at  the  time), 
as  the  ciyil  head  of  that  proyince  (John  xviii,  28-38; 
Matt  xxvii,  12-14 ;  Lukę  xxiii,  4-7).  Herod,  however, 
on  eagerly  que8tioning  Jesus,  in  hopes  of  witnessing 
some  display  of  his  miraculous  power,  was  so  enraged  at 
Ms  absolute  silence  that  he  sent  him  back  to  Pilate  in 
a  mock  attire  of  royalty  (Lukę  xxiii,  8-12).  The  proc- 
urator,  thus  compelled  to  exeTci8e  jurisdiction  over  the 
case,  convinced  of  the  pri8oner'8  innocence  (especially 
after  a  message  from  his  wife  to  that  efTect),  proposed 
to  the  populace  to  release  him  as  the  malefactor  which 
custom  Foqaired  him  to  set  at  liberty  on  Łhe  holiday  of 
the  Passoyer  (q.  y.) ;  but  the  hierarchy  insisted  on  the 
release  of  a  notorious  criminal,  Barabbas,  instead,  and 
enforced  their  clamor  for  the  crucifixion  of  Jesus  with 
80  keen  an  insinuation  of  Pilate's  disloyalty  to  the  em- 
peror,  that,  after  yaried  efforts  to  exonerate  himself  and 
discharge  the  prisoner  (whose  personal  bearing  enhanced 
his  idea  of  liis  character),  hc  at  Icngth  pelded  to  their 
demands,  and,  after  allowing  Jesus  to  be  beaten  [see 
Flaoellation]  and  otherwise  shamefully  handled  by 
Łhe  soldiers  [see  Mocking],  he  pronounced  sentence  for 
his  execution  on  the  cross  (Lukę  xxiii,  13-16 ;  MatŁ. 
xy,  17-19,  16,  20-30;  John  xix,  4-16;  and  parallels). 
See  Pilate.  The  traitor  Judaś,  perceiying  the  enor- 
mity  of  his  crime,  now  that,  in  conseąuence  of  his  Mas- 
ter's  acąuiescence,  there  appeaied  no  chance  of  his  es- 
cape,  retumed  to  the  hierarchy  with  the  bribe,  which, 
on  their  cool  reply  of  indifference  to  his  retraction,  he 
fluiig  down  in  the  Tempie,  and  went  and  hung  himself 
in  despairing  remorse  (Matt.  xxvii,  3-10).  See  Judas. 
On  his  way  out  of  Łhe  city  to  Golgotha,  where  he  was 
to  be  crucified,  Jesus  fainted  under  the  burden  of  his 
cross,  which  was  Łłierefore  laid  upon  the  shoulders  of 
one  Simon,  who  chanced  to  pass  at  the  Łime,  and  as 
Łhey  proceeded  Jesus  bade  Łhe  disconaolate  Jewish  fe- 
males  attending  him  to  weep  rather  for  Łhemselyes  and 
Łheir  naŁion  Łhan  for  him ;  on  reaching  the  place  of  ex- 
ecuŁion  [see  Gtolgotha],  afŁer  refusing  Łhe  usual  nar- 
cotic,  he  was  suspended  on  the  cross  between  two  male- 
factors,  while  praying  for  his  murderers ;  and  a  brief 
statement  of  his  offence  (which  the  Jews  in  yain  en- 
deayorcd  to  induce  Pilate  to  change  as  to  phraseology) 
was  placed  aboye  his  head,  Łhe  executioner8  meanwhile 
haying  diyided  his  garments  among  Łhemselyes:  while 
hanging  thus,  Jesus  was  reyiled  by  Łhe  specŁators,  by 
Łhe  soldiers,  and  even  by  one  of  his  feUow-sufferers 
(whom  the  other  penitently  rebuking,  was  assured  by 
Jesus  of  speedy  salvation  for  himself  [see  Thtef  on  the 
Cross]),  and  committed  his  mother  to  the  care  of  John ; 
theii,  at  the  close  of  the  three  hours'  pretematunl  dark- 
ness  [sec  Eclipse],  giving  uŁterance  (in  the  language 
of  Psa.  xxii)  to  his  agonized  emotions  [see  Sabactha- 
Ki]  amid  Łhe  scoifs  of  his  enemies,  he  called  for  some- 
Łhing  Ło  quench  his  Łhirst^  which  being  given  him,  he 
expired  with  Łhe  words  of  resignation  to  God  upon  his 
lips,  while  an  earthquake  (q.  v.)  and  the  revivification 
of  the  sleeping  dead  borę  witness  to  his  sacred  charac- 
ter, as  the  by-^tanders  [see  Centurion]  were  forced  to 
acknowledge  (Matt.  xxvii,  31,  82;  Lukę  xxiii,  27-31; 
Mark  XV,  22,  23,  26,  27,  28 ;  Lukę  xxiii,  34;  John  xix. 


19-24;  MaŁt  xxyii,  86,  99^8;  Łukę  xriii,  36,  87,  89, 
43 ;  John  xix,  25-27 ;  MatŁ.  xxyii,  45^7, 49 ;  John  xix, 
28-30 ;  Lukę  xxiii,  46 ;  MaŁt  xxvii,  51-33 ;  Lakę  xxiii, 
47, 48 ;  and  parallels).  Sce  Passion.  Towaids  even- 
ing,  on  accounŁ  of  Łhe  approaching  SabbaŁh,  Łhe  Jews 
petitioned  Pilate  to  cauae  Łhe  crucified  persoos  to  be 
killed  by  Łhe  usual  prooess  of  hastening  Łheir  death  [sec 
Crucifd^ion],  and  Łheir  bodies  remoyed  from  eo  public 
a  place ;  and  as  Łhe  soldiers  were  execuŁing  Łhis  order, 
Łhey  were  aurpiised  to  find  Jesus  already  dead ;  one  of 
Łhe  soldiers,  howeyer,  tested  Łhe  body  by  plunging  a 
spear  into  Łhe  side,  when  water  mixed  wiŁh  clots  of 
blood  issued  from  Łhe  wound  (John  xix,  31-37).  See 
Bux>D  A2a>  Watrr.  a  rtch  ArimaŁhaean,  named  Jo- 
seph (q.  V.),  a  secrct  belieyer  in  Jesus,  soon  came  and 
desired  Łhe  body  of  Jesus  for  burial,  and  PilaŁe,  aa  sooo 
as  he  had  ascertained  the  acŁual  death  of  Jesus,  gave 
him  permission;  accordingly,  with  Łhe  help  of  Nicode- 
mus,  he  laid  it  in  his  own  new  yault,  temporarily  wrap> 
ped  in  spioes,  while  Łhe  female  friends  of  Jesos  obseryed 
Łhe  place  of  its  sepultore  (Marie  xv,  42-44;  John  xix, 
38-42 ;  Lukę  xxiii,  25,  26 ;  and  parallels).  See  Skpui^ 
CHRE.  NexŁ  day  (SaŁurday,  March  19,  A.D.  29)  the 
hierarchy,  remembering  Jesus^s  predictions  of  his  owo 
resurrection,  persuaded  Pilate  to  secure  the  entrance  to 
Łhe  tomb  by  a  lai^  stone,  a  seal,  and  a  guard  [see 
Watch  ]  aŁ  Łhe  door  (MaŁt.  xxvii,  62-66).  The  womes, 
meanwhile,  prepared  additional  embalming  materials  in 
Łhe  eyeuing  for  Łhe  body  of  Jesus  (Mark  xyi,  1).  Sas 
Embalm. 

Yeiy  early  nexŁ  moming  (Sunday,  MarcH  20,  A.D. 
29)  Jesus  arose  aliye  from  Łhe  tomb  [see  Resurrec- 
tion], which  an  angd  opened,  Łhe  guazds  swooning 
away  aŁ  Łhe  sight  (MaŁŁ.  xxyiii,  2-4^  and  parallcl). 
The  women  soon  appeared  on  Łhe  spoŁ  with  the  spicG 
for  compleŁing  Łhe  embalming,  but,  discoyering  the  stone 
remoyed  from  Łhe  door,  Maiy  Magdalenę  hastily  retum- 
ed to  tell  Peter,  while  Łhe  resŁ,  cntering,  misscd  Łhe  body, 
but  saw  two  angels  aŁ  Łhe  enŁrance,  who  informed  them 
of  the  resurrection  of  Łheir  Master,  and,  as  Łhey  were  re- 
Łuming  to  inform  the  disciples,  they  met  Jesus  himself; 
buŁ  Łhe  diaciples,  on  Łheir  reŁum,  disbelieyed  their  r&- 
porŁ  (Mark  xxi,  ^-4;  John  xx,  2;  Lukę  xxiy,  S-8; 
MaŁŁ.  xxviii,  7-10;  Lukę  xxiy,  9,  10;  and  paraBels). 
The  guaid,  howeyer,  had  by  Łhia  time  lecorered,  and, 
on  reporting  to  the  hierarchy,  Łhey  were  biibed  to  ciren- 
late  a  story  of  Łhe  abrepŁion  of  Łhe  body  dnring  thdr 
sleep  (Matt.  xxxiii,  11-15).  Mary  Magdalenę  mean- 
while had  roused  Peter  and  John  with  Łhe  tidings  of  the 
abeence  of  Łhe  body,  and,  on  their  hastening  to  Łhe  tomb^ 
Łhey  boŁh  obseryed  Łhe  state  of  things  Łhere,  wiŁhoot 
arriying  aŁ  any  saŁisfactory  explanation  of  it) ;  but  Ma- 
ry, who  arriyed  soon  after  Łhey  had  left,  as  she  ^ood 
weeping,  saw  a  person  of  whom,  misŁaking  him  for  the 
keeper  of  Łhe  garden,  she  inquired  for  Łhe  body,  buŁ  was 
soon  madę  aware  by  his  yoice  that  iŁ  waa  Jesus  himself, 
when  she  fell  at  his  feet,  being  foiiudden  a  neaier  ap- 
proach,  but  bidden  to  announce  his  resunection  to  the 
disciples  (John  xx,  11-18 ;  Mark  xvi,  1 1 ;  and  panlleb). 
On  Łhe  same  day  Jesus  appeared  to  two  of  the  disdple 
who  were  going  to  Emmaus,  and  discoorsed  to  them  re- 
specting  Łhe  Christology  of  the  Old  Test.,  but  thęy  did 
not  recognise  him  till  Łhey  were  partaking  the  meal  to 
which,  at  their  joumey'8  end,  Łhey  inyited  him,  and 
then  Łhey  immediately  retumed  with  the  news  to  Jent- 
salem,  where  Łhey  found  thaŁ  he  had  in  the  meanwhile 
appeared  also  to  Peter  (Lukę  xxiy,  1S~33,  and  paralieb). 
At  Łhis  momenŁ  Jesus  himself  appeared  in  Łheir  midst, 
and  oyercame  Łheir  incredulity  by  ahowing  them  his 
wounds  and  eating  before  them,  and  then  gave  them 
instructions  respecŁtng  Łheir  ^)0St<^cal  misaion  (Lnke 
xxiv,  86-49 ;  John  xx,  21 ;  Mark  xyi,  15>18;  John  s, 
4, 22, 23 ;  and  parallels).  Thomas,  who  had  been  absent 
from  Łhis  interyiew,  and  therefore  refosed  to  believe  his 
associates'  report,  was  also  oonylnced,  at  the  next  ap- 
pearance  of  Jesus  a  week  afterwaids  (Sunday  eveniiąg, 
March  27,  A.D.  29),  by  handling  him  penonally  (Jofaa 


JESUS  CHRIST 


899 


JESUS  CHRIST 


9EX,  24-29).  Some  time  afterwards  (proh.  Wedneaday, 
Mareh  90,  A.D.  29)  Jesus  again  appeared  to  his  disciples 
on  tbe  shore  of  Łlie  Sea  of  Tiberias,  as  they  wete  flshing; 
and,  after  they  had  taken  a  pretematural  qaantity  of 
fiah  at  his  direction,  coming  ashore,  they  partook  of  a 
meal  which  he  had  prepared,  afler  which.  he  tenderly 
reproved  Peter  for  his  nnfaithfolness,  and  tntimated  to 
him  his  futnre  martyrdom  (Matt.  xxviii,  16 ;  John  xxi, 
1-23).  Soon  alterwarcŁs  (probably  Thursday,  March  81, 
A.D.  29)  he  appeared  to  some  fire  hundred  of  his  disci- 
ples (1  Cor.  XV,  6)  at  an  appointed  meeting  on  a  moun- 
tain  in  Galilee,  where  he  commissioned  his  apostles 
afresh  to  their  work  (Matt.  xxTiii,  16-20).  Next  he 
appeared  to  James  (1  Cor.  xv,  7),  and  finally  to  all  the 
apostles  together  [see  Appearance  (of  risex  Christ)], 
to  whom,  at  the  end  of  forty  days  from  his  passion 
(Thursday,  April  28,  A.D.  29),  he  now  gave  a  generał 
charge  relatire  to  their  mission  [see  Apostlb],  and, 
leading  them  towards  Bethany,while  blessing  them  he 
was  suddenly  canied  up  bodily  into  the  aky  [see  Ascbn- 
bion]  and  enfolded  froih  their  sight  in  a  doiid  [aee  In- 
TRRCESSio:«],  angels  at  the  same  time  appearing  and 
dedaring  to  them,  in  their  astonishment,  his  futurę  re- 
turn in  a  similar  manner  (Acts  i,  2-12,  and  panllels). 
(For  a  fuller  explanation  of  the  details  of  the  foregoing 
namtive,jee  Strong'8  Hamumy  and  £sepotiiion  ofthe 
CotpeU,  N.  Y.,  1852.)     See  Go6i*bls. 

lY.  Z,»7era/ure.— Much  of  this  has  been  cited  under 
the  foregoing  hcada.  We  present  here  a  generał  snm- 
mary. 

.  1.  The  eflbrts  to  produce  a  biography  of  the  SaTionr 
of  mankind  roay  be  said  to  have  begun  with  the  at- 
iempts  to  combine  and  harmonize  the  statements  of  the 
evangelists  (see  Hase,  Aeften  Jetu,  p.  20).  See  Harmo- 
2nES.  The  early  Church  contented  itself  simply  with 
ooUating  the  narratives  of  the  different  apostles  and  an 
pccasional  comment  on  some  passages.  See  Monotes- 
s<VROX.  In  the  Middle  Ages,  as  a]so  later  in  the  Roman 
Catholic  Church,  the  works  written  on  the  life  of  Christ 
were  uucritica],  fantastic,  and  iiction-like,  being  merę 
leligioos  tracts  (Hase,  p.  26).  £ven  after  the  Reformar 
tion  had  given  rise  to  spectdation  and  religious  theory, 
the  works  on  the  Ufe  of  Christ  continued  to  be  of  a  like 
character.  It  was  not  till  near  the  doee  of  the  18th 
centur}',  when  the  WolfenbUttel  Fragmentists  had  at- 
tacked  Christianity  [see  Lbssino],  that  the  ApologisŁs 
felt  themse1ves  constrained  to  treat  the  history  of  Christ 
in  his  twofold  naturę,  as  God  and  also  as  man.  This 
period  was  therefore  the  fint  in  which  tbe  Ufe  of  Christ 
was  treated  in  a  critical  and  pragmatical  manner  (comp. 
Strauss,  Ltbm  JesUy  1864,  p.  1).  Soon,  however,  these 
eflbrts  degenerated  into  hnmanitarianism,  and  even  pro- 
fanity.  Herder,  the  gteat  German  poet  and  theok)gi»n, 
WTote  distinct  treatises  on  the  life  of  "*  the  Son  of  God" 
and  on  the  life  of  **  the  Son  of  man."  Some  treated  of 
the  propket  of  Nazareth  (BahnltyYenturini ;  later  Lang»> 
dorf) ;  others  even  instituted  comparisons  with  men  like 
Socratesyoftentimes  drawing  the  parallel  in  faror  rather 
of  the  latter.  Others  (Paulus,  Greiling),  in  order  to 
siut  the  tendency  of  the  age,  hesitated  not  to  strip  the 
life  of  Christ  of  all  the  mlraculous,  and  painted  him 
simply  aa  the  humane  and  wise  teacher.  Such  a  theo- 
ry waS)  of  course,  **  the  reducHo  ad  abturdum  of  a  ration- 
alism  pure  and  simple"  (compare  Plumptrc,  Christ  and 
CAriaiendomj  Boyle  Lect.  1866,  p.  829).  The  morę  mod- 
em theology  (we  refer  here  mainly  to  German  theology 
aince  Schleiermacher)  attemptcd  to  crowd  forward  the 
ideaL  Thus  Hase  proposed  for  his  task  the  Łreatment 
**  how  Jesus  of  Nazareth,  aoconiing  to  diviDe  predesti- 
Dation,  by  the  free  exercise  of  his  own  mind,  and  by  the 
will  of  his  age,  had  beoome  the  SaWour  of  the  world." 

A  stiłl  morę  de8tTuctive  attitude  (oomp.  Lange,  I,  x 
•q.)  was  aasumed  by  Strauss,  who,  while  not  denying 
that  Jesus  had  lived,  yet  recognised  in  the  accounts 
ot  tbe  gospels  simply  a  mythical  reflex  of  what  the 
young  Christian  sodety  had  invented  to  oonnect  with 
the  prophetical  annooncements  of  the  old  covenant, 


though,  of  oourse,  he  added  that  it  had  been  dono  un< 
conscioualy  and  thoughtlesaly.  Thus  the  (poetico-speo« 
ulatiye)  truth  of  the  ideał  Christ  was  to  be  maintained, 
but  it  soon  yanished  in  the  clouds  like  a  mist.  In  a 
modified  form  this  mythical  theory  was  advocated  by 
Weisse,  who,  like  others  before  him,  endeayored  to  solye 
the  miraculous  in  the  life  of  Christ  by  the  introduction 
of  higher  biology  (magnedsm,  etc),  and  used  Strau8s'8 
hypotheses  in  order  to  dispoee  of  whatever  he  found 
impracticable  in  his  own  view.  The  Tubingen  theolo- 
gian,  Bruno  Bauer  (Kritik.  der  wangtL  Gesch,  yoL  iii), 
went  further,  and  dedaring  that  he  could  not  see  in 
the  accounts  of  the  apostles  a  harmless  poesy,  branded 
them  as  downright  imposture.  A  much  morę  moderate 
position  was  taken  by  one  who  utterly  disbelieyed  the 
fidfilment  of  the  prof^ecies,  Salyailor  tho  Jew.  He  u> 
knowledged  the  historical  personality  of  Jesus,  though 
the  Sayiour,  in  his  treatment,  came  to  be  nothing  but  a 
Jewish  reformer  (and,  of  course,  a  demagogue  also). 

It  must  be  acknowledged,  howeyer,  that  these  criti- 
ciams  provoked  a  morę  thorough  study  of  the  subject, 
and  that  orthodox  Christianity  is  therefore  in  no  smali 
measure  indebted  to  German  rationalism  for  the  great 
intercst  which  has  sińce  been  manifested  in  the  history 
of  our  Lord.  The  rationalistic  works  called  forth  innu- 
merable  critiqne8  and  rejoindeis  (most  prominent  among 
which  were  those  of  W.  Hoffmann,  Stuttg.  1838  sq. ; 
Hengstenberg,  in  the  J^rangeł*  KirchenzHtungj  1836; 
Schweizer,  iu  the  Stttd,  u.  Krif.  1837, No.  iii;  Tholuck, 
Hambiug,  1888;  UUmann,  Hamb.  1838) ;  and  finally  re- 
sulted  in  the  publication  of  a  vast  uumber  of  produc- 
tions  on  the  life  of  Jesus.. 

We  cali  attention,  likewisc,  to  the  efforts  ofthe  Dutch 
theologians,  among  whom  are  Mcijboom  (Groning.  1861), 
Yan  Osterzee,  and  others.  A  new  treatment  of  the  sub- 
ject was  proroised  by  the  late  cheyalier  Bunsen  (Preface 
to  his  Ilippolytusj  p.  xlix)  but  it  neyer  madę  its  appear* 
ance.  Ewald,  howeyer,  continued  his  work  on  the  Jews 
{Geaeh,  d,  VoUxs  Uraet),  dosing  in  a  fifth  yolume  with 
the  Ufe  of  Christ  {Leben  Ch-utus),  The  autlior  evi- 
dently  ia  a  non-beUeyer  in  our  Lord's  godhead  (compare 
Liddon,  Bampt.  Lecłure^  1866,  p.  605).  His  method  of 
dealing  with  the  subject  has  something  of  tbe  same  in* 
definiteness  which  characterized  the  work  of  Schleier- 
macher (compare  Plnmptre,  BojfU  I^cture,  1866,  p.  386). 
Ewald  yiewB  Jesus  ^  as  the  fuUUment  of  the  O.  T.— as 
the  finał,  highest,  fuUest,  clearest  reyelation  of  God — as 
the  true  Messiah,  who  satisfies  aU  right  longing  for  God 
and  for  deliverauce  from  the  cnrse — as  the  eterual  King 
of  the  kingdom  of  God.  But  with  aU  this,  and  while 
he  depicts  our  Lord*s  person  and  work,  in  its  love,  aotiv- 
ity,  and  majesty,  with  a  beauty  that  is  not  oflen  met 
with,  there  is  but  one  naturę  acoorded  to  this  pcrfect 
Penon,  and  that  naturę  is  human."  Of  a  yery  different 
character  from  aU  these  works  are  the  loctures  of  Prof. 
C  J.  Riggenbach,  of  Basie,  who  presents  us  the  picturc 
of  our  Lord  from  a  harmonistico-apologetic  point  of  yiew. 

Here  desen'e  mention  also  the  labors  of  Neander,  who, 
"in  the  conyiction,  which  runa  through  his  Church  Ilis- 
tortfy  that  Christendom  rests  upon  the  personality  of 
Christ,"  was  not  a  Uttle  alarmed  by  the  production  of 
Strauss,  and  ^  with  fear  and  trembUng,  feeling  that  oon- 
troyersy  was  a  duty,  and  yet  also  that  it  marred  the  de- 
yotion  of  spirit  in  which  alone  the  life  of  his  Lord  and 
Master  oould  be  oontemplated  rightly,"  entcrod  the  lists 
against  rationaUstic  oombatauts.  His  excelleiiŁ  work 
has  found  a  worthy  trauslator  in  the  late  Ucv.  Dr, 
M'CUntock.  We  pass  over  men  like  Hare,  "who  re- 
produce  morc  or  less  the  rationalism  of  Paulus"  (perhaps 
the  flrst  conspicuons  work  of  tbe  rationaUstic  Germans, 
though  it  failed  to  awaken  the  generał  interest  that 
Strauss's  work  did;  comp.  Plumptre,  BoyU  Lect,  1866,  p. 
329) ;  others  also,  who,  like  £brard  and  Lange,  "avow- 
edly  assume  the  position  of  apdogists,  though  their 
works  are  at  least  evidenoe  (as  are  bishop  £lUcott's  //u^> 
setm  J^ct.^  and  the  many  elaborate  oommentaries  on  the 
Gospels  in  our  country  and  abroad)  that  orthodox  theo* 


JESUS  CHRIST 


900 


JESUS  CHRIST 


logians  do  not  shrink  fW>m  the  field  of  inquiiy  thos 
opened." 

A  time  of  quiet  and  rest  seemed  now  to  haye  dawned 
upon  thU  polemical  field  of  Christian  theology,  when 
suddenly,  in  1803,  the  leamed  Frenchman  Renan  ap- 
peared  with  his  Kie  de  Jettu^  and  stirred  anew  the  spir- 
its,  as  Strauss  had  done  thirty  years  before.  Most  ar- 
bitrarily  did  Mr.  Renan  deal  with  the  data  upon  which 
his  work  professed  to  be  based ;  while  theologicaUy  he 
proceeded  throughout  "on  a  really  atheistic  assumption, 
disguised  beneath  the  veil  of  a  panthebtic  phraseology. 
.  .  .  It  is,  however,  when  W€  loók  at  the  Vie  de  Jitus 
from  a  morał  point  of  view  that  its  shortcomings  aie 
most  apparent  in  their  leugth  and  breadth.  Its  hero 
is  a  fanatical  impostor,  who  pret«nd8  to  be  and  to  do 
that  which  he  knows  to  be  bcyond  him,  but  who,  neyer^ 
theless,  is  held  up  to  our  admiration  as  the  ideał  of  hu- 
manity'*  (Ltddon,  p.  506).  It  is  sufficient  to  reply  to 
this  caricatine  by  Mr.  R^nan  that, "  If  this  be  the  found- 
er  of  Christianity,  and  if  Christianity  be  the  right  be- 
licf,  then  all  religion  must  ccase  from  the  earth ;  for  not 
oiily  is  this  character  unfit  to  sustain  Christianity,  but 
it  is  unfit  to  sustain  any  religion ;  it  wants  the  honćT 
(Lange,  I,  xviii).  Yet  "it  may  be  that  to  the  thou- 
sands  whose  thoughts  have  either  rested  in  the  symbols 
of  the  infancy  and  the  death  which  the  cuUu9  of  the 
Latin  Church  brings  so  prominently  before  them,  or 
who,  haying  rejected  these,  have  accepted  nothing  in 
their  place,  the  V%e  de  Jisus  has  giyen  a  sense  of  human 
reality  to  the  Gospel  history  which  they  neyer  knew 
before,  and  leci  them  to  study  it  with  a  morę  deyout 
sympathy"  (Plumptre,  p.  337).  Countless  editions  and 
translations  were  madę  of  the  work,  and  it  was  read 
ererywhere  with  as  much  interest  as  if  it  had  been  sim- 
ply  a  work  of  fiction ;  indeed  German  theologians,  eyen 
the  Rationalists,  hcsitated  not  to  rank  it  among  French 
noyels.  Innumerable  are  the  works  which  were  writ* 
ten  against  and  in  defence  of  this  legendary  hypothesis. 
Iłi  Germany,  especially,  the  contest  raged  fiercely,  and 
for  a  time  it  seemed  as  if  the  materialisttc  Frenchman 
was  to  uproot  all  Christian  feelings  in  the  hearts  of  the 
common  people  of  Germany,  when  Strauss  suddenly 
rcappeared  on  the  sUge  in  behalf  of  his  mythical  the- 
ory  with  a  new  edition  of  his  Leben  J>«/,  this  time 
prepared ybr  tke  toants  ofthe  German  peopU,  "and  the 
new  work,  morę  popular  in  form,  morę  caustic  and  sneer- 
ing  in  its  hostillty,  has  been  read  as  widely  as  the  old. 
.  .  .  Muatering  all  old  objections  and  starting  anew,  he 
seeks  to  prove  that  the  first  three  gospels  oontradict 
each  other  and  the  fourth.  Without  entering  into  the 
morę  elaborate  theories  as  to  their  origin  and  their  re- 
lation  to  the  seyeral  parties  and  sects  in  early  Christen-' 
dom,  as  Baur  did  afterwards,  he  has  a  generał  theory 
which  accounts  for  them.  Men'8  hopes  and  wishes, 
their  reycrence  and  awe,  tend  at  all  times  to  deyelop 
themsclyes  into  myths,  .  .  .  The  mytks  were  not  'cun- 
ningly  deyised,*  but  were  the  spontaneous,  unconscious 
growth  of  the  time  in  which  they  first  appeared.  If 
men  asked  what,  then,  was  left  them  to  belieye  in— what 
was  the  idea  which  had  thus  deyeloped  itself  throngh 
what  had  been  worked  on  as  the  facts  of  Christianity, 
the  answer  was  that  God  manifested  himself,  not  in 
Christ,  but  in  humanity  at  largc — humanity  is  the  union 
of  the  two  natures,  the  finite  and  the  infinite,  the  child 
of  the  Wsible  mother  and  the  inyisible  father.  .  .  .  The 
outcry  against  the  book  was,  as  might  be  expected, 
enormous.  It  opened  the  eyes  of  those  who  had  dallied 
with  unbelief  to  see  that  they  were  naked,  and  it  strip- 
ped  off  the  fig-leaf  covering  of  words  and  phrases  with 
which  they  had  sought  to  hide  their  nakedness.  What 
was  offcred  as  the  com])enBation  for  all  this  work  of  de- 
struction,  if  it  were  offered  in  any  other  spirit  than  that 
of  the  mockcry  eyen  then,  and  yet  morę  now,  so  charac- 
teristic  ofthe  author,  was  hardly  enough  to  giye  warmth 
and  shclter  to  any  human  soul"  (Plumptre,  p.  834). 
The  ablest  among  Christian  divinc8  and  scholars  came 
forward  to  refute  the  naked  falsehoods,  and  up  to  our  day 


the  contest  rages,  nor  can  it  be  said  how  aonn  it  will  be 
ended ;  it  is  certain,  howeyer,  that  orthodox  ChristianitT 
is  daily  gaining  ground,  eyen  in  the  yeiy  core  of  tlń 
heart  of  Rationaliam.  In  France  it  drew  foith  the  ible 
work  of  Pressens^,  JUut  Ckritt  ton  Tempg,  sa  Vit  »m 
(Euvre  (Paiis,  1865),  which  has  sinoe  appeared  in  an 
English  dress  in  this  country.  In  England,  Ectt  H<mo^ 
a  Buryey  of  the  life  and  work  of  Jesus  Christ  (London, 
1866),  was  a  response  to  French  and  German  Rational- 
ists, in  BO  far  as  the  reality  of  our  Sayioui^s  human  ca- 
reer  is  concemed.     (See  above,  II,  3.) 

Great  senńce  has  also  been  done  f<ir  the  tmlh  by  tbe 
productions  of  Weiss  {Secht  Vortrage  uber  die  Permm 
Jesu  Ckrisiij  Ingolst.  1864),  Liddon  {Bampion  JjHturę, 
1866 ;  see  Ckrigtian  Remembrancer^Jui,  1868,  artide  vi), 
and  particularly  by  Row  (London,  1868 ;  N.  Y.  1871 ;  siee 
Princeton  Ret,  1810,  art  y),  Plumptre  {BoyU  I^ect.  1866), 
R.Payne  Smith  {Bampton  Leeture,  1869),  Leathes,  Ift^- 
nett  ofSł,  John  to  Christ  {Boyle  Lect,  1870),  Andrews,  aod 
Hanna.  Several  popular  treatises  on  the  subject  wcie 
also  produced  in  Germany,  £ngUmd,and  America,  among 
which  are  those  of  Abbott  and  Eddy.  Henry  Ward 
Beecher  has  just  published  yoL  i  of  a  similar  work. 

2.  The  foUowing  is  a  list  of  the  most  important  ofthe 
yery  numerous  works  relating  to  the  person  and  histonr 
of  Christ,  of  which  Germany  has  been  especially  fnutful 
(comp.Walch,  iii,  404;  Hase,  p.  28,  37,  ft;  Andrews^ 
Preface). 

(1.)  Of  a  generał  character  are  treatises  by  the  ibl- 
łowing  authors,  rcspecting  the  proper  method  of  inves- 
tigating  the  career  of  Christ :  Doderlein  (Jena,  1783  są.), 
Semler  (Hal.  1786),  Eberhard  (Hal.  1787),  Albers  (Gtin. 
1793),  Ammon  (Gótt.  1794),  BrUggeman  (Gott.  1795), 
Stuckert  (Prancfort,  1797),  3f  Uller  (Stuttg.  1785),  Piper 
(G8tt.  1835),  Sextroh  (Gott.  1785),  Peterson  (LUb.  18S8), 
Scholten  (Traj.  1840),  Wiggere  (Roat.  1837).  On  pro- 
fane  and  apocryphal  materials:  Kocher  (Jena,  1726), 
Meyer  (Hamb.  1805),  Augusti  (Jena,  1799),  Huldric  (U  a 
1705),  Werner  (Stad.  1781).  Diateasura  of  the  Gos^ 
history  have  been  oomposed  by  the  following:  J.  F. 
Bahrdt  (Lpz.  1772),  Roos  (Tttbingen,  1776),  Mutschdk 
(MUnch.  1784),  C.  F.  Bahrdt  (BerL  1787),  Bergen  (iiies- 
sen,  1789  8q.),  White  (Oxon.  1800),  Kdler  (Stuttg.  \fm\ 
Hom  (Nllmburg,  1803),  Sebastiani  (Lpzg.  1806),  Ham- 
mer (Wien,  1807),  Langsdorf  (Mannheim,  1830),  KUchler 
(Lip&  1885),  and  other^    See  Harmoniks. 

Discussions  on  the  Itfe  of  Jesus,  in  a  morę  historica] 
form,  of  a  hostUe  character,  are  by  the  following :  Reimar 
(Braunscbweig,  1778  8q.),  C.  F.  Bahrdt  (HaHe,  17«2;  Bert. 
1784  sq.),  J.  G.  Schidthess  (ZUr.  1783),yenturini  (Kopcn. 
1800),  Langsdorf  (Maimh.  1831),  D.  F.  Strauss  (Tobing. 
1835, 1887, 1838  [the  work  which  provoked  the  innuroei^ 
aUe  crttique8  and  rejoinders,  as  aboye  stated],  Sack 
(Bonn,  1836),  Theile  (Lpzg.  1832),  Hahn  (Leipoig,  1839> 

Of  an  apologetic  character  [besides  those  in  exitfeaB 
opposition  to  Strauss]  are  the  following:  Reinhard  (\Vit- 
tenburg,  1781 ;  5th  edition,  with  additions  by  Heubner, 
1830),  Hess  (ZUrich,  1774,  rewritten  1823),  Yermehran 
(HaUe,  1799),  Opita  (Zerbst,  1812),  Planck  (Gott,  1818), 
Bodent  [Rom.  Cath.]  (GemUnd.  1818  8q.),  Paulus  (Het- 
delb.  1828),  J.  Schulthess  (Zllrich,  1830),  Hase  (Lpag. 
1829, 1835), Neander  (Hamb.  1887;  tranalated byM-Clin- 
tock  and  Blumenthal,  N.  Y.  1840),  Kleuker  (Brem.  1776 ; 
Ulm.1793),  Basedow  (Lpz.l781),Wizenman(Lpz.];>»), 
Herder  (Riga,  1796),  Hacker  (Leipzig,  1801>^),  Sch<«^ 
(Lpzg.  1841),  Kolthoff  (Hafn.  1852),  Hofmann  (Leipzig, 
1852),  Keim  (ZUr.  1861, 1864),  Wisenniann  (1864),  Weisa 
(Ingolst.  1864).    See  Rationausm. 

Among  those  of  a  morę  practical  character  aie  the 
following:  Walch  (Jena,  1740),  Httniber  (Frankf.  176S), 
Hoppenstedt  (Hannov.  1784  8q.),  Hunter  (Lond.  1785), 
Fleetwood  (Lond.),  Craroer  (Lpz.  1787),  Marx  (MtUuter, 
1789, 1830),  Gosner  (Leipzig,  1797;  ZUrich,  1818),  Sinte- 
nis  (Zerbst^  1800),  Mcister  (Basel,  1802),  Reichenbeiga 
(Wien,  1793,  1826),  Gerhard  and  MuDer  (Erfort,  1801), 
Bauriegel  (Neustadt,  1801, 1821),  GreUing  (Halle,  18I3\ 
Jacobi  (Gotha,  1817;  S<Nideis.  1819),  Pflaiun  (NUnibuigi 


JESUS  CHRIST 


901      JESUS  CHRIST,  ORDERS  OF 


1819),  Ammon  (Ling.  1842-7,  3  yols.)*  Muller  (Berlin, 
1819, 1821),  Schmidt  (Wien,  1822, 1826),  Fraiicke  (BresL 
J823,  Lpzg.  1838, 1842),  Buchfelner  (MUnch.  1826),  Ne- 
vels  (Aachen,  1826),  Stephani  (Magdeb.  1830),  Onymus 
(Sulzb.  1831),  Bliuit  (London,  1835),  Uartmann  (Stuttg. 
1837),  Weiaae  (Lpzg.  1838),  Kuhn  (Mainz,  1888),  Lchr- 
reich  (QuedL  1840),  Hinicher  (Tubing.  18B9),Wtlrkert« 
(Meisa.  1840),  Hug  (1840),  Krane  (Caw.  1850),  Lichten- 
Stein  (ErL  1855),  Kougemont  (Paris  and  Lausanne,  1856), 
J.  Bucher  (Stuttgard,  1859),  Krummacher  (Biełf..l854), 
Bauragarten  (Brunsw.  1859),  Uhlhom  (Uamh.  1866 ;  BoBt. 
1868),  EUicott  (London,  1859),  Andrewa  (N.  Y.  1862). 

Among  thoae  pictorially  illustrated  are  thc  worka  of 
Schleich  (MUnch.  1821),  Langer  (Stuttgart,  1823),  Kitto 
(Lond.  1847),  Abbott  (N.  Y.  1864),  Croaby  (N,  Y.  1871). 

Among  thoae  of  a  poetical  character  are  Juyencua, 
ed.  Arevalu8  (Rom.  1792),  Yida  (L.  B.  1566,  ed.  MtUler; 
Hamb.  1811),  Wilmaen  (Berlin,  1816, 1826),  Gittermann 
(Hannov.  1821),  Schtncke  (UaL  1826).  Klopatock  (HaL 
1751,  and  oOen),  Lavater  (Winterth.  1783).  Halem  (Han- 
noY.  1810),  Weihe  (Elberf.  1822,  1824),  Wilmy  (Snlzb. 
1825),  Kirach  (Lpz.  1825),  Gopp  (Lpz.  1827). 

(2.)  Of  a  morę  apecial  naturę  are  treatiaea  on  particu- 
lar  portiona  of  Chriat*a  outward  hiatoiy  or  circumatancea, 
e.  g.  hia  relativea:  Walthcr  (Beri.  1791),  Oertel  (Germ. 
1792),  Haaae  (Regiom.  1792;  BerL  1794),  Ludewig  (Wolf- 
enb.  1831),  TUiander  (Upaal.  1772),  Geyer  (Yiteb.  1777), 
Blom  (L.  Bat  1839),  Ooaterzee  (Traj.  a.  R.  1840);  and 
faia  country :  Konigaman  (Slearic.  1807).  Among  thoae 
on  his  birth:  Korb  (Lpz.  1831),  Meerheim  (Viteb.l785), 
Keimer  (Lubec,  1653),  Oetter  (Numb.  1774);  and  in  a 
chronological  point  of  view,  among  othera:  Maaaon 
(Roterd.  1700),  Maiua  (KUon.  1708;  id.  1722),  Heinec- 
ciua  (HaL  1708),  Liebknecht  (Gieaa.  1735),  Hager  (Chem- 
nit.  1743),  Maim  (Lond.  1752),  Joat  (Wirceb.  1754),  Hai- 
den  (Prague,  1759),  Reccared  (Regiom.  1768;  id.  1766), 
Uorix  (MogunL  1789),  Sanclementa  (Romę,  1795),  Mi- 
chaelia  (Wien,  1797),  Mllnter  (Kopenh.  1827),  Feldhoff 
(FrankC  1832),  Mayer  (Gryph.  1701),  Hardt  (HelmatHdt, 
1754),  Komer  (Lipaiie,  1778),  Mynater  (Kopenh.  1837), 
Uuschke  (BreaL  1840),  Caapari  (Hamb.  1869);  compare 
8huk  u,  KriL  1870,  ii,  357 ;  1871,  ii;  BapłiH  QuarUrly, 
1871,  p.  113  aq. ;  and  aee  Zumpt,  Daa  Geburigjahr  Chruti 
(Liipzig,  1869).  On  hia  infancy,  education,  etc. :  Nie- 
meyer  (Halle,  1790),  Ammon  (Gotting.  1798),  Schubert 
(Gryph.  1813),  Carpzoy  (Helmat,  1771),Wei8e  (Hclmat 
1798),  Lange  (Aid.  1699),  Arnold  (Regiom.  1730),  Rau 
(ErL  1796),  Bandelin  (Lub.  1809).  On  the  duration  of 
hia  miniatry :  Cbryaander  (Brunaw.  1750),  Piaanaki  (Re- 
giom. 1778),  Loeber  (Altenb.  1767),  Kćłmer  (Lipa.  1779), 
Frieatley  (Birmingham,  1780),  Newcome  (Dublin,  1780), 
Prieaa  (Roet.  1789),  HUnlein  (ErUng.  1796).  See  Ai>08- 
TLE.  On  his  baptiam,  aee  John  the  Baptist.  On  hia 
travela :  Schmidt  (llmenau,  1833 ;  Paria,  1837).  On  hia 
celibacy :  Niedner  (Schneeberg,  1815).  On  hia  teaching : 
Tachucke  (Lipsis,  1781),  Bahrdt  (Berlin,  1786),  Mandcr- 
bach  (Elberf.  1813),  Martini  (Roat,  1794),Stier  (Leipzig, 
1853  8q. ;  Edinb.  1856  aq.).  See  Sermon  on  the  Mount. 
On  hia  alleged  writinga :  Ittig  (Lipaite,  1696),  Epistoła 
apocrypha  J,  C,  ad  Petrum  (Rom.  1774),  Sartoriua  (Ba- 
filL  1817),  Gieaeke  (LUnenb.  1822),  Witting  (Braunachw. 
1823).  SeeAfiOAR.  On  hia  miraclea  (q.  v.) :  Heumann 
(G6tt.l747),  Ifaff  (Tttbingen,  1752),  PauU  (Riga,  1773), 
Trench  (Lond.  1848 ;  N.  Y.  1850).  On  hia  tranafigura- 
tion  (q.  V.) :  Reuamann  (Gotting.  1747),  (i«orgi  (Viteb. 
1744),  anonymoua  Eaaay  (Lond.  1788),  Haubold  (Gott, 
1791),  Eger  (1794),  Rau  (Erl.  1797) ;  and  hia  white  gar- 
ment.  Frankę  (Lipa.  1672),  Sagittariua  (Jena,  1673).  On 
hia  tempUtion  (q.  v.):  Baumgarten  (Halle,  1755),  De 
Saga  (Gott.  1757),  Farmer  (London,  1671),  Sauer  (Bonn, 
1789),  Poatiua  (Zweibr.  1791),  Ziegenhagen  (Franckfort, 
1791),  Domey  (Upaal.  1792),  SchUtze  (Hamb.  1793),  Dahl 
(UpaaL  1800),  Bertholdt  (ErL  1812),  Gellerichta  (Altenb. 
1815),  Richter  (Yiteb.  1825),  Schweizer  (ZUrich,  1833), 
Ewald  (Bayreuth,  1833) ;  comp.  the  ZettecAr./.  wisseruch, 
TheoL  1870,  p.  188  aq.  On  hb  paaaion  (q.  v.) :  Iken  (Brem. 
1743  i  Tr.  a.  R.  1758),  Baumgarten  (Halle,  1757),  Glanz 


(Stuttg.  1809),  Hennebeig  (Lpzg.  1828),  Schlegel  (Lpzg. 
1775),Moache  (Franckfort,  1785),  Ewald  (Lemgo,  1785), 
Fiacher  (Lpzg.  1794),  Kindervater  (Lpzg.  1797),  Moaler 
(Eiaenb.  1816),  Krummacher  (BerL  1817),  Jongh  (IV.  a. 
R.  1827),  Adriani  (Tr.  a.  R.  1827),  Walther  (Breal.  1738; 
Lpzg.  1777).  On  hia  cnicifixion  (q.  v.) :  Schmidtman 
(Oanabr.  1830),  Neubig  (ErL  1836),  Haacrt  (BerL  1839), 
Karig  (Lpzg.  1842),  Stroud  (Lond.  1847).  See  Agony  ; 
Atongmknt.  On  hia  worda  upon  the  croaa:  Hopner 
(Lipa.  1641),  Dankauer  (Arg.  1641),  Luger  (Jena,  1739), 
Scharf  (Yiteb.  1677),  Niemann  (Jen%  1671),  Lokerwitz 
(Yiteb.  1680).  On  hia  burial:  Te  Water  [L  e.Weaael- 
ing]  (Traj.  a.  Rh.  1761).  See  Calyary.  Ou  hia  res- 
urrection  (q.v.):  among  othera,  Buttatedt  (Gene,1749), 
Sherk)ck  (London,  1751),  Seidel  (Hehnat.  1758),  Weickh- 
maim  (Yiteb.  1767),  Burkitt  (Melning.  1774),  Rehkopf 
(Hehnatadt,  1775),  LUderwald  (Helmat  1778).  Leaa  (Gott. 
1779),  Scheibel  (Frankf.  1779),  Moache  (Frankf.  1779), 
Semler  (Halle,  1780),  Moldenhauer  (Hamb.  1779),  Yelt- 
huaen  (Helmat.  1780),  Pfeiffer  (Erlang.  1779, 1787),  m- 
chaelia  (HaL  1783),  Schmid  (Jena,  1784),  Pleaaing  (HaL 
1788),  Yolkmar  (BreaL  1786),  Henneberg  (Lpzg.  1826), 
Frege  (Hamb.  1883),  Grieabach  (Jena,  1784),  Niemeyer 
(HaL  1824),  RoaenmUller  (Erlang.  1780),  Paulua  (Jena, 
1795),  Piaanaky  (Regiom.  1782),  Zeibich  (Gene,  1784), 
Ruameyer  (Gryph.  1734),  Feuerlein  (Gott  1752),  Gut- 
achmidt  (Halle,  1758),  MuUer  (Hafn.  1836).  On  hia  aa- 
cenaion  (q.  v.),  among  othera :  Grieabach  (Jena,  1793), 
SeUer  (Erlang.  1798, 1803),  Ammon  (Gott  1800),  Otter- 
bein  (Duiab.  1802),  FlUgge  (Argent  1811),>Veichert  (Yi- 
teb. 1811),  Fogtmann  (Havn.  1826),  Haniui,  The  Forty 
Days  after  ovr  Lor^s  Resurrection  (London,  1863). 

The  foUowing  are  aome  of  the  treatiaea  on  the peraonal 
traita  of  Jeaua,  e.  g.  hia  phyaical  conatitution :  Weber 
(HaL  1825),  Engelmann  (Lpz.  1834),  Gieaeler  (Gotting. 
1837).  On  hia  dreaa:  Zeibich  (Witt  1754),  Gerberon 
(Par.  1677).  Hia  language :  Reiake  (Jena,  1670),  Klae- 
den  (Yiteb.  1739),  Diodati  (NeapoL  1767),  Pfannkuche 
(in  Eichhom'3  A  Ug.  BibL  vii,  865-480),  Wiaeman  (in  hia 
Ifor,  Syr,  Romę,  1828),  Zeibich  (Yiteb.  1791),  Paulua 
(Jena,  1803).  On  hia  modę  of  lifc :  Luiize  (Lips.  1784), 
Rau  (Erl.  1787, 1796),  JacoboBua  (Hafn.  1703),  Schrciber 
(Jena,  1743),  Tragard  (Gryph.  1 781).  On  hia  intercourae 
with  othera :  Geaeniua  (Helmaudt,  1734),  Jetze  (Liegn. 
1792).  Reapecting  the  ńmer  naturę  of  hia  character, 
the  foUowing  may  be  named,  e.  g.  on  hia  (human)  dia- 
poaition  and  temperament:  Woytt  (Jena,  1753),  BUck- 
ing  (Stendal.  1793),  Schinmaier  (Flenab.  1774  aq.),  Wink- 
ler (Lpz.  1826),  Domer  (Stuttg.  1839) ;  on  hia  paychol- 
ogy,  aee  the  BiUioth.  Sacra^  Aprii,  1870.  On  hia  ainleaa- 
neaa,  among  othera :  Walther  (Y^iteb.  1690),  Baumgarten 
(HaL  1740),  Erbatein  (Meiaa.  1787),  Weber  (Yiteb.  1796), 
Ewald  (Hannov.  1798;  Genu,  1799),  Ullmann  (Hamburg, 
1833,  tranalated  in  Clark'a  Biblical  Cabinef^  Edinburgh), 
Fritzache  (Halle,  1885).     See  Messiah. 

Jesus  Christ,  Orders  ot  Theae  were  formed 
of  temporal  knighta  in  the  countriea  paying  homage  to 
the  Roman  aee  for  the  protection  and  promotion  of  the 
Roman  Catholic  religion. 

I.  Such  waa  the  order  founded  under  thia  name,  alao 
known  aa  the  Order  o/Dobrin^  in  1213,  by  duke  Conrad 
of  Maaoyia  and  Kujavia,  Poland.  They  followed  the 
rulea  of  St  Auguatine  aa  a  religioua  aociety,  and  their 
aim  waa  to  oounteract  the  influencea  of  the  heatheniah 
Pruaaiana,  their  weateni  neighbora.  Their  atronghold 
waa  the  burgh  of  Dobrin,  m  Pruaaia.  The  inaignia  and 
dreaa  of  the  order  were  a  white  mantle,  on  the  left  breaat 
a  red  aword,  and  a  five-pointed  red  atar.  The  order  was 
merged  into  the  German  order  in  1234. 

II.  In  Spain  auch  an  order  waa  founded  in  1216  by 
Dominicua.  The  knighta  bound  themaełrea  to  practiae 
monaatic  dutica,  and  to  battle  in  defence  of  their  Church. 
It  waa  approved  by  pope  Honoriua  III,  and  confirmed, 
under  varioua  namea,  by  different  popea.  When  Piua 
Y  founded  the  congregation  of  St  Peter  the  Martyr  at 
Romę,  compoaed  of  the  cardinala,  grand  inquiaitora,  and 
other  dlgnitariea  of  the  Holy  Office,  thia  order  waa 


JESUS,  CONGREGATION  OF     902 


JETHER 


mergcd  into  it.  In  181  d  king  Feidinand  Ali  oommand- 
cci  thc  mcmbcrs  of  the  Inqaisittou  to  wcar  the  insigniA 
of  the  order. 

III.  AnoŁher  of  liko  name  was  started  in  Portugal  in 
1317  by  king  Diony»ius  of  Portugal,  in  concert  with 
popo  John  XXII,  and  was  composcd  of  the  knights  of 
thc  formcr  Knights  Templars  (q.  v.).  See  Ciibist,  Ob- 
DEii  OF,  vol.  ii,  p.  268. 

IV.  Anothcr  of  this  class  was  the  Order  ofJents  cmd 
Mary,  and  was  foundcd  in  1643  by  Eudcs  (q.  v.).  'fheir 
insii^nia  are  a  gildcd  Maltesc  cross,  cnameUcd  with  blue, 
surrounded  by  a  golden  border,  and  in  the  centrę  of 
which  is  the  naroc  cf  Jesus :  it  is  wom  at  the  button- 
hole.  The  full-drcss  cloak  is  of  white  camlet,  with  the 
cross  of  thc  order  in  blue  satin,  with  gilt  border,  and 
namc  on  thc  left  sidc.  The  order  consists  of  a  grand 
master,  thirty-tłirec  commanders  (in  commemoration  of 
thc  ycars  of  Chrisfs  life),  knights  of  tiprightness  and 
of  grace,  chaplains,  and  scrving  brcthren.  Sec  Herzog, 
Ił€al'£ncy1dop,  vi,  615;  Pierer,  Ciwr,  L€x,  viii,  809. 

Jesus  (Holy  Child),  Congregation  of,  the 
Daugiitkrs  ov  tiik,  is  thc  name  of  a  socicty  cxisting  in 
Borne,  and  was  foundcd  by  Anna  Moroni,  of  Lucca,  who 
in  early  years  went  to  Korne,  and  therc  amassed  a  for- 
tunę, which  she  decidetl  to  devotc  to  a  rcligious  pur- 
pose.  In  its  cliaractcr,  she  madę  it  an  institution  sim- 
ilar  to  that  of  thc  "Hospital  Sistcrs,"  for  the  cdu- 
cation  of  young  women,  so  as  to  ciuiUe  them  to  cam  a 
livelihood.  Thc  congregation  was  confirmed  by  pope 
Clcment  X  in  1673.  The  number  of  thc  membera  is  set 
down  at  thirty-three,  corresponding  with  the  years  Je- 
sus spent  on  earth ;  they  assume  the  vow  of  poverty, 
chastity,  and  obedience.  The  novitiate  lasts  three  years, 
but  thcy  may  withdraw  before  taking  the  vow,  leaving, 
however,  to  the  congregation  whatever  they  may  h»ve 
brought  therc  on  thcir  admission.  The  diacipline  of 
the  congregation  io  strict;  the  dress  is  a  fuli  dark  brown 
garment  and  white  cowL  There  existed  also  a  similar 
order  under  the  name  of  "  Sisters  of  the  good  Jesus*' 
early  in  the  15th  century.  Their  main  objcct  was  thc 
promotion  of  a  life  of  chastity  among  femalcs. — Herzog, 
Real-Enajklop,  vi,  616.     See  IIospital  Sistekjs. 

Jesus'  Sacred  Heart,  Society  of.     In  the 

beginning  of  the  18th  centory,  the  Jesutts,  fearing  the 
suppression  of  their  own  order,  actively  engaged  in  the 
establishment  of  other  orders  likely  to  continue  the 
same  peculiar  work.  Morę  particniarly  thcse  were  the 
Societies  of  the  Sacred  Heart  of  Jesus,  wluch  they 
formed  in  nearly  erery  part  of  the  world  where  Roman  i 
Catholicism,  especially  Jesuitisro,  had  a  foothold.  Os- 
tensibly  they  were  to  be  societies  of  a  purely  rtliffious 
charactcr.  but  in  reality  they  proved  to  be  nothing 
morę  nor  less  than  the  Słłcicty  of  the  Jiaccanarists — 
an  asylum  for  the  ex-Jc«uits,  a  society  in  the  Church 
of  Komc  advocating  the  doctrines  of  the  Jesuits  under  a 
new  name  and  form.  Such  was  evidently  the  aim  of 
this  society  in  1794,  when  the  ex-Jesuit  abbes  Charles 
de  Broglie,  Pey,  Toumely,  and  others  of  lesser  notę,  or- 
ganizeci  it  at  a  countr>'  rctreat  near  Lćiwen,  in  Belgium, 
with  Tournely  (q.  v.)  as  suiicrior.  After  the  battlc  of 
Fleunis  (June  26,  1794),  not  only  the  fate  of  Belgium 
seemcd  detcrmined,  but  also  that  of  this  eocicty,  and  ! 
it  was  post-hastc  remove<l  to  morę  congenial  climes. 
They  found  a  protector  in  the  elector  Clemens  Wences- 
laus,  and  settled  at  Trcve8.  "The  Jesuits  who  dwelŁ 
there,"  says  a  Koman  Catholic  \iTiter,  "would  gladly 
have  welcomed  them  as  of  their  own  number  if  thcse 
Frenclnnen  had  only  been  masters  of  the  (>erman  lan- 
gimge."  They  flourishetl  at  Treves  for  morę  than  two 
years,  when  the  approach  of  the  victorious  French  army 
obligcd  them  again  to  puli  up  stakes,  and  they  settled 
first  at  Passau,  next  at  Yienna,  and,  when  driven  from 
the  iin])crial  city,  removed  to  its  very  shades,  entering, 
even  alter  this  (1797),  quite  frcquo*ntly  the  limits  of  i 
Yienna.  In  1799  thc  order  was  merged  into  that  of  the 
Baccojiariats  (q,  v.).  I 


A  female  oider  of  like  name  with  thc  abore,  wboae 
origin  is  also  attńbated  to  the  Jesuits,  was  ibańded  in 
1800  at  Paris.  The  first  leader  of  it  was  the  nuid- 
cn  Barat,  and  it  was  approred  by  Leo  XII  Deoember 
22, 1826.  As  they  engage  in  the  edncation  of  yonng 
females,  they  enjoy,  not  only  in  Roman  Catholic  com>- 
tries,  a  fayorable  reputation,  but  are  in  a  flonzishing 
condition  in  many  Fh>te8tant  countries  alflOu  They 
liaye  in  Europę  alone  morc  than  a  hondrcd  eatablish- 
ments.  They  cxi8t  also  in  America  and  Africa.  Their 
priyate  aims,  no  doubt,  are  thoec  of  the  Jesnitical  order. 
See  Herzog,  lUcd-EncyUop,  v,  116;  Wetser  nnd  Welle, 
Kirchen^Ler.  iv,  485  sq. ;  Henrian-Fehr,  IfOndksorden, 
ii,  62  8q. ;  Schlor,  Die  Frautn  v.  hóL  Herten  Jttu  (Gnitz, 
1846, 8vo).    See  Sacred  Hrabt. 

Jesus,  Society  o£    Sec  Jesuits. 

Je^ther  (Heb.  Ye'tker,  ^p;^,  surplui),  the  name  of 
8ix  men,  and  {icrhaps  idso  of  a  place. 

1.  (Sopt.'l£^ćp.)  A  son  of  Jada  aml  great-gimndson 
of  Jerahmeel,  of  thc  family  of  Judah;  hc  had  a  brothcr 
Jonathan,  but  no  children  (1  Chroń,  ii,  32).  RC  oihi- 
siderably  post  1856. 

2.  (Sept,  'Io3óp,Vulg.  ^irtAro,  Auth.Vefs.«  Jethru") 
The  father-in-law  of  Moscs  (Exo(L  iv,  18,  (kst  clausci, 
clsewhere  (last  clausc  of  thc  same  verse)  caUed  Jetiiiso 
(q,v.). 

3.  (Scpt.  'Ie^^'p.)  The  tirst  namcd  of  the  sons  of 
Ezra  (?  Ezcr),  of  the  tribe  of  Judah  (his  broihcis  being 
Mcred  [q.  v.],  Epher,  and  Jalon),  but  whosc  connectiuna 
are  not  otherwisc  detined  (1  Chroń,  iv,  17).  RC.  piob. 
cir.  1618.  'In  the  Sept.  the  name  is  lepeated:  *-aiid 
Jether  begat  Miriam,"  etc  By  thc  author  of  the  Chtcrs*. 
IMr,  in  Par.  hc  is  said  to  havc  been  Aaron,  Ezra  being 
auotlier  name  for  Amram  (q.  v.).  Miriam  (ą.  v.)  in  thc 
second  i^art  of  the  vcrse — e^plained  by  the  Taigum  to 
be  identical  with  Efrath — ^is  taken  by  many  to  be  a 
małe  name. 

4.  (Scpt.  'Il&fp.)  The  oldest  son  of  Gidcoo,  who, 
when  calle<l  \i\to\\  by  his  fathcr  to  cxecute  thc  capcnred 
Midianite  kings,  Zebah  and  Zalmunna,  timidly  dedinol 
on  accomit  of  his  youth  (Judg.  viii,  20).  RC  1361 
According  to  Judg.  ix,  8,  he  was  slain,  togethcr  with 
60  of  his  brothers — Jonathan  al<xie  cscaping — ^u^wn 
one  stone"  at  Ophrah,  by  the  lumds  of  Abimcicch,  the 
son  of  Gideon'8  concubine,  of  ShecKem.    Sec  Gideon. 

5.  (Sept,  'U^tc,  'tóśp.)  Thc  father  of  Amasa,  Da- 
vid's  generał  (1  Kings  ii,  6,  32 ;  1  Chroń,  xi,  17) ;  elsc- 
where  (2  Sam.  xvii,  6)  calleil  Ithra  (q.  v.).  Hc  is  de- 
scribed  in  1  Cliron.  ii,  17  as  an  Islimaelite,  which,  again, 
is  morę  likely  to  be  correct  than  the  '*  Israelite"  of  the 
Hebrew  in  2  Sam.  xvii,  or  the  "  Jezreelite"  of  thc  Sept. 
and  Vulg.  in  thc  same  passage.  ^  Ishmaelite*'  is  saii 
by  the  author  of  the  Quast,  JJebr.  in  Ub,  Rfg,  to  ha\-e 
bccn  the  reading  of  the  Hebrew,  but  therc  is  no  tnce 
of  it  in  the  M88.  The  Talmud  records  two  divergent 
opinions  on  the  snbject  (Jer.  JeŁatn,  9,  c ;  comp.  Babli, 
Jeb.  77,  a).  According  to  R.  Samuel  bar-NacbmanL  Je- 
ther was  an  Ishmaelite  by  birth,  but  became  a  proselyte : 
hence  the  two  appellations.  Another  opinion  is  that.  a 
staunch  upholder  of  David's  rcign,  he,  when  the  kini;  s 
dcscent  through  Ruth,  a  Moabitish  woman,  was  madę  a 
pretext  by  some  of  his  antagonista  to  depiiye  him  of 
his  crown,  ^'girded  his  loins  Uke  an  IsraeUte,"  tnd 
threatcned  to  uphold  by  the  sword,  if  necd  be,  the  ut- 
thority  of  the  Halacha,  which  had  decided  that  **  a  Mo- 
abitish marif  but  fwt  a  Moabitish  vaman,  an  Ammoni- 
tish  man,  but  not  an  Ammonitish  icomoii,  should  be 
proliibited  from  entering  into  the  congreg^ation.''  Sijn> 
ilarly  we  find  in  the  Targ.  to  1  Chroń,  ii,  17  (Wilkins*s 
cdition — this  ver8e  bekmgs  to  those  wanting  in  Beck) 
that  the  father  of  Amaaa  was  Jether  Ike  IsraeUŁf^  bot 
that  he  was  called  Jether  tht  Ishmaelite  becaose  he  aki- 


cd  David  nX3nra  (='p"ł  H^^n)  before  the  tribimal 
[Wilkins,  **  rum  AraibSms!^'],  Later  commentatois 
(Rashi,  Abrabanel,  DaWd  Kimchi)  assume  that  he  was 
an  Israelite  by  birth,  but  dwelt  in  the  land  of  J 


JETHETH 


903 


JETHRO 


and  was  for  this  reasoii  also  called  the  Ishmadite,  as 
Obed  £doin  is  also  called  the  Gittite  (2  Sam.  vi)i  or  Hi- 
ram'8  father  the  Zań  or  Tyrian  (1  Kiags  vi).  David 
Kimchi  also  adduces  a  suggestion  of  his  father,  to  the 
eifect  **  that  in  the  land  of  Ishmael  Jether  was  called 
the  Israelite  from  his  nationalityi  and  in  that  of  Israel 
they  called  him  the  Ishmaelite  on  acoount  of  his  li^ing 
in  the  land  of  IshmaeL"  Josephus  calls  him  'Ic^opcnic 
(^ArU,  \u,  10, 1).  He  mairied  Abigail,  David*s  sister, 
probably  dtiring  the  sojoum  of  the  family  of  Jesse  in 
the  land  of  Moidi,  mider  the  protection  of  its  king.  See 
Amasa. 

6.  (Sept.  'Ic^ip  y.  r.  'Icd^p.)  An  Asherite  (head  of  a 
warrior  family  numbering  26,000)  whose  three  sons  are 
namcd  in  1  Chroń,  vii,  88 ;  possibly  the  same  with  Ith- 
RAN  of  the  preceding  verse. 

7.  Whethcr  the  Itkrite$  C^^T\^,  SepL  'E^ipaioc, 
'Ic^pi,  *I«^*pi,  Te^pinjc,  Vulg.  Jethrites,  Jełhrceus,  etc) 
Ira  and  Gareb^  mentioned  In  2  Sam.  xxiii,  38,  etc,  were 
natives  of  an  otherwise  unknown  place  called  Jether, 
or  of  Jathir,  ^T^H'',  one  of  David'8  places  of  refuge  (1 
Sam.  xxx,  27),  or  descendants  of  one  Jethcr->-the  least 
probable  suggestion — cannot  now  be  deteimined.  See 
Itiirite. 

Je^theth  (Heb.  Yetheih%  nn^,  prób.  api^,  or  fig.  a 
prince ;  Sept.  'Ic^cd  and  'le^ip,  the  last  apparently  from 
falscly  reading  "IDIJ;  Vulg.  JirfArtA),  the  third  named  of 
the  petty  Edomitiah  sheiks  in  Mount  Seir  (Gen.  xxxvi, 
40;  1  Chroń,  i,  61).  Ra  antę  1658.  See  Esau.  As 
to  Identification,  El-Wetideh  is  a  place  in  Nejd,  said  to 
be  in  the  Dabna  [see  Isiibak]  ;  there  is  also  a  place 
called  El-Wttid^  and  Ei-Wetidaty  which  is  the  name  of 
mountains  belonging  to  Bene  Abd-Allah  Ibn-Ghatfón 
(^Jfardsid,  s.  v.)  (Smith).     See  Arabia. 

Jeth^lah  (Heb.  Yiihhh',  nbn^,  suąpended,  I  e.  lof- 
ty;  Sept.  'U^Xa  v.  r.  ScAa&ri ,  Yulg.  Jethela),  a  city  on 
the  bonlers  of  the  tribe  of  Dan,  mentioned  between 
Ajalon  and  Elon  (Josh.  xix,  42).  The  associated  names 
seem  to  indicate  a  locality  in  the  eastem  part  of  the 
tribe,  not  far  from  the  modem  el-Atnm  (Ataroth),  per- 
haps  the  ruined  aite  marked  on  Van  de  yelde's  Afap 
(last  ed.)  as  A  mwaa  (Nicopolis).     See  Emmaus,  2. 

J6th'ro  (Heb.  Yithro^y  ńn%  i.  q.  -jinn^,  excellence 
or  ffaiiif  as  often  in  Eccies. ;  occurs  in  Exod.  iii,  1 ;  iv, 
18;  xviii,  1,  2,  5,  6,  9, 10, 12;  Sept.  'Io3óp)  or  Jether 
(^r^,  abundancCf  as  oflen;  occurs  with  refcrenoe  to  this 
person,  £xod.  iv,  18,  where  it  is  Anglicized  *<  Jethro" 
in  the  Auth.  Yera.,  though  in  the  Heb.-Sam.  text  and 
Sam.  ver8ion  the  reading  is  1*in%  as  in  the  Syriac  and 
Targ.  Jon.,  one  of  Kennicott^s  MSS.,  and  a  MS.  of  Targ. 
Onk.,  No.  16  in  De  Ro8si's  collection;  Sept  'lo^óp)^  a 
"  pricst  or  prince  (for  the  word  ]TÓ  carries  both  signi- 
fications,  and  both  these  oflices  were  united  in  the  pa- 
triarchal  sbeiks)  of  Midian,  a  tract  of  countiy  in  Ara- 
bia Petnea,  on  the  eastem  border  of  the  Red  Sea,  at  no 
great  dlstancc  from  Mount  Sinai,  where  Moses  spent  his 
exile  fwra  the  Egyptian  court,  B.C.  1698.  The  family 
of  this  individual  secms,  in  the  8cquel  at  least,  to  have 
obser^•ed  the  worship  of  the  true  God  in  coramon  with 
the  Hebrewa  (Exod.  xviii,  11, 12),  and  from  this  cir- 
cumstancc  some  suppose  it  to  havc  been  a  branch  of  the 
posterity  of  Midian,  fourth  son  of  Abraham,  by  Ketu- 
rah,  while  others,  on  the  contrary,  maintain  that  the 
aspcr&ion  cast  upon  Moses  for  having  married  a  Cushite 
is  incoiisistent  with  the  idea  of  its  genealogical  descent 
from  that  patriarch  (Calmet).     See  Midian. 

**  Consiclcrable  difficulty  has  been  felt  in  determining 
who  this  person  was,  as  well  as  his  exact  relation  to 
Moses ;  for  the  word  "iHh,  which,  in  Exod.  iii,  1 ;  Numb. 
X,  29;  Judg.  iv,  11,  is  translated /<jM«r-«n-/atr,  and  in 
Gen.  xix,  14,  «on-^Watr,  is  a  term  of  indeterminate  sig^ 
nification,  denoting  simply  relationship  by  maniage; 
and  besides,  Łho  trausacLion  which  in  one  place  (£xod. 


xviii,  27)  is  rdated  of  Jethro,  seems  to  be  in  another 
related  of  Hobab  (Numb.  x,  28).  Hence  some  have 
oonduded  that,  aa  forty  years  had  eli^ised  sinoe  Moses^s 
connection  with  this  family  was  formed,  his  father-in« 
law  (£xod.  ii,  18),  lieuel  or  Raguel  (the  same  word  in 
the  original  is  used  in  both  places),  was  dead,  or  eon- 
fined  to  his  tent  by  the  infirmities  of  age,  and  that  the 
person  who  visited  Moses  at  the  foot  of  Sinai  was  his 
brother-in-law,  called  Hobab  in  Numb.  x,  29;  Judg.  iv, 
11 ;  Jethro  in  Exod.iii,  1 ;  and  in  Judg.  i,  16,  Keiti  C?''!?. 
which  there,  as  well  as  in  iv,  11,  is  rendered  'the  Ke- 
nite')"  (Kitto).  Agą^nst  this  explanation,  however, 
there  lies  this  serious  objection,  that  in  Numb.  x,  29 
Hobab  is  expresBly  called  the  son  of  Kaguel  (or  Kcucl), 
who  in  Exod.  ii,  16-21  is  evidently  madę  the  father-in- 
law  of  Moses,  and  in  iii,  1  is  clearly  the  same  as  Jethro. 
Nor  will  the  interpretation  of  the  Targum  avail,  which 
makes  Reuel  the  grandfather  of  Moses's  wife  (by  a  fre> 
quent  Hebraism  of '*  daughter**  for  granddaughter,  etc.); 
for  then  Moees's  real  father-in-law  would  be  nowhere 
named;  and  it  is  clearly  Jethro  whose  fiocks  he  kept, 
and  to  whom  he  **made  obeisance"  (£xod.  xviii,  7) ; 
which,  with  other  inddental  allusions,  are  all  natuńi 
on  the  supposition  that  Moses  was  his  son-in-law,  but 
aie  out  of  place  in  a  brother-in-law.  Besides,  it  is  Jethro 
who  is  called  the  sacerdotal  and  tribal  head  of  the  elan, 
which  could  not,  under  the  patriarchal  domestic  consti- 
tution,  have  been  the  case  had  his  father  Reuel  been 
still  alive.  If,  indeed,  we  could  accept  the  ingeiuous 
conjecture  of  Ewald  (Gesck,  dea  Itr.  sec  ii,  88)  that,  by 
an  ancient  derical  error,  the  words  13  1*in^,  "Jethro, 
son  of,"  had  dropped  out  before  the  name  of  Reuel, 
it  would  then  be  easy,  with  the  Targum  Jonathan, 
Aben-Ezra,  Rosenmuller,  etc,  to  assume  that  Jethro 
was  Reuel'8  »on;  but  there  is  no  tracę  of  such  an  error. 
All  those  methods  of  adjusting  these  accounts  must 
thercfore  be  abandoned  which  maintain  the  identity  of 
Jethro  and  Hobab,  in  whatevcr  way  they  seek  (see 
Winer'8  Realwórterbuchj  s.  v.  Raguel)  to  reconcile  the 
discrepancies;  and  the  whole  of  the  statements  may  be 
deared  up  by  understanding,  with  Yon  Lengerkc  {Ke- 
naan,  i,  893),  Bcrtheau  (Gesch,  Itra,  sec  242),  KaUsch 
{Exod.  p.  35),  and  others,  that  Jethro  and  Ragud  were 
but  different  names  of  Moses^s  father-in-law,  and  that 
the  son  Hobab  was  his  brother-in-law  (referring  "jnh 
in  Numb.  x,  29  to  Ragud,  and  in  Judg.  iv,  11  taking  it 
in  the  generał  scnse  of  affinu,  relative  by  marriagi^. 
Josephus,  in  speaking  of  Raguel,  remarks  once  {AtU.  ii, 
12, 1)  that  he  ''had  lothor  ('lo^óp,  i.  e.  Jethro)  for  a 
sumame"  ('Ic^eyAciToc  */v  iiriKXrifAa  rtf  *Payoor}\). 
''  The  abbreviated  form  ojf  his  name  (Jether  or  Jethro^ 
for  Jethron)  is  enumerated  by  the  Midrash  as  the  first 
of  the  seven  (or,  according  to  another  ver8ion,  eight) 
names  by  which  this  Midianitish  priest  was  known  [  viz. 
Jether  or  Jethro,  because  he  heaped  up  (^'^niM)  good 
deeds,  or  becaose  *he  added  a  Parasha  to  the  Torah;' 
CJhebcr  (*^an),  because  he  was  a  friend  of  the  Lord; 
(^obeb  (n2n),  because  he  was  bdovcd  by  the  Lord,  or 
because  *  he  loved  the  Torah ;'  Reuel,  because  he  was  a 
companion  {'S'^)  to  the  Lord;  Petuel,  because  ho  freed 
himself  (^136)  from  idolatry],  Indeed,  Jether  is  con- 
sidered  his  original  name,  to  which,  when  he  became  a 
beUever  and  a  convcrt  to  the  faith,  an  additional  letter 
(1)  was  aflEixed.  According  to  the  Midrash  (foL  53, 54), 
he  had  been  one  of  Pharaoh's  musicians,  and  had  got 
possession  of  Adamus  stafT,  which  had  bdonged  to  Jo- 
seph ;  but  he  was  driven  from  Egypt  because  he  opposed 
the  decree  for  drowniug  the  Israditish  infanta"  (Kitto). 
See  Hobab;  Raguel. 

'^The  hospitality,  free-hearted  and  unaought,  which 
Jethro  at  once  extended  to  the  unknown,  homeless  wan- 
derer,  on  the  relation  of  his  daughters  that  he  had  w»> 
tered  their  flock,  is  a  picture  of  Eastem  manners  no  lesa 
tme  than  lovdy.    We  may  perhaps  suppose  that  Je» 


JETHRO 


004 


JETZER 


thro,  befoTe  hia  acquaintanoe  with  Hoses,  was  not  a  woi^ 
shipper  of  the  tnie  God.  Traces  of  thia  appear  in  the 
delay  which  Moaes  had  suflered  to  take  place  with  re- 
apect  to  the  circumcision  of  hU  son  (Exod.  iv,  24-26)  : 
indeed,  it  is  eyen  poaBible  that  Zipporah  had  aflerwardB 
been  subjected  to  a  kind  of  divorce  (Exod.  xviii,  2, 
n'^n!|^d),  on  account  of  her  attachment  to  an  alien 
creed,  but  that  growing  conviction8  were  at  work  in  the 
mind  of  Jethro,  from  the  circumstance  of  Israel's  con- 
tinued  pioepeńty,  till  at  last,  acting  upon  these,  he 
brought  back  hia  daughter,  and  declared  that  hia  im- 
preasiona  were  confirmed,  for  ^noto  he  knew  that  the 
Lord  waa  greater  than  all  gods,  for  in  the  thiug  wherein 
they  dealt  proudly,  he  waa  above  thero :'  conaequently 
we  are  told  that '  Jethro,  Moaea^a  father-in-law,  took  a 
bumt-offcring  and  aacrifices  for  God:  and  Aaron  came, 
and  all  the  eldera  of  larael,  to  eat  bread  with  Moaca^a  fa- 
ther-in-law  hefore  Gody  aa  if  to  celebrate  the  eyent  of 
hia  conreraion"  (Smith).     See  Moses. 

""Shortly  after  the  £xodi]a  (B.C.  1658),  Jethro  paid  a 
yiait  to  Moaea,  while  the  Hebrew  camp  waa  lying  in  the 
6nviiona  of  Sinai,  bringing  with  him  Zipporah,  Moaea^a 
wife,  who,  together  with  her  two  aona,  had  been  left 
with  her  family  while  her  huaband  waa  abaent  on  hia 
embaaay  to  Pharaoh.  The  intenriew  waa  on  both  aidea 
aifectionate,  and  waa  celebrated  iiiat  by  the  aolemn  ritea 
of  rełigion,  and  afterwarda  by  featiyitiea,  of  which  Aaron 
and  the  eldera  of  larael  were  invited  to  partake.  On 
the  foUowing  day,  obaerving  Moaea  inoeaaantly  occupied 
in  dedding  cauaea  that  were  aubmitted  to  him  for  judg- 
ment,  hia  experienced  kinaman  remonatrated  witli  him 
on  the  apeedy  exhau8tion  which  a  peT8everance  in  auch 
arduoua  labora  would  auperinduce ;  and  in  order  to  re- 
lieve  himaelf,  aa  well  aa  aecure  a  due  attention  to  erery 
caae,  he  urged  Moaea  to  appoint  a  numbcr  of  aubordinate 
officera  to  divide  with  him  the  duty  of  the  Judicial  tri- 
bunala,  with  power  to  decide  in  all  common  affaira,  while 
the  weightier  and  morę  aerioiia  mattera  were  reaerved 
to  himaelf.  ThłB  wise  auggeation  the  Hebrew  legialator 
adopted  (Exod«  xviii).  Aa  the  Ilebrewa  were  ahortly 
afterwarda  about  preparing  to  decamp  from  Sinai,  the 
kinamen  of  Mosea  announced  their  intention  to  return 
to  their  own  territory,"  and  Moaea  interpoaed  no  apecial 
objection  to  the  purpoee  on  the  part  of  hia  father-in- 
law,  whoee  preaence  waa  doubtleaa  eaaential  at  home, 
and  who  accordingly  took  hia  deparure  (Exod.  xviii, 
27).  Hia  brother-in-law  Hobab  naturally  purpoaed  to 
accompany  hia  father  back  to  Midian,  and  at  firat  ex- 
preaaed  a  refuaal  to  the  invitation  of  Moaea  to  accompa- 
ny the  laraelitea  to  Canaan  (Numb.  x,  29,  80).  It  ia 
not  atated  whether  he  actually  rctamed  with  hia  father, 
"  but  if  he  did  carry  that  purpoae  into  execntion,  it  was 
in  oppoaition  to  the  urgent  aolicitationa  of  the  Jewiah 
leader,  who  entreated  him,  for  his  own  advantage,  to 
caat  in  hia  lot  with  the  people  of  God ;  at  all  e^^enta  to 
continue  with  them,  and  afford  them  the  benefit  of  hia 
thorough  acquaintance  with  the  wildemeaa.  *  Leave  us 
not,  I  pray  thee,*  aaid  Moaea,  *  foraamuch  aa  thou  know- 
eat  how  we  are  to  encamp  in  the  wildemeaa,  and  thou 
maytMt  beto  iu  insłead  ofeyea ;'  which  the  Sept,  haa  ren- 
dered  *and  thou  ahalt  be  an  clder  among  us,'  But  there 
can  be  little  doubt  that  the  tnie  meaning  ia  that  Hobab 
might  perform  the  office  of  a  hyhtr  or  guide  (aee  Bruce'8 
Travels^  W,  586) — hia  influence  aa  an  Arab  chief,  hia 
knowledge  of  the  routea,  the  aituation  of  the  wella,  the 
placea  for  fuel,  the  prognostics  of  the  weather,  and  the 
most  eligibie  atationa  for  encamping,  rendering  him  pe- 
culiarly  qualifled  to  act  in  that  important  capacity.  See 
CARAyAN.  It  ia  tnie  that  (lod  waa  their  leader,  by  the 
pillar  of  cloud  by  day  and  of  flre  by  night,  the  advance- 
ment  or  the  halting  of  which  rcgulated  their  jounieys 
and  flxed  tneir  encampmcnta.  But  beyond  theae  gen- 
erał dirc«:tions  the  tokens  of  their  heavenly  guide  did 
not  exten'i.  Aa  amaller  partica  were  frequently  saUying 
forth  from  the  main  body  in  gueat  of  forage  and  other 
neoesaariea,  which  human  obaenration  or  enterpriae  were 


aufBcient  to  piovide,  ao  Moaea  diaooveied  hia  wiadon 
and  good  aenae  in  enliating  the  aid  of  the  son  of  a  natire 
aheik,  who,  from  hia  family  oonnection  with  himaelf,  bit 
powerful  influence,  and  hia  long  experienoe,  promiacd  u> 
render  the  laraelitea  moat  important  aeryicea."  To  theae 
aolicitationa  we  may  infer,  firom  the  abeenoe  of  anj  fur« 
ther  refuaal,  that  Hobab  finally  yielded;  a  oonciiiSMn 
that,  indeed,  aeeroa  to  be  explicitly  referred  to  in  Jod^ 
i,  16;  iv,  11.     See  KKNrrE;  Itiirite. 

No  other  particulara  of  the  life  of  Jethro  are  knowo, 
but  the  Araba,  who  cali  him  ShoaSb^  have  a  variety  of 
traditiona  oonceming  him.  They  aay  that  Michael,  the 
Bon  of  Taakir,  and  grandaon  of  Midian,  waa  hia  father; 
thia  laat  waa  the  immediate  aon  of  Ishmael,  acooiding 
to  the  author  of  Leb-Tarik^  but  Moaea  makea  no  men- 
tion  of  Midian  among  the  aona  of  lahmael  (Gen.  xxv, 
18, 14).  Jethro  gaye  hia  aon-in-law  Moaea  the  miiaco- 
loua  rod ;  it  had  once  been  the  rod  of  Adam,  and  waa  of 
the  myrtle  of  Paradiae,  etc  (Lane^a  /Coron,  p.  190;  Weil^s 
Bibl.  Legend*,  p.  107-109).  Although  blmd  (Lane,  p.  180, 
notę),  he  waa  favored  with  the  gift  of  prophecy,  and  God 
aent  him  to  the  Midianitea  to  preach  the  unity  of  God, 
and  to  withdraw  them  from  idolatry.  A  commentator 
on  the  Koran  afiirma  that  whenever  Jethro  performed  hia 
devotiona  on  the  top  of  a  certain  mountain,  the  monn- 
tain  became  lower,  in  order  to  render  hia  aacent  more 
eaay.  Another  Arabian  commentator  aaya  that  Jethro 
took  paina  to  reform  the  bad  cuatoma  of  the  Midianitea, 
auch  aa  atealing,  having  two  aorta  of  weighta  and  meas- 
urea,  for  buying  by  the  larger  and  aclling  by  the  amall- 
er. Beaidea  theae  frauda  of  the  Midianitea  in  their  trad- 
ing,  they  offered  violence  to  traveller8,  and  robbcd  them 
on  the  highwaya.  They  threatened  even  Jethro  for  hia 
remonatrancea.  Thia  inaolence  obliged  God  to  manifest 
hia  wrath :  he  aent  the  angel  Gabriel,  who,  with  a  voice 
of  thunder,  madę  the  earth  to  tremble,  which  deatroyed 
them  all  exoept  Jethro,  and  thoae  who,  like  him,  be- 
lieved  the  unity  of  God  (Lane,  p.  179-181).  AlYer  thia 
puniahment  Jethro  went  to  Moaea,  as  related  in  £xod. 
xviii.  1-8.  The  Mohammedaua  term  him,  from  the  ad- 
vice  he  gave  to  Mosea, "  The  preacher  of  the  propheta"* 
(D'Herbelot,  BibL  OrienL  iii,  273  aq. ;  comp.  J.  C.  Maier, 
De  Jethrone,  Helmat.  1715).  ^  The  name  of  Sho^eib  still 
remaina  attached  to  one  of  the  wadya  on  the  eaat  aide 
of  the  Jordan,  oppoaite  Jericho,  through  which,  accord- 
ing  to  the  tradition  of  the  locality  (Sectzen,  lieutm,  iSbi, 
ii,  819, 876),  the  children  of  larael  dcacended  to  the  Jor- 
dan. Other  placea  bearing  hia  name  and  thoae  of  hia 
two  daughters  are  ahown  at  Sinai  and  on  the  Gulf  of 
Akaba  (Stanley,  Syr,  and  PaL  p.  88)"  (Smith). 

Je'tur  (Hcb.  Yetur%  nsia^,  prób.  i.  q.  lilia,  an  inch- 
rare,  L  e.  nomadic  camp;  Sept.  'ieroup,  'Icrrorp,  but 
*lTovpaioi  in  1  Chroń.  v,  19),  one  of  the  twelve  aons  of 
lahmael  (Gen.  xxv,  15 ;  1  Chroń,  i,  81).  B.C.  post  2063. 
Hia  name  atanda  also  for  hia  deaccndanta,  the  Jtunrans 
(1  Chroń.  v,  19),  a  people  living  eaat  of  the  northem 
Jordan  (Lukc  iii,  1),  where  he  appeara  to  have  aettled. 
See  iTURiKA. 

Jetser,  Johann,  a  religioua  fanatic,  a  tailor  by  trade, 
who  lived  In  the  early  part  of  the  16th  centur^',  waa  a 
lay  brother  of  the  Dominican  convent  at  Benie.  The 
oider  to  which  he  belonged  about  thia  time  were  cn^ 
gaged  in  a  controver8y  with  the  Franciacana  on  the 
doctrine  of  the  immaculate  oonception.  Some  uotod 
monka  and  pńesta  of  the  former  had  ao  flercely  aasailed 
it  that  they  had  been  aummoncd  to  Romę  to  anawer  for 
their  conduct.  The  Dominicana  of  Wimpfen  thereupon 
detcrmined  to  appear  to  one  of  their  novitiatea  at  Beme 
— thia  very  Jctzer— at  midnight,  and,  repreaenting  de- 
parted  spirits,  aasured  him  that  in  the  other  world  the 
doctrine  of  immaculate  conception  waa  denied,  and  that 
thoae  who  had  in  this  world  persecuted  the  opponenta 
of  the  doctrine  were  atill  in  Purgatory,  and  there  expi- 
atuig  their  crime.  He  at  firat  waa  completely  duped, 
and  created  a  grcat  excitement  among  the  maaaea,  which 
waa  all  that  tho  monka  had  deaired  in  order  to  eecuie 


JEUEL 


905 


JEW 


the  Hberation  of  their  oomradea  at  Some.  But  when 
Jetzer  found  that  he  had  been  imposed  upon,  he  serioufl- 
fy  oppofled  the  plot  at  the  danger  of  his  life.  For  f ur- 
ther  particulare,  see  Moshdm,  EccUm,  Ilist.  book  iv,  cent 
xvi,  sec.  1,  eh.  i,  §  12.    See.a]flO  Berhk  Confcrkkck. 

Jeił'el  (Heb.  YeM\  5KSir  J,  matched  away  by  God, 
u  e.  protected;  SepL  *l€^\,Vulg.  Jekuel),  a  dcacendant 
of  Zerah,  who,  with  his  kindred  to  the  number  of  690, 
reaided  in  Jerusalem  after  the  captivity  (1  Chroń,  ix, 
6).  RC.  536.  This  name  b  alao  everywhere  written 
in  the  text  for  ^»''5\  See  Jeieu  In  the  Apocrypha 
(1  Esdr.  viii,  39)  \t  sŁands  for  the  Heb.  Jeud  (Ezra  viii, 
13)  aa  the  name  of  one  of  the  Bene-Adonikam  who  re- 
tumed  to  Jerusalem  after  the  captivity. 

Je'ttah  (Hebiew  Yeu8h%  OW^,  assembkr;  written 
«•'?■»,  Yd8h\  in  the  text  of  Gen.  xxxvi,  6, 14 ;  1  Chroń. 
vii,  10),  the  name  of  8everal  men. 

1.  (Sepu  'Uovc,  but  'Uov\  in  1  Chroń,  i,  85;  Vulg. 
Jehus).  The  oldest  of  the  three  sons  of  Esau  by  Aholi- 
baraah,  the  daughter  of  Anah,  bom  in  Canaan,  but  af- 
terwards  a  sheik  of  the  Edomites  (Gen.  xxxvi,  5, 14, 18 ; 
1  Chroń,  i,  35).     B.a  post  1964. 

2.  (SepL  'lewę  v.  r.  'laouc,Vulg.  Jehus,')  The  flrst 
named  of  the  sons  of  Bilhan,  grandson  of  Benjamin  (I 
Chroń,  vii,  10).    RC.  conaiderably  poet  1856. 

3.  (Sept,  'Iwac,Vulg.  Jaus,)  A  Levite,  one  of  the 
four  aons  of  Shimei ;  not  having  many  sons,  he  was  reck- 
oned  with  his  brothcr  Beriah  as  the  third  branch  of  the 
family  (1  Chroń,  xxiii,  10, 11).     B.C.  1014. 

4.  (Sept.  'Icouc,  Vulg.  Jehtu.)  One  of  the  three  sons 
of  Rehoboam,  apparently  by  Abihail,  his  sccond  wife  (2 
Chroń,  xi,  19).     RC.  post  973. 

5.  (Sept.  'iSiac  V.  r.  'lac,Vulg.  Jekusj  A.Ver8.  « Je- 
hush.**)  The  second  son  of  Eshek,  brother  of  Aasel,  of 
the  descendants  of  Saul  (1  Chroń,  viii,  39).  B.C.  cir. 
588. 

Je'U«  (Heb.  Yeuts',  y!ł5%  counsellor,  q.  d.  Ev(3oV' 
Xoc;  Sept,  Uoóc  v.  r.  'l«/3owc,  Vulg.  Jehua)^  a  chief 
Benjamitc,  one  of  the  sons  apparently  of  Shaharaim, 
bom  of  his  wife  Hodesh  or  Baara  in  the  land  óf  Moab 
(i  Chroń,  viii,  10)/    RC.  perh.  cir.  1618. 

Jew  (Heb.r«Ai«K,'  "^nsin^plur.  D''n*in^,  sometimes 
C?7^^ł  Esth.  iv,  7 ;  viii,  1,7, 18 ;  ix,  15, 18  text ;  fem. 
njnin;',  l  Chron.  iv,  18 ;  Chald.  in  plur.  emphat.  "^^^^S^^, 
Dan.  iii,  8;  Ezra  iv,  12;  v,  1, 5;  adv.  rr^^^^T^^^i  Judaic€y 
in  the  Jews'  language,  2  Kings  xviii,  26 ;  Neh.  xiii,  24 ; 
SepL  and  N.  T.  'lotUaioc,  henoe  verb  'lou^at^w,  to  Ju- 
daize^  GaL  ii,  14 ;  adj.  'lovŁouKÓCy  Jeteish,  TiL  i,  14,  etc.), 
A  name  formed  from  that  of  the  patriarch  Judah,  and 
i^plied  in  its  first  use  to  one  belonging  to  the  tribe  or 
country  of  Judah,  or  rather,  perhaps,  to  a  subject  of  the 
aeparate  kingdom  of  Judah  (2  Kings  xvi,  6 ;  xxv,  6 ; 
Jer.  xxxii,  12;  xxxviii,  19;  xl,  11;  xli,  3;  xliv,  1 ;  lii, 
28),  in  contradistinction  from  the  seceding  ten  tribes, 
who  retained  the  name  of  Israel  or  laraelites.  During 
the  captivity  the  term  secms  to  have  been  extended 
(aec  Josephus,  Anł,  xi,  5, 6)  to  all  the  people  of  the  He- 
brew  language  and  country,  without  distinction  (Eath. 
iii,  6,9;  Dan.  iii,  8, 12);  and  this  loose  application  of 
the  name  was  presenred  after  the  restoration  to  Pales- 
tine  (Hag.  i,  14 ;  ii,  2 ;  Ezra  iv,  12 ;  v,  1, 5 ;  Neh.  i,  2 ;  ii, 
16;  V,  1,8, 17),  when  it  came  to  denote  not  only  every 
descendant  of  Abraham  in  the  largest  possible  sense 
(2  Mace  ix,  17;  John  iv,  9;  Acts  xviii,  2,24,  etc.),  es- 
pecially  in  opposition  to  foreigners  ("  Jews  and  Greeks," 
Acts  xiv,  1 ;  xviii,  4 ;  xix,  10 ;  1  Cor.  i,  23, 24),  but  even 
proeel^tes  who  hail  no  blood-relation  to  the  Hebrews 
(Acts  ii,  5;  comp.  10).  An  especial  use  of  the  term  is 
noticeable  in  the  Gospel  of  John,  where  it  frequently 
atands  for  the  chief  Jews,  the  elders,  who  were  opposed 
to  Christ  (John  i,  19;  v,  15,  16;  vii,  1, 11, 18;  ix,  22; 
zviii,  12, 14,  etc. ;  comp.  Acts  xxiii,  20).     See  Judah. 

The  ońginal  designation  of  the  Israelitish  nation  was 
the  Hebrews,  by  which  all  the  legitimate  posterity  of 


Abraham  were  known,  not  only  among  themscWes  (Gea 
xl,  15;  Exod.ii,7;  iii,  18;  v,  8;  vii,  16;  ix,  18;  Jonah 
i,  9 ;  comp.  4  Mace.  ix— although  the  name  Jew  was  in 
later  times  prevalent ;  see  the  Targum  of  Jonathan  on 
£xod.,  ut  8up.),  but  also  among  foreigners  (as  the  Egyp- 
tlans,  (łen.  xxxix,  14 ;  xli,  12;  Exod.  i,  16;  the  Philis- 
tines,  1  Sam.  iv,  6, 9;  xiii,  19;  xxix,  3;  the  Assyriana, 
Judith  xii,  11 ;  and  even  the  Greeks  and  Komans,  see 
Flutarch,%m/NW.  iv,  5;  Appian,  Civ,  ii,  71 ;  Pausan.  i, 
6,  24;  V,  7,  8;  x,  12,  5;  Porphyry,  Vit,Pythag.  p.  185; 
TaciL  //«f.  V,  2).  See  Israklitk.  After  the  exile,  the 
title  Jewt  became  the  usual  one  (compare  1  Mace.  viii), 
while  the  term  "Hebrews''  fell  into  disuse,  being  still 
applied,  however,  to  the  Samańtans  (Josephus,  A  nL  xi, 
8, 6),  or  morę  commonly  to  designate  the  vulgar  Syro- 
Chaldee  spoken  by  the  Palestinian  Jews  (comp.  Acts  ix, 
29;  Eusebius  iii,24),in  distinction  from  the  Hellenista 
(Acts  vi,  1 ;  comp.  the  title  of  the  "  Epistie  to  the  He- 
brew^"  and  see  Bleek,  JCinleit.  in  d,  Br.  u.  d,  IJebr.  p.  32 
8q. ;  Euseb.  vi,  14).  See  Hkllknist.  Yet  Paul,  who 
spoke  Greek,  was  appropriately  styled  a  Hebrew  (2  Cor. 
xi,  22;  PhiL  iii,  6) ;  and  stiU  later  the  terms  Hebrew 
and  Jew  were  applied  with  little  distinction  to  persona 
of  Jewish  descent  (Eusebius,  I/ist.  Lv,  ii,  4 ;  Philo,  iii,  4). 
See  Hbbrew.  (For  a  further  dlscussion  of  these  epi* 
thets,  see  Gesenius,  Gescfu  d,  Ildtr,  Spracke^  9  są. ;  Heng- 
steiiberg,  BiUatHy  p.  207  są.;  Ewald,  Krii.  Gntmnu  p.  8, 
and  Itrad.  Getch.  i,  884 ;  Hoffmaim,  in  the  IlalL  Ency 
dop.  II,  iii,  807  są. ;  Henke'8  Mus.  ii,  639  sq. ;  Carpzov, 
Crii.  Saa-u,  p.  170  są.) 

The  history  of  the  Jewish  nation  previous  to  the 
Christian  lera,  is  interwoven  with  that  of  their  country 
and  capitaL  See  Palkstink;  Jerusalkm.  During 
the  Biblical  periods  it  consists  mostly  of  the  narrative8 
of  the  progenitors  and  rulers  of  the  people,  or  of  the 
events  that  marked  its  leading  epochs.  See  Adi:.vham  ; 
Jacob;  Moses;  Josiiua;  Judges;  Dayid;  SoiX)MOif ; 
Judah;  Isr.\kł;  Captiyity;  Maccabkf-s;  IIkrod; 
JuDiKA.     (For  further  deteils,  see  list  of  works  below.) 

1.  Strictly  speaking,  a  history  of  the  Jews  ought  per- 
haps to  oommence  with  the  return  of  the  remnant  of 
the  chosen  people  of  God  from  the  exile  (q.  v.),  but  this 
portion  of  their  history,  down  even  to  the  time  of  their 
finał  dispenion,  A.D.*185,  has  already  been  treated  at 
length  in  other  parto  of  this  work  (we  refer  the  reader 
to  the  articles  Hadrian  ;  BAR-Ckx;HKBA ;  DisPERStai; 
Jkrusalem).  It  was  the  effort,  under  the  leadership  of 
Bar-Cocheba,  to  regain  their  independence,  that  brought 
about  a  repetitioh  of  scenes  cnacted  under  Titus,  and 
resulted  actually  in  the  depopulation  of  Palcstine.  Tal- 
mud and  Midiash  (espedally  Midrash  Echa)  alikc  ex- 
hauBt  even  Eastem  extravagance  in  describing  the  ter- 
rible oonaeąuences  that  followed  the  capture  by  the  Ro- 
mans of  the  last  of  the  Jewish  forts— Bither,  their  great- 
eat  stronghold.  The  whole  of  Judsa  was  turned  into  a 
desert;  about  985  towns  and  village8  were  laid  in  ash- 
es;  fifty  of  their  fortresses  were  razed  to  the  groimd; 
even  the  name  of  their  capital  was  changed  to  iElia 
Capitolina,  and  they  were  forbidden  to  approach  it  on 
pain  of  death;  thousands  of  those  who  had  cscapcd 
death  were  reduced  to  8lavery,  and  siich  as  could  not  be 
thus  disposed  of  were  transported  into  EgypL  "The 
previou8  invasions  and  conąuesU,  civil  strifes  an«l  q\^ 
presńona,  persecution  and  farainc,  had  canied  hosts  of 
Jewish  captive8,  slavfts,  fugitive8,  exiles,  and  emigranta 
into  the  remotest  provinccs  of  the  Medo-Pcrsian  em- 
pire, all  over  Asia  Minor,  into  Armenia,  Arabia,  Egypt, 
Cyrene,  Cyprus,  Greeee,  and  Italy.  The  Roman  con- 
ąuest  and  peraecutions  completed  this  work  of  disper- 
słon;"  and  thus  suddenly  scattered  abroad  into  almost 
ev«ry  part  of  the  empire,  in  the  regions  of  ML  Atlns,  on 
both  sides  of  the  Pyrenees,  on  the  Rhine,  the  Dajiubo, 
and  the  Po,  the  Jews  were  deprived  of  the  boml  of  con- 
nection  which  the  posseasion  of  a  common  country  only 
can  afforcL  Their  lot  henceforth  was  oppression,  pov- 
erty,  and  scom. 

Yet  even  in  their  utmost  depreasion,  their  rdigioiui 


JEW 


906 


JEW 


llfe  aaserted,  as  it  has  ever  done,  its  saperiority  orer  all 
the  diaastera  of  time.  No  sooner  had  the  war  termina- 
ted  than,  as  if  rbing  from  the  ruina  of  the  tomb,  the 
Sanhedrim  (q.  v.)  and  the  eynagogue  reappeared.  Out 
of  Palestine  innumerable  congregationa  of  various  sizes 
had  long  been  esŁablished;  but  the  late  eventa  in  Egypt, 
Cyienaica,  Cyprus,  and  MeBopotamia,  aa  well  as  Pales* 
tine,  would  have  insured  their  annihilation  but  for  the 
leligious  idiosyncrasy  of  the  people.  If  but  three  per- 
sons  were  left  in  a  neighborhood,  they  would  rally  at 
the  trysting-place  of  the  law.  The  senae  of  their  com- 
mon  dangers,  miseries,  and  wants  bound  the  Jewiah 
people  niore  closely  to  one  another.  A  dtizen  of  the 
world,  having  no  country  he  could  cali  his  own,  the 
Jew  neyerthelcss  lived  within  certain  well-defined  lim- 
its,  beyond  which,  to  him,  there  was  no  world.  Thus, 
though  scattered  abroad,  the  Israelites  had  not  ceased 
to  be  a  nation ;  nor  did  any  nation  feel  ita  oneness  and 
integrity  so  truły  as  they.  Jerusalem,  indeed,  had  ceased 
to  be  their  capital ;  but  the  school  and  the  synagogue, 
and  not  a  Leyitical  hierarchy,  now  became  their  imprefc- 
nable  citadel,  and  the  law  their  palladium.'  The  old 
men,  schoolcd  in  sorrows,  rallied  about  them  the  man- 
hoiKl  that  remained  and  the  infancy  that  multiplied,  re- 
8olving  that  they  would  tnuismit  a  knowledge  of  their 
religion  to  futurę  generationa.  They  founded  schools 
88  wcll  as  syiiagogues,  untU  their  e£fort8  resulted  in  the 
writing  of  a  codę  of  laws  seoond  only  to  that  of  Moaes — 
a  system  of  traditionaiy  principles,  precepts,  and  cua- 
toms  to  kcep  alive  forerer  the  peculiar  spirit  of  Juda- 
ism  (see  Rule,  KaraUes,  p.  69). 

Among  the  first  things  to  be  aocomplished  by  the  Jews 
of  Palestine  at  this  period  of  their  histoiy  was  the  eleo- 
tion,  in  place  of  the  late  Gamaliel  II  (q.y.),of  a  patriarch 
from  the  eminent  rabbins  who  had  escapcd  the  sword 
of  the  Itoman  conąueror.  A  synod  congregated  at  Us- 
cha  (q.  V.),  and  Simon  ben-Gamaliel,  presenting  the  best 
hereditary  cloims  for  this  distinguished  office,  was  cho- 
sen,  and  intrustcd  with  the  reconstmction  of  the  synar 
goguo  and  school  at  Jamnia  (q.  v.),  there  to  re-estab- 
lish  with  frcsh  efliciency  a  rabbinical  apparatus.  Soon 
another  and  morę  important  institution  was  founded  on 
the  banks  of  the  Lakę  Gennesaieth,  in  the  pleasant 
toim  of  Tiberias  (q.  r.).  Herę  also  was  reorganiased 
the  Sanhedrim  (q.v.),  tmtil  Judaism  was  brought  to 
stand  out  even  in  bolder  relief  than  it  had  dared  to  do 
sinoe  the  calamitics  under  Titus.  In  a  great  meas- 
ure  this  succcss  of  the  Jews  was  due  to  the  Komana, 
who,  under  the  goveniment  of  the  Antonines,  mitigated 
their  scYcrity  against  this  unfortunate  people,  restoring 
to  tliem  many  ancicnt  pri\'ileges,  and  permitting  them 
to  enjoy  cycu  municipal  hoiiors  in  oommon  with  other 
citizcns.  Indeed,  of  Antoninus  Pius,  Jewish  writers  as- 
scrt  that  he  had  ^ecrcth'^  become  a  conrert  to  their  faith 
(oomp.  Jost,  Gcsch,  d  hraeliten,  bk.  xiii,  eh.  ix),  but  for 
this  Btatcmcnt  there  sccms  to  be  no  very  good  reaaon; 
at  Icaat  Griitz  (Jiesch,  der  Juden,  iv,  225,  226)  does  not 
cvcn  allude  to  it,  Bfost  prominently  associated  with 
Gamaliel  II  in  this  work  of  reconstruction,  among  the 
Jews  of  the  Wcat,  were  Meir,  Juda,  Jose,  Simon  ben- 
Jochai,  to  whose  res|iective  blographical  articlcs  we  re- 
fcr  for  furthcr  dctails;  alao  Juda  Ha-Nasi,  the  succes- 
sor  of  (tamoliel  II.  In  Babylonia  likewise  the  Jews  had 
strained  everj'  ner\'e  to  rcgain  their  lost  power  and  in- 
fluence, and  they  had  established  a  patriarchate  very 
much  like  that  of  the  West.  At  first  they  had  looked 
to  the  Koman  Jews  for  oounsel,  and  had  virtually  ao- 
kno^vlcdge<l  the  superiority  of  their  Jerusalem  brethren 
in  all  spiritual  matters,  confining  to  temporal  roatters 
alone  the  ofiicc  of  the  Resk  Gelutha  (q.v.),  or,  "Prince  of 
the  Captivity,"  as  they  called  their  rulcrs;  but  as  the 
chances  for  a  rebuilding  of  the  Tempie  and  a  return 
to  pov.or  in  the  holy  city  grew  less  and  less,  they  dc- 
termined,  encoura^etl  by  the  growing  celebrity  of  their 
own  schools  at  Nisibis  (q.  v.)  and  Nahardea  (q.  v.),  to 
establish  their  total  indepcndencc  of  the  schools  of  Pal- 
estine^ and  to  uuitc  m  their  officcr  Besh  Gelutha,  who 


WBB  choaen  from  thoae  held  to  be  desoended  from  flie 
house  of  Dayid,  both  spiiitnal  and  temporBl  authority 
(see£theridge,/fi/nNŁtoife&.Z4(.p.l52,153>.  Wean 
told  of  the  Reah  Gelotha  that,  after  the  ooDsotidatiaii  of 
the  temporal  and  apiritoal  offioes,  he  ezeicised  a  powcr 
almoet  despotic,  and,  though  a  yassal  of  the  king  of  Per- 
sia,  he  assumed  among  his  0¥m  people  the  style  of  a  mon- 
an:h,lived  in  great  s{dendor,  had  abody-guard,  oounael- 
lors,  cup-bearers,  etc ;  in  fact,  his  goyemment  was  ąuite 
an  imperium  in  iniperio,  and  poaaessed  a  thonmgfaly  sao- 
erdotal,  or  at  least  theocratic  character.  His  sobjects 
were,  many  of  them  at  least,  extremely  wealthy,  and 
pursaed  all  sorts  of  industrial  occupataons.  They  were 
merchants,  banken,  artiaans,  husbandmen,  and  abcp- 
herds,  and,  in  particular,  had  the  reputation  of  being 
the  best  wearers  of  the  then  fiunooa  Babybnian  gar- 
ment8»  What  was  the  oondition  of  the  Jews  at  this 
time  further  east  we  cannot  tell,  but  it  seema  quite 
certain  that  they  had  obtained  a  footing  in  China,  if 
not  before  the  time  of  Christ,  at  least  duting  tlie  Ist  oen- 
tuiy.  They  were  first  discoyered  by  the  Jesuit  miasioD- 
aries  of  the  17th  ceutury.  They  did  not  appear  ever  to 
hayc  heard  of  Christ,  but  they  poasessed  the  book  of 
£zra,  and  retained,  on  the  whole,  a  yery  dedded  nar 
tionalism  of  creed  and  character.  From  their  Umguage, 
it  was  inferred  that  they  had  originally  come  from  Per- 
sia.  At  one  time  they  would  appear  to  have  been  high- 
ly  honored  in  China,  and  to  have  held  the  highest  civil 
and  military  offices.  In  India  also  they  gained  a  footr 
hołd,  and  sińce  the  Bussian  embassies  into  Aaia  Jews 
have  been  found  in  many  places  (see  North  American 
Reneto,  1831,  p.  244). 

Keyerting  to  the  Jews  of  the  Roman  empire,  we  find 
them  perfectly  resigned  to  their  fate,and  comparativeIy 
proeperous,  until  the  time  of  Constantine  the  Great  (q. 
V.).  Indeed,  the  dosing  part  of  the  2d  and  the  fint 
part  of  the  8d  century  will  eyer  remain  among  Ibe  most 
memorable  years  in  the  annals  of  Jewish  history.  It 
was  dnring  this  period  that  Judah  Hakkodesh  (q.  v.) 
flourished,  and  it  was  under  his  presidency  over  the 
school  at  Tiberias  that  the  Jews  proyed  to  the  worid 
that,  though  they  were  now  left  without  a  metropolita 
without  a  tempie,  and  eyen  without  a  country,  they 
could  still  continue  to  be  a  nation.  Driyen  from  the 
sacred  city,  they  changed  Tiberias  into  a  kind  of  Jeroaa- 
lem,  where,  instead  of  building  in  wood  and  stone,  they 
employed  workmen  in  reaiing  another  ediflce,  which 
eyen  to  this  day  contuiues  to  prodaim  the  greatncss  of 
the  chosen  people  of  God  ailer  their  dispersion  —  the 
Mishna  (q.  y.),  and  the  Gemara,  better  known  as  the 
Babylonian  Talmud  (q.  y.),  the  so-called  Orał  Law  re- 
duced  to  writing,  anranged,  commented  upon,  and  cx- 
plained,  which  became  in  the  course  of  a  few  centuries 
a  complete  Digcst  or  Encyclopasdia  of  the  law,  the  re- 
ligion, and  the  nationality  of  the  Jews.    See  Rabbi  Nisai. 

2.  We  haye  already  sald  that  under  the  Roman  em- 
perors  of  the  2d  and  Sd  centuries  the  Jews  were  in  a 
somewhat  fiourishing  condition.  Qnite  diifercnt  became 
their  fato  in  the  4th  ccntui^',  when  the  emperor  of  Romę 
knelt  before  the  cross,  and  the  empire  became  a  Chris- 
tian State.  Not  only  were  conyerts  irom  Judaism  pn>- 
tected  from  the  resentment  of  their  countrymen,  but 
Christiana  were  prohibited  from  beooming  Jews.  The 
cquality  of  rights  to  which  the  pagan  empcrora  had 
admittćd  them  was  by  degrees  restricted.  In  short, 
from  the  establishment  of  Christianity  in  the  Roman 
empire  dates  the  great  period  of  humiliation  of  the 
Jews;  hereafter  they  change  to  acondemned  and  perpe- 
cuted  sect.  But  if  the  asoendency  of  Christianity  be- 
came baneful  to  the  Jews,  it  does  by  no  means  follow 
that  Christianity  is  to  bear  the  blame.  Nay,  the  Jews 
of  that  age  and  country  are  altogether  responsible  for 
their  sufTerings.  They  appeared  as  the  perwcntors  of 
the  new  religion  whenever  the  opportunity  prcaented 
itself.  Thus  they  allied  themselyes  to  Ariąns  dnring 
the  reyolntion  of  3&8  in  destroying  the  property  and 
liyesoftheCatholics.    See  Alexam>bł,\.    Yct,thoagh 


JEW 


907 


JEW 


decried  **mi  the  most  hateful  of  all  pelyple,**  tbey  oon- 
Unoed  to  fili,  afler  this  period,  important  (dvii  and  mil- 
icary  situationB,  had  especial  oouits  of  jiutice,  and  exep- 
cised  the  influence  włiich  springa  from  the  poasession 
of  wealth  and  knowledge.  Under  the  role  of  Julian  the 
Apostatę  everythingchangedagainintheirfavoir.  The 
heathen  wonhipper  felt  that  the  Jew,  aa  the  opponent 
of  the  Christian,  was  hia  natural  ally ;  and,  freah  from 
oppression  and  tyianny  which  a  Christian  govemment 
had  heaped  upon  them,  the  Jews  hesitated  not  to  un- 
sheath  the  sword  in  union  with  the  Apo6tate'8  legions. 
A  gleam  of  splendor  seemed  to  shine  on  their  futurę 
destiny ;  and  when  Julian  (q.  v.)  determined  *^  to  belie, 
if  possible,  the  fulfilment  of  the  prophecles,*'  and  gaye 
them  pcrmisaion  to  rebuild  their  Tempie  at  Jerusalem, 
the  transport  which  they  manifestod,  it  ia  said,  ia  one 
of  the  most  sublime  spectacles  in  their  hbtory.  (Comp^ 
as  to  the  views  of  Christian  writors  on  the  mirade  said 
to  have  been  yrrought  here,  preventing  the  Jews  from 
the  rcbuUding  of  the  Tempie,  especially,  Etheridge,  I»- 
irod.  (o  Hebrew  Lit,  p.  134  sq.)  The  attempt,  as  is  well 
known,  was  signally  defeated.  The  emperor  suddenly 
died,  and  from  that  event  the  policy  adopted  by  the 
Koman  govemment  towards  the  Jews  was  morę  or  less 
depressiye,  though  never  seyere.  "  In  short,  down  to 
the  time  that  terminated  the  Western  patriarchato  (A. 
D.  415),  the  couduct  of  the  emperors  towards  the  Jews 
appcars  to  have  been  marked  by  au  inflexlble  deteimi- 
natlon  to  keep  them  in  order,  tempered  by  a  wise  and 
worthy  moderation."  Thus,  in  the  codę  of  Theodosius 
II,  their  patriarchs  and  officers  of  the  synagoguc  are 
honorably  mentioned  as  "  Viri  spectcUisńmi,  iilustresj  cla- 
rissimV*  They  enjoyed  absolute  liberty  and  protec- 
tion  in  the  obseirance  of  their  ceremonies,  their  feasts, 
and  their  sabbaths.  "  Their  synagogues  weie  piotected 
by  law  against  the  fanatics,  who,  in  some  parts  of  Asia 
and  Italy,  attacked  and  set  them  on  iire.  Tbroughout 
the  empire  the  property  of  the  Jews,  their  slayes,  and 
their  lands  were  sceured  to  them.  Yet  the  Christians 
were  exhorted  to  hołd  no  intercourse  with  the  unbeliey- 
ing  people,  and  to  beware  of  the  doctriiies  of  the  synar 
gogue.  The  laws,  however,  could  not  prevent  the  zeal 
of  sereral  bishops  from  stirring  up  the  hatred  of  the 
populacc  against  the  Jews.  £vGn  Ambrose  impuŁed  as 
a  crime  to  some  Asiatic  bishops  and  monks  the  effbrt  to 
rebuilil,  at  their  own  expense,  a  synagogue  which  they 
had  demolished."  Nor  ought  we  to  omit  here  the  dis- 
reputablc  acts  of  another  great  fathcr  of  the  Christian 
Church,  Cyril  (q.  v.),  who,  in  A.D.  415,  during  the  reign 
of  Theodosius  II,  caused  the  expul8ion  of  all  Jews  from 
the  bishopric  of  Alexandria. 

8.  The  condition  of  this  people  became  even  worse 
after  the  diyision  of  the  Koman  world  (AD.  395)  mto 
the  Eastem  and  Western  empires,  especially  in  the 
East,  under  Justin  I  (AD.  518-27),  wheie  they  were 
depriyed  of  their  citizenship,  which  they  had  hitherto 
enjoyed,  and  were  classed  with  heretics.  Justinian  (A 
D.  527-65)  went  still  further.  He  not  only  contirmed 
former  enactments,  but  madę  others  still  morę  onerous, 
intended,  no  doubt,  to  drive  the  Jews  into  the  Church. 
♦*  The  emperor,  laying  it  down  as  a  principle  that  ciril 
rights  could  only  belong  to  those  who  professed  the  or- 
thodox  faith,  entirely  escluded  the  Jews  in  his  codę 
(codex)  and  his  edicts  (noyelte).  Anj^thing  which 
could  in  the  least  interfere  with  the  festi^als  of  the 
Christian  Church  was  strictly  forbidden  them ;  all  dis- 
cussion  with  Christians  was  looked  upon  as  a  crime,  and 
all  proselytism  punbhed  with  death.  Even  their  right 
of  holding  property  was  recitricted  in  many  ways,  espe- 
cially in  the  matter  of  wills.  The  emperor  declared 
himself  with  especial  sererity  against  the  traditions  and 
precepta  of  the  Talmud."  Such  oppression  naturally 
enough  provoked  the  Jews  to  repeated  rebellion,  only 
to  be  subjected,  after  complete  failure  to  regain  their 
frcedom,  to  increased  hittomess  of  their  cup  of  degrada- 
tion  [see  Justinian],  until,  deprived  of  the  last  de- 
grce  of  political  importanoe^  many  of  their  number 


quitted  the  Byzantiiie  empire  to  aeek  a  refuge  in  PerBun 
and  BabykMi,  where  the  Israellte  was  treated  with  mom 
leniency.    Compare  also  Samaritans. 

Ab  we  have  said,  their  condition  waa  morę  tolerable 
in  the  Western  empire,  where,  upon  the  imiption  of  the 
barbaroua  tiibes^  they  were  morę  iavorably  rcgarded 
than  their  Christian  neighbors.  The  Jews  also  formed 
a  part  of  all  the  kingdoms  which  rosę  up  out  of  the  ruina 
of  ancient  Korne;  but,  unfortunately,  our  information 
reapecting  them,  for  a  conaiderable  period  at  least,  ia 
very  impeifect.  ^  In  the  absence  of  a  literaturę  of  their 
own,  we  know  of  them  only  through  eodesiastical  wiit- 
ers,  who  tnke  notioe  of  them  chiefly  as  the  objects  of 
the  conrerting  seal  of  the  Catholic  Church.  The  suc- 
cess  of  the  Christian  priesthood  among  their  barbarA 
inraders  inspired  them  with  hopes  of  gaining  conrerta 
among  the  Jews.  But  the  circumstances  of  the  two 
dasses  were  altogether  different  Among  the  heathen, 
when  a  prince  or  a  suooessful  waińor  waa  oonverted  to 
the  faith,  he  carried  along  with  him  all  his  subjects  or 
his  companions  in  war.  But  the  Jews  moved  in  massea 
only  in  matters  connected  with  their  own  religion ;  in 
eyery  other  reapect  they  were  wholly  independent  of 
each  other.  Their  conversion,  therefore,  could  only  be 
the  effect  of  conriction  on  the  part  of  each  indiriduaL 
The  character  of  the  Christian  dergy  did  not  fit  them 
for  80  ardttooa  an  midertaking.  Their  ignorance  and 
freąuent  immorality  placed  them  at  a  disadvantage  in 
regard  to  the  Jews,  who  were  in  poasession  of  the  0.-T. 
Scriptures,  and  had  argnmenta  at  oommand  which  their 
opponenta  oould  not  answer.  Besides,  there  were  no 
inducements  of  a  worldly  naturę  at  thia  period  to  influ* 
ence  the  Jews  in  exchanging  their  religion.  They  had 
no  wish  for  the  retreat  of  the  doiater,  nor  did  they  stand 
in  need  of  protection  on  aocount  of  deeds  of  yiolence  and 
rapine.  Their  habits  were  of  a  description  altogether 
different  from  thoae  of  the  monk  or  brigand.  The  at- 
tompts  of  the  dergy,  howeyer,  were  unremitted,  and 
threats  and  blandishments  were  altemately  resorted  to, 
so  that  the  struggle  was  constant  between  Catholicism 
and  Judaiam  .  .  .  till  the  appearance  of  a  new  religion 
wrought  a  diyendon  in  foyor  of  the  latter." 

4.  According  to  Griltz  {Gesch.d,Juden^  y,  81),  the  his- 
tory  of  the  Jews  in  Arabia  a  century  preceding  Moham- 
med's  appearance  and  during  his  actiyity  prescnts  a 
beautiful  page  in  Jewish  aiinals.  Many  were  the  Ara- 
bian  chiefs  and  their  tribes  who  had  assimilated  with 
the  Jews  or  beoome  actnal  conyerta  to  the  Mosaic  relig- 
ion. Indeed, for  seyeral  oenturies preArious  toMoham- 
med's  appearance,  a  Jewish  kingdom  had  existed  in  the 
south-west  of  Arabia,  and  some  eyen  daim  that  it  ex- 
tended  back  preyious  to  the  birth  of  Christ.  Others  as- 
sert  that  a  Jew  did  not  monnt  the  throne  of  Yemen  (q. 
y.)  until  about  A.D.  820 ;  while  Grtttz  (y,  91  sq.,  442  sq., 
especially  p.  448, 447)  holda  that  the  conyersion  of  the 
Himyaritic  kingdom  to  Judaism  did  not  take  place  until 
the  5'th  oentoiy.  So  much,  howeyer,  is  now  settled,  that 
in  the  early  part  of  the  6th  century  (about  A.D.  520- 
580)  the  last  king  who  rdgned  oyer  the  country  Zunaan 
or  Zu-n-Nuwaa  was  a  Jew  (comp.  Perron,  Sur  thisUnn 
des  Arabes  ctoant  VIdandtmf,  in  the  Journal  Aaiatiguef 
i  1888,  Oct,  Noy.,  p.  853  8q.,  448  8q.),  and  that  only  with 
his  death  Judaism  ceased  to  be  the  religion  of  the 
Himyarite8(q.y.).  SeearticloARABiA(i2e'/*^ion).  The 
influence,  then,  which  the  Jews  must  have  cxerted  in 
the  Arabian  peninsula  at  the  time  of  Mohammed's  ap- 
pearance failed  not  to  be  perceived  by  the  prophet,  and 
he  haatened  to  secure  the  aid  of  these  counti^^men  of 
his,  who  were  equally,  with  his  other  Arabian  brethren, 
the  desoendants  of  Abraham,  and  had  with  them  at 
leaat  the  oommon  cause  of  extirpating  idolatry  and 
Christianity.  There  was,  perhaps,  also  another  rear 
son  why  the  prophet  of  Arabia  should  haye  songht  an 
association  yrith  the  Jews.  łlis  own  mother  was  a 
Jewess  by  descent,  and  had  only  in  after  life  teon  eon- 
yerted  to  Christianity  by  the  Syrian  monk  SergiusL 
To  ber  matcmal  instructiona  he  i»  supposed  to  haye 


JEW 


906 


JEW 


Iłfc  asserted,  as  U  has  ever  done,  its  snperioritj  orier  all 
Łhe  disasters  of  time.  No  sooner  had  the  war  termina- 
ted  than,  as  if  rising  from  the  niins  of  the  tomb,  the 
Sanhedrim  (q.  v.)  and  Łhe  synagogue  reappeared.  Out 
of  Palestuie  iunuroerable  congregations  of  yańous  sizes 
bad  long  bccn  establiahed;  but  the  late  event8  in  Egypt, 
Cyrenaica,  Cyprus,  and  Mesopotamia,  as  well  aa  Palea- 
tine,  would  have  insnred  their  annihilation  but  for  the 
religioiis  idioayncrasy  of  the  people.  If  but  three  per- 
sons  were  left  in  a  neighborhood,  they  would  rally  at 
the  trysting-place  of  the  law.  The  senae  of  their  com- 
mon  dangers,  miseries,  and  wants  bound  the  Jewish 
people  morę  closely  to  one  another.  A  citizen  of  the 
world,  having  no  country  he  could  cali  his  own,  the 
Jew  neverthelcs8  lived  within  certain  well-defined  lim- 
its,  beyond  which,  to  him,  there  was  no  world.  Thus, 
though  scattered  abroad,  the  Israelites  had  not  ceased 
to  be  a  nation ;  nor  did  any  nation  feel  its  oneneas  and 
integrity  so  truły  as  they.  Jerusalem,  indeed,  had  ceased 
to  be  their  capital;  but  the  school  and  the  synagogue, 
and  not  a  LeviŁical  hierarchy,  now  became  their  impreg- 
nable  citadel,  and  the  law  their  palladium.'  The  dd 
men,  schooled  in  sorrows,  rallied  about  them  the  man- 
hoocl  that  remained  and  the  infancy  that  multiplied,  re- 
flolring  that  they  would  transmit  a  knowledge  of  their 
rehgion  to  futurę  generations.  They  founded  schools 
8S  wcll  as  syuagogues,  until  their  eflforts  resulted  in  the 
writing  of  a  codę  of  laws  second  only  to  that  of  Moees — 
a  B}'stera  of  traditionary  principles,  precepŁs,  and  cus> 
toms  to  kccp  aliye  forerer  the  peculiar  spirit  of  Juda- 
ism  (see  Kule,  KaraiteSj  p.  69). 

Among  the  iirst  thiiigs  to  be  aocomplished  by  the  Je¥r8 
of  Palestine  at  this  period  of  their  history  was  the  elec- 
tion,  in  pkcc  of  the  late  Gamaliel  II  (q.  v.),  of  a  patriarch 
from  the  emiiient  rabbius  who  had  escaped  the  sword 
of  the  Koman  conquerur.  A  synod  congregated  at  Ub> 
cha  (q.  V.),  and  Simon  ben-Gamaliel,  presenting  the  beat 
hereditary  claims  for  ttiis  distinguished  office,  was  cho- 
sen,  and  intnistcd  with  the  reconstruction  of  the  syna- 
gogue  and  school  at  Jamnia  (q.  v.),  there  to  re-estab- 
lish  with  fresh  efficiency  a  rabbinical  apparatus.  Soon 
another  and  morę  important  institution  was  founded  on 
the  banks  of  the  Lakę  Gennesareth,  in  the  pleasant 
town  of  Tiberias  (q.  v.).  Herę  also  was  reorganized 
the  Sanhedrim  (q.  v.),  until  Judaism  was  brought  to 
stand  out  cven  in  bolder  relief  than  it  had  daied  to  do 
sińce  the  calamities  uudcr  Titus.  In  a  great  meas- 
ure  this  succcss  of  the  Jews  was  due  to  the  Romans, 
who,  undcr  the  goremment  of  the  Antonines,  mitigated 
their  sererity  against  this  unfortunate  people,  resŁoring 
to  tliem  many  ancicnt  priyileges,  and  permitting  them 
to  ęnjoy  cvcn  municipal  honora  in  common  with  other 
citizen».  Indeed,  of  Antoninus  Pius,  Jewish  writers  as- 
sert  that  he  had  secretly  become  a  conrert  to  their  faith 
(comp.  Jest,  G(.'sch.  d.  Isrcteliten,  bk.  xiii,  eh.  ix),  but  for 
this  statcraent  there  seems  to  be  no  very  good  reason; 
at  least  Grittz  {(^csch,  der  Juden,  iv,  225,  226)  does  not 
cveii  alludc  to  it.  Most  prominently  associated  with 
Gamaliel  II  in  thia  work  of  reconstruction,  among  the 
Jews  of  the  West,  were  Meir,  Juda,  Jose,  Simon  ben- 
Jochai,  to  whose  respective  biographical  articles  we  re- 
fer  for  furthcr  dotaiLs ;  also  Juda  Ha-Nasi,  the  succes- 
sor  of  Gamaliel  II.  In  Babylcmia  likewise  the  Jews  had 
straincd  every  non'e  to  regain  their  lost  power  and  in- 
fluence, and  they  liad  established  a  patriarchate  very 
much  like  that  of  the  West.  At  first  they  had  looked 
to  the  Itomnn  Jews  for  counsel,  and  had  rirtually  ac- 
knowledj^ed  the  superiority  of  their  Jerusalem  brethren 
in  all  spiritual  matters,  confining  to  temi)oral  matters 
alone  tłic  ofUcc  of  the  liesh  Gelutha  (q.v.),or,  "Ihrince  of 
the  Ca  pt  i  vi  ty,"  as  they  calletl  their  nUers;  but  as  the 
chanccs  for  a  rebuilding  of  the  Tempie  and  a  return 
to  power  in  the  hoh"-  city  grew  less  and  less,  they  de- 
termincd,  encouraped  by  the  growing  celebrity  of  their 
own  se!io<)ls  at  Nisihis  (q.  v.)  and  Nahardca  (q.  v.),  to 
establish  their  tutal  intlc]wndencc  of  the  schools  of  Pal- 
estine, and  to  unitc  in  their  officcr  Reah  Gelutha,  who 


was  choaen  from  those  held  to  be  desoended  from  Oie 
hoose  of  Darid,  both  spiiitual  and  tempotal  authońtj 
(see  Etheridge,  InŁrod,  to  Meh.  LU,  p.  15:^  158).  We  m 
told  of  the  Resh  Gelntha  that,  after  the  cansc^idatian  of 
the  temporal  and  spiritual  offioes,  he  ezeicised  a  power 
almost  despotic,  and,  though  a  yaasal  of  the  king  of  Per- 
sia,  he  assumed  among  his  own  people  the  style  of  a  moo- 
arch,lived  in  great  splendor,  had  a  body-guard,  coonsdk 
lors,  cup-bearers,  etc ;  in  fact,  his  goyemment  was  quite 
an  imperium  in  imperio,  and  poaseesed  a  thoroughly  sao- 
erdotal,  or  at  least  theocratic  chaiacter.  His  sabjecta 
were,  many  of  them  at  least,  extremely  wealthj,  and 
punued  all  sorts  of  industrial  oecupadona.  They  were 
merchants,  bankers,  artiaans,  husbandmen,  and  abep- 
herds,  and,  in  partlcular,  had  the  leputation  of  b^ig 
the  hest  wearcrs  of  the  then  £unona  Babylonian  gaiw 
menta.  What  was  the  oondition  of  the  Jcwa  at  thia 
time  further  east  we  cannot  tell,  but  it  seems  ąuiłe 
certain  that  they  had  obtained  a  footing  in  China,  if 
not  before  the  time  of  Christ,  at  least  during  the  Ist  aok- 
tuiy.  They  were  first  diBGOvered  by  the  Jesiut  nuasian- 
aries  of  the  17th  century.  They  did  not  appear  ever  to 
hayc  heard  of  Christ,  but  they  poeaessed  the  book  of 
Ezra,  and  retained,  on  the  whole,  a  very  dedded  na- 
tionalism  of  creed  and  character.  From  their  language, 
it  was  inferred  that  they  had  originally  come  from  Per- 
sia.  At  one  time  they  would  appear  to  have  been  higb- 
ly  honored  in  China,  and  to  have  hdd  the  highest  civil 
and  military  offices.  In  India  also  they  gained  a  foot- 
hołd,  and  sińce  the  Ruseian  embassies  into  Asia  Jews 
have  been  foimd  in  many  places  (see  Narth  A  meriam 
Reńew,  1831,  p.  244). 

Reverting  to  the  Jews  of  the  Roman  empire,  we  find 
them  perfectly  resig^ed  to  their  fate,and  oomparatiTely 
prosperous,  until  the  time  of  Constantine  the  Great  (q. 
V.).  Indeed,  the  dosing  part  of  the  2d  and  the  first 
part  of  the  dd  century  will  ever  remain  amon|!^  the  moat 
memorable  years  in  the  annals  of  Jewish  histonr.  It 
was  during  this  period  that  Jndah  Hakkodcsh  (q.  r.) 
flourished,  and  it  was  under  his  preeidency  orer  the 
school  at  Tiberias  that  the  Jews  prored  to  the  worid 
that,  though  they  were  now  left  withoot  a  metropolia 
without  a  tempie,  and  even  without  a  country,  they 
could  still  continue  to  be  a  nation.  Driven  from  the 
sacred  city,  they  changed  Tiberias  into  a  kind  of  Jemaa- 
lem,  wherc,  instead  of  building  in  wood  and  stone,  they 
employed  workmen  in  rearing  another  edificc,  which 
even  to  this  day  contumes  to  proclaim  the  greatness  of 
the  chosen  peojilo  of  God  aftier  their  dispersion — the 
Mishna  (q.  v.),  and  the  Gemara,  better  known  as  the 
Babylonian  Talmud  (q.  v.),  the  so-called  Orał  Law  r^> 
duced  to  writing,  arranged,  commented  upon,  and  ex- 
plained,  which  became  in  the  course  of  a  few  centnries 
a  complete  Digest  or  Encydopndia  of  the  law,  the  re- 
ligion,  and  the  nationality  of  the  Jews.    See  RABunsissi. 

2.  We  have  already  said  that  under  the  Roman  em- 
perors  of  the  2d  and  8d  centuries  the  Jeirs  were  in  a 
somewhat  ńourishing  condition.  Quite  differcnt  became 
their  fate  in  the  4th  century,  when  the  emperor  of  Romę 
knelt  before  the  croes,  and  the  empire  became  a  Chris- 
tian State.  Not  only  were  converts  from  Judaism  pro- 
tected  from  the  resentment  of  their  oountrymen,  but 
Christians  were  prohibited  from  becoming  Jews.  The 
equality  of  rights  to  which  the  pagan  emperors  bad 
admitted  them  was  by  degrees  restricted.  In  shcrr, 
from  the  establishment  of  Cliristiamty  in  the  Ronnan 
empire  dates  the  great  period  of  humiliation  of  the 
.Jews;  hereafter  they  change  to  a condemned  and  per<e- 
cuted  sect.  But  if  the  ascendency  of  Christianity  be- 
came baneful  to  the  Jews,  it  does  by  no  means  iollow 
that  Christianity  is  to  bear  the  blame.  Nay,  the  Jews 
of  that  age  and  country  are  altogether  responsible  for 
their  sufferings.  They  appeared  as  the  persecutors  of 
the  new  religion  whenever  the  opportunity  prcaented 
itsdf.  Thus  they  allied  themsdves  to  Ariąns  doring 
the  reyolution  of  358  in  destroying  the  propeny  and 
liyes  of  the  Catholic&    See  AuŚassobia.    Yet.  thoagh 


JEW 


907 


JEW 


decried  **as  the  moit  hateful  of  all  pe^yple,"  thty  oon- 
tinoed  to  fili,  afler  thU  period,  important  civU  and  mil- 
itaiy  situationa,  had  especial  oourU  of  juatice,  and  exei>- 
ciaed  the  influence  which  springa  from  the  pceacnaion 
of  wealŁh  and  knowledge.  Under  the  role  of  Julian  the 
ApoaUte  eyerything  changed  again  in  their  iavor.  The 
heftthen  wonhipper  felt  that  the  Jew,  as  the  opponent 
of  the  Christian,  was  his  natuial  ally ;  and,  freah  from 
oppression  and  tyranny  which  a  Christian  govemment 
had  heaped  upon  them,  the  Je¥rs  hesitated  not  to  un- 
aheath  the  sword  in  union  with  the  Apo6tate'8  legions. 
A  gleam  of  splendor  seemed  to  shine  on  their  futurę 
dcstiny ;  and  when  Julian  (q.  v.)  determined  "  to  belie, 
if  possible,  the  fulfilment  of  the  prophecies,"  and  gave 
them  permisaion  to  rebuild  their  Tempie  at  Jerusalem, 
the  transport  which  they  manifested,  it  ia  said,  ia  one 
of  the  most  sublime  spectades  in  their  history.  (Comp^ 
as  to  the  viewa  of  Christian  ^rritcrs  on  the  mirade  sald 
to  have  been  wrought  here,  preventing  the  Jews  from 
the  rcbuilding  of  the  Tempie,  especially,  Etheridge,  In- 
trod.  to  Hebrew  LiL  p.  134  8q.)  The  attempt,  as  is  well 
known,  was  aignally  defeated.  The  emperor  suddenly 
died,  and  from  that  event  the  policy  adopted  by  the 
Koman  govemment  towards  the  Jews  was  morę  or  less 
depressi^e,  though  never  8evere.  *^  In  short,  down  to 
the  time  that  terminated  the  Western  patriarchato  (A. 
D.  415),  the  oonduct  of  the  emperors  towards  the  Jews 
appean  to  havo  been  marked  by  au  iuflexible  determi- 
nation  to  keep  them  in  order,  tempcred  by  a  wise  and 
worthy  moderation."  Thus,  in  the  codę  of  Theodosius 
II,  their  patriarcha  and  ofiicers  of  the  synagoguc  are 
honorably  mentioned  as  "  Viri  sptctatisaindj  iUattre*,  cla- 
rUtimu*^  They  enjoyed  absoluto  liberty  and  protec- 
tion  in  the  obsenrance  of  their  ceremonies,  their  feasts, 
and  their  sabbaths.  "  Their  synagogues  were  protected 
by  law  against  the  fanatics,  who,  in  some  parts  of  Asia 
and  Italy,  attacked  and  set  them  on  firc.  Throughout 
the  empire  the  property  of  the  Jews,  their  8laves,  and 
their  landa  were  secured  to  them.  Yet  the  Christiana 
were  exhorted  to  hołd  no  intercourse  with  the  unbelier- 
ing  people,  and  to  beware  of  the  doctrines  of  the  syna- 
goguc The  lawa,  however,  could  not  prevcnt  the  zeal 
of  seyeral  bishops  from  stirring  up  the  hatred  of  the 
populace  against  the  Jews.  £ven  Ambroae  imputed  as 
a  criroe  to  some  Asiatic  bishops  and  mouks  the  effort  to 
rebuild,  at  their  own  expense,  a  synagogue  which  they 
had  demolishecL"  Nor  ought  we  to  omit  hcre  the  dls- 
reputable  acta  of  another  great  father  of  the  Christian 
Church,  Cyril  (q.  v.),  who,  in  A.D.  415,  during  the  reign 
of  Theodosius  II,  caused  the  expu]sion  of  all  Jews  from 
the  bishopric  of  Alexandria. 

8.  The  condition  of  thia  people  became  eren  worse 
after  the  diyision  of  the  Roman  world  (A.D.  895)  into 
the  Eaatem  and  Western  empires,  especially  in  the 
East,  under  Justin  I  (A.D.  518-27),  where  they  were 
dcprived  of  their  citizenship,  which  they  had  hitherto 
enjoyed,  and  were  classed  with  heretics.  Justinian  (A. 
D.  0*27-65)  went  stiU  further.  He  not  only  confirmed 
former  enactments,  but  madę  others  still  morę  onerous, 
intended,  no  doubt,  to  drive  the  Jews  into  the  Chuich. 
•*The  emperor,  laying  it  down  as  a  principle  that  ciril 
righu  could  only  belong  to  those  who  professed  the  or- 
thodox  faith,  entirely  excluded  the  Jews  in  his  codę 
(codex)  and  his  edicts  (novell«).  Anything  which 
could  in  the  least  interfere  with  the  festiirals  of  the 
Christian  Church  waa  strictly  forbidden  them;  all  dis- 
cuasion  with  Christiana  was  looked  upon  as  a  crimc,  and 
all  proselytiam  punished  with  death.  £ven  their  right 
of  holding  property  waa  restricted  in  many  ways,  espe- 
ciałly  in  the  matter  of  willa.  The  emperor  declared 
hiroself  with  eapedal  aererity  against  the  traditions  and 
precepU  of  the  Talmud."  Such  oppression  naturally 
enough  provoked  the  Jews  to  repeated  rebellion,  only 
to  be  subjected,  after  complete  failure  to  regain  their 
frcedom,  to  increased  bittemess  of  their  cup  of  degrada- 
tion  [see  Justikian],  mitil,  deprived  of  the  last  de- 
gree  of  political  importancei  many  of  their  number 


ąułtted  the  Byzintine  empire  to  aeek  a  refuge  in  FenSa 
and  Babylon,  where  the  laraelite  was  treated  with  mon 
leniency.    Compare  also  Samaritans. 

Aa  we  haTe  soid,  their  condition  waa  morę  tolerable 
in  the  Western  empire,  where,  upon  the  imiption  of  the 
barbaroua  tribea,  they  were  morę  fororably  rcgaided 
than  their  Christian  neighbors.  The  Jewa  also  formed 
a  part  of  all  the  kingdoms  which  rosę  up  out  of  the  ruina 
of  ancient  Romę;  but,  unfortnnately,  our  Information 
leapecting  them,  for  a  considerable  period  at  least,  ia 
very  imperfect.  **  In  the  absenoe  of  a  literaturę  of  their 
own,  we  know  of  them  only  through  ecdesiastical  writ- 
ers,  who  take  notice  of  them  chiefly  as  the  objects  of 
the  oonTerting  seal  of  the  Catholic  Church.  Tho  suc- 
ceas  of  the  Christian  priesthood  among  their  barbarA 
inradeiB  inapired  them  with  hopes  of  gaining  convert8 
among  the  Jewa.  But  the  circumstances  of  the  twro 
dasaes  were  altogether  different.  Among  the  heathen, 
when  a  prince  or  a  auooessful  warrior  waa  converted  to 
the  faith,  he  carried  along  with  him  all  his  aubjecta  or 
hia  oompanions  in  war.  But  the  Jews  moTed  in  massea 
only  in  matters  oonnected  with  their  own  religion ;  in 
every  other  respect  they  were  wholly  independent  of 
each  other.  Their  conversion,  therefbre,  could  only  be 
the  effect  of  conviction  on  the  part  of  each  indiridual. 
The  character  of  the  Christian  dergy  did  not  fit  them 
for  80  arduous  an  undertaking.  Their  ignorance  and 
fraquent  immorality  plaoed  them  at  a  disadvautage  in 
regard  to  the  Jews,  who  were  in  poaaeasion  of  the  0.-T. 
Scripturea,  and  had  argumenta  at  oommand  which  their 
opponenta  oould  not  anawer.  Beaides,  there  were  no 
inducements  of  a  worldly  naturę  at  thia  period  to  influ- 
ence the  Jewa  in  exchanging  their  religion.  They  had 
no  wish  for  the  retreat  of  the  doiater,  nor  did  they  stand 
in  need  of  protection  on  aocount  of  deeds  of  yiolence  and 
rapine.  Their  habita  were  of  a  deacription  altogether 
different  from  thoae  of  the  monk  or  brigand.  The  at» 
tempta  of  the  dergy,  howerer,  were  unremitted,  and 
threats  and  blandishments  were  altematdy  resorted  to, 
so  that  the  struggle  was  constant  between  Catholicism 
and  Judaiam  .  .  .  till  the  appearance  of  a  new  religion 
wrought  a  diyendon  in  iavor  of  the  latter." 

4.  According  to  GriŁtz  {Ge»ch.cLJuden,y,8l)ythe  his- 
tory of  the  Jews  in  Arabia  a  century  preceding  Moham- 
med^s  appearance  and  during  his  activity  presenta  a 
beautiful  page  in  Jewish  aiinals.  Many  were  the  Ara- 
bian  chiefa  and  their  tribes  who  had  assimilated  with 
the  Jews  or  become  actnal  conrerta  to  the  Mosaic  relig- 
ion. Indeed, for  aereral  centuries preyious  toMoham- 
med's  appearance,  a  Jewish  kingdom  had  exbted  in  the 
south-west  of  Arabia,  and  aome  eren  claim  that  it  ex- 
tended  back  previous  to  the  birth  of  Christ.  Others  a»- 
aert  that  a  Jew  did  not  mount  the  throne  of  Yemen  (q. 
V.)  until  abaut  A.D.  820 ;  while  Griitz  (y,  91  są.,  442  są., 
especially  p.  448, 447)  holda  that  the  conyersion  of  the 
Himyaritic  kingdom  to  Judaism  did  not  take  place  until 
the  5th  oentory.  So  much,  howerer,  is  now  settled,  that 
in  the  early  part  of  the  6th  century  (about  A.D.  520- 
530)  the  last  king  who  reigned  oyer  the  country  Zunaan 
or  Zu-n-Nuwas  was  a  Jew  (comp.  Perron,  Sur  thistoin 
deg  Araba  avant  tldamUme,  in  the  Journal  Asiatigue, 
1888,  Oct.,  Nov.,  p.  868  są.,  443  są.),  and  that  only  with 
his  death  Judaism  oeased  to  be  the  rdigion  of  the 
Himyarite8(q.y.).  See  artide  Arabia  (/2c/ągr«)»»).  The 
influence,  then,  which  the  Jews  must  haye  exerŁed  in 
the  Arabian  peninsula  at  the  time  of  Mohammed'8  ap- 
pearance failed  not  to  be  perceived  by  the  prophet,  and 
he  hastened  to  secure  the  aid  of  these  countrymen  of 
his,  who  were  eąually,  with  his  other  Arabian  brethren, 
the  descendanta  of  Abraham,  and  had  with  them  at 
least  the  common  cause  of  ext]rpating  idolatry  and 
Christianity.  There  was,  perhapa,  also  another  rea 
son  why  the  prophet  of  Arabia  should  haye  sought  an 
association  yrith  the  Jews.  His  own  mothcr  was  a 
Jewess  by  descent,  and  had  only  in  after  life  been  eon- 
yerted  to  Christianity  by  the  Syrian  monk  Sergiua 
To  her  matcmal  instructiona  he  ia  suppoaed  to  have 


JEW 


908 


JEW 


been  indebted  for  his  fint  religioiis  impreflaions;  and 
though  he  did  not  remain  long  under  her  care,  yefc  the 
slight  knowledge  of  ptire  leligion  which  he  thus  ob> 
tained  mustcertainly  have  incłmed  him  to  draw  the  Jew- 
iflh  influence  to  his  side  in  his  attacks  against  the  idol- 
atrous  hoides  of  Arabia  (oomp.  Ockley,  Saracens,  i,  98 ; 
Von  Hammer,  Asacusini,  chap.  i).  The  Jews,  however, 
Boon  became  comdnced  that  the  cause  of  Mohammed 
was  not  their  own ;  that  his  object  waa  a  union  of  all 
forces  under  his  sccptre,  the  supremacy  <^  lalam,  and 
the  subjugation,  if  not  ultimately  utter  extinction  of 
all  rivai  religions;  and  the  compact  so  latdy  formed 
was  as  ąuickly  broken  by  an  open  revołt.  Mohammed, 
howerer,  proved  the  8tronger,and  in  the  wars  which  he 
traged  against  the  different  Jewish  tribes  he  came  forth 
conąueror.  From  624  to  628  aeveral  of  the  latter  were 
subjugated  or  wholly  destroyed,  or  obliged  to  qait  the 
Arabian  terńtory.  In  632  all  Jews  were  finally  driven 
from  Arabia,  and  they  settled  in  Syria.  A  greater  dis- 
play of  heroism  than  the  Jews  exhibited  during  these 
struggles  with  the  Islamitish  impostor  has  never  been 
witnessed,  and  we  do  not  wonder  that  a  Jewish  writer 
should  point  to  the  epoch  as  one  of  which  every  Jew 
has  reason  to  be  proud.  The  prophet  himself  yery  near- 
ly  paid  by  his  life  for  the  yictories  which  he  had  gained 
oyer  Mosaism  *,  but  it  seems  that,  when  Mohammedan- 
iam  had  acquired  sufficient  strength  to  ^read  beyond 
Arabia,  the  animosity  towaitls  the  Jews  was  forgotten, 
and  they  were  kindiy  treated.  So  much  is  oertaiu,  that 
the  extension  of  the  religion  of  the  Crescent  through 
Asiatic  Turkey,  Persia,  Egypt,  Africa,  and  the  south  of 
Spain,  proved,  on  the  whole,  adyantageous  to  the  Jews. 
£xcepting  accidental  persecutions,  such  as  those  in  Mau- 
litania  A.D.  790,  and  in  Egypt  A-D.  1010,  they  enjo3red, 
ander  the  caliphs  and  Arabian  princes,  comparative 
peace.  The  Jews  actually  entered  upon  a  prosperous 
career  in  ercry  country  to  which  the  Moslem  crms  ex- 
tendcd.  In  North  Africa,  in  Egypt,  in  Persia,  their 
oondition  greatly  improved,  and  in  Moorish  Spain,where 
their  religion  enjoyed  fuU  toleration,  their  numbers 
greatly  increased,  and  they  became  famous  for  their 
leaming  as  well  as  for  trade.  "In  the  new  impulse 
•given  to  trade  by  the  progress  of  the  Moslem  arms,  the 
Jews,  ever  awake  to  their  own  interests,  took  their  ad- 
yantage.  In  the  wide  extent  of  conąuest,  new  wanta 
were  createtl  by  the  adyance  of  Wctorious  armies :  king^ 
doms  which  had  long  ceased  to  hołd  intercourse  with 
each  other  wero  brought  into  union,  and  new  channels 
of  commercial  intercourse  were  opened  up;  and,leaying 
•the  pursuits  of  agriculture,  which  were  placed  at  a  dis- 
adyantage  by  the  policy  of  the  caliphs,  the  Jews  be- 
came the  merchants  by  whom  the  business  betwecn  the 
Kasteni  and  the  Western  world  was  conducted.  In  the 
court  of  the  caliphs  they  were  fayorably  receiyed,  and 
for  centuries  the  whole  management  of  the  coinage  was 
intrusted  to  them,  from  the  superior  accuracy  and  ele- 
gance  with  which  they  could  execute  it,  and  from  their 
opportunities,  by  the  extent  and  yariety  of  their  com- 
mercial relations,  to  give  it  the  widest  circulation,  and 
at  the  same  time  to  draw  in  all  the  preyious  mint^ 
ages."  But,  as  we  have  already  said,  it  was  not  only  in 
commercial  ^eatness  that  they  tlourished.  Not  a  few 
of  them  distinguished  themselyes  in  the  walks  of  sci- 
ence and  literaturę.  They  were  counsellors,  secretaries, 
astroloicers,  or  physicians  to  the  Moorish  rulers;  and 
this  period  may  well  be  considered  the  golden  age  of 
Jcwiah  literaturę.  Poets,  orators,  philosophers  of  high- 
est  emincnce  arose,  not  isolated,  but  in  considerable 
numbers ;  and  it  is  a  well-established  fact,  that  to  them 
is  chiefly  due — through  the  Arab  medium — the  preser 
ratinn  and  subsequent  spreading  in  Europę  of  ancient 
classical  1  i  terat  ure,  morę  especially  of  philosophy.  (Com- 
parc,  on  the  offurts  of  Nestorian  Christians  in  this  direc- 
tion,  Etheridge,  tSt/ritm  Churckes, p.  239  są.)  Their  chief 
attention,  ho\\-ever,  continued  to  be  even  then  directed 
to  the  Talmud  and  its  literaturę,  espociaUy  in  Babylo- 
nia,  where  tbcy  stiU  had  a  Heth-fftlutha  as  their  imme- 


diate  rtder.  Here  their  gieat  achoob,  reorganized  tm- 
der  the  Seboraun  (thinkera),  were  pat  in  a  atill  morę 
flouiiahing  oondition  by  the  Geonim  (emlnent),  of  wbon 
the  most  prominent  are  Saadias  (q.  y.)  (abont  892-942), 
the  translator  of  the  Pentateach  into  Arabie,  whom,  for 
his  great  linguistic  attainments,  Aben-Ezn  deńgnate 
as  the  nipio  ia?  D-^-nąnąn  »X^;  Sherira  Gaon  (q. 
y.)  (died  997),  grandson  of  Judah,  to  whom  we  owe  oor 
most  accurate  knowledge  of  the  Jewish  schooLs  in  Bab- 
ylonia.  In  this  period  (from  the  6th  to  the  8th  centu- 
ries) the  Masora  was  deyeloped,  followed  by  numerooa 
commentaries  on  it  and  on  the  Targnm  ofJernsaUmy 
besides  a  collection  of  the  earlier  Hagpadtu  (e.  g.  Bat- 
kitk-rabba)j  now  mostly  known  as  Midrashim,  See 
MiDRASH.  From  Palestine,  also,  came  about  thia  time 
signs  of  freshness  and  yigor  in  Jewish  literaturę :  the 
admirable  yowel  system ;  talmudical  compends  and  writ- 
ings  on  theological  coemogony.  See  Gabaul.  The 
Karaites  (q.  v.)  likewise,  according  to  soroe  authorities, 
originated  about  the  8th  centory  (thia  is,  however,  dis- 
puted  now  by  Rule,  Karaite  Jetc4,  Lond.  1870,  sm.  8yo, 
who  bdieyes  them  to  be  of  much  earlier  d&t«).  and  un- 
der their  influence  a  whole  kingdom,  naroed  Kbozar,  ii 
belieyed  to  have  been  conyerted  to  Judaism,  on  the 
shores  of  the  Caspian  Sea.  See  Jehudah  (Ha-Leai) 
bkn-Sabiuel.  Here  deser^^e  mention,  also,  the  rooct 
celebrated  of  the  Jews  in  Africa  under  the  Saracen 
princes,  the  grammarians  Ibn-Koraish  (q.  y.),  Donash 
(q.  V.),  Chayug  (q.  y.) ;  the  lexicographer  Hefetz,  and 
Isaac  ben-Soleyman. 

Yeiy  different  was  the  fate  of  the  Jews  under  Chris- 
tian rulers.  Few  were  the  roonarchs  of  ChnstetKlom 
who  rosę  aboye  the  barbariom  of  the  Middle  Age«.  By 
considerable  pecuniary  sacrilices  only  oould  the  sons  of 
Israel  cnjo}'  tolerance.  In  Italy  their  lot  had  always 
been  most  seyere,  Now  and  tben  a  Koman  pontiff 
would  afford  them  his  protection,  but,  aa  a  rule,  they 
have  receiyed  only  intolerance  in  that  country.  Down 
even  to  the  time  of  the  deposition  of  Pius  IX  from  the 
temporal  powcr,1t  has  been  the  barbarous  custom.  on  the 
last  Saturday  before  the  Canuyal,  to  compel  the  Jews  to 
proceed  "  en  masse"  to  the  capitol,  and  ask  permission  of 
the  i)ontiff  to  reside  in  the  sacred  city  another  year.  At 
the  foot  of  the  hill  the  petition  was  refused  them,  but, 
afber  much  entreaty,  they  were  granted  the  faror  vhai 
they  had  rcached  the  summit,  and,  as  their  reeideoce, 
the  Ghetto  was  assigned  them. 

Their  circumstanoes  were  most  fayorable  amon^  ihc 
Franks.  Charlemagne  is  said  to  haye  had  im|iiicit 
confidence  not  only  in  the  ability,  but  also  in  the  integ- 
rity  of  the  Jewish  merchants  in  his  realm,  and  he  eren 
sent  the  Jew  Isaac  as  his  ambaasador  to  the  couit  of 
Haromi  Alraschid.  To  Isaac^s  iaithfolness  and  ability 
may  perhaps  be  attributed  the  great  priyileges  which 
the  Jews  enjoyed  mider  Louis  le  Debonnaire,  who  is 
said  to  haye  madę  them  **  all-powerfuL**  But  if  these 
two  Christian  rulers  were  noble  and  generous  towaids 
the  Jews,  the  clergy  of  their  day  by  no  mcans  shared 
the  same  feeling  towards  the  deapised  race.  Many  a 
bishop  of  the  Church  of  Komę,  and  many  a  memb»  of 
the  lower  orders,  were  heard  before  the  throne  and  be- 
fore the  people  complaining  of  the  kuid  trcatment  which 
the  Jews  receiyed.  One  i»elate  hesitAted  not  to  oon- 
demn  the  Jews  becauae  the  '^  country  people  looked 
upon  them  as  the  only  people  of  God  !**  Hence  we  cao- 
not  wonder  that  after  the  deceaae  of  thcae  two  noble 
monarchs,  when  the  weaker  Carloyingians  began  to  nile, 
and  the  Church  to  adyanoe  with  imperious  stridea,  a 
melancholy  change  ensued — kings,  bishopa,  feudal  bar- 
ons,  and  eyen  the  municipalitiea,  all  joined  in  a  cuni- 
yal  of  persecution,  and  the  hlstory  of  the  Jews  became 
nothing  else  than  a  succeasiye  seriea  of  ma8eacr&  (See 
below,  5 ;  Bi-it.  and  For,  Rev.  1842,  p.  459  aq.) 

In  England  the  Jews  madę  their  fiist  appcaianoe 
during  the  period  of  the  Saxona.  They  are  mentioned 
in  the  ecclesiastical  constitntions  of  £gbert,  aidibith- 


JEW 


909 


JEW 


op  of  York,  A.D.  740;  tbey  are  alao  named  in  a  charter 
to  tfae  monks  of  Cioylandf  A.D.  888.  They  enjoyed 
many  pńyileges  under  William  the  Conąueror  and  hit 
son,  William  Kufus,  who  favored  Łhem  in  many  ways. 
The  landa  of  the  vacant  bishoprica  were  farmed  out  to 
Uiem,  which  pioveB  that  the  Jews  most  have  been  ag- 
riculturiflts  at  thia  time ;  while  in  the  achools  they  beld 
many  honorable  poaitionfl.  Thua,  at  Oxford,  even  at 
thia  time  a  great  seat  of  leaming,  they  poesessed  them- 
selres  three  halla— Lombard  Hall,  Moses  Hall,  and  Ja- 
oob  Hall,  to  which  Christiana  as  weU  as  Jews  went  for 
instruction  in  the  Hebrew  tongne.  They  enjoyed  these 
and  other  pririleges  nntil  the  period  of  the  Crusades 
aaddenly  changed  everybody  against  them.  (See  below.) 

In  Grermany  their  poeition  was  perhape  morę  seryile 
than  in  any  other  European  country.  They  were  re- 
garded  as  the  soTereign'a  property  (Jeammerknechte, 
chamber-senrants),  and  were  bought  and  sold.  They 
had  oome  to  that  country  as  early  as  the  days  of  Con- 
atantine,  but  they  did  not  beoome  a  numerous  class  until 
the  days  of  the  CrusadeiB,  and  we  therefore  postpone 
further  treatment  to  the  next  section. 

In  Spain  their  circumstances  at  fiist  were  moet  for- 
Łunate.  Especially  during  the  whole  brilliant  period 
of  Moorish  rule  in  the  Peninsula  they  shared  the  same 
favDrable  condition  as  in  all  other  oountries  to  which 
the  Moslem  arms  had  extended ;  **  they  enjoyed,  indeed, 
what  must  have  seemed  to  them,  in  comparison  with 
their  ordinary  lot,  a  sort  of  Elysian  life.  They  were  al- 
most  on  terms  of  equality  with  their  Mohammedan  mas- 
ters,  riralled  them  in  dyilization  and  letters,  and  prób- 
ably  surpassed  them  in  wealth.  The  Spanish  Jews  were 
conseąuently  of  a  much  higher  tjrpe  tban  their  brethren 
in  other  parta  of  Europę.  They  were  not  reduced  to 
the  one  degrading  occupadon  of  usury,  though  they  fol- 
lowed  that  too ;  on  the  contrary,  they  were  husband- 
men,  landed  proprietors,  physicians,  finandal  adminis- 
trators,  etc;  they  enjoyed  apecial  privilege.s  and  had 
Gourts  of  justice  for  theniselves.  Nor  was  this  state  of 
things  confined  to  those  portions  of  Spain  under  the 
80vereignty  of  the  Moors;  the  Christian  monarcha  of 
-  the  north  and  middle  gradually  canac  to  appreciate  the 
Talue  of  their  senrices,  and  we  tind  them  for  a  time  pro- 
tected  and  encouraged  by  the  rulcr^  of  Aragon  and  Cas- 
ttle.  But  the  extraTagance  and  consequent  poverty  of 
the  nobles,  as  well  as  the  increasing  power  of  the  priest^ 
hood,  ultimately  brought  about  a  disastroos  change. 
The  esutes  of  the  nobles,  and,  it  is  also  belieyed,  those 
attached  to  the  cathedrals  and  chnrches,  were  in  many 
caaes  mortgaged  to  the  Jews;  hence  it  was  not  difficult 
for  'conscience'  to  get  np  a  persecntion,  when  goaded 
to  its  *  duty'  by  the  pressure  of  want  and  shame.  Grad- 
ually the  Jews  were  deprived  of  the  privilege  of  living 
where  they  pleaaed ;  their  rights  were  diminished,  and 
their  taxes  augmented*'  (Chambers).  Morę  in  the  next 
paragraph. 

5.  In  tradng  the  history  of  the  Jewish  people  in  the 
Hiddle  Agea,  the  Crusades  form  a  distinct  epoch  amid 
these  centuries  of  darkness  and  turmoiL  If  the  Jew  had 
hitherto  suifered  at  the  hand  of  the  Christian,  and  had 
been  gradually  reduced  in  social  priyilege,  he  was  now 
grossly  abused  in  the  name  of  the  rehgion  of  him  who 
taught,  **  Love  thy  neighbor  as  thyself."  Undertaken 
to  bring  about  a  union  of  the  Christians  of  the  world— 
**  that  ideał  of  a  Christian  commonwealth  which  forms 
the  centrę  of  the  polemical  and  religious  life  of  the  Mid- 
dle Ages**— the  crusading  moremcnt  was  inaiigurated 
by  a  Wholesale  massacre  and  persecntion  fiist  of  the  Jew, 
and  afterwards  of  the  Mussnlman.  The  latter,  perhaps, 
had  gireii  just  proTocation  by  his  endeavors  to  sup- 
plant  the  Cross  by  the  Crescent,  but  what  had  the  mof- 
łensive  and  non-proselyting  Jew  done  to  desenre  such 
acts  of  yiolenoe  and  rapine?  Shut  out  from  all  oppor- 
tunities  for  the  derelopment  of  their  better  quahties, 
the  Jews  were  gradually  reduced  to  a  dechne  both  in 
character  and  condition.  From  a  leanied,  influential, 
and  powerfnl  class  of  the  oommnmty,  we  fiud  them,  after 


the  inaognration  of  the  Crusades,  sinking  into  misera- 
ble  outcasts;  the  common  prey  of  clergy,  and  nobles, 
and  burghers,  and  existing  in  a  state  worse  than  slay 
ery  itself.  The  Christians  deprired  the  Jews  even  of 
the  right  of  holding  real  estate,  and  confined  them  to 
the  narrower  channels  of  trafiic.  ^  Their  ambition  being 
thus  fixed  npon  one  subject,  they  soon  mastered  all  the 
degrading  arU  of  aocumulating  gain;  and  prohibited 
finom  inyesting  their  gains  in  the  purchase  of  land,  they 
found  a  morę  profltable  employment  of  it  in  lending  it 
at  usuriotts  interest  to  the  thoughtless  and  extravagant. 
The  effect  of  this  was  inevitable.  At  a  time  when  com- 
mereial  pursuits  were  held  in  oontempt,  the  assistance 
of  the  Jews  became  indispcnsable  to  the  nobles,  whose 
hatred  rosę  in  proportion  to  their  obligations;  and, 
where  there  waś  the  power,  the  temptation  to  cancel  the 
debt  by  yiolence  became  irresistible.'*  A  raid  against 
the  Jews  was  a  favorite  pastime  of  a  banknipt  noble, 
and  we  need  not  wonder  that  the  Jew  had  recourse  to 
the  only  revenge  that  was  left  him  to  atone  for  this 
groas  injustice— the  exaction  of  a  morę  cxorbitant  gain 
when  the  opportunity  was  afforded  him.  Thus,  in  £ng- 
land,  at  the  enthronement  of  Richard  I  (1189),  the  Cm- 
aaders,  on  their  departure  for  the  Holy  Land,  hesitated 
not  to  inaugnrate  their  warfare  by  a  pillage  of  the  Jewa. 
In  the  desperate  defence  which  the  latter  waged  against 
the  knights  of  England  in  the  castle  at  York,  finding 
resistanoe  nseless,  600  of  them,  having  first  destroyed 
eyerything  of  yalue  that  belonged  to  them,  murdered 
their  wiyes  and  children,  and  then  deprived  themselyes 
of  life,  rather  than  fali  a  prey  to  Christian  warriora. 
(See  Hume,  HtMiory  of  England^  A  like  treatment  the 
Jews  reoeiyed  under  the  two  following  monarcha ;  their 
liyes  and  wealth  were  protected  only  for  a  considera- 
iian.  With  the  tyrannical  treatment  they  rccciyed  at 
the  hand  of  king  John  (q.  y.)  eyery  reader  of  history 
IS  familiar.  Under  Henry  111  they  were  treated  still 
worse,  if  poasible.  The  reign  of  Edward  I  (1272- 1307) 
flnally  brought  snddenly  to  a  terminus  the  miserable 
condition  of  this  people  by  a  wholesale  expulsion  from 
the  kingdom  (A.D.  1290),  after  a  yain  attempt  on  the 
part  of  the  priesthood  to  conyert  them  to  Christianity, 
preceded,  of  couise,  by  a  wholesale  confiscation  of  their 
property.  These  exilesamounted  to  about  16,000.  They 
emigrated  mostly  to  Gennany  and  France.  In  the  former 
country  the  same  sort  of  treatment  befell  them.  In  the 
Empire  they  had  to  pay  all  manner  of  iniquitous  taxe8 
— body-tax,  capitation  tax,  trade  taxe8,  coronation  tax, 
and  to  present  a  multitude  of  gifts,  to  mollify  the  aya- 
rice  or  suppły  the  necessities  of  emperor,  princes,  and 
barons.  It  did  not  soffice,  howeyer,  to  saye  them  from  the 
loss  of  their  property.  The  populaoe  and  the  lower  cler- 
gy alao  must  be  satisfied ;  they,  too,  had  passions  to  grat- 
ify.  A  wholesale  slaughter  of  the  ^  enemies  of  Chria- 
tianity'*wasinangunted.  Troyes,  Metz,  Cologne,Mentz, 
Worms,  Spires,  Straaburg,  and  other  citie^  were  dduged 
with  the  blood  of  the  ''unbeUeyers."  The  word  Uep 
(said  to  be  the  initials  of  Hierosofyma  ett  perditOt  Jeru- 
salem  is  taken)  throughout  all  the  dties  of  the  empire 
became  the  signal  for  massacre,  and  if  on  insensate 
monk  sounded  it  ak>ng  the  streets,  it  threw  the  rabble 
into  paroxysms  of  murderous  ragę.  The  choice  of  death 
or  conyersion  was  giyen  to  the  Jews,  but  few  were 
found  wilhng  to  purchase  their  hfe  by  that  form  of  per- 
jvary.  Rather  than  subject  their  offspring  to  conyer- 
sion and  such  Christian  training,  fathers  presented  their 
breast  to  the  sword  after  putting  their  children  to  death, 
and  wiyes  and  yirgins  sought  refuge  from  the  brutality 
of  the  soldiers  by  throwing  themselyes  into  the  riyer 
with  Stones  fastened  to  their  bodiea.  (Comp.  Gibbon, 
DecUm  and  FaU  o/ths  Roman  Empire  [Harpcrs*  edit], 
V,  &54.)  Not  less  than  17,000  were  supposed  to  haye 
penshed  in  the  German  empire  dunng  these  persecu- 
tions ;  yct  those  who  sunriyod  dung  to  the  land  that  had 
giyen  them  birth,  and  suffered  from  pillage  and  mal« 
treatment  until  they  were  expeUed  by  forcc— from  Yi- 
enna  (A-D.  1196),  Meckknburg  (1225),  Breslau  (1226), 


JEW 


010 


JEW 


Brandenburg  (1348),  Frankfort  (1241),  Monich  (1285), 
Norenburg  (1390),  Prague  (1391)«  and  Ratiabon  (1476). 
The  **  Black  Death,'*  in  partictdar,  oocasioned  a  great 
aod  wideapread  persccution  (1348-1360).  They  were 
murdered  and  bumed  by  thousanda,  and  many  eren 
aonght  death  amidst  the  oonflagrationB  of  their  syna- 
gogues.  From  Switzerland  to  Silesia  the  land  was 
dienched  with  Innocent  blood,  and  even  the  interfer- 
ence  of  the  emperor  and  the  pope  long  proved  insoffi- 
dent  to  pat  an  end  to  the  atrocitiea  that  were  perpetra- 
ted.  When  the  race  had  almoat  disappeared  from  Ger- 
many, feelings  of  humanity  as  well  as  the  interests  of 
his  kingdom  cauaed  Charles  lY  to  ooncede  them  some 
pńyileges;  and  in  the  Goklen  Buli  (1356)  the  fnture 
.condition  of  the  Jews  was  so  clearly  pointed  out,  that  it 
preyented,  in  a  great  measure,  further  bloodshed,  thoogh 
it  still  continued  to  leave  them  subject  to  oppression 
and  injustice.  Their  residenoe  was  forbidden  in  some 
places,  and  in  many  cities  to  which  they  had  aoceas 
they  were  oonfined  to  certain  ąuarters  or  streeta,  known 
08  ghettoe  or  Jews'  streeta  (Judengtrcuse), 

No  better,  nay  worse,  if  possible,  was  their  oondition 
in  France  from  the  1 1  th  to  the  16th  centuries.  AU  man- 
ner  of  wild  stories  were  circolated  against  them :  it  was 
aaid  that  they  were  wont  to  steal  the  host,  and  to  con- 
temptaously  stick  it  throogh  and  through ;  to  inveigle 
Christian  children  into  their  houses  and  murder  them ; 
to  poison  wells,  etc  They  were  alao  hated  here  as  elae- 
where  on  plea  of  exce88ive  usury.  OocasionaUy  their 
debtors,  high  and  Iow,  hesitated  not  to  haye  reconrse  to 
what  they  called  Christian  religion  aa  a  veiy  easy  means 
of  getting  rid  of  their  obligations.  Thus  Philippe  Au- 
gustus  (1179-1228),  under  whose  rule  the  Jews  seem  to 
haye  hdd  mortgages  of  enormous  yalne  on  the  estates 
of  Church  and  state  dignitariea,  simply  conflscated  the 
debtfl  due  to  them,forced  them  to  snrrender  the  pledges 
in  their  possession,  seizod  their  goods,  and  finally  eyen 
banishcd  them  from  France ;  but  the  decree  appears  to 
,  haye  taken  effect  chiefly  in  the  north ;  yet  in  less  than 
Iwenty  years  the  same  proud  but  Wasteful  monarch  was 
glad  to  let  them  come  back  and  take  up  their  abode  in 
Paiia.  Louis  IX  (1226-1270),  wfao  was  a  yery  pioos 
prince,  among  other  teliffious  acts,  cancelled  a  tiiird  of 
the  claims  which  the  Jews  had  against  his  snbjects, 
*^/or  the  benefit  o/his  souL"  An  edict  was  also  issued 
for  the  scizure  and  destruction  of  their  sacred  books, 
and  we  are  told  that  at  Paris  twenty-four  carta  filled 
with  copies  of  the  Talmud,  etc,  were  oonsigned  to  the 
flames.  See  Talmud.  The  Jews  were  also  forbidden 
to  hołd  social  mtercourse  with  their  Christian  neigh- 
bors,  and  the  mnrderer  of  a  Jew,  if  he  were  a  Chris- 
tian, went  unpnnished.  Need  we  wonder,  then,  that 
when,  in  the  foUowing  century,  a  religious  epidemie, 
known  as  the  Rising  of  the  Shepherds,  scized  the  com- 
mon  people  m  Languedoc  and  the  central  regiona  of 
France  (A.D.  1821),  they  indulged  in  horrible  massacres 
of  the  dctested  race ;  so  horrible,  indeed,  that  in  one 
place,  Yerdun,  on  the  Garonne,  the  Jews,  in  the  mad- 
ness  of  their  agony,  threw  down  their  children  to  the 
Christian  mob  from  the  tower  in  which  they  were  gath- 
ered,  hoping,  but  in  yain,  to  appease  the  dasmoniacal  fury 
of  their  assailants.  ^  One  shudders  to  lead  of  what  fol- 
lowed;  m  whole  proyinces  eyery  Jew  was  bumed.  At 
Chinon  a  deep  dkch  was  dug,  an  enormous  pile  rcdsed^ 
<md  1 60  ofboth  sex€S  bumed  together  !  Yet  ChrisUanity 
neyer  produced  more  resolute  martyra ;  as  they  sprang 
into  the  place  of  torment,  they  sang  hymns  as  though 
they  were  going  to  a  wedding;"  and,  though  **sayage 
and  horrible  as  such  self-deyotion  is,  it  is  impossible  not 
to  admire  the  strength  of  heart  which  it  discoyers;  and, 
withoiit  inspiration,  one  might  foretell  that,  so  long  as 
a  solitary  heart  of  this  dcscription  was  Icft  to  beat  it 
would  treasure  its  national  distinction  as  its  sole  remain- 
ing  pride."  At  last,  in  1694,  they  were  indefinitely  ban- 
ished  from  France,  and  the  sentence  ngidly  exccuted 
(see  Schmidt,  Gesch,  Frankreirhsy  i,  604  są.). 

Such  is  the  frightfui  picture  of  horrors  and  gloom 


which  the  Jews  of  Germany,  France,  England,  and  Ita- 
ly  offer  in  their  medueyal  history.  '^  Circtimecribed  in 
their  rights  by  decrees  and  laws  of  the  ecdeaiastical  as 
well  as  dyil  power,  exduded  from  aU  honorablc  occup** 
tions,  driyen  from  plaoe  to  place,  from  proyinoe  to  pro^^ 
ince,  oompelled  to  subsist  almoat  exdusiyely  by  mer- 
cantile  occupationa  and  usary,  oyertaxed  and  d<^o;raded 
in  the  cities,  kept  in  narrow  ąuarters,  and  marked  in 
their  drees  with  signs  of  contempt,  plundered  by  lawlesa 
barona  and  penniless  prinoes,  an  easy  prey  to  all  parties 
during  the  ciyil  fenda,  again  and  again  robbed  of  their 
pecuniary  daims,  owned  and  sold  bb  serti  (chamber- 
senrants)  by  the  emperars,  butchered  by  mobs  and  re- 
yolted  peasants,  chased  by  the  monks,  and  finally  bum- 
ed in  thousands  by  the  Crusaders,  who  also  bumed  their 
brethren  at  Jerusalem  in  their  synagogues,  or  tormented 
by  ridicule,  abusiye  aermons,  monstrous  accusationa  and 
tnals,  threata  and  ezperimenta  of  conyersion." 

In  Spain  and  Portugal,  indeed,  the  days  of  prosperity 
to  the  Jews  lingeied  longest.  As  we  haye  already  no- 
tioed,  they  enjoyed  in  these  countiies,  while  they  re- 
mained  under  Moorish  rule,  ahnost  eqnality  with  the 
Moslems.  As  in  France  under  the  Carloringians,  so  in 
Spain  under  Saraoen  rale,  their  literatura  bctokens  an 
uncommon  progress  in  ciyilization — a  progreas  which 
le(l  far  in  the  distanoe  all  other  nations,  eyen  thoee  who 
professed  to  unfurl  the  banner  of  the  Cross.  But  this 
waa  especially  tnie  of  the  Spanish  Jews.  Acquainted 
with  the  Arabie,  they  oould  easily  diye  into  the  treaa- 
nres  of  that  language ;  and  the  fadlity  with  which  the 
Jews  mastered  all  langnages  madę  them  ready  inter- 
pretera between  Mnssulman  and  Christian.  It  waa 
through  their  original  thinkers,  such  aa  Ayiccbron  (Ibn^ 
Gebirol,  q.  y.)  and  Moees  Maimonides  (q.  y.),  that  the 
West  became  leayened  with  Greek  and  Oriental  thought 
(Lewes,  PkiŁos,  ii,  68),  and  the  same  persecuted  and  de- 
spised  race  must  be  regarded  as  the  chief  instramenta 
whereby  the  Arabian  philosophy  was  madę  efTectiye  on 
Europoan  cultnre.  ^'Dans  le  monde  Musulman  comme 
dans  le  monde  chrćtien,"  said  the  late  professor  Munk» 
of  Paria  (Milanges,  p.  385),  **  les  Juifs  exclns  de  la  yie 
publique,  youes  k  la  haine  et  au  mepris  par  la  religion 
dominantę,  toujours  en  presence  des  dangers  dont  Ica 
menacait  le  fanatisme  de  la  foule,  ne  trouyaient  la 
tranąuillite  et  le  bonheur  que  dans  un  isolement  oom- 
plet  Ignor^s  de  la  socidte  les  sayanta  Juifs  youaient 
aux  sdenoes  un  culte  d^sinteresse."  But  all  their  abtl- 
ity,  leaming,  and  wealth  did  not  long  ward  ofT  the  nn- 
lestiained  religious  hatrcd  of  the  common  people,  who 
felt  no  need  of  cultnre,  and  enjoyed  no  opportunitiea  to 
borrow  money  from  them.  The  world,  which  before 
seemed  to  haye  madę  a  kind  of  tacit  agreement  to  allow 
them  time  to  regain  wealth  that  might  be  plundered, 
and  blood  that  might  be  poured  out  like  water,  now 
seemed  to  haye  entered  into  a  oonapiracy  aa  eictcnsiye 
to  drain  the  treasnres  and  the  life  of  this  deyoted  race. 
Kingdom  aflor  kingdom,  and  people  after  people,  fol- 
lowed  the  dreadful  example,  and  stroye  to  peal  the  knell 
of  the  descendanta  of  larael ;  till  at  length,  what  we 
blush  to  cali  Christianity,  with  the  InquiBition  in  its 
train,  cleared  the  fair  and  smiling  proyinces  of  Spain  of 
this  industrious  part  of  its  popnlation,  and  brought  a 
self-inflicted  curse  of  barrenness  upon  the  benighted  land 
(Milman,  Hisł.  ofJews,  iii ;  comp.  Prescott,  FenL  and  Fu- 
abeila,  pt.  i,  eh.  yii ;  Jost,  GestA,  d.  Tsraeliłeny  yi,  75, 110, 
184, 216, 290;  Da  Costa,  Tsrael  and  the  GewtUes,  p.  221). 

The  oondition  of  the  Jews  in  Spain  continued  to  be 
fayorablo  from  near  the  rlose  of  the  llth  century  (to 
which  time  we  traced  them  in  the  preceding  seo- 
tion)  until  the  middle  of  the  14th  centur}%  when  the 
star  of  their  fortunę  may  be  said  to  haye  culminated. 
It  is  tme,  the  Mobammedan  power  was  now  on  the 
wane,  but  then  the  Christian  rulen  felt  not  yet  sniB* 
ciently  well  establisbed  in  the  peninsula  to  take  aeyere 
measures  against  the  Jews  (Da  Coeta,  Itrael  and  the 
Gentiles,  p.  189  sq.,  224).  A  capitation  tax  was  paid  by 
thc  numeroua  synagogues,  and  presenta  wen  niade  to 


JEW 


911 


JEW 


the  infante,  the  nofaility,  or  the  Ghmch;  bat  in  ereij 
other  respect  the  Jews  lived  like  a  separate  nation, 
Ihuning  and  ezecuting  their  own  civil  and  cńminal 
juriadiction.  It  ia  true  they  had  not  here  a  ReshgdU" 
tka  as  their  aothority,  but  a  substitute  was  afforded 
them  in  the  ^^rabbino  mayor,"  the  Jewish  magistnite, 
who  ^  exeraacd  his  right  in  the  king'B  name,  and  sealed 
his  decrees,  which  the  king  alone  could  annul,with  the 
Toyal  arms.  He  madę  joarneya  throogh  the  country 
to  tako  oognizanoe  of  all  Jewish  affiiirs,  and  inqmre 
into  the  dii^osal  of  the  leyenoes  of  the  different  syna- 
goguea.  He  had'under  him  a  *  yice-rabbino  mayor/  a 
chancelbr,  a  secretaiy,  and  aeyeral  other  officers.  Two 
different  orden  of  rabbins,  or  jadges,  acted  nnder  him 
in  the  towns  and  districts  of  the  kingdom."  The  first 
important  danger  that  threatened  them  was  in  1218, 
when  a  multitade  of  foreign  knights  and  soldiere  gather- 
ed  together  at  Toledo  preparatory  to  a  cnisade  against 
the  Moors.  The  campaign  was  to  be  opened,  as  had 
been  done  in  Germany,  by  a  generał  maasacre  of  the 
Jews;  bat,  by  the  intenrention  of  Alphonso  IX,  sur- 
named  the  Good,  the  attempt  was  in  a  great  measore 
defeated,  and  the  Jews  oontinaed  to  proaper,  after  a 
mmilar  attempt  madę  by  the  Cortes  of  Madrid  had 
failed,  antil  the  middle  of  the  14th  century.  By  this 
time  the  generał  hatred  against  the  Jews  had  spiead 
alarmingly  in  all  oountries  of  £urope,  as  we  hare  al- 
rcady  had  occasion  to  see,  in  oonaequence  of  the  terror 
which  the  Wack  deach  caosed  throughoat  that  portion 
of  the  globe.  They  were  now  also  in  Spain  oonfined  to 
-particular  qaarters  of  cities  in  which  they  resided,  and 
Ettempts  were  madę  for  their  oonyersion.  In  1250  an  in- 
stitution  had  even  been  erected  for  the  expre8s  pnrpose  of 
training  men  to  carry  on  saccessfully  controyersies  with 
the  Jews,  and,  if  possible,  to  bring  about  their  conver- 
aion.  Bot  yery  different  results  foUowed  the  bloody 
petBecutions  which  were  actually  and  successfully  inan- 
gurated  against  them  at  Seville  in  1891, 1892.  These 
were  the  outborsta  of  priestly  and  popular  yiolence,  and 
had  no  sooner  oommenced  in  that  city  than  CordoYa, 
Toledo,  Yalenćia,  Catalonia,  and  the  island  of  Majorca 
followed  in  its  train;  immense  nambers  were  mardered, 
and  Wholesale  theft  was  perpetrated  by  the  retigious 
nbble.  Escape  was  possible  only  through  flight  to 
other  conntries,  or  by  acoepting  baptism  at  the  point 
of  the  sword,  and  the  number  of  such  enforced  convert8 
to  Ghristianity  w  reckoned  at  no  less  than  200,000.  If 
the  persecutions  in  Germany,  England,  France,  and  else- 
where  had  severely  tried  the  Jewish  race,  these  persecu- 
tions in  Spain  completely  extingaished  all  hope  of  fur- 
ther  joy,  for  they  hit,  so  to  speak,  the  very  oore  of  the 
Jewish  heart,  and  form  a  sad  tuming-point  in  the  his- 
tory  of  the  Jews,  and  the  15th  of  March,  1891,  forma  a 
memorable  day  not  only  for  the  Jew,  not  only  for  the 
-  Spaniaid,  but  for  all  the  world ;  it  was  the  seed  ftom 
which  germinated  that  monster  called  the  IngttisUion 
{Gr&tz,  Getdu  d.  Judem,  viii,  61  8q.).  Daily  now  the  eon- 
dition  of  this  people,  even  in  the  Spauish  petunsula, 
grew  woTse  and  worse,  until  it  fairly  beggars  descrip- 
tion. .  A.D.  1412-1414  they  had  to  endure  another  bloody 
psrsecution  throughout  the  peninsula,  and  by  the  mid- 
dle of  the  15th  century  we  read  of  nothing  but  perse- 
cution,  yiolent  conyersion,  maasacre,  and  the  tortures  of 
the  Inąuisition.  '*  Tbouaands  were  bumed  aliye.  *  In 
one  year  280  were  bumed  in  Seyiłle  alone.'  Sometimes 
the  ix>pca,  and  even  the  nobles,  shuddered  at  the  fiend- 
ish  zcal  of  the  inąuisitors,  and  tried  to  mitigate  it,  but 
in  rain.  At  length  the  hour  of  finał  horror  came.  In 
A.D.  1492,Fenllnand  and  Isabella  iasued  an  edict  for  the 
expulBion,  within  four  months,  of  all  who  refused  to  be- 
Gome  Christiana,  with  the  strict  inhibition  to  take  nci- 
ther  gold  nor  silyer  out  of  the  country.  The  Jews  of- 
ferei  an  enormous  sum  for  its  reyocation,  and  for  a  mo- 
ment the  soyereigns  hesitated;  but  Torąuemada,  the 
Dominican  inąutsitor-general^dared  to  compare  his  roy- 
al  master  and  mistress  to  Judas;  they  shrank  from  tho 
awfnl  aecuaation ;  and  the  min  of  the  most  industrious, 


the  most  thriying,  the  moet  peaoeable,  and  the  moat 
leamed  of  their  subjects— 4md  consequently  of  Spain  her^ 
self— became  irremediable.''  (See  Imquisition  in  this 
yolume,  p.  601  sq.)  This  is  perhaps  the  grandest  and 
most  melanchcdy  hour  in  their  modem  history.  It  ia 
considered  by  themselyes  as  great  a  calamity  as  the  de- 
straction  of  Jerusalem.  800,000  (some  eyen  giye  the 
numberB  at  660,000  or  800,000)  resolyed  to  abandon  the 
country,  which  a  residence  of  seyen  oenturies  had  madę 
ahnoet  a  second  Judsea  to  them.  The  incidenu  that 
marked  their  departure  are  heart-rending.  Almost  ey- 
ery  land  was  shut  against  them.  Some,  howeyer,  ven- 
tured  into  France,  others  into  Italy,  Turkey,  and  Mo- 
rocco,  in  the  last  of  which  countries  they  suffered  the 
moet  ftightful  priyations.  Of  the  80,000  who  obtained 
an  entranoe  into  Portugal  on  payment  of  eight  gold 
pennies  a  head,  but  only  for  eight  months,  to  enable 
them  to  obtain  means  of  departure  to  other  countries, 
many  lingered  after  the  expiration  of  the  appointed  time, 
and  the  poorer  were  sold  as  slayes.  In  A.D.  1495,  king 
Emanuel  commanded  them  to  quit  his  tenitońes,  but 
at  the  same  time  issued  a  secret  order  that  all  Jewish 
children  under  14  years  of  age  should  be  tom  from  theii 
mothers,  retained  in  Portugal,  and  brought  up  as  Chria- 
tians.  Agony  dioye  the  Jewish  mothers  into  madness ; 
they  destroyed  their  children  with  their  own  hands, 
and  threw  them  into  wclls  and  riyers,  to  preycnt  them 
from  falling  into  the  hands  of  their  persecutors.  Nei- 
ther  were  the  miseries  of  those  who  embraced  Chris- 
tianity,  but  who,  for  the  most  part,  secretly  adhered  to 
their  ild  faith  {Onsiim,  Anufimr-^  yielding  to  yiolence, 
foroed  ones")  less  dreadfuL  It  was  not  until  the  17th 
century  that  persecution  ceascd.  Autos-da-fi  of  sus- 
pected  conyertB  happened  as  late  as  A.D.  1655  (Cham- 
bers,  s.  y.).    See  Marrahos. 

6.  The  discoyery  of  America,  the  restoration  of  Icttors 
oocaaoned  by  the  inyeiition  of  the  art  of  printing,  and 
the.  reformation  in  the  Christian  Church  opened  in  a 
certain  sense  a  somewhat  morę  beneficial  aera  to  the 
Jews.  It  is  trae,  they  reaped  the  benefits  of  this  trans- 
formation  leas  than  any  other  portion  of  European  aod- 
ety ;  "  stiU,  the  progreas  of  drilization  was  silently  pre- 
paring  the  way  for  greater  justice  being  done  to  this 
people;  and  their  conduct,  in  drcumstanocs  where  they 
were  allowed  scope  for  the  deyelopment  of  their  better 
ąualities,  tended  greatly  to  the  removal  of  the  prcju- 
dices  that  exi8ted  against  them."  They  found  a  friend 
in  Reuchlin  (q.  v.),  who  madę  strenuous  exerlions  in 
behalf  of  the  preserration  of  Jewish  literaturę.  Lu- 
ther,  in  the  earlier  part  of  his  public  career,  is  supppsed 
to  haye  fayored  the  conrersion  of  the  Jews  btf  tripleni 
meam  (questioned  by  some ;  comp.  GrStz,  Gegchickte  des 
Juden,  ix,  220  sq, ;  883  sq. ;  Etheridge,  p.  440  8q. ;  Jost, 
GeaeA,  des  Judewthums  u,  s,  Sehten,  iii,  217) ;  and  it  is  a 
fact  that  all  through  Germany,  where  the  Protestant 
element.,  if  any  where,  was  stióng  in  those  days,  their 
lot  actually  became  harder  than  it  had  eyer  been  be- 
fore.  See  below.  On  the  other  hand,  we  find  a  Koman 
pontiff  (Sixtus  V,  1585-90)  animated  by  a  far  morę 
wise  and  kindly  spirit  towards  them  than  any  Protes- 
tant prtnce  of  his  time.  In  1588  he  aboUshed  all  the 
persecnting  statutes  of  his  predecesaors,  allowed  them  to 
settle  and  trade  in  eyeiy  city  of  his  dominions,  to  enjoy 
the  free  exefci8e  of  their  religion,  and,  in  respect  to  the 
admimstcation  of  justice  and  taxation,  placed  them  on  a 
footing  with  the  rest  of  his  subjecta  Of  course,  all  this 
was  done  for  a  consideration.  The  Jews  had  moneyy 
and  it  he  madę  them  furmsh  freeh',  but  then  they  en- 
joyed  ot  least  certain  adyantages  by  yirtuc  of  their  pos- 
aesaions. 

Strange  indeed  must  it  appear  to  the  student  of  his- 
tory that  one  of  the  firat  countries  in  modem  days  that 
rosę  aboye  the  barbariam  of  the  Middle  Ages,  and  grantu 
ed  the  Jews  the  moet  liberał  concessiona,  was  a  part  of 
the  posaessions  of  their  most  inyeterate  enemy,  Philip 
II  of  Spain,  and  that  one  of  the  principal  causes  oontrib- 
uting  to  this  change  was  the  yery  instrument  selected 


JEW 


912 


JEW 


by  the  faatnd  of  the  Dominicmii  the  Uoodj  lDqi]]ii- 1 
tioD.  It  was  the  actiye,  energetic,  intelligait  Holland-  ! 
er,  readily  apprectating  the  bosuwas  gnalifimfiona  of  his  | 
Jewish  brother,  that  permitted  bim  to  settle  by  his  side  j 
as  early  as  1603.  It  is  true,  the  Jew  did  not  enjoy  eveD 
in  Holland  the  rights  of  citizenship  antił,  afler  neariy 
two  handied  yeais  of  trial  (1796),  he  had  been  fonnd  the 
equal  of  his  Christian  neighbor  wheoerer  he  was  per- 
mitted to  exchange  the  garb  of  a  aUve  for  that  of  a 
master.  It  was  Holland  that  afforded  to  the  honted 
yictims  of  a  cmel  and  refined  fanatidsm  a  lesting-plaoe 
on  which  they  conld  encamp,  and  finally  enjoy  even 
equality  with  the  natires  of  the  soiL  Many  of  the  Por- 
tnguese  Jews  (00  the  Jews  ofthe  Spanish  peninsula  are 
termed)  left  their  mother  countir,  and  in  this  new  re- 
pablic  vied  with  its  citizens  in  the  highest  gualities  of 
commercial  greatness.  Soon  came  the  Jews  of  Poland 
and  Germany  also  to  enjoy  the  special  pńnleges  which 
the  Dutch  stood  ready  to  administer  to  them.  Denmark 
and  Hamburg  partook  ofthe  libenl  spirit,  and  there  also 
the  Jews  were  heartily  welcomed.  In  England,  also, 
they  soon  afler  (1665),  by  the  suooess  of  the  Indepen- 
dents,  gained  anew  a  foothold.  It  is  tme,  they  did  not 
leally  obtain  public  permission  to  settle  again  in  the 
island  until  the  reign  of  Charles  II  (1660-^),  but 
Cromwell,  it  is  generally  belieyed,  farored  their  admis- 
flion  to  the  country,  and  no  doubt  permitted  it  qnietly 
in  a  great  many  instances.  The  right  to  possess  land, 
boweyer,  they  did  not  acqnire  until  1728,  and  the  right 
of  citizenship  was  not  conferred  on  them  until  1753. 
Into  France,  also,  they  were,  in  the  middle  of  the  16th 
oentury,  admitted  again,  though,  of  course,  at  lirat  the 
places  which  opened  their  gates  to  them  were  few  in- 
deed.  Most  of  those  who  came  thither  were  relics  of 
that  mighty  host  of  exiles  which  had  left  Spain  and 
Portugal  afber  the  establishment  of  the  Inąuisition  (see 
abovc).  They  went  in  conńderable  numbers  to  the 
proyinces  Ayignon,  Lorraine,  and  Alsace,  and  of  the  cit- 
ies  among  the  first  10  bid  them  enter  were  Bayonne  and 
Bordeaux.  The  outbreak  ofthe  French  Reyolution,  to- 
wards  the  close  of  the  18th  oentur>',  finally  caused  here, 
as  elsewhere,  a  decided  change  in  their  fayor  (of  which 
morę  below).  In  Germany,  as  we  haye  already  said, 
their  worth  failed  to  be  recognised.  They  were  mal- 
treated  eyen  under  the  great  and  otherwise  liberał 
monarch,  Frederick  II;  ami,  as  Prussia  (Brandenbuig) 
was  eyen  then  in  the  yanguard  of  German  affairs,  the 
łntolerant  treatment  which  they  here  receiyed  was  aped 
in  the  othcr  and  less  important  realms  of  the  em- 
pire. They  were  driyen  out  of  Bayaria  in  1553,  out  of 
Brandenburg  in  1573,  and  similar  treatment  befell  them 
elsewhere.  l^ey  also  excited  numerous  popular  tu- 
roults  (as  late  eyen  as  1730  in  Hamburg,  of  whose  liberał 
treatment  of  the  Jews  we  spoke  aboye  in  connection 
with  the  Low  Counlries),  and,  in  fact,  during  the  whole 
of  the  17th  and  neariy  the  whole  of  the  18th  century, 
the  hardships  intlicted  on  them  by  the  German  goy- 
emroents  bccamc  positiyely  morę  and  morę  gńeyous. 
Kussia  also  failed  to  treat  with  the  least  consideradon 
the  Jewish  people.  Adroitte<l  into  the  realm  by  Peter 
the  Great  (1689-1725),  they  were  expelled  from  the  em- 
pire, 35,000  strong,  in  1743  by  the  empress  Elizabeth. 
They  were,  howeyer,  readmitted  by  the  empress  Cath- 
arine  II.  The  only  other  two  oountries  which  truły 
afforded  the  Jews  protection  were  Turkey  and  Po- 
land. The  Mohammedans  as  we  haye  already  had 
opportunity  to  obser\'e,  have,  eyer  sinoe  the  decease  of 
the  founder  of  their  religion,  been  considerate  in  their 
dealiiigs  with  their  Jewish  subjects.  In  Turkey,  the 
Jews  were  at  this  period  held  in  higher  estimation  than 
the  conqucrcd  (irceks;  the  latter  were  termed  teshir 
(slaycfl),  but  the  Jews  monaaphir  (yisitoni).  They  were 
permitted  to  rc-establish  schools,  rebiuld  synagogues, 
and  to  settle  in  all  the  commercial  towns  ofthe  Leyant. 
In  Poland,  where  they  are  to  this  day  morę  numerously 
represented  than  in  any  othcr  Euiopean  country,  they 
met  a  most  fayorablo  reception  as  early  bb  the  14th  cen- 


tury by  king  Caaimir  the  Great,  whose  friwHtafaip  ftr 
the  Jews  is  attributedto  the  knre  be  boie  a  Jewish  mia- 
ŁresB  of  his.  For  many  yean  the  wlHde  tcade  of  tlM 
coontry  was  in  their  handa.  Dining  the  17th  and  Out 
greater  part  of  the  18th  centniy,  howeyer,  they  wcse 
much  pewccutcd,  and  sank  into  a  state  of  great  igno- 
ruice  and  eyen  poyetty.  The  French  Beyolutkifr-.' 
which,  in  spite  of  the  seyeiity  and  haibarism  of  ffnnram 
intoleńnce,  affected  morę  or  less  the  Polish  people — 
also  greatly  benefited  the  Jews  of  P<4and.     See  below. 

7.  Tke  Modem  Period— The  appearance  of  Moms 
Mendelssohn  (q.  y.),  the  Jewiah  pfaikieopher,  od  tbe 
stage  of  European  htstory  greatly  improyed  the  statns  of 
the  Jews  not  only  in  Genmmy,  but  all  oyer  Europę,  and 
we  migfat  say  the  worU.  Tarious  other  caoses,  among 
which,  especially,  the  American  and  French  reyolution% 
and  the  great  European  war  of  1812-15,  also  oontribiited 
to  this  change.  ElTorts  to  amelioiate  the  oonditioo  of 
the  Jews,  indeed,  began  to  be  manifested  eyen  befofc 
these  important  eyents.  In  Italy,  as  early  as  1740^ 
Charles  of  Naples  and  Sidly  gaye  to  the  Jews  the  rig^ht 
to  reaettle  in  his  kingdom,  with  the  priyileges  of  une- 
stńcted  commeroe.  In  England  we  notice  as  early  as 
1753  a  Jews*  Natoralization  Bill  pass  the  honses  of  P)up- 
liament,  and  in  Austiia  the  emperor  Francis  pnblished 
his  celebrated  toleration  edict,  which  gave  the  Jews  a 
comfortable  atanding  in  his  dominions,  in  1782.  With 
this  last  datę  yirtoally  opens  the  new  era. 

The  Iow  ebb  to  which  Rabbiniam  had  sunk  aboat  tlie 
middle  of  the  18th  century  madę  a  Jewish  lieformatioii 
not  only  possible,  but  necessary.  In  the  preceding  cen- 
turies,  before  and  eyen  after  the  Christian  Reforma  tion, 
again  and  again  false  Meeaahs  had  come  forward,  and 
sought  to  impose  themselyes  upon  the  nnfortunate  leadea 
as  embassadoTB  from  on  high  to  ameliorate  their  condi- 
tion,  and  to  fulfil  the  law  and  the  prophets.  See  S^\b8A- 
THAi  Zewi  ;  Chasidim  ;  Jacob  Fra^ck.  The  people,  in 
their  forlom  condition,  had  grayitated  with  their  teacb- 
ers,  and  had  fallen  deep  in  the  slough  of  ignorance  and 
superstition.  No  man  was  better  qualifted  to  raise  them 
up  from  this  low  estate,  and  transform  the  Jewish  race 
into  a  higher  state,  than  the  **  third  Mosee,"  who— bom 
in  Germany  (m  1729),  an  ardent  disciple  of  the  great 
Moses  of  the  12th  centuiy  [see  Maimonides],  the  as- 
sociate  of  the  master  ntinds  of  Germany  of  the  last  half 
of  the  18th  century,  and  the  bosom  fńend  of  Lessing — 
eminently  poesessed  eyery  quality  necessary  to  consti- 
tute  a  leader  and  a  guide;  and  it  is  to  Moses  Mendels- 
sohn that  pre-eminently  belong  the  honor  and  glory  of 
haying  transformed  the  Jewish  race  all  oyer  the  world 
to  a  position  of  equality  with  their  fellow-beings  of  the 
Christian  faith,  not  only  menUlly  and  morally,  but  po- 
litically  also.  It  is  tnie  the  change  was  slowly  wrought, 
and  there  is  eyen  yet  much  to  be  accompUshcd.  SciU, 
in  Germany,  there  is  hardly  an  ayenue  of  tcmporal  pur- 
suit  in  which  the  Jew  is  not  found  occupying  tbe  lirst 
positions.  In  the  rostrum  of  the  best  German  uniycrsi- 
ties  he  is  largely  represented;  on  the  bench,  howerer 
great  the  obstaeles  that  might  seem  to  bar  him  from 
promotion,  he  bas  secured  the  most  honorable  di.«tino- 
tions.  As  physicians,  the  Jews  are  among  the  elitę  of 
the  profession;  and  so  in  all  the  other  yocations  of  llfe 
they  haye  proyed  that  they  are  worthy  of  the  trust  rc- 
posed  in  them.  The  country  in  Eturope,  howcvcr,  in 
which  the  Jew  holds  the  highest  social  position  is 
France.  There  Napoleon,  in  1806,  conferred  upon  them 
many  priyileges,  and  they  have  sińce  entered  the  high- 
est offices  in  the  goyemment,  in  the  army,  and  nayy. 
At  present  they  enjoy  like  priyileges  in  Knglond  alao. 
The  progress  in  remoying  "Jewish  disabilities**  was 
rather  slow,  but  it  was  finally  effccted  m  1660,  wben 
the  Jew  was  admitted  to  PailiamenL  In  Holland  and 
Belgium  all  restrictions  were  swept  awny  by  ihc  rero- 
lution  of  1830.  In  Russia,  which  contaius  about  two 
thirds  of  the  Jewish  population  of  Europę,  their  condi- 
tion has  been  very  yariable  sińce  the  opening  of  the 
present  century.    In  1805  and  1809  the  emperor  A]cx- 


JEW 


918        JEW,  THE  WANDERING 


ander  iasoed  decrees  gnntłng  tbem  liberty  of  trade  and 
oommeice,  bot  the  barbaioiis  Nicholas  depriyed  them  of 
all  these,  and  treated  them  quite  inhumanly,  espedally 
in  Foland,  where  they  wen  known  to  be  in  sympatbj 
with  the  Revolationist8.  Since  the  aocesaion  of  Alex- 
ander  II  their  condition  has  been  improving,  and  there 
is  reason  to  hope  for  still  forther  amelioration  of  their 
drcumstancea.  In  Italy  they  were  subject,  morę  or  leas, 
to  intolerance  and  oppreeńon  nntil  the  dethronement  of 
the  papai  power.  Since  the  estabUshment  of  a  united 
kingdom  they  enjoy  there  the  same  high  priyileges  as 
in  France.  In  Spain,  too,  the  establishment  of  a  repub- 
lican  goremment,  so  lately  remodelled  into  a  monazchyi 
broiight  "  glad  tidings''  to  the  Jews.  They  had  sufEeśw 
ed  under  the  yoke  of  Romanism  the  generał  fate  of  the 
heretic;  the  downfall  of  the  Bourbon  dynasty,  and  the 
establishment  of /i  popular  govemment,  at  once  secured 
for  all  religioiis  toleration,  and  it  has  sińce  been  ascer- 
tained  that  Spain  oontains  many  adherenta  to  the  Jew- 
ish  faith  among  the  attendants  of  t^e  Komish  service. 
In  Denmark  they  were  granted  eąuality  with  other  na- 
tive9  in  1814.  In  Norway  they  were  esclnded  until  1860, 
and  in  Sweden  their  freedom  is  as  yet  limited.  In  Aus- 
tria, as  in  other  countries  where  Koman  Gatholicism  has 
so  long  swayed  the  aceptre  with  medinral  barbarity,  the 
politi^  changes  of  late  years  have  placed  the  Jew  on 
an  equality  with  his  Christian  neighbor,  and  not  a  few 
of  the  higher  positions  of  the  state  are  filled  by  Jews. 
Oor  notłce  of  their  condition  in  other  countries  (aaide 
from  the  United  States  of  America,  for  which  aee  ho- 
tice  below)  must  be  neoeasarily  brief  on  account  of 
our  limited  space.  In  Turkey,  in  spite  of  the  exactaon 
of  pashas,  the  insolenoe  of  janizaries,  and  the  miseries 
of  war,  they  are  ąuite  numerous  and  thriving.  In  Pal- 
estine,  where  they  are  rapidly  increasing,  they  are  very 
poor,  and  depend  mainly  on  their  European  brethren 
for  assiatanoe.  See  Je3Usalem«  Li  Arabia  their  num- 
ber  is  smali,  and  they  enjoy  much  independence.  In 
Persia  they  are  ąuite  numerous,  but  their  condition 
is  rather  pittable.  They  exis^  also  in  Afghanistan,  a 
country  whose  importance  will  now  be  morę  realized 
sińce  the  occupation  of  Turkistan  (June,  1871)  by  Rus- 
sia  leaves  Afghanistan  the  only  independent  country 
separating  the  Russian  empire  from  the  wealth  of  India. 
The  Jews  here  thrive  as  traffickers  between  Cabul  and 
China.  Jews  are  likewise  found  in  India  and  Cochin- 
China,  where  they  are  both  agriculturisŁs  and  artisans; 
as  a  flourishing  colony  in  Surinam ;  in  Bokhara,  where 
they  poasess  equal  rights  with  the  other  inhabitants, 
and  are  skUled  in  the  manufacture  of  silks  and  metals ; 
in  Tartary  and  China,  where,  howerer,  their  number  is 
believed  not  to  be  adeąuately  known.  In  Africa,  also, 
they  exist  in  large  numbers;  especially  numerous  are 
they  all  along  the  North-AMcan  coast,  where,  indeed, 
they  have  had  communities  for  perhaps  morę  than  a 
thousand  years,  which  were  largely  re-enforoed  in  con- 
8eqaence  of  the  great  Spaniah  persecutions.  They  are 
numerous  in  Fez  and  Morocco,  are  found  in  smali  num- 
bers in  £gypt  and  Nubia,  morę  numerous  in  Abyssinia, 
and  it  is  ascertained  that  they  have  even  madę  their 
way  into  the  heart  of  Africa;  they  exi8t  in  Sudan,  and 
are  also  found  further  south.  America,  too,  has  invited 
their  spirit  of  enterprise.  In  the  United  States,  as  in 
Great  Britain,  they  enjoy  absolute  liberty.  (^ee,  for 
further  particulara  of  the  history  of  the  Jews  in  our 
country,  the  article  Judaism.)  They  have  been  in 
Brazil  sińce  1625,  and  in  Cayenne  sińce  1639,  and  are 
also  aetUed  in  aome  parta  of  the  West  Indies. 

The  entire  number  of  Jews  in  the  world  is  reckoned 
yariously  at  between  8^  and  15  millions.  Chambers, 
taking  the  former  estimate,  distribntes  them  as  follows: 
about  1,700,000  to  Russian,  Austiian,  and  Prussian 
Polami,  about  600,000  to  Germany,  about  240,000  to 
fiungaiy  and  Transylyania,  about  200,000  to  Galicia, 
about  800,000  to  Turkey,  about  47,000  to  Italy,  about 
80,000  to  Great  Britain;  Asia,  about  188,000;  Africa, 
about  504,000 ;  and  America,  about  80,000.  We  are  in- 
lY.— Mmm 


dined  to  estimate  the  number  of  Jews  to  be  no  less  than 
nx  millions,  and  of  these  giye  to  Europę  about  4,000,000, 
and  to  the  United  States  of  America  about  500,000.  The 
estimate  of  Chambers  for  the  United  States  might  be 
morę  accurately  adopted  as  the  census  of  the  city  of 
New  York  only.  The  Hcmdbuch  der  Yergkichaidai  Sta- 
tisHk  by  G.yon  Kolb  (Łeipzig,  1868)  giyes  the  following 
as  the  number  of  Jews  in  the  countries  named : 

Germany 476,600jDeDmark 4,200 

Austria 1,124,000;  Sweden 1,000 


Greece 600 

European  Turkey . .  70,000 
Aslatic  Turkey  and 

Syria 02,000 

Morocco  and  North 

Aft-lca 610,000 

EastcrnAsia 600,800 

America. 400,000 


Great  BriUln 40,000  < 

France 80,000] 

European  Rnssla... 2,277,000  i 

Italy 20,200 

Portugal 3,0001 

Switzeriand 4,200 

Belgium 1,500] 

Netberiauds 64,000  i 

Luzemburg 1,500 

See  Jost,  Getchichie  d,  Israditm  (sińce  the  time  of  the 
Itfaocabees)  (Berlin,  1820-29,  9  yols.  8yo),  his  Neuere 
Ge$ck,CieA.  1846-7,  3  yols.  8yo),  and  also  his  Gesch,  d, 
JudetUhunu  u.  8.  Sekten  (Leipzig,  1857-9,  3  yols.  8yo) ; 
GrUtz,  Gegch.  d,  Juden  (yoL  iii-xi ;  yols.  i  and  ii,  treating 
of  the  earliest  period  of  Jewish  history,  haye  not  yet 
madę  their  appearance) ;  Milman,  History  of  ihe  Jew» 
(London  and  N.York,  new  edit.,  reyised  and  augmented, 
1869-70, 3  yoLs.  sm.  8yo) ;  Geiger,  Judenthum  v, «.  Geach. 
(Lpz.  1864-^,  2  yols.  8yo) ;  D^aauer,  Getch.  d,  IsraelUm 
(Leipzig,  1845)  ;  Da  Costa,  Itrad  and  the  GentUes  (Lond. 
1850, 12mo) ;  Kaiserling,  Gesch.  der  Juden  in  Portugal 
(Lpz.  1859, 8yo) ;  Morgoliouth, //is/ory  o/Jetcs  in  Great 
Britain  (Lond.  1851 , 8  yols.  8yo) ;  Capefigue,  Hist.philos. 
des  Juifs  (Par.  1838) ;  Depping,  Les  Jmf*  dąns  le  moyen- 
dge  (Paris,  1834) ;  Etheridge,  Introd.  to  Heb.  Literaturę^ 
(Lond.  1856, 12mo) ;  Haller,  Des  Jutft  en  France  (Paris, 
1845) ;  Bedanide,  Les  Juifs  en  France^  en  Italie  et  en 
Espagne  (Paris,  1859) ;  Smucker,  Hist,  of  Modem  Jews 
(N.  Y.  1860) ;  Bcer,  Gesch.  Lehren  u.  Meinung.  der  Juden 
(Lpz.  1825,  8vo) ;  Jenks  (William),  History  ofthe  Jetcs 
(Bost.  1847, 12mo) ;  Mills,  British  Jews,  their  Religious 
Ceremomes  (LondL  1862) ;  Ockley,  History  ofthepresenl 
Jews  (translated  from  the  Italian  of  Jeh.  Ari.  da  Modę- 
na,  Lond.  1650) ;  Schimding,  I)ie  Juden  in  Oesterreichj 
Preussen  und  Sachsen  (Lpz.  1842);  Toway,  Anglia  Ju- 
daica (Oxf.  1788);  Benjamin,  Eight  Yean  in  Asia  and 
Africa  (Hanoyer,  1859) ;  Finn,  Sephardim^  or  History 
ofthe  Jews  in  Spain  and  Portugal  (London,  1841,  8yo; 
leyiewed  in  Brii.  and  For,  Rev.  1842,  p.  459  8q.) ;  Brit, 
and  For.  Rev,  1837,  p.  402  są. ;  Lond,  Quarferly  Review, 
xxxyiii,  114  sq. ;  Christian  £xaminerj  1848,  p.  48  są. ; 
1830,  p.  290  są. ;  North  Am,  Eev.  1831,  p.  284  są.  The 
work  of  Basnage  (Hist.  de  la  Beligion  des  Juifs  depuis 
Jesus-Christ  juscua  prisent  (Haag,  1716, 15  yols.  8yo) 
was  compiled  from  second-hand  aources,  and  so  teems 
with  enrors  and  unjust  statements  towards  Jews  that  we 
can  hardly  adyise  its  perusal  to  any  who  aeek  accuracy 
and  erodition.  For  the  religious  riews,  etc.,  of  the  Jews, 
see  JuDAisH.    (J.H.W.) 

Jew,  THE  Wanderino.  While  the  tradition  ob- 
tained  in  the  Christian  Church  that  the  **  disciplc  whom 
Jesus  loyed"  should  not  die  (John  xxi,  28),  we  lind  as  a 
counterpart  the  tradition  of  an  enemy  ofthe  Redeemer, 
whom  remorse  condemned  to  oeaseleas  wanderings  until 
the  sccond  coming  of  the  Lord.  This  tradition  of  the 
Wandering  Jew  has,  like  other  traditions,  undergone 
yarious  changes.  The  first  Christian  writer  by  whom 
we  find  it  mentioned  is  the  Benedictine  chronicler  Mat-  - 
thieus  Parisius  (f  1259).  According  to  the  account  he 
giyes  in  his  Historia  Major — an  account  which  he  pro- 
fesses  to  haye  receiyed  from  an  Armcnian  bishop,  to 
whom  the  Wandering  Jew  had  himself  told  it — his  his- 
tory was  as  follows :  His  name  was  Cartaphilus,  and  he 
was  door-keeper  of  the  palące,  in  the  employ  of  Pilate. 
When  the  Jews  dragged  Jesus  out  of  the  pałace,  after 
his  sentence  had  been  pronounced,  the  door-keeper 
stnick  him,  aaying  mockingly,  ^  Go  on,  Jesus,  go  faster ; 
why  dost  thott  linger?"  Jesus  tumed  around  stemly, 
and  said,  ^^  I  am  going,  but  thoa  shalt  zemain  waiting 


JEWEL 


914 


JEWESS 


tmtil  I  return."  The  door-keeper  was  then  abouŁ  Łhirty 
yeara  old ;  but  ńnje,  whenever  he  reaches  hU  hundredth 
year,  a  eudden  faintness  OTercomes  him,  and  when  he 
awakes  from  hia  swoon  he  finda  himaelf  retumed  to  the 
age  he  was  at  the  time  the  Lord  pronoanced  his  punish- 
ment  Cartaphilus  was  baptized  with  Ananias  under 
the  name  oi  Joseph,  which  caosed  him  afterwards  to  be 
confounded  with  Joseph  of  Arimathea.  As  a  Christian, 
he  led  a  Ufe  of  strict  penitence,  in  the  hope  of  obtaining 
forgiyeness.  The  scenę  of  action  of  this  Wandcring 
Jcw  is  in  the  East — namety,  Armenia. 

llie  tradition  of  the  West  is  somewhat  different. 
Herę  we  find  him  first  mentioned  in  the  16th  century, 
under  the  name  o{  AhasuertUf  and  he  is  said  to  havc 
appeared  in  1547  in  Hamburg,  then  in  Dantzig  and  in 
other  cities  of  Germany,  and  in  ofcher  oountries  also. 
Dr.  Paulus,  of  Eizen,  bishop  of  Schleswig — the  story 
goes — heanl  him  relate  his  history  as  foUows:  Ahasue- 
rus  was  a  shoemaker  in  Jerusalcm  during  the  life  of 
Jesus,  and  one  of  the  loudest  in  crying  ^  Crucify  him." 
When  Jesus  was  led  to  the  place  of  execution,hc  passed 
before  the  shoemakcr^s  house.  Tired  with  the  weight 
of  the  cross,  the  Sariour  leaned  against  the  porch  for 
rest;  but  the  shoemaker,  who  stood  at  his  door  with  a 
child  in  his  arms,  bade  him  haishly  move  on  (according 
to  some  he  even  struck  him),  when  Christ,  tuming 
lound  and  looking  sererely  at  him,  said, "  I  shall  stay 
and  rest,  but  thou  shalt  move  on  until  the  last  day.** 

Towards  the  end  of  the  17th  century  and  the  begin- 
ning  of  tlie  18th,  the  tradition  of  the  Wandering  Je  w, 
in  Englanil,  changed  to  the  original  Eastem  account. 
A  stranger  madę  his  appearance  daiming  to  be  an  offi- 
cer  of  the  upper  council  of  Jerusalem,  and  that  he  had 
done  what  was  generally  attributed  to  Cartaphilus— 
namely,  had  struck  Jesus  as  the  latter  left  Pilate's  pal- 
ące, and  said  to  him, "Go,  move  on;  why  doet  thou 
yet  linger  here?"  The  English  uniyersitics  sent  their 
ablest  professors  to  question  him.  He  proyed  himself 
able  to  answer  them  all ;  he  related  a  great  deal  con- 
ceming  the  apoetles,  as  also  about  Mohammed,  Tamer- 
lane,  Soliroan,  etc,  all  of  whom  he  professed  to  hare 
known  personally ;  he  knew  all  the  dates  of  the  erents 
connected  with  the  Crusades,  eto.  Some  considered  him 
an  impostor  or  a  risionary,  while  others  beliered  him. 

Whethcr  the  allegory  of  Ahasuerus,  or  this  erer-rest- 
less  being,  is  to  be  understood  as  a  typc  of  the  anti- 
Christian  spirit  of  scepticism,  or  whcther,  in  a  roore 
concreto  sense,  it  is  meant  to  typify  the  ever-wandering, 
homeless,  yet  still  unchanged  Jewish  people,  is  a  ques- 
tion  for  critics  to  decide.  We  will  oniy  add  that  this 
fanciful  tradition  has  become  the  theme  for  a  great 
number  of  works  of  imagination.  It  has  been  worked 
up  into  songs,  as  by  Schubert,  Schlegel,  etc ;  into  epics, 
as  by  Julius  Mosen,  Nich.  Lenaw,  etc :  into  dramas,  as 
by  Klingemann.  French  writers  also  have  used  it; 
Edgar  Quinet  and  Beranger  have  composc<1  songs  on 
the  Wandering  Jew.  But  the  most  remarkable  produc- 
tion  to  which  this  legend  has  given  riae  is  Eug^ne  Sue's 
noYcl,  The  Wandering  Jew  {Le  Juiferrcmt,  Paria,  1844). 
See  Dr.  J.  G.  Th.  Grilsse,  Sagę  r.  ewigen  Juden^  hittorisch 
eniwicheU  (Dresden  u.  Leipz.  1844, 8vo) ;  Herzog,  Real- 
Encyklopedie,  Wi,  181  sq.     (J.  N.  P.) 

Je^nrel  is  the  representatire  in  the  A.  V.  of  the  follow- 
ing  terms  in  the  original :  DT3  (ne'zem,  a  ring),  a  no»e-ring 
(Prov.  xi,  22 ;  Isa.  iii,  21 ;  Ezek.  xvi,  12 ;  everywhere  clse 
rendered  "  ear-ring,"  Gen.  xxiv,  22,  30,  47 ;  see  Jerome 
on  Ezek.  ad  loc;  Hartmann^s  Hfbraerin,  ii,  166;  iii, 
205),  or  an  ear-ring  (Gen.  xxxv,  4 ;  £xod.  xxxii,  2,  S) ; 
elsewherc  without  specifying  the  part  of  the  person  on 
Which  it  was  wom  (Judg.  viii,  24-26 ;  £xod.  xxxv,  32 ; 
Job  xlii,  11 ;  Prov.  xxv,  12;  Hos.  ii,  15).  '^^H  {chaK% 
BO  called  as  helng  poiiahed),  a  necklace  or  trinket  (Cant. 
vii,  1 ;  "  ornament,"  Prov.  xxv,  12),  and  flJ^H  {chelgah^ 
fem.  of  preced.),  a  necklace  or  female  ornament  (Hos.  ii, 
18).  *^>3  {keli%  an  impUment  or  tettel  of  any  kind),  an 
artide  of  silyer-ware  or  other  precious  materiał  (Gen. 


xxiv,  68 ;  Exod.  iii,  22 ;  xi,  2 ;  xii,  85 ;  NnmK  xxvi  50^ 
51 ;  1  Sam.  vi,  8, 15;  Job  xxviii.  17;  Pft>v.  xx,  15),  ot 
any  elegant  trappinfft  or  piece  of  ilnery  in  dress  (Isa.  Ld, 
10;  Ezek.  xvi,  7,  89;  xxiii,  16),  elsewhere  rendcnd 
"  yessel,**  etc  fliaD  (seguHak',  properfy),  wealth  or 
treamrt  (MaL  iii,  17;  elsewhere  usually  "  peculiar  treas- 
ure,"  Exod.  xix,  5 ;  Psa.  cxxxa',  4,  etc).  See  Dbebs; 
Precious  Stone;  etc 

Je^well,  John,  a  leamed  English  writer  and  bishop^ 
one  of  the  fathers  of  the  English  Protestant  Church, 
was  bom  May  24, 1522,  at  Buden,  in  the  county  of  Dev- 
on,  and  educated  at  Oxford,  wherc  he  took  the  degne 
of  bachclor  of  arts  in  1541,  becamc  a  noted  tutor,  and 
was  soon  after  chosen  lecturer  on  rhetoric  in  his  oołłrge. 
He  had  early  imbibed  the  prindples  of  the  Reformation, 
and  inculcated  them  upon  his  pupils,  though  it  had  to 
be  done  privately  till  the  accession  of  king  Edward  the 
Sixth,  which  took  place  in  1546,  when  he  madę  a  publie 
declaration  of  his  faith,  and  entcred  into  a  doae  ftiend- 
ship  with  Peter  Mart}T,  who  was  vi8iting  Oxford  aUmt 
this  time.  On  the  accession  of  qucen  Mai^'  in  1653,  he 
was  one  of  the  iirst  to  feel  the  ragę  of  the  storm  then 
raised  against  the  Reformation;  he  was  obliged  to  flee, 
and,  after  cncountering  many  difficultics,  joined  the 
English  exile8  at  Frankfort,  in  the  second  ycar  of  qi]eeB 
Maiy*s  reign,  and  hcre  madę  a  publie  recantation  of  his 
forced  siibscription  to  the  popish  doctrines.  Ife  thea 
went  to  Strasburg,  and  afterwards  to  Ziłrich,  whcre  he 
resided  with  Peter  Martyr.  He  retumed  to  England 
in  1559,  after  the  death  of  queen  Maiy,  and  in  the 
foUowing  year  was  consecrated  bishop  of  Salisbuiy. 
He  now  preached  and  wrote  anew  in  favor  of  the  RH^ 
ormation,  and  songht  in  evexy  way  to  extinguiah  any 
attachment  still  remaining  for  the  Roman  Cathclioi 
It  was  at  this  time,  afler  morę  than  twenty  yeta%  spent 
in  researches,  that  he  published  his  famous  Apohgia  pr9 
Keclesia  Anglicana  (tnnslated  into  8ix  diflemit  lan- 
guages,  and  into  English  by  lady  Bacon  [wife  of  the 
coundllor],  under  the  title,  An  Apologg  or  Antncer  ń 
defence  of  the  Church  of  England,  1662,  4to).  But  hii 
watchful  and  laborious  manner  of  life  impaired  his 
health,  and  brought  him  quickly  to  the  gr8ve.  He 
died  at  Monkton  Fariey  Sept.  22, 1 571 .  "  He  was  a  pi^ 
ate  of  great  leaming,  piety,  and  moderation ;  irr€proacb> 
able  in  his  private  life ;  extremc}y  generous  and  charita- 
ble  to  the  poor,  to  whom,  it  is  said,  his  doors  alwaya  stood 
open.  He  was  of  a  pleasant  and  affable  temper,  modeet, 
meek,  and  temperate,  and  a  great  nUuter  of  his  passioia 
His  memory  was  naturally  strong  and  retontive,  bot  he 
is  said  to  have  greatly  improved  it  by  art,  insomuch  that 
mar\'ellous  things  are  related  of  it  by  his  biograpfacn.* 
The  writings  of  bishop  Jewell,  which  are  chiefly  contio- 
ver8ial,  are  greatly  valued  even  in  our  day,  and  are 
f^ly  used  in  t¥ro  departments  of  Church  contrmmy^ 
on  the  question  between  the  Church  of  England  and  the 
Church  of  Romę,  and  on  the  que8(ion  respccting  the  de> 
votional  sentiments  of  the  English  Protcf  tent  fatben 
Besides  his  Apologg,  he  wrote,  in  reply  to  Thomas  Har- 
ding  (q.  v.),  A  Defence  of  the  Apologg  (1565  and  15€7, 
folio),  the  reading  of  which  was  obligatoiy  in  al  par- 
ishes  until  the  time  of  Charles  I  -.—A  Yiew  ofa  mdUum 
Buli  sent  info  EngUmdhg  Pope  Pius  Vin  1569:— .4  Tm- 
tiseonthe  I  folg  Scripturts  (Lond.  1682, 8vo)  -.—AnEr^ 
position  of  the  hco  Episiles  to  the  Thesfaloman$:—A 
Treatise  on  the  Saeraments  (Lond.  1683,  8vo);  bnides 
8everal  sermons  and  contrDversial  treatises.  His  woaks 
were  collected  and  published  in  one  folio  volame  (I/hmŁ 
1609, 1611, 1631, 1711 ;  recent  edition^ Camb.  1845^.4 
vols.  sm.  fol. ;  Oxf.  1847, 1848, 8  vo]s.  8vo).  See  Fnlkf^ 
Church  Hist. ;  Bumet,  Hi$t,  of  Reformation;  L.  Hum- 
frey,  Ufe  ofJohn  JeweU  (1573) ;  Hoefer,  Aoirr. Biog,  Gin, 
xxvi,  710 ;  Allibone,  Dicf,  of  A  uth,  i,  967 ;  Wood,  .4  the- 
nas  Oxon,  voL  i  (see  Index) ;  Chas.  Webb  le  BaN  Uff  rf 
Bishop  JeweU  (1885) ;  Middleton,  Refmmters,  iii,  852  są. 
(J.H.W.) 

Jewess  ('lou^a/a),  a  woman  of  Hebrew  tHrth,iritb* 
out  distinction  of  tribe  (Acta  xvi,  1 ;  xxiv,  24).    It  ii 


JEWETT 


915 


JEZEBEL 


iq>pUed  in  the  fonner  passage  to  Eonioe,  the  mother  ef 
ńmoŁhj,  who  was  unquesŁionably  of  Hebrew  origin 
(comp.  2  Tim.  iii,  15)|  and  in  the  latter  to  Dnisilla,  the 
wife  of  Felix  and  daughter  of  Herod  Agrippa  I. — Smith. 
8ee  Jew. 

Je-wett,Willlami  a  Methodist  Episcopal  minia- 
ret,  waa  bom  in  Sharon,  Conn.,  in  the  year  1789.  At 
the  age  of  8eventeen  he  waa  oonverted,  oommenced 
preaching  the  year  foUowing,  and  trayelled  a  circuit  by 
diiection  of  a  preaiding  elder.  In  1808  he  joined  the 
New  York  Annual  Conference.  Hia  miniateiial  labora 
were  imintemipted  from  1807  to  1851,  a  period  of  forty- 
four  yeara,  during  nineteen  of  which  he  held  the  office 
of  preaiding  elder.  IU»  appointmenta  were  Middletown, 
Conn.;  Poiighkeepeie,  New  York  City,  and  from  1832  on 
the  Hudaou  Kiver,  White  Plaina,  Newborgh,  Pough- 
keepaie,  and  Rhioebeck  districta.  The  laat  aix  years  of 
hia  life  he  auatained  to  the  Conference  a  auperannuated 
lelation.  Aa  a  man,  Mr.  Jewett  poaaeaaed  many  eatiroa- 
ble  traita  of  character.  Aa  a  Chriatian,  be  waa  diatin- 
gttiahed  for  a  marked  decision  and  firmnesa  of  character. 
Aa  a  pieacher,  he  waa  plain,  aimple,  and  eminently  prac- 
ticaL  Aa  a  paator,  he  waa  wiae,  diligent,  faithful,  and 
unuaually  auccesaful,  leayiiig  behind  him,  whererer  he 
went,  a  holy  influence.  Aa  a  preaiding  elder,  he  córo- 
manded  the  confidence  and  reapect  of  his  brethren.  He 
died  at  Ponghkeepsie,  N.  Y.,  June  27, 1857.     (G.  L.  T.) 

Jewett,  William  D„  a  Methodiat  Epiacopal  min- 
iater,  waa  bom  at  Ballaton,  N.  Y.,  about  1788 ;  waa  eon- 
rerted  in  1811;  waa  licensed  to  preach  in  1821,  and 
preached  much,  and  waa  ordained  deacon  preyioua  to 
enteiing  the  Geneaee  Conference  in  1830;  waa  auperan- 
nuated in  1845,  and  died  at  Huron,  N.  Y.,  Nov.  10, 1855. 
Mr.  Jewett  was  a  man  of  **  nnobtrusiye  piety,  and  a  pat- 
iem of  ministerial  fidelity."  He  labored  with  all  faith- 
fulneaa  and  loye  until  hia  atrength  failed  him.  At  death 
he  leli  hia  property,  about  $8000,  to  the  Bibie  and  Mis- 
sionary  aocieties,  and  the  auperannuated  brethren  of  his 
own  Conference.— il/tRK/e*  o/  Conf,  yi,  102.     (G.  L,  T.) 

Je^^Tish  (loySatKÓc),  of  or  belonging  to  Jews:  an 
epithet  applied  to  the  Rabbinical  legenda  againat  which 
the  apoatle  Paul  wanu  his  younger  brother  (Tit.  i,  14). 
— Smith.     See  Jkw. 

JEWISH  CHRlśTIANS.    See  Judaizers. 

Je  w'iy  OirJ^,  YehucT,  Chald.,  Dan.y,  13,  kst  clauae ; 
**  Judaea"  in  Ezra  v,  8;  elsewhere  "Judah;"  'lov3atay 
Łukę  xxiii,  5;  John  yii,  1;  claewhero  <Mudjea**),  the 
nation  of  the  Jews,  i.  e.  the  kingdom  of  Judaii,  later 
JCD.KA.  « Jewry"  alao  occura  freąuently  in  the  A.V. 
of  the  Apocrypha  (1  Esdr.  i,  32 ;  ii,  4 ;  iv,  49 ;  y,  7, 8, 57 ; 
vi,l;  yiii,81;  ix,3;  Bel83;  2Macc.x,24). 

Jews.    See  JE\y. 

Jesani^^ah  (Jer.  xl,  8 ;  xlii,  1).    See  Jaazaniah,  4. 

Jes^ebel  (Hebrew  /ze'bel,  ^r^*  not-cohabUed,  q.  d. 
^oxoc,  compare  Plato,  p.  249;  Lat.  Atpies^  i.  e.  intada, 
chaste;  an  appropriate  female  name,  remarka  Geacniua, 
and  not  to  be  estimated  from  the  character  of  Ahab*8 
ąueen ;  comp.  Itabełla ;  Sept.  'UZafiiK  ;  N.  T.  'l£Ca/3/;X, 
Rev.  ii,  20 ;  Joseph.  'la^ipi\Łc,  Ani,  ix,  6, 4 ;  Vulg.  Jez- 
aW),the  conaort  of  Ahab,king  of  larael  (1  Kings  xvi, 
81),  waa  the  daughter  of  Ethbaal  (q.  y.),  king  of  Tyre 
and  Sidon,  and  originally  a  pricsŁ  of  Aatarte  (Joseph  ua, 
Apton,  i,  18).  This  unsuitable  alliance  proyed  most  dis- 
astrous  to  the  kingdom  of  Israel;  for  Jezebel  induced 
hcr  weak  husband  not  oiily  to  conniye  at  her  introducing 
the  worship  of  her  natiye  idola,  but  eyentually  to  be- 
come  himself  a  worshipper  of  them,  and  to  use  all  the 
means  in  hb  powcr  to  eatablish  them  in  the  room  of 
the  God  of  Israel  The  worship  of  the  golden  calves, 
which  preyioualy  exiBted,  was,  howeyer  mistekenly,  in- 
tended  in  honor  of  Jehoyah ;  but  this  was  an  open  alien- 
ation  from  him,  and  a  tuming  asidc  to  foreign  and 
atrange  gods,  which,  indeed,  were  no  gods  (but  see  Vat- 
kc,  BibL  Theol.  i,  406).  Most  of  the  particulars  of  this 
bad  but  apparently  highly-gifted  woman's  conduct  liaye 


been  related  in  the  noticea  of  Ahab  and  Eluatt.  From 
the  course  of  her  proceedings,  it  would  appear  that  she 
grew  to  hate  the  Jewish  aystem  of  law  and  religion  on 
account  of  what  muat  h«tvc  aeemed  to  her  ita  iiitoler- 
ance  and  ita  anti-social  tendenciea.  She  hence  sought 
to  put  it  down  by  all  the  meana  she  could  command; 
and  the  imbecility  of  her  husband  seems  to  haye  madę 
all  the  powers  of  the  sute  subaeryient  to  her  designa. 
The  manner  in  which  ahe  acquired  and  used  her  power 
over  Ahab  is  atrikingly  shown  in  the  matter  of  Naboth, 
which,  perhaps,  morę  than  all  the  other  affaira  in  which 
she  waa  engaged,  brings  out  her  tnie  character,  and  dia- 
playa  the  naturę  of  her  influence.  B.C.  cir.  897.  When 
she  found  him  puling,like  a  spoiled  child,  on  account  of 
the  refusal  of  Naboth  to  gratify  him  by  selling  him  hia 
patrimonial  yineyard  for  a  "  garden  of  herbe,*"  she  taught 
him  to  look  to  her,  to  rcly  upon  her  for  the  accom- 
plishment  of  hia  wiahea;  and  for  the  aake  of  this  im- 
preasion,  morę  perhapa  than  from  aayageneas  of  temper, 
she  scmpled  not  at  murder  under  the  abuaod  forma  of 
law  and  religion  (1  Kings  xxi,  1-29).  She  had  the  re- 
ward  of  her  unscrapulous  dedaiyeness  of  character  in 
the  trinmph  of  her  policy  in  larael,  where,  at  last,  there 
were  but  7000  people  who  had  not  bowed  the  knee  to 
Baal,  nor  kiased  their  hand  to  his  image.  Nor  waa  her 
sucoeaa  confined  to  larael;  for  through  Athaliah  —  a 
daughter  after  her  own  heart — who  waa  roarried  to  the 
son  and  auoceaaor  of  Jehoshaphat,  the  same  policy  pre- 
yailed  for  a  time  in  Judah,  after  Jezebel  heradf  had  per- 
iahed  and  the  house  of  Ahab  had  met  ita  doom.  It 
aeems  that  after  the  death  of  hcr  husband,  Jezebel  main- 
taincd  considenble  aacendency  oycr  her  aon  Jehoram ; 
and  her  measures  and  misoonduct  formed  the  principal 
charge  which  Jehu  caat  in  the  tecth  of  that  mihappy 
monaich  before  he  aent  forth  the  arrow  that  ^ew 
him.  The  last  effort  of  Jezebel  was  to  intimidatc  Jehu 
aa  he  pasaed  the  palące  by  wamuig  him  of  the  eyentual 
rewards  of  eyen  auccessful  trcaaon.  It  is  eminently 
characteristic  of  the  woman  that,  even  in  this  terrible 
moment,  when  she  knew  that  her  son  waa  alain,  and 
muat  haye  felt  that  her  power  liad  departcd,  she  dia- 
playcd  herself,  not  with  rent  yeil  and  disheyelled  hair, 
"  but  tired  her  hcad  and  painted  her  eyea"  before  ahe 
looked  out  at  the  window.  The  eunucha,  at  a  word 
from  Jehu,  haying  caat  her  down,  ahe  met  her  death  bo- 
ueath  the  wali  [see  Jehu];  and  when  afterwards  the 
new  monarch  bethought  him  that,  aa  *^  a  king*s  daugh- 
ter," her  corpse  ahould  not  be  treated  with  disrcspect, 
nothing  waa  found  of  hcr  but  the  palma  of  her  handa 
and  the  soles  of  her  feet:  the  dogs  had  catcn  all  the 
reat  (1  Kinga  xyi, 81 ;  xviii, 4, 13, 19 ;  xxi,  5-25 ;  2  Kinga 
ix,  7, 22, 80-37).     B.C.  883.-Kitto. 

The  name  of  Jezebel  appeara  anciently  (aa  in  modem 
timcs)  to  haye  becomc  provcrbial  for  a  wicked  terma^ 
gant  (comp.  2  Kinga  ix,  22),  and  in  this  sense  it  is  prob- 
ably  used  in  Rey.  ii,  20,  where,  inatead  of  **  that  woman 
Jezebel"  (r/}v  ywaUa  'Ic^a/S^A),  many  editora  prefer 
the  reading  "  thy  wife  Jczeber  {n)v  ywaued  oov  '1«^- 
ri/3<X),  i.  e.  of  the  biahop  of  the  Church  at  Thyatura, 
who  scema  to  haye  assumcd  the  office  of  a  public  teach- 
er,  although  heraelf  as  comipt  in  doctrine  as  in  prac- 
tice.  In  this  addrcss  to  the  representatiye  of  the 
Church  she  is  called  hia  wife,  t  e.  one  for  whoee  char- 
acter and  conduct,  as  being  a  member  of  the  congrega- 
tion  oyer  which  he  had  charge,  he  was  responsible,  and 
whom  he  ahould  haye  taken  care  that  the  Church  had 
long  aince  repudiated.  Her  proper  imme  ia  probably 
withheld  through  motiyea  of  delicacy.  We  need  not 
suppose  that  she  waa  literally  guilty  of  licentiouaneaa, 
but  only  that  ahe  disaeminated  and  acted  upon  such  cor^ 
mpt  religiouB  principlea  aa  madę  her  reaemble  the  idol- 
atroua  wife  of  Ahab  in  her  public  influence.  (See  Ja- 
blouaki,  ZHss.  de  Jezabde  Thyatirenor,  pteudo^rophtŁ' 
essa^  Frankf.  1739 ;  Stuart*8  Commenf.  ad  loc.)  Othera, 
howeyer,  maintain  a  morę  literał  interpretation  of  the 
pasaage  (see  Ciarkę  and  Alfoid,  ad  loc.)*    See  Nicolai* 

TAM. 


JEZELUS 


916 


JEZIRAH 


Jeze^ns  ('Ie(i7Xoc)|  the  Gnecized  form  (in  Łhe 
Apocrypha)  of  the  luune  of  two  Jews  whose  sons  are 
said  to  have  retomed  from  Babylon  with  Ezra ;  but  a 
comparison  with  the  Hebrew  text  aeems  to  indicate  an 
identity  or  else  confosion. 

1.  (Yulgate  Zechdeus,)  The  father  of  Sechenias,  of 
"the  9ons  of  Zathoe"  (1  Esdr.  riu,  32);  evidently  the 
Jahaziei.  of  £zra  yiii,  5. 

2.  (Yulg.  Jekelua,')  The  father  of  Abadiaą  of  "  the 
sona  of  Joab'*  (1  Esdr.  viii,  86) ;  e^ńdently  the  Jishiel  of 
Ezra  viii,  9. 

Je'zer  (Heb.lVtóer,'nąr^,/ormatów/  Sept 'I<r<ra«p, 
'Uffipf  but  in  Chroń,  ^aap  v.  r.  'Ao^p),  the  third  named 
of  the  four  sons  of  Naphtali  (Gen.  xlvi,  24 ;  Numb.  xxvi, 
49 ;  1  Chroń,  vii,  13),  and  progenitor  of  the  family  of 
Jezerites  (Heb.  YUsri\  *^^2C%  Septuag.  'l£ffcp(,  Numb. 
xzvi,  49 ;  see  Izri).    £.a  i856. 

Je^zetite  (Numb.  xxvi,  49).    See  Jezer. 

Jezi'ah  (Heb.  Yuńyah',  m»%  for  nj-^ł^  gprmh- 
led  by  Jehotsah  ;  or  perhaps  to  be  'written  >1  JJ%  Yizyah', 
for  }^^**^P>  OMHmibkd  by  Jekocah,  comp.  Jezibł;  Sept. 
*A^ia,  Yulgate  Jezia),  an  Israelite,  one  of  the  "sons"  of 
Parosh,  who  divorced  his  Gentile  wifo  after  the  exile 
(Ezra  X,  25).    B.C.459. 

Je^ziSl  [aome  /«ri'a/]  (Heb.  Yezul\  bx''p,  as  in 
the  margin,  astembled  by  God;  Sept.  'A^ł^\  v.  r.  'Ia;7/X, 
etc ;  Vulg.  Jaziel)j  a  "  son"  of  AzmaveŁh,  who,  \ńth  his 
biother,  was  one  of  the  Benjamite  archers  that  rein- 
forced  David  at  Ziklag  (I  Chroń,  xii,  3).     B.C.  1055. 

Jezlrah  (n^-łSJ  "IfiO,  Sepher  Yetsirdh),  or  the 
Book  ofCrtaiioffiy  is  the  name  of  one  of  the  cabalistic 
books  which,  next  to  the  Zohar,  forms  the  principal 
source  whence  we  derive  our  knowledge  of  Jewish  mys- 
tidsm.  The  age  of  the  book  it  has  thus  far  been  im- 
possible  exactly  to  deterroine.  Jewish  tradition  claims 
it  to  be  ofditine  origin.  It  was  intrusted  by  the  Lord 
to  Abraham,  and  he  handed  it  down  to  Akiba  (q.  v.). 
Modem  scholara  have  come  to  the  conclusion  that  the 
Jezirah  is  the  product  of  the  Jewish  schools  in  Egypt  at 
the  time  of  Philo  Judtens.  Dr.  Znnz,  however,  assigns 
it  to  the  Geonastic  period,  the  8th  or  9th  century.  For 
the  lattcr  assertion  there  seems  to  ns  to  be  no  good  rca- 
son,  and  we  are  inclined  to  believe  it  was  composed 
during  the  period  of  the  firat  Mishnaists,  i.  e.  between 
a  century  before  and  about  eighty  yeare  after  the  birth 
of  Christ  (comp.  Etheridge,  Introd,  tę  llth.  LU.  p.  800  sq. ; 
Enfield,  HisL  Philoś.  p.  405).  See  Cabala,  voL  ii,  p.  1. 
We  do  this  after  having  determined  that  the  Hebrew 
of  this  work  is  of  that  dialectic  kind  used  by  the  leamed 
Jews  at  the  time  of  the  opening  of  the  Christian  tera. 
Indeed,  it  is  barely  possible  that  the  work  itself  was  a 
coUection  of  fragments  of  various  carlier  times ;  a  kind 
otresunU  of  what  had  hitherto  been  determined  on  the 
occnlt  subject  of  which  it  treata.  The  Jezirah  treats 
of  the  Creation  of  the  World,  and  "  is,  in  fact,  an  ancient 
elTort  of  the  human  mind  to  di8cover  Łhe  plan  of  the 
nniverse  at  large,  and  the  law  or  band  which  miites  its 
various  \Mrts  into  one  harmonious  whole.  It  opens  its 
instructions  with  something  of  the  tonc  and  manner  of 
the  Bibie,  and  announces  that  the  univer8C  beors  upon 
itself  the  imprint  of  the  name  of  God ;  so  that,  by  means 
of  the  great  panorama  of  the  world,  Łhe  mind  may  ac- 
quire  a  conception  of  the  Deity,  and  from  the  unity 
which  reigns  in  the  creation,  it  may  leam  the  oncness 
of  the  Creator."  So  far,  so  good.  But  now,  instead  of 
tracing  in  the  univer8e  the  laws  which  govcm  it,  so  as 
to  ascertain  from  those  laws  the  thoughts  of  the  law- 
giver,  "it  is  soughŁ  raŁher  Ło  arrive  aŁ  the  same  end  by 
flnding  some  Łangible  analogy  between  the  thiiigs  which 
exist  and  the  signs  of  thought,  or  the  means  by  which 
thoaght  and  knowledge  are  principally  communicated 
and  interpreted  among  men;  and  recoiuw  is  had  for 
this  purpose  to  the  twenty-two  letters  of  the  Hebrew 


alphabet,  and  to  the  ftnt  ten  of  the  nnmben"  (oompm 
Etheridge,  p.  804  są.). 

*'The  book  of  Jezirah  begins  by  an  enumeration  of 
the  ŁhirŁy-two  ways  of  wisdom  (fl^SH  n'ia''ro),  or,  in 
plainer  terms,  of  the  thirty-two  aŁtributes  of  the  divine 
mind  (^Sb),  aa  Łhey  are  demoostimted  in  the  ibunduig 
of  the  univer8e.  The  book  shows  why  there  aie  juafc 
thirty-two  of  these;  by  an  analyaia  of  this  nmnber  it 
sceks  to  exhibit,  in  a  peculiar  method  of  theoaophicd 
arithmetic,  so  to  speak  (on  the  aasumption  that  figurea 
are  the  signs  of  exi8tence  and  thought),  the  docŁiine 
that  God  is  the  author  of  all  things,  the  m)iverse  being 
a  derelopnient  of  original  entity,  and  exi8tence  being  but 
thought  become  ooncrete;  in  short,  that,  instead  of  the 
heathenish  or  poptdar  Jewish  conception  of  the  world 
as  outwaid  or  ooexistent  with  Deity,  it  is  ooeqaal  in 
birth,  having  been  brought  out  of  nothing  by  God,  tbus 
establishing  a  pantheistic  system  of  emanation,  of  which, 
principally  becaiise  it  is  not  anywhere  designated  by 
this  name,  one  would  think  the  writer  was  not  himself 
quite  consciouB.  The  following  sketch  will  iUuatrate 
the  cańous  process  of  this  aigumentation.  The  number 
82  is  the  sum  of  10  (the  number  of  digits)  and  22  (the 
number  of  the  letters  of  the  Heb.  alphabet),  this  lattcr 
being  afterwards  further  resolred  into  3+7+12.  The 
fijst  chapter  treats  of  the  formcr  of  these,  or  the  <2^- 
cadćf  and  its  elements,  which  are  designated  aa  figurea 
(ni^T^BD,  Sephiroth),  in  contradistinction  from  the  22 
letters.  This  decade  is  the  sign  manuał  of  the  anivene. 
In  the  details  of  this  hypothesis,  the  exi8tence  of  diviii- 
ity  in  the  abstract  is  really  ignored,  though  not  foimally 
denied ;  thus  the  number  1  is  its  spirit  as  an  active  prin* 
cipie,  in  which  all  worids  and  beings  are  yet  indosed ;  2 
is  the  spirit  from  this  spirit,  i.  c.  the  active  princiiile  in 
80  far  as  it  has  beforehand  dccided  on  creaŁing ;  3  ia  wa* 
ter;  4  firc,  these  two  being  the  ideał  foundations  of  the 
materiał  and  spiritual  worids  respective1y ;  whilc  the  8ix 
remaining  figures,  5  to  10,  are  regardcd  se\*era]ly  as  the 
signs  manuał  of  height,  depth,  east,  w^est,  north,  and 
south,  forming  the  six  sides  of  the  cubc,  and  repreaen^ 
ing  the  idea  of  form  in  its  geometrical  pcrfection. 

"  We  sec,  however,  that  this  alone  establishes  nothing 
real,  but  mercly  expounds  the  idea  of  possibility  or  ac- 
tualityj  at  the  same  time  establishing  the  rirtiialiier  as 
exbting  in  Go<l,  the  foundation  of  all  Łhings.  The  ac- 
tiud  entities  are  thercfore  introduccd  in  the  subscquent 
chapters  under  the  22  letters.  The  connection  bct^-een 
the  two  series  is  eyidently  the  Word,  which  in  the  first 
Sephirah  (number)  is  yet  idcntical  in  voice  and  action 
with  the  spirit;  but  aften\<-ards  these  elements,  scpa- 
laŁing  as  creator  and  substance,  togcther  produce  the 
world,  the  materials  of  which  are  rcpresented  by  the 
letters,  sińce  thcsc,  by  thctr  manifold  combinatioua, 
name  and  describe  all  that  exist8.  Next,  three  letters 
are  abstracted  from  the  22  as  the  three  mothen  (oompo- 
sing  the  mnemotechnic  word  Gtifi^),  i.  e.  the  univer- 
sal  rclations  of  principle,  contrary  principle,  and  bal- 
ance,  or  in  naturę — fire,  water,  and  air;  in  the  world — 
the  heavens,  the  earth,  the  air;  in  the  scasons — hcat, 
cold,  mild  temperaturę;  in  humanity — the  spirit,  the 
iKHly,  the  soul;  in  the  body— the  head,  the  feet,  tha 
trunk ;  in  the  morał  organization— guilt,  innocenco.  law, 
etc.  These  are  followed  by  sevcn  douUeś  (consisting 
of  n*nB3^:i3),  L  e.  the  relations  of  things  which  ara 
subject  to  chaitge  (opposition  withouŁ  bałancc),  c.  g.  life 
and  deaŁh,  happiness  and  misery,  wisdom  and  insanity, 
riches  and  ]x>vcrty,  ł^eauty  and  ugłincss,  masteiy  and 
seryitudc.  But  Łhese  seyen  also  dcsignatc  the  materiał 
world,  namcly,  the  8ix  ends  (sides)  of  tlic  cubc,  an<l  the 
pałace  of  hoUness  in  the  middle  (the  immanent  deity) 
which  supports  it;  also  Łhe  sevcn  planets,  the  8cven 
heavcnly  spheres,  the  8evcn  days  of  the  week,  Łhe  seven 
wceks  (from  rassover  to  Pcutecost),  Łhe  Beven  portab 
of  the  soul  (i.  e.  the  eyes,  ears,  nose,  moutb,  etc.).  Thia 
theory  furŁhcr  lias  eaq)re8B  reference  to  the  fact  that 


JEZŁIAH 


917 


J  Hj-A  Iy.  H..  H^  i  j 


Ijnm,  the  oomlHiuUioa  of  the  letten  reraltOy  with  mathe- 
matical  oertainty  and  in  a  g^metiical  ratio,  a  ąuaoŁity 
of  wordB  ao  great  that  the  mind  cannot  eDumerata  them; 
thuB,  from  two  letten,  two  worda ;  from  three,  siz ;  from 
four,  twenty-fonr,  etc ;  or,  in  other  words,  that  the  let- 
ten, whethcr  spoken  as  results  of  breath,  or  written  as 
elements  of  words,  are  the  ideał  foundation  of  all  things. 
Finally,  the  twelre  single  letten  (conatituting  the  re- 
mainder  of  the  alphabet)  show  the  relations  of  things  00 
far  88  they  can  be  appiehended  in  a  uniyenal  categoiy. 
Their  geometrical  repreaentative  is  the  regular  twelv&> 
sided  polygon,  such  as  that  of  which  the  hoiizon  oon- 
sists;  their  repreaentation  in  the  world  gires  the  twelve 
aigns  of  the  zodiac  and  the  twelve  months  of  the  lonar 
jear ;  in  haman  beinga,  the  twelve  parts  of  the  body  and 
twelve  facłłlties  of  the  mind  (these  being  very  arbitrari- 
ly  determined).  They  are  so  organized  by  God  as  to 
form  at  onc«  a  proyinoe  ąnd  yet  be  ready  for  battle,  L  e. 
they  are  os  well  fitted  for  harmonious  as  for  oontentious 
action**  (Herzog). 

The  text  of  the  Jezirah  is  divided  into  six  chapters, 
which  are  subdirided  into  sections.  Its  style  is  purely 
dogmatic,  having  the  air  and  character  of  aphorisms, 
or  theorems  laid  down  with  an  absolute  authority. 
The  abetract  character  is,  howerer,  relierod  by  an  ha- 
gadistic  addition  which  relates  the  convenioD  of  Abcam 
from  Chaldffian  idolatry  to  pure  theism,  so  treated  as  to 
Tender  the  work  a  kind  of  monologue  of  that  patri- 
arch  on  the  natural  world,  as  a  monument  or  manifesta- 
tion  of  the  glory  of  the  one  only  God.  The  book  of 
Jeziiah  has  been  pubUshed  with  five  commentaries 
(Mantua,  1562) ;  with  a  Latin  tranalation  and  notes  by 
Eittangelius  (Amst.  1642),  and  with  a  German  tranala- 
tion and  notes  by  Meyer  (Lpzg.  1880).  See  GrUtz,  in 
Fiankel'8  Monatttduyty  ylii,  67  8q.,  108  sq.,  140  8q. ; 
Steinschneider,  Całatog,  Libr,  HAr,  in  BibUotheea  BodL 
coL  835  sq.,  552,  689  sq.;  Y\XtaXj BiblioUu  Jud,  i,  27  Bq.; 
ii,  258  8q.    See  Paittheism. 

Jezli^ah  (Heb.  Yizliah^  hM^tlbr,  perh.c&-atn»  out, 
i  e^jnruerwd ;  Sept  'liCKia  v.  r.  'Ic^Aiac,  Vulg.  JexHa)f 
one  of  the  ^  sons"  of  Elpaal,  and  apparently  a  chief  Ben- 
jamite  resident  at  Jeniaalem  (1  Chroń,  viii,  18).  B.C. 
probw  dr.  688. 

Jeso^ftr  [some  Jez'oar]  (1  Cairon.  ir,  7).    See 

ZOAB. 

Jesrahl^ah  (Neh.  zii,  42).    See  Izrahiah,  2. 

Jes^reSl  (Heb.  Yizriel,'  ^K^-IT;*,  once  b^rin,  2 
Kings  ix,  10;  iown  by  God;  Sept.  l<Cpa^X,  but  some- 
limes  'Ic^pfi^X,  'l£^p(^X,'Ic^paA  or  'UZpak\ ;  Josephus 
'UffpdTi\a,  Ant.  viii,  13,  6 ;  'IcffpacAa,  ^niL  ix,  6, 4),  the 
name  of  two  places  and  of  seyeral  men. 

1.  A  town  in  the  tiibe  of  Issachar  (Josh.  xix,  18), 
where  the  kings  of  laiael  had  a  palące  (2  Sam.  ii,  8  8q.), 
and  where  the  court  often  resided  (1  Kings  xviii,  45; 
xxi,  1 ;  2  Kings  ix,  80),  although  Samaria  was  the  me- 
tropolis  of  that  kingdom.  It  is  most  freąuently  men- 
Łioned  in  the  history  of  the  house  of  Ahab.  **  In  the 
neighborhood,  or  within  the  town  probably,  was  a  tem- 
pie and  grove  of  Astarte,  with  an  establishment  of  400 
priests  supported  by  Jezebel  (1  Kings  xvi,  88 ;  2  Kings 
X,  11).  The  pajace  of  Ahab  (1  Kings  xxi,  1 ;  xviii,  46), 
probably  oontaining  his  <ivory  house'  (1  Kings  xxii, 
89),  was  on  the  eastem  side  of  the  city,  forming  part  of 
the  dty  wali  (comp.  1  Kings  xxi,  1 ;  2  Kings  ix,  26, 80, 
88).  The  seraglio,  in  which  Jezebd  lived,  was  on  the 
dty  wali,  and  had  a  high  window  facing  eastward  (2 
Kings  ix,  80).  Ck)se  by,  if  not  fonning  part  of  this  se- 
niglio  (as  Josephus  supposes,  A  nt.  ix,  6, 4),  was  a  watch- 
tower,  on  whioh  a  sentinel  stood,  to  give  notioe  of  ar- 
rivaLi  from  the  disturbed  district  beyond  the  Jordan  (2 
Kings  ix,  17).  This  watch-tower,  well-known  as  *  the 
tower  in  JezreeV  may  possibly  have  been  the  tower  or 
migdal  near  which  the  Egyptian  army  was  encamped  in 
the  battle  between  Necho  and  Joaiah  (Herod,  ii,  159). 
An  ancient  sqaare  tower  which  stands  amongst  the 
hovels  of  the  modem  yiUage  may  be  its  repre8entative. 


The  gateway  of  the  dty  on  the  east  was  alao  the  gate* 
way  of  the  palące  (2  Kings  ix,  34).  Inunediately  in 
front  of  the  gateway,  and  under  the  dty  wali,  was  an 
open  space,  such  as  existed  beforc  the  neighboring  dty 
of  Bethshan  (2  Sam.  xxi,  12),  and  is  usually  found  by 
the  walls  of  Eastem  dties,  under  the  name  of  'the 
mounds'  (see  A  rabian  Nighłś,  passim),  whence  the  dogs, 
the  scavengen  of  the  Kast,  prowled  in  search  of  offal  (2 
Kings  ix,  26).  See  Jekkbbl.  A  littk  further  east, 
but  adjacent  to  the  royal  domain  (1  Kings  xxi,  1),  was 
a  smooth  tract  of  land  deared  out  of  the  uneven  valley 
(2  Kings  ix,  25),  which  belonged  to  Naboth,  a  dtizen 
of  Jezreel  (2  Kings  ix,  26),  by  a  hereditaiy  right  (1 
Kings  xxi,  8) ;  but  the  royal  grounds  were  so  near 
that  it  would  have  easUy  been  tumed  into  a  garden 
of  herfos  for  the  royal  use  (1  Kings  xxi,  2).  Herę 
Elijah  met  Ahab  (1  Kings  xxi,  17)"  (Smith).  Herę 
was  the  vineyard  of  NalMth,  which  Ahab  ooveted  to 
enlarge  the  palace-grounds  (1  Kings  xyiii,  45, 46 ;  xxi), 
and  here  Jehu  exocuted  his  dreadful  oommiasion  against 
the  house  of  Ahab,  when  Jezebel,  Jehoram,  and  all 
who  were  oonneoted  with  that  wietehed  dynasty  pei^ 
ished  (2  Kings  ix,  14r^7 ;  x,  1-1 1).  These  horrid  scenes 
appear  to  have  gtven  the  kings  of  Israel  a  distaste  for 
this  residence,  as  it  is  not  again  mentioned  in  their  his* 
tory.  It  is,  however,  named  by  Hoeea  (i,  4 ;  compare  i, 
11 ;  ii, 22) ;  and  in  Judith  (i,8;  iv,  8;  vii,  8)  it  occun 
under  the  name  of  Eadradon  (Effdfnikiinf),  near  Do- 
thaim.  In  the  days  of  Euaebius  and  Jerome  it  was  stiU 
a  large  viUage,  12  R.  miles  from  Scythopolis  and  10  from 
Legio,  called  Eadratia  CEodpwiKa,  Onomast,  s.  v.  'U^ 
pau\,  Jezrael) ;  and  in  the  same  age  it  again  occun  as 
Stradda  (Jtin,  Uieroi,  p.  586).  Nothing  morę  u  heard 
of  it  till  the  time  of  the  Crusades,  when  it  was  called  by 
the  Franks  Parcum  Gerinum,  and  by  the  Aiabs  Zerin 
(an  evident  oorraption  of  the  old  name) ;  and  it  is  de- 
scribed  as  commanding  a  wide  prospect — on  the  east  to 
the  mountains  of  Gilead,  and  on  the  west  to  Mount  Car- 
mel  (Wia  Tyr.  xxii,  26).  Bot  this  linę  of  Identification 
seems  to  have  been  afterwards  lost  sight  of,  and  Jezred 
came  to  be  identlfled  with  Jenin.  Indeed,  the  villBge 
of  Zerin  ceased  to  be  mentioned  by  travellen  till  Tui^ 
ner,  Buckingham,  and  otben  after  them  again  brought 
it  into  notice;  and  it  is  still  morę  lately  that  the  Iden- 
tification of  Zerin  and  Jezred  has  been  restored  (Rau- 
mcr,Paia«fi)uz,p.l55;  Schubert,  iii,  164;  Elliot,  ii,  879; 
Bobin8on,iii,  164). 

Zerin  is  seated  on  the  brow  of  a  rocky  and  veiy  steep 
descent  into  the  great  and  fertile  vaUey  of  J^reel,  which 
runa  down  between  the  mountains  of  Gilboa  and  Her- 
mon.  Lying  compantivdy  high,  it  oommands  a  wide 
and  noble  view,  extending  down  the  broad  vallcy  on 
the  east  as  far  as  the  Jordan  (2  Kings  ix,  17)  to  Beisan 
(Bethshean),  and  on  the  west  quite  across  the  great 
plain  to  the  mountains  of  Carmd  (1  Kings  xviii,  46). 
It  is  described  by  Dr.  Robinson  (JUsearcheg,  iii,  163)  as  a 
moet  magnificent  site  for  a  city,  which,  being  itself  a 
conspicuous  object  in  every  part,  would  naturally  give 
its  name  to  the  whole  region.  In  the  valley  directiy 
under  Zerin  is  a  conaiderable  fountain,  and  another  still 
larger  somewhat  further  to  the  east,  under  the  northem 
side  of  Gilboa,  called  Ain  Jalud.  There  can,  therefore, 
be  Uttle  question  that  as  in  Zerin  we  have  Jezreel,  so  in 
the  valley  and  the  fountain  we  have  the  ^  valley  of  Jez- 
reer  and  the  "  fountain  of  Jezreel"  of  Scripture.  Ze- 
rin has  at  present  little  morę  than  twenty  humble  dwell- 
ings,  mostly  in  rains,  and  with  few  inhabitants.  (See 
De  Saulcy,'i,79;  ii,806sq.;  Schwarz,  p.  164 ;  Thomson, 
ii,  180.)— Kitto. 

The  inhabitants  of  this  city  were  called  Jbzrerlites 
(Heb.  Tezral%\  ■'^KC^^*  1  Kings  xxi,  1,4, 6, 7, 15, 16; 
2  Kings  ix,  21, 25). 

Jezreel,  Blood  op  (0*^X3^,  L  e.  Uoodiked)^  put  for 
the  mnrden  perpetrated  by  Ahab  and  Jehu  at  this  plaoe 
(Hos.  i,  4).    See  bdow. 

Jezbeeł,  Day  of  (Di*^,  L  e,  period)  j  put  for  the  pre- 


j 


JEZREEL,  DrrCH  OF 


918 


JEZREEL,  YALLEY  OF 


dicted  time  of  the  execntion  of  veiigeance  for  the  atroci- 
ties  there  committed  (Hos.  i,  5).     See  8,  below. 

Jezreel,  Ditch  of  (bn,  Septuag.  irpoTtixifrfia),  was 
simply  the  fortification  or  intienchments  surrounding 
the  city,  outeide  of  which  Naboth  was  executed  (1  Kings 
xxi,  23;  comp.ver.  13).     See  Trench. 

Jezreel,  Fountain  of  d^?,  always  a  pereimial 
natural  spring),  a  place  where  Saul  encamped  before  the 
fatal  battle  of  Gilboa  (1  Sam.  xxLx,  1).  Still  in  the 
same  eastem  direction  from  Zeńn  are  two  springs,  one 
12  minutes  from  the  town,  the  other  20  minotes  (Robin- 


son, Bib.  Res,  iii,  167).  This  latter  spring  "  flows  from 
undcr  a  sort  of  cavem  in  the  wali  of  oonglomerate  rock, 
which  here  forms  the  base  of  Gilboa.  The  water  is  ex- 
oellent ;  and  issuing  from  creyices  in  the  rocks,  it  spreads 
out  at  once  into  a  tine  limpid  pool  40  or  50  feet  in  diam- 
eter,  fuli  of  fish"  (Robinson,  iii,  168).  This  probably, 
both  from  its  size  and  situation,  is  the  one  above  re- 
ferred  to.  It  is  also  probably  the  same  as  the  spring 
(A.  V. "  wdl*')  of  "  Harod,"  where  Gideon  encampeśd  be- 
fore his  night  attack  on  the  Midianites  (Judg.  yu,  1). 
(Possibly  the  nearer  spring  may  distinctively  h&re  been 
called  that  of  Jezreel,  and  the  farther  one  that  of  Har- 
od.) The  name  of  Harod,  "  trembling,"  probably  was 
taken  from  the  "  trembling"  of  Gideon*s  army  (Judg.  vii, 
8).  It  was  the  scenę  of  succe8sive  encampments  of  the 
(iusaders  and  Saracens,  and  was  called  by  the  Chris- 
tiaiis  Tuhania,  and  by  the  Arabs  A  in  Jdlud, "  the  spring 
of  Goliath"  (Robinson,  Bib.  Res.  iii, 69).  This  last  name, 
which  it  still  bears,  is  derived  from  a  tradition  men- 
tioned  by  the  Bordeaux  Pilgrim,  that  here  David  killed 
Goliath.  The  tradition  may  be  a  confused  reroiniscence 
of  many  battles  fought  in  its  neighborhood  (Ritter,  Jor- 
dan, p.  416) ;  or  the  word  may  be  a  comiption  of  "  Gil- 
ead," supposing  that  to  be  the  ancient  name  of  Gilboa, 
and  thus  explaining  Judg.  vii,  8,  ^  depart  from  Momit 
Gilead"  (Schwarz,  p.  834).  See  Gilead.  Accordingto 
Josephus  {Ant.  viii,  16,4,6),  this  spring,  and  the  pool 
attached  to  it,  was  the  spot  where  Naboth  and  his  sons 
were  executed,  where  the  dogs  and  swine  licked  up  their 
blood  and  that  of  Ahab,  and  where  the  harlots  bathed 
in  the  blood-stained  water  (Sept.).  But  the  natural  iii- 
ference  from  the  present  text  of  1  Kings  xxii,  88  makes 
the  scenę  of  these  eyents  to  be  the  pool  of  Samaria. — 
Smith.    See  Naboth. 

Jezreel,  Portion  of  (P1?H),  mcrcly  signifiea  the 
field  or  country  adjoining  the  city,  where  the  crime  of 
Ahab  had  been  perpetrated,  and  where  its  retribution 
was  to  be  exacted  (2  Kings  ix,  10, 21, 36, 37 ;  comp.  ver. 
25,  26).  Naboth  was  stoned  to  death  outside  the  dty 
of  Jezreel  (1  Kings  xxi,  13),  and  the  dogs  licked  up 
Ahab's  blood  that  was  clotted  in  the  bottom  of  his  char- 
iot,  before  it  was  washed,  near  the  pool  of  Samaria  (1 
Kinga  xxii,  35, 38) ;  hence  Schwarz  {Pałest.  p.  165,  notę) 
proposes  to  render  the  expre8sion  Cip^ą 
^ilTK,  "in  the  place  where"  (occurriug  in  the 
seńtence  of  retaliation,  1  Kings  xxi,  19),  as 
signifying  "  in  punishment  for  that ;"  but  this 
construction  is  not  in  accordance  with  the 
Heb.  idiom  (see  Gesenius'8  Lex.  s.  v.  Diptt), 
and  the  other  incidenta  fumish  a  sufficient- 
ly  exact  fulfilment  of  the  prediction  (see 
Ćlarkc's  Comment.  ad  loc). 

Jezreel,  Tower  of  (b^i?,  Sept,  łrwp- 
yoc),  was  one  of  the  turrets  or  bastions  guard- 
ing  the  entrance  to  the  city,  and  seutinelled 
as  usual  by  a  watchman  (2  Kings  ix,  17). 
See  aboye. 

Jezreel,  Valley  of  (p^?,  Josb.  xvii, 
16 ;  Judg.  vi,  33 ;  Hos.  i,  5).  On  the  north- 
em  side  of  the  city,  between  the  parallel 
ridges  of  Gilboa  and  Moreh  (now  called  Jebel 
ed-Duhy;  see  Moreh),  lies  a  rich  ralley 
(hence  its  name,  Gods  seedinff-place),  an  oflf- 


sboot  Oi  Esdradon,  running  down  eastward  to  the  Jordan. 
This  was  called  the  "  Valley  of  Jezreel ;"  and  Bethshan, 
with  the  other  towns  in  and  around  the  valley,  was  orig- 
inally  inhabited  by  a  fierce  and  warlike  race  wbo  had 
"  chariots  of  iron"  (Josh.  xvii,  16).  The  region  fell  chiei^y 
to  the  lot  of  Issachar,  but  ueither  this  tribe  nor  iŁ»  mon 
powerful  neighbor  Ephraim  was  ablc  to  drive  out  the  an- 
cient people  (xix,  18).  The  "  ralley  of  Jezreel"  became 
th(  8  en**  of  one  of  the  most  signal  victories  evcr  achiercd 
by  luc  Israelites,  and  of  one  of  the  most  melancboly  de- 
I  fcats  they  evcr  sustained.  In  the  time  of  the  Judp(:s, 
the  Midianites,  Amalekites,  and  "  children  of  the  East' 


crossed  the  Jordan,  and  "  pitched  in  the  yalley  uf  Jez- 
reel," almost  covering  its  green  pastures  with  their 
tents,  flocks,'and  herds  (Judg.  vi,  33  sq.).  Gideon  has- 
tily  summoned  the  warriors  of  Israel  round  his  standard, 
and  took  up  a  position  on  the  lower  slopes  of  Gilbua, 
close  to  the  "well  of  Harod**  (vii,  1 ;  also  called  "ihe 
fomitain  of  Jezreel"),  about  a  mile  east  of  the  city.  (See 
above.)  See  Gideon.  Two  centurios  later  the  Philis- 
tines  took  up  the  identical  position  formeily  occupied 
by  the  Midianites,  and  the  Israelites  undcr  Saul  pitched 
on  Gideon's  old  camping-ground  by  the  "fountain  of 
Jezreel"  (1  Sam.  xxix,  1-11).  The  Israelites  were  de- 
feated,  and  Saul  and  Jonathan,  with  the  flowcr  of  iheir 
troops,  fell  on  the  heighta  of  Gilboa  (xxxi,  1-6)-— Kitto. 
See  Saul. 

In  later  ages  the  ralley  of  Jezreel  seems  to  have  ex- 
tended  its  name  to  the  whole  of  the  wider  plain  of  Ei- 
draelon,  which  continued  to  be  the  scenę  of  the  greatcit 
militaiy  evolutions  of  Palcstine.  This  latter  ia.  indced, 
the  most  exten8ive  level  in  the  Holy  Land  (ro  Til'iov 
fiiya  simply,  1  Mace.  xii,  49;  Josephus,  ^  n/.  xv,  1, 32; 
viii,  2,  3;  iii,  8,  5;  xv,  8,  5;  War,  iii,  8, 1;  Li/fAU 
fully  TÓ  fiiya  ttłciop  'E<T^pijXw/i,  Judith  i,  8).  It  is  the 
modem  J/er;  /6n-M  mir,  by  which  the  whole  of  th« 
plain  is  known  to  the  Arabs.  It  is  also  known  in  Scrip- 
ture  as  the  plain  ofMfffiddo  (2  Chroń,  xxxv,  22 ;  Zoch. 
xii,  11),  and  the  Armageddon  of  the  Apocaiypse  (Rer. 
xvi,  16).  It  extend8  about  thirty  miles  in  length  from 
east  to  west,  and  eighteen  in  brcadth  firom  nonh  to 
Bouth.  It  is  bounded  on  the  north  by  the  mountains  of 
Galilee,  and  on  the  south  by  those  of  Samaria;  oa  tha 
eastem  part  by  Mount  Tabor,  the  Little  Hennon.  uhI 
Gilboa;  and  on  the  west  by  Carmel,  between  which 
rangę  and  the  mountains  of  Galilee  is  an  outlct,  where- 
by  the  river  Kishon  winds  itt  way  to  the  bay  of  Acre 
(see  Robinson^s  Research^,  iii,  160-162, 181, 227).  Hens, 
in  the  most  fertile  part  of  the  land  of  Canaan  (see  llafi- 
seląuist,  Trat.  p.  176;  Troiło,  p.  545;  Maundrdl,  p.  76; 
Schubert,  iii,  163, 166),  the  tribe  of  Issachar  rejoiced  ia 
their  tents  (Deut.  xxxiii,  18).  In  the  first  ages  of  Jew- 
ish  history,  as  well  as  during  the  Boman  empire  sń 
the  Crusades,  and  even  in  later  timcs,  this  plain  ha 
been  the  scenę  of  many  a  memorable  contest  (see  Bob- 


Map  of  the  Yalley  of  Jezreel  and  Plam  of  l»draeń». 


J  K^KHjHjI  j 


919 


JIPHTHAH-EL 


inson,  Rnearches,  u,  283).  The  same  plain  was  the 
scenę  of  the  conflict  of  Łhe  Israelites  and  the  Syrians  (1 
Kings  XX,  26-30).  Herę  also  Josiah,  king  of  Judab, 
fuo^ht  in  diflguise  against  Mecho,  king  of  Egypt,  and 
fell  by  the  atrows  of  hia  antagonist  (2  Kings  xxłii,  29). 
Jowphus  olten  mentions  this  remarkable  part  of  the 
Holy  Land,  and  always  (as  aboye)  under  the  appella- 
tion  of  the  Great  Pkan ;  under  the  same  name  it  is  also 
spoken  of  by  Eusebios  and  Jerome  (in  the  Onomtuł,^ 
**  It  has  been  a  chosen  place  for  encampment,'*  says  Dr. 
K.  Clarkc, "  in  ever}'  contest  from  the  da>^  of  Nabucha- 
donosor,  king  of  the  Aasyrians,  in  the  history  of  whose 
war  with  Arphaxad  (Judith  i,  8)  it  is  mentioned  as  the 
great  plain  of  Esdraelon,  imtil  the  disastious  roarch  of 
the  late  Napoleon  Bonaparte  from  Egypt  into  Syria. 
Jews,  Gentiles,  Saracens,  Christian  crusaders,  Egyptians, 
Persians,  Druses,  Turks,  Arabs,  and  French,  warriors  out 
of  erery  nation  which  is  under  hearen,  have  pitched 
their  tents  in  the  plain  of  Esdraelon,  and  have  beheld 
the  Yarious  banners  of  their  nation  wet  with  the  dews 
of  Tabor  and  of  Hermon.**  (For  other  notices  of  this 
place,  see  De  Saulcy*s  Narratwe^  ii,  806-3 1 1 .)  This  no- 
ble plain,  like  the  greater  portion  of  all  the  rich  plains 
of  Palestine  and  S^^ria,  is  in  the  hands  of  the  goyem- 
ment,  and  is  only  partially  cultiyated;  the  soil  is  deep, 
of  a  dark  red  color,  inclined  to  be  clayey,  and  cannot  be 
Burpaased  in  natural  fertility  (see  Reland,  Palast,  p.  366 
8q. ;  Hamesyeld,  i,  418  sq.).     See  £sdraeix>v. 

2.  A  town  in  the  mountains  of  Judah,  mentioned  be- 
twecn  Juttah  and  Jokdeam  (Josh.  xy,  56),  situated  (ac- 
cordiiig  to  the  associated  names)  in  the  district  south- 
east  of  Hebron,  on  the  edge  of  the  desert  of  Judah.  It 
is  possibly  identical  with  the  modem  ruined  site  Zurłuł, 
which  lies  in  a  fertile  region  (Robinson,  RetearcheSy  ii, 
201),  as  the  name  Jezrecl  implies.  See  No.  8.  It  was 
probably  this  place  (1  Sam.  xxy,  43)  from  which  came 
Ahinoam,  one  of  David*s  wives  (comp.  the  neighboring 
Carmel,  whcre  Abigail,  his  other  wifc,  taken  about  the 
same  time,  resided),  the  Jkzreelitess  (n**ix5*łt|;',  1 
Sam.  xxvii,  3 ;  xxx, 5;  2  Sam. ii, 2;  iii, 2;  1  Chroń. iii, 
1).    See  Abez. 

3.  A  dcscendant  of  Judah  (1  Chroń,  iv,  8,  where  two 
brothers  and  a  sister  are  also  mentioned),  apparently 
of  the  same  family  with  Pennel  and  Ezer,  **  sons**  of 
Hur,  the  grandson  of  Hezron  (ver.  4).  From  the  fre- 
quent  association  of  names  of  places  in  the  yicinity  of 
Bethlehem  in  the  same  comiection,  it  is  probable  that 
this  Jezreel  was  the  founder  of  the  town  in  the  tribe  of 
Judah  (Ko.  2,  aboye)  which  borę  his  name.  In  the 
text  it  is  stated  of  him  and  his  relatLve8, "  these  are  the 
father  of  Etam"  (D^*^?  "^n^  nisM;),  Sept.  Kai  ohroi 
tHol  AlrófAf  Vulg.  ista  quoque  śłirpt  Etom,  Auth.  Yers. 
**  and  these  are  of  the  fathers  of  Etam*"),  meaning  ap- 
parently that  they  founded  or  resided  in  the  place  by 
that  name;  and,  as  seyeral  other  towns  in  the  same 
generał  neighborhood  are  expre88ly  assigned  to  separate 
individuals  in  the  enumeretion,  this  must  be  ascribed 
specially  to  Ishma  and  Idbash,  who,  with  their  sister, 
are  the  only  two  not  thus  particularly  identified  with 
any  other  locality.    B.C.  cur.  1612. 

4.  A  symbolical  name  giyen  by  the  prophet  Hosea 
to  his  oWest  son  (Hos.  i,  4),  then  just  bom  (B.C.  cir. 
782),  in  token  of  a  great  slaughter  predicted  by  him, 
like  that  which  had  before  so  often  drenched  the  soil  of 
the  plain  of  Esdraelon  with  blood  (ii,  2).  He  is  after- 
wards  ma«le,  together  with  his  brother  Ło-ammi  and 
•his  sister  Lo-ruhama  (i,  6,  9),  emblems  of  the  Jewish 
•people  to  be  restored  after  punishment  and  dispersion  in 
tbe  approaching  exile,  and  to  be  aiigmented  by  new  fa- 
Tors  (ii,  24, 25).  In  this  way  is  to  be  understood  the 
▼ex6d  passage  of  the  same  prophet  (Hos.  ii,  22),  *<  And 
the  earth  shall  hear  [rather,  answer,  and  yield]  the 
oom,  and  the  winę,  and  the  oil  [due  from  the  soil];  and 
they  [L  e.  these  gifts  of  the  earth]  shall  hear  [answer] 

•Jezreel,"  L  e.  the  earth,  rendered  fertile  from  heaven  (see 
ver.  21),  shall  yield  anew  her  produce  to  (the  tillers  of) 


Jezreel.  The  prophet  then  (yer.  28)  caińes  out  the  ref« 
erence  to  his  son,  with  eyident  alluaion  to  the  ńgnifica- 
tion  of  the  name  Jezreel,  which  implies  the  productiye- 
ness  of  that  plain,  ^  And  I  will  sow  her  [i.  e.  him  and  if, 
Jezreel  being  construed  as  a  fem.,  like  other  coliectiyea, 
e.  g.  Ephraim  in  Isa.  xvii,  10, 11,  etc]  unto  me  in  the 
earth ;  and  I  will  have  mercy  upon  her  that  had  not  ob-  | 
tained  mercy  [L  e.  again  cherith  Lo-ruhama]f  and  I  ' 
will  say  to  them  which  were  not  my  people  [L  e.  to 
^o-amfnt],  Thou  art  my  people,  and  they  shall  say, 
Thou  art  my  Grod ;"  L  e.  the  whole  people  of  Israel,  whom 
the  prophet  thus  emblematically  represents  by  his  three 
children,  will  again  be  planted,  cherished,  and  claimed 
byjehoyahashisown. — Gesenius.  See  Hosea.  ''From 
this  time  the  image  seems  to  have  been  continued  as  a 
prophetical  expres8ion  for  the  sowing  the  people  of  Is- 
rael, as  it  were  broadcast;  as  if  the  whole  of  Pales- 
tine and  the  world  were  to  become,  in  a  spiritual  sense, 
one  rich  plain  of  JezreeL  *  1  will  aow  them  among  the 
people,  and  they  shall  remember  me  in  far  countries* 
(Zech.  X,  9).  *  Ye  shall  be  tiUed  and  soum,  and  I  will 
multiply  men  upon  you*  (Ezek.  xxxvi,  9, 10).  '  I  will 
SO10  the  house  of  Israel  and  the  house  of  Judah  with  the 
seed  of  men  and  with  the  seed  of  beast'  (Jer.  xxxi,  27). 
Heuce  the  consecration  of  the  image  of  'sowing,'  as  it 
appears  in  the  N.  T.  (Matt.  xii,  2)"  (Smith). 

Jez''reSlite  (1  Kings  xxi,  1, 4, 6, 7, 15, 16 ;  2  Kings 
ix,  21, 25),  an  inhabitant  of  Jezreel  (q.v.),  in  Issachar. 

Jez''reelite88  (1  Sam.  xxyii,  8 ;  xxx,  5 ;  2  Sam.  ii, 
2 ;  1  Chroń,  iii,  1),  a  woman  of  Jezreel  (q.  v.),  in  Ju- 
dah. 

Jib^sam  (Hebrew  Pt&fam',  ^TO^*^,  pleasatU ;  Sept 
'Ufiaaaii  y.  r.  'Ic|ia(rav),  one  of  the  "  sons"  of  Tola,  the 
son  of  lasachar,  a  yaliant  chief,  apparently  of  the  time 
of  David  (1  Chroń,  vii,  2).     Ra  cir.  1017, 

Jld'laph  (Hebiew  Yidlaph',  5)^7%  tearful;  Sept 
*U\Ba^\  the  seyenth  named  of  the  eight  sons  of  Nahor 
(Abraham*s  brother)  by  Milcah  (Gen.  xxii,  22).  B.C. 
cir.  2040.  # 

Jim''iia  (Numb.  xxvi,  44),  Jim^nah  (Gen.  xlvi,  17), 
Jim'nlte  (Numb.  xvi,  44).    See  Imna. 

Jiph^tah  (Heb.  Yiphtach',  tlPlfi%  the  same  name 
as  Jfphthah;  Sept.  'Ic^^d),  a  town  in  the  "lowUnd" 
district  of  Judah,  mentioned  between  Ashan  and  Ash- 
mah  (Josh.  xy,  43),  and  lying  in  the  southern  medial 
group  west  of  Hebron  and  east  of  Eleutheropolis.  See 
Judah.  Some  (e.  g.  Keil,  ad  loc.)  haye  located  it  in 
the  mountain  district,  contrary  to  the  text;  but,  al- 
though  the  import  of  the  name  implies  a  "  defile"  ad- 
joining,  and  the  associated  names  cre  iudicative  of  nat- 
urally  strong  positions,  yet  the  "plain"  or  Shąihelah  (q. 
y.)  here  actuaily  comes  quite  far  in<this  direction  to  the 
proper  "hill  country"  (Robinson,  Researchet,  iii,  18). 
We  may  therefore  presume  a  location  for  Jiphtah  at  the 
ruined  yillage  Jimrm,  where 'a  smaller  valley  mus  up 
south  from  wady  el-Melek  (Robinson,  ii,  842,  notę ;  Yan 
de  yelde's  Map]  ed.  1864). 

Jiph^thah-el  (Heb.  Yiphtach''d,  ^K-nnfi^,  opeth- 
ing  of  God;  Sept  [Tal]  'Ic^a^X),  a  yalley  at  the  in- 
tersection  of  the  linę  between  Asher  and  Naphtali  with 
the  noTthem-  boundary  of  Zebulon  (Josh.  xix,  14,  27). 
Dr.  Robinson,  with  great  probability,  suggests  (new  ed.  i 
of  Researchesj  iii,  106, 107)  that  the  name  is  represented 
by  that  o(Jotapała  ('Iwran-ara),  the  renowned  fortress 
of  Galilee  mentioned  by  Josephus  as  haying  been  forti- 
fied  by  himself  {War,  ii,  20,  6;  Life,  87),  and  then  as 
haying  held  out,  under  his  own  command,  against  the 
continued  assaults  of  Tespasian,  and  where  he  was  at 
last  taken  prisoner  after  the  downfall  of  the  place  (  War, 
iii,  7,  8-86).  He  describes  it  as  soirounded  by  a  preci- 
pice,  except  on  the  north,  where  the  dty  extended  out 
upon  the  sloping  extremity  of  the  opposite  mountain; 
the  deep  yalleys  on  the  other  sides  were  overlooked  by 
surrounding  mountains.  It  contained  no  fountains,  but 
only  cistems,  with  cayems  and  subterranean  recesses. 


JIREH 


920 


JOAB 


BeUuid  had  alieady  lemaiked  CPaJa$L  p.  816, 867)  that 
tbe  GopakUa  (Knn&ISi)  ofthe  Tabnadic  writings,  three 
miles  iiom  Sepphoriu,  was  probably  idendcal  with  this 
place.  It  is  doubtless  the  modem  Jefaij  which  lies  four 
OT  five  English  miles  from  Sefurieh.  It  was  fint  yińted 
and  identified  by  Schultz  (Ritter,  Erdh,  xyi,  768  8q.). 
The  yalley  in  ąuestion  would  thus  answer  to  the  great 
wady  AbUwj  which  nmB  aouth-westerly  from  Jcfat,  the 
boundary  between  Aaher  and  Zebolon  foUowing  the  linę 
of  hiUs  between  Sukhnin  and  Kefir  Menda,  in  which 
thiB  wady  has  its  head  (Robinson,  tU  tup.),  rather  than 
to  the  deeper  wady  Jiddin,  considerably  sonth  of  this, 
and  numing  in  the  same  direcdon,  on  the  southem  aide 
of  which  stands  the  yiUage  of  Aru^ah,  therefore  not  al- 
together  answering  to  Beth-Emek  (as  thought  by  Dr. 
Smith,  BibUotheca  Sacra,  1853,  p.  121),  which  was  thus 
situated  on  the  yalley  Jiphthah-el  (Josh.  xix,  27).  Dr. 
Thomson,  while  justly  objecting  to  the  latter  vaUey,  as 
being  too  far  north  (Land  and  Book,  i,  472),  proposes  as 
the  site  of  Jiphthah  the  niined  site  J{ftah, "  situated  on 
the  edge  of  the  long  valley  [rather  plain]  of  Thiran," 
which  he  would  identify  with  the  "  yalley  of  Jiphthah- 
el"  (ft6.  ii,  122) ;  but  this,  on  the  other  hand,  lies  eyen 
south  of  Rumaneh  (Rimmon),  which  undoubtedly  lay 
within  Zebulon  (1  Chroń,  yi,  77).  The  title  (K*'*,  rar- 
9fi«,  and  not  bns,  toacbf,  L  e.  '^yalley  watered  by  a 
brook;"  see  Gesenius,  Lexic,  s.  y.)  properly  designates 
this  fine  pass  (hence  the  superlatiye  luune,  God's  Defile), 
which  connects  the  rich  plain  el-Buttauf  on  the  east 
with  the  yet  morę  fertile  plain  of  Acre  on  the  west,  and 
is  described  by  the  Scottish  deputation  as  <<inclosed 
with  stcep  wooded  hills;  sometimes  it  tiarrows  almoU 
io  Ihe  BtraUness  o/a  dejile.  .  .  .  The  yalley  is  long,  and 
dedines  yery  gently  towards  the  west;  the  hills  on 
either  side  are  often  finely  wooded,  sometimes  rocky 
and  picture8qu&  The  road  is  one  of  the  best  in  Pales- 
tine,  and  was  no  doubt  much  frequented  in  ancient  days" 
CReporł,  p.  $09, 810).  There  seems  also  to  be  an  allu- 
aion  to  the  etymological^  force  of  the  name  (q.  d.  the 
opemtiff  out  of  a  gorge  into  a  plain)  in  the  statement 
(Josh.  xix,  14), "  And  the  oułffoingt  thereof  are  in  the 
yalley  of  Jiphthah-er  (comp.  Deut  xxxiii,  18,  "And  of 
Zebulon  hc  said,  Rejoice,  Zebulon,  in  thy  ffoinffs  ouT). 

Jireh.    See  JEuoyAH-jiREH. 

Jizchaki.    See  Rasiii  ;  Saktar. 

Jo^^b  (Heb.  Yoab\  2Ki%  Jehovah  is  luB/ather; 
Sept.  'Iwd/3,  but  'lufiafi  in  1  Chroń,  ii,  16),  the  name 
nf  three  men.    See  also  Ataroth-bbth-Joab. 

1.  The  son  of  Seraiah  (son  of  Kenaz,  of  the  tiibe  of 
Judah),  and  progenitor  of  the  inhabitants  of  Charashim 
or  craftsmen  (1  Chroń,  iv,  14).     RC  post  1667, 

2.  One  of  the  three  sons  of  Zeruiah,  the  sister  of  Da- 
yid  (2  Sam.  viii,  16 ;  xx,  18),  and  "  captain  of  the  host** 
(generalisstmo  of  the  army)  during  nearly  the  whole  of 
David'8  reigii  (2  Sam.  ii,  13 ;  x,  7 ;  xi,  1 ;  1  Kings  xi, 
15;  2  Sam.  xviii,  2).  It  is  a  little  remarkable  that  he 
b  destgnated  by  his  matenial  parentage  only,  his  father's 
name  being  nowhere  mentioned  in  the  Scriptnres.  Jo- 
sephus  ('I  (łia/Soc))  indeed,  gives  (A  ni,  vii,  1,8)  the  father^s 
name  as  Suri  (£oi/f>t),  but  this  may  be  meiely  a  repeti- 
tion  of  the  preceding  Sarouiah  (Sapoina),  Perhaps  he 
was  a  foreigner.  He  seems  to  bave  resided  at  Bethle- 
hem,  and  to  have  died  before  his  sons,  as  we  find  men- 
tion  of  his  sepulchre  at  that  place  (2  Sam.  ii,  32). 

Joab  first  appears  aseociated  with  his  two  brothers, 
Abishai  and  Asahel,  in  the  command  of  David's  troops 
against  Abner,  who  had  set  up  the  claims  of  a  son  of 
Saul  in  opposition  to  those  of  David,  then  reigning  in 
Hebron.  The  armies  having  met  at  the  pool  of  Gibeon, 
a  generał  action  was  brought  on,  in  which  Abner  was 
worsted,  RC.  1058.  See  Gibeon.  In  his  flight  he  had 
the  misfortune  to  kill  Joab^s  brother,  the  swifk^footed 
Asahel,  by  whom  he  was  pursued  (2  Sam.  ii,  13-82). 
See  Abner  ;  Asaheu  Joab  smothered  for  a  time  his 
resentment  against  the  shedder  of  his  brother'8  blood; 


but,  being  whettad  by  the  natond  riyaky  of  position 
between  him  and  Abner,  he  afterwards  madę  it  tbe  ez.- 
cnse  of  his  policy  by  tieacberously,  in  the  act  of  fńend- 
ly  comrounication,  siaying  Abner,  at  the  reiy  time 
when  the  seryices  of  the  latter  to  Dayid,  to  wham  be 
had  then  tumed,  had  rendered  him  a  moet  dangeioiu 
riyal  to  him  in  power  and  influence  (2  Sam.  iii,  22-27}. 
That  Abner  had  at  first  suspected  that  Joab  would  take 
the  position  of  blood-ayenger  [see  Blooi>-re\'ekge]  is 
elear  from  the  apprehension  which  he  expire8sed  (2  Siibi. 
ii,  22) ;  but  that  he  thought  that  Joab  had,  under  all 
the  circumstances,  abandoned  this  {losition,  is  shown  by 
the  unsuspecting  readiness  with  which  he  went  aaide 
with  him  (2  Sam.  iii,  26,  27);  and  that  Joab  placed  his 
ronrderous  act  on  the  footing  of  yengeance  for  his  brotb- 
er^s  bkxMi  is  plainly  stated  in  2  Sam.  iii,  80;  by  whicb 
it  also  appeais  that  the  other  brother,  Abishai,  ahsred 
in  some  way  in  the  deed  and  its  responsbilitiea.  At  the 
same  time,  as  Abner  was  perfectly  justified  in  alsjin^ 
Asahel  to  saye  his  own  life,  it  ia  veiy  doubtful  if  Joiab 
would  ever  have  asserted  his  right  of  blood-reven|ce  had 
not  Abner  appeared  likely  to  endanger  his  influence 
with  Dayid.  The  king,  much  aa  he  reprobated  the  act, 
knew  that  it  had  a  sort  of  exctt8e  in  the  old  customa  of 
blood-reyenge,  and  he  stood  habitually  too  much  in  awe 
of  his  impetuous  and  able  nephew  to  bring  bim  to  p«in- 
ishment,  or  even  to  displace  him  from  his  oomnusiid. 
'^  I  am  this  day  weak,"  he  said, "  though  anointed  kin^ 
and  these  men,  the  sons  of  Zeniiah,  be  too  bard  far  me* 
(2  Sam.  iii,  39).  KC.  1046.  Desirous  probably  of  mak- 
ing  some  atonement  before  Dayid  and  the  public  for 
this  atrocity,  in  a  way  which  at  the  same  time  was 
most  likely  to  proye  effectual,  lumnely,  by  some  darin^ 
exploit,  Joab  was  the  fiist  to  mount  to  the  aseaulŁ  at  tbe 
storming  of  the  fortress  on  Mount  Zioń,  which  had  re- 
mained  so  long  in  the  hands  of  the  Jebusites,  RC  etc 
1044.  By  this  8er\Hce  he  acquired  the  chief  command 
of  the  amiy  of  all  Israel,  of  which  Dayid  was  by  this 
time  king  (2  Sam.  y,  6-10).  He  had  a  chief  armoi^ 
bearer  of  his  own,  Naharai,  a  Becrothite  (2  Sam.  xxiii, 
87 ;  1  Chroń,  xi,  89),  and  ten  attendanta  to  canry  his 
equipment  and  baggage  (2  Sam.  xviii,  15).  He  had 
the  charge,  formerly  belonging  to  the  king  or  judge,  of 
giying  the  signal  by  trumpct  for  adyance  or  retieat  (2 
Sam.  xviii,  16).  He  was  called  by  the  almoat  regal 
title  of  "  lord"  (2  Sam.  xi,  11),  *"  the  prince  of  the  king^s 
anny"  (I  Chroń.  xxyii,  84).  His  usual  naidence  (ex* 
cept  when  campaigning)  was  in  Jeruaalem,  but  he  had 
a  house  and  property,  nnth  barley-fielda  adjointn|c,  in 
the  country  (2  Sam.  xiy,  80),  in  the  ^^wildemeaa"  (1 
Kings  ii,  84),  probably  on  the  north-east  d  Jemaakoi 
(compare  1  Sam.  xiii,  18 ;  Joab.  viii,  15,  iO),  near  an  m^ 
cient  sanctuary,  called  from  ita  iKMnadic  yiDage  ^  Baai- 
bazor"  (2  Sam.  xiii,  23;  compare  with  xiy,  d0X  where 
there  weie  exten8iye  sheepwalks.  It  is  possihle  that 
this  **  house  of  Joab"  may  haye  giyen  ita  name  to  At^ 
roth  Beih'-Joab  (1  Chroń,  ii,  54),  to  distinguish  it  from 
Ataroth-adar.  His  great  militaiy  achieyementa,  which 
he  oonducted  in  person,  may  be  diyidcd  into  three  cain* 
paigns:  (a)  The  first  was  against  the  ailied  foroes  of 
Syria  and  Ammon.  He  attacked  and  defeated  tbe  Svt- 
ians,  while  his  brother  Abishai  did  the  same  for  the 
Ammonitea.  The  Syiiana  rallied  with  their  kindred 
tribes  from  beyond  the  Euphiates,  and  were  finally 
routed  by  David  himself.  See  Hadarezkr.  (6>  The 
seoond  was  against  Edom.  The  dedsiye  yictoiy  was 
gained  by  Dayid  himself  in  tho  **  yalley  of  salt,^  and 
celebrated  by  a  triumpbal  monument  (1  Sam.  yiii,  13). 
But  Joab  had  the  chaige  of  canying  out  the  yictoijy 
and  remained  for  six  months  extirpatang  the  małe  poi>- 
ulation,  whom  he  then  buńed  in  the  tombs  of  Petia  (i 
Kings  xi,  15, 16).  So  loog  was  the  terror  of  bis  name 
presonred  that  only  when  the  fugitive  prince  of  Edom, 
in  the  Egyptian  court,  heazd  that  '^Dfayid  ałept  with 
his  fathers,  and  that  Joab,  tke  eaptam  oftkt  hoat,  wtm 
dead"  did  he  yenture  to  return  to  his  own  comitiy  (ifa^ 
xi,  21,  22).    (c)  The  third  was  against  the/ 


JOAB 


921 


JOACHIM 


They  weie  again  left  to  Joab  (2  Sanu  x,  7-ł9).  He 
went  againat  them  at  the  beginniog  of  Łhe  next  year, 
*<  at  the  time  when  kingą  go  out  to  battle" — to  the  aiege, 
of  Rabbah.  The  ark  was  scDt  with  him,  and  the  whole 
army  was  encamped  in  booths  or  huts  round  the  b&- 
leaguered  city  (2  Sam.  xi,  1, 11).  After  a  sortie  of  the 
inbabitanta,  which  caused  some  loss  to  the  Jewish  anny, 
Joab  took  the  lower  dty  on  the  river,  and  then,  with 
tnie  loyalty,  sent  to  urge  D«vid  to  come  and  take  the 
citadel,  *'Babbah,"  leat  the  gloiy  of  the  capture  should 
pass  fiom  the  king  to  his  generał  (2  Sam«  zii,  26-28). 

It  is  not  neceasary  to  tracę  in  detail  the  later  acts  of 
Joab,  seeing  that  they  are  in  fact  part  of  the  puUic  rec- 
ord  of  the  king  he  seryed.  See  Dayid.  He  senred 
him  faithfully,  both  in  political  and  private  relations; 
for,  although  be  knew  his  power  o^er  Dayid,  and  often 
trńted  him  with  litUe  ceremony,  there  can  be  no  doubt 
that  he  was  most  truły  devoted  to  his  interests.  But 
Joab  had  no  piinciples  apart  from  what  he  deemed  his 
daty  to  the  king  and  the  people,  and  was  quite  as  ready 
to  senre  his  master*8  yices  as  his  yirtues,  so  long  as  they 
did  not  tnterfere  with  his  own  interests,  or  tended  to 
promote  them  by  enabling  him  to  make  himself  useful 
to  the  king.  (See  Niemę>'er,  Charakt,  iy,  458  aq.)  His 
ready  appiehension  of  the  king^s  meaning  in  the  matter 
of  Uriah,  and  the  facility  with  which  he  madę  himself 
the  instrument  of  the  murder,  and  of  the  hypocrisy  by 
which  it  was  coyered,  are  proofs  of  this,  and  form  as 
deep  a  stain  upon  his  character  as  his  own  murders  (2 
Sam.  xi,  14-25),  B.C.  1085.  As  Joab  was  on  good  terms 
with  Ahsalom,  and  had  taken  pains  to  bring  about  a  reo- 
onciliatłon  between  him  and  his  father,  we  may  set  the 
higher  yalne  upon  fus  firm  adhesion  to  Dayid  when  Ab- 
salom  reyolted,  and  upon  his  stera  senae  of  duty  to  the 
king — ^from  whom  he  expected  no  thanks — dispUyed  in 
putting  an  end  to  the  war  by  the  slaughter  of  his  ftyor- 
ite  son,  when  all  others  shrunk  from  the  responsibility 
of  doing  the  king  a  senńce  against  his  own  will  (2  Sam. 
xyiii,  1-14).  B.G.  cir.  1023.  In  like  manner,  when  D»- 
yid  unhappily  resolyed  to  number  the  people,  Joab  dis- 
cemed  the  eyil  and  remonstrated  against  it,  and  al- 
though he  did  not  yenture  to  disobey,  he  performed  the 
duty  tardily  and  reinctantly,  to  afford  the  king  an 
opportunity  of  reconsidering  the  matter,  and  took  no 
pains  to  conceal  how  odious  the  measure  was  to  him 
(2  Sam.  xxiy).  Dayid  was  certainly  ungrateful  for  the 
seryices  of  Joab  when,  in  order  to  oonciliate  the  pow- 
erful  party  which  had  supported  Absalom,  he  offered 
the  command  of  the  host  to  Amasa,  who  had  command- 
ed  the  army  of  Abeaknn  (2  Sam.  xix,  13).  But  the  in- 
effieiency  of  the  new  commander,  in  the  emergency 
which  the  reyolt  of  Bichri's  son  prodooed,  arising  per- 
haps  from  the  nsloctanoe  of  the  troops  to  foUow  their 
new  leader,  gaye  Joab  an  opportunity  of  displaying  his 
-auperior  reaouroes,  and  also  of  remoying  his  riyal  by  a 
murder  yery  aimilar  to  that  of  Abner,  and  in  some  le- 
spects  less  excusable  and  morę  fouL  See  Amasa.  Be- 
aides,' Amasa  was  his  own  cousin,  being  the  son  of  his 
inother's  sister  (2  Sam.  xx,  1-13).    KG.  cir.  1022. 

When  Dayid  lay  apparently  on  his  death-bed,  and  a 
demonstration  was  madę  in  fayor  of  the  succession  of 
the  eklest  suiyiying  son,  Adonijah,  whoae  interests  had 
been  compromised  by  the  preference  of  the  young  Solo- 
mon,  Joab  joined  the  party  of  the  former.  B.C.  cir. 
1015.  It  would  be  unjust  to  regard  this  as  a  defection 
fiom  Dayid.  It  was  nothing  morę  or  less  than  a  dem- 
cmstration  in  fayor  of  the  natural  heir,  which,  if  not  then 
madę,  oould  not  be  madę  at  all.  But  an  act  which 
would  hmye  beeu  justifiable  had  the  preference  of  Solo- 
mon  beeu  a  merę  caprice  of  the  old  Idng,  became  ciimi- 
nal  as  an  act  of  contumacy  to  the  diyine  king,  the  real 
head  of  the  goyemment,  who  had  called  the  bouse  of 
Dayid  to  the  throne,  and  had  the  sole  right  of  determin- 
ing  which  of  its  members  should  reign.  We  leam  from 
Dayid*s  last  song  that  his  powerkssiiess  oyer  his  court- 
ien  was  eyen  then  present  to  his  mind  (2  Sam.  xxiii,  6, 
7),  and  now  he  recaUed  to  Solomon*s  recollection  the  two 


roorden  of  Aboer  and  Amasa  (1  Kings  ii,  5, 6),  with  an 
injunction  not  to  let  the  aged  soldier  escape  with  impu- 
nity.  When  the  prompt  measures  taken  under  the  di- 
rection  of  the  king  rendeied  Adonijah's  demonstration 
abortiye  (1  Kings  i,  7),  Joab  withdrew  into  pńyate  life 
tiU  some  time  after  the  death  of  Dayid,  when  the  fate 
of  Adonijah,  and  of  Abiathar— whose  life  was  only  spared 
in  conseąuence  of  his  sacerdotal  character— wamed  Joab 
that  he  had  little.  mercy  to  expect  from  the  new  king. 
He  fled  for  refuge  to  the  altar ;  but  when  Solomon  heard 
this,  he  sent  Benaiah  to  put  him  to  death;  and,  as  he 
refused  to  come  forth,  gaye  orders  that  he  should  be 
slain  eyen  at  the  altar.  Thus  died  one  of  the  most  ac- 
oomplished  waniors  and  unscrupulous  men  that  Israel 
eyer  produoed.  His  corpse  was  remoyed  to  his  domain 
in  the  wilderness  of  Judah,  and  buried  there  (1  Kings 
ii,  5,  28-^).  B.a  dr.  1012.  He  left  desoendants,  but 
nothing  is  knoT^n  of  them,  unless  it  may  be  inferred 
from  the  double  curse  of  Dayid  (2  Sam.  iii,  89)  and  of 
Solomon  (1  Kings  ii,  28)  that  they  aeemed  to  dwindle 
cway,  stricken  by  a  succession  of  >isitations— weakness, 
leproey,  lameness,  murder,  stanration.  His  name  is  by 
some  supposed  (in  allusion  to  his  part  in  Adonijah'8  oor- 
onation  on  that  spot)  to  be  preseryed  in  ithe  modera  tcj^ 
pellation  of  Enrogel— "  the  well  of  Job" — corrupted  from 
Joab.— Kitto;  Smith. 

3.  One  of  the  "aons"  of  Pahath-moab  (1  Esdr.  yiii, 
85),  whose  desoendants,  together  with  those  of  Jeshua, 
retuined  from  the  exile  to  the  number  of  2812  or  2818 
(Ezra  ii,  6;  Neh.  yii,  11),  besides  218  malcs  subseąuent- 
ly  under  the  leadership  of  one  Obadiah  (Ezra  yiii,  9). 
B.a  antę  588. 

Jo''&chaz  CJuax<iC  y*  r*  *l*^aZ  and  *Uxovitic)f  a 
Grsedzed  form  (1  Esdr.  i,  84)  of  the  name  of  king  Jjbuo 
HAZ  (q.  y.). 

Jo''&chim  CliaaKiifA)y  a  Grsecized  form  of  the  Hebw 
name  Jehoiakim,  and  applied  in  the  Apocrypba  to 

1.  The  king  of  Judah,  son  of  Josiah  (Bar.  i,  3). 

2.  A  pricst  (o  «p<vf,  A.  V. "  high-pricst"),  said  to  be 
son  of  Hilkiah  at  the  time  of  the  burning  of  Jerusalem 
by  the  Babylonians  (Bar.  i,  7).  See  Joacim,  4.  As  no 
such  pontiff  occurs  at  this  time  (see  Hioh-piubist),  the 
person  intended  may  perhaps  haye  been  not  the  suc- 
cessor,  but  only  a  junior  son  of  Hilkiah — ^if,  indecd,  the 
whole  narratiye  be  not  spurious.    See  Babuch. 

Joaobim,  abbot  of  Floris,  was  bora  at  Celico,  in 
the  diooese  of  Cosenza,  about  1130.  Afler  a  short  resi- 
dence  at  the  court  of  Roger  of  Sicily,  he  joumeyed  to 
Jerusalem,  and  on  his  retura  joined  the  Cistercians,  and 
became  abbot  of  Corace  (Curatium),  in  Calabria.  This 
Office  he  resigned,  howeyer,  some  time  after,  and  found- 
ed  himself  a  monasteiy  at  Floris,  near  Cosenza.  Joa^ 
chim  died  between  1201  and  1202.  He  enjoyed  great 
reputation  during  his  life :  he  was  reverenced  by  many 
as  a  prophet,  and  stood  in  high  consideration  with  popea 
and  prinoes,  but  sińce  his  day  he  bas  been  yeiy  vari- 
ously  judged.  Praised  as  a  prophet  by  J.  G.  Syllansus, 
and  defended  by  the  Jesuit  Papebroch,  he  was  accused 
of  heresy  by  Bonayentura,  and  called  a  pseudo-prophet 
by  Baroniua.  His  partisans  claimed  that  he  worked 
miracles,  but  it  appears  better  proyed  that  he  wrote 
prophecies,  and  denounced  in  the  strongest  terms  the 
growing  corniption  of  the  Komish  hierarchy.  He  en- 
deayored  to  bring  about  a  reformation.  His  character 
bas  perhaps  been  best  delineated  by  Neander  (CA.  Hist, 
iy,  220),  who  says  of  him :  "  (irief  ovcr  the  corniption 
of  the  Churoh,  longing  desire  for  better  times,  profound 
Christian  feeling,  a  mcditatiye  mind,  and  a  glowing 
imagination,  such  are  the  peculiar  characteristics  of  his 
qpirit  and  his  writings."  He  complained  of  the  deifica- 
tion  of  the  Roman  Church,  opposed  the  Lssue  of  indul- 
gences,  condemned  the  Crusades  as  antagouistic  to  the 
expreas  purpose  of  Christ,  who  had  himself  predicted 
only  the  destruction  of  Jerusalem,  decried  the  simonious 
habits  of  the  dergy,  and  eyen  argued  against  the  be- 
itowal  of  temporal  power  on  Che  pope,  fearing  that  the 


JOACHIM 


922 


JOAN 


oontendons  in  his  daj  for  temponl  powet  migbt  nlti- 
mately  resolt,  aa  they  eveiitualiy  did,  in  Uhe  assumption 
of  **  spiritoal  things  which  do  not  belong  to  him."  Joa^ 
chim'8  doctrines,  howeyer,  are  aomewha^  peculiar.  His 
fundamental  argument  is  that  the  Christian  sera  closes 
with  the  year  1260,  when  a  new  sera  would  oommenoe 
under  another  dispeiisation.  Thus  the  three  persons  of 
the  Godhead  diyided  the  goyemment  of  ages  among 
them:  the  reign  of  the  Father  embraced  the  period 
from  the  creation  of  the  world  to  the  coming  of  Christ ; 
that  of  the  Son,  the  twelye  centuries  and  a  half  ending 
in  1260,  and  then  woald  commence  the  reign  of  the 
Holy  Spirit  This  change  would  be  marked  hj  a  prog- 
resB  similar  to  that  which  foUowed  the  substitution  of 
the  new  for  the  old  dispensation.  Thus  man,  after  hay- 
ing  becn  camal  undcr  the  Father,  half  camal  and  half 
Bpiritual  under  the  Son,  would,  under  the  Holy  Ghost, 
biecome  exclasiyely  spiritual.  So  there  haye  been  three 
Btages  of  deyelopmeut  in  society,  in  which  the  suprem- 
acy  belonged  successiyely  to  warriors,  the  secular  clergy, 
and  monks  (comp.  Neander,  Church  Hittory,  iy,  229  flq.)* 
As  Joachim  found  many  adherents,  the  third  Lateran 
Council,  at  the  reąuest  of  Alexander  III,  condemned 
Joachim's  **  mystical  extrayagances ;"  Alexander  IY  was 
atill  morę  seyere  in  opposition  to  Joachim ;  and  in  1260 
the  Council  at  Arles  finally  pronounced  all  followers  of 
Joachim  heretics.  Joachim'8  ideas  were  chiefly  present- 
ed  in  the  form  of  meditations  on  the  N.  T.  He  strongly 
opposed  the  scholastic  theology,  which  aimed  at  estab- 
lishing  the  pńnciples  of  faith  dialectically,  and  also  the 
manner  in  which  Peter  Lombard  expUuned  the  doctńne 
of  the  Tńnity.  Towards  the  middle  of  the  I3th  centu- 
ry  these  yiews  had  gained  a  large  number  of  adherents. 
Among  the  many  works  attributod  to  Joachim  some  are 
undoubtedly  spuńous,  while  others  haye  probably  been 
subjected  to  additions,  etc,  in  consequence  of  his  popu- 
larity  (compare  Neander,  iy,  221,  noto).  The  Erpositio 
super  Apocalypsim  (Venice,  1517,  4to,  often  reprinted), 
Conoordue  Yeteris  ac  Nom  Testamenii  Ubri  v  (Yenice, 
1519, 8yo),  and  the  PioUerium  decem  Chordarum  appear 
to  be  genuine.  Among  the  others  bearing  his  name  are 
commentańes  on  Jeremiah,  the  Psalms,  Isatah,  parts  of 
Nahum,  Habakkuk,  Zechariah,  and  Malachi;  also  a 
number  of  prophecies  concerning  the  popes,  and  predict- 
Ing  the  downfall  of  the  papacy.  AU  these  were  pub- 
lished  at  Yenice  (1519-1524)  and  Cologne  (1577).  Ilia 
Life  was  writtcn  by  Gregory  di  Lauro  (Napłes,  1660, 
4to).  Among  the  MS.  works  attributed  to  him,  Pro- 
pheŁim  et  Espositione*  SibyUtirum ;  Eroerptiones  e  lihns 
Joachimi  de  AfuruUJiney  de  Terroribus  et  ACrurmis^  sen 
de  peeudo-Chrisłis ;  Propheiia  de  Oneribu$  Promncia- 
rum;  Epistolce  Joachimi  de  mis  ProphełOs;  and  Jieve- 
lationeSf  are  to  be  found  in  the  public  libraries  of  Piuis. 
See  HisŁ.  Litier,  de  la  France^  yoL  xx ;  Dom  Genraise, 
Histoire  de  Vabbe  Joachim,-  Tiraboschi,  Storia  delia 
ietUr.  ItaL  yol.  y,  2d  ed. :  Gregoire  Laude,  Vie  de  Vabbe 
Joachim ;  Hoefcr,  Nouv.  Bioff,  GerUraUj  xxyi,  718 ;  Ne- 
ander, Ch,  Histon/y  iv,  215  8q.  •  Herzog,  ReaUEnctfUop, 
vi,  713  8q. ;  Engclhardt,  Joachim,  etc.,  in  Kirchengesck, 
Abhandlunffen  (ErL  1832). 

Joaohlm  I  and  IL    See  Repobmation  (Gebmak). 

Joaohimites.     See  Joachim  of  Floris. 

Jo'liciin  {'lutaKipjf  another  Greecized  form  of  the 
HeUnamc  Joachim,  applied  in  the  Apocrypha  to 
•     1.  The  son  of  Josiah,  king  of  Judah  (1  Esdr.  i,  87, 88, 
»9). 

2.  By  corruption  for  jEnoiAcnm,  the  next  king  of 
Judah  (1  Esdr.  i,  43). 

3.  A  son  of  Zerubbabcl,  who  retumed  to  Jerusalem 
after  the  exile  (1  Esdr.  v,  5),  apparently  a  mistake  for 
Zerubbabcl  himsclf. 

4.  "  The  high-priest  which  was  in  Jerusalem*'  (Judith 
iy,  6,  14)  in  the  time  of  Judith,  and  who  weloomed  the 
heroinę  aflcr  the  death  of  Holofemes,  in  company  with 
*  the  ancients  of  the  children  of  IsraeF  (»/  ytpowia  twv 
viwv  'I<rpaii\y  xy,  8  sq.).     The  name  oocurs  with  the 


yarioBB  reading  JSZtoAwn,  but  it  is  impoflsiUe  to  identiiy 
him  with  any  historical  chaiacter.  No  such  name  oo- 
curs in  the  lists  of  high-priests  in  1  Chroń,  yi  (compare 
Josephus,  i4fi^.  X,  8,  6) ;  and  it  is  a  merę  arbitrary  cob- 
jecture  to  suppose  that  Eliakim,  mentioned  in  2  Kinga 
xyiii,  18,  was  afterwaids  raised  to  that  dignity.  Still 
less  can  be  said  for  the  identification  of  Joacim  with 
Hilkiah  (2  Kings  xxii,  4;  Joaephns  'E^iojciac,  Aa/.  x, 
4,  2;  Sept.  Xt\Kiac).  The  name  itself  is  appropriata 
to  the  position  which  the  high-priest  occupies  in  the 
story  of  Judith  (**  The  Lord  hath  set  np"),  and  the  per- 
son must  be  regarded  as  a  neoeasary  part  of  the  fictioo. 
— Smith.     See  Judith. 

5.  The  husband  of  Susanna  (Sus.  1  Bq).  The  name 
seems  to  haye  been  chosen,  as  in  the  forroer  caae,  with 
a  reference  to  its  meaning;  and  it  was  probably  for  th« 
same  reason  that  the  husband  of  Anna,  the  mother  of 
the  Virgin,  is  called  Joacim  in  eariy  legenda  (Protet, 
Jac,  i,  etc.). — Smith.     See  Susakna. 

Jo&da'ntiB  ('Iu>afóvoc,  Vulg.  Joadeus)^  one  of  tha 
priests,  ^  sons  of  Jesus,  the  son  of  Joeedec,  and  his  breth* 
ren,"  who  had  married  foreign  wiyes  after  the  exile  (1 
Esdr.  ix,  19) ;  apparently  the  same  as  Gedauaii  in  the 
corresponding  Hebrew  text  (Ezra  x,  18)  by  a  oorraptioo 
(see  Burrington,  GenealoffieSy  i,  167). 

Jo'ah  (Heb.  Yoach',  HCI^  Jehorah  is  his  brother,  i. 
e.  helper),  the  name  of  four  men. 

1.  (SepL  'Imad  y.  r.  'Ia>a^,  Vulg.  Joaha,)  The  tlurd 
son  of  Obed-edom  (q.  y.),  appointed  with  his  bretłunm 
to  take  charge  of  the  sacred  furoiture  (1  Cliron.  xxyi,4). 
RC.  1014. 

2.  (SepL  'Iitfax  y.  r.  'Iwa/3,  'Ia>ac,  *lioad  i  but  in  2 
Chroń,  first  occurrence  'Iwa  y.  r.  'Iw^aad,  sccond  'Icmi- 
Xa ;  Vulg.  JoahJ)  A  Leyite  of  the  family  of  (tcrahom, 
the  son  of  Zimmah  and  father  of  Iddo  (1  Chroń,  vi,  21) ; 
apparently  the  same  elsewhere  called  Ethan,  and  father 
of  Adaiah  (yer.  42).  He  is  probably  the  same  as  the 
person  who,  with  his  son  Eden,  aided  Hezekiah  in  hia 
efforts  at  a  religious  reformation  (2  Chroń,  xxix,  12). 
B.C.726. 

3.  (Sept  'Ia>ac,  in  Isa.  *Iałrtx,  Vulg.  Joake,)  Son  of 
Asaph  and  historiographer  of  king  Hezekiah,  who  waa 
one  of  the  messengers  that  receiyed  the  uisulting  mea- 
sage  of  Rabshakeh  (2  Kings  xyiii,  18, 26, 37 ;  Isa.  xxxyi9 
3,11,22).     RC.712. 

4.  (Sept  'Ioi;ax  v.  r.  'liaaCy  Vulg.  Joha ;  Josephoa 
'Iwar^C,  ^^^'  Xf  4i  !•)  ^n  of  Joahaz  and  historiograf 
phcr  of  king  Josiah ;  hc  was  one  of  the  officers  that  so- 
perintonded  the  repairs  of  the  Tempie  (2  Chroń.  xxxiy, 
8).     RC.623. 

Jo^^Uiaz  (Heb.  Yoachaz%  TnK'i%  a  contractcd  form 
of  the  name  Jehoahaz,  for  which  it  oocurs  in  speaking 
of  others  of  the  same  name;  Sept.  'Ia>axa^,yuig.  Joa^ 
chaz)y  the  father  of  Joah,  which  latter  was  historiogiB- 
pher  in  the  reign  of  Josiah  (2  Chroń.  xxxiy,  8).  &€• 
antę  628. 

Joan,  pope(ss),  is  the  name  of  a  fictitioas  female 
who  was  supposed  to  haye  oocapied  the  chair  of  8t  Pie- 
ter, as  John  VIII,  between  the  popes  Leo  IV  and  Bene> 
diet  III,  about  858-855.  This  personage  is  first  said  to 
haye  been  spoken  of  as  a  Roman  pontiff  by  Maiianui 
Scotus,  a  monk  of  the  abbey  of  Fnlda,  who  died  at  Ments 
in  1086,  and  who  says  in  his  chronicie  (which  many 
authorities  dedare  to'  be  spurious),  nnder  the  year  868, 
the  thirteenth  year  of  the  reign  of  the  emperor  Lothft- 
rius,  that  Leo  IV  died  on  the  Ist  of  August  and  that  to 
him  sncceeded  Joan,  a  woman,  whose  pontificate  laated 
two  years,  flye  months,  and  four  daj^s,  after  which  Ben- 
edict  III  was  madę  pope.  But  Anastasius,  who  liyed  at 
the  time  of  the  supposed  pope  Joan,  and  who  vrrote  the 
liyes  of  the  popes  down  to  Nicholas  I,  who  eucceeded 
Benedict  III,  says  that  fifteen  days  after  Leo  H^s  death 
Benedict  III  sncceeded  him.  Further,  Hincmar  of 
Rheims,  a  contemporary,  in  his  twenty-«ixth  letter  to 
Nicholas  I,  states  that  Benedict  III  sucoeeded  Leo  IY 
immediately.    It  is  jroyed.  moreoyer,  by  the  aiiqiM»> 


JOAN 


923 


JOAN 


tioęable  evidenoe  of  j  diploma  still  preeeired,  and  of  a 
coDtemporaiy  coin  which  Ganonpi  has  pablisbed,  that 
Benedict  III  was  actoally  reigning  before  the  death  of 
tbe  emperor  Lothaire,  whicb  occunred  towards  the  dose 
of  855.  It  is  tme  that  fxnne  MS.  copies  of  AnaataMiu, 
among  otheiBi  one  in  the  king^a  library  at  Paris,  contain 
the  story  of  Joan ;  but  this  haa  been  ascertained  to  be 
an  interpolation  of  later  oopyistS)  who  have  inserted  the 
tale  in  the  yery  worda  of  Martinus  Polonus,  a  Cistercian 
monk  and  oonfessor  to  Giegory  X  (latter  part  of  the  12th 
oentury),  who  wrote  the  Licet  of  the  PopeSj  in  which, 
after  Leo  lY,  he  places  <*  John,  an  Englishman,"  and 
then  adds, "  Hic,  lU  asseritur,  foemina  fuit."  Other  au- 
thorities  for  this  story  are  Sigbert  of  Gemblours  (f  1113) 
and  Stephen  do  Bourbon,  who  wiote  about  1225. 

According  to  these  aocounts,  she  was  the  daughter  of 
an  English  misaionary,  was  bom  at  Mayence  or  Ingel- 
heim,  and  was  a  woman  of  very  looee  morals.  She  is 
aaid  to  haye  remoyed  to  Fulda,  and  haying  there  estab- 
lished  an  improper  intimacy  with  a  monk  of  the  eon- 
yent,  assumed  małe  attire,  cntered  the  conyent,  and 
afterwards  eloped  with  her  paramonr,  who  was  a  yery 
leamed  man,  to  Athens,  where  she  appUed  herself  to  the 
study  of  Greek  and  the  sciences  under  her  loyer^s  able 
directions.  After  the  death  of  her  companion  she  went 
to  Romę,  where  she  became  equaUy  proficient  in  sacred 
leaming,  for  which  her  reputation  became  so  great,  un- 
der the  assumed  name  ofJokannet  AtiffUcanus^  that  she 
easily  obtained  holy  orders,  and  with  snch  ability  and 
adroitness  clad  the  deccption  that  at  the  death  of  Leo 
she  was  unanlmously  elected  as  his  successor,  under  the 
generał  beUef  of  her  małe  8ex.  Gontimiing  to  indulge 
in  8exual  intercourse,  the  fraud  was  finally  discoyered, 
to  the  infinite  mortification  of  the  Koman  Church,  by 
her  sudden  deliyery  of  an  infant  in  the  public  streets, 
Bear  the  Colosseum,  while  heading  a  religious  prooession 
to  the  Lateran  Basilica.  The  mother  and  chUd  died 
aoon  after,  and  were  buried  in  856.  This  eycnt  is  sald 
to  haye  caused  the  adoption  of  the  ŚeUa  ttercorctrioj 
which  was  in  use  from  the  middle  of  the  llth  centnry 
to  the  time  of  Leo  X,  for  the  purpoee  of  proying  the  sex 
of  the  popes  elect. 

The  story  was  generally  creclited  from  the  latter  part 
of  the  llth  until  the  opening  of  the  16th  century.  Ali 
Church  historians  after  Martinua  generally  copied  it 
from  him,  and  preeented  it  as  an  authentic  narratiye. 
The  first  to  doubt  the  accniacy  of  the  story  was  Platina 
(1421>1481))  who,  although  repeating  it  in  his  Livet  of 
the  Popes^  condudes  with  these  woids :  *^  The  things  I 
haye  aboye  stated  are  current  in  yulgar  reports,  but  are 
taken  from  uncertain  and  obecure  authorities,  and  I  haye 
inserted  them  briefly  and  umply  not  to  be  taxed  with 
obstinacy.*'  Panyinius,  Platuia*s  condnnator,  seems  to 
haye  been  morę  critical :  he  subjoins  a  yery  elaborate 
Dote,  in  which  he  shows  the  absurdity  of  the  tale,  and 
proyes  it  to  haye  been  an  inyention.  Later  Roman 
Catholic  writers,  seeing  the  arguments  which  their  op- 
ponents  in  doctrine  obtained  from  this  story  against  pa- 
pai succession,  took  great  pains  to  impeach  its  accnracy ; 
but  it  is  truły  cnrious  that  the  best  dissertation  on  the 
aubject  is  that  of  Dayid  Blondel,  a  Protestant,  who  com- 
plctely  refutes  the  story  in  his  FamiUer  Hclairduemeni 
de  la  guesŁion  ń  une  Femme  a  ke  astise  cm  SUtge  Papai 
entre  Leon  IV  H  Benoit  III  (Amsterdam,  1649).  He 
was  foliowed  on  the  same  side  by  Leibnitz  {Flores  gparsi 
M  tumulum  Papitsce,  in  [Chr.  L.  Scheidt]  Biblwth,  Hist. 
[Gotting.  1758],  i,  297  sq.),  and,  although  attempts  haye 
been  madę  from  time  to  time  by  a  few  writers  to  main- 
tain  the  tale  (among  which  one  uf  the  most  noted  was 
a  work  published  in  1785  by  Humphrey  Shuttleworth, 
entitled  A  Present  for  a  Papitł,  or  the  Bisiory  of  the 
L\fe  ofPope  Joan,  proving  that  a  Woman  called  Joan 
rtaUy  %tas  Pope  ofRome\  it  has  been  all  but  uniyersal- 
ly  diacarded,  its  latest  patron  being  professor  Kist,  of 
Łeyden,  who  but  a  few  yearo  sińce  deyoted  an  elaborate 
essay  ( Verhandeling  over  de  Pausin  Joanna)  to  the  sub- 
jeet    Nearly  all  eodesiastical  writers  of  our  day  seem 


to  be  agreed  that  no  feminine  character  eyer  filled  the 
papai  chair,  bat  there  is  certainly  a  yariety  of  opinions 
as  to  the  causes  which  proyoked  the  story.  Some  at- 
tribate  it  to  a  misconception  of  the  object  of  the  Sełla 
słereoraria;  thecanons  excluded  eunuchs  from  the  pa- 
pai throne,  and  the  sella  stercoraria  was  contńyed  to 
proye  that  the  person  elected  fuliilled  the  requiremcnts 
of  the  canons.  Others  consider  it  as  a  symbolical  satire. 
Still  others  look  upon  it  as  a  lampoon  on  the  inconti- 
nence  of  the  pope,  John  YIII ;  or,  and  perhaps  morę 
correctiy,  as  a  satire  on  the  female  regiment  (under  Ma- 
rozia)  during  the  popędom  of  John  X-XII.  See,  for 
further  details,  Gie8eler's  Kirchengeschichte,  voL  ii,  pt.  i 
(4th  ed.),  29  8q. ;  also  Wensing,  Over  de  Pausin  Joanna 
— in  reply  to  Kist — (S^Grayenhage,  1845) ;  Bianchi  Gi- 
oyini*s  Esame  Criłico  degli  atti  relatim  alla  Papessa 
Guwanna  (Milan,  1845) ;  Bower,  Hisł.  Popes,  iy,  246  sq. ; 
Fuhrmann,  Hcmdwdrterb,  der  Kirchengesch,  ii,  469  sq. ; 
Herzog,  Real- Encyklop.  yi,  721 ;  Christ.  Examiner,  bcxy, 
197 ;  Western  Bec,  April,  1864,  p.  279.     ( J.  H.  W.) 

Joan  d^Ałsuet.    See  Huguenots  ;  France. 

Joan  OF  Aro  (French  Jeanne  (2Mre),  or  *Uhe  Matd 
of  Orleans,"  is  the  name  of  a  character  w  bose  histoiy 
ooncems  not  only  the  secular  historian ;  it  desenres  the 
careful  oonsideration  also  of  the  ecclesiastical  student. 
The  remarkable  fate  of  this  heroinę  is  truły  a  phenome-' 
non  in  religious  phiłoeophy.  We  haye  room  here,  how- 
eyer,  onły  for  a  short  biographicał  sketch  of  the  heroinę, 
and  refer  the  student  to  Bottiger,  WeUgesch.  in  Biogra- 
phien,  iy,  474 ;  Michełet,  Hist.  de  France,  yii,  44 ;  Gdires, 
Jungfrau  v,  Orleans  (Regensb.  1884) ;  Hase,  Neue  Pro^ 
pheten  (Lpz.  1851);  Strass,  Jean  d'Arc  (1862);  Eysell^ 
Joh,  d'Are  (1864);  Locher,  Schlafu,  Traume  (Zurich, 
1858) ;  and  espeaally  (mainly  on  her  yisions,  etc.)  the 
oelebnted  Gennan  Uieologian  of  Bonn  Uniyersity,  Dr. 
J.  P.  Lange,  in  Herzog,  Beal-Fncyklop,  yii,  165  8q. 

Joan  was  the  daughter  of  respectable  peasants,  and 
was  bom  in  1412,  in  the  yillage  of  Domremy,  in  the  de- 
partment  of  Yosges,  France.  She  was  taught,  like  other 
young  women  of  her  station  in  that  age,  to  sew  and  to 
spin,  but  not  to  read  and  write.  She  was  distinguished 
from  other  girls  by  her  greater  simplidty,  modesty,  in- 
dustry,  and  piety.  When  about  tbirteen  years  of  age 
she  belieyed  that  she  saw  a  flash  of  light,  and  heard  an 
unearthły  yoioe,  wliich  enjoined  her  to  be  modest,  and 
to  be  diligent  in  her  religious  duties.  The  impression 
madę  upon  her  ezcitable  mind  by  the  national  distresses 
of  the  time  soon  gaye  a  new  character  to  the  reyełationa 
which  she  supposed  herself  to  receiye,  and  when  fifteen 
years  old  she  imagined  that  unearthły  yoices  called  her 
to  go  and  fight  for  the  Daupłiin.  Her  story  was  at  first 
rejected  as  that  of  an  insane  person ;  but  she  not  onły 
succeeded  in  making  her  way  to  the  Daupłiin,  but  in 
persuading  him  of  her  heayenły  mission.  She  assumed 
małe  attire  and  warłike  equipment8,  and,  with  a  sword 
and  a  white  lianner,  she  put  herself  at  the  head  of  the 
French  troops,  whom  her  example  and  the  notion  of  her 
heayenły  mission  inspired  with  new  enthusiasm.  April 
29, 1429,  she  threw  hersdf,  with  suppłies  of  proyisions, 
into  Orleans,  then  dosely  besieged  by  the  English,  and 
from  the  4th  to  the  8th  of  May  madę  successfuł  salliea 
upon  the  English,  and  ńnałły  compclłed  tbem  to  raise 
the  siege.  After  this  important  yictory  the  national 
ardor  of  the  French  was  rekindled.to  the  utmoet,  and 
Joan  became  the  dread  of  the  preyiously  triumphant 
enemy.  She  conducted  the  Dauphin  to  Rheims,  where 
he  was  crowned,  July  17,  1429,  and  Joan,  with  many 
tears,  saluted  him  as  king.  She  now  wishcd  to  return 
home,  deeming  her  mission  accomplished ;  but  Charles 
importuned  her  to  remain  with  his  army,  to  which  she 
consented.  Now,  howeyer,  because  she  no  longer  heard 
any  unearthły  yoice,  she  began  to  haye  fearfuł  forelx)d- 
ings.  She  continued  to  accompany  the  French  army, 
and  was  present  in  many  conilicts.  May  24, 1480,  while 
heading  a  sałły  from  Compi^gne,  which  the  Burgun- 
dian  forces  were  besieging,  she  was  taken  prisoner,  and 


JOAN 


924 


JOASH 


Bold  by  a  Buigundian  officer  tx>  the  English  for  Łhe  sam 
of  16,000  franca.  Being  conveyed  to  Rouen,  the  head- 
quartcrs  of  the  English,  she  was  brought  before  the 
spiritual  tribunal  of  the  bishop  of  Beauvai8  as  a  aorcer- 
ess  and  heretic;  and  after  a  long  trial,  aocompanied 
with  many  shameful  circumstanoes,  of  which  perhaps 
the  most  astounding  is  the  fact  that  her  own  country- 
men,  and  the  most  leamed  of  these,  representing  the 
Uniyersity  of  Paria,  pronounced  her  under  the  influence 
of  witchcraft.  By  thdr  adyice,  she  was  condenmed  to 
be  bumed  to  dcath.  Recanting  her  alleged  erron,  her 
puniahmeut  was  commuted  into  perpetoal  imprison- 
menL  But  the  Engliah  feared  her,  and  detennined  at 
all  hazards  to  aacrifice  her  life,  and  they  finally  suoceed- 
ed  in  renewiug  the  trial;  words  which  fell  from  her 
when  subjected  to  great  indignities,  and  her  resumption 
of  małe  attiie  when  aU  articlee  of  female  dress  were 
carefully  remoyed  from  her,  were  madę  groonds  of  oon- 
duding  that  she  had  reUpsed,  and  she  was  brought  to 
the  atake  May  30, 1431,  and  bumed,  and  her  ashea  caat 
into  the  Seine.  Her  family,  who  had  been  ennobled 
on  her  account,  obtained  in  1440  a  rerisal  of  her  trial, 
and  in  1456  she  was  formaUy  pronounced  by  the  high- 
est  ecclesiastical  authorities  to  have  been  Innocent.  The 
doubts  req>ectiiig  the  fate  of  Joan  d'Arc  raised  by  M. 
Delapierre  in  his  Doute  kittorigue  (1850),  who  is  in- 
dined  to  think  that  she  never  suffered  martjrrdom,  and 
that  anothcr  person  was  executed  in  her  stead,  seem  to 
have  no  good  ground. — Chambera,  Cydop.  s.  y. 

Joan  OF  Kent  is  the  name  of  a  female  character 
who  flourished  in  the  first  half  of  the  16th  century,  and 
who  was  condemned  to  death  aa  a  heretic,  April  25, 1552, 
ibr  holding  the  doctrine  that  '*'  Chrbt  waa  not  truły  in- 
camate  of  the  Yirgin,  whose  flesh,  being  sinful,  he  could 
not  partake  of ;  but  the  Word,  by  the  conaent  of  the 
inward  man  in  the  Yirgin,  took  flesh  of  her."  Thia 
Bcholastic  nicety  appalled  all  the  grandeea  of  the  Eng- 
lish  Church,  inclucUng  even  Cranmer,  who,  finding  the 
king  slow  to  approye  the  condemnation  of  Joan  of  Kent, 
presented  to  the  soyereign  the  practice  of  the  Jewish 
Church  in  stoning  blasphemers  as  a  counterpart  of  the 
duty  of  the  head  of  the  English  Church,  and  secured 
the  king's  approyal  for  the  execution  of  the  poor  woman, 
who  "  could  not  reconcile  the  spotleaa  purity  of  Christ*8 
human  natore  with  hta  receiying  flesh  from  a  sinful 
creature."  See  Neal,  Puritoms,  i,  49 ;  Stiype,  MemoriaJs 
ofihe  RfformcUion,  ii,  214. 

JoSl^nan  {'latayap  v,  r.  'Itavav),  a  Gnecized  form 
(1  Esdr.  ix,  1)  of  the  name  of  Joranam  (q.  y.),  the  son 
of  Eliashib  (Ezra  x,  6). 

Joanea  (or  Juanbs),  Yicente,  a  celebrated  Span- 
ish  painter  whoae  subjects  are  exclusiyely  reUgioua,  waa 
bom  at  Fuento  la  Higuera,  in  Yalencia,  in  1523.  He 
studied  in  Italy,  and,  as  we  may  infer  from  his  atyle, 
chiefly  the  works  of  the  Roman  school,  and  died  Dec. 
21, 1579,  while  cngaged  in  flnUhing  the  altar-piece  of 
the  church  of  Bocaircnte.  HU  body  was  remoyed  to 
Yalencia,  and  deposited  in  the  church  of  Santa  Cruz  in 
1581.  Joanes  was  one  of  the  best  of  the  Spanish  paint- 
ers :  he  is  acknowledged  as  the  head  of  the  school  of 
Yalencia,  and  is  sometimes  termed  the  Spanish  Rafia- 
elle.  His  drawing  is  correct,  and  displays  many  suc- 
ce^ful  examples  of  foreshortening ;  his  draperies  are 
well  cast,  his  coloring  is  sombre  (he  was  particularly 
fond  of  mulbcrry  color),  and  his  expression  is  mostly  in 
perfect  accordance  with  his  subject,  which  is  generally 
deyotion  or  impassioned  resignation,  as  in  the ''  Baptism 
of  Christ"  in  the  cathedral  of  Yalencia.  Like  his  coun- 
trymen  Yargas  and  D'Amato  of  Naples,  he  is  said  to 
have  always  taken  the  sacramcnt  before  he  commenced 
an  altar-piece.  His  best  works  are  in  the  cathedral  of 
Yalencia,  and  there  are  seyeral  good  specimens  in  the 
Prado  at  Madrid. — EngUah  Cyclopcedia,  s.  y. 

Joan^na,  the  name  of  a  man  (prop^  Jocumcu)  and 
alao  of  a  woraan  in  the  New  Testament. 
1.  (lioawdcy  probably  i,  %  'ludw^ic,  John.)    The 


(great)  grandson  of  Zerabbabel,  in  the  lineąge  ef  Chanń 
(Lukę  iii,  27) ;  probably  the  same  called  Abstak  in  the 
Old  Testament  (1  Chroń,  iu,  21.  See  Strong'8  łłarm, 
and  Easpos.  ofthe  Go^ptU^  p.  16, 17).  &C.  coneiderably 
poet  536.    See  Gkkeaumy  of  CHBisr. 

2.  (Itaawa^  piob.  femin.  of  'liadwtiCf  JoknS)  The 
wife  of  Chuza,  the  stoward  of  Herod  Antipaa,  teuarch 
of  Galilee  (Lukę  yiii,  8).  She  waa  one  of  thoee  women 
who  foUowed  Christ,  and  miniatered  to  the  wanta  of  him 
and  his  disciples  out  of  their  abundance.  They  had  aU 
been  cured  of  grieyoua  diaeaaes  by  the  Sayiour,  or  had 
receiyed  materiał  benefits  from  him ;  and  the  cuscoms 
of  the  country  allowed  them  to  testify  in  this  way  their 
gratitude  and  deyotedneas  without  repioach.  It  is  um- 
aiły supposed  that  Joanna  waa  at  this  time  a  widów.  She 
waa  one  of  the  femalea  to  whom  Christ  appeared  ailer 
his  reaurrection  (Lukę  xxiy,  10).    A.D.  27-2d. — ^Kitta. 

JolLa^nan  (lwawdv  y.  r.  'ItMwtfc),  the  ekkst 
brother  of  Judaa  Maocabaeoa  (1  Maoc;  ii,  2) ;  elaewhen 
called  John  (q.  y.). 

Joannes.    See  Jomr. 

Jo''&]ib  ('IiiMzpi/3  y.  r.  'loiopci^),  a  Gnecized  fomi 
(1  Haoc.  ii,  1)  of  the  name  of  the  priest  Jehoiabib  (i 
Chroń.  xxiy,  7). 

Jo'&8h  (Heb.  Tod$h%  the  name  of  eeyeral  peraons^ 
written  in  two  forma  in  the  originaL 

1.  (ttŚKi^  a  contracted  form  of  Jehoash  ;  Septoag. 
'Ici»a£.)  The  father  of  Gideon,  buried  in  Ophrah,  where 
he  had  Uyed  (Judg.  yi,  11,  29 ;  yii,  14 ;  yiii,  13,29,82). 
Although  himaelf  probably  an  idolater,  he  ingeniooaly 
acreened  hia  son  from  the  popular  mdignatłon  in  ovcf- 
throwing  the  altar  of  Baal  (Judg.  yi,  80, 31).  KC.  1362. 
See  GiDEON. 

2.  (Same  form  as  preoeding ;  Sept.  'liopac  t.  r.  'I«mc.) 
A  son  of  Shemaah  or  Hasmaah  the  Gibeathite,  and  aeo- 
ond  only  to  hia  brother  Ahiezer  among  the  hraye  Ben- 
jamite  archera  that  joined  Dayid  at  Ziklag  (1  Chron. 
xii,  3).    B.C.1055. 

3.  (Same  form  aa  preoeding ;  Sept.  *luac.')  One  of  the 
deaoendanta  of  Shełah,  aon  of  Judah,  mentioned  among 
those  who  were  in  some  way  distinguished  among  the 
Moabitoa  in  early  timea  (1  Chron.  iy,  22).  KC.  perh. 
cir.  995.  See  Jashubi-lehr3Ł  <'  The  Hebrew  tzadi^ 
tion,  quoted  by  Jerome  (OttasL  Hebr,  m  PtaraL)  and 
Jarchi  {Comm.  ad  loc.),  applies  it  to  Mahlon,  the  son  of 
Elimelech,  who  mairied  a  Moabiteaa.  The  esrpceaaion 
rendered  in  the  A.Y.,'who  had  the  dominion  (^^^^) 
in  Moab,'  would,  according  to  thia  interpretatian,  signify 
*  who  Tnarried  in  Moab.*  The  same  explanation  is  giy- 
en  in  the  Targum  of  R  Joseph*'  (Smith). 

4.  (Same  form  as  preceding;  ScpU  'ludę.)  An  emi- 
nent  officer  of  king  Ahab,  to  whoee  cloae  custody  the 
prophet  Micaiah  was  remanded  for  denouncing  the  al- 
lied  expedition  against  Ramoth-GUead  (1  Kings  xxii, 
26 ;  2  Chron.  xyiii,  25).  RC.  896.  He  is  styled  "the 
king*s  son,"  which  is  usoally  taken  literaUy,  Thenios 
(jCommerU.  ad  loc.,  in  Kings)  suggesting  that  he  may 
haye  been  placed  with  the  goyemor  of  the  dty  for  mifi- 
tary  education.  Geiger  conjectures  that  Maaseiah,  '*•  the 
king'8  son,"  in  2  Chron.  xxyiii,  7,  was  a  prince  of  the  Mo- 
loch worship,  and  that  Joash  was  a  prieat  of  the  same 
( Urschriftf  p.  807) .  The  title,  howeyer,  may  merely  in- 
dicate  a  youth  of  prinoely  stock. 

5.  (Same  form  as  preceding;  Sept. 'Iwdę.)  Kingof 
Judah  (2  Kings  xi,  2;  xił,  19, 20;  xui,  1, 10;  xiv.  1,3, 
17, 23 ;  1  Chron.  iii,  1 1 ;  2  Chron.  xxii,  1 1 ;  xx2y,  1  [r fij"^], 
2, 4, 22, 24 ;  xxv,  23, 25).     See  Jehoasii,  1. 

6.  (Same  form  as  preceding ;  Sept.  'lutac.')  King  of 
Israel  (2  Kings  xui,  9,  12, 13, 14,  25;  xiv,  1,  28,  27;  2 
Cłiron.  xxy,  17, 18,  21,  23;  Hoa.  i,  1 ;  Amos  i.  1).  Sea 
Jehoasu,  2. 

7.  (d^i^,  to  whom  Jeh<wak  hastm$,  Le.  for  aid;  SepL 
*lMdc,)  One  of  the  ^  sona"  of  Becher.  son  of  Benjamina 
a  chieftain  of  hia  family  (1  Chion.  yii,  8).  BXX  \ 
cir.  1017. 


JOATHAM 


925 


JOB 


8.  (Same  form  ta  last ;  Septoag.  'Iiadę,)  The  pcmon 
batring  chaige  of  ibe  royal  stores  of  oil  nnder  Dayid 
and  Solomon  (I  Chroń,  xxvii,  28).    B.C.  1014. 

Jo''ILthaxn  (Matt.  i,  19).    See  Jotham. 

JoSLsab^dtis  (luMlZafiSoc  y.  r.  *lw^aPdoc),  a  Gr»- 
cized  form  (1  Esdr.  ix,  48)  of  the  name  of  Jozabau  (q. 
V.),  the  Levite  (Neh.  viii,  7). 

Joasar  (liodZapoc,  ^lióZacoc,  L  e.  Joezer),  a  son  of 
Bo^thua.  and  brother-in-law  of  the  high-priest  Matthiaa 
(q.  V.),  whom  he  sucoeeded  in  the  pontifical  office  by  the 
art>itjrar7  act  of  Herod  the  Great  on  the  day  preceding 
an  edipee  of  the  moon  (Josephua,  Ant,  xvii,  6, 4),  which 
occorred  March  18,  B.C.  4.  He  was  deprived  of  the  of- 
fice by  Cyreoias  (although  he  had  aided  that  offioer  in 
enfoicing  the  tax,  t5.  xviii,  1, 1)  in  the  d7th  year  afler 
the  battle  of  Actium  {ib.  xviii,  2, 1),  i.  e.  A.D.  7^.  It 
appears,  however,  that  he  had  been  temporarily  removed 
(aId.  4)  by  Archelaus  during  the  short  term  of  his 
biother  Eleazar,  and  then  of  Jesua,  the  son  of  Sie  (tb, 
xvii,  13,  1),  and  restored  by  popular  acdamation  (ib. 
xviii,  2, 1).     See  High-priest. 

Job,  the  name  of  two  persona,  of  differenc  form  in 
theoriginaL 

1.  pi^K,  lyob^tpeneeitUd;  Sept.  and  N.  T.  'Iitf/3.) 
An  Arabian  patriarch  and  hen>  of  the  book  that  beam 
his  name;  mentioned  elsewhere  oniy  in  £zek.  xiv,  14, 
20;  Jaa.  V,  11.  The  yarions  ąuestions  connected  with 
his  history  are  involyed  in  the  discmsion  of  the  poem 
itself.  In  the  following  statements  we  laigely  avail 
ooiselyes  of  the  articles  in  Smith*8  Dictionary  of  the 
Bibie  and  Kitto'8  Cydopadia, 

I.  Anahfsis  of  ConiewU^--l,  The  ItHroditciitm  (i.  I-ii, 
10)  supplies  all  the  facts  on  which  the  argument  is 
baaed.  Job^  a  chieftain  in  the  land  of  Uz  (apparently 
a  district  of  Northern  Arabia— see  Uz),  of  immense 
wealth  and  high  rank,  is  represented  to  us  as  a  man  of 
perfect  intcgrity,  and  Uameless  in  all  the  relations  of 
life.  The  highest  goodness  and  the  most  perfect  tem> 
porał  happiness  are  oombined  in  his  person ;  under  the 
proiection  of  God,  snnoonded  by  a  numerous  family,  he 
enjcys  in  advaneed  life  (from  xlii,  16  it  has  been  infer- 
red  that  he  was  about  seventy  years  old  at  this  time), 
an  almost  paradisiacal  state,  exemplifying  the  normal 
results  of  human  obedienoe  to  the  will  of  a  righteous 
God. 

One  question,  however,  could  be  raised  by  envy :  May 
not  the  goodness  which  secures  such  direct  and  tangible 
rewards  be  a  refined  form  of  selfishness?  In  the  world 
of  spirits,  where  all  the  mysteries  of  exi8tence  are 
brought  to  light,  Satan,  the  accusing  angel,  suggests 
this  doubt,  and  boldly  asserta  that  if  those  extemal 
blessings  were  withdrawn  Job  woułd  cast  ofT  his  alle- 
giance.  The  question  thus  distinctly  propounded  is  ob- 
yiously  of  infinite  importance,  and  could  only  be  an- 
swered  by  inflicting  upon  a  man,  in  whom,  while  proe- 
perous,  malice  itself  could  detect  no  evil,  the  calamities 
which  are  the  due,  and  were  then  believed  to  be  inva- 
riably  the  results,  even  in  this  life,  of  wickedness.  The 
accuser  receives  permission  to  make  the  triaL  He  de- 
stroys  Job's  property,  then  his  children ;  and  afterwards, 
to  1eave  no  poesible  opening  for  a  cayil,  is  allowed  to 
inflict  npon  him  the  most  terrible  disease  known  in  the 
East.  See  Job's  Disease.  Each  of  these  calamities 
aasumes  a  form  which  produces  an  impression  that  it 
mnst  be  a  visitation  from  God,  precisely  such  as  was  to  be 
expected,  snpposing  that  the  patriarch  had  been  a  suo- 
oe»Bful  hypocrite,  rescnred  for  the  day  of  wrath.  Job's 
wife  breaks  down  entirely  under  the  trial — in  the  very 
words  which  Satan  had  anticipated  that  the  patriarch 
himself  woold  at  last  ntter  in  his  despair,  she  connsels 
him  **  to  curae  God  and  die.**  (The  Sept.  has  a  remark- 
abie  addition  to  her  speech  at  ii,  9,  severely  reproaching 
him  as  the  cause  of  ker  bereavements.)  Job  remains 
flteadfast.  The  destruction  of  his  property  draws  not 
from  him  a  word  of  complaint;  the  death  of  his  children 
elicits  the  sublimest  words  of  rcsignation  which  ever 


fen  ftom  the  lips  of  a  roonmer— the  disease  which  madę 
him  an  object  of  loathing  to  man,  and  seemed  to  desig- 
nate  him  as  a  yisible  example  of  divine  wrath,  is  borne 
without  a  murmur ;  he  repds  his  wife's  suggestion  with 
the  simple  words,  *<  What !  shall  we  reoeive  good  at  the 
hand  of  the  Lord,  and  shall  we  not  reoeive  evil  ?"  ^  In 
all  thia  Job  did  not  sin  with  his  lips." 

2.  Tke  Conłrmerty  (li,  ll-xxxi,  40).— Still  it  is  elear 
that,  had  the  poem  ended  here,  many  points  of  deep  in« 
terest  would  have  been  left  in  obscurity.  Entire  as  was 
the  Bubmtssion  of  Job,  he  mnst  have  been  inwardly 
perplexed  by  events  to  which  he  had  no  dew,  which 
were  qnite  unacoonntable  on  any  hypothesis  hitherto 
entertained,  and  seemed  repngnant  to  the  ideas  of  jus- 
tice  engraven  on  man's  heart  It  was  also  most  desira- 
ble  that  the  impressions  madę  npon  the  generality  of 
men  by  sudden  and.  nnaccountable  calamities  should 
be  thoronghly  discussed,  and  that  a  broader  and  firmer 
basis  than  heretofore  should  be  found  for  specnlatłons 
conoeming  the  proyidential  goyemment  of  the  world. 
An  opportumty  for  such  discnssion  is  alTorded  in  the 
most  natural  manner  by  the  introdnction  of  three  men, 
reprceenting  the  wisdom  and  experience  of  the  age,who 
came  to  oondole  with  Job  on  heaiing  of  his  misfortnnes. 
Some  time  appears  to  haye  elapsed  in  the  interim,  dur- 
ing which  the  disease  had  madę  formidabic  progress, 
and  Job  had  thoronghly  realized  the  extent  of  his  mis- 
ery.  The  meeting  is.described  with  singular  beauty. 
At  a  distance  they  greet  him  with  the  wild  demonstra- 
tions  of  sympathizing  grief  usual  in  the  East;  coming 
near,  they  are  oyerpowered  by  the  sight  of  his  wretch- 
edness,  and  sit  seyen  days  and  seyen  nighta  without  ut>- 
tering  a  wcrd  Qi,  11-18).  This  awful  siknce,  whether 
Job  felt  it  as  a  proof  of  real  sympathy,  or  as  an  indica- 
tion  of  inward  suspicion  on  their  part,  drew  out  all  his 
angnish.  In  an  agony  of  desperation  he  curses  the  day 
of  his  birth,  and  secs  and  hopes  for  no  cnd  of  his  misery 
but  death  (eh.  iii). 

This  causes  a  discussion  between  him  and  his  friends 
(eh.  iv-xxxi),  which  is  diyided  into  three  main  parts, 
each  with  subdiyisions,  embracing  altemately  the 
speeches  of  the  three  friends  of  Job  and  his  answers: 
the  last  part,  howeyer,  consists  of  only  two  subdiyisions, 
the  thiid  Iriend,  Zophar,  having  nothing  to  rejoin ;  a 
silence  by  which  the  author  of  the  book  generaUy  de»- 
ignates  the  defeat  of  Job*s  friends,  who  are  defending  a 
common  cause.  (It  has,  however,  been  argued  with 
much  force  by  Wemyss,  that  some  derangemcnt  bas  oc- 
cnrred  in  the  order  of  tłie  composition ;  for  chap.  xxvii, 
18-28,  appears  to  oontain  Zophar^s  third  address  to  Job, 
while  eh.  xxviii  s^ems  to  be  the  condusion  of  the  whole 
book,  containing  the  morał,  added  perhaps  by  some 
later  hand.)    But  see  below,  §  6. 

(a.)  The  results  of  the/r»f  discussion  (chap.  iii-xiv) 
may  be  thus  summed  up.  We  have  on  the  part  of 
Job*s  friends  a  theoiy  of  the  diyine  goyemment  resting 
upon  an  exact  and  uniform  correlation  between  sin  and 
punishment  (iv,  6, 11,  and  throughout).  Afflictions  are 
always  penal,  issuing  in  the  destruction  of  those  who 
are  radically  opposed  to  God,  or  who  do  not  submit  to 
his  chastisementa.  They  lead,  of  course,  to  correction 
and  amendment  of  life  when  the  sufferer  rcpcnts,  con- 
fesses  his  sins,  puts  them  awa}',  and  tums  to  God.  In 
that  case  restoration  to  peace,  and  eyen  incrcased  pros- 
perity, may  be  expected  (v,  17-27).  Still  the  fact  of 
the  suiDTering  always  proves  the  commission  of  some  spe- 
dal  sin,  while  the  demeanor  of  the  suifcrer  indicates  the 
tme  intemal  relation  between  him  and  God. 

These  principles  are  applied  by  them  to  the  case  of 
Job.  They  are,  in  the  iirst  place,  scandalized  by  the  ve- 
hemence  of  his  complaints,  and  when  they  find  that  he 
maintains  his  freedom  from  wilful  or  conscious  sin,  they 
are  driven  to  the  condusion  that  his  faith  is  radically 
unsonnd ;  his  protestations  appear  to  them  almost  blas- 
phemous;  they  become  convinced  that  he  has  been  se- 
cretly  guilty  of  some  nnpardonable  sin,  and  their  tonę, 
at  fint  courteotts,  though  waming  (compare  eh.  iy  with 


JOB 


926 


JOB 


cIl  xy)y  beoomes  stera,  ftnd  even  hanh  and  meiuieiiig. 
It  IB  elear  that,  unleas  they  are  driveii  from  their  partlal 
and  exclusive  theory,  they  moat  be  led  on  to  an  unąual- 
ifled  condemnation  of  Job. 

In  this  part  of  Łhe  dialogne  the  characfcer  o^  the  three 
fiiendfl  is  clearly  deyeloped.  Eliphaz  repreaents  the 
tnie  patriarchal  chieftain,  grave  and  dignified,  and  err- 
ing  only  from  an  exclu8iye  adherenoe  to  tenets  hitherto 
unque8tioned,  and  iniluenoed  in  the  first  place  by  genu- 
ine  regard  for  Job  and  ayinpathy  with  his  affliction. 
Bildad,  without  much  originality  or  independence  of 
character,  reposes  partly  on  the  wise  aaws  of  antiquity, 
partly  on  the  authority  of  his  older  friend.  Zophar  dif- 
fers  from  both :  he  seems  to  be  a  young  man ;  ^his  lan- 
guage  18  yiolent,  and  at  times  even  ooarae  and  offenaiye 
(see,  especially,  his  second  speech,  eh.  zx).  He  repre- 
sents  the  prejudiced  and  narrow-minded  bigota  of  his 
age. 

In  order  to  do  justioe  to  the  position  and  aiguments 
of  Job,  it  must  be  borne  in  mind  that  the  direct  object 
of  the  trial  was  to  ascertain  whether  he  would  deny  or 
forsake  God,  and  that  his  real  integrity  is  asserted  by 
God  himaelf.  His  answers  throughout  correspond  witb> 
these  data.  He  knows  with  a  surę  inward  conyiction 
that  he  is  not  an  offender  in  the  sense  of  his  opponents : 
he  is  therefore  confident  that,  whateyer  may  be  the  ob- 
ject of  the  afflictions  for  which  he  cannot  aocount,  God 
knows  that  he  is  innocent.  This  oonsciousness,  which 
from  the  naturę  of  things  cannot  be  tested  by  others, 
enabies  him  to  examine  fearlessly  their  position.  He 
denies  the  assertion  that  punishment  foilows  surely  on 
guilt,  or  proyes  its  oommission.  Appealing  boldly  to 
expericiice,  he  declares  that,  in  point  of  fact,  prosperity 
and  misfortune  are  not  always  or  generally  commensn- 
rate;  both  are  ofteu  irrespectiye  of  man's  deserts;  "the 
taberaadcs  of  robbers  prosper,  and  they  that  pioyoke 
God  are  secure"  (xii,  6).  In  the  goyemment  of  Proyi- 
denoe  he  can  see  but  one  point  clearly,  yiz.  that  all 
eyents  and  results  are  absolutely  in  Grod's  hand  (xii,  9- 
25),  but  as  for  the  principles  which  underlie  those  eyents 
he  knows  uothing.  In  fact,  he  is  surę  that  his  friends 
are  eąually  uninfurmed,  and  are  sophiats  defending  their 
position,  out  of  merę  prejudice,  by  argumenta  and  state- 
ments  false  iu  themselyes  and  doubly  offensiye  to  God, 
being  hypocritically  adyanced  in  his  defence  (xiii,  1-13). 
Still  he  doubts  not  that  God  is  just,  and  although  he 
cannot  see  how  or  wheii  that  justice  can  be  manifested, 
he  feels  confident  that  his  innocence  must  be  recognised. 
"Though  he  slay  me,  yet  will  I  trust  in  him^  he  also 
will  be  my  salration"  (xiii,  14,  16).  There  lemains, 
then,  but  one  course  open  to  him,  and  that  he  takes. 
He  tums  to  supplication,  implores  God  to  giye  him  a 
fair  and  open  trial  (xiii,  18-28).  Admitting  hb  liabil- 
ity  to  sucli  sins  as  are  common  to  man,  being  undean 
by  birth  (xiii,  20;  xiv,  4),  he  yet  protests  his  substan- 
tial  innocence,  and  in  the  bitter  struggle  with  his  mis- 
ery  he  first  meets  the  Łhought  which  is  aflerwards  de- 
yeloped with  remarkable  distinctness.  Belieying  that 
with  death  all  hope  connected  with  this  world  ceases, 
he  prays  that  he  may  be  hidden  in  the  grave  (xiy,  18), 
and  there  reserred  for  the  day  when  God  will  try  his 
cause  and  manifest  himself  in  love  (yerse  15).  This 
prayer  represents  but  a  dim,  yet  a  profound  and  tnie 
prescntiment,  drawn  forth,  then  eyidently  for  the  flrst 
time,  as  the  possible  solution  of  the  dark  problem.  As 
for  a  renewal  of  life  Aerc,  he  dreams  not  of  it  (yerse  14), 
nor  will  he  allow  that  the  poesible  restoration  or  pros- 
perity of  his  descendants  at  all  meets  the  exigencieB  of 
his  casc  (ver.  21, 22). 

(b.)  In  the  second  discussion  (eh.  xy-xxi)  there  is  a 
morę  resolute,  elaborate  attempt  on  the  part  of  Job'8 
friends  to  yiudicate  their  theory  of  retributiye  justioe. 
This  reąuires  an  entire  oyerthrow  of  the  position  taken 
by  Job.  They  cannot  admit  his  innocence.  The  fact 
that  his  calamities  are  unparalleled  proyes  to  them  that 
there  must  be  something  ąuite  unique  in  his  guilt.  Eli- 
phaz (eh.  xv),  who,  as  osual,  lays  down  the  baais  of  the 


argoment,  doea  not  now  hesitate  to  impnte  to  Job  tfaa 
worst  crimes  of  which  man  oMild  be  guilty.  His  de- 
fence is  blasphemoua,  and  proyes  that  he  is  ąuite  god- 
leas;  that  he  disregards  the  wisdom  of  age  and  expe- 
rienoe,  denies  the  fundamental  truths  of  leligion  (yene 
3-16),  and  by  his  lebellions  stmggles  (yer.  25-27)  agunst 
God  deaeryes  eyery  calamity  which  can  befail  him  (yer. 
28-80).  Bildad  (eh.  xyiii)  takes  up  thu  suggestion  of 
ungodlineas,  and,  after  enlarging  upoo  the  ineyitable 
results  of  all  iniquity,  eoncludes  that  the  special  eyili 
which  had  come  npon  Job,  soch  as  agony  of  heart,  min 
of  home,  destniction  of  lamily,  are  peculiariy  the  penal- 
tiea  due  to  one  who  is  without  God.  Zophar  (eh.  xx) 
draws  the  further  inferenoe  that  a  8inner*B  sufleringi 
must  needs  be  proportioned  to  his  former  enjoymenta 
(yer.  5-14),  and  his  lossea  to  his  former  gain»  (v«r.  15- 
19),  and  thus  not  only  aooonnts  for  Job*8  present  calami 
ities,  but  menaoes  him  with  still  greater  eyils  (yer.  20- 
29). 

In  answer,  Job  recogmses  the  hand  of  God  in  his  af- 
flictions (xyi,  7-16,  and  xix,  6-20),  but  lejects  the  charge 
of  ungodlineas;  he  has  neyer  forsaken  his  Maker,  and 
neyer  ceased  to  pray.  This,  bemg  a  matter  of  inwani 
oonsciousness,  cannot  of  course  be  proyed.  He  i^ipeals 
therefore  directly  to  earth  and  heayen :  **  My  witness  is 
in  heayen,  and  my  record  is  oo  high"  (;xriy  19).  The 
train  of  thought  thua  suggeated  cames  him  much  fur- 
ther in  the  way  towaida  the  gieat  tnith — that  slnoe  in 
this  life  the  righteous  certainly  are  not  sayed  from  e\il, 
it  foilows  that  their  ways  are  watched  and  their  softem 
ings  recorded,  with  a  yiew  to  a  futurę  and  perfect  man- 
ifestation  of  the  diyine  justioe.  This  yiew  becomes 
gradually  biighter  and  morę  definite  as  the  controyesBr 
proceeds  (xyi,  18, 19 ;  xyii,  8, 9,  and  perhape  1&-16),  and 
at  last  finds  expre8sion  in  a  strong  and  elear  declaratioa 
of  his  conyiction  that  at  the  latter  day  (eyidently  that 
day  which  Job  had  expreaBed  a  longing  to  aee,  xiy.  12^ 
14)  God  will  personally  manifest  himself  as  his  nearest 
kinaman  or  ayenger  [see  Gobl],  and  that  he,  Job,  al- 
though in  a  dłsembodied  state  ("^"liSSlTą,  %tiUumŁ  m^f 
Jksk^j  should  suryiye  in  spirit  to  witneas  this  posthu- 
mous  yindieation,  a  pledge  of  which  had  already  often 
been  given  him  (^1X1  "^3*^^) — ^he,  notwithstanding  the 
destniction  of  his  skin,  i.  e.  the  outward  man,  retaining 
or  recoyering  his  personal  identity  (xix,  25-27).  There 
can  be  no  doubt  that  Job  here  yirttially  anticipates  the 
finał  answer  to  all  difficulties  supplied  by  the  Christian 
reyelation. 

On  the  other  hand,  stung  by  the  harsh  and  namnr- 
minded  bigotry  of  his  opponents,  Job  dran^^s  out  (chapL 
xxi)  with  terrible  force  the  undeniable  fact  that,  from 
the  beginning  to  the  end  of  their  liyea,  ungodly  nteo, 
ayowed  athcists  (ver.  14, 15),  peraons,  in  fact,  guilty  of 
the  yery  crimes  imputed,  out  of  merę  conjectuie,  to 
himaelf,  frequently  enjoy  great  and  unbroken  prosperity. 
From  this  he  draws  the  inference,  which  he  Mates  in  a 
yery  unguarded  manner,  and  in  a  tonę  calculated  to  give 
just  offence,  that  an  impenetraUe  yeil  hanga  oyer  the 
temporal  dispensations  of  God. 

(c)  In  the  ihird  dialogue  (chapw  xxii-xxxi)  no  real 
progress  is  madę  by  Job^s  opponents.  They  will  not 
giye  up  and  cannot  defend  their  position.  Eliphaz  (eh. 
xxii)  makes  a  last  eifort,  and  laises  one  new  point  which 
he  States  with  some  ingenuity.  The  sution  in  which 
Job  was  formerly  placed  presented  temptations  to  cer^ 
tain  crimes;  the  pumshmenta  which  he  undcrgoes  are 
precisely  such  as  might  be  expected  had  thoee  crimes 
been  oommitted;  henoe  he  infers  they  actually  wen 
committed.  The  tonę  of  this  dLscourse  thorougbly  har- 
monizes  with  the  character  of  Eliphaz.  Ile  coold 
scarcely  come  to  a  different  condusion  without  surreo- 
dering  his  fundamenta!  principles,  and  he  uiges  with 
much  dignity  and  impreaaiyeneBS  the  exhortations  and 
warnings  which  in  his  opinion  were  needed.  Bikiad 
has  nothing  to  add  but  a  few  solemn  words  on  the  in- 
oompcehcnsible  mąjesty  of  God  and  the  otothingness  o^ 


JOB 


927 


JOB 


man.  Zophar,  the  most  Tiolent  and  least  rational  of 
the  three,  is  pat  to  sUenoe,  and  retirea  from  the  contest 
(nnlesB  we  adopt  the  aboye  snggestion  of  a  transpoaition 
ofthetext). 

In  his  last  two  diaooanes  Job  doea  not  alter  his  potd- 
tion,  nor,  properly  speaking,  addace  any  new  argument, 
but  he  States  with  inoompa»ble  force  and  eloquence  the 
chief  points  whicb  he  regards  as  established  (eh.  xxyi). 
Ali  creation  is  oonfounded  by  the  majesty  and  might  of 
God;  man  catches  but  a  faint  echo  of  God'8  woid,  and 
18  bafiied  in  the  attempt  to  comprehend  his  ways.  He 
then  (eh.  xxvii)  deambes  eyen  morę  completely  than 
his  opponents  had  done  the  destraction  whicb,  as  a  rule, 
ultimately  falls  upon  the  hypociite,  and  which  he  cer- 
tainly  would  deserye  if  he  were  hypocritically  to  dis- 
gulse  the  tmth  conceming  himself,  and  deny  his  0¥m 
integrity.  He  thus  reoognises  what  was  tnie  in  his  op- 
ponents' arguments,  and  corrects  his  own  hasty  and  un- 
guaided  statements.  Then  foUows  (chap.  xxviii)  the 
grand  description  of  Wisdom,  and  the  declaration  that 
haman  wisdom  does  not  oonsiit  in  exploring  the  hidden 
and  inscmtable  ways  of  God,  but  in  the  fear  of  the  Lord, 
and  in  tuming  away  from  eviL  The  remainder  of  this 
disoourse  (eh.  xxix-xxxi)  oontains  a  singularly  beauti- 
ful  description  of  his  former  life,  contrasted  with  his  ac- 
toal  misery,  together  with  a  fuli  yindication  of  his  char- 
aeter  from  all  the  chaiges  madę  or  insinuated  by  his 
opponents. 

Taking  a  generał  view  of  the  argument  thos  far,  Job's 
three  friends  may  be  oonsidered  as  aaserting  the  follow- 
ingpoeitions: 

(1.)  No  man  being  free  from  sin,  we  need  not  wonder 
that  we  are  liable  to  calamities,  for  which  we  most  ac- 
ooant  by  a  reference,  not  to  God,  but  to  ouwlyes.  From 
the  misery  of  the  distiessed,  others  are  enabled  to  infer 
their  goilt ;  and  they  must  take  this  yiew  in  order  to 
yindicate  divine  Justice. 

(2.)  The  distress  of  a  man  proves  not  only  Huzi  he  kas 
guited,  but  shows  also  the  degree  and  measure  of  his  sin ; 
and  thus,  from  the  extent  of  calamity  sustained,  may 
be  inferred  the  extent  of  sins  oommitted,  and  from  this 
the  measure  of  impending  misfortune. 

(8.)  A  distressed  man  may  recoyer  his  former  happi- 
ness,  and  even  attain  to  greater  fortunę  than  he  ever 
enjoyed  before,  if  he  takes  a  waming  from  his  afHic- 
tions,  repents  of  his  sina,  reforms  his  life,  and  raises  him- 
self to  a  higher  degree  of  morał  rectitude.  Impatience 
and  irreverent  expoetulation  with  God  serve  but  to  pro- 
kmg  and  increase  punishment;  for,  by  accusing  €rod  of 
injnstioe,  a  fresh  sin  is  added  to  former  transgressions. 

(4.)  Though  the  wicked  man  is  capable  of  prosperity, 
atill  it  is  never  lasting.  The  most  awful  retribution 
soon  oyertakes  him ;  and  his  transient  felicity  must  it- 
aelf  be  considered  as  punishment,  sińce  it  renders  him 
heedless,  and  makes  łum  feel  misfortune  morę  keenly. 
In  opposition  to  them,  Job  maintains: 
(1.)  The  most  upright  man  may  be  highly  unfortu- 
nate— moro  so  than  the  inevitable  faults  and  shortcom- 
ings  of  human  naturo  would  seem  to  iroply.  Thero  is  a 
sayage  cmelty,  desenring  the  aeyerities  of  the  divine 
lesentment,  in  inferring  the  guilt  of  a  man  from  his  du- 
treases.  In  distribating  good  and  evil,  God  regards 
neither  merit  nor  guilt,  but  acts  aoconUng  to  his  8over- 
eign  pleasuro.  His  omnipotenoe  is  apparent  in  every 
part  of  the  creation,  but  his  justice  cannot  be  seen  in 
the  goyemment  of  the  world;  the  afflictions  of  the 
lighteous,  as  well  as  the  prosperity  of  the  wicked,  are 
eyidence  against  it  There  are  innumerable  cases,  and 
Job  oonsiders  his  own  to  be  one  of  them,  in  which  a  snf- 
ferer  bas  a  right  to  justify  himself  before  God,  and  to 
appeal  to  some  other  explanation  of  his  decrees.  Of 
this  right  Job  freely  ayails  himself,  and  maintains  it 
against  bis  friends. 

(2.)  In  a  State  of  oomposure  and  calmer  reflection, 
Job  qualifies,  chieily  in  his  concluding  speech,  some  of 
his  former  rather  extrayagant  assertions,  and  says  that, 
although  God  geńerally  afilicts  the  wicked,  and  blesses 


the  righteous,  still  there  are  exceptions  to  this  rule,  sin- 
gle cases  in  which  the  pious  undergo  seyere  trials;  the 
infeience,  therefore,  of  a  man'8  gtdlt  firom  his  misfor- 
tunes  is  by  no  means  warranted.  For  the  exceptions 
established  by  experience  prove  that  God  does  not  ał* 
w&yn  distribute  proq[)erity  and  adyersity  after  this  rule, 
but  that  he  sometimes  acts  on  a  dilTerent  principle,  or 
as  an  absolute  lord,  aocording  to  his  merę  will  and 
pleasuro. 

(8.)  Humbly  to  adore  God  is  our  duty,  eyen  when  we 
are  subject  to  calamities  not  at  all  deseryed;  but  we 
should  abstain  from  harshly  judging  of  those  who,  when 
distressed,  seem  to  send  forth  complaints  against  God. 

8.  Thus  ends  the  discussion,  in  which  it  is  eyident 
both  parties  had  partially  failed.  Job  has  been  betray- 
ed  into  yery  hazardous  statements,  while  his  friends  had 
been  on  the  one  hand  dińngenuous,  on  the  other  bigot- 
ed,  harsh,  and  pitileśs.  The  points  which  had  been 
omitted,  or  imperfectly  developed,  are  now  taken  up  by 
a  new  interiocutor  (eh.  xxxii-xxxyii),  who  argues  the 
justice  of  the  divine  administration  both  from  the  na- 
turę of  the  dispensations  allotted  to  man,  and  from  the 
•essential  character  of  God  himself.  Elihn,  a  young 
num,  descended  from  a  collateral  branch  of  the  family 
of  Abraham,  has  listened  in  indignant  silence  to  the  ar- 
guments of  his  elders  (xxxii,  7),  and,  impelled  by  an 
inward  inspiration,  he  now  addresses  himself  to  both 
parties  in  the  discussion,  and  specially  to  Job.  He 
shows,  flrst,  that  they  had  accnsed  Job  opon  false  or  in- 
sufficient  grounds,  and  failed  to  convict  him,  or  te  yin- 
dicate God's  justice.  Job,  again,  had  assumed  his  entire 
innocence,  and  had  arraigned  that  justice  (xxxiLi,  9-11). 
These  errors  he  traoes  to  their  both  oyerlooklng  one 
main  object  of  all  suffering.  God  speakt  to  man  by 
chastisement  (yer.  14, 19-22)— wams  him,  teaches  him 
self-knowledge  and  humility  (yer.  16, 17)— and  preparea 
him  (yer.  28)  by  the  mediation  of  a  spiritual  interpreter 
(the  angel  Jehoyah  of  Genesis)  to  implore  and  to  obtain 
pardon  (yer.  24),  rcnewal  of  life  (yer.  25),  perfect  access 
and  restoration  (yer.  26).  This  stateroent  does  not  in- 
yolye  any  charge  of  spccial  gnilt,  such  as  the  friends 
had  alleged  and  Job  had  repudiated.  Since  the  wam- 
ing and  suffering  are  preyentiye  as  well  as  remediaL 
the  yisitation  anticipates  the  oommission  of  sin ;  it  sayes 
man  from  pride,  and  other  temptations  of  weahh  afid 
power,  and  it  effects  the  real  object  of  all  diyine  inter- 
positions,  the  entire  submiasion  to  God^s  wilL  Again, 
Elihu  argues  (xxxiy,  10-17)  that  any  charge  of  injua- 
tice,  direct  or  implicit,  against  God  inyolyes  a  contra- 
diction  in  terms.  God  is  the  only  source  of  justice;  the 
yery  idea  of  justice  is  derived  from  his  govemance  of 
the  uniyene,  the  principle  of  which  is  loye.  In  his  ab- 
solute knowledge  God  sees  all  secrets,  and  by  his  abso^ 
lute  power  he  oontrols  all  eyents,  and  that  for  the  one 
end  of  bringing  righteousness  to  light  (yerse  21-80). 
Man  has,  of  course,  no  claim  upon  God ;  what  he  re- 
oeiyes  is  purely  a  matter  of  grace  (xxxy,  6-9).  The 
occasional  appearance  of  mianswered  prayer  (yerse  9), 
when  eyil  seems  to  get  the  upper  hand,  is  owing  merely 
to  the  fact  that  man  prays  in  a  proud  and  insolent  spirit 
(yer.  12, 18).  Job  may  look  to  his  hcart,  and  he  will 
see  if  that  is  trae  of  himself. 

Job  is  silent,  and  £lihu  proceeds  (eh.  xxxvi)  to  show 
that  the  almightiness  of  God  is  not^  as  Job  seems  to  a»- 
sert,  assodated  with  any  conteropt  or  neglect  of  his 
creatures.  Job,  by  ignoring  this  trath,  has  been  led 
into  graye  error,  and  terrible  dangcr  (yer.  12;  comp.  18), 
but  God  is  still  drawing  him,  and  if  he  yields  and  fol- 
lows  he  will  yet  be  delivered.  The  reat  of  the  discourse 
brings  out  forcibly  the  lesaons  taught  by  the  manifesta- 
tions  of  goodness  as  well  as  greatness  in  creation.  In- 
deed,  the  great  object  of  all  natural  phenomena  is  to 
teach  men—"  Who  teacheth  like  him  ?"  This  part  dif- 
fers  fVom  Job's  magnificent  description  of  the  mystery 
and  majesty  of  God's  works,  inasmuch  as  it  indicates  a 
dearer  recognition  of  a  loying  purpose — and  fh>m  the 
address  of  the  Lord  which  follows,  by  its  discursiye  and 


J 


JOB 


928 


JOB 


argmnentatiTe  tonę.  The  last  worda  are  eridently  spo- 
ken  while  a  yiolent  storm  ie  ooming  oii|  in  wbich  Eliha 
yiews  the  aigna  of  a  Theophany,  such  as  cannot  fail  to 
pEodace  an  intense  lealization  of  Uie  nothingneM  of  man 
before  God. 

4.  Tke  Almight^i  Rapotue.  —  From  the  preoeding 
analysis  it  is  obviou8  that  many  iNreighty  tmths  hare 
been  developed  in  the  cotine  of  the  duciuńon — ^neariy 
every  theoiy  of  the  objecto  and  uaes  of  suffering  has 
been  reviewed — while  a  great  advanoe  has  been  madę 
towards  the  apprehenaion  of  doctrines  hereafter  to  be 
rerealed,  such  as  were  known  only  to  God.  But  the 
mystery  is  not  as  yet  really  cleared  up.  The  poaition  of 
the  tbree  original  opponenlis  is  shown  to  be  untenable — 
the  yieyrs  of  Job  himself  to  be  bot  imperfect — while  even 
£liha  giYos  not  the  least  intimation  that  he  racogmsee 
one  special  object  of  calamity.  In  the  case  of  Job,  as 
we  are  expres8ly  told,  that  object  was  to  try  his  ainoer^ 
ity,  and  to  demonstrato  that  goodness,  integiity  in  all 
relationsy  and  de^out  faith  in  God  can  exist  independent 
of  eztemal  circumstances.  This  object  never  occuis  to 
the  mind  of  any  one  of  the  interlocuton,  nor  oould  it  be 
proyed  without  a  reve]ation«  On  the  other  hand,  the 
exact  amount  of  censiue  due  to  Job  for  the  esceases  into 
which  he  had  been  betrayed,  and  to  hU  three  opponents 
for  thór  harshness  and  want  of  candor,  could  only  be 
awarded  by  an  omniscient  Judge. 

Accordingly,  from  the  midst  of  the  stinrm,  Jehoyah, 
whom  Job  had  8everal  times  yehemently  challenged  by 
appeal  to  decide  the  contest,  now  speaks.  In  langaage 
of  incomparable  grandeur  he  reproyes  and  silences  the 
mormurs  of  Job.  God  does  not  oondescend,  stzictly 
speaking,  to  argue  with  his  creatures.  The  specolatiye 
ąuestioiis  discussed  in  the  coUoąay  are  nnnoticed,  but 
the  declaration  of  God's  absolate  power  is  illostrated  by 
a  maryellously  beantiful  and  comprehensiye  sunrey  of 
the  glory  of  creation,  and  his  all-embradug  proyidence 
by  reference  to  the  phenomena  of  the  animal  kingdom. 
He  who  wuuld  argue  with  the  Lord  most  anderstand  at 
least  the  objects  for  which  instincts  so  stiange  and  man- 
ifold  are  giycn  to  the  beings  far  below  man  in  gifts  and 
powers.  This  declaration  suffices  to  bring  Job  to  a  light 
mind:  he  confesses  his  inability  to  comprehend,  and 
therefore  to  answer  his  Maker  (xl,  3,  4).  A  second  ad- 
dress  completes  the  work.  It  proyes  that  a  charge  of 
injustice  against  God  inyolyes  the  oonseqaenoe  that  the 
accuser  is  morę  competont  than  he  to  rule  the  uniyerse. 
He  should  then  be  able  to  oontrol,  to  punish,  to  reduoe 
aU  creatures  to  order — but  he  cannot  eyen  subdae  the 
monstera  of  the  irrational  creation.  Baffled  by  leyia- 
than  and  behemoth,  how  can  he  hołd  the  reins  of  goy- 
emment«  how  contend  with  him  who  madę  and  rulee 
themalL? 

5.  Job'8  unreseryed  submission  tenninates  the  trial 
(eh.  xxxviii-xliL  There  is  probably  another  transpo- 
aition  at  xl,  1-14,  which  belongs  after  xlii,  1-6).  He 
expresses  deep  contrition,  not,  of  course,  for  sins  fiilsely 
imputed  to  him,  but  for  the  bittemess  and  arrogance 
which  had  characterized  some  portion  of  his  complaints. 
In  the  rebuke  then  addressod  to  Job^s  opponents  the  in- 
tegrity  of  his  charactcr  is  distinctly  recognised,  while 
they  are  condemned  for  untruth,  which,  inasmnch  aa  it 
was  not  wilful,  but  proceeded  from  a  real  but  narrow- 
minded  conviction  of  the  diyine  jusdce,  is  pardoned  on 
the  intercessiou  of  Job.  The  restoration  of  his  extemal 
prosperity,  which  is  an  ineyitable  resolt  of  God's  per- 
sona! maiiifestation,  symbolizes  the  ultimate  oompenaa- 
tion  of  the  righteoua  for  all  anfTeringa  nndeigone  upon 
earth. 

IL  Design  ofthe  Booh. — 1.  From  thia  analyaia  it  may 
aeem  elear  that  certain  yiews  oonceming  the  generał 
object  of  the  book  are  partial  or  erroneous.  o.  It  can- 
not be  the  oł>ject  of  the  writer  to  proye  that  there  is  no 
connection  bctwecn  guUt  and  sorrow,  or  that  the  old 
orthodox  doctrine  of  retribution  was  ńdically  unsonnd. 
Job  himself  rcco^nigcs  the  generał  tmth  ofthe  doctnne, 
which  is,  in  fact,  coudrmed  by  his  ultimate  restoration 


to  happinesB.  5.  Nor  la  tha  deydopmeDt  of  the  gieii 
doctrine  of  a  foture  atato  the  prinuuy  object  It  woold 
not,  in  that  caae,  haye  been  pained  oyer  in  Job^s  latt  dis- 
courae,  in  the  apeech  of  Elihu,  or  in  the  addieas  of  the 
Lord  God.  In  fact,  critica  who  hołd  that  yiew  admit 
that  the  doctrine  is  rather  aoggeated  than  deyekped, 
and  amoants  to  acareely  morę  than  a  bope,  a  preeatti- 
ment,  at  the  most  a  aabjectiye  oonyiction  of  a  tmth  ficat 
fully  reyealed  by  him  "who  brought  life  and  immoitality 
toUght"  (SeePaieat^/^/iRMortettofu  aottf  MK&ft) 
Jobi,  Deyent.  1807.)  The  cardinal  tmth  of  the  immar- 
tality  of  the  aoul  ia,  indeed,  deaziy  implied  throngfaoat 
Job'a  reaaoning,  aa  it  ia  daewhere  aaaomed  in  the  O.  T. 
(oomp.  ICatt.  xxii,  82) ;  and  thia  thoiigfat,  in  fact,  coo- 
atitutea  the  afflicted  patńarch*s  groond  of  ooDsoiatioo 
and  trust,  espedally  in  that  saUiine  paaaage  (xix,  25- 
27)  where  he  eipreaaea  hia  oonfidence  in  his  po^oraoa 
yindication,  which  oould  be  of  no  satiafaction  unleas  his 
apirit  ahould  aoryiye  to  witaeaa  it.  Yet  this  bdief  is 
nowhere  carried  out  at  length,  aa  woold  haye  been  the 
caae  had  this  been  the  main  theme  of  the  epopec. 
Mach  leas  is  the  later  doctrine  of  the  icaDnectkrn  of 
the  body  oontained  in  the  poem.  See  RBsusBBcnoif. 
c.  On  the  doctrine  of  futurę  retribation,  aee  below.  See 
FuTUBB  Life;  Immortalitt. 

2.  It  may  be  granied  that  the  primaiy  design  of  the 
poem  is  that  which  is  diatinctty  intimated  in  the  intio- 
duction,  and  oonfirmed  in  the  coodnaion,  namelT,  to 
ahow  the  elTeota  of  calamity  in  ita  worat  and  most  awful 
form  upon  a  truły  rełigioua  apiiit.  Job  ia  no  Stoic  od 
Titan  (Ewald,  p.  26),  stmggłiiig  rebellioosły  against 
God ;  no  Frometheos  yictim  of  a  jealooa  and  unrdeut- 
ing  Deity:  he  ia  a  auffering  man,  acatdy  aenaitiTe  to 
all  impreaaiona  inward  and  outwaid,  gricyed  by  the  loa 
of  wealtłi,  position,  domeatic  happineae,  the  respect  of 
his  countrymen,  dependenta,  and  followers,  tactnicd  by 
a  loathsome,  incurabłe,  and  all  but  nneodoraUe  disease, 
and  stuiig  to  an  agony  of  grief  and  paaaion  by  the  in- 
sinoations  of  oonscioua  guilt  and  hypocriay.  Under 
auch  proyocation,  k)eing  wholly  without  a  dew.to  the 
cause  of  his  misery,  and  hopelesa  of  reatotatian  to  bsp* 
piness  on  earth,  he  is  ahaken  to  the  utmoet,  and  diireo 
almost  to  desperation.  Still  in  the  oentie  of  his  bein^ 
he  remaina  firm  and  unmoyed— with  an  intense  con- 
sciousness  of  his  own  integrity— without  a  doubt  as  lo 
the  power,  wisdom,  tmth,  or  abeoluto  justice  of  God, 
and  therefore  awaiting  with  longing  expectation  ihe 
finał  judgment  which  he  is  aasnred  mnat  oome  and  bńof; 
him  deliyerance.  The  repreaentation  of  anch  a  chsnc- 
ter,  inyolying  the  diacomfituie  of  man'a  great  enemy, 
and  the  deyelopment  of  the  manifold  problems  which 
auch  a  apectade  auggeata  to  men  of  imperfect  knowt- 
edge,  but  of  thoughtful  and  inąuiring  mind,  is  the  mofc 
direct  object  of  the  writer,  wlio,  Uke  all  great  spirits  of 
the  andent  worłd,  deałt  less  with  abatract  propositiuDa 
than  with  the  objectiye  realities  of  existence.  Soch  ia 
the  impression  naturally  madę  by  the  book,  and  which 
is  recognised  morę  distinctly  in  proportion  as  the  retder 
graspe  the  tenor  of  the  argumenta,  and  realiaea  the  dui^ 
actera  and  eyenta. 

8.  Still,  beyond  and  beneath  thia  ootwanl  and  occs- 
aional  design  there  evidently  lies  a  grander  proUen, 
which  has  exercised  the  reflection  of  all  pioos  and  cod- 
siderate  minds,  and  which  we  know  was  yiyidly  pn»Kd 
upon  the  oontemplation  eyen  of  the  Orieotal  aaint  of 
early  timea  (Psa.  xxxyii).  Hence  the  nearly  onsm- 
mous  yoice  of  critlcs  and  readen  haa  decided  that  the 
ultimate  object  of  the  l)ook  ia  the  conaideradon  of  the 
qtteation  how  the  aiilictiona  of  the  righteoua  and  the 
prosperity  of  the  yricked  can  be  oonaiatent  with  Gods 
justice.  But  it  should  be  obeenred  that  the  direct  prob- 
lem exclu8iydy  refers  to  the  firat  point,  the  second  be- 
ing  only  inddentaUy  discuased  on  occaaion  of  the  leadioip 
theme.  If  this  is  oyerlooked,  the  author  would  appear 
to  haye  aolyed  only  one  half  of  hia  problem:  the  case 
from  which  the  whołe  diacnaaioa  prooeeds  has  refiefeaoe 
mecdy  to  the  leading  proUeoi. 


JOB 


929 


JOB 


Thero  is  another  fnndamental  errat  which  has  led 
nearly  all  modem  interpreteza  to  a  mistaken  idea  of  the 
design  of  thia  book.  Tfaey  aasame  that  the  problem 
could  be  aatasfactoiiiy  8olved  only  when  the  doctrine  of 
retribution  in  another  life  had  been  fint  established, 
which  had  not  been  done  by  the  author  of  the  book  of 
Job :  a  perfect  solution  of  the  que8tion  was  therefore  not 
to  be  expected  fiom  him.  Some  anert  that  his  solution 
b  erroneotis,  aince  retribution,  to  be  expected  in  a  futurę 
world,  is  tnuisferred  by  him  to  this  life ;  others  say  that 
he  Gut  the  knot  which  he  could  not  unlooee,  and  has 
been  satisfied  to  ask  for  implicit  submission  and  devo- 
tedness,  showing  at  the  same  time  that  eyery  attempt 
at  a  solution  must  lead  to  dangerous  poeitions:  blind 
resignation,  therefore,  was  the  short  meaning  of  the 
lengthened  discussbn.  Upon  the  doctrine  of  retribu- 
tion after  death  our  author  does  not  enter;  but  that  he 
knew  it  may  be  inferred  from  several  passages  with 
great  probability;  as,  for  instance,  xiv,  14,  "If  a  man 
die,  shall  he  liye  again?  AU  the  days  of  my  appointed 
time  will  I  wait,  tiU  my  change  come.**  The  if  here 
ahows  that  the  writer  had  been  before  engaged  in  eon- 
aidering  the  subject  of  life  after  death;  and  when  such 
is  the  case,  a  pious  mind  will  neceesarily  indulge  the 
hope,  or  will,  at  least,  have  an  obscure  presentiment  of 
immortality.  The  truth  also  of  6od'8  undoubted  grace, 
on  which  the  doctrine  of  immortality  is  based,  will  be 
found  clearly  laid  down  in  chap.  xix.  Still  the  author 
does  not  recur  to  this  hope  for  the  purpose  of  solying 
his  problem ;  he  did  not  intend  in  his  discussion  to  ex- 
ceed  the  limits  of  what  God  had  clearly  rerecJed,  and 
this  was  in  his  time  confined  to  the  vague  notion  of  life 
continued  after  death,  but  not  oonnectcd  with  rewards 
and  punishments.  From  these  considerations  it  appears 
that  those  interpretera  who,  with  Bernstein,  De  Wette, 
and  Umbreit,  assume  that  the  book  of  Job  was  of  a 
sceptical  naturę,  and  intended  to  dispute  the  doctrine 
of  retribution  aa  laid  down  in  the  other  books  of  the  Old 
Testament,  have  entirely  misunderstood  it 

On  nearer  examination,  however,  it  appeara  that  the 
doctrine  of  retribution  after  death  is  not  of  itself  alone 
calculated  to  lead  to  a  solution  of  the  problem.  The  be- 
lief  in  a  finał  judgment  is  firm  and  rattonal  only  when 
it  rests  in  the  belief  in  God's  continued  proyidential 
gorcmment  of  the  world,  and  in  his  acting  as  soyereign 
Lord  in  all  the  events  of  human  life.  Temporary  in- 
Justice  is  stiU  injustioe,  and  de6tro3r8  the  idea  of  a  holy 
andjustGrod.  A  God  who  has  something  to  redress  is 
no  God  at  all.  £yen  the  ancient  heathen  perceiycd 
that  futurę  awards  would  not  yindicate  incongniities 
in  divine  proyidenoe  here  (see  Barth,  Notes  to  Claudian, 
1078  sq.).  God's  jnst  retribution  in  this  world  is  extol- 
led  thioughout  the  Old  Testament.  The  New  Testa- 
ment holds  out  to  the  righteous  promises  of  a  futurę  life, 
aa  well  as  of  the  present;  and  our  Sayiour  himself,  in 
setting  forth  the  rewards  of  thoee  who,  for  his  sake,  for- 
aook  eyerything,  begins  with  this  life  (Matt.  xix,  29). 
A  nearer  examination  of  the  benedictions  contained  in 
the  Sermon  on  the  Mount  (Matt.  y)  shows  that  nonę  of 
them  exclusiyely  refer  to  futurę  blessings;  the  judg- 
ment of  the  wicked  is  in  his  yiew  proceeding  without 
intermption,  and  therefore  his  example8  of  the  distribu- 
tion  of  diyine  justioe  in  this  world  are  mingled  with 
thoee  of  requital  in  a  futurę  order  of  things.  The  Gali- 
lieans,  whose  blood  Pilate  had  mingled  with  their  own 
sacrifices  (Lukę  xiii,  1),  were  in  Christ'8  opinion  not  ac- 
ddentally  killed ;  and  he  threatens  thoee  who  would  not 
lepent  that  they  should  in  like  manner  perish.  That 
sickness  is  to  be  considered  as  a  punishment  for  sin  we 
are  clearly  taught  (John  y,  14 ;  Lukę  y,  20,  24) :  in  the 
former  passage  it  is  threatened  as  a  punishment  for  sins 
oommittcd  \  in  the  latter  it  is  healed  in  consequence  of 
punishment  remitted.  The  passage  in  John  ix,  2,  8, 
which  is  often  appealed  to  in  proof  that  our  Lord  did 
not  consider  sickness  as  a  punishment  for  sin,  does  not 
proye  this,  but  only  oppoaes  the  Jewish  position — found- 
•d  on  the  mistaken  doctrine  of  retribution— that  all  se- 
IV^Nkk 


yere  sicknesses  and  infirmities  were  conaequences  of 
crimes.  The  solution  of  the  problem  regarding  the  suf- 
ferings  of  the  righteous  rests  on  two  positions : 

(1.)  Their  Necessity^^Eyen  the  comparatiyely  right< 
eous  are  not  without  sin,  which  can  be  eradicated  only 
by  afilictions,  and  he  who  patiently  endures  them  wiB 
attain  a  clearer  insight  into  the  otherwise  obscure  wayfc 
of  God.  The  trials  of  the  pious  isaue  at  ouce  from  God's 
justice  and  loye.  To  him  who  entertains  a  proper  sense 
of  the  sinfulness  of  man,  no  calamity  appears  so  great  as 
not  to  be  desenred  as  a  punishment,  or  useful  as  a  cor- 
rectiye. 

(2.)  The  CompemaHons  attendmg  <A«m.--Calamity,  as 
the  yeiled  grace  of  God,  is  with  the  pious  neyer  expe- 
rienced  alone,  but  m^anifest  proofs  of  diyine  fayor  accom- 
pany  or  foUow  it.  Though  snnk  in  misery,  they  stiU 
are  happier  than  the  wicked,  and  when  it  has  attained 
its  object  it  is  terminated  by  the  Lord.  The  oonaoUt- 
tions  ofiered  in  the  Old  Testament  are,  agreeably  to  the 
weaker  judgment  of  its  professors,  deriyed  chiefly  from 
extemal  circumstances,  while  in  the  New  Testament 
they  are  mainly  apiritual,  the  eye  being,  moreoyer,  di- 
rected  beyond  the  limits  of  this  world. 

It  is  this  purely  correct  solution  of  the  problem  which 
occurs  in  the  book  of  Job.  It  is  not  set  forth,  howeyer, 
in  any  one  set  of  speeches,  but  is  rather  to  be  gathered 
from  the  concurrent  drift  of  the  entire  discussion.    For, 

[1.]  The  solution  cannot  be  looked  for  in  Jch'$  speech' 
es,  for  God  proyes  himself  gradous  towards  him  only 
after  he  has  been  corrected  and  humbled  himself.  Al- 
though  the  author  of  the  book  does  not  say  (i,  22 ;  ii, 
10 ;  comp.  xlii,  7)  that  Job  had  charged  God  foolishly, 
and  sinned  with  his  lips,  yet  the  sentiment  calling  for 
coiiection  in  his  speeches  is  clearly  pointed  out  to  be 
that  "  he  was  righteous  in  his  own  eyes,  and  justified 
himself  rather  than  God"  (xxxii,  1, 2).  The  entire  pu- 
rity  of  his  character  did  not  preyent  his  falling  into 
misconceptions  and  eyen  contradictions  on  this  impor- 
tant  topie,  which  the  discussion  only  tended  the  morę  to 
perplex.  Job  oontinues  to  be  emburassed  for  the  solu- 
tion, and  he  is  only  certain  of  this,  that  the  explanation 
of  his  friends  cannot  be  satisfactory.  Job  erred  chiefly 
in  not  acknowledging  his  need  of  chaatisement;  not- 
withstanding  his  integrity  and  sincere  piety,  this  pre- 
yented  him  from  apprehending  the  object  of  the  calam- 
ity infiicted  on  him,  led  him  to  consider  God's  dispen- 
sations  as  arbitrary,  and  madę  him  despair  of  the  return 
of  bctter  days.  The  greatness  of  his  sufferings  was  in 
some  measure  the  cause  of  his  misconception,  by  excit- 
ing  his  feelings,  and  preyenting  him  from  calmly  con- 
sidering  his  case.  He  was  in  the  state  of  a  man  tempt- 
ed,  and  deserying  God'8  indulgence.  He  had  reoeiyed 
considerable  proyocation  from  his  fnends,  and  often  en- 
deayored  to  soften  his  harsh  assertions,  which,  particu- 
larly  in  eh.  xxyii,  leads  him  into  such  contradictions  as 
must  have  occurred  in  the  life  of  the  tempted;  he  ia 
loud  in  acknowledging  the  wisdom  of  God  (eh.  xxyiii), 
and  raises  himself  at  dmes  to  cheering  hopes  (comp.  eh. 
xix).  But  this  can  only  excuse,  not  jostify  him,  and 
therefore  it  is  in  the  highest  degree  honorable  to  him 
that  he  remaios  sUent  when,  in  £lihu's  speeches,  the 
correct  solution  of  the  ąuestion  is  suggested,  and  that  he 
ultimately  acknowledges  his  fundamental  error  of  doing 
justice  to  himself  only. 

[2.]  The  solution  of  the  question  mooted  cannot  be 
contained  in  the  speeches  of  J6b's  friends,  Their  de- 
meanor  is  reproyed  by  God,  and  represented  as  a  real 
sin,  so  much  so,  indeed,  that  to  obtain  pardon  for  them 
Job  was  directed  to  offer  a  propitiatory  sacrifice.  Their 
enor  proceedod  from  a  crude  notion  of  sin  in  its  exter- 
nal  appearance ;  and,  inferring  its  existenoe  from  calam- 
ity, they  were  thus  led  to  oondemn  the  afflicted  Job  as 
guilty  of  heinous  crimes  (eh.  xxxii).  The  morał  use  of 
sufferings  was  imknown  to  them,  which  cyidently  proyed 
that  they  themselyes  were  not  yet  purged  and  cleared 
from  guUt  If  they  had  been  sensible  of  the  naturę  of 
man,  if  they  had  understood  thenueheSf  they  would«  on 


JOB 


030 


JOB 


neing  the  mueiy  of  Job,  hare  ezdaimed,  ''God  be 
merdfui  to  ob  sumess!"  There  ib, indeed, au  impoftant 
conect  principle  in  their  speectaefl,  whofle  centrę  it  forma, 
w  much  80  that  they  moatly  err  ooly  in  tbe  application 
of  the  generał  tnith.  It  conaists  in  the  peroeption  of 
Łhe  inyariable  eonnection  between  ńn  and  misery,  whieb 
Im  indelibly  ingnifted  on  the  heart  of  man,  and  to  whicb 
many  andent  authon  aUude.  The  problem  of  the  book 
is  then  soiyed  by  properly  uniting  the  oomct  pońtions 
of  the  speechee  both  of  Job  and  hiB  fiiends,  by  main- 
Caining  his  innocenoe  as  to  any  moml  obliqaity  (al- 
thongh  cherishing  a  view  which  must  have  resulted  in 
ipiritual  pride,  had  not  the  Lord  thus  mercifully  expoeed 
-its  character  before  it  ripened  into  guilt),  and  at  the 
•same  time  aToiding  the  idea  that  misfortune  is  neoea- 
aarily  a  panitive  infliction  (being  only  a  cone  when  it 
foliowa  the  yiolation  of  the  physical  lawa  of  the  Creator, 
and  eyen  then  capable  of  being  oyerruled  for  the  wel- 
lare  of  his  aaints),  thus  tiadng  the  enois  of  both  par- 
ties  to  a  oommon  source,  the  want  of  a  aound  insight 
into  the  natore  of  ain.  Job  considen  himself  righteons, 
and  not  deaenong  of  anch  inflictions,  becanse  he  was  not 
conacioua  of  having  oommitted  any  crime;  and  his 
•iriends  fancy  they  must  asaume  that  he  was  highly 
cńminal,  in  order  to  justify  hia  miaeiy. 

[8.]  The  aolutaon  of  the  queation  at  iaane  ia  not  ez- 
duaiyely  given  in  tke  addre$»et  of  God,  which  oontain 
only  the  bosia  of  the  aolation,  not  the  aolation  itaelf.  In 
aetting  forth  hia  mi^eaty,  and  in  ahowing  that  impating 
to  him  injustice  ia  repugnant  to  a  correct  oonception  of 
his  naturę,  these  addreaaea  eatabUah  that  there  muat  be 
a  aołtttion  which  doea  not  impair  di>-ine  juatioe.  Thia 
ia  not,  indeed,  the  aolntion  itaelf,  but  everythiiig  ia  tbua 
prepared  for  the  aolution.  We  apprehend  that  God 
mutt  be  juat,  but  it  remaine  further  to  be  ahown  how  he 
ean  be  juat,  and  atill  the  righteoua  be  miaerable. 

[4.  ]  Kor  yet  can  we  Juatly  regard  the  speech  ofEUku 
aa  affbrdlng  altogether  a  correct  aolution  of  thia  main 
queation;  for,  aa  the  preceding  analyaia  bas  ahown,  it 
falla  ahort  of  tbe  purpoae,  and  the  text  itaelf  (xzxviu, 
8)  ezpresaly  atatea  ita  bewUderment  and  inoompetency. 
Neyerthekśa,  the  poaition  of  thia  in  the  poem,  and  the 
generał  agreement  of  ita  doctrineę  with  the  finał  reault, 
indicate  that  it  oontaina,  in  germ  at  leaat,  the  correct 
aolution,  as  far  at  human  tagaeity  can  go.  The  leading 
principle  in  Elihu'a  atatement  ia,  that  calamity  in  the 
ahape  of  trial  waa  inflicted  eyen  on  the  oomparatiyely 
beat  men,  but  that  God  allowed  a  fayorable  tum  to  take 
plaoe  aa  aoon  aa  it  had  attaiqed  ita  object.  Now  thia  ia 
the  key  to  tbe  eyents  of  Job'a  life.  Though  a  pioua 
and  righteoua  man,  he  ia  tried  by  aeyere  afflictiona.  He 
knows  not  for  what  purpoae  he  ia  smitten,  and  his  ca- 
lamity continuea;  but  when  he  leama  it  fiom  the  ad- 
dreaaea of  Elihu  and  God,  and  humblea  himielf,  he  ia 
lelieyed  from  the  burden  which  oppreaaes  him,  and  am- 
ple prosperity  atonea  for  the  afflictiona  he  haa  auatained 
(the  laat  yeatige  of  injuatioe  on  the  part  of  the  Almtghty 
in  thua  affltcting  a  good  man  at  the  inatauce  of  Hatan, 
and  for  the  aake  of  the  esample  to  futura  ages,  diaap- 
pearing  with  the  conaideration  that  the  aubject  of  it 
htmaelf  required  the  aeyere  leaaon  for  hia  own  apritual 
profit).  Add  to  thia  that  the  remaining  portion  of  Eli- 
ha'a  apeechea,  in  which  he  pointa  to  God'a  infinite  maj- 
eaty  aa  induding  hia  juatice,  ia  continued  in  the  ad- 
dreaaea of  God;  that  Elihu  foretella  God'a  appearance; 
that  he  ia  not  puniahed  by  God  aa  are  the  frienda  of 
Job ;  in  fine,  that  Job,  by  hia  yery  ailence,  acknowledgea 
the  problem  to  haye  been  aolyed  by  Elihu ;  and  his  ai- 
lence ia  the  morę  aignificant,  becanae  Elihu  had  uiged 
■him  to  defend  himadf  (zx3uii,  82),  and  becauae  Job  had 
lepeatedly  dedared  he  wouki  **  hołd  hia  peaoe"  if  it  waa 
ahown  to  him  wherein  he  had  erred  (yi,  24, 25 ;  zix,  4). 
Thia  yiew  of  the  book  of  Job  haa  among  modem  authora 
been  aupported  chiefly  by  Btftudlin  {Beitrage  eur  Re- 
ligiom  und  SittenUhrt,  ii,  138)  and  Stickd  {Da»  Buch 
Hiob,  Lpzg.  1842),  though  in  both  it  ia  mixed  np  with 
much  erroneoua  matter;  and  it  ia  further  oonfirmed  by 


the  whole  Old  Testament  giying  the  aame  answer  to 
the  ąueation  mooted  which  the  apeechea  of  EUhu  oiTer: 
in  ita^Doncentrated  form  it  ia  pteaented  in  Paa.  xxxyii, 

At  the  aame  time,  it  muat  be  conceded  that  the  re{^ 
rehenaion  of  £lihn'a  speech  by  Jehoyah  himaelf,  aa  ai^ 
yoring  of  preaumption,  intimatee,  as  the  tenor  of  tba 
whole  sucoeeding  portion  of  the  poem  alao  impliea,  that 
there  lure  myaferiea  in  diyine  proyidenoe,  the  fuU  aolu*- 
tion  of  which,  in  thia  life  at  least,  God  doea  not  ddgn 
nor  tłiink  beat  to  make  to  hia  creatorea  who  are  the  aul^ 
Jecta  of  them.  The  inacratability  of  God'a  waya  by  ha- 
man judgment  ia  a  neceaaary  inferenoe  from  hia  inflnity, 
and  the  character  of  thia  life  as  a  probation  iequirea  the 
withholding  of  noany  of  hia  piana  in  order  to  their  prop» 
er  disciplinary  effecta.  Eapecially  ia  the  aaint  reąuired 
to  ''walk  by  fiuth  and  not  by  aight,"  and  the  growtk 
and  fttlleat  exerciae  of  this  faith  can  only  oocur  undcr 
aoch  circumatanoea  aa  Uioae  in  which  Job  waa  plaoed. 
While  it  ia  pre-eminently  the  doctrine  of  both  the  Old 
and  the  New  Testament  that  afflictiona  are  the  earthły 
lot  of  the  righteoua,  it  ia  equaUy  a  maxim  under  both 
diapenaationa  that  the  moat  ennobling  motiye  for  their 
padent  enduranoe  ia  the  aimple  fact  that  they  are  di»> 
penaed  by  our  heayenly  Father,  who  ałone  fully  knows 
why  they  are  beat  for  ua.  Gould  the  aubject  of  thcm  at 
the  time  percdye  dearly  their  neoeaaity  and  adyantage, 
half  thdr  yałue  would  be  deatiojred ;  for  an  aaaurance 
of  thia  he  muat  trust  the  known  kindneaa  and  wiadom 
of  the  Hand  that  amitea  him  (Heb.  xii,  1).  It  waa  thia 
aabłime  podtion,  finally  attained  by  the  tried  patiiar^ 
(Job  zxiii,  10),  which  giłda  hia  character  witli  ita  most 
aacred  Iwe.  The  aboye  ia  aubatantially  the  yiew  of  tbe 
morał  design  of  tlie  book  entertained  by  the  latest  exh 
podtora  (e.  g.  Conant,  Delitsach,  etc),  althoogh  they 
do  not  bring  out  theae  ethicd  conuderationa  with  auift* 
dent  diatinctneaa. 

It  remaina  to  condder  tbe  yiew  taken  by  Ewald  r»- 
apecting  tbe  deaign  of  the  book  of  Job.  He  juatly  ie« 
jecta  the  common,  auperfidał  yiew  of  ita  dedgn,  which 
haa  reoently  been  leyiyed  and  defended  by  Uind  (aee 
hia  Conuneniarf  Lpzg.  1889),  and  which  repreaenta  the 
author  aa  intending  to  ahow  tliat  man  cannot  apprehend 
the  piana  of  God,  and  does  beat  to  aubmit  in  ignoAnoe, 
without  repining  at  afflictiona.  Nowhere  in  the  whole 
book  ia  aimple  reaignation  craddy  enjoined,  and  uk 
where  doea  Job  aay  that  he  anbmita  to  auch  an  injnno- 
tion.  The  prologue  repreaenta  hia  aufferinga  aa  triala^ 
and  the  epilogue  dedarea  that  the  end  had  proyed  thia; 
oonacquently  the  author  waa  oompetent  to  giye  a  the- 
odicy  with  referenoe  to  the  calamity  of  Job  and  if  auch 
ia  the  caae  he  cannot  liaye  intended  aimpiy  to  reoom- 
mend  reaignation.  The  Biblical  writen,  when  engaged 
on  thia  problem,  know  how  to  juatify  (iod  with  refe^ 
ence  to  the  afflictiona  of  the  righteona,  and  haye  no  iiK 
tention  of  eyading  the  difficułty  when  they  reoommeiid 
reaignation  (aee  the  Ptaahna  quoted  aboye,  and,  in  the 
New  Teatamentf  the  Epiatle  to  the  Hebrewa,  chap.  zii). 
The  yiew  of  the  book  of  Job  alluded  to  would  iaolate  tt, 
and  take  it  out  of  ita  naturał  eonnection.  Thua  lar, 
then,  we  agree  yrith  Ewald,  but  we  cannot  approye  of 
his  own  yiew  of  the  design  of  the  book  of  Job.  Acoor^ 
ing  to  his  system,  ''caluaity  is  neyer  a  punishment  for 
sins  committed,  but  always  a  mera  phantom,  an  imag- 
inary  ahow,  aboye  which  we  muat  raiae  ouradyea  by  . 
the  oonadouaneaa  of  the  eterad  nature  of  the  hnman 
mind,  to  which,  by  extemd  proaperity,  nothing  can  ba 
added,  and  from  which,  by  exterad  misfortune,  nothing 
can  be  taken  away.  It  waa  (aBy%  Ewdd)  the  merit  at 
the  book  of  Job  to  haye  prepared  theae  aounder  yiewa 
of  worldly  eyił  and  of  the  immortality  of  mind,  tian^ 
mitting  them  aa  fruitful  buda  to  poaterity."  fiut  mnA 
a  ayatem  aa  this  muat  be  abortiye  to  conade  undcr 
any  condderable  afHiction,  and  ia  equally  oppoaed  ta 
the  whole  tenor  of  Scripture,  which,  while  rcoograaing 
the  redity  and  naturalneaa  of  aonow,  and  eyen  dlowiog 
ita  exhibition,  yet  knows  how  effaictualły  to  cun  Ita 


JOB 


«91 


JOB 


wopndB  by  the  mott  tnb<t>ntial  ooMideiatiaiM>  K<«  Ib 
it  in  aooordAnce  with  the  book  łtaelf,  which  nowhere 
junpagiu}  or  mit^gtt^  the  exteiit  of  Job*8  caLainities,  but, 
from  the  high  yantage  grouod  of  the  prologue  and  epi- 
iogoe,  impreases  lu  with  a  moie  ackleiim  inaight  into  their 
■ignififJMToe  than  evea  Job  was  enabled  to  take,  and 
thioughout  the  diacuasiou  (both  od  the  part  of  the  three 
fnenda— whose  aigiunent  is  baacd  upon  their  tangibU- 
ity  as  evidence  of  the  divine  diBpleaMiie,  and  eapeimally 
in  the  key  funiished  by  £lihur<-which  ezalta  them  to 
the  most  intereeting  degree  of  importance  In  the  morał, 
dindplinf,  of  the  people  of  Giod),  admita  and  therefore 
aeeks  to  juatify  their  puogency.  Their  design  is  as  far 
fiEom  stoidsra  aa  from  insensibility.  Yiewed  in  the  light 
of  the  fidregoing  purpoae,  this  book  becomes  one  of  the 
most  precious  l^acies  to  .the  Chuich>-to  whiidi  tńbula- 
tion  in  this  world  has  been  left  as  a  heiitage ;  and  a 
sttblime  expoflition  <^8ome  of  the  mostinteresting  prob- 
lems  of  religioiis  ezpoienoe  in  its  most  highly  deyeloped 
phase. 

m.  Hittoricai  Character  o/ the  Worhr-^On  this  sub- 
ject  there  are  three  opinions;  (1.)  Some  oontend  that 
the  book  contains  an  entirely  true  history.  (2.)  Others 
aasert  that  it  contains  a  narratire  entirely  imaginary, 
and  coDstmcted  by  the  author  to  teach  a  great  morał 
tnith.  (3.)  The  thiid  opinion  is  that  the  book  is  found- 
ed  on  a  tnie  history,  which  has  been  recast,  modified, 
and  enlaiged  by  the  author. 

1.  The  first  vicw,  taken  by  nnmerous  andent  inter- 
preters,  is  now  abandoned  by  nearly  all  ezpositorB. 
Until  a  oomparatively  late  time,  the  generał  opinion  was 
not  only  that  ttie  persona  and  events  which  it  describes 
are  real,  but  that  tlie  very  words  of  the  speakera  were 
actuaUy  recorded.  It  was  supposed  either  tliat  Job 
himself  employed  the  Utter  years  of  his  life  in  writing 
it  (A.  Schultens),  or  that  at  a  veiy  early  age  some  in- 
spired  Hebrew  ooUected  the  facts  and  sayings,  faithfuDy 
preseryed  by  orał  tradition,  and  preseoted  them  to  liis 
oountrymen  in  their  own  tongue.  Some  such  view 
seems  to  Itaye  been  adopted  by  Josephus,  for  he  płaoes 
Job  in  the  łist  of  the  historicał  books ,  and  it  was  prev- 
alent  with  all  the  fatlieis  of  the  Church.  In  its  sup- 
port  seyeral  reasons  are  addoced,  of  which  only  the  fiist 
and  seoond  haye  any  real  force ;  and  eyen  these  are  out- 
weighed  by  other  considerations,  which  render  it  impos- 
alble  to  consider  the  book  of  Job  as  an  entirely  true  his- 
tory, but  which  may  be  used  in  defence  of  the  third 
yiew  alluded  to.  It  is  sald.  (1.)  That  Job  is  (Ezek.  xiy, 
14-20)  mentioned  as  a  public  character,  together  with 
Koah  and  Daniel,  and  represented  as  an  example  of  pi- 
ety. (2.)  In  the  Epbtle  of  James  (y,  11),  padence  in 
'  auirerings  is  recommended  by  a  refcrence  to  Job.  (8.) 
In  the  Greek  translation  of  the  Sept.  a  notioe  is  append- 
ed  to  the  book  of  Job,  eyidently  referring  to  Gen.  xxxyi, 
83,  and  stating  that  Job  was  the  king  Jobab  of  Edom. 
It  is  as  follows:  ''And  it  is  wńtten  that  he  will  rise 
again  with  those  whom  the  Lord  will  raise  up.  This 
18  translated  out  of  a  Syrian  book.  He  dwelt  indeed  in 
the  land  of  Ausitis,  on  the  oonfines  of  Idumiea  and  Ara- 
bia. His  first  name  was  Jobab;  and  haying  married 
an  Arabian  woman,  he  had  by  ber  a  son  whose  name 
was  Ennon.  He  was  himself  a  son  of  Zare,  one  of  the 
sons  of  Esau,  and  his  mother*s  name  was  Boeorra;  so 
that  he  was  the  fifth  in  descent  from  Abraham.  And 
these  were  the  kings  who  reigned  in  Edom,  oyer  which 
country  he  ałso  borę  rule.  The  first  was  Balak,  the  son 
of  Beor,  and  the  name  of  his  city  was  Dennaba.  And 
after  Balak,  Jobab,  who  is  called  Job ;  and  afler  him 
Asom,  who  was  goyemor  from  the  region  of  Thaiman- 
itis;  and  after  him  Adad,  son  of  Barad,  who  smote  Ma- 
dian  in  the  plain  of  Moab ;  and  the  name  of  his  city  was 
Gethaini.  And  the  friends  who  came  to  him  were  Eli- 
phaz  of  the  sons  of  Elsau,  the  king  of  the  Thaimanites ; 
Bałdad,  the  soyereign  of  the  Sauchasans ;  and  Sophar, 
the  king  of  the  Minaians."  An  account  is  giyen  at  the 
close  of  the  Arabie  yersion  so  similar  that  the  one  has 
wery  apf«arance  of  haying  been  copied  tcom  the  other. 


or  of  their  haring  had  a  eommon  origin.  AristSBiii, 
Philo,  and  Polyhistor  aciuiowledged  the  acooont  to  be 
tnie,  as  did  the  Greek  and  Istm  fatbers.  It  is  not  u]> 
likely  that  the  tradition  is  deriyed  from  the  Jewa.  This 
statement  is  too  late  to  be  relied  on,  and  cniginates  in 
an  etymological  combination  [see  Jobab]  ;  and  that  it 
most  be  erroneous  is  to  a  eertain  extent  eyident  from 
the  Gontents  of  the  book,  in  which  Job  is  not  represent- 
ed as  a  king.  (4.)  In  the  East  numezoos  tiaditions  (see 
t)'Hecbelot,  a.  y.  Ayoub)  about  the  patńarch  and  his 
family  show  the  deep  impreseion  madę  by  his  character 
and  calamities:  these  traditionB  may  possibly  haye  been 
deriyed  from  the  book  itself,  but  it  is  at  least  equaUy 
probahle  that  they  had  an  independent  origin.  Indeed, 
Job^s  tomb  oontittues  to  be  shown  to  Oriental  tourista. 
Now  the  fact  of  a  Job  haymg  liyed  somewhere  wonld 
not  of  itself  proye  that  the  hero  of  our  nairatiye  was 
that  person,  and  that  this  book  contained  a  purely  hia- 
torical  aooount.  Moreoyer,  his  tomb  is  ahown  not  in 
one  plaoe,  but  in  aiz,  and,  along  with  it,  the  dunghili 
on  which  Job  is  reported  to  haye  aat!  (See  Carpsoy, 
IrUrwl,  ii,  88 ;  Jahn,  Ewieit.  I,  i,  761 ;  Michaelis,  £mkit. 
i,  1 ;  Bertholdt,  y,  2040).  (6.)  Dr.Hales  and  others  haye 
eyen  gone  so  far  as  to  fix  his  ezact  year,  by  a  calcula- 
tion  of  the  constelladon  alluded  to  in  ix,  9;  xxxyiii,31 ; 
but  the  uncertainty  of  such  a  process  is  too  eyident  to 
need  consideration,  as  the  y&ey  names  of  the  planeta  al- 
luded to  are  doubtfuL 

Against  this  yiew  it  most  be  remaiked  generally,  thait 
the  whole  WiHrk  is  arranged  on  a  well-considered  pUm, 
proying  the  author^s  power  of  independent  inyention; 
that  the  speeches  are,  in  their  generał  stnictiue  and  in 
their  details,  so  elaborate  that  they  oould  not  haye  been 
brought  out  in  the  ordinary  couzse  of  a  conyersation  or 
disputaticn ;  that  it  would  be  unnatural  to  suppose  Job 
in  his  distressed  state  to  haye  deliyered  such  speeches, 
fhiished  with  the  utmoet  care;  and  that  they  exhibit 
uniformity  in  their  design,  fulness,  propriety,  and  color- 
ing,  though  the  author,  with  considerable  skill,  repre- 
sents  each  speaker  whom  he  introduces  arguing  accord- 
ing  to  his  character.  Moreoyer,  in  the  prologue  and 
epilogue,  as  well  as  in  the  arrangement  of  the  speeches, 
the  figures  8  and  7  coostaiiUy  occur,  with  the  decimal 
number  formed  by  their  addition.  The  transactions  be- 
tween  God  and  Satan  in  the  prologue  abeolutely  require 
that  we  should  distinguish  between  the  subject-matter 
forming  the  foundation  of  the  work  and  its  eolargement, 
which  can  be  ouly  doue  when  a  poetical  prindple  is  ao- 
knowledged  in  its  composition.  God'8  speaking  out  of 
the  clottds  would  be  a  miracle,without  an  object  corre- 
spondlng  to  its  magnitude,  and  having  a  merely  per- 
aonal  refcrence,  whiłe  all  the  other  miracles  of  the  Old 
Testament  are  in  connection  with  the  theocratical  goy- 
emn^ent^  and  occur  in  the  midst  and  for  the  benefit  of 
the  people  of  God. 

2.  Impelled  by  the  force  of  these  arguments,  many 
critics  haye  adopted  the  opinion  either  that  the  whole 
work  Łb  a  morał  or  religious  apologue,  or  that,  upon  a 
substratum  of  a  few  ruoimental  facts  preseryed  by  tra- 
dition, the  genius  of  an  originał  thinker  has  raised  this, 
the  most  remarkable  monument  of  the  Shemitic  mind. 
The  first  indications  of  tliis  opinion  are  found  in  the 
Talmud  (Baba  Both  ra,  xy ,  1) .  In  a  discussion  upon  the 
age  of  this  book,  while  the  Rabbins  in  generał  maintain 
its  historicał  character,  Samuel  Bar-Nachman  dedares 
his  conyiction  ''Job  did  not  exist,  and  was  not-  a  created 
man,  but  the  work  is  a  parable.**  Hai  Gaon  (Ewald  and 
Duke'8  BeUrdge,  iii,  165),  A.D.  1000,  who  is  followed  by 
Jarchi,  ałtered  this  passage  to  "Job  existed,  and  was 
created  to  beoome  a  parable."  They  had  eyidently  no 
critical  ground  for  the  change,  but  borę  witness  to  the 
preyalent  tradition  of  theHebrews.  Maimonides  (M<h- 
reh  Nfhochim,  iii,  22),  with  his  characteristic  freedom  of 
mind,  oonsiders  it  an  open  question  of  littłe  or  no  mo- 
ment to  the  real  yalue  of  the  inapired  book.  Balbag, 
i.  e.  R.  Leyi  Ben-Grershom,  treatB  it  as  a  philosophic  work. 
A  late  Hebrew  commentator,  Simcha  Arieh  (Schlott^ 


JOB 


932 


JOB 


mann,  p.4)|  denies  the  historical  tntth  of  the  namtire 
on  the  groand  that  it  b  incredible  that  the  patriarchB 
of  the  choeen  nce  shonld  be  snrpmed  in  goodnen  by  a 
child  of  Edom.  This  is  worth  noting  in  corrobontion 
of  the  argument  that  soch  a  fact  was  not  likely  to  haye 
been  uwented  by  an  Israelite  of  any  age. 

la  opposition  to  this  view,  the  foUowing  argoments 
may  be  addaced:  (1.)  It  has  always  seemed  to  pious 
wiiten  incompatible  with  any  idea  of  inspiration  to  a»- 
same  that  a  narrative,  oertainly  not  allcgorical,  shoold 
be  a  merę  fiction,  and  iireyerent  to  suppose  that  the  AI- 
mighty  would  be  intRMluced  as  a  speaker  in  an  imagin- 
aiy  coIIoquy. 

(2.)  We  are  led  to  the  same  condusion  by  the  sound- 
est  principles  of  criticism.  Ewald  says  (EmL  p.  1 5)  most 
truły,  '^  The  inyention  of  a  history  without  foundation 
in  facto — the  creation  of  a  person,  represented  as  haying 
a  real  historical  existence,  out  of  the  merę  head  of  the 
poet — is  a  notion  so  entirely  alien  to  the  spirit  of  all  an- 
tiquity,  that  it  only  began  to  deyelop  itself  gradually 
in  the  latest  epoch  of  the  literatore  of  any  ancient  peo- 
ple,  and  in  its  complete  form  belongs  only  to  the  most 
modem  times.**  In  the  canonical  books  there  is  not  a 
tracę  of  any  such  inyention.  Of  all  people,  the  Hebrews 
were  the  least  likely  to  mingle  the  merę  creations  of 
imagination  with  the  sacred  records  reyerenced  as  the 
peculiar  glory  of  their  race. 

It  is  tnie  that  the  arguments  adyanced  by  Ewald  to 
show  the  historical  character  of  the  chief  featores  of  the 
book  are  not  entirely  concluaiye,  especially  the  literaturę 
of  the  name  Job,  which  may  haye  reference  to  the  char- 
acter he  sustains  in  the  narratiye  (from  S^M,  to  Ao/p, 
q.  d. "  the  assailed,"  i.  e.  tempted ;  see  Gesenius,  Thes.  ffeb. 
p.  81) ;  still  they  must  be  aJlowed  to  haye  some  weiglit, 
and,  taken  in  connection  with  the  generał  usage  of  Scrip- 
turę  in  its  poetical  and  rhetorical  amplificatioiis,  and  es- 
pecially with  the  considerations  presently  to  be  adduced 
in  relation  to  the  author  of  this  book,  justify  the  pre- 
sumption  of  a  historical  foundation,  not  only  for  the  facts 
and  personages  represented  in  the  book,  but  also,  to  a 
certain  cxtent,  for  the  speeches. 

(8.)  To  this  it  must  be  added  that  there  is  a  singular 
air  of  reality  in  the  whole  narrative,  such  as  must  either 
proceed  naturally  from  a  faithful  adherence  to  objectiye 
truth,  or  be  the  result  of  the  most  consummato  art. 


icism  legtids  aa  the  best  eyidence  of  gaminenen  and 
authentidty  in  any  work. 

8.  Luther  first  suggested  tho  theory  which,  in  aoma 
form  or  other,  is  most  generally  receiyed.  In  his  intat>- 
duction  to  the  first  edition  of  his  translat30n  of  the  BI- 
ble  he  speaks  of  the  author  as  haying  so  treated  the  hm- 
torical  facts  as  to  demonstrate  the  truth  that  God  akmc 
is  righteous ;  and  in  the  Tuchreden  (ed.  Wakh,  xxii, 
2093)  he  says:  "*!  look  upon  the  book  of  Job  as  a  tnie 
history,  yet  I  do  not  belieye  that  all  took  place  just  as 
it  is  written,  but  that  an  ingenious,  pioos,  and  leemed 
man  brought  it  into  its  present  form."  This  position 
was  strongly  attacked  by  Bellarmine  and  other  Koman 
tbeologians,  and  was  afterwards  repudiated  by  most  La- 
therans.  The  fact  that  Spinoza,  Cleiicus,  Du  Pin,  and 
Father  Simon  held  nearly  the  same  opinion,  the  ftat  de- 
nying,  and  the  others  notorionsly  holding  Iow  views  of 
the  inspiiation  of  Scripture,  had  of  oourse  a  tendency  to 
bring  it  into  disrepute.  J.  D.  Michaelis  first  reyired  ibe 
old  theory  of  Bar-Nachman,  not  upon  critical,  but  dog- 
matic  grounds.  In  a  merę  history  the  opinions  or  doc- 
trines  enounoed  by  Job  and  his  friends  could  haye  no 
dogmatic  authority ;  whereas,  if  the  whole  book  were  a 
pure  inspiration,  the  strongest  arguments  conld  be  de- 
duced  f!om  them  on  behałf  of  the  gieat  trutha  of  the 
resurrection  and  a  futuze  judgment,  which,  tbough  im- 
plied  in  other  early  books,  aie  nowhcre  so  distinctly  in- 
culcated.  The  artńtrsiy  character  of  soch  reaaoning  is 
obyious.  At  present  no  critic  doubts  that  the  narrati^^ 
rests  on  facts,  althongh  the  preyalent  opinion  amoog 
Continental  scholars  is  certainly  that  in  its  form  and 
generał  features,  in  its  reasonings  and  represeniatioDs  of 
character,  the  book  is  a  work  of  creatiye  genios. 

Taidng  this  yicw,  we  must  still  abstain  from  nnder- 
taking  to  detormine  what  the  poet  deriyed  from  tiadi- 
tion,  and  what  he  added  himself,  sińce  we  know  not  how 
far  tradition  had  already  embellbhed  the  miginal  iucL 
Thus  much  only  will  it  be  safe  to  conclude :  that  the  in- 
diyidual  really  existed,  possibly  in  the  region  indicated; 
that  he  literaUy  underwent  a  trial  substautially  like  that 
represented,  and  that  a  discussion  grew  out  of  it,  held, 
perhaps,  between  him  and  a  party  of  his  friends  after  its 
first  seyerity  was  passed,  covering  the  essential  principles 
deyeloped  in  the  book,  but  briefiy  and  simply  expRSBed. 

IV.  Descent,  Country ^  and  Age  oftka  A  uthor^ — 1.  Opin- 


The  cffect  is  produced  partly  by  the  thorough  consist-  '  ions  differed  in  ancient  times  as  to  the  notion  to  which 


ency  of  all  the  characteis,  especially  that  of  Job,  not 
merely  as  drawn  in  broad,  strong  outlines,  but  as  deyel- 
oped under  a  yariety  of  most  trying  circumstances ; 
partly  also  by  the  minuto  and  accurate  account  of  inci- 
dcnts  which  in  a  fiction  would  probably  haye  been  noted 
by  an  ancient  writer  in  a  yague  and  generał  manner. 
Thus  we  remark  the  modę  in  which  the  supeniatural 
trial  is  cairied  into  execution  by  natorał  agencies — by 
Chaldaum  and  Sabiean  robbers — by  whirlwinds  common 
in  and  peculiar  to  the  desert— by  fire— and,  lastly,  by  the 
elephantiasis  (see  Schlottmann,  p.  15 ;  Ewald,  L  c. ;  and 
Hengstenberg),  the  most  formidable  disease  known  in 
the  Kast.     Tho  disease  was  indeed  one  which  the  In- 


the  author  belonged,  some  considering  him  to  haye  been 
an  Arab,  others  an  Israelite.  Yarious  indications  fiiyor 
the  latter  supposition:  (Ist),  We  find  in  our  book  many 
ideas  of  genuine  Israelitish  growth :  the  creation  of  the 
world  is  described,  in  accordance  wiih  the  preyailing. 
notions  of  the  Israelitos,  as  the  immediate  effoct  of  di- 
vine  omnipotence;  man  is  formed  of  clay;  the  spirit  of 
man  is  God*s  breath ;  God  cmploys  the  angels  for  the 
I)crformance  of  his  ordcrs;  Satan,  the  great  enemy 
of  the  children  of  God,  is  liis  instrument  for  tempcłog 
them;  men  are  weak  and  sinful;  nobody  is  pure  in  the 
sight  of  God ;  morał  corruption  is  propagated.  There 
promulgated  to  men  the  law  of  God,  which  they  most 


dians  and  most  Orientals  then  probably  belieyed  to  be  ,  not  infringe,  and  the  transgiessions  of  which  are  yisiŁed 


peculiarly  indicative  of  diyine  wrath,  and  would  therefore 
be  naturally  sclected  by  the  writer  (see  the  aiuilysis 
above).  But  the  symptoms  are  described  so  faithfully 
as  to  Icaye  no  doubt  that  the  writer  must  either  have 
introduced  them  with  a  yiew  to  giying  an  air  of  truth- 
fulness  to  his  work,  or  have  recorded  what  he  himsolf 
witnessed  or  receiyed  from  an  exact  tradition.  The 
former  8upiK)8ition  is  confuted  by  the  fact  that  the  pe- 
culiar 8>Tnptoms  are  not  described  in  any  one  single 
passage  so  as  to  attract  the  readefs  attention,  but  are 
madc  out  by  a  critical  and  scientific  exaroination  of 
words  occurring  here  and  there  at  interyałs  in  the  com- 
plaints  of  the  sufferer.  The  most  refined  art  fails  in 
producing  such  a  result;  it  is  rarely  attempted  in  the 
mo«t  artificial  ages,  was  never  dreamed  of  by  ancient 
writora,  and  must  horę  be  regarded  as  a  strong  instancc 
of  the  undesigned  coincidences  which  the  soundest  crit- 


on  ofienders  with  punishmenta.  Moreoyer,  the  nethcr 
world,  or  Sheol,  is  depictod  in  hues  entirely  Hebiew.  To 
these  particulars  might,  without  much  trouble,  be  added 
many  morę  y  but  the  deep-searching  inquirer  win  par- 
ticularly  weigh,  (2dły),  the  fact  that  the  book  displays  a 
strength  and  feryor  of  rcligious  faith  such  aa  oould  ooly 
be  expected  within  the  domain  of  revelation.  Hono- 
theism,  if  the  assertions  of  ancient  Arabian  aathors  may 
be  trusted,  preyailed,  indeed,  for  a  long  period  among  the 
Arabs,  and  it  held  its  ground  at  least  among  a  poantion 
of  the  nation  tilł  the  ago  of  Mohammed,  who  obtained 
for  it  a  oomplete  triumph  oyer  polytheism,  which  was 
spreading  from  Syria.  Still  the  god  of  the  Arabs  ma, 
ns  thosc  of  the  heathens  generally  were,  a  redred  god, 
dwelling  far  apart,  while  the  people  of  the  Old  Goyenant 
cnjoyed  the  priyilege  of  a  yital  communion  with  God; 
aud  the  warmth  with  which  our  author  enters  into  tkia 


JOB 


983 


JOB 


view  incontrovCTtibly  prores  that  he  was  an  Isiaelite. 
(Sdly),  As  legards  the  language  of  our  book,  eeyeral  an- 
dent  writeiB  asserted  that  iŁ  was  origioally  written  in 
the  AiaiDsan  or  Aiabic  tongue,  and  aftenrards  trans- 
kted  into  Hebrew  by  Moses,  David,  Solomon,  or  some 
unknown  writer.  Of  this  opinioii  was  the  author  of  the 
Appendix  in  the  Septuagint,  and  the  compUer  of  the 
tract  on  Job  added  to  the  works  of  Origen  and  Jerome ; 
in  modem  times  it  has  been  chiefly  defended  by  Span- 
heim,  in  his  Historia  JobL  But  fojp  a  tnuulation  there 
18  too  much  propriety  and  piecision  in  the  use  of  words 
and  phrases;  the  sentences  are  too  compact,  and  free 
firom  redundant  expiefl8ion8  and  members;  and  too  much 
care  is  bestowed  on  their  hannony  and  easy  flow.  The 
paralleliam  also  is  too  accurate  and  perfect  for  a  tran»- 
lation,  and  the  whole  bieathes  a  fireshneas  that  could  be 
expeoted  from  an  original  work  only. 

Sensible  of  the  weight  of  this  argument,  othen,  as 
Eichhom,  took  a  medium  coniae,  and  assumed  that  the 
author  was  a  Hebrew,  though  he  did  not  lirę  among  his 
countiymen,  but  in  Arabia.  **  The  earlier  Hebrew  his- 
'toiy,"  they  say,  *'is  unknown  to  the  author,  who  is  igno- 
rant of  Abraham,  Isaac,  and  Jacob.  In  portraying  na- 
turę, also,  he  proces  himself  always  familiar  with  Aiabia, 
while  he  is  silent  respecting  the  characteristics  of  Pales- 
tine.  With  Egypt  he  mnst  hare  been  well  acquainted, 
which  can  be  accounted  for  better  by  snppoeing  him  to 
haye  lired  in  Arabia  than  in  Palestine.**  Hitzig  and 
Hirzel  aocordingly,  among  the  ktest  wiiters,  hołd  that 
the  wńter  was  an  Egyptian.  Wetzstein  and  Delitzsch 
aay  that  he  was  a  natire  of  the  Hauran.  The  oocasional 
nse  of  the  name  Jehoyah,  howeyer,  appears  to  imply  a 
later  datę  than  the  Ezode,  and  the  absenoe  of  allusion 
to  the  eyents  of  Jewish  history,  it  has  been  thought, 
may  be  accounted  for  by  the  peculiar  linę  of  argument 
(fiom  natuial  religion)  pursued  in  the  book,  as  in  Ecde- 
aiastes.  It  has  further  been  suggested  that  the  author, 
withoat  directly  mentioning  the  Pentateuch,  firequently 
alludea  to  portions  of  it,a8in  iii,4,to  Gen.  1,8;  in  iv,19, 
and  xxxiii,  6,  to  Mofles's  acoount  oif  the  creation  of  man ; 
In  y,  14,  to  Deut.  xxxii,  82 ;  in  xxiy,  11,  to  Deut.  xxv,  4. 
Moreover,  history  says  nothing  of  the  Israelites  having 
permanently  taken  up  theur  residenoe  in  the  land  of 
Arabia,  so  as  to  alłow  the  supposition  of  the  aboye  oi> 
igin  of  the  book  of  Job  by  a  Hebrew  thus  isolated  from 
Palestine;  nor  will  most  of  the  arguments  adduced  to 
proye  the  acquaintance  (and  therefore  neighborhood)  of 
the  author  with  Egypt  bear  a  dose  examination.  Thus 
it  is  a  mistake  to  suppose  that  the  description  of  the 
wotking  of  mines  in  eh.  xxviii  must  necessarily  have 
reference  to  Egypt ;  Phcenida,  Arabia,  and  Edom  aiford- 
ed  much  better  materials.  That  the  author  mnst  have 
known  the  Eg3rptian  mausolea  rescs  on  an  erroneous  in- 
terpretation  of  iii,  14,  which  may  also  be  said  of  the  as- 
aertion  that  xxix,  18,  refers  to  the  Egyptian  mythus  of 
the  phoenix.  Casting  aside  these  arbitrarily  assumed 
Egyptian  references,  we  haye  only  the  foUowing :  Our 
author  knows  the  Egyptian  yessels  of  bulrushes,  ix,  26 ; 
the  Nile-grBSS,yiii,  12;  the  Kile-horse  (Behemoth)  and 
the  crocodile  (Leviathan),  xi,  16 ;  xli,  1.  Now,  as  these 
things  belong  to  the  morę  prominent  peculiarities  of  a 
neighboring  country,  they  must  have  been  known  to 
eyery  educated  Isrselite:  the  yessels  of  bulmsbes  are 
mentioned  also  in  Isa.  xviii,  2.  Keither  are  we  disposed 
to  adopt  the  compromising  yiew  of  Stickel,  who  assumes 
that  the  author  wrote  his  book  in  the  laraelitish  territory 
indeed,  but  close  to  the  frontier,  iu  the  far  south-east  of 
Palestine.  That  the  author  had  there  the  materials  for 
his  descriptions,  oompari8ons,and  imagery  set  better  be- 
fore  his  eyes  than  anywhere  else,  is  true,  for  there  he 
had  an  opportunity  of  obserying  mines,  carayans,  drying 
np  of  brooks,  etc  But  this  is  not  sufBdent  proof  of  the 
author  haying  liyed  permanently  in  that  remote  part  of 
Palestine,  and  of  haying  there  written  his  book ;  he  was 
not  a  merę  copyist  of  naturę,  but  a  poet  of  conaderable 
eminenoe,  endowed  with  the  power  of  yividly  represent- 
iog  things  abaent  from  hinu 


2,  Ab  to  the  offe  ot  the  author  of  this  book,  we  meefc 
with  three  opinions:  (a.)  That  he  liyed  before  Moses, 
or  was,  at  least.  his  contemporary.  (&)  That  he  lived 
iu  the  time  of  Solomon,  or  in  the  centnries  next  foUow- 
ing—the  opinion  of  Hahn,  Schlottmann  (BerL  1857).  and 
Delitzsch.  (c.)  That  he  liyed  shortly  before,  or  duriug, 
or  eyen  after  the  Babylonian  exile.  Against  this  last 
yiew  (adopted  by  Le  Clerc  among  earlier  interpreters, 
and  among  modem  eacpositon  by  Bernstein,  Gesenius, 
Umbreit,  and  De  Wette)  it  is  condusiyely  objected,  (1.) 
That  the  book  is  referred  to  in  the  Old  Testament  itself 
(Ezek.  xiy,  14-20)  as  well  known  before  the  Chakiaean 
exile.  Others,  with  less  phiusibility,  nige  what  they 
deem  imitations  of  yarious  sentiments  and  eyeh  pa^ 
sages  of  Job  in  the  ante-exilian  prophets,  e.  g.  Jer.  xx, 
14,  comp.  with  Job  iii  (see  KUper,  JerenuoM  hbrorum  «a- 
crorum  interprts  aicue  vindexj  p.  164  8q.) ;  Lam.  ii,  16, 
comp.  Job  xyi,  18 ;  Lam.  iii,  7,  9,  compw  Job  xix,  8 ;  Isa. 
xl,  2,  comp.  Job  i  (and  x,  17 ;  xiy,  14) ;  Isa.  li,  9,  comp. 
Job  xxyi,  18 ;  Isa.  xix,  5,  comp.  Job  xiy,  11 ;  Psa.  cyii, 
42,  comp.  Job  y,  16.  (2.)  The  absence  of  thoge  Chalda- 
isms  in  Job  which  oocur  in  books  written  about  the  time 
of  the  captiyity.  (8.)  The  poetical  character  of  the 
book,  which  is  wholly  diiferent  from  the  dedining  style 
of  the  later  period. 

The  most  complete  statement  of  the  reasons  in  sup* 
port  of  the  opinion  that  the  book  of  Job  was  written 
between  the  age  of  Moses  and  the  Exile  may  be  found 
in  Kichter^s  essay.  De  jEtate  Jóbi  defimenda^  reprinted 
in  BoeenmQller'B  edition  of  Lowth's  PraUctiones  de  Po' 
en  3<icra  B^raoruTn,  in  which  he  maintains  that  it 
was  wiitten  in  the  age  of  Solomon.  Most  of  these  rea- 
sons, indeed,  are  either  not  condusiye  at  all,  or  not  quite 
cogent.  Thus  it  is  an  arbitraiy  assumption,  proved  by 
modem  researches  to  be  erroneous,  that  the  art  of  writ- 
ing  was  unknown  preyious  to  the  age  of  Moses.  The 
assertion,  too,  that  the  marka  of  cultiyation  and  refine- 
ment  obseryable  in  our  book  belonged  to  a  later  age 
resto  on  no  historical  ground.  Further,  it  cannot  be 
said  that  for  such  an  early  time  the  language  is  too 
smooth  and  neat,  sińce  in  no  Shemitic  diakct  is  it  pos- 
sible  to  tracę  a  progresaiye  improyement.  The  eyident 
correspondenoe  also  between  our  book  and  the  Ftoyerbs 
and  Psalms  is  not  a  point  proving  with  resistless  force 
that  they  were  all  wiitten  at  the  same  time.  Nor  ia 
it  altogether  of  such  a  kind  that  the  authors  of  the 
Proverbs  and  Psahns  (comp.  especially  Psa.  xxxix,  18, 
with  Job  \'ii,  19;  xiy,  6;  x,  20,  21;  yii,  8,  21,  in  the 
Hebrew  Bibie),  can  be  exactly  said  to  haye  copied  our 
book ;  but  it  may  be  accounted  for  by  their  all  bdong- 
ing  to  the  same  dass  of  wńtings,  by  the  yeiy  great  uni- 
formity  and  aooordaqce  of  religious  conceptions  and 
sentiments  expree8ed  in  the  Old  Testament,  and  by  the 
stability  of  its  religious  character.  The  striking  coin- 
cidence,  in  particular,  obseryable  between  the  eulogy  of 
**wisdom"  contained  in  Job  xxyiii  and  the  numerous 
similar  didactic  stiains  found  in  the  writings  of  Solo- 
mon (comp.  especially  Prov.  lii,  iy),  may  be  accounted 
for  by  the  above  supposition  that  this  chapter  was  add- 
ed by  a  later  hand  than  the  author  of  the  rest  of  the 
book,  or  at  least  as  a  sequd  to  the  traditional  part  of  the 
poem. 

The  traditionary  yiew  of  the  authorship  of  the  book  of 
Job  ascribes  it  to  Moses;  the  arguments  in  favor  of  thia 
yiew  have  been  collected  by  Spanheim,  and  may  be 
seen  with  replies  in  Wemyss  {Li/e  and  Times  o/Job,  p. 
82  sq.).  The  following  leading  points  are  deserying  of 
conaideration :  (1.)  There  is  m  the  book  of  Job  no  direct 
reference  to  the  Mosaic  legislation ;  and  its  descńptiona 
and  other  statementa  are  suited  to  the  period  of  the  pa- 
triarcha; as,  for  instance,  the  great  authorlty  held  by 
old  men,  the  high  age  of  Job,  and  fatheis  offering  sacii- 
fioes  for  their  families — ^which  leads  to  the  supposition 
that  when  our  book  was  written  no  sacerdotal  order  yet 
existed.  Nor  is  thia  ignormg  of  all  the  most  mterest- 
ing  objects  and  assodations  of  Judaism  fully  cxp]ainable 
on  the  ground  of  the  author's  desiro  to  base  the  ąuestion 


JOB 


984 


JOB 


at  iwue  whcny  on  reUgions  oanscioofliMS  «nd  ttcpeń- 
ence ;  for  many  of  the  incktonts  of  Jewish  and  even  par 
tiiarchal  hietory  were  too  apporite  to  his  topie  to  be 
passed  orer  (e.  g.  the  overthiow  of  Pharaoh  and  the  de- 
atniction  of  the  eitiee  of  the  plain),  nnleas  we  sappose  a 
degiee  of  stodied  impenonation  at  yariance  with  the 
natundness  and  piactical  aims  of  Scriptare.  (2.)  The 
kuiguage  of  the  book  of  Job  seems  strongly  to  sopport 
the  opinion  of  Its  haviag  been  written  as  eariy  as  the 
time  of  Moses.  It  has  often  been  said  that  no  writing 
of  the  Old  Testament  may  be  morę  frequent]y  iUustrated 
from  Ihe  Arabie  than  this  book.  Jerome  obserres  (PrtB- 
/at.  m  Dofu),  **Jobum  cum  Arabica  lingua  plurimam 
habere  societatem ;"  and  Schultens  prored  this  so  incon- 
trorertibly  that  Geeenius  was  lather  too  late  in  denying 
the  faet  (see  his  Cfetchichte  der  H^raiachen  Sprache,  p. 
9S),  Now,  from  this  character  of  its  langnage  we  might 
be  indnced  to  infer  that  the  work  was  written  in  the 
lemotest  times,  when  the  separation  of  the  dialects  had 
enly  begun,  but  had  not  yet  been  oompleted.  It  is  tnie 
that  this  pecnliarity  of  idiom  is  not  sneh  as  to  be  of  it- 
flelf  conclosire  as  to  the  datę ;  and  it  might  eren  have 
been  to  some  extent  asaumed  in  order  to  correspond 
With  the  foreign  garb  of  the  poem.  It  abo  contains 
some  Aramaisms  and  other  signs  of  degeneracy ;  but 
these  (unless  attributable  to  oopyists)  may  easily  be  ac- 
counted  for  by  the  supposition  of  a  later  edUorahip 
merely.  (3.)  The  Jewish  tradition  of  the  anthoiship  of 
Moses  (see  Otho,  Lex.  Rabbin,  p.  823 ;  oomp.  Tobit  ii,  12 ; 
Euseb.  Prtep.  Ev,  ix,  25),  although  not  entirely  uniform, 
seems  to  have  been  firmly  estaUished  at  an  early  pe- 
riod; and,  lightly  as  it  has  been  treated  by  some  (see 
Dr.  Davidson,  in  the  new  ed.  of  Hoine*s  Introd,  ii,  727), 
still  affords  the  only  writer  of  suffident  notę  to  whom 
the  work  has  ever  been  definitely  ascribed.  The  fa- 
cilities  enjoyed  by  Moses  during  his  qniet  sojonm  in 
Midian  were  greater  perhape  than  those  of  any  other 
Uebrew  author  for  such  a  production ;  and  the  contem- 
plations  of  his  actire  and  well-etored  mind  may  have 
fhmished  as  ample  a  motiye  for  the  task  as  can  be  found 
at  any  other  period,  or  in  the  ease  of  any  other  writer 
to  whom  the  book  has  been  assigned,  eren  if  no  special 
outward  occaaion  can  be  shown  to  hare  led  to  the  Uter- 
ary  eifort  at  that  time.  This  datę,  moreorer,  is  pre- 
dsely  such  as  to  admit  the  incorporation  of  Jewish  the- 
ology  withont  its  history,  and  affords  a  locality  where 
all  the  elements  of  the  poem  were  at  hand.  (4.)  The 
period  in  which  Job  himself  Uved  is  a  distinct  qnestion 
from  that  of  the  age  in  which  the  book  was  written,  it 
being  only  necessary  (on  the  supposition  of  the  reality  of 
the  narratiye)  to  loeate  the  author  subsequently  to  the 
times  of  his  hero,  and  under  such  circumstances  as  to 
suggest  the  topie.  The  ante-Mosaio  datę  of  Job's  life 
is  erident  from  his  longerity  (probably  two  oentories 
and  a  half,  xliii,  16, 17— where  the  Sept.  expressly  gives 
his  total  age  as  240  years,  assigning,  however,  170  of 
these  aB  precedińg  his  affliction),  which  seems  to  mark 
him  as  contemporary  with  Peleg,  Reu,  or  Serug  (B.C5. 
2414-2122),  as  weU  as  from  the  primitive  character  of 
bis  social  relationa,  which  are  similar  to  those  of  Abra- 
ham (RC.  2163-1988).  His  country  oould  not  haye 
been  far  from  the  Sinaitie  peninsula.  See  Uz.  There 
is  thus  found  to  be  a  reasonable  presumption  in  fayor  of 
the  Mosaio  authorship  of  this  book,  so  far  as  time  and 
place  are  coiioemed,  while  there  is  no  intemal  eyidence 
decidedly  opposed  to  the  tradition  in  its  fayor.  Our 
conclnsion,  as  being  the  most  probable  combination  of 
all  the  facts  in  the  ease,  is  that,  as  a  redtatiye  poem  in 
a  rudimentary  form,  it  was  originally  framed  in  Job's 
age  (by  that  romance  style  of  oomposition  spontaneous 
with  Orientals),  and  that,  in  its  Arabie  dress,  it  was 
gathered  by  Moses  from  the  lipę  of  the  Midianitish 
bards  during  his  residenoe  among  them;  that  it  was 
first  composed  by  him  in  the  Hebrew  langnage,  but  not 
rednced  to  its  present  complete  form  till  oonsiderably 
iat«r,  perhaps  by  Solomon.  This  progressiye  kind  of 
auŁhorship  is  yindicated  by  the  fact  that  other  epice 


haye  eome  down  to  ns  throngfa  similar  stages  of  hente 
legend,  orał  presenration,  oollection,  formal  composition, 
and  editofship,  and  is  eyen  illustrated  in  the  origin  o( 
other  less  obscuzely  tnceable  books  of  the  Bibie.  See 
GKKKSiSb  (5.)  In  defence  of  the  theory  that  the  book 
was  written  during  the  Assyrian  inyasion,  B.C.  dr.  700, 
see  the  intiodnction  to  Meix's  Buch  Job  (Jena,  1870). 

"V.  ItdtgrUy  of  the  Book — It  is  satisfactory  to  iind 
that  the  aiguments  employcd  by  those  who  impugn  the 
authentidty  of  considerable  portions  of  this  book  are, 
for  the  moet  part,  mutually  destnictiye,  and  that  the 
most  minutę  and  searching  inyestigations  bring  oot  the 
moet  convindng  proofs  of  the  unity  of  its  composition, 
and  the  coherence  of  its  oonstituent  parts.  One  point 
of  great  importanoe  is  noted  by  the  latest  and  one  of  the 
most  ingeniotts  writers  (M.  £.  Renan,  Le  Lwrt  de  Job, 
Par.  1859)  on  this  subject.  After  some  strong  remarfcy 
upon  the  inequabty  of  the  style,  and  appearance  of  in- 
terpolation,  M.  £.  R^nan  obeeryes  (p.  xliy) :  **The  He- 
brewB,  and  Orientals  in  generał,  differed  widely  from  ua 
in  their  yiews  about  composition.  Their  works  neyef 
haye  that  perfecŁly  defined  outline  to  wiiich  we  are  ac« 
customed,  and  we  shoułd  be  careful  not  to  assume  inter« 
polations  or  alterations  (retouchet)  when  wo  m<^  with 
defects  of  8equence  which  surprise  us."  He  then  słiows 
that  in  parts  of  the  work,  acknowledged  by  aO  critics 
to  be  by  one  hand,  there  are  yeiy  strong  instances  of 
what  EuTOpeans  might  regard  as  repetition,  or  suspect 
of  interpolation :  thus  Elihu  recommences  liis  argument 
fouf  times ;  whiłe  discourses  of  Job^  which  haye  distincC 
portions,  such  as  to  modem  critics  might  seem  nnooD- 
nected  and  eyen  misplaced,  are  impressed  with  soch  a 
character  of  snblimity  and  force  as  to  leaye  no  doubi 
that  they  are  the  product  of  a  single  inspiration.  To 
this Justand  tnie  obseryation  it  must  be  added that  tlie 
assumed  want  of  coherence  and  of  logicał  consistency  is, 
for  the  most  part,  only  apparent,  and  results  from  a  rad- 
ical  diiference  in  the  modę  of  thinidng  and  enunciating 
thought  between  the  old  Eastem  and  modem  European. 

1.  Objecrions  haye  been  madę  to  the  introductoiy  and 
oonduding  chapten  (1.)  on  aooount  of  the  style.  Of 
oourse  there  is  an  obyious  and  natural  difference  be- 
tween the  prose  of  the  nairatiye  and  the  higlily  poetical 
language  of  the  ooUoąuy.  Tet  the  best  critics  now  ac- 
knowledge  that  the  style  of  these  portions  is  quite  at 
antiąue  in  its  simple  and  seyere  grandeur  as  that  of  the 
PenUteuch  itself  (to  which  it  bears  a  striking  rescm* 
blance :  see  aboye,  and  comp.  Lee,  Job,  p.  49),  or  as  any 
other  part  of  the  l)ook,  while  it  is  as  strikingly  unlike 
the  narratiye  style  of  all  the  later  productions  of  the 
Hebrews.  Ewald  says  with  perfect  truth, "  These  pio- 
saic  words  harmonize  thoroughly  with  the  old  poem  in 
subject-matter  and  tlioughts,  in  ooloring  and  in  ait; 
also  in  language,  so  far  as  prose  can  be  like  poetiy." 
(2.)  It  is  said,  again,  that  the  doctrinal  yiews  are  not  in 
liarmony  with  those  of  Job.  This  is  whołly  unfoundedt 
The  fundamental  principles  of  the  patriarch,  as  deyeloped 
in  the  most  solemn  of  his  discourses,  are  identical  with 
those  maintained  throughout  the  t)0ok.  The  form  of 
worship  belongs  essentially  to  the  eariy  patriarchal  type; 
with  little  of  ceremoniał  ritual,  without  a  separatc  priest- 
hood,  thoroughly  domeetic  in  form  and  spirit.  The  rep- 
resentation  of  the  angels,  and  their  appellatlon,  ''sona 
of  God,''  peculiar  to  this  book  and  to  Genesis,  accord 
entirely  with  the  intimations  in  the  earliest  documents 
of  the  Shemitic  race.  (3.)  It  is,  moreoyer,  alłeged  that 
there  are  discrepancies  between  the  facts  relateid  in  the 
introduction,  and  statements  or  allusions  in  the  dialogue. 
But  the  apparent  contradiction  t)etween  xix,  17  and 
the  statement  that  all  Job*s  children  had  perished  rests 
upon  a  misinterpretation  of  the  words  *^9Id!I  "^SS,  ''chil- 
dren of  my  womb,"*L  e.  "  of  the  womb  that  iMure  me"— 
"my  brethren,"  not  "my  children"  (oompare  iii,  10) : 
indeed,  the  destruction  of  the  patriarch's  whole  family 
is  repeatedly  assumed  in  the  dialogue  (e.  g.yiii,  4 ;  xxix:, 
5).    Again,  the  oroission  of  aU  referenoe  to  the  defeat 


JOB 


935 


JOB 


of  Sat^n  in  tbe  last  cluipter  is  qTiite  in  aocordttioe  with 
the  gnmd  sunpiicity  of  the  poem  (Schlottmann,  p*  89, 
40).  It  was  too  obvioiiB  a  ranilt  to  need  apecial  nodce, 
and  it  had,  in  Ikct,  been  acoompliBhed  by  the  steadikat 
fliuth  of  the  patriarch  eren  before  the  diacussionfl  oom- 
menoed.  No  allumon  to  the  agency  of  that  spirit  was 
to  be  expected  in  the  coIloquy,  sińce  Job  and  his  friends 
are  represented  as  whoUy  ignorant  of  the  transactions 
in  heayen.  At  present,  indeed,  it  is  generally  acknowl- 
edged  that  the  entire  work  would  be  unintelligible  with- 
out  these  portiona.  (4.)  The  single  objection  (Renan, 
p.  40)  which  preseots  any  difficulty  on  the  ground  of 
anachronism  is  the  mention  of  the  Chaldfeans  in  the  in- 
troductory  chapter.  It  is  certain  that  they  fint  appear 
in  Hebrew  history  abont  the  year  B.C.  770.  But  the 
name  of  Chesed,  the  ancestor  of  the  race,  is  found  in  the 
genealogical  table  in  Genesis  (xxii,  22),  a  fact  quite  suf- 
iScient  to  proTe  the  early  existence  of  the  people  as  a 
aepaiate  tribe.  It  is  higbly  probable  that  an  ancient 
race  bearing  that  name  in  Kurdistan  (see  Xenoph.  Cyr, 
iii,  1, 84 ;  Andb,  iv,  8, 4 ;  v,  5, 17)  was  the  original  source 
cf  the  nation,  who  were  there  tiained  in  predatoiy  hab- 
its,  and  accustomed,  long  before  their  appearanee  in 
bistoiy,  to  make  excursions^into  the  neighboring  des- 
crts,  a  view  quite  in  hannony  with  the  part  assigned  to 
them  in  this  book. 

2.  Strong  objections  are  madę  to  the  passage  chapw 
xxńi,  linom  Ter.  7  to  the  end  of  the  chapter.  Herę  Job 
describes  the  ultimate  fate  of  the  godless  h3rpocńte  in 
terms  which  some  critics  hołd  to  be  in  direct  contradio- 
tion  with  the  whole  tenor  of  hu  arguments  in  other  dis- 
oonrses.  Dr.  Kennicott,  whose  opinion  is  adopted  by 
Eichhom,  Froude,  and  othen,  held  that,  owing  to  some 
confuaion  or  omission  in  the  MS.,  the  missing  speech  of 
Zophar  has  been  pnt  into  the  mouth  of  Job.  The  fact 
of  the  contradiction  is  denied  by  able  writers,  who  have 
•hoMm  that  it  rests  upon  a  misapprehension  of  the  pa- 
triarch'B  character  and  fundamental  principles.  He  had 
been  proyoked  uuder  circumstances  of  peculiar  aggrara- 
tion  into  statements  which  at  the  dose  of  the  discussion 
be  would  be  anxioa8  to  guard  or  recall :  he  was  bound, 
having  spoken  so  harshly,  to  lecogmse,  what,  beyond 
doubt,  he  never  intended  to  den}%  the  generał  justtce  of 
diyine  dispensations  even  in  this  world.  Moreoyer,  he 
intimates  a  belief  or  presendment  of  a  futore  retribu- 
tion,  of  which  there  are  no  indications  in  any  other 
spekker  (see  yer.  8).  The  whole  chapter  is  thoroughly 
coheraa:  the  first  part  is  admitted  by  all  to  belong  to 
Job;  nor  can  the  rest  be  disjoined  from  it  without  inju- 
ry  to  the  sense.  Ewald  says,  "Only  a  grieyous  misun- 
derstanding  of  the  whole  book  coidd  haye  misled  the 
modern  critics  who  hołd  that  this  passage  is  inberpolated 
or  misplaced."  Other  critics  have  abundantly  yindi- 
cated  the  authcnddty  of  the  passage  (Hahn,  Schlott- 
mann,  etc).  As  for  the  style,  £.  R^fnan,  a  most  com- 
petent  anthority  in  a  matter  of  taste,  declares  that  it  is 
one  of  the  finest  deyelopments  of  the  poem.  It  oertain- 
ly  differs  exceedingly  in  its  breadth,  lofUness,  and  de- 
Tout  spirit  finom  the  speeches  of  Zophar,  for  whose  si- 
knce  satisfactory  reasons  haye  already  been  assigned 
(see  the  analysis).  This  last  argument,  howeyer,  ap- 
plics  rather  to  chap.  xxyiii,  which  may,  without  any 
impeachment  of  the  integrity  of  the  poem,  be  regarded 
as  an  embellishment  repreaentlng  the  timee  and  senti- 
ments  of  the  finał  editor  (i.  e.  Solomon). 

8.  The  last  two  chapters  of  the  addreas  of  the  Al- 
mighty  haye  been  rejected  tA  interpolations  by  many, 
of  course  rationałistic,  writers  (Stuhhnan,  Bernstein, 
Eichhold,  Ewald,  Meier),  partly  beeause  of  an  alleged 
inferiority  of  style,  partly  as  not  haying  any  bearing 
npon  the  argument;  but  the  connection  of  reasoning, 
inyołyed,  thongh,  as  was  to  be  expected,  not  drawn  out, 
in  this  discourse,  has  been  shown  in  the  preoeding  anal- 
ysis; and  as  for  the  style,  few  who  have  a  tnie  ear  for 
the  resonant  grandenr  of  ancient  Hebrew  poetry  will 
dissent  from  the  Judgment  of  E.  R^nan,  whose  sugges- 
tion,  that  it  may  haye  been  written  by  the  same  author 


at  a  later  datę,  is  far  ftom  weakening  the  Ibrae  of  Us 
obseryataon  as  to  the  identity  of  the  style. 

4^  The  speech  of  Elihu  presento  greater  dtiBcultieą 
and  has  been  rejected  by  seyeral  lationalista,  whoae 
opinion,  howeyer,  is  controyerted  not  only  by  orthodos 
writers,  but  by  some  of  the  most  scepticał  commentft- 
tors.  lite  former  support  their  dedsion  on  the  appar- 
ent,  and,  to  a  certain  extent,  the  leal  difference  between 
this  and  other  parta  of  the  book  in  tonę  of  thought,  in 
doctrinal  yiews,  and,  morę  positiyeły,  in  language  and 
generał  style.  Much  stresa  also  is  laid  upon  the  facts 
that  Elihu  is  not  mentioned  in  the  introduction  nor  at 
the  end,  and  that  liia  speech  is  unanswered  by  Job,  and 
unnoticed  in  the  finał  addzess  of  the  Ahnighty.  These 
pointa  were  obseryed  by  yery  early  writers,  and  were 
aooounted  for  in  yarions  ways.  On  the  one  lumd,  Eliha 
was  regarded  as  a  spedally  inspired  person  (Schłott* 
mann,  p.  68).  In  the  Seder  Olom  (a  rabbinical  system 
of  chionology)  he  is  reckoned  among  the  prophets  who 
declared  the  will  of  God  to  the  Gentiles  before  the  pzom- 
ulgation  of  the  law.  S.  BarwNachman  (12th  century) 
notes  his  eonnection  with  the  famiły  of  Abraham  as  • 
sign  that  he  was  the  fittest  person  to  expound  the  ways 
of  God.  The  Greek  fathers  generally  ibllow  Chrysos* 
tom  in  attribntin^to  him  a  superior  intellect,  whiŁs 
many  of  the  best  critics  of  the  last  two  ccnturies  ooi»- 
sider  that  the  tme  dialectic  solution  of  the  great  prot^ 
lems  discussed  in  the  l>ook  is  to  be  found  in  his  di»- 
oourse.  On  the  other  hand,  Jerome,  who  is  foUowed  by 
Gregory,  and  many  ancient  as  weU  as  modem  wiiteia 
of  the  Western  Church,  speak  of  his  character  and  argu^ 
ments  with  singular  eontempt.  Later  critics,  cłuefiy 
rationałists,  see  in  him  but  an  empty  babbler,  introduced 
only  to  hdghten  by  oontrast  the  effect  of  the  last  solemn 
and  dignified  discourse  of  Jobw  The  ałtematiye  of  re* 
jecting  his  speech  as  an  interpolation  was  scarcdy  lesa 
objectionable,  and  has  been  preferred  by  Stublman,  Ben^ 
stdn,  Ewald,  R^nan,  and  otbcr  writers  of  sinular  opin- 
ions  in  other  countries.  A  candid  and  searching  exam- 
ination,  howeyer,  leads  to  a  differcnt  ooncłusion.  It  is 
proyed  (see  Schłottman,  EinL  p.  66)  that  there  is  a  dose 
intemał  connection  between  this  and  other  parts  of  tlie 
book.  There  are  references  to  numerous  passages  in  the 
discourses  of  Job  and  his  ftiends,  so  coyert  as  only  to  be 
discoyered  by  dose  inquiry,  yet,  when  pointed  out,  so 
striking  and  natural  as  to  łeave  no  room  for  doubt. 
EUhu  supplies  exactly  what  Job  repeatedly  demands— 
a  confutation  of  his  opinions,  not  merdy  produced  by  an 
oyerwhelming  display  of  diyine  power,  bot  by  rational 
and  human  arguments,  and  prooeeding  Irom  one  not, 
łike  his  other  opponents,  bigoted  and  hypocritical,  but 
upright,  candid,  and  tnithfuł  (comp.  xxxiii,  8,  with  yi, 
24, 26).  The  reasonings  of  Elihu  are  moreoyer  such  as 
are  needed  for  the  deyelopment  of  the  doctrines  incul- 
cated  in  the  book,  while  they  are  necessariły  cast  in  a 
form  which  could  not  without  irreyerence  be  assigned 
to  the  Ałmighty.  As  to  the  objection  that  the  doc- 
trinal system  of  Elihu  is  in  some  points  morę  adyanced 
than  that  of  Job  or  his  friends,  it  may  be  answered,  first, 
that  there  are  no  traoes  in  this  discourse  of  certain  doc- 
trines which  were  undoubtedly  known  at  the  earliest 
datę  to  which  those  critics  would  assign  the  interpola- 
tion, whereas  it  is  e^ńdent  that  if  known  they  would 
haye  been  adduced  as  the  yery  stroogest  arguments  lor 
a  waming  and  consolation.  No  reader  of  the  l^aalms  and 
of  the  ł^phets  could  haye  faiłed  to  urge  such  Łopics  as 
the  resurrection,  the  futurę  judgment,  and  the  personal 
adyent  of  Messiah.  Secondly,  the  doctrinal  system  of 
Elihu  differs  rather  in  degree  than  in  kind  from  that 
which  has  been  dther  deyeloped  or  intimated  in  seyeral 
passages  of  tłie  work,  and  consists  ehiefly  in  a  specifie 
appłication  of  the  mediatorial  theory,  not  unknown  to 
Job,  and  in  a  deeper  appredation  of  the  loye  manifested 
in  dl  proyidentid  dispensations.  It  is  qmte  consistent 
with  the  plan  of  the  writer,  and  with  the  admirable  skill 
shown  in  the  arrangement  of  the  whole  work,  that  the 
highest  yiew  as  to  the  object  of  afflictions,  and  to  the 


JOB 


936 


JOB 


tomce  to  which  men  should  apply  for  comfort  and  in- 
Btroction,  should  be  rescryed  for  tbis,  wbich,  ao  far  as  re- 
gaids  the  haman  reasonere,  is  the  cuLninating  point  of 
the  discussion.  Little  can  be  said  for  Lightfoofs  theoiy 
that  the  whole  work  was  oomposed  by  EUhu,  or  for  E. 
Benaa's  oonjecture  that  this  discourse  may  haye  been 
oomposed  by  the  authojBn  his  old  age ;  yet  thcse  yiews 
imply  an  unoonscious  impresnon  that  £Uhu  is  the  full- 
est  exponent  of  the  tmth.  It  is  sadsfactory  to  know 
that  two  of  the  most  impartial  and  diaceming  critios 
(Ewald  and  Itóuan),  who  miite  in  denying  this  to  be  an 
originoi  and  integral  portion  of  the  work,  f  iilly  acknowl- 
edge  ita  intrinsic  excellence  and  beauty. 

There  is  no  difficolty  in  acoounting  for  the  omiasioa 
of  Elihu's  name  in  the  introdoction.  No  persona  aze 
named  in  the  book  undl  they  appear  as  agenta^  or  as 
otherwise  concemed  in  the  erents.  Thos  Job's  fareth- 
ren  are  named  incidentally  in  one  of  his  speeches,  and 
his  relatires  are,  for  the  first  time,  in  the  oonclading 
chapter.  Had  Elihu  been  mentioned  at  first,  we  should 
of  oourse  have  expected  him  to  take  part  in  the  discus- 
sion, and  the  impression  madę  by  his  startling  address 
would  have  been  lost.  Job  does  not  answer  him,  nor, 
indeed,  ooold  he  deny  the  cogency  of  his  argoments, 
while  this  silence  brings  out  a  corious  point  of  coinci- 
dence  with  a  previoas  dedaration  of  the  patriarch  (vi, 
24, 26).  Again,  the  discourse,  being  substantially  trae, 
did  not  need  oonrection,  and  is  therefore  left  unnoticed 
in  the  finał  decision  of  the  Almighty.  Nothing,  indeed, 
could  be  morę  in  harmony  with  the  ancient  traditions 
of  the  East  than  that  a  youth,  moyed  by  a  special  and 
supematural  impulse  to  speak  out  Grod's  truth  in  the 
presence  of  his  cJders,  should  retire  into  obscurity  when 
he  had  done  his  work.  Morę  weight  is  to  be  attached 
to  the  objection  reating  upon  diyersity  of  style  and  diar 
lectic  peculiarities.  The  most  acute  critics  differ  in- 
deed in  their  estimate  of  both,  and  are  often  grosaly  de- 
eeiyed  (see  Schlottmann,  p.  61) ;  still,  there  can  be  little 
doubt  as  to  the  fact.  It  may  be  accounted  for  eithcr  on 
the  supposition  that  the  author  adhered  strictly  to  the 
form  in  which  tradition  handed  down  the  diakigue— in 
which  case  the  speech  of  a  Syrian  might  be  expected  to 
bear  tiaces  of  his  dialect— or  that  the  Ghaklaic  forms 
and  idioma,  which  are  far  from  resembling  later  yidgar- 
isms  or  corruptioDS  of  Uebrew,  and  occur  only  in  highly 
poetic  passages  of  the  oldest  writcrs,  are  such  as  pecul- 
iarly  suit  the  style  of  the  young  and  fiery  speaker  (see 
Schlottmann,  £inL  p.  61).  It  has  been  obseryed,  and 
with  apparent  truth,  that  the  discourses  of  the  other  in- 
terlocutors  haye  each  a  yery  distinct  and  characteristic 
coloring,  shown  not  only  in  the  generał  tonę  of  thought, 
but  in  peculiarities  of  expres8ion  (Ewald  and  Schlott- 
mann). The  exce8siye  obscurity  of  the  style,  which  is 
uniyersally  admitted,  may  be  accounted  for  in  a  similar 
manner.  A  young  man  speaking  under  strong  excite- 
meijt,  embarrassed  by  the  presence  of  his  elders  and  by 
the  peculiar  responsibility  of  his  position,  might  be  ex- 
pected  to  use  language  obscured  by  repetitions,  and, 
thougb  ingenious  and  true,  yet  somewhat  intricate  and 
imperfecdy  deyeloped  arguments,  such  as,  in  fact,  pre- 
sent  great  difficulties  in  the  exegesis  of  this  portion  of 
the  book. 

YI.  Commentariet, — The  foUowing  is  a  list  of  the  ex- 
egetical  helps  on  the  whole  book  exclu8iyely,  the  most 
important  being  designated  by  an  asterisk  [*  ]  prefixed : 
Origen,  Selecta  (in  (^.  ii,  499) ;  also  Scholia  (in  BibL 
Patr,  Gallandii,  xiy);  Anon.  Commenlarius  (in  Origen'8 
Opp.  ii,  850) ;  Athanasius,  Exoerpta  (in  Opp,  I,  ii,  1003) ; 
Jerome,  Commenlarius  (in  Opp,  Sitppos,  xi,  566) ;  Ptd- 
lippus,  Expo8Uio  (in  Jerome'8  Opp,  Spur,  iii,  833 ;  also 
in  Bede'8  Opp.  iy ;  also  BasiL  1527,  foL) ,  Augustine,  w4fi- 
notationes  (in  Opp,  iii,  828) ;  Chrysostom,  HomUia  (in 
Opp.  Spur.  yi,  681) ;  Ephrem  Syrus,  Scholia  (in  Syriac, 
in  Opp.  iii,  1-20) ;  Gregory,  Moralia  (in  Opp,  i,  1 ;  also 
translation  in  English,  Oxford,  1844-50,  4  yols.  8yo) ; 
Olympiodorus,  etc,  Catena  (Lugdunum,  1586, 4to ;  Lon- 
don. 1657,  folio) ;  Bruno  AstenaLs,  In  Jobum  (in  Opp,  i) ; 


Biipeit,/fiJo&iimCui6^.i,1084);  FMerorBloia,Co0»- 
pwdium  (in  Opp,  iii,  19) ;  Aąuinaa,  CommeiUarii  (in  Opp, 
i;  also  Yen.  1605,  foL;  Bom.  1562, 4to) ,  Baflolaa  (L  e. 
Balbag),  ^!|1B  (Ferrara,  1477,  4to;  with  yariooa  aapcr- 
comment8,Naples,1486,4to;  and  in  Bomberg^s  Babbinie 
Bibles);  Arama,  T^^  (Salonica,  1517,  foUo;  Biya  da 
Trento,  1562,  4to;  Ven.  1567,  4to)  j  Bugenhagen,  AdM>' 
łationea  (Aigent,  et  BasiL  1526,  8yo) ;  Bucer,  Comm»- 
taria  (Argent.  1528,  folio) ;  (Ecolampadins,  Eregrmaia 
(BamL  1531,  foL,  1533, 1536, 4to ;  Geney.  1532, 1553. 1578, 
foL ;  in  French,  Geney.  1562,  4to) ;  Borrhilua,  Commten- 
tariui  (Argent.  1532,  BaaiL  1539, 1544,  Geney.  1590,  foL) ; 
Cajetan,  Commentarius  (Bom.  1585,  folio);  Is.  ben-Salo- 
mon  (ha-Kohen),  O^D  (Constantii].  1545,  4to) ;  Titel- 
mann,  JSlucidatio  (Paris,  1548,  1550,  8yo;  1558,  l2mo; 
Lugd.  1554,  Antw.  1566, 12mo) ;  Ferus,  EipUcaiio  (CoL 
1558, 1574,  Lugdun.  1567,  8yo);  Lutzins,  Adnołationa 
(BasiL  1559.  1563,  8yo);  Calyin,  Sermom  (in  French, 
Geney.  1563, 1611,  foL ;  in  Lat.  ib»  1569, 1593,  foL  [also 
in  Opp,  iii]  *,  in  EngL,  Lond.  1584,  foL;  in  Germ.,  Hezfa. 
1587,  4  yols.  4to) ;  Strigel,  Scholia  (Upsise,  1566, 1571, 
1575,  8vo) ;  Steuch,  Enarrationa  (Ven.  1567,  4u>) ;  Fo- 
bian  (Mos.  b.-EL),  D^Ji^Pt,  etc.  (modem  Greek  in  tieb. 
chancters,  Gonstantmople,  1576, 4to);  Ibn-Jaiah  (Bar. 
ben-Is.),  Tj^^a  *l'ip?  [indud.  Eccles.]  (Constant.  1576» 
foL);  Marloratu8,J5ig)o««o  (Geney.  1581, 4to) ;  De  Hn- 
erga,  Commentaria  [on  eh.  i-xyiii,  includ.  Cant-]  (Com- 
plut.  1582,  foL) ;  Beza,  Conmmtariut  (Geney.  1588, 1589, 
1599,  4to);  Stunica,  Commentaria  (Tolet.  1584,  Borna, 
1591,  4to) ;  Layatcr,  Coneionet  (Tigur.  1585,  foL) ;  Rdl- 
lock,  Commemarius  (Geneya,  1590,  8yo) ;  Duran  (Sim. 
bcn-Zcmach),  OBl^T?  S^jiS^  (Yenice,  1590, 4to;  also  in 
Frankfurter'8  Babbinie  Bibie) ;  Farissol  (Abr.  b.-Mard.), 
dsjIB  (in  the  Babbinie  Bibles);  Mord.  b.-Jacob  (of  Orar 
cow),"  DIIB  (Prague,  1597,  4to);  ♦De  Pineda  [Boman 
Cath.],  Commeniaru  (Madrit.  1597-1601,  2  yola.  folio; 
Colon.  1600, 1605,  1685,  Antwp.  1609,  Tenet.  1619, 170ą 
UrseL  1627,  Paris,  1681,  Lugdun.  1701,  foL) ;  Alschech, 
ppiną  ng^n  (Yenicc,  1603,  4to;  Jcsnitz,  1722,  foL); 
Feuardientius,  ilomUia  [on  prose  paits]  (Par.  1606,  foL); 
Strack,  Pre^m  (Casacl,  1607, 4to) ;  Humfty,  Dialogw 
(Lond.  1607,  4to) ;  Joannes  a  Jesu  Maria,  Paraphratiś 
(Bom.  1611,  4to)i  Piscator,  CommaUaritu  (Herb.  1612, 
8vo);  DePmeda,Coi«»i«itorM«(Colon.l613,1701,foL); 
Buhlich,  Predigten  (Wittonb.  1617, 3  yols.  4to)  ;  Janaoo, 
EnarraUo  (Loyan.  1623, 1648,  folio);  Quaile9,  Mfdka- 
tiont  (London,  1624, 4to) ;  Sanctius,  Commentarii  (Logd. 
1625,  folio ;  Lipa.  1712, 4to) ;  Olearius,  Prediglen,  (Lpzg. 
1633, 1665, 1672,  4to) ;  Dnisius,  Scholia  (Amsterd.  1636, 
4to;  also  in  CriL  Sac);  Diodati,  Explicaiions  [indud. 
Psa.,  ete.]  (in  French,  Geney.  1638, 4to) ;  Yayasaor,  Met- 
aphrasis  (Par.  1638, 12mo,  1679, 8yo ;  Francf.  1654, 4to); 
Bolducius,  CommetOaria  (Par.  1638, 2  yols.  foL) ;  Abbott, 
Paraphrase  (Lond.  1640, 4to) ;  Cocceius,  Diagrammata 
(Franec  1644,  fol. ;  also  in  Opp,  i) ;  Oorderius,  Elucida- 
Ho  (Antw.  1646, 1656,  foL) ;  Schultetus,  Anafywu  (SteŁ 

1647,  Francf.  1684,  foL) ;  Scnnaalt,  Paraphraae  (London, 

1648,  4to);  Meiem,  CommentaH*  [induding  Proy.,  etc] 
(L.  a  1661,  foL);  Codurcus,  Scholia  (Paria,  1661,  4to); 
Caryl,  ExposiHon  (London,  1651, 1664, 1694, 6  vola.  4to; 
1666, 1677, 2  yols.  foL) ;  Witzleben,  JoU  gms  (Sor»,  1656, 
4to) ;  Leigh,  A  dnotationes  [including  other  poet,  books] 
(Lond.  1657,  foL) ;  Durham,  Expońtum  (London,  1659, 
8vo) ;  Chemnitz,  Persona  Jobi  (Jen.  1665, 4to,  and  sińce)  j 
Breniua,  Nota  (transL  by  Cuper,  Amst.  1666,  4to) ;  Zel- 
ler,  AuslegiMg  (Hamb.  1667,  4to);  Spanhcim,  HigUtria 
(Geney.  167Ó,  4to;  L.  R  1672,  8yo);  Mercer,  Commm- 
łarius  (Geney.  1673,  L.  Bat.  1651,  folio);  Hack,  /WflT 
(Hamb.  1674,  4to);  Hottinger,  Anal^tis  (Tigur.  1679. 
8yo) ;  *Seb.  Schmidt,  Commenlarius  (ArgenL  1680, 1690, 
1705,  4to);  Fabridus,  Predigten  (Norimb.  1681,  4to); 
Patrick,  Paraphrase  (Lond.  1686,  8yo) ;  Clark,  £xm»- 
tałiona  [poetical]  (Edinb.  1685,  foL);  Van  Hoecke,  Vgt- 
legging  (Leyd.  1697, 4to) ;  Hutohe8on,£ccfttr«  (London, 


JOB 


937 


JOB 


1099,  fd.) ;  Blackmoce,  Paraphraae  (Lond.  1700,  folio) ; 
Antonidefl,  Yerkiaaring  (Leyd.  1700, 4to ;  in  Genn.  F.  a. 
M.  1702, 4to);  Stiaser,  Prtdigtm  (Lpz.  1704, 4to);  Ish- 
am,  NoUm  [includ.  Piot.,  etc]  (Lond.  1706,  8vo);  Kor- 
tom, Amnerk,  (lipsis,  1708,  4to) ;  Daniel,  Ancdyiis  (in 
French,  Leyd.  1710, 12nio) ;  Ob.  ben-J.  Sphomo,  a&^» 
pri  (in  the  Babb.  Bibles  and  in  Daian*s  Comment ;  in 
Lathi,  Gotha,  1713-14, 8  yoK  4to) ;  Egard,  £rlautentng 
(HaUe,  1716,  4to);  Michaelia,  Notą  (Halle,  1720, 4to); 
Scheochzer,  NaturtriaaeMck^  etc  (Zttr.  1721, 4to) ;  DU- 
tel.  De  sabiie  usearis  Jobi  (Alt.  1722, 4to) ;  la.  ben-Salo- 
iiKmJabez,'^n^  nK^I^^Cui  the  AmatRabb.  Bibie,  1724); 
Ton  der  Uardt,  In  Jobum  (voL  i,  Helnut  1728,  foL  [voL 
Si  neyer  appeaied,  haying  been,  it  is  said,  oonsigned  to 
the  flames  by  the  author  himeelf  aa  absurd]) ;  CrinBoz, 
Noiet  (in  French,  Rotterd.  1729,  4to) ;  Hardouin,  Para" 
phraae  (in  French,  Par.  1729,  Timo) ;  Dugaet,  ErpUca- 
Hon  [mystical]  (Par.  1782,  4  vola.  12mo) ;  Anon.  JCsępli^ 
caiion  (in  French,  Par..l732, 2  yoIb.  12mo) ;  Fenton,  An- 
notatiofu  [indnd.  Psa.]  (London,  1782, 8vo) ;  Hoffmann, 
ErOdnmg  (Hamb.  1784,  4to) ;  &  Wesley,  IHsaeriaHonu 
(Lond.  1786,  foL);  Yogel,  CommaUaruu  (Lugd.  1757,  2 
Tols.  4to;  abridged,  ibid.  1778,  8vo);  *Schultens,  Comr 
mmtartiu  (L.  B.  1787,  2  ycls.  4to),  also  Ammadotrnonu 
(Tr.  ad  Rh.  1706,  8vo),  and  Obtentationu  (Amst  1748, 
8to)  ;  abridged  by  Grey  (Lond.  1741, 8vo)  and  by  Yogel 
(HaL  1778^,  2  toIs.  8vo) ;  Baumgarten,  Au^egwig  (pt. 
1,  HaL  1740, 4to) ;  Oetinger,  Anmerkunc.  (F.  a.  M.  1748, 
8vo);  Koch,  Anmerkung.  (Lemg.  1748-7,  8  yoIs.  4io); 
Bahidt,  ErkUlrung  (Lipsin,  1744, 4to) ;  Bellamy,  Para- 
pkrate  (Lond.  1748, 4to) ;  Reinhard,  ErkUlr.  (Lpz.  1749- 
60, 2  Yols.  4to);  Hodges,  Scope,  etc  (London,  1760, 4to, 

1766,  8to  ;  DnhL  1768, 8yo) ;  Gamet,  Diasertation  (Lond. 
1751, 4to) ;  Chappelow,  Paraphraae  (Gamb.  1762, 2  yoIs. 
4to);  Heath,  E$aay  (London,  1756, 4to;  ih.  1766,  4to); 
Peters,  DiaserlaHon  [against  Warboiton]  (Lond.  2d  ed. 

1767,  8vo);  Boullier,  OhtenaiUmeM  (Amst  1758,  8yo); 
Stuas,  De  EpopcM  Jobeea  (Gotha,  1768,  4to);  Ceniti, 
GuMo  (Romę,  1764, 1778,  8yo)i  J.  TJri-Scherago,  CK 
apC  n-^a  (F.  a.  o.  1765,  foL) ;  Sticht,  De  coUoguio  Dei 
cum  Saiana  (Altona,  1766,  4to) ;  Grymeua,  Anmerkung, 
(Basel,  1767, 4to) ;  Froriep,  JSpkraemiana  m  J„  (Lipsiie, 
1769, 8yo);  Cube,  Teftcrt.  (BerL  1769-71,  8  yols.  8yo); 
Meintcl,  ErUantng  (NUmb.  1771, 4to) ,  also  Metaphra- 
stt  (ibitL  1775,  4to);  ^cott,  Remarha  (London,  1771, 4to, 
1778, 8yo) ;  Anon.  HiMt,  ofJob  (Lond.  1772, 8vo) ;  Dres- 
ler,  ErlauU  [on  parts]  (Herb.  1778,  8yo) ;  Eckermann 
Umtchreibunff  (Lub.  1778,  4to);  also  Ammadrersionu 
(ibid.  1779, 8yo) ;  Reiske,  ConjecturoB  [indud.  Proyerbs] 
(Upa.  1779,  8yo);  Dessau,  ^a^  ^^B  (BerL  1779,  4to); 
Sander,//to5  (Lpz.  1780, 8yo)*;  Moldenhaaer,  Uerbenetz, 
(Lpz.  1780-1,  2  Yols.  8yo) ;  Hufnagel,  Anmerk.  (Erlang. 
1781, 8yo) ;  Kessler,  Ann»erhmff,  (Tubingen,  1784, 8yo) ; 
Bchnurrer,  i4fMma<lpernofief  [on  parts]  (TUb.  1787  sq.,  2 
pts.  4to) ;  Greye,  Noła  [on  last  eh.]  (Dayent  1788, 4to) ; 
Dathe,  A  oto  [indud.  Piroy.,  etc]  (Hal.  1789,  8yo);  II- 
gen.  Natura  Jobi  (Lipsiie,  1789,  8yo);  Heins,  Anmerk, 
(in  Danish,  Kiobenh.  1790, 8yo) ;  Ab.  Wolfasohn,  D^nnn 
(Pragnę,  1791,  Yienna,  1806, 8yo);  Bellermann,  Num  tU 
liber  J,  bittoria  (Erf.  1792, 4to) ;  also  />e  Jobi  indole  (ib. 
1798, 4to) ;  also  Ueber  <L  Plan  Hiob  (Berlin,  1813, 8yo) ; 
Hontinghe,  Anrnerh  (in  Dittch,  Amster.  1794, 8yo) ;  in 
Genn.,  Lpz.  1797,  8yo) ;  Jacobi,  AfmoUUionee  [on  parts] 
(Jen.  1795, 8yo) ;  Garden,  Notee  (Lond.  1796, 8yo) ;  Ber- 
giua,  Exerciiatione8  (Upeala,  1796,  8yo) ;  Papę,  Yertuch 
(Gdtting.  1797, 8yo) ;  Wheelden,  DdmeaUon,  etc  (Lond. 
1799,  9\oy,  Błock,  Uebere,  (Ratzeb.  1799,  Hamb.  1804, 
8yo) ;  Riedel,  Getange  (Pteasb.  1799,  8yo) ;  Satanow, 
D4ft*1R,  etc  (Berlin,  1799, 8yo) ;  Richter,  De  <Ełaie  Jobi 
(Lipeue,  1799,  4to);  Eichhom,  U^ten.  (Lpz.  1800,  8yo; 
also  in  his  BtbUoth,  iy,  10  sq.);  Kem,  Inhalt,  etc  (in 
Bengel*s  Archir,  yiii,  852  są.) ;  also  Ob$ervationes  (TUb. 
1826,  4to) ;  Stuhlmann,  Erlatif.  (Hamburg,  1804,  8yo) ; 
Stock,  Notee  (BaŁh,  1805, 8yo) ;  Ottensosser,  DSlA^n,  etc 


(Offenb.  1807  [?],  8yo);  Pareau,  De  immortaUtate,  etc 
(Dayent.  1807,  8yo);  Polozk  (Pinch.  ben-Jeh.),  D^ąĄ 
OnpD  (Wihia,  1808, 4to) ;  Gaab,  Hiob  (Tttb.  1809, 8yo) '; 
Elizabeth  Smith  [ed.  Randolph],  Armotatiotu  (London, 
1810, 8yo) ;  ♦Good,  Notes  (Lond.  1812, 8yo) ;  G.  H.  Bern- 
stein, Zweekj  etc.  (in  Keil*8  Analekten^  1813, 1,  iii,  1-187) ; 
Neumann,  CharakterisHk^  etc  (BresL  1817,  4to);  Mid- 
deldorpf,  Syr,'hexapL  etc  (YratisL  1817,  4to) ;  Bridel, 
Commenłaire  (in  part  only,  Paris,  1818,  8yo) ;  Schttrer, 
ErUtuU  (Bem,  1818-20,  2  yols.  8yo);  Jttger,  De  integri^ 
tatę,  etc  (Tttb.  1820, 8yo) ;  Autenrieth,  Hiob  (TUb.  1828, 
8yo) ;  Melsheimer,  Anmtrk,  (Mannh.  1828, 8yo) ;  *Um- 
breit,  Aueleg,  (Heidelb.  1824, 1832, 8yo ;  in  EngL,  Edinh. 
1886-7,  2  yols.  12mo);  ♦RoeenmUllcr,  Scholia  (Lipsise, 
1824, 8yo) ;  Hrabieszow,  D-ł^lsiKą  (Lemberg,  1824, 1834, 
Warsaw,  1838,  8yo);  Hunt,  Translation  (Bath,  1825, 
8yo) ;  Leyasseur,  Traduction  (Par.  1826, 8vo) ;  Blumen- 
feld,  Comment.  (in  Heb.,  Yienna,  1826,  8yo) ;  Fry,  Expo- 
sUion  (Lond.  1827,  8yo) ;  Bócksel,  Erlaut.  (Hamb.  1880, 
8yo) ;  Koster,  Uebere.  [indud.  Eccles.]  (Schlcswig,  1881, 
8yo) ;  G.  Lange,  Uebert.  (Halle,  1881,  8yo);  Petri,  Comr 
mentationes  (Brunsw.  1888,  4to) ;  Sachs,  Charatt.,  etc 
(in  StucL  und  Krit,  1834,  p.  910  sq.) ;  Jeitteles,  Q!|J;*nn, 
etc  (Yienna,  1834,  8yo) ;  Knobel,  De  Jobi  argumenio 
(YratisL  1885,  8yo);  Amheim,  Commentar  (Glog.  1836, 
8vo);  ♦Ewald,  ErJdar.  (Gott.  1886,  8yo);  Fockens,  De 
Jobeide  (Zutphen,  1836, 8yo) ;  ^LceyCommentarg  (Lond. 
1837, 8yo) ;  Anon.  Paraphrase  [poetical,  on  last  10  eh.] 
(Lond.  1838, 8yo) ;  I>e8Bauer,  U^r^T},  etc  (Pressb.  1838, 
8yo);  Holzhansen,Cre6fr«.  (Gott  1839, 8yo);  Holscher, 
Ueberg.  (Osnab.  1889,  8yo);  Lauiens,  Traduction  [in- 
clud. Paalms]  (Par.  1889,  8vo);  *Wemys8,  Job^s  Timet 
(Lond.  1889,  «yo);  ♦Hirzel,  Erkldr,  (Lpz.  1889,  ed.  Ols- 
hausen,  1852,  ed.  Dillmann,  1864,  8yo) ;  Justi,  Erlauter. 
(Kassel,  1840, 8yo);  Jenour,  Translation  (London,  1841, 
8vo);  *Yaihinger,  Erlauter.  (Stuttg.  1842,  1866,  8yo); 
Stickd,  Bemerk.  (Lpzg.  1842,  8yo);  J.Wolfson,  Erldut. 
(Lpzg.  1848,  8yo) ;  Gleias,  Beitrage  (Hamb.  1846, 8yo) ; 
Polak,  Ijjob  (in  Dutch,  Amst.  1845,  8yo);  Tattam,  Tr, 
from  Coptic  (London,  1846, 8yo);  Heiligstedt,  Comment, 
(in  new  ed.  of  Maurer,  lips.  et  BerL  1847,  8vo) ;  Wdte, 
ErHdr.  (Freib.  1849,  8yo) ;  Hahn,  Commentar  (Berlin, 
1849, 8yo) ;  ♦Noyea,  A^otoJ  (Bost.  1850, 1864, 1867, 12mo) ; 
Bames,  Notes  (N.  Y.  and  Lond.  1850, 1854, 2  yols.  12mo) ; 
♦Schlottmann,  Erldut.  (Berlin,  1851, 8vo) ;  Merder,  Cewn- 
mentaritts  [including  Proy.]  (Lugd.  1651,  foL) ;  Froude, 
Jo6  (in  the  Westminster  Rec.  1853 ;  reprinted  in  Skort 
StudieSy  London,  1858) ;  Kempę,  Lectures  (London,  1856, 
12mo) ;  Eyans,  Lectures  (London,  1856, 8vo) ;  Krahmer, 
Hiob  (in  the  TheoL  LiteraturU.  1856) ;  *Heng8tenberg, 
7/to6  (BerL  1856, 1870  są.,  8vo);  Anonym.  Iłlustrations 
(Lond.  1856, 8vo) ;  ♦Conant,  Job  (in  public.  of  American 
Bibie  Union,  N.  Y.  1856,  4to  and  12mo) ;  Carey,  Erpla- 
nation  (Lond.  1858, 8yo) ;  ♦Ebiard,  Erlduł.  (Land.  1858, 
8vo) ;  C.  H.  Bernstein,  Bar-Hebrai  Scholia  (Yratislay, 
1858,  8yo);  Berkholz,  Hiob  (Riga,  1859,  8vo);  ♦Renan, 
Livre  de  Job  (Paris,  1859, 1860,  8vo) ;  Crelier,  Lirre  de 
Job  [against  R^nan]  (Par.  1860, 8yo) ;  Hupfdd,  Bedfu- 
tunt/j  etc  (in  the  Zeitschr.f.  Christ.  Wissensch.  Aug.  and 
Sept.  1860);  Wagner,  Sermons  (Lond.  1860,  8yo);  Sim- 
son, Kritik  (Konigsbcrg,  1861, 4to) ;  Lcroux,  Traduction 
(Par.  1861,  8yo);  Dayjdson,  Commentary  (voL  i,  Lond. 
1862,  8yo);  Odiosus,  ^r/ćTuf.  (Berlin,  1868, 8vo) ;  Ooly, 
Job  (Lond.  1868, 8yo) ;  Bernard,  Job  (voL  i,  Lond.  1864, 
8yo);  Rodwell,  Translation  (London,  1864,  8vo);  ♦De- 
litzsch,  Commentar  (Lpz.  1864, 8yo ;  in  English,  Edinb. 
1866,  2  yols.  8vo);  Mourad,  Orersalt.  (Kjobenh.  1865, 
8vo) ;  Mathes,  Yerklaarwg  (Utrecht,  1866, 2  yols.  8yo)  •, 
Reuss,  Yortrag  (Strassb.  1869, 8vo) ;  Anon.  Notes  (Lond. 
1869, 4to) ;  Yolk,  Summa,  etc  (Dorpat,  1870, 4to).     See 

POETRY. 

JOB'S  DISEASE.    The  opinion  that  the  malady 

under  which  Job  soffered  was  elephantiasis,  or  black 

I  leprosy,  is  so  ancient  that  it  is  found,  according  to  Or- 

1  igen's  Heząpkif  in  the  rendering  which  one  of  the  Greek 


JOB 


938 


JOCHANAN 


tonions  bas  madę  of  ii,  7.  It  was  alao  eBtotained  hy 
Abulfeda  (Hitt,  AtUetO.  p.  26),  and,  in  modem  ńnuB, by 
ilM  best  ichoUn  generaliy.  The  passagea  which  are 
oonaidered  to  indicate  this  diaeaae  ara  foood  in  the  de- 
acription  of  hia  akin  buiuing  fiom  head  to  foot,  bo  that 
he  took  a  potsherd  to  scrape  himaelf  (ii, 7,8) ;  in  ita  be- 
ing  corezed  with  putrefaction  and  eniata  of  eartb,  and 
being  at  one  time  stiff  and  baid,  while  at  another  it 
cracked  and  discharged  fluid  (yi^  5) ;  in  the  offenaiTO 
breath,  which  dpove  away  the  kindneas  of  attendanta 
(xix,  17);  in  the  reatlesa  nighta,  which  were  either 
•leepleas  or  scared  with  frightful  dreama  (yii,  18,  U; 
zxx,  17) ;  in  generał  emaciation  (xvi,  8) ;  and  in  bo  in* 
tense  a  loathing  of  the  burden  of  life  that  atrangling  and 
death  were  preferahłe  to  it  (vii,  16).  In  this  picture  of 
Job'8  soffsrings  the  state  of  the  akin  ia  not  bo  diatincUy 
descńbed  aa  to  enable  ua  to  identify  the  diaease  with 
dephantiasis  in  a  rigorous  sense.  The  difficulty  ia  alao 
increased  by  the  fact  that  "pril^  {shet^in',  a  tore,  Sept. 
SAicoc)  ia  generaliy  rendered  "  boils.'*  But  that  word, 
according  to  ita  radical  aense,  only  meana  hirning,  tn- 
JlamłncUion-^  hot  sense  of  pain,  which,  although  it  at- 
tends  boils  and  abscesses,  la  common  to  other  cutaneoua 
irritationa.  Moreorer,  the  fact  that  Job  scraped  him- 
aelf with  a  potsherd  is  irreconcilable  with  the  notion 
that  hia  body  was  covered  with  boila  or  open  sores,  but 
agreea  very  well  with  the  thickened  atate  of  the  skin 
which  characterizes  the  diseaae.— Kitto.    See  LspRosr. 

2.  pi\  Yob  i  if  genuine,  perh.  ntumii^,  from  ^I^*^  = 
a!|X;  Sept'Ia<rot;/3,yulg.Jo6.)  The  thiid-named  of  the 
foor  Bona  of  Isaachar  (Gen.  xlvi,  18),  elaewhere  called 
Jashub  (Numb.  xxvi,  24;  1  Chroń,  vii,  1)^  for  which 
this  is  probably  an  erroneoua  tnmacription. 

Job  or  RuBTOPF,  flrst  patriarch  of  the  Ruaso-Greek 
Church,  flourished  in  the  second  half  of  the  16th  centary. 
We  have  already  had  occasion  to  refer  to  the  circum- 
atancefl  under  which  Russia  succeeded  in  eatablishing  an 
Independent  patriarchate  in  her  dominions  in  the  bio- 
graphical  sketch  of  the  Greek  patriarch  Jeremiah  (q.  v.). 
This  important  event  took  place  in  1589,  and  was  boI- 
emnly  oonfirmed  by  the  Conatantinopolitan  patriarch  in 
B  synod  of  the  Greek  Church  held  in  1692.  The  act  was 
also  confinned  in  1619  by  Theophil,  the  patriarch  of  Je- 
rusalem.  By  the  other  Ońentid  patriarohs  Job  was  reo- 
ognised  as  the  fiflh  patriarch  of  the  orthodox  Church. 
Of  his  pcrsonal  history  we  are  ignorant.  See  Aschbach, 
Kirehm-Lex.  iii,  291 ;  Stanley,  Eatt,  Church,  p.  436, 486 ; 
8trahl,  Rast-Kirchengeach,  i,  619.  See  Gbsbk  Cmubch, 
▼oL  iii,  p.  984,  coL  2. 

JoHbab  (Heb.  Yohab\  l^r,  probably  dweller  in  the 
desertj  from  the  Arabie;  SepL  ^iut^afi,  but  in  1  Chroń,  i, 
23,  TOP  EvŁ  Kai  tom  'Qpdfi,  v.  r.  simply  'Imifi),  the  name 
of  8everal  men. 

1.  The  last-named  of  the  sona  of  Joktan,  and  founder 
of  a  tribe  in  Arabia  (Gen.  x,  29 ;  1  Chroń,  i,  23),  B.a  poat 
2414.  Bochart  compares  {PhaUg,  ii,  29)  the  Jobariła 
('IwjSapirac)  of  Ptolemy  (vi.  7, 24),  a  people  on  the  eaat- 
em  coast  of  Arabia,  near  the  Socalitś,  which,  after  Sal- 
masius,  he  supposcs  to  be  for  JobabUaf  bo  also  Micha- 
eUs  {Spicileg,  ii,  303 ;  Supplem.  1043). 

2.  Son  of  Zerah  of  Bozrah,  king  of  Edom  after  Bela 
and  before  Uusham  (Gen.  xxxvi,  33, 84;  1  Chroń,  i,  44, 
45),  B.C.  prób.  long  aute  1617.  The  auppoeition  that  he 
was  idontical  with  the  patriarch  Job  resU  only  upon  the 
apocr>q^hal  addition  to  the  book  of  Job  in  the  SepU,  and 
ia  utterly  unworthy  of  credit.     See  Jon. 

3.  The  Canaanitish  king  of  Madon,one  of  thoae  whoae 
aid  Jabin  invoked  in  the  struggle  with  the  Israelites 
(Josh.  xi,  1),  RC.  1617. 

4.  The  first-named  of  the  Bons  of  Shaharaim  by  one 
of  his  wives,  Hodesh  or  Baara,  of  the  tribe  of  Benjamin, 
although  apparently  bora  in  Moab  (1  Chroń,  viii,  9),  RC. 
dr.  1612. 

5.  One  of  the  **  sons''  of  Elpaal,  a  chief  of  Benjamin, 
at  Jerusalem  (1  Chroń,  viii,  18),  RC  probably  ek.  588. 


Jooali]i«,U8hopopBATHA3fDWKLŁa.   SeeJom 

(Un^  o/EnffUmd). 

Jooellne  op  Sausoust,  a  prdate  of  the  early  Eng- 
liah  Chmfch,  flouriahed  iWna  1142  to  1184.  In  the  coo- 
tioversy  of  Thomaa  k  Becket  with  Km^  Henry  II  (m 
inveatitarea,  he  pJayed  no  unimportant  part,  for  he  aided 
with  the  king  m  this  gieat  ccclpHiasrira]  war,  and  thos 
fell  under  the  diapleaaura  of  the  archbiahop.  See  l5- 
YsaTiTURB.  The  latter,  in  accoidance  with  hia  indom- 
itable  Bpirit,  aoon  found  a  pretext  to  impreaa  hia  in> 
ferior  with  hia  power  at  Romę  by  condemning  Joee> 
linc  for  hiB  aasent  to  the  royal  election  or  appoint- 
ment  of  John  of  Oxford  to  the  deanery  of  Saliabiiry, 
notwithatanding  the  archbLshop*8  prohibition.  Jocelina 
adhering  to  hia  former  courae,  Beckcł  pronouneed  ex- 
communication  againat  the  rebellious  prelate,  and  thia 
act  waa  approved  ahortly  after  by  pope  Alexander  III 
(1 166).  Of  couise  the  bishop  remained  in  hia  place,  bot 
he  encountered  many  diflindtiea  from  the  subowlinarioo 
of  inferior  ecdeaiaatics,  aa  in  Uie  caae  of  the  moaka  of 
Kahnesbury  about  1180  (comp.  Inett,  Ilist.  EngL  CK  ii, 
chb  XV,  §  19).    See  Emglahd,  Chcbch  of. 

Joob»  JoiŁAini  GaOBG,  a  German  theologian,  bon 
at  Rotenbufg,  in  Franoonia,  In  1685,  became  profeasor  of 
theology  at  Wittenberg,  and  died  ia  178L  To  him  be- 
kmga  the  eredit  of  having  been  the  fiiat  to  aaseit  the  mr 
periority  of  practical  Chriatianity  over  the  then  prevai]r 
ing  pietiam,  in  the  principal  Btionghold  of  Latheran  the* 
ology,  the  cathedra  lAUkeri  of  Wittenberg.  W  hile  yct 
at  Jena,  the  oentre  of  pietiam  in  the  begimiing  of  the 
18th  centary,  he  waa,  both  as  a  student  and  bb  pcivate 
tutor,  one  of  the  diadplea  of  Spener,  and  an  ardent  pae- 
tist ;  but  when  he  became  superintendent  of  the  gymoa- 
aium  of  Dortmund,  where  d<^gmataca  and  polemicB  akne 
fUled  the  chuichea  and  the  haUa  of  learnins:,  Joch  tomed 
his  attentbn  to  the  Bubjecta  of  eonvenioa  and  Becood 
birth.  He  was  of  couiae  involved  in  a  coniioversy,  bat 
he  aeema  to  have  been  quit«  Booceasful,  for  in  1728  he 
waa  madę  a  profesaor  of  theok)gy  at  Wittenbeiy^w— 4i»- 
zog,  Real^Encjfldop,  a.  v.  See'  Auguati,  Der  Pietismuu  » 
Jenoj  etc.  (Jena,  1837) ;  Gdbel,  GetcL  d.  ChristL  Lebem 
M  d  rK-toes^h,  ev,  Kirehe, 

Joohanan  B.\a-KAPACHA,  a  distin^^ished  labbŁ 
was  bora  in  Judasa  about  A.  D.  170.  He  is  said  to  hare 
studied  under  Judah  Hakkodesh  and  other  Jewi^h  teach- 
ers,  and  is  beheved  to  have  fonned  a  Mchool  of  hi:9  own  at 
Tiberiaa  when  quite  a  youth.  His  hbtory,  likc  thatof 
all  other  distinguished  rabbis  of  that  period,  has  been  «o 
intermingled  with  extraoidinary  legenda  that  it  is  weO- 
nigh  impoesible  to  arrive  at  anything  dcfinite  cotwefn- 
ing  his  life.  So  much  appears  certain,  that  he  ]ived 
to  a  very  old  age,  inatructing  very  neaily  to  hia  laft 
hour  (in  279).  He  ia  by  some  Hebraisia  soppoeed  to 
have  collected  all  the  worka  wńtten  on  the  JeiuBakm 
Talmud  (q.  v.) ;  but  thia  aeema  nnreasotiable.  See  J. 
Furst,  BMiołh.  Judaiea,  ii,  94, 99 ;  Gratz,  GescMdUe  dar 
Juden,  iv,  285  fiq.  See  Jddah  u/tk-Kodksu.  (J.  U. 
W.) 

Joduman  Ben-Zaghai,  a  Jewish  rabbi  of  aome  note, 
and  oontemporaiy  of  the  oelebrated  Gamaliel  II,  whoia 
he  auooeeded  in  the  patriarcha]  dignity,was  bom  abo«t 
RC.  60.  But  llttle  ia  known  of  hia  peraonal  hiafeorr. 
He  is  said  to  have  been  a  dedded  peace  roan,  and  to 
have  greatly  disoouraged  any  Tevolutionary  elRats  of 
his  sufRering  oountiymen.  Thia  may  account  for  the 
esteem  in  which  he  was  held  at  the  conrt  of  ypopanaB, 
who  was  alwaya  found  ready  to  oblige  his  Jewiah  fntsid. 
Jochanan  Ben-Zachai  ia  regarded  as  the  reatorpr  of  Jew- 
ish learning  and  acholaatic  habita  after  the  dcatnicaw 
of  the  Tempie,  by  the  fomding  of  a  achool  at  Jabneh, 
and  a  new  aanhedrim,  of  which  he  waa  the  first  ptcs- 
dent,  thuB  preaenting  to  the  nnfortonate  and  dispened 
race  another  centrę  in  place  of  the  lately-de^troycd  cap- 
itaL  How  long  he  s^red  his  people  at  Jabaeh  ia  net 
well  known ;  GrilU  indinee  to  pot  it  at  about  te-n  yemn 
(oomp.  Frankel,  M<maUachńft  [1852,  p.  201  aą.]>.    Ha 


JOCHANAN 


d3d 


JOEL,  BOOK  OP 


died  abont  A.D.70.    For  detaiłs,  im  Oritx,^Meft.<fer 
Juim,  iv,  eh.  i ;  Bunage,  HitL  di$  Juif$y  y,  15  aq. ;  ix, 
95  aa.     (J.H.W.) 
Jochanan  Ofr  Gibcsaul    See  John  of  Gibcha- 

ŁA. 

Jooh^^ebed  (Heb.  Yohe^led,  'Y^St^  JtKovah  ib  her 
^ory ;  Sept  'l«axafiid  or  *lmxafiid%  the  wife  of  Am- 
nuD,  ood  mother  of  Miriam,  Aaron,  and  Moses  (Numbw 
zzri,  59).  KG  1788.  In  £xod.  vi,  20  sbe  U  ezprenly 
dedaied  to  have  be«n  the  ńster  of  Anuram's  fatber,  and 
confleqiiently  the  aunt  of  her  hustiand.  Aa  raarriage 
between  persona  thua  related  waa  afterwarda  forbidden 
by  the  law  (Lev.  zYiii,  12),  variou8  attempta  have  been 
madę  to  show  Łhat  the  relatioiiship  was  morę  dUtant 
than  the  text  in  its  literał  meaning  indicates.  But  the 
merę  raention  of  the  relationahip  implies  that  there  was 
something  remarkaUe  in  the  case.  The  fact  seema  to 
be,  that  where  this  maniage  was  contracted  there  was 
no  law  foibidding  such  allunoes,  but  they  must  in  any 
case  have  been  oniisual,  although  not  forbidden;  and 
thia,  with  the  writer^s  knowledge  that  they  were  subse- 
ąuently  interdicted,  sufficiently  acoomits  for  this  one 
being  so  pointedly  mentioned.  The  candor  of  the  hi»- 
toiian  in  declaring  himself  to  be  spnmg  from  a  mar- 
riage  afterwarda  forbidden  by  the  law,  deUvered  tbrough 
himself,  deservea  eapecial  notioe.— Kitto.  In  Kumb. 
zxvi,  59,  Jochebed  is  stated  to  have  been  ''the  daugh- 
ter  of  Levi,  whom  her  mother  borę  to  Levi  in  £g3rpt,'* 
from  wfaich  It  likewise  appeara  that  she  waa  literally 
the  siater  of  Kohath,  Levi's  son  and  Ajnram^s  father 
(£xod.vi,  16, 18.  On  the  chronology,  see  Brown^s  Ordo 
Smdorumy  pw  901).  The  oourage  and  faith  of  thia  ten- 
der mother  in  braving  Fharaoh'a  edict  by  her  ingenioua 
aecretion  and  8absequent  expoeare  of  the  infant  Mosea 
(Exod.  ii,  1-10)  are  alluded  to  with  commendation  by 
the  apoatle  (Heb.  zi,  28),  and  were  ugnaUy  rrwarded  l^ 
diviue  providenGe ;  to  her  pioua  ezample  and  preoepta 
the  futurę  lawgiver  doubtleśa  owed  much  of  that  integ- 
rity  which  ao  eminently  characterized  him«   See  Mosaa. 

Jo''da  ('IcD^a),  a  oomipt  form  (1  Eadr.  v,  58)  of  the 
name  of  Judah  (q.  y),  the  Levite  (E^ra  iii,  9> 

lo'W.  (Heb.  ToidT,  19i%  Jdumik  ia  Ma  witntM ; 
Sept  'Iii»a^,  aon  of  Pedaiah,  father  of  Meshullam,  and 
grandfather  of  Salin,  which  laat  waa  one  of  the  Benja- 
mitea  who  reaided  in  Jeruaalem  afler  the  captiyity  (Keh. 
zi,  7).    B.G.  confflderably  antę  588. 

Jo^el  (Heb.  Yoil',  ^^1%  Jthovah  ia  hia  God}  Sept. 
and  N.  T.  'Iwi|X),  the  name  of  at  leaat  twelve  men. 

1.  The  oldeat  of  the  two  aona  of  Samuel,  appoinied 
by  him  aa  judgea  in  Beer-aheba,  where  their  maladmin- 
iatration  led  to  the  popular  desire  for  a  monarchy  (1 
Sam.  yiti,  2).  See  Samuel.  In  1  Chroń,  vi,  38,  by  a 
derical  error,  he  ia  caUed  Yashni  (q.  v.).  B.G.  cir. 
1094.  He  appeara  to  ha(ve  been  the  father  of  Heman, 
the  Leyitical  ainger  (1  Chroń,  vi,  88;  xv,  17). 

2.  A  deaoendant  of  Beoben  (but  by  what  lina  doea 
not  appear),  and  father  of  Shemaiah  or  Shema,  aeveral 
incidenta  in  the  hiatory  of  whoae  poeterity  are  rdated 
(1  Chroń,  y ,  4, 8).    B.a  oonaideiaUy  antę*  1092. 

3.  Brolher  of  Nathan  of  Zobah,  and  one  of  Dayid^a 
fiUDona  wairiors  (1  Chroń.  x],  88);  called  Ioał  (q.  v.) 
in  the  parallel  paaaage  (2  Sam.  xxiii,  86). 

4.  The  third  named  of  the  four  sona  of  Izrahiah,  a 
chieftain  of  the  tribe  of  laaachar  (1  Chnm.  vii,  8).  B.C. 
prób.  cir.  1017. 

5.  A  chief  Levite  of  the  ftmily  of  Genhom,  at  the 
łiead  of  180  Tempie  senatora  (1  Chnm.  xv,  7, 11) ;  prob- 
aUy  the  same  with  the  third  of  the  *<  sona"  of  Łaadan 
(1  Chroń,  xxiii,  8),  and  alao  with  the  aon  of  Jehiel,  who, 
with  Zetham  hia  brother,  had  charge  of  the  "  trBaaorea 
of  the  honae  of  the  Lord"*  (1  Chnm.  xxvi,  22>  B.CL 
1042. 

6.  Son  of  Pedaiah,  and  prince  of  the  half-tribe  of  Hap 
naaseh  weat  (1  Chroń,  xxvii,  20).    B.C.  1014. 

7.  Son  of  Pethnely  and  aeoond  of  tha  twelye  miiior 


piophata  (Joel  i,  1>  Hia  hlatoiy  ia  only  known  fron 
the  contenta  of  the  book  that  beara  his  name. 

JO£L»  BOOK  OF.  Ł  Permnal  CircunuUmcea.  ^  L 
i?trt*pfa«t^Pteiido-£{Mphaniua  (ii,  246)  reoorda  a  tiw 
dition  that  the  prophet  Joel  waa  of  the  tribe  of  Beuben, 
bom  and  bnried  at  Bethhoron  (v.  r.  fiethoim,  etc.),  be- 
tween Jeruaalam  and  Cnsatea.  It  ia  most  likely  that 
he  liyed  in  Judna,  for  hia  commiaaion  waa  to  Judah,  aa 
Łhat  of  Hoaea  had  been  to  the  ten  tribea  ( Jerome,  (7om- 
mmi,  ta  JofL).  He  exhorta  the  priests,  and  makea  lVe- 
quent  mention  of  Jndah  and  Jeruaalem  (i,  14;  ii,  1,  I6y 
82;  iii,  1, 12,  17,  20,  21).  It  haa  been  madę  a  que8tion 
whether  he  were  a  prieat  himadf  (Winer,  Realfc,)^  bot 
there  do  not  aecm  to  be  aufficient  gronnds  for  determin-* 
ing  it  in  the  afflrmatiye,  though  sonie  recent  writera  (e. 
g.  Maorice,  Praphets  and  Kwg$,  p.  189)  have  taken  thła 
view. 

2.  i>afe.— Yarioua  ofńniona  have  been  held  respecting 
the  period  in  which  Joel  lived.  It  appeara  most  próba- 
ble  that  he  waa  contemporary  with  Amoa  and  laaiah, 
and  deUvered  hia  predictiona  in  the  reign  of  Uzziab,  B. 
C  cir.  800.  This  ia  the  opinion  maintained  by  Abar* 
banel,  Yitringa,  KoaenmuUer,  De  Wette,  Ilolzheuacn, 
and  othera  (see  D.  H.  v.  K^Dn,  IHm,  de  Joel  atate,  Marb. 
1811 ;  JSger,  in  the  TUhmg.  thtoi  Zeiłsckr,  1828,  ii,  227). 
Credner  (Joel,  p.  88  8q.),  with  whom  agree  Mm^cra 
(CftroH.  119  aq.), Hitzig  {KlemeProph. p. 4),  and  Meier 
(Joel,  p.  16  aq.),  placea  hfan  in  the  time  of  Joaah ;  Ber- 
thoidt  (EMeie.  iv,  1604)  in  that  of  Hezekiah ;  Cramcr 
and  Eckermann  in  Josiah^a  reign ;  Jahn  (iTtn/.  ii,  476)  in 
Maiiaaaeh*8;  and  SchrSder  atill  later;  while  aome  have 
placed  him  dming  the  Babykmian  captiyity  (Steude^ 
in  Bengel*a  ArcAw,  ii,  282),  and  evcn  after  it  (Yatke, 
BibL  TkeoL  p.  462).  The  principal  reaaon  for  the  above 
conduaion,  beńdea  the  order  of  the  booka  (the  Sept, 
howcver,  placea  Joel  after  Amoa  and  Uicah),  ia  the  spe* 
ciał  and  exclu8ive  mention  of  the  Egyptiana  and  £dom« 
itea  aa  enemiea  of  Judah,  no  allnaion  being  madę  to  the 
Aasyriana  or  Babyloniana,  who  aroee  at  a  later  period. 

II.  Confentt. — ^We  fiiid,  what  we  should  expect  on  the 
anppoeition  of  Joel  being  the  flret  prophet  to  Jndah,  only 
a  grand  outline  of  the  whole  terrible  sccne,  which  waa 
to  be  depicted  more  and  morę  in  detail  by  aubaeąucnt 
propheta  (Browne,ć>rrfo  Sad.  p.  691).  The  acope,  there* 
fore,  ia  not  any  pinticular  inyaaion,  but  the  whole  de^ 
of  the  Lord.  **  This  book  of  Joel  ia  a  type  of  the  ear^ 
Jewiah  prophetical  diaconrae,  and  may  explain  to  ua 
what  diatant  eyenta  in  the  hiatory  of  the  land  would 
expand  it,and  bring  freah  diacoyeriea  within  the  ephcra 
of  the  inapired  man*a  yiaion"  (Maurice,  PropheU  and 
Kingi,  p.  179).  The  pnaimate  event  to  which  the 
piophecy  related  waa  a  public  calamit}',  then  impendlng 
on  Judiea,  of  a  twofold  character :  want  of  water,  and  a 
pkigue  of  locuata,  continuing  for  seyeral  years.  The 
prophet  exhorta  the  people  to  tum  to  6od  with  peni- 
tence,  fasting,  and  prayer,  and  then,  he  saya,  the  plague 
shaU  ceaae,  and  the  rain  deacend  in  its  season,  and  the 
land  yield  her  accnstomed  fhiit— nay,  the  time  will  be  a 
moet  Joyfttl  one ;  for  God,  by  the  outpouring  of  his  Spirit, 
will  impart  to  his  worshippers  increased  knowledge  of 
himaelf,  and,  after  the  exciaion  of  the  enemiea  of  hia 
people,  will  extend  through  them  the  bleaainga  of  tme 
religion  to  heathen  landai  Browne  {Ordo  StrcL  p.  692) 
regania  the  contenta  of  the  prophccy  aa  embracing  two 
yiaiona,  but  it  ia  better  to  conaidcr  it  aa  one  connected 
representation  (Hengstenbeig,  Winer).  For  ita  intcr- 
pretation  we  mnst  obsenre  not  isolated  facts  of  hiatory, 
but  the  idea.  The  swarm  of  locusts  waa  the  medium 
through  which  thia  idea,  **  the  ruin  npon  the  apostatę 
Church,*'  waa  repreaented  to  the  inwaid  contemplation 
of  the  prophet ;  but,  in  one  unbroken  connection,  the 
idea  goea  on  to  penitence,  return,  bleasinp^,  outpouring  of 
the  ^irit,  Judgmenta  on  the  enemiea  of  the  Church  (1* 
Pet.  iv,  17),  flnal  eatabliahment  of  God^a  kingdom.  AJO 
prior  destructiona,  judgmenta,  and  vietoriea  are  like  the 
amaller  cirdea,  the  finał  conaummation  of  all  thinga,  to 
whidł  the  piophecy  leadtea^  being  the  outmost  one  of 


JOEL,  BOOK  OP 


940 


JOEL,  BOOK  OF 


aU.  There  are  Łhos  four  Datanl  diióflions  of  the  entire 
book. 

1.  The  prophet  opens  his  oommission  by  aimoiiiicing 
an  extnordinaiy  plague  of  locusts,  acoompanied  with 
ertreme  drought,  which  he  depicts  in  a  strain  of  ani- 
mated  and  Bablime  poetry  under  the  image  of  an  in- 
yading  army  (i,  I-ii,  11).  The  fidelity  of  hia  highly- 
WTOught  deacription  is  oorroborated  and  illuatrated  by 
the  testimonies  of  Shaw^YoIneyi  Forbea,  and  other  em- 
inent  travelleiB,  who  haye  been  eye-witneaaea  of  the 
rayages  committed  by  thia  most  terrible  of  the  inaect 
tribe.  See  Locust.  It  is  to  be  obeerved  that  locusts 
are  named  by  Moses  as  instniments  of  the  divine  justice 
(Deut.  xxviii,  88,39),  and  by  Soiomon  in  his  prayer  at 
the  dedication  of  the  Tempie  (1  Kinga  viii,  87).  In  the 
seoond  chapter  the  formidable  aspect  of  the  locnstSt  their 
rapid  progress,  their  sweeping  deyastation,  the  awful 
munnur  of  their  countless  throngs,  their  instinctive 
marahalling,  the  irresistibie  perseyeranoe  with  which 
they  make  their  way  over  every  obetade  and  thzongh 
every  apertoze,  are  delineated  with  the  ntmosŁ  graphic 
force  (JoBti,  Die  Ileuaehrechm-YerwuMtung  Jod  tś  in 
£ichhom'8  BibUothek,  iv,  80-79).  Dr.  Hengstenberg 
calls  in  qae6tion  the  reality  of  their  flight,  bat,  as  it  ap- 
poars  to  us,  without  adequaŁe  reason.  Other  particu- 
lars  are  mentioned  which  literally  can  apply  only  to  lo- 
custs, and  which,  on  the  supposition  that  the  language 
is  allegorical,  are  explicable  only  as  being  accessory 
traits  for  filling  up  the  picture  (Davidson,  Sacred  Her^ 
meneuHcs,  p.  810). 

Maurice  (PropheU  and  Kingij  p.  180)  strongly  main- 
tains  the  literał  interpretation  of  this  j  udgment.  Yet  the 
plague  contained  a  parable  in  it  which  it  was  the  proph- 
efs  mission  to  unfold  (comp.  <*  heathen,"  i,  6).  Hence  a 
figurative  interpretation  was  adopted  by  an  early  par- 
aphrast,  Ephrem  the  Syrian  (A.D.  850),  who  supposes 
that  by  the  four  different  denominations  of  the  locusts 
were  intended  Tiglath-pileser,  Shalmaneser,  Sennache- 
rib,  and  Nebuchadnezzar.  The  Jews,  in  the  time  of 
Jerome  (A.D.  400),  understood  by  the  tirst  term  the  As- 
syiians  and  Chaldieans;  by  the  second,  the  Medes  and 
Peruans;  by  the  third,  Alexander  the  Great  and  his 
BucceseoTs ,  and  by  the  fourth,  the  Romans.  By  others, 
howeyer,  the  prophecy  was  interpreted  literally,  and 
Jerome  himself  appears  to  have  fluctuated  between  the 
two  opinions,  though  morę  inclined  to  the  allegorical 
yiew.  Grotius  appUes  the  deacription  to  the  inyasions 
by  Pul  and  Shalmaneser.  Holzhausen  attempts  to  unitę 
both  modes  of  interpretation,  and  applies  the  language 
literally  to  the  locusts,  and  metaphorically  to  the  Assyr- 
ians.  It  is  aingular,  howeyer,  that,  if  a  hostile  inyasion 
be  intended,  not  the  least  hint  is  giyen  of  personal  injury 
sustained  by  the  inhabitants;  the  immediate  eifects  are 
confined  entirely  to  the  yęgetable  productions  and  the 
cattle.  Dr.  Hengstenberg,  while  strongly  ayerse  fh>m 
the  literał  sense,  is  not  disposed  to  limit  the  metaphor- 
ical  meaning  to  any  one  eyeut  or  class  of  in yaders.  **  The 
enemy,"  he  remarks, "  are  designated  only  as  mrth  coun- 
tries.  From  the  north,  howeyer,  from  Syria,  all  the 
principal  inyasions  of  Palestine  proceeded.  We  haye, 
therefore,  no  reason  to  think  exclu8iyely  of  any  one  of 
them ;  nor  ought  we  to  limit  the  prophecy  to  the  peo- 
ple  of  the  old  coyenant  Throughout  all  centuńes  there 
is  but  one  Church  of  God  existing  in  unbroken  connec- 
tion.  That  this  Church,  duńng  the  first  period  of  its 
existence,  was  concentrated  in  a  land  into  which  hostile 
irruptions  were  madę  from  the  north  was  purely  acci- 
dental.  To  make  this  circumstance  the  boundary-etone 
of  the  fulfilment  of  prophecy  were  just  as  absurd  as  if 
one  were  to  assert  that  the  threatening  of  Amoe,  'By  the 
Bword  ahall  all  sinners  of  my  people  die,*  has  not  been 
fulfilled  in  those  who  perished  after  another  manner** 
{Chriitologyy  Keith'8  translalion,  iii,  104).  In  acoordance 
with  the  literał  (and  certainly  the  primary)  interpreta- 
tion of  the  prophecy,  we  should  render  ni^^iaHTK  as  in 
our  A.y.,*'the  former  rain,"  with  Rosenmttller  and  the 
lexicographerB,  rather  than  *<  a  (or  the)  teacher  of  right- 


eousnesB,"  with  margin  of  A.y.,  Hengatenbeig,  and  oth* 
era.  The  allusion  to  the  Messiah  which  Hengatenbeig 
finds  in  this  word,  or  to  the  ideał  teacher  (Deut.  xviii, 
18),  of  whom  Messiah  was  the  chief,  acaroely  aoooida 
with  the  immediate  context 

2.  The  prophet,  after  describing  the  approaching  jndg- 
ments,  calls  on  his  oountiymen  to  repent,  aasnring  then& 
of  the  diyine  placability  and  leadiness  to  forgiye  (ii, 
12-17).  He  foretells  the  restoration  of  the  land  to  its 
former  fertility,  and  declarea  that  Jehoyah  would  still 
be  their  God  (ii,  18-26 ;  oomp. MtlUer,  A nmerk.  vku,l&, 
in  Brem,  and  VetxL  BtbUoth,  ii,  161).  / 

8.  The  15''^?  W  of  iii,JL  in  the  Hebiew,  "afterwaida," 
ii,  27  of  the  A.  V.,  nuses  us  to  a  higher  level  of  yision, 
andbrings  into  yiew  Messianic  times  and  acenes  (comp. 
Tyachen,  lUustrcUio  raiidmi  JodU  ui  [Gott.  1788]; 
Stendel,  Diaą,  in  JodU  iii  [Tubing.  1820]).  Herę,  says 
Steudel,  we  haye  a  Measianic  prophecy  altogether.  If 
this  prediction  has  eyer  yet  been  fuldlłed,  we  must  cer- 
tainly refer  the  event  to  Acts  ii.  The  best  commenta- 
tors  are  agreed  upon  this.  We  must  not,  howeyer,  in- 
terpret  it  thus  to  the  exclusion  of  all  reference  ta  pre- 
paratory  eyents  under  the  earlier  dispensation,  and  still 
less  to  the  exclusion  of  later  Measianic  timea.  Acts  ii 
yirtually  contained  the  whole  subseąuent  deyelopment. 
The  outpouring  of  the  Spirit  on  the  day  of  Pentecoat 
was  the  airapxn}  while  the  fuli  accomplishment  and  the 
flnal  reality  are  yet  to  come.  But  here  both  are  Uend- 
ed  in  one,  and  the  whole  passage  has  therefore  a  double 
aspect  (see  Dresde,  Proph.  Jodis  de  effuńone  Sp,  S.  [  Witt. 
1782]).  The  paaaage  is  well  quoted  by  Peter  from  the 
firat  prophet  to  the  Jewish  kingdom.  His  quoting  it 
ahows  that  the  Messianic  reference  was  the  preyailing 
one  in  his  day,  though  Acts  ii,  89  proyes  that  he  extend- 
ed  his  reference  to  the  end  of  the  dispensation.  The 
expre8sion  "all  fleah"  (Acts  ii,  17)  is  exp]ained  by  the 
fołlowing  dauses,  by  which  no  prindple  of  distribution 
is  meant,  but  only  that  all  dasaea,  without  reapect  of 
persona,  will  be  the  subjecta  of  the  Spirit*a  influencea. 
All  distinction  of  racea,  too,  will  be  done  away  (oomp. 
Jod  ii,  82  with  Rom.  x,  12, 18). 

4.  Lastly,  the  accompanying  portents  and  jadgments 
upon  the  enemies  of  God  (eh.  iii,  A.y.;  iy,  Heb.),  and 
their  yarious  aolutions,  according  to  the  interpretera,  in 
the  repeated  deportations  of  the  Jews  by  neighboring 
merchants,  and  sale  to  the  Mascdonians  (1  Mace  iii,  41 ; 
Elzek.  xxvii,  18),  foUowed  by  the  sweeping  away  of  the 
ndghboring  nations  (Maurice) ;  in  the  events  accompa- 
nying the  crucifixion,  in  the  fali  of  Jerosakm,  in  the 
breaking  up  of  all  human  polities.  But  here  again  the 
idea  includes  all  manifestations  of  judgment,  ending 
with  the  last.  The  whole  is  ahadowed  forth  in  dim 
outline,  and,  while  some  crises  are  past,  others  are  yet  to 
oome  (oomp.  iii,  18-21  with  Matt  xxiy  and  Key.  xix). 
See  Double  Sbnsb. 

III.  The  style  of  Jod,  it  has  been  remarked,  unitea 
the  Btrength  of  Micah  with  the  tendemess  of  Jerenńah. 
In  yiyidnesB  of  descripHon  he  riyals  Nahnm,  and  in  aob- 
limity  and  majesty  is  acarody  inferior  to  laaiah  and 
Habakkuk  (Couz,  Diu,  de  characłere poetko  JodU  [Ttth. 
1788] ).  ^  Imprimia  est  degans,  danis,  fosus,  floensąue ; 
yalde  etiam  sublimis  aoer,  feryidus"  (Lowtfa,  7>e  Saara 
Poeti  Hebr,  PneL  xxi).  Many  German  dlyines  hdd 
that  Jod  was  the  patiem  of  all  the  prophets.  Some 
say  that  Isaiah  ii,  2-4 ;  Micah  iy,  1-8,  are  direct  imitp- 
tions  of  him.  Parts  of  the  New  Test  alao  (Rey.  ix,  2 
aq. ;  xiy,  18)  are  pointed  out  as  passages  in  his  style. 

The  canonidtff  of  this  book  has  neyer  been  called  in 
ąuestion. — Kitto;  Smith. 

IY.  CommetUaries.— 'The  special  exeget]cal  helps  on 
the  book  of  Jod  as  a  whole  are  the  fołlowing,  to  the 
most  important  of  which  we  prefix  an  asterisk :  Ephrem 
Syrus,  Explanaiio  (in  Syr.,  in  C^.  ▼,  249) ;  Hugo  k  St 
Yictor,  Armołationes  (in  Opp,  i) ;  Seb. MUnster,  Cofnmen- 
tarius  (Aben-Ezra'a,  Basil.  1580, 8yo) ;  Luther,  Emarra- 
tio  [brief,with  Amos  and  Obadiah]  (Argent.  1586,  8yo) ; 
also  CommetUarius  (Yitemb.  1547, 4to ;  both  in  German. 


JOELAH 


941 


JOHANAN 


Jen.  1558, 4to ;  and,  together  with  SeiUentim,  in  Opp.  iii, 
497;  iv,  781,  821)  ;  Seb.  Tuacan,  CommaUarius  (Colon. 
1556,  foL) ;  Topaell,  CommaUarius  (London,  1556, 1618, 
4to ;  aLso  in  EngL  ib.  1599, 4to) ;  Mercier,  Commeniarius 
[on  fint  five  minor  proph.  ]  (Paria,  s.  a.  foL ;  Logd.  1621, 
4to) ;  Genebnund,  Adnotationei  (fiom  Aben-Ezra  and oŁb- 
eiB,  Paria,  1568,  4to) ;  Dnoonis,  ^apUcoHo  [with  Micab 
and  Zech.]  (Yitemb.  1565,  foL;  and  later  separately) ; 
Selnecker,  Anmerhagm  (Lpz.  1578, 4to) ;  Schadsus,  Sy- 
nopnt  (Afgent  1588, 4to);  Mattbias,  Pnelectionea  (Ba- 
BiL  1590,  8to)  ;  Simonia,  Jotl  propketa  (Craooy.  1598, 
4to) ;  Bunny,  Enarratio  (Lond.  1588, 1595,  8yo) ;  Bone- 
riia,  ParaphraaU  (F.  ad  0. 1597, 4to) ;  Wolder,  Diacodut 
(Yitemb.  1605,  4to) ;  Geaner,  Comment.  (Yitemb.  1614. 
8vo) ;  Tainoyiaa,  Commentariua  (Rost.  1627, 4to) ;  Uni- 
nus,  ConmaUarwM  (Fnncf.  1641,  8to)  ;  Strahl,  ErWtr, 
(Wittenb.  1650,  4to);  Leaaden,  łJocpUcaiio  [Rabbinical, 
indad.  Obad.]  (Ultraj.  1657,  8to);  De  Yeil,  Conunenia- 
riMS  (Par.  1676,  8to);  *Pocock,  CommaUary  (Oxf.  1691, 
foL ;  in  Latin,  lipsiie,  1695, 4to)  \  Hase,  A  ruUysis  (Brem. 
1697,  4to);  *Yan  Toll,  Yitiegginffe  (Utrecht,  1700,  4to); 
Schumnann,  Sehaubukne  (Wesel,  1700,  4to;  in  Dntch, 
ib.  1703, 4to) ;  Zierold,  i4t»^e^itf^  [mystical]  (Francfort, 
1720, 4to) ;  J.  A.  Turretin,  in  his  De  S.  S.  InterpretcOume, 
p.  807-45  (ed.  Teller,  Tr.  ad  Rh.  1728,  8to)  ;  Clhandler, 
Commeatary  (Lond.  1735, 4to)  i  l^chieif  Ammadverndnes 
(Yitemb.  1747,  8to)  ;  Baumgarten,  Ausleffung  (Halle, 
1756, 4to)  ;  Cramer,  Commentariua  (in  his  Scytk,  Denkm, 
Kieł  and  Uamb.  1777-^,  p.  143-245)  ;  Oiiz,  Distertałio, 
etc  (Tub.  1788, 4to) ;  Buttner,  Jod  vates  (Coburg,  1784, 
8vo)  ;  Eckermann,  ErJddrung  (Tub.  u.  Lpz.  1786,  8to)  ; 
Juati,  Erlauterung  (Lpz.  1792, 8vo) ;  Wiggers,  Eridarung 
(Gótt  1799, 8vo) ;  Horaley,  Noteg  (in  BM.  Crit.  ii,  890) ; 
M.  Philippson,  h^ira  nns^  [including  Hos.]  (Dessau, 
1805, 8vo) ;  Swanborg,  Nota  (Upaala,  1806,  8vo) ;  ♦Ro- 
aenmUller,  SckoUa  (in  toL  vii,  pt  i,  LipsiA,  1827,  8vo)  ; 
Scbroder,  Anmerk,  [inclnd.  other  poet  books]  (in  Uar- 
ftnJdange,  etc,  Hildsh.  1827,  8vo ;  also  separately,  Lpz. 
1829, 8vo);  Holzhaiuen,  Tf TMM^im^,  etc  (Gotting.  1829, 
8vo);  *Credner,  J?ribiaru<^  [Radonalistic]  (Halle,  1831, 
8vo) ;  *Meier,  ErkUbrtmg  (Tub.  1844,  8vo) ;  Robinson, 
HonuUes  (Lond.  1865, 8vo).    See  Profiiets,  Minor. 

8.  A  cMef  of  the  Gadites,  resident  in  Bashan  (1  Chroń. 
T,12).     RC.cir.782. 

9.  A  Leńte,  son  of  Uzziah  or  Azariah,  and  father  of 
Elkanah,  of  the  family  of  Kohath  (1  Chroń,  vi,  86),  and 
one  of  tbose  wha  co-ojperated  with  Hezekiah  in  his  res- 
toration  of  the  Tempie  senrioes  (2  Chroń,  xxix,  12). 
RC  726.  In  1  Chroń,  vi,  24  he  is  called  Shaul  by  an 
evident  error  of  transcribers. 

10.  A  descendant  of  Simeon,  apparently  one  of  thoee 
whose  enlarging  families  compelled  them  to  emigrate 
to  the  va]ley  of  Gedor,  whose  aboriginal  inhabitants 
they  expeUed  (1  Chroń,  iv,  85).    RC.  cir.  712. 

11.  Son  of  Zichri,  and  pinfect  of  the  Benjamifces  res- 
ident at  Jemsalem  afier  the  captivity  (Neh.  xi,  9) .  RC. 
586. 

12.  One  of  the  ^'sons**  of  Xebo,  who  divorced  his 
Gentile  wife  after  the  return  from  Babylon  (Ezra,  x,  48). 
Ra  459. 

JoSaah  (Heb.  7oilah'y  rhiąv^,  derivation  uncer- 
tain;  Sept  'Ici>f}Xa  v.  r.  'l£Xia,  Yulg.  Joila\  one  of  the 
two  sons  of  Jerobam  of  Gedor,  mentioned  along  with  the 
bnve  Benjamite  archers  and  othera  who  joiaed  David*8 
fortunce  at  Ziklag  (1  Chroń,  xii,  7).    RC.  1055. 

Jo^^ser  (Heb.  Yo9'zer,  nt^ń  Jehovóh  is  his  Ae/p; 
Sept.  'lo^adp  v.  r.  'lwCa/»a),  one  of  the  Korhites  who 
leinfoTced  David  while  at  Ziklag,  and  remained  among 
bis  famoua  body-guard  (1  Chroń,  xii,  6).    RC.  1055. 

Joga.    See  Hca>risx ;  Yishnu. 

Jog''b6hall  (Heb.  Yogbah't  SnąĄ^,  only  with  H  par- 
agogic,  TlT^j^y^,lo/hf;  Sept.  'Icyc/3aa,  but  i;^wav  av- 
rdc  in  Numb. ;  Yulg.  Jegbaa\  a  place  mentioned  (be- 
tween  Jazer  and  Beth-nimrah)  among  the  "  fcnced  cities 
■ad  fokla  for  aheep"  leboilt  by  the  Gadites  (Numb.  xxxii, 


35).  It  lay  on  the  roate  of  Gideon  when  pursuing  the 
nomadic  Midianites,  near  Nobah,  beyond  Pcnuel,  in  the 
direction  of  Karicor  (Jndg.  viii,  11).  These  noticcs  cor- 
respond  sufiiciently  with  the  locaUty  of  the  niined  vii- 
lagę  EArJebeiha  (Robinson's  RtMardus,  iii,  Append.  p. 
168),  laid  down  on  Robinson*s  and  Zimmennan*s  maps 
on  the  edge  of  the  desert  east  of  Jebel  el-Fukeis. 

Jogee.    See  Yooke. 

Jog'U  (Heb.  Yogli',  -^ij;,  ezOed;  Sept  'I«jcXi),  the 
father  of  Bukki,  which  latter  was  the  Danite  commis- 
aioner  for  partitioning  the  land  of  Canaan  (Numb.xx3vv, 
22).     RC.  antę  1618. 

Jognes,  or  Ttigs,  is  a  name  among  the  Hindus  for 
periods  of  extraordinajy  length  spokeu  of  in  their  myth- 
ological  chronology. 

Jo^ha  (Heb.  Yocka',  \Xnv^,  probably  contracted  for 
njHi"',  whom  Jehovah  revivei),  the  name  of  two  men. 

1.  (Sept.  'ItaaZai  v.  r.  'Iw^ai.)  A  person  mentioned 
as  a  Tizite,  along  with  his  brother  Jediael,  the  son  of 
Shimri,  among  I>avid*s  iamous  body-guard  (1  Chroń,  xi, 
45).     RC  1046. 

2.  (Sept.  'liaaxd  v. r.  'IwSa,)  The  last-named  among 
the  Benjamite  chiefa,  dcscendants  of  Beriah,  resident  at 
Jemsalem  (1  Chroń,  viii,  16).   RC.  apparently  588  or  636. 

Jolia''nan  (Heb.  FocAamin',  l^nl*^,  a  contracted 
form  of  the  name  Jeuohakam;  comp.  also  Johk),  the 
name  of  several  men.    See  also  Jkbohakan,  8, 4, 6. 

1.  (Sept  'liDvav  V.  r.  'lwavdv.}  The  eighth  of  the 
Gadite  braves  who  joined  David's  band  in  the  fastness 
of  the  desert  of  Judah  (1  Chroń,  xii,  12).   RC.  cir.  1061. 

2.  (Sept  *luavavJ)  One  apparently  of  the  Benja- . 
mite  slingers  and  archers  who  joined  David  at  Ziklag  (1 
Chroń,  xii,  4).     Ra  1055. 

3.  (Sept  *liaavdc  v.  r.  *Iiaavav,  *Iuvac.)  Son  of 
Azariah  and  father  of  Azariah,  high-priests  (1  Chroń. 
vi,  9, 10,  where  perhaps  an  enx)neou8  repetition  of  namea 
bas  occurred).  He  is  thought  by  some  to  hnve  been 
the  same  with  Jehoiada  (2  Chroń,  xxiv,  15).  Jose- 
phuB,  however  {Ant,  x,  8,  6),  seems  to  cali  him  Joram, 
and  the  Seder  Olam  Jehoaiiaz,  whom  it  places  in  the 
reign  of  Jehoshaphat    See  High-priest. 

4.  (Sept  'la»avav.)  The  oldest  son  of  king  Josiah 
(1  Chroń,  iii,  15).  He  must  have  been  bom  in  the  fif- 
teenth  year  of  his  father^s  age,  and  he  seems  to  have 
been  of  so  feeble  a  constitution  as  not  to  hAve  survived 
his  father.    B.C.  cir.  685-610.    See  Jehoaiiaz,  2. 

5.  (Sept  'I(iiva,  in  Jer.  'Itałó.vav  and  'ludwav ;  Jo- 
sephus  Gnecizea  the  name  as  John,  'lutawriCj  Ant,  x,  9, 
2).  The  son  of  Careah  (Kareah),  and  one  of  the  Jewish 
chiefs  who  rallied  around  Gedaliah  on  his  appointment 
as  govemor  by  the  Chaldaeans  (2  Kings  xxv,  23 ;  Jer. 
xl,  8).  It  was  he  that  wamed  GedaHah  of  the  nefa^ 
rious  plans  of  Ishmael,  and  offered  to  destroy  him  in 
antidpation,  but  the  unsuspecting  govenior  rcfused  to 
listen  to  his  prudent  advice  (Jer.  xl,  13,  16).  After 
Gedaliah's  assassination,  Johanan  pursued  the  murderer, 
and  rescued  the  people  taken  away  by  him  as  captive8 
to  the  Ammonites  (Jer.  xli,  8, 13, 15, 16).  He  then  ap- 
plied  to  Jeremiah  for  counsel  as  to  what  course  the  rem- 
nant  of  the  people  should  pursue,  being  apprehensive  of 
8evere  treatment  at  the  hands  of  the  Chaldasan  authori- 
ties,  as  having  interfered  with  the  goveniment  (Jer.  xlii, 
1,  8) ;  but,  on  hearing  the  diWne  injunction  to  remain 
in  the  land,  he  and  his  associates  violated  their  promise 
of  obedience,  and  persisted  in  retiring,  with  all  their 
families  and  effects  (carrying  with  them  the  prophet 
himself),  to  Tahpanes,  in  E^^pt  (Jer.  xliii,  2, 4, 5),  where, 
donbtless,  they  were  scized  by  the  Chaldnans.    RC.  587. 

6.  (Sept  'Iwavav.)  Son  of  Katan  (Hakkatan),  of 
the  "sons"  of  Azgad,  who  returaed  with  110  males  from 
Babylon  with  Ezra  (Ezra  viii,  12).    RC.  459. 

7.  (Sept  'Iudvav.)  A  son  of  Tobiah,  who  named 
Meshullam^s  daughter  (Neh.  vi,  18).    B.C.  446. 

8.  (Sept  'liaavdv.)  A  chief  priest,  son  (?  grandson) 
of  Eltashib,  named  as  last  of  tbose  whose  contemporariea 


J0HA2JNES 


942 


JOHM" 


tłie  Lerites  weie  recotded  in  *<ti»  book  of  the  Chroni- 
cłes"  (Neh.  xii,  22,  28>  He  appean  to  be  the  Mne 
caUed  Jehohakan  (in  tbe  text,  bat  '^  Johenen"  in  tbe 
Aath-Yera.)  in  Ezra  x,  6;  alao  Johatham,  tbe  mb  of 
Jeieda  and  father  of  Jaddne,  in  Keb.  zii,  11;  oomp.  22. 
S.G.  prób.  459. 

9.  (Sepu  'Iwora/i.)  The  fifth  named  of  the  aerea 
8ons  of  Elioenai,  of  the  descendante  of  Zernbbabel  (1 
Chroń,  iii,  24).  He  is  apparently  the  same  with  the 
Nahum  mentioned  among  the  ancestry  of  Christ  (Lakę 
iii,  25.  See  Strong'8  Harm,  tmd  Expot.  of  the  Gotp.  p. 
16,17).  aC.  somewhat  post  406.  See  Gsneaumt  of 
Christ. 

Johan^nds  C^<aavvfic,  the  Greek  form  of  the  name 
John  or  Jehohanan)  occun  in  this  form  in  the  A.  V.  <^ 
two  men  in  the  Apocrypha. 

1.  A  son  of  Acatan  (1  Esdi.  viii,  88) ;  the  Johanan  of 
Ezra  viii,  12. 

2.  A*'8on"ofBebiui(l£adr.iz,29);  tbe  Jsbohaiian 
<ifBzra?:,28. 

Johannites.    See  Kmiorts  op  Malta. 

JohlBohn,  J.  Joseph,  a  Jewbh  scholar  of  some  re- 
nown,  was  bom  in  Fulda  in  1777.  Being  the  son  of  a 
tabbi,  he  was  instructed  from  his  early  youth  in  the 
language  and  literaturę  of  the  Oid  Testament,  in  which 
he  became  a  great  ad&pt  When  quite  young,  he 
left  his  natire  place  and  went  to  Frankfort-on-the- 
Main,  wheie  he  engaged  in  pńvate  toition,  parsuing 
himself,  at  the  same  tune,  an  eztended  eoune  of  study 
In  languages  and  metaphysioa.  Later  he  iemoved  to 
£reaznach,  and  became  professor  of  Hebrew,  etc,  in  a 
.  poblic  academy,  bat  was  called  back  in  1818  by  the 
govemment  to  the  professorial  chair  of  Hebrew  and  le- 
ligion  in  the  Jewish  academy  at  Frankfort,  known  as 
the  "  Philontropin."  Johlsohn^s  activity  in  this  once- 
jenowned  capital  of  the  German  empire  fell  in  a  time 
marked  in  Jewish  annals  as  a  period  of  agitation.  The 
reform  movemenŁ  [see  Judaism],  which  shortly  after 
developed  morę  fully,  was  j  ust  badding,  and  he,  partak- 
ing  morę  or  less  of  that  spirit,  eamestly  laboied  for  the 
introductłon  of  sermona  in  the  vemacu]ar,  hoors  of  de- 
votion  on  the  Christian  Sabbath,  etc  To  further  en- 
tourage this  awakening  of  a  religious  spirit,  especially 
in  the  young,  he  published  (1)  a  hymn-book  entitled 
Gttangbuch/ur  IsraeiiUn  (Frkf.  1816,'and  often,  8vo)  :— 
•Iso  (2)  a  valuable  work  on  the/undameniaU  ofthe  Jew- 
Uh  relu/ioriy  entitled  mn  •'tt?"!©,  with  an  Appendix  de- 
scribing  the  manners  and  customs  ofthe  Hebrews  (Frkf. 
2d  ed.  1819) :— (3)  A  ChronohgicaL  Tlutory  ofthe  Bibie, 
in  Heb.,  with  Ihc  morał  sayings  ofthe  Scriptures,  seven 
Psalms  with  Kimchi's  Commentary,  a  Hebrew  Chresto- 
■mathy  with  notes,  and  a  glossary  called  DISK  mniin 
(1820 ;  2d  ed.  1837) :— (4)  The  PentaUućh  transhted  into 
Germanjwilh  ArmotaHons  (1831) :— (6)  The aacred Scrip- 
tures ofthe  Jew8,  tranalated  into  German^  toith  Atmota- 
tioru  (of  which  only  2  vols.  were  ever  published),  voL  ii 
containing  Joshua,  Samuel,  and  Kings  (1886) :— (6)  A 
Hebrew  Grammar  for  SchooU,  entitled  littsbrt  ''TIO'^^ 
ibrming  a  second  part  to  the  new  ed,  of  the  Chrettoma- 
ihy  (1838) :— (7)  A  Hebrew  Leiicon,  giving  also  the 
jynonymes,  with  an  appendiz  containing  an  explanation 
ofthe  abbreyiations  used  in  the  Babbinical  writings,  en- 
tiUed  D-^ia  1^?  (1840):— (8)  A  hietorieal  and  dog- 
matic  Treatise  on  Circumcieion  (1848).  Johlsohn  died  in 
Frankfort  June  13, 1851.  See  Stern,  Gesch  des  Juden- 
thums,  p.  181  8q.;  AUffem,  Zeitung  des  JuderUh.  1851,  p. 
366;  Kayseriing  (Dr.  M.),  BiUioth.  jud  Kanzelredner 
(Berlin,  1870),  p.  882;  Stein,  Israelii,  Yolkslehrer,  i,  140 
8q. ;  FUTst,  BiU,  Jud,  u,  99  są. ;  Kitto,  s.  v. 

John  ('I oiawfyc,  the  Greek  form  oi  Jehohanan;  corop. 
Josephus,  Ant.  yiii,  15,  2),  a  common  name  among  the 
Jews  after  the  captiWty. 

I.  In  tfie  Apocrypha  the  foUowing  oocor  under  this 
rendering  in  the  A.  V. : 


1.  The  fiiłfaflr  efHatatłiiaa,  ofthe  1 
(1  Bfaoc  ii,  1>    See  Maocabkks. 

2.  The  son  of  Aoooa,  and  father  of  fiopolemaa,  whieh 
Utter  was  one  of  the  enroys  sent  by  Judas  Maecabw> 
te  Romę  (1  Maocviii,  17;  2  Siaoc  iv,  11). 

8L  Sonianied  Caddis  (q.T.),  the  eklest  son  ofthe  aan» 
Matathias,  and  one  of  the  Maccabwm  brothers  (1  Mafie. 
'ń,2,Johananf  less  oonrectly  Joseph  in  2 Maoc viii, 22). 
He  had  been  sent  by  his  bcother  Jonathan  on  a  mcesage 
to  the  Nabathaans,  when  he  waa  taken  prisoner  by  '^tha 
ohildren  of  Jambri"  (q.  v.),  from  Medeba,  and  appean  te 
have  been  pat  to  death  by  them  (1  Mace  ix, 85,36,8^ 

4.  Onei^thepersoDssentbytihe  Jewewithapetitaon 
to  the  Syiian  gemoal  Lyaias  (2  Maoc  xi,  17). 

&  The  son  <^  Simon  Maocab«is(l  Maoc  xui,  68;  zvi, 
1,2, 9, 19,21,28),  better  known  by  the  epithet  Htbcahus 
(q.v.). 

IL  /»^JVewre«tain«ii<  the  foUowing  aieall  that  avs 
mentioned,  besides  Johm  thb  Apostłb  and  Johm  thb 
Baftist,  who  are  noticed  separately  below : 

1.  One  of  the  high-priest^s  family,  who,  with  Annaa 
and  Caiaphas,  sat  in  jodgment  upon  the  apostles  Peta 
and  John  for  their  cure  of  the  lamę  man  and  preachin^ 
in  the  Tempie  (Acts  iv,  6),  A.D.  29.  lightfoot  ideotifiet 
him  with  R.  Johanan  Beń-Zachai,  who  lived  forty  yeait 
before  the  destruction  of  the  Tempie,  and  was  president 
of  the  great  synagogue  after  its  removal  to  Jabne,  or 
Jaomia  (Lightfoot,  Cent,  Chor,  Matthpraef.  cli.  15;  set 
also  Selden,  De  SynedrOs,  ii,  eh.  xv).  Grotius  meicły 
says  he  was  known  to  Rabbimcal  writeis  as  **  John  tbe 
pńest"  {Comnu  inAet.  iv). — Smith. 

2.  The  Hebrew  name  of  the  evangelist  Mark  (q.  yr,\ 
who  thronghout  the  naintive  of  the  Acta  is  deńgnated 
by  the  name  by  which  he  was  known  among  hia  oou»- 
trymen  (Acts  xii,  12, 25 ;  xiii,  5, 18 ;  xv,  87). 

III.  In  Josephus  the  following  are  the  most  notewor* 
thy  of  this  name,  besides  the  above  and  John  op  Gi»> 
CHAŁA, whom  we  notice  separately  below: 

1.  A  high-priest  (son  of  Jadas,  and  grandson  of  £li^ 
shib),  who  siew  his  brother  Jesus  in  the  Tempie,  thereby 
proYokiog  the  vengeanoe  of  Bagoees,  the  Persian  vio^ 
roy  under  Artaxerxes  {Ant,  xi, 7, 1).  He  oorresponds  to 
the  Jonathan  (q.  v.),  eon  of  Joiada,  of  Neh.  xii,  10,  IL 
See  HioH-pRiRST. 

2.  Son  of  Dorcas,  sent  by  the  Sicarii  with  ten  execił- 
tioners  to  murder  the  persona  taken  into  custed}'  faj 
John  of  Gischala  on  his  anrival  in  Jerusalem  (Joeąihui^ 
W'ar,iv,8,5). 

8.  Son  of  Soaaa,  one  ofthe  four  popular  generale  ofthe 
Idumseans  who  marched  to  Jerusalem  in  aid  of  the  seal- 
ots  at  the  instanoe  of  John  of  Gischala  (Josephus,  War, 
iv,  4, 2).  He  was  poesibly  the  same  w^ith  John  the  Ea- 
sene,  spoken  of  as  comroander  of  the  toparchy  of  Shan> 
ma  at  an  earlier  stage  of  the  war  (&  ii,  20, 4 ;  oomp.  iii, 
2, 1).  He  was  mortally  wounded  by  a  dart  doring  the 
finał  siege  (»6.v,6,5). 

John  (liuawfic)  the  AposłUy  and  brother  of  the 
i^KMtle  James  "^  tbe  greater"  (Matt.  iv,  21 ;  x,  2;  Maik 
i,  19;  iii,  17;  x,85;  Lukę  v,  10;  viii,8;  etc). 

1.  Personal  Histortf,—!,  Early  Life^—lt  is  probafak 
that  he  was  bom  at  Bethsaida,  on  the  Lakę  of  Galilee. 
The  generał  impression  lefl  on  us  by  the  Gospel  narra- 
tive  is  that  he  was  younger  than  the  brother  whoee 
name  commonly  precedes  his  (Matt.  iv,  21 ;  x,  8;  xvii, 
1,  etc. ;  but  compare  Lukę  ix,  28,  where  the  order  is  inr 
verted  in  most  codices),  younger  than  his  fHend  Peter, 
possibly  also  than  his  Master.  The  life  which  was  pro- 
tracted  to  the  time  of  Trajau  (Eusebina,  i/.  £.  iii,  28, 
foUowing  Iren«us)  can  hardly  have  begun  before  the 
year  B.C.  4  of  the  Dionysian  tera.  Tbe  Goąiels  giw 
us  the  name  of  his  father  Zebedseus  (Matt  iv,  21)  and 
his  mother  Salome  (comp.  Matt.  xxvii,  56  mth  Mark 
xv,  40 ;  xvi,  1).  Of  the  former  we  know  nothing  morę. 
See  Zebedbe.  The  traditions  of  the  fourth  oentury 
(Epiphan.  iii,  Hter,  78)  make  the  latter  the  danghter 
of  Joseph  by  his  lirst  wife,  and  oonsequentIy  half-oster 
to  our  Lord.    By  some  lecent  ctitics  sbe  bas  been  id«i- 


JOHN 


»48 


JOHN 


liflBdwiththe  riatar  of  Msy,  the  motlur  of  J«tui,  in 
John  xix,  25  (Wieaelei,  in  StucL  tu  KriL  1840,  p.  646). 
JBwald  {Getch.  Itraeb,  v.  171)  adopta  WaeBder^s  conjeo 
tate,  and  oonnects  U  with  Iub  own  hypoUteńfl,  tluit  the 
lonB  of  Zebedee,  and  onr  Lord,  as  well  aa  the  Baptiat, 
wen  of  the  tńbe  of  LevL  On  the  other  hand,  morę  ao- 
ber  critics,  like  Neander  (P/ona. «.  LeiL  p.  609  [4th  ed.]) 
•od  LUcke  (Johamtea,  i,  9),  rcject  both  the  traditłon  and 
the  conjecture.  See  Sałomb.  Thęy  lived,  U  may  be 
infened  from  John  i,  44,  in  or  near  the  same  town  as 
thoee  who  were  afterwards  the  compaaions  and  pait- 
Ben  of  their  cfaildren.  See  Bethsaida.  There,  on  the 
aboccs  of  the  Sea  of  GaUlee,  the  qioatłe  and  his  biother 
■gnw  np.  The  mention  of  the  **  hiied  senrants"  (Maik 
i,  20),  of  his  mothec^s  "  substanoe*'  (jiwó  t&p  virapxóv' 
TMy,  Loke  viii,  9),  of  **  his  own  honee"  (rd  tdutf  John 
zix,  27),  impUes  a  poeition  remored  by  at  least  some 
atepa  from  aboohite  poverty.  The  fact  that  the  apostle 
'W9M  known  to  the  high-piiest  Caiaphae,  as  that  knowi- 
cdge  was  haidly  Ukely  to  hare  begun  after  be  had 
«vowed  himself  the  diaciple  of  Jesus  of  Nazareth,  sug- 
geats  the  probability  of  some  early  intimacy  betwcen 
the  ttro  men  or  their  families.  The  name  which  the 
parents  gave  to  their  yoonger  child  was  too  oonmion  to 
aenre  as  the  ground  of  any  special  infeienoe;  but  it  de- 
aenres  notioe  (1)  that  the  name  appeats  among  the  kin- 
<dred  of  Caiaphas  (Acts  iy,  6) ;  (2)  that  ii  was  given  to 
«  priestly  child,  the  son  of  Zachaiias  (Lukę  i,  IS),  as  the 
ambodiment  and  symbol  of  Messianic  hopes.  The  fie- 
<qiient  occuirence  of  the  name  at  this  period,  onconnect- 
•ed  as  it  was  witli  any  of  the  great  deeds  of  the  old  heroic 
^ys  of  Isiael,  is  indeed  in  itaelf  significant  as  a  sign  of 
that  yeanung  and  expeotation  which  then  characterized 
not  onły  the  morę  fiiithful  and  devouŁ  (Lukc  ii,  25, 88),  but 
the  whde  people.  The  prominenoe  giren  to  it  by  the 
wonden  connected  with  the  birth  of  the  futuie  Baptist 
may  hare  imparted  a  meaning  to  it  for  the  paients  of  the 
futurę  evangelist  which  it  would  not  otherwise  hare 
had.  Of  the  character  of  Zebedsns  we  have  hardly  the 
alightest  tracę.  He  iuterposes  no  refusal  when  his  sons 
cre  called  on  to  leare  him  (Matt.  iv,  21).  After  this  he 
disappears  fiom  the  soene  of  the  Gospel  history,  and  we 
ara  led  to  infer  that  he  haddied  before  his  wife  foUowed 
faer  children  in  their  work  of  ministration.  Her  char- 
acter meets  us  as  presenting  the  same  marked  features 
aa  those  which  were  oonspicuous  in  her  son.  From  her, 
:who  foUowed  Jesus  and  ministered  to  him  of  her  sub- 
atance  (Lukę  viii,  3),  who  sought  for  her  two  sons  that 
they  might  sit,  one  on  his  right  hand,  the  other  on  his 
lefk,  in  his  kingdom  (Matt.  xx,  20),  he  might  well  derive 
his  stnmg  affections,  his  capadty  for  giving  and  reoeiv- 
Ing  love,  his  eagemess  for  the  speedy  manifestation  or 
the  Messiah^s  kingdom.  The  early  years  of  the  apostle 
we  may  believe  to  have  passed  under  this  influence. 
He  would  be  trained  in  all  that  censtituted  the  ordinary 
aducation  of  Jewish  boyhood.  Though  not  tanght  in 
the  achook  of  Jerusalem,  and  therefont,  in  later  life,  lia- 
Ue  to  the  reproach  of  ha^ńng  no  recognised  position  as  a 
teaeher,  no  Kabbinical  education  (Acts  iv,  13),  he  would 
yet  be  taught  to  read  the  Law  and  obsenre  its  precepts, 
to  feed  on  the  writings  of  the  prophets  with  the  fediing 
that  their  acoomplishment  was  not  far  off. 

2.  Incidmts  recorded  o/kim  m  the  New  Testament, — 
The  ordinary  life  of  the  flsherman  of  the  Sea  of  Galilee 
was  at  iast  broken  in  upon  by  the  news  that  a  prophet 
had  once  morę  appeared.  The  voice  of  John  the  Bap- 
tist was  heard  in  the  wildemess  of  Judsea,  and  the  pub- 
Hcans,  peasants,  soldiers,  and  fishermen  of  Galilee  gath- 
ered  round  him.  Among  these  were  the  two  sons  of 
Zebediens  and  their  frienda.  With  them  perhaps  was 
One  whom  as  yet  they  knew  not.  They  heaid,  it  may 
be,  of  John'8  protests  against  the  vices  of  their  own  ruler 
«-4igainst  the  hypecrisy  of  Pharisees  and  Scribes.  But 
they  heard  also,  it  is  dear,  words  which  spoke  to  them 
of  their  own  sins — of  their  own  need  of  a  deUveier. 
The  words  "*  Behold  the  Lamb  of  God  that  taketh  away 
the  sins*^  imply  that  those  who  heaid  them  would  enter 


into  the  Uassedaess  of  which  they  spoke.  Assumii^ 
that  the  mmamed  diaoiple  of  John  i,  87-40  was  tha 
eraogeHat  himself  we  aie  led  to  think  of  that  meeting^ 
of  the  lengthened  iatenriew  that  foUowed  it  as  the 
startiiig^[)oint  of  the  entire  devotion  of  heart  and  soid 
which  lasted  through  his  whole  life.  Then  Jesus  loved 
him  M  he  ]oved  all  eameat  seekers  after  rightcousneia 
and  tnith  (comp.  Mark  x,  21).  The  words  of  that  ev«n* 
ing,  though  unrecorded,  were  mighty  ui  their  effect 
The  disctples  (John  apparently  among  them)  foUowed 
their  new  teaeher  to  Galilee  (John  i,  44),  were  with  hia, 
as  soch,  at  the  maniage-feast  of  Oana  (ii*  2),  joumeyed 
with  him  to  Capemaum,  and  thence  to  Jcmsalem  (ii, 
12, 22),  came  back  through  Samaria  (iv,  8),  and  then, 
for  some  unoertain  intenral  of  time,  retumed  to  their 
former  oocupations.  The  uncertainty  which  hangs  over 
tiie  naiTatives  of  Matt  ir,  18  and  Lukę  v,  1-11  (comp^ 
the  aiguments  for  and  against  their  relating  to  the  same 
evenU  m  Lampe,  Cwiment  ad  Joann,  i,  20),  leaves  ua 
in  doabt  whether  they  reoeired  a  special  cali  to  becoma 
"  flshetB  of  men**  once  only  or  twice.  in  either  case 
^«y  g«ve  up  the  employment  of  their  life  and  went  to 
do  a  work  Uke  it,  and  yet  unlike,  in  God^s  spiritual  king^ 
dom.  From  this  time  they  take  their  place  among  tha 
company  of  diadples.  Only  here  and  there  are  theia 
traoes  of  individual  character,  of  special  tuming-poinfca 
in  their  lives.  Soon  they  find  them8elve8  in  the  num^ 
ber  of  the  Twelve  who  are  chosen,  not  as  disdples  only, 
but  as  their  Lord's  delmtes— representativeB-~apo8tle& 
In  all  the  lists  of  the  Twelve  those  four  names  of  the 
sons  of  Jonah  and  Zebedseus  stand  foremost.  They 
come  within  the  innermost  circle  of  their  Lord's  frienda 
and  are  as  the  itKneruty  iKKwrórtpoi.  The  thi«e,  Pe- 
ter, James,  and  John,  are  with  him  when  nonę  else  are, 
in  the  chamber  of  death  (Mark  v,  37),  in  the  glory  of 
the  transaguration  (Matt.  xvii,  1),  when  he  forewami 
them  of  the  destmcdon  of  the  Holy  City  (Msrk  xiii,  B, 
Andrew,  in  this  instance,  with  them),  in  the  agony  of 
Gethseman&  Peter  is  thronghout  the  leader  of  that 
band ;  to  John  bekoigs  the  yet  morc  memorable  distiniy 
tion  of  being  the  disciple  whom  Jesus  loved.  This  Iow 
b  retumed  with  a  morę  single,  undivided  heart  by  him 
than  by  any  other.  If  Peter  is  the  ^iK6xpiOT0c\  John 
is  the  ^(Xif7(rovc  (Grotius,  Prolegom,  m  JoannI),  Sama 
striking  facts  indicate  why  this  was  so ;  what  the  char- 
acter was  which  was  thus  worthy  of  the  love  of  Jesua 
of  Nazareth.  They  hardly  sustsin  the  popular  notion, 
fostered  by  the  received  types  of  Christian  art,  of  a  na* 
turę  gentle,  yielding,  feminine.  The  name  Boanergea 
(Mark  iii,  17)  implies  a  vehemence,  zeal,  intesisity, 
which  gave  to  those  who  had  it  the  might  t>r  Sons  of 
Thunder.  That  spirit  broke  out  once  and  agaii»  when 
they  Joined  their  mother  in  asking  for  the  highest  placea 
in  the  kingdom  of  their  Master,  and  declared  that  they 
were  ready  to  face  the'  dark  tenors  of  the  cup  that  he 
drank,  and  the  baptism  that  he  was  baptized  with  (Matt. 
xx,  20-24;  Mark  x,  8i>-41)  — when  they  rebuked  one 
who  east  out  devik  in  their  Lord^s  name  because  he  was 
not  one  of  their  company  (Lukę  lx,  49) — when  they 
sought  to  cali  down  fire  from  heaven  upon  a  vil]age  of 
the  Samaritans  (Lukę  ix,  54).  About  this  time  Salome, 
aa  if  her  hnsband  had  died,  takes  her  place  among  the 
women  who  followed  Jesus  in  Galilee  (Lnke  viii,  8), 
ministering  to  him  of  their  substance,  and  went  up  with 
him  Ul  his  Iast  joumey  to  Jerusalem  (Lukę  xxiii,  56). 
Through  her,  we  may  well  believe,  John  first  came  to 
know  Mary  Magdalenę,  whose  character  he  depicts  with 
such  a  lire-like  touch,  and  that  other  Mary,  to  whom  he 
was  afterwards  to  stand  in  so  close  ańd  special  a  rela- 
tion.  The  fulness  of  his  namtive  of  what  the  other 
evangelists  omit  (John  xi)  leads  to  the  conclusion  that 
he  was  united  alBo  by  some  special  ties  of  intimacy  to 
the  family  of  Bethany.  It  is  not  necessary  to  dwell  at 
length  on  the  famiiiar  history  of  the  Last  Supper.  What 
is  characteristic  is  that  he  is  there,  as  ever,  the  disciple 
whom  Jesus  loved;  and,  as  the  chosen  and  favored 
friend,  reclines  at  table  with  his  head  upon  his  Maato^s 


JOHN 


944 


JOHN 


breast  (John  xiu,  28).  To  him  the  eager  Peter— they 
had  becn  sent  together  to  prepare  the  sapper  (Lakę  xxU| 
8) — ^makes  aigns  of  impatient  questioiiiiig  that  he  shonld 
ask  what  was  not  likely  to  be  anawerad  if  it  came  from 
any  other  (John  xiii,  24).  Ab  they  go  oat  to  the  Moont 
of  01ives  the  chosen  three  are  neareat  to  their  Master. 
They  only  are  within  sight  or  hearing  of  the  conflict  in 
Gethsemane  (Matt  xxvi,  87).  When  the  betrayal  is 
accomplished,  Peter  and  John,  after  the  first  moment  of 
confosion,  follow  afar  o!f,  while  the  others  simply  seek 
safety  in  a  hasty  flight  (John  xviii,  15).  The  peraonal 
acqaaintance  which  exi8ted  between  John  and  Caiaphaa 
enabled  him  to  gain  acoess  both  for  himaelf  and  Peter, 
but  the  latter  remains  in  the  porch,  with  the  offioers  and 
8ervant8,  while  John  himaelf  apparently  is  admitted  to 
the  oouncil-chamber,  and  foliowa  Jesoa  thence,  even  to 
the  pnetorium  of  the  Koman  procorator  (John  xviii,  16, 
19, 28).  Thence,  as  if  the  deńre  to  seo  the  end,  and  the 
love  which  was  stronger  than  death,  sustained  him 
through  all  the  terrors  and  sonows  of  that  day,  he  fol- 
lowed — accompanied  probably  by  his  own  mother.  Mary 
the  mother  of  Jesus,  and  Mary  Magdalenę— to  the  plaoe 
of  crucifixion.  The  teacher  who  had  been  to  him  as  a 
brother  ]eave8  to  him  a  brother*s  daty.  He  is  to  be  a 
a  son  to  the  mother  who  is  left  desolate  (John  xix,  26 
27).  The  Sabbath  that  foUowed  was  spent,  it  would 
appear,  in  the  same  coiApany.  He  receive8  Peter,  in 
apite  of  his  denial,  on  the  old  terms  of  friendship.  It  is 
to  them  that  Mary  Magdalenę  first  rans  with  the  tidings 
of  the  emptied  sepulchre  (John  xx,  2) ;  they  are  the 
first  to  go  together  to  see  what  the  stiange  words  meant 
Not  without  some  hearing  on  their  respective  characteis 
is  the  fact  that  John  is  the  most  impetaoos,  nmmng  on 
most  eagerly  to  the  rock-tomb;  Peter,  the  least  lestrain- 
ed  by  awe,  the  first  to  enter  in  and  look  (John  xx,  4-6). 
For  at  least  eight  days  they  continaed  in  Jerosalem 
(John  xx,  26).  Then,  in  the  interval  between  the  res- 
nrrection  and  the  ascension,  we  flnd  them  still  together 
on  the  Sea  of  Galilee  (John  xxi,  1),  as  thoagh  they 
woald  calm  the  eager  suspensę  of  that  period  of  expec- 
tation  by  a  return  to  their  old  calling  and  their  old  fa- 
miliar  haunts.  Herę,  too,  there  is  a  characteristic  dif- 
ference.  John  is  the  first  to  recognise  in  the  dim  form 
seen  in  the  moming  twilight  the  presenoe  of  his  liaen 
Lord ;  Peter  the  first  to  plonge  into  the  water  and  swim 
towanls  the  shore  where  he  stood  calling  to  them  (Joha 
xxi,  7).  The  last  words  of  the  Gospel  reveal  to  us  the 
deep  affection  which  united  the  two  fVienda.  It  is  not 
enough  for  Peter  to  know  his  own  futurę.  That  at  once 
suggests  the  que8tion— "  And  what  shall  this  man  do?** 
(John  xxi,  21).  The  history  of  the  Acta  shows  the 
same  union.  They  are  of  ooarse  together  at  the  asoen- 
sion  and  on  the  day  of  Pentecost  Together  they  enter 
the  Tempie  as  worshippers  (Acta  iii,  1),  aod  protest 
against  the  threats  of  the  Sanfiedrim  (iv,  13).  They 
are  fellow-workers  in  the  first  great  step  of  the  Charch*s 
expan8ion.  The  apostle  whose  wrath  had  been  roused 
by  the  unbelief  of  the  Samaritans  overcome8  his  nation- 
al  excla8ivene88,  and  receives  them  as  his  brethren  (viii, 
14).  The  persccution  which  was  pushed  on  by  Saul  of 
Tarsus  did  not  drive  him  or  any  of  the  apostles  from 
their  post  (viii,  1).  When  the  persecntor  came  back  as 
the  convcrt,  he,  it  b  tnie,  did  not  see  him  (Gal.  i,  19), 
but  this,  of  couree,  does  not  involve  the  inferencc  that  he 
had  left  Jerusalem.  The  sharper  though  shorter  perse- 
cution  which  followed  under  Herod  Agrippa  brought  a 
great  sorrow  to  him  in  the  martyrdom  of  his  brother 
(Acts  xii,  2).  His  friend  was  driven  to  seek  safety  in 
flight  Fiftcen  ycars  after  Paal'8  first  visit  he  was  still 
at  Jerusalem,  and  helped  to  take  part  in  the  great  set- 
tlement  of  the  controver8y  between  the  Jewish  and  the 
Gentile  Christians  (Acts  xv,  6).  His  pońtion  and  rep- 
otation  there  were  tbose  of  one  ranldng  among  the  chief 
"piUars"  of  the  Church  (GaL  ii,  9).  Of  the  work  of  the 
apostle  during  this  jicriod  we  have  hardly  the  slightest 
tracę.  There  may  havc  been  special  calls  to  mission- 
work  like  that  which  drew  him  to  Samaria.    There 


m^  haye  been  tha  work  of  teaching,  oigaoiziog,  ex.« 
horting  the  chaichea  of  Jadaa.  Hia  folfilment  of  tha 
solemn  chaige  intraated  to  him  may  liave  led  him  to  a 
life  of  loving  and  revereDt  thoaght  ratber  than  to  oq« 
of  eooapiciiooa  actiyity.  We  may,  at  all  eventa,  fed 
sore  that  it  was  a  time  in  which  the  natiiral  elcmeoti 
of  hia  character,  with  aU  their  fiery  enagy,  becnne 
porified  and  mellowed,  rising  step  by  step  to  that  high 
aerenity  which  we  find  perfected  in  the  cŁosing  portica 
of  his  life.  Herę,  too,  we  may,  without  moch  heńtatioD, 
aooept  the  traditions  of  the  Ghoich  as  recording  a  his*  - 
torie  fact  when  they  ascribe  to  him  a  life  of  celibacy 
(TertoIL  De  Monog,  c.  xiii).  The  abaenoe  of  his  namt 
from  1  Gor.  ix,  6  tenda  to  the  same  oondoaion.  It  har- 
monizea  with  all  we  know  of  hia  character  to  think  of 
hia  heart  as  so  absorbed  in  the  higher  and  diviner  love 
that  there  was  no  room  left  for  the  lower  and  the  haman. 
8.  8equel  o/ku  Career.— The  traditions  of  a  later  age 
oome  in,  with  morę  or  less  show  of  likelihood,  to  fili  op 
the  great  gap  which  aeparates  the  apoatłe  of  JenisaleB 
fiom  the  bishop  of  £pheaaa.  It  waa  a  natuial  oonjeo- 
tore  to  aappoee  that  he  lemained  m  Judsa  tiB  the  dóth 
of  the  Yiigin  releaaed  him  from  hia  trnst.  Wlien  this 
took  plaoe  we  can  only  conjecture.  The  hypothasifl  of 
Baronius  and  TiUemont,  that  the  Tii^gin  aooompamed 
him  to  Epheeos,  haa  not  even  the  aathority  of  tradition 
(Lampe,  i,  61).  There  are  no  signa  of  his  being  at  Je- 
ruaalem  at  the  time  of  Paars  last  yiait  (Acts  xxi>  Tht 
pastorał  epistles  set  aaide  the  notion  that  he  had  comc 
to  Epheaua  before  the  work  of  the  apoatłe  of  the  Gcn- 
tilea  was  broaght  to  ita  oondoaion.  Out  of  many  cod* 
tradictoiy  statements,  fixing  his  departure  under  Claod* 
iua,  or  Nero,  or  as  late  even  as  Domitian,  we  have  hardlr 
any  data  for  doing  mors  than  re}ecting  the  two  ex- 
tzeme&  Lampe  fixea  A.D.  66,  whoi  Jeroaalem  was  ł» 
aieged  by  the  Roman  foroes  under  Cestius,  as  the  most 
probable  datę.  Nor  is  it  certain  that  his  work  as  m 
apostle  waa  tranafeired  at  once  from  Jeroaalem  to  Eph- 
esus.  A  tradition  cuirent  in  the  time  of  Aagnsdne 
(Q»€Btt,  £vanff,  ii,  19),  and  embodied  in  aome  MSS.  of 
the  New  Teat.,  repreeented  the  Ist  Efustle  of  John  u 
addreased  to  the  Parthians,  and  ao  iar  implied  that  his 
apoetolic  work  had  brought  him  into  contact  with  theoL 
In  the  earlier  tradition  which  madę  the  apoetles  for- 
mally  partition  oat  the  world  known  to  them,  Partlua 
falls  to  the  lot  of  Thomas,  while  John  reoeiTes  Procoo- 
sular  Asia  (Euaebius,  HitL  Ecd,  iii,  1).  In  one  of  the 
legenda  connected  with  the  Apostles*  Greed,  Peter  eon* 
tributea  the  first  artide,  John  the  aecond ;  but  the  tradi- 
tion appeara  with  great  variationa  aa  to  time  and  onkr 
(comp.  Paeudo-AngusL  Serm^  ocxl,  ccxli).  Wlien  the 
form  of  the  aged  diadpk  meeta  na  again,in  the  twilight 
of  the  apostolic  age,  we  are  still  leli  in  great  doabt  as  to 
the  extent  of  his  work  and  the  circumstancea  of  his  ont- 
ward  life.  Aaaoming  the  authorship  of  the  Epistks  aod 
the  Revelation  to  be  his,  the  Ikcta  which  the  New  Test 
writings  aasert  or  imply  are:  (1)  that,  having  oone  to 
Epheaua,  aome  persecution,  local  or  generał,  diove  him 
to  Patmoa  (Rev.  i,  9);  (2)  that  the  8even  churchca,  of 
which  Aaia  waa  the  centrę,  were  special  objects  of  his 
solidtode  (Rev.  i,  11) ;  that  in  hia  work  he  had  to  en> 
counter  men  who  denied  the  truth  on  which  his  faith 
rested  (1  John  iv,  1 ;  2  John  7),  and  others  who,  with  a 
railing  and  malignant  temper,  disputed  hia  antbocity  (3 
John  9, 10).  If  to  this  we  cdd  that  be  must  have  ont- 
lived  all,  or  nearly  all,  of  those  who  had  been  the  fmjxis 
and  companiona  even  of  hia  matorer  years— that  this 
lingering  age  gave  atrength  to  an  old  imagination  that 
his  Lord  had  promiaed  him  inunortality  (John  xx],  23) 
— ^that,  as  if  remembering  the  actnal  worda  which  had 
been  thua  penrerted,  the  longing  of  hia  aoul  gathoed 
itaelf  np  in  the  ay,  ''EYCn  ao,  come,  Lord  Jesus**  (Rcr. 
xxii,  20)— that  from  aome  who  apoke  with  aotbority  he 
received  a  aokmn  atteatation  of  the  confidenoe  they  re- 
poaed  in  him  (John  xxi,  24)— we  have  atated  all  that 
haaanydaim  to  the  character  ofhistoricaltintli.  The 
pictore  which  tradition  filia  up  for  na  has  the  merit  of 


JOHN 


945 


JOHN 


tMlng  fuU  and  yiTid,  bat  it  blendB  together,  withoat 
mach  regard  to  hannony,  things  piobable  and  improba- 
ble.  He  is  shipwiecked  off  Ephesua  (Simeon  Metapb. 
In  vitd  Johamu  c  2 ;  Lampe,  i,  47),  and  amYea  there  ia 
time  to  check  the  progieaa  of  the  heresies  which  sprang 
up  after  Paul*8  departore.  Then,  or  al  a  later  period, 
he  numben  among  his  diadplea  men  like  Poljcarp,  Pa- 
piaa,  Ignatius  (Jerome,  Zh  vir,  lUusL  c.  xvii).  In  the 
penecation  under  Domitian  he  is  taken  to  Borne,  and 
there,  by  hia  boldneai,  thoogh  not  by  death,  gaina  the 
crown  of  martyrdom.  The  boiling  oil  into  which  he  ia 
thrown  haa  no  power  to  hurt  him  (TerUiUDePraicrigft, 
c.  xxxvi).  The  aoene  of  the  supposed  mirade  waa 
oataide  the  PorU  Latina,  and  hence  the  Western  Church 
oommemorates  it  by  the  apecial  fe8tival  of  *'St.  John 
Port.  Latin."  on  May  6th.  He  u  then  sent  to  labor  in 
the  mines,  and  Patmoa  is  the  plaoe  of  his  exile  (Yicto- 
linos,  In  Apoc,  ix ;  Lampe,  i,  66).  The  aocession  of 
Nerva  firees  him  from  danger,  and  he  retums  to  Ephesoa. 
There  he  settles  the  canon  of  the  Gospel  history  by  for- 
mally  attesting  the  truth  of  the  first  three  Gospels,  and 
writing  his  own  to  supply  what  they  left  wanting  (Eu- 
aeb.  //.  E.  iii,  24).  The  elders  of  the  Chnrch  are  gath- 
ered  together,  and  he,  as  by  a  sudden  inspiration,  begins 
with  the  wonderful  opening, "  In  the  beginning  was  the 
word"  (Jerome,  De  vir.  lUusL  29>  Heresies  continue  to 
show  themseWes,  but  he  meets  them  with  the  strongest 
poesible  protest  He  refoses  to  pass  nnder  the  same 
roof  (Łhat  of  the  public  baths  of  Ephesos)  with  their 
foremost  leader,  lest  the  hoose  should  fali  downron  them 
and  crush  them  (Iren.  iii,  8 ;  Euseb.  H,  E,  iii,  28 ;  iv,  14). 
Eusebius  and  Irennoa  make  Cerinthus  the  heretic  In 
Epiphanius  (Har,  xxx,  c.  24)  Ebion  is  the  hero  of  the 
story.  To  modem  feelings  the  anecdote  may  seem  at 
▼ariance  with  the  character  of  the  apostle  of  love,  bat  it 
is  hardly  morę  than  the  development  in  act  of  the  piin- 
dple  of  2  John  10.  To  the  mind  of  Epiphanius  there 
was  a  difficolty  of  another  kind :  nothing  less  than  a 
spedal  inspiration  could  aooonnt  for  such  a  departure 
firom  an  aaoetic  Ufe  as  going  to  a  bath  at  alL  Thioogh 
his  agency  the  great  tempie  of  Artemis  is  at  last  reft  of 
ite.magnificence,  and  eren  (!)  levelled  with  the  ground 
(CyriL  Alex.  OraL  de  Mar.  Virg. ;  Nicephor.  i7.  JS:  ii,  42 ; 
Lampe,  i,  90).  He  intioduoes  and  perpetuates  the  Jew- 
ish  modę  of  celebrating  the  Easter  feast  (Eusebius,  ^.£. 
iii,  3)— at  Ephesus,  if  not  before,  as  one  who  was  a  tiuB 
priest  of  the  Lord,  bearing  on  his  brow  the  plate  of  gold 
(irćroAoy;  compare  Suicer.  Thet.  «.«.),  with  the  saoped 
name  engTaved  on  it,  which  was  the  badge  of  the  Jew- 
iah  pontiff  (Polycrates,  in  Eusebius,  ^.  £*.  iii,  81 ;  v,  24). 
In  strange  contrast  with  this  ideał  exaltation,  a  later 
tradition  tells  how  the  old  man  osed  to  flnd  pleasure  in 
the  playfulness  and  fondness  of  a  favorite  bird,  and  de- 
fended  himself  against  the  charge  of  unworthy  trifling 
by  the  (amiliar  apologue  of  the  bow  that  must  some- 
Łimes  be  unbent  (Cas^UL  CoUaL  xxiv,  c  2).  Morę  true 
to  the  N.-T.  character  of  the  apostle  is  the  story,  told 
with  80  much  power  and  beauty  by  Clement  of  Alexan^ 
dna  ((2if  w  divet,  c  42),  of  his  special  and  loving  interest 
in  the  younger  members  of  his  flock — of  his  eagemess 
and  courage  in  the  attempt  to  rescue  one  of  them  who 
had  fallen  into  evil  oouzses.  The  scenę  of  the  old  and 
loving  man,  standing  face  to  face  with  the  outlaw-chief 
whom,  in  days  gone  by,  he  had  baptized,  and  winning 
him  to  repentance,  is  one  which  we  could  gladly  look  on 
as  belonging  to  his  actoal  Ufe— part  of  a  story  which  is^ 
in  Ciement'8  words,  ov  fAv9oc  dXXd  Xóyoc.  Not  less 
beautiful  is  that  other  scenę  which  comes  befinne  os  as 
the  last  act  of  his  Ufe.  When  aU  capadty  to  work  and 
teach  Ib  gone — when  there  is  no  strength  eren  to  standu 
the  spirit  8tiU  retains  its  po¥rer  to  love,  and  the  Upe  are 
stłll  opened  to  repeat,  withoat  change  and  variataon,  the 
command  which  sammed  up  all  his  Master^s  wiU,  '*  little 
children,  love  one  another"  (Jeron^e,  in  GaL  vi).  Other 
atories,  morę  apocryphal  and  less  interesting,  we  may 
pass  over  rapidly.  That  he  pat  forth  his  power  to  raise 
the  dead  to  Ufe  (Euseb.  JI,  E.  v.  18) ;  that  he  diank  the 
IV.-0  o  o 


cap  of  hemlock  which  was  intended  to  caose  his  death, 
and  soffered  no  harm  from  it  (PSendo-August  8olUoq,f 
Isidor.  Hispal.  De  Morte  Sanct.  o.  78) ;  that  when  he  felt 
his  death  approaching  he  gave  orders  for  the  oonstruction 
of  his  own  sepulchre,  and  when  it  was  finished  calmly 
laid  himself  down  in  it  and  died  (Augostin.  7Vac<.  tu 
Joann,  cxxiv) ;  that  after  his  interment  there  were 
strange  movement8  in  the  earth  that  coYered  him  (ib.) ; 
that  when  the  tomb  was  sabseąoently  opened  it  was 
foand  empty  (Nioeph.  H,  E,  ii,  42) ;  that  he  was  resenred 
to  reappear  again  In  conflict  with  the  personal  anti- 
christ  in  the  last  days  (Suicer,  Thei,  t,  v,  'l<i»avvi|c)— 
these  traditłons,  for  the  most  part,  indicate  Uttle  else 
than  the  uncritical  spirit  of  the  age  in  which  they  passed 
current  The  very  time  of  his  death  Uee  within  the  re- 
gion of  oonjecture  rather  than  of  history,  and  the  dates 
that  have  been  assigned  for  it  rangę  ftom  A.D.  89  to  AD. 
120  (Lampe,  i,  92).— Smith. 

See  Perionii  YUa  ApottoLp.  95  sq. ;  Edzard,2)e  Jom^- 
ne  Ceriniki  prmsenHam  fugiente  fyiteb.  1782) ;  Schwoll- 
mann,  CommenL  de  Jo,  in  PaUhmo  eziUo  (Halle,  1757) ; 
Hering,  Von  d.  Schtk  d,  Ajpott,  Joh.  zu  Ephemt  (BresU 
1774);  Bishop,  Life,  etc,  o/  8t.  John  (London,  1827); 
Webb,  The  BeUwtd  Di»c^  (Lond.  1848) ;  Ejrummacher 
(in  Life  of  Conulius,  etc) ;  Lee,  Ufe  ofSU  John  (N.  Y. 
1854) ;  Macfarlane,  Th€  Diecipie  whom  Jesus  Uwed  (Lond. 
1855) ;  Kienkel,  Der  Aposttl  Johannes  (Berlin,  1871). 

II.  The  most  prominent  iraits  qfJohn*s  character  ap- 
pear  to  have  been  an  ardent  temperament  and  a  delicacy 
of  sentiment.  These  combined  to  prcduce  that  devoted 
attachment  to  his  Master  which  leads  him  to  detail  all 
his  discoorses  and  vindicate  his  character  on  aU  occa- 
sions.  Tet,  with  aU  his  mildness  and  amiabiUty  of  tem- 
per—donbtless,  in  part,  the  fruit  of  divine  grace,  for  we 
timcealBoadegreeofselfishne8sinMai^ix,88;  x.35— 
he  was  not  altogether  feminine  in  dispositicn,  but  pos- 
sessed  an  energy  and  force  of  mind  which  gave  him  the 
title  of  one  of  the  *<sons  of  thnuder"  (Mark  iii,  17),  burst- 
ing  forth  in  vehement  langoage  in  his  writings,  and  on 
one  oocasion  calUng  even  for  rebuke  (Loke  ix,  54, 55). 
See  BoANERGEfl.  It  was  these  traits  of  mind  that  en- 
abled  him  to  take  so  profound  and  oomprehensive  a  view 
of  the  naturę  and  office  of  the  incamate  Son  of  God,  evi- 
dent  in  aU  his  writings,  and  especiaUy  devek>ped  in  the 
introduction  to  his  Gospel 

See  Yon  MeUe,  Entwurf  einer  Lebentbesehreibung  und 
Charakterisłik  d,  AposL  Joh.  (Heidelb.  1808);  Niemeyer, 
CharakterisŁik  der  Bibel,  i,  808  sq. ;  Wemedorf,  Mektema 
de  Eioffi^JUior.  tonitrui  (Hehnst.  1755) ;  Obbar,  De  Tem^ 
peramento  Joa.  chokrico  (Gdtt.  1788) ;  F.  Trench,  Ufe 
and  Character  o/John  the  Evangelist  (London,  1850) ; 
Stanley,  Sermons  and  Eseays  on  the  Apost,  A  ge^  serm.  iv ; 
W.  Grimm,  in  Ersch  und  Gruber^s  EncgcL  sect.  ii,  pt  22, 
Pb  1  sq. ;  Ad.  Monod,  Sermons  {La  Parole  moanU)  (Par. 
1858);  Pie8sens^,i4j)o«to&;^'ra,p.415. 

JOHN,  GOSPEL  OF.  The  fourth  in  order  of  the 
eyangeUcal  narratives  in  nearly  aU  editions,  though  a 
few  MSS.  place  it  immediately  afler  Matthew.    See 

GOBFELS. 

I.  {jAtifMwneM.— There  is  no  reason  to  doubt  that  the 
fourth  Gospel  was  linom  the  beginning  received  in  the 
Church  as  the  production  of  the  apostle  whose  name  it 
bears.  We  may  dedine  to  accept  as  a  testimony  for 
this  the  statement  at  the  doee  of  the  Gospel  itself  (xxi, 
24),  for  this  can  have  the  force  of  an  independent  testi- 
mony only  on  the  suppos^tion  that  the  passage  was  add- 
ed  by  another  hand;  and  though  there  is  an  evident 
allusion  in  2  Pet.  i,  14  to  what  is  recorded  in  John  xxi, 
18, 19,  yety  as  that  saying  of  the  Lord  was  one  which 
tradition  would  be  surę  to  send  forth  among  the  breth- 
ren  (compare  ver.  28),  it  cannot  be  inferred  from  Peter's 
aUnsion  to  it  that  it  was  then  pat  on  reoord  as  we  have 
it  in  the  Gospel.  We  may  also  admit  that  the  passages 
in  the  writings  of  the  apoetoUc  fathers  which  have  been 
adduced  as  evincing,  on  their  part,  acqaaintance  with 
this  Gospel  are  not  decisiye.  The  passages  usually  cited 
for  this  purpoee  are  Bamab.  Ep,  v,  vi,  xii  (compw  John 


JOHN 


946 


JOHN 


iii,  14) ;  Henn.  Past.  Sim.  ix,  12  (oompare  John  x,  7,  9 ; 
xiv,  6) ;  I^at.  A  d  Magnes,  rii  (comp.  John  xii,  49 ;  x, 
80;  xir,  11).  See  Lardner,  Works,  voL  ii,  Ali  of  them 
may  owe  their  aocordAnce  with  John*s  statements  to  the 
influenco  of  tnie  tradition,  or  to  the  necessaiy  resem- 
blance  of  the  just  utteianoe  of  Christian  tbought  and 
feeling  by  diffierent  men;  thoogh  in  three  other  paft- 
aages  cited  from  Ignatios  (^4 d  Rom,  yij;  Ad  TralL  viii ; 
and  A  d  Philad,  vii)  the  coincidence  of  the  fint  two  with 
John  vi,  82  8q.,  and  of  the  last  with  John  iii,  8,  is  al- 
ni08t  too  close  to  be  accounted  for  in  thia  way  (Ebrard, 
Evang,  Jok.  p.  102;  Rothe,  An/Satge  der  ChrisO.  Kircke, 
p.  715).  But  Eusebins  attesta  that  this  Gospel  was 
among  the  books  nniveT8a]ly  received  in  the  Church 
(^Hist,  Eccks.  iii,  25) ;  and  it  cannot  be  doabted  that  it 
fonned  part  of  the  canon  of  the  churches,  both  of  the 
East  and  West,  before  the  end  of  the  2d  century.  See 
Canon.  It  b  in  the  Peshito,  and  in  the  Munitori  Frag- 
ment. It  is  quot6d  or  referred  to  by  Justin  Martyr 
{Apol.  i,  62,  61 ;  ii,  6 ;  c  Tryph.  105,  etc ;  compare  Ols- 
hausen,  Echikeit  der  Katu  Ew.  p.  804  sq.) ,  by  Tatian 
(Orat.  ad  GrtBCOSf  4,  18,  19),  who,  indeed,  composed  a 
Diatessaron  (Eusebins,  Ifist  EccL  iv,  29 ;  Theod.  Ilceret. 
Fah.  i,  20),  in  prepaiing  which  he  must  have  had  this 
gospel  before  him;  in  the  Epistle  of  the  Church  at  Yi- 
enne  and  Lyons  (Euseb.  v,  1) ;  by  Mclito  of  Sardes  (see 
Pitra,  SpicUeg.  Solmense,  i,  Prolegom.  p.  5,  Paris,  1852) ; 
by  Athenagoras  (,Ltg.  pro  Christ.  10);  by  Apollinaris 
(^Frag,  Chroń.  Pasch.  p.  14,  ed.  Dindorf) ;  by  Polycrates, 
bishop  of  Ephesus  (Euseb.  Hist.  EccL  v,  24);  and  in  the 
Oementine  Homilies  (xix,  22,  ed.  Dressel,  1853),  in  such 
a  way  that  not  only  is  its  existence  proved,  but  evidence 
is  afforded  of  the  esteem  in  which  it  was  held  as  canon- 
ical  from  the  middle  of  the  2d  century.  Still  morę  pre- 
cise  is  the  testimony  of  Theophilns,  bishop  of  Antioch, 
who  not  only  composed  a  Harmony  of  the  four  evange- 
lists  (Jcrome,  De  viris  lUusł.  25 ;  Ep.  151,  ad  A  Igasiam), 
but  in  an  extant  work  (jid  A  utol.  ii,  22)  expre88ly  ąuotes 
John  i,  1  as  part  of  holy  8cripture,  and  as  the  produc- 
tion  of  the  apostle,  whom  he  ranks  among  the  wtv- 
ftaro^ópoi.  Morę  important  still  is  the  t«8timony  of 
IreniBus  {ffar.  iii,  11, 8,  p.  218,  ed.  Grabę),  both  because 
of  his  acąuaintance  in  early  yonth  with  Polycarp,  and 
because  of  the  distinctnoss  and  oonfidence  with  which  he 
asserts  the  Johannean  origin  of  this  GospeL  See  Ire- 
VMVS.  To  these  testimonies  may  be  added  that  of  Cel- 
sus,  the  enemy  of  the  Christians,  who,  in  preparing  his 
attack  upon  them,  evidently  had  the  four  canonical  Gos- 
pels  before  him,  and  of  whose  citations  from  them  some 
are  undoubtedly  from  that  of  John  (compare  Olshausen, 
ul  sup.  p.  849,  855;  LUcke,  Commenł.  i,  68  sq.,  8d  edit) ; 
which  shows  that,  at  the  time  when  he  wrote,  this  Gos- 
pel must  have  been  in  generał  acceptance  by  the  Chris- 
tians as  canonical.  Tbe  beretu:  Marcion,  also,  in  reject- 
ing  this  Gospel  on  dogmatical  grounds,  is  a  witness  to 
the  fact  that  its  canonical  authority  was  generally  held 
by  the  Christians  (TertulL  c.  Marcion^  iv,  5;  De  Came 
Christt).  That  the  Gospel  was  recognised  as  canonical 
by  the  Yalentinians,  one  of  the  most  important  sects  of 
the  2d  century,  is  placed  beyond  doubt  by  the  state- 
ment  of  Irenteus  (Ilar.  iii,  1 1),  and  by  the  fact  that  it  is 
quoted  by  Ptolenueus,  a  disciple  of  Yaientinus  (Epiphan. 
Heer.  xxxiii,  8),  and  was  commented  on  by  Heracleon, 
another  of  his  disciples,  both  of  whom  lived  about  the 
middle  of-  the  2d  century.  That  Yaientinus  himself 
knew  and  nsed  the  book  is  rendered  probable  by  this, 
and  by  the  statement  of  Tertullian  (De  Prascr,  HareL 
88),  that  Yaientinus  acoepted  the  Biblical  canon  entire, 
tfaough  he  perverted  its  meaning;  and  this  probability 
is  raised  to  certainty  by  the  fact  that,  in  the  recently 
di8covered  work  of  Hippolytus,  Yaientinus  is  found  twice 
(JPhUosoph.  vi,  38, 34,  ed.  Miller)  citing  the  phrase  6  dp- 
Xt*>v  rov  KÓ<Tftov  TovroVy  as  applied  to  the  devil,  which 
occurs  only  in  John's  Crospel,  and  repeatedly  there  (xii, 
81 ;  xiv,  80 ;  xvi,  11);  and  also  quoting  the  saying,  John 
X,  8,  as  the  word  of  Christ.  From  the  same  source  also 
(vii,  22, 27,  p.  282,  242)  we  leam  that  Basilidea  was  ac- 


ąuainted  with  John^s  Gospel,  and  cited  it;  and  Uui 
brings  us  up  to  the  beginning  of  tbe  2d  centmy,  wiUiin 
a  sbort  time  of  the  apoetle*s  death. 

This  concurrence  of  extenial  testimony  is  the  mon 
noticeable  as  there  are  certain  pecnliarities  in  the  foaith 
Gospel  which  would  łiave  thrown  suspidon  on  its  genn^ 
ineness  had  not  that  been  plaoed  beyond  doubt  by  the 
knowledge  which  the  Christians  had  of  its  having  pn>- 
ceeded  from  the  pen  of  John.  Such  are  tbe  promi- 
nence  given  to  the  ext<a-6ali]ffian  ministry  of  ourLord; 
the  record  of  remarkable  miracles,  such  as  the  besling 
of  the  impotent  man  (eh.  v),  of  the  blind  man  (eh.  iz), 
the  raińng  from  the  dead  of  Lazarus,  and  others,  omi^ 
ted  by  the  other  evangelista;  the  inaertion  of  so  many 
discourses  of  Jesus,  of  which  no  hint  is  found  in  ibe 
other  Gospels,  as  well  as  the  omisaon  of  remarkable 
facts  in  the  evangelic  history,  especiaUy  the  institution 
of  the  supper  and  the  agony  in  the  garden ;  and  oatua 
important  apparent  discrepancies  between  this  and  the 
synoptical  Gospels.  In  perfect  keeping  with  this  as- 
sumption,  also,  is  the  entire  tonę,  spirit,  and  chancter 
of  the  Grospel ;  it  is  emphatically,  as  Clement  of  Alezsn- 
dria  calls  it,  the  wtvfuiruchv  evayyi\tov,  and  breathei 
throughout  the  spirit  which  was  cfaaracteristic  of  "the 
disciple  whom  Jesus  loved."  The  work  is  eWdemly 
the  production  of  one  who  was,  as  the  writer  profeMS 
to  be  (i,  14  [comp.  1  John  i,  1 ;  iv,  14] ;  xix,  36;  xxi, 
24),  an  eye-witness  of  what  he  namttes;  and  there  is  a 
simplicity,  a  naturalness,  and  a  vividnes8  in  the  whofe 
narrative  which  no  forger  of  a  later  age  oonkl  have  at* 
tained — which  the  very  consdoosness  of  oompośng 
what  was  intended  to  be  an  imposition  would  have  pre- 
duded.  The  remarkable  manner  also  in  which  the 
writer  avoids  introdudng  John  by  name  (xud,  23;  xiz, 
16 ;  XX,  2,  8,  4;  xxi,  7,  24)  afibrda  additional  eridence 
that  John  himself  was  the  writer.  It  has  been  uged 
also  by  some  (Bleek,  Ebrard,  Credner)  that  the  ose  of 
the  simple  'luawtię,  without  in  any  case  the  sdditkn 
of  the  UBual  6  BaTrrurrfiCj  to  designate  the  Baptist,  in 
this  Gospel,  is  an  evidence  of  its  being  the  prodoction 
of  John  the  apostle,  on  the  groond  that,  *'  snpposing  the 
apostle  not  to  be  the  writer,  one  would  expcct  that  he 
should,  like  the  Synoptists,  discńminate  the  Bipdst 
fVom  the  apostle  by  this  epithet,  whereas,  supposing  the 
apostle  himself  to  be  the  writer,  he  would  feel  Ie« 
prompted  to  do  so**  (Bleek,  EuUeił.  in  das  N.  T.  p.  148); 
but  to  this  much  weight  cannot  be  at4;acfaed;  for,  thougfa 
it  is  probable  that  a  writer,  taking  his  materials  from 
the  other  evangelist8,  would  have  designated  John  as 
they  do,  and  though,  as  Meyer 'suggests  {Krii.  EtegeL 
Comm.,  Ewdeitung  ta  doM  Ev.  des  JohtomeSf  p.  28),  it  b 
probable  that  John,  who  had  been  a  disciple  of  the  Bap- 
tist, might  prefer  speaking  of  him  by  the  name  br 
which  he  had  been  accnstomed  to  designate  him  dnring 
their  personal  intercourse  rather  than  by  his  hisforical 
name,  yet,  as  we  cannot  tell  what  considerations  might 
have  occurred  to  a  forger  writing  in  the  apostle'*  nsme 
to  induce  him  to  drop  the  distinctive  epithet.  it  is  hard- 
ly  competent  for  us  to  accept  this  omission  as  a  proof 
that  the  work  is  not  the  production  of  a  foiger.  It  is 
needless  to  press  every  minutę  particular  into  the  Mf- 
vice  of  the  argument  for  the  genuincness  of  this  Go^; 
it  is  impossible  to  read  it  without  feeling  that  it  is  Jo- 
hannean m  all  its  parta,  and  that,  had  it  been  the  pitK 
duction  of  any  other  than  the  apostle.  that  other  miaC, 
in  mind,  spirit,  affection,  dicumstances,  and  charactei^ 
have  been  a  second  John. 

Attempts  to  impugn  the  genuineness  of  th»  Go^ 
havc  been  oomparatively  rocent  (Guerike»  Ei^eitmg,  p. 
808).  The  work  of  Bretschneider,  entitled  ProbabSia 
de  EtangeHi  et  Epp.  Joharnds  aposU  indoU  et  origim 
(Lips.  1820),  is  the  eailiest  foimal  attack  of  any  impor- 
tance  madę  upon  it;  and  thia,  the  author  has  hinnelf 
assured  us,  was  madę  by  him  with  a  riew  to  excitiBg 
anew  and  extending  inąoiry  into  the  gennineneas  of 
the  Johannean  writings,  an  end  which,  he  adds,  hss 
been  gained,  so  that  the  doubts  he  suggesied  may  he 


JOHN 


947 


JOHN 


regarded  as  duchaiged  (^Dogmatik,  i,  268, 8d  ecL).  Since 
Łhat  work  appeared,  ihe  clftims  of  the  Gospel  bayc  been 
oppo0ed  by  Strauss  in  his  />6e»  Jetu  ;  by  Weisse  in  his 
£v€mffełiiche  Gesckichtef  by  Lutzelberger  (^Die  Kirch- 
Uche  TradUkm  vb,  d,  Apott,  Joh,  Lpz.  1848,  and  in  many 
otber  foims  sińce) ;  by  Baur  (^Krii,  Utdersuck,  iUber  die 
Kanoniichen  Evang.^ ;  by  Hilgenfeld  {D<u  Ev<mg.  und 
die  Briąfe  Jok,  fUMch  tkrem  Lehrbegr,  datyettelU,  Halle, 
1849),  and  by  othen.  But  the  reasons  advanced  by 
theae  writers  haye  so  litde  force,  and  have  been  so  thor- 
oughly  replied  to,  that  eren  in  Gennany  the  generał 
opinion  has  rsyerted  to  the  ancient  and  catholic  belief 
in  respect  of  the  aathorship  of  the  fourth  Gospel.  See 
Tholuck,  GlaubwurdigkeU  der  EtangeL  Geech, ;  Ebraid, 
Kriłik  d.  Eoangei.  Geeehichte  (ZUr.  1850, 2d  ed.) ;  Ewald, 
Jahrbuchj  iU,  146;  v,  178;  Meyer,  KrUik,  Eaceg,  Comm, 
ii,  Th.  2  Abt.  (Gott.  1856,  3d  cdit) ;  Bleek,  EinL  m  das 
N,  T,  (Berlin,  1862) ;  Davidson,  Introduction  to  the  New 
Test,  i,  238  sq. ;  Schaff,  Church  lltitory  {ApostoUc  Age), 
§  105.  The  importanoe  of  the  fourth  Gospel  as  a  proof 
of  the  divine  character  of  Jesus  Christ  led  to  this  spe- 
eial  assault  on  its  genuineness  by  the  Rationalists  of  the 
Tubtngen  school  and  their  imitators  elsewhere,  but 
without  shaking  the  oonyictions  of  the  Church  at  large. 
See  Jesus  Christ.  For  further  details  of  the  contro- 
versy,  see  Fisher,  SupemaL  Origin  of  Chrittianky  (new 
edit.  N.  y.  1870) ;  Piessens^,  ApostoL  Age  (N.  Y,  1871), 
p.  509  sq.  See  Kationausm.  The  most  important 
other  express  treatises  in  opposition  to  the  authenticity 
of  John*8  Gospel  are  thoee  of  Bruno  Bauer  (Brem.  1840, 
Beri  1850),  Zeller  {JahHK  1845  sq.),  Kostlin  (ift.  1858), 
Yolkmar  (in  several  works  and  arts.  in  Germ.  Joumals), 
Scholten  (Leid.  1864,  etc.),  Matthes  (ib.  1867),  Tayler 
(Lond.  1867);  in  favor,  Stein  (Brandenh.  1822),  Crome 
(Lpzg.  1824),  Hauff  (NUmb.  1881,  and  in  the  Siud.  und 
Krit.  1846,  1849),  Weitzel  («5.  1849),  Mayer  (Schaffh. 
1854),  Schneider  (Beri  1854),  Tischendorf  (Lpzg.  1865 
and  Since),  Riggenbach  (Basel,  1866),  Witticher  (Elberf. 
1869),  Pfeiffer  (St.  Gall  1870),  Row  (ui  the  Journal  of 
Sacrtd  Lit.  1865,  1866,  etc),  Ciarkę  (in  the  Chritłian 
Ex€miner,  1868) ;  see  also  the  Brit.  and  lor.  Ev.  Jiev. 
July,  1861,  p.  558 ;  Wesiminater  Rev.  Ap.  1865,  p.  192. 

IIL  /fi^ć^rAy.— Certain  portions  of  this  Gospel  have 
been  regarded  as  interpolations  or  later  additions,  even 
by  thoee  who  accept  the  Gospel  as  a  whole  as  the  work 
of  John.  One  of  these  is  the  dosing  part  of  yerse  2, 
from  iKiŁX0fuvutv<,  and  the  whole  of  yer.  4,  in  regard  to 
which  the  critical  authorities  iiuctuate,  and  which  eon- 
tain  statements  that  giye  a  legendaiy  aspect  to  the  nar- 
ntiye,  such  as  belongs  to  no  other  of  the  mirades  re- 
lated  in  the  Gospels.  Both  are  rejected  by  Tischendorf, 
but  retained  by  [jichmann ;  and  the  same  diyersity  of 
judgment  appeais  among  interpreters,  some  rejec^ing 
both  passages  (LUcke,  T^olnck,  Olshausen),  others  re- 
taining  both  (Bruckner),  others  rejecting  yer.  4,  but  re- 
taining  yeise  2  (Ewald),  while  some  leaye  the  whole  in 
doubt  (De  Wette). 

Another  doubtful  portion  is  the  section  reladng  to  the 
woman  taken  in  adultery  (yii,  53-yiii,  11).  This  is 
regarded  as  an  interpolation  because  of  the  deficiency 
of  critical  eyidence  in  its  fayor  (see  Tischendorf  or  Al- 
ford,  ad  loc.),  and  because  of  reasons  fonnded  on  the  pas- 
sagę  itsdf,  yiz.  the  apparently  foroed  way  in  which  it 
is  connected  with  what  precedes  by  means  of  yii,  58 ; 
the  interruption  caused  by  it  to  the  oourse  of  the  nanra- 
tive,  the  words  in  yiii,  12  being  evidently  in  continua- 
tion  of  what  precedes  this  section ;  the  alleged  going  of 
Jesus  to  the  Mount  of  Oliyes  and  return  to  Jerusalem, 
which  wonld  place  this  occurrence  in  the  last  residenoe 
of  our  Lofd  in  Jerusalem  (Lukę  xxi,  87) ;  the  absence 
of  the  characteristic  usage  of  the  ow,  which  John  so 
constantly  introduoes  into  his  narratiyes,  and  for  which 
we  haye  in  this  section  ^e,  used  as  John  generally  uses 
ovy ;  and  the  presence  of  the  expre8sions  ć»p^pov,  Trdę 
6  Xa6Cf  Ka^iaac  UiiatrKiy  aifTovCf  ół  ypafAfiardę  Koi 
oł  ^ptoaiOŁf  ŁwtfŁiytiPf  avafuipTriToc,  icaraAcifl-codai, 
and  icaTaKpivHVf  which  are  foreign  to  John'8  styk.  On 


the  other  side,  it  is  uiged  that  the  section  oontains,  aa 
Calyin  says,  **  Nihil  apostolico  spiritu  indignum,"  that 
it  has  no  appearance  of  a  later  legend,  but  bears  eyery 
traoe  of  an  original  account  of  a  yery  probable  fact,  and 
that  it  has  a  oonsiderable  amount  of  diplomatic  eyidence 
in  its  fayor.  llie  question  is  one  which  hardly  admits 
of  a  decided  answer.  The  preponderance  of  eyidence  is 
undoubtedly  against  the  Johannean  origin  of  the  sec- 
tion, and  it  has  consequently  been  regarded  as  an  inter- 
polation by  the  great  majority  of  critics  and  interpret- 
ers, induding  among  the  latter  Calyin,  Beza,  Tittmann, 
Tholuck,  Olshausen,  LUcke,  and  Luthaidt,  as  weU  as 
Grotius,  De  Wette,  Paulus,  and  Ewald.  At  the  same 
time,  if  it  did  not  form  part  of  the  original  Gospel,  it  is 
difiicult  to  aooount  for  its  being  at  so  early  a  period  in- 
serted  in  it.  From  a  passage  in  Eusebius  (iTw^  EceL 
iii,  89)  some  haye  oonduded  that  Papias  inserted  it  from 
the  Gospel  according  to  the  Hebrews;  but  it  is  not  cer- 
tain  that  it  is  to  this  section  that  the  words  of  Eusebius 
refer,  nor  is  it  oertain  that  he  meant  to  say  that  Papias 
inserted  the  story  he  refers  to  in  the  Gospel.  See  Adułt 
TERY,  yol  i,  p.  87. 

Morę  important  than  either  of  these  portions  is  chapb 
zxi,  which  is  by  many  regarded  as  the  addition  of  a 
later  hand  after  the  apostle*s  death.  This  opinion  rests 
wholly  on  intemal  grounds,  for  there  ib  no  eyidence 
that  the  Grospd  was  eyer  known  in  the  Church  withont 
this  chapter.  At  first  sight  it  certainly  appears  aa  if 
the  original  work  ended  with  eh.  xx,  and  that  eh.  xxi 
was  a  later  addition,  but  whether  by  the  apostle  him- 
self  or  by  some  other  is  open  to  question.  The  absence 
of  any  tracę  of  the  Gospel  haying  eyer  existed  withont 
it  must  be  allowed  to  afibrd  stiong  jmma^cttf  eyidence 
of  its  haying  been  added  by  the  author  himself ;  still 
this  is  not  conclusiye,  for  the  addition  may  haye  been 
madę  by  one  of  his  friends  or  disdples  before  the  work 
was  in  circulation.  Grotius,  who  thinks  it  was  madę 
by  the  elders  at  Ephesus,  argues  against  its  genuineness, 
espćcially  from  yer.  24;  but,  thongh  the  language  there 
has  certainly  the  appearance  of  being  rather  that  of 
others  than  that  of  the  party  himself  to  whom  it  refers, 
still  it  is  not  impossible  that  John  may  haye  referred  to 
himself  in  the  third  person,  aa  he  does,  for  instance,  in 
xix,  35 ;  and  as  for  the  use  of  the  pi  oidapiy,  that  may 
be  acoounted  for  by  his  tacitly  joining  his  readers  with 
himself,  just  as  he  assuraes  their  presence.  in  xix,  35. 
There  is  morę  difficulty  in  accepting  ver.  25  as  genuine, 
for  such  a  hyperbolical  modę  of  expressiou  does  not  seem 
to  comport  ¥rith  the  simplidty  and  sincerity  of  John; 
but  there  seems  to  be  no  yalid  reason  for  calling  into 
doubt  any  other  part  of  the  chapter. 

lY.  Betign^r^At  the  dose  of  the  Gospd  the  apostle 
has  himself  stated  his  design  in  writing  it  thus:  "These 
are  written  that  ye  might  belieye  that  Jesus  is  the 
Christ,  the  Son  of  God,  and  that,  bdieying,  ye  might 
haye  Ufe  through  his  name**  (xx,  81).  Taken  in  the 
generał,  this  may  be  said  to  be  the  design  of  ali  the 
eyangelical  narratiyes,  for  all  of  them  are  intended  to 
produce  the  conyiction  that  Jesus  of  Nazareth  was  the 
Messiah  promised  to  the  fathers,  and  so  to  exhibit  him 
in  his  saying  power  that  men  belieying  on  him  might 
enjoy  that  life  which  he  had  come  to  bestow.  We  must 
seek,  therefore,  John's  specific  design  either  in  some  spe- 
cial  occasion  which  he  sought  to  meet,  or  in  some  pe- 
culiarity  in  his  modę  of  presenting  the  daims  of  Jesus, 
by  which  not  merely  his  Messiahship  shoold  be  eyinced, 
but  the  higher  aspect  of  bis  person,  and  the  spiritual 
effects  of  his  working,  should  be  prominently  exhibited. 
Probably  both  of  these  concurred  in  the  apostle^s  design ; 
and  we  shall  best  conceiye  his  purpoee  by  ueither,  on 
the  one  hand,  ascribing  to  him  a  merely  historical,  nor, 
on  the  other,  a  purdy  dogmatical  design.  It  is  an  old 
and  still  preyalent  opinion  that  John  wroto  his  Gospd 
to  supply  the  omissions  of  the  other  three;  but  no  such 
impression  ia  conveyed  by  the  Gospd  itsdf,  which  is  as 
far  as  poesible  from  haying  the  appearance  of  a  merę 
series  of  supplemental  notes  to  preyiously  exi8ting  wńtr 


JOHN 


948 


JOHN 


iiigs;  indeed,  if  this  hftd  been  the  apostłe'fl  pnipose,  it 
caiuioŁ  be  saidthathehis  in  anj  adegnate  way  fiilflUed 
it.  Nor  ia  there  any  giound  for  believiiig  that  it  waa  a 
polemieal  obj«ct  which  chiefly  prompted  him  to  write 
thia  Goapel,  tlioagh  soch  a  auggestioa  haa  often  been 
madę.  Thos  IreuMia  (iTcsniii,  U,  1)  aays  that  the  Go»- 
peL  was  written  against  the  errorB  of  Ceiintho&  Jerome 
iDe  vir.IlbuL 9)  adda  the £biaaitei;  and  later  writen 
hare  maintained  that  the  Gnoetus  or  the  Dooet»  are 
the  paities  agaioat  whom  the  pokmic  of  the  apostle  is 
here  diiected.  Ali  thia^  howeyer,  ia  merę  aiippoaition. 
Doubtleas  in  what  John  haa  written  there  ia  that  which 
f umiahea  a  fuli  zefutation  of  all  EbionitiBh,  Gnoatic,  and 
Docetic  hereay ;  but  that  to  confate  theee  waa  the  detign 
oi  the  apoBtle,  aa  theae  writeri  affirm,  cannot  be  proved. 
See  Gnostics.  At  the  same  tame^  though  he  may  hare 
had  no  intention  of  fonnally  oonf nting  any  eTiiring  her- 
eny,  it  ia  morę  than  probable  that  he  waa  stimulated  to 
aeek  by  means  of  thia  record  to  countesact  oertain  ten- 
dencies  which  he  aaw  riaiog  in  the  Chuch,  and  by  which 
the  followen  of  Chiiat  might  be  aedooed  iram  that  aim- 
ple  £uth  in  him  by  which  alone  the  true  Ufe  coiild  be 
enjoyed.  Still  thia  most  be  regaided,  at  the  utmoat,  aa 
f orniahing  only  the  occaaion,  not  the  deaign,  of  hia  writ- 
ing.  The  latter  Ib  to  be  aooght  in  the  eifect  which  this 
Gospel  ia  fitted  to  prodoce  on  the  mind  of  the  reader  in 
regard  to  the  daima  of  Jeana  aa  the  divine  Redeemer, 
the  soaroe  of  light  and  life  to  darkened  and  periahing 
humanity.  With  thia  viBw  John  preaenta  him  to  ua  as 
he  taberaaded  among  men,  and  eapedally  aa  he  taoght 
when  occasion  caUed  forth  the  deeper  reyelationa  which 
he,  as  the  Word  who  had  oome  forth  ftom  the  inyliible 
God  to  rereal  unto  men  the  Father,  had  to  oommnni- 
cate.  John'8  main  design  is  a  theological  one ;  a  eon- 
yiction  of  which  doobtleas  led  to  his  ieoeiving  in  the 
pcimitive  Church  the  title  Kar  iĘoxffy  of  et6\oyoc. 
But  the  historical  character  of  his  writing  most  also  be 
acknowledged.  As  one  who  had  been  privileged  to 
**  company*'  with  Jesus,  he  seeks  to  present  him  to  us  aa 
he  really  appeared  among  men,  in  Tery  deed  a  partalser 
of  their  naturę,  yet,  under  that  naturę,  veiling  a  higher, 
which  erer  and  anon  broke  forth  in  manifestation,  so 
that  thoee  around  him  **  beheld  hia  glory  aa  the  glory 
of  the  Only  Begotten  of  the  Father"  (i,  14>  **  Thera  is 
here  no  histoiy  of  Jesus  and  his  teaching  after  the  man- 
ner  of  the  other  eyangeUsts;  but  there  is,  in  historical 
form,  a  representation  of  the  Christian  iaith,  in  relation 
to  the  person  of  Christ,  aa  ita  central  point,  and  in  this 
representation  there  is  a  picture,  on  the  one  hand,  of  the 
antagomsm  of  the  world  to  the  truth  rerealed  in  him, 
and  on  the  other  of  the  apiritual  UeBsedneas  of  the  few 
who  >ield  themselyes  to  him  as  the  Light  of  iife" 
(BeusR,Ge8ch.derHeU,8ch.d.N.T.p,20i).  AsJohn 
doubtless  had  the  other  Gospels  before  him,  without  for- 
mally  designing  to  supplement  them,  he  would  naturally 
enlarge  morę  particularly  npon  those  portiona  which 
they  had  lefl  nntouched,or  paased  over  morę  briefly. 

lY.  (7on/ente.~The  Gospel  begins  with  a  prologne,  in 
which  the  author  presents  the  great  theme  of  which  his 
subseąuent  narratiye  is  to  funush  the  detailed  illustra- 
tion — "the  theological  programme  of  his  hiśtoryt"  as 
one  haa  called  it,  and  which  another  has  compared  to 
the  overture  of  a  muaical  compoeition  in  which  the  lead- 
ing  idea  of  the  piece  is  expre88ed  (i,  1-6).  The  histor- 
ical expo8ition  begins  with  yerse  6,  and  the  rest  of  the 
book  may  be  diirided  into  two  parta.  Of  theae  the  for- 
mer  (i,  6-xii)  oontains  the  aocount  of  our  Lord'8  public 
ministry  from  his  introduction  to  it  by  John  the  Baptist 
and  his  solenm  consecration  to  it  by  God,  to  ita  dose  in 
the  Passion  Week.  In  this  portion  we  have  the  Sa^'ionr 
presented  to  us  chiefly  in  his  manifestation  to  the  world 
as  a  teacher  sent  from  God,  whose  mission  is  authenti- 
cated  by  eigns  and  wonders,  and  whose  doctńnes,  truły 
diyine,  transcend  in  their  spiritual  import  the  nanow 
limits  of  human  speculation,  and  can  be  comprehended 
only  by  a  spiritual  dlscemment.  The  second  portion 
(eh.  xui<xxi)  may  be  diyided  into  two  parts,  the  one 


of  which  Isintrodnetoiy  to  the  other.    The  i 
adii^-zrii)  presents  to  ua  our  Lord  in  the  i 
piiyate  life,  in  hia  intercomae  with  hia  f 
kiwen,  to  whom  he  poars  out  hia  aool  in  loviiig  i 
waming,  and  piomiae,  in  the  prospect  of  hia  depnCore 
from  them;  and  in  oommnninn  with  hia  hecwnly  Fa- 
ther, with  whom,  aa  one  who  had  finiahed  tbe  wnik  he 
had  Eecdved  to  do^  he  interoedea  for  thoae  whose  re- 
demption  from  ain  and  evil  ia  the  cowted  reoompenae 
of  his  obedienoe.    To  this  auooeeda  the  aoooimt  of  tbe 
FtasioD,  and  Um  appearanoea  of  Chriat  to  hia  diaciplea 
after  his  lesurrection  (eh.  xviii-ocxi),  whi^  famom  the 
other  part  of  the  aeoond  portion  of  the  book.     See  the 
minutę  analyslB  of  Lampe  in  his  CommmLf  and  n  bfieftr 
one  in  Westoott, /NCrod  to  iSlati^  o/a<  6o9Mii^  p.  281  aq. 
The  greater  part  of  the  book  ia  oocupied  with  the  dia- 
oouraea  of  onr  Loid,  the  plan  of  the  erangdiat  hein^  oh- 
▼iously  to  bring  the  nader  aa  mach  aa  poeaihle  into 
perBonal  oontact  with  Jesus,  and  to  nake  the  Utter  his 
own  erpoaitor.    Begarding  the  diacomaes  thuarepoated^ 
the  qnestion  haa  ariaen,  How  far  ara  they  to  be  eooept- 
ed  aa  an  exact  report  of  what  Jeana  nttered?  and  in  re- 
płyto  thia,  threeopiniooahaTe  been  ad^anoed:  l.That 
both  in  aubstanoe  and  in  form  we  here  them  aa  they 
came  fimn  the  lipa  of  Chriat;  2.  That  in  anfaatance  they 
pnsent  what  Christ  uttered,  but  that  the  form  in  whidi 
they  appear  Ib  due  to  the  erangeiist ;  and,  8.  That  they 
are  not  the  diMOorBes  of  Christ  in  any  ptoper  aeiiae,bat 
only  qieechea  put  in  his  mouthby  the  erangdiat  to  ez- 
preaa  what  the  latter  oonodved  to  be  a  jnst  repreaenta- 
tion  of  hia  doctrine.    Of  these  Tiewa  the  last  haa  found 
adherenta  only  among  a  few  of  the  aeeptical  acbool;  it 
ia  without  the  dightest  authority  from  the  book  itadf, 
ia  irrecondlable  with  the  aimplidty  and  eameatneas  of 
the  writer,  is  ibroign  to  the  haluu  and  notiooa  of  the 
daaa  to  which  the  cTangeUat  bdonga,  and  ia  ocotradiet- 
ed  by  the  frequent  explanationa  which  he  introdoces  of 
the  sense  in  which  he  understood  what  he  leporta  (oonp. 
ii,  19, 2ii  yii,  88,  89;  xu,  82, 88,  etc),  by  the  bcief  no- 
tices,  whidi  evinoe  an  acuial  remimsoenoe  of  the  acenes 
and  dzcumatancea  amid  whidi  the  diMoazae  waa  ddir- 
ered  (e.  g.  xiy,  81),  and  by  the  prophetic  amKNmoemeots 
of  his  impending  sufferinga  and  death  aacribed  to  tbe 
Sarionr,  which  are  oooched  in  langnage  aoch  aa  he 
might  naturally  nae,  sudi  aa  aooountalbr  thoae  to  wbon 
he  spoke,  eren  his  diariplesh  not  undentanding  hia  mcaa- 
iog,  but  such  aa  it  ia  utterly  incredible  that  one  not  de- 
sirous  of  repoiting  hia  very  worda  abould,  wiiting  after 
the  fulfilment  of  these  predictiona,  impute  to  him  (oomp. 
vii,  88^86;  viii,  21,  22;  X,  17-20;  zii,  2S-86;  xiv,  1^ 
18,  28{  xvi,  16, 19,  etc.).    Some  of  these  conaideratiani 
are  of  weight  alM  aa  againat  the  aeoond  of  the  opónoni 
above  stated;  for,  if  John  sought  merdy  to  give  che 
substanoe  of  the  Saviour'a  teaching  in  hia  own  wordą 
why  dothe  predictiona,  the  meaning  of  whidi  at  the 
time  of  his  writing  he  perfectly  uadentood,  in  obocaic 
and  difficult  phraseokigy  ?    Why  eapedally  in^mle  to 
the  speaker  language  of  which  he  feela  it  necemaiy  to 
give  an  expknation,  instead  of  at  ooee  putting  the  in- 
telligible  statement  in  hia  diaoonne ?    Undonbtedly  the 
impreesion  which  one  geta  from  the  namitire  b  thst 
John  meana  the  discourMS  he  aacribea  to  Jeaua  to  be  n- 
cdved  as  iaithful  reports  of  what  he  actnally  nttocd; 
and  this  is  oonfirmed  when  one  compares  hia  report  af 
John  the  Baptist*8  sayinga  with  thoee  of  our  LÓd,  the 
character  of  the  one  being  totally  different  fron  that  of 
the  other.    To  this  view  it  haa  been  obfected  that  theie 
is  such  an  idendty  of  style  in  the  disoouraes  włuch  Joba 
ascribes  to  Christ  with  hia  own  atyle^  both  in  this  Gos- 
pd  and  in  his  Epittles,  aa  betraya  in  the  ftnner  the 
hand,  not  of  a  faithful  reporter,  but  of  one  wbo  giveB  ia 
the  manner  natunl  u>  himaelf  the  snbatanoe  of  what  hia 
Master  taught    In  thia  there  ia  aome  forae,  whidi  ia 
but  partially  met  by  the  suggestion  that  John  was  s» 
imbuod  with  the  very  mind  and  aool  of  Chiiat,  ao  ia- 
formed  by  his  doctrine,  and  ao  fiUed  by  his  apirit,  that 
his  own  manner  of  thougfat  and  utterance  1 


JOHN 


949 


JOHN 


■one  M  tbat  of  Chiitt,  and  he  ioaensibly  wiote  and 
■poke  in  the  style  of  his  Lord.  BeosB  objects  to  thia 
ttkat  on  thia  aoppoaition  the  style  of  Jesus  **  most  haye 
been  a  vvrf  onifonn  and  sharply-defined  one,  and  soch 
aa  ezdndea  the  Tery  difRnent  style  aacribed  to  him  by 
thetynoc^óttar{Gt8eh.derH.S.de$N,T.p.^S0S).  Bot 
the  facts  here  aie  oyentated ;  the  style  of  onr  Łoid's 
diBCOUfses  in  John  ia  by  no  meana  perfectly  unifonn,  nor 
ia  it  moeh  forther  rano^ed  from  that  aacribed  to  him  by 
the  synoptistB  than  the  differenoe  of  subject  and  circom- 
atanee  wiU  soiBce  to  aoooont  for.  As  for  the  objection 
that  it  ia  inoonoeiTable  that  the  erangclist  oonld  haye 
retained  for  so  many  yean  a  faithfol  reooUection  of  dia- 
oomsea  heaid  by  him  only  onoe,  we  need  not,  in  order  to 
meet  it,  resort  to  the  foolish  soggestion  of  Bertholdt 
that  he  had  taken  notea  of  them  at  the  time  for  his  own 
behoof ;  nor  need  we  to  lay  stress  on  the  aasnranoe  of 
Christ  which  John  reooids  that  the  Holy  Ghost  whom 
the  Father  shoold  send  to  them  would  tc^h  them  all 
thinga,  and  biing  all  things  to  their  remembrance  what- 
soerer  he  had  said  unto  them  (John  xiv,  26),  though  to 
the  belleycr  thia  ia  a  faet  of  the  otmoet  importanoe.  It 
will  soiBce  to  meet  the  objection  if  we  suggest  that,  aa 
the  apostle  went  forth  to  the  woild  aa  a  fitness  for 
Ohrist,  he  did  not  wait  tiU  he  sat  down  to  write  his 
Ciospel  to  giye  forth  his  leoollections  of  his  Master^s 
words  and  deeda.  What  he  narrates  here  in  writing  is 
only  what  he  maat  have  been  repeating  oonstantly  dor^ 
ing  his  whole  apostołic  career.  Still,  after  due  allowance 
bas  been  madę  for  ali  theae  oonaiderations,  it  most  yet 
be  admitted  that  the  dedded  Johannean  castof  all  these 
diaooinaes,  »b  oompared  with  out  Loid's  sayinga  reported 
in  ihe  synoptical  Gospels,  shows  that  while  the  erangel- 
ist  giyes  the  subetanoe  and  essential  form  of  Chiisfs 
poUic  ntteranoes,  he  neyerthdess,  to  a  laige  degree, 
moolda  them  into  his  own  style  of  phraaeology  and  oo- 
herenoe.  This  ia  especially  tme  of  xii,  44-60,  which  is 
eridently  a  snmmary  of  statements  madę  on  perhaps 
morę  than  one  occasion  not  definitely  given.  Indeed, 
it  is  donbtfol  if  any  of  the  eyangelists  gtve  os  the  exact 
woida  of  oor  Lord,  aa  they  oertainly  .do  not  tally  m  this 
particolar  any  morę  than  they  do  in  the  order  and  oon- 
nection  in  which  these  are  narrated.    (See  Tholock, 

p.  814  sq.)'.    See  H  armonies. 

y.  CftanKferMfJes.— 1.  As  to  matter,  the  pecnliarities 
of  John's  Gospel  morę  especially  oonsist  in  the  four  fol- 
lowing  doetrines:  (1.)  The  mystical  rehition  of  the  Son 
to  the  Father.  (2.)  That  of  the  Bedeemer  to  belieyers. 
^.)  The  annooncement  of  the  Holy  Ghost  §b  the  Com- 
foTter.  (4.)  The  peculiar  importanoe  aacribed  to  kiye. 
Yet  these  pecoliaritiea  are  not  oonfined  to  thia  GospeL 
Althoogh  there  can  be  shown  in  the  writings  of  the  oth- 
er  evangelista  some  iaolated  dicta  of  the  Lord  which 
aeem  to  bear  the  impiess  of  John,  it  can  abo  be  śhown 
that  they  oontain  thooghts  not  originating  with  that 
disdpłe,  bot  with  the  Lord  himsdf.  Matthew  (xi,  27) 
apeaks  of  the  relation  of  the  Son  to  the  Father  so  en- 
tirely  in  the  style  of  John  that  penooa  not  soflictently 
Tened  in  Holy  Writ  aie  apt  to  search  for  this  passage 
In  the  Gospel  of  John.  The  mystical  anion  of  the  Son 
with  believen  is  expressed  in  Matt  xxviii,  20.  The 
pfomise  of  the  eifasion  of  the  Holy  Ghost  in  order  to 
perfect  the  diaciplca  is  found  in  Loke  xxiv,  49.  The 
doctrine  of  Pani  with  respect  to  bve,  in  1  Cor.  xiii,  en- 
tirely  resemblea  what,  aooording  to  John,  Christ  taóght 
on  the  aame  subject  Paol  here  deserres  oor  partkular 
attention.  In  the  writings  of  Pani  are  found  Christian 
tnitha  which  have  thor  pointa  of  coaksoence  only  in 
John,  Tiz.,  that  Chriatis  eA«  image  ofłJU  wmdbie  God, 
by  whom  all  things  are  created  (CoL  i,  16, 16).  Paul 
considen  the  Spirit  of  God  in  the  Chorch  the  apiritual 
Chriti,  aa  Jesus  himself  does  (John  xiv,  16),  frequently 
■sing  the  words  flyni  Łv  Xpt(fTtf, 

2.  As  to  form,  then  is  something  pecoliar  in  the  evan- 
gelisf  s  manner  of  writing.  His  language  betrays  tiaoes 
of  that  Hebraistic  character  which  belongs  genbally  to 


the  N.-T.  writers^  and  the  aothor  shows  his  Jewish  de- 
soent  by  yarioua  inddental  indications;  but  he  wńtes 
porer  Greek  than  most  of  the  others,  and  his  freedom 
from  Jndaic  narrowneas  is  so  marked  that  some  have 
founded  on  this  an  argument  against  the  genoineness 
of  the  book,  forgetting  that  the  experience8  of  the  apoa- 
tle  in  his  morę  advanoed  years  woold  materially  tend  to 
correct  the  prejudicea  and  party  leanings  of  his  earlier 
career.  The  apoetle's  style  is  marked  by  ease,  simplic- 
ity,  and  TividnesB ;  his  sentenoes  are  linked  together 
rather  by  inner  affinity  in  the  thoughts  than  by  ont- 
ward  forma  of  eomposition  or  dialectic  concatenation — 
they  move  on  one  after  the  other,  genendly  with  the 
help  of  an  ohf,  sometimes  of  a  Kai,  and  occasionally  of  a 
Si,  and  favorite  terma  or  phrases  are  repeated  without  re- 
gard  to  rhetorical  art  The  anthor  wrote  eyidently  for 
HeUeniadc  readers,  but  he  makes  no  attempt  at  Greek 
elegance,  or  that  wisdom  of  words  which  with  many  in 
hia  day  oonstituted  the  perfection  of  Greek  art  One 
of  the  pecnliarities  of  John  is  that,  in  speaking  of  the 
adTersaiiea  of  Jesus,  hę  alwaya  calla  them  oi  *Iovdaiou 
The  simplkaty  of  John*8  character  ia  also  evinced  by  the 
repetition  of  certain  leading  thonghta,  reproduoed  in  the 
same  words  both  in  the  Gospel  and  in  the  Epistles,  such 
aB /Łaprvpia,łe$timoiijf  ;  S6Ka,ffloiy;  iikn9tta,truth;  ^&c, 
Ugfd;  mtóroc,  darkńe$$;  C«tfi)  aiwioc,  etemal  Kfe;  /aŁ- 
vttp,  to  abide^—Kitto.  See  Kaiaer,  De  tpeeiaii  Jotau 
GrammaHea,  etc.  (ErUmg.  1842) ;  Westoott,  Iwtrod,  to 
Studff  oftke  GoąpiU,  eh.  v. 

YL  Place  ^  H>i«H^.— Ephesus  and  PAtmos  are  the 
two  plaoea  mentioned  by  eaily  writers,  and  the  weight 
of  evidenoe  aeema  to  preponderate  in  favor  of  Ephesus. 
Irennos  (iii,  1 ;  ako  apud  Eoseb.  H.  E.  v,  8)  states  that 
John  pubUdied  his  (jospel  whilst  he  dwelt  in  Ephesoa 
of  Asia.  Jerome  (ProL  ta  ifotf.)  states  that  John  waa 
in  Aaia  when  he  oomplied  with  the  reqaeat  of  the  błah> 
opa  of  Asia  and  othera  to  wiite  morę  profoondly  con- 
oeming  the  di vinity  of  Christ.  Theodore  of  Mopsuestia 
{PmL  ta  Joannem)  relates  that  John  waa  living  at  Eph- 
esus when  he  waa  moved  by  hia  disdplea  to  wiite  hia 
GoapeL 

The  evidence  in  favor  of  Patmos  comes  ftom  two 
anonymona  writers.  The  author  of  the  SynoptU  of 
Ser^tture,  printed  in  the  worka  of  Athanasius,  states 
that  the  Gospel  waa  dictated  by  John  in  Patmos,  and 
pohUahed  afterwarda  in  Epheaus.  The  author  of  the 
work  De  XII  ApoeloUt,  printed  in  the  Appendix  to  Fa^ 
briciua*s  Hippołytiu  (p,  952  [ed.  Mignę  ]),  states  that  John 
was  banished  by  Domitian  to  Patmos,  where  he  wrote 
hia  GospeL  The  later  datę  of  these  nnknown  writers, 
and  the  aeeming  inconsistency  of  their  testimony  with 
John's  declaration  (Rev.  i,  2)  in  Patmos,  that  he  had  pre- 
yioosly  borne  record  of  the  Word  of  God,  render  their 
testimony  of  little  weight, 

After  the  destruction  ofJemsalem,A.D.  70,  Ephesus 
probably  became  the  centrę  of  the  acdve  life  of  Eastem 
Chriatendom.  £yen  Antioch,  the  original  source  of 
missions  to  the  Gentiks,  and  the  lVituie  metropolia  of 
the  Chiiatian  patiiarch,  appears,  for  a  time,  less  conspio- 
nous  in  the  obscurity  of  eariy  Chmch  history  than  Eph- 
eaus, to  which  Paul  inacribed  hia  Epistle,  and  in  which 
John  found  a  dwellin^plaoe  and  a  tomh.  This  half- 
Greek,  half-Oriental  city,  <<  yisited  by  ships  firom  all  parta 
of  the  Mediterranean,  and  united  by  great  roada  with 
Uie  marketa  of  the  interior,  waa  the  common  meettng- 
place  of  yarioua  chancters  and  dasses  of  men"  (Cony- 
beare  and  Howson,  St,  Parni,  eh.  xiv).  It  ooutained  a 
large  church  of  faithfol  Chriatiana,  a  multitude  of  zeał- 
oos  Jews,  an  indigenoua  population  deyoted  to  the  woiw 
ahip  of  a  atrange  idol,  whoee  image  ( Jerome,  Prtrf,  m 
Ephea,)  waa  bonowed  ftom  the  East,  its  name  ftom  the 
Weat— in  the  XytituB  of  Ephesus  ftee-thinking  philoso- 
phers  of  aU  nationa  disputed  oyer  their  fiiyorite  tenets 
(Jostin,  Tiypko,  i,  yit).  It  waa  the  place  to  which  Ce- 
rinthos  chose  to  bring  the  doetrines  which  he  deyised  or 
leamed  at  Alexandria  (Neander,  Chureh  Hialory,  i,  896 
[Totxey*a  trana.]).    In  this  dty,  and  among  the  lawleas 


JOHN 


950 


JOHN 


heathens  in  ite  neighborhood  (Ciem.  Alexaii.  Ouit  dwei 
talr.  §  42),  John  was  engaged  in  extending  ihe  Chris- 
tian Chnrch  when,  for  the  greater  edifłcation  of  that 
Church,  his  Gospel  was  written.  It  was  obyioosly  ad- 
dressed  primarily  to  Christians,  not  to  heathens.  See 
Ephissus. 

YII.  Daie  of  ITrif  in^.— Attempts  hare  been  madę  to 
elicit  from  the  language  of  the  Gospel  itself  some  argu- 
ment which  should  decide  the  qaestion  whether  it  was 
written  before  or  after  the  destruction  of  Jerusalem ; 
but,  considering  that  the  present  tense  *'  is"  is  used  in  v, 
2,  and  the  past  tense  *' was"  in  xi,  18;  xviii,  1 ;  xix,  41, 
it  woold  seem  reasonable  to  condude  that  these  passages 
throw  no  light  upon  the  question. 

element  of  Alexandria  (apud  Ensebius,  ff,  E.  yi,  14) 
speaks  of  John  aa  the  latest  of  the  eyangeUsta.  *  The 
apostle's  sojonm  at  Ephesus  probably  began  after  Paul's 
Epistle  to  the  Ephesians  was  written,  i.  e.  after  A.D.  56. 
Eosebius  {H,  E,  iii,  20)  specifies  the  fourteenth  year  of 
Domitian,  L  e.  A.D.  95,  as  the  year  of  his  banishment  to 
Patmos.  Probably  the  datę  of  the  Gospel  may  lie  be- 
tween  these  two,  about  A.D.  90.  The  referenoes  to  it 
in  the  Ist  Epistle  and  the  Revelation  lead  to  the  suppo- 
sition  that  it  was  wiitten  somewhat  before  those  two 
books,  and  the  tradition  of  its  supplementary  character 
would  lead  us  to  place  it  some  considerable  time  after 
the  apostle  had  fixed  his  abode  at  Ephesus. — Smith. 

YIII.  Commeniariet. — ^The  foUowing  aie  the  separate 
exegetical  helps  on  the  whole  of  John*s  Gospel  exclu- 
8ively  (including  the  prindpal  monographs  on  its  spe- 
dal  featnres),  to  the  most  important  of  which  we  prefix 
an  asterisk  [*] :  Origen,  CommaUaria  (in  Opp.  iv,  1 ; 
also  Berlin,  1831,  8  yols.  12mo) ;  Jerome,  Expontio  (in 
Opp,  Suppos,  xi,  77, 773) ;  Augustine,  Tractatut  (in  Opp, 
iv,  385;  translated,  Homilies  [indud.  Ist  Ep.],  Oxford, 
1848-9, 2  vols.  8vo) ;  Chrysoetom,  Hamiliee  (in  C^.  viii, 
1 ;  transL  ITomilies,  Oxf.  1848-52,  2  vols.  8vo) ;  also  In- 
terpretoHo  (in  Canisius,  i,  217) ;  Nonnns,  Meiaphraset 
(Gr.  and  Lat.  in  BibL  Max,  PaŁr,  ix,  437 ;  also  ed.  Hein- 
sius,  L.  B.  1627,  8vo,  1689,  fol ;  also  ed.  Pas8oviiłs,  Lipa. 
1833,  8vo) ;  Cyril  of  Alexandria,  CommaOarii  (in  Opp. 
iv,  1-1128);  Bede,  tn  Joamu  (m  Opp,  v,  451);  Alcuin, 
CommentarU  (in  Opp,  I,  ii,  457 ;  also  AngusL  1527, 8vo) ; 
Hugo  &  SLTlctor,  Atmotationea  (in  Opp.  i,  233) ;  Aqui- 
nas,  Commentarii  (in  Opp,  v) ;  also  CcUena  (in  Opp,  iii ; 
trausl.  as  vol.  iv  of  "  Catena  Aurea,"  Oxford,  1845, 8vo) ; 
Bonaventura,  ExpotUio  (in  Opp,  ii,  813);  also  CoUaHo- 
nea  {ib.  ii,  467) ;  Albertus  Magnus,  C&mmaUańi  (in  Opp. 
xi) ;  Zwingle,  Amotaiionet  (in  Opp.  iv,  283) ;  Melanc- 
thon,  EnarraHoneB  (Yitemb.  1523,  fol ;  also  in  Opp.) ; 
Bucer,  EnarrcUumes  (Argent  1528, 8vo) ;  CEcolampadius, 
Adnotationes  (Baail.  1533, 8vo) ;  Ferus  [Rom.  Catholic], 
EnarrcUumet  (Mogunt  1536, 1560,  foL,  Par.  1552, 1569, 
Lugd.  1653, 1558,  1663,  Lovan.  1559,  8vo;  ed.  Medina, 
Complut.  1569, 1578,  Mogunt.  1572,  Borne,  1578,  folio); 
Sarcer,  Scholia  (BasiL  1540,  8vo) ;  Cruciger,  EnarraHo 
(Yitemb.  1540,  Argent  1546,  8vo);  Bullinger,  Commen- 
tarii (Tigur.  1543,  fol) ;  Musculus,  Commentarii  (Basil 
1545, 1553, 1554, 1564, 1580, 1618,  fol) ;  GuiUiand,  Enar- 
rationes  (Par.  1550,  fol;  Lugd.  1555, 8vo) ;  Alesius,  Com- 
menłariut  (Basil  1553,  8vo) ;  Calvin,  CommentarU  (Ge- 
nev.  1553, 1565,  fol ;  also  in  Opp. ;  with  a  karmor^,  Ge- 
nev.  1563 ;  in  French,  ib.  1568 ;  in  English,  by  Feterston, 
London,  1584, 4to ;  by  Pringle,  Edinb.  1847, 2  vols.  8vo) ; 
Traheron,  ExpotiHon  [on  part]  (London,  1558, 8vo) ;  De 
Reyna,  ArmotaHonet  (Francof.  1578,  4to);  Marloratoa, 
ExpoaUion  (from  the  Latin,  by  Timme,  Lond.  1575,  fol) ; 
Aretius,  CommerUarius  (Lausanne,  1578, 8vo) ;  Dancus, 
CommentariuB  (Geneva,  1585,  8vo);  Hunnius,  Commen- 
tarius  (Francof.  1586, 1591, 1595, 8  vo) ;  Delphinus,  Com^ 
menlarii  [indud.  Hebrews]  (ed.  Semanus,  Romę,  1687, 
8vo);  Chytraus,  Scholia  (ed.  Schincke,  F.  ad  M.  1588, 
8vo) ;  ♦Toletus  [Rom.  Cath.],  CommentarU  (Rom,  1588, 
fol  1590,  2  vola.  4to;  Lugd.  1589, 1614,  fol;  Yen.  1589, 
Brix.  1603,  4to);  Hemmingius,  Commeniarius  (Basil. 
1591, fol);  Zepper,iliic%»M (Herb.  1595, 8vo);  RoUock, 
Commeniarius  (Gcnev.  1599, 1618,  8vo) ;  AgricoU  Com- 


m&iiaruu  (Colon.  1699, 8vo) ;  Capponoa,  CommeKiarmi 
(Yen.  1604,  4to);  Pereriua,  Duputatiomes  (Lugd.  1608. 
10),  2  vols.  4to) ;  Pelaigus,  Quatita  (FranooC  1615, 4io) ; 
De  Ribeia,  Commeatarius  (Lugdun.  1628, 4to);  MyliofB^ 
CommentariuM  (Francof.  1624, 4to) ;  Tamoyinsy  Commen- 
tarius  (Roet.  1629, 4to) ;  Jansonins,  Commemtarws  (Lo- 
van.  1630, 8vo) ;  Corderius,  Catena  (Antw.  1680,  folio) ; 
Lenaeus,  CommentariuM  (Hdm.  1640,  4Ło)  ;  Gomani% 
lUuttratio  (AmsL  1644,  fol;  also  in  Opp.)-,  Lyser,  Diś^ 
puiationes  (Yitemb.  1646, 4to);  Yiiginius,  Notai  (Dorpu 
1647, 4to) ;  Amyraut,  Paraphrase  (Fr.,  Salm.  1651, 8vo); 
Petrus,  Artndy  etc  (Dutch,  Amsterd.  1668,  3  vols.  4to); 
Schlichting,  Commentaria  [iududing  other  booka  of  che 
N.  T.]  (Irenop.  1656,  fol) ;  Hutcheson,  Eipomtion  (Lond. 
1657,  fol,  1840,  8vo) ;  Nifanins,  Commeniarius  (F.  ad  IŁ 
1684, 4to) ;  &  Schmidt,  Parapkrasis  (Argent.  1685, 1689, 
4to ;  also  in  Germ.,  Hal  1716, 8vo) ;  Yassor,  Paraphrase 
(Fr.,  Paris,  1689,  12mo);  Comazzi,  Dimonstrazione,  etc 
(Naples,  1706,  8vo) ;  Sibersma,  Explicatum  (in  Frencfa, 
Amst  1717,  4to ;  in  Geim.,  Basel,  1718,  4to) ;  GaUlaen, 
Adnotationes  [includ.  begin.  of  Matt.  and  Loke]  (Gan- 
dav.  1724,  4to);  *Lampe,  Commeniarius  (Amst.  1724-6, 
Basil  1725-7,  3  vol8.  4to;  in  German,  Lpz.  1729.  4to); 
also  SynUagma  (Amst  1737,  2  vols.  4Co) ;  Merrick,  .4ii. 
notations  [on  i-iii]  (Lond.  1764-7,  2  Yołs.  8vo) ;  light- 
foot,  Exercitations  (in  Works,  xii) ;  also  Chorograpkia 
(in  Ugolino,  Thesaurusy^f  1117);  Semler,  Por^rtim 
(HaUe,  1771-2,  2  voIs.  8vo);  Moaheim,  ErMarttmg  (ed. 
Jaoobi,  Weim.  1777, 4to) ;  Hesel,  Atdatwsg  (pt.  i,  Frkft. 
1792, 8vo) ;  Oertel,  Eri&ut.  [indud.  EpisUea]  (Frkil.  and 
Gorl.  1795,  2  vol8.  8vo) ;  Morus,  Reettationes  (edit  Din- 
dorf,  Prag.  1795,  Ups.  1796, 1808,  1821, 8vo);  &  Luige, 
Erkidrung  [indnding  Epistks]  (Weimar,  1795-7,3  voU 
8vo) ;  Shepherd,  Notes  [induding  Episdes]  (Lond.  1796, 
4to) ;  Schmid,  Theoiogia,  etc  (Jen.  1800,  8vo) ;  Schulze, 
Charakter,  etc.  (Lpz.  1803, 8vo) ;  Paulus,  Conumadar  (pt 
i,  Tubing.  1806, 8vo) ;  Breitenstein,  A  nmertungen  (Frkft 
1813, 1823,  8vo) ;  *Tittmann,  Commentarius  (Lips.  1816^ 
8vo;  tr.  in  English,  Edinb.  1844,  2  vola.  12mo) ;  Majer, 
Beitrage  (Lps.  1820, 8vo) :  *Lllcke,  Commentar  [indod. 
Epistles]  (Bonn,  1820-32, 1833-5,  1840-43,  8  Tola.  8ro; 
vol  iii  [epistle]  transl  into  Engl,  Edinb.  1837, 12ino); 
MojTsey,  Lectures  (Oxf.  182U28,  2  vo1b.  8vo);  Pitman, 
I^tctures  [on  i-x]  (Lond.  1822, 8vo) ;  Seyffiuth,  SpeM- 
charakteristik,  etc  (Lpzg.  1823,  8vo);  ^TbdUick,  Com- 
mentar (Hamb.  1826, 1828, 1831, 1833;  lips.  1837, 1844; 
Gotha,  1857 ;  in  Engl  by  Kaufman,  fioatoo,  1836,  ISmo; 
by  Krauth,  Phila.  1859, 8vo) ;  Klee,  Commentar  (Maiaz, 
1829,  8vo)  ;  Fickenscher,  Auslegunff  (NUmbi  1831-88,  S 
vols.  8vo) ;  Grimm,  Christologia,  etc  (lipsL  1833,  8to); 
Sumner,  EacposUUm  (Lond.  IKfó,  8vo) ;  Mattb&i,  Amde^ 
gung  (vol  i,  Gott  1837,  8vo) ;  Slade,  Readmgs  (London, 
1837,  1843,  12mo);  Simson,  Theologia,  etc  (Reg.  1839^ 
8vo)  ;  Fromann,  Lehrhegriff'^  etc  (L^pocig,  1839,  8vo); 
Wirth,  Erldantng  (Ulm,  1839, 8vo) ;  F^ittenon,  Ledum 
[xiv-xvi]  (London,  1840, 12mo) ;  Anderson,  Eiposilum 
(London,  1841,  2  vols.  12mo);  Dmmmond,  Erposkim 
(Lond.  1841, 12mo);  Heiberden,  ite/Mtfiow  (Lond,  1842, 
12mo);  Kćietlin,  Lehrhegriff,  etc  (Beriin,  1848,  8to); 
Baumgarten-Cni8ius,i4iM2c^f^  [indud.  Epistks]  (Jea. 
1843-5,  2  vols.  %vo)\  Jones,  Sermons  [xiii-xvii]  (Qx£ 
1844,  8vo);  Aislab^e,  Translatum  (Lond.  1845,  12ido); 
Ford,  Ilhutration  (Lond.  1852,  8vo);  Lnthaidt,  Eigm- 
thumlichkeił,  etc  (Lpz.  1852-8,  2  vo]a.  8vv>);  Boucfaier, 
Exposition  (London,  1854, 12mo) ;  Comming,  Beadiagt 
(London,  1856,  8vo) ;  Maurice,  Discourses  (Camb.  1857, 
12mo) ;  5  Cleigymen,  Rerision  (Lond.  1857, 8vo) ;  Reuai, 
Introd.  (in  his  Hist.  de  la  łhioL  ChriHenm  Stnsb.  1860, 
ii,  272  sq.);  Fawoett,  EzposiOoin  (London,  1860,  8to); 
*Ewald,  Erkidrung  [indud.  Efóstles]  (Gdtt  1861  są.,  3 
vols.  8vo) ;  *Heng8tenbeig,  Erl&uierm^  (Beri  1861-64, 
8  vo1b.,  1869,  2  vo]s.  8vo ;  tr.  in  English,  Edinb.  1865«  2 
vols.  8vo) ;  Malan,  Notes  (Lond.  1862, 4to);  Asti^  Ex- 
pUcation  (Gen^ve,  1862-4, 8  vols.  8vo);  Klofutar,  Com- 
mentarius (Yienna,  1868,  8vo);  Brown,  Leetmrts  (Ox£ 
1868,  2  vola.  8vo);  BHumlein,  Commentar  (Stnttg.  1863^ 
8vo)  ,•  Scholten,  OmkrzocL  (heyć,  1864  Bq.,  2  vo]8i  8ro)  j 


JOHN 


951 


JOHN 


Godet,  Commtniaire  (toL  i,  1864,  8to)  ;  Ryle,  TktmgkU 
(Loiid.  186&-6, 2  vol&  8yo) ;  Anon.  Erlauierwng  (Berlin, 
1866,  8vo) ;  Von  Burger,  ErHdrung  (Niirdl.  1867, 8vo) ; 
noffhack,  Au^^egwng  (Leipóg,  1871,  2  yoU.  8vo).     See 

GOSPKLS. 

JUHN,  FIRST  EPISTLE  OF,  ihe  most  important 
of  the  8o-ć«lled  ccUkoUc  or  '*  generał"  EpUtles,  of  which 
it  is  the  fourth  in  order.     See  Bibue,  yoL  i,  p.  800,  coL  2. 

L  Its  ^  uthentic%ty,^-ThwX  thia  U  the  production  of  the 
same  author  as  wrote  the  fonrth  Gospel  is  so  manifest 
Łhat  it  has  uniyersally  been  admitted  (comp.  Hauff,  Die 
A  utkentie  u.  dtr  hohe  Werth  dei  Evang,  Johan,  p.  187  Bq.). 
The  estabUsbment  of  the  gennineness  of  the  one,  there- 
fore,  inroWes  the  adnussion  of  that  of  the  other.  The 
eyidence,  however,  in  favor  of  thę  Epistle  is  suiBcient  to 
establish  its  daims,  apart  from  its  relation  to  the  Goq)eL 
See§7,be]ow. 

1.  £xtemaL — Eosebios  informs  ns  that  Papias  knew 
and  madę  iise  of  it  (//.  A\  iii,  89) ;  Polycarp  quotes  a  pas^ 
sagę  (iv,  8)  from  it  in  his  Epistle  to  the  Philippians,  eh. 
vu ;  Irenieus  uses  it  (comp.  A  dr.  Har,  iii,  16 ;  v,  8,  with 
1  John  ii,  18 ;  iv,  1, 8 ;  y*  1) ;  it  is  quoted  or  referred  to 
by  element  of  Alezandria  {Strom,  ii,  889)  and  TertuJIian 
{Scorpiae.  c.  22 ;  i4  cfe.  Prax,  c.  15) ;  and  Eusebius  assures 
ns  that  it  was  aniverBal]y  and  always  acknowledged  in 
Łhe  Church  {JI,  E,  iii,  26, 26).  It  is  fomid  in  the  Peshito 
and  in  all  the  ancient  yersions,  and  is  included  in  every 
catalogue  of  the  canonical  books  which  has  oome  down 
to  us  (Laidner,  Worla,  v),  684).  In  fact,  the  only  per- 
Bons  who  appear  not  to  have  reoognised  this  Epistle  are 
the  ancient  heretics,  the  Alogi  and  the  Marcionites,  the 
latter  of  whom  were  aoqnainted  with  nonę  of  the  writ- 
ings  of  John,  and  the  former  lejected  them  all,  ascńlńng 
them  to  Cerinthus,  not  opon  critical,  but  purely  arbitraiy 
and  dogmatical  grounds. 

2.  With  this  the  iniemal  evidence  fully  accords.  The 
work  is  anonymous,  but  the  apostle  John  is  plainly  indi- 
cated  throughout  as  the  writer.  The  author  asserts 
that  he  had  been  an  immediate  disctple  of  Jesus,  and 
that  he  testifies  what  he  himself  had  seen  and  heard  (i, 
1-4 ;  iv,  14),  and  this  assumption  is  sustained  through- 
out in  a  way  so  natural  and  unaffected  that  it  would  be 
doing  yiolence  to  all  probability  to  suppose  that  it  could 
have  becn  attained  by  one  who  felt  that  he  was  practis- 
ing  in  this  a  delibeiate  imposition.  The  circumstanoes 
also  of  the  writer  to  which  he  alludes,  the  themes  on 
which  he  chiefly  dwells,  and  the  spirit  which  his  writing 
breathes,  are  aU  such  as  fali  in  with  what  we  know  of 
the  apostle  John,  and  suggeet  him  as  the  writer.  If  this 
be  the  work  of  a  pretender,  he  has,  as  De  Wette  remarks 
{Exeg^,  Hdb,),  '^shown  incredible  snbtlety  in  oonoealing 
the  name  of  the  apostle,  whiist  he  has  indirectly,  and  in 
a  most  simple  natural  way,  indicated  him  as  the  writer." 

A  few  German  theologians  in  our  own  times  (Lange, 
Schriften  des  Johan,  iii,  4  Bq. ;  Cludius,  Uranńchten  des 
ChriiteiUh.p,b2aą,;  Bretschneider,Pro6a6»&i,p.l668q.; 
Zeller,  in  the  TheoL  Jahrb.  1845)  have  been  the  first  crit- 
ics  to  throw  doubts  on  the  genuineness  of  any  of  John'8 
writings,  and  this  altogether  on  intemal  grounds,  but 
they  have  met  with  oomplete  refutations  from  the  pens 
of  Bertholdt  (vi),  Harmsen  {A  uthent.  d,  ^cAr.  d,  Erangd, 
Johan,\  and  LUcke  {Commentar^  iii).  See  above.  The 
only  serions  objections  to  the  Epistles  are  those  of  Bret- 
Bchneider,  who  has  eqnally  attacked  the  genuineness  of 
the  GospeL 

(1.)  He  maintains  that  the  doctrine  conoeming  the 
Jjogot^  and  the  antt-dooetic  tendenc}'  of  John's  Ist  Epis- 
tle, betray  an  author  of  the  second  century,  whom  he  as- 
sumes  to  be  John  the  Presbyter.  But  it  is  beyond  all 
question,  says  LUcke  (L  c),  that  .the  Logo*  doctrine  of 
John,  snbetantiaUy,  althongh  not  fully  devebped,  exiBt^ 
ed  in  the  Jewish  th€M>logical  notions  respecting  the  Son  of 
God,  and  that  we  find  it  distinctly  ezpressed,  although  in 
difTerent  words,  in  the  Pauline  representation  of  Christ's 
exalted  dignity  (compare  Coloesi  i  with  Heb.  i) ;  that 
the  radiments  of  it  appear  in  the  literaturę  of  the  Jews, 
canonical  and  apocryphal,  Chaldaic  and  Alezandiian ; 


that  in  the  time  of  Christ  it  was  oonsiderably  developed 
in  the  writings  of  Philo,  and  sŁill  morę  sbongly  in  the 
fathers  of  the  second  century,  who  were  so  far  from  re- 
taining  the  simple,  Hebraizing,  and  canonical  modę  of 
ezpression  peculiar  to  John  that  in  them  it  had  assumed 
a  g^ostically  erudite  form,  although  essentially  identicaL 
John  intends  by  the  Word  {Logos)  to  ezpress  the  divine 
naturę  of  Christ,  but  the  patristic  logology  attempts  to 
determine  the  relation  between  the  J^i;^  and  the  invis- 
ible  God  on  one  side,  and  the  world  on  the  other.  The 
earliest  fathers,  as  Justin  Martyr  and  Tatian,  while  they 
make  nse  of  John's  phraseology,  further  support  their 
doctzines  by  ecdesiastical  traditum,  which,  as  LUcke  ob- 
senres,  must  have  ito  root  in  doctrines  that  were  known 
in  the  first  century.  But,  from  Theophilus  of  Antioch 
downwards,  the  fathers,  mentioning  John  by  name,  ex- 
pressly  oonnect  their  elucidations  with  the  canonical 
foundation  in  the  Gospel  of  John,  without  the  granting 
of  which  the  langnage  of  Justin  would  be  inexplicable 
(Olshauaen,  On  (he  Genuineness  of  the  Four  Gospels,  p. 
306  sq.>  Accordingly,  adds  LUcke,  on  this  side,  the 
authenticity  of  the  Gospel  and  Epistle  remains  unassail- 
able.    See  Looos. 

(2.)  On  similar  grounds  may  be  refuted  Bretschnei- 
der's  argruments  derived'from  the  anti-docetic  character 
of  John*s  Epistle.  It  is  tnie,  docetism,  or  the  idealistic 
philosophy,  was  not  fully  developed  before  the  second 
century,  but  its  germ  existed  before  the  time  of  Christ, 
as  has  been  shown  by  Mo8heim,Walch,  and  Niemeyer. 
Traoes  of  Jewish  theology  and  Oriental  theosophy  hav- 
ing  been  applied  to  the  Christian  doctrine  in  the  apos- 
tolic  age  are  to  be  found  in  the  Epistles  of  Paul,  and  it 
would  be  unaccountabk  to  suppose  that  the  fuUy  devel- 
oped  docetism  should  hare  first  madę  its  appearance  in 
the  Epistles  of  Irenanis  and  Polycarp.  We  have  the 
authority  of  the  former  of  these  for  the  fact  that  Cerin- 
thus taught  the  dooetic  heresy  in  the  lifetime  of  John 
in  the  simple  form  in  which  it  seems  to  be  attacked  in 
1  John  iv,  1-8 ;  ii,  22 ;  2  John  7.     See  Docetje. 

IL  Integritg,— The  genuineness  of  only  two  smali  por- 
tions  of  this  writing  have  been  called  in  ąuestion,  viz., 
the  words  o  6fŁoXoy&v  rov  wiiv  Kai  t6v  Traripa  ixit 
(ii,  28),  and  the  words  iv  rtf  obpayf  6  Ilar^p,  ó  Aóyoc 
Kai  rb  uywv  nvcv/<a  •  Kai  ovtoi  oi  rptię  tv  tlm,  Kat 
rptlę  tiaiv  ol  fŁapTvpovvTfc  lv  rg  yy  (v,  7,  8).  The 
former  of  these  is  omitted  in  the  TexŁ  Rec.,  and  is  print- 
ed  in  italics  in  the  A.y.  it  is,  however.  supported  by 
sufficient  authority,  and  is  inserted  by  Griesbach,  Łach- 
manu, Tischendorf,  Schobs,  etc  The  latter  of  these  paa- 
sages  has  given  rise  to  a  world -famous  controyersy, 
which  can  hardly  be  said  to  have  yet  cnded  (Orme, 
Memoir  ofthe  Conirover$y  retpecting  the  Hearenlg  Wit" 
nesses  [Lond.  1880]).  The  prevailing  judgmcnt,  how- 
ever,  of  all  critics  and  interpretera  is  that  the  passage  is 
spurious  (see  Griesbach,  Ajytend,  adN,  T,  ii,  1-26 ;  Tisch- 
endorf  on  the  passage ;  LUcke,  Comment.  on  the  Epistles 
of  John,  in  Bib.  Cabinefj  No.  xv,  etc.) .     See  Witnesses, 

THB  ThRKE  HbA^^EMLY. 

IIL  Time  and  Place  of  writing  the  First  Epistle.— On 
these  points  nothing  certain  can  be  deteimined. 

1.  It  has  been  conjectured  by  many  interpreters,  an- 
cient and  modem,  that  it  was  written  at  the  same  place 
as  the  GospeL  The  morę  ancient  tradition  places  the 
writing  of  the  Gospel  at  Ephesus,  and  a  less  authentie 
report  refers  it  to  the  island  of  Patmos.  Hug  (Introd,) 
infers,  from  the  absence  of  writing  materials  (3  John  18), 
that  all  John's  Epbtles  were  composed  at  Patmoe.  The 
most  probable  opinion  is  that  it  was  written  somewhere 
in  Asia  Minor,  in  which  was  the  ordinary  rcsidence  of 
the  apostle  (Eusebius,  Hist,  EccL  m,  28) ;  perhap8,acoord- 
ing  to  the  tradition  of  the  Greek  Churoh,  at  Ephesus, 
but  for  this  we  have  no  historical  warrant  (LttckeyCof»- 
mentary), 

2.  It  is  eąually  difficult  to  determine  the  time  of  the 
writing  of  this  Epistle,  although  it  was  most  probably 
posterior  to  the  Gospel,  which  seems  to  be  referred  to  in 
1  John  1,4.    Some  are  of  opinion  that  the  Epistle  was 


JOHN 


052 


JOHN 


■n  enrelope  or  aoeompanimeiit  to  the  Gotpd,  and  tfa«t 
they  were  ooiuequently  written  nearij  BimnlUmeoiuiy 
(Hug,  Introd),  Ab,  howeyer,  the  period  when  the  Gos- 
pel was  written,  acootding  to  the  eridenoe  of  tradition 
and  criticiam,  ^  fluctoates  between  the  tucth  and  ninth 
deoenniom  of  the  fint  oentniy"  (Lttcke,  Commaitorgr),  we 
are  at  a  loea  for  data  on  which  to  foond  any  probabk 
hypotheaia  reapecting  the  exact  time  of  the  writing  of 
the  Epistle;  bat  that  it  waa  poeterior  to  the  Gospel  ia 
further  rendered  probable  trom  the  fact  that  it  is  formed 
on  such  a  view  of  the  perMm  of  Jesus  as  is  foond  only  in 
John*8  Gospel,  and  that  it  aboands  in  allusions  to  the 
speeches  of  Jesus  as  there  reoorded.  Lttcke  oondudes, 
fiom  its  raembling  the  Gospel  in  its  apologetical  and 
polemical  allusions,  that  it  indicates  soch  a  state  of  the 
Christian  commnnity  as  prores  that  it  most  be  posterior 
eren  to  the  last  Epistles  of  Paul,  and  oonsequently  that 
the  ancient  Church  was  justified  in  claasing  it  among 
the  catholic  Epistles^  which  all  bear  this  chronologicid 
character. 

It  has  been  aigned  by  serenl,  from  ii,  18  (l^ani  &pa 
iffriy),  that  the  Epistle  was  written  before  the  destmc- 
tion  (^  Jemsalem,  whik  others,  founding  their  oonjecture 
onthesamepas8age,maintaintheveryrever9e.  Among 
the  former  are  to  be  foond  the  names  of  Hammond,  Gro- 
tius,  Caloyius,  Lange,  and  HlUilein,  and  among  the  lat- 
ter  those  of  Baionius,  Basnage,  Mili,  and  Le  Clerc 

£qually  onsatisfactoiy  is  the  argument,  in  respect  to 
the  time  when  this  Epistle  was  written,  derived  from  its 
suppoeed  senile  tonę ;  for,  although  the  style  is  somewhat 
moie  tantological  than  the  Gospel,  this  can  be  aooounted 
for  by  its  epistolary  character,  without  ascribing  it  to  the 
effects  of  senile  forgetfulnesa.  In  fact,  this  character  is 
altogether  denied  by  some  of  the  ablest  critics.  Stlll, 
ftom  the  patriarchal  tonę  aasumed  in  the  Epistle,  and  the 
ficequent  use  of  the  appeliation  *'  little  chlldren,"  we  may 
leasonably  oonclude  that  it  was  written  in  advanced 
age,  peihaps  not  kmg  after  the  Gospel,  or  about  AD.  92. 

IV.  For  tokom  nfrittefu— The  writer  eyidently  had  in 
his  eye  a  cirde  of  readers  with  whom  he  stood  in  close 
persooal  relation — Christians,  apparently,  who  were  liv- 
ing  in  the  midst  of  idolaters  (y,  21),  and  who  were  ex- 
posed  to  danger  from  false  speculation  and  wrong  meth- 
ods  of  presenttng  the  truths  of  Christianity  (ii,  22-26; 
iv,  I-d;  V,  1-6,  etc).  If  the  Epistle  was  written  by 
John  at  Ephestts,  we  may,  from  these  circnmstances, 
with  much  probability  oondnde  that  the  Christians  in 
that  region  were  the  parties  for  whoae  behoof  it  was  first 
designed.  Augustine  (Quast,  EvanffeL  ii,  89)  says  it  was 
addresaed  ''ad  Parthos,"  and  this  inscription  appears  in 
seyeral  MSS.  of  the  Yulgate,  and  has  been  defended  by 
Grotius,  Paulus,  and  others,  &i  giving  the  real  destin*- 
tion  of  the  Epistle.  John,  however,  had  no  relations 
with  the  Parthians  that  we  know  of,  nor  does  a  single 
ancient  testimony  oonfirm  the  statement  of  Augustine, 
exoept  on  the  part  of  later  writers  of  the  Latin  Church, 
who  probably  simply  followed  him.  It  has  been  sug- 
gested  that,  as  the  2d  Epistle  is  by  some  of  the  andents 
described  as  irphc  irap^ivovc  (Ciem.  Alex.  Frag^  edit. 
Potter,  p.  1011),  this  may  have  been  changed  into  rrpbc 
nap^ovc,  and  by  mistake  applied  to  the  Ist  Epistle 
(Whiftton,  Comment,  on  the  Cath,  Epistles ;  Hag,  TtUrocL 
p.  464,  Fo8dick'8  transL).  This  is  possible,  but  not  very 
probable.  The  suggestion  of  Wegscheider,  that ''ad 
Parthos'*  is  an  error  for  "ad  Sparsos,**  an  inscription 
which  actually  is  found  in  seyeral  MSS.  (Scholz,  BibL 
KrU,  Reise,  p.  67),  is  ingenious,  and  may  be  correct  If 
we  are  to  understand  the  term  catkoNc,  as  applied  to  this 
Epistle,  in  the  sense  of  drcular,  we  may  naturally  infer, 
from  the  abaence  of  the  epistolary /orm,  that  this  was  an 
encydical  letter  addressed  to  seyeral  of  John*8  congrega- 
tions,  and  in  all  probability  to  the  churches  of  the  Apoc- 
alypse.  See  §  8,  bdow.  Lardner  is  clearly  right  when 
he  says  that  it  was  primarily  meant  for  the  churches  in 
Asia  under  John*s  inspection,  to  whom  he  had  alieady 
orally  deliyered  his  doctrine  (i,  8 ;  ii,  7).     See  Rbykła- 

TION. 


y.  CAoracfer^— Thoogh  lanked  among  the  eatiuAe 
Epistles,  this  writing  has  not  the  ibnn  of  an  cpiatie— in 
this  respect  it  morę  resembles  a  free  homily ;  sdll,  in 
fkct,  it  nndoabtedly  was  sent  as  a  letter  to  the  peisou 
for  whoae  instruction  it  was  designed.  The  genecd 
strain  is  admonitoty,  and  the  author  seems  to  haye  writ- 
ten as  he  wonld  haye  spoken  had  those  whom  he  ad- 
diesBcs  been  present  before  him.  One  great  thoogbt 
peryades  the  book— the  reality  of  Christ^s  appeaianee  in 
the  flesh,  and  the  all-soffidency  of  his  doctrine  for  sid- 
yation — a  salyation  which  mimifests  itself  in  holines 
and  loye.  But  the  author  does  not  discoss  these  topiei 
in  any  systematic  or  logical  form;  he  rather  aUows  his 
thoughts  to  flow  out  in  snocession  as  one  soggeats  anoth- 
er,  and  dothes  them  in  simple  and  eamest  words  as  they 
arise  in  his  mind.  Some  haye  imputed  a  character  of 
senility  to  the  work  on  this  aoooont,  bot  without  reaaon. 
Under  a  simple  and  inartifldal  exterxir  there  lies  deep 
thought,  and  the  book  is  penraded  by  a  aupfppcsscd  in- 
tensity  of  feeling  that  recalls  the  yoathfiil  Boaoages  in 
the  aged  apostle.  The  migfaty  power  that  is  in  it  hai 
drawn  to  it  in  all  ages  the  reyerenoe  and  loye  of  the  no- 
blest  minds,  "especially  of  those  who  morę  particolarly 
take  up  Christianity  as  a  religion  of  loye — a  religion  of 
the  heart"  (LUcke,  Int,  p.  66). 

YI.  CoiaenU.—A  strict  analysis  of  this  Epistle,  thoe- 
fore,  seems  haidly  possifale,  as  the  writer  does  not  appear 
to  haye  been  sjrstematic  in  its  plan,  hut  rather  to  hare 
written  out  of  a  fuli  and  kmng  heart.  "  He  aasirto  the 
pre-existent  glory  and  the  r»il  homanity  of  oar  Lord, 
in  oppońtion  to  false  teachem,  and  for  the  comfort  of 
the  Chmch  (i,  1-7).  Theo  foDows  a  statement  irf*  the 
sinfulness  of  man,  and  the  propitłation  of  Christ,  this 
propitlation  bdng  intended  to  stir  os  np  to  hoKness  and 
loye  (i, 8;  ii,  17);  Jesus  and  the  Christ  are  aaserted  to 
be  one,  in  oppońtion  to  the  fidse  teachere  (ii,  18-29). 
The  next  chapter  seems  deyoted  to  the  singnlar  loye  of 
God  in  adopting  us  to  be  his  sona,  with  the  happines 
and  the  duties  arising  ont  of  it,  espedally  the  dnty  of 
brotheriy  loye  (eh.  iii).  The  following  chapter  is  prin- 
dpaUy  oocupied  with  marks  by  which  to  distingoish  the 
teaching  of  the  Spirit  of  God  from  that  of  lalse  Ceadiefs 
and  of  AntichristfWith  repeated  exhortation8  to  'loye  as 
brethren'  (eh.  iy).  The  apostle  then  showa  the  ooonee- 
tion  between  fiUth,  renewal,  loye  to  God  and  to  the 
brethren,  obedience,  and  yictory  oyer  the  woild,  and 
oondudes  with  a  brief  summary  of  what  had  been  al- 
ready  said  (eh.  y)**  (Fairbaim>    See  §  8,  bdow. 

TH.  Relation  to  the  Fowth  Gotpd,—Tht  dose  aAnity 
between  this  Epistle  and  John*8  Gospd  has  ataeady  been 
alloded  to.  In  style,  in  preyaiUng  fonnobs  of  ezprea- 
sion,  in  spirit,  and  in  thooght,  the  two  are  identicaL  "It 
is  eyident  that  the  writer  of  each  had  a  simikr  daas  of 
opponents  in  his  mind— those  who^  like  the  DoeetJB,  de- 
nied the  tme  humanity  of  Christ ;  those,  again,  who  de- 
nied that  the  man  Jesus  was  the  Christ  and  Son  of  God ; 
and  those  who,  under  pretence  of  being  his  diadpleB, 
were  habitually  liying  in  yiolaHon  of  his  oommandsi  In 
both  books  is  the  same  deeply  loying  and  oontempiathre 
natore ;  in  both,  a  heart  oompletdy  imboed  with  the 
teaching  of  the  Sayiour;  in  both,  also,  the  aame  tenden- 
cy  to  abhorienoe  of  those  who  opposed  his  Lord.  Re- 
maikable,  too  (to  use  the  worda  of  Ebrard),  ia  the  sfani- 
larity  of  the  cirde  o/Ueas  in  both  writii^  The  no- 
tions,  light,  t^fe,  darkness,  trutk,  l£e,  meet  us  in  the  Epis- 
tle with  the  same  broad  and  deep  meaning  which  they 
bear  in  the  Gospel;  so,  also,  the  aotions  of  propiłiiaiom 
(cAaff/ióc),  of  doing  righteoosneas,  sin,  or  iniąuity  (apsap' 
TiaVf  dvofdav\  and  the  sharply-presented  antitheses  of 
light  and  darkness,  truth  and  lie,  life  and  death,  of  loy- 
ing and  hating,  the  k>ye  of  the  Father  and  of  the  wvdd, 
children  of  God  and  of  the  deyil,  spirit  of  trnth  and  of 
eiTor"(Fabtaim).  Madmight,  and,  still  moie  fnUy,  De 
Wette,  haye  drawn  out  a  oopkMis  oompaiison  of  expns- 
ńons  common  to  the  Gospd  and  Epistle. 

This  similarity  has  led  to  the  suggestion  thatbo«h,in 
a  sense,  Ibim  one  whole,  the  Epistle  being,  aoeonli^g  to 


JOHN 


968 


JOHN 


•ODM,  a  prokgonieoon  to  the  CkMpel;  aeooidiiig  to  oth- 
eiąitipnctiGmlooiidiuioo;  and  aoooidiiig  to  othen,  its 
conilDendaftoryaccompaiiiiiieiit.  TheprobabOityistluiŁ 
both  weie  written  at  the  same  peiiod  of  the  author^s 
life,  and  that  they  both  oontain  in  writing  what  be  had 
been  aociutomed  to  testify  and  teach  dnring  his  apoa- 
lolic  niiniitzy;  but  whether  any  ckMer  rdation  than 
thia  ezisti  between  them  niut  remaiu  matter  entirelj 
ofoonjectuie. 

YIII.  Daign, — ^That  the  apofltle  foogfat  to  confiim  the 
believen  for  whom  he  wrote  in  their  attachment  to 
Chriatianity  as  it  had  been  deliyered  to  them  by  the 
ambassadon  of  Christ  ia  evident  on  the  mrlhoe  of  the 
Epiatle.  It  is  dear,  alao,  that  he  had  in  yiew  oertain 
fidae  teachecB  by  whose  arta  the  Chrutians  were  in  dan- 
ger  of  being  seduoed  ftom  the  faith  of  Jesus  as  the  in^ 
csmate  Son  ofGod,  and  fWnn  that  holy  and  loYing  coone 
of  condnct  to  which  tme  iidth  in  Jesus  leads ;  but  who 
theee  fabe  teacheis  were,  or  to  what  school  they  be- 
longed,  is  doubtful.  It  is  an  oldopinion  that  they  were 
Dooets  (TertuUian, Db  earm  ChriiU,  i,  24;  Dionys.  AL 
ai».  Ensebius,  H,  E,  vii,  25),  and  to  this  many  reoent  in- 
quiren  have  giyen  in  their  adherence.  Lttcke,who 
atrennonsly  d^enda  this  yiew,  attempta  to  show  that 
Dooetism  was  in  yogue  as  early  as  the  time  of  John  by 
an  appeal  to  the  case  of  Cerinthus,  and  to  the  referencee 
to  IJooetism  in  three  of  the  epiśtles  of  Ignatius  (Ad 
8m9m.2ws\.^AdTraU.'ui',AdEph.yvi)\  butthedoo- 
tiine  of  Cerinthus  lespeding  the  person  of  Jesus  Christ 
was  not  Dooetic  in  the  proper  sense,  and  the  passages 
cttcd  from  Ignatius  are  all  snbfect  to  the  suspicion  of 
being  interpolations,  as  nonę  of  them  aie  Ibnnd  in  the 
Syriac  recension.  LUcke  lays  stress  also  on  the  words 
iv  ffapKi  iXii\v^&ra  (W,  2 ;  comp.  8  John  yii)  as  indicatr 
ing  an  expres8  antithesis  to  the  doctrine  of  the  Dooetics 
that  Christ  had  come  only  in  appearsnoe.  It  may  be 
doubted,  howeyer,  whether  this  means  anything  morę 
than  that  Christ  had  rea%  come,  the  phńse  iv  aafuu 
iX^ttv  being  probably  a  famillar  technicality  for  this 
amoDg  the  Christians.  It  may  be  questioned,  also, 
whether  the  passage  should  not  be  trandated  thus, 
''Eyeiy  spirit  whidk  oonfesseth  Jesus  Christ  haying 
[who  has]  oome  in  the  flesh  is  of  God,"  rather  than 
thus,  "Eyery  spirit  which  oonfesseth  tkat  Jesus  Christ 
is  oome,"  etc.  (for  6fto\oyuv  with  the  accusatiye,  see 
John  ix,  22;  AcU  zztii,  8;  Bom.  X,  9;  1  Ttm.  yi,  12), 
and  in  this  case  eyen  the  appearance  of  allusioo  to  a 
oontrary  doctrine  yanishes  (see  Bleek,  EndeiL  p.  698). 
It  may  be  added  that,  had  John  intended  to  expre8s  a 
diicct  aniithesb  to  Dooetism,  he  would  hardly  haye  oon- 
tented  himself  with  merely  using  the  woids  iv  oapid, 
for  there  is  a  sense  in  which  eyen  the  Dooetn  would 
baye  admitted  this. — ^Kitta 

The  main  object  of  the  EpisUe,  therefore,  does  not 
appear  to  be  simply  that  of  opposiug  the  errors  of  the 
BocetB  (Schmidt,  Bertholdt,Niemeyer),  or  of  the  Onos- 
ńa  (Kleulser),  or  of  the  Nicolattana  (Macknight),  or 
of  the  Cerinthians  (MichaeliB),  or  of  all  of  them  togeth- 
er  (Townsend),  or  of  the  Sabians  (Barkey,  Stoir,  Keil), 
or  of  Judaiaers  (LOffier,  Semler),  or  of  apostates  to  Ju- 
daiam  (Lange,  Eichhom,  H&nlein) :  the  leading  pnr- 
poee  of  the  apoetle  appears  to  be  rsther  constmctiye 
than  polemicaL  John  is  remarkable  both  in  his  history 
and  in  his  writings  for  his  abhorrenoe  of  fidse  doctrine, 
but  he  does  not  aOack  enor  as  a  oontroyersialist.  He 
States  the  deep  tmth  and  lays  down  the  deep  morał 
teaching  of  ChrisŁianity,  and  in  thia  wmy,  rather  than 
directly,  condemns  heresy.  In  the  introdnction  (i,  1-4) 
the  apoetle  states  the  purpoee  of  his  Epistle.  It  is  to 
dedare  the  Word  of  life  to  those  whom  he  is  addres»- 
ing,  in  order  that  he  and  they  might  be  united  in  tme 
oommonion  wUh  each  other,  and  with  God  the  Father, 
and  his  Son  Jesus  Christ.  He  at  onoe  begins  to  explain 
Ibe  naturę  and  oonditiona  of  oommunioo  with  God,  and, 
being  led  on  from  this  point  into  other  topics,  he  twioe 
faringshimselfbacktothesamesubject  The  first  part 
ofthe  Epistle  may  be  oonsidered  to  endatii,  28.    The 


apostle  begins  aftedi  with  the  doctrine  of  sonship  or 
oommunion  at  ii,  29,  and  retums  to  the  same  theme  at 
iy,  7.  His  lesBon  thronghout  is,  that  the  means  of 
union  with  God  are,  on  the  part  of  Christ,  his  atoning 
bkwd  (i,  7;  ii,  2;  iii,  5;  iy,  10, 14;  y,  6)  and  adrocacy 
(ii,  l)-><m  the  put  of  man,  holiness  (i,  6),  obedienoe  (ii, 
8),  pnrity  (iii,  8),  iaith  (iii,  28 ;  iy,  8 ;  y,  5),  and,  aboye 
all,  loye  (ii,  7;  iii,  14 ;  iy,  7 ;  y,  1).  John  is  designated  §B 
the  Apostle  of  Loye,  and  lightly ;  but  it  should  be  eyei 
remembered  that  his  "loye"  does  not  exdude  or  ignore, 
but  embraoes  both  faith  and  obedience  as  constituent 
parts  of  itself.  Indeed,  Paul's  **  faith  that  worketh  by 
loye,"  and  James*8  **works  that  are  the  fruit  of  fUth," 
and  John's  ''loye  which  springs  from  faith  and  pro- 
duoes  obedience,"  are  all  one  and  the  same  state  of 
mind  described  according  to  the  flrst,  third,  or  seoond 
stage  into  which  we  aie  able  to  analyze  the  complex 
wholer— Smith. 

IX.  Commoifariei.— The  special  exegetical  helps  on 
the  whole  of  the  three  epiśtles  of  John,  besides  those 
mentioned  under  the  Goipti  aboye,  are  the  foUowing, 
of  which  we  designate  the  most  importsnt  by  predxing 
an  asterisk :  Didymus,  /»  Ep.  Jo.  (in  BibL  Max,  Patr,  y ; 
also  in  BibL  Peir.  GalL  yi) ;  Bede,  ErpotUio  (in  OpgK 
y);  Althamer,  Commaitaritu  (Argent.  1621, 1628, 8vo); 
Hemming,  CommenUniut  (Yitemb.  1569, 8yo) ;  Selneck- 
er,  ffmmSa  (Franc.  1580, 1597, 8yo) ;  Dameus,  Commer^ 
tariui  (Geney.  1585, 8yo);  Home,  Erpontio  [including 
Jude]  (Bransw.  1064,  4to);  Bappolt,  Commentaiio  (ed. 
Carpiioy,  lips.  1687,  and  later,  4to) ;  Creyghton,  Ontked- 
mff  (Franec.  1704, 4to);  J.  Lange,  £xegesit  (HaL  1718, 
4to ;  induding  Pet,  ib.  1724,  fol.) ;  Rusmeyer,  ErkUtrwng 
(Hamh.  1717,  4to) ;  Whiston,  Commentary  (Lond.  1719, 
8yo) ;  TgUde,  YerUaarwg  (Ddph.  1786, 4to) ;  Ruhlius, 
NoUb  (Amst.  1789, 12mo) ;  Benson,  Noiet  (London,  1749, 
4to;  indud.  other  cath.  ep.,  ib.  1756, 4to) ;  Schirmer,  Er- 
aSrunff  (Breslau,  1780,  8yo) ;  Morus,  Pralecłionet  (edit 
Hempd,  lips.  1797, 8yo);  Hawkins,  CommaUary  (Hal- 
ifax.  1808, 8yo) ;  Jaspis,  ^dnofo^  [indud.  Rey.]  (lips. 
1816, 1821, 8yo) ;  Paulus,  ErUdrwuff  (Hdddberg,  1829, 
8yo);  Bkkentbethf  Esepogiium  [indud.  Jude]  (London, 
1846,  12mo);  Branne,  AtuUgnnff  (Grim.  1847,  8yo); 
Mayer,  C<mme$ttctr  (Wien,  1861, 8yo) ;  Sander,  Commm" 
tar  (Elberf.  1851, 8yo);  Besser,  AtuUffmc  (Halle,  1851, 
1866, 1862, 12mo);  *Dttsteidieck,  Commentar  (GdtUng. 
1852-56»  2  yols.  8yo);  *Huther,  in  Meyer^s  Hmdimck 
(Gdtting.  1858, 1861,  8yo);  *Maurioe,  Lecturet  (Cambr, 
1857, 1867, 8yo). 

On  the  Firtt  Epittle  alone  there  are  the  following: 
Attgnstine,  Traetattu  (in  Opp.  iv,  1091 ;  tr.  into  French, 
Par.  1670, 12mo) ;  Lnther,  Commtataruu  (ed.  Nenmann, 
lips.  1708;  ed.  Brans,  Lub.  1797, 8yo ;  also  in  German, 
in  Werbe,  Lpc  xi,  572;  Halle, ix,  906);  (Ecolampadius, 
HomUuB  (BasiL  1625,  8yo) ;  Zwingle,  Amotatumes  (in 
Opp,  iy,  585) ;  Tyndale,  Expontum  (London,  1681,  8yo; 
repiinted,  in  EaepotUiomf  ib.  1829,  p.  145) ;  Megander, 
AdnoUaiimu  [uidud.  Hebrews]  (Tigur.  1589, 8vo) ;  Fo- 
leng,  Commadaria  (Venioe,  1546, 8vo) ;  Beuiiinns,  Com- 
meMariuB  (Tttbing.  1571, 8yo) ;  Hunnius,  Enarratio  (F. 
ad  M.  1586, 1592,  8yo) ;  Hessels,  Commeniarwt  (Duaid, 
1599,  8yo);  Eckhard,  DUputatitmet  (Gies.  1609,  8vo); 
Sodnus,  Commentaruu  (Racoy.  1614, 8yo;  also  in  Oj^, 
i,  157);  Egaid,  ErkUtrmig  (GosL  1628, 8vo);  Cundińus, 
OMBitUmn  (Jena,  1648, 1698,  4to) ;  Roberts,  Erideneetj 
etc  (Land.  1649,  8yo) ;  Mestrezat,  ErpoikUm  (Fr.,  Ge- 
n^ye,  1651,  2  yols.  12mo) ;  Cotton,  Commtiaanf  (Lond. 
1656,  foL) ;  Hardy,  Unfoktmg  [on  i-iU]  (Lond.  1656-9, 
2  yols.  4to) ;  *S.  Schmid,  Cammentarius  (F.  et  lipsin, 
1687, 1707, 1786, 4to) ;  Dorsche,  Ditputationei  (Rostock, 
1697, 4to) ;  Spener,  ErkUŁrmg  (Halle,  1699, 1711, 4to); 
Zeller,  Predi^ten  (Lpc.  1709, 8yo) ;  Marperger,  A  usieguńg 
(Nurob.  1710, 4to) ;  Oporinus,  lAberatio  (Giitting.  1741, 
4to);  FreyUnghausen,  ErUÓrung  (Halle,  1741,  8vo); 
Steinhofer,  ErUSrwHg  (Tttbing.  1762,  Hamb.  1848,  8yo) ; 
Ctfpaoy,  SckoUa  (Hehnstadt,  1778, 4to) ;  Semler,  Para- 
pknuU  (Riga,  1792, 12mo) ;  Heeselgren,  Prolt^omemi 
(Upsala,  1800,  8yo);  Weber,  De  authaOia,  etc  (Hallą 


JOHN 


954 


JOHN 


1828,  4to);  RicklL,  ErJddrung  (Luz.  1828,  8vo);  Pieroe, 
Sermons  (Lond.  1885, 2  yola.  8vo) ;  JohaniiBen,  Prtdigtm 
(Alton.  1838,  8vo);  Paterson,  CommaUaiy  (Lond.  1842, 
18ino);  Thomas,  £tudes,  etc  (Gen.  1849,  8vo) ;  *Nean- 
der,  EHauierung  (Beri  1851, 8vo ;  tr.  into  Engl  by  Mn. 
Gonant,  N.  Y.  1852, 12mo);  Erdmann,  A  rgumentum,  etc 
(BeroL  1855,  8vo) ;  Graham,  Commeatary  (Lond.  1857, 
12mo);  Myrbeig,  Commentarius  (Upsala,  1859,  8vo); 
Handoock,  ExpotUion  (£dinbaTgh,1861,8vo);  Candliah, 
LecŁures  (Edinburgh,  1866, 8vo)  •,  Haupt,  EmkUrn^^  etc 
(Colb.  1869,  8vo).     Sec  Epistles  (Catholic). 

JOHN,  SECOND  and  THIRD  EPISTLES  OF. 
The  Łitle  catholic  does  not  properly  belong  to  the  2d 
and  3d  Epistles.  It  became  attached  to  them,  althougb 
addressed  to  Indmduals,  because  they  were  of  too  little 
importance  to  be  classed  by  themselres,  and,  so  far  as 
doctrine  went,  were  regarded  as  appendices  to  the  Ist 
Eplstle. 

Ł  Authorahip. — 1.  The  earterao/ evidence  for  the  gen- 
uineness  of  these  two  Epistles  is  less  copious  and  dęci- 
8ive  than  that  for  the  Ist  Epistlc  They  are  not  in  the 
Peshito  yersion,  which  shows  that  at  the  time  it  was  ex- 
ecuted  they  were  not  recogniaed  by  the  S3rrian  chorch- 
es;  and  Eusebius  places  them  among  the  ÓLwiKiyóiuya 
{H,  E.  iii,  25).  See  Antilboomb^ta.  The  llth  rerse 
of  the  2d  Epistle,  however,  is  qaoted  by  Irensus  (HoBr, 
i,  16, 8)  as  a  sajring  of  John,  the  diaciple  of  the  Lord, 
meaning  thereby,  withoat  doubt,  the  apostle.  Clement 
of  Alexandria  (^Strom,  ii),  in  referring  to  John*s  Ist  Epis- 
tle, uses  the  words  'Itaaw^c  lv  ry  fuiKovi  i}rurroXy, 
which  shows  that  he  was  acquainted  with  at  least  two 
Epistles  of  John ;  thcie  Is  extant,  in  a  Latln  translation, 
a  commentary  by  him  on  the  2d  Epistle ;  and,  as  Euse- 
bius and  Photius  both  attest  that  he  wrote  commenta- 
ries  on  all  the  seoen  catholic  Epistles,  it  would  appear 
that  he  must  have  known  and  acknowledged  the  8d 
also.  If  the  Adumbrationes  are  Clement^s,  he  bears  di- 
rect  testimony  to  the  2d  Epistle  {Adumbr,  p.  1011,  edit 
Potter).  Origen  speaks  of  the  apostle  John  having 
left  a  2d  and  3d  Epistle,  which,  however,  he  adda,  all  did 
not  accept  as  genulne  {In  Joan»  ap.  Eusebius,  vi,  25). 
Dionysius  of  Alexandria  (jS>id.  vii,  25)  recognises  them 
as  productions  of  the  same  John  who  wrote  the  Gospel 
and  the  Ist  Epistle,  and  so  do  all  the  later  Alexandrian 
writers.  Eusebius  himself  elsewhere  refers  to  them 
(Dem,  Evang.  iii,  5)  without  hesitation  as  John*s;  and  in 
the  synod  held  at  Carthage  (A.D.  256),  Aurelius,  bishop 
of  ChuUabi,  confirmed  his  vote  by  citing  2  John  10  sq. 
as  the  language  of  the  apostle  John  (Cyprian,  Opp,  ii, 
120,  ed.  Oberthilr).  Ephrem  Syrus  speaks  of  them  in 
the  same  way  in  the  fourth  centnry.  In  the  fifth  cen- 
tury  they  are  almost  unlversally  received.  A  homily, 
wrongly  attributed  to  St.  Chrysostom,  declares  them  un- 
canonical,  In  the  MurcUoń  Fragment,  which,  howerer, 
in  the  part  relating  to  the  Epistles  of  John,  is  somewhat 
confused  or  apparently  vitiated,  there  are  at  least  two 
Epistles  of  John  recogniscd,  for  the  author  uses  the  plu- 
ral  in  mentioning  John^s  Epistles.  In  aii  the  later  cat- 
alogues,  with  the  exception  of  the  lambicg  ad  Selmcum, 
they  are  Inaerted  with  the  other  canonical  books  of  the 
N.  T.  There  is  thus  a  solid  body  of  evidence  in  favor 
of  the  genuincness  of  these  epistles.  That  they  were 
not  unlvei8ally  known  and  receWed  is  probably  to  be 
accounted  for  by  their  character  as  private  letters  to  in- 
dividuals,  which  would  naturally  be  longer  in  ooming 
under  generał  recognition  than  such  as  were  addressed 
to  churches  or  the  Ćhrlstians  of  a  district 

The  only  antagonistic  testimony  which  has  reached  us 
from  antiquity  is  that  of  Jerome,  who  says  {De  vir,  lUust, 
ix,  18)  that  both  epistles  were  commonly  reputed  to  be 
the  production,  not  of  John  the  apostle,  but  of  John  the 
presby  ter,  confirmed  by  the  statement  of  Eusebius  (iii, 
25)  that  it  was  doubtful  whether  they  were  the  produc- 
tion of  the  evangelist  or  of  another  John.  On  this  it 
may  be  obsenred,  1.  That  the  statement  of  Jerome  b 
certainly  not  true  in  its  fuli  extent,  for  there  is  evidence 
<mAtąg)x  that  both  in  his  own  time  and  before^  as  well  as 


alber  it,  the  generał  belief,  both  in  the  Latin  and  the 
Greek  churches,  was  that  they  were  written  by  John 
the  apostle.  2.  Both  Jerome  and  Eusebius  concur  in  at>- 
testing  that  aU  aacribed  these  Epistles  either  to  John 
the  apostle  or  John  the  presbj^ter  as  their  author,  whicli 
may  be  acoepted  as  convincing  evidence  that  they  are 
not  forgeries  of  an  age  later  than  that  of  the  apostle. 
8.  The  ąuestion  being  between  John  the  apostle  and 
John  the  presbj^ter,  we  may,  without  laying  streas  on 
the  fact  that  the  existence  of  the  latter  is,  to  say  the 
least,  involved  in  doubt  [see  John  thk  Presbyter], 
cali  attention  to  the  consideration  that,  whilst  the  use  <^ 
the  expre8sion  d  irptafitfTtpoc  by  the  writer  of  the  2d 
Epistle  may  have  given  risc  to  the  report  which  Jerome 
and  Eusebius  attest,  there  lies  in  this  a  strong  evidenoe 
that  the  yrriter  was  John  the  apostle,  and  not  John  the 
presbyter;  for  it  is  ąuite  credible  that  the  former,  writ- 
ing  in  his  old  age,  should  employ  the  term  wp«r/3trrcpoc 
to  express  this  fact  just  as  Paul  does  (Philem.  9),  and  as 
Peter  does  (1  EpisL  v,  1),  whereas  it  is  incredible  that  the 
latter,  with  whom  presbyter  was  a  tiUe  of  office,  should, 
in  writing  a  letter  to  an  indlvidual,  designate  himself 
thus,  inasmuch  as,  the  office  hang  common  to  him  with 
many  others,  the  title,  in  the  absence  of  his  name,  was 
no  designation  at  all,  to  say  nothing  of  the  fact  that 
there  is  no  evidence  that  the  members  of  Lhe  Tcptafiu- 
rSiptoy  in  the  primitive  churches  ever  received  irpttr^ 
punpoc  as  a  title,  any  morę  than  the  members  of  the 
Church,  though  collectively  ol  uyioi  and  oi  dd(\^i,  re- 
ceived  individually  aytoc  or  ddcA^óc  u  a  iitle  (see  be- 
Iow).  On  these  grounds  there  seems  to  be  no  reastm  for 
attaching  much  importance  to  the  opinion  or  tradtcion 
reported  by  Jerome,  though  it  has  been  adoptcd  by  £ns> 
mus,  Grotius,  Credner,  Jachmann  (Comnu  iib.  d,  KałMoL 
Br.\  and  morę  recently  by  Ebrard  (Olshausen,  CommmL 
vi,  4,  E.  T.  voL  X,  and  in  Herzog,  Encye.  vi,  786).  A  lato 
writer  (WUlichen,  Der  ffetchichtluAe  Charakter  de$  Ee, 
Joh.  Elberf.  1869)  holds  that  the  2d  and  8d  EptsUes  aro 
the  production  of  disciples  of  John  the  apostle. 

2.  If  the  extemal  testimony  is  not  as  decimre  as  we 
might  wish,  the  intemał  evidence  is  peculiarly  strong. 
Mili  has  pointed  out  that  of  the  thirtecn  veTBes  which 
compose  the  2d  Epistle,  eight  are  to  be  found  in  the  Ist 
EpiBtle.  Either,  then,  the  2d  Epistle  proceeded  from 
the  same  author  as  the  Ist,  or  from  a  conscious  fabri- 
cator  who  desired  to  pass  off  something  of  his  own  as 
the  production  of  the  apostle;  but,  if  the  latter  altemfr> 
tive  had  been  true,  the  fabricator  in  ąuestion  would  as- 
suredly  have  assumed  the  title  of  John  the  ajtottle  in- 
stead  of  merely  desigiiating  himself  as  John  the  elder, 
and  he  would  have  introduced  some  doctrine  which  It 
would  have  been  his  object  to  make  popular.  The  title 
and  oontonts  of  the  Epistle  are  strong  arguments  agalnst 
a  fabricator,  whereas  they  would  account  for  its  non> 
univer8al  reception  in  early  times ;  and  if  not  the  work 
of  a  fabricator,  it  must,  iirom  style,  diction,  and  tonę  of 
thought,  be  the  work  of  the  author  of  the  Ist  Epistle, 
and,  we  may  add,  of  the  Gospel  The  private  naturo 
of  their  contents  removes  also  the  suspicion  that  they 
could  have  been  foi^ed,  sinoe  it  woidd  be  difficult  to 
discover  any  purpose  which  could  have  led  to  such  a 
forgery. 

The  reason  why  John  designates  himself  as  trptafiih- 
rtpoc  rather  than  AirótrroKoc  (2  Epist.  1 ;  8  Epist.  1)  is 
no  doubt  the  same  as  that  which  madę  Peter  designate 
himself  by  the  same  title  (1  Pet  v,  1),  and  which  caiised 
James  and  Jude  to  give  themselves  no  other  title  than 
^'the  senrant  of  God  and  of  the  Lord  Jesus  Christ" 
(James  i,  1),  *'  the  Bervant  of  Jesus  Christ,  and  brother 
of  James'*  (Jude  1).  Paul  had  a  special  object  in  de- 
daring  himaelf  an  apostle.  Those  who  belonged  to  the 
original  Twelve  had  no  such  necessity  imposed  upon 
them.  With  them  it  was  a  matter  of  indifference 
whether  they  employed  the  name  of  apostle,  like  Peter 
(1  Pet.  i,  1 ;  2  Pet.  i,  1),  or  adopted  an  appellation  which 
they  shared  with  others,  like  John,  and  James^  and  Jude. 
SeeEiDEB. 


JOHN 


955 


JOHN 


n.  The  mcond  Eputle  is  addieased  to  one  whóm  the 
writer  calls  inKutrii  Kvpia.  Thii  has  been  differenŁly 
undentood.  By  Bome  it  bas  been  regaided  as  desig- 
nating  tbe  Church  oollectiyely,  by  oŁben  as  designating 
a  particular  congregation,  and  by  others  as  denoting  an 
indiriduaL  This  expre8Bion  cannoŁ  mean  the  Church 
(Jerome),  nor  a  particular  church  (Cassiodorus),  nor  the 
elect  Church  which  comes  together  on  Sunda3r8  (Micha* 
elis),  nor  the  Church  of  Philadelphia  (Whiston),  nor  the 
Church  of  Jerusalem  (Whitby).  These  opinions  are 
zendered  improbable  partly  by  the  reference  in  yerse  11 
to  the  chUdrcHy  and  in  yerse  13  to  the  tisUr  of  the  party 
addressed,  partly  by  the  want  of  any  authority  for  such 
a  nsage  of  the  term  Kvpia  as  would  thus  be  imputed  to 
the  i^ostle.  By  those  who  understand  this  of  an  indi- 
yidual  there  are  three  renderings :  according  to  one  in- 
terpretation  she  is  *'  the  lady  Electa  f  to  another,  **  the 
elect  Kyria  ;"*  to  a  third, "  the  elect  lady."  The  first  in- 
terpretation  is  that  of  Clement  of  Alexandria  (if  the 
passage  above  referred  to  in  the  Adumbraiionet  be  his), 
Wetstein,Grotius,Middleton;  the  seoond  is  that  of  Ben- 
son, CarpzoY,  Schleusner,  Heumann,  Bengel,  KosenmUl- 
ler.  De  Wette,  LUcke,  Neander,  Davidson ;  the  third  is 
the  rendering  of  the  English  yersion,  Mili,  Wall,  Wolf, 
Le  Clerc,  Lardner,  Beza,  Eichhom,  Newcome,  Wakefield, 
Macknigbt.  For  the  rendering  ^  the  lady  Electa"  to  be 
right,  the  word  Kvpi^  must  have  preoeded  (as  in  modem 
Greek)  the  word  Uktm,  not  foUowed  it;  and,further, 
the  last  yerse  of  the  Epistle,  in  which  ber  sister  is  also 
spoken  of  as  IkkŁKrri,  is  fatal  to  the  hypothesis.  The 
rendering  *'  the  elect  lady"  is  probably  wrong,  because 
there  is  no  article  before  tlie  adjectire  icXficry.  It  re- 
mains  that  the  rendering  "  the  elect  Kyria"  is  probably 
right,  though  here  too  we  should  haye  expected  the  ar- 
ticle— as,  iudeed,  we  should  under  any  of  the  three  ren- 
derings (though  the  rendering  "an  elect  lady*'  is  not 
demanded ;  see  Alford,  Gr,  Test.  yoL  y,  proleirg.)*  1*^0 
choice,  therefore,  being  between  the  last  two  of  these 
renderings,  two  circumstanoes  seem  to  be  decisiye  in  fa- 
yor  of  the  former :  Kyria  occurs  elsewhere  as  a  proper 
name  [see  Cyria]  ;  and  that  kXcjcr^  is  to  be  taken  in 
its  usual  signlfication  is  rendered  prubable  by  its  being 
applied  in  yerse  13  to  the  sister  ol  the  party  addressed. 
See  Elect  A. 

At  the  time  of  writing  this  Epistle  the  apostle  was 
with  the  sister  of  the  lady  addressed,  but  CKpresses  a 
hope  ere  long  to  see  the  latter,  and  oonyerse  with  her 
on  matters  of  which  he  could  not  then  write.  From 
this  we  may  infer  either  that  tbe  apostle  was  at  the 
time  on  a  joumey  from  which  he  expected  ere  long  to 
return,  or  that  the  lady  in  question  resided  not  yery  far 
from  his  usual  residence,  and  that  he  intended  soon  to 
pay  her  a  yisit  Adopting  the  latter  hypothesis  as  the 
morę  probable,  and  yiewing  it  in  connection  with  the 
apoetle's  styling  himself  irptafiyrtpoc,  we  may  infer 
that  the  Epistle  was  written  at  a  late  period  of  the 
apo6tle*8  life. 

The  object  of  the  apostle  in  writing  the  2d  Eputle 
was  to  wam  the  lady  to  whom  he  wrote  against  abetting 
the  teacłiing  known  as  that  of  Basilides  and  his  foUow- 
en,  by  perhaps  an  undue  kindness  displayed  by  her  to- 
wards  the  preachers  of  the  false  doctrine.  After  the  in- 
tioductory  salntation,  the  apostle  at  once  urges  on  his 
oorrespondent  the  great  principle  of  loye,  which  vrith 
him  (as  we  haye  before  seen)  means  right  affection 
■pńnguig  from  right  faith,  and  issuing  in  right  conduct 
The  immediate  conseąuence  of  the  poesession  of  this 
loye  is  the  abhorrence  of  heretical  misbelief,  because  the 
latter,  being  incompatible  with  right  faith,  is  destructiye 
of  the  producing  cause  of  loye,  and  therefore  of  loye 
itself.  This  is  the  secret  of  John's  strong  denunciation 
of  the  "deceiyer,"  whom  he  designates  as  "Antichrist" 
Loye  is  with  him  the  essence  of  Christianity,  but  loye 
can  spring  only  from  right  faith.  Wrong  belief,  there- 
fore, destroys  loye,  and  with  it  Christianity.  Therefore 
aays  he, "  If  there  coroe  any  unto  you  and  bring  not  this 
doctrine,  receiye  him  not  into  your  house,  neither  bid 


him  God  speed,  for  he  that  biddeth  him  God  tpeed  is 
partaker  of  his  eyil  deeds"  (2  Epist  10, 11). 

IIŁ  The  third  Epistle  is  addressed  to  Caius,  a  Chri»- 
tian  brother  noted  for  his  hospitality  to  the  saints. 
Whether  this  be  one  of  those  mentioned  elsewhere  in 
the  N.  T.  by  this  name  is  uncertain ;  he  ma^  haye  been 
the  same  mentioned  Acts  xix,  28.  See  Gaius.  The 
apostle  writes  for  the  purpose  of  commending  to  the 
kindness  and  hospitality  of  Caius  some  Christians  who 
were  strangers  in  the  place  where  he  liyed.  It  is  prob- 
able that  these  Christians  carried  this  letter  with  them 
to  Caius  as  their  introduction.  It  would  appear  that 
the  object  of  the  trayellers  was  to  preach  the  Gospel  to 
tbe  Gentiles  without  money  and  without  price  (8  Epist. 
7).  The  apostle  had  already  written  to  the  ecclesiaa- 
tical  authorities  of  the  place  (fypai/^a,  ver.  9,  not "  scrip- 
siasem,"  as  the  Yulg.),  but  thęy,  at  the  imitigation  of 
Diotrephes,  had  refused  to  receiye  the  roissionary  breth- 
ren,  and  therefore  the  apostle  now  commends  them  to 
the  care  of  a  layman.  It  is  probable  that  Diotrephes 
was  a  leading  presbyter  who  held  Judaizing  yiews,  and 
would  not  give  assistance  to  men  who  were  going  about 
with  the  purpose  of  preaching  solely  to  the  Gentiles. 
The  apostle  intimates  the  probability  of  his  soon  per- 
sonally  yisitlng  the  church,  when  he  would  deal  with 
Diotrephes  for  his  misconduct,  and  would  communicate 
to  Caius  many  things  of  which  he  could  not  then  write. 
In  the  mean  time  he  exhorts  him  to  follow  that  which 
is  good,  commends  one  Demetrius,  and  concludes  with 
benediction  and  salutation.  Whether  this  Demetiins 
(ver.  12)  was  a  tolerant  presbyter  of  the  same  commu* 
nity,  whose  example  John  holds  up  as  worthy  of  com- 
mendation  in  contradistinction  to  that  of  Diotrephes,  or 
whether  he  was  one  of  the  strangers  who  borę  the  letter, 
we  are  now  unable  to  determine. 

From  their  generał  similarity,  we  may  conjecture  that 
the  two  epistles  were  written  shortly  after  the  Ist  Epifr- 
tle  from  Ephesus.  They  both  apply  to  indiyidual  casea 
of  conduct  the  principles  which  had  been  laid  down  in 
their  fulness  m  the  Ist  Epistle. — Kitto;  Smith. 

rV.  Commenlaries. — l*he  fuUowing  are  the  exegetical 
helps  on  the  whole  of  both  the  latter  epistles  exclusiye- 
ly,  in  addition  to  those  noticed  aboye :  Jones,  Commen- 
tary  [including  Fhilem.  etc]  (Lond.l6S5,foL);  Smith, 
Ea^^otition  [on  2d  Epistle]  (Lond.  1668, 4to) ;  SonnUg, 
Hypomnenuita  (Altorf,  1697,  8vo) ;  Feustking,  Commen- 
tariua  (Yitemb.  1707,  fol.) ;  Terpoorten,  Ezercitationes 
(Gedan.  1741, 4to) ;  Heumann,  Commeniar  [on  3d  Epist] 
(Helmst.  1778, 8yo) ;  MUller,Commefi/ar»u4  [on  2d  Epist.] 
(Schleiz,  1783, 4to) ;  Sommel,  hagoge  (Lond.  1798, 4to) ; 
Bambonnet,  Specimen,  etc.  [on  2d  Epistle]  (Tr.  ad  Bh. 
1818,  8vo);  Gachon,  Auikeniiciie,  etc.  (Montoub.  1851, 
8yo)  ł  Cox,  Pritate  Lettert  o/Sts.  Paul  and  John  (Lond. 
1867, 8yo).    See  Commentary. 

JOHN,  BEYELATION  OF.    See  Reyełation. 

Jobn  the  BapHsŁ  (^Itadmnic  6  /3oirrt<Tr^c,  or  simply 
*I(i»dvvriCj  when  the  reference  is  dear,  as  in  MatL  iii,  4 ; 
iy,  12;  Lat,  Joanmet  [Tacitus,  Uist.  y,  12] ;  Heb.  "jj^i'', 
denoting  ^racr,  oit/avor  [see  Simonis,  Aear.iY.  T.  p.  513]). 
In  the  Church  John  commonly  bears  the  honorable  title 
of  **  forerunner  of  the  Lord'* — antecursor  et  pneparator 
yiaram  Domini  (TertulL  adv,  Marc,  iy,  38) ;  in  Greek, 
wpóSpofŁoCj  vpodyyi\oc  Kvpiov.  llie  accounts  of  him 
which  the  GospelB  present  are  fragmentary  and  impep- 
fect;  they  inyolye,  too,  some  difiiculties  which  the 
leamed  haye  found  it  hard  to  remoye;  yet  enough  is 
giyen  to  show  that  he  was  a  man  of  a  lofty  character, 
and  that  the  relation  in  which  he  stood  to  Christianity 
was  one  of  great  importance.  Indeed,  according  to  our 
Lord*s  own  testimony,  he  was  a  morę  honored  character 
and  distinguished  saint  than  any  prophet  who  had  pre- 
ceded  him  (Lukę  yii,  28).    See  Prophet. 

1.  John  was  of  the  priestly  race  by  both  parents,  for 
his  father  Zacharias  was  himself  a  priest  of  the  course 
of  Abia,  or  Abijah  (1  Chroń.  xxiy,  10),  offering  incense 
at  the  yery  time  when  a  son  was  promised  to  him ;  and 


JOHN 


966 


JOHN 


Elizabeth  was  of  the  danghtera  of  Aaron  (Lnke  i,  5), 
the  latter  "a  oouaiii'*  (avyy€vfic^  rdatM)  ot  Mary,  the 
ibother  of  Jesua,  whoee  fleuor  John  was  by  a  pericid  of 
liz  montha  (Lukę  i).  Both  paients,  toO)  were  devoat 
penons,  waUcing  in  the  commaiidmeiits  of  God,  and 
waiting  for  the  fnlfflment  of  hia  promise  to  ImeL  The 
diyine  mittion  of  John  was  the  sabject  of  prophecy 
many  centuriee  before  his  birth,  for  BCatthew  (iii,  8) 
tells  us  that  it  was  John  who  was  prefigmed  by  IsiUah 
as  ^  the  Toioe  of  ooe  crying  in  the  wildemess,  Prepare 
ye  the  way  of  the  Lord,  make  his  paths  straight"  (Isa. 
zl,  8),  while  by  the  prophet  Malachi  the  Spirit  annoon- 
oes  morę  definitely,  **  Behold,  I  will  send  my  messenger, 
and  he  shall  prepare  the  way  befofe  me**  (iii,  1).  His 
birth — a  birth  not  acoording  to  the  ofdinary  laws  of  nap 
turę,  but  throngh  the  miracolous  interposition  of  Ał- 
mighty  power—- was  foretold  by  an  angel  sent  from  God, 
who  annonnced  it  as  an  oocasion  of  Joy  and  gladness  to 
many,  and  at  the  same  time  assigned  to  him  the  name 
cfJohn,  to  signify  either  that  he  was  to  be  bom  of  God'8 
especial  fsTor,  or,  perhaps,  that  he  was  to  be  the  har- 
binger  of  grace.  The  angel  Gabriel,  moreoyer,  pro- 
daimed  the  chancter  and  oflioe  of  this  wonderfiil  child 
eyen  before  his  conoeption,  foretelling  that  he  would  be 
filled  with  the  Holy  Ghost  from  the  flist  moment  of  his 
existenoe,  and  appear  as  the  great  reformer  of  his  coon- 
trymen— «nother  Elijah  in  the  boldness  with  wbich  he 
would  speak  truth  and  rebuke  Tioe— but,  above  all,  as 
the  chosen  foremnner  and  henld  of  the  long-ezpected 
Messiah.  These  marrellons  revelations  as  to  the  char- 
acter  and  career  of  the  son  for  whom  he  had  so  long 
prayed  in  vain  were  too  much  for  the  faith  of  the  aged 
Zacharias,  and,  when  he  songht  some  assnrance  of  the 
certunty  of  the  promised  blessing,  God  gare  it  to  him 
in  ajudgmentr— the  privation  of  speech— until  the  eyent 
foretold  should  happen^a  judgment  intended  to  senre 
at  once  as  a  token  of  God*8  truth  and  a  rebuke  of  his 
own  incredulity.  And  now  the  Lord*8  gracious  promise 
tarried  not  Elisabeth,  for  gieater  privacy,  retiied  into 
the  hill-country,  whither  she  was  soon  afterwards  fol- 
lowed  by  her  kinswoman  Mary,  who  was  heiself  the  ob- 
Ject  and  channel  of  diyine  grace  bejrond  measure  great- 
er  and  morę  mysterious.  The  two  oousins,  who  were 
thns  honored  aboye  all  the  mothen  of  Isnid,  came  to- 
gether  in  a  remote  city,  and  immediately  God's  pur- 
pose  was  oonflrmed  to  them  by  a  minumloos  sign;  for, 
as  soon  as  Elisabeth  heard  the  salntations  of  Mary,  the 
babę  leaped  in  her  womb,  thus  acknowledging,  aa  it 
were,  eyen  before  birth,  the  presenoe  of  his  Lord  (Lukę 
1,48,44).  Threemonthsafter  this,  and  while  Mary  stiU 
remained  with  her,  Elizabeth  was  deliyered  of  a  son, 
fibC  6.  The  exact  spot  where  John  was  bom  is  not  de- 
termined.  The  rabbins  (Otho,  Lex.  Rabb,  p.  824 ;  Witsii 
MiścdL  Sacr,  ii,  889)  flx  on  Hebron,  in  the  hill-country 
of  Judna ;  Paulus,  Kuinoel,  and  Meyer,  aOer  ReUmd,  are 
iniayorof  Jutta,'*adty  of  Juda."  SeeJuTTAH.  On 
the  eighth  day  the  child  of  promise  was,  in  conformity 
with  the  law  of  Moses  (Ley.  xii,  8),  bcought  to  the  priest 
for  circumdsion,  and,  as  the  performance  of  this  rite  was 
•the  accustomed  time  for  naming  a  child,  the  fHends  of 
the  family  proposed  to  cali  him  Zacharias,  after  the 
name  of  his  father.  The  mother,  howeyer,  reąuired 
that  he  should  be  called  John,  a  decision  which  Zach** 
rias,  still  speechless,  conflrmed  by  writing  on  a  tablet, 
<<his  name  is  John.^  The  Judgment  on  his  want  of 
faiUi  was  then  at  once  withdrawn,  and  the  fint  ose 
which  he  madę  of  his  reooyered  speech  was  to  praise 
Jehoyah  for  his  faithfuhiess  and  mercy  (Lnke  i,  64). 
God's  wonderful  interposition  in  the  birth  of  John  had 
impressed  the  minds  of  many  with  a  oertain  solemn  awe 
and  expectation  (Lukę  iii,  15).  God  was  surely  again 
Tisiting  his  people.  His  proyidenoe,  so  long  hidden, 
seemed  once  morę  about  to  manifest  itseł^  The  child 
thus  supematoially  bom  must  doubtless  be  commission- 
•d  to  perform  some  important  part  in  the  history  of  the 
chosen  people.  Gould  it  be  the  Messiah?  Gould  it  be 
Elijah?    Wastheenoftheiroldpiopbetaaboattobe 


restored?  With  soch  graye  thooghts  were  the  minda 
of  the  people  occupied  as  they  mused  on  the  eyenta 
which  had  been  passing  under  their  ęyes^  and  said  one 
to  another,  *«  What  manner  of  child  shall  this  be  ?"  while 
Zacharias  himself,  *<  filled  with  the  Holy  Ghost,"  faioke 
forth  in  a  glorious  stiain  of  pniae  and  prophecy — a 
stndn  in  which  it  is  to  be  obseryed  that  the  fiUher,  b^ 
fora  speaking  of  his  own  child,  blesses  God  for  remem- 
bering  his  coyenant  and  promise  in  the  redempdon  and 
salyation  of  hia  people  throngh  him  of  whom  his  own 
son  was  the  prophet  and  forerunner.  A  single  yene 
oontains  aU  that  ure  know  of  John's  history  for  a  spaoa 
of  thirty  y eais,  the  whole  period  which  elapsed  between 
his  hirth  and  the  oommencement  of  his  puUic  ministry : 
*<The  child  grew  and  waxed  strong  in  the  spirit,  and 
was  in  the  deserta  till  the  day  of  his  showing  nnto  !»• 
rad"  (Lnke  i,  80).  John,  it  will  be  remembernl,  was  or- 
dained  to  be  a  Nazarito  (see  Numb.  yi,  1>2])  fiom  hh 
birth,  for  the  words  of  the  angel  were, "  He  diall  drink 
neither  winę  nor  strong  drink"  (Lnke  i,  15).  What  we 
are  to  understand  by  this  brief  annonncement  is  probft* 
Uy  thiss  the  choaen  forerunner  of  the  Messiah  and  her- 
ald of  his  kingdom  was  required  to  foiego  the  ordinary 
pleasures  and  indulgences  of  the  world,  and  iiye  a  lift 
of  the  stiictest  self-denial  in  retirement  and  solitude. 
The  apociyphal  Protev.  Jac  eh.  xxii,  states  that  hia 
mother,  in  order  to  rescue  her  aon  from  the  murder  of 
the  childien  at  Bethlehem  which  Herod  oommanded, 
fled  with  him  into  the  desert.  She  could  find  no  plaoe 
of  refuge ;  the  mountain  opened  at  her  request,and  gay« 
the  needed  shelter  in  its  bosom.  ZmrhBńm,  being  quea- 
tioned  by  Herod  as  to  where  his  son  was  to  be  found, 
and  refiising  to  answer,  was  dain  by  the  tyrant.  At  a 
later  period  Elizabeth  died,  when  angds  took  the  youth 
under  thdr  cara  (Fabridns, Cod,  Apocryph,  p.  117  są.; 
comp.  Kuhn,  LAm  Jetu,  i,  168,  remark  4).  It  was  thns 
that  the  holy  Nazarite,  dwdling  by  himsdf  in-the  wild 
and  thinly-peopled  r^on  westward  of  the  Dead  Sea, 
called  **  desert"  In  the  text,  prepared  himsdf  by  sdf-di»» 
dpline,  and  by  constant  oommunion  with  God,  for  the 
wonderful  olBoe  to  which  he  had  been  diyindy  called. 
Hera  year  after  year  of  his  stem  probatian  psosed  by, 
till  the  time  for  the  fulfiiment  of  his  misdon  arriyed. 
The  yery  appearance  of  the  holy  Baptist  waa  of  itaelf  a 
lesBon  to  his  countzymen;  his  dress  was  that  of  the  ołd 
piophets— a  garment  woyen  of  camd*s  hair  (2  Kings  i, 
8),  attacfaed  to  the  body  by  a  leathem  giidle.  His  food 
was  such  as  the  desert  spontaneoudy  aiTorded— kicosta 
(Ley.  xi,  22)  and  wild  honey  (Fte.  lxxxi,  16)  from  the 
rock.  (See  Endemann, />B  9»ofv  Jo.  ^(^Hersidd,  1752; 
Thadd.  a  St.  Adamo,  DerietuJoa,  BapUmdeterto,  Bonn, 
1785;  Muller,  Varia  de  victu  Joa,  BapUtU  Bonn,  1829; 
Hackett,  IlUutr.  of  ScripL  p.  96.)  Desert  though  tha 
place  is  designated,  the  country  where  he  spent  these 
early  years—the  wild  mountainous  tnct  of  Judah,  Ijriog 
between  Jerusalem  and  the  Dead  Sea,  along  which  it 
stratchea— was  not  endrdy  destitute  of  means  for  sap> 
porting  human  existence  (Matt.  iii,  1-12;  Mark  i,  1-8; 
Lukę  iii,  1-20;  John  x,  28;  Justin  Martyr,  DidL  cmm 
Ttypk,  c.  88).  Josephus,  in  his  Lift  (ii,  2),  giyes  an 
acoount  of  one  of  his  instractors,  Banus,  which  throwa 
light  on  John*s  condition  in  the  desert:  ''He  liyed  in 
the  desert,  and  had  no  other  food  than  what  grew  of  its 
own  aooord,  and  bathed  himself  in  cold  water  frequent> 
ly,  both  by  night  and  by  day.  I  imitated  him  in  theae 
things,  and  oontinued  with  him  thiee  yeaiB."  Some 
writers  infer  that  John  was  an  Ea»me;  so  says,  e.  g. 
Taykir,  editor  of  Cafanet*8/>io«MMiargr  ofłkeBible;  compw 
Johnson,  ifoiOy  brfon  ChrUt  (Bobu  1870, 12mo),  p.  109 
sq.  But  this  is  denied  by  Benan,  Vie  de  JtmM  (18th  ed. 
Paris,  1867),  p.  101  sq. 

2.  At  length,  in  the  fifteenth  year  of  the  assodata 
reign  of  the  emperor  Tiberius  (see  Janris,  Cknm,  Inirod, 
p.  228  sq.,  462  sq.),  or  A.D.  25,  the  kmg^^eduded  hcmiii 
came  forth  to  the  discharge  of  his  office.  His  supemat* 
ural  birth,  his  hard  asoetic  life,  his  repntation  for  ex* 
tnordinaiy  aanctity,  and  the  generally-pieyailing  ez* 


JOHN 


»57 


JOHN 


pectatłon  that  some  great  one  waa  aboat  to  appear— 
theae  cansea,  witbout  the  aid  of  mincukina  power,  for 
**  John  did  no  minde"  (John  x,  41),  were  si^flScient  to 
attract  to  him  a  great  moltitade  fióin  **  erery  ąnartei^ 
<Matt  iii,  5).  Brief  and  startling  was  hia  fint  exhorta- 
tioii  to  them— '*Bepent  ye,  for  the  kingdom  of  heayen 
is  at  hand."  A  few  aooraa  of  yenes  oontain  all  that  is 
leooided  of  John'8  preaching,  and  the  aum  (tf  it  aU  ia  re- 
pentanoe — ^not  merę  legał  aUntion  or  expiation,  but  a 
change  of  heait  and  life.  Heiein  John,  thongh  exhib- 
iting  a  maiked  contract  to  the  sciibes  and  Phariaeee 
of  hia  own  dme,  waa  but  repeating,  with  the  atimulua 
of  a  new  and  powerful  motive,  the  leaaona  which  had 
been  again  and  again  impreańd  upon  them  hy  thdr 
andent  propheta  (oomp.  Isa.  i,  16, 17 ;  lv,7 ;  Jer. yii,  S-7 ; 
Ezek.  xviii,  19-82  i  xxxYi,  25-27 ,  Joel  ii,  12,  la ;  Micah 
Tl,  8;  Zech.  i,  8, 4).  Bot,  while  anch  waa  hia  Bolemn 
admonition  to  the  mnldtode  at  laige,  he  adopted  to- 
wardB  the  leading  secta  of  the  Jewa  a  aererer  tonę,  de- 
nooncing  Phariaeea  and  Saddnoeea  alike  aa  ''a  generap 
tion  of  yipeiB,"  and  waming  them  of  the  foUy  of  troat- 
ing  to  eztemai  priyilegea  aa  deaoendanta  of  Abraham 
(Łoke  iii,  8).  Now,  at  laat,  he  warna  them  that  '<the 
•ze  waa  laid  to  the  root  of  the  tree,**  that  fonnal  light- 
ttnianeas  would  be  tolerated  no  longer,  and  that  nonę 
woold  be  acknowledged  for  children  of  Abraham  bnt 
■och  aa  did  the  worka  of  Abraham  (comp.  John  yiii,  89). 
Soch  alarming  dedarationa  prodnoed  their  effect,aiid 
nany  of  eyeiy  daaa  preaaed  forwaid  to  oonfen  their  aina 
and  to  bebaptized. 

What,  then,  waa  the  baptism  which  John  adminia- 
teied  ?  See  Wabkino.  (Comp.  Olahamcn,  Ccmment,  ad 
loc  Joh.;  Dale,  JoAomMe  BąpHsmy  Fbila.  1871.)  Not  al- 
together  a  new  rite,  for  it  waa  the  coatom  of  the  Jewa  to 
baptize  proaelytea  to  thdr  leligion ;  not  an  ordinanoe  in 
itaelf  coaveying  remiańon  of  ains,  but  rather  a  token  and 
ąymbol  of  that  repentanoe  which  waa  an  indispenaable 
oondition  of  fofgiveneas  throogh  him  whom  John  point- 
ed  out  aa  ^  the  Lamb  of  God  that  taketh  away  the  aina 
of  the  woild."  Still  leea  did  the  baptiam  of  John  impart 
the  grace  of  regeneration— ^if  a  new  8{Mritaal  hfe  (Acta 
xiz,  3, 4).  This  waa  to  be  the  myateriooa  effect  of  bap- 
tiam '<  with  the  Holy  Ghoat,"  which  waa  to  be  ordained 
by  that  ''mightier  one"  whoae  coming  he  proclaimed. 
The  prepamtory  baptiam  of  John  waa  a  yińble  sign  to 
the  peo|de,  and  a  distinct  acknowledgment  by  them  that 
a  hearty  renundation  of  ain  and  a  real  amendment  of 
life  were  neceasary  for  admisaion  into  the  kingdom  of 
heayen,  which  the  Baptiat  proclaimed  to  be  at  band. 
Bat  the  ftmdamental  diadnction  between  John'8  bap- 
fSam  unto  repentanoe  and  that  baptiam  accompanied 
with  the  gift  of  the  Holy  Spirit  which  our  Lord  af- 
terwarda  ordained  ia  dearly  marked  by  John  hiniaelf 
(Mattlti,ll,12).  SeeBAPTiaMOFJoHM.  Aaapreach- 
er,  John  waa  eminently  practical  and  diacriminating. 
Sdf-loye  and  Goyetouanesa  were  the  preyalent  sina  óf 
the  peopte  at  large  on  them,  therefore,  he  enjoined 
charity  and  conuderation  for  othean.  The  pnblicana  he 
cautioned  againat  eztortion,  the  aoldiers  against  yio- 
lence  and  plunder.  Hia  answera  to  them  are,  no  doabt, 
to  be  regarded  aa  instancea  of  the  appropriate  waming 
and  adyice  which  he  addresBed  to  eyery  clasei  The 
firat  reaaon  aaaigned  by  John  for  entering  on  hia  most 
weighty  and  perilona  office  waa  announced  in  theae 
worda:  *'The  kingdom  of  heayen  u  at  band.**  It  waa 
hia  great  work  to  prepare  the  mind  of  the  nation,  ao 
that  when  Jeana  himself  came  Łhey  might  be  a  people 
madę  ready  for  the  Lord.  What  waa  the  exact  idea 
which  John  intended  to  conyey  by  the  term  *' kingdom 
of  heayen'*  it  ia  not  easy,  at  leaat  in  the  space  before  ua, 
to  determine  with  satiafiiction.  (See  Richter,  De  munere 
tacro  Joanm  BapL  dMmius  ddegatOf  lipa.  1766.)  We 
feel  ooTNlyea,  howeyer,  jostifled  in  protesting  againat 
the  practice  of  those  who  take  the  ynlgar  Jewiah  notion 
and  aacribe  it  to  John,  while  some  go  so  far  aa  to  deny 
that  our  Lord  himaelf,  at  the  flrst,  poaaessed  any  other. 
Had  we  space  to  develop  the  nx>nil  chaiacter  of  John, 


we  coold  show  that  thia  fine,  stem,  high-minded  teachei 
possessed  many  eminent  qoalitiea;  but  his  peraonal  and 
offidal  modesty  in  keeping,  in  all  ciicumstancea,  in  the 
lower  rank  aasigned  hhn  by  God  mnat  not  pass  witbout 
spedal  mentton.  The  doctrine  and  numner  of  life  of 
John  appear  to  haye  loaaed  the  entire  of  the  south  of 
Pakatine,  and  people  fiocked  from  all  parta  to  the  spot 
where,  on  the  banka  of  the  Jordan,  he  baptized  thoo- 
aanda  anto  repentance.  Such,  indeed,  waa  the  famę 
which  he  had  gained,  that  '<  people  were  in  expectation, 
and  aU  men  mnaed  in  their  hearta  of  John,  whether  he 
were  the  Chnat  or  not"  (Lnke  iii,  16).  Had  he  chosen, 
John  might  withont  doubt  haye  assumed  to  himself  the 
higher  office,  and  rłaen  to  great  worldly  power;  but  he 
waa  faithful  to  hia  trust,  and  neyer  failed  to  dedare,  in 
the  fuUest  and  cleareat  mumer,  that  he  was  not  tha 
Christ,  but  merdy  his  harbinger,  and  that  the  sole  work 
he  had  to  do  waa  to  usher  in  Uie  day-apring  from  on 
high.    (See  Beeeher,  Ltfe  ofJetua,  yoL  i,  eh.  y.) 

The  morę  than  prophetic  famę  of  the  Baptiat  reached 
the  eaiB  of  Jeans  in  liis  Nazaiene  dwelling,  far  distant 
from  the  locality  of  John  (Matt.  ii,  9, 11).  The  naturę 
of  the  report— namely,  that  hia  diyindy-predicted  for»- 
runner  hiwi  appeared  in  Judaa— showed  our  Lord  that 
the  time  had  now  oome  for  hia  bdng  madę  manifest  to 
larad.  The  miańon  of  the  baptiat— an  extraordinaiy 
one  for  an  eztraordinary  purpoae— waa  not  limited  to 
thoae  who  had  openly  foiaaken  the  coyenant  of  God, 
and  ao  forfdted  ita  principlea;  it  waa  to  the  whole  peo- 
ple alike.  Thia  we  muat  infer  fiom  the  baptism  of  one 
who  had  no  oonfesmon  to  make,  and  no  sina  to  waah 
away.  Jeana  hinisdf  came  from  Galilee  to  Jordan  to 
be  baptized  of  John,  on  the  special  ground  that  it  b&- 
came  him  ^  to  fulfil  all  righteouaness,"  and,  aa  man,  to 
submit  to  the  customs  and  ordinancea  which  were  bind- 
ing  npon  the  rest  of  the  Jewiah  people.  John,  howeyer, 
naturaUy  at  firat  ahrank  ftom  olfering  the  symbole  of 
purity  to  the  stnkas  Son  of  God.  Immediatdy  on  the 
termination  of  thia  aymbolical  act,  a  divine  attestation 
was  giyen  from  the  opened  yault  of  heayen,  declaring 
Jeaua  to  be  in  truth  the  long  looked-for  Messiah — ^"Thia 
is  my  bdoyed  Son,  in  whom  I  am  well  pleased"  (Matt. 
iii,  17).  The  eyents  which  are  found  reoorded  in  John 
i,  19  sq.  seem  to  haye  happened  after  the  baptiam  of  Je- 
sus by  John.    See  Jbsus  Chbist. 

Herę  a  difficult  qaestion  arisea— How  ia  John'a  ac- 
knowledgment of  Jeana  at  the  moment  of  hia  presentińg 
himadf  for  baptism  compatible  with  hia  aubaeąnent  a»- 
sertion  that  he  knew  him  not  saye  by  the  desoent  of  the 
Holy  Spirit  npon  him,  which  took  place  after  hia  bap- 
tism? It  ia  difBcułt  to  imagine  that  the  two  cousina 
did  not  peraonaUy  reoogniae  each  other,  fiom  their  doee 
relationahip,  and  the  account  which  John  could  not  haye 
failed  to  reodye  of  the  remaikable  drcnmstanoes  attend- 
ing  Je8us's  birth;  hence  his  generał  deference  at  that 
time,  bnt  his  explidt  teatamony  aubaeąuently  (see  Kui- 
nSl,  Alford,  CowmaiL  on  Matt  iii,  14).  The  suppoaitioa 
that  John  waa  not  personally  acquainted  with  Jesus  ia 
therefore  out  of  the  qnestion  (see  Lttcke,  CommeKt,  on 
John  i,  81).  Yet  it  muat  be  borne  in  mind  that  their 
plaoea  of  reńdence  were  at  the  two  extremitie8  of  the 
countiy,  with  bnt  Httle  means  of  communication  be- 
tween them.  Ferhapa,  too,  John'8  special  destination 
and  modę  of  life  may  haye  kept  him  irom  the  atated 
featiyala  of  his  countrsrmen  at  Jeruaalem.  It  is  iM>asi- 
ble,  therefore,  that  the  Sayionr  and  the  Baptist  had 
not  often  met.  It  waa  certainly  of  the  ntmoet  impor- 
tance  that  there  ahould  be  no  auapidon  of  concert  or 
coUuaion  between  them.  John,  howeyer,  must  aasured- 
ly  haye  been  in  daily  expectation  of  Chr>8t'8  manifesta- 
tion  to  larad,  and  so  a  word  or  sign  would  haye  sufficed 
to  reyeal  to  him  the  person  and  presenoe  of  our  Lord, 
though  we  may  well  suppose  such  a  fact  to  be  mada 
known  by  a  direct  communication  from  God,  aa  in  the 
caae  of  Simeon  (Lukę  ii,  26 ;  comp.  Jackson  on  the  Creed, 
Work$,  Oxf.  ed.  yi,  404).  At  all  eyenta,  it  ia  whoUy  in- 
ooncdyabłe  that  John  ahould  haye  been  pennitted  to 


JOHN 


958 


JOHN 


baptize  the  Son  of  God  withoat  bdng  enabled  to  distin- 
guish  tLim  from  any  of  the  ordinary  multitade.  Upon 
the  whole,  the  trae  meaning  of  the  woidfl  luływ  oitK 
ffdiw  avTÓv  would  seem  to  be  as  foliowa :  And  I,  even  I, 
though  standing  in  so  near  a  relation  to  him,  both  per- 
Bonally  and  ministerially,  had  no  anured  knowledge  of 
him  as  the  Messiah,  I  did  not  know  him,  and  I  had 
not  aathority  to  prodaim  him  as  such  till  I  saw  the  pre- 
dicted  sign  in  the  descent  of  the  Holy  Spirit  npon  him. 
It  must  be  borne  in  mind  that  John  had  no  means  of 
knowing  by  preyioos  announcement  whether  this  won- 
derful  acknowledgment  of  the  divine  Son  would  be 
Touchsafed  to  his  forerunner  at  his  baptism  or  at  any 
other  time  (see  Dr.  Mill*8  HisL  Character  of  8t,  LvJ»'$ 
Gospel,  and  the  authorities  qaoted  by  him).  See  Baf^ 
TI8M  OF  Jesus. 

With  the  baptism  of  Jesus  John's  morę  espedal  office 
ceased.  The  king  had  come  to  his  kingdom.  The 
function  of  the  herald  was  discharged.  It  was  this  that 
John  had  with  singtdar  hmnility  and  self-renmiciation 
announced  beforehand :  *^  He  most  increase,  but  I  must 
decrease."  It  seems  but  natural  to  think,  therefore, 
when  their  hicherto  relative  position  is  taken  into  ac- 
oount,  that  John  would  forthwith  lay  down  his  office  of 
harbinger,  which,  now  that  the  Sun  of  Righteouaness 
hiraself  had  appeared,  was  entirely  fulfilled  and  termi- 
natcd.  Such  a  step  he  does  not  appear  to  have  taken. 
From  incidental  notices  we  leam  that  John  and  his  dis- 
ctples  oontinued  to  baptize  some  time  alter  onr  Lord  en- 
tered  upon  his  ministry  (see  John  iii,  28;  iv,  1).  We 
gather  also  that  John  instructed  his  (tisdples  in  certain 
morał  and  religious  duties,  as  fasting  (Matt.  iX|  14; 
Lukę  T,  83)  and  prayer  (Lukę  xi,  1).  In  short,  the  lan- 
guage  of  Scripture  seems  to  imply  that  the  ^pdst 
Church  coiitinued  side  by  side  with  the  Messianic 
(Matt  xi,  8 ;  Lukę  vii,  19;  John  xiv,  25),  and  remaiaed 
long  after  John's  execution  (Acts  xix,  8).  Indeed,  a 
sect  which  bears  the  name  of  ^  John*s  disciples"  exi8t8 
to  the  present  day  in  the  East,  whose  sacied  books  are 
said  to  be  penraded  by  a  Gnostic  leaven.  (See  Gese- 
nius,  in  the  A  Ugeni,  LiteraturzeUunff^  1817,  No.  48,  p.  878, 
and  in  the  ffalL  Encydop,^  probeheft,  p.  95  są. ;  Bnrck- 
hardt,  Les  Nazorieans  apelles  Zabiena  et  Chritiens  de  St^ 
Jeanj  secie  Gnostiąue,  Strasb.  1840;  aiso  Blarkcy,  in  the 
Bibl,  ring.  iv,  355  sq. ;  Schaff,  Apogt,  Hist,  p.  279  są.).  See 
John,  St.,  Christians  of.  Thcy  are  hostile  alike  to 
Jndaism  and  Christianity,  and  their  John  and  Jesus  are 
altogether  diffcrent  from  the  characters  bearing  these 
uames  in  our  evangelist8.  Still,  though  it  has  been 
generally  assumed  that  John  did  not  lay  down  his  of- 
fice, we  are  not  satisfied  that  the  New  Testament  estab- 
lishes  this  alleged  fact  John  may  have  ceased  to  exe- 
cute  his  own  pectiliar  work  as  the  forerunner,  but  may 
justifiably  have  continued  to  bear  his  most  important 
testimony  to  the  Messiahship  of  Christ ;  or  he  may  even 
have  altłłgether  given  up  the  duties  of  active  life  some 
time,  at  least,  bcfore  his  death;  and  yet  his  disciples, 
both  before  and  allcr  that  event,  may  have  maintained 
their  individuality  as  a  religious  communion.  Nor  will 
the  student  of  the  New  Testament  and  of  ecclesiastical 
history,  who  knows  how  grossly  a  teacher  far  greater 
than  John  was,  both  during  his  life  and  afler  his  cruci> 
fixion,  misunderstood  and  misrepresented,  think  it  im- 
possible  that  some  misoonception  or  some  sinister  motive 
may  have  had  weight  in  preventing  the  Baptist  Church 
from  diasoUing  and  passing  into  that  of  Christ,  (See 
Weber,  J.  d.  Tdtifer  und  die  Parteien  seiner  Zeił,  Gotha, 
1870.)  It  was,  not  improbably,  with  a  view  to  remove 
some  error  of  this  kind  that  John  sent  the  embassy  of 
his  disciples  to  Jesus  which  is  recorded  in  Matt  xi,  8 ; 
Lukę  vii,  19.  The  spiritual  course  which  the  teachings 
of  Jesus  were  morę  and  morę  taking,  and  the  apparent 
failure,  or  at  least  uneasy  postponement  of  the  promised 
kingdom  in  the  popular  sense,  especially  after  their  es- 
teemed  master  lay  in  prison,  and  was  in  imminent  dan- 
ger  of  losing  his  Ufo,  may  well  have  led  John'8  disciples 
to  doubt  if  Jesus  were  in  truth  the  expected  Messiah ; 


bat  no  intimation  ia  foond  in  the  reoofd  that  Johi  i«- 
ąuired  eyidenoe  to  give  him  satiafaction.  (See  bełow.) 
Be  that  as  it  may,  it  is  certain  that  John  still  continued 
to  present  himsclf  to  his  countiymen  in  the  capacity  ci 
witneu  to  Jesua.  Eepeeially  did  he  bear  testimony  to 
him  at  Bethany  faeyond  Joidan  (for  Bethany,  not  Betłi- 
abara,  is  the  reading  of  the  beat  MSS.).  So  oonfidently, 
indeed,  did  he  point  oot  the  Lamb  of  God,  on  whom  he 
had  seen  the  Spiiit  alightang  like  a  dove,  that  two  of 
his  own  disciples,  Andrew,  and  probably  John,  beiąg 
conyinced  by  his  testimony,  foUowed  Jesna  as  the  tme 
Messiah. 

8.  Bat  shoiUy  after  he  had  given  his  testimony  to 
the  Messiah,  John*B  public  ministiy  was  broaght  lo  a 
dose.  He  had,  at  the  beginning  ot  it,  condemned  the 
hypocrisy  and  worldliness  of  the  Phanisees  and  Saddn- 
eees,  and  he  had  now  occasion  to  denounce  the  Inat  of  a 
king.  In  daiing  diaregard  of  the  dirine  lawą  Herod 
Antipas  had  taken  to  himself  the  wife  of  hia  biother 
Philip;  and  when  John  reprored  him  for  thia,  as  well 
as  for  other  sina  (Lukę  iii,  19),  Herod  cast  him  into  pn»> 
OD.  Josephua,  howeyer,  aasigns  a  somewhat  diflierent 
cauae  for  Herod's  act  from  that  giyen  in  the  Gospels: 
**  Now  some  of  the  Jews  tbought  that  the  deatmctioiL 
of  Herod's  aimy  came  firom  God,  and  that  very  justly, 
as  a  punishment  of  what  he  did  against  John  that  was 
caUed  the  Baptist;  for  Herod  siew  him,  althougii  he 
was  a  good  man,  and  oommanded  the  Jewa  to  exerciae 
yirtae,  both  as  to  lighteouanesa  one  towarda  another 
and  piety  towarda  God,  and  so  to  come  to  baptisoL 
Now  when  others  came  in  crowda  about  him — ^for  they 
were  greatly  moved  by  heaiing  his  words— Herod,  who 
feared  lest  the  great  influence  John  had  over  the  people 
might  put  it  into  his  power  and  indination  to  raise  a  re- 
bellion  (for  they  seemed  ready  to  do  anything  he  shoold 
advise),  thought  it  best,  by  potting  him  to  death,  to 
prevcnt  any  mischief  he  might  caose,  and  not  briąg 
himself  into  difficulties  by  sparing  a  man  who  might 
make  him  repent  of  it  when  it  shouid  be  too  late,  Ae- 
oordingly  he  was  sent  a  priaoner,  out  of  Ilerod^s  aospt- 
cious  temper,  to  Macherua,  the  castle  I  before  nKntion- 
ed,  and  was  there  put  to  death"  {A  nt,  xyiii,  5, 2).  There 
is  no  contrariety  between  this  account  and  that  whieh 
is  given  in  the  New  Testament  (See  Lamy,  Diss.  de 
mrKtdit  Joa,  BapL ;  Yan  Til,  De  Jocu  Bapł.  mcanrra- 
tione  fictiHa  HerodLma  vmcula  anleeedente,  L.  R  1710.) 
Both  may  be  tnie:  John  was  condemned  in  the  miód 
of  Herod  on  pohtical  grounda,  as  endangcring  hia  posi- 
tion, and  executed  on  private  and  oatensible  groonda,  in 
order  to  gratify  a  malidoos  bat  poweifiil  woman.  The 
scriptural  reaaon  was  but  the  pretext  for  canrying  into 
effect  the  determination  of  Herod's  cahinet.  That  the 
fear  of  Herod  was  not  withoot  some  ground  may  be 
seen  in  the  popularity  which  John  had  gained  (Maik 
xi,  82 ;  see  Lardner,  Worksj  vi,  483). 

The  castle  of  Machsenis,  where  John  was  imprisoned 
and  beheaded,  was  a  fortress  lying  on  the  aoathem  ex- 
tremity  of  Persea,  at  the  head  of  the  Lakę  Aaphaldtes, 
between  the  dominions  of  Herod  and  Aretas,  king  of 
Arabia  Petrsa,  and  at  the  time  of  our  history  appeaza  to 
have  belonged  to  the  former  (Lardner,  vi,  483).  It  was 
here  that  the  above-mentioned  reports  reached  him  of 
the  miracles  which  onr  Lord  was  working  in  Jodjea— 
miracles  which,  doubtless,  were  to  John's  mind  but  the 
oonfirmation  of  what  he  expected  to  hear  aa  to  the  es- 
tablishment of  the  Messiah'8  kiogdom.  But  if  Christ^s 
kingdom  were  indeed  establiahed,  it  waa  the  daty  of 
John'8  own  disdples,  no  less  than  of  all  otbera,  to  ae- 
knowledgeit  They,  howerer,  woold  naturally  dingto 
their  own  master,  and  be  slow  to  tnnafer  their  allegianoe 
to  another.  With  a  view,  thefefore,  to  overcorae  their 
scruplee,  John  sent  two  of  them  to  Jesas  himself  to  ask 
the  ąuestion,  ''Art  thou  he  that  shouid  come?"  Thcy 
were  answered  not  by  words,  bot  by  a  aeries  of  mindes 
wrought  before  their  eyea---4he  venr  mirades  whidi 
prophecy  had  specified  aa  the  diitingaiahing  credeitials 
of  the  Messiah  (Isa.  xxzy,  5;  lxi,  1) ;  and  while  Jc<u 


JOHN 


9S9 


JOHN 


tiade  the  two  menengen  cany  back  to  John  as  hia  only 
anawer  Łhe  report  of  what  they  had  aeen  and  beard,  be 
took  occasion  to  gaaid  the  multitude  who  annoanded 
him  against  auppoeing  that  the  Baptiat  himaelf  was 
ahaken  in  mind,  by  a  diiect  appeal  to  tbeir  own  knowl- 
edge  of  his  life  and  character.  Weil  might  tbey  be  ap- 
pealed  to  as  witneaaes  that  the  stem  piophet  of  the  wił- 
derneas  waa  no  warereri  bending  to  every  breeze,  like 
the  leeds  on  the  banka  of  Jordan.  Proof  abondant  had 
they  that  John  was  no  worldling,  with  a  heart  set  upon 
rich  dothing  and  dainty  farę— the  luxnries  of  a  king^s 
oourt— and  they  must  have  been  ready  to  acknowledge 
that  one  so  inured  to  a  life  of  haidneas  and  privation 
waa  not  likely  to  be  aifected  by  the  ordinaiy  tenora  of 
a  prison.  But  onr  Lord  not  only  yindicatea  hia  for&- 
ranner  from  any  saapicion  of  inconatancy,  be  goea  on  to 
proclaim  him  a  prophet,  and  morę  than  a  prophet;  nay, 
inferior  to  nonę  bom  of  woman,  thongh  in  respect  to 
apiritual  pri^ilegea  behind  the  least  of  thoae  who  were 
to  be  bom  of  the  Spirit  and  admitted  into  the  feUowship 
of  Christ'8  body  (Matt  xi,  11).  It  shoold  be  noted  that 
the  expre8sion  6  ik  fUKcmpoc,  k.  r.  X.,  is  nnderstood 
by  Chrysoetom,  Augustine,  Hilary,  and  some  modem 
oommentators  to  mean  Ctuiat  himaelf,  but  this  inter- 
pretation  is  less  agreeaUe  to  the  spirit  and  tonę  of  our 
Loid*s  discourse.  Jesus  further  prooeeds  to  dedare  that 
John  was,  aooording  to  the  tiue  meaning  of  the  proph- 
ecy,  the  Elijah  of  the  new  oovenant,  foretold  by  Malachi 
(iii,  4). 

The  erent,  indeed,  prored  that  John  was  to  Herod 
what  Elijah  had  been  to  Ahah,  and  a  prison  waa  deemed 
too  light  a  punishment  for  his  boldnesa  in  aaserting 
God'8  law  before  the  face  of  a  king  and  a  queen.  Noth- 
faig  but  the  death  of  the  Baptist  would  satisfy  the  re- 
aentment  of  Herodiaa.  Though  foiled  onoe,  she  contin- 
ned  to  watch  her  opportunity,  which  at  length  arrived. 
A  court  fe8tival  was  kept  in  honor  of  the  king*s  birth- 
day.  After  supper  the  daughter  of  Herodias  came  in 
and  danced  before  the  company,  and  so  charmed  was 
the  king  by  her  grace  that  he  promised  with  an  oath  to 
gtve  her  whatsoever  she  shonld  ask.  Salome,  prompt< 
ed  by  her  abandoned  mother,  demanded  the  head  of 
John  the  Baptist  The  promise  had  been  given  in 
the  hearing  of  his  distinguished  guests,  and  so  Herod, 
though  loth  to  be  madę  the  instmment  of  so  bloody  a 
work,  gaye  instmctions  to  an  officer  of  his  guard,  who 
went  and  executed  John  in  the  prison,  and  his  head 
was  brought  to  feast  the  eyea  of  the  adulteress  whoee 
ains  he  had  denonnced.  See  Herodias.  Acoording  to 
the  Scripture  account,  the  daughter  of  Herodias  ob- 
tained  the  Baptiafs  head  at  the  entertainment,  without 
delay.  How  could  this  be  when  Macluerus  lay  at  a  dis- 
tance  from  Jerusalera?  The  feast  seems  to  have  been 
madę  at  Machserus,  which,  besides  being  a  stronghold, 
was  also  a  palące,  built  by  Herod  the  Great,  and  here 
.  Antipas  appears  to  have  been  spending  some  time  with 
his  paramour  Herodias. 

4.  Thus  was  John  added  to  that  glorious  army  of 
martyrs  who  have  suffered  for  righteousness'  sake.  His 
death  seems  to  have  occurred  just  before  the  thinl  Pa 
over,  in  the  course  of  the  Lord's  ministry,  A.D.  28. 
Herod  undoubtedly  looked  upon  him  as  some  extraor- 
dinary  person,  for  no  sooner  did  he  hear  of  the  mirades 
of  Jesus  than,  thongh  a  Sadducee  himself,  and,  as  such, 
a  disbelieyer  in  the  resurrection,  he  aacribed  them  to 
John^  whom  hc  supposed  to  have  risen  from  the  dead. 
See  Herod  Antipas.  Holy  Scripture  tells  us  that  the 
body  of  the  Baptist  was  hitd  in  the  tomb  by  his  disci- 
plea,  and  ecclesiastical  history  records  the  honors  which 
succeflfflve  genorations  paid  to  his  memoiy.  He  is  men- 
tioned  in  the  Koran,  with  much  honor,  under  the  name 
otJahja  (see  Hottinger,  Historia  Orientalit^  p.  144>149, 
Tigur.  1660 ;  Herbelot,  BiUioth.  Or,  ii,  288  są.). 

The  brief  history  of  John*8  life  is  marked  throughout 
with  the  characteriscic  graoes  of  self-denial,  humility, 
and  holy  courage.  So  great,  indeed,  was  his  abstinenoe 
that  worldly  men  considered  him  poeaeaaed.    ''John 


came  neither  eating  nor  drinking,  and  they  sald  he  hath 
a  deviL**  His  humility  waa  such  that  he  had  again 
and  again  to  diaaTow  the  character  and  dedine  the 
honoTB  which  an  admiring  multitude  almoat  forced  upon 
hinu  To  their  questions  he  anawered  plainly  he  waa 
not  the  Christ,  nor  the  Elijah  of  whom  they  were  think- 
ing,  nor  one  of  their  old  propheta.  He  was  no  one — a 
Yoioe  meiely^the  voioe  of  God  calling  hia  people  to  re- 
pentanoe  in  prepaiation  for  the  coming  of  him  whoae 
shoe-latchet  he  waa  not  worthy  to  unlooae.  For  hia 
boldneas  in  speaking  tmth,  he  went  a  willing  yictim  to 
priaon  and  to  deatłul-Smith ;  Kitto. 

Reaembling,  though  John  did,  in  so  many  things  the 
Elijah  of  former  days,  the  exit  of  the  one  from  his  fleld 
of  labor  waa  remarkable  for  its  humiliating  circum- 
stanoea,  as  the  other  for  ita  singular  gloiy— the  one  dy- 
ing  aa  a  felon  by  the  band  of  the  executioner,  the  other, 
without  taating  at  all  of  death,  ascending  to  heayen  in 
a  chariot  of  fbre.  But  in  John'8  case  it  could  not  be 
otherwise;  the  forerunner,  no  morę  than  the  disdple, 
could  be  aboye  his  Master;  and  especially  in  the  treat- 
ment  of  the  one  must  the  followers  of  Jesus  be  prepared 
for  what  waa  going  to  be  acoomplished  in  the  other. 
Afler  John'8  dcHith,  and  growing  out  of  it,  a  whole  seriea 
of  spedal  actions  and  dLscourses  were  directed  to  this 
end  by  our  Lord.  The  manner  of  John'8  death,  therfr- 
fore,  ia  on  no  acoonnt  to  be  regarded  aa  throwing  a  d»- 
preciatory  leflection  on  his  position  and  ministry.  He 
was,  aa  Christ  himaelf  testifiod,  '<  a  buraing  and  a  shin- 
ing  light**  (John  t,  86),  and  he  fulfilled  his  arduoos 
course  in  a  truły  noble  and  valiant  spirit.~Fairbaim. 

5.  For  the  literaturę  connected  with  this  subject,  see, 
beńdes  the  treatisea  noticed  aboye,  Hase,  L^ten  Jent 
(4th  ed.  Ldpdg,  1854),  p.  82,  86, 149 ;  Yolbeding,  Iwkz 
Progranmatum,  p.  20  sq.,  23,  125;  W&lch,  Bibiiotheca 
Tkeologioa,  iii,  402;  WitsU  Ex€rc,  de  Joannę  Bapł,  (in 
his  Miśoett,  Sacra,  ii,  867) ;  Leopold,  Johatmes  der  TdU' 
fer  (Hannoy.  1825);  Usteri,  Nackrichtm  ton  Johannes 
dem  Tdt^er  (in  the  Studien  und  Kritiken,  1829,  iii,  489); 
Von  Rohden,  Johamtet  der  Tdyfer  (LUbeck,  1888);  Ne- 
ander,  />6.  Jem  (Hamb.  1837),  p.  49 ;  Keim,  Leb,  Jeęu,  i, 
469^23 ;  Hansrath,  Lehfn  Jesu^  p.  316-340.  The  eccle- 
siastical traditions  touching  John  may  be  found  in  the 
A  eta  Sanct.  W,  687-846 ;  and,  in  a  compendious  form,  in 
Tillemont,  Mimoires,  i,  82-108,  482-506.  Other  treat- 
ises  of  a  morę  special  character,  in  addition  to  thoae 
aboye  dted,  are :  Hottinger,  Pentas  disśert,  B^  cAno- 
noL  (Traj.  a.  R.  1728)  p.  143  są.;  De>'ling,  Obterratuma 
Baer,  iii,  251  aq. ;  Aromon,  Pr.  de  doctrina  et  morte  Jo, 
Bapł,  (Erlangen,  1809) ;  Rau,  Pr.  de  Joan,  Bapt,  ta  rem 
Christ,  ttudiis  (Frlang.  1785),  ii,  4;  Abegg,  Orat.  de  Jo. 
Bapł,  (Hddelb.  1820) ;  Bax,  Specim.  de  Jo,  Bapt,  (L.  B. 
1821) ;  Stdn,  Ueb,  Getch,  Lehre  ir.  Schickeah  Joh,  d,  T, 
(in  Keil's  AnaUet,  iy,  i,  87  8q.);  Wessenberg,  Johanmet 
der  VorUti\fer  un$.  Herm  (Constanz,  1821) ;  Muller,  Pr, 
de  Jo,  Bapt,  (Hdmst.  1733) ;  Asp.  Obs,  PhiL  hisł,  de  Jo, 
Bapt.  (Upsala,  1783);  Lisco,  BibliKheBeiłr.iiber  J,  d, 
Taufer  (Berlin,  1826) ;  Eckhard,  Josephus  de  Jo.  Bapt, 
testatus  (Eiaen.  1785) ;  Harenberg,  J)e  cibo  Jo.  Bapt,  (in 
Otta  Gand,  sacra,  Traj.  ad  R.  1740,  p.  1  8q.) ;  Amnele, 
Amietus  et  ridus  J,  Bapł.  (UpsaL  1755);  Stollberg,  id, 
(YitemK  1678) ;  Oipzoy,  De  atitu  Jo.  B.  Ataiguat,  Chr, 
(Romę,  1756) ;  Huth,  J^um,  Jo.  B.  Afaria  et  discip.  Chr, 
fueriiU  bap^Mii  (Erlangen,  1759) ;  Blatt,  A  Disserf,  on 
John^s  Message  to  our  Saviour  (London,  1789) ;  Zciger- 
mann,  Conun,  de  consU,  guo  Jo.  discip.  ad  Jesum  oblega- 
verit  (Nnremb.  1818) ;  Frank,  Joh.  d.  Taufer  (Eisleben, 
1841);  Kromayer,  De  bapłisme  Christi  (Lips.  1680). 

John  iEoKATJts  (6  Aiyidrrię),  a  presbyter  of  iEg» 
(Aiyai)  (probably  in  Cilicia,  between  Mopsuestia  and 
Issus).  Photius  calls  him  {Cod.  55)  a  Nestorian,  but 
FabriduB,  with  reason,  suppoees  that  he  was  a  Eutych- 
ian.  When  he  flouruhed  is  not  known ;  he  may  perhapa 
be  consigned  to  the  lat  ter  half  of  the  5th  centtuy.  Yoe- 
sius  places  him  under  Zeno  the  Isaurian,  but  Caye 
thinks  he  was  later.  He  is  the  reputed  author  of  (1) 
'BKicKiu^set^hei  i^opla-ijlistoria  EcdesiasUcd),  in  ten 


1  ..   >  M,.  .:-;) 


JOHN 


960 


JOHN 


booka,  of  whicb  Fhotios  had  read  fire,  containing  the 
history  of  the  Charoh  from  the  depositioii  of  Nestorios 
at  the  Goancil  of  Ephesua  (the  third  generał  oomicU,  A. 
D.  431)  to  the  depońtioa  of  Petrus  FoUo  (AJ).  477), 
who  had  usurped  the  eee  of  Antioch  ia  the  zeigii  of  the 
emperor  Zeno.  As  the  GoimcU  of  Epbesos  ia  ihe  point 
at  which  the  ecdesiastical  histofy  of  Socratea  leaves  ofl^ 
it  is  probable  that  the  histoiy  of  John  of  J£ga  oom- 
menoed,  like  that  of  Eyagrioa,  at  that  point,  and  comse- 
qaentl7  that  theae  flye  books  were  the  fint  Are  of  hia 
histoiy.  Photios  deacribes  his  style  as  peropicnoos  and 
florid,  and  says  that  be  was  a  great  admirer  of  Dioaoo- 
rus  of  AlexandTia,  the  successor  of  Gyril,  and  extolled 
the  Synod  of  Ephesiis  (A.D.  449),  geneially  bnmded 
with  the  epithet  rf  Xi|(rrpiJc4»  ''the  synod  of  lobbers," 
while  be  attacked  the  Goancil  <^  Chalcedon.  How  late 
a'  period  the  histoiy  came  down  to  cannot  be  deter- 
mined :— (2)  -^  ^'""'^  which  Photios  describea  as  Kard 
rrię  ayUtę  rtrd^rric  9vv6Sov  {Adverau$  Q»artam  SanC' 
tam  Synodum),  This  miist  be  Photios^s  deecription,  not 
the  original  title  of  the  work;  for,  opposed  as  we  infer 
John  to  have  been  to  the  authority  of  the  Gouncil  of 
Chalcedon,  be  would  hardly  hare  deseribed  it  as  ''the 
fourtb  saored  counciL"  Photios  commends  the  style  in 
which  the  work  was  written.  Fabńcius  identifles  John 
of  ^g»  with  the  Joannes  o  duŁKpiv6fuvoc,  L  e.  '•'  the 
diflsenter,"  dted  by  the  anonymoos  wiiter  of  the  A»- 
aeramic  9vvrofioi  xpovu:at  {Bnoei  DemomiraHtmet 
ChrOHograpkictB),  glyen  by  Combefis  (in  his  Origemtm 
C,  PoŁitinarum  Mampuhu,  p.  24, 83),  bot  Combefis  him- 
self  {{bid.  p.  69)  identifies  this  John  with  John  Malałaś. 
Whether  John  of  iBgsB  is  the  John  o  'Pifrwp,  '^the 
Bhetoridan,'*  cited  liy  Eragrios  Scholasticos  {HitiL  EocL 
i,  16;  ii,  12;  iii,  10,  etc)  is  doobtfuL  Le  Quien  {Ope- 
ra 8,  Joamdi  Danuucenif  i,  868,  notę)  identifies  them, 
bot  Fabridos  thinks  they  weie  different  peisons.  See 
Fhotius,  BibŁ  Cod.  41,  55 ;  Fabridos,  BibL  Gr.  yii,  419 ; 
Cave,  Hia.  Li^  i,  456,  ed.  Oxfoid,  1740-43;  Smith,  Diet. 
ąf  Greek  €aid  Roman  Biograpkjf,  ii,  585. 

John  Agrioola.    See  Aobiooła. 

John  ALASoa    See  LAsoa 

John  OF  AŁicxA2n>]iiA.  See  Johm  Niciota;  John 
Tałaia. 

John  AuEZAiiDBiNus.    See  John  thb  Laborious. 

John  THB  Almsgiybr  (Johaithbs  £łKEM08TMA- 
Bius),  one  of  the  best  of  the  patriarcha  of  the  East- 
em  Chorch,  was  bom  of  noble  parentage  at  Amanthos, 
in  Cypms,  aboot  550.  He  had  mairied  yoong,  but, 
loaing  his  wife,  be  distriboted  his  possessioiis  among  the 
poor,  and  devoted  himself  to  a  life  of  ascetic  practices. 
So  irreproachable  was  his  oonduct,  and  so  great  his  lep- 
tttation  for  piety  and  charity,  that,  on  the  moider  of 
Theodore,  be  was  unanimooaly  demanded  as  successor 
in  the  patriarchate.  He  was  appointed  by  the  emperor 
in  A.D.  606.  The  fint  years  of  his  reign  weie  qoiet; 
not  so  the  last  yeais,  which  were  marked  by  the  soc- 
cessfol  inyasions  of  Chosroes  U,  king  of  the  Persians, 
doiing  the  reign  of  Pbocas,  into  the  Roman  poasessions 
oi  the  Orient  (compare  Gibbon,  Dtcline  and  Fali  of  the 
Rom.  Empire,  eh.  xlvi).  From  aU  parts  of  Syria  Chris- 
tians  fled  to  Alexandria  to  flnd  a  protector  in  John,  and 
when  at  last  Jerasalem  also  had  fedlen  (A.D.619),  not 
ocmtent  with  feeding  and  dothing  the  refogees  he  found 
right  at  his  own  door,  he  sent  large  sums  of  money  to  the 
Holy  City  to  redeem  Christian  captires  and  prevent  for- 
ther  maasacre.  (The  statement  that  at  this  fali  of  Je- 
rusalem  *' 90,000  Christiana  were  massacred,  and  that 
prlncipally  by  the  Jews,  who  porchased  them  from  the 
Persians  on  purpose  to  put  them  to  death"  [Xeale],  bas 
no  better  basta  than  the  inventions  of  prejodiced  monas- 
tics,  bent  on  the  destruction  of  the  Jews.  Comp.  Grttta, 
Gesch.  d.  Juden,  v,  84  8q.,  438  Bq.).  In  620,  when  the 
Peraians  threatened  Egypt  also,  he  fled  to  his  native 
Island,  and  died  there  a  short  time  after  his  arrivaL 
He  is  commemorated  in  the  Criental  Chordi  November 
11,  and  in  the  Lattn  January  28.    Curiously  enough,  he 


is  abo  oommemonted  by  ihe  Jaoobitea.  It  is  fiom  thit 
John  that  the  famoos  order  of  the  HotpitaUer$,  in  the 
firat  inst.anfte,  derived  its  name.  Gardiner,  bishop  of 
Winchester,  ascribed  to  him  the  authorship  of  the  oele- 
brated  Epiitola  ad  Ctuarium,  with  which  most  Piotea- 
tant  and  some  Boman  CathoUc  critics  credit  Chiyso»> 
tom.  Threebiographicalaoooants were writtenitf him: 
(1)  by  Joannes  Hoschus  and  Sophronios  (no  longer  ez- 
tant) ;  (2)  by  Leontius,  bishop  of  Neapolis,  in  Cypraa 
(tianalatedybetween  858  and  867,  into  Latin  by  Anast*- 
sius  Bibliothecarios,  and  repeatedly  i»inted) ;  found  in 
the  Acta  Sanatomm  of  the  Bollandists  (Jan.  28,  ii,  495) ; 
(8)bySinieonHetaphrBstes(batnottnłstworthy).  See 
Neale,  HitL  Eatt.  Ch.  {Akxandna\  ii,  52  sq. ;  Wetcer  o. 
Wdte,  Kircken^Leańkon,  y,  718  sq. ;  Fabńoos,  BibUotk. 
(?raKa,i,699,notexx;  Yiii,822;  x,262.     (J.H.W.) 

John  of  Amtioch  (1),  a  prelate  of  the  early  Gredc 
Church,  distingoished  for  the  part  he  took  in  the  oon- 
troveny  between  Cyril  and  Nestorius,  flouiished  in  the 
fint  half  of  the  5th  centuiy,  and  snoceeded  Theodotne 
in  the  patriarchate  of  Antioch  about  A.D.  427.  FaTor- 
ably  disposed  towards  Nestorius,  who  is  sald  to  hare 
been  a  schoolmate  of  his  in  the  monasteiy  of  SLEupre- 
pius,  near  Antioch,  he  was  foioed  to  take  dedded  gTonnd 
against  Cyril  by  the  impolitic  conduct  <tf  the  latter  at 
the  Coondl  of  Epbesos  (q.  v.).  Among  the  Eastem 
bishops  who'  came  with  John  of  Antioch  to  attend  the 
oouiual,  he  was  the  admowledged  leader,  and  we  need 
not  wonder,  therefore,  that  he  swayed  them  all  in  faTor 
of  Nestorius,  when,  on  amying  at  Ephesoa,  they  leam- 
ed  that  the  sesstons  had  not  only  commenoed,  but  that 
Nestorius  had  already  been  actoally  oondemned  withoot 
thdr  sanction.  As  long  as  Imuens  (q.  v.)  and  Candidi- 
us  auooeeded  in  maintaining  the  Nestorians  at  the  conit 
of  the  emperor  Theodosius,  John  proyed  faiihful  to  hie 
oourae  taken  at  Ephesus;  but  when  he  foocd  the  Cyril- 
Uan  party  gaining  the  upper  hand,  he  alowly  modified 
his  position  until  a  reoondliation  with  Cynl  followed 
(A.D.  482).  He  now  tumed  actually  against  his  ibrmer 
friend  Nestorius,  and  aiter  much  trouble  and  oppositko, 
which  he  yanqniahed,  partly  by  persuasion,  partly  by 
deposing  the  pertinadous,  the  other  Eastem  hishopa 
also— in  proyindal  councils  hdd  at  Antioch  (A.D.  432), 
Anazarbns  (A.D.  488),  and  Tarsus  (A.D.  484)--declared 
for  Cyril  and  the  decrees  of  the  third  (Ecumenical  Coon- 
ciL  Nay,  it  is  sald  that  John  of  Antioch  was  eyen  the 
man  who  instigated  the  emperor  to  make  the  banish- 
ment  of  Nestorius  perpetoal;  no  doubt  actuated  by  e 
desiie  to  oonyinoe  the  Cyrillians  of  the  truthfulness  of 
his  conyeifion.  In  the  oontroyeray  with  Theodoie  of 
MopsoestiA  he  took  morę  liberał  ground,  declining,  at  a 
coundl  hdd  in  438,  to  oondemn  the  writings  and  opin- 
ions  of  Theodore;  aoooiding  to  Liberatus,  he  eyen  ap- 
peared  in  his  defence.  John  died  in  441  or  442.  He  is 
spoken  of  by  Gennadius  {De  Virit  IlbutrUmi,  c  54)  as 
poasessed  of  great  rhetorical  power.  He  wrote  (1) 
*ETn9To\ai  {kpistolai)  and  'Ava^opai  {Relatianeś)  le- 
specting  the  Nestorian  controyeray  and  the  Conncil  of 
Epheaus^  of  which  seyeral  are  contained  in  the  yarious 
editions  of  the  ConciUa:—(2)  'OfjuXia  {Homilia),  the 
bomily  or  exhortation  deliyered  at  Chalcedon,  just  after 
the  Coundl  of  Ephesus,  to  the  people  of  Constantinople, 
with  the  aim  to  animate  them  to  continue  ateadfast  iu 
thdr  adherence  to  the  old  Nicene  Confeasion ;  a  frag- 
ment of  it  we  have  in  the  Coneilia : — (3)  Ilepi  rMV  Mf- 
oaktaptrutp  {De  MesmlianU),  a  letter  to  Nestorius,  enu- 
merated  by  Photius  {Bibl,  Cod.  82)  among  the  epiacopal 
and  synodical  papers  against  that  hereticsl  body,  con- 
tained in  the  histoiy  or  acta  of  the  Coundl  of  Side  (A. 
D.  388)  :~(4)  Contra  eo$  qui  una  tantum  tubgtantia  a»- 
9erunt  adorandum  Christian  (only  known  to  us  by  Gen- 
nadius; probaUy  the  work  from  which  the  passages  ara 
taken  with  which  Eulogius  credits  John  of  Antioch). 
See  Smith,  DicU  Gr.  and  Rom.  Biog.  ii,  586  8q. ;  Tille- 
mont,  Mimoire$,  yoL  xiy ;  Mansi,  ConciUa,  iy,  1259  są. ; 
Neale,  Hist.  Eatt.  Ch.  {Alezandria^,  i,  bk.  ii,  aect  ii  and 
iii;  Hefek,  ConcUitng^ch.  ii,  178  8q.;  Schafii;  Ch.  HitU 


JOHN 


901 


JOHN 


lu,  f  188-140;  Milman,  Latin  ChrUHamiyt  i,  224  aq.; 
GLbbon,  DecL  and  FaU  Rom,  Emp,  eh.  xlvii. 

Jobn  OF  Antioch  (2),  sunuuned  Codonahu,  the 
soccesBor  of  Petrus  Goipheiu,  or  Fullo  (the  Fuller),  after 
hiB  depodtion,  in  the  patńarchate  of  Antioch,  A.D.  447. 
John  had  preyioiuly  been  bishop  of  Apamea;  but,  af- 
ter  holding  the  patriarchate  three  months,  he  was  de- 
poaed  hy  e  synod  of  Eastem  bishops,  and  suoceeded  by 
Stephen.  Theophanes  inoorrectly  places  the  appoint- 
raent  of  John  after  Stephen^s  death.  Both  John  and 
his  predeceasor  Petrus  had  been,  at  the  instigation  of 
Acadas  of  Constantinople,  excommunicated  by  the  pope ; 
yet,  afler  the  deposition  of  John,  the  same  AĆadus  pro- 
cured  his  eleyation  to  the  bishopric  of  Tyre.  Theopha- 
nes incorrectiy  ascribes  this  appointment  to  Calendion 
of  Antioch.  See  Theophanes,  Chnmog,  p.  110,  etc.,  ed. 
Paris  (p.  88,  etc,  ed.  Yenice;  p.  199,  etc,  ed.  Bonn); 
Yalesins,  NoL  ad  Evaęrii  H.  E,  iii,  16,  and  Obterratia- 
nes,  Ecdeś,  ad  Epogriumf  ii,  8.— Smith,  IHeL  Greek  and 
Roman  Biog.  ii,  586. 

John  OF  A^mocu  (3),  sumamed  ScholastieuM^  an 
eminent  Greek  legist,  floniished  in  the  6th  centuiy.  He 
entered  the  Chnrch,  and  became  patriarch  of  Constan- 
tinople (564-578).  He  oompiled  a  collection  of  ecdesi- 
astical  laws,  which  greatly  suipassed  in  extent  and 
method  those  which  preceded  it,  and  which  haa  remain- 
ed  the  basis  of  canon  law  in  the  Greek  Church.  An- 
other  of  his  works,  entitled  Nomocanon,  was  an  attempt 
to  harmonize  Justinian's  constitntions  relating  to  the 
Church  with  the  older  rules.  Both  works  were  for 
many  centuries  held  in  high  estimation,  and  were  in- 
serted  in  Yoell  and  Just^'8  BibL  jurit  canonici  veteri$ 
(Paris,  1961),  ii,  603-789.  See  Fabricius,  BibL  Gneca, 
xi,  100 ;  Hoefer,  iYour.  Biog,  Gm.  xxTi,  580.    (J.  N.  P.) 

Jobn  Abchaph  (*Apx^^)»  an  Egyptian  schismatic 
of  some  notę,  was  a  contemponry  of  Athanasius.  He 
was  a  deyoted  follower  of  Melitius,  who,  just  before  his 
death,  which  occurred  shortly  after  his  condemnation 
by  the  Coundl  of  Nice  (A.D.  825),  madę  John  the  Me- 
letian  bishop  of  Memphis,  and  intrusted  to  him  also  the 
kadership  of  the  Melitians  as  a  body,  John,  supported 
by  the  Arians,  renewed  the  attacks  against  the  ortho- 
dox  party,  and  the  schism  soon  became  as  riolent  as 
ever.  Athanasius,  now  patriarch  of  Alexandria,  and 
leader  of  the  orthodox  party,  was  the  great  object  of 
attack;  and  John  and  his  foUowers  sought  to  thiow  on 
him  the  odium  of  originating  the  disturbances,  and  of 
persecutiug  his  opponents ;  and,  especially,  they  charged 
him  with  the  murder  of  Arsenius,  a  Melitian  bishop, 
whom  they  had  secreted  in  order  to  gire  oolor  to  the 
charge,  Athanasius  (q.T.),  on  his  part,  appealed  to 
the  emperor,  Constantine  the  Great,  charging  John  and 
his  foUowers  with  unsoundness  in  the  faith,  with  a  de- 
sire  to  alter  the  decrees  of  the  Niecne  Coundl,  and  with 
raising  tumults  and  msulting  the  orthodox ;  he  also  ob- 
jected  to  them  as  being  irregularly  ordained.  He  re- 
futed  their  charges,  especially  the  charge  of  murder, 
ascertaining  that  Anenius  was  aUve,  and  obliged  them 
to  remain  quiet.  John  professed  to  repent  of  his  disor- 
derly  prooeedings  and  to  be  reoonciled  to  Athanasius, 
and  retumed  with  his  party  into  the  oommunion  of  the 
orthodox  Chnrch,  but  the  reconciliation  was  not  sinoere 
or  lasdng;  tronbles  broke  out  again,  and  a  fresh  sepa- 
ration  took  place,  John  and  his  foUowers  either  being 
ejected  from  communion  by  the  Athanasian  party,  or 
their  return  oppoaed.  The  Coundl  of  Tyre  (AD.  885), 
in  which  the  opponents  of  Athanasius  were  triumphant, 
ordered  them  to  be  readmitted ;  but  the  emperor,  deem- 
ing  John  to  be  a  oontentious  man,  or  at  least  thinking 
that  his  presence  was  incompatible  with  the  peace  of 
the  Egyptian  Church,  banished  him  (A.D.  386),  just 
after  he  had  banished  Athanasius  into  GauL  The  place 
of  his  exile  and  his  subeequent  fate  are  not  known.^— 
Sozomen,  flist.  Eccks,  ii,  21, 22, 25, 81 ;  Athanasius,  ApoL 
contra  Arianosj  c  66,  67,  70,  71 ;  TiUeroont.,  Mimoires, 
▼oL  yi  passim,  roi  yiii  passim ;  Neaie,  Hist,  Eastem  CK 
IY.-PPP 


(AUaeandria)  i,  161 ;  Smith,  Dict^  Greek  and  Bom,  Bioo. 
u,  587, 

John  AroykopOlus  CApyvpoirov\oc)f  one  of  the 
leamed  Greeks  whose  flight  into  Western  £uh>pe  con- 
tributed  so  powerfuUy  to  the  reviyal  of  leaming,  was 
bom  at  O)nstantinople  of  a  noble  fanuly,  and  was  a 
presbyter  of  that  dty,  on  the  capture  of  which  (A.D. 
1453)  he  is  said  by  Fabridus  and  Care  to  haye  fled  into 
Italy ;  but  there  is  eyery  reason  to  beUeye  that  his  re- 
moyal  was  anteoedent  to  that  eyent,  and  that  he  was 
in  Italy  seyeral  times  preyiously.  A  passage  dted  by 
Tiraboschi  (^Storia  delia  Lett,  Italicma,  yi,  198)  makes  it 
Ukely  that  he  was  at  Padua  A.D.  1484,  reading  and  ex- 
plaining  the  works  of  Aristotle  on  natund  phUosophy. 
In  A.D.  1489  an  Argyropulus  was  present  with  the  em- 
peror John  Paheologns  at  the  Coundl  of  Florence  (Mi- 
chael  Ducas,  nist,  ByzanŁ,  c.  81),  and,  though  it  is  not 
certain  that  this  was  our  John,  it  yet  seems  yez^"  prob- 
able.  In  A.D.  1441  he  was  at  Constantinople,  as  ap- 
pears  from  a  letter  of  Francesco  FUelfo  to  Piętro  Peiieoni 
(see  PhUdphus,  Epistoł  8),  engaged  in  pubUc  teaching, 
but  it  is  uncertain  how  long  he  had  been  establish^ 
there.  Probably  he  had  retumed  some  time  between 
A.D.  1484  and  1489,  and  aocompanted  Bessarion  to  and 
from  the  Coundl  of  Florence.  Among  his  pupils  at 
Constantinople  was  Michael  Apostolius.  During  his 
abode*in  Italy,  after  his  last  remoyal  thither  in  1453,  he 
was  honorably  receiyed  by  Cosmo  de'  Medici,  and  was 
madę  preceptor  to  Lorenzo  de'  Medici,  the  cdebrated 
son  of  Piętro,  in  Greek  and  in  the  Aiistotelian  philoeo- 
phy,  espedaUy  in  ethics.  When  Lorenzo  suooeeded  to 
the  throne  in  A.D.  1469  he  estabUshed  a  Greek  academy 
in  that  dty,  and  in  it  Aigyropulus  read  and  expounded 
the  rlafwiciil  Greek  writers  to  the  Florentine  youtlu 
From  Florence  he  remoyed  to  Romę,  on  account  of  the 
pUgue  which  had  broken  out  in  the  former  dty ;  the 
time  of  his  remoyal  is  not  ascertained,  but  it  was  before 
1471.  At  Komę  he  obtained  an  ample  subsistence  by 
tcaching  Greek  and  phUosophy,  and  espedaUy  by  pul>- 
Udy  expounding  the  works  of  Aristotle.  He  dicd  at 
the  age  of  seyenty  from  an  autumnal  feycr  said  to  haye 
been  brought  on  by  eating  too  freely  of  melons,  but  the 
year  of  his  death  is  yariously  sUted ;  aU  that  appeara 
to  be  certainly  known  is  that  he  suryiyed  Theodore 
Gaza,  who  died  A.D.  1478.  The  attainments  of  Argy- 
ropulus were  htghly  estimated  in  his  own  and  the  suc- 
ceeding  age.  Thus  it  is  related  of  Theodore  Gaza  that, 
when  he  found  that  Argyropulus  was  engaged  in  trans- 
lating  some  pieces  of  Aristotle,  on  which  he  had  also 
been  occupied,  he  bumt  his  o^n  yersions,  that  he  might 
not,  by  proyoking  any  unfayorable  comparison,  stand  in 
the  way  of  his  friend'8  rising  reputation.  The  worka 
of  Argyropulus  are  as  foUows:  Original  works — 1.  Utęi 
r^c  t6v  aylov  UvfVfiaTOc  imroptutrtwCf  De  Proceesi' 
one  Spiritus  Saneti;  printed  with  a  Latin  yerńon  in  the 
Gmecia  Orihodoxa  of  Leo  Allatius,  i,  400-418 :— 2.  Ora^ 
do  cuarta  pro  Synodo  FlorenHna,  dted  by  Nicolaua 
Comnenus  PapadopoU  in  his  Pranotiones  Mystagogicm^ 
We  do  not  know  if  this  has  been  published,  or  whether 
it  is  in  Latin  or  Greek :— 3.  CommentarH  in  Eihica  NU 
comackea  (Florence,  1478).  This  work  comprehends 
the  substance  of  his  exp08itoTy  lectures  on  the  Nico- 
machlan  ethics  of  Aristotle,  ta^en  down  and  published 
by  Donatus  AcciajuoU,  who  is  mentioned  as  a  pupU  of 
Argyropulus : — 4.  CommentarH  in  A  ristotelis  Metaphys- 
iccL,  pubUshed  with  Bessarion^s  yersion  of  that  work 
(Paris,  1515,  foL).  The  other  original  worics  of  Argy- 
ropulus are  scattcred  in  MSS.  through  the  libraries  of 
Europę  (of  which  a  fuU  Ust  is  giyen  by  Smith,  vt  infrcC), 
He  also  translated  the  Prtedicabiliay  or  De  qmnque  voci- 
hus  of  Porphyiy,  and  the  Homilia  S,  BasilH  in  Herai' 
meron.  His  yerdon  of  Porphyry  was  printed  with  his 
translations  of  Aristotle  at  Yenice  in  1496,  and  that  of 
BasU  at  Romę  in  1515.  See  Hody,  De  Guecis  lUustri- 
husy  p.  187-210 ;  Wharton  in  Caye,  Hist,  Litt,  ii,  Appen* 
dix,  p.  168;  Fabridus, BibL  Gnec,  iu,  496,  etc;  xi, 460, 
etc ;  Smith,  Diet,  Gr,  and  Rom,  Biog,  u,  587, 


JOńN 


^02 


JOHN 


'  John,  abbot  of  St.  Abnoul  of  Ketz,  u  fint  men- 
tioned  in  960,  when  he  succeeded  Anstee  in  Łhat  office. 
He  was  reputed  to  be  a  learoed  and  very  liberał  man 
-for  the  timea.  He  granted  a  charter  of  freedom  to  the 
łnhabitants  of  Maurrille,  formerly  serffl  of  the  abbey^ 
and  divided  the  land  among  them,  retainuig  only  for 
the  abbey  the  right  of  levying  oertain  taxes.  He  died 
about  977.  John  wrote  a  Life  of  SLGlodreinde  (Mabil- 
lon,  Acta  ScousUb,  voL  ii,  col  1087)  and  the  Life  of  St 
John  de  Yendi^re,  abbot  of  Goize  (BoUandii,  vol  iii, 
Feb.).  See  GaUia  Chritt,  yoL  xiii,  col  900;  Hist,  Liłt. 
de  la  France,  yii,  421 ;  Hoefer,  Nouveau  Biog,  GMrale, 
xxvi,  630.     (J.  N.  P.) 

'  John  OF  Ayila  {Jtuin  de  A  vild),  the  apostle  of  An- 
dalasia  in  the  16th  centuiy,  was  bom  at  Almodovar  del 
Campo,  a  smali  city  of  the  proyince  of  Toledo,  aboat 
the  year  1500.  His  father  intended  him  for  the  profes- 
sion  of  law,  but,  after  a  short  stay  at  the  Unirersity  of 
Salamanca,  he  retumed  home,  and  spent  three  years  in 
Btrict  asceticism.  Then,  afler  extended  studies  in  phi- 
loeophy  and  theolog^  under  Domingo  de  Soto,  he  com- 
inenced  preaching  with  great  success.  His  popularity 
excited  enry,  and  he  was  imprisoned  for  a  yery  short 
time  by  the  Inquińtion.  After  preaching  for  nine  yeais 
in  Andalusia,  be  yisited  also  Oordoya,  Granada,  Baeza, 
Hontilla,  etc,  wheze  his  sermons — chiefiy  in  hoaor  of 
the  Yirg^n  Maiy — proyed  a  great  success.  The  highest 
ecdesiastical  offices  were  now  offered  him ;  pope  Paul 
ni  contemplated  eyen  creating  him  cardinal,  but  John 
preferred  to  oontinue  the  work  of  an  itinerant  mission- 
ary.  With  a  yiew  to  the  early  religious  education  of 
the  people,  and  Ło  eleyate  their  morał  standing  perma- 
nenUy,  he  established  schools  at  SeyUle,  Ubeda,  Baeza, 
Granada,  Gordoya,  and  Montalla.  His  health  failed  him, 
howerer,  and  he  remained  for  twenty  years  sick  at  the 
latter  place,  which  aocounts  for  his  not  aocompanying 
the  archbishop  of  Granada  to  the  Gouncil  of  Trent. 
Herę  he  oomposed  his  Ępitłolario  espiritual  (2  yola.  4Ło), 
which  has  been  translated  into  seyeral  languages.  He 
died  Uay  10, 1569.  His  Ufe  has  been  written  by  Luis 
de  Granada  (see  Obra*  del  V,  P.  M,  Luis  de  Granada, 
Madrid,  1849;  Luis  Munnoz,  Vida  del  Fen.  Var(m  el 
Maestro  Juan  de  AvUa;  Antonio  de  Capmany,  Teatro 
historico  de  la  eheuencia  Etpannola),  See  Fr.  J.  Schir- 
mer,  Werke  det  Juan  de  AvUa  {Sermonea  del  santissimo 
sacramento;  de  la  incamacion  del  Hijo  de  Dios;  del 
Espiritu  Santo;  las  fietwilates  de  la  sanłissima  mr^en 
Maria,  etc),  Regensburg,  1856. — ^Herzog,  Real-Encyldo- 
padie,  vi,  737. 

John  Baptist,  a  French  missionary  priest  In  the 
iatter  part  of  the  18th  and  the  beginning  of  the  19th 
century.  The  son  of  the  emperor  of  Cochin  China,  Gya- 
Long,  haying  oome  to  France  with  the  bbhop  of  Adran 
in  1787,  concłuded  a  treaty  with  king  Louis  Xyr,  by 
which  the  latter  was  to  aid  him  in  regaining  his  throne, 
which  he  had  lost  by  a  reyolution.  Eyents  preyented 
Louis  from  keeping  his  promise,  but  Gya-Long,  having 
regained  his  kingdom,  called  to  his  oourt  the  bishop  of 
Adran,  who  became  his  prime  minister,  and  John  Bap- 
tist, who  had  acted  as  generał  yicar  to  the  bishop.  He 
also  enacted  seyend  laws  fayoring  Roman  Catholicism. 
The  bishop  of  Adran  died  in  1817,  and  Gya-Iiong  him- 
self  in  1819.  His  succAsor  being  opposed  to  Christian- 
ity,  John  Baptist  left  Hu6-Foo,  the  capital  of  the  em- 
pire of  Annam,  where  he  had  resided,  travelled  throngh 
ihe  East,  and  in  1827  settled  in  the  conyent  of  St.  Fran- 
óa  at  Macao,  where  he  died  Jnly  9, 1847.  He  is  said  to 
,haye  left  a  collection  of  interesting  documents  on  China 
jmd  the  other  oountries  he  yisited.  See  I^e  Constitution- 
nd,  Oct.  17, 1847.— Hoefer,  Now,  Biog,  GhUrale,  xxyi, 
.567.     (J.N.P.) 

John  OF  Bassora  is  the  name  of  a  prelate  of  the 
'Eastcm  Church  who  ilourished  at  Bassora,  the  ancient 
Bostra,  from  A.D.  617-650,  after  whom  one  of  the  litur- 
gies  of  the  Oriental  Church  is  named.  He  was  formerly 
supposed  to  be  the  author  of  it,  but  Neale  thinks  it  ói 


later  datę,  and  supposes  it  had  its  origin  in  the  nortln 
em  parto  of  Arabia.  See  Neale,  UisL  ofEatL  CkmrA^ 
Introd.  p.  828  (6). 

John  Bbssariom.    See  Bb88abiox. 

John  or  Bbvkblt.    See  BiysRLT. 

John  BoREŁŁus.    See  Johm  of  Parka. 

John  OF  Bbuges.    See  Joris,  Dayid;  Anabl4f- 

TISTS. 

John  BuRiDAKus,  a  celebrated  Nominalist  of  the 
14th  century,  was  bom  at  Bethune,  in  Artois.  He  is  re- 
puted to  have  been  a  pupil  of  Occam,  then  to  haye  lec- 
tured  with  great  abiUty  and  success  in  Paris,  and  to 
haye  risen  to  the  distinction  of  rector  of  the  uniyerńty 
of  that  city  about  1830,  and  to  haye  quitted  that  place 
only  after  the  Realisto  had  gained  the  ascendency  [see 
Reausm  and  Nominalism],  and  to  haye  asasted  in 
the  founding  of  the  uniyersity  at  Tlenna.  He  was 
looked  upon  by  his  contemporaries  as  one  of  the  most 
powerful  adyeraaries  of  Realism,  and  distinguished  him- 
self  also  by  his  rules  for  finding  the  middle  term  in 
log^c,  a  spedes  of  oontriyancc  denominated  by  some  the 
A  S8's  Bridge,  as  well  as  by  his  inąuiries  conceming  fn^ 
will,  wherein  he  approached  the  principles  of  Detenni- 
natism,  maintaining  that  we  necessarily  prefcr  the 
greater  of  two  goods.  As  for  the  celebrated  illnstniton 
which  beaiB  his  name,  of  an  ass  dying  for  hunger  be- 
tween  two  bnndles  of  hay,  it  is  not  to  be  found  in  his 
writings,  which  are,  Qaastiones  in  X  libb.  Ethicorum 
A  ristot,  (Paris,  1489,  foL ;  Oxford,  1687, 4to) :— Qv<uf.  ta 
Polit,  A  rist,  (Par.  1500,  foL)  i—Compendium  Logica  (Yen- 
1499,  foL)  i—Summula  de  Dialecticd  (Paris,  1487,  foL) ; 
Ac  Complete  editions  of  his  works  were  published  at 
Pferis  in  1500, 1516,  and  1518.  See  Bayle,  Histor.  Diet. 
art  Buridanus;  Tennemann,  Gesch.  der  PhiL  yiii,  2,  914 
8q. ;  Matu  ofPhilos,  (tnmaL  by  Moreli),  p.  246. 

John  OF  CAPI8TRA2I.    See  Capistrak. 

John  THE  Cappadocian,  patriarch  of  Constantmo- 
ple  (he  was  the  seoond  patriarch  of  the  name  of  John, 
Chrysostom  being  John  I)  from  A.D.  517  or  518,  wwb, 
before  hui  election  to  the  patriarchate,  a  presbyter  and 
syncellus  of  Constantinople.  Originally  he  sided  with 
the  opponento  of  the  Council  of  Chalcedon,  but  he  had 
either  too  little  firmness  or  too  little  prindple  to  follow 
out  steadily  the  inclination  of  his  own  mind,  for  he  ap- 
pears  to  haye  been  in  a  great  degree  th^  tool  of  otben; 
On  the  death  of  Anastasius,  and  the  accession  of  the 
emperor  Justin  I,  the  orthodox  party  among  the  inhab- 
itanto  of  Constantinople  raised  a  tumult,  and  compeUed 
John  to  anathematize  Seyerus  of  Antioch,  and  to  insert 
in  the  diptychs  the  names  of  the  fathers  of  the  Gomicii 
of  Chalcedon,  and  restore  to  them  thoee  of  the  patriarcha 
Euphemius  and  Macedonius.  These  diptychs  were  two 
tables  of  ecdesiastical  dignitaries,  one  oontaining  thoee 
who  were  living,  and  the  other  thoee  who  had  died  in 
the  peaoe  and  commnnion  of  the  Church,  so  that  inser- 
tion  was  a  palpable  dedantion  of  orthodoxy,  and  erasore 
of  heresy  or  schlsm.  These  measures,  extorted  in  the 
first  instance  by  popular  yiolenoe,  were  afterwards  sanc- 
tioned  by  a  synod  of  forty  bishops.  In  A.D.  519,  John, 
at  the  expressed  desire  of  Justin,  sought  a  reconciliation 
with  the  Western  Church,  from  which,  under  Ana8ta>- 
sius,  the  Eastem  Church  had  separated,  and  in  this  toak 
John  displayed  oonsiderable  cunning.  Not  only  was  he 
snecessful  in  restoring  a  friendly  and  unionlike  feeling 
between  the  Greek  and  Roman  churches,  bat  Hormisdas 
eyen  left  to  him  the  task  of  bringing  about  also  the  rec- 
ondliation  of  the  patriarchs  of  Antioch  and  Alexandria 
to  the  orthodox  Church.  See  HoRMisDAa.  In  this  he 
failed.  John  died  about  the  beginning  or  middle  of  the 
year  520,  as  appears  by  a  letter  of  Hormisdas  to  his  va^ 
cessor  Epiphanius.  John  wrote  seyeral  letters  or  other 
papers,  a  few  of  which  are  sdll  extant  Two  short  let- 
ters (Eirt9To\ai),  one  to  John,  patriarch  of  Jerusalem, 
and  one  to  Epiphanius,  bishop  of  Tyre,  aie  printed  in 
Greek,  with  a  Latin  yersion,  in  the  ConeiliOj  among  the 
documento  relating  to  the  Council  of  Constantinople  in 


JOHN 


968 


JOHN 


A.D.  586  (r,  ool  185,  ed.  Łabbe;  viii,  1065^7,  ed.  Mim- 
«i).  Fonr  reUtiones,  or  Libelli,  are  extant  011I7  in  a 
iatin  yeraion  among  the  Epistols  of  pope  Honnisdas 
(in  the  ConciKa,  iv,  1472, 1486, 1491, 1521,  edit  Labbe; 
viii,  486,  451, 457, 488,  edit  Mann).  It  ii  remarkaUe 
Łhat  in  the  two  short  Greek  lettera  addieased  to  Eastera 
preUtes  John  takes  the  title  of  oicou/m  yiieoc  irarpiap%i|c, 
€acummicał,  or  universal  patriarck  [aee  Patriabch], 
and  is  rappoaed  to  be  the  flrst  that  aasumed  this  ambi- 
tiottB  designation.  It  is  remarkable,  however,  that  in 
thoee  piecea  of  his  which  were  addieased  to  pope  Hor- 
misdas,  and  which  are  extant  only  in  the  Latin  Tersion, 
the  title  does  not  appear;  and  drcamstancea  are  not 
wanting  to  lead  to  the  suspicion  that  its  presence  in  the 
Greek  epiatles  is  owing  to  the  mistake  of  some  tran- 
acnber,  who  has  oonfounded  this  John  the  Cappadodan 
with  John  the  Faster.  It  is  oertainly  remarkaUe  that 
the  title,  if  assumed,  shoold  have  incurred  no  rebuke 
from  the  jealousy  of  the  popes,  not  to  speak  of  the  other 
iwtriarchs  equal  in  dignity  to  John ;  or  that,  if  onoe  as- 
anmed,  it  should  haye  bieen  dropped  again,  which  it 
must  have  been,  sińce  the  employment  of  it  by  John 
the  Faster  (q.  v.),  many  yeais  after,  was  violently  op- 
posed  by  pope  Gregory  I  as  an  onaathorized  assump- 
tion.  We  may  oonjectore,  perhaps,  that  it  was  assamed 
by  the  patriaichs  of  Con8tantinqple  without  opposition 
ftom  their  feUow-prelates  in  the  East  doring  the  schism 
of  the  Eaatem  and  Western  chmnches,  and  qiiietly  drop- 
.ped  on  the  termination  of  the  schism,  that  it  might  not 
prevent  the  re-establishment  of  friendly  relationfl.  See 
Theophanes,  Chnmog.  p.  140-142,  ed.  Paris  (p.  112, 118, 
ed.Ven.;  p. 258-256, ed.  Bonn);  Cave,  ^iit  Zttt.  i,  508 ; 
Fabridus,  BibL  Gr.  xi,  99;  Smith,  Diet,  Gr.  and  Bom, 
Biog.  ii,  592. 

John  Chrysostom.    See  Crrtsostom. 

John  OF  CiTRUS  (now  Kiiro  or  Kidroś),  in  Mace- 
donia, the  ancient  Pydna,  was  bishop  of  that  see  about 
A.D.  1200.  He  is  the  author  of'AvoKpia(ŁC  vp6c  K^av- 
OTavTXvov  'Af)x^^^<"^o7rov  £^vppaxiov  tov  Ka^aaiKay 
(Rf sporna  ad  Consłantuium  CabaśUum,  A  rckiepiscopum 
Dyrrachii},  of  which  8ixteen  answers,  with  Uie  ąues- 
tions  prefixed,  are  given  with  a  Latin  yersion  in  the  Jus 
GrcBco-Romanorum  of  Leunclavius  (Frankf.  1596,  folio), 
V,  323.  A  laiger  portion  of  the  Responsa  is  given  in 
the  Synopsis  Juris  Grad  of  Thomas  DiplovaticiiJS  (Di- 
ploratizio).  Seyeral  MSS.  of  the  Responsa  contain 
twenty-four  answers,  others  thirty-two;  and  Nicholas 
Comnenus  Papadopoli,  citing  the  work  in  his  Prano^ 
tiones  Mystagogioos,  speaks  of  a  hundred.  In  one  MS. 
he  is  mentioned  with  the  sumame  of  Dalassimu.  Al- 
latius,  in  his  De  Consensu,  and  Contra  Hottingentmj 
qnotes  De  Conswtudinibus  et  Dogmatibus  Latinorum  as 
the  prodaction  of  John  of  Citrus.  See  Fabridus,  BibL 
Greeca,  xi,  841, 590 ;  Cave,  Jlist  Lit.  ii,  279 ;  Smith,  Dio- 
Honary  of  Greek  and  Roman  Biography,  ii,  593. 

John  CuMACus.    See  John  thk  Scholar,  2. 

John  THE  CoNSTAMT,  clector  of  Saxony.  See  Ref- 
OR3iATio2f  (in  Germany). 

John  op  C0N8TANTINOPLE.  See  John  the  Dea- 
oon;  John  the  Faster. 

John  (I,  patriarch)  of  Constantinopue.  See 
Ciirtsostom. 

John  (II,  patriarch)  of  Constantinopue.  See 
John  the  Cappadocian. 

John  (III,  patriarch)  of  Constantinopue,  Sea 
John  the  Scholar  (1). 

John  (VT,  patriarch)  of  Constantinopłb  was  ap- 
pointed  by  the  emperor,  Phtlippicns  Baidanes,  A.D.  712, 
for  his  Monothelite  opinions  and  his  rejection  of  the  aa- 
thority  of  the  sixth  cecamenical  (third  Constantinopol- 
itan)  coandl.  Cyms,  the  predecessor  of  John,  was  de- 
posed  to  make  way  for  him,  aooording  to  Cave.  John 
was  deposed,  not  long  after  his  elevation,  in  oonseqaenoe, 
apparently,  of  the  deposition  of  his  patron  Philippicns, 
and  the  devatłon  of  Artemios  or  Anastasios  IL    The- 


ophanes does  not  notice  the  fate  of  John,  but  records 
the  elevation  of  his  suooessor,  Germanus,  metropolitan 
of  Cyzicus,  to  the  patriarchate  of  Constantinople  A.D» 
715.  John  wrote  '£iri<rroXi)  Tcphc  KiaporaPTii/op  ritv 
ayttóraroy  irairav  *P<tffii|c  AiroKo-yinieii  {Epistoła  ad 
Constaniimm  Sanctissimum  Papam  Romanum  Apologeta 
icd),  in  which  he  defends  oertain  transactions  of  the 
reign  of  Philippicus.  This  letter  is  published  in  the 
Concilia  (vi,  coL  1407,  ed.  Labbe ;  xii,  ooL  196,  ed.  Man- 
d).  It  had  previoiiBly  been  published  in  the  A  uciarium 
Novum  of  Combeiis,  ii,  21 1.  See  Fabridus,  BiU,  Gr,  xi, 
152 ;  Cave,  ffist.  Lit,  i,  619 ;  Smith,  Dictionary  0/ Greek 
and  Roman  Bioyraphy,  ii,  598. 

John  of  Cornwall  was  an  eminent  theologian  of 
the  12th  centuiy  whom  both  England  and  France  daim 
as  their  own.  Little  is  known  of  his  life.  He  appears 
to  have  studied  at  Paris  nnder  Peter  Lombard  and  Rob- 
ert of  Mdun,  and  to  have  died  towards  the  dose  of  the 
12th  centuiy.  Great  uncertainty  also  prevai]s  respect- 
ing  his  writings;  still  he  is  generally  consideied  as  the 
author  of  a  work  entitled  Euhgium  (pubL  by  Martynę, 
AneodotoL,  v,  coL  1637).  It  is  a  spedal  treatise  on  the 
human  naturę  of  Christ,  refuting  Uie  subtle  distinctions 
of  Gilbert  de  la  Porree  and  other  scholastic  theologians, 
who  maintained  that  Christ,  quoad  Aomńion,  couki  not 
be  oonddered  as  a  merę  person,  aliguis;  or,  in  other 
words,  his  humanity  was  but  a  oontingent  or  accidentsU 
form  of  his  naturę.  This  doctrine  had  already  been 
condemned  by  pope  Alexander  III  in  the  Council  of 
Tours  (1163).  Casimir  Oudin  oondders  him  also  as  the 
author  ofLibettus  de  Canone  mystici  łibaminis,  contained 
in  the  works  of  Hugo  of  St.  Yictor,  voL  ii,  etc  See  Cas. 
Oudin,  De  Scripł,  Ecdes, ;  Ilist,  Lit,  de  la  France,  voL 
xiv. — Hoefer,  Nout,  Biog,  Gin.  xxvi,  543. 

John  OF  Crkma,  a  caidinal  who  flourished  in  the 
first  half  of  the  12th  oentory,  is  celebrated  for  his  exer- 
tions  in  behalf  of  the  cause  of  pope  Calixtus  II  against  his 
adverBary  Buidin,  and  espedally  for  his  activity  in  the 
EngUsh  Church,  whither  he  was  sent  by  pope  Honorius 
II,  in  1126,  to  enforce  the  laws  of  celibacy  on  the  English 
clergy.  How  sncoessful  he  was  in  this  mission  may  be 
best  judged  from  the  sudden  termination  of  his  stay  on 
the  English  continent  Not  only  did  the  English  der- 
gy  violently  oppose  the  caidinal^s  eflTorts,  but  he  was 
even  entrapped  into  a  snare  that  most  have  oonsidera* 
bly  annoyed  the  eminent  Roman  Catholic  ecclesiastic 
Says  Lea  (Hist.  Saoerdotal  CeUb.  p.  293 ;  oompare  Inett, 
HisL  Eng,  Ch.  ii,  chap^  viii),  the  cardinal,  **  after  fierody 
denouncing  the  concubines  of  priests,  and  expatiating 
on  the  buming  shame  that  the  body  of  Christ  should 
be  madę  by  one  who  had  just  left  the  ude  of  a  harlot, 
he  was  that  veTy  night  surprised  in  the  company  of  a 
oourtesan,  though  he  had  on  the  same  day  celebrated 
mass."  Althoughinstrumental,afler  his  return  to  Romę, 
in  the  dection  of  pope  Innocent  II  (1130),  the  latter  af- 
terwaids  forsook  him,  and  John  for  a  time  espoused  the 
cause  of  the  rival  pope,  Anadetus,  retuming,  of  course, 
again  to  obedienoe  to  Innocent  II  as  soon  as  he  had 
leamed  that  by  such  an  act  only  he  could  advance  his 
own  interests.  The  time  of  his  death  is  not  known 
to  us. 

John,  THE  DKAOON  and  oAitor  (Acoffoyoc  "^o^  P4~ 
rwp)  of  Constantinople,  was  a  deacon  of  the  great  chnrch 
(St  Sophia)  in  that  dty  about  the  end  of  the  9th  cen- 
tury.  He  wrote  Koyoc  tlę  róv  pióv  tov  Łv  ayioic  ira- 
rp6c  rffŁw  'lutnik,  tov  vfŁvoypd^  {Yita  S,  Josephi 
Hymnogrttpki),  published  in  the  yicto  Sanctorum  (April 
8),  voL  i,  a  Latin  verBion  being  given  in  the  body  of 
the  work,  with  a  leamed  Commenitaius  Pramus  at  p. 
266,  etc,  and  the  original  in  the  Appendix,  p.  xxxiv. 
AUatius  {De  PseUis,  c  xxx)  dtes  another  work  of  thia 
writer,  entitled  Tic  6  msoToc  rtf  dnp  rifę  irfHttrtjc  ro0 
óvdfHivov  wXa(rewc,  c.  r.  X.  {dUd  est  ConsUium  Dei  «• 
prima  Ifominis/ormatione,  etc).  The  deaignation  Jo* 
ANNES  DiACONcs  is  commou  to  seveial  medisval  writ* 
ers,  as  John  Galenos  or  Pediaamna;  John  Hypatinsi 


JOHN 


964 


JOHN 


Johiit  deaoon  of  Romę;  snd  John  Diiooiuu,  a  oontein- 
ponury  sod  coireq)Oiident  of  Geoige  of  Trebizond.  See 
Ada  Sanetorum,  L  c. ;  Fabridofl,  BMioa  Gneca,  x,  264 ; 
zi,  654;  Gare,  Hitt.  Lit,  ii,  Dittertatio  i^  11 ;  OÓdLii,X)e 
ScriptorUmM  et  8cripiu  EocŁeńauticJB,  ii,  886^— Smith, 
JDkL  Greek  and  Roman  Bm^.  ii,694. 
John  OF  CsESSY.    See  Johu  thb  Monk. 

John  Ctfabissióta  (JLmrapwawrttę),  miroamed 
tht  Wite,  an  eoclflmiiHr.iml  wńter,  ]i\red  in  the  latter  half 
of  the  14th  centoiy,  not  in  the  middle  of  the  12tb,  as 
enponeooaly  stated  by  Labbe  in  hia  Chronologia  Breńt 
Eoderiofticorum  Scriptorum,  Cyparisaiota  was  an  op- 
ponent  of  Gregory  Palamas  (q.  y.)  and  his  foOowers  (the 
belieren  in  the  light  of  Monnt  Tabor),  and  most  of  his 
worka  (of  which  some  were  written  after  1359)  had  ref- 
eienoe  to  that  controyersy.  They  compose  a  series  of 
fiye  tzeatises,  bat  only  the  first  and  fonith  books  of  the 
fint  treatise  of  the  series,  PalanuHcarum  Tramgretńo- 
num  Libri  w,  haye  been  poblished.  They  appeared, 
with  a  Latań  yersion,  in  the  Auctarium  Norimmwn  of 
Gombefis,  ii,  68-105,  and  the  Latin  yersion  was  giyen  in 
the  SibUotheca  Patrum,  xxi,  476,  etc  (ed.  Lyons,  1677). 
Oyparissiota  wrote  alao  *EK^i<nc  trroixtMflC  prffftuw 
Oto\oytKuv  {Ezpotitio  Materiarum  eorum  gwe  de  Deo  a 
Theoloffit  diaintttr).  The  work  is  diyided  into  one  han- 
dred  chapten,  which  are  subdiyided  in  ten  decades  or 
porttons  of  ten  chapters  each,  fh>m  which  arrangement 
the  work  is  sometimes  referred  to  by  the  simple  title  of 
Decadee.  A  Latin  yerńon  of  it  by  Frandscos  Turrianos 
was  pablished  at  Some  in  1581, 4to,  and  was  reprinted 
in  the  BMiotkeca  Patrum,TadjS77f  etc. — Gombefis,  A uo- 
tar.  łfonimm.  ii,  105 ;  Fabridas,  BibL  Gr,  xi,  507 ;  Gaye, 
Siet,  LitL  yoL  ii,  Appendix  by  Gery  and  Wharton,  p.  65 ; 
Oadin,  De  Scriptor.  et  Scriptis  EcdeHasticie,  iii,  1062 ; 
Smith,  DicL  Gr,  and  Rom,  Biog,  ii,  594. 

John  OF  Damascub  (Johannes  DAUASciicus,  'Ictf- 
iann\c  ^afiatjrfKyóc)  (1),  one  of  the  early  ecdesiastical 
writers,  and  the  aathor  of  the  standard  text-book  of 
dogmatic  theology  in  the  Greek  Ghorch,  was  bom  at 
Damascas  aboat  the  year  676.  His  oratorical  talents 
caased  him  to  be  samamed  Chrytorrhoae  (golden  stream) 
by  his  friends  (the  Arabs  called  him  Manaur),  Little 
is  known  of  his  life  except  that  he  belonged  to  a  high 
family,  was  ordained  pri^  and  entered  the  conyent  of 
St  Sabas  at  Jerasalem,  where  he  passed  his  life  in  the 
midst  of  literary  Ubon  and  theological  stadies.  The 
other  details  foand  oonceming  him  in  his  biography  by 
John,  patriarch  of  Jerasalem,  are  oonsidered  antrost- 
worthy.  Aooording  to  this  writer,  John  Dama8cenas'8 
Ikther  was  a  Ghristian,  and  goyeraor  of  the  proyince  of 
Damascas,  then  in  the  hands  of  the  Saraoens,  and  John 
was  ably  edacated  by  an  Italian  monk.  Under  Leo  the 
Isanrian  and  Gonstantane  Gapronymos  he  zealoosly  de- 
fended  image  worship  both  by  his  pen  and  tongae,  and 
eyen  went  to  Gonstantinople  on  that  acooant  A  leg- 
endary  story  relates  that  Leo,  who  was  then  a  decided 
Iconoclast,  forged  a  tieasonable  letter  irom  John  to  him- 
self,  which  he  contriyed  to  pass  into  the  hands  of  the 
caliph,  who  sentenced  John  to  haye  his  right  band  cut 
olT,  when  the  seycred  band  was  restored  to  the  arm  by 
•  a  miracle.  Aboat  that  time,  howeyer,  John  withdrew 
from  the  caliph'8  coort  to  the  monastery  of  St.  Saba, 
near  Jerasalem,  where  he  passed  the  remainder  of  his 
life  in  ascetic  practices  and  stady.  He  died  between 
764  and  787.  In  the  former  year  we  find  his  laat  pablic 
act,  a  protest  against  the  Iconoclastic  S3mod  at  Gonstan- 
tinople, and  in  the  latter  the  CEcomenical  Goancil  of 
Nice  honored  his  memoiy  with  a  eology.  The  Greek 
Chorch  oonunemorates  him  on  Noyember  29  and  De- 
oember  4,  and  the  Roman  Gatholic  Gharch  on  May  6. 
Ghorch  writeis  agree  in  considering  John  Damascenus 
as  superior  to  all  his  contemporaries  in  philosophy  and 
eradition ;  yet  his  works,  thoagh  justifying  his  repatar 
tion,  aie  defident  in  critidsm. 

The  most  important  literaiy  achieyement  of  Damas- 
ia  the  llify^  yimcuac  (Soarce  of  Knowledge), 


comprising  the  foDowing  thiee  woiks:  L  ILtfakBua 
*tXoffofuui,  or  Dialectiet,  which  treats  ahnost  exc]B» 
siydy  of  k)gical  and  ontological  categońes,  based  rnain* 
ly  on  Azistotle  and  Pofphyxy^— 2.  Hcpc  akpiottn^  iw 
owTtnńay  De  haretibmM,  oontaining  in  103  artides  a 
chioDological  synopsis  of  the  heresies  in  the  Ghiistum 
Ghozch,  with  a  few  aitides  on  the  enon  of  pagans  and 
Jews  (the  fint  eighty  are  reaUy  the  work  of  Epipha- 
nins;  the  remainder  partly  treat  of  the  bereaics  fiom 
the  time  of  Epiphaniaa  to  that  of  the  image  oontnnrer- 
sies,  aecocding  to  Theodoretos,  Sophnmias^  Leonfins  of 
Byzantiam,  etcu,  and  partly  of  fictitaons  secta,  which 
merely  reprosent  poańble,  not  actoai  enon  of  bdieO: — 
8.  The  third  and  most  important  work,  to  which  the 
former  two  were  really  simply  the  introdnetioo,  is  enti- 
tled  'Ek^ooic  &Kpiprfc  rifę  iriartmę  6pdoióKiv,  Doe^ 
trmet  oftke  Orthodox  Ckurck,  collected  firam  the  writ- 
ings  of  the  Ghoich  fathers,  espedally  Giegoiy  of  Naa- 
anznm,  Athanaaos,  Baail  the  Gieat,  Gregoiy  of  Nyaaa. 
Ghiysostom,  Epiphaniaa,  Gyiil,  Neme8iaa»  and  othob 
The  whole  work  is  diyided  into  100  aectiona  or  four 
books  (the  latter  is  probably  a  later  anangement),  and 
treats  of  the  fc^kming  sabjects:  (a)  GotT*  ezMleace,  et^ 
aem^yWuły.audtkepośMibiiiiyo/kmimnaffkim,  Thoagh 
John  teacbes  that  it  is  neither  impoańble  to  know  God, 
norpoasibletoknowhim  all;  that  his  easence  is  neither 
expreambłe  nor  entiiely  ineipiesóble,  he  neyertheleas 
inclines  to  the  tnmscendental  chancter  of  the  idea  of 
God,  ft— igning  to  hoDian  thooght  incapadty  lor  its 
ooncepdon,  and  referring  man,  in  the  end,  as  Aieopagl- 
tes  does,  to  the  reoordB  of  diyindy  reyealed  trath.  it 
may  be  oonddered  as  a  characteristic  featnre  of  hia  tb^ 
ology  that  it  prindpally  dweUs  on  God's  metaphyaical 
attribates,  hardly  toaching  the  ethical  que8tion.  (5) 
The  Trinity,  to  which  he  giyes  great  pcominenoe.  He 
not  only  repeats  the  doctńnes  of  the  Greek  Ghorch,  aa 
well  as  the  arguments  of  the  Greek  fathers,  but  rcsomes 
a  sdentific  constraction  of  the  dogma  within  the  esub- 
lished  creed,  thoagh  admitting  that  there  are  ceruin 
boands  to  the  inqairy,  which  human  reason  cannot 
scalę  CASvvaTov  ydp  tifpt^rjyai  iv  r^  Kri<rit  ttKÓya 
a'trapaXXaKr(oc  lv  lavTfj  Tbv  Tp6irov  rijc  ayiac  rpta- 
Soc  irapaSŁŁKvvov(rav).  The  Trinity,  therefore,  can- 
not be  adeąuately  concdyed  nor  defined.  His  real  ob- 
ject  in  the  discussion  seems  to  be  to  foond  the  personal- 
ity  of  the  \óyoc  and  of  the  irv(Vfm  aytov  upon  the 
onity  of  the  diyine  essence,  and,  further,  to  describe  the 
naturę  of  ooexistence,  and  of  personal  dilTerence  in  the 
Triune,  and  the  reciprocal  relations  of  the  three  persons 
— irfpix<^ptioic—mth  all  attainable  strictneas,  and  he  at- 
tempts  to  achieye  this  resolt  rather  by  the  negatiye  pro- 
0688  of  exduding  faDacics  than  by  podtiye  demonstra- 
tion.  Wheneyer  he  yentores  upon  the  latter  he  fluctuatca 
between  Peripatcticism,  tending  to  Tritheism,  and  Flato- 
nlsm,  leading  almost  imperceptibly  to  Sabellianism  and 
Modalism.  (c)  Creation^  A  ngeU,  and  Dcemoru.  On  these 
he  simply  collects  the  doctrines  of  his  predecessors,  clos- 
ing  with  a  somewhat  lengthy  exposition  of  his  yiews 
on  heayen,  heayenly  bodies,  light,  fire,  winds,  water, 
earth,  also  chiefly  based  on  the  authority  of  the  fathera. 
Some  aingular  opinions  of  his  own  he  attempts  to  8up-> 
port  by  scriptund  passages.  (d)  Man,  his  creaiion  cmd 
naturę^  are  so  treated  by  him  that  they  may  aptly  be 
termed  a  psychology  in  nucę,  Herę  he  again  depended 
on  Aristotle  and  other  Greek  authors,  in  part  dłrectiy, 
and  in  part  through  the  medium  of  Nemesius,  vipi  0i;- 
aetac  ńv&pu»frov,  Like  a  genuine  son  of  the  Greek 
Ghurch,  he  lays  particular  stress  on  the  doctrine  of  free 
will  and  its  efficacy  for  good,  and  treats  in  connection 
therewith  of  the  doctrines  of  proyidence  and  predesti- 
nation,  following  in  the  footstepe  of  Ghiysostom  and 
Nemedus.  (e)  Manie  faU  is  merely  adyerted  to  in  the 
yague  oratorical  manner  of  Semipelagian  writers,  with« 
out  the  least  regard  for  the  great  deyelopment  which 
this  doctrine  had  recdyed  in  the  Western  Ghorch.  (/) 
The  doctrine  of  tkt  person  of  Christ  is  argued  with 
greatest  foUness,  and  he  eyinces  no  litde  ingonoity  and 


JOHN 


965 


JOHN 


dUectic  skin  in  treating  of  the  penomal  unity  in  Chrisfs 
twofold  naturę  (which  he  conceiyed  as  enhypostasiB,  not 
anhypofltaaiB,  of  the  haman  naturę  in  the  Logoe),  of  the 
commtmicatio  idiomatom  (which,  however,  amounts  to 
merely  a  yertud  one),  and  of  ToUtion  and  the  operation 
of  Tditłon  in  Christ  This  exposition  of  Christology  is 
foDowed  by  oontroyenial  tracts  against  the  Acephali: 
ircpi  mfV^iTov  ^wreuc;  and  against  the  Monothelites: 
mpi  TMf  Łv  Xpf0ra>  6vo  ^tXxifiamav  Kai  kvipyuSiv  Kai 
\otirkhf  ^ytrucSnf  liMfutruWy  etc.  (oomp.  Baur,  Geteh,  d, 
DreUmighdt^  ii,  176  są. ;  CkriOologie,  ii,  257).  (^)  Bap' 
titm  (which  is  allęgorically  represented  as  serenfold)  he 
holds  to  be  necessaiy  for  the  forgireness  of  sin  and  for 
etemal  life.  Body  and  sool,  to  be  purified  and  saved, 
need  regeneration,  wMch  comes  Irom  the  water  and  the 
Spiiit.  (A)  Fakh  ^  is  the  acceptance  of  the  7fapd$09iQ 
rifę  iKKKfitriac  cadoXiJC^c,  and  of  the  teachings  of  Scrip- 
tare;  it  is  also  confidenoe  in  the  fulfihnent  of  God's 
promises  and  in  the  e£9cacy  of  our  prayers.  The  for- 
mer  depends  on  oarselves,  the  latter  is  a  gift  of  the  Holy 
Spińt.**  On  the  relation  of  faith  to  worics,  on  regener- 
ation and  sanctiflcation,  he  but  imperfectly  repeats  the 
Semipelagian  yiews  of  the  earlier  Greek  teachers.  His 
lemarks  on  the  cross  and  on  adoration  reflect  the  mirao- 
nk>as  spirit  of  the  times.  (%)  The  £ucharitł  John 
teaches  to  be  the  means  by  which  (jod  oompletes  his 
oommimication  of  himself  to  oian,  and  thus  lestores  him 
to  immortality.  Transubetantiation,  in  the  fuU  accep- 
tance of  the  term,  he  does  not  teach,  though  Romanists 
haTe  tried  to  interpret  his  writings  in  fisTor  of  their 
TiewB.  He  admits,  it  is  tnie,  that  the  £nchaiiBt  is  the 
actnal  body  of  Christ,  but  he  does  not  consider  it  idenH- 
cal  with  that  which  was  gloriiied  in  heaven,  and  does 
not  deem  the  bread  and  winę  merę  accidentid  phenom- 
€na.  (j)  On  Mary,  tkn  Immaculate  ConetpUon,  ReHoj 
and  the  Wonhip  o/Images,  he  espreases  himself  morę 
ezpiicitly  in  separate  treatises.  The  authority  for  ador- 
ing  the  cross,  images,  etc,  he  finds,  not  in  Scriptorcy  but 
in  tradition.  {k)  In  his  remaiks  on  the  ScripturtM  he 
allndes  simply,  and  that  rery  briefly,  to  inspiration,  and 
the  Talne  of  Holy  Writ,  repeats  the  canon  of  the  O.  T. 
accoiding  to  Epiphanins,  and  indudes  in  the  books  of 
the  N.  T.  the  canons  of  the  apostles.aooording  to  the 
TruUan  canon.  Inctdentally  he  also  adyerts  to  the  four 
different  formulse  used  in  Scriptnre  to  designate  Christ 
and  the  origin  of  eyil,  which  he  holds  can  neither  be 
assigned  to  God,  nor  to  an  eril  principle  independent  of 
God.  Celibacy  John  attempts  to.yindicate  by  the 
Scriptures ;  he  aUudes  to  the  abrogation  of  circnmcisian, 
to  anti-Christ,  resurrection,  and  the  last  judgment 
These  aie  the  principal  oontents  of  John's  main  woik. 
He  has  by  no  means  done  equal  justice  to  all  its  parts; 
the  impoTtant  qae8tions  of  atonement,  sin,  grace,  and 
the  means  of  salyation,  receiye  only  a  cursory  notioe. 
The  style  of  his  discoune,  owing  to  the  diyersity  of  his 
aources,  is  not  miiform ;  while,  for  the  most  part,  it  has 
strength  and  fluency,  it  sometimes  lapses  into  rhetoiical 
piolijdty  and  affectation.  John  was  particularly  in- 
dined  to  the  philosophy  of  Aiistotle,  and  wrote  yarious 
popular  tracts,  In  which  he  oollected  and  iUustrated  that 
philoflopher^s  principles.  He  wrote  also  letters  and 
treatises  against  heretics,  especially  against  the  Mani- 
chnans  and  Nestońans.  His  works  haye  been  collected 
by  Le  Quien  onder  the  title  Opera  omnia  Datnaseeni 
Joh,  qua  eaetarUf  etc,  Gr.  and  Łat.  (Yenet.  1748,  2  yols. 
8yo).  This  edition  oontains  KŁ^a\ata  ^cAoffo^uea; 
Ilfpc  atpivtuw ;  'EKioinc  łucp^^Ąc  rJ7C  ^c^oióĘmt  inV 
rf<tfc;  ilpbc  robę  ^«a/3aXXovrac  róc  &yiac  iiKÓyac; 
Ai/3cXXoc  ^rcpi  ópdoti  n(HivofifUiroc ;  Tóftoc;  Kurd 
M  ayi;^atW  AioAoyoc  »  A(aXoyoc  Sapaciyyoi;  Kai 
Xpumavov  ;  Iltpl  opeaĆAuruw ;  Hcpi  djiac  TpiaSoc ; 
ne^  roi;  rpurttyiov  S|ivov ;  Hipc  rwv  aylwv  yriarttuu ; 
Tltpi  r&v  ÓKTut  rifę  Trovffpiac  tnf€vuarwv ;  l^aayuyri 
^oyftAruw  tfrocx«ió^f/c ;  Ilcpi  <yvvdtrov  ^uattac ;  Hf  pi 
tCiv  iv  rtf  Xpurr<S  Svo  dtKfiuarunf  Kai  lvtpyuiuv  Kai 
Xo(irwv  ^v<rue&v  Łouitfidrwy ;  Ewoc  dcpi/Sctrraroy  Kard 
dt09rvyauc  aipifftiśc  r&y  "Siaroptapwy ;  nii<yxóXiov; 


A6yoc  drnditKrucbc  Trtpi  rHy  dyiuv  Kai  trijrrSty  cckó- 
vitfv ;  Hcpi  rStv  dZvtiu»v ;  'Upd  irapaXXi|Xa,  etc 

John  of  Damascus  is  now  generally  regarded  as  one 
of  the  ablest  men  of  the  Greek  Church  in  the  8th  oen- 
tory ;  but  he  by  no  means,  on  that  acoount,  deseryes  to 
be  honored  with  the  title  of  ^^philosopher."  He  was 
not  an  independent  inquirer,  but  simply  **an  acute  and 
diligent  oompiler  and  expounder  of  what  others  had 
thought,  and  the  Church  receiyed."  "  He  was,"  as  an 
American  ecdesiastic  has  weU  put  it,  ^*  in  design,  meth- 
od,  and  spirit,  the  precunor  of  the  scholastic  theologi- 
ans.  They,  indeed,  liyed  in  another  quarter  of  the 
globe  from  Syria,  spoke  a  different  language,  and  drew 
their  materials  from  a  different  souice.  With  them 
Augustine  was  the  chief  authority,  whereas  Damas- 
cenus  foUowed  Gregory  of  Kazianzum  and  other  Greek 
fathers  as  his  principal  guides.  The  spirit  of  the  age 
no  donbt  acted  in  a  similar  way  upon  both.  It  was 
considered  nnsafe,  both  in  a  rdigious  and  in  a  ciyil 
point  of  yiew,  to  think  differently  from  the  Church  and 
its  reyerend  teachers.  In  the  Weet,  as  well  as  in  the 
£ast,  Aristotle  had  come  to  be  regarded  as  an  orade. 
These  circumstances  may  account,  in  part,  for  the  simi- 
larity  which  we  perceiye  both  in  the  Greek  theologian 
and  in  Peter  of  Lombardy,  the  first  great  scholastic  the- 
ologian of  the  Latin  Church.  But  no  one  who  has  com- 
pared  the  orthodoz  faith  of  the  one  with  the  sentcnces 
of  the  other  can  well  doubt  that  some  of  the  early  trans- 
lations  of  the  former  were  employed  in  the  composition 
of  the  latter.  It  cannot,  probably,  be  far  from  the  tnith 
to  say  that,  while  Augustine  is  the  father  of  the  scho- 
lastic theology  as  to  the  matter  of  it,  the  leamed  Greek 
of  Damascus  was  the  father  of  it  as  to  its  form." 

John  of  Damascus  is  generally  considered  as  the  re- 
storer  of  the  practice  of  chanting  in  the  Greek  Church, 
and  he  is  also  named  as  the  author  of  a  number  of 
hymns  yet  in  use  in  that  Church.  It  is  by  no  means 
proyed,  howeyer,  that  he  was  the  inyentor  of  musical 
notation,  as  some  haye  affirmed.  Copies  of  a  MS.  trea- 
tise  on  Church  musie,  of  which  he  is  considered  the  au- 
thor, are  to  be  found  in  seyeral  European  (publlc)  libra- 
riee :  it  was  published  by  abbe  Gerbert  in  the  2d  yoL  of 
his  treatise  De  Cantu  et  Muska  Sacra,  It  was  trans- 
lated  into  French  by  Yilloteau  in  his  memoir  Sur  FEtat 
actuel  de  VArt  musical  en  Egypte  (in  Description  de 
rEgifpte,  xiy,  880  są.).  See  Jean  de  Jerusalem,  Vie  de 
SLJean  de  Danuu  (in  Surius,  VUtB  Sanctorunij  May  6); 
Lenstrom,  De  fidei  ortAod,  auctore  J.  Damasceno  (Up- 
saL  1839) ;  Fabridus,  BibL  Graca,  ix,  682-744 ;  Caye, 
Hist.  LitL  i,  482  (Lond.  ed.  1688) ;  Ceillier,  JBistoire  ghu 
dee  auteur$  eacris,  xyiii,  110  są. ;  Sclirt)ckh,  Kirdien-^ 
geack.  zx,  420;  Chrittian  Rn,  yii,  694  sq. ;  Hagenbach, 
Doctrinet  (see  Index)$  ¥śńB,^Biog.  det  Mumciens, 

John  OF  Damascus  (2).  See  Jomr  of  Jerusa- 
lem (3). 

John,  Jaoobite  buhop  of  Dara  (a  dty  in  Mesopo- 
tamia,  near  Nisibis)  in  the  first  half  of  the  9th  century 
(not  in  the  6th  or  7th,  as  says  Caye  in  his  Hist.  Liii, 
ii,  181,  nor  in  the  4Łh,  as  is  maintained  by  Abraham  £o- 
chelensis,  nor  in  the  8th,  as  it  is  said  by  Assemani  in 
his  Bibliotheca  OrimtaHa,  ii,  118;  see  also  ii,  219  and 
347).  He  was  a  oontemporary  of  Dionya  of  Telmahar, 
who  dedicated  his  chronide  to  him  (see  Assemani,  BUjL 
OrienL  ii,  247).  A  manuscript  of  the  Yatican,  used  by 
Abraham  EochelensiB,  oontains  three  works  in  Syriac  by 
John :  1.  De  reeurrectione  oorporum,  in  four  books: — 2. 
De  hierarchia  coektU  et  ecdenasOca,  two  books,  ascribed 
to  the  peendo-Dionydas  on  aooonnt  of  the  similarity  of 
names  ^-^.  De  ea/cerdotio,  four  books  (Assemani,  ii,  118 
sq.).  He  is  also  considered  as  the  author  of  the  book  De 
A  ntma  (Assemani,  ii,  219),  which  he  probably  oomposed 
aller  the  work  of  Gręgory  of  Nyssa,  whose  writings  he 
also  used  otherwise  (Assemani,  iii,  22) ;  and  also  an  An- 
aphora  (acoording  to  the  Caialogut  Uturgiarum,  by 
Schulting,  pt.  iii,  p.  106,  No.  29).^Heizog,  Real-Encgh. 
yi,746.     (J.N.P.) 


JOHN 


966 


JOHN 


John  DB  DiEu  (JoHAHNBs  A  DBo),Mmt,  foiinderof 
the  order  of  charity,  was  bom  at  Monte-Mor-el-Novo, 
Portugal,  March  8, 1496.  An  unknown  prieat  stole  bim 
from  his  father,  a  poor  man  called  Andrea  Ciudad,  and 
afterwards  abandoned  him  at  Oropesa,  in  Caatile.  After 
roying  about  many  years,  he  was  led  to  dedicate  him- 
self  to  a  religious  lUe  by  tbe  preacbing  of  Jobn  of  Avila, 
whom  be  beard  at  Grenada.  So  excited  became  he, 
tbat,  acoording  to  Ricbard  and  Giraud,  be  went  tbioogb 
the  town  flogging  bimself,  and  never  stopped  till  be 
went,  half  dead,  to  the  bospital.  He  resolyed  to  devote 
bimself  to  tbe  care  of  tbe  sick,  and  cbanged  bis  family 
name  for  de  Dieu  (a  Deo),  by  permission  of  tbe  bisbop 
of  Tui.  In  1540  be  opened  tbe  first  boose  of  bis  order 
at  Seyille,  and  died  Marcb  8, 1550,  witbout  leaving  any 
set  rules  for  bis  discipleo.  In  1572  pope  Pius  Y  subject- 
od  tbem  to  tbe  nile  of  St.  Angustine,  adding  a  vow  to 
de^-ote  tbemselyes  to  tbe  care  of  tbe  sick,  and  sundry 
otber  regulations.  See  Charitt,  Brothsrs  of.  Jobn 
de  Dieu  was  canonized  by  pope  Alexander  YIII,  Octo- 
ber  1 6, 1690.  He  is  commemorated  on  tbe  8tb  of  Marcb. 
See  Castro  et  Girard  de  Yille-Tbierri,  Viei  de  SU  Jean  de 
Dieu ;  BaiUet,  Vie3  des  SainU,  Marcb  8 ;  Hdliot,  Hittoire 
des  Ordres  MonasHgues,  voL  iv,  cb*  xviU ;  Hoefer,  Nouv, 
Biog,  Generale,  xxvi,  442  8q. 

John  OF  Drandorf,  a  Saxon  Hussite,  renowned  9B 
one  of  tbe  ablest  of  tbe  German  reformers  before  tbe 
Keformation,  was  bom  of  noble  parentage  at  Slieben,  or 
Scblieben,  in  tbe  diocese  of  Meissen,  about  tbe  beginning- 
of  tbe  15tb  century.  He  studied  at  Drcsden  under  tbe 
celebrated  Peter  Dresdensis,  tben  went  to  Prague,  and 
furtber  imbibed  reformatory  opinions,  and  finaBy  com- 
pleted  bis  stndles  at  tbe  newly-founded  UniverBity  of 
Leipzig.  Unable  to  obtain  ordination  on  account  of  his 
beretical  proclivities,  be  travelled  tbrougb  Germany  and 
Bohemia,  preacbing  against  all  unfaitbful  sbepberds  of 
tbe  Roman  Churcb,  and  finally  suoceeded  in  gatbering 
a  congregation,  first  at  Weinsberg,  tben  at  Heilbronn. 
Tbe  civil  autborities,  bowever,  interfered,  and  be  was 
imprisoned  and  transported  to  Heidelberg,  tbere  to  be 
judged  by  tbe  faculty  of  tbe  uniyersity,  whicb  took  so 
active  a  part  in  tbe  trial  and  condcmnation  of  Huss  and 
Jerome  at  tbe  Council  of  Constance.  Tbe  faculty  met 
February  13, 1425,  and,  ailer  a  few  days'  bearing,  Jobn 
of  Driindorf  was  condemned  as  a  beretic,  and  was  bomed 
at  Worms  in  great  baste,  lest  tbe  laymen,  as  tbese  doc- 
tors  have  it,  sbould  partake  of  bis  beretical  spirit.  See 
Krummel,  in  TheoL  Stud,  wid  Krit.  1869,  i,  130  są.  C*^ . 
H.W.) 

John  DuNS  ScoTus.    See  Dcns  Sootus. 

John  of  Eoypt  (Joanses  iEaYprius),  a  Christian 
martyr  wbo  suffered  in  Palestine  in  tbe  Diodetian  per- 
secution,  is  spoken  of  by  Eusebius,  wbo  knew  bim  per- 
sonally,  as  tbe  most  illustrious  of  tbe  sufferers  in  Pales- 
tine, and  especially  wortby  of  admuration  for  bis  philo- 
sophic  (L  e.  ascetic)  life  and  conyersation,  and  for  tbe 
wonderful  strengtb  of  bis  memory.  After  tbe  loas  of 
his  eyesight  be  acted  as  anagnostes,  or  reader  in  tbe 
churcb,  suppl3ring  tbe  want  of  sight  by  bis  extraordi- 
nary  power  of  memory.  He  could  rcdte  conectly 
wbole  books  of  Scripture,  whetber  from  tbe  Płopbets, 
tbe  Gospels,  or  tbe  apostolic  Epistles.  In  tbe  seventb 
year  of  tbe  persecution,  A.D.810,  be  was  tieated  with 
great  cmelty ;  one  foot  was  buroed  off,  and  fire  was  ap- 
plied  to  bis  sightless  eyeballs  for  tbe  merę  purpose  of 
torturę.  As  be  was  unable  to  undergo  the  toil  of  the 
mines  or  tbe  public  worka,  be  and  several  otbera  (among 
whom  was  Silyanus  of  Gaza),  wbom  age  or  infirmity 
bad  disabled  from  labor,  were  confined  in  a  place  by 
tbemselyes.  In  the  eigbtb  year  of  tbe  persecution, 
A.D.  311,  tbe  wbole  party,  thirty-nine  in  number,  were 
decapitated  in  one  day  by  order' of  Maximin  Daza,  wbo 
tben  govemed  tbe  eastem  provinces.  See  Eusebius,  De 
MarfyriLPakutinay  sometimes  subjoined  to  tbe  eigbtb 
book  of  bis  UisL  Ecck»,  c  18 ;  Smith,  Diet,  of  Greek  and 
Roman  Biog,  ii,  586.  ^ 


John  EunacosnrABiua.     See  John  trk  Aua^ 

GiyER. 

John  (suraamed  LacUand)  king  of  Englakd,  and 
yoongest  son  of  Henry  II,  was  bom  at  Oxfonl  Dec.  24, 
1166.  After  tbe  conąnest  of  Ireland,  bis  fatber,  in  ac- 
Gordance  with  a  buli  from  the  pope  authorizing  Hetuy 

II  to  invest  any  one  of  bis  sons  with  tbe  lordsbip  oflie- 
land,  appointed  bim  to  tbe  govemment  of  tbat  ooonuy 
in  1178,  and  be  removed  thitber  in  1185;  but  he  fiul- 
ed  so  utterly  in  tbe  taak  tbat  he  was  recalled  in  a  few 
moDtha.  He  bad  always  been  tbe  favorite  of  bis  fis- 
ther,  and  is  said  to  bave  caused  his  deatb  by  joinin^ 
bis  elder  brotbers  in  rebellion  against  Henry  (of  coiane, 
tbe  oontn>veisy  with  Thomas  k  Becket,  and  bis  remone 
after  the  arcbbisbop*s  deatb,  oontributed  no  little  to  the 
sudden  deatb  of  Henry  II).  Upon  bis  brotber  Kicbard^a 
suocession  be  obtained  a  very  fayorable  poution  in  the 
Englisb  realm;  indeed,  so  many  earldoms  were  oonfer- 
red  on  him  tbat  be  was  virtually  soyereign  of  nearłjr 
one  third  of  the  kingdom.  But  this  by  no  means  sati*- 
fied  Jobn,  by  naturę  base,  cowardly,  and  oovetoua.  Dur* 
ing  tbe  absence  of  bis  brotber  on  a  cnisade,  be  8oug;fat 
even  to  obtain  for  bimsdf  the  crown,  bat  failed  signally, 
earńing  only  a  yery  unenviable  reputation  for  bimself 
while  greatly  increasing  tbe  affection  of  the  EngUsh 
people  for  Richard.  Upon  tbe  deatb  of  the  latter,  John, 
by  exprefls  wish  of  Richard  on  his  deatb-bed,  ascended 
the  long-coyeted  throne  (May  26, 1199).  The  accnaa- 
tion  tbat  Jobn  ayoided  tbe  claims  of  Arthur,  tbe  son  of 
bis  elder  brother  Geoffrey,  by  imprisooing  bim  and  thea 
priyately  putting  him  out  of  the  way,  are  que8tioiła 
wbicb  belong  to  secular  historians.  It  remidns  for  us 
to  State  here  only  tbat  king  Philip  Augnstus  of  France^ 
wbo  bad  espoused  Jobn*8  cause  in  opposition  to  Ricbaid, 
now  espoused  tbe  cause  of  Arthur,  and  inyolyed  John  in 
a  war  in  wbicb  tbe  latter  was  seyerely  tbe  loser,  France 
regaining  by  1204  tbe  proyinces  tbat  bad  been  uTested 
from  ber.  Far  morę  serious  were  tbe  results  of  another 
contest  into  whicb  be  was  drawn,  in  1205,  by  tbe  death 
of  tbe  arcbbisbop  of  Canterbury,  and  wbicb  forms  s 
most  important  chapter  in  the  history  of  inyestitore. 
Insisting  upon  the  royal  rigbt  of  investiture,  Jobn  fint 
waged  war  against  bis  own  dcrgy,  untU  finally  Innocent 

III  also  took  up  the  gamitlet,  and  thus  drew  upon  bim- 
self not  only  tbe  formidable  bostility  of  the  wbole  body 
of  tbe  national  dergy,  but  also  of  one  of  tbe  ablest  and 
most  imperiotts  pontiffii  of  Romę  (see  Innocent  III). 
The  ąuestion  at  issue  was,  of  course,  the  dection  of  a 
suocessor  Ło  tbe  latdy  yacated  archbisbopric.  It  bad 
bitherto  been  tbe  custom  of  tbe  deigy  to  defer  the  deo 
tion  to  any  yacandes  in  their  ranks  until  tbe  king  had 
fayored  tbem  with  a  congć  d'elire.  In  this  instance 
some  of  tbe  juniora  of  the  monka  or  canons  of  Christ 
Churcb,  Canterbur)',  wbo  possessed  the  rigbt  of  yoting 
in  tbe  cboioe  of  their  arcbbisbop,  bad  prooeeded  to  the 
dection  witbout  such  a  grant  from  the  royal  chaii^ 
and  chosen  Reginaid,  their  sub-prior,  as  sncoessor,  and 
installed  bim  in  tbe  arcbiepiscopal  throne  before  day- 
Ugbt  Haying  enjoined  uiwn  bim  the  strictest  ae- 
crecy,  tbey  sent  bim  immediatdy  to  Bome  to  secure  the 
pontiiTs  oonfirmation  of  their  act  The  foolish  Reg- 
inaid, boweyer,  disdosed  tbe  secret,  and  it  came  to  the 
ears  of  the  king  and  tbe  suffrągan  bisbops  of  Canterr 
bury.  He  at  once  caused  tbe  canons  of  Christ  Churcb 
to  prooeed  to  a  new  dection,  and  suggested  Jobn  de 
Gray,  bisbop  of  Norwich,  for  tbe  honorable  position, 
wbo  was  acoordingly  installcd,  likewise  against  tbe  wish 
of  tbe  sufiragran  bisbope.  Tbese  appealed  to  Rome» 
and  Jobn  and  tbe  canons  of  Canterbu^  were  focced  to 
do  likewise.  This  afforded  Innocent  III,  eyer  on  tbe 
alert  to  make  bis  imperial  power  fdt,  a  yduable  oppor- 
tunity  to  plaoe  foreyer  at  bis  own  dispoaal  one  of  tbe 
most  important  dignities  in  tbe  Christian  Churcb.  Ao- 
ceding  to  tbe  doctńne  of  tbe  inyalidity  of  Reginald*a 
dection,  be  maintained  tbat  tbe  new  yacancy  oould 
only  baye  been  dedared  such  by  tbe  soyereign  pontifl^ 
and  tbat  theręfore  the  cboice  of  the  bisbop  of  Norwich 


JOHN. 


Ml 


johk; 


•ibo  waś  iOe^,  and  put  Ibrthtas  ib«  caildidJi.t0  for  the 
primacy  cartiinal  Langton,  an  EngUshman  by  birth,  but 
a  devoted  fullower  of  the  papai  prince.  Of  coune  the 
ntonkfl,  however  reluctantly,  acŁcŃl  on  the  suggeation  of 
the  supremę  head  of  the  Church ;  but  John  by  no  meana 
gave  hia  adheaion  to  an  act  the  important  resnlta  of 
which  he  could  well  foreaee.  He  al  mce  initiated  vio- 
lent  measnres  againat  the  native  dergy,  detennined  to 
retain  for  the  crown  the  rights  of  inyestiture  (q.  v.)« 
Innocent  III,  however,  finding  that  he  oould  not  con- 
qaer  the  sUibbom  John  by  kind  measures,  at  first  mild- 
ly  hinted  the  interdict,  and  in  1208  actually  subjected 
the  whoie  kingdom  to  thia  ecdeaiaatical  chastiaement, 
and  the  year  following  added  to  it  the  eKoommunica- 
tion  of  John  himaelf,  abflolving  hb  anbjects  from  their 
allegiance  to  him,  and  permitting  them  even  to  depoee 
him  from  the  thfone.  fiut  John  paid  litŁle  heed  to  this 
display  of  "  eodesiastical  thunder/*  and  in  the  midst  of  it 
even  Tentuied  to  engage  in  war  with  Scotland,  and  ¥rith 
an  energy  quite  uncommon  to  him  suppressed  all  rebd- 
lious  outbursts  in  his  own  domaina.  Innocent,  finding 
hia  ^'ecclesiastical  artillery"  to  be  inefficient  against 
England*8  king,  entered  into  league  with  Philip  Au- 
gustus,  and  caused  the  latter  to  piepare  for  an  invaaion 
of  England.  This  undertaking  soon  brought  John  to 
terms,  and  in  1218  (May  18)  he  at  last  consented  to  sub- 
mit  to  all  the  demanda  of  the  Holy  See,  of  which  the 
admisaion  of  the  pope*8  nominee,  Stephen  de  Langton, 
to  the  archbishopric  of  Canteibury,  was  the  first.  Nay, 
he  even  yielded  much  morę  than  could  haye  consistent- 
ly  been  asked  of  him  by  the  Roman  see,  and  perpetra- 
ted  an  act  of  diagraoeful  oowardice,  which  haa  heaped 
ereriasting  infamy  on  his  memory.  Two  days  after,  he 
madę  over  to  the  pope  the  kingdoms  of  England  and 
Ueland,  to  be  held  by  him  and  by  the  Roman  Church 
in  fee,  and  took  to  his  holiness  the  ordinary  oath  taken 
by  yaasals  to  their  lords  (see  Reichel,  Tke  Roman  See  m 
łke  Middle  Affes,  p.  251  sq.).  It  is  not  to  be  wondered  at 
'  that  the  Roman  see  now  readily  conceded  to  the  de- 
mand  of  John  that  hereafter  there  should  be  an  obliyion 
of  the  past  on  both  sides,  and  that  the  buli  of  exoomma- 
■  nication  should  be  revoked  by  the  pope,  while,  in  return, 
Jehn  was  obliged  to  pledge  that  of  his  disaffected  Eng- 
lish  subjects  those  who  were  in  confinement  should  be 
liberated,  and  those  who  had  fled  or  been  banished  be- 
yond  seaa  should  be  permitted  to  retnm  home.  Philip, 
whose  ambition  was  not  a  little  mortified  by  this  sndden 
agreement  of  pope  and  king,  persisted  in  his  inyasion 
acheme,  thongh  no  longer  approved  by  Romę;  but  the 
French  fleet  was  totally  defeated  in  the  harbor  of  Dam- 
me,  800  of  their  yessels  were  captured  and  aboye  100 
destroyed.  Subseqaent  erenta,  howeyer,  proyed  morę 
fayorable  to  France,  and  aggravated  the  diacontent  at 
home  against  John«  At  length  the  English  barons,  tired 
•  of  their  tyrannical  ruler,  after  ybiińy  petitioning  for  morę 
-  liberał  cónoeasions,  aasembled  at  Stamford  to  wagę  war 
themselyes  agunst  him,  and  marched  directly  on  London, 
where  they  were  hailed  with  great  joy  by  the  citisens. 
The  king,  fearing  for  hia  throne,  now  gladly  consented 
to  a  conference.  They  met  the  king  at  Rannymead, 
and,  aa  a  lesoU  of  thia  meeting,  they  obtained,  on  June 
15th,  1216,  the  Great  Charter  (Magna  Charta),  the  baais 
of  the  English  Constitntion.  The  pope,  who  had  oon- 
atantly  oppoaed  the  English  in  their  reyolutionary  moye- 
ments,  soon  after  annulled  the  charter,  and  the  war 
broke  out  again.  The  barona  now  called  oyer  the  dau- 
phin  of  France  to  be  their  leader,  and  Louis  landed  at 
Sandwich  on  May  80th,  1216.  In  attemptlng  U>  cross 
the  Wash,  John  lost  his  regalia  and  tieasures,  waa  taken 
ill,  and  died  at  Newaric  CaaUe  on  Oct.  19th,  1216,  in  the 
'  49th  year  of  his  age.  <*  AU  English  hiatorians  paint  the 
.  ćbaracter  of  John  in  the  darkest  ćolors;  and  the  history 
of  his  reign  seems  to  proye  that  to  his  fuli  ahare  of  the 
feiocity  of  hia  linę  he  oonjoined  an  unsteadineaa  and 
>yolaŁility,  a  susceptibility  of  being  suddenly  depressed 
by  eyil  fortunę,  and  dated  beyond  the  bounds  of  moder- 
ation  and  pmdence  by  its  oppoeite,  which  g«ye  a  little- 


neH  to  hia  character  not  bdonging  to  that  of  any  of  hii 
royal  anoeaton.  He  is  chaiged,  in  addition,  ¥rith  a  say- 
age  cruelty  of  dispońtion,  and  with  the  most  unbounded 
lioentiouaness,  while,  on  the  other  hand,  so  many  yicea 
are  not  allowed  to  haye  been  relieyed  by  a  aingle  good 
ąuality**  (^EngL  CydopoBdtOj  s.  y.).  Of  conrse  this  may 
all  be  due  to  the  fact  that  John  haa  had  no  hlstorian, 
that  his  cauae  espired  with  himself,  and  that  eyery 
writer  of  his  story  has  told  it  in  the  spirit  of  the  oppo- 
site  and  yictorious  party;  and,  further,  that  the  intenae 
disgust  always  felt  by  eyery  daaa  of  his  oountrymen  at 
hia  base  surrender  of  his  kingdom  in  yassalage  to  the 
pope  may  haye  led  them  to  regard  with  less  distmst  all 
adyerse  reports  respecting  łus  generał  character.  See 
Milman,  Liti,  ChrUt,  y,  eh.  y ;  Hallam,  Middle  Agea;  Lin- 
gard,  Hist,  ofEngUmd,  ii,  eh.  ii ;  Hume,  Hitt*  of  Engi.  i, 
eh.  xi;  Gie8eler,CA.  ffist,  iii,  §  54;  Neander,  Ck.  HiaL 
yii,  235  sq. ;  Inett,  Hi»t,  EngL  Ck,  ii,  eh.  xix  8q. ;  Riddle, 
Papacy,  ii,  212  8q.     (J.  H.  W.) 

John,  Monophysite  (missionaiy)  bishop  of  Ex*ia- 
8US,  gencrally  called  Epiścoput  Atite^  aa  Ephesus  is  the 
most  important  see  of  Asia  Minor  (see  Aasemani,  BibL 
Orient,  t  ii,  ZWw.  de  MonophynL  §  ix,  a.  y.  Asia),  waa  a 
natiye  of  Amid  (?),  Syria,  and  liyed  in  the  6th  century 
(about  591).  He  resided  chiefly  in  Constantinople,  and 
was  highly  esteemed  at  court,  especially  during  the  reign 
of  Justinian.  The  latter  appointed  him  to  iłiquire  into 
the  State  of  the  heathen,  of  whom  there  was  yet  a  laige 
number  in  the  empire,  eyen  in  Constantinople,  and  to 
secure  their  conyersion.  Quite  successful  in  his  efibrta 
at  home,  the  emperor  authorized  John  to  take  a  mission- 
ary  tour  through  the  whole  empire,  and  we  are  told  that 
this  time  he  oonyerted  70,000  peoplc,  and  founded  96 
churches  (oomp.  Gibbon,  Dedine  cmi  FaU  ofthe  Roman 
Empire,  eh.  x\vu),  He  seems  not  to  haye  had  any  di- 
rect  spiritual  jurisdiction  oyer  the  metropolia  of  Asta 
Minor,  but  to  haye  been  honored  with  the  title  aimply 
on  account  of  his  great  succcss  as  a  missionaiy,  and  we 
are  inclined  to  belieye  that  in  reality  he  was  simply  a 
'^missionary  bishop,"  for  he  is  often  styled  **he  who  is 
set  oyer  the  heathen"  (Syr.  KBSn  bsn),  and  alao  ''the 
destroyer  of  łdob"  (Syr.  KISP.B  "iana).  How  long 
John  remained  a  fayońte  with  Justinian  we  do  not 
know,  but  haye  reason  to  suppose  that  his  fate  depend- 
ed  upon  the  success  of  his  Monophysite  brethren.  In 
the  reign  of  Justin  II  he  shared  laigely  in  the  sufTerings 
which  befell  the  Monophysites  at  the  instigation  of  John 
of  Sirimis.  The  period,  ciicumstances,  and  place  of  hia 
death  are  uncertain.  He  is  probably  the  John  RheŁor 
mentioned  by  Eyagrius  and  Theodorus  Lcctor,  and 
whom  the  former  calls  (libw  y,  c.  24)  his  compatriot  and 
his  relatiye.  Assemani  {BibU,  Orient,  ii,  84)  opposes  this 
identity,  but  withont  good  rcasons.  John  wrote  a  his- 
torical  work,  in  three  parta,  in  Syriac,  which  is  of  great 
importance  for  the  Church  history  of  the  East  The 
first  part  appears  to  be  totally  lost,  and  of  the  second 
only  a  few  fragments,  ąuoted  by  Aasemani,  are  preseryed 
to  us.  It  is  indeed  the  third  part  alone  that  haa  come 
down  to  ua,  and  that  only  in  a  somewhat  mntilated 
form.  Dionysius  of  Tehnahar,  in  his  chronicie  (from 
Theodoeius  the  younger  to  Justin  II),  used  this  part  i 
freely ;  and  Aasemani  obtained  his  passages  {Bibliotk,  \ 
Orient,  i,  859-868, 409, 411^14 ;  ii,  48  sq.,  51, 52, 87-90, 
812,  828, 829)  from  this  souroe  and  from  Bar-HebiKua 
{Chroń.  Syr,  ed.  Bruna  and  Kinch,  p.  2, 88, 84).  Theae 
were  the  only  souices  through  which  the  work  of  John 
was  known  to  us  until  the  third  part  of  it  (somewhat  in- 
complete)  waa  diaooyeied  by  William  Cureton  amang 
the  Syrian  MSS.  brought  to  England  from  the  Syrian 
monasteries  of  Egypt  by  Dr.  Tattam  and  A.  Pacho,  in 
1848, 1847,  ąnd  1860.  This  third  part  was  published  un- 
der  the  title  The  Third  Part  ofthe  Ecdetiaetical  Hittory 
ofJohn,  Bishop  ofEpheeu*.  Now  first  edited  by  WiUiam 
Cureton  (Oxf.  1855, 4to,  pp,420).  The  first  two  parta, 
forming  twelye  booka,  contained,  as  the  author  himaetf 
says  (p.  2),  the  history  of  the  Church  lirom  the  begiii« 


JOHN 


968 


JOHN 


ning  of  tbe  Roman  Empire  to  the  8ixth  yew  of  the 
reijgn  of  Jiutinus  II,  nephew  of  Jiutinian,  and  conae- 
quently  to  the  year  671.  The  third  part  forms  Bix 
chapters,  of  which  we  hare  only  the  second  and  fifth 
in  foli;  the  othen  aie  all  morę  or  less  incomplete  (see 
Bernstein,  Zeittck.  der  D,  MorgenL  GtteUachąftf  viii,  897). 
It  oontinaes  the  history  to  the  thiid  year  after  the  death 
of  Justinus  II  (581)  (see  bk.  vi,  eh.  xxv,  p.  402),  and 
mentions  even  later  dates  down  to  688.  We  find  in  it 
accounts  of  many  facts  of  ecdeeiastical  history  not  to 
be  diflcovered  In  other  soorcea.  It  is  the  morę  impor- 
tant  from  the  fact  that  the  aathor,  although  a  partisan 
of  the  Monophymte  doctrine,  and  occasionally  somewhat 
over-creduloua,  was  a  oontemporaiy,  and  often  an  eye- 
witness  of  the  facts  he  relates.  Cureton  promised  an 
English  translation  of  the  work,  but  to  our  knowledge 
it  bas  not  yet  appeaied.  The  German  scholar  Schon- 
felder  (Die  KirchengesehidUe  dea  Johamna  von  Ephenu, 
A  U8  dem  Syriśchen  ubersetzł.  Mit  emer  A  hkcmdUmg  u.  d 
Tritheiten  [MUnch.  1862, 8vo])  bas,  however,  fumished 
a  German  translation,  of  which  those  who  do  not  read 
the  Oriental  Unguages  can  avail  themselve8  in  their 
atudies  of  the  Eastem  Church.  In  1866  a  young  Dutch 
scholar,  Dr.  Land,  published  a  treatise  on  John,  Bitkop 
e/Ephesiu,  the  fint  Syriac  Church  hittorian  (for  the 
foli  title,  see  below),  in  which  he  discussed  the  generał 
relations  of  Syriac  literaturę,  and  the  productions  of  the 
Syriac  Church  historians  in  particular,  the  person  and 
hifltory  of  bishop  John,  his  style  and  treatmentof  Church 
bistory,  and  the  oontents  of  his  work.  Since  then.  Dr. 
Land  bas  oontinued  bis  studies  of  the  Syriac  writers, 
and  in  voL  ii  of  his  Anecdota  Syriaca  (alw  onder  the 
spedal  title  JoannU,  Episcopi  MoTtophyńta  Serbia  Hu- 
toHca  [Leyd.l868,8vo]),bas  published  all  the  inedited 
works  of  John  of  Ephesus.  See  Heizog,  Beal-Encyldop, 
vi,  747 ;  Kitto,  Joum,  Sac,  LU.  xvi,  207  są.     (J.  H.  W.) 

John  op  EuCHAiTA  (Euchaita  or  Eitchania)  (a  city 
afterwards  called  Theodoropolis)  was  arcfabishop  of  Eu- 
chaita  {MrjTpoiroWirrię  EifxaŁTutv)f  and  lived  in  the  time 
of  the  emperor  Constantine  and  Monomachus  (A.D. 
1042-1054),  but  notbing  fortber  is  known  of  bim.  He 
was  sumamed  Mauropus  (Mavpóirovc),  l  e. "  Blackfoot." 
He  WTote  a  number  of  iambic  poems,  sermons,  and  let- 
ters.  A  Yolume  of  bis  poems  was  publLshed  by  A£attbew 
Bust  (Eton,  1610,  4to),  They  were  probably  written 
on  occasion  of  the  Church  festivals,  as  they  aie  com- 
memorative  of  the  incidents  of  the  life  of  Christ  or  of 
the  saints.  An  Offidum,  or  ritual  service,  composed  by 
bim,  and  containing  three  canones  or  bymns,  is  given  by 
Kicolaus  Bayasus  ia  his  disserUtion  De  AcoloutAiaOf- 
ficii  Canonicij  prefixed  to  the  Acta  Sandorum,  Junii, 
vol.  ii.  John  wrote,  also,  Vita  S,  Dorothei  Jumoris, 
given  in  the  A  eta  Sanctonony  Junii,  i,  605,  eta  Yarious 
sermons  for  the  Church  festŁvals,  and  other  works  of  bis, 
are  extant  in  MS.  See  Fabricius,  Bibiioth.  Orient,  viii, 
309,  627,  etc ;  x,  221,  226 ;  xi,  79 ;  Cave,  Ilist.  Liter,  ii, 
189;  Oudin,  De  Scriptoribus  et  Scriptis  Ecclet.  ii,  606 ; 
Smith,  DicL  o/ Greek  and  Roman  Biog.  ii,  595. 

John  OF  Fałkenbero,  sumamed  Jacobita  de  8ax- 
onia,  or  Doctor  de  Prateruis,  a  German  Dominican,  is 
celebrated  for  the  zeal  with  which  he  defended  pope 
Gregory  XII  in  the  Council  of  Constance.  He  also  en- 
deavored  to  defend  the  regicidal  opinions  of  John  Petit, 
but  he  failed  in  both  instances.  He  next.  at  the  re- 
ąnest  of  the  Knights  of  the  Cross,  wrote  a  libcl  against 
Wladishis  JageUon,  king  of  Poland,  for  which  he  was  de- 
dared  a  heretic,  and  condemned  to  imprisonment  for  life 
at  Romę.  Pope  Martin  Y,  bowever,  liberated  bim  a  few 
years  ailer,  and  John,  enoouraged,  now  demanded  of 
Paul  of  Russdorf,  grand  master  of  the  Knights  of  the 
Cross,  the  price  of  the  libel  he  had  written.  The  latter 
offering  bim  but  a  smali  amount,  John  of  Falkenberg 
insnlted  bim,  wheteupon  be  was  again  imprisoned,  and 
condemned  to  be  drowned.  He  escaped,  however,  re- 
tired  to  the  oonvent  of  Kiimpen,  and  wrote  against  the 
^ider.    He  was  present  at  the  Coundi  of  Basie,  in  1481, 


and  died  shortly  aftei •    See  Echard,  8er^  (ML  PrmŁ  f 
Hoefer,  N<mv.  Biog.  Głnirakf  xxvi,  568. 

John  THE  Faster  (Johax5es  Jejitnatob  or  Nbb- 
TEUTEs),  of  humble  extraction,  became  patiiarch  of 
Constantinople  in  682.  Ile  was  distinguisbed  for  hia 
piety,  benevolence,  strong  asceticism,  and  fasting.  He 
was  the  first  who  assumed  the  title  of  **  cecnmenical  pa- 
triarch,"  and  tbereby  involved  himself  in  difficulttes 
with  the  bisbops  of  Romę,  Pelagius  U  and  Gregory  I, 
the  opening  of  a  struggle  which  resulted  finally,  intbe 
llth  century  (1064),  in  a  complete  rupture  of  the 
churches  of  Romę  and  Constantinople.  (See  the  artide 
Gregory  I,  and  Ffoulkes,  Ckristendom^s  DititioM,  toL 
it  §  17.)  John  died  Sept  2,  696.  The  Greek  Church 
oounts  bim  among  its  saints.  He  is  reputed  the  autbor 
of  'Axo\ov$Ła  Kai  rdĘic  twv  l^o/Jio\oyovfjdvtav ;  Aóyoc 
TTobę  rbv  fŁkX\o%n'a  llayopewai  rdv  avrov  wyev/iarc* 
Kov  vŁÓVj  which  belongs  to  the  earliest  penitential  woifca 
of  the  Greek  Church  (pub.  by  Morinus,  Comm,  kist.  de 
adminutratione  sacramenti  poemłeniiee,  Paris,  1661,  Ten. 
1792,  etc).  See  Oudin,  De  Ser,  Eodee.  i,  1473  sq. ;  Fa- 
bricius, BibL  Grcecay  x,  164  sq. ;  Le  Qnien,  Oriau  Chris- 
tian, i,  216  8q. ;  Schr()ckb,  Kirchengeack.  xvii,  66  8q. ; 
Herzog,  iZoi^iSiMyiMop.  vi,  748;  Aschbach,  irtrcftcn-LoB, 
iii,  666. 

John  (called  also  Jeanndin\  abbot  of  Fćcamp, 
France,  was  bom  in  the  neighborhood  of  Ravenna.  His 
family  name  Labbe  supposes  to  have  been  Daljfej  or 
D^Ajge.  He  came  to  France  with  William,  abbot  of  Sc 
Bdnigne  of  Dijon,  and  studied  under  that  leamed  man. 
He  practioed  medicine  with  suocess;  bat  WiUiam  goin^ 
to  F^camp  to  reform  the  abbey,  and  install  there  a  col- 
ony of  Benedictines,  John  aocompanied  bim,  was  madę 
prior,  and  finally  sucoeeded  William  as  abbot.  He  le- 
formed  several  convents,  and  by  his  firm  adherenoe  to 
disdpline  embroiled  himself  with  many  prelates,  ana- 
tained,  bowever,  in  eveiy  instance  by  the  pope.  In 
1064  be  visited  England,  where  he  was  welcomed  by 
king  £dward,  but,  having  8absequently  undertaken  a 
joumey  to  the  Holy  Land,  be  was  madę  priaoner  by  the 
Mobammedans,  and  is  said  to  have  only  retumed  to 
France  in  1076.  He  died  Feb.  2, 1079.  He  wrote  a 
book  of  prayers,  the  prefaoe  of  which  is  to  be  found  in 
MabiUon,  AnalectOy  i,  188,  and  three  chaptera  in  the 
MedUałwnes  8,  A  uguśtinL  He  is  also  considered  aa  tbe 
autbor  of  a  treadse.  De  Dirina  ConiempkUione,  pabL  in 
1689,  under  the  title  of  Coi^euio  Theologicot  and  attńb- 
uted  to  John  Cassien,  etc.  See  GalUa  CkriU.  xi,  ooL  206 ; 
Ui^  LUt.  de  la  Franoe^  viii,  48;  Hoefer,  Aoar.  Biogr. 
Giniraky  xxvi,  681. 

John  Frederick,  elector  of  Saxony.  See  Rkpob- 
matiom;  Sazont. 

John  Gallensis.    See  Canon  Law,  voL  ii,  p.  88  (2> 

John  OF  GiscHAŁA,  son  of  Levi,  named  after  bis 
native  place  [see  Gischala],  was  one  of  the  most  cele- 
brated leaders  of  the  unfortunate  Jews  of  Galilee  in  thdr 
finał  struggle  with  the  Romans,  A.D.  66-67.  Of  his  • 
personal  bistory  we  know  scarcely  anyt  bing.  The  only 
writer  to  whom  we  can  go  for  information--^Q0ephaB— 
is  prejudioed,  becaose  John  of  Gischak  proved  the  most 
formidable  rival  of  the  renowned  Jewish  historiaa,  and 
be  ia  on  that  account  depicted  by  Josephus  in  a  Teiy 
dispazaging  manner.  His  deeda,  however,  indicate  to 
every  fair-minded  person  that  he  belonged  to  that  diss 
of  men  who,  for  the  defense  of  their  country,  readily  ig- 
norę  all  other  dutiea.  We  are  fiirtbermore  enoounged 
to  give  credence  to  the  noble  picture  which  Grita 
(^Geteh.  der  Juden,  iii,  896)  has  dmwn  of  John,  when  w« 
remember  that  the  virtaous  and  leamed  Simon  ben-Ga- 
maliel  was  a  devoted'and  life-long  friend  of  our  bero. 
(By  this  it  must,  however,  by  no  means  be  infenred  that 
we  are  ready  to  aocept  Grtttc's  viewa  on  tbe  character 
of  Josephus,  for  which  we  refer  our  readers  to  the  art  Jo- 
sephus.) Thougb  by  natare  Joaephus*s  superior,  mors 
particolarly  in  the  art  of  waifiue,  he  readily  sobmittod 


joinr 


969  JOHK 


Umadf  to  tbe  oomnumds  ot  the  num  whom  tbe  Scnbe- 
diim  had  seen  fit  to  inrett  with  taperior  aatbority.   Kot 
■o  patriotic  was  the  oondocŁ  of  Josephcu,  whO)  in  his 
jeiJoasy,  hesitated  not  to  pat  wety  obetade  in  the  way 
of  John,  80  as  to  preyent  the  tuooees  of  his  noble  and 
patriotic  effoita.    This  impolitic  oonduct  of  Josephos 
towards  all  who  seemed  to  preeent  any  likelihood  o€  be- 
ooming  ńrals  in  office  oontinaed  until  the  people*8  at- 
tention  was  directed  to  it,  and  their  anger  against  bim 
was  80  great  that  his  Tery  life  was  in  danger.    Instead, 
howerer,  of  piofiting  by  this  sad  experienoe,  Joeephus, 
in  his  yanity  and  blindnessy  oontinaed,  so  soon  as  he  felt 
that  the  danger  had  passed,  his  animońty  towards  his 
colaborers,  espedally  towards  John  of  Gischala,  whom 
he  hesitated  not  to  accuse  even  of  haring  headed  the 
tttacks  upon  his  life  (Josephns,  Life,  18, 19),  a  reproach 
which  was  not  in  the  least  desenred  by  John,  who,  how- 
«yer  great  bis  disappointment  in  Joeephus,  never  songht 
lelief  by  yiolent  measuies.    It  is  trae  that,  when  he 
foond  the  people^s  oonfldence  in  Josephus  restored,  he 
lent  measengerB  to  Simon  ben-Gamaliel  and  to  the  San- 
hedrim  to  remove  the  man  in  whom  public  confidence 
was  80  misplaced.    Ordered  to  the  defenoe  of  his  natiTe 
place,  John  did  ererything  in  his  power  to  strengthen 
the  fortification  of  Gischala,  and  when,  after  a  long 
siege  from  tbe  experienced  tioops  of  Titas,  he  foond  it 
impoflsible  to  bold  the  city  ¥rith  his  handful  of  oomitry- 
men,  morę  accustomed  to  the  plooghshare  than  to  the 
«word,  he  madę  his  escape  by  a  gamę  of  strategy  which 
his  enemy  could  ne\rer  forgiye  him.    Haying  obtained 
■n  armistice  from  the  Bomans  on  pretence  that  the  day 
was  their  Sabbatb,  be  improved  tbe  opportmiity  to 
make  his  escape  with  his  forces  to  Jerusalem.    The  sa- 
cred  dty  was  at  this  time  unfortnnately  dirided  of  itself, 
anarchy  reigned  within  the  walls,  and  it  was  with  great 
difflculty  that  John  sacoeeded  in  rallying  tbe  people  to 
their  defence  against  a  common  enemy.    He  actually 
aroosed  them  to  sally  fortb  against  the  Roman  inraders, 
and  sacceeded  in  destroying  tbe  first  works  erected  by 
them  to  besiege  the  city.    Not  so  happy  were  they  in 
their  futnrc  nndertakings.    Defeat  after  defeat  flnaUy 
obliged  John  to  seek  reftige  in  the  tower  of  Antonia. 
Soon  afler  foUowed  the  fali  of  Jemsalem  (A.D.  70),  and 
John  now  sought  refuge  in  a  neigbboring  caye,  deter- 
mined  not  to  fali  into  the  hands  of  Titus.    But  hunger 
soon  proyed  eyen  a  morę  formidable  foe  than  tbe  Ro- 
mans, and  John  gladly  went  fortb  lVom  bis  hiding-place 
to  surrender  himself  to  them,  who,  in  their  pride  and 
the  sayage  state  of  that  age,  hesitated  not  to  increase 
the  mental  agonies  of  the  poor  Jew  by  marching  bim, 
with  700  othcr  fellow-countrymen^  at  tbe  head  of  tbe 
▼ictorious  legions  to  the  Etemal  City,  to  enhanoe  the 
magnifioence  of  his  public  triumph.     Tbe  grand  spec- 
tade  oyer,  John  was  imprisoned  at  Romę,  and  died 
in  a  dnngeon  of  broken  beart.    Not  so  Incky,  eyen,  was 
liis  brother  in  arms,  Simon  bar-Giora  (q.  y.),  who  was 
diagged  throngb  the  streets  of  Romę  by  a  ropę,  and 
finally  execnted,  in  accordance  with  Roman  cnstom, 
which  demanded  a  haman  sacrifice  in  honor  of  a  yictory 
gained  oyer  thdr  enemies.     See  Josephos,  War,  iy,  2 
8q. ;  OrKtz,  GetchichU  d,  Juden^  yoL  iii,  eh.  xiy  and  xy ; 
Baphall,Po8e^<N:i7uf.</fA«Jeco«,ii,416  8q.    (J.H.W.) 

JohnGocH.    See  Goch. 

JTohn  OF  GoRZ,  a  French  monk  of  some  notę  who 
floniished  in  the  lOth  centoiy,  was  bom  at  Tendi^re, 
near  Fdnt-^Monsson,  and  studicd  theology  under  Ber- 
ner,  deacon  of  TouL  After  joining  yarious  conyents 
— among  the  last  that  of  tbe  Reclusea — and  not  finding 
that  eamest  piety  and  strict  asoetic  life  which  he  sougbt 
to  impose  upon  himself,  he  finally  gathered  a  few  tnie 
ftiends  of  like  mind  in  the  conyent  of  Gofc,  proscntcd 
to  them  by  bishop  Adalbert,  of  Mayenoe.  In  the  latter 
part  of  his  life,  Otbo  the  Great  sent  him  as  ambaseador 
to  Abderrabman  II,  in  Gordoya.  His  biography  was 
written  by  a  friend  and  oontempomfy,  St.  Anralph  (died 
9M),and  is  giyen  by  Pata,  Jromm.  iy,  885. 


jrohn  THB  GsAsofABiAif .  See  Jomr  thb  LabobI* 
ous. 
John  Hybcanub.  See  Htbcanus. 
John  THE  Italian  (Johannes  Iłalus)  (1).  a  monk 
of  the  lOth  centory.  He  was  at  fint  canon  at  Romę, 
but  his  acqu«Jitance  with  Odon,  abbot  of  Clugny,  led 
him  to  France,  and  he  entered  a  conyent  there.  Some 
say  that  he  afterwards  retomed  to  Italy,  and  became 
prior  of  a  Roman  conyent,  while  otbers  say  that  he  be- 
came abbot  of  some  French  Cistercian  conyent,  and  that 
he  died  in  France  after  945.  Our  Information  regard- 
ing  his  personal  history  is  deriyed  only  from  his  biogra- 
phy in  tbe  Life  of  St.  Odon  (in  Mabillon,  A  eta  Sand.  yii, 
152).  He  published  extracts  of  St  Gregory's  MoraUa, 
See  ffisł,  Litt.  de  to  France^  yi,  266 ;  Ceillier,  Hisł.  det 
Auteurs  Sacris,  zii,  825. 

John  THE  Italian  (/to/««,  'IraX6c)  (2),  a  Greek 
philosopber  and  heretic  who  flooiisbed  in  the  time  of 
Alexiu8  I  Comnenus  (1081-1118),  escaped  to  Italy  after 
the  reyolt  of  Maniaces  against  Constantine,  and  there 
prueecatcd  his  preparator}"  studies.  He  finally  retumed 
again  to  Constantinople,  and  became  a  disdple  of  Mi- 
chael  PscUus  the  younger.  His  leaming  and  ability 
attracted  generał  attention,  and  the  emperor  Michad 
Ducas  (1071-1078),  finding  himself  in  need  of  a  man  ac- 
quainted  with  the  Italian  proyinces  to  influence  them 
to  a  return  to  the  Byzantine  empire,  sdected  John  Ita- 
las  for  this  purpose,  and  dispatcbed  bim  to  Dyrrachium. 
He,  howeyer,  proyed  unfaithful  to  tbe  trust,  and,  his 
intrigues  haying  become  public,  was  obliged  to  flee  to 
Romę  to  ayoid  persecution.  He  was  subseąuently  al- 
lowed  to  return  to  Constantinople,  and  there  entered  the 
monastery  of  Pega.  When  Psdlus  was  banished  in 
1077,  John  was  madę  first  professor  of  pbilosopby 
(Ciraroc  rwv  0«Xo(tć0wv),  and  filled  this  place  with 
great  suocese.  Yet  be  was  better  acąuainted  with  logie 
and  Aristotle'8  pbilosopby  than  with  tbe  other  branches 
of  sden<%,  and  was  but  little  yersed  in  grammar  and 
rhetoric.  He  was  vcry  passionate  and  hasty  in  argu- 
ment, and  sometimes  even  resorted  to  bodily  yiolence, 
but  he  was,  fortunately,  prompt  in  acknowledging  his 
errors.  He  expounded  to  his  pupils  Proclus,  Plato,  Jam- 
blichus,  Porphyriue,  and  Aristotle,  but  often  in  a  manner 
quite  inconaistent  with  the  position  of  Christian  ortho- 
doxy.  Alexius,  soon  after  ascending  the  throne,  caused 
Italu8*s  doctrines  to  be  examined,  and  summoned  him 
beforo  an  ecdesiastical  court.  Notwitbstanding  the 
protection  of  the  patriarch  Eustratius,  John  Italus  was 
obliged  publidy  to  recant  and  anathematize  deyen  he- 
retical  opinions  adyanced  in  his  lectures.  Among  other 
things,  he  was  accused  of  "ńdiculing  image-worship." 
Continuing,  howeyer,  to  teach  the  same  doctrines,  he 
was  anathematized  by  the  Church,  and,  feańng  persecu- 
tion, he  forsook  the  roetrum.  It  is  sald  that  in  his  later 
years  he  publicly  renounced  his  errors.  His  principal 
works  (all  in  MSS.)  are,  'EKdo<nc  łIc  Siaipopa  i^tiTtifta' 
Ta ;  'Ejc^offtc  tic  rd  TOtriKa  ;  Ilfpi  ^taAcicruc^c ;  Mi3ro- 
Soc  ptiTopiKtic  USo^tiaa  Kard  <rvvo^iv;  some  dis- 
courses,  etc  See  Anna  Comnenus,  A  lezius,  y,  8, 9 ;  Fa- 
bridus,  BibL  Graca,  iii,  218-217 ;  yi,  181 ;  xi,  646-662 ; 
Cave,  HiaL  Litt,  ii,  164 ;  Oudin,  Comment,  de  Scriptoribus 
et  Saiptis  Ecdes,  ii,  coL  760 ;  Larob^ce,  Commentar.  de 
Biblioih,  Ctuar.  iii,  coL  41 1,  ediL  Kollar ;  L«  Beau,  I/ist, 
du  Ba^-Empire,  lxxxi,  49 ;  Hase,  Notices  d.Manmcriptt, 
yoL  ix.— Hoefer,  Nowe,  Biog,  Gen,  xxyi,  567. 
John  JjBjunATOB.  See  Joum  thk  Fasteb. 
John  or  Jbbijbai.bic  (1),  originally  a  monk,  was 
bishop  of  Jerusalem  (A.D.  886)  when  not  mnch  morę 
than  thiity  years  of  age  (Jerome,  EpiU.  lxxxii,  8). 
Some  speak  of  him  as  patriaroh,  but  Jerosalem  was  not 
eleyated  to  the  dignity  of  a  patriarchate  until  the  fd- 
lowing  oentory.  John  was  a  man  of  insignificant  per^ 
aonal  appeaianoe  (Jerome,  Lib,  contra  Joan,  c  10),  bnt 
he  was  generally  oelebrated  for  eloqnence,  talent,  and 
leaming.  He  was  acąuainted,  at  least  in  some  degree, 
with  the  Hebiew  and  Syiiac  languages,  bat  it  is  doabt- 


JOHBT 


DTB 


jOHisr 


-ftil  if  he  was  acquainted  with  Latm.  *  He  ia  said  io  Kaye 
been  at  one  peńod  an  Arian,  or  to  have  ńded  with  the 

Ariaiis  when  they  were  in  the  aaoendant  under  th6  em- 
peior  Yalens  (Jerome,  Lih,  conira  Joan,  c.  4,  8).  For 
eight  jeara  afier  his  appointment  to  the  bishopric  he 
was  on  fiiendly  terms  with  St.  Jerome,  who  was  then 
living  a  monastic  life  in  Bethlehem  or  its  neighborhood; 
bnt  towards  the  dose  of  that  period  strife  was  stirred 
up  hy  Epiphanius  of  Constantia  (or  Salamis),  in  Cy- 
pras,  who  came  to  Palestine  to  ascertain  the  tnith  of  a 
report  which  had  reached  him,  that  the  obnoxious  sen- 
timents  of  Origen  were  gaining  ground  under  the  pat- 
ronage  of  John.  £piphanius*s  violence  against  all  that 
had  even  the  appearance  of  Origeniam  led  him  into  a  eon- 
troyersy  with  John  alao.  See  Epipha^cius.  Whether 
John  really  cherished  opinions  at  yariance  with  the  or- 
thodoxy  of  that  time,  or  only  esercised  towards  those 
who  held  Łhem  a  furbearance  which  was  looked  upon 
with  suspicion,  we  do  not  know ;  but  he  became  again 
inyolyed  in  sąuabbles  with  the  supporters  of  orthodox 
yiews.     He  was  charged  by  them  with  fayoring  Pela- 

*  gius,  who  was  then  iu  Palestine,  and  who  was  accused 
of  heresy  in  the  councils  of  Jerusalem  and  Diospolis  (A. 
D.  415),  but  was  in  the  latter  council  acquitted  of  the 
charge,  and  restored  to  the  communion  of  the  Church. 
See  Pelagius.  In  the  controyersies  waged  against 
Ghiysostom,  John  of  Jerusalem  always  sided  decidedty 
with  Chrysostom.    See  Ciirysostom.    John  wrote,  ac- 

'  oording  to  Gcnnadius  {De  Ftru  Illuttr,  c.  SO),  A  doer' 
tut  OhtrecŁatoret  tui  Słudu  Liber,  in  which  he  showed 
that  he  rather  admired  the  ability  than  followed  the 
opinions  of  Ońgen.  Fabricius  and  CeiUier  think,  and 
with  apparent  reason,  that  this  work,  which  is  los^was 
the  apologetic  letter  addressed  by  John  to  Theophilus, 
patriarch  of  Alexandria,  which  resulted  in  a  reooncilia- 
tion  between  John  and  Jerome.  No  other  work  of 
John  is  noticed  by  the  ancients;  but  in  the  17th  centu- 
ly  two  huge  yolumes  appeared,  entitled  Joannit  Nepa- 
tit  Sylcani,  HUrosolym,  Episcopi  xUv,  Opera  omnia 
gna  hactenut  incognita,  reperiri  pohurunt :  in  unum  col- 
lecta,  tuogue  Auctori  et  Audoriiati  łribut  Yindicianan 
iibrit  atserła per  A,R.P.  Pełrum  Wattetium  (Brussels, 
1643,  fot).  The  YindiciaB  occupied  the  second  yolume. 
The  works  profess  to  be  translated  from  the  Greek,  and 
are  as  follows :  (1)  Liber  de  Intlitutione  primorum  Mo- 
nachorum,  in  Legę  Yeteri  exorłorum  et  in  Nora  perteve- 
rantium,  ad  Caprasium  Monachunu  Interpreie  Aymer- 
ico  Patriarcha  A  ntiodieno.  This  work  is  mentioned  by 
Trithemius  (apud  Fabricius,  Bibl,  Gr,  x,  626)  as  "  Volu- 
men  intigne  deprindpio  et  profectu  ordimt  Carmdiiiciy^ 
and  is  ascribed  by  him  to  a  later  John,  patriarch  of  Je- 
rusalem (in  the  8th  century).  It  is  contained  in  seyeral 
editions  of  the  BiUiołheca  Patrum,  in  which  work,  in- 
deed,  it  secms  to  haye  been  fint  published  (yoL  ix.  Par. 
1589,  fol.)}  and  in  the  works  of  Thomas  ii  Jesu,  the  Car- 
melite  (i,  416,  etc,  Cologne,  1684,  folio).  It  is  gener- 
ally  admitted  to  be  the  prodnction  of  a  Latin  writer, 
and  of  much  later  datę  than  our  John : — (2)  In  ttrała- 
gemata  Beałi  Jobi  Libri  iii,  a  commentary  on  the  first 
three  chapters  of  tlie  book  of  Job^  often  printed  in  Latin 
among  the  works  of  Origen,  but  supposed  to  belong  nei- 
ther  to  him  nor  to  John : — (8)  In  8,  Maithaunij  an  im- 
perfect  commentary  on  the  Gospel  of  Matthcw,  usually 
printed,  under  the  title  of  Oput  imperfectum  in  MatOuB' 
unij  among  the  works  of  Chrysostom,  in  the  Latin  or 
Gneco-Latin  editions  of  that  father,  but  supposed  to  be 
the  work  of  some  Arian  or  Anomoean  about  the  end  of 
the  6th  or  some  part  of  the  7th  century: — (4)  Fragmenła 
ex  Commentario  ad  prima  Capita  xi  8,  Marci,  dted  by 
Thomas  Aquinas  {Caiena  A  wrea  ad  Etang.')  as  a  work 
of  Chrysostom : — (5)  Fragmenta  ex  Commentario  in  Lu- 
cam,  extant  under  the  name  of  Chr3r8oetom,  paitly  in 
editions  of  his  works,  partly  in  the  Latin  yersion  of  a 
Greek  CaUna  in  Lucam  pubUshed  by  Corderius  (Antw. 
1628,  folio),  and  partly  in  the  Cateaa  Aurea  of  Thomas 
Aąuinas  :--(6)  Homilue  Leiii,  almost  all  of  them  among 
those  pubUshed  in  the  works  of  Chrysostom.    There  ia 


no'goód  iteson  for  aacribing  any  of  these  works  to  John"; 
nor  are  they,  in  fact,  ascribed  to  him  except  by  the  Cuw 
meUtes.  See  Fabńdus,  BibL  Gr.  ix,  299;  x,  52a,  etc; 
Caye,  His(.  Litt.  i,  281,  etc;  Dupin,  Nowf,  Bibliathśęuę 
det  A  uteurt  EeoUtiattiquet,  iii,  87,  ed.  Par.  1690 ;  Smith, 
DioHonary  of  Greek  and  Roman  Biograpkg,  ii,  596. 

John  OF  Jer0SALex  (2).  A  83modical  letter  of 
John,  who  was  a  patriarch  of  Jerusalem  early  in  the  6th 
century,  and  his  suifragan  bishops  assembled  in  a  coun- 
cil at  Jerusalem  A.D.  517  or  518,  to  John  of  Constanti- 
nople  [John  of  Cappadocia],  is  giyen  in  the  ConeiKa 
(yoL  y,  coL  187,  etc,  ed.  Labbe ;  yiii,  1067,  ed.  Mansi). 

John  OF  Jebusał£M  (8)  [or  of  Damascus,  2^. 
Three  extant  pieces  relating  to  the  Iconoclastic  contro- 
yersy  bear  the  name  of  John  of  Jerusalem,  but  it  is 
doubtful  how  far  they  may  be  ascribed  to  the  same  aą- 
thor,  henoe  we  add  them  here  simply  under  a  separata 
heading.  They  are,  1.  *l*i>avvov  iv\afitaTdrov  tov 
*Upo<ro\vfŁiTov  iiovaxov  ^rjytioiCfOi  Jocamit  Hieroto* 
lymitani  recerendittUni  Monacki  Narratio,  a  yery  brief 
account  of  the  origin  of  the  Iconoclastic  moyement,  pub- 
lished by  Combefis  among  the  Scriptoret  pott  Theopka^ 
nem  (Par.  1685,  fol.),  and  reprinted  at  Yeuice,  A.D.  1729, 
as  part  of  the  series  of  Byzantine  historians;  it  is  alao 
induded  in  the  Bonn  edition  of  that  series.  It  is  alsp 
printed  in  the  Bibliotkeca  Patrum  of  Gallandius,  xiii, 
270 : — 2.  AiaXoyoc  ffnjAtrf i/ruroc  ytv6fUVoc  napd  ma* 
rwv  icac  Łp^MĘ.uy  Kai  iro^ov  Kai  l^rikoy  ixóvTuy 
Kpbc  i\tyxo^  ^*^  Łvamwv  rĄc  martMC  Kai  rqc  ^«- 
iatfKaMac  r«v  ayiuiy  Kai  ópdoSóluy  iffŁwv  ^arip^u^ 
or  Ditceptatio  invectiva  qu<B  kobita  ett  afidelOmt  et  or- 
tkodoxitf  tttidiumgue  ac  zehtm  kabentibut  ad  con/utando9 
adoertąriot  fdei  atgue  doctrina  tanctorum  orłkodoz^ 
rumąue  patrum  nottrorum,  first  published  by  Combefis 
in  the  Scriptoret  pott  Tkeopkanem  aa  the  work  of  aa 
anonymous  writer,  and  contained  in  the  Yenetian,  bot 
not  in  the  Bonn  edition  of  the  Byzantine  writers.  It  is 
aLso  reprinted  by  Gallandius  (ut  tupra)^  p.  352,  and  a»> 
cribed  to  John  of  Damascus  or  John  of  Jerusalem,  some 
MSSi  gtviug  one  name,  and  others  giying  the  otho. 
Gallandius  considers  that  he  is  called  Damascus  from 
his  birthplace.  The  author  of  this  inyectiye  is  to  be 
distinguished  from  the  greatly  cdebrated  John  of  Da- 
mascus (q.  y.),  his  oontemporary,  to  whom,  perhaps,  the 
transcribers  of  the  manuscripts,  in  prefixing  the  name 
Damascus,  intended  to  ascribe  the  work :— 3.  *liśdwov 
fiovaxov  Kai  irpfOpuTepoy  roH  ćkaiiaoKifvov  XóyQC 
avohtKTtKbc  TTtpi  Tdhf  ayiiav  Kai  <nirTwv  UKÓptw^ 
rrpoc  vdvTac  Xpi(mavoi)c  Kai  irpbc  r6v  j3a<rtXea  Kov- 
aTavTivov  rby  Kafia\ivov  Kai  irpbc  irawac  atpin- 
Kowc,  or  Joannit  Damatceni  Monacki  ac  Pre^teri  Ora' 
Łio  demontłrativa  de  tacrit  ac  renerandit  imagimbut,  ad 
Ckiitiianot  omnet,  aduertutgue  Imperatorem  Conttantir 
nam  Cabalinum.  The  title  is  giyen  in  othcr  MSS., 
'Ejri«TroX^  'l(oawov  *Upoffo\vfitnf  dpxu7eiaKÓ7tov^  k.  t. 
K^Epitfola  Joannit,  or  ffierotolgmił<mi  Archiepitoopi, 
etc  The  work  was  first  printed  in  the  A  uctarium  AV 
vum  of  Combefis  (Paris,  1648,  folio),  yoL  ii,  and  was  re- 
printed by  Gallandius  (ut  tupra),  p.  358,  etc  Fabricius 
is  dispoeed  to  identify  the  authors  of  Nos.  1  and  3,  and 
treats  No.  2  as  the  work  of  another  and  unknown  writer; 
but  Gallandius,  from  intemal  eyidence,  endcayors  to 
show  that  Nos.  2  and  3  are  written  by  one  person,  but 
that  No.  1  is  by  a  different  writer,  and  this  seems  to  be 
the  preferable  opinion.  He  thinks  there  is  also  interaal 
eyidence  that  No.  3  was  written  in  the  year  770,  and 
was  sub8equent  to  No.  2.  See  Fabridus,  BibL  Gr,  yii, 
682 ;  Gallandius,  BibL  Patrum,  xiii.  Prolegomena,  c^ 
X,  p.  15 ;  Smith,  Diet,  Gr,  and  Bom.  Biog.  ii,  596. 

John  OF  Jrrusalbm  (4),  patriarch  of  JenisaleA, 
who  flourished  probably  in  the  latter  half  of  the  10^ 
century,  was  the  author  of  a  life  of  Joannes  Diunasoenu^ 
BJoc  Tov  69iov  irarpoc  yiiiSnf  *l*a&wov  tov  Aafunh 
Kfivov  wyypa^tc  irapA  l«tf<ivvov  irarptópxov  *Upo9&' 
\vfiiav  (  Vita  tancti  Pairit  nottri  Joannit  Damatceni  n 
JooHne  Pairiarcka  HterotofymiUmo  comcr^ąta),    TUe 


JOHN 


»łr 


JOHN 


'^ork  U  a  translation  fhim  the  Anbie,  or  at  teaat  fonnded 
npon  an  Arabie  biograph3r,  and  was  written  a  conńder- 
abie  time  aiter  the  death  of  John  of  Damaacus  (A.D, 
756),  and  afler  the  ceasation  of  the  IconacUtstic  conUaty 
Which  may  be  regarded  as  haTing  terminated  on  the 
death  of  the  emperor  Theophilua  (A.D.842).  But  we 
have  no  data  for  detennining  how  long  after  theae 
event8  the  author  liyed.  Łe  Quien  identifies  him  with 
a  John,  patriarch  of  Jerusalem,  who  was  bumt  aliye  by 
the  Saracens  in  the  latter  part  of  the  reign  (A.D.  96a-9) 
of  Nicephoros  Fhocas,  opon  suspicion  that  he  had  exci- 
ted  that  emperor  to  attack  them  (Gedrenus,  Compend. 
p.  661 ,  edit  Paris ;  ii,  874,  ed.  Bonn).  This  life  of  John 
of  Damascus  was  first  pablished  at  Romę  with  the  ora^ 
tions  of  Damascenus  (De  8aens  ImagmSntf  [1558, 
8vo]);  it  was  reprinted  at  Baael  with  all  the  works 
of  John  of  Damascus  A.D.  1575;  in  the  Ada  Sancto- 
rum  (May  6),  yoL  ii  (the  Latin  yerńon  in  the  body 
of  the  work  [p.  111,  etc],  and  the  original  in  the  Ap- 
pendix  [p.  723,  etc]);  aod  in  the  edition  of  the  Works 
of  Dcmtuceiau  by  Le  Qaien,  vol.  i  (Paris,  1712,  folio). 
The  Latin  yersion  is  giyen  (s.  d.  6  Maii)  in  the  YUm 
Sanetorum  of  Lippomani,  and  the  De  ProbatU  Sancto- 
rum  VUi8  of  Smius.  See  Le  Quien,  Joamtit  Damaseem 
Opera f  notę  at  the  beginning  of  the  Vita  8,  J,  Damasc, ; 
and  Orient  Christianua,  iii,  466.— Fabricius,  BibL  Graca, 
ix,  686, 689 ;  x,  261 ;  Caye,  HisL  LitL  ii,  29 ;  Smith,  Diet, 
Gr.  and  Rom.  Biog,  ii,  598. 

John  THE  Laborious  (Johatikbs  Phujoponus,  also 
snmamed  Alskandrinus  and  Grammaticus),  an  East^ 
em  scholar  of  great  renown,  was  bom  at  Ałexandria  to- 
wards  the  close  of  the  6th  centary  or  the  beginning  of 
the  7th.  Of  his  personal  history  but  yery  little  seems 
to  be  definitely  known.  He  is  said  to  haye  been  pres- 
ent  at  the  capture  of  that  city  by  the  Mohammedans 
(A.D.  639),  and  to  haye  temporarily  embraced  their 
creed  to  preyent  the  buming  of  the  Alexandrian  libra- 
ly ;  but  the  tnith  of  this  story  is  rather  doubtful  (comp. 
Gibbon,  Deeline  and  FaU  Rom,  Emp.  eh.  11).  The  great 
renown  of  John  Philoponus  is  due  mainly,  perhape,  to 
his  specolations  on  Christian  doctrine,  morę  espedally 
his  theories  on  the  Trintty,  cosmocrony,  and  immortali- 
ty.  He  wąsa  passionate  admirer  of  Plato  and  Aristo- 
tle,  and  hence  his  persistency  in  amending  Christian 
dogma  by  philosophy,  and  hence  much  ambiguity  in 
liis  poeition  on  Christian  doctrines,  and  hence  also  the 
reason  why  he  has  so  freąuently  been  the  subject  of  at- 
tack as  a  heretic  It  is  espedally  his  theory  on  the 
Trinity  that  has  classed  him  among  the  Tcitheists,  of 
which  he  has  eyen  oiten,  though  inaccurately,  been 
pointed  out  as  the  founder,  while  in  truth  he  was  only 
A  foremnner  of  them.  See,  however,  Tritheism.  His 
principal  work  on  dogmatics,  ^lairrirĄc  ri  mpi  tvil!nrnoc, 
is  lost,  yet,  from  extracts  of  it  stiU  extant,  the  foUowing 
has  been  determined  to  be  his  position  on  the  doctrine 
of  the  Trinity.  Naturę  and  hypostasis  he  regards  as 
identical ;  a  double  naturę  in  Christ  is  incompatible  with 
one  hypostasis;  and  to  the  objection  that  in  the  Trinity 
there  are  confessedly  three  h3rpoBta8es  and  but  one  na- 
turę, he  argues  that  in  the  Trinity  three  particular  and 
•ndiyidual  existence8  or  hypostases  are  comprised  un- 
tfer  the  idea  of  unity.  This  unity,  howeyer,  is  merely 
the  gcneric  term,  which  comprehends  the  seyeral  par- 
ticulars,  the  Koiv6c  rov  flvai  X6yoc.  If  this  be  called 
naturę,  it  is  done  in  an  abetract  sense,  and  is  inductiyely 
deriyed  from  particulare ;  but  if  ^wnę  is  to  conyey  the 
■ense  of  independent  exi8tence,  it  must  joln  the  particu- 
lar, indiyidual  being,  and,  therefore,  the  hypostasis.  Ap- 
plying  this  argument  to  Christ,  he  concludes  that  to  the 
onity  of  his  hypostasis  belongs  also  the  unity  of  naturę. 
(Comp.  again  Tritheism,  and  Domer,  DocL  Person  of 
Christ,  dias.  ii,  yoL  i,  p.  148, 414.)  His  works  extant  aie ; 
(1)  De  atermtate  mundi,  or  Hcpl  diStórriroc  KÓOfioy 
<Ven.  1535,  foL),  in  which  he  attempu  to  establish  the 
Christian  dogma  of  oreation  by  reason  alone,  withont  ref- 
erence  to  Btblical  anthority.  The  ideas  are  etemal  only 
«rhen  they  are  regarded  aa  creatiye  thoughta  of  God; 


as  snch  they  are  inherent  in  Proyidence.  and  their  real- 
ization  adds  nothing  to  diyine  perfection.  Grod,  by  his 
if^iCy  was  etemally  Creator,  and  his  essence  required  no 
new  characteristics  by  the  Łyk^yna,  The  world  itself 
cannot  be  etemal,  for  the  effect  cannot  be  equal  to  the 
caose : — (2)  In  his  Commentaria  in  Mosaicam  mundi  cre^ 
Ottonem,  or  Hipc  Koofioiroiiac  (edited  by  Corder,yienna» 
1680),  he  attempts  to  reconcile  the  Mosaic  account  of 
creation  with  the  facts  deriyed  from  our  own  esperience ; 
— (3)  In  his  Hcpc  dva<rraff€uc  (known  to  us  only  from 
Photius  ICod.  21-28],  Nicephorus  [//.£".  xyiii,  47],  an4 
Timotheus  ^De  recepłu  htsret,  in  Cotil,  Mon.  iii,  414  są.]) 
he  separates  the  sensual  from  the  spiritual  creation,  a 
concession  to  philosophy  madę  at  the  expen8e  of  Chria- 
tianity.  **  The  rational  soul,"  he  argues,  "  is  not  only 
an  tlŁoc,  but  an  imperishable  substance,  entirely  distinct 
from  all  irrational  exi8tence,  in  which  mattcr  is  always 
associated  with  form.  In  conseąuence  of  this  insepara- 
ble  connection  of  matter  and  form,  the  natural  body  i^ 
destroyed  and  annihilated  by  death.  The  resuirectioą 
of  the  body  is  the  new  creation  of  the  body :" — (4)  IIcpl 
riic  rov  iLOTgo\dfiov  XPV<^^^C  (publlshed  by  Plase,  Bonn, 
1839)  : — (5)  Ilcpi  ayaXfiaTwv  against  Jamblichns) : -« 
(6)  Commentaries  on  Aristotle  (Yenice,  1509, 1534, 1585, 
etc.) : — (7)  Grammaiical  Essays  (in  Labbe,  Glaśsaria^ 
London,  1816),  etc  See  J.  G.  Scharfenberg,  De  J,  Ph, 
(Leipzig,  1768);  Fabricius,  Bibtioth,  Grcsca,  x,  689  sq.; 
Ritter,  Gesch.  d,  Philos,  yi,  500  8q.^  Stud.  u.  Krił,  1885, 
p.  95  są. ;  Herzog,  Real-Encyldop,  yi,  760 ;  Smith,  DicU 
of  Greek  and  Roman  Biography,  iii,  321.  ^ 

John  1  LAsoa    See  LASca 

John  OF  Lbitomysł.    See  Leitoktsł. 

John  OF  LETDEir.    See  Boccold. 

John  the  Little,  or  Johannes  Paryus  (Jean  P^ 
tit),  a  French  theologian,  was  bom  in  Normandy  in  the 
latter  half  of  the  14th  century.  He  was  at  one  time 
professor  of  Łheology  in  the  Uniyersity  of  Paris,  but  was 
deposed  for  haying,  on  the  8th  of  March,  1408,  pio* 
nounoed  a  discourse  in  justification  of  the  murder  of  th^ 
duke  of  Orleans,  brother  of  the  king  of  France,  who  waa 
assassinated  by  the  duke  of  Buigimdy.  He  died  at 
Hesdin,  France,  in  1411. — Pierer,  Umv,  Lex, 

John  Maio.    See  Maronites. 

John  OF  Matha,  SL,  founder  of  the  Order  of  the 
HoUf  Trinity  (also  called  Fathers  ofMercy  in  Spain,  and 
Mathurins  in  Paris),  was  bom  at  Faucon,  in  Pnnrence,  in 
1154,  of  noble  parents.  He  studied  at  Paris  Uniyersity, 
and  then  entered  the  Church.  '*  At  his  first  celebration 
of  diyine  seryice,"  the  legend  goes,  **be  beheld  a  yision 
of  an  angd  clothed  in  wbite,  haying  a  cross  of  red  and 
Une  on  his  breast,  with  his  hands,  crossed  oyer  each 
other,  resting  on  the  heads  of  two  slayes,  who  knclt  oil 
each  ńde  of  him ;  and  belieying  that  in  this  yision  of 
the  mind  God  spoke  to  him,  and  called  him  to  the  de- 
liyerance  of  prisoners  and  captiyes,  he  immediately  sold 
all  his  goods,  and  forsook  the  world,  to  prepare  himself 
for  his  mission."  In  conjunction  with  Felix  of  Yalois  he 
arranged  the  constitutions  of  the  new  order,  and  togeth- 
er  they  went  to  Romę  to  obtain  the  approyal  of  pope 
Innocent  IIL  Felix  haying  had,  the  legend  continues; 
a  similar  dream,  the  pope  gladly  compUed  with  their  re* 
ąuest,  and  the  order  was  approyed  Feb.  2, 1199.  Gan- 
cher  III,  of  ChAtillon,  haying  giyen  them  the  estate  of 
Cerftoi,  they  there  established  their  fIrst  conyent.  They 
also  obtained  seyenl  other  conyents  and  hospitals  in 
France  and  Spun,  and  a  conyent  and  church  at  Borne. 
Haying  coUected  large  snms  of  money,  John  dispatched 
two  of  his  brotherhood  to  the  coast  of  Africa,  whenoe 
they  retumed  with  186  Christians  redeemed  from  the 
Mussnlman's  bonds;  The  year  foUowing  John  himself 
went  to  Tunis,  preaching  on  his  way  all  through  Spain^ 
and  creating  many  friends  for  his  noble  undertaking; 
he  retumed  with  110  captiyes.  From  another  yoyage 
he  retumed  with  120  Christiana,  Hereafter  he  deyoted 
hifluelf  to  preaching  at  Borne.    He  died  there  Dec  21| 


JOHN 


972 


JOHN 


1218,  and  was  canonized  by  Innocent  XT,  Jiily  80, 1679. 
He  IB  commemorated  on  Febnuny  8.  The  dresB  of  the 
order  consists  in  a  flowing  white  gown,  with  a  red  and 
blue  croes  on  the  breast  See  P.  lgnące  DiUand,  Vie  de 
SU  Jean  de  Maiha  (1695) ;  BaiUet,  Fte*  des  Samis,  Feb. 
8 ;  Hoefer,  Nouv,  Biogr,  Gen,  xxvi,  441 ;  Mrs.  Jameeon, 
Legendę  o/Moncutic  Ordert,  p.  217  są. 

John  OF  Meda,  St.,  founder,  or  rather  refonner  of  the 
order  of  the  ffunMicUiy  was  bom  at  Meda,  near  Como,  to- 
wards  the  dose  of  the  1 1  th  century.  He  was  a  member 
of  the  Oldrati  fainily  of  Milan.  After  ordination  he 
withdrew  to  the  aoUtude  of  Rondenario,  near  Como, 
which  he  subseąuently  left  to  join  the  Humiliati,  then 
a  lay  oongregation.  Choeen  their  soperior,  he  subjected 
them  to  the  rule  of  StBenedict,  only  changing  the  ap- 
pellations  of brelhren  and  monke  into  canone,  He  obliged 
them  also  to  say  the  Yiigui^s  mass  eyery  day,  and  com- 
posed  a  special  breyiaiy  for  their  use,  which  was  caU- 
ed  canone*  office,  The  Humiliati  (q.  y.)  thus  became  a 
regular  order,  with  clerical  and  lay  members.  John  of 
Meda  gaiaed  a  large  niimber  of  pT08el3rte8  by  his  preach- 
ing,  and  was  reputed  very  charitable.  He  died  Sept. 
26, 1169»and  was  canonized  a  few  days  after  his  death 
by  pope  Alexander  IH.  See  St.  Antonin,  Hitt,  part  ii, 
§  XV,  eh.  xxiii ;  Sylve8tre  Maurolyc,  Marę  Ocean  di  tutti, 
U  Rdig,;  Morźri,  Grand  Diet,  hittorique;  Richard  et 
Giraad,  BibliotA,  iSoc:— Hoefer,  NouteUe  Bioff.  Ginłrcde, 
xxvi,  441. 

John  THE  MoNK  (Johannee  Monachus),  or  Johk  of 
Cressy,  a  French  canonist,  was  bom  at  Cressy,  Fon- 
thieu,  in  the  13th  century.  He  was  a  Cisterdan  monk, 
and  was  created  cardinaL  He  died  in  1818.  He  wrote 
oommentaries  on  the  decretals  of  Boniface  YIII  and 
Benedict  IX,  and  was  the  first  who  wrote  on  the  whole 
Sextus  of  Boniface  YIH.  The  same  work  was  after- 
wards  done  by  Guido  de  Baisio,  and  still  better  by  Jo- 
hannes Andreśe.  The  glossaries  of  Johannes  Monachns 
were  annotated  and  publLshed  by  PhiL  Probus,  doctor  of 
the  school  of  Bourges.  His  MSS.,  under  the  title  Ghe- 
fcs  m  eertum  decretalium,  are  presenred  in  the  pnblic  li- 
brary  of  Chartres.  He  is  also  considered  by  some  as 
the  author  of  the  Defentorium  Jurisy  but  this  is  not 
proved.  See  Savigny,  Cataiogw  de  la  BibL  de  Chartres, 
iv,  274.— Hoefer,  Nouv,  Biog.  Gen,  xxvi,  659.    (J.  N.  P.) 

John  OF  MoMTB  CoRYiNo^  a  celebrated  early  Bo- 
man  missionaiy  among  the  Mongole,  belonged  ,to  the 
Franciscau  order,  and  flourished  towards  the  close  of 
the  ISth  century.  He  was  bom  in  Monte  Corvino,  a 
smali  city  in  Apulia,  and  had,  previous  to  his  appoint- 
ment  as  Eastem  missionary,  distinguished  himself  (in 
1272)  as  ambassador  of  the  emperor  Michael  Palaeolo- 
gus  to  pope  Gregoiy  X  in  behalf  of  a  oontemplated  union 
of  the  Eastem  and  Western  churches.  He  had  traveUed 
in  the  East,  and,  aware  of  the  opening  for  Christian- 
ity  among  the  Mongo^  had  urged  the  Boman  see  to 
dispatch  missionaries  to  them ;  but  their  efforts  proved 
unsuccessful,  and  in  1289  he  finally,  at  the  instance  of 
pope  Nicholas  lY,  set  out  for  that  distant  field  himself. 
Of  an  energetic  character,  discouraged  by  no  reYersea 
however  great,  or  trials  however  severe,  he  finally  suo- 
oeeded  in  building  up  a  Christian  Chorch.  As  an  in- 
stance of  his  undauntcd  courage  may  be  dted  the  fact 
that  he  had  to  buy  the  childim  of  native6  in  order  to 
educate  them  in  Christian  doctrines,  aud  through  them 
to  influence  maturer  minds.  About  1805  he  had  some 
8ix  thousand  converts,  and  the  prospect  of  sUll  greater 
additions.  In  1807  other  laborera  were  sent  into  the 
field,  and  John  de  Monte  Corvino  was  appointed  arch- 
bisbop  (his  see  was  named  Cambalu),  and  the  Christian 
interests  were  advanced  among  the  Mongols  even  after 
tlbhu's  death  (1328),  until  the  downfall  of  the  Mongoł 
dynasty.    See  Mongols,    (J.H.W.) 

John  op  Nbpomuk  (morę  properly  Pomuk),  a  Ycry 
popular  Bohemian  saint  of  the  Roman  Catholic  Chorch, 
and  honored  by  them  as  a  martyr  of  the  inyiolability 
of  the  seal  of  oonfesaioo.    He  was  bom  at  Pomok,  a 


vi]Iaga  in  the  diatrict  of  Klatao,  abont  the  middk  al 
the  14th  century.  After  taking  orders,  he  rosę  rmpidly 
to  distinction.  He  was  created  a  canon  of  the  Gathe* 
dnd  of  Piagne,  and  eventuaUy  vioar  generał  of  the  dk>- 
cese.  The  queen,  Sophia,  the  seoond  wife  of  Wenael  oc 
Weneedaus  lY,  having  selected  him  for  her  oonfeasor, 
Wenceslaus,  himself  a  man  of  most  dissolute  life,  eon- 
odving  suspidons  of  her  virtne,  leąuired  of  John  to  i^ 
veal  to  him  what  he  knew  of  her  life  fh>m  the  oonfes- 
dons  which  she  had  madę  to  him.  John  steadiastly 
refused,  and  the  king  resoWed  to  be  revenged  for  the 
refusaL  An  oppoftunity  occnrred  soon  afterwards,  when 
the  monks  of  the  Benedictine  abbey  of  Kladran  elecŁed 
an  abbot  in  oppodtion  to  the  design  of  the  king,  who 
wished  to  bestow  it  upon  one  of  his  own  dissolute  favor- 
ites,  and  obtained  from  John,  as  vicar  generał,  at  once  s 
oonfirmation  of  their  choice.  Wenceslaus,  having  flrst 
put  him  to  the  torturę,  at  which  he  himself  personally 
predded,  had  him  tied  hand  and  foot,  and  flung,  already 
half  dead  from  the  rack,  into  the  Moldan  (March,  1398). 
Theee  historical  facts  have  been  oondderably  enlaiged, 
and  embellished  with  legendary  additions,  in  his  biog- 
raphy  by  BohUdav  Balbinus.  Aooording  to  these,  his 
birth  was  dgnalled  by  miraculoos  signs,  and  after  his 
martyrdom  his  body  was  di80oveied  by  a  miraculoua 
light  which  issued  lirom  it,  was  taken  up,  and  boried 
with  the  greatest  honor.  Several  able  Romantst  wiiten 
have  ftequently  attempted  to  reooncile  the  pointa  of 
oonflict  between  the  l^pend  and  the  historical  account. 
See  Hersog,  ReaUEnojfldop,  vi,  749  sq. ;  Pelzel,  Kaiaer 
Wenoeelaus,  i,  262  8q. ;  Weteer  u.  Wdte,  Kirchat-Lex.  v, 
725  są.  Dr.  Otto  Abd  (Die  Sagę  v,  keiL  Johan.  r.  Nep.} 
snppoees  the  legend  to  be  a  Jesuitical  invention,  and  to 
datę  fWnn  the  restoration  of  popery  in  Bohemia,  to  aerve 
as  a  popular  counterpart  to  the  martyrdom  of  Husa  and 
Ziska.  His  memoiy  is  cheiished  with  peculiar  affeotłoa 
in  his  native  country.  He  was  cancmized  as  a  saint  of 
the  Roman  Catholic  Church  by  Benedict  XIII  in  1729, 
his  feast  bdng  fixed  for  the  20th  of  Biarch.  By  some 
historians,  two  distinct  personages  of  the  same  name  are 
enumerated— one  the  martyr  of  the  confesdonal  seal, 
the  other  of  the  redstanoe  to  the  dmoniacal  tyianny  of 
Wenceslaus ;  but  the  identity  of  the  two  is  well  sustain- 
ed  by  Palacky,  Geieh.  ton  Bdhmen,  iii,  62.  See  Cham- 
bers,  Cydop.  s.  v. ;  Ascfabach,  Kirchen^Lez.  iii,  556  sq. 

John  KicióTA  (from  Nicius,  probably  the  dty  of 
that  name  in  the  Thebals),  also  sumamed  the  Recbuei 
patriarch  of  the  Jaoobite  Alexandrian  Church,  flourish' 
ed  in  the  early  pait  of  the  6th  century,  and  was  in  the 
patriarchal  chair  from  507  to  517.  He  is  noted  for  his 
viQlent  opposition  to  the  decrees  of  the  Coundl  of  Chalce- 
don, and  is  sald  to  have  refused  communication  with  any 
that  did  not  expre8dy  anathematize  them,  and  to  have 
promised  the  emperor  Anastadus  two  hundred  pounds 
of  gold  if  he  would  procure  their  finał  and  decisive  abro- 
gation  (see  Neałe,  Hitt.EasL  Ch,  [  Alexandria]  ii,  26, 27 ; 
Theophanes,  s.  a.  A.D.  512).  Among  the  Jacobitea,  who 
in  his  day  enjoyed  especial  favor  at  the  imperial  court 
(a  period  on  which,  says  Neałe, "  the  Jacobite  writers 
dwelł  with  peculiar  oomplacency,**  and  in  which  *' their 
heresy  had  gaiued  a  footing  which  it  uever  l>efore  or 
dnce  possessed*^,  John  Niciota,  better  known  as  patri- 
arch John  JJ  of  Alexandria,  is  reckoned  among  the 
saints.  He  is  believed  to  be  the  author  of  a  leamed 
work  agdnst  the  Pelagians,  addressed  to  pope  Geladua. 
Some  think  it  was  written  by  John  I  of  Alcxandria,but 
it  is  in  all  probability  the  production  of  John  Nidota, 
and  was  written  before  his  acoesdon  to  the  patriardud 
chair.     (J.H.W.) 

John  of  NICKŁAU8HAD8E9,  a  GeHuan  rdigious  fa* 
nade,  flourished,  in  the  second  half  of  the  15th  centuiy, 
at  Nicklanshausen,  in  the  diocese  of  WUnburg.  He 
waa  eaminą  his  ]ivelihood  as  a  swineherd  when  it  snd- 
denly  oocnrred  to  liim  that  an  attack  upon  the  dagy, 
and  a  summons  to  them  to  reform  their  profligate  ways^ 
migkt  meet  with  applaoae  from  the  people,  to  whum  at 


JOHN 


973 


JOHN 


this  tiine  ^the  deigy,  m  •  body,  had  beoome  a  steneh 
in  tbeir  nostrila."  He  was  not  dow  openly  and  loodly 
to  prodaim  his  mission  (in  1476),  to  which  ha  daimed 
he  had  been  inspired  by  the  Yirgin  Maiy,  and  soon  im- 
mensę  flocks  gathered  about  him,  who  came  from  the 
Bhine  lands  to  Miśnia,  and  from  Sasony  to  BsTaria,  so 
tbat  at  times  he  preached  to  a  oongiegation  of  20,000  or 
80,000  men.  **  His  doctrines,"  says  Lea  (Hi»t.  Cełibacy, 
p.  897),  <<  were  revolationary,  for  he  denounced  oppres- 
ńon  both  secular  and  derical;  but  he  was  particularly 
aerere  upon  the  yices  of  the  ecdesiastical  body.  A 
special  reyelation  of  the  Yirgin  had  informed  him  that 
God  could  no  longer  endure  them,  and  that  the  woild 
ooold  not,  without  a  speedy  reformation,  be  sa^ed  fiom 
the  divine  wrath  conseąuent  upon  them"  (comp.  Trithe- 
mius.  Chroń,  Hirtcmg,  ann,  1476).  The  unfortunate  man, 
who  was  a  fit  precursor  of  MUncer  and  John  of  Leyden, 
was  seized  by  the  bishop  of  WUrzburg,  the  fanatical 
ceal  of  his  unarmed  followers  eadly  subdued,  and  he 
himself  snifered,  for  his  lashnesa,  death  at  the  stake  a 
few  days  aOer  his  triaL    (J.  H.  W.) 

John  OF  NiooMEDiA,  a  presbyter  of  the  Church  of 
Nicomedia,  in  Bithynia,  in  the  time  of  Constantine  the 
Great,  is  noted  as  the  author  of  Maprvpiov  rov  aytov 
BafriX(tatc  iTrtaKÓwoy  'AfŁaaiiac,  Acta  martyrii  S,  Ba- 
$Uei  episcopi  A  masuBf  which  b  gi  ren  in  the  A  eta  Sano- 
torum  of  the  Bollandists  (Aprflis,  yoL  iii);  the  Latin 
yersion  in  the  body  of  the  work  (p.  417),  with  a  prelimi- 
nary  notice  by  Henschen,  and  the  Greek  original  in  the 
Appendix  (p.  50).  An  extract  from  the  Latin  yersion, 
containing  the  history  of  the  female  saint  G]i4)h}*Ta, 
had  preyiously  been  giyen  in  the  same  work  (Januar.  i, 
771).  The  Latin  yersion  of  the  A  eta  Martyrii  8.  Bań- 
Id  had  already  been  published  by  Aloysius  Lippomani 
(Tite  Sanctor.  Patrum,  yoL  yii)  and  by  Surius  {De  pro- 
batis  Sanctorum  yitis^  s.  d.  26  Aprilis).  Basileos  was  put 
to  death  about  the  close  of  the  reign  of  Lidnius,  A.D. 
822  or  323,  and  John,  who  was  then  at  Nicomedia,  pro- 
fesses  to  haye  conyersed  with  him  in  prison.  Caye 
thinks  that  the  Acta  haye  been  interpolated,  apparently 
by  Metaphrastes.  See  A  eta  Sanctorum,  W.  cc. ;  Cave, 
liist,  Liłt,  i,  185.~Smith,  Diet,  Gr.  and  Bom,  Biog,  ii,  601. 

John  or  Ozfobd,  an  English  prdate,  flonriahed  in 
the  second  half  of  the  12th  centozy,  and  took  an  ao- 
tiye  and  important  part  in  the  controyeny  between  king 
Henry  U  of  England  and  his  archbishop  Thomas  k 
Bedcet  in  behalf  of  his  royal  master,  whose  fayor  and 
nnlimited  confidenoe  he  enjoyed.  He  had  attended  the 
Diet  at  WUrzborg  in  1165,  hdd  to  cement  a  union  be- 
tween Henry  and  the  emperor  of  Germany,  and  had 
there  taken  the  oath  of  fldelity  to  the  liyal  pope  of  Al- 
ezander,  Paschal  IH,  whom  the  emperor  supported. 
For  his  snccess  in  this  mission,  John,  on  his  return,  was 
lewaided  by  king  Henry  H  with  the  appointment  of 
dean  of  Salisbury.  Of  course  the  archbishop,  at  this 
time  himsdf  daiming  the  right  to  fUl  these  podtions, 
dłsapproyed  of  the  appointment,  and  eyen  suspended 
and  dted  before  him  for  trial  the  bishop  of  the  diocese 
ef  Salisbury,  who  had  approyed  the  royal  action.  (See 
Inett,  Hittortf  o/ the  Ei^ith  Church,  yoL  ii,  pt  i,  p.  837, 
notę ;  Robertoon,  lĄfe  o/Beckefy  p.  186,  notę  d ;  compare 
art  JocELiins  of  Sałibburt  and  CuutEKDOM  Consti- 
TCTTiONB.)  John,  disregarding  the  archbishop's  censures, 
was  finally  punished  by  exoommunication  (in  1166).  The 
king  at  once  dispatched  a  special  embassy  to  pope  Al- 
exander,  John  of  Ozford  being  one  of  the  number,  and, 
Botwithstanding  the  archbishop's  serious  actions  against 
John  of  Oxford,  the  pope,  anxion8  to  continue  friendly 
lelations  with  the  English  court,  fayoraUy  recdyed 
John,  and  the  latter  eyen  measttrably  succeeded  in  the 
object  of  tbeir  mission  [see  art.  Bbckbt],  securing  also 
the  pope^s  oonfirmation  of  his  appointment  as  dean  of 
Salisbury.  After  the  dose  of  the  controyersy  and  the 
fetom  of  Becket,  John  of  Oxford  was  appoihted  by  the 
king  to  meei  and  reinstate  the  archbishop,  a  not  yery 
BiodBiate  reproyal  to  the  haogh^  pcdate;  and  npon 


the  death  of  the  latter  John  further  leodyed  eyidenoe 
of  the  gmteful  remembranoe  of  his  royal  master  by  the 
appointment  to  the  bishopric  of  Norwich  (1176),  and 
as  soch  attended  the  Lateran  Council  in  1179.  The  ex- 
act  time  of  his  decease  is  not  known  to  us,  ndther  are 
we  awaie  that  he  performed  any  liteiary  work  of  yalue ; 
in  all  probability,  his  actiye  part  in  the  king*s  contro- 
yeisy  absorbed  all  his  interests.  See  Milman,  Lalm 
C^rMoady,  iy,  864  sq.,  408.     (J.H.W.) 

John  OF  Paru,  a  oelebrated  French  Dominican  of 
the  18th  oentuiy,  waa  professor  of  theology  at  the  Uni- 
yersity  of  Paris.  He  owes  his  renown  to  the  part  he 
took  in  the  oontroyersy  then  waging  between  his  king, 
Philip  the  Fair,  and  pope  Boniface  YIH.  The  latter, 
fearing  his  depodtion  on  the  plea  tbat  the  resignation 
of  his  piedecesBor  Cdestine  waa  illegal,  took  eyery  meana 
to  adyanoe  the  doctrine  of  papial  absoluttsm.  Not 
only  in  matters  spiritual,  but  also  in  matters  tempo- 
ral,  the  pope  was  to  be  regarded.  supremę ;  in  short,  to 
saye  his  oiBce,  he  canied  his  schemes  for  the  enlarge- 
ment  of  the  papai  power  to  the  yerge  of  frenzy.  Un<f 
luekily  for  Boniface,  howeyer,  he  found  his  equal  in 
Philip  the  Fair,  who  not  only  denied  the  temporal  pow* 
er  of  the  pope,  but  finally  eyen  Komed  the  foofish  oon* 
duet  of  Boniface  in  seeking  to  frighten  him  by  issuing 
bulls  against  him  and  his  kingdonk  The  Uniyerńty 
of  Paris  sided  with  the  king,  and  among  his  most  out- 
spoken  friends  were  John  of  Paris  and  Acddius  of  Romę. 
The  fonner  eyen  published  a  work  against  the  papai 
assumptions,  entitled  De  regia  potestaie  papali  (iu  the 
oollection  of  Goldast,  yoL  ii),  in  which  he  dared  to  as- 
sert  that  "the  priest,  in  spiritual  things,  was  greater 
than  the  prince,  but  in  temporal  things  the  prince  was 
greater  than  the  priest ;  though,  absolutdy  oonsidered, 
the  priest  was  the  greater  of  the  two.''  He  also  main- 
tained  that  the  pope  had  no  power  oyer  the  property 
either  of  the  Church  or  her  subjects.  As  the  kingdom 
of  Christ  is  a  spiritual  one,  hayuig  its  fóundation  in  the 
hearts  of  men,  not  in  their  possessions,  so  the  power 
conferred  on  the  pope  relates  simply  to  the  wauts  or  to 
the  adyantage  of  the  uniyersal  Church.  He  also  stood 
up  in  defence  of  the  independent  power  of  the  bishops 
and  priests,  and  denied  that  this  is  deriyed  from  God 
through  the  mediation  of  the  pope  alone,  maintaining 
that  it  springs  directly  from  God,  through  the  choice  or 
concuirence  of  the  communities.  "  For  it  was  not  Pe- 
ter, whose  suocessor  is  the  pope,  that  sent  forth  the 
other  apostles,  whose  successors  are  the  bishops ;  or  who 
sent  forth  the  seyenty  disdples,  whose  successors  are 
the  parish  priests;  but  Christ  himself  did  this  directly. 
It  was  not  Peter  who  detained  the  apostles  in  order  to 
impart  to  them  the  Holy  Ghost;  it  was  not  he  who 
gaye  them  power  to  foigiye  sins,  but  Christ.  Nor  did 
Paul  say  that  he  recdyed  from  Peter  his  apostolical  of- 
fice,  but  he  said  that  it  came  to  him  directly  from  Christ 
or  from  God;  that  three  years  had  dapsed  afrer  he  re- 
ceiyed  his  commiadon  to  preach  the  Gospd  before  he  had 
an  inteiriew  with  Peter.**  But  morę  than  this  he  argued. 
The  pope  himself  was  eyen  amenable  to  a  woridly  power 
for  his  conduct  in  the  papai  chair.  As  such  he  regarded 
not  simply  the  CEcumenical  Council,  but  to  the  secular 
prinoes  aiso  he  belieyed  this  right  bdongcd,  subject, 
howeyer,  to  a  demaod  on  the  part  of  the  clergy  for  aid. 
Neander  8a3rs  (CK  Hitt,  y,  18), "  If  the  pope  gaye  scan- 
dal  to  the  Church,  and  showed  himself  incorrigible,  it 
was  in  the  power  of  secular  rulers  to  bring  about  his 
abdication  or  his  depodtion  by  means  of  their  influence 
on  him  or  on  his  cardinals."  If  the  pope  would  not 
yield,  they  might  so  manage  as  to  oompd  him  to  yidd. 
They  might  ooramand  the  people,  under  seyere  penal- 
ties,  to  refuse  obedience  to  him  as  pope.  John  of  Paris 
finally  enters  into  a  particular  inyestigation  of  the 
que8tion  whetber  the  pope  can  be  deposed  or  can  abdi- 
cate,  a  qnery  that  had  been  laised  by  the  family  of  the 
Colonnas,  whom  the  pope  had  estruiged,  and  who  were 
anxious  to  make  nuli  and  yoid  the  resignation  of  pope 
Cekaiine,  and  to  zeaasert  the  latter^s  daim  to  the  papa* 


JOHN 


974 


JOHIT 


cy.  What  condusioiis  he  mnst  h«ve  amved  at  on  thiB 
point  may  be  gathered  ftom  the  preoeding  remarka. 
He  diatinctly  affirmed  that,  as  the  papacy  e»sted  onły 
for  the  benefit  of  the  Church,  the  pope  ougbt  to  lay 
down  hia  office  wheneyer  it  obatnicted  thia  end,  the 
highest  end  of  Christian  love.  Though  he  meaauiably 
8erved  Boniface  VIII  by  his  last  oonduaions,  he  had  yet 
siifficiently  arouscd  the  hatred  of  the  Roman  see  to  fear 
for  his  position  in  the  Choich ;  and  no  aooner  did  an 
'  opportunity  present  itself  to  Boniface  than  John  was 
madę  to  feel  the  strong  aim  of  his  opponent.  Haviiig 
adTOcated  in  the  pulpit,  contrsry  to  the  Roman  Catholic 
dogma  of  the  reai  presence,  a  ao-caUed  tatponorMm,  yiz. 
**  that,  in  yirtue  of  a  union  of  the  body  and  Uood  of 
Christ  wtth  the  bread  and  winę,  like  the  anion  of  the 
two  natares  in  Christ,  the  predicates  of  the  one  might 
be  transferred  over  to  the  other,"  he  was  piohibited 
from  preaching  by  the  bishop  of  Paris.  An  appeal  to 
the  pope,  of  course,  proyed  fatiie,  and  his  tiDaUes  ended 
only  with  his  life,  in  1804.  He  embodied  his  view8  of 
the  sacrament  in  his  work  Determmatio  de  modo  eans- 
teadi  corporis  ChrisH  m  Sacremento  aUarit  (London, 
1686, 8vo)  '.-^Corrtetorium  doctrina  MMcti  Tkoma.  See 
Neander,  CL  Hiti,  iv,  840;  v,  sect.  1;  Mosheim,  Eockt, 
Hut,  bk.  iii,  cent.  ziii,  pt.  ii,  eh.  iii,  §  14.  See  alBO  Boh- 
IFACE ;  Papacy  ;  Lord*8  Supper. 

John  OF  Parma,  also  called  Joannes  Borełłus 
or  BuRALŁUs,  a  learned  monk  of  the  ISth  century,  was 
bom  at  Parma  about  1209.  He  became  a  Franciscan, 
taught  thcology  with  great  success  at  the  uniTersities 
of  Naples,  Bologna,  and  Paris,  and  in  1247  was  madę 
generał  of  his  order  by  the  chapter  assembled  at  Avig- 
non.  He  showed  great  zeal  for  the  reformation  of  con- 
yents,  and  strictly  enforced  the  discipline.  In  1249  he 
was  sent  to  Greece  by  Innocent  lY,  with  a  view  to  the 
leconciliation  of  the  Eastem  Church,  bat  failed  in  that 
undertaking,  and  retumed  to  iŁaly  in  1251.  A  chapter 
held  at  Home  in  1256  accused  him  of  fayoring  tlie  her- 
esies  of  Joachim,  abbot  of  Floris,  whose  work,  TA*  Ecer- 
Uuting  Gogpel,  he  edited,  and  accompanied  with  a  pref- 
ace  of  his  own  (see  Farrar,  Cril.  Ilirt,  Free  Thovght^  p. 
86),  and  he  was  obliged  to  resign  the  generaiship  of  the 
order.  His  successor,  Bonayentura  Fidanza,  eyen  caused 
him  to  be  condemned  to  imprisonment,  but  the  protec- 
tion  of  cardinal  Ottoboni,  afterwards  Adrian  V,  prevent- 
ed  the  cxccution  of  the  sentence.  He  was  neyertheless 
obliged  to  hide  himself  in  the  conyent  of  Grecchia,  near 
RietL  Ho  subseąuently  set  out  to  return  to  Greece,  but 
died  at  Camerino  in  1289.  He  was  canonized  in  the 
18th  century  by  the  Congregation  of  Rites.  Nonę  of 
his  writings  were  published.  See  TlisL  Litteraire  de  la 
France,  xx,  23 ;  Wadding,  Script,  Ord,  Minor,;  Fleury, 
JiisU  EccL ;  Irenco  Affo,  Mevwrie  degli  ScriUori  et  IM- 
terali  Parmigiani;  Sbaraglia,  Supplem,  et  castig,  ad 
Script.  Ord,  S,  Francisc, ;  Hocfer,  Aowr.  Biog,  Generale, 
xxvi,  550 ;  Mosheim,  Ch,  Ilist,  cent.  xiu,  pt,  ił,  eh.  ii,  § 
88,  notę.     (J.N.P.) 

John  Pakvu8.    See  John  thb  Littłb. 

John  PiULOPoNus.    See  John  the  Laborious. 

John  Phocas  (^ojcac)t  a  Cretan  mouk  and  priest, 
Bon  of  Matthseus,  who  became  a  monk  in  Patmos,  had 
serred  in  the  army  of  the  emperor  Manael  Comnenas 
(who  reigned  A.D.  1148-80)  in  Asia  Minor,  and  aflei^ 
wards  yisited  (A.D.  1185)  Syria  and  Pałestine,  is  noted 
for  a  short  geographical  acoount  which  he  wrote  of 
those  countries,  entitled 'Eie^pacnc  lv  cvpÓ}I/h  tuv  aic 
}AvTioxfiac  fiixP'C  'Upo9o\vfUM»v  inurTpwu  eai  %ta»pwv 
^vpiac  Kai  ^otyiKfjc  Kai  twv  Kard  Ilakatffńvtiv  ayiu>v 
rÓ7rwv,  Compendiaria  Descriptio  Castrorum  et  Urbium 
(sic  in  Allat.  yers.)  ab  Urht  A  ntiockia  usque  Hierosofy- 
mamj  necnon  JSgrice  ac  Phenicia,  et  ta  Patastina  Saero^ 
rum  Locorum,  which  was  transcribed  by  his  son  (for  he 
was  married  bcfore  he  became  a  priest),  and  finally  pub- 
lished by  Allatius,  with  a  Latin  yeraion,  in  his  Ilu^/ujc- 
ra,  i,  1^6.    The  Latin  yeraion  is  also  giyen  in  the  Acta 


Samiormm  of  the  Bollandisła,  Maii  ii,  śd  inlŁ  SeeAł^ 
latius,  'Sńmmrra^  Prąfatumada ;  Fahridos,  BUL  Gr.iy, 
662;  yiii,99..-Smith,/>»ct(rr.oiH<jeom.AM^ii,601. 

John  Phurnes  (4otipv^c)f  a  monk  of  the  monsstery 
of  Mount  Ganus,  who  flourishcd  in  the  reign  of  the  em- 
peror Alexis  Comnenus  (Uth  century),  was  an  opponent' 
of  the  Latin  Charch,  and  is  noted  as  the  author  of 
'AiroAoyća,  Defeimo,  or  dioAf ^(c,  Diaceptatio,  a  disciis- 
aion  which  was  carried  on  with  Peter,  archbbhop  of 
Milan,  in  the  preaence  of  the  emperor.  If  tlus  is  the 
work  which  John  Teccus  cites  and  replies  to  in  his 
De  Unione  Ecdetiarum  Orałio  (apud  AUatium,  Gnecia 
OrthodoiOy  i,  179,  etc),  it  appears  that  the  fonn  of  a 
dialogue  was  assumed  for  conyenience*  sake,  and  that  it 
was  not  the  dialogue  of  a  real  conferenoe.  According 
to  Fabriciua,  AUatins  also  pubUshed  in  tus  work  Zie 
Coruentu  (sc.  De  Ecdetia  OcddaitaUs  et  OrientaliB  per- 
petua  Cotuentume),  p.  1158,  a  work  of  John  which  ii 
described  as  Epitlola  de  RUOnu  imnuUcOis  w  Sana 
Communione,  Other  works  of  John  are  extant  in  MS. 
See  Allatius,  Gnec.  Orthodor,  L  c;  Fahricius^  BStL  Gr, 
xi,  648,  660.— Smith,  DicL  Gr,  ontf  Rom,  Biog,  ii,  601. 

John  the  Presbyter,  a  soppoaed  diadple  of  Jesoa, 
and  instructor  of  Papiaa  of  Hierapolis,  is  said  to  haye 
been  a  contemponury  of  the  apoetle  John  (with  whom  it 
is  thought  he  haa  been  oonfounded  by  early  Chuich  his- 
torians),  and  to  haye  reaided  at  Ephesua.  For  the  as- 
sertion  that  there  existed  such  a  person,  the  teatimony 
adyanced  is  (1)  that  of  Papias  (in  Eosebios,  Biit,  Eecia, 
lii,  39),  who,  in  speaking  of  the  personal  «Sbrts  he  pat 
forth  to  establish  himself  in  the  Christian  faith,'says: 
*'  Wheneyer  any  one  aidyed  who  had  had  intercoiuse 
with  the  elders  (rotę  irpta0vripotc)f  I  madę  inquiiy 
conceniing  the  declarations  of  these;  what  Andieir, 
what  Peter,  or  Philip,  or  Thomas,  or  James,  or  John.or 
Matthew,  or  any  other  of  the  disdples  of  the  Lord  said, 
CU  aUo  what  Arittion  aaid  John  the  Preabgter,  ditapka 
o/ the  Lord,  sag.  For  I  belieyed  that  I  should  not  de- 
ri^^e  80  much  adyantage  from  books  as  from  liying  and 
abiding  disoourse."  Euaebius,  in  reporting  this,  takea 
special  paiiis  to  report  that  Papias  piuposely  addaoea 
the  name  John  twice,  firat  in  connection  with  Peter, 
James,  and  Matthew,  where  only  the  apoatle  can  be  in- 
tended,  and  eigain  along  with  A  riMion,  where' he  dittiih 
guithet  him  hg  the  title  of  *^tke  PretbgtrrJ"  Eosetńos 
fhrther  states  that  this  confiims  the  report  of  those  who 
relate  that  there  were  two  men  in  Asia  Minor  who  boie 
that  name,  and  had  been  doaely  oonnected  with  Christ, 
and  then  continaes  by  showing  that  two  łombe  had  heen 
fonend  m  Ephetu*  hearing  the  name  of  John,  Foitber 
proof  is  foand  in  another  part  of  his  history  (yii,  25), 
where  he  cites  Dionysios,  biahop  of  Alexandria,  aboat 
the  middle  of  the  8d  oentoiy,  as  uttering  the  aame  txa- 
dition  oonceming  the  finding  of  the  two  tombs  at  Ephc- 
aus  inscribed  with  the  name  of  John,  and  aa  ascńbing 
to  John  the  Presbyter  the  anthorahip  of  the  Apocalypse, 
which  Eusebios  himself  was  inclined  to  do.  The  exist- 
enoe  of  a  presbyter  John  is  (2)  dedared  in  the  Apottul- 
ical  Constituiiont  (yii,  86),  where  it  is  said  that  the  see- 
ond  John  was  bishop  of  Ephesus  alter  John  the  Apos- 
tle,  and  that  It  was  by  the  latter  that  he  was  institotcd 
into  office.  Further  teatimony  is  obtained  £rom  Jcroine 
{De  Vir,  III,  c  9),  who  reports  the  opinion  of  some  that 
the  secondaud  third  epistles  of  John  are  the  prodoctioo 
of  John  the  Presbyter,  "cujua  et  hodie  altenun  sepuł- 
crum  apad  Ephesum  ostenditur,  etsi  nonnoUi  putant 
doas  memorias  ejusdem  Johannis  eyangelistie  ease."*  la 
defence  of  the  ezistence  of  soch  a  paraon  as  John  the 
Presbyter  appear  prominently  among  modeni  cńtiea 
Grotins,  Beck,  Fritzsche,  Bretachncider,  Oiidaer,  £b- 
tard,  and  SteiU  (Jahrb,  deutseher  TheoL  1869,  i,  138  8q.), 
all  of  whom  ascribe  to  him  the  antbonhip  of  the  lait 
two  epistlea  of  John,  geneiaUy  belieyed  to  be  the  pio- 
ductioos  ofJohn  the  Apoatle;  also  LUcfce,  Bledc,  Da 
Wette,  and  Neander,  who  consider  John  the  Pkeabrter 
the  anthor  of  the  AjMcalypae.    The 


JOHN 


9W 


JOHN 


whether  another  John  ezisted  in  AbU  Minor  oonteinpo- 
taiy  with  John  the  Apostle  would,  of  ooiine,  be  of  little 
kaport,  bat  the  fact  that  the  apostolical  anthonhip  of 
flome  of  the  epistles  and  of  the  Apocalypee  U  doubted 
has  called  to  critical  inquiiy  most  of  the  leading  theo- 
logical  minda  of  our  day.  The  resnlt  is  that,  while 
Bome  haye  conoeded  the  eziatence  of  another  John, 
dothed  eyen  with  epiaoopal  dignity  (Dollinger,  Fint 
Age  of  the  Churchf  p.  113),  others  have  denied  alto- 
gether  the  probability  of  the  esiatence  of  such  a  person 
eontemporary  with  the  apoetle  John  (see  Schaff,  ĆAtercA 
Hittoty,  Apostolic  Age,  p.  421,  notę).  Dr.  W.  L.  Alex- 
ander,  in  reriewing  the  proofa  of  thoee  who  aaaert  the 
«xistence  of  John  and  his  authorship  of  some  of  the  Jo- 
hannean  'writings,  thinks  that  in  the  way  of  this  asaonip- 
tion  stands  the  following:  1.  *'The  negatiye  eyidence 
ariaing  fironi  the  silence  of  all  other  ancient  authoritiea, 
especially  the  ailenoe  of  PolycrateSf  biahop  of  Epheaiia, 
who,  in  a  liat  of  eminent  teachers  and  biehops  in  Asia 
Minor,  preaeryed  by  Eoaebina.  (FiisL  EecL  y,  24),  makea 
no  mention  of  John  the  Preabytęr;  and,  2.  The  positiye 
eyidence  afforded  by  the  statement  of  Irenieua,  who  not 
only  omita  all  mention  of  the  Presbyter,  but  says  that 
Fapias  was  a  hearer  of  John  the  Apostle  along  with 
Polycarp  {adv.  Harts.  y,  83).  [Not  so  thinks  Donald- 
aon  in  his  Ilist.  ChritL  Lit,  and  Doctr,  i,  812  są.]  This 
coonter  eyidence  has  appeared  to  some  so  stioug  that 
they  haye  thooght  it  sufficient  to  set  aaide  that  of  Pa- 
fńaa,  who,  they  lemind  us,  is  described  by  Eusebios  aa 
a  nuuL  of  a  yery  smali  inteUect  {o^pa  oftucpoc  tóv 
vovy,  Hut,  Ecde$,  iii,  39).  [See  Schaff,  below.]  But 
this  seems  going  too  far.  Papias  describes  himself  as  a 
hearer  of  the  presbyter  John  (Euseb.  y,  24),  and  in  this 
he  oould  hardly  be  mistaken,  whateyer  was  hia  defi- 
dency  in  intellectual  power  [this  yiew  is  adyocated  by 
Zahn  (in  his  Iłemuu)  and  Riggenbach  {Jakrb,  deutscker 
TheoL  xiii,  319) ;  against  it,  see  Steitz  (in  Jahrb,  xiy, 
145  sq.)] ;  whereas  it  is  yery  poeaible  that  Irenneus  may 
have  confounded  the  presbyter  with  the  apoatle,  the 
latter  of  whom  would  be  to  his  mind  much  morę  famil- 
iar  than  the  former.  The  silence  of  Polycrates  may  be 
beld  proof  sufficient  that  no  John  the  Presbyter  was 
bishop  of  Epheaua,  or  famed  aa  a  teacher  of  Christianity 
in  Asia  Minor;  but,  as  Papias  does  not  attest  this,  his 
testimony  remains  unaffected  by  this  conclusion.  On 
the  whole,  the  existence  of  a  John  the  Presbyter  seems 
to  be  proyed  by  the  testimony  of  Papias;  but  beyond 
this,  and  the  fact  that  he  was  a  disdple  of  the  Lord, 
ńothing  is  certainly  known  of  him.  Credner  oontends 
that  TTptirfitfTłpoc  is  to  be  taken  in  its  ordinaiy  sense 
of  *older,'  and  that  it  was  applied  to  the  person  men- 
tioned  by  Papias  either  because  he  was  the  senior  of 
SL  John,  or  because  he  arrived  before  him  in  Asia  Mi- 
nor; but  this  is  improbable  in  itadf;  and,  had  Papias 
meant  to  intimate  this,  he  would  not  haye  simply  called 
him  ó  9rpe9j3vrepoc  'Iwawłjc  (see  Liddon,  p.  614).  In 
hia  statement  vQt<rfivTtpoc  is  plainly  opposed  to  iLTróu- 
ToKoc  as  a  distinctire  title  of  office"  (Kitto,  Cydop.  s.  y.). 
We  cannot  dose  without  permltting  Dr.  Schaff  {ApotL 
Ch,  Hist,  p.  421  8q.)  to  give  his  yiew  on  this  important 
qae8tion.  He  says:  '*There  is  room  eyen  to  inquire 
whether  the  yery  exlBtence  of  this  obscure  presbyter 
and  mysterious  duplicate  of  the  apostle  John  rests  not 
opon  shecr  misnnderstanding,  as  Herder  suspected  (O/- 
/enb.  Joh.  p.  206,  In  the  xiith  yoL  of  Herder's  Werke  zur 
TheoL),  We  candidly  ayow  that  to  ua,  notwithstand- 
ing  what  LUcke  (ly,  896  sq.)  and  Credner  (Einkit,  in's 
N,  Tett.  i,  694  8q.)  have  said  in  its  fayor,  this  man*s 
•xistence  seems  yery  doubtful.  The  only  proper,  orig- 
inal  testimony  for  it  is,  aa  is  well  known,  an  obscure 
pasaage  of  Papias  in  Euaebins,  iii.  39.**  Afler  donbting 
the  propriety  of  giying  credit  to  a  statement  of  Papias 
not  reiterated  by  any  other  authority  of  the  early 
Church,  he  says :  *<  It  is  yery  possible  that  Papias  meant 
in  both  cases  one  and  the  same  John,  and*repeated  his 
name  perhaps  on  aooonnt  of  his  peculiarly  close  oontact 
włth  him.    (See  aboye,  Dr«  Alesander^a  yiew.)    Sa  Ire- 


mena,  at  least,  aeema  to  haye  understood  him,  when  he 
calls  Papiaa  a  disdple  of  the  apostle  John  (without  men- 
tioning  any -presbyter  of  that  name)  and  friend  of  Poly- 
carp (Adv,  Har,  y,  33).  The  arguments  for  this  inter- 
pretation  are  the  following :  (1)  The  term  *  presbyter'  ia 
here  probably  not  an  official  title,  but  denotes  age,  in- 
duding  the  idea  of  yenerableness,  as  also  Credner  aup* 
poses  (p.  697),  and  as  may  be  inferred  from  2  John  1 
and  8  John  1,  and  from  the  nsage  of  Iremeus,  who  ap- 
pliea  the  same  term  to  hia  master  Polycarp  {A  dv.  I/cer, 
y,  80),  and  to  the  Roman  bishops  before  Soter  (y,  24). 
Thb  being  so,  we  cannot  oonoeiye  how  a  eontemporary 
of  John,  bearing  the  aame  name,  should  be  distinguished 
from  the  apostle  by  this  standing  title,  sińce  the  apostle 
himaelf  had  attained  an  nnusual  age,  and  was  probably 
even  sixty  when  he  came  to  Asia  Minor.  (2)  Papias, 
in  the  same  paasage,  atyles  the  other  apoetles  also  *pre»- 
byters,'  the  andents,  the  fathers;  and,  on  the  other 
hand,  calls  alao  Aristion  and  John  (peraonal)  'discipLea 
of  the  Lord.*  (8)  The  eyangelist  designates  himself  aa 
*  the  elder  (2  John  1  and  3  John  1),  which  leads  ua  to 
auppoee  that  he  was  fireąuently  so  named  by  his  '  little 
children,'  aa  he  lorea  to  cali  his  readers  in  his  first  epis- 
tle.  For  this  leaaon  also  it  would  haye  been  dtogether 
unsuitable,  and  could  only  haye  created  confusion,  to 
denote  by  this  tiUe  another  John,  who  liyed  with  the 
apoetie  and  under  him  in  Ephesus.  Credner  suppoaea, 
indeed,  that  these  two  epistles  came  not  from  the  apoa- 
tle, but,  like  the  Apocalypse,  from  the  'presbyter  John* 
in  qne8tion.  But  it  is  evident  at  first  sight  that  theae 
episUea  are  far  morę  akin,  eyen  in  their  language,  to 
the  fhst  epistle  than  to  the  Apocalypse  (comp^  2  Jolm  4- 
7  with  1  John  ii,  7,8;  iy,  2,3;  2  John  9  with  1  John  ii, 
27 ;  iii,  9,  etc.).  Tfaia  is  De  Wette*8  reason  for  conaid* 
ering  them  genuine.  When  Credner  suppoaea  that  the 
presbyter  afterwarda  accommodated  himself  to  the  apoa- 
tle's  way  of  thinking  and  speaking,  he  makes  an  entire* 
ly  arbitraiy  aaeumption  which  he  himself  condemns  in 
pronoundng  a  like  change  in  the  apostle  'altogether 
unnatural  and  inadmissible'  (p.  733).  (4)  The  Ephesian 
bishop  Pdycrates,  of  the  2d  century,  in  his  letter  to 
Yictor,  bishop  of  Borne,  on  the  Paschal  controyersy  (in 
Euseb.  y,  24),  mentions  but  one  John,  thottgh  be  there 
enumerates  the  fuya\a  (n-oix«<a  of  the  Asian  Church, 
Philip,  with  his  pious  daughters,  Polycarp,  Thraseaa,  Sa* 
garia,  Papiriua,  Melito,  most  of  whom  were  not  so  im* 
portant  aa  the  presbyter  John  must  haye  been  if  he  wera 
a  peraonal  disdple  of  the  Lord,  and  the  anthor  of  the 
Apocalypae.  We  can  hardly  think  that  in  this  conneo* 
tion,  where  it  vra8  his  object  to  present  aa  many  authori« 
tiea  as  poasible  for  the  Asiatic  uaage  respecting  the  feaat, 
Polycratea  would  haye  passed  oyer  thia  John  if  he  had 
known  anything  about  him,  and  if  hia  tomb  could  haye 
been  reaUy  pointed  out  in  Ephesus,  aa  the  later  Diony- 
sius  and  Jerome  intimate.  Jerome,  howeyer,  in  speak- 
ing  of  thia,  expre88ly  obsenrea,  *Nonnulli  putant,  duaa 
memoriaa  ejuadem  Johannis  eyangelists  esse'  (De  Vir, 
JU,  c.  9) ;  which,  again,  makes  thia  whole  story  doubt- 
AU,  and  destroys  ita  character  as  a  historical  testimony 
in  fayor  of  thia  obscure  presbyter." 

Ridiculous,  certainly,  is  the  argument  which  some 
haye  adyanoed,  that  the  different  Johannean  eputlea 
differ  so  much  in  style  that  they  cannot  possibly  be  aa- 
cribed  to  one  and  the  same  person.  On  this  argument 
Ebrard  {EiideUung)  laid  particular  stress,  but  he  is  ably 
anawered  by  Dr.  Tholuck  in  his  Glaubwurdigkeit  der 
eoamgel,  Geschichie,  2d  ed.  p.  288.  From  the  rich  tieaa- 
ury  of  hia  reading  the  latter  draws  such  analogies  aa  the 
**yarietas  dictionis  Appulejana ;"  the  difTerence  between 
the  DicUoffiu  de  Oratotibus  and  the  Aftnakt  of  Tacitus; 
between  the  Leges  and  the  earlier  dialogues  of  Plato; 
the  sermona  and  the  satires  of  Swift,  etc  **  This  cata- 
iogue,"  says  Dr.  Schaff,  *'roay  easily  be  increased  from 
the  history  of  modem  literaturę.  Think,  for  example, 
of  the  immense  distance  between  SchleieTmacher's  Re- 
den  Uber  die  Religion  and  his  Dialekłikf  Hegers  Logik 
and  A  eetketikf  the  first  and  second  part  of  Gothe's/\itM^; 


JOHN 


976 


JOHN 


Carlyle'0  lAfe  ofSchUkr  and  his  Latter-daif  PamphleU^ 
etc''  Comp.  alBO  Liddon,  DimnUy  of  Christa  p.  512  Bq. 
See  JoHKi  sBCOsiD  and  thibd  Epistues  of. 

John,  Prbster  {Priest  Jokn)j  a  sappoeed  Christian 
king  and  piiest  of  a  mediiBval  kingdom  in  the  interior 
of  Aaia,  the  locality  of  which  ia  vagae  and  undefined. 
tn  the  llth  and  12th  centuries  the  Nestorian  mimiona- 
ries  penetrated  into  Eastem  Asia,  and  madę  conyersions 
among  the  Keraeit  or  Krit  Tartars,  which,  aooording  to 
the  earliest  reports,  are  gaid  to  haye  included  the  khan 
or  soYcreign  of  the  tribc,  Ung  {or  Ungh)  Khan,  who  re- 
aided  at  Karakorunii  and  to  whom  the  afterwards  cele- 
brated  Genghis  Khan  was  tribntary.  This  name  the 
S}rrian  roissionaries  translated  by  analogy  with  their 
own  langoage.  oonyerting  Ung  into  ^  Jachanan"  or 
**  John,"  and  rendering  Khan  by  "  priest."  In  their  le- 
ports  to  the  Christians  of  the  wńt,  acoordingly,  their 
royal  convert  fignied  as  at  once  a  priest  and  the  sover- 
eign  of  a  rich  and  magnifioent  kingdom.  Genghis 
Khan^aring  thrown  off  his  aliegiance,  a  war  ensued, 
which  ended  in  the  defeat  and  death  of  Ung  Khan  in 
1202;  but  the  tales  of  his  piety  and  magnifloence  long 
soryiyed,  and  not  only  fumished  the  materiał  of  num- 
beriess  mediseral  legenda  (which  may  be  read  in  Asse- 
manrs  Bibliotheca  Orientaligf  III,  ii,  484),  but  supplied 
the  occasion  of  seyeral  of  thoee  missionaiy  expeditions 
from  Western  Christendom  to  which  we  owe  almost  all 
tmr  knowledge  of  medi»val  Eastem  geography.  The 
leports  regarding  Ung  Khan,  carried  to  Europę  by  two 
Armenian  legates  in  1145  to  Eugene  III,  created  a  most 
profound  impression;  and  the  letters  addressed  in  his 
name,  but  dnwn  up  by  the  Nestorian  missionaries,  to 
the  pope,  to  the  kings  of  France  and  Portugal,  and  to 
the  Greek  emperor,  impressed  all  with  a  lively  hope  of 
the  speedy  exten8ion  of  the  Gospel  in  a  region  hitherto 
regarded  aa  hopelessly  lost  to  Christianity.  They  are 
printed  in  Assemani^s  Bibliotheca  OrientcUis,  The  ear- 
liest mention  of  Prester  John  is  in  the  narratiye  of  the 
Franciscan  father  John  Carpini,  who  was  sent  by  pope 
Innocent  lY  to  the  court  of  Batd  Khan  of  Kiptchak, 
the  grandaon  of  Genghis  Khan.  Father  Carpini  sup- 
posed  Łhat  Prester  John's  kingdom  lay  still  further  to 
the  east,  but  he  did  not  proeecute  the  search.  This  was 
reseryed  for  a  member  of  the  same  order,  father  Rubm- 
quis,  who  was  sent  as  a  missionary  into  Tartary  by  St 
Louis,  and,  haying  reached  the  camp  of  Batii  Khan,  was 
by  him  sent  forward  to  Karakorum,  the  seat  of  the 
suppoeed  Prester  John.  He  failed,  however,  of  his  hope 
of  finding  such  a  personage,  the  Khagan  of  Karakorum, 
Mangil,  being  still  an  unbelieyer;  and  his  intercourse 
with  the  Nestorian  missionaries  whom  he  found  estab- 
lished  there  satisfied  him  that  the  accounts  were  griev- 
ously  exaggerated.  His  narratiye,  which  is  printed  in 
Purchas's  CoUection,  Łs  one  of  the  most  interesting 
among  those  of  mediieyal  trayellers.  Under  the  same 
yague  notion  of  the  exi8tence  of  a  Christian  prince  and 
a  Christian  kingdom  in  the  East,  the  Portuguese  sought 
for  traces  of  Prester  John  in  their  newly-acquired  In- 
dian teiritory  in  the  15th  century.  A  similar  notion 
preyailed  as  to  the  Christian  kingdom  of  Ab^^ssinia, 
which,  in  the  hope  of  findbig  Prester  John,  was  yisited 
so  late  as  the  rdgn  of  John  II  of  Portugal  (1481-95)  by 
Pedro  Coyilham  and  Alfonzo  di  Payya,  the  formejr  of 
whom  mairied  and  settled  in  the  country.r— Chambers, 
Cydop.  s.  V,  See  Gieseler's  Kirchengeschicht^f  III,  iii, 
43 ;  Kitter^s  Erdkunde  von  Ańm,  i,  283  8q. :  Schmidt, 
Forsehungen  im  Gebiete  d,  dlłeren  BUdungsffesch,  d.  Mon^ 
goleń  und  Tubełer  (Petersb.  1824),  p.  162, 

John  PuppER.    See  Goch. 

John  PuNGENs  AsiNUiŁ    See  John  of  Paris. 

John  Raithuensis  or  ILutuknus,  i.  e.  of  Raithut 
OTJRaithu  {tov  'PaY^oiź),  hcgumenos  or  abbot  of  a  mon- 
astery  at  Elim,  or  the  Śerenty  Springs,  on  the  western 
coasŁ  of  the  peninsula  of  Mount  Sinai,  llourished  in  the 
6th  century.  He  is  celebrated  on  account  of  the  friend- 
ly  relations  he  sustained  and  the  influence  he  ezeited 


oyer  JcAm  the  Scholar,  or  John  Oiuacosi  It  wn  al 
the  deaire  of  Raithaenais  that  Climacns  wroce  the  wodc 
KkifuiĘ  or  Scala  Paradmj  ftom  which  he  deriyes  hia 
name,  and  to  which  Raithnenais  wiote  a  ComtnemdaHo 
and  Seholicu  The  'BarurroA^  rov  ayŁov  'littawow  roi 
iiyovfikvov  TOV  *Pa(dov,  Litterm  Joanmt  Raitkttemtia^ 
addressed  to  Climacns,  requesting  him  to  undertake  the 
work,  and  the  answer  of  CHimacos  are  giyen  by  Kadenia 
in  the  original  Greek,  with  a  Latań  yersion,  in  hia  eda« 
tion  of  the  works  of  aimacus  (Paria,  1688,  foL).  Thia 
yersion  of  the  Littens  of  Raithuensis,  and  a  Latin  yer-  ' 
sion  of  his  Commendatio  and  SchoUa,  are  giyen  in  t»-> 
rious  edltions  of  the  Bibliotheca  Pairutn :  the  UUerm  in 
yoL  iii,  ediL  Paris,  1575;  the  lAUera  and  Commendatio^ 
ycL  y,  edit  Paris,  1589  and  1654 ;  the  LUUrtB,  EpiMcia^ 
Commendatio,  and  SchoUa,  in  yoL  yi,  pt  ii,  ed.  CoŁogne, 
1618,  and  yoL  x,  ed.  Lyme,  1677.  See  Fabricitts,  BM, 
Gr,  ix,  523-524 ;  Ittigius,  De  BHUioth,  Po^ncnk— Smitha 
DiaU  Gr.  and  Bom.  Biog.  ii,  601. 

John  OF  RAyzNNA.    See  Nicholas  I;  Ratkhsa« 

John  THE  RscŁusE,    Sce  John  Kiciota. 

John  DE  LA  RocHELUE,  a  Floich  theok>gian,  was 
bom  in  the  early  part  of  the  13th  century,  probably  in 
the  city  of  La  Rochelle.  He  joined  the  Franciscans, 
and  studied  under  AIexander  de  Hales,  whom  he  800 
ceeded  in  1238,  but  reaigned  in  1253  in  fayor  of  SlBo- 
nayentunu  He  died  at  Paris  in  1271,  acooiding  to  Lue 
Wadding.  John  de  la  Rochelle  was  a  suocessful  teach- 
er,  yet  his  works  did  not  enjoy  much  renown,  probably 
because  he  did  not  foUow  the  mystical  tendency  of  the 
times.  Among  his  works  we  notice  oommentaries  on  a 
number  of  the  books  of  the  Bibie;  sermons,  presenred 
in  the  MS.  collections  of  diyers  libraries,  chiefly  in  that 
of  Troyes,  France;  De  Amma^  MSS.  in  the  libraiy  of 
St.Yictor;  and  he  is  aiso  oonńdered  the  anthor  of  aome 
other  works,  but  on  doubtful  grounda.  He  is  eapedaSy 
deserying  of  notice  as  one  of  the  first^  if  not  the  first, 
who  attempted  to  explain  Aristotle^s  Hcpć  ^tf^^.  t 
task  of  which  he  ably  dispoeed.  Thomas  Aąainaa  prob- 
ably ayailed  himself  of  this  work.  See  Cas.  Oudin,  Dt 
Script,  Eccles, ;  Nisłoire  Litt.  de  la  FrcoKCy  xix,  171 ;  B, 
Haurćau,  De  la  Philotophie  Scolcułigue^  i,  475;  Hoefer, 
youv.  Biog.  GhUrak,  xxyi,  548.     (J.  N.  P.) 

John  OF  RuFEscissA  or  RoguETAiLLADE,  a  French 
Frandscan,  who  flourished  near  the  middłe  of  the  14th 
century,  at  Aurillac,  in  Auyeigne,  is  noted  for  his  seveie 
denunciations  of  the  gross  immozmlitiea  of  the  cleigy  of 
the  Roman  Church  in  his  day.  He  was  especially  op- 
posed  to  the  court  at  Ayignon,  and  hesitatcd  not  to 
brand  the  whole  papai  court  as  the  seat  of  a  great 
whoredom.  Popee  Clement  VI  and  Innocent  TI  im- 
prisoned  him  on  account  of  his  continued  remonstramea 
and  prophesying,  but  eyen  while  in  prison  he  wrote 
much  against  the  papai  court  and  the  dergy.  He  died 
while  in  prison,  but  the  cause  of  his  death  is  not  kaown. 
His  works  of  interest  are,  (1)  Yodemecum  in  trUndo' 
tione  (in  Ed.  Brown's  addition  to  OrturU  Gratii/atcic, 
rer,  €xpectandar,  ei/ugiendar.  London,  1690),  wheiein  he 
handles  the  French  clergy  without  gk>yea,  and  propfa^ 
sies  much  trouble  to  their  natiye  land  on  account  of 
their  sins : — (2)  A  Commentary  on  the  prophecies  of  the 
hermit  Cyril  of  Mount  Carmel  and  of  abbot  Jo«chim 
(q.  y.).  See  Trithemius,  De  acript.  Ecdet,  c.  611  (in  Fa- 
bricius,  Bib,  Ecd.  pt.  ii,  p.  145) ;  Wolfius,  LectL  memorak 
cent.  xiy,  p.  623  sq. ;  Fuhrmann,  Handw,  der  Kir^en^ 
gesch,  ii,  482 ;  Aschbach,  Kirdu-Ler,  iii,  565.    (J.  H. W.) 

John  OF  Sałisburt,  an  eminent  English  pielatc^ 
was  bom  at  Salisbury  (old  Sarum)  about  Ilia  Ha 
was  first  educated  at  Oxford,  and  in  1186  went  to  Fniiee^ 
where  he  continued  his  stodiea  under  Abelard,  and 
many  other  celebrated  French  diyines  of  that  age. 
About  1151  he  retumed  to  England,  and  was  appońited 
chaplain  of  Theobald,  archbishop  of  Canterbuiy.  ScDt 
on  a  misrton  to  pope  Hadrian  IT  in  1156,  he  openly  ap- 
proached  the  latter  on  the  abuaes  of  the  Church  and  of 
the  papaqy»  thoogh  always  an  eameat  adFocate  e£  te 


JOHN 


977 


JOHN 


unity  and  liberty  of  the  Cburch,  and  the  independenoe 
of  mc  epiacopate  from  the  secular  princea.  He  was  an 
intimate  fiiend  and  admirer  of  Thomas  h  Becket,  whooe 
cauae  he  espotued  warmly,  and  whom  he  foUowed  into 
«xile  leturning  only  to  England  with  him  in  1170,  and 
afler  his  death  aecured  his  canonization.  John  was 
cailed  Beckefs  eye  and  arm.  In  1176  he  was  appointed 
bishop  of  Chartres,  and  died  aboot  1180.  His  works, 
which  evince  positiye  Realistic  tendencies,  and  bear  evi- 
<lence  of  fruitfulgenius,  soand  understanding,  and  great 
eradition,  are,  Połicraiicus  t.  de  nugis  curialium  et  p«(i- 
gii»  phiiośopkorum  (Leydcn,  1691)  (an  exeellent  treatise 
on  the  eroployments,  dutiea,  Yirtues,  and  yices  of  great 
men — a  curious  and  yaluable  monument  of  the  litera- 
turę of  John  of  Salisbnry'8  time)* — Metalofficus  (Leyd. 
1610,  Amst.  1664),  an  exhibition  of  tnie  and  false  sci- 
ence:— Enthetiau  de  dognuUe  phiiosophorum  (pub.  by 
Chr.  Petersen,  Ilamb.  1843)  ^-  VUa  ac  Paatio  S.  Thoma 
(a  Life  of  Thomas  k  fiecket),  etc  His  coUective  works 
haye  bcen  published  by  J.  A.  Giles  (Lond.  1848,  5  yola. 
8vo).  See  H.  Reuter,  J.  von  SaUtbury  (BerL  1842);  J. 
Schmidt,  Joan  Parr.  Saritb,,  etc  (1888) ;  Ilitt,  JMi.  (2e 
la  Frcmee,  etc,  xiy,  89  8q. ;  Kitter,  Geadi,  d,  Philos,  yii, 
606 ;  Darling,  Cychp.  BiUiogr,  s.  y.    See  Bbcket  ;  Pa- 

PACY. 

John  lU,  the  patriarch,  sumamed  the  Schołab  (1), 
was  bom  at  Sirimis,  near  Antioch,  towards  the  raiddle 
of  the  6th  century.  He  became  sncceasiyely  attomey, 
then  presbyter  of  Antioch,  and  finally,  in  665,  patriarch 
of  Constantinople  under  Justinian  I.  He  died  in  677. 
He  prepared  a  large  CoUecHo  ccmonum  under  fifty  head- 
ings,  which  became  anthoritatiye  in  the  whole  Greek 
Church.  He  is  also  considered  as  the  author  of  a  col- 
lection  of  ecclesiastical  rules  and  regulations  under  the 
title  Nomocanon  (both  in  Jnstelli,  BibliotA.jurit  cano- 
ntci  [Pazis,  1662],  ii,  499,  603,  660).  He  is  also  said  to 
haye  deliyered  a  dissertation  on  the  doctrine  of  the 
Tiinity  which  inyolyed  him  in  a  controversy  with  the 
renowned  so-oalled  Tritheist  John  Philoponus  (Phot 
Cod,  76). 

John  THR  Scholar  (2)  (Johannes  Scholasticcb 
or  Climacus),  «  monk  of  the  latter  half  of  the  6th  cen- 
tury, was  a  zealous  partisan  of  monastic  life,  and  became 
abbot  of  a  conyent  on  Mount  SinaL  He  died  there 
about  606.  He  wrote  K\ifiaĘ  tou  napaS(iaoVf  an  as- 
cetic  mystical  work  (Latin,  Scala  paradwi,  Ambroeins, 
Yenlce,  1631,  etc),  which  was  greatly  celebrated  and 
widely  circulated  among  Greek  monks  for  centuries  af- 
tcr  his  death : — Liber  ad  rtligiosum  potforem^  qui  est  de 
offióo  canobiarcha  (pubL  by  Matth.  Rader,  1606).  A 
collection  of  his  works  in  Greek  and  Latin  has  been  pub- 
lished by  Matth.  Rader  (Paris,  1683)^-Pierer,  Univers, 
Lex,B.y, 

John  ScoTUS  Eriqexa«    See  Scorus. 

John  OF  ScYTHOPOLis,  a  Greek  ecclesiastical  writer, 
who  in  all  probability  fiourished  in  the  latter  part  of 
the  5th  century  or  the  beginning  of  the  6th,  wrote  a 
work  against  the  followcrs  of  fiutyches  and  Dioscorus, 
entitled  Kara  rufv  a7ro(TXMrrtSv  Trjc  UKKfjoiac,  Contra 
deaertores  ecdeeieB,  It  was  diyided  into  twelve  parts, 
and  was  undertaken  at  the  suggestion  of  a  certain  prel- 
ate,  one  Julianus,  in  reply  to  an  anon3rmous  Eutychian 
writer,  who  had  published  a  book  deoeitfully  entitled 
Kara  Neffropiwv,  Athemu  Nestorium,  and  whom  Pbo- 
tius  {Bibl.  Cod.  96, 107)  supposed  to  be  Basilius,  a  pre»- 
b3rter  of  Cilicia.  This  Basilius  wrote  a  reply  to  John 
in  vcry  abusiye  style,  charging  him,  among  many  other 
things,  with  being  a  Manichmui,  and  with  restricting 
Lent  to  a  period  of  three  weeks,  and  not  abstaining  from 
flesh  even  in  that  shortened  peńod.  Certain  TlapaBi- 
auCf  Schoiia,  to  the  works  of  the  pteudo  DUmyńus  A  re- 
opiMcitOf  which  Usher  has  obeeryed  to  be  mingled  in 
the  printed  editions  of  Dionyslus  with  the  Scholia  oj" 
SL  Maximu$f  haye  been  ascribed  to  John  of  Scythopo- 
lis.  Anastasius  Bibliothecarius,  In  the  8th  century, 
madę  a  Latin  translation  of  these  mingled  scholia,  not 
IV.-Qqq 


now  extant,  in  which  he  profesaed  to  distinguuh  those 
of  MaEimus  from  those  of  John  by  the  mark  of  a  cross. 
Fabricius  (BtW.  Gr,  yii,  9;  x,  707,  710)  identifies  the 
Scholia  of  John  with  the  Commentarii  in  Dionyrium 
Areopagitam  cited  by  John  Cyparissiota  as  by  Diony- 
sius  of  Alexandria.  See  Usher,  Distert,  de  ScripU$  Di- 
omfs,  Areop,  suppositis,  p.  299,  subjoined  to  his  Historia 
Dogmatica  de  Scripłoris  Yemaculie,  etc  (London,  1689, 
4to) ;  Caye,  Hitt,  Litt,  i,  466^— Smith,  Diet,  of  Gr.  and 
Bom,  Liog,  ii,  602. 

John  OF  Talaia  or  Tałaida  (otherwise  Tabernim- 
oto,  Ta(iłwt<ruarric,  from  the  monasteiy  of  Tabenna, 
near  Alexandria ;  or  o/A  kzandriay  from  his  patriarchal 
see;  or  fh>m  the  offices  which  he  had  preyiously  held, 
eteonomus  [oiKÓpofioc]  and  presbyter),  a  celebrated  ec- 
desiastic  in  the  Eastem  Church,  was  one  of  the  dep- 
utation  sent  by  Salofaciolus,  the  twenty-seyenth  patri- 
arch of  Alexandria  (A.D.  460-482),  shortly  before  his 
decease,  to  the  emperor  Zeno,  to  secuie  his  leaye  for  a 
free  dection  of  the  next  patriarch  from  among  the  de- 
fenders  of  the  Coundl  of  Chalcedon  by  the  ciergy  and 
laity  of  Alexandria.  **  The  emperor,''  says  Neale  {Easł, 
Church  [ilferofid],  ii,  18),  "receiyed  the  deputies  gra- 
dously,  complied  with  their  reąnest,  and  in  the  letter 
which  he  gaye  them  by  way  of  reply  tpohe  atrongly  in 
fanor  ofJohn,^  Soon  after  the  return  of  John,  Timo- 
theus  Salofadolus  died,  and  John  was  tmanimously  dect- 
ed  to  succeed  him,  but  was  almost  immediately  expelled 
from  his  see  by  order  of  the  emperor.  The  cause  of  his 
expulsion  is  differently  stated.  Liberatus  says  that  ho 
was  expelled  mainly  through  the  jealousy  of  Acacius, 
patriarch  of  Constantinople,  to  whom,  on  different  occa- 
ńons,  he  had  failed  in  paying  due  attention.  According 
to  Eyagrius,  who  quotes  Zacharias  as  his  authority.  he 
was  detected  in  haying  procnred  his  own  dection  by 
bribery,  and  had  broken  an  oath  which  he  had  taken 
before  Zeno  not  to  seek  for  himself  the  patriarchate. 
But  Neale  thinks  it  doubtful  whethcr  John  eyer  took 
such  an  oath,  and  holds  that,  eyen  if  he  had,  he  can  see 
no  reason  for  the  harshness  with  which  he  was  treated, 
and  for  his  ejection  from  the  see,  so  long  as  it  was  fredy 
proffered  to  him  (which  seems  elear  from  the  ynammoiu 
election).  The  tnie  reason  seems  to  be  John*8  cardess 
delay  of  the  announcement  of  his  dection  to  the  patri- 
arch of  Constantinople,  scnding  the  message  by  Dlus, 
who  was  then  In  Antioch,  instead  of  dispatching  a  me»- 
senger  direct,  as  he  had  done  in  the  case  of  Romę  and 
Antioch,  thereby  proyoking  the  patriarch  of  Constanti- 
nople, also  his  selection  of  Illus  for  the  messengei;  when 
the  latter  was  then  the  object  of  jealousy  and  suspidon 
to  Zeno,  if  not  actually  in  rebdlion  against  him.  John, 
expelled  from  Alexandria,  first  resorted  to  lUus,  then  to 
Antioch ;  and  haying,  through  Illus's  intenrention,  ob- 
tained  from  the  patriarch  of  Antioch  and  his  suffragans 
a  synodical  letter  commending  him  to  pope*  Simplicius, 
departed  to  Romę  to  plead  his  cause  there  in  person. 
Simplicius,  with  the  usual  papai  jealousy  of  the  patri- 
archs  of  Constantinople,  took  the  side  of  John ;  but  uei- 
ther  the  exertions  of  Simplicius  nor  those  of  his  suc> 
cessor  Fdix  could  obtain  the  restoration  of  the  banished 
patriaroh,  and  John  finally  accepted  from  Fdix  the 
bishopric  of  Nola,  in  Campania,  which  he  hdd  seyeral 
yeąrs,  and  at  last  died  peaceably  (the  precise  datę  of  his 
decease  is  not  known).  John  (whom  Theophanes  ex^ 
tols  for  his  piety  and  orthodoxy)  wrote  Dpóc  riKaaiop 
Tbv  'Pwfiiję  airoAoyfa,  Ad  Gelasium  Papatn  Apologia, 
in  which  he  anathematized  Pdagianism,  as  well  as  its 
defenders  Pehigius  and  Cdestius,  and  their  successor  Ju- 
lianna. ITie  work,  which  is  notioed  by  Photius,  is  not 
extant  See  Tlllemont,  Mim,  yoL  xvi ;  Caye,  IJi»t.  Litt, 
i,  446.— Smith,  Diet,  Gr,  and  Bom,  Biog,  ii,  602;  Neale, 
Hist,  East,  Ch,  {Alex,)  ii,  18  są. 

John,  sumamed  the  Teuton,  from  his  nationality, 
abbot  of  St,Victor,  was  a  naŁive  of  the  diocese  of  Trfeyes. 
He  studied'at  Paris,  joined  the  canon  regulars  of  St. 
Yictor,  and  became  their  abbot  in  1203.    He  was  one 


JOHN 


978 


JOHN 


of  tho  ablest  of  Łhe  gloasaioret  (q.  y.)  on  canon  law,  and 
appears  to  haye  exerted  great  influence  in  generał  oyer 
thc  eccleaiastical  af&iirs  of  hU  Łime,  and  to  haye  been  in 
preat  favor  both  with  the  pope  and  with  the  king  of 
France.  He  died  at  Paris  Noy.  28,  1229.  He  left 
thirty-aeyen  scnnona,  which  are  preseryed  among  the 
MSS.  of  the  Imperial  Library  at  Paris.  (Two  Domin- 
ican  monks  of  like  name  ilourifihed  in  the  latter  half  of 
the  13th  and  the  first  half  of  the  14th  century.)  See 
Ceaalre  d^Heisterbah,  lUusłr,  Mirac.  et  ffigłoire  Memor. 
lib,  vi,  c  12;  Jacąues  de  Vitiy,  //wf.  OccidenłaL  c  24; 
Ilisł.  LiU.  de  la  France,  xviii,  67?  GaUia  ChrisL  yoL  x, 
col.  673 ;  Hoefer,  Nouv.  Biog,  Generale,  xxvi,  647. 
.  John,  archbishop  of  Thessaix)nica,  who  ilourished 
in  the  7th  century,  is  noted  as  a  stout  defender  of  the 
orthodox  faith  against  the  Monothelites.  He  attended 
as  papai  legate  the  third  Constantinopolitan  (8ixth 
<ecumenical)  Council  (A.D.  680),  and  in  that  character 
subscribed  the  Acta  of  the  oouncil  (Concilia,  vdL  yi,  ool. 
1058,  ed.  Labbe ;  yoL  iii,  coL  1425,  ecL  Hardouin ;  yoL  xi, 
col  639,  ed.  Mansi).  The  time  of  his  death  is  alto- 
gether  uncertain.  He  wrote  (1)  £i'c  rdc  fivpo^ópovc 
ywalKuCj  In  mulieres  Jereates  ungtunła,  a  discourse  or 
treatiae  in  which  he  argues  that  there  is  no  contradic- 
tion  in  the  seyeral  accounts  of  the  resurrection  of  Christ 
given  by  the  four  eyangelists.  This  piece  appears  to 
haye  been  legarded  by  some  as  a  work  of  Chrysostom, 
and  was  first  published  (but  frora  a  mutilated  and  cor- 
rupt  text)  by  Savile  in  his  edition  of  Chrysostom  (y, 
740,  Eton.  1610,  foL),  thongh  with  an  expre8sion  of 
doubt  as  to  its  genuineness.  It  was  subsequently  print- 
ed  morę  correctly  in  the  Novum  Aucłarium  of  Combefls 
(yoL  i,  Paris,  1648,  folio),  and  by  him  assigned  to  the 
right  author.  It  is  giveii  in  a  mutilated  form  in  Mont- 
faucon^s  edition  of  Chrysostom  among  the  Spuria,  yiii, 
159  (Paris,  1718,  foL),  or  in  yiii,  816  of  the  8vo  reprint 
(Paris,  1839).  It  is  also  giyen  in  the  Sibliotheca  Pa- 
trum  of  GaUandius,  xiii,  185,  etc.  A  Latin  yersion  is 
giyen  in  the  Bibliotheca  Patnim,  yoL  xii  (Lyons,  1677) : 
— (2)  Aóyoc,  OraiiOy  of  which  a  considerable  extract 
was  read  by  Nicolaus,  bishop  of  Cyzicus,  at  the  second 
Nicenc  (seyenth  oocumenical)  Council,  and  is  printed 
in  the  Concilia,  yoL  yii,  col.  353,  ed.  Labbe ;  yoL  iy,  coL 
292,  ed.  Hardouin;  yol.  xiii,  coL  163,  ed.  Mansi ;  and  by 
GaUandius  in  his  Bibliotheca  Pairum,  xiii,  196.  See 
Cave,  I/iM.  LiU.  i»  697;  Fabricius.  BibL  Grac,  x,  250.— 
Smith,  Diet.  Gr.  and  Rom,  Biog,  ii,  603. 

John  OF  TiTRRKCRBMATA.      See  TURRISCRBMATA. 

John  OF  Wesel.    See  Wesel. 

John  OF  Wessel.    See  Wessel. 

John  I,  pope  of  Romę,  a  Tuscan  by  birth,  ascended 
the  papai  throne  Aug.  13,  623.  About  this  time  the 
bigoted  Eastem  emperor  Justus  II  had  issued  an  edict 
against  heretics  of  all  denominations,  commanding  them 
to  be  put  to  death  wherever  found  in  his  dominions; 
but,  as  it  was  principally  aimed  against  the  detested 
^lanichaeans,  all  went  well  until,  in  524,  the  emperor  is- 
sued another  edict,  this  time  against  the  Arians  of  Italy. 
Their  patron  Theodoric,  king  of  the  Ostrogoths,  was  in- 
duced  to  intercede  for  them  in  Byzantium,  and  he  des- 
patched  an  embassy  for  this  purpose,  headed  by  thc 
orthodox  pope  John  himself,  who  had  thus  to  plead  a 
cause  for  which  he  had  no  sympathy.  The  latter  prom- 
ised,  in  undertaking  the  mission,  to  procure  the  revoca- 
tion  of  the  edict,  and  in  this  he  succeeded,  but,  failing 
to  procure  also  the  emperor*s  permission  for  all  those 
who  had  forsaken  Arianism  unwillingly  to  return  to 
their  former  faith,  and  Theodoric  fearing  that  the  whole 
work  on  the  part  of  the  pope  was  a  piece  of  deception, 
and  that  the  Romans,  with  the  bishop  at  their  head, 
instead  of  seeking  relief  from  the  intolerance  of  Greek 
orthodoxy,  soUcited  aid  against  the  Goths,  imprisoned 
the  pope  on  his  arriyal  at  Rayenna,  where  he  died,  May 
18,  526.  A  Roman  tradition  reports,  not  ^yithout  some 
oomplacency,  that  in  Constantinople  the  enl)>eror  bowed 
down  before  the  bishop  of  Romę,  and  that  at  high  mass 


the  fleat  of  the  latter,  by  his  special  reąnest,  was  niaed 
aboye  that  of  the  patciarch ;  seemingly,  of  couik,  a 
conoession  of  superiority  to  the  Romiui  see.  John  is 
numbered  among  the  martyra.  Two  letters  aie  ascńbed 
to  him  by  Baronius  and  othezs,  but  they  are  now  geoef- 
ally  rejected.  See  Bower,  HitL  ofthe  Pepee,  ii,  312  Gq.; 
Riddle,  Papaey,  i,  199. 

John  U,  Pope,  a  Roman  by  biith,  sumamed  Mn* 
curitu,  sucoeeded  Bonifaoe  U  in  the  Roman  see  in  532, 
being  elected  by  the  clergy  and  the  people  of  Romę  aftei 
considerable  agitation  and  many  timoniacal  practioes, 
and  confirmed  by  king  Athalaric,  for  which  con&mstion 
a  certain  payment  was  fixed  by  an  edict  of  the  same 
king.  The  emperor  Jnstinian,  in  a  letter  addressed  to 
him  shortly  afler  his  accesaion,  after  eamest  assnianctt 
of  his  endeayor  to  nnite  the  Western  and  iMiem 
churches,  makes  fuU  oonfeeaion  of  superior  power  be- 
longing  to  the  Roman  hierarchy,  designating  him  as 
"  the  head  of  the  holy  Chorch."'  The  only  other  im- 
portant  eyents  in  his  lifo  are  his  dedsion  on  the  Tiini^ 
ąuestion  in  fayor  of  Jnstinian  (q.  y.)  [see  Ackemet^J, 
and  in  the  case  of  the  bishop  of  Riez  (q.  y.).  He  died 
in  585.  See  Bower,  Ilist,  o/ the  Pcpes,  ii,  333  8q. ;  Rid- 
dle, Papaey,  i,  203. 

John  IH,  Pope,  a  natiye  of  Romę,  was  elected  to 
sucoeed  Pelagius  I  in  560,  and  was  confirmed  by  the 
exarch  of  Rayenna  in  the  name  of  the  emperor  Justin- 
ian.  like  many  of  his  predeoessors,  he  used  his  poweis 
mainly  for  the  aggrandizement  of  the  l^oman  see.  He 
is  noted  for  his  interferenoe  in  behalf  of  the  two  French 
bishops  of  Embnin  and  of  Gap,  who  had  been  depoecd 
by  local  councils  for  improper  oonduct.  Though  known 
to  be  guilty,  he  ordered  their  restoration,  which  Gon- 
tram,  the  Burgundian  king,  was  only  too  happy  to  cn- 
foroe  in  opposition  to  the  French  clergy.  Bat  the  Gal- 
lican  Church,  which  had  with  yery  greac  hesitaocy 
permitted  the  restoration  ofthe  guilty  men,  soon  pro%-e(i 
them  to  be  unworthy  of  eccleaiastical  office,  and  a  new 
French  oouncil  confirmed  their  preyious  depońtion. 
John  died  in  574.  See  Riddle,  Papaey,  i,  210;  Bower, 
IJistory  ofthe  Popes,  ii,  426  8q. 

John  ry,  Pope,  a  Dalmatian  by  biith«  was  conss- 
crated  I>ec  25,  640.  He  displayed  great  zeal  in  foond- 
ing  conyents  and  endowing  the  churches  of  Romę.  But 
he  is  noted  espcciaily  for  his  sdife  against  his  Greek 
riyaL  The  Monothelite  creed  of  the  patriarch  Seipos^ 
promulgated  by  the  emperor  Herodius  aa  tK^tmę,  was 
denounced  by  John  as  heresy,  and  condemncd  by  a 
Roman  synod  A.D.  641.  John  IY  defended  Honorios 
from  the  charge  madę  by  the  Kastem  Chnrch  that  he 
was  guilty  of  the  Monothelite  heresy,  and  Eutydiins 
informs  us  that,  before  his  death  (Octl  12,  642).  the  em- 
peror Constans  gaye  John  IV  the  promise  of  withdiaw^ 
ing  the  iK^tatę,  but  the  controyersy  continucd  uodcr  his 
successors.  Sec  Bower,  Hiatory  ofthe  Popes,  iii,  24  aif; 
Herzog,  Re<d-Encyhlop,  vi,  754. 

John  V,  Pope,  a  natiye  of  Syria,  elcyated  to  the 
papai  dignity  iu  May  or  July,  685,  hardly  ever  Icil  the 
bed  during  the  short  time  of  his  insignificant  pontificate. 
The  authenticity  of  the  letters  assigned  to  Łdm,  and  of 
the  book  De  dignOate  palUi,  has  been  contested.  He 
died  Aug.  2,  686. 

John  VI  and  VII,  Popes,  both  Greeks  by  birth, 
were  quite  insignificant  occupants  of  thc  papai  throne. 
The  former  was  consecrated  October  10,  701,  and  buiied 
January  10,  705.  He  was  defended  by  Roman  sołdieiB 
against  the  exaroh  Theophylact,  who  was  ordefed  to 
driye  him  from  the  apostolic  see.  In  a  council  whifch 
he  held  at  Romę  he  acqaitted  Wilfied,  archbi^op  of 
York,  of  seyeral  chazges  brought  against  him  by  tfae 
English  clen;^.  The  latter  (consecrated  Marcfa  1«  705, 
buried  OcL  18,  707)  is  described  as  weak  and  ^piritkaa. 
The  happiest  iUustration  of  the  weakness  of  tłie  Roman 
see  at  this  time  is  afibrded  us  in  the  action  of  this  pope^ 
who  did  not  dare  to  yenture  to  express  an  opinion  on 
the  Trullan  canon,  submitted  to  his  examioation  by  tba 


< 


JOHN 


979 


JOHN 


emperor  Justinian  II,  for  fear  of  giviiig  offence  to  some- 
body ;  and  we  do  not  wonder  that  an  able  ecclesiastical 
wiiter  of  our  day  (BuUer,  in  hia  Ch.  Historyj  i,  859)  says 
that  the  whole  peńod  from  Gregory  I  to  Gregoiy  II 
^  may  be  bńefly  designated  as  that  in  which  the  popes 
were  under  BubjecŁion  to  the  emperors  of  the  Eant  and 
their  Ueutenanta,  the  exarch8  of  Ravenna."  See  the 
Vii€B  in  Anastasius;  Bower,  History  o/ the  PopeSj  iii,  159 
8q.,  167  8q. ;  Riddle,  Papacy,  i,  305  8q. 

John  VIII,  Pope  (styled  the  ninth  by  thoae  who 
believed  in  the  story  of  pope  Joan  [q.  v.],  whom  they 
style  John  VI 11}^  a  native  of  Korne,  saoóecded  Adrian 
II  Dec  14, 872.  He  displayed  much  tact,  and  harbored 
great  schemes,  but  was  destitute  of  noble  motiyes,  and 
the  spirit  displayed  during  his  administration  is  in  keep- 
ing  with  the  ideas  of  the  pseudo-Isidorian  collection,  to 
which  his  predeoessor  Nicholas  I  had  first  ventured  to 
appeaL  John's  designs,  howerer,  found  but  a  tardy  re- 
sponse  in  the  little  minds  with  which  he  had  to  deal, 
and  the  preyalence  of  generał  anarchy  was  not  morę 
auspicions  to  their  execntion.  The  pope,  as  well  as  the 
clergy,  in  the  strife  after  power,  actuated  only  by  world- 
ly  ambition,  knew  no  other  arms  than  cunning  and  in- 
trigiie,  and  with  these  they  were  neither  able  to  control 
the  rude  powers  which  sapped  the  foundations  of  the 
Carlovingian  monarchy,  nor  to  erect  on  its  ruins  the 
fabric  of  ecclesiastical  domiuion.  When  Louis  II  died, 
875,  without  an  heir  to  his  land  and  crown,  Charles 
the  Bald  marched  hastily  into  Italy,  and  took  posses- 
sion  of  the  Italian  dominions.  Then  he  prooeeded  to 
Korne,  and  accepted  (Christmas,  875),  as  a  boon  of  the 
chair  of  St.  Peter,  the  imperial  crown,  to  which  he  had 
no  lawful  daim.  Some  Church  annalists  claim  that 
the  two  then  entered  into  a  compact  by  which  the  em- 
peror ceded  to  the  pope  the  abeolute  and  independent 
govemment  of  Korne,  a  confirmation  and  amplification 
of  Pcpin^s  douation  •,  but  documentary  proof  (and  that 
of  an  ambiguous  kind)  can  be  deduced  only  for  the  sur- 
rcnder  of  Capua  (compare  Mansi,  ConciL  xvu,  10).  By 
this  alliance  not  much  was  directly  gained  by  either 
party,  for  Charles,  haying  once  secured  his  coronation, 
cared  but  little  for  the  papai  interests;  yet  eventually 
the  manner  iu  which  Charles  had  become  possessed  of 
the  empire  and  of  Italy  increased  rery  materially  the 
papai  power,  especially  when,  in  a  moment  of  fear  for  his 
throne,  Charles  the  Bald  suffered  the  pope  to  declare 
that  to  him  had  been  intrusted  the  imperial  diadem  by 
the  only  power  on  earth  tbat  could  claira  its  disposal — 
the  yicar  of  Korne.  The  emperor,  however,  failed  to 
protect  the  papai  dominions  from  the  attacks  of  the 
Saracens.  It  is  tnie  he  at  one  time  led  an  army  against 
the  infidels  (877),  but  his  sudden  death  cut  off  all  further 
hopie  of  relief,  especially  afler  Athanasius'8  (bishop-dukc 
of  Naples)  double-handed  gamę  of  pleasing  the  pope  and 
forming  alliances  with  the  Saracens  became  known  at 
Komę,  acd  we  do  not  worder  that  the  plundering  of 
Campanla  and  the  exactions  of  John  make  Milman  say 
of  the  pope's  difficulrieH  from  this  score  that  "the 
whole  pontificate  of  John  VIII  was  a  long,  if  at  times 
intcrrupted,  agony  of  apprehcnsion  lest  Korne  should  fali 
into  the  hands  of  the  unbclieycr"  {Latin  Christianiiy,  iii, 
84).  Much  morę  prccarious  became  the  condition  of 
the  Koman  pontiff  after  the  death  of  Charles  the  Bald, 
whose  son  and  succeasor  in  the  West  Frank  dominion, 
Louis  the  Hammerer,  engaged  in  warfare  with  the  Nor- 
mans,  found  himsclf  neither  in  a  position  to  be  an  aspi- 
rant for  the  imperial  crown,  nor  to  affbrd  assistance  to 
the  yicar  of  Christcndom.  The  only  one  from  whom 
the  pope  really  receiyed  any  assurances  of  succor  was 
Carloman,  who  at  this  time,  with  an  army  in  Upper  It- 
aly, and  jttst  recognised  as  king  at  Paria,  was  aiming  at 
the  imperial  throne  against  the  French  Hue.  But,  finding 
the  pope  inore  favorably  inclined  towards  the  French,  he 
suddenly  departed,  and  left  to  his  nobles  the  disposition 
of  the  pope'8  case.  Lambert,  duke  of  Spoleto,  and  Adel- 
bert,  count  of  Tuscany,  immediately  madę  themselyes 
masteis  of  Korne,  and,  after  imprisoning  the*  pope,  com- 


pelled  the  clergy  and  the  nobles  jo  swear  allegianoe  to 
Carloman.  But  no  sooner  had  Komę  been  cleared  of  Car- 
loman'8  friends  than  the  pope  himself  set  out  for  France, 
determined  no  longer  to  conceal  his  desire  to  create  for 
himself  an  emperor  whom  all  the  world  should  recognise 
as  absolutely  indebted  for  the  crown  to  the  see  of  Komę 
only.  Arriyed  in  France,  the  pope  madę  Proyence  his 
refuge.  Everywhere  he  was  receiyed  with  great  re- 
spect,  but  especial  deference  was  paid  him  by  one  Boso, 
duke  of  Lombardy,  connected  with  the  imperial  house 
by  marriage,  possessed  of  great  influence  and  wealth, 
and  an  aspirant  for  the  imperial  purple.  He  succeeded 
in  winning  the  good  graces  of  the  Koman  pontiff,  and 
was  designated  for  the  yacant  throne  (comp.  the  letter  in 
Mansi,  xyii,  121).  Boso  was,  howeyer,  only  madę  king 
of  Burgundy,  as  Charles  the  Fat  proyed  too  fast  for  the 
pope ;  he  had  marched  with  a  preponderating  force  into 
Italy,  and  the  pope,  foreseeing  that  the  prince  would 
not  be  likely  to  await  his  decision  as  to  the  rights  of 
the  Carloyingians  to  the  throne,  hastencd  to  meet  him 
at  Kayenna,  and  reluctantly  (though  contriying  to  ayoid 
the  appearance  of  constraint)  placed  the  crown  upon 
the  head  of  Charles  the  Fat.  But,  if  John  failed  in 
pladng  upon  the  throne  his  own  fayorite,  he  certainly 
succeeded  eyen  now  in  exalting,  as  he  had  done  under 
Charles  the  Bald,  the  pope  aboye  the  emperor.  To  this, 
as  well  as  to  his  efforts  to  make  the  clergy  independent 
of  the  temporal  princes,  may  be  ascribed  his  popiilarity 
as  a  pope,  and  the  magnificent  reception  he  enjoyed  on 
his  yisit  to  France.  "At  the  Coundl  of  Kayenna  in 
877,  and  again  at  another  at  Troyes,  which  he  conyened 
in  the  following  year,  during  his  stay  in  France,  he  pro- 
pounded  seyenl  decrees,  to  the  astonishment  of  the 
bishops  themselyes,  daiming  for  them  yarious  righta 
and  priyileges  which  they  had  not  themselyes  hitherto 
yentured  to  demand.  This  proceeding  produced  upon 
their  minds  the  greater  impression,  inasmuch  as  they 
had  long  been  dcsirons  of  adyancing  their  social  posi- 
tion. Neyer  until  now  had  they  been  madę  aware  of 
the  points  at  which  they  ought  to  aim  in  order  to  se- 
cure  for  themselyes  the  highest  rank  and  influence  in 
the  State,  and  the  pontiff  who  gaye  them  powerful  as- 
sistance in  this  weighty  affair  could  not  but  be  highly 
popular  aroong  them.  It  was  perhaps  by  this  meas- 
ure  that  John  principally  contributed  to  the  strcngth- 
ening  of  the  papacy  to  such  an  extent  that  it  remained 
without  any  considerable  loss  during  a  long  succession 
of  unworthy,  or  impotent  and  inactiye  popes,  who  occu- 
pied  and  disgraced  the  see  during  the  troubles  which 
shook  Italy  for  morę  than  half  a  century"  (Kiddle,  Pa- 
paąff  ii,  81,  32),  The  controyersy  with  the  Eastem 
Church  on  the  question  of  ecclesiastical  jurisdiction  oyer 
Bułgaria  was  continued  under  John.  At  first  he  in- 
dined  to  fayor  Photius  (q.  y.),  and  acknowledged  him 
as  patriarch  of  Constantinople,  but  he  was  afterwards 
obligcd  to  excommunicate  him,  as  the  Latin  party  se- 
yerely  condemned  his  course.  Ffoulkes  (ChristendanCi 
Division,  ii,  p.  yii)  says  that  the  fable  of  pope  Joan  must 
haye  originated  with  the  Latin  party  of  this  time,  and 
that  it  was  aimed  agauist  John  YIII,  "  not  because  his 
theology  was  defectiye,  or  his  life  imnioral,  or  his  nile 
arbitrary,  but  solely  because  he  had  had  the  courage, 
the  manlinetSi  to  appreciate  the  abilities  and  desire  to 
cultiyate  the  friendiship  of  the  great  patriarch  his  broth- 
er."  But  his  excommunication  of  Photius  was  by  no 
means  the  only  one  he  pronounced.  Indeed,  "no  pope 
was  morę  prodigal  of  excommunion  than  John  YIIL 
Of  his  letters,  above  300  (found  in  Mansi,  ConciUOf  yoL 
xyi),  it  is  remarkable  how  large  a  proportion  threaten, 
inflict,  or  at  least  allude  to  this  last  exercise  of  sacerdo- 
tal  powef  *  (Milman,  Lat.  Christianifyj  iii,  92  sq.).  John 
found  his  death,  as  the  A  ttnalet  Fuldentet  relate,  through 
a  conspiracy  of  his  own  curia.  The  assassiiis  first  tried 
poison ;  when  this  did  not  operate  quick  enough,  they 
siew  him  lyth  a  hammer,  Dec  15,  882.  See  Milman, 
Lat,  Christ,  bk.  y,  ch.  iii ;  Bower,  Uittory  ofthe  Popes,  v, 
36  sq. ;  Kiddle,  Papacy,  ii,  27  sq.;  Keichel,  Bom,  See  m 


JOHN 


980 


JOHN 


the  Middle  Agei,  p.  109  są. ;  Gieseler,  EccUi.  TTUt  ii,  347 ; 
Giesebrecht,  Gcsch,  der  deutscken  Kaiserzeky  i,  189  sq. ; 
Herzog,  Real-Encyldop,  vi,  754 ;  Muratori,  Scńptt,  iii,  pt. 
i,  ii.     (J.H.W.) 

John  IZ,  Pope,  a  Benedictine  of  Tivoli,  was  con- 
secrated  to  the  pontifical  office  June,  898.  He  held  two 
councils,  one  at  St.Peter'8,  where  the  wrong  done  to  his 
badly-abused  predecesaor  Fonnosus  was  redreased ;  the 
other  at  Bayenna,  which  passed  an  act  for  the  better 
protectioii  of  Church  property  against  thięyes  and  in- 
cendiaries.  John  displayed  an  honest  zeal  in  defending 
the  rights  and  regulating  the  disdpline  of  the  Church. 
His  rival  for  the  papai  throne,  Se^lius  (q.v.),  he  suo- 
cessfully  combated,  and,  by  authority  of  a  council  he 
had  called,  escommunicated  him,  with  seyeral  other  ec- 
clesiastical  accessories.  John  died  July,  900.  On  his 
life,  see  Muratori,  vol.  iii,  pt.  ii ;  on  the  synods,  Mansi, 
YoL  xviii.  See  aiso  Milman,  Laiin  Chriitiamtjf,  iii,  112 
sq. ;  Bower,  Hiatory  oftke  Popes,  v,  77  są, 

John  Z,  Pope,  according  to  liutprand  (discredited 
by  Milman,  Laiin  Christianiiyy  iii,  163),  owed  his  pro- 
motion  in  ecclesiastical  offioes  to  the  dissolute  Theodora 
(q.  V.),  who,  attracted  by  his  handsome  figurę,  madę 
him  sucoessiyely  archbishop  of  Bologna,  Ravenna,  and 
finally  pope  (May  16, 914).  The  profligacy  of  his  times, 
especially  in  Romę,  surpaased  that  of  the  most  degener- 
ate  period  of  paganism.  The  popes  were  merely  the 
contemptible  creatures  of  the  Roman  nobility.  But,  if 
the  archbiBhop  of  Ravenna  was  not  a  fit  example  of  pi- 
ety or  holiness  to  be  selected  for  the  spiritual  head  of 
Christendom,  **  he  appears,"  says  Milman  {Laiin  Chris- 
tianiiy,  iii,  161), "  to  have  bcen  highly  ąualified  for  the 
secular  part  of  his  office."  He  was  a  man  of  ability  and 
daring,  emineutly  needed  at  this  juncture  to  8ave  Romc 
from  beooming  the  prey  of  Moharamedan  couąucst. 
The  Saiacens  from  Africa,  who  had  landed  in  Italy  and 
fortified  themselves  near  the  banks  of  the  Łiris,  had 
madę  freąuent  irruptions  into  the  Roman  territory.  At 
first  John  contented  himself  with  inciting  the  neighbor- 
ing  dukes  to  come  to  his  defence;  but,  finding  the  aid  of 
the  two  emperors  necesBajry  to  combat  successfully  the 
Mohammedans,  he  crowned  Berenger  emperor  of  the 
West,  March  24,  916,  and,  aftcr  having  united  all  forccs 
previously  at  his  command  with  Berenger  and  the 
dukes  of  Benevento  and  Naples,  he  marched  in  person 
against  them,  and  completely  routed  and  extenninated 
them.  After  a  reign  of  fourteen  years,  this  powerful 
prelate  of  Romę  came  to  a  miserable  end  by  the  legiti- 
matę  conseąuences  of  the  same  vices  that  had  bcen  in- 
strumental  in  raising  him  to  hia  high  dignity.  Maro- 
zia,  the  daughter  of  Theodora,  anxious  to  secure  for 
herself  and  her  lover  the  govemment  of  Romę,  and  find- 
ing John  too  much  in  their  way,  surprised  him  in  the 
Łateran  palące,  and  thrust  him  into  a  prison,  where, 
flome  montha  afler,  he  died,  either  of  want  or  by  some 
morę  summary  means  (A.D.  929).  Comp.  Bower,  Hisł. 
ofthe  Popes,  v,  90  są. ;  Hofler,  Die  deułfchen  Pdłute,  i,  18 ; 
Milman,  LaU  Christ,  iii,  168  sq,     (J.  H.  W.) 

John  Zł,  Pope,  a  natural  son  of  Marozia,  and,  in  all 
probability,  of  pope  Sergius  IH,  was  seated  on  St.  Pe- 
ter'8  chair  by  his  mother,  in  whosc  hands  rested  at  this 
time  (931)  the  power  to  supply  any  vacancics  in  the 
papai  chair.  Of  course  spiritiuil  govemment  was  by 
such  people  not  in  con*«ideration ;  in  fact,  Rorae  was 
now  by  all  Christendom  detested  like  a  pestiferous 
swamp.  *'  Marozia,  not  content  with  haring  bcen  the 
wife  of  a  marąuis,  the  wifc  of  a  wealŁhy  and  powerful 
duke  of  Tuscany,  perhap  •<  the  mistress  of  one,  certainly 
the  mother  of  another  pope,  looked  still  higher  in  her 
Instful  ambition;  she  must  wed  a  monarch.  To  the 
king  of  Italy  her  hand  was  offercd,  and  by  him  accepted. 
But,  if  the  Romans  had  brooked  the  nile  of  a  Roman 
woman,  they  would  not  so  readily  consent  for  her  para- 
mour,  a  foreigner,  to  rule  over  them,  and,  headed  by 
Marozia's  own  son  Alberic,  the  nobles  put  an  end  to  the 
goyemment  of  Marozia  (and  Hugh  of  Provenoe)  and  of 


pope  John  XI  by  espdling  the  formcr  and  impńsoiung 
the  latter,  who  died  of  poison,  as  is  generally  suppned, 
in  January,  936.  See  Milman,  Lat  Christ,  lii,  185  tą. ; 
Du  Cheaie,  IlisL  des  Papes,  ii,  460 ;  Aschbach,  Kircketir- 
Lex,  iii,  618 ;  Bower,  Hist,  ofthe  Popes,  v,  96  sq. 

John  "^Trr,  Pope,  a  son  of  Alberic,  and  grandson  of 
the  profligate  and  amhitious  Marozia,  whose  rices  he 
seems  to  have  inherited,  succeeded  to  the  dignity  of 
Roman  patridan  upon  the  death  of  hia  fathcr  Alberic, 
and  in  Noyembcr,  955,  after  the  death  of  Agapetua,  was 
eleyated  to  the  papai  see,  though  only  about  axxteen 
years  old.  His  own  namc  was  ÓcUyianus,  bat  aa  pope 
he  took  that  of  John  XII,  thua  inaugurating  the  prac- 
tice  which  has  ever  sińce  becn  foTlowed  by  the  popes 
of  aasuming  a  pontifical  namc.  Ambitious  to  estend 
the  boundaries  of  the  States  of  the  Church,  he  socm 
involved  himself  in  a  disastroos  war  with  Berenger 
II,  himself  fuli  of  ambition,  and  ansious  to  beoome 
master  of  Romę.  In  this  most  extreme  hour  of  need 
the  pope  hesiuted  not  to  beseech  help  from  one  whoni 
he  had  formerly  declined  to  recdve  aa  worthy  of  the 
imperial  crown,  the  emperor  Otho  L  Daring  and  in- 
domitable  as  was  the  ^pirit  of  Otho  I,  he  waa  no  aooner 
aaked  by  Romę  than  we  find  him  crossing  the  Alps 
with  a  large  army,  and,  haying  entered  Romę,  he  aerured 
to  the  pope  not  only  personal  safety,  but  also  confirm- 
ed  his  title  to  the  SUtes  of  the  Church.  The  extent 
of  thesc  pTomises,  however,  has  been  subject  to  contro- 
yersy,  and  it  is  not  without  a  reason  that  the  Tatican 
record,  by  which  Pepin's  donation  was  confinncd  and 
enlarged,  is  withheld  from  critical  scrutiny.  See  Pa- 
PACY.  At  Pavia,  already,  Otho  had  been  crowned  king 
of  Italy ,  here,  at  the  Etemal  City,  he  received  from  the 
pope  himself  the  Imperial  diadem.  •'Neyer  did  a  morę 
important  event  in  history  take  place,  making  lew  im- 
prcssion  on  those  who  witnessed  it,  and  lese  commemo- 
rated  by  subeeąuent  historiana,  than  the  coronation  of 
Otho  I  at  Romę  in  the  year  962.  By  the  coronation  of 
Charles  162  years  earlicr  the  first  foundations  had  becn 
laid  for  the  empire;  by  the  coronation  of  Otho  that  em- 
pire itaelf  was  founded  afresh,  and  from  that  time  for- 
waids  it  had  an  miinterrupted  exi8tence"  (ReicheL  Ko- 
man See  in  the  Middle  Ages,  p.  124).  For  a  short  period 
the  spiritual  and  temporal  heads  of  Christendom  seemed 
to  be  happily  united,  but  the  fickle  John,  infiucnced 
either  by  mistrust  or  jealousy,  aoon  again  intemiptcd 
that  happy  concord  by  concocting  anew  intrignes  with 
Alberia,  the  son  of  Berenger.  Rumors  of  the  treacher- 
ous  conduct  of  John  reached  the  ears  of  Otho  I,  bat  the 
noble  German  would  hardly  believe  the  reports  nntfl 
some  trustworthy  officera  whom  he  had  haatily  di*- 
patched  to  Italy  pronounced  them  truć.  The  profiigacr 
and  vices  of  the  pope  were  also  reported  to  Otho  I,  and 
the  latter  determined  to  return  to  Romę  and  depoM  the 
yicar,  if  found  guilty  of  the  charges  preferred  against 
him.  A  council  composed  of  the  first  codesiastics  of 
Germany,  France,  and  Italy  was  ąuickly  caUed  by  Otho 
I,  he  himself  presiding,  and  the  vicar  of  Christ,  accuscd 
of  the  crimes  of  murder,  adulteiy,  and  perjuiy,  T»-as  sum- 
moned  to  appear  m  defence.  Failing  to  comply  with 
the  emperor'8  reąuest,  judgment  was  pronounced,  and 
lie  was  dcposed  and  excommunicated  Dec.  4,  963,  and 
Leo  VIII  (q.  v.)  dcdared  his  auccessor.  HanDy  hail  the 
emperor  left  Romę  when  John,  supported  by  the  Ronun 
nobility,  retumcd,  conycned  another  s\Tiod  at  St,Pe- 
tor's,  and  caused  it  to  rescind  the  reaolutions  of  the  far- 
mer one.  Otho  I,  informed  of  these  outrages,  was  pn>- 
paring  for  a  return  to  Romc  for  the  third  time,  whcn 
John  suddenly  died  of  apoplexy  while  he  was  cngaged 
in  an  adulterous  intrigue,  May  14,  964.  **  He  was  a 
man  of  most  licentious  habits,  aasociating  with  women 
of  eyery  station,  and  fiUing  the  Lateran  with  the  noi^ 
profanity  of  a  brothcl."  Panviniu8,  in  a  notę  to  Plali- 
na's  account  of  pope  Joan,  suggests  that  the  licentions- 
11CS3  of  John  XII,  who,  among  his  nnmerous  mistresws, 
had  one  called  Joan,  who  cxercised  the  chief  influence 
at  Romc  during  his  pontificate,  may  haw  giv€n  lisc  to 


JOHN 


881 


JOHN 


Uie  story  of  **  pope  Joan.**  Comp.  Lnitpnnd,  Historia 
Otionisj  in  Monum,  Germ.  Script.  yóL  iii ;  Milman,  Lat, 
Christ,  iii,  176  8q.;  Neander,  Ch,  Ilistory;  Gieader,  CK 
Hist,  ii,  860;  Reichel,  See  ofRome  tu  the  Middle  A  ges, 
p.  121  8q. ;  Ridtlle,  Papacy,  ii,  89  8q.     (J.  H.  W.) 

Jolm  ZHI,  Pope,  wbo  was  madę  such  A.D.  965, 
was  of  noble  descent,  and  held,  prerioos  to  his  election, 
the  bishopric  of  NaniL  Provoking  the  yrratb  of  the 
Roman  nobility  on  aocoont  of  his  seyerity,  and  being 
a  farońte  of  the  imperial  party,  they  instigated  a  liot 
against  him,  and  finally  secored  him  as  prisoner.  llie 
pope,  howerer,  effected  his  escape,  and  retumed  to  the 
city  about  a  year  after,  when  the  emperor  himself  madę 
his  appearance,  yisiting  the  disorderly  factions  of  the 
dty  with  unmitigated  severity.  After  the  appointment 
of  a  prefect  as  representatiye  of  the  imperial  power,  Otho 
the  Great  went  to  Ravenna,  followed  by  the  pope.  Herę 
a  great  and  influential  council  was  held,  Easter,  967, 
and  fresh  guarantees  ofiercd  to  the  pontifical  chair  on 
all  the  teiritoiy  to  which  it  had  ever  been  entitled,  in- 
duding  Rayenna.  In  return  for  these  fayors,  John 
downed  the  younger  Otho  (afterwards  Otho  II)  as  em- 
peror, and  associate  king  of  Germany;  also  his  wife 
Theophania,  the  daughter  of  the  Greek  emperor.  He 
also  eyinced  his  gratefulness  by  establishing,  at  the  em- 
peror*s  expressed  desire,  a  mission  among  the  north- 
eastem  Slayonians.  John  died  in  972.  Ilis  few  letters 
are  foond  in  Mansi,  ConciL  SuppL  i,  1142,  and  Harduin, 
CaaciL  vi,  pt.  i,  639.  See  Pagi,  Brev.  Poniif.  R,  ii,  283 
8q.;  Aschbach,  ^trcA«f»-Z.«a?.  iii,  520 ;  Herzog^  ReaUEn- 
cyklop,  vi,  757, 

John  ZXV,  Pope,  who  was,  preyioos  to  his  eleya- 
tion,  Peter^  bishop  of  Pavia,  and  archchancellor  of  the 
emperor,  was  elected  pope  through  the  influence  of  Otho 
II  Ul  Noyember  or  December,  983,  in  place  of  Bon- 
iface  VII  (q.  v.).  Unfortunately,  howeyer,  his  patron 
died  at  Romę  December  7  of  the  same  year,  and  the  ex- 
pope,  encouraged  by  the  anti-empirical  party,  yentured 
to  return  the  foUowing  spring  (April,  984)  from  Con- 
stantinople,  whither  he  haid  fled,  and  proying  sufficient- 
ly  stroug  to  oyercome  John,  his  person  was  secured,  and 
he  was  imprisoned  in  the  Castle  dd  Angelo,  where  he 
was  dther  poisoned  or  star\'ed  to  death.  See  Aschbach, 
KircAen-Lerikon,  iii,  520. 

John  ZV,  Pope,  who  began  his  inglorioos  reign 
in  September,  986,  was  in  reality  only  the  puppet  of 
Crescentius,  the  tnie  goyemor  of  Romę,  for  he  presided 
and  ruled  at  the  Castle  dd  Angek)  as  patricius.  At 
one  time  John  fled  to  Tuscany,  but  at  the  interyen- 
tion  of  Otho  III  he  was  afterwards  permitted  to  return 
and  to  liye  in  the  Lateran,  but  he  remained  destitute  of 
all  authority.  By  way  of  compensation  for  his  lack  of 
power,  he  enriched  hirnwlf  and  his  rdatiyes  with  the 
reyenues  of  the  Church.  Conoeming  the  dispote  about 
the  bishopric  of  Rheims,  see  Sylyester  II.  He  died  in 
April,  996. 

Some  belieye  that  another  John,  son  of  the  Roman 
Rnpertua,  was  the  fifteenth  pontiff  under  the  name  of 
John,  and  that  the  present  John  was  the  8ixteenth  pope 
of  that  name,  holding  that  he  was  pope  four  months  af- 
ter the  muider  of  Boniface  YIU ;  but  this  is  a  yery  du- 
bions  statement,  and  is  wholly  denied  by  modem  critics. 
Comp.  Willman's  JahrbScher  des  deutschen  Reichs  unter 
Otto  III,  p.  208,  212;  Aschbach,  Kirchen^Ler,  iii,  620; 
Herzog,  Real-Encyklop,  yi,  767. 

John  XVI  (or  XVII),  Pope,  a  natiye  of  Greece,  a 
Calabrian  and  bishop  of  Piacenza,  was  appointed  in  997 
by  Crescentius,  in  opposition  to  Gregory  V ;  but  when 
Otho  III,  in  Febraary,  998,  brought  Gregory  V  back  to 
Romę,  he  imprisoned,  mutilated,  and  ill  treated  John 
most  shamefully,  and  put  to  death  Crescentius  and  his 
partisans.  See  Gregory  Y.  Though  a  riyal  pope,  and 
in  Office  only  ten  months,  John  is  generally  numbered 
in  the  series  of  the  popcs. 

John  XVII  (or  XVIII),  Pope,  succeeded  Sylyes- 
ter U  in  1003,  and  died  four  months  after  his  dection. 


John  XVIII  (or  XIX,  with  the  sumame  Fasa- 
nus)f  Pope,  succeeded  the  preceding,  and  died  about 
1009.  The  history  of  the  popes  during  this  period  is 
yery  obscure,  and  the  chronology  confused.  He  seems 
to  hayc  been  on  a  good  footing  with  the  Greek  Church, 
for  his  name  found  a  place  in  the  great  book  of  the  Con- 
stantinopolitan  Church.  See  Aschbach,  Kirchen-Ler, 
iii,  521. 

John  XIX  (or  XX),  Pope,  son  of  connt  Gregory 
of  Tuscany,  procured  the  papai  throne  by  yiolence  and 
brit>ery  after  the  decease  of  his  brother  Benedict  YIH, 
in  the  year  1024,  and  died  in  1034.  He  crowned  the 
emperor  Conrad,  but  is  especiaUy  noted  for  his  imbecil- 
ity  and  simoniacal  inclinations.  The  latter  so  much 
oontrolled  him  that  he  came  yery  near  disposing  of  the 
Roman  supremacy  oyer  the  Eastem  Choich  for  a  pecu- 
niary  consideration. 

John  XX.    See  John  XXL 


John  XXI  (who  should  really  haye  been  counted 
XX),  Pope  (whose  true  name  was  Petrus  Juliani,  car- 
dinal  bishop  of  Tusculum,  a  natiye  of  Lisbon),  was  elect- 
ed Sept.  13, 1276.  He  was  a  man  of  leaming  and  hon- 
est  intentions,  but  weak,  and  unable  to  carry  out  any 
honest  designs.  Whether  he  is  identical  with  Petrus 
Hispanus,  the  writer  of  many  medical  and  philosophical 
works,  Ib  not  certain.  His  efforts  to  unito  the  European 
powers  for  a  crusade  were  tmsuccessfuL  It  is  said  that 
he  found  his  death  May  16,  1277,  at  Yitorbo,  by  the 
falling  of  a  ceiling.    See  Herzog,  RealrEncyhlop,  yi,  758. 

John  XXII,  Pope,  one  of  the  most  cdebrated  of  the 
pontiffs  of  Ayignon,  whose  family  name  was  James  de 
Cahors,  was  dected  pope  in  1816,  on  the  death  of  Ciem- 
ent  Y.  Attempting  to  carry  out,  in  yery  altered  circum- 
stances,  the  yast  and  comprehenaiye  policy  of  Gregory 
YII  and  Innocent  III,  John  interpoeed  his  authority  in 
the  contest  for  the  imperial  crown  in  Germany  between 
Louis  of  Bayaria  and  Frederick  of  Austria,  by  not  only 
espousing  the  cause  of  the  latter,  but  eyen  excommu- 
nicatiug  his  riyaL  Public  opinion,  howeyer,  and  the 
politicai  relations  of  the  papacy  founded  npon  it,  had 
already  begun  to  change.  The  people  of  Germany  op- 
posed  this  policy,  and  encouraged  the  Diet  of  Frank- 
furt to  ignore  the  papai  action,  and  it  was  by  this' body 
declared  that  the  imperial  authority  depended  upon 
God  alone,  and  that  the  pope  had  no  temporal  author- 
ity, direct  or  indirect,  w^ithin  the  empire.  A  long  con- 
test ensued,  which  resulted  in  his  deposition.  (See  be- 
lo w.)  In  Italy  aiao  he  experienced  much  trouble. 
The  Guelphs  or  papai  party,  led  by  Robert,  king  of 
Naples,  defeated  the  Ghibdlines,  and  the  pope  excom- 
municated  Matteo  Yisconti,  the  great  leader  of  that 
party,  and  likewise  Frederick,  king  of  Sicily.  Between 
Guelphs  and  Ghibellines,  Italy  was  at  that  time  in  a 
dreadful  stato  of  confusion.  The  pope  preached  a  cru- 
sade against  Yisconti,  Cane  delia  Scala,  and  the  Este, 
as  heretics.  Robert,  with  the  assistance  of  the  pope, 
aspired  to  the  dominion  of  all  Italy,  and  the  pope  sent  a 
legate,  who,  at  the  head  of  an  army,  assisted  Robert  and 
the  other  Guelphs  against  the  Ghibellines  of  Lombardy. 
But  the  Ghibellines  had  cleyer  leaders ;  Castruccio  Cas- 
tracani,  Cane  ddla  Scala,  and  the  Yisconti  kept  the  fate 
of  the  war  in  suspensę  until  Louis  of  Bayaria  sent 
troops  to  their  assistance.  In  1327  Louis  finally  came 
himself  to  Italy,  and,  after  being  crowned  at  Milan  with 
the  iron  crown,  proceeded  to  Romę,  where  the  people 
roused  in  his  favor,  drove  away  the  papai  legate,  and 
caused  Louis  to  be  crowned  emperor  in  St.  Peter*8  by  the 
bishops  of  Yenice  and  of  Aleria.  After  the  coronation, 
Louis  held  an  assembly  in  the  square  before  the  church, 
in  which  he  summoned  John  under  his  original  name, 
James  of  Cahors,  to  appear  to  answer  the  charges  of 
heresy  and  high  treason  against  him.  After  this  mock 
dtation,  the  emperor  proceede<l  to  depose  the  pope,  and 
to  appoint  in  his  stead  Peter  de  Conrara,  a  monk  of 
Abruzzo,  who  assuroed  the  name  of  Nicholas  Y.  Louis 
also  proclaimcd  a  law,  which  was  sanctioned  by  the  peo- 


JOHN 


982 


JOHN'S,  EVE  OF  ST. 


ple  of  Romę,  to  the  effect  that  the  pope  should  residc  at 
Borne,  and,  if  absent  more  tban  three  months,  should  be 
considered  as  deposed.  These  measures,  however,  wcre 
attended  witb  little  result.  Louis  retumed  to  Gennany, 
and  the  Guelphic  predominance  at  Romę  was  restored, 
the  papai  representatiye  resuming  his  authority.  But 
John  XXII  never  personally  yisited  Romc,  having  died 
at  Avignon  in  1334,  when  he  had  accumulated  in  his 
coffers  the  enormous  sum  of  18,000,000  florins  of  gold. 
John  is  renowned  in  theological  history  as  the  author  of 
that  portion  of  the  canon  law  called  the  Extravagcmie9y 
and  also  for  the  singular  opinion  he  entertained  that  the 
just  will  not  be  admitted  to  the  beatiiic  yision  nntil 
after  the  generał  resurrection.  This  opinion  he  was 
obligcd  formally  to  retract  before  his  death  (see  Reichel, 
Roman  Seeinihe  Middle  Aget,  p.  421).  Under  his  pon- 
tificate  the  clergy  and  people  of  the  towns  were  doprived 
of  the  right  of  electing  their  bishops,  which  right  he 
reserved  to  himself  on  payment  of  certain  feca  by  the 
person  elected.  He  was  especially  rapacious  in  the  col- 
lection  of  the  Annates,  or  First  Fruits.  See  Bower,  Uia- 
tory  ofthe  Popes,  vi,  413  sq.;  Labbd,  xv,  147;  Engluh 
CyclopcBdUtf  8.  V. 

John  XXIII,  Pope,  a  native  of  Naples,  and  prcvi- 
ously  to  his  election  known  as  cardinal  Cossa,  succeeded 
Alexander  Y  in  1410.  A  man  of  great  talents,  but 
worthless  in  character,  his  reputation  as  cardinal  under 
his  predecessor  is  by  no  means  enyiablc.  Indeed,  he  is 
accused  of  haying  poitoned  Alexander  V  (q.  v.).  As  a 
pope,  he  supported  the  claims  of  Louis  of  Anjou  against 
Ladislaus,  king  of  Naples;  but  Ladislaas,  ha^^ing  de- 
feated  his  rival  in  battle,  advanced  to  Romę,  and  obliged 
John  to  flee  to  Florence.  He  then  preached  a  cru- 
sade  against  Ladislaus,  which  gave  occaaion  to  denun- 
ciations  and  invectives  from  John  Huss.  Meantime 
the  great  schism  continued,  and  Gregory,  styled  XII, 
and  Benedict,  antipopes,  divided  with  John  the  homage 
of  the  Christian  statea.  In  his  exile,  wishing  to  secure 
the  favor  of  the  emperor,  he  proposed  to  Sigismund  the 
convocation  of  a  generał  council  to  rcstore  peace  to  the 
Church,  and  Sigismund  fixcd  on  the  city  of  Constance 
as  the  place  of  assembly.  On  hearing  of  the  death  of 
Ladislaus,  by  which  eyent  Itome  became  again  open  to 
hlm,  John  repented  of  what  he  had  proposcd,  but  was 
obliged  to  oomply  with  the  generał  wlsh  by  repairing 
to  Constance.  By  this  council  (sec  vol.  ii,  p.  486)  John 
was  forced  to  drop  the  papai  tiara;  but  soon  afler,  by 
the  assistance  of  Frederick  of  Austria,  he  rcsimied  his 
authority  by  ordering  the  council  to  dissolye.  This 
proyoked  the  quc8tion  whether  the  pope  is  the  supremę 
authority  in  the  Church,  and  the  fourth  and  fifth  ses- 
sions  decided  "  tłiat  the  General  Council,  once  assem- 
bled,  is  superior  to  the  pope,  and  caii  reccive  no  orders 
from  him."  A  formał  proccss  was- no  w  instituted  against 
John ;  sixty  charges  were  lald  against  him,  and  he  was 
finalły  deposed  on  May  29, 1415,  and  giyen  into  the  cus- 
tody  of  the  cłector  palatine.  After  the  election  of  Mar- 
tin y  and  the  termination  of  the  Council  of  Constance, 
John,  now  again  Balthazar  Cossa,  cscaped  from  Ger- 
many, and  madę  his  submlssion  to  the  new  pope,  who 
treated  him  klndly,  and  gave  him  the  first  rank  among 
the  cardinaJs.  He  died  soon  afler,  Nov.  22,  1419,  at 
Florence.  The  name  of  John,  which  most  of  those  who 
borę  it  disgraced,  either  by  debaucher}',  simony,  or  other 
crimes,  has  sińce  been  avoided  by  the  occupants  of  the 
chair  of  St.  Peter.  See  Herzog,  Real-EncyUop,  vi,  759 ; 
Eng,  Cyclop,  s.  v. ;  Muratori,  Yita,  iii,  2,  p.  846  sq. ;  Rid- 
dłe,  Papactfj  li,  353. 

John  (St.),  ChriatianB  of.    See  Sabianb. 

Jolin's  (St.)  Day,  a  festival  to  commemorate  the 
nativity  of  John  the  Baptlst.  It  was  observed  as  early 
as  the  4th  century.  The  birth  of  John  is  known  to 
have  preceded  that  of  Jesus  Christ  six  months,  and  June 
24  is  therefore  the  day  fixed  upon  for  this  festival.  Au- 
gustine  had  commented  upon  the  peculiarlty  of  observ- 
ing  his  binhday  rather  than  his  martyrdom,  and  the 


Church  of  Romę  seems  to  have  acted  on  this  auggotio!!, 
for  it  set  aside  also  a  day,  namely,  August  29,  in  com- 
memoration  of  his  beheading;  but  both  his  biith  and 
martyrdom  are  cełebrated  on  the  same  day  in  the  ser- 
vice  of  the  Church  of  England,  the  chief  passages  rcla- 
ting  to  his  life  and  death  being  induded  in  the  lessooa. 
See  below,  Johii'8,  Eve  of  St. 

John  (St.)  the  ISvangeli8t'a  Day,  the  festiril 
in  honor  of  John  the  beloved  disciple,  tbc  brotber  of 
James.  The  first  tracę  of  this  fe8tival,  beld  on  Decem- 
ber  27,  occurs  in  the  writings  of  **thc  venenible''  Bedc 
It  is  presumed  that  the  obeenrance  of  it  at  fint  was  only 
local.  The  Coundl  of  Lyons,  A.0. 1240,  ordcred  that  it 
should  be  perpetually  and  univeT8al]y  eelebrated. 

John'a,  Bve  of  St.,  one  of  the  most  joyow  fcsti- 
vals  of  Christendom  dnńng  the  Middle  Ages,  was  cełe- 
brated on  the  eve  of  the  birthday  of  John  the  Baptid 
(q.  V.).  From  the  account  given  of  it  by  Jakob  Grimm 
{Deutsche  Mythologie,  i,  678,  581,  583  są.),  it  would  ap- 
pear  to  have  been  obsenred  with  similar  rites  in  cypty 
country  of  Europę.  Fircs  were  kindled  chiefly  in  tho 
streets  and  market-places  of  the  towns,  as  at  Paris, 
Metz,  etc.;  sometŁmes,  as  at  Gemshcim,  in  the  district 
of  Mainz,  they  were  blcssed  by  the  parish  priest.  and 
prayer  and  praise  offered  until  they  had  bumed  ont; 
but,  as  a  nile,  they  were  secular  in  their  character,  and 
conducted  by  the  laity  themselves.  The  young  peopla 
leaped  ovcr  the  flames,  or  threw  flowers  and  garlands 
into  them,  with  meny  shoutings;  songa  and  danccs 
were  also  a  freąuent  accompaniment  At  a  compars- 
tively  late  period  the  yery  highest  peisonages  took  part 
in  these  fe8tivitie8.  In  England,  we  are  told  (see  R. 
ChamberB's  Book  of  Days,  June  24),  the  people  on  the 
Eve  of  St.  John's  were  accustomed  to  go  into  the  woods 
and  break  down  branchcs  of  trees,  which  they  brought 
to  their  homes  and  plaiited  over  their  doois,  amid  greaŁ 
demonstrations  of  joy,  to  make  good  the  prophecy  re- 
specting  the  Baptist,  that  many  should  rejoice  io  hii 
birth.  This  custom  was  univer8al  in  England  till  the 
recent  change  in  manners.  Some  ofthe  superstiuum 
notions  connected  with  St.  John's  Evc  are  of  a  higWy 
fanciful  naturę.  The  Irish  believe  that  the  aoub  of  sU 
people  on  this  night  leave  their  bodioa,  and  wander  to 
the  place,  by  land  or  sea,  where  death  shall  finally  sep- 
arate  them  from  the  tenement  of  cUy.  It  is  not  im- 
probable  that  this  notion  was  originally  nniTeisd,  and 
was  the  cause  of  the  widespread  custom  of  watching  or 
sitting  up  awake  on  St,  John'8  night,  for  we  may  well 
believe  ihtX  there  would  be  a  generał  wish  to  prevent 
the  soul  from  going  upon  that  somewliat  dismal  ramlJe. 
In  England,  and  perliaps  in  other  coontries  also,  it  was 
bełieved  that  if  any  one  aat  up  fasting  all  night  in  the 
church  porch  he  would  see  the  spirita  of  those  who  were 
to  die  in  the  parish  dnring  the  ensuing  twelve  roontha 
oome  and  knock  at  the  chorch  door  in  the  order  and 
Buocession  in  which  they  were  to  die.  We  can  eaały 
perceive  a  posable  oonnection  between  thla  dreaiy  fancy 
and  that  of  the  80ul*8  midnight  nimbie.  The  kindling 
of  the  fire,  the  leaping  ovcr  or  through  the  flames,  and 
the  flower  garlands,  cłeaily  show  that  these  rites  are  ea- 
sentially  of  heathen  origin,  and  of  a  sacrifidal  charac- 
ter. They  are  obviou8ly  connected  with  the  ąin  and 
fire  worship  of  the  ancient  heathen  nations,  particulaily 
the  Arians  (comp.  Agnł,  of  the  Hindus  [q.  v.] ;  Mitte- 
ra,  of  the  Persians;  the  vestal  virgins,  and  the  Roman 
f(8tlval  of  Pałllia),  and  the  Celts,  Germaos,  and  Sła^i. 
In  old  heathen  times,  Midsummer  and  Yule  (q.  v.),  tbe 
summer  and  winter  solstices,  were  the  two  greatest  and 
most  widespread  festivals  in  Europę.  The  Church  of 
Rome,in  its  accommodating  splrit,  inatead  ofabolishii^ 
the  custom,  ylelded  to  popular  feeling,  and  retained  this 
heathen  practice  under  the  garb  of  a  Christian  name. 
See  Kłiautz,  De  ritu  ignis  U  naicUi  S,  Johamds  atonn 
(Yienna,  1769) ;  Paciandi,  De  eultu  S.  Joamu  Bapt  aa- 
1iqq.  Christ.  (Rom.  1758) ;  Erach  und  Gruber,  ABg,  En* 
cyklop,  ii,  22,  p.  265 ;  F.  Nork,  Fest-KaleMkr  (Stuttgari, 
1847),  p,  406.— Chamben,  Cydop,  8.  v. 


JOHNS 


983 


JOHNSON 


Johns,  Richard,  a  celebrated  member  of  tbe  So- 
dęty  of  "  Friends,"  was  bom  at  BiisŁol,  £ngbuid,  in  1645, 
and,  coming  to  thia  oonntiy  in  early  manhood,  settled  in 
Maryland.  He  was  won  oyer  to  Łhe  Qiiaker8  by  George 
Fox,  and  preachcd  for  many  years.  Ue  died  Oct.  16, 
1717.  For  further  details^  see  Janney,  Jiisi.  of  Fritndt, 
iii,  190. 

Johns,  W.  Q.,  a  minister  of  the  Methodist  Episoo- 
pal  Church  Soutb,  was  bom  in  Pułaski  County,  Ky., 
October  24, 1823,  joined  the  Church  at  thirteen  years  of 
age,  was  licensed  to  preach  in  1845,  and  continued  in  the 
work  for  twenty-one  yeais,  with  inteimptions  for  want 
of  health.  Indeed,  it  is  said  that  so  great  was  his  de- 
rotion  to  the  Christian  rainistry  that  he  oltcn  prcached 
when  barely  able  to  leavo  his  room.  He  died  October 
23, 1866 Conf,  Min,  Meth.  £pisc  Church  Southy  iii,  167. 

Johnson,  Albert  Osbome,  an  American  mis- 
■ionaiy  of  the  Presbyterian  Church  to  India,  was  bom 
in  Cactiz,  Ohio,  June  22, 1883.  He  was  educated  at  Jef- 
ferson College,  Pa.,  where  ho  was  converted,  and,  on  grad- 
uation  (1852),  went  to  the  Theological  Seminary  at  Al- 
leghany,  where  he  graduated  in  1855,  and  was  ordained 
by  the  presbytery  of  Ohio  June  12,  in  the  same  year. 
He  at  once  entered  the  missionary  work,  which  was 
shared  by  his  wife,  whom  he  had  married  the  day  he 
leffc  the  Theological  Seminaiy.  But  both  did  not  long 
endure  the  toils  of  a  missionary  life ;  during  the  Sepoy 
rebellion  in  1857  they  suffered  martyrdom  at  the  hands 
of  the  Indian  rebels.  For  details,  see  Walsh,  Metnorial 
of  łhe  Futtthgurh  Mission  and  her  Martyred  Mission^ 
arie*  (PhilacU.  1859, 12mo),  p.  241  sq.  Mr.  Johnson  is 
spokcn  of  by  Walsh  as  **  a  mau  of  yery  genial  influences 
and  of  fine  social  ąualities.  As  a  Christian  he  was 
zealous  and  deyoted,  a  man  of  prayer,  and  faithful  in  all 
his  duties;  as  a  missionary  he  bade  fair  to  excel  in 
erery  department  of  labor.  His  ąualifications  were  of 
a  high  order." 

Johnson,  ZhlOCh,  a  Methodist  Episoopal  minister, 
was  bom  in  North  Carolina;  he  was  early  converted; 
Joined  the  itinerancy  in  1819,  and  died  Xovember  25, 
1824.  He  was  a  man  of  deep  piety  and  useful  talents. 
His  labors  were  abundantly  successful,  and  his  character 
greatly  heioyed,—Minutes  of  ConferenceSf  i,  432. 

Johnson,  Eran  BC,  D.D.,  a  minister  of  the  Prot- 
estant Episoopal  Church,  was  a  native  of  Rhode  Island. 
He  was  ordained  to  the  ministry  in  Trinity  Chorch, 
Newport,  by  bishop  Griswold,  July  8, 1813;  removed  to 
New  York  City  in  1814,  and  became  assistant  rector  of 
Grace  Church,  but  the  year  following  he  exchanged  this 
position  for  the  rectorate  of  St.  James's  Church,  New- 
town,  L.  I.  In  1824  he  settled  in  Brooklyn,  and  bnilt 
8t«  John's  Church.  During  his  ministry  he  united  near- 
ly  4000  oouples  in  marriage,  and  baptized  nearly  10,000 
children.  He  was,  at  the  time  of  his  deoease,  March  19, 
1866  (ir*  his  seven^-third  year),  the  oldest  settled  Epis- 
oopal dergyman  in  the  State  of  New  York. 

Johnson,  Hajrnes,  a  Methodist  Episcopal  minis- 
ter, was  bom  at  Newbury,  Vermont,  in  1801 ;  convcrted 
in  1829;  entered  the  New  Hampshirc  Conference  in  1831, 
and  died  at  Newbury,  ApriI  9,  ISM).  He  was  "  a  faith- 
ful and  laborious  preacher,"  and  during  the  ten  monlhs 
previous  to  his  doath  he  madę  nine  hundred  pastorał  vis- 
ita.  He  was  rery  successful  in  winning  souls  to  Christ. 
— Minutę*  ofConferenceSy  vi,  75. 

Johnson,  Herman  Merrill,  S.T.D.,  LL.D.,  a 
prominent  minister  and  educator  of  the  Methodist  Epis- 
copal Church,  was  bom  in  Oswego  County,  N. Y.,  Nov. 
25, 1815.  Aftor  prcparation  at  Cazenoyia  Seminark",  he 
entered,  in  1837,  the  junior  class  of  Wesleyan  Uniyersity, 
graduating  with  distinction  in  1839.  The  same  year 
he  was  electcd  professor  of  ancient  languages  in  St. 
Charles's  College,  Missouri,  where  he  remained  fur  three 
years.  Thence  he  was  called  to  occupy  the  chair  of 
ancient  languages  in  Augusta  College,  Kentucky,  which 
he  held  for  two  years,  when  he  was  elected  professor  of 


ancient  languages  and  literaturę  in  the  Ohio  Wesleyan 
Univer8ity  at  Delaware,  Ohio.  Herę  he  performed  for 
a  while  the  duties  of  acting  president  of  the  institution, 
oiganizing  its  cuniculum,  and  was  especially  interested 
in  introducing  therein  a  Biblical  course  of  study  as  a 
method  of  ministerial  education.  In  1850  he  was  elect- 
ed professor  of  philosophy  and  English  literaturę  in 
Dickinson  College,  a  position  which  he  filled  for  ten 
years,  when  he  was  called  to  the  presidency  of  this  in- 
stitution, together  with  the  chair  of  morał  science,  in 
1860.  Dr.  Johnson  died  April  5, 1868,  just  after  the  me- 
morials  in  behalf  of  the  Methodist  oentenary  had  secured 
to  Dickinson  College  a  fair  endo^rment.  He  contributed 
largely  to  the  Church  periodicals,  especially  the  New 
York  Chrietian  Adnocate  and  the  Methodii  Quarterly 
Review,  Indeed,  he  was  decidedly  able  both  as  a  writer 
and  an  instmctor,  and  his  oontributions  were  always  read 
with  imcommon  interest;  for,  as  a  thinker,  he  was  dear, 
concise,  original,  and  his  writings  were  often  eminently 
distinguished  for  their  simplidty  and  grace  of  expression. 
He  had  an  especial  liking  for  all  questions  of  liistorical 
and  phUological  inquiry,  and  published  a  leamed  edition 
of  the  CUo  oflferodołu*  (N.  Y.  1842,  and  oflen).  He  left 
unfinished  another  large  and  valuable  philological  oon- 
tribution,  the  translation  and  revision  of  £berhard*8 
great  Synonj^mical  Dictionary  of  German,  French,  Ital^ 
ian,  Spanish,  and  English.  It  is  especially  to  be  regret- 
ted  that  he  did  not  live  to  complete  his  Cwamentary  on 
the  hi*torical  Book*  of  the  Old  Test,  "  PersonaUy,  Dr. 
Johnson  was  a  man  of  many  and  rare  excellendes.  He 
was  pre-eminently  a  scholar,  extensively  leamed,  and 
yet  distinguished  for  culture  rather  than  for  merę  leam- 
Ing.  He  was  especially  eminent  as  a  teacher,  and  as  an 
administrator  and  disciplinarian  he  had  few  superiora. 
In  priyate  he  was  a  model  Christian  gentleman,  affable, 
refined,  and  unassuming;  able  and  entortaining  in  con- 
Yersation,  and  as  a  companlon  genial,  without  dcscend* 
ing  to  any  thing  out  of  harmony  with  his  elevated  char- 
acter and  position.  As  a  prearher  he  was  both  fordble 
and  instmctiye,  though  too  rigidly  correct  in  his  tastes 
to  allow  him  to  become  extenBiveIy  popular.  In  his  re- 
lations  to  the  Church  he  belonged  to  an  important  but 
very  smali  class.  His  Christian  character,  his  leaming, 
and  his  confessed  abilities  fitted  him  for  almost  any  one 
of  the  highest  and  most  responsible  offices  in  the  Church. 
Such  was  the  place  he  occupied,  while  othen  of  eqnal 
dlgnity  and  importance  were  ready  to  be  ofTered  to  him" 
{Chri*tianAdvocate,  N.  Y., AprU  16, 1868).    (J.  H.  W.) 

Johnson,  John  (1),  an  eminent  and  leamed  di- 
vine  of  the  Church  of  England,  was  bom  Dec.  80, 1662. 
He  was  educated  at  King's  School,  in  the  city  of  Can- 
terbury,  and  at  StMary  Magdalen  College,  Cambridge. 
Soon  after  graduadon  (1682)  he  was  nominated  by  the 
dean  and  chapter  of  Canterbury  to  a  scholarship  in  Cor- 
pus  Christi  College,  and  there  took  the  degree  of  master 
of  arts  in  1685.  Shortly  after  he  entered  in  to  deacon's  or» 
dera,  and  became  curate  to  Thomas  Hardres,  at  Hardres, 
near  Canterbury.  In  1686  he  became  yicar  of  Boughton 
under  the  Bleam,  and  in  1687  he  held  the  yicarage  of 
Hemhill,  adjoining  to  Boughton.  In  1697  he  obtained 
the  living  of  St.  John,  in  the  Isle  of  Thanet,  which  he 
shortly  after  exchanged  for  that  of  Appledon,  and  in  1707 
he  was  inducted  to  the  yicarage  of  Cranbrook.  He 
died  in  1725.  His  works  display  the  highest  scholar- 
ship, a  mastery  both  of  the  Greek  and  Hebrew  lan- 
guages, and  a  deep  research  iiito  the  Holy  Scriptures. 
His  Utibloody  Sacrifice  (London,  1714,  8vo;  latest  ed. 
Oxf.  1847,  2  Yols.  8vo)  is  the  most  complete  work  on 
the  Eucharist,  oonsidered  as  a  sacriBce,  extant,  particu- 
larly  on  account  of  its  large  collection  of  authonties 
from  the  fathers,  which  are  printed  in  fuIL  Thcse  are 
dted  to  prove  that  the  Eucharist  is  a  proper  matonai 
sacrifice ;  that  it  is  both  euchaiistic  and  propitiatory ; 
that  it  is  to  be  offered  by  proper  officen;  that  the  ob- 
lation  is  to  be  madę  on  a  proper  altar;  that  it  is  to  be 
consumed  by  manducation;  together  with  arguments  to 
proYC  that  what  our  Sariour  speaks  conceming  eating 


JOHNSON 


984 


JOHNSON 


his  flesh  and  drinking  his  blood  in  the  6Łh  chapter  of 
St.  Joha^B  Gospel  is  piiiicipally  meant  of  the  Eachańst. 
This  publicatioii,  having  involved  him  in  a  bittcr  con- 
troversy  on  aoooimt  of  its  High-Church  views,  indaced 
him  to  publish,  in  1717,  The  Unbloody  Sacńficej  af»d  A  I- 
tar  uiweUed  and  nipporłed,  part  ii,  showing  the  agree- 
ment  and  disagreement  of  the  Eucharist  with  the  sac- 
rifices  of  the  ancients,  and  the  excellency  of  the  former; 
the  great  importance  of  the  Eacharist  both  as  a  feast 
and  a  sacrifice;  the  necessity  of  freąuent  communion  *, 
the  unity  of  the  Eucharist ;  the  natore  of  escommunica- 
tion ;  the  primitive  method  of  preparation,  with  devo- 
tions  for  the  altar.  His  other  works  are,  A  CoUecłion 
of  all  EccUsiastical  Laws,  etc^  conceming  the  G<wemr 
merUy  etc,  ofthe  Church  of  Englcmd  (Loud.  1720,2  vols. 
8vo ;  Oxford,  1850-51, 2  vols.  8vo)  i—A  CoiUctitm  ofDii- 
courses,  etc  (Lond.  1728, 2  yoIs.  8to)  :—The  Ptalitr,  or 
Holy  Damd  and  his  old  Engluh  Translatort  deared 
(London,  1707,  8vo).  See  Life,  by  Rev.  Thos.  Brett— 
Hook,  Eccles.  Diet.  s.  y.;  Allibone,  DicU  Engl  and  Am. 
Auth,'ń,^y.     (E.deP.) 

JohuBOn,  John  (2),  an  able  and  popolar  minister 
of  the  Methodist  Episcopal  Church,  bom  in  Louisa  Co., 
Va.,  Jan.  7,  1783 ;  joined  the  Church  in  1807,  and  en- 
tered  the  Conference  at  Liberty  Hill,  Tennessee  in  1808. 
Two  years  after  he  removed  to  Kentucky,  and  was  ap- 
pointed  first  to  the  Sandy  River  Circuit,  and  in  1811  to 
Natchez  Circuit  His  early  educational  adrantages  had 
been  few,  and  when  he  entered  the  ministry  of  his 
Church  he  can  hardly  be  sald  to  have  possessed  a  fair 
Engli:łh  education;  but  unremitting  efforts  to  gain 
knowledge  at  last  madę  him  one  of  the  best  scholars  of 
his  Conference.  Thus,  while  at  the  Natchez  Circuit,  he 
displayed  an  extensive  knowledge  ofthe  Greek  and  He- 
brew,  of  which  no  one  had  belie'ved  him  io  have  an  idea 
eveu,  and  from  that  time  he  began  to  rise  rapidly  in 
the  estimation  of  his  coUeagues.  He  now  took  rank 
with  Lakin,  Sale,  Page,  Blackroan,  and  Oglesby,  and  was 
regardcd  by  many  as  the  most  remarkable  preachcr  of 
the  West.  In  1812  he  was  appointed  to  the  Nashyille 
Circuit;  then  successirely  to  the  Liyingston,  Christian, 
and  Goose  Creek,  and  finally  again  to  the  Liringston  Cir- 
cuit ;  and  in  1818  he  was  sent  to  the  Nasbrille  Station. 
While  herc  he  engaged  in  a  controversy  on  the  ques- 
tion  of  immersion  with  the  Baptist  preacher  Yardeman, 
in  which  he  is  generally  beliered  to  have  come  off  vic- 
tor ;  at  least  from  this  event  dates  his  great  popularity 
in  the  West  "  Henceforth,"  saye  Redford  (Methodism  in 
Kentucky,  ii,  143),  "  the  name  of  John  Johnson  was  the 
synonym  of  succeas  in  reltgious  controversies."  From 
1820  he  tiUed  successively  the  Red  River,  Hopkinsville, 
and  Rui»ellville  Circuits,  and  in  1823  he  was  stationed  at 
Louisville,  and  in  1824  at  MaysYille,  and,  afl«r  seyeral 
years  of  rest,  was  In  1831  appointed  presiding  elder  of 
the  Green  River,  and  iu  1832  of  Hopkinsville  District 
In  1835  he  was  finally  located,  and  he  now  remoyed  to 
M  tYcrnon,  IllinoiB.  Herę  he  died  April  9, 1858.  '•  As 
a  Christian,"  says  the  Western  Christian  Adcocate  (May 
26, 18Ó8),  "brother  Johnson  was  consistent,  exemplary, 
and  deeply  deyoted.  ^  Holiness  to  the  Lord'  appears  to 
haye  been  his  motto.  He  died  in  great  peace,  testify- 
Ing,  as  his  tlesh  and  heart  failed,  that  God  was  the 
strcngth  of  his  heart  and  his  portion  foreyer."    ( J.  H.  W.) 

Jolmaon,  John  (3).    See  Johnsonians. 

Johnson,  John  Barent,  a  minister  of  the  Re- 
formed  (Dutch)  Church,  was  bom  in  1769  in  Brooklyn, 
L.  I. ;  graduated  at  Columbia  College,  1792 ;  studied  the- 
ology  under  Dr.  John  H.  Liyingston,  and  entered  the 
ministry  in  1795.  He  was  copastor  of  the  Refurmcd 
Dutch  Church,  Albany,  with  Rey.  Dr.  John  Bassett,  from 
1796  to  1802,  and  affcerwards  pastor  of  the  church  in 
Brooklyn,  1802-3.  Of  preposscssirig  appearance  and  en- 
gaging  manners,  he  won  many  friends  by  his  dignifled 
and  courteous  ł>earing.  He  was  popular  with  all  class- 
es,  eapecially  with  the  young.  As  a  preacher  he  was 
distliiguished  for  a  melodious  yoice,  a  natural  manner, 


and  effectiye  oratory.  His  culogy  on  General  Wash- 
ington "  produced  a  great  senaation  thioo^bout  the  oom- 
munlty.  The  exordium  was  spoken  of  at  the  time  aa  a 
rare  spedmen  of  e]oqnence;  and  the  whole  perfonnanoe 
was  certainly  of  a  very  high  order."  U  was  published 
by  the  Legislature,  at  whose  request  it  was  deliyeied. 
He  also  published  seyeral  other  disoourses,  and  contrib- 
uted  largely  to  literary  periodicals  of  his  day.  In  per- 
son he  was  tali,  slender,  well  proportioned,  and  gracefnl. 
His  imagination  was  brilliant  and  his  feryor  profoond. 
His  intellectual  ąualities  and  theological  and  literary 
attainments  were  eminent  He  wrote  his  sermona,  bui 
deliyered  them  extemporaneously,  with  great  sim]:aic- 
^,  dircctness,  and  unction.  He  died  of  consumption, 
Aug.  29, 1803.  Of  his  threc  children,  two  became  Epis- 
copalian  clergymen :  one  at  Jaroaica,  L.  I. ;  the  other  a 
professor  in  the  General  Theological  Seminary  at  New 
York.  —  Rogers,  Historical  Discourse  (Albany,  1858); 
Spraguc,^wia&,ix,167.     (W.J,R.T.) 

Johnson,  Joseph,  an  Indian  preacher,  was  bom 
at  Mohegan,  near  Norwich,  Conn.,  about  1750.  After  a 
brief  course  of  instruction  under  Mr.Wheelock  at  Leba- 
non,  he  was  sent,  at  the  age  of  fifteen,  as  a  schoolmaster 
to  the  Six  Nations  of  Indiana  in  New  York,  and  remain- 
ed  there  a  couple  of  years.  Ailterwards  he  spent  a  va- 
grant  hfc  for  some  time,  until,  during  a  fit  of  sickneas 
occasioncd  by  his  irregulańties,  he  became  a  sincere 
penitent,  and  determined  to  preach  the  Gospel  of  Christ 
He  was  soon  licensed  to  preach,  and  for  seyeral  yeaza 
was  a  missionary  in  the  State  of  New  York.  He  was 
well  acquainted  with  theology.  The  datę  of  his  death 
is  not  known  to  us. 

Johnson,  Samnel  (1),  an  English  diyine,  and  a 
leamed  but  \nolent  writer  against  popery  in  the  reiip 
of  James  II,  was  bom  in  Warwickshire  in  1649.  He 
studied  at  St  Paulus  School  and  at  Truiity  College,  Cam- 
bridge. In  1670  he  obtained  the  liying  of  Corringham, 
Essex,  but  continued  to  reside  in  London,  and  mingled 
much  in  politlcs.  He  was  a  friend  of  £^asex,  and  chap- 
lain  to  lord  William  Russell,  and  adyocated  the  succes- 
sion  of  the  duke  of  Yotk.  He  was  a  decided  opponent 
of  king  James  II  and  of  his  schemes  to  introduce  popeir 
as  the  religion  of  the  state,  and  attacked  Dr.  Hickes  (q. 
y.),  the  upholder  of  passiye  obedience,  in  a  pamphlet 
entitled  Julian  the  Apostatę,  He  would  haye  gonc  fur- 
ther  had  not  the  death  of  his  protector,  lord  RuaseD, 
obliged  him  to  become  morę  pradent,  and  to  kcep  his 
JuUan*s  Aris  to  tmdermine  Christianie  unpoUished. 
For  haying  written  the  former  work  he  was  aommoned 
before  judge  Jefifries,  and  of  ooorse  condemned  to  a 
heayy  fine.  Unable  to  pay  the  fine,  he  was  impriMoed, 
and  during  his  confinement  wrote  An  humble  cmd  hearty 
A  ddress  to  all  Prołestants  tn  thepreseni  A  rmy,  intendfd 
to  proyoke  a  rebellion  against  king  James  IL  He  was 
now  put  in  the  pillory  in  Palące  Yaid,  at  Charing  Cross, 
whipped,  and  fined,  after  being  degiaded  from  onki& 
After  the  Reyolution  of  1688,  William  IU  canaed  the 
yerdict  to  be  reyerscd,  and  gaye  him  an  indemnity.  He 
died  in  1703.  His  writings  were  coUected  and  publish- 
ed under  the  style  Works  (2d  ed.  Lond.  1713,  foL).  See 
Biographia  Brilaimica ;  Hoefer,  Nouv,  Biog.  Ghtirale^ 
xxyi,  791 ;  Debary,  Hist,  Ch,  ofEn^from  James  lita 
17j7,  p.  70 ;  Allibone,  Did.  Enigl,  and  A  mer.  A  uthors,  ii, 
971.     (E  de  P.) 

Johnson,  Samnel  (2),  D.D.,  an  American  diyine^ 
was  bom  at  Guilford,  Conn.,  Oct  14, 1696,  and  passed 
A.B.  in  1714  at  Yale  College,  then  situated  at  Saybrook. 
On  the  remoyal  of  Yale  to  New  Hayen  he  became  one 
of  its  tutors,  and  in  1720  pastor  of  the  Congregatkmal 
Clmrch,  West  Hayen.  Determined  to  change  his  eode- 
siastical  relations,  he  went  to  England,  and  reoeiyed 
episcopal  ordination  in  1723.  He  then  yiated  Oxfo<id 
and  Cambridge,  where  he  was  madę  A.K.,  and  retumed 
to  America.  Upon  his  arriyal  he  entered  on  the  mis- 
sion  of  Stratford,  Conn.,  and  formed  the  acąuaintanoe 
of  William  Bumet,  son  of  the  biahop  of  Saliabuzy.    Hii 


JOHNSON 


985 


JOHNSON 


mioisterial  duties  were  now  cooBiderably  increaaed,  and 
bis  pen  warmly  engaged  for  some  yeare  in  defence  of 
episcopacy.  In  1743  be  was  madę  D.D.  by  the  Uni- 
yenity  of  Oxford.  In  1744  be  was  appointod  president 
of  King's  College,  New  York,  in  wbicb  offiee  be  contin- 
ued  tiU  1754,  when  be  retumed  to  Stratford,  where  be 
spent  a  Łranquil  and  dignified  old  age,  chiefly  in  literary 
labor.  In  1746  be  issued  A  System  ofMorality,  and  in 
1752  A  Compendium  of  Loffic,  MdaphyńcSf  and  Ethics, 
and  otber  tbeological  and  misceUaneous  treatises  after 
Łbis  datę.  He  died  Jan.  6, 1772.— Sprague,  Annals,  v, 
52 ;  Allibone, Diet. Eng, and  Am,  A uth,  ii,  971.    (£.  de  P.) 

Johnson,  Samuel  (3),  LL.D.,  one  of  tbe  most 
distinguished  literary  men  of  tbe  eigbteentb  century, 
was  bom  at  Licbfield  September  18,  1709.  His  early 
edacatlon  w^as  acquired  in  bis  nattve  town.  In  1728 
be  was  entered  at  Pembroke  College,  Oxford,  but,  in 
conseqaence  of  tbe  want  of  means,  did  not  remain  long 
enougb  to  obtain  bis  degree.  In  1731  bis  fatber  died 
insolvent.  In  tbe  same  year  be  went  to  Bosworth  as 
nsber  of  a  scbooL  He  soon  became  disgusted  witb 
tbe  drudgery  of  teacbing,  and  preferred  to  support  bim- 
self  by  working  for  booksellcrs  in  Birmingbam.  In 
1736  be  marri^  Mrs.  Porter,  the  widów  of  a  mercer, 
wbo  brouG^bt  bim  £800,  Failing  in  an  effort  to  estab- 
lisb  an  acadcmy,  be  repaired  in  1737  to  London,  accom- 
panied  by  bis  celebrated  pupil  Dayid  Garrick.  He  now 
deroted  btmself  entirely  to  Utenuy  labor.  His  first 
production  wbicb  attracted  notice  was  bis  London,  a 
poem  in  imitation  of  tbe  tbird  satire  of  Juvenal.  Hav- 
ing  entered  into  an  engagement  witb  tbe  Genilmtan^s 
Magazine^  be  publisbed  tbe  parliamentary  debates, 
wbicb,  being  tben  a  breacb  of  privilege,  came  out  under 
the  fiction  of  Debates  in  tbe  Senate  of  Lilii  pat.  Tbese 
obtaincd  greal  celebrity  on  account  of  tbeir  extraordi- 
nary  eioquence,  and  were  almost  exclu8ively  the  prod- 
net  of  bis  own  lnvention.  Tbe  works  wbicb  were  now 
produced  were  celebrated  beyond  measure,  and  wiU  ever 
be  regarded  as  extraordinary  monuments  botb  of  vigor 
and  originality  In  thinking,  and  of  great  tbough  pon- 
derous  power  of  expre88ion. 

But  Dr.  Johnson  bad  excellencies  far  superior  to  merę 
literary  accomplisbments.  He  was  truły  a  devout  man, 
and  be  possessed  a  vigor  and  independence  of  mind 
wbicb  enabled  bim  to  scom  the  ridicule  and  sUence  tbe 
opposition  of  wita  and  woridlings  to  serious  religion. 
He  often  rinnirred  in  after  life  to  tbe  impression  madę 
upon  his  tender  imagination  by  bis  motber^s  example 
and  instruction.  Wbile  a  student  at  Oxford  tbese  im- 
pressions  were  reriyed  and  intcnsifled,  acoording  to  his 
©wn  account,  by  the  careful  study  of  Law's  Serious  Cali, 
in  con8equence  of  whicb  be  was  incited  to  a  deyout  and 
holy  life.  Seńous  and  pious  meditattons  and  resoln- 
tions  bad  been  early  familiar  to  bis  mind.  The  pious 
gratitude  witb  wbicb  be  acknowledged  mercies  upon 
every  occasion,  the  bumble  submission  wbicb  he  breathes 
when  it  is  the  will  of  his  beavenly  Fatber  to  try  bim 
witb  affliction,  show  bow  seriously  the  mind  of  Johnson 
bad  been  impressed  witb  a  sense  of  religion. 

Dr.  Johnson  is  generally  charged  witb  extreme  big- 
otry,  and  want  of  charity  towards  religionists  wbo  dif- 
fered  from  bim.  This  charge,  boweyer,  is  yery  unfair 
in  the  face  of  his  repeated  declaration  to  tbe  cóntrary. 
*'A11  dcuominations  of  Christiana,**  be  is  reported  to 
haye  said,  "have  really  little  difference  in  point  of  doc- 
trine,  tbough  they  may  difler  widely  in  extemal  forma*' 
<'For  my  part,  I  think  all  Christians,  whetber  papist  or 
Protestant,  agree  in  tbe  essential  articies,  and  that  tbeir 
differences  are  triyial,  and  rather  political  than  relig- 
ious.**  He  spoke  in  the  bighest  terms  of  Wesley  from 
intimate  knowledge  of  his  character,  bayiiig  been  at  tbe 
same  college  witb  him,  and  said  that  ^*  he  thought  of 
religion  only."  "  Whaterer  might  be  thought  of  somc 
Methodist  teacheis,**  he  said, "  he  could  soarcely  doubt 
tbe  sincerity  of  that  raan,  wbo  trayelled  900  miles  in  a 
month,  and  preacbed  twelve  times  in  a  week ;  for  no 
adequate  reward,  mcroly  temporal,  could  be  gtyen  for 


such  indefatigable  labor.  Tbe  establisbed  clergy  ia 
generał  did  not  preach  plain  enougb ;  polished  periods 
and  glittering  sentences  tlew  oyer  the  beads  of  the  com- 
mon  people  without  impression  on  tbeir  hearts.  Some- 
thing  might  be  necessary  to  excite  tbe  affections  of  tbe 
common  people,  wbo  were  sunk  in  languor  and  letbargy, 
and  therefore  be  suppoeed  that  the  new  concomitants 
of  Metbodism  might  probably  produce  so  desirable  an 
effect.  The  mind,  like  tbe  body,  delighted  in  change 
and  noyelty,  and  eyen  in  religion  itaelf  oourted  new  ap- 
pearances  and  modifications."  His  yicws  on  tbe  great 
subjects  of  original  sin,  in  consequence  of  the  fali  of 
man,  and  of  tbe  atonement  madę  by  our  Sayiour,  as 
reported  by  his  celebrated  biographer,  were  dedded  and 
eyangelicid.  His  sentiments  on  natural  and  revealed 
religion  were  equally  explicit  In  short,  it  appears 
that  few  men  bare  eyer  liyed  in  wboae  tboughts  re- 
ligion bad  a  larger  or  morę  practical  share.  ^His 
habitual  piety,"  says  lord  Brougham,  ^*  bis  sense  of 
his  own  imperfections,  bis  generally  blamciess  conduct 
in  the  yarious  relations  of  life,  haye  alrcady  been  sof- 
ficiently  described.  He  was  a  good  man,  as  be  was  a 
great  man ;  and  he  bad  so  firm  a  regard  for  yirtue  that 
be  wisely  set  much  greater  storę  by  bis  worth  than 
by  his  famc."  "  Tbough  consciousness  of  superiority 
might  Bomctimes  induce  bim  to  carry  it  high  witb  man 
(and  eyen  this  was  much  abated  in  tbe  latter  part  of  bis 
Ufe),  his  deyotions  haye  shown  to  the  whole  world  how 
bumbly  he  walked  at  all  times  witb  bis  God."  '*If, 
tben,  it  be  asked,"  sa\*s  lord  Mahoń, "  wbo  first  in  Eng- 
land,  at  that  period,  breasted  the  wayes  and  stemmed 
tbe  tide  of  infidelity — wbo  enlisted  wit  and  eloquence, 
together  witb  argument  and  leaming,  on  the  side  of 
rcyealod  religion,  first  tumed  the  literary  currcnt  in  its 
fayor,  mainly  prepared  t\łe  reaction  wbicb  succeedcd — 
that  praise  secms  most  justly  to  belong  to  Dr.  Samuel 
Johnson.  Religion  was  witb  bim  no  mcre  lip  senńce 
nor  cold  formality;  he  was  mindful  of  it  in  his  social 
bours  as  much  as  in  bis  graycr  lucubrations ;  and  he 
brought  to  it  not  merely  erudition  such  as  few  indeed 
possessed,  but  tbe  weight  of  the  bighest  character,  and 
the  respect  wbicb  eyen  his  enemies  could  not  deny  him. 
It  may  be  said  of  him  that,  tbough  not  in  orders,  he  did 
the  Church  of  England  belter  seryice  than  most  of  those 
wbo  at  that  listless  sera  ate  ber  bread." 

The  death  of  this  great  man  was  a  beautiful  com- 
mentary  on  his  life.  "  When  at  length,"  says  lord  Ma- 
caulay,  ^  the  moment  drcaded  through  so  many  yean 
came  dose,  the  dark  cloud  passed  away  from  John8on*s 
mind.  His  temper  became  unusually  paticnt  and  gen- 
tle ;  he  ceased  to  think  of  death  and  of  that  which  lies 
beyond  death,  and  be  spoke  much  of  the  mercy  of  God 
and  the  propitiation  of  Christ.  Tbough  tbe  tender  care 
which  bad  mitigated  his  sufferings  during  months  of 
sickness  at  Streatham  was  withdrawn.  he  was  not  left; 
desolate.  ...  In  this  serene  frame  of  mind  be  died, 
Dec.  18,  1784 ;  a  week  latcr  he  was  laid  in  Westminster 
Abbey,  among  the  eminent  men  of  whom  he  bad  been 
tbe  historian — Cowley  and  Denham,  Dryden  and  Con- 
greye,  Gay,  Prior,  and  Addison."     (E.  de  P.) 

It  remains  for  us  to  append  a  brief  oatline  of  all  tbe 
literary  labors  of  his  life.  In  addition  to  bis  contribu- 
tions  to  the  Gentleman**  Magazine  and  bis  poem  London, 
Johnson  wrote  in  1744  an  interesting  Life  of  Richard 
Sarage;  in  1749  his  best  poem,  The  Yaniły  of  Iluman 
Wiahts,  an  imitation  of  tbe  tenth  satire  of  Juvenal;  and 
in  1750  commenced  The  Rambler,  a  periodical  which  he 
conductcd  for  two  yeais,  and  the  contents  of  which  were 
almost  wholly  bis  own  composition.  But  perhaps  one 
of  his  greatest  accomplisbments  is  bis  Dictionary,  a  no- 
ble piece  of  work,  entitling  its  author  to  be  considered 
the  founder  of  English  lexicography ;  it  appeared  in 
1755,  after  eight  years  of  solid  labor.  The  Jdler,  an- 
other  periodical,  was  begun  by  him  in  1758,  and  carried 
on  for  two  years  also ;  and  in  1759  occurred  one  of  the 
most  touching  episodes  of  bis  life — ^the  writing  of  Ra*- 
selat  to  pay  the  expenseB  of  bia  motber's  funeraL    It 


JOHNSON 


986 


JOIADA 


was  writtcn, he  tella  ns,  "In  thc  erenings  of  a  week." 
But,  with  aiu  these  pablications  before  the  public,  he 
did  not  really  emerge  fiom  obscuńty  until  1762,  when  a 
pension  of  £300  a  year  was  confeired  on  him  by  lord 
Butę ;  and  in  the  foUowing  year  occurred  an  erent,  ap- 
parently  of  little  moment,  but  which  had  a  lasting  in- 
fluence upon  his  famę:  this  was  his  introduction  to 
James  Boswcll,  whose  Life  of  Dr,  Johnson  is  probably 
more  impeńshable  tban  any  of  the  doctor's  own  writ^ 
ings.  In  1764  the  famons  Literary  Club  was  instituted, 
and  in  the  foliowing  year  began  his  intimacy  with  the 
Thrales.  In  the  same  year  appeared  his  edition  of 
Shakspeare.  In  1778  he  yisited  the  Highlands  with 
Boswell,  and  in  1781  appeared  his  Lires  ofłhe  Poets,  his 
last  literary  work  of  any  importance.  S«b  Boswell,  TĄfe 
of  Johnson;  Wilkes,  Christian  Essat/B;  Murphy,  Li/J*, 
in  preface  to  Works;  Memoir  by  Walter  Soott;  Essays 
by  Macaulay  and  Carlyle;  a  brief  but  elaborate  charac- 
ter  of  Dr.  Johnson,  written  by  Sir  James  Maekintosh,  in 
his  L(/e,  ii,  166-9 ;  Dr.  Johnson,  his  Relifficus  Life  and 
Death  (N.  Y.  1850,  8vo) ;  Chambers,  Cydop.  a.  v. ;  Enff- 
lish  Ct/ctop,  8.  V. ;  and  the  excellent  and  elaborate  artide 
in  Allibone,  Diet,  EngU  and  Amer,  Authors,  s.  v. 

Johnson,  Thomas,  a  minister  of  the  Methodiat 
Episcopal  Church  South,  was  Iwm  in  Yirginia,  July  11, 
1802;  went  to  Missouri  in  1822,  and  commenced  the 
work  of  the  ministry  in  1825.  He  labored  as  an  itiner- 
ant  in  the  bounds  of  the  St.  Louis  Conference,  filling 
Bome  of  the  most  important  stations;  but  spent  his 
greatest  labors,  and  was  most  successful,  as  missionary 
to  the  Indiaus.  His  name  will  ever  be  connected  with 
the  history  of  Indian  missions.  Wise  and  eamest^  he 
oarńed  success  with  him  in  his  responsible  and  arduous 
labors.  He  honorably  sustained  his  character  as  a 
Christian  minister  through  all  his  pilgrimage,  and  died 
an  approyed  seryant  of  God.  He  was  shot  by  unknown 
parties  in  the  night  of  Jan.  3, 1865,  probably  on  account 
of  his  political  principles.  Among  his  oolleagues  in  the 
Conference  Johnson  ranked  with  the  first,  and  was 
highly  esteemed  by  alL  Says  one  of  them :  "  He  woa 
a  mcm  ófprindple;  one  of  the  very  few  among  the 
many  thousands  w  ho,  on  all  occasions  and  under  aU 
circumstances,  acted  upon  the  settled  principle  of  mo- 
rality  and  religion."  See  Conf,  Min,  M,  E,  Ch,  S,  iii, 
168. 

Johnson,  William  Bollien,  D.D.,  a  Baptist 
minister,  was  boru  on  John's  Island,  near  Charleston,  S. 
C.,  June  13, 1782.  He  was  intended  for  the  jurist's  pro- 
fession,  but  after  conrersion  (1804)  he  decided  for  the 
ministry,  and  was  ordained,  January,  1806,  pastor  of  a 
church  at  Eutaw,  a  C.  In  1809  he  removed  to  Colum- 
bia ;  later  he  li  ved  at  Savaiinah,  Ga.,  wheuoe  he  retum- 
ed  to  Columbia  in  181  &  In  1822  he  was  placed  in 
charge  of  the  female  academy  at  Greenrille,  S.  C.  Eight 
or  niue  years  later  he  remoyed  to  £dgeville,  S.  C,  as 
pastor,  teaching  also  at  the  same  Ume  at  a  female  high 
achool,  and  subseąuently  to  Anderson,  S.  C,  where  a 
university  for  ladies  bears  his  name.  He  tinally  retumed 
to  Greenyille,  S.  C,  where  he  labored  faithfuUy  for  the 
Church  of  his  choice  up  to  the  hour  of  his  death,  in  perfect 
yigor  of  mind  and  soundness  of  body  very  unlike  an  octo- 
geuarian.  He  died  in  1867  or  1 868.  The  degree  of  D.D. 
was  conferred  upon  him  by  Brown  Uniyersity  in  1833. 
Dr.  Johnson  was  a  prominent  membcr  of  the  Bibie  Be- 
yision  Society,  and  one  of  the  presidents  of  the  General 
Baptist  Conrention  of  the  United  States  (formed  in 
1814).  Over  the  Baptist  Conrention  of  his  natiye  state 
he  presided  for  a  score  and  a  half  of  years.  He  wrote 
lar^ely  for  the  religious  periodicals  of  his  Church,  and 
published  DeuelopmerU  of  the  Gospel  of  Jesus  Christ 
Hirouyh  the  Govemment  and  Order  of  the  Churches^  he- 
sides  scrmons,  circulars,  and  addresses.— Appleton,  (7y- 
doj),  X,  36. 

Johnsonians,  followers  of  John  Johnson,  a  Baptist 
minister  at  liyerpool,  England,  in  the  last  century,  of 
whom  there  are  still  seyeral  congregations  in  different 


parta  of  England.  He  denied  tbat  faith  was  a  daty,  or 
even  action  of  the  sool,  and  defined  it  **  an  acti ve  prin- 
ciple" conferred  by  grace;  and  denied  also  the  daty  of 
ministers  to  exbort  the  anconyerted,  or  preach  any 
ntoral  duties  wbateyer.  Though  Mr.  Johnson  enter- 
tained  high  supralapeaiian  notions  on  tb«  divine  de- 
crees,  he  admitted  the  uniyersality  of  the  death  of 
Christ.  On  the  doctrine  of  the  Trinity,  his  foUowen 
are  said  to  haye  embraced  the  indwelling  scheme,  with 
Calyinistic  Tiews  of  jostification  and  the  atonemenL 
See  Johnson'8  Faiłh  ofGod's  Eket;  Brintfs  Mittabet 
of  Mr.  Johnson  (1746). 

Johnston,  Arthur,  a  Scottish  writer  of  great  ce- 
lebrity,  a  natiye  of  Caskieben,  near  Aberdeen,  was  bom 
in  1587.  He  was  a  physician  by  profeasion,  but  spent 
most  of  his  time  in  literary  pursuits;  especiaUy  thor- 
ough  was  his  acąuaintance  with  Latin,  and  it  U  mainly 
for  his  Latin  yersion  of  the  Psalms,  one  of  his  hisŁ  and 
best  works,  that  we  mention  his  name  here.  They  wcre 
published  under  the  title  of  Psabnorum  DaruKs  Para- 
phrasis  PoeUca,  et  Canticorum  Evanffe2icorum  (Abeid. 
1637, 12mo,  and  often  sińce).  As  another  writer  of  notę, 
George  Buchanan,  also  fumished  a  Latin  yersion  of  ihe 
Psalms,  a  compańson  was  freąuendy  instituted  bb  to 
the  comparatiye  merits  of  their  work.  Hallam  (Uter. 
Hist.  of  Europę^  4th  ed.  Lond.  1854,  iii,  53),  in  alluding 
to  it,  thinks  that  '*  Johnston's  Psalms,  all  of  which  are  in 
elegiac  metre,  do  not  fali  far  short  of  thosc  of  Haclianan 
either  in  elegance  of  style  or  correctness  of  Latinity." 
Johnston  spent  the  earlier  part  of  his  life  in  France  and 
Italy.  His  medical  degree  he  obtained  at  Padua.  He 
retumed  to  Scotland  in  1625,  and  about  1628  was  ap- 
pointed  physician  to  the  court  of  Cliarles  L  In  1637 
his  literary  attainments  receiyed  reoognition  by  his 
election  to  the  rectorate  of  King*s  College,  He  died  in 
1641.  Besides  the  Psalms,  he  translated  iuto  Latin  the 
Te  Deum,  Creed,  Decalogue,  etc. ;  also  SolomotCs  Soty 
(Lond.  1633,  8vo).  His  other  publications  are  Elegia 
in  Obiium  R,  Jacobi  (Lond.  1625,  4to)  i—Epigranunata 
(x\.berdeen,  1632, 8yo).  See  memoirs  of  him  in  Benson'8 
ed.  of  Johnston's  yersion  of  the  Psalms;  AUilwnc,  IHct, 
of  Eng.  and  Amer,  Authors^  ii,  983;  Cychp.  BriL  voŁ 
xii,  s.v. 

Johnston,  John,  a  Scotch  minister,  was  a  natirc 
of  Aberdeen,  and  iiourished  in  the  latter  half  of  the  16ch 
century.  He  was,  like  his  relatiye  Arthur  Johnston  (q, 
y.),  of  a  poetical  turo  of  mind,  but  fac  also  ser\-ed  his 
Church  (the  Presbyterian)  in  the  capacity  of  professor 
of  diyinity  at  St.  Andrew*s  College.  He  diod  in  1611 
He  wrote  Consolatio  Christiana  sub  Cruce,  etc  (160^ 
8yo)  :—Jambi  Saara  (1611)  :—Terłrasticha  et  Ijemmaia 
Sacra — Item  CatUica  Sacrar—Item  loones  Regutn  Jvdem 
et  Israelis  (Lngd.  Bat.  1612,  4to) ;  etc  See  Allibooe, 
Diet,  ofEnglish  and  American  A uthors^  toL  ii,  a.  t. 

Johnstone,  Bryce,  an  eminent  Scottish  theologian 
and  writer,  was  bom  at  Annan,  Dumfriesshire,  in  1747. 
He  studied  at  the  Uniyersity  of  Edinburgh,  where  he 
graduated  D.D.  He  entered  the  Church,  and  was  lor  a 
long  time  pastor  of  Holyrood  (from  1771),  and  died  in 
1805.  He  wrote,  Commentary  on  the  Rerelation  ofJoha 
(17^,  2  yols.  8yo)  :—0n  the  Injluence  ofReliginn  on  dei 
Society  and  ciml  Gotfemment  (1801).  AU  of  his  Sfrmms 
and  Life  were  published  by  his  nephew,  the  Rey.  John 
Johnstone  (1807,  8yo) ;  etc  See  Gorton's  Biogr.  Dic- 
tionary,  s.  y. ;  Allibone,  Diet,  EngL  and  A  m.  A  «łh,  &  y. 

Joi^ada  (Heb.  Toyada%  51fji%  a  contractioo  of  Jb- 
HOiADA,  found  only  in  Nehemiah,  who  inrańably  oses 
it),  the  name  of  two  men. 

1.  (Sept  *li0iidd  V.  r.  'Iiiii^d,Tu]g.  Jojada,  A.  Ten. 
"  Jehoiada.**)  Son  of  Paseah,  and  apparently  one  of  the 
chief  priests;  in  conjanction  with  Mcshullara  he  repci^ 
ed  the  Old  Gate  [see  jBRuarVLEM],  with  its  appurte- 
nances,  after  the  captiyity  (Neh.  iii,  6).    B.C.  446. 

2.  (Sept  'lutaSd  v.  r.  'Ia»ia^a,  *lt^faL)  Son  aad 
sucoessor  of  Eliashib  in  the  high-prieathood,  hinadf 


JOIAKIM 


987 


JOKTAN 


nooeeded  by  his  son  Jonathan  (Neh.  xii,  10, 11,  22); 
another  of  his  sons  having  married  a  daughter  of  San- 
ballat,  on  which  acconnt  he  was  banished  (Neh.  xiii, 
28).  B.C.  post  446.  Josephos  {Ant.  xi,  7, 1)  Gnecizes 
the  name  as  Judcu  ClottSai),    See  Hioh-priest. 

Joi^^akim  (Heb.  Yoyakim\  D^^p^^i*^,  a  contraction 
of  Jehoiakim,  used  exclu8ively  by  Nehemiah ;  Sept 
'ImaKtifi  y.  r.  'liuacifi),  son  of  Jeshua  and  fathcr  of  Eli- 
ashib,  high-priesto  successiYcly  (Neh.  xii,  10, 12,  26). 
B.C.  aiiŁe  446.    Josephus  does  not  mention  him.    See 

HiGH-PRIEST. 

Joi^^arib  (Heb.  Toyarib',  '2'^'^';^'^,  a  contraction  of 
Jkhoiarib,  oociimng  exclusively  in  Ezra  and  Nehemi- 
ah),  the  name  of  three  or  four  peraons. 

1.  (Sept. 'I(tfap</i3  V.  r. 'litfpj/3.)  A  priest  named  (Neh. 
xi,  10)  in  connection  with  Jachin,  and  as  father  of  Jed^ 
aiah  (q.  y.),  but  by  some  error ;  compare  1  Chroń,  ix,  10, 
where  he  is  calied  Jkhoiarib  (q.  y.),  well  known  as 
founder  of  one  of  the  saceidotal  **  counes."   See  Priest. 

2.  (Sept  *Iitfiapfj3.)  A  descendant  of  Judah,  son  of 
Zechariah  and  father  of  Adaiah  (Neh.  xi,  5),  apparently 
throagh  Shelah.  See  Shiloni.  B.C.  considerably  antę 
586. 

3.  (Sept.  la>(apfi/3,  'Iwapi/3.)  One  of  the  priests 
who  retnraed  from  Babylon  with  Zerubbabel  (Neh.  xii, 
6).  Ile  was  the  father  of  Mattenai,  a  contemporary 
with  the  high-priest  Joiakim  (Neh.  xii,  19).     B.C  686. 

4.  (Sept.  'lutaptifŁ  y.  r.  'lutapifi.)  A  person  men- 
tioned  in  oonnecdon  with  Ehiathan  as  a  ''man  of  un- 
derstanding"  (the  others  being  calied  **  chief  nien*')f  ap- 
parently among  the  priests,  sent  for  by  Ezra  at  the 
ńyer  of  Ahaya  to  deyise  means  for  obtaining  a  company 
of  Leyites  to  return  with  him  to  Jerusalem  (Ezra  yiii, 
16).     aC.  459. 

Joining,  besides  its  common  sense  (p^^*  to  cHnff  or 
adherc),  is  technically  used  of  the  bmders  ("^'Tiąn^, 
mechahberoth'')^  whether  of  wood  or  stone,  of  the  waUs 
of  a  building  (1  Chroń,  xxii,  3).     See  Couplino. 

Joint,  besides  its  usual  meaning  (pS*!  de'hek^  a^, 
etc."),  is,  in  one  passage  (Cant  vii,  1)^  very  erroneously 
employed  in  the  A.V.  as  a  rend<  rinjj  of  D'^p'nQn,  chamr- 
mukim'  (Sept.  yaguely  pv^/ioi ,  Vulg.  Jiinrmra,  occuis  no- 
where  dse),  the  wrappert  (of  the  thighs),  L  e.  draicen, 
a  part  of  the  female  dress;  which,  in  the  case  of  bridal 
toilettc,  are  represented  as  being  fringed  with  a  worked 
edginglikelaceoraskilfullychasedjeweL   SeeATTUiE. 

J'ok''deam  (Heb.  Yokdeam%  D?7;?;,  bummg  o/ the 
people;  Sept  liKSaafi^y ulg,  Jucadam),  a  town  in  the 
mountains  of  Judah,  mentioned  betwecn  Jezreel  and  Za- 
noah  (Josh.  xy,  56).  The  associated  namcs  indicate  a 
locality  in  the  district  south-east  of  Hebron,  perhaps  at 
the  ruined  site  marked  as  ed-Dar  on  Tan  deYelde^s 
J/op,  just  north  of  Jebel  Ziph. 

Jo^kim  (Heb.  YókiM^  D'^p'i'',  prób.  a  contraction 
of  Joiakim  ;  Sept  'loiacf  t/i  y.  r.  'latcucifiy  Yulg.  para- 
phrases  ^t  stare/eeit  solem)^  a  person  mentioned  among 
the  descendants  of  Shelah  (his  third  son,  aocording  to 
Burrington),  son  of  Judah  (1  Chroń,  iy,  22).  B.C.  prób. 
antę  588.  See  Jasiiubi-i^iiem.  ^  The  Targum  trans- 
lates, '  and  the  prophets  and  scribes  who  caroe  forth  from 
the  sccd  of  Joshua.'  The  reading  which  that  and  the 
Vulg.  had  eyidently  was  D^^pJJ,  applied  by  some  Babbin- 
ical  tradition  to  Joshua,  and  at  the  same  timc  identify- 
ing  Joash  and  Saraph,  mentioned  in  the  same  yerse,  with 
Mahlon  and  Chilion.  Jerome  quotes  a  Hebrew  legend 
that  Jokim  was  Elimelech,  the  hiisband  of  Naomi,  in 
whose  days  the  sun  stood  still  on  account  of  the  trans- 
gressors  of  the  law  {Qu€B8t,  Hth,  in  Paraiy  (Smith). 

Jok'meam  (Heb.  roibneam',Cripp;,^aM4Ttn^</ 
ih%  people;  in  1  Kings  iy,  12,  Sept  'Uyfiaa^  y.  r.  Aov- 
KÓfL,  Ynig.  Jeemaan,  Auth.  Yers. "  Jokneam ;"  in  1  Chion. 
yi,  68  [58],  'liKfjuidv,  Jecmaam),  a  place  elaewhere  cali- 


ed KiBZAm  (Josh.  xxi,  22),  bat  better  known  9B  Joskb* 
AM  (Josh.  xii,  22,  etc.). 

Jok^ne&n  (Heb.  Yo1ene&m\  ti?3p^, />os«e«non  of 
the  people;  Sept  'lcjcova/i,  Yulg.  Jachanan,  Jeconatii, 
Jecnam),  a  royal  city  of  the  Canaanites  (Josh.  xii,  22), 
situated  on  the  soutfawestem  boimdazy  of  Zebulon  (but 
not  within  it  [see  Trtbb]),  near  Dabbasheth,  and  front- 
ed  by  a  stream  [the  Klshon]  (Josh.  xix,  11) ;  assigned 
out  of  the  territory  of  Zebulon  to  the  LeWtes  of  the  fam- 
ily  of  Merari  (Josh.  xxi,  84).  From  1  Chroń,  vi,  68,  the 
name  appears  to  have  been  in  later  times  written  in  the 
nearly  synonymous  form  of  Jokmeam,  and  it  thus  ap- 
pears (in  the  original)  as  the  boundaiy  point  of  one  of 
the  puryeyorships  of  Solomon  (1  Kings  iv,  12).  It  also 
seems  to  have  been  identical  with  the  Levitical  city 
KiszAiM  (see  Lightfoot,  Opp,  ii,  233)  in  Mount  Ephraim 
(Josh.  xxi,  22).  Dr.  Bobinson  has  lately  identified  it 
with  the  modem  Tell  Kaimon,  a  commanding  position 
at  the  foot  of  Mount  Carmel,  across  the  Kishon  from  the 
plain  of  Esdraelon,  and  in  a  locality  exactly  agreeing 
with  the  scriptural  data,  and  in  name  and  situation  with 
the  Cyamon  (q.  y.)  of  the  Apocrypha  (Judith  yii,  3),  as 
well  as  with  that  of  the  Cammona  of  Eusebius  and  the 
Cimoma  of  Jerome,  although  (in  their  Onomasticon)  they 
profess  ignorance  of  the  site  of  Jokneam  (new  ed.  of 
BibL  ResearcheSf  iii,  1 15).  Schwarz  (Palest.  p.  91)  giyes 
a  conjecture  agreeing  with  the  latter  part  of  this  Identi- 
fication. (See  also  Yan  de  Yelde,  Memoir,  p.  326 ;  Trist- 
ram.  Land  o/Israelf  p.  119.) 

Jok^^ahan  (Heb.  Yokthan\  l^^j^^,  marer;  Sept 
'IfCav  y.  r.  'U^dv  or  *UKeńp)t  the  second  son  of  Abra- 
ham and  Keturah,  whose  sons  Sheba  and  Dedan  appcar 
to  have  been  the  ancestors  of  the  Sabicans  and  Dedan- 
ites,  that  peopled  a  part  of  Arabia  Felix  (Gen.  xxv,  2, 3 ; 
1  Chroń,  i,  82, 88).  B.C.  cir.  2020.  "  If  the  Keturahites 
stretched  acroes  the  desert  from  the  head  of  the  Ara- 
bian  to  that  of  the  Persian  Gulf  (see  Dedan),  thcn  we 
must  suppose  that  Jokshan  retumed  westwards  to  the 
tran»Jordanic  country,  where  are  placed  the  settlements 
of  his  sons,  or  at  least  the  chief  of  their  settlements,  for 
a  wide  spread  of  these  tribes  seems  to  be  indicated  in 
the  passages  in  the  Bibie  which  make  mention  of  them. 
The  writings  of  the  Arabs  are  rarely  of  use  in  the  case 
of  Keturahite  tribes,  whom  they  seem  to  confound  with 
Ishmaelites  in  one  common  appellation.  They  mention 
a  dialect  of  Jokshan  (Yńkish,  who  is  Yokshan,  as  having 
been  formerly  spoken  near 'Aden  and  £1-Jened,  in  South- 
ern Arabia :  YakOfs  Moajam,  cited  in  the  Zeitschrifi 
d,  Deutsch,  Morgefd,  Gesellschąfty  viii,  600-1 ;  x,  30-1); 
but  that  Midianites  penetrated  so  far  into  the  peninsula 
we  hołd  to  be  highly  improbable**  (Smith),  "  Knobel 
(Genes.  p.  188)  suggests  that  the  name  Jokshan  may 
have  passed  into  Kashan  (^Cp),  and  that  his  descend- 
ants were  the  CastanUm  (Kacreraytrai)  of  Ptolemy  (vi, 
7,  6)  and  Steph.  Byzant  (s.  v.),  the  Casandres  (Kaffat^ 
dptię)  of  Agatharchides  (p.  6,  ed.  Huds.),  the  Gamndres 
(^TaaapSptię)  of  Diod.  Sic.  (iii,  44),  and  the  Casani  or 
Gasani  of  Pliny  (//m/.  XaL  vi,  32),  who  dwelt  by  the 
Bed  Sea,  to  the  south  of  the  Cinśedocolpitcs,  and  ex- 
tended  to  the  most  northem  of  the  Joktanites"  (Kitto). 
See  Ar.vbia. 

Jok^tan  (Heb.  Yoktan',  "jOp;^,  little;  Sept  'Uktóp  ; 
Josephus  *lovKTaCyAnt,  i,  6, 4;  Yulg.  Jecfan)^  n  Shcmitc, 
second  named  of  the  two  sons  of  Eber,  his  brother  being 
Peleg  (Gen.  x,  25 ;  1  Chroń,  i,  19).  B.C.  cir.  2400.  Ho 
is  mentioned  *as  the  progenitor  of  thirteen  sons  or  heads 
of  tribes,  supposed  to  haye  resided  in  Southern  Arabia 
(Gen.  X,  26-«0) ;  1  Chroń,  i,  20-28).  The  Aiabians  cali- 
ed him  Kahtan,  and  assert  that  from  him  the  eif/kt  orig- 
inal residents  of  Yemen  sprang.  His  name  is  still  point- 
ed  out  by  them  near  Keshin  (Niebnhr,  Beachreib,  p.  287), 
and  traces  of  the  same  name  appear  in  a  city  mentioned 
by  Niebuhr  (Bet^r,  p.  275)  as  lying  three  days'  jour- 
ney  north  of  Nejeian,  perhaps  the  station  Jaktan  alluded 
to  by  Edrisi  as  situated  in  the  distiict  of  Sanaa.     (See 


JOKTAN  9i 

A.  Schultens,  IlisL  imp,  vetusł,  Joctanidar,  in  Ar,  FeL 
ex  Abulfeda^  etc,j  Harderov.  178C ;  Pococke,  Specim.  hist. 
Arab,  p.  82  są. ;  Assemaiii,  BibL  Orient,  III,  ii,  553  8q.; 
Bochart'8  Phakg^  iii,  15.)— Winer,  i,  595. 

The  original  limits  of  the  Joktanidie  are  sUted  in  the 
Bibie :  "  Their  dwelling  was  from  Mesha,  as  thou  goest 
unto  Sephar,  a  mount  of  the  East"  (Gen.  x,  80).  The 
position  of  Mesha,  which  is  reasonably  supposed  to  be 
the  western  boondaiy,  is  still  uncertaln  [see  Mesha]  ; 
but  Sephar  is  well  established  as  being  the  same  aa  Za- 
fari,  the  sea-port  town  on  the  east  of  the  modem  Yemen, 
and  formerly  one  of  the  chief  centres  of  the  great  In- 
dian and  African  trade.     See  Sephar. 

1.  The  natire  traditions  respecting  Joktan  himself 
oommence  with  a  difficulty.  The  ancestor  of  the  great 
Boathem  peoples  was  called  /TaA/an,  who,  say  the  Arabs, 
was  the  same  as  Joktan.  To  this  some  European  crit- 
ics  have  objected  that  there  is  no  good  reason  to  ac- 
count  for  the  change  of  name,  and  that  the  identifica> 
tion  of  Kahtan  with  Joktan  is  evidently  a  Jewish  tra- 
dition  adopted  by  Mohammed  or  his  followers,  and  con- 
8equently  at  or  after  the  promulgation  of  El-Islam.  M. 
Caussin  de  Perceval  commences  his  essay  on  the  history 
of  Yemen  (Essai^  i,  39)  with  this  assertion,  and  adda, 
*'Le  nom  de  Cahtdn,  disent-ils  [les  Arabes],  est  le  nom 
de  YectsLn,  leg^rement  alterć  en  passant  d*une  langue 
ćtrang^re  dans  la  langue  Arabe.*'  In  reply  to  theae  ob- 
Jectors,  we  may  state : 

'  (1.)  The  Rabbins  hołd  a  tradition  that  Joktan  settled 
in  India  (see  Joseph,  ii n/.  i,  6, 4),  and  the  suppoaition  of 
8  Jewish  influence  in  the  Arab  traditions  respecting 
him  is  therefore  untenable.  In  the  present  case,  even 
were  this  not  so,  there  is  an  abscnce  of  motive  for  Mo- 
hammed's  adopting  traditions  which  alienate  from  the 
race  of  Ishmael  many  tribes  of  Arabia:  the  influence 
here  suspected  may  rather  be  found  in  the  contradictory 
assertion,  put  forward  by  a  few  of  the  Arabs,  and  reject- 
ed  by  the  great  majority  and  the  most  judicious  of  their 
historians,  that  Kahtan  was  descended  from  IshmaeL 

(2.)  That  the  traditions  in  question  are  postp-Moham- 
medan  cannot  be  proved ;  the  same  may  be  said  of  ev- 
erything  which  Arab  writers  tell  us  dates  before  the 
propheŁ'8  time ;  for  then  orał  tradition  alone  existed,  if 
we  exccpt  the  rock-cut  inscriptions  of  the  Himyarites, 
which  are  too  few,  and  our  knowledge  of  them  is  too 
fllight  to  admit  of  much  weight  attaching  to  them. 

(3.)  In  the  Mir-at  ez-Zeman  it  is  stated,  "Ibn  El- 
Relbl  says,  Yuktan  [the  Arabie  equivalent  of  Joktan] 
is  the  same  as  Kahtan,  son  of  'Abir,"  L  e.  Eber,  and  so 
say  the  generality  of  the  Arabs.  El-Beladhirt  says, 
**  People  diifer  respecting  Kahtan ;  some  say  he  is  the 
same  as  Yuktan,  who  is  mentioned  in  the  Pentateuch ; 
but  the  Arabs  arabidzed  his  name.  and  said  Kahtan, 
the  son  of  HCid  [because  they  identifled  their  prophet 
Hiid  with  Eber,  whom  they  caU  *Abir] ;  and  some  say, 
son  of  Es-Semeyfa,"  or,  as  is  sald  in  one  place  by  the  au- 
thor  hęre  quoted,  "  El-Heme^^sa,  the  son  of  Nebt  [or 
Nabit,  i.  e.  Nebaioth],  the  son  of  Ismall,"  L  e.  Ishmael. 
He  then  procecds,  in  continuation  of  the  former  passagc, 
*'Abl-Hanlfeh  ed-Dlnawarl  says,  He  is  Kahtan,  the 
son  of  Abir,  and  was  named  Kahtan  only  because  of 
his  suifering  from  drought"  [which  is  termed  in  Ara- 
bie KahtJ.  (Mir-at  ez-Zeman ;  account  of  the  sons  of 
Shem.)  Of  similar  changes  of  names  by  the  Arabs 
there  are  numerous  instances.  (See  the  remarks  occur- 
ring  in  the  Koran,  chap.  ii,  248,  in  the  ErpotUions  of  Ez- 
Zamakhshert  and  El-Beydawl.) 

(4.)  If  the  traditions  of  Kahtan  be  rejected  (and  in 
this  rejection  we  cannot  agree),  they  are,  it  must  be  re- 
mcmbered,  immateńal  to  the  fact  that  the  peoples  call- 
ed by  the  Arabs  descendants  of  Kahtan  are  certainly 
Jokt«nitcs.  His  sons'  colonization  of  Southern  Arabia 
is  provcd  by  indisputable  and  undisputed  identiflcations, 
and  the  great  kingdom  which  there  exist«d  for  many 
ages  before  our  sra,  and  in  its  later  days  was  renowned 
in  the  world  of  classical  autiąuity,  was  as  surely  Jok- 
tanitic 


8  JOKTHEEL 

2.  The  settlements  of  the  wont  ofJcktan  are  cram- 
incd  in  the  separate  artides  bearing  their  naoaea.  and 
generally  in  Akabia.  They  oolonized  the  whole  of  the 
south  of  tlie  peninsula,  the  old  '*  Arabia  Felis,"  or  tbe 
Yemen  (for  this  appellation  had  a  yery  wide  ńgnilW 
cance  in  early  times),  stretchuig,  acoording  to  the  Arabs 
(and  there  is  in  this  case  no  ground  for  doubting  their 
generał  correctness),  to  Mekkeh  on  the  north-west,  and 
along  nearly  the  whole  of  the  southem  ooast  eastwards, 
and  far  inland.  At  Mekkeh  tradition  oonnects  the  two 
great  races  of  Joktan  and  Ishmael  by  the  marriage  of  a 
daughter  of  Jurhum  the  Joktanite  with  IshmaeL  It  is 
necesaaiy,  in  mentioning  this  Jurhum,  who  is  called  a 
"•  son"  of  Joktan  (Kahtaii),  to  obeenre  that  ''son''  in  these 
cases  must  be  r^arded  as  signifying  "  deaoendant,'*  and 
that  many  generations  (though  how  many,  or  in  what 
order,  is  not  known)  are  missing  from  the  existing  lisi 
between  Kahtan  (embracing  the  most  important  time 
of  the  Joktanites)  and  the  establishment  of  the  compar- 
atively  modem  Himyaritic  kingdom ;  from  this  latter 
datę,  stated  by  Caussin,  Essai,  i,  68,  at  RC  ax,  100,  the 
sucoession  of  the  Tubbaas  is  apparently  presenred  to  ns. 
At  Mekkeh  the  tribe  of  Jorhnm  long  held  the  offioe  of 
guardians  of  the  Kaabeh,  or  tempie,  and  the  aacred  in* 
closore,  until  they  were  expelled  by  the  IshoDaelites 
(KuŁb  ed-Dln«  Hist,  o/Mtlkeh,  ed.  WOstenfeld,  p.  35  and 
39  są. ;  and  Caussin,  Estai^  h  194). 

But  it  was  at  Seba,  the  Biblical  Sheba,  that  the  king- 
dom of  Joktan  attained  its  greatness.  In  the  south- 
westem  angle  of  the  peninsula,  Sana  (Użal),  Seba  (She- 
ba), and  Hadramaut  (Hazamiaveth),  all  closely  neigfa- 
boring,  formed  together  the  prindpal  known  settlements 
of  the  Joktanites.  Here  arose  the  kingdom  of  Shebs, 
foUowed  in  later  times  by  that  of  Himyar.  The  domi- 
nant tribe  from  remote  ages  seems  to  hare  been  tłiat  of 
Seba  (or  Sheba,  the  Sabat  of  the  Greeks),  while  the 
family  of  Himyar  {ffomeriła;)  held  the  first  place  in  the 
tribe.  The  kingdom  called  that  of  Himyar  we  belie^-c 
to  have  been  merely  a  late  phasis  of  the  old  Sheba, 
dating,  both  in  its  rise  and  its  name,  only  shortly  before 
oor  sera. 

Next  in  importance  to  the  tribe  of  Seba  was  that  of 
Hadramaut,  which,  till  the  fali  of  the  Himyaritic  power, 
maintained  a  position  of  independence  and  a  direct  linę 
of  rulers  from  Kahtan  (Caussin,  i,  135-6).  Joktanic 
tribes  also  passed  northwards  to  Hlreh,  in  £1-Irak,  and 
to  Ghassan,  near  Damascus.  The  emigration  of  these 
and  other  tribes  took  place  on  the  occasion  of  the  mp- 
tare  of  a  great  dike  (the  dike  of  £1-Arim),  above  the 
metropolia  of  Seba;  a  catastrophe  that  appeans  from 
the  ooncurrent  testimony  of  Arabie  writers,  to  have  de- 
yastated  a  great  extent  of  country,  and  destzoyed  the 
city  Maprib  or  Seba.  This  evont  forms  the  conmience- 
ment  of  an  sera,  the  dates  of  which  ex]st  in  the  inscrip- 
tions on  the  dike  and  clsewhere ;  but  when  we  shoidd 
place  that  commencement  is  still  ąuite  an  open  qae9- 
tion.  (See  the  extracts  from  El-Mes^di  and  other  an- 
thorities,  edited  by  Schultens ;  Caussin, i,  84  sq.) — Smith. 
See  Tuch,  CommaOary  on  Genetis  (Halle,  1838).  chap.  x ; 
Knobel,  YdlkerUifel,  p.  178  8q.;  Ritter,  Halbinaei  Ara- 
bien,  i,  88  sq. ;  Dr.  Ley,  De  Tempii  Mecctad  origine  (Ber- 
Un,  1849). 

Jok'theel  (Hebrew  Yohke^l',  ^Mr]^^,  subdtud  by 
God),  the  name  of  two  cities. 

1.  (Sept.  'Ux^ai\\  v.  r.  'laxaptii\.)  A  town  in  the 
plain  of  Judah,  mentioned  between  Mizpeh  and  I^achish 
(Josh.  xr,  38).  The  associated  names  indicate  a  Icjcal- 
ity  in  the  district  south-west  or  west  of  Eleutherapolis 
(Keil's  Commentary,  ad  loc.) ;  possibly  at  Baliuj  a  smali 
modem  yillage  a  little  south  of  Tell*  es-Sa£eh  (Robin- 
son, Researches,  ii,  368). 

2.  (Sept.  'Ier^o^X  v.  r.  'Ic^oi7X.)  The  name  gircn 
by  king  Amaziah  to  Sblah,  the  capital  <^  Idumsea,  or 
Arabia  Petrsea,  and  subseąuently  borne  by  it  (2  Kingi 
xiv,  7) ;  from  which  drcumstance  he  appears  to  hare 
improTed  it  after  haTiug  captnred  it.    See  Pistba* 


JOLLY 


989 


JONAH 


Jolly,  Alexandeii,  an  English  prelate,  was  bom  In 
1766.  He  was  ordained  for  the  miniatry  in  1777,  and 
became  pastor  at  Turiff  the  same  year.  In  1778  he  le- 
moYed  to  Frasersbingh,  where  he  resided  for  forty-nine 
years.  In  17%  he  was  elerated  to  the  bishopńc  of 
Dundee,  and  later  he  became  bishop  of  Moray,  a  see 
founded  in  the  12th  century,  and  which,  after  bishop 
Jolly^s  decease,  was  absorbed  in  other  dioceses.  He  died 
in  1838.  Bishop  JoUy's  works  are,  Baptismal  Regener^ 
ation  (Lond.  1826 ;  new  edition,  with  Life  of  author  by 
Chejme,  1840, 12mo) : — Sunday  Serrices  cmdlloly  Days^ 
etc  (182^;  8d  ed.,  with  Memoir  of  author  by  Bp.  Walker, 
Edinb.  1840, 12mo)  i—The  Christian  Sacrijice  in  the  Eu- 
charist  (1832, 12mo ;  2d  ed.  Aberdeen,  1847, 12mo).  See 
Allibone,  Diet,  ofEngl,  and  American  Authois,  ii,  986. 

Jomtob.    See  Lippmann. 

Jon,  Francis  Du.    See  Jusius. 

Jo^na  (John  i,  42).    Sec  Jonas. 

Jon^adab,  a  shortened  form  of  the  name  Jehona- 
dabf  for  which  it  is  used  indilTerently  in  the  Hebrew  as 
applied  to  either  of  two  men  in  certain  passagea;  bnt 
these  have  not  been  accurately  represented  in  the  A.  V., 
which  applies  the  briefer  form  indeed  to  either,  bot  the 
fuli  form  to  but  one  in  three  of  these  passages.  See 
Jehonadab. 

1.  The  son  of  Shimeah  and  nephew  of  David  (A.  V. 
correctiy  in  2  Sam.  xiii,  3  twice,  32,  35;  incorrectly  in 
Ter.  5,  where  the  Hebrew  has  Jehonadab). 

2.  The  Kechabite  (Jer.  xxxv,  6,  10, 19 ;  incorrectly 
in  verse  8, 14, 16, 18). 

Jo^nah  (Hcb.  Yonah',  T\y^\  a  dove^  as  often,  but  in 
that  scnsc  fem.  ^  SepL  'Iwva  in  2  Kings  xiv,  25 ;  else- 
where  and  in  the  N. T.  'Itayaci  see  Jonas),  the  son  of 
Amittai,  the  fifth  in  order  of  the  minor  prophets.  No 
sera  Ls  assigncd  to  him  in  the  book  of  his  prophecy,  yet 
thcrc  18  littlc  doubt  of  his  being  the  same  person  who  is 
spoken  of  in  2  Kings  xiv,  25  as  having  uttered  a  proph- 
ecy of  the  relief  of  the  kingdom  of  laracl,  which  was  ac- 
complishcd  by  Jeroboam*H  recapture  of  the  ancient  ter- 
ritory  of  the  northem  tribes  between  Coele-Syria  and 
the  (łhor  (comparo  ver.  29).  The  Jewish  doctors  have 
supposed  him  to  be  the  son  of  the  widów  of  Sarepta  by 
a  puerile  interpretation  of  1  Kings  xvii,  24  (Jerome, 
Pr(F/ał,  in  Jonam),  His  birthplace  was  Gath-hepher, 
in  tlic  tribe  of  Zebulon  (2  Kings  xiv,  25).  Jonah  ńour- 
ished  in  or  bcfore  the  reign  of  Jeroboam  U  (B.C.  cir. 
820),  sińce  he  predicted  the  successful  conąuests,  en- 
larged  icrritory,  and  brief  prosperity  of  the  IsraeUtish 
kingdom  under  that  raonarch's  sway  (comp.  Josephus, 
Ant.  ix,  10, 1).  The  oracie  itself  Ls  not  cxtant,  though 
Hitzig  has,  by  a  novel  process  of  criticism,  amused  him- 
self  with  a  fancied  discoyerj'  of  it  in  chaps.  xv  apd  xvi 
of  Isaiah  (Des  Proph,  Jon,  OrakeL  Uber  Moab  Jbitisch 
tindicirt,  etc,  Heidelb.  1831). 

The  pcrsonal  history  of  Jo- 
nah 18,  with  the  exception  of  ■'**r±_ 
this  incidental  allusion,  to  be 
gathered  from  the  account  in 
the  book  that  bears  his  name. 
Having  already,  as  it  seems 
(from  1  in  i,  1),  prophesied  to 
Israd,  he  was  sent  to  Nincve1i. 
The  time  was  one  of  political 
rcvival  in  Israel ;  but  ere  long 
the  AssjTians  were  to  be  em- 
ployed  by  God  as  a  scourge 
upon  them.  The  Israelites 
con8equently  viewed  them 
with  rcpulsiveness ;  and  the 
prophct,  in  accordance  with  his 

name  (nji"^, "a  dove"),  out  of  timidity  and  love  for  his 
country,  shrunk  from  a  commission  which  ho  felt  surę 
would  result  (iv,  2)  in  the  sparing  of  a  hostile  city.  He 
attcmptcd,  therefore,  to  escape  to  Tarshish,  either  Tar- 
tessus  in  Spain  (Bochart,  Titcomb,  Hengstenbeig),  or 


morę  probably  (Drakę)  Tarsus  in  Cilicia,  a  port  of  com* 
mercial  intercourse.  The  providence  of  God,  however, 
watched  over  him,  first  in  a  storm,  and  then  in  his  being 
swallowed  by  a  large  fish  (binj  yi)  for  the  space  of  three 
days  and  three  nights  (see  Hauber,  Jonas  im  Bauche  des 
WaUJisches  [Lemg.  1753] ;  Delitzsch,  in  Zeitschr,/.  Lu- 
ther,  Kirche  u.  Theol  [1840],  ii,  112  sq.;  Baumgarten, 
ibid.  [1841],  ii,  187;  Keil,  BibL  Commentar  zu  d.  KL  Pro- 
pheten  [Leipz.  1866]).  After  his  deliyeimnce  Jonah  ex- 
ecuted  his  commission ;  and  the  king,  having  hcard  of 
his  miraculous  deliverance  (dean  Jackson,  On  the  Creed, 
bk.  ix,  c  42),  ordered  a  generał  fast,  and  averted  the 
threatened  judgment  But  the  prophet,  not  from  per- 
sonal,  but  national  feelings,  grudged  the  mercy  shown 
to  a  heathen  nation.  He  was  therefore  taught,  by  the 
significant  lesson  of  the  "gourd,"  whoee  growth  and  de- 
cay  (a  known  fact  to  naturalists :  Layard*8  Ninereh,  i, 
123,  124)  brought  the  truth  at  once  home  to  him,  that 
he  was  sent  to  testify  by  deed,  as  other  prophets  would 
aflerwards  testify  by  word,  of  the  capacity  of  Gentiles  for 
salvation,  and  the  design  of  God  to  make  them  partakers 
of  it  This  was  ^  the  sign  of  the  prophet  Jonas"  (Lukę 
xi,  20-32),  which  was  given  to  a  proud  and  peryerse 
generation  of  Jews  after  the  ascension  of  Christ  by  the 
preaching  of  his  apostles.  (See  the  monographs  on 
this  subject  dted  by  Hase,  Ltben  Jesu,  p.  160).  But 
the  resurrection  of  Christ  itself  was  also  shadowed  forth 
in  the  history  of  the  prophets,  as  is  madę  certain  to  us 
by  the  words  of  our  Saviour  (see  Jackson  as  above,  bk. 
ix,  c  40).  Titcomb  {Bibie  Studies,  p.  237,  notę)  sees  a 
correspondence  between  Jon.  i,  17  and  Hos.  vi,  2.  Be- 
sides  this,  the  fact  and  the  faith  of  Jonah's  prayer  in 
the  belly  of  the  fish  betokened  to  the  nation  of  Israel 
the  intimation  of  a  resurrection  and  of  immortality. 

On  what  portion  of  the  coast  Jonah  was  set  down  in 
safety  we  are  not  informed.  The  opinions  held  as  to 
the  peculiar  spot  by  rabbins  and  other  thaumaturgic 
expoBitors  need  not  be  rcpeated.  According  to  modern 
traidition,  it  was  at  the  spot  now  marked  as  Khan  Nebi 
Yunas,  near  Sidon  (Kelly *s  Syria,  p.  302).  The  partic- 
ular  plant  (yT'p'^p,  kikayon%  "gourd")  which  sheltered 
Jonah  was  possibly  the  Ricinus,  whose  name  Kiki  is  yet 
prescnred  in  some  of  the  tongues  of  the  East.  It  is 
morę  likely,  however,  to  have  been  some  climbing  plant 
of  the  gourd  tribe.  The  Sept.  renders  it  ko\okvv^. 
Jerome  translates  it  hedera,  but  against  his  better  judg- 
ment and  for  fear  of  giving  offence  to  the  critics  of  his 
age,  as  he  ąuietly  adds  in  justification  of  bis  less  prefer- 
able  rendering, "  Sed  timuimus  grammaticos."  (See  an 
elucidation  of  the  passage  in  the  Beitr,  zur  Beford,  etc 
xix,  p.  183.)    See  Gourd. 

Yarious  spots  have  been  pointed  out  as  the  place  of 
his  sepulchre,  such  as  Mosul  in  the  East,  and  Gath-he- 


**Tomb  of  the  Prophet  Jonah"  at  Mosal. 

pher  in  Palestine ;  while  the  so-called  Epiphanius  speaks 
of  his  retreating  to  Tyre,  and  being  buried  there  in  the 
tomb  of  Cenezeus,  judge  of  IsraeL  (See  Otho,  I^ricon 
jRabb,  p.  326  sq. ;  comp.  Ephnem  Syrus^s  Bepentance  of 
Ninetehj  transL  by  Dr.  Burgess,  Lond.  18530    Apociy- 


JONAH 


990 


JONAH 


phal  prophedes  aacribed  to  Jonah  may  be  found  in  the 
pseudo- Epiphanius  (Z>e  Yitis  PropheU  c.  16)  and  the 
Chrome.  Paschakj  p.  149. 

JoNAii's  Pbophect  contaios  the  above  acoount  of 
the  prophet'8  oommimion  to  denoonce  Nineyeh,  and  of 
his  refusal  to  undertake  che  embassy — of  the  method  he 
employed  to  escape  the  imweloome  taak,  and  the  mirao- 
nlous  means  which  God  UBed  to  curb  his  aelf-willed 
spirit,  and  sabdue  his  petulant  and  ąueniloos  disposi- 
tion  (Reindeli Die  Sendung  d, PropłuJoncts  nach  Ninive, 
Bamb.  1826).  His  attempt  to  flee  from  the  presence  of 
the  Lord  seems  like  a  partial  insanity,  prodaced  by  the 
excLtement  of  distracting  motires  in  an  irascible  and 
melancholy  heart  (J.  C.  Lange,  Diss,  de  mirabiU  Juffa 
JoruB,  HaL  1761). 

I.  nistoriccd  Character  ofłhe  BooL—The  history  of 
Jonah  is  certainly  striking  and  extraordinary.  Its  char- 
acteristic  prodigy  does  not  resemble  the  other  mirac- 
ulous  phenomena  recorded  in  Scriptore,  yet  we  most 
believe  in  its  literał  oocurrence,  as  the  Bibie  afibrds  no 
indication  of  its  being  a  mythos,  allegoiy,  or  parable 
(Piper,  Historia  Jona  a  recentior,  conatibus  tnndicatay 
Gryph.  1786).  On  the  other  hand,  our  Sarioor^s  pointa 
ed  and  peculiar  allusion  to  it  is  a  presomption  of  its 
reality  (Matt.  xii,  40).  The  historical  character  of  the 
narrativo  is  held  by  Hess,  Lilienthal,  Sack,  Reindel,  H^v- 
emick,  Hengstenberg,  Laberenz,  Baumgarten,  Delitzsch, 
Welte,  Stuart,  and  Keil,  Einteituwj,  sec  89.  (See  Fried- 
richsen,  KriL  Uebersichł  der  rertchied.  Annchtm  von  dem 
Buch  JonaSf  2d  edit.  1841.)  The  opinion  of  the  earlier 
Jews  (Tobit  Xłv,  4,  8 ;  3  Mace  vi,  8 ;  Josephus,  Ant.  ix, 
10,  2)  is  aiso  in  favor  of  the  literality  of  the  adventure 
(see  Buddei  Hisł.  V.  Test.  ii,  689  sq.).  It  requires  less 
faith  to  credit  this  simple  excerpt  from  Jonah'8  biogra- 
phy  than  to  believe  the  numerous  hypotheses  that  have 
been  inrented  to  depriye  it  of  its  supematural  character, 
the  great  majority  of  them  being  clumsy  and  far-fetch- 
ed,  doing  yiolence  to  the  language,  and  despite  to  the 
spirit  of  rerelation ;  distiiiguished,  too,  by  tedious  ad- 
justments,  laborious  combiiiations,  historical  oonjecture, 
and  critical  jugglery.  In  vindication  of  the  reality  of 
this  striking  narrative,  it  may  be  argued  that  the  allu- 
sions  of  Christ  to  Old-Testament  erents  on  similar  oo 
caaions  are  to  actual  oocurrences  (John  iii,  14  ^  vi,  48) ; 
that  the  purpose  which  God  had  in  view  justified  his 
miraculous  interposition ;  that  this  miracle  must  have 
had  a  salutaiy  effect  both  on  the  minds  of  the  Niueyites 
and  on  the  people  of  IsraeL  Neither  is  the  character 
of  Jonah  improbable.  Many  reasons  might  induce  him 
to  avoid  the  discharge  of  his  prophetic  duty — fear  of 
being  thought  a  false  prophet,  scom  of  a  foreign  and 
hostile  race,  desire  for  their  utter  destruction,  a  false 
dignity  which  might  reckon  it  beneath  his  prerogative 
to  officiate  among  uncircumcised  idolaters  (Yerschuir, 
Opłtsc.  p.  73,  etc;  Albcr,  InstituU  Ilermen.  Vet.  Test.  iii, 
899, 407;  Jahn,  Introduction  to  the  Old  Testament,  transl. 
by  Turner,  p.  372,  378,  tran8lator'8  notes;  Laberenz,  De 
Vera.  łib.  Jona  Interp,  Fulda,  1836). 

Othera  regard  this  book  as  an  allegory,  such  as  Ber- 
tholdt  and  KosenmlUler,  Gesenius  and  Winer.  Espe- 
dally  have  many  deemcd  it  a  parody  upon  or  even  the 
original  of  the  varioiis  heathen  fables  of  Arion  and  the 
Dolphin  (Herodot.  i,  2\\  and  the  wild  adyenture  of  Her- 
cules which  is  refcrred  to  in  Lycophron  (Cassandra,  v, 
83 ;  see  Forbiger,  De  Lycophr,  Cassandra  c.  epimetro  de 
Jona,  Lips.  1827 ;  comp. //w//,  xx,  145  i  xxi,  442;  Diod. 
Sic  iv,  42 1  Phitostr. /eon.  12;  Hygin. /'aft.  89 ;  Apollod. 
ii,  5,  9)  and  Perseus  (Apollod.  ii,  4, 3 ;  Ovid,  Metam.  iv, 
662  są.;  Hygin.  64;  Phot.  Cod.  186,  p.  231),  Joppa  be- 
ing oven  famous  as  the  scenc  of  Andromeda'8  expo8ure 
(Pliny,  y,  14,  34;  ix,  4;  Strabo,  xvi,  759).  Cyrill  Al- 
exaii(L,  in  his  Commeni^  in  Jon..  noŁices  this  similitnde 
betwcen  the  incident  of  Jonah  and  the  fabled  enter- 
prise  of  the  son  of  Alcmena  (sec  AUat.  Ercerpt.  var.  p. 
274;  Euilocia  Viol.  in  VilloLson's  Anec.  Gr.  i,  844;  An- 
ton, Compuratio  librorum  V.  T.  et  seripior.  profan,  ceł. 
p.  10,  Gorlic  1831 ;  oompaie,  too,  Theophylact,  Opp.  iy, 


169).  Bleek  jostly  says  {EinleiL  p.  676)  that  there  is 
not  the  smallest  probability  of  the  story  of  Jonah*8  tein- 
porary  sojoum  in  the  belly  of  the  whale  haying  becn 
either  mediately  or  immediately  deriyed  from  thoee 
Greek  fables.  F.  yon  Baur's  hypothesis  of  the  story  of 
the  book  being  a  compound  of  some  popular  Jewiah  tim- 
ditions  and  the  Babylonian  royth  respecting  a  sea  mon- 
ster Oannes,  and  the  iast  for  Adonis,  is  now  uniyersally 
regarded  as  exploded.  For  further  discussion  of  this  part 
of  Jonah'8  histonr,  see  Gesenius,  in  the  HalL  Lit.-Żeit^ 
1813,  No.  23 ;  Friedrichsen,  Krił.  Ueberblick  der  Ansich" 
ten  vom  Jonas  (Leipz.  1841) ;  Delitzsch,  in  Rndelbach's 
Zeiłschriftf  1840,  ii,  112  8q.  These  legendaiy  pazallels 
may  be  seen  drawn  out  at  length  by  professor  Stowe  in 
the  BibUotheca  Sacra  for  Oct.  1853,  p.  744  są.  See 
Joppa. 

Some,  who  cannot  altogether  rej«ct  the  reahty  of  tlie 
narratiye,  snppoee  it  to  baye  had  a  historical  baaia^ 
though  its  present  form  be  fandful  or  mythicaL  Soch 
an  opinion  is  the  eyident  resolt  of  a  mental  atruggle  be- 
tween  receiying  it  as  a  real  tranaactioo,  or  regaiding  U 
as  wholly  a  fiction  (Goldhom,  Excur8.  z,  B,  Jon.  p.  28 ; 
Friedrichsen,  Krił,  Ueberblick  der  Antiekten  B.  Jen.  p, 
219).  Grimm,  in  his  UeherteU.  p.  61,  legaida  it  as  a 
dream  prodaced  in  that  al«ep  which  fell  upon  Jonah  as 
he  lay  in  the  sides  of  the  ship.  The  fanciful  opinion 
of  the  famous  Herman  yon  der  Hardt,  In  his  Jonas  m 
luce,  etc,  a  fuli  abstract  of  which  is  giyen  by  Roseomlll- 
ler  \Prolegom,  in  Jonom,  p.  19),  was,  that  the  book  is  a 
historical  allegory,  descriptiye  of  the  fale  of  Manas- 
seh,  and  Josiah  his  grandson,  kings  of  Judah.  Tar- 
shish,  according  to  him,  represents  the  kingdom  of 
Lydia ;  the  ship,  the  Jewish  republic,  whoae  captain  was 
Zadok  the  high-priest;  while  the  casting  of  Jonah  into 
the  sea  symbolized  the  temporary  captiyity  of  Manas- 
seh  in  Babylon.  Less  (  Vom  historischen  Styl  dtr  Cr- 
iceU)  supposcd  that  all  difficulty  might  be  removed  by 
imagining  that  Jonah,  when  thrown  mto  the  sea,  was 
taken  up  by  a  ship  baying  a  large  fish  for  a  figure-head 
—a  theory  somewhat  morę  pleasing  than  the  rancid  hy- 
pothesis of  Anton,  who  fancied  that  the  prophet  took 
refuge  in  the  interior  of  a  dead  whale,  floating  near  the 
spot  where  he  was  cast  oyerboard  (Rosenm.  Prolegonu 
in  Jon.  p.  328).  Kot  unlike  the  opinion  of  Less  is  that 
of  Charles  Taylor,  in  his  Fragments  affixed  to  Calmet'8 
Dicłionary,  No.  cxlv.,  that  2i'n  signifies  a  life-preserycr, 
a  notion  whirh.  as  his  manner  is,  he  endeayors  to  sup- 
port  by  mythological  metamorpboses  founded  on  the 
form  and  names  of  the  famous  fish-god  of  Philistia. 
There  are  othcrs  who  allow,  as  De  Wette  and  Knobel, 
that  Jonah  was  a  real  person,  but  hołd  that  the  book  is 
madę  up,  for  didactic  purposes,  of  legendaiy  stories  which 
had  gathcred  around  him.  A  slender  basis  of  fact  has 
been  flllowed  by  some— by  Bunsen,  for  example,  who, 
strangely  enough,  fixes  upon  the  veiy  portion  which  to 
most  of  his  rationalistic  cotmtrymen  bears  the  clearest 
marks  of  spuriousness,  as  the  one  genuine  part  of  the 
whole — Jonah's  thanksgiying  from  the  penis  of  ship- 
wreck  (as  Bunsen  judges);  and  thinks  that  some  one 
had  mistaken  the  roatter,  and  fabricated  out  of  it  the 
present  story— by  others,  such  as  Krahmer  {Dos  Buck 
Jonas^  introd.),  who  suppose  that  Jonah  was  known  to  , 
have  uttered  a  prophccy  against  Nineveh,  and  to  have 
been  impaticnt  at  the  delay  which  appeared  in  the  ful- 
filment,  and  was  hence,  for  didactic  puiposcs,  madę  the 
bero  of  the  story. 

But  the  roore  common  opinion  in  the  present  day 
with  this  school  of  diWnes  is,  that  the  story  b  purely 
morał,  and  without  any  historical  foundation ;  nor  can 
any  elew  be  found  or  imagined  in  the  known  history  of 
the  tiroes  why  Jonah  in  particular,  a  prophet  of  Isnel 
in  the  latter  stages  of  the  kingdom,  should  have  been 
ch)8en  as  the  ground  of  the  instniction  meant  to  be 
conveyed.  So  Ewald,  Bleek,  etc,  who,  howeyer,  dlffcr 
in  some  respects  as  to  the  specific  aim  of  the  book,  while 
they  agrec  as  to  its  non-historical  character.  In  short, 
that  the  book  is  the  groteaque  ooinage  of  a  Hebiew  im- 


JONAH 


991 


JONAH 


agination  seems  to  be  the  opinion,  yarioiidy  modified, 
of  Seniler,  Michaelki,  Herder,  SŁttudlin,  Eichhom,  Au- 
gusti,  Meyer,  Pareau,  Uitzig,  and  Maurer. 

The  plaiD,  literał  import  of  tbe  narratire  being  aet 
•flide  with  miaapplied  ingennity,  the  sapposed  design 
of  it  has  been  yery  rarioosly  interpreted.  Michaelis 
{Ueberśetz,  (L  N,  T,  part  xi,  p.  101)  and  Semler  (ApparaL 
ad  Lib,  Vei,  Teat,  Interpret.  p.  271)  suppoeed  the  narra- 
tive  to  be  intended  to  show  the  injostice  of  the  arrogance 
and  hatred  cherished  by  the  Jews  towards  other  nationa. 
So  in  subetance  Bleek.  Similarly  Eichhom  {Eudeit. 
§  577)  and  Jahn  (JnŁroducL  §  127)  think  the  design  was 
to  teach  the  Jews  that  other  people  with  less  privileges 
excelled  them  in  pious  obedience.  Kegel  {BibeL  d,  A . 
tciM^  N,  Test,  vii,  129  sq.)  argues  that  this  epiaode  was 
meant  to  solaoe  and  excite  the  prophets  under  the  dis- 
chaige  of  difllcnlt  and  dangerous  dudes ;  while  Paulus 
{MemorabUiay  yi,  32  sq.)  maintains  that  the  object  of 
the  author  of  Jonak  is  to  impress  the  fact  that  God  re- 
mits  puniflhment  on  repentance  and  reformation.  Sim- 
ilar  is  the  idea  of  Kimchi  and  Pareau  {Interpretatian  of 
OU7V^ameii^,BibUcalCabinet,No.xxy,p.263).  Krah- 
mer  thinks  that  the  theme  of  the  writer  is  the  Jewish 
colony  in  its  relation  to  the  Sanuuitans  (Dcu  B,  Jon, 
Krit,  unierstŁchłj  p.  66).  Maurer  (Commeat,  in  Proph, 
Min,)  adheres  to  the  opinion  which  lies  upon  the  sur- 
fiioe,  that  it  inculcates  the  sin  of  not  obeying  God,  eyen 
in  pronouncing  seyere  threatenings  on  a  heathen  peo- 
ple. Ewald  would  make  the  design  quite  generał, 
namely,  to  show  how  the  tnie  fear  of  God  and  repent- 
ance bring  salyation— first,  in  the  case  of  the  heathen 
eailors;  then  in  the  case  of  Jonah;  flnally,  in  that  of 
the  NlneWtes.  Hiuig  (first  in  a  separate  treatise,  then 
in  his  commentary  on  the  minor  prophets)  snpposes  the 
book  to  haye  been  written  by  some  one  in  the  4th  cen- 
tury  before  Christ,  "in  Egypt,  that  land  of  wonders," 
and  chiefly  for  the  purpose  of  yindicating  Jehovah  for 
having  failed  to  yerify  the  prophecy  in  Obadiah  re- 
apectiug  the  heathen  Edomites.  SimiUrly,  Koster  (Die 
Propheten  des  A,  und  N,  Test,,  Leipz.  1839)  fayors  the 
malignant  insinuation  that  its  chief  end  was  to  8ave  the 
credit  of  the  prophets  among  the  people,  though  their 
predictions  against  foreign  uations  might  not  be  fulfill- 
ed,  as  Nineyeh  was  preseryed  after  being  menaced  and 
doomed. 

Thcse  hj^theses  are  all  yague  and  baseless,  and  do 
not  meńt  a  spedal  refutation.  Endeayoring  to  free  us 
firom  one  difBculty,  they  plunge  us  into  others  yet  morę 
intricate  and  perplexing.  We  notice  the  pńnctpal  ex- 
temal  objections  that  haye  been  brought  against  the 
book. 

(1.)  Much  profane  wit  has  been  expended  on  the  mi- 
lacttlous  means  of  Jonah^s  deliyerance,  yery  unnecessa- 
rily  and  very  absurdly ;  it  is  simply  said, "  The  Lord 
had  prepared  a  great  fish  to  swallow  up  Jonah."  Now 
the  species  of  marinę  animal  is  not  defined,  and  the 
Greek  Kr\Toc  is  often  used  to  specify,  not  the  genus 
whale,  but  any  laige  fish  or  searmonster.  All  objec- 
tions to  its  being  a  whale  which  lodged  Jonah  in  its 
atomach,  from  ita  straitness  of  throat  or  rareness  of 
haunt  in  the  Mediterranean,  are  thus  remoyed.  He- 
sychius  explains  le^roc  as  dcLKoffoioc  iyjdhc  TraftfuyiBrię, 
Enstathiufl  explain8  its  correspondent  adjective  KijTióta- 
aav  by  /icyoAi}}'  (in  the  Iliadf  ii,  581).  Diodonis  Sicu- 
lus  speaiks  of  terrestrial  monsters  as  KtjTwdri  ^<i>a,  and 
describes  a  huge  fish  as  ktitoc  dvi(JToy  to  ptytOoc, 
The  Scripture  thus  speaks  only  of  an  enormous  fish, 
which  under  God^s  direction  swallowed  the  prophet,  and 
does  not  point  out  the  species  to  which  the  yoracious 
prowler  belonged.  Therc  is  little  ground  for  the  sup- 
poeition  of  bishop  Jebb,  that  the  asyium  of  Jonah  was 
not  in  the  stomach  of  a  whale,  but  in  a  cayity  of  its 
throat,  which,  acoording  to  naturalists,  is  a  yery  capa- 
cious  rcceptacle,  sufficienUy  large,  as  captain  Scoresby 
.  asserts,  to  contain  a  merchant  ship^s  jolly-boat  fuli  of 
men  (bishop  Jebb,  Sacrtd  Literaturę,  p.  178).  Since 
the  days  of  Bochart  it  has  been  a  oommon  opinion  that 


the  fish  was  of  the  shark  species.  Lamia  canis  carcka* 
rias,  or  «  seardog"  (Bochart,  Op,  iii,  72;  Cahnefs  Dis- 
sertation  sur  Jon.),  Entire  human  bodies  haye  been 
found  in  some  fishea  of  this  kind.  The  stomach,  too, 
has  no  influence  on  any  liying  substance  admitted  into 
it.  Granting  all  these  facts  as  proof  of  what  is  termed 
the  economy  of  miracles,  still  must  we  say,  in  reference 
to  the  supematurol  presenration  of  Jonah,  Is  anything 
too  bard  for  the  Lord?    See  Wuale. 

(2.)  What  is  said  about  the  size  of  Nineyeh,  also,  is  in 
acoordance  with  fact  (see  Piet,  Bibie,  notę,  ad  loc.).  It 
was  "  an  exceeding  great  city  of  three  days'  joumey." 
Built  in  the  form  of  a  parallelognim,4t  madę,  according 
to  Diodonis  (ii,  7),  a  circuit  of  480  furlongs,  or  about  60 
miles.  It  has  been  nsual,  sińce  the  publication  of  Lay- 
ard*B  Ninmeh,  to  say  that  the  great  ruins  of  Koyunjik, 
Nimrud,  Keremles,  and  Khorsabad  form  such  a  parał- 
lelogram,  the  distancea  from  north  to  south  being  about 
18  miles,  and  from  east  to  west  about  12 ;  the  longer 
sides  thus  measuring  36  miles,  and  the  shorter  ones  24. 
But  against  this  yiew  professor  Rawlinson  has  recently 
urged,  with  considerable  force,  that  the  four  great  ruina 
borę  distinct  local  titlee ;  that  Nimrud,  identified  with 
Calah,  18  mentioned  in  Scripture  as  a  place  so  far  sep- 
arated  from  Nineyeh  that  "a  great  city" — ^Besen— lay 
between  them  (Gen.  x,  12) ;  that  there  are  no  signs  of 
a  continuous  town ;  and  that  the  four  ńtes  are  fortified 
"  on  what  would  be  the  inside  of  the  city."  Still  Nine- 
yeh, as  repiesented  by  the  rnins  of  Koyunjik  and  Neb- 
bi-Ynnus,  or  Tomb  of  Jonah,  was  of  an  oblong  shape, 
with  a  circuit  of  about  eight  miles,  and  was  therefore  a 
place  of  unusual  size—"  an  exceeding  great  city."  The 
phrase,  "  three  days'  joumey,"  may  mean  that  it  would 
take  that  time  to  trayerse  the  city  and  proclaim  through 
all  its  localities  the  diyine  message ;  and  the  emphatic 
point  then  is,  that  at  the  end  of  his  first  day*s  joumey 
the  preaching  of  Jonah  took  eiiect.  The  clause, "  that 
cannot  discem  their  right  hand  Arom  their  left  hand," 
probably  denotes  children,  and  120,000  of  these  might 
represent  a  population  of  morę  than  half  a  miUion  (Baw- 
linson's  Fioe  Great  Afonarckies,  i,  810;  Sir  Henry  Raw- 
linson's  Comment,  on  Cwieif,  Tnscriptions,  p.  17 ;  Captain 
Jone8'8  Topography  o/Nineveh,  in  the  Jour,  of  As,  So- 
ciety,  XV,  298).  Jonah  entered  the  city  "a  day'8  jour- 
ncy,"  that  is,  probably  went  from  west  to  east  uttering 
his  incisiye  and  temble  message.  The  sublime  audac- 
ity  of  the  stranger— the  ringing  monotony  of  his  sharp, 
short  ery— had  an  immediate  effect.  The  stoi^'  of  his 
wonderful  deliyerance  had  perhaps  preceded  him  (Thom- 
son, Land  and  Book,  i,  100).  The  people  belieyed  God, 
and  proclaimed  a  fast,  and  man  and  bcast  fasted  alike. 
The  exaggeration  ascribcd  to  thb  picture  adds  to  ita 
credibility,  so  prone  is  Griental  naturę  to  extremes.  If 
the  burden  of  Jonah  was  to  have  any  cffect  at  all,  one 
might  say  that  it  must  be  profound  and  immediate.  It 
was  a  panic— we  dare  not  cali  it  a  reyiral,  or,  with  Dr. 
Pusey,  dignify  it  into  conyersion.  There  was  plainly 
no  permanent  result.  After  the  sensation  had  passed 
away,  idolatiy  and  rapacity  resumed  their  former  sway, 
as  is  testified  by  the  prophets  Isaiah,  Nahiim,  and  Zeph- 
aniah ;  yet  the  appalled  conscience  of  Nineyeh  did  con- 
fess  its  "  eyil  and  its  yiolence"  as  it  groyelled  in  the 
dust.  Yarious  causes  may  haye  contributed  to  deepep 
this  constemation — the  superstition  of  the  people,  ana 
the  sudden  and  unexplaiDed  appearance  of  the  foreigner 
with  his  yoice  of  doom.  "  The  king,"  as  Layard  say^ 
"  might  belieye  him  to  be  a  special  minister  from  the 
supremę  deity  of  the  nation,"  and  it  was  only  "  when 
the  gods  themselyee  seemed  tointerposc  that  any  check 
was  placed  on  the  royal  prlde  and  lust."  Layard  adda, 
"  It  was  not  necessaiy  to  the  eifect  of  his  preaching  that 
Jonah  should  be  of  the  religion  of  the  people  of  Nine- 
yeh. I  haye  known  a  Christian  priest  frilghten  a  whole 
Mussulman  t^own  to  tents  and  repentance  by  publidy 
proclaiming  that  he  had  receiyed  a  diyine  mission  to 
announce  a  coraing  earthquake  or  plague"  (^Nineceh  and 
Babylan,  p.  632).    The  compulsoiy  moumiug  of  the 


JONAH 


992 


JONAH 


bnitc  creation  nas  at  least  one  analogy  in  the  lamenta- 
tion  madę  over  the  Perńan  generał  Masistius :  "  The 
hoTscs  and  beasts  of  borden  were  shared"  (Uerodotns, 
ix,  24).  According  to  Platarch,  alao,  Alexander  com- 
manded  the  obeerranoe  of  a  similar  custom  on  the  death 
of  HephsBStion.  Therefore,  in  the  acceflsories  of  the 
narratiye  there  is  no  yiolation  of  probability — all  is  in 
accordance  with  known  costoms  and  facts.    See  Nim^ 

V3H. 

(3.)  It  haa  appeared  to  some,  in  particnlar  to  Bleek 
(Eifileif,  p.  571),  improbable,  and  againsŁ  the  historical 
yeiity  of  this  book,  that  on  the  Bupposition  of  all  that  is 
here  related  having  actually  occurred,  there  should  be 
in  the  relation  of  them  such  a  paucity  of  circumstantial 
details — nothing  said,  for  instance,  of  the  place  wherc 
Jonah  was  discharged  on  dry  land,  or  of  the  particular 
king  who  then  reigned  at  Ninereh— and  not  only  so, 
but  no  apparent  rcference  in  the  futurę  allusions  to  Xin- 
eveh  in  Scripture,  to  the  slngular  change  (if  bo  be  it 
actually  took  place)  wrought  through  the  preaching  of 
Jonah  on  the  religions  and  mond  state  of  the  people. 
These  are  still  always  regarded  as  idolaters,  and  the 
judgments  of  God  uttered  against  them,  as  if  they  stood 
in  much  the  same  position  with  the  heathen  enemies 
generally  of  God's  cause  and  people.  It  roay  fairly  be 
admitted  that  there  is  a  certain  degree  of  strangeness 
in  such  things,  which,  if  it  were  not  in  accordance  with 
the  character  both  of  the  man  and  of  the  mission,  and 
in  these  found  a  kind  of  explanation,  might  not  unnat- 
urally  give  rlse  to  some  doubts  of  the  credibility  of 
what  is  written.  But  Jonah'8  relation  to  Nineveh  was 
altogether  of  a  special  and  peculiar  naturę;  it  stood 
apart  from  the  regular  calling  of  a  prophet  and  the  or- 
dinary  dealings  of  God ;  and  having  for  its  morę  spęd- 
flc  object  the  instruction  and  waming  of  the  covenant- 
people  in  a  very  criticsl  period  of  their  afiairs,  the  resenre 
maintained  as  to  local  and  historical  details  may  have 
been  designed,  as  it  was  certainly  fitt^d,  to  make  them 
think  less  of  the  parties  immediately  concemed,  and 
morę  of  what  through  these  God  was  seeking  to  impress 
upon  theroseU-es.  The  whole  was  a  kind  of  parabolical 
action;  and  beyond  a  certain  limit  circumstantial  mi- 
nuteness  would  have  tended  to  mar,  rather  than  to  pro- 
mote,  the  leading  aim.  Then,  as  to  the  change  pro- 
duced  upon  the  Ninevites,  we  are  led  from  the  naturę 
of  the  case  to  think  chiefly  of  the  morę  flagrant  iniqui- 
ties  as  the  evils  morę  particularly  cried  against;  and 
Israel  itself  affonled  many  examples  of  generał  refor- 
mations  in  respect  to  these,  of  which  little  or  no  tracę 
was  to  be  found  in  the  course  even  of  a  single  genera- 
tion.  Much  morę  might  such  be  expected  to  have  hap- 
pened  in  the  case  of  Nineyeh. 

IL  Słyiey  Daie,  etc— The  book  of  Jonah  is  a  simple 
narrative,  with  the  exception  of  the  prayer  or  thanks- 
giving  in  chap.  ii.  Its  style  and  motle  of  narration  are 
uniform.  There  are  no  traces  of  compilation,  as  Nachtl- 
gall  supposed;  neither  is  the  prayer,  as  De  Wette  (£wi- 
leit,  §  237)  imagines,  improperly  borrowed  from  some 
other  sources.  That  prayer  contains,  indecd,  not  only 
imagery  peculiar  to  itself,  but  also  such  imagery  as  at 
once  was  suggested  to  the  mind  of  a  pious  Hebrew  pre- 
served  in  circumstances  of  ex  tremę  jeopardy.  On  this 
'  principle  we  accoimt  for  the  similarity  of  some  portions 
of  its  phraseology  to  Psa.  lix,  xlii,  ctx%  The  language 
in  both  placcs  had  been  hallowed  by  freąuent  usage,  and 
had  become  the  consccrated  idiom  of  a  distressed  and 
succored  Israelite.  Perhaps  the  prayer  of  Jonah  might 
be  uttered  by  him,  not  during  his  mysterious  imprison- 
ment,  but  after  it  (njnn  "^rap,  out,  i.  e,  when  out  o/ 
the  Jisłis  belly ;  comp.  Job  xix,  26 ;  xi,  15).  The  hymn 
seems  to  have  been  composed  after  his  deliverance,  and 
the  rcoson  wliy  his  deliverance  is  noted  after  the  hymn 
is  recordcd  may  be  to  show  the  occasion  of  its  composi- 
tion.  <'  The  Lord  had  spoken  unto  the  fish,  and  it  had 
Yomited  Jonah  on  the  dry  land !"  (See  further  Hau- 
ber,  in  his  IHbl,  Betrachłungen,  Lemgo,  1753 ;  also  an  ar- 
ticle  on  the  subject  in  the  Brit,  Theoh  Mag,  i,  3,  p.  18.) 


There  was  little  reuon  either  for  dating  the  < 
sition  of  this  book  later  than  the  age  of  Jonah,  or  for 
supposuig  it  the  production  of  another  than  the  prophet 
himself.  The  Chaldaisma  which  Jahn  and  othecs  find 
may  be  acoounted  for  by  the  neameas  of  the  canton  of 
Zebulon,  to  which  Jonah  belonged,  to  Łhe  northem  ter- 
ritory,  whence  by  national  interoourse  Aramaic  pecuł- 
iarities  might  b^  insensibly  boirowed.  (Thns  we  have 
n3'^ED — a  sMp  tńth  a  deck — not  the  morę  common 
Hebrew  term;  3*^—41  foreign  title  applied  to  the  cap- 
tain;  n|7D,  to  appoint — found,  howeyer,  in  Psa.  lxi,  a 
psalm  which  Hupfeld  without  any  yalid  grounds  places 
aSUsr  the  Babylonian  captiyity ;  ^^M,  to  command,  as 
in  the  later  books;  D>^,  commtmd,  referring  to  the 
royal  decree,  and  probably  taken  &om  the  natiye  As- 
syrian  tongue;  ^rn,  to  roi0,  a  nantical  term;  and  the 
abbreyiated  form  of  the  relatiye,  which,  howeyer,  oocozb 
in  other  books,  etc.)  Gesenius  and  Bertholdt  place  it 
before  the  exile ;  Jahn  and  Koster  after  it.  Roeenmtłl- 
ler  supposes  the  author  may  haye  been  a  contemporaiy 
of  Jeremiah ;  Hitzig  postpones  it  to  the  period  of  the 
Maocabecs.  The  generał  opinion  is  that  Jonah  was  the 
first  of  the  prophets  (RosenintkUer,  Bp.  Lloyd,  Da^ison; 
Browne,  Drakę) :  Hengstenberg  would  place  him  after 
Amos  and  Hosea,  and,  indeed,  adheres  to  the  order  of 
the  books  in  the  canon  for  the  chronology.  He,  as  wdl 
as  Hitzig,  would  identify  the  author  with  that  of  Ohap 
diah,  chiefły  on  acconnt  of  the  initial  **  and.'*  The  king 
of  Nineyeh  at  this  time  is  supposed  (Usher  and  others) 
to  haye  been  Pul,  who  is  phwed  by  Layard  {Xi$L  ani 
Bab,  p.  624)  at  B.C.  750;  but  an  earlier  king,  Adnunme- 
lech  II,  B.C.  840,  is  regarded  as  morę  probable  by  Drakę. 
— Kitto;  Smith;  Fairbaim.  The  dat«  aboye  assigned 
to  Jonah  would  seem  to  indicate  the  huaband  of  the 
famous  Scmiramis.     See  Assyria. 

III.  Commenf<irws.  —  The  foUowing  are  the  special 
exegetical  helps  espreasly  on  the  whole  book,  the  most 
important  of  which  we  designate  by  prefixing  an  aste- 
risk :  Ephraem  Syrus,  In  Jonom  (in  Opp.  iii,  562 ;  transL 
from  the  Syriac  by  Burgess,  HomUy,  Lond.  1853,  l2nK}) ; 
Basil,  In  Jonam  (in  <9/>p.  p.  66) ;  TertuUian,  Carmm  (in 
Opp.  p.  576) ;  Theophylact,  Commadariug  (in  Opp.  iv); 
Brentius,  Commeniarius  (in  Opp.iv) ;  Luther,  A udtfftinff 
(AYittenb.  1526,  4to  and  8yo;  £rf.  1526,  1531,  8yo;  aiso 
in  Werbe,  Wittenb.  ed.  y,  810 ;  Jen.  iii,  214 ;  Alt.  iii,  351 ; 
Lpz.  yiii,  516 ;  HaL  yi,  496 ;  in  Latin,  by  Jonaa^  in  Opp. 
y itemb.  iy,  404 ;  and  separately  by  Opsopaeua,  Hag.  15^ 
8yo ;  and  Lonekeir,  Argent.  1526, 8yo) ;  Artopceus,  Con- 
mentaritu  (Stet.  1545,  Basil,  1558,  8vo);  Bugenhageo, 
Expo8itio  (\ltemb.  1550, 1661,  8yo) ;  Hooper,  Scraum 
(London,  1550, 12mo;  also  in  Writińffgj  p.  431) ;  Ferus, 
Commentaruu  (Lugd.  1554,  Antw.  1567,  Yen.  1567,  8ro; 
also  in  German,  Coln,  1567,  8yo) ;  Willicb,  Commenfa- 
riui  [includ.  sey.  minor  proph.]  (Basil.  1566, 8yo);  Sel- 
necker,  Auskffunff  [induding  Naham,  etc,]  (Lpc  1567, 
4to) ;  Tuscan,  Commeniarius  (^'en.  1578,  8yo) ;  Calrin, 
Lecłures  (trans,  by  Baxter,  Lond.  1578,  4to) ;  Pomarios, 
Ausleffunff  (Magdeb.  1579,  Lpz.  1599,  4to;  Stettin,  ł6ftł, 
8vo);  Baron,  PraUcŁumts  (ed.  Lakę,  Lond.  1579.  foIk»); 
Grynwus,  EnarraHo  (Basili  1581,  8yo) ;  Schadieas.  .Sff 
nopsis  (Argent.  1588,  4to);  Juniua,  Ijecłiones  (Heidfih. 
1694,4to;  also  in  6>pp.  i,  1327) ;  *Kinf;,  Lectur^s  (Lond. 
1594, 1600, 161 1, 1618 ;  Oxf.  1597, 1599, 4to) ;  Feuanlent, 
Cotnmmlarius  (Colon.  1594,  folio ;  1595.  Sro) ;  Abbott, 
Erposition  (Lond.  1600, 1613,  4to;  1845;  2  vols.  12mo); 
Wolderus,  Dierodus  [includ.  Joel]  (Yitemb.  1605, 4to); 
Krackewitz,  Commenłarius  (Hamb.  1610,  Giessen,  1611, 
8yo) ;  Miley,  Erklarunff  (Heidelbw  1614,4to) ;  Tamoyius, 
Commentariłts  (Rost.  1616,  1626,  4to) ;  Schnepf,  Com- 
meni<irws  (Rost  1619, 4to) ;  Quarle8,  Poem  (Lond.  1620, 
4to) ;  Treminius,Comłn«fitorn  (Oriolae,  1623, 4to) ;  Hylius^ 
Commentaruu  (Fraiioof.  1624,  Regionu.  1640, 4to;  also  in 
his  Sylloffe^  Amst.  1701,  foL,  p.  976  sq.) ;  Uryen,  C^mens*- 
tarius  (Antw.  1640,  foL) ;  Acosta,  Commentarku  (Logd. 
1641,  fol.) ;  Ursinns,  Commentaruu  (Francot  1642, 8ro) ; 
PaciucheUi,  Leuiom  (Yen.  1650, 1660, 1664, 1701,  ibiioi 


JONAH  B.-ABRAHAM 


903 


JONAS 


ibo  in  Łatin,  Monach.  1672,  foL;  Antw.  1681-3, 8  yoila. 
IbL);  De  Salinaa,  CommadarU  (Lugd.  1662  tą^  8  yoIb. 
foL);  Crodiu,  Commentarńu  (CaaseL  1656, 8vo) ;  Leos- 
ticn,  ParaphroMś  [Rabbinical]  (Tr.  ad  Rh.  1656, 8vo) ; 
Petneaa,  Nota  [to  a  tianaL  fiom  the  i£th.]  (L.  B.  1660, 
4to) ;  '^iJcheid,  Commentariut  (Argent.  1659, 1665, 4to) ; 
Gerhard,  Annotaiumet  [inchid.  AmoeJ  (Jen.  1668, 1676, 
4to) ;  Pfeiffer,  Pralectuma  (Yitemb.  1671, 1706,  Lipsias, 
1686, 4to ;  alao  in  Opp.  i,  1181  8q.) ;  Moebtiu,  Jontu  łgpi- 
ciu  (lipa.  1678, 4to) ;  Chriatianua,  Ilhułraiio  (Lipa  1683, 
8vo) ;  Biicherod,  ńrpoiiiio  (Hafn.  1686,  4to);  Von  der 
Uardt,  ^nigmat^y  etc  (Uelmstadt,  in  aeparate  treatises, 
1719;  together,  1728,  fol) ;  Outhof,  Yerhlaaring  (AmsŁ. 
1728, 4to) ;  Steuersloot,  OtUleediag  (Leyden,  1780, 4to) ; 
Yan  der  Meer,  Yerhlaaring  (Gor.  1742,  4to);  Keichen- 
bach, />eiia56MU«rraiif»6iM,etc.(Alt.l761,4to);  Leasing, 
Ob9ervaiumes  (Chemnitz,  1780, 8yo) ;  Łavater,  Prtdiglen 
(WintenŁh.  1782, 2  rola.  8to)  ,  Adam,  Sendtmgtgetchichte, 
etc.  (Bonn,  1786,  4to) )  Piper,  Yindkatio  (Gtyph.  1786, 
4to) ;  Luderwald,  A  Uegorie^  etc  (Hehnstadt,  1787,  8yo)  ; 
Hdpfher,  Cura  in  SepL,  etc  (Lipa.  1787-8,  8  parta  4to); 
K(adntOb$ervaiionaw8ept^etc{JtnM,  1788,4to) ;  Lowe, 
^^Ma  (BerL  1788, 8roł  alao  in  hia  generał  commentary, 
Dessau,  1805) ;  Grimm,  ErhUtrung  (DUsseld.  1789,  8to)  ^ 
Fabriciua,  Commeaiarius,  etc  [fVom  Jewiah  sources] 
(Gott  1792, 8vo) ;  Grangaard,  Ueberaetzung  (Lpzg.  1792, 
8vo) ;  Patdus,  Zwtck,  etc  (in  hia  MemorabUieny  Leipzig, 
1794,  vi,  32  flq.)  ?  Giietdorf,  Inierpretandi  roHo^  etc  (Yi- 
temb. 1794, 2  dissert.  4to)  %  Benjoin,  Notes  (Cambr.  1796, 
4to) ;  Nachtigall,  Aufsdirifi,  etc  (in  £ichbom*9  BiNio- 
thek,  Lipew  1799,  ix,  221 8q.) ;  Eliaa  of  Wihia,  OnO  (Wil- 
na, 1809, 4to) ;  Goldhom,  Ercurae  (Lpz.  1803,  8yo)  ;  Jones, 
PortraU,  etc  (London,  1810,  and  often  aince,  12mo); 
♦rriedridi8en,ire6crW»dt^  etc  (Alt  1817,  Lpz.  1841, 8vo) ; 
Toung,  Lectures  (London,  1819,  8vo) ;  Rcindel,  yerntch^ 
etc  (Bamberg,  1826,  8vo)  \  ^RosenmUUer,  Schoiia  (part 
vii,  voL  ii;  Lpzg.  1827,  Syo)^  Hitzig,  Orakel  ub.Moah 
(Heidelb.  1831, 4to) ;  Cunningham,  lectures  (Lond.  1833, 
12mo) ;  Sibthorp,  Lectures  (Lond  1834, 8vo) ;  Krahmer, 
UnŁersuchung  (KasaeL  1839,  8vo) ;  Preston,  Lectures 
(London,  1840,  8vo);  Jliger,  Endzweck,  etc  (TUb.  1840, 
8vo) ;  Peddie,  Lectures  (Edinb.  1862, 12mo) ;  Fairbaim,' 
JońcJCs  Life^  etc  (Edinburgh,  1849, 12mo) ;  Macpherson, 
Lectures  (Edinb.  1849, 12mo) ;  Tweedie,  Iassom  (Edinb. 
1850, 12mo) ;  Drakę,  Natjes  [including  Hosea]  (Cambr. 
1853, 8vo) ;  Harding,  Lectures  (Lond.  1856, 12mo) ;  Muir, 
Lessons  (Edinb.  1854,  1857,  8vo);  Wright,  Giossaries, 
etc  (Lond.  1857,  8vo) ;  Desprez,  lUustrations  (London, 
1857, 12mo) ;  Broad,  Lectures  (Lond.  1860,  8vo) ;  *Kau- 
len,  Exposiiio  (Mogunt.  1862,  8vo) ;  ^Martin,  JonaKs 
Mission  (Lond.  1866,  8vo).     See  Propuets,  Mimob. 

Jonah  ben -Abraham  Gerukdi,  a  Jewiah  sa- 
Tant,  and  one  of  the  principal  leadera  of  the  opposition 
to  the  achool  of  Maimonides,  waa  bom  about  1195.  A 
disciple  of  the  celebrated  Salomo  of  Montpenaier,  he  had 
eapoused  the  canse  of  the  latter.  He  waa  one  of  the 
paitiea  that  pronounccd  the  ban  againat  all  who  ahoold 
dare  to  read  the  writings  of  the  celebrated  Jewiah  phi- 
loeopher,  and  his  opposition  had  in  eveiy  way  been  so 
bttter  againat  the  Maimonidiats  that*it  caoaed  no  little 
■arprise  in  the  Jewiah  camp  when  he,  opon  the  attanpt 
of  the  inąnisitors  to  destroy  all  copies  of  the  Rabbinicad 
writings,  openly  declared  hia  former  conrse  a  mistake, 
and  pronounced  the  seoond  Moses  a  great  and  good  man. 
He  even  entered  upon  a  pilgrimage  to  the  grave  of  the 
man  whose  writings  and  disciples  he  had  formerly  op- 
poaed ;  and  when,  at  the  solidtation  of  a  Jewiah  con- 
gregation  which  demanded  hia  8ervioes,  he  halted  on 
the  joumęy,  and  there  died  (about  1270),  hia  death  was 
attribated  by  aome  of  hia  aoperstitiona  brethren  ans  a 
pnniahment  of  heaven  for  the  non-ful61ment  of  hia  daty 
to  viait  the  gimve  of  Maimonides,  and  theie  dedare  the 
IbOy  of  hia  fonner  conrse.  Jonah  was  a  man  of  aplendid 
paits,  and  did  mach  to  aOay  strife  among  hia  people. — 
Grtttz,  Gesch,  d,  Juden^  vii,  46, 117  sq.    See  8aix>mo  of 

MOIITPEZIBIBR.      (J.H.W.) 

IV.~B  B  B 


Jo^nan  (litfvdv,  perh.  contr,  for  Jonathan  or  Jo* 
UANAN,  or  i  q.  JoMAa),  the  son  of  Eliakim  and  father 
of  Joseph  among  the  matemal  anoestors  of  Christ  (Lukę 
iii,  80).  Ue  ia  not  mentioned  in  the  Old  Tesu  B.C 
conaiderably  antę  876.    See  GbneaijOOY  of  Christ. 

Jo^nas  ('I<tfvac,  for  the  Heb.  Jonah),  the  Gnecized 
form  of  the  name  of  three  men  in  the  Apocrypha  and 
New  Testament. 

1.  The  prophet  Jonah  (2  Esdr.  i,  89;  Tobit  xiv,  4, 
8 ;  Matt.  xii,  89,  40,  41 ;  xvi,  4 ;  Lukę  xi,  29,  30,  82). 

2.  A  person  occupyuig  the  same  position  .in  1  Esdr. 
ix,  28  aa  Ełiezbr  in  the  corresponding  list  in  Ezra  x,  28. 
Perh^M  the  corruption  originated  in  reading  ''3'^r^bK 
for  'ltr'łbit,  as  appears  to  have  been  the  case  in  1  Esdr. 
ix,  32  (compare  Ezra  x,  31).  The  former  would  have 
caught  the  oompiler's  eye  from  Ezra  x,  22,  and  the 
original  form  Elionas,  aa  it  appeais  in  the  Yulg.,  could 
eaaily  have  beoome  Jouas.— Smith. 

Z,  The  father  of  the  aposUe  Peter  (John  xxi,  15, 16, 
17).  In  John  i,  42  the  name  is  less  eorrectly  Anglicized 
"  Jona"  (some  MSS.  have  "Itadwrię).  A.D.  antę  25. 
See  abo  Bar-jona.  Instead  of  loii/a  (genitive)  in  all 
the  above  paasages,  good  codices  have  *liaawov  or  Iw- 
avoVy  which  latter  Lachmann  has  introdaced  into  the 
text.  Perhaps  Jonas  is  but  a  contraction  for  Joannas 
(Lukę  iii,  27),  which  is  the  same  as  John. 

Jonas,  bishop  of  Orlbans,  an  eminent  prelate  in  the 
Latin  Church,  flourished  in  the  first  half  of  the  9th  cen- 
tur>'.  He  died  in  842.  Jonas  took  an  active  part  in  the 
ecdesiastical  affairs  of  his  time,  and  played  no  unim- 
portant  part  in  the  loonoclastic  controyersy,  in  which  he 
assumed  a  mediate  course.  In  his  De  cultu  Imaginum 
(1645, 16mo)  he  wrote  both  against  Claudius,  bishop  of 
Turin,  and  the  Iconoclasts.  The  work  was  dcdicated 
to  king  Charles  the  Bald,  with  whom  he  was  in  great 
favor.  Although  condemning  the  destroyers  of  imagea, 
he  did  not  approye  the  worship  of  them,  and  the  most 
eminent  Catholic  writors,  such  as  Bellarmine,  therefore 
disappn>ve  of  his  work.  His  other  principal  worka 
are,  Libri  tres  de  mstitutume  laicali  (transL  into  French 
by  De  Mege,  1662, 12mo): — De  mstUuiione  reyia  (transL 
into  French  by  Desmareta,  1661 ,  8vo).  These  two  worka 
are  to  be  found  in  Latin  in  D'Acheiy's  SpicUeg.  He  ia 
aiso  the  author  of  a  treatise  on  Miracles  (in  B^L  Patri), 
See  Milman,  Latin  Christ,  iv,  421 ;  SchiÓckh,  Kircher^e* 
schichte,  xxiii,  294  sq.,  416  sq. ;  Aschbacb,  Kirchen-Lex4 
iii,  573. 

Jonas,  Justos,  one  of  the  most  eminent  reformera 
in  German}',  a  contemporary  and  aasociatc  of  Luther, 
waa  bom  at  Nordhausen,  June  5, 1498.  He  studied  law 
at  the  Univer8ity  of  Erfurt  In  1519,  however,  encour- 
aged  by  the  advice  of  both  Hess  and  Erasmus,  he  de- 
cided  to  atudy  theology,  and,  indining  to  the  cause  of 
the  Reformera,  he  allied  himself  to  Luther  in  1521,  and 
thereafter  became  ckMely  connected  with  the  great  re-* 
former.  He  went  to  Worma  with  him,  and  was  soon 
ailer  appointed  provoat  of  the  church  at  Wittenberg. 
Herę  he  waa  madę  D.D.  by  the  university,  in  which  h« 
became  a  profeasor,  and  ever  afler  worked  zealously  for 
the  propagation  of  the  principles  of  the  Reformadoa 
His  legał  knowledge  waa  of  especial  senrice  to  the  Re< 
formers.  In  1529  he  accompanied  Luther  to  Marburg, 
and  his  letters  on  ihis  oocasion  are  a  yaluable  hiatorical 
contribution.  In  1580  we  find  him  assisting  Melanc- 
thon  in  the  oompletion  of  hia  Augustana.  In  1541  he 
removed  to  Halle  to  asanme  pastorał  dutiea  at  StMary's 
Church  in  that  dty,  but  in  1546  duke  Maurice  ordered 
him  to  quit  the  place,  and  he  retumed  oniy  after  the 
elector  John  Frederick  had  taken  possession  of  the  city 
in  1547.  The  battle  of  Mohlbei^Tf  which  falls  in  thia 
year,  again  tumed  the  fate  of  the  Protestants,  and  he 
onoe  morę  qiutted  Halle.  In  1561  he  waa  appointed  court 
preacher  at  Coburg,  and  in  1558  superintendent  of  Eia- 
feld,  where  he  died  Oct.  9, 1665.  Jonaa  waa  particulai^ 
ly  diatinguiahed  aa  a  ready  speaker  and  aa  a  wńter. 
He  took  part  in  the  tnmalatioii  of  the  BiUe  by  Luther, 


JONAS 


994 


JONATHAN 


and  wrote  Prwfafio  tn  EpistoUu  dhi  Pauli  ApoMi,  ad 
Cormthioi,  etc.  (Erfurt,  1520,  4to)  :—Epitome  JudicH  J, 
Jona^  propos,  WitUmb,,  de  corrigendiś  carimomis  (1528) : 
— Atmotationei  J.  Jona  in  Ada  Apoitolorum  (Wittemb. 
1524,  Basie,  1525)  :—Vom  aJUm  u,  neuen  Gott,  Glauben  u. 
Lehre  (Wittenb.  1526):— HV^  die  rechte  Kirche,  wid 
dagegen  wekh  d,/alscke  Kircke  wł  (Wittenb.  1534, 4co) : 
— Oratio  JusH  Jona,  docL  theoL,  de  Studiiś  Theologicit 
(Wittemb.  1539 ;  Mekncthon,  Sekcie  Dedamat,  i,  23)  :— 
Det  XX  Psaims  Auslegung  (Wittembeig,  1546) :— i^urze 
Iliatoria  v.Luihers  Wdiicken  iLgeistUchen  Anfechtungen 
(in  Luther's  Workt) ;  etc  He  alao  published  a  number 
of  trausktions  into  German,  especially  of  worka  of  La- 
ther  and  MelancŁbon;  also  tranalationa  from  German 
into  Latin.  See  Reinhard,  Commentatio  hist,  theolog,  de 
Vita  et  Obitu  JusH  JowBj  etc  (Weimar,  J731) ;  Knapp, 
Narratio  de  Jutto  Jona,  etc  (Halle,  1817,  4to);  Erach 
u.  Gruber,  A  Ugememe  Eneyldop, ;  Herzog,  Real-Ewyklop. 
yii,  1  8q.;  Pressel,  Lehen  te  autgew,  Schr^ften  d,  Yaiers 
«.  BeffrUnden.  d.  luther,  Kircke  (1862),  voL  viiL 

JonaB,  Ludwig,  one  of  the  ablest  German  theo- 
logiaiis  of  OUT  day,  was  bom  at  Neiutadt  a.  O.  February 
11, 1797.  During  the  Franco-Pmasian  war  of  1812- 
1815  he  fought  agminat  the  foreign  invader,  but  as  ecion 
as  peace  dawned  on  his  native  land  he  reaumed  his  the- 
ological  studies  under  the  oelebrated  Schleiermacher,  of 
whom  he  was  one  of  the  most  prominent  and  faithful 
followers.  Afler  preaching  at  different  places,  he  re- 
moved  to  Berlin  in  1834,  and  soon  secured  a  place  in 
the  foreground  among  Berlin*8  large  array  of  theological 
writers.  He  published  Schleiermacher^s  MSS. :  his  phil- 
osophical  Esaays  and  Distertatione  in  1835,  the  DUdec- 
tic  in  1839,  AforaU  in  1843,  Letters  in  1858.  He  died 
Sept.  19, 1859.  Jonas  was  one  of  the  founders  of  the 
Monatssckrift  of  the  United  Church  of  Prussia  (com- 
prising  the  Reformed  and  Lutheran  churches  at  that 
time.    See  art  Prussia). 

Jon^athan  (Heb.  Yonathan,'  irST^,  1  Sam.  xiu,  2, 
8, 16, 22 ;  xiv,  1, 8, 4, 12, 13,  14, 17,  2Y,  27,  29,  89, 40,  41, 
42, 43, 44, 45, 49 ;  xix,  1 ;  1  Kings  i,  42, 43 ;  1  Chroń,  ii, 
32,83;  X,  2;  xi,  84;  Ezra  viii,  6;  x,  15;  Neh.  xii,  11, 
14,  35;  Jer,  xl,  8;  Sept.  'Iwvtt3av),  a  contracted  form 
of  Jehomathan  flPiJin^ją.d.  Theodore,  1  Chroń,  xxvii, 
25;  2  Chroń.  x>'ii,  8;  Neh.  xii,  18;  Anglicizcd  "Jona- 
than" elsewhere,  Judg,  xviii,  30  i  1  Sam.  xiv,  6, 8 ;  xviii, 
1, 8, 4 ;  xix,  1, 2, 4, 6, 7 ;  xx,  1, 8, 4,  5, 9, 10, 1 1, 12, 18, 16, 
17, 18, 25, 27, 28, 30, 32, 33, 84, 35, 37, 38, 39, 40, 42 ;  xxiii, 
16,  18 ;  xxxi,  2 ;  2  Sam.  i,  4, 5,  12, 17, 22, 28, 25,  26 ;  iv, 
4;  ix,  1,  8,  6,  7;  xv,  27,  36;  xvii,  17  20;  xxi.  7,  12, 18, 
14^21;  xxiii, 82;  1  Chroń,  viii,  83, 84 ;  ix,  39, 40;  xx,  7; 
xxvii,  32;  Jer.  xxxvii,  15, 20;  xxxviii,  26;  Sept.'Iuiv<i- 
dav)y  the  name  of  fifteen  or  morę  men  in  the  canonical 
Scriptures,  besides  several  in  the  Apocrypha  and  Jose- 
phus. 

1.  A  Levite  descended  ftom  Gershom,  the  son  of  Mo- 
ses  (Judg.  xviii,  30).  It  is  indeed  said,  in  our  Maso- 
retic  copies,  that  the  Gershom  flrom  whom  this  Jona- 
than sprang  was  "the  son  of  Manaaaeh ;**  but  it  is  on 
very  good  grounds  suppoeed  that  in  the  name  Moses 
(niś«),  the  single  letter  n  (3)  has  been  interpolated  (and 
it  is  usually  written  auspended,  Bnxtorf,  Tiber,  p.  14), 
changing  it  into  Manaaseh  (piSS^),  in  order  to  8ave  the 
character  of  the  great  lawgiver  from  the  stain  of  having 
an  idolater  among  his  immediate  descendants  {Baba 
Bathra,  109,  b).  The  singular  name  Gershom,  and  the 
datę  of  the  transaction,  go  far  to  eatablish  this  view. 
Accordingly  the  Yulgate,  and  some  copies  of  the  Sep- 
tuagint,  actually  exhibit  the  name  of  Moses  instead  of 
Manasseh.  (See  Clarke'8  CommenL  ad  loc)  The  his- 
tory  of  this  Jonathan  is  invQlved  in  the  narrative  which 
occupies  Judges  xvii,  xviii,  and  is  one  of  the  two  ac- 
connts  which  form  a  sort  of  appendix  to  that  book. 
The  eventa  themselves  appear  to  have  occuned  soon  af- 
ter  the  death  of  Joshna,  and  of  the  elders  who  outlived 
him,  when  the  govemflient  was  in  a  most  nna^trtliMi 


Its  pioper  plaoe  in  the  ehronological  order  wooUI 
have  been  between  the  aecond  and  third  chapters  of  the 
book.     B.a  cir.  1590. 

Jonathan,  who  was  reaident  at  Betblehem,  lived  at  a 
time  when  the  dues  of  the  sanctnary  did  not  afibid  a 
liveIihood  to  the  numeroos  LeWtes  who  had  a  daim 
upon  them,  and  belonged  to  a  Iribe  destitute  of  the 
landed  poooeooiona'which  gave  to  all  others  a  suffidcnt 
maintenance,  He  therefore  went  forth  to  seek  his  for- 
tunę. In  Mount  Ephraim  he  came  to  "  a  houae  of  goda," 
which  had  been  establishcd  by  one  Micah,  who  wanted 
nothing  bat  a  priest  to  make  his  establishment  com- 
plete.  See  Micah.  This  person  madę  Jonathan  what 
was  manifestly  considered  the  handsome  offec  of  en- 
gaging  him  as  his  priest  for  his  vicuiałB,  a  yearly  suit 
of  doUies,  and  ten  shekels  (abont  six  doUais)  a  year  in 
monęy.  Herę  he  lived  for  some  time,  tali  Łbe  Danite 
^ies,  who  were  sent  by  their  tribe  to  eiplone  the  noith, 
passed  this  way  and  formed  hii  acquaintanoe.  Ir^lien, 
not  long  after,  the  body  of  azmed  Danites  paaaed  the 
same  way  in  going  to  settle  near  the  aourcea  of  the 
Jordan,  the  spies  mentioned  Micah^s  establishment  to 
them,  on  which  they  went  and  took  away  not  only 
"  the  ephod,  the  teraphim,  and  the  graven  image,'*  bot 
the  priest  also,  that  they  might  set  up  the  same  wonhip 
in  the  place  of  which  they  were  going  to  take  posses- 
sion.  Micah  vainly  proteeted  against  this  robbery ;  but 
Jonathan  himself  was  glad  at  the  improvement  in  his 
proepects,  and  from  that  time,  even  down  to  the  cap- 
tivity,  he  and  his  descendants  continued  to  be  priests  of 
the  Danites  in  the  town  of  Laish,  the  name  of  which 
was  changed  to  Dan. 

There  is  not  any  reaaon  to  suppose  that  this  estab- 
lishment, whether  in  the  hands  of  Micah  or  of  the  Dan- 
ites, involved  an  apostasy  from  Jehovah.  It  appean 
rather  to  have  been  an  attempt  to  localizc  or  domesti- 
cate  his  presence,  under  thoee  symbols  and  fonns  of 
service  which  were  common  among  the  neighboring  na- 
tions,  but  were  forbidden  to  the  Hebrews.  The  offenoe 
here  was  twofold— the  establishment  of  a  aacred  ritoal 
different  from  the  only  one  which  the  law  recognised, 
and  the  worship  by  symbols,  naturally  leading  to  idohr 
try,  with  the  ministration  of  one  who  could  not  lęgally 
be  a  priest,  but  only  a  Levite,  and  imder  circumstances 
in  which  no  Aaronie  priest  could  legally  have  offidatedL 
It  is  morę  than  likely  that  this  establishment  was  event- 
ually  meiged  in  that  of  the  golden  calf,  which  Jeioboam 
set  up  in  this  place,  his  choioe  of  which  may  veiy  pas- 
sibly  have  been  determined  by  its  being  already  in  pos- 
session  of  "  a  house  of  gods." — Kitto. 

The  Taigum  of  R.  Joseph,  on  1  Chroń,  xxiii,  16,  idoi- 
tifies  thb  Jonathan  with  Shebuel,  the  son  of  Gershom, 
who  is  there  said  to  have  repented  (^^rri  "1^^  io 
his  old  age,  and  to  hare  been  appointed  by  David  as 
chief  over  his  treasorea.  AU  thb  ariaes  from  a  play 
upon  the  name  Shebuel,  from  which  thia  meaning  is  oc- 
tracted  in  aocordance  with  a  lavorite  practice  of  the 
TargumiBt— Smith. 

2.  Second  of  the  two  sona  of  Jada,  and  grandson  of 
Jerahmee],ofthefamilyof  Jndah;  ashisbrotber  Jether 
died  without  issne,  this  bnnch  of  the  linę  was  continued 
through  the  two  sons  of  Jonathan  (1  Cbnm.  ii,  82;  88). 
aa  oonsiderably  post  1612. 

3.  The  eldest  son  of  king  Sani  and  the  bosom  fiieod 
of  David  (JoaephUs  'Iwyadi;,  iliiC  vi,  6, 1 ).  He  fint  ap- 
pears  some  time  after  his  father^s  aoccsaion  (1  SaoLzii^ 
2).  If  his  younger  brother  Ishbosheth  was  forty  at  the 
time  of  Saul's  death  (2  Sam.  ii,  8),  Jonathan  mnBt  hars 
been  at  least  thirty  when  he  is  fizśt  mentioned.  Of  his 
own  family  we  know  nothing  except  the  fairth  of  one 
son,  five  yeais  before  his  death  (2  Sam.  ir,4).  He  mi 
regarded  in  his  father's  lifetime  aa  heir  to  the  thnoe. 
Like  Sani,  he  was  a  man  of  great  ati«ngth  and  actinty 
(2  Sam.  i,  28),  of  which  the  exploit  at  Michmash  was  a 
proof.  He  was  also  famous  for  the  pecnliar  maitial  ei- 
erdses  in  which  his  tribe  excdled--archery  and  slinf^ 
iug  (1  Chroń,  xii,  2).    His  bow  was  to  him  what  the 


JONATHAN 


995 


JONATHAN 


Bpear  was  to  his  father:  "the  how  of  Jonathan  turned 
not  back"  (2  Sam.  i,  22).  IŁ  was  always  about  him  (1 
Sam.  xyiii,  4 ;  xx,  85).  It  is  through  his  relation  with 
David  that  he  is  chiefly  known  to  us,  pzobahly  as  re- 
lated  by  his  desoendants  at  David's  court  Bat  there  is 
a  background,  not  so  dearly  given,  of  his  relation  with 
his  father.  From  the  time  that  he  fi^t  appears  he  is 
Saul^s  oonstant  companion.  He  was  always  present  at 
his  fathei^s  meals.  As  Abner  and  David  seem  to  hare 
oocapied  the  phices  aiterwards  called  the  captaincies  of 
**  the  host"  and  ^  of  the  guard,"  so  he  seems  to  have  been 
(as  Hoshai  afterwards)  ^  the  friend"  (comp.  1  Sam.  xx, 
25 ;  2  Sam.  xv,  87).  The  whole  story  implies,  without 
expre8sing,  the  deep  attachment  of  the  father  and  son. 
Jonathan  can  only  go  on  his  dangeroos  expedition  (1 
Sam.  xiv,  1)  by  oonc^ing  it  from  SaiU.  Saul's  vow  is 
coniirmed,  and  its  tragic  effect  deepened,  by  his  feeling 
for  his  son,  **  though  it  be  Jonathan  my  son**  (ibid.  xiv, 
89).  *<Tell  me  what  thou  hast  done*"  (ibid.  xiv,  43). 
Jonathan  cannot  bear  to  believe  his  iathefs  enmity  to 
David :  *'My  father  will  do  nothing,  great  or  smali,  but 
that  he  will  show  it  to  me :  and  why  shuuld  my  father 
hide  this  thiug  from  me?  it  is  not  so**  (1  Sam.  xx,  2). 
To  him,  if  to  any  one,  the  wild  frenzy  of  the  king  was 
amenaUe — *'Saal  hearkened  mito  the  voice  of  Jona- 
than" (I  Sam.  xix,  6).  Their  mutnal  affection  was  in- 
deed  intennipted  by  the  growth  of  Saul's  insanity.  Twioe 
the  father  would  have  sacrificed  the  son:  once  in  con- 
seąaence  of  his  vow  (1  Sam.  xiv) ;  the  second  time,  morę 
deliberately,  on  the  discovcTy  of  David'8  fligbt;  and  on 
this  last  occasion,  a  momentary  glimpse  is  given  of  some 
darker  history.  Werę  the  pbrases  "  son  of  a  penrerse  re- 
bellioos  woman" — ''shame  on  thy  mother^s  nakedness" 
(1  Sam.  XX,  80, 81),  merę  frantic  invective8?  or  was  there 
something  in  the  story  of  Ahinoam  or  Rizpah  which  we 
do  not  know ?  "In fierce  anger"  Jonathan  left  the  roy- 
al  presence  (ib.  84).  But  he  cast  his  lot  with  his  father's 
decline,  not  with  his  fTiend'8  risc,  and  "in  death  they 
were  not  divided"  (2  Sam.  i,  28 ;  1  Sam.  xxiii,  16). 

1.  The  first  main  part  of  his  career  is  connected  with 
the  war  with  the  Philistines,  commonly  called,  from  its 
locality, "  the  war  of  Michmash"  (1  Sam.  xiii,  21,  Sept), 
as  the  last  years  of  the  Peloponnesian  War  were  called, 
for  a  similar  reason, "  the  war  of  Decclca.''  In  the  pre- 
vious  war  with  the  Ammonites  (1  Sam.  xi,  4-15)  there  is 
no  mention  of  him ;  and  his  abrupt  appearance,  without 
explanation,  in  xiii,  2,  may  seem  to  iroply  that  some  part 
ofthenarrativehasbecnlost.  RC.1078.  Heisaiieady 
of  great  importance  in  the  state.  Of  the  8000  men  of 
whom  Saul*s  standing  army  was  formed(xiii,2;  xxiv, 
2;  xxvi,  1,  2),  1000  were  under  the  command  of  Jona- 
than at  Gibeah.  The  Philistines  were  still  in  the  gen- 
erał command  of  the  country;  an  officer  was  stationed 
at  Geba,either  the  same  as  Jonathan*s  position  or  close 
to  it.  In  a  sodden  act  of  youthful  daiing,  as  when  Tell 
loee  againat  Gessler,  or  aa  in  sacred  history  Moses  loee 
against  the  Egyptian,  Jonathan  alew  this  ofBoer(Auth. 
Yers.  **  garrison,"  Sept.  róv  Na<n'/3, 1  Sam.  xiii,  8, 4.  See 
Ewald,  ii,  476),  and  thna  gave  the  signal  for  a  generał 
revolt.  Saul  took  advantage  of  it,  and  the  whole  pop- 
ulation  lose.  But  it  was  a  premature  attempt  The 
Philistinee  poured  in  from  the  plain,  and  the  tyianny  be- 
came  moie  deeply  rooted  than  ever.  See  Saul.  Saul 
and  Jonathan  (with  their  immediate  attendants)  alone 
had  arms,  amidst  the  generał  weaknesa  and  disarming 
of  the  people  (1  Sam.  xiii,  22).  They  weie  encamped 
at  Gibeah,  with  a  smali  body  of  600  men,  and  as  they 
looked  down  from  that  heigbt  on  the  misfortnnes  of 
their  country,  and  of  their  native  tribe  especially,  they 
wept  aloud  (Sept.  ĆcXacov,  1  Sam.  xiii,  16). 

From  this  oppresaion,  as  Jonathan  by  his  former  act 
had  been  the  fint  to  piovoke  it,  so  now  he  was  the  first 
to  dełiyer  his  people.  On  the  former  occasion  Saul  had 
been  eąnaUy  with  himself  involved  in  the  responsibility 
of  the  deed.  Sani "  blew  the  tnmipet  f  Saul  had  "  smit- 
ten  the  officer  of  the  Philistines"  (xiii,  8, 4).  But  now 
it  wonld  seem  that  Jonathan  waa  lesolyed  to  undertake 


the  whole  risk  himself.  "The  day,**  the  day  fixed  by 
him  (Sept.  yirerai  r/  t)ftipa,  1  Sam.  xiv,  l),appioached; 
and  without  communicating  his  project  to  any  one,  ex- 
cept  the  young  man,  whom,  like  all  the  chiefa  uf  that 
age,  he  retained  as  his  armor-bearer,  he  sallied  forth  from 
GibŃeah  to  attack  the  garrison  of  the  Philistines  station- 
ed on  the  other  side  of  the  steep  defile  of  Michmash 
(xiv,  1).  His  words  are  short,but  they  breathe  exact- 
ly  the  andent  and  peculiar  spirit  of  the  Israelitish  war- 
rior:  "Come,  and  let  us  go  oyer  uuto  the  garrison  of 
these  uncircumcised ;  it  may  be  that  Jehovah  will  work 
for  us;  for  there  is  no  reetraint  to  Jehovah  to  save  by 
many  or  by  few."  The  answer  is  no  less  characteristic 
of  the  dose  friendship  of  the  two  young  men,  already 
like  that  which  afterwards  sprang  up  between  Jona- 
than and  David.  "  Do  all  that  is  in  thine  heart ;  .  .  .  . 
behold,  /  am  with  thee ;  as  thy  heart  is  my  heart  (Sept., 
1  Sam.  xiv,  7)."  After  the  manner  of  the  time  (and 
the  morę,  probably,  from  having  taken  no  connsel  of  the 
high-priest  or  any  prophet  before  his  departure),  Jona- 
than proposed  to  draw  an  omen  for  their  course  from 
the  oonduct  of  the  enemy.  If  the  garrison,  on  seeing 
them,  gave  intimations  of  desoending  upon  them,  they 
would  remain  in  the  valley ;  if,  on  the  other  hand,  they 
raised  a  challenge  to  advance,  they  were  to  accept  it. 
The  latter  tomed  out  to  be  the  case.  The  first  appear- 
ance of  the  two  waniors  from  behind  the  rocks  was 
taken  by  the  Philistines  as  a  funive  apparition  of  "  the 
Hebrews  coming  forth  out  of  the  holes  where  they  had 
hid  themsdve8;"  and  they  were  weloomed  with  a  scof- 
fing  invitation  (such  as  the  Jebusites  afterwards  olTered 
to  Dayid), "  Come  up,  and  we  will  show  you  a  thing" 
(xiv,  4-12).  Jonathan  immediately  took  them  at  their 
word.  Strong  and  active  as  he  wasj  **  strong  as  a  Ilon, 
and  swift  as  an  eagle"  (2  Sam.  i,  28),  he  was  fully  equal 
to  the  adventure  of  dimbing  on  his  hands  and  feet  up 
the  face  of  the  clilf.  When  he  came  directly  in  view 
of  them,  with  his  armor-bearer  behind  him,  they  both, 
after  the  manner  of  their  tńbe  (1  Chroń,  xii,  2),  dis- 
charged  a  flight  of  arrows,  stones,  and  pebbles  from  their 
bows,  cross-bows,  and  słings,  with  such  effect  that  twen- 
ty  men  fell  at  the  first  onaet  A  panic  seized  the  garri- 
son, thence  spread  to  the  camp,  and  thence  to  the  sur- 
rounding  hordes  of  marauders ;  an  earthąuake  combined 
with  the  terror  of  the  moment ;  the  confusion  increased ; 
the  Israelites  who  had  been  teken  8laves  by  the  Philis- 
tines during  the  last  three  dajrs  (Sept.)  rosę  in  mutiny ; 
the  Israelites  who  lay  hid  in  the  numeious  caverns  and 
deep  holes  in  which  the  rocks  of  the  neighborhood 
abound,  sprang  out  of  their  subterranean  dwellings. 
Saul  and  his  llttle  band  had  watched  in  astonishment 
the  wild  retreat  from  the  beights  of  Gibeah ;  he  now 
joined  in  the  pursuit,  which  led  him  headlong  after  the 
fugitives,  over  the  mgged  plateaa  of  Bethel,  and  down 
the  pass  of  Beth-horon  to  Ajalon  (xiv,  15-81).  See 
Gibeah.  The  father  and  son  had  not  met  on  that  day : 
Saul  only  conjectured  his  Bon's  absenoe  firom  not  finding 
him  when  he  numbered  the  people.  Jonathan  had  not 
heanł  of  the  rash  curse  (xiv,  24)  which  Saul  invoked  on 
any  one  who  ato  before  the  evening.  In  the  dizziness 
and  darkness  (Hebrew,  1  Sam.  xiv,  27)  that  came  on 
after  his  desperate  exertion8,4ie  put  forth  the  staff  which 
apparently  had  (with  his  ding  and  bow)  been  his  chief 
weapon,  and  tasted  the  honey  which  lay  on  the  ground 
as  they  passed  through  the  forest  The  pursuers  in 
generał  were  restrained  even  fit>m  this  alight  indul- 
gence  by  fear  of  the  royal  corse ;  but  the  moment  that 
the  day,  with  its  enforćed  iast,  waa  over,  they  flew,  like 
Muslims  at  sunset  during  the  fast  of  Ramadan,  on  the 
captuied  cattle,  and  devoured  them,  even  to  the  brutal 
neglect  of  the  law  which  forbade  the  dismemberment  of 
the  fiesh  carcasses  with  the  blood.  This  vio]ation  of 
the  law  Saul  endeavored  to  prevent  and  to  expiate  by 
eiecting  a  large  stone,  which  senred  both  as  a  rude  ta- 
ble  and  as  an  altar ;  the  first  altar  that  was  raised  under 
the  monarchy.  It  was  in  the  dead  of  night,  after  this 
wild  revd  waa  over,  tłiat  he  propoaed  that  the  pursuit 


i 


JONATHAN 


996 


JONATHAN 


Bhoald  be  oontinued  till  dawn;  and  then,  when  Łhe  ń- 
lence  of  the  oiade  of  the  higb-priest  indicated  that 
BomethiDg  had  occurred  to  mtexx3ept  the  diyine  favor, 
tbe  lot  was  tried,  and  Jonathan  appeared  as  the  colpriŁ. 
Jephtbah's  dieadful  sacrifioe  wonld  bare  been  repeated ; 
but  the  people  interposed  in  bebalf  of  the  bero  of  tbat 
great  day,  and  Jonathan  was  sayed  (xiv,  24^). 

2.  But  the  chief  interest  of  Jonathan'8  career  is  de- 
rived  fiom  the  friendship  witb  David,  which  began  on 
the  day  of  David'8  return  ftiom  tbe  victory  over  tbe 
champion  of  Gatb,  and  oontinued  tiU  his  death.  It  is 
the  first  Biblical  instanoe  of  a  romantic  friendship,  sach 
as  was  oommon  afterwards  in  Greece,  and  bas  been  sinoe 
in  Christendom;  and  is  remarkable  both  as  giving  its 
sanction  to  these,  and  as  filled  witb  a  patbos  of  its  own, 
which  bas  been  imitated,  but  never  surpassed,  in  modem 
Works  of  fiction.  **  Tbe  soul  of  Jonathan  was  knit  witb 
the  soul  of  Dayid,  and  Jonathan  loved  him  as  his  own 
soul*' — '^Thy  loTe  to  me  was  wonderful,  passing  the 
love  of  women"  (1  Sam.  xyiii,  1 ;  2  Sam.  i,  26).  £acb 
found  in  each  the  affection  tbat  be  found  not  in  bis  own 
family;  no  jealousy  of  riyalry  between  the  two,  as 
claimants  for  the  same  tbrone,  erer  interposed:  *<Tbou 
ahalt  be  king  in  Israel,  and  I  sball  bo  next  imto  tbee** 
(1  Sam.  xxiii,  17).  The  friendship  was  oonfirmed,  after 
the  manner  of  the  time,  by  a  solemn  compact  oflen  re- 
peated. The  first  was  immediately  on  theii  first  ac- 
ąuaintance.  Jonathan  gave  David  as  a  pledge  his  royal 
mantle,  bis  sword,  bis  girdle,  and  his  famoos  bow  (xviii, 
4).  His  fidelity  was  soon  called  into  action  by  the  in- 
sanę  ragę  of  his  father  against  David.  He  interceded 
for  his  life,  at  first  witb  suoceas  (1  Sam.  xix,  1-7).  Tben 
the  madness  retumed,  and  David  fled.  It  was  in  a  se- 
cret  interview  during  this  flight,  by  the  stone  of  Ezel, 
tbat  tbe  seoond  covenant  was  madę  between  the  two 
friends,  of  a  sdll  morę  binding  kind,  extending  to  their 
mutual  poBterity— Jonathan  layiug  such  empbasis  on 
tbis  portion  of  tbe  compact  as  almost  to  suggest  the  be- 
lief  of  a  sligbt  misgiying  on  bis  part  of  David'8  futurę 
oonduct  in  this  respect.  It  is  tbis  interview  which 
brings  out  the  character  of  Jonathan  in  tbe  liyeliest  col- 
ors — ^bis  litUe  artifices — ^bis  love  for  both  his  father  and 
his  friend — ^bis  bitter  disappointment  at  his  father's  un- 
manageable  fuiy^bis  Jhmiliar  sport  of  archery.  Witb 
passionato  embraces  and  tears  the  two  Menda  parted, 
B.C.  dr.  1062,  to  meet  only  onco  morę  (1  Sam.  xx). 
Tbat  one  morę  meeting  was  far  away  in  the  forest  of 
Ziph,  during  Saul's  pursuit  of  David.  Jonathan'a  alarm 
for  his  Mend'8  life  is  dow  chauged  into  a  oonfidence  tbat 
he  will  escape:  ''He  strengthened  his  band  in  God." 
Finally,  and  for  the  third  time,  they  renewed  the  cove- 
nant,  and  tben  parted  forever  (1  Sam.  xxiii,  16-18).  B. 
C.  cir.  1061. 

From  tbis  time  forth  we  bear  no  morę  till  tbe  battle 
of  Gilboa.  In  tbat  battle  be  fell,  with  bis  two  biothers 
and  his  father,  and  bis  corpse  shared  their  fate  (1  Sam. 
xxxi,  2,  8).  B.C.  1053.  His  remains  were  buried  first 
at  Jabesh-Gilead  Cb.  13),  but  afterwards  removed  with 
those  of  his  father  to  Zelah  in  Benjamin  (2  Sam.  xxi, 
12).  The  news  of  bis  death  oocasioned  tbe  oelebrated 
elegy  of  Dayid,  in  which,  as  the  Mend,  be  naturally  oc- 
cupies  the  chief  phioe  (2  Sam.  i,  22, 23, 25, 26),  and  whiob 
seems  to  have  been  sung  in  the  education  of  the  archers 
of  Judab,  in  commemoration  of  the  one  great  archer, 
Jonathan :  ''He  bade  them  teach  the  children  of  Jodab 
the  use  of  the  bow"  (2  Sam.  i,  17, 18). 

Jonathan  left  one  son,  aged  five  years  old  at  tbe  time 
i  of  his  death  (2  Sam.  iv,  4),  to  whom  be  bad  probably 
given  bis  original  name  of  Merib-baal,  afterwards 
chauged  for  Mephibosheth  (oomp.  1  Chroń,  viii,  34 ;  ix, 
40).  See  Hephibosiiktii.  Through  him  the  linę  of 
descendants  was  oontinued  down  to  the  time  of  £zra  (1 
Chroń,  ix,  40),  and  eyen  tben  their  great  anoestor^s 
archery  waa  practiced  among  them. — Smith.  See  Da- 
yid. 

See  Niemeyer,  Charakter,  iv,  413 ;  Herder,  Geist,  der 
E«br,  Poetie,  ii,  287 ;  Koster,  in  the  Stud,  u.  KriL  1882, 


ii,  866;  Ewald,  Tsr.  GeB^  u,  530;  Parean,  Ehgia  Do* 
vi^t  etc  (Groning.  1829);  Simon,  De  amkUia  JkrnUs 
et  Jon.  (Hildbuigb.  1789). 

4.  Son  of  Shage,  a  xelative  of  Ahiam,  both  amoog 
David's  famous  waniors  and  descendants  of  Jamien  of 
the  monntains  of  Judab  (2  Sam.  xxiii,  82;  1  Chroo.  zi, 
34).    KC.  1046.    See  Harabitk. 

5.  Son  of  the  bigh-priest  Abiathar,  and  one  of  the 
adherenta  to  David*s  cauae  during  the  lebeUion  of  Ab- 
salom  (2  Sam.  xv,  27, 36).  He  remained  at  En-rogel 
onder  pietenoe  of  procuring  water,  and  reported  to  bia 
master  tbe  proceedings  in  the  camp  of  tbe  insoigents  (2 
Sam.  xvii,  20 ;  Josephus  lwva3i|C9  ^n<-  vii,  9, 2>  KC 
cir.  1023.  At  a  later  dato  bis  oonstancy  was  mamfested 
on  a  similar  occasion  by  annooncing  to  the  amUtioos 
Adonijah  the  forestalroent  of  bis  measuies  by  tbe  suo- 
cession  of  Solomon  (1  Kings  i,  42,  48).  RC.  cir.  1016. 
"  On  both  occasions  it  may  be  remarked  tbat  be  appesn 
as  the  swift  and  tmsty  messenger.  He  is  the  lasc  de- 
Bcendant  of  Eli  of  whom  we  bear  attything**  (Smith). 
Sec  Dayid. 

6.  Son  of  Shammah  (Shimeah  or  Shimea),  and  Da- 
vid*8  nephew,  as  well  as  one  of  his  chief  warńors,  a  po- 
sition  which  be  eamed  by  slaying  a  gigantic  lelatiTc 
of  Goliatb  (2  Sam.  xxi,  21 ;  1  Chroń,  xx,  7;  Josephu 
'liavd^CfAnt.Yu,l2y2).  KClOld.  He  was aiso madę 
secretaiy  of  tbe  royal  cabinet  (1  Chroń,  xxvii,  32,  where 
li^  is  mistaken  in  the  Auth.  Yers.  for  the  usual  seme 
of  "uncle").  B.a  1014.  "  Jerome  {Ouatt  Hdtr.  on  1 
Sam.  xvii,  12)  conjecturee  tbat  this  was  Nathan  the 
prophet,  tbus  making  np  the  eightb  son,  not  named  in 
I  Chroń,  ii,  13-15.     But  this  is  not  probahle**  (Smith). 

7.  Son  of  Uzziah,  and  steward  of  tbe  agricaltunl 
revenue  of  David  (1  Chroń,  xxvii,  25 ;  Heh.  and  A.  V. 
"Jehonatiian"). 

8.  One  of  tbe  Leyites  sent  by  Jehosłiapbat  to  aid  in 
teaching  tbe  Law  to  the  people  (1  Chroń,  xvi],  8;  Heh. 
and  A.V. "  Jehonathan'*). 

9.  A  scribe  wbose  bouse  was  converted  into  a  prism 
in  which  Jeremiab  was  dosely  confined  (Jer.  xxvii,  15, 
20 ;  xxxviii,  26).    RC.  589. 

10.  Brotber  of  Johanan,  the  son  of  Kareah,  and  as- 
sociated  with  him  in  his  intercourse  witb  Gedaliab.  the 
Babylonian  go vemor  of  Jerusalem  (Jer.  xl,  8).   BwC<.  587. 

11.  Son  of  Shemaiah  and  priest  contemporaiy  with 
Joiakim  (Neh.  xii,  18 ;  Heb.  and  A.y. "  Jehonatuas^. 

12.  Son  of  Melicu  and  priest  oontempocary  with  Joi- 
akim (Neh.  xii,  14).    B.a  between  536  and  459. 

13.  Father  of  Ebed,  which  latter  waa  an  bnełite  of 
tbe  "  sons"  of  Adin  that  retumed  from  Babykm  trith 
Ezra  (Ezra  viii,  6)  at  the  head  of  fifty  malea,  a  munher 
which  is  increased  to  250  in  1  Esdr.  Tiii,  32,  where  Jon- 
athan is  written  'lawd^ac,    B.C  antę  459. 

14.  Son  of  Asahel,  a  chief  Israelito  aaaodated  nith 
Jahaziah  in  sepaiating  the  retnmed  exikB  from  their 
Gentilewives(Eznz,15).    B.a45d. 

15.  Son  of  Joiada  and  father  of  Jaddoa,  Jewiah  high- 
prieats  (Neh«  xii,  11) ;  elsewbeie  called  JotULSAS  (Neh. 
xii,  22),  and  apparently  John  by  Joeeplnia,  wbo  rebtes 
bis  assassination  of  bia  own  brotber  Jeans  in  the  Tem- 
pie (Ant.  xi,  7, 1  and  2).  Jonathan,  or  John,  waa  high- 
priest  for  tbirty-^two  yean,  acoording  to  Eosdńns  and 
Che  A]exandr.  Ćbron.  (Selden,  De  Sueeeet,  m  Potśtf.  o^ 
vi,  vii).    See  Hioh-priest. 

16.  Son  of  Shemaiah,  of  the  &nu]y  of  Aaaph,  and 
father  of  Zechariab,  whidi  last  waa  one  of  the  priesta 
app(ńnted  to  flonrish  tbe  tiompets  aa  the  prooessiMi 
moved  aronnd  the  reboilt  walla  of  Jeraukm  (Kdk  xii, 
35).    KC.  anto  446. 

17.  A  son  of  Mattathiaa,  and  leader  of  the  Jews  ia 
their  war  of  independence  after  the  death  of  hb  farothcr 
Juda8MaocabeBQS,B.ai61  (IMiaGC.]x,19aq.)^-&nith. 
See  Maocabkbs. 

18.AaonofAbaałom  (1  Maee.  xiii,  11),  aentbf  Si- 
mon with  a  force  to  oocnpy  Joppa,  whidi  waa  alńadf 
in  the  ha&dB  of  the  Jews  (1  Ifaoc.  xii,88),  tłMwgtLpnlr 


JONATHAN  BEN-ANAN         997        JONATHAN  BEN-UZZIEL 


•bły  hełd  only  by  a  weak  ganiwii.  Jonathan  expeUed 
tbe  inhabitants  (roic  mnac  lv  abrg ;  oomp.  Josephus, 
^fie.xiU,6,d)and8eci]Tedthecity.  Jonathan  was  piob- 
ably  a  biother  of  Mattathiaii  (2)  (1  liacc  xi,  70)«— 

19.  A  priest  who  u  said  to  bave  offend  ap  a  Bolemn 
pniyer  on  the  oocaaion  of  thc  aacriflce  madę  by  Nebe- 
miah  after  the  recovery  of  the  sacred  flre  (2  Maoc.  i,  28 
8q. ;  oompare  Ewald,  GtttA.  d.  V.  Itr.  iv,  184  8q.).  The 
nanatiTe  is  intereating,  as  it  preaents  a  aingnlar  exam- 
ple  of  the  Gombination  of  public  prayer  with  aaerifioe 
(Grimm,  ad  2  Maec  L  c.).— ^mith. 

20.  A  Saddocee  at  whoae  inatigation  Hyrcanna  (q. 
y.)  abandoned  the  Phariaeea  for  their  mild  aentence 
againat  hia  maligner  Eleazar  (Joeephua,  A  nL  ziii,  10, 6). 

21.  Son  of  Ananoa,  appointed  Jewiah  high^prieat,  A. 
D.  86,  by  Yitelliua  in  p]ace  of  Joaeph  Caiaphaa  (A  nL  xviii, 
4, 2),  and  depoaed  afber  two  yeaia,  when  hia  brother  The- 
opldlua  aucoeeded  him  (tb.  6, 2).  He  waa  reappointed  by 
Agrippa  A.D.  43,  bat  thia  time  he  dedined  that  honor 
in  ikvor  of  his  brother  Matthias  (Joeephua,  AnL  xix,  6, 
4) ;  he  waa  aent  by  Comanua  to  Claudiua  in  a  ąnairel 
with  the  Samaritana,  but  appears  to  have  been  rdeaaed 
by  the  emperor  (War^  ii,  12, 6  and  7);  he  waa  at  last 
murdered  by  the  Sicarii  ( War^  ii,  18, 8).  He  waa  per- 
hapa  the  high-prieat  wbom  Felix  caoaed  to  be  aasaaai- 
nated  for  hia  reproofa  of  hia  bad  goyemment< Joeephua, 
AnL  XX,  8,  5).  (See  Frankd,  Monatuchrift^  i,  589; 
Gri&tz,  GeBch,  der  Juden,  iii,  268,  287, 867.)    fiee  Hiou- 

PBISST. 

22.  A  common  weayer,  leader  of  the  Sicarii  in  Cy- 
lene,  captured  and  put  to  death  by  the  Romana  after 
yarioua  adventarea  (Josephoa,  War^  yii,  11, 12). 

23.  A  Jew  who  chaUenged  the  Romana  to  ńngle 
combat  during  the  laat  aiege,  and,  afler  alaying  one 
oombatant,  Padena,  waa  at  length  killed  by  Priacna  (Jo- 
aephua,  War,  vi,  2, 10). 

Jonathan  ben- Anan.    See  Jonathan,  21. 

Jonathan  ben-Uzziel,  the  celebrated  tranalator 
of  the  Hcbrew  prophetical  writinga  into  Chaldee,  a  diaci- 
ple  of  HiUel  I,  one  of  the  firat  of  thoae  thirty  disciplea  of 
Hillel  wbofiu  the  language  of  the  Talmud,  '^  were  worthy 
to  poaaesa  the  power  of  atopping  the  aun  Uke  Joahua,*' 
flouńshed  about  B.C.  30.  His  expoeitiona  were  eapecially 
on  Haggai,  Zechariah,  and  Malachi,  a  fanciful  reaaon  for 
which  is  given  in  the  Talmud :  "'  When  the  illuminating 
aun  aroae  upon  the  dark  paasagea  of  the  propheta,  through 
thia  tranalation,  the  length  and  breadth  of  Paleatine 
were  agitated,  and  everywhere  the  yoice  of  God  (ns 
ilp)  or  the  yoice  of  the  people  (vox  populi  vox  dei) 
waa  heard  aaking,  *Who  haa  disdoaed  theae  mjrateriea 
to  the  aona  of  men  ?'  With  great  humility  and  hecom- 
ing  modeaty  Jonathan  b.-Uzziel  anawered, '  I  have  dia- 
doeed  the  myateriea;  but  thou,  O  Lord,  knoweat  that  1 
have  not  done  it  to  get  glory  for  myself,  or  for  the  houae 
of  my  father,  but  for  thy  glory'a  aake,  that  dtacuaeion 
might  not  increaae  in  Israel'"  {MegiUa,  8,  a).  From 
these  noticea  in  the  Talmud,  it  ia  manifeat  that  Jona- 
than waa  only  the  Chaldee  tranalator  of  the  propheta; 
for  it  ia  diatinctly  declared  in  the  laat  qnoted  paasage 
that  when  Jonathan  wiahed  alao  to  tranalate  the  Ha- 
giographa  (D^^irs),  the  aame  yoice  from  heaven 
(ilp  na)  emphatically  forbade  it  (T^^^l),  becauae  of 
the  great  Measianic  mysteriea  contained  therein  (n*^K^ 
n*^3313  yp  n-«3),  eapedally  in  the  book  of  Daniel 
(comp.  Raahi  in  loco).  But  tradition  haa  alao  aacribed 
to  him  the  paraphrase  of  the  Pentateueh  known  under 
the  name  of  PBeudo-Jonathan  and  the  Targum  of  the 
fiye  Megilloth. 

The  que8tion  of  the  anthorahip  of  the  paraphraaea 
will  be  treated  in  fuli  in  the  article  Targum  (q.  y.). 
We  haye  room  here  only  for  a  few  pointa  in  the  diBcua- 
aion,  aud  will  mainly  ap^ak  of  the  work  which  ia  gen- 
eially  ftatened  upon  iiim.    Firstly,  then,  aa  to  thia  Par^ 


aphnue  on  the  PropheU  (fi-^SlOK^n  D''»''a5  ftia^in 
C*^aiinK1),  which  embraoea  Joahua,  Judgea,  Samuel, 
Kinga,  laaiah,  Jeremiah,  Ezekiel,  and  the  twelve  minor 
propheta,  ita  importance  ia  not  only  great  becauae  it  con- 
taina  expoeitiona  of  Haggai,  Zechariah,  and  Malachi, 
but  mainly  ao  becauae,  dating,  aa  it  doea,  firom  a  period 
when  the  Hebrew  language  gave  place  to  the  Aramaic 
dialect,  and  when  ancient  Jewiah  traditiona  and  scrip- 
tural  expositiona  were  introdnced  in  the  paraphraaea 
read  during  the  divine  eeryioea  of  the  Jewiah  people,  it 
containa  veiy  many  ancient  readinga,  which  go  far  to 
explain  many  an  obacure  peasage  in  the  prophetical 
writinga,  and  thua  preyent  false  ciiticiam  and  looae 
conjecture.  A  liat  of  theae  yarioua  readinga  haa  been 
oollected  in  the  Hebrew  annual  entitled  V*lbn}l  (Lem- 
burg,  1852),  i,  109  aą.  The  paiaphraae  waa  firat  pub- 
liahed  in  1494,  and  afterwarda  with  that  of  Onkeloa  on 
the  Pentateueh  (Yenice).  It  is  found  in  all  the  Rab- 
binic  Biblea;  alao  in  Walton'a  Biblia  Pofygl  (ii,  iii,  and 
iv),  and  in  Buxtorra  BibHa  Htbrma  (Bade,  1720,  u-iy), 
etc.,  with  a  Latin  tranalation. 

Aa  to  the  other  leputed  writinga  of  Jonathan,  we  haye 
(a)  the  Paraphra»e  on  the  Pentateueh  OnST'  DlilH 
niinn  bs?);  it  ia  nothing  more  or  leaa  than  a  com- 
pleted  yersion  of  what  is  called  the  Jeruaalem  or  Pale^ 
tine  Taigum  C^aittJin**  Oiann),  which  of  itaelf  ia  in 
reality  only  deaultory  gloasea  on  Onkeloa*a  paraphraae. 
ThiB  completed  yeralon  was  at  firat  called  Taigum  Jeru- 
aalem, after  the  fragment  on  which  it  waa  baaed,  but  af- 
terwarda it  obtained  the  name  of  Taigum  Jonathan,  by 
erroneoualy  reeoMng  the  abbreviation  *^Vi  =  D12i*m 
•^abiun^  into  •jnm''  n^y^r\,  The  additiona  to  the 
work  were  probably  not  madę  pńor  to  the  aeyenth  cen- 
tury.  The  work  waa  firat  puUiahed  in  Yenice  1590^1, 
with  the  Hebrew  text  of  the  Pentateueh,  the  paraphraae 
of  Onkeloa,  the  fragmenta  of  the  Jeruaalem  gloeeea,  the 
commentariea  of  Raahi  and  Jaoob  ben-Aaher,  then  in 
Baale  (1607),Hanau  (1614),  Amaterdam  (1640),  Prague 
(1646),  etc.,  and  haa  lately  been  printed,  "with  a  oom- 
mentaiy,  in  the  beautiful  edition  of  the  Pentateueh  with 
the  Rabbinic  commentariea  (Yienna,  1859).  £xplanap> 
tiona  of  it  were  also  written  by  David  b.-Jacob  (Pragnę, 
1609),  Feiwel  b.-David  Secharja  (Hanau,  1614),  Moide- 
cai  Kremaier  (Amaterdam,  1671) ;  and  it  was  translated 
into  Latin  by  Chevallier,  in  Walton^a  Polygłot,  An 
English  tranalation  waa  puUiahed  by  the  late  leamed 
Wealeyan  preacher,  J.  W.  Etheridge  (Lond.  1862, 2  rola. 
8vo) ;  but  the  maaterly  treaUaea  on  thia  Pseudo-Jona- 
than  are  by  Seligaohn  and  Traub,  and  by  Frankel,  Zeit- 
tchr.  /.  d  reliff.  Int,  d,  JudentL  (1846),  p.  100  są.  (oomp. 
Seligaohn  and  Traub,  in  FrankeFa  Afonatstchrifl,  Lpz. 
1866,  vi,  96-114, 138-149 ;  Etheridge,  Inlrod.  to  JticUh 
Lit.  p.  195 ;  Wiener,  Dt  Jonathanie  in  Pent.  paraphraei 
Chaldaica;  Petermann,  De  duahua  Pent,  paraphrasibue 
Chaldaicii)' — (h)  the  Paraphraee  on  the  Five MegiUoth, 
Some  early  critica  have  attributed  thia  work  to  Mar  Jo- 
aef,  of  Sora  (died  882),  but  of  late  it  ia  asaigned  to  a 
later  period  eyen  than  the  paraphrase  of  the  Penta- 
teueh, and  ia  oonadered  simply  a  compilation  from  an- 
cient materiala  madę  by  aeyeral  indiyiduala.  This  yer- 
alon ia  generally  published,  together  with  the  Hebrew 
text,  in  the  Jewiah  editiona  of  the  Pentateueh,  and  ia 
oontained  in  all  the  Rabbinic  Biblea.  A  rhymed  ver- 
aion  of  the  whole  of  this  paraphraae  waa  published  by 
Jaoob  beą-Samuel,  alao  called  Koppelmann  ben-Bonem 
(about  1584).  A  Latin  yersion  of  it  ia  given  in  Wal- 
ton*s  PoitfffloL  Gili  haa  given  an  English  translation 
of  the  entire  paraphraae  on  the  Song  of  Songs  (Com- 
menL  on  the  Song,  1728) ;  and  Dr.  Ginsburg  has  lately 
translated  the  firat  chapter  of  the  paraphraae  of  the  Song 
{CommenL  on  the  Song,  p.  29  aq.),  and  tbe  whole  of  Ec- 
cl^i4tMł^  (Comment,  on  Ecdee.  p.  503  aq.) .  Hebrew  com- 
mentariea on  thia  paraphraae  have  been  written  by  Mor- 
decai  Lorca  (Cracow,  1580)  and  Chajim  Feiwel  (Berlin, 
1705).    See  alao  Bartokwci,  BOUoth,  Ma^na  Babbimca, 


JONATHAS 


998 


JONES 


iii,  788  8q. ;  Wolf,  BibUoth.  Hebraa,  ii,  1159  8q. ;  Zonz, 
Die  GottekUentL  Yortrage  d,  Juden,  p.  62  8q. ;  Greiger, 
Urtchr^ft  u.  Ueberseizungm  d.  Bibel;  Jost,  GeacMchie  d. 
Juden,  i,  269;  FUret,  Bibliotheca  Judaica^  ii,  105,  107; 
Kitto,  Ctfclop.  BOdical  LU.  ii,  &  v. 

Jon^athas  (luva^av  y,T/la^dv;  Yvilg,J(małhu£ 
V.  r.  Naihan)i  the  LaŁin  form  of  the  oommon  name  Jon- 
athan, which  IB  preaenred  in  the  A.  V.  at  Tob.  v,  13. 

Jo^nath-eaem-recho^kimCD^^phn  Di»  rr>, 
yonath'  t'Um  reckoHm^  dove  o/*the  dumbnesB  o/*  the  du- 
tanceSf  i.  e.  the  silent  dove  in  distant  plaoes,  or  among 
atrangecB;  Septuag.  virćp  rov\aov  rov  diró  Tutvayiutv 
fUfAaKpvfifuvoVfYvi)g,  pro  populo  qtti  a  SaneUa  longe 
fachu  es/),  an  enigmatical  title  of  Psa,  lvi,  yariously  in- 
terpreted,  but  probably  deacripŁive  of  David'8  solitary 
feelings  while  abuent  from  the  worehip  of  the  Tempie 
among  the  Philistines;  oomp.  Psa.  xxxviii,  13;  lxv,  5; 
lxxiv,  19.  (See  Alexander,  Comment.  ad  loc)  The  ex- 
presslon  "  upon"  (bc),  preceding  this  phraee,  would  seem 
to  indicate  that  it  was  the  name  or  opening  daiue  of 
some  well-known  air  to  which  the  ode  was  set,  a  sup- 
position  not  inconsistent  with  .the  above  ap{«opriation. 
Ita  original  application  would  in  that  caae  be  nnknown, 
like  that  of  similar  superscriptions  of  other  Psalms. 
"  Rashi  considers  that  DaWd  employed  the  phrase  to 
describe  his  own  unhappy  condition  when,  exiled  from 
the  land  of  Israel,  he  was  liyiog  with  Achish,  and  was 
an  object  of  suspidon  and  hatred  to  the  countrymen  of 
Groliath :  thus  waa  he  amongst  the  Philistines  as  a  mute 
(fi^sbK)  dove.  Kimchi  supplies  the  ibUowing  oom- 
mentary :  *  The  Philiatines  sought  to  seize  and  slay  Da- 
vid  (1  Sam.  xxix,  4-11),  and  he,  in  his  terror,  and  pre- 
tending  to  hare  lost  his  reason,  called  himself  Jonath, 
eren  as  a  dove  dxiven  from  her  oote.'  Knapp^s  explana- 
tion  '  on  the  oppression  of  foreign  ruleiB* — aasigning  to 
EUm  the  same  meaning  which  it  has  in  Exod.  xv,  15 — 
is  in  harmony  with  the  contents  of  the  psalm,  and  is 
worthy  of  consideration.  De  Wette  translates  *•  dove  of 
the  distant  terebinths,'  or  '  of  the  dove  of  dumbness 
(Stummheit)  among  the  strangers'  or '  in  distant  places.' 
According  to  the  Septuagint,  the  phrase  means  *on  the 
people  far  removed  from  the  holy  places'  (probably 
Dbfi<=:Db^K,the  Temple-hall;  see  Orient,  Literatur- 
blatł.  p.  579,  year  1841),  a  rendering  which  veiy  nearly 
accords  with  the  Ghaldee  paraphrase :  *  On  the  congre- 
gation  of  Israel,  compared  with  a  mute  dove  while  ex- 
iled  from  their  cities,  but  who  come  back  again  and  of- 
fer  praise  to  the  Lord  of  the  Unirerse.*  Aben-Ezn 
rcgards  Jonaih-elem-rechokim  aa  merely  indicating  the 
modulation  or  the  rhythm  of  the  psalm.  In  the  notes 
to  1Vf  endelssohn^s  version  of  the  Psalms,  J^math-^lemr- 
recholdm  is  mentioned  as  a  musical  instrument  which 
produced  duli,  moumful  sounds.  *•  Some  take  it  for  a 
pipę  caUed  in  Greek  'ikufioc^  n3t'^,from  y\\  G^rw*,  which 
would  make  the  inscription  read  *'  the  tong  Grecian 
pipę,"  but  tbb  does  not  appear  to  us  admissible'  (JPrrf- 
ace,  p.  26)"  (Smith).     See  Psalms. 

Jonoourt,  Petbr  de,  a  French  Protestant  thedo- 
gian,  was  bom  at  Clermont  towards  the  middle  of  the 
17th  century.  A  few  yeara  before  the  revocation  of  the 
Edict  of  Nantes  he  removed  to  Holland,  and  became 
pastor  of  Middelburg  in  1678,  and  of  La  Haye  in  1699. 
He  died  in  the  latter  city  in  1725.  He  wascousidered 
one  of  the  best  preachers  of  his  day.  He  wrote  Entrę- 
Hens  mr  les  dijferentes  Afethodes  d'expliquer  PEcrilure  et 
deprecher  de  ceux  qu"on  appelle  Cocceiens  et  YoHiena,  etc 
(Amst  1707, 12mo) : — Noureaux  entretien»j  etc  (Amst 
1708, 12mo) ;  ąuite  a  contro  ver8y  resulted  from  this  work, 
but  Joncourt  was  ordered  by  the  s}^od  of  Nimcguen  to 
desist  from  Iiis  attacks,  and  to  retract,  which  he  did  in 
the  I^ifre  aux  eglises  WaUonnet  des  Pat/s-Bcu (lAHaye, 
1708,  r2mo) : — Petisies  utiies  aux  Chretiens  dt  tous  les 
etałit,  etc.  (La  Haye,  1710, 8vo)  :—Ijetłres  sur  le£  Jeux  de 
Jlasard  et  sur  Cusage  de  sefaire  celer  pour  eviter  une 
visite  incommode  (La  Haye,  1713, 12mo),  mostly  against 


lATUMMBiyU>eriTraititsurdeimaiiire8deeimKim» 
(Amat.  1708, 12mo>,  and  a  woik  which  give  rise  to  8ev- 
end  pamphlets  on  thia  ąoestion  'r—Lettre$  cntiqtu$  sht 
d»»ers  ntjeU  importatUs  de  PŹeritta^  SatHte  (Amst  1715, 
12tao)i—Entreiiem  sur  Fetat  primU  de  ki  Sdi^  tn 
/yoRce  (La  Haye,  1726, 12mo).  He  abo  poUiahed  a  re- 
vised  edition  of  Clement  Marot  and  Th.de  Beaa^s  tnus- 
ladon  of  the  Paalms  (AmstenL  1716, 12nio).  See  J.  G. 
WakhjBiUioth.  TkeUogica  aefeeto,  voL  ii ;  Joumał  des 
Savant4,  June,  1714^  p.  579 ;  January,  1716,  p.  85 ;  Fehm- 
ary,  p.  128 ;  Qa^nnl,  La  Fnmee  Litterairt ;  Haag,  La 
France  Protestante;  Boe^Of Naw. Bioc,Ghiirale,:aLvi, 
901.     (J.N.P.) 

Jones,  Beąjamin  (1),  an  early  Methodist  Episco- 
pal  minister,  was  bom  in  Sonth  Cttolina  aboot  1774; 
entered  the  itinenmcy  in  1801  s  was  stationed  at  Chaiks- 
ton  in  1802;  and  died  suddenly  on  Bladen  Ciraiit  m 
1804.  He  was  a  man  of  much  aerioosneas  and  Chris- 
tian gentlenesB,  and  a  reiy  usefol  preacher.— Ctm/l  if «- 
ttto,i,125.    (G.L.T.) 

Jones,  Benjamin  (2),  a  Methodist  Epiaeopal  min- 
ister, was  bom  at  Sandwich,  Mass^,  July  28, 1786 ;  united 
with  the  Church  in  1806;  entered  the  New  York  Coo- 
ference  in  1809;  was  madę  presiding  elder  in  1820;  was 
delegate  to  the  General  Conferenco  in  1882  and  in  1840; 
was  by  poor  health  superannnated  in  1846 ;  and  died  at 
LincohiviUe,  Me.,  July  18,  1850,  aged  64.  Mr.  Jones 
was  a  man  of  morę  than  ordinary  alńlity  and  hifluence: 
His  preaching  was  bold,  snstained,  and  independent; 
dealing  in  tmthfnl  logie  and  the  word  of  God  nther 
than  fancy,  and  very  strong  in  argument.  His  eflbits 
were  often  eloqaent  in  the  highest  degree.— Cofs/I  Mm. 
iv,  606;  Steven8,  Memoriods  of  Metkodism^  clum.  zlii. 
(G.L.T.) 

Jones,  Charles  Colcock,  D.D.,  a  Fresbjtcrian 
divine,  was  bom  at  Liberty  Hall,  Ga.,  Dec  20,  1804. 
While  yet  a  youth  he  entered  a  laige  oounting-bonse 
in  Savannah,Ga.,  but  when  converted,  in  hia  18th  year, 
he  decided  to  qnit  mercantile  life  and  enter  the  minis- 
try.  He  prepared  for  coUege  at  Phillipa  Academy,  then 
entered  Andover  Seminary,  and  later  the  theokgical 
seminary  at  Princeton.  He  was  licensod  in  1830  by  the 
New  Branswick  Presbytery  at  Allentown,  2Tew  Jersey, 
and  retumed  to  Georgia  in  the  antumn,  and  shoitly  af- 
terwards  became  missionary  to  the  negroes  of  Liberty 
County,  Ga.  He  soon  became  interestcd  in  the  oobred 
race,  and  during  the  remainder  of  hia  life  sought  bv 
extensive  correspondence,  by  his  annual  reports  as  a 
missionary,  and  by  all  other  means  in  hia  power,  to  en- 
gage  the  attention  of  the  Christian  public  to  the  morał 
condition  of  this  daas  of  our  population.  In  1833  he 
was  elected  professor  of  Church  history  and  polity  ie 
the  seminary  at  Columbia,  and  after  having  been  earib 
estly  urged  to  accept  the  chair,  on  the  plea  that  be 
might  even  there  continue  to  work  for  the  colored  peo- 
ple, by  inciting  the  studenta  to  engage  with  him  in  the 
work,  he  accepted  the  poaition  in  1836.  But  he  fek 
restless  in  his  new  place,  and  in  1888  retumed  again  to 
his  former  work.  In  1847  he  waa  re-elected  to  the  pio- 
fessorship,  and  again  prerailed  npon  to  aooept  the  prof- 
fered  honor ;  he  now  continued  in  the  seminary  uncil 
its  close  in  1850.  At  the  same  time  he  filled  the  pwi- 
tion  of  secretary  to  the  Board  of  Misaions  for  the  South 
and  South-west  In  1850  he  removed  to  Philadelphia, 
to  assume  the  duties  of  secretary  of  the  AasemUy  s 
Board  of  Domestic  Missions,  and  this  poeition  be  ffltod 
until  Oct  1858,  when  failing  health  necesńcated  his  re- 
tum  to  Georgia.  Dnring  the  Rebelłion  he  attacbed 
himself  to  the  Southern  canse.  But  his  health  was  too 
feeble  to  permit  much  exertion,  for  he  suffered  ftvm  cob- 
sumption.  He  died  March  16, 1863.  **  Dr.  Jonea  fiDcd 
a  large  place  in  the  esteem  and  affectioas  of  the  Chorch 
of  God.  As  a  man  there  waa  dedfion  and  enagy  of 
character,  united  with  great  friendlineaa  of  heait,  cbeer- 
fulness  of  disposttion,  activity  of  mind,  and  ease  and  pol- 
ish  of  manners.    Few  oquaUed  him  in  all  that  i 


JONES 


999 


JONES 


ap  the  ease  and  polish  of  the  Christian  gentleman.  Ab 
a  preacher  there  was  mach  that  was  attractive  in  his 
appcarance  and  manner.  A  delightful  simplicity,  eaae, 
and  unction  pervaded  his  happiest  efforts."  Dr.  Jones 
piihlished  a  Cateckism  ofScripture  Dodr,  and  Practice : 
—CaUckism  on  the  Cre&i: — Bitt,  Całeckinn  ofihe  O.  and 
N.  T, ;  besides  seyeral  pamphlets  on  the  Rdigunu  Imtr, 
of  the  Negro,  His  Catechism  of  Seript,  Doctrine  and 
Practice  was  extensively  used,  and  was  found  so  ser- 
yiceable  to  missionaries  generally  that  it  was  tianslated 
łnto  sereral  langnages,  and  was  madę  a  manuał  for  the 
instnictlon  of  the  heathen.  He  also  began  a  HisŁory  of 
the  Church  ofCod,  which  he  did  not  live  to  complete  (it 
was  published  by  Scribner).  Sec  Wilsoni  Presb,  Hist, 
A  Imanac,  1867,  p.  438.     (J.  H.  W.) 

Jones,  Comelius,  a  Methodist  Episcopal  minis- 
ter, was  bom  at  Hinsdale,  Mass.,  May  20, 1800 ;  was  con- 
Tcrted  iu  Geaoga  Co.,  Ohio,  Feb.  1821 ;  entered  the  Pitts- 
barg  Conferenoe  in  1827 ;  and  died  at  Alleghanytown, 
Aog.  27, 1835.  He  was  a  diligent  student,  an  able  min- 
ister, and  a  suocessful  erangelist. — Conference  Minutes, 
ii,  483. 

Jones,  David  (1),  a  Baptist  minister,  was  bom  in 
White  Clay  Creelc  Hundied,  NewcasUe  Ca,  DeL,  May 
12, 1786.  In  1758  he  was  oonverted,  and  soon  after 
determined  to  improve  his  education,  which  had  been 
scimewhat  neglected.  He  entered  Hopewell  School,  and 
retnained  there  three  yeais,  eagerly  pursoing  the  stndy 
of  the  classic  languages.  In  1761  he  became  a  licen- 
tiate,  and  was  regularly  ordained  pastor  in  1767  to  the 
church  at  Freehold,  Moumouth  Ca,  New  Jersey.  In 
1772  he  remoyed  to  enter  upon  the  misńonary  work 
among  the  Indiana  in  Ohio.  But  he  failed  so  utterly 
in  these  efforts  that  after  the  lapee  of  two  years  he  le- 
twned  again  to  his  former  chaige.  In  the  Berolution- 
aiy  War  he  senred  as  chaplain,  and  only  resumed  the 
regular  work  of  the  ministry  at  the  dose  of  the  war. 
In  1786  he  became  pastor  at  Southampton,  Pa.  In  1794 
be  again  entered  the  army,  this  time  at  the  special  re- 
ąuest  of  generał  Wayne.  He  also  seryed  as  chaplain 
during  the  War  of  1812.  He  died  in  Chester  Co.,  Pa., 
Feb.  5, 1820.   See  Sprague,  A  rmals  A  m.  Pulpit,  vi,  85  Bq. 

Jones,  David  (2),  another  Baptist  minister,  was 
bom  in  the  north  of  Wales  in  April,  1785.  He  united 
with  the  Independent  Church  when  about  fifteen  years 
old.  Shortly  after  he  emigrated  to  this  country,  and 
liyed  in  Ohio.  After  a  stay  of  two  years  among  the 
Baptists,  who  were  thickly  settled  in  that  immediate 
Ticinity,  he  joined  their  Church,  and  was  lioensed  to 
preach.  He  aocepted  a  caU  to  the  Bearer  Creek  Bap- 
tist Church,  teaching  at  the  same  time.  From  1810  to 
1813  he  had  no  settled  charge,  and  he  trarelled  through 
seyeral  of  the  middle  and  border  states,  preaching  from 
place  to  place.  In  1813  he  went  to  Newark,  New  Jer- 
sey, as  pastor,  from  whIch,  in  1821,  he  was  called  to 
assume  the  pastorate  of  the  Baptist  Church  at  "  Low- 
er  Dublin,"  near  Philadelphia,  wbere  he  had  preached 
occasionally  before  his  departure  for  Newark.  With 
this  people  he  spent  the  remainder  of  his  life.  He  died 
April  9, 1833.  He  was  (in  part)  the  author  of  a  tract 
on  Baptisra,  entitled  Lełtert  of  David  and  John,  and 
wrote  also  the  tract  Sahaiion  hy  Grace,  published  by 
the  Baptist  General  Tract  Society.  See  Sprague,  An~ 
nals  A  m.  Pulpit,  vi,  518  8q. 

Jones,  Qreenbury  R.,  a  Methodist  Episcopal 
minister,  was  bom  at  Brownsville,  Pa.,  April  7,  1784 ; 
was  converted  in  August,  1808 ;  entered  the  itinerancy 
at  Steubenyille,  Ohio,  in  1818 ;  was  presiding  elder  on 
Scioto  District  in  1821 ;  Miami  District  in  1827 ;  Port- 
land  District  in  1832;  but  superannuated  in  that  year, 
and  80  remained  until  1839;  and  died  at  Marietta  Con- 
ference Sept.  20, 1844.  Mr.  Jones  was  a  zealous  and 
capable  minister,  of  fine  tact  and  sound  judgment.  He 
was  seyeral  times  secretaiy  of  the  Ohio  Conference,  nine 
years  presiding  elder,  and  twice  ddegate  to  the  Creneral 
Conference.    He  was  faithful  in  all  things,  and  much 


beloyed. — Minutes  of  Conferenoet,  iii,  651 ;  Sprague,  Ań- 
naU  A  tn.  Pulpit,  vii,  587.     (G.  L.  T.) 

Jones,  Oriffith,  a  Welsh  divine,  generally  known 
as  the  Welsh  Apostle,  was  bora  at  Kilreddis,  Caermar- 
thenshire,  in  1684.  His  parcnts,  who  were  eminently 
pious,  took  great  pains  to  imbue  the  mind  of  their  son 
from  his  earliest  years  with  impresaions  of  religion. 
The  senous  tum  which  they  thus  gttve  to  his  mind  in- 
clined  him  towards  the  Christian  ministry.  At  the 
completion  of  his  theological  stndies  he  was  ordained 
by  bishop  Buli,  Sept.  19, 1708,  and  shortly  after  apix)int- 
ed  to  the  rectory  of  Llanddowror  by  Sir  John  Philips, 
whose  own  religious  character  madę  him  anxious  to  se- 
cure  the  senrices  of  a  man  of  piety  and  leaming  like 
Jones.  "  In  this  situation,"  says  Middleton  {Evangelical 
Biography,  s.  v.),  "•  he  soon  developed  all  the  best  qual- 
ities  of  a  man  of  God,  and  a  most  eloquent  and  eyangel- 
ical  preacher.  Christ  waa  all  to  him ;  and  it  was  his 
greatest  delight  to  publish  and  exalt  the  unsearchable 
riches  of  his  Redeemer's  righteousness.  Nor  was  he  less 
blessed  in  his  priyate  plans  of  doing  good.  He  founded 
amotfg  his  countrymen  fiee  schools,  and  by  this  means 
morę  than  a  hundred  and  fifty  thousand  poor  people 
were  taught  to  read.  He  also  circnlated  thirty  thou- 
sand copies  of  the  Welsh  Bibie  among  them,  besidea 
other  religious  and  useful  books.  His  humility  gaye 
lustre  to  all  these  labors  of  love.  On  his  dying  bed  he 
said,  'I  must  bear  witness  to  the  goodness  of  God  to 
me.  Blessed  be  God,  his  oomforts  fiU  my  souL*  He 
died  in  April,  1761.  It  may  be  truły  said  of  Griffith 
Jones  that  few  lives  were  morę  heayenly  and  useful, 
and  few  deaths  morę  triumphant.*'  Jones  also  wrote  and 
published  seyeral  religious  treatises  in  Welsh  and  £ng- 
lish,  of  which  numy  thousands  were  distributed  as  had 
been  the  Bibie.  See  Jamieson,  Cydop,  Relig,  Biog,  p. 
289 ;  Allibone,  Diet,  EngL  and  A  mer,  A  uthort,  yoL  ii,  s.  y. 

Jones,  Horatlo  Oates  (son  of  Dayid  Jones,  1), 
also  a  Baptist  minister,  was  bom  at  Easttown,  Ches- 
ter County ,  Pa.,  Feb.  1 1 ,  1777.  His  early  education  waa 
quite  thorough,  and  remarkably  so  for  a  young  man 
destined  for  agricultural  life.  Gifted  with  great  tluen- 
cy  of  speech,  young  Jones  became  "  the  politician"  of 
his  own  immediate  yicinity,  and  before  he  had  reached 
his  majority  enjoyed  the  prospect  of  preferment  in  po- 
litical  Ufe.  Just  about  this  time  he  became  conscious, 
howerer,  of  his  responsibility  to  his  Maker,  and,  beliey- 
ing  himsclf  to  have  been  the  subject  of  spiritual  reno- 
vation,  he  madę  public  declaration  of  his  belief,  June  24, 
1798,  and  determined  to  deyote  his  life  to  the  Christian 
ministry.  He  was  licensed  Sept,  26, 1801,  and  callćd 
to  Salem,  New  Jersey,  Feb.  13, 1802.  In  1805  his  health 
became  enfeebled,  and  he  was  obliged  to  resign,  how- 
eyer  reluctantly,  the  charge.  Hereafter  he  deyoted 
himself  to  farm  life  on  a  place  which  he  bought  on  the 
banka  of  the  Schuylkill  River,  about  fiye  miles  aboye 
Philadelphia.  But  Jones  had  engaged  too  heartily  in 
the  cause  of  his  Master  not  to  be'  tempted  to  re-en- 
ter  the  work  of  the  Christian  ministry  wheneyer  his 
health  should  warrant  the  task.  At  first  he  went  to 
different  places  from  time  to  time  and  preached;  finalły 
he  madę  **  Thomson^s  Meeting-house"  at  Lower  Meii* 
on,  Montgomery  County,  belonging  to  the  Presbytcri- 
ans,  his  head-qnarters,  and  he  sncceeded,  after  seyeral 
years  of  ardent  labor,  in  bnilding  np  tbere  a  Baptist 
Church,  which  he  senred  nntil  the  end  of  his  earthły 
days,  Dec.  12, 1853.  Mr.  Jones  heM  a  prominent  pó- 
sition  in  the  board  of  trastees  of  the  Uniyenity  of  Lew- 
isburg,  Pa.,  and  was  at  one  time  its  chancellor.  This 
high  school  conferred  on  him  the  degree  of  D.D.  The 
degree  of  M.A.  he  reoeiyed  from  Brown  UniyerBity  in 
1812.  He  was  also  a  member  of  the  Baptist  Boaid  of 
Missions,  and  was  at  one  time  (1829)  president  of  the 
Philadelphia  Baptist  Aasociation,  of  which  society  he 
published  a  Bistory  in  1823,  and  held  a  oo-editorship  of 
the  Latter-day  Luminary,  an  early  Baptist  misaionsfy 
magazine.    Indeed,  we  are  tołd  that  '*few  men  of  his 


JONES 


1000 


JONES 


day  have  written  so  much  and  so  well,  and  publiahed  ao 
litUe."     See  Sprague,  A  rmals  A  m.  Pulpit,  vi,  462  są. 

Jones,  Jeremicdl,  a  learned  English  dissenting 
miniAter,  was  bom,  ab  ia  supposed,  of  parents  in  opulent 
circumstances,  in  the  noith  of  England,  in  1693.  After 
finishing  his  education  under  the  Bey.  Samuel  Jones, 
of  Tewksbury,  ivho  was  also  the  tutor  of  Chandler,  But- 
ler, Secker,  and  many  other  distinguished  diyinea,  he 
became  minister  of  a  congregation  at  Forest  Green,  in 
Gloucestershire,  where  he  also  kept  an  academy.  He 
died  in  1734.  His  works  are  as  foUows:  A  Yundica- 
tion  ofikeformer  Part  o/the  Gospel  by  Afatthew/rom 
3fr.  Whition^s  Charge  of  Disloeaiionj  eUJ.  (London,  1719, 
8vo;  Salop,  1721,  8voi  Oarendon  Press,  Oxford,  1808): 
—also,  A  new  andfutt  Meihod  ofsettling  the  Ccmonieal 
AuthorUy  o/the  New  Testament  (London,  1726,  2  yoIs. 
8vo;  YoLiii,  1727, 8vo;  Clarendon  Press,  Oxford,  1798, 
8  vols.  8vo,  and  unce).  See  Chalmera,  Bioc.  Diet.  (Lon- 
don) ;  Gentleman  8  Magazine,  voL  xxiii ;  MorUhfy  Maga- 
ziney  April,  1803 ;  AUibonc,  DicUof  EngUsh  and  Amerir 
can  Auihors,  ii,  988. 

Jones,  Joel,  a  oelebrated  lay  writer  on  theological 
sttbjects,  and  jurist  by  profession,  was  bom  of  Puritan 
ancestry  at  Coventry,  Conn.,  Oct.  26, 1795,  and  educated 
at  Yale  College,  where  he  graduated  in  1817.  He  was 
one  of  the  jadges  of  the  Philadelphia  District  Court, 
and  later  mayor  of  Philadelphia.  In  1848  he  was 
elected  president  of  Girard  CoUege,  and  he  held  that 
position  for  two  yeais.  He  died  Feb.  3, 1860.  Distin- 
guished  for  his  great  legał  abilitiea,  judge  Jones  desenres 
a  place  in  our  work  on  account  of  his  extended  re- 
searches  in  the  Biblical  departmeut.  His  acąuirements 
extended  far  beyond  the  widest  rangę  of  professional  at- 
tainment  Judge  Jones  wrote  extenstvely  for  literary 
joumąls  and  ąuarterlies ;  he  also  published  largely.  Of 
special  interest  to  the  theological  student  are,  Story  of 
Josephf  or  Patriarcha!  Age  (originally  published  for 
the  use  of  Girard  College  students) :— rA«  Knowledge 
ofOne  Anołher  in  the  Futurę  State  -.—Notes  on  Scripture 
(published  by  his  widów,  Phila.  1860).  He  also  edited 
8everal  English  works  on  Prophecy,  which  he  published 
under  the  title  of  LiteralisŁ  (5  voU.  8vo),  enriched  with 
many  yaluable  additions  of  his  own^  and  translated 
from  the  French,  Outlines  ofa  Uistory  ofthe  Court  of 
Romę  and  ofthe  Temporal  Power  ofthe  Popes  (to  which 
he  appended  many  original  notes).  Judge  Jones  was  a 
ruling  elder  in  thePresbyterian  Church,  and  held  poei- 
tions  in  various  ecclesiastical  boards,  where  his  serrices 
werc  greatly  prized.  See  Princeton  Reciewy  Index,  ii, 
219  sq. 

Jones,  John  (1),  an  English  Roman  C^tholic  the- 
ologtan,  was  bom  at  London  in  1575.  He  studied  at 
St  John's  College,  Oxford,  where  he  roomcd  with  Laud, 
afterwards  archbishop  of  Canterbury.  Haying  tumed 
Soman  Catholic,  he  went  to  Spain,  completed  his  stud- 
ies  at  the  UnlYersity  of  Coropostello,  and  became  a 
Benedictine  under  the  name  of  Leander  a  Sancto- 
Martino,  After  teaching  for  a  while  Hebrew  and 
theology  in  the  College  of  StYedast,  he  returaed  to 
England  at  the  1nvitation  of  Land,  and  died  at  Lon- 
don, Dec  17, 1636,  He  wrote  Sacra  Ars  Memorim,  ad 
Scripturas  dimnets  m  prompłu  habendas  accomodata 
(Douay,  1623,  8vo)  \—ConcUiatio  locorum  commumum 
totius  Scriptura  (Douay,  1623, 8yo).  He  also  publish- 
ed some  editions  of  the  Bibie,  with  interlinear  glosses  (6 
Yols.  foL) ;  of  the  works  of  Blosius ;  of  Amobe,  A  dcersus 
Gentes  (Douay,  1634) ;  and  worked  with  P.  Reyner  on 
the  Apostolatus  Benedictinorum.  See  Wood,  A  thena  Ox- 
onienaisy  voL  i ;  Dodd,  Ch,  Uistory  /  Hoefer,  Nouv,  Biog, 
GeniraUy  xxvi,  905.     (J.  N.  P.) 

Jones,  John  (2),  an  English  Protestant  diyine,  was 
bom  in  1700.  He  was  educated  at  Worcester  College, 
Oxford,  and  ordained  in  1726.  Having  become  vicar 
of  Aconbury,  he  resigned  in  1761,  to  take  the  rectory  of 
Boulne  Hurat,  Bedfordshire.  His  death  was  caused  by 
a  fali  from  his  horse;  the  time  of  its  oocniience  is  not 


recorded.  He  wrote  [Ancm.]/Viee  oni  cmwiWDMgwrf- 
tions  rdatmg  to  the  Church  ofEnglandyt^  (Lond.  174^- 
60, 8vo) :  this  work  prodoced  a  great  conarovei»y,  last- 
ing  seyeral  years  :—Cur$ory  A  mmadversians  upon  *Fne 
and  Candid  'Discuisitums,"  etc.  (Lond.  1763, 8yo)  i—Cath- 
oHc  Faith  and  Praclice  (1765).  See  Nichols,  Lilerary 
Anecdotes;  London  GentL  Magazine,  lxxxi,  pt.  i,  p.  510 
są.  i  Allibone,  Did,  EngL  and  Am,  A  utk.  i'^  s.  v, 

Jones,  John  (3),  LL.D.,  a  Wdsh  Socinian  diyine 
and  philological  writer,  was  bom  in  Caermarthenshire, 
and  educated  at  the  Unitarian  New  College,  Ilackney. 
In  1792  Mr.  Jones  was  appointed  classical  and  mathe- 
matical  teacher  in  the  Welsh  Academy,  Swansea,  which 
situation  he  held  about  three  years,  and  then  settled  at 
PljTnouth  Dock  oyer  the  Unitarian  congregation.  In 
1797  he  became  minister  of  the  Unitarian  congregacion 
at  Halifax,  in  Yorkshire,  and  about  1800  he  remoYod  to 
London,  where  he  reaided  dnring  the  remainder  of  his 
life,  chiefly  occupied  as  a  dassiod  teacher,  and  preadi- 
ing  only  occasionally.  He  died  January  10, 1827.  A 
few  yeara  before  his  death  he  receiyed  the  dipkMoa 
of  LL.D.  from  the  Uniycreity  of  Aberdeen.  Dr.  Jonei 
was  the  author  of  seyeral  works,  some  of  which  are  re- 
ligioua,  chiefly  in  lupport  or  defence  of  the  eyidcnces  of 
Christianity.  Of  these  the  most  important  are  lUustro' 
tions  of  the  Four  Gospeisyfounded  on  circumstances  pe- 
euUar  to  our  Lord  and  the  Evangelists  (LondL  1808, 8yo) : 
^EccksiasticalBesearckeSyOrPhUo  aadJosephuspro^ 
to  be  historians  and  apohgists  ofChrisfy  etc  (London, 
1812— a  seąnel,  1818,  2  yols.  Svo)'^Epistk  to  the  So- 
mans  cmcUyted  (1802, 8yo)  i^New  Yerskm  ofthe  Epis- 
łles  to  the  ColossianSy  ThessahmanSy  Timathy,  Titusy  and 
the  generał  Epistleof James  (}Si9^2(iy\2taoy,—Xav  Terw 
Sion  oftheJirsŁ  three  Chapters  of  Genesis  (1819, 8yo). 
He  also  wrote  a  number  of  philological  works  which  are 
oonsidered  yaluable.  It  may  not  be  ont  of  place  here 
to  State  that  Dr.  Jones  was  the  first  English  phildoguD 
who  taught  Greek  by  the  medium  of  the  English  in- 
stcad  of  the  Latin.  See  Lond,  Gentl  Mag.  ApriL  1827; 
Engl,  Cydop.  s.  v. ;  Allibone,  Diet.  EngL  and  Am^Auth, 
ii,  s.y. 

Jones,  John  Bff.,  a  Methodist  Episcopal  minister 
and  natiye  of  England,  was  bom  about  1810.  He  was 
educated  a  Romanist  in  France,  and  while  yo«mg  emi- 
grated  first  to  Canada  and  then  to  Maryland,  where  be 
was  a  teacher  in  a  Romish  institudon  in  St.  Geocf(e*s 
County.  He  was  conyerted  to  Protestantism  in  1834, 
and  two  years  afler  entered  the  Baltimore  Conference, 
and  « for  Wenty  years  pursned  the  ministerial  calliag, 
laboring  day  and  night  with  ąuenchlees  seal  to  rescue 
souls  from  death."  He  died  at  South  Baltimore  Sia- 
Uon  April  20, 1866.  He  "  was  a  man  of  rare  exoeIleDC8 
and  many  yirtues,"  of  deep  piety,  and  an  able  and  de- 
yoted  ministen—Con/:  MinuteSy  vi,  201.    (G.  L.  T.) 

Jones,  John  Taylor.  D.D.,.a  Baptist  missioany, 
was  bom  at  New  Ipswich,  N.  H.,  July  16, 1802.  He 
graduated  atAmherst  College  m  1825;  studied  theology 
at  Andover  and  Newton  Seminary ;  and,  haying  joined 
the  Baptist  Church  in  1828,  was  the  following  year  ap- 
pointed a  missionary  to  Burmah.  He  arriyed  at  Maoł- 
main,  his  destined  place  of  labor,  in  Feb.  18S1,  and,  after 
haying  mastered  the  Taling  and  Siameac  languages,  he 
was  chosen  to  go  to  the  kingdom  of  Siam,  and  reached 
Bangkok  in  April,  1833.  After  a  sncoessful  mission,  he 
left  Siam  in  1839,  on  aeooont  of  his  cbildren,  went  to 
Singapore,  and  thence  on  a  yisit  to  the  United  States 
After  retuming  to  Siam  for  8ix  yeare  he  came  bonie 
again  in  1846,  and  in  the  fali  of  1847  went  tnmj  for  the 
lasttime.  Hedied  at  Bankok  Sept.13,1861.  The  de- 
gree  of  D.D.  was  confened  upon  him  a  few  years  befon 
his  death.  Dr.  Jones  published  three  tnicts  in  Siam- 
ese,  1834;  and  a  translation  of  the  New  Testament  ia 
the  same  language,  Oct  1848.  The  Rey.  William  Dem 
says  of  Dr.  Jone8'B  qualification8  for  the  miseiooaiy 
work, "  Take  him  altogether,  I  haye  neycr  aeen  his 
equel;  andamongmorethanahundredmenlhayeiacC 


^ 


JONES 


1001 


JONES 


mntmg  the  heathen,  I  would  telect  Dr.  Jones  as  the 
model  i]ii88ionary."--Spngue,  A  rmalt  A  m.  Pulpity  vi,772. 

Jones,  Joseph  Htmtingtoii,  D.D.,  an  aUe  Pres- 
byterUn  minister,  and  brother  of  judge  Joel  (see  aboye), 
was  bom  at  Corentry,  Conn.,  Aug.  24, 1797,  and  gradu- 
Ated  at  Hairard  College  in  1817.  After  teaching  a  short 
time  at  Bowdoin  College,  he  decided  on  tbe  ministiy  for 
bis  lifc-work,  and  entered  Princeton  Theological  Semi- 
luny.  His  first  charge  be  entered  June  1 ,  1824,  at  Wood- 
bory,  New  Jersey.  The  year  following,  after  a  most 
•accessfol  work  on  the  smali  and  feeble  charge,  he  was 
called  to  Xew  Brunswick,  and  was  installed  the  second 
Wednesday  of  July,  1825.  In  1888  he  remoyed  to  Phil- 
adelphia,  to  take  charge  of  the  Sixth  Presb3rterian 
Chorch  tn  that  dty,  and  he  continaed  his  itlation  there 
for  twenty-three  years.  **  Beginning  with  a  church  re- 
duced  BO  Iow  that  a  resusdtation  was  deemed  well-nigh 
impoesibłe,  and  struggling  with  difficolties  that  would 
bare  discouraged  oidinary  men,  a  manifest  bleseing 
crowned  his  efforts."  In  1861,  finding  tłuit  the  secreta- 
T3r8hip  of  the  committee  on  the  **  fimd  for  disabled  min- 
isters,"  etc.,  which  he  had  filled  nearly  for  8even  years 
in  connection  with  his  pastora!  duties,  was  of  itself  oner- 
ons  enough  in  its  duties,  he  resigned  his  posttion  as  pas- 
tor, and  devoted  himself  hereafter  entirely  to  this  noble 
cause  of  providing  for  thoee  of  his  brethren  who  were  in 
need  of  assistance.  He  died  Dec.  22, 1868,  in  the  midst 
of  his  work,  <*  suddenly,  as  it  were  with  the  hameas 
oo."  In  1843  Lafayette  College  conferred  on  him  the 
degree  of  D.D.  Dr.  Jones  published  Jłeńrals  o/Reliff' 
ton  (PhiU.  1839)  i—EffecU  o/Physical  Caułea  on  Chris- 
tian Eacperience  (1846,  and  oftcn,  18mo)  :->A/eniotr  of 
the  Rev.  Ashbd  Green,  D,D,  (N.  Y.  1849, 8vo)  i—History 
ofthe  BevivcU  at  New  Bruntwidt  in  1837 ;  and  seyeral 
of  his  sermons  and  essays.— Prinoefon  lievietPf  Indez, 
ToL  ii,  222  sq. 

Jones,  Lot,  D.D.,  a  clergyman  of  the  Protestant 
Episcopal  Church,  was  bom  in  Brunswick,  Maine,  Feb. 
21, 1797,  and  was  educated  at  Bowdoin  College,  Maine, 
where  he  graduated  in  1821.  Joining  the  Protestant 
Episcopal  Church,  he  studied  for  the  ministry  under 
bishop  Griswold,  and  was  by  him  ordained  deacon  Jan- 
jtary,  1823,  and  priest  September,  1823.  In  1823  he  was 
aetUed  at  Marblehead  and  Marshfield.  Mass. ;  in  1825  at 
Macon,  Ga.;  in  1827  at  Sarannah ;  in  1828  at  Gardiner, 
Maine;  in  1829  at  South  Leicester,  Mass.;  and  in  Jan- 
uary, 1833,  he  remoyed  to  New  York,  and  took  charge 
of  the  new  miasion  church  of  the  Epiphany.  ,  Herę  his 
bumility,  single-hearted  deyotion  to  his  one  great  work, 
and  untiring  industry,  madę  his  ministry  remarkably 
effectiye.  In  1858  he  published  his  25th  anniyersary 
disoourse.  During  thoee  25  years  hebaptized  2501—253 
adults  and  2248  children,  married  759  couples,  presentcd 
915  for  confirmation,  enroUed  1494  as  communicants, 
and  attended  13Ć2  funerals.  He  died  in  Philadclphia 
Oct.  12, 1865.  His  death  was  the  result  of  accident  in 
falling  upon  the  pavement  at  St  Luke^s  Church,  where 
be  was  in  attendance  upon  the  meeting  of  the  Board  of 
Missions.— CAurcA  Reviewy  Jan.  1866. 

Jones,  Robert  C,  a  Methodist  Episcopal  minis- 
ter, was  bom  at  Petersburg,  Ya.,  Dec.  28, 1808.  He 
graduated  at  William  and  Mary's  College  in  1828,  stud- 
ied law  and  was  ready  for  practice,  when  he  was  con- 
yerted  in  1883,  and  at  once  prepared  for  tbe  ministry. 
He  entered  the  Yirginia  Conference  in  1836,  and  died 
Aug.  2, 1838.  Mr.  Jones  was  a  man  of  good  abilities, 
much  modesty,  and  a  consistent  witneas  of  sanctifying 
grace.  '  He  was  a  dignified  and  conscientious  minister, 
and  a  yery  successful  eyangelist— Con/I  Minutes,  ii,  667. 

Jones,  Samuel,  D.D.,  a  Baptist  minister,  was 
bom  in  Glamorganshire,  South  Wales,  Jan.  14, 1735,  and 
was  bronght  by  his  paients  to  this  country  during  his 
infancy,  and  was  educated  in  the  College  of  Philadcl- 
phia, where  he  receiyed  the  degree  of  M.A.  May  18, 
1762,  and  tnmed  his  attention  to  the  study  of  theology. 
He  was  oidained  in  Jannaisr,  1768,  and  became  pastor 


of  the  nnited  cborches  of  Pennepek  and  Southamptooi 
In  the  same  year  he,  by  reąuest,  remodelled  the  draft 
of  tbe  charter  of  a  college  in  Newport,  K  I.,  which  in- 
stitution  afterwards  became  Brown  Uniyersity.  In  1770 
he  resigned  the  care  of  the  Southampton  Church,  and 
deyoted  himself  thereafter  to  that  of  Pennepek,  after* 
wards  called  Lower  Dublin.  He  receiyed  the  honorary 
degree  of  M.A.  from  the  College  of  Khode  Island  in 
1769,  and  that  of  D.D.  from  the  College  of  Pennsylya- 
nia  in  1788.  While  attending  £uthfully  to  his  minia* 
terial  labors,  he  also  deyoted  much  time  to  teaching,  in 
which  he  was  yery  successful.  He  died  Feb.  7, 1814 
Dr.  Jones  madę  aeyeral  compilations  for  diyers  associa- 
tions  in  which  he  filled  high  ofBces,  and  published  some 
occasional  sermons.— Spragne,  ArmaŁB,yif  104  Bq. 

Jones,  Thomas,  an  English  diyine,  was  bom  in 
1729,  and  educated  at  Queen*s  College,  Cambridge.  He 
was  chaplaiii  at  St.Sayior*s,  Southwark,  and  is  noted  for 
his  deep  piety  and  great  e^ertions  in  behalf  of  the  con- 
yersion  of  the  masses  at  a  time  when  the  English  pulpit 
was  in  that  deep  letbargy  from  which  Wesley  and  his 
coadjutors  first  eamestly  aroused  it.  like  the  Wesley- 
ans,  he  met  with  much  opposition  in  his  noble  eiforts, 
and  **  his  sweetness  of  natural  temper,"  says  his  biogra- 
pher,  *^  great  as  it  was,  would  neyer  haye  supported  him 
under  the  numberless  insults  he  met  with  had  it  not 
been  strengthened,  as  well  as  adomed,  by  a  sublimer 
influence."  His  health  flnally  gaye  way  under  his  ex- 
traordinary  labors,  and  he  died,  while  yet  a  young  man, 
in  1761.— Middleton,  £vang.  Biog.  iv,  380. 

Jones,  \!7illiam,  M.A.,  ^.RS.,  of  Nayland,  as  be 
is  generally  caUed,  was  bom  at  Lowick,  in  Northamp* 
tonshire,  July  80, 1726.  He  was  educated  at  the  Char- 
ter House  and  Uniyersity  College,  Oxford.  He  there 
became  a  conyert  to  the  philosophy  of  Hutchinson,  and, 
haying  iuduced  Mr.  Home,  afterwards  bishop  of  Nor- 
wich,  to  adopt  the  same  sjrstcm;  together  they  became 
the  prindpal  championa  of  that  philosophy.  He  waa 
admitted  to  deacon*s  orders  after  haying  receiyed  the 
degree  of  B.A.,  in  1749.  In  1751  he  was  ordained  priest 
by  the  bishop  of  Lincoln,  and  on  quitting  the  uniyersity 
became  cnrate  of  Finedon,  and  afterwards  of  Wadsohoe, 
both  in  his  natiye  county.  In  1764  archbishop  Secker 
presented  him  to  the  yicarage  of  Betbersden,  in  Kent, 
and  in  the  next  year  to  the  rectoty  of  Pluckley,  in  the 
same  oounty.  In  1776  he  took  up  his  reńdenoe  at  Nay- 
land, in  SuiRblk,  where  he  held  the  perpetual  curacy ; 
and  soon  after  he  exchanged  his  liying  of  PlucUey  for 
the  rectory  of  Paston,  in  Northamptonsbire.  In  1780 
he  became  fellow  of  the  Royal  Society  of  London*  Dur- 
ing many  years  he  was  engaged  in  the  composition  of  a 
treatise  on  philosophy,  which  was  intended  to  elucidate 
his  favorite  system.  In  that  work  he  displayed  great 
leaming  and  ingenuity,  as  well  as  ardent  attachment  to 
the  interests  of  piety  and  yirtue,  united  with  the  eccen- 
tric  peculiarities  ofthe  Hutchinsonian  school.  Alarmed 
at  the  progress  of  radical  and  reyolutionary  opinions 
during  the  French  Reyolution,  he  eroployed  his  pen  in 
opposition  to  the  adyocates  of  such  destructiye  princi- 
ples,  and  his  writings  were  widely  circulated  by  the 
friends  of  the  British  goyemment  He  treated  with 
equal  saocess  ąnestions  of  theology,  morals,  literaturę, 
philosophy,  and,  in  addition  to  all  these,  showed  great 
talents  in  musical  composition.  **He  was  a  man  of 
quick  penetration,"  says  bishop  Horaley,  "of  extensive 
leaming,  and  the  soundest  piety,  and  he  had  the  talent 
of  writing  upon  the  deepest  snbjects  for  the  plainest  un- 
deistanding."  In  the  year  1792  he  met  with  a  seyere 
loBS  in  the  death  of  his  most  intimate  friend,  bishop 
Home^  to  whom  he  was  chaplain.  Being  now  of  ad- 
yanoed  age,  and  obllged,by  his  growing  infirmities,  to 
disoontinue  his  practice  of  takhig  pupils,  that  he  might 
not  be  subjected  to  inconyenience  from  the  diminution 
of  his  incomc,  in  tbe  year  1798  the  archbishop  of  Can- 
terbury  presented  him  to  the  sinecure  rectory  of  Hol- 
lingboum  in  Kent,  which,  howeyer,  he  did  not  liye  long 


JONES 


1002 


JOPPA 


to  enjoy,  dying  Feb.  6, 1800,  in  oonseąuenoe  of  a  para- 
lytic  Btroke.  His  most  important  works  «re,  A  fuU 
Answer  to  Bp,  ClaytofCs  Essay  on  Spirit  (1758,  8vo) : — 
Catholic  Boctrine  of  the  Trimty  provtdfrom  Scripłure 
(1767) : — Courae  of  Ledures  on  the  FigurcUive  Lcoif- 
ffuage  of  the  Holy  Scripłures  (1787,  8vo):  —  Sermon» 
(1790,  2  vola.  8vo):— The  Scholar  armed  agauut  the 
Error$  ofthe  Times  (2  vol».  8vo)  i—Memoirs  ąfthe  Lift^ 
Studiesy  and  Wriłmffs  of  George  Home  (1796  and  1799, 
870).  The  moet  complete  oollection  of  his  works  ib  tbat 
in  12  Yols.  8vo  (Lond.  1801).  The  theological  and  mis- 
cellaneoas  workis  were  republished  aeparately  (London, 
1810,  6  Yols.  8vo).  Two  postbumons  Yolumes  of  ser^ 
mona  were  published  for  the  fint  time  in  1830  (London, 
8  vo).  Sce  W.  Steyena,  lAfi  of  W.  Jonet  (1801)  \  Aikin, 
Gen.  Bioffraphy;  Hoefer,  Nouv.  Biogr,  Gineraley  xxvi, 
908*,  Buck;  Davenport;  "Das^mg^CydopcediaBibliog/ńj 
1682.     (E.  de  P.) 

Jones,  Sir  'William,  an  eminent  poet,  scholar, 
and  lawyer,  was  bom  in  London  Sept.  28, 1746,  and  was 
aent  to  Harrow  In  1763,  where  he  soon  eclipsed  all  his 
fellows,  particularly  in  classical  knowledge.     In  1764  he 
was  entered  at  Uniyersity  College,  Oxford,  where  he  waa 
enabled  to  gratify  tbat  desire  for  a  knowledge  of  the 
Oriental  langnages  which  had  shown  itself  during  the 
last  two  years  of  his  residence  at  Harrow.    In  1766  he 
Icft  Oxford,  to  become  tutor  to  the  eldest  son  of  eail 
Spencer,  with  whom  he  travelled  on  the  Continent.    In 
1770  he  was  admitted  to  the  Inner  Tempie,  and  the 
aame  year  he  published,  at  the  request  of  the  king  of 
Denmark,  a  Life  ofNadir  8hah,  translated  into  French 
from  the  Persian ;  in  the  following  year  a  Peraian  Grantu 
mary  republished  some  years  ago,  with  corrections  and 
additions,  by  the  late  professor  Lee;  and  in  1774  his 
Commentaries  on  AsicUic  Poetry,  republished  by  Eich- 
hom  at  Leipsic  in  1776.     In  1776  he  waa  madę  a  com- 
missioner  of  bankrupts.     In  1780  he  completed  a  trans- 
lation  of  seren  Arabie  poems,  known  as  the  MoaUdkat  ; 
wrote  an  essay  On  the  Legał  Afode  of  Suppreasing  Riołs, 
and  another,  entitled  Essay  on  the  Law  ofBailmenłSy 
and  two  or  three  odes.     In  March,  1783,  Jones  obtained 
a  judgesbip  in  the  Supremę  Court  of  Jndicature  in  Ben- 
gal,  and  landed  at  Calcutt«  in  September.    He  at  once 
set  about  the  acqui8ition  and  promulgation  ofthe  knowl- 
edge of  Oriental  knguages,  literaturę,  and  customs.    He 
cstablished  the  Royal  Asiatic  Society  "fof  inyestigating 
the  history,  antiąuities,  arts,  sciences,  and  literaturę  of 
Asia,"  of  which  he  was  the  first  president.     To  the  vol- 
nmea  of  the  A  siatic  Researches  Sir  WiUiam  oontributed 
largely.     Beaides  thesc,  he  wrote  and  published  a  story 
in  yerse,  called  Tke  Enchanled  Eruiły  or  the  ffutdu  Wife; 
and  a  translation  of  an  ancient  Indian  drama,  cailed 
Saconialay  or  the  Fatal  Ring,    A  translation  bv  him  of 
the  Ordinances  of  Menu  (q.  v.)  appeaied  in  17*94*     He 
was  busily  eraployed  on  a  digest  ofthe  Hindu  and  Mo- 
hammedan  laws,  when  he  was  attacked  with  an  inflam- 
mation  of  the  liver,  which  terminated  fatally  April  27, 
1794.     Sir  Wm.  Jones  was  one  of  the  first  linguists  and 
Oriental  scholars  that  Great  Britain  bas  produced,  be- 
ing  morę  or  less  acąuainted  with  no  less  than  twenty- 
eight  different  languages.    His  poems  are  always  ele- 
gant, often  animated,  and  their  yeraification  is  mellifln- 
ous.     His  leaming  was  exten8iye,  his  legał  knowledge 
was  profound,  and  he  was  an  enlightened  and  zealous 
champion  of  constitutional  principles.     He  was  also  an 
eamest  Christian.     To  deyotlonal  exerci8e8  he  was  ha- 
bitually  attentiye.     In  addition  to  the  aboye  works,  Sir 
William  Jones  published  a  translation  of  Is»us ;  and  also 
translations  of  two  Mohammedan  law  tracts  On  the  Law 
of  Inheritance,  and  of  Suecession  to  Property  ofintes- 
iates:—Taks  and  Fables  by  Niżami:— Two  Hymns  to 
Pracritif  and  Extractsfrom  the  Vedas,    The  East  In- 
dia Company  erected  a  monument  to  his  memory  in  St. 
Paurs  Cathedral,  and  a  statuę  in  BengaL     A  complete 
edition  of  his  works,  in  6  yols.  4to,  was  published  by  lady 
Jones  iii  1799 ;  and  another  appc«red,  in  18  yols.  8yo,  in 
1807,  with  a  life  of  the  author  by  lord  Teignmouth. 


JonSBOn,  FfNK  (known  also  by  the  Latin  nime 
of  Finnus  JohcauuBua\  the  historian  of  the  Iceliodic 
Church  and  literaturę,  was  bora  on  the  16th  of  Janaazr, 
1704,  at  Uitardal,  in  Iceland,  where  his  father,  Jon  H^ 
dorsBon,  was  minister.  He  was  educated  at  the  School 
of  Skalholt,  and  in  1726  passed  to  the  Uniyenity  of  Go- 
penhagen.  On  his  return  to  Iceland  his  intenticm  wm 
to  become  a  lawyer,  but  the  death  of  his  unde,  a  piriak 
priest,  who  left  bebind  him  a  numeroos  iamily  of  anuU 
chiidren,  led  bis  father  to  reque8t  him  to  alter  his  ykira 
to  the  Chuich,  that  he  might  bring  up  the  orphaos.  He 
obtained  the  yacant  benefice,  brought  up  the  famDy, 
married,  and  in  1764  was  appointed  to  the  bishopric  of 
SkalholL  He  was  yeiy  attentiye  to  the  reyenues  ^  his 
diooese,  and  the  aocount  of  his  episcopate  by  Petansoo 
is  chieiSy  occupied  with  his  disputes  with  refiactonr 
tenants  of  Church  property.  He  died  on  the  23d  i 
July,  1789.  He  oomposed  seyend  works  in  Latin  and 
Icelandic,  especially  a  Historia  Ecdeńastioa  JtUmditBy 
first  published  with  yaluable  additions  by  his  son  Flno- 
son  (Copenhagen,  1772-8, 4  yols.  4to),  and  contmoed  by 
Petursson  do¥m  to  1840  (ib.  1841),  a  yaluable  and  intei^ 
esting  work,  embracing  the  literuy  as  well  as  ecdesis»> 
tical  affairs  of  Iceland.— ^fi^/ictA  C^ckp,  s.  y. 

Jop^pa  (Heb.  Fc^Ao',  tD^,  Josh.  xix,  46;  2  ChniD. 
ii,  16 ;  Jonah  i,  8,  or  KiC^,  Ezra  iii,  7 ;  heauty  ,•  Sept,  N. 
T.,  and  Josephus  'lóir^n;,  other  Greek  writeis  'Iwnni^ 
'IdnnjfOT  'lóirti ;  Yulgate  Joppe;  AutłuTers^  **  Japho," 
except  in  Jonah;  usually  <<  Joppe**  in  the  ApocryphaX 
a  town  on  the  south-west  coast  of  Paleatine,  the  port  oif 
Jerusalem  in  the  day s  of  Solomon,  as  it  bas  beói  erer 
sińce. 

1.  Legends,—TYi^  etymology  of  the  name  is  yarioiBly 
explained ;  Rabbinical  writers  deriying  it  from  Ja^ut, 
but  classical  geographeis  from  Jopa  Clómfy,  daoghter 
of  i£olus  and  wife  of  Cepheus,  Andiomeda*8  father,  its 
reputed  founder;  othere  inteipreting  it  *'the  watch- 
tower  of  joy,"  and  so  forth  (Reland,  Palaut.  p.  864), 
The  fact  is,  that,  from  its  being  a  sea^port,  it  had  a  pro- 
fane  as  well  as  a  sacred  history.  Pilny,  foUowing  Mda 
{De  sita  Orb,  i,  12),  saya  that  it  was  of  antedilayian  an- 
tiąuity  (Hist.  NaU  y,  14) ;  and  eyen  Sir  John  Mannde- 
yille,  in  the  14th  centnry,  bears  witness — though,  it  most 
be  confessed,  a  dumsy  one — to  tha£  tiadition  {Eariy 
Travels  in  P,  p.  142).  Aocording  to  Josephus,  it  origis- 
ally  bdonged  to  the  Phoenidans  {A  ni,  xiii,  16, 4).  Hen, 
writes  Strabo,  some  say  Andromeda  was  expoeed  to  the 
whale  {GeograpK  xyi,  p.769 ;  corap.  MuUer^s  //«/.  Grvc 
Fragm,  iy,  326,  and  his  Geograpk,  Grcec  Min,  i,  79),  aod 
he  appeals  to  its  eleyated  poeition  in  bchalf  of  thoae  who 
laid  the  scenę  there;  though,  in  order  to  do  so  consł»- 
tently,  he  had  already  shown  that  it  wouM  be  neces* 
sary  to  transport  ^thiopia  into  PhcBoida  (Stiabo,  i, 
43).  Howeyer,  in  Pliny's  age — and  Joeephus  had  jost 
before  affirmed  the  same  {War^  iii,  9,  3)  — they  still 
showed  the  chains  by  which  Andromeda  was  boond; 
and  not  only  so,  but  M.  Scaurus  the  younger,  the  ssme 
that  was  so  much  employed  in  Judaea  by  Pompey  ( fTar, 
i,  6, 2  8q.),  had  the  bones  of  the  monster  transported  CD 
Romę  from  Joppa,  where  tUi  then  they  had  been  ex- 
hlbited  (Mela,  ibid,)^  and  dispkiyed  them  there  during 
his  (edileship  to  the  public  amongst  other  prodigiea. 
Nor  would  they  haye  been  oninteresting  to  the  modem 
geologist,  if  his  report  be  correct;  for  they  measnred 
forty  feet  in  length,  the  span  of  the  ribs  exoeeding  that 
of  the  Indian  elephant,  and  the  thickness  of  the  spine 
or  yertebra  being  one  foot  and  a  half  (''sesąuipedaUs,* 
i.  e.  in  drcumference — when  Solinus  says  "  semipedaliSi" 
he  means  in  diameter,  see  Plmy,  HisL  Not,  ix,  5  and 
the  notę,  Delphin  ed.).  Bdand  woold  teace  the  adren- 
tures  of  Jonah  in  this  legendary  guise  [see  Jo5jih]; 
but  it  is  far  mors  probaUe  that  it  symbołizes  the  fint 
interchange  of  commeroe  between  the  Greeks,  pcnooi- 
fied  in  their  errant  bero  Peraeua,  and  the  PhoBnictaB^ 
whose  loyely,  but  till  then  anexp]ored  cUme  may  ba 
shadowed  forth  in  the  fiuryizginAndnuDoda.    Pcoea^ 


JOPPA 


1003 


JOPPA 


in  the  tałe,  is  Btid  to  haye  plunged  his  dagger  into  tbe 
right  shottlder  of  the  mooBter.  PoBBibly  he  may  have 
diacoreied  or  improyed  the  barbor,  the  roar  from  whoee 
foaming  reefs  on  the  north  oould  scarcely  have  been 
aorpaaeed  by  the  barkings  of  Scylla  or  CharybdlB.  £ven 
ihe  chains  shown  there  may  hare  been  thoee  by  which 
hia  ahip  waa  attached  to  the  shore.  Ruigs  uaed  by  the 
Bomans  for  mooring  their  yessela  are  still  to  be  seen 
near  Terradna,  in  the  soath  angle  of  the  ancient  port 
(Murray^s  HandbŁ/or  S.  Italy,  p.  10, 2d  ed.). 

2.  Bigtory.—We  iind  that  Japho  or  Joppa  was  aitua- 
ted  in  the  portion  of  Dan  (Joeh.  xiz,  46),  on  the  coast 
towards  the  south,  and  on  a  bill  so  high,  says  Sttabo, 
that  people  affirmed  (but  incorrectly)  that  Jemsalem 
was  yisible  from  its  summit.  Haying  a  harbor  attach- 
ed to  it— thoogh  alwajrs,  aa  stiU,  a  dangerous  one^it 
became  the  port  of  Jemsalem,  when  Jerusalem  became 
metropolia  of  the  kingdom  of  the  house  of  Dayid,  and 
oertainly  neyer  did  port  and  metropolia  morę  strikingly 
resemble  each  other  in  difficulty  of  approach  both  by 
aea  and  land.  Hence,  except  in  joumeys  to  and  from 
Jerusalem,  it  was  not  mach  uaed.  Accordingly,  after 
the  aboye  inddental  notice,  the  plaoe  is  not  raentioned 
till  the  times  of  Solomon,  when,  as  being  almost  the 
only  ayailable  sea-port,  Joppa  waa  the  place  fixed  upon 
for  the  oedar  and  pine  wood  from  Moont  Lebanon  to  be 
landed  by  the  senrants  of  Hiram,  king  of  Tyre,  thence 
to  be  conyeyed  to  Jemsalem  by  the  seryants  of  Solo- 
mon for  the  erection  of  the  first  ^  house  of  habitation" 
eyer  madę  with  hands  for  the  inyisible  Jehoyah.  It 
was  by  way  of  Joppa  similarly  that  like  materials  were 
conyeyed  from  the  same  locality,  by  permiasion  of  Cy- 
TUBj  for  the  rebuilding  of  the  second  Tempie  under  Ze- 
rabbabel  (1  Kings  y,  9;  2  Chroń,  ii,  16;  Ezra  iii,  7). 
Herę  Jonah,  wheneyer  and  whereyer  he  may  haye  liyed 
(2  Kings  xiy,  25,  certainly  does  not  dear  up  the  first  of 
these  points),  *'  took  ship  to  flee  from  the  presence  of 
his  Maker^  (Jonah  1,8),  and  accomplished  that  singular 
history  which  our  Lord  bas  appropriated  as  a  type  of 
one  of  the  prindpal  scenes  in  the  grcat  drama  of  his 
own  (Matt.  zii,  40). 

After  the  close  of  O.-T.  history  Joppa  rosę  in  impor- 
tance.  llie  sea  was  then  beginning  to  be  the  highway 
of  nations.  Greece,  Egypt,  Persia,  and  some  of  the  lit- 
tle  kingdoms  of  Asia  Minor  had  their  fleets  for  com- 
merce  and  war.  Until  the  constmction  of  Gtesarea  by 
Herod,  Joppa  was  the  only  port  in  Palestine  proper  at 
which  foreign  shipe  could  touch ;  it  was  thos  not  only 
the  shipping  capita],but  the  key  of  the  whole  conntry 
on  the  sea-board.  Daring  the  wars  of  the  Maccabees  it 
was  one  of  the  principal  strongholds  of  Palestine  (1 
Mace  X,  75;  xiy,  5, 84;  Josephus,  AtiL  xiii,  15, 1).  It 
would  seem  that  Jews  then  constitated  only  a  minority 
of  the  population,  and  the  fureign  residents— Greeks, 
Egyptians,  and  Syrians — were  so  rich  and  powerful,  and 
80  aided  by  the  fleets  of  their  own  nations,  as  to  be  able 
to  rule  the  dty.  During  tbis  period,  thcrefore,  Joppa 
expcrienced  many  yicissitudes.  It  had  sided  with  Apol- 
lonius,  and  waa  attacked  and  captured  by  Jonathan  Mac- 
cabeeos  (1  Mace.  z,  76).  It  witnesaed  the  meeting  be- 
tween  the  latter  and  Ptolemy  (ibid.  xi,  6).  Simon  had 
hia  sospicions  of  its  inhabitants,  and  set  a  garrison  there 
(ibid.  xii,  84),  which  he  afterwards  strengthened  con- 
aderably  (ibid.  xiii,  1 1).  But  when  peace  was  restored, 
he  re-established  it  once  morę  aa  a  hayen  (ibid.  xiy,  5). 
He  likewise  rebuilt  the  fortifications  (ibid.  y,  84).  This 
oocupation  of  Joppa  was  one  of  the  grounds  of  oom- 
plaint  uiged  by  Antiochos,  son  of  D^etrius,  against 
'  Simon;  but  the  latter  aUeged  in  excase  the  mischief 
which  had  been  done  by  its  inhabitants  to  his  fellow- 
dtizens  (ibid.  xy,  80  and  85).  It  would  appear  that  Ju- 
das  Maccabeus  had  bumt  their  hayen  some  time  back 
for  a  groas  act  of  barbarity  (2  Mace  xii,  6).  Tribute 
waa  subseąuently  exacted  for  its  possession  from  Hyi^ 
canns  by  Antiochus  Sidetes.  By  Pompey  it  was  once 
morę  madę  independent,  and  comprehended  under  Syria 
(Josephus,  Ant.  xiy,  4, 4) ;  but  by  Osar  it  was  not  only 


restored  to  the  Jews,  but  its  leyenues — whether  from 
land  or  from  export-datae»— were  bestowed  upon  the  2d 
Hyrcanus  and  his  heiis  (xiy,  10, 6).  When  Herod  the 
Great  commenced  operations,  it  was  seized  by  him,  lest 
he  should  leaye  a  hosdle  stronghold  in  his  rear  when  he 
marched  upon  Jerusalem  (xiy,  15, 1),  and  Augnstus  con- 
firmed  him  in  its  possession  (xy,  7, 4).  It  was  after- 
wards aasigned  to  Archelaus  when  constituted  ethnarch 
(xyii,  11,4),  and  passed  with  Syria  under  Cyrenius  whoi 
Ajrehelaus  had  been  deposed  (xyii,  12, 5).  Under  Ces- 
tius  (l  e.  Gessius  Floms)  it  was  destroyed  amidst  great 
daughter  of  its  inhabitants  {War,  ii,  18, 10) ;  and  such 
a  nest  of  pirates  had  it  become  when  Yespasian  arriyed 
in  those  parta  that  it  underwent  a  seoond  and  entire 
destraction,  together  with  the  adjacent  yillages,  at  hia 
hands  (iii,  9, 8).  Thus  it  appears  that  thb  port  had  al- 
ready  begnn  to  be  the  den  of  robbers  and  outcasts  which 
it  was  in  Strabo*s  time  {GeograpK.  xyi,  759),  while  the 
distiict  aiound  it  was  so  populous  that  from  Jamnia,  a 
ndghboring  town,  and  its  yictnit}',  40,000  armed  men 
could  be  oollected  (ibid.).  There  was  a  yast  plain 
around  it,  as  we  leam  from  Josephus  (AtiL  xiii,  4, 4) ;  it 
lay  between  Jamnia  and  Osarear— the  latter  of  which 
mtght  be  reached  ''on  the  morrow'*  frcnn  it  (Acta  x,  9 
and  24) — not  far  from  Lydda  (Acta  ix,  88),  and  distant 
from  Antipatris  150  sUdia  (Joseph.  Ani.  xiii,  15, 1). 

It  waa  at  Joppa,  on  the  house-top  of  Simon  the  tan- 
ner,  '*by  the  sea-side" — with  the  yiew  therefore  dr- 
cumscribed  on  the  east  by  the  high  ground  on  which 
the  town  stood,  but  commanding  a  boundless  prospect 
oyer  the  western  waters— that  the  apostle  Peter  had  hia 
*<  yision  of  tolerance,**  as  it  haa  been  happily  designated, 
and  went  forth  like  a  second  Perseus — but  from  the 
east  to  emandpate,  from  still  wonie  thraldom,  the  yir- 
gin  daughter  of  the  west  The  Christian  poet  Arator 
haa  not  failed  to  disooyer  a  mystical  connection  between 
the  raising  to  life  of  the  aged  Tabithar— the  occasion  of 
Peter^s  yisit  to  Joppa — and  the  baptism  of  the  first 
Gentile  household  {De  Act.  ApottoL  L  840,  ap.  Mignę, 
PcUroL  Curt.  CompL  bcyiii,  164). 

In  the  4th  centuiy  £usebius  calls  Joppa  a  city  (OtuH 
most,  s.  y.) ;  and  it  was  then  madę  the  seat  of  a  bishop- 
ric,  an  honor  which  it  retained  till  the  conque8t  of  the 
country  by  the  Saraoens  (Reland,  p.  868 ;  S.  Paul,  Geogr. 
Sae,  p.  805) ;  the  subscńptions  of  its  prelates  are  pre- 
serye^  in  the  acta  of  yarious  synods  of  the  5th  and  6th 
centuries  (Le  Quien,  Orient  Christian,  iii,  629).  Joppa 
haa  been  the  landing-place  of  pilgrims  going  to  Jemsa- 
lem for  morę  than  a  thousand  years,  from  Arculf  in  the 
7th  century  to  his  royal  highnesa  the  prince  of  Walea 
in  the  19th,  and  it  is  mentioned  In  almost  all  the  itin- 
eraries  and  books  of  trayd  in  the  Holy  Land  which  haye 
appeared  in  different  languages  (Early  TrawU  in  PdL 
p.  10, 34, 142, 286).  Nonę  of  the  early  trarellets,  how- 
eyer,  giye  any  explidt  description  of  the  place.  Dur- 
ing the  Crasadea  Joppa  waa  seyeral  times  taken  and 
retaken  by  Franka  and  Saracens.  It  had  been  taken 
possession  of  by  the  forces  of  Godfrey  de  Bouillon  pre- 
yiously  to  the  capture  of  Jemsalem.  The  town  had 
been  deserted,  and  was  allowed  to  fali  into  ruin,  the 
Crasaders  contenting  themselyes  with  possession  of  the 
dtadd  (William  of  Tyre,  Hitt.  yiii,  9);  and  it  was  in 
part  aamgned  subsequently  for  the  support  of  the  Church 
of  the  Besunection  (jbid.  ix,  16),  though  there  seem 
to  haye  been  bishops  of  Joppa  (perhaps  only  titular 
after  all)  between  A.D.  1258  and  1868  (Le  Quien,  1291 ; 
compare  p.  1241).  Saladin,  in  AD.  1188,  destroyed  iU 
fortifications  (SanuŁ  Stertt.  Fid.  Crucis,  lib.  iii,  part  x, 
c.  5) ;  but  Bichard  of  England,  who  was  confined  here 
by  sickness,  rebuilt  them  (t6«2.,  and  Bichard  of  Deyizes 
in  Bohn's  Ani.  Lib,  p.  61).  Its  last  oocupation  by  Chris- 
tiana was  that  of  St.  Louis,  A.D.  1253,  and  when  he  came 
it  was  still  a  city  and  goyemed  by  a  count.  "  Of  the 
immense  sums,"  says  Joinyille, "  which  it  cost  the  king 
to  indose  Jaffa,  it  does  not  become  me  to  speak,  for 
they  were  countless.  Ue  inclosed  the  town  from  one 
side  of  the  sea  to  the  othcr;  and  there  were  twenty? 


JOPPA 


1004 


JOKDAK 


four  towen,  indading  snuJl  and  great.  The  ditches 
weie  wdl  sooured,  and  kept  cleau,  boŁh  within  and 
without.  There  were  three  gates"  (Chroń,  ofCrua,  p. 
495,  Bohu).  So  restored,  it  fell  into  the  handa  of  Łhe 
Bultana  of  Egypt,  together  with  the  rest  of  Palestme, 
hj  whom  it  waa  once  morę  laid  in  ruina ;  ao  much  ao 
that  Bertrand  de  la  Brocąuiere,  Yiaidng  it  about  the 
middle  of  the  15th  century,  atatea  that  it  then  conaiated 
only  of  a  few  tenta  covered  with  reeda,  having  been  a 
atrong  place  under  the  Chńatiana.  Guidee,  aocredited 
by  the  sułtan,  here  met  the  pilgiima  and  reoeiyed  the 
cuBtomary  tribute  from  them ;  and  here  the  papai  in- 
dulgences  offered  to  pilgrima  commenoed  {Early  Traif- 
eUy  p.  286).  FinaUy,  Ja£h  fell  under  the  Turka,  in  whoae 
hands  it  still  is,  exhibiting  the  uaual  decrepitude  of  the 
dties  poBsessed  by  them,  and  depending  on  Christian 
commerce  for  its  feeble  esdatenca.  During  the  period 
of  their  rule  it  haa  been  three  timea  aacked — by  the 
Arabs  in  1722,  by  the  Mamelukea  in  1775,  and  Uutly 
by  Napoleon  I  in  1799,  when  a  body  of  4000  Albaniana, 
who  held  a  strong  poeition  in  the  town,  aunrendered  on 
promise  of  haring  their  Iive8  apared.  Yet  the  whole 
4000  were  afterwarda  pinloned  and  shot  on  the  atrand ! 
When  Napoleon  was  compelled  to  retreat  to  Egypt,  be- 
tween  400  and  500  Frenoh  aoldiera  lay  ill  of  the  plagne 
in  the  hospitals  of  Joppa.  They  could  not  be  removed, 
and  Napoleon  ordered  them  to  be  poiaoned  I  (Porter, 
Bandbookfor  S.andP.p,  288). 

8.  DeseriptUm, — Yąfa  is  the  modem  name  of  Joppa, 
and  is  identical  with  the  old  Hebrew  Japho.  It  oon- 
tains  about  5000  inhabitanta,  of  whom  1000  are  Chria- 
Hans,  about  150  Jewa,  and  the  reat  Moalema.  It  is 
beautifully  situated  on  a  little  rounded  hill,  dippuig  on 
the  west  into  the  wayea  of  the  Mediterranean,  and  on 
the  land  sidc  encompassed  by  orcharda  of  orange,  lemon, 
apricot,  and  other  trees,  which  for  luxuriance  and  beau- 
ty  are  not  surpaased  in  the  world.  They  extend  for 
seyeral  miles  acroaa  the  great  plain.  like  most  Orien- 
tal  towns,  however,  it  looks  beat  iu  the  diaUuice.  The 
houses  are  huddled  together  without  order;  the  atreeta 
are  narrow,  crooked,  and  filthy ;  the  town  ia  ao  crowded 
along  the  steep  sides  of  the  hill  that  the  rickety  dwell- 
ings  in  the  upper  part  seem  to  be  toppling  oyer  on  the 
flat  roofs  of  those  below.  The  most  prominent  featurea 
of  the  architecture  from  without  are  the  flattened  domes 
by  which  most  of  the  buildings  are  surmounted,  ąnd  the 
appearance  of  arched  yaults.  But  the  aspect  of  the 
whole  is  mean  and  gloomy,  and  inside  the  place  haa  all 
the  appearance  of  a  poor  though  Uuge  yillage.  From 
the  steepness  of  the  site  many  of  the  stieeta  are  eon- 
nected  by  flights  of  steps,  and  the  one  that  runa  along 
the  sea-wall  is  the  most  clean  and  regular  of  the  whole. 
There  are  three  mosąues  iu  Joppa,  and  Latin,  Greek, 
and  Armenian  convents.  The  former  is  that  in  which 
European  pUgrims  and  trayellera  nsually  lodge.  The 
bazaars  are  worth  a  yisit  The  chief  manufacture  is 
aoap.  It  has  no  port,  and  it  ia  only  under  favorable 
drcumstanoes  of  wind  and  weather  that  yessels  can 
ride  at  anchor  a  mile  or  so  from  the  shore.  There 
is  a  place  on  the  shore  which  is  called  "the  har^ 
bor."  It  consists  of  a  strip  of  water  from  fifleen  to 
twenty  yards  wide  and  two  or  three  deep,  incloaed  on 
the  sea  side  by  a  ridge  of  Iow  and  partiaUy  sunken 
rocks.  It  may  afford  a  little  shelter  to  boats,  but  it  is 
worse  than  useless  so  far  as  commerce  is  conoemed. 
The  town  is  defended  by  a  wali,  on  which  a  few  old 
guns  are  mounted.  With  the  exoeption  of  a  few  broken 
columns  scattered  about  the  streets,  and  through  the 
gardens  on  the  southem  alope  of  the  hiU,  and  the  large 
Btones  in  the  foundations  of  the  castle,  Joppa  haa  no  re- 
mains  of  antiąuity;  and  nonę  of  its  modem  buildings, 
not  even  the  reputed  '^house  of  Simon  the  tanner," 
which  the  monks  show,  are  worthy  of  notę,  although 
the  locality  of  the  last  is  not  badly  chosen  (Stanley,  S. 
and  P,  p.  2G3, 274 ;  and  seo  Seddon's  Memoir^  p.  86, 185). 
The  town  has  still  a  considerable  trade  as-  the  port  of 
Jerusalem.    The  oranges  of  JaSa  are  the  fineat  in  aU 


Palestuie  and  Syria ;  ita  pomęgranatea  and  wstermdoDi 
are  likewise  in  high  repute,  and  ita  gardena  and  arange 
and  citron  groyes  delidoualy  fragrant  and  fcrtile.  Boi 
among  ita  populatiou  are  fugitiyea  and  yagabonda  from 
all  countries ;  and  Europeana  haye  little  security,  whetłn 
er  of  life  or  property,  to  induce  a  peimanent  abode  theio. 
A  British  Gonsul  is  now  reaident  in  the  plaoe^  and  a  laił- 
road  has  been  projected  to  Jerusalem. 

See  Raumer^s  Paldstina  ;  Yokiey,  i,  186  aą. ;  Chatean- 
briand,  ii,  108;  Ciarkę,  iy,  438  aq.*,-  Buckingham,  i,  237 
8q.;  Richter,  p.  12;  Richardaon,  ii,  16;  Skinner,  i,  175- 
184;  Robinson,  i,  18;  Stent,  ii,  27^  M'Calloch*8  Gtaet- 
teer;  Reland, p.  864;  Cellar.  Not,  ii,  524;  Hamelayeld,  i, 
442;  ii,  229;  Haaaeląnist,  pi  187;  Niebnhr,  iii,  41;  JoU 
iffe,p.248;  Light,p.l25;  Ritter,£nft.ii,400;  Schwan, 
p.  142,  378,  875 ;  Thomson,  L<md  and  Book,  ii,  273^ 
Kitto;  Smith. 

Jop^pd  ('lółnri?),  the  Greek  form  (1  Eadr.  y,  55;  1 
Maoc.x,  75,  76;  xi,6;  xii,88;  xiii,  11;  xiy,5.34;  xy, 
28, 85 ;  2  Mace  iy,  21 ;  xii,  8, 7  ['lamrinf  c])  of  the  name 
of  the  town  Joppa  (q.  y.). 

Jo^rah  (Heb.  Yorah%  n^i%  prob.  for  tir\i'^,  iprinh- 
Ung,  or  autumnal  rain  ;  SepL  'Iwpa  y.  r.  Óupa^  "^ul^ 
Jora)j  a  man  wbose  d^oendants  (or  a  place  whoae  fos- 
mer  inhabitanta)  to  the  number  of  112  retumed  from 
the  Babylonian  captiyity  (Ezra  ii,  18) ;  caNed  Haripb 
in  the  parallel  passage  (Neh.  vii,  24).  "  In  £zrm  two 
of  De  Ro8Bi'a  MSS.,  and  originally  one  of  Kennicott^ą 
had  tVV\\  i.  e.  Jodah,  which  ia  the  reading  of  the  Syiiae 
and  Arabie  yersiona.  One  of  Kenniootfs  MSS.  had  th« 
original  reading  in  Ezm  altered  to  D11%  L  e.  Joram; 
and  two  in  Nehemiah  read  &'inn,  L  e.  Uarim,  which 
corresponds  with  'Apci;*  of  the  AJexandrian  MS^  and 
Ckurom  of  the  Syriac  In  any  case,  the  change  or  con- 
fusion  of  letters  which  might  have  cauaed  the  yariation 
of  the  name  ia  ao  slight  that  It  ia  difiicult  to  pronounoe 
which  ia  the  tnie  form,  the  cocruption  of  Jorah  into 
Hariph  being  aa  easily  conceiyable  as  the  reyene.  Bup- 
rington  (Geneal  u,  75)  decides  In  fayor  of  the  latter,  but 
from  a  compariaon  of  both  paasagea  with  Ezra  x,  31  we 
ahould  be  indined  to  regard  Harim  (Q^<n)  aa  the  cne 
reading  in  all  caaea.  But,onany8uppoatton,it  isdiffi- 
cult  to  account  for  ^e  form  Acephui^,  or,  owe  prop^ 
erly,  'Apm^pi^,  in  1  Esdr.  y,  16^  wMcb  Burńngtoa 
conaiders  aa  haying  originated  in  a  corraption  of  the  two 
readings  in  Ezra  and  Nehemiah,  the  aecond  syllable 
ariaing  from  an  error  of  the  transcriber  in  mistaking  the 
uncial  £  for  £"  (Smith). 

Jo^ral  (Heb.  Yoraif\  '^^1%  perh.  i.  q.  Jordk;  Sepc. 
'Iwpcć^Yulg.  Jorat)y  the  fourth  name  of  the  aeyen  chief- 
tains  of  the  Gadites  other  than  those  resident  in  Bashan 
(1  Chroń,  y,  18).  B.C.  perh.  cir.  782.  "Four  of  Keu- 
nicott's  MSS.,  and  the  piinted  oopy  uaed  by  Luther, 
read  "^^^^  i.  e.  Jodai"  (Smith). 

Jo'rain  (Heb.  tnS^  \  Sept.  ^Ii^pd^),  prop.  a  shoit- 
ened  form  of  the  name  Jehoram  (q.  y.),  for  wfaich  it  la 
indififerently.uaed  in  the  Heb,,  and  arbitiaiily  in  the  A. 
V.,  as  the  following  dassification  ahows :  o.  The  aon  of 
the  king  of  Zobah  (2  Sam.  yiii,  10;  Sept.  'le^^ovfiKi;t; 
elsewhere  called  Hadoram).  b.  The  king  of  Jodah 
(2  King8yiii,21,23,24;  xi,  2;  1  Chroń,  iii,  11;  elsewhere 
Jehoram),  c.  The  king  of  larael  (2  Kinga  yiii,  16, 25, 28 
[twice],29  [twice];  ix,  14  [twice],  16, 16  [twiee],29; 
incorrectly  for  Jeharamj  2  Kinga  ix,  17,  21  [twioe],  22, 
23;  elsewhere  correctly  ao).  <L  The  Leyite  (1  Chran. 
xxvi,  25,  D^*^).    e.  By  error  for  Jozabad  (1  Eadr.  i,  9). 

Jor^dan  (Reb.Yarden%  'j?'^^  always  with  the  aiti- 
cle  "ifl^l^^n ;  1opddvfic)y  the  chief  and  most  celebrated 
riyer  oif  Palestine,  flowing  through  a  deep  yalley  down 
the  centro  of  the  country  from  north  to  aouth.  In  the 
follpwing  account  we  Iwrgely  dte  from  Kitto'8  Qrol!o- 
padia  and  Smith*8  JHOionary  qf  the  BMe,  s.  r.    Sea 

RlYEB. 


JORDAN 


1005 


JORDAN 


1.  The  Name.—Tbh  ńgmiies  deieaukr,  from  the  root 
T^^f  <*  to  descend** — a  name  most  applicable  to  it,  wheth- 
er  we  consider  the  rapidity  of  its  cuirent,  or  the  great 
depth  of  the  valley  throngh  which  it  runs.  From  what- 
ever  part  of  the  country  its  banka  are  approacbed,  the 
descent  ia  long  and  steep.  That  thia  ia  the  tnie  ety- 
mology  of  the  word  aeema  evident  from  an  incidental 
remark  in  Josh.  iii,  16,  where,  in  describing  the  effect 
of  the  opening  of  a  paasage  for  the  Israelitea,  the  word 
nsed  for  the  "coming  down"  of  the  waters  (D^^il 
Q'^'?'?^?)  ifl  almoet  the  same  as  the  name  of  the  river 
(see  Stanley,  8,  and  P.  p.  279,  notę).  Other  deriratlonB 
hare  been  given.  Some  say  it  is  compoonded  of  ")M*^, 
a  riv€r,  and  *|^,  the  name  of  the  city  where  it  rises,  but 
thia  etymology  is  imposaible  (ReUnd,  PaUut.  p.  271). 
Another  view  ia,  that  the  river  haying  two  aourcea,  the 
name  of  the  one  was  Jor,  and  of  the  other  Dauf  heijce 
the  united  stream  ia  called  Jordan,  So  Jerome  (jComm, 
in  Mażt,  xvi,  13),  Thia  theory  haa  been  copied  by 
Adamnanus  {De  Loc  Scmct,  ii,  19),  William  of  Tyre 
(xiii,  18),  Brocardus  (p.  8),  Adiichomiua  (p.  109),  and 
othera;  and  the  etymology  aeema  to  have  spread  among 
the  Christiana  in  Palestine,  from  whom  Burckhardt 
heard  it  {JraveU  m  Sifria,  p.  42, 43 ;  see  Bobinaon,  Bib. 
Beś.  iii,  412,  notę).  Arab  geographers  cali  the  riyer 
either  El-Urdon,  which  ia  equiyalent  to  the  Hebrew,  or 
Eshsheriah,  which  signifies  **  the  watering-place ;"  and 
this  latter  ia  the  name  almost  uniyersally  given  to  it  by 
the  modem  Syrians,  who  sometimes  attach  the  appelh^ 
tive  d-Kdir,  **  the  great,"  by  way  of  diatinction  from 
the  Sheriat  el-Mandhur,  or  Hieromax. 

2.  ^ourcef.— The  snows  that  deeply  cover  Hermon 
dojing  the  whole  winter,  and  that  still  cap  its  glittering 
snmmit  dnring  the  hotteat  ^Ky^  of  summer,  are  the  real 
springs  of  the  Jordan.  They  feed  its  perennial  foun- 
taiua,  and  thęy  anpply  from  a  thouaand  chaiinels  thoae 
superabundant  watera  which  make  the  river  "  oyerflow 
all  its  banka  in  haryest  time"  (Joah.  iii,  15).  The  Jor- 
dan has  two  hittorical  aources.  a,  In  the  midat  of  a 
rich  but  marahy  phun,  lying  betwcen  the  southem  pro- 
longation  of  Hermon  and  the  mouiitaina  of  Naphtali,  is 
a  Iow  cup-shaped  hiil,  thiddy  co  ver(  d  with  shruba.  On 
it  once  stood  Dan,  the  northem  border-city  of  Palestine ; 
and  from  its  weatem  base  guahes  forth  the  great  foun- 
tain  of  the  Jordan.  The  waters  at  once  form  a  large 
pond  encirded  with  rank  grass  and  jungle —  now  the 
home  of  the  wild  boar— and  then  flow  off  aouthward. 
Within  the  rim  of  the  cup,  beneath  the  spreading 
branches  of  a  gigantic  oak,  is  a  smallcr  spring.  It  ia 
fed,doubtle6S,by  the  same  sonrce,  and  its  atream,  break- 
ing  through  the  rim,  joins  its  sister,  and  forms  a  riyer 
some  forty  feet  wide,  deep  and  rapid.  The  modem 
name  of  the  hill  is  Tell  d-Kady,  '*  the  hill  of  the  judge ;" 
and  both  fountain  and  riyer  are  called  Leddan— eyi- 
dently  the  name  Dan  corrapted  by  a  double  article,  £1- 
ed-Dan  (Robinson,  Bib.  Res.  iii,  894 ;  Thomson,  Land 
and  Book,  p.  214;  and  in  BibUotkeca  Sac.  1846,  p.  196). 
Josephua  calls  this  stream  ^  little  Jordan"  (tóv  fUKpby 
*IopidvrfVf  War,  iy,  1, 1 ;  comp.  Ant.  i,  10, 1 ;  yiii,  8, 4) ; 
but  it  is  the  principal  souioe  of  the  riyer,  and  the  largest 
fountain  in  Syria. 

b.  Four  miles  east  of  Tell  el-K&dy,  on  a  lower  temce 
of  Hermon,  amid  forests  of  oak,  lie  the  ruins  of  Banias, 
the  andent  Cnsarea-Philippi,  and  morę  ancient  Panium. 
Beaide  the  ruins  is  a  lofty  diff  of  red  limestone,  haying 
a  large  fountain  at  ita  base.  Beneath  the  cliff  there 
waa  formerly,  aa  Josephua  tells  us,  a  gloomy  caye,  and 
within  it  a  yawning  abyss  of  unfathomable  depth,  fiUed 
with  water.  Thia  was  the  other  source  of  the  Jordan 
(  War,  i,  21, 3 ;  comp.  A  nt.  xv,  10, 8 ;  Pliny,  v,  12 ;  Mish- 
na,  Para,  viii,  12).  A  tempie  was  erected  oyer  the  cave 
by  Herod,  and  its  ruins  now  fili  it  and  oonceal  the  foun- 
tain. From  it  a  foaming  torrent  still  bursts,  and  dashes 
down  to  the  plain  through  a  nanrow  rocky  tavine,  and 
then  glides  swiitly  on  till  it  joins  the  other  about  four 


miles  south  of  Tell  d-Kftdy  (Robinson,  iii,  897 ;  Porter, 
J7aiia&ooJk,p.446). 

c.  The  Jordan  has  also  a  faU&d  fountain,  thus  de- 
scribed  by  Josephus :  ^  Apparently  Panium  is  the  source 
of  the  Jordan,  but  the  water  is,  in  reality,  oouyeyed 
thither  uuseen  by  a  subterranean  channel  from  Phiala, 
as  it  is  called,  which  lies  not  for  from  the  high  road,  on 
the  right  as  you  asoend  to  Trachonitis,  at  the  diatanoe 
of  120  stadia  from  Oesarea.  .  •  .  That  the  Jordan  hence 
deriyed  its  origin  was  foimerly  unknown,  until  it  was 
ascertained  by  Philip,  tetrarch  of  Trachonitis,  who,  hay- 
ing thrown  chafTinto  Phiak,  found  it  cast  out  at  Pani- 
um" (  War,  iii,  10, 7).  The  lakę  here  referred  to  ap- 
peara  to  be  Burket  er-Ram,  which  Robinson  yiaited  and 
described  {Bib.  Bes.  iii,  899).  The  legend  has  no  foun- 
datioii  in  reality. 

d.  Other  fountains  in  this  region,  though  unnamed 
in  history,  oontribute  much  to  the  Jordan.  The  chief 
of  these,  and  the  highest  perennial  aource  of  the  Jor- 
dan»  is  in  the  bottom  of  a  yalley  at  the  western  base  of 
Heimon,  a  short  distance  from  the  town  of  Hasbeiya, 
and  twelye  miles  north  of  Tell  el-Kady.  The  fountain 
is  in  a  pocd  at  the  foot  of  a  basalt  cliff;  the  stream  from 
it,  called  Hasbany  (from  Hasbeiya),  iłowa  through  a  uai^ 
row  glen  into  the  plain,  and  falla  into  the  main  atream 
about  a  mile  souUi  of  the  junction  of  the  Leddan  and 
BaniAsy.  The  relatiye  size  of  the  three  stiearos  Rob-, 
inson  thus  eatimates:  '*That  from  Banias  is  twice  aa 
large  as  the  Hasbany,  while  the  Leddan  is  twice,  if  not 
three  times  the  size  of  that  from  Banias"  {Bib.  Ret.  iii, 
895).  The  united  riyer  flows  southward  through  the 
manhy  plain  for  six  miles,  and  then  falls  into  Lakę  Hii- 
leh,  called  in  Scripture  "  The  Waters  of  Merom."  Se^ 
Mkrom. 

e.  Besides  these,  a  considerable  stream  comes  down 
from  the  plain  of  Ijon,we8t  of  the  Haabfiny;  and  two 
large  fountaina  (called  B&lat  and  Mellahah)  biuat  forth 
from  the  baae  of  the  mountain-chain  of  Naphtali  (Por- 
ter, Handboohfor  8.  and  P.  p.  486). 

8,  Phytical  Feaiuret  ofthe  Jordan  and  iłs  Yalley. — 
The  moet  remarkable  feature  of  the  Jordan  ia,  that 
throughout  nearly  its  entire  couree  it  is  behto  the  level 
ofthe  tecu  Its  yalley  ia  thua  like  a  huge  fissure  in  the 
earth^s  crust.  The  following  measurementa,  taken  from 
Yan  de  yelde's  Memoir  accompanying  his  Map,  will 
giye  the  best  idea  of  the  depression  of  this  aingnlar  yal- 
ley: 

Fountain  of  Jordan  at  HAshelja. . .  1700  ft.  eleyation. 

"  "  Banias 114T 

"  Dan 647  " 

LakeHfileh about   120  " 

ŁakepfTlberias KO  (L  depression. 

DeadSea 1812  " 

There  may  be  some  error  in  the  eleyations  of  the  foun- 
tains as  here  giyen.  Lakę  Hdleh  ia  encompassed  by  a 
great  plain,  extending  to  Dan ;  and  as  it  appeara  to  the 
eye  almost  leyel,  it  is  difficult  to  belieye  that  there  could 
be  a  difference  of  500  feet  in  the  eleyations  of  the  foun- 
tain and  the  lakę.  Porter  eatimated  it  on  the  spot  at 
not  aboye  100  feet;  but  it  is  worthy  of  notę  that  Yon 
Wildenbrach  makes  it  by  measurement  587  feet,  and 
De  Bertou  844. 

The  generał  oouise  of  the  Jordan  is  due  south.  From 
their  fountains  the  three  streams  flow  south  to  the 
pointa  of  junction,  and  continue  in  the  same  direction 
to  the  HOleh ;  and  from  the  aouthem  extremity  of  this 
lakę  the  Jordan  again  issues  and  resumes  its  old  courae. 
For  some  two  miles  its  banka  are  flat,  and  its  current 
not  yeiy  rapid ;  but  on  passing  through  Jisr  Benat  Ya- 
ktib  C*  the  Bridge  of  Jaoob'8  Daughtera"),  the  banks  sud- 
denly  contract  and  rise  high  on  each  aide,  and  the  riyer 
dashes  in  sheets  of  foam  oyer  a  rocky  bed,  rebounding 
from  cliff  to  diff  in  its  mad  career.  Here  and  there  the 
retieating  banks  haye  a  little  green  meadow,  with  its 
fringe  of  oleanders  aU  wet  and  glistening  with  spray. 
Thus  it  radies  on,  often  winding,  occasionally  donbling 
back  like  the  coils  of  a  serpent,  till,  breaking  from  rocky 
bameiS)  it  enters  the  rich  plain  of  Batlhah,  where  on 


JORDAN 


1006 


JORDAN 


the  leil  bank  stand  the  niins  of  Bethauda  (q.  v,y.  The 
Btream  now  expandB,  and  glides  iazily  along  taU  it  falls 
on  the  still  boeom  of  the  Sea  of  Galilee.  Between  Beth- 
saida  and  the  sea  the  Jordan  ayerages  about  twenty 
yards  in  width,  and  flows  sluggishly  between  Iow  allu- 
vial  banka.  Bara  of  sand  eztend  across  its  channel  here 
and  there,  at  which  it  is  eańly  forded  (Porter,  Hond' 
bookj  p.  426 ;  Kobinson,  ii,  414  8q. ;  Burckhardt,  Syria,  p. 
816).  From  Jisr  Ben&t  Yak(ib  the  distanoe  is  only  8even 
miles,  and  yet  in  that  distanoe  the  riyer  falls  700  feet. 
The  total  length  of  the  section  between  the  two  lakes 
is  about  eleren  miles  as  the  crow  flies. 

An  old  tradition  tells  us  that  the  Jordan  flows  direet 
ihrough  the  Sea  of  Galilee  without  mingUng  with  its 
waters.  The  origin  of  the  story  may  be  the  fact  that 
the  river  entera  the  lakę  at  the  northem  extreniity,  and 
leaves  it  at  a  point  ezactly  oppońte  at  the  soathem, 
without  apparent  increase  or  diminution. 

The  third  section  of  the  river,  lying  between  the  Sea 
of  Galilee  and  the  Dead  Sea,  is  the  Jordan  of  Scripture, 
the  other  two  sections  not  being  directly  mentioned 
either  in  the  O.  T.  or  N.  T.  Until  the  last  few  years 
little  was  known  of  it.  The  notices  of  ancient  geograp 
phers  are  not  fuU.  Tnivellers  had  crossed  it  at  seyeral 
points,  but  all  the  portions  between  these  points  :(7ere 
unknown.  When  the  remarkable  depression  of  the 
Dead  Sea  was  ascertained  by  trigonometrical  measure- 
ment,  and  when  it  was  shown  that  the  Jordan  mnst 
have  a  fali  of  1400  feet  in  its  short  course  of  aboat  100 
miles,  the  measurements  were  called  in  qnestion  by  that 
distinguished  geographer  Dr.  Robinson,  in  a  paper  read 
before  the  Royal  Geog^aphical  Society  in  1847  (Joumai, 
Yol.  xviii,  part  ii).  In  that  same  year  lieutenant  Moly- 
neux,  R.N.,  conyeyed  a  boat  from  the  Sea  of  Galilee  to 
the  Dead  Sea,  mostly  in  the  river,  but  in  plaoes  on  the 
backs  of  caraels,  where  rocks  and  rapids  prerented  nav- 
igation.  Owing  to  the  hoetility  of  the  Arabs  the  ex- 
pedition  was  not  successful,  and  the  Jordan  was  not 
yet  explored.  Lieutenant  Lynch,  of  the  United  States 
Navy,  headed  a  much  morę  successful  expedition  in 
1848,  and  was  the  first  fully  to  describe  the  course,  and 
fully  to  solve  the  mysteries  of  the  Jordan.  His  Officiai 
Report  is  the  standard  work  on  the  river.  Molyneux'8 
paper  in  the  Journal  ofike  Royal  Geog,  Society  also  con- 
tains  somc  useful  matter  (yoL  xviii,  part  ii). 

The  yalley  through  which  this  section  of  the  Jordan 
flows  is  a  long,  Iow  plain,  runntng  from  north  to  south, 
and  sbut  in  by  steep  and  rugged  parallel  ridgea,  the 
eastem  ridge  riaing  fully  500io  feet  above  the  river's 
bed,  and  the  western  about  8000.  This  plain  is  the 
greał  plain  of  the  later  Jews;  the  great  desert  iiro\Kriv 
iptilŁiay)  of  Josephus;  the  Aukm  or  '* channel"  of  the 
Greek  geographers;  the  "  region  of  Jordan"  of  the  N.  T. 
(Matt,  iii,  5 ;  Lukę  iii,  3) ;  and  the  Ghor  or  **  sunken 
plain''  of  the  modem  Arabs  (Stanley,  p.  277 ;  Josephus, 
War,  iii,  9,  7 ;  iv,  8,  2 ;  Reland,  Palasł,  p.  805, 361,  377 
sq.).  It  is  about  six  miles  wide  at  its  northem  end,  but 
it  gradually  expands  until  it  attains  a  width  of  upwards 
of  twelve  at  Jericho.  Its  sides  are  not  straight  lines, 
nor  is  its  surface  perfectiy  leveL  The  mountains  on 
each  side  here  and  there  send  out  rocky  spurs,  and  long, 
Iow  roots  far  into  it.  Winter  torrents,  descending  from 
wild  ravines,  cut  deeply  through  its  soft  strata.  As  a 
whole  it  is  now  a  desert.  In  its  northem  diyision,  aboye 
the  fords  of  Succoth,  smaU  portions  are  culti vated  around 
fountains,  and  along  the  banks  of  streamlets,  where  irri- 
gation  is  easy ;  but  all  the  rest  is  a  wildemess— in  spring 
coyered  with  rauk  grass  and  thistles,  but  in  summer 
parched  and  bare.  The  southem  section — known  as 
the  "pUin  of  Jericho"— is  different  in  aspect  Its  sur- 
face is  covered  with  a  white  nitrous  crust,  like  hoar- 
frost,  throuj]^h  which  not  a  blade  of  grass  or  green  herb 
springs.  Nothing  oould  be  imagined  morę  dreaiy  or 
desolate  than  this  part  of  the  plain. 

Down  the  midst  of  the  plain  winds  a  rayine,  yaiying 
from  200  yards  to  half  a  mile  in  breadth,  and  from  40  to 
150  feet  in  depth.     Through  this  the  Jordan  flows  in 


a  tortnoua  oonrse,  now  sweeping  the  western,  and  now 
the  eastem  bank;  now  making  a  wide,  gracefol  curre^ 
and  now  doubling  back,  but  evexywhere  fringed  by  a 
narrow,  dense  border  of  trees  and  shrubs.  The  iiver 
bas  thus  two  distinct  lines  of  banks.  The  fiist  or  k»wer 
banks  confine  the  stream,  and  aie  fnm  fiye  to  ten  feet 
high,  the  height  of  course  decreasing  in  spring  when 
the  river  is  high ;  the  second  or  upper  are  at  some  dis- 
tance  from  the  channel,  and  in  places  rise  to  a  height 
of  150  feet  The  scenery  of  the  riyer  is  pecnliar  and 
striking.  Lynch  thus  describes  the  npper  aectioaa: 
**The  high  alluyial  tercaces  on  each  aide  were  ^wry- 
where  shaped  by  the  action  of  the  winter  rains  into 
nmnbers  of  oonical  hills,  some  of  them  pvTamidal  and 
cuneiform,  presenting  the  appearanoe  of  a  giant  en- 
campment.  This  singidar  conformation  extended  south- 
wards  as  far  as  the  eye  could  leach.  At  interrals  I 
caught  a  glimpse  of  the  river  in  its  gracefol  meander^ 
ings,  sometimes  glittering  like  a  spear-head  throagh  an 
opening  in  the  fbliage,  and  again  dasping  some  little 
island  in  its  shining  arms,  or,  Ux  away,  snapping  with 
the  fierceness  and  white  foam  of  a  torrcnt  by  some  pro- 
jecting  point.  .  .  .  The  banks  were  fnnged  with  the 
laiimstinus,  the  oleander,  the  willow,  and  the  tamarisk, 
and  further  inland,  on  the  slope  of  the  second  teirace, 
grew  a  smali  species  of  oak,  and  the  cedar.** 

The  Jordan  issues  from  the  Sea  of  Galilee  dose  to  the 
hills  on  the  western  side  of  the  plain,  and  sweepa  roand 
a  little  peninsula,  on  which  He  the  rains  of  Tarichaea 
(Porter,  Handb,  p.  821 ;  Robinson,  i,  588).  The  stream 
is  about  100  feet  wide,  and  the  cuirent  strong  (Lyiidi). 
A  short  distanoe  down  ara  the  remains  af  a  Roman 
bridge,  whose  fallen  arches  greatly  obstract  the  riyer, 
and  make  it  daah  throngh  in  sheets  of  foam.  Bdow 
this  are  seyeral  weirs,  constmcted  of  roogh  Stones,  and 
intended  to  raise  the  water  and  tum  it  into  canals,  so  as 
to  irrigate  the  neighboring  plain  (Molynens).  Ftya 
miles  finom  the  lakę  the  Jordan  receiyes  ita  largest-  trib- 
utary,  the  Sheriat  el-MandhQr  (the  Hieroroax  of  the 
Greeks),  which  drains  a  large  section  of  Baahan  and 
Gilead.  This  stream  is  180  feet  wide  at  its  moath. 
Two  miles  further  is  Jisr  el-Mejftmia,  the  only  bridge 
now  standing  on  the  Lower  Jordan.  It  is  a  ąuaint 
stracture,  one  laige  pointed  arch  spanning  the  stream, 
and  double  tiers  of  smaller  arches  supporting  the  road- 
way  on  each  side.  The  riyer  is  here  deep  and  impeto- 
ous,  breaking  oyer  high  ledges  of  rocks. 

Below  this  point  the  rayine  indines  eastwards  to  the 
centrę  of  the  phun,  and  its  banks  eontrsct.  Ita  sides 
are  bare  and  white,  and  the  chalky  stnta  are  deepły 
fnrrowed.  The  margin  of  the  riyer  haa  atill  ita  beanti- 
ful  innge  of  foliage,  and  the  little  islets  which  occor 
here  and  there  are  coyered  with  shrabbeiy.  Fiiteen 
miles  south  of  the  bridge,  wady  Tabes  (so  caUed  from 
Jabesh-gilead),  oontaining  a  winter  torrent,  falla  in  iimn 
the  east  A  short  distanoe  aboye  it  a  barren  aandy  isl- 
and diyides  the  channel,  and  with  ita  bars  on  each  ade 
forms  a  ford,  probably  the  one  by  which  Jacob  erossed, 
as  the  Bite  of  Succoth  bas  been  identified  on  the  western 
bank.  The  plain  round  Succoth  ts  extensiydy  cahi- 
yated,  and  abundantly  watered  by  fbontains  and  stream- 
lets fiom  the  adjoining  mountains.  The  ridmeas  of  the 
soil  is  wonderfuL  Dr.  Robinson  says,  ^'The  giass,  in- 
termingled  with  tali  daiaies  and  wild  oata,  reached  to 
our  horses'  backs,  while  the  thistles  sometimes  oyei^ 
topped  the  riders*  heads.  All  was  now  dry,  and  in  some 
plaoes  it  was  difBcnlt  to  make  oor  way  thiongh  this  ex- 
nberant  growth"  (iii,  p.  818).  Jacob  exerciaed  a  wise 
choice  when  ^  he  madę  booths  for  his  oattle"  at  this  fa- 
yored  spot  (Gen.  xxxiii,  17).  No  other  plaoe  in  the 
great  plain  eąnals  it  in  richness.  The  rayine  of  the 
Jordan  is  here  150  feet  bdow  the  pUin,  and  ahnt  in  by 
steep,  bare  banks  of  chalky  strata  (Robinson,  t  c  p.  816)l 

Aboat  nine  miles  below  Sooooth,  and  aboot  half  way 
between  the  lakes,  the  Jabbok,  the  only  other  couider- 
able  tributary,  fiills  into  the  Jordan,  coming  down 
through  a  deep,  wild  glen  in  the  moontaina  of  Gilead 


JORDAN 


logr 


JORDAN 


When  Lynch  paaaed  (April  17)  it  waa  ''a  smali  stieam 
tńckliog  down  a  deep  and  wide  torrent  bed.  .  .  .  There 
was  another  bed,  quite  dry,  showing  that  in  Limes  of 
fteshet  there  were  two  ouŁlets."  Lynch  gives  some 
good  pictures  of  the  scenery  abore  the  j  unction.  **  The 
phun  that  sloped  away  from  the  bases  of  the  hills  was 
broken  into  ridges  and  moltitudinous  oone-like  mounds. 
...  A  Iow,  pale  yellow  ridge  of  conical  hills  marked 
the  termination  of  the  higher  terrace,  beneath  which 
swept  gently  thls  Iow  plain,  with  a  similar  undulating 
sor&ce,  half  redeemed  from  banenness  by  sparse  Ter- 
dmre  and  thistle-coyezed  hillock&  Still  lower  was  the 
yalley  of  the  Jordan— its  banks  fringed  with  perpetual 
verdiire — winding  a  thousand  graceful  mazes  ...  its 
conrse  a  bright  linę  in  this  cheerless  waste.*' 

Below  the  Jabbok  the  fali  of  the  river  is  still  greater 
than  aboye,  but  there  is  less  obstmction  from  rocks  and 
cliffib  The  jungles  along  the  banks  beoome  denser,  the 
sides  of  the  riyer  glen  morę  regular,  and  the  plain  aboye 
morę  dreaiy  and  desolate. 

On  approaching  the  Dead  Sea,  the  plain  of  the  Jor- 
dan attains  its  greatest  breadth — aboat  twelye  miles. 
The  mountain  ranges  on  each  side  are  higher,  morę 
rugged,  and  morę  desolate.  The  plain  is  coated  with  a 
nitious  crost,  like  hoar-frost,  and  not  a  tree,  shrub,  or 
blade  of  grass  is  seen  except  by  fountains  or  riyulets. 
The  glen  winds  like  a  serpent  through  the  centrę,  be- 
tween  two  tiers  of  banks.  The  bottom  is  smooth,  and 
sprinkled  on  the  oatside  with  stonted  shrubs.  The  riy- 
er winds  in  ceaseless  coils  along  the  bottom,  now  touch- 
ing  one  side  and  now  another,  with  its  beautifol  bonier 
of  green  foliage,  looking  all  the  greener  from  contrast 
with  the  desert  aboye.  The  banks  are  of  soft  day,  in 
places  ten  feet  high ;  the 
stream  yaries  from  80  to 
150  feet  in  breadth,  and 
from  fiye  to  twelye  in 
dcpth.  Near  its  mouth 
the  current  beoomes 
morę  sluggish,  and  the 
stream  expand8.  Where 
wady  Hesban  falls  in, 
Lynch  foimd  the  riyer 
150  feetmde  and  11  deep, 
**  the  current  four  knota." 
Further  down  the  banks 
are  Iow  and  sedgy;  the 
width  gradually  in- 
creases  to  180  yards  at 
ita  mouth,  but  the  dcpth 
is  only  threc  feet  (Lynch, 
Cfficial  RepoH;  Robin- 
son, i,  588  8q. ;  Stanley, 
p.290). 

Lynch  in  a  few  words 
erpUins  the  secret  of  the 
great  and  almost  incredible  faU  in  the  Jordan. 


great  secret  is  solyed  by  the  tortuons  conrse  of  the  Jof* 
dan.  In  a  space  of  60  miles  of  latitude,  and  four  or  fiy« 
of  longitude,  the  Jordan  trayerses  at  least  200  miles. .  . . 
We  haye  plunged  down  twenty-seyen  threatening  rap- 
ids,  beaides  a  great  many  of  lesser  magnitude." 

Dr.  Robinson  (ResearckeSf  ii,  257  8q.)  describes  the 
banks  as  oonsisdng  of  three  series,  with  terraces  be- 
tween,  the  outer  ones  composed  of  the  mountains  bor- 
dering  the  riyer,  the  middle  ones  being  the  tnie  banks, 
and  the  third  the  proper  channel  of  the  stream ;  and  he 
argues  that  the  scriptural  allusions  to  the  oyerflow  of 
the  Jordan  at  hanrest  (Josh.  iii,  16;  1  Chroń,  xii,  15; 
oompare  Jer.  xii,  5;  xlix,  19 ;  1, 44 ;  Zech.  xi,  8 ;  Sirach 
xxiy,  26, 86)  simply  refer  to  the  fuli  stream,  or  at  most 
to  its  expansion  as  far  as  to  the  middle  one  of  these 
three  banks,  at  the  Ume  of  the  annual  melting  of  snows 
on  Lebanon  and  Hermon,  rather  than  to  any  true  fresh- 
et  or  inundation.  The  riyer  in  this  respect  probably 
resembles  other  mountain  streams,  which  haye  an  oyer- 
flow  of  their  secondary  boundaries  or  alluyial  "bottoms** 
during  the  spring  and  early  summer  months.  Comp. 
Thomson,  Land  mid  Book,  ii,  452  sq. 

4.  The  Forda  of  the  Jordan  haye  always  been  impor- 
tant  in  connection  with  the  history  of  the  country.  The 
three  streams  which  flow  from  the  fountains  are  forda- 
ble  at  almost  eyery  point  It  is  south  of  Lakę  HOleh 
that  the  riyer  begins  to  form  a  serious  barrier.  The 
bridge  caUed  Jbr  Ben&t  YakAb  has  for  centuries  been 
the  leading  pass  from  western  Palesdne  to  Damascus. 
The  first  reference  to  it  is  in  A.D.  1450  (in  6umpenberg*8 
day ;  see  Robinson,  RetearcheSy  iii,  362),  though  aa  early 
as  the  Crusades  a  **  Ford  of  Jaoob''  ( V€idum  Jacob,  WilL 
Tyr.  Bitt.  xyiii,  18)  is  mentioned,  and  was  reckoned  a 


Upper  Ford  of  Ibe  Jordan,  near  Bethshan.   (From  Van  de  Yelde.) 


"The 


Terraces  of  the  Jordan.    (From  Photogrąph  831  ot  the 
**Pale8tice£zpIoration  Fund.^) 


most  important  pass.  The  bridge  was  probably  builft 
during  the  15th  century,  when  the  caravan  road  was 
constructed  from  Damascus  to  Kgypt  (Porter,  JJand- 
book,  ii,  466).  The  origin  of  the  name,  "  Bridge  of  Ja- 
cob'8  Daughters,"  is  unknown.  Perhaps  this  place  may 
haye  been  confounded  with  the  ford  of  Succoth,  where 
the  patriarch  crossed  the  Jordan,  or  perhaps  the  "  Ja- 
cob"  referred  to  was  some  Muslem  saint  or  Turkish 
pasha  (Kitter,  Pał.  und  Syr,  p.  269  sq.).     See  Bridge. 

Between  Bethsaida-Jnlias  and  the  Sea  of  Galilee  there 
are  seyeral  fords.  The  rirer  Łs  there  shallow  and  the 
current  sluggish.  At  this  place  the  multitudes  that  fol- 
lowed  our  Lord  from  Oipemaum  and  the  neighborhood 
were  able  to  cross  the  river  to  where  he  fed  the  5000 
(Mark  yi,  82  sq. ;  Robinson,  ii,  414). 

The  first  ford  on  the  southem  scction  of  the  Jordan 
is  about  half  a  mile  ftt>m  the  lakę,  where  the  ruins  of 
the  Roman  bridge  now  lie.  It  was  the  means  of  com- 
munication  between  Tibcrias  and  Gadara,  and  it  was 
doubtless  at  this  point  our  Lord  crossed  when  he  went 
from  Galilee  to  Judasa  ^  by  the  farther  side  of  Jordan 


JORDAN 


1008 


JORDAN 


(Mjffk  Kf  1 ;  Matt.  xix,  1, 2).  Jisr  el-MeJAmia  łs  a  Sar- 
aoeDic  bridge  on  an  old  cararan  route  from  Damaaciu 
to  Egypt.  Probably  a  Roman  bńdge  may  have  stood 
at  the  same  place,  connecting  Sc3rtbopoli8  with  tbe  oth- 
er  cities  of  Decapolis.  There  is  no  ford  here.  At  a 
point  east  of  the  ruina  of  Scythopolis,  ten  mUes  below 
the  bridge,  the  ńver  ifl  n&w  fordable,  bat  the  passage  is 
deep  and  dangerooa  (Robinsoni  iii,  825;  Yan  de  Yelde, 
Memoirj  p.  137). 

At  Succoth  is  one  of  the  best  and  moet  important 
fords  orer  the  Jordan.  Here  Jacob  crossed  with  his 
cattle.  This,  too,  is  poasibly  the  Bethbarah,  *<  house,  or 
ford  of  passage,"  where  the  Israelites  intercepted  the 
routed  Midianites  (Judg.  vii,  24),  and  it  was  probably 
here  that  the  men  of  Gilead  siew  the  Ephraimites  (xii, 
6).  Not  far  off,  in  "  the  clay  ground  between  Sacooth 
and  Zarthan,"  were  the  brass  foundries  of  king  Solomon 
(1  Kinga  yii,  46).  These  fords  undoubtedly  witnessed 
the  first  recorded  paasage  of  the  Jordan  in  the  O.  T. ; 
we  say  recorded,  becaose  there  can  be  little  dispute  but 
that  Abraham  must  have  crossed  it  likewise.  It  is  still 
the  place  at  which  the  eastem  Bedawln  cross  in  their 
periodical  inrasions  of  Esdradon.  From  Succoth  to  the 
mouth  of  the  Jabbok  the  ńver  becomes  very  Iow  during 
the  summer,  and  is  fordable  at  many  points.  At  one 
spot  are  the  remains  of  a  Roman  bridge  (Mol3meax,  p. 
1 15  8q. ;  Lynch,  April  16 ;  Burckhardt,  p.  344  8q.).  Ten 
miles  south  of  the  Jabbok  there  is  a  noted  ford  on  the 
road  from  Nabulus  to  Es-Salt.  Traces  of  a  Roman  road 
and  bridge  were  here  discorered  by  Yan  de  Yelde  (Me- 
moir^  p.  124).  The  only  other  fords  of  notę  are  those 
in  the  plain  of  Jericho,  one  above  and  one  below  the 
pilgrims'  bathing-place.  They  are  much  deeper  than 
those  higher  up,  and  when  the  river  b  swollen  they  be- 
come  impassable. 


Lower  Ford  of  the  Jordan  at  Wady  Nawaimeh.    (From 
Photograph  293  of  the  "  Palestiue  Ezploration  Fund.") 

5.  Hutorical  Notices. — ^The  first  notice  of  the  Jordan 
is  in  the  story  of  the  separation  of  Abraham  and  Lot — 
Lot  "  beheld  all  the  plain  of  Jordan,  that  it  was  well 
watered  everywhere,  before  the  Lord  destroyed  Sodom 
and  (Jomorrah"  (Gen.  xiii,  10).  Abraham  had  just  left 
Egypt  (xii,  10-20),  and  therefore  the  comparison  be- 
tween the  fertilizing  properties  of  the  Jordan  and  of  the 
Nile  is  very  appositc.  The  section  of  the  valley  yisible 
from  the  heights  of  Bethel,  where  the  patriarchs  stood, 
was  the  plain  of  Jericho  and  southward  over  a  part  of 
the  Dead  Sea.  The  "  plain"  or  cirde  (*l?3)  of  the  Jor- 
dan must  have  been  different  then  from  what  it  is  now. 
It  is  now  a  parched  desert—then  it  was  well  watered  ev- 
erywhere.  The  waters  of  numerous  springs,  mountain 
torreuts,  and  probably  of  the  Jordan,  raised  by  weirs 
such  as  are  secn  at  its  northem  end,  were  used  by  the 
old  Phamician  inhabitants  in  the  irrigation  of  the  vast 
plaiu.  The  curse  had  not  yet  come  upon  it ;  the  fire 
of  heaycn  had  not  yet  passed  over  it ;  the  Ix)rd  had  not 
yet  destroyed  Sodom  and  Gomorrah  (Stanley,  p.  216). 
It  is  manilcst  that  some  great  physical  change  was  pro- 
duced  in  the  valley  by  the  conwlsion  at  the  destniction 


of  the  cities.  The  bed  of  the  Dead  Sea  was  probibly 
lowered,  and  a  gpreater  iall  thus  giren  to  the  riret.  See 
Dbad  Sea. 

Another  wonderful  epoch  in  the  Jordan^s  łustoiy  was 
the  passage  of  the  Israelitea.  They  were  encamped  on 
the  ^  plains  of  Moab^ — on  the  broad  plain  east  of  the 
river,  extending  akmg  the  northem  ahora  of  the  sea  to 
the  foot  of  the  mountaina.  It  was  harve8tp-tim&— the 
beginning  of  April — when  the  rains  were  still  ialling 
heayily  in  Uermon,  and  the  winter  anows  were  melting 
nnder  the  rays  of  the  warm  son,  and  when  a  thoiuand 
moontain  torrenta  thus  fed  awept  into  the  Jordan,  and 
madę  it "  oveiliow  all  its  banks  ;*'  or,  as  the  Uebrew  lit- 
erally  signifies,  nuuk  it/uU  up  to  cdi  its  banks  (see  Rob- 
inson, Bib,  Res,  i,  540) ;  that  is,  perhapa,  up  not  merely 
to  the  banks  of  the  stream  itself,  bat  up  to  the  banks  of 
the  glen ;  covering,  aa  it  still  does  in  a  few  places  (Moly- 
neux,  p.  116;  Yan  de  Yelde,  Memoir,  p.  125),  the  whde 
bottom  of  the  glen,  and  thos  rendering  the  foids  impas- 
sable for  such  a  host  aa  the  Israelitea.  There  can  be  no 
doubt  that  in  ancient  times  the  Jordan  roee  higher  than 
it  does  now.  When  the  country  was  more  thickly  wood» 
ed  and  more  extensiyely  cultivated,  moro  rain  and  morę 
snów  must  have  fallen  (Yan  de  Yelde,  Ncarraiice^  ii,  272). 
There  are  wet  seasons  even  yet,  when  the  river  rises 
several  feet  more  than  ordinarily  (Reland,  p.  273;  Ran- 
mer,  PcddsU  p.  61, 2d  ed.).  The  openin^  of  a  passage 
throngh  the  river  at  such  a  season  was  the  greater  mir- 
acle.  Had  it  been  late  in  summer  it  might  have  been 
thought  that  natural  causes  operated,  but  in  hanreat— 
the  time  of  the  overflow — ^the  finger  of  God  most  have 
been  manifest  to  aU.  It  ia  a  remarkable  fact  that  at 
this  same  spot  the  Jordan  was  aft^wards  twice  miracu- 
lously  opened — by  Elijah  and  Elisha  (2  Kings  ii,  8, 14). 

At  a  later  period  it  was  considered  a  feat  of  high 
daring  that  a  party  of  David's  ^mighty  men"  cto^eA 
the  Jordan  "^  in  the  first  month  (April),  when  it  had 
overflown  all  its  banks,"  and  snbdued  their  enemies  oo 
the  east  side  (1  Chroń,  xii,  15).  Jeremiah  speaks  of 
the  lions  *^ooming  up**  from  the  "swellings  of  the  Jor- 
dan ;**  but  the  Hebrew  word  IIKA  signifies  beauty  or  rfh- 
rtff  and  refers  to  the  dense  jungles  and  rcrdant  folia^ 
of  its  banks ;  these  jungles  are  impenetrable  excepi  to 
the  wild  beasts  that  dwcll  there.  No  allusdon  ia  niade 
to  the  rise  or  overflow  of  the  river  (Geseniiis,  Thescmntt, 
s.  V. ;  Robinson,  i,  540).  Travellers  have  oft<»n  secn  mtM 
swine,  hyaenas,  and  jackals,  and  also  the  tracka  of  pan- 
thers,  on  the  banks  of  the  Jordan  (Molyneux,  p.  118). 

The  passage  of  the  river  by  king  Dairid  in  hia  flight 
from  Absalom  has  one  pecuUarity  —  Ajerry-boat  was 
used  to  convey  his  household  over  the  channel  (2  Sam. 
xix,  18).  The  passage  was  probably  effectcd  at  one  of 
the  fords  in  the  plain  of  Jericho.  The  word  rT"25 
simply  signifies  a  thing  for  crossing;  it  may  havc  been 
a  **  boat,"  or  a  "  raft,**  or  a  few  inflated  skina,  such  as  are 
represented  on  the  monuments  of  Ninereh,  and  are  sdU 
used  on  the  Euphrates  and  the  Jordan.     See  Febrt. 

Naaman's  indignant  depreciation  of  the  Jordan,  as 
compared  with  the  "  rivers  of  Damascus,**  ia  well  knomk 
The  rirers  of  Damascus  water  its  great  plain,  aHivert- 
ing  a  desert  into  a  paradise;  the  Jordan  rolls  on  in  ics 
deep  bed,  useless,  to  the  Sea  of  Death. 

The  great  event  of  the  N.-T.  history  enact«d  at  the 
Jordan  was  the  baptism  of  our  Lord.  This  has  madę 
it  the  queen  of  rirers,  and  has  given  it  the  title  "sacrwL" 
The  exact  spot  is  disputed.  See  Betitbara  ;  .Enon. 
The  topography  and  the  inddents  of  the  narratire,  borh 
before  and  afler  the  baptism,  unquestionabIy  puint  to 
the  same  place,  already  famous  as  the  scenę  of  three 
mirąples  (Porter,  Handbook,  p.  198).  In  commemora- 
tion  of  the  baptism,  the  Christian  pilgrims  who  asacm- 
ble  at  Jemsalem  at  Easter  yisit  the  Jordan  in  a  body 
and  bathe  at  this  spot  (Stanley,  p.  308). 

The  references  to  the  Jordan  in  the  writings  of  Joee- 
phus  contain  nothing  of  importance  beyond  what  has 
already  been  mentioned  in  connection  with  the  foon- 


JORDAN 


1009 


JORDANUS 


tum  and  the  ptayainl  featunii  Greek  «nd  Romaii  ge- 
ognphen  aeem  to  have  known  bat  little  of  the  river. 
Pliny  pniaes  it«  bewity,  and  etatee  that,  ^with  the 
greatest  reluctance,  as  it  were,  it  moTes  onward  towaida 
Aaphaltitee,  a  lakę  of  gloomy  and  unpropitioiia  natun, 
by  which  it  ia  at  last  awallowcd  up"  {ffist,  NaL  v,  16). 
Scrabo  makea  the  ringnlar  assertion  that  it  is  ^nayiga- 
ted  upwcurb  with  y^sels  of  bnrden !"  Of  ooune,  he 
can  only  refer  to  the  Sea  of  Galilee  (xvi,  2, 16).  Pan- 
aanias  telle  how  strangely  the  liyer  disappean  in  the 
P^adSea(bookv,7,4). 

6.  Mmerai,Ammalf<mdVegetabl€ProducHoni, — Some 
of  theee  hare  been  incidentaUy  nodced  aboye.  As  there 
were  elime-pita,  or  pits  of  bitomen,  and  salt-pits  (Gen. 
xi,  8 ;  Zeph.  ii,  9)  in  the  vale  of  Siddim,  on  the  extTeme 
eotttb,  BO  Mr.  Thompson  speaks  of  bitamen  wells  twenty 
minutes  from  the  bridge  orer  the  Hashbdya  on  the  ex- 
tieme  north ;  while  Ain-el  MellAhah  aboye  Lakę  H(kleh 
is  emphatically  *^  the  foontain  of  the  salt-works"  (L7nch'8 
Narratw,  p.  470).  Thennal  springs  are  freqnent  aboot 
the  Lakę  of  Tiberias;  the  naost  oelebrated,  bek>w  the 
town  bearing  that  name  (Robinson,  ii,  884, 885) ;  some 
near  Emmaus  (Lynch,  p.  467),  some  near  Magdala,  and 
aome  not  far  from  Gadam  (Irby,  p.  90, 91).  The  hill  of 
Dan  is  said  to  be  an  extinct  cnter,  and  masses  of  ycd- 
eanic  rock  and  tufa  are  noticed  by  Lynch  not  &r  from 
the  mouth  of  the  YermAk  {Ncarratioe^  April  12).  Daik 
basalŁ  IB  the  characteristic  of  the  rocks  in  the  upper 
stage ;  trap,  limestone,  sandstone,  and  eonglomerate  in 
the  lower.  On  the  seoond  day  of  the  paseage  a  bank 
of  f uller'8  earth  was  obsenred. 

How  far  the  Jordan  in  olden  time  was  eyer  a  sonę  of 
eultiyation,  like  the  Nile,  is  uncertain.  Now,  with  the 
exoeption  of  the  eastem  shores  of  the  Lakę  Hi^lch,  the 
hand  of  man  may  be  said  to  haye  diaappeared  fttym  its 
banks.  The  gennine  Aiab  is  a  ńomad  by  natnre,  and 
contemna  agriculture.  There,  howerer,  Dr.  Robinson, 
in  the  month  of  May,  found  the  land  tilled  almost  down 
to  the  lakę,  and  large  crops  of  wheat,  harley,  maize,  ses- 
ame,  and  rice  rewarded  the  husbandman.  Horsea,  cat- 
tle,  and  sheep— ^l  belonging  to  the  Ghawftrinah  tribe— 
fattened  on  the  rich  pastore ;  and  large  herds  of  black 
boffaloes  luxariated  in  the  streams  and  in  the  deep  mirę 
of  the  marshes  (iii,  896).  These  are  doubtless  lineal 
descendants  of  the  "<  fat  bolls  of  Bashan ;"  as  the  **'  oaks 
of  Bashan"  are  still  the  magnificent  etapie  tree  of  those 
regions.  Cultiyation  degenerates  as  we  adyance  sonth- 
ward.  Com-fields  waye  arnund  Gennesareth  on  the 
west,  and  the  palm  and  yine,  fig  and  pomegranate,  are 
'still  to  be  seen  here  and  there.  Melons  grown  on  its 
shores  are  of  great  size  and  much  esteemed.  Pink  ole- 
anders,  and  a  rose-colored  species  of  hollyhock,  in  great 
profusion,  wait  npon  eyeiy  approach  to  a  rill  or  spring. 
These  gems  of  naturę  reappear  in  the  lowcr  course  of 
the  Jordan.  There  the  purple  thistle,  the  bright  yellow 
marigold,  and  scarlet  anemone,  saluted  the  adyenturers 
of  the  New  World :  the  laumstinus  and  oleander,  cedar 
and  arbutus,  willow  and  tamarisk,  aocompanied  them  on 
thdr  route.  As  the  climate  became  morę  tropical,  and 
the  Lower  Ghór  was  entered,  large  ghumh  trees,  like 
the  aspen,  with  silvery  foliage,  oyerhung  them ;  and  the 
cane,  frequently  impenetrable,  and  now  in  blosaom, 
"  was  ever  at  the  water^s  edge."  Only  once  during  the 
whole  yoyage,  on  the  fourth  day,  were  patches  of  wheat 
and  harley  yisible;  bat  the  hand  that  had  sowed  them 
liyed  far  away.  As  Jeremiah  in  the  O.  T.,  and  St  Je- 
rome  and  Phocas  (see  Reland)  among  Christian  pilgrims, 
had  spoken  of  the  Jordan  as  the  resort  of  lions,  ao  tracks 
of  tigers,  wild  boars,  and  the  like  presented  themselyes 
from  time  to  time  to  these  expIorerB.  Flocks  of  wild 
docks,  of  cranes,  of  pigeons,  and  of  swallows  were  scared 
by  their  approach;  and  a  specimen  of  the  bulbnl,  or 
Syrian  nightingalc,  fell  into  their  hands.  The  scenery 
throughout  was  not  inspiring — it  was  of  a  subdued  char- 
acter  when  they  started,  profoundly  gloomy  and  dreary 
near  ford  Sflkwa,  and  then  utteriy  sterile  jost  before 
they  reached  Jericho.  With  the  exception  of  a  few 
rv.— Saa 


Arab  tiibea— oo  sayage  aa  scarody  to  be  cooaidered  ea»- 
oeptions— humanity  had  beoome  extinct  on  its  banka. 

Snch,  then,  is  the  riyer  Jordan,  without  any  parallel, 
historical  or  physical,  in  the  whole  world.  A  complete 
riyer  beneath  the  leyel  of  the  sea !  Disappeaiing  in  a 
lakę  which  has  no  outlet,  which  oould  haye  nonę,  and 
which  originated  in  a  mirade !  Thiice  were  ita  waten 
diyided  by  the  direct  agency  of  God,  that  his  seryants 
might  pass  in  safety  and  comfort.  It  is  a  riyer  that 
has  neyer  been  nayigable,  flowing  into  a  sea  that  has 
neyer  known  a  port — has  neyer  been  a  high-road  to 
morę  hospitable  ooasts^has  neyer  poasessed  a  flsheiy — 
a  riyer  that  has  neyer  boasted  of  a  single  town  of  emi- 
nenoe  apon  its  banks ;  in  fine,  it  is,  if  not ''  the  riyer  of 
God"  in  the  book  of  PBalms,  at  least  that  of  his  chosen 
people  throughout  their  history,  and,  as  such,  it  figores 
largely  in  the  poetical  ^mbolism  of  the  passage  from 
this  world  to  the  next 

In  addition  to  the  works  aboye  cited  on  the  physical 
features  of  the  Jordan,  the  foUowing  aflbrd  important 
Information :  Joumal  o/R.  Gtog,  Sodeły^  xyiii,  part  ii, 
artides  by  Robinson,  Petermann,  and  Mol3aieux;  Ber- 
tou,  in  BuUetin  de  la  8oc.  Geograph,  de  Parit,  xii,  166 
8q.;  Wildenbmch,  MonaUberiekłe  der  GeteOteha/i  fUr 
Erdkunde  ku  Berim,  1846-46;  Capt.  Newboki,  Joitr.  of 
Boy,  Atiat,  Soeiety,  xyi,  8  8q. ;  Rey.  W.  Thompson,  bAl 
Scu^  iii,  184  są.  A  dear  sumroary  of  all  known  abont 
the  Jordan  np  to  1860  is  giyen  by  Ritter,  p  PaUutma 
tmd  Syrien,  ii,  162-666;  also  in  his  separate  essay,  Der 
Jordan  und  die  Besckiffmtg  de$  todtm  Meert»  (Berlin, 
1860).  Morę  popular  descriptions  are  those  pablished 
by  Łhe  Religious  Tract  Society  (London,  1868),  and  Nel- 
son (ib.  1864).  Most  trayellers  in  Palestine  haye  lik»- 
wise  giyen  an  account  of  the  riyer,  chiefly  at  its  mouth. 
See  PALEsnuE. 

Jordan,  Joseph,  a  minister  of  the  Sodety  of 
Friends,  was  bom  in  Nansemond  County,  Ya.,  in  1696, 
and  began  preaching  about  1718,  first  in  the  States,  and 
later  łn  yarious  parts  of  England  and  Ireland,  and  aome 
portions  of  Holland.  He  died  Sept.  26, 1786.  *<  He  ao- 
ąuitted  himself,**  was  the  tcstimony  of  the  annual  meet- 
ing  of  Yirginia  Quaker8  in  the  year  of  his  death,  "  as  a 
workman  that  need  not  be  ashamed."  See  Janney,  Hiit^ 
of  Friends,  iii,  261. 

Jordan,  Richard  (l),  a  minister  of  the  Sodety  of 
Friends,  was  bom  in  Nansemond  County,  Yo.,  in  1698, 
and  began  preaching  the  same  year  with  his  younger 
brother  Joseph  (see  aboye).  The  two  brothers  fre- 
quently  trareUed  together,  preaching  the  word  of  God, 
in  Yu^nia,  Mar>'land,  and  Carolina,  and  suffered  no 
little  from  persecution.  In  1728  he  yisited  the  Qua- 
kers  in  £ngland,  Irdand,  Scotland,  Wales,  and  in  Bar- 
badoes.  Aftcr  two  years  he  retumed  to  the  States,  and 
settled  in  Philadelphia,  where  he  died  August  6, 1742. 
'*  His  ministry  was  convincing  and  consolatoiy,  his  de* 
lirery  graceful,  but  unaffected ;  in  prayer  he  was  solemn 
and  reyerent"     See  Janney,  //wf.  o/Friendtf  iii,  270. 

Jordan.  Richard  (2),  a  minister  of  the  Society  of 
Friends,  was  bom  in  Norfolk  County,  Ya.,  Dec.  12, 1766. 
He  entered  on  ministerial  labors  in  1797  in  New  York 
and  New  England,  and  in  1802  yisited  Europę,  where 
he  spent  two  yeara.  On  his  return  he  settled  at  Hart- 
ford, Conn.,  and  fiye  years  later  remoyed  to  Newton,  N. 
J.,  where  he  died  Oct,  14, 1826.  He  was  an  able  minis- 
ter of  the  Gospel,  deyoted  to  the  senrice  of  his  heayenly 
Master.     See  Janney,  BUL  ofFriendt,  iy,  106» 

Jordanas.    See  JoRMAia>Bs. 

Jordanna  da  Giano,  or  dk  Tanę.    See  Minob* 


Jordanna  of  Saxonta,  second  generał  of  the  Do- 
minicans,  was  bom  at  Borrentrick,  in  the  diocese  of 
Paderbom,  near  the  doee  of  the  twelfth  centuiy.  Af- 
ter  stud3dng  theology  at  the  Uniyersity  of  I^uis,  he 
joined  the  Dominicans  in  1219,  and  in  1220  took  part 
in  the  flrst  generał  chapter  of  his  order.  In  1221  he 
was  madę  prior  of  the  proyinoe  of  Lombardy,  and  finally 


JORffiAS 


1010 


J0RI8 


•€l0cfe6d  generał  in  1222,  ten  monthfl  after  the  death  of 
St,  Dominie.    Tbe  order  grew  rapidly  under  his  admin- 

.istnOion,  and  aoon  poaeesaed  estabUshmento  as  far  as 
Poland,  and  eyen  in  Palestine,  whither  Jordanus  went 
in  1228.  The  ship  was  wrecked  on  the  retom  Toyage, 
and  Jordanus  drowned,  in  1286.  He  wrote.  De  PHn- 
dpio  Ordinis  ProBÓicatorum  (Echard,  Seriptorea  Ordmu 
Pradicatorum,  voL  i) : — Epistoła  de  TranśloHone  corpo- 
ris  B.  Domimci  (Bzoviu8,  A  nnaleSj  1238,  toL  i) : — <9uper 
Pritóanum,  et  quadam  fframmcUicaUat  a  MS.  in  the 
Leipzig  Library.  See  Acta  Sanctorum,  Feb.,  ii,  720; 
Echard,  Scriptorea  Ordimt  Prmdicatorum,yiy  98;  Uoe- 
fer,  youi\  Biog,  GóUrale,  xxvi,  941.     (J.  N.  P.) 

Jor^ibas  (1  Esdr.  viii,  44)  or  Jor^ibus  (1  Esdr.  ix, 
19),  Grsecized  forma  ('I(5p(/3oc,  Vulg.  Joribua)  of  the 
name  Jarib  (q.  v.)  of  two  persons  (corresponding  to 
Ezra  yiii,  16,  and  Ezra  x,  18,  in  the  Hebrew  text  of  the 
above  passages  respectiycly). 

Jo'tim  ('la>/0€i/i,  perh.  L  q.  Joram),  the  son  of  Mat^ 
Łhat  and  father  of  Eleazar,  matemal  ancestors  of  Jesus, 
not  mentioned  in  the  O.  Test  (Lukę  iii,  29).  fi.C.  post 
876.    See  Genbalogy  of  Ciibist. 

Joris  (really  Joriszoon,  L  e.  Georg^—on^  henoe  alao 
(»Ued  Georgu)  f  Dayid,  founder  of  an  Aiiabaptist  sect  of 
.  the  16th  oentury,  known  under  the  name  of  Daviduł$,  or 
morę  generally  under  that  of  JoristSf  himself  altogether 
a  most  extraordinazy  character,  was  bom  either  in  1501  or 
1602,  at  Dcfft,  in  Holland,  or,  as  Nippold  thinks,  at  Ghent. 
He  has  generally  been  spoken  of  as  of  Iow  parentage,  but 
Kippold  holds  that  David'8  fi&ther  was  originally  a  mer- 
chant,  and  aflerwards  the  head  of  a  company  who  went 
about  acting  the  play  of  the  life  of  Dayid  the  Psalmist, 
but  that  his  mother  was  of  noble  origin.  David  was 
early  placed  at  school,  but  the  boy*s  indinatioa  was 

•  morę  to  a  roving  life,  like  that  of  his  father,  than  to 
books.  He  early  evinced  a  particular  fondness  for  the 
art  of  glass  painting.  He  was  therefore  finally  taken 
from  school  and  apprenticed  to  a  glass  painter,  and  soon 
displayed  great  aptltude  iu  hi^  prufession.  To  perfect 
hiinself  iu  this  art  he  set  out  on  a  joumey  to  neighboring 
oountries,  and  travelled  through  Belgium,  France,  and 
England,  until  a  dangerous  dlsease  hastened  his  return 
to  Holland.     He  now  (1524)  settled  at  Delft,  and  mar- 

.  lied.  Hitherto  the  young  painter  had  displayed  no  ex- 
traordinary  religious  seal;  it  is  tme  he  had  been  strict 
in  all  his  religious  obseryances,  and  had  freąuently  de- 
clared  himself  in  favor  of  yital  piety,  but  this,  at  a  time 

'  when  the  reformatory  movement  was  in  its  infancy,  was 
not  remarkable.  Even  now  he  continued  his  attention 
to  his  business,  and  only  on  a  few  public  occasions  dur- 

•  ing  the  religious  commotions  of  this  time  he  dropped  a 
'  word  against  the  fanatic  zeal  of  the  Romish  clergy,  and 
'  the  religious  exce8ses  of  the  Romish  Church.     In  1530, 

howeyer,  he  appears  morę  promineutly  on  the  stage. 
'  It  is  true  he  had  preyiously  written  a  few  pamphlets 
against  Komanism,  but  these  had  failed  to  proyoke  reply, 
or  a  demand  for  interference  on  the  part  of  the  authori- 
ties.    But  this  year,  while  a  procession  of  Roman  Cath- 

•  olics  was  moying  through  the  streets  of  Delft,  he  stop- 
ped  the  priests  and  accused  them  of  the  crime  of  de- 
ceiying  the  people  by  false  teachings;  he  especially 
reproached  them  for  their  worship  of  images  and  pic- 

•  tures.  The  burgomaster  of  Delft  fayored  Joris  not  a 
-  little,  being  a  friend  of  his ;  but  this  daring  action  could 

not  go  unpunished,  and  Joris  was  arrested  and  impris- 
oned  for  some  time.  After  a  trial,  howeyer,  he  escaped, 
no  doubt  by  the  aid  of  his  friend,  without  any  seyere 
ponishment.  He  quitted  Delft  for  six  years,  and  it  was 
during  his  wanderings  at  this  time  that  he  became 
.eatranged  from  the  tme  Reformation  principles  and 
an  adherent  to  Anabaptist  yiews,  and  finally  eyen  the 
.founder  of  an  independent  sect  His  roying  life,  ao 
yery  much  akin  to  that  of  all  the  Anabaptist  leaders, 
inclined  him  to  their  cause;  but,  being  as  yet  morę 
moderate  than  they,  and  opposed  to  their  tumultuous 
ptooeedijig^  especially  to  their  yiews  of  estahliahing 


their  antbority  by  the  aword,  it  was  not  antU  15S4  that 
he  actoally  joined  them  by  rebaptiam.  At  thia  time 
the  AnabaptisU  were  at  the  zenith  of  their  8ttoce6^  es- 
pecially at  Munster.  See  Anabaptists.  Being  r&- 
que8ted  to  preach  and  espouse  their  cause  befofe  the 
people,  he  at  first  hesitated,  and  plea4/9d  incompetency; 
but  at  last  was  prevailed  upon,  and  was  oonsecrated  by 
Danmia8,Ubbo,andothe(sasbishopofDeUt  The  same 
zeal  which  he  had  manifested  in  the  cauae  of  the  Ło- 
therans  he  now  displayed  in  behalf  of  the  Anabaptista, 
and  we  may  infer  from  the  hesitancy  of  tbe  authoiiiiei 
to  interfere  with  Jofia  that  his  influence  had  become 
quite  extended  and  his  foUoweis  yery  numeroua.  Cer^ 
tainly  Joris  himself  waa  qnite  conscious  of  the  extent 
of  his  power,  and  he  heaitated  not  to  use  it  for  the  ao- 
oomplishment  of  the  one  great  object  that  seemed  to  be 
neareat  his  heart,  the  union  of  all  Anabaptist  foroes  mi- 
der  one  oommon  leader,  the  secure  eatabUshment  of  tbe 
principles  which  he  himself  esponsed,  and  which  no 
doubt  he  as  yet  belieyed  to  be  baaed  on  tbe  Scriptoies 
and  indorseil  by  diyine  fi&yor.  But  his  coiune  soon 
aronsed  suspicion  among  the  other  Anabaptiat  letden, 
They  were  not  slow  to  recognise  in  Joris  an  able  and 
determined  leader,  and,  jealous  of  the  aucoess  he  had  al- 
ready  achieyed,  and  fearfol  of  their  own  position,  they 
openly  dlsayowed  him.  Such  a  coorae  was  adopted,  es- 
pecially, by  Batenburg  himself,  the  founder  of  an  Ana- 
baptiat sect,  a  determined  ruffian,  yoid  of  all  feeling, 
who,  under  the  garb  of  rdigion,  aought  the  enjoymeoc 
of  wealth  and  power.  He  preached  the  extinction  of 
all  non-Anabaptists  by  the  sword.  Straugely  enoagh, 
howeyer,  his  yery  foUoweia,  after  his  decease,  became 
the  most  faithful  adherenta  of  Joris.  Opposed  withta 
the  camp  of  the  Anabaptiata,  Joris,  in  1536,  at  the  Con- 
Yocation  of  Anabaptiata  held  at  Bocholt,  aaaumed  a  still 
morę  independent  poaition,  and  prondly  dedared  him- 
self di  vinely  appointed  aa  leader.  This  further  pro\-oked 
the  jealousy  of  the  other  leaders;  and  as,  immediatdy 
after  tbe  Conyocation  of  Bocholt,  Joris  iasaed  a  pamph- 
let  calling  all  partiea  to  a  peaceful  union,  tbe  wrath  of 
the  different  leaders  waa  stimulated  anew,  and  resuited 
in  an  entire  estrangement  of  most  of  the  Anabaptiata. 
Those  who  now  continued  to  espouse  his  cause  were 
hereafter  known  as  Jorigtt  or  DatidisU.  Proyidenoe 
seemed  to  fayor  his  eflfort,  Letters  came  to  him  from 
all  diiectiona  uiging  him  to  stand  firm  in  this  tiying 
hour ;  to  these  were  added  yiaiona  and  reyelations  which 
he  fancied  he  had.  Eyen  the  peraecutiona  to  whidi  bis 
followers  were  now  aubjected  by  the  authorities  woe 
interpreted  by  him  as  a  further  proof  of  the  divine  &- 
vor.  Was  it  not  gain  for  them  to  die?  From  Hol- 
land we  see  him  haaten  to  Westphalia,  and  thence  back 
again  to  his  natiye  state  to  oomfort  his  solTeńng  adher- 
enta, and  to  attend  and  anunate  them  in  their  dying 
hours.  Nor  did  he  wayer  when  be  aaw  his  own  mo:hcr 
led  to  the  acaffold  (at  Delft,  1537),  attesting  in  ber  dying 
hour  the  doctrines  which  ber  son  was  propagating. 
The  extent  of  his  influence  may  be  inferród  from  the 
number  who  at  this  time  became  the  subjecta  of  peiae- 
cution.  At  Delft  thirty-fiye  peraoos  were  execttted  far 
their  adherence  to  Jona;  at  Haarlem,  Amsterdam,  Ley- 
den,  Rotterdam,  and  other  citiea  alao  many  suffered 
likewise.  In  the  apaoe  of  two  yean  morę  than  two 
hundred  betokened  their  faithfulness  to  Anabaptiat 
yiews  at  the  expense  of  their  life.  Nor  waa  Joris  him- 
self safe  from  persecution.  He  waa  obliged  to  leave 
Delft,  where  he  had  liyed  for  a  while  secretly,  and,  after 
fleeing  from  place  to  place  in  hia  natiye  country,  he  at 
laat  quitted  Holland.  A  monitory  letter  which  be  dia- 
patched  to  the  senate  of  his  natiye  land  cciet  the  bearer 
his  head.  To  retum  to  Holland  then  became  for  Joiis 
a  hazardoua  undertaking ;  he  therefore  soughi  a  home 
witbin  the  domiuions  of  tbe  landgraye  of  Hesse^but  tbe 
latter  alao  refuaed  the  weaiy  wanderer  a  reating^-plaoe 
unlesa  he  came  aa  a  Lutheran.  Of  courae  Joris  was  nut 
now  likely  to  yield  up  all  that  hia  imagination  had  fiu- 
cied  to  be  diyine  truth,  and  he  continued  hia  royii^ 


JORIS 


1011 


JORNANDEZ 


nntil  he  fdt  safe  nowhere.  Suddenly  we  meet  in  SwiŁe- 
erlaad,  in  the  dty  of  Basie,  a  peraon  by  the  name  of 
John  of  Bruges,  the  owner  of  leal  estate  in  the  town 
and  in  the  ooontźy,  a  peaceable  and  good  citizen,  a  oom- 
monicant  in  the  Reformed  Church,  who  had  oome  to 
Bade  with  hia  family  in  the  apnring  of  1644.  Thia  man 
was  nonę  other  than  David  Joria,  the  oelebrated  Ana- 
baptbt  leader,  who,  tired  of  yean  of  wandering,  preferred 
a  life  of  safety  and  comfort  under  a  fictitioua  name  to  a 
life  of  celebrity  and  tlanger  aa  the  leader  of  a  large  le- 
ligioofl  sect  No  one  ever  suspected  nnder  the  garb  of 
John  of  Brugea  the  form  of  Da^id  Joris,  and  he  ended 
his  days  peacefuUy,  in  the  midst  of  his  family,  in  1556. 
By  the  people  of  Basie,  John  of  Bruges,  aliaa  Darid  Jo- 
ris, was  highly  esteemed  while  he  lived  among  them, 
for,  bdng  a  man  of  wealth,  he  nnited  magnificence  vrith 
▼irtne  and  integrity»  But  they  thonght  differently  after 
his  death,  when  hia  son-in-law,  Nicholas*  Bleadyck,  a 
Beformed  preacher  in  the  Palatinate,  an  avaridou8  and 
unprindpled  man,  charged  the  deceased  with  the  moat 
blasphemooa  errors.  Uowever  much  DaTid's  family 
might  remonstrate  and  deny  the  serious  chaiges,  the 
univerdty  and  the  dergy  were  called  upoD  to  pronoonce 
Joris'8  opiniona  aa  heretical,  and  his  body  waa  ordered 
to  be  dug  up  forthwith  and  committed  to  the  common 
hangman  to  be  bumed.  Thos,  strangdy  enoogh,  the 
Bade  people  actually  bronght  to  paas  what  Joris  him- 
adf  had  told  some  of  his  disciples  before  his  decease, 
that  he  would  rise  again  at  the  end  of  three  years. 

Respecting  the  character  and  opiniona  of  Joris,  Moa- 
heim  says  {Ecdes.  Hiał,  bk.  iv,  cent.  xvi,  aec  iii,  pt  ii, 
eh.  iii),  **  He  possessed  morę  senae  and  morę  virtue  than 
is  commonly  sapposed,  as  is  evinced  not  oniy  by  his 
books,  of  which  he  publiahed  a  great  many,  but  also  by 
his  disdples,  who  were  persons  by  no  means  base,  but  of 
great  simplidty  of  mannera  and  character.  ...  In  the 
manner  of  the  morę  moderate  Anabaptista,  he  labored 
bard  to  revive  languishing  piety  among  his  fellow-men; 
and  in  this  matter  his  imagination,  which  was  exces- 
dvdy  warm,  so  decdved  him  that  he  falsdy  supposed 
he  had  divine  vision8;  and  he  placed  religion  in  the 
excltidon  of  dl  etemd  objects  fh>m  the  thoughts,  and 
the  cultivation  of  silence,  contemplation,  and  a  peculiar 
and  indcBcribablc  state  of  the  soul.  The  Mystics,  there- 
forc,  of  the  highest  order,  and  the  Quakers,  might  claim 
him  if  they  would,  and  they  might  asstgn  him  no  mean 
rank  among  their  sort  of  people."  He  believed  that  the 
tnie  word  of  God  is  no  extemd  letter,  but  God  himself, 
his  word,  and  Ikia  voice  in  man  himsdf.  He  opposed 
the  doctrine  of  the  Church  conceming  the  Trinity  on 
the  ground  that  God  is  impersonaL  "  Is  it  not  contrar 
ry  to  the  manifestations  of  Grod  in  the  creature  to  be- 
lieve  him  to  be  three,  and  to  cali  all  three  one?"  he 
asks;  and  then  replies,  ''God  reveals  himself  in  three 
periods,  following  each  other  Bucce86ively — ^the  periods 
of  fdth,  hope,  and  ]ove,  all  of  them  headed  by  a  God- 
man  appearing  in  God*8  stead."  The  second  oommenced 
with  Jesus  Christ,  but  the  third  and  higher  period,  the 
period  of  perfect  manhood,  waa  inaugurated  with  the 
appearance  of  David  Joris.  The  true  Christ  is  the  spir- 
itual,  the  etemd  word,  etemaUy  hid  in  the  Father,  the 
heart  and  the  naturę  of  God.  This  spiritnd  Christ  has 
by  no  means  really  become  flesh,  but  Jesus  took  the 
form  of  Christ  in  the  flesh  to  make  himself  manifest. 
All  that  waa  done  on  or  by  Jesus  in  the  body  was  a 
ahadow  (type)  of  what  man  will  do  and  suffer  in  the 
apirit  Hence  also  there  was  no  power  for  sdvation  in 
Chri8t*s  extemd  (L  e.  bodily)  sufferings  and  death,  but 
we  of  onr  own  accord  must  save  ourBdves  by  the  suffer- 
.ings  and  death  of  our  old  man.  This  deeper  and  morę 
complete  revelation  is  madę  to  the  world  by  David  Jo- 
ris, the  true  David,  the  Christ,  not  by  descent  in  the 
fleah,  but  in  the  Spirit,  and  not  in  the  spirit  of  the  cru- 
dfied  and  deoeaaed,  bot  of  the  resurrected  and  living 
Christ.  With  Joris'8  appearance  must  terminate  the 
annonncement  of  Christ  after  the  fieah.  Joris  himsdf 
ia  to  eatabliah,  both  intemally  and  eztemally,  the  etei^ 


nd  kingdom  of  Christ,  which  hitherto  waa  the  king> 
dom  of  Christ  only  intemally.  He  who  has  reached 
the  peifectioD  of  this  kingdom  [which,  of  course,  could 
alao  be  done  in  this  world,  his  extemal  kingdom]  ia 
freed  thereafter  from  all  law,  be  it  human  or  divine. 
Evidently  Joris^s  doctrine  waa  nothing  but  a  fuUy  d^ 
vdoped  system  of  Montaniam  (q.-  v.).  He  denied  the 
doctrine  of  futurę  judgment,  aa  he  dedared  that  perfec- 
tion  is  attained  in  this  world,  and  thereafter  the  depend- 
ence  of  the  subject  on  the  Creator  ceases.  Of  course  he 
also  mled  out  of  existence  angels,  both  good  and  bad. 
He  held,  with  Manes,  that  the  body  only,  and  not  the 
aoul,  waa  deflled  by  dn ;  and  he  took  a  moat  impolitic 
atep  when  he  adopted  the  prindplea  of  the  Adamitea 
with  reapect  to  mairiage. 

Of  hia  250  booka  and  1000  letters,  the  moat  important 
ia  his  Book  ofMiracUSf  which  appeared  at  Deventer  in 
1542,  nnder  the  title  of  Wonderboeck,  etc.  (2d  ed.  1551, 
folio),  A  list  of  all  his  writings,  and  a  very  elaborate 
statement  of  his  life  and  work,  were  written  by  Frof. 
Nippolt,  of  Heidelberg  Univerrity,  in  the  ZeUtchryt/Ur 
Awf.rAeoi:  1863,  p.  889;  1864,  p.  483  są. ;  1868,  p.  476  są. 
See  also  Arnold,  Kirchźm  te.  KeUerhittwie^  pt  ii,  bk.  xTi, 
eh.  xxi,  §  36,  p.  878  sq. ;  Trechsel,  Protett,  AntUrmit.  i, 
86,  55 ;  Escher,  in  Ersch.  und  Graber,  A  Ugem,  Ewy  Hop. 
xxiii,  86^7 ;  Schr6ckh,  Kirckenguch,  a.  d,  SeformaHoHf 
V,  442  są.,  469  są.;  Henke,  Kirdiengtadi.  iii,  148  są.; 
Gramer,  in  the  Archiv.  of  Kut  en  Royaard»,  v,  1  aq. ;  vi, 
291  są.    See  Azf abaftists.    (J.  H.  W.) 

Joiiflsen,  Matthias,  a  minister  of  the  Dutch  Re- 
formed Church,  waa  bom  at  Wezel,  Holland,  October  26, 
1789,  and  edncated  at  the  Univer8ity  of  Utrechtu  Hia 
fint  settlement  was  atHavezathen,whence  he  waa  cdl- 
ed  to  Hassdt,  and  thence,  in  1782,  to  the  Hague,  to 
preach  to  a  German  congregation.  This  charge  he  hdd 
np  to  his  death,  Jan.  18, 1823.  Jorissen^s  characteristics 
were  cleamess  and  vigor  of  intdlect,  warmth  of  affec- 
tion,  solidity  of  judgment,  and  a  remarkable  tdent  to 
read  men  and  things.  His  native  endowments  were 
cultivared  by  extensive  reading,  thorough  study,  and 
much  intercourse  with  the  best  sodety.  He  was  evan- 
gelicd  in  sentiment,  of  eminent  persond  piety,  devoted 
to  the  best  interests  of  his  flock,  and  commanded  uni- 
rersd  esteem  and  love.  He  was  one  of  the  founders  of 
the  Netherlands  Missionory  Society.  A  new  veTdon  of 
the  Psdms  in  German  was  prepared  by  him.  To  it  he 
added  a  few  hymns.  It  was  welcomed  and  adopted  by 
(jrerman  congregations  in  the  Beformed  Church  of  Hol- 
land. His  other  published  writings  are  comparative- 
ly  few.  See  Gladus,  GodgeUerd  Nederland,  7i,  186  sq. ; 
Gesckiedenis  der  Nederlandsche  I/errormde  Kerkj  by  A. 
Ypeij  and  J.  Dermont,  iv,  320.     ( J.  P.  W.) 

Jor^koSm  [some  Jorko'^^  (Hebrew  Torkedm', 
Drp*i^, /Kiiieneat  of  the  people,  or  perh.  ertended  people ; 
Sept.  UpKaav  t.  r.  'IcicXav,  both  oonfounded  with  Re- 
kem  following;  Yulgate  Jercaam),  a  person  apparently 
named  as  the  son  of  Baham,  of  the  descendanta  of  Cdeb, 
the  brother  of  Jerahmeel,  of  the  tribe  of  Judah  (1  Chroń, 
ii,  44) ;  but  others  (e.  g.  Gesenius  after  Jaichi)  under- 
stand  **  father**  there  to  meau/ounderj  so  that  this  would 
be  the  name  of  a  town  settled  by  Rahiun — an  intcrpretar 
tion  sustained  by  a  similar  use  of  other  namea  in  the 
aame  oonnection.  The  locality  thus  allnded  to  is  oth- 
erwiae  unknown,  but  from  the  aaaociated  places  may  be 
presumed  to  have  been  a  place  in  the  region  south-eaat 
of  Hebron. 

Jomandes  (Jomcmdes  or  Jordane»\  a  odebrated 
historian  of  the  6th  centnry,  waa  by  birth  a  Goth,  or 
both  of  Alan  and  Gothic  descent  After  adopting  the 
Christian  religion  he  became  a  zealoua  churchman,  sub- 
seąuently  entered  a  monaatery,  and  was  finally  mada 
bidiop  of  Croton,  in  Itdy.  He  wrote  two  historicd 
worka  in  the  Latin  language,  De  Regnorum  ac  Tempo- 
rum  SueceBnone—A  short  oompendium  of  the  most  im- 
portant event8  in  history  fnm  the  Creation  down  to 
A.D.  562 ;  vduable  from  the  accounta  it  contains  of  ser- 


JORTIN 


1012 


JOSEPH 


eral  bflitMuroas  northem  iuition»— «nd  De  Getarum  Ori- 
ginę  et  Btbus  Gettit  (oonoeming  tbe  origin  and  deeds  of 
the  GoŁhs),  which  has  obtained  great  renown,  cbiefly 
from  its  being  our  011I7  source  of  infonnation  about  tbe 
GoŁhB  and  other  barbarian  tribea,  ezcept  wben  they  are 
casaally  mentłoned  by  KMne  Greek  or  Latin  hiatorian. 
Tbe  work,  wbich  in  tbe  main  ia  a  compilation  of  otber 
writers,  ia  fuli  of  inaccuradea,  both  of  time,  place,  and 
person ;  Joniandes  himaelf,  boweyer,  seems  to  bave  been 
aware  of  the  impeifect  oondition  of  hia  works,  for  be 
makea  no  claima  to  eradition  or  eztended  researcb. 
The  aim  of  tbe  worka  U  belieyed  to  bave  been  fint  to 
eztol  tbe  Gotbic  nation,  and,  secondly,  to  bring  aboat 
a  imion  of  the  Gotba  and  the  Romans,  for  be  tńea  to 
prore  that  both  nationa  have  long  been  frienda  and  oon- 
federates,  and  that  tbdr  perpetuation  depended  upon 
ibe  most  intimate  alliance  of  the  two.  See  Grimm  and 
Kraflfk,  K,  geach,  cL  genar,  Yblker^  I,  i,  77,  etc ;  Schmidt*8 
ZeiUchr,  /.  GesehichiL  Wwentckąfi,  yi,  516  8q. ;  Sybel, 
Defoniiłnu  libri  Jordanu,  etc.  (Berlin,  1888);  Herrog, 
Real^EncyBop,  vi,  s.  v. 

Jortin,  John,  D.D.,  an  eminent  Englisb  divine,  was 
bom  in  London  Oct  28, 1698.  His  parents  were  French 
Hugnenots,  and  formed  part  of  that  noble  and  devoted 
band  who  fled  from  France  at  the  reyocation  of  tbe 
Edict  of  Nantes,  giying  np  all  in  preference  to  abjur- 
ing  their  faith.  He  receiyed  his  grammatical  eda- 
cation  at  tbe  Charter  House.  In  May,  1715,  be  was 
admitted  to  Jeans  College,  in  Cambridge,  of  which  he 
became  in  dne  time  a  fellow.  He  yery  soon  attracted 
attention  by  his  remarkable  proficiency  as  a  scholar, 
particolarly  his  maatery  of  the  leamed  languages,  and 
two  years  after  being  admitted  to  the  college  was  rec- 
ommended  by  his  tutor,  Dr.  Styan  Thirlby,  to  make  ez- 
tracts  from  Eustathiua  for  the  use  of  Pope'8  Homer,  and 
for  bis  seryices  in  tbe  work  he  receiyed  tbe  bigheat 
oommendations  from  that  distinguisbed  poet.  While  at 
Cambridge  he  published  a  smali  yolume  of  poems,  which 
are  g^reatly  admired,  and  allowed  by  scholars  to  possess 
a  yery  high  rank  among  modem  Latin  yerses.  In  1723 
be  was  admitted  to  deacon's  orders,  and  the  following 
June  to  that  of  priest  In  1726>27  he  was  presented  to 
the  liying  of  Swayesey,  near  Cambridge,  but,  in  conse- 
quence  of  his  marriage  soon  after,  he  resigned  that  liy- 
ing, and  remoyed  to  London,  where  he  soon  became  an 
admired  and  popular  preacher.  Wben  his  friend.  Dr. 
Osbaldeston,  became  biahop  of  London  in  1762,  Jortin 
was  appointed  his  domestic  chaplain,  and  was  presented 
with  a  piebend  in  the  Church  of  SLPaul  and  the  liying 
of  Kensington.  To  theae  was  soon  added  the  archdea- 
conry  of  London.  He  fixed  his  residenoe  at  Kensing- 
ton, where  he  died  in  1770.  He  was  as  much  beloyed 
for  his  priyate  yirtues  aa  admired  for  bis  leaming,  abil- 
ities,  liberality  of  mind,  and  contempt  of  subseryiency. 
Few  men  haye  eyer  enjoyed  the  intimacy  of  so  many 
eminent  persons.  Among  these  may  be  mentioned  the 
names  of  bishops  Horsley,  Warburton,  Sherlock,  Hare, 
Lowth,  and  Secker,  besides  Cudworth,  Middleton,  Pope, 
Akenside,  Dr.  Samuel  Johnson,  Dr.  Parr,  Dr.  Doddiidge, 
and  others.  The  most  intimate  relations  subsisted  be- 
tween  Dr.  Jortin  and  bishop  Warbiurton  until  he  incur- 
red  tbe  displcasure  of  that  distinguished  prelate  by  con- 
troyerting  his  doctrine  with  regard  to  the  state  of  the 
dead,  as  described  by  Homer  and  Yirgil,  in  his  '*  Diyine 
Legation  of  Moses."  The  critical  writings  of  Dr.  Jortin 
are  greatly  admired  by  all  who  haye  a  taste  for  curious 
literaturę.  It  is  not  merely  on  account  of  the  leaming 
which  is  displayed  in  them,  and  the  use  which  is  madę 
of  obecure  authors,but  there  is  a  tersenessin  the  expres- 
aion,  and  a  light,  pla3rful  satire  in  the  thoughts,  which 
render  them  yery  entertaining.  His  principal  works 
are,  Discourses  concemmg  łhe  Truth  ofthe  Christian  Re- 
ligumj  etc.  (I^ond.  1746,  8  yols.  8yo) :—/.(/«  o/Eramua 
(Lond.  1758-60, 2  yols.  4to)  i—Sermon$  on  diferetU  Sub- 
^ects,  ani  the  Doctrine  ofa  Futurę  State,  etc.  (Lond.  1771, 
^  Ycls.  8yo) : — Six  DiMertationt  upon  different  SubjecU 
CLoDd.  1772, 7  yola.  8yo)  i-^Tractt,  phUologieal,  eriticalt 


€md  mitedlcmim  (Lond.  1790, 2  rob.  8n>)  v~ JftMeSiti. 
netnu  Ob9ervations  upcn  Autkort,  aadent  and  modem 
(1781,  2  yola.  8yo)  .--On  Cowtotuneu  (Tncte  of  Ai^ 
Fathen,  iy,  226) ;  and  Jiemarkt  on  Ecdemaetieed  Hi*" 
tory,  a  woric  which  ia  uniyersaUy  allowed  to  be  emiooi^ 
interesting,  and  impartial;  fnll  of  manly  aenae,  acote- 
nesB,  and  profoirnd  emdition.— iS^t^&A  Cgdopadia,  a.  y. ; 
AUibone, /Mflftonargr  ofEngUtk  łmd  American  Authot% 
a.v.    (£.deP.) 

Jos^abad,  a  less  correct  form  for  1.  Jozabad  (q.r.), 
o,  1  Chroń,  xii,  4;  b  (lutZafiSóc  y.  r.  'ItjMyapBóc),  1 
Esdr.  yiii,  68 ;  compare  Ezra  yiii,  88.  2.  For  Zabdai 
Clialapdoc  V.  r.  'liavdfiaSoc,  'QCa/3a^oc,  snd  2m^6c\ 
1  Esdr.  ix,  29;  comp.  Ezra x,  28. 

JoB^aphat  (loMra^ar),  a  Giscized  fonu  (Mati.  i, 
8)  of  tbe  name  of  Jehoshaphat  (q.  v.),  king  of  Judah. 

JoBaphi'as  ('IiMra^oc),  a  Gnsdzed  fomi  <1  Eadr. 
yiii,  86)  of  tbe  name  Josiphiah  (q.  t.)  of  the  Hefai  test 

(Ezra  yiii,  10). 

Joscelin,  bishop  of  Soissońs,  a  liyal  of  Abćłaid,  and 
one  ofthe  most  distinguished  teacbeis  in  Fana,  was  bom 
in  tbe  latter  part  of  the  llth  oentoiy.  In  1115  he  b^ 
came  arehdeaoon  of  Soissońs,  and  in  1126  saooeeded 
liaiard  aa  bishop  of  that  see.  He  took  part  in  tbe 
councils  of  Troyes  and  Rouen,  and  in  tbe  coronatioo  of 
king  Philip.  In  1181  Innocent  II  sent  him,  together 
with  St  Bernard,  on  a  mission  to  the  aicbbiahop  md  to 
the  count  of  Boideaux.  On  hia  retnm  in  1182  he  foimdr 
ed  the  abbey  of  Longpont  In  1140  be  was  one  of  the 
judgea  of  Abćlard  at«tbe  Council  of  Sena,  and  at  tbe 
Coundl  of  Paris  in  1147  was  oommissioned  to  ]Dquiie 
into  the  propositions  attribnted  to  Gilbert  de  la  Posree. 
He  died  Oct.  25, 1152.  Joscelin  enjoyed  great  repota- 
tion  for  leaming  and  wisdom,  and  in  Ms  diocese  foMlled 
all  the  duties  of  hu  charge  with  scmpuloua  faithlubiess. 
He  wrote  an  Erpositio  eymboU  and  an  Erpoeitio  Ora- 
łionie  Dominicte,  both  of  which  were  published  in  Mar> 
tene  and  Durand*8  Amplissuna  CoUectio,  ix,  1101, 1111 , 
Martene,  Anecdota,  p.  484,  giyes  alao  two  of  hia  lettenL 
See  GaUia  Chriet,  ix,  857 ;  Hist^Litt,  de  la  Fnmee^  xii, 
412.— Hoefer, Nout,Biog,  Ghterak,  xxyi,948.   (J.N.P.) 

JOBciuB  (called  also  JoDOCua,  Josciokus,  Josceu- 
Nus,  JosTHo,  and  Gotho),  a  French  Roman  Oatbolic 
prelate,  became  bishop  of  St.  Brieuc  in  1150.  In  1157 
be  was  translated  to  the  see  of  Tours,  and  immediately 
began  to  quarrel  with  the  oonyents  of  bis  diooeae,  tiU 
king  Louis  VII  was  obliged  to  interfere.  When  Fred- 
erick  Barbarosaa  pretended  to  judge  the  daims  of  the 
riyal  popeSjYlctor  and  Alexander,  Joscius  was  sent  to 
tbe  latter  by  England  and  France  to  aasore  him  of  their 
support  and  bring  him  to  France.  In  1167  Joacius  was 
the  prelate  who,  after  the  murder  of  Thomaa  i^  Becket, 
was  oommissioned  by  the  pope  to  excommunicate  Łhe 
king  of  England.  It  was  Josdos  alao  who^  wben  Henry 
had  receiyed  absolution  in  1172,  went  to  him  at  Caen, 
and  publidy  declared  him  reoonciled  to  the  Church. 
He  died  in  1173  or  1174.  See  GaUia  ChrisL  rtŁ  xir, 
coL  89, 1088.— Hoefer,  Nouv.  Biogr.  Geniraie,  xxyi,  949. 

Jo''8d  (Itttrń,  or,  rather,  'Iunrii,  Gen.  of  'Iamfitc,  Jo- 
9e$),  the  son  of  Eleazar  and  father  of  Er,  among  the 
matemal  ancestora  of  Christ,  unnentioned  in  the  O.  T. 
(Lukę  iii,  29).     aa  between  876  and  628.     See  Giob- 

ALOOT  OF  JkSUB  ChRIST. 

JOB^edeo  (\ta9iUK),  a  Grecused  form  Cl  Eadr.  r,  5, 
48,  56;  yi,  2;  ix,  19;  Eccias.  xlix,  12)  of  Joaedecb, 
the  high-priest  (Hag.  i,  1).    See  Jehosadak. 

Jo'8eph  (Heb.  Yoeeph',  CjOi*^,  containing,  accoid- 
ing  to  Greń.  xxx,  23, 24,  a  two-fold  ńgnificanoe  [the  two 
Heb.  roots  coinciding  in  form  in  Hiphil],  remoter,  firom 
C]DK,  and  thcreoaer,  firom  C)D^,  the  latter  iayoied  by  tfaa 
unoontracted  or  Cbaldaistic  form  TekoeąA',  CjOirr,  oo» 
curring  only  Pul lxxxi,  6;  Sept  and  N. T.  Iwn/f,  L  q. 
Josephus),  the  name  of  aereral  men  in  the  ScnpŁmei 
and  Joeephua,  all  doobtleaa  after  the  fint  of  the  nan^ 


JOSEPH 


1013 


JOSEPH 


whoM  becntiM  histoiy  is  told  at  lengtfa  in  the  Scrip- 
turee  with  inimitable  simpUdŁy.    See  «lflo  Joskphub. 

1.  Th«  elder  son  of  Jaoob  and  Bacbel,  bom  (BlC. 
1918 ;  compw  Gan.  xli,  46)  under  peculiar  dieumstancea, 
as  may  be  saan  in  GÓi.  xxx,  22;  on  which  aoooont,  and 
becaoae  be  was  tha  son  of  his  old  age  (xxxvii,  8),  he 
was  belored  by  bis  fatber  more  than  were  the  rest  of 
his  children,  thoogh  Benjamin,  as  betng  also  a  son  of 
Jacob^s  favorite  wife  Bachel,  was  in  a  peculiar  manner 
dear  to  the  patiiarch.  The  paitiality  evinced  towards 
Joseph  by  his  father  excited  Jealoosy  on  the  part  of  his 
bnthren,  the  rather  as  Łhey  were  bom  of  different 
mothen  (xxxTii,  2).  Jaoob  at  this  time  had  two  smali 
pieces  of  land  in  Canaan,  Abraham^s  bnrying-plaoe  at 
Hebron  in  the  soath,  and  the  **  parcel  of  a  field,  where 
he  [Jaoob]  had  spread  his  tent**  (xxxtii,  19),  at  She- 
ehem  in  the  north,  the  latter  being  probably,  ftorn  its 
prioe,  the  lesser  of  the  two^  He  seema  then  to  have 
staid  at  Hebron  with  the  aged  laaac,  while  his  sons 
kept  his  flocks. 

1.  Joseph  had  reached  his  seventeenth  year,  having 
hitherto  been  engaged  in  boyish  sports,  or  aiding  in 
pastorał  daties,when  some  oonduct  on  the  part  of  *'the 
sona  of  Bilhah  and  the  sons  of  Zilpah,  his  father'8  wires," 
seems  to  haye  been  siich  as,  in  the  opinion  of  Joseph,  to 
reqiiire  the  special  attention  of  Jaoob,  to  whom  aooord- 
ingly  he  commnnicated  the  facts.  This  regard  to  vir- 
tae,  and  this  manifestation  of  filial  fldelity,  greatly  in- 
creased  his  brothers'  dislike,  who  henceforth  "  hated  him, 
and  oould  not  speak  peaceably  anto  him"  (xxxyii,  4). 
Their  jeakMisy  was  i^ggoiTated  b^  the  fact  that  Jacob 
had  shown  his  preference  by  making  him  a  dress  (T^hS 
D'«^D),  which  appean  to  haye  been  a  long  tonie  with 
sleeyes,  wom  by  youths  and  maidena  of  the  richer  class. 
See  Attibk.  Their  ayersion,  howeyer,  was  canried  to 
the  taighest  pitch  when  Joseph  aoquainted  them  with 
the  two  dreams  that  he  had  hJtid,  to  the  elfect--the  flrst, 
that  while  he  and  they  were  binding  sheayes,  his  sheaf 
aroee  and  stood  erect,  while  theirs  stood  roond  and  did 
obetsance  to  his;  the  seoond,  that  **the  son  and  the 
moon  and  the  eleyen  stan  did  him  homage."  These 
dreams  appeared  to  indicate  that  Joseph  wonld  acąnire 
pre-eminenoe  in  the  family,  if  not  soyereignty;  and 
while  eyen  his  iather  rebaked  him,  his  brothers  were 
fiUed  with  envy  (xxxvii,  11).  Jacots  howeyer,  was  not 
aware  of  the  depth  of  their  iU  wiU;  so  that,  on  one  oc- 
casion,  haying  a  desira  to  hear  intelligenoe  of  his  sons, 
who  were  pastoring  their  flocks  at  a  distanoe,  he  did 
not  hesitate  to  make  Joseph  his  messenger  for  that  por- 
pose.  They  had  goue  to  Shechem  to  feed  the  flock, 
and  Joseph  was  sent  thither  from  the  yale  of  Hebron  by 
his  iather  to  bring  him  word  of  their  welfare  and  that 
of  the  flock.  They  were  not  at  Shechem,  bat  had  gone 
to  DoŁhan,  which  appears  to  haye  been  not  yeiy  far 
diatant,  pastoring  their  flock  Uke  the  Anbs  of  the  pres- 
ent  day,  whereyer  the  wiki  country  (yer.  22)  was  un- 
owned.  His  appearing  in  yiew  of  his  brothers  was  the 
aignal  for  their  malice  to  gain  head.  They  began  to 
deyise  means  for  his  immediate  destraction,  which  they 
woold  haye  unhesitatin^^y  eifected  but  for  hia  half- 
brother  Reuben,  who,  aa  the  ekleat  son,  might  well  be 
the  party  to  iuterfere  on  behalf  of  Joseph.  A  compro- 
mise  waa  entered  ioto^  in  yirtue  of  wbieh  the  youth  was 
atripped  of  the  dirtingniahing  yestmenta  which  he  owed 
to  hia  iather^s  aflection,  and  cast  into  a  pit.  Uaving 
perfonned  this  evil  deed,  and  while  they  were  taking 
refreshment,  the  brothers  beheld  a  camvan  of  Arabian 
merchants  (Ishmaelites^Midianites),  who  were  bearing 
the  apioes  and  aromatic  guma  of  India  down  to  the  well- 
kiK>wn  and  moch-frequented  mart,  £gypt.  Judah  on 
this  feela  a  better  emotion  arise  in  his  mind,  and  pro- 
poses  that,  instead  of  allowing  Joseph  to  perish,  they 
ahould  sell  him  to  the  merchants,  whose  tiade  obviooa- 
ly  from  this  embraced  haman  beings  as  well  aa  spioeiy. 
Aooordingly  the  anhappy  young  man  was  sold  for  a 
alaye  (at  the  prioe  of  twenty  ahekela  of  silyer,  a  sort  of 


fixed  nte;  see  Ley.  xxyii,  5),  to  be  conyeyed  by  hia 
masteiB  into  Egypt  While  on  his  way  thither,  Reu- 
ben  returaed  to  the  pit,  intending  to  rescoe  his  brother, 
and  conyey  htm  safely  back  to  their  father.  Finding 
Joseph  gone,  he  returaed  with  expostulations  to  the 
wicked  young  men,  who,  so  far  from  relenting,  now  eon- 
certed  a  fresh  act  of  treacher)*,  by  which  at  once  to  coyer 
their  crime  and  also  punish  their  father  for  hia  partial- 
ity  towards  the  unofTending  suiferer.  With  this  view 
they  dipped  Joeeph's  party-colored  garment  in  the  blood 
of  a  kid  and  sent  it  to  Jaoob,  in  order  to  make  him  be- 
lieye  that  hia  fayorite  chiM  had  been  tom  to  pieces  by 
some  wild  beaat  The  trick  sacoeeded,  and  Jaoob  was 
grieyed  beyond  meaaure  (Gen.  xxxyiii,  12*85).  KC, 
1895. 

2.  Meanwhile  the  merchants  sold  Joseph  to  Potiphar, 
an  officer  of  Pharaoh'8,  and  captain  of  the  royal  guard, 
who  waa  a  natiye  of  the  countiy  (Gen.  xxxvii,  86).  It 
is  by  no  means  easy  to  determine  who  at  this  time  was 
the  Pharaoh,  or  ruling  monaroh,  thoogh,  what  is  far 
more  important,  the  condition  of  the  country,  and  there- 
in  the  progress  of  civiUzation,  are  in  certain  generał  and 
important  featurea  madę  dear  in  the  course  of  the  nar- 
ration.  Acoording  to  Syncellus,  howeyer,  the  generał 
opinion  in  his  day  waa  that  the  soyereign's  name  who 
rnled  £gypt  at  the  time  of  the  deportation  of  Joseph 
was  Aphophis.  See  Eoyft.  In  Potiphar*s  house  Jo- 
seph enjoyed  the  highest  confidence  and  the  laigest 
prosperity.  A  higher  power  watched  oyer  him;  and 
whateyer  he  nndertook  auoceeded,  till  at  length  hia  mas* 
ter  gaye  eyery  thing  into  his  hands.  He  was  placed 
oyer  all  his  master'8  property  with  perfect  trust,  and 
'^the  Lord  blessed  the  Egsrptian^s  house  for  Jo6eph's 
sake"  (yer.  6).  The  sculpturee  and  paintings  of  the  an- 
cient  Egyptian  tombs  bring  yiyidly  before  us  the  daily 
life  and  duties  of  Joseph.  The  property  of  great  men 
is  shown  to  haye  been  managed  by  scribes,  who  exer* 
dsed  a  most  methodical  and  minuto  superyision  oyer  all 
the  operations  of  agriculture,  gardening,  the  keeping  of 
liye-stock,  and  fishing.  Eyeiy  prodoct  was  carefully 
registered  to  check  the  disbonesty  of  the  biborers,  who 
in  Egypt  haye  always  been  famous  in  this  respect. 
Prob^ly  in  no  country  was  farming  eyer  more  system- 
atic  Joseph*B  preyious  knowledge  of  tending  flocks, 
and  perhaps  of  husbandry,  and  bis  truŁhful  character, 
exactly  fitted  him  for  the  post  of  oyereeec. 

The  Hebrew  race  have  always  been  remarkable  for 
personal  beaoty,  of  which  Joseph  seems  to  haye  had  an 
annsoal  share.  This  fact  explains,  thoogh  it  cannot 
palliate,  the  conduct  of  Potiphar^s  wife,  who,  with  the 
well-known  profligacy  of  the  Egyptian  women,  tried  ey- 
ery means  to  bring  the  pure-minded  youth  to  fulfil  her 
unchaate  deaires.  Foiled  in  her  eyil  wishes,  she  re- 
solyed  to  punish  Joseph,  who  thus  a  second  time  inno- 
cently  brings  on  hinuielf  the  yengeance  of  the  ill-dis- 
posed.  Charged  with  the  yery  crime  to  which  he  had 
in  yain  been  tempted,  he  is,  with  a  fickleness  character- 
istic  of  Oriental  lords,  at  once  cast  into  the  state  prison 
(Gen.  xxxix).  If  the  suddennees  and  magnitude  of  this 
and  other  changea  in  the  lot  of  Joseph  should  sorprise 
any  ooe,  the  feeting  will  be  mainly  owing  to  his  want  of 
acqaaintanoe  with  the  manners  and  cnatoms  of  the  East, 
where  yidańtodes  not  less  markcd  and  sodden  than  are 
those  presented  in  oor  present  histoiy  are  not  oncom* 
mon ;  for  thoee  who  oome  into  the  channed  circle  of  an 
Eastem  court,  espedally  if  they  are  persona  of  great  en- 
ergy  of  chancter,  are  subject  to  the  most  wondeifid  al- 
temationa  of  fortunę,  the  slaye  of  to-day  being  the  yiaier 
of  to-morrow,  and  yic^-yersa. 

It  must  not  be  scyiposed,  Arom  tlie  lowness  of  the  mor^ 
ais  of  the  Egyptians  in  practice,  that  the  sin  of  unfaith- 
folness  in  a  wife  waa  not  ranked  among  the  heayiest 
yioes.  The  punishment  of  adolterers  was  seyere,  and  a 
morał  tale,  entitled  ^'Tke  Tvo  Brotkers''  (oontained  in 
a  papyros  of  the  19th  dynasty,  foond  in  the  firitish  Mo- 
seum,  and  translated  in  the  Cambridge  Eaaajft  for  1858), 
is  founded  opon  a  case  nearly  resembling  that  of  Joseph. 


JOSEPH 


1014 


JOSEPH 


It  has,  indeedjbeen  imagined  that  this  Btory  wbb  based 
upon  the  trial  of  Joseph,  and  aa  it  waa  written  for  the 
heir  to  the  throne  of  Egypt  at  a  later  period,  there  U 
aome  reason  in  the  idea  that  the  virtue  of  one  who  had 
held  so  high  a  position  as  Joseph  might  have  beeu  in 
the  mind  of  the  wńter,  were  this  part  of  his  history  weii 
known  to  the  priests,  which,  however,  is  not  Ukely. 
This  incident,  nioreover,  is  not  so  remarkable  as  to  jos- 
tify  great  stress  being  Lud  upon  the  similaiity  to  it  of 
the  main  event  of  a  morał  tale.  The  stoiy  of  Belle- 
rophon  might  as  reasonably  be  traced  to  it,  were  it 
Egyptian  and  not  Greek.  The  Muslims  have  founded 
upon  the  history  of 'Joseph  and  Potiphar'8  wife,  whom 
they  cali  Y&suf  and  Zellkha,  a  famous  religiotis  alle- 
góry.  This  is  much  to  be  wondered  at,  as  the  Koran 
relates  the  tempting  of  Joseph  with  no  materiał  varia- 
tion  in  the  main  particulars  from  the  authentic  narra- 
tive.  The  commentators  say  that,  after  the  death  of 
Potiphar  (Kitflr),  Joseph  married  Zellkha  (Sale,  chap. 
xii).  This  mistake  was  probably  caosed  by  the  circum- 
Btance  that  Joseph^s  father-in-law  borę  the  same  name 
as  his  master. 

Potiphar,  although  believing  Joseph  guilty,  does  not 
appear  to  hare  brought  him  before  a  tribunal,  where 
the  enormit^y  of  his  alleged  crime,  especially  after  the 
trust  placed  in  him,  and  the  fact  of  his  being  a  foreign- 
er,  which  was  madę  much  of  by  his  master's  wife  (xxxix, 
14, 17),  would  probably  have  insured  a  ponishment  of 
the  severc8t  ktnd.  He  seems  to  have  only  cast  him 
into  the  priaon,  which  appears  to  have  been  in  his  house, 
or,  at  least,  under  his  control,  sińce  afterwards  prisoners 
are  related  to  have  been  put  "in  ward  [in]  the  house 
of  the  captain  of  the  executioner8,  into  the  prison"*  (xl, 
3),  and  simply  "  in  ward  [in]  the  captain  of  the  execu- 
tioners*  house"  (xli,  10 ;  comp.  xl,  7).  The  prison  is  de- 
scribed  as  "a  place  where  the  king's  prisoners  [were] 
bound"  (xxxix,  20).  Herę  the  hardest  tiroe  of  Joseph^s 
period  of  probation  began.  He  was  cast  into  prison  on 
a  false  accusation,  to  remain  there  for  at  least  two  years, 
and  perhaps  for  »  much  longer  time.  At  first  he  was 
treated  w»th  serrrityi  this  we  leani  from  Psa.  cv,  "He 
sent  a  man  before  them,  Joseph  [who]t  was  sold  for  a 
slave:  whose  f'',«t  they  afflicted  with  the  fctter:  the 
iron  entered  irito  his  soul"  (ver.  17, 18).  There  is  prob- 
ably herc  a  connection  between  "fetter"  and  "iron" 
(comp.  c^lis,  ^),  in  which  case  the  signification  of  the 
last  clau?e  wtuld  be  "  the  iron  entered  into  him,"  mean- 
ing  that  the  %tters  cut  his  feet  or  legs.  This  is  not  in- 
consisf  ent  with  the  statement  in  Genesis  that  the  keep- 
er  of  the  prison  treated  Joseph  well  (xxxix,  21),  for  we 
are  Ztct  justified  in  theuce  inferring  that  he  was  kind 
from  ihe  first. 

.  In  the  prison,  aa  in  Potiphar*s  house,  Joseph  waa 
found  worthy  of  complete  trust,  and  the  kecper  of  the 
prison  placed  everything  under  his  control,  God'8  espe- 
dal  blessing  attending  his  honest  seryice.  After  a  while 
Pharaoh  was  incensed  againat  two  of  his  officers, "  the 
chief  of  the  cup-bearers"  (D'^p;^ąn  nto),  and  "the 
chief  of  the  hakera"  (D^^BIMn  '^to\  and  cast  them  into 
the  prison  where  Joseph  was.  Herę  the  chief  of  the 
executionerB,  doubtless  a  successor  of  Potiphar  (for,  had 
the  latter  been  conyinced  of  Joeeph's  innocence,  he 
would  not  have  left  him  in  the  prison,  and  if  not  so  con- 
yinced he  would  not  haye  trusted  him),  charged  Joseph 
to  sen^e  theae  priaoners.  Like  Potiphar,  they  were  "  of- 
icera" of  Pharaoh  (xl,  2),  and  though  it  may  be  a  mia- 
\take  to  cali  them  grandeea,  their  eaay  aoceas  to  the  king 
would  giye  them  an  importance  that  explains  the  care 
taken  of  them  by  the  chief  of  the  executioner8.  Each 
dreamed  a  prophetic  dream,  which  Joseph  correctly  in- 
terpreted,  disclaiming  human  skill  and  acknowledging 
that  intcrpretations  were  of  God.  It  ia  not  necessary 
here  to  diaciiss  in  detail  the  particulars  of  this  part  of 
Joscf»h's  history,  sińce  they  do  not  materially  affect  the 
leadin^  cvent.H  of  his  life  f  they  are,  however,  yery  in- 
terestinj;,  frora  thcir  perfect  agreement  with  the  man- 


nera  of  the  andent  Egyptiana  aa  npreseRtcd  oo  tiidr 
monumenta.  On  the  authority  of  Heiodotoa  aod  otb- 
era,  it  was  long  denied  that  the  vine  grew  in  Egypt; 
and  if  so,  the  imagery  of  the  batler^a  dreun  would  haid- 
ly  haye  been  appropriate.  Wilkinaon,  hofweyer,  bas 
shown  beyond  a  qoeBtioa  that  yines  did  grow  in  Egypt, 
and  thua  not  only  remored  a  doubt,  but  givcn  a  pońtiye 
confirmation  of  the  aacred  record  {Afamiert  oftke  Ane, 
Egypt.  u,  152). 

The  butler,  whoae  fate  waa  auapictoaa,  promiaed  the 
young  Hebrow  to  employ  hia  influence  to  procure  hia 
restoration  to  the  free  air  of  day ;  bat  when  again  in 
the  enjoyment  of  hia  "  butlership,"  "  he  forgat"  Joseph 
(xl).  B.(X  1885.  Pharaoh  himaelf,  however,  had  two 
dreama,  which  found  in  Joaeph  a  aucceasfol  expoundier; 
for  the  butler  remembered  the  akiO  of  his  priaon-com- 
panion,  and  adyised  hia  royal  maater  to  put  it  to  the 
teat  in  hia  own  caae.  Pharaoh'8  dream,  as  interpveced 
by  Joaeph,  foreboded  the  approach  of  a  aeyen  yeaia' 
famine ;  to  abate  the  eyila  of  which  Joseph  reoammeDd- 
ed  that  aome  "  discreet  and  wiae  man"  ahould  be  choesi 
and  aet  in  fuli  power  oyer  the  hmd  of  Egypt.  The  mon- 
arch  waa  alarmed,  and  called  a  council  of  hia  adyiaerEL 
The  wiadom  of  Joaeph  waa  recogniaed  aa  of  divine  ori- 
gin  and  aupereminent  yalue ;  and  the  king  and  his  min- 
iatera  (whence  it  appears  that  the  Egyptian  monarchy 
— at  Memphis— waa  not  deapotic,  but  conatitotional j  Jt- 
aolyed  that  Joaeph  ahould  be  madę  (to  borrow  a  term 
from  Romę)  dictator  in  the  approaching  time  of  need. 
"And  Pharaoh  aaid  unto  Joseph,  Forasmuch  as  God 
hath  ahowed  thee  all^hia,  there  b  nonę  ao  diacrect  and 
wiae  aa  thou  art.  T^ou  ahalt  be  oyer  my  house,  and 
according  to  thy  word  ahall  all  my  people  be  ruled* 
only  in  the  throne  will  I  be  greater  than  thou.  Sce,  I 
haye  aet  thee  oyer  all  the  land  of  Egypt.  And  Pharaoh 
took  off  hia  ring  and  put  it  upon  Joeeph*a  haod,  and  ar- 
layed  him  in  yeaturea  of  fine  linen,  and  pot  a  gold  chain 
about  hia  neck ;  and  he  madę  him  to  ride  in  the  sccond 
chariot  which  he  had;  and  they  cried  before  bim,  Bow 
the  knee.  [See  Abrecii.  ]  And  Pharaoh  aaid  nnto  Jo- 
aeph, I  am  Pharaoh,  and  without  thee  ahall  no  man  lift 
up  hia  hand  or  foot  in  all  the  land  of  EgypC  And  Pha- 
raoh called  Joseph*a  name  Zaphnath-paaneah  [sayioor 
of  the  world ;  comp.  Jablonaky,  Optue,  i,  207  są.] ;  and 
he  gaye  him  to  wife  Aaenath,  the  daughter  of  Poti- 
pherah,  prieat  of  On.  And  Joaeph  went  out  otgx  all 
the  land  of  Egypt"  (xli,  89  aq.).  The  monomenta  show 
that  on  the  inyeatiture  of  a  high  offidal  in  Egypt,  one 
of  the  chief  ceremoniea  waa  the  putting  on  him  a  coDar 
of  gold  (see  Aneieni  Egffptiam,  pL  80);  the  other  par- 
ticulars, the  yesturea  of  fine  linen  and  the  liding  in  the 
second  chariot,  are  equa)ly  In  accordance  with  the  man- 
nera  of  the  country.  It  has  been  anppoeed  that  Joaeph 
waa  taken  into  the  priestly  order,  and  thua  ennobled. 
The  Biblical  nairatiye  doea  not  aupport  thia  opinioo, 
though  it  leayea  it  without  a  doubt  that  in  reality,  if 
not  in  form  aa  well,  the  higheat  tmat  and  the  proadest 
honors  of  the  state  were  conferred  on  one  so  lecently  a 
Hebrew  alaye.  The  age  of  Joaeph  u  atated  to  haye 
been  thirty  years  at  the  time  of  this  promotion  (xli, 
46).     B.C.1888. 

8.  Seyen  yesrs  of  abondance  afibrded  Josepb  opportn- 
nity  to  carry  into  effect  anch  piana  aa  secnrcd  aa  ample 
proyiaion  agfunat  the  aeyen  years  of  need.  The  famioe 
came,  but  it  fonnd  a  prepared  people.  The  repreaenta- 
tiona  of  the  monumenta,  which  ahow  that  the  contenta 
of  the  granariea  were  accurately  noted  by  the  acribes 
when  they  were  filled,  well  illuatrate  thia  part  of  the 
hiatory.  See  Granary.  The  yiaitation  was  not  mere^ 
ly  local,  for  "  the  famine  waa  oyer  aU  the  face  of  the 
earth ;"  "  and  all  counfcries  came  into  Egypt  to  Joseph 
to  buy  com"  (yer.  56, 57).  The  expreBBions  here  uaed, 
howeyer,  do  not  reąuire  ua  tę  soppose  that  tbe  iaasine 
extended  beyond  the  oonntriea  aroond  Egypt,  audi  a^ 
Paleatine,  Syria,  and  Arabia,  aa  well  aa  aome  part  of  Af- 
rica,  although  of  oourse  it  may  haye  been  more  widely 
experienced.    It  may  be  obaeryed,  that  altbongh  fimt« 


JOSEPH 


1015 


JOSEPH 


liMs  in  lEfcypt  depend  immeduitely  upon  the  fiulure  of 
the  muudaŁion,  and  in  other  ooontńes  upon  the  failure 
of  rain,  yet  Łhmt,  as  tbe  riae  of  the  Nile  is  caiued  by 
heavy  rains  in  Ethiopia,  an  extremely  dry  aeason  theie 
and  in  Palestine  would  produoe  the  result  deecribed  in 
the  fuxred  nairatiye.  It  most  also  be  lecoUected  that 
Źgypt  waa  andently  the  granary  of  neighboiing  coun- 
tries,  and  that  a  famine  there  woold  cauae  fint  scarcity, 
and  then  famine,  aroond.  Famines  ara  not  very  unfre- 
qoent  in  the  history  of  Egypt;  but  the  famoua  eeven 
yean'  famine  in  the  reig^  of  the  Fatimite  Caliph  £1-  ^ 
Mnstanair-billah  is  the  only  known  parallel  to  that  of 
Joseph.  See  Famine.  Early  in  the  time  of  famine, 
Jo8eph'8  brethren  came  to  bay  oorn,  a  part  of  the  hia- 
tory  which  we  mention  here  only  as  indicaling  tbe  lib- 
CEral  policy  of  the  gOTemor  of  Egypt,  by  which  the  stora- 
houses  were  opened  U>  all  buyen,  of  whatever  naiion 
they  were. 

After  the  famine  had  lasted  for  a  time,  apparently  two 
years,  there  was  ^  no  bread  in  all  the  land ;  for  the  fam- 
ine [was]  yery  sora,  so  that  the  land  of  Egypt  and 
[all]  the  land  of  Canaan  fainted  by  raason  of  the  famine. 
And  Joseph  gathered  up  all  the  money  that  was  found 
in  the  land  of  Egypt,  and  in  the  land  of  Canaan,  for  the 
córa  which  they  booght ;  and  Joseph  brooght  the  moncy 
into  Pharsoh^s  house"*  (zlyii,  18,  14).  When  all  the 
money  of  Egypt  and  Canaan  was  exhausted,  barter  be- 
came  neoessaiy.  Joseph  then  obtained  all  the  cattle  of 
Egypt,  and  in  the  next  year,  all  the  land,  escept  that 
of  the  priests,  and  apparently,  as  a  oonseqaence,  the 
Egyptians  themselyes.  He  demanded,  however,  only  a 
fifth  part  of  the  produoe  as  Pharaoh's  right  It  has 
been  attempted  to  tracę  thia  enactment  of  Joseph  in  the 
fragments  of  Egyptian  histoiy  presenred  by  profana 
writers,  but  the  resolt  has  not  been  satisfactory.  £ven 
wera  the  latter  sources  trustworthy  as  to  the  early  pe- 
riod of  Egyptian  histoiry,  it  would  be  dililcult  to  deter- 
mine  the  age  referred  to,  as  the  actions  of  at  least  two 
kings  ara  ascribed  by  the  Greeks  to  Sesostris,  the  king 
particularized.  Herodotus  says  that,  according  to  the 
Egyptians,  Sesostris  **made  a  divisaon  of  the  soil  of 
Egypt  among  the  inhabitants,  assigning  square  plota  of 
ground  of  eqnal  size  to  all,  and  obtaining  his  chief  reve- 
nae  from  the  rent  which  the  hołden  were  required  to 
pay  him  every  year^  (ii,  109).  Ebewhere  he  speaks  of 
the  priests  as  haring  no  expen8es,  being  snpported  by 
the  property  of  the  temples  (ii,  87),  but  he  does  not  as- 
aign  to  Sewstris,  as  has  been  rashly  supposed,  the  ex- 
emption  linom  taxation  that  we  may  reasonaUy  infer. 
Diodorus  Siculus  ascribes  the  dirision  of  Egypt  into 
nomes  to  Sesostris,  whom  he  calls  Sesoósis.  Taking 
into  oonsideretion  the  generał  chaiacter  of  the  infor- 
roation  giren  by  Herodotus  respecting  the  histoiy  of 
Egypt  at  periods  remote  from  hii  own  time,  we  are  not 
Justified  in  supposing  anything  mora  than  that  some 
tradition  of  an  ancient  aUotment  of  the  soil  by  the  crown 
among  the  population  was  currant  when  he  visited 
the  country.  The  testimony  of  Diodorus  is  of  far  less 
weight. 

There  is  a  notice,  in  an  ancient  Egyptian  inscription, 
of  a  famine  which  has  been  suppoaed  to  be  that  of 
Joseph.  The  inscription  is  in  a  tomb  at  Benl  Hasan, 
and  records  of  Ameni,  a  goveraor  of  a  district  of  Upper 
Egypt,  that  when  there  were  years  of  famine,  his  dis- 
trict was  supplied  with  food.  This  was  in  the  time  of 
Sesertesen  I,  of  the  tweUUi  dynasty.  U  has  been  sup- 
posed by  Bunsen  {Egypta  Płace-  iii,  884)  that  this  must 
be  Joseph^s  famine ;  but  not  only  are  the  partlculars  of 
the  reoord  inapplicable  to  that  iustance,  but  the  calami- 
ty  it  relates  was  never  unusual  in  Egypt,  as  its  ancient 
inscriptions  and  modem  histoiy  eąually  testif}*. 

Joseph^s  policy  towards  the  subjects  of  Pharaoh  is 
important  in  reference^  to  forming  an  estiroate  of  his 
character.  It  displays'  the  resolution  and  breadth  of 
Tiew  that  mark  his  whole  career.  H  e  percei ved  a  great 
adrantage  to  be  gained,  and  he  lost  no  part  of  it.  He 
put  all  Egypt  nnder  Phaiaoh.    First  the  monę}*,  then 


the  cattle,  last  of  all  the  hmd,  and  the  Egyptians  them* 
selves,  became  the  property  of  the  soyereign,  and  that, 
too,  by  the  voluntary  act  of  the  people  without  any 
pressure.  This  being  eifected,  he  ezercised  a  great  act 
of  generosity,  and  required  only  a  fiflh  of  the  produoe 
as  a  reoognition  of  the  rights  of  the  crown.  Of  the  wis- 
dom  of  this  policy  there  can  be  no  doubt.  Its  Justice 
can  hardly  be  ąuestioned  when  it  is  borne  in  mind  that 
tbe  Egyptians  were  not  forcibly  deprived  of  their  lib- 
erties,  and  that  when  these  had  been  giyen  up  they  were 
at  ouce  restored.  We  do  not  know  all  the  circumstances  \ 
but  if,  as  we  may  reasonably  suppose,  the  people  were 
wamed  of  the  famine,  and  yet  madę  no  prepantion  dur- 
ing  the  years  of  orerflowing  abundance,  the  goveniment 
had  a  dear  daim  upon  its  subjects  for  having  taken  pre- 
cautions  they  had  neglected.  In  any  case  it  may  have 
been  desirable  to  make  a  new  allotment  of  land,  and  to 
reduoe  an  unequal  system  of  taxation  to  a  simple  claim 
to  a  fifth  of  the  produoe.  We  have  no  evidence  wheth- 
er  Joseph  were  in  this  matter  diirinely  aided,  but  we 
cannot  doubt  that  if  not  he  acted  in  aocord  with  a  judg- 
ment  of  great  clearaess  in  distinguishing  good  and  evil, 

4.  We  haye  now  to  consider  the  conduct  of  Joseph  at 
this  time  towards  his  brethren  and  his  father.  Early  in 
the  time  of  famine,  which  preyailed  equaUy  in  Canaan 
and  Egypt,  Jacob  reproyed  hia  helpless  sons  and  sent 
them  to  Egypt,  where  he  knew  there  was  com  to  be 
bought  Benjamin  alone  he  kept  with  him.  Joseph 
was  now  goyernor,  an  Egyptian  in  habits  and  speech, 
for  like  all  men  of  large  mind  he  had  suffered  no  scruples 
of  prejudice  to  make  him  a  stranger  to  the  pegple  he 
ruled.  In  his  exalted  station  he  labored  with  the  zeal 
that  he  showed  in  all  his  yarious  charges,  presiding 
himself  at  the  sale  of  corn.  They  had,  of  necessity,  to 
appear  before  Joseph,  whose  lioense  for  the  purchase  of 
córa  was  indispensaUe.  Joseph  had  probably  expected 
to  see  them,  and  he  seems  to  haye  foraied  a  deliberate 
plan  of  action.  His  condnct  has  brought  on  him  the  ai- 
ways  ready  charges  of  thoee  who  would  rathcr  impeach 
than  study  the  Bibie,  and  eyen  firiends  of  that  sacred 
book  haye  hardly  in  this  case  done  Joseph  fuU  justice 
(Niemeyer,  Charakt,  ii,  366;  Heuser,  DtM,  non  inhumam- 
ter  8ed  pruilenti$ńtne  Jo$epkum  cum  fratribut  feciste. 
Hal  1778).  Joseph'8  main  object  appeais  to  haye  been 
to  make  his  brothers  feel  and  recognise  their  guilt  in 
their  conduct  towards  him.  For  this  puq)ose  sulTering, 
then  as  well  as  now,  was  indispeusable.  Accorduigly, 
Joseph  feigned  not  to  know  his  brothers,  charged  them 
with  being  spies,  threatened  them  with  imprisonment, 
and  allowed  them  to  retura  home  to  fetch  their  youn- 
ger  brother,  as  a  proof  of  their  yeracity,  only  on  coudition 
that  one  of  them  should  remain  behind  in  chains,  with 
a  prospect  of  death  before  him  should  not  their  words 
be  yerifled.  Then  it  was,  and  not  before,  that  ^  they 
said  one  to  another,We  are  yerily  guilty  conceraing  our 
brother,  in  that  we  saw  the  anguish  of  his  soul  and 
would  not  hear«  therefore  is  this  distress  come  upon  us. 
And  Reuben  said,  Spake  I  not  unto  you,  saying,  Do  not 
sin  against  the  child,  and  ye  would  not  hear?  therefore, 
behold,  also  his  blood  is  required*'  (xlii,  21).  Upon  this, 
after  weeping  bitterly,  he  by  oommon  agrecment  bound 
his  brother  Simcon,  and  left  him  in  custody.  How 
deeply  oonceraed  Joseph  was  for  his  family,  how  tnie 
and  affectionate  a  heart  he  had,  may  be  learaed  from 
the  words  which  escape  from  the  brothers  in  their  en- 
treaty  that  Jacob  would  allow  Benjamin  to  go  into 
Egypt,  as  required  by  Joseph:  **The  man  asked  us 
streitly  of  our  state  and  of  our  kindred,  saying,  Is  your 
father  yet  aliye?  haye  ye  another  brother?"  (xliii,  7). 

At  length  Jacob  oonsents  to  Benjamin's  going  in  com- 
pany with  his  brothers:  "And  God  Almighty  giye  you 
mercy  before  the  mau,  that  he  may  send  away  your  oth- 
er brother  and  Benjamin.  If  I  be  bereayed  of  my  chil^ 
dren,  I  am  bereayed"  (yer.  14).  Thus  proyided,  with  a 
present  consisting  of  balm,  honey,  spices,  and  myrrh, 
nuta  and  almonds,  and  with  double  money  in  their 
hands  (double,  in  order  that  they  might  repay  the  sum 


JOSEPH 


1016 


JOSEPH 


which  Joseph  had  caosed  to  be  put  into  «ach  man*8 
sack  at  their  departure,  if,  aa  Jaoob  8i]ppo0ed,*'it  was 
an  oyenight"),  Łbey  weot  again  down  to  Egypt  and 
stood  before  Joseph  (zliii,  15);  and  Łhere,  too,  stood 
Benjamin,  Jo8eph'8  beloved  brother.  The  requirad 
pledge  of  tnithfahiesB  was  giren.  If  it  is  aaked  why 
such  a  pledge  was  demanded,  sińce  the  giring  of  it 
cansed  pain  to  Jaoob,  the  answer  may  be  thus:  Joseph 
knew  not  how  to  demean  himself  towaids  his  family 
until  he  ascertained  its  actoal  oondition.  That  knowl- 
edge  he  coold  haidly  be  ceitain  he  had  gained  ftom 
the  mera  words  of  men  who  had  spared  his  life  only  to 
sell  himself  into  sUrery.  How  had  these  wicked  men 
behared  towazds  his  ▼eneraUe  fi&ther?  His  belored 
brother  Benjamin,  was  he  safe  ?  or  had  he  suffered  from 
their  jealousy  and  malice  the  worse  fate  with  which  he 
himself  had  been  threatened?  Nothing  bnt  the  sight 
of  Benjamin  oould  answer  these  ąnestiona  and  iesolve 
these  details. 

Benjamin  had  oome,  and  immediately  a  natoral  change 
took  place  in  Joseph's  condact ;  the  brother  began  to 
daim  his  rights  in  Jo6eph's  bosom.  Jaoob  was  safe, 
and  Benjamin  was  safe.  Joseph*s  heart  melted  at  the 
sight  of  Benjamin:  **And  he  said  to  the  ruler  of  his 
hoose,  Bring  these  men  home,  and  slay  and  make  ready, 
for  these  men  shall  dine  with  me  at  noon"  (xliii,  16). 
But  guilt  is  always  the  ready  parent  of  fear;  acoord- 
ingly,  the  brothers  expected  nothing  but  being  rednoed 
to  slarery.  When  taken  to  their  own  bn>ther's  honse, 
they  imagined  they  were  being  entrapped.  A  colioqay 
ensaed  between  them  and  Jo8eph's  steward,  whenoe  it 
appeared  that  the  money  pat  into  their  sacks,  to  which 
they  now  attributed  their  peril,  was  in  tmth  a  present 
from  Joseph,  designed,  after  his  own  brotherly  manner, 
to  aid  his  family  in  their  actoal  necessities.  The  stew> 
ard  said, "  Peace  be  to  you;  fear  not;  yoor  God  and  the 
€rod  of  your  father  hath  given  yon  the  treasure  in  your 
sacks.     I  had  your  money"  (ver.  28). 

Noon  came,  and  with  it  Joseph,  whose  firrt  ąnestion 
regarded  home :  *^  He  asked  them  of  their  welfare,  and 
said,  Is  your  father  well,  the  old  man  of  whom  ye  spake  ? 
is  he  yet  aliye  ?  And  he  lifted  up  his  eyes  and  saw  his 
brother  Benjamin,  his  mother's  son,  and  said,  Is  thls 
your  younger  brother?  And  he  said,  (>od  be  gracious 
unto  thee,  my  son  !'*  ''And  Joseph  madę  hastę,  for  his 
bowels  did  yeam  upon  his  brother,  and  he  sought  where 
to  weep ;  and  he  entered  into  his  chamber,  and  wept 
there."     Does  thislook  like  harshncss? 

The  connection  brings  into  view  an  Egyptian  ctis- 
tom,  which  is  of  morę  than  ordinary  unportance,  in  oon- 
seqaence  of  its  being  adopted  in  the  Jewish  polity: 
**  And  they  set  on  (food)  for  him  by  himself  (Joseph), 
and  far  them  by  themselves  (the  brethren),  and  for  the 
Egyptians  which  did  eat  with  them,  by  themselyes :  be- 
cause  the  E<]7ptians  might  not  eat  bread  with  the  He- 
brews;  for  that  is  an  abomination  vrith  the  Egyptians" 
(ver.  82).  This  passage  is  also  interesting,  as  proving 
ihat  Joseph  had  not,  in  his  princely  grandeur,  beoome 
ashamed  of  his  origin,  nor  consented  to  receive  adoption 
into  a  ntrange  nation :  he  was  still'a  Hebrew,  waiting, 
like  Moses  after  him,  for  the  proper  season  to  nse  his 
power  for  the  good  of  his  own  people. 

Other  customs  appear  in  this  iuteresting  narrative : 
**  And  they  (the  brothers)  sat  before  him  (Joseph),  the 
first-hom  according  to  kit  birłhHghł^  and  the  youngest 
according  to  his  youth."  *' And  he  sent  messes  (delica- 
des)  unto  them  from  before  him ;  but  Benjamin*s  mess 
was  five  times  so  much  as  any  of  theiis"  (ver.  82, 88). 
Fear  had  now  giren  place  to  wonder,  and  wonder  at 
length  issued  in  joy  and  mirth  (comp.  yer.  18,  88, 84). 
The  scenes  of  the  Egyptian  tombs  show  us  that  it  was 
the  custom  for  each  person  to  eat  singly,  particularly  i 
among  the  great ;  that  gnests  were  plac^  according  to 
their  right  of  prccedence,  and  that  it  was  usual  to  drink 
freely,  men  and  eyen  women  being  represented  as  oyer- 
powered  with  winę,  probably  as  an  e^ńdenoe  of  the  Ub- 
«iality  of  the  entertainer.     See  Bam^uei; 


Joeeph,  apparently  with  a  Tiew  to  aacyHatin  how  ikr 
his  brethren  were  futhful  to  their  father,  hit  opon  a 
plan  which  woold  in  its  issne  aerye  to  show  whetba 
they  woold  make  any,  and  wbat  sacrifiee,  in  otder  to 
fulffl  their  Bolenm  prooiise  ofrestoring  Benjamin  in  aafe- 
ty  to  Jacoh.  Aocordingly,  he  oideEs  not  only  that  erciy 
man's  money  (as  befoce)  shoold  be  pot  in  his  sadc*s 
mouth,  bot  also  that  his  ''ailyer  cup,  in  which  my  loid 
drinketh,  and  whereby  he  diyineth,"  shoold  be  pot  in 
the  sack's  month  of  the  youigest.  The  brethi«n  lesre, 
^  but  are  soon  oyertaken  by  Joeeph's  steward,  who  charges 
them  with  haying  surreptitioody  cairied  off  this  ooatlj 
and  highly-yalued  yeascL  They,  on  their  party  rehe- 
mently  repel  the  aocusation,  adding,  *'  with  whoaiaoever 
of  thy  serranta  it  be  foond,  both  let  him  die,  and  w« 
also  will  be  my  lord  s  bondmen."  A  aeaich  is  madę, 
and  the  cup  is  foond  in  Benjamin's  sadc  AooocdinglT 
they  return  to  the  city.  And  now  comes  the  hoor  of 
trial :  Would  they  puichase  their  own  libenttion  by  sor- 
rendering  Benjamin  ?  After  a  most  touching  interriew, 
in  which  they  proye  themselyes  worthy  and  fiuthlb], 
Joseph  dedares  himself  onable  any  longer  to  withstand 
the  appeal  of  natoral  aflbction.  On  this  occasum  Jo- 
dah,  who  is  the  spokesman,  shows  the  deepeet  regaid  to 
his  aged  father^s  feelings,  and  entieats  for  the  Uberation 
of  Benjamin  eyen  at  the  price  of  his  own  liberty.  In 
the  whole  of  litentore  we  know  of  nothing  more  sim- 
ple,  natund,  troe,  and  impressiye;  nor,  while  paswiges 
of  this  kind  stand  in  the  Psntateoeh,  ean  we  eyen  on- 
derstand  wbat  is  meant  by  terming  that  coOectioo  of 
wtitings  '*  the  Hebrew  national  epic,"  or  leganiing  it  as 
an  aggregation  of  historical  legends.  If  here  we  have 
not  hLstoiy,  we  can  in  no  caaebe  sore  thathistoty  is  be- 
fore us  (chap.  xliy). 

Most  natoral  and  impressiye  is  the  scenę  also  whidi 
ensoes,  in  which  Joseph,  after  Informing  his  brethren 
who  he  was,  and  -inqoiring,  ibnst  of  all,  **  Is  my  fiitber 
aliye?"  expre9nes  feelings  free  from  the  slightest  taint 
of  reyenge,  and  eyen  shows  how,  under  diyine  Pkoyi- 
dence.  the  oonduct  of  his  Inothers  had  issoed  in  good — 
''God  sent  me  before  yoo  to  preserye  a  poeteti^  in  the 
earth,  and  to  saye  your  liyes  by  a  great  ddiyennoe.* 
Fiye  years  had  yet  to  ensoe  in  which  "there  woold  be 
neither  earing  nor  haryest,"  and  therefore  the  bnilacn 
were  directed  to  return  home  and  bring  Jaoob  down  to 
Egypt  with  all  speed.  "  And  he  feU  opon  his  brother 
Benjamin's  neck  and  wept;  and  Benjamin  wept  opon 
his  neck.  Moreoyer,  he  kissed  all  his  brethren  and 
wept  upon  them;  and  after  that  his  brethren  taikcd 
with  him"  (xly,  14, 16). 

The  news  of  these  striking  eycnts  was  oanied  to  Pha- 
rsoh,  who,  bdng  pleased  at  Joseph*s  condoct,  gsre  direo- 
tions  that  Jacob  and  his  fiunUy  shoold  oome  foithwith 
into  Egypt :  *'  I  will  giye  yoo  the  good  of  the  land  of 
Egypt,  and  ye  shall  eat  the  fat  of  the  land ;  regard  not 
yoiir  stuif,  for  the  good  of  all  the  land  ia  ywan,"  The 
brethren  departed,  bdng  wdl  prorided  for :  "  And  to  his 
father  Joseph  sent  ten  asses  laden  with  the  good  things 
of  Egypt,  and  ten  she-asses  laden  with  com,  and  bread, 
and  meat  for  his  father  by  the  way."  The  intdligcnoe 
which  they  borę  to  their  ihther  was  of  soch  a  natoie 
that  "  Jaoob*s  heart  fatnted,  for  he  belieyed  them  noL" 
When,  howeyer,  he  had  reoorered  ftmn  the  thos  nati^ 
rally  told  eflfects  of  his  sorprise,the  renerahle  psitriardi 
said, " Enough ;  Joseph,  my  son,  is  3ret  afiye:  I  will  go 
and  see  him  before  I  die"  (xly,  26, 28).  Acoordin|i^y  Ja- 
cob and  his  family,  to  the  nnmber  of  threesoors  and  ten 
sools,  go  down  to  Egypt,  and  by  the  expree8  eflbits  cf 
Joseph,  are  aUowed  to  settle  in  the  distrkt  of  Gosken, 
where  Joseph  met  his  father:  "And  he  fell  on  his  nsdc, 
and  wept  on  his  neck  a  good  while."  There  Joseph 
"  nouriahed  his  father  and  his  brethren,  and  all  his  £i- 
ther's  household,  with  bread,  according  to  their  fimi- 
Ues"  (xlyii,  12).     &a  1874. 

6.  Joseph  had  now  to  pass  tfaroogh  the  moomfnl 
scenes  which  attend  on  the  death  and  borial  of  a  ftther 
(Gen.l,l-21>    aClSM.   Hmying  had  Jaoob  i 


JOSEPH 


1017 


JOSEPH 


«d,  ind  seen  the  rites  of  nioaraiiig  faUy  obflenred,  the 
£uthfal  and  aflfectionate  son— leave  being  obtained  of 
the  mooaich— piooeeded  into  the  land  of  Canaan,  in  or- 
der, agreeaUy  to  a  promiBe  which  the  patriarch  had  ex- 
acted  (Gen.  zlvii,  29-^1),  to  lay  the  old  man'8  bones  with 
thoae  of  hia  fiithen,  in  *Hhe  field  of  Ephion  the  Hit- 
tite."  Haying  performed  with  long  and  bitter  mourn- 
ing  Jacob'8  fhneral  riteą  Joseph  letoroed  into  Egypt 
The  last  reoorded  act  of  his  life  fonns  a  most  becoming 
dose.  Alter  the  death  of  their  father,  his  brethien,  un- 
abłe,  Uke  all  g^iity  people,  to  forget  their  criminality, 
and  characteristicaUj  fiiiding  it  difficult  to  thińk  that 
Joseph  had  really  fofgiren  them,  grew  afraid,  now  they 
.  were  in  his  power,  that  he  woold  take  an  opportunity  of 
inflicting  some  ponishment  on  them.  They  according- 
ly  go  into  his  presence,  and  in  impkmng  terms  and  an 
abject  manner  entieat  his  foigiyeness.  **Fear  not" — 
thii  is  his  noUe  reply— *<  I  will  nouiish  you  and  your 
littleones." 

ft.  By  his  Egypdan  wife  Aaenath,  daughter  of  the 
high-priest  of  Heliopolis,  Joseph  had  two  sons,  Manas- 
seh  and  Ephraim  (Gen.  xli,  60  sq.),  whom  Jaoob  adopt- 
ed  (xlviii,  5),  and  who  accordingly  took  their  place 
among  the  heads  of  the  t¥relve  tribes  of  laraeL 

Joseph*  lived  a  hundred  and  ten  yeais,  kind  and  gen- 
tle  in  his  affections  to  the  last;  for  we  aze  told,  '*The 
childien  of  Machir,  the  son  of  Manasseh,  were  brooght 
np  upon  Joeeph*8  knees"  (1,  23).  Having  obtaued  a 
promise  fiom  his  brethren  that  when  the  time  came,  as 
he  assnied  them  it  woold  come,  that  God  should  yisit 
them,  and  **  biing  them  unto  the  Und  which  he  sware 
to  Abraham,  to  Isaac,  and  to  Jacob,"  they  would  cany 
up  his  bones  oat  of  Egypt,  Joseph  at  kngth  "  died,  and 
they  embalmed  him,  and  he  was  pat  in  a  ooffin"  (1, 26). 
Ra  1802.  This  promise  was  religiooaly  fulfilled.  His 
deeoendantfl^  after  canying  the  corpee  about  with  them 


"  JoMph*8  Tomb.** 


in  their  wanderings,  at  length  pat  it  in  its  finał  resting* 
place  in  Shechem,  in  a  parcel  of  ground  that  Jacob 
bought  of  the  sons  of  Hamor,  which  became  the  inheri- 
tanoe  of  the  children  of  Joseph  (Josh.  xxiv,  32).  A  tomb 
which  probably  represents  the  same  spot  is  still  shown 
to  traveUer8  in  the  yicinity  of  Jacob'B  Weil  (Hackett'8 
lUustraiiotUf  p.  197).  It  is  a  flat^roofed  rectangular 
building  surmounted  by  a  dome,  uuder  which  ia  pointed 
out  the  leal  tomb,  in  shape  like  a  coyered  wagon  (Wil- 
son, Bibie  LcmdSt  ii,  60). 

The  history  of  Joeeph^s  posterity  is  g^yen  in  the  arti- 
des  devoted  to  the  tribes  of  Ephbaim  and  Manasseh. 
Sometimes  these  tńbes  are  spoken  of  onder  tbe  name  of 
Joseph  (Josh.  xiv,  4 ;  xvii,  14, 17 ;  xvLii,  5 ;  Judg.  i,  28, 
85,  etc.),  which  is  even  given  to  the  whole  Israelitish  na- 
tion  (Psa.  lxxx,  1 ;  lxxxi,  6 ;  Amos  v,  15 ;  vi,  6).  Ephra- 
im is,  howeyer,  the  oommon  name  of  his  descendants, 
for  the  diyisioD  of  Manasseh  gave  almost  the  whole  po- 
litical  weight  to  the  brother-tńbe  (Psa.  lxxviii,  67; 
Ezek.  xxxvii,  16, 19;  Zech.  x,  6).  That  gruit  people 
seems  to  have  inherited  all  Joseph*s  ability  with  iione 
of  hia  goodness,  and  the  very  knowledge  of  bis  power  in 
Eg3rpt,  instead  of  stimulating  his  offspring  to  follow  in 
his  steps,  appears  only  to  have  constantly  drawn  them 
into  a  hankering  after  that  forbiddeu  land  which  began 
when  Jeroboam  iutroduoed  the  calyes,  and  ended  only 
when  a  treasonable  alliance  laid  Samaria  in  ruina  and 
sent  the  ten  tribes  into  captivity. 

7.  The  chaiacter  of  Joseph  is  wholly  composed  of 
great  materials,  and  therefore  needs  not  to  be  minutely 
portrayed.  We  tnce  in  it  very  little  of  that  balance  o^ 
good  and  evil,  of  strength  and  weakness,  that  marks 
most  things  human,  and  do  not  anywhere  distinctly  dia- 
cover  the  results  of  the  oonflict  of  motives  that  generally 
occasions  such  great  difficulty  in  judging  men's  actions. 
We  have  as  fuli  an  acoount  of  Joseph  as  of  Abraham 
and  Jaoob,  a  fuller  one  than  of  Isaac ;  and  if  we  oompare 
their  histories,  Joseph*B  character  is  the  ieast  marked 
by  wTong  or  indedsion.  His  first  quality  seems  to  have 
been  the  greatest  resolution.  He  not  only  believed 
faithfuUy,  but  could  endure  patiently,  and  could  com- 
mand  equally  his  good  and  evU  paasions.  Hence  his 
strong  senae  of  daty,  his  zealous  work,  hb  strict  juatice, 
hia  dear  diacrimination  of  good  and  evil.  Like  all  men 
of  yigorous  character,  he  loved  power,  but  when  he  had 
gained  it  he  used  it  with  the  greatest  generosity.  He 
seems  to  have  8triven  to  get  men  unoonditionally  in  his 
power  that  he  might  be  the  meana  of  good  to  them. 
Grenerosity  in  conferring  benefita,  as  wdl  aa  in  forgiv- 
ing  injuriea,  ia  one  of  hia  diatinguiahing  characteristics. 
With  thia  atrength  waa  united  the  deepeat  tendemess. 
He  waa  eaaily  moved  to  tears,  even  weeping  at  the  firat 
aight  of  hia  brethren  after  they  had  aold  him.  Hia  love 
for  hia  father  and  Benjamin  waa  not  enfeebled  by  years 
of  separation,  nor  by  hia  great  atation.  The  wiae  man 
was  atill  the  aame  aa  the  tnie  youth.  These  great  qual- 
ities  explain  hia  power  of  goreming  and  adminiatcring, 
and  hia  extniordinary  fiexibility,  which  enabled  him  to 
suit  himsdf  to  each  new  poeition  in  life.  The  last  trait 
to  make  up  thia  great  character  waa  modesty,  the  natu- 
ral  result  of  the  othera. 

In  the  hiatory  of  the  choaen  race  Joseph  occupies  a 
very  high  place  aa  an  instrument  of  Providence.  He 
waa  "aent  before"  hia  people,  aa  he  himaelf  knew,  to 
preseire  them  in  the  terrible  famine,  and  to  aettle  them 
where  they  could  multiply  and  proaper  in  the  intenrai 
before  the  iniquity  of  the  Canaanitea  waa  fuU.  In  the 
latter  daya  of  Joaeph*a  life,  he  ia  tbe  leading  character 
among  the  Hebrews.  He  makes  hia  father  come  into 
Egrpt,  and  directs  the  settlement  He  proteccs  his 
kinsmen.  Dying,  he  reminds  them'  of  the  promise, 
charging  them  to  take  hia  bones  with  them.  Blessed 
with  many  reyeladons,  he  ia  throughout  a  God-taught 
leader  of  hia  people.  In  the  N.  T.  Joseph  ia  only  men- 
tioned ;  yet  the  atriking  particulars  of  the  peraecution 
and  aale  by  hia  brethren,  hia  reaiating  temptation,  his 
great  degradation  and  yet  greater  eTaltatinn,  the  saving 


JOSEPH 


1018 


JOSEPH 


of  hu  people  hy  his  hand,  and  the  oonfoimding  of  his 
enemies,  seem  to  indicate  that  he  was  a  typ«  of  car 
Lord.  He  aiso  coimects  Łhe  Fktiiarchal  with  the  Gos- 
pel dispensation,  as  an  instance  of  ^the  esercise  of  some 
of  the  highest  Christian  yiitnes  under  the  less  distinct 
manifestation  of  the  divine  wiU  gnutted  to  the  fathers. 
— Kitto;  Smith. 

8.  For  further  discuasion  of  the  events  of  Joseph^s 
history,  see  Wolfenb.  Fragment,  p.  36;  Less,  Getekicktf 
der  Rei  iy  267 ;  J.  T.  Jacobi,  SdmmtL  Sckrift.  part  8 ; 
Hess,  Geach,  der  Patriarch,  ii,  824 ;  Niemeyer,  Charakt, 
ii,  840 ;  A  Ugem,  Welthut,  ii,  832 ;  Heeien,  Idem,  ii,  661 ; 
Jabłoński,  Opusc,  i,  207;  Gesenius,  Thes.  Htbr,  p.  1181 ; 
Hammer,  D.  Oaman,  Reich,  ii,  88  -,  Hengstenbeig,  Mos, 
und  jEg,  p.  30 ;  J.  R  Barcardi,  in  the  Mru,  Heh,  I,  iii, 
855;  Yoigt,  in  the  Brem,  und  terd,  BibUoth.  t,  699; 
Bauer,  Heb,  Gesch,  i,  181 ;  Ewald,  /«r.  GescK  i,  464 ;  Do- 
derlein,  Theol.  BibUoth,  iv,  717;  KosenmUller,  AUerih. 
iii,  310 ;  Lengcrke,  Kendan,  i,  263 ;  Otho,  Lex.  Rabb.  p. 
831 ;  Herbelot,  Bibl,  Orient,  ii,  332;  Kitto,  Daily  Bibie 
JUust, ;  Kurtz,  IJisł.  ofthe  Ołd  Corenant;  Stanley,  fJist. 
o/ the  Jewish  Church ;  Aibunaon,  Joseph  and hia  Brethren 
(Lond.  1844) ;  Edelman,  Sermont  on  the  Ilist,  o/ Joseph 
(LoncL  1839);  Lcighton,  f^ectures  on  Iłitł,  of  J,  (Lond. 
1848);  Plumptre,//w/.o//o9fpA(Lond.l848);  Randall, 
jActures  on  I/isf.  ofj.  (Lond.  1852) ;  Wardlaw,  ffiat,  of 
Joseph  (new  ed.  Lond.  1851);  Gibson,  Lectures  on  Ilist. 
o/J.  (Lond.  1853) ;  Overton,  Lectures  on  Life  o/ Joseph 
(London,  1866).  Treatises  on  special  pointa  are  the  fol- 
lowing :  Hoppe,  De  phiiosophia  Josephi  (Helmst.  1706) ; 
A  Review  of  the  Life  and  Administratinn  of  Joseph 
(London,  1743) ;  J.  li.  Burckhard,  De  criminibus  Josepho 
impactis  (Basil.  1746) ;  Ansaldus,  Josephi  reUgio  rhKH" 
cała  (Brix.  1747) ;  Trigland,  De  Josepho  adorato  (L.  B. 
1750) ;  Winkler,  Unters.  einiger  Schwierigk,  tom  Jos,  (in 
his  Schrifstellery  iii,  1) ;  Heuser,  iJe  non  inhmnaniter  Jo- 
tephum  fecisse  (Halle,  1773);  KUchler,  Quare  Josephus 
patrem  non  de  se  certioremfecej-it  (Leucop.  1798);  Nic- 
olai, De  serris  Josephi  medicis  (Helmst.  1762) ;  Piderib, 
De  nomine  Josephi  in  M-Eggpto  (Martx  1768-9);  Reinec- 
cius,  De  nomine  nsrB  ńśfi^  (Weisacnf.  1725);  Schro- 
der,  De  Josephi  laudibus  (in  Schdnfelrt'8  Vita  Jacobi, 
Marb.  1713) ;  Von  Seelen,  De  Josepho  jEgyptiorum  rec^ 
tore  (Lub,  1 7-42) ;  T.  Smith,  Ilist.  of  Joseph  in  comiec- 
tion  triM  Kg,  AntiguUies  (Lond.  1858);  Walter,  De  Jo- 
sepho lapide  Israells  (Hersf.  17:M);  Wunschald,  De  cog- 
nomine  Josephi  jEgypHuco  (Wlttenb.  1669).     See  Ja- 

COB. 

2.  The  father  of  Igal,  which  Utter  was  the  Issachar- 
ite  "  spy"  to  explore  Caiiaan  (Numb.  xiii,  7).  B.C.  antę 
1657. 

3.  The  sccond  named  of  the  sons  of  Asaph,  appotnted 
head  of  the  tirst  division  of  sacred  musicians  by  David 
(I  Chroń,  xxv,  2,  9).     B.C.  1014. 

4.  The  8on  of  Jonan,  and  father  of  Jadah  or  Adaiah, 
among  Clirist's  matemal  ancestors,  but  unmeńtioned  in. 
the  O.  T.  (Lukę  iii,  30).     B.C.  antę  876. 

5.  Son  of  Shebaniah,  and  one  ofthe  chief  priests  con- 
temporary  with  Jchuiokim  (Neh.  xii,  14).  B.C.  poet 
536. 

6.  One  ofthe  ''aons"  of  Bani  who  divorced  his  Gen- 
tile  wife  after  the  exile  (Kzra  x,  42).     B.C.  459. 

7.  The  son  of  Judah,  and  father  of  Semei,  matemal 
ancestors  of  Jesus  (Lukę  iii,  26) ;  probably  the  same 
with  ScHECHANiAii,  the  son  of  Obadiah,  and  father  of 
Shemaiah  (1  Chroń,  iii,  21,  92).  B.C.  betwceu  536  and 
410. 

8.  The  son  of  Mattathiah,  and  father  of  Janna,  ma- 
ternal  ancestors  of  Christ,  unmeńtioned  in  the  Old  Test. 
(Lukę  iii,  24).  B.C.  considcrably  post  406.  See  on  this 
and  Nos.  4  and  7,  (iESEALOGY  of  Jesus  Christ. 

9.  ('Iui(T/y0.)  Son  of  Dziel,  and  father  of  On,  an  an- 
cestor  of  Judith  (Judith  viii^  1). 

10.  A  young  man  of  high  character,  son  of  Tobias, 
and  nephew  of  the  Jewish  high-priest  Onias  II,  whnse 
ayaricc  he  rebuked,  but  prevented  its  ctU  conseąuences 


by  propitiating  Ptolemy,  and  beooming  the  collector  of 
his  tazes.  His  histoiy  is  giTen  at  conńderable  kngth 
by  Josephus  {Ani,  xii,  4,  2-10),  including  his  muntCD- 
tional  marriag«  with  his  own  nieoe,  by  wbom  be  had  a 
son  named  Hyrcaniis. 

11.  (Im^oc.)  Son  of  Zurhariaa,  left  with  Asartai 
as  generał  of  the  Jewish  troopa  by  Jodas  Maccabmia, 
and  defeated  by  Goigias,  &C  dr.  164  (1  Mace.  f,8,56, 
60 ;  Josephus,  Ant,  xii,  8, 6). 

12.  ('lfllioi7voc.)  In  2  Maoc  viii,  22;  X,  19,  Joseiih 
is  named  among  the  brethren  of  Jndas  Maccabceus  ap- 
parently  in  place  of  Johm  (Ewald,  Gestk,  ir,  384,  notę ; 
Grimm,  ad  2  Mace  viti,  22).  The  confnsion  of  'Imaih' 
pifę,  'Itsfni^,  'IdMT^c  ^  w^  n^n  in  the  yaiiona  rcadingi 
in  Matt  xiii,  55.    See  Josaa. 

13.  Unde  of  Herod  the  Great,  who  left  him  in  cfaazge 
when  he  went  to  plead  his  cause  before  Antony,  with 
injunctions  to  pat  Mariamne  to  death  in  case  he  nevcr 
retumed ;  bat  this  order,  being  diadosed  to  Mariamne, 
led  to  Joseph*s  death  by  command  of  Herod  thioągh 
suspicion  of  criminal  inteicoane  with  Mariamne  (Jose- 
phus, Ant,  XV,  6,  6, 9).  He  had  manied  Salome,  Hcr- 
od*s  sister  (  War,  i,  22,4).  He  seems  to  be  the  same 
elsewhere  called  Herod*s  ticasurer  (rapiac,  A  nt„  xt,  6i,  5). 

14.  Son  of  Antipater,  and  brothcr  of  Herod  the  Great 
(Josephus,  War,  i,  8,  9),  was  sent  by  the  latter  with  a 
large  force  to  subdue  the  Idanueaua  {Ant.  xiv,  16. 4X 
and  afterwards  left  by  him  in  Jerasalem  with  fuli  pow- 
ers  to  act  on  the  defen8ive  against  Macheras,  neglecting 
which  orders  he  lost  his  life  in  an  engagement  near  Jer- 
icho  (  War,  i,  17, 1-4).  He  also  had  a  son  named  Jo- 
seph (^Ant,  xviii,  6,4),  who  seems  to  be  the  one  mcaB- 
tioned  as  oousin  (dvci^óc)  of  Archelaos  (  War,  ii,  5, 2). 

15.  Son  of  EUemus,  a  relatiye  of  the  high-priest 
Matthias,  in  whoee  place  he  offidated  for  a  single  day 
(apparenUy  that  of  the  annnalatonement),  in  coose- 
quence  of  the  accidental  disąualification  of  the  pontiff 
(Josephus,  Ant,  xvii,  6, 4). 

16.  The  foeter-father  of  our  Saviour,  being  ^  the  hus- 
band  of  Maiy,  of  whom  was  bom  Jesus,  who  is  called 
Christ"  (Matt.  i,  16).  By  Matthew  he  ia  said  to  have 
been  the  son  of  Jacob,  whose  lineage  is  tiaoed  by  the 
same  writer  throogh  David  up  to  Abraham.  Lukę  lep- 
resents  him  as  being  the  son  of  Heli,  and  traces  his  oń- 
gin  up  to  Adam.  Lukę  appears  to  have  had  some  tpe- 
cific  object  in  view,  sińce  he  introduces  his  genealogical 
Une  with  words  of  peculiar  import:  "Jesus  being  (as 
was  supposed)  the  son  of  Joseph,  which  was  the  son  of 
Heli"  (Lukę  iii,  28) — itc  mpititro,  **  as  was  supposed," 
in  other  terms,  as  accounted  by  law,  as  enroUed  in  the 
family  registers ;  for  Joseph  being  the  husband  of  Maiy, 
became  thereby,  in  law  (vó/foc),  the  father  of  Jesus. 
See  Genealog Y  op  Jesus  Christ.  He  lived  at  Naz- 
areth,  in  Galilee  (Lukę  ii,  4),  and  it  is  probable  that  his 
family  had  been  settled  there  for  some  time,  ainoe  Mary 
lived  there  too  (Lukę  i,  26, 27). 

The  fltatements  of  Holy  Writ  in  regard  to  Joseph  are 
few  and  simple.  Acoording  to  a  custom  among  the 
Jews,  traces  of  which  are  still  foond,  soch  as  hand^ast- 
ing  among  the  Scotch,  and  betrothing  among  the  Ger- 
mans,  Joseph  had  pledged  his  iaith  to  Mary:  but  belore 
the  marriage  was  oonsummated  she  proved  to  be  with 
chlld.  Grieved  at  this,  Joseph  was  disposed  to  break 
off  the  oonnect^on ;  but,  not  wishing  to  make  a  public 
example  of  one  whom  he  loved,  he  contemplated  a  pń- 
vate  disruption  of  their  hond.  .From  this  step,  howev- 
er,  he  is  doterred  by  a  heaveilly  measenger,  who  asBuro 
him  that  Mary  bas  conceived  under  a  divine  influence. 
"  And  she  shall  bring  forth  a  son,  and  thoa  shalt  cali 
his  name  Jesus ;  for  he  shall  Bave  his  people  from  their 
sins"  (Matu  i,  18  sq. ;  Lukę  i,  27).  It  must  hare  been 
within  a  very  short  time  of  his  taking  ber  to  his  hone 
that  the  decree  went  forth  from  Augustus  Cnsar  which 
obliged  him  to  leavc  Nazareth  with  his  wifc  and  go  to 
Bethlehem.  He  was  there  with  Maiy  and 'ber  fint- 
lM>m  when  the  shepherds  came  to  see  the  babę  in  the 
manger,  and  he  went  with  them  to  the  Tempie  to  pie- 


JOSEPH 


1019 


JOSEPH 


aent  tbe  infant  acconting  to  the  law,  and  there  heard 
the  prophetic  words  of  Simeon  aa  he  held  him  in  bis 
anoB.  When  the  wise  men  trom  the  Eaat  came  to  Beth- 
lehem  to  wonhip  Christ,  Joaeph  waa  there ;  and  he  went 
down  to  Egypt  with  them  by  night,  when  warned  by 
an  angel  of  the  dsnger  which  threatened  them ;  and  on 
a  second  message  he  retumed  with  them  to  the  land  of 
Israel,  intending  to  raaide  at  Bethlehem,  the  city  of  Da- 
rid;  but,being  afraid  of  Archelaus,  he  took  up  his  abode, 
as  before  his  manriage,  at  Nazareth,  where  he  canied  on 
his  trade  as  a  carpenter.  When  Jesus  was  twelve  years 
old  Joseph  and  Mary  took  him  with  them  to  keep  the 
Paaaorer  at  Jerusaiem,  and  when  they  retumed  to  Naz- 
areth  he  continued  to  act  as  a  father  to  the  child  Jesus, 
and  was  always  reputed  to  be  so  indeed. 

Joseph  was  by  trade  a  carpenter,  in  which  business 
he  probably  educated  Jesus  (Thilo,  Apocr,  i,  811).  In 
Matt  xiii,  65,  we  read,  **l8  not  this  the  son  of  the  car- 
penter?" and  in  Mark  vi,  8,  *'Is  not  this  the  carpenter, 
the  son  of  Mary?'*  The  term  employed,  r(cra;v,  is  of 
a  generał  character,  and  may  be  Htiy  rendered  by  the 
English  word  artificer  or  artizan,  signifying  any  one 
that  labors  in  the  yh^ńcation  {faber  in  Latin)  of  arti- 
des  of  ordinary  use,  whatever  the  materiał  may  be  out 
of  which  they  are  madę.  See  Carpe^tteb.  Schleus- 
ner  (in  roc)  aseerts  tliat  the  uniyersal  testimony  of  the 
ancient  Church  represents  our  Lord  as  being  a  caipen- 
ter^s  son.  This  is,  indeed,  the  statement  of  Justin  Mar- 
tyr  {DiaL  cum  Trypkone,  §  88),  for  he  explain8  the  term 
rćrruii',  which  he  applies  to  Jesus,  by  saying  that  he 
madę  dporpa  Kai  Zvya,plough8  andyohetf  but  Origen, 
in  replying  to  Celsus,  who  indulged  in  jokes  i^inst  the 
hnmble  employment  of  our  Lord,  expre8sly  denied  that 
Jesus  was  so  termed  in  the  Gośpels  (see  the  passage 
cited  in  Otho'8  Juttm  Martyr^  ii,  806,  Jenie,  1848)— a 
declaration  which  suggests  the  idea  that  the  copies 
which  Origen  read  dilTered  fnrni  our  own ;  while  Hila- 
rius,  on  Matthew  (quoted  in  Simon's  Didiicmiaire  de  la 
BibU,  i,  691),  asserts,  in  terms  which  cannot  be  mistak- 
en,  that  Jesus  was  a  smith  (Jerrum  igne  rincentis,  mas- 
tamgue  formantis,  etc»),  Among  the  ancient  Jews  all 
handicrafts  were  held  in  so  much  honor  that  they  were 
learoed  and  pursued  by  the  first  mui  of  the  nation.    See 

AllTIFICKR. 

Jewish  tradition  (Hieros.  Shąph.  c  li)  names  the  fa- 
ther of  Jesus  ^n^^iaDjPiikftra,  or  P&dhira  (Kn-^rOfi, 
Midrash,  Kohely  x,  6 ;  Uap^p^  Thik>,  Apocr,  i,  528) ,  and 
represents  him  (Orig.  c.  Cek,  i,  82)  as  a  rough  soldier, 
who  became  the  father  of  Jesus  afler  Mary  was  be- 
trothed  to  Joseph.  Another  form  of  the  legend  sets  him 
forth  {ToM,JeshUf  p.  8,  ed.  Wagenseil ;  oomp.  Epiphan. 
ff€Br,  78, 7)  under  the  name  of  Jotepk  Pandora  {Zp^^ 
K'^'13B).  Christian  tradition  makes  Joseph  an  old  raan 
when  first  espoused  to  Mary  (Epiphan.  Jlar.  78, 7),  be- 
ing no  less  than  eighty  years  of  age,  and  father  of  four 
sons  and  two  daughters.  Theophylact,  on  MatL  xiii, 
55,  says  that  Jesus  Christ  had  brothers  and  sisters,  all 
children  of  Joseph,  whom  he  had  by  his  sister-in-law, 
wife  of  his  brother  Cleophas,  who  having  died  without 
issue,  Joseph  was  obliged  by  law  to  marry  his  widów. 
Of  the  sons,  James,  the  brother  of  the  Lord,  was,  he 
States,  the  first  bishop  of  Jerusalem.  Eusetńus  (//wf. 
£ccle»»  ii,  1)  agrees  in  substance  with  Theophylact;  so 
also  does  Epiphanius,  adding  that  Joseph  was  foursoore 
years  old  when  he  married  Mary.  Jerome,  ftom  whom 
it  appears  that  the  alleged  mother's  name  was  Escha, 
opposes  this  tradition,  and  is  of  opinion  that  what  are 
termed  the  brothers  of  Jesus  were  really  his  consins. 
See  James  ;  Mart.  The  painters  of  Christian  antiq- 
uity  conspire  with  the  writers  in  representing  Joseph  as 
an  old  man  at  the  period  of  the  birth  of  our  Lord — an 
eridence  which  is  not  to  be  lightly  rejected,  though  the 
precise  age  mentioned  may  be  but  an  approximation  to 
fact.  Another  account  (Niceph.  ii,  3)  gives  the  name 
of  Salome  as  that  of  Jofleph'8  first  wife,  who  was  related 
to  the  family  of  John  the  Baptbt    Tbe  oiigin  of  all  the 


earliest  stories  and  assertions  of  the  fathers  oonoeming 
Joseph,  as,  e.  g.,  his  extreme  old  age,  his  having  sons  by 
a  former  wife,  his  having  the  custody  of  Mary  given  to 
him  by  lot,  and  so  on,  is  to  be  found  in  the  apocryphai 
Goapehł,  of  which  the  earUest  is  the  Proterangelium  of 
St.  James,  apparently  the  work  of  a  Christian  Jew  of 
the  2d  oentury,  quoted  by  Origen,  and  referred  to  by 
element  of  Alexandria  and  Justin  Martyr  (Tischcndorf, 
Prokg,  xiii).  The  same  stories  are  rcpcated  in  the  oth- 
er  apocryphai  (jospels.  The  Monophysite  Coptic  Chria- 
tians  are  said  to  have  first  assigned  a  festiyal  to  St  Jo- 
seph in  the  Calendar,  viz.,  on  the  20th  of  July,  which  is 
thns  inscribed  in  a  Coptic  Almanac :  ^  Requie8  sancti  se- 
nis  justi  Josephi  fabri  lignarii,  Deipane  Yirginis  Marin 
sponsi,  qni  pater  Christi  rocari  promeruit."  The  apoc- 
ryphai Hittaria  Jotepkifabri  lignarii,  which  now  exist8 
in  Arabie  (ed.  Walling,  Lips.  1722 :  in  Latin  by  Fabri- 
cius,  pBcudfpigr,  i,  800;  also  by  Thilo  and  Tischendorf), 
b  thought  by  Tischendorf  to  hare  been  originally  writ- 
ten  in  Coptic,  and  the  festiyal  of  Joseph  is  supposed  to 
haye  been  tranaferred  to  the  Western  churches  from  the 
East  as  late  as  the  year  1899.  The  aboye-named  his- 
tory  is  acknowledged  to  be  quite  fabulous,  though  it  be- 
longs  probably  to  the  4th  century.  It  professes  to  be 
an  account  giyen  by  our  Lord  himself  to  the  apostles  on 
the  Mount  of  Oliyes,  and  placed  by  them  in  the  libraiy 
of  Jerusalem.  It  ascribes  111  years  to  Joeeph*8  Ufe,  and 
makes  him  old,  and  the  father  of  four  sons  and  two 
daughters  before  he  espoused  Mary.  It  is  headed  with 
this  sentence :  "  Benedictiones  ejus  et  preces  senrant  noa 
omnes,  o  fratres.  Amen."  The  reader  who  wishes  to 
know  the  opinion  of  the  ancients  on  the  obscure  sobject 
of  JoBeph's  marriage  may  consult  Jerome's  acńmonioua 
tract  Contra  Ileltidium,  He  will  see  that  Jerome  high- 
ly  disappioyes  the  common  opinion  (dcriyed  from  the 
apocryphai  Gospels)  of  Joseph  being  twice  married,  and 
that  he  daims  the  authońty  of  Ignatius,  Polycarp,  Ire- 
luens,  Justin  Martyr,  and  "■  many  other  apostolical  men," 
in  fayor  of  his  own  yiew,  that  our  Lord'B  brcthren  were 
his  cousins  oniy,  or,  at  all  eyents,  against  the  opinion  of 
Helyidius,  which  had  been  held  by  Ebion,  Theodotua 
of  Byzantinm,  and  Yalentine,  that  they  were  the  chil- 
dren of  Joseph  and  Mary.  lliose  who  held  this  opin- 
ion were  called  Antidtcomarianitatf  as  enemies  of  the 
Yirgin.  (Epiphanius,  A  dv.  I/ceres,  L  iii,  t.  ii ;  ffceret, 
lxxyiii,  also  ffter.  li.  See  also  Pearson,  On  the  Creed, 
art.Virgin  Mary;  Mili,  0»^fA«  Bretkren  of  the  Lord; 
Calmet,  De  St,  Joseph.  St,  Mar,  Virg,  conjuge ;  and,  for 
an  able  statement  of  the  opposite  yiew,  Alford's  notę  om 
Matt,  xiii,  55.)     See  Gospels,  Spurioub. 

It  is  not  easy  to  determine  when  Joseph  died.  That 
eyent  may  haye  taken  place  before  Jesus  entered  on  his 
pnblic  ministry.  This  has  been  argued  from  the  fact 
that  his  mother  oniy  appeared  at  the  feast  at  Cana  in 
Galilee.  The  premises,  howeyer,  hardly  bear  out  the 
inferenoe.  With  more  force  of  argument,  it  has  been 
alleged  (Simon,  Diet,  de  la  Bibie)  that  Joseph  must  haye 
been  dead  before  the  crucifixion  of  Jesus,  else  he  would 
in  all  probability  haye  appeared  with  Mary  at  the  cross. 
Certainly  the  absence  of  Joseph  from  the  public  life  of 
Christ,  and  the  failure  of  reference  to  him  in  the  di»- 
oomrses  and  history,  while  "  Mary"  and  "  his  brethren" 
not  unfrequently  appear,  aiford  eyidence  not  oniy  of  Jo- 
8eph's  death,  but  of  the  inferior  part  which,  as  the  legał 
father  oniy  of  our  Lord,  Joseph  might  haye  been  ex- 
pected  to  sustain.  So  far  as  our  scanty  materials  ena- 
ble  us  to  form  an  opinion,  Joseph  appears  to  haye  been 
a  good,  kind,  simple-minded  man,  who,  while  he  affbrd- 
ed  aid  in  protecting  and  sustaining  the  family,  would 
leaye  Mary  unrestrained  to  use  all  the  impressiye  and 
formatiye  influence  of  ber  gentle,  affectionate,  pious,  and 
thonghtful  souL  B.C.  cir.  45  to  A.D.  cir.  25.— Kitto; 
Smith. 

Further  discossion  of  the  abore  pointa  may  be  seen 
in  Meyer.  Num  Jot,  tempore  nofir.  C/uerił  senex  <fe- 
crepitut  (Lips.  1762) ;  oomp.  Reay,  Narratio  de  Jot,  e  8. 
oodice  detumpta  (0x00,  1828);  Walther,  Dau  Jot,  d. 


JOSEPH 


1020 


JOSEPH 


wakre  VcUer  ChrM  m»  (BerUn,  1791);  Oertel,i4fi^ 
MpAumtu  (1792) ;  Hane,  Jo$,  verum  Jetu  patrem  non  fu- 
itK  (Regiom.  1792) ;  Ludewig,  Hist,  Krit.  Uniers.  (Woi- 
fmb.  1831).  The  traditioos  respecting  Joseph  are  ool^ 
lected  in  AcLJSanct,  iii,4  8q.;  there  is  a  life  of  Joseph 
written  in  Italian  by  Affaiuti  (Mail.  1716).  See  alao 
Yolbeding,  Index,  p.  8 ;  Haae,  Leben  Jem  (4th  ed.  1854), 
p.  £6.    Comp.  Jesus  Christ. 

17.  Sumamed  Caiaphas  (q.  y.),  Jewish  high-priest 
in  Łhe  time  of  our  Loid'fl  miniatiy. 

18.  A  native  (not  resident,  as  in  Michaelis,  Begrab' 
nUt-  und  A  uferstekuncsffesck.  ChrUti,  p.  44)  of  Arimatbsea 
(Matt.  xzvii,  57,  59 ;  Mark  xv,  48,  45 ;  Lnke  xxiii,  50 ; 
John  xix,  38),  a  city,  probably  the  Bańaah  of  the  O.  T., 
in  the  territory  of  Benjamin,  on  the  monntain  rangę  of 
Ephraim,  at  no  great  dlstance  south  of  Jerusalem  (Josh. 
xviii,  25;  Judg.  iv,  5),  not  far  from  Gibeah  (Judg.  xix, 
18 ;  Isa.  X,  29 ;  Hos.  v,  8).     See  ABDCATHiBA. 

Joseph  was  a  secret  disciple  of  Jesus — "^  an  honoraUe 
counsellor  (/3ovXcvr^),  who  waited  for  the  kingdom  of 
God"  (Mark  xv,  43),  and  who,  on  leaming  the  death  of 
our  Lord,  *'canie  and  went  in  boldly  unto  Pilate,  and 
craved  the  body  of  Jesus."  Pilate,  having  leamed  from 
the  centurion  who  commanded  at  the  execation  that 
Jesus  was  actually  dead,  gave  the  body  to  Joseph,  who 
took  it  down  and  wrapped  his  deceased  Lord  in  fine 
linen  which  he  had  purchased  for  the  purpose;  after 
which  he  laid  the  oorpee  in  a  sepulchre  which  was  hewn 
out  of  a  rock,  and  rolled  a  stone  against  the  door  of  the 
sepulchre  (Mark  xv,  43  sq.)t  From  the  parallel  pas- 
sages  in  MaUbew  (xxvii,  58  sq.).  Lukę  (xxiii,  50  są.)} 
and  John  (xix,  38  sq.),  it  appears  that  the  body  was 
previou8ły  embalmed  at  the  cost  of  another  secret  dis- 
ciple, Nioodemus,  and  that  the  sepulchre  was  new, 
'^wherein  never  man  before  was  laid"  (thus  fulfilling 
Isa.  liii,  9) ;  also  that  it  lay  in  a  garden,  and  was  the 
property  of  Joseph  himself  (comp.  Origen,  c  Ccfo,  ii,  p. 
108,  ed.  Spenc. ;  Walch,  Ob»trv,  in  Matt.  ex  wacr^tt,  p. 
84).  This  garden  was  '4n  the  place  where  Jesus  was 
crucified."  A.D.  29.  See  Goukitha.  Lukę  describes 
Łhe  character  of  Joseph  as  <<  a  good  man  and  a  just,*' 
adding  that  "■  he  had  not  assented  to  the  couusel  and 
deed  of  them,"  L  e.  of  the  Jewish  authorities.  From 
this  remark  it  is  dear  that  Joseph  was  a  member  ofthe 
Sanhedrim :  a  conciusion  which  is  corroborated  by  the 
epithet  **  counsellor,"  applied  to  him  by  both  Lukę  and 
Mark.  Whether  Joseph  was  a  priest,  as  Lightfoot  {Hor, 
H^»  p.  669)  thought,  there  is  uot  evidence  to  deter- 
minę.  Yarious  opinions  as  to  his  social  condition  may 
be  found  in  Thiess  {Krii,  Comment,  ii,  149).  Tradition 
reprosents  Joseph  as  having  been  one  of  the  Seventy  (It- 
tig,  Di$8,  de  Pat,  Apostoł.  §  13 ;  Asaemani,  Biblioth.  Ori- 
ent, lii,  1, 319  sq.) ;  and  that  Joseph,  being  sent  to  Great 
BriUin  by  the  apostle  Philip  about  the  year  63,  settled 
with  his  brother  disciples  at  Glastonbury,  in  Somerset- 
shire,  and  there  erected  of  wicker-twigs  the  first  Chris- 
tian oratory  in  England,  the  parent  of  the  majestic  ab- 
bey  which  was  afterwards  founded  on  the  same  site. 
The  local  guides  to  this  day  show  the  miraculous  thom 
(said  to  bud  and  blossom  every  Christmas-day)  that 
spnmg  from  the  staff  which  Joseph  stuck  in  the  ground 
as  he  stopped  to  rest  himself  on  the  hill-top.  (See  Dng^ 
dale's  Moncuticonj  i,  1 ;  and  Heame,  Hitt,  and  Antiq,  of 
Glastonbury.^  —  Kitto;  Smith.  Other  txaditional  no- 
tices  may  be  seen  in  the  Evang.  Nicod,  e.  12  8q.:  Acta 
sanctor,  Mart  ii,  507  sq. ;  comp.  the  disserUtions  be  Jo^ 
tepko  Arimath.  of  Bromel  [Teutzel]  (Yiteb.  1683)  and 
Bjomland  (Aboae,  1729).     See  Jksus  Christ. 

19.  Sumamed  Barsabas  (q.  v.),  one  of  the  two  per- 
sons  whom  the  primitive  Church,  immediately  after  the 
resurrection  of  Christ,  nominated,  pmying  that  the  Holy 
Spińt  would  show  which  of  them  should  enter  the  apos- 
tolic  band  in  place  of  the  wretched  Judas.  On  the  lots 
being  cast,  it  proved  that  not  Joseph,  but  Matt-hias,  was 
chosen  (Acts  i,  23).     A.D.  29. 

Joseph  also  borę  the  honorable  sumame  ofJuttut  (q. 
v.)|  which  was  uot  improbably  givea  him  on  acoount  of 


his  welMmown  probity.  He  was  one  of  thoae  wbo  hiA 
'^companied  with  the  apostles  all  the  time  that  the 
Lord  Jesus  went  in  and  out  among  them,  beginning 
from  the  bapttsm  of  John,"  until  the  asoension  (Acta  i, 
15  sq.).  Tradition  also  acoounted  him  one  of  tbe  Sev- 
enty  (Eusebius,  Hitt.  Eodee.  i,  12).  Tbe  aaoae  hiatorian 
relates  (iii,  89),  on  the  authority  of  Papias,  that  Joseph 
the  Just "'  drank  deadly  poison,  and  by  the  grace  of  God 
sustained  no  harm."  It  has  been  maintained  that  he  is 
the  same  as  Joses,  sumamed  Bamahas,  mentioiied  in 
Acts  iv, 36;  but  the  manner in  which  the  latter  ia  char- 
acteiiased  seems  to  point  to  a  diflerent  person  (Heinrichs» 
On  Actt,  i,  28;  UUmann,  in  the  Theolog.  8tvd,  u.  KriłiŁ 
i,  877 ;  Mynster,  ibid.  1829,  ii,  d26>r— Kitta  Ue  is  also 
to  be  distinguiahed  Irom  Judas  Baraabaa  (Acts  xv,  22). 

20.  Soa  of  Camus  or  CilamyduBi  appointed  Jewish 
high-piiest  in  place  of  Cantheraa  by  Ueiod,  brother  of 
A^ppa  I,  who  had  obtained  tempoiaiy  contiol  over  the 
Tempie  £róm  Clandins  Cesar  during  the  presideocy  of 
Longinus  and  the  piocoratocship  of  Fadua,  A.D.  46. 8 
( Josephus,  A  nt.  xx,  1,8).  He  was  removed  by  tbe  same 
authority  in  favor  of  Ananias,  son  of  Nebedseus,  during 
the  procnratorship  of  Tiberiua  Alezander,  A.D.  48  (lik 
5,2). 

21.  Sumamed  Cabi,  son  of  Simon,  a  fonner  high- 
priest  of  the  Jews,  and  himself  appointed  to  thai  officc 
by  Agrippa  during  the  procuratorship  of  Festas  (AJ). 
62),  but  shoHly  afterwards  removed  by  the  same  au- 
thority on  the  'arrival  of  Albinua  (A.D.  62),  in  fiivor  of 
Ananus,  son  of  Ananus  (Josephos^  AnL  xx,  8, 11 ;  9, 1> 
See  HiGH-PRiBST. 

22.  Son  of  a  female  physician  (Jarpiwi),  '^^  excited 
a  aedition  at  Gamala  near  tbe  ckwe  of  the  Jewish  inde- 
pendenoe  (Josephus,  Life,  87). 

23.  Son  of  Dalieos,  an  eminent  Jew,  who  tbrew  him- 
self into  the  flamee  of  the  Tempie  rather  than  snirendcr 
to  the  Romans  (Josephus,  War,  vi,  b,  1). 

Joseph,  patriarch  of  CoNSTAim^oFŁE  from  A.D. 
1416  to  1439,  is  one  of  the  distinguished  characters  in 
the  history  of  the  Council  of  Florence.  He  was  for 
a  long  time  one  of  the  most  radical  opponents  to  a  nn- 
ion  of  the  Eastcm  and  Western  churches,  but  the  ctm- 
iiing  RomanisŁs  at  last  ensnared  the  hoary  patriaicfa, 
and  he  was  induced,  at  a  time  when  Romę  itaelf  was 
divided,  to  throw  his  influence  in  favor  of  the  politie 
Eugenius  lY,  and  actually  attended  the  Council  of  Fkr- 
ence,  there  and  then  argued  for  union,  and  finally  signed 
articles  of  agreoment  to  eflbct  this  end.  No  aooncr, 
however,  had  he  assented  than  deep  remorae  for  his  ac* 
tion,  foroed  upon  him  mainly  by  the  unfortunate  condi- 
tion of  his  country,  then  greatly  harassed  by  the  in- 
vading  Turks,  brought  him  to  a  sick  bed,  and  he  died 
elght  days  after  sigiiing  the  instrument,  Junc  10, 1439, 
leayiug  the  Greek  emperor,  John  Palcologos,  the  only 
support  of  the  Greek  CounciL  See  Milmaii'a  Latim 
ChristicmUyi  viii,  13  Bq. ;  Mosheim,  Ecdes.  Iliat.  book  iii, 
cent.  XV,  pt  ii,  eh.  ii,  §  13,  23,  notę  57.  For  further  de- 
tails,  see  the  articles  Baslb,  Coukcił  of  ;  Fłobesce, 
CouNciLS  of;  Greek  Church.     (J.H.W.) 

Joseph  (St.)  the  Hymkolooist  (Jotephus  bjfwt- 
nograpkus,  a  native  of  Sicily,  fled  from  that  ialaod  to 
Africa  and  then  to  Groeoe.  He  entered  a  coavent 
at  Theasalonica,  where  he  beeame  eminent  for  his  aa- 
cetic  practices,  and  for  the  fluency  and  gracefulnes  of 
his  utterance,  "so  that  he  easily,'*  says  his  biograpbcr, 
"  threw  the  fabled  sirens  into  the  shade."  Having  been 
oidained  presbyter,  he  went  to  Constantinople  with 
Gregory  of  Decapolis,  who  there  beeame  one  of  the  lead- 
ers  of  the  "orthodoK**  party  in  thdr  struggle  with  the 
iconoclastic  emperor,  Leo  the  Arroenian,  which  began 
in  A.D.  814.  From  Constantinople  Joseph  repaiieri,  at 
the  desire  of  this  Gregory,  to  Romę,  to  eolicit  the  sup- 
port of  the  pope,  but,  faliing  into  the  hands  of  pścates, 
was  by  them  carried  away  to  Crete.  Herę  he  icmained 
till  the  death  of  Leo  the  Armeman  (A.D.  820),  when  hs 
was^  as  his  biognpher  aaseftSy  miracoloualy  ddivaed^ 


JOSEPH  BEN-CHIJA 


1021 


JOSEPH  BEN-GORION 


aUd  conveyed  to  Gonstantiiiople.  On  bis  retam  be 
fband  his  tiriend  and  leadef  Gregoiy  dead,  and  attached 
hbnaelf  to  anotber  leader,  John,  on  whoae  death  be 
cauaed  bia  body,  tog«tber  wich  that  of  Gregoiy,  to  be 
transferred  to  tbe  deserted  cburcb  of  St.  John  Cbryioa- 
tom,  in  connection  with  wbicb  he  establiahed  a  monaa- 
tery,  that  waa  soon,  by  the  attractiTeneas  of  bis  elo- 
ąnence,  fllled  with  inmates.  After  this  be  was,  lor  bis 
stienuoos  defenoe  of  image  worship,  banisbed  to  Cher- 
aonjB,  apparently  by  the  emperor  Tbeophilus,  wbo  leign- 
ed  from  A.D.  829  to  842 ;  but,  on  tbe  death  of  tbe  em- 
peror, was  recalled  from  exile  by  tbe  empress  Theodora, 
i|nd  obtauied,  througb  tbe  favor  of  the  patriarch  Igna- 
tius,  the  Office  of  BcenophyUx,  or  keeper  of  the  sacred 
▼esśels  in  the  great  cburcb  of  Constantioople.  Joseph 
was  eąually  acceptable  to  Ignatius  and  to  his  competi- 
tor  and  successor  Fhotius.  He  died  at  an  advanced  age 
in  A.D.  883.  Joseph  is  chiefly  celebrated  as  a  writer 
of  canones  or  hymni,  of  which  seyeral  are  extant  In  MS., 
but  there  is  some  difficulty  in  distingubbing  his  com- 
positions  fiom  tboae  of  Joseph  of  Thessalonica.  His 
Canones  m  otnnia  Btaim  Virgimś  Marice  fea(a,  and  his 
Theotocia,  hymns  in  honor  of  the  Yirgin,  scattered 
througb  the  eodesiastical  books  of  tbe  Greeks,  were 
pnblisbed,  with  a  leamed  commentaiy  and  a  life  of 
Joseph,  translated  from  the  Greek  of  John  the  Dea- 
oon,  by  Hippolito  Maracci,  under  the  title  of  Mariale 
S.  Josepki  Hymnographi  (Romę,  1661).  The  yersion 
of  tbe  life  of  Joseph  was  by  Luigi  Maracci,  of  Lucea, 
the  brotber  of  Tppolito.  Anotber  Latin  Tersion  of  the 
same  life,  but  less  exact,  by  the  Jesnit  Floritos,  was 
published  among  the  ViUB  Setnetorum  Sieuhrum  of  Oc- 
tayins  C«jetanu8  (OiŁavio  Gaetano),  ii,  48  (Palermo, 
1657,  folio),  and  reprinted  in  the  Acta  Sancłorum  (see 
below).  Some  writers  suppose  that  there  was  anotber 
Joseph,  a  writer  of  hymns,  mentioned  in  tbe  title  of  a 
MS.  typicon  at  Romę  as  of  tbe  monastery  of  St.  Nico- 
lans  Ćasulamm  (riup  Kaffov\uw).  See  Viła  S,Jotephi 
Hymm^rophi,  in  the  A  da  Sanełorum,  s.  d.  III  Aprilis, 
i,  269,  etc,  with  the  commentary  of  Pnevius  of  Papele- 
Toche,  and  Appendix,  p.  xxiv ;  Fabricius,  Bibi.  Grac,  xi, 
79;  Menoloffium  GrtBcorum,  jussu  Basilii,  ImperaŁoris 
editum,  s.  d.  HI  Aprilis  (Urbino,  1727,  folio) ^1-Smitb, 
Diet,  Gr,  and  Rom,  Biog.  iii,  929. 

Joseph  ben-ChiJa  (in  tbe  Talmud  simply  styled 
Rabbi  Joseph),  one  of  the  greatest  of  Iarael's  Rabbis,  was 
bom  in  Babylon  abont  A.D.  270.  Rabbi  Joseph  was  a 
disciple  of  Jebudah  ben-Jecheskel,  the  founder  and  pres- 
ident  of  tbe  college  at  Pumbadita,  and  a  fellow-studcnt 
and  intimate  lifelong  friend  of  tbe  celebrated  Rabba 
ben-Nachmani,  commonly  called  Rabba,  tbe  reputed 
autbor  of  the  Midraah  Rahba,  or  the  traditional  com- 
mentary on  Genesis,  whom  he  succeeded  in  the  presi- 
dency  at  Pumbadita  about  A.D.  830.  He  died,  however, 
only  three  years  after  (about  A.D.  383).  Joseph  de- 
serves  our  notice  not  so  much  from  his  connection  with 
tbe  school  at  Pumbadita,  which,  though  brief,  was  yet 
of  marked  benefit  to  the  deyelopment  of  Biblical  schol- 
arship  at  that  centrę  of  Jewish  leaming,  as  for  his  Chal- 
dee  yersions  of  the  Uebrew  Scriptures  (L  e.  the  Psalms, 
F^yerbs,  and  Job),  particularly  of  tbe  Hagiographa, 
of  which  alone  the  authorship  can  be  ascribed  to  him 
with  any  certainty  (oomp.  the  Rabbinic  Bibles).  Some 
Jevrish  critics  credit  him  with  a  yersion  of  the  whole  O. 
Test. ;  and,  indeed,  from  passages  qttoted  in  the  Talmud 
(comp.  Moid  Katon,  26,  a ;  Pesachim,  68,  a ;  Menackoth, 
110,  a;  Joma,  82,  b;  77,  b;  Aboda  Sara,  44,  a;  Kiddu- 
skm,  13,  a;  72,  b;  Nedartm,  38,  a;  Baba  Kama,  3,  b; 
Beraehothj  28,  a)  from  a  paraphrase  with  which  he  is 
aocredited,  it  would  appear  that  he  translated  Kings, 
Isaiah,  Jeremiab,  Hoeea,  Amos,  Obadiah,  Zephaniah, 
and  Zechariab,  sińce  these  passages  are  from  these 
books,  and  are  distinctiy  ci  ted  with  the  declaration 
^D1->  nn  DA^^TOIS,  «<  as  R.  Joseph  bas  lendered  it 
into  Obaldee."  These  renderings  are,  however,  almost 
exactiy  those  giyen  in  the  Targum  of  Jonathan  ben- 


Uaziel  (a  fact  which  bas  led  some  to  sappose  that  tbia 
Targum  ascribed  to  Jonathan  is  in  zeality  Joeepb's); 
and  be  himsdf  eyen  dedared  on  seyeral  oocasions,  wben 
discussing  tbe  meaning  of  a  difficult  passage  in  the 
Scriptures, "  If  we  bad  not  tbe  Targum  on  this  passage 
we  shoold  not  know  what  it  means**  (see  Sankedrim,  94, 
9i\MoidKaton,^h\MtgiUa,^ti),  It  is  therefote  un- 
leaaonable  to  suppose  him  to  haye  himself  actnally  len- 
deied  into  Cbaldee  morę  tban  the  Hagiographa  contain- 
ed  (with  a  Latin  yersion)  in  the  Polyglota  of  Antwerp 
(1672),  Paris  (1646),  London  (1667),  etc,  In  his  day.  Jo- 
aeph  b.-Cbija  most  haye  eiijoyed  a  yeiy  enyiable  reputa« 
tion  for  emdition.  His  knowledge  of  traditional  lorę  is 
said  to  haye  been  so  extensive  that  be  was  sumamed, 
botb  in  Palestine  and  Babylon,  Joseph  of  Sinai,  i  e.  one 
acąuainted  wkh  all  tbe  timditions  in  socoession  sinoe  tbe 
giying  of  the  law  on  Sinai  (HorajoA,  14,  a;  8anh&» 
drUn,  42,  a).  One  of  his  fiiyorite  stndies  was  the  Cab« 
alisticTbeosophy,  the  mysteriea  of  which,  being  eon* 
tained  in  tbe  yiaion  of  Esekiel  respecting  tbe  tbrona 
of  God  (na3'nQ  hV9Q),  be  endeayMed  to  proponnd 
{Chagiga,  18,  a).  See  Bartolooci,  Bibliotheca  Magna 
Rabbittica,  iii,  814;  Wolf,  BiNiotkeca  Hebnea,  ii,  1171 
sq. ;  Zunz,  Bie  Gottftdiensilichen  Vortrdge  der  Juden,  p^ 
66,  etc ;  FUrst,  Kultur  und  LUeraturgesch,  der  Juden  tu 
Asien,  p.  144^166;  Grtttz,  Gesck.  der  Juden,  \v,  408  sq., 
653  iq. ;  Ersch  u.  Gruber^s  Attgemeine  Encgldopadien  sec 
ii,  yoL  xxxi,  p.  76 ;  Etheridge,  Introd.  to  Heb,  Lit,  p.  166 
sq. ;  Kitto,  BibL  Cydop,  s.  v. 

Joseph  ban-Gikatilla.  See  Moses  (ha-Ko- 
HEZi)  bbn-Samuel. 

Joseph  ben-Oorion  (also  called  Josijopon),  is 
the  name  of  the  reputed  author  of  the  celebrated  He- 
brew  chronicie  "pB^Oi'^  *^C9i  ^  ^^  ofJońppon,  or 
''"^35h  •p"B'^p'i%  the  JJebrew  Jos^ppon,  a  work  which, 
by  tbe  statement  of  tbe  antbor,  is  placed  in  tbe  a>ra 
of  Christ,  for  be  says  of  himself  that  he  is  *'  the  pricst 
of  Jerusalem"  (and  this  can  refer  only  to  the  celebrated 
Jewish  historian  Flayius  Josephus  [q.y.]))  ^^^  further- 
more  that  be  was  appointed  goyemor  of  the  whole  Jew- 
ish nation  by  Titus;  and  from  the  days  of  Saadia  (A.D. 
960)  up  to  oui  own  time  it  was  quoted  botb  by  Jewish 
and  Christian  writers  as  a  genuine  woik  of  Josephus. 
Of  late,  boweyer,  critical  inquiry  bas  determined  the 
work  to  be  a  production  of  tbe  Middle  Ages.  Tbe  con- 
jecture  is  that  the  author  was  a  Jew,  and  that  he  flour- 
ished  about  tbe  9th  or  lOtb  century.  Zuna,  in  the  Zeit- 
Khriftf,  Wissenachąft  d.  Judach,  (BerL  1822,  p.  300  sq.), 
asserted  that  Joseph  ben-Gorion  flourisbed  in  tbe  9th 
century,  and  that  his  work  must  sinoe  bis  day  haye  nn- 
dergone  freąuent  emendations  and  alterations.  Later 
Zunz  (in  his  notes  on  Beąjamin  of  Tudela,  ed.  Asber, 
1841,  ii,  246)  changed  bis  opinion  somewhat,  and  regard- 
ed  Joseph  as  "  the  [Hebrew]  trandaior  and  editor  ofio- 
sephns,"  and  assigns  him  to  "tbe  middle  of  tbe  latter 
half  of  the  lOth  century,'*  and  says  of  him  that  his  ao- 
oounts  of  seyeral  nati<His  of  bis  time  are  as  important  aa 
hia  ortbogiapby  of  Italiau  towns  is  lemarkable."  To 
tbe  same  period  Steinschneider  {Jewish  Liter,,  London, 
1867,  p.  77)  also  assigns  the  wwk,  but  he  belieyes  tbe 
author  to  haye  been  a  natiye  of  Northern  Italy,  and  con- 
siders  the  chronicie  **  the  Hebrew  edition  of  the  Latin 
Hegesippos,"  and  "an  ofTshoot  from  tbe  fully  deyeloped 
Midrash  of  Arabian  and  Latin  literaturę."  A  still  mora 
modem  critic,  the  celebrated  Jewish  historian  Griitz 
{Gesch,d,Judm,\,^\,  and  notę  4  in  the  Appendix  of  tbe 
same  yolume),  holds  that  the  Jewish  book,  which  he  also 
assigns  to  tbe  lOth  century,  is  simply  a  tianslation  of  an 
Arabie  book  of  Maccabees,  entitled  Hittorg  ofthe  Macca^ 
bees  o/ Joseph  ben-Gorion  (of  which  parta  were  published 
in  the  Polyglots,  Paris,  1646;  Lond.  1667)  under  tbe  title 
of  the  And)ic  book  of  Maccabees,  and  wbicb  is  eoctant  in 
two  MSS.  in  tbe  Bodleian  library  (Uri  Catalogue,  Nos. 
782, 829),  madę  by  a  skilful  Italian  Jew,  wbo  enricbed  it 
with  many  original  additions.    Hia  leaaon  for  aasign- 


JOSEPH  BEN-ISAAC  KIMCHI    1022 


JOSEPHUS 


ing  it  to  the  eiilier  part  of  tbe  lOth  century  is  that 
Donash  bw-Tanaim  (who  flourished  about  955)  knew  the 
work  and  spoke  of  parta  of  it  (comp.  Milman'8  Gibbon, 
DecltHe  and  Fali  o/ the  Haman  Empire,  ii,  6,  uote). 

Bttt  as  to  the  chronicie  itaelf.  It  consiats  of  six 
bookii.  It  begins  its  record  witb  Adam;  ezplaina  the 
genealogical  table  in  Gen.  xi ;  then  passes  on  to  the  hi»- 
tory  of  Romę,  Babylon,  Cynis,  and  tbe  fali  of  Babylon ; 
resumes  again  the  biatory  of  the  Jews;  describes  the  times 
of  Daniel,  Zerubbabel,  Esther,  etc ;  gires  an  acoount  of 
Alexander  the  Great,  hia  connectbn,  his  exploiU,  and 
ezpeditions  of  hia  aucceasora ;  and  then  continoee  the 
'  hifltory  of  the  Jews ;  of  Heliodoru8'8  assault  <m  the  Tem- 
pie; the  translation  of  the  O.  T.  into  Greek;  the  deeds 
oftheMaccabees;  theeventBoftheUerodians;  and  the 
laat  war  which  tenninated  in  the  deatniction  of  the 
Tempie  by  Titoa.  The  authorities  qaoted  in  thia  re- 
markable  book  are :  1.  Nicolaas  the  Damaacene ;  2.  Stn- 
bo  of  Cappadoda;  8.  Titus  LiTiiis;  4.  Togthaa  of  Jem- 
aalem ;  5.  Porophius  of  Romę ;  6.  The  history  of  Alex- 
ander,  written  in  the  year  of  his  death  by  Magi ;  7.  The 
book  of  the  antediluvian  patriarch  Cainan  b.-£no8;  8. 
Books  of  the  Greeks,  Mediana,  Persians,  and  Maoedoni- 
ima;  9.  Epistle  of  Alezander  to  Aristotle  aboat  the  won- 
ders  of  India;  10.  Treaties  of  alliance  of  the  Romana: 
11.  Cicero,  who  was  in  the  Holy  of  Holies  of  the  Tem- 
pie during  the  reign  of  Pompey ;  12.  The  intercalaiy 
yean  of  Julius  Csmt,  composed  for  the  Nazaiites  and 
Greeks ;  13.  The  chronicles  of  the  Roman  emperora ; 
14.  The  constitational  diploma  which  Yespaaian  vener- 
ated  80  highly  that  he  kisaed  ereiy  page  of  it;  15.  The 
Alezandriaii  Library  with  its  995  volames;  16.  Jewish 
histories  which  are  lost;  and,  17.  The  national  tradi- 
tions  which  have  been  tranaUted  orally.  The  first 
printed  edition  of  this  work  appeared  in  Mantua,  1476 
-1479,  with  a  prefaoe  by  Abraham  ben-Salmon  Coiia- 
to.  A  reprint  of  this  edition  (the  text  yitiated),  with  a 
Latin  yersioii  by  Munster,  waa  pubrished  at  Basie,  1541. 
There  appeared  an  edition  from  a  MS.  oóntaining  a 
Bomewbat  different  rersion  of  the  work,  and  dirided  into 
ninety-8even  chapters,  edited  by  Tam  Ibn-Jachja  ben- 
David  (Constantinople,  1610).  New  editions  of  it  were 
publi8hedinyemce,1544;  Craoow,1589;  Frankfort-on-' 
the-Main,  1689;  Amsterdam,  1723 ;  Pragnę,  1784;  Żół- 
kiew, 1805;  YiUia,  1819.  It  was  partly  transkted  into 
Arabie  by  Zechariah  ben-Said  el-Tement  about  1228, 
and  into  English  by  Peter  Morwyng  (Lond.  1558, 1561, 
1575, 1579, 1602>  There  are  two  othor  Latin  transla- 
tions,  besides  the  one  by  Munster,  1541 ;  one  was  madę 
by  the  leamed  English  Orientalist,  John  Gagnier  (Ox- 
fonl,  1716),  and  one  by  Breithaupt ;  the  last  has  also  the 
Hebrew  text  and  elaborato  notes,  and  will  always  con- 
tinne  to  be  the  8tudent'8  edition.  There  are  <*erman 
translations  by  Michael  Adam  (Zurich,  1546),  Moses  b.- 
Bezaliel  (Prague,  1607),  Abraham  ben-Mordecai  Cohen 
(Amsterdam,  1661),  and  Seligmann  Reis  (Frankfort-on- 
the-Main,  1707).  Compare,  besidea  the  authorities  al- 
ready  cited,  Zunz,  Die  Gotłe»diensłlichen  YortrHge  der  Ju- 
den  (Berlin,  1832),  p.  146-154;  Delitassch,  Zur  Gttehichit 
derjUdiscken  Poetie  (Leipzig,  1836),  p.  87-40;  Carmoly 
in  Jost's  Annalen  (Frankfort-on-the-Main,  1889),  i,  149 
8q. ;  Milman,  /list,  o/the  Jews,  iii,  131 ;  FUfBt,  Bibliotheca 
Judaica,  ii,  111-114;  Steinachneider,  Catalogus  Libr, 
Hebr,  in  Bibliotheca  Bodleiana,  1547-1552;  Kitto,  Bibl, 
Cydopcedia,  8.  v. 

Joseph  ben-Isaac  Kimchi    See  Kimchi. 

Joseph  ben-Satia.    See  Saadia. 

Joseph  ben-Shamtob,  a  noted  Jewish  philoao- 
pher,  polemic,  and  commenfcator,  flourished  in  the  mid- 
dle  of  the  15th  oentury  in  Castile,  and  was  in  high  office 
at  the  court  of  Juan  II.  He  was  especially  noted  in  his 
day  as  a  philosopher,  and  wrote  many  philosophical 
worka,  which  form  important  contributiona  to  the  his- 
tory of  Jewish  phiiosophy.  He  was  eapeciaUy  rigid  in 
defence  of  Judaism  as  a  religious  system,  in  opposition 
to  the  Christian,  and  in  that  linę  freely  uaed  Fk^t  Du- 


randa writings,  upon  which  he  commented.  See  Pso- 
FiAT.  In  his  later  days  he  lost  his  poaition  at  comt 
through  the  machinations  of  the  papiats  and  the  so-call- 
ed  conyerts  from  Judaiam,  and  finalły  died  the  death  of 
martyidom  about  1460.  Hia  worka  of  especial  interest 
to  ua  are :  (1)  CommaUary  on  the  cMraJted  EpiMk.  of 
Profiai  Duran  againtt  Chrittiamty  (Constantinople, 
1577) ;  contained  also  in  Geigei^s  D^rns-^l  ^3ip  (Brea- 
lau,  1844) :~  (2)  Cmrse  of  Homilies  deliTered  in  the 
synagogne  on  different  Sabbaths  on  rarious  portions  of 
the  Kble,  entitled  X'TTpn  'pT,  Tke  Eye  oftke  Reader 
(stiU  in  MS.  in  the  Bodleian  Library  at  Oxford,  Codez 
Michael,  581) :— (3)  Conimentaty  on  Lamentations,  com- 
posed at  Medina,  del  Campo  in  the  year  1441  (MS.  by  De 
Rossi,  No.  177) :— (4)  Commentary  on  Genesis  i,  l-vi,  81, 
being  the  Sabbatic  lessou  which  oommences  the  Jewish 
year  [see  Haphtarah]  :— and  (5)  Expońiion  ofDeHL 
XV,  11.  0>mp.  Steinachneider,  in  Ersch  und  Gruber'8 
A  Ugemeine  Encjfhlop,  sec  ii,  voL  xxxi,  p.  87-93 ;  Coia- 
loffus  Libr,  Ildn:  in  Bibliotheca  Bodleiana,  coL  1529; 
Gratz,  Gesch.  d,  Juden,  viii,  179  8q. ;  also  notę  4  in  the 
Appendix;  Kitto,  BibL  Cydop.s,y, 

Joseph,  JoeL    See  Witzbniiauskn. 

Joseph  Taltatsak.    See  Taitatzak. 

Jose'phus  CluMnj^oc  v.  r.  ^ó^iriroc),  the  Gneoo- 
Latin  form  (1  Esdr.  ix,  34)  of  the  Heb.  name  Joseph  (q. 
V.)  6  (Ezra  x,  42). 

Josfiphus,  Flayids,  the  cęlebcated  Jewish  histo- 
rian,  waa  bom  at  Jeruaalem  A.D.  87.  His  father^a  name 
waa  Mattathiaa,  and  in  his  autobiography  (the  ooly 
source  left  us  to  write  his  history,  as  the  worka  of  his 
rival,  Justoa  of  Tiberiaa,  are  unhappily  loet)  he  lays 
cUim  to  royal  and  aaoerdotal  lineage,  and  aUndea  to  tbe 
renown  he  enjoyed  while  yet  a  youth  {Life,  i,  1 ).  His 
early  yeara  aeem  to  have  been  apent  in  close  atndy  of 
the  Jewish  tradidons  and  the  O.-T.  nrritinga.  Diaaat- 
isfied  with  all  of  the  three  principal  Jewish  sects,  while 
yet  a  young  man  he  spent  three  years  as  the  foUower 
of  one  Banus,  an  eremitę,  in  the  desert,  but  at  laat  joined 
the  sect  of  the  Phariaeea.  He  waa  only  19  when  he  left 
Banus,  and  he  joined  the  Pharisees  between  19  and  261, 
when  he  went  to  Romę.  Soon  afterwards,  the  impri»- 
onment  of  aome  Jewish  priests  by  the  procurator  Felix 
afTorded  him  an  opportonity  of  pleading  his  people*8  cauae 
before  the  emperor  himself  at  the  Roman  capital,  whitb- 
er  these  men  had  been  sent.  On  the  way  he  was  ahip- 
wrecked  (some  have  unwarnmtably  inmgined  that  he  was 
Paurs  oompanion  in  that  disastrous  voyage),  but,  being 
rescued  by  a  Cyrenian  ve88el,  he  madę  hu  way  to  Rotne. 
He  there  not  only  secured  the  ohject  of  his  misaion,  bat 
also  ingratiated  himself  in  the  favor  of  the  empreaa,  and 
at  length  retumed  home  loaded  with  presenta.  He 
fonnd  the  mass  of  his  countrymen  detormined  on  a  re- 
volt  from  the  empire,  and  he  anxiously  sought  to  dia- 
suade  them  from  so  rash  a  course.  The  Jews,  how^ever, 
refused  to  listen  to  his  advice ;  and  the  only  altematirea 
for  him  were  either  to  foUow  the  popular  will,  and  thos 
perhaps  make  himself  the  leader  of  h^i  people,  or  to  re- 
turn to  Romę,  and  there  receive  the  rewards  of  treach- 
ery.  In  his  deacription  of  the  Jewish  insnrrection  he 
has  given  us  a  graphic  acoonnt  of  the  numeroos  plota 
and  perils  in  which  he  became  entangled  duńn^  thia 
period  of  his  life.  After  the  disastrous  retreat  of  Ceatiiia 
GaUus  from  Jerusalem,  and  the  barbarona  maonaue  of 
the  Jews  at  Sepphoris  (q.  v.)  and  the  Syrian  citiea,  the 
most  peacefully  inclined  of  the  Jews  joined  the  zealota, 
and  Josephus  no  longer  hesitated  aa  to  the  best  ooorse 
to  be  pursued.  With  great  oetentation  of  patriotisn 
and  self-devotion,  he  declaied  in  favor  of  war  **  a  om- 
trance,"  and  he  soon  secured  for  himself  the  appoint- 
ment  as  generał.  Together  with  Joazar  and  Jadas  he 
was  sent  to  Galilee, "  the  proyinoe  on  which  the  stnrm 
would  first  break.'*  His  two  colleagues,  howerer,  de- 
voted  themselyes  to  their  priestly  fnnctioda,  and  Jo- 
sephus bećame  the  sole  oommander  {Hfe,  4-7 ;    War^ 


JOSEPHUS 


1023 


JOSEPHUS 


&,  fO,  4).  Finding  the  GaHlean  Jews  divided  among 
themselyeB  (see  John  of  Gischai^i),  and  fearing  that 
his  oommand  was  too  weak  to  meet  the  army  of  the 
approachmgYespasian,  he  retired  to  the  Jewish  strong- 
hold  Jotapata,  and  there  awaited  the  attack  of  the  Ro- 
mans. For  fortyHBeren  days  he  encouraged  his  sol- 
diera  to  deeds  that  immortalized  his  name.  (For  an 
interasting  descrłption  of  this  si^^  see  Weber  and 
Holtzmann,  G€9ch,  d,  YoUoet  Israely  ii,  475  są. ;  Milman, 
//u/.  oflAe  Jews  [Middleton's  edition],  ii,  252  8q.)  Yet 
some  writerBi  among  them  Raphall  and  Grfttz,  aoease 
him  even  here  of  treachery  and  cowardice,  alleging  that 
he  endeavored  to  get  away  from  Jotapata  on  the  pra- 
tenoe  of  desiring  to  raiae  an  army  for  its  relief,  althoogh 
he  could  not  have  left  ^'without  either  falling  into  the 
hands  of  the  Romans  or  tcbmUtrily  joininff  thtm,"  £  ven 
alter  the  fali  of  that  fortreas  he  did  not  surrender  to  the 
Romans,  but  hid  himself  with  forty  companions  in  a  care, 
and  refused  to  come  forth,when  his  place  of  refuge  was 
betrayed,  unlil  his  life  was  gaaranteed  him.  (See  Smith, 
J)ice.  o/ Greek  and  Roman  Biog,  ii,  611,  ool.  i;  Raphall, 
Po9t-BibL  IliaL  Jewt,  p.  427  8q.)  After  his  surrender 
to  Yespasian  he  was  put  in  chains,  with  a  view  to  being 
sent  to  Romę  for  trial  before  Nero.  He  evaded  this 
danger  by  predicting  (he  distinctly  daims  the  gift  of 
prophecy,  War,  iii,  8,  9)  to  Yespasian  his  futurę  elerar 
tłon  to  the  imperial  throne,  but  was  still  held  in  oon- 
flnement  for  three  years,  until,  on  the  realization  of  his 
predłction,  his  chains  were  cut  from  him,  as  a  sign  that 
he  had  been  unjostly  bound  (War,  iv,  10,  7).  Yespa- 
sian had  been  declared  emperor  by  the  Roman  soldiers 
in  the  East,  and  he  immediately  set  ont  for  the  West, 
]eaving  Titus  in  command,  with  orden  to  hasten  the 
condusion  of  the  war  still  raging  in  Palestine.  In  this 
eicpedition  on  Jerusalem  Josephus  aooompanied  Titus. 
Titus  had  suppoeed  this  task,  with  the  assistance  of 
the  '^ rencgade**  (so  Milman  calls  him),  an  easy  one; 
but  the  Jews  braved  the  attack  of  the  Romans  much 
morę  obstinately  than  the  latter  had  %xpectoA,  and, 
finally,  Josephus  was  induced  to  go  forth  and  urge  his 
country  men  to  capitulate,  and  thus  to  sare  the  place 
from  certain  and  total  destmction.  The  people,  by  his 
account.  were  touched  and  ready  to  yield,  but  the  lead- 
era remained  obstinate ;  but  the  fact  is  that  they  were 
natorally  disinclined  to  listen  to  the  connsels  of  a  man 
who  had  quitted  them  in  the  hour  of  their  greatest  need. 
They  even  sought  to  kill  him,  and  continued  the  de- 
fence  to  the  last  extiemity.  On  the  downiall  of  the 
óty,  the  most  intimate  friends  and  relatiyes  of  Jose- 
phus were  spared  at  his  request,  and,  in  return  for 
his  aid  and  ooimsel  in  the  siege,  a  valuable  estate 
in  Judiea  was  assigned  him  as  a  residence.  Weil 
aware,  howeyer,  that  among  his  countrymen  he  wouid 
haidly  find  a  safe  lefuge,  he  retumed  with  Titus  to 
Romę  to  enjoy  the  honors  which  Yespasian  might  be- 
atow  upon  him.  He  was  rec^yed  with  great  kind- 
ness  by  the  emperor;  but,  although  the  pńvileges  of 
Roman  citizenship  were  conferred  upon  him  and  an  an- 
nnal  pension  awarded  him,  he  was  detested  by  the  Ro- 
mans no  less  than  by  the  Jews.  It  is  supposed  that 
his  death  occurred  in  the  early  years  of  Trajan's  reign, 
perhaps  A.D.  108.  For  other  facts  of  a  morę  directly 
personal  character,  such  as  his  three  marriages,  the 
names  of  his  sons,  etc,  see  the  seyenty-8ix  chapters  of 
his  life,  and  the  foUowing  other  passages  of  his  other 
works:  Apiori,  i,  9,  10;  fFdr,  i;  ii,  20,  8  8q.;  21,  2  8q.; 
iii,  7, 13  8q.;  8,  1  sq.;  9;  yi,  6;  Ant,  ed.  Hayercamp,  i, 
5, 228, 586, 545, 682, 982 ;  Suidas,  S.  y.  'IwniTroc, 

The  character  of  Josephus  has  been  yery  diiferently 
delineated  by  different  writers.  From  his  own  works,  es- 
pedally  his  books  against  Apion,  it  is  evid«nt  that,  though 
he  dealt  rather  treacherously  with  his  people,  he  yet  felt 
a  pride  in  the  antiqnity  of  the  nation  and  in  its  ancient 
glories;  and  in  the  description  of  the  misfortunes  of  the 
Jews  he  is  by  no  means  wanting  in  sympathy  for  them. 
Thus  his  acconnt  of  the  miserable  fate  of  Jerusalem 
is  altogether  free  from  that  tonę  of  reyolting  coldness 


which  shocks  us  in  Xenophon*s  acconnt  of  the  downfall 
of  Athens  {HeU,  ii,  2,  §  8  8q.).  Yet  the  mildest  iuter- 
pretadon  that  his  conduct  can  receiye  certaiiily  is  that 
he  despaired  (as  eamest  patriota  neyer  do)  of  his  coun- 
try, and  that  he  deserted  his  countrymen  in  their  great- 
est extEemity.  Indeed,  from  the  yery  beginning,  he 
appean  to  haye  looked  on  the  national  cause  as  hope- 
less,  and  to  haye  cherished  the  intention  of  making 
peaoe  with  Romę  whenever  he  could.  llius  he  told 
some  of  the  chief  men  of  Tiberias  that  he  was  well 
aware  of  the  inyindbility  of  the  Romans,  though  he 
thought  it  safer  to  dissemble  his  conyiction;  and  he 
adyised  them  to  do  the  same,  and  to  wait  for  a  con- 
yenient  season—ircpifićrouirt  Kaip6v  (A(/f,85;  compare 
War,  iii,  5);  and  yf%  find  him  again,  in  his  attack  on 
Justus  the  historian  {Life,  65),  eamestly  defending 
himself  from  the  charge  of  having  in  any  way  caused 
the  war  yrith  Romę.  Had  this  feeling  originated  in  a 
reUgious  conyiction  that  the  Jewish  nation  had  forfeited 
God's  fayor,  the  case,  of  course,  would  haye  been  differ- 
ent ;  but  such  a  spirit  of  liying,  practical  faith  we  do 
not  disooyer  in  Josephus.  Holding  in  the  main  the 
abstract  doctrines  of  a  Pharisee,  but  with  the  principles 
and  temper  of  a  Herodian,  he  stroye  to  accommodate 
his  religion  to  heathen  tastes  and  prejudices;  and  this 
by  actual  commissions  (Ottius,  Pratemńua  a  Jotepho, 
appended  to  his  Spicilegium),  no  less  than  by  a  ration- 
aiistic  system  of  modilication  (Smith,  Dicf.  Greek  and 
Rom,  Biog,  ii,  612).  A  morę  fayorable  opinion  is  some- 
times  expreB8ed  of  Josephus,  as  by  a  writer  in  the  Eranr 
geUcal  Quart.  Reriew,  1870,  p.  420.  Prof.  F.  W.  Farrar 
(in  Kitto,  Cydop,  BibL  Literaturę,  s.  y.)  has  perhaps  best 
summed  up  the  religious  character  of  Josephus  as  that 
of  "  a  stnmge  mixture  of  the  bigoted  Pharisee  and  the 
time-serving  Herodian,"  and  as  '*  mingliug  the  national 
pride  of  the  patriot  with  the  apostasy  of  a  iraitor." 

Yeiy  different  is  the  opinion  of  all  on  the  writings  of 
Josephus.  Kyen  in  his  day  he  was  greatly  lauded  for 
his  literały  abilities.  Though  a  Jew  by  birtb,  he  had 
so  ably  aaquired  the  Greek  that  he  could  be  counted 
among  the  classic  writers  in  that  language.  St.  Jfrome 
designatee  him  as  the  *'  Gnocus  Livius"  (Episł,  ad  Eu- 
Stach,) ;  and,  to  come  nearer  our  own  days,  Niebuhr 
pronounces  him  a  Greek  writer  of  singular  purity  {Anc* 
Hitt,  iii,  455).  But,  withal,  he  is  hardly  deserving  of 
the  epithet  ^aA^diyCi  so  oflen  bestowed  on  him  (Suid. 
8.  y.  'l<^iroc;  Isidor  Pelusiot.  iy,  Ep,  75 :  ^  diligends- 
simus  et  ^akfj^karaToc^  Jos.  Scaliger,  De  Emend, 
Temp,  Prmf,,  etc).  It  is  true,  he  understood  the  duty 
and  impoftance  of  yeradty  in  the  historian  {Ani, xiy,  1, 
1 ;  War,  i,  1 ;  c  Apion,  i,  19) ;  neyertheless, "  he  is,"  8a}'8 
Niebufar  (Leet,  Bom,  Hi$t,  L  c),  "  often  untruc,  and  his 
archaeology  abounds  in  distortions  of  historicsl  facts,  and 
in  falsifications  which  arise  from  his  inordinate  national 
pride ;  and  whereyer  he  deals  in  numbers,  he  shows  his 
Oriental  loye  of  exaggeration"  (this  charge  is,  in  a  meaa- 
uie,  refuted,  howeyer,  in  Stud,  u,  Krit,  1 858,  p.  48).  But, 
eyen  though  Josephus  may  not  in  all  things  be  implic- 
itly  relied  npon,  his  writings  are  to  the  theologian  espc- 
cially  inyaluable,  and  we  may  well  say,  with  Casaubon 
and  Fanar,  that  it  is  by  a  singular  proyidence  that  his 
works,  which  throw  such  a  flood  of  light  on  Jewish  af- 
fairs,  haye  been  preseryed  to  us.  They  are  of  immenra 
senrice  in  the  entire  Biblical  department,  as  may  be  scen 
from  the  frequent  referenoes  that  haye  been  madę  to  his 
writings  throughout  this  Cydopndia,  in  the  clucidation 
of  the  łustoiy,  geography,  and  archaeology  of  Scripture. 
Yet  by  this  it  must  by  no  means  be  inferred  that  we 
detract  in  the  least  from  our  former  statement,  that  Jo- 
sephus was  not  a  man  who  belieyed  in  the  inspiration 
of  the  Biblical  writings.  *'  In  spite  of  his  con^tant  as- 
sertions  {Ant,  x,  11),"  says  Farrar  (in  Kitto),  *^he  can 
haye  had  no  leal  respect  for  the  writings  which  he  so 
largely  illustrates.  If  he  had  felt,  as  a  Jew,  any  deep 
or  religious  appredation  of  the  O.-T.  history,  which  he 
professes  to  follow  {ovBtv  Trpo^iic  ovS'  av  vapaXifnIfv, 
Ant,  i,  proosm.),  he  would  not  haye  tampered  with  it  aa 


JOSEPHUS 


1024 


JOSEPHUS 


he  does,  mixii]g  it  with  psendo-philosophied  fancies 
{Apion,  i,  10),  with  groundleas  Jewish  Uagadoik  or  tra- 
didons  (such  aa  the  three  yean'  war  of  Moeea  with  the 
Ethiopiana,  the  love  of  Tharbia  for  hhs,  etc:  AnLu, 
10, 2),  and  with  ąuotatioDS  from  heathen  wiiters  of  v€ry 
doubłjful  authority  (AnL  viii,  5,  8,  etc.;  see  Yan  Dale^ 
De  A  ritted,  p.  211).  The  worst  charge,  however,  against 
him  is  his  oonstant  attempt,  by  alterationa  and  supprea- 
aions  (and  eapecially  by  a  rationaliatic  method  of  deal- 
Ing  with  miracles,  which  contraats  atrangely  with  his 
ciedolous  fancies),  to  make  Jewish  history  palatable  to 
Greeks  and  Rooians,  to  such  an  extent  that  J.  Ludolfus 
calls  him  ^fabulator  snpius  quam  historicus'  {Hi&L 
Etkiop.  p.  280).  Thus  he  omits  ali  the  most  importaot 
Mesaianic  prophecies ;  he  manipnlates  the  book  of  Dan- 
iel in  a  most  unsatisfactory  manner  (Ant,  ix,  11) ;  he 
^leaks  in  a  very  loose  way  about  Moaea  and  Abraham 
(Ant,  i,  8, 1 ;  Apion,  ii,  16) ;  and,  thoogh  he  can  swaUow 
the  romance  of  the  pseudo-Aristeas,  he  rationalizea  the 
accoant  of  the  Exodus  and  Jonah'8  whale  (AnL  ii,  16, 6; 
ix,  10, 2).'*  On  the  whole  subject  of  his  credibiiity  aa  a 
writer,  his  omissions,  his  yariations,  and  his  panderings 
to  Gentile  taste,  oomp.  J.  A.  Fabńcios,  De  JaUpk,  et  gut 
Scriptu,  in  Hudson's  ed. ;  Yan  Dale,  De  A  ritted,  x,  xi : 
De  Idoiolatrid,  yii ;  Biinch,  Examen  ffi$t,  FUw.  Jotephi, 
in  Havercamp,  ii,  809  sq.;  Ottius,  SpieUegium  ex  Joee- 
pho;  Itiigia&yProUgowtena;  lJBheryEpi8LadLMd.C(^ 
peHum,  p.  42;  \Vhiston's  Dittertaiuma,  etc. 

Of  still  greater  infcerest,  perbaps,  to  onr  readen  muat 
be  the  relation  which  Joaephus,  living  as  he  did  in  the 
age  of  Christ  himself,' sustained  towards  Christianity. 
Somo  haye  gone  so  far  as  to  assert  not  only  the  anthen- 
ticity  of  passages  in  his  writings  ailuding  to  Christ,  etc 
(see  below),  but  haye  eyen  madę  out  of  Josephus  an 
Ebionite  Christian  (Whlston,  Diuert,  i),  if  not  a  tme 
folio wer  of  Jesus  the  ChrisL  Prof.  Farrar  (in  Kitto), 
speaking  on  this  point,  says:  '^Nothing  is  morę  certain 
than  that  Josephus  was  no  Christian  (dirurrwr  r<f  Iiy- 
aov  uc  Xpi(rrtf^  Orig.  c.  Celt,  i,  85) ;  the  whole  tonę  of 
his  mind  was  alien  from  the  noble  simplicity  of  Chris- 
tian belief,  and,  as  we  haye  seen  already,  he  was  not 
eyen  a  good  Jew.  Whateyer,  therefore,  may  be  thought 
about  the  passages  ailuding  to  John  the  Baptist  {Ant, 
xyiii,  5,  2),  and  James,  *  the  LoTd*^  brother*  (tbid,  xx,  9, 
1),  which  may  possibly  be  gennine,  there  can  be  no  rea- 
Bonable  doubt  that  the  famous  alluaion  to  Christ  (Ant. 
xyiii,  8, 3)  is  either  absolutely  apurious  or  laigely  inter* 
polated.  Tho  silence  [partial  or  total]  of  Joaephna  on 
a  subject  of  such  importanoe,  and  with  which  lie  must 
haye  been  ao  thoroughly  acquainted,  is  eaaily  explica- 
ble ;  and  it  is  intrinsically  much  morę  piobable  that  he 
should  haye  passcd  over  the  subject  altogether  (as  is 
done  also  by  his  contemporary,  Jostns  of  Tiberias,  Phot. 
Cod,  Bibi.  33)  than  that  he  should  only  haye  deyoted 
to  it  a  few  utterly  inadeąuate  lines.  £yen  if  he  had 
been  induced  to  do  this  by  some  yague  hope  of  getting 
aomething  by  it  from  Christiana  like  Flavius  Clemens, 
he  certaiiily  would  not  haye  expres8ed  himself  in  lan- 
guage  so  strong  {Łiyi  dvSpa  ai/roy  \iynv  XP^\  ''^ 
still  less  would  be  haye  youched  for  the  Messiahahip, 
the  miracles,  or  the  resurrection  of  Jesus.  Jnstin,  Ter- 
tullian,  Chrysostom,  Origen,  and  eyen  Photius,  knew 
nothing  of  the  passage,  nor  does  it  appear  till  the  time 
of  Eusebius  {Hist.  EccL  i,  2;  Dem,  Euanff,  iii,  5),  a  man 
for  whom  Niebubr  can  find  no  better  name  than  *a  de- 
testable  falsifier,'  and  one  whose  historical  credibiiity  b 
well  nigh  given  up.  Whether  Eusebius  forged  it  him- 
self or  boRowed  it  from  the  marginalia  of  some  Chris- 
tian reader  cannot  be  determined,  but  that  Josephus  did 
not  write  it  [at  least  in  its  present  form]  may  be  re- 
garded  as  settled.  Nay,  the  yeiy  next  sentence  (Ant, 
xyii,  3, 4)  is  a  disgusting  story,  wholly  irreleyant  to  the 
tenor  of  the  narratiye,  and  introduced  in  all  probability 
for  the  sole  purpoee  of  a  blasphemous  parody  on  the  mi- 
racttlous  conception,  such  as  was  attempted  by  yarioos 
Rabbinical  writers  (e.  g.  in  the  Sepher  Toledoth  Jeahua  ; 
eee  Wagenseil,  Tela  Ignea  SaUma;  see  Jbsus  Christ). 


Tfaftt  Joaephns  intended  obfiąndy  to  dlacredk  boim  of 
the  chief  Christian  dodzinee  by  representisg  them  as 
haying  been  anticipated  by  tł»  Easenas  seans  bj  no 
means  improbable  (oomp.  De  Ouincey^s  WoHct^  yoL  ix» 
The  EsBeoes)."  For  a  compendium  of  the  abondant  lit- 
eratura on  these  ąnestions,  see  GŁcnaier,  Eed,  BuL  sec 
84.  The  chief  treatises  are,  Danbos,  Pro  teatimomh  FI 
Job.  de  Jetu  Christ  (London,  1706) ;  repiinted  in  Havcr- 
camp ;  Bdhmert,  Ueber  dee  FL  Jot.  Zengmas  9on  Ckritl» 
(Lpz.  1828) ;  Le  Moyne,  Var,  Saar.  ii,  981 ;  Heinicheo, 
Excurs,  /.  ad  EuteA,  //.  £,  iii,  881 ;  comp.  also  Langeo, 
Judenihim  in  Paldstma  (Fkeib.  1866),  p.  440  sq.;  Stad, 
u.  Krit,  1856,  840  sq. 

It  remauis  for  ns  only  to  add  a  list  of  the  warkeo/Joe^ 
phu  (here  we  mainly  follow  Smith  {DieL  Gr.  and  Ro». 
Biog,  s.  y.]),  which  are,  1.  A  Hittory  ofike  Jewiak  War, 
(mpl  rov  IwSeuKoi  iro\ifŁOV  ^  loi^aic^c  ioropieic  mfi 
aX4w<nwc),  in  seyen  books.  Joaephus  teUs  na  tbafc  ha 
WTote  it  first  in  his  own  language  (the  Syio-Chaldee), 
and  then  tianalated  it  into  Greek,  for  the  information  ót 
Euiopean  readers  (  War,  i,  1).  The  original  is  no  knger 
extant.  The  Greek  was  published  about  A.D.  75,  under 
the  patronage  and  with  the  eapecial  reoommcndattoa 
of  Titiis.  .^^rippa  II,  also^  in  no  fewer  than  8ixty-tws 
letterB  to  Josephus,  bora  testimony  to  the  care  andfidel- 
ity  displayed  in  iL  It  was  admitted  into  the  Palatine 
litoiry,  and  its  author  was  honored  with  a  statne  at 
Romę.  It  oommences  with  the  capture  of  Jemaakm 
by  Antiochna  Epiphanes,  B.C  170 ;  rana  rapidly  orcr  the 
eyents  before  Jo8ephus*s  own  time,  and  gtyea  a  detailed 
aoconnt  of  the  fatal  war  with  Romę  (Josephus,  l^fe,  p. 
65;  Eusebius,  Hi^.  Eedee.  iii,  9;  Jerome,  CataL  iScnjpL 
EecL  pu  18 ;  Ittigius,  ProUffomena  ;  Fabridos,  BikL  Grme, 
y,  4 ;  Yossins,  De  Hitt.  Grac  p.  289,  ed.  Westennann)  :— 
2.  Jewith  A niijuitiee  ('lovda'iiat  ap%aMXo7ia),  in  twen- 
ty  books,  completed  about  A.D.  98,  and  addreased  to 
Epaphroditns.  The  title,  as  wdl  as  the  number  of  books, 
may  haye  been  soggested  by  the  'Pw/iaYcjf  d^aio^oyiet 
of  Dionysius  of  Halicamaasos.  The  wwk  extenda  fiom 
the  creation  of  the  worid  to  A.D.  66,  the  12th  year  of 
Nero,  in  which  the  Jews  were  goaded  to  rebcllion  bj 
Gessius  Florus.  ItembzBoee,  therefore,  bot  morę  in  de- 
tali, much  of  the  matter  of  the  ficrt  and  aeoond  books 
on  the  Jewieh  War.  Both  these  histories  aie  aaid  to 
haye  been  tnuidated  into  Hebrew,  of  which  yenion, 
howeyer,  there  are  no  traces,  though  some  haye  er- 
Toneously  identified  it  with  the  works  of  the  Fsendo- 
Josephus.  See  JoeicPH  bbn-Gorion  ^-^.  His  lAfe^  ia 
one  book.  This  is  an  autobtography  appended  to  the 
Antiquitie$^  and  is  addressed  to  the  same  Epapfaroditia. 
It  cannot,  howeyer,  haye  been  written  eariier  than  ADl 
97,  sińce  Agrippa  II  is  mentioned  in  it  aa  no  kmgcr  liy- 
ing  (65) :— 4.  ILard  'Aviwvoc  (a  treatise  c^^OMst^^wa), 
m  two  books,  also  addreased  to  Epaphroditua.  U  is  ia 
answer  to  such  as  impngned  the  antiqnity  of  the  Jew- 
ish nation  on  the  ground  of  the  silence  of  Greek  wńten 
respectmg  iL  The  title,  "^  against  Apkui,**  is  rathcr  a 
misnomer,  and  is  applicable  only  to  a  partion  of  the 
second  book  (1-18).  It  exhibit8  coosiderable  kazning^ 
and  is  highly  oommended  by  Jerome.  The  Greek  text 
is  deflcient  at  ii,  5-9:— 5.  The  Fourfk  ofMacoabeee  (tic 
Maicra/3aiovCt  ^  wfpi  atiroicparopoc  Aoyioycoi'),  in  one 
book.  The  genuineness  of  this  treadse  has  been  cailed 
ia  que8tion  by  many  (see  Cavc,  Bist,  IM.  Scr^  £c- 
dee.  p.  22%  but  it  is  attributed  to  Joaephus  by  Eusebius, 
Jerome,  Philoetotgius,  and  otheza  (see  Fabriciua,  BibL 
Grme.  v,  7 ;  Ittigius,  Prolegomena).  Ceitainly,  howey- 
er, it  does  not  read  like  his  works.  It  is  an  eKtrenoe- 
ly  dedamatoiy  aooount  of  the  martyrdom  of  Eleanr 
(an  aged  priest),  and  of  seyen  youths  and  their  mothr 
er,  in  the  persecution  under  Antiochua  Epiphanes ; 
and  this  is  prefaced  by  a  discnsaion  on  the  soprcan- 
acy  which  reason  possesses  de  jurę  oyer  pleasore  aod 
pain.  Ita  title  has  reference  to  the  zeal  for  God*s 
law  dłsplayed  by  the  saifereis  in  the  spirit  of  the  ICac- 
cabees.  There  is  a  paraphraae  of  it  by  Ensmoa,  and 
in  aome  Gieek  oopies  of  the  fiible  it  was  inaerted  as  the 


JOSES 


1026 


JOSHUA 


foarth  book  of  the  Maccabew  (Fabriduą  £1  c).  There 
are,  beńdea  these,  aIm)  attribuled  to  him  i—G,  The  ŁreaU 
be  ricpi  Tov  nayróc,  which  wab  certaiiily  not  wiitten 
by  Josephu*.  For  an  acoount  of  it,  aee  Photiiu,  Cod, 
xlviii;  YabńduSf BibL Gracy, S\  lUifpuBfProlegomenOf 
ad  fin*  *. — 7.  Jerome  {Pnąf,  ad  Lib,  xi  Comm,  ad  Estti' 
om)  speaks  of  a  work  of  one  Josephus  on  Daniel'8  yińon 
of  the  8eventy  i^eeks^  but  he  probably  refen  to  some 
otber  Joeephu» : — 8.  At  the  end  of  his  A  tUiguiiies  Joee- 
phus  mentions  hi»  intention  of  wiiting  a  work  in  four 
books  on  the  Jewiab  nodons  of  God  and  his  eesence, 
and  on  the  rationale  of  the  Moeaic  laws,  but  this  taak  he 
never  accomplished.  At  aiiy  ratę,  the  works  have  not 
confe  do^Tn  to  us.  (See  Whiston^s  notę,  AtU,ad&a.\  Fa- 
bńcius,  BibL  Grcsc  y,  9.) 

The  writiugs  of  Josephus  fint  appeared  in  print  in  a 
Latin  transUtion,  with  no  notice  of  the  place  or  datę  of 
publication :  the  edition  seeros  to  have  contained  only  a 
portion  of  the  A  tUiguiłies,  These,  with  the  seren  books 
of  the  Jewish  War,  were  leprinted  by  SchUsler  (Augsb. 
1470)  in  Latin;  and  there  were  many  editions  in  the 
same  language  of  the  wbole  works,  and  of  portions  of 
them,  before  the  editio  princep^  of  the  Greek  text  ap- 
peared at  Basel,  1544,  edited  by  Arlenius.  Since  then 
the  worka  of  Josephus  have  frequently  been  printed, 
both  in  the  Greek  and  hi  many  other  languages.  One 
of  the  most  yaluable  editions  is  that  by  Hudson  (Ox£ 
1720, 2  rola.  fol.).  The  text  is  founded  on  a  most  care- 
ful  and  extensive  oollation  of  MSS.,  and  the  edition  is 
further  enriched  by  notes  and  indices.  The  principal 
English  Yerstons  are  those  of  Lodge  (Lond.  1602) ;  one 
from  the  French  of  D'Andilly  (Oxford,  1676 ,  reprinted 
at  London,  1683);  that  of  L'£strange  (Lond.  1702),  and 
that  of  Whłston  (London,  1787).  The  two  last^men- 
tioned  rersions  have  frequently  been  reprinted  in  yari- 
oos  shapes.  See,  besides  the  aathorides  already  no- 
ticed,  Gratz,  GeschiehU  d.Juden,  iii,  899  8q. ;  Weber  and 
Holtzmami,  Gesck.  d,  Judenih,  ii,  467  sq. ;  Jost,  Getck.  d, 
Judenth.  «.  *.  Seklen,  i,  225,  319, 444;  De  Wette,  Jlebr. 
Jud.  A  rchdoloffif,  p.  9;  Ewald,  Getch,  Christus  (1856),  p. 
104  8q.;  Milman,  ffitł,qfthe  Jews^yól  ii  (see  Index  in 
vol.  iii) ;  Smith,  Diet.  Gr,  and  Bom,  Biog.  &  y. ;  FUiati 
BibłiotJteca  Judaica,  ii,  117  sq.     (J.  H.  W.) 

Jo^ses  ('loMr^c*  perhaps  for  Joteph,  which  is  some- 
times  thus  written  in  the  Talmud,  ^Di*^  for  CjCi*^ ;  see 
Lightfoot  on  Acts  i,  23;  and,  indced,  *lu»frff<^  actually 
appears  in  some  codices  for  *lio<rr}c  in  MatC,  Mark  xv, 
and  Acts ;  but  better  MSS.  have  'luavinfc  in  Matt.  xiii ; 
others  have  'Itfffottę  m  Lukę),  the  name  of  two  or  three 
peraons  in  the  New  Testament 

1.  Erroneously  in  the  A.  V.  (Łukę  iii,  29)  <<  Josk" 
(q.v.). 

2.  The  son  of  Mary  and  Cleopas,  and  brother  of  James 
the  Less,  of  Simon,  and  of  Jude,  and,  conseąuently,  one 
of  thoee  who  are  called  "  the  brcthren"  of  our  Lord 
(Matt.  xiii,  55 ;  xxyił,  56 ;  Mark  vi,  3 ;  xv,  40, 47).  See 
Jasoes  ,•  JuDB.  He  was  the  only  one  of  these  brethren 
who  was  not  an  apoeUe  — a  drcumstance  which  has 
giyen  occasion  to  some  imsatisfactory  conjecture.  It  is, 
perhaps,  morę  remaikable  that  three  of  them  trere  apos- 
tles  than  that  the  fourth  was  not.  A.D.  28.— Kitto. 
See  Jesus  Christ. 

3.  (Acts  iv,  86.)    See  Barnabas. 

Jo'ahab  (Heb.  Yoshah^  rm'*,  prób.  estahlisherf 
Sepu  'JuHTiac,  v.  r.  'liiKTia  ;  Vulg.  Jota),  son  of  Ama- 
ziah,  and  one  of  the  chief  Simeonites.  the  incrcase  of 
whosc  family  induccd  them  to  migrate  to  the  vaUey  of 
Gcdor,  whencc  they  expclled  the  aboriginal  Hamites 
(1  Chroń,  iv,  34).     B.C.  cir.  711. 

Joah'aphat  (1  Chroń,  xi,  43).     See  Juiosha- 

PlIAT,  1. 

Joahavl'ah  (Heb.  Yothavyah%  ri;n;śi%  Jdunah  is 
MUjficimł,  otherwise  L  q.  Josibiah ;  Sept.  'lutria ;  Vnlg. 
Joaajd),  son  of  Elnaam,  and  (with  his  brother  Jeribai) 
one  of  David's  fiunooa  body-guard  (I  Chroń,  xi,  46). 
RC 1046. 

IV.— T  T  T 


JMhbek^ashmh  Qlf\KYo$hbekashah',  tr^^^'^^, 
piob.  for  ndj^ą  !3d%  Kat  in  hardnesa ;  Sept.  £e/5arai- 
rav  and  *ltijfiaKaTav  v.  r.  'UofiaaaKa ;  Vulg.  JesbacaS" 
sa),  one  of  the  sons  of  Heman,  and  leader  of  the  seven- 
tecnth  diyision  of  Tempie  musicians  (1  Chroń,  xxv,  4, 
24).    B.C.1014. 

Jo'aheb-ba8'seł>eŁh  (Heb.  YoBhef-baak-She^beth, 
raiśa  ^^\  tiaittff  in  the  session,  i.  c.  couneil;  Sept. 
'Ufiwj^k',  Vulg.  tttiefw  tn  cathedra;  Auth.Ters.  <'that 
sat  in  the  seat**),  the  chief  of  Dayid'8  three  principal 
heroes  (2  Sam.  xxiii,  8) ;  called  in  the  fMurallel  passagb 
(1  Chroń,  xi,  11)  Jashobkah  (q.  y.). 

Jo8h'u&  (Heb.  Yehoshu'd,  C!iain%  Jehotah  is  hia 
h€lp,  or  Jehwah  the  Sariour,  according  to  Pearson,  On 
the  Creed,  art  u,  p.  89,  cd.  1843 ;  Sept.,  N.  T.,  and  Joee- 
phus  'Ificoiic;  Auth.  Yers. '*  Jehoehua'*  in  Numb.  xiii, 
16,  and  "  Jehoshuah**  in  1  Chroń,  vii,  27 ;  *'  Jesus*"  in  Acta 
vii,  45 ;  Heb.  iv,  8 ,  comp.  Jeshua  ;  Jesus),  the  name  of 
seyoral  men. 

1.  The  son  of  Nun,  of  the  tribe  of  Ephnum,  the  aa- 
siatant  and  successor  of  Moses,  whose  history  is  chiefly 
contained  in  the  book  that  beara  his  name.  His  name 
was  originally  Hosiiea  (?d*M,  takatian,  Numb.  xiii, 
8),  and  it  seems  that  the  subeequent  alteration  of  it  by 
Moses  (Numb.  xiii,  16)  was  significant,  and  prooeeded 
on  the  same  principle  as  that  of  Abraip  into  Abraham 
(Gen.  xvii,  5),  and  of  Sarai  into  Sarah  (Gen.  xvii,  15). 
In  Neh.  yiii,  17,  he  is  called  by  the  equivalent  name 
Jeshua  (?^Ó.7,  sahation).    See  Jesus. 

1.  Personal  History. — ^According  to  the  Tsemach  Da- 
vid,  Joshua  was  bom  in  Kgypt,  in  the  year  of  the  Jewish 
nra  2406  (RC  1087) ;  but  as  he  was  probably  about  the 
age  of  Caleb,  with  whom  he  was  associated,  we  may  aa- 
sign  his  birth  to  RC.  cir.  1698  (or,  as  below,  1698).  The 
futurę  captain  of  invading  hosts  grew  up  a  slaye  in  the 
brick-fields  of  Egypt.  Bom  about  the  time  whcn  Mo- 
ses fled  into  Midian,  he  was  a  man  of  some  forty  yeart 
when  he  saw  the  ten  plagucs  and  shared  in  the  hurried 
triumph  of  the  Exodus.  The  keen  eye  of  the  sged  Law-^ 
giver  Boon  discemed  in  Hoshea  those  ąualities,  which 
might  be  reąuired  in  a  collcague  or  successor  to  bim- 
selC  In  the  Bibie  he  is  first  mentioned  as  bdng  the 
yictorious  commander  of  the  Israclites  in  their  batti^ 
against  the  Amalekites  at  Rephidim  (£xod.  xvii,  8-16X 
RC  1658.  When  Moses  ascended  Mount  Sinai  to  ic- 
ceive  for  the  lirst  time  (compare  Exod.  xxiv,  13,  a^jd 
xxxiii,  1 1)  the  two  Tables,  Joshiia,  who  is  called  his  min- 
ister or  8ervant,  accompanied  him  part  of  the  way,  and 
was  the  first  to  accost  him  in  his  descent  (£xod.  xxxii^ 
17).  Soon  afterwards  he  was  one  of  the  twelve  chieft 
who  were  sent  (Numb.  xiii,  17)  to  explore  the  land  of 
Canaan,  and  one  of  the  two  (xiv,  6)  who  gavo  an  en- 
couraging  report  of  their  joumey.  RC.  1657.  '  The 
forty  years  of  wandering  were  almost  passed,  and  Joshua 
was  one  of  the  few  snnriyors,  when  Moses,  shortJy  be- 
fore his  death,  was  directed  (Numb.  xxvii,  18)  to  invest 
Joshua  aoleronly  and  pnblicly  with  definite  aathority, 
in  connection  with  Eleazar  the  pricst,  over  the  people 
(Deut.  iii,  28).  After  this,  God  himself  gave  Joshua  a 
charge  by  the  mouth  of  the  dying  Lawgiver  (Deut. 
xxxi,  14, 28).  Ra  1618.  Under  the  dircction  of  God 
again  renę  wed  (Joeh.  i,  1),  Joehua,  now  in  his  85th  year 
(Josephus,  Ant,y,\,  29),  asaumed  the  command  of  the 
people  at  Shittim,  sent  spies  into  Jericho,  crossed  the  Jor- 
dan, fortified  a  camp  at  (lilgal,  circnmcised  the  people, 
kept  the  Passoyer,  and  was  yisited  by  the  ca)3tain  of  the 
Lord's  host.  (See  below.)  A  miracle  madę  the  fali  of 
Jericho  morę  terrible  to  the  Canaanites.  A  miracnloua 
repulse  in  the  first  aasault  on  Ai  impressed  upon  the  in- 
yadeiB  the  waming  that  they  were  the  instruments  of  a 
holy  and  jealous  God.  Ai  fell ;  and  the  law  was  inscribcd 
on  Mount  Ebal,  and  read  by  their  leader  in  the  prescnce 
of  all  IsraeL  The  treaty  which  the  feai^tricken  Gib- 
eonites  obtained  deceitfuUy  was  generously  respected  by 
Joshua.    It  stimulated  and  brought  to  a  point  the  hoe* 


JOSHUA 


1026 


JOSHUA 


tile  movements  of  the  five  confederate  chiefó  of  the  Am- 
orites.  Joahua,  aided  by  an  unpreoedented  hailstonn 
and  a  miraculous  prolongation  of  the  day  (see  below), 
obtained  a  declsive  vicŁory  over  Łhem  Jit  Makkedah,  and 
proceeded  at  once  to  subjugate  the  iiouth  country'  as  far 
as  Kadesh-barnea  and  Gaza.  He  retumed  to  the  camp 
at  Gilgal  master  of  half  of  Palestine. 

In  another  campaign  be  marched  to  the  watera  of 
Merom,  where  he  met  and  overthrew  a  oonfedeiacy  of 
the  Canaanitish  chiefe  in  the  north,  under  Jabin,  king 
of  Hazor;  and  in  the  course  of  a  protracted  war  he  led 
his  victoriou8  soldiers  to  the  gates  of  Zidon  and  into  the 
valley  of  Lebanon  under  Hermon.  In  Bix  years,  six  na- 
tions,  with  thirty-one  kings,  swell  the  roU  of  his  oon- 
quests ;  amongst  others  the  Anakim — the  old  terror  of 
Israel — are  specially  recorded  as  destroyed  everywhere 
except  in  Philistia.  It  roust  be  borne  in  mind  that  the 
exten8ive  conquc9ts  of  Joshua  were  not  intended  to 
achieve,  and  did  not  achiere  the  oomplete  extirpaŁion 
of  the  Canaanites,  many  of  whom  continued  to  occupy 
iBolated  strongholds  throughout  the  land.    (See  beiow.) 

Joshua,  now  stricken  in  ycars,  proceeded,  in  oonjunc- 
tion  with  Eleazar  awl  the  heads  of  the  tribes,  to  com> 
plete  the  diviflion  of  the  ^uąuered  land ;  and  when  all 
was  allottod,  Timnath-serah  in  Mount  £phraim  was  as- 
signed  by  the  peopte  as  Joshna'8  peculiar  inheritance. 
The  tabemade  of  the  congregation  was  estabUshed  at 
Shiloh,  8ix  cities  of  refuge  were  appointed,  forty-eight 
cities  assigned  to  the  Levites,  and  the  warriors  of  the 
tnuis-Jordanic  tribes  dismissed  in  pcaoe  to  their  homes. 

After  an  interval  of  rest,  Joehua  oonFoked  an  assem- 
Uy  from  all  IsraeU  He  delivered  two  solemn  addresses 
leminding  them  of  the  maryelous  fuMlmcnt  of  God's 
promiscs  to  their  fathers,  and  wamed  them  of  the  oondi- 
tions  on  which  their  prosperity  depended ;  and,  lastly, 
he  caused  them  to  renew  their  covenant  with  God  at 
Shechcm,  a  place  already  famoos  in  connection  with 
Jacob  (Gen.  xxxv,  4)  and  Joseph  (Josh.  xxiv,  82).  He 
died  at  the  age  of  110  years,  and  was  buried  in  hb  own 
city,  Timnath-serah  (Josh.  xxiv).  RC.  1698.  Accord- 
ing  bo  Schwarz  (^PaUst.  p.  147),  his  grave,  omamented 
with  a  handsome  monument,  is  still  pointed  out  at  Ke- 
far  Charas. 

2.  Ilia  Character,—Jo»łiatCs  life  has  been  noted  as 
one  of  the  ver}'  few  which  are  recorded  in  history  with 
some  fulness  of  detail,  yet  without  any  stain  upon  them. 
In  his  character  have  been  traced,  under  an  Oriental 
garb,  such  features  as  chietiy  kindled  the  imagination 
of  Western  chroniclers  and  poeta  in  the  Middle  Ages: 
the  character  of  a  devout  warrior,  blamelees  and  fear- 
less,  who  has  been  taught  by  serring  as  a  youth  how  to 
oommand  as  a  man ;  who  eams  by  manly  vigor  a  quiet, 
łionored  old  age ;  who  combines  strength  with  gentle- 
ness,  ever  looking  up  for  and  obeyijig  the  divŁne  im- 
pulse  with  the  simplicity  of  a  child,  while  he  ińelds 
great  power  and  directs  it  calmly,  and  without  sweir- 
ing,  to  the  accomplishment  of  a  bigh,  unselfish  purpooe. 

All  that  part  of  the  book  of  Joshua  which  relates  his 
persona!  history  seems  to  be  written  with  the  uncon- 
scious,  vivid  power  of  an  eye-witness.  We  are  not  mere- 
ly  uught  to  look  with  a  dłstant  reverence  upon  the  fizst 
man  who  bears  the  name  which  is  above  every  name. 
We  stand  by  the  side  of  one  who  is  admitted  to  hear 
the  words  of  God,  and  see  the  vision  of  the  Almighty. 
The  image  of  the  armed  warrior  is  before  us  as  when  in 
the  sight  of  two  armies  he  lifted  up  his  spear  over  un- 
guarded  AL  We  see  the  majestic  presence  which  in- 
spired  all  Israel  (iv,  14)  with  awe ;  the  mild  father  who 
remonstrated  with  Achan;  the  calm,  dignified  judge  who 
pronounced  his  sentenoe;  the  devoted  worahipper  pros- 
trating  himself  before  the  captain  of  the  Lord*s  boet. 
We  see  the  lonely  man  in  the  h^ght  of  his  power,  sep- 
arate  from  those  about  him,  the  last  survivor,  save  one, 
of  a  famous  generation ;  the  honored  old  man  of  many 
deeds  and  many  sufferings,  gathering  his  dying  eiiergy 
for  tan  attcmpt  to  bind  his  people  morę  dosely  to  the 
8ervioe  of  God  whom  he  had  so  long  serred  and  wor- 


shłpped,  and  whóm  he  was  ever  leaniing  to  know  mon 
and  morę. 

The  great  work  of  Joehua's  life  was  matę  exdting 
but  less  hopeful  than  that  of  Moses.  He  gatheied  the 
fint  fraita  of  the  autumn  hanrest  wbere  bia  predecettor 
had  sown  the  seed  in  spring.  It  was  a  high  and  inspir- 
ing  task  to  watch  beside  the  cradle  of  a  mig^faty  nation, 
and  to  train  ita  eariy  footsteps  in  lawa  which  shonki  last 
for  oenturies;  and  it  was  a  fit  end  to  a  life  of  expect»- 
tlen  to  gazę  with  longing  eyes  from  Piągah  upon  the 
Land  of  Promise.  But  no  sucfa  brightness  gleamed  opon 
the  calm  cloae  of  Joshua^s  life.  Solemn  woida,  and  daik 
with  foreboding,  fell  from  him  i»  he  aat  **  uoder  tbe  oak 
that  was  by  the  sanctoaiy  of  the  Lord  in  Shecben."' 
The  excitement  of  his  battles  was  past;  and  there  had 
grown  up  in  the  mind  of  the  pious  leader  a  conscions- 
ness  that  it  is  the  tendency  of  prosperity  and  auocoss  to 
make  a  people  wanton  and  worldly-minded,  idolaten  in 
spirit  if  not  in  act,  and  to  alienate  them  from  God. 

Holy  Scripture  itself  suggests  (Heb.  iv,  S)  the  oonsid- 
eration  of  Joshua  as  a  type  of  ChrisL  Many  of  tbe 
Christian  fathers  hare  enlarged  upon  thia  view;  and 
Bishop  Peafson,  who  hęa  coUected  their  opiniona  {Om  tke 
Creed,  ait.  ii,  p.  87-90,  and  94-96,  ed.  1843),  pointa  out 
the  fcAlowing  and  many  other  typicaliesemblancea:  (1.) 
the  name  oommon  to  both ;  (2.)  Joahua  brings  the  peo- 
ple of  God  ijłto  the  land  of  promise,  and  divide8  tbe  land 
among  the  tribes ;  Jesus  brings  his  people  into  the  prai- 
ence  of  God,  and  assigns  to  them  their  manaions;  (3.) 
as  Joshua  suoceeded  Moeea  and  oompleted  hia  work,  m> 
the  Gospel  of  Christ  sucoeeding  the  law.  announoed  One 
by  whom  all  that  be]ieve  are  justified  fiom  all  tfaiogs 
from  which  we  conld  not  be  justified  by  the  Ław  c£ 
Moses  (Acts  xiii,  39) ;  (4.)  as  Joshoa,  the  minister  of 
Moses,  renewed  the  rite  of  drcnmcisiim,  so  Jesus,  tbe 
minister  of  the  circumcisioii,  brought  in  the  curcumóa- 
ion  of  the  heart  (Rom.  xv,  8 ;  ii,  29). 

8.  DiffictUtiea  in  his  Narratitf,r-lt  has  been  questton- 
ed  whether  the  captain  of  the  Lord's  host  (eh.  v,  13-15) 
was  a  created  being  or  not.  Dr.  W.  H.  Mili  discuaMS 
this  point  at  fuU  length  and  with  great  leaming,  and 
decides  in  favor  of  the  former  altematire  (On  the  HistoT' 
ical  Character  of  Sf.  Lu&^s  First  ChajOer,  C^mb.  1841, 
p.  92).  But  J.  G.  Abicht  {De  Dum  Ererciłus,  etc,  ap. 
Aot*.  Thes,  Theohffiohphilohff,  i,  608)  is  of  opinion  that 
he  was  the  uncreated  angel,  the  Son  of  God.  Compaie 
also  Pfeiffer,  DiJT^  Script,  Loe,  pw  173.     See  Anoki. 

The  treatment  of  the  Canaanites  by  their  Jewiah  eon- 
qtteronł  is  fuUy  dtscussed  by  Dean  urave8.  On  the  Potfo- 
teuch,  pt.  iii,  lect.  i.  He  oondudes  that  the  extermina- 
tion  of  the  Canaanites  was  Justified  by  their  crimea,  and 
that  the  employment  of  the  Jews  in  soch  exteTminatiion 
was  quite  consistent  with  €rod*s  method  of  goreming 
the  world.  Professor  Fttrbaim  ( Typolog  ofScr^tre^ 
bk.  iii,  eh.  4,  §  1,  ed.  1854)  aignes  with  great  force  and 
candor  in  favor  of  the  complete  agreementof  the  pcinci- 
pies  on  which  the  war  was  carried  on  by  Joshua  with 
the  principles  of  the  Chriatian  diapensation.     See  Ca- 

NAAKITKS. 

Among  the  supematural  oocnrrenoea  in  the  life  of 
Joshua,  nonę  has  led  to  ao  much  diacusńon  as  the  pro- 
longation of  the  day  of  the  battle  of  Makkedah  (x,  1^ 
14).  No  great  difileulty  is  found,  in  deciding  aa  Pfeiffer 
has  done  {Diff^ ScripLloc, ^  175)  between  the  lengths 
of  this  day  and  that  of  Hezekiah  (2  Kinga  xx,  1 IX  and 
in  connecting  both  days  with  the  Egyptian  tradition 
mentioned  by  Herodotus,  ii,  142.  But  sińce  modem  sci- 
ence revea]ed  the  stupendous  character  of  this  mindc, 
modem  criticism  has  maile  8everal  attempts  to  explain 
it  away.  It  is  regarded  by  Le  Qerc,  Dathe,  and  othen 
as  no  miracle,  but  an  optical  illusion ;  by  RosenmlUler, 
following  Ilgen,  as  a  mistake  of  the  time  of  day;  by 
Winer  and  many  reoent  German  critics,  with  whom  Dr. 
David8on  {Intród, toO,T.p, 644)  seems  to  agree,  aa  a 
mistake  of  the  meaning  or  the  autbority  of  a  poctioil 
contribótor  to  the  book  of  Jasher.  So  Ewald  {OtsHL 
Isr,  ii,  826)  traces  in  the  latter  part  of  \txae  18  an  ia* 


JOSHUA 


1027 


JOSHUA 


tenM^ation  by  the  hiod  of  tbat  aiionyliioiis  Jew  whom 
h»  Bupposn  to  haye  written  the  book  of  DeateioDoroy, 
and  here  to  bave  miaimdentood  the  yivid  ooiiceptian  of 
«ii  old  poet;  and  be  dtes  namenms  aunUar  oonoeptioiiB 
litom  tbe  old  poetFy  of  Oraeoe,  Romę,  Arabia,  and  Peni. 
But  the  literał  and  nattirał  interpretation  of  the  text,  as 
intended  to  desciibe  a  miiacle,  ia  suflkiently  yindicated 
byDeyling,O6«erv.i5acr.i,§19,p.l00;  and  J.G.Abicht, 
JM  staiume  Soli*  Kp.Nav,  Tkes.  TheoL'pkiM.i,bl6;  and 
ia  forcibly  sUted  by  Biahop  Wataon  in  the  foorth  letter 
in  hia^Apologsf/or  the  Bibk.  Banillai  {Joma  und  dk 
JSotme,  from  the  Italian,  Trieste,  1869)  nndentandi  the 
word  dS^,  <<  stand  still"  (lit.  he  dumb)^  to  dgnify  merep 
ly  ceaae  to  skme,  and  tbe  expresBion  **  hasted  not  to  go 
down  a  whole  day"  as  equlvalent  to  withheid  its  fuU 
Uffhtf^m  other  wordSjthere  was  an  edipse:  bow  this 
coold  be  of  senrice  to  the  Hefarews  does  not  appear. 
See  Gibson;  Jashkr. 

4.  Length  of  kit  AdmimatrfUum, — According  to  Jo- 
aephos  {AnL  v,  1,  29),  Joshua  commanded  the  Jews 
twenty-five  years,  but,  according  to  other  Jewish  chro- 
nologers,  twenty-seren  years.  The  Ttemach  Danid,  on 
the  years  of  the  Jewish  era  2489  and  2496,  remarks : 
^It  is  written  in  the  8eder  Olom  that  Joshua  judged  Is- 
rael  twenty-fi^e  3rears,  commencing  from  the  year  2488, 
immediately  from  the  death  of  Moses,  to  the  year  2516. 
This,  howeyer,  would  not  be  known  to  ns  but  for  cabal- 
iatic  traditłon,  but  in  some  degree  also  by  reasoning," 
etc  Hottinger  {Smegtna,  p.  469)  says :  "  According  to 
the  Midrath,  Rahab  was  ten  years  old  when  the  Israel- 
ites  lefl  Egypt;  she  played  the  harlot  dnring  the  forty 
years  in  which  the  Israelites  were  in  the  desert.  She 
became  the  wife  of  Joshua,  aad  eight  prophets  descend- 
ed  frem  her,  viz.  Jeremiah,  Hahiuia,  Hanamael,  Shal- 
lum,  Baruch,  Ezekiel.  Some  say  also  that  Huldah  the 
prophetess  was  her  descendant."  Some  chronologers 
have  endeavored  to  reduce  the  mle  of  Joshua  to  seyen- 
teen,  and  others  to  twenty-one  years.  There  is  no  good 
reason  for  departing  from  the  number  asaigned  by  Jo- 
seph us  (see  MetA.  Quar,  Rec,  1856,  p.  450).     See  Chro- 

ROLOOY. 

6.  Other  TradiHonary  NoHcu.—Ug}\tfoot(ffar,  ffeb. 
in  Matt  i,  5,  and  Choroffr.  Lucmpramit,  iy,  §  8)  ąuotes 
Je\%-ish  traditions  likewrise  to  the  eflect  that  the  sep- 
ulchre  of  Joshua  was  adomed  with  an  image  of  the  sun 
in  memory  of  the  mirade  of  Ajalon.  The  Sept  and  the 
Arab.  Ver.  add  to  Josh.  xxiy,  80  the  statoment  that  in 
his  septdchre  were  depoeited  the  flint^kniyes  which  were 
used  for  the  circumcision  at  Gilgal  (Josh.  y,  2). 

There  also  occur  some  yestiges  of  the  dceds  of  Joshua 
in  other  historians  besides  tbose  of  his  own  country. 
Procopius  mentions  a  Phoenician  inscription  near  the 
city  of  Tingis  in  Mauritania,  the  sense  of  which  was : 
<*  We  are  those  who  fled  before  the  face  of  Joshua  the 
lobber,  the  son  of  Nun"  (De  BdL  Vandal.  ii,  10).  Suidas 
(sub  voce  Xayaav):  "  We.are  the  Canaanites  whom 
Joshua  the  robber  persecuted."  Compare  Fabricii  Co- 
dex  Paeudepigraphua  Yeterit  Testamenti^  i,  889  są.,  and 
the  doubts  respecting  this  statement  in  Dale,  IM  Origine 
et  Progrtuu,  IdokUrim,  p.  749  sq.  Ewald  {Geech,  Itr, 
ii,  297, 298)  giyes  soimd  reasons  for  forbearing  to  use 
this  Story  as  anthentic  history.  It  is,  howeyer,  accept- 
ed  by  Kawlinson  {BampUm  Ledure  for  1859,  iii,  91). 
A  letter  of  Shaubech,  '^m^T,  king  of  Armenia  Minor,  in 
the  Samaritan  book  of  Joshua  (eh.  xxyi),  styles  Joshua 
PinHpPK  a'^*13K,  lupiu  percustor,  *Mhe  murdeious 
wolf;"  or,  according  to  another  zeading  in  the  book 
Juchasm  (p.  154,  f.  1),  and  in  the  ShaUheieth  Rakkabbar 
lah  (p*  96),  nia*15  axt,  b^us  pegperHmUj "  the  eyening 
wolf*  (comp.  Hab.  i,  8;  Hottinger,  Hirtoria  OrimUdig, 
Tlgnri«  1651,  p.  40  8q. ;  Boddeus,  Uiet.  Ecdee.  p.  964  sq.). 
A  oompanson  of  Hercules,  according  to  the  Phcenician 
and  Greek  mythology,  with  Joshua  has  been  attempted 
by  Hercidits  (jQj»od  Heradea  idem  sit  ac  Jomoj  Lipsift, 
1706;  comp.  Anton.  Compar.  Hbror.  tac.  V,  7\  et  tcrfpt 
fTcfim^  iy»  y»  Gorlic;  1817).--Kitto ;  Smith. 


6.  A  ddirionai  Literaturę  on  Joikua  penonatty,  andhii 
Erphita,^^T\ke  principal  oocuirenoes  in  the  life  of  Joshua 
are  reyiewed  by  Bishop  Hall  in  his  Contempiatione  on  the 
0.r.bks.7,8,and9.  See  also  T.  Smith, //irt.  o/^otAtta 
(UmćL  1862);  Oyerton,  Life  of  Joshua  (Lond,  1866); 
Hess,  Geseh.  Josuom  (ZUr.  1759) ;  Masius,  Josuee  historia 
(Antw.  1754) ;  Plumptre,  Ilist.  of  Joshua  (Lond.  1848). 

JOSHUA,  Book  of,  the  first  in  order  of  the  &''K''ą3 
D*^3VdS<*1,  or  Former  Prophets  in  the  Hebrew  Canon. 
See  BiBLB.  It  is  so  called  from  the  personage  who  oo- 
cupies  the  principal  place  in  the  nairation  of  eyenU  con- 
tained  therein,  and  may  be  considered  siB  a  oontinuation 
of  the  Pentateuch,  sińce  it  commenoes  with  **'vav  eon* 
tinuatiye**  in  the  word  *^ri^n,  which  may  be  lendeied 
thereupon  it  happemd, 

L  Con/«nte.— This  book  gjycs  an  acoount  of  the  for- 
tnnes  of  the  Israelites  from  the  death  of  Moses  to  that 
of  Joshua,  the  son  of  Nun.  Beginning  with  the  Kp- 
pointment  of  Joshua  to  succeed  Moses  as  the  leader  of 
the  people,  it  prooeeds  to  describe  the  anrangementa 
madę  by  Joshua  in  prospect  of  passing  oyer  Jordan  (i^ 
ii) ;  the  crossing  of  the  riyer,  and  the  setting  up  of  a 
memoriał  on  the  further  side  at  Gilgal  (iii-<iy) ;  the  diś- 
may  which  this  occasioned  to  the  Canaanites  (y,  1) ;  the 
circumcision  of  the  males  among  the  people,  that  rito 
haying  been  negiected  in  the  wildemess ;  tlie  obsery- 
ance  of  the  Passoyer  by  them  in  the  camp  at  Gilgal ; 
the  ceasing  of  the  manna  on  the  day  afler  they  had 
entered  Canaan  (y,  2-12) ;  the  encouragement  giyen  to 
Joshua  to  proceed  on  his  enterprise  by  the  appcarance 
of  an  angel  to  him  (y,  13-15) ;  the  siege  and  capture  of 
Jericho  (yi);  the  defeat  of  the  Israelites  at  Ai  (yii) ;  the 
taking  of  Ai  (ym^  1-29) ;  the  writing  of  the  Uw  on  U- 
bies  of  stone,  and  the  solemn  repetition  from  Ebal  and 
Gerizim  of  the  blessings  and  tbe  curses  which  Moses 
had  written  in  the  book  of  the  law  (yiii,  30-85) ;  the 
oonfederation  of  the  kings  of  Northern  Canaan  against 
the  Israelites ;  the  cunuing  deyice  by  which  the  Gibeon- 
ites  secured  themsdyes  from  being  dcstroycd  by  the  Is- 
raelites ;  the  indignation  of  the  other  Canaanites  against 
the  Gibeonites,  and  the  confederetion  of  the  kings  around 
Jerusalem  against  Joshua,  with  their  signal  defeat  by 
him  (ix,  x) ;  the  oyerthrow  at  the  waters  of  Megiddo  of 
the  great  northem  confederacy,  with  the  destruction  of 
the  Anakim  (xi) ;  the  list  of  kings  whose  country  the 
Israelites  had  takcn  under  Moses  and  Joshiu  (xii)*;  the 
diyision  of  the  country,  both  the  parts  oonquered  and 
those  yet  remaining  under  the  power  of  ihe  Canaanites, 
among  the  different  tribes,  chiefly  by  lot ;  the  setting  up 
of  the  tabemacle  in  Shiloh ;  the  appointment  of  cities 
of  refuge  and  of  cities  for  the  Leyites ;  the  return  of  the 
Reubenites,  the  Gaditcs,  and  the  half  tribe  of  Manasseh, 
to  their  possessions  on  the  east  of  the  Jordan,  afber  the 
settlement  of  their  brethren  in  Canaan  (xiii-xxii);  and 
the  farewell  addrcsses  of  Joshua  to  the  people,  his  death 
and  burial  (xxiii-xxiy).  The  book  naturally  divides  it^ 
self  into  two  parts;  the  former  (i-xii)  containing  an  ac- 
count  of  the  conąuest  of  the  land ;  the  latter  (xiii-xxiv) 
of  the  diyision  of  it  among  the  tribes.  These  are  fre- 
qnently  cited  distincriyely  as  the  historical  and  tbe  geo- 
graphical  portions  of  the  book. 

o.  The  first  twelye  chapters  form  a  continuous  narra* 
tiye,  which  seems  neyer  to  halt  or  tag,  The  desciip- 
tion  is  frequently  so  minutę  as  to  show  the  band  not 
merely  of  a  contemporary,  but  of  an  eye-witneak  An 
awful  sense  of  the  diyine  Presence  rcigns  throughout. 
We  are  called  out  from  the  din  and  tumult  of  each  bat- 
tle-field  to  listen  to  the  still  smali  yoice.  The  pmgresa 
of  eyents  is  clearly  foreshadowed  in  the  first  chapter 
(yers.  5, 6).  Step  by  step  we  are  led  on  through  the 
solemn  preparation,  the  aiduous  struggle,  the  crowning 
triumph.  Moying  eyerything  around,  yet  himself 
moyed  by  an  unseen  power,  the  Jewish  leader  risea 
high  and  calro  amid  all. 

6.  The  second  part  of  the  book  (eh.  xiii-xxl)  has  been 
aptly  compared  to  the  Domesday-book  of  the  Norman 


JOSHUA 


1028 


JOSHUA 


conqueior9  of  England.  The  docnments  of  which  it 
coiisisu  were  doubtless  the  abeCracts  of  aach  reports  aa 
were  suppUed  by  the  men  whom  Joehua  aent  out  (xvui, 
8)  to  describe  the  land.  In  the  course  of  time  it  is  prób- 
able  that  chiinges  were  introdiiced  into  their  leporta — 
whethel  kept  separately  among  the  national  aichirea, 
or  embodied  in  the  contenta  of  a  book^by  tianscriben 
adapting  them  to  the  actual  state  of  the  country  in  later 
timea  w  hen  political  di\d8ion8  were  modified,  new  towna 
sprung  up,  and  old  ones  diaappeared  (comp.  the  two  lista 
of  Leyitical  towns,  Josh.  xxi,  and  1  Chroń,  vi,  54,  etc). 

II.  Deńgn, — ^The  object  of  the  book  ia  manifeatly  to 
fumish  a  continnation  of  the  history  of  the  Israelites 
from  the  point  at  which  it  is  left  in  the  dosing  book  of 
the  Pentatench,  and  at  the  same  time  to  illustrate  the 
faithfuluess  of  Jehovah  to  his  word  of  promise,  and  his 
grace  in  aiding  his  people  by  miraculous  interferenoe  to 
obtain  possession  of  the  land  promised  to  Abraham.  The 
ground  idea  of  the  book,  as  Maurer  {Comment,  p.  S)  ob- 
serres,  is  fumished  by  God'8  declaration  to  Joehua,  re- 
cordcd  i,  5, 6,  that  the  work  which  Moses  commenoed  he 
should  finish  by  subduing  and  dividing  to  the  tribes  of 
Israel  the  Promised  Land.  The  book,  therefore,  may  be 
ręgarded  as  setting  forth  historically  the  grounda  on 
which  the  claims  of  Israel  to  the  proprietorship  of  the 
land  rcsted;  and  as  possessing,  conseąuently,  not  mere- 
ly  a  hbtorical,  but  also  a  oonstitutional  and  legał  worth. 
As  illustrating  God*8  grace  and  power  in  dealing  with 
his  people,  it  possesses  also  a  religious  and  spiritual  in- 
terest. 

III.  Umttf, — On  this  head  a  variety  of  opinions  have 
been  entertained.  It  has  been  asserted,  1.  That  the 
book  is  a  oollectiou  of  fragments  from  different  hands, 
put  togethcr  at  different  times,  and  the  whole  revised 
and  enlarged  by  a  later  writer.  Some  make  the  num- 
ber  of  sources  whence  these  fragments  have  been  de- 
rived  ten  (Ilerwerden,  Disp,  de  Libro  Jo9,  Groning.  1826) ; 
others^W,  induding  the  reriser  (Knohei,  ExeffeL  HbL 
pt  13 ;  Ewald,  Gesch.der  Israel.  i,  73  są.) ;  while  others 
content  themselves  with  three  (Bleek, £>«/»'/.  mu.  A,  T, 
p.  325).  2.  That  it  is  a  complete  and  uniform  composi- 
tion,  interspersed  with  glosses  and  additions  morę  or 
less  extensive.  8.  That  the  first  part  is  the  compoeition 
of  one  author;  but  the  second  betrays  indications  of 
being  a  compUation  from  various  sources  (Hayemick, 
EirUeit,  II,  i,  34).  4.  That  the  łNwk  is  complete  and  mii- 
form  throughout,  and,  as  a  whole,  is  the  composition  of 
one  writer.  It  is  impossible  here  to  en  ter  into  all  the 
details  of  this  discussion.  The  reader  ^-ill  tind  these 
fully  presented  by  De  Wette,  EUdeit.  xns,A,T., 4th  and 
8ubsequent  editions;  Haveniick,  ^iniei^.  I,  i,  1 ;  Konig, 
Alt-testamend,  Słudien,  i,  4;  Maurer,  Commeni,;  Keil, 
Comment.  E.  T.  p.  3 ;  Bleek,  łJinleit,  tn».  ^ .  T.,  p,  811 ; 
Knobd,  in  the  Exeget.  HcmdbucK,  pt.  13 ;  and  Dayidson, 
Inirod.  to  the  O,  T,  i,  412. 

a,  £vents  alleged  to  be  twice  narrated  in  this  book 
are,  Joshua's  decease,  eh.  xxiii  and  xxiv ;  the  command 
to  appoint  twelve  men,  one  out  of  each  tribe,  in  con- 
nection  with  the  pasaing  over  Jordan  (iii,  12 ;  iv,  3) ; 
the  stoning  of  Achan  and  his  dependenta  (vii,  25) ;  the 
setting  of  an  ambush  for  the  taking  of  Ai  (viii,  9, 12) ; 
the  rest  from  war  of  the  land  (xi,  28 ;  xiv,  15) ;  the  com- 
mand to  Joshua  conceming  diWding  the  land  (xiii,  6) ; 
and  the  granting  of  Hebron  to  Caleb  (xiv,  13 ;  xv,  13). 
This  list  we  have  traiiscribed  from  Knobel  {ExegeL 
Hdhk.  xiii,  498).  Is  it  incredible  that  Joshua  should 
have  twice  assembled  the  repre8entative8  of  the  people 
to  address  them  before  his  decease?  May  he  not  have 
fclt  that,  spared  beyond  his  expectation,  it  behoved  him 
to  avail  himself  of  the  opportunity  thus  afforded  to  ad- 
dress once  morę  to  the  people  words  of  counsel  and  ad- 
monition?  In  the  case  of  the  grant  to  Caleb  of  He- 
bron there  is  undoubtedly  a  rcpetition  of  the  same  fact, 
but  it  is  such  a  repetition  as  might  proceed  from  the 
same  pen ;  for  the  two  statcments  are  madę  in  different 
connections,  the  one  ui  connection  with  Caleb's  per- 
sonal  merita,  the  other  in  connection  with  the  bounda- 


ries  and  occopatioii  aUotted  to  Jadah.  Tbe  taking  of 
Ai  will  be  oonaidered  forther  on.  Aa  for  the  otber  iiH 
stances,  we  leave  them  to  the  Judgment  of  onr  readen. 

h.  Of  the  alleged  dtKrepaneie*^  one  on  which  much 
atreaa  has  been  laid  is,  that  in  ▼ariona  parta  of  the  book 
Joshua  ia  aaid  to  have  aubdued  the  whole  land  add  de- 
stioyed  the  Canaanites  (xi,  10;  xii,  7  Bq.;  xxi, 43;  xxii, 
4),  whereaa  in  others  it  ia  stated  that  laige  portiona  of 
the  land  were  not  conąuered  by  Joehua  (xiii,  1  8q. ;  xvti, 
14  8q. ;  xviii,  3  aą. ;  xxiii,  5-12).  It  ia  woithy  of  notę, 
howerer,  in  the  outaet,  that  this  is  a  diacrepancy  which 
pervadee  the  book,  and  on  which,  oonsequently,  no  ar^ 
gument  for  diversity  of  authorahip,  as  between  the/nf 
and  the  second  parta  of  it,  can  be  builu  Again,  a  dia- 
crepancy of  thia  aort  is  of  a  kind  so  obrioua,  tbat  it  ia 
exactly  auch  as  a  compiler,  cooUy  sunreying  the  mate- 
rials  he  is  putting  together,  would  at  onoe  detect  and 
eliminate ;  whereaa  an  original  writer  might  write  ao  ai 
to  give  the  -appearanoe  of  it  from  looking  at  the  aame 
object  from  different  points  of  view  in  the  course  of  his 
writing.  Yiewed  in  relation  to  purpoae  and  effect,  the 
land  was  oonquered  and  appropriated;  larael  was  aet^ 
ded  in  it  as  master  and  proprietor,  the  power  of  the  Ca- 
naanites was  broken,  and  God^s  covenant  to  hia  people 
was  fulfilled.  But  through  varioua  caosea,  chiefly  the 
people's  own  fault,  the  work  was  not  literally  completed ; 
and  therefore,  yiewed  in  relation  to  what  ought  to  have 
been  doneand  what  might'have  been  done,  the  historian 
could  not  but  record  that  there  yet  remained  aome  ene- 
mies  to  be  conquered,  and  some  portiona  of  the  land  to 
be  appropriated.  It  waa  intended  (Ex.  xxiii,  28, 30) 
(Ex.  xxiii,  28, 30)  that  the  people  shoold  oocupy  tbe 
land  little  by  little.  In  l|ke  manner,  it  can  not  be  al- 
lowed  that  the  generał  statement  (xi,  23)  that  Joshua 
gave  the  land  unto  all  Israel  according  to  their  divisioiia 
by  their  tribes  is  inoonsiaCent  with  the  iact  (xviii,  1 ; 
xix,  51)  that  many  subseąuent  years  paaeed  before  the 
process  of  diyision  waa  completed  and  the  alSotmenta 
dnally  adjustcd. 

The  boundaries  of  the  different  tribes,  it  ia  said,  are 
stated  sometimes  with  greater,  sometimea  with  leaa  ex- 
actness.  Now  this  may  be  a  &ult  of  the  aonreyois  em- 
ployed  by  Joshua ;  but  it  is  scarcdy  an  inconaistencr  to 
be  charged  on  the  writer  of  the  book  who  tranacribed 
their  descriptions.  Again,  the  divine  promiae  that  the 
coast  of  Israel  shaD  extend  to  the  Enphratea  (i,  4)  ia  not 
inconsistent  with  the  fact  that  the  country  which  Joehua 
was  commanded  to  divide  (xiii,  16)  does  not  exieiid  so 
far.  Again,  the  statement  (xiii,  3)  that  Ekron,  etc,  re- 
mained yet  to  be  possessed  is  not  inoonaistciit  with  the 
subsequent  statement  (xv,  45)  that  it  waa  aasigned  to 
Judah.  Dr.  Davidson  gives  no  proof  either  of  hia  aa- 
sertion  that  the  former  text  is  in  fact  suhseqaent  to  the 
latter,  or  of  his  supposition  that  Ekron  waa  in  the  pos^ 
session  of  Judah  at  the  time  of  its  assignment. 

Another  apparent  discrepancy  has  been  foond  be- 
tween xxii,  2  and  xxiv,  14, 23.  How,  it  ia  aaked,  coold 
there  be  "gross  idolatry"  amongst  a  people  who  had  in 
all  things  conformed  to  the  law  of  God  given  by  Hoses? 
This  difficulty  is  dealt  with  by  Augustine  (Qu<ase.  tn  Jou 
qu.  29),  who  aolyes  it  by  understanding  the  injundion 
of  Joshua  to  refer  to  alienation  of  heart  on  the  part  of 
the  people  from  God.  This  explanation  is  foUowed  in 
substance  by  Calvin  and  others,  and  it  is  apparenily 
the  tnie  one.  Had  Joshua  known  that  **  gmss  idolatcy" 
was  practiced  by  the  people,  he  would  have  taken  vigQi^ 
ous  measures  before  this  to  exrirpate  iL  But  against 
secret  and  heart  idolatry  he  could  use  only  words  of 
waming  and  counseL 

Another  discrepancy  is  thoa  set  forth  by  Dr.David- 
son  {Introd.  i,  p.  415) :  "  It  is  related  that  the  people  aa- 
sembled  at  Sichem,  *  under  an  oak  that  waa  by  the  aane- 
tuary  of  the  Lord,'  and  *■  they  preaented  themselve8  be- 
fore God,'  implying  that  the  tabemade  and  aik  were 
there.  But  we  know  ftx>m  xviii,  1  that  the  taberoada 
had  been  removed  from  its  former  place  at  Gilgal  to  Shi- 
loh,  where  it  remained  for  a  long  period  after  Joahiia'a 


JOSHUA 


1029 


JOSHUA 


(1  Sam.  iii,  21 ;  iy,  8).  Hero  are  aeyenl  mis- 
tskw.  The  phraae  "*  beforo  God"  (fi^^r^MH  *^3B>)  does 
not  necesBarily  mean  **  before  the  ark  of  the  Lord"  (oomp. 
Gen. xxyii,  7 ;  Judg.  xi,  U ;  xx,  1 ;  1  Kinga  xvii,  1, etc; 
Hengstenbefg,  Beitr,  iii,  48) ;  and  it  is  fu>^  related  that 
**tfae  people  aasembled  under  an  oak  that  was  by  the 
aanctuary  of  the  Lord,"  but  that  Joshua  "  took  a  great 
stone  and  set  it  op  therc  under  the  oak  that  was  witbin 
the  aanctuary  of  the  Lord"  (xxiv,  26).  The  oak  refer- 
red  to  was  probably  a  well-known  one  that  stood  ¥rithin 
the  spot  which  had  been  the  first  sanctuaiy  of  the  Lord 
in  Ganaan  (Gen.  xii,  6, 7),  and  where  the  nation  had 
been  oonvened  by  Joshua,  on  first  entering  the  Pkom- 
ised  Land,  to  listen  to  the  words  of  the  law  (Joeh.  viii, 
80-86).  No  place  morę  fitting  bb  the  site  of  a  memo- 
riał stone  such  as  Joshua  is  here  said  to  have  set  up 
oould  be  found. 

These  are  the  only  discrepancies  that  have  even  the 
cppearance  of  seriously  affecting  the  daim  of  the  book 
to  be  legaided  as  the  work  of  one  author  throughout 
The  others,  which  have  been  diaoovered  and  urged  by 
Bome  recent  critics  in  Grermany,  are  such  that  it  seems 
nnneoesBary  to  take  up  space  by  uoticing  them.  The 
reader  will  flnd  them  not^  and  acoounted  for  in  the  In- 
troduction  to  Kól^s  Commentary  on  Jathua,  p.  9  są. 
The  treatment  of  the  Canaanites  which  is  sanctioned  in 
this  book  has  been  denounced  for  its  seyeńty  by  Eich- 
hom  and  earlier  writers.  But  there  is  nothing  in  it  in- 
oonsistent  with  the  divine  attribute  of  justioe,  or  with 
God%  ordinary  way  of  govemiiig  the  world.  See  above, 
Joshua;  also  Canaanites.  Thereforo  the  sanction 
which  is  given  to  it  does  not  impair  the  authority  of  this 
book.  Critical  ingenuity  has  searched  it  in  vain  for 
any  incident  or  sentiment  inconsistent  with  what  we 
know  of  the  character  of  the  age,  or  irreooncilable  with 
other  parts  of  canonical  Scripture. 

c.  The  alłcged  differences  oiphroMology  and  ttyk  in 
different  parts  of  the  book  might  desenre  morę  exteud- 
ed  notłce  were  it  not  for  the  very  unsatisfactory  state  in 
which  this  method  of  inquiry  as  yet  is.  Without  doubt, 
it  is  true  that,  if  it  can  be  shown  that  these  difTereuces 
aro  such  as  to  indicate  diyersity  of  authorship,  the  argu- 
ment must  be  admitted  as  Icgitimate,  and  the  condu- 
sion  as  valid ;  but  before  dealing  with  such  ąuestions, 
it  would  be  well  if  it  were  settled  on  some  scientific 
basis  what  is  the  oompetent  test  in  such  a  case,  what 
kind  and  amount  of  diflerence  in  phraseology  and  style 
are  snffident  to  prove  a  diyersity  of  authorship.  On 
this  head  critics  seem  whoUy  at  sea ;  they  haye  no  oom- 
mon  standard  to  which  to  appeal ;  and  hence  their  con- 
clusions  are  frequently  dctermined  by  purely  personal 
leanings  and  subjectiye  affections,  and  hardly  any  two 
of  them  agree  in  the  judgment  at  which  they  arriye. 
This  is  remarkably  the  case  with  the  instances  which 
have  been  adduced  from  the  book  before  us.  Of  these, 
some  are  of  such  a  kind  as  to  render  an  argument  from 
them  against  the  unity  of  the  book  little  better  than 
puerile.  Thus  we  are  told  that  in  some  places  the  word 
WlĆ  is  used  for  a  tribe,  while  in  others  Msop  is  used,  and 
this  is  employed  as  a  test  to  distinguish  one  fragment 
from  anoŁher.  Accordingly,  for  instance,  in  chap.  xviii, 
▼erses  2, 4, 7  are  pronounced  to  bdong  to  one  writer,  and 
ver.  11  to  another;  which  is  just  as  if  an  author,  in  giving 
an  aocount  of  the  rebeUion  of  1745,  should  speak  in  the 
same  chapter  first  of  a  body  of  Highlanders  as  a  don, 
and  then  of  the  same  tiB  a  tfpty  and  some  critic  were  to 
oome  after  him  and  say,  *^  This  oould  not  haye  been  writ- 
ten  by  one  author,  for  he  would  not  haye  called  the  same 
body  by  different  names."  Gould  it  be  shown  that  ei- 
ther  '^'yĄ  or  Http  is  a  word  introduced  kito  the  language 
for  the  fint  time  at  a  datę  much  later  than  the  age  of 
Joshua,  while  the  other  word  had  then  become  obsolete, 
an  argument  of  some  weight,  and  such  as  a  scholar  like 
Bentley  might  have  employed,  would  have  been  ad- 
vanced;  but  to  attempt  to  assign  parts  of  the  same 
ćhiq;)t6r  to  different  authors  and  to  different  epochs 


simply  because  synonymous  appdlations  of  the  same 
object  aro  employed,  is  nothing  better  than  sheer  tri- 
fiing.  Again,  it  is  said  that  "  the  historical  parts  haye 
the  rare  word  P.p^n^,  inheriianoe  [rather,  dirisiottsi 
(xi,  28 ;  xii,  7 ;  xyiii,  10),  which  does  not  appear  in  the 
geographical  sections"  (David8on,  i,  417).  Is  chap.  xviii, 
then,  not  in  the  geographical  part  of  the  book?  or  does 
a  part  become  geographical  or  historical  as  suits  the  ca- 
price  or  the  preconceiyed  theory  of  the  critic  ?  "  Simi- 
larly.  the  geographical  portion  has  Hn'^^'*  l!?"?!*.  Jordan 
by  Jericko,  xiii,  82 ;  xyi,  1 ;  xx,  8 ;  a  modę  of  expre8sion 
wanting  in  the  historical"  (ibid,),  True ;  but  suppose 
there  was  no  occasion  to  use  the  phrase  in  the  historical 
portions,  what  then?  Aro  they,  therefore,  from  a  dtlfer- 
ent  pen  from  that  which  produced  the  geographical? 
*<  Again,  in  the  historical  parts  occur  the  words  C^srjS 
[0'*5K»n]  D*?in,  the  prietU,  the  Lemiea  (iii,  8;  viii, 
88) ;  or  simply  ^'^^TTS^priests  (iii,  6, 16;  vi,  4,6,  etc) ; 
but  in  the  geographical  sections  the  same  persona  aro 
termed  sont  o/ Aaron  (xxi,  4, 10, 13, 19)"  (ibid,).  Is 
thero  not,  howo-er,  a  reason  for  this  in  the  fact  that,  as 
it  was  in  yirtue  of  their  being  desoended  ftt>m  Aaron, 
and  not  in  yirtue  of  their  being  priests,  that  the  Ko- 
hathites  reoeiyed  their  portion,  it  was  more  proper  to 
designate  them  **children  of  Aaron,  of  the  Le^-ites," 
than  "  priests,"  or  **  the  priests  the  Leyites."  Dayidson 
scottts  this  explanation  as  one  which  *<only  betn}'s  the 
weakness  of  the  cause."  We  oonfess  ounelyes  unable 
to  see  this;  the  explanation  is,  in  our  judgment,  per- 
fectly  yalid  in  itself,  and  suffident  for  the  end  for  which 
it  is  adduced ;  and  he  has  madę  no  attempt  to  show  that 
it  is  otherwise.  Ali  he  says  is,  *'  The  former  is  a  Deuter- 
onomistic  expreBsion;  the  latter  Elohistic"  What  this 
is  meant  to  conyey  we  are  at  a  loes  to  determine,  for  the 
only  places  in  which  the  phrase  **8ons  of  Aaron"  occurs 
is  in  connection  with  the  names  of  Nadab  and  Abihu, 
who  were  sons  of  Aaron  by  immediate  descent,  and  must 
have  been  so  described  by  any  writer,  whether  Deuter^ 
onomist  or  Elohist 

A  number  of  other  words  are  adduced  by  the  oppo- 
nents  of  the  unity  of  the  book  of  Joshua  for  the  purpose 
of  showing  that  it  indudes  fragments  from  different  au- 
thors. On  these  we  do  not  liuger.  llłere  are  two  con- 
siderations  which  seem  to  us  entirdy  to  destroy  their 
foroe  as  eyidences  for  that  which  they  are  adduced  to 
proye.  The  one  of  these  is  that,  aocording  to  Ewald, 
"the  later  historians  imitAted  the  words  and  phraseolo- 
gy of  those  who  preceded  them,  and,  moreoyer,  that  they 
frequently  altered  the  phraseS  which  they  found  in  the 
earlier  documents."  On  this  Keil  (from  whom  we  bor- 
row  the  statement)  remarks  with  great  force,  "If  that 
be  the  case,  we  can  no  longer  think  of  peculiarities  of 
■style  as  characteristic  signs  by  which  the  different 
souroes  may  be  distinguished.  His  entire  theor>'  is 
therefore  built  on  sand"  (^Comment.  on  Josh.  Introd.  p.  9, 
E.T.).  The  other  obseryation  we  would  make  is,  that 
supposing  it  madę  out  by  indubitable  marks  that  the 
book  of  Joshua  has  undergone  a  careful  reyision  by  a 
later  editor,  who  has  altered  expre8sions  and  interpo- 
lated  brief  statements  that  would  not  seriously  impeach 
the  unity  of  the  book,  it  would  sdll  remain  substantially 
the  work  of  one  author.  We  cannot  forbear  adding 
that,  m  all  such  inquiries,  more  faith  is  to  be  placed  oii 
a  Bound  literary  perception  and  taste  than  on  those  mi- 
nutic  of  expression  and  phraseology  on  which  so  much 
stress  has  of  late  been  laid  by  some  of  the  scholars  of 
Germany  and  their  followers  in  this  country.  The  im- 
pression  undoubtedly  left  on  the  mind  of  the  reader  is, 
that  this  book  contains  a  continuous  and  uniform  narra- 
dye ;  and  its  claims  in  this  respect  can  be  brought  into 
doubt  only  by  the  application  to  it  of  a  species  of  criti- 
dsm  which  would  produce  the  same  result  were  it  ap- 
plied  to  the  histories  of  Liyy,  the  commentaries  of  Gsesar, 
or  any  other  ancient  work  of  narratiye. 

IV,  Dat€  of  CompoHtioru—ThiB  can  only  be  approzi- 


JOSHUA 


1030 


JOSHUA 


mately  detennined.  Of  gnat  Talae  for  this  purpose  ia 
the  fJ%queDt  uae  of  Łbe  pbrase  ^  ontil  thU  day"  by  the 
writer^  iu  referenoe  to  tbe  duration  of  oertain  ohjects  of 
whicb  be  wriŁes.  Tbe  use  of  sucb  a  pbrase  indicates 
iadubitably  tbat  tbe  iiarrative  was  written  wbile  tbe 
object  referred  to  was  still  existing.  It  is  a  pbrase, 
alw),  wbich  may  be  osed  witb  reference  to  a  yery  limited 
period;  as, for  instanoe,  wben  Josbua  uses  it  of  tbe  pe- 
riod up  to  wbicb  tbe  two  tribes  and  a  balf  bad  continued 
witb  tbeir  bretbren  (xxii,  3),  or  wben  be  uses  it  of  tbe 
period  up  to  wbicb  the  Israelites  bad  been  suffering  for 
the  iQiquity  of  Peor  (xxii,  17) ;  comp.  also  xxiii,  8,  9. 
Now  we  find  this  pbrase  used  by  the  historian  in  cases 
where  tbe  referenoe  is  undoubtedly  to  a  period  dtber 
withia  tbe  lifetime  of  Josbua,  or  not  long  after  bis  deatb. 
Tbus  it  is  used  witb  reference  to  the  Stones  wbicb 
Josbua  set  up  in  the  midst  of  Jordan,  in  the  place  where 
the  priests  bad  stood  as  tbe  people  paaaed  over  (iv,  9),  and 
whicb  we  cannot  suppose  remained  in  tbat  position  for 
a  very  long  time ;  it  is  used  also  of  Rabab's  dwelling  in 
the  midst  of  Israel  (yi,  25),  wbicb  must  have  ceased,  at 
the  furthest,  rery  soon  after  Joebua'8  deatb;  also  of 
Caleb's  personal  possession  of  Hebron  (xiv,  14),  whicb 
of  couTse  tenninated  soon  after  tbe  time  of  Josbua. 
From  these  notioes  we  infer  tbat  tbe  book  may  bave 
been  written  during  Joshtta's  lifetime,  and  ccamoł  bave 
been  written  long  after.  Witb  this  falls  in  the  use  of 
the  first  person  in  the. reference  to  the  croesing  of  the 
Jordan  (v,  1),  where  one  who  was  present  on  tbe  occar 
sion  is  evidendy  tbe  writer-  To  the  same  effect  is  the 
fact  tbat  no  allusion  is  anywhere  madę  to  anything 
tbat  is  koown  to  have  been  long  posteńor  to  the  time 
of  Josbua. 

Several  words  occnrring  in  this  book  bave  been  ad- 
duced  as  belonging  to  the  later  Hebrew,  and  as,  conse- 
ąuently,  indicating  a  later  datę  of  composition  for  tbe 
book  than  the  age  of  Josbua,  or  tbat  immediately  suo- 
ceeding.  Bat  it  strikingly  shows  the  precarious  basŁs 
on  wbich  all  sucb  reasoning  rests,  tbat  words  are  pro- 
nonnced  archaic  or  late  just  as  it  suits  the  purpose  of 
tbe  inquirer;  what  De  Wette  calls  late  being  declared 
to  be  anclent  by  Uavenuck  and  Keil,  and  what  Haver- 
nick  and  Keil  cali  ancient  being  again  pronounced  late 
by  Knobel  and  Dayidson,  and  witb  equal  absence  of 
any  show  of  reason  on  botb  sides.  One  tbing  of  impor- 
tance,  however,  is,  tbat  whetber  tbe  wiiter  bas  used 
what  modem  scbolars,  judging  a  priori,  cali  later  forms 
or  not,  be  bas  undoubtedly  madę  no  allusions  to  later 
facts,  and  so  bas  given  eyidence  of  antiquity  wbich 
common-śenae  inąuirers  can  appreciate. 

y.  Author, — ^Assuming  tbat  tbe  book  is  the  prodoc- 
tion  of  one  writer,  and  that  it  was  written  about  tbe 
time  above  suggested,  the  ąuestion  arises,  To  wbom  is 
it  to  be  ascribed  ?  Tbat  it  is  the  work  of  Josbua  him- 
self  is  tbe  tradition  of  the  Jews  (Baba  Batkra^  cap.  i, 
fol.  14,  B) ;  and  this  bas  been  embraced  by  8everal  Chris- 
tian writers,  and  among  othera,  in  recent  times,  by  Ko- 
nig,  and,  as  respects  tbe  first  half  of  the  book,  by  Hflver- 
nick.  Tbat  this  might  haye  been  the  case  as  respects 
all  but  tbe  conduding  section  of  tbe  book  cannot  be  de- 
nied,  but  the  reasons  wbicb  bave  been  adduoed  in  sap- 
port  of  it  bave  not  appeared  sofficieńt  to  the  great  ma- 
jority  of  cńtica.  These  may  be  tbus  briefly  stated : 
(a)  It  is  evident  (xxiv,  26)  tbat  Josbua  could  and  did 
wńte  some  account  of  at  least  one  transaction  wbicb 
is  related  in  this  book;  (b)  the  numerous  aocounts  of 
Josbua^s  intercourse  witb  God  (i,  1 ;  iii,  7 ;  iv,  2 ;  v,  2, 9; 
yi,2;  vii,  10;  viii,  1;  x,8;  xi,  6;  xiii,  1,2;  xx,  1;  xxiv, 
2),  and  witb  the  captain  of  tbe  Lord's  host  (ver.  13), 
must  have  emanated  from  himself ;  (c)  no  one  is  morę 
likely  than  the  speaker  bimself  to  bave  committed  to 
iiiTiting  the  two  addresses  wbich  were  Joshua^s  legacy 
to  his  people  (xxiii  and  xxiv) ;  (d)  no  one  was  so  well 
ąualified  by  his  position  to  dcscribe  the  events  related, 
and  to  collect  the  documents  contained  in  the  book ;  (e) 
the  exAmpIe  of  his  predecessor  and  master,  Moses,  would 
have  suggested  to  bim  sucb  a  record  of  bis  acts;  (/) 


one  Terse  (ti,  25)  muat  hare  been  wzitten  by  mam  pcr> 
son  who  Uved  in  the  time  of  Joshua;  and  two  otber 
yerses,  v,  I  and  6— assaming  the  common  readingof  the 
fbrmer  to  be  GoiTectr-«re  most  fairly  inteipreted  as  writ- 
ten by  actors  in  the  scenę. 

No  one  would  deny  that  some  additioos  to  tbe  book 
might  be  madę  after  the  deatb  of  Joshna  without  de- 
tracting  from  the  poańble  fact  that  the  book  was  sub- 
stantiaUy  his  composition.  The  last  yersea  (xxiY,  29- 
33)  were  obyiously  added  by  some  later  band.  If^  as  ia 
possible,  tboogb  not  certain,  some  subordinate  events,  as 
the  capture  of  Hebron,  of  Debir  (Josh.  xv,  13-19,  and 
Judg.  i,  10-15),  and  of  Leshem  (Josh.  xix,  47 ;  and  Jodg. 
xviii,  7),  and  the  Joint  occupation  of  Jerusalem  (Josh. 
XV,  63,  and  Judg.  i,  21)  did  not  occur  till  after  Joshaa's 
deatb,  they  may  have  been  inserted  in  the  book  of 
Joshua  by  a  late  transcriber.  The  passagea  xiii,  2-6; 
xvi,  10;  xvii,  11,  wbich  also  are  subseąuently  repeated 
in  the  book  of  Judges,  may  doubtless  desaibe  aocnnte- 
ly  the  same  state  of  thuigs  fKisting  at  two  distinct  pe- 
ńods. 

Otber  autbors  have  been  conjectured,  as  Fbinehas  by 
Ligbtfoot :  Eleazar  by  Calvin;  Samuel "byTan  Til ;  Jer- 
emiah  by  Henry ;  one  of  the  dders  who  8&UTived  Joshua 
by  KeiL  Vou  Leugerke  thinks  it  was  written  by  pome 
one  in  the  time  of  Josiah ;  David8on  by  some  one  in  the 
time  of  Saul,  or  somewhat  later ;  Masius,  Le  Clerc,  BlaiH 
rer,  and  otbers,  by  some  one  who  lived  after  the  Babylo- 
nian  captivity. 

YI.  CrediliUfy, — ^That  the  narrative  contained  in  tbis 
book  b  to  be  acoepted  aa  a  trostworthy  account  of  the 
transactions  it  records  is  proved  aUke  by  the  esteem  io 
wbicb  it  was  always  held  by  the  Jews ;  by  the  referenccs 
to  events  recorded  in  it  in  the  national  sacred  Fon^ 
(comp.  Psa.  xliv,  2^;  lxxviii,  54,  55;  lxYiii,  13-15. 
cxiv,  1-8;  Hab.  iii,  8-13),  and  in  other  parta  of  iscrip- 
ture  (comp.  Judg.  xviii,  31 :  1  Sam.  i,  3,  9,  24;  iii,  21 , 
Isa.  xxviii,  21;  Acts  \'ii,  45;  Ueb.  iv,  8;  xi,  30-^2; 
James  ii,  25) ;  by  tbe  traces  wbich,  both  in  the  historica^ 
and  in  the  geographical  portions,  may  be  foond  of  the 
use  by  the  writer  of  contemporaiy  documents ;  by  tbe 
minnteness  of  the  details  wbich  the  author  fuzmsłies, 
and  wbich  indicates  familiar  aoąuaintance  witb  what 
he  records;  by  the  accuracy  of  his  geographical  delbe- 
ations,  an  accuracy  whicb  the  results  of  modem  inve»ti-' 
gation  are  increasingly  demonstrating;  by  the  fact  that 
tbe  tribes  never  bad  any  dispute  as  to  the  boandaries  of 
tbeir  respective  territories,  but  adhered  to  the  arrange- 
ments  specified  in  this  book ;  and  by  the  generał  fidelity 
to  bistorical  consistency  and  probability  wbich  the  book 
displays  (Havemick,  EinL  sec.  148  8q.).  Some  of  the 
naiTative8,  it  is  true,  are  of  a  miraculoua  kind,bnt  such 
are  wholly  in  keeping  witb  tbe  avowed  relation  to  tbe 
Almighty  of  the  people  wbose  bistory  the  book  reconła, 
and  they  can  be  regarded  as  unhistorical  only  on  the  aa- 
sumption  tbat  all  miracles  are  incredible — a  ąuestioD  we 
cannot  stop  to  discuss  here.  See  Miracles.  In  the 
Ust  of  such  miraculous  interpoeitions  we  do  not  inchMk 
tbe  standing  still  of  the  sun,  and  the  staying  of  tbe 
moon,  recorded  in  eh.  x,  12, 13.  That  passage  is  ap- 
parently  wholly  a  ąuotation  from  the  book  of  Jasber, 
and  is  probably  a  fragment  of  a  poem  compoeed  by  some 
Israelite  on  the  occasion ;  it  records  in  hlghly  poetical 
language  the  gradons  help  wbich  God  granted  to  Josbua 
by  tbe  retazding  of  the  approach  of  darkness  long  enougb 
to  enable  him  to  complete  the  destruction  of  his  ene- 
mies,  and  is  no  morę  to  be  taken  literaUy  than  is  soch 
a  passage  as  Psa.  cxiv,  4-6,  where  the  Ked  Sca  b  de- 
scribed  as  bdng  frightened  and  iledng,  and  the  mons- 
tains  as  skipping  like  rams.  See  Jasiieb,  Book  of. 
That  God  interpoaed  on  this  occasion  to  help  his  people 
we  do  not  doubt ;  but  that  he  interposed  by  the  working 
of  such  a  miracle  as  the  words  taken  litenlly  would  in- 
dicate,  we  see  no  reason  to  believe. 

The  account  given,  cb.  viii,  1  sq.,  of  the  taking  of  Ai 
bas  been  much  dwdt  upon  as  presenting  a  nanatire 
wbich  18  unbistoiica].   It  is  incredible  that  Joshua  aent 


JOSHUA 


1031 


JOSHUA 


tufo  bodies  of  roeiii  one  oompriang  80,000  soldien,  the 
other  6000,  to  lie  ia  ambosh  againat  the  city,  while  he 
MmMlf  advaiiced  on  it  wtth  the  main  body  of  his  anny ; 
and  yet  this  seenu  to  be  what  the  narrattve  statea, 
What  increases  the  improbability  here  ia  that  the  lar- 
gcr  Lody  is  never  mentioned  aa  having  come  into  action 
at  all,  for  the  whole  exploit  was  acoompliahed  by  the 
5000  and  those  who  were  irith  Joshoa.  If  the  case 
were  stated  Łhoa :  That  Joahna  took  80,000  of  his  war- 
liors,  and  of  theae  sent  away  6000  to  lie  in  ambosh, 
while  he,  with  the  lemaining  25,000,  advanced  againsŁ 
the  city,  the  nanatire  would  be  perfectly  simple  and 
credible.  The  suggestion  that  yeraes  12  and  18  are  a 
maiginal  gloss  which  łias  been  supposed  to  creep  into 
the  text,  leares  the  naiTative  buniened  with  the  im- 
probable  statement  that  80,000  men  oonld  adyance  on 
Ai  in  daylight,  and  He  conoealed  in  its  immediate  neigh- 
borhood  for  seyeral  hours  without  their  presence  behig 
Buspected  by  the  inhabitants.  Still  less  probable  seems 
the  suggestion  that  in  these  yerses  we  have  a  fragment 
of  an  older  reoord.  Keil  labors  to  show  that  fimn  the 
peculiar  style  of  Shemitic  narratire  it  is  competent  to 
supply,  in  Ter.  8,  in  thought,  from  the  subseąuent  nar^ 
ratlre,  that  from  the  30,000  whom  Joshua  took  he  se- 
lected  5000,  whom  he  sent  away  by  night  But,  what^ 
eyer  may  be  the  difficulties  in  this  text,  it  would  be  un- 
reasonable  on  this  account  to  relinqtiish  our  confidenoe 
on  the  generał  credibility  of  the  book. 

TlhEdation  to  the  Pentateuch The  Pcntateuch 

brings  down  the  hbtory  of  the  Israelites  to  the  dcath 
of  Moses,  at  which  it  natarally  tenninates.  The  book 
of  Joshua  takes  up  the  bisiory  at  this  point,  and  eon- 
tinues  it  to  the  death  of  Joshua,  which  fnmishes  anoth- 
er  natural  pause.  From  resemblanccs  between  the  lan- 
guage  and  forms  of  expre88ion  used  by  the  anthor  of 
the  book  of  Joshua  and  those  found  in  Deuteronomy,  it 
has  been  supposed  that  both  are  to  be  ascribed,  in  part 
at  least,  to  the  same  writer.  This,  of  course,  proceeds 
on  the  siipposition  that  the  book  of  Deuteronomy  is  not 
the  composition  of  Moees ;  a  qnestion  on  which  it  would 
be  out  of  place  to  enter  here.  See  Deuterokomy  ; 
Pentateuch.  It  may  suffice  to  obeerye,  that  whilst  it 
is  natural  to  expect  that  many  similarities  of  phraseol- 
ogy  andlanguage  would  be  apparent  in  works  so  nearly 
contemporaneous  as  that  of  Deuteronomy  and  that  of 
Joshua,  there  are  yet  such  diiferences  between  them  as 
may  seem  to  indicate  that  they  are  not  the  production 
of  the  same  writer.  Thua,  in  the  Pentateuch,  we  have 
the  word  Jericko  always  spelt  "iH^^,  whilst  in  Joshiui  it 
is  always  "iH*^*!^;  in  Deuteronomy  we  haye  KJg  ?X 
(iy,24;  y,9;  yi,' 15),  in  Joshua  k'iS^  ^K  (xxiy,19);  in 
Deuteronomy  the  inf.  of  HC^'^^  tofear,  is  T\}<y^  (iy,  10; 
▼,  26 ;  yi,  24,  etc),  in  Joshua  it  is  K*1^  (xxii,  25) ;  in 
Deuteronomy  we  haye  warriors  dcscribed  as  ^7?  *^9!1 
(iii,  18),  whilst  in  Joshua  they  are  called  i^nn  '^^'laft 
(i,  14 ;  yi,  2,  etc.).  We  haye  also  in  Joshua  the  peculiar 
formuła  iCK*13  is^.  which  nowhere  occms  in  the  Pen- 
tateuch,  but  only  13  iW  (Lev.  xx,  9, 11, 12,  etc) ;  the 
expre98ion  yi^Kil  V3  "Ć^*^^^  (iii,  11}  18),  which  occurs 
again  only  in  Zech.  yi,  5 ;  the  phrase,  '*  the  heart  melt- 
ed"  (ii,  11 ;  y,  1 ;  yii,  5) ;  etc  In  the  Pentateuch,  also, 
we  find  the  usage  with  respect  to  the  third  personal  pro- 
noun  feminine  fluctoating  between  fiC^fl  and  K^Sl ;  in 
the  book  of  Joshua  the  usage  is  fixed  down  to  ftC^n^ 
which  became  the  permanent  usage  of  the  language. 
We  find,  also,  that  in  the  Pentateuch  the  demonstratiye 
pronoun,with  the  artide,  sometimes  appears  in  the  form 
bMtl,  while  in  Joshua  and  elsewhere  U  is  always  nięMil. 
The  eyidence  here  is  the  same  in  effect  as  would  accrue 
in  the  case  of  Latin  writers  from  the  use  of  ijmu  and 
t/we,  o//t(«  and  iUt*  That  the  author  of  the  book  of 
Joshua  deriyed  part  of  his  Information  from  the  Penta- 
teuch is  eyident,  if  we  compaie  Deut.  xyiii,  1,2,  and. 


Numb;  xy]ii,  20,  with  Josh.  xiii,  14, 88 ;  xiy,  4.  Eyen 
the  nnusual  form  *^ÓK  is  repeated  in  Joshua.  Compaie 
alsó  iNumb.  xxxi,  8,  with  Josh.  xiii,  21  and  22.  The  au- 
thor of  the  book  of  Joshua  frequently  repeats  the  state- 
ments  of  the  Pentateuch  in  a  morę  detailed  form,  and 
mentions  the  changes  which  had  taken  place  sińce  the 
Pentateuch  was  written.  Compare  Numb.  xxxiy,  18 
and  14,  with  Josh.  xiii,  7  są. ;  Numb.  xxxii,  87,  with 
Josh.  xiii,  17  są. ;  Numb.  xxxy  with  Josh.  xxL 

There  is  also  considerable  similarity  between  the  fol- 
bwing  passages  in  the  books  of  Joshua  and  Judgcs : 
Josh.  xiii,  4,  Judg.  iii,  8;  Josh.  xy,  18  są.,  Judg.  i,  10, 
20;  Josh.  xy,  15-19,  Judg.  i,  11-15;  Josh.  xy,  62,  Judg. 
i,  21 ;  Josh.  xyi,  10,  Judg.  i,  29;  Josh.  xvii,  12,  Judg.  i, 
27;  Josh.  xix,  47,  Judg.  xviii.— Kitto;  Smith. 

YIIŁ  CommenŁcarUe^-^lhA  exegetical  helps  cxpre8Bly 
on  the  whole  book  of  Joshua  exclusiyely  are  the  follow- 
ing,  of  which  w^e  designate  the  most  important  by  an 
asteiisk  prefixed :  Origen,  Stlecta  (in  Opp.  ii,  893) ;  also 
Homilia  (Jb,  ii,  897) ;  also  Sckolia  (in  BibL  Pair,  Gal- 
Undii,  xiv) ;  Ephraem  Syrus,  ErpUmatio  (in  Opp.  iy, 
292) ;  Procopius,  Nota  (in  his  Octateucham)  j  Theodoret, 
OucBsłionea  (in  0^,lf'i)\  Isidore,  Commentaria  (in  Opp,); 
Bede,  Qucutione*  (in  Opp.  p.  8) ;  Rabanus,  m  Jos,  (in 
Opp,  ed.  Martene  et  Durand,  p.  668) ;  Bupert,  In  Jos,  (in 
(^,  i,  821) ;  Tostatu8,/n  Jos,  (in  Opp,) ;  Sashi  or  Jar- 
chi,  Commentarius  (from  the  Heb.  [found  in  the  Rab- 
binical  Bibles]  by  Brcithaupt,  Goth.  1710, 4to) ;  Babbi 
Esaia,  IŚn*^?  (ed.  with  Lat.  notes  by  Abicht,  Lips.  1712, 
4to ;  also  in  the  Thes,  Nov,  Th€ol.-Pha,  L.  R 1732,  i,  474 
są.) ;  Borrhaua  or  Cellarius,  Commentarii  [includ.  Buth, 
Samuel,  and  Kings]  (Basil.  1557, fol.);  Layater, //omt/* 
ta  (Tigur.  1566, 4to) ;  Calyin,  Commeniarius  (in  Opp,  i ; 
in  French,  Geney.  1665, 8yo;  transL  in  Engl.  by  W.  F., 
Lond.l578,4to;  by  Beyeridge,  Edinb.  1854, 8yo) ;  Bren- 
tius,  Commentarii  (in  Opp,  ii) ;  Kaneus,  £xcerpia  (in 
Ugolini  Thesaur,  xx,  497) ;  Ftrigel,  i8^cAo/«a  (Lips.  1570, 
1576,  8vo) ;  Ferus,  Enamiłumfs  [indud.  Exodus,  etc] 
(Colon.  1671, 1574,  8vo);  *Masiu«  [Rom.  Cath.],//fo*- 
tratio  (Antw.  1574,  foL ;  also  in  Walton*s  Polyglot,  yi, 
and  in  the  Critici  Sacrij  ii) ;  Chytneus^  PraUdiones 
(Rost.  1577,  8vo);  Montanus,  Commentarius  (Autwerp, 
1688,  4to) ;  Hcidenreich,  Predifften  (Lcipz.  1589 ;  Stet. 
1604, 4to) ;  Hcling,  Periocha  [includ.  Ruth,  Samuel,  and 
Kings]  (Norib.  1598-4,2  yol8.8vo);  Laniado,  ^1)5;  -^bs 
(Yenice,  1603,  foL);  Ibn-Chsjim,  "|'"ir[K  sb  [indudińg 
Judges]  (Yenice,  1609,  foL;  also  in  Frankfurter^s  Rab- 
binical  Bibie) ;  SeiańuSj  Commentarius  (Mógunt.  1609- 
10, 2  vols.  fol. ;  Par.  1610,  foL) ;  Magalianus,  Commenta- 
rius (Tumon.  1612, 2  yolś.  foL) ;  WAmcken,  J^eiseprecUg- 
ten  (Leipz.l618,4to) ;  DmsiuBf  Commentarius  [indudińg 
Judges  and  Samud]  (Franeck.l618,4to);  Baldwin,Pre- 
digfen  O^^ittenb.  1621, 4to) ;  Stocken,  Pra%<«n  (Cassel, 
1648, 4to) ;  De  Naxera,  Commentarii  (voL  i,  Antw.  1660 ; 
iifLugd.  1662, fol.) ;  k  Lapide,  In  Jos,  [and  other  books] 
(Antw.  1058,  fol.) ;  Cocccius,  Nota  (in  Opp,  i,  309;  xi, 
47) ;  Bonefr^re,  Commentarius  [indud.  Judges  and  Ruth  j 
(Paris,  1659,  fol.) ;  Marcellius,  Commentarius  (Herbip. 
1661, 4to);  Hannecken,^(/florcfto(Giss.l665,8vo);  Osi- 
ander,  Commentarius  (TUbing.  1681,  fol.) ;  Ising,  JSa;«r- 
citationes  (Regiom.  1683,  4to) ;  *Schmidt,  Pralecłiones 
[with  Isaiah]  (Hamb.  1693, 1695, 1708,  4to);  Heideg- 
ger, JSre^tca  [indud.  Matthew,  etc]  (Tigur.  1700, 4to); 
MUhlmann,  Commentarius  (ed.  Martin,  Dresd.  1701, 4to) ; 
Felibien,  Commentarii  [includ.  Judges,  Ruth,  and  Kings] 
(Paris,  1704, 4to) ;  Le  Clerc,  Commentarius  (Amst.1708; 
Tubiog.  1738,  foL) ;  Moldenhauer,  Erlduterung  [indud. 
Judges,  etc]  (Qufidlinb.  1774,  4to);  Obornik,  DSlSi'in, 
etc  (in  the  Hebrew  Commentary,yienna,  1792, 8yo,  pt 
166);  lA^Yktioot,  Annołationes  (in  Worksy  x);  Hordey, 
Notes  (in  Bibt,  Crit,  i) ;  Meyer,  Bestandtheile,  etc  (in 
Aramon  and  Berthold's  Krit,Joum.  1816, 4to,  ii,  337  są.) ; 
Kley,  Ueberstg,  (Ldpz.  1817,  8vo) ;  Paulus,  BUcke,  etc 
(in  his  TkeoL-Exeg,  Conserr,  Heldeb.  1822,  ii,  149  sq.); 
Ueidwerden,  DitpuiaHOf  etc  (Groningen,  1826,  8vo); 


JOSHUA 


1032        JOSHUA  BEN^EHUDAH 


Maarar,  Commentar  (Stattg.  1881, 8vo);  *RoMnmU]ler, 
Scholia  (Lips.  1833, 8vo) ;  ♦Keil,  Ćommeniar  (Erkngen, 
1847, 8vo ;  transL  in  Clarke'8  Lib,  Edinb.  1857, 8vo ;  dif- 
fereut  from  that  in  Keil  and  Delitz8cfa's  Commentuy) ; 
*Buah,  Notes  (N.  Y.  1852, 12mo) ;  Miller,  Lccfti/y*  (Lond. 
1852,  rimo) ;  Cumming,  Readtngs  (London,  1857, 8vo) ; 
*Knobe],  Erlddrung  [including  Numbere  and  Deutear- 
onomy]  (in  the  Kurzgef,  Exeif,  Hdbch,  Leipz.  1861, 8vo) ; 
Anon.,  Gospel  in  Josh,  (Lond.  1867, 8vo).    See  Commkn- 

TARY. 

,  JOSHUA,  Spurious  writings  of.  The  Samaii- 
tans,  who  for  dogmatical  purposes  endeayored  to  depre- 
datę  the  authority  of  persona  mentioned  in  the  latter 
books  of  the  Old  Testament,  such  as  Eli,  Samuel,  Zerub- 
babel,  and  others,  had  no  such  interest  in  attacking  the 
person  of  Joshua.  Ealogius,  aooording  to  Photii  Codex, 
p.  230,  States:  '*The  Samaritan  multitade  belieres  that 
Joshua,  the  son  of  Nun,  is  the  person  conceming  whom 
Moses  said,  *  The  Lord  will  raise  us  up  a  prophct,' "  etc 
(Gompare  Lampe,  Comment,  «n  EvangtUum  Johanms,  i, 
748.)  The  Samaritans  even  endearored  to  exa]t  the 
memory  of  Joshua  by  making  him  the  nudeus  of  many 
strange  legends  which  they  embodied  inlo  their  Arabie 
book  of  Joshua,  a  work  which  seems  to  hare  been  com- 
piled  in  the  Middle  Ages,  and  is  ąuoted  by  the  Rabbin- 
ical  chrohiders  of  that  period,  Sepher  Juchasin,  R.  Sam- 
uel, Shullam  (f.  154),  Shalshdcth  {ffakabbalah,  p.  96), 
Hottinger  {/Tistoria  OrientaUsy  p.  40  sq.),  Zunz  (jGottes- 
diensUicht  Yortrage  der  Juden,  p.  140).  Reland  supposed 
that  this  book  was  written  at  an  earlier  period,  and  aug- 
mented  in  the  Middle  Ages ;  but  it  is  morę  likdy  that 
the  whole  is  a  late  compilation.  (Compare  Uottingeri 
JSmegjMh  p.  468.) 

The  soHK:alied  book  of  Joshua  of  the  Samaritans  con- 
sists  of  compilations  from  the  Pentateuch,  our  book  of 
Joshua,  the  books  of  Judges  and  of  Samuel,  intermixed 
with  many  Jewish  legends.  Its  coropiler  pretends  that 
it  is  translated  from  the  Hebrew  into  Arabie,  but  it  was 
probably  originally  written  in  Arabie,  and  mauifestly 
after  the  promulgation  of  the  Koran,  which  exercised  a 
perceptible  influence  upon  it  (oomp.  Reland,  De  Samar' 
ilanisj  Dissertationes  MUccUaneaf,  ii,  12  and  68 ;  Rodi- 
ger,  in  the  UalL  AUg,  Lit,  Zeit.  for  1848,  No.  217).  The 
author  of  this  compilation  endearors  to  prove  that  the 
Samaritans  are  Israelites,  and  he  claims  for  them  the 
oelebrity  of  the  Jews.  He  attempts  to  tum  the  tradi- 
tions  of  Jewish  history  in  favor  of  the  Samaritans.  By 
his  account  Joshua  built  the  tempie  on  Mount  Gerizim, 
and  there  established  public  worship;  the  schism  be- 
tween  Jews  and  Samaritans  commenced  under  Eli,  who, 
as  well  aa  Samuel,  was  an  apostat«  and  sorcerer;  after 
the  return  from  the  Babylonian  exile,  the  Samaritan 
form  of  worship  was  declared  to  be  the  legitimate  form ; 
Zerubbabcl  and  his  sacred  bookis  which  were  corrupt«d, 
were  authoritatively  rejccted ;  Alexander  the  Great  cx- 
preased  his  veneration,  not  for  the  Jews,  but  for  the  Sa- 
maritans ;  thcse  were  oppresscd  under  the  emperor  Adri- 
an, but  again  obtained  permisnion  to  worship  publidy 
on  Mount  Gerizim.  The  whole  book  consist^  of  a  mix- 
ture  of  Biblical  history  and  legends,  the  manifest  aim 
being  to  falsify  facts  for  dogmatical  purposes.  This 
book  terminates  with  the  history  of  the  Jewish  war  un- 
der Adrian.  The  only  known  copy  of  this  book  is  that 
of  Jos.  Scaliger,  which  is  now  in  the  library  at  Leyden. 
Although  the  language  is  Arabie,  it  is  written  in  Sa- 
maritan characters.  £ven  the  Samaritans  them8clves 
■eem  to  have  lost  it.  Huntington,  in  his  Kpistoke 
(Lond.  1704,  p.  48),  mentions  that  he  could  not  find  it 
at  Nabulus,  nor  havc  subseąuent  inquiries  led  to  ita  dis- 
covery  there.  An  edition,  from  the  only  MS.  extant, 
appeared  in  1848  at  Leyden,  with  the  title  **  Liber  Joma: 
Ckronicum  Samaritanum ;  edidit,  Latine  vertit,  etc,  T. 
G.  J.  Juj-nbolL"  It  seems  never  to  have  been  recog- 
nised  by  the  Samaritans  themsdyes  (De  Wette,  EutL 
sec  171). 

Besides  this  adulterated  yersion  of  the  history  of 
Joshua,  there  exists  stUl  auother  in  the  Samaritan 


chionidet  of  Abul  Fhetach.  See  AeUi  ErndUonoR 
Ups^  anno  1691,  p.  167 ;  Schnunei^s  SamariUnńsdter 
Britfwechsd,  in  Eichhom^a  Repertorium,  ix,  54 ;  a  spec- 
imen  by  Schnuirer,  in  Paiiliia'0  Neuet  Bepertoriumy  i, 
117  Bq<— Kitta 

The  mentton  of  the  book  of  Jaaher  haa  giyen  riae  to 
some  spurious  compilations  under  that  name,  as  well  io 
Hebrew  aa  in  Engliah.    See  Jasiier. 

2.  A  natiye  of  Beth-ahemeah,  an  Imelite,  the  owner 
of  the  field  into  which  the  cart  came  wbich  borę  the  ark 
on  ita  return  from  the  land  of  the  PhiUstine^;  upon  a 
gieat  stone  in  the  midst  of  the  field  the  Beth-shemites 
sacrifioed  the  oows  that  drew  the  cart,  in  honor  of  its 
airiyal  (I  Sam.  yi,  14, 18).    KC 1 124. 

3.  The  goyemor  of  Jemaalem  at  the  time  of  the  ref- 
ormation  by  Joelah ;  the  entranoe  to  his  palące  was  sit- 
uated  near  one  of  the  idolatroos  erectioiia  at  the  dty 
gatea  (2  Kings  xxiii,  8).    B-C  628. 

4.  The  son  of  Joeedech  (Hag.  i,  1, 12, 14 ;  Zecb.  iii,  1, 
8, 9;  vi,  11),  a  high-prieat  in  the  time  of  Haggai  and 
Zechariah ;  better  known  by  the  name  of  Jeshua  (q.y.). 

Joshaa  ben-HananJa,  one  of  the  most  honored 
maaters  in  Israel,  flonrishcd  in  the  second  centur%'  of  tbe 
Christian  sra.  He  was  a  medianie  by  trade,  and  earn- 
ed  his  liyelihood  by  continning  to  work  at  hb  trade  eyen 
when  teacher  of  the  Rabbinical  school  at  Bekiin,  whither 
he  had  remoyed  from  Jemsalem  after  its  downfall.  He 
was  a  disdple  of  the  cdebrated  Rabbi  ben-Zachai,  and 
did  honor  to  his  master  aa  a  teacher  in  Israel.  His  con- 
troyersies  with  Gamalid  and  Eliezer  ben-Hyrtanos, 
which  are  cdebrated  in  the  Mishna  and  the  Talmud, 
eyinoe  that  he  was  a  yery  formidaUe  antagonist.  on  ac- 
count of  the  foroe  of  his  reaaoning  powen  and  the  p«m- 
gency  of  his  wit  In  after  life  Joshiu  went  with  Gama- 
liel  and  Akiba  to  Romę,  to  plead  with  Trajan  on  łjehalf 
of  his  oppressed  countrymen,  and  włb  rcceiyed  by  the 
emperor  with  unusual  courtesy  and  respcct  It  is  eyen 
reported  (though  not  on  any  ocrtain  anthority)  that 
l>ajan'8  daughter,  the  princess  Imra,  honored  the  Jew- 
ish Rabbi  with  her  fricndsłiip;  and  tliat  on  one  occa- 
sion,  lookiiig  at  the  homdy  garb  In  which  so  much  wis- 
dom  was  encased,  she  said  to  him, "  Tbou  ait  the  beanty 
of  wisdom  in  an  abject  dress."  '*Good  winę,"  Joehua 
complacently  replied,  *'  is  not  kept  in  gold  or  ailyer  yases, 
but  in  yessels  of  carthen-ware."  When  we  consider 
that  about  this  time  Judaism  nnmbered  many  proadytea 
among  the  patrician  ladies  of  Romę,  to  whosc  aching 
hearts  the  herd  of  old  and  diareputaUe  ddtics  presented 
no  ground  of  comfort  or  hopc  at  all  cómparable  with  that 
afforded  by  the  Hebrew*s  purcr  worship— the  worship 
of  the  one  tnie  God— we  need  not  hcsitate  to  credit  the 
truth  of  this  story,  and  the  belief  of  some  that  Imraeren 
was  a  Jewish  conyert  It  is  aiso  rdated  that  Trajan,  in 
a  bantering  way,  begged  the  old  Rabbi  to  show  him  his 
God,  whom  he  had  affirmed  to  be  eyeiy  whcre  presenL 
After  some  conyersation,  Trajan  still  adhcring  to  his 
demand  to  sce  tbe  God  of  the  Hefarewa,  Joshua  said, 
"  Well,  Ict  us  first  look  at  one  of  his  ambasudcrs  ;^  and, 
taking  the  emperor  into  the  open  air,  he  dedred  bim  to 
gazę  at  the  sun  in  his  fuli  mertdian  power.  ^  I  cancot,* 
replied  Trajan;  *'thc  light  dazzlea  me.''  "Canst  thoa, 
then,"  said  the  Rabbi,  "expect  to  behold  the  ploiy  of 
the  Creator,  when  thou  art  unable  to  endure  the  light  of 
one  of  his  creatures  ?"  In  auch  anecdotes  attributed  to 
Joshua  ben-Hananja  the  Talmud  abonnda,  and  it  is  eyi- 
dent  that  in  his  day  Joshua  figured  aa  the  most  able  of 
all  the  Rabbins.  See  Etheridge,  Inlrod.  to  Jficiśk  LiL 
p,  61 ;  GrUtz,  Gesch,  der  Juden,  iy,  56  są.     (J.  H.  W.) 

Joshua  (or  Jeahna)  ben-Jehadah  (called  in 
Arabie  AbuJ/arag  Forkan  Ib^Astad^j  ąuoted  by  Aben- 
Ezra  as  R,  Joshua  (r^yW^'^  S),  a  distinguiahed  Jew- 
ish philosopher,  grammarian,  and  commentator  of  tbe 
Karaitc  sect,  flourished  in  the  llth  century.  From  his 
great  piety  and  extensiye  knowledge,  he  obtained  the 
honorableappellation  of  the  aged  or  prtmbjfłer  (//a-5fl- 
ken,  A  l-Sheikh).  His  expositiona,  whidi  oover  tbe  whole 


JOSHUA  NARBONI 


1083 


JOSIAH 


of  the  OM  Test,  sre  atill  in  Ma  The  only  fragnents 
printed  are  gl ven  bv  Aben-Ezim  on  Gen.  jcxviii,  12 ;  xlix, 
27;  Exod.  iii,  2, 18;  iv, 4;  vi,  8, 18;  vH,  3, 12;  vul,22; 
X,  6;  xii,  6;  xv,  4;  xvii,  16;  xxi,  87;  xxii,  7;  xxxv, 
6;  Lev.  xvi,  1;  Hob.  v,  7;  Joel  iii,  1;  Amoa  ix,  10; 
Obad.  17 ;  Jonah  iii,  8 ;  Micata  ii,  7 )  vii,  12 ;  Hab.  ii,  7 ; 
Zeph.  iii,  1 ;  Hag.  ii,  10 ;  MaL  ii,  6 ;  Dan.  i, 8 ;  ii,  4;  iv, 
17;  vii, 9;  xii, 2;  Psa. lxxxviii,  1 ;  cix,8;  ex, 8;  cxix, 
160;  cxxii,  1 ;  cxlix,  6.  Compare  Delitiśeh,  •»  Aaron 
hen-EliaSt  d-^-^n  ]^5  (Leiprig,  1844),  p.  815  są.;  Knsker, 
Lichtte  KadmomoŁ  (Yienna,  1860),  text,  p.  117;  Grfttz, 
Geadiickte  der  Juden,  vi,  94  8q. ;  Kitto,  BibŁ.  Ctfclop,  s.  v. 

Joflhua  NarbonL    See  Yidal. 

Josi^ah  (Heb.  Yoshi^ah%  n;^X^  heakd  by  Jeho- 
v<thf  Zech.  vi,  10,  elsewhere  in  the  paragogic  form  Yo- 
shiya'hUj  !in^pK%  and  in  the  text  of  Jer.  xxvLi,  1, 
»injÓ1X'';  SepL,  N.  T.,  and  Josephus  'Iwiriac,  "Jofli- 
as."  Ifatt.  i,  10, 11),  the  name  of  two  men. 

1.  The  ńxteenth  king  of  Jadah  after  its  separation 
fkom  the  kingdom  of  Israel,  the  son  (by  Jedidah)  and,  at 
the  early  agc  of  eight  years,  B.C.  640,  the  suocessor  of 
Amon  (2  Kings  xxii,  1 ;  2  Chroń,  xxxiii,  1).  His  history 
18  contained  in  2  Kings  xxii-xxiv,  30 ;  2  Chroń,  xxxiv, 
xxxv;  and  the  first  twelve  chaptera  of  Jeremiah  throw 
much  Ught  upott  the. generał  character  of  the  Jews  in 
his  day&  Avoiding  the  example  of  his  immediate  pre- 
deoeasors,  hc  '*  did  that  which  was  right  in  the  fdght  of 
the  Lord,  and  walked  in  all  the  ways  of  David  his  fa- 
ther,  and  tumed  not  aside  to  the  right  hand  or  to  the 
left"  (2  Kings  xxii,  2;  2  Chroń,  xxxiv,  2). 

1.  So  early  as  the  8Lxteenth.year  of  his  age  (B.C. 
683)  he  began  to  manifest  that  enmity  to  idolatry  in  all 
its  forms  which  distinguished  his  character  and  reign ; 
and  he  was  not  qaite  twenty  years  old  (B.C.  628)  when 
he  pToclaimed  open  war  against  it,  although  morę  or 
less  fiivored  by  many  men  of  rank  and  influence  in  the 
kingdom  (2  Chroń,  xxxiv,  3).  He  then  commenced  a 
thorungh  porification  of  the  land  from  all  taint  of  idola- 
try by  going  about  and  superintending  in  person  the 
operations  of  the  men  who  were  employed  in  breaking 
down  idolatrous  altan  and  images,  and  cutting  down 
the  groves  which  had  been  oonsecrated  to  idol-worship 
(see  Bertholdt,  De  purgatione  per  Joticm,  Erl.  1817). 
His  detestation  of  idolatry  could  not  have  been  morę 
strongly  expre8sed  than  by  ransacking  the  sepulchres 
of  the  idolatrous  priests  of  former  days,  and  consuming 
their  bones  upon  the  idol  altars  before  they  were  over- 
tumed.  Yet  this  operation,  although  unexampled  in 
Jewish  history,  was  foretold  845  years  before  Josiah 
was  bom  by  the  prophet  who  was  commissioned  to  dc- 
noułce  to  Jeroboam  the  futurę  punishment  of  his  sin. 
He  even  named  Josiah  as  the  person  by  whom  this  act 
was  to  be  performed,  and  said  that  it  should  be  per- 
formed  in  Beth-el,  which  was  then  a  part  of  the  king- 
dom of  Israel  (1  Kings  xiii,  2).  All  this  seemed  much 
beyond  the  rangę  of  human  probabilities;  but  it  was 
performed  to  the  letter,  for  Josiah  did  not  confine  his 
proceedings  to  his  own  kingdom,  but  went  over  a  con- 
siderable  part  of  the  neighboiing  kingdom  of  Israel, 
which  then  lay  comparatively  desolate,  with  the  same 
object  in  view ;  and  at  Beth-el,  in  particular,  executed 
all  that  the  prophet  had  foretold  (2  Kings  xxiu,  1-19 ; 
2  Chroń,  xxxiv,  3-7, 82).  In  these  proceedings  Josiah 
seems  to  bave  been  actuated  by  an  abeolute  htUred  of 
idolatry,  such  as  no  other  king  sińce  David  had  mani- 
fested,  and  which  David  had  scarcely  occasion  to  mani- 
fest in  the  same  degree.  So  important  was  this  refor- 
mation  of  the  public  cultus  under  Josiah  that  it  forms 
an  epoch  whence  Jeremiah  dates  many  of  his  prophe- 
cies  (Jer.  xxv,  8, 11,  29). 

2.  In  the  eighteenth  year  of  his  reign  and  the  twen- 
ty-aixth  of  his  age  (B.C.  623),  when  the  land  had  been 
thoroaghly  purified  from  idolatry  and  all  that  belonged 
to  it,  Josiah  proceeded  to  repair  and  beautify  the  Tem- 
pie of  the  Lord  (2  Kings  xxii,  8 ;  xxiii,  28).    In  the 


oonne  of  this  pions  labor  the  high-priest  Hilkiah  'di»> 
oovered  in  the  sanctuary  a  volume,  which  proved  to 
oontain  the  books  of  Moses,  and  which,  from  the  terma 
employed,  seems  to  have  been  considered  the  original 
of  the  law  as  written  by  Moses.  On  this  point  there 
has  been  much  anxions  dSscusńon  and  some  rash  asser- 
tion.  Some  writers  of  the  German  school  allege  that 
there  is  no  extemal  evidence — that  is,  evidence  besides 
the  law  itaelf— that  the  book  of  the  law  exi8ted  till  it 
was  thus  prodnced  by  Hilkiah.  This  assertion  it  is  the 
less  neoessary  to  answer  here,  as  it  włU  be  noticed  In  the 
artide  Pentateucii.  (See  also  De  Wette,  Beitr.  i,  168 
sq.;  Bertholdt,  Progr,  de  eo  guod  in  purgatione  sacror^ 
Jud.  per  Jotiamfacła  otnmium  Jnazime  contigerit  memO' 
rabUe,  Erl.  1817 ;  also  in  his  Opusc  p.  82  sq.)  But  it 
may  be  observed  that  it  is  founded  veiy  much  on  the 
fact  that  the  king  was  greatly  astonished  when  some 
parts  of  the  law  were  read  to  him.  It  is  indeed  perfect- 
ly  manifest  that  he  had  previously  been  entirely  igno- 
rant of  much  that  he  then  beard ;  and  he  rent  his  clothes 
in  constemation  when  he  found  that,  with  the  best  in- 
tentions  to  senre  the  Lord,  he  and  all  his  people  had 
been  living  in  the  neglect  of  duties  which  the  law  de- 
dared  to  be  of  vital  importanoe.  It  is  oertainly  diflicult 
to  acoount  for  this  ignorance.  Some  suppose  that  all 
the  copies  of  the  law  had  perished,  and  that  the  king 
had  never  seen  one.  But  this  is  very  unlikely;  for, 
however  scarce  complete  copies  may  have  been,  the 
pious  king  was  likely  to  have  been  the  possessor  of  one. 
The  probability  seems  to  be  that  the  passages  read  were 
those  awful  denunciations  against  disobedience  with 
which  the  book  of  Deuteronomy  concludes,  and  which, 
for  some  caose  or  other,  the  king  had  never  before  read, 
or  which  had  never  before  produced  on  his  mind'  the 
same  strong  conriction  of  the  imminent  dangers  under 
which  the  nation  lay,  as  now  when  read  to  him  from  a 
volume  invested  with  a  character  so  venerable,  and 
brooght  with  such  interesting  circumstances  under  his 
notice.  We  should  bear  in  mind  that  it  Łs  very  difficult 
for  us  in  this  age  and  country  to  estimate  the  soantiness 
of  the  opportunities  which  were  then  open  to  layrocn  of 
aoquiring  literaiy  knowledge  connected  with  religion. 
The  special  comnuaslon  sent  forth  by  Jehoehaphat  (2 
Chroń,  xvii,  7)  is  a  proof  that  even  nnder  such  kings  as 
Asa  and  his  son  the  Levite8  were  insufBcient  for  the  re- 
ligious  instruction  of  the  people.  What,  then,  must 
have  been  the  amonnt  of  Information  aooesuble  to  a 
generation  which  had  grown  up  in  the  reigns  of  Manas- 
siih  and  Amon?  We  do  not  know  that  the  law  was 
lead  as  a  stated  part  of  any  ordinary  public  serdce  in 
the  Tempie  of  siolomon  (unless  the  injimction  Dent 
xxxi,  10  was  obeyed  onoe  in  Beven  years),  though  God* 
was  woiahipped  there  ¥rith  daily  sacrifioe,  psalmody, 
and  prayer. 

The  king,  in  his  alarm,  sent  to  Huldah  **^  the  prophet- 
ess"  for  her  oounsel  in  this  emeigency  [see  Huldah]  : 
ber  answer  assured  him  that,  although  the  dread  penal- 
ties  threatened  by  the  law  had  been  incurred  and  wonld 
be  inflicted,  he  should  be  gathered  in  peace  to  his  fa- 
thers  before  the  days  of  punishment  and  sorrow  came. 

It  was  perhaps  not  without  some  hope  of  averting 
this  doom  that  the  king  immediately  called  the  people 
together  at  Jerusalem,  and  engaged  them  in  a  solemn 
renewal  of  the  ancient  covenant  with  God.  When  this 
had  been  done,  the  t*a8sover  was  oelebrated  with  care- 
ful  attention  to  the  directions  given  in  the  law,  and  on 
a  scalę  of  unexampled  magniiicenoe.  (On  the  public 
importance  of  this  sera,  sec  Ezek.  i,  1,  2.)  But  all  was 
too  late;  the  hour  of  merey  had  passed;  for  '*the  Lord 
tumed  not  from  the  fierceness  of  his  great  wrath,  where- 
with  his  anger  was  kindled  against  Judah"  (2  Kings 
xxii,  3-20)  xxiii,  21-27;  2  Chroń,  xxxiv,  8^-83;  xxxv, 
1-19). 

8.  That  removal  from  the  world  which  had  been 
promised  to  Josiah  as  a  blessing  was  not  long  delayed, 
and  was  brónght  about  in  a  way  which  he  probably  had 
not  expectfld.    Phaiaoh-necho,  king  of  Egypt,  sought 


JOSIAH 


1034 


JOST 


a  panage  through*  his  tenritoriet  on  an  eacpedidon 
ogainst  the  ChalcUuuifl;  bat  Jonah  lefcued  to  allow  the 
nuurch  of  the  Egyptian  anny  through  hb  domimoną 
andprepandtoreasttheattemptbyfoioeof  anns.  HU 
reaaon  for  thia  oppositioii  haa  uaually  been  aaBamed  to 
have  been  a  high  sense  of  loyalty  to  the  Assyrian  mon- 
arch|  whoee  tributaiy  he  u  sappoeed  to  have  been.  Such 
18  at  least  the  conjectuie  of  Prideanx  (jdmneeUoHj  tamo 
610)  and  of  Mthnan  {Uiatory  o/tka  Jewg,  i,  813).  But 
the  Bibie  aseńbes  no  such  chivalrooa  motive  to  Jooah ; 
and  it  doea  not  occur  to  Josephns,  who  attńbuteB  (^Ant, 
X,  5, 1)  Josiah^s  reeistanoe  merely  to  Fato  uiging  him 
,to  destniction*,  nor  to  the  author  of  1  Eadr.  i,  28,  who 
describes  him  aa  acting  wilfuUy  against  Jeremiah^s  ad- 
vice ;  nor  to  £wald,  who  (CrescA.  Itr,  iii,  707)  conjectures 
that  It  may  have  been  the  constant  aim  of  Josiah  to  re- 
atore  not  only  the  ritual,  but  alao  the  kiugdom  of  David 
in  its  fuli  extent  and  independence,  and  that  he  attacked 
Necho  aa  an  invader  of  what  he  oonaidered  as  hia  north- 
em  dominiona.  Thia  conjectuie,  if  eqaally  probable 
wUh  the  former,  ia  eąually  withont  adequate  aupport  in 
the  Bibie,  and  ia  aomewhat  derogatory  to  the  character 
of  Joeiah.  Kecho  waa  yery  unwiUing  to  engage  in  hoe- 
tilitiea  with  Josiah :  the  appearance  of  the  Hebrow  army 
at  Megiddo  (comp.  Herod,  ii,  169),  however,  brought  on 
a  baUle,  in  which  the  king  of  Judah,  although  dia- 
guised  for  aecurity,  waa  ao  despeiately  wounded  by  a 
random  arrow  that  his  attondanta  removed  him  from 
the  war^haiiot  and  plaoed  him  in  another,  in  which  he 
waa  taken  to  Jerosalem,  where  he  died,  after  a  reign  of 
thirty-one  years.  KC  609.  (See  J.  K.  KieaUng'8  Et- 
9ay  on  this  aubjcct.  Lipa.  1764.)  No  king  that  reigned 
in  Israel  was  ever  morę  deeply  hunented  by  all  his  sub- 
jecta  than  Josiah  {  and  we  are  told  that  the  prophet 
Jeremiah  compoaed  on  the  oocasion  an  elegiac  ode, 
which  was  long  presenred  among  the  people  (2  Kmgs 
xxiii,  29-37;  2  Chroń,  xxxv,  20-27).  See  Lamekta- 
TIOM&  Ck)mpare  the  namitive  in  2  Chroń,  xxxv,  25 
with  the  alluaiona  in  Jer.  xxii,  10, 18,  and  Zech.  xii,  1 1, 
and  with  Jackaon,  On  the  Creed,  bk.  viii,  eh.  xxiił.  p.  878. 
The  piediction  of  Huldah  that  he  ahould  ^  be  gathered 
łnto  the  grave  in  peace"  muat  be  intorpreted  in  aócord- 
ance  with  the  explanation  of  that  phraae  given  in  Jer. 
xxxiv,  6.  Some  exoeIlent  remarka  en  it  may  be  found 
in  Jackson,  On  the  Creed^  bk.  xi,  eh.  xxxvi,  p.  664.  Jo- 
aiah's  reformation  and  hia  death  are  commented  on  by 
bishop  Hall,  ConŁemplaHona  en  the  O.  T,,  bk.  xx.  See 
alao  Howard,  Hittory  o/Jotiah  (London,  1842). 

4.  It  waa  in  the  reign  of  Josiah  that  a  nomadie  hoMe 
of  Scythiana  overrBn  Asia  (Herod,  i,  104-106>  A  de- 
tachment  of  them  went  towards  Egypt  by  the  way  of 
Philistia:  somewhere  aouthwarda  of  Ascalon  they  were 
met  by  messengers  from  Psammetichua  and  induced  to 
tum  back.  They  are  not  mentioned  in  the  hiatorical 
acoounts  of  Josiah^s  reign;  but  Ewald  (^Die  Ptalmen,  p. 
166)  conjectures  that  the  69th  Psalm  was  composed  by 
king  Joaiah  during  a  siege  of  Jerusalem  by  theae  Scyth- 
ians.  The  town  Bethshan  is  ai^d  to  derive  ita  Greek 
name  Scythopolia  (Keland,  Patoaf.  p.  992;  Lightfoot, 
Chor.  Marc.  vii,  §  2)  from  these  invaderB.  The  fadlity 
with  which  Joaiah  appears  to  have  extended  hia  au- 
thority  in  the  land  of  larael  ia  addnced  aa  an  indication 
that  the  Assyrian  conąuerors  of  that  land  were  tbem- 
aelve8  at  thia  time  under  the  reatraining  fcar  of  some 
enemy.  The  prophecy  of  Zephadiah  is  conaiderod  to 
have  been  written  amid  the  terror  cauaed  by  their  ap- 
proach.  The  aame  people  are  deacńbed  at  a  later  pe- 
riod by  Ezckiel  (xxviii).  See  Ewald,  Gesck.  Itr.  iii, 
689.  Abarbauel  (ap.  Eiaenmenger,  Ent.  Jud.  i,  858)  re- 
corda  an  orał  tradition  of  the  Jewa  to  the  eifect  that  the 
ark  of  the  oovenant,  which  Solomon  deposited  in  the 
Tempie  (1  Kiiigs  \\y  19),  waa  removed  and  hidden  by 
Josiah  in  expectaŁion  of  the  dcstruction  of  the  Tempie, 
and  that  it  will  not  be  brought  again  to  light  until  the 
comingof  Messiah.— Kitto;  Smith. 

2.  Son  of  Zephaniah,  and  a  resident  of  Jerusalem  after 
the  captivity,  in  whose  houae  the  prophet  waa  directed 


to  crown  the  high-prieat  Jeahna  aa  a  type  of  the  Mea- 
aiah  (Zech.  vi,  10).  KC.  prob.  520.  **  It  haa  been  ood- 
jectored  that  Joaiah  waa  either  a  goldamith,  or  treaamer 
of  the  Tempie,  or  one  of  the  keepers  of  the  Tempie,  who 
received  the  money  oifered  by  the  worahippera,  bot 
nothing  ia  known  of  htm.  Poasibły  he  waa  a  deaoend- 
ant  of  Zephaniah,  the  piiest  mentioned  in  Jer.  xxi,  1 , 
xxx\'ii,  8 ;  and  if  Hen  in  Zech.  vi,  15  be  a  proper  name, 
which  is  duubtful,  it  probably  refeia  to  the  aame  penon, 
elaewhere  called  Joaiah"  (Smith). 

Josi^aB,  a  Gnedzed  form  of  the  name  of  (a)  ('I*^ 
<riac9  ^^ulg*  JotioM)  Josiah  (q.  y.),  king  of  Judah  (1 
Esdr.  i,  1,7, 18,  21-23,  25,  28,  29,  82-34;  Ecclus.  xUx,  1, 
4;  Bar.  i,  8;  MatŁ  i,  10, 11);  (6)  ('Iwiac  v.  r.  ^Unci" 
acYulg.  Macuias\  Jeshaiah  (q.  v.),  the  son  of  Ath»- 
liah  (1  Eadr.  viii,  83 ;  comp.  Ezra  viii,  7). 

JOBibi^mh  (Heb.  Yaahib^ah^  n;ą«r,  dt^eUtr  with 
Jehotah ;  Sept.  'Iffaftia  y.  r.  Atrapa),  aon  of  Seiaiaih 
and  father  of  Jebu,  which  laat  waa  one  of  the  Simeon- 
itea  who  mlgrated  to  Gedor  (1  Chroń.  iv.  85).  aa 
anto  711. 

JOfliphi^^ah  (Heb.  Yotipkyah',  n^tpi^,  wcreaśed 
by  Jehtwcih ;  Sept.  'Iai0v0/a),  one  of  the  "  sons"  <»f  She- 
lomith  (aa  the  Heb.  text  now  stands),  a  chief  Israelite, 
whose  aon  (Ben-Josiphiah)  returoed  with  a  company 
of  160  malee  under  Ezra  to  Jerusalem  (Ezra  viii,  10). 
B.C.  459.  A  word,  however,  haa  evidently  fallen  out 
of  the  Hebrew  text  in  the  beginning  of  the  yerse,  and  ia 
aupplied  by  the  Sept.  and  the  author  of  1  Esdr.  viii,  36, 
aa  well  as  (leaa  correctly)  in  the  Syriact  namely,  BaaW 
(Bavi^),  i.  e.  **3S,  omitted  from  almilarity  to  *^3ą  pr6- 
ceding ;  thua  making  J9ant  (q.  v.)  the  son  of  Shelomith, 
and  the  leader  of  the  party  of  retumed  exiles. 

JoBippon.    See  Joseph  ben-Gobion. 

JoflO,  Torial,  one  of  Wbitefield^s  preachers,  a  na- 
tive  of  Scotland,  waa  a  aea-captain  by  profession.  He 
had  a  vigoroua  mind,  had  been  fond  of  the  Bibie  from 
hia  yonth,  and  had  acąuired  a  good  degree  of  educatioo 
by  industrious  study  alone.  He  waa  converted  by  the 
preaching  of  Mr.  Wesley  at  Robin  Hood*8  Bay,  and  soon 
after  began  to  prcach  to  and  exhort  his  sailors  with 
much  effect,  who  were  converted  and  did  likewise.  Af- 
ter variou8  reverBes  in  his  business,  he  was  constrained 
by  WhiteHeld  to  gi^^e  himaelf  wholly  to  the  ministiT, 
and  in  1766  he  became  his  colleague  at  the  Tabemade 
and  Tottenham  CourL  His  preaching  in  London  had 
from  the  6ret  drawn  great  thręngs  and  been  veiy  usefol, 
and  his  popularity  waa  only  aecond  to  that  of  White- 
field,  whoee  asaociate  he  waa  for  thirty  years  in  the  Cal- 
vimatic  Methodist  societies  of  London,  usually  itiner- 
ating  In  England  and  Wales  four  or  five  months  annn- 
ally.    See  Stovena^/^w/.o/i/riAo(fwm,  1,460.    (G.UT.) 

Joflt,  IsAAc  Marcub,  one  of  the  most  celebrated 
writers  of  modem  Jews,  the  first  of  his  people  sińce  the 
days  of  Josephus  to  write  a  complete  history  of  the 
Jews,  was  bom  at  Bemburg,  Germany,  Feb.  2S;  1798. 
His  father,  a  poor  blind  man,  the  head  of  a  family  of 
twelve  children,  was  obliged  to  depend  mainly  upon 
Marcua,  the  only  boy,  for  aupport,  and  great  and  8evere 
were  the  straggles  which  lie  had  to  endure  until,  in 
1808,  his  father  died,  and  the  youth  removed  to  Wolf- 
enbuttel,  where  his  grandfather  resided.  He  waa  now 
admitted  to  a  Jewish  orphan  asylum,  where  one  of  bis 
most  intimato  assodatea  waa  the  celebrated  Jewish  sa- 
vant  Leopold  Zunz,  and  together  theae  two  boys  pur- 
sned,  under  great  di8advantage8  and  deprivations,  ay, 
sufTerings,  the  studies  necessary  to  admit  them  to  the 
higher  classes  of  the  gymnasiimi.  **  Whole  nighta,"  he 
touchingly  records,  **have  we  labored  by  the  tapen 
which  we  madę  ourseWes  from  the  wax  that  ran  down 
the  big  wax  candles  in  the  83magogue.  By  hard  study 
we  succeeded  in  bringing  it  so  far  in  the  course  of  the  8ix 
months  terminating  with  April,  1809,  that  we,  Zoiu  in 
WolfenbUttel  and  1  in  Branswick,  were  put  in  the  senior 
dąsa  (prima)  in  the  gymnaaium"  (Paachelea,  S^purtm^ 


JOT 


1035 


JOTBATHAH 


8d  coL,  Pngue,  1855,  p.  Ul  tq.).  After  foor  yean  of 
hard  study  he  nmoved  to  the  Unirereity  of  Gottingen, 
wfaere  fur  one  year  and  a  half  he  puiBaed  with  great 
eamestness  stadies  in  hiatoiy,  phUology,  phikMophy, 
and  theology,  and  Łhen  oontinued  his  uiyestigationB  at 
Berlin  Unireraity.  In  the  capital  of  Pmańa  Joet  toon 
won  the  hearts  of  many  of  hie  people,  and,  tbongh  oom* 
paratirely  a  youth,  yet  mcoeeded  in  the  management 
of  a  fint-cla80  achool,  to  which  flocked  the  children  of 
Jew  and  Gentile.  In  1885  he  aocepted  the  head-mas- 
.  tenship  of  the  Jewiah  high-echool  at  Frankfort-on-the- 
Maili,  and  in  that  capacity  spent  the  renudnder  of  hię 
days.  He  died  November  20,  1860,  at  Frankfort-on- 
the-Matn.  Whilc  at  Berlin  he  published :  (1)  The  gi- 
gantic  hiAtorical  work  entitled  Geschichte  der  ItraeiUen 
aeU  der  Zeit  der  Maccabaer  hit  aufuruere  Tage  (Ber- 
lin, 1820-28, 9  vol«.) :— (2)  AUgemane  Geschichte  det  la- 
raelUischen  Yolkes,  etc.  (Berlin,  1831-32,  2  vola.  8ro), 
being  an  abridgment,  with  corrcctions,  of  the  former 
work:— and  (8)  nattJO  "^-ns  łrrtt?,  the  Mishna,  with 
the  Hebrew  text  and  yowel-points,  accompanied  by  a 
German  translation,  a  Rabbinic  commentary,  and  Ger- 
man annotations  (BerUn,  1832-34,  6  rols.),  beaides  va- 
rious  eflTorta  of  a  philoeophical  naturę,  and  numberleas 
contributions  to  Jewish  periodicals  of  all  grades  and  de- 
flcriptions.  In  Frankfort  the  same  literary  acti vity  oon- 
tinued. In  1839  he  startod  a  weekly  joumal  for  Jewish 
history,  literaturę,  eto.,  of  which  three  yolumes  appear- 
ed,  entitled  hradituche  Anaalen  (Frankil.  a.  M.  1839- 
41),  which  boasted  of  the  names  of  some  of  the  ablest 
of  Jewish  writon  as  contributors,  and  which  fumished 
ariicles  whoae  ralue  every  true  Biblical  student  will  not 
fail  to  recognise,  in  fact,  for  many  items  of  Information 
there  contained  we  would  look  eliwwhere  in  vain.  To 
reawaken  an  interest  in  the  study  of  Hebrew,  he  started 
in  1841  (when  the  Annalen  were  discontinued),  in  con- 
junction  with  the  distinguished  Jewish  wrirer  Creize- 
nach,  a  periodical  in  Hebrew,  of  which  two  yolumes  ap- 
peared,  entitled  ")1^2,  Epkemerides  Hebraica  #.  coUectio 
dissertafiomtm  maxime  theolofficarum,  rariorumcue  Jle- 
hraicorum  tcriptorum,  ad  ordinem  menńum  lunarium 
dUposiia  (Frankfort  a.  M.  1841 -4  J).  Like  the  former 
joumal,  it  constlŁutes  a  yery  i.nportant  contribution  to 
Biblical  and  Jewish  literaturę,  and  will  always  be  read 
with  great  pleasure  by  the  loyer  of  the  sacred  language, 
owing  to  the  beautiful  Hebrew  style  in  which  \i  is  wiit- 
ten.  At  the  same  time,  howeyer,  Jost  was  also  laboriug 
at  his  grand  history  of  the  Jews,  of  which  he  published 
(6),  in  1816-47,  three  móre  parts,  uuder  the  title  Neutre 
Geschichte  der  laraeliten,  eto.,  being  a  continuation,  and 
forming  a  tcnth  yolume,  of  his  great  bistorical  wprk ; 
and  in  1857-59  he  finally  gaye  to  the  world,  as  the  re- 
sult  of  his  life-long  historical  and  critical  researchcs,  the 
Geschichte  des  Judenthums  und  seiłier  Secten^  a  work 
which  may  fitly  make  the  top  stone  of  the  great  histor- 
ical edifice  he  had  reared  so  perfectly  from  the  yery  out- 
set.  He  found  no  prcparatory  work,  as  did  GrUtz,  Munk, 
Zunz,  and  Herzfeld ;  he  was  obliged  to  coUect  himself 
all  the  materiał  needful  for  his  great  undertoking,  and 
he  spared  no  pains  to  do  his  work  well.  Jost  desen^es 
our  notice  also  as  a  philanthropist :  not  only  did  he  ser^'e 
the  literary  world,  and  daily  work  for  the  advancement 
of  Jewish  interests  eyerywhere,  but  he  also  founded  an 
asylum  for  Jewish  fornale  orphans  in  the  city  which 
cnjoyed  his  ripest  scholarship.  Sce  Jahrhuchjur  die 
GescA.  der  Juden  (Lpzg.  1861, 12mo),  yol.  ii,  p.  yii  8q. ; 
J&d,  Athenaum  (Grimma  and  Lpz,  1851, 18mo),  p.  117; 
Ehrentheil,  JUd,  Charakterbilder  (Pesth,  1867, 8vo),  No. 
i,  p.  67  8q. ;  Tapereau,  DictitmncUre  des  CorUemporaitUy 

B,  V. 

Jot,  or,  rather,  Ióta  (Iwra)^  the  smallest  letter  of 
the  Greek  alphabet  (i),  deriyed  from  the  Hebrew  yod 
C^),  and  answering  to  the  i  (J)  or  y  of  European 
languages.  Its  name  was  emploj^ed  metaphorically 
to  expre8S  the  minuŁest  trifle.  IŁ  is.  in  fact,  one  of 
sereral  metaphors  deriyed  from  the  alphabet,  as  when 


alpha^  the  ńnt  letter,  and  omega-  tb«  last,  are  em« 
ployed  to  expie88  the  beginning  and  the  end.  We 
are  not  to  suppose,  howeyer,  that  this  proyerb  was  ex« 
dnsiyely  apposite  in  the  Greek  languagei  The  same 
practical  allusion  equally  existed  in  Hebrew,  some  curi- 
008  examples  of  which  nuy  be  seen  in  Wetstein  and 
Lightfoot.  One  of  these  may  here  soflice :  In  the  Tal- 
mud (Scmhćd.  XX,  2)  it  is  fabled  that  the  book  of  Den- 
teronomy  came  and  prostrated  itself  before  God,  and  saidf 
^  O  Lord  of  the  uniyerse,  thou  hast  written  in  me  thy 
law,  but  now  a  testament  defectiye  In  some  parts  is  de- 
fectiye  in  aU.  Behold,  Solomon  endeayors  to  root  the 
letter  jod  out  of  me"  (Ł  e.  in  the  t€xt,  D'^S:3  na'n'*  Śb, 
"he  shall  not  multiply  wiyes,**  Deut.  xvii,  17).'  '  **The 
holy,  blesaed  God  answered-^lomon,  and  a  thousand 
such  as  he,  shall  perish,  but  the  least  word  shall  not 
perish  out  of  thee.'*  This  is,  in  fact,  a  parallel  not  only 
to  the  usage,  but  the  sentiment,  as  conyeyed  in  Matt.  y, 
18,  *'  One  Jot  or  one  tittle  shall  in  no  wise  pass  from  the 
law."— Kitto.  The  propriety  of  the  use  of  this  letter 
for  such  a  proyerb  is  especially  eyident  from  the  fact 
that  it  is  the  smallest  letter  of  the  Heb.  alphabet  like- 
wise,  being,  in  fact,  often  dispensed  with  as  a  mater  leC" 
tionis,  and  yery  liable  to  be  omitted  in  writing  or  mis- 
taken  for  a  paitofsomeother  letter.    Sec  Tittle. 

Jotap&ta.    See  Jiphthah-el. 

JotlNUl  (Heb.  rotbah\  mif';, goodneas ;  Sept.  Iri* 
pa  y.  r.  'Icra^^a,  Josephos  'Ira/3any,  ^af.  x,  3,  2),  a 
town,  probably  of  Judah,  the  reńdence  of  Hamz,  whose 
daugbter  MeshuUemeth  became  the  wife  of  king  Ma- 
nasseh  and  mother  of  Amon  (2  Kinga  xxi,  19).  M.  de 
Saulcy  {Narrat,  i,  94,  note)  suggests  its  identity  with 
FfAna,  a  yiUage  almoet  in  ruins  on  the  north  side  of  the 
yalley  (wady  Ribah),  north  of  Lebonah  and  south  of 
NablCto  (Robinson^s  Renarckes,  li,  92) ;  but  this  would 
lie  within  the  precincts  of  the  lato  kingdom  of  IsraeL 
It  is  UBuaUy  identified  with  Jothath  ot  Jotbaiha  of  the 
£xode  (Knmb.  xxiii,  88, 84;  Deut.  x,  7),  as  the  names 
are  essentially  the  same  in  the  Heb. ;  but  the  latter  ia 
spoken  of  only  aa  a  region^  not  an  inhabited  town,  and 
is  out  of  the  bonnds  of  the  Jewish  monarchy.  "  The 
Arabie  equiydent  for  Jotbah  is  et-Tcńgib^  or  et-Tcńgi- 
behf  and  no  less  than  three  sites  of  this  name  are  met 
with  in  modem  Palestine.  One  is  considerably  south 
of  Hebron  (Robinson,  Bib.  Hes,  ii,  472) ;  another  to  the 
west  of  that  city  (ib,  p.  427-429) ;  and  the  third  is  north 
of  Jemsalem,  in  the  country  of  Benjamin.  This  last  is 
most  likely  to  answer  to  Jotbah,  for  the  two  first-named 
plaoes  are  yery  insignificant,  and  neyer  can  have  been 
of  much  importance ;  whereas  this  is  described  by  Dr. 
Robinson  as  crowning  a  conspicuons  hill,  skirted  by  fei^ 
tile  basins  of  some  bieadth, ...  fuli  of  gardens  of  oliyes 
and  flg-treesL  The  remarkable  position  (he  adds)  would 
not  probably  haye  been  leli  unoocupied  in  ancient  times 
{Biblie*  Bet.  ii,  121,  124).  In  a  subseąuent  yisit  to  the 
place  he  was  stmck  both  with  the  depth  and  quality  of 
the  soil,  which  were  roore  than  one  would  anticipate  in 
80  rocky  a  region  {Later  Bib.  Bet.  p.  290).  These  ex> 
tzacta  explain  while  they  justify  the  signification  *  good- 
ness,*  which  belongs  both  to  Jotbah  and  Taiyibeh" 
(Fairbaim,  s.  y.).  Against  this  identkfication,  howeyer, 
there  lie  two  not  yery  strong  objections,  namdy,  ita  dis- 
tance  from  Jemsalem,  and  the  fact  of  the  probable  oo- 
incidenoe  of  this  sito  with  that  of  Ophrah  (q.  y.). 

Jofbath  (Deut.  x,  7).    See  JoTBATiiAn. 

Jofbathah  [some  Jotha'ihah^  (Heb.  Yotba'thah, 
n!^3Id^,  goodnettj  L  cpkatantnessy  compare  AgathopoUt 
[the  name  is  the  same  with  ^319^,  Jotbah^yrith  n  para- 
gogic  appended] ;  Sept.  'lirifia^d  v.  r.  Tai/3a3a,,etc. ; 
Auth.  Yers.  in  Deut  x,  7,  ''Jothath"), the  thirty-fourth 
station  of  the  Isnelites  during  their  wandering  in  the 
deeert,  sitnated  between  Hor-hagidgad  and  Ebronah 
(Numb.  xxxiii,38,d4),  and  again  their  forty-iirst  station, 
between  Gudgodah  and  the  Red  Sea  (DeuU  x,  7),  dc- 
scdbed  in  the  latter  passage  as  "  a  land  (kńyon  (O^^^HS^ 


JOTHAM 


1036 


JOURNEY 


mnt&c-broolu)  of  watcTS.**  The  locality  thus  indicated 
ia  probably  the  expanded  valley  near  the  confluenoe  of 
wady  Jerafeh  in  its  nouthern  part  witfa  wady  Mukutta 
el-Tuwarik  and  others  (Robinson'8  Researchea,  i,  261), 
especiaUy  wady  e\-Adbeh,  which  neariy  approachea  the 
Heb.  name  (Jour,  Sac,  Lit.  \pri!,  1860,'  p.  47-49).  Thia 
ifl  generally  a  region  answering  to  the  description  of 
fertility  (Bonar'8  Denrt  ofSinai,  p.  295).  Schwarz  (Pal- 
eitmey  p.  213),  however,  thinks  wady  Thtbci,  nearer  the 
hjismeanc    See  £xodb. 


Jo'tham  (Heb.  Yotham',  DCi'*,  Jehoeah  U  upright; 
Sept  and  N.  Test.  'luaBafA,  but  'lua^dfi  in  1  Chroń,  ii, 
47 ;  'l<ttvaBav  v.  r.  'liod^av  in  1  Chroń,  iii,  12 ;  v.  r.  *la>- 
dófŁ  in  1  Chroń.  v,  17 ;  v.  r.  *liad^av  in  2  Chroń,  xxvi, 
21 ;  V.  r.  *lijjva^av  In  2  Chroń,  xxvi,  23 ;  Josephus  'ItoO' 
dafioCf  A  n/.  V,  7, 2 ;  ix,  1 1 , 2  są. ;  Vulg.  Joathan  and  Jo- 
ałham ;  Auth.yer8. "  Joatham,"  Matt  i,  9),  the  name  of 
6everal  men. 

1.  The  second  named  of  the  six  sons  of  Jahdai,  of  the 
family  of  Caleb  the  Hezronite  (1  Chroń,  ii,  47).  RC. 
post  1612. 

2.  The  youngest  of  Gideon^s  8eventy  legitimate  sona, 
and  the  only  one  who  eacaped  when  the  rcst  were  maa- 
sacred  by  the  order  of  Abimelech  (Judg.  ix,  5).  RC. 
1322.  When  the  fratricide  was  madę  king  by  the  peo- 
ple  of  Shechem,  the  young  Jotham  was  so  dńing  as  to 
make  his  appearanoe  on  Mount  Gerizim  for  the  purpose 
of  lifting  up  a  protesting  voice,  and  of  giving  vent  to 
hu  feelings  (see  Thomson,  Land  and  Book,  ii,  210).  This 
he  did  in  a  beautiful  parable,  wherein  the  trees  are  rep- 
resented  as  making  choice  of  a  king,  and  bestowing  on 
the  bramble  the  honor  which  the  cćdar,  the  oUve,  and 
the  vine  would  not  accept.  See  Fable.  The  obvioa8 
application,  which,  indeed,  Jotham  failed  not  himself  to 
point  out,  must  have  been  highly  exa8perating  to  Abim- 
elech and  his  friends;  but  the  speaker  fled,  as  soon  as  he 
had  delivered  his  parable,  to  the  town  of  Beer,  and  re- 
mained  there  out  of  his  brother's  reach  (Judg.  lx,  7-21). 
We  hear  no  morę  of  him  \  but  three  years  after,  if  then 
living,  he  saw  the  aocomplishment  of  the  malediction 
he  had  pronounced  (Judg.  ix,  57). — ^Kitto. 

3.  A  person  named  by  Josephus  (lutaBafŁoc^  i4n/.  viii, 
1, 3)  as  the  son  of  Bukki  and  father  of  Meraioth,  in  the 
regular  linę  of  Phineha8's  desoendants,  although  he  (in- 
correctly)  states  that  these  lived  pnvately ;  he  seems  to 
refer  to  Zerahiah  (q.  v.)  of  the  scriptural  list  (1  Chroń. 
vi,  5).    See  High-priest. 

4.  The  eleventh  king  of  the  separate  kingdom  of  Ju- 
dah,  and  son  of  Uzziah  (by  Jerusha,  daughter  of  Za- 
-dok),  whom  he  succeeded  B.C.  756 ;  he  reigned  sixteen 
years  (comp.  the  synchronism  in  1  Chroń.  v,  17).  His 
father  having  during  his  last  years  been  excluded  by 
leprosy  from  public  life,  the  govemmenc  was  adminis- 
tered  by  his  son,  at  that  time  twenty-five  years  of  age 
(2  Chroń,  xxvi,  21, 28 ;  xxvii,  1  •,  2  Kings  xv»  33).  RC. 
781.  See  Uzziah.  For  the  chronological  difficulties 
of  his  reign  (see  Crusius,  De  cera  Jotkamka,  lips.  1756 ; 
Winer'8  ReabpOrłerb,  s.  v.),  see  Chrokologt.  Jotham 
profited  by  the  experience  which  the  reign  of  his  fa- 
ther, and  of  the  kings  who  preceded  him,  affordcd,  and 
he  rulcd  in  the  fear  of  God,  although  he  was  unable  to 
correct  all  the  comipt  practices  into  which  the  peopfe 
had  fallen.  His  slncere  intentions  were  rewarded  with 
a  prosperous  reign.  He  was  successful  in  his  wars. 
The  Ammonitcs,  who  had  **  given  gifts"  as  a  sort  of  trib> 
Ute  to  Uzziah,  but  had  ceased  to  do  so  afler  his  leprosy 
had  incapacitated  him  from  goveming,  were  constrain- 
ed  by  Jotham,  but  not  till  several  years  after  he  had  be- 
comc  settled  as  sole  monarcb,  to  pay,  for  the  three  re- 
maining  years  of  his  reign,  a  heavy  tribute  in  8ilver, 
wheat,  and  harley  (2  Chroń,  xxvi,  8;  xxvii,  5, 6).  Many 
important  public  works  were  also  undertaken  and  ac- 
complished  by  Jotham.  The  principal  gate  of  the  Tem- 
pie was  rebuilt  by  him  on  a  morę  magnificent  scalę ;  the 
ąuarter  of  Ophel,  in  Jerusalem,  was  strengthened  by  new 
fortifications;  various  towns  were  built  or  rebuilt  in  the 


moontains  of  Judah;  and  castles  and  towers  of  defence 
were  erected  in  the  wildemeas.  Jotham  died  greatly 
lamented  by  his  people,  and  was  buiied  in  the  scpulchre 
of  the  kings  (2  Kings  xv,  38 ;  2  Chroo.  xvii,  8-9).  RC 
740.— Kitto.  His  reign  was  favored  with  the  ministra- 
tions  of  the  prophets  Isaiah,  Hosea,  taSA  Micah  (Isa.  i,  1  -, 
vii,  1 ,  Hofl.  i,  1 ;  Mic  i,  1).    See  Jodah. 

5.  A  high-priest  named  by  Josephus  ('Jma^aficę^ 
Ant,  X,  8, 6)  as  son  of  Joel  and  father  of  Urijah  in  the 
regular  incumbency ;  probably  the  AaiARiAH  (q.  v.>  cf 
I  Chroń,  vi,  11).    See  High-priest. 

•  Joubert,  Frascis,  a  noted  French  ecclesiastical  wri- 
ter,  bom  at  Montpellier  Oct.  12, 1689,  entered  the  ser- 
vicc  of  the  Romish  Church  in  1728.  In  1730  he  was  im- 
prisoned  in  the  Bastlle  as  a  Jansenist,  and  aflerwards  ex- 
iled  to  Montpellier.  He  subseąuently  retnmed  to  Faiiis 
and  there  died,  Dec.  23, 1763.  He  wrotie  extensively,  espe- 
dally  in  the  department  of  exegetical  theology.  Ajnong 
his  best  works  we  reckon  Erplication  de  VIIigt,  de  Joseph 
(Paris,  1728, 12mo) :—  Eclaircissemaa  tur  let  Discoun 
de  Job  (12mo) : — Traiti  du  Caractire  euentiel  a  tom  fe* 
Propkełet  (12mo) :  —  Obterratitmt  sur  Joil  (A%'ignon, 
1733, 12mo)  i—Lettreg  sur  rinterpretafion  des  Źcriture* 
(Paris,  1744, 12mo) :  —  Cowcontowcc  et  Erpiicałion  des 
principales  Prophities  de  Jeremie^  d^ Ezechiel  et  de  Dan- 
iel (Paris,  1745,4to)  i—EsepUcation  des  principales  propk- 
itieSf  etc  (Avignon  [Paris],  1749,  5  vols.): — Contmen- 
taires  sur  les  Douze  petits  Prophttes  (Avignon,  1754,  6 
vola.  12mo)  t^Commenlaire  sur  FApocofypse  (Avignftn 
[Paris],  1762, 2  vola.  12mo) ;  etc  Sec  Chaudon  et  Dc- 
landine.  Diet.  Unit,  Ilistor,  Crif.  et  Bibliogr, ;  Querud, 
La  France  Litterairt ;  Hoefer,  Nout,  Biogr.  Generale, 
xxvii,  18.     (J.N.P.) 

Jonffroy,  Th^dore  Simon,  a  noted  modem  French 
ędectic  phUosophcr,  was  bom  at  Poutets  in  1796.  In 
1832  he  became  professor  uf  phUosophy  at  the  College 
of  France,  and  continued  in  this  relation  until  1837.  Ile 
died  in  1842.  He  was  by  far  the  moat  celeUmted  pu[til 
of  Cousin,  and  vcry  popular  as  a  writer  of  grcat  ele- 
gance  of  style  and  tcrseness  of  diction.  He  first  became 
known  to  the  public  at  large  through  the  medium  of 
a  translation  of  Dugald  Stcwart^s  Morał  Pkilosopky. 
To  this  translation  he  prefixed  an  easay  or  prcface,  in 
which  he  vindicates  the  study  of  intcUcctual  science 
against  the  attacks  of  those  who  would  banish  all,  ex- 
cept  natural  philosophy,  out  of  the  domain  of  human 
inve8tigation.  '*  Nothlng,**  says  Moreli  (Higt,  of  MoŁ 
Phil.  p.  662),  "  can  exceed  the  deamess,  and  even  the 
beauty,  with  which  he  establishes  in  this  little  produc- 
tion  the  fundamental  principlea  of  intellectiial  philoso- 
phy:" To  a  careful  obsenrer  it  is  evident  that  he  had 
deeply  imbibed  the  principlcs  and  the  spirit  of  the  Scot- 
tish  metaphysicians,  whilst,  at  the  same  time,  he  would 
generally  rise  to  thoee  morę  expan8ive  view8  of  philo- 
sophical  trath  which  were  inculcated  in  the  łecturK  of 
his  illustrious  instruutor.  In  the  Mekmges  Pkilotc- 
pkiques  (Paris,  iaS3 ;  2d  edit.  1838-43),  the  second  work 
to  which  we  desire  to  cali  attention,  "we  see,*"  says 
Moreli,  'Hhe  zealous  pupil  and  successor  of  Cousin.  the 
genuine  modem  eclectic,  toucliing  morę  or  less  upon  all 
pointa  within  the  rangę  of  intellectual  philosophy,  and 
pouring  light  derived  from  all  directions  upon  ihem. 
We  feel  ourselves  in  company  with  a  master  mind,  ore 
who  does  not  servilely  foUow  in  the  track  pointed  out 
by  others,  but  yet  who  knows  how  to  appreciate  the 
labors  of  all  true-hearted  thinkers,  and  to  make  their 
results  tell  upon  the  elucidation  of  his  own  system."* 
We  have  not  space  here  to  elucidate  his  system,  and 
refer  our  readers  to  Moreli.  His  works  were  publi&bed 
entire  in  6  octavo  voIs.  in  1836.  See  Caio,  in  the  lUrue 
de  deux  MondeSy  March  15, 1865. 

Journal,  or  Diumal,  is  the  andent  name  of  the 
day  hours  contained  in  t|ie  Breviary  (q.  v.).  By  it  was 
also  known  in  monasteries  the  diary  of  daily  expen9e& 

Jouzney  (prop.  SD3,  to  puU  up  the  stakea  of  ooe*a 


JOVE 


1037 


JOYINIAN 


tent  prepantoiy  to  removal;  wopiuofuu)  properly  re- 
fers  to  trarel  by  land.    See  Trayellino. 

In  thc  East,  a  day^sjoumty  is  reckoned  about  8ixteen 
or  twenty  milea.  To  this  dUtance  around  the  Hebrew 
camp  were  the  ąuailfl  scattered  for  food  for  tbe  people 
(Numb.  xi,  31).  Shaw  computes  the  eleven  days*  jonr- 
ney  from  Sinai  to  Kadesh  Baraea  (Deat  i,  2)  to  be 
about  one  hundred  and  ten  milea.  The  first  day*s  jour- 
ney  (Lnke  ii,  44)  is  usually  a  short  one  (Hacketfs  // 
lustra,  o/Scripł.  p.  12).     See  Day'8  Journey. 

A  Sabbath-day^s  joumey  (Acta  i,  12)  ia  reckoned  by 
thc  fiebrews  at  about  8even  furlonga,  or  a  little  less 
than  one  mile,  and  it  is  sald  that  if  any  Jew  travelled 
above  this  from  the  city  on  the  Sabbath  he  was  beaten." 
See  Sabbatii-dat's  Journey. 

Joto.    See  Jupiter. 

JotiTenoi  or  JouToncy,  Joseph  de,  an  eminent 
Jesuit,  was  bom  at  Paiis  Sept  14, 1643.  He  taught 
rhetoric  with  uncommon  reputation  at  Cacn,  La  Fl§che, 
and  Paria,  and  at  length  was  invited  to  Romę,  In  order 
to  continue  the  "  Histoiy  of  the  Jesuita"  with  morę  free- 
dom  than  he  could  hare  enjoyed  at  Paris.  His  other 
prindpal  worka  are  two  yolnmes  of  speeches,  a  smali 
tract  entitled  De  Batume  Ditcendi  et  Docendt,  and  notes 
on  different  dassical  writers.  In  his  history  of  the  Jes- 
oits  be  attempts  to  justify  fathcr  Guignaid,  the  Jesuit, 
who  was  executed  for  enoouraging  the  bigotcd  <M»MMgin 
Chatel  in  his  attempt  on  the  life  of  Henry  IV.  In 
France  Parliament  prohibited  the  publication  or  circn- 
lation  of  the  work  on  ihat  account.  See  Gorton,  Biogr. 
Diet.  s.  V. 

Jovian  (sometimes,  but  erroneously,  called  Jorm- 
tan),  fully  Flayius  Claudius  Joyianls,  Koman  ero- 
peror  from  A.D.  863  to  864,  His  predecessor  Julian 
was  slain  on  the  field  of  battle,  in  his  unhappy  cam- 
paigii  against  the  Persians,  June  26,  A,D.  868.  Jovi- 
anus,  finding  the  continuation  of  the  unfortunate  strug- 
gle  uscless,  sought  iLs  terminatjon,  and  secured  qiute 
honorable  terms  from  the  Persians,  and,  once  free  from 
the  attacks  of  foreign  enemies,  he  at  once  initiated 
measures  to  establish  his  aulhority  in  the  West,  and 
hereafter  his  time  was  malnly  devoted  to  administra- 
tive  and  legislatire  business.  Immediately  after  his 
election  to  the  imperial  dignity  Joyianus  had  professed 
hunself  to  be  a  Christian,  and  one  of  his  first  measures 
when  peace  was  restored  to  his  dominions  was  the  cel- 
ebrated  edict  by  which  he  placcd  the  Christian  religion 
on  a  legał  baais,  and  thus  put  an  end  to  the  persecutions 
to  which  the  Christiana  had  been  expo8ed  during  the 
short  reign  of  Julian.  The  heathens  were,  however, 
eąually  protected,  and  no  supcriority  was  alJowed  to  the 
one  over  the  other.  Thc  different  scctaries  assailed 
him  with  petitions  to  help  them  against  each  other,  but 
he  declined  interfering,  and  referred  them  to  the  decia- 
ion  of  a  generał  council ;  and  the  Arians  showing  them- 
aelves  most  troublesome,  he  gave  them  to  underatand 
that  impartiality  was  the  first  duty  of  an  emperor.  His 
friend  Athanasius  waa  restored  to  his  see  at  Alexandria. 
He  died  suddcnly  on  his  way  home  from  the  Orient, 
A.D.  364.  It  is  possible,  though  not  probable,  that  he 
died  a  yiołent  death,  to  which  Ammianus  Marcelllnus 
(xxv,  6-10)  seems  to  allude  when  he  compares  his  death 
irith  that  of  i£milianus  Scipio.  See  De  la  Bl^terie,  Nie- 
toire  de  Jorien  (Amsterdam,  1740),  the  beat  work  on  the 
subject^Smith,  Diet,  Grk,  and  Rom,  Biog.  ii,  616. 

JoTinian,  emperor.    See  Joyian. 

Jovinian,  one  of  the  early  opponents  of  monachism, 
and,  in  a  measure,  one  of  the  earliest  reformere  before 
the  Keformation,  flourished  near  the  end  of  the  4th  cen- 
tuiy.  He  was  an  Italian,  but  whether  a  native  of  Romę 
or  Milan  is  not  known.  He  taught  in  both  cities,  and 
gained  a  number  of  adherenta.  His  real  opinions,  freed 
ftom  the  misrepresentations  of  his  opponents,  it  is  hard- 
ly  posńble  to  ascertain;  it  is  apparent,  however,  that 
he  opposed  ascetidam,  which  we  find  so  generally  and 
atrenuously  advocated  in  the  writings  of  tbe  Chuich 


fathen  of  the  4th  oentury.    He  e^idently  maintained 
"  that  there  ia  but  one  diyine  element  of  life,  which  all 
bełieyeiB  ahare  in  common;  but  one  feilowahip  with 
Christ,  which  proceeda  from  faith  in  him ;  but  one  new 
birth.    AU  who  poasesa  tbia  in  common  with  each  other 
—all,  therefore,  who  are  Christiana  in  the  tme  sense, 
not  baiely  in  outward  profesaion — ^have  the  same  cali- 
ing,  the  same  dignity,  the  same  heavenly  blessings ;  the 
diyeEBity  of  outward  circumstancea  creating  no  diffeiv 
enoe  in  tbia  reapect,  that  all  persona  whataoeyer,  if  they 
keep  the  yows  they  make  to  Chriat  in  baptism  and  liye 
godly  Uyes,  haye  an  equal  title  to  the  rewarda  of  heay- 
en,  and,  oonseąnently,  that  thoae  who  spend  their  liyes 
in  celibacy  or  maoerate  their  bodiea  by  faating  are  no 
morę  acoeptable  to  God  than  Łhose  who  liye  in  wedlock, 
and  nourish  their  bodies  with  moderation  and  sobriety.** 
He  also  held  that  Mary  ceased  to  be  a  yiigin  by  bring- 
ing  forth  Christ ;  that  the  degrees  of  futurę  blessednesa 
do  not  depend  on  tbe  meritoriousness  of  our  good  works ; 
and  that  a  truły  oonyerted  Christian,  so  long  as  he  ia 
euch,  cannot  sin  wilfuDy,  but  will  resist  and  oyercome  the 
temptationa  of  the  deyiL   Yet,  while  upholding  all  these 
yiews,  Joyinian  himself  remained  single,  and  liyed  like 
all  other  monka,  and  his  enemies  eyen  admit  that  the  ten- 
or of  his  life  was  alwaya  blamelesi^    He  first  adyocated 
his  opinions  at  Milan,  but,  being  there  denied  by  the  stem 
Ambroee  all  liberty  of  speech,  he  went  to  Romę,  which, 
aa  appears  from  the  eyidence  of  Jerome,  waa  one  of  the 
last  plaoes  to  entertain  the  ascetic  fanaticiem ;  nor  waa 
it  nntil  after  monaateries  had  darkened  all  parts  of  the 
East,  aa  well  as  many  of  the  Wait,  that  these  establish- 
menta  were  seen  in  that  city.    There,  according  to  the 
report  of  pope  Syriciua  and  otbers,  the  doctrine  of  the 
Milanese  monk  had  madę  many  oonyerta,  so  that  the 
Church,  *'tom  by  doga"  in  a  manner  heretofore  un- 
heard  of,  doubted  wtuereto  ao  unlooked  for  an  assault 
might  proceed.    Not  a  few  of  the  laity,  if  not  of  the 
deigy,  had  lietened  to  Joyinian ;  and  eight  persona  are 
named  aa  hia  aupporters,  who,  with  him,  were,  by  a 
onanimoua  dedsion  of  the  Romish  deigy,  oondemned 
and  eKoommnnicated  in  a  conncil  held  at  Milan  in  390, 
aa  the  aut  hora  of  a  ''new  heresy,  and  of  blasphemy;** 
and  they  were  foreyer  expelled  from  the  Church.    ''  Pi- 
late  and  Herod"  were  at  one  in  this  instance.    Pope 
Syridus  confirmed  the  oondemnation,  the  emperor  Ho- 
norius  enacted  penal  laws  againat  the  Joyinians,  and 
JoTinian  himaelf  waa  banished  to  tbe  desolate  island 
of  Boa,  off  the  ooast  of  Illyria,  and  there  died  before 
A.D.  406.    But  Joyinian  had  also  written,  as  well  aa 
preached,  in  snpport  of  hia  opinions,  which  continued  to 
apread  on  all  aidea,  notwithatanding  the  tenora  of  Church 
authority.    At  Borne,  althongh  nonę  dared  openly  to 
profess  Joyinian^s  heresy,  it  was  neyerthdess  coyertly 
taught,  and  was  whiapered  about,  eyen  to  such  an  ex- 
tent  that  certain  nuna  fcll  into  matrimony  in  conae- 
qnence  of  ita  preyalence.    In^thia  emeigency,  and  in 
aid  of  the  endeayors  of  the  ^omiah  Church  to  crush 
the  ^  roonstroua  doctrine,"  tbe  good  Augustine,  a  tool 
of  bad  men,  came  forth  in  defence  of  the  "orthodox" 
practicea  and  principlea  of  the  asoetica;  and  in  his  trea- 
tise  De  bono  cotijugali,  and  in  others  of  a  similar  kind, 
h^  laboia  bard,  by  wiły  sophistry,  to  reconcile  the  pre- 
yaiłing  absurdities  with  reason  and  Scripture.    The 
miłd,  pioua,  and  honest  Augustine,  howeyer,  was  not  the 
man  to  be  tlie  Church*8  thorough-going  champion  on 
thia  notable  oocańon:  ahe  had  a  better  maii  at  band; 
**one  who,  by  yarious  leaming,  by  a  yoluble  pen,  as  well 
aa  by  rancor  of  temper,  and  boundlesa  arrogance,  and  a 
blind  deyotion  to  whateyer '  the  Church'  had  sanction- 
ed,  waa  well  ąualifled  to  do  the  neoessary  work  of  cajol- 
ing  the  simple,  of  inflaming  the  ianatical,  of  liightening 
the  timid,  of  calumniating  the  innocent,  and,  in  a  word, 
of  ąuashing,  if  it  could  be  quashed,  all  inquiry  concem- 
ing '  authonized'  errora  and  abuses.    The  Churcb,  right 
or  wTong,  was  to  be  justified ;  the  objector,  Innocent  or 
gnilty,  waa  to  be  crusbed;  and  Jerome  would  scruple 
nothing  could  he  but  aocompliah  ao  dearable  aa  object" 


JOT 


1038 


JUAN  YALDEZ 


8ee  Jerome.  Bat,  notwithstanding  these  attacibi  by 
thc  Chuich^B  three  greatest  docton^AuguBtiiie,  Am- 
bro6e,  and  Jerome,  whofle  great  initation  and  anjdety 
for  tbe  canse  of  the  Churcb  ia  sufBcienUy  betnyed  hy 
theii  determination  to  oppoie  JoTimaniBin  jointly, 
ihough  living  at  pointa  qtiite  lemote  from  eacb  otber— 
tbe  "  beresy,"  instead  of  dying  out^  spread,  and  waa  fa- 
voiably  tbougbt  of  and  aocepted-in  different  parta  of 
CbrUtendom,  and  no  doubt  madę  eaaier  tbe  taak  of 
Yigilantiiu  and  of  Lutber.  Neander  does  not  beaitate 
to  rank  the  semoes  of  Jovinian  so  bigb  as  to  oonsider 
bim  wortby  of  a  place  by  tbe  aide  of  Lutber.  See  Ne- 
ander, Ch.  Hitu  ii,  266  8q. ;  Scbaff,  Ch,  HitL  U,  226  8q. ; 
Ambrosius,  Epitt,  42;  Augustine,  De  Uctm,  c  82 ;  Ba- 
zonios,  A  rmales  EccL  p.  390,  412 ;  Walcb,  Ketzerhutorie, 
iii,  635  8q.;  Baur,  ChristL  Kirche  (4tb  to  6tb  century), 
p.  811  8q. ;  Lindner,  De  Jorimano  et  Yi^ikudio  puHoriś 
doctriiuB  antetignamt  (Lpz.  18S9). 

Joy  (usoally  some  form  of  ^"^9,  wbicb  prop.  meana 
to  tpin  round  witb  pleasorable  cmotion,  and  is  tbna  a 
stronger  term  tban  nc^,  wbicb  expre88e»  gladneu ;  but 
less  8o  tban  y^^i  to  exuU  or  leap  with  exubenait  Joy , 
Gr.  prop.  x'^^)^  '^  deligbt  of  tbe  mind  ariaing  from  tbe 
eonsideration  of  a  piesent  or  assured  approaching  poa- 
aession  of  a  futurę  good  (Ezra  yi,  16  \  Eatb.  Tiii,  16).  1. 
Natural  joy  ia  of  yariona  degrees :  wben  it  is  moder- 
ate,  it  b  caUed  ^adnets ;  wben  raiaed  on  a  audden  to 
tbe  bigheat  degree,  it  is  tben  eiuUaium  or  trantport ; 
wben  we  limit  our  deaires  by  our  poasessions,  it  ia  eon- 
tentmad;  wben  our  desires  are  raised  bigb,  and  yet  ao- 
oompliahed,  tbis  is  called  taiu/acHomi  wben  our  joy  is 
deriyed  from  aome  comical  occaaion  oi  amnaement,  it  ia 
mvrth ;  if  it  ariae  from  oonaiderable  opposltion  tbat  ia 
vanquisbed  in  tbe  purault  of  tbe  good  we  deaire,  it  ia 
tben  called  triumph ;  wben  joy  bas  so  long  poaaeaaed 
tbe  mind  tbat  ic  u  settled  into  a  temper,  we  cali  it  ckeer- 
Julness;  wben  we  rejoloe  opon  tbe  aooount  of  any  good 
wbicb  oihers  obtain,  it  may  be  called  eympaiJip  or  can' 
gratulation,  2.  Morał  joy  la  alao  of  8everal  kinda^  aa 
tbe  self*appn>bation,  or  tbat  wbicb  ariaea  from  tbe  per^ 
formance  of  any  good  actions;  thia  ia  called  peace^  or 
terertify  of  conacienoe;  if  the  action  be  honorable  and 
tbe  joy  riae  high,  it  may  be  called  giory.  8.  Tbere  ia 
alao  a  bpiritual  joy,  wbicb  tbe  Scripture  calla  a  **  fhiit 
of  the  Spirit"  (GaL  v,  22),  **tbe  joy  of  faitb"  (Phil.  i, 
26),  and  "the  rejoicing  of  hope"  (Heb.  iii,  6).  The  ob- 
jects  of  it  arc^l.)  God  bimaelf  (Paa.  xliii,  4,  laa.  lxi, 
10).  (2.)  Christ  (Phil.  iii,  3;  1  Pet,  i,  8).  .'(8.)  The 
promises  (Paa.  cxix,  162).  (4.)  The  admlniatration  of 
tbe  Gospel  and  Goepel  ordinances  (Paa.  lxxxix,  16). 
(6.)  The  prosperity  of  tbe  interest  of  Christ  (Acts  xv,  8: 
Bey.  xi,  15, 17).  (6.)  The  happiness  of  a  futurę  state 
(Rom.  V,  2 ;  Matt.  xxv).  Tbe  naturę  and  properties  of 
tbis  joy :  [1.]  It  Is,  or  sbould  be,  constant  (PhiL  iv,  4). 
[2.]  IŁ  ia  unknown  to  the  men  of  the  world  (1  Cor.  ii, 
14).  [3.  J  It  is  unspeakaUe  (1  Pet.  i,  8).  [4.J  It  is 
permanent  (John  xvi,  22).  See  Watts,  On  Pau.  sec 
11 ;  Giirs  Bod;/  o/Div.  Ul,  111,  8vo  ed.;  Grove'8  Morał 
PhiL  i,  856 ;  HenderBon'a  Buck. 

Joy  of  God  relatcs,  1.  To  the  deligbt  and  compla- 
oency  be  has  in  bimself,  bis  own  naturę,  and  perfectiona. 
2.  He  rejotcea  in  bia  own  worka  (Paa.  civ,  81).  8.  In  hia 
Son  Christ  Jeaua  (Matt.  iii,  17).  4.  In  tbe  work  of  re- 
demption  (John  iii,  15).  5.  In  the  aubjecta  of  his  grace 
(Paa.  cxlvii,  11 ;  Zeph.  iii,  17 ;  Psa.  cxlix,  4).— Hender^ 
8on'8  Buck. 

Joy  or  Joye,  Grorge,  an  early  promoter  of  tbe 
Reformation,  a  native  of  the  county  of  Bedford,  waa  ed- 
ucated  at  Pcterbouse,  (Cambridge,  where  be  graduated 
M.A.  in  1517.  An  associate  of  T>'ndale,  be  waa  in  1527 
accu8cd  of  heresy,  and  obłiged  to  go  to  (lermany,  where 
be  residcii  for  many  years.  He  was  concemed  in  tbe 
superintendence  of  fyndale*8  Bibles,  printed  at  Antwerp, 
and  fiiially  retumed  to  his  native  country,  but  the  time 
of  his  death  is  unknown.  Besides  hia  tninslation  of  part 
of  tbe  Bibie,  be  publiahed  On  the  UnUy  and  Schitm  of 


Oe  aneieat  Churdk  (1684)  -^Subeenkrn  ofAf&r^s  Fabe 
Foundation  (1684)  i-^ommtmtary  on  Daniel,  in  tbe  main 
firam  Melanctbon,  etc.    See  Gorton,  Bioc,  Diet.  a.  v. 

Joyner,  James  E.,  a  miniater  of  tbe  Metbodist 
Epiacopal  Churcb  Soutb,  waa  bom  in  Amberst  County, 
Ya.,  and  died  at  hia  own  borne  in  Hen^  0>unty,  Ta, 
Marcb  16, 1868.  For  morę  tban  tbirty  years  Jo3mer 
senred  the  Churcb  witb  great  aoceptability  and  naeful- 
nesa  in  yarioua  appointmenta.  Hia  preadung  waa  tar' 
neat,  pointed,  and  eminently  practical  During  tbe  Ute 
war  be  aenred  aa  a  cbaplain  in  tbe  Confederate  States 
army,  and  exerted  among  tbe  officen  and  men  an  influ- 
ence for  good  wbicb  waa  felt  and  acknowledged  by  all. 
—Conf,  MinuUM  M,  E.  ChurtA  South,  iii,  203. 

JOB^abad  (Heb.  Yozabad\  ^^ti*^,  a  oontraction  for 
Jehozabad;  Sept.  *Iw2;a/3a^,but  aometimea  in  Cbron. 
'lutZafiad  V.  r.  *Ia>^a/3aid,  *l€Ztfiov^ ;  alao  'liitcafMc  or 
'luHTafiaS  in  Neb.;  Autb-Yen.  ''Joaabad'*  in  1  Cbraa. 
xii,  4),  tbe  name  of  aeyend  men. 

1.  A  Gederathite,  one  of  tbe  famoua  Benjamite  arcb- 
ers  wbo  joined  Dayid  at  ZiUag  (1  Chroń,  xii,  4).  KGL 
1056. 

2.  A  cbiliarcb  of  Manasaeb,  who  re-enforced  Dayid 
on  retreating  to  Zikbig  (1  Cbron.  xii,  20).     K(X  1053. 

3.  Anotber  cbiliarcb  of  Manaaseb,  wbo  deaert^d  Sanl^s 
cauae  for  tbat  of  Dayid  wben  he  madę  Ziklag  bis  reai- 
dence  (1  Chnm.  'xii,  20) ;  it  ia  poeaible,  boweyer,  tbat 
the  name  baa  been  erroneoualy  rq>eated  for  tbe  preced- 
ing.    B.C.  1053. 

4.  Probably  a  Leyite,  one  of  tbo  persona  charged  witb 
tbe  care  of  the  Tempie  ofTeńngs  undcr  tbe  snperintend- 
ence  of  Cononiab  and  Sbimei,  at  tbe  reformatioo  by 
Hezekiab  (2  C!hn>n.  xxxi,  13).    B.C.  726. 

5.  One  of  the  chief  Leyites  who  madc  offertngs  for 
the  renewal  of  the  Tempie  aeryicea  undcr  Josiab  (i 
Chroń,  xxxv,  9).     B.C.  623. 

6.  A  son  of  Jesbtu^  and  one  of  tbe  Leritea  who  took 
account  of  the  precious  metals  and  yeaads  offercd  for 
the  Tempie  by  the  laraelites  who  dedined  personally  to 
return  from  the  captiyity  (Ezra  viii,  33).  RC.  459. 
He  waa  probably  the  aame  witb  one  of  tbe  chief  Levites 
wbo  **  bad  the  orersigbt  of  tbe  outward  roattere  of  Uie 
house  of  God"  afl^r  the  re-establishment  at  Jerusakm 
(Neb.  xi,  16).  B.a  cir.  440.  He  was  poasibly  identical 
with  No.  8. 

7.  An  Israelite,  one  of  tbe  ''aons"*  of  Paabur,  wbo  di- 
yorced  hia  Gentile  wife  after  tbe  exilc  (Ezra  x,  22). 
RC.  459. 

8.  One  of  the  Leyites  wbo  diyorced  bis  beatben  wife 
after  the  return  from  Babylon  (Ezra  x,  23).  B.C  4,iQ. 
He  is  probably  identical  witb  one  of  the  Leyites  who 
aasisted  Ezra  in  expounding  the  Law  to  tbe  people  aa- 
sembled  in  the  T>nropoeon  (Neb.  viii,  7).    RC,  cir.  410. 

JOB'achar  (Heb.  Yozakar*,  *^2t'i'',  Jehocah-remem' 
bered;  SepL  'Iin^ayóp  y.  r.  'IcCip^op)*  tbe  son  of  Shim- 
eath,  an  Ammonitesa,  one  of  the  two  seryanta  wbo  a»> 
sassinated  Jehoash,  king  of  Judab,  in  Millo  (2  Kings  xii, 
21).  In  the  parallel  paaaage  (2  Chroń.  xxiy,  26)  the 
name  ia  erroneoualy  written  Z abadw  RC  837.  *^  It  ia 
uncertain  whether  their  conspiracy  waa  prompted  by  a 
personal  feeling  of  reyenge  for  tbe  deatb  of  Zechariah, 
aa  Joeephus  intimatee  (Ant.  ix,  8,4),  or  whetber  tbey 
were  nrged  to  it  by  tbe  family  of  Jeboiada.  Tbe  caie 
of  the  chronider  to  show  tbat  tbey  were  of  foreign  de- 
scent  aeems  almoat  intended  to  diaarm  a  auspidon  that 
the  king'a  asaassination  waa  an  act  of  prieatly  yengeance. 
But  it  is  moTC  likely  tbat  the  conspiracy  had  a  diflereot 
origin  altogether,  and  tbat  the  king*s  murder  was  re- 
garded  by  the  chronicler  as  an  inatance  of  divine  retri- 
bution.  On  the  acoeaaion  of  Amaziah  tbe  conspiraton 
were  executed"  (Smith). 

JOB'aaak(Ez»iii,2,8;  y,2i  z,  18;  Keh.xii,S6). 
See  Jehozadak. 

Juan  de  Dloa.    See  Jobn  db  Dno. 

Juan  Valćles.    See  Yałirbs. 


JUBAL 


1039 


JUBILEE 


Jtl^bal  (Heb.  Tubal^  ian^,  proh.  for  iai>.>W«,  i. 
e.  musie  i  Sept.  'Iov/3aX),  Lamech^ś  Mcond  son  by  Adah, 
of  the  linę  of  Cun ;  deacribed  as  the  inrentor  of  the 
"liBS,  kinnór,  and  the  ^^^^j  ugdby  rendered  in  our  ver- 
tion  *'  the  harp  and  the  organ,"  bat  perhaps  morę  prop- 
erly  ^łhe  lyrt  and  mouth-organ,^  or  Pandaean  pipę  (Gen. 
iv,  21).  See  Musie.  B.C.  prób.  dr.  8490.  Acoording 
to  Joeephus  ('lot;/3aXoc,  Ant,iX  2)t  '*  be  caltivated  mu- 
sie, and  invented  the  paaltery  and  cithara.**  Some  have 
compared  him  with  the  Apollo  of  heathen  mythology 
(Haffie's  Entdeck.  ii,  37;  oomp.  Euseb.  Prcep,  Evang,  x, 
6;  Diod.  Sic.  i,  20;  Buttmann,  MythoL  i,  164;  Kalisch, 
Commeataryy  ad  loc). 
Jnbilate.    See  Suicday. 

Ja'bUee  (HeU  ToM',  b^lt  or  bnS  a  joyfol  thmU 
or  dangor  of  trumpets;  once  in  the  Author.  Yen.  for 
hJ^l^^tJ,  Lev.  xxr,  9,  which  b  elsewhere  rendered  "  a 
shoat,''  etc),  usually  in  the  connection  Year  of  Jubi- 
1XB,  (bai*n  Pą^,  or  merely  ba1^  as  in  Lev.  xxv,  28; 
Septuag.  usually  tomslates  ćroc  rnc  a^<r«tfc»  or  simply 
a^9ic\  but  Gracises  'Xa>/34X  in  Joeh.  vi,  8, 13;  Jose- 
phos  Gnscizes  'Iw/3f}Xoc,  Ani,  iii,  12, 3 ;  Yulgate  camui 
juhiicBy  orjubUaus,  but  buocina  in  Exod.  xiz,  13) ;  also 
caUed  the  «y«ir  o/hberty'*  ("t^^  P3«,  Ezek.  xlvi,  17), 
the  great  semi-centennial  epocb  of  the  Hebrews,  oon- 
stltutług  a  feBtiva],  and  marked  by  striking  pubbc  and 
domestic  changes.  The  rdation  in  which  It  stood  to 
the  sabbatical  year,  and  the  generał  directions  for  its 
obaenrance,  are  given  Lev.  xxv,  '8-16  and  23-65.  Its 
bearing  on  landa  dedicated  to  Jehovab  is  stated  Lev. 
xxvii,  16-25.  There  is  no  mention  of  the  jubilee  in 
the  book  of  Deuteronomy,  and  the  only  other  reference 
to  it  in  the  Pentateuch  Is  in  the  appeal  of  the  tribe  of 
Manasseh,  on  acconnt  of  the  daughters  of  Zelophehad 
(Numb.  xxxvi, 4) .  In  the  following  statements  we  large- 
ly  nse  Ginsburg^s  art.  on  the  subject  in  Kitto^s  Cydopa* 
dia,  with  additions  from  other  sources.  See  Festiyau 
I.  SifftuficaUon  ofthe  Name, — Acoording  to  pseudo^ 
Jonathan  {Targum  on  Joeh.  vi,  5-9),  the  Talmud  {Rosh 
Jla-^kana,  26,  a),  Kashi,  Aben-Ezra  (on  Exod.  xix,  3), 
iKimchi  (on  Josh.  v,  6),  and  other  Jewish  authorities,  the 
meaning  ram^  which  b^l^  seems  at  times  to  bear  (see 
FUrst,  Lexicon,  s.  v. ;  but  Gesenius  utterly  denies  this 
•ense),  is  the  pńmary  one ;  hence  metonymicaily  a  ram^» 
kom  (comp.  £xod.  xix,  18  with  Joeh.  vi,  5) ;  and  so  the 
sound  of  a  ram*s  hom,  like  the  Latin  buccina.  Acoord- 
ing to  anotber  andent  interpretation,  the  Heb.  word  is 
ftom  a  root  iaj,  to  liberctie  (parallel  with  tltT,  mfreed 
captire;  comp.  Hitzig  on  Jer.  xxxiv,  8) ;  an  et3miology 
which  is  somewhat  sanctioned  by  Lev.  xxv,  10,  and  the 
Uflual  rendering  of  the  Sept  (also  Josephus,  i\tv^tpiav 
Sł  onfJiaivn  Tovvofta,  Ant,  iii,  12,8;  and  by  St  Jeroroe, 
Jobel  ett  demktens  aut  mittena^  Comment.  ad  loc.).  Oth- 
ers,  again,  regard  the  root  hy^  as  onomatopoetic,  like 
the  Latinyu6»/a7v,denoting  to  bejubikmt  (Gesenius,  etc), 
Most  modem  critics,  however,  derive  iST^  from  the  bet- 
ter  known  root  bs^,  to  fiow  impetuoualy  (Gen.  vi,  17), 
and  hence  assign  to  it  the  meaning  of  the  loud  or  impet- 
uouM  aound  (Gen.  iv,  21)  streaming  forth  from  the  tram- 
pet,  and  proclaiming  this  fe8tivaL  The  other  notions 
respecting  the  word  may  be  found  in  Fuller  {Ali$c.  Sac. 
p.  1026  są. ;  Criiici  Sacri,  voL  ix),  in  Carpzov  (p.  448 
sq.),  and,  most  oompletely  given,  in  Kranold  (p.  11  8q.). 
II.  Laws  oormected  with  this  Festi»<iL—TheaG  embraoe 
the  foUowing  three  main  pointa: 

1.  Rest  for  the  SoiL—T\\is  enactment,  which  is  com- 
prised  in  Lev.  xxv,  11, 12,  enjoins  that,  as  on  the  Sab- 
batical year,  the  land  should  lie  fallow,  and  that  theie 
should  be  no  tillage  nor  harvest  during  the  jubilee  year. 
The  Israelites,  however,  were  permitted  to  fetch  the 
^wntaneous  produce  of  the  field  for  their  immediate 

wanto  (nriKian  rx  ibastn  nnujn  p),  but  not  to 

Uy  i^  tq)  in  their  stordioiifea. 


2.  Rm^etnm  of  landed  Properfy^^ThiB  prorision  is 
oomprised  in  Le>%  xxv,  18-84;  xxvii,  16-24.    The  Mo- 
saic  law  enacted  that  the  Fkomised  Land  should  be  di« 
vided  by  lot,  in  eqnal  parts,  among  the  Israelites,  and 
that  the  plot  which  should  tbua  come  into  the  poeses- 
Sion  of  eaeh  family  was  to  be  absolutely  inalienable,  and 
forBver  continue  to  be  the  property  of  the  desoendanto 
of  the  oilginal  possessor.    6ee  Land.    Wben  a  propri^ 
etor,  therefore,  belng  pressed^by  poverty,  had  to  dispose 
of  a  field,  no  one  oould  buy  it  of  him  for  a  longer  period 
than  up  to  the  time  of  the  next  jubilee,  when  it  revert> 
ed  to  the  original  possessor,  or  to  his  family.    Henoe 
the  sale,  properly  speaking,  was  not  of  the  land,  but  of 
the  produce  of  so  many  years,  and  the  prioe  was  fixed 
aocording  to  tbe  nnnber  of  years  (PKian  "^aiD)  up  to 
the  next  jubilee,  so  as  to  pTevent  any  injustice  bdng 
done  to  thoae  who  were  oompelled  by  circumstances  to 
part  temporazily  with  their  land  (Lev.  xxv,  15, 16).   The 
lessee,  bowever,  aocording  to  Josephus,  in  case  he  had 
madę  great  outlays  on  the  field  just  before  he  was  re- 
quired  by  the  law  of  jubilee  to  return  it  to  its  owner, 
oould  daim  compenaatiun  for  thcse  (^  rU,  iii,  12, 3).   But 
even  before  the  jubilee  year  the  origmal  proprietor  could 
reoover  his  fidd,  if  eitber  his  own  circumstances  im- 
proved,  or  if  his  ncxt  of  kin  (see  Go&l)  could  redeem  U 
for  him  by  paying  back  accordiug  to  the  same  prioe 
which  regulated  the  purchase  (Lev.  xxv,  26,  27).    In 
the  interests  of  the  purchaaer,  however,  the  Kabbinical 
law  enacted  tbal  this  red^mption  should  not  take  place 
before  he  had  the  beuefit  of  the  field  for  łwo  productite 
years  (so  the  Rabbina  undentood  riKinn  "^atz?),  exdu- 
8ive  of  a  sabbatical  year,  a  year  of  bazrenness,  and  of 
tbe  first  harvest,  if  he  happened  to  buy  the  plot  of  land 
shortly  before  the  seventh  month,  i.  c.  with  the  ripe 
fniit  (Erachin,  ix,  1 ;  Maimonides,  Jobel^  xi,  10-13).    Ab 
poverty  is  the  only  reason  which  the  law  suppoeea 
might  lead  one  to  part  with  his  field,  the  Kabbins  en- 
acted that  it  was  not  allowable  for  any  one  to  sell  his 
patiimony  on  speculation  (comp.  Mamionides,  Jobelf  xi, 
8).    Though  nothing  is  here  said  about  fields  which 
were  given  away  by  the  proprietors,  yct  there  can  be  no 
doubt,  as  Maimonides  8a>'s  {ibid,  xi,  10),  that  the  same 
law  is  intended  to  apply  to  gifts  (comp.  Esek.  xlvi,  17), 
but  not  to  those  plota  of  land  which  came.into  a  man's 
possession  through  marriage  with  an  hdress  (Numb. 
xxxv^i,  4-9 ;  compare  liishna,  Berachołh,  viii,- 10).   Nd- 
thcr  did  this  law  apply  to  a  house  in  a  waUed  dty. 
Still,  the  seller  had  the  privi]ege  of  redeeming  it  at  any- 
time  within  a  fuli  year  from  the  day  of  the  sale.    After 
the  year  it  became  the  absolute  property  of  the  piuw 
chaser  (Lev.  xxv,  29, 80,  Keri).    As  this  law  requiied 
a  morę  minutę  definition  for  practical  purposes,  the  Rab- 
bins  determised  that  thia  right  of  redemption  might  be 
exerdaed  fiom  the  reiy  first  day  of  the  sale  to  the  last 
day  which  madę  up  the  year.    Moreover,  as  the  pur- 
cbaser  sometimes  conoealed  himself  towards  the  cud  of 
the  year,  in  order  to  prevent  the  seller  from  redeeming 
his  house,  it  was  enacted  that  when  the  purchaser  could 
not  be  found,  the  original  proprietor  should  band  ovet 
the  redemption-money  to  the  powers  that  be,  break  open 
the  doors,  and  take  possession  of  the  house ;  and  if  the 
purchaser  died  during  the  year,  the  original  proprietor 
oould  redeem  it  from  the  heir  (comp.  Mishna,  Erachin, 
ix,  3, 4;  Maimouides,Jo6e^xii,l-7).    Open  places,  how- 
ever,  which  are  not  surrouoded  by  walls,  belong  to  land- 
ed property,  and,  like  the  cultivated  land  on  which  they 
stand,  are  subject  to  the  law  of  jubilee,  and  must  revert 
to  their  original  proprietoiB  (Lev.  xxv,  31).    But,  al- 
though  houses  in  open  places  are  thus  treated  like  fields, 
yet,  acoording  to  the  Kabbinic  definition,  the  rererse  is 
not  to  be  the  case ;  L  e.  fidda  or  other  places  not  buUt 
upon  in  walled  cities  are  not  to  be  treated  as  dtics,  but 
ooroe  under  the  jubilee  law  of  fields  (comp.  Erachin^  ix, 
5).    The  houses  of  the  Levite8,  in  the  forty-eight  cities 
given  to  them  (Numb.  xxxv,  1-8),  were  cxempt  from 
this  generał  law  of  honae  property.    UAving  the  baom 


JTJBILEE 


1040 


JUBIŁEE 


yaloe  to  tho  LeviteB  as  Itnded  property  had  to  the  oth- 
er  itribeB,  these  houaes  were  subject  to  tbe  jubilee  law 
for  fieldfl,  and  could  at  any  time  be  ledeemed  (Lev.  xxv, 
82 ;  comp.  JCrachin,  ix,  8),  so  that,  even  if  a  Levito  le- 
deemed  the  house  which  hb  brother  Leyito  was  obliged 
to  aell  through  poyerty,  the  genend  law  of  houae  piop- 
erty  is  not  to  obtatn,  eveii  amoDg  the  Leyitea  them- 
selyes,  but  they  are  obliged  to  tieat  each  other  aocord- 
ing  to  the  law  of  landed  property.  Thua,  for  instaoce, 
the  house  of  A,  which  he,  out  of  poverty,  was  obliged  to 
aell  to  the  non-Leyite  B,  and  waa  redeemed  from  him 
by  a  Leyito  C,  reyerta  in  the  jubilee  year  from  G  to  the 
original  Leyitical  proprietor  A.  This  aeema  to  be  the 
most  probable  meanlng  of  the  enactment  contaioed  in 
Łey.  xxy,  83,  and  it  doea  not  neceasitato  us  to  inaert 
into  the  toxt  the  negatiye  particie  Bib  before  h^y^j  as  is 
done  by  the  Yulgate,  Houbigant,  Ewald  (AltertkUmer, 
p.  421),  Knobel,  etc^  nor  need  we,  with  Rashi,  Aben-Esra, 
etc,  take  bKA  in  the  nnnatural  aenae  otbuykig.  The 
lands  In  tbe  suburbe  of  their  citiea  the  Leyites  were  not 
permitted  to  part  with  under  any  condition,  and  there- 
fore  these  did  not  come  under  Uie  law  of  jubilee  (yer. 
84).  The  only  exception  to  this  generał  law  were  the 
houses  and  the  fields  consecrated  to  the  Lord,  or  to  the 
aupport  of  the  sanctuary.  If  these  were  not  redeemed 
before  the  ensuing  jubilee,  instead  of  reyerting  to  their 
original  proprietors,  they  at  the  jubilee  became  forever 
the  property  of  the  prieata  (Lcy,  xxvii,  20,  21).  The 
conditions,  howeyer,  on  which  consecrated  property 
could  be  redeemed  were  as  foliowe :  A  house  thua  de- 
Toted  to  the  Lord  waa  yalued  by  the  priest,  and  the  do- 
nor who  wished  to  redeem  it  had  to  pay  one  fifth  in  ad- 
dition  to  this  fixed  value  (Ley.  xxyii,  14, 15).  A  field 
was  yalued  accoiding  to  the  number  of  homers  of  bar- 
ley  which  could  be  sown  thereon,  at  the  ratę  of  fifly  sil- 
yer  shekels  of  the  sanctuaiy  for  each  homer  for  the 
whole  fifly  years,  deducting  from  it  a  proportionato 
amount  for  the  lapse  of  each  year  (Ley.  xxyii,  16-18). 
Aocording  to  the  Talmud  the  fi][tieth  year  was  not  count- 
ed.  Hence,  if  any  one  wished  to  redeem  his  field,  he 
had  to  pay  one^fifth  in  addition  to  the  regular  rato  of  a 
Kia  (shekel),  and  a  pundium  (  =  l-48th  sda)  per  annum 
for  eyery  homer,  the  surplns  pundium  being  intonded  for 
the  forty-ninth  year.  No  one  waa  therefore  allowed  to 
eanctlfy  his  field  during  the  year  which  immediately 
preceded  the  jubilee,  for  he  would  then  haye  to  pay  for 
the  whole  forty-nine  years,  because  months  could  not 
be  dcducted  from  the  sanctuary,  and  the  jubilee  year  it- 
aelf  was  not  coiuited  (Mishna,  Erackinj  yu,  1).  If  one 
sanctified  a  field  which  he  had  purchased,  i.  e.  not  free- 
hold  property,  it  reyerted  to  the  original  proprietor  in 
the  year  of  jubilee  (Lev.  xxyii,  22-24). 

8.  Afanumission  oftho»e  Jsraelitta  who  had  bewme 

8lav€s This  enactment  is  comprised  in  Ley.  xxy,  89- 

54.  AU  Israelites  who  through  poyerty  had  sold  them- 
selycs  as  slayes  to  their  fellow-Israelites  or  to  the  for- 
eigners  rcsident  among  them,  and  who,  up  to  the  time 
of  the  jubilee,  had  neither  completed  their  8ix  years  of 
seryitudc,  nor  redeemed  themselyes,  nor  been  redeemed 
by  their  relative*,  were  to  be  set  free  in  the  jubilee,  to 
return  with  their  children  to  their  family  and  to  the 
patrimony  of  their  fathers.  Great  dlfficulty  has  been 
experienccd  in  reconciling  the  injnnction  here,  that  in 
the  jubilee  all  slayes  are  to  rcgain  their  freedom,  with 
£xod.  xxv,  6,  where  it  is  enacted  that  those  bondmen 
who  refiise  their  liberty  at  the  expira(ion  of  the  ap- 
pointed  8ix  years'  seryitudc,  and  submit  to  the  boring 
of  their  ears,  are  to  be  slarts  forerer  (obrb  11351). 
Josephud  (Anf.  iy,  8,  28),  the  Mishna  {Kidushirty  i,  3) 
and  Talmud  (if/ul  14, 15),  Bashi,  Aben-Ezra,  Maimonides 
(JlilcUoth  Abadiiiiy  iii,  6),  and  most  Jewish  intcrpreters, 
who  aro  followed  by  Ainsworth,  fip.  Patrick,  and  other 
Christian  commentators,  take  obsp  to  denote  iiU  the  ju- 
bilee^ maintaiiiiii^  that  the  slayes  who  submitted  to  haye 
their  ears  bored  are  iuciuded  in  this  generał  manomis^ 


aioD,  and  Uina  tiy  to  eacape  the  diiBcalŁy.  Bat  i  _ 
thia  is  to  be  urged,  that,  1.  The  phraae  xAlh  ro?  is 
used  in  Ley.  xxy,  46  for  perpetual  senritude,  whidi  is 
unaffected  by  tbe  year  of  jubilee.  2.  The  deckrajdoa 
of  the  slaye  that  he  will  not  haye  his  freedom,  in  Exod. 
xxi,  5,  mique8tionably  shows  that  perpetual  slayeiy  is 
meant.  3.  Seryitude  till  the  year  of  jubilee  ia  not  at  all 
spoken  of  in  Ley.  xxy,  40-42  as  aomething  contempd- 
ble,  and  therefore  oould  not  be  the  punuhment  dengned 
(ot  him  who  refuaed  his  freedom,  eapecially  if  the  year 
of  jubilee  happened  to  occur  hto  or  three  years  afler  re- 
fuaing  hia  freedom ;  and  that  it  is  bondage  beyond  that 
time  which  ia  characterized  as  real  slayery ;  and,  4.  Tbe 
jubilee,  without  any  indication  whateyer  from  the  law- 
giyer,  ia  here,  according  to  this  explanation,  madę  to 
giye  the  slaye  the  right  to  take  with  him  the  maid  and 
the  children  who  are  tbe  property  of  the  master— tbe 
yery  right  which  had  preyioualy  been  denied  to  him. 
Ewald,  therefore  {AUeHhumer,  p.  421),  and  others,  eon- 
clude  that  the  two  enactments  belong  to  lUfTerent  peri- 
ods,  the  manumiasion  of  slayes  in  the  year  of  jubilee 
haying  been  institnted  when  the  law  enjoining  the  lib- 
eration  of  slayes  at  the  expiration  of  8lx  yeara  had  be- 
come  obfloleto ;  while  Knobel  (on  £xod.  xxi,  6)  regards 
this  jubilee  law  and  the  enactments  in  £xod.  xxi,  6, 6 
as  representing  one  of  the  many  contradictions  which 
exiat  between  the  Jehoióstic  and  Elohisdc  portions  of 
the  Pentatonch.  All  the  difiiicnltiea,  howeyer,  dis^tpear 
when  the  jubilee  mannmiasion  enactment  is  rei^rded 
aa  deaigned  to  sapplement  the  law  in  Exod.  xxi,  2-6b 
In  the  ktter  case  the  regular  period  o/ierritude  iffaud, 
at  the  expiration  of  which  the  bondman  is  ordiiaribf 
to  become  free,  whilat  Lev.  xxy,  39-54  institutea  an  ad- 
ditlonal  and  eiiraordmary  period,  when  thoae  slayes 
who  had  not  as  yet  completed  their  appointed  8ix  years 
of  seryitude  at  the  time  of  jubilee,  or  had  not  forfeited 
their  right  of  free  cltizenahip  by  spontaneo«iriy  sobmit- 
ting  to  the  yoke  of  bondage,  and  becoming  alaves  for- 
cyer  (C^5  ^35),  are  onoe  in  eyeiy  fifty  yeare  to  ob- 
tain  their  freedom.  The  one  enactment  lefen  to  the 
freedom  of  each  indiridual  at  diiferent  days,  weeks, 
months,  and  years,  inasmuch  as  hardly  any  twenty  of 
them  entered  on  their  seryitude  at  exactly  the  same 
time,  whilst  the  other  legislates  for  a  generał  manumis- 
sion,  which  is  to  take  place  at  exact]y  the  same  time. 
The  enactment  in  Łey.  xxy,  89-64,  therefore,  takcs  for 
granted  the  law  in  Exod.  xxi,  2-6,  and  begins  where 
the  latter  ends,  and  does  not  mention  it  because  it  sim» 
ply  treata  on  tbe  influence  of  jubilee  apon  alayeiy. 

4.  That  there  muat  alao  hare  been  a  perfect  remissian 
of  debts  in  the  year  of  jubilee  is  8elP«yident,for  it  is  im- 
plied  in  the  fact  that  aU  persona  who  were  in  bondage 
for  debt,  aa  well  as  all  the  landed  property  of  debtois, 
were  freely  retumed.  Whether  det>ta  generally,  for 
which  there  were  no  such  pledges,  were  remitted,  is  a 
mattcr  of  dispute.  Josephus  positively  declaies  thtt 
they  were  {A  nt,  xiii,  2, 3),  whilst  Maimonides  (Jobel,  x, 
16)  as  positiyely  denies  it. 

II L  Time  when  the  Jubilee  was  celebraied, — ^Accord- 
ing to  Ley.  xxy,  8-11,  it  is  eyident  that  forty-nine  >-eais 
are  to  be  countod,  and  that  at  the  end  thereóf  thefJHrik 
year  is  to  be  celebrated  as  the  jubilee.  Hence  the  ju- 
bilee is  to  foUow  immediately  upon  the  aabbatical  year, 
so  that  there  are  to  be  two  successiye  fallow  years. 
This  is  also  corroborated  by  ycne  21,  where  it  is  prom- 
ised  that  the  produoe  of  the  sixth  year  shall  soffice  for 
three  years,  L  e.  forty-nine,  fifty,  and  fifty-one,  or  the 
two  former  years,  which  are  the  sabbatical  year  and  (he 
jubilee,  and  the  immediatoly  foUowing  year,  in  which 
the  oidinary  pioduce  of  the  pieceding  >*ear  would  be 
wanting.  Moreoyer,  from  the  remark  in  yerse  22,  it 
would  appear  that  the  aabbatical  year,  like  the  jubike, 
began  in  the  autumn,  or  the  month  of  Tisri,  which  oom- 
menced  the  cwU  yeaXy  when  it  was  custoroazy  to  begin 
sowing  for  the  ensuing  year.  At  all  eyenta,Ver.  9  dis- 
tinctly  saya  that  the  jubilee  ia  to  be  prodaimed  by  the 


JUBILEE 


1041 


JUBILEE 


•  bUst  of  the  tmmpet "  on  Łhe  ientb  of  the  aeyenth  month, 
on  tbe  day  of  atodement,"  which  u  Tisri.  See  Atonb- 
ME3CT,  Day  op.  The  opinion  tbat  the  sabbatical  year 
and  the  jubilee  were  diBtinicŁ,  or  tbat  there  were  two 
faliow.yearSf  is  aiso  entertained  by  the  Talmud  (Roah 
HorShana,  8  b,  9  a),  Philo  {On  tke  Deealogue,  xxx), 
Josephus  (/.  c.)i  and  many  other  anclent  wńten.  It 
most,  however,  be  borne  ui  mind  tbat,though  there  waa 
to  be  no  aowmg,  nor  any  regular  har\'est,  during  tbese 
two  yeara,  yet  the  Israelitee  were  allowed  to  fetch  from 
the  field8  whateyer  thęy  wanted  (Lev.  xxv,  12).  That 
the  fields  did  yield  a  crop  in  their  second  fallow  year  is 
moflt  unque8tionabIy  presupposed  by  the  prophet  Isaiab 
(xxxvii,  90).  Palestine  waa,  at  all  eyents,  not  less  fmit- 
ful  than  Albania,  in  whicb  Strabo  tells  us  (Ub.  xi,  c  iv, 
sec.  8),  '*  The  ground  tbat  bas  been  sowed  once  prodnces 
in  many  places  two  or  three  ciops,  the  fruit  of  which  is 
even  tifty-fold." 

It  modt,  however,  be  remarked,  tbat  many,  firom  a  yery 
early  period  down  to  the  present  day,  have  taken  the 
jubilee  year  to  be  identical  with  the  seventh  sabbatical 
year.  Thus  tbe  **£ook  ofJubilees^  wbich  dates  prior 
to  the  Christian  era  [see  Jubilees,  Book  of],  divides 
the  Biblical  bistory  from  the  creation  to  the  entrance 
of  the  Israelites  into  Canaan  into  flfty  Jubilees  ofjbrfy- 
mne  yeara  eacb,  wbich  sbows  that  tbis  view  of  the  jubi- 
lee must  have  been  pretty  generał  in  those  óaya.  Some 
Kabbiiis  in  the  Talmud  (Erachin,  12  b,  with  83  a),  as 
well  as  many  Christian  writers  (Scaliger,  Petayliis,  Ush- 
er,  Cuna^us,  Calyitius,  Gatterer,  Frank,  Schróder,  Hug, 
RosenmUller),  support  tbe  same  ylew.  As  to  the  re- 
mark, ''  Ye  shall  hallów  Ihe  fiftieth  year"  (ver.  10),  *<  a 
jubilee  shall  t\isXjyHah  year  be  unto  yon"  (ver.  11),  it 
is  uiged  that  thts  is  in  accordance  with  a  modę  of  speech 
which  is  common  to  all  languages  and  ages.  Thus  we 
ciU  a  week  eight  <iay$,  inclading  both  Sundays,  and  tbe 
best  classdcal  writers  called  an  olympiad  by  tbe  name  of 
quinquettniumf  thongh  it  only  contained  four  entire 
yearj.  Moreover,  the  sacred  number  seten^  or  the  sab- 
hitic  idsa,  wbich  underlles  all  tbe  festiyals,  and  connects 
them  all  into  one  cbain,  the  last  link  of  which  Łs  the  ju- 
bilee, corroborates  this  view,  inasmnch  as  we  bave,  1. 
A  Sabbath  of  days;  2.  A  Sabbatb  of  weeks  (the  seventh 
weeJe  after  the  Pa89ovcr  being  tbe  Sabbath  week,  as  the 
first  day  of  it  is  the  fe8tival  of  weeks) ;  8.  A  Sabbath  of 
months  (inasmuch  as  the  terenth  month  has  both  a  festi- 
val  and  a  fast,  and  with  its  first  day  begins  the  civil 
year) ;  4.  A  Sabbath  of  years  (the  Beveiith  year  is  tbe  sab- 
batical year) ;  and,  5.  A  Sabbath  of  Sabbaths,  inasmuch 
as  the  teoenŁh  ettbbcUicai  year  is  the  jubilee.    See  Sab- 

BATIŁ 

IV.  Modę  of  Cel^aiion,—Aa  the  obsenrance  of  tbe 
jubilee,  like  that  of  the  sabbatical  year,  was  only  to  be- 
come  obligatory  when  the  Israelites  had  taken  posses- 
sion  of  the  promiaed  land,  and  cultivatedtbe  land  for 
that  period  of  years,  at  the  oonclusion  of  which  the  fes- 
.tival  was  to  be  celebrated,  the  ancient  tradition  pre- 
seryed  in  the  Talmud  seems  to  be  correct,  tbat  the  first 
sabbatical  year  was  in  the  one-and-twentieth,  and  the 
lirst  jubilee  in  the  sixty-fourth  year  afler  the  Jews  came 
into  Canaan,  for  it  took  them  seven  years  to  conąuer  it, 
and  seven  years  more  to  distribute  it  (Erachin,  xii,  6 ; 
Maimonides,  Jobel,  x,  2).  The  Bibie  says  nothing  abont 
the  manner  in  wbich  the  jubilee  is  to  be  celebrated,  ex- 
cept  that  it  should  be  proclaimed  by  the  blast  of  a- tmm- 
pet. Sce  Trumpet.  As  in  many  other  eases,  the  law- 
głver  leayes  the  practical  appUcation  of  this  law,  and 
the  neoesearily  complicated  arrangements  connected 
therewith,  to  the  elders  of  Israel.  Kow  tradition  tells 
u3  that  the  trumpets  nsed  on  this  occasion,  like  those 
of  the  feast  of  trumpets,  or  new  year,  were  of  rams' 
homs,  stiaight,  and  had  their  mouth-piece  covered  with 
gold  (Mishna,  Iio$h  HaShanaj  iii,  2;  Maimonides,  Jobel, 
X,  U);  that  every  Israelite  blew  nine  blasts,  so  as  to 
make  Łhe  tmmpet  literally  '^  sound  throughout  the  land" 
(Ley.  xxv,  9) ;  and  that  <*  from  the  feast  of  tmropets,  or 
new  vear  (i.  e.  Tiari  1),  till  the  day  of  atonement  (i.  e. 
IV.-U  u  u 


Tiari  10),  the  slares  were  ndther  mannmitted  to  retnm 
to  their  homes  nor  madę  use  of  by  their  masters,  bot 
ate,  drank,  and  rejoioed,  and  wore  garlands  on  their 
heads ;  and  when  the  day  of  atonement  came  tbe  jndgea 
blew  the  tmmpet,  the  slavee  wereroanumitted  to  go  to 
their  homes,  and  the  flelds  were  set  free"  {Roah  Ha- 
ShanOf  8  b;  Maimonides,  Jobel,  x,  14).  Though  the 
Jews,  ftom  the  nature  of  the  case,  cannot  now  celebrate 
the  jubilee,  yet  on  the  evening  of  tbe  day  of  atonement 
tbe  oonclttsion  of  the  fast  is  announced  in  all  the  syna- 
gognee  to  the  present  day  by  the  blast  of  the  Shophar 
or  bom,  which,  acoording  to  the  Babbins,  is  intended  to 
commemorate  the  ancient  jubilee  proclamation  {Oroeh 
Chajim,  cap.  dcxxiii,  sec.  6,  note). 

Because  tbe  Bibie  does  not  record  any  particular  in- 
stance  of  the  public  celebration  of  this  festival,  Micbaelis, 
Winer,  etc,  have  qne8tioned  whether  the  law  of  jubilee 
ever  came  into  actual  operation  \  while  Kranold,  Hup- 
feld,  etc,  bave  positively  denied  it.  The  following  con- 
siderations,  however,  speah  for  its  actual  obsenrahce :  1. 
All  the  other  Mosaic  festivals  have  been  obeerved,  and 
It  łs  therefore  surpasatng  strange  to  suppose  tbat  the  ju- 
bilee which  is  80  organically  connected  with  them,  and 
18  the  climax  of  all  of  them,  is  the  only  oAe  that  never 
was  observed.  2.  The  law  about  the  inalienability  of 
landed  property,  which  was  to  be  the  result  of  the  jubi- 
lee, actually  obtained  among  the  Jews,  thus  showing 
that  this  fe8tival  must  have  been  observed.  Hence  it 
was  with  a  view  to  obflerving  tbe  jubilee  law  that  tbe 
right  of  an  heiress  to  marry  was  restricted  (Numb. 
xxxvi,  4, 6,  7) ;  and  it  was  the  obsenrance  of  this  law, 
forbidding  the  sale  of  land  in  such  a  manner  as  to  pre- 
vent  its  reverBion  to  the  original  owner  or  bis  heir  in 
the  year  of  jubilee,  that  madę  Naboth  refuse  to  part 
with  his  yineyard  on.  the  solicitation  of  king  Ahab  (1 
Kings  xxi,  1-4).  8.  From  Ezek.  xlvi,  17,  where  even 
the  king  is  reminded  tbat  if  be  madę  a  present  of  his 
landed  property  to  any  of  his  servant8  it  could  only  be 
to  the  jubilee  year,  when  it  must  revert  to  him,  it  is  ev- 
ident  that  the  jubilee  was  observed.  Allusions  to  the 
jubilee  are  also  to  be  found  in  Neh.  v,  1-19 ;  Isa.  v.  7, 8, 
9, 10,  lxi,  1,  2;  Ezek.  vii,  12, 13  (isa.  xxxvii,  80  islesa 
elear).  Ewald  contends  that  the  institution  is  emi- 
nently  practical  in  the  character  of  its  details,  and  that 
the  accidental  circumstance  of  no  particular  instance  of 
its  ob8er\'ance  having  been  recorded  in  the  Jewish  his- 
toiy  provos  nothing.  Besides  the  passages  to  which 
reference  has  been  madę,  he  applies  8everal  others  to  tbe 
jubilee.  He  oonceive8  that  "the  year  of  vi8itation" 
mentioned  in  Jer.  xi,  28;  xxiii,  12;  xlviii,  44,  denotes 
the  pmiishment  of  those  who,  In  the  jubilee,  withheld 
by  tyranny  or  fraud  the  possessions  or  the  liberty  of  the 
poor.  From  Jer.  xxxii«  6-12,  he  infers  that  the  law  was 
restored  to  operation  in  the  reign  of  Josiafa  {AtterthUmer, 
p.  424,  note  1),  It  is  likely,  however,  that  in  the  gen- 
erał declension  of  religious  obsenrances  under  the  later 
monarcha  of  Jndah  this  institation  yielded  to  the  avar 
rice  and  worldliness  of  landed  proprietors,  especially  as 
mortgaged  property  and  senrants  would  thereby  be  re- 
leased  (see  Jer.  xxxiv,  8-1 1 ;  comp.  Neh.  v).  Indeed, 
it  is  intimated  that  the  Babylonian  captivity  should  be 
of  such  a  duration  as  to  compensate  for  the  years  (sab- 
batical and  jubilee  togetber)  of  which  Jehovah  had  thus 
been  defrauded  (2  Chroń,  xxxvi,  21).  4.  The  generał 
obsenrance  of  the  jubilee  is  atteseed  by  the  unanimous 
voice  of  Jewish  tradition.  This  unanimity  of  opinion, 
however,  only  extends  to  the  observance  of  the  jubilee 
prior  to  the  Babylonian  captivity,  for  many  of  the  later 
Rabbius  affirm  that  it  was  not  kept  afler  the  captivlty. 
But  in  the  Seder  Olam  (cap.  xxx),  the  author  of  which 
lived  shortly  after  the  dcstmction  of  Jemsalem,  we  are 
p06itively  assured  that  it  was  observed.  Josephus,  too 
(^n/.  iii,  12,  3),  speaks  of  it  as  being  permanently  ob- 
9erved.  This  is,  moreover,  confirmed  by  Diodoras  Sio- 
ulus  (lib.  xl),  who  tells  us  that  the  Jews  cannot  dispoee 
of  their  oMm  patrimony  (iSiovc  K\ijpovc  vu\Hv)f  aa 
well  as  by  the  fact  tbat  we  have  distinct  recoida  of  the 


JUBILEE 


1042 


JUBILEE 


Uw  respecting  Łhe  redemption  of  boiues  in  dties  with- 
out  walls,  which  formę  aii  integnd  part  of  the  jubilee 
law,  belng  stńctly  obserred  to  a  yery  late  period  C£ra- 
chin,  SI  b ;  Baba  Kanta,  82  b). 

Y.  OrigWf  Design,  and  Importance  of  łhe  Jubilee. — 
The  foundation  of  Łhe  law  of  jubilee  appears  to  be  8o  es- 
Bentially  connected  with  the  children  of  Israel  Łhat  it 
seems  strange  that  Michaeli*  should  hare  oonfidently 
affirmed  its  Egyptian  origin,  while  yet  he  acknowledgee 
that  he  can  prodace  no  specitic  eTidence  on  the  aubject 
{Mo8.  Law,  arU  73).  The  only  weU-proved  instance  of 
anything  like  it  in  other  natioDS  appears  to  be  that  of 
the  Daknatiana,  mentioned  by  Strabo,  Uh.  vii  (p.  315, 
edit.  Casaubon).  He  aays  that  they  redistributed  their 
land  eveiy  eight  yeais.  Ewald,  following  the  Btate- 
ment  of  Plutarch,  refers  to  the  institution  of  Lycurgus; 
bat  Mr.  Grotę  has  given  another  view  of  the  matter 
(Jiisłory  ofGreece,  ii,  630). 

The  object  of  this  institation  was  that  thoee  of  the 
people  of  God  who,  through  poverty  or  other  acWersc 
circumstanoes,  had  forfeited  their  personal  liberty  or 
property  to  their  fellow-citizeDS,  shotdd  have  their 
debts  foigiven  by  their  co-religionista  every  half  centu- 
ly,  on  the  great  day  of  atonement,  and  be  restoretl  to 
their  families  and  iuheritance  as  freely  and  fully  as  God 
on  that  very  day  forgave  the  debts  of  his  people  and  re- 
stored  them  to  perfect  fellowship  with  himself,  so  that 
the  whole  commanity,  having  forgiven  each  other  and 
being  forgiven  of  God,  might  return  to  the  original  or- 
der which  had  been  disturbed  in  the  lapee  of  time,  and, 
being  freed  from  the  bondage  of  one  another,  might  un- 
reseryedly  be  the  senrants  of  him  who  is  their  redeemer. 
The  aim  of  the  jubilee,  therefore,  is  to  preserre  unim- 
paired  the  essential  character  of  the  theocracy,  to  the 
end  that  there  be  no  poor  among  the  people  of  God 
(Deut»  XV,  4).  Hence  God,  who  redeemed  Israel  from 
the  bondage  of  Egypt  to  be  his  peculiar  people,  and  al- 
lotted  to  them  the  promised  land,  will  not  sufTer  any 
one  to  nsuip  his  t^tle  as  Lord  over  thosc  whom  he  onnis 
as  his  own.  It  is  the  idea  of  grace  for  all  the  sulfering 
children  of  man,  bruiging  freedom  to  the  captivc  and 
lest  to  the  weary  as  well  as  to  the  earth,  which  madę 
the  year  of  jubilee  the  symbol  of  the  Messianic  year  of 
giace  (Isa.  lxi,  2),  when  all  the  eonflicts  in  the  uniyerse 
should  be  restored  to  their  original  harmony,  and  when 
not  only  we,  who  have  the  first-fruits  of  the  Spirit,  but 
the  whole  creation,  which  groaneth  and  travaileth  in 
pain  together  until  now,  may  be  restored  into  the  glori- 
ous  liberty  of  the  sons  of  God  (comp.  Isa.  lxi,  1-3 ,  Łukę 
iv,  21;  Rom.  viii,  18-23:  Heb.  iv,  9). 

The  importance  of  this  institation  will  be  apparent 
if  it  is  considered  what  morał  and  social  advantages 
would  accrue  to  the  community  from  the  sacred  observ- 
ance  of  it.  1.  U  would  prevent  the  accumulation  of 
land  on  the  part  of  a  few  to  the  detiiment  of  the  com- 
munity at  large.  2.  It  would  render  it  impoesible  for 
any  one  to  be  bom  to  absolute  poverty,  sińce  every  one 
had  his  hereditary  land.  3.  It  would  preclude  those  in- 
eąualities  which  are  prodaced  by  extremes  of  riches  and 
poverty,  and  which  make  one  man  domineer  over  an- 
other. 4.  It  would  utterly  do  away  with  slayery.  6. 
It  would  afford  a  fresh  opportunity  to  those  who  were 
leduced  by  adyerse  drcumstances  to  begin  agam  their 
caieer  of  industiy,  in  the  patrimony  which  they  had 
temporarily  forfeited.  6.  It  wonld  periodically  rectify 
the  disorders  which  crept  into  the  state  in  the  course  of 
time,  preclude  the  diyision  of  the  people  into  nobles  and 
plebeians,  and  presenre  the  theocracy  inviolate. 

YI.  Literaturę, — The  Mislma  (Erachin,  eh.  viii,  ix) 
gives  very  important  enactments  of  a  vezy  ancien  t  datę 
zespecting  the  jubilee.  In  Maimonides  (Jod  lla-Che- 
taJea,  especially  the  tract  so  oilten  above  refcrred  to  as 
Hilchoth  Shemiła  Ve^obel,  eh.  x-xiii)  an  epitome  will 
be  found  of  the  Jewish  Information  on  this  subject 
which  is  scattered  through  the  Talmud  and  Midrashim. 
Of  the  modem  productions  are  to  be  mentioned  the  val- 
oable  treatises  of  Cunsus,  De  Rep,  Htbr,  chap.  ii,  sec  iv 


Cm  the  CriHei  Saeriy  ix,  278  sq.),  and  Meyer,  De  Tem^ 
por,  eł  Diebtu  Hebrmorum  (in  Ugołini  Tkeaaurus,  i,  708, 
1755),  p.  341^60;  Michaelis,  Commeniariea  on  the  Lmem 
ofMoseg  (EngL  verBion,  Lond.  1814),  voL  i,  art.  bucsiii, 
p.  876  8q. ;  Ideier,  JiamBmck  der  Chronologie  (BeiL  1825), 
1,502  8q;  the  eKcelientprizeessaysof  Kranold,Z>e^iaH> 
łIebr,Jvbilao  (Góttuig.  1837),  and  Wolde,  De  anao  Nebr. 
JubUao  (Gottingen,  1837)  ;  Biihr,  Symbolik  des  JfomM- 
iechen  Culttts  (Heidelberg,  1839),  i,  572  0q.;  Ewald,  IHe 
A  IferthUmer  dee  YoUeee  Israel  (Gotting.  1854),  p.  415  aq.; 
Saalschtłtz,  Da$  Moeaieche  Becht  (Bedin»  1853),  i.  141. 
etc;  and  Archaologie  der  Hebraer  (Konigsb.  1856),  ii, 
224,  etc;  Herzfeld,  Geschichłe  des  Volku  łerael  (Noid- 
hausen,  1855),  i,  463,  etc ;  Keil,  Nandbueh  der  Bibluekem 
Archaologie  (Fraukf.  a.  M.  1858),  i,  374,  etc  Hapfcid 
(jCommemlaJlio  de  Hthrmorum  Feetis^  part  iii,  1852)  \um 
lately  dealt  with  it  in  a  wilful  and  recldess  style  of  cnt- 
idsm.  Yitringa  notices  the  prophetical  beaiing  of  the 
j  ubilee  in  lib.  iv,  c  4  of  the  Obierv€iticnes  Sacra.  Ligbt- 
foot  (Harm,  Evang,  tn  Lmc  iv,  19)  pursoes  the  sabject  in 
a  fanciful  manner,  and  makes  out  that  Christ  suffiered  in 
a  jubilee  year.  For  further  details,  see  Wagenseil,  Z>e 
como  Jubilao  Bebr,  (Akdorf,  1700) ;  J.  C  Buck,  De  amto 
Hebraor,  jubilao  (Yitebi  1700);  Garpzov,  De  aimojuki' 
Ubo  (Lipa.  1730;  also  in  his  Apparaf.  crir.p.447) :  Ode, 
De  anno  Beb.  jttbileeo  (Traj.  a.  R  1736 ;  also  io  Oelrich'« 
Colkdio,  ił,  421-Ó08) ;  Łaurich,  Legislałio  Motaica  de 
armo  eemiśeailari  (Altenb.  1794);  also  Marek,  SjfUog. 
diseert.  302 ;  Bauer,  Gotteed.  Yerfau,  ii,  277 ;  HuUmanD, 
Urgeech,  des  Staats,  73 ;  Yan  der  Hardt,  DejubiL  Mosis 
(HehnsUdt,  1728);  Jochanan  Salomo,  De  jubU,  Bthr. 
(Dan2. 1679) ;  Meier,  De  wysterii  Jóbelai  (Brem.  1700) , 
Reinecdus,  De  origine  Jutileeomm  (Weiwenfek,  1730) ; 
Stemler,  De  atmo  Jdbdao  (Lipa.  1730);  Yan  Foorteres, 
Jubilaus  Bebneorum  (Cob.  1730) ;  Id^ther,  De  JubUeeo 
Jndaorum  (8o<Un.  1762).  Other  monographs,  relatin^, 
however,  rather  to  later  times,  are  dted  by  Yolbeding, 
Inder,  p.  128, 162.     See  Sabbatical  Tear. 

JUBILEE,  or  JUBILEE  YEAB,  an  inftitntioD  of 
the  Koman  Catholic  Ghurch,  the  name  of  which  is  bor- 
rowed  from  that  of  the  Jewish  jubilee  (see  above).  The 
Catholic  jubilee  is  of  two  kinds,  ordittary  aod  eairaar* 
dinary,  The  ordinary  jubilee  is  that  which  is  colebnK 
ted  at  sUted  intervals,  the  length  of  which  has  ywńeó. 
at  difieient  times.  Its  origin  is  traoed  to  pope  Boniface 
YIII,  who  issued,  for  the  year  1300,  a  buli  gnmtmg  a 
plenary  indulgence  to  all  pilgńm-visitoTB  of  Romę  dur- 
ing  that  year  on  condition  of  their  penitently  confessing 
their  sins,  and  visiting  the  church  of  St.  Peter  and  Sc 
Paul  fifteen  times  if  stnngers,  and  thlrty  times  if  lea- 
dents  of  the  city.  The  invitation  was  accepted  with 
marvellous  enthusianD.  Innnmerable  troops  of  piigrima 
from  every  part  of  the  Church  flocked  to  Korne.  Gio- 
vanni  Yiliani,  a  oontemporiry  chronicler,  states  that  tlw 
constant  number  of  pilgrims  in  Romę,  not  reckoning 
those  who  were  on  the  road  going  or  retuming,  duriąg 
the  euUre  year,  never  fell  below  200,000.  Bonifafle, 
finding  the  jubilee  a  suceess,  and  having  been  infonned, 
80  the  story  goes,  by  a  hoar>-  patriarch,  who,  at  the  agc 
of  107,  attended  it,  that  a  hundred  ^'ears  ago  a  like  ju- 
bilee had  been  held,  now  ordered  that  it  shouhl  there- 
after  be  held  every  hnndredth  year.  The  great  gain 
which  the  oocasion  afforded  to  the  chorcbes  at  Romę 
induced  Clement  YI  to  abridge  the  time  to  fiity  yean. 
His  jubilee  aooordingly  took  phwe  in  1350,  and  was  erea 
morę  numeroosly  attended  than  that  of  Boniface,  the 
average  number  of  pilgńma,  ontil  the  heats  oT  sammer 
suspended  their  frequency,  being,  aocording  to  Mattbew 
YiUani,  nó  fewer  than  1,000,000 !  The  tenn  of  inteml 
was  still  further  abridged  by  Uiban  YI;  but  in  rbe 
storroy  days  of  his  pontiiScato  the  jufailee  cónld  not  take 
place,  and  his  socoessor,  Boni&ce  IX,  impioved  thia  to 
his  advantage,  and  ordered  it  to  take  place  in  1S9Ql 
Ten  years  later  he  repeated  it,  and,  besideą  institoted 
extra  years  of  jubilee,  and  permitted  their  ofaeerraBec 
also  in  for^gn  citacs  proYided  the  worahippers  wonld 
pay  into  the  Koman  treaaury  the  oost  of  a  jonniey  te 


JUBILEES,  BOOK  OF 


1043 


JUBILEES,  BOOK  OP 


the  holy  city-  (oompk  Amort,  De  origme,  prognttUj  po- 
hre  ac/ructu  wukil^feni,  i,  87  8q.).  Paul  U  fuuUy  o]> 
deied  ia  1470  that  thenoeforwaid  eyeiy  twenty-fiflh 
year  should  be  held  aa  jubilee,  an  aRangement  which 
haa  oontinued  eyer  stnce  to  regulate  the  ordinary  jubi- 
lee. Ab  the  indulgencea  coold,  by  the  payment  of  given 
8ums  and  the  contribution  to  eocleaiaatical  purposea,  al- 
waya  be  obUdned  at  the  bonie  of  the  penitenti  the  ptl- 
grimages  to  Romę  gradually  diminiahed  in  freqneucy ; 
but  the  obsenranoe  itself  has  been  punctually  maintain- 
ed  at  each  recumog  period,  with  the  single  exception 
of  the  year  1800,  in  which,  o^ying  to  the  vacancy  of  the 
holy  see  and  the  troubles  of  the  times,  it  was  not  held. 
For  the  eKceases  committed.  in  the  sale  of  indulgencea, 
aee  Induloknces.  The  extraordinary  jubilee  is  order- 
ed  by  the  pope  out  of  the  regular  period,  either  on  his 
accession,  or  on  some  occasion  of  public  calamity,  or  in 
aome  critical  oondition  of  the  fortunes  of  the  Church ; 
one  of  the  conditions  for  obtaining  the  indulgence  in 
such  caaes  being  the  recitation  of  certain  stated  prayers 
for  the  particular  necessity  in  which  the  jubilee  orig- 
inated.  See  Herzog,  Real- EncyHop,  vii,  117;  Cham- 
bers,  8.  V. ;  Walcott,  Sac  A  rchaoL  p.  334. 

Jubilees,  Book  of.  This  apocryphal  or  Hagadie 
book,  which  was  used  so  largely  in  the  ancient  Church, 
and  was  still  known  to  the  Byzantines,  but  of  which 
botb  the  original  Hebrew  and  the  Greek  were  after- 
wards  lost,  has  reccntly  been  discovered  in  an  Ethiopic 
rersion  in  Abysania. 

I.  TUk  ofthe  Book,  and  its  SiffiUfication.— The  book 
is  caUed  r&  'Iw/3i7Xaca  =  nibm*'n  IBD,  "the  JubUeeB,"* 
or  *'the  book  o/ JiUńleeś,"  because  it  dirides  the  period 
of  the  Bibiical  bistory  upon  which  ic  treats,  L  e.  from 
the  creation  to  the  entrance  of  the  Israelites  iuto  Ca- 
naan,  into  Tifty  jubilees  of  forty-nine  years  each,  equal 
to  2450  years,  and  carefuUy  describes  every  event  ac- 
cording  to  the  jubilee,  sabbatical  year,  or  year  in  which 
it  transpired,  as  stated  in  the  inscription :  *'  These  are 
the  words  of  the  division  of  the  days  according  to  the 
law  and  the  testimony,  according  to  the  c\'ents  of  the 
years  in  sabbatical  years  and  in  jubilees,"  etc  It  is 
ałso  called  by  the  fathers  »)  X£irri}  rkvs<nc,  \Łvn<ry£ve' 
wj,  fiiKpoyipfoic  1  rd  Aiard  Ftpiatutę  =  łT^CJK^^a 
K:31T,  i.  e.  ^  smali  Geneńg,  compmdium  ofGenens,  be- 
cause it  only  selects  certain  portions  of  Genesis,  although 
tbruugh  its  lengthy  comments  upon  these  points  it  is 
actually  longer  than  this  canonical  book  (comp.  Epipha- 
niiis,  Adc,  IfcBr,  lib.  i,  tom.  iii,  cap.  vi,  edit.  Petav. ;  G. 
8yncel]us,  p.  8) ;  or,  according  to  Ewald's  rendering  of 
it,  rd  \ŁTrrd  ($tdfH/ia,  muuttd)  rku&nc,  because  it  di- 
▼ides  the  history  upon  which  it  treats  intu  very  minutę 
and  smali  periods  (Gesckichte  ckt  Yolkes  ItraĄ  i,  271) ; 
it  ia  called  by  St  Jerome  the  apocryphal  Gtnetu  (see  be- 
Iow,  sec.  8),  and  it  ia  also  styled  r)  tov  Mututriuc  diro- 
Kd\u\l/iCj  the  Apocalypse  of  Monet,  by  George  S3nicellus 
and  Cedrenus,  because  the  book  pretends  to  be  a  revela- 
tion  of  God  to  Moses,  and  is  denominated  "  the  book  of 
the  dicision  ofdayi"  by  the  Abyssinian  Church,  from  the 
ilrst  words  of  the  inscription. 

II.  Detign  and  Contents  of  the  Book, — This  apocry- 
phal book  is  designed  to  be  a  commentary  on  the  ca- 
nonical books  of  Genesis  and  Exodus.  (1)  It  fixes  and 
arranges  morę  minutely  the  chronology  of  the  Bibiical 
history  from  the  creation  to  the  entrance  of  the  Israel- 
ites into  Canaan ;  (2)  Solres  the  rarlous  difficulttes  to 
be  found  in  the  narratives  of  these  canonical  books;  (8) 
Describes  morę  fuUy  erents  which  are  straply  hinted  at 
in  the  sacred  history  of  that  early  period;  and  (4)  Ex- 
patiates  upon  the  religious  obsenrances,  such  as  the 
Sabbath,  the  festirals,  circumcision,  sacrifices,  lawful  and 
milawful  meats,  etc.,  setting  forth  their  sacred  charac- 
ter,  as  weil  as  our  duty  to  keep  them,  by  showing  the 
high  antiquity  of  these  institutions,  inasmuch  as  they 
have  been  sacredly  obserred  by  the  patriarchs,  as  raay 
be  seen  from  the  foliowi  ng  notice  of  theae  four  pointa. 

a.  In  its  chrotulogtcal  arrangementt  we  find  that  it 


pbees  the  deloge  in  AJf.  1858  (JubiL  vi,  61),  and  the 
exodus  in  the  year  A.M.  2410  (iv,  10).  This,  with  the 
forty  years'  aojoum  ia  the  wilderaess,  yields  fifty  jubi- 
lees of  forty-nine  years  each  from  the  creation  to  the 
entrance  into  Canaan,  L  e.  2450,  and  also  allows  a  new 
jubilee  period  to  commence  immediately  upon  the  en- 
tering  of  the  Israelites  into  the  Promised  Land.  Though 
in  the  calculations  of  this  period  the  book  of  Jubi- 
lees agrees  in  its  particulars  with  the  Hebrew  text  of 
Genesis  and  Exodus,  yet  it  diflers  from  the  canonical 
text  both  as  to  the  time  of  the  sojoum  in  Egypt  and 
the  years  in  which  the  antę  and  pO0t"diluvian  patri- 
archs begat  theil  children.  Thus  Jared  is  sald  to  have 
lived  62  instead  of  162  yean  before  Enoch  was  bom, 
Jl^thuselah  was  67  instead  of  187  at  the  birth  of  La- 
mech,  and  Lamech  again  was  68  instead  of  182  when  he 
begat  Noąhj  agreeing  partly  with  the  Samaritan  Pen- 
tateuch,  and  partly  with  the  Septuagint  in  their  aute- 
ments  about  theee  antedilnvian  patriarcha.  In  the  chro- 
nology of  the  post-diluyian  patriarchs,  however,  the  book 
of  Jubilees  deviate8  from  these  versions,  and  says  that 
Arphasad  begat  Cainan  when  74-75 ;  after  the  deloge, 
Cidnan  begat  Sahih  when  57,  Salah  begat  Eber  when 
67,  Eber  begat  Peleg  when  68,  Peleg  begat  Beu  when 
61 ;  the  birth  of  Serug  is  omitted,  but  Serug  is  said  to 
have  begat  Nahor  in  the  year  116  after  the  birth  of 
Reu,  and  Nahor  begat  Terah  in  his  62d  year  (compare 
Jubil.  iv, 40,  etc).  The  going  down  into  Egypt  b  placed 
about  A.M.  2172-2173  (JubiL  xlv,  l^),so  that  when  we 
deduct  it  from  2410,  in  which  year  the  exodus  is  placed, 
there  remains  for  the  sojoum  in  Egypt  288  years.  In 
the  description  of  the  live8  of  Noah,  Abraham  (xxiii, 
23),  Isaac  (xxxvi,  49-52),  Jacob  (xlv,  40-43),  and  Jo- 
seph (xlvi,  9-15),  the  cluonology  agrees  with  the  He- 
brew text  of  Genesis. 

5.  Gf  the  difficuUies  in  the  sacred  narrative  which  the 
book  of  Jubilees  tńea  to  6olve  may  be  mentioned  that 
it  accounts  for  the  serpent  speaking  to  Eve  by  saying 
that  all  animals  spoke  before  the  fali  in  paradise  (oomp. 
Gen.  i,  I  with  JubiL  iii,  98) ;  explain8  very  minutely 
whence  the  first  heads  of  families  took  their  wives  (Ju- 
biL iv,  24, 71, 100,  etc);  how  far  the  sentence  of  death 
pronounced  in  Gen.  ii,  17  has  been  fulfiUed  literally  (iv, 
99,  etc);  shows  that  the  sons  of  God  who  came  to  the 
daughters  of  men  were  angels  (v,  3) ;  with  what  help 
Noah  brought  the  animals  Into  the  ark  (v,  76) ;  where- 
with  the  tower  of  Babel  was  destroyed  (x,  87) ;  why 
Sarah  disliked  Ishmael  and  urged  Abraham  to  send  him 
away  (xvii,  13) ;  why  Kebecca  loved  Jacob  so  dearly 
(xix,  40-84) ;  how  it  was  that  Esau  came  to  sell  his 
birthright  fur  a  mess  of  pottagc  (xxiv,  5-20) ;  who  told 
Rebekah  (Gen.  xxvii,  42)  that  Esau  determinedjto  kill 
Jacob  (xxxvii,  1,  etc) ;  how  it  was  that  he  ailerwards 
desisted  from  his  determination  to  kill  Jacob  (xxxv, 
29-105) ;  why  Rebekah  said  (Gen.  xxvii,  45)  that  she 
would  be  deprived  o/ both  her  sona  in  one  day  (xxxvii, 
9) ;  why  Er,  Judah's  Urst-bom,  died  (xlj,  1  -7) ;  why  Onan 
would  not  redeem  Tamar  (xli,  11-13);  why  Judah  was 
not  punished  for  his  sin  with  Tamar  (xli,  57-67) ;  why 
Joseph  had  the  money  put  into  the  sacks  of  his  breth* 
ren  (xlii,  71-73) ;  and  how  Moses  was  uourished  in  the 
ark  (xlvii,  13),  and  that  it  was  not  God,  but  the  chief- 
mastemah,  n^::'C713,  the  enemy,  who  hardened  the  hearts 
of  the  Egyptians  (xlviii,  58). 

e,  Instanoes  where  events  which  are  briefty  mentioned 
or  simply  hinted  at  in  the  canonical  book  of  Genesis,  and 
which  seem  to  refer  to  another  narrative  of  an  earlier 
or  later  datę,  are  given  morę  fully  in  the  book  of  Jubi- 
lees, will  be  found  in  JubiL  xvi,  89-101,  where  an  exten- 
sive  description  is  given  of  the  appearance  of  the  angels 
to  AbiBham  and  Sarah  as  a  sopplement  to  Gen.  xviii, 
14 ;  in  JubiL  xxxii,  5-88, 50-58,  where  Jacob  is  described 
as  giving  tithes  of  all  his  poesessions,  and  wishing  to 
erect  a  house  of  God  in  Bethel,  which  is  a  fuller  de- 
scription of  that  hinted  at  in  Gen.  xxviii,  22 ;  in  JubiL 
xxxiv,  4^25,  where  Jacob'8  battle  with  the  8even  kiąga 


JUBILEES,  BOOK  OF  1044  JUBILEES,  BOOK  OP 


of  the  Amorites  U  describedf  to  which  alluaion  ia  madę 
in  Cren.  zlviii,  22. 

d  As  to  ^e  reUffious  oUetrancet,  we  ara  told  that 
the  Feoił  of  Weekg,  or  PeiUecoH  (O-^^lsan  01%  SH 
m5'iaw,  I^SpPI),  is  contained  in  the  coyenants  which 
God  madę  with  Noah  and  Abraham  (comp.  JubiL  vi,56- 
60  with  Gen.  ix,  8-17 ;  xiv,  61-64  with  Gen,  xv,  18-21) ; 
the  Feast  of  Tabemacles  waa  first  celebrated  by  Abra- 
ham at  Beersheba  (JubiL  xvi,  61-101) ;  the  conduding 
Festwal  (H^nS^  ■'r»tt5),  which  ia  on  the  28d  of  Tiari, 
continuing  the  Feast  of  Tabemacles  [sce  Fe8Tival], 
was  Institated  by  Jacob  (Jubil  xxxii,  87-94)  after  hu 
yiaion  at  Bethel  (Gen.  xxxv,  9-14) ;  and  that  the  moum- 
ing  on  the  Day  ofAtonemeiU  0*^03  01*^)  was  instituted 
(Lev.  xvi,  29)  to  commemorate  the  mooming  of  Jaoob 
over  the  losa  of  Joseph  (JubiL  xxxiv,  50-60). 

(The  German  veraion  by  Dillmann,  throogh  which 
this  book  has  reoently  been  madę  known  to  Europeans, 
has  been  divided  by  the  enidite  translator  into  fifh/ 
chapters,  bat  not  into  yerses.  The  references  in  this 
article  are  to  thoee  chapters,  and  the  Unes  of  the  retpec- 
ti^^e  chapters.) 

III.  Anthor  and  Oriffiaal  Jjmguage  of  the.  Book, — 
That  the  author  of  this  book  was  a  Jew  is  eyident  from, 
(1)  His  minutę  description  of  the  Sabbath  and  festi- 
vids,  aa  well  aa  all  the  Rabbinic  ceremonies  connected 
therewith  (L 19-83, 49-60),  which  developed  themselve8 
in  the  course  of  time,  and  which  we  are  told  are  simply 
types  described  by  Moses  from  heavenly  archetypes, 
and  have  not  only  been  kept  by  the  angels  in  heayen, 
but  are  binding  upon  the  Jews  world  yrithout  end;  (2) 
The  elevated  position  he  ascribca  to  the  Jewish  people 
(ii,  79-91 ;  xvi,  50-66) ;  ordinory  Israelites  are  in  digni- 
ty  equal  to  angels  (xv,  72-75),  and  the  priests  are  like 
•the  presence-AUgela  (xxxi,  47-49);  ovcr  Israel  only  does 
the  Lord  hlmself  nde,  whilat  he  appointed  evil  spirits  to 
exerci8e  dominion  over  all  other  nations  (xv,  80-90) ; 
and  (8)  The  many  Hagadic  elementa  of  this  book  which 
are  still  preseryed  in  the  Talmud  and  Midrashim.  Com- 
parę,  for  instance,  JubiL  i,  116,  where  the  presence-angel, 
11*i:3a?3,  a^łSlcn  niS,  b  described  as  having  preceded 
•the  hosts  of  Israel,  with  Sanhedrim,  88,  b;  the  descrip- 
tion of  the  creation  of  paradise  on  the  thirdday  (JubiL  ii, 
87  with  Bereshith  Babba,  c  xv) ;  the  twenty-two  gen- 
erationa  from  Adam  to  Jacob  (JubiL  ii,  64, 91,  with  Bc- 
reshith  Rabba  and  Midraah  Tadshe^  169) ;  the  animala 
speaking  before  the  fali  (JubiL  iii,  98  with  the  Mid- 
rashim) ;  the  remark  that  Adam  lived  70  years  less  than 
1000  ycars  in  order  that  the  declaration  might  be  ful- 
filled  "  in  the  day  in  which  thou  catest  thereof  thou  shalt 
die/*  sińce  1000  years  are  as  one  day  with  the  Lord  (Ju- 
biL iv,  99  with  BereshUh  Rabba,  c  xix ;  Justin.  DiaL  c. 
TrtfpL  p.  278,  ed.  Otto) ;  the  causes  of  the  deluge  (Jubil. 
V,  6-20  with  BereshUh  Rabba,  c.  xxxi) ;  the  declaration 
that  the  beginning  of  the  first,  fourth,  sevcnth,  and  tenth 
months  are  to  be  celebrated  as  fcstiva]a,  being  the  be- 
guming  of  the  four  seasons  called  niBpr,  and  having 
jdready  been  obeerved  by  Koah  (JubiL  vi,  81-95  with 
Pirke  R,  Eliezer,  cap.  viii ;  Pseudo-Jonathan  on  Gen, 
yiii,  22) ;  the  statement  that  Satan  induced  God  to  ask 
Abraham  to  sacrifice  his  sou  (JubiL  xvii,  49-53  with 
Sanhedrim,  89,  b) ;  that  Abraham  was  tempted  ten  times 
(JubiL  xix,  22  with  Mishna,  A  both,  v,  8 ;  Targtim  Jem- 
salem  on  (Jen.  xxii,  l,etc.);  and  that  Joseph  spoke  He- 
brew  when  he  madę  himself  known  to  his  brothers  (Ju- 
biL xliii,  54  with  Bereshith  Rabba,  cap.  xciii).  As,  how- 
ever,  some  of  the  practices,  rites,  and  interpretations 
given  in  this  book  are  at  yańance  with  the  traditional 
expo8itions  of  the  Babbins,  Beer  is  of  opinion  that  the 
writer.  was  a  DosUhean  who  was  anxious  to  bring  about 
A  fusion  of  Samaritanism  and  Kabbinic  -  Judaism  by 
making  routual  conccasions  {Dos Buch  d,  Jubilden,p.  61, 
62) ;  Jellinek,  again,  thinks  that  he  was  an  Essene,  and 
wrote  this  book  against  the  Pharisees,  who  maintained 
that  the  beginning  of  the  month  ia  to  be  fixed  by  ob- 


8ervation  and  not  by  calculation  (^B  bj  ©TWI  TDITłp 
n*i'^K"tn),  and  that  the  Sanhedrim  had  the  power  of  or- 
daining  intercalary  years  [see  Hillel  II],  addocing  in 
currobcńration  of  this  view  the  remark  in  JubiL  ri,  96- 
183,  the  chronological  system  of  the  author,  which  is 
based  upon  heptades;  and  the  strict  obaenrance  of  the 
Sabbath,  which,  aa  an  Easene  lo\'ing  the  sacred  numł^n- 
8even,  he  luges  upon  every  Israelite  (compare  JubiL  ii, 
78-135 ;  iv,  19-61 ;  Beth  Ha-Midrash,  iii,  p.  xi) ;  wha« 
Frankel  maintaina  that  the  writer  waa  an  Egjptian  Jew, 
and  a  priest  at  the  tempie  in  Leontopoli^  which  ac- 
counta  for  his  setting  such  a  high  value  upon  saciificea^ 
and  tracing  the  origin^of  the  festivala  and  sacrificea  to 
the  patriarcha  {Afonałsschrift,y,  p,  396). 

Kotwithatanding  the  difference  of  opinion  aa  to  whicb 
phaae  of  Judiuam  the  author  belonged,  all  agree  that 
thia  book  waa  written  io  Hebrew,  that  it  waa  afterwards 
translated  into  Greek,  and  that  the  Ethiopic,  of  which 
Dillmann  has  given  a  German  ver8ion,  was  madę  fioni 
the  Greek.  Many  of  the  expre86ions  in  the  book  can 
only  be  understood  by  retranslating  them  into  H«brew. 
Thus,  for  instance,  the  remarks  *'und  ea  giebt  kcine 
Uebergehung"  (JubiL  vi,  101, 102),  "und  sie  solkn  kei- 
neu  Tag  uebergehen"  (vi,  107),become  inteUigible  when 
we  bear  in  mind  that  the  original  had  *^*13*^7,  mterca- 
lałion.  Moreover,  the  writer  designates  the  wiv€s  of 
the  patriarchs  from  the  family  of  Seth  by  namea  which 
cxpre88  beauty  and  virtue  in  Hebrew ;  Seth  mairied  Az* 
urah,  n*l'łX5,  restramt ;  Jared  married  Beracha,  MS^S, 
hkstmg ;  Enoch  and  Methuselah  married  wive8  of  the 
name  of  Adni,  TXy^'S,  płeasure ;  whilat  Cain  married  hia 
sister  Avan,  "j^JC,  trtcc  (Jubil.  iv,  24-128).  The  worda 
*^r\  J3X3  •■'3,  Gen.  xxii,  16,  are  rendered  in  the  book  d 
JubiL  (xvii,  42)  bet  meinem  JTavpte,  which  is  the  well- 
knówn  Palestinian  oath  ~^fi<'^,  "'CKI  ■'*<na  (compare 
Sanhedrim,  2,  3,  aL),  and  which  no  Greek  writer  wocdd 
uae,  eapecially  aa  the  Sept.  does  not  have  it  berę.  There 
are  alśo  other  renderings  which  show^  that  the  writer 
had  the  Hebrew  Scriptures  before  him  and  not  the  Sept^ 
a  fact  which  ia  irreconcilable  on  the  suppoaition  that  he 
waa  a  Greek  Jew,  or  wrote  in  Greek,  as  he  would  mi* 
doubtedly  have  used  the  Scpt,  Thus,  for  instance,  the 
bouk  of  JubiL  xiv,  9, 10,  has  **  der  aus  dcincm  Ltibe  her- 
vorgeht,"  which  is  a  literał  translation  of  the  Hebrew 
l^^sr^ia  H^*^  *ltt:x,Gen.  xv,4;  otherwise  the  Sept.  oc 
ikf^Łv<rtrai  U  aov :  Jubil.  xiv,  29  haa  ^  aber  Alsam 
wehrte  sie  ab,"80  the  Hebrew  U'^'2^  DniK  niT^I  (Gen. 
XV,  11),  not  the  Sept«  cat  <nfp(Ka^totv  airoic^Aftpa/i 
(comp.  also  book  of  JubiL  xt,  17  with  Sept«  Gen.  xvii,  7; 
XV,  48  with  Sept,  x^^i,  17;  xv,  46  with  Sept.  xvii,  19\ 
To  these  is  to  be  added  the  testimony  of  St.  Jerome.who 
remarks  upon  n©'^,  "  Hoc  verbum,  ąuantum  memoria 
suggerit,  nu8quam  alibi  in  scripturis  sanctb  apud  He- 
bneos  iuveni88e  me  novi,  absąue  libro  apociypho,  qid  a 
GraM;is  fitKpoytvwic  appellatur.  Ibi  in  fedificatione  tor- 
ris  pro  etadio  ponitur,  in  quo  excercentur  pugilea  et  ath- 
Ictaj  et  cursorum  velocitas  comprobatur"  (comp.  In  fpi*- 
toia  adFabiolam  de  mansionibus,  Mansio  xviii  on  Knmb. 
xxxiii,  21,  22);  and  again  (Mansio  xxiv  on  NumU 
xxxiii,  27,  28); "  Hoc  eodem  vocabulo  (H^Fj)  et  ii^dcm 
literis  scriptum  invenio  patrem  Abraham,  qui  in  supra- 
dicto  apocrypho  Geneseos  volumine  abactis  conris,  qui 
hominum  frumenta  vastabant,  abactoris  vel  depideoria 
sortitus  est  nomen ;"  as  well  as  the  fact  that  portions  of 
the  book  are  still  extant  in  Hebrew  (comp.  Jellinek, /?«/* 
Jla-Midrash,  voL  iii,  p.  ix,  etc).  The  agrecroent  of 
many  passages  with  the  Sept.,  when  the  latter  de\iatea 
from  the  Hebrew,  ia,  as  Dillmann  obscrve8,  to  be  aa- 
cribed  to  the  translator,  who,  when  rendering  it  into 
Greek,  used  the  Sept,  (Ewald,  Jahrb*Lch,m,  90). 

IV.  Datę  and  Importance  of  the  Soo*.— That  this 
book  was  written  before  the  destmction  of  the  Templa 
is  e^ńdent  not  only  from  ita  description  of  the  i 


JUBILEES,  BOOK  OF  1045 


JTTDMA 


■od  the  aenrieeft  perfonned  therein,  trat  from  its  whole 
oomplezioiii  and  this  is  admitted  by  all  who  havd  writp 
tan  on  iU  lu  exact  datę,  howerer,  ia  a  matter  of  dia- 
pate;  Krttger  maintaina  that  it  was  wńtten  between 
B.a  882  and  820;  Dillmann  and  Fnuikel  think  that  it 
was  writien  m  thejirtt  centwry  be/ore  Christ  f  whilst 
Ewald  ia  of  opinion  tbat  it  originated  about  tke  hirth  of 
Ckritt,  The  mediom  of  the  two  extreme8  is  the  most 
piobable. 

The  impoitance  of  this  book  can  haidly  be  oyerrated 
when  we  remember  that  it  is  one  of  the  very  few  Bibli- 
cal  worka  which  have  come  down  to  us  written  between 
the  ckMe  of  the  O.-T.  canon  and  the  beginning  of  the 
N.  T.  Theie  are,  however,  severil  other  constderatioos 
which  render  thia  book  a  most  important  contribation, 
both  to  the  interpretation  of  the  Bibie  and  to  the  history 
of  Jewish  belief  anterior  to  the  Christian  era.  1.  Many 
poitions  of  it  are  literał  translations  of  the  book  of  Gen- 
esis, and  therefore  enable  us  to  see  in  what  state  the 
Uebrew  text  was  at  that  age,  and  fumish  us  with  some 
readings  which  are  preferable  to  those  given  in  the  tex- 
ius  receptusj  e.  g.  JubiL  xvii,  17  renders  it  probable  that 
the  correct  reading  of  Gen.  xxi,  11  ia  bri  133  flTK  br 
imaM  n^K,  which  is  corroborated  by  the  yerse  imme- 
diately  following.  2.  It  shows  us  that  the  Jews  of  that 
age  beliered  in  the  8uryival  of  the  soul  aiter  the  death 
-  of  the  body  (xxiii,  115).  though  the  resurrectian  of  the 
body  is  nowhere  mentioucd  therein ;  that  they  belieyed 
in  the  exi8tence  of  Satan,  the  prince  of  legions  of  evil 
spirits,  respecting  which  so  little  is  said  in  the  O.  Test. 
and  so  much  in  the  New;  and  that  these  evil  spirits 
have  dominion  over  men,  and  are  often  the  cause  of 
their  ilhiesscs  and  death  (x,  86-47;  xlix,  7-10).  8.  It 
shows  us  what  the  Jews  beliered  about  the  coming  of 
the  Mesaiałi,  and  the  great  day  of  judgment  (xxxiii, 
87-118).  ^4.  It  explains  the  statements  in  Acts  rii,  58 ; 
Gal.  iii,  19;  Ueb.  ii,  2,  which  have  caused  so  much  dif- 
ficulty  to  interpretera,  by  most  distinctly  declaring  that 
the  law  was  given  throngh  the  pre»€»ce-angd  (i,  99-102). 
5.  It  eren  appean  to  be  ąuoted  in  the  N.  T.  (compare  2 
Pet.  ii,  4 ;  Jude  6,  with  JubiL  iv,  76 ;  v,  8,  20). 

V.  LUerahirt,—\i  has  aiready  been  remarked  that 
the  Hebrew  original  of  this  book  is  lost.  Chapters 
xxxiv  and  xxxv  are,  however,  preseryed  from  Afidrash 
VaJisaUf  ia  Midrcuh  Jalkut  Subbctt^  section  Bertihiihy 
cxxxiii,  as  has  been  pointed  out  by  JeUinek  (see  he- 
lów) ;  and  Treuenfels  has  shown  parallels  between  other 
parta  of  the  book  of  Jubilees  and  the  Hagada  and  Hid- 
rashim  in  the  IMeraturblait  des  OriealSf  1846,  p.  81  sq. 
The  Greek  venion  of  this  book,  which  was  madę  at  a 
very  early  period  of  the  Christian  sra,  as  is  evident 
from  Clemenfs  Heoognit.  cap.  xxx-xxxii,  though  £pi- 
phanius  (A  dc.  J/ares,  lib.  i,  cap.  iv,  vi ;  Uh.  ii ;  tom.  ii, 
cap.  lxxxiii,  lxxxiv)  and  St.  Jerome  (m  Epistoła  adFa- 
biolam  de  mansiordbuSf  Mansio  xviii  on  Numb.aucxiii, 
21,  22 ;  Mansio  xxiv  on  Numb.  xxxiii,  27,  28)  are  the 
first  who  mention  it  by  name,  was  soon  lost  in  the  West- 
ern Church,  but  it  still  existed  in  the  Eastem  Church, 
and  was  copiously  used  in  the  Chronographia  of  Geor- 
gius  Syiicellus  and  Georgius  Cedrenus,  and  quoted  8ev- 
eral  timcs  by  Joamies  Zanoras  and  Michael  Glycas,  By- 
zantine  theologians  and  historians  of  the  llth  and  12th 
centuries  (compare  Fabricius,  Codex  Pseud.-ejńgrapK  V. 
Test.  p.  851-863 ;  Dilhnann,  in  £wald's  Jahrbuch.  iii,  94 
8q.).  From  that  time,  howeyer,  the  Greek  venion  was 
also  lost,  and  the  book  of  Jubilees  was  quite  unknown  to 
Europeans  till  1844,  when  Ewald  announced  in  the  Zeit- 
sehri/ljur  die  Kunde  des  Morgenlandes,  p.  176-179,  that 
Dr.  Krapff  had  found  it  pre8er\'ed  in  the  Abyssinian 
choich  in  an  Ethiopic  translation,  and  brought  over  a 
MS.  copy  which  was  madę  over  to  the  Tubingen  Uni- 
veiaity.  This  Ethiopic  yersion  was  tninslated  into  Ger- 
man by  DiUmann  in  Ewald's  Jahrbucher,  ii,  280-256, 
and  ii^  1-96  (Gottingen,  1849-51),  and  Ewald  at  once 
nsed  its  contents  for  the  new  edition  of  his  Geschichte  d, 
Yolhes  Israeł  (yóL  i,  GdUing.  1851,  p.  271 ;  vol.  ii,  1858, 


p.  294>  This  was  seasonably  foUowed  by  Jdfinek^s  edi« 
tion  of  the  Midrash  Yajisau,  with  an  erudite  preface  in 
Beth  HoF^Midrash,  vol.  iii  (Leipwg,  1856);  next  by  the 
leamed  treattses  of  Beer,  Das  Buch  der  JubUSen  und 
sem  YerhaUmss  su  den  Midraschim^  1856;  and  Frankel, 
Das  Budid.JuhUam  (in  the  Momtssehr{ftf,  Geschichte 
und  Wissenschaft  des  Judenthums,  v,  811-816,  880400) ; 
then  by  another  masterly  production  byfSśer,  entitled 
Noeh  em  Wort  Ober  das  Buch  der  Jubilden  (in  FrankeFs 
Monatsschiftt  1857)  ^  and  strictures  on  the  works  of  Jel- 
linek,  Beer,  and  Frankel,  by  Dillmann,  in  the  Zeitschrj/i 
der  Deuźsehen  morffenUbtdischen  GeseUschąft^  xi  (Leipzig, 
1867),  161  8q.  Krttger,  too,  pnblished  an  artide  on  Die 
Chronologie  tm  BuchederJubitOen  in  the  same  joumal,  xii 
(Łps.  1858),  279  sq.,  and  Dillmann  at  last  pnblished  the 
Ethiopic  itself  (Kieł  and  Lond.  1859),  which  Ronsch  has 
sanoe  translated  with  notes  (Łeips.  1874, 8 vo)«— Kitto,  s.  v. 

Jtl^cal  (Jer.  xxxviii,  1).    See  Jehucał. 

Ju'da  Clot/Sa,  merely  the  Genitive  case  of  'Iov^ac, 
the  Graecized  form  of  Judah\  an  incorrect  AngUcizing 
of  the  name  Judas  or  Judah  in  seyeral  passages  of  the 
AuttLYers.    See  also  Judk. 

1.  The  patriarch  Judah,  son  of  Jaoob  (Susan.  56; 
Lukę  iii,  83 ;  Ueb.  vii,  14 ;  Bev.  v,  5 ;  vii,  5).  For  the 
*'city  of  Juda**  (L  e.  the  tribe  of  Judah),  in  Łukę  i,  39, 
see  Juttah. 

2.  The  son  of  Joseph,  and  father  of  Simeon,  in  Christ*s 
matemal  ancestry  (Lukę  iii,  80) ;  probably  the  same 
with  Adaiaii,  the  father  of  Maaseiah,  which  latter  was 
one  of  the  Jewish  centurions  who  aided  Jehoiada  in  re- 
storing  Joash  to  the  throne  (2  Chroń,  xxiii,  1).  B.C. 
antę  876.    See  Genealooy  of  Chbist. 

3.  The  son  of  Joanna,  and  father  of  Joseph  (Lukę  iii, 
26),  another  of  Chrisfs  matcnial  ancestors;  probably 
identical  with  Abiud,  the  father  of  Eliakim,  among 
Christ^s  patemal  ancótry  (Matt.  i,  13) ;  and  likewise 
with  Obadiaii,  the  son  of  Aman,  and  father  of  Shecha- 
niah  (1  Chroń,  iii,  21).  B.C.  antę  406.  (See  Strong's 
Harm.  and  Earpos.  ofthe  Gospels,  p.  16, 17.) 

4.  One  of  the  Lord*s  brethren,  enumerated  in  Mark  vi, 
3.  See  JosES;  Joseph.  On  the  question  of  his  iden- 
tity  with  Jude,  the  brother  of  James,  one  of  the  twelve 
apostles  (Lukę  vi,  16;  AcU  i,  18),  and  with  the  author 
of  the  generał  epistle,  see  James.  In  Matt.  xiii,  55,  hia 
name  is  giyen  morę  correctly  in  the  A^Yers.  as  Judas. 

Juda  (or  Judji)  Leo.  See  Jud^ih  Lsa 
Judae^a  (*Iot;^afa,fem.  of 'Iov^atoc,  Jfw  or  Jewish^ 
SC  land ;  once  in  A.  V.  for  Chald.  ^'^tr^t  J^dahj  Ezra  v, 
8;  *^  Jewiy,"  Lukę  xxiii,  5;  John  vii,  1),  the  sonthem- 
most  of  the  three  divisions  of  the  Holy  Land.  It  de- 
noted  the  kingdom  of  Judah  as  distinguished  from  that 
of  IsraeL  See  Judah.  But  ailer  the  captivity,  as  most 
of  the  exiles  who  iietuined  belonged  to  the  kingdom  of 
Judah,  the  name  Judsea  (Judah)  was  applied  generally 
to  the  whole  of  Palestine  west  of  the  Jordan  (Hag.  i,  1, 
14;  ii,  2).  Under  the  Romans,  in  the  time  of  Christ, 
Palestine  was  divided  into  Galilee,  Samaria,  and  Judtea 
(John  iv,  4, 5 ;  Acts  ix,  81),  the  last  induding  the  whole 
of  the  southem  part  west  of  the  Jordan.  But  this  divi- 
sion  was  only  obserred  as  a  political  and  bcal  distinc- 
tion,  for  the  sake  of  indicating  the  part  of  the  country, 
just  as  wo  use  the  name  of  a  county  (Matt  ii,  1,  5 ;  iii, 
1 ;  iv,  25 ;  Lukę  i,  65) ;  but  when  the  whole  of  Palestine 
was  to  be  indicated  In  a  generał  way,  the  term  Judsea 
was  still  employed.  Thus  persons  in  Galilee  and  else- 
where  spoke  of  going  to  Judsea  (John  vii,  8;  xi,  7),  to 
distinguish  the  part  of  Palestine  to  which  they  were 
prooeeding ;  but  when  persons  in  Romę  and  other  places 
spoke  of  Judea  (Acta  xxviii,  21),  they  used  the  word  as 
a  generał  denomination  for  the  country  of  the  Jews,  or 
Palestine.  Indeed,  the  name  seems  to  have  had  a  morę 
extensive  application  than  even  to  Palestine  west  of  the 
Jordan.  It  denoted  all  the  dominions  of  Herod  the 
Great,  who  was  called  the  king  of  Judsea;  and  much  of 
these  lay  beyond  the  river  (comp,  Matt.  xix,  1  ^  Mai^ 


JUDuEA 


1046 


judah 


k 


X,  1).  After  the  deaih  of  Herod,  liowerer,  the  JudttA 
to  which  his  son  Archelaus  sacceeded  was  only  the 
Southern  proyince  so  caUed  (Matt.  ii,  22),  which  after- 
wards  became  a  Roman  prorinoe  dependent  on  Syria 
and  goveraed  by  procuraton,  and  thia  was  its  condition 
dttńng  OUT  LoTd*8  ministry  (aee  Nohrbor,  Judtea  pnww- 
cia  Honumorum^  Upsal.  1822).  It  was  ailerwaids  for  a 
time  partly  onder  the  dominion  of  Herod  Agrippa  the 
elder  (Acts  xii,  1-19),  but  on  hb  death  it  reyeited  to  its 
former  ccmdition  under  the  Bomana.  See  Saiith's  JHcL 
of  Ckut.  Geog,  s.  v. 

It  is  only  Judaa,  in  the  provincial  sense,  that  reąuires 
our  present  notice,  the  oountiy  at  large  bcdog  described 
in  the  artide  Paucstise.  In  this  sense,  howeyer,  it 
waa  much  morę  exten8ive  than  the  domain  of  the  tribe 
of  Judah,  even  morę  so  than  the  kingdom  of  the  same 
name.  There  are  no  materials  for  describing  its  limita 
with  precision,'but  it  induded  the  ancient  tenitories  of 
Judah,  Benjamin,  Dan,  Simeon,  and  part  of  Ephrairo. 
It  is,  howeyer,  not  correct  to  describe  Idumoa  as  not 
andently  belonging  to  Judah.  The  Idumaea  of  later 
times,  or  that  which  bdonged  to  Judsa,  was  the  south- 
ero  part  of  the  ancient  Judah,  into  which  the  Idumasans 
had  intruded  dnring  the  exile,  and  the  annexatłon  of 
which  to  Judiea  only  restored  what  had  andently  be- 
lon|;^d  to  it. 

The  name  Judsa  occurs  among  the  list  of  nations 
represented  at  the  paschal  outpouring  of  the  Holy  Spirit 
(Acts  ii,  9),  where  some  haye  preferred  the  yarious  read- 
ings  India  or  Idumaa  (see  Kuinol,  ad  loc.),  and  eyen 
Junia  ('Xouviav,  Schulthcss,  De  ckarinnat,  i,  145),  a 
place  in  Armenia,  with  yarious  other  conjectural  emen- 
dations  (see  Bowyer^s  Conjectureś  on  fke  N.  T,  ad  loc), 
all  alike  unnecessaiy  (see  Hackett,  Alford,  ad  loc). 

In  the  Babbinical  writings,  Judsa,  as  a  diyision  of 
Palestine,  is  freąnently  called "the  southj^or  "the  south 
country,"  to  distinguish  it  from  Galilee,  which  was  call- 
ed "  the  north"  (Lightfoot,  Chorog,  Ceni,  xii).  The  dis- 
tinction  of  the  tribe  of  Judah  into  **  the  Mountain,' 
«<  the  Flain,"  and  *"  the  Yale,"  which  we  meet  with  in 
the  Old  Testament  (Numb.  xiii,  30),  was  preseryed  un- 
der the  morę  extended  denomination  of  Judsa  (for  the 
morę  spedfic  diyisions  in  Josh.  xy,  21-63,  see  Keil'8 
Comment.  ad  loc. ;  Schwarz,  PaUst.  p.  98-122).  The 
J/ottiitoftt,or  hiU-country  of  Judasa  (Josh.  xxi,  11 ;  Lukę 
i,  89),  was  that "  broad  back  of  mountains,**  as  Lightfoot 
calLs  it  {Chorog.  Cent.  xi),  which  fills  the  centrę  of  the 
country  from  Hebron  northward  to  beyond  Jerusalem 
(for  Lukę  i,  89,  see  Juttah).  The  Plam  was  the  Iow 
country  towards  the  sea-ooast,  and  seems  to  haye  in- 
cluded  not  only  the  broad  plain  which  extend8  between 
the  sea  and  the  hill-conntry,  but  the  lower  parts  of  the 
hilly  region  itself  in  thatdirection.  Thus  the  Rab- 
bins.aUege  that  from  Beth-horon  to  the  sea  is  one  region 
(Tahnnd  Hieros.  ShebUih,  ix,  2).  The  Yale  is  defmed 
by  the  Rabbins  as  extending  from  Engedi  to  Jericho 
(Lightfoot,  Panergon,  §  2) ;  from  which,  and  other  indi- 
cations,  it  seems  to  haye  induded  snch  parts  of  the  Ghor, 
or  great  plain  of  the  Jordan,  as  lay  within  the  territory 
of  Judiea.  This  appropiiation  of  the  terms  is  far  prefer- 
able  to  that  of  some  writers,  such  as  Lightfoot,  who  sup- 
pose  *Hhe  Plain"  to  be  the  broad  yalley  of  the  Jordan, 
and  "  the  Yalley"  to  be  the  k>wer  yalley  of  the  same 
river.  That  which  is  caUed  the  WUdermsa  ofJudaa 
was  the  wild  and  inhoepitable  region  lying  eastward  of 
Jerusalem,  in  the  direcdon  of  the  Jordan  and  Dead  Sea 
(Isa.  id,  3 ;  Matt.  iii,  1 ;  Lnke  i,  80 ;  iii,  2-4).  In  the  N. 
T.  only  the  Jlighlanth  and  the  Desert  of  Judiea  are  dis- 
tinguished.  We  may  haye  some  notion  of  the  extent 
northward  which  Judasa  had  obtained,  from  Josephus 
całling  Jerusalem  the  centrę  of  the  country  ( War,  iii, 
3,  5),  which  is  remarkable,  seeiiig  that  Jerusalem  was 
originally  in  the  northemmoet  border  of  the  tribe  of  Ju- 
dah. Id  fact,  he  describes  the  breadth  of  the  country  as 
exteiiding  from  the  Jordan  to  Joppa,  which  shows  that 
this  city  was  in  Judcea.  How  much  further  to  the 
north  the  boundaiy  lay  we  cannot  know  with  predsion, 


as  we  are  miaoq[nainted  with  the  dtc  of  AniMfii,oClKr^ 
wise  Borceroe,  which  he  8a3r8  lay  on  the  bmuldairy-łim 
between  Judea  and  SamariiL  The  mera  fact  tbat  Joe»> 
phus  makes  Jemsalon  the  centre  of  the  land  seems  to 
proye  that  the  proyinoe  did  not  extend  so  fiu  to  the 
south  as  the  ancient  kingdom  of  the  same  name.  As 
the  southem  boundaiy  of  Judsa  was  also  that  of  tbe 
whole  country,  it  is  only  neceasaiy  to  remaik  that  J<»e- 
phus  places  the  southem  boundary  of  the  Judasa  of  tbe 
time  of  Christ  at  a  yiUage  called  Jardan,  on  the  confines 
of  Arabia  Petnoa.  No  phM»  of  this  name  haa  bcen 
found,  and  the  indication  is  yery  indistinct,  from  ibe 
fact  that  all  the  country  which  lay  beyond  the  Idimuea 
of  thoee  times  was  then  called  Arabia.  In  fixxng  this 
boundary,  Josephus  regards  Idunuea  as  part  of  Judaea, 
for  he  immediatdy  after  reckons  that  as  one  of  the 
eleyen  districta  into  which  Juda>a  was  diyided.  Most 
of  these  districts  were  denominated,  like  our  coonties, 
from  the  chief  towns.  They  were,  1.  Jerusalem ;  2. 
Gophna;  8.  Acrahatta;  4.  Thumna;  5.  Lydda:  6.  £n»- 
maus;  7.  Pdla;  8b  Idunuea;  9.  Engaddi;  10.  Herodinm; 
and,  11.  Jericha 

Judea  is,  as  the  aboye  intimations  would  soggest,  a 
oountiy  fuli  of  hiUs  and  yalleys.  The  hills  an  gener- 
ally  separated  from  one  anothcr  by  yalleys  and  tonents, 
and  are,  for  the  most  part,  of  moderate  hdght,  uneyeo, 
and  sddom  of  any  regular  figurę.  The  rock  of  which 
they  are  compoeed  is  easily  conyerted  into  soil,  which 
being  arrested  by  the  terraces  when  washed  down  by 
the  rains,  lenders  the  hills  cultiyable  in  a  senes  of  long, 
narrow  gardens,  formed  by  thcse  temcca  from  the  base 
upwards.  In  this  manner  the  hills  were  in  ancient 
times  cultiyated  most  mdustriously,  and  enriched  and 
beantified  with  the  fig^-tree,  the  olire-tree,  and  the  yine; 
and  it  is  thus  that  the  scanty  cnitiyation  which  still 
subsiats  is  now  carried  on.  But  when  the  inhabłtants 
wero  rooted  out,  and  the  culŁure  neglected.  tbe  terraces 
fell  to  decay,  and  the  soil  which  had  been  coUected  in 
them  was  washed  down  into  the  yalleys,  leaviiig  only 
the  arid  rock,  naked  and  desolate.  This  is  the  generał 
character  of  the  scenery ;  but  in  some  paits  the  hills  aze 
beautifully  wooded,  and  in  others  the  application  of  tbe 
ancient  modę  of  cultiyation  still  suggests  to  the  tray^ 
ler  how  rich  the  conntiy  once  was  and  might  be  again, 
and  how  beautiful  the  profspects  which  it  oflered.  As, 
howeyer,  much  of  this  was  the  result  of  cultiyation,  the 
country  was  probably  anciently,  as  at  present,  natnralły 
less  fertile  than  either  Samaria  or  Galilee.  The  present 
difference  is  yery  pointedly  remarked  by  diiTerent  tray- 
eUers;  and  lord  lindsay  plainly  dedaies  that  '^all  Jn- 
dsea,  exoept  the  hills  of  Hebron  and  the  rales  immedi* 
ately  about  Jerusalem,  is  barren  and  desolate.  Qut  tbe 
proepect  brightcns  as  soon  as  you  quit  it,  and  Samarim 
and  Galilee  still  smile  like  the  land  of  promise.**  But 
there  is  a  season— after  the  spring  rains,  and  before  the 
summer  heat  has  absorbed  all  the  moistnre  left  by  them 
— when  eyen  the  desert  is  dothed  with  yezdore,  and  at 
that  season  the  yalle3r8  of  Judaea  present  a  refrŃbingly 
green  appearance.  This  yemal  season,  howeyer,  is  of 
short  duration,  and  by  the  beginning  of  Hay  the  grass 
upon  the  mountains,  and  eyery  yestige  of  regetation 
upon  the  lower  grounds,  haye  in  generał  completely  dia- 
appeared.  (See  Kitto,  Pietorial  History  of  Palettuif^ 
Introduct  p.  89, 40, 1 19, 120 ;  and  the  Trarels  of  Nau,  p. 
489 ;  Roger,  p.  182 ;  Mariti,  ii,  862 ;  Lindsay,  ii,  70 ;  Ste- 
phena, ii,  249 ;  ElHot,  p.  408, 409 ;  Olin,  ii,  823 :  Stanley, 
p.  161, 178.  For  a  generał  discussion,  see  Rdand,  Pa^ 
last,  p.  81, 174, 178 ;  RosenmtlUer.^tUl  Geogr,  II,  ii,  149; 
Ritter,  Krdk.  xiy,  81, 1064, 1080, 1088;  xv,  25, 125, 181, 
655;  xyi,  1  sq.,21  sq.,83  sq., 35  sq.,  509  8q.,26, 114  sq., 
547.) — Kitto.    See  Judah,  Tribk  of. 

Jn^dah  (Heb.  Tehudah%  m^rt^,  edOmted;  coinp. 
Gen.  xxix,  35 ;  xlix,  8 ,  Chald.  TlM^,  !> AmT,  Ezra  y,  1 ; 
yii,  14;  Dan.  ii,  25;  y,  18^  vi,  18;  "<  Jndsea,"  Ezn  y,  8; 
"  Jewry,"  Dan.  v,  18;  Sept.  and  N.T.  geneńlly  'loi^c 
[as  also  Josephus] ;  bat  comp.  'Iovia,  Loke  iii,  26, 80; 


JTTDAH 


1047 


JTJDAH 


tót  Lakę  i,  89,  see  Juttah),  the  name  of  8ev«nd  per^ 
Bons,  etc.,  in  Scripture.    See  alao  Judas;  Judk. 

1.  The  fonrth  son  of  Jaoob  by  Leah,  bom  KC  1916 
(Gen.  xxbc,  85),  being  the  last  before  the  tempoiuy 
ceasiirion  in  the  blrths  of  ber  children.  His  whole-broth- 
ers  w  .re  Reuben,  Stmeon,  and  LeTi,  elder  than  hinuelf— 
Inachar  and  Zebulon  jrounger  (see  xxxv,  28).  The 
name  is  explained  aa  havuig  originated  in  Leah'8  excla- 
mation  of  ''praise*'  at  thia  fifesh  gift  of  Jehovafa~"  She 
Mud,  <  Now  wiU  I  praifle  (rniK,  ódeh)  Jehovah,'  and  ahe 
called  his  name  Yehudah"  (xxix,  85),  The  same  play 
is  preseired  in  the  bleesing  of  Jacob— "  Judah,  thou 
whom  thy  brethren  shall  praise !"  (xlix,  8). 

The  narratire  in  Genesis  brings  this  patriarch  morę 
before  the  reader,  and  makes  known  moie  of  his  Msto- 
ry  and  character  than  it  does  in  the  case  of  any  other 
of  the  twelve  sons  of  Jacob,  with  the  single  exception 
of  Joseph.  It  was  Jadah's  advice  that  the  brethren 
foUowed  when  they  sold  Joseph  to  the  Ishmaelitee  in- 
Btead  of  taking  his  life.  By  the  light  of  his  sabseqnent 
actions  we  can  see  that  his  conduct  on  this  occasion 
arose  from  a  generous  irapulse,  althongh  the  form  of  the 
ąuestion  he  put  to  thcm  bas  been  sometimes  held  to 
snggest  an  interested  motiye :  "  What  profit  is  it  if  we 
slay  our  brother  and  conceal  his  blood?  Come,  let  us 
seli  him"  (xxxvii,  26,  27).  Thoogh  not  the  fint-bom, 
he  **  prevailed  above  his  brethren"  (1  Chroń.  v,  2),  and 
we  find  him  subsequently  taking  a  dedded  lead  in  all 
the  affairs  of  the  family.  When  a  second  visit  to  Egypt 
for  com  had  become  inevitable,  it  was  Jadah  who,  as 
the  moathpiece  of  the  rest,  headed  the  remonstrance 
against  the  detention  of  Benjamin  by  Jacob,  and  finally 
ondertóok  to  be  responsible  for  the  safety  of  the  lad 
(Gen.  xlUi,  3-10).  When,  througb  Joseph's  artifice,  the 
brothers  were  brought  back  to  the  palące,  he  is  again 
the  leader  and  spokesman  of  the  band.  In  that  thor^ 
oughly  Oriental  scenę  it  is  Judah  who  nnhesitatingly 
acknowledges  the  guilt  which  had  never  been  oommit- 
ted,  throws  himself  on  the  mercy  of  the  supposed  Egyp- 
tian  prince,  olfers  himself  as  a  8lave,  and  makes  that 
wonderfal  appeal  to  the  feelings  of  their  disguised  broth- 
er which  renders  it  impossible  for  Joseph  any  longer  to 
conceal  his  secret  (xliv,  14, 16-84).  So,  too,  it  is  Judah 
who  is  sent  before  Jacob  to  smooth  the  way  for  him  in 
the  land  of  Goshen  (xlvi,  28).  This  ascendency  over 
his  brethren  is  reflected  in  the  last  words  addreśsed  to 
him  by  his  father — Thou  whom  thy  brethren  shall 
praise !  thy  father^s  sons  shall  bow  down  before  thee ! 
anto  him  shall  be  the  gathering  of  the  people  (xlix,  8- 
10).  In  the  interesting  traditions  of  the  Koran  and  the 
Midrash  his  figurę  stands  out  in  the  same  prominenoe. 
Before  Joseph  his  wrath  is  mightłer  and  his  recognition 
heartier  than  the  rest.  It  is  he  who  hastens  in  advance 
to  bear  to  Jacob  the  fragrant  lobe  of  Joseph  (Weil's  Bib- 
lieal  Leffmds,  p.  88-90). 

Not  long  after  the  sale  of  Joseph,  Jadah  had  with- 
drawn  from  the  patemal  tents,  and  gone  to  reside  at 
Adullam,  in  the  country  which  afterwards  borę  his 
name.  Herę  he  married  a  woman  of  Canaan,  called  Shu- 
ah,  and  had  by  her  three  sons,  Er,  Onan,  and  Shelah. 
When  the  eldest  of  these  sons  became  of  fit  age,  he  was 
married  to  a  woman  named  Tamar,  but  soon  after  died. 
See  Er.  As  he  died  childless,  the  patriarehal  law,  af- 
terwards adopted  into  the  Mosaie  codę  (DeuL  xxv,  6), 
feqaired  Judah  to  bestow  npon  the  widów  his  second  son. 
This  he  did ;  but  as  Onan  also  soon  died  childless  [see 
Onak],  Judah  became  relactant  to  bestow  his  only  sur- 
▼iving  son  npon  tlus  woman,  and  pot  her  olTwith  the 
excuse  that  he  was  not  yet  of  sufflcient  age.  Tamar 
aooordingly  remained  in  her  father^s  house  at  Adullam. 
She  had  the  usual  paasion  of  Eastem  women  for  off- 
apring,  and  could  not  endure  the  stigma  of  having  been 
twioe  married  without  bearing  children,  while  the  law 
preduded  her  from  contractingany  alliance  but  that 
which  Judah  withheld  her  from  completing.  Mean- 
while  Judah's  yrife  died,  and,  after  the  time  of  moum- 
ing  had  expiied,  he  went,  accompanied  by  his  friend 


Hiiah,  to  attend  the  shearing  of  his  sheep  at  Timnath, 
in  the  same  neighborhood.  These  ciroomstances  sag- 
gested  to  Tamar  the  strange  thought  of  connecting 
herself  with  Judah  himself,  under  the  gotse  of  a  looee 
woman.  HAving  waylaid  him  on  the  road  to  Timnath, 
she  Bucceeded  in  her  object,  and  when  the  oonsequences 
began  to  be  manifest  in  the  penon  of  Tamar,  Judah  was 
highly  enraged  at  her  crime,  and,  exercising  the  powers 
which  belonged  to  him  as  the  head  of  the  family  she 
had  dishouored,  he  oommanded  her  to  be  brought  forth, 
and  oommitted  to  the  flames  as  an  adultereea.  Bot 
when  she  appeared  she  produced  the  ring,  the  bracelet, 
and  the  staff  which  he  had  left  in  pledge  with  her,  and 
pnt  him  to  oonfusion  by  dedaring  that  they  belonged 
to  the  father  of  her  ooming  ofbpring.  See  Tamar. 
Judah  acknowledged  them  to  be  his,  and  oonfessed  that 
he  had  been  wrong  in  withholding  Shelah  from  her. 
The  resttlt  of  this  painful  affair  was  the  birth  of  two 
soDS,  Zerah  and  Pharez  (KG.  cir.  1898),  from  whom,  with 
Shelah,  the  tribe  of  Judah  desoended.  Pharez  was  the' 
anoestor  of  the  linę  from  which  I>avid,  the  kings  of  Ja- 
dah, and  Jesus  came  (Gen.  xxxviii;  xl\i,  12;  1  Chroń, 
ii,  3-5 ;  Matt.  i,  8 ;  Lukę  iii,  88).  Theee  circumstanoes 
seem  to  have  disgusted  Judah  with  his  residence  in 
towns,  for  we  flnd  him  ever  afterwards  at  his  father's 
tents.  His  expeiience  of  life,  and  the  strength  of  his 
character,  appear  to  have  given  him  much  influence 
with  Jaoob;  and  it  was  chiefly  from  confidence  in  him 
that  the  aged  fiuher  at  length  consented  to  allow  Benja- 
min to  go  down  to  Egypt.  That  this  confidence  was 
not  misplaoed  bas  already  been  sbown  [see  Joseph]  ; 
and  there  is  not  in  the  whole  lange  of  literaturę  a  finer 
piece  of  tme  natural  eloquence  than  that  in  which  Ju- 
dah offers  himself  to  remain  aa  a  bond-fllave  in  the  place 
of  Benjamin,  for  whoee  safe  return  he  had  madę  himself 
responsible  to  his  ibther.  The  strong  emodons  which 
it  raised  in  Joseph  disaUed  him  from  keepuig  up  longer 
the  disguise  he  had  hitherto  roaintained,  and  there  are 
few  who  have  read  it  without  betng,  like  him,  moved 
even  to  teais  (xliv,  14-34).    ac.  1874.    See  Jaoo& 

We  hear  nothing  morę  of  Judah  till  he  received, 
along  with  his  brothers,  the  finał  blessing  of  his  father, 
which  was  oonveyed  in  lofry  language,  gUncing  far  into 
futurity,  and  strongly  indicative  of  the  high  destinies 
which  awaited  the  tribe  that  was  to  descend  from  him 
(Gen.  xlix,  8-12).    B.C.1856.— Kitto;  Smith.   See  Sm- 

LOH. 

JUDAH,  TRIBE  and  Tkrritort  op.  I.  ffitłoricał 
Memoranda,-^i,  Judah*8  sons  were  five.  Of  these,  three 
were  by  his  Canaanitish  wife  Bath-shua;  they  are  all 
insignificant ;  two  died  early,  and  the  third,  Shelah,  does 
not  come  prominently  forward  either  in  his  person  or 
his  family.  The  other  two,  Pharez  and  Zerah— twins 
— were  iUegitimate  sons  by  the  widów  of  Er,  the  eldest 
of  the  former  family.  As  is  not  unfreąuently  the  case, 
the  illegitimate  sons  surpassed  the  legitimate,  and  from 
Pharez,  the  elder,  were  descended  the  royal  and  other 
illustrious  families  of  Judah.  These  sons  were  bom  to 
Judah  while  he  was  ]iving  in  the  same  district  of  Pales- 
tińe,  which,  centuries  after,  was  repossessed  by  his  de- 
scendants — amongst  villages  which  retain  their  names 
unaltered  in  the  catalogues  of  the  time  of  the  conąuest. 
The  three  sons  went  with  their  father  into  Egypt  at 
the  time  of  the  finał  removal  thither  (Gen.  xlvi,  12; 
Exod.  i,  2).     See  Jaoob. 

2.  When  we  again  meet  with  the  families  of  Judah 
they  oocupy  a  position  among  the  tribes  similar  to  that 
which  their  progenitor  had  taken  amongst  the  patri- 
archa. At  the  time  that  the  Israelites  ąuitted  Egypt,  it 
already  exhibited  the  elements  of  its  futurę  distinction 
in  a  larger  population  than  any  of  the  other  tribes  pos- 
sessed  (Numb.  i,  26,  27).  It'  numbered  74,000  adult 
males,  being  nearly  12,000  morę  than  Dan,  the  next  in 
point  of  numbers,  and  84,100  morę  than  Ephraim,  which 
in  the  end  contested  with  it  the  superiority  among  the 
tribes.  During  the  sojouzn  in  the  wildemess,  Judah 
neither  gained,  like  some  tribes,  nor  lost  like  otbers. 


JTTDAH 


1048 


JUDAB 


Its  nnsabere  faad  increaaed  to  76|600,bdng  12,100  morę 
tbaii  iBsachar,  which  had  beoome  nexŁ  to  it  in  popala- 
tion  (Numb.  xxvi,  22).  The  chief  of  the  tńbe  at  Łhe 
fonner  oensus  was  Nahshon,  the  son  of  Amminadab 
(Numb.  i,  7 ;  ii,  8 ;  vii,  12 ;  x,  14),  an  anceetor  of  David 
(Ruth  iv,  20).  Its  iepreflentative  amongst  the  spies, 
and  also  amongst  tboee  appointed  to  partiiion  the  knd, 
was  the  great  Oaleb,  the  son  of  Jephanneh  (Namb,  xiii, 
6;  xxxiv,  19).  During  the  march  throngh  the  deseit 
Jadah's  place  wasin  the  van  of  the  hoet,  on  the  east 
side  of  the  tabernacle,  with  his  kinsmen  lasachar  and 
Zebolun  (ii,  3<-9;  x,  14).  The  tnulitional  standard  of 
the  tribe  was  a  lion's  whelp,  with  the  words,  Kise  ap, 
Lord,  and  let  thine  enemiea  be  scattered !  (Targ.  Psen- 
dojon.  on  Numb.  ii,  8.) 

8.  During  the  oonquest  of  the  country  the  only  ind- 
dents  specially  aifecting  the  tribe  of  Judah  are,  (1)  the 
misbehavior  of  Achan,  who  was  of  the  great  house  of 
Zerah  (Josh.  yii,  1, 16-18) ;  and  (2)  the  conque8t  of  the 
mountain-district  of  Hebron  by  Caleb,  and  of  the  strong 
<aty  Debir,  in  the  same  lucality,  by  his  nephew  and  son- 
in-law  Othniel  (Josh.  xiv,  6-15 ;  xv,  18-19).  It  is  the 
only  instance  given  of  a  portion  of  the  country  being 
expre88ly  reserred  for  the  person  or  persons  who  con- 
qaered  it.  In  generał  the  conqae8t  seems  to  have  been 
madę  by  the  whole  community,  and  the  territoiy  aliot- 
ted  afterwards,  without  reference  to  the  original  con- 
qnerorB  of  each  locaUty.  In  this  case  the  high  charao- 
ter  and  position  of  Cisdeb,  and  perhaps  a  claim  estab- 
lished  by  him  at  the  time  of  the  vi8it  of  the  spies  to 
<Uhe  land  whereon  his  feet  had  trodden"  (Joeh.  xiv,  9; 
comp.  Numb.  xiv,  24),  may  have  led  to  the  exception. 

4.  The  history  of  the  Judges  contains  fewer  facts  re- 
specting  this  important  tribe  than  might  be  expected. 
It  seems,  however,  to  have  been  usually  considered  that 
the  birthright  which  Reuben  forfeited  had  passed  to  Ju- 
dah under  the  blessing  of  Jacob;  and  a  sanction  was 
given  to  this  impression  when,  ailer  the  death  of  Joeh- 
na,  the  divine  oracie  nominated  Judah  to  take  prece- 
dence  of  the  other  tribes  in  the  war  against  the  Cttiaan< 
ites  (Judg.  i,  2).  It  does  not  appear  that  any  tribe  was 
disposed  to  dispute  the  superior  claim  of  Judah  on  its 
own  acoount  except  Ephrairo,  although  in  dotng  this 
Ephraim  had  the  support  of  other  tribes.  Ephraim  ap- 
pean  to  have  rested  its  claims  to  the  leadership  of  the 
tribes  upon  the  ground  that  the  house  of  Joseph,  whose 
interest  it  represented,  had  received  the -birthright,  or 
double  portion  o£  the  eldest,  by  the  adoption  of  the  two 
sons  of  Joseph,  who  became  the  founders  of  two  tribes 
in  Israel.  The  existence  of  the  saoerdotal  establish- 
ment at  Shiloh,  in  Ephraim,  was  doubtless  also  alleged 
by  the  tribe  aa  a  ground  of  superiority  over  Judah. 
When,  therefore,  Judah  assumed  the  sceptre  in  the  per- 
son of  David,  and  when  the  sacerdotal  establishment 
was  remoyed  to  Jerusalem,  Ephraim  could  not  brook  the 
edipse  it  had  sustained,  and  took  the  flrst  opportunity 
of  erectuig  a  separate  throne,  and  forming  separate  es- 
tablishraents  for  worship  and  sacrifice.  Perhaps  the 
separation  of  the  kingdoms  may  thus  be  traced  to  the 
riyalry  of  Judah  and  Ephraim.  After  that  separation 
the  rivalry  was  between  the  two  kingdoms,  but  it  was 
Btill  popularly  considered  as  representing  the  ancient 
rivalry  of  these  great  tribes ;  for  the  prophet,  in  foretel- 
ling  the  repose  of  a  coming  time,  describes  it  by  saying, 
^  The  envy  also  of  Ephraim  shall  depart,  and  the  adver- 
saries  of  Judah  shall  be  cut  otf :  Ephraim  shall  not  envy 
Judah,  and  Judah  shall  not  vex  Ephraim"  (l8a.xiii,  12). 
When  the  kingdom  was  divided  under  Rehoboam  and 
Jeroboam,  the  history  of  Judah  as  a  tribe  lapsed  into 
that  of  Judah  a*  a  kingdom.  See  Judah,  kingdom  of. 
-  II.  Geographical  Dała. — In  the  first  distribution  of 
lands,  the  tribe  of  Judah  receivcd  the  southemmost  part 
of  Palestine  to  the  extent  of  fally  one  third  of  the  whole 
country  west  of  the  Jordan,  which  was  to  be  distributed 
amonp;  the  nine  and  a  hałf  tribes  for  which  provi8ion 
was  to  be  madę  (Josh.  xv).  This  over8ight  was  dis- 
covered  and  rectified  at  the  time  of  the  second  distribu- 


tion, which  was  foonded  on  an  actual  sonrey  of  tiie 
country,  when  Simeon  ieceived  an  aUotment  out  of  the 
temtoiy^.which  had  before  been  wholly  aasigned  to  Ju- 
dah (josh.  xix,  9).  See  Sucbon.  That  which  remain- 
ed  was  still  veiy  laige,  and  morę  proportioned  to  the 
futurę  greatness  than  the  actual  wants  of  the  tńbe.  We 
now  also  know,  throngh  the  ieaearches  of  recent  trar- 
elleiB,  that  the  extent  of  good  land  bek>nging  to  thia 
tribe,  southward,  was  nrach  greafcer  than  had  uaualłf 
been  suppoeed,  much  of  that  which  had  been  laid  down 
in  maps  as  merę  desert  being  actually  composed  of  ex- 
cellent  pasture-land,  and  in  part  of  arabie  soil,  still  ex- 
hibiting  some  traces  of  ancient  cultivation«  Dan  de- 
fended  the  western  border  against  the  inroada  of  the 
Philistines  with  a  brave  and  well-trained  band  of  aol- 
diers,  having  cstablished,  aa  it  seems,  a  permanent 
camp  on  the  commanding  height  between  Zorah  and 
Eshtaol  (Judg.  xiii,  25;  xvi,  81;  xviii,  12;  see  Das), 
Simeon  borę  the  bmnt  of  all  aUacks  and  forays  madę 
on  the  southem  border  by  the  tribes  of  the  great  **  Wil- 
demess  of  Wandering;"  and  when  the  Edomites  at- 
tempted  to  penetrate  Judah,  Simeon  could  alwaya  cbeck 
them  by  an  attack  upon  their  flank.  When  Judah  be^ 
came  a  kingdom,  the  original  extent  of  teiritory  assign- 
ed  to  the  tribe  was  morę  than  restorcd  or  compeneat^^d, 
for  it  must  have  cmbraced  the  domains  of  Simeon,  and 
probably  also  of  Dan,  and  we  know  that  Benjamin  was 
likewise  included  in  it.    See  Israkl,  kingdom  op. 

The  boundaries  and  contents  of  the  territory  allotted 
to  Judah  are  natnited  at  great  kngth,  and  with  greater 
minuteneas  than  the  others,  in  Josh.  xv,  20-68.  Thtt 
may  be  due  either  to  the  fact  that  the  lista  were  reduccd 
to  their  present  form  at  a  later  period,  when  the  monar- 
chy resided  with  Judah,  and  when  morę  care  would 
naturaUy  be  bestowed  on  them  than  on  thoee  of  any 
other  tribe,  or  to  the  fact  that  the  territory  was  morę 
important  and  morę  thickly  covered  with  towns  and 
villages  than  any  other  part  of  Palestine.  The  grealer 
prominence  gircn  to  the  gcnealogics  of  Judah  in  1 
Chroń,  ii,  iii,  iv,  no  douLt  arises  from  the  fonner  resson. 
The  towns  are  also  spedfically  named,  not  only  under 
the  generał  divisions,  but  eveB  in  detailed  gronpei  (See 
below.)  The  norfh  boundary  —  coincidcnt  with  the 
south  boundaiy  of  Benjamin^began  at  the  embouchmpa 
of  the  Jordan,'entered  the  hiUs  apparently  at,  or  about 
the  present  road  from  Jeńcho,  nm  westward  to  en-Sbe- 
mesh—probably  the  present  Ain-Hand,  below  Bcthany 
— thence  over  the  Mount  of  01ivcs  to  Enrogel,  in  Ibo 
yalley  beneath  Jerusalem;  went  along  the  ravine  of 
Uinnom,  under  the  precipices  of  the  city,  climbed  the 
hill  in  a  north-west  direction  to  the  water  of  Nephtoak 
(probably  Lif^a),  and  thence  by  Kiijath-jearim  (proba- 
bly Knriet  el-£nab),  Bethshcmeeh  (Ain-Shems),  Tim- 
natb,  and  Ekron  to  Jabneel  on  the  sea-coast.  On  the 
east  the  Dead  Sea,  and  on  the  west  the  Meditenmneaa, 
formed  the  boundaries.  The  southem  Une  is  hard  to 
determine,  sińce  it  is  denoted  by  phues  many  of  whkh 
have  not  been  identified.  It  left  the  Dead  Sea  at  ita 
extreme  south  end,  and  Joined  the  Hediteiranean  at  the 
wady  el-Arish ;  but  between  these  two  points  it  passed 
through  Maakh  Acrabbim,  the  Wildemces  of  Zin,  Hex- 
ron,  Adar,  Karkaa,  and  Azmon;  the  Wildemeas  of  Zin 
the  extreme  south  of  all  (Josh.  xt,  1-12).  The  cotm- 
try  thua  defined  was  Bixty-fłve  miles  feng,  and  areraged 
about  flfty  in  breadth.  But  while  this  large  tract  waa 
nominally  allotted  to  Judah,  the  portion  of  it  available 
for  actual  settlement  waa  compararively  smali,  not 
amounting  to  one  third  of  the  whole.  From  it  most 
also  be  deducted  a  large  aecUon.  stietching  entirełj 
across  irom  the  Mediterranean  to  the  Dead  Sea,  being 
the  part  set  off  to  the  tribe  of  Simeon.  The  actual  ter- 
ritory of  Jodsa  therefore  extended,  on  an  average,  only 
about  twenty-dTe  miles  from  north  to  south,  by  about 
forty  from  east  to  west  See  Tribe.  The  whole  of  the 
above  extensive  region  was  from  a  very  eariy  datę  di- 
vided  into  four  roain  regions. 

1.  The  ^oiiM—the  undulating  pasture  coontry  whidi 


JUDAH 


1049 


JUDAH 


interrened  between  the  hiOa,  the  proper  poBMirion  of 
tbe  tribe,  and  the  deBerts  wbich  enoomptaB  the  lower 
part  of  Palestine  (Jooh.  xv,  21>  It  is  this  which  ia 
once  deńgnated  as  the  wilderneM  (ffwSfor)  of  Judah 
(Jndg.  i,  16).  It  oontained  twenty-nine  cities,  with 
tbeir  dependent  irillagea  (Joah.  xv,  20-82),  ^hich,  with 
Etber  and  Aahan  in  the  mountaina,  were  ceded  to  Sim- 
eon  (xix,  1-9).  Amongst  theae  southem  dtiea  the  moet 
familiar  name  to  Beenheba.  These  southem  paatore- 
landa  were  the  favoiite  camping^grounda  of  the  old  pa- 
triarcha,  aa  they  atitt  are  of  those  nomad  tribea  that  fre- 
ąuent  the  southem  border  of  Paleetine.    See  Soceon. 

2.  Tke  Lowkmd  (xv, 88 ;  A.  V.  ** valley")— or,  to  give  it 
ita  own  proper  and  oonatant  appellation,  the  Shephelah 
—the  broad  belt  or  strip  lying  between  the  central  high- 
landa— **the  moontain'*— and  the  Mediterranean  l£a; 
the  lower  portion  of  that  maritime  pUun  which  extend8 
throogh  the  whole  of  the  sea-board  of  Palestine,  from 
Sidon  in  the  north  to  Rhinocolura  at  the  souŁh.  This 
tract  was  the  garden  and  the  granary  of  the  tribe.  In 
it,  long  befoTB  the  conąueat  of  the  country  by  larael,  the 
Philistines  had  settled  theniaelve8,  never  to  be  com- 
pLetdy  dislodged  (Neh.  xiii,  28, 24).  There,  planted  at 
eqnal  intervalB  along  the  l€vel  coast,  were  thcir  five 
chief  citics,  each  with  ita  cirde  of  smaller  dependenta, 
overiooking,from  the  natura!  undulations  of  the  ground, 
the  **  standing  corn,"  ^  shocks,''  ^  vineyard8  and  olive8,** 
which  excited  the  ingenuity  of  Samson,  and  are  still  no- 
ticeable  to  modem  traveller8.  **  They  are  all  remarfc- 
aUe  for  the  beanty  and  profuaioo  of  the  gardena  which 
auzround  them— the  scarlet  bloasoma  of  uie  pomegran- 
atea,  the  enormons  orangea  which  gild  the  green  foliage 
oC  their  famoua  grovea"  (Stanley,  8jfr.  ani  Pal  p.  267). 
From  the  edge  of  the  aandy  tract,  which  fringea  tbe  im- 
mediate  shore  right  up  to' the  very  wali  of  the  hills  of 
Judah,  stretches  the  immenae  plain  of  oom-flelda.  In 
thoae  rich  hanreata  liea  the  expianation  of  the  conatant 
contests  between  Israel  and  the  Philirtinee  {Syr.  ani 
Pal,  p.  258).  From  them  were  gathered  the  enormous 
cazgoea  of  wheat  which  were  tranamitted  to  Phcenida 
by  Solomon  in  exchange-  for  the  arta  of  Hiram,  and 
which  in  the  time  of  the  Heroda  atiU  ^  nourished*'  the 
country  of  Tyre  and  Sidon  (Acta  xii,  20).  There  were 
the  oUve-tree8,  the  sycamore-trees,  and  the  treaaurea  of 
oil,  the  care  of  which  was  auflicient  to  taak  the  enerp^iea 
of  two  of  David*8  spedal  officers  (1  Chroń,  xxvii,  28). 
The  nature  of  this  locality  would  seem  to  be  reflected  in 
the  namea  of  many  of  ita  towns  if  interpreted  as  Hebrew 
words:  DUean=cucambers;  Gederah,  Gedernth,  Gede- 
rothaim,8heep-folds;  ZoreahjWaaps;  £x-ganmm,  spring 
of  gardens,  etc  But  we  have  yet  to  leam  how  far  these 
namea  are  Hebrew,  and  whether  at  best  they  are  but 
mero  Hebrew  accommodations  of  earlier  originala,  and 
therefore  not  to  be  depended  on  for  their  significations. 
The  number  of  dtiea  in  thia  district,  without  counting 
the  smaller  YiUagea  oonnected  with  them,  waa  forty-two. 
Of  theae,  however,  many  which  belonged  to  the  Philia- 
tines  can  only  have  been  allotted  to  the  tribe,  and,  if 
taken  poasession  of  by  Judah,  were  only  held  for  a  time. 
What  were  the  exact  boundariea  of  the  Shephelah  we 
do  not  know.  We  are  at  preaent  ignorant  of  the  princi- 
plea  on  which  the  andent  Jews  drew  their  boundariea 
between  one  tenitory  and  another.  One  thing  only  is 
almoat  oertain,  that  they  were  not  determined  by  the 
natural  features  of  the  ground,  or  dse  we  should  not  find 
cities  enumerated  as  in  the  lowland  plain  whose  mod- 
em represenutiYea  are  found  deep  in  the  mountaina. 
Sec  Jarmuth  ;  Jiphtah,  etc  (The  UOest  Information 
regarding  this  diatrict  is  oontained  in  Tobler^s  Ihrkie 
Wanderung,  1859.) 

8.  The  third  region  of  the  tribe— the  Mauntam,  the 
**  hill-country  of  Judah'*— though  not  the  richest,  was,  if 
not  the  largeat,  yet  the  most  important  of  the  four.  Be- 
ginning  oonsideraUy  bdow  Hebron,  it  stretches  north- 
ward  to  Jeruaalem,  eastward  to  the  Dead  Sea  slopes, 
and  weBtward  to  the  Shefelah,  and  forma  an  devated 
district  or  plateau,  which,  though  thrown  into  oonaidei^ 


able  imdalationB,  yet  preeeryea  a  generał  level  in  both 
directiona.  It  to  the  southem  portion  of  that  elevated 
hiUy  dtotrict  of  Palestine  which  stretehea  north  until 
intersected  by  the  plain  of  Esdradon,  and  on  which  He- 
bron, Jerusalem,  and  Shechem  are  the  chief  apots.  On 
every  dde  the  iq[>proachea  to  it  were  difficult,  and  the 
paasea  easily  defended.  The  towna  and  Yillages,  too, 
were  genendly  perched  on  the  tope  of  hiUs  or  on  rocky 
slopes.  The  resouroea  of  the  aoil  were  great  The 
country  waa  rich  in  com,  wuie,  oil,  and  fruite;  and  the 
daring  shepberda  were  able  to  lead  their  tiocka  far  out 
over  the  neighboring  plains  and  through  the  moimtaina. 
The  surface  of  thto  region,  which  is  of  limestone,  is  mo- 
notonous  enough.  Round  swelling  hiUs  and  hoUows^ 
of  somewhatbolder  proportions  than  those  immediately 
north  of  Jerusalem,  which,  though  in  early  timea  prob- 
ably  covered  with  forests  [see  Haretr],  have  now, 
where  not  cultivated,  no  growth  larger  than  a  brush* 
wood  of  dwarf-oak,  arbutua,  and  other  bushes.  In  many 
placea  there  to  a  good  soft  turf,  diacoverable  even  in  the 
autumn,  and  in  apring  the  hiUs  are  covered  with  flow- 
era.  The  number  of  towna  enumerated  (Josh.  xv,  48- 
60)  aa  bdonging  to  thto  dtotrict  to  thirty-eight,  but,  if 
we  may  judge  from  the  mins  which  meet  the  eye  on 
every  side,  thto  muat  have  been  very  far  below  the  real 
number.  Hardly  a  bill  which  to  not  crowned  by  sorae 
fregmenta  of  stone  buildings  more  or  less  considerable, 
those  which  are  still  inhabited  suirounded  by  grorea 
of  olive-tree8,  and  inclosurea  of  stone  walto  protecting 
the  Tineyarda.  Streama  there  are  nonę,  but  wells  and 
springa  are  frequent — in  the  neighborhood  of  *^Solo- 
mon*a  Pooto"  at  Urtaa  most  abundant  onea. 

4.  l*he  fourth  dtotrict  to  the  WUdemeu  {Midbar, 
which  here  and  there  only  appears  to  be  synonymoua 
with  Ardbah)^  the  sunken  district  immediately  ac^oin- 
ing  the  Dead  Sea  (Josh.  xv,  6),  aveniging  ten  milea  in 
breadth,  a  wild,  barren,  uninhabitable  region,  fit  only 
to  afford  scanty  pasturage  for  sheep  and  goata,  and  a 
secure  home  for  leoparda,  bears,  wild  goata,  and  outlawa 
(1  Sam.  xvii,  84 ;  Mark  i,  18 ;  1  Sam.  xxii,  1  sq.).  Dif- 
ferent  sections  of  it  were  called  by  different  names,  aa 
'<  Wildemeaa  of  Engedi"  (1  Sam.  xxiv,  1) ;  "  Wildemesa 
of  Judah"  (Jndg.  i,  16)  -,  *'  WUdemess  of  Maon"  (1  Sam. 
xxiii,  24 ;  aee  art.  Desert).  It  was  the  training-ground 
of  the  shepherd-warriors  of  Isrsel,  **  where  David  and 
hto  mighty  men"  were  braced  and  trained  for  those  feata 
of  daring  courage  which  so  highly  dtotingutohed  them. 
See  Bethubhem  ;  Da\id.  Ił  contained  only  six  dtiea, 
which  must  have  been  either,  like  Engedi,  on  the  edge 
of  the  clifb  overhanging  the  sea,  or  else  on  the  higher 
slopes  of  the  basin.  The  *•  dty  of  Salt"  may  have  been 
on  the  salt  plains,  between  the  sea  and  the  diffs  which 
form  the  southem  tormination  to  the  Ghor. 

Ninę  of  the  citiea  of  Judah  were  allotted  to  the  prieata 
(Josh.  xxi,  9-19).  The  Levite8  had  no  dtiea  in  the 
tribe,  and  the  priests  had  nonę  out  of  iL— Ritto;  Smith. 

The  following  to  a  tabulated  vtew  of  theae  subdiYisiona 
of  the  tribe,  with  the  dtics  in  each  group,  as  laid  down 
in  Joah.  xv^  21-68 : 

I.  "The  South"  (^SiStl),  or  Blmeonittoh  portion. 

1.  KabceeL  17  and  18.  Bealoth  or  Balah 

8.£der.  (Ramath  -  Nekeb).    and 

8.  Jngnr.  Bizjoth -Jah-Baalnh 

4.  Kioab.  (BaaUth-beer  or  Łehl). 

5  BImonah.  19.  liro. 

<L  Adadah.  20.  Aaem. 

7.  Kedesh  (Kadesh-Barnea).  21.  Eltolad. 

8.  Hazor.  S2.  Chesil  or  Bethul. 
9  and  10.  Ithnan-Zlph  or  28.  Ziklag. 

Zephath,   and    Hormah  94k  Madmaonah    or    Beth- 
(Hazor-addah).  marcaboth. 

11.  Telem.  8S.  Sansanuah  or  Hazor^eu- 

12.  Shema  or  Sheba  (Hasor-        sah. 

«h  nal).  8flw  Lebaoth  or  Beth-lebaoth. 

18.  Moladah.  27.  Shilhlm  or  Sbamba. 

14.  Heiihmon  or  Azmon.  28  and  20.  Ain-Rimmon  or 

15.  Beth-palet.  Bn-rimmon. 

16.  Beentheba. 

The  Yillflges  (1.)  Hazor-hadattah  and  (8.)  Kerioth-hea- 
ron,  or  Hazor-amam,  both  belonged  to  Haaor  proper; 
(8.)  Hasor-gaddah  to  Hazornihoal. 


JTJDAH 


1050 


JUDAH 


>    tw«eiL] 


Also  Cl.)  Bther  and  C9.}  Athan  oat  of  tiM  **TBibiltir  anb- 

dlYlBioii. 

n.  "The  Yalley-  (nbc«n),  or  PUrin. 

€k  Fint  groop^N.w'.  corner. 
1.  EshUol.  9.  AdnlUm. 

S.  Zoreah.  10.  Socoh. 

8.  Aehna.  11.  Asekah. 

4.  Zanoah.  IS.  SharaJm. 
e.  En-gamiim.                        1&.  AdlŁhalm. 
0.TappnalL                           14.0ederah    and    Gedero- 
T.  Enam.  thalm. 

8.  Jarmath. 

b.  Second  groap— aoath  of  the  abore,  In  the  wMt  part 
ofthetribe. 
1.  Zenan.  10.  Cabbon, 

5.  HadaBhata.  IL  Łahmam. 
a.  MlKdal-gad.                        12.  Kithllah. 

i:^!^  18.Gederoth 

C  Joktheel  Hno  1  copnlatlvo  !*•  Beth-dagon 
T.  Lachish  j    between.]         iS.Naamah. 
&  Boskath.  16.  Makkedah. 

».  Eglon. 
«.  Third  gronp— E.  of  groap  b  and  8.  otgranp  a:  In  the 

mlddle  of  ihe  tribe,  K  of  the  road  from  Eleotheropo- 

lis  to  JemnaleaL 
1.  Libnah.  A.  Nezlh. 

«.)  Bther.  7.  Kellah. 

(ilAshan.  8.Achzlb. 

4.  Jłphtah.  9.  Mareebab. 

fi.  Aabnah. 

d.  Foarth  gronp— Philistine  pentarch7y  on  the  Mediter> 
ranean  ehore. 

1.  Ekron  (really  in  Dan).  8.  Gaza. 

9.  Asbdod. 

etc.  (Ashkelon,  and  Gatb  [tbe  ]ast=:Mizpeh,  really  in  tbe 
"yalley"]). 

in.  "The  Monntalna"  Of^),  or  Higkland. 

a.  First  ^itrap— along  the  border  of  Simeon,  In  the 

1. 8hamir.  7.  Esbteniob. 

2.  Jattir.  8.  Anlm. 
8.  Socoh.  9.  Ooshen. 
4.  Dannah.  10.  Holon. 

6.  Kirjath-sannah=:Debir.  11.  Gilob. 
6.  Anah. 

b.  Second  gronp— N.  nf  sroap  a,  In  the  eoathem  part  of 
tbe  trlM,  aronnd  Hebron. 

1.  Arab.  6.  Aphekab. 

8.  I>aniah.  7.  Hnmtab. 

8.B8hean.  &  Kiijath-arba=Hebron. 

4.  Janam.  9.  Zior. 

6.  Beth-tappaah. 

e.  Third  gronp— E.  of  gronp  b. 
I.Maon    )Cno  1  copulatlTe   J  J**?!;?- 
•.Carmel[    between.]  luUTn      U"^  "^   "^^"^ 
8.Z!ph.  g  oibeah)    tire  between  J 
J-Jntuh.                                 loiTimnah. 

6.  Jezreel. 
<Ł  Fonrth  eronp— N.  of  groaps  b  and  c,  to  Jemsalem  on 
the  N.  Doandary. 

l.Halbnl    )  [no  1  copulatlve    l¥"/L™?Li. 
jLBe,h-xar[    between.!  JSlikT*^ 

8.  Gedor. 

e.  Fifth  gronp— in  the  N.  medial  angle,  between  gronp  d 
and  the  "  Yallcy"  dlstrict 
1.  Kiijath-baal=KirJath-Jear!ni. 

9.  Rabbah  (f  merely  a  title  of  Jerasalem). 

[/.  Gronp  added  In  the  Septnagint  between  d  and  •— 

sitnated  N.  of  gronp  «,  np  to  Jemsalem  —  probably 

shonld  be  added  to  «.] 

1.  Tekoah. 

9.  Ephrathahr=Bethlehem. 
8.  Phagor. 
4.  EtAih. 

6.  KnIoD[in  Benjamin]  [prób. 
spnrioas]. 


8.  Tatam. 


IV.  ' 


7.  Snres  (Thebet)  [in  Ben- 
iamin] [spnrions]. 

8.  Karem    (t  Beth-hacce- 
rem]. 

9.  Oallim  Hn  Benjamin]. 
10.  Bether  [Thether]. 
ll.Mennkah. 


*The  Wlldemess"  037^^)'  °'  ^^w^t- 

LBeth-arabah)  [no  1  copo.  J-S^?*^' 

[really    Ini     ,  ^,      T  4.  Nibshan. 

Benjamin]  (    1""^®  J*®"  B.  Ir-ham-Melach. 

2.Middiii         ;     tween.]  6.Bn.gedi. 
Snpplementary— Jebaa. 

The  foUowing  table  comprises  all  the  scriptural  local- 
ities  in  Judah  (excepŁ  those  in  Jemsalem),  with  their 
probable  or  ascertained  identiflcations. 

Aceldama«  Field.         See  Jkbusałsic. 

Achor.  Yalley.       Wady  Dabr  t 


Adwib. 

Adlihaim. 

AdoraTm. 

AdnllaoL 

Adnmmim. 

Anab. 

Anim. 

Aphekah. 

Aphrah. 

Arab. 

Asbdod. 

Ashkelon. 


Ashnah  (Joah.  zr,  48). 

Azekah  (Josb.  zy,  88). 

Acotna. 

Asiab. 

Baalah  OT  Baale. 

Baalah. 

Beer. 

Berachah. 

Betbanoth. 

Bethany. 

Beth-dagon. 

Bethel. 

Bether. 

Beth-eoeL 

Beth-gader. 

Beth-naccercm. 

Beth-le-Aphrah. 

Beth-Iehem. 

Bethphage. 

Betb-tappnah. 

Beth-car. 

Beaek. 

Bilhah. 

Boakath. 

Cabbon. 

Całn. 

Cpmel. 

Chesalon. 

Chealb. 

Dannah. 

Debir  (Josb.  zr,  48). 

Debir  (Josb.  zr,  7). 

Dileon. 

Dilean. 

Dlmonah. 

Bnmab. 

Eben-Bohan. 

Edar. 

Bgion. 

Eiah. 

Eltekon. 

Enam. 

En-gannluL 

En-gedL 

Ephes-dsmmfn. 

Ephrath  or  Ephrata. 

EebcoL 

Eshean. 

Eshtemoa. 

Etam. 

Gath. 

Gaaa. 

Geder. 

Gederah. 

Gederotb. 

Gederotbaim. 

Gedor. 

Oibeah. 

Gllon. 

Goshen. 

Goshen. 

Hnchilah. 

Hada^hah. 

Halhnl. 

Hareth. 

Hazezon-tamar. 

Hebron. 

Hepber. 

Holon. 

Hnmtah. 

Tr-nahash. 

Jabes. 

Jannm. 

Jarmnth. 

Jattir. 

Jebns. 

JehoTab-Jłreh. 

Jemel. 

Jerasalem. 

Jeehlmon. 

Jeshna. 

Jezreel. 

Jiphtah. 

Jnkdeam. 

JoktheeL 


Town. 
do. 
do. 
do. 
da 
do. 
do. 
da 
da 
do. 
do. 
da 
da 
da 
da 
da 

do. 

da 
Mount 
Town. 
YaDey. 
Town. 

da 

da 

da 
Xonnt 
Town. 

da 

da 

da 

do. 
TiUag^ 

Town. 
da 
da 
da 
da 
da 
da 
do. 
do. 
da 

da 
da 
da 

*     do. 

do. 

da 
Stone. 
Tower. 
Town. 
Yalley. 
Town. 

da 

da 

da 
Field. 
Town. 
Yalley. 

da 

do. 

da 

da 

do. 
Town. 

da 

da 

da 

do. 

do. 

do. 

da 
Dlstrict 
HUl. 
Town. 

do. 
Forest 
Town. 

do. 

do. 

da 

do. 

da 

da 

do. 

da 

da 

da 
Altar. 
Desert 
CIry. 
Desert 
Town. 

da 

da 

do. 

da 


SeaCnsiflL 
Dura. 

Amab. 
Okuwełn, 

Sae  Bsra-i.BiApiiBAa. 
IBI^Hadblt 


A»hdan. 
iBttt-Almm^f 
[DeirAbdn^i 
Ahbek. 
See  AsnT>oi>. 
See  Gaza. 

See  KiBJATn-JKABOL 
[TUZ  Uermuil  ? 
iDeir  Dubban^J 
WadpBerakuL 
Bett-Amm. 
El-Atariyth. 
IBeit-Jetjaj  * 
SeeBicmrŁ. 
Bitttrf 
IBttt^Danuilf 
See  Gkdek. 
Jebel  Fureiditf 
IBeit^AfaU 
BeO-Lakm. 
CS.  top   of  JeM.sC 
Tur]t 

BaUSur. 

[B.ofNnkhalio]rt 
See  Baalaii. 
[TWIi/Ms;/]? 
[£(-jrią/Ur]r 

JTurmiłŁ 

JTMa. 

CRoios  with  welli  ob 

W.Stlr]? 
ind-Dhokeniyeh\  * 
Khwrbet  td-Ihlhehf 
fN.B.ofWadyDabanr 
See  DiMOMAii. 

TiMOLt 

Sd.Dhś(br 

Dauim^h. 

[N.słdeofW.Dahr]? 

CS.ofBethlebeiiur 

AjUm. 

Wady  es-Stemf. 

[BeiiSttkur^J 

Weirti-ButmZf 

iRanajf 

Ain-Jidy, 

SeeEŁAn. 

See  BiTijusizsMa 

Ain^Eakałt 

Khurmf 

Semua. 

Urtmf 

IWtt-Sańekf 

GiauzeK 

See  Gkdob. 

Oketfrah, 

iBeU'TimaV 

See  OCDKKAIŁ 

Jedur, 

{Br/aiitehjf 

iRą/atn 

[DeirSh0m»l1 

ca  of  Kiiiaih-Jearijn]7 

C7W<  fiphl. 

Kl^arakt 

BaJOntL 

See  AaiTBOTB. 

See  Ekgfdi. 

BUKhmHU 

ilTm-Butj^ 

IBeOrAmra}! 

iSabtin  a-Almeh}? 

DeirNdthaz, 

See  KiBJATB^ifKABua 

iRaa  Jabnk}  t 

YarmmŁ 

Attir. 

8.  part  of  JsKraAUOL 

See  MoKiAo. 

[&B.orMlnea]? 

m-Kh^dM, 

See  JcBAH  (Deeert  oQi 

Yt$kmeL 

Utrrtwl]? 

(JYmrt-ti]? 

[Kd'Dar\l 


JUDAH 


lOSI 


JIJDAH 


Jordan. 


Jndffa. 


Jottah. 

Keilab. 

Kerioth. 

Kiijatta-Jearim 

Kfijath-orba  or  Kir-' 


Jath-Baal. 
Siij 


Kirłath-flaDnah  or 

Klriath-aepher. 
Kithlish. 

Łachish.  • 

LahmaiD. 
Libnab. 
Maarntta. 
Macpelftb. 
Makkedab. 
Mamre. 
Maon. 
Mareebab. 
Mekonalk 
Hiddlo. 


/Rlver. 
iPInln. 
(Mtfl. 
-<Det«ert 
(Vall«j. 
Town. 

do. 

do. 

da 

da 

da 

da 
da 
da 
do. 
da 

Cave. 

Town. 

Field. 

Town. 
da 
da 
da 


Sheriat  eŁ-Kebir. 

El-Ohor. 

Middle  ridge. 

Kplain. 

8ea-abore. 

Tutta. 

KOa. 

KureUHn. 

Ktaryai  el-Endbf 

See  Hkbsoh. 

See  DEsn. 

[Jelameh]  f 
UnuLakhia, 
[Beit^Ukia]1 
Arak  el-MMahiytht 
[Mertiid]  7 
See  IlRiiaOK. 

8ee  Hrbboit. 
7V//  Maia. 
Trtt  Meranh. 
[Jerośh]  * 
[iETAanJfordeA]? 


Mlgdal-gad. 
Mlzpeb. 

Moresbeth-gath. 
Naamab. 
Nephtoab. 
Netopbab. 
Nezlb. 
Nihsban. 
Babbah. 
Racbers  Tomb. 
Bamab  or  Rama-    \ 
thaim-cophim.        f 
Salt  City. 
Saphłr. 
Secacab. 

Sela-hammalekotb. 
Shaaraim  or  Staaraim. 
Shamir. 

Staocho  (Joeb.  XV|  48). 
SIddim. 
Slrah. 

Socoh  or  Shooob. 
Sorelc. 
Tappnah. 

Tekoab.       ^-■•-'-. - 
'  .  M    ; 


Town. 

See  Gatd. 

da 

da 

WarHanmhf 

do. 

[iV«»uiA]? 

Spring. 
Town. 

AinYalof 
ArUithnht 

da 

Beit  Kualb. 

aa 

[Ka»r  el'Leiman]f 

do. 

See  JnauBALiui. 

Sepnlcbre.  N.  of  Bethlebein. 

Town. 

Jiameht 

da 

iKhuUUim.Baghskit 

do. 

Eś-Sawa/Lrf 

da 

iKaar  Anłar}? 

Bock. 

See  Maon. 

Town. 

lShahfMh]1 

da 
da 

IStmia)? 
Shuweibeh. 

Vale. 

S.endofDeadSe&7 

WelL 

[S(uirah]1 

Town. 

Shuweikśh, 

Vallej. 

WadySifMint 

Town. 

!S2^*^^' 

'  /    'v 

t 

\ 

'  1  V  ) 


JUDAH 


1052 


JUDAH 


Tlmnah.  Town. 
Zaaoan.  do. 

Zanoah  (łn  Łhe  plaln).  do. 
Zanoah  (in  the  nills).  do. 
Zenan.  do. 

Zephathah.  VaUej. 

Ziklag.  Town. 
Zlor.  do. 

Zlph.  da 

Zi2.  CUff. 


Zoph. 


Dlatrict 


{iTmd-Amętlf 

See  ZwMAit'. 

Zannah. 

ZamUahf 

[Jenin}f 

Wady&ofSfaraahr 

Precipioe  W.  of  Aln 

Jldff 
See    Ramatkaim    Zo- 

PDIIf. 


JUDAH,  KiNODOM  OF.  When  the  territofy  of  all 
the  reat  of  Israelf  except  Jadah  and  Benjamin,  was  lost 
to  Łhe  kingdom  of  Rehoboam,  a  special  single  name  was 
needed  to  denote  that  which  remained  to  him ;  and  al- 
mo6t  of  necessity  the  word  Judah  received  an  extended 
meanlng,  according  to  which  it  oompiisednot  Benjamin 
only,  but  the  priests  and  Levite8,  who  were  ejected  in 
great  numbers  from  Israel,  and  rallied  round-the  honae 
of  David.  At  a  atill  later  time,  when  the  nationality 
of  the  ten  tribes  had  been  dissolred,  and  ereiy  practical 
distinction  between  the  ten  and  the  two  had  yanished 
during  the  captivity,  the  scattered  body  had  no  yisible 
head,  except  in  Jenualem,  whicJi  had  been  reocca^ed 
mostly  by  a  portion  of  Jndah^s  exile9.  See  Captiyitt. 
In  oonseąnence,  the  name  Judah  (or  Jew)  attached  it- 
aelf  to  the  entire  nation  from  abont  the  epoch  of  the 
restoration.  See  Jew.  But  in  this  artide  Judah  is 
understood  of  the  people  over  which  David*8  successors 
reigned,  from  Rehoboam  to  Zedekiah.  Our  sUtements 
are  chiefly  taken  from  Smith'8  Diet,  ofthe  BUfle,  s.  y. 

I.  ErterU  of  the  Kingdom.— When  the  disruption  of 
Solomon'8  kingdom  took  place 'at  Shechem,  only  the 
tńbe  of  Judah  followed  the  houae  of  David.  But  al> 
most  immediately  afterwards,  when  Rehoboam  conceiy- 
ed  the  design  of  establiahing  his  authority  over  larael 
by  force  of  arms,  the  tribe  of  Benjamin  alsc)  is  recorded 
as  obeying  his  summons,  and  coniributing  its  waniors 
to  make  up  his  army.  Jerusalem,  situate  within  the 
bordere  of  Benjamin  (Josh.  xviii.  28,  etc),  yet  won  from 
the  heathen  by  a  prince  of  Judah,  connected  the  fron- 
tiers  of  the  two  tribes  by  an  indissoluble  political  bond. 
By  the  erection  of  the  city  of  David,  Benjamin'8  former 
adherence  to  Israel  (2  Sam.  ii,  9)  was  canoelled,  thoogh 
at  least  two  Benjamite  towns,  I^thel  and  Jericho,  were 
included  in  the  northem  kingdom.  A  part,  if  not  all, 
of  the  torritory  of  Simeon  (1  Sam.  xxvii,  6;  1  Kinga 
xix,  3 ;  comp.  Josh.  xix,  1)  and  of  Dan  (2  Chroń,  xi,  10,- 
oomp.  Josh.  xix,  41,  42)  was  rccognised  as  belonging  to 
Judah  ^  and  in  the  reigns  of  Abijah  and  Asa  the  south- 
em  kingdom  was  enlarged  by  some  additions  taken  ont 
of  the  territory  of  Ephraim  (2  Chroń,  xiii,  19:  xv,  8; 
xvii,  2).  Afler  the  conąuest  and  deporution  of  Israel 
by  Assyria,  the  influence,  and  pcrhaps  the  delegated  ju- 
risdiction  of  the  king  of  Judah,  sometimes  extonded 
over  the  territory  which  formerly  belonged  to  laraeL 
See  Judzka. 

'  II.  Popukaion,—A  singtdar  gauge  of  the  growth  of 
the  kingdom  of  Judah  is  supplied  by  the  progressive 
augmentation  of  the  army  under  successiye  kings.  In 
David's  time  (2  Sam.  xxiv,  9,  and  1  Chroń,  xxi,  6)  the 
warriors  of  Judah  numbered  at  least  500,000.  But  Re- 
hoboam brought  into  the  field  (1  Kings  xii,  21)  only 
180,000  men ;  Abijah,  eighteen  years  aflerwards,  400,000 
(2  Chroń,  xiii,  3) ;  Asa  (2  Chroń,  xiv,  8),  his  suocessor, 
580,000,  exactly  cqual  to  the  sum  of  the  armies  of  his 
two  predecessors ;  Jehoshaphat  (2  Chroń,  xvii,  14-19), 
the  next  king,  numbered  his  warriors  in  five  armies,  the 
aggregate  of  which  is  1,160,000,  exactly  double  the 
army  of  his  father,  and  exactly  equal  to  the  sum  of  the 
armies  of  his  three  predccessors.  After  four  inglorions 
reigns,  the  energetic  Amaziah  could  muster  only  300,000 
men  when  he  set  out  to  recover  Edom.  His  son  Uzziah 
had  a  standing  (2  Chroń,  xxvi,  11)  force  of  807,500 
fighting  men.  It  would  be  out  of  place  here  to  discuss 
the  que8tion  which  has  been  raised  as  to  the  accuracy 
of  these  numbers.  See  Numbrr.  So  far  as  they  are 
anthentic,  it  may  be  safely  reckoned  that  the  popula- ! 


tłon  sabf  eet  to  each  khig  was  aboat  fonr  times  the  naa- 
ber  of  the  fighting  men  in  his  dominions.     See  Iabakl. 

KIHODOM  OP. 

III.  Remntrce».—Vnle»  Judah  had  some  other  means 
of  acquiiing  wealth  beaides  pasture  and  tillage — as  hy 
maritime  commerce  from  the  Red  Sea  ports,  or  (less 
probably)  from  Joppa,  or  by  keeping  up  the  oM  tiade 
(I  Kings  X,  28)  with  £gypt_it  seems  difficnlt  to  ac- 
oount  for  that  ability  to  accumnlate  wealth  whicfa  sup- 
plied the  Tempie  treasoiy  with  aufiicient  stoie  to  invite 
so  freqneotly  the  band  of  the  spotler.  Egypt,  Damascns, 
Samaria,  Nineveh,  and  Babylon  had  each  in  succession 
a  share  of  the  pillage.  The  treasuiy  was  emptied  by 
Shishak  (1  Kings  xiv,  26).  again  by  Asa  (1  Kings  xv, 
18),  by  Jehoash  of  Judah  (2  Kings  xii,  18),  by  Jeboash 
of  Israel  (2  Kings  xiv,  14),  by  Ahaz  (2  Kings  xvi,  8), 
by  Hezekiah  (2  Kings  xviii,  15),  and  by  Kebacfaadnes- 
zar  (2  Kings  xxiv,  13). 

lY.  Adcantagea  of  P(mtu>n,r-Jn  Edom  a  vas8al-king 
probably  reuined  his  fidelity  to  the  son  of  Solomon, 
and  guarded  for  Jewish  enteiprise  the  road  to  the  mari- 
time trade  with  Ophir.  Philistia  maintained,  for  the 
most  part,  a  qniet  independence.  Syria,  in  the  heigfat 
of  her  brief  powcr,  pushed  her  cońąnests  along  the 
northem  and  eastem  frontierB  of  Judah,  and  threatened 
Jerusalem :  but  the  interpońdon  of  the  tenitory  of  Is- 
rael generally  re]ieved  Jadah  from  any  immediate  coo- 
tact  with  that  dangeious  neighbor.  The  southem  bor- 
der  of  Judah,  resting  on  the  uninhabited  desert,  was  not 
ftgitated  by  any  turbulent  stream  of  oommercial  activity 
like  that  which  flowed  by  the  rear  of  Israel,  firatn  Da- 
mascus  to  Tyie.  Though  some  of  the  Egyptian  kings 
were  ambitipus,  that  ancient  kmgdom  was  lar  less  ag- 
gresiye  as  a  neighbor  to  Judah  than  Assyria  was  to  Is- 
rael 

The  kingdom  of  Judah  thns  posseased  many  advan- 
tages  which  secored  for  it  a  lougcr  continnaDce  than 
that  of  IsraeL  A  frontier  less  expoaed  to  powcrful  ene- 
mies,  a  soil  less  fertile,  a  population  hardier  aod  man 
united,  a  fixed  and  yenerated  centrę  of  administration 
and  religion,  a  hereditaiy  aristocrmcy  in  the  sacerdotal 
casto,  an  army  always  subordinate,  asoccession  of  kings 
which  no  revolution  intenupted,  many  of  whom  were 
wise  and  good,  and  stroye  successfully  to  promote  the 
rooral  and  spiritoal  as  well  as  the  materiał  prosperity  of 
their  people «  still  morę  than  these,  the  devotion  ofthe 
people  to  the  One  True  God,  which,  if  not  always  a  pnre 
and  eleyated  sentiment,  was  yet  a  oontrast  tosuch  de- 
yotion  as  could  be  inspired  by  the  worship  of  the  calycs 
or  of  Baal ;  and,  lastly,  the  popular  reyerance  for  and 
obedience  to  the  divine  law  so  far  as  they  leamed  it 
from  their  teachers— to  these  and  other  secońdaiy  causcs 
is  to  be  attńbuted  the  fact  that  Jadah  survived  her 
morę  populous  and  morę  powerfnl  sister  kingdom  bv 
186  years,  and  lasted  from  RC.  975  to  RC.  586.  (Sec 
Bemhardy,  De  catuis  guibu*  effeetum  sił  quod  frgmm 
Judm  diutuu  peniałfret  CMom  rtgn,  ItraeL  in  the  A  mwiA 
Acad.  Groning,  1822-28,  p.  124  sq. ;  also  Lovan.  1824; 
Schmeidler,  Der  Untergang  d.  Radu  Juda^  IkesL  1831.) 

y.  Hit(<ny„—FoT  the  circumstances  that  led  to  the 
sehism,  and  for  a  comparison  with  the  histoafy  of  the 
rival  kingdom,  see  Israel,  kingdom  of.  For  a  further 
examination  of  the  many  chronological  difficułtics  aris- 
ing  from  the  double  list  of  kings,  see  Chronology. 
The  annals  of  the  kingdom  wiU  be  found  detailed  under 
the  name  of  the  seveiml  kings,  and  a  generał  Wew  un- 
der the  artides  Jbrusamcm,  and  Palestroc.  (S«e 
White,  Kmgs  of  Judah  and  Israel^  Lond.  1868 ;  HesMT, 
Biograpkies  ąf  King$  of  Judak,  Lond.  1865;  Hess,  Gt- 
tchichte  der  Kómge  Juda  und  larael,  Ztkrich,  1787 ;  also 
Ge»cX  der  Regenten  Juda  nach  dem  Exil,  ib.  1788.)  It 
will  be  sufficient,  as  a  renumiy  here  to  noticc  the  ftrt 
that  the  kingdom  of  Judah,  in  the  cooise  of  its  histon-, 
acted  upon  three  different  lines  of  policy  in  suoccerion. 

1.  Ammońti/  againai  the  rwał  Kingdom  of  IsrutL-^ 
The  first  three  kings  of  Judah  seem  to  have  chervhed 
the  hope  of  re-establishing  their  aothority  oyer  the  Ten 


JUDAH 


1053 


JUDAH 


Tribes;  for  sizty  yean  there  was  war  between  them 
and  the  kings  of  InaeL  Neither  the  disiianding  of  Be- 
hoboam's  forces  by  the  authority  of  Shemaiah,  nor  the 
pilUige  of  Jeruaalem  by  the  irreaistible  Shishak,  aenred 
to  put  an  end  to  the  fratemal  hoatility.  The  yictory 
achieyed  by  the  daring  Abijah  brought  to  Judah  a  tem- 
porary  aoceańon  of  teiritrar^'.  Asa  appean  to  have  en- 
laiged  it  stUl  further,  and  to  have  given  so  powerful  a 
stimiilus  to  the  migration  of  religious  laraelites  to  Jeru- 
aalem that  Baasha  was  induced  to  fortify  Ramah  with 
a  view  to  checking  the  moyement.  Asa  proWded  for 
tbe  aafety  of  hia  subjecta  from  inraders  by  bullding^ 
like  Rehoboam,  serend  fenc^  cities;  he  repelled  an 
alarming  imiption  of  an  Ethiopian  hordę,  he  hired  the 
anned  intervention  of  Benhadad  I,  king  of  Damascus, 
against  Baasha;  and  he  diBCoaraged  idolatry  and  en- 
fbrced  the  worship  of  the  tnie  God  by  serere  penal  lawa. 
(See  Jiinge,  Bella  inter  Judam  et  /sraeL  Tub.  1716.) 
.  "L  RetUtcmee  (^eneralfy  in  AlUfmce  mik  Urael)  to 
DamtueuB, — Hanani's  remonstranoe  (2  Chroń,  xvi,  7) 
prepares  us  for  the  rerersal  by  Jehoshaphat  of  the  pol- 
icy  which  Aaa  purBned  towarda  larael  and  DamaBcna. 
A  cloee  alliance  sprang  up  with  atrange  npidity  be- 
tween Judah  and  laraeL  For  eighty  yean,  till  the  time 
of  Amaziah,  there  waa  no  open  war  between  them,  and 
PamaBcoa  appears  aa  their  chief  and  oommon  enemy, 
though  it  roee  afterwards  from  ita  oyerthrow  to  beoome, 
under  Resdn,  the  ally  of  Pekah  againat  Ahaz.  Jehoah- 
aphat,  active  and  proeperous,  repelled  nomad  inradera 
in>m  tbe  deaert,  curbed  the  aggrenive  apirit  of  his 
nearer  neighbors,  and  madę  hia  influence  fdt  eyen 
among  the  Philiatines  and  Arabiana.  A  still  morę  last- 
ing  benefit  was  oonferred  on  hia  kingdom  by  his  peiae- 
yering  efforta  for  the  religioua  inatruction  of  the  people 
and  the  regolar  administration  of  juntioe.  The  reign 
of  Jehoram,  the  hnaband  of  Athaliah,  a  time  of  blood- 
ahed,  idolatry,  and  diaaster,  waa  cnt  ahort  by  diaease. 
Ahaziah  waa  alain  by  Jehu.  Athaliah,  the  grand- 
daughter  of  a  Tyrian  king,  uaurped  the  blood-atained 
throne  of  David,  till  the  followera  of  the  ancient  relig- 
ion  put  her  to  death,  and  crowned  Jehoaah,  the  8urviv- 
ing  scion  of  the  royal  houae.  Hia  preseryer,  the  high- 
priest,  acquired  prominent  personal  influence  for  a  time ; 
but  the  Idng  feU  into  idolatry,  and  failing  to  withatand 
the  power  of  Sjrria,  waa  mnrdered  by  his  own  ofiicers. 
The  Yigoroua  Amaziah,  flnahed  with  the  rictoiy  of 
Edom,  proToked  a  war  with  hia  morę  powerful  oontem- 
porary  Jehoaah,  the  oonqneror  of  the  Syriana,  and  Je- 
ruaalem waa  entered  and  plundered  by  the  laraditea. 
But  their  eneigiea  were  aufficiently  occupied  in  the  taak 
of  completing  the  aubjugation  of  Damaacua.  Under 
Uasiah  and  Jotham,  Judah  long  enjoyed  political  and 
religious  proapeiity  till  the  wanton  Ahaz,  aurroundcd  by 
nnited  enemiea,  with  whom  he  was  unable  to  cope,  be- 
came  in  an  evil  hour  the  tributary  and  raaaal  of  Tig- 
lath-PUeaer. 

8.  Defermioe,  perktgM  Vcu»alagey  to  the  Auyrian 
J^in^.— Already  in  the  fatal  grasp  of  Asayria,  Judah  waa 
yet  apared  for  a  checkered  exiatence  of  almoat  another 
centuiy  and  a  half  after  the  termination  of  the  kingdom 
of  laraeL  The  effect  of  the  repulae  of  Sennacherib,  of 
the  aignal  religioua  revivala  under  Hezekiah  and  Joaiah, 
and  of  the  extenaion  of  these  kingą'  aalutary  influence 
over  the  k>ng-flevered  territory  of  larael,  waaapparently 
done  away  by  the  igiiominioua  reign  of  the  impioua 
Manaaaeh,  and  the  lingering  decay  of  the  whole  people 
under  the  fuur  feeble  deacendanU  of  Joaiah.  Provoked 
l^  their  treachery  and  imbectlity,  their  Babylonian  raaa- 
ter,  who  had  meanwhile  aucceeded  to  the  dominion  of 
the  Aasyriana,  drained,  in  auccesaire  deportations,  all  the 
atrength  of  the  kingdom.  The  conaummation  of  the  ruin 
came  upon  them  in  the  deatruction  of  the  Tempie  by  the 
band  of  Nebuzaradan,  amid  the  wailing  of  propheta  and 
the  taunta  of  heathen  tribea  releaaed  at  length  from  the 
yoke  of  Dayid. 

YI.  Morał  i^ta^e.— The  national  life  of  the  Hebrewa 
appeared  to  beoome  gradually  weaker  duiing  theae  auc- 


ceaaiye  atagea  of  hiatory,until  at  length  it  aeemed  ex* 
tinct ;  bia  there  waa  atill,  aa  there  had  been  all  along,  a 
apiritual  life  hidden  within  tbe  body.  It  waa  a  time  of 
hopeleaa  darkneaa  to  all  but  thoae  Jewa  who  had  atrong 
faith  in  God,  with  a  elear  and  ateady  inaight  into  the 
waya  of  Providence  aa  interpreted  by  prophecy.  The 
time  of  the  diviaion  of  the  kingdoma  waa  the  gulden  age 
of  prophecy.  In  each  kingdom  the  prophetical  oflice 
waa  aubject  to  peculiar  modificationa  which  were  re- 
quired  in  Judah  by  the  circumatancea  of  the  priesthood, 
in  larael  by  the  exiatenoe  of  the  houae  of  Baal  and  the 
altar  in  BetheL  If,  luider  the  ahadow  of  the  Tempie, 
there  waa  a  depth  and  a  graap  elawhere  unequailed,  in 
the  riewa  of  laaiah  and  the  propheta  of  Judah;  if  their 
writinga  touched  and  ele\'afed  the  hearta  of  thinking 
men  in  8tu(^ou8  retirement  in  the  ailcnt  night-watchea, 
there  waa  also,  in  the  fćw  buming  worda  and  energetic 
deeda  of  the  propheta  of  larael,  a  power  to  tamę  a  law- 
leaa  multitude  and  to  check  the  high-handcd  tyranny 
and  idolatry  of  kingą.  The  organization  and  morał  in- 
fluence of  the  prieathood  were  matured  in  the  time  of 
David ;  from  about  that  time  to  the  building  of  the 
aecond  Tempie  the  influence  of  the  propheta  roae  and 
became  predominant  Some  historiana  have  auapected 
that  after  the  reign  of  Athaliah,  the  prieathood  gradu- 
ally acąuired  and  retained  ezceaaiye  and  unconatitu- 
tional  power  in  Judah«  The  recorded  facta  acarcely  aua- 
tain  the  oonjecture.  Had  it  been  ao,  the  eifect  of  auch 
power  would  have  been  manifest  in  the  exorbitant 
wealth  and  luxury  of  the  prieata,  and  in  the  constant 
and  cruel  enforcement  of  penal  lawa,  like  those  of  Asa, 
againat  irrdigion.  Bui  the  peculiar  offencea  of  the 
prieathood,  aa  witneaaed  in  the  prophetic  writinga,  were 
of  another  kind.  Ignorance  of  God'a  word,  neglect  of 
the  inatruction  of  the  laity,  untruthfulneaa,  and  partial 
judgmenta,  are  the  offences  apecially  imputed  to  them, 
just  auch  aa  roight  be  looked  for  where  the  prieathood 
ia  a  hereditaiy  caate  and  irretponaible,  but  neither  am- 
bitlous  nor  powerfuL  When  the  prieat  either,  aa  was 
the  caae  in  larael,  abandoned  the  land,  or,  aa  in  Judah, 
ceaaed  to  be  really  a  teacher,  oeaaed  from  apiritual  com- 
mnnion  with  God,  ceaaed  from  liying  aympathy  with 
man,  and  became  the  merę  image  of  an  interceaaor,  a 
mechanical  performer  of  ceremoniał  dutiea  little  undei^ 
atood  or  heeded  by  himaelf,  then  the  prophet  waa  raised 
up  to  aupply  aome  of  hia  deficienciea,  and  to  exerci8e  hia 
functiona  ao  tar  aa  waa  nece88ar>%  Whilat  the  prieata 
aink  into  obacurity  and  almoat  diaappear,  except  from 
the  genealogical  tablea,  the  propheta  come  forward  ap- 
pealing  eyerywhere  to  the  conacicnce  of  indiyiduala — in 
larael  aa  wonder-workera,  calling  together  God'a  choaen 
few  out  of  an  idolatroua  nation,  and  in  Judah  aa  teach- 
era  and  aeera,  aupporting  and  purifying  all  that  remain- 
ed  of  ancient  piety,  exp]aining  each  myaterioua  dispen- 
aation  of  God  aa  it  waa  unfolded,  and  promulgating  hia 
gracioua  apiritual  promiaea  in  all  their  extent  The 
part  which  laaiah,  Jeremiah,  and  other  propheta  took  in 
preparing  the  Jewa  for  their  captiyity,  cannot,  indeed, 
be  fully  appreciated  without  reviewing  the  succeeding 
efforta  of  Ezekiel  and  Daniel.  But  the  influence  which 
they  exerciaed  on  the  national  mind  waa  too  important 
to  be  oyerlooked  in  a  aketch,  however  brief,  of  the  hia- 
tory  of  the  kingdom  of  Judah.     See  Prophet. 

JUDAH,  M0UNTAIN8  OF.  Thia  ia  appropriately  the 
name  of  a  rangę  of  hills  to  the  aoath  and  weat  of  Jeru- 
aalem, atyled  m  Lukę  i,  89, 65,  the  "  hill-country  of  Ju- 
daea"  (yi  ópttvĄ  rr/c  'lovcaiac),  The  hilla  are  Iow  and 
oonical,  uniform  in  ahape  eyen  to  wearineaa;  the  vege- 
tation,  aaye  in  early  apring,  ia  dry  and  parched,  the  val- 
leya  are  broad  and  featureleaa.  Eyerywhere  at  the  prea- 
ent  day  are  aigna  that  the  land  of  com,  and  winę,  and 
oil  haa  beoome  deaolate.  The  fenced  citica  and  yiUagea 
aurmotmt  the  hill8,but  they  are  in  ruina;  the  terracea 
where  once  were  yineyarda  and  comfielda  can  be  traced 
along  the  mountain  aidea,  but  they  are  neglected ;  wella 
and  poola  of  water  are  to  be  found  in  eyery  yalley,  but 
there  ia  nonę  to  drink  of  them.    See  Judah,  tbibk  of. 


JUDAH 


1054         JUDAH  HAK-KODESH 


JUDAH,  W11.DISRNBS8  op.  The  deeert  of  Jodah 
(Jiniinji  ■^a'!?)  '^  mentioned  in  the  title  of  Psa.  bdii, 
juid  the  deseit  of  Judsa  {al  tptfiat^  or  t)  tptjfioc  rijc  'lov 
iaiac)f  frequently  referreid  to  in  the  gospels,  is  couńder- 
ed  to  be  the  same  locality.  It  was  situated  adjacent  to 
the  Dead  Sea  and  the  Ri ver  Jordan,  and  was  a  mountain- 
GUS  and  thinly-uihabited  tracŁ  of  countiy,  but  abound- 
ing  in  pastures.  In  the  time  of  Joshoa  it  had  8ix  cit^ 
ies,  with  their  villages  (Joeh.  xv,  61, 62),  but  it  is  now, 
and  has  long  been,  one  of  the  most  dreary  and  desolate 
regions  of  the  whole  country  (Kobin8on'8  Re^earcheś,  ii, 
202, 310).  The  positions  of  this  desert  speciaUy  alluded 
to  in  the  K.  T.  are,  (1.)  That  in  which  John  the  Baptist 
grew  up,  probably  west  of  the  Dead  Sea  (Lukc  i,80 ;  iii, 
2)  ;  (2.)  That  where  he  baptized,  L  e.  the  uninhabited 
tiact  along  the  Jordan  (MatL  iii,  1 ;  Mark  i,t ;  compare 
5);  (3.)  That  where  Jesus  was  tempted,  perhaps  the 
high  desert  west  of  Jericho  (MatL  iv,  1 ;  Mark  i,  12, 18) ; 
(4.)  The  tract  between  the  Mount  of  01ive8  and  Jericho, 
probably  referred  to  in  Acts  xxi,  38  (see  Josephus,  Ant, 
XX,  8, 6) ;  (5.)  The  tract  adjacent  to  the  city  Ephraira, 
probably  Tayibeh,  towards  the  Jordan  (John  xi,  54). 
See  Jud  AU,  tribb  of. 

JUDAH  UPON  JORDAN  (T?7?n  078^0%  Judak 
o/ths  Jordan;  Sept.  and  Vulg.  in  most  editions  omit 
**  Judah"  altogether),  is  mentioned  as  the  extreme  east- 
em  limit  of  the  territory  of  Naphtali  (but  not  within  it), 
apparently  on  its  northem  bóundary  (Josh.  xix,  84),  and 
therefore  probably  referring  to  a  tract  immediately  east 
of  that  around  the  sources  of  the  Jordan,  between  Monnt 
Hermon  and  Banias.  Schwarz  {Palutine^  p.  185)  plau- 
sibly  exphuns  the  application  of  the  name  of  Judah  to 
a  region  so  far  distant  from  the  territoiy  of  that  tribe 
by  assigning  it  as  the  title  to  the  Gileaditish  district  em- 
braced  in  the  circuit  of  the  towns  of  Hawth^air,  i.  e. 
the  villages  of  Jair,  who  was  a  descendant  of  Judah  (1 
Chroń,  ii,  21)  <  and  he  adduces  Taknudical  authorities 
for  reckoning  his  poesessions  as  a  part  of  that  tribe.  See 
Jair.  The  same  explanation  had  been  soggested  by  C 
von  liaumer  (cited  by  Keil,  Comnunt,  on  Jotfu  ad  loc.). 
Dr.  Thomson  [Land  and  Book,  i,  889  8q.)  speaks  of  three 
interesting  domes  in  this  vicinity,  called  those  of  Seid 
Yehuda  (i.  e.  "  Lord  Judah,"  the  Arabs  traditionally 
holding  that  they  represent  the  tomb  of  the  son  of  Ja- 
cob),  which  he  believe8  is  a  dew  to  the  connection  of 
this  city  with  the  tribe  of  the  same  name. 


Tombs  of"Seid  Yehnda." 


2.  One  of  the  Levite8  who  retnmed  from  Rabvlon 
with  Zerubbabel  (Neh.  xii.  8).  Ra  686.  It  w  perhaps 
he  whose  sons  are  alluded  to  (but  unnamed)  as  aiding 


the  priesta  in  poahing  the  reoonatmction  of  tbe  Tenpk 
(£aniii,9);  unleaa  this  latter  be  rather  the  pecwn  ekfr- 
where  called  Hodayiah  (Ezra  ii,  40). 

3.  One  of  thoee  who  foUowed  the  balf  of  the  Jewidi 
chiefs  arowid  the  southem  section  of  the  newly-erecud 
walls  of  Jeroaalem,  but  whether  he  was  a  Levite  or  priot^ 
is  not  stated  (Neh.  xii,  84).    KC  446. 

4.  One  of  thoee  who  acoompanied  with  musical  per- 
formances  the  procession  around  the  southem  ąnartcr 
of  the  walls  of  Jerusalem  lately  reconstructed  (Neh.  xii, 
86).  B.C.  446.  He  was  perhaps  identical  with  tbe  pte- 
oeding. 

5.  Son  of  Senuah,  a  descendant  of  Benjamin,  and  pie- 
fect  of  Acra  or  the  Lower  City  (HSllJp  *^^?«7"^?ł  otw 
the  teoond  cUy,  not  **  second  over  the  city,"  as  the  Aatłc 
Yers.  following  the  Sept.  and  Yulg.)  after  the  esile  (Neh. 
xi,  9).     B.a  cir.  440. 

Jndah  hak-Kodesh,  or  the  Hoiy,  son  of  Simon, 
of  the  tribe  of  Benjamin,  and  a  descendant  of  Hilkl  t, 
ia  one  of  the  moat  celebńted  characten  in  Jewish  lua- 
toiy.    He  was  bom  at  Tiberiaa,  according  to  accoanta» 
about  185,  on  the  same  day  on  which  Rabbi  Akiba  suf- 
fered  martyrdom— an  event  predicted,  aooofding  to  hk 
admireiB,  in  the  verBe  of  Solomon :  **  One  sun  ariseth, 
and  one  sun  goeth  down.**    While  yet  a  youth  he  was, 
on  aooount  of  his  extraordinary  prodciency  in  Jewiak 
law,  admitted  to  the  Sanhedrim,  and  on  the  death  of 
his  father  followed  him  in  the  presidency  of  that  leamed 
body.    The  manner  in  which  he  adminiatered  the  dn- 
ties  of  this  high  office  was  in  itself  aufficient  to  win  ićr 
him  *^  the  praiae  of  his  people  in  all  their  generatiooa.^ 
Maimonid^  deecribea  him  as  having  been  a  man  ao  no- 
bly  gifted  by  the  Almighty  with  the  choiceat  endow- 
menta  as  to  be  the  phoeoix  and  ornament  of  his  age. 
But  the  best  eridenoe  of  the  high  estimatlou  in  which 
his  contempoiariea  held  him  ia  afforded  by  the  many 
favorabIe  epitheta  which  they  fastened  on  him.     Besides 
the  title  of  Nasi,  which  his  position  as  president  of  ihe 
Sanhedrim  secnred  him,  he  was  morę  geneimlly  known 
as  **  Rabbi,"  which  was  applied  tu  him  Kar    iKoxvvt 
with  no  further  notę  of  individual  disŁinction.     He  was 
known  as  the  **saint,"  the  **  holy  one,"  the  meek.     Be- 
ing,  like  Hillel  I,  of  the  honae  of  David,  be  sametimes 
was,  as  Bar-Cocheba  had  previou8ly  been,  looked  npon 
as  the  promised  Mesaiah.    But  this  opinion  waa,  after 
all,  oondned  only  to  a  few.    Certau  it  is,  however,  ihat 
he  exerted  an  influence  o\-er 
tbe  Jewish  nation  of  hia  day 
far  wider  and  morę  pometfal 
in  ita  extent  than  had  ever 
fallen  to  tbe  lot  of  any  Naa, 
even  any  member  of  his  house 
ainoe  the  daya  of  HiUeL    This 
may  be  due  perhaps   noc  90 
much  to  his  vast  erudition  u 
to  his  wealth,  whidi  enabled 
him  to  become  the  aopporter 
of  hundreda  and  thonsands  of 
poor  youths,  who,  after  tber 
had  sat  at  his  feet,  went  out 
all  over  the  Jewish  abodes  to 
sound  aloud  the  praiaes  of  their 
noble  master  and  teacher  in 
Israel.     But  Judah  hak-Ko- 
deah  has  far  greater  daima  for 
our  considcration :  he  has  built 
himself  a  lar  morę  enduring 
monument  as  the  Moaes  oflater 
Rabbinism  (q.  v.),  aa  the  coin> 
piler  of  the  Mishna  (q.  v. ),  or 
oode  of  traditiooal  law,  the  em- 
bodiment  of  all  the  authoriz«d 
interpretationa  of  the  Massie 
law,  the  traditions,  the  decislons  of  the  leamed.  and  ibe 
prpcedenffl  of  the  courts  or  scfaools — a  sort  of  Jetcitk  Pan- 
dects,    **  In  attempting  this  Herculean  taak,"  says  Eth- 


JUDAH  JUDGHAN 


1055 


JUDAISM 


eridge  (InirotL  Jewiak  UL  p*  88),  '^he  may  luive  been 
mored  by  the  peculuur  oonditioii  of  the  Jewish  oommmu- 
ty.  Tbey  wezB  a  Bcattered  people,  liable  at  any  hour  to 
the  lenewU  of  a  wasting  pcnecatJon,  and  maintaioing 
their  leligiouB  standing  in  the  preeence  of  au  erer^d- 
Tancing  Chiifltianityi  and  in  defiance  of  the  menacea  of 
«  world  which  alwąys  yiewed  them  with  hatred.  Their 
achoolfl)  tolerated  to-day,  might  to-monow  be  onder  the 
imperial  interdict,  and  the  lipa  of  the  Babbina,  which 
DOW  kept  the  knowledge  of  the  law,  beoome  dumb  by  the 
terror  of  the  oppieesor.  Theae  drcumetanoes  poaaeased 
him  with  the  apprehenaion  that  the  traditionalleaming 
receiyed  firom  their  iathers  would,  without  a  fized  me- 
moriał, at  no  diatant  time  be  either  greatly  oornipted 
or  altogether  periah  from  amoog  them.  It  waa  his  wiah 
also  to  fumiah  the  Hehrew  people  with  such  a  docu- 
mentaiy  oode  aa  wonld  be  a  aufficient  guide  for  them, 
not  only  in  the  affaira  of  religion,  but  alao  in  their  deal- 
ings  with  one  another  in  dTil  life,  so  aa  to  render  it  un- 
neoeieary  for  them  to  hav6  reooune  to  suita  at  law  at 
the  beathen  tribunala.  In  addition  to  these  motiyea, 
ho  was  próbably  actuated  alao  by  the  pievaiUng  apirit 
of  Godi&Mtion,  which  waa  one  of  the  charaeteiistics  of 
the  age.  Legał  adence  waa  in  the  aaeeodant,  and  the 
great  law-echoola  of  JEU>me,  Berytua,  and  Alezandria 
were  in  their  meiidian;  and  Judah,  who  lored  hia  law 
better  tban  they  could  theira,  wiahed  to  give  it  the  aame 
adrantagea  of  aimplification,  ayatem,  and  immutability 
which  auch  juriata  aa  Salyioa  Julianna  had  aooompUahed 
for  the  Boman  lawa  in  the  time  of  Hadrian,  and  Ulpian 
waa  laboring  at  in  hia  own  day."  The  Miahna  ia  diyi- 
ded  into  aix  parta  (sedarim) :  the  firat  treata  of  agricnl- 
turę,  the  aecond  of  featirala,  the  third  of  marriagea,  the 
fourth  of  civil  afEura,  the  fifth  of  aacrifieea  and  religioua 
oeremoniea,  and  the  aixth  of  legał  purification.  The 
teact  waa  publiahed  with  ahort  gloaaea  at  Amaterdam 
(1681, 8vo),  and  ofben  reprinted,  with  morę  or  kaa  ex- 
tenaire  commentatiea,  at  Amaterdam,  Yenioe,  Conatan- 
tinople,  etc.  (See  a  list  of  the  editiona,  tranalations, 
etc,  in  Funt,  BibUotk,  Judaica,)  Hia  laat  daya  Judah 
hak-Kodeah  apent  at  Sepphoria,  whither  he  remored  on 
account  of  hia  failing  health.  The  exact  datę  of  hia 
death  ia  no(  known,  but  it  muat  have  oocurred  between 
190  and  194.  He  ia  frequent1y  apoken  of  aa  a  friend 
and  oontemporary  of  one  of  the  emperoia  Antoninua, 
generally  suppoaed  to  be  Marcua  Anreliua,  but  Grłltz 
and  other  critica  are  inclined  to  doubt  the  poaaibility  of 
an  intimate  relation  between  thia  head  of  the  Jewiah 
Church  and  a  Roman  emperor.  See,  however,  Bodeck, 
M»A.A Htmunus  aU  Frtund  tu  Zettgenoue  des  R,  Jehuda 
korNoH  (Lpz.  1868) ;  Canttmp, Raf,  1869, p.81  aq. ;  Griltz, 
Get^iekte  d.  Juden^  iv,  246  aq.  See  alao  Schneebeifrer, 
Life  and  Worka  of  Rabbi  Jehuda  ha-NoH  (Beri.  1870) ; 
Joet,  Gesch,  d,  Judmth,  u. «.  Sekten,  ii,  426  aq.  (J.  H.W.) 
Jndah  Judghan,  thb  Persiaw,  one  of  the  moat 
oelebrated  of  the  Karaitea,  afterwarda  himaelf  the  found- 
er  of  an  independent  Jewiah  aect,  flouriahed  probably 
about  the  first  half  of  the  9th  centnry,  in  the  city  Ha- 
madan,  in  Peraia.  Hia  opponenta  aay  of  him  that  he 
waa  of  Iow  dcacent,  and  that  hia  early  yeara  were  apent 
aa  a  tender  of  camcla,  bat  the  leaming  he  displayed  and 
hia  intimate  knowledge  of  Mohammedaniam  make  tbia 
report  doubtfni.  We  know  nothing  deAnitely  of  him 
until  he  appeared  before  hia  countrymen  with  the  dec- 
laration  that  he  waa  the  foremnner  of  the  Meseiah,  and 
preached  the  doctrine  of  finee-will,  and  non-intervention 
of  God  in  roundane  affaira.  He  alao  argtied  that  Sab- 
batha  and  festivala  were  no  longer  to  be  kept,  aa  they 
had  been  done  away  with  by  the  diapersion  of  the  cho- 
aen  people,  enjoining,  howerer,  at  the  aame  time,  a  Itfe 
of  atrict  aaceticiam.  Preaching,  aa  be  did,  under  the 
▼eiy  ahadow  of  Mohammedaniam,  doctrinea  rery  much 
akin  to  it  (comp.  Mutazilites),  he  found  ready  con- 
verta,  and  hia  foUowera  increaaed  rapidly.  They  contin- 
aed  faithfnl  even  after  hia  deceaae,  believing  (like  the 
•Shtitea  of  Ali)  that  he  did  not  die  a  natural  death,  and 
{hal  he  waa  to  reappear  and  giye  to  Judaiam  a  new  law. 


TheJtftftUAanśtef  (q.  v.)  may  be  conaidefed  aa  a  branch 
of  thia  aect.  For  further  detaila,  aee  Furst,  Geaekichte  d, 
Kardertkunuj  p.  26  8q.;  Gratz,  Geach,  der  Juden,  v,  227 
Bq.,516  8q.     (J.H.W.) 

Judah  (or  Jnd&),  Leo,  one  of  the  Swiaa  reform- 
era,  waa  bom  at  Gennar,  in  Alaace,  in  1482.  His  father*a 
name  waa  John  Jud,  but  whether  of  Jewiah  deacent, 
Leo  himaelf  tella  na  he  waa  nnable  to  aay.  The  name, 
however,  expoaed  him  to  rbproach,  and  perhapa  for  thia 
reaaon  we  find  him  aometimea  deaignating  himaelf  aa 
Leo  KeUer;  in  ZUrich  he  waa  known  aa  Meiater  Lów, 
and  thia  name  hia  deacendanta  adopted.  He  was  edu- 
cated  for  the  medical  profession,  but  through  the  in- 
fluence of  Zwingle  foisook  thia  for  the  clericaL  He 
aucceeded  the  latter  in  the  church  of  Notre  Damę 
des  £rem!tea,  and  finaUy  became  hia  aaaociate  at  Ztt- 
rich.  Together  they  entered  zealoualy  on  their  work 
of  reform,  and  Judah  contributed  no  little  to  the  spread- 
ing  and  propagating  of  Zwinglian  ideaa.  With  the 
great  reformer  he  appeared  at  the  aecond  conference 
in  ZUrich  (1523),  and  together  they  rcplied  to  all  who 
defended  the  worahip  of  imagea  and  the  celebration 
of  the  maaa  aa  a  aacrifice.  Judah  died  June  19, 1542. 
He  madę  a  tranalation  of  the  greater  part  of  the  Old 
Testament  from  the  Hebrew  text,  and  alao  of  the  New 
from  the  Greek.  It  waa  completed  by  Bibliander  and 
Peter  Cbolin,  and  reviewed  by  Pellicanua  (ZUrich,  1548; 
reprinted  at  Paria,  with  the  Yulgate,  in  1546).  See 
Gkrmaic  Yebsions.  Of  hia  original  productiona,  hia 
Cateckism  (1634,  Latin  and  German)  ia  the  moat  noted. 
He  tranalated  the  writinga  of  Zwingle  and  Luther.  See 
Hook,  Eccles,  Bioy,  vi,  3G5 ;  Kitlo,  Cydop,  a.  y. 

Jndaism,  the  name  by  which  we  deaignate  the  r&- 
ligioua  doctrinea  and  ritea  of  the  people  choaen  by  Je- 
hovah  aa  hia  peculiar  people ;  the  deacendanta  nf  Jaoob, 
to  whom  the  law  waa  given  by  Moaea,  atid  religious 
light  and  truth  were  rerealed  in  the  Old  Testament; 
the  moat  important  branch  of  that  family  of  nationa 
conyentionally  coropriaed  undcr  the  title  of  Słiemitea 
— ^a  people  of  many  fatea  and  of  many  names,  called  by 
the  Bibie  the  people  of  God ;  by  Mohammed,  the  peo- 
ple of  the  Book ;  by  Hegel,  "  the  people  of  the  Geiaf^^ 
and  now  generally  known  aa  Hebrewsj  hra^litea,  or  Jews, 

AłnrJutmitm, — ^To  the  Christian  atudent  especially, 
the  early  deyelopment  of  the  doctrinea  of  thia  people  ia 
intereating,  aa  nnfolded  in  the  pagea  of  the  older  half  of 
the  inapired  writinga  that  go  to  make  up  the  baaia  of 
hia  own  creed.  Judaiam  ia  pre-eminently  a  monothe- 
iatlc  faith,  originating  with  the  patriarch  Abraham 
when,  in  an  lera  of  poły  theism  and  flagrant  vice,  he  be- 
came the  fonnder  of  monotheism  by  a  prompt  rccogni- 
tion  and  worahip  of  the  one  liWng  and  true  God ;  and 
from  that  remote  day  to  this,  all  the  Jewiah  people  pride 
theraaelyea  in  being  "•  children  of  Abraham.**  It  is  a 
fact  atriking  to  every  student  of  ćomparative  religion, 
and  in  no  amaU  degree  a  proof  of  Łhc  authenticity  of  the 
O.-T.  Scripturea,  that  thia  monotheiatic  faith  originated 
at  a  ttme  when  the  religion  of  all  other  branchf  s  of  the 
aame  family,  which,  with  the  Hebrew,  make  up  the  She- 
mitic,  differed  widcly  from  it  in  every  res))ect.  The  Aa- 
ayriana,  Babyloniana,  Phccnidans,  and  Carthaginiana  all 
poaaeaaed  a  nearly  identical  religion,  but  one  that  lackcd 
the  eaaential  feature  of  Judaism.  They  all,  it  is  true,  bc- 
lieyed  in  a  aupreme  god,  called  by  the  diffcrent  namca 
of  Ilu,  Bel,  Set,  Hadad,  Moloch,  Chemosh,  Jaoh,  £1,  Adon, 
Aaahur,  but  they  alao  all  tielieyed  in  aubordinate  and 
aecondary  beinga,  emanations  from  this  aupreme  being, 
hia  manifeatationa  to  the  wnrld,  rulers  of  the  planeta; 
and,  like  other  pantheistic  religions,  the  custom  prevailed 
among  theae  Sbemitic  nations  of  pmmoting  first  one  and 
then  another  deity  to  be  the  supremę  object  of  worship. 
Among  the  Aaayriana,  as  among  the  £g>'ptian8,  the  goda 
were  offcen  arranged  in  triada,  as  that  of  Anu,  Bel,  and 
Ao.  Anu  or  Oannea  wore  the  head  of  a  fish ;  Bel  wore 
the  borna  of  a  bull;.Ao  was  repreaented  by  a  serpent. 
Theae  religions,  in  ahort,  repreaented  the  goda  aa  the 


JUDAISM 


1050 


JUDAISM 


Spińt  -within  and  behind  natunl  objecU  and  foioes — 
poweiB  within  the  world,  lather  than,  aa  among  the  He- 
brewB,  a  Spirit  aboTe  Uie  world.  The  Hebrewa'  €rod 
was  a  God  abore  naturę,  not  simply  in  iL  He  atood 
alone,  unaccompaiiied  by  secondaiy  deities.  His  wor- 
Bhip  reąuired  puńty,  not  poUation ;  its  aini  was  holinesa, 
and  its  spirit  humane,  not  craeL  Monotheistic  from  the 
fint,  it  became  an  absolute  nsonotheisoi  in  its  deveIop- 
ment  In  all  the  Shemitic  nations,  behind  the  numer- 
ous  diyine  beings  representing  the  powers  of  naturę 
there  was,  it  is  tnie,  dimly  yisible  one  supremę  Being, 
of  whom  allthese  were  emanations;  but  there  was  alao 
among  all  of  them,  except  the  Hebrew  branch,  a  ten- 
dency  to  lose  sight  oi  the  firtł  great  Ccauej  the  yery  re- 
yerse  of  the  tendency  of  the  faith  of  Abraham,  whoae 
80ul  rosę  to  the  contemplation  of  the  perfect  Being, 
aboye  all  and  the  source  of  alL  With  passionate  loye 
he  adored  this  most  high  God,  maker  of  heayen  and 
earth.  Such  was  his  deyotion  to  this  almighty  Being, 
that  men  said,  **  Abraham  is  the  fńend  of  the  most  high 
God."  The  difference,  then,  between  the  religion  of 
Abraham  and  that  of  the  pol3rtheistic  nations  was,  that 
while  they  dcscended  from  the  idea  of  a  supremę  Being 
into  that  of  subordinate  ones,  he  went  back  to  that  of 
the  supremę,  and  clung  to  thia  with  his  whole  aoul 
(Clark,  Ten  great  ReUgionSy  chap.  x).     See  Abraham. 

ifo«a£»m.— This  abstract  faith  continued  to  be  the 
faith  of  the  Israelites  imtil  it  was  transformed  at  Mount 
Sinai  by  the  Lord  himself,  through  his  chosen  seryaut 
Moses.  Thercafter  the  Abrahamie  idea  was  clothed  in 
forms  rendered  necessary  not  only  by  the  character  of 
the  age,  but  also  by  the  frailty  of  men,  to  the  generality 
of  whom  hitherto  ceremonies  had  been  absolutely  eseen- 
tiaL  From  the  "Mosaic  Reyelation,**  as  Dean  Stanicy 
(Jeicish  Ch,f  First  Series,  Lect.  yii)  calls  it,  datea  the  es- 
tablishment not  only  of  the  Judaic  prindple  itself,  but 
of  the  Theocracł/  (see  Josephus,  Apion,  ii,  17).  Thence- 
forth  the  fullowers  of  Abraham  not  only  worshipped  the 
one  **  supremę  Being,"  but  they  were  govemed  by  him ; 
L  e.  from  the  oonvcrse  of  Moses  with  the  Lord  dates  the 
ultimate  imion  of  the  Jewish  Church  and  State — ^the 
corelatlon  of  life  and  religion,  of  the  nation  and  the  in- 
diyidual.    See  Moses;  Law. 

Prophetism,~-SiiiToim6ed  by  idolaters  on  aU  aidea, 
with  whom  they  were  brought  in  contact  continually, 
the  Hebrews  gradually  disobeyed  the  commandmeuta  of 
Sinai  uutil  idolatry  destroyed  all  persona!  morality,  and 
the  chosen  i)eople  kuew  not  their  Lord.  To  saye  the 
race  from  utter  apostasy,  holy  men  were  inspired  by  the 
Lord  to  make  known  the  penalty  of  idolatry  and  immo- 
rality.  Amid  the  trials  and  sore  afflictions  with  which 
he  yisits  the  nation,  he  yet  declares  the  perpetuity  of 
the  Jewish  faith.  A  Messiah  shall  eyentuaJly  gather 
in  the  people,  and  to  the  Lord  alone  shall  seryice  be  ren- 
dered. See  IiIessiaii.  Though  the  present  plant  shall 
wither,  the  sced  shall  continue  to  liye,  from  whose  ger-' 
minaŁion  shall  spring  a  flower  of  greater  fragrance  in 
the  fulness  of  time.  All  through  the  captiyity  among 
the  Aasyrians  and  Babylonians,  eyen  after  the  dcstruc- 
tion  of  the  Tempie,  the  life  of  the  seed  was  attested  by 
the  fniit  it  borę.     See  CimyiTY ;  Phophecy. 

Rabbimsm, — When  the  political  esistence  of  the  Jews 
was  annihilated,  they  neryed  themselyes,  with  that  de- 
termination  characteristic  of  the  Hebrew  race,  for  an- 
other  and  morc  determined  strife.  In  consequence  of 
their  dispersiou  as  a  nation,  after  the  Babylonian  exile 
the  Mosaic  constitution  could  be  but  partially  re-estab- 
lished.  ^  The  whole  building  was  too  much  shattered, 
and  its  fragments  too  widely  dispersed,  to  reunite  in 
their  ancient  and  regular  form."  But  from  his  captiy- 
ity the  Jew  had  brought  with  him  a  reyerential,  or, 
rather,  a  passionate  attachment  to  the  Moeaic  law  and 
the  consecration  of  the  second  Tempie,  and  the  re-ea- 
tablishmcnt  of  the  state  had  been  acoompanied  by  the 
ready  and  solemn  reoognition  of  the  law.  The  syna- 
gogue  was  instituted,  and  with  it  many  of  the  institu- 
tious  which  have  teuded  to  perx)etuate  Judaiam  to  the 


preaent  homr.  One  of  the  moat  important  of  thcte  waa  Che 
oonstant  infceipretation  of  the  law  and  tlie  prophcta;  and 
aa  the  acqaaintance  with  the  law  became  morę  intimat^, 
the  attachment  to  it  grew  deeper  and  deeper  in  the  na- 
tional  character,  untU  it  finally  was  not  only  tlieir  Bi- 
bie and  atatate-book,  bat  a  guide  for  the  moat  minote 
details  of  oommon  life.  **  Bat  no  wńtten  Isw  cu  pn^ 
yide  for  all  poańble  esigenciea;  wbether  generał  and 
oomprełienaiye,  or  minote  and  maltifaiiona,  it  eqnaUy 
Teqaire8  the  expoflitor  to  adapt  it  to  the  tmmediate  can 
which  may  occor,  either  before  the  pablic  tiibanal  or 
that  of  the  priyate  oonsdence.  Hence  the  law  becnne 
a  deep  and  intricate  Btudy.  .  .  .  Leanungin  the  law  be- 
came the  great  distinction  to  which  all  alike  paid  rey- 
erential homage.  Public  and  priyate  affidra  depeoded 
on  the  aanction  of  this  aelf-^rmed  spiiitoal  aiiatocracy. 

.  .  Eyery  daty  of  life,  of  aóeUl  intercoorBe  between 
man  and  man,  not  to  speak  of  ita  weightier  autbority  as 
the  national  codę  of  ciiminal  and  dyil  jnriapmdence,  was 
regulated  by  an  appeal  to  the  book  of  the  law"  (HUman, 
Hittonf  ofike  Jwt^  ii,  417).  Thna  aroae  the  oflioe  of 
the  rabbia— the  deirgy,  the  leamed  interiiEeteis  of  the 
law,  the  pablic  instroctors,  to  whom,  l^  ddgreea,  alao  the 
Bpiritaal  aotbority  waa  tranefened  ftom  the  piiesthood. 
At  this  time,  alao^  beaides  the  uiq)ired  Scriptorea,  tn^ 
ditional  writinga  became  another  groand  of  nuthority 
oyer  the  pablic  mind.  See  Tbaditioh.  This  waa  not, 
howeyer,  as  untyersaUy  ackoowledged,  and  gmye  liae 
to  that  echism  in  Jodaiam  which  originated  the  JTo- 
raiU»  (q.  y.).  Thoa  Jodaiam  had  foitiiied  itself  after 
the  captiyity,  ao  that  when  the  Tempie  waa  finally 
again  destroyed,  and  pablic  worship  became  extinct, 
Babbinism  was  able  to  aapplant  the  origtnal  rdigioL 
of  the  Jewa,  and  from  amid  the  blackened  walla  of  Jera- 
aałem  roee,  ere  the  amoke  of  the  ruina  had  yet  oeaied,  a 
new  hond  of  national  anion,  the  great  diadnctiye  featnre 
in  the  character  of  modem  Jads&iBn.  With  the  Miaaara 
(q.  y.)  alao  came  aoon  after  the  Miahna  (q.  v.)  and  the 
Gemara,  which  together  fonn  the  Babylonian  Tatannd 
[see  Talkud],  that  wonderful  monoment  of  haman  in- 
dostry— fbrmuiated  Mosaiam— which  to  the  Jew  '^  be- 
came the  magie  cirde  within  which  the  national  mind 
patiently  labored  for  agea  in  performing  thc  bidding  of 
the  ancient  and  mighty  enchanters,  who  drew  the  sa- 
cred  linę  beyond  which  it  might  not  yenture  to  pass" 
(Milman),  and  which  so  aecarely  enwrapped  the  Jewiah 
idea  io  almost  infinite  ndes  and  lawa  that  it  oompleteły 
aheltered  it  from  poUuting  contact  in  the  succeediDg 
dark  agea.  It  is  thoa  that  Judaism,  weathering  maoy 
a  long  and  aeyere  atoim,  haa  continoed  to  piosper,  taA. 
floorishes  eyen  in  our  own  day. 

8tcU, — ^In  the  early  age  of  Jodaiam  we  saw  that  the 
simple  worship  of  a  supremę  Being  oonstituted  ita  pecnl- 
iar  characteristic.  At  that  dme,  aa  a  sign  of  the  ooye- 
nant  of  Abraham  with  the  Lord,  the  rite  of  tircwmdmm 
(q.  y.)  was  introdoced,  and  waa  aoon  foUowed  by  the  ibr> 
nul  inatitution  of  aaóifice.  In  the  peńod  of  Mosaism 
the  Jewish  belief  became  an  eatahUahed  fonn  of  religian, 
and  then  were  introduced  ceitain  oeremoniea  and  feast 
days,  together  with  the  piieathood.  In  the  Rabbioic 
period,  aa  the  law  became  oyerlaid  by  tradition,  discoa- 
sions  arose,  and  the  Jews  were  diyided  into  three  pńn- 
cipal  secta— the  Phariaees  (q.y.)»  who  piaoed  religion  ia 
extemal  oeremony;  the  Sadduceea  (q.yOł  who  were  le- 
markable  for  their  incredulity ;  and  the  Easenes  (q.  y.), 
whoae  peculiar  distinction  waa  the  practioe  of  austeie 
sanctity.  Still  later  sprang  op  other  secta ;  prominently 
among  these  are  the  Karaiiet,  the  strict  adheients  to  the 
letter  of  the  law,  the  oppenenfcs  of  rabbinical  intopreta- 
tions.    For  a  reyiew  of  Jewish  literaturę,  see  Rabbisism. 

Modem  Judaitm^-ln  the  hiatory  of  the  Jewa  (q.  y.) 
we  haye  seen  how  greatly  the  oondkion  of  thia  people 
was  ameliorated  about  the  ckwe  of  the  ISth  eentuzy  by 
the  infiuenoe  of  Moaee  Mendelasohn.  But  not  onty  in 
their  ciyil  condition  did  hia  ellbrta  aifect  the  Jewa;  he 
also  greatly  changed  the  character  of  Jadaiam  itsclU 
With  him  originated  a  tendency  of  thooght  and  actioii» 


JUDAISM 


1057 


JUDAISM 


which  łuu  stnoe  spiMd  wmoog  th«  leaden  of  Jndaisin 
gtenerallyt  to  weaken  nbbinieal  authority,  and  to  main- 
tain  a  more  aiinpla  Biblieal  Jndauin.  Tbese  have  now 
been  dereloped  into  two  spedal  phases  of  Jewish  opin- 
ioD,  which  are  lepresented  by  the  terma  ^  ComenfoHt^ 
(or  Modente  Orthodox)  and  '^Rtfarmed"  (or  liberał) 
Judałsni.    (See  each  of  these  titles  below.) 

Genered  Creed, — ^A  Bnmmary  of  the  religious  views  of 
the  Jews  was  fint  compUed  in  the  llth  century  by  the 
fleoond  great  Mosea  (Maimonides),  and  it  continaea  to 
be  with  the  OrŁhodox  the  Jewish  oonfessioD  of  faith  to 
the  present  day.    It  is  as  foUows : 

1. 1  believe,  wlth  a  trne  and  perfect  fliith,  that  God  Is  the 
creator  (whose  Damę  be  błessed),  firoTeraor.  aod  maker  of 
aU  creatarcs ;  and  that  he  halh  wronght  all  things,  work- 
eth,  and  Bhnll  work  furever. 

S.  I  belleve,wUh  perfect  falth.  that  the  Creator  (whose 
name  be  blettyed)  is  one ;.  and  tnat  sach  a  nnity  as  Is  in 
him  can  be  found  in  nonę  other ;  and  that  he  alone  hatb 
been  oiir  God,  Is,  and  forever  shall  be. 

8. 1  belfere,  with  a  perfect  Dftith,  that  the  Creator  (whose 
name  be  blessed)  is  not  oorporeal.  not  to  be  comprehended 
wlch  auy  bodily  properties ;  and  that  there  is  no  bodily 
es^ence  that  can  be  Iikened  unto  him. 

4. 1  belieTe,  with  a  perfiect  faith,  the  Creator  (whose 
name  be  blessed)  to  be  the  llrst  aod  the  last ;  that  nothing 
was  before  him,  and  that  he  shall  abide  the  last  forever. 

B.  I  believe,  wlth  a  perfect  falth,  that  the  Creator  (whose 
name  be  blessed)  is  to  be  worshińped,  and  nonę  else. 

«.  I  believe,  wlth  a  perfect  faith,  that  all  the  words  of 
the  propheŁs  are  trne. 

7. 1  believe,  with  a  perfect  fl&ith,  that  the  prophedes  of 
Moees  our  master  (may  he  rest  In  peace  1)  were  trne :  that 
he  was  the  father  and  chief  of  all  wise  men  that  llvcd  be- 
Ibre  him.  or  ever  shall  llve  after  him. 

&  I  beiieve,  with  a  perfect  faith,  that  all  the  law  which 
at  this  day  is  foand  In  onr  hands  waa  delivered  by  God 
himself  to  onr  master  Moses  (God'8  peace  be  wlth  him !). 
9. 1  beHeve,  with  a  perfect  faith,  that  the  same  law  is 
neyer  to  be  changed,  nor  any  other  to  be  given  os  of  God 
(whose  name  be  lilessed}. 

10. 1  believe,  with  a  perfect  Atith,  that  God  (whose  name 
be  blessed)  nnderstanaeth  all  the  works  and  tbonghts  of 
meu,  as  It  is  written  in  the  prophets ;  he  fashioneui  their 
hearts  allke,  he  nnderstandeth  all  their  works. 

11. 1  belleve,  wiih  a  perfect  faith,  that  God  (whose  name 
be  blessed)  will  recompense  good  to  them  that  keep  his 
commaudments,  aud  will  ponish  them  who  transgress 
them. 

12. 1  belleye,  wlth  n  perfect  falth,  that  the  Messinh  is  yet 
to  oome ;  and  althoogn  he  retard  his  coming,  yei  I  will 
wait  for  him  tlU  he  oome. 

13. 1  łielieve,  with  a  perfect  faith,  that  the  dead  shall  be 
restored  to  llfe  when  it  shnll  seem  flt  nnto  God  the  crea- 
tor (whose  name  be  blessed,  and  memory  celebrated  wlth- 
ont  eud.    Amen). 

Doctfine  of  ImmorialUy* — In  regard  to  the  fatnre  life, 
they  be&eye  in  reward  and  punishment,  bat,  like  the 
Unirersalists  (q.  v.),  the  Jews  believe  in  the  ultimate 
Balvation  of  aU  men.  Łike  the  Soman  Catholics  [see 
PmoATORY],  the  Jews  offer  up  prayers  for  the  soals  of 
their  deceased  friend8'(comp.  Alger,  Hi$t,  Doctr,  Futurę 
Life,  chap.  viii  and  ix). 

Saerifice. — Sinoe  the  destmction  of  their  Tempie  and 
their  dispession  the  sacrifioes  have  been  discontinned, 
but  in  all  other  rei^iects  the  Mosaic  dispensation  is  ob- 
seryed  intact  among  the  Orthodox  Jews. 

Worahip. — ^Their  divine  worship  consists  in  the  read- 
ing  of  the  Scriptnres  and  prayer.  But  while  they  do 
not  insist  on  attendanoe  at  the  synagogue,  they  enjoin 
all  to  say  their  prayers  at  home,  or  in  any  place  where 
drcumstances  may  place  them,  thiee  times  a  day — moni- 
ing,  altemoon,  and  evening;  they  repeat  also  blessings 
and  particular  praises  to  God,  aside  from  them,  at  their 
meals  and  on  many  other  occasions. 

In  their  moming  deyotions  they  nsc  the  phylacteries 
(q.  V.)  and  the  TcUUk,  except  Saturdays,  when  they  use 
the  Talith  ouly.    See  Frikge. 

Ca/«Mfar.— The  Jewish  year  is  either  cw&  or  eccUtir 
attieaL  The  civil  year  commenoes  in  the  month  of 
Tisri,  which  falls  into  some  part  of  onr  September,  on 
the  view  that  the  worid  was  created  on  the  Urst  day  of 
thia  month  (Tisri).  The  eoclesiastical  year  commences 
abont  the  vemal  eqainox,  in  the  month  of  Nisan,  the 
latter  part  of  onr  month  of  March  and  the  iłrst  hałf  of 
April.  The  seventh  month  of  the  ciril  year  they  cali 
the  firtt  of  the  ccdesiastical  year,  becauae  this  was  enr 
IV.— Xxx 


J<^ed  npon  them  at  their  departoie  ftom  Egypt  (Nomb, 
xxviii,  11).    See  Calendar. 

Fecut  IkufB, — ^The  feasts  which  they  obserye  at  pres- 
ent  are  the  foUowing :  1.  Passorer^  on  the  14th  of  Nisan, 
and  lasting  eight  days.  On  the  evening  before  the 
feast  the  first-bom  of  every  family  obseryes  a  fast  in  re- 
membrance  of  Qod's  mercy  toward  the  nation.  They 
eat  at  this  feast  unlearened  bread,  aud  obsenre  as  strict 
holidaye  the  two  first  and  last  days.  2.  Pentecosłf  or 
the  Feast  of  Weeks,  falUng  seyen  weeks  after  the  Pass- 
over,  is  at  present  celebrated  only  two  days.  8.  Trutn- 
peU,  on  the  Ist  and  2d  of  Tisri,  of  which  t^e  ihst  is  cali- 
ed  New-year's  day.  On  the  second  day  is  rcad  the  22d 
chapter  of  Genesis,  which  giyes  an  account  of  Abraham's 
oflfering  of  his  son  Isaac.  and  God^s  blessing  on  him  and 
his  seed.  Thcn  they  blow  the  trumpet,  or,  more  ao- 
curetely,  the  hom^  and  pray,  as  usual,  that  God  wonld 
bring  them  to  Jemsalem.  4.  Tabernacles,  on  the  15th 
of  Tisri,  and  lasting  nine  days ;  the  first  and  the  last  two 
days  being  obseryed  as  feast  days,  and  the  other  four  aa 
days  of  labor.  On  the  first  day  they  take  branches  of 
palm,  myrtle,  willow,  and  citron  bound  together,  and  go 
around  the  sitar  or  pulpit  singing  psalms,  because  thia 
ceremony  was  formerly  performed  at  their  Tempie.  On 
the  fleventh  day  of  the  festiyal  they  take  copies  of  the 
torahf  or  law  of  Moses,  out  of  the  ark,  and  carry  them 
to  the  altar,  and  all  the  congregation  follow  in  procession 
seven  times  around  the  altar,  in  remembrance  of  the 
Sabbatical  year,  singing  the  29th  Psalm.  On  the  even- 
ing  of  this  day  the  feast  of  sokmn  oMemibly,  or  ofrtjoio- 
ing,  commences.  They  read  paasages  from  the  law  and 
the  prophets,  and  entreat  the  Lord  to  be  propitious  to 
them,  and  ddiver  them  from  captivity.  On  the  ninth 
day  they  repeat  several  prayeis  in  honor  of  the  law, 
and  bless  God  for  his  mercy  and  goodness  in  giving  it 
to  them  by  his  servant  Moses,  and  read  that  part  of  the 
Scriptures  which  makes  mentlon  of  his  death.  6.  Pu- 
riMf  on  the  14th  and  15th  of  Adar  (or  March),  in  com- 
memoration  of  the  deliverance  from  Haman  (Esth. 
ix).  The  whole  book  of  Esther  is  read  repeatedly,  with 
liberał  alm8giving  to  the  poor.  6.  Besides  these  festiyala 
appointed  by  Moses  and  Mordecai,  they  celebrate  the 
dscHcation  ofthe  aUar,  in  commemoration  of  the  victor]r 
oyer  Antiochus  Epiphanes.  This  festival  lasts  eight 
days,  and  is  appointed  to  be  kept  by  lighting  lampa. 
The  reason  they  assign  for  this  is  that,  at  this  pwifica- 
tion  and  rededication  of  the  Tempie  aAsr  the  deliverance 
from  Antiochus,  there  was  not  enough  of  pure  oil  left  to 
bum  one  night,  but  that  it  miraculously  lasted  eight  daya^ 
when  they  obtained  a  fresh  supply.  7.  Expiation  day, 
the  lOth  day  of  Tisri,  is  obseryed  by  the  Jews,  thougli 
they  have  neither  tempie  nor  priest.  Before  the  feast 
they  seek  to  re-establish  friendly  relations  with  their 
neighbors,  and,  in  short,  do  eyei^^thing  that  may  serve  to 
evince  the  sincerity  of  their  repentance.  For  twenty- 
fonr  hours  they  obsenre  a  strict  fast,  and  many  a  pioua 
soul  does  not  quit  the  sj^nagogue  during  these  long  hours, 
but  remains  in  prayer  through  the  night.  See  Festiyał, 
Mitsion  and  Preterrałion  ofthe  Jewt, — The  preserva- 
tion  of  the  Jews  as  a  dlstinct  nation,  notwithstanding 
the  miseries  which  they  have  endured  for  many  ages, 
is  a  wonderfid  fact.  The  religions  of  other  nations  have 
depended  on  temporal  prosperity  for  their  duration; 
they  have  triumphed  under  the  protection  of  conąuer- 
ors,  and  have  fallen  and  given  place  to  others  under  a 
succession  of  weak  monarcha.  Paganism  once  over^ 
spread  the  known  world,  even  where  it  no  longer  ex- 
ists.  The  Christian  Church,  glorious  in  her  martyra^ 
has  sunriye^the  persecution  of  her  enemies,  though  she 
cannot  heń  the  wounds  they  have  inflicted ;  but  Juda- 
ism,  hated  and  pcrsecuted  for  so  many  centuries,  has  not 
merely  escaped  destmction,  it  has  been  powerful  and 
flourishing.  Kinga  have  employed  the  severity  of  lawa 
and  the  band  of  the  executioner  to  eradicate  it,  and  a 
seditious  populace  have  injured  it  by  their  massacros 
more  than  kings.  Sovereigns  and  their  subjects^  pa- 
gans,  Cliristians,  and  Mohammedans,  opposed  to  eiicll 


i 


JUDAISM 


105fr 


JUDAISM 


otber  in  eTerything  elae,  hAre  formed  a  common  design 
to  annihilate  thU  nation  without  suooess.  The  bush  of 
Moses  has  always  continued  burning,  and  never  been 
consumed.  Tbe  expulsion  of  the  Jews  from  tbe  great 
cities  of  kingdoms  bas  only  scattered  tKem-throoghout 
tbe  world.  They  bave  lived  from  age  to  age  in  wretch- 
edness,  and  their  blood  haa  llowed  freely  in  peraecatton ; 
they  bave  continued  to  our  day,  in  spite  of  tbe  disgiaoe 
and  batred  wbicb  eveiywbere  clung  to  Łbem,  wbile  tbe 
greatest  empires  bave  fallen  and  been  abnost  forgotten. 
£very  Jew  is  at  tbis  moment  a  living  witneaa  to  tbe 
Cbristian  as  to  tbe  autbenticity  of  bis  own  leligion,  an 
nndeniable  eyidence  tbat  Cbristianity  is  tbe  last  rev- 
elation  from  God;  and  tbe  patient  endoianoe  of  tbe 
descendants  of  Abrabam  is  an  eyidence  tbat  Fro^i- 
dence  bas.guarded  tbem  tbroogbout  all  tbeir  miseriea. 
Hence  tbe  Cbristian  sbould  regard  with  compassion  a 
people  80  long  pieserred  by  this  peculiar  care  amidst 
calamities  wbicb  woald  bave  destroyed  any  otber  na- 
tioń.  "  I  woold  look  at  tbe  ceremonies  of  pagan  wor- 
sbip,"  says  Dr.Ricbardson/^as  a  matter  of  Uttle  morę 
tban  idle  curiosity,  but  tbose  of  tbe  Jews  reacb  tbe 
beart.  This  is  tbe  most  ancient  form  of  worship  in  ex- 
istence ;  this  is  the  ms0^ner  in  whicb  tbe  Ck>d  of  beaTen 
was  woTsbipped  wben  a^  the  othćr  nations  in  tbe  woild 
were  sitting  in  darkness,  or  falling  down  to  stocks  and 
Stones.  To  tbe  Jews  were  committed  tbe  onuUes  of 
Crod.  This  is  the  manner  in  wbicb  Moses  and  Elias, 
David  and  Solomon,  worsbipped  the  God  of  their  fa- 
thers;  this  worship  was  instituted  by  God  himself. 
Tbe  time  will  come  wben  the  descendants  of  bis  an- 
cient people  sball  join  the  song  of  Moses  to  tbe  song  of 
tbe  Lamb,  and,  singing  hosannas  to  tbe  son  of  David, 
confess  his  power  to  saye.** 

RestoraUon  o/łhe  Jewt, — ^The  Jews,  as  is  well  known, 
deny  the  accomplishment  of  the  propbecies  in  the  per- 
son of  Jesus.  The  Reformed  Jews  (see  below)  deny  tbe 
promise  of  a  personal  Messiab  altogether;  but  tbe  or- 
thodox,  the  greater  part  of  tbe  Jews,  hołd  tbat  tbe  Mes- 
siab has  not  yet  come,  but  tbat  they  will  be  redeemed  at 
tbe  appointid  time,  wben  be  of  whom  tbe  propbets 
spoke  sball  make  bis  appearance  in  great  worldly  pomp 
and  grandeur,  subduing  all  nations,  and  restoring  the 
sceptre  of  uniyersal  rule  to  tbe  house  of  Judab.  Then 
tbere  sball  reign  unirersal  peaoe  and  bappmess  in  all 
the  eartb,  never  again  to  be  inteimpted,  and  to  tbe 
Jewish  fold  sball  return  those  of  the  flock  tbat  strayed 
into  the  Christian  and  Mohammedan  folds  f  then  idola- 
try  sball  cease  in  the  world,  and  aU  men  acknowledge 
tbe  unity  of  God  and  bis  kingdom.  (Comp.  Zecb.  xiv, 
9,  *<  And  the  Lord  sball  be  king  over  all  tbe  earth :  in 
tbat  day  shall  tbere  be  one  Lord,  and  bis  name  one.) 
This  restoration  sball  be  effected,  not  on  oooount  of  any 
merits  of  their  own,  but  for  the  Lord*s  sake ;  so  as  to  se- 
cure  their  own  righteousness,  and  the  perfedion  to 
whicb  they  shall  attain  after  their  delirerance.  (Atone- 
inent  for  sin  is  madę  by  tbe  fulMing  of  the  law  and  by 
circumcision,  and  not,  as  the  Christian  holds,  by  the  sac- 
rifice  of  the  Mesńah.)  For  the  Christian  doctrine  of 
the  Restoration  of  the  Jews,  see  Restobation. 

JUDAISM,  CONSERVATIVE.  Tbe  gradual  eman- 
eipation  of  the  Jews  in  Gennany,  whicb,  however,  did 
not  become  finał  anywhere  until  1848,  and  wbicb  was 
lendered  complete  in  fiavaria  so  recently  as  1866,  in- 
■ensibly  diminisbed  tbe  influence  of  Talmudical  studies 
and  of  Rabbinical  lorę  as  the  paramount  obligation  of 
life.  Compelled,  happily,  to  bear  their  own  share  in 
£beir  deliveranoe  from  oppression,  the  Jews  became 
morę  and  morę  attacbed  to  the  land  of  their  nativity, 
and  morę  and  morę  estranged  from  the  traditional  alle- 
giance  to  the  kingdom  of  IsraeL  .  Their  love  for  Pales- 
tine,  intense  and  impassioned  as  e^er,  has  assumed  a 
different  form.  Tbeir  union  and  fellowship  no  longer 
represented  a  nationality  yeaming  to  be  released  from 
captiyity,  but  settkd  down  into  tbe  indissoluble  affec- 
tion  of  race  and  a  common  faith,  not  inconsistent  with 
ties  of  citizenship  in  the  world. 


In  1807,  when  Napoleon  ooDrened  tłie  so-oafled  Jcw- 
isb  Sanhedrim,  with  a  yiew  of  estabłishing  the  lelations 
between  the  empire  and  the  Jews  leńdeot  in  Fianoe, 
tbe  firstofficial  and  authoritatiye  espresaion  of  the  tna»> 
formed  Jewish  sentiment  was  published.  In  effeet,  it 
was  a  defence  of  the  Jew  who  badfor  caatiiriea  been  de- 
nied  tbe  rights  of  man^and  pconounced  unfit  foc  dtiacn- 
ship.  It  dedared  tbat  tbe  Jews  of  France  reeognise  in 
tbe  fuUest  sense  tbe  French  people  as  their  bcetfaren; 
that  France  is  their  country ;  tbat  tbe  Jews  of  Fhmoe 
reeognise  as  paramount  the  laws  of  the  land,  and  their 
religious  tribunals  haye  no  anthority  in  conflict  with 
the  civilcourt8  and  national  laws;  that  the Tahnad e&- 
joins  the  pursutt  of  a  nseful  trade  and  prohibits  oamy; 
tbat  polygamy  is  forbidden  and  divoroe  permitted. 

The  Jews  of  France  were  equal  to  the  promiae  of  tbe 
Sanhedrim.  They  proTed  good  dtizena,  and  faithluUy 
adhered  to  tbeir  distinct  religious  belief  and  piactioe. 
The  chief  rabbi  of  France  has  been  reoognised  aa  ci  tar- 
responding  dignity  with  the  archbishop  of  Faria,  aad  in 
the  distribution  of  state  aid  to  eodeaiastical  inadtutioos 
tbe  Jews  bare  been  admitted  to  thór  proportionate 
share.  The  Jews  of  France,  tike  those  of  Great  Britain 
and  Holland,  are  Conserratire.  Tbe  form  of  worship 
has  not  materially  chianged  to  this  day.  The  Porto- 
giiese  ritual  is  followed  at  one  of  the  Paria  eynagoguo, 
as  at  London  and  Amsterdam.  The  German  or  FÓlish 
ritual  is  otberwise  the  rule. 

In  Great  Britain.  about  the  year  1842,  the  key-nota 
of  prog^ress  was  struck  by  a  Jewiah  oongregation  at  Loo- 
don,  followed  by  that  of  Manchester.  Tbere  are  dow 
only  two  congreghtions  in  the  United  Kingdom  deny- 
ing  tbe  anthority  of  tbe  chief  rabbL  In  Great  Britain, 
France,  and  Holland  there  esists  a  recpgniaed  ecdeaas- 
tical  autbority.  The  administrauon  of  religiona  affims 
is  conducted  nearly  upon  tbe  Episoopal  eytienL  Tbe 
spirit  of  the  chnrches  in  these  tbree  countries  is  ex- 
tremdy  oonservati  ve.  Ne yertbeless,  great  latitude  is  al- 
lowed  to  indiyidual  belieyers,  and  what  woukl  haye  been 
regaided  as  capital  sina  a  oentury  ago  are  considcfed 
triyial  to-day.  It  may  be  said  that  the  Jews  haye  thor- 
ougbly  assimilated  tbemselyes  to  the  rest  of  the  popula- 
tion.  In  France  their  conseryatismisformalrathcrtbaD 
substantial,  and  the  nonconformlst  is  treated  with  gieat 
liberality.  Tbat  be  yiolatee  tbe  sanctity  of  the  Jewish 
Sabbatb  is  not  necesaarily  a  disqualification  for  high  ot- 
fice  in  tbe  oongregation.  Tbe  ministers  aie  espected 
to  liye  consLstently  with  tbeir  profeasions;  the  lalty  are 
not  sharply  criticised.  In  England  consenratiam  is  de- 
dded,  autboritatiye,  unoompromising.  Nonconformista 
are  on  sufferance,  and  are  rarely  allowed  a  voice  in  the 
administration  of  synagogoal  alEfurs.  In  HoHand  lib- 
erty  bas  dealt  kindly  with  the  Jewish  people,  who  are 
prominent  In  the  state  and  in  commeroe,  in  scieiice,  in 
leaming,  and  in  art,  and  are  at  oooe  conaeryatire  and 
tolerant  in  their  rdigioua  riews,  while  oonaiatent  in  the 
conduct  of  tbe  synagogne.  There  are  saocessfol  Coo- 
senratiye  colleges  or  theological  seminaries  at  Fmia, 
London,  Amsterdam,  Breslau,  B^lin,  and  Wursbnig. 

Consen^atiye  Judaiaro  is  paramount  in  Belgiom  and 
Italy,  and  has  bdd  its  own  in  some  parta  of  Anstiia  ałso. 
The  great  Bapoport  (q.  y.)  of  Prague,  one  of  the  finest 
scholare  of  tbat  century,  may  be  ręgarded  aB  the  type  of 
tbe  intelligent  Conseryatiye  Jew,  who  loyed  the  Joda- 
ism  of  the  past  with  feryor  and  intensity,  but  recognised 
as  the  duty  of  the  present  hbnr  tbe  prepaiation  of  bis 
brethren  for  tbeir  plaoe  in  the  worid  at  length  gni4g- 
ingly  accorded  tbem. 

Tbe  Judaism  of  Poland  and  Rossiat  as  of  Pdestine  and 
tbe  otber  Asiatic  and  the  African  countries,  can  scaroely 
be  denominated  Conseryatiye.  It  ia  strictly  stationary. 
Education  bas  not  yet  been  suffidently  diŚoaed  among 
tbe  maases  to  enable  tbem  intelllgently  to  comprehend 
the  diffierenees  or  points  of  uuity  in  Judałam,  eonserra- 
tiye  or  progreasiye.  The  study  of  tbe  Talmud  is  still 
pursued  with  ardor  in  eyeiy  Polish  yillage,  but  the  sfiir- 
it  of  Judaism  ia  not  as  potent  as  the  maintenaaoe  of 


JUDAISM 


1059 


JUDAISM 


fonn  or  of  icholastic  authoritr.  Consenratire  JndaUm 
bius  no  histoiy  in  these  countiies,  yet  its  scholara  bave 
done  the  world  a  senrice  In  the  presenration  of  Hebrew 
literaturę,  and  in  reecuing  from  oblirion  ancient  thougbt 
M  peculiarly  habit«d  and  diiguiscd*  It  is  wortby  of 
notę  that  the  chief  rabbi  at  Jenualem  presenres  great 
itate,  and  la  regarded  as  a  fonctionary  of  aignal  ooniBe- 
ąuenco,  but  the  institntiona  of  leaming  within  his  jn- 
risdiction  are  mainly  sustained  by  the  beneYolence  of 
Enropean  and  American  Jewa. 

Tbc  Hebrews  in  the  United  Sutes  number  about  half 
a  million.  Their  materiał  progrets  has  been  extraoTdi- 
nary.  TheyoompriseatpireBentBomethreehundredcon- 
gregitions,  of  which  fuli  one  half  came  to  this  country 
only  within  the  last  twelye  yeara.  The  synagogues  ri- 
val  the  moet  beautiful  and  coetly  churchea  in  the  prin- 
cipal  dties.  In  1840  there  were  acarcely  ten  thoiuand 
Jewa.  and  not  morę  than  a  dozen  oongregations  in  the 
United  States.  Their  synagogues  now  number  twohon- 
died  and  iifty.  The  Conserratiye  ministiy  is  not  stiong. 
Only  recently  has  any  active  interest  been  displayed  tn 
the  higher  Hebrew  edncation,  the  preparation  of  can- 
didates  for  derical  stationa  Maimonides  CoUege,  es- 
tablished  in  1866  at  Philadelphia,  has  not  been  snc- 
oessful  in  the  number  of  studenta,  although  ita  facolty 
ia  scholarly  and  eneigetic  The  Gon8ervative  pulpit  is 
ably  supplied  in  sereral  synagogues  of  New  York,  Phil- 
adelphia, and  New  Orleans.  In  other  cities  the  leading 
■cholars  are  of  the  progressire  or  Reform  school 

The  policy  of  Conservative  American  Israelitcs  does 
not  favor  eoelcsiastical  authority.  Occasionally  efforts 
have  been  madę  to  perfect  a  union  of  synagogues,  but 
they  hare  uniformly  failed  whcn  doctrinal  or  ritual 
questions  were  the  points  to  be  determined  in  oonyen- 
tion.  The  tendency  is  clearly  in  faror  of  independent 
synagogues,  united  for  piupoees  of  a  chariuble,  educa- 
tional,or  seml-political  character— otherwise  reoognising 
no  will  or  expo8ition  of  Jewish  doctrine  superior  to  that 
of  their  respective  ministers  or  secular  offidals.  The 
oo-operative  movements  for  aiding  oppressed  Israelites 
111  foreign  oouutries,  and  for  repressing  antidpated  dan- 
ger  or  checking  legał  discriminations  at  bome,  result- 
ing  in  the  establishment  of  the  **  Board  of  Delegates  of 
American  Israelites,**  are  not  oonfined  to  the  Consenra- 
tive  or  to  the  Pit>gressive  oongregations.  Doctrinal 
ąuestions  are  eschewed  in  this  organization,  which  is 
purely  roluntaiy,  and  assumes  no  authority  except  what 
may  be  delegated  from  time  to  time  to  interpret  the 
sentiments  of  American  Israelites. 

The  GonseryatiTes  have  of  Ute  years  paid  attention 
to  religious  edncation.  Elementary  schools  are  attach- 
ed  to  most  oongregations,  and  in  New  York  a  society 
was  formedln  1866  for  the  gratnitous  instruction  in  He- 
brew and  In  English  of  children  whose  paients  are  not 
attachod  to  any  synagogue,  or  are  unable  to  oontribute 
to  its  Bupport.    (M.  ^  I.) 

.  JUDAISM,  REFORMED,  also  caUed  progrwwe  or 
vndem  Judaism,  is  the  Jewish  leligion  as  reformed  in 
the  19th  century  in  Germany,  Austria,  America,  and  in 
aome  congregations  of  France  and  England.  The  places 
of  worship  are  cslled  temples,  distinguished  from  other 
Jewish  synagogues  by  choir,  organ,  regular  sermons,  and 
part  of  the  liturgy  in  the  yemacular  of  the  country,  and 
in  America  aiao  by  family  pews.  The  ministers  of  these 
temples  are  rabbis  who  bave  attained  praficiency  in 
Hebrew  lorę,  and  are  graduates  of  colleges  or  unirersi- 
ries;  or  preachers  by  the  choice  of  the  congregation, 
who  are  mostly  autodedactic  studenta  t  and  cantors,  ca- 
pablc  of  reading  the  divine  senrice  and  leading  the  choir. 
In  some  congregations  the  offices  of  preacher  and  cantor 
are  united  in  one  person.  Large  oongregations  are  con- 
ducted  by  the  ordained  rabbi  and  the  cantor  x  the  for- 
mer  is  the  expoundcr  of  the  law,  and  the  latter  presides 
over  the  wonhip,  and  is  also  called  Iłazany  or  Rtader 
(q.  V.).  Eyery  congregation  elects  secular  officers  to 
oonduct  the  temporał  affairs.  The  ministers  are  eleoted 
by  the  congregation  for  a  stated  period.    A  school  for 


instruction  in  religion,  Hebrew,  and  Jeińsh  history  is 
attached  to  every  tempie.  Like  all  other  Jews,  the  re- 
formed also  are  unitarian  in  theology,  and  acknowledge 
the  Old-Testament  Scriptnres  as  the  divine  source  of 
law  and  doctrine,  but  rqect  the  additional  author- 
ity of  the  Talmud,  in  pUioe  of  which  they  appeal  to 
reason  and  conscience  as  the  highest  authority  in  ez- 
pounding  the  Scriptures.  They  belieye  in  the  immor- 
tality  of  the  soul,  futurę  reward  and  punishment,  the 
perfectibility  of  human  naturę,  the  finał  and  universal 
triumph  of  truth  and  righteousness.  They  reject  the 
belief  in  the  ooming  of  a  Messiah ;  the  gathering  of  the 
Hebrew  people  to  Palestine  to  form  a  separate  govem- 
ment,  and  to  restore  the  ancient  polity  of  animal  sacri- 
fices  and  the  Leyitical  priesthood ;  the  resurrection  of 
the  body  and  the  last  judgment  day  i  and  the  authority 
of  the  Talmud  above  any  other  ooUection  of  comment*- 
ries  to  the  Bibie.  All  these  doctrines  are  ezpressed  in 
their  prayer-books  and  catechisms.  Their  henneneu- 
tics  is  rationalistic  They  leject  the  eyidenoe  of  mira- 
cles,  rel}ring  exclusively  upon  the  intemal  eyidence  of 
the  Scriptiires,  and  the  common  oonsent  of  all  dyilized 
nations  to  the  diyinity  of  tl|e  scriptund  laws  and  doc- 
trines. Ezoept  in  the  case  of  Moses,  of  whom  the 
Scriptures  testify,  <'Mouth  to  mouth  I  speak  unto  him," 
the  appearance  and  speaking  of  angels,  as  also  the  ap- 
peanmce  and  speaking  of  God,  were  subjectire,  in  the 
rision,  waking  or  dreaming,  appearing  objectirely  to 
the  prophet,  which  was  not  the  case  in  reality.  In 
this  respect  they  follow  the  guide  of  Moses  Maimonides. 
See  PHiLoeoPHY,  Theolooicał,  of  thb  Jews.  In  re- 
spect to  doctrine,  they  hołd  tliat  all  religious  doctrines 
must  t)e  taken  from  the  Bibie,  and  must  be  in  łuurmony 
with  the  loftiest  and  pureet  oonceptions  of  the  Deity  and 
humanity  suggcsted  by  the  Scriptures,  and  oonfirmed  by 
reason  and  conscience.  In  respect  to  ław,  they  hołd  that 
all  laws  contained  in  the  Decalogue,  ezpresied  or  im- 
plied,  are  obligatoiy  foreyer,  both  in  letter  or  spirit. 
All  laws  not  contained  in  tlie  Decalogue,  ezpressed  or 
implied,  are  local  and  temporał  (although  the  principle 
ezpreased  by  some  may  l)e  etemal)  and  could  have  been 
intended  for  oertatn  times  and  locałities  only.  These 
theories  of  Judaism  were  deydoped  by  yarious  Jewish 
authors  between  the  years  1000  and  1600;  partly  they 
are  also  in  the  andent  Rabbinicał  literaturę,  but  were 
dropped  after  1500,  and  taken  up  again  by  the  disdples 
and  successon  of  Moses  Mendeissohn  toward  the  close 
of  the  last  centiuy,  and  graduaUy  deyeloped  to  the  pres- 
ent  system.    (I.  M  W.) 

From  a  few  late  articłes  in  the  IsraelUe  (Noy.,  1871), 
by  the  distinguished  writer  of  the  aboye  artide  on  He^ 
/ormed  JudaUnif  we  leam  tłiat  he  regards  as  the  first 
reformer  in  the  camp  of  Judaism  the  celebrated  gaon 
Saadia  (q.  y.)  l)en-Joseph,  of  Fayum,  who  flourished  in 
the  first  half  of  the  lOth  centuiy ;  as  the  second,  tlie 
famous  body-physician  of  the  caliph  of  Cairo,  Rambam, 
**  the  classicał  Moses  Maimonides."  Of  perhaps  minor 
influence,  bot  also  as  actiye  in  the  field  of  refonn,  he 
introduces  us  next  to  Bechai  ben-Joseph,  of  Saragossa, 
and  Ibn-Gebirol  (q.  y.),  of  Malaga,  who  flourished  in 
the  llth  centuiy.  He  eyen  counts  among  the  reform- 
ere  the  celebrated  Frcnch  rabbi  Isaac,  of  Troyes,  better 
known  under  the  sumame  of  HmM  (q.  y.) ;  and  on 
the  side  of  reform  or  progressiye  Judaism  are  also  rank- 
ed  by  Dr.Wise  the  celebrated  Jewish  sayants  Judah 
ha-Leyy  (q.  y.),  Aben-Ezra  (q.  y.),  and  Abraham  hen- 
Dayid,  the  celebrated  author  of  the  Emmeah  Hamak 
(Exalted  Faith),  who  fell  a  yictim  to  fanaticism  in  A.D. 
1180  at  Toledo,  in  Spain,  and  with  whom  close  up  the 
two  centuries  that  elapsed  l>etween  the  appearance  of 
Saadia  and  Maimonides,  in  which  days  *'  idl  [Jewish] 
philosophy  had  becorae  peripatetic,^ 'the  Jewish  phil- 
osophical  writers  of  this  period  considering  their  main 
objecŁ  *'  the  self-dcfence  of  Judaism  on  the  one  hand, 
and  the  expounding  of  the  Bibie  and  Talmud  as  ration- 
ał  as  possible,  in  order  to  reooncile  and  harmoniae  faith 
andi 


JUDAIZING  CHRISTIANS        1060 


JUDAS 


With  the  18th  centcny  nndoabtedly  opens  a  new 
epoch  in  Jodaism,  for  it  is  here  that  we  cncounter  the 
great  Jewiah  master  mind  Mo6es  Maimonides,  of  whom 
it  has  been  tndy  said  that "  from  Moees  [the  ]awgiver] 
to  Moses  [Mendełuohii]  there  waa  nonę  like  Moses 
[Maimonides]."  Since  the  days  of  Ezra,  no  man  has 
exerted  so  deep,  uniyersal,  and  lasting  an  influence  on 
Jew8  and  Jndidsm  as  this  man,  and  we  need  not  wonder 
that  Ofthodox,  Ck)n8ervativ'e,  and  Reformed  Jews  alike 
lay  daim  to  this  master  mind;  bat  it  most  be  con- 
fessed  that,  after  all,  he  really  belongs  to  the  l^ogressiye 
Jews  only.  It  is  tnie  the  creed  drawn  np  by  the  second 
Moses  is  now  the  possession  of  all  Jews,  and  the  Orthodox 
ding  to  it  with  even  morę  tenacity  than  the  Consenr- 
atives  and  the  Reformed,  bat  his  theologico-philosophi- 
óal  works  gained  authority  mainly  among  the  Reformed 
thinkers  of  the  Jadaistic  faith.  After  that  datę,  of 
eouTse,  Jewish  literaturę  aboonds  with  names  whoee  pro- 
ductions  betray  a  rationalistic  tendency,  for  ^  all  Jewish 
thinkers  up  to  datę,  Baruch  Spinoza,  Moses  Mendels- 
sohn, and  the  writeis  of  the  19th  century  induded,  are 
morę  or  less  the  disdples  of  Maimonides,  so  that  no 
Jewish  theologico-philosophical  book,  from  and  after 
1200,  can  be  picked  up  in  which  the  ideas  of  Maimoni- 
des do  not  form  a  prominent  part.**  In  our  own  days  the 
Reform  movement  first  became  very  prominent.  In  Ger- 
many, where  Judaism  has  always  been  strong  on  account 
of  the  high  literary  attainments  of  the  German  Jews, 
the  separation  between  the  Orthodox  and  Reformed,  and 
the  establishment  of  independent  Reformed  congrega- 
tions  first  originated,  and  the  celebrated  Holdheim  (q. 
T.)  was  among  the  first  as  pastor  of  a  fmpfe  in  1846. 
Other  Jewish  rabbis  of  notę,  identified  with  the  Reform 
movement  in  Germany,  are  Stein,  of  Frankfurt-on-the- 
Maine ;  Einhom,  now  of  New  York  City ,  Deutsch,  now 
of  Baltimore,  Md. ;  and  Ritter,  the  successor  of  Holdheim, 
and  historian  of  the  Reform  agitation.  In  the  U.  SUŁes 
those  prominently  identified  with  the  Reform  que»- 
tion  are  Drs.  Adler  and  Gutheim,  of  the  Fifth  Avenae 
Tempie,  New  York  City ;  Mr.  Ellinger,  editor  of  the  Jete- 
ish  TimeSf  New  York  City;  Dr.  Lewin,  of  Brookljrn,  ed- 
itor of  the  New  Era ;  Dr.  Isaac  M.  Wise,  editor  of  the 
Itraelit^y  etc.  See  Jost,  GescL  des  Judentkumt  u. «.  Sek- 
ten,  iii,  849  sq.  j  Grfttz,  Gesch.  A  Juden,  x ;  Ritter,  Gesch, 
d,jiid,  Reformation  (Berlin,  3  yoIs.  8vo)  ;  Geiger,  Juda- 
ism andits  His(4)ryy  EngL  trans,  by  M.  Mayer  (N.  Y.  1870, 
8vo) ;  Astruc  (the  grand  rabbi  of  Belgium),  Histoire 
abr^ge  des  Juifs  et  de  Łeur  croyance  (Paris,  1869) ;  Ra- 
phad,  D.  C.  Lewin,  What  is  Judaism  (N.  Y.  1871, 12mo) ; 
New  ErOf  May,  1871,  art  i ;  Brił,  and  For,  Ecang.  Rev, 
April,  1869 ;  Kitto,  Joum,  Sac,  Literaturę^  viii ;  A  tlantic 
Monihly,  Oct.  1870;  and  the  works  dted  in  the  article 
Jews.     (J.H.W.) 

Judaizing  Chiistians,  a  term  freąuently  em- 
ployed  to  designate  a  clasa  of  early  Christiana,  ofwhom 
traces  appear  in  the  N.-T.  epistles,  and  still  morę  dis- 
tinctly  in  the  succeeding  century.  They  are  believed 
to  have  been  converts  from  Judaism,  who  still  dung  to 
the  Mosaic  institutions,  particularly  circumcision.  They 
appear  to  have  been  of  two  cbuMea,  some  consldering 
the  ceremoniał  law  as  binding  only  upon  Christians  de- 
scended  from  the  Jews,  while  others  looked  upon  it  as 
obligatory  also  for  the  heathen.  The  bead-ąuarters  of 
the  Judai2ing  Christians  is  said  to  have  been  first  at 
Antioch.  The  council  hdd  at  Jcmsalem  decided  that 
the  heathen  sbould  not  be  subjcct  to  circumcision.  The 
morę  zcalous  Judaizing  Christians,  thus  opix)sed  by  the 
aposŁles,  abandoned  Palestiue,  and  went  about  trying  to 
convert  the  heathen  to  their  view8,  but  with  little  suc- 
cess.  They  were  probably  the  "  false  apostles,"  persons 
"brought  in  miawarcs,"  etc.,  so  often  mentioned  by 
Paul,  and  are  known  in  histor}^  the  morę  moderate  ais 
Nazarenes  (q.  v.),  the  others  as  £^bionites  (q.  v.). 
See  D.  van  Hey8t,/>e  Jud,  Christianismo  (1828).— Pie- 
-•er,  Unitersal  Lezikon^  ix,  159. . 

Jn^das  ('Iov^ac),  the  Gnscized  form  of  the  Hebrew 


name  Judah,  and  generdly  leCained  in  the  A.y.  of  tlie 
Apociypha  and  N.  T.,  as  also  in  Josephns,  where  It  oo- 
curs  of  a  oonsiderable  namber  of  men.    See  also  Jcda  ; 

JUDE. 

1.  The  patriarch  Judah  (q.  ▼.),  son  of  Jaoob  (Matt 
5,2,8). 

2.  One  of  the  Leyites  who  TenooDceA  his  Gentile 
wife  after  the  captivtty  (1  Eedr.  ix,  28) ;  the  Judah  of 
Ezra  X,  28. 

3.  The  thiid  son  of  Mattathias,  and  the  leading  one 
of  the  three  Maccabsean  brothers  (1  Mace.  ii,  4,  etc). 
See  Maocabees. 

4.  The  son  of  Calphi  (Alphsos),  a  Jewish  geneial 
under  Jonathan  Maocabms  (1  Maoc.  xi,  70). 

5.  A  Jew  occupying  a  conspicoous  poeitioo'at  Jera- 
salem  at  the  time  of  the  mission  to  Aristobolos  (q.  v.) 
and  the  Egyptian  Jews  (2  Mace.  i,  10).  He  is  thought 
by  some  to  have  been  the  sime  with 

6.  An  aged  person,  and  a  noted  teacher  among  the 
Essenes  at  Jerusalem,  famons  for  his  art  of  ptedicting 
erents,  which  was  confirmed  in  a  remarkable  manner 
by  the  death  of  Antigonns  (q.  ▼.)  at  the  order  of  his 
brother  Aristobulus,  as  rdated  by  Joeephns  {AwL  xiii, 
11,2;  irar,i,3,5). 

7.  A  son  of  Simon,  and  brother  of  John  Hyreanns  (1 
Mace  xvi,  2),  murdered  by  Ptolenosnia  the  naurper, 
either  at  the  same  time  (RC  cir.  135)  with  his  father 
(1  Mace  x\ń,  16  Bq.),  or  shortly  afterwards  (Josephns, 
Ant.  xiii,  8, 1 ;  see  Grimm,  ad  Mace,  L  c.). — Smith. 

8.  Son  of  one  Ezechias  (which  latter  was  famons  for 
his  phj^sical  strength),  and  one  of  the  three  prindpal 
bandits  mentioned  by  Josephus  {Ant.  xvii,  10, 2;  War, 
ii,  4, 1)  as  infesting  Palestine  in  the  eariy  dkjrs  of  Herod. 
This  person,  whom  Whitson  (ad  loc.)'  reganis  aa  the 
Theudas  (q.  v.)  of  Lukę  (Acts  x,  86),  temporarily  goc 
possession  of  Sepphoris,  in  Galilee.  What  became  of 
him  does  not  particularly  appear,  but  it  may  be  pre- 
sumed  he  shared  the  fate  of  the  otherr  named  żn  the 
same  connection. 

9.  Son  of  one  Sariphseos,  or  Sepphoris,  and  one  of  the 
two  eminent  Jewish  teachers  who  indted  thetr  yoong 
disdples  to  demolish  the  golden  eagle  erected  by  Herod 
over  the  Tempie  gate,  an  act  of  sedition  for  which  the 
whole  party  were  bnmed  alive  (Joeephns,  AnL  xvii,  6, 
2-4;  ITar,  i,  88,  2-4). 

10.  A  perBon  sumamed  *^  the  GaUlaon^  (6  raXcXaToc, 
Acts  V,  37),  so  called  also  by  Josephus  (Ant,  xviii,  1,6; 
XX,  5,  2 ;  War,  ii,  8, 1),  and  like  wise  « the  Gaulomte'  (i 
rav\oviTric,  A  nt,  xviii,  1,1).  He  was  bom  at  Gamala, 
a  fortified  city  on  the  Sea  of  Galilee,  in  Lower  Ganloni- 
tis ;  and  affcer  the  deposition  of  Archelaua,  duiing  the 
thut}'-8eventh  year  after  the  battle  of  Actium  (Jose- 
phus, Ant,  xviii,  2, 1),  L  e.  A.D.  6,  he  exdted  a  riolent 
insurrection  among  the  Jews,  in  concert  with  a  wdl- 
known  Pharisee  named  Ssdok,  against  the  Roman  gov- 
emment  exercised  by  the  prucurator  Coponius,  on  ooca- 
sion  of  a  census  levied  by  the  emperor  Angustus,  assert- 
ing  the  popular  doctrine  that  the  Jews  ought  to  acknowi- 
edge  no  dominion  but  that  of  God.  He  was  destroyed, 
and  his  foUowers  scattered  by  Cyrenins,  then  proconsul 
of  Syń&  and  Jndaea.  We  also  leam  from  Josephns  that 
the  scattered  remnant  of  the  party  of  Judas  continued 
after  his  destruction  to  woric  on  still  in  secret,  and  la- 
bored  to  maintain  his  free  spirit  and  reckless  prindples 
among  the  people  (Josephus,  War,  ii,  17,  7-19).  (See 
E.  A.  Schulze,  Dissert,  de  Juda  Galilteo  ejuscue  secta, 
Frankf.  a.  Y.  1761 ;  also  in  his  Ezercił,  philosoph,/ase. 
non.  p.  104.)     See  Sicaril 

11.  Son  of  Simon  (John  vi,  71 ;  xiii,  2, 26),  snraamed 
(slways  in  the  other  Gosp>els)  Iscabiot,  to  distingnish 
him  ftom  the  other  apostle  of  the  same  name.  See 
JuDE.  In  the  following  account  we  largdy  avail  onr- 
8elves  of  the  artides  on  the  subjcct  in  thedictionaries 
of  Smith  and  Fairbaim. 

1.  Signification  o/ the  Sumame,— The  e^ńtbet  Iscaiiot 
ClaKapnórrię)  has  received  many  inteipretatioDB  mon 
or  less  conjectural. 


JUDAS 


1061 


JUDAS 


(1)  From  Kerioth  (Josh.  xv,  25),  in  Łbe  tribe  of  Jo- 
dah,  the  Heb.  ni^*;ip  d''K,  Ish-Keri&th^y  pasong  into 
'luKOfmmic  in  the  mme  way  as  ShlS  tŚ^^M— /«A^7o6, 
"  a  man  of  Tob"— appears  in  Josephus  (Ant,  vii,  6, 1)  as 
"larufioc.  In  oonnection  with  this  explanation  may 
be  noticed  the  reading  of  aome  MSS.  in  John  vi,  71,  dnb 
KapiwroVf  and  that  receiyed  by  Lachmann  and  Iliach- 
eilOorf,  which  makes  the  name  Iscariot  belong  to  Simon, 
and  not,  as  elsewhere,  to  Judas  only.  On  this  hypoth- 
esis,  his  pomtion  among  the  Twelve,  the  rest  of  whom 
belonged  to  Galilee  (Acta  ii,  7),  would  be  exceptional; 
and  this  Ib  perhaps  an  additional  reason  why  this  local- 
ity  is  noted  This  is  the  most  common  and  probable 
opinion.    See  Kekioth. 

(2)  Prom  Kartka  (A.V.  «Kartan,»»  Josh.  xxi,  82),  in 
Galilee  (so  Ewald,  Getch,  Itraeh,  v,  821). 

(3)  As  equivalent  to  fssacharite,  or  *lffaxapuaTiic 
(Grotins  on  Matt  x,  4;  Hennann,  Miscett,  Groming,  iii, 
6d8). 

(4)  From  the  daU-4ree8  (Kapiutńdię)  in  the  neigh- 
borhood  of  Jerusalem  or  Jericho  (Bartolocd,  Bibl.  Rab- 
hm.  iii,  10;  GUI,  Comm,  on  Mott.  x,  4). 

(6)  From  K-^anipDK  (^-scortea,  GiU,  I  c),  a  leath^ 
em  aprartj  the  name  being  applied  to  him  as  the  bearer 
of  the  bag,  and ="  Judas  with  the  apton"  (Lightfoot, 
Bor,  ffeb.  m  Mott,  x,  4). 

(6)  From  M*^3DK,  (ucora  =stmigling  (angina),  as 
given  alter  his  death,  and  commemoradng  it  (Light- 
foot, L  c.)f  or  indicating  that  he  had  been  snbject  to  a 
disease  tending  to  suflbcation  pTevioualy  (Heinsius,  in 
Soicer,  Tkes.  s.  v.  *lov6ac).  This  is  mentioned  alao  as  a 
meaning  of  the  name  by  Oiigen,  Tr€ut  m  Mott,  xxxv, 

2.  Pertonal  Noticet,-~4X  the  life  of  Judas,  before  the 
appearance  of  his  name  in  the  lisŁs  of  the  apostks,  we 
loiow  absolutely  nothing.  It  most  be  left  to  the  sad 
vifflon  of  a  poet  (Keble,  Lgfra  lunocentium^  ii,  18)  or  the 
ftntastic  fables  of  an  apocryphal  Gospel  (Thilo,  Cod, 
Apoc  N,  T.,  £vang.  Infant,  c,  85)  to  portray  the  infancy 
imd  youth  of  the  traitor.  His  cali  as  an  apostle  im- 
plies,  howeyer,  that  he  had  previousiy  dedaied  him- 
self  a  disciplow  He  was  drawn,  as  the  others  were,  by 
the  pieaching  of  the  Baptist,  or  bis  own  Messianic 
bopes,  or  the  ''gradoos  words"  of  the  new  teacher,  to 
]eave  his  former  life,  and  to  obey  the  cali  of  the  Prophet 
of  Nazareth.  What  baser  and  morę  selfish  motives 
may  have  mingled  even  then  with  his  faith  and  zeal 
we  can  only  jadge  by  reasoning  backwards  fiom  the  se- 
qiieL  Gifts  of  some  kind  there  most  have  been,  ren- 
dering the  choice  of  such  a  man  not  strange  to  others, 
not  uniit  in  itself,  and  the  fonction  which  he  exerci8ed 
afterwards  among  the  Twelve  may  indicate  what  thęy 
were.  The  podtion  of  his  name,  uniformly  the  last  in 
the  lists  of  the  apostles  in  the  S3moptic  Gospels,  is  due, 
it  may  be  imagined,  to  the  infamy  which  afterwards 
rested  on  his  name,  but,  prior  to  that  guilt,  it  would 
seem  that  he  externally  differed  in  no  marked  particti- 
lar  from  the  other  apostles,  and  he  doubtleas  exerotsed 
the  same  miaśon  of  preaching  and  miracles  as  the  rest 
(MaŁL  X,  4;  xxvi,  14-47;  Mark  iii,  19;  xiv,  10,  48; 
Lnke  vi,  16;  xxii,  8,  47,  48;  John  vi,  71;  xii,  4;  xiii, 
2,  26;  xiv,  22;  xviii,  2, 8).    A.D.  27. 

The  geims  (see  Stier^s  Words  o/Jenu,  at  the  passa- 
ges  where  Judas  is  mentioned)  of  the  evil,  in  all  likeli- 
hood,  unfolded  themselve8  gradually.  The  rules  to 
which  the  Twelve  were  subject  in  their  iirst  Joumey 
(Matt.  X,  9, 10)  sheltered  him  tnm  the  temptation  that 
would  have  been  most  dangerous  to  him.  The  new 
Ibrm  of  life,  of  which  we  find  the  traces  in  Lukę  viii,  8, 
brought  that  temptation  with  it.  As  soon  as  the  Twelve 
were  reoognised  as  a  body,  traveUing  hither  and  thither 
with  their  Master,  reoeiving  money  and  other  offerings, 
and  redistributing  what  they  reGeived  to  the  poor,  it 
beeame  necessary  that  some  one  should  act  as  the  stew- 
ard and  almoner  of  the  sraaU  sodety,  and  this  fell  to 
Judas  (John  xii,  6 ;  xiti,  29),  either  as  having  the  gifts 
that  qualified  him  for  it,  or,  as  we  may  co^Jecture,  fh>m 


his  character,  becanse  he  songht  it,  or,  as  some  hav« 
imagined,  in  rotation  from  time  to  time.  The  Galilseam 
or  Judftan  peasant  (we  have  no  reason  for  thinking  that 
his  station  dilfered  from  that  of  the  other  apoetles)  found 
himself  intnisted  with  larger  sums  of  money  than  before 
(the  three  hundred  denarii  of  John  xii,  6  are  spoken  of 
as  a  sum  which  he  might  reasonaUy  have  expected), 
and  with  this  there  came  covetousnes8,  unfaithfulness, 
embezzlement.  It  was  impossible  after  this  that  he 
oonld  feel  at  ease  with  one  who  asserted  so  clearly  and 
sharply  the  laws  of  faithfulness,  duty,  unselfishnees';  and 
the  words  of  Jesus,  "^  Have  I  not  chosen  you  Twelve, 
and  one  of  yon  is  a  devil?*^  (John  vi,  70)  indicate  that 
even  then,  though  the  greed  of  immediate  or  the  hope 
of  laiger  gain  kept  him  from  ''going  back,**  as  others 
did  (John  vi,  66),  hatred  was  taking  the  place  of  love, 
and  leading  him  on  to  a  fiendish  midignity.  The  scenę 
at  Bethany  (John  xii,  1-9 ;  liUtt  xxvi,  6-18 ;  Mark  xiv, 
8-9)  showed  how  deeply  the  canker  had  eaten  into  his 
souL  The  warm  outpouring  of  love  calls  forth  no  sym- 
pathy.  He  ntters  himself,  and  snggests  to  others,  the 
complaint  that  it  is  a  waste.  Under  the  plea  of  caring 
for  the  poor  he  coverB  his  own  miserable  theft. 

The  naiTative  of  Matt.  xvi,  BCark  xiv,  places  this  his- 
tory  in  close  connecdon  (apparently  in  order  of  time) 
with  the  fact  of  the  betraykL  Dnring  the  days  that 
intervened  between  the  supper  at  Bethany  and  the  pas- 
chal  or  qua8i-paschal  gathering,  he  appeared  to  ^ave 
conccaled  his  tieachery.  He  went  with  the  other  dis- 
ciples  to  and  fro  from  Bethany  to  Jerusalem,  and  looked 
on  the  acted  paraUe  of  the  barren  and  condemned  tree 
(Mark  xi,  20-24),  and  shared  the  vigils  in  Gethsemane 
(John  xviii,  2).  At  the  beginning  of  the  Last  Supper  he 
is  present,  looking  forwaid  to  the  consummation  of  his 
guilt  as  drawing  nearer  every  hoor.  All  is  at  fint  as  if 
he  were  still  faithful.  He  is  admitted  to  the  feast.  His 
feet  are  washed,  and  for  him  there  are  the  feaiful  words, 
'^  Te  aie  dean,  but  not  alL"  At  some  point  during  the 
meal  (see  bdow)  come  the  sorrowful  words  which  show- 
ed him  that  his  design  was  known.  "  One  of  you  shall 
betzay  me."  Others  ask,  in  their  sorrow  and  confusion, 
*'Is  it  I?"  He,  too,  must  ask  the  same  que8tion,  lest 
he  should  seem  guilty  (Matt.  xxvi,  25).  He  alone  hears 
the  answer.  John  only,  and  through  him  Peter,  and 
the  traitor  himself,  understand  the  meaning  of  the  act 
which  pointed  out  that  he  was  the  guilty  one  (John 
xiii,  26).  Afler  this  there  comes  on  him  that  paroxysm 
and  insanity  of  guilt  as  of  one  whose  hnnum  soul  was 
possessed  by  the  Spirit  of  £vil — ^*Satan  entered  into 
bun"  (John  xiii,  27).  The  words,  **  What  thou  doest, 
do  qnickly,"  oome  as  a  spur  to  drive  him  on.  The  other 
disdples  see  in  them  onJy  a  command  which  they  inter- 
pret  as  oonnected  with  the  work  he  had  hitherto  under- 
taken.  Then  he  completes  the  sin  fVom  which  even 
those  woids  might  have  dimwn  him  back.  He  knows 
that  garden  in  which  his  Master  and  his  companions 
had  80  often  rested  after  the  weary  work  of  the  day. 
He  oomes,  accompanied  by  a  band  of  ofRcers  and  ser- 
vant8  (John  xviii,  8),  with  the  kiss  which  was  probably 
the  nsnal  salutation  of  the  disdples.  The  words  of  Je- 
sus, cahn  and  gentle  as  they  were,  showed  that  this  was 
what  embittered  the  treachery,  and  madę  the  sufTering 
it  inflicted  morę  acote  (Lukę  xxii,  48). 

What  followed  in  the  confusion  of  that  night  the 
Gospels  do  not  record.  Not  many  students  of  the  N.  T. 
will  foUow  Henmann  and  archbishop  Whately  {Essaya 
on  Danfftrs)  in  the  hypothesis  that  Judas  was  *'the 
other  disdple**  that  was  known  Xjo  the  high-priest,  and 
brought  Peter  in  (comp.  Meyer  on  John  xviii,  1 5).  It 
is  probable  enough,  indeed,  that  he  who  had  gone  out 
with  the  high-prieet*B  officers  should  return  with  them 
to  wait  the  issue  of  the  triaL  Then,  when  it  was  over, 
came  the  reaction.  The  fever  of  the  crime  passed  away. 
There  came  back  on  him  the  recollection  of  the  sinless 
righteousness  of  the  Master  he  had  wronged  (Matt. 
xxvii,  8).  He  feels  a  keen  remone,  and  the  gold  that 
had  tempted  him  to  it  becomes  hatefuL    He  will  get 


JIJDAS 


1062 


JUDAS 


ńd  of  the  ftccuned  thing,  will  transfer  tt  back  again  to 
tbose  who  with  it  bad  laied  hun  on  to  desŁniction. 
They  mock  and  sneer  at  the  tool  wbom  tbey  bave  used, 
and  then  there  comes  over  bim  the  horror  of  great 
darknees  Łhat  preoedea  eelf-murder.  He  bas  owned  bis 
fin  with  ^  an  exceedmg  bitter  ery,"  bnt  be  dares  not 
tum,  with  any  bope  of  pardon,  to  the  Master  wbom  be 
bas  betrayed.  He  borls  the  money,  which  the  prieHts 
refused  to  take,  Into  the  sanctuary  (yaóc)  where  they 
were  assembled.  For  him  there  is  no  longer  sacrifice  or 
propitiation.  He  U  *'  the  son  of  perdition"  (John  xvii, 
12).  **He  departed,  and  went  and  hanged  bimselT* 
(ftlatt.  xxvii,  5).  He  went  "  anto  bis  own  place"  (Acts 
1,25).    A.D.29.     Seebelow. 

With  the  exception  of  the  stories  already  mentioned, 
there  are  but  few  traditions  tbat  gather  lound  the  name 
of  Judaa.  It  appears,  bowever,  in  a  stnmge,  baidly  in- 
telligible  way  in  the  bistory  of  the  wilder  heresies  of 
the  2d  century.  The  sect  of  Cainites,  consistent  in  their 
inver8ion  of  all  tbat  Christians  in  genend  believed,  was 
reported  to  bave  honored  bim  as  the  only  apostle  that 
was  in  poseesaion  of  the  tnie  gnorit,  to  have  madę  bim 
the  object  of  their  worship,  and  to  have  had  a  gospel 
bearing  hia  name  (comp.  Neander,  Chtrch  HitL  ii,  153 ; 
Irenseus,  ade,  Har,  i,  85;  Tertullian,  De  Pnetc,  c  47). 
For  the  apocryphal  gospel  (Epiphanios,  Har.  xxxviii, 
1),  see  Fabriciua,  Codex.  Apocr.  i,  362.  See  Gospels, 
Spurious. 

3.  Our  LorcTs  ObfecŁ  m  hu  SeUdion  cu  an  Apottk,— 
The  cboioe  was  not  madę,  we  must  remember,  withont 
a  prevision  of  its  issue.  "Jesus  knew  from  the  begin- 
ning  .  .  .  who  should  betray  him"  (John  vi,  64) ;  and 
the  distinctness  with  which  tbat  evangeli8t  reoords  the 
8ucces8ive  stages  of  the  guilt  of  Judas,  and  hia  Ma8ter'8 
diacemment  of  it  (John  xii,  4;  xiii,  2,  27),  leave8  with 
ua  the  impression  that  be,  too,  shrank  ui8tinctively 
(Bengel  describes  it  as  "singularis  antipathia,"  Gnomon 
N.  Test,  on  John  vi,  64)  from  a  naturę  so  oppoeite  to  bis 
own.  We  can  bardly  expect  fully  to  solve  the  ąuestion 
wby  such  a  man  was  chcisen  for  such  an  offioe,  nor  is  it 
our  piovince  to  sound  all  the  deptbs  of  the  divine  pur- 
poaes,  yet  we  may,  without  presumption,  raise  an  in- 
quiry  on  this  subject. 

(1.)  Some,  on  the  groond  of  God'8  absolnte  fore- 
knowledge,  oontent  themselve8  with  saying,  with  Cal- 
vin,  that  the  Judgments  of  God  are  as  a  great  deep,  and 
with  UUmann  (^Siindiosigk,  Jem,  p.  97),  that  Judas  was 
chosen  in  order  tbat  the  divine  purpose  might  be  ac- 
oompliahed  through  bim.    See  Predestination. 

(2.)  Otbers,  less  dogntatic  in  their  viewa,  believe, 
with  Neander  (Leben  Jeni^  §  77),  that  there  was  a  dis- 
cemment  of  the  latent  germs  of  evil,  such  as  belonged 
to  the  Son  of  Man,  in  bis  insight  into  the  bearts  of  men 
(John  ii,  25 ;  Matt.  be,  4 ;  Mark  xii,  15),  yet  not  such 
as  to  exclude  emotions  of  sudden  eorrow  or  anger  (Mark 
iii,  5),  or  aatonishment  (Mark  vi,  6;  Lukę  vii,  9),  ad- 
mitting  the  thought  "  with  men  this  ia  impossible,  but 
not  with  God."  Did  be,  in  the  deptb  of  that  insight, 
and  in  the  fulness  of  bis  compaaaion,  aeek  to  overcome 
the  evil  which,  if  not  conquered,  would  be  so  fatal  ?  It 
give8,  at  any  rato,  a  new  meaning  and  force  to  many 
parta  of  our  Lord'8  toaching  to  remember  tbat  tbey  most 
have  been  spoken  in  the  bearing  of  Judas,  and  may 
bave  been  deaigned  to  make  him  conscious  of  his  dan- 
ger.  The  wamings  as  to  the  tmpoasibility  of  a  service 
dirided  between  God  and  mammon  (Matt  vi,  19-34), 
and  the  de8tructive  power  of  the  "carea  of  this  world," 
and  the  ''  deceitfulness  of  richea"  (Matt.  xii,  22, 23),  the 
pointed  worda  tbat  apoke  of  the  guilt  of  unfaitbfulneaa 
in  the  "  unrighteoua  mammon"  (Lukę  xvi,  11),  the  prov- 
erb  of  the  camel  passing  through  the  needle's  eyc  (Mark 
X,  2b\  must  bave  fallen  on  hia  heart  aa  meant  apecially 
for  bim.  He  was  among  tboae  who  aaked  the  queation, 
TVlio,  then,  can  be  aaved?  (Mark  x,  26).  Of  him,  too, 
we  may  say  tbat,  when  be  sinned,  be  was  "kickiug 
against  the  pricka,"  lettlng  abp  hia  ''  calling  and  elec- 
tion,"  fruatratiiig  the  purpoae  of  bis  Master  iu  giving 


bim  so  high  a  woik,  and  edncating  bim  for  it  (oompoe 
Chrysoetom,  Horn,  on  Matt.  xxvi,  xxvii,  Jokn  vi). 

(3.)  But  to  most  persona  these  will  appear  to  be  arfai- 
trary  or  recondite  argumenta.  Important  reaaona  of.a 
morę  practical  kind,  we  may  be  surę,  we^  not  wanting 
for  the  procedurę,  and  they  are  not  veiy  far  to  seek. 
The  presence  of  such  a  falae  friend  in  the  company  of 
hia  immediate  disciples  was  needed,  fint  of  all,  to  o«n- 
plete  the  cirde  of  Chriat'8  triala  and  temptations.  He 
could  not  otherwiae  have  known  by  personal  experienoe 
some  of  the  sharpeat  wounda  inflicted  by  human  pei^ 
versenes8  and  ingratitude,  nor  exhibited  bis  superiority 
to  the  evil  of  the  world  iu  its  most  offen8ivc  forma.  But 
for  tbe  deceit  and  trcachery  of  Judas  be  would  XM>t  have 
been  in  all  things  tempted  like  hia  brethren.  Then 
thua  only  could  the  things  undergone  by  bis  great  pro- 
totype  David  find  their  proper  counterpart  in  bim  who 
was  to  entor  into  David's  heritage,  and  raise  from  tbe 
dust  David'8  throne.  Of  the  things  written  in  the 
Psalms  conceming  bim — vnritton  there  aa  derived  from 
the  deptha  of  David'a  sore  expcrience  and  abarp  oonfiia 
with  evil,  but  deatined  to  meet  again  in  a  still  greater 
thau  be — ^few  have  morę  affecting  prominence  given  to 
them  than  thoee  which  relate  to  the  hardened  wicked- 
ness,  base  treachery,  and  reprobate  condition  of  a  fidse 
friend,  wbose  words  were  smootb  as  batter,  but  whoee 
actions  were  drawn  swords,  who  ato  of  his  meat,  but  lift- 
ed  up  tbe  heel  against  bim  (comp.  Psa.  xli,  9,  with  John 
xiii,  18 ;  and  see  AHrrROPHEL).  Otber  propbeciea  also, 
especially  two  in  Zechariab  (x,  12, 13 ;  xiii,  6),  waited  for 
their  accomplisbment  on  such  a  oourse  of  ingratitude 
and  treachery  as  tbat  pursued  by  Judas.  Further,  the 
relation  in  which  tbia  false  but  ungenial  and  aharp- 
sighted  disdple  stood  to  tbe  rectitude  of  Jesus  affoidcd 
an  important  reaaon  for  bis  presence  and  agency.  It^ 
was  well  tbat  thoee  who  stood  at  a  greater  disumoe* 
from  the  Saviour  fuled  to  discovcr  any  fanlt  in  him; 
tbat  nonę  of  them,  when  the  bonr  of  trial  came,  could 
convict  bim  of  sin,  tboogh  the  most  watcbful  inspec- 
tion  had  been  exercised,  and  the  most  anxious  efforta 
bad  been  madę  to  enaUe  them  to  do  ao.  But  it  was 
much  morę  that  even  this  bosom  friend,  who  had  been 
privy  to  all  his  counsels,  and  had  seen  him  in  hia  moit 
unguarded  moments,  waa  eąually  incapable  of  finding 
any  evil  in  him ;  be  oould  betray  Jesua  to  his  enemiea, 
but  be  could  fumiah  these  enemies  with  no  proof  of  hia 
criminality ;  nay,  with  the  bittemess  of  death  in  his 
soul,  be  went  baick  to  testify  to  them  that,  in  dclivering 
up  Jesus,  be  had  betiayed  Innocent  blood.  Wliat  morę 
conclusire  evidence  oould  the  world  have  had  that  our 
Lord  was  indeed  without  spot  and  UamelesB?  FinaUr, 
the  appearance  of  such  a  person  as  Judas  among  the 
immediato  attendants  of  Jesus  was  needed  as  an  exaro- 
ple  of  tbe  strengtb  of  human  depravity~how  it  can  luk 
under  the  most  sacred  profeasions,  subsist  in  the  hoUc-st 
company,  live  and  grow  amid  the  dearnt  light,  the  rooat 
solemn  wazninga,  the  tenderest  entreaties,  sjid  the  divi- 
nest  works.  The  instruction  afforded  by  the  incama- 
tion  and  public  ministry  of  tbe  Son  of  CSod  would  noc 
bave  been  complete  without  sUch  a  memorable  exhibi-> 
tion  by  its  side  of  the  darker  aspects  of  haman  naturę; 
the  Chnrch  should  have  wanted  a  portion  of  the  mate- 
riałs  reąuired  for  ber  futurę  waming  and  admonition : 
and  on  tiiis  aooount  also  there  waa  a  vaiid  reason  (ar  tbe 
calling  of  one  who  oould  act  the  shamefnl  part  of  Judas 
Iscańot 

4.  Mottpet  of  Judas  m  tke  Bełragffd  o/kit  Master^— 
The  Scripture  acoount  leaves  these  to  conjectore  (^eomp. 
Neander,  Leben  Jetu,  §  264).  The  merę  love  of  money 
may  have  been  strong  enough  to  make  hun  dutch  at 
the  bribe  offered  him.  He  came,  it  may  be,  expecting 
morę  (Matt.  xxvii,  15) ;  be  will  take  that.  He  bas  ]<«£ 
the  chance  of  dealing  with  tbe  three  hundred  dcnarii; 
it  will  be  something  to  get  the  thuty  abekels  aa  his  ows. 
It  may  have  been  that  he  felt  that  his  Master  saw 
through  his  bidden  guilt,  and  that  be  hastencd  on  a 
crisis  to  avoid  the  shame  of  open  detection,     Mingted 


JUDAS 


1063 


JUDAS 


witli  thiii  tbere  may  lisTe  been  some  feeling  of  rindio- 
tivi:iietfis  a  vagiie,  oonfiued  deaiie  to  show  that  he  had 
pow«r  to  stop  the  career  of  ftie  teacher  who  bad  re- 
pmyed  him.  Had  the  worda  that  npoke  of  **  the  burial" 
•of  Jesiu,  and  the  lukewammen  of  the  people,  and  the 
eonspi/acies  of  the  priesta,  led  him  at  last  co  aee  that 
the  Menianic  kingdom  was  not  as  the  kingdoms  of  thb 
worki)  and  that  hia  dream  of  power  and  wealth  to  be 
enjojed  in  it  was  a  delnsion?  (Ewald,  Geteh,  Israeli,  y, 
441-446).  Tbere  may  have  been  the  thought  that,  af- 
ter  all,  the  betrayal  oould  do  no  hann,  that  his  Master 
would  prore  his  innocencei  or  Yry  some  supematural 
manifestation  effect  his  escape  (Lightfoot,  Hor,  Hti>,  p. 
886 ;  and  Wbitby  on  Matt,  xxvii,  4).  Another  motive 
bas  been  snggested  (compare  Neander,  Lthen  Jem,  L  c. ; 
and  Whately,  Enayt  on  Daugerg  to  Chrittian  FaUk, 
disooune  iii)  of  an  entirely  different  kind,  altering  al- 
together  the  character  of  the  act.  Not  the  love  of 
money,  nor  reyenge,  nor  fear,  nor  disappointment,  but 
policy,  a  subtle  plan  to  foroe  on  the  bour  of  the  tiiiimpb 
of  the  Messianic  kingdom,  the  belief  that  for  this  senrioe 
he  would  reoeiTe  as  high  a  place  as  Peter,  or  James,  or 
John— this  it  was  that  madę  him  the  tńitor.  If  he 
oould  place  his  Master  in  a  poaition  from  which  retreat 
would  be  imposBible,  where  he  would  be  oompelled  to 
throw  himself  on  the  people,  and  be  raised  by  them  to 
the  throne  of  his  father  I>avid,  then  he  might  look  for- 
waid  to  being  foremost  and  highest  in  that  kingdom, 
with  all  his  desires  for  wealth  and  power  g^tified  to  the 
fuli.  Ingenious  as  this  hypothesis  is,  it  iails  for  that 
reiy  reason.  I(  attributes  to  the  groYclling  peasant  a 
snbtlety  in  forecasting  political  combinations,  and  plan- 
ning  stratagems  accordingly,  which  is  hardly  compati- 
ble  with  hb  character  and  leaming,  hardly  consistent 
either  with  the  pettiness  of  the  faults  into  which  he  had 
hitherto  fallen.  It  is  characteristic  of  the  wide,  far- 
reaching  sympathy  of  Origen  that  he  suggests  another 
motive  for  the  suicidc  of  Judas.  Despairing  of  pardon 
in  this  life,  he  would  rush  on  into  the  world  of  the  dead, 
and  tbere  (yv/ivy  rg  ^X9)  ™^^^  ^^  Lord,  and  confess 
his  guilt,  and  ask  for  ptódon  {TrticL  in  Matt.  xxxy; 
oomp.  also  Theophanes,  Horn,  xxvii,  in  Suicer,  Theg.  s. 
V.  'lovdac).  Of  the  other  motives  that  have  been  i 
aigned  we  need  not  care  to  flx  on  any  one  as  that  which 
ńngly  led  him  on.  Crime  is,  for  the  most  part,  the  re- 
snlt  of  a  hundred  motives  rushing  with  bewildering  fury 
tbroogh  the  mind  of  the  crimuud. 

6.  The  question  bas  often  been  agitated  whether  Judas 
was  present  at  the  flrst  celebration  of  the  Lord*8  supper, 
or  left  the  assembly  before  the  institution  actnally  took 
place ;  but  with  no  very  decisiye  result.  The  condusion 
reached  on  either  side  bas  yeiy  commonly  been  deter- 
mincd  by  doctńnal  prepossessions  rather  than  by  exe- 
getical  principles.  The  generał  consensus  of  patristic 
commentatoTS  gives  on  affirmative  to  the  quc8tion  of  his 
portaking  of  the  commemoratiye  meal,  that  of  modem 
critics  a  negntire  answer  (comp.  Meyer,  Comm,  on  John 
xiii,  86).  Of  the  thrce  synoptic  evangelists,  Matthew 
and  Mark  represent  the  charge  of  an  intcntion  to  betray 
on  the  part  of  Judas  as  being  brought  again^t  him  be- 
tween  the  pascbal  feast  and  the  supper,  while  Lukę  does 
not  mention  it  till  both  fcasts  were  iinished ;  yet  nonę 
of  them  say  preciscly  when  he  left  the  chamber.  From 
this  surely  it  may  be  inferrcd  that  nothing  vcry  mate- 
riał depended  on  the  circumstance.  If  Judas  did  ]eave 
before  the  commencement  of  the  supper,  it  was  plainly 
not  becanse  he  was  formally  excluded,  but  becauae  he 
felt  it  to  be  morally  impossible  to  contlnne  any  longer 
in  such  company.  As,  however,  it  scems  certain,  from 
John  xlii,  80,  that  he  left  the  moment  Jesus  brought 
home  the  charge  to  him,  and  gave  him  the  sop,  and  as 
it  is  next  to  certain  that  the  feast  then  proceeding  was 
not  that  of  the  supper,  the  probabilities  of  the  cas<e  must 
be  held  to  be  on  the  side  of  his  previous  withdrawaL 
The  leąulsitions  of  time,  too,  favor  the  same  view ;  sińce, 
if  Judas  did  not  leaye  till  so  late  as  the  close  of  both 
feests,  it  is  scarcely  possible  to  oonceive  how  he  should 


have  had  time  to  arrange  with  the  chief  priests  for  pro- 
ceeding with  the  arrest  of  Jesus  that  very  night.  The 
matter  in  this  shape  came  alike  on  him  and  ou  them  by 
surprise ;  fresh  consultations,  therefore,  reąuired  to  be 
held,  fresh  measures  to  be  adopted  j  and  these  necessań- 
ly  demanded  time,  to  the  extent  at  least  of  sbme  hours. 
6.  AUfffed  DUcrepaney  ag  to  the  Modę  of  Juda^g 
Suicide,—We  have  in  Acta  i  another  account  Ihan  the 
above  of  the  circumstances  of  his  death,  which  some 
hav^  thought  it  difficult  to  harmonize  with  that  given 
by  Matthew.  Therc,  in  words  which  may  have  been 
spoken  by  tyter  (Meyer,  foUowing  the  generał  congengng 
of  interpreters),  or  may  have  been  a  parenthetical  notice 
inserted  by  Lukę  (Calvin,  Olshausen,  and  others),  it  is 
sUted, 

(1)  That,  instead  of  throwing  the  money  into  the 
Tempie,  he  bought  {iKrń^aro)  a  field  with  it  As  to 
this  point,  it  bas  been  said  that  tbere  is  a  kind  of  irony 
in  Petei^s  words,  ''This  was  all  he  got"  A  better  ex- 
planation  is,  that  what  was  bought  with  his  money  is 
spoken  of  as  bought  by  him  (Meyer,  ad  loc). 

(2)  That,  instead  of  hanging  hinoself, '' falling  head- 
long,  he  bunt  asunder  in  the  midst,  and  all  his  bowels 
gushed  out"  On  this  we  have  two  methods  of  rećon- 
ciliation:  (a)  That  airffy^arOf  in  Matt  xxvii,  5,  in- 
clndes  death  by  some  sudden  spasm  of  sufTocStion  (on- 
gima  pectorigf),  such  as  might  be  caused  by  the  over- 
powering  misery  of  his  remorse,  and  that  then  came  the 
fali  described  in  the  Acts  (Suicer,  Theg.  s.  v.  Airayxu; 
Grotius,  Hammond,  Lightfoot,  and  others).  By  some 
this  bas  even  been  connected  with  the  name  Iscariot,  aa 
implying  a  constitutional  tendency  to  this  disease  (Gil^. 
(6)  That  the  work  of  suicide  was  but  half  accomplished, 
and  that,  the  halter  breaking,  he  fell  (from  a  fig-tree,  in 
one  tradition)  across  the  road,  and  was  mangled  and 
cmshed  by  the  carts  and  wagons  that  passed  over  him. 
This  explanation  appears,  with  strange  and  horrible  ex- 
aggerations,  in  the  narrative  nf  Papias,  quotcd  by  CEcn- 
menius  on  Acts  i,  and  in  Thcophylact  on  Matt,  xxviL 
It  is,  howeyer,  but  a  reasimable  snppoeition  that  (Ju- 
das being  perhaps  a  corpulent  man),  the  ropę  breaking 
or  slipping,  he  fell  (probabły  from  some  elevated  place, 
see  Hackett,  lUuatra,  of  SeripL  p.  266)  with  such  vio- 
lence  that  his  abilomen  burst  with  the  falL 

(8)  That  for  this  reason,  and  not  because  the  priests 
had  bought  it  with  the  price  of  blopd,the  field  was  caB- 
ed  Aoeldama.  But  it  may  readily  be  supposed  that  the 
potter*s  field  which  the  priests  had  bought  was  the  same 
as  that  in  which  the  traitor  met  so  terrible  a  death. 

See  ACKLDAMA. 

7.  On  the  question  of  Judas*s  flnal  salyation,  it  is  dif- 
ficult to  see  how  any  dispute  conld  well  arise  in  yiew  of 
his  self-murder  (comp.  1  John  iii,  15).  But  aside  from 
this,  two  statements  seem  to  mark  his  fate  in  the  other 
world  as  distinctly  a  reprobate  one. 

(1.)  His  unmitigated  remorse,  as  expressed  in  Matt 
xxvii,  5.  This  passage  has  often  been  appealed  to  as 
illustrating  the  dilTerenoe  between  fUTafu\Łia  and  ftira- 
voia,  It  is  questionabIe,  however,  how  far  the  N.-Test. 
writers  recognise  that  distinction  (compare  Grotius,  ad 
loc).  Still  morę  questionable  is  the  notion  that  Mat- 
thew describes  his  disappointment  at  a  result  so  differ- 
ent from  that  which  he  had  reckoned  on.  Yet  this  u 
neyertheless  clearly  an  instance  of  "  the  sorrow  of  the 
world  that  worketh  death"  (2  Cor.  yii,  10).     See  Rb- 

PKKTANCB. 

(2.)  His  ''  going  to  his  own  place"  (Acts  i,  25),  where 
the  words  tdioc  róiroc  conyey  to  our  minds,  probabły 
were  meant  to  convey  to  those  who  heard  them  the  inv- 
pression  of  some  dark  region  in  Gehenna.  Lightfoot 
and  Gili  (ad  loc.)  quote  passages  from  Rabbinical  wri- 
ters who  find  that  roeaning  in  the  phrase,  eyen  in  Gen. 
xxxi,  55,  and  Numb.  xxiv,  25.  On  the  other  band,  it 
should  be  reroembered  that  many  interpreters  reject 
tłiat  explanation  (compare  Meyer,  ad  loc.),  and  that  one 
g^reat  Anglican  divine  (Hammond,  Comment,  on  N,  Teg(. 
ad  loc.)  enters  a  distinct  protest  against  it    Similarly 


JUDAS-LIGHT 


1064 


JUDE 


Dr.  Clarke  (Commentary^  ad  loc)  argnes  againut  the 
whole  of  oor  condoaions  respectiog  the  riolent  death  of 
Judas;  but  his  reasoning,  as  weU  as  that  of  the  other 
critics  namedfis  far  from  satiafactoiy. 

8.  Literaturę. — Special  treatises  on  the  chaiacter  of 
Judas  are  the  followingi  Zandt,  Comment,  de  Juda  pro- 
ditore  (lips.  1769) ;  Kau,  ^  nm«rib.  u6.  d.  Charakter  de* 
Judas  (Lemgo,  1778) ;  Schmidt,  Apohgie  d,  Judas,  in  his 
ExegeL  Beitr.  i,  18 ;  ii,  842 ;  Lechtlen,  De  adpa  Juda 
(Argent  1813) ;  Daub,  Judas  Isckarioth  (Heidelb.  1816) ; 
Schollmejer,  Jesus  und  Judas  (LUneb.  1886)  ;  Aogosti, 
TheoL  BibL  i,  497, 520  s  Ferencasy,  De  consiUo  proditums 
Juda  (Utr.  1829) ;  Gerling,  De  Juda  sacne  comte  contwa 
(Hal.  1744) ;  Hebenstreit,  De  Juda  Iscar.  (Yiteh.  1712) ; 
Philipp,  Ueb,  d.  Verratker  Judas  (Naumb.  1764) ;  Rutz,  D. 
Yerrdtherei  d,  Judas  (Haag,  1789) ;  Jour.  Sac  Lit,  July, 
1868.  On  his  death,  see  Casaubon,  Exerc.  antibar.  16,  p. 
627;  Alberti,ć>&MrraAp.222;  Paulus,  Comment  iii,  506 ; 
Barbatii  DisserL  nomssima  Juda  Iscar,  faJta  (Regionu 
1665) ;  Gotze,  Dt  suspendio  Juda  (Jen.  1661) ;  Roser,  De 
morte  Juda  (Yiteb.  1668) ;  Neunhofer,  De  Juda  lapsu 
eastincto  (Chenm.  1740)  j  Oldendoip,  2>6  Juda  mi  temph 
oociao  (Hannov.  1764).  For  other  monographs,  see  Yol- 
beding,  Index,  p.  82, 54 ;  Hase,  LAen  Jesu,  p.  191.  See 
Jesus  Christ.  { 

12.  A  Jew  lesiding  at  Damascus  in  the  Stiaigfat 
Street  at  the  time  of  Paul'8  conyersion,  to  whose  houae 
Ananias  was  sent  (Acts  ix,  11).    A.D.  80.     *'The 

*  Straight  Street*  may  with  little  ąuestion  be  identified 
with  the  '  Street  of  Bazaars,'  a  long,  wide  thoroughfare, 
penetrating  from  the  southem  gate  into  the  heart  of  the 
dty,  which,  as  in  all  the  Syro-Greek  and  Syro-Roman 
towns,  it  intersects  in  a  straight  line.    The  so-called 

*  House  of  Judas'  is  stiJl  shown  in  an  open  space  cailed 
<the  Sheykh's  Place,'  a  few  steps  out  of  the  ^Street  of 
Bazaars :'  it  contains  a  8quare  room  with  a  stone  floor, 
partly  waUed  pff  for  a  tomb,  shown  to  HaundreU  (Earfy 
Trav,  Bohn,  p.  494)  as  the  ^  tomb  of  Ananias.*  The  house 
is  an  object  of  religioiis  respect  to  Mussulmans  as  well 
as  Christiana  (Stanley,  Syr,  and  Pal  p.  412 ;  Conybeare 
and  UowsoD,  i,  102^  Pococke,  ii,  119)"  (Smith).  See 
Damascus. 

13.  Sumamed  Barsabas,  a  Christian  teacher  sent 
from  Jeruaalem  to  Antioch  along  with  Paul  and  Bama- 
bas  (Acts  XV,  22, 27, 82).  A.D.  47.  He  is  supposed  by 
some  (see  Grotius,  Wolf,  ad  k>c.)  to  have  been  one  of  the 
aeyenty  disciples,  and  brother  of  Joseph,  also  sumamed 
Barsabas  (son  of  Sabas),  who  was  proposed,  with  Maxr 
thias,  to  fili  up  the  place  of  the  traitor  Judas  (Acts  i, 
28);  but  others  (Augusti,  [/ebert,  dKaihoLBr,  ii,  86) 
identify  him  with  Judas  Thaddftus  (but  see  Bertholdt, 
V,  268 1).  Schott  supposes  that  Barsabas  means  the  son 
of  Sabas,  or  Zabas,  which  he  fancifully  legarda  as  an 
abridged  form  for  Zebedee,  and  oondudes  that  the  Judas 
here  mentioned  was  a  brother  of  the  elder  James  and  of 
John.  Judas  and  Silas  are  mentioned  together  (in  the 
above  deputation  of  the  Church  to  determine  the  obii- 
gation  of  the  Mosaic  Uw)  as  "■  prophets**  and  "  chief  men 
among  the  brethren'*  at  the  metropolia,  ^  perhaps  a 
member  of  the  Pre8b3rtery"  (Neander,  PL  and  Tr,  i,  123). 
After  employing  their  prophetical  gifts  for  the  confir- 
mation  of  the  Syrian  Christiana  in  the  faith,  Judas  went 
back  to  Jerusalem,  while  Silas  either  remained  at  Anti- 
och (for  the  reading  Acts  xv,  84  is  uncertain ;  and  while 
some  MSS.,  foUowed  by  the  Yulgate,  add  fióroc  'lovSac 
dk  itropŁifBrjy  the  best  omit  the  verse  altogether)  or 
speedily  retumed  thither.     See  Paul. 

14.  Son  of  one  Jałrus,  and  leader  of  a  company  of 
Jews  during  the  flnal  siege  of  Jerusalem  by  the  Romans, 
from  which  he  escaped  by  an  underground  passage ;  he 
was  afterwards  slain  while  leadtng  the  defence  of  the 
castle  of  Machienis  agauist  the  Roman  troops  (Josephus, 
War,  vii,  6, 5). 

Judas-tiight,  or  Judas  of  the  Faschal.  was 

the  name  of  a  woodcn  imitation  of  the  candle  which 
held  the  real  paschal  in  the  seyenth  branch  standing 


npright,  the  fest  diyei!gi]|g  on  either  aide.   SeeWaleott, 
SacArchaoL  s.  y. 

Jndd,  Oaylord,  a  Iklethodist  Epiaeopttl  miusta^ 
was  bom  at  Watertown,  Conn.,  Oct  7, 1784,  and  oon- 
yerted  in  1805.  He  was  liceosed  as  a  local  preacfaer  ia 
1809,  and  thiis  labozed  faithfully  for  twelye  yean;  cn- 
tered  the  Genesee  Conference  in  1821 ;  waa  mipemnnii- 
ated  in  1841;  and  died  at  Candor,  Tioga  Co.,N.  IT.,  in 
1859.  He  was  a  soond  and  eyangeliol  preacfaer,  and 
^had  a  good  report  of  all  meo."  Many  aoola  were  oon- 
yerted  by  his  ministry,  and  hb  memory  is  predoos  in 
the  Susquehanna  Yalky,  the  piinci|Ml  field  of  his  labon. 
^Minules  of  Coąferenoes,  1859,  vii,  162. 

Jndd,  BylTOSter,  a  Unitarian  minister  of  some 
notę,  was  bom  in  Westhampton,  Mass.,  July  23, 1813, 
and  was  edncated  at  Yale  College.  He  was  of  Oitbo- 
dox  paientage,  but  shortly  after  the  completkn  of  his 
collegiate  studies  he  changed  his  rdigions  opinioD^  and 
went  to  Cambridge  Diyinity  School  to  prepare  for  min- 
isterial  dnties  in  the  Unitarian  Churdu  He  was  cailed 
to  Augusta,  Maine,  and  there  spent  his  life.  He  died 
in  1858,  *<at  the  yeiy  beginning  of  a  oonrse  of  high  nse- 
fulness,  of  a  life  which  seemed  essential  to  the  Chnrch." 
Judd  wrote  seyeral  books  having  a  morał  end  in  view, 
and  as  a  literaiy  character  enjoyed  a  good  reputatioń 
for  ability.  See  Li/e  and  Character  o/the  Rec.  JS,  Jmdi 
(Bost.  1854),  p.  681 ;  Christian  Ezaminer,  1855,  p.  63  są. 

Jndd,  Willard,  a  Baptist  miiuster,  was  bom  in 
Southington,  Conn.,  Feb.  23, 1804.  After  teaching  for  a 
short  time,  he  settled  in  Canaan,  N.  Y.,4uid  was  lioensed 
to  preach  in  1826.  He  then  remoyed  to  Herkimer  Co., 
and  preached  altemately  in  Salisbuiy  and  Oppenhcim 
until  Aug.  28, 1828,  when  he  united  with  the  Church  in 
Salisbuiy.  He  continued  his  labon  here  with  great 
success  until  1885,  when  his  health  oompelled  him  to 
abandon  the  ministry.  In  1839  he  acoepted  an  appoint- 
ment  as  dassical  teacher  in  Middlebuiy  Academy,  at 
Wyoming,  which  situation  he  held  until  his  deaUi  in 
Feb.  1840.  Mr.  Judd  published  A  Reriete  ofProfetsor 
Stuar^s  Work  on  Bapłism  (1836,  and  later  revised  and 
enlaiged).  A  coUection  of  8everal  of  his  miscellaneous 
papers,  with  a  brief  Memoir  of  his  life,  waa  published 
after  his  death.— Sprague,  Afmals,  vi,  750. 

Jude,  or,  rather,  Judas  CloiSac,  I  q.  Judah;  see 
Jut)a).  There  were  two  of  this  name  among  the  twdye 
apostles— Judas,  cailed  also  Lebbaus  and  Tiiabdjeds 
(Matt.  X,  4;  Mark  iii,  18),  and  Judas  Iscariot.  Jodas 
is  likewise  the  name  of  one  of  our  Lord*s  brethren  (Matt. 
xiii,  55 1  Mark  vi,  8),  but  it  is  not  agreed  whether  oor 
Lord'8  brother  is  the  same  with  the  apostle  of  this  name. 
Lukę  (Gospel,  yi,  16;  Acts  i,  13)  calls  him  'loudac  la- 
Kiópov,  which  in  the  English  Anth.Tex8.  is  tranałated 
*' Judas,  the  brother  of  James."*  This  is  defended  by 
Winer  {Grarnm,  of  N.-T,  Diet,),  Amand  (Recher,  Crit. 
sur  VEp,  de  Jude),  and  accepted  by  Buiton,  Alfoid,  Tte- 
gelles,  Michaelia,  etc  The  ellipsis,  howcver,  betwecn 
'lovSac  and  *laKtt0ou  is  supplied  by  the  old  Syiiac 
transktor  (who  was  unaoquainted  with  the  Epistle  of 
Jude,  the  writer  of  which  calls  himself  'lovŁac  ac^fcc , 
'Icucw^ou,  Jude,  yerse  1),  with  the  word  son,  and  not 
brother,  Among  our  Lord's  brethren  are  named  (akng 
with  Judas)  James  and  Joses  (Matt.  xiii,  55;  Mark  vi, 
8).  If,  with  Helyidius  among  the  andents  (see  Jezome, 
Contra  Hehidium),  and  Kuinol,  Neander,  and  a  few 
other  modem  commentators,  we  weie  to  cooaider  our 
Lord*8  brethren  to  be  children  of  Joseph  and  the  Mrgin 
Mary,  we  should  be  under  the  necesaity  of  supposing 
that  there  was  a  James,  a  Joses,  and  a  Jodas  who  were 
uterine  brothers  of  our  Lord,  together  with  the  apoetles 
James  and  Judas,  who  were  children  of  Mary,  the  sistcr 
or  cousin  of  the  Yiigin  (see  Pearaon,  On  the  Creed,  aiU 
iv).  Otherwise  it  remains  for  us  to  chooee  the  opinion 
that  our  Lord*8  brethren  were  children  of  Joseph  by  a 
former  wife  (Escha  or  Salome,  acoording  to  an  apoóy- 
phal  tradition),  which  was  the  sentimeiit  of  the  major- 
ity  of  the  fathen  (still  receiyed  in  the  Orientd  Chuzch)i 


JUDE 


1065 


JUDE,  EPISTLE  OF 


<Hr  tbe  opinioii  adopted  in  the  Western  Cbuxch|  and  fint 
bioached  by  Jerome  {Cont,  Helńd,'),  that  the  brethren 
of  oiir  Lord  were  hiB  couńns,  as  being  children  of  Mary, 
the  wife  of  Cleophas,  who  most  therefore  be  considered 
aa  the  same  with  Alphsua.  If  we  conaider  James,  the 
biother  of  onr  Lord,  to  be  a  different  person  from  James, 
the  son  of  Alphsus,  and  not  one  of  the  Twelve,  Jude, 
the  brother  of  James,  must  conseąuently  be  plaiced  in 
the  same  category ;  but  if  they  are  one  and  the  same, 
Jude  most  be  considered  as  the  person  who  is  nunbered 
with  our  Lord*s  apoetles.  The  most  plaosible  sohition 
of  the  whole  difficulty  is  by  means  of  the  following  hy- 
pothoses:  Alph«is,  otherwise  called  Clopas,  was  the 
brother  of  Joseph,  the  reputed  father  of  Christ,  and 
married  Mary  (not  necessarily  a  blood-relatiye  of  the 
Yirgin) ;  dying  without  issue,  he  kft  his  wife,  thenoe- 
forth  deugnated  aa  Mary,  the  wife  (i.  e.  widów)  of  Clo- 
pas, to  his  brother  Joseph,  who  had  by  her  seyeral  chil- 
dren, namely,  James,  Judas,  Simon,  and  Joses  (and  per- 
haps  others,  induding  siaters),  the  eldest  of  whom 
(James)  was  especially  designated  as  the  son  of  Alphsfr- 
us,  as  being  his  heir  (Deut.  xxy,  5).  The  first  two  of 
these  (being  probably  older  than  Jesus)  were  the  James 
and  Judas,  or  Jude,  mentioned  among  the  apostles,  as 
also  the  authors  of  the  epistles  bearing  their  respectiye 
names,  being  half-brothers  of  Christ,  as  the  reputed  son 
of  the  common  parent  Joseph.  See  Alpheus  ;  Jamks  ; 
Joseph;  Makt. 

We  are  not  informed  as  to  the  time  of  the  yocation 
of  the  apostle  Jude  to  that  dignity.  Indeed,  the  only 
órcumstance  relaling  to  him  which  is  reoorded  in  the 
Goepels  consists  in  the  question  pnt  by  him  to  our  Lord 
(John  xiy,  22):  *<  Judas  saith  unto  him  (not  Iscariot), 
Lord,  how  is  it  that  thou  wilt  manifest  thyself  to  us,  and 
not  unto  the  world?'*  Nor  have  we  any  acoount  giyen 
of  his  proceedings  alter  our  LoTd's  resurrection,  for  the 
traditionary  notices  which  haye  been  preseryed  of  him 
rest  on  no  yery  certain  foundation  (Lardner*s  Hittory  of 
ihe  Apottla),  There  may  be  some  truth  in  the  tiadi- 
tion  which  connecta  him  with  the  foundation  of  the 
church  at  Edessa;  though  here  again  there  is  much 
confusion,  and  doubt  is  thrown  oyer  the  account  by  its 
connection  with  the  worthless  fiction  of  ^^  Abgams,  king 
of  Edesaa"  (Eusebius,  Hist,  EccL  i,  13 ;  Jerome,  Comm, 
in  Matt»  x).  Nicephoms  (^Hist,  EccL  ii,  40)  makes  Jude 
die  a  natural  death  in  that  city  after  preaching  in  Pal- 
estine,  Syria,  and  Arabia.  The  Syrian  tradition  speaks 
of  his  abode  at  Edessa,  but  adds  that  he  went  thence  to 
Assyria,  and  was  martyred  in  Fhoenicia  on  his  return; 
while  that  of  the  West  makes  Persia  the  field  of  his  la- 
bors  and  the  scenę  of  his  martyidom.  Jude  the  apostle 
is  commemorated  in  the  Western  Church,  together  with 
the  apostle  Simon  (the  name,  also,  of  one  of  our  Lord*s 
brethren),  on  the  8th  of  October.  Eusebius  giyee  us  an 
interesUng  tradition  of  Hegesippus  (HigU  EccL  iii,  20, 
82)  that  two  grandsons  of  Jude,  ''who,  acoording  to  the 
flesh,  was  called  the  Lord's  brother**  (oomp.  1  Cor.  ix,  5), 
were  seized  and  carried  to  Romę  by  order  of  Domitian, 
whose  apprehensions  had  been  excited  by  what  he  had 
beaid  of  the  mighty  power  of  the  kingdom  of  Christ; 
but  that  the  emperor  haying  discoyered  by  their  an- 
swers  to  his  inquines,  and  the  appearance  of  their  hands, 
that  they  were  poor  men,  supporting  themselyes  by  their 
labor,  and  haying  leamed  the  spiritual  naturę  of  Chrisfs 
*  kingdom,  dismissed  them  in  contempt,  and  ceased  from 
his  persecution  of  the  Church,  whereupon  they  retumed 
to  Palestine,  and  took  a  leading  place  in  the  churches, 
<' as  being  at  the  same  time  confesaors  and  of  the  Lord*s 
family"  (ctrę  dv  $ii  /iapTvpac  dfŁov  Kai  diró  yivtoc  óv 
rac  TOv  Kvpiov)f  and  liyed  till  the  time  of  Trajan. 
Kioephores  (i,  28)  tells  us  that  Jude*s  wife  was  named 
Mary.— Kitto ;  Smith.  For  further  discussion,  see  Bex^ 
tholdt,  EinL  y,  2679;  yi,  81, 79;  Perionii  Vita  Apostoł, 
p.  166 ;  Assemani,  Bibliotk,  Orient,  III,  ii,  13 ;  i,  302, 611 ; 
Bayer,  Uist.  Otrhan,  et  Edesten,  p.  104 ;  Credner,  EifiL 
i,  611 ;  De  Wette,  EmL  im  N,  T.  p.  840;  Harenberg,  in 
Mitcell,  Lipt.  nov,  iii,  878 ;  Michaelis,  EinL  ii,  1489 ;  and 


the  monographs  dted  by  Yolbeding,  Index,  p.  82.  On 
the  pretended  Gospel  of  Thaddsus,  see  Kleuker,  Apokr, 
N,  T,  p.  67  sq.    See  LebbuGus. 

JUDE,  Epistle  of.  The  last  in  order  of  the  cath- 
olic  epistles. 

L  Authon — ^The  writer  of  this  epistle  styles  himself, 
yeise  1,  ''Jude,  the  brother  of  James"  (aBtk^c  'laKtj- 
)3ov),  and  has  usually  been  identified  with  the  apostle 
Judas  Lebbseus  or  Thaddseus,  called  by  Lukę  (vi,  16) 
'loiSac  'Iacitf/3ov,  A.V.  "Judas,  the  brother  of  James." 
It  has  been  seen  i^ye  that  this  modę  of  supplying  the 
ellipsis,  though  not  altogether  in  acoordance  with  the 
utus  loguendi,  is,  neyertheless,  quite  justifiable^  although 
there  are  strong  reasons  for  rendering  the  words  "Ju- 
das, the  ttjn  of  James.'*  Jerome,  Tertullian,  and  Origen 
among  the  ancients,  and  Calmet,  Calvin,  Hammond) 
Hanlein,  Lange,  Yatablus,  Amaud,  and  Tregelles  among 
the  moderna,  agree  in  aasigning  the  epistle  to  the  apoa- 
Ue.  Whether  it  were  the  work  of  an  apostle  or  not,  it 
has  firom  yery  early  times  been  attributed  to  "  the  Lord's 
brother"  of  that  name  (Matt.  xiii,  65;  Mark  yi,  8):  a 
yiew  in  which  Origen,  Jerome,  and  (if  indeed  the  ^Id^ 
umbrationee  be  rightly  assigned  to  him)  Qemens  Alex- 
andrinus  agree ;  which  is  implied  in  the  words  of  Chry- 
sostom  (//om.  48  in  Joan,'),  confirmed  by  the  epigraph 
of  the  Syriac  yersions,  and  is  accepted  by  most  modem 
commentators— Amaud,  Bengel,  Burton,  Uug,  Jcssien, 
Olshausen,  TregeUes,  etc  The  objectiou  that  has  been 
fdt  by  Neander  {PL  and  Tr,  i,  892)  and  others,  that  if 
he  had  been  "  the  Lord*s  brother*^  he  would  haye  direct- 
ly  styled  himself  so,  and  not  merdy  "  the  brother  of 
James,**  has  been  anticipated  by  the  author  of  the  "  Ad- 
umbrationes'*  (Bunsen,  A  naleci.  A  nte-Nicem,  i,  880),  who 
says, "Jude, who  wrote  the  cathollc  Epistle,  brother  of 
the  sons  of  Joseph,  an  extremely  religious  man,  though 
he  was  aware  of  his  relationship  to  the  Lord,  did  not 
caU  himself  his  brother;  but  what  said  he?  '  Jude,  the 
aeryant  of  Jesus  Christ*  as  his  Lord,  but  'brother  of 
James.'  **  We  may  easily  belieye  that  it  was  through 
humility,  and  a  true  eense  of  the  altered  relations  ^- 
tween  them  and  him  who  had  been  "  dedared  to  be  the 
Son  of  God  with  power  ....  by  the  reeurrection  from 
the  dead**  (oomp.  2  Cor.  y,  16),  that  both  Jude  and  James 
forbore  to  cali  themselyes  the  brethren  of  Jesus.  The 
arguments  conceming  the  authorship  of  the  epistle  are 
ably  summed  up  by  Jessien  (De  Authent,  Ep,  Jud,  lips. 
1821)  and  Amaud  (Recher,  Criiig,  sur  FEptst,  de  Jude, 
Strasb.  1851,  transl.  in  the  Brit,  and  For.  Ev.  Rev.  July, 
1869) ;  and,  though  it  is  by  no  means  dear  of  difficulty, 
the  most  probable  oondusion  is  that  the  author  was 
Jude,  one  of  the  brethren  of  Jesus,  and  brother  of  James, 
aa  also  the  apostle,  the  son  of  Alphasus.  See  Bketiirkn 
OF  OUR  Lord. 

II.  Genuineness  and  Caaomctfy.— Although  the  Epis- 
tle of  Jude  is  one  of  the  so-called  Antilegomena,  and  its 
canonicity  was  ąuestioned  in  the  earliest  ages  of  the 
Church,  there  neyer  was  any  doubt  of  its  genuineness 
among  those  by  whom  it  was  knowu.  It  was  too  un- 
important  to  be  a  forgery ;  few  portions  of  holy  Scrip- 
ture  oould,  with  reyerence  be  it  spoken,  haye  been  roore 
easily  spared ;  and  the  ąuestion  was  neyer  whether  it 
was  the  work  of  an  impostor,  but  whether  its  author 
was  of  suffident  weight  to  warrant  its  admission  into 
the  canon.  This  question  was  gradually  decided  in  its 
fayor,  and  the  morę  widdy  it  was  known  the  morę  gen- 
erally  it  was  receiyed  as  canonical,  until  it  took  its  place 
without  further  dispute  as  a  portion  of  the  yolume  of 
holy  Scripture.    See  Antilegomkna. 

This  epistle  is  not  ci  ted  by  any  of  the  apostolic  fa- 
thers;  the  passages  which  haye  been  adduced  as  con- 
taining  allusions  to  it  (Hermsjs  Past,  Vis.  iy,  8 ;  Ciem. 
Bom.,  Ep,  ad  Cor.  eh.  xi ;  Polycarp,  Ep.  ad  PhiL  eh. 
iii)  presentiug  no  oertain  ev-idence  of  being  sneh.  It  is, 
howeyer,  formally  quoted  by  Clement  of  Alexandria 
{Padag,  iii,  239,  ed.  Sylburg. ;  Sirom.  iii,  431),  and  Eu- 
sebius  testifies  {Uist,  Eccles.  yi,  14)  that  he  treated  it  in 
his  Jlypoiyposes ;  it  is  also  treated  in  the  A  dunUn-ationes, 


JUDE,  EPISTLE  OF 


1066 


JUDE,  EPISTLE  OP 


•  flflcribed  to  Clement,  and  presenred  in  a  Latin  yenion. 
Tertullian  refen  to  the  epistle  as  that  of  Jtide  tbe  apostlc 
(Z)e  HabU,  Mulieh,  eh.  iii).  It  appeara  in  the  Muratori 
Fragment  among  the  canonical  booka.  Origen  repeated- 
ly  refera  to  it^  and  occaaionally  as  the  work  of  the  apostle 
Jude  {Hom.  m  Mott,  xiii,  55,  in  Opp^  ed.  De  la  Rue,  iii, 
403 ;  Com,  m  Kp,  ad  Rom.,  in  Opp,  iv,  519 ;  Him,  in  Jo$^ 
m  Opp,  ii,  41 1 ;  Z)e  Pnne^.f  in  Opp.  i,  188,  etc) ;  though 
in  one  place  he  speaks  as  if  doubts  were  entertained  by 
some  as  to  its  genaineness  (in  Mott,  xxii,  28,  in  Opp,  iii, 
814).  It  is  not  in  the  Peshito,  and  does  not  appear  to 
have  been  known  to  the  Syrian  chorehes  before  the  4th 
century,  near  the  close  of  wfaich  it  is  qooted  by  Ephra- 
em  Syrus  (Opp,  Syr,  i,  186).  Eusebius  ranks  it  among 
the  Antilegomena,  but  this  rather  because  it  was  not 
uniyersally  known  than  because  where  known  it  was 
by  any  regarded  with  snspicion  (//w/.  Eedes,  ii,  28;  iii, 
25).  By  Jerome  it  ia  referred  to  as  the  work  of  an 
apostle  (in  Tit,  i ;  Kp.  ad  Paulin,  iii),  and  he  states  that, 
though  suspected  by  some,  in  conseąuence  of  containing 
a  quotation  from  the  apr>rr}'phal  book  of  Enoch,  it  had 
obtained  such  authority  as  to  be  reckoned  part  of  the 
canonical  Scriptures  (Cafal.  Scripł,  Ecdes,).  From  the 
4th  century  onwards,  the  place  thns  conceded  to  it  re- 
mained  unąuestioned  (Westcott,  Canon  oftke  N,  Test), 
Thus  the  epistle  is  quoted  by  Malchian,  a  presbyter  of 
Antioch,  in  a  letter  to  the  bishops  of  Alexandria  and 
Romę  (Eusebius,  Hisf.  Eccles.  vii,  80),  and  by  Palladius, 
the  friend  of  Chrysostom  (Chrysostom,  Opp,  xiii,  DiaL 
cc,  18, 20),  and  is  contained  in  the  Laodicene  (A.D.  868), 
Carthaginian  (397),  and  so-called  Apostolic  catalogues, 
as  well  as  in  tłiose  emanating  from  the  churches  of  the 
Kast  and  West,  with  the  exception  of  the  Synopsis  of 
Chrysostom,  and  those  of  Cassiodoras  and  Ebed  Jesiu 

Yańous  reasons  might  be  assigned  for  delay  in  re- 
ceiving  this  epistle,  and  the  doubts  long  prevalent  re- 
epectiug  it.  The  uncertainty  as  to  its  author,  and  his 
standing  in  the  Church ;  the  unimportant  naturę  of  its 
contents,  and  their  almost  absolute  identity  with  2  Pet, 
ii;  and  the  suppotjed  ąuotation  of  apocryphal  books, 
would  all  t«nd  to  create  a  prejudice  ogainst  it,  which 
could  only  be  overcome  by  time,  and  the  gradual  recog- 
nition  by  the  leading  churches  of  its  genuineness  and 
canonicity. 

At  the  Reformation  the  doubts  on  the  canonical  au- 
thority on  this  epistle  were  revived,  and  have  becn 
shared  in  by  modern  commentatora.  They  were  morę 
or  less  enteruined  by  Grotius,  Luther,  Calvin,  Bergen, 
Bolten,  Dahl,  Michaelis,  and  the  Magdeburg  Centuria- 
tors.  It  has  been  ably  defended  by  Jessien,  De  A  uthfn- 
tia  Ep.  Juda,  Ups.  1821. 

There  is  nothing,  however,  in  the  epistle  itself  to  cast 
suspicion  on  its  genuineness ;  on  the  contrary,  it  rather 
impresses  one  with  tbe  conviction  that  it  must  have 
proceeded  from  the  writer  whose  name  it  bears.  An- 
other,  forging  a  work  iu  his  name,  woidd  hardly  have 
omitted  to  make  prominent  the  personality  of  Judas, 
and  his  relation  to  oiu*  Lord,  neither  of  which  oomcs  be- 
fore us  in  this  epistle  (Bleek,  EinL  in.  d,  N.  Test.  p.  557). 
See  Canon. 

III.  Tiim  and  Place  of  łTrdw^.— There  are  few,  if 
any,  extemal  grounds  for  deciding  these  points,  and  the 
intemal  evidence  is  but  smali 

1.  The  ąuestion  of  datę  is  connected  by  many  with 
that  of  its  relation  to  2  Peter  (see  below),  and  an  earlier 
or  later  period  has  been  assigned  to  it  according  as  it 
has  been  considered  to  have  been  anterior  or  posterior 
to  that  epistle.  Attempts  have  also  been  madę  to  prove 
a  late  datę  fur  the  epistle,  from  an  allegcd  ąuotation  in 
itfrom  the  apocryphal  book  of  Enoch  (ver8e  13) ;  but  it 
is  by  no  means  certain  that  the  passage  is  a  ąuotation 
from  the  now  extant  book  of  Enoch,  and  scholars  have 
yet  to  settle  when  the  book  of  Enoch  was  written,  so 
that  from  this  nothing  can.be  inferred  as  to  the  datę  of 
this  ejłistle. 

From  the  character  of  the  errors  against  which  it  is 
directed,  however,  it  cannot  be  placed  very  early ;  though 


there  is  no  sufficient  ground  for  SchleiermacheT'8  opSik 
ion  that ''  in  the  last  time**  (lv  ŁffxaTtf»  xpóv<fi,  >'er.  18 \ 
oomp.  1  John  ii,  18,  k<TxaTri  S»pa  iari)  forbids  our  placing 
it  in  the  apostolic  age  at  alL  Lardner  placea  it  between 
A.D.  64  and  66,  Davidson  before  A.D.  70,  Oedner  AJ). 
80,  Calmet,  Estiua,  Witsius,  and  Neander,  aftcr  the  death 
of  all  the  apostles  but  John,  and  perhaps  after  the  fali 
of  Jemsalem;  although  conaderable  weight  is  to  be 
given  to  the  argument  of  De  Wette  (Einleii.  in  N.  T.  p. 
300),  that  if  the  destruction  of  Jemsalem  had  already 
taken  place,  some  waming  would  have  been  drawn  from 
so  signal  an  instance  of  God'8  vengeance  on  the  "on- 
godly."  From  the  allusion,  however  to  the  preaching 
of  the  apostles,  we  may  infer  that  it  was  among  tbe 
later  productions  of  the  apostolic  age ;  for  it  was  written 
whilst  persons  were  still  alive  who  had  heard  spostla 
preach,  but  when  this  preaching  was  beginning  to  be- 
come  a  thing  of  the  past  (ver.  17).  On  the  other  hand, 
agaio,  if  the  author  were  really  the  biother  of  Jesuą  es- 
pecially  an  elder  brother,  we  cannot  weU  suppose  him 
to  have  lived  much  beyond  the  middle  of  the  flrst  cen- 
tury. We  mav  theiefore  oonjectnrally  plaoe  it  abont 
A.D.66. 

2.  There  are  still  less  data  from  which  to  determiDe 
the  place  of  writing.  Barton,  howerer,  is  of  opinion 
that  inasmnch  as  the  descendants  of  "  Judas,  the  brother 
of  the  Lord,"  if  we  identtfy  him  with  the  author  of  the 
epistle,  were  found  in  Palestiue,  he  probably  *'did  not 
absent  himsdf  long  from  his  native  countr\',"  and  that 
the  epistle  was  publisbed  there,  sińce  he  st^-les  himself 
"  the  brother  of  James,**  an  exprG88ion  most  likely  to  be 
used  in  a  country  where  James  was  well  known"  (£e- 
rlet.  łfisł.  i,  884).  With  this  locality  will  agree  all  tha 
above  considerations  as  to  datę. 

lY.  Persons  to  tekom  the  Epistle  is  addressed. — ^These 
are  described  by  the  writer  as  ^  the  called  who  are  sancd- 
fied  in  God  the  Father,  and  kept  for  Jesus  Christ."  From 
the  resemblance  of  some  parts  of  this  epistle  to  the  sec- 
ond  of  Peter,  it  has  been  inferred  that  it  was  sent  to  tbe 
same  parties  in  Asia  Minor,  and  with  a  view  to  enfoidng 
the  apoBtle*s  admonitions;  whilst  otbcrs,  from  the  stiong- 
ly  Jewish  character  of  the  writing,  infcr  that  it  was  ad- 
dressed to  some  body  of  Jewish  Christiana  in  Palestina. 
From  the  fact  that  the  parties  addressed  aeem  to  bare 
been  surrounded  by  a  large  and  wicked  popolatlon,  sonw 
have  supposed  that  they  may  have  dwelt  in  Corinth, 
whilst  others  suggest  one  of  the  oommcrcial  citi0  of 
Syria.  The  supposition  that  the  parties  addressed  dwelt 
in  Egypt  is  merę  conjecture.  But  the  address  (vec.  I) 
is  applicable  to  Christians  generally,  and  there  is  noth- 
ing in  the  body  of  the  epistle  to  limit  its  refcrence;  and 
though  it  is  not  improbable  that  the  author  had  a  pai^ 
ticular  portion  of  the  Church  in  view,  and  that  the 
Christians  of  Palestine  were  the  immcdiate  objecta  of 
his  waming,  the  dangers  described  were  sach  as  the 
whole  Christian  world  was  cxpo8ed  to,  and  the  adver- 
saries  the  same  which  had  eveiywhere  to  be  guarded 
against. 

V.  Objecff  Contents,  and  Errors  inreighed  againsl^-^ 
The  purpoae  which  the  writer  had  in  view  is  stated  by 
himself.  Afler  the  inscription,  he  says  that,  intendin^ 
to  write  "of  the  common  salvation,'*  he  found  himself^ 
as  it  were,  compeUed  to  utter  a  solemn  waming  in  de- 
fence  of  the  faith,  imperilled  by  the  evil  condnct  ^cor- 
mpt  men  (i-er.  8).  Possibly  there  was  some  obeenred 
outbreak  which  gave  the  oocasion.  The  evil  for  a  while 
had  been  working  in  secret — "certain  men  crept  in  un- 
awares"  (ver.  4)— but  now  the  canker  showed  itself.  The 
crisis  must  be  met  promptly  and  resolutely.  Therefore 
the  writer  denounces  those  who  tumed  the  grace  of 
God  "  into  lascivionsne8B,"  virtually  dcnying  God  by  dis- 
obeying  his  law.  He  alarms  by  holding  out  three  ez- 
amples  of  snch  sin  and  its  punishment — the  Israehtcs 
that  sinned  in  the  wildemess;  the  angels  that  ^' kept 
not  their  first  estate;"  and  the  foul  cities  of  Sodom  and 
Gomorrha  (ver.  5-7).  He  next  describes  minutely  the 
character  of  those  wbom  he  censurea,  and  shows  hów  of 


JUDE,  EPISTLE  OP 


1067 


JUDE,  EPISTLE  OP 


old  they  bad  been  prophetically  marked  oat  as  objects 
of  deaeryed  yengomce  (rer.  8-16).  Then,  timing  to 
the  faithful^he  rcminds  them  that  the  apostles  had  fore- 
warned  them  that  eyil  men  woald  rise  in  tbe  Chureh 
(ver.  17-19);  exhoit8  them  to  maintain  tbeir  own  stead- 
Cutneae  (ver.'!iO,  21),  and  to  do  their  utmost  in  rescuing 
othen  from  contamination  (yer.  22, 28) ;  and  oondades 
with  an  aacription  of  praiae  to  him  wfao  alone  could 
keep  his  people  from  falling  (yer.  24, 25).  The  whole 
was  thoroughly  applicable  to  a  time  when  iniquity  was 
aboundiog,  and  the  loye  of  many  wazing  cold  (Matt 
xxiv,  12). 

Tho  design  of  soch  a  tnin  of  thought  ia  obyiously  to 
pot  the  belierers  to  whom  the  epistle  was  addressed  on 
their  guard  against  the  misleading  elforts  of  oertain  per- 
sons  to  whoso  influence  they  were  expoeed.  Who  these 
persons  were,  or  to  what  dass  of  errorists  they  belonged, 
can  only  be  matter  of  conjectore.  Some,  indeed  (De 
Wette,  Schwegler,  Bleek),  think  the  persons  alluded  to 
hekl  no  peculiar  opinions,  and  were  simply  men  of  lax 
morals;  but,  from  the  manner  in  which  the  writer  refen 
to  them,  it  is  evident  that  they  were,  to  use  the  words 
of  Domer  {Entwkkdungsgeack,  i,  104,  £.  T.  i,  72)^  "not 
merely  practically  corrapt,  bat  teachers  of  error  as  weU." 
Their  opinions  seem  to  haye  been  of  an  antinomian 
character  (yers.  4, 18, 19),  but  there  is  nothing  to  eon- 
nect  them,  ezoept  in  a  yery  yague  and  distant  way,  with 
any  of  the  later  gnostic  sjrstema.  The  wiiter  formally 
chaiges  them  with  <*denying  the  only  Lord  Ciod,  and 
our  Lord  Jesus  Christ,**  langnage  which  De  Wette  ad- 
mits  usually  applies  to  error  of  doctrine,  bot  which  here 
be,  without  any  reason,  would  understand  of  feeling  and 
conduct.  The  licentious  courses  in  which  they  indulged 
led  element  of  Alezandria  to  think  that  they  were  the 
prototypes  of  the  Carpocratians  and  such  like :  **  Of 
these,  and  such  as  these,"  hc  says,"  I  think  that  Ju.le 
spokc  prophetically  in  his  epistle"  (5'^roin.  iii, 43 1, Sy Ib.); 
but  this  does  not  imply  that  they  had  formed  a  system 
like  that  of  the  Carpocratians,  but  only  that  the  notions 
and  usages  of  the  one  adumbrated  thoee  of  tbe  other. 
Perhaps  thcrc  haye  been  in  all  ages  persons  who  haye 
sought  by  peryerted  doctrine  to  gani  a  sanction  for  sen- 
sual  indulgence,  and  such  undoubtcdly  were  found  dis- 
turbing  the  peace  and  corrupting  the  purity  of  the 
churches  of  Christ  in  different  places  as  eaily  as  the 
second  half  of  the  Ist  centuiy.  The  persons  against 
whom  Jude  writes  were  appaiently  of  this  dass,  but  in 
their  immorality  the  practical  dement  was  morę  promi- 
nent than  the  speculatiye. 

TT.  5/iyfc.— The  main  body  of  tbe  epistle  is  wdl  cbar- 
acterized  by  Alford  {Gic  Test,  iy,  147)  as  an  impassioned 
inyectiye,  in  the  impetuous  whiriwind  of  which  the 
writer  Ib  hurried  along,  coUecting  example  after  exam- 
ple  of  dirine  yengeance  on  the  ungodly ;  heaping  ept- 
thet  upon  epithet,  and  piling  image  upon  image,  and, 
as  it  were,  laboring  for  words  and  images  strong  enough 
to  depict  the  poUuted  character  of  the  licentious  apos- 
tates  against  whom  he  is  waming  the  Chureh ;  return- 
'  ing  again  and  again  to  the  subject,  tm  though  all  lan- 
guage  was  insufl^ent  to  giye  an  adequate  idea  of  their 
profligacy,  and  to  ezpress  his  buming  hatred  of  their 
peryersion  of  the  doctrines  of  the  Gospel 

The  epbtle  is  said  by  De  Wette  {Eudeit, inaN.T,^^ 
800)  to  be  tolerably  good  Greek,  though  there  are  some 
pecoliarities  of  diction  which  have  led  Schmid  (Einleif, 
i,  814)  and  Bertholdt  (yi,8194)  to  imagine  an  Aramaic 
original. 

VII.  RHation  between  the  Epittle  o/ Jude  <mi  2  Peter, 
—The  larger  portion  of  this  epistle  (yer.  8-16)  doeely 
resembles  in  language  and  subject  a  part  of  the  second 
Epistle  of  Peter  (2  Pet.  ii,  1-19).  In  both  the  heretical 
enemies  of  the  (Tospel  are  described  in  terms  so  similar 
as  to  predude  all  idea  of  entire  independenoe.  Jude^s 
known  habit  of  quotation  would  seem  to  render  the  sup- 
position  most  probable  that  he  bas  borrowed  fVom  Pe- 
ter. Dr.  Dayidson,  howeyer  {Iwtrod,  to  the  N,  Tetf,  iii, 
607),  maintains  the  priority  of  Jude,    As  Jude*6  Epistle 


apparently  emanated  ftam  Ptdestine,  and  (if  the  aboye 
datę  be  correct)  from  Jerusalem,  it  may  in  some  sort  be 
reg^aided  as  an  echo  of  Petersa  admonitions  uttered  not 
long  before  at  the  Roman  eapital.  This  qnesŁion  will 
be  moro  fully  ezamined  under  Pbtbr,  8ecx)kd  Epistub 

OF. 

VIIL  ApoerypkaŁ  OmUationt, — ^Tbis  epistle  presents 
one  peculiarity,  which,  as  we  leam  from  Jerome,  cauaed 
its  authority  to  be  impugned  in  yery  eariy  times — the 
supposed  citation  of  apocryphal  writings  (yer.  9, 14, 16). 

1.  The  former  of  these  passages,  containing  the  refer- 
enee  to  the  contest  of  the  arohangel  Michael  and  the 
devil  '^about  the  body  of  Moses,"  was  supposed  by  Ori- 
gen  to  haye  been  founded  on  a  Jewish  work  called  the 
"Assumption  of  Moses"  ('AvaXi}if/ic  Mufcktac)^  ąuoted 
also  by  CEcumenius  (ii,  629).  Origen*s  words  are  ex- 
press,  "^  Which  little  work  the  apostle  Jude  has  madę 
mention  of  in  hu  epistle**  (De  Prmcip,  ii,  2;  yoL  i,  p. 
188) ;  and  some  haye  sought  to  identify  the  book  with 
the  m$«  r^y^^y^^Tke  Demi$e  of  Motet,"  which  ią 
howeyer,  proyed  by  Michadis  (iy,  882)  to  be  a  modem 
oomposition.  Attempts  haye  also  been  madę  by  Lard- 
ner,  Macknight,  Yitringa,  and  others,  to  interpret  the 
passage  in  a  mystical  sense,  by  reference  to  Zech.  iii,  1, 
2;  but  the  similarity  is  too  distant  to  afford  any  weight 
to  the  idea.  There  is,  on  the  whole,  little  ąuestion  that 
the  writer  is  here  making  use  of  a  Jewish  tradition, 
based  on  Deut  xxxiy,  6,  just  as  facts  unrecorded  in 
Scripture  are  referred  to  by  Paul  (2  Tim.  iii,  8 ;  Gal.  iii, 
19) ;  by  the  writer  of  the  Epistle  to  the  Hebrews  (ii,  2 ; 
xi,  24) ;  by  James  (y,  17),  and  Stephen  (Acts  vii,  22, 
28,  80).  (See  further,  Zirkel,  De  Motit  ad  Superot 
trantlaiiOjWiTcttb,  1798.)    See  Mosks,  Assumption  of. 

2.  As  regards  the  supposed  qnotation  from  the  book 
of  Enoch,  the  qnestlon  is  not  so  dear  whether  Jude  is 
making  a  citation  ftom  a  work  already  in  the  hands  of 
his  readers— which  is  the  opinion  of  Jerome  (/.  c.)  and 
TertnUian  (who  was,  in  con8equerce,  inclined  to  receire 
the  book  of  Enoch  as  canonical  Scripture),  and  has  beea 
held  by  many  modem  critics — or  is  emjiloying  a  trad»- 
tionary  i>rophecy  not  at  that  time  commltted  to  writing 
(a  theory  which  the  words  uscd,  "Enoch  prophcńed, 
taymg^**  ivpo^ł}Tev9tv  .  .  .  'Evdtx  Ae-ywy,  seem  rather 
to  faror),  but  aftcrwards  embodied  in  the  apocryphal 
work  already  named.  This  is  maintained  by  TregeUes 
(Home*s  Introd,  lOth  edit.,  iy,  621),  and  has  been  hdd 
by  Caye,  Hofinann  {SiAr\ftbewtity  i,  420),  Lightfoot  Cń, 
117),  Witsius,  and  Calvin  (oomp.  Jerome,  Comm,  in  EpK 
c  y,  p.  647,  8;  in  Tit,  c.  i,  p.  708).  The  prcsent  book 
of  Enoch  actuaUy  contains  (eh.  ii  of  The  Book  o/Enoch^ 
in  iEthiopic  and  English,  by  Dr.  Laurence,  8d  cd.  Lond. 
1888)  the  yeiy  words  dted  by  Jude;  but  some  modem 
critics  maintain  that  they  were  inserted  in  that  book 
out  of  Jude's  epistle.    See  Enoch,  Bock  of. 

But  why  should  not  an  inspired  author  appropriate  a 
piece  of  an  apocryphal  writing?  If  it  contained  ele- 
ments  of  truth,  or  was  simply  apposite  to  his  purpose, 
why  should  he  not  use  it?  He  does  not  (as  some  al- 
legc)  attribute  to  it  any  inspired  authority,  nor  cyer 
yonch  for  its  accuracy.  It  is  neyer  objected  in  deroga- 
tion  of  the  apostle  Paul  that,  both  in  speech  and  writing, 
he  dted  heathen  authors,  sometimes  with  a  spedal  ref- 
erence (Acts  xvii,  28 ;  1  Cor.  xy,  88 ;  Gal.  v,  28 ;  Titus 
i,  12).  It  has  also  been  asserted  that  in  yarious  parts 
of  the  New  Testament  there  are  allusions  (if  not  formal 
dtations)  to  seyeral  of  the  books  commonly  called  apoc- 
ryphsl,  and  to  other  Jewish  productions  (see  Gough*s 
Ń,'  Tetf,  Qttotatumtj  p.  27&-296).  Common  proyerbs,  we 
know,  haye  been  introduced  into  Scripture  (1  Sam.  xxiy, 
18 ;  2  Pet.  ii,  22,  where  the  former  part  only  of  the  proy- 
erb  dted  is  from  the  Old  Testament). 

Dut  there  is  no  decisiye  proof  that  Jude  could  haye 
seen  the  so-called  book  of  Enoch.  For,  though  this  has 
been  ascribed  in  part  to  the  Maccabieian  times,  and  is 
said  to  haye  assnmed  its  present  shape  prior  to  our 
Lord*s  adyent  (sec  Westcott,  Introduct,  p.  98,  notę),  yet 
this  is  B  theoiy  on  which  critics  are  by  no  mcans  agreed. 


JUDE,  EPISTLE  OF 


1068 


JUDGE 


One  of  tbe  latest  wbo  haa  inyeBtigtted  th«  gneadon, 
ProŁYolkmar,  of  ZUricb  (Zeittckrifl  der  daUtek.  mor- 
genL  GtteŁUchąfl,  1860),  maintaiiiB  that  it  was  oompoaed 
by  one  of  the  diaciples  of  Rabbi  Akiba,  in  tbe  time  of 
tbe  sedition  of  Barcbocbebaa,  about  AA).  182.  Dr.  Al- 
ford  is  convinced  by  Yolkmar^B  aigbments,  and  infen 
bence  that "  tbe  bgok  of  £nocb  was  not  only  of  Jewisb, 
but  uf  distinctly  anticbristian  origin"  {ProUg.  to  Jvde, 
p.  196).  We  are  autborized,  tben,  in  believing  tbat 
Jadę  merely  inoorporated  into  bis  epistle  tbe  tnuUtion 
of  £nocb's  propbecy,  wbicb  was  afterwaids  embodied  in 
the  book  as  we  now  bsTe  it — Smith;  Kitto;  FairbainL 
See  Traditiom. 

IX.  Comm«ntoru!«.— Special  exegetical  helps  on  the 
wbole  Epistle  of  Jude  excla8ively  are  tbe  following,  of 
which  we  designate  the  most  important  by  an  asterisk 
preflxed :  Didymtis  Alexandrinas,  In  Ep,  Juda  (in  BibL 
Max,  Patr.  y ;  and  BibL  Patr.  Gallandii,  vi) ;  Bede,  Ex- 
patiUo  (in  Opp.  y) ;  Lutber,  Av»legnr^  (Wittenb.  1524, 
4to  and  8yo;  etc) ;  Mafle,  EiplanaUo  (Yen.  1676, 8vo) ; 
Bidley,  £xposkum  (Lond.  n.  d.  16mo) ;  De  Bree,  Enar' 
rado  (Sagont.  1582,  4to) ;  Badeus,  In  Juda  q),  (Antw. 
1584,  Gen.  1599,  8vo) ;  DauKus,  Commentanui  [indnd. 
Ep.  John]  (Geneya,  1585,  8yo);  Feoardent,  CommaUa' 
riu*  (Colon.  1595,  Syo)  ;  Jnnius,  Noia  (Lugd.  Bat  1599, 
8yo;  alBO  in  Opp.  i,  1654) ;  Willet,  CommoUarius  (Lond. 
1603,  Cambr.  1614,  foL ;  also  CatkoUcon,  in  *"  Harmonie," 
etc.) ;  Turabull,  Sermona  (London,  1606, 4to) ;  Lancelott, 
Exegetii  (Antw.  1618, 1626,  8vo);  Botdduc,  Commeata- 
ria  (Paris,  1620, 4to);  Pareos,  Conuneałaritu  (Flmncof. 
1626,  4U>);  Rost,  Commeniaritu  (Rostock,  1627,  4to); 
Stumpf,  ExpUcatio  (Coburg,  1627,  8vo);  Otes,  Sermom 
(London,  1633,  4to);  (i^bud,  Adnotałiones  (Jen.  1641, 
1660, 1665, 4to) ;  Du  Bois,  Explicatio  (Paris,  1644, 8vo) ; 
Jenkyn,  Expońiion  (Lond.  1652-54,  2  pts.  in  1  yoL  4to; 
Glasgow,  1783;  Lond.  1889,  8vo);  Caioyius,  E^pUoaHo 
(Yitemb.  1654, 1719,  4to)  Msnton,  Lecturei  (London, 
1658, 4to);  Broughton,  AI^TKwirion  (Lond.  1662,  fol ;  also 
in  Works,  p.  402) ;  Wandalin,  Prodromus  (Hafniae,  1668, 
4to) ;  Rappolt,  Obaertaiumeś  (Lipsise,  1675, 4to) ;  Grelot 
Commentarius  (L.  B.  1676,  4to) ;  Yenryn,  Commentariau 
(L.  Bat  1677,  4to);  Yisscher,  VerUaarinff  (Amst  1681, 
4to;  also  in  Greraum,  Bremen,  1744,  4to);  Titelmann 
[Schenok],  Commentarius  (Haip.  1693,  8vo)i  Antonio, 
Verklaaring  [indad.  1  Pet]  (Leoward.  1693, 1697,  4to; 
also  in  German,  Brem.  1700,  foL) ;  Martin,  Commentarius 
(Lipsie,  1694, 1727,  4to) ;  Fecht,  Erpositio  (Rost  1696, 
4to);  Nemeth,  ExpUcatio  (1700,  4to);  Dorsche,  Comr 
mentarius  (fragment  in  Gerhard's  Commentatio,  Francf. 
et  Lips.  1700, 4to) ;  Perkins,  Erposition  (in  Works,  Cam- 
bridge, 1701,  etc,  iii,  479) ;  Szattmar,  ErpUoatio  (Fra- 
nec  1702,  4to) ;  Witsius,  Commentarius  (L.  K 1703, 4to ; 
also  m  Meleiemata,  p.  823) ;  Feustking,  Commentarius 
(Yitemb.  1707,  foL) ;  Quade,  In  Epistołom  et  vitam  Juda 
(Gryph.  1709,  4to);  Creyghton,  Ontleeding  (Haariem, 
1719,  4to) ;  Weiss,  CommentaHo  (Hebnstadt,  1728, 4to) ; 
Walther,  Eregesis  (Guelpherb.  1724, 4to) ;  Buckner,  Er^ 
Udrung  (Erfurt,  1727,  4Ło);  Reimmann,  Entsiegelung 
(Braiisw.  1731,  4U>) ;  Yan  Seelen,  Judas  antifanatieus 
(Lub.  1732,  4  to) ;  Semler,  Commentatio  [on  var.  read.] 
(HaL  1747, 1784,  4to) ;  Schmidt,  Obsayfoiiones  (Lipsis, 
1768, 4to);  Herder,  Brie/e  zweener  BrUder  Jesu  (Lemgo, 
1775,  8vo) ;  Pomarius,  Commentarius  (Yitemb.  1784, 
8vo) ;  Ilasse,  Erlduterung  (Jen.  1786,  8vo) ;  Hartmann, 
Commentatio  (Cothen,  1793,  4to) ;  Kabler,  Anmerkungen 
(Riut  1798,  8vo);  *Hanlein,  CommnUarius  (Erlangen, 
1799, 1801, 1804, 8vo) ;  Harenberg,  ErposUio  (in  MiscelL 
Lips,  nov,  iii,  379  8q.);  Elias,  Disseriatio  (Ultraj.  1808, 
8vo);  Dahl,  De  aii^eyrię,  etc  [including  2  Pet]  (Roet 
1807,  8vo) ;  Laiirmann,  Nota  (Gron.  1818,  8vo) ;  •Jes- 
sien,  Commentatio  [  introductory  ]  (Lipsies,  1820,  8vo); 
Muir,  Discourses  (Glasg.  1822, 8vo) ;  *Amaud,  Sur  Cau- 
theniiciłf,  etc.  (Strasb.  1835,  8vo) ;  Scharling,  Commen^ 
tarius  [incliid.  James]  (HavD..1841,  8vo) ;  Brun,  Intro- 
duction  (in  Frcnch,  Strasb.  1842,  8vo);  Bickersteth,  Ex- 
position  (London,  1846,  12mo) ;  Macgillivray,  I^ectures 
(Lond.  1846«  8vo) ;  *Stier,  Auslegung  (BerL  1850,  8vo): 


*Bampf;  BdradUmtg  (Salsbnrg,  1854^  Syo);  G«v&ia^ 
Commentary  (Boston,  1856, 12mo);  Ritachl,  Antiaomis- 
ien,  etc  (in  tbe  Stud.  u.  KriL  1861,  p.  103  8q.) ;  Scbott, 
JE:7id{iifena^(£ilang.l868,8yo).  8ee  Eputues,  C ath> 
OLia 

Judez,  Matthacus,  a  German  tbeokigian,  and  one 
of  tbe  principal  writers  of  tbe  Centuries  oj*  Magdeburg 
(q.  y.),  was  bom  at  Dippoklsforest,  in  Sax<»y,  Septem- 
ber  22, 1528.  He  was  educated  at  Wittenbóg  Univer^ 
sity,  wbere  be  took  bis  mastei^s  degree  in  Ocf.  1549. 
Sbortly  after  be  became  minister  of  the  chnreh  of  St  LI- 
ric,  at  Blagdebatg,  and  leil  this  position  in  1559  to  be- 
come  piofeasor  of  diyinity  at  the  Uniyenity  at  Jena;  but 
only  eigbteen  montbs  later  be  was  ousted  from  tbe 
chair  by  order  of  tbe  dake  of  Sazony ,  on  accoimt  of  his 
opposition  to  tbe  Synergists,  wbo  were  in  gpreat  fayor 
at  oourt  As  a  caiise  for  bis  remoyal  tbe  authorities  as- 
signed  bis  pnblication  of  De  fuga  Papatus,  He  tben 
remoyed  to  Magdeburg,  but,  Uke  tbe  otber  anthon  of 
the  Centuries,  be  bad  to  endors  pereecution.  He  was 
finally  obliged  to  quit  Magdebmg,  and  spent  the  ranain- 
der  of  bis  life  at  Wismar.  He  died  May  15, 1564.  See 
Bayle,J7Ml.i>»ce.B.y. 

Jtidc;e  (hSfiid,  shophet%  nsu.  in  the  plnr.  &'*ąC'id, 
thopheiim',  rulers  rather  than  magistratea,  from  SBĆ, 
different  from  l*^^,  to  ^  a  eause,  see  Gesenios,  a.  y.; 
oompare  Bertholdt*s  Theolog,  Joum.  yii,  1 ;  Werner,  ia 
Radelbach*s  ZeUschr,  1844,  iii,  17 ;  Sept,  N.  Test.  Acts 
xiii,  20,  and  Josephos,  Ani,  vi,  b,  A,  Kpirai ;  in  Dan.  iii, 
2, 8,  a  diff.  Chald.  term  is  employed,  ^"^"^T^*^?^  adar» 
gazerin%  chief  judges:  in  two  passagea,  £xod.  xxi,  6; 
xxii,  8,  the  Hebrew  magistrates  are  caUed  D^H^K,  tlo- 
kim',  gods,  compare  Psa.  lxxxii,  1,6 ;  John  x,  34 ;  but  see 
Gesenius,  s.  y.).  Besides  being  tbe  generał  citle  of  any 
magistrate,  this  name  is  applled  to  tbose  persons  wbo 
at  interyalB  presided  oyer  tbe  affiurs  of  the  Israelites 
duńng  the  four  and  a  half  centuries  wbicb  dapscd  from 
the  death  of  Joshua  to  tbe  accession  of  Saol,  as  reoounted 
in  the  book  of  Judges,  and  as  alluded  to  by  the  apostle 
Paul  in  Acts  xiii,  20.  These  judges  were  fifteen  in  nnm- 
ber:  1.  Othniel;  2.  Ebud;  8.  Sbamgar;  4.  Deborah  and 
Barak;  5.  Gideon;  6.Abimelech;  7.  Tola;  8.  Jair;  9. 
Jephtbah;  10.  Ibzan;  11.  Elon;  12.Abdon;  13.  Sam- 
8on ;  14.  Eli ;  15.  SamneL  For  au  account  of  the  events 
of  each  judgeship,  see  the  judges  in  their  alphabetical 
place;  for  a  discusiion  of  the  length  of  the  entire  pe- 
riod, and  the  adjustment  of  the  different  epochs,  see 
CiiuoNOŁOOT.  In  the  following  statements  on  this  head 
we  chiefiy  follow  tbe  arttcles  in  Kitto's  and  Smith*s  dic- 
tionaries,  s.  y.    See  also  Judges,  Book  of. 

L  EarUest  Forms  and  Characteristics  oftke  Magister 
rial  Office  among  the  Hfhrews, — ^The  administratioD  of 
Justice  in  alJ  early  Eastem  nations,  as  among  tbe  Arabs 
of  the  desert  to  Uiis  day,  rests  with  the  patriarcbal  se- 
niors,  the  judges  beuig  the  heads  of  tribes,  or  of  chief 
bousee  in  a  tribe.  (Tbe  expre88ion  ^K*r.*^ą  K^^t), 
Numb.  xxy,  14,  ii  remarkable,  and  seems  to  inean  the 
patriarcbal  senior  of  a  subdiyision  of  tbe  tribe :  compk  1 
Chroń,  iy,  88 ;  Jodg.  y,  3,  15).  Soch,  from  their  ele- 
rated  position,  would  haye  tlie  reqni8ite  leisore,  wonld 
be  able  to  make  their  decisions  reepected,  and  through 
the  wider  intercourM  of  soperior  station  woold  decide 
with  fuller  experience  and  riper  reflection.  Thoa,  in  the 
book  of  Job  (xxix,  7, 8,  9),  the  patriarcbal  magnate  ii 
represented  as  going  fórth  "  to  the  gate**  amid  the  re- 
spectful  silence  of  elders,  princes,  and  nobles  (compare 
xxxiL,  9).  The  actnal  chieft  of  individiial  tribes  sre 
mentioned  on  yarious  occasions,  one  as  late  as  the  time 
of  David,  as  proRerv'ing  import ance  in  ihe  cifimm«>a- 
wealcb  (Numb.  yii,  2, 10,  U ;  xvłi,  6,  or  17  in  Heb.  text; 
xxxiy,  18;  Josh.  xxii,  14;  so  perb.  Numb.  xyi,  2;  xxi, 
18).  Whether  the  prinoes  of  the  tribes  mentioned  in  1 
Chroń,  xxvii,  16;  xxviii,  1,  are  patriarcbal  heads,  or 
merely  chief  men  appointed  by  the  king  to  govero,  is 
Dot  strictly  certain;  but  it  would  be  foreign  to  all  an* 


JUDGE 


1069 


JUDGE 


dent  Eafltem  analogy  to  soppoee  th«t  they  foifeitod  the 
judidal  prerogatiye  before  they  wer«  oTenhadowed  by 
the  monarchy,  and  in  David*s  tinie  thts  is  contrary  to  the 
tenor  of  history.  During  the  opprewion  of  Egypt  the 
nascent  people  wonld  necessarily  have  few  ąuetitiona  at 
law  to  plead,  and  the  Egyptian  magistrate  wonld  take 
cógnizance  of  theft,  yiolence,  and  other  matiws  of  poliee. 
Yet  the  ąuestion  put  to  Moees  shows  that  *'a  prince" 
and  "a  judge"  were  connected  even  then  In  the  popular 
idea  (£xod.  ii,  14;  oompare  Numb.  xvi,  18).  When 
the  people  emeiged  liom  thia  oppreflsion  into  national 
exi8tonce,  the  want  of  a  machineiy  of  judioature  began 
to  preas.  The  patriarchal  seniorB  did  not  instantly  as- 
some  the  function,  having  probably  been  depreased  by 
bondage  till  rendóred  untit  for  it,  not  haying  become 
experienced  in  such  matters,  nor  haying  secured  the 
confidence  of  their  tribesmen.  Perhaps  for  theee  rea- 
gons  Moees  at  first  took  the  whole  burden  of  jadicatare 
upon  himself,  then  at  the  soggeetion  of  Jethro  (£xod. 
xTiii,  14-24)  institnted  judgee  oyer  numerically  gradu- 
ated  sections  of  the  people.  Theee  were  choeen  for  their 
morał  fitness,  bnt  from  Deut  i,  15, 16,  we  may  infer  that 
they  were  taken  fiom  among  those  to  whom  primogen- 
iture  wonld  haye  aasigned  it  Saye  in  offences  of  public 
magnitade,  criminal  cases  do  not  appear  to  haye  been 
distinguished  from  ciyiL  The  daty  of  teaohing  the 
people  the  knowledge  of  the  law  which  pertained  to  the 
Leyitesy  doubtless  included  such  instmction  as  would 
assist  the  judgment  of  those  who  were  thna  to  decide 
according  to  it  The  Leyites  were  thus  the  ultimate 
sources  of  ordinary  jurisprudence,  and  perhaps  the 
**teaching"  aforesaid  may  merely  mean  expounding 
the  law  as  applicable  to  difficult  eases  arising  in  prac- 
tice.  Beyond  this  it  is  not  possible  to  indicate  any  di- 
yision  of  the  proyinces  of  deciding  on  pointa  of  law  as 
distinct  from  points  of  fact  The  judges  mentioned  as 
Btanding  before  Joshua  in  the  great  assemblies  of  the 
people  must  be  understood  as  the  succeseon  of  those 
choeen  by  Moses,  and  had  doubtless  been  elected  with 
Joshua^s  aanction  from  ąmong  the  same  generał  daas  of 
patriarchal  seniors  (Josh.  iy,  2, 4 ;  xxii,  14;  xxiv,  1). 

The  judge  was  reckoned  a  sacred  person,  and  secured 
eyen  from  yerbal  injuries.  Secking  a  decision  at  law  is 
called  *'  inquiring  of  God*'  (Exod.  xviii,  15).  The  tenn 
'*god8*'  is  actuaUy  applied  to  judges  (Exod.  xxi,  6; 
oompare  Psa.  lxxxii,  1 , 6).  The  judge  was  told,  '*  Thou 
ahalt  not  be  afraid  of  the  face  of  men,  for  the  judgment 
is  God'B;''  and  thus,  while  human  instmmentality  was 
indispensable,  the  source  of  justice  was  upheld  as  diyine, 
and  the  puiity  of  its  administration  only  sank  with  the 
dedine  of  religious  feeling.  In  this  spirit  speaks  Psa. 
lxxxii — a  lofty  charge  addreseed  to  aU  who  judge ;  oom- 
pare the  qualities  regaided  as  essential  at  the  institution 
of  the  office  (£xod.  xyiii,  21),  and  the  strict  admonition 
of  Deut  xvi,  18-20.  But  besides  the  sacred  dignity 
thus  giyen  to  the  only  royal  function,  which,  under  the 
theocracy,  lay  in  human  hands,  it  was  madę  popular  by 
being  yested  in  those  who  led  public  feeling,  and  its  im- 
portance  in  the  public  eye  appears  from  such  passages 
as  Psa.  Ixix,  12  (comp.  cxix,  28);  lxxxii;  cxlviii,  11 ; 
Froy.  yiii,  15;  xxi,  4,  5,  23.  There  could  have  been  no 
oonaiderable  need  for  the  legał  studies  and  exposition8 
of  the  Leyites  during  the  wanderings  in  the  wildemess, 
while  Moses  was  aliye  to  solve  all  ąuestions,  and  while 
the  law  which  they  were  to  expound  was  not  whoUy 
deliyered.  The  Leyites,  too,  had  a  charge  of  cattle  to 
look  after  in  that  wildemess  like  the  rest,  and  seem  to 
havc  acted  also,  being  Moses^s  own  tribe,  as  supports  to 
his  executiye  authority.  But  then  few  of  the  greator 
entanglements  of  property  could  arise  before  the  people 
were  settled  in  their  posaession  of  Canaan.  Thus  they 
were  disdplined  in  smaller  matters,  and  under  Moses's 
own  eye,  for  greator  ones.  When,  howeyer,  the  com- 
mandment,  "Judges  and  officers  shalt  thou  make  thee 
in  all  thy  gates**  (Deut  xyi,  18),  came  to  be  fulfllled  in 
Canaan,  there  were  the  following  sources  from  which 
thoae  offidals  might  be  supplied:  Ist,  the  ez^oJMo 


judges,  or  their  sucoessorB,  as  chosen  by  Moees;  2dly, 
any  sur];di]8  left  of  patriarchal  seniora  when  these  were 
taken  out  (as  has  been  shown  from  Deut  i,  15, 16)  from 
that  dass;  and,  8dly,  the  leyites.  On  what  prindple 
the  non-Leyitiód  judges  were  choeen  after  diyine  super- 
intendence  was  intenupted  at  Joshua*s  death  is  not 
dear.  A  siniple  way  wonld  haye  been  for  the  existing 
judges  in  eyery  town,  eto.,  to  choose  thdr  own  col- 
leagues,  as  yacandes  fell,  from  among  the  limited  num- 
ber  of  penona  who,  bdng  heada  of  fitmilies,  were  com<- 
petent  Cknerally  speaking,  the  reputation  for  superior 
wealth,  as  some  guarantee  against  fadlities  for  cormp- 
tion,  wóuld  determine  the  choice  of  a  judge,  and,  taken 
in  conneetion  ¥rith  personal  gualities,  woidd  tend  to 
limit  the  choiee  to  probably  a  yery  few  personę  in  prac- 
tice.  The  snpposition  that  judicature  will  always  be 
proyided  for  is  canried  through  all  the  books  of  the  Law 
(see  £xod.  xxi,  6 ;  xxii ;  Ley.  xix,  15 ;  Numb.  xxxv,  24; 
Dent  i,  16 ;  xyi,  18 ;  xxy,  1).  All  that  we  know  of  the 
facts  of  later  history  oonfinns  the  suppoeition.  The  He- 
brews  were  sensitiye  aa  Tegaids  the  administration  of 
juBtioe;  nor  is  the  free  spbit  of  their  early  common- 
wealth  in  anything  morę  manifest  than  bi  the  resent- 
ment  which  foUowed  the  yenal  or  parttal  judge.  The 
fact  that  justice  reposed  on  a  popular  basis  of  adminis- 
tratkm  largdy  eontributed  to  keep  np  this  sptrit  of  in- 
dependenoe,  which  is  the  ultimate  check  on  all  peryer- 
sions  of  the  tribunal.  The  popular  aristocracy  (if  we 
may  so  term  it)  of  heads  of  tribes,  sections  of  tribes,  or 
families,  is  found  to  fali  into  two  main  orders  of  yarying ' 
nomenclature,  and  roee  from  the  capiie  cmn,  or  merę 
dtizens,  upward.  The  morę  oommon  name  for  the 
higher  order  is  ''prinoes,**  and  for  the  lower,  ''elders'* 
(Judg.  yiii,  14;  Exod.  ii,  14;  Job  xxix,  7,  8,  9 ;  Ezra  x, 
8).  These  orders  were  the  popular  element  of  judica- 
ture. On  the  other  hand,  the  Leyitical  body  was  Im- 
bned  with  a  keen  sense  of  allegiance  to  God  a»  the  Au- 
thor  of  Law,  aąd  to  the  Coyenant  as  his  erobodiment  of 
it,  and  soon  gained  whateyer  forensic  experience  and 
erudition  those  sirople  times  oould  yield;  hence  they 
brought  to  the  judidal  task  the  legal  acumen  and  sense 
of  generał  principles  which  complemented  the  ruder  lay 
demeut  Thus  the  Hebrews  really  enjoyed  much  of 
the  yirtoe  of  a  system  which  allota  separate  proyinces 
to  judge  and  jury,  although  we  cannot  tracę  any  such 
linę  of  separation  in  their  functions,  saye  in  so  far  as  has 
been  indicated  aboye.  To  return  to  the  first  or  popolar 
branch,  there  Is  reason  to  think,  Irom  the  second  con- 
currence  of  phraseology  amid  much  dłyersity,  that  in 
eyeiy  city  these  two  ranks  of  "princes"  and  "elders" 
had  their  analogies,  and  that  a  yariable  number  of  heads 
of  families  and  groups  of  families,  in  two  ranks,  were 
popularly  recognised,  whether  with  or  without  any 
form  of  election,  as  charged  with  the  dnty  of  adminis- 
tering  justice.  Succoth  (Judg.  yiii,  14)  may  be  taken 
as  an  example.  £vidently  the  ex-^fficio  judges  of  Mo- 
Bes*s  choice  would  have  left  their  successors  when  the 
tribe  of  Gad,  to  which  Succoth  pertained  (Josh.  xiii, 
27),  settled  in  its  tenritory  and  towns:  and  what  would 
be  morę  simple  than  that  the  whole  number  of  judges 
in  that  tribe  should  be  aOotted  to  its  towns  in  propor- 
tion  to  their  size?  As  such  judges  were  mostly  the 
head  men  by  genealogy,  they  wonld  fali  into  their  nat. 
ural  places,  and  symmetry  would  be  preseryed.  The 
Leyites  also  were  apportioned,  on  the  whole,  cqually 
among  the  tribes;  and  if  they  preseryed  their  limits, 
there  were  probably  few  parts  of  Palestlne  beyond  a 
day*s  joumey  from  a  Leyitical  city. 

One  great  hołd  which  the  priesthood  had,  in  their  ju- 
risdiction,  upon  men*8  ordinaiy  life  was  the  custody  in 
the  sanctuary  of  the  standard  weights  and  measures,  to 
which,  in  cases  of  dispute,  reference  was  doubtless  madę. 
It  is,  howeyer,  reasonable  to  suppose  that  in  most  towns 
Buffidently  exact  models  of  them  for  all  ordinary  qnefr- 
tions  would  be  kept,  sińce  to  refer  to  the  sanctuaiy  at 
Shiloh,  Jerusałem,  eto.,  in  eyery  case  of  dispute  between 
dealers  would  be  nugatory  (Exod.  xxx,  18 ;  Numb.  iii,  47 ; 


JITDGE 


1070 


JUDGE 


Ezek.  xly,  12).  Above  all  these,  the  high-pfie«t  in  the 
ante-iegal  period  was  the  resort  in  difficult  oaaes  (Deut. 
zriii  12),  as  the  chief  jurist  of  the  nation,  and  one  wbo 
wouid,  in  case  of  need,  be  perbaps  oracnlarly  directed; 
yet  we  hear  of  nonę  acting  as  Jodge  saye  Eli,  nor  is  any 
jodicial  act  recorded  of  him — though  perhaps  bis  not  re- 
straining  his  sons  is  meant  to  be  noticed  as  a  failiue  in 
his  judicial  duties.  Now  the  jodidal  authority  of  any 
such  sapreme  tribunal  must  haye  whoUy  lapeed  at  the 
time  of  the  eyents  recorded  in  Judg.  xiz.  It  should  not 
be  fozgotten  that  in  some  cases  of  '*blood"  the  "oon- 
gregation"  themseires  were  to  '^Jodge"  (Niunh.  xxxy, 
24),  and  that  the  appeal  of  Jodg.  xx,  4-7  was  tbus  in 
the  regular  course  of  constitutional  law.  It  is  aiso  a 
fact  of  some  weight,  negatiyely,  that  nonę  of  the  special 
deliyerers  called  judges  was  oi  priestly  lineage,  or  eyen 
became  as  mach  noted  as  Deborah,  a  woman.  This 
seems  to  show  that  any  centnd  action  of  the  high-priest 
on  national  onity  was  nuli,  and  of  this  snpremacy,  had 
it  existed  in  force,  the  judicial  prerogatiye  was  the  maiu 
element.  Difficult  cases  would  indude  cases  of  appeal, 
and  we  may  presume  that,  saye  so  lar  as  the  authority 
of  those  special  deliyerers  madę  itself  felt,  there  was  no 
judge  in  the  last  resort  fiom  Joshna  to  Samuel.  In- 
deed,  the  current  phrase  of  those  deliyeren  that  they 
''Judged'*  Israel  during  their  term,  shows  which  branch 
of  their  authority  was  most  in  reąuest,  and  the  demand 
of  the  people  for  a  king  was,  in  the  first  instance,  that 
he  might  <<  judge  them,"  rather  than  that  he  might 
'*  fight  their  battles"  (1  Sam.  yiii,  6, 20). 

IL  PecuUar  Traits  and  FuncHom  ofłke  ^^Judget""  in 
the  Period  dengnated  by  their  Rule.— The  station  and 
Office  of  these  shophełim  are  inyolved  in  great  obscurity, 
partly  from  the  want  of  elear  intimations  in  the  history 
in  which  their  exploits  and  goyerament  are  recorded, 
and  partly  from  the  abeence  of  parallels  in  the  history 
of  other  natious  by  which  oor  notions  might  be  assist^ 
ed.  The  offices  filled  by  Moses  and  Joehiąa,  whose  pres- 
ence  was  so  essential  for  the  time  and  the  occasion,were 
not  at  all  inyolyed  in  the  generał  machineiy  of  the  He- 
brew  goyernment.  They  were  specially  appointed  for 
particular  seryices,  for  the  performance  of  which  they 
were  inyested  with  extnK>rdinary  powers;  but  wben 
their  miasion  was  aocomplished,  sodety  reyerted  to  its 
permanent  institutions  and  its  established  forms  of  goy- 
ernment. As  above  seen,  eyeiy  tiibe  had  its  own  he- 
reditary  chief  or  "  pnnce,'*  who  presided  oyer  its  afGurs, 
administered  justice  in  aU  ordinary  cases,  and  led  the 
troops  in  time  of  war.  His  station  resembled  that  of 
the  Arabian  emira,  or  rather,  perhaps,  of  the  khans  of 
the  Tartar  tribes  inhabiting  Persia  and  the  countries 
further  east.  He  was  assisted  in  these  important  duties 
by  the  subordinate  officers,  the  chiefa  of  families,  who 
formed  his  council  in  such  matters  of  policy  as  affected 
their  particular  district,  supported  his  dedsions  in  dyil 
or  criminal  iuąuiries,  and  oonunanded  under  him  in  the 
field  of  battle  (Numb.  xxvi,  xxvii;  Josh.  yii,  16-18). 
This  was,  in  fact,  the  old  patriarchal  goyenunent,  to 
which  the  Hebrews  were  greatly  attached.  It  was  an 
institution  suited  to  the  wanta  of  men  who  liye  dispersed 
in  loofldy  connected  tńbes,  and  not  to  the  wants  and 
exigende8  of  a  nation.  It  was  in  prindple  8egregative, 
not  aggregative ,  and  although  there  are  traoes  of  uni- 
ted  agreement  tbrougb  a  congress  of  ddegates,  or  rather 
of  national  chiefa  and  clders  of  the  trib^,  thb  was  an 
inefficient  instrument  of  generał  govemment,  seeing  that 
it  was  only  applicablc  or  applied  to  great  occadomi,  and 
oould  have  no  beańng  on  the  numerous  queetłona  of  an 
administrattve  naturę  which  arise  from  day  to  day  in 
eyery  state,  and  which  there  should  somewhere  exist  the 
power  to  arrange  and  determinc^  This  defect  of  the 
generał  goyernment  it  was  one  of  the  objects  of  the  the- 
ocratical  institutions  to  remedy.  Jehoyah  had  taken 
upon  himself  the  function  of  king  of  the  chosen  people, 
and  he  dwelt  among  them  m  his  palące -tabernacle. 
Herę  he  was  always  ready,  through  his  priest,  to  coun- 
Bel  them  in  matters  of  generał  interest,  as  wełl  as  in 


those  haying  referenoe  only  to  parriciilar  tribes;  aod  to 
his  oourt  they  were  all  required  by  the  law  to  repsir 
three  times  eyeiy  year.  Herę,  then,  was  the  prindple 
of  a  generał  administration,  calcułated  and  dedgned  to 
onite  the  tribes  into  a  nation  by  giying  them  a  common 
goyernment  in  all  the  higher  and  morę  generał  branches 
of  sdminifttrarion,  and  a  common  centrę  of  interest  foc 
all  the  politicał  and  eodesiastical  relatiims  of  the  oom- 
munity.  It  was  on  this  footing  that  the  law  destined 
the  goyernment  of  the  Hebrews  to  prooeed,  afler  the  pe- 
culiar  functions  of  the  legialator  and  tlie  oonąneror  had 
been  fulfilłed.    See  Theoc&acy. 

The  fact  is,  lioweyer,  that,  tliroogh  the  peryenity  of 
the  people,  tłiis  settlement  of  the  generał  goyernment  on 
theocratical  prindples  was  not  canried  out  in  its  proper 
form  and  extent,  and  it  is  in  this  neglect  we  are  to  seek 
ttie  neoessity  for  those  offioers  called  jadges'  wbo  were 
from  time  to  time  raised  up  to  correct  some  of  the  e^-ils 
which  resulted  firom  it.  It  is  yery  eyident  from  the 
whołe  liistory  of  the  judges  tliat,  after  the  death  of 
Joshua,  the  Israelites  threw  th^m8dves  back  upon  tlw 
segregatiye  piincipłes  of  their  goyernment  by  tribes, 
and  all  but  utterły  uegłected,  and  for  s  long  period  did 
utterły  neglect,  the  rułes  and  uaages  on  which  the  gen- 
erał goyernment  was  established.  There  was,  in  fact, 
no  human  power  adeąnate  to  enforoe  them.  They  were 
good  in  themselyes,  they  were  gradoos,  they  oonferred 
high  priyilęges,  but  they  were  enforced  by  no  auffident 
aath<Hrity.  No  one  was  amenable  to  any  tribunal  for 
neglecting  the  annual  feasts,  or  for  not  refening  the  di- 
rection  of  public  affaiss  to  the  divine  King.  Omiasions 
on  these  points  inyolyed  the  absence  of  the  diyine  pro- 
tection  and  błessing,  and  were  left  to  be  punisbed  by 
their  oonseąuenoes.  The  man  who  obeyed  in  this  and 
other  things  was  blessed ;  tbe  man  who  did  not  was  not 
Idessed;  and  generał  ob^ence  was  rewarded  with  na- 
tional błessing,  and  generał  disobedience  with  national 
punishment,  The  enormities  and  trmnsgresaiooa  into 
which  the  people  fell  in  Gon8eqaence  of  such  neglect, 
which  left  them  an  easy  prey  to  idolatrous  influencea, 
are  fułły  recorded  in  the  Book  of  Judgea.  The  people 
could  not  grasp  the  idea  of  a  diyine  and  inyiaibłe  lung; 
they  could  not  bring  themselyes  to  recur  to  him  in  all 
those  cases  in  which  the  jndgment  of  s  haman  king 
would  haye  determined  the  course  of  action,  or  in  which 
his  arm  would  haye  worked  for  thdr  deliyerance.  There- 
fore  it  was  tłiat  God  allowed  them  judges  in  the  peisons 
of  faithfuł  men,  who  acted  for  the  most  part  aa  agenta  a[ 
the  divine  will— regenta  of  the  inyisible  Kin|c,  and  who, 
holding  their  commission  directły  from  him  or  with  his 
sanction,  would  be  roore  incłined  to  act  as  dependent 
yassals  of  Jehovah  tban  kings,  wlio,  as  membeis  of  roysl 
dynasties,  would  come  to  reign  with  notions  of  indepen- 
dent rights  and  royal  priyilęges,  włiich  would  draw 
away  their  attention  from  their  tme  place  in  tbe  theoc- 
racy.  In  this  greater  dependenoe  of  tbe  jadgee  upon 
the  diyine  King  we  see  the  secret  of  their  institiition. 
The  Israelites  were  disposed  to  rest  upon  their  sepa- 
rate  interests  as  tńbes,  and,  liaying  tbus  allowed  ifae 
standing  generał  goyernment  to  remain  inop^^tiye 
through  disuse,  they  would,  in  case  of  emergency,  havc 
been  disposed  *'  to  make  themsdyes  a  king  like  the  na- 
tious" had  thdr  attention  not  been  directed  to  the  ap- 
poiutment  of  officers  włiose  authority  could  rest  on  no 
tangible  richt  apart  from  character  and  ser^-icea,  whicłi, 
with  the  temporaiy  nature  of  thdr  power,  rendeiied  their 
functions  more  aocordant  with  the  prindples  of  the  tbe- 
ocracy  than  those  of  any  other  public  officers  could  be. 
It  is  probably  in  this  adaptation  to  the  peculiar  cirmm- 
stances  of  the  Hebrew  theocracy  that  we  shall  diacoyer 
the  reason  of  our  inability  to  find  any  dmilar  offioe 
among  other  nations.  In  bdng  thus  peculiar  it  rcacm- 
bled  the  dictatorship  among  the  Romans,  to  wbich  of^ 
fice,  indeed,  that  of  the  judges  bas  been  compared,  and 
perhaps  this  parsiUd  is  the  neareet  that  can  be  found. 
But  there  is  this  great  difTerenoe,  that  the  diciator  łaid 
down  his  power  as  soon  as  the  crids  which  had  called 


JUDGE 


1071 


JUDGE 


for  its  esezcisę  had  paaeed  away,  and  in  no  caae  oonld 
thia  imwonted  supremacy  be  retained  beyond  a  limited 
time  CLivY,  lx,  34) ;  but  the  Hebrew  Judge  remained  in- 
Tcsted  with  hU  high  authority  the  ¥rhole  period  of  hia 
life,  and  is  therefore  uaually  described  by  the  aacred  his- 
torian  as  presiding  to  the  end  of  his  days  oyer  the  trlbes 
of  larael,  amid  the  peace  and  security  which  his  milita- 
ly  skill  and  counsels  had,  under  the  divine  bleasing,  le- 
stored  to  the  land. 

Ił  ia  usoal  to  conaider  the  Judgee  aa  commencing  their 
eareer  with  military  ezploita  to  deUver  Israel  from  for- 
cign  oppreasion,  but  thia  is  by  no  means  invariably  the 
case.  £li  and  Samuel  were  not  militaiy  men ;  Deborah 
Jadged  Israel  befoie  she  planned  the  war  against  Jabin ; 
and  of  Jair,  Ibzan,  Elon,  and  Abdon,  it  is  at.  least  unoer- 
tain  whether  they  ever  held  any  militaiy  oommand. 
In  many  cases  it  is  true  that  military  achieyementa 
were  the  means  by  which  they  elerated  themaelvea  to 
tbe  rank  of  judges;  but  in  generał  the  appointment 
may  be  said  to  have  varied  with  the  exigenciea  of  the 
timea,  and  with  the  particular  circumstanoes  which  in 
tames  of  trouble  woolddraw  the  pabltc  attention  to  per- 
aona  who  appeared  suited  by  their  giits  and  influence 
to  adyiae  in  matters  of  generał  ooncemment,  to  dedde 
in  ąuestions  arising  between  tribe  and  tńbe,  to  admin- 
ister  poblic  affairs,  and  to  appear  as  their  reoognised 
head  in  their  intercourse  with  their  neighbors  and  op- 
preasors.  As  we  find  that  many  of  these  Judges  arose 
durwff  times  of  oppression,  it  seems  to  us  that  this  last 
circomstance,  which  has  neyer  been  taken  into  account, 
muat  haye  had  a  remarkable  influence  in  the  appoint- 
ment of  the  judge.  Foreigners  could  not  be  expected 
to  enter  into  the  peculiarities  of  the  Hebrew  constttu- 
tion,  and  would  expect  to  recdye  the  propoaals,  remon- 
ttrances,  or  complaints  of  the  people  throogh  some  pei^ 
son  representing  the  whole  nation,  or  that  part  of  it  to 
which  their  intercouise  appUed.  The  law  proyided  no 
auch  officer  except  in  the  high->prieBt;  but  as  the  He- 
brews  themselyes  did  not  recognise  the  true  operation 
of  their  theocracy,  much  less  were  strangers  likely  to  do 
ao.  On  the  officer  they  appointed  to  repreeent  the  body 
of  the  people,  under  circtunstances  which  compelled 
them  to  deal  with  foreigners  mightier  than  themselyes, 
would  naturally  deyolve  the  oommand  of  the  army  in 
var,  and  the  administration  of  justice  in  peace.  This 
last  was  amcng  aiicient  nations,  and  it  is  still  in  the 
East,  regarded  as  the  fłrst  and  most  important  duty  of 
s  ruier,  and  the  iuterference  of  the  judges  was  probably 
oonfined  to  the  cases  arising  between  different  tribes,  for 
which  the  ordinary  magiatrates  would  find  it  difficult  to 
aecuie  doe  authority  to  their  deciaiona. 

In  nearly  all  the  instanoes  reoorded  the  appointment 
aeems  to  haye  been  by  the  free,  unsolicited  choice  of  the 
people.  The  election  of  Jephthah,  who  was  nominated 
aa  the  fittest  man  for  the  exiBting  emergency,  probably 
lesembled  that  which  was  usually  foUowed  on  such  oc- 
casions;  and  probably,  as  in  his  case,  the  judge,  in  ac- 
oepting  the  office,  took  care  to  make  such  stipolations 
aa  he  deemed  necessary.  The  only  cases  of  direct  diyine 
appointment  are  those  of  Gideon  and  Samson,  and  the 
last  stood  in  the  peouliar  poeition  of  haying  been  from 
befoie  his  birth  ordained  "  to  begin  to  deliyer  IsraeL" 
Deborah  was  called  to  deliyer  Israel,  but  was  already  a 
judge.  Samuel  was  called  by  the  Lord  to  be  a  pzophet, 
but  not  a  judge,  which  ensued  from  the  high  giflts  which 
tlie  people  reoognised  as  dwelling  in  him ;  and  as  to  Eli, 
the  office  of  judge  seems  to  have  deyolyed  naturally,  or, 
rather,  ex^fficio,  upun  him ;  and  his  case  seems  to  be 
the  only  one  in  which  the  high-priest  appean  in  the 
oharacter  which  the  theocratical  instiMitions  deeigned 
for  him. 

.  The  following  elear  summary  of  their  duties  and  priy- 
łleges  is  from  Jahn  {Bibl.  ArckaoL  II,  i,  §  22  8q. ;  /Ted. 
CommonweeUth,  Stowe's  transL,  §  23) :  "  The  office  of 
jodges  or  rcgents  was  held  during  life,  but  it  was  not 
heieditary,  neither  could  they  appoint  their  sncoessors. 
Their  authority  was  limited  by  (hje  law  alonc ;  and  in 


doubtful  cases  they  were  directed  to  oonsult  the  diyine 
King  tłuough  the  priest  by  Urim  and  Thummim  (Numh. 
zxyii,  21).  They  were  not  obliged  in  common  cases  to 
ask  adWce  of  the  ordinary  ruleis;  it  was  sofficient  if 
these  did  not  remonstrate  against  the  measures  of  the 
judge.  In  important  emeigencies,  howeyer,  they  oon- 
yoked  a  generał  assembly  of  the  rulers,  oyer  which  they 
preaided  and  exercised  a  powerful  influence.  They  could 
iasue  orders,  but  not  enact  laws ;  they  could  neither  leyy 
taxe8  nor  appoint  officers,  exoept  perhaps  in  the  army. 
Thęir  authority  extended  only  oyer  those  tribes  by 
whom  they  had  been  elected  or  acknowledged ;  for  it  ia 
elear  that  several  of  the  judges  presided  oyer  separate 
tribes.  There  was  no  income  attached  to  their  office, 
nor  waa  there  any  income  appropriated  to  them,  unless 
it  might  be  a  larger  share  in  the  spoils,  and. those  pres- 
enta  which  were  madę  them  as  testimonials  of  rcspect 
(Judg.  yiii,  24).  They  borę  no  extemal  marks  of  dig- 
nity,  and  maintalned  no  retiuue  of  courtiers,  though 
some  of  them  were  yery  opulent  They  were  not  only 
simple  in  theąr  manners,  moderate  in  their  desires,  and 
free  from  ayarice  and  ambition,  but  noble  and  magnan- 
imous  men,  who  felt  that  whateyer  they  did  for  their 
country  was  aboye  all  reward,  and  could  not  be  recon- 
pensed;  who  desired  merely  to  promote  the  public  good, 
and  who  chose  rather  to  desenre  well  of  their  country 
than  to  be  enriohed  by  its  wealth.  This  exalted  patri* 
otism,  like  everything  else  oonnected  with  poUtics  in 
the  theocratical  state  of  the  Hebrews,  was  partly  of  a 
religious  character,  and  these  regents  always  conducted 
themselyes  aa  the  offioers  of  God;  in  all  their  ente^> 
prises  they  relied  upon  him,  and  their  only  care  waa 
tliat  their  countrymen  should  acknowledge  the  authori- 
ty of  Jehoyah,  their  inyisible  king  (Judg.  yiii,  22  Bq.; 
compare  Heb.  xi).  Still  they  wcrc  not  without  faults, 
neither  are  they  so  represented  by  their  hisiorians; 
they  relate,  on  the  oontnury,  with  the  utmost  franknesa, 
the  gieat  sins  of  which  some  of  them  were  guUt y.  They 
were  not  merely  deliyerers  of  the  state  frum  a  foreign 
yoke,  but  destroyers  of  idolatry,  focs  of  pa^n  yices, 
promoten  of  the  knowledgc  of  God,  of  religion,  and  of 
morality ;  restorers  of  theocracy  in  the  minds  of  the 
Hebrews,  and  powerful  Instruments  of  diyine  Proyi- 
denoe  in  the  promotion  of  the  great  design  of  preserying 
the  Hebrew  constitution,  and  by  that  means  of  rescuing 
the  true  religion  from  destruction.  ...  By  comparing 
the  perioda  during  which  the  Hebrews  were  oppressed 
by  their  enemies  with  those  in  which  they  were  inde- 
pendent and  goyemed  by  their  own  constitution,  it  ia 
apparent  that  the  nation  in  generał  esperienced  much 
more  prosperity  than  adyersity  in  the  time  of  the  judges. 
Their  dominion  oontinued  four  hundred  and  fiilty  years; 
but  the  whole  time  of  foreign  oppression  amounts  only 
to  one  hundred  and  eleyen  years,  scareely  a  fourth  part 
of  that  period.  £yen  during  these  one  hundred  and 
eleyen  years  the  whole  nation  was  seldom  under  the 
yoke  at  the  same  time,  but,  for  the  most  part,  separate 
tribes  only  were  held  in  seryitude ;  nor  were  their  op- 
pressions  always  yery  seyere;  and  all  the  calamities 
teiminated  in  the  ach-antage  and  glor>'  of  the  people  aa 
Boon  as  they  abolished  idolatry  and  refnmed  to  their 
king,  Jehoyah.  Neither  was  the  nation  in  such  a 
state  of  anarehy  at  this  time  as  has  generally  been  sup- 
posed.  There  were  regular  judicial  tribunals  at  which 
justioe  could  be  obtained,  and  when  there  was  no  su- 
premę regent,  the  public  welfare  was  proyided  for  by 
the  ordinary  rulers"  (Ruth  iy,  1-11;  Judg.  yiii,  22;  x, 
17, 13;  xi,  1-11 ;  1  Sam.  iy,  1 ;  yii,  1,  2). 

See  generally  Buddei  Bi»t.  V,  T,  i,  939  6q.;  Zeltncr, 
De  adolesceniia  reip.  Israel  (Altorf,  1696);  Bauer,  fleb. 
Gesch.  ii,  34  8q. ;  Hess,  Gtsch.  Joma^t  u.  d,  Jleerfukrer 
(ZUr.  1779),  ii ;  Paulus,  TheoL-ereget,  Conserrator.  ii,  I80 
8q. ;  Doring,  Dom  Zeitalfer  der  RichUr  (Freibuig,  1388) ; 
Ewald,  /«r.  Gesch.  ii,  362  £q.;  Stanley,  Hut.  ąjfJewiik 
Churck,  lect.  xiiL 

III.  Tke  Judicial  Office  in  later  Periods  among  the  He^ 
I  hrew9,—ThQ  magisteiial  functions  of  the  priesthood  be- 


JUDGE 


1072 


JUDGE 


Ing,  it  may  be  preramed,  is  Abeyanoe  doring  the  period 
of  tbe  judgeBy  seem  to  have  merged  in  the  monarchT. 
The  kiogdoni  of  Saul  soifered  too  sererely  from  extei^ 
lul  foes  to  allow  ciyil  matten  much  prominence.  Henoe 
of  hia  only  two  lecorded  judicial  acta,  the  one  (1  Sam. 
zi,  18)  was  the  merę  remisaion  of  a  penalty  popcdarly 
dónanded ;  the  other  the  pronoimdng  of  a  sentence  (ib. 
ziv,44,45),which,if  it  waa  eiiłcercly  intended,waa  over^ 
luled  in  turn  by  the  right  eense  of  the  people.  In  Da- 
Yid'8  reign  it  waa  evidently  the  role  for  the  king  to  hear 
oausea  in  penon,  and  not  merely  be  paastyely,  or  eyen 
by  depaty  (though  thia  might  also  be  indaded),  the 
**foantain  of  juatice"  to  his  people.  For  thia  purpoae, 
perhapfl,  it  waa  proapectiyely  ordained  that  the  king 
ahould  **  write  him  a  copy  of  the  law,"  and  ^read  there- 
in  all  the  days  of  his  Ufe*'  (Deut.  xvii,  18, 19).  The 
Mme  dass  of  cases  which  were  reseired  for  Moeea  woold 
probably  fali  to  his  lot,  and  the  high-priest  waa,  of 
course,  ready  to  assist  the  monaich.  Thia  ia  furtber 
presamable  from  the  fact  that  no  oiBcer  analogoua  to  a 
chief  justice  eyer  appean  under  the  kings.  It  bas  been 
supposed  that  the  subjection  of  all  larael  to  David'8 
sway  caused  an  infliuc  of  auch  cases,  and  that  adyantage 
waa  artfiłUy  taken  of  this  by  Absalom  (2  Sam,  xy,  1-4) ; 
but  the  ratę  at  which  casea  were  disposed  of  can  haidly 
have  been  slower  among  the  ten  tńbea  after  David  bad 
beoome  their  king,  than  it  was  during  the  previons  an- 
archy.  It  is  morę  probable  that  during  David'a  oni- 
fonnly  successful  wara  wealth  and  population  increaaed 
rapidly,  and  civil  cases  multipUed  faatsr  than  the  king, 
eccupied  with  war,  conld  attend  to  them,  espedally  when 
the  sommaiy  piocess  customaiy  in  the  East  is  consid- 
ered.  Perhaps  the  airangements  mentioned  in  1  Chroń. 
xxiii,  4 ;  xxvi,  29  (compare  v,  82,  "nilers"  probably  in- 
duding  judges),  of  the  6000  Levites  acting  aa  ''officers 
and  judges,"  and  amongst  them  specially  **Chenaniah 
and  his  sons,"  with  others,  for  the  trans-Jordanic  tiibea, 
may  have  been  madę  to  meet  the  need  of  suiton.  In 
Solomon'8  character,  whose  reign  of  peace  would  snrely 
be  fertile  in  civil  ąuestions,  the  "wisdom  to  judge**  was 
the  fitting  flrst  quality  (1  Kinga  iii,  9;  comp.  Fea.  lxxii, 
1-^).  As  a  ju^  Solomon  ahines "in  all  his  glory**  (1 
Kings  iii,  16,  etc.).  No  criminal  waa  too  powerful  for 
his  justice,  as  some  had  been  for  his  father^a  (2  Sam.  iii, 
89,  1  Kings  ii,  5,  6,  88, 84).  The  example6  of  direct 
royal  exercise  of  judicial  anthority  aze  2  Sam.  i,  15;  iy, 
9>12,  where  sentence  is  summarily  executed,  and  the 
Bopposed  case  of  2  Sam.  xiy,  1-21.  The  denunciation 
of  2  Sam.  xii,  5, 6,  though  not  formally  judicial,  is  yet 
in  the  same  spirit  Solomon  similarly  proceeded  in  the 
cases  of  Joab  and  Sbimei  (1  Kinga  ii,  84, 46;  compare  2 
Kings  xtv,  6, 6).  It  is  likely  that  royalty  in  larael  waa 
ultimately  unfayorable  to  the  local  independence  eon- 
nected  with  the  judicature  of  the  "  princes"  and  "  eld- 
ers"  in  the  territory  and  cities  of  each  tribe.  The  ten- 
dency  of  the  monarchy  was  doubtless  to  centralize,  and 
we  read  of  large  numbers  of  king's  officere  appointed  to 
this  and  cognate  duties  (1  Chroń,  xxiii,  4 ;  xxyi,  29-82). 
If  the  generał  machinery  of  justice  had  been,  aa  is  rea- 
aonable  to  think,  deranged  or  retarded  during  a  period 
of  anarchy,  the  Lerites  afforded  the  fitteat  materials  for 
its  reconstitution.  Being  to  some  extent  detached,  both 
locally,  and  by  special  duties,  exemptions,  etc.,  from  the 
mass  of  the  population,  they  were  morę  easily  brought 
to  the  steady  routine  which  justice  requires,  and,  what 
is  no  less  important,  were,  in  case  of  neglect  of  duty, 
morę  at  the  mercy  of  the  king  (as  shown  in  the  case  of 
the  priests  at  Nob,  1  Sam.  xxii,  17).  Hence  it  is  prob- 
able that  the  Levites  generally  superaeded  the  locol  eld- 
en  in  the  administration  of  justioe.  But  Bubficquently, 
when  the  Leyites  withdrew  from  the  kingdom  of  the 
ten  tribes,  judicial  elders  probably  again  filled  the  gap. 
Thus  they  conducted  the  mock  trial  of  Naboth  (1  Kings 
xxi,  8-13).  Therc  is  in  2  Cbron.  xix,  6,  etc,  a  special 
noticc  of  a  reappointment  of  judges  by  Jehoshaphat,  and 
of  a  distinct  court,  of  appeal,  perbape,  at  Jerusalem,  com- 
poaed  of  Levitical  and  of  Łay  elementa.    In  the  same 


plaee  (aa  aJso  in  a  preyioofl  one^  1  Chroń.  xxyi,89f)  oe- 
cura  a  mention  of ''the  king'a  matten''  as  a  branch  of 
juriąmidence.  llie  lights  of  the  prerogaitiv«  having  a 
o(M]Stant  tendency  to  encroach,  and  needing  eontinnal 
regalation,  these  may  haye  grown  probaUy  into  a  de- 
partment  somewhat  like  the  English  £xeheqiier. 

One  morę  change  is  notioeable  in  the  pre-Babjloaian 
period.  The  ''prinoes"  constantly  appear  as  a  pofweifnl 
political  body,increa8ing  in  influence  and  privil^ea,  and 
haying  a  fixed  centrę  of  action  at  Jerusualem,  tiO,  in 
the  reign  of  Zedekiah,  they  aeem  to  ezeroae  aome  of 
the  duties  of  a  priyy  cooncil,  and  espedally  a  ooBeetły^ 
joriadiction  (2  Chroń.  xxyiii,  21 ;  Jer.  xxTi,  10,  16). 
These  ''prinoes**  are  probably  the  heada  of  grait  hoosea 
in  Judah  and  Benjamin,  whose  fathers  bad  onoe  been 
the  pillan  of  local  jurisdiction,  bot  wbo,  throngh  the 
attractiona  of  a  court,  and  probably  also  under  the  oao- 
stant  alarm  of  hoedle  inyasion,  became  gradnally  rań- 
denta  in  the  ciq)ital,  and  forroed  an  oligarchy  which  diew 
to  itsdf,  amidst  the  growing  weakness  of  the  latter  mon- 
archy, whateyer  yigor  was  lelt  in  the  atate,  and  en- 
croached  on  the  soyereign  attribate  of  joatice.  Tbe 
employment  in  officea  of  trust  and  emoloment  woold 
tend  alao  in  the  same  way,  and  soch  chief  familiea  woold 
probably  monopolize  soch  employment.  Henoe  the  ooo- 
stant  burden  of  the  prophetic  8tnun,denoancing  the  neg- 
lect, the  peryersion,  the  corroption  of  jodicial  fimctioo- 
aries  (Isa. i,  17, 21 ;  y,7;  x,  2;  xxyiii,7;  lyi,l;  ]ix,4; 
Jer.ii,8;  y,l;  yii,5;  xxi,12;  £zek.xxii,27;  xly,^9; 
Hoe.  y,  10;  yii, 5, 7 ;  Amoe  y,  7, 16,  24 ;  yi,  12;  Uab.  1, 
4,  etc).  Still,  althoogh  far  changed  from  ita  broad  and 
simple  basis  in  the  earlier  period,  the  administtation  of 
justice  had  little  reaembling  the  aet  and  rigid  system  of 
the  Sanhedrim  of  later  timea.  This  last  change  araee 
from  the  fact  that  the  patriarchal  aeniority,  degeneiate 
and  cormpted  aa  it  became  before  the  captiyity,  was  by 
that  eyent  broken  up,  and  a  new  basa  of  jodicatmce  had 
to  be  songfat  for.    See  Sanhedrih. 

IV.  Judieiai  Ctutomt,— With  regard  to  tbe  forma  of 
procedurę,  little  morę  is  known  than  may  be  gatbeied 
from  the  two  exampleB,  Rnth  iv,  2,  of  a  ciyil,  and  1 
Kings  xxi,  8-14,  of  a  criminal  character;  to  which,  as  a 
spedmen  of  royal  summaiy  joriadiction,  may  be  added 
the  weU-known  *' jodgment"  of  Solomon.  Boaz  appar- 
ently  empanels,  aa  it  were,  the  first  ten  ''dders"  whom 
he  meets  *<  in  the  gate,"  the  weU-known  site  of  the  Ori- 
ental  court,  and  dtea  the  other  party  by  **  Ho,  aoch  a 
one  i"  and  the  people  appear  to  be  inyoked  aa  atteating 
the  legality  of  the  proceeding.  The  whole  affair  beara 
an  extemporaneous  aspect,  which  may,  however,  be 
merdy  the  result  of  the  terseness  of  the  nazratiye.  In 
Job  ix,  19,  we  haye  a  wisb  expre8Bed  that  a  "  time  to 
plead"  might  be  **  set"  (oomp.  the  phraae  of  Roman  law, 
diem  dieere),  In  the  caae  of  the  inyolnntaiy  homidde 
seeking  the  dty  of  refhge,  he  was  to  make  oot  hia  case 
to  the  aatisfaction  of  its  dden  (Josh.  xx,  4),  and  this 
failing,  or  the  congregation  dedding  agatńst  hia  daira 
to  sanctoar}'  tbere  (thoogh  how  its  aenae  was  to  be 
taken  does  not  appear),  he  was  not  pot  to  death  by  act 
of  public  justice,  but  lefr  to  the  '^ayenger  of  Uood'* 
(Deut.  xix,  12).  The  expreBBioos  between  **  blood  and 
blood,"  between  '*  plea  and  plea*  (Deot.  xyii,  8),  indieate 
a  presumption  of  legał  intricacy  arińng,  tbe  latter  ex- 
presdon  aeeming  to  imply  something  like  what  we  GaQ 
a  '^crosfr-suit,**  We  may  infer  from  the  scantineas,  or, 
rather,  ahnost  entire  abaence  of  direction  as  r^ards  forma 
of  procedore,  that  the  legislator  was  oontent  to  feaie 
them  to  be  proyided  for  aa  the  necessity  for  them  araee^ 
it  being  impoasible  by  any  jurisprodential  deyioes  to  an- 
tidpate  chicane.  It  is  an  interesting  qaeBtion  how  te 
judges  were  allowed  to  receiye  fees  of  suiton ;  Michaeiis 
reasonably  presumes  that  nonę  were  allowed  or  costom- 
ary,  and  it  seems,  from  the  words  of  1  Sam.  xi],  3,  that 
such  transactions  woold  haye  been  regarded  as  corrapt, 
Tbere  is  another  ąoestion  how  far  adyocatea  were  osoaL 
Tbere  is  no  reason  to  think  that,  ontil  the  period  of 
Greek  influence,  when  we  meet  with  woids  based  on  aiPi^ 


JUDGES,  BOOK  OF 


lOłS 


JUDGES,  BOOK  OP 


łtyopoc  and  irapÓKhiroCt  woj  profaased  cla»  of  pluń* 
era  exi8ted.  Yet  paaMgeB  aboimd  in  which  the  plead- 
ing  of  the  caase  of  those  who  are  unable  to  plead  their 
own  is  spoken  of  as,  what  it  indeed  was,  a  noble  act  of 
cbarity ;  and  the  espreeśon  has  even  (which  showa  the 
populańty  of  the  practice)  become  a  basia  of  figuratWe 
alluaion  (Job  xyiy  21 ;  Proy.  xxii,  28;  xxiii,  U ;  xxxi, 
9;  l0a.i,17;  Jer.xxx,18;  1,84;  li,86).  The  bleased- 
neas  of  such  acta  ia  forcibly  dwelt  opon,  Job  xxix,  12, 13. 

There  is  no  mention  of  any  dłstinctiye  dresa  or  badge 
aa  pertainiog  to  the  judicial  officer.  A  staff  or  sceptre 
was  the  common  badge  of  a  niler  or  prince,  and  thia  they 
probably  borę  (Isa.  xiT,  5 ;  Amoa  i,  5, 8).  They  wouM, 
doubtless,  be  morę  than  uanally  careful  to  comply  with 
the  legulationa  about  djreea  laid  down  in  Numb.  xv,  88, 
89 ;  DeuL  xxii,  12.  The  uae  of  the  "  whłte  aaaes'*  (Judg. 
V,  10)  by  thoee  who  "ait  in  judgment"  waa  perhapa  a 
oonvenient  distinctire  mark  for  them  when  joumeying 
where  they  would  not  osually  be  personaUy  known. 

For  other  matteia  relating  to  some  of  the  procettes  of 
law,8eeOATH;  Officeb^  Tkial;  WiTSEsąetc 

Judges,  BooK  OF,  the  third  in  the  liat  of  the  hiator- 
ical  Gompositions  of  the  O.  T.  (counting  the  Pentateuch 
as  one),  or  the  8eventh  of  the  separate  booka.  In  the 
following  account  we  fredy  arail  ourselyes  of  the  arti- 
des  in  the  dictionariea  of  Kitto,  Smith,  and  Fairbaim. 

L  Tiile  and  Order.— In  the  original  Hebrew,  aa  well 
as  in  all  the  translatións,  this  book  bears  the  name  of 
Judges  (D'^:^D'!tŚ,  Sept.  KpiraijYulgate  liber  Judkum), 
and  thia  name  haa  obyiooaly  been  giyen  to  it  becauae 
chiefly  relatiug  the  tranaactiona  oonnected  with  the  de- 
•liyerance  and  goyemment  of  larad  by  the  men  who 
heax  this  title  in  the  Hebrew  polity.  The  period  of  his- 
toiy  contained  in  thia  book,  ho^eyer,  reaches  from  Joah- 
oa  to  Eli,  and  is  thos  morę  extensiye  than  the  time  of 
the  jndgea.  A  considerable  portion  of  it  also  makea  no 
mention  of  them,  though  belonging  to  their  time.  The 
Book  of  Ruth  waa  originally  a  part  of  thia  book,  but 
abont  the  middle  of  the  5th  oentory  after  Christ  it  waa 
placed  in  the  Hebrew  copiea  immediatdy  after  the  Song 
of  Solomon.  In  the  Sept  it  haa  preseryed  iu  original 
pońtion,  but  aa  a  separate  book.  The  chronological  re- 
lation  of  these  booka  coriesponds  with  the  order  in  which 
they  are  arranged,  namdy,  after  the  Book  of  Joahua. 
See  bdow,  §  yi. 

IL  CoHtents.—Th^  book  may  moat  properly  be  diyided 
into  three  parta,  the  middle  one  of  which  alone  is  in 
strictly  chronological  order. 

1.  The  Introduction  (eh.  i-iii,  6),  oontaining  prelimi- 
nary  Information  on  ceruin  pointa  requisite  to  be  known, 
or  elae  generał  statementa  which  give  a  key  to  the  courae 
of  the  history  propeily  so  call^  and  to  the  writer^a 
modę  of  presenting  it.  The  first  chapter  ia  chiefly  geo- 
graphical,  containing  a  statement  of  what  the  aeyeral 
tiibes  had  done  or  failed  to  do;  the  second  chapter,  to- 
gether  with  the  opening  yenea  of  the  third,  are  predom- 
inantly  morał  and  reflectiye;  or,  otherwise.  the  first 
giyes  the  political  relationa  of  Israd  to  the  Canaanites, 
and  the  second  giyes  the  rdigious  relation  of  Israel  to 
the  Lord.  This  part  may  thoefore  be  subdiyided  into 
Cwo  sections,  as  foliowa : 

■  a,  Chap.  i-ii,  5,  which  may  be  considered  as  a  fint  in* 
troduction,  giving  a  summary  of  the  results  of  the  war 
canied  on  against  the  Canaanites  by  the  seycral  tribea 
on  the  west  of  Jordan  afler  Joshua^s  death,  and  fonning 
a  continuation  of  Joeh.  xiL  It  ia  placed  tirst,  aa  in  the 
most  natural  position.  It  tella  ua  that  the  people  ^did 
not  obey  the  command  to  expd  the  people  of  the  land, 
and  containa  the  reproof  of  them  by  a  prophet. 

h,  Chapter  ii,  6-iii,  6.  This  is  a  second  introduction, 
atanding  in  nearer  relation  to  the  following  history.  It 
informs  ua  that  the  people  fell  into  idolatry  after  the 
death  of  Joshua  and  his  generation,  and  that  they  were 
punished  for  it  by  being  unable  to  driye  out  the  rem- 
nant  of  the  inhabitants  of  the  land,  and  by  falling  under 
the  haud  of  oppresaors,  A  parenthesis  occurs  (ii,  16-19) 
nr.— Y  T  Y 


of  the  higbeat  iroportanoe,  aa  giving  a  key  to  the  follow* 
ing  portion.  It  is  a  summary  view  of  the  history :  the 
people  fali  into  idolatry;  they  are  then  oppressed  by  a 
foreign  power;  upon  their  repentance  they  are  deliver* 
ed  by  a  judge,  after  whoee  death  they  relapse  into  idol- 
atry. 

2.  Bodjf  ofthe  History  (chap.  iii,  7-xyi),  The  worda 
"  And  the  children  of  Israd  did  eyil  in  the  sight  of  the 
Lord,"  which  had  abeady  been  used  in  eh.  ii,  11,  are  em- 
ployed  to  introduce  the  history  of  the  thirteen  judges 
oompriaed  in  this  book.  An  account  of  six  of  these  thir- 
teen is  giyen  at  greater  or  less  length,  The  account  of 
the  remaining  seyen  is  yery  short,  and  merdy  attached 
to  the  longer  narratiyea.  These  narratiyes  are  as  fol- 
iowa :  (1)  The  deliyerance  of  Israd  by  Othniel,  iii,  7-11. 
(2)  The  history  of  Khud  and  (in  81)  that  of  Shamgar, 
iii,  12-81,  (8)  The  deliyerance  by  Deborah  and  Barak, 
eh.  iy.-y.  (4)  The  whole  iiaasage  in  yi-x,  6,  The  łiia- 
toiy  of  Gideon  and  hia  son  Abimelech  is  contained  in 
chiq).  yi-ix,  and  followed  by  the  notice  of  Tola  (x,  1, 2) 
and  Jair  (x,  8, 5),  This  is  the  0Qly  case  in  which  the 
hiatory  of  a  judge  is  continued  by  that  of  his  children. 
But  the  exception  is  one  which  illustratea  the  lesson 
tanght  by  the  whole  book.  Gideon^s  sin  in  making  the 
ephod  is  punished  by  the  destruction  of  liia  family  by 
Abimdech,  with  the  hdp  of  the  men  of  Shechero,  who, 
in  their  tum,  become  the  Instruments  of  each  other*8 
punishment.  In  addition  to  thia,  the  short  reign  of 
Abimdech  would  seem  to  be  recorded  aa  being  an  unau- 
thorized  anticipation  of  the  kingly  goyemment  of  later 
timea,  (5)  Ch.  x,  ^xii.  The  history  of  Jephthah  (x, 
6-xii,  7),  to  which  is  added  the  mention  of  Ibzan  (xii, 
8-10),  Elon  (11, 12),  Abdon  (18-16).  (6)  The  histoiy 
of  Samaon,  consisting  of  twdye  exploits,  and  forming 
three  groupa  oonnected  with  hia  loye  of  three  FbiUstine 
women,  chap.  xiii-xyL  We  may  obaerye  in  generd  on 
thia  portion  of  the  book  that  it  is  almost  entijdy  a  his- 
tory of  the  wara  of  deliyerance :  there  are  no  sacerdotd 
alluaiona  in  it;  the  tribe  of  Judah  is  not  alluded  to  after 
the  time  of  Othnid ;  and  the  greater  part  of  the  judges 
belong  to  the  northem  half  of  the  kingdom, 

A  cloaer  inspection,  howeyer,  discloses  a  morę  interior, 
and  iherefore  truer  arrangement  of  this,  the  main  par^ 
of  the  book,  and  one  better  calculated  to  bring  out  Ihe 
theocratic  goyemment  of  God,  which,  as  we  haye  seen 
in  the  preceding  artide,  waa  the  cardinal  idea  of  the  of;- 
fioe  known  as  that  of  ^  the  Judges."  Moses  had  been 
oommissioned  by  the  A  ngtl  ofthe  Cotenant,  who  went  be- 
fore  the  people  in  all  their  marchcs  (£xod.  iii,  1-6;  xiii, 
21 ;  xiy,  19,  etc),  and  to  fit  him  for  hia  office  Moses  waa 
fllled  with  the  Spirit  ofthe  Lord^  which  waa  giyen  to  łmn 
in  a  meaaure  apparently  not  giyen  to  any  merę  man  af- 
ter him.  But  the  Spirit^  which  waa  communicated  in  a 
certain  degree  to  men  for  yarious  taska  in  connection 
with  the  Church  and  people,  was  espedally  commHni- 
cated  from  Moses,  in  whom  t^e  fuhięss  resided  (fulness 
such  aa  was  possible  under  the  Old-Testament  dispensa-r 
tion),to  the  seyenty  elders  who  asaisted  him  in  the  adT 
ministration,  and  to  Joshua,  who  waa  called  to  be  hią 
aucoessor  (Numb.  xi,  17, 25 ;  xxyii,  16, 18, 20).  Agreer 
ably  to  this,  the  true  gronping  of  the  eyents  iu  the  time 
of  the  judges  must  be  looked  for  in  connection  with  thę 
comingforth  oftheAngel  ofthe  Covenant,  and  thę  cor^ 
retponding  mission  of  the  Spirit  of  the  Lord  into  the 
hearta  of  hia  Instruments.  (No  aiguing  is  needcd  to 
establish  the  erroneousness  of  our  translation,  "ai^  angel 
ofthe  Lord"  f  ii,  1 ;  vi,  11] ;  "  an  angel  of  God"  [xiii,  6, 
9, 13].  The  only  possible  rendering  is, "  the  Angel  of 
the  Lord,"  "  the  Angel  of  God ;"  and  this  is  amply  con- 
firmed  by  the  attribotea  of  Godhead  which  appear  in  the 
narratiyes.)  Yet.  while  we  notice  these  epochs  of  special 
manifes^tton,  we  must  remember  that  God  was  always 
present  with  his  people,  at  the  head  of  their  goyem- 
ment, and  working  in  a  morę  ordinary  manner  in  caUing 
out  agenta  for  presenring  and  recoyering  the  yisible 
Church  and  boly  nation.  Besides,  there  was  the  stand- 
ing  method  of  consulting  him  by  Urim  and  Thummln^ 


ilTDGES,  BOOK  OF 


1074 


JIJDGES,  BOOK  OF 


thiough  the  high-priest,  and  there  was  his  way  of  ex- 
traordinarily  addreuing  the  people  by  prophets;  of  both 
of  these  there  are  lecorded  instanoes  iu  thu  book,  al- 
Łhough  the  prophetifial  agency  ia  rare  and  feeble  till  the 
time  of  Samuel  (1  Sam.  iii,  1, 19-21),  with  whom  the 
Bucoession  of  prophets  began  (Acts  iii,  24). 

Kow  the  appearance  of  the  Angel  of  the  Lord  and 
the  miseion  of  the  Spirit  in  a  speciai  manner  is  four 
times  uoticed  in  the  body  of  the  history,  and  nowhere 
else,  esoept  in  the  poetical  alluńon  in  eh.  r,  28.  (1.) 
The  Angel  of  Jehovah  went  up  from  Gilgal  to  Bochim, 
and  reproached  the  people  for  neglecting  his  work  of  re- 
demption;  thieatemng  to  help  them  no  morę;  yet  in 
reality,  by  the  utteranoe  of  this  thieat,  suggesting  that 
his  free  graoe  Would  help  them,  as  in  fact  they  immedi- 
ately  gained  a  yictory  over  their  own  sinful  selyes  (ii,  1- 
6).  The  outward  yictory  oyer  oppressors  was  soon  gain- 
ed by  Othniel  (iii,  10)  when  **  the  Spiiit  of  the  Lord 
came,"  literally  was,  **  upon  hlm,  and  he  judged  Israel, 
and  went  out  to  war."  (2.)  The  Angel  of  the  Lord  came 
and  gaye  a  miasion  to  Gideon  to  deliyer  Israel  (yi,  11, 
etc) ,  and  to  fit  him  for  it  (yer.  84), "  the  Spirit  of  the 
Lord  came  upon,"  literally  clothed,  ''Gideon,  and  he 
blew  the  trumpet."  (8.)  A  ptfsaage  (x,  10-16)  is  so  sim- 
ilar  to  the  acoount  of  the  Angel  at  Bochim  that  we  do 
not  know  how  to  ayoid  the  impression  that  it  is  the  An- 
gel himself  who  speakri  iń  that  immediate  manner  which 
is  peeuUar  to  this  book ;  certainly  there  is  no  hint  of 
any  prophet  in  the  case,  and  a  message  like  this  from 
the  Urim  and  Thummim  is  nowhere  on  reoord  in  Scrip- 
turę.  The  dosing  woids  that,  after  haying  refused  to 
"saye"  them  (not  merely  "deliyer,"  as  in  our  yersion) 
on  the  repentance  of  the  people, "his  soul  was  grieyed 
for  the  misery  of  Israel,^'  suggest  the  same  interpreta- 
tion,  in  the  llght  of  the  oommentary  (Isa.  lxiii,  8, 9)  : 
''So  he  said,  Surely  they  are  my  people,  children  that 
will  not  lie ;  so  he  was  their  Sayiour.  In  all  their  afflic- 
tion  he  was  afBicted,  and  the  Angel  of  his  Presence  sa^ed 
them."  Upon  this,  Jephthah  was  called  to  lead  the 
people;  and  as  on  the  two  eaflier  occaaions  (xi,  29), 
"The  Spirit  of  the  Lord  came,"  literally  was,  "upon 
Jephthah."  (4.)  The  Angel  of  the  Lord  appeared  to 
the  parents  of  Samson,  annoiincing  the  birth  of  -  their 
son,  who  was  to  begin  to  "deliyer,"  or  rather  " saye," 
Israel  (xiii,  3-28).  This  occurs  with  the  usual  oor- 
respondence  (yer.  24, 25), "  The  child  grew,  and  the  Lord 
blessed  him ;  and  the  Spińt  of  the  Lord  began  to  moye 
him  at  times;"  while  of  him  alone,  as  one  pecuHarly 
chosen  by  the  Lord  and  giyen  to  him  fh>m  his  birth,  it 
is  said  repeatedly  afterwards,  that  "  the  Spirit  of  the 
Lord  came  mightily  upon  him." 

This  arrangement  suggests  the  four  periods  of  histoiy 
lioted  in  the  table  giyen  below  (§  ix).  The  appearance 
of  the  angel  of  the  Lord  and  the  mission  of  the  Spirit, 
iioweyer,  belong  not  to  the  yery  oommencement  of  the 
period,  but  rather  to  the  continuanoe  or  dose  of  a  term 
x>f  sin  and  disgrace.  Perhaps  in  Gideon  and  Jephthah^s 
cases  the  appearance  of  the  angd  and  the  misuon  of  the 
■Spirit  were  almost  contemporaneous;  but  in  the  firet 
case  and  in  the  last  there  must  haye  been  some  distance 
of  time  between  them,  not  now  asoertainable,  but  possi- 
bly  amounting  to  seyeral  yearB,  and  determined  in  eacb 
case  by  the  particulars  of  the  crisis  which  demanded 
these  manifestations. 

B,  An  Appeadix  (chap.  xyii>xxi).  This  part  has  no 
formal  connection  with  the  preceding,  and  haa  often, 
but  unnecessarily,  been  assumed  to  haye  been  added  by 
a  later  band.  No  mention  of  the  judges  occurs  in  it. 
it  oontains  allusions  to  "  the  house  of  God,"  the  ark,  and 
the  high-priest.  The  period  to  which  the  narratiye  re- 
lates  is  simply  marked  by  the  expresBion  "when  there 
was  no  king  in  Israel"  (xix,  1 ;  comp.  xyiii,  1).  It  re- 
oords  two  series  of  inddents : 

a,  The  conque0t  of  Laish  by  a  portion  of  the  tribe  of 
Dan,  and  the  establishment  there  of  the  idolatrous  wor- 
ship  of  Jehoyah  already  instituted  by  Micah  in  Mount 
Ephraim  (eh.  xyii,  xviii).     The  datę  of  this  oocurrence 


is  not  raaiked,  but  it  has  been  thonght  to  be  aabaegiMnt 
to  the  time  of  Deborah,  as  ber  song  oontains  no  sUniioD 
to  any  northem  settlements  of  the  tribe  of  Dan. 

b,  The  ahnost  total  extinetion  of  the  tribe  of  Benja- 
min by  the  whole  people  of  Israel,  in  cooseąnenoe  of 
their  aupportuig  the  caose  of  the  wicked  men  of  Gibeah, 
and  the  means  afterwaids  adopted  for  prorentiiig  its 
beooming  complete  (eh.  xix-zxi^.  Tne  datę  is  in  tomt 
degree  marked  by  the  mention  of  Phinehas,  the  gnmd- 
son  of  Aanm  (xx,  28) ,  and  by  the  proof  of  the  nnammiły 
still  preyailing  among  the  people. 

III.  i>ef»9fi.— The  aboye  analyais  deariy  indicatea  a 
imity  of  plan  on  the  part  of  the  writer.  His  leadiog 
object  he  distinctly  intimates  xa  ii,  11-28,  namdy,  in 
enforcement  of  the  central  idea  of  the  theociacy,  to  prore 
that  the  calamities  to  which  the  Hebrews  had  been  ex- 
poeed  sińce  the  death  of  Joahna  were  owing  to  thdr  apos* 
tasy  from  Jehoyah,  and  to  their  iddatiy.  "  They  forsook 
the  Lord,  and  seryed  Baal  and  Ashtaioth"  (ii,  18),  for 
which  crimes  they  .were  deseryedly  pimiahed  and  great- 
ly  distressed  (ii,  15).  Neyerthełess,  when  they  repeoted 
and  obeyed  again  the  oommandments  of  the  Lordl,  he 
ddiyered  them  out  of  the  hand  of  thdr  enemies  by  ihe 
shopketim  whom  he  raised  up,  and  madę  them  proeper 
(ii,  16-28).  To  illuatrate  this  theme,  the  author  col- 
lected  the  most  important  elements  of  the  Hebrew  hia- 
tory  duiing  the  period  between  Joebua  and  EIL  Some 
episodes  occur,  but  in  arguing  his  subject  he  neyer  loaei 
sigbt  of  his  leading  theme,  to  which,  on  the  oontrary, 
he  fre<iuently  recurs  while  stating  facta,  and  shows  how 
it  applied  to  them ;  the  morał  eyidently  being,  that  the 
only  way  to  happiness  was  to  shnn  idolatry  and  ofaey 
the  commandments  of  the  Lord.  The  appendix  funher 
illustrates  the  lawlesaness  and  anarchy  preyailing  in  Is- 
rad  after  Jo8hua*s  death. 

Yet  the  words  of  the  paaaage  in  which  the  anthor 
thus  disdoses  his  main  object  must  not  be  preesed  loo 
closdy,  as  if  impljong  a  peifect  remedy  of  each  poUtical 
ruin.  It  is  a  genend  tiew,  to  which  tbe  facts  of  the 
history  correspond  in  diiferent  degree&  Thus  the  peo- 
ple is  oontemplated  as  a  whole;  tbe  judges  are  spoken 
of  with  the  reyerence  dne  to  God's  Instruments,  and  the 
deliyeranoes  appear  complete.  But  it  would  seem  that 
the  people  were  in  no  instaoce  under  exact]y  the  saoe 
drcumstanoes,  and  the  judges  in  some  potnts  fali  sboit 
of  the  ideaL  Thus  Gideon,  who  in  some  reapects  is  the 
most  eminent  of  them,  is  only  the  head  of  his  own  tribe, 
and  has  to  appease  the  men  of  Ephraim  by  conciliatoiy 
language  in  the  moment  of  yictory  oyer  the  Midtanite»; 
and  he  himsdf  is  the  means  of  leading  away  the  people 
from  the  pure  worship  of  God.  In  Jephthah  we  fiod 
the  chief  of  the  land  of  Gilead  still  affected  to  some 
extent  by  personal  reasona  (xi,  9) :  his  war  against  tbe 
Ammonites  is  confined  to  the  east  aide  of  Jordan,  thoi^h 
its  issues  probably  also  freed  the  western  side  from  their 
presence,  and  it  is  followed  by  a  bloody  conflict  with 
Ephraim.  Again,  Samson*8  task  was  ńmply  "  to  hf^ 
to  deliyer  Israel"  (xiii,  5) :  and  the  occaaons  which 
called  forth  his  hoetility  to  the  Philistines  aie  of  a  kiod 
which  place  him  on  a  different  leyd  from  Deborah  or 
Gideon.  This  shows  that  the  paasage  in  ąuesrion  is  a 
generał  reyiew  of  the  coUectwe  history  of  lareel  daring 
the  time  of  the  judges,  the  details  of  which,  in  their  ya- 
r>'ing  aspects,  are  giyen  faitfafulły  as  the  narratire  pio- 
ceeds. 

This  yiew  of  the  aathoi's  design  may  lead  us  to  ex- 
pect  that  we  haye  not  a  complete  history  of  the  times— a 
fact  which  is  elear  from  the  book  itself.  We  bare  oaly 
acoounts  of  parts  of  the  nation  at  any  one  tima  We 
may  easily  suppose  that  there  were  otiier  incidents  of  a 
similar  naturę  to  thoee  reoorded  in  eh.  xvii-xxL  In- 
deed,  in  the  histoiy  itself  there  are  points  which  are  ob- 
scure  from  want  of  fnller  infoimation,  e.  g.  tbe  reasoo 
for  the  silence  about  the  tribe  of  Judah  (aee  aleo  yiii, 
18;  ix,  26).  Some  suppose  eyen  that  the  number  of 
the  judges  is  not  complete,  but  thśre  is  no  reason  fer 
this  opinion.     Bedan  (1  Sam.  xii,  11)  is  probably  Ihe 


JtTDGES,  BOOK  OF 


1076 


jrUDGES,  BOOK  OF 


■nne  «b  Ahdon,  BwM  ((j^ckA.  K, 477)  rejects  the  oom- 
mon  explanation  that  the  woid  is  a  oontracted  fonn  of 
Ben-Dan,  i  e.  Samson.  Jad  (r,  6)  need  not  be  the 
name  of  an  unknown  jadge,  or  a  ooimption  of  Jairy  as 
Ewald  Łhinką  but  U  probably  the  wife  of  Heber.  '<  The 
days  of  Jael"  would  canj  the  miBery  of  łBiael  up  to  the 
time  of  the  yictory  over  Sisera,  and  ftach  an  ezpresBion 
could  hardly  be  thought  too  great  an  honor  at  that  time 
(see  r,  24).  Had  the  writer  deaigned  to  glve  a  fuli  and 
connected  histoiy  of  the  Hebrews  in  the  period  between 
Joshua  and  the  kingą,  he  would  doubtleas  haye  descńbed 
the  State  of  the  domestic  affaiis  and  of  the  goyemment 
in  the  seyeral  tribes,  the  relation  in  wbich  they  stood  to 
each  other,  and  the  extent  of  power  exercifled  by  a 
judge,  ¥rith  other  paiticolan  nch  aa  do  not  appear  in 
thenarratiye. 

lY.  8<mrce$  ąfthe  Matenale.-^Paits  of  the  work  are 
nndoubtedly  taken  from  ancient  recorda  and  genealogtesy 
otheiB  from  tiaditions  and  orał  information.  From  an* 
cient  authentic  documents  are  probably  copied  the  song 
of  Debozah  (chap*  y),  the  beaudful  parable  of  Jotham 
ix,  8-15),  and  the  bęginning  of  Samson^s  epinician,  or 
triumphal  poem  (xy,  16).  See  also  chap.  xiy,  14^  18 ; 
zy,  7.  In  their  genealogies  the  Hebrews  osually  in- 
aeited  also  some  histoncal  aocounts,  and  from  this  souice 
may  haye  been  deriyed  the  narratiye  of  the  ciicum- 
atancee  that  preceded  the  eonception  of  Samson,  which 
were  giyen  as  the  parents  related  them  to  others  (chap. 
xiii).  These  genealogies  were  sometimes  further  illus- 
trated  by  tradition,  and  seyeial  incidents  in  the  histozy 
of  Samson  appear  to  haye  been  deńyed  from  this  kind 
4>f  infoimation.  But  on  many  pointa  tradition  ojfered 
noŁhing,  or  the  anthor  rejected  its  information  as  not 
genuine,  and  unworthy  of  belief.  Thus  it  is  that  of 
Tola,  Jair,  Ibzan,  Elon,  and  Abdon,  the  author  giyes  only 
the  nnmber  of  years  that  they  goyemed  and  the  num- 
ber  of  their  children,  but  relates  nonę  of  their  tran»- 
actions  (x,  1-5;  xii,  8,  9, 11, 18).  In  some  instances 
the  yery  words  of  the  ancient  documents  which  the  an- 
thor used  seem  to  hare  been  presenred,  and  this  proyes 
the  care  with  which  he  compoaed.  Tbus,  in  the  first 
dirision  of  oor  book,  but  nowhere  else,  rich  and  power- 
iul  men  are  described  as  men  ridiug  on  ass-colts  (z, 
4 ;  xii,  14,  etc) ;  also  in  the  song  of  Deborah  (y,  9, 
10).  In  the  appendix  also  of  this  book,  but  nowhere 
else,  a  priest  has  the  honorary  title  of  father  giyen  him 
(x\u,  10 ;  xyiii,  19).  But,  though  the  author  some- 
times retained  the  words  of  his  sonrces,  still  the  whole 
of  the  compoeition  is  written  in  a  particular  style,  dis- 
tinguishing  it  from  all  other  books  of  the  OM  Testa- 
menL  The  idea  of  the  Israelites  being  oyercome  by 
their  enemies  he  expre8SQB  often  in  this  way :  **  The  an- 
ger  of  the  Lord  was  hot  against  Israel,  and  he  sold  them 
into  the  hands  of  their  enemies"  (ii,  14;  iii,  8;  iy,  2; 
X,  7).  A  courageous  and  yaliant  warrior  is  described  as 
a  person  upon  wbom  rests  the  spirit  of  Jehoyah,  or  as  a 
person  whom  the  spirit  of  Jehoyah  ck>thed  (yi,  84;  ix, 
29;  xiy,  6, 19;  xy,  14,  etc). 

Stahelin  (^Krił.  Unttrmch,  p.  106)  thinks  that  iii,  7- 
xyi  present  the  same  manner  and  diction  throoghout, 
and  that  there  is  no  need  to  suppose  ¥rritten  souroes. 
So  Hiiyemick  (EinleUung,  i,  1,  p.  68  sq.,  107)  only  recog- 
nises  the  use  of  documents  in  the  appendix.  Other 
critics,  howeyer,  tracę  them  throughouL  Berthean  {On 
Judffts,  p.  xxviii-xxxii)  says  that  the  difference  of  the 
diction  in  the  principal  narratiyes,  coupled  with  the  fact 
that  they  are  united  in  one  pUn,  pointa  to  the  incorpo- 
lation  of  parts  of  preyioos  histories.  Thus,  according 
to  him,  the  author  found  the  suhetance  of  iy,  2-24  al- 
ready  accompanying  the  song  of  Deborah;  in  eh.  yi-ix 
two  distinct  authorities  are  used*-a  life  of  Gideon,  and  a 
history  of  Shechem  and  its  usurper;  in  the  aocount  of 
Jephthah  a  history  of  the  tribes  on  the  east  of  Jordan 
is  employed,  which  meets  us  again  in  different  parts  of 
the  Pentateuch  and  Joshua ;  and  the  history  of  Samson 
18  taken  fh>m  a  longer  work  on  the  Philistine  wars. 
£wa]d*8  yiow  is  similar  {Gesch,  i,  184  8q.;  ii,  486  sq.). 


y.  Um/y,^ThiB  has  already  been  pretty  fuUy  vindi- 
cated  in  the  aboye  remarks  on  the  design  of  the  writer 
(§  iii).  The  attacks  that  haye  been  madę  upon  the  unity 
of  the  book  aro  rested  on  yery  trifling  grounds.  The 
chief  one  is  the  exi8Łenoe  of  the  appendix,  though  it  is 
not  difficttlt  to  siee  the  two  great  reasons  for  this  part  of 
the  book  assuming  snch  a  form :  the  one,  that  the  his- 
torical  deyelopment  according  to  plan  was  not  to  be  in- 
termpted;  the  other,  that  the  two  eyents  which  it  nar^ 
rates  are  to  be  looked  on  less  aa  single  eyents  than  as 
permanent  influenoes.  The  permanence  of  the  wor- 
ship  at  Dan  is  expresdy  mentioned  (xyiii,  80, 81),  and 
*'  the  captiyity  of  the  Uind"  for  the  twenty  years  before 
Samuel  assamed  office  is  tnced  to  it  with  tolerable  dis- 
tinctness.  The  permanence  of  the  morał  eyil  which 
came  out  at  Gtbctth  is  not  so  phunly  intimated ;  on  the 
oontraiy,  it  might  haye  been  supposed  to  be  eradicated 
by  the  yengeance  taken  on  Benjamin.  Yet  the  evil  to 
be  found  in  the  whole  tribes  is  indicated  by  their  share 
in  the  tenible  chastisement;  and  thero  is  a  hint  of  the 
oontinuance  of  some  equally  potent  mischieyous  influ- 
ence in  the  similar  slanghter  of  the  tribe  of  Ephraim  by 
Jephthah.  The  prophet  Hosea  in  so  many  words  in- 
forms  us  that  the  days  of  Gibeah  neyer  ceased  in  Israel, 
and  that  the  root  of  the  eyil  had  not  been  taken  away 
(Hos.  ix,  9 ;  x,  9).  There  haye  been,  indeed,  some  yery 
unsttccessful  efforts  to  establish  a  diiferenoe  of  the  words 
in  use  and  the  styk  of  composition  in  the  appeDdix  and 
in  the  body  of  the  book,  but  there  has  been  litUe  ap- 
pearance  of  success  in  the  undertaking.  £yen  these 
objectors  haye  frequently  admitted  a  resemblance  and 
unity  between  the  appendix  and  the  introduction,  on 
acconnt  of  which  some  of  them  haye  gone  so  fiff  as  to 
aay  that  both  these  may  belong  to  a  later  editor,  who 
prefixed  and  annexed  his  new  materials  to  a  preyiously 
existing  work,  the  histozy  of  the  Judges  strictly  so  call- 
ed.  The  argument  firom  intemal  chronolqgical  data  will 
be  examined  below  (§  yii).  The  attempts  to  discoyer 
oontradictions  in  the  book,  with  a  yiew  to  show  a  plu*- 
rality  of  authors,  haye  also  signally  failed. 

VL  Relation  to  other  Books  of  Scripture.—This  is 
somewhat  connected  with  the  topics  discussed  under  the 
preoeding  and  foUowing  heads.  The  coincidences  with 
the  two  adjoining  Biblical  books,  howeyer,  are  so  strik- 
ing  as  to  cali  for  a  distinct  notioe. 

1.  Rdatwn  to  ike  Book  of  Jothtui,—JoBYL.  xy-xxi 
must  be  oompared  with  Judg.  i  fai  order  to  undentand 
fttUy  how  far  the  seyeral  tribes  failed  in  expelling  the 
people  of  Canaan.  Nothing  is  said  in  chap.  i  about  the 
tribes  on  the  east  of  Jordan,  which  had  already  been 
mentioned  (Joeh.  xiii,  18),  nor  about  Łeyi  (see  Josh.  xiii, 
88;  X3U,  1-42).  The  canying  on  of  the  war  by  the 
tribes  singly  is  explained  by  Josh.  xxiy,  28.  The  book 
begins  with  a  reference  to  Joshua^s  death,  and  ii,  6-9  re- 
sumes  the  nanatiye,  suspended  by  i-ii,  5,  with  the  same 
words  as  are  used  in  oonduding  the  history  of  Joshua 
(xxiy,  28-81).  In  addition  to  this,  the  foUowiitg  pas- 
sages  appear  to  be  oommon  to  the  two  books:  Judg.  i, 
10-15, 20, 21, 27, 29,  compared  with  Josh.xy,  14-19, 18, 
68;  xyLi,  12;  xyi,  10.  A  reference  to  the  conąuest  of 
Łaish  (Judg.  xyiii)  occurs  in  Josh.  xix,  47. 

2.  Reiation  to  the  Books  of  Samuel  and  Kmg»,^We 
find  in  i,  28,  30, 83, 85,  a  number  of  towns  upon  which, 
"  when  Israel  was  strong,**  a  tribute  of  bond-senrice  was 
levied :  this  is  supposed  by  some  to  refer  to  the  time  of 
Solomon  (1  Kings  ix,  13-22).  The  conduct  of  Saul  to- 
wards  the  Kenites  (1  Sam.  xy,  6),  and  that  of  Dayid  (1 
Sam.  xxx,  29),  is  explained  by  i,  16.  A  reference  to  the 
oontinuance  of  the  Philistine  wars  is  impKed  in  xiii,  5. 
The  aUueion  to  Abimelech  (2  Sam.  xi,  21)  is  explained 
by  eh.  ix.  Chapters  xyii~xxi  and  the  book  of  Ruth  are 
more  independent,  but  they  have  a  generał  reference  to 
the  subseąucnt  history. 

3.  The  que8tion  now  arises  whether  this  book  fonns 
one  link  in  a  historical  series,  or  whether  it  has  a  doser 
onnnection  either  with  thoee  that  precede  or  follow  it. 
We  cannot  infer  anythiug  from  the  agreement  of  its 


JtJDGES,  BOOK  OF 


1076 


JUDGES,  BOOK  OP 


view  and  spirit  with  thoae  of  the  other  books.  The 
object  of  the  wńter  was  to  give  an  account  oniy  of  the 
**  Judges"  proper.  Hence  the  history  ceases  with  Sam- 
son,  excluding  £It  and  Samuel;  and  then  at  this  point 
two  histoiical  pieoes  are  added — eh.  xvii-xxi  and  the 
book  of  Sath,  supplemental  to  the  generał  plan  and  to 
each  other.  This  is  less  well  explained  by  £wald*s 
Bupposition  that  the  books  from  Judges  to  2  Kings  form 
one  work«  In  this  case  the  histories  of  Eli  and  Samuel, 
80  closely  united  between  themselves,  are  only  deferred 
on  account  of  their  ck>se  connection  with  the  rise  of  the 
monarchy.  Judg.  xvii-xxi  is  inserted  both  as  an  illus- 
tration  of  the  sin  of  Israel  during  the  time  of  the  judgeą 
iu  wliich  respect  it  agroes  with  eh.  i-xyi,  and  as  pre- 
senting  a  contrast  with  the  better  order  prevailing  in 
the  time  of  the  kings.  Ruth  follows  next,  as  touching 
on  the  time  of  the  judges,  and  containing  Information 
abont  David's  family  history  which  does  not  occur  else* 
where.  The  connection  of  these  books,  howeyer,  is  de- 
nied  by  De  Wette  {JCinleit,  §  186)  and  Thenius  {Kun- 
gff,  Extg,  Hcmdb,  Sanu  p.  xv,  KOnigej  p.  i).  Berthean, 
on  the  other  hand,  thinks  that  one  editor  may  be  traoed 
from  Genesis  to  2  Kings,  whom  he  believes  to  be  Ezra, 
in  agreement  with  Jewish  tradition. 

Vn.  Aułhorship  ani  Daie,—The  only  guide  to  the 
time  when  the  book  was  written  is  the  eKpression  *^unto 
this  day,"  which  we  frequently  find  in  it  (ii,  6-xvi), 
and  the  last  occurrence  of  which  (xt,  19)  implies  some 
distance  from  the  time  of  Samson.  But  i,  21,  acoording 
to  the  most  natural  explanation,  would  indicate  a  datę, 
for  this  chapter  at  lea^t,  previous  to  the  taking  of  Jebus 
by  Dayid  (2  Sam.  v,  6-9).  Again,  we  should  at  first 
sight  suppose  i,  28, 80,  83,  35,  to  belong  to  the  time  of 
the  judges ;  but  these  passages  are  taken  by  many  mod- 
em critics  as  pointing  to  the  time  of  Soiomon  (comp.  1 
Kings  ix,  21).  The  first  portion  of  the  book  (chap.  i- 
xvt)  was  originally,  afe  Ewald  thinks  {GeacKi,  202),  the 
oommencement  of  a  larger  work  reaching  down  to  aboye 
a  century  after  Soiomon  (sce  aiso  Dayidson,  Introdudion, 
p.  649),  but  this  is  equally  gratuitous.  The  anthor  of 
the  second  diyision  always  describes  the  period  of  which 
he  speaks  thus :  **  In  those  days  there  was  no  king  in 
Israel,  but  eyery  man  did  that  which  was  right  in  his 
own  eyes"  (xyii,  6 ;  xyiii,  1 ;  xix,  1 ;  xxi,  26) ;  but  this 
expres8ion  never  once  occurs  in  the  first  diyision.  Henoe 
many  modem  critics  conclude  that  the  author  of  the 
first  sixteen  chapters  of  our  book  was  different  from  him 
who  composed  the  appendix  (see  Bertholdt,  Historiach- 
hrititcke  Einkitung  in  die  admmtiichen  Schri/ten  des  A . 
und  N,  T,  p.  876;  £iohhom's  EtnUUung  indos  A,  Test. 
iii,  §  467 ;  S.  Dayidson,  in  Home's  Jnirod^  new  ed.,  ii, 
648;  but  Kcil  the  contrary,  EinUiU  pw  182).  The  au- 
thorship  of  the  first  sixteen  chaptere  has  been  assigned 
to  Joshua,  Samuel,  and  Ezra.  That  they  were  not 
written  by  Joshua  appears  from  the  difference  of  the 
method  of  relating  subjects,  as  well  as  from  the  differ- 
ence of  the  style.  In  the  book  of  Joshua  there  is  a  con- 
tinual  reference  to  the  law  of  Moses,  which  is  much  less 
freąuent  in  the  book  of  Judges;  and  in  Joshua,  again, 
there  are  no  such  inferences  from  history  as  are  common 
in  Judges  (iii,  1,  4 ;  \ńii,  27 ;  ix,  56).  The  style  of  the 
book  of  Joshua  is  neater  than  that  of  Judges;  the  nar- 
ration  is  morę  elear,  and  the  arrangement  is  better  (com- 
pare  i,  10,  U,  20,  with  Josh.  xiv,  6-15,  and  xy,  13-19: 
also  ii,  7-10,  with  Josh.  xxiv,  29-31).  That  the  book 
of  Judges  was  composed  by  Samuel,  aithoagh  an  inven- 
tion  of  the  Talmudists,  unsupported  by  any  exteraal 
eyidence,  is  neyertheless  the  most  plausible  authorship 
that  has  bcen  assigned  to  it,  at  least  so  far  as  relates  to 
the  first  diyision.  The  opinion  that  this  portion  was 
written  by  Ezra  will  not  be  entertained  by  any  one  who 
attentiyely  peruses  the  original ;  for  it  has  a  phraseolo- 
gy  of  its  own,  and  certain  favorite  ideas,  to  which  it 
constantly  reyerts,  but  of  which  there  is  not  a  tracę  in 
Ezra.  If  Ezra  had  int«nded  to  continue  the  history  of 
the  Ilebrcws  from  Joshua  down  to  EU  in  a  separate 
work,  ho  would  not  have  given  a  selection  ijS  incidents 


to  proya  a  parUcular  theme^  but  a  oomplete  hiatory. 
The  orthograpby  of  the  book  crf^Ezn,  with  many  phnsea 
characteristic  of  his  age,  do  not  appear  in  tbe  book  of 
Judges.  The  prefix  Ó  occon^  indeed  (y,7;  vi,  17;  yii, 
12^  yiii,  26);  bat  this  cannot  be  refenwd  to  in  proof 
that  the  language  u  of  the  time  of  Ezra,  for  it  bek>nged 
to  the  dialect  of  North  Palestine,  aa  Ewald  and  othen 
haye  proyed.  Other  yerbal  peculiarities  may  be  ex- 
pUdned  in  a  similar  manner  (see  Ottmar,  in  Henke*8 
MagasinjVo\,\y\  De  Wette,  Lekrłmek  der  Einkiłui^  in 
die  Bibelf  Berlin,  1838-^9).  The  first  flixteen  chapters 
must  haye  been  written  under  Sani,  whom  the  Isaelitea 
madę  their  king  in  the  hope  of  improying  their  oondi* 
tion.  Phrases  used  in  the  period  of  the  jodges  may  be 
tnced  in  them,  and  the  author  mnsŁ  ooDseąoently  łiave 
lived  near  the  time  when  they  were  yet  cnzient.  He 
8a3r8  that  in  his  time  ''the  Jebosites  dwelt  with  the 
children  of  Benjamin  in  Jemaalem"  O,  21) :  oow  thia 
was  the  case  only  before  Dayid,  who  oonqiieied  the 
town  and  droye  oat  the  Jebosttea.  Conseąnently,  the 
author  of  the  first  diyision  of  the  book  of  Jndges  must 
haye  liyed  and  written  before  Dayid,  and  yet  he  was 
acquainted  with  a  rągal  form  ofgoyemment,  which  can 
only  point  to  the  reign  of  SauL  If  he  had  lived  nnder 
David,he  would  haye  mentioned  the  captore  of  Jerasa- 
lem  by  that  monarch,  as  the  natnre  of  his  sabject  did 
not  allow  him  to  pass  it  oyer  in  silenoe.  The  omission, 
moreover,  of  the  history  not  only  of  Samuel,  but  also  of 
Eli,  indicates  an  author  who,  liying  in  an  age  very  near 
that  of  Eli,  considered  his  history  as  generally  kuown, 
because  BO  recent 

The  exact  datę  of  the  appendix  is  morę  dlificok  to  de- 
termine,  but  its  author  oertiunly  liyed  in  an  age  consid- 
erably  later  than  that  of  the  recorded  event&  That  in 
his  time  the  period  of  the  eyents  which  he  rdatea  had 
been  long  forgotten  is,  howeyer,  hardly  a  fair  inferenoe 
from  the  frequent  chronological  formuła, "  In  thoae  days 
there  was  no  king  in  Israel"  (xyii,  6) ;  and  it  is  gratu- 
itous to  suppose  that  oertain  particulars  of  his  narrative 
oould  no  longer  be  ascertained,  and  that  this  catned  him 
to  omit  the  nAme  of  the  Leyite  whoee  history  is  given 
in  eh.  xix.  In  his  time,  indeed,  the  houae  of  God  was 
no  longer  in  Shiloh  (xyiii,  81)  ;  and  it  will  be  reooUect- 
ed  that  it  was  David  who  biought  the  ark  to  Jenisalem. 
But  it  must  be  borne  in  mind  that  it  had  ireąuently 
changed  places  during  the  Philisdne  war,  and  it  ie- 
mained  a  kmg  time  away  from  Shiloh  even  aftcr  £li*s 
death.  The  author  knew  that  the  posterity  of  Jonathan 
were  priests  of  the  grayen  image  in  Dan,  or  Laish,  ''nn- 
til  the  day  of  the  captiyity  of  the  land"  (syiii,  30). 
This  latter  circnmstanoe  has  been  assumed  by  Le  Oeic 
and  others  to  |nnove  that  the  appendix  was  not  publish- 
ed  until  after  the  Babylonian  captiyity,  or  at  least  until 
after  that  of  Israel  by  Shalmaneser  and  Esar-haddon. 
It  cannot  be  understood  of  the  domination  of  tbe  Philip 
tines  over  the  Israelites,  which  would  vexT  improperly 
be  called  **  the  captiyity  of  the  land,"  thb  expn»iott 
always  implying  tbe  deportation  of  the  inhabitants  of  a 
country.  But  we  may  reasonably  suppose  that  this  ex- 
pression  was  added  by  a  later  editor.  The  circumstance 
that  the  author,  in  mentioning  Shiloh,  adds,  **  which  ts 
in  the  land  of  Canaan"  (xxi,  12),  and  that  the  topo- 
graphical  description  of  the  site  of  Shiloh  is  gi  ven  (xxi, 
19),  has  led  sóme  interpreters  to  assert  that  the  author 
of  the  appendix  must  haye  been  a  foreigner,  as  to  an 
Israelite  such  remarks  would  have  appeared  trivial  (see 
Brie/e  eimger  HoUandischen  GoUesgelehrten  uher  B.  «Vh 
mon^s  kritische  GeschidiU  des  A,T^  edited  by  Le  Clerc 
at  ZUrich,  p.  490).  The  inferenoe  is  certainly  spedow. 
but,  from  an  examination  of  the  oontexts,  it  appean  that 
in  the  first  passage  Shiloh  is  oppoeed  to  Jahesfa  in  Gil- 
ead, a  town  without  the  land  of  Canaan,  and  that  this 
led  the  author  to  add  to  Shiloh  that  it  was  in  Canaan; 
while  the  second  passage  describes,  not  the  site  of  Shi- 
loh, but  of  a  place  in  its  neighborhood,  where  an  annnal 
feast  was  celebrated,  when  the  daughters  of  Shikh  came 
out  to  dance,  to  aing,  and  to  play  on  inscrumenta  of  mn^ 


S 


JTJDGES,  BOOK  OP 


1077 


JUDGES,  BOOK  OP 


sic;  the  antbor  thns  beightening  the  interest  of  his  nar- 
latiTe  by  giriog  a  clearer  idea  of  tbe  circumstanoes  of 
tbe  festiraL  Meitber  of  theae  pasaageą  therefore,  aa- 
tborizea  tbe  inference  tbat  be  was  a  foreigner.  Under 
tbeae  drcumstancefl,  many  bare  becn  content  to  conjec- 
tore  tbat  tbe  latter  portion  of  tbe  book  was  compiled, 
perbaps  by  Ezra,  out  of  bistorical  documents  originating 
with  tbe  yarioos  propbetical  cbaracters  tbat  appeared 
firom  time  to  time  doiing  tbe  earlier  period  of  tbe  He- 
brew  oommonwealtb,  cbiefly  perbaps  SamueL  Bat  if 
tbe  aboye  reasoning  is  ooircct,  especially  tbat  relating 
to  tbe  unity  of  tbe  entiie  book,  we  do  not  see  wby  Sam- 
uel bimaelf  may  not  bave  added  tbe  appendiz,  substan- 
tially  in  ita  preaent  form,  to  tbe  fonner  part  of  tbe  bis- 
tofy. 

Yin.  Canomdiy  cmd  CredOfUity^lht  book  was  pub- 
liabed  at  a  time  wben  tbe  events  related  were  generally 
known,  and  wben  tbe  yeracity  of  tbe  autbor  ooald  be 
aacertained  by  a  reference  to  tbe  original  documents. 
Seyerai  of  its  nanatiyes  are  oonfirmed  by  tbe  books  of 
Samuel  (comp.  Judg.  iy,  2;  yi,  14;  xi,  witb  1  Sanu  ni, 
&-12;  Jodg.  U,  68  witb  2  Sam.  sd,  21).  Tbe  Psalms 
not  oniy  allude  to  tbe  book  of  Judges  (compare  Fta. 
lxxTiii,  11  witb  Judg.  yii,  25),  but  copy  from  it  entire 
Tenes  (compare  Pta.  bcyiii,  8, 9;  xcyii,  6,  witb  Judg.  y, 
4, 5).  Pbilo  and  Josepbus  knew  tbe  book,  and  madę 
nse  of  it  in  tbeir  own  compositions.  Tbe  New  Testa- 
ment alludes  to  it  in  seyeral  pUices  (comp.  Matt  ii,  18- 
23  witb  Judg.  xiii,  6;  xyi,  17;  Acta  xiii,  20;  Heb.  xi, 
82). 

Tbis  extemal  eyidence  in  support  of  tbe  autbority  of 
tbe  book  of  Judges  is  corroborated  by  many  intemal 
proofs  of  its  autbenticity.  Ali  its  ńarratiyes  are  in 
cbaracter  witb  tbe  age  to  wbicb  tbey  belong,  and  agree 
witb  tbe  natoral  order  of  tbings.  We  find  beie  tbat 
abortly  after  tbe  deatb  of  Josbua  tbe  Hebrew  nation 
bad,  by  seyeral  yictories,  gained  courage  and  become 
yalorous  (cb.  i  and  xix),  but  tbat  it  afterwards  tumed 
to  agricultnre,  preferred  a  quiet  life,  and  allowed  tbe 
Canaanites  to  reside  in  its  territory  in  consideration  of 
a  tribute  impoeed  on  tbem,  wben  tbe  original  plan  was 
tbat  tbey  sbould  be  expelled.  Tbis  cbanged  tbeir 
cbaracter  entirely:  tbey  became  effeminato  and  indo- 
lent— a  resnlt  wbicb  we  find  in  tbe  case  of  all  nations 
wbo,  from  a  nomadtc  and  warlike  life,  tum  to  agricnl- 
toie.  Tbe  intercourse  witb  tbeir  heatben  neigbbors 
freąuently  led  tbe  uncultiyated  Hebrews  into  idolatry ; 
and  tbis,  again,  furtber  prepared  tbem  for  seryitude. 
Tbey  were  oonsequently  oyerpowered  and  oppressed  by 
tbeir  beatben  neigbbors.  Tbe  first  subjugation,  indeed, 
by  a  king  of  Mesopotamia,  tbey  endured  but  eigbt  years ; 
but  tbe  second,  mora  seyere,  by  Eglon,  lasted  longer:  it 
was  the  natural  conseąuence  of  tbe  public  spirit  baying 
gradually  moro  and  more  dedined,  and  of  Eglon  baying 
remoyed  bis  residence  to  Jericbo  witb  a  yiew  to  cloaely 
watcbing  all  tbeir  moyements  (Josepbus,  Ant,v,  5). 
Wben  £bud  sounded  tbe  trumpet  of  reyolt,  tbe  wbole 
nation  no  longer  roee  in  arms,  but  only  the  inbabitants 
of  Mount  Epbraim  (iii,  27) ;  and  wben  Barak  called  to 
arms  against  Sisera,  many  tribes  remained  quietly  ¥riitb 
tbeir  berds  (y,  14, 15, 26,  28).  Of  tbe  80,000  men  wbo 
oifered  to  fuUow  Gideon,  be  oould  make  use  of  no  more 
than  800,  tbis  smali  number  only  being,  as  it  woold  seem, 
filled  witb  true  patriotism  and  courage.  Thus  the  peo- 
ple  bad  sunk  graduaUy,  and  deseryed  for  forty  years  to 
bear  tbe  yoke  of  tbe  Pbilistines,  to  wbom  tbey  bad  tbe 
ineanness  to  deliyer  Samson,  wbo,  boweyer,  loosed  tbe 
oords  witb  wbicb  be  was  tied,  and  killed  a  laige  num- 
ber of  tbem  (cb.  xy).  It  is  impossible  to  consider  such 
a  bistorical  work,  wbicb  perfectly  agrees  with  tbe  nat- 
oral couTM  of  tbings,  as  a  flction :  at  tbat  early  period 
of  autborsbip,  no  autbor  could,  firom  fancy,  baye  depict- 
ed  the  cbaracter  of  tbe  Hebrews  so  conformably  witb 
naturę  and  establisbed  facts.  All  in  tbis  book  breatbes 
tbe  spirit  of  tbe  ancient  worid.  Martial  law  we  find  in 
it,  as  oould  not  but  be  expected,  bard  and  wild.  The 
fionąuered  people  are  subjected  to  rougb  treatment,  as 


is  tbe  case  in  tbe  wars  of  all  un^iyilized  people ;  tbe  in- 
babitants of  cities  are  destroyed  wbolesale  (yiii,  16, 17 ; 
xx).  Hoepitality  and  tbe  protection  of  strangers  re- 
oeiyed  as  guests  is  oonsidered  the  bigbest  yirtue :  a  fa- 
tber  will  ratber  resign  bis  daugbter  than  allow  yiolence 
to  be  done  to  a  stranger  wbo  stops  in  bis  bouse  for  tbe 
night  (cb.  xix;  comp. Gen.  xix). 

In  tbe  State  of  oppression  in  wbicb  tbe  Hebrews  often 
found  tbemselyes  during  tbe  period  from  Josbua  to  Eli, 
it  was  to  be  expected  tbat  men,  filled  witb  heroism, 
sbould  now  and  then  rise  up  and  cali  tbe  people  to  arms 
in  order  to  deliyer  tbem  iiom  tbeir  enemies.  Such.  yal- 
iant  men  are  introduced  by  our  autbor,  and  be  extols 
tbem,  indeed,  bigbly ;  but,  on  tbe  otber  band,  he  is  not 
silent  respecting  tbeir  faults,  as  may  be  seen  in  tbe  in- 
stances  of  Ebud,  wbom  he  reports  to  baye  murdered  a 
king  to  recoyer  liberty  for  bis  country  (iii,  16  są.) ;  of 
Gideon,  wbo  is  recorded  to  baye  pumsbed  tbe  inbabi- 
tants of  Succotb  and  Penuel  cruelly  for  baying  refused 
bread  to  bis  weaiy  troops  (yiii,  16, 17) ;  and  of  Jeph- 
tbab,  wbose  inconsiderato  yow  depriyes  bim  of  bis  only 
daugbter  (xi,  84).  Tbis  cannot  be  a  fiction;  it  is  no 
panegyric  on  Israd  to  describe  tbem  in  tbe  manner  the 
autbor  bas  done.  Now  tbis  frank,  impartial  tonę  per- 
yades  tbe  wbole  work.  It  begins  witb  displaying  tbe 
Israelites  as  a  refractory  and  obstinate  people,  and  tbe 
appendix  ends  witb  the  statement  of  a  crime  committed 
by  tbe  Benjamites,  wbicb  bad  tbe  most  disastrous  conse- 
quence8.  At  tbe  same  time,  due  praise  is  bestowed  on 
acts  of  generońty  and  justice,  and  yaliant  feats  are  care- 
fully  recorded. 

But  are  not  tbe  exploits  of  its  beroes  exaggerated  in 
our  book,  like  those  of  Sesostris,  Semiramis,  and  Hercu- 
les? Tbeir  deeds  are,  no  doubt,  often  splendidi  but 
tbey  do  not  surpass  belief,  proyided  we  do  not  add  to 
the  narratiye  anything  wbicb  tbe  original  text  docs  not 
sanction,  nor  giye  to  particular  words  and  pbrases  a 
meaning  wbicb  does  not  belong  to  tbem.  Thus,  wben 
we  read  tbat  **  Shamgar  siew  of  the  Pbilistines  600  men" 
(iii,  81),  it  woold  perbaps  baye  been  correct  if  tbe  He- 
brew 'TJJI  bad  been  rendered  by  "put  to  flight;"  and  it 
sbould  furtber  be  recollected  tbat  Shamgar  is  not  stated 
to  baye  been  alone  and  uuassisted  in  repelling  tbe  ene- 
my :  be  did  it,  no  doubt,  supported  by  those  braye  men 
wbose  leader  be  was.  It  freąuently  bappens  tbat  to  the 
leader  is  attributed  what  bas  been  performed  by  his  fol- 
lowers.  Nor  can  it  oiTend  wben,  in  the  passage  ąuoted 
aboye,  it  is  said  tbat  Shamgar  repelled  the  Pbilistines 
witb  an  ox-goad ;  for  tbis  was  cxactly  tbe  weapon  wbicb 
an  uncultiyated  Oriental  warrior,  wbo  bad  been  brought 
up  to  busbandiy,  would  choose  in  praference  to  otber 
Instruments  of  oifence.  From  tbe  description  wbicb 
trayellers  giye  of  it,  it  appears  to  baye  been  well  suited 
to  such  a  purpose.  See  Goad.  It  is  cbiefly  the  prodig- 
ious  strengtb  of  Samson,  boweyer,  wbicb  to  very  many 
readers  seems  exaggerated,  and  surpassing  all  belief. 
He  is,  e.  g.,  reported  to  baye,  unarmed,  slain  a  lion  (xiy, 
5,6);  tohayecaught800jacka]s  (D'^b;^Ó), bound tbeir 
tails  to  one  anotber,  put  a  firebrand  between  two  tails, 
and  let  tbem  go  into  tbe  standing  com  of  tbe  Pbilis- 
tines, wbicb  was  thus  bumt  up  (xy,  4,  5, 8) ;  to  baye 
broken,  with  perfect  ease,  the  new  cords  witb  wbicb  bu 
arms  were  bound,  etc  (xy,  14;  xyi,7-9,ll).  Nowthere 
is  in  these  and  otber  recorded  feats  of  Samson  nothing 
wbicb  ought  to  creato  difiSculty,  for  lustory  aflbrds  many 
instances  of  men  of  extraordinaTy  strengtb,  of  whom  Go- 
liatb  among  tbe  Pbilistines  is  not  tbe  least  remarkable ; 
and  for  others  we  refer  to  T.  Ludolf,  Historia  ACthiopia, 
i,  10;  to  the  Acta  Dei  per  Francos,  i,  76,  814;  and  to 
Scbiłlinger,  Missionsberichły  iv,  79.  Lions  were  also  slain 
by  otber  persons  unarmed,  as  by  Dayid  (1  Sam.  xyii,86) 
and  Benaiah  (2  Sam.  xxiii,  20).  It  were  easy  to  show 
tbat,  wben  properly  under8tood,his  otber  exploits  do  not 
necessarily  exceed  the  limits  of  human  power.  £xtraor- 
dinary  Indeed  tbey  were,  but,  cven  if  regarded  as  not 
alleged  by  the  Scripture  itself  to  baye  been  supematu* 


JTJD6ES,  BOOK  OF 


1078 


JUDGES,  BOOK  OP 


nd,  they  «re  far  from  lnbulooB.  Conńdeiing  the  reiy 
remote  period  at  which  our  book  was  written — consid- 
ering  also  the  manner  of  ^'iewing  and  deseńbing  eyento 
and  perBODs  which  preyailed  with  the  andent  Hebrewa, 
and  which  very  much  diffen  from  that  of  our  age— 
takingi  moreorer,  into  aocount  the  breTity  of  the  nam- 
tires,  which  oonsist  of  hiatorical  fiagments,  we  may  weli 
wonder  that  there  do  not  occur  in  it  morę  difficulties, 
and  that  not  morę  doabts  have  been  laised  as  to  ita  his- 
torical  authority  (see  Herder,  GeUt  der  HebrSuchen  Po- 
eaUf  ii,  250, 59 ;  Eichhom,  Repertoruim  der  Bibiischm  und 
Morgeidanditchen  Litłeratur,  yii, 78).  For  a  forther  elu- 
ddatton  of  the  above  and  otber  diflicultiea,  see  the  Bev- 
eral  subjects  in  their  alphabetical  places. 

IX.  Chronohgicai  lĄficułties.—The  time  commonly 
assigned  to  the  period  contained  in  this  book  is  299 
years.  But  this  number  is  not  deriyed  directly  from  it. 
The  length  of  the  interyal  between  Jo8hiia*s  death  and 
the  inyasion  of  Chashan-ri8hathaim,and  of  the  time  dur^ 
ing  which  Shamgar  was  judge,  is  not  stated.  The  dates 
which  are  giyen  amount  to  410  yean  when  reckoned 
consecatiyely;  and  Acta  xiii,  20  would  show  that  this 
was  the  compntation  commonly  adopted,  as  the  ^50  years 
seem  to  result  from  adding  40  years  for  Eli  to  the  410 
of  this  book.  But  a  difficulty  is  created  by  xi,  26,  and 
in  a  still  greater  degree  by  1  Kinga  yi,  1,  where  the 
whole  period  from  the  exodus  to  the  buildiog  of  the 
Tempie  is  stated  at  480  years  (Septuag.  440).  One  solu- 
tion  questiotis  the  genuineness  of  the  datę  in  1  Kings. 
Kennicott  pronounces  against  it  {Dies,  Gen,  80,  §  8)  be- 
cause  it  \&  omitted  by  Origen  when  quoting  the  rest  of 
the  yerse.  It  is  also  urged  that  Josephns  would  not 
haye  reckoned  592  years  for  the  same  period  if  the  pres- 
ent  reading  had  exl8ted  in  his  time.  But  it  is  defendcd 
by  Thenius  (ad  loc.),  and  is  generally  adopted,  partly 
on  account  of  its  agreement  with  Egyptian  chronology. 
Most  of  the  systems  therefore  shortcn  the  time  of  the 
judges  by  reckoning  the  dates  as  inclusiye  or  contem- 
porary.  But  alł  these  combinations  are  arbitraiy.  The 
same  may  be  said  of  Keil*s  scheme,  which  is  one  of  those 
least  open  to  objection.  Ue  reckons  the  dates  succes- 
sively  as  far  as  Jair,  but  makes  Jephthah  and  the  three 
following  judges  contemporary  with  the  40  years  of  the 
PhiUstine  oppression  (oomp.  x,  6-xiii,  1) ;  and  by  oom- 
pressing  the  period  between  the  diyision  of  the  land  and 
Chushan-rishathaim  into  10  years,  and  the  PhiUstine 
wars  to  the  death  of  Saul  into  89,  be  arriyes  ultimately 
at  the  480  years.  Ewald  and  Bertheau  haye  proposed 
ingenious  but  unsatisfactory  explanations — differing  in 
details,  but  both  built  upon  the  supposition  that  the 
wholc  period  from  the  exodns  to  Solomon  was  di\dded 
into  12  generations  of  40  years;  and  that, for  the  period 
of  the  judges,  this  system  has  become  blendcd  with  the 
dates  of  another  morę  precise  reckoning. 

But  the  whole  theory  of  the  parallel  or  conterapora- 
neous  rule  of  two  or  morę  judges,  upon  which  all  these 
fihortenings  of  the  period  in  question  prooeed,  is  purely 
arbitrary.  There  is  nothing  in  the  book  of  Judges  to 
warrant  the  supposition  that  the  national  miity  was 
completely  broken  up,  so  that  there  eyer  were  two  in- 
dependent judges  ruling  diflerent  parta  of  Isracl :  sach 
a  schism  flrst  appeared  in  the  days  of  Ishbosheth  and 
Jeroboam,  and  then  our  attention  is  strongly  called  to 
it.  The  Ammonitish  oppression  is  distinctly  stated  to 
haye  extended  far  beyond  the  eastem  tribes,  into  Judah, 
and  Benjamin,  and  Ephraim,  all  being  included  in  that 
^  Isracl  which  they  oppressed.**  Nor  is  there  anything 
Ul  the  history  which  suggests  the  restriction  of  Jeph- 
thah's  jurisdiction  to  the  cast  of  Jordan.  On  the  con- 
trary,  Mizpeh  of  Gilead  (xi,  29)  seems  to  be  distinguish- 
ed  from  Mizpeh  simply  so  called,  where  he  took  up  his 
house  (yer.  84),  where  he  uttered  all  his  words  before 
the  LonI  (yer.  11),  and  where  the  children  of  Israel  had 
assembled  themselyes  together  and  encamped  (x,  17) ; 
and  it  will  be  difficult  to  assign  a  reason  for  thinking 
that  this  was  not  the  Mizpeh  in  Benjamin,  where  at 
otber  times  the  people  of  the  Lord  were  used  to  meet  in 


thoae  days  (xx,  1 ;  1  Sam. yii, 5, 6;  x,  17).  Jephthah^ 
suooesBon,  wbose  role  most  also  be  madę  ooatemporsif 
with  the  Philistiiie  oppression  during  40  yeais,  had  no 
special  connection  whateycr  with  the  eastem  tiibea 
Ibzan  bekmged  to  Bethlehem,  and  was  boiied  thuv; 
Elon  stood  in  the  same  relatlon  to  the  tribe  of  Zebok», 
and  Abdon  to  Pirathon,  in  the  land  of  Ephnńm.  So 
far  as  we  know,  these  are  fair  specimens  of  the  oomiec- 
tions  which  the  judges  had  with  the  ditReient  locafitiet 
of  the  land  of  Isnel,  and  there  is  no  ground  for  restrict- 
ing  the  rule  of  one  of  tfaem  morę  tban  that  of  another  to 
a  part  of  the  land.  We  are  prettysnre  that  this  was  wtf 
the  case  with  Deboiah  and  Barak,  nor  ¥riith  Gideon,  nor, 
certainly,  with  Samuel ;  why  imagine  it  with  any  of  the 
rest?  What  time  oould  be  suggested  less  likely  for 
such  a  reyolution  in  the  oonstitution  of  Israd  tban  the 
dose  of  55  years  of  peacefui  goyemment  onder  two  sac- 
cessiye  judges,  in  wbose  administration  there  was  so  lit- 
tle  to  record  for  the  insbnction  of  posterity  ?  Or,  if  there 
had  been  a  threatening  of  such  dinntegntion  of  the 
commonwealth,  would  it  not  be  preyented  by  the  nomi- 
nation  of  the  high-priest  EU  to  the  office  of  jodge  ?  Yet 
that  otber  supposition  of  EU's  last  20  yean  falling  un- 
der  the  first  20  of  the  Philistines  compela  ns  to  euppose 
that  hiB  first  20  were  contemporaneoos  with  Jair*s  goy- 
emment, down  to  whose  death  Keil  admiu  that  there  is 
no  traoe  of  diyision  *.  henoe  he  is  driyen  to  the  deflperstc 
resoorce  of  den3ring  that  EU  was  a  judge  at  all,  excppc 
in  the  sense  in  which  eyery  high-priest  migfat  be  csHed 
by  this  name.  But,  had  EU  been  only  a  judge  during 
the  PhiUstine  seryitnde,  we  should  expect  this  to  be 
stated,  as  in  Samson*s  case.  Neither  is  it  easily  credi- 
ble  that  four  judges,  Jephthah,  Ibzan,  Eloo,  and  Abdoo, 
shonld  role  the  eastem  tribes  in  oninterropted  soeoes- 
sion,  without  attempting  to  driye  out  the  PhiUstiaea, 
and  support  Samson  in  his  maryeUoos  stroggłe. 

In  order  to  weaken  the  force  of  Pan]*8  statement  in 
Acts  xiii,  20,  which  oonfirms  the  consecutiyeness  of  the 
judgeships,  reoourK  has  been  had  to  a  yaiious  reading 
of  thAt  passage,  by  which  it  may  be  rendered,  **  When 
he  had  destroyed  seyen  nations  in  the  land  of  Guuum, 
he  diyided  their  land  to  them  by  lot  in  aboat  450year8, 
and  after  that  he  gaye  them  judges  until  Samuel  the 
prophet."  This  reading  has  the  support  of  our  foar  old- 
est  manuscripts  (A]exandrian,Vatican,  Ephraem  palimp- 
sest,  and  Sinaitic),  and  of  the  Yulgate,  and  it  has  been 
adopted  by  Łachmanu,  TregeUes,  and  otbera,  bot  not  by 
Tiachendorf  (7th  ed.),  Alford,  or  Meyer.  Bot  the  yań- 
ons  readings  of  the  paasage  are  in  soch  a  form  as  sug- 
gests that  there  had  been  tampering  with  the  text  by 
the  scribes,  plainly  for  the  yery  reaaon  that  they  fdt 
the  chronological  difficulty;  and  no  one  would  haye  sl- 
tered  the  text  into  the  present  form,  for  which  there  is 
the  aothority  of  the  yersions  generaUy,  and  of  the  &- 
thers  who  quote  it,  so  as  to  create  a  difficulty  for  thon- 
selyes.  The  sense,  too,  is  yeiy  unsatisfactory,  the  4J0 
yean  being  then  underrtood  to  run  from  the  birth  of 
Isaac  to  the  diyision  of  the  land,  a  compntation  for 
which  no  reason  can  be  giyen,  and  which  ill  agrees  with 
the  other  sutements  of  time  in  the  oontext,  wheie  there 
is  surely  a  chronological  8equence.  It  wońld  oeitainly 
oonflict  with  the  480  yean  aańgned  to  the  sojoora  ia 
Egypt  (Exod.  xii,  41),  a  period  oomputed,  as  GaL  ui.  17 
shows,  from  the  cidl  of  Abraham,  when  he  was  seyenty- 
fiye  yean  old  (Gen.  xu,  4),  to  the  Exode  (comp.  Gen.  xy, 
16).  KeU,  indeed,  makes  the  inconsistency  eyen  worw 
for  himself  by  reckoning  these  480  yean  from  Jaeob'i 
descent  into  Egypt.    See  Chbomolooy,  yoL  ii.  p.  802. 

We  are  compeUed,  therefore,  to  understand  the  peń- 
oda  of  oppreanum  and  jndgeship  as  immediately  snooes- 
siye,  and  then,  ananging  them  in  four  periods,  as  mj^ 
gested  in  §  ii  aboye,  wo  may  t^ilate  the  whole  of  the 
middle  part  of  the  history  as  on  the  foUowing  page. 

X.  Coimncn/artM.— The  following  are  the  spedal  ex* 
egetical  helpa  on  the  wh<de  book  of  Judges,  akne,  the 
most  important  of  which  we  designate  by  an  astoiA 
prefixed :  Origq;i,  8deda  (in  Opp,  ii,  467;' also  in  BSA 


JUDGING 


1079 


JUDGMENT 


IHiiIm. 


IMl. 


Fint  Period  (Chap.  ili-v). 

{    I.  Serritude,    Chnslum  RiBhathaini,  of  MesopoUmia 8>  begli 

\    1.  Jndge.    OniMiKŁ 40f  " 

{JhSenUudś,    BgloD.ofMoabi  Ammftn,  Amalek 18i  " 

^    ŁJudge.    EuuD 80J.  •• 

(    S.  Jndge.    SBAiiaAB('*BlewofthePhi1i8tine8*') I  •< 

rm.  iS0n^(t«d«L    JabiDfOfHBSorinCaDun M)  •< 

1    «Ł  Jndge,    Barak    /  *') 

-  9W 
8econd  Period  (Chap.  Ti~x,  6). 

iW.  Serpłtude.    Midian,  Asalek,  and  chUdren  of  Łhe  Bast 7\  ** 

\    «.  Jndge.    GiPBOM 40/  " 

King.     Abimsłiou 8  '* 

T.Jndge.    Toi.a 28  " 

8.  Jndge.    Jaib M  «« 

—  86 
Third  Period  (Chap.  z,  «-xii). 

i  y.SgnritwU.    Ammonitea,  wiŁh  PhiUstines 18)  ** 

{    9.  Jndge.    JsPHTUAa C)  ** 

10.  Jndge.    Ibzam 7  *' 

11.  Jndge.    Błoh 10  " 

18.Jndgei    Akdom , 8  " 

-  48 
Fonrth  Period  (Chap.  zi]l-zvi). 

XLServ{tude,    PblHstlneB 40  " 

18.  Jndge.    Saiibon  <"in  the  days  of  Ihe  Philistinea"*) 10 

—  60 
410  endiDg 


B.O. 

157» 
1664 
1584 
1006 

1486 
1400 


1866 
IBfiO 
1819 
1816 
1298 


1271 
1268 
1247 
1240 
1880 


1222 


1188 


B.O. 

1430 
1427 
1367 
1860 

•1880 
1268 


1229 

1222 
1182 
1179 
1166 


1134 
1116 
1110 
1108 
1003 


1184 


B.a 
1402 
1894 
1864 
1886 

1816 
1286 


1856 
1240 
1209 
1206 
1188 


1161 
1148 
1187 
1180 
1120 


1161 


1120 


fi 
H 


1064 


1044 
1041 
1018 


996 
979 
973 
967 
967 


{"•} 


B.O. 

1676 
1667 
1627 
1609 

1418 
1409 


1869 
1868 
1822 
1319 
1296 


1274 
1266 
1860 
1248 
1282^ 


1226 
1186 
1166 


Patr.  Gallandii,  xiv);  Ephraem  Syrua,  EiplanaHo  (m 
Opp,  iv,  808) ;  Tbeodoret,  OuasHones  (łn  Opp.  i,  1) ;  Isi- 
dorus  Hispalensis,  CommenŁaria  (in  Opp,  i) ;  Bede,  Q^as• 
tionet  (in  Opp.  p.  8) ;  RnperŁua  Tuitiensis,  In  Jud.  (in 
Opp.  if  S31) ;  IrimpertuB,  Cotnmentarii  (in  Pez.  Thesaur. 
lY,  i,  127) ;  Babbi  Tanchum,  Commmtarii  (from  the  Ar- 
abie, by  Schnurrer,  Tubing.  1791,  8vo;  by  Haarbrticber, 
HaL  1842, 8vo) ;  Bafiolaa,  onD  [induding  Joah.,  etc] 
(Leira,  1494,  folio;  alao  in  the  Rabbinical  Bibles,  etc.) ; 
Bttcer,  CommetUariut  (Paiia,  1&54, 1663,  foL);  Bonrhaus 
[Cellariua],  Commentariut  [indud.  Joahua,  etc.]  (Basil. 
1567,  folio) ;  Uvater,  Homilia  (Tigur.  1561, 1571, 1582, 
1609,  foL) ;  Ferus,  £narraiioite$  [induding  £xod^  etc] 
(Colon.  1571, 1574, 8vo);  Strigel,  Seholia  (lipais,  1575, 
1586,  8vo) ;  Chytmua^  Commentariut  (Fnncof.  1589, 
Sro) ;  Peter  Martyr,  Commtniariuś  (Tignr.  1561,  Lond. 
1565, 1576, 1582,  Ueidelb.  1590,  folio);  Montanus,  Com- 
meniarius  (Antw.  1592, 4to) ;  Heling,  Periocha  (NoriU 
159S,  1594, 8vo) ;  Alacheicb,  riK*;i^,  etc  [indud.  Joefa., 
etc]  (Tenice,  1601, 1620;  Prague,  1620;  Offenb.  1719, 
foL) ;  Felibien,  Commmtarii  [indud.  Josh.,  etc]  (Paris, 
1604, 4to) ;  Ibn-Chajim,  I^J^*  a)?  [indud.  Josh.]  (Ven. 
1609,  fol.;  also  in  Frankfurter'8  Kabbinic  Bibie);  Sera- 
rius,  £xpianatio  [indud.  Ruth]  (Mogunt.  1609,  folio)  ; 
Rogcrs,  Lectures  (Lond.  1615,  foL) ;  Drusius,  Commenta- 
riut [indud.  Josh.,  etc]  (Franec  1618, 4to);  Magalio- 
nus,  irplanationes  (Lugd.  1626,  folio) ;  Bonfr^re,  Com- 
mentariut  [indud.  Josh.,  etc]  (Pańs,  1631, 1659,  folio) ; 
Yillaroel,  Commmtarii  (i&Iadr.  1636,  foL) ;  Freyre,  Com- 
mentarii  (Olyssip.  and  Mach.  1642,  4to) ;  Jackson,  Com- 
mentary  [indud.  Ruth,  etc]  (Ombr.  1646,  2  rola.  4to) ; 
De  Vega,  Commentarii  (Lugd.  1663  są.,  3  vol8.  fol) ;  De 
Naxera,  Commentarii  (Lugd.  1664,  3  rols.  foL) ;  ♦()sian- 
der,  Commentariut  (TUb.  1682,  foL) ;  •8,  Schmidt,  Com- 
mentariut (Argent.  1684, 1691, 1706, 4to) ;  Moldenhauer, 
Zeitrechnunffy  etc  (Hamb.  1766,  8vo) ;  also  Krldutemng 
[indud.  Josh.,  etc]  (Quedlinb.  1774, 8vo) ;  RosenmUller, 
JSeholia  (Lipsifle,  1835,  8vo) ;  Studcr,  KrWŁrung  (Beme, 
1835,  1842,  8v());  Herzfeld,  Chronologia,  etc.  (BeroL 
1836, 8vo);  ♦Berthcau,/>iWarwfi^  [includ.Ruth]  (Lpz. 
1845,  8vo);  Bush,  Xotet  (N.York,  1852,  12mo);  Noble, 
Sermont  (I^ondon,  1856,8vo) ;  Curomings,  Readingt  [in- 
dud. Josh.]  (Lond.  1857,  Timo) ;  Rłmlam,  Vert.  Syrittco- 
hexapL,  etc  (HavniiB,  1859,  4to) ;  Fritzsche,  Siecundum 
Sepł.,  etc  (Turid,  1867,  8vo) ;  ♦Bachmann,  Erfdarung 
(Berlin,  1807-70,  vol.  i,  8vo).    See  Ou)  Tf-stament. 

Judghanites.    See Judah Jliksiian. 

Judging,  Rash,  the  act  of  carelesdy,  precipitatdy, 
wantonly,  or  malidonaly  cenauring  others.    Thia  ia  an 


evn  which  abounda  too  much  among  almoet  all  daases 
of  men.  "Kot  content  with  being  in  the  right  our^ 
aelTea,  we  must  lind  all  others  in  the  wrong.  We  claim 
an  exduńve  poesession  of  goodneaa  and  wisdom ;  and 
from  approving  warmly  of  thoae  who  join  na,  we  proceed 
to  condemn,  with  much  acrimony,  not  only  the  prind- 
plea,  but  the  charactera  of  thoae  from  whom  we  difler. 
We  rashiy  estend  to  every  individual  the  seyere  opinion 
which  we  have  unwarrantably  conceived  of  a  whole 
body.  Thia  man  ia  of  a  party  whoee  principles  we 
reckon  alańsb,  and  therefore  his  whole  eentimenta  are 
comxpt«d.  That  man  bclongs  to  a  religioua  aect  which 
we  are  aocuatomed  to  decm  bigoted,  ahd  therefore  he  ia 
incapable  of  any  generuus  and  liberał  thought.  An- 
other  ia  connected  with  a  aect  which  we  have  been 
taught  to  account  relaxed,  and  therefore  can  have  no 
aanctity.  We  should  do  well  to  conaider,  1.  That  thia 
practice  of  rash  judgtng  is  abeolutely  forbidden  in  the 
sacred  Scriptures  (Matu  vii,  1).  2.  We  thcreby  author* 
ize  others  to  rcquite  us  in  the  aame  kind.  3.  It  often 
evidenccs  our  pride,  enyy,  and  bigotry.  4.  It  arguea  a 
want  of  charity,  the  distinguishing  feature  of  the  Chris- 
tian religion.  5.  They  who  are  moet  forward  iu  censu- 
ring  othera  are  often  most  defectiye  themseh-es."  See 
BaiTDw'8  Worktf  yoL  i,  ser.  20;  Bhur'8  Sermont,  ser.  10, 
voL  ii ;  Saurin'8  Sermont,  aer.  4,  voL  v. — Buck. 

Judgment,  conaidered  aa  a  technical  and  sdentifia 
term  of  logie,  ia  an  act  of  the  mind  by  which  somethiog 
ia  affirmed.  In  thia  restricted  aenae  it  ia  one  of  the  8im« 
pleat  acta  or  operationa  of  which  we  are  consctoua  in  the 
exerciae  of  our  rational  powera.  The  intellectual  fao 
nity  called  Judgment  ia  the  power  of  determining  any* 
tbiug  to  be  true  or  falae.  In  eveiy  inataoce  of  memoiy 
or  peroeption  there  is  involved  some  judgment,  aome 
feeling  of  relationahip,  of  apace,  or  time,  or  aimiłarity,  or 
contrast  Conaciouaneaa  neceasarily  involve8  a  judg^ 
ment;  and,  aa  every  act  of  mind  is  an  act  of  conadoua* 
neaa,  every  act  of  mind  conaeąucntly  inyolrea  a  judg- 
ment. U  ia  a  proceaa  not  only  aubseąuent  to  the  acqui» 
aition  of  knowledge,  but  "  involved  aa  a  condition  of  the 
aoquiBitive  proceaa  itaelf."  Thero  ia  not  only  induded 
what  ia  popularly  underatood  aa  compariaon  (when  the 
propertiea  of  bodies  are  compaied),  but  that  elemen« 
tary  faculty,  that  fundamental  law  or  innate  idea,  which> 
in  the  ńnt  instance,  makea  ua  oognisant  of  the  property. 
Hence  Sir  William  HamUton'a  divińon  into  derivativ€ 
'  and  primilive  cognitions,  the  derivative  being  of  oor 
own  fabrication,  forroed  from  certain  rulea,  and  being 
the  tardy  result  of  perception  and  memory,  of  attention, 
le^ection,  abatraction.    Theae  are,  derived  fiom  expe« 


JUDGMENT 


1080 


JTJDGMEifT 


ńence,  and,  as  such,  are  contingeiiŁ;  and  aa  all  expe- 
rience  is  contingeut,  all  the  knowledge  deriyed  fiom 
experienoe  ia  contiogent  also.  But,  aa  there  aro  condi- 
tiona  of  the  mind  which  are  not  ooatiiigait,  whłcK  ans 
necessaiyi  which  we  cannot  bat  Łhink,  which  thought 
Bupposes  as  iis  fundamental  oonditioni  these  are  denom- 
inated  primid^e  cognltiona;  these  primitive  and  gen- 
erał notions  being  the  root  of  all  principles,  the  fonndar 
tion  of  the  whole  edilioe  of  sdenoe.  For  the  disooYery 
of  this  great  tnith  we  are  indebted  to  Leibniti,  who,  in 
controyerting  Łocke*s  view  of  innate  ideas,  asserted  the 
exiBtence  of  a  principle  of  haman  knowledge  Indepen- 
dent of  and  superior  to  that  which  is  aflbrded  by  the 
senses.  Kant,  adopting  LeibniU's  yiew,  funushes  a 
test  by  which  these  two  elemcnts  are  distinguished  frąm 
each  other:  the  former,  being  oontingent,  are  fluctu- 
athig  and  uncertain ;  they  may  be  in  the  mind,  or  they 
may  not.  £yery  fresh  scenę  in  which  we  are  placed 
completely  alters  the  sensadons,  and  the  particalar  sen- 
sational  jadgments  of  which  we  are  conscioas.  On  the 
contraiy,  our  prxmitive  jadgments  are  steady,  abiding, 
nnalterable.  These  primitiye  j  odgments,  he  asserta,  are 
of  two  kinds,  Imały  tle  and  synthetic  An  analytic  judg- 
ment  is  simply  a  dedaration  of  something  necessarily 
belonging  to  a  g^yen  notion,  as  that  eyery  triangle  has 
three  sides.  A  synthetic  jadgment  may  be  a  dedara- 
tion of  something  which  does  not  actually  belong  to  a 
notion,  but  which  our  minds  are  led,  by  some  kind  of 
eyidence  or  other,  to  attribute  to  it,  as  ^  £yery  eyent  has 
an  efficient  cause."  Herę  we  do  morę  than  analyze  the 
expre8sion;  we  attribute  altogether  a  fresh  notion  to  it, 
and  form  a  jadgment  by  which  our  knowledge  is  ex- 
tended.  Both  these  jadgments  are  foand  in  the  porę 
Sciences,  and  form  the  very  prindples  apon  which  they 
are  pursued.  It  may  be  wdl  to  remark,  however,  that 
Gomte,  Herbert  Spencer,  Mili,  etc,  following  Locke, 
deny  the  exUtence  of  these  primitiye  jadgments  alto- 
gether, eyen  the  axioms  which  stand  at  the  head  of 
mathematical  reasoning.  So  far  from  being  mental  and 
subjectiye,  they  are  truły  inductiye,  deriyed  from  ob- 
seryation ;  only  that  obseryation  is  so  oonstant,  and  thai 
indaction  is  so  easy  and  immediate,  that  we  fali  easily 
into  an  impression  that  these  laws  are  intuitiye,  where- 
as  they  are,  in  fact,  experimental.  For  instance,  the 
axioms  and  postulates  which  are  the  basts  of  £uclid's 
Oeoroetry  are  not  metaphysical — written  on  the  intd- 
lect,  and  drawn  out  of  the  braiu— they  are  only  state- 
ments  of  laws  obseryed  and  experienced.  See  Watts, 
Lofficy  eh.  iy,  p.  231 ;  Locke,  On  the  Undersiandingf  i, 
222,  256;  ii,  271,  278;  Duncan,  lA)gic,  p.  145;  Keid,  On 
the  Intellectual  Powers,  p.  497,  etc     (E.  de  P.) 

JUDGMENT,  RiGHT  of  FRiyATK.  The  Church  of 
Romę  deuies  the  ńght  as  claimed  by  Protestanta  on  the 
following  groands :  that  the  Church,  being  assisted  by 
the  Spirit  of  God  in  searching  the  SScriptures,  haying  the 
promise  of  the  presence  of  Jesus  to  the  end  of  the  world, 
and  haying  the  possession  of  the  unwritten  word  as  a 
commentary  on  the  written,  is  the  only  safe  interpreter 
of  holy  Scripture,  and  the  supremę  judge  by  whose  de- 
tinitiye  sentence  all  controyersies  with  regard  to  the 
meaning  of  particalar  passages  or  the  generał  doctrine 
of  holy  Scripture  must  be  determined.  It  makes  a  dis- 
tinction,  howeyer,  between  the  leamed  CKegesis,  aa  ap- 
piied  to  the  sacred  writings,  and  that  interpretation 
which  emanates  from  the  Chureh.  The  interpretation 
of  the  Church  does  not  desccnd  to  the  details  which 
must  claim  the  attention  of  the  sdentific  exegetist.< 
Thus,  for  example,  she  does  not  hołd  it  her  duty,  nor  in- 
dade  it  in  the  oompass  of  her  rights,  to  determine  when, 
by  whom,  and  for  what  object  the  book  of  Job  was 
written;  or  what  particular  inducement  engaged  St. 
John  to  publish  his  Gos[)el,  or  St.  Paul  to  address  an 
epistle  to  the  Romans;  in  what  order  of  time  the  epis- 
tles  of  the  apostle  followed  cach  other,  etc.  As  little  does 
she  undcrtake  to  explain  particuUr  words  and  yerses, 
their  bearings  one  on  the  other,  or  the  connection  exist- 
ing  between  larger  portions  of  the  sacred  book.    An- 


tiqnitiea,  in  the  widest  aenae  of  the  word,  &I1  not  withia 
the  domain  of  her  Interpretation ;  in  short,  tłiat  inter- 
pretation extends  only  to  doctrines  of  faith  and  morali. 
Within  these  limits  she  dedarea  it  to  be  the  daty  of 
Christians  to  aoąuieaoe  in  this  infallible  determinatioo, 
and  that  it  ia  preaumption  and  impiety,  and  a  sin  lor 
which  they  deaenre  eyerlasting  ponishment,  to  oppoae 
thdr  own  priyate  judgmęnty  which  cannot  óf  itsdf  at- 
tain  the  truth,  to  the  dedsioii  of  the  Charch,  which' cn- 
noterr. 

To  this  extraordinary  daim  Protestanta  agree  in  op* 
posing  thia  prindple,  that  the  holy  Scriptures  azc  the 
only  role  of  faith.  But,  while  there  is  a  generał  agree> 
m^t  aa  to  this,  i.  e.  to  receiye  ihe  Scriptures  aa  a  snffi- 
cient  role  of  faith,  and  aa  the  only  authoritatiye  rule, 
there  are  wide  diyermties  of  opinion  oonceniing  the 
power  reseryed  to  the  Charch  as  to  the  doctrines  of  re- 
li^n.  The  extreme  yiew  is  that  the  Charch  at  no 
time  poMfgwes  the  right  of  intermeddling  in  artides  of 
faitłb  The  essentiał  artidea  of  faith  are  so  few,  so  sim* 
ple,  and  so  easily  gathered  out  of  dear  and  exi^cit  pas* 
sages,  that  it  is  impoesible  for  any  man  who  haa  the 
exercise  of  his  reason  to  miss  them ;  that  no  harm  cin 
arise  hom  allowiug  any  man  to  interpret  the  Smptures 
aa  he  pleaaes ;  and  that,  as  Scripture  may  be  suffideotły 
understood  for  purposes  of  salyation  without  any  foreign 
assistance,  all  creeds  and  confessions  of  faith  composed 
and  prescribed  by  hnman  authotity  are  an  encroach- 
ment  apon  the  prerogatiye  of  the  supremę  Teacher,  and 
an  inyasion  of  the  right  of  priyate  judgmenL  Such 
furthermora  maintain  tliat  all  diyistons  among  Chris- 
tians haye  grown  out  of  the  attempt  of  the  Charch  to 
force  upon  Christiana  onifonnity  of  bellef  aa  to  the  doc^ 
trines  of  holy  Scripture. 

This  yiew  of  the  right  of  priyate  judgooent  is  gener- 
ally  held  by  the  followers  of  Sodnua,  and  among  iti 
aUest  championa  at  the  present  day  are  aome  of  the 
leading  minds  of  the  Chureh  of  England,  wtio,  oo  ao 
count  of  thdr  pecuUar  yiews,  are  denominated  Moder- 
ate,  CathoUc,  Broad  Chaich,  by  the  friends  of  that  party: 
Latitudinarian,  or  Indifierent,  by  ita  enemiesL  Beliey- 
ing  that  the  superficial  differenoea  between  Christians 
are  as  nothing  in  oomparison  ¥rith  their  eaaential  agree- 
ment,  they  are  willing  that  the  portala  of  the  Charch 
should  be  flung  as  wide  open  u  the  gates  of  heayen. 
This  is  dearly  set  forth  by  Ihe  Ute  Dr.  Arnold:  ''All 
sodeties  of  men,  whetlier  we  cali  them  atatea  or  church- 
es,  should  make  their  bond  to  oonsiat  in  a  oommon  ob- 
ject and  a  common  practioe  rather  than  in  a  oommoa 
bdief ;  in  other  worda,  their  end  should  be  good  rather 
than  truth.  We  may  consent  to  act  togwther,  bot  we 
cannot  consent  to  belieye  together;  many  nootiyes  may 
persuade  us  to  the  one :  we  may  like  the  object,  or  we 
may  like  our  company,  or  we  may  think  it  safest  to  join 
them,  or  most  oonyenient,  and  any  one  of  these  moti^-es 
is  quite  suffident  to  induce  a  unity  of  action,  action  be* 
ing  a  thing  in  our  own  power.  But  no  motiyes  can  per- 
suade us  to  belieye  together;  we  may  wish  a  statemeot 
to  be  true,  we  may  admire  those  who  belieye  it,  we  may 
find  it  yery  inconyenient  not  to  belieye  it;  all  thb  hdps 
us  nothing;  unless  our  own  mind  is  fredy  conyinced  that 
the  statement  or  doctrine  is  true,  we  cannot  by  poeaibil- 
ity  belieye  it. 

"  Such  a  union  of  action  appears  historicalły  to  haye 
been  the  originał  bond  of  the  Christian  Church.  Who- 
eyer  was  willing  to  receiye  Christ  as  his  Master,  to  join 
his  people,  and  to  walk  acoording  to  his  rulecs  was 
admitted  to  the  Christian  sodety.  We  know  that  in 
the  earliest  Chureh  there  existed  the  strangest  yarietiea 
of  belief,  some  Christians  not  eyen  bełieying  that  there 
would  be  a  rcsurrection  of  the  dead.  Of  oourse  it  was 
not  intended  that  such  yarietiea  should  be  perpetual;  a 
closer  union  of  belief  was  gradually  effected;  but  the 
point  to  obserye  is  that  the  union  of  belief  grew  out  of 
the  union  of  action ;  it  was  the  result  of  bek>nging  to 
the  sodety  rather  than  a  preyionscondition  requiredfar 
bdonging  to  it,  for  no  haman  power  can  piesume  U 


JUDGMENT 


1081 


JUI>GMENT  DAY 


inąidre  into  the  degree  of  a  iium*8  poeitiye  bdief.  A 
generał,  hearty  belief  in  Cfariatianity  is  to  be  regarded 
by  the  Chozch,  not  as  ita  startiog-point,  bat  as  its  high- 
est  perfection.  To  begin  with  a  stńct  creed  and  no  effi- 
cient  Christian  institations  is  the  surę  way  to  hypocrisy 
and  onbelief ;  to  begin  with  the  most  generał  confession 
of  faith  imputed,  that  is,  as  a  test  of  membership,  bnt 
with  Yigoioofl  Christian  institations,  is  the  way  most 
likely  to  lead  not  only  to  a  real  and  generał  belief,  but 
also  to  a  łiyely  iperoeption  of  the  bighest  points  of  Ctiris- 
tian  faitłk  In  other  woids,  intellectaal  objections  to 
Christianity  shoald  be  toleńted  when  they  are  oora- 
bined  with  morał  obedienoe;  tolerated,  becaase  in  this 
way  they  are  most  sorely  remoyed ;  whereas  a  oomipt  or 
disoigaiilzed  Church,  with  a  minate  creed,  encourages 
łntdłectaal  objections;  and  if  it  proceeds  to  pat  them 
down  by  foioe,  it  does  often  Tiolate  the  right  of  eon- 
science,  ponishing  an  unbelief  wliich  its  own  evił  had 
proYoked,  and,  so  far  as  haman  jadgment  can  see,  lias 
in  a  great  measare  jostifled.  In  primitiTe  usage,  a  het^ 
etle  was  not  properły  he  who  did  not  believe  wlut  the 
Chnrch  tanght,  bat  he  who  wilfułly  withdrew  himsełf 
from  its  society,  refasing  to  oonform  to  its  system,  and 
-setting  np  another  system  of  his  own.** 

To  most  Protestanta  liowever,  this  plan  seems  veiy 
defectire.  Regarding  the  Christian  Church  as  a  soci- 
ety created  by  divine  institation,  it  possesses  alł  the 
authority  which  Christ  meant  to  conręy  throagh  his 
apostles  to  their  successors,  and  of  the  exeidse  of  which 
the  apostles  have  left  ezamplee.  They  deem  it  to  be 
]ncontrovertible  that  these  saccessive  teachers  in  the 
Christian  Chnrch  were  intended  to  be  interpreters  and 
ezpoanders  of  the  sacred  book;  that  they  are  inyested 
with  authority  in  rdadon  to  the  doctrines  of  holy  Scrip- 
tnre;  and  tluit,  as  a  merę  achnowledgment  of  the  truth 
of  Scriptaie  is  not  a  sufficient  security  for  soundness  of 
faith,  it  is  lawful  for  the  Choieh  to  empby  additional 
guards  to  that  *^  form  of  sound  words**  which  it  is  re- 
ąoired  to  hołd  fast  and  to  defend.  It  is  one  thing  to 
say  tliat  the  Bibie  is  the  rułe  of  faith,  and  another  to 
say  that  it  is  the  Judge  to  determine  what  that  rułe  is. 
The  latter  it  can  as  little  be  as  the  codę  of  civił  law  can 
exercise  the  functions  of  the  judge ;  it  forms,  indeed,  the 
rnld  of  judgment,  but  it  does  not  itself  pronounce  judg- 
ment.  Hence  the  twentieth  articłe  of  the  Church  of 
England  dechures  that  **  the  Church  hath  authority  in 
matters  of  faith."  So  the  Westminster  Confession,  **  It 
•belongeth  to  synods  and  councils  ministerially  to  de- 
termine contioyersies  of  faith."  See  Rogers,  Reośon  and 
Taitk  ;  Wilson,  Apottolie  Fatken  ;  Elliot,  DeliMOtion  of 
Romamam  (see  Index);  Litton,  CAurc^  of  Christ,  p*  77 
sq.     (£.  de  P.) 

JUDGMENT,  The  Last,  the  sentence  that  wilł  be 
passed  on  our  actions  at  the  last  day,  when  the  everlast- 
ing  designs  of  God  conceming  this  lower  creation  sball 
be  accomplished,  an  end  put  to  dme,  and  the  destinies 
of  the  human  race  fixed  for  eternity.  This  is  one  of  the 
peculiar  doctrines  of  rerelation,  a  doctrine  of  the  Gospel 
of  Jesus  Christ.  There  were,  indeed,  some  łiints  of  it  in 
the  Old  Testament;  but  it  is  in  the  New  Testament 
that  we  haye  it  freąuently  and  particularly  decUu%d  and 
described,  with  the  circumstances  with  which  it  will  be 
attended.  It  ii  a  doctrine,  too,  which  is  entirely  agree- 
able  to  reason,  which  fulły  ooncurs  with  reyelation  in 
directing  our  minds  to  a  state  of  retribution,  there  being 
no  altematiye,  if  we  liold  not  the  truth  of  a  judgment 
to  come,  but  the  holding  that  the  creation  is  not  under 
a  morał  govemment.  For,  on  the  one  band,  there  is  no 
óoaht  that  we  liye  under  a  retributiye  goyemment,  and 
that  oognizance  ii  taken  of  our  actions  by  an  inyisible 
bnt  eyer-present  Being,  whose  attributes  render  him  the 
determined  foe  of  yioe,  and  the  steadfast  upholder  of 
righteousness.  On  the  other  lumd,  there  has  been  an 
irresistible  deroonstration,  from  the  experience  of  alł 
ages,  tluit  no  accurate  proportion  is  at  present  main- 
tained  between  conduct  and  condition.  The  wicked 
trinmph  in  their  imquity,  włiiłe  yirtue  is  despised;  her 


humble  yotaries  aie  borne  down  by  the  gloom  of  adyersi- 
ty,  or  reared  in  the  midst  of  sorrows  and  tears.  In  eyery 
age  of  the  world,  therefore,  men  haye  been  perplexed  by 
what  seemed  opposite  eyidences  as  to  the  superintend- 
ing  care  of  a  wise  and  beneficent  Being.  The  only  way 
to  escape  the  difBculty  is  an  appeał  to  the  futurę ;  for 
either  the  idea  is  erroneous  of  one  liying  under  a  morał 
goyemment  at  alł,  or  that  morał  goyemment  must  haye 
another  soene  of  display  where  its  impartiałity  shslł  be 
yindicated,  and  eyery  discrepancy  remoyed.  See  Fuller, 
Workt,  ii,  78, 106, 162,  211,  867,'892, 487,  841,  859,  871, 
888, 906 ;  DwightjThwhgff ;  Irying,  Argument  for  Jud^h 
mmt  to  oome.    See  Judobcbnt  Day.     (E.  de  P.) 

Judgment  Day,  a  term  generslly  used  to  desig- 
nate  that  important  day  which  ui  to  terminate  the  pre»> 
ent  dispensation  of  grace ;  at  the  end  of  the  worłd,  when 
time  słialł  be  no  morę,  and  the  etemał  state  of  alł  men 
he  uncliangeably  fised  (2  Pet  iii,  7). 

I.  Proof  of  a  generał  Judffment^—The  arguments  for 
tłus  are  these :  1.  The  justice  of  God  reąnires  it ;  for  it 
is  eyident  that  this  attribute  is  not  clearły  displayed  in 
the  dispensation  of  things  in  the  present  state  (2  Thess. 
i,  6, 7 ;  Lukę  xiy,  14).  2.  The  aocusations  of  natural  con- 
scienoe  are  testamonies  in  fayor  of  tłus  belief  (Rom.  ii, 
16;  Dan.  y,  6,  6;  Acts  xziy,  26).  8.  It  may  be  con- 
duded,  from  the  relation  men  stand  in  to  God,  as  crea- 
tures  to  a  Creator.  He  has  a  right  to  giye  them  a  law, 
and  to  make  them  aocountable  for  the  breach  of  it  (Rom. 
xiy,  12).  4.  The  resurrection  of  Clirist  is  a  certain  proof 
of  it.  See  Acts  xyii,  81 ;  Rom.  xiy,  9.  6.  The  Scrip- 
tnre,  in  a  yariety  of  plaoes,  sets  it  beyond  all  doubt  (Jnde 
14,  16;  2  Cor.  y,  10;  Matu  xxy;  Rom.  xiy,  10, 11;  2 
Thess.  i,  7, 10;  1  Thess.  iy,  16, 17).  See  aboye,  Judg- 
ment, Last. 

IL  Tke  Judge, —The  Bibie  dedares  that  God  will 
judge  the  worid  by  Jesus  Christ  (Acts  xvii,  81).  The 
triune  €rod  wilł  be  the  Judge,  as  to  originał  authority, 
power,  and  right  of  judgment ;  but  according  to  the 
eoonomy  settled  l)etween  the  three  divine  persons,  the 
work  is  assigned  to  the  Son  (Rom.  xiy,  9. 10),  who  wilł 
appear  in  tiis  human  naturę  (John  y,  27 ;  Acts  xvLi,  81), 
with  gpreat  power  and  glory  (1  Thess.  iy,  16, 17) ;  ylsible 
to  eyery  eye  (Rey.  i,  7) ;  penetratiug  every  beart  (1  Cor. 
iy,  6;  Roul  ii,  16)^  with  fuli  authority  over  alł  (Matt* 
xxyiii,  18),  and  acting  with  sŁrict  justice  (2  Tim.  iv,  8). 
As  for  the  concero  of  others  in  the  judgment,  angels 
wiU  be  no  otherwise  concemed  than  as  attendants,  gatb- 
ering  the  elect,  raising  the  dead,  etc,  but  not  na  ad\'ising 
or  judging.  Saints  are  said  to  judge  the  worid,  not  as 
oo^udges  with  Christ,  but  as  approrers  of  his  sentence, 
and  as  their  hoły  liyes  and  exhortations  will  rise  up  in 
judgment  against  their  wicked  neighbors  (1  Cor.  yi,  z,  8). 

IlL  The  Pertom  that  iciU  he  judged.—Theae  will  be 
men  and  deyils.  The  righteous  wiU  probably  be  tried 
first,  as  represented  in  Matt.  xxy.  They  will  be  raised 
first,  though  perhaps  not  a  thousand  years  before  the 
rest,  as  some  haye  supposed  [see  Millennium]  ;  sińce 
the  resurrection  of  all  the  bodies  of  ths  saints  is  spoken 
of  as  in  a  moment,  in  the  twinkling  of  an  eye,  at  the 
last  trump,  in  order  to  their  meeting  the  Lord  in  the 
air,  and  being  with  hiro,  not  on  earth,  but  forever  in 
heayen  (1  Cor.  xy,  62 ;  1  Thess.  iv,  16, 17). 

IV.  The  Rułe  ofJudffment,—y^e  are  informed  that  the 
books  wilł  be  opened  (Rev.  xx,  12) ;  1.  The  book  of  di- 
vine  omniscience  (MaL  iii,  5),  or  remem  brance  (MaL  iii, 
16) ;  2.  The  book  of  consciencc  (Rom.  ii,  16) ;  8.  The 
book  of  Proyidence  (Rom.  ii,  4,  5) ;  4.  The  book  of  the 
Scriptures,  law,  and  Gospel  (John  xii,  48 ;  Rom.  ii,  12, 
16);  6.  The  book  of  life  (Lukę  x,  20;  Rev.  iii,  6;  xx, 
12,16). 

V.  The  Time  of  Judgment,— The  soul  will  be  either 
happy  or  miserable  immediately  after  dcath,  but  the 
generał  jadgment  will  not  be  till  after  the  resurrection 
(Heb.  ix,  27).  There  is  a  day  appointed  (Acts  xvii,  81); 
but  it  is  unknown  to  men.    See  Intermedlite  State. 

VI.  The  Place. — ^This  ii  also  nncertain.  Some  sup^ 
pose  it  wilł  be  in  the  air,  because  the  judge  wilł  come  in 


JUDGMENT-HALL 


108S 


JUDICIAL  BUNDNESS 


tbe  doods  of  heayen,  and  the  liyiog  Baiott  will  tłwii  be 
changed,  and  the  dead  Bainto  raised,  and  both  be  caugfat 
aptomeettheLordiutheair(lThe8a.iv,16,17).  Och- 
en  Łhink  it  will  be  on  the  eartb,  on  the  new  earth,  on 
which  they  will  descend  from  the  air  with  ChrisU  The 
place  where,  however,  is  of  no  oonaequence,  when  oom- 
pared  with  the  state  in  which  we  shall  appear.  As  the 
ScńptuFes  represent  it  as  certain  (Eccks.  xiy  9),  uniyer- 
sal  (2  Cor.  Vf  U),  righteoos  (Bonu  ii|  6),  decisive  (1  Cor. 
zv,  52),  and  eternal  as  to  its  conseąuences  (Heb.  vi,  2), 
let  us  be  oonceraed  for  the  welfare  of  our  immortal  in- 
terests,  flee  to  the  refoge  set  before  os,  iniprove  our  pre- 
cious  time,  depend  on  the  merits  of  the  Bedcemer,  and 
adhere  to  the  dictates  of  the  divine  Word,  that  we  may 
be  found  of  him  in  peace.  See  Bateą  Works,  p.  449; 
Hopkins  and  Stoddard,  On  the  LaHJudffmeiU ;  Gili,  Body 
ofDicinHy,  ii,  467,  8vo;  Boston,  Fourfold  StaUf  Her- 
vey,  Works,  new  edition,  i,  72, 76;  ii,  ^  223;  iv,  166r— 
Henderaon^s  Buck.    See  Besurrectiom. 

Judgment-hall.    See  Pratoriuk. 

Jadgment-seat  (Pnftaj  pmperly  a  tfep,  henoe  a 
rostriim  or  stage  for  speakers;  as  a  **throne,"  e.  g.  Her- 
od*8  in  the  theatre  at  Oesarea,  Acts  xii,  21),  an  elevated 
seat  or  tribunal  (in  James  ii,  6,  the  term  is  Kpirf}piov,  a 
Gourt  of  justice),  especiaUy  of  the  Boman  goyemor 
(Matt.  xxyii,  19;  John  xix,  18;  Acts  xyiii,  12, 16, 17; 
xxv,  6, 10, 17) ;  hence  of  the  fiual  bar  of  God  (Bom.  xiv, 
10 ;  2  Cor.  v,  10).    See  Pavemekt. 


Boman  Jadgmeut-eeat    (From  a  nnlaue  ezample  at 
Wilton  Hoase.) 

Judgments  of  God.  1.  This  eipreesion  is  of  fre- 
quent  occurrence  iii  the  Scriptures,  and  its  sense  is  gen- 
erall y  determined  by  the  connection,  When  God^s  judg- 
ments are  spoken  of,  the  term  may  denote  either  the 
socret  docisions  of  the  divine  will  (Psa.  x,  5;  xxxvi,  6), 
or  the  declarations  of  (tods  will  reyealed  in  the  Scrip- 
tures (Exod.  xxi,  1;  Deut.  vii,  12;  Neh.  ix,  13;  Psa. 
cxix,  7-175),  or  the  inflictions  of  punishment  on  the 
wicked  (Exod.  vi,  6 ;  xii,  12 ;  Prov.  xix,  29 ;  Ezek.  xxv, 
U ;  Bev.  xvi,  7).  The  Scriptures  give  us  many  awful 
iiistances  of  the  display  of  diYdne  justice  in  the  punish- 
ment of  nations,  families,  and  indiriduals  for  their  in- 
iąuities.  See  Gen.  vii;  xix,  25;  £xod.  xv;  Judg.  i,  6, 
7 ;  Acts  xii,  23 ;  Esther  v,  14,  with  vii,  10 ;  2  Kings  xi; 
Lev.  X,  1,  2;  Acts  v,  1-10;  Isa.  xxx,  1-5;  1  Sam.  xv, 
9;  1  Kings  xii,  25,  33. 

2.  In  a  less  legitimate  application,  the  strange  trials 
to  which  those  suspcctcd  of  guilt  were  put  in  the  Mid- 
dle  Ages,  conducted  with  many  devout  ceremonies  by 


the  ministera  of  reUgion,  and  pranoiiiioed  to  be  tlM 
JHdgme$iU  of  God/  The  ordeal  coosisted  ot  yariow 
kinds:  walking  blindfold  amid  boming  plooghshaRi, 
holding  in  the  hand  a  red-hot  bar,  and  plunging  the  arm 
into  boiling  water.  The  popular  affinnation,  "I  win 
pat  my  hand  into  tbe  fiie  to  ooofinn  this,"  appears  to  be 
deriyed  from  this  solenin  cnstom.  Chaljenging  the  m> 
cuser  to  single  combat,  when  freąnently  the  stouteit 
champion  was  allowed  to  supply  their  place;  swaDow- 
ingamorselofoonsecratedbraul;  anking  or  swimming 
in  a  riyer  for  witchcraft,  or  weighing  a  witcb ;  scietcb- 
ing  out  the  anns  before  the  cross,  till  the  champioii 
soonest  wearied  dropped  his  aima  and  lost  his  cstate, 
which  was  decided  by  the  rery  short  chanoery  suit  call- 
ed  the/MdioMiM  erucis, 

Those  who  were  accoaed  of  robbery  weie  pat  to  trial 
by  a  piece  of  barky  br«yMl,  on  which  the  mass  had  been 
said,  and,  if  the}'  coold  not  swallow  it,  were  dedared 
guilty.  ProbaUy  the  saying,  ^  May  this  piece  of  bread 
choke  me,**  comes  from  this  custom.  Among  the  (nooffs 
of  guilt  was  that  ofthe  bleedutff  o/a  eorpse.  If  a  penoa 
was  murdered,  it  was  believed  that  at  the  tooch  or  ap- 
pioach  ofthe  murderer  the  bkM)d  gushed  out  ofthe  body 
in  yarious  part&  By  the  side  of  the  bier,  if  the  slight- 
est  change  was  obseryable  in  the  eyes,  the  nsouth,  feet, 
or  hands  ofthe  corpse,  the  murderer  was  oonjectored  to 
be  present;  and  it  is  probaUe  that  many  Innocent  8pe&> 
tatoTS  haye  soffered  death  in  conseąuence. 

It  is  well  to  mark,  in  eztenoation  of  theae  absurd  path 
tices  of  our  rude  ancestors^  that  thcse  customs  were  a 
substitute  for  written  laws  which  that  baibarous  peiwd 
had  not ;  and  as  no  community  can  exist  withoot  /oin, 
the  ignorance  of  the  people  had  recoorse  to  these  cu^ 
Ums,  which,  bad  and  absurd  as  they  were,  senred  to 
dose  oontroyeraies  whic1|  otherwise  might  haye  giyea 
birth  to  morę  deatructiye  {Hactices.  Ordeals  are,  ia 
truth,  the  rude  laws  of  a  barlMunus  people  who  have  not 
yet  obtained  a  written  codę,  and  not  adyanced  enough 
in  ciyiliza^n  to  enter  into  refined  inąuiiies,  the  sabile 
distinctions  and  elaborate  inyestigations  which  a  couit 
of  law  demands. 

It  is  a  well-established  fact,  boweyer,  that  tbęy  were 
acquainted  in  those  times  with  secreis  to  pass  unhiot 
these  singular  trials.  This  was  especially  the  case  witk 
ordeals  of  tire  and  boiling  water.  Doubtlesa  the  morę 
knowing  ones  possessed  those  secrets  and  medicamenti 
which  they  had  at  hand  to  pass  through  theae  trials  is 
perfect  security.  See  Joitin,  Remarkt  on  Ecda,  HuL 
iu,  246  sq.    See  Ordkał.     (£.  de  P.) 

Judicatore,  Conrts  o£  See  Jcdge;  Cocrt; 
Trial;  Trirunal;  Council,  etc 

Jndlces  electi,  seUctjudgeM,  is  a  term  applied  to  a 
number  of  judges  occasionally  selectcd  to  hear  an  appeal 
frum  an  exoommunicated  prcsbyter  or  deacon  against 
his  own  bishop.  The  Council  of  Sardica  allowed  la 
appeal  to  the  metropolitan ;  and  in  such  a  case  the  me- 
tropolitan  had  three  ways  of  proceeding — either  to  select 
a  number  of  judges,  gencrally  twelve,  to  hear  the  case; 
or  to  refer  the  matter  to  a  provincial  synod ;  or  to  hear 
the  causes  himself  without  a  synod.  It  is,  howerer, 
doubtful  whether  a  metropolitan  had  powerto  depoee  a 
bishop.— Farrar,  Eccies,  DicL  s.  y. 

Jndioial  Bundness  or  Hardkrss,  a  tenn  cmplof- 
ed  to  express  a  state  of  morał  inoorrigibility.  So  we 
read,  Mark  iii,  5,  <^  Being  grieyed  for  the  blindiKM—iard- 
nesf  — of  their  hearts."  So  Bom.  xi,  25,  "^JUmdmst— 
hardnem^in.  part  hath  happened  to  IsńeL''  Eph.  ir,  18, 
^'Because  of  the  blwdneis—kardBem—oi  their  heaitt." 
2  Cor.  iii,  14, "« Their  minds  were  błinded^hardemdr 
and  elsewhere.  This  expreeBion  is  of  spedal  intere«t  to 
the  theologian  oa  aocount  of  two  qoestioii8  conoeded 
with  it. 

h  IsUoM  imJUction  o/Godf-^Fmm  soch  f^ssages  as 
Isa,  \ń,  10,  some  have  said  that  God  commands  the 
prophet  to  do  a  certain  thing  to  this  people,  and  theo 
punishes  tbe  people:  nay,  this  appears  stioi^ger  stafl. 


JUDICIUM  DEI 


1083 


JUDITH,  BOOK  OF 


when  the  passage  is  qaoted,  as  (John  ZU)40),  He  hath 
blinded  their  eyes  and  hardened  Łbeir  hearta;  which 
aeems  to  be  oontradictoiy  to  Malt.  xiii,  16,  where  tbe 
people  themselres  are  said  to  hare  cłosed  their  own 
eyes ;  and  ao  Acta  xzyiii,  27.  Theae  seeming  oontra- 
dictions  are  very  eaaily  leooneiled.  God,  by  giving 
plenty  and  abnndance,  aiforda  the  means  of  the  |)eople'8 
abusing  his  goodneas,  and  beooming  both  over^fat  with 
food  and  intoxicated  with  drink;  and  thns  his  very  be- 
neficenc^  may  be  said  to  make  their  heart  fat,  and  their 
eyes  heayy,  while  at  the  same  time  the  people,  by  their 
own  act,  their  overfeeding,  beoome  unwieldy,  indolent, 
bloated,  over-fat  at  heart,  and,  moreover,  so  stupefied 
by  Iiquor  and  strong  drink,  that  their  eyes  and  ears  may 
be  uaeless  to  them :  ¥rith  wide-open  eyes,  ^  staring,  ibey 
may  stare,  but  not  perceiTe;  and  listening,  they  may 
hear,  but  not  understand  f  and  in  this  lethaigic  state 
they  will  oontinne,  preferring  it  to  a  morę  sedate,  ra« 
tional  oondition,  and  refusing  to  forbear  from  prok)nging 
the  causes  of  it,  lest  at  any  sober  intenral  they  shouU 
aee  tmly  nńth  their  eyes  and  hear  accurately  with  their 
ears,  in  conseqnence  of  which  they  sbould  be  shocked 
at  themselyea,  be  conyerted,  be  changed  from  snch  mis- 
eondnct,  and  I  sbould  heal  them — should  cure  theae  de- 
losoiy  effects  of  their  surfeits  and  dissoloteness.  Comp. 
Isa.  ▼,  11 ;  xxyiii,7.  This  is  equaUy  tnie  in  spiiitual 
matteis.  In  short,  the  eipressions  in  ąuestion  are  to  be 
understood  in  the  same  sense  as  the  hardeniug  of  Phar 
noh*s  heart  under  a  penrersion  by  his  own  wilfulness 
of  the  providenoes  of  God  (Rom.  ix,  17, 18).    See  Pbb- 

I>£STlNATION. 

2. 1$  tM»  State  hopeUsa  f — That  sinners  may,  by  a 
course  of  persistent  opposition  to  God,  so  far  destroy  or 
deaden  their  conscienoe  as  to  be  beyond  the  hope  (but  not 
abflolutely  the  power)  of  divine  grace,  is  a  fearful  fact, 
and  one  conoborated  by  the  Holy  Scriptuies  (1  Hm.  iv, 
2;  Koro.  i,  28;  2  Thess.  ii,  11 ,  Heb.  vi,  6).  But  this 
oondition,  again,  is  not  so  much  the  result  of  God^s  de- 
termihation  as  of  their  own  inveterate  penrenity.    See 

U>'PARDOMA]lLE  SlSI, 

Judicium  Dai    See  Judometcts  of  God. 

Ju^dith  (Heb.  Yehudith,'  P'^7'?n^,  Jeweaa ;  Septuag. 
'loviiB)y  the  name  of  two  femules;  properiy  the  femi- 
nine  form  of  *^7^n7,  Judaut  (comp.  Jer.  xxxvi,  14, 21) ; 
but  in  the  paasage  of  Genesis  it  is  generally  taken  as 
the  correlative  of  Judah,  L  e.  "predted," 

1.  The  danghter  of  Beeri,  the  Hittite,  and  one  of  the 
fiiBt  two  wivcs  of  Esau  (Gen.  xxvi,  34).  She  is  else- 
where  morę  correctly  called  AHOUB.uiAłi,  the  daughter 
of  Anah  the  Horite  (Gen.  xxxvi,  2-14).    See  Esau. 

2.  The  heroinę  of  the  apocryphal  book  which  bean 
her  name,  who  appears  as  an  ideał  type  of  piety  (Jud. 
viii,  C),  beauty  (xi,  21),  courage,  and  chastity  (xvi,  22 
8q.)*  Her  supposed  desccnt  from  Siroeon  (ix,  2),  and 
the  manner  in  which  she  refers  to  his  cruel  deed  (Gen. 
xxxiv,  25  8q.),  mark  the  conception  of  the  character, 
which  evidently  bclonga  to  a  period  of  stem  and  peńl- 
ous  conflict  The  most  nnscrupulous  daring  (ćh.  xiii)  is 
combined  with  zealous  ritualism  (xii,  1  8q.),  and  faith  is 
tumed  to  action  rather  than  to  supplication  (viii,  81 8q.). 
Clement  of  Romę  (Ep,  i,  55)  assigns  to  Judith  the  epi- 
thet  given  to  Jael  Clov^iW  t)  fiaieapia) ;  and  Jerome 
aees  in  her  exploit  the  image  of  the  victory  of  the 
Church  over  the  power  of  evil  (Ep.  lxxix,  1 1,  p.  608 ; 
Judith  .  .  .  in  typo  Ecclesise  diabolum  capite  trunca- 
vit;  compare  Ep.  xxii,  21,  p.  105).  According  to  the 
Greek  text,  Judith  was  tbe  rich  widów  of  Manasses  of 
Bethulia ;  to  which  the  Yulgate  adds  that  she  was  the 
daughter  of  Merari,  or  morę  properiy  Beari  ("^"IKS),  as 
the  Hebrew  recension  bas  it ;  the  lattcr  aiao  places  her 
in  the  days  of  Maccabseus,  which  is  undoubtedly  correct. 
— Smith ;  Kitto.    See  Judith,  Book  of. 

JUDITH,  Book  of,  one  of  the  most  interesting  of 
the  apocryphal  books,  which  bas  called  forth  a  greater 
Tariety  of  opinions  among  inlerpreters  sińce  the  days  of 
the  Beformation  than  almost  any  other  of  the  Deutero- 


canonical  productions.  Onr  statements  on  the  subject 
are  largely  taken  from  the  articłe  in  Kitto's  Cydopadia, 

L  Titk  and  Po$ition  o/the  Book^— The  book  is  named 
after  its  heroinę,  n'^7^^*^^*^*^*^^''*  SU  Jerome's  opin- 
ion,  that  it  is  so  called  because  Judith  was  the  authoress 
of  it  (^Comment,  m  Affff,  i,  6),  is  rightiy  rejected  by  eveiy 
schobir.  In  the  MSS.  of  the  Alexandrine  verBion,  the 
Yulgate,  and  in  Wycliife's  tnuislation,  Judith  is  pUced 
between  Tobit  and  Esther.  This  is  foUowed  by  Gover* 
dale,  the  Geneva  verBion,  the  Bishops*  Bibie,  and  the  A, 
V.,  where,  from  the  naturę  of  the  division,  it  is  put  be- 
tween Tobit  and  the  apocryphal  Esther.  In  the  Yati- 
can  copies  it  is  pUced  between  Tobit  and  tbe  Wisdom 
of  Solomon ;  in  the  Zurich  Bibie,  between  Baruch  and 
the  apocryphal  Esther;  whilst  Luther  puts  it  at  the 
head  of  the  apocryphal  books. 

II.  Detign  andConteafs  o/the  BooK— The  object  of 
this  book  evident]y  is  to  show  that  as  long  as  God'8  peo- 
ple walk  in  his  oommandments  blamelessly,  no  matter 
how  distresstng  the  circumstanoes  in  which  they  may 
tempomrily  be  plaoed,  the  Lord  will  not  snffer  the  ene^ 
my  to  tńumph  over  Uiem,  bat  will  in  due  time  appear 
for  their  deliveranoe,  and  cause  even  those  who  are  not 
Jews  to  acknowledge  that  the  God  of  Israel  is  the  only 
troe  God.  In  its  exteniai  form  this  book  beais  th% 
character  of  the  record  of  a  historical  event,  describing 
the  complete  defeat  of  the  Assyrians  by  the  Jews 
through  the  prowess  of  a  woman. 

In  the  twelfth  year  of  his  reign,  Nebuohadnezzar, 
or,  as  he  is  called  in  the  Greek,  Nabuchodonosor,  king 
of  Assyria  in  Kineveh,  assisted  by  the  nations  ii-ho 
dwelt  in  the  hill-countiy,  by  Euphrates,  Tigris,  Hydas* 
pes,  and  by  the  plain  of  Arioch,  king  of  the  Elym»* 
ans,  madę  war  against  Axphaxad,  king  of  Media,  who 
had  ibrtified  himself  in  Ecbatana  (i,  1-7) ;  and,  despite 
the  inhabitants  of  the  countries  of  the  west,  Perńa,  Łi« 
banus,  anti-Libanus,  Carmel,  Galaad,  Galilee,  Esdraelon^ 
Samaria,  etc,  refusing  their  aid  (ver.  8-12),  conquered 
Arphaxiid,  and  retumed  bonie  to  Nineveh  in  the  scven- 
teenth  ycar  of  his  reign  (ver.  18-16).  The  folloi^dng 
year,  determined  to  carry  out  his  rcsolution  to  wreak  his 
vengeance  on  those  niaions  who  refused  their  aid,  he 
dispatched  his  chief  generał  Holofemes,  at  the  head  of 
120,000  infantry  and  12,000  cavahry  (ii,  1-22),  who  soon 
subdued  Mesopotamia,  Syria,  libya,  Cilicia,  and  Idunuea 
(ii,  28 ;  iii,  8),  and  marched  on  Judsa  (ver.  9, 10).  The 
inhabitants  of  the  sea-coast  madę  a  voluntary  submis* 
sion,  which,  however,  did  not  prevent  their  territories 
from  being  laid  waste,  their  sacred  groves  bumed,  and 
their  idols  deetroyed,  in  order  that  divine  honors  should 
be  paid  only  to  Nebuchadnezzar.  Holofemes,  having 
finally  encamped  in  the  plain  of  Esdraelon  (i,  3),  re- 
mained  inactive  for  a  whole  month — or  two,  according 
to  the  Latin  ver6ion.  But  the  children  of  Israel,  who 
had  newly  retumed  from  the  captivity,  having  heard  of 
Holofemes*s  atrocities,  and  being  afniid  of  his  despoiltng 
the  Tempie,  determined  to  resist  the  enemy,  and  pre- 
pared  for  war  under  the  direction  of  their  high-pńest 
Joachim,  or  Eliakim,  and  the  senate.  They  at  once  took 
possession  of  the  high  mountains  and  fortified  ylllages 
(iv,  1-5),  whilst  the  inhabitants  of  Bethulia  and  Beto- 
mestham,  according  to  tbe  command  of  the  high-pńest 
Joachim,  guarded  the  passes  of  the  mountains  near  Qo- 
thaim  (ver.  0-8) ;  and,  ha\4ng  madę  all  the  necessary 
preparations,  they  held  a  solemn  fast  and  prayed  to  Gcd 
for  protection  (ver.  9-15),  Enraged,  as  weU  as  aston- 
ishcd  at  their  audacity  in  preparing  to  fight  against  him, 
Holofemes  madę  inquiries  of  the  chiefs  of  Ammon  and 
Moab  who  this  people  was  (v,  1-4).  Achior,  the  leader 
of  the  Ammonites,  then  givcs  him  the  histoiy  of  the 
Jews,  and  tells  him  that  no  power  could  vanqui8h  them 
unless  they  sin  against  their  God  (vcr.  5-21).  The 
proud  army,  however,  bccomes  exceedingly  angry  with 
this  statement  (vi,  1-9),  and  Holofemes  orders  Achior 
to  be  thrown  into  the  Jewish  camp,  in  order  that  ht 
may  be  destroyed  in  the  generał  destroction  which  waa 
impending  over  the  people  whom  he  described  as  inr 


J  UDITH,  BOOK  OF 


1084 


JUDITH,  BOOK  OF 


Tucible  (ver.  10-13).  The  Jews  pick  him  up,  and  lead 
hlm  to  the  goyernor  of  Bethulia,  to  whom  he  relates 
thifl,  and  who  comforts  him  (ver.  14-21).  The  ncxt  daj 
Holofemes  marchee  against  Bethulia,  takea  the  moun- 
tain  paaaes,  seizes  all  the  BuppUes  of  water  (tu,  1-7),  and 
lajs  aiege  to  the  city  (ver.  8-19),  which  Usta  forty  days, 
when  the  famishing  people  urge  opon  the  goireinor 
Oadas  to  Buirender  it,  and  he  decides  to  do  so  iinleas  re» 
lieved  within  fire  daya  (ver.  20-82).  The  pious  widów 
Judith,  howerer,  denouncea  thia  deciaion  aa  tempting 
the  Ahnighty  (yiii,  1-81),  and  oonoeivea  a  pUn  for  de- 
liyering  the  people  (ver.  82-86).  With  thia  view  ahe 
entreata  the  goyernor  and  elders  to  giye  np  all  idea  of 
Borrender,  and  to  pennit  the  gatea  of  the  city  to  be 
opened  for  her.  Haying  prayed  to  the  God  of  her  &• 
thers  for  the  oyerthrow  of  the  enemy  (iz«  1-U),  ahe  ar- 
lays  heraelf  in  rich  attire,  and,  aooompanied  by  her  maid, 
who  carriea  a  bag  of  proyision,  goea  to  the  camp  of 
Holofemes  (x,  1-U).  The  guarda,  aeeing  thia  beautiful 
woman,  and  hearing  her  story,  conduct  her  to  the  gen- 
erał (yer.  12-23),  whom  ahe  tella  that  the  Jews  wouU 
now  be  yanąuiahed,  because  they  had  ainned  againat 
God  in  eating  the  yictnals  conaecrated  to  the  Tempie 
(3U,  1-15) ;  that  ahe  had  fled  from  the  impending  de- 
etmction,  and  would  show  him  the  aoceaa  to  the  city, 
only  reąuestiiig  that  she  should  be  permitted  to  go  oot 
of  the  camp  to  pray  in  the  night  (yer.  16-19).  Holo- 
femes, smitten  with  her  charms,  giyes  her  a  sumptuous 
entertainment,  and  inyitea  her  to  remain  alone  urith  him 
within  the  tent  that  night  (xii,  1-20).  When  heayily 
asleep  in  oonsequence  of  haying  drunk  too  freely,  JodiUi 
aeizes  his  falchion,  stiikes  off  his  head,  giyes  it  to  her 
maid  outsidc,  who  puts  it  in  the  bag  which  contained 
the  proyisions;  they  both  leaye  the  camp  aa  usoal  un- 
der  the  pretence  of  deyotion,  and  retom  to  Bethulia,  dis- 
playing  the  head  of  Holofemes,  amidst  the  lejoicings 
and  thankagiyings  of  the  people  (xiii,  1-20).  Achior, 
hearhig  of  this  wonderful  deliyerance,  is  at  once  eon- 
yerted  to  Judaism,  whilst  Judith  counsela  the  Israelites 
to  surprise  the  enemy  next  moming  (xiy,  1-10),  who, 
being  panic-stricken  at  the  loas  of  their  generał,  are  soon 
discomfited,  leaying  immeuse  spoil  in  t£e  handa  of  the 
Jews  (xiy,  ll-xy,  11).  The  women  of  Israel  then  ex- 
press  their  gratitude  to  their  sister  (yer.  12-13),  whilst 
Judith  bursts  forth  in  a  sublime  song  of  pralse  to  the 
God  of  their  salyation  (xyi,  l-17Whcrenpon  allof  them 
go  up  to  Jerusalem  to  worship  tne  Lord  with  sacrifices 
and  feastings  (yer.  18-20).  Judith  aflerwards  retuma  to 
her  natiye  pilące,  Bethulia,  mannmits  her  maid,  and  dies 
at  the  adyanced  age  of  105  years,  greatly  lamented  by  all 
the  nation,  whose  peace  no  enemy  dared  to  disturfo  for  a 
long  timc  (yer.  21-25).  The  Jews  enjoying  a  profound 
and  happy  peace,  a  yearly  festiyal  (acoording  to  the 
Yulgate)  is  instituted  in  honor  of  the  yictory. 

IIL  Oriffinal  LanffuaffefVenionSf  Conditumoftke  Texłi^ 
<fc.— That  thia  book  was  originaUy  written  in  Hebrew 
or  Syro-Chaldaic  is  distinctly  declared  by  St.  Jerome, 
who  says  that  *'  Judith  is  read  by  the  Jews  among  the 
Hagiographa  .  .  .  and,  heing  written  in  Chaldee  (Chal- 
daK)  sermone  conacriptus),  is  reckoned  among  the  histo- 
ries,"  and  that  he  had  used  a  Chaldee  codex  to  correct 
thereby  the  yitiated  readings  of  the  MSS.  {Prtrf,  ad 
Jud,).  This  is,  morcorcr,  corroborated  by  the  Byzan- 
tine  historian  John  Malałaś  (fl.  circa  A.b.  880),  who, 
haying  embodied  the  contents  of  Judith  in  his  Chrono- 
graphia,  remarks,  TaOra  Sk  kv  raic  'Efipaiicaic  ifi^kpt' 
TM  ypa<paic  (i,  203,  ed.  Oxon.  1691).  Besides,  the  Greek 
contains  uiimistakabic  indications  that  it  was  madę  from 
a  Hebrew  or  Aramfean  origind,e.  g.  giying  the  Hebrew 
nse  of  the  relarire  iv  <f  duTpifitp  iv  abri^  (x,  2),  u»v  ro 
vXri^oc  avTufv  (xyi,4),the  literał  rendering  of  nan^S, 
iv  Tj  naptfipo\y  (xii, 7),  which  has  occasioned  so  much 
difficulty  to  interpretera,  but  which  is  easy  enough  when 
it  is  borne  in  miud  that  the  Hebrew  preposition  3  sig- 
nifies  at,  by,  near;  the  many  Hebraisma  (i,  7, 16 ;  ii,  5, 7,  j 
18, 23i  iii,  3, 10;  iy,  2, 6, 11, 13 ;  y,  9, 12, 14, 16, 18 ;  yu,  | 


15,18;  ix,  8;  x,7,28;  zi,5,16;  xii,lA,20;  iar,l9% 
and  the  miatnualationa  of  the  Hebfew  (i,  8;  u,  2;  iii,l, 
9, 10;  y,  15, 18;  yiii, 27;  xy,  11).  Geseniua,  aod  espe- 
dally  Moyers,  haye  been  yery  sucoeasful  in  their  elTacti 
to  correct  the  preaent  geographical  errors  by  the  snppo- 
aition  of  a  Hebrew  originaL  fietani  (i,  9)  the  latter  ooo- 
ceiyea  to  be  Beth-anoth  (Joeh.  zy),  and  the  łwo  wtas  (i, 
12)  the  two  arms  of  the  Nile.  For  xaXXaf  wv  he  reada 
Xak$aiktVj  and  conaiders  Raasea  to  be  an  oyerdght  for 
Tarshish.  Origen  waa  therefore  miainformed  when  be 
was  told  that  Judith  did  not  exiat  in  tiie  Hebrew  (rfpc 
Tw/3ia  i//Adc  *XP^  iyvwavai  5n  rf  Tupię  ov  xo*»v 
rai  ovdk  ry  'lou^i^,  ohlk  ydp  ixovm  airrd  ml  kv  'Asro- 
Kfivfoic  'Bppaiaraif  %tc  atr  avrw  fia!^6»T(c  lyvtM* 
fuvy  £p,  ad  Afric^  sec.  18).  The  (M  Latm  and  the 
Syriac  yersions  were  madę  fiom  the  Septoagint,  which, 
howeyer,  does  not  repreaent  a./Ez«i  Hebrew  or  Anuncan 
otiginal  text,  aa  may  be  seen  firom  the  raiioos  reoen- 
aions  of  it  differing  greatly  from  each  other.  This  is, 
moreoyer,  conoborated  by' the  fact  that  the  (M  LaUn, 
the  MSS.  of  which  also  deyiated  greatly  from  each  oth- 
er, and  which  St.  Jerome  corrected  acoording  to  an  An- 
masan  codex,  difFers  materially  fiom  the  Sepu  some- 
timea  haying  morę  than  the  latter  (comp.ynlg.  iy,8-15 
with  Sept.  iy,  10;  Yulg.  y,  11, 12  with  Sept.  ▼,  11-16; 
Yulg.  V,  26-29  with  Septnag.  y,  23-26;  Yulg.  ti,  15>  19 
with  Sept.  vi,  19;  Yulg.  vii,  18-20  with  Sept.  vii,  29)^ 
sometimes  leń  (comp.  Yulg.  yii,  9  8q.,  with  Sept.  vii,  8- 
15;  Yulg.  V,  11  są.,  with  Sept.  y,  17-22;  Yulg.  ix,  ^7, 
11  8q.,  with  Sept.  ix,  7, 10).  Sometimes  the  namee  are 
different  (comp.  i,  6,  8, 9;  iy,  5 ;  viii,  1),  and  aotnetimes 
thenumber8(i,2;  ii,l;  vii,  2,  etc.).  A  very  minnte  coł- 
lation  of  the  yariationa  between  the  Yulgate  and  the 
Sept,  18  giyen  by  Capcllus,  Commentarn  et  Nof€B  Critiem 
in  V,  T,  (AmsteL  1689),  p.  574,  etc;  and  Eidibocn. £m- 
kttunffiudie  apokrypkitcken  ;SćArt/?ai,p.818,etc  There 
are  also  extant  seyeral  Hebrew  recensions  of  Judith. 
Three  of  these  haye  been  published  by  Jellinek  in  his 
Beth  Ha^Midrask,  yols.  i  and  ii,  Leipcig,  1853,  aitd  the 
one  which  comes  nearest  to  the  Greek  and  Latin  yer- 
sions certainly  remoyes  all  the  difBcaltiea  against  the 
historical  character  of  the  book  contained  in  tbose  ver>- 
aions.  They  are  called  nsisnb  TSniC,  n-^Tirr^  PICTO 
(JBMft  Ha-Midrath,  i,  130-136),  and  n-^nim  McrTD  (ii, 
12-22).  Gther  Hebrew  editions  (n-^n^n^i  n09p)  haye 
been  published  at  Berlin  (1766, 8yo),  Yeńice  (a.'  a.  8yo)^ 
and  Frankfort-on-tbe-Main  (ed.  S.,  London,  1715, 8yo). 
Coyerdale  and  the  Bishops*  Bibie,  foUowing  Lather  and 
the  Zurich  Bibie,  haye  tranalated  from  the  Yulgeie, 
whilst  the  Geneya  yersion,  which  is  foUowed  by  the  A 
Y.,  has  a  translation  of  the  Greek  text 

IY.  Hittorical  Character  oftht  BooŁ— There  are  three 
theories  about  the  naturę  of  thb  book : 

o.  Up  to  the  time  of  the  Reformation,  the  vicw  that 
this  book  records  actttal  hitiory  was  uniycnally  enter- 
tained  among  Christiana.  The  differcnce  of  opinioo 
which  obtained  during  those  fifteen  centuriea,  and  which 
still  exi8ts  among  the  defenders  of  its  historical  charac- 
ter, is  about  the  precise  time  when  these  eyents  occur- 
red,  inyolying  as  a  necessary  conseąoenoe  the  idcntifica- 
tion  of  the  principal  charactcra,  etc.  The  limits  of  the 
rangę  of  time  within  which  they  haye  altemately  been 
plaoed  are  B.C. 784-A.D.  li*.  The  moet  ancieni  opin- 
ion,  howeyer,  is,  that  the  circumstances  here  described 
occurred  ajier  the  Babylonian  captiyity,  which  is  sop- 
portcd  by  the  book  itself  (comp.  iy,  8;  y,  18, 19,  Sept.; 
y,  22, 23,  Yulg.).  Still,  as  it  does  not  tell  who  this  Neb- 
uchadnczzar  was,  the  adyocates  of  this  view  haye  tried 
to  identify  him  with  eyeiy  Persian  monarch  in  suooes- 
sion.  Thus,  St.  Augustinc  (De  Cir,  Dei,  xyiii,  16\  aod 
others,  take  him  to  be  Cainby»e$;  Julius  Afńcanus  and 
Gcorgius  SynceUus  regard  him  as  Xerxtt:  Mercator, 
Eatius,  etc.,  make  him  to  be  Dariui  Hyatatpii;  whikt 
Sulpidus  Seyerus  and  others  identify  him  with  Arta* 
xerxes  Ochu$  (comp.  Suidas,  s.  v.  Judith ;  BeOanniDe.  fk 
VeriK  />M,i,  12;  Sciho\Zy,£inki^mg  ta  die  UeiUgm  Sckrif* 


JUDITH,  BOOK  OF 


1086 


JUDITH,  BOOK  OP 


ten,  ii,  688  8q.).  Againat  this  view,  howerer,  U  to  be 
urged,  that,  1.  AU  theee  monarcha  inherited  the  proy- 
incea  which  are  deacńbed  in  thia  book  aa  haviog  been 
concwaredfor  them  by  Holofernea,  Łhua  precluding  tbe 
identity  of  any  one  of  them  with  Nebachadnezzar.  2. 
KineTeh,  which  U  here  mentioned  aa  the  capital  of  Neb- 
ochadnezzar^a,  or  the  Aaayrian  empire,  waa  deetroyed 
before  the  Babylonian  captivity,  and  no  Aaayrian  or  Me- 
dian Idngdom  exiated  during  the  po8t-exilian  period,  8. 
The  Persiana,  Syńanai  Phceniciana,  (ściana,  and  Egyp- 
tiana  are  deacribed  aa  aubject  to  the  Aaayrianai  which 
could  not  have  been  the  caae  after  the  captivity  of  Ju- 
dah,  when  the  Aasyrian  empire  waa  whoUy  eztinguiah- 
ed,  and  the  Peraiana,  inatead  of  being  aubject  to  the  Aa- 
fl^riana,  had  madę  themaelyea  lorda  over  them,  and  all 
the  other  nationa  of  the  Eaat,  from  the  Helleapont  to 
the  River  Indua^  4.  Theie  ia  no  point  of  time  except 
tbe  Maccabsean  period  when  the  eventa  here  recorded 
oottld  poaaibly  haye  oocuned,  aince  the  Jewa  were  aub- 
ject to  the  Peraiana  for  207  yeara,  then  were  nnder  the 
dominion  of  Alexander  the  Great,  and  finally  under  the 
Ptolemiea  and  the  kingą  of  Syria  till  they  obtained  tbeir 
independence  through  Judaa  Maocabeoa,  B.C.  164,  The 
only  time  to  which  they  could  poaaibly  be  referred  ia 
tbat  of  Antiochua  Epiphanea,  but  this  auppoeition  ia  in- 
ccmaiatent  with  the  fact  that  tho  Jewa  had  but  recently 
zetunied  from  captiyity,  and  reatored  tho  worahip  of 
God  in  the  Tempie.  The  geographical  inoonaistenciea 
are  eąiially  embarraaaing. 

To  escape  theae  difficultiea,  and  morę  eapecially  to 
obtain  a  point  of  time  auitable  for  theae  eyenta,  Usher, 
IJoyd,  Calmet,  Montfauoon,  Prideaux,  Whiaton,  WolfE; 
etc.,  maintain  that  they  occurred  hrfore  the  exik,  either 
in  the  reign  of  Zedekiah,  Manaaaeh,  Amon,  Joaiah,  or 
Jehoiakim.  The  generał  opinion,  howeyer,  is,  that  the 
atory  ia  to  be  placed  under  Manaaaeh,  and,  aa  Calmet, 
Montiaucon,Prideaux.Whiaton,  and  othera  will  haye  it, 
after  thia  monarchia  retum  from  Babylon.  According 
to  them,  the  eyenta  recorded  in  the  book  of  Juditb,  and 
tbe  coUateral  circnmatanoea,  occurred  in  the  following 
order  of  time: 

BlrthofJudUh 8285  719 

Manasseh  begioB  to  reign 880C  COS 

He  ia  tflken  prlsoner  to  Babylon  and  aent  back 

toJad«» 8888  «T6 

War  l)et\veen  KebachadnezzAf  and  Arphazad. .  8347  657 

Ylctorj'  of  Nebncbadnezzar  over  Arphaxad 8847  657 

Ezpedltion  of  Uolofemea  and  siege  of  BethuUa  8848  866 

Beath  ofManaweh 8861  648 

Amon,  his  eon.  beginił  to  reigti 8861  648 

Amon  Is  mnraered  for  hla  wickedneaa 8368  641 

Joaiah,  his  son,  eocceeda  blm,  belng  eight  yeara 

old 8868  641 

Death  of  Jadlih,  aged  106  yenra 8890  614 

Battle  of  Megiddo  and  death  of  King  Joslah . . .  8394  010 

The  la^t  aiege  of  Jeniaalem  by  Nebncbadnezzar  8414  690 
Deatmction  of  Jeniaalem  and  captivity  of  the 

Jewa 8416  688 

Tbe  Nebncbadnezzar  of  thia  book  ia,  according  to  thia 
theory,  Saoaduchinua,  who  aucceeded  hia  father  £aar- 
haddon  in  the  kingdom  of  Aaayńa  and  Babylon  in  the 
Blat  year  of  Manaaseh^a  reign,  and  Arphaxad  ia  Deiocea, 
king  of  Media.  But  this  pre-erUian  yiew  again  incura 
the  following  objections :  1.  It  makes  Judith  to  be  nrfy- 
three  yeais  old  at  tbe  time  when  ahe  ia  deacribed  aa  *'  a 
fiur  damael"  (77  naiSiffierf  >/  koA^)  captiyatlng  Holofer- 
nea  (xii,  18)  and  rayiahing  the  hearta  of  many  who  de- 
aired  to  marry  ber  (xyi,  22).  Calmet,  howeyer,  ia  not 
disconcertcd  by  auppoeing  that  Jndith  might  in  thia 
caae  be  8ixty-three  or  Bixty  yeara  old,  *'  being  then  what 
we  cali  a  fine  woman,  and  haying  an  engaging  air  and 
peraon,"  "  likely,"  adde  Dn  Pin,  **  to  cbarm  an  old  gen- 
erał." 2.  It  ia  absolutely  inconsistent  with  chap.  xvl, 
23,  where  we  are  expre8sly  toki  that  "  there  waa  nonę 
that  madę  the  children  of  Israel  afraid  in  the  daya  of 
Juditb,  nor  a  long  time  after  her  death."  For  even  if 
we  Łake  the  worda  **  a  long  time  after  her  death"  to 
mean  no  morc  than  twenty  years,  this  would  bring  Ju- 
dith*B  death  to  ttcenfif  years  before  the  disastrous  bat- 
Ue  of  Megiddo,  wherein  Josiah  waa  mortally  wounded, 


wbereaa  tbia  bypotheaia  placea  her  death  only^ur  yeara 
before  that  calamitoua  eyent  TMa  inoonsistency  ia  atill 
morę  glaring  according  to  tbe  cakulationa  of  Prideaus, 
who  maintaina  that  Judith  could  not  haye  been  morę 
than  forty-fiye  yeara  of  age  when  ahe  captiyated  Holo- 
femea,  aa  thia  canriea  down  her  death  to  the  4th  year 
of  Zedekiah,  when  the  atate  of  the  Jewa  had  been  ex- 
ceedingly  disturbed  for  aeyeral  yeara  by  the  Babyloni- 
ana,  and  actually  bringa  the  period  inyolyed  in  the  "long 
time  after  her  death"  beyond  the  total  subyersion  of  the 
Jewiah  atate.  8.  Judith  affirma  that  there  waa  no  Jew 
to  be  found  in  any  dty  who  worshipped  idolatry  (yiii, 
17. 18),  which  ia  incompatible  with  the  reign  of  Manaa- 
aeh, Amon,  and  the  firat  eight  yeara  of  Joaiah  (comp.  2 
Chroń,  xxxiii,  14>17).  4.  Holofemea,  the  chief  officer 
of  the  Aaayrian  army,  who  had  only  recently  inyaded 
Judiea  and  taken  Manaaaeh  priaoner,  muat  aurely  haye 
known  aomething  about  the  Jewa,  yet  he  ia  deacribed  aa 
being  utterly  ignorant  of  the  yery  name  of  thia  Jewiah 
monarcb,  aa  not  knowing  the  people  and  the  city  of  Je- 
niaalem, and  being  obliged  to  ask  for  some  Information 
about  them  from  the  Amoritiah  chief  (y,  1-8).  5.  The 
Jewiah  atate  ia  repreaented  aa  being  under  the  goyem- 
ment  of  a  higb-prieat  and  a  kind  of  Sanhedrim  (yi,  6- 
14  i  XV f  8),  which  is  only  compadble  with  the po8t-exilian 
period,  when  the  Jewa  had  no  king.  6.  The  book  itaelf 
diatinctly  tella  ua  in  chap.  iy,  8,  and  y,  18,  that  the  eyenta 
tranapired  ąfter  the  captiyity,  aa  ia  rigbtly  intcrpreted 
by  the  compilera  of  the  marginal  referencea  of  the  A.y., 
who,  on  thia  paaaagc,  refer  to  2  Kinga  xxy,  9-11,  and 
£zra  i,  1-8. 

h,  The  diificulty  of  taking  the  book  to  record  either 
pre-exilian  or  p08t-exilian  history  madę  Luther  view  it 
aa  "  a  religioua  fiction  or  poem,  written  by  a  holy  and 
ingenioua  man,  who  depicta  therein  the  yictory  of  tho 
Jewiah  people  oyer  all  tbeir  enemiea,  which  God  at  all' 
timea  most  wonderfuUy  youchaafes.  .  .  .  Judith  is  tbe 
Jewish  people,  represented  aa  a  chaate  and  holy  widów, 
which  ia  alwaya  the  character  of  God's  people.  Uolo- 
femea ia  the  heathen,  the  godleaa  or  unchristian  lord  of 
all  agea,  while  the  city  of  Bethulia  denotea  a  yirgin,  in- 
dicating  that  the  belieying  Jews  of  thoae  daya  were  the 
pure  yirgina"  (Forrede  aufi  Buch  Judith).  Some  of 
the  namea  can  acarcely  haye  been  choaen  without  regard 
to  their  deriyation  (e,  g.  Achior =/?ro^fr  ofLighi ;  Be- 
thulia=>l'^Pin3,  the  tirgin  of  Jehovah),  and  the  hia- 
torical  difficultiea  of  th^  peraon  of  Nebuchadnezzar  dia- 
appear  when  he  ia  regarded  aa  the  acriptaral  type  of 
worldly  power.  Grotiua,  elaborating  upon  thia  idea» 
regarda  it  aa  a  parabolicdeacription  of  Antiochua  Epiph- 
anea*a  aaaault  on  Judaea — '*  Judith  ia  the  Jewiah  people 
(n'^n'in'«);  Bethulia  ia  the  Tencie  (rT^bK  n'^!)}  the 
sword  which  went  out  of  it,  the  prayere  of  the  sainU; 
Nebuchadnezzar  aignifiea  the  devii;  Aaayria  ia  pride,  the 
deriTe  kingdom;  Holofemea  is  the  detiTs  wutrument; 
(©na  *l|jin,  Uctor  aerpentis,  minister  diabolt) ;  the  wid- 
ów ia  the  helpUtmeea  ofthe  Jetcish  people  under  tbe  tyr- 
anny  of  Antiochua  Epiphanea;  Joachim  or  Eliakim  aig- 
nifiea God  wiU  arise  (Dip  n'\n'^  or  Dip*^  h^)  to  defend 
Judaea  and  cut  off  the  inatrament  ofthe  deyil  who  would 
haye  her  corropted."  Many  of  the  modem  writera  who 
regard  it  as  containing  pure  fiction  cali  it  either  drama 
(Buddeus),  epopee  (ArtropKus,  Moreua,  You  Niebuhr, 
etc),  apologue  (Babor),  didactic  poem  (Jahn),  morał 
fiction  (Bauer),  or  romance  (Berthold).  Among  the 
Roman  CathoUca  thia  notion  of  an  allegory  is  fayored 
by  Jahn,  who  maintaina  that  the  difficultiea  are  other- 
wiae  insuperable.  De  Wette,  howeyer,  considera  that 
the  fact  of  Holofemea  being  a  historical  name  (together 
yrith  other  reaaona)  militatea  againat  the  notion  of  an 
allegory,  aa  maintained  by  Grotiua.  The  name  Holo- 
femea is  found  in  Appian  (In  Sgriac,  c.  47)  and  in  Po- 
ły bius  (x,  11).  The  latter  hiatorian  atatea  that  Holo- 
femea, haring  conquered  Cappadocia,  loat  it  by  endeay- 
oriiig  to  change  tbe  customs  of  the  country",  and  to 
iotroduce  the  dmnken  rites  of  Bacchua;  and  Caaauboa 


JUDITH,  BOOK  OF 


1086" 


JUDITH,  BOOK  OP 


(ad  Athen,")  conJectnrM  that  this  was  the  Holofemes  of 
Judith.  From  its  termination  the  name  is  suppoeed  to 
be  of  Persian  extraction  (oompare  Orophemetj  Polybinsi 
zzziii,  12),  aa  Tiaaphemea,  Artaphemes,  etc 

c  Aa  the  book  itself,  however,  giree  no  intimation 
whateyer  that  it  ia  ajiction  or  an  aUegory^  but,  on  the 
contraiy,  purporta  to  be  real  hiatorr,  aa  ia  evident  finom 
its  minutę  geographical  (i,  7 ;  ii,  21  flq.;  iii,  9  Bq. ;  iv,  4, 
6  8q.)»  historical  (i,  5  8q.),  and  chronological  (i,  18,  16; 
viii,  4;  xvi,  28)  descriptions,  Gutmann,  Hensfeld,  Keil, 
and  others  take  it  to  cootain  a  substance  of  truth  em- 
bellished  vith  fiction.  This  view  ia  aupported  by  the 
foUowing  facts:  1.  NotwithBtanding  the  arbitraiy  and 
nncritical  manner  in  which  the  deutero-canonical  hia- 
torians  dispose  of  their  materials,  they  have  alwa3rB  a 
oertain  amount  of  truth,  around  which  they  dueter  the 
traditional  embellishmenta.*  2.  A  aummaiy  of  the  con- 
tents  of  Judith  is  given  in  the  ancient  Jewiah  prajen 
for  the  first  and  second  Sabbaths  of  YAe  Featt  ofDedka" 
««w— beginning  with  airni  *<Z  nB3X  •'S  '^Tl»  and 
PK')^!  27*^;Z?1!a  "j^K — among  the  event8  which  occurred 
in  the  times  of  Antiochua  Epiphanee^  and  it  cannot  be 
aupposed  that  the  Jews  would  make  it  the  basis  of 
thanksgiying  when  the  deUyeraoce  was  never  wrought, 
and  the  whole  of  it  was  nothing  but  a  fiction.  8.  There 
are  ancieot  Midraahim  which  rccord  the  fiMta  indepen- 
dently  of  the  book  of  Judith.  There  is  one,  in  particu- 
lar,  which  giyes  a  better  reoension  of  thia  book  than 
cdther  the  Septuagint  or  the  Yulgate,  beara  aa  much  le- 
aemblance  to  the  Septuagint  and  Yulgate  aa  theee  iwo 
Tersions  bear  to  each  other,  and  remove8  many  of  the  dif- 
flculties  against  its  historical  truthfulneas,  inasmucb  as 
it  begins  with  cbu  v,  5,  and  thus  shows  that  the  Septua- 
gint, from  which  the  other  yersions  were  madę,  has  put 
together  two  dilTerent  records. 

Those,  howeyer,  who  understand  the  book  to  be  an 
allegorical  representation  of  the  Jewish  people,  widowed 
as  to  earthly  resources,  yet,  by  fayor  with  God  and  man, 
preyailing  oyer  the  powers  of  the  world,  do  aot  thus  re- 
lieye  the  fable  from  grave  morał  objections.  An  intel- 
Ugent  Jew,  well  read  in  the  Hebrew  Scriptures,  could 
not  baye  thought  of  sctting  up  Judith  as  a  proper 
embodiment  of  female  heroism  and  yirtue.  Her  plan 
of  procedurę  is  marred  throughout  by  hypocrisy  and 
deceit ;  she  eyen  prays  to  God  that  he  would  prosper 
hcr  deceit  (ix,  12),  and  pnuses  the  cruelty  of  Simeon  in 
daying  the  Shechemites,  as  if  fus  deed  borę  on  it  the 
sanction  of  heayen,  though  Jacob,  the  father  of  Simeon, 
had  consigned  it  in  the  name  of  God  to  etemal  reproba- 
tion.  The  spińt  of  yengeance,  resolute  in  ita  aim,  un- 
Bcrupulous  in  the  meaits  taken  to  accomplish  it,  is  the 
peryading  animus  of  the  story--«  spirit  oertainly  op- 
posed  to  the  generał  teacbing  of  Old  aa  well  as*  New 
Testament  Scripture,  and  incapable  of  being  embodied 
in  a  heroic  story  except  by  one  who  had  much  morę 
regard  for  the  political  than  the  morał  and  religioua  el- 
emeuts  in  Judaism. 

V.  Author  and  Datę, — The  dilTerence  of  opinion  upon 
this  subject  is  as  great  as  it  is  upon  the  character  of  the 
book.  It  is  not  named  either  by  Philo  or  Joseph  us; 
nor  haye  we  any  indication  whateyer  by  which  to  form 
a  conjecture  respecting  its  author.  But  it  has  been 
supposed  by  some  that  it  could  not  haye  been  written 
by  a  contemporary,  from  the  circnmstance  of  the  family 
of  Achior  being  mentioned  as  still  in  existence,  and  of 
the  festiyał  of  Judith  being  still  celebrated.  If  this  fes- 
tiyal  eyer  took  place,  it  must  haye  been  of  temporary  ! 
duration,  for,  as  Calmet  ob8er\'e8,  no  record  of  it  can  be 
traccd  sińce  the  exile.  Professor  Alber,  of  Pesth,  how- 
eyer, maintains  that  it  is  still  recorded  in  the  Jewish 
oalcndars.  Jahn,  after  Grotiua,  refers  the  datę  of  the 
book  to  the  Maocabemn  period,  and  deriyes  an  argument 
for  its  late  composition  from  Łhe  fact  of  the  feast  of  the 
New  Moon  being  mentioned  (yiii,  6,  comp.  with  Mark 
XV,  42).  De  Wette  {EinleUung)  conceives  that  the 
whole  composition  bespeaks  an  author  who  was  a  na- 
tiye  of  Palestine,  who  could  not  haye  łiyed  beyond  the 


e&d  of  the  Ist  centiny  of  the  Christian  §bul  (the  dala 
aasigned  to  it  by  £iehhom),  inaamocfa  aa  it  ia  then  eiud 
by  element  of  Romę,  bat  that  the  probability  ia  that  it 
waa  much  earlier  written.  Moven^  a  Koman  Catholic 
professor  at  Bonn,  a  man  of  great  penetntion  in  aimilar 
inyestigationa  respecting  the  canonieal  booka  of  the  Old 
Testament,  endeayors  to  flx  the  datę  of  ita  oomposi^oa 
in  the  year  B.a  104.  <*  Tbe  author,"  he  obseryea,  '^  who 
has  transferred  the  geographical  relations  of  hia  own 
time  to  a  former  period  [see,  however,  Foater,  G^o^ra* 
phy  ofA  rabia,  1844,  i,  185],  makea  the  Jewiah  terńtoty 
commence  at  Scythopolis  (iii,  10),  and  makes  Bethnlia, 
against  which  Holofemes  directed  hia  attack,  the  fint 
Jewiah  city  at  the  entrance  into  Judssa  (iv,  7),  reckoo- 
ing  the  territory  intenrening  between  thia  aiid  Sama- 
ria as  tributary  to  the  Jewiah  high-priest  Thia  stafee 
of  aihira  oontinued  Irom  the  time  of  John  Hyrcanns 
to  Pompey^s  invaaion  of  Judaa.  Hyicanoa  had  aetzed 
upon  Samaria,  and  wrested  Scythopolis,  with  the  sar- 
loanding  tetritor^,  from  Epicratee,  the  generał  of  Ptol- 
emy  Lathurus  (Josephus,  Ant,  xiii,  10, 8),  B.(X  110,  ae- 
coiding  to  Usher.  Bat  Samaria  and  Scythopolia,  with 
other  acquisitions  of  the  Maccabees,  were  lost  fofcver  to 
the  Jewish  nation  when  Pompey,  B.C  48,  ledaoed  Jn- 
daea  to  ita  ancient  limita.  TIm  aea-coast  (iii,  1),  inde- 
pendent of  the  Jews,  continoed,  sińce  the  last  yeais  of 
the  leign  of  Alexander  Janmeua,  to  be  a  Jewish  pogoes 
sion ;  but  Carmel,  which  (i,  8)  was  inhabited  by  the 
Gentiles,  was  still  independent  in  the  bąginninic  of  his 
reign,  and  he  first  aeized  it  after  the  war  with  Ptolemy 
Lathyrua  (xiii,  16, 4)."  It  ia  to  thia  war  that  Moyen 
considers  the  book  of  Jadith  to  lefer,  and  he  auppuaes  it 
to  have  been  written  after  the  uitfortonate  battle  at 
Asochis,  in  Galilee  (or,  lather,  Asopben  on  tbe  Jordan) 
CbloyeKj  Ueber  die  Urtpraehe  der  Deuterohatu  Biicker, 
in  the  Bowner  ZeitstArifij  xiii,  86  sq.).  De  Wette  cod- 
ceiyea  that  this  hypotheaia  ia  oppoaed  by  the  foUowing 
geographical  combinationa:  L  Galilee  biolongcd  to  the 
Aamonsans,  the  proof  of  which,  indeed,  is  by  no  means 
certain,  while  the  foUowing  indications  thereof  preseot 
themselyes:  (a)  Asochis  seems  to  haye  belonged  to  Ał- 
exander  Jannseus,  aa  it  receiyed  I^lemy  Lath}Tus  (Jo- 
sephus, A  tit,  xiii,  12, 4,  comp. ¥rith  xv,  4).  (6)  llyrcanw 
had  his  son  Alexander  Jannous  broaght  up  in  Italiles 
(xiii,  12, 1).  (c)  Antigoncs  retumed  ftom  Galilee  (  H'fir, 
i,  8,  8).  {d)  Aristobulus  seized  upon  Itunea  (A  raf.  xiii, 
1 1, 8),  which  presuppoees  the  poesession  of  GaUlee.  (O 
Eyen  after  the  limits  of  Galilee  were  circumscribed  by 
Pompey,  it  stiU  belonged  to  the  Jewish  hi^h-priest 
(  Wary  i,  1 0, 4).  2.  Idumea  belonged  to  the  Jewiah  state, 
but  the  sons  of  Esau  oame  to  Holofemes  (yii,  8, 18).  3. 
If  the  author  had  the  war  with  Ptolemy  Lathynis  in 
yiew,  the  irruption  of  Holofemes  would  rather  cone- 
spond  with  the  moyemenu  of  the  Cyprian  army,  which 
prooeeded  from  Asochis  to  Seppboris,  and  thenoe  to 
Aaophen  {Einleitunc,  §  807). 

Wolff  and  others  asoibe  the  aathorship  to  Achior, 
B.C.  636-629;  Huetius  (in  Prap,  Etang,  p.  217),  Ca^ 
met  (DisMerł.  PrcMm,  p.  142),  etc,  to  Joshua,  the  son  of 
Josedech,  the  companion  of  Zerabbabel,  B.C  536<-515; 
St  Jerome,  etc,  to  Judith  herself;  Ewald,  Yaihinger,  etc, 
to  the  time  of  John  Hyrcanns,  B.G.  180-128;  YoUonar, 
who  takes  it  to  be  an  allegorical  description  of  the  vio- 
tory  of  the  Parthians  and  Jews  over  Quietus,  the  dele- 
gata ofTrajan,  maintains  (originany  in  the  TkeoL  Jakr- 
buchj  1856,  p.  862;  and  1857,  p.  448  8q.;  afterwards  in 
Handh.  d,  EinL  in  d.  Apokr,  TUb.  1860)  that  it  waa  wrilr 
ten  for  the  twelfth  of  Adar,  A.D.  117«118,  to  commemo- 
rate  this  day  (Oia*^"iniI3  Dl*^).  He  makea  Nebuchad- 
nezzar  stand  for  Trajan,  Nineveh  for  Antioch,  Assyria 
for  Syria,  ATphaxad  for  the  Parthians,  Ecbatana  for 
Nisibis,  Holofemes  for  Lucius  Ouietus,  and  Judith  §ot 
Judaea.  This  explanation  assumes  the  spurionsness  of 
the  reference  in  the  First  Epistle  of  Clement  (§  6), 
which  is  too  early  for  tbe  datę  assigned.  It  has  htea 
adopted  by  Baur,  Hitzig  (in  Hilgenfeld'a  Zeitschr.  1X60, 
p.  240  sq.),  and  Schenkel;  but  it  is  oppoaed  by  Uilgea- 


JUDSON 


1087 


JUDSON 


feld  (iM.  1858,  p.  270  Bq.  t  1861,  p.  886  8q.),  lipAius  (ibid. 
1869,  p.  89),  and  Ewald. 

The  fact,  however,  tbat  there  aie  Beveral  reeoida  or 
receosions  of  the  evenŁ8  oootained  in  the  book  of  Judith 
proceeding  itom  different  aathoia,  and  deyiating  mate- 
ztally  from  each  other,  predudes  the  poańbility  of  aa- 
eertaming  whoae  prodnctiona  they  are.  Ali  tMt  can 
be  said  with  certamty  ia  that  they  all  emanated  fiom  a 
lUestanian  sotine.  Aa  the  drcumstaoeea  reooided  are 
moet  pUtnly  declared  by  the  morę  tniatworthy  Hebtew 
eopiea,  and  in  the  Jewiah  prayen,  to  haye  oocurred  in 
the  Maocaboum  adrngglea  for  independenoe  (circa  &C. 
170-160),  the  fint  and  shotteat  reoord  of  them  which 
waa  oaed  for  litnrgical  purpoaea  moat  be  oimtemporary 
with  the  eyenta  themaelrea.  The  poetical  genioa  of  the 
oation,  howerer,  aoon  embelUahed  the  facta  in  yarioua 
wa3r8,  and  hence  the  dilferent  leccnsiona.  The  Greek 
yenion  contained  m  the  Septuagint  most  haye  been 
madę  at  a  much  later  period,  aince  the  author  of  it  waa 
already  ignorant  of  the  time  when  theae  circumetanoea 
cecoired,  and,  as  we  haye  aeen,  mized  np  two  totally 
difFerent  records  narrating  eyenta  of  different  perioda  ot 
the  JewtBh  history. 

VŁ  CcmomcUy  oftks  Booł.^Thoagh  the  eyenta  re- 
coided  in  Judith  are  inoorporated  in  the  hy  mnal  senrice 
of  the  Jewa  called  ni*^:^^^  yet  the  book  itaelf  waa  neyer 
in  the  Jewiah  canon.  The  distinctimi,  howeyer,  which 
the  Jewiah  synagogae  kept  up  between  treating  the 
bo<^  with  respect  and  putting  it  into  the  canon  could 
BOt  be  presenred  in  the  Christian  Church.  Hence  Ju- 
dith, which  was  at  first  quoted  with  approbation  by 
Caemena  Romanus  {Ep,  c  66),  was  graduaUy  cited  on  an 
eqaality  with  other  Scripture  by  Clemens  Alexandrintts 
(Sironu  iy),  TertnUian  {De  Monoff,  c.  17),  Ambrose  {De 
Ofi,  Minist,  iii,  18),  and  Augnstine  {De  Dodrima  Chr%$- 
Uana,  ii,  8),  and  finally  was  canonized,  in  the  coundla 
of  Carthage,  by  Innocent  I  of  Romę,  under  Gclasias,  and 
of  Trent.  Some  wiU  haye  it  that  this  book  is  qaoted  in 
the  K.  T.  (comp.  Judith  yiii,  4  8q.,  with  1  Cor.  ii,  10  8q. ; 
Judith  ix,  12  with  Acta  iy,  24;  Judith  xyi,  17  with  Matt. 
xii,  42,  60).  Judith,  with  the  other  dentero-canonical 
books,  has  been  at  all  times  read  in  the  Church,  and  les- 
aona  are  taken  from  it  in  the  Church  of  England  in 
oourse. 

.  YII.  ZAera/ure.— The  three  Midrashim  in  Jellinek*s 
Betk  Ha-Midrash,  yols.  i  and  ii  (Leipzig,  1863);  Mont- 
Ikucon,  La  Verite  de  VHisUńre  de  Judith  (Paris,  1690) ; 
Hartmann,  UtrumJuditha  eontineat  hitioriam  (Begiom. 
1671);  De  honacaM,Juditka^cta  (Yerou.  1614)  |  Arto- 
poBus,  JudUha  Epopaia  (Strasb.  1694) ;  Capellus,  Com- 
menL  et  Nota  CriL  in  F.  T.  p.  469 ;  Amald,  The  Apocry- 
phoj  in  Patrick,  Lowth,  and  Whitby'8  Comment. ;  Dn 
Pin,  Ilistoiy  ofłht  Canon  (Lond.  1699),  i,  10  są.,  90  8q. ; 
Eichhom,  Eńdeitutiff  in  die  Apocryphischen  Schriften  dee 
Alten  TeHaments  (Leipzig,  1796),  p.  291  8q.;  Prideaux, 
The  Old  and  New  Teetaments  oonnected  (ed.  1816),  i,  60 
są. ;  Whiston,  Sacred  History  ofthe  Old  and  New  Tes- 
tamenty i,  202 ;  Reuas,  in  Ersch  und  QrubeT'8  EncyJdopd' 
die,  sec.  ii,  yoL  xxviii,  p.  98  8q. ;  Fritzsche,  Kungeftisstes 
exegetisches  Handbuch  zu  den  Apokryphen  des  AU,  Test, 
(Lpzg.  1863),  ii,  113  8q.;  Joumid  oj' Sacred  Literaturę^ 
1866,  p.  342  8q. ;  1861,  p.  421  sq. ;  Yaihinger,  in  Herzog, 
SecU^Encyklopddie, yii,  136  8q. ;  Keil, Einleitung ind.  A. 
T.  (ed.  1859),  p.  698;  Diestel,  in  the  Jahrb./,  d,  TheoL 
1862,  p.  781  8q. ;  lipsius,  in  Hilgenfeld'8  Zeitschr.  1867, 
p.  837  8q. 

£xpre88  commentaries  on  this  book  alone  haye  been 
writtenbyJofl.Conzio,n^7«in^  -J*^©  (Asti,1628,16mo); 
Jeh.Low  ben-Seeb,  n-^nsitt];'  ńia^  (Yienna,  1799, 1819, 
8vo) ;  Frankel,  n-^nw^  (Lpzg.  1830,  8vo) ;  Is.  Sicben- 
berger,  n"«7!in^  pŁw  (Warsaw,  1840, 8vo) ;  Yolkmar, 
has  Buch  judith  (Tubing.  1860, 8yo) ;  Wolff,  Dos  Buch 
Judith  (Leipzig,  1861,  8yo),    See  Apocryfha. 

.  Jndaon,  Adoniram,  the  senior  Baptist  mission- 
aiy  to  Bunnah,  was  bom  in  Malden,  Mass.,  Aag.9, 1788. 


He  was  the  eldeat  son  cff  Adoniram  and  Abigail  Judaon. 
Before  he  was  ten  years  of  age  he  had  acquired  a  repu- 
tation  as  a  superior  student,  and  in  1807  graduated  with 
the  highest  honozs  from  Proyidence  College  (now  Brown 
Uniyernty),  being  not  yet  twenty  years  old.  For  a  short 
period  sub6equently  he  was  unsettled  in  his  religioua 
belief,  but,  aroused  by  the  deeth  of  an  old  dassmate  un- 
der peculiar  circumstances,  he  became  an  eamest  inquirer 
aiter  the  trath,  and,  though  not  a  Christian,  was  admit- 
ted  as  a  "special  student*'  in  the  diyinity  school  of  An- 
doyer,  and  while  there  was  conyerted,  and  joined  the 
Congregational  Church.  In  1809  he  decUned  a  tutor- 
ahip  in  Brown  Uniyersity,  and  in  Febmary,  1810,  formcd 
the  resolution  of  beooming  a  missionary  to  the  heathen. 
Seyeral  young  men  joined  the  seminary  at  this  time 
who  had  alsó  been  for  some  time  impressed  with  the 
need  of  missbns  to  unchrisdan  peoples.  Judson  became 
indmately  aseociated  with  them,  and  their  eeal  linally 
led  them  to  press  this  object  on  the  attention  of  the 
American  churches,  and,  though  not  properly  the  cause, 
they  were  the  occaston  ofthe  formation  ofthe  American 
Board  of  Commissioners  for  Foreign  Missions,  who  sent 
Mr.  Judson  to  England  to  confer  with  the  London  Mis- 
sionary Society  as  to  the  practicability  of  an  affiliation 
between  the  societies  and  their  joint  operation  in  **  for- 
eign parta."  Mr.  Judson  lefl  America  on  this  errand 
January  1, 1811,  but  on  the  way  was  captured  by  a 
priyateering  yessel,  carried  to  France,  and  did  not 
reach  London  till  April  6, 1811.  His  mission  failed  in 
its  primary  object,  but  was  of  adyantage  to  the  cause  of 
missions  in  America,  for  the  American  Board  resolyed 
to  assume  the  responsibiiity  of  sending  out  its  own  mis- 
sionaries.  Mr.  Judson,  aiter  marrying  Ann  Hasseltine, 
Feb.  6, 1812,  embarked  for  India'  on  the  19th  of  the 
aame  month,  under  the  auspiccs  of  this  new  organiza- 
tion.  Changing  his  yiews  of  baptism  on  the  yoyage, 
almost  immediately  after  his  arriyal  hc  8ou;;ht  iromer- 
sion  at  the  handsof  Dr.  Carey,  the  Baptist  missionary  at 
Serampore.  The  Baptists  in  America  wcre  already  pos- 
sessed  of  cónsiderable  missionary  zeal  and  intelligcnce,' 
and,  on  leaming  of  Dr.  Judson's  cbange  of  vie^v,  wcre 
roused  to  intense  eamestnees,  and  in  1814  they  organ- 
ized  a  denominational  missionary  society,  and  took  Dr. 
Judson  under  their  patron^.  The  hostility  of  the 
East  India  Company  towards  missionaries  was  at  that 
timJe  so  intonse,  that  within  ten  days  after  Judson'8  ar- 
riyal in  India  he  was  j)eremptorily  ordered  to  leave  the 
country,  and,  being  forced  to  comply,  he  took  passage 
in  a  yessel  for  the  Isle  of  France,  Ńoy.  80, 1812.  He 
subseąuently  retumed  to  Madras,  but,  finding  the  East 
India  Company  uncompromising  in  their  opposition,  he 
departed  for  Burmah,  and  reached  Rangoon  July  18, 
1818.  Aocepting  Bunnah  as  his  mission-ficld,  Mr.  Jud- 
son addressed  himself  to  the  task  of  acquiring  the  lan- 
guage  of  that  country,  and  not  only  attaincd  to  the 
greatest  familiaiity  with  it,  but  spoko  and  wrote  it  with 
**  the  elegance  of  a  cultured  scholar.**  At  an  carly  pe- 
riod in  these  pursuits  he  published  some  "  Grammatical 
Notices*'  of  the  language,  which  in  a  few  short  pages 
(only  twenty-six)  fumish  "  a  most  complete  grammar 
of  this  difficult  tongue."  In  imitation  of  the  Burmese 
rest-hottses  attached  to  their  pagodas  for  the  accommo- 
dation  of  pilgrims  and  wonhippers,  Mr.  Judson  insti- 
tuted  a  Zt/at  in  the  public  street  for  the  reception  of  and 
conyersation  with  inąuirers  about  Christianity.  This 
was  e^'er  a  notable  feature  of  his  ministry,  as  he  spent 
whole  days  thus  with  the  people.  Meeting  with  some 
sucoess  among  the  people,  he  resolyed  to  go  to  Ava,  the 
capital,  and  "lay  his  missionary  designs  before  the 
throne,  and  solicit  toleration  for  the  Christian  religion." 
His  efforts  were  ineffectual,  and  he  retumed  to  Kangoon, 
and  madę  a  short  trip  to  Calcutta  for  the  recovery  of 
Mrs.  Judson'6  hcalth.  On  July  20,  1822,  Dr.  Price,  a 
newly-arrired  missionary  physician,  was  summoncd  to 
attend  on  the  ktng  at  Ava,  and  Mr.  Judson  was  compelled 
to  accompany  him  as  interpreter.  While  at  Ava  Mr. 
Judson  became  known  as  the  **  Religion  propagating 


JUDSON 


losa 


JUEL 


teacher,"  and,  as  his  missionaiy  prospects  seemed  faToia* 
ble,  though  be  went  to  Rangoon  temporarilj,  heretumed 
to  Ava  to  prosecute  his  work.  War  breaking  oat  be- 
tween  the  British-India  and  the  Bannese  govemmenta, 
all  the  foreigners  at  Ava  came  nnder  suspicion  as  spies, 
ąnd  Mr.  Judson,  with  others,  was  imprisoned,  The  hor« 
cible  expeńence8  of  that  incarceiation  cannot  readily 
be  described.  On  Marcb  25, 1826,  Mr,  Jndson  himseir 
wrote, "  Through  the  kind  interpoeition  of  our  heavenly 
Father,  our  Iives  have  been  preserved  in  the  most  immi- 
nent  danger  from  the  hand  of  the  executioner,  and  in 
repcated  instances  of  most  alarming  ilkiess  diiring  my 
protracted  imprisonment  of  one  year  and  five  months ; 
nine  months  in  three  pairs  of  fetters,  two  months  in  fiye, 
8ix  months  in  one,  and  two  months  a  prisoner  at  laige." 
After  his  release  he  rendered  most  important  seryioe  to 
the  British  govemment  in  ihe  formation  of  the  treaty 
at  Yandabo,  and  later  in  a  oommerdal  treaty.  While 
absent  with  the  goyemment  embassy  as  interpreter,  his 
first  wifc,  one  of  the  noblest  of  women,  died,  Mr.  Jud- 
son  shortly  afler  (1827)  retumed  from  Ara  and  settled 
at  Amherst,  but  subeeąuently  removed  to  Mauhnain,  as 
event8  had  madę  it  a  much  morę  important  poet.  From 
this  time  to  1834  he  was  varioualy  employed  in  his 
mission-work  at  Manhnain,  Rangoon,  Prome,  and  other 
places,  and  became  interested  in  the  Karena  (q.  v.)} 
among  whom  he  madę  seyeral  missionary  tours.  In 
1834  he  married  Mrs.  Sarah  Boardman,  and  completed 
his  translation  of  the  whole  Bibie  into  Burmese,  in  the 
reyising  and  perfecting  of  which,  however,  he  spent  8ix- 
teen  years  morę,  This  was  the  great  work  of  his  life, 
and  *'  the  best  judges  yenture  to  hazard  the  opinion  that 
three  centuries  hence  Judson*8  Bibie  will  be  the  Bibie  of 
the  Christian  Church  of  Burmah"  {Calcutta  Bemew^ 
ziy,  434).  He  also  compiled  a  short  Burmese  and  £ng- 
lish  dictiona^'.  With  a  larger  work  of  this  ktnd  he 
was  occupied  at  the  time  of  his  death.  In  1839-^  his 
bealth  faileil,  and  he  was  obliged  to  take  seyeral  yoy- 
ages  for  its  recoyery,  In  1845,  in  conseąuence  of  the 
failing  health  of  Mrs.  Judson,  he  left  for  America.  Mrs. 
Judson  died  at  St.  Helena,  and  Mr.  Judson,  continuing 
bis  yoyage,  reached  Boston  on  October  15.  He  was  re- 
oeiyed  in  America  "with  affectionate  and  entbuMastic 
yeneration  that  knew  no  bounds.  His  eminent  poeition 
as  the  founder  and  pioneer  of  the  mission ;  his  long  and 
successful  labors  in  the  Eaat;  his  romantic  and  eyentful 
life,  associatcd  with  all  that  ia  most  beautiful  and  lofty 
in  human  naturę ;  his  world-wide'  famę,  and  his  recent 
afflictions,  encircled  him  in  the  people's  mind  with  the 
halo  of  an  apostle."  But  Mr.  Judson^s  heart  was  in 
Bnrmah.  After  marrying  Miss  Emily  Ćhubbuck  in 
Jnne,  1846,  he  again  set  sail  for  India,  and  arriyed  at 
Baiigoon  on  Noy.  30  of  that  year.  His  health,  howeyer, 
again  declined,  and  he  was  obliged  once  morę  to  resort 
to  the  sea  for  relief,  but  died  on  his  way  to  the  Isle  of 
Bourbon,  April  12, 1850,  and  was  buried  at  sea,  (J.  T.  6.) 
Judson,  Ann  Hasaeltina,  was  bom  at  Brad- 
ford,  Mass.,  Oct.  22, 1789.  She  was  married  to  Adoni- 
ram  Judson  on  Feb.  5,  1812,  and  was  the  first  American 
woman  to  devote  herself  to  foreign  mission  seryice. 
She  became  "intimately  associated  with  her  husband 
In  all  his  plans  of  beneyolence,  and  borę  an  important 
partin  their  accomplishment"  (Wayland's«ru(/9on,i,414). 
In  1824,  in  conseąuence  of  protracted  ill  health,  lea\ńng 
her  husband  in  Burmah,  she  proceeded  alone  to  Amer- 
ica, where  she  remained,  adding,  howeyer,  mnch  to  the 
iuterest  and  adyancement  of  missions  by  the  publication 
of  a  yery  interesting  account  of  the  hittory  o/ the  Bur- 
man  Mission  in  a  series  of  lettors  to  Mr.  Butterworth, 
a  member  of  Parliament,  whose  hospitality  she  enjoyed 
while  in  £ngland,  till  1823,  when  she  rejuined  her  hus- 
band at  Rangoon,  and  proceeded  with  him  to  Aya.  It 
was  during  the  trying  sccnes  of  the  succeeding  two 
yeara  that  her  '*  deroted  loye,  consummate  tact,  and  he- 
roić  resolution  were  so  manifest.  Her  whole  time,  with 
the  exception  of  twenty  days  when  she  was  confiued  by 
the  birth  of  her  child,  was  deyoted  to  the  alleyiation  of 


the  sorrowa  of  her  hosband  and  hia  feOow-priaoAen^ 
She  was  perfectly  familiar  with.  the  Boimese  languagc^ 
and  posseased  of  a  "  presence  which  oommanded  reapect 
eyen  irom  sayage  barbariana,  and  endrcLed  her  with  a 
morał  atmoaphere  in  which  ahe  walked  anharmed  in  the 
midat  of  a  hoatile  city  with  no  earthly  piotector^  (Way« 
land,  i,  829).  Her  influence  was  acknowledged  aa  oon* 
tributing  laigely  to  the  submiaBlon  to  the  Engliah  tenna 
of  peace  by  the  Burmese  goyemment,  She  died  at 
Amherst  on  Oct.  24, 1826,  during  tbe  abaence  of  her 
husband,  of  disease  which  her  sufFerings  and  proetntioii 
at  Aya  had  rendered  her  constitution  incapahle  of  reast* 
ing.  *'  To  great  cleamess  of  intellect,  large  powen  of 
comprehension,  and  intuitiye  female  ssgadty,  ripened 
by  the  constant  neoessity  of  independent  action,  she 
added  that  heroic  disintereatedness  which  natundly  losea 
all  oonsciousnees  of  aelf  in  the  prosecation  of  a  gieat  ob- 
jecU  These  elements  were,  howeyer,  aU  hekł  in  reserre, 
and  were  hidden  from  public  yiei7  bj  a  veil  of  nniisiial 
feminine  delicacy/'    (J.  T.  G.) 

JndAon,  Sarah  Boardman,  was  bom  in  Al- 
stead,  N.  H.,  Noy.  4, 1808.  She  was  the  daughtcr  oT 
Ralph  and  Abia  HuU,  and  waa  married  to  the  Rer. 
George  D.  Boardman  in  1825,  with  whom  she  proceeded 
to  Tayoy,  Burmah,  and  in  his  miasionazy  work  shared 
great  dangen  and  auflerings.  Her  husband  died  in 
1881.  Two  of  her  children  had  preyioudy  died,  and 
with  one  child,  a  atm,  left  to  her,  she  continned  to  prose- 
cute her  missionary  work.  In  1884  ahe  nuuiied  Dr. 
Judson,  and  in  1845,  in  conseąuence  of  failing  health, 
she  left  Burmah  for  America,  accompanied  by  her  hus- 
oand.  On  their  aniyal  at  St.  Helena  Mm  Jndson  died, 
Sept.  8, 1845.  She  translated  tbe  New  Testament  and 
Burmese  tracts  into  Peguan,  and  P%rtm'a  Progress 
into  Burmese.  Of  her  a  writer  in  the  Calcutta  Reriev 
says  (yoL  xiy), "  £xquisite  sensibility,  a  poefa  sool  and 
imagination,  great  natural  abilitiea,  thoroogh  muelish- 
ness,  and  a  woman'a  depth  of  love  and  affecdon,  all 
sfarouded  by  the  most  unpretending  meeknees  and  de- 
yotion,  were  some  of  the  elements  which  blended  to- 
gether  to  fomi  a  character  of  extreme  beauty."  Her 
poem  oommendng  **  We  part  on  this  green  islet,  lorę," 
etc,  ia  enough  to  entitle  her  to  high  praiae  m  a  poet, 
( J.  T.  G.) 

Judson,  Emily  Chablmck,  wlfe  of  Dr.  Adom- 
ram  Judson,  was  bom  in  Eaton,  New  York,  in  1818.  She 
oontributed  to  the  magazine  literaturę  of  the  country  in 
eariy  life  under  the  assumed  title  of  *'  Fanny  Forester." 
She  had  contemplated  beooming  a  missionary  from  early 
life,  and  marrying  Dr.  Judson  June  2, 1846,  she  aailed 
with  him  from  Boston  for  India,  where  she  **  employed 
all  her  strength  in  adyancing  the  holy  cause  in  which 
he  was  engaged.**  After  his  decease  she  was  compeUed, 
by  reason  of  feeble  health,  to  relinąmsh  her  mission 
work,  and  retumed  with  her  children  to  America.  She 
rendered  good  seryice  to  Dr.  Wayland  in  the  prepara- 
tion  of  his  merooir  of  Dr.  Judson.  She  died  June  1 ,  18M. 
Her  pnblished  works  are  **  Aldeibrook ;  a  collection  of 
Fanny  Forester*s  Yillage  Sketches  and  Poems"  (Boston, 
1846, 2  yols.) ;  and  the"  Biogtaphical  Sketoh  of  Mrs.  Sa- 
rah B.  Judson"  quoted  below.  There  are.  besides,  a  good- 
ly  number  of  separate  poems,  of  exquisito  beauty  of  sen- 
timent  and  of  great  pathos,  of  which  w^e  mention  only 
3/y  Bird  and  The  tiro  Mammas,  See  Wayland.  Li/f 
and  Labors  o/Adoniram  Judson  (Boston,  1854,  2  yoU. 
8yo);  Calcutta  Bevietr,  vol.  xiv;  The  Judson  Off^rioffy 
edited  by  J.  Dowling,  D.D.  (New  York,  1848) :  Biograpk- 
ical  Shetdi  of  Sarah  B.  Jndson,  by  Mrs.  Emily  C  Jud- 
son (New  York,  1849);  Knowlea,  Li/«  ofMrs,  Ann  H. 
Judson;  Kendrick,  Life  and  Letters  of  Mrs,  Emily  C. 
Judson  (1861) ;  Stuart,  Livts  ofMrs,  A  nn  IL  Judson  and 
Sarah  B,  Judson,  wUh  a  Biographical  Sketch  (fMrs, 
Emily  C.  Judson  (1853).     (J.  T,  G.) 

Ja-'el  (*Iov^X),  a  Gnecized  form  (1  Esdr.  ix,  34, 35) 
of  two  Heb.  names :  a.  in  the  former  rerse  Ueł  (Ezia 
X,  84)  ;^  5.  in  the  latter  Josł  (Ezra  z,  48), 


JUENNIN 


1089        JULIAN  THE  APOSTATĘ 


Jnennln,  Gaspasd,  a  f^ench  Boman  Catholic  the- 
ologian,  was  bom  at  Yarembon  (Brease)  in  1650,  en- 
tered  tbe  Oratory  in  1674,  and  taught  literaturę,  philos- 
ophy,  and  theology  in  Beveral  schoola  of  the  congrega- 
tion  of  tbe  Oratory.  He  died  in  1718.  He  deseryes 
special  recognition  aa  a  tbeological  writer.  His  princi- 
pal  works  are,  (1)  CcmmentariuB  łJitioricuB  et  dogmaH- 
CUM  de  Sacrameniii  (Lyons,  1696, 2  yoIs.  foL).  This  work 
contains,  bteidee  the  oommentary,  three  disaertations 
on  censnres,  irregnlarities,  and  indulgences,  and  desenres 
special  notioe  for  the  fact  that  it  is  the  first  work  of 
modem  theologians  treating  at  iengtb  tbe  snbject  of 
tbe  sacraments: — (2)  InttUuHoms  TheologuM  (Lyons, 
1696, 4  Yols.  l2mo,  and  often),  wbich  was  used  for  sonie 
time  as  a  text-book  of  theology  in  seyeral  Roman  Gath- 
olic  institutions;  a  rerised  edition,  expunging  some  ob- 
jectionable  riews,  was  prepared  by  Juennin  in  1705,  and 
tbe  work  continued  in  iise.  In  1708  be  pnUished  an 
abridgment  of  it  as  a  Compemdiam  Theologw  (Pańs,  1708, 
12mo).  He  also  published  a  separate  treatise  on  tbe 
sacraments,  Theorie  et  pratigue  des  Sacraments  (Paris, 
1713, 8  Yols.  12mo),  which  is  Yalnable.  See  Hook,  Ee- 
des.  DicfMjSei?. 

Juggemant.    See  Jaggernaut. 

Jugglers,  a  word  brougbt  into  Engllsh  from  tbe 
mediasral  Latin /ocuio/or  (in  FroYenctl,jofflarjjoglador; 
in  old  French,jbRy/«rs  orjonglier),  througb  the  modem 
French  jcngleur,  and  originally  used  to  designate  the 
Professional  mosicians  who  attended  the  Troubadois  and 
TrouY^res  of  Provence  and  the  north  of  France,  either 
singing  their  poems,  or,  if  they  sung  them  themaelYes, 
accompanying  Łbem  with  an  instrament,  which  was 
reckoned  beneath  the  dignity  of  the  poet  himself.  This 
profesfflon  was  in  the  Middle  Ages  (firom  the  llth  to  the 
15th  century)  an  honorable  one,  but  it  gradually  died 
out,  or  at  least  lost  its  respectability,  and  jugglers  became 
a  term  for  rope-dancers,  and  all  that  class  of  persons 
who  aougbt  to  gratify  the  populace  by  sleight  of  band 
or  Teats  of  agility,  until  in  our  own  day,  finally,  it  bas 
come  to  be  used  as  a  synonyme  of  con/tirer,  and  is  ap- 
plied  to  persons  who  perform  tricks  of  legerdtmain  (q. 
V.).    See  also  the  artides  £xorci8h;  Sobcert. 

Jngulum.    See  Transenna. 

Julce  (0^0^,  ans',  as  frcsbly  trodden  from  grapes), 
new  winę  (as  rendered  Isa.  xlix,  26,  etc.) ;  hence  fer- 
mented  liquor  of  pomegranates  (Cant.  Tiii,  2).    See 

WiNE. 

Jukes,  Charles,  a  (Dutcb)  Reformed  minister,  na- 
tiye  of  England  (1788),  was  converted  in  1812,  and  join- 
ed  the  Church  of  St.  Neots,  Nottinghamshire,  under  the 
ministry  of  Rev.  Thomas  MoralL  Filled  with  pious  zeal, 
he  began  to  preach  as  a  hiyman,  with  great  acoeptance, 
among  the  destitute  yillages  within  twenty  miles  of  his 
borne;  subseąuently  he  entered  the  ministry,  and  came 
to  this  country  in  1880.  On  his  way  to  Canada,  on  the 
day-boat  to  Albany,  he  preached,  at  the  request  of  pas- 
sengers,  a  sermon  from  the  words  "  There  is  a  God  in 
heayen  who  reyealeth  secrets;"  and,  at  the  urgent  re- 
quest  of  a  plain  farmer,  who  was  not  a  professing  Chris- 
tian, be  ttumed  aside  to  preach  to  two  churches  in  Sar- 
atoga  County,  N.  Y.,  to  which  he  was  at  once  called. 
He  was  settled  succeasiyely  in  Presbyterian  and  Re- 
formed churches  at  Edinburgh  and  Fish  Honse,  Amster- 
dam, Glen  and  Auriesyille,  Stone  Arabia  and  Kphratah, 
and  at  Rotterdam,  all  in  fł.  Y.  He  died  at  the  latter 
place  in  1862.  At  Glen  about  seyenty  persons  united 
with  the  Church  during  the  four  years  of  bis  pastorate. 
His  great  characteristic  was  his  untiring  zeal  and.ear- 
nestness.  He  was  a  bold,  catholic,  eyangelical  preacher 
of  righteousness,  an  exceUent  pastor,  and  a  very  exem- 
plary  and  useful  seryant  of  the  Lord.  His  temperament 
was  peculiarly  happy;  his  Christian  experience  large 
and  yaried;  his  deatb  peaceful  and  triumphant.  See 
0)ming,  Manuał  ofthe  Ref»  Ck, ;  Pertonal  Recoliectiont, 
(W.J.R.T.) 

Jnl,  the  name  of  Christmas  among  the  northem 
IV.— Z  z  z 


tribes  of  Europę.  Originally  it  was  the  name  of  tbe 
old  Seandinayian  festival  of  winter  solstice,  but  as  the 
practices  of  that  festiyal  haye  in  the  main  been  inoor- 
porated  in  the  (christmas  feast,  they  teim  it  JuL    See 

JULES. 

Jales  are  aerial  spirits  and  dsmons  among  the  north- 
em tribes,  especially  the  Laplanders,  to  whom  diyine 
adoration  is  paid.  They  suppose  them  to  dwell  under 
particulai  trees,  and  prooeed  thither  to  offer  up  sacrifiocs 
once  a  year,  at  Christmas  time,  whence  tbe  name  of  the 
Christian  festiyal  corresponds  to  their  Jul  (q.  y.).  See 
Broughtoo,  Bibiioth,  hist^  Sacra,  a.  y. ;  Thorpe,  Northern 
MythoL'ń,4Q  w\, 

Jn^lia  Clot;Xi'a,  fem.  of  Julttu),  a  Christian  woman 
of  Romę,  to  whom  Paul  sent  his  salutations  (Rom.  xyi, 
15) ;  she  is  named  with  Philologus,  and  is  supposed  to 
haye  been  his  wife  or  sister.  A.D.  55. — Kitto.  "  Ori* 
gen  supposes  that  they  were  master  and  mistress  of  a 
Christian  household  which  induded  the  other  persons 
mentioned  in  tbe  same  yerse.  Some  modem  critics 
haye  conjectured  that  the  name  may  be  that  of  a  man, 
Julias**  (Smith). 

Julian  THE  Apostatę,  emperor  of  Romę  A.D.861- 
868,  is  especially  oelebrated  by  his  able  and  yigorous, 
but  yain  attempt  to  dethrone  Christianity,  and  to  re- 
storę  tbe  ancient  Gneco-Roman  paganism  in  the  Roman 
Empire  to  its  former  power  and  glory.  He  was  the 
nephew  of  Constantine  the  Great,  ^e  first  Christian  on 
the  throne  of  the  Ctesars,  and  was  educated  under  the 
restraining  influence  of  the  court  Christianity  of  his 
cousin,  the  Arian  emperor  Constantius.  The  austere, 
monastic,  intolerant,  tyrannical,  and  hypocritical  form 
of  this  belief  repelled  the  independent  youtb,  and 
madę  him  a  bitter  enemy  of  Christianity,  and  an  euthu- 
siastic  admiier  of  the  beathen  poets  and  pbilosophers, 
wboee  writings,  in  spite  of  the  seyere  prohibition,  he 
managed  secretly  to  procure  and  to  study,  especially 
during  hb  sojoum  at  the  Uniyersity  of  Athens.  "The 
Arian  pseudo-Christianity  of  Constantius  produced  the 
beathen  anti-Christianity  of  Julian,  and  the  latter  was 
a  well-deseryed  punishment  of  the  former."  But  he 
sbrewdly  concealed  his  real  conyictions,  and  hypocriti- 
cally  conformed  to  aU  the  outward  rites  cf  Christianity 
till  the  deatb  of  the  emperor.  His  heathenism  was  not 
a  simple,  spontaneous  growth,but  an  artiiicial  and  mor- 
bid  production.  It  was  the  heathenism  of  pantheistic 
eckcticism  and  Neo-Platonism,  a  strange  mixture  of 
philosophy,  poesy,  and  superstition,  and,  in  Julian  at 
least,  in  great  part  an  imitation  or  caricature  of  Chris^ 
tianity.  With  all  his  pbilosophical  intelligence,  he  cred- 
ited  the  most  insipid  legenda  of  the  gods,  or  gaye  them 
a  deeper  mystic  meaning  by  the  most  arbitrary  allegor- 
ical  interpretation.  He  was  m  intimate  personal  inter- 
course  with  Jupiter,  Minerya,  Apollo,  Hercules,  who  paid 
their  noctumaJ  yisits  to  his  heated  fancy,  and  assured 
him  of  their  special  fayor  and  protection.  His  morał 
character  corresponded  to  this  pseudo-pbilosophy.  He 
was  fuli  of  affectation,  yanity,  sophistiy,  loquacity,  and 
dissimulation.  Ererytbing  he  said,  or  wrote,  or  did 
was  studied  and  calculated  for  effect.  His  apostasy  from 
Christianity  Julian  dates  from  his  twentieth  year,  A.D. 
351.  But  while  Constantius  lired  he  concealed  his  pa- 
gan  sympathies  with  consnmmate  hypocrisy  for  ten 
years,  and  outwardly  conformed  to  all  the  rites  of  tbe 
Church.  After  December,  855,  he  suddenly  surprised 
the  world  with  brilHant  military  successes  and  execu- 
tive  powers  as  Csesar  in  Gaul,  which  was  at  that  time 
threatened  by  barbarians,  and  won  the  enthusiastic  loye 
of  his  soldiers.  Now  he  raised  tbe  standard  of  rebellion 
against  his  imperial  cousin,  and  in  361  openly  dedared 
himself  a  friend  of  the  gods.  By  the  sudden  deatb  of 
Constantius  in  the  samo  year  he  became  sole  empe- 
ror, and  madę  his  triumphal  entry  into  Constantinople. 
He  immediately  set  to  work  with  the  utmoet  zeal  to  re- 
organize  all  dopartments  of  the  goyemment  on  the  for- 
mer heathen  basis.    He  displayed  extraordinar}'  tal- 


JULIAN  THE  APOSTATĘ.       W|9Q; 


JULIAN  CESARINI 


ent,  industiy,  and  execative  tact.  The  eight«en  ahcort 
moDths  of  his  reign  (Dec  S61-June,  363)  comprel)en4 
Łhe  plans  of  a  life-long  administration.  He  was  Uie  most 
gifled,  the  most  leamed,  and  most  active,  ąnd.  yet  Łhe 
least  successful  of  Roman  emperors.  His  reign  was  an. 
utter  failure)  teaching  the  important  lesson  that  it  is 
useless  to  swim  against  the  stream  of  history  and  to 
impedc  the  onward  march  of  Christianity.  He  proyed, 
heyond  the  possibility  of  doubt,  that  paganism  had  out^ 
lived  itself,  and  that  Christianity  was  the  only  liring 
religion  which  had  truły  conąuered  the  world,  and  car- 
ried  all  the  hopes  of  humanity.  He  died  in  the  midst  of 
his  plans  in  a  campaign  against  Peisia,  characteristical- 
ly  exclaimuig  (according  to  later  tradićion)/' Galilsan, 
thou  hast  conąueredf* 

Julian  did  not  resort  to  open  yiolence  in  his  attempt 
to  destroy  Christianity  in  the  empire.  He  affected  the 
policy  of  philoflophical  toleration.  He  did  not  wish  to 
give  the  Christians  an  additional 
glory  of  martyrdom.  He  hoped 
to  attain  his  end  morę  surely  in 
an  indirect  way.  He  endeayored 
to  reyive  heathenism  by  his  own 
płrsonal  zeal  for  the  worshlp  of 
the  gods.  But  his  zeal  found  no 
echo,  and  only  madę  him  ridicu- 
lous  in  the  eyea  of  the  cultivated 
heathen  themselres.  When  he 
endeayored  to  restore  the  oracie 
of  Apollo  near  Antioch,  and  ar- 
raoged  for  a  knagniitcent  display, 
only  a  solitaiy  priest  appeared  in 
the  tempie  and  ominously  ofTered 
— a  goose.  He  also  attempte^  to 
reform  heathenism  by  incorpora- 
ting  with  it  the  morals  and  be- 
ncyolent  institutions  of  Chris- 
tianity. But  this  was  like  gal- 
yanizing  a  decaying  corpse,  or 
grafting  frcsh  scions  on  a  dead 
JTarins  Clandłanus  Ju-trunk.  As  to  the  negatiye  part 
liauus.  of  .his  assault  upon  Christianity, 

Julian  gftye  liberty  to  all  the  sects,  in  the  hope  that 
they  might  deyour  each  other,  but,  instead  of  that,  he 
only  gave  new  yigor  to  the  cause  he  hated.  He  forbade 
the  Christians  to  read  the  classical  authors,  and  depriyed 
them  of  the  bcnefit  of  schools  of  their  own,  that  they 
might  either  grow  up  in  ignorance,  or  be  forced  to  get 
an  education  from  heathen  teachers.  He  assisted  the 
Jews  in  rebuilding  the  Tempie  of  Jerusalem  in  order  to 
falsify  the  prophecy  of  Christ,  but  the  attempt,  thiee 
times  repeated,  signally  failed,  by  an  interposition  of 
Proyidence  approaching  to  the  character  of  a  miracle. 
(Respecting  this  ąuestion,  see  the  judicious  remarks 
in  Lardner's  Jewisk  and  Heathen  Testimonies,  v6i  iv.) 
Finałly  he  wrote  a  book  against  Christianity,  in  which 
he  united  all  the  arguraents  of  Porphyry,  Celsus,  Lucian, 
and  other  cuemies  before  him,  and  iiifused  into  them 
his  own  bitter  and  sarcasdc  spiriL  But  this  attack 
called  forth  able  refutations  from  Gregory  of  Nazianzum, 
Cyril  of  Alesandria.  and  others,  and  contauis  a  number 
of  incidcntal  admissions  which  confirm  the  truth  of  most 
of  the  leaduig  facts  of  the  Gospel  history.  Dr.  Lard- 
ner  (in  his  leamed  book  on  the  CredibUity  ofthe  Gospel 
Hittory,  in  the  London  edition  of  his  works  by  Kippis, 
yii,  638-639)  thus  suras  up  the  involunUry  testimony 
of  thb  ablest  and  bitterest  of  all  the  heathen  opponents 
of  Christianity : 

"  Julian  has  borne  a  yaluable  testimony  to  the  history 
and  to  the  books  of  the  New  Testament.  He  allows 
that  Jesus  was  bom  in  the  reign  of  Augustus,  at  the 
time  of  the  taxing  madę  in  Judiea  by  Cyrenius ;  that 
the  Christian  religion  had  its  rise,  and  began  to  be  prop- 
agated,  in  the  times  of  the  emperors  Tiberius  and  Clau- 
dius.  He  bears  witness  to  the  genuineness  and  authen- 
ticity  of  the  four  gospels  of  Matthew,  3Iark,  Lukę,  and 
John,  and  the  Ac^3  of  the  Apostles;  and  he  so  ąuotes 


thcnp-  aa  to  intimate  that  they  were  the  only  historioi 
bpoks  receiyed  by  Christiaiis  as  of  authority,  and  ibe 
only  au^ntie  memoirs  of  Jesus  Christ  and  his  apostles. 
and  the  doctrines  preached  by  them.  He  allows  thór 
early  datę,  and.even  argues  for  it. .  He  also  quotes,  or 
plainly  refers.to,  the  Acta  of  the  Apestles,  to  8l  PsoTs 
Epistles  to  the  Ronums,  the  Corinttdans,  and  the  Gala- 
tians.  He  4oe8  not  deny  the  miracles  of  Jesus  Chris. 
but  allo¥rs  him  to  haye  *  healed  the  blind,  and  the  Isme, 
and  dsemoniacs;'  and  to  haye  'rebuked  the  winds,  sod 
walked  upon  the  wayea  of  the  sea.'  He  endeavorB,  ia- 
deed,  to  diminish  these  worka,  but  in  yain.  The  eome- 
quence  is  undeniable — soch  works  are  good  proofs  of  a 
diyine  misaion.  He  endeayors  also  to  lessen  the  nam- 
ber  of  the  early  belieyers  in  Jesus,  and  yet  be  acknowl- 
edges  that  there  were '  multitudes  of  such  men  in  Greece 
and  Italy'  before  St  John  wrote  his  GospeL  He  like- 
wise  affecta  to  diminish  the.quality  ofthe  early  belier- 
era»  and  yet  acknowledges  that,  besides  '  men-servaoa 
and  maid-eeryants,'  Comelins,  a  Ronmn  oentuiioa  at 
Cnsarea,  and  Seigius  Paulus,  proconsul  of  Cyprus,  were 
converted  to  the.  faith  of  Jesus  before  the  end  of  tbe 
reign  of  Claudius.  And  he  oflen  speaks  with  grett  in- 
dignation  of  Pfeter  and  Paul,  those  two  great  aposUes  of 
Jesus,  and  successful  preachers  of  his  Gospel;  so  that, 
upón  the  whole,  he  has  undesignedly  borne  testimoDj 
to  the  truth  of  many  things  recorded  in  the  books  ofthe 
New  Testament.  He  aimed  to  oyerthrow  the  Christian 
religion,  but  has  confirmed  it :  his  arguments  against  it 
are  perfcctly  harmless,  and  insuflScicnt  to  unscttle  the 
weakest  Christian.  He  justly  except8  to  some  thingi 
introduced  into  the  Christian  profession  by  the  latc  pio- 
fessors  of  it,  in  his  own  time  or  sooner,  but  haa  not  madę 
one  objection  of  moment  against  the  Christian  religioo 
as  contained  in  the  genuine  and  authentic  books  ofthe 
New  Testament." 

Literaturę. — Juliani  Impcratoris  Opera  cuae  supersmś 
omnia  (ed.  by  Pctayius,  Par.  1583,  and  morę  completdy 
by  E.  Spanheim,  Lips.  1696, 2  vols.  fol.) ;  Cyril  of  Akx- 
andria,  Contra  impium  JuU  Itbri  x  (which  contains  the 
chief  arguments  of  Julian  against  Christianity,  with 
their  refutation),  in  Cyril'8  0^*a,  ed.  Aubert,  tom.  vi, 
and  in  Spanheim's  edition  of  Julian^s  works.  Al£0  the 
releyant  sections  in  the  heathen  historians  Ammianus 
Marcellinus,  Zosimus,  and  Eunapius,  and  in  the  Chorch 
historie8ofSocrates,Socomenus,andTheodoTCt.  Among 
modem  writers  on  Julian  we  refer  to  Tillemont,  J/e- 
moiresj  etc,  vii,  822-420;  Warburton,  JuUcm  (London, 
1751) ;  Neander,  JuHan  undsein  Zeiłailer  (Leipc  1812; 
in  an  English  dress,  N.  T.  1850, 12mo) ;  Joudot,  Hutoire 
de  tempereur  JuUen  (1817, 2  vois.) ;  Wiggera,  JuUan  der 
A  btrunniffe  (Leipzig,  18^7) ;  Teuffel,  De  Juliana  religio- 
nia  Christiani  cóntemptore  (TUb.  1844) ;  Fr.  Strauss,  Ikr 
Romanfiher  au/dem  Thron  der  CcBtaren^  oder  Julian  da- 
Ahtrumdge  (Manheim,  1847) ;  Schaff,  CA.  Hisi.  ii, 40 8q. 

Jnlian  op  Ecłanum.    See  Pelagius  ;  Piclagiass. 

Julian  OF  Halicarkassus,  the  bishop  celebrated 
as  the  leader  of  a  facdop  of  the  Monophysites,  who  bear 
his  name,  flourished  in  the  early  part  ofthe  6th  centinr. 
When  the  Monophysite  bishops  were  deposed  in  519  he 
was  obliged  to  flee  to  Alexandria  for  saiety.  For  fio^ 
ther  dctails,  see  Monophysites. 

Julian,  St.    See  Pomerius. 

Julian  of  Toledo.  See  Toledo,  Councils  oł 
(14th);  Spain. 

Jullan(us)  Cesarini,  Cardinal,  one  of  the  mo8( 
distinguishcd  characters  of  the  Church  of  Romę  in  the 
Middle  Ages,  prominently  comiected  with  the  efiforts  to 
healthe  dissensions  within  the  pale  of  the  Romah 
Church  of  the  15th  century,  and  the  union  of  the  East- 
em  and  Western  cburches  at  the  Council  of  Florencc. 
was  bom  at  Romę  in  1398,  the  descendant  of  a  nohle 
family  noted  in  the  annals  of  Italian  history.  He  was 
educated  at  the  Uniyersity  of  Perugia,  and  early  erinced 
the  possession  of  great  ability  and  uncommon  talentu 
He  particularly  interested  himself-  in  the  study  of  the 


JULIAN  CESARmi 


1091 


JULIAN  CESARINI 


Koman  law,  and  eoon  aoąniced  the  repntation  of  being 
one  of  the  foremoet  Uiinken,  and  was  honored  with  a 
profeB8or'8  chair  a^  Padua.  He  was  not  suffered,  how- 
ever,  to  c^ntinue  long  in  the  rostrum,  for  the  Church  of 
Ihis  day  needed  men  of  decisiou  and  energy  to  allay  the 
strife  which  was  raging  fiercely,  and  threatening  the  de- 
atruction  of  the  hierarchal  edifice  8o  hitely  dishonored 
in  the  occupation  of  the  papai  chair  by -HoentiouB  char^ 
actera.  See  Innocent  XXIII.  Seirenty  yeara  of  an- 
archy  and  orphana^,  sometimea  familiarly  termed  the 
Babylooiah  captivity  of  the  Chorch  of  Borne,  the  illua- 
trious  Colonna,  better  known  as  Martin  Y,  was  to  oblit^ 
€Tate,  as  well  as  to  rebuild  on  a  firm  foundation  both 
the  morał  and  materiał  influence  of  the  papacy.>  For 
jmch  a  task  his  own  talenta,  however  gpreat,  were  not 
aofiicłent,  and  the  wise,  far-seeing  pontiff  waa  not  slow  to 
jreoognise  the  mioommon  endowments  of  yotmg  Julian, 
who  was  accordiogly  appointed  apoatolic  prothonotary, 
and,  later,  auditor  of  the  Rota  Romana.  Cardinal  Branda 
fB  pardculsr  became  interested  in  the  rising  Cesarinus; 
ftnd  when,  in  1419,  he  was  sent  as  papai  legate  to  Bo- 
hemia  to  bring  back  the  erring  (?)  sheep  of  the  Sla- 
vonic  fold,  JulUn  was  the  legate*s  companion  and  main 
atay.  Though  this  roission  failed  to  accomplLsh  its 
objects,  at  the  Diet  of  Brunn,  Julian  won  golden  opin- 
ions  from  the  Romans,  and  in  1426  (May  22)  was 
promoted  to  the  cardinalate  of  Santo  Angeli).  When, 
in  1431,  a  diet  was  summoned  at  Nuremberg  "  to  con- 
cert  immediate  and  vigorous  action  for  crashing  the 
hitherto  successful  rebellion,"  it  was  nonę  other  than 
Cardinal  Julian  whom  Martin  Y  selccted  (afler  his  death 
Gonfirmed  by  Eugenius  IV)  to  represent  him  in  thateo 
clesiastical  body,  as  well  as  in  the  generał  council  which, 
in  accordance  with  the  celebrated  decree  ^^fregttens^  of 
the  Council  of  Constance,  was  soon  to  meet  at  Basie. 
It  had  been  determined  to  extirpate  the  Hussites  by  all 
means.  As  kind  words  would  not  bring  them  back  to 
the  open  anus  of  the  Church,  the  cardinal  legate  holdly 
exchanged  the  mitrę  for  the  helraet.  Quickly  an  army 
of  Cnisaders  was  gathered,  and  in  himself  blending  to- 
gcther  the  characters  of  the  priest  and  the  soldier,  he 
sought  to  kindle  in  their  hearts  the  fires  of  religious  zeal 
and  patriotic  derotion.  But  neither  the  potency  of  a 
blesscd  banner  and  a  consecrated  sword,  nor  the  specta- 
cle  of  an  ecclesiastic  urging  on  an  army  to  a  war  of  faith, 
had  sufficiently  impressed  Rome'8  most  faithful  adhe- 
renta to  brave  ^  the  face  of  a  religious  influence  like  that 
of  Hussitism,  which  was  rooted  in  national  sympathies, 
sucb  aa  Romę  could  never  awaken  in  the  day  of  ber 
greatest  power,"  and  ignominiously  the  papai  legate 
again  failed  in  his  mission.  Meanwhile,  howerer,  the 
Council  of  Basie  had  conrened,  opened  in  the  absence  of 
the  legate  by  two  of  his  deputies,  and  thither  Julian  di- 
rected  his  steps.  He  assumed  its  presidency  Sept.  9, 
1431,  determined  by  peaceful  measures  to  essay  once 
morę  the  accompłishmcnt  of  a  task  which  he  had  found 
łt  impoesible  to  secure  on  the  field  of  battle ;  and  to  his 
honor  be  it  said  that  all  the  inducements  which  were  now 
held  out  to  the  Hussites  were  the  offerings  of  a  sincere 
and  pious  soul,  which  desired  above  all  tłiings  else  the 
glory  of  God  and  the  honor  of  his  Church.  "  The  san- 
guine  and  undaunted  legate,  who  had  been  the  first  to 
reckon  on  the  military  campaign  as  the  onły  remedy  for 
the  spreading  disease,  was  now  the  first  to  fali  back 
Hpon  the  council  from  which  be  had  hitherto  augured 
so  little  good.  'As  I  saw  no  other  remedy  lefl' (are  his 
own  words),  *  I  animated  and  encouraged  all  to  remain 
steadfast  in  the  faith,  and  to  fear  nothing,  sińce  on  this 
very  account  I  was  going  to  the  council  where  the  whołe 
Church  would  assemble' "  ( Jenkins).  How  much  Julian 
did  to  obtain  £ugeuius's  sanction  to  the  continuation  of 
the  council  which  that  pontiff  was  determined  to  abro- 
gate,  and  how  Julian,  notwithstanding  the  publication 
of  a  buli  abrogating  the  coimcil,  and  copvoking  it  eigh- 
teen  months  later  at  Bologna,  continued  the  session, 
and  with  what  liberality  and  aagadty  he  counselled  in 
^e  deliberations  of  this  synod,  and  with  what  eamest- 


ness  and  zeal  he  defended  the  independence  of  the 
council  and  its  superiority  over  the  pontifl^  we  have  al- 
ready  mentioned  in  the  article  on  Basłe,  Council  of 
(q.  V.).  Suffice  it  to  say  here  that,  had  the  wise  and 
far-seeing  policy  of  the  legate  been  allowed  to  be  car- 
ried  out  in  the  name  and  with  the  fuU  consent  of  the 
Roman  pontiff,  the  Hussites  would  have  been  redeemed, 
and  the  Church  of  Romę  been  spared  the  reductions 
wtiich  she  suffered  in  the  16th  century,  and  which  even 
now  threaten  her  yery  existence.  See  Otjd  Catholic 
Chubch.  Annoyed  and  distracted  by  the  oppoeition 
of  £ugeniu8,  the  president  hardly  knew  how  to  dispose  of 
the  Bohemian  ąuesdon,  and  the  Hussites,  doubting  the 
sincerity  of  the  cardinal,  received  every  adrance  with 
distrast,  and  misinterpreted  eyery  ntterance  of  Julian ; 
till  it  finally  became  erident  to  both  parties  that  their 
mission  waa  frnitlesa,  and  that  it  had  only  opened  an- 
other  and  a  still  morę  intricate  chapter  in  the  histoiy 
of  this  long  and  eventful  controyersy.  See  Hussites. 
Bat  if  Julian  had  battled  for  reform  within  the  Church, 
and  had  boldly  argued  in  fayor  of  the  council*s  suprem- 
acy  oyer  the  incumbent  of  the  papai  chair,  he  had  yet 
faithfully  adhered  to  the  Roman  pontificate;  and  when, 
aa  he  beiieyed,  the  fathers  of  the  Church  determined  to 
depriye  Eugenius  of  a  portion  of  his  support,  he  as  ear- 
nestly  defended  the  pontiff's  cause,  and  suddenly  the 
council  found  itself  at  yariance  with  its  able  president, 
and  the  Church  threatened  with  a  greater  schism  than 
she  had  eyer  yet  endured.  It  is  tnie  Julian  had  been 
one  of  the  prime  and  most  zealous  łeaders  in  abolishing 
the  annates  (q.  y.),  but  he  stanchly  insiated  with  the 
same  zeal  for  some  compensation  from  other  sources; 
and  when  he  found  the  council  indiaposed  to  meet  his 
yiews,  he  quickly  changed  front,  and  became  one  of 
£ugeniu8'8  most  outapoken  adherenta.  The  breach  had 
opened  in  February,  1437;  in  September,  the  arriyal  of  a 
papai  buli  ordering  a  synod  at  Ferrara  to  consider  the 
questton  of  uniting  the  Eastera  and  Western  churches 
obhged  Julian  to  resign  the  presidency,  and  on  Jan.  9, 
1438,  he  quitted  Basie,  and,  dter  a  short  yisit  to  Romę, 
liastened  to  Ferrara.  See  Fix>rence,  Council  of  ;  Fe- 
ux  Y.  This  suddeu  change  of  Julian  from  an  opponent 
to  an  adherent  of  the  Eugenian  party  has  led  historians 
to  doubt  the  sincerity  of  the  cardinal;  but  when  we 
consider  that  Julianna  great  object  was  the  union  of  the 
Eastera  and  Westera  churches,  the  healing  of  schisms 
within  either,  and  a  thorough  reformation  to  suit  the 
wanta  of  the  day,  this  action  explains  itself  to  us  aa 
really  the  natural  deyelopment  of  those  great  princi- 
pies  of  ecclesiastical  policy  upon  which  Julian  had  acted 
from  the  beginning;  and  **while  the  adyocates  of  the 
pope  were  rejoicing  oyer  the  immediate  fruita  of  a  suc- 
cessful duplicity,  that  yigoroua  and  impulsive  mind, 
which  had  guided  the  intellectaal  atrength  of  Christen- 
dom  in  the  freest  and  most  enlightened  council  that  had 
assembled  sińce  the  apostolic  age,  was  preparing  itself 
lor  a  futurę  of  morę  enduring  triumph.  The  long  and 
dreary  night  of  schisms  and  controyersies  seemed  now 
far  spent,  and  the  day  of  strength  and  reunion  was  at 
hand.  .  How  sublime  was  the  prospect  now  opening 
upon  an  earaest  and  sanguine  mind !  The  restoration 
of  the  Church  to  its  first  bcauty  and  integrity ;  its  ref- 
oraiation  by  the  reooyeiy  of  its  first  estate,  and  of  that 
spirit  which  madę  it  one  in  Christ;  the  oyertlirow  of 
the  infidel  and  the  enemy  of  the  Church  by  a  warfare 
of  whoae  gtories  the  earlier  Cruaades  would  became  but 
a  faint  prophecy ;  the  extenaion  of  the  power  of  the  pa- 
pacy  oyer  all  Chriatendom,  and  the  restoration  of  the 
episcopacy  to  its  priatine  beauty  under  the  one  uniyer- 
sal  patriarch— these  were  the  most  prominent  featurea 
of  tłiis  yision  of  things  to  come.  We  cannot  wonder 
that,  with  such  a  view  before  him,  the  great  reformer 
of  the  Church  at  Basie  laid  down  the  work  of  reforma- 
tion to  take  up  that  of  union ;  and  while  keeping  still, 
as  the  rule  of  all  his  labors,  the  truth  proclaimed  at 
Constance,  *  There  can  be  no  real  union  without  refor- 
mation, nor  trae  reformation  witłiout  union/  he  fell  l>aclc 


JULIAN  CESARINI 


1092 


JULIUS  AFRICANUS 


apon  tne  work  of  imion  when  that  of  r^fonnation  be- 
came  impoflsible.  To  one  who  regards  his  ooune  firom 
this  point  every  stage  of  his  tranaition  from  Basie  to 
Florence  will  become  elear  and  consistent.  Ereiywhere 
we  shall  recognise  a  careful  proYision  for  the  exigencies 
of  the  Church,  fonned  finom  the  matnred  experience  of 
its  past  dangers,  and  a  disinterested  zeal  which,  in  an 
age  of  selfish  intrigue,  was  as  natiirally  misrepresented 
as  it  was  wilfully  misundeistood.  The  insinuation  of 
Gibbon  is  at  once  confronted  by  the  fact  that  if  Julian 
had  not  sought  the  peace  of  the  Church  rather  than  his 
own  aggrandizement,  he  might  have  grasped  at  this 
moment  the  papacy  itself,  and  wrested  from  Eugenios 
that  authoritj  under  which  he  was  oontent  to  dose  a  life 
of  brilUant  but  i]l-reqaited  senrice"  (Jenkins,  p.  266-268). 
But  if  the  conduct  of  Julian  had  hitherto  been  the 
ootgrowth  of  a  sincere  heart,  we  can  only  look  with  sos- 
picion  upon  his  actions  in  the  Cooncil  of  Florence,  rfr> 
moved  thither  from  Ferrara.  His  naroe  deserres  to  be 
tieated  with  ignominy  for  the  duplidty  he  manifested 
towards  the  leading  prelates  of  the  Eastem  Church,  ani 
from  this  time  dates  the  earliest  *^  morał  dedension  in 
the  course  of  Julian,  which  was  at  onoe  closed  and  ex- 
piated  in  the  dark  page  of  the  Hungarian  legation." 
See  Flokence,  GouNciL  of;  Puroatory;  Filioquk; 
Joseph  of  Ck>N8TAiniNOPLB.  For  his  yaluable  ser- 
vioes  to  the  papacy,  Engenius  bestowed  on  him  the  bish- 
opric  of  Frascati,  and  in  1443  forther  erinoed  his  recog^ 
nition  of  Julian's  efforts  by  appointing  him  legate  to 
Hungary,  which  country,  the  yery  bulwark  against  fnr- 
ther  adyances  of  the  Turks,  was  at  this  time  threat- 
ened  by  dvii  dissensions,  and  was  fast  devdoping  many 
causes  of  as  serious  apprehensions  to  the  court  of  Romę 
as  Bohemia  had  done  in  the  preyious  ccntury.  See  Sig- 
ISMUND ;  Wladislas.  Agslu  Julian  was  obliged  to  lay 
aside  his  spiritual  weapons,  and  to  draw  the  temporal 
sword  which  he  had  once  before  widded  so  unsucceasful- 
ly.  But  not  only  did  he  change  the  manner  and  weapons 
of  warfare,  but  even  the  principles  for  which  he  fought; 
and  hereafter  Julian  is  marked  by  an  utucrupulous  pur- 
suit  of  his  object,  and  it  becomes  really  difficult  to  de- 
tect,  under  the  strange  disgnise  which  he  henceforth  as- 
sumes, "  the  features  of  that  enlightened  mind  which  in- 
spired  the  decrees  and  directed  the  correspondence  of 
the  Council  of  Basie."  His  task  was  to  heal  the  dissen- 
sions of  the  Hungarian  royalty,  and  to  enlist  that  coun- 
try, in  union  with  all  the  rest  of  Christendom,  to  check 
the  further  adrance,  and,  if  possible,  bring  about  the  ut- 
ter  annibilation  of  the  Turks;  and  when  the  sudden 
death  of  the  queen  regent  Elizabeth  (which  is  often- 
times  said  to  have  been  caused  by  Julian  Cesarinns) 
and  the  accession  of  Wladislas  had  secured  to  the  Turks 
a  peace  of  ten  years,  it  was  Julian  who  came  forward  to 
argue  with  the  king  on  the  faUacy  of  adhering  to  a 
compact  with  heretics,  especially  as  the  treaty  had  been 
madę  without  the  sanction  of  the  holy  see.  The  apoe- 
tolic  authority  seryed  to  frec  Wladi^as  from  his  obli- 
gation,  and  the  war  with  the  Saracens  began  anew,  In 
which  both  king  and  papai  legate  fell  a  prey  to  Moham- 
medan  defenders  at  the  battle  of  Vama  (1440).  Ac- 
cording  to  some,  Julian  was  murdered  in  his  ilight  by  a 
Wallachian  who  saw  gold  on  his  clothes;  others  say  that 
the  Flungarians  killed  him  in  punishment  for  his  evil 
advice ;  while  others,  again,  say  that  he  died  in  1446,  in 
consequencc  of  a  wound  received  while  leading  on  the 
Christiana ;  and  some  Romish  historians  even  claim  that 
he  suiferctl  mart}'rdom  in  the  camp  of  the  Turks ;  but 
as  notic  of  the  contemporary  historians  knew  anything 
of  the  kind  to  have  occurred,  it  seems  iiseless  to  refute 
the  statcroent.  His  speeches  are  contained  in  the  Acts 
of  CouncU8,and  his  two  letters  to  Eugenius  conceming 
the  Council  of  Basie  in  the  Fascicuius  rerum  expetend, 
(Col.  1535),  p.  27  8q.  See  Jenkins.  Li/e  and  Times  of 
Cardinal  Julian  (lindon,  1861,  8vo)  j  Hefele,  OuartaJ- 
schrij}f  1847,  ii ;  Cave,  Scriptores  eccles. ;  Schnickh,  A'»r- 
chenff€8chich(e,  xxxii,  11  sq. ;  Milman,  Latin  Christianity 
(see  Index  in  voL  viii).     (J.  H.  W.) 


Jnllan  Calendar.    See  Całbkdab,  Bomab. 
Julian  CroM,  or  Cross  of  8t  Julian,  is  the 

name  of  a  crosslet  placed  aaltire-ways.    See  Cboobl 

Jnllan  Bpooh ;  Julian  Tear.  See  CHsooroŁ- 
ooY,  Christian. 

Juliana,  St.    See  Corpus  Christi. 

Julianiata.    See  Julian  of  Haucabsassub. 

Juliano,  a  Spanish  Roman  Catholic  of  the  17tłi 
oentury,  who,  while  trayelling  in  Germany,  was  coo- 
verted  to  the  Protestant  iaith.  His  zeal  for  the  dilfo- 
ńon  of  the  Word  of  God  led  him  to  mdertake  the  dasf 
gerous  enterprise  of  conveying  into  Spain  a  large  qiuuk- 
tity  of  Bibles  conoealed  in  casks,  and  packed  ap  as 
Rbenish  winę.  A  pretended  Protestant  betrayed  łmn. 
He  was  seized  by  the  lnquisitioii,  and,  togeUier  with 
eight  hundred  purchasers  of  bis  piedoas  tzeaaore,  was 
condemned  to  the  torturę  and  to  death.— Fox,  Bouk  of 
MatitfTB,  p.  186. 

Julias,  the  name  given  by  Philip  the  Tetnrch  to 
Bethsaida  in  honor  of  Julia,  the  daughter  of  the  em- 
peror  Augustus.    See  Bethsaida. 


Coin  of  Julias. 


Julitta  OF  Cappadocia,  a  fcmale  martyrof  the  4th 
oentury,  under  Piocletian,  was  a  Lycaonian  of  royal  de- 
scent,  and  greatly  cdebrated  for  her  Christian  Tirtoes. 
To  avoid  the  bigoted  ragę  of  the  pagan  goyemor,  sbe 
withdrew  from  Iconium,  her  iiative  dty,  to  Tarsosi  But 
here,  with  her  young  son  Cyricus,  she  was  seized,  and, 
confessing  herself  a  Christian,  was  ordered  to  the  rack. 
Her  beautiful  boy,  for  repeating  his  mother's  worda,  **  I 
am  a  Christian,""  was  dashed  in  pieccs  on  the  paveiiient 
before  her  e>'e8,  for  which  the  dying  mother  gave  thanks 
to  God.  After  patiently  suffering  yariou?  torments,  she 
was  beheaded,  April  16,  A.D.  805.— Fox,  Book  o/Mar- 
tyrt,  p.  55. 

Ju^lius  Clov\ioc^  for  the  Latin  Ju/»t»,  the  name  of 
an  honorable  Roman  family),  the  centurion  of  the  im- 
perial cohort  who  had  the  charge  of  conducting  Paul  as 
a  prisoner  to  Romę,  and  who  treated  him  with  mnch 
oonsideration  and  kindness  on  the  way  (Acts  xxvii,  1, 
3,  43;  comp.  ver.  U,  81).  A.D.  5.1.— Kitto.  *<  Aogns- 
tus's  band,"  to  which  Julius  belonged,  bas  been  identified 
by  some  commentators  with  the  Italian  band  (Acts  x, 
1) ;  by  others,  less  probably,  with  the  body  of  caralry 
denominated  Sebasteni  by  Josephus  (^4  n/.  xix,  9, 2,  etc). 
Conybeare  and  Howson  {_Lif€  o/St.  Patd,  eh.  xxi)  adopc 
in  the  main  Wiesder^s  opinion,  that  the  Augostan  co- 
hort was  a  detachment  of  the  Pnetorian  Gnards  attat^ 
ed  to  the  person  of  the  Roman  govemor  at  Caosaiea; 
and  that  this  Julius  may  be  the  same  as  Julias  Priscos 
(Tacitus,  Iliat  ii,  92 ;  iv,  11),  sometime  centurion,  afler^ 
wards  pnsfect  of  the  Pnstorians. — Smith.  See  Ital- 
ian; Paul. 

Julius,  a  Christian  martyr,  was  a  Roman  senator  in 
the  2d  century.  A  convert  to  Christtanity,  he  was  or- 
dered by  the  emperor  to  sacrifice  to  him  as  Hercules* 
This  Jidius  absolutely  refused  to  do,  and  he  was  impris- 
oned,  and  finally  beaten  to  death  with  dubs. — FaXyBooŁ 
of  Marłyrs,  p.  22. 

Julius  Apricancs,  an  ecdesiastical  writer  who 
flourished  m  the  beginmng  of  the  3d  century,  was,  ac- 
cording  to  Suidas  (8.  v.  Africanus),  a  native  of  libya, 
but  resided  generally  at  Emmaus  (afterwards  Nicopo- 
lis),  in  Palestine.  'Fhe  same  writer  calls  him  abo  Sex^ 
tus.  Lit  tle  is  known  of  his  personal  history.  Kasebios 
(^Hitt^  Ecd,  vi,  31)  relates  that  he  nndertook  a  Joumey 
to  Alexandria  to  Usten  to  Heraclas,  the  teacher  of  tłia 


JUHUS  CuESAR 


1093 


JULIUS  CiESAR 


ćatechnnwmił  in  that  city,  as  also  that  he  was  sent  by 
the  inhabitants  of  Emmaus  to  ask  of  Łbe  empeior  Helio- 
gabalaa  tbe  restoiation  of  tbeir  city,  wbich  was  granted 
(see  Jerome,  JDe  vir,  iUuatr,  c  63).  He  was  a  fiiend  of 
Oiigen;  and  as,  in  letters  addressed  to  him  wben  tbe 
latter  was  already  aome  fifty  years  old,  be  stylee  bim 
^  son,**  it  is  to  be  suppoeed  tbat  be  was  mucb  advanced 
in  years  in  288,  wbile  tbe  expfe8ebn  ^^coUeague"  seems 
to  imply  tbat  be  was  also  a  priest.  He  was,  aocording 
to  Jerome,  in  tbe  fuU  vigor  of  life  during  tbe  reign  of 
Heliogabalns  and  Alexander  SeTenia.  We  bave  no  in- 
fonnation  oonoeming  tbe  precise  datę  of  bis  deatb ;  it 
oocuned,  in  all  probability,  near  tbe  middle  of  tbe  8d 
centory— some  say  about  A.D.  282.  He  enjoyed  great 
reputation  for  leaming  among  tbe  andents.  He  is  tbe 
autbor  of  tbe  oklest  Cbristian  bistory  of  tbe  world,  tbe 
Ckronograplńayix  De  temporUnu^  wbicb  Eosebius  consid- 
ered  very  trustwortby :  it  extended  from  tbe  creation  to 
tbe  tbird  year  of  tbe  reign  of  Heliogabalus  (221).  Un- 
fortnnately,  tbe  complete  work  is  not  in  oor  possession ; 
a  poition,  boweyer,  was  preser^ed  to  os  by  copious  ex- 
tiacts,  wbicb  subseąoent  Cburcb  bistorians  niade  firom 
■it,  and  tbese  (fifty-«ix  fragments)  baye  been  oollected 
by  Galland  (BibliotkecOf  yoL  ii).  Julios  also  wiote  a 
letter  to  Origen  conoeming  tbe  aotbenUcity  of  tbe  bis- 
tory of  Snaannab  and  tbe  Elders,  and  anotber  to  Aristi- 
des  on  tbe  differences  between  tbe  geneak)gie8  of  CbrisŁ 
by  Mattbew  and  Łukę.  In  tbis  kst  letter,  speaking 
against  tbe  opinion  of  tifrcnu  pkt  baying  been  perpe- 
trated  by  tbe  Cbnrcb  in  order  to  proye  tbe  rigbts  of 
Jesus  as  bigb-priest  and  king,  be  says,  ^  Far  be  it  tbat 
sncb  a  tbougbt  sbould  goyem  tbe  Cburcb  of  Cbrist  as 
to  inyent  a  falsebood  to  glorify  Cbrist."  Eusebius, 
Pbotitts,  and  Suidas  ascribe  to  bim  also  tbe  autbor- 
abip  of  anotber  work  in  twenty-foar  books,  a  sort  of 
oompendium  of  infonnation  on  medicine  and  natural 
pbiloeopby.  According  to  Suidas,  it  was  a  ooUection 
of  empiric  formulas  for  curing  diseases  by  sorcery,  etc. 
But,  as  tbis  does  not  seem  to  agree  witb  wbat  we  know 
of  the  generał  cbaracter  of  tbe  nuui,  Dupin  thinks  tbat 
tbere  must  be  some  mistake,  and  tbat  tbere  probably 
esisted  botb  a  Jnlius  Africanns  and  a  Jolius  Sextus, 
wbo  baye  been  confounded  one  witb  tbe  otber.  Final- 
ly,  be  bas  also  been  consklered  tbe  autbor  of  seyeral 
tieatises— De  trmitate,  De  circumcisioney  De  Attalo,  De 
Paschoj  De  Sabbaie — ^wbicb  are  eyidently  not  bis,  but 
belong  to  tbe  Koman  presbyter  Noyatiań.  See  M6b- 
ler.  Patrologie,  i,  677-680;  Routb,  Rd,  Sacr.  ii,  108  sq.; 
Herzog,  Real-Encyldop,  yii,  166. 

Juliiis  Casar,  tbe  first  emperor  of  tbe  Romans, 
desenres  a  place  in  our  work  on  acoount  of  bis  conneo- 
tion  witb  Jewisb  bistory.  He  was  bom  at  Romę  R 
C  100,  and  was  educated  in  Greece,  wbitber  tbe  Ro- 
man youtbs  of  bis  day  were  wont  to  resort  for  instruc^ 
tion.  After  baying  successiyely  beld  tbe  offioes  of  trib- 
une,  qusntor,  sddile,  bigb-priest,  and  pnetor  or  goyemor 
of  Spain,  Cańar  was  one  of  tbe  tbree  partics  wbo  con- 
stituted  tbe  triumyirate  of  Romę,  B.C.  60.  He  now  set 
out  for  Gaul,  ostensibly  aiming  at  tbe  siibjngation  of 
Łbe  Gauls,  but  actually  to  form  and  discipline  an  army 
tbat  migbt  enable  bim  to  foroe  bis  ooadjutors  to  lea^e 
to  him  aknie  tiie  goyemment  of  tbe  Romans.  Tbe  suc^ 
ceas  witb  wbicb  bis  etTorts,  botb  as  a  soldier  and  a  poU- 
tidan,  were  rewarded,  are  known  to  us  firom  tbe  bistory 
of  tbe  GalUc  War  tbat  flowed  from  his  own  pen,  as  wdl 
as  from  otber  distinguisbed  dassic  historians.  Wben 
he  went  to  Gaul  be  was  to  remain  tbere  fiye  years,  but 
tbe  ezpiration  of  tbat  time  finding  bim  inyolyed  in 
wars  witb  the  barbarians,  fire  years  morę  were  added. 
Germany,  Britain,  and  otber  oountzies  also  were  inyaded 
iu  tum;  and  wben,  at  tbe  deatb  of  Crassus,  Csesar  and 
Pompey  alone  were  left  to  contend  for  supremacy,  a 
quarTel  naturally  enougb  aroee  between  tbe  two  liyals. 
Pompey  was  tbe  favorite  of  tbe  people,  and  tberefore 
easily  controlled  tbe  senate ;  if  only  onoe  Csesar  could  be 
ohliged  to  disbaud  tbe  army,  as  whoee  bero  tbe  yictorious 
generał  of  tbe  Gallic  wars  was  worsbipped,  tbeie  could 


be  no  longer  any  need  for  contention,  and  Pompey  alone 
would  be  intrusted  witb  tbe  responsibility  of  the  Roman 
goyemment.  A  decree  was  quickly  passed  by  tbe  Ro- 
man senate  commanding  Ciesar  to  dtsband  bis  forces; 
but  CKsar  not  only  refused  to  comply  witb  tbe  demand, 
but  actually  marcbed  against  Pompey,  wbom  be  soon 
droye  from  Romę,  and  in  the  Etemal  City,  B.C.  49,  was 
madę  dictator.  Of  tbe  pursuit  of  Pompey  and  tbe  fate 
of  tbe  latter  we  need  not  speak  berę ;  but  tbe  noble  con- 
duct  of  tbe  Roman  generał  towards  łus  fallen  enemy 
and  towards  bis  assassins  is  so  roeritorious  in  its  cbar- 
acter, tbat  it  desenres  at  least,  in  passing,  a  Cbristian 
oommendation.  Wben  tbe  news  of  tbe  deatb  of  Pom- 
pey  reached  Romę,  Cssar  was  again  appointed  dictator 
for  one  year  and  consul  for  fiye  years,  and  was  inyested 
witb  tribunidal  power  for  life.  His  adherence  to  tbe 
cause  of  Cleopatra  led  bim  to  enter  Egypt  and  to  engage 
in  the  ^Alexandrine  war,"  wbicb  also  he  brought  to  a 
successful  termination  in  Marcb,  B.C.  47.  In  Septem- 
ber  of  this  year  be  returoed  to  Romę,  and  was  once  morę 
appointed  dictator.  But  witb  tbe  deatb  of  Pompey  his 
partisans  had  by  no  mcans  yanished.  It  is  tme  that 
they  had  quitted  Romę,  but  in  Africa  they  were  still 
dutiful  to  the  memory  and  principles  of  tbeir  late  mas- 
ter. To  Africa,  tberefore,  C«esar  directed  bis  steps; 
tbe  party  of  Pompey  was  quickly  attacked  and  sub- 
dued.  The  feud  of  Metellus,  of  Scipio,  of  Cato,  and 
Juba  was  sad  indeed,  but  the  display  of  noble  and  ^óse 
generoeity  wbicb  Ccesar  now  displayed  towards  those 
arrayed  in  arms  against  him  proyes  him  "  to  baye  been 
possessed  of  a  great,  magnanimous  naturę.  He  was  nott 
a  man  that  could  stoop  to  tbe  yulgar  atrocities  of  Ma- 
rius  or  Sulla,  and  so  he  majestically  declared  that  hence- 
fortb  he  had  no  enemies,  and  tbat  bereafter  he  would 
make  no  diflerence  between  Pompeians  and  Cssareans." 
Retumed  to  Romę,  be  cekbrated  his  yictories  in  Gaul, 
Egypt,  Pontus,  and  AfHca  by  four  great  triumphs,  dur- 
ing wbicb  the  wbole  Roman  populace  was  feasted  and 
f§ted  by  bis  magnificent  liberality.  But  tbe  display  in 
wbicb  Ciesar  indulged  soon  led  the  Romans  to  fear  tbat 
he  aimed  bigher  than  the  dictatorship — tbat  absolute 
goyemment  was  bis  object,  Roman  patriotism  had  not 
yet  expired.  Many  tbere  were  in  the  Etemal  City  in 
wbose  yeins  flowed  republican  blood,  and  tbe  man  wbo 
dared  to  conspire  to  depriye  them  of  the  liberties  they 
had  so  long  enjoyed  was  doomed  to  fali  at  tbeir  bands. 
His  deatb  seemed  the  only  surety  of  the  continuation 
of  tbdr  long^njoyed  priyileges  of  a  free  and  untram- 
melled  goyemment.  Wbile  Ciesar  was  planning  bow 
soonest  to  wear  the  insignia  of  royalty,  Bratus  and  otber 
senators  were  sharpening  tbeir  weapons  to  take  bis 
life.  On  the  ides  or  fifteenth  of  Marcb,  after  Csesar  had 
taken  his  aocustomed  seat  in  the  senate  at  tbe  Capitol, 
a  friend  gaye  him  a  paper  containing  an  account  of  tbe 


Cains  Jnliaa 


JULITJS  ECHTER 


1094 


JULUTS  m 


oonspincy  against  hu  life,  bat,  while  yet  holding  it  in 
his  hand,  Łhe  conspiraton  themselyea  crowded  around 
hini|  and  at  a  given  aignal  their  daggen  pierced  his 
fareast,  and  Romę  was  yisited  by  Łhe  g^neatest  disaster 
that  could  have  befalien  her  at  this  time.  To  secular 
works  belongs  a  referenoe  to  the  writings  of  this  re- 
markable  character.  For  his  reformatioa  of  the  cakn- 
dar,  see  Całendar,  Roman.  By  the  ecdesiastical  writ- 
er  Oesar  desenres  notice  for  his  kind  enactments  in  be- 
half  of  the  Jews,  and  generous  tieatment  of  them.  Fiom 
this  people  he  had  receiyed  yaluable  assistance  during 
his  campaign  in  Egypt,  and  Ceesar  always  preserved  a 
grateful  recoHection  of  Antipater  and  his  brethren.  In 
£gypt  he  confirmed  all  the  priyileges  the  Jewshad  pre- 
▼iously  enjoyed.  In  Judsea  morę  fayorable  laws  were  en- 
acted ;  Antipater  was  appointed  lientenant  of  the  coim- 
tiy,  with  the  honored  title  of  a  Roman  citizen ;  Hyr- 
canus  was  confirmed  in  the  priesthood,  and  provision 
was  madę  for  .the  fortification  of  the  Holy  City  and  the 
repair  of  its  walls.  See  Josephus,  Jewith  A  fOiguitieSf  bk, 
ziv,  chap.  viii  są. ;  Strabo,  Geocraphy  (Bohn'8  ed.),  iii, 
184.     SeeCiBSAR.     (J.H.W.) 

Jrlius  EcKTER.    See  Mespełbrunk. 

Julius  Henry,  duke  of  Brunswick,  deseires  onr  no- 
tice on  account  of  his  Identification  with  the  Relbnu 
movement  of  the  16th  century.  He  was  bórn  July  10, 
1538,  and  was  originally  designed  for  the  derical  office, 
bot  in  1568  he  succeeded  his  father,  and  at  once  intro- 
duced  the  religion  of  the  Reformers,  for  which  he  had 
early  manifested  a  strong  inclination.  In  1576  he  found- 
ed  the  University  of  Helmstedt.     He  died  May  8, 1589. 

JuliuB  Maternus.    See  Firmicus. 

Julius  I,  Pope,  a  native  of  Romę,  succeeded  Marcos 
(t  Oct.  7,  836)  on  the  6th  of  Feb.  837,  afler  the  papai 
chair  had  been  vacant  for  four  months.  We  know  hard- 
ly  anything  of  him  beyond  the  part  he  took  in  the  Ath- 
anasian  controrersy.  He  sided  with  Athanasius,  and 
oonvokcd  a  synod  to  be  held  under  his  presidency;  but 
the  Eastem  choiches  were  not  inclined  to  admit  the 
right  of  arbitration  and  decision  of  the  Roman  bishop  in 
such  matters  (see  ^>«^.  Sifnodalu  JSjfn.  Sardicentis  ad 
Donatunif  in  Mansi,  iii,  186),  and  dedared  to  Julius  that 
they  did  not  admit  his  superiority  to  any  other  bishop, 
even  though  his  was  the  largest  city;  yet  they  would 
continue  in  friendly  relation  with  him  if  he  would  re- 
nounce  the  plan  of  subyerting  their  decisions.  Julius 
persisted  in  holding  the  synod  despite  the  absence  of 
the  Eastem  bishops,  and  Athanasius  was  declared  the 
lawful  bishop.  He  also  took  part,  through  his  legates, 
in  the  Synod  of  Sardica.  The  Eastem  bishops  of  this 
council,  after  their  withdrawal  to  Philippopolis,  excom- 
municated  Julius.  But  this  continued  oppoeition  did 
not  preyent  him  from  writing  in  849,  on  the  return  of 
Athanasius  to  Alexandria,  to  the  Church  of  that  city  an 
autograph  letter  of  congratulation.  This  letter,  and  the 
one  mcntioned  above,  are  all  that  we  haye  from  the  pen 
of  Julius  (see  Socrates,  Hi»L  EccL  ii,  23 ;  Athanasius, 
Apol  2,  p.  770).  He  died  April  12, 352,  and  is  commem- 
onited  in  the  Roman  Catholic  Church  on  that  day.  The 
Eastem  Church  erroneously  considers  Julius  as  the  au- 
thor  of  one  of  its  liturgies.  See  Socrates,  lib.  ii  and  iii ; 
Baronius,  Awu  EccUs, ;  Tillemont,  Afetnoires ;  Sozomen, 
J)e  Secł,  art.  8 ;  Dupin,  BibHołhecw  des  A  uteura  EccUs.  ; 
BaiUet,  Fr*  Hm  SamtSy  April  12 ;  Herzog,  Real-Ency- 
klopadie ;  Hoefer,  Nouv,  Biog,  Generale,  xxyii,  157. 

Julius  II,Popc,  Cardinal  deli«a  Rovere,  nephew 
of  pope  Sixtus  rV,  took  the  papai  chair  after  the  one 
month'8  role  of  Pius  III,  in  1 603.  He  was  bom  at  Albez- 
zola,  near  Savona,  in  1441 ;  became  successiycly  bishop  of 
Carpcntras,  Albano,  Ostia,  Bologna,  Ayignon,  and  Mendę, 
and  was  finally  madę  cardinal  by  his  uncle,  Sixtus  IV. 
During  the  pontificate  of  Alexander  VI,  the  most  infa- 
mous  and  deprayed  of  all  the  popcs,  Julian  delia  Royere 
already  sought  to  preppre  Łhe  way  for  his  own  succes- 
sion  in  the  pontificate;  but  the  caBdinal  d^Amboise, 
archbishop  of  Rouen  and  minister  of  Louis  XII,  be- 


came his  competitor,  and  the'  dalms  óf  the  French 
prelate  were  sustained  by  an  amiy  marching  against 
Romę.  Outwitted  in  this  attempt,  Julian  at  ooce  set 
out  to  procure  his  futurę  snocett,  and,  pennuding  the 
Italtan  cardinals  that  their  interest  demanded  the  elec^ 
tion  of  a  natiye  popc,Becuyed  the  election  of  Piooolcmum 
as  pope  Pius  III.  During  the  short  reign  of  the  latter 
Julian  resumed  his  intriguea,  and  when  Pius  III  died, 
twenty-«ix  days  after  his  election,  Julian  had  ao  wefl 
succeeded  in  bribing  the  most  iufluential  cardinals  by 
promises  of  power  and  temporal  adyantages  that  be 
receiyed  the  poeition.  After  his  exaltatioa  to  the  pa- 
pai throne,  he  set  aboot  to  raise  the  papacy  from  the 
political  degradation  to  which  it  had  sunk  durin|c  the 
reign  of  his  predeceseors,  genenlly  termed  ''the  ni|;ht  of 
the  papacy."  Determined  to  reooyer  for  the  Church  afl 
that  had  belonged  to  the  Roman  see  in  the  days  of  It^• 
nocent  III,  he  began  by  driying  Ciesar  Borgia  out  of  his 
ill-gotten  poasessions  in  the  Romagna;  bat  there  he 
found  another  power,  the  Venetiaiis,  who,  during  tbe 
preoeding  troaUes,  had  taken  poeseańoo  of  Ravenna, 
Rimini,  and  other  plaoesL  The  Venetian8  offered  to  pay 
tribute  to  the  see  of  Romę  for  thoee  territories,  but  Ju- 
lius refused,  and  demanded  their  abeolute  restitution  u 
the  Church.  After  fruitless  negotiations,  Juhas,  in  1KI8, 
madę  a  league  with  Louis  XII,  the  emperor  Maximit- 
ian,  and  the  duke  of  Ferrara,  against  Venice.  This  was 
called  the  League  of  Cambray,  and  its  objcct  was  tbe 
destraction  of  tiie  republie  of  Venice  and  the  partitioa 
of  its  territońes.  Yenice,  howeyer,  stood  firm,  altbough 
its  armies  were  defeated  and  its  territories  were  imy* 
aged  by  both  Germans  nnd  French.  At  last  Julius  him- 
self,  haying  recoyered  the  town  of  Romagna,  peiceiyed 
the  impolicy  of  uniting  with  nltramontane  aoTereigns 
against  the  oldestltalian  state,  and  accordingly,  in  Feh. 
1510,  he  madę  peaoe  with  Yenice.  Wishing  to  unds 
the  mischief  which  he  had  done,  and  to  drive  tbe  for- 
eigners  (whom  he  styled  *'  barbaiians^  out  of  Italy.  he 
fiist  sought  to  arm  the  Germans  against  the  French, 
whom  he  dreaded  most ;  bat,  not  suoceeding,  be  called  t» 
his  aid  the  Swiss.  He  himself  took  the  field,  and  mu 
tacked  and  took  the  town  of  La  Mirandola,  entering  it 
by  a  breach,  in  January,  1511 ;  laCer  he  met  wiih  re- 
yerses,  and  lost  Bologna.  But  in  the  following  Oct^ 
ber  his  legates  succeeded  in  forming  a  leagne,  which 
he  called  **holy,'*  with  Ferdinand  of  Spain,  Henry  of 
England,  the  Yenetiana,  and  the  Swiss.  The  campaign 
subeequent,  in  1512,  effected  the  total  expu]aion  of  the 
French  from  Lombardy.  But  this  was  done  by  the 
Swiss,  German,  and  Spanish  troops,  and  Julius  noerdy 
succeeded  in  driying  one  party  of  foreigners  out  of  Italy 
by  means  of  other  foreigners,  who  meantime  Babretted 
the  xept|blic  of  Florence,  and  gaye  it  to  the  Medici.  la 
the  midst  of  these  eyents,  Julius  died  of  an  inDamma- 
tory  disease,  on  the  21et  of  Febroaiy,  1518.  He  was  sao- 
ceeded  by  Leo  X.  Louis  XII  had  oonvoked  a  councfl 
in  order  to  obtain  the  approyal  of  the  French  derf^y  oa 
his  warfare  against  Romę.  To  retort  this  measure  the 
fifth  Lateran  Council  was  oonyoked  (broaght  to  a  dose 
after  the  accession  of  Leo  X),  and  thus  the  deeógns  of 
the  French  king  were  compkftely  frustiated.  As  an  ec- 
desiastical- roler,  Julius  has  little  to  recommend  him  ia 
the  eyes  of  the  Christian  Church.  As  a  political  soy* 
erdgn,  he  is  described  by  Rankę  as  **a  noble  eoul,  ful 
of  lofty  plans  for  the  glory  and  weal  of  Italy  ;**  and  piro- 
fessor  Leo  considers  him,  with  all  his  del^(^  as  one  of 
the  noblest  characters  of  that  age  in  Italy.  He  was 
fond  of  the  fine  arta,  pationiaed  Bramante,  Michad  An- 
gdo,  and  Raffaelle,  and  began  the  stracture  of  SuPe- 
teT'8  Church.  See  Engliik  Cydopndia,  a.  y. ;  Hersa^. 
RealrEncykhp,  yii,  157 ;  Reichel,  Aomoit  See  in  the  Mid- 
(&  ^^«,  p.  584  8q. ;  Baxmann,  PciiHk  d.  PSp&U  ;  Bowec, 
Hist,  ofthe  Popet,  yii,  872  są.     (J.  H.  W.) 

Julius  III,  Pope  {Gian-Maria  del  Momte^  Cardi- 
nal Giocci),  succeeded  Paul  III  In  1550.  He  waa  bon 
at  Monte  San  Soyino,  near  Arezzo,  Sept.  10, 1487.  He 
firit studiedlaw^but,  securing  the ^rotection  of  hia  nn- 


JITMENTA 


<l0d5 


JUNIPER 


cle,'«fltdii}al  Antonio  del  Monte,  be  ćntered  the  Chitfeh,' 
•ud  MfoB  became  archbishop,  and  was  intrusted  with 
'  the  administration  uf  different  dioceaea*'  Paul  III  madę 
him  cardinal  of  St.yita]^^and  bbb^^  of  j^  Palestrina, 
and  sent  him  as  v>ne  of  tbę  fonr  legatea'  to  open  the 
Coui:i'J  of  Trent  t<l*^*)*  After^feis  elevation  to  the 
pontificate  be  reopened  (Ifól)  the  aittin^  of  the  Conn- 
cil  of  Trent,  suspended  undet  his  predfcessor  (1549). 
Closely  altied  to  Ghailesy,  be  spent  bis  reign  in  quar- 
relling  with  FnmoeyWjnioe,  and  also  with  ferdinand, 
king  of  the  Komana,  and  brotber  of  Charles  Y.  His 
name  is  linked  with  English  biatoiy  by  his  ^śSfJurta  Ur 
OTganize  with  Mary  the  reunion  of  England  with  Some. 
See  Pole.  Julius  III  died  in  March,  1555,  leasing  be- 
bind  him  a  very  indifferent  chancter,  marked  by  in- 
capacity  and  mi^condnct.  While  a  cardinal  be  was 
remarkable  for  bis  (kmness  and  activity,  but  after  be- 
ooming  pope  be  gave  bimself  np  to  luzury  and  pleasure, 
and  went  so  far  in  bis  disregaid  of  all  consiflCency  as 
to  giye  the  cardinal'8  place  left  vacant  by  his  election 
to  one  of  his  senrants,  wboae  only  merit  oonsisted  in 
having  taken  care  of  his  pet  monkey.  See  Ciaoconi, 
Vii€B  Pontif, ;  Hoefer,  Now,  Bioff,  GinhraU,  xxyii,l65 ; 
Herzog,  ReeU^Eruyklop,  Tli,  158;  Rankę,  Papacy^  i,  201 
aą.;  Bower,  ffii^.  o/^^Ae  Popef ,  vii,  458  sq. 

Jomenta,  cattU.  Heretics  wbo  denied  the  resur-j 
rection  of  the  dead  were  accustomed  to  bcstow  oppro- 
brious  epithets  on  those  wbo  persisted  in  maintaining 
the  truth  of  Scripture.  Sometlmeś  they  called  them 
camei,  animaUsJumenta,  camal,  sensual,  cattle ;  also  lu- 
tet, earthy,  etc— Farrar,  />cc£M.i)td.  s.  v. 

JtimperB  or  Barkers  is  a  name  for  tbose  persons 
wbo,  as  an  inference  from  2  Sam.  yi,  16,  belieye  tbat  re- 
ligious  worsbip  mu8t  be  accompanied  by  viólent  agita- 
lions,  oonyulsiye  leaping  and  dancing.  Tbis  singular 
'  religious  belief  is  said  to  baye  originated  among  the 
congregations  of  Mr.  Wbitefield,  in  the  western  part  of 
Wales,  about  1760,  but  it  soon  found  friends  among  the 
Ouakers,  and  later  among  the  Iryingites.  Tbcr  Jumpers 
found  spiedal  defenders  in  theWebb  poet  William  Wil- 
liams (q.  V.),  Harris  Kowland  (q.  y.),  etc.  They  are 
soraetimes  called  Barhera  bocause  frequently  they  do 
not  confine  their  religious  exaberance8  to  jumping  and 
dancing,  but  accompany  them  with  yiolent  groans  and 
incoberent  remarks,  oflen  degenerating  into  a  sort  of 
■  bellowing.  Disoountenanced  in  England,  .the  Jump> 
ers  emigrated  to  the  United  States,  and  here  they  eon- 
tińue  to  flouiisb  moderately.  We  belieye  they  have 
some  adherenta  in  Pennsylyania  and  Ohio,  and  panicu- 
larly  in  the  extieme  West.  Eyans,  in  bis  Skeich  ofthe 
Denommatums  oftke  Christian  World  (Lond.  1811),  re- 
lates  his  experience  in  a  meeting  of  tbe  Jumpers  wbich 
be  attended:  "About  the  year  1785 1  myself  was  yery 
aocidentally  present  at  a  meeting  wbich  terminated  in 
jumping.  It  was  held  in  tbe  open  air,  on  a  Sunday  even- 
ing,  near  Newport,  in  Monmoutbsbire.  Tbe  preacher 
was  one  of  lady  Huntingdon*8  students,  wbo  iDoncluded 
his  sermon  with  the  rccomroendation  of  jumping ;  and  I 
must  allow  him  the  praise  of  consistency,  for  hc  got  down 
firom  the  chair  on  wbich  be  stood  an<l  jumjwd  along 
with  his  hearers.  The  arguments  be  adduced  for  tbis 
purpoee  were,  tbat  David  danced  before  tbe  ark,  tbat 
4he  babę  leaped  in  tbe  womb  of  Elizabeth,  and  tbat  the 
man  whose  lameness  was  remoyed  leaped  and  praised 
God  for  the  mercy  wbich  be  bad  received !  He  expa- 
tiated  on  these  topics  with  uncommon  fenrency,  and 
then  drew  the  inference  tbat  they  ought  to  show  simi- 
lar  expTe8i*ion8  of  joy  for  tbe  bleesings  which  Jesus 
Christ  bad  put  into  their  poesession.  He  then  ^aye  an 
impaflflioned  flketch  of  the  sufferings  of  tbe  Sayiour,  and 
'  thereby  ronsed  the  passions  of  a  few  around  him  into  a 
State  of -\nolenL  af^ication.  About  nine  men  and  seren 
women  for  some  littlc  time  rocked  to  and  fro,  groaned 
aloud,  and  then  jumped  with  a  kind  of  frantic  fury. 
Some  of  tbe  audience  flew  in  all  directione ;  otbers  gazed 
~QQ.  in  silent  amazement    They  all  gradually  dispersed 


exoept  tbe  Janipeń,  wbo  continned  their  exertions  from 
eight  in  tbe  eyening  tiU  near  eleyen  at  night  I  saw 
the  condusion  of  it;  they  atlast  kneeled  down  in  a  cir- 
cle,  bolding  each  other  by  tbe  band,  wbile  one  of  them 
prayed-  with  great  fenror,  and  then,  all  risiiig  up  from 
olt  tbeip  knees,  departed  *,  but  preyious  to  their  disper- 
sion  they  wiklly  pointed  up  towards  the  sky,  and  re- 
minded  one  anotber  that  they  shoold  soon  meet  there, 
and  neyer  agaiii  be  separated." 
■  Jung.    See  Stillino. 

Ja'nia,  or  ralher  Ju^nlas  Oowiac,  a  deriy.  of 
JuttitUf  the  name  of  a  Roman  family),  a  Christian  at 
Romę,  to  whom  Paul  addressed  a  salutation  in  connec- 
tion  with  Andronicus,  as  bein^  bis  **  kinsmen  and  fel- 
low-pńsoners,  wbo  are  of  notę  among  the  apoetles,^  and 
were  in  Christ  before  bimself  (Rom.  xyi,  7) ;  hence  prob- 
ably  of  Jewisb  extraction.  A.D.  55.  As  the  gender  of 
the  epithets  applied  is  uncertain  (^avyy€VHC  Kai  <wvaix- 
/laAiurouc),  Bome  (e.  g.  Origen,  Chrysostom,  and  other 
fathers)  have  suppoeed  a  female  (Iowiav  comes  eąually 
well  from  'lowm)  to  be  meant  (but  see  Micbadls,  in 
PoU's  Sylloge,  vii,  128). 

JiuiliuB  OF  Africa,  generally  belieyed  to  baye 
been  bishop  in  tbe  6tb  oentury,  is  known  by  his  work 
De  partibus  diritue  leffi»,  dedicated  to  a  certaln  bishop 
Primasius,  probably  the  one  of  Hadrumetum  wbo  in  558 
indorsed  the  Constitntum  of  Yigilius.  Junilius  bimself 
daimed  no  originality,  but  acknowledged  bis  obligation 
to  a  certain  Paulus  of  Persia,  suppoeed  to  have  been 
Paulus  of  Bassora,  wbo  afterwards  became  metropolitan 
of  Nisibis  (thougb  be  was  not  a  Peinan).  The  work  is 
in  the  form  of  a  dialogue  between  a  master  and  his  pu- 
pil, and  is  a  sort  of  introduction  to  tbe  sacred  writings. 
Tbe  first  book,  on  Scripture,  is  divided  into  two  parts,  on 
the  outward  eacprtstion  and  the  imcard  meaning;  the 
outward  expression  contains  five  particulars— tbe  spe- 
cies  of  writing,  its  authority,  its  autber,  its  style,  and 
its  order  of  place.  The  inwiud  meaning  bas  reference 
especially  to  three  particulars,  God,  tbis  world,  and  the 
next.  Tbe  second  book  treats  of  tbis  worid,  its  crea- 
tion,  its  goyemment,  tbe  properties  and  accidents  of 
naturę,  the  naturę  of  will,  and  tbe  conseąuences  and  re- 
sults  of  will.  Junilius  then  speaks  of  types,  of  predic- 
ti(»i8  before  and  undor  the  law  conceming  Christ  and 
the  calling  of  the  Gentiles,  and  of  Reason  in  its  agree- 
ment  with  tbe  commands  of  Scripture.  Special  atten- 
tion  is  due  to  the  fact  that  Junilius  does  not  count  the 
Chronicles,  Ezra,  Nehemiab,  Job,  Judith,  Esther,  and  tbe 
Maccabees  among  canonicid  books.  The  work  has  been 
pubUshed  as  Junilii  de  Partibus  Dimna  Legis,  libri  ii 
(Baail  1545,  8vo;  Francfort  ad  Oder,  1603,  8vo;  and  in 
Biblioth.  Pafri,  i).— Herzog,  ReaUEncyklop,  yii,  174  8q. ; 
Clark,  Success,  o/Sac,  LU.  ii,  828. 

Jn^niper  (Cnn,  ro^them,  prób.  so  called  from  ita  use 
in  binding;  Sept.  in  1  Kings  xix,  4,  *PaBafi  y.  r.  'Po^- 
fiiy;  ia  yerae  5,  ^f^róv;  in  Job  xxx,  4,  ^vXov\  in  Psa. 
cxx,  4,  iprjfUKÓc;  Yuiig.  jumperus,  but  in  Psa.  cxx,  4, 
desolatorius)f  a  sbrub  or  tree  mentioned  as  affording 
shade  to  Elijah  in  his  tligbt  to  Horeb  (1  Kings  xix,  4, 5), 
and  as  affording  materiał  for  fiiel,  and  alao,  in  extreme 
cases,  for  human  food  (Pml  cxx,  4 ;  Job  xxx,  4).  The 
older  translatora  seem  to  baye  been  unacąuainted  with 
it.,  while  the  modem  yetaions  bave  generally  followed 
the  Yulgate  in  referring  it  to  the  juniper  (see  Stengel 
in  tbe  Bibliołh.  Brem,  yii,  fasc.  5 ;  Hiller,  Ifierophyt,  i, 
258 ;  Spiengel,  Ge$ch,  d,  Boian,  i,  26),  wbich,  boweyer, 
seems  to  be  indicated  by  a  difTerent  Hebrew  word.  See 
Heath. 

The  different  species  of  juniper  baye  by  some  botan- 
ists  been  ranked  undcr  Cedrus^  the  tnie  8|^)ecie8  being 
distinguisbed  by  the  title  of  Cedrus  harcifera,  and  the 
pines  by  tbat  of  Cedrus  con^era,  Of  Juniperus,  tbe 
dpKłv^oc  of  the  Greeks  and  abkul  of  the  Arabs,  there 
are  8everal  species  in  Syria.  Of  these,  J.  commums^  tbe 
common  juniper,  is  a  yery  widely  diffiised  species,  being 
found  in  Europę  aad  Asia,  in  the  plaios  of  northem  and 


JUNIPER 


109C 


JUNIPER 


in  the  mounUins  of  sootliem  latiŁiides,  nsiudly  fonning 
a  Iow  shruby  but  in  some  ńtoations  being  fiftfeen  ieet, 
and  even  thirty  feet  high«  J.  oxycednUf  the  sharp  or 
prickly,  or  brown-berried  Juniper,  dotiely  allied  to  the 
oommon  juniper,  U  an  ereigreen  shrub,  from  ten  to 
twelye,  but  sometimes  even  twenty  feet  high.  It  was 
foond  by  M.  Boye  on  Mount  Lebanon.  J,  drupaoeot  or 
laige-lruited  joniper,  is  a  species  which  was  introduoed 
into  Europę  from  the  £ast  under  the  Arabie  name  halh- 
hd,  This  name,  howeyer,  is  applied  rather  to  all  the 
species  than  to  any  one  in  particular.  It  is  a  natiye  of 
Mount  CassiuSy  and  is  thought  to  be  the  same  as  the 
greater  juniper  found  by  Belon  on  Mount  Taurus,  which 
he  describes  as  lising  to  the  height  of  a  cypres^  J, 
PhcmiceOf  or  Phoenician- juniper,  is  the  great  juniper  of 
Dioscorides,  and  is  a  natiye  of  the  south  of  Europę,  Rus- 
sia,  and  Syria.  It  has  imbrioated  leayes,  bears  some  re- 
sembknce  to  the  cypress,  and  attains  a  height  of  from 
twenty  to  thirty  feet.  J.  Łyda,  or  Lycian  juniper,  is  a 
dwarf  species,  and  J,  SabmOy  or  the  common  Sayine,  is 
osually  a  Iow  spreading  shrub,  but  sometimes  rises  to 
the  height  of  ten  or  twelye  feet  It  is  a  natiye  of  the 
south  of  Europę  and  Syria.  Of  these  species,  J,  oxy- 
cedrus  and  J.  Phcmicea  are  the  only  species  which  could 
haye  been  the  beróth  of  Scripture.  Some  are  of  opinion 
that  the  wood  of  J,  oxycedru8,  rather  than  that  of  the 
so-called  cedar  of  Lebanon,  is  the  cedar-wood  so  famed 
in  ancient  times  for  its  durability,  and  which  was  there- 
fore  employed  in  making  statues.  It  is  to  the  wood  of 
certain  species  of  juniper  that  the  name  of  cedar-wood 
is  now  specially  applied,    See  Cedar. 


son.    The  twigs  are  used  for  tying  bimdlea,'  and  iH 
kinds  of  herbs  that  are  biooght  to  maiket  are  fiutened 


Geniito  If cmoąpermo. 

together  with  them.  The  Spaniaids  cali  it  rtiamcu, 
ftom  the  Arabie  name  rtiem,  It 
is  now  lefened  by  all  botanisti 
to  the  genus  Gtmstaf  and  called 
G.  moHotpermcL.  It  is  described 
by  De  CanduUe  as  a  bianch- 
ing  and  erect  8hrab,with  slen- 
der,  wandlike,  flesible  branches ; 
leayes  comparatiyely  few,  linear, 
oblong,  prńsed  to  the  branches, 
pubescent;  infloresoence  in  few 
flowered  lateral  racemea;  petab 
white,  silky,  neaily  eąual  to  one 
another;  lągumcs  oyal,  inflaifd, 
smooth,  membnmaceous,  one  to 
two  seeded.  It  occurs  oa  the 
sterile  shores  of  Portugal,  Spaio, 
Barbary,  and  Egypt.  It  was 
found  by  Forskal  at  Suez,  and 
named  by  him  Gemata  Spar- 
tium  f  with  raUnn  as  its  Aiabk 
name.  Boyć  also  foiind  it  at 
Suez,  and  again  in  different  pans 
of  Syria.  Belon  also  mentioos 
finding  it  in  seyeial  pUcea  when 
trayelling  in  the  East.  Barck- 
bardt  also  frequently  menUoos 
the  shrub  retkem  in  the  desnta 
to  the  south  of  Pklestine,  and  be 


Juniperua  Phcetncea—jonug  and  old.    (The  yonng  tree  is  bero  aboot  thrae  feet  thought  it  to  be  the  aame  plant 
hlgh^and^oT  a  compact j)yraniidal  forin^^  It  nfuirwards  spreods,  and  reaches  a  ^  the <r«iwto  rotom  of  FonkaL 


height  uf  fifteen  feet  or  morę,  as  iu  the  otber  spedmcus.) 

The  rothem,  howeyer,  is  no  doubt  the  plant  still  called 
by  the  Arabs  retem,  and  commonly  known  as  SpanUh 
broom,  In  Loudon'8  Kncydopadia  o/Plants  it  is  named 
Spartium  monospermum,  or  white  single-seeded  bmom, 
and  is  described  as  a  yery  handsome  shrub,  remarkable 
for  its  numerous  snow-white  flowers.  Osbeck  remarks 
that  it  grows  like  willow-bushes  along  the  shores  of 
Spain,  as  for  as  the  flying  sands  reach,  where  scarcely 
any  other  plant  exists  except  the  Onama  aerpens,  or 
creeping  restharrow,  The  use  of  this  shrub  is  yery 
great  in  stopping  the  sand.  The  leaves  and  young 
branches  fumish  delicious  food  for  goats.  It  conyerts 
the  most  barren  spot  into  a  fine  odoriferous  garden  by 
its  flowers,  which  continue  a  long  time.  It  seems  to 
shelter  hogs  and  goats  against  the  scorching  heat  of  the 


He  States  that  whole  plains  are 
sometimes  coyeied  with  this  shrub,  and  that  such  placca 
are  fayorite  places  of  pasturage,  as  sheep  are  remarkably 
fond  of  the  pods.  Lord  Undsay  again,  while  trayelling 
in  the  middle  of  the  yalleys  of  Mount  Sinai,  say s,  *^  The 
rattanif  a  species  of  broom,  bearing  a  white  flower,  deli- 
cately  streaked  with  purple,  afibrded  me  freqaent  shelter 
from  the  sun  while  in  adyance  of  the  carayau"  (^Lettersy 
p.  183).  Dr.  Robinson,  in  his  jonmey  from  Akabafa  to 
Jerusalem,  says  (Retearckeśj  ii,  124) :  **  The  shrub«  which 
we  had  met  with  throughout  the  desert  stUl  coiitinned. 
One  of  the  principal  of  these  is  the  reł^m,  a  species  of 
the  broom-pianły  the  Gentsta  ratmm  of  ForskaL  This  is 
the  largest  and  most  oonipicuous  shrub  of  these  deaerts, 
growing  thickly  in  the  water-ooursea  and  yalleys.  Gar 
Arabs  always  selected  the  place  of  encampmeat,  if  poa- 


JUNIUS 


1097 


JUNIUS 


albie,  in  a  spot  where  it  grew,  in  order  to  be  ebeltered 
by  it  at  night  from  the  wind ;  and  during  the  daj,  when 
thej  often  went  on  in  advance  of  the  camek,  we  found 
them  not  iinfireqaently  ńtting  or  sleeping  under  a  bush 
of  rttem  to  protect  them  from  the  snn.  It  was  in  this 
▼eiy  desert,  a  day^s  journey  from  Beenheba,  that  the 
inophet  EUjah  lay  down  and  slept  beneath  the  same 
ahrab"  (1  Kings  zix,  4^^,**  onder  a  jun^peMieet"),  It 
BttotdB  shade  and  piotection,  both  in  beat  and  storm,  to 
trareUeis  0^iigil,6'e9iy.ii,484,486),andBonar  describes 
it  aa  particaUurly  nsefiil  for  sbelter  in  the  peninsola  of 
Arabia  Petnea  {Smai,  p.  190). 

In  the  other  passages  the  meaning  ia  not  sodear, 
and  therefore  different  interpretations  have  been  given. 
Thos  Job  (xzz,  4)  saya  of  the  half-famished  peopke  who 
despised  him,  **  Who  cat  up  mallows  by  the  boshes,  and 
roCftem^rooto  for  their  food."  Thoagh  the  broom-root 
may  perhapa  be  morę  suitable  lor  diet  than  the  jim^per, 
yet  they  are  both  too  bitter  and  medidnal  to  be  oonaid- 
eied  or  nsed  as  notritioas,  and  therefore  some  say  that 
''when  we  read  that  ro^Aem-roots  were  their  food,  we 
are  to  suppose  a  great  deal  morę  than  the  words  ezpress, 
namely,  that  their  honger  was  so  violent  as  not  to  re- 
fndn  e^en  from  these  loots,**  which  were  neither  refresh- 
ing  nor  noorishing.  Dr.  Thomson*s  ingenious  sugges- 
tion  (Land  and  Boohy  ii,  488),  that  perhapa  the  mallows 
only  were  nsed  for  Ibod,  and  the  rothem-roota  as  fuel  to 
cook  them  with,  seems  hardly  tenable  from  the  phrase- 
ology,  Ursinus  supposea  {Arborti*  BibL  c.  27)  that  in- 
atead  of  the  roots  of  this  broom  we  are  to  nnderstand  a 
l>]ant  which  grows  upon  these  roots,  as  well  as  upon 
aome  other  plaints,  and  which  is  well  known  by  the  Eng- 
lish  aame  of  hroom-rapey  the  orubanche  of  botanists. 
These  are  somedmes  eaten.  Thos  Diosoorides  (ii,  186) 
obeerves  that  the  oroftoncAs^  which  grows  ftom  the  roots 
of  broom,  was  sometimes  eaton  raw,  or  boiled  Uke  as- 
paiagos.  Gelsins  again  saggests  an  amendment  in  the 
aentence,  and  thinks  that  we  should  understand  it  to 
mean  that  the  broom-roots  were  leouired  for  /iie/,  and 
not  for /bod;  aa  the  Hebrew  words  signifyingyiui  and 
food,  thoagh  very  similar  to  each  other,  are  very  differ> 
ent  in  their  derivation  (see  Geseniua,  fhetaur,  p.  1817; 
on  the  contiary,  Michaelis,  JVe«a  Orient,  BibL  y,  4, 5),  and 
thia  sense  is  confirmed  by  some  of  the  Talmndical  wńt- 
ers,  as  R.  Levi  ben-Gerson,  in  his  remarks  on  this  pas- 
aage,  says.  The  broom  is  the  only  fuel  procorable  in 
many  of  these  desert  sitnatlona  (see  Thevenot,  Trav,  i, 
222).  In  Psa.  cxx,  4,  Darid  obeenres  that  the  calum- 
nieś  of  his  enemies  were  ''like  arrows  of  the  mighty, 
with  coals  of  rothem,^  The  broom,  being  no  doubt  yery 
oommonly  used  as  fuel  in  a  country  where  it  is  abnn- 
dant  and  other  plants  scaroe,  might  readily  snggest  itself 
in  a  oomparison ;  but  it  ts  also  described  as  spariding, 
tmming,  and  crackling  more  rehemently  than  other 
wood,and  the  Aiaba  r^ard  it  as  yielding  the  best  char- 
coaL  Thus  the  tree  which  aiforded  shade  to  Elijah 
may  hare  fnmished  also  the  *^  coals"  or  ashes  for  baking 
the  cake  which  satisfied  his  hunger  (1  Kings  xix,  6). 
See  Celsius,  Hieroboi,  i,  246 ;  Oedmann,  ferm.  Samadun- 
i9ini,ii,8;  YotAtl,  FhrajEg.  H  Arcdt.  i^\v\  and  214; 
Schnltens,  CammefO,  on  Jób^  ad  loc. ;  Robinson,  Remarek, 
i,  299:  Burekhardt,  Syria^  p.  488;  Pluiy,i/.  N,  xxiv,  9, 
65 ;  Balfour,  Plant*  o/theBiUej  p.  60 ;  Stanley,  S.  and  P. 
l).20,79,621^Kitto. 

Jnniiui,  Franoifl,  son  of  the  foUowing,  was  bom  at 
Heidelbeig,  1589.  In  early  life  be  stndied  mathemat- 
ics,  but  ftnally  tumed  his  attention  to  litenture  and  the- 
ology.  After  finishing  his  stadies  he  went  to  Frsnee 
to  yisit  his  parents.  In  1620  he  came  over  to  England, 
and  was  receiyed  into  the  house  of  the  earl  of  Arundel, 
where  he  ItTed  as  his  librarian  for  thirty  years.  In 
1650  he  retomed  to  the  Conttnent,  in  order  to  pass  some 
time  in  the  bosom  of  his  iamily.  For  t wo  years  he  lived 
in  Friesland,  in  a  district  where  the  andent  Saxon 
tongtte  was  preserved,  that  he  might  study  the  lan- 
guage.  In  1675  he  retumed  to  England,  and  in  1676 
went  to  Oxford,  whence  he  retired  to  Windsor,  to  his 


nephewIsflaeyossiiia,anddiedthereNoy.l9,1677.  He 
was  a  yery  leamed  philologian,  as  is  evinced  by  his 
writings,  which  ara  £>t  pictura  yeterum,  libri  iii  (Am- 
sterdam, 1687, 4to)  i—C^miTcUioneM  in  Wiilerami  ParO' 
pkranm  Franeieam  Cantiei  Cantioorum  (Amsterdam, 
1655, 8vo)  i^AfmoUUiones  m  harmaniam  Latino^ranci' 
cam  guaittor  Evangdiitanim  LaHtte  a  Tatian,  confto- 
Uxm  (Amsterd.  1655>  8vo)  -.—Ofiatitor  D.  N,  J,  C,  £van- 
gtUonan  VtnUmtipenmkqum  dua^  Gołhica  $citicet  et  Aft- 
glO'4aaMmiea,  eto.;  Aocedit  et  glossarium  Gothicum :  cui 
pnemittitur  a^phabetwn  Gotkicum,  Jhttttcum^  Anglo-»a»- 
onicum,  eto.  (Dordrechti,  1655, 4to)  •.—Cademonit  ParU' 
phraei*  poetiea  Geneteoe  (Amsterdam,  1655, 4to).  His 
EtymologieuM  AngUcanum  was  edited  by  Edward  Lye, 
Oxford,  1748,  folia— Kitto,  Cydop,  BiU.  Lit.  i,  697. 

Junitui,  FranciflOns  {Francoia  Du  Jon)y  an  emi- 
nent  French  Protestant  tbeologian,  was  bom  at  Bouiges 
in  1545.  He  studied  law  at  firn,  but  embncing  the 
prindples  of  the  Reformadon,  for  which  his  father  suf- 
fered  persecution,  he  remoyed  to  Geneya  in  1562,  to 
study  the  dead  langusges  and  thedogy.  In  1565  he 
took  chaige  of  a  Walloon  oongregation  at  Antwerp ;  the 
party  troubles  of  the  time,  however,  obliged  him  to  with- 
draw  first  to  a  chnrch  in  Limburg,  and  finally  to  Ger- 
many. Frederick  II  weloomed  him  at  Heidelberg,  and 
he  obtained  a  church  in  the  Palatinate.  During  the 
war  of  1568  he  liyed  in  the  Low  Countries,  and  was 
chaplain  of  the  Prince  of  Orange.  He  afterwards  again 
retumed  to  his  chaige,  and  remained  there  until  1578, 
when  he  was  called  to  f  leiddberg  by  the  elector,  to  take 
part  with  Tremellius  f&  the  tranałation  of  the  Old  Tes- 
tament. Afterbeing  also  for  a  while  professor  of  the- 
ology  at  Hdddbeig,  he  retumed  to  France  in  1592  with 
the  duke  of  BoniUon,  and  was  employed  by  Henry  lY 
on  a  misdon  to  Germany.  Lator  he  acoepted  a  profes- 
soiship  at  lieyden,  where  he  remained  until  his  death 
in  1602.  His  prindpal  work  was  the  Latin  tranda- 
tion  of  the  Old  Testament,  which  he  executed  in  con- 
junction  with  Tremellius.  It  appeared  in  five  parts, 
the  flist  oontaining  the  five  books  of  Moses  (Frankfort, 
1575,  folio);  the  seoond  embracing  the  histoncal  books, 
1576 ;  the  third  the  poetical  books,  1579 ;  the  fourth 
the  prophets,  1579 ;  and  the  fifth  the  apocr}'phal  books, 
1579.  After  the  -death  of  Tremdlius  the  translation 
was  reyised  by  his  coUeague,  and  printed  at  London, 
1584,  8to.  In  the  course  of  twenty  yeam  it  passed 
through  twenty  editions,  and  was  printed  for  the  last 
time  at  Zurich,  1764, 8vo.  Junius  lived  to  superintend 
a  third  edition,  1596,  folio ;  but  the  best  edition  probably 
ia  łhe  setentk,  published  in  1624,  folio,  oontaining  a  good 
index  by  Faul  Tossanus.  ^*  The  index  was  published  in 
a  rolume  by  itself  at  Frankfort,  1687,  fulio,  and  repeat- 
edly  alter.  The  translation  cannot  be  called  elegant; 
it  is  too  literał,  and  is  sometimes  obscure  on  that  ac- 
count.  It  is  also  disfigured  with  useless  giosses  and 
rabbinical  traditions"  (Kitto).  He  wrote  besides,  A  poo- 
alypaeos  Analgeie  (1592):— 6'ramma/tco  Lincua  Jltbraa 
(3d  edition,  1598):— ^  c/a  Apo8tolorvm  et  epistoła  2  S, 
Paulłi  ad  Corinth,  ex  A  rahica  ircmslatione  Latitte  red- 
dita  :—Procaiaclema  ad  V.  T,  iałerpreUaionem  :-~Prce- 
lectiones  in  Spriora  capita  Geneseoa  :—Explicatio  ^pri- 
orum  Paalmorum: — Paalmtu  101,  geu  principis  Chris' 
tiani  inatitutio:  —  Comment,  in  Ezechielem: — Erpositio  . 
Damdis: — Lectiones  in  Jonam: — Sacra  paraUela: — 
Nota  in  Epistolam  3,  Juda,  His  Opera  theologica  were 
published  at  Geneva  in  1613,  in  two  yoIs.  folio,  and  are 
partly  exegetical,  partly  phitU)logical  and  polcmic.  His 
antobiography,  which  is  pulUished  at  the  beginning  of 
his  works,  was  written  in  1595,  and  is  the  source  of  his 
biograpbies  published  by  Mdch.  Adam  and  in  Bayle's 
Dictionary,  See  Haag,  Im.  France  Pro/esłante ;  Herzog, 
Reai-Encyklop,  s,  v. ;  Kitto,  s.  v.     (J.  H.  W.) 

Jnnius,  Robert,  a  Dnfch  misńonary,  a  natiye  of 
Delft,  who  flourished  in  the  17th  centuiy,  wss  sent  by 
the  Dutch  govemment  to  the  western  part  of  the  island 
of  Formosa  in  1684,  and  was  eminently  succeBsfui  in  his 


JUNKIN 


1098 


JUPITER 


miaaiónaTy  labors.  '  He  is  ńid  to  haye  bsptized  no  less 
than  8ix  thousand  penons.  He  also  provided  good  ed- 
ncational  adyantages  for  the  natlyes,  and  oTer  8ix  hun- 
dred  yoang  men  crowded  the  schocla  he  had  founded. 
Of  his  perwnal  hUtory  in  other  reepectg  we  aie  ignorant. 
Hia  lUefary  labors  were  oonfined  to  eifcMrta  in  behalf  of 
the  people  to  whom  he  was  eent.  He  cottipoeed  some 
prayeiB,  and  transUited  certain  Psalma  into  the  Formoean 
iangnage.  He  retumed  to  HoUand  in  after  dajs,  but 
the  datę  of  his  death  is  not  known  to  na.  See  Moe- 
heim,  Eedes.  HigU  iii,  bk.  iv,  cent.  xvii,  aect.  1,  notę  24. 

Jankin,  George,  D.D.,  LL.D.,  a  Presbyteiian  min- 
ister of  notę,  was  bom  in  Kingston,  Ciunberland  Coun- 
ty,  Pa.,  Nov.  1, 1790,  entered  Jefferson  College  in  1809, 
and  graduated  in  1813.  While  at  college  he  was  eon- 
yerted  (1811),  and  upon  the  completion  of  his  oollegiate 
Btudies  he  entered  at  onee  on  a  theological  course  of 
'  stndy  under  Dr.  John  M.  Mason  in  New  York  city,  was 
ordained  at  Gettysburg,  Pa.,  in  1818,  and  remained  in 
the  pastorale,  though  teaching  and  editing  a  paper  a 
part  of  the  time,  till  1880.  He  was  principal  of  Pennsyl- 
vania  Manuał  Labor  Academy  at  Germantown,  Ptu,  from 
•1830  to  1832;  president  of  Lafayette  CoUege,  Easton, 
Pa.,  from  1882  to  1841;  president  of  Miami  Uniyersity 
irom  1841  to  1844;  was  thcn  recalled  to  the  presidency 
of  Lafayette  Ck»llege ;  and  was  president  of  Washington 
College,  LexiDgton,ya.,from  1848  Ło  1861,when,on  the 
aecession  of  Yirginia,  he  left  the  college,  his  home,  and 
his  property.  Lafayette  College  therMfter  honored  him 
with  an  Emeritus  professorshipb  He  died  May  20, 1868. 
^  Dr.  Jankin  for  many  yeais  maintained  a  great  influ- 
ence in  the  Church  courts,  sustained  by  his  thorough 
knowledge  of  every  subject  on  which  he  attempted  to 
speak^  and  the  keen  logie  with  which  he  expo8ed  the 
fallacies  in  the  arguments  of  his  opponents.  In  1844  he 
was  moderator  of  the  General  Assembly.  In  1838  he 
received  the  dcgree  of  D.D.  from  Jefferson  College,  and 
in  1856  that  of  LL.D.  from  Rutgers  College.  Dr.  Jun- 
kin  performed  an  amazing  amount  of  work  in  his  life- 
.tims.  His  preaohing  reoord  shows  that  he  delivcred  a 
larger  number  of  sermons  than  most  pastors  do,  while 
his  toUs  in  building  up  and  reHving  colleges,  in  labo- 
ńous  agencies,  in  ecclesiastical  labors  in  the  Church 
courts,  in  the  profes8or's  chair,  at  the  ediŁor's  desk,  and 
.through  the  press,  in  his  numerous  books,  sermons,  and 
essay^  make  us  wonder  how  he  could  find  the  time  and 
endure  the  labor  of  doing  so  much.*'  He  published  The 
Educator^  a  periodical,  in  1838;  Tke  Yindicatwn,  con- 
taining  a  history  of  the  trial  of  the  Rev.  Albert  Bonies 
by  the  Second  Presbytery  and  by  the  Synod  of  Phila- 
delphia,  in  1836 ;  A  Treatise  on  Jtutijication,  in  1889 ; 
The  Little  Słone  and  the  Great  Image,  orLectures  on  the 
Prophedesj  in  1844;  The  Great  ApotUuyy  a  sermon  on 
Romanism,  in  18ó3;  PolUical  Fallades,  in  1862;  A 
Treatise  on  Sanctification,  in  18^;  and  The  Tabemade, 
or  the  Gospel  according  to  Moses,  in  186&  See  Index 
volume  (No.  2)  to  Princeton  Reoiew,  p.  226  8q. 

luno,  the  Roman  name  of  the  queen  of  heaven, 
essentially  identical  with  the  Grecian  Hera^  Junu 
was  the  daughter  of  Kronos  (Saturn)  and  Rhea.  Shc 
was  the  highest  and  most  powerful  divinity  of  the 
Greeks  and  Romans  next  to  Jupiter  (the  Greek  Zivc\ 
of  whom  she  was  the  siatet  and  wife.  Argos  and  Samos 
claimed  the  honor  of  hcr  birth.  According  to  Homer, 
she  was  educatcd  by  Oca^us  and  Thctis;  according  to 
others,  by  the  Hours.  Het  toiarriagc  with  Jupiter  on  the 
blaiid  of  Cretc  was  honoifd  by  the  presence  of  all  the 
gods.  This  marriage,  according  to  Homer,  was  con- 
summated  without  the  knowledge  of  their  parents. 
Others  say  that  he  subdued  hcr  by  artifice  on  the  island 
of  Samos,  and  there  married  her.  According  to  the 
Greek  conception  of  her  character,  she  was  proud,  am- 
bitious,  and  jealous;  and  in  the  Homeric  poems  she  is 
represented  as  an  obHtinate,  ąuarrelsome  shrew.  and  her 
temper  a  source  of  continual  discord  between  herself 
and  her  lord.     She  often  spitcfully  fayors  persons  who 


were  tłie  objects  of  his  diapleasme,  and  fae,  in  reUnc 
treats  her  with  all  that  86verity  which,  in  ancient  timca, 
the  huaband  was  accustomed  to  use  towaids  the  wife. 
He  soolda  and  ofŁen  beata  her,  and  on  one  dccttioa, 
when  she  had  driven  Hercules,  the  favoiite  of  her  bua^ 
band,  to  Coe  by  a  st4Nrm,  Jupiter  was  so  angry  that  he 
bound  her  hands  and  feet,  k)aded  her  with  iwo  anTik, 
and  .suapended  her  from  Olympus;  and,  to  add  to  tha 
inoonvenienoes  of  her  sitoation,  nonę  of  the  gods  wen 
permitted  to  help  her.  Dnring  the  Trojan  War  abe 
lulls  Jupiter  to  aleep,  in  order  to  give  the  victoiy  to  the 
Greeks  during  his  alumben,  and  with  difficolty  eacapes 
the  blows  wfałćh  are  aimed  at  ber  when  he  awakea.  No 
one  of  the  goddesses  dared  oontend  with  her.  Diana 
once  attempted  it,  but  her  cheeks  exhibited  the  most 
woful  evidences  of  the  strength  of  the  mighty  Janoi 
All,  in  fine,  who  assumed  to  themselves  or  attribated  u 
others  a  superiority  to  her,  experienced  her  vengeaiic& 
But  she  is,  notwithstanding,  a  female  of  majestic  beaa- 
ty,  the  grandest  of  the  Olympian  goddesses,  well  calca- 
lated  to  inspire  awe,  although  wanting  the  soft,  inatna^ 
adng,  and  heart-touching  beauty  of  Yenus.  Aa  the 
only  wedded  goddess  in  the  Greek  mythology,  ehe  nat- 
nrally  piesided  over  marriage  and  the  birth  of  children. 
It  is  a  signifieant  featoze  of  the  Roman  character  that 
Juno,  in  addition  to  her  other  ąualities,  was  the  guardiaa 
of  the  national  financea,  watching  over  hcr  people  łike  a 
thrifty  mother  and  houśewife ;  and  a  tempie,  coniaining 
the  mint,  was  erected  to  her  on  the  Capitolinc  as  Juds 
Moneta  (the  Money-coiner).  In  the  Roman  ooncepdon 
she  was  also  the  goddess  of  chastity,  and  prostatutes 
were  forbidden  to  toueh  her  altara.  She  was,  in  ahort, 
tlie  protector  of  women.  She  not  only  preaided  orer 
the  fertility  of  marriage,  but  also  over  its  invi<dable 
sanctity,  and  unchastity  and  inoidinate  love  of  8ex^ 
ual  pleasures  were  hated  by  the  g^dese.  Womcn  ia 
childbed  invoked  Juno  Lucina  to  hdp  them,  and  after 
the  delivery  of  the  child  a  table  was  laid  out  for  her  ia 
the  house  for  a  whole  week,  for  newly-bom  chikiraa 
were  Ukewise  under  her  protection.  The  month  of 
June,  which  was  originally  called  Junonins,  was  coi^ 
sidered  to  be  the  most  favorable  period  for  naarrying: 
As  Juno  bas  the  same  charactcristics  as  her  hnaband 
in  80  far  as  they  refer  to  the  female  8ex,  she  ptceidas 
over  all  human  aflkirs,  which  are  based  upon  joatkfc 
and  faithfulness,  but  especially  over  domestic  afihira.  ia 
which  women  are  morę  particnlariy  concemed.'  The 
companions  of  Juno  were  the  Nymphs,  Graces,  and 
Hours.  Isis  was  her  particular  senrant.  Among  ani- 
mals,  the  peacock,  the  goose,  and  the  cuckoo  were  aacied 
to  her.  Her  usual  attribnte  is  the  royal  diadem,  fonned 
like  a  long  triańgle.  She  is  drawn  in  a  canriage  by  tws 
peacocks.  She  had  S0veral  temples  in-  Romę.  The  fint 
day  of  every  month,  and  the  whole  of  June,  weie  oatied 
to  her.  See  Smith,  Diet,  of  Grede  and  Romtm  JSioffra- 
phg,  ii,  658. 

Ju^piter  (the  Latin  form  of.the  Greek  name  Ze»^ 
Zeiźc,  Genit.  Aióc);  the  principal  deity  of  the  Greek  and 
Roman  mythology,  in  which  he  is  fabled  to  hare  becii 
the  son  of  Saturn  and  Ops.  He  is  supposed  to  represent 
the  fertilizing  power  of  the  hearens  (see  Crenzer,  Sjfwy- 
boUk,  ii,  618, 522),  and  was  woishipped  under  varioi»  epi- 
thets. .  See  Walch,  Diatert.  in  A  eta  Apott,  iii,  173 ;  oom- 
pare  Horace,  Odyssey,  i,  x,  5 ;  Ovid,  Fasti,  v,  495 ;  J/«(a- 
marph,  viii,  626 ;  Taetz.  in  Lyoophr.481 ;  "  Hermes  tńiprl 
Acóc,"  Apollod.  BibL  iii,  10, 2 ;  Homer,  Iliada  ii, 402 ;  Tirg. 
^R.  iii,  21;  ix,  627;  Xen.Cyrqp.viii,8,31;  Senec^^rc 
/'Kr.299.  SeeMBRCURY;  DIA29A.  (See  Schmebel,7>r 
J(we  iro\iovxv  ad  Ae,  Altdorf,  1740).  This  deity  is  al- 
luded  to  in  seveFBl  passages  of  the  Bibie,  and  Joeepha 
frequently  refers  to  his  woiship.  The  fuUowing  state* 
ments  are  chiefly  from  Kitto's  Cydopadia,  s.  v. : 

1.  It  is  stated  in  2  Mace  ri,  1,  2,  that  "  the  king  aeu 
an  old  man  of  Athens  (Sept.  'A^iivotiov;  Yulfc.  Antio" 
chenum)  (some  say  *  an  old  man,  Atheneas,^  bul  Gio> 
tius,  following  the  Latin,  suggests  instead  of  'Adi^yoZo^ 
to  read  'Avnóx(toy)  to  oompel  the  Jews  to  depart  finon 


JUPITER 


1099 


JUPITER 


the  1«W8  of  their  foŁherSy  and  not  to  lirę  after  the  Uiws 
of  God ;  and  to  pollute  alBo  the  Tempie  in  Jenualem, 
and  to  cali  it  the  tempie  of  Jupiter  Olympins  (Atóc 
'0\vfimov),  and  that  in  Geiizim,  of  Jupiter  the  defend- 
er  of  strangers  (SepL  Atóc  Stviov ;  Yulg.  Aoąpito^),  as 
they  did  desire  that  dwelt  in  the  place."  Olympius  was 
a  very  oommon  epithet  of  Zeus,  and  he  is  sometimee 
ńmplj  called  'O\vfiirioc  (Homer,  JL  xix,  108).  Olym- 
pia,  in  Greece,  was  the  seat  of  the  tempie  and  sacred 
grove  of  Zeus  Olympias,  and  it  was  here  that  the  fa- 
mous  statuę  of  gold  and  iv'or7,  the  work  of  Phidias,  was 
erected.  Caligula  attempted  to  haye  this  statuę  re- 
moved  to  Romę,  and  it  was  only  piesenred  in  its  place  by 
the  assurance  that  it  would  not  bearTemoyal  (Josephus, 
AfU.  xix,  1,  1).*  Antiochus  Epiphanes,  as  related  by 
AthensMis,  surpassed  all  other  kings  in  his  wership  and 
yeneration  of  the  gods,  so  that  it  was  impoesible  to 
oount  the  nnmber  of  the  statues  he  erected.  His  espe- 
cial  fayorite  was  Zeus.  The  Olympian  Zeus  was  the 
national  god  of  the  Hellenie  race  (Thucydides,  iii,  14), 
as  well  aa  the  supremę  ruler  of  the  heathen  world,  and, 
as  snch,  formed  the  true  opposite  to  Jehoyah,  who  had 
Ryealed  himself  as  the  God  of  Abraham.  Antiochus 
oommonced,  in  B.C.  174,  the  completion  of  the  tempie 
of  Zeus  Olympius  at  Athens  (Polybius,  Reiig,  xxvi,  10; 
Liry,  Ilist.  xli,  20),  and  associated  the  worship  of  Jupi- 
ter with  that  of  Apollo  at  Daphne,  erecting  a  statuę  to 
ihe  former  god  resembling  that  of  Phidias  at  Olympia 
(Amm.  Marceli,  xxii,  18, 1).  Games  were  celebrated  at 
Daphne  by  Antiochus,  of  which  there  is  a  long  aooount 
in  Polybius  (Relig,  xxxi,  8)  and  Athensus  (v,  6).  Coins 
also  were  ^truck  referring  to  the  god  and  the  games 
(Mionnet,  v,  21 5 ;  Ml\ller,  A  rUiq.  A  ntioch,  p.  62-64).  On 
the  ooins  of  Elis,  the  wreath  of  wild  oliye  (jeÓTiyóc)  dis- 
tinguishes  Zeus  Olympius  firom  the  Dodonsan  Zeus, 
who  has  an  oak  wreath. 

Antiochus,  after  compelling  the  Jews  to  cali  the  Tem- 
pie of  Jerusalem  the  tempie  of  Jupiter  01ym|,iu8,  built 
an  idol  altar  upon  the  altar  of  God.  Upon  this  altar 
awine  were  olTered  every  day,  and  the  broth  of  their 
flesh  was  sprinkled  about  the  Tempie  (1  Mace  i,  46;  2 
Mace  vi,  5 ;  Joeephus,  Ant.  xii,  5,  4 ;  xiii,  8,  2 ;  (Fiar,  i, 
1, 2).  The  idol  altar  which  was  ution  the  altar  of  God 
(róv  putfŁÓy  oc  ijv  im  Tov  ^vaiaimi^nov)  was  consider- 
ed  by  the  Jews  to  be  the  ^  abomination  of  desolation** 
(/iSe\vyfia  rw  ipflf"^*^S*  1  Mace  i,  54)  foretold  by 
Daniel  (xi,  81 1  xii,  11)  and  mentioned  łiy  our  Lord 
(Matt.  xxiy,  15).  Many  interpretations  of  the  meaning 
of  this  prophecy  have  been  giyen.  See  Ajjominatiok 
op  Desolation. 

The  grove  of  Daphne  was  not  far  from  Antioch 
(Ad^v>7  1/  irpbc  'AvTióxiiav,  2  Mace.  iv,  88 ;  Josephus, 
TTor,  i,  12, 15),  and  at  this  city  Antiochus  Epiphanes 
erected  a  tempie  for  the  worship  of  Jupiter  Oapitolinus. 
See  Dapiine.  It  is  described  by  Łivy  as  having  its 
walls  entirely  adomed  with  gold  (xli,  20).  To  Jupiter 
Capitolinus  the  Jews,  after  the  taking  of  Jerusalem,  in 
whateyer  country  they  might  be,  were  compelled  by 
Tespasian  to  pay  two  drachnue,  as  they  used  to  pay  to 
the  Tempie  at  Jerusalem  (Josephus,  War,  vii,  6, 6 ;  Dion 
Cass.  lxvi,  7).  Hadrian,  afler  the  second  revolt  of  the 
Jews,  erected  a  tempie  to  Jupiter  Capitolinus  in  the 
place  where  the  tempie  of  God  formerly  stood  (Dion 
Cass.  lxix,  12).  There  Ls,  probably,  reference  madę  to 
Jupiter  Capitolinus  in  Dan.  xi,  38,  ałiuding  to  Antiochus 
Epiphanes :  "  But  in  his  estate  shall  he  worship  the 
god  of  forces**  (fortresses,  0'Vry^  '^^^^  ^^  Gesenius, 
Tkesaur,  s.  v.  TIS?^,  p.  1011),  for  under  this  name  Jupi- 
ter wss  worshipped  by  the  victoriou8  generał  on  his  re- 
turn from  a  campaign,  and  it  was  in  honor  of  Jupiter 
Capitolinus  that  he  celebrated  his  triuroph.  Other  con- 
jectures  have  been  roade  relative  to  this  passage,  but 
the  opinion  of  Gesenius  seems  most  probable.    See  Ma- 

17ZZIM. 

In  the  passage  from  2  Mace.  above  quoted  a  tempie 
-was  alao  ordered  to  be  set  up  to  Zeus  Xenius  on  Mount 
Ckrizim.    Joeephus  gives  a.  different  aooount.    He  re- 


lates  tihat  the  Samaritans,  who,  when  it  pleased  them,> 
denied  that  they  were  of  the  kindred  of  the  Jews,  wiote 
to  Antiochus,  the  god  (^tóc  on  ooins)  Epiphanes,  beg- 
ging  him  to  allow  the  tempie  on  Mount  Gerizim,  which' 
had  no  name  (^Avuwvfiov  Upóy ;  comp. "  Ye  worship  ye 
know  not  what,"  John  iv,  22),  to  be  called  the  tempie 
of  Jupiter  Hellenius  (Ant,  xii,  5,  5).  This  petition  is 
said  to  have  been  granted.  The  epithet  Sivtoc  is  giyen 
to  Zeus  as  the  supporter  of  hospitality  and  the  friend  of 
strangers  (Plutarch,  Amator,  20;  Xenoph.  Anab.  iii,  2, 
4;  Yirgil,  Alneidy  i,  735,  etc.),  and  it  is  explained  in  2 
Mace.  by  the  dause  '^as  they  did  desire  (Greek  ica3aȣ 
kTvyxavoVy  as  they  were ;  \\i\g,prout  erant  hi,  [ss  they. 
were])  who  dwelt  in  the  place."  Ewald  supposes  that 
Jupiter  was  so  called  on  account  of  the  hospitable  dis- 
position  of  the  Samaritans  (Gfschichte,  iv,  889,  note), 
while  Jahn  suggests  that  it  was  because  the  Samaritans^ 
in  their  letter  to  Antiochus  Epiphanes,  said  that  they. 
were  strangers  in  that  country  CHebrew  ComnumweaUh^ 
i,  319) ;  Grotius  says  because  the  dwellers  of  the  place 
were  pilgrims  from  the  regions  of  Mysia  and  Mesopo- 
tamia,  specially  referring  to  their  idolatrous  practices  (2 
Kings  xvii,  24  sq.). 

2.  The  appearance  of  the  gods  upon  earth  was  yery. 
commonly  believed  among  the  ancients.  Accordingly, 
we  find  that  Jupiter  and  Mercury  are  said  to  have  wan-. 
dered  in  Phrygia,  and  to  have  been  entertained  by  Bau<* 
cis  and  Philemon  (Ovid,  J/e/,  viii,  61 1  8q.).  Hence  the 
people  of  Lycaonia,  as  recorded  in  Acts  (xiv,  11),  cried 
out,  ^  The  gods  have  come  down  to  us  in  the  Hkeness  of 
men ;  and  they  called  Bamabas  Jupiter,  and  Paul  Mer- 
curius,  because  he  was  the  chief  speaker."  Bamabaa 
was  probably  identified  with  Jupiter  not  only  because 
Jupiter  and  Merciury  were  companions  (Ovid,  Fasł,  v, 
495),  but  because  his  personal  appearance  was  majestig 
(Chrysostom,  Horn,  xxx ;  Alford,  on  Acts  xiv,  12 ;  comp, 
2  Cor.  X,  1, 10).  Paul  was  identified  with  Mercury  aa 
the  speaker,  for  this  god  was  the  god  of  eloąuence 
(Horace,  Ub.  i,  od.  x,  5,  etc.).  The  tempie  of  Jupiter  at 
Lystra  appears  to  bave  been  outside  the  gates  (jov  Ałoq 
Tov  vvTo\;  TTpb  TTię  iroKuttę,  Acts  xiv,  18),  as  was  fr^r 
quently  the  custom  (Strabo,  xiv,  4 ;  Herod,  i,  26),  and 
the  priest  being  summoneil,  oxen  and  garlauds  wer^ 
brought,  in  order  to  do  sacrifice  with  the  people  to  Paul 
and  Barnabas,  who,  iilled  with  horror,  restrained  tlie 
people  with  great  difficulty.  It  is  well  known  that  oxei| 
were  wont  to  be  sacrificcd  to  Jupiter  (Homer,  //.  ii,  402 ; 
Yirgil,  ^n,  iii,  21 ;  ix,  627;  Xenoph.  Cyrop,  vii,  8, 11, 
etc.).  According  to  the  interpretation  of  others,  how- 
evcr,  the  sacridce  was  about  to  be  offered  before  the 
doors  of  the  house  where  the  apostles  were  {im  tovc  irv^ 
\ajvac),  Alford  {Comment,  ad  loc.)  dcnics  that  there  is 
any  ellipsis  of  tov  vaov  in  the  phrasc  upivc  tov  ^tóc : 
his  references,  however,  do  not  sustain  his  position ;  for 
Złvc  TrpoTcv\u)voc  would  not  necessarily  be  trpb  Trjc  irćf 
\noc,  but  merely  the  tulelary  delty  of  a  private  mausiou. 


Head  of  Jupiter  Olympius. 


8.  The  word  Ev6ia  (fair  or  fine  weather)  is  deriyed 
firom  f  V  and  Aia,    Jupiter,  as  lord  of  heaven,  had  power 


JURĘ  DIYINO 


1100 


JUS  DEYOLUTUM 


ora  all  the  ćhanges  of  th6  weather.  The  Łatana  eveii 
lued  his  name  to  ugnify  the  air— sub  Dio  (Horaoe,  lib. 
ii,  od.  iii,  23),  sub  Joye  frigido  (Horace,  lib.  i,  od.  i,  25, 
etc^  comp. "  the  image  which  fell  down  ftom  Jupiter," 
AtYers. ;  gai  tov  diomroyc^  Acta  xix,  85).  The  word 
tuSia  occun  in  Matt.  xvi,  2,  and  in  Eoclus.  iii,  15.  (For 
a  faU  aocoont  of  Jupiter  and  Zeoa,  see  Smith^s  DicL  of 
Biographffj  a.  v. ;  and  for  a  liat  of  the  epitheta  applied 
to  thia  god,  aee  Bawlinaon,  Herod,  YoL  i,  Appendix,  p. 
680.) 

Jard  Divino,  an  expre0Bion  meaning  **by  cKfrMe 
riffht"  used  in  connection  with  the  ąueation  of  the  aottree 
Ol  che  miniaterial  authority.  They  who  daim  the  **ju8 
diyinum"  for  that  authority  oontend  that  the  epiacopal 
diacipline  and  orders,  having  iaaned  immediately  from 
the  aothority  of  God,  are  the  exdtuwe  channel  throngh 
which  holy  ordinancea  can  be  lawfoUy  or  efficadoudy 
exeicia6d.  Othera,  again  (who  oonaeqnently  relinąmah 
the  jure-<Uvino  daim),  wUle  they  maintain  that  the 
epiacopal  regimen  ia  agreeabLe  to  the  will  of  Chriat  and 
the  practice  of  hia  apoatlea,  do  not  find  a  warrant  for 
holding  the  above  exdnaive  yiewa,  nor  for  aaaerting  the 
utter  inyalidity,  while  they  etiU  admit  the  irregularity 
of  any  other  miniatrationa.  In  thdr  opinion,  the  claima 
of  a  Christian  miniatry  mt  not  on  any  onbroken  auc- 
ceeaion,  but  on  the  baaia  of  the  dwinely  sanctioned  insti- 
totion  of  a  Chriatian  Ghurch.  The  authority,  there- 
fore,  with  which  a  Chriatian  miniater  ia  inveated  they 
condder  to  be  derived  from  Chriat  only  by  yirtue  of  the 
aanction  given  by  him  to  Chriatian  oommunitiea;  and 
they  hołd  that  it  comea  direct  from  the  Church  in  whoee 
name  and  behalf  he  acta  aa  ita  repreaentatiye,  and  joat 
to  that  extent  to  which  it  haa  empowered  and  directed 
him  to  acL  They  conaider  that  the  ayatem  which  makea 
the  aacramental  virtne  of  holy  ordera  inherent  indefea- 
dbly  in  each  individual  miniater  detracta  from  the 
daima  of  the  Church,  makea  the  Church  a  aort  of  ap- 
pendage  to  the  prieathood,.  and,  in  fact,  confounda  the 
Church  with  the  clergy,  aa  if  the  apiritual  community 
consiated  only  of  ita  officera.— Eden,  £ccle».  Dictionaty, 
a.  y.    See  Succession. 

Joriea,  Pierre,  an  eminent  French  Proteatant  the- 
ologian,  was  bom  at  Mer,  in  the  dioceae  of  Bloia,  in  1637. 
He  waa  the  son  of  a  Protestant  miniater,  and  nephew  of 
the  odebrated  Riyet  and  Du  Moului.  He  poss^sed  un- 
common  talents,  and  when  barely  nineteen  recdyed  the 
master'8  degree,  and  after  trayelling  in  Holland  and 
England,  retamed  to  his  country  to  auoceed  hia  father  in 
his  pastorał  ofiice.  His  reputation  for  leaming  in  1674 
obtained  for  him  the  situation  of  profesaor  of  theology 
and  the  Hebrcw  language  in  the  Huguenot  aeminary  at 
Sedan.  When  in  1681  the  Ph)Łeatanca  were  depriyed  by 
Louis  Xiy  of  the  permisaion  to  give  public  instruction 
in  that  town,  he  retired  to  Rouen,  and  from  thence  went 
to  Rotterdam,  where  he  was  appointed  profeseor  of  the- 
ologsr.  In  that  city  the  ardor  of  hia  zeal  soon  drew  him 
into  controyersy  with  Bayle,  Baanage,  and  Saurin,  in 
the  heat  of  which  he  manifested  the  same  rancor  which 
unfortunately  disgracea  most  of  hia  polemical  writinga. 
He  allowed  himsdf  likewiae  to  fali  into  yarioua  errors 
by  too  much  indulging  a  naturally  liydy  imagination  in 
the  interprctatioii  of  piophecy.  In  hia  Commentary  on 
the  Apocalypse  he  eyen  predicted  the  establishment  of 
Protestantism  in  France  during  the  year  1686.  Thoae 
who  differed  from  him  in  opinion,  howeyer  high  their 
character  for  leaming  and  piety,  he  treated  with  a  most 
nnbecoming  seyerity.  Grotius  and  Hammond,  perhaps 
the  two  greatest  theologians  of  their  age,  because  they 
differed  from  him  on  the  subject  of  the  Antichńst  pre- 
dicted in  the  book  of  Reyelation,  ha  styles  "  the  dis- 
grace  ot  the  Reformed  Church,  and  eyen  of  Christian- 
ity."  The  same  spirit  ia  manifested  in  his  wdl-known 
controyersy  with  the  great  Bossuet,  whom  he  does  not 
scmple  to  accuse  of  falsehood  and  dishonesty,  though, 
on  the  other  band,  it  must  be  allowed  that  the  recrimi- 
nationa  of  thia  cdebnted  defender  of  the  Church  of 
Borne,  if  morę  politdy  expres8ed,  are  equally  aeyere  and 


destitute  of  taith ;  the  grett  object  of  Booaet  beiiig,  it 
would  appear,  to  chai^  hia  antagonist  with  hokling  the 
here1|JK»l  opiniona  of  the  Sociniana  (BoaBnet,//»i^,<ies  Fa- 
riotuMu,  iy,  64 ;  V,  236*288).  With  ali  theae  defecta,  Jo- 
rieu  Btanda  deaenredly  high  aa  a  oontioyenialiat.  Hia 
leaming  waa  moat  profoond ;  be  ia  generally  exaict  in  ibe 
dtation  of  hia  authciitieB,  andhe  had  a  apecial  takot  in 
diaooyering  the  weak  point  in  the  cause  of  hia  antago- 
nista. In  reapect  of  style  and  eloąnenoe  he  »  iamieaa- 
urably  behind  Boesnet,  bnt  he  ia  at  leaat  hia  equal  in 
polemical  talent,  and  by  aome  ia  oonflidered  hia  superior 
in  enidition.  Ali  of  hia  writinga  are  held  in  csteem  by 
theologiana  of  eyery  ahade  aa  a  atoidumae  of  great  re- 
aearch.  Juriea'8  pariyate  life  waa  becoming  that  of  a 
Chriatian  miniater;  he  waa  charitable  to  the  poor  al- 
moat  bęyond  hia  meana,  and  employed  his  influence 
abroad  in  alleyiating  the  aufferinga  of  hia  esiled  bretb> 
ren.  He  died  Jan.  11, 1718.  Hia  prindpal  worka  are, 
UitUAn  dtt  Cabńmtme  et  du  Pąpisme  mite  en  partdUlf^ 
etc  (Rotterdam,  1682, 2  yola^  12mo;  2d  ediu,  ibid.  1683, 
12mo):^£e«ref  Postarałeś  (Rotterdam,  1686-7,  3  rola. 
12mo)  i^Le  Vrai  Systems  de  FEgiise  (Dord.  1686,  8yo) : 
-^UEsprU  de  M.Amatdd  (Deyenter  [Rotterdam],  1684, 
2  yola.  12mo): — Prśfugis  Ugitmes  ctmtre  ie  Papierni 
(Amat.  1685, 8yo)  i—Apologie  pour  FA  coon^fHssememi  des 
Prophelies  (1687,  which  haa  been  tnnalated  into  £n- 
gliah,  Lond.  1687, 2  parta,  8yo)  -^La  Bdigim  des  Latitu^ 
dmcares  (Rotteid.  1696, 8yo) ;  Histoire  des  Doffmes  et  des 
Cukes  (Amat.  1704, 12mo ;  also  tnnalated  into  Englisfa, 
Lond.  1705, 2  yds.) :— /.a  poUźigw  du  derffe  de  France 
(Amat.  1681,  l2mo)*^Enfflish  Cydap.;  Herzog,  Real- 
EnofUop,  yii,  126 ;  Hoefer,  Nouv,  Biog,  Generale,  xxyii, 
267  aq. 

Juiiadictiozi  ia  an  ecdeeiaatical  term  denotii^  the 
power  and  authodty  yeated  in  a  biahop,  by  rlrtue  of  the 
apostolical  commiseion,  of  goyeming  and  adminiateriog 
the  laws  of  the  Church  within  the  bounds  of  hia  dio- 
oeae.  The  aame  term  ia  alao  uaed  to  expres8  the  bounds 
within  which  a  biahop  eierdaea  hia  power,  i.  e.  bia  dio- 
ceae. To  define  thia  power  of  the  ecdeaiaatic  propcriy 
from  that  of  dyil  jnriadiction  haa  led  to  no  little  diacii»> 
aion.  Of  old  the  earl  and  biahop  aat  in  the  aame  oourt. 
Aflerwarda  the  biahop  hdd  his  conrts  by  himaelf,  though 
temporal  lords  aat  in  synod  with  biahops — "'  the  one  to 
aearch  the  lawa  of  the  land,  and  the  other  the  laws  of 
God."  The  ąueation  of  jurisdiction,  after  the  peiiod  of 
the  Conqaeror,  waa  often  agitated  between  the  pope  and 
aoyereigna.  The  things,  the  Utter  argued,  and  reaaon- 
ably,  that  are  Oeaar^a  bdong  to  Cnar,  and  it  ia  treaam 
to  take  them  from  him ;  the  things  that  are  Gocl*s  be« 
long  to  God,  and  it  ia  impiety  to  take  them  from  him. 
The  Church  ia  a  free  aociety,  and  ahould  hay«  per- 
fect  power  of  aelf-goyemment  within  ita  own  donaain. 
and  a  purely  apiritual  aentence  ahould  be  b^ond  re» 
yiew  by  a  dyil  oourt.    See  l9rvE8TrruRE;  KiCTs,  l*ow- 

ER  OF. 

Jns  Ab^II,  the  rigkt  ofprotection.  Fimn  the  4th 
oentury,  the  priyilege  of  aayhim,  or  the  right  of  pn^ 
tecting  criminalB,  waa  poaaesaed  by  Christian  chuiches 
and  altars.  This  priyilege  had  bdonged  to  aacred  plaoea 
among  Hebrews,  Greeks,  and  Romans,  and  from  tbem  it 
may  haye  been  adopted  by  Christiana.  It  aeema  to  hare 
been  first  introduced  into  the  Christian  Choich  in  the 
thne  of  Constantine;  but  the  right  waa  aabeeąuendy 
much  circumscribed  by  yarious  restrictions,  aa  it  was 
found  to  be  a  serions  hinderanoe  to  the  administiauoa 
of  justice.  Since  the  16th  century  the  privikg<e  haa 
been  almoet  entirdy  aboUshedL— FarrBr,l.*cofeii.jMi.s. 
y.    See  Asylum. 

Jus  Devoltltiim  (detfole^d  right).  When,  in  the 
Established  Church  of  Scotland,  a  patron  docsi  not  pie- 
sent  to  a  parish  within  8ix  montha  after  the  comoieiioe- 
ment  of  the  yacancy,  the  right  of  pieaentation  CaUs  w 
the  presbytery,  tanguamjure  decoluto,  Siill  further  to 
goard  against  abuse,  it  Kas  been  enacted  (act  17  Id,  e.  29) 
*'  that  if  any  patron  shall  preeent  any  person  to  a  ya- 
cant  churdi  who  ahall  not  be  qualified,  by  taking  and 


JTISHAB-HHESED 


1101 


JUSTICE 


sabflcribing  the  said  oath  in  manner  afbresaid,  or  shall 
present  a  penon  to  any  racancy  who  U  then  or  shall  be 
pastor  or  minister  of  any  otber  chuioh  or  parish,  or  any 
pemn  who  shall  not  accept  or  declare  his  willingness 
to  acoept  of  the  presentation  and  charge  to  which  be  is 
presented  within  the  said  time,  such  presentation  shall 
not  be  aocoonted  any  interraption  of  the  course  of  time 
aliowed  to  the  patron  for  presenting;  but  the  ju»  dtvo- 
lutum  shall  take  place  as  if  no  such  presentation  had 
been  offered,  any  law  or  cnstom  to  the  contraiy  not- 
withstanding."  — Eadie,  Eoektkutioal  JHetionary^  s.  v. 
See  Patronaoe. 

Jus  Ibnnriaram.    See  Spoliatiok. 

Jus  Gislii  or  Metatos.    See  Immumity. 

Ju^ahab-he^sed  (Hebrew  Yuthal/^Che^Md,  ^wn^ 
*10n,  retumer  ofkbtdness;  Sept.  'AffojSaioS  v.  r.  'Acro- 
pi2r;  Yolg.  Jotabhe»ed\  the  last  named  of  the  sona  of 
Pedaiah,  of  the  royal  linę  of  Jadah  (1  Chroń,  iii,  20;  see 
Strong'8  ffarm,  and  Expos,  o/ the  GcapeU^  p.  17,  where  it 
is  shown  that  this  is  not  a  son  of  Zembbabcl,  as  appears 
in  the  texty  which  immediately  adds  that  these  sons 
were  in  all/re^either  meaning  nierely  those  enumcrated 
in  the  same  yeise,  or  reąairing  one  of  these  [prob.  the 
one  in  guestion,  sińce  it  lacks  the  distinctive  connecting 
particie  \  *'and*^]  to  be  regarded  as  another  name  for 
the  preceding,  inasmuch  as  at  least  nx  sons  woold  oth- 
erwise  be  enumerated.    See  ver.  19).    B.CX  cir.  636. 

Jus  prlmanmi  precuni.    See  £xpecta2(cy. 

Juotel,  Christopher,  an  eminent  French  Protes- 
tant canonist,  was  bom  at  Paris  in  1560.  He  became 
counseUor  and  secretAry  to  the  king  of  France,  and  died 
in  1649.  He  is  said  to  have  been  one  of  the  most  leamed 
men  of  the  Middle  Ages,  and,  according  to  Haag,  one  of 
those  whose  writings  throw  great  light  on  the  obscure 
parts  of  the  history  of  the  earl^  Church.  His  works 
have  been  published  nnder  the  style  ot  BtbSotheea  juris 
canotdci  V€terig,  in  duos  tomot  disłribut<i,  guorum  umu 
cananum  ecdesicuticorum  codices  awtiguosy  tum  Gnecos, 
tum  Laiinos  eomplectUur;  alłerrero  insiffnioresjurii  ca- 
nonici  vełeru  ooUeciora  Grascos  exhtbet,  ex  anticuis  eodi- 
cUnis  3fSS,  BibliotkecoB  Chrittjopkori  JutteUu  Opera  et 
ttwUo  Gulidm  YoelHf  theologi  ac  aocii  Sarbcmici,  et  Henr 
rid  JusUUi,  Ckrutophori  F.  (Paris,  1661,  2  rola.  fd.).— 
Hoefer,  Nouo,  Biog.  Genirak,  xxyii,  287. 

Jnstel,  Henry,  a  French  Protestant  canonist,  son 
of  Christopher  Justel  (q.  v.),  was  bom  at  Paris  in  1620. 
He  succeeded  his  father  as  secretary  and  connsellor  to 
king  Henry  lY.  He  appears  to  have  foreseen  the  com- 
ing  revocation  of  the  Edict  of  Nantes  (1685),  and  went 
to  London  in  1681.  He  was  there  appointed  librarian 
of  St.  James,  and  retained  that  situation  until  his  death, 
SepL  24, 1698.  He  had  sent  to  the  Univenity  of  Ox- 
foni,  by  his  Mend  Dr.  Hickes,  the  original  Greek  MS. 
of  the  Canone$  Eodeake  umversaHs,  and  receive<l  in  re- 
turn from  that  institution  the  degree  of  LL.D.  in  1675. 
He  was  a  friend  of  Locke  and  Leibnitz,  and  corresponded 
with  most  of  the  leamed  men  of  his  day,  by  all  of  whom 
he  was  highly  esteemed.  His  principid  work  is  his  edi- 
taon  of  Christopher  JustePs  (see  above)  Btbliotheca  jur 
TU  eanmiei  reteris,  See  Chaaffepid,  Aour.  Diet,  I/isior. 
et  CriL ;  Dupin,  BtbUoiheca  des  A  uteurt  £cc^.— Hoefer, 
Naup.  Biog.  Geniraley  xxvii,  289. 

Jnatl,  Karl  Wiuielm,  a  German  Protestant  thco- 
logian,  was  bom  at  Marburg,  January  14, 1767.  He  Fas 
educated  at  Jena,  and  became  a  private  tutor  at  Metdar, 
whence  he  remoyed  to  Marburg  as  a  preacher  in  1790. 
In  1793  he  was  chosen  professor  of  philosophy  in  the 
uniyenity.  In  1801  he  was  appointed  archdeaoon ;  soon 
after,  superintendent  and  consistorialrath;  in  1814  was 
madę  oberpfiirrer,  and  in  1822  profeesor  of  theology.  He 
died  Aug.  7, 1846.  Justi  devoted  himself  to  the  stady 
of  O.  and  N.  T.  ezegesis,  after  the  method  of  Eichhora 
and  Herder.  He  was  a  man  of  eradition,  taste,  and  lib- 
enlity.    The  Prophets  of  the  O.  T.  occupied  his  chief 


attention,  and  he  pi^iHabed  editions  of  sereral  books  of 
the.  O.  Test.  ScriptuieiL  But  he  is  espedally  noted  for 
the  tłuee  following  works :  NaiUmalgetange  der  HArSer 
(1808-1818,  8  Yols.)  *.— an  enlaiged  edition  of  Herder's 
Geitt  der  ff^iUacken  Poerie  (1829,  2  toIs.)  :-^Blumen 
aWubrmacher  DickOamat  (1809,  2  \o]&.)  \-- Ziomtiache 
HttrfenkidHge  (1829).— Kitto,  Cychpadia  o/ BUUical 
Literaturę,  ii,  699;  Brockhaus,  Coweraatiotu^Lea,  yiii, 
566. 

JustlOe  (P7^>  righieauMnesB,  as  an  intemal  trait  of 
chaiacter ;  I3BVpp,  judgmtMt,  as  a  judicial  act),  as  ap- 
plied  to  men,  is  one  of  the  four  cardinal  yirtnca.  Itcon- 
sists,  aooording  to  Cicero  (J)t  FitabuM,  libu  v,  cap.  23),  tn 
8UO  cuigue  tr^etido,  in  according  to  evexy  one  his  right. 
By  the  Py  thagoreans,  and  also  by  Plato,  it  was  regarded 
aa  indnding  lOl  human  yirtue  or  duty.  The  word  right- 
eoumeas  is  usedin  our  tranalation  of  the  Scriptures  in  a 
like  extGn8ive  signification.  As  opposed  to  equity,  jus- 
tice  {to  vofjiuc6v)  means  doing  merely  what  positiye  law 
requires,  while  equity  (ró  iaov)  means  doing  what  is  fair 
and  right  in  the  circumstances  of  eyery  particular  case. 
Justioe  is  not  founded  in  law,  as  Hobbes  and  others  hołd, 
but  in  our  idea  of  what  is  right.  Laws  are  just  or  un- 
Just  in  80  far  as  they  do  or  do  not  conform  to  that  idea, 
Jnstice  may  be  distinguished  as  ethical,  economical,  and 
political.  The  first  consists  in  doing  justice  between 
man  and  man  as  men ;  the  second,  in  doing  justice  be- 
tween the  members  of  a  family  or  household ;  and  the 
thiid,  in  doing  justice  between  the  members  of  a  com- 
munity  or  commonwealth  CSlore,  mnchiriiUon  Hthicum; 
Groye,  Morał  Pkilotophy),  Dr.  Watte  giyes  the  follow- 
ing rules  respecting  justice :  ^  1.  It  is  just  that  we  honor, 
reyerence,  and  rcspect  those  who  are  superiors  in  any 
kind  (Eph.  yi,  1, 8 ;  1  Pet  ii,  17;  1  Tim.  y,  17).  2.  That 
we  show  particular  kindness  to  near  relations  (Proy.  xyii, 
17),  8.  That  we  loye  those  who  loye  us,  and  show  grat- 
itude  to  those  who  hayc  done  us  good  (GaL  iv,  15).  4. 
That  we  pay  the  fuli  due  to  those  whom  we  bargain  or 
deal  with  (Rom.  xiii ;  Deut.  xxiy,  14).  5.  That  we  help 
our  fcllow-creatures  in  cases  of  great  necessity  (Exod. 
xxii,  4).  6.  Reparation  to  those  whom  we  have  wilfuUy 
injured"  (Watts,  Sermotu,  serm.  xxiy,  xxyi,  voL  ii).  Sec 
Wollaston,  Religion  o/Nature,  p.  187, 141 ;  Jay,  Sermons, 
ii,  181. 

Justice  of  God  is  that  perfection  whereby  he  is  in- 
finitely  righteous,  both  in  himself  and  in  all  his  pioceed- 
ings.  Mr.  Ryland  defines  it  thus :  "  The  ardent  inclina- 
tion  of  his  will  to  prescribe  equal  laws  as  the  supremę 
goyemor,  and  to  dispense  equal  rewards  and  puiiish- 
ments  as  the  supremę  judge"  (Rey.  xyi,  5 ;  Psa.  cxlv,  7; 
xcyi],  1, 2).  This  altributo  of  the  Supremę  Being  u  the 
necessary  result  of  the  diyiiie  holiness,  as  exhibited  in 
all  his  extemal  relations  to  intelligent  creaturcs.  As 
holiness,  in  relation  to  God,  is  subjectiye,  declaring  his 
perfect  purity,  justice  is  objectiye,  exhibiting  his  oppo- 
sition  to  sin  as  the  transgression  of  his  law.  (These  two 
aspects  are  exactly  exhibited  by  the  two  Hebrew  terms 
aboye.)  Diyine  justice  is  distinguished  as  legislatiye,  and 
rectoral  or  distńbutiye.  /^,^if2a<tre  j  ustice  must  approye 
and  require  that  rational  creatures  conform  their  inter- 
nal  and  extemal  acts  to  the  dictates  of  the  morał  law, 
which,  either  by  the  influence  of  the  Holy  Spirit  on  the 
conscience  or  by  direct  reyelation,  has  been  madę  kuown 
to  all  men.  Rectoral  or  di$tributice  justice  is  God'8  deal» 
ing  with  his  accountable  creatures  according  to  the  sanc- 
tions  of  his  law,  rewarding  or  punisbing  them  according 
to  their  deserts  (Psa.  lxxxix,  14).  The  latter  is  again 
distinguished  into  remuneratiye  and  pwiitiye  justice. 
Remuneratiye  justice  is  a  distribution  of  rewards,  the 
rule  of  which  b  not  the  merit  of  the  creaturc,  but  God*s 
own  gracious  promise  (James  i,  12 ;  2  Tim.  iy,  8).  Puni- 
tiye  or  yindictiye  justice  is  the  infliction  of  punishment 
for  any  sin  committed  by  men  (2  Thess.  i,  6).  That  God 
will  not  let  sin  go  unpunished  is  eyident:  1.  From  the 
word  of  God  (Exod.  xxxiy,  6, 7;  Numb.  xiy,  18;  Neh. 
4,8) ;  2.  From  the  natura  of  God  (Isa.  i,  18, 14;  Pte.  y, 


JUSTICE 


no2r 


JUSTIFICATION  . 


5; 6;  Heb. zii, 29);  8.  From  sin being punuhed  in Ghrbt, 
the  siirety  of  his  people  (1  Pet.  iii,  18);  4.  From  all  the 
vańous  iiatural  eyils  which  men  bear  in  the  present 
State.  The  use  we  shoiiid  make  of  thia  doctrine  ia  thia : 
1.  We  shoold  leam  the  dieadrul  naturę  of  sin,  and  the 
ineritable  ruin  of  impenitent  sinners  (Psa.  ix,  17).  2.  We 
should  highiy  appreciate  the  Lord  Jesus  Christ,  in  whom 
jastioo  is  satisfied  (1  Pet  iii,  18>  8.  We  should  imitate 
the  justice  of  God  by  cherishing  an  ardent  regard  to  the 
rights  of  God  and  to  the  rights  of  mankind.  4.  We 
should  abhor  all  sin,  as  it  strikes  directly  at  the  Justice 
of  God.  5.  We  should  derire  comfort  from  the  oonsid- 
eration  that  the  jndge  of  all  the  earth  wili  do  right  aa 
regardfl  ourselres,  the  Church,  and  the  world  at  laige 
(Pba.  xcvii,  1,2).  See  Ryland,  Coniemp,  ii,  489 ;  Witsius, 
JSwnomjf,  lib.  xi,  eh.  viii,  xi ;  Owen,  On  the  Jutiioe  o/God  ; 
Oill, Bodtf  oflHvwUy,  i,  156, 8vo;  Elisha  Gole,  On  the 
JUghteowmess  of  God;  Henderson*s  Buck,  s.  y. 

JUSTICE,  ADMiNiSTRATiON  opI  This  seems  to  have 
been  one  of  the  first  subjects  which  daimed  the  atten- 
tion  of  the  great  lawgiver  of  the  Hebrews.  It  appears 
fyom  the  adyice  of  Jethro  to  Moses  when  "  Israel  was 
encamped  at  the  Mount  of  God"  (Exod.  xviii,  18-24). 
When  Jethro  had  seen  how  constantly  and  laboriously 
Moses  was  occupied  in  '*  judging  between  one  and  an- 
other,"  he  advised  him  to  make  some  other  provision  in 
relation  to  the  matter,  and  to  restrict  himself  to  the 
work  which  properly  belonged  to  him,  as  the  inspired 
teacher  and  leader  of  the  people.  This  was  according- 
ly  done.  A  civil  magistracy  was  created  in  a  form 
adapted  to  the  existing  wants  of  the  people,  and  by 
reference  to  the  record  we  shafl  find  how  fuUy  it  oovers 
every  essential  point  in  the  case.  The  value  of  eri- 
dence  in  conducting  trials;  the  prindples  upon  which 
yerdicts  should  be  rendered,  both  in  civil  and  criminal 
cases,  together  with  the  great  institution  of  trial  by 
Jury,  are  all  found  in  greater  or  less  developmcnt  in  the 
Btatutes  and  ordinances  given  from  God  to  the  Hebrews. 

Thcir  courts  of  justice  were  of  rarious  grades,  some 
known  as  high  courts  of  appeal,  and  others  so  sirople 
and  multiplied  as  to  carry  the  administration  of  justice 
to  every  man  s  door,  and  eifectually  to  secure  the  parties 
against  that  ruinous  evil, "the  law^s  delay."  '* Judges 
and  offices  shalt  thou  make  in  all  thy  gates,**  was  the 
command ;  and  to  what  minutę  subdivision  this  creation 
of  tribunals  was  carried  out,  we  see  in  the  ordinance  di- 
recting  that  there  should  be  ''rulers  over  thousands, 
rulers  over  hundreds,  rulers  over  fifties,  and  rulers  over 
tens,  who  should  judge  the  people  at  all  seasons." 

The  candidatGs  for  office  were  not  to  be  selected  from 
any  one  privileged  class.  They  were  taken  "out  of  all 
the  people."  They  were  reąuired  to  be  well  known  for 
their  inteUectual  and  morał  worth,  and  their  fitness  for 
the  station  to  which  they  were  chosen.  They  were  to  be 
"  able  men,  such  as  fear  God;  men  of  truth,  hating  cov- 
etousness;'*  "wise  men,  and  understanding,  and  known 
among  the  tribes;'*  and  these  qualifications  being  not 
only  all-important,  but  all-sufficient,  nonę  others  were 
reąuired. 

Witlfi  a  judiciary  constructed  aAer  this  manner,  jus- 
tice could  be  administered  proraptiy  and  freely;  and,  on 
the  othcr  hand,  a  remedy  was  proyided  against  the  evils 
of  hasty  dccision,  which  could  not  fail  in  the  end  to  dis- 
cover  and  maintain  the  right  of  the  case.  And  if  "  the 
best  Uws  are  those  which  are  best  administered,"  we 
shall  find  the  ordinances  given  to  the  Hebrews  for  car- 
rying  the  laws  of  the  land  into  effect  admirably  adapted 
to  their  end,  giving  eąual  security  to  the  poor  and  to 
the  rich  against  yiolence  and  wrong.  See  Judge  ;  Tri- 
AU     (E.deP.) 

JuBtification  (some  form  of  the  verbe  pTL,  Susai- 
6w)f  a  forensic  term  equivalent  to  acguittalj  and  opposed 
to  condemnation ;  in  an  apologetic  sense  it  is  often  sy- 
nonymous  with  tindiccUion  or  freeing  from  unjust  impu- 
tation  of  blame. 
.  hI>offmaiic  StaUmenł, ^ThiB  term,  in  theological 


usage,  is  employsd  to  desijgnate  the  Jodidal  act  of  God 
by  which  he  pardons  all  the  sins  of  the  sinner  who  be- 
lieves  in  Christ,  receiving  him  into  favor,  and  regarding 
him  as  relatively  righteooa,  notwithstanding  his  psit 
actual  nnrighteottsness.  Hence  jnstificatioo,  and  the  rfr> 
mission  or  forgivenees  of  sin,  relate  to  one  and  the  same 
act  of  God,  to  one  and  the  same  privilege  of  his  beliey- 
ing  people  (Acts  xiii,  88, 89;  Rom.  iv,  5, 8).  •  So,  also, 
"the  jastification  of  the  ungodly,"  the  "corering  of 
sins,"  " not  yisiting  for  sin,"  "not  remembering  sin,"  and 
"  imputing  not  inąuity,"  mean  to^paidon  sin  and  to  treat 
with  favor,  and  expre8s  substantially  the  aame  thing 
which  is  designated  by  "imputing  or  counting  faith  for 
righteousness."  See  Pardon.  '  Jiistification,  then,  id  an 
act  of  God,  not  in  or  upon  man,  but  for  him  and  in  his 
favor ;  an  act  which,  abstiactly  con8idered,teBpecte  man 
only  as  its  object,  and  trandates  him  into  another  rela- 
tive  State;  while  sancUfication  respecto  man  as  iUsub- 
ject,  and  is  a  consequent  of  this'  act  of  God,  and  insep- 
arably  connected  with  it.    See  Reoeneratiok. 

The  originating  cause  of  justification  is  the  free  grace 
and  spontaneous  love  of  God  towards  fallen  man  (Kom. 
i,  6 ;  iii,  24;  Tit.  ii,  11;  iii,  4, 5).  Our  Lord  Jesus  Christ 
18  the  sole  meritorious  cause  of  our  justification,  ina»- 
much  as  it  js  the  result  of  his  atonement  for  us.  The 
sacrificial  death  of  Christ  b  an  expedicnt  of  infinite 
wisdom,  by  which  the  fuli  claims  of  the  law  may  be  ad- 
mitted,  and  yet  the  penalty  avoided,  because  a  monl 
compensation  or  equivalent  has  been  proyided  by  tbe 
sufferings  of  him  who  died  in  the  8inner's  stead  (Eph.  i, 
7;  CoL  i,  14;  Rev.  v,  J).  Thus,  while  it  appears  ihat 
our  justification  ia,  iunts  origin,  an  act  of  the  higliest 
grace,  it  is  alsó,  in  its  modę,  an  act  most  perfectly  cod- 
sistent  with  God*s  essential  righteousness,  and  demon- 
stratiye  of  his  inviolable  justice.  It  proceeds  not  on  the 
principle  of  abolishing  the  law  or  its  penalty,  for  that 
would  have  implied  that  the  law  was  unduly  rigorous 
either  in  its  preoepts  or(in  its  sanctions.  See  Atone- 
ment. 

Faith  is  the  instmmental  cause  of  Justification.  prez- 
ent faith  in  him  who  is  able  to  save,  faith  actually  cx- 
isting  and  exercised.  See  Faith.  The  atonement  of 
Jesus  is  not  acceptcd  for  ua,  to  our  individual  justifica- 
tion, until  we  individually  belieye,  nor  after  we  ceaae  to 
live  by  faith  in  him.    See  iMPirrATioN. 

The  immediate  results  of  justification  are  the  rcstora- 
tion  of  amity  and  intercourse  between  the  pardoncd  sio- 
ner  and  the  pardoning  God  (Rom.  v,  1 ;  James  ii,  23) ; 
the  adoption  of  the  persons  justified  into  the  family  of 
God,  and  thcir  conseąuent  right  to  etemal  life  (Rom. 
viii,  17) ;  and  the  indwelling  of  the  Holy  Spirit  (Acts  iL 
88;  GaL  iii,  14;  iv,  6),  producing  tranąuillity  of  eon- 
science  (Rom.  viii,  15, 16),  power  over  sin  (Rom.  viii,  1> 
and  a  joyous  hope  of  heaven  (Rom.  xv,  13 ;  GaL  v,  3). 
See  Spirit,  Fruits  of. 

We  must  not  forget  that  the  Justification  of  a  sinner 
does  not  in  the  least  degree  alter  or  dimini^h  the  eril 
naturę  and  desert  of  sin.  Though  by  an  act  of  divine 
cleroency  the  penalty  is  remitted,  and  the  obligation  to 
sulTer  that  penalty  is  dissolyed,  stiU  it  is  naturally  dne, 
though  graciously  remitted.  Henoe  appear  the  propri- 
ety  and  duty  of  continuing  to  confess  and  lament  eren 
purdoned  sin  with  a  lowly  and  contrite  heart  (Kzek.  xn, 
62).— Watson,  Theolog.  Diet,  s.  v.     See  Penttence. 

II.  History  ofihe  boctrine.—l.  The  early  Ckurck  Fa- 
then  and  the  LaHn  CftureA.— Ecdesiastlcal  science,  from 
the  .beginnlng  of  its  developm«nt,  occupied  itaelf  with 
a  discussion  on  the  relation  of  faith  to  knowledge; 
but  even  those  who  attributed  the  greatest  importaoce 
to  the  latter  reoognised  faith  as  the  foundatiun.  A 
merely  logical  diyision  into  Babjective  and  objectire 
faith,  and  an  intimation  of  a  distinctton  between  a  his- 
torie and  a  ratioiud  faith  (in  Cleroens  A]exandriniis, 
Stromat,  ii,  454;  Augustine,  De  Trmiiate,  xiii,  2),  were 
of  little  consequenoe.i  Two  oonceptions  became  prerail- 
ing :  Faith  as  a  generał  religious  convicUon,  particiilar^ 
ly  as  confidence  in  God,  and  the  aoceptance  of  the  en- 


JTSTIFICATION 


1103 


JUSTIFICATION 


tłre  doćtrineoftbe  Chnreh^jStief  catiioUetu  The  foN 
mnla  that  faith  alone  wit^out  the  worka  Jostifles  is 
(eand  in  the  ftiU  Panline  aense  in  Clemena  Romanua  (1 
ad  Corinihios,  c.  82)|  and.ia  aometiroes  ufied  by  Augua- 
tine  polemically  in  oider  to  defend  the  freedom  of  gnoe 
and  the  priori^  of  faith.  Morę  generally  it  is  uaed  as 
ąn  argument  againat  the  neoeinty  of  the  Jewuih  law 
(Irensua,  iv,  25;  Tertnllian,  ado.  MarcdL  y,  8). :  The 
oBcumenical  ajruoda  were  inatrumental  in  gradoidly  giy- 
ing  to  the  oonception  ofjldes  catkoUca  the.  new  aenae 
tj^iat  salyation  oould  be  found  only  by  adhereooe  to.eo- 
desiaatical  orthodoxy.  Bot  as  a  merę  aceeptanoe  was 
poaaible  without  a  really  Christian  sentiment,  and  as 
Uie  Panline  doctrine  was  mistised  by  heretics  in  an  an- 
^omiaii  sense,  ik  was  demanded  that  faith  be  proved 
by  works.  Church  discipline  deyeloped  this  idea  with 
legaid  to  the  sins  of  the  faithful,  so  as  to  demand  a  sat^ 
i^fiiiction  through  penanoea  and  good  works  (Augustine, 
Serm,  161, 12).  It  became,  therefore,  the  doctrine  of 
ihe. Church  that  snch  iaith  alone  worka  salyation  as 
abows  itself  in  acts  of  charity,  whik  to  merely  eztemal 
woiks  faith  or  chańty  is  opposed  aa  something  ao- 
9BBsory.  Pełagius  assomed  only  a  reUtiye  distinction 
^ween  naturally  good  works  and  the  good  works  that 
prooeed  from  faith ;  in  opposition  to  which  Augustine 
insisted  that  the  difference  is  absolute,  and  that  with- 
<mt  faith  no  good  works  at.all  are  possible.  As  salya- 
tion was  thought  to  be  oonditioned  by  works  also,  it 
^Wy  eyen  when  it  was  represented  as  beiug  merely  an 
fct  of  God,  identilied  with  sanctification.  The  impor- 
tiimce  attributed  to  abstention  created  graduaUy.a  dis- 
t^ction.between  commands  and  advioes,  and  jthe  belief 
that  through  the  fulfilment  of  the  latter  a  yirtue  greater 
than  required  would  arise  (Hermas,  Pastor  SimiL  iii,  5, 
3 ;  Origen,  In  EpisUAam  ad  Rom,  iii ;  Ambrose,  De  Vi' 
dttis,  iy,  508> 

2.  The  Greek  Church.  — lAttle  diacnsaion  and  little 
<;ontroyersy  has  occurred  on  this  doctrine  in  the  Greek 
Church.  Faith  and  works  together  are  regarded  as  the 
conditions  of  salyation.  The  words  of  James  are  refer- 
iced  to  fiist,  yet  faith  is  deolared  to  be  the  stock  from 
which  the  gcŃod  works  oome  as  the  iruits.  The  desciip- 
tion  of  faith  proceeds  fjom  the  delinition  in  the  Epistle 
to  the  Hebrews  to  the  acoeptance  of  the  entire  ecdesi- 
astical  tradition.  Man  is  said  to  participate  in  the 
merit  of  the  Mediator  not  only  through  faith,  but  also 
through  good  worka.  Among  the  latter  are  comprised 
the  fulfilment  of  the  commandments  of  God  and  of  the 
Cfanrch,  and,  in  particular,  prayers,  faatings,  pilgrimages, 
ąnd  monastic  life.  They  are  oonsidered  useful  and  nec- 
essaiy  not  only  as  a  means  of  proraoting  sanctification, 
but  also  as  penances  and  satisfaction. 

8.  Doctrine  ofthe  Roman  CaikoUe  Church  durmg  the 
Middle  Ages^—The  Scholastics  regarded  faith  as  an  ac- 
oeptance of  the  supersensual  as  far  as  it  belongs  to  re- 
ligion,  differing  both  from  intuition  and  from  knowl- 
edge;  and  although  estentially  of  a  theoretic  character, 
yet  conditioned  by  the  consent  of  the  will,  which,  how- 
eyer,  in  the  description  of  faith,  is  reduced  to  a  minimum. 
Originally  only  God  is  an  ob|ect  of  faith,  but  raediately 
also  the  holy  Scriptures;  as  a  sumroary  q{  the  Biblical 
doctrines,  the  Apostles'  Creed,  and,  as  its  explication, 
the  entire  doctrine  of  the  Roman  Catholic  Cburoh.  As 
an  accurate  knowledge  of  the  doctrines  of  the  Church 
cannot  be  expected  from  eyery  one,  the  subjectiye  dis- 
tinction was  madę  between,;S(i{e«  implicita  and  explicita ; 
the  former  sufficieut  for  the  people,  yet  with  the  demand 
of  a  deyeloped  belief  in  soroe  chief  artidea.  There  was, 
howeyer,  a  diflerence  of  opinion  on  what  these  articles 
were,  and  eyen  Thomas  Aquinas  wayered  in  bis  .yiews. 
Faith  may,  eyeu  upon  earth,  partly  become  a  science, 
and  appears  in  this  restpect  only  as  the  popular  form  of 
religion.  It  is  a  condition  of  salyation,  but  becomes  a 
yirtue  only  when  love^  as  animating  principle  [forma], 
peryades  it  [fides  fonnata] ;  with  a  merę  faith  [infor- 
mis]  one  may  be  damned.  The  Jides  formatu  includes 
the  necessity  of  the  good  works  fpr  salyation,  but  tbey 


musi  be  foanded  in  pious  sentiment.  AU  other  works,' 
not  pTOceeding  from  faith,  are  dead,  though  not  entirely 
uaelćsa.  The  necessity  of  good  works  is  fully  carried 
out  only  by  the  inculcation  of  penance  as  satisfactioneSf 
but  with  constant  reference  to  a  union  of  the  soul  with 
Christ,  and  the  morał  effect  of  the  good  worka.  .  Justi- 
fication,  aocording  to  Thomas  Aquinas,  is  a  moyement 
from  the  state  of  injustice  into  the  state  of  justice,  in 
which  the  remission  of  sins  is  the  main  point,  though  it 
is  oonditioned  by  an  infusion  of  grace  which  aotually 
jnstifies  men.  Aa  an  act  of  God  which  establishes  in 
mana  new  state  [habitus],  it  is  accomplished  in  a  mo- 
ment. Among  the  people  the  Pelagian  yiews  preyail- 
ed,  that  man,  by  merely  outward  works,  had  to  gain  his 
salyation,  and  the  Church  became,  especially  through 
the  tiafilc  in  indulgenoes,  a  prey  to  the  immoral  and 
insipid  wonhip  of  ceremonies.  In  opposition  to  this 
ooimption,  numy  of  the  ptons  Mystics  pointed  to  the 
Panline  doctrine  €t  faith. 

4.  Doctrine  ofihe  Refonners  ofthe  Wh  Century  and 
łke  old  ProteMant  Doffmaties.—The  Reformation  of  the 
16th  oentnry  lenewed  the  Panline  doctrine  of  justifica- 
tion  by  &ith  akme,  emphauzing,  in  the  sense  of  Augus- 
tine, the  entire  hdpłesmess  of  man,  and  madę  it  the 
fundamental  doctrine  of  the  Reformed  Church.  lliis 
faith  is  represented  as  not  merely  an  acceptance  of  his- 
torie facts,  but  is  distinguished  aajideg  ępecialis  from 
the  generał  religious  conyiction,  arising  amidst  the  ter- 
rors  of  oonacience,  and  consisting  in  an  entire  despair  of 
one's  own  merit  and  a  confident  surrendcr  to  the  mercy- 
of  God  in  the  atoning  death  of  Christ  Worked  by  God, 
it  does  not  work  as  yirtue  or  merit,  but  merely  through 
the  apprehension  of  the  merit  of  Christ.  Its  necessity 
lies  in  the  impossibility  of  becoming  reconciled  with  God 
through  one*B  own  power.  Hcuce  this  reconciliation  ia 
impossiUe  through  good  work9,  which  are  i.ot  nccessary 
for  salyadon,  though  God  rewards  thcm,  according  to 
his  promise,  upon  earth  and  in  heayen ;  but,  as  a  neoes- 
saiy  consequence,  the  really  good  works  will  fłow  forth 
from  faith  freely  and  copiously.  The  opinion  of  Ams- 
dorf,  that  good  works  are  an  obstade  to  salyation,  was  re-' 
garded  as  an  unfortnnate  exprefi8ion,  which  may  be  taken 
in  a  true  aense,  though  it  is  false  if  understood'  in  a  gen- 
erał sense.  As  man  is  unable  to  satisfy  the  law,  super- 
erogatory  works  and  a  satisfaction  through  one's  own 
works  are  impoasiUe.  Justification  through  loye  b  im- 
poflsible,  becsause  man  cannot  love  God  truły  amidst  the 
ternwB  of  conscienoe.  Hence  justification  is  a  diyine 
judicial  act,  which,  through  the  apprehension  of  the  jus- 
tice of  Christ;  apprehended  in  faith,  accepts  the  sinner 
as  just,  though  be  is  not  just  This  strict  distinction 
between  justification  and  sanctification  was  maintained 
on  the  one  hand  against  Scholasticism,  which,  through 
its  Pelagian  tendendes,  seemed  to  offend  against  the- 
honor  of  Christ,  and  to  be  unable  to  satisfy  conscience, 
and  on  the  other  hand  against  Oóander,  who  regarded 
justification  as  being  complęted  only  in  sanctification. 
The  works  eyen  of  the  regenerated,  according  to  the 
naUiral  side,  were  regarded  by  the  Rcformen  as  sina. 
The  Reformed  tbeolo^  in  generał  agrecd  with  the  doc- 
trine of  justification  as  stated  aboye,  yet  did  not  make 
it  to  the  same  eztent  the  fundamental  doctrine  of  the 
whole  theology.-  According  to  Calrin,  justification  and 
sanctification  took  place  at  the  same  time.  The  dog- 
matic  writers  of  the  Lutheran  Church  distinguished  in 
faith  knowledge,  assent,  and  confidence,  assigning  the 
former  two  to  the  intellcct,  the  latter  to  the  will  From 
the,/S(i{e«^ffieralw  they  dbtinguished  the  justifying  faith 
(apecialis  seu  salyifica),  and  rejected  the  diyision  into 
Jides  informi*  et  formuła.  As  a  distinguishing  mark, 
they  demanded  from  a  true  faith  that  it  be  eflicient  in 
charity.  For  works  they  took  the  Decalogue  as  a  rułe; 
a  certain  necessity  of  works  was  strictly  limitcd.  But, 
howeyer  firmly  they  clung  in  generał  to  the  conception 
of  justification  as  something  merely  cxtemal  (actus  fo- 
rensis)  and  foieign  (imputatio  justitiie  Christi),  some 
dogmatic  writers  held  that  justification  had   really 


JUSTIFICATION 


1104 


JUSTIN 


changed  lomethuig  in  loaiii  and  indeed  preaappoBed  xŁ  as 
changed.  HoUaz  pronounced  this  doctriDe  openly  and 
incaudoualy,  while  Quen8tedt  designated  theee  preoed- 
Ing  acta  as  merely  preparatory  to  conYernon. 

6.  Dodrine  of  the  Eaman  Catholic  Churck  tmce  ihe 
Rrformaium, — ^The  Coiindl  of  Trent,  in  order  to  make  a 
ooropromiae  with  the  PauUne  formuła,  recogniaed  faith 
as  the  beginning  and  the  foundation  of  justification,  but 
the  fuU  sense  wbich  ProtestantUm  found  in  it  was  re- 
jected.  ThiB  faith  is  the  generał  belief  in  divine  rere- 
lation,  though  in  transition  to  a  spedal  faith,  yet  a  merę 
knowledge  which  still  giyes  room  to  mortal  ans,  Jus- 
tlfication  is  remission  of  sins  and  aanctification,  through 
an  infuaion  of  the  divine  grace,  in  as  far  as  the.  merit  of 
Christ  is  not  merely  imputed,  but  communicated.  It  ia 
given  through  grace,  but  as  a  permanent  state  it  grows 
Uirough  the  merit  of  good  works  aocording  to  the  com- 
mandments  of  God  and  the  Chuich,  through  which 
works  the  justified,  always  aided  by  the  grace  of  God  in 
Christ,  haye  to  render  saUsfaction  for  the  temporal  p«m- 
ishment  of  their  sins  and  to  desenre  saiyation.  Not  ali 
the  works  done  before  justiiication  are  sins,  and  to  the  Jus- 
tified the  fulfilment  of  the  oommandments  of  God  is  quite 
possible,  although  even  the  saints  still  commit  smali,  ye- 
nialsins.  Afurtherdeyelopmentofthisdoctrineisfonnd 
in  the  writings  of  Bellarmine.  He  admits  faith  only 
as  Jidei  genercUiSf  as  a  matter  of  the  intellect,  yet  as  a 
consent,  not  a  knowledge.  Though  only  the  fint  among 
many  preparations  for  justificadon,  a  certain  merit  is  as- 
cribed  to  faith.  The  Council  of  l>ent  had  rejected  the 
imputation  of  the  merita  of  Christ  only  as  the  exclu8iye 
ground  of  justification ;  Bellarmine  rejected  it  altogether. 
He  explicitly  proclaimed  the  neoessity  of  good  worka  for 
salyation,  though  only  a  relatiye  salyation.  The  opera 
mpereroffcUioms,  which  were  not  mentioned  at  Trent, 
though  they  remained  unchanged  in  tiadition  and  prac- 
tice,  are  further  deyeloped  by  Bellarmine.  Acooiding 
to  him,  they  go  beyond  naturę,  are  not  destined  for  all, 
and  not  commanded  under  penalties. 

6,  Modem  ProłeetoBnHsnu — Soćinns  denied  any  foreign 
imputation,  also  that  of  the  merit  of  Christ.  When  su- 
pranatoralism  in  generał  declined,  the  points  of  differ- 
ence  from  the  Roman  Catholic  Church  were  frequently 
kwt  sight  of.  Kant  found  in  the  doctrine  of  justification 
the  reiation  of  the  always  unsatisfiictory  reality  of  our 
morał  deyelopment  to  the  futurę  perfection  reoognised 
in  the  intuition  of  God«  De  Wette  decłared  it  to  be  the 
highest  morał  confidence  włiich  is  founded  on  the  com- 
munion  with  Christ,  and  tums  from  an  unhappy  past  to 
a  better  futurę.  Modem  mystics  haye  often  found  faułt 
with  the  Protestant  doctrine  as  being  tóo  outward,  and 
approached  the  doctrine  of  the  Roman  Church.  The  He- 
gelian  School  taught  that  justification  is  the  reception 
of  the  subject  into  the  spirit,  L  e.  the  knowledge  of  the 
subject  of  his  unity  with  the  al>sołute  spirit,  or,  accord- 
ing  to  Strauss,  with  the  concrete  idea  of  mankind.  Ao> 
cording  to  Schleiermacher,  it  is  the  reception  into  the 
oommunion  of  life  with  both  the  archetypal  and  histor- 
ical  Christ,  and  the  appropriation  of  his  perfection.  Jus- 
tification and  sanctification  are  to  him  only  different 
sides  of  the  carrying  out  of  the  same  diyine  decree. 
Many  of  the  recent  dogmatic  writers  of  Germany  haye 
again  proclaimed  this  doctrine  to  be  the  essential  princi- 
płe  of  Protestantisra,  some  (Domer,  Dat  Prmcip  umerer 
Kirche,  Kieł.  1841)  taking  justification  in  the  sense  of  a 
new  peraonality  founded  in  Christ,  others  (Hundesha- 
gen,  ber  deutsche  Profegtantismus,  Frankfl.  1847)  in  the 
sense  that  God,  suryeying  the  whole  futurę  deyelopment 
of  the  principłe  which  communion  with  Christ  estab- 
lishes  in  the  belieyer,  yiews  tiim  as  righteous.  One  of 
the  Ust  dogmatic  manuals  of  the  Refbrmed  Church 
(Schweizer,  ii,  528  8q.)  distinguishes  conyersion  and 
sanctification  as  the  beginning  and  progrees  of  a  life  of 
salyation,  and  assigns  justification  to  the  forroer.  See 
Hase,  Evanffelisclte  Dogmalik  (Leipzic,  1850),  p.  310  8q. ; 
C  F.  Baur,  Lehrbuch  der  chrisflichen  Dogmengeschichte 
(Stuttgardt,  1847) ;  Hahn,  Das  Bekeitniniss  der  evangel- 


ieckenKiriAeagese^kiehte  m  aemem  VerkSllms8  tm  dem  der 
Rórndechenund  Grieckiechetu 

III.  Literoftu^c.— See,  for  Roman  Gath.  yiew*,  Ifohler, 
%m6o/wiR,  eh.  iii  ;Wilłett,iS>M.  Pop.  yiii,  67  8q.;  Cmopi, 
Text-book  ofPopery,  eh.  y ;  Boesuet,  Worke,  yoL  i  and  ii ; 
8iud.  %md  Krit,  1867,  yoL  ii ;  D'Aubignć,  HisL  Reforma- 
iwn,  yoL  ii;  Forbes,  Conńdemtione,  i,  1;  Nioene  Crred, 
i,  178;  Hughes,  Worktj  i,  4ia  For  Protestant  Tiewa, 
see  Buchanan,  JusUficatian  (Edlnb.  1867,  Syo ;  rerieired 
atlength  in Lond,  Reciewy  Oct  1867,  p.  179);  BriL<md 
Fot,  EtKmg,  Rev.  Oct,  1867,  art.  yi;  Wesley,  Warigy  t-, 
266;  yi,  106;  Calyin,  Imtii^  yoL  ii;  Cunningham,  JŁt- 
/om«r9,p.402;  Flańx^ HisL ProL  Tkeol.  (aee  Index); 
Knapp,  Tkeology  (see  Index) ;  Wardlaw,  Systemu.  Tkeoł- 
ogy^  ii,  678  sq. ;  Grayes,  Workt,  yoL  iy ;  Moaaeil,  ir,  3St, 
240;  Waterland,)rorib,yol.yi;  T.Goodwi]i,frorl«(see 
Index) ;  Wilson,  Jpofto/.  Foeilerr  (see  Indez) ;  Maiteo- 
am, Doffmatice,  p.  890  sq.;  Pye  Smith, Imrod,  to  7%eoL 
(see  Index);  Buznet,Oii  the  89  Artidee  (aee  Index); 
Carmich,  TheoL  ofthe  Scripturet^  yoL  ii ;  Neander,  Prii, 
(md  Ca<A.p.  181-146;  CA.  1%. ii, 66  M}.;  PlemHm^  tmd 
Traiik  ofChristiam  Churck,  yoL  ii ;  Riggenbach,  in  tbe 
Stud.  wnd  KriL  1868,  iy,  691 ;  1867,  i,  406,  ii,  294;  185K, 
ii,  201 ;  North  BriL  Reriew,  June,  1867,  p.  191  8q.;  Dr. 
Schaff,  ProtetUmtism,  p.  64^7 ;  Good  Worde,  Jan.  1866 ; 
Heppe, Do^moAfc*,  p.  892 ;  BtbliotŁ  Sacra,  1863,  p.  615 ; 
BibL  Repoe,  xi,  448;  Chrut.  BecieWy  Oct.  1846;  JoAHl 
deuUch.  TheoL  yii,  516 ;  Ware,  Workt,  iii,  381 ;  Jomrmd 
ofSac  LiU  zzi ;  1869,  iii,  646 ;  Ckrittian  Momtkfy,  184a, 
Jan.,  p.  102 ;  Fek,  p.  281 ;  New  Englander  (see  Indez); 
Hauck,  Theolog.  Jahresber.  Jan.  1869,  i,  69;  1867,  pw 
548 ;  BulL  Theoiogique,  i,  25,  41 ;  BriL  ami  For.  £ra^ 
Bev,  Jnły,  1868,  p.  637;  BriL  and  For.  Raf,  Oct  1888,  |v 
688, 692;  Amer,  PretbyU  Review,  Jan.  1867,  p.  69,  202 ; 
Evang. Q»arL  Rev.Oct,  1869,  p. 48;  Britieh  QtiarL  Rer. 
Jan.  1871,  p.  144;  Church  Rev,  Oct,  1870,  p.  444,  462; 
ZeUichr.  wissetuch.  TheoL  1871,  iy. 

JuBtin,  sumamed  the  PkHoeopher,  cit,  morę  generally, 
the  Martyr,  of  whom  Eusebius  {Hist,  Eedet,  L  iy,  c  II) 
says  that  he  oyershadowed  all  the  great  men  who  iDn- 
minated  the  2d  oentuiy  by  the  splendor  of  his  name, 
was  łx>m  towards  the  close  of  the  apoetolic  age,  that  ia. 
the  beginning  of  the  2d  centnry.    He  was  the  son  of 
a  wealthy  Greek,  Prisdus,  who  had,  in  all  probabil- 
ity,  come  to  reside  at  Flayia  Keapolis  (erected  on  tbe 
site  of  the  ancient  Sichem),  in  Samaria,  with  the  Ro- 
man oobny  sent  by  Yespasian  to  the  city  that  boie  hia 
name.     But  little  Lb  known  of  his  peraonal  histórr. 
From  one  of  his  works,  the  Dialoguei  with  Tygpkam  (c 
2  sq.),  we  leam  that  he  trayelled  much  in  his  youth,  and 
stodied  aidently  the  yarious  systems  of  phiłoeophy  prey- 
alent  in  łus  day,  searching  after  some  Imowledge  whkb 
should  satisfy  the  crayings  of  his  souL   The  mytha  and 
absurd  worship  of  the  heathen  had  failed  to  satisfy  the 
youthful  sonł  longing  to  know  God  and  the  relations  of 
God  to  man,  and  in  tum  Stoic  and  Peripatetic,  Pytha- 
gorean  and  Flatonist,  were  examined  to  set  his  mind  at 
rest  upon  the  yital  que8tion.    By  the  Stoic  he  was  told 
that,  in  philoeophical  speculation,  the  subject  which  be 
seemed  to  oonsider  the  most  important  was  only  of  tab- 
ordinate  rank.    A  Peripatetic,  at  the  end  of  a  few 
days,  informed  him  that  the  most  important  thing  for 
him  to  attend  to  was  to  afford  the  philoeophic  inatructor 
security  for  his  tuidon.    By  the  Pythagorean  he  was 
rejected  outrigbt,  because  he  oonfesaed  himself  ignorant 
of  musie,  astronomy,  and  geometry,  which  that  schodl 
considered  a  necessaiy  introduction  to  the  stndy  of  pbi- 
losophy,  and  so  he  tumed  in  despair  to  the  Fłatonista, 
at  this  time  in  high  repute  in  the  place  in  which  Justin 
resided.    At  last  he  seemed  to  haye  gained  the  bayen 
of  peace ;  the  Platonie  doctrine  of  ideas  could  not  fail  to 
inąjire  young  Justin  with  the  hope  that  he  ^shouki 
soon  have  the  intuition  of  God,"  for  is  not  this  the  aim 
of  PUtonic  płiilosophy  ?     **•  Under  the  influence  of  this 
notion,"  he  relates  himself,  "  it  occurred  to  me  that  I 
would  withdraw  to  some  solitary  place,  far  from  the  tm^ 
moil  of  the  world,  and  there,  in  peifect  sełf-ooUectioo^ 


JUSTIN 


1105 


JUSTIN 


glve  myself  to  my  own  oontemplations.  I  chose  a  spot 
by  Łhe  sea^side."  Whether  JusŁiii  still  resided  at  thia 
time  at  Flavia  Neapolia— 4nd  in  Łhat  case  the  quiet  le- 
8ort  must  hare  be^  the  sbores  of  the  Dead  Sea,  per- 
hapa  the  yalley  of  the  Jordan,  north  of  thia  sea  (Otto), 
OT  on  8ome  unfreąuented  spot  of  Lakę  Genesaieth — or 
whether,  as  seems  morę  probable,  he  then  resided  at 
Ephesua,  is  a  matter  of  dispate.  In  favor  of  Ephesus 
are  Schi^kh,  Tillemont,  Hilgenfeld,  Domer,  etc.  Bat, 
be  the  name  of  the  place  Flavia  Neapolis  or  Ephesus,  it 
was  in  his  resort  by  the  shore  of  the  resoonding  ąea — 
attracted  to  it,  no  doabt,  chiefly  by  the  grandeor  of  the 
object  he  was  seeking  to  8olve,  and  the  loyelinesa  of  the 
spot— that  we  find  him  one  day,  while  wrapped  up  in 
thought,  pacing  ap  and  down  by  the  side  of  the  sea, 
which  moaned  in  melancholy  unison  with  his  reflections, 
accosted  by  a  man  of  yenerable  aspect,  sagę  and  grave, 
and  Eoon  the  two  are  engaged  in  eamest-conrerse  on 
the  subject  ever  nppermost  in  yoong  Jiistin's  mind. 
Somewhat  enamored  of  the  Platonie  philosophy,  he  ar- 
guea  in  its  favor  with  Łhe  appositely  present  senior,  and 
conteiids  that  at  some  futurę  day  it  will  oonduct  him 
into  that  nearer  acquaintance  with  6od,  or,  in  the  Pkir 
tonista'  term,  afford  him  the ''  yision  of  diyinity."  But 
the  meek  old  man,  who  is  a  Christian,  oontends  that 
the  goal  which  he  is  seeking  to  gain  cannot  be  reached 
by  anyphilbeophical  school  or  by  unsided  mind  even 
of  the  highest  order;  the  falUcy  of  Plato  is  proTed  in 
some  two  or  three  points  of  doctrine  bekmging  to  that 
system,  and  finally  the  doubting  and  indocile  disciple  is 
yisited  with  the  curt  and  not  gentle  apostrophe,  *^  You 
are  a  merę  dealer  in  wonls,  but  no  loyer  of  acdon  and 
truth ;  your  aim  ia  not  to  be  a  practiser  of  good,  but  a 
deyer  disputant,  a  cunning  sophist."  Once  roore  the 
inquiring  youth  is  baffled  in  hia  attempt  to  lay  hołd  of 
the  truth ;  he  is  again  conyinced  that  eyen  from  the  fore- 
moet  of  heathen  philosophers  he  cannot  obtain  the  pearl 
for  which  he  is  seeking  so  eamestly.  But  with  thia  in- 
telligence  there  comes  also  the  direction, "  Search  the 
Scripturesf  study  the  Hebrew  prophets;  men  who, 
guided  by  the  Spirit  of  God,8awand  reyealed  the  truth, 
and  eyen  foretold  eyents  futurę  to  their  day;  read  the 
last  and  heroic  words  of  the  disciples  of  him  who  came 
to  raise  a  fallen  world,  and  to  restore  it  to  etema}  and 
imperishable  felicity.  "Pray,"  ended  the  yenerable 
Christian,  "  tl^at  the  gates  of  light  may  be  opened  to 
tbee,  for  nonę  can  perceiye  and  comprehend  these  things 
except  God  and  his  Christ  grant  them  understanding.*' 
Justin  was  impressed;  he  had  often  heard  the  Plato- 
nists  calumniate  the  Chiistians,  but  he  had  always  di»* 
credited  the  statements.  He  had  freqnently  obsenred 
the  tranquillity  and  fortitude  with  which  these  follow- 
ers  of  Jesus  enoountered  death  and  ali  other  eyils  which 
appear  terrible  to  man,  and  he  could  neyer  condemn  as 
profiigates  those  who  could  so  patiently  endure.  He 
had  long  belieyed  them  innocent  of  the  crimes  impnted 
to  these  consistent  martyrs.  He  was  now  prepared  to 
think  that  they  held  the  truth.  He  refłected  on  the 
words  of  the  yenerable  stranger,  and  waa  conyinced  that 
they  inculcated  the  "  only  safe  and  useful  philosophy." 
From  this  time  (the  ejuict  datę  is  doubtful ;  the  Bol- 
landists  place  it  in  A.D.  119;  it  ia  generally  belieyed, 
with  Caye,  Tillemont,  Ceillier,  and.others,  that  it  occur- 
red  in  A.D.  133)  his  personal  history  becoroes  obscure, 
as  he  has  but  little  to  relate  of  himself  hereailer,  and  as 
from  other  souroes  we  cannot  gather  much  on  which  we 
can  depend.  Certain  it  is  that  he  at  once  enlisted  iik 
actiye  seryice  in  behalf  of  the  new  cause.  Ketainingf 
the  garb  of  a  philosopher,  he  ardently  deyoted  him- 
lelf,  aa  is  eyinced  by  his  works,  to  the  propagation  of 
Christianity  by  writing  and  otherwise.  Tillemont  ar- 
gues,  from  the  language  of  Justin  (Apohg,  Prima,  c  61, 
65),  that  he  was  a  priest,  but  this  inference  is  not  borne 
out  by  the  passage,  and,  though  approyed  by  Maran,  is 
rejected  by  Otto,  Neander,  and  Seroiach.  That  he  yis- 
ited many  plaoes  in  order  to  diffuse  the  knowledge  of 
the  Christian  religion  is  probable  (comp.  CohortaL  ad 
rV.— A  A  A  A 


(Trać  c  18, 84),  and  he  appears  to  haye  madę  the  pro* 
fession  of  a  philosopher  subseryient  to  this  purpose  (/>»• 
alog.  cum  TrypK  init. ;  Eusebius,  Hiit,  EccL  iy,  11 ;  Pho- 
tius,  BibL  cod.  126).  According  to  what  is  commonly 
deemed  the  ancient  record  of  his  martyrdom  (though 
Papebroche  regards  this  as  narrating  the  death  of  another 
Justin),  he  yisited  Komę  twice.  On  his  second  yisit  he 
was  apprehended,  and  brought  before  the  tribunal  of 
Husticus,  who  held  the  office  of  pnefectus  urbi ;  and  as 
he  refused  to  offer  sacrifice  to  the  gods,  he  was  sentenced 
to  be  soonrged  and  beheaded,  which  sentence  appears  to 
haye  been  immediately  carried  into  effect.  Seyeral  oth- 
er persona  suiTered  ?rith  him.  Papebroche  rejects  this 
aocount  of  his  martyrdom,  and  thinks  hisezecntion  was 
secret,  so  that  the  datę  and  manner  of  it  were  neyer 
known.  The  Greek  Menaa  (s.  d.  1  Junii)  state  that  ho 
drank  hemlock.  His  death  is  generally  oonsidered  to 
haye  taken  place  in  the  persecntion  nnder  the  emperor 
Marcua  Antoninus;  and  the  Chronicon  Patckale  (i,  268, 
ed.  Pazia;  207,  ed.  Yenice ;  482,  ed.  Bonn),  which  is  fol- 
lowed  by  Tillemont,  Baronius,  Pagi,  Otto,  and  other  mod- 
ems,  places  it  in  the  consulship  of  Orphitus  and  Pudens, 
A.D.  165;  Dupin,  Semisch,  and  Schaff  place  it  in  A.D. 
166;  Fleury  in  A.D.  167 ;  and  llllemont  and  Maran  in 
A.D.  168.  Papebroche  {Acta  Sanetorum,  ApriL  ii,  107), 
assigning  the  Apologia  Secunda  of  Justin  to  the  year 
171,  contends  that  he  must  haye  liyed  to  or  beyond  that 
time.  Dodwell,  on  the  oontnry,  following  the  enone- 
ous  statement  of  Eusebius  in  his  Ckromcon,  places  his 
death  in  the  reign  of  Antoninus  Pius;  and  Epiphanius, 
according  to  the  present  reading  of  the  passage  (adv, 
HartB,  xlyi,  1),  which  is  most  likely  corrupt,  places  it  in 
the  reign  of  the  emperor  Hadrian  or  Adrian,  a  mani- 
fest enor,  aa  the  Apohgia  Prima  is  addressed  to  Anto- 
ninus Hus,  the  successor  of  Hadrian,  and  the  Secunda 
probably  to  Marcus  Aurelius  and  LbYcms,  who  succeed- 
ed  Antoninus.  The  death  of  Justin  has  been  yery  com- 
monly ascribed  (compare  Tatian,  Contra  Gretcosj  c  19; 
Eusebius,  Hist.  EccL  iy,  16,  and  Chroń.  Patchale)  to  the 
machinations  of  the  Cynie  philosopher  Creecens.  The 
enmity  of  Crescens,  and  Justin*s  apprehension  of  injury 
from  him,  are  mentioned  by  Justin  himself  (Apoloff» 
Secunda,  c  8).  He.  haa  been  canonized  by  the  Eastem 
and  Western  churches;  the  Greeks  ceŁebrate  his  mem- 
ory  on  the  Ist  of  Jnne,  the  Latins  on  the  18th  of  ApriL 
At  Romę,  the  Church  of  St.  Lorenzo  without  the  walls  ia 
belieyed  to  be  the  resting-place  of  his  remains;  but  the 
Church  of  the  Jesuits  at  Eysstadt,  in  Germany,  daima 
to  possess  his  body :  there  is,  faoweyer,  no  reason  to  be- 
lieye  Łhat  dther  daim  is  well  founded.  The  morę  com- 
mon  epithet  added  to  the  name  of  Justin  by  the  an* 
cients  is  that  of  "  the  philosopher"  (Epiphanius,  L  c  ; 
Eusebius,  Chronicon,  lib.  ii ;  Jerome,  De  YirUnu  lUustr, 
c.  xxiii ;  Chronioon  Paśchale,  L  c. ;  George  Syncellus,  p. 
860,851, ed.Paris;  p.279,ed.yenice;  Glijca8,^im<iiLpan 
iii,  p.  241,  ed.  Pazia ;  p.  186,  ed.  Yenice ;  p.  449,  ed.  Bonn) ; 
that  of "  the  martyr,"  now  in  genend  use,  is  employed  by 
Tertullian  (Atk.  YalenL  c.  5),  who  calls  him  ^'philosophus 
et  martyr ;"  by  Photius  {Biblioth,  cod.  48, 125, 282),  and 
by  Joannes  Damascenus  (Sacra  Parali,  ii,  754,  ed.  Le- 
ąuien),  who,  like  Tertullian,  conjoins  the  two  epithets. 

WorJcB, — It  remains  for  us  to  consider  the  writings  of 
Justin  Martyr,  which,  although  not  yery  yolumiuous,  so 
far  as  they  are  known  to  be  or  to  haye  been  extant,  are 
among  the  most  important  that  haye  come  down  to  us 
from  the  2d  century,  not  so  much  because  they  are  apol- 
ogetic  as  because  they  are  the  earliest  Christian  apol- 
ogies  extant.  In  their  classification  we  follow  closely, 
with  Smith  {Diet*  Gr.  and  Rom,  Biog,  s.  y.),  one  of  Łhe 
latest  editors  of  the  works  of  Justin  Mart^T,  J.  F.  C 
Otto,  who  makes  four  distinct  classes. 

(1.)  UndispuiedWorh8A-Ą.'Kirę\tbyia  trpurri  virkp 
Xpuniavuv  vpbc  'Avrwv<vov  róv  EinTtPilf  Apologia 
prima  pro  ChrittiamM  ad  Anfonimtm  Pium,  mentioned 
in  the  only  two  known  MSS.  of  the  Apologies,  and  in 
the  older  editions  of  Justin,  e.  g.  that  of  Stephens  (Paris, 
1551,  foL)  and  that  of  Sylburg  (Heiddberg,  1598,  folio), 


JUSTIN 


1106 


juffnN 


es  his  second  Apologj,  is  one  of  the  most  interesting 
remains  of  Christian  antiąuity.  It  is  addtessed  to  the 
emperor  Antoninus  Pius,  and  to  his  adopted  sons  "  Ve- 
rissimus  the  Philosopher,"  afterwards  the  emperor  M. 
Aurelioą,  and  **  Lncios  the  Philosophei"  (we  follow  the 
oommon  reading,  not  that  of  Eusebius),  afterwards  the 
emperor  Yerus,  oolleague  of  M.  Aurdius.  From  the 
circumstance  thatYerissimus  is  not  styled  Cnsar,  which 
dignity  he  acąuired  in  the  coone  of  A.D.  139,  it  is  in< 
ferred  by  many  critics,  mdading  Pagi,  Neander,  Otto, 
Semlach,  and  others,  that  the  Apology  was  written 
preyiously,  and  probably  early  in  that  year.  Euse- 
bius  places  it  in  the  fourth  year  of  Antoninus,  or  the 
first  year  of  the  280th  Olympiad,  A.D.  141,  which  is 
rather  too  hite.  Others  contend  fbr  a  still  later  datę. 
Justin  himself,  in  the  ooiuse  of  the  work  (c.  46),  states 
that  Christ  was  bom  a  hondred  and  fifty  yean  before 
he  WTote,  but  he  must  be  understood  as  speaking  in 
round  numbers.  Howeyer,  Tilleroont,  Grabę,  Fleury, 
Geillier,  Maran,  and  others,  fix  the  datę  of  the  work  in 
A.D.  IdO.  ■  Its  contents,"  says  bishop  Kaye,  *'may  be 
reduced  to  the  following  heads:  fi]  Appeals  to  the  jus- 
tice  of  the  ruling  powers,  and  expoetalatiovi8  with  them 
on  the  unfaimess  of  the  proceedings  against  the  Chris- 
tians,  who  were  condemned  without  any  previous  inyes- 
tigation  into  their  lires  or  opinions  merdy  because 
they  were  Christiana,  and  were  denied  the  liberty  al- 
lowed  to  all  the  other  sabjects  of  the  Roman  empire,  of 
worshippibg  the  God  whom  they  themselyes  preferred. 
[2]  Refutations  of  the  charges  of  atheism,  immorality, 
and  disaffection  towards  the  emperor,  which  were 
brought  against  the  Christiansr  these  charges  Justin 
refnted  by  appealing  to  the  purity  of  the  Ckwpel  pre- 
oepts,  and  to  the  amelioration  produced  in  the  conduct 
of  those  who  embraced  Chrisdanity;  and  by  stating 
that  the  kingdom  to  which  Christians  looked  forward 
was  not  of  Łhis  world,  but  a  heavenly  kingdom.  [3] 
Direct  arguments  in  proof  of  the  truth  of  Christianity, 
drawn  from  mirades  and  prophecy.  With  respect  to 
the  furmer,  Justin  prindpally  occnpies  himself  in  refu- 
ting  the  objection  that  the  mirades  of  Christ  were  per- 
formed  by  magical  arts.  With  respect  to  the  latter,  he 
States  in  fordble  terms  the  generał  naturę  of  the  argu- 
ment from  prophecy,  and  shows  the  aocomplishment  of 
many  particular  prophedes  in  the  person  of  Jesus;  in- 
ferring,  from  their  accomplishment,  the  reasonableness 
of  entertaining  a  firm  persuasion  that  the  prophecies  yet 
nnfuliilled— that,  for  instance,  respecting  Christ^s  sec- 
ond  advent — will  in  due  time  b^  accomplished.  [4] 
iuatin  does  not  confine  himself  to  defending  Christianity, 
but  occadonally  becomes  the  assailant,  and  expo8es  with 
soooess  the  absurdities  of  the  Grentile  polytheism  and 
idolatry.  In  further  confirmation  of  the  innocuous,  or, 
rather,  benefldal  character  of  Christianity,  Justin  oon- 
dudes  the  treatise  with  a  description  of  the  modę  in 
which  proedytes  were  admitted  into  the  Church,  of  its 
other  rites  and  customs,  and  of  the  habits  and  manner 
of  life  of  the  nrimitiye  Christians.**  To  this  Apology, 
the  larger  one  of  the  two,  are  generally  appended  three 
documents:  (iy'A$piavov  virkp  Xpi<rrtavi^  itritrroKfi, 
Adriampro  Christiams  Epistoła,  or  £xemplum  Episto- 
Im  Imperatoria  Adriani  ad  Minueium  Fundanum,  Pro- 
eoiuulum  A  sub,  This  Greek  yersion  of  the  emperor*8  let- 
ter  was  madę  and  is  given  by  Eusebius  {ffist.Eccles.  iy, 
8).  Justin  had  subjohied  to  his  work  the  Latin  original 
(Eusebius,  Hist,  EccL  iv,  8),  which  probably  is  still  pre- 
senred  by  Rulinus  in  his  yersion  of  Eusebius,  for  which, 
in  the  work  of  Justin,  the  yenńon  of  Eusebius  was  after- 
wards subetituted.  (2)  'AvT<avivov  Łfnino\Ą  ^pbc  to 
K0Łv6v  Tffc  'Affiacj  Antonim  Epistoła  adComnnmeAsitB. 
It  is  hardly  likely  that  this  d«cument  was  inserted  in 
ks  place  by  Justin  himsdf ;  it  has  probably  been  added 
^ince  his  time,  and  its  genuineness  is  subject  to  condd- 
erable  doubt.  It  is  giyen,  but  with  great  yariation, 
by  Eusebius  (Hist.  Eccles.  iv,  13),  and  was  written,  ac- 
cording  to  the  text  of  the  letter  itsdf,  as  it  appears  in 
Eusebius,  not  by  Antoninus,  but  by  his  sucoessor,  M. 


Aorelius.  (3)  Mopcon  fiaunkkmc  linino\il  iręhc  n^ 
vvyKknroVy  iv  y  pa^wpii  Xpumavovc  airŁovc  ytyt- 
r^o-^oi  rifę  7'iiafc  airr&v,  Mard  Imperatoris  EpUtola 
ad  Smaium  qua  iestatur  ChnsHanot  rictorue  eatuam 
ftUsae,  This  letter,  the  spariousneBS  of  which  is  gen- 
erally admitted  (thoogh  it  is  said  by.Tertullijui,  Apoio^ 
getictf  cap.  5,  that  a  letter  of  the  same  tenor  was  writ- 
ten by  the  emperor),  relates  to  the  iamous  mirade  of 
the  so-called  thundering  le^n  (q.  y.).  2.  'Aroikoyia 
d€vrkpa  i/ir^p  rwp  Xpumavuv  wpdc  r^  'Pw/uu- 
u»v  ovyKKifTov,  Apohgia  Seamda  pro  ChriMmis  ad 
Senatum  Romanum,  Thit  second  and  shorier  plea  for 
the  Christians  was  addressed  probably  to  the  emperora 
M.  Aurdius  and  Ludus  Yems,  or,  rather,  to  Anrelins 
alone,  as  Yerus  was  engaged  in  the  East  in  the  Parthian 
war.  (See  below.)  Neander  adopts  the  opinion  for^ 
meriy  maintained  by  Yaledus,  that  this  Apology  (piaoed 
in  the  older  editions  before  the  longer  one  jnst  descńbed) 
was  addressed  to  Antoninus  Pius;  but  Eosebins  {Hi$L 
EecL  iy,  17, 18)  and  Photius  (BibL  ood.  125)  among  the 
andents,  and  Dupin,  Pagi,  Tillemont,  Grabę,  Bidnart, 
Geillier,  Maran,  Moshdm,  Semtsch,  and  Otto  among 
the  modems,  maintain  the  oppodte  side.  Otto  thinks 
it  was  written  about  A.D.  164 ;  others  place  it  soooewbat 
later.  Scaliger  {Ammadv,  in  Chroń,  Etueb.  p.  219)  and 
Pkpebroche  {Ada  Sanctorum,  Aprilis,  ii,  106)  conaider 
that  this  second  Apology  of  Justin  is  dmply  an  intro- 
duction  or  preface  to  the  first,  and  that  the  Apokgy 
prcsented  to  Aurelius  and  Yems  has  been  lost,  bat  their 
opinion  has  been  refuted  by  seyeral  writers,  espedalły 
by  Otto.  Gnmted,  then,  that  this  Apology  was  pre- 
sented  to  M.  Aurelius,  we  flnd  it  ''occasioned  by  the 
punishment  inflicted  on  three  peisons  at  Romę,  whom 
Urbicus,  the  prefect  of  the  city,  had  pat  to  death  merdy 
because  they  were  Christians.  After  exp06ing  the  in- 
justice  of  this  proceeding,  Justin  replies  to  two  objec- 
tions  which  the  enemies  of  the  Gospel  were  accostomed 
to  urge.  The  first  was,  'Why,  if  the  Christians  were 
certain  of  being  recdyed  into  heaven,  they  did  not  de- 
stroy  themsdyes,  and  saye  the  Roman  goyemors  the 
trouble  of  putting  them  to  death?*  Justin^s  answer  is, 
that,  if  they  were  so  to  act,  they  would  contrareoe  Łbe 
designs  of  God  by  diminishing  the  number  of  belieren, 
preyenting  the  diffusion  of  tnie  religion,  and,  aa  far  m 
depended  upon  them,  extinguishing  the  hnman  nee. 
The  second  objection  was,  *  Why,  if  they  were  rpgaided 
by  God  with  an  eye  of  fayor,  he  sufTered.them  to  be  ex- 
posed  to  injury  and  oppresdon  ?  Justin  replies  that  the 
persecutions  with  which  they  then  were,  and  with  which 
many  yirtuons  men  among  the  heathens  had  belóce 
been  yisited,  originated  in  the  malignant  artifioea  of  di^ 
mons,  the  offspring  of  the  apostatę  angels,  who  were 
permitted  to  eserdse  ihdr  power  until  the  desigiu  of 
the  Almighty  were  finally  accomplished.  Another  ot^ 
jection,  of  a  different  kind,  appears  to  have  been  uiKed 
against  the  Christiana:  that,  in  exhorting  men  to  liye 
yirtuously,  they  inmsted,  not  upon  the  beauty  of  yirtne, 
but  upon  the  etemal  rewards  and  punishmenta  which 
await  the  yirtuous  and  wicked.  Justin  replies  that 
these  are  topics  on  which  eyery  believer  in  the  exist- 
ence  of  God  must  insist,  sińce  in  that  belief  is  inyolved 
the  further  bdief  that  he  wiU  reward  the  good  and  pon- 
ish  the  bad.  With  respect  to  direct  arguments  to  ptroTe 
the  diyine  origin  of  Christianit}%  that  wbich  Justin 
prindpally  urges  is  drawn  from  the  fact  that  no  man 
eyer  consented  to  die  in  attestation  of  the  truth  of  any 
philosophical  tenets;  whereas  men,  eyen  from  the  low- 
est  ranks  of  life,  brayed  danger  and  death  in  the  canae 
of  the  Gospd.  Towards  the  condudon  of  the  tract, 
Justin  States  that  he  was  himself  induced  to  embnee 
Christianity  by  obserying  the  courage  and  conscancy 
with  which  its  professors  encoontered  all  the  tertors  of 
persecution."  Two  Fraffmenta,  giyen  by  Grabę  in  his 
Spicileg.  sncul.  ii,  178,  are  suppoeed  by  him  to  bdong 
to  the  second  Apology,  in  the  present  oopies  of  which 
they  are  not  found ;  but  the  correctnees  of  this  supposi- 
tion  is  yery  doubtful.    3.  IIpóc  Tpv^iiva  'Iov^aToy  cir 


JTJSTIN 


1107 


JUSTIN 


dKoyoCf  Cum  Tryphone  Judao  Dialogiu,  ThU  dialogae, 
in  which  Jtutin  defiwda  ChriBtianity  against  the  objec- 
tioos  of  Try-pho^  professes  to  be  the  reoord  of  an  actual 
ducuflBioni  beld,  acooiding  to  Eiuebius  (Hitt.  Eocles.  iv, 
18),  at  Ephesna  Trypho  deacribes  himself  as  a  Jew, 
"  flying  firom  the  ifmr  now  raging,"  pzobably  oocasłoned 
by  the  Tevolt  under  Baichochebas,  in  the  leign  of  Ha- 
drian,  A.D.  182>184.  But,  thoagh  the  discaańon  prob- 
ably  took  place  at  the  time,  it  was  not  oommitted  to 
writingi  at  least  not  finished,  till  some  years  after,  as 
Justin  makes  a  reference  to  his  first  Apology,  which  is 
assigned,  as  we  have  seen,  to  A.D.  188  or  139.  It  has 
been  conjectured  that  Tiypho  is  the  Rabbi  Tarphon  of 
the  Talmiidists,  teacher  or  ooUeague  of  the  celebrated 
Babbi  Akiba,  bat  he  does  not  appear  as  a  rabbi  in  the 
dialogne.  The  dialogue  is  perhaps  fonnded  upon  the 
conreisation  of  Jostin  with  Trypho  rather  than  an  ao- 
cnrate  record  of  it.  After  an  introduction,  in  which 
Jostin  giyes  an  accoont  of  the  manner  of  his  oonyersion 
to  Christianityi  and  eamestly  exhort8  Trypho  to  foUow 
his  example,  l^r3q>ho  repUes  to  the  exhortation  by  say- 
ing  that  Jostin  woold  haye  acted  morę  wisdy  in  adhe- 
ling  to  any  one  of  the  philosophical  sects  to  which  he 
had  formerly  been  attached  than  in  leaving  God,  and 
pladng  ail  his  reliance  upon  a  man.  In  the  former 
case,  if  he  lired  yirtaoosly,  he  might  hope  to  obtain  sai- 
▼ation ;  in  the  latter  he  oould  have  no  hope.  His  only 
safe  Goune,  therefore,  was  to  be  circomcised,  and  com- 
ply  with  the  other  reqaiaitions  of  the  Mosaic  law.  Jus- 
tin answers  that  the  Christians  had  not  deserted  God, 
though  they  no  longer  obserred  the  ceremoniał  law. 
They  worshipped  the  God  who  brought  the  forefathers 
of  the  Jews  oot  of  the  land  of  Egypt,  and  gare  the  law, 
but  who  had  plainly  dedarcd  by  the  prophets  that  he 
woold  giye  a  new  Uw — a  law  appointing  a  new  modę 
of  purification  from  sin,  by  the  baptism  of  repentance 
and  of  the  knowledge  of  God— and  requiring  a  spiritoal, 
not  a  camal  circumcision.  The  ceremonia!  law  was,  in 
tmth,  giyen  to  the  Jews  on  aocount  of  the  haidness  of 
their  heart{  as  a  mark  of  God'8  .displeasore  at  their 
apostasy,  when  they  madę  the  golden  calf  in  Horeb. 
Ali  its  ordinances,  its  sacrifices,  its  Sabbath,  the  prohi- 
bition  of  certain  kinds  of  food,  were  designed  to  coun- 
teract  the  inyeterate  tendency  of  the  Jews  to  fali  into 
idolatry.  If,  says  Justin,  we  oontend  that  the  ceremo- 
niał law  is  of  uniyersal  and  perpetoal  obligation,  we  mn 
the  hazard  of  charging  God  with  inconsistency,  as  if  he 
had  appointed  different  modes  of  justification  at  differ- 
ent  times;  sińce  they  who  liyed  before  Abraham  were 
not  circumcised,  and  they  who  liyed  before  Mosee  nei- 
ther  obseryed  the  Sabbath  nor  oifered  sacrifices,  although 
God  borę  testimony  to  them  that  they  were  righteoos. 
Haying,  as  he  thinks,  satisfactorily  proyed  that  the  cer- 
emoniał law  is  no  longer  binding,  Justin  replies  to  an 
argument  nsed  by  Trypho,  that  the  prophecy  of  Dan. 
yii,  9  taught  the  Jews  to  expect  that  the  Messiah  would 
be  great  and  glorioos;  whereas  the  Messiah  of  the 
Christians  was  unhonored  and  inglorious,  and  fell  under 
the  extreme  curse  of  the  law,  for  he  was  crucified.  Jus- 
tin^s  answer  is,  that  the  Scriptures  of  the  Old  Testament 
speak  of  two  adyents  of  the  Messiah,  one  in  humiliatton 
and  the  other  in  glory;  though  the  Jews,  blinded  by 
their  prejudices,  looked  only  to  those  passages  which 
foretold  the  latter.  He  then  proceeds  to  ąuote  passages 
of  the  Old  Testament  in  which  the  Messiah  is  called 
God,  and  Lord  of  Hosts.  In  this  part  of  the  dialogue 
Justin  extracts  from  the  Old  Testament  sevend  texts  in 
which  he  finds  aiiusions  to  the  Gospel  history.  Thus 
the  paschal  lamb  was  a  type  of  Chrisfs  crucifiidon ;  the 
offering  of  fine  flour  for  those  who  were  deansed  from 
the  leprosy  was  a  type  of  the  bread  in  the  Eucharist; 
the  twelye  bells  attached  to  the  robę  of  the  high-pńest, 
of  the  twelye  apostles.  Justin  next  undertakes  to  prove 
that  the  yarious  prophecies  respecting  the  Messiah  were 
fulfiiled  in  Jesus ;  but,  haying  quoted  Isaiah  yii  to  proyc 
that  the  Messiah  was  to  be  bom  of  a  yirgin,  he  first 
luna  into  a  digreaaion  caosed  by  an  inquiry  firom  Try- 


pho, whether  Jews  who  led  hdy  liyes,  like  Job,  Enoch, 
and  Noah,  but  obseryed  the  Mosaic  law,  could  be  sayed ; 
and  afterwards  into  a  second  digression,  occasioned  by  a 
remark  of  Tiypho's  that  the  Christian  doctrine  respect- 
ing the  pre-existence  and  diyinity  of  Christ,  and  his 
sabseqneiit  assumption  of  humanity,  was  monstrous  and  •' 
absurd.  Combating  these  points,  Tiypho  next  inąuires 
of  Justin  whether  he  really  belieyes  that  Jerusalem 
would  be  rebuilt,  and  all  the  Gentiles,  as  weU  as  the 
Jews  and  proselytes,  ooUected  theie  under  the  goyem- 
ment  of  the  Messiah;  or  whether  he  merely  professed 
such  a  belief  in  order  Ło  condliate  the  Jews.  Jostin,  in 
answer,  admits  that  the  belief  was  not  uniyersal  among 
the  orthodox  Christians,  but  that  he  himself  maintained 
that  the  dead  would  rise  again  in  the  body,  and  liye  for 
a  thoosand  years  in  Jerusalem,  which  would  be  rebuilt, 
and  beautifled  and  enlarged.  He  appeals  in  support  of 
his  opinion  to  Isaiah,  and  to  the  Apocalypse,  which  he 
ascńćes  to  John,  one  of  Chrisfs  apostles.  Justin  then 
condudes  the  interyiew  by  debating  the  conyersion^of 
the  Gentiles.  He  contends  that  the  Christians  are  the 
true  people  of  God,  inasrouch  as  they  fiilfil  the  spiritoal 
meaning  of  the  law,  and  do  not  merely  conform,  like  the 
Jews,  to  the  letter.  They  haye  the  troe  circumcision 
of  the  heart ;  they  are  the  true  race  of  priests  dedicated 
to  God,  and  typified  by  Jesus,  the  high-priest  in  the 
prophecy  of  Zechariah;  they  offer  the  true  spiritual 
sacrifices  which  are  pleasing  to  God,  agreeably  to  the 
prophecy  of  Malachi;  they  are  the  seed  promised  to 
Abraham,  because  they  are  actuated  by  the  same  prin- 
ciple  of  fiuth  which  actuated  Abraham;  they  are,  in  a 
word,  the  true  IsraeL  The  dialogue  with  Trypho  ap- 
pears  to  be  mutilated,  but  to  what  extent  is  a  matter  of 
dispnte.  Two  f^agments  are  assigned  to  it  by  Grabę 
{Spicileffiumf  saec  ii,  176),  but  it  is  doubtfol  with  what 
correctness.  ''  It  ia  to  be  obseryed,"  says  Smith  (Du>- 
tAonary  of  Greek  and  Roman  Biography\  '*that,  al- 
thongh  Otto  ranks  the  DialoguB  cum  Tryphone  among 
the  ondisputed  works  of  Justin,  its  geniiiueness  has  been 
repeatedly  attacked.  The  first  assault  was  by  C.  G. 
Koch,  of  Apenrade,  in  the  duchy  of  Sleswick  {Justmi 
Marłyris  Diaiogua  cum  Tryphone  .  .  .  vodtvfftiac  .  .  . 
oomfietus\  but  this  attack  was  regarded  as  of  little  mo- 
ment. That  of  Wetstein  {ProUg,  m  Not,  Test,  i,  66), 
founded  on  the  difference  of  the  dtations  ftom  the  text 
of  the  Sept  and  their  agreement  with  that  of  the  Hex- 
aplar  edition  of  Origen,  and  perhaps  of  the  yersion  of 
Symmachos,  which  are  both  later  than  the  time  of  Jus* 
tin,  was  morę  serious,  and  has  called  forth  elaborate  re- 
plies from  Krom  (Dialribe  de  Authentia  Dialog,  JuHmi 
Martyr.  cum  Trypk^  etc.,  1778,  8yo),  Eichhom  {ErnUi' 
tung  ta  daa  A ,  T,\  and  Kredner  (Bekrdge  zur  Einieittmg^ 
etc).  The  attack  was  renewed  at  a  later  period  by 
Lange,  but  with  little  resolt.  An  aocount  of  the  contro- 
yersy  is  giyen  by  Semisch  (book  ii,  sect  i,  eh.  ii),  who 
contends  eamestly  for  the  genuineness  of  the  work.  It 
may  be  obseryed  that  the  genuineness  eyen  of  the  two 
Apologies  was  attacked  by  the  learaed  but  eccentric 
Hardouin." 

(2.)  Dispułed  or  Douhtftd  Works,  —  4.  Aóyoc  irpóc 
"£XAi}vac,  Oratio  ad  GrcBcot,  "  If  this  is  indeed  a  work 
of  Justin,  which  we  think  yery  doubtful,  it  is  probably 
that  deecribed  by  Eosebius  {Hist,£ccL  iy,  18)  as  treat- 
ing  irtpi  Tffc  twv  daifióvufv  i^ottac  (oompare  Photios, 
BibL  cod.  125),  and  by  Jerome  (De  Vir,  lUustr,  c.  23)  as 
being  ^^de  Dsemonum  natura;"  for  it  is  a  seyere  attack 
on  the  fiagitioos  immoralities  ascribed  by  the  heathens 
to  their  deities,  and  committed  by  themselres  in  their 
religious  festiyals.  Its  identity,  however,  with  the  work 
respecting  damaons  is  doubted  by  many  critics.  Caye 
suppoees  it  to  be  a  portion  of  the  work  next  mentioned. 
Its  genuineness  has  been  on  yarious  grounds  disputed 
by  Oudin,  Semler,  Semisch,  and  others,  and  is  doubted 
by  Grabę,  Dupin,  and  Neander.  The  grounds  of  objec- 
tion  are  well  stated  by  Semisch  (book  ii,  sect.  ii,  c.  i) ; 
but  the  genuineness  of  the  piece  is  asscrted  by  Tille- 
raont,  Ccillier,  Caye,  Maran,  De  Wette,  Baumgarten-Cra« 


JUSTIN 


1108 


JTJSTIN 


siii8|  and  otheiB,  and  by  Otto,  who  haa  aigaed  the  que8- 
tion,  we  think,  with  very  doubtfol  aacoess.  If  the  work 
be  that  descńbed  by  Eusebiua,  it  most  be  matilaŁed,  for 
the  diflaertation  on  the  natnie  of  the  dsmons  or  heathen 
.deities  is  said  by  Euselńns  to  have  been  ooly  a  part  of 
the  work,  but  it  now  constitates  the  whole.  6.  Aóyoc 
Tlapaiyerucóc  irpoc  "EWiprac,  CohoriaHo  ad  Grącoe. 
ThLB  is,  perhape,  another  of  the  worka  mentioned  by  £a- 
sebios,  Jerome,  and  Photiua  (L  c),  namely,  the  one  said 
by  them  to  have  been  entitled  by  the  author'EXc7xoC9 
ĆonfutatiOf  or  perhaps  Tov  nXar£ivoc  lAf/^oc*  -P^ato- 
fitf  ConfiUatio  (Photiua,  BUŁ  ood.  232),  thoagh  the  title 
haa  been  dropped.  Others  are  dispoBed  to  identify  the 
work  iaat  described  with  the  Confuta/tb.  The  genuine- 
ness  of  the  extant  work  haa  been  diapnted,  chiefly  on 
the  ground  of  intemal  evidenoe,  by  Oudin,  and  by  aome 
German  scholars  (Semler,  Arendt,  and  Herbig) ;  and  is 
spoken  of  with  doabt  by  Neander ;  but  it  haa  generally 
been  received  aa  genuine,  and  is  defended  by  Mazan, 
Semisch  (book  ii,  sect  i,  c  iii),  and  Otto.  It  ia  a  mach 
longer  piece  than  the  Oraiio  ad  Gracos,  6.  Ilcpi  ftov- 
apxiacy  De  Monarchia,  The  title  is  thos  giren  in  the 
MSS.  and  by  Maran.  A  treatise  under  nearly  the  same 
title,  Ilcpi  6eoi;  /<ovapx*aCf  ^  Monarchia  Dd,  ia  men- 
tioned by  Ensebiua,  Jerome,  and  Photiua  {L  c).  The 
word  Bcot;  is  oontained  in  the  title  of  the  older  editions 
of  the  extant  treatise,  which  is  an  argument  for  Mon* 
otheism,  aupported  by'  numeroua  ąuotationa  from  the 
Greek  poets  and  philosophers.  As,  aocording  to  Euse- 
bius,  Justin  had  used  citations  from  the  sacred  writings 
which  are  not  fouud  in  the  extant  work,  it  ia  probable 
that,  if  thia  be  the  genuine  work,  it  haa  come  down  to 
us  mutilated.  Petavius  and  Tillemont  in  a  former  age, 
and  Uerbig  and  Semisch  in  the  present  day,  doubt  or 
deny  the  genuineness  of  this  treatise,  and  their  ai^- 
ments  are  not  without  considerable  foroe ;  but  the  great 
majority  of  critica  admit  the  treatise  to  be  Justin^s, 
though  some  of  them,  as  Cave,  Dupin,  and  Ceillier,  oon- 
tend  that  it  is  mutilated.  Maran,  understanding  the 
passage  in  Ensebiua  differently  from  others,  yindicates 
net  only  the  genuineness,  but  the  integrity  of  the  work. 
Some  of  the  paasagcs  ąuoted  from  the  andent  poets  are 
not  fouńd  in  any  other  writing,  and  are  on  that  account 
auspected  to  be  sparious  additions  of  a  later  hand."  7. 
'E7n9To\rf  vpoc  AióyvriT0Vj  Epistoła  ad  Dio^^netum. 
Thia  yaluable  relic  of  antiquity,whićh  deactiłiea  the  life 
and  worship  of  the  early  Chństians,  ia  by  some  eminent 
critics,  as  Labbe,  Cave,  Fabricius,  Ceillier,  Baumgarten- 
Crusius,  and  otbers,  ascribed  to  Justin;  by  others,  aa 
Tillemont,  Le  Nourry,  Oudin,  Neander,  and  Semisch,  it 
is  ascribed  to  some  other,  but  unknown  writer,  who  is 
supposed  to  have  lived  earlier  than  Justin.  Grabę, 
Dupin,  Maran,  and  Otto,  are  in  doubt  aa  to  the  author- 
sbip.  Both  Otto  and  Semisch  give  a  lengthened  state- 
ment  of  the  argumenta  on  the  qaestum :  thoee  of  Se- 
misch, deriyed  chiefly  from  a  comparison  of  the  style 
and  thoughta  of  the  author  with  those  of  Justin  in  his 
undisputed  worka,  dearly  point  to  some  other  person  as 
its  autjior."  Comp.  especially  Pressensć,  Early  Years  of 
Christioftttfff  ii  {Martyrs  ańd  ApohgisU),  p.  691,  foot- 
note  (N-.  Y.  187 1, 12mo).  (The  fragment  of  Justin  on  the 
Resurrectiou  is  notioed  under  lost  works.) 

(3.)  Spurious  IToria.— 8.  'Avarp03r^  Łoyfiarwf  n- 
v(uł/  'ApŁ(rror<Xuciuv,  Quorundam  Arisiotdia  Dogmatum 
Confuiałio,  "  Possibly  this  is  the  work  described  by  Pho- 
tius  (^Bibl.  ood.  125)  as  wńtten  against  the  first  and  sec- 
ond  books  of  the  Physics  of  Aristotle.  Its  spuriousness 
is  generally  admitted;  scarcely  any  critics  except  Cavc, 
and  perhaps  Grabę,  contend  that  it  belonga  to  Justin ; 
but  its  datę  ia  veiy  doubtful,  and  its  real  auihorship  un- 
known. 9.  'EK^łOic  rfic  óp^tjc  6fio\oyiacj  Erpositio  rec- 
ta  Con/e8siom$.  Possibly  this  is  the  work  cited  as  Jus- 
tin'8  by  Leontius  of  Byzantium,  in  the  6th  centuiy;  but 
it  was  little  known  in  Western  Europę  till  the  time  of 
the  Rcformation,  when  it  was  reoeiyed  by  some  of  the 
reformcrs,  as  Calyin,  as  a  genuine  work  of  Justin,  and 
by  others,  as  Mdancthon  and  the  Magdeburg  centuria-  j 


ton,  plaoed  ainoog  the  wotka  of  donbif  ul  i 
But  it  is  now  generally  allowed  that  the  predaion  cf  ha 
orthodoxy,  and  the  oae  of  Tariooa  tenna'  not  in  nse  in 
JaBtin'8  time,  make  it  evident  that  it  waa  wiitten  at  any 
rato  affcer  the  commenoement  of  the  Arian  oontiovc»y, 
and  probably  after  the  Nestocian,  or  eren  the  Eutychian 
controyersy.  Grabę,  Ceillier,  and  some  otheiB  aacńbe 
it  to  Justinua  Siculua.  10.  'Airocpto«ic  rpóc  roifę  6^ 
^oió^ottę  irtpi  TtvAv  avayKaiuv  l^tfniiuminf,  Rapon^' 
rionea  ad  Orthodoxot  de  guSmtdam  NeoesMonis  (^mb*- 
tionibm,  This  ia  oonfesaedly  apuziousL  11.  'JE^Mrr^ouc 
Xpurriavucai  irphc  robę  "£XXifvact  OMutimnea  Chri»» 
tianm  ad  Graoot,  and  'EcmrriiyHC  'EX\3pw€u  wpoc  iwę 
XptaTiavovCt  OuatUonet  Grwea  ad  Cftrif«K0iot.  KesU 
ner  alone  of  modem  writers  oontenda  for  the  gennine- 
neas  of  theae  pieoea.  It  is  thonght  by  aome  that  dther 
these  anawen,  etc,  or  thoee  to  the  Orthodoz  jnst  men- 
tioned, are  the  'AropŁw  card  lifę  cv<rc/3lurc  K§^aXatw- 
6ttc  ŁwtKifmtc,  Brirf  ResohUions  ofDoubU  umfawfraih 
to  Pie^t  mentioned  by  Photiua  (BibL  cod.  125>  12. 
Epistoła  ad  Zenam  et  Seremim,  oommendng  'lovo7hfoc 
Zf}v^  Kai  £cpi7v^  roic  ditk^tc  ^^^tp^'*'**^"'^^^'"''  ^^^^ 
et  Serenofrairiiiu  salutem,  This  piece  ia  by  the  leam- 
ed  (escept  Grabę,  Caye,  and  a  few  othen)  rejeeted  &om 
the  worka  of  Justin  Martyr.  Halloiz,  Tillennont,  and 
CeiUier  aacńbe  it  to  a  Justin,  abbot  of  amonaatery  oear 
Jerusalem,  in  the  idgn  of  the  emperor  HeiacUoa,  of 
whom  mention  is  madę  in  the  life  of  StAnastadna  the 
Perdau ;  but  Ikfaian  oondders  that  aa  doubtfoL" 

(4.)  JLoft  Works,  — 18.  ^vvraypa  Kari  roff&y  rwv 
yŁyŁvtifJikviav  aipiofow,  Liber  contra  omnes  Hareses, 
mentioned  by  Juatin  himself  in  his  Apohgia  Prima  (c, 
26, p. 70, ed. Maran;  i,194,ed.Otto)»and  tbereforeante- 
cedent  in  the  time  of  ita  compodtion  to  that  work.  14. 
A6700C  or  'Sóyypapfia  Kard  MapKŁUPoc,  or  Upóc  Ma^ 
Kiiava,  Contra  Mareionen  (Irenseua,  Adt,  Hares,  iy,  €, 
oonf.  y ,  26 ;  Jerome,  De  Vir.  lUustribus,  c.  28 ;  Eusebłos, 
HisLEocLiTyll;  Photius, i7tóŁ cod.  125).  *«Banmgar- 
ten-Crudns  and  Otto  coojectnre  that  thia  work  agałoat 
Mardon  was  a  part  of  the  laiger  woik,  Contra  Otmes 
IlareseSfjuBt  mentioned ;  but  Jerome  and  Phc^ua  dear- 
ly. diatinguish  them.  The  fragment  De  HesurreOims 
Camisj  presenred  by  Joannea  Damascenna  {Sacra  Par' 
aU.  Operoj  ii,  756,  etc,  ed.  Lequien),  and  usitally  printed 
with  the  worka  of  Justin,  ia  thought  by  Otto  to  be  from 
the  Liber  contra  onmes  Haresesy  or  ficom  that  ^ainst 
Maidon  (suppodng  them  to  be  distinct  worka),  for  no 
separate  treatiae  of  Juatin  on  the  Resonectioo  appeaia 
to  haye  been  known  to  Ensebius,  or  Jerome,  or  l^boitia^; 
but  such  a  work  is  cited  by  Procopina  of  Gaza,  In  OetU' 
teuch,  ad  Genes,  iii,  21.  Semisch,  howeyor  (book  ii,  aect. 
i,  c.  iy),  who,  with  Grabę  and  Otto,  contends  for  the  geo' 
uineneiB  of  the  fragment,  which  he  yindicates  against 
the  objections  of  Tillemont,  Łe  Nourry,  Blaran,  Neander, 
and  others,  thinka  it  was  an  independent  woric**  15. 
^aAriTCy  Psałtes,  a  woric  the  natore  of  which  is  oot 
known;  and,  16.  Ilcpi  4^xfiCj  ^  Amma — both  men- 
tioned by  Euaebina  {Bist,  EccL  iy,  18)  and  Jerome  (L  c). 
Beddes  these  worics  Justin  wiote  aeyecaLothen,  of 
which  not  eyen  the  names  haye  oome  dowo  to  na  (En- 
sebius, iy,  18),  but  the  following  are  ascribed  to  faim  ob 
insufficient  gronnda.  17.  *Xiropviiftara  tic  *ECaif/ifpor, 
Commentarius  ta  ffezaimeron,  a  work  of  which  a  fra^ 
ment,  dted  from  Anaatadoa  Sindta  (/n  Hezaem,  Uh. 
yii),  is  giyen  by  Grabę  (SpiciL  S8.  Patr,  yoL  a.  aec  iL  p. 
195)  and  Maran  (Opp,  Justin,),  Maran,  howerer,  donbts 
it  u  Jo8tin*s,  and  obsenrea  that  the  worda  of  Anastadus 
do  not  imply  that  Jusdn  wrote  a  aeparate  wozk  on  the 
subject.  18.  npoc  E^^pa^coy  oo^unrpf  wepc  irpovoiac 
Kai  irioTłutę,  Adversus  Eupkrasium Sopkistam^de  Prot- 
identia  et  Fide,  of  which  a  dtation  ia  preseryed  by  Max- 
imus  (Opus,  Polemicoj  ii,  154,  ed.  Combefi8>  This  trea- 
tise  is  probably  the  work  of  a  later  Justm.  19.i4Coa»- 
mentary  on  the  Apocafypse,  The  sappoddon  that  Job* 
tin  wrote  such  a  woik  is  probably  founded  on  a  misoH 
derstanding  of  a  passage  in  Jerome  (De  Viris  lUastr,  c 
9),  who  aays  that  *<  Justin  Martyr  inteipreted  the  Apoe- 


jusnN 


1109 


JUSTIN 


aljpoe,'*  bot  withont  saying  that  it  woa  in  a  eepante 
woifc.  The  aathoiBhip  of  the  work  Uśpi  tov  iravróc» 
J}e  UnitertOj  mentioned  by  Photius  {BibL  cod.  48),  was, 
as  he  tells  us,  dUputed,  some  ascribing  it  to  Justin,  but 
apparently  with  little  reason.  It  is  now  asaigned  to 
Hippolytus  (q.  v.)» 

"  Nearly  all  the  works  of  Jastin,  genuine  and  spurioos 
(viz.  all  enumeiated  aboye  in  the  fint  three  diyisions, 
except  the  OraHo  ad  Gracos  and  the  Epistoia  ad  Dioff- 
netem),  wcgre  publiahed  by  Robert  Stephena,  Paiis,1551, 
foL  This  is  the  editio  princepe  of  the  collected  works ; 
but  the  Cokortatio  ad  Greecos  had  been  previously  pub- 
liahed, with  a  Latin  yersion,  Pańs,  1639, 4to.  There  is 
no  discrimination  or  attempt  at  discrimination  in  this 
edition  of  Stephens  between  the  genuine  and  spurious 
works.  The  Orałio  ad  GrcBCOt,  and  the  Epistoła  ad  Di- 
offnetitm,  with  a  Latin  yersion  and  notes,  were  published 
by  Henry  Stephens,  Paris,  1592, 4to,  and  again  in  1596. 
All  these  works,  reid  or  supposed,  of  Justin  were  pub- 
lished, with  the  Latin  yersion  of  Langus,  and  notes  by 
Frejd.  Sylburgius,  Heidelberg,  1598,  fol. ;  and  this  edition 
was  reprinted,  Paris,  1615  and  1686,  foL,  with  the  addi- 
tion  of  some  lemains  of  other  early  fathers;  and  Cologne, 
(or  rather  Wittenberg),  1686,  foL,  with  some  fiuther  ad- 
ditions.  A  far  superior  edition,  with  the  remains  of  Ta- 
tian, Athenagoras,  Theophilos  of  Antioch,  and  Hermias 
the  Philosopher,  with  a  leamed  preface  and  notes,  was 
published,  **  opera  et  studio  unios  ex  Monachia  congreg. 
S.  Maori,"  L  e.  by  Pnidentius  Maranas,  or  Maran  (Paris, 
1742,  foL).  In  this  the  genuine  pieces,  according  to  the 
judgment  of  the  editof  (Nos.  1-6  in  our  enumeration), 
Ute  giyea  in  the  body  of  the  work,  together  with  the 
Epittola  ad  Dioffnetumy  of  the  anthorship  of  which  Ma- 
ran ¥ras  in  doubt  The  two  Apologies  were  plaoed  in 
their  right  order  for  the  fiest  time  in  this  edition.  The 
lemaining  works,  together  with  fragments  which  had 
been  ooUected  by  Grabę  (who  had  first  published  in  his 
SpicUegium  8S,Patrum  the  fragment  on  the  Resurreo- 
tion  irom  Joannea  Damaaoenos)  and  others,  and  the 
Marłyrum  8,Jutiwi^  of  which  the  Greek  text  was  first 
published  in  the  ii  eto  Sanetorum,  Aprilis,  yoL  ii,  were 
giyen  in  'the  Appendix.  From  the  time  of  Maran,  no 
oomplete  edition  of  Justin  waa  published  until  that  of 
Otto  (Jena,  1842-44,  2  yols.  8yo;  new  edition,  1847-50, 
8  yolsw  8yo).  The  first  yolume  containa  the  OraHo  et 
CokorUUio  ad  Groacot^  and  the  Apohgia  Prima  and 
Apohffia  Seeunda,  The  aecond  contains  the  Diahgiu 
€um  Tryphone,  the  Epistoła  ad  Diognetum,  the  frag- 
ments, and  the  Ada  Martyrii  Justud  et  Sociorum, 
Komeroua  yaluable  editiona  of  the  aeyeral  pieces  ap- 
peaied,  chiefly  in  England.  The  Apohgia  Prima  was 
edited  by  Grabę  (Oxford,  1700, 8yo) ;  the  Apologia  Se- 
amda,  Oratio  ad  Gracos,  Cohortatio  ad  GrceooSj  and 
De  Monarchia,  by  Hntchin  (Oxford,  1708,  8yo);  and 
the  Dialogus  cum  Tryphone,  by  Jebb  (Lond.  1719,  8yo), 
These  three  editiona  had  the  Latin  yersion  of  Langus, 
and  yariorom  notes.  The  Apologia  Prima,  Apohgia 
Seeunda,  and  Dialogus  cum  Trypkone,  from  the  text  of 
Robert  Stephena,  with  some  oorrections,  with  the  yer- 
iuon  of  Lańe^,  and  notes,  were  edited  by  Thirlby,  and 
publiahed,  Lond.  1722,  folio.  It  has  been  conjectured  that 
t^is  yaluable  edition,  though  published  under  the  name 
of  Thirlby,  was  leally  by  Markland.  The  Apohgia  Pri- 
ma, Apohgia  Secunda,  Diahgus  cum  Tryphone,  and  the 
iragi^ents,  are  giyen  in  the  first  yolume  of  the  Biblio- 
ikeea  Patrum  of  Galland.  We  do  not  profess  to  haye 
enumerated  all  the  editiona  of  the  Greek  text,  and  we 
haye  not  noticed  the  Latin  yersions.  Fuli  information 
will  be  fonnd  in  the  prefaoes  of  Maran  and  Otto.  There 
aie  English  tranalationa  of  the  Apohgies  by  Reeyea,  of 
the  Diahgue  wiih  Trypho  by  Brown,  and  of  the  Ezhor- 
tation  to  the  Gentiles  by  Moses." 

Tkcohgical  Views*-—Ofthe  morę  striking  peculiarities 
of  Jostin^s  theological  eystem,  we  present  the  reader 
a  short  but  faithfcd  summary  from  the  pen  of  the  late 
profeesor  C.  E.  Stowe :  "  There  is  in  eyery  man  a  germ 
of  the  diyine  reaaon,  a  aeed  of  the  Logos,  whereby 


man  is  related  to  Ciod,  and  becomes  capaUe  of  forming 
an  idea  of  God.  By  this  spark  of  the  diyine  intelli- 
gence  the  better  men  among  the  pagan  philosophers 
were  iUominated;  but  morę  especially,  and  far  beyond 
these,  the  prophets  and  inj^ired  men  of  the  Old  Testa- 
ment. Still  this  reyelation  waa  only  fragmentary  and 
partiaL  Only  in  Christ  was  the  Logos,  the  diyine  rea- 
son, perfectly  reyealed.  The  Logos,  the  Word,  is  him- 
self  God,  yet  from  Crod;  the  Word  the  First-begotten, 
the  Power,  the  piimitiye  Reyelation  of  God.  He  is  the 
only-begotten  of  God,  yet  without  any  diyiding  or  pour- 
ing  forth  of  the  diyine  substance,  but  begotten  solely  by 
the  wiJll  of  the  Father.  The  Son  was  with  God  before 
the  creation^  the  Word  of  the  Father,  and  begotten 
when  God  by  him  ia  the  beginning  created  and  ordered 
all  things.  Aa  to  his  personal  snbeastence,  he  is  distinct 
from  God,  but  nomericaUy  only,  not  essentially ;  and 
subordinate  to  the  Father,  but  only  insomuch  as  he  has 
his  origin  and  being  from  the  oounsel  of  the  patemal 
will.  Aa  he  ia  the  first  reyelation  of  the  Father,  so  he 
is  the  medium  of  all  the  Bubsequent  reyelations  of  the 
diyine  light  and  Ufe.  He  is  the  Oreator  and  Goyemor 
of  the  world,  the  uniyersal  reason.  He  dweUs  in  eyery 
reaaonable  being,  in  diiferent  measore,  according  to  the 
ausceptibility  of  each  indiyidnal ;  and  he  was  the  leader 
and  bearer  of  the  Old-Testament  theocracy.  He  is  the 
God  who  appeared  to  Mosea  and  to  the  patriarcha.  He 
it  is  who  said,  I  am  the  God  of  Abraham,  and  of  Isaac, 
and  of  Jacob;  and  he  was  with  such  heathen  as  Socra- 
tes,  though  not  with  thoee  who  were  ungodly.  When 
the  fulness  of  time  had  come,  this  Word,  through  the 
Yiigin,  became  flesh,  according  to  the  will  of  the  Fa^ 
ther,  that  he  might  participate  in  and  bear  our  infirmi- 
ties,  and  take  away  from  ua  the  curae  of  the  law.  In 
him  were  united  and  madę  objectiye  the  human  reason 
and  the  diyine  intelligence;  he  was  in  the  fiesh  both 
man  and  God  incamate,  and  thus  the  Sayiour  of  falleh 
men.  This  is  the  true  and  the  only  safe  and  sayiąg 
philoaophy ;  in  comparison  with  this,  all  other  philoso- 
phy  has  only  a  subordinate  yalue ;  this  alone  works  sal- 
yation,  and  here  only  can  we  recognise  the  diyine,  and 
attain  to  God.  He  who  ia  filled  with  the  spirit  of 
Christ  deriyes  not  his  knowledge  from  the  erring,  and 
impeifect,  and  fragmentary  reason,  but  from  the  fulness 
and  perfection  of  reason,  which  is  Christ  himselT'  {Bib- 
Uotkeca  Sacra,  1852,  p.  829  sq.).  As  a  whole,  the  works 
of  Justin  Martyr  "  eyerywhere  attest,"  aaya  Dr.  Schaff 
(CA.  Bisi,  ii,  484),  *^  hia  honesty  and  eamestness,  his  en- 
thusiastic  love  for  Christianity,  and  his  fearleasness  in 
ita  defence  against  all  assaults  from  without  and  peryer- 
sions  from  within.  Justin  was  a  man  of  yeiy  extensiye 
reading,  enormous  memory,  inąuiring  spirit,  and  many 
profound  ideas,  but  wanting  in  critical  discernment.  His 
modę  of  reasoning  is  often  ingenioua  and  conyincing, 
but  aometimea  loose  and  rambling,  fanciful  and  puerile. 
Hia  style  ia  easy  and  yiyadous,  but  diffuse  and  careless. 
He  is  the  first  of  the  Church  fathers  to  bring  classical 
scholarship  and  Platonie  philosophy  in  contact  i^-ith  the 
Christian  theology.  He  found  in  Platonism  mępy  ro- 
sponses  to  the  Ciospel,  whichiie  attributed  in  part  to  the 
fragmentary,  germ-like  reyelation  of  the.  LogOs  before 
the  incamation,  and  in  part  to  an  acąuaintoncc  with 
the  Mosaic  Scriptures.  With  him  Christ  was  the  abso- 
hite  reason,  and  Christianity  the  only  true  philosophy. 
His  sources  of  theological  knowledge  are  partly  the  ilv- 
ing  Church  tradition,  partly  the  Holy  Scriptures,  from 
which  he  cites  most  fipequently,  and  generally  from 
memory,  the  Old-Testament  prophets  (in  the  Sept.),  and 
the  *  Memorials  of  the  Apostles,'  as  he  caUs  the  canoni- 
cal  gospels.  He  expre88ly  mentions  the  reyelation  of 
John.  But,  like  the  Pastor  Hemue,  he  nowhere  notices 
Paul,  though  seyeial  allusions  to  passages  of  his  epistles 
can  hardly  be  mistaken,  and  Justin's  position  towards 
heathenism  was  anything  but  the  Ebionistic,  and  was 
far  morę  akin  to  that  of  PauL  Any  dogmatical  infer- 
ence  from  this  silence  is  the  less  admissible,  sińce  in  the 
genuine  wiitings  of  thia  father  not  one  of  the  apostles 


JUSTIN 


1110 


jusrmiAN  I 


or  eyangeluts  is  expreflBly  named,  bnt  leference  is  al- 
wsys  madę  directly  to  Christ,  Justin^s  exegesis  of  the 
Oid  Testament  is  trpological  and  Messianic  thiotighout, 
finding  referenoes  eveiywhere  to  ChrUt.** 

See  Eusebius,  Hist  Eccles.  iv,  8-18, 16-18 ;  Jerome, 
De  YinlUust.  c  28;  Pbot.  BibL  cod.  48, 126,  232,  234; 
Marły rium  $.  Acta  Marłyrii  Justmij  apud  Acta  Sanc" 
(orum,  April.  voL  ii ;  and  apud  Opera  Jttsłim,  edit.  Maran 
and  Otto;  Halloix,  fUustrium  EccL  Orient,  Scr^pŁorwn 
YitcBy  aaBcL  ii,  p.  151,  etc. ;  reprinted,  with  a  Commewt.  Prcs- 
vxuu  and  NotcB  by  Papebroche,  in  the  A  eta  Sancłorum, 
April  voL  ii;  Grabę,  SpicUegium  SS,  Patrum,  V,  183; 
Baronius,  Aimales^  ad  annos  130,  142,  143,  150,  164, 
165;  Pagi,  Critice  in  Baronium;  Cave,  History  of  Lit- 
eraturę^ i,  60,  ed.  OxŁ  1740-43 ;  the  ecclesiasticiil  histo- 
ries  of  Tillemont,  ii,  844,  etc ;  Fleury,  i,  413,  etc,  476, 
etc«  Dupin,  NoutelU  BibUothecue,  etc.;  Ceillier,  Des 
Auteurs  Sacres,  ii,  1,  etc.;  Lardner,  CrA/iiM^,  etc; 
Otto,  De  Justini  Marłyri$  Scripti»;  Fabricios,  BUdioth, 
GrcEc,  yii,  52,  etc;  Semisch,  Jtwitn  der  Martyrer  (Bres- 
lau,  1840-2 ;  translated  by  Ryland  in  the  Biblical  CaU- 
net) ;  Smith,  Diet,  of  Greek  and  Roman  Bioff.  and  My- 
thohgy,  ii,  682  są. ;  Bp.  Kaye,  Writingt  and  Opiniont  of 
Justin  Martyr  (2d  ed.,  reyied,  Lond.  1836, 8vo) ;  Kitto, 
Journal  Sacred  Lit.  v,  253  są. ;  Roberts  and  Donaldson, 
A  nte-Nicene  Christian  Lib,  (Edinb.  1867,  T.  and  T.  Clark), 
ToL  ii ;  Neander,  Church  Uiatory^  i,  661  8q. 

Justin  THE  Gnostic,  who  flourished  towards  the 
closc  of  the  sccond  centuiy,  has  only  recently  bccomc 
known  to  us  throngh  the  Pkilosophoumena  of  Ilippoly- 
tus  (v,  22;  X,  15),  and  of  his  personal  history  and  ori- 
gin  very  little  information  has  come  down  to  us.  His 
system  has  a  Jnd/uzing  cast,  and  is  mostly  based  upon 
a  mystical  interpretation  of  Genesis.  He  propagated 
his  doctrines  secrctly,  binding  his  disciplcs  to  silence 
by  Bolemn  oaths.  In  his  gnosis  Justin  madę  use  of 
Greek  mythology,  especially  the  tradition  of  the  twelve 
conflicts  of  Hercules.  He  assumes  three  original  prin- 
ciples,  two  małe  and  one  femalc  The  last  he  iden- 
tifies  with  Eden,  which  marries  Elohim,  and  becomes 
thus  the  mother  of  the  angels  of  the  spirit-world.  The 
tree  of  life  in  Paradise  represcnts  the  good,  the  tree  of 
knowledge  the  eyW  angcK  The  four  riyers  aie  syra- 
bols  of  the  four  divisions  of  angels.  The  Naas,  or  the 
serpent-spińt,  he  madę,  unlike  the  Ophitcs,  the  bearer 
of  the  evil  principle  ^  he  committed  adultery  with  Eve, 
and  a  worse  crime  with  Adam ;  he  adulterated  the  laws 
of  Moses  and  the  oracles  of  the  prophets  ^  he  nailed  Jesus 
to  the  cross.  But  by  this  crucifixion  Jesus  was  emanci- 
patcd  from  his  materiał  body,  rosę  to  the  good  God  to 
whom  he  committed  his  spirit  in  death,  and  thus  became 
the  deliverer.— Schaff,  ChunA  History^  i,  242, 243.  See 
Gnosticism. 

Juatln  OF  SiciLY.    See  Justinus. 

Justin  I,  or  ike  Elder,  Roman  emperor  of  the  East, 
bom  A.D.  450,  was  originally  a  swineherd,  The  sol- 
diers  of  the  Pnetorian  band  forced  him  to  accept  the 
imperial  dignity  on  the  death  of  Anastasiiis  in  618. 
He  is  not«d  in  ecclesiastical  history  for  his  interference 
in  behaif  of  the  orŁhodox  bishops  who  had  becn  banished 
by  the  Arians,  but  whom  he  recalled,  and  for  seyeral 
edicts  which  he  published  against  the  Arians.  Hearing 
of  the  destruction  of  Antioch  by  an  earthquake,  he  laid 
asiilo  ihe  imperial  robę,  clothed  himself  in  sackcloth,  and 
passc'(i  scveral  days  in  fasting  and  prayer,  to  avoid  di- 
vine  judgment.  He  rebuilt  that  city  and  other  places 
which  were  destroyed  by  the  same  calamity.  He  died 
in  527.    See  Smith,  Diet,  ofGr,  aiul  Hanu  Biog,  ii,  677  są. 

JuBtina,  St.,  is  said  to  have  bcen  bom  at  Antioch, 
of  Christian  parents,  and  to  have  suffered  martyrdom  at 
2s'icomedia  in  304.  St.  Cyprian,  sumamed  the  Magidan, 
is  charged  with  tłie  atteropt  of  her  seduction  by  magie, 
and  that  her  couduct  led  him  to  embrace  the  Christian 
faiih.  During  the  pcrsecution  ordered  by  Diocletian 
anłl  >raximian  they  were  arrested  together,  and,  after 
suiTcriiitj  torturo  with  great  finuuess,  were  scnt  to  Dio- 


cletian at  Nicomedia.  The  latter  cauaed  them  at  onee 
to  be  beheaded.  The  Greek  Church  oommemoratei 
them  on  the  2d  of  October,  and  the  Roman  Cliarch  on 
the  26th  of  September.  The  empress  Eododa,  ^nife  of 
Theodońus  the  Younger,  wrote  a  poem  in  three  cancoa 
in  honor  of  St.  Jnstina  and  St.  Cyprian.  See  Photins, 
BtUtotkeca,  cap.  clxzxi7;  Tillemont,  ifńnot  ret,  voL  v; 
Dupin,  Bibiioth,  des  A  uteurs  Ecdes.  au  łroisieme  nede ; 
Hoefer,  N(mv.  Biog,  Geniraie,  :xjlvu,  309. 

Justina  of  Padua,  St.,  patronesa  of  Padua,  and, 
together  with  St^  Mark,  of  Yenice  aisa  According  to 
the  hagiographers,  she  was  a  native  of  the  former  city, 
and  suffered  martyrdom  there  in  304,  under  Diocletian, 
and  according  to  others  under  Nero.  We  ha%'e  no  de- 
tails  on  the  event,  however.  Her  relics,  which  were 
lost,  were  recovered  (?)  in  1177,  and  are  pre«erved  in  a 
church  of  Padua  which  bears  her  name.  In  1417  a  eon- 
vent  of  Benedictines  in  the  neighbortiood  reformcd  their 
rules,  taking  the  name  of  Conyregation  of  SLJu*iina 
of  Padua,  This  reform  was  foUowed  by  another  in 
1498,  under  the  care  of  Luigi  Barbo,  a  Yenotian  senator, 
whom  pope  Alexander  VI  created  firet  abbot  of  the  or- 
der. The  congregation  spread,  and  the  mona^teiy  of 
Mount  Cassin,  having  Joined  it  in  1504,  was  madę  ita 
head-quarters  by  Julius  II.  Moreri  considers  the  Ic-gcnd 
of  this  saint^s  miracles  as  fabnloua,  yet  the  Roman  Church 
commemorates  her  on  the  7th  of  October.  See  Tille- 
mont, J/isł,  de  la  Persecution  de  Diodetian,  art.  55 ;  Bail- 
let,  Vies  det  Saints,  Oct.  7th. — Hoefer,  Xouv,  Biog.  Gener, 
xxvii,  310. 

Justinian  I,  ihe  Greai  (Flatius  AHicirs  Justc;- 
lANUs),  empemr  of  the  East,  was  bom  in  483  of  an  ob- 
scure  family.  He  shared  the  fortanea  of  his  ancie  Justin, 
who,  from  a  common  Thiacian  peasant,  was  raised  to  the 
imperial  throne,  and,  after  the  death  of  his  uncle,  Aug. 
1,  527,  was  himself  prodaimed  emperor.  He  obtained 
great  militaiy  sucoesses  over  the  Peisiana  tfarough  his 
celebrated  generał  BeUsarius,  destroyed  the  empire  of  the 
Yandals  in  Africa,  and  pat  an  end  to  the  domimon  of 
the  Ostrogoths  in  Italy,  which  sacoesses  restorcd  to  the 
Roman  empire  a  part  of  its  Tast  poasessions.  But  Jus- 
tinian was  by  no  meana  satiafied  with  the  renown  of 
a  conqueror.  Leamed,  unweaiiedly  active,  and  occłe- 
siastically  devout,  be  aspired  to  the  nnited  renown  of 
a  lawgtver,  theologian,  and  cham|ńon  of  the  genuine 
Christian  orthodoxy  as  well ;  and  his,  in  somc  re^pecta, 
brilliant  reign  of  neariy  thirty  yeazB  is  mazked  by  ear- 
nest  though  unsoccessfol  efforta  to  establiah  the  **  tnie 
faith"  for  all  time  to  come.  Indeed,  he  regarded  it  as 
his  especial  misaion  to  compel  a  generał  unifonnlty  of 
Christian  belief  and  practice,  bnt  by  his  persiatency  only 
increaaed  the  dirisions  in  church  and  state,  as  he  was 
greatly  misguided  by  his  famoua  wife,  who,  though  ani- 
mated  by  great  zeal  for  the  Church,  was  blindly  deroted 
to  the  Monophysites.  Yet,  howe^rer  unfortanate  the  <^ 
forts  of  Justinian  in  behaif  of  Christian  ortłiodosy  r&- 
sulted,  80  much  is  certain,  that  his  um  was  noble  and 
lofly,  and  that  he  was  actuated  by  the  holiest  of  poi^ 
poses.  It  is  said  of  him  that  he  spent  whole  nights  in 
prayer  and  fasting,  and  in  theoiogical  atudies  and  di^ 
cussions,  and  that  he  placed  his  throne  under  the  C5pe- 
dal  protection  of  the  Yirgin  Mary  and  the  archam^d 
MichaeL  He  adomed  the  capital  and  the  prorinces  with 
ooetly  temples  and  inatitutiona  of  charity.  Among  the 
churches  which  he  rebuilt  was  that  of  St.  Sophia  at 
Constantinople,  which  had  been  bumed  in  one  of  the 
civil  commotions.  This  church  is  esteemed  a  ma«ter- 
piece  of  architectuie.  The  altar  was  entirely  of  gT>łd 
and  silver,  and  adomed  with  a  vast  namber  and  yaricry 
of  precious  stones.  It  was  by  thia  emperor  that  the  dfth 
CEcumenical  Council  waa  oonrened  at  Constantinople 
(A.D.  558)  to  secure  the  end  for  which  Justinian  was 
personally  laboring — the  anion  of  the  Church  and  the 
extirpation  of  heresiea.  His  iSune,  howerer,  rests  chief- 
ly  on  hia  great  ability  aa  Icgialator.  Detennined  to  c.^1- 
lect  all  prerioua  legislative  Roman  enactments,  he  in- 


jusTmus 


1111 


JUSTUS 


trnsted  to  a  nntnber  of  the  ablest  Uwyen  of  Bome,  nn- 
der  the  direction  of  the  lenowned  Triboniauas,  the  task 
of  a  complete  rerisioii  and  digested  coUection  of  the 
Homan  law  from  the  time  of  Hadrian  to  his  own  reign ; 
and  thus  aroee,  after  the  ahort  lapae  of  seren  yean,  the 
oelebrated  Codex  Justmianeus,  **  which  thenceforth  be- 
came  the  nniyenal  law  of  the  Roman  empire,  the  sole 
text-book  in  the  academies  at  Romę,  Constantinople, 
and  BeiytuB,  and  the  basis  of  the  legał  relations  of  the 
greater  part  of  Christian  Emope  to  this  day.**  This 
body  of  Roman  law,  which  ia  '^  an  iroportant  aonrce  of 
our  knowledge  of  the  Christian  life  in  its  relations  to 
the  State  and  its  influence  upon  it,"  opens  with  the  im- 
perial creed  on  the  Trinity  (for  which,  see  Schaff,  Church 
ffistory,  iii,  769)  and  the  imperial  anathema  against  the 
prominent  Christian  heretics.  The  whole  collections  of 
Justinian  are  now  known  under  the  style  of  Corput  Juris 
Ciriiis,  The  editions  with  Gothofredus'8  notes  are  much 
esteemed.  The  four  books  of  Justinian's  Institutions 
were  translated  into  English,  with  notes,  by  George  Har- 
ris, LL.D.  (Lond.  2d  ed.  1761, 4to,  Lat.  and  EngL).  Jus- 
tinian also  wTote  a  libeUus  confessiomtJidei,&nA  a  hynm 
(pfioytyrię  vioc  rai  Xoyoc  tov  3«oi;,  etc.).     (J.  H.  W.) 


Medal  of  JosŁinian. 


Jostlnns  OF  Siciły,  bishop  of  one  of  the  sees  in 
that  island  in  the  latter  part  of  the  fiflh  century,  was 
present  at  a  council  held  at  Roroe  A.D.  483  or  484,  under 
pope  Felix  III,  in  which  Petrus  FuUo  (rva0£wc),  or  Peter 
the  Fuller,  was  condemned  as  a  heretic  for  having  added 
to  the  "  trisagion"  the  heretical  words  "  wbo  suffered  for 
ns.^*  Seyeral  bishops,  among  whom  was  Justin,  desirous 
of  recalling  Peter  from  his  errors,  addrcssed  Ictters  to 
him.  Ju8tin'8  Ictter  to  Peter,  in  the  original  Greek,  with 
a  Latin  yerńoTit  EpUtoia  Justmi  Episcopi  in  Sicilia,  ad 
Petrum  Fulknem  S,  Gnapheum,  w  given  in  the  ConcUia 
(voL  iv,  coL  1103,  etc,  edit.  Labbe;  voL  ii,  col.  839,  ediL 
Hardouin;  vol.  vii,  coL  1115,  edit,  Mansi).  The  genu- 
ineness  of  this  letter,  and  of  8ix  othcrs  of  similar  charac- 
ter  from  vańou8  Eastem  or  Western  bishops,  which  are 
also  given  in  the  ConcUia^  is  disputed  by  Yalesius  (ć?6- 
Merrat,  Eccles,  ad  Evagńum  Libri  dus,  Lib.  I  De  Petro 
Aniiocken,  Episcop.  c.  4),  but  defendcd  by  Cave  (llisł, 
Litt,  i,  458),  who,  however,  contends  that  the  Greek  text 
b  not  the  original,  but  a  ycrsion  from  the  Latin.  Pagi 
{Criiici  in  Baronii  Annales^  ad  ann.  485,  c.  15)  propoees 
to  correct  the  rcading  of  the  titlc  of  Justin*8  letter  from 
"Episcopi  in  Sicilia"  to  "Episcopi  in  Cilicia;"  others 
would  rcad  the  name  "  Justinianus,"  but  on  what  au- 
thority  we  do  not  know.  Dodwell  and  others  oscribe 
to  this  Justin  the  Respontiones  ad  Orikodoiosy  and  the 
EzposiŁio  Reda  Confessiomty  reputetl  to  be  by  Justin 
Martyr,  and  printed  with  his  works.  See  Fabricius, 
Bibl,  Gr.  ^'ii,  53 ;  xi,  661;  xii,  655.— Smith,  Diet,  Greek 
and  Roman  Biog,  s.  v. 

Jus''tus  (lov<rToCj  for  Lat  Jiutua^jusi;  a  frequent 


name  among  the  Jews,  eqmvalent  to  p*^*?^,  Josephos, 
Life,  9,  65,  76),  the  name  or  sumame  of  seyeral  men. 
Schdttgen  (/for.  Hebr,  in  Act,  Ap.)  shows  by  quotattons 
from  Rabbinical  writers  that  this  name  was  not  unusnal 
among  the  Jews. 

1.  Anothcr  name  for  Joseph  (q.  v.),  sumamed  Bar- 
8ABAS,  who  was  one  of  the  two  selected  as  candidates 
for  the  yacant  apostolate  of  Jndas  (Acts  i,  28). 

2.  A  proeelyte  at  Corinth,  in  whose  house,  adjoining 
the  synagogue,  Paul  preached  to  the  Gentiles  after  leay- 
ing  the  synagogue  (Acts  xyiii,  7).    A.D.  49. 

3.  Otherwise  called  Jesus,  a  Jewish  Christian,  named 
in  connection  with  Mark  by  Paul  as  beiiig  his  only  fel- 
low-laborers  at  Romę  when  he  wrote  to  the  Colossians 
(CoL  iv,  11).  A.D.  57.  Tradition  (Acta  Sanctorum, 
Jun.  iy,  67)  names  him  as  the  bishop  of  Eleutheropolis ! 

Justus,  St.,  u  the  name  of  a  Christian  martyr  who, 
with  his  brother  Pastor  (aged  respectiyely  twelve  and 
nine  years),  when  the  persecution  of  Diocletian  against 
the  Christians  began,  in  the  face  of  certain  martyrdom 
boldly  ayowed  himself  a  Christian.  For  this  alone  they 
were  cruelly  flogged ;  and  Dacian,  at  that  time  the  goy- 
emor  of  Spain,  enraged  at  their  courageous  reeignatiou, 
finally  caused  them  to  be  beheaded. 

Another  StJustus,  cclebrated  in  hiBtory,was  bishop 
of  Lyons,  in  France.  His  life  giyes  us  an  insight  into 
the  customs  of  the  4th  century.  The  monks,  both  in 
the  East  and  the  West,  sought  at  that  time  to  preyent 
as  far  as  possible  capital  punishment,  and  often  rcpre- 
sented  those  who  had  undergone  it  in  punishment  of 
their  crimes  as  martyrs.  A  man  who,  in  an  excess  of 
ragę,  had  killed  seyeral  persons  in  the  streets  of  Lyons, 
fled  to  the  bishop*s  church  for  protection.  Justus,  in  or- 
der to  shield  him,  delivered  him  into  the  hands  of  the 
authorities  on  the  condition  that  he  should  be  but  light- 
ly  punished,  but  the  mob  took  him  out  of  the  bands  of 
the  officers  and  killed  him.  Justus,  considering  him- 
self responsible  for  the  dcath  of  this  man,  and  hencc- 
forth  unworthy  of  his  office,  fled  to  £g>'pt,  wherc  he  re- 
mained  unknown  in  a  conyent,  aud  there  died  about  890. 

Another  SL  Justus,  a  native  of  Romę,  followed  StAu- 
gustine  in  his  mission  to  England,  and  became,  in  624, 
archbishop  of  Canterbuiy.  He  died  Noy.  10, 627. — Her- 
zog, Real-Encykiop,  s.  v. 

Jnstus  op  TiBERiAS  (in  Galilee),  son  of  Pistns, 
one  of  the  most  noteworthy  Jewish  historians,  flour- 
bhed  in  the  beginning  of  the  Christian  sera.  He  was 
in  the  employ  of  king  Agrippa  as  priyate  secretary 
when  the  reyolution  in  Galilee  broke  out,  and  though 
the  dty  of  Tiberias  had  been  especially  fayored  by  the 
king,  the  Tiberian  Jews  soon  followed  in  the  course  of 
their  neigbbors,  and  many  gathered  nnder  Pistus  and 
his  son  Justus,  who,  besides  the  adyantage  of  a  Greek 
education,  was  a  great  natural  orator,  and  easily  swayed 
the  masses.  As  we  haye  shontni  in  our  artides  on  Joee- 
phus  and  John  of  Gischala,  Josephns  desired  cver  the 
leadership,  be  it  among  his  own  nation  or  among  the 
Romans,  and  Justus  haying  madę  early  adyances  in  fa- 
yor  of  the  reyolution,  and  quickly  gained  the  confldence 
of  the  peoplc,  Josephus  feared  and  hatcd  him,  and,  as 
soon  as  the  war  terminated,  took  special  pains  to  con- 
yince  the  Romans  that  Justus  was  the  greater  rebel  of 
the  two.  The  conduct  of  Josephus  towards  Justus  be- 
came still  morę  unjustly  seyere  ailer  the  latter  had  yen- 
tured  to  write  a  history  of  the  war,  now  unhappily  lost,  in 
which  the  treacherous  action  of  Josephns  was  laid  bare. 
Indeed,  Josephus  himself  makes  the  only  arowed  object 
of  the  publication  of  his  "life"  his  yindication  from  the 
calumnies  of  Justus,  who  is  accused  of  łianng  falsified 
the  history  of  the  war  with  Romę  (comp.  Josephus,  De 
vita  maj  §  37,  65,  74),  as  well  as  of  haying  dclaycd  the 
editing  of  the  book  until  the  decease  of  Agrippa  and 
the  othcr  great  men  of  the  time,  because  his  accounts 
were  false,  and  he  feared  the  consequence8  of  his  un- 
justness  and  untruthfulness.  Justus,  according  to  Pho- 
tius  {Bibl,  cod.  33),  also  wrote  a  history  of  the  Jews 


JTJTLAND 


1112 


JXJXON 


fram  the  tlmes  of  Moses  down  to  the  death  of  Heroda  in 
the  third  year  of  the  reign  of  Trajan,  bat  thiB  work  abo  is 
anfortunately  loet  Some  wńten  (Żusebius,  HisL  Ecda, 
iii,  9 ;  Stephaniu  Byzant.  s.  v.  Tifiipiac)  speak  of  a  spe- 
dal  work  of  his  on  the  Jewbh  War,  but  this  may  lefer 
only  to  the  last  portion  of  his  chionide,  which  Diogenes 
Laertiufl  (ii, 41)  calla  a  ^rififta.  Soidas  {a,y/lowrroc) 
mentions  some  other  works  of  Justus,  of  which,  howeyer, 
nothing  is  extant.  See  Grtttz,  Getch,  der  Judm,  iii,  897 
sq.;  StuiLundKrit.  1868,p.  66  są.     (J.H. W.) 

Jutland,  a  province  of  Denmark,  oontains,  sińce  the 
Peace  ofYienna  of  Oct.80, 1864,  which  regulated  the  firon- 
ticr  between  Denmark  and  Germany,  9716  8quaie  milea, 
and  in  1870  had  787,927  inhabitants.  It  constitotes  the 
northem  part  of  the  Cimbrian  peninsula,  and  is  bounded 
on  the  north  by  the  Skagerrack,  on  the  east  by  the  Kat- 
tegat,  on  the  south  by  Schleswig,  and  on  the  west  by 
the  German  Sea.  OriginaUy  the  Cimbii  aie  said  to 
have  lived  there ;  subseąuently  the  oointry  was  oocupied 
by  the  Jiits,  a  Saxon  tńbe.  At  the  beginning  of  the 
lOth  centary  it  was  conquered  by  the  Damish  king  Grorm, 
and  sińce  then  it  has  been  a  part  of  the  kingdom  of 
Denmark.  Christianity  was  introduced  into  Jatland  by 
Ansgar  (q.  v.),  and  the  Christianization  of  the  country 
was  completed  within  a  oomparatively  short  period. 
The  first  chorch  was  erected  at  Ribe.  The  Reforma- 
tion  was  fint  carried  throogh  in  the  city  of  Yiborg  by 
the  efforts  of  Hans  Yansen,  a  yoong  peasant  from  the 
island  of  Fuhnen.  Jutland  has  now  foor  Lutheran  di- 
ooeses— Aalboi^,  Viborg,  Aarhuus,  and  Bibę.  See  Den- 
mark.   (A.  J.  S.) 

Juftah  (Hebrew  Yut4ih%  n^H\  Josh.  xv,  66,  Vulg. 
Jota ;  or  YuUah',  hSD*^,  perhaps  inclined,  otherwise  L  q. 
Joibak,  Josh,  xjd,  16,  Vulg.  JeŁa ;  Sept  'lerra  v.  r.  *Iróv 
and  Tavv),  a  Leritical  city  in  the  mountains  of  Jndah, 
named  in  connection  with  Ztph,  Jezreel,  etc,  in  the 
neighborhood  of  Maon.and  Carmel  (Josh.  xy,  66).  It 
was  allotted  to  the  priests  (xxi,  16),  but  in  the  catalogue 
of  1  Chroń,  yi,  67-69,  the  name  has  escaped.  Eusebius 
{Onotnasł.  s.  y.)  calls  it  a  large  yillage  by  the  name  of 
Jettan  ('Ierrav),  and  places  it  eighteen  miles  south  of 
Eleutheropolis,  in  the  district  of  Daromas  (the  south). 
It  is  doubtless  the  yillage  discoyered  by  Dr.  Robinson 
{Ruearches^  ii,  628),  four  miles  south  of  Hebron,  and 
still  called  Ynita^  haying  the  appearance  of  a  laige  Mo- 
hammedan  town,  on  a  Iow  eminence,  with  trees  around, 
and  where  the  guides  spoke  of  the  existence  of  old 
foundations  and  former  walls.  Schwarz  calls  it  Zata  in 
his  PaksL  p.  106,  and  Seetzeń  JiUa  on  his  map. 

^  The  selection  of  Juttah  as  a  city  of  the  priests  sug- 
gests  the  idea  of  its  haying  alrcady  been  a  place  of  im- 
portanc^,  which  is  scemingly  confirmed  by  early  and 
numerous  allusions  to  it  in  the  inscriptions  on  the  Egyp- 
tian  monuments.  There  it  appears  to  be  described  un- 
der  the  names  ToA,  7ViA-n,  and  7VzA-fMiti,  as  a  fortress 
of  the  Anakim  near  Arba  or  Hebron ;  and  it  is  not  a  lit- 
tle  remarkable  that  another  Egyptian  document,  the 
Septuagint,  CKpresses  the  word  in  almost  the  selfsame 
manner,  'Irav  and  Tavv  (Jour,  Sac,  Lit,  April  and  July, 
1862,  p.  73,  816,  817)"  (Fairbaim,  s.  y.). 

The  *'city  of  Juda"  (Lukę  i,  89),  whither  Mary  went 
to  yiBit  Elizabeth,  the  mother  of  John  the  Baptist  (tic 
7róXiv  'loifda),  and  where  Zecharias  therefore  appears 
to  haye  resided,  has  iisually  been  supposed  to  ntean  He- 
bron; but,  if  the  reading  be  correct,  the  proper  rendering 
would  be  ^*  to  the  city  Judah,"  i  e.  its  capi  tal,  or  Jem- 
salem  (see  Bomemann,  SchoL  in  Luc,  p.  12),  notwith- 
standing  the  abscnce  of  the  article  (Winer's  GrammaL 
N.  T,  p.  136).  But,  as  this  was  not  intended  (see  Rob. 
Yalesius,  Fpist.  ad  Casaubon.  1618,  p.  669),  Reland  (Po- 
hBst  p.  870)  has  suggested  a  conjectural  reading  of  ^  Jut" 
łah"  for  ^^Judiih"  ('Ioutol  for  'lou^a)  in  the  aboye  pas- 
sagę  of  Lukę,  which  has  met  with  fayor  among  critics 
(see  Hnrenberg,  in  the  Nor,  Miscell.  Lips.  iy,  696;  Pau- 
lus, Kuinol,  ad  loc.),  although  no  yarious  reading  exist8 
to  justify  iU 


JnTttnous,  Caius  \Krnxm  A^utuiruB,  one  of  tfae 
earliest  Ghuich  historians  and  Christian  poeta,  a  natm 
of  Spain,  was  a  contemporaiy  ofConatantine,  and  a  pres- 
byter  of  the  Church.  Living  at  the  time  when  Ciuis> 
tianity  asoended  the  thzone  of  the  Casarsyhe  attempted 
to  dothe  the  recital  of  Biblical  eyents  in  the  daasic  and 
elegant  style  of  the  best  proikne  writeisi  Abont  330  he 
oomposed  his  Historia  eoangdioat  a  woik  in  foor  booka^ 
dedicated  to  Gonstantine.  Itiatheiepnductiaaofthe 
Goepela  in  Latin  hexanieten,  foUowing  the  text  dosely, 
espedally  8t  Matthew'8,  and  in  the  style  imitsting  Lu- 
cretius,  (Md,  and  espedally  Yirgil,  thns  making  a  sort  of 
epic  poem,  after  the  model  of  the  ^neid.  **■  The  libenl 
praises  bestowed  npon  Juyencos  by  diyincs  and  schol- 
an,  from  St  Jerome  down  to  Petnich,  must  be  under- 
Btood  to  belong  rather  to  the  substanoe  of  the  piece 
than  to  the  form  in  which  the  nurtfriala  are  pceacnted. 
We  may  honor  the  pious  motiye  which  piompted  the 
undertaking,  and  we  may  bestow  the  same  ooomieiida- 
.tion  npon  the  laborioos  ingennity  with  which  eyery  par- 
ticnlar  reoorded  by  the  saoted  łustoiians,  and  fireąuently 
their  yery  words,  are  foroed  into  nnmb^  bat  the  yery 
plan  of  the  oomposition  excludea  ail  play  of  £mcy  and 
all  poetical  froedom  of  expre8sion,  while  the  yenifica- 
tum,  although  fluent  and  genenlly  haimonioas,  too  of- 
ten  bida  defiance  to  the  laws  of  prosody,  and  the  lan- 
guage,  although  eyidently  in  many  plaoea  oopied  from 
the  purest  models,  betnys  here  and  there  eyident  indi- 
cations  of  oorruption  and  decay.  The  idea  that  this 
production  might  be  employed  with  adyantage  in  the 
interpretation  of  the  Scriptoies,  inasmuch  as  it  may  be 
supposed  to  exhibit  fidtlifully  the  meaning  attached  to 
yarioua  obacure  passages  in  the  early  age  to  which  it 
belongs,  will  not,  upon  examination,  be  fonnd  to  merit 
much  attention'*  (Piofessor  Ramsay,  in  Smith,  vŁ  w- 
fra),  He  also  wiote  parta  of  the  Old  Testament  in  the 
same  manner,  but  of  these  we  know  only  hia  LUter  m 
Genesin  (aocording  to  Jerome,  De  scr^,  t^  84,  he  wrote 
*^  nonnulla  eodem  metro  ad  sacramentorum  ordinem  pei^ 
tinentia**).  The  Historia  evanffeUoa  was  finst  printed 
by  Deyenter,  s.  L  (probably  1490) ;  then  oftco  lepńnt- 
ed,  as  in  the  CoUecłio  ret.  PoeL  eccL  of  Fabricins  (Baal 
1664);  the  BibL  M,  Lugd.  iy,  65  są.;  by  £.  Reoadi 
(Francfort  and  Lpz.  1710) ;  and  later  from  a  manoscript 
in  the  oollection  of  the  Yatican  by  F.  Areyale  (Romę, 
1 792, 4to),  and  in  the  first  book  of  Gebeer.  Estracts  of 
the  Genesis  were  giyen  in  Martene'8  A  or.  CoilecL.  tom. 
ix ;  and  lately  J.  B.  Pitra,  in  his  Spicileffium  Soiesmense 
(Paris,  Didot,  1862;  comp.  ProUffg.  xlii  sq.),  pabliahed 
both  these  yerses  from  the  Genesis,  and  other  Iragmenta 
from  the  Old  Testament,  forming  6000  yer»cs,  and  galo- 
ed  great  credit  by  his  efforts  to  proye  thcir  authcntidty 
as  works  of  Juyencus.  See  Schrockh,  Kireheng^^gci.  y, 
277 ;  Fabricius,  Bibl,  med,  et  in/.  Lat,  iv,  212 ;  Geb«?r,  /> 
Jurenci  vita  et  serwis  adj,  lib,  i  kist.  evang,  (Jena.  18271 : 
Bahr,  Rdm,  Lit,  Gesch,  (SuppL  i) ;  Smith,  Uicł,  Crk,  cnd 
Bom.  Biog,  ii,  s.  y. 

Juxon,  WiLUAM,  a  celebrated  English  prelate,  db- 
tinguished  for  his  faithfuluess  to  the  unfoftunatc  king 
Charles,  was  bom  at  Chichester  in  1682,  and  was  edu- 
cated  at  St  John*8  College,  Oxford,  where  he  obtained  a 
fellowship  in  1698.  He  first  studied  law,  but  alterwards 
altered  his  mind,  took  orders,  and  was  preseoted  in  1609 
to  the  yicarage  of  St  Giles,  Oxford,  togethcr  with  which, 
after  1614,  he  held  the  rectory  of  Somerton.  In  1 621  he 
was  chosen  president  of  his  college,  after  which  he  rasę 
rapidly,  through  the  interest  of  archbishop  Lattd,beiiig 
suocessiyely  appointed  dean  of  Worcester,  derk  of  the 
closet,  bishop  of  Hereford,  dean  of  the  Chapel  Royal, 
and,  in  1633,  bishop  of  London.  The  sweetness  of  his 
temper,  the  kindness  and  oourtesy  of  his  manners,  and 
his  uniform  beneyolence,  madę  bishop  Juxon  a  generał 
fayorite,  and  archbbhop  Land  fixed  npon  him  as  a  fit 
peraon  to  hołd  a  secular  office  under  goyemment  This 
was  one  of  Laud's  fatal  errors.  He  did  not  perceiye 
and  make  allowance  for  the  change  of  public  opinioo. 
Bishops  had,  before  the  Reformation,  bccome  great  men 


JUXON 


1113 


JUXON 


by  holding  secnlar  appointments,  and  the  arcbbishop 
thought  to  restore  the  order  to  its  ancient  importance 
in  men*8  ey es  by  revertuig  to  the  exploded  system.  He 
forgot  that  bishops  held  secalar  offices  formóly  from  the 
necesBity  of  the  case,  and  becaiue  there  were  not  a  suf- 
ficient  nnmber  o£  the  laity  ąualified,  and  that  the  fact 
itselfi  thongh  neoessaiy,  was  stiU  an  evil,  sinoe  it  inter- 
fered  with  their  higher  and  spiritual  duties.  In  Łaad's 
own  time  the  laity  were  better  qaalified  than  the  dergy 
for  Office,  and  the  appointment  of  the  dergy  was  justly 
offensire,  both  as  an  insult  to  the  laity,  and  as  leading 
Che  people  to  sappose  that  the  bishops  had  nothing  to 
do  in  their  dioceses.  Under  this  false  poUcy,  in  1626 
Jnzon  was  appointed  to  the  post  of  lord  high  treasurer, 
the  highest  offioe  at  that  time  in  the  kingdom,  and  next 
in  preoedenoe  to  that  of  the  azdibishop  and  to  the  great 
seal,  which  had  not  been  held  by  a  dergyman  sinoe  the 
leign  of  Henry  YIL  In  1641  he  resigned  this  office, 
wUch,  it  was  admitted  by  all  parties,  he  had  held  with- 
ont  reproach.  The  genóal  harmlessness  of  his  charao- 
ter  enabled  him  to  remain  for  the  most  part  undistorbed 
at  Fulham.  Nevertheless,  he  remained  firm  to  his  prin- 
dpłes,  and  steady  in  his  loyalty  to  the  king,  by  whom 
he  was  freqaently  oonsolted.  He  was  in  attendanoe 
opon  the  king  at  the  treaty  in  the  Isle  of  Wight,  in 
1648,  and  dnring  the  king^s  trial  acted  as  his  spiritual 
adyiser.  Bishop  Jazon  was  also  in  attendance  upon  the 
king  in  his  lost  hours  upon  the  scaffold.  Juzon  oon- 
tinued  in  his  position  until  the  abolition  of  kingly  goy- 
emment,  by  the  Hoose  of  Lords,  and  the  estaUishment 
ofaCommonwealth.   He  then  retiłed  to  his  own  estate. 


the  manor  of  little  Gompton,  in  Gloueestershire,  when 
he  passed  his  days  in  a  priyate  and  deyout  condition. 
At  the  Restoration,  aged  as  he  was,  he  was  appointed, 
we  might  almost  say  by  acdamation,  archbishop  of  Can- 
terfomy  in  1660.  He  was  not  able  to  exert  himsdf 
much  in  his  q[>iritaal  office,  but  he  was  a  benefactor  to 
the  see,  for  duiing  the  short  time  he  held  the  archbish- 
opric  he  ezpended  on  the  property  fifteen  thousand 
pounds;  he  moreoyer  augmented  the  yicarages,  the 
great  tithes  of  which  were  appropriated  to  the  see.  He 
died  June  4, 1668.  By  his  last  will,  archbishop  Juzon 
bequeathed  £7000  to  his  ahna  mater.  He  left  also  £100 
to  the  parish  of  St  Giles,  of  which  he  had  been  yicar ; 
the  same  sum  to  four  other  parishes  in  Oxford,  and  sums 
for  the  repair  of  StPattl's  and  Canterbuiy  Cathedrals, 
and  other  charitable  uses,  in  all  to  the  amount  of  £5000. 
Wood  tells  us  that  he  was  a  man  of  primitiye  sanctity, 
wisdom,  piety,  leaming,  patience,  charity,  and  all  apos- 
tolical  yirtuea.  Whitelock  says  of  him  that  he  was  a 
oomely  person,  of  an  actiye  and  liydy  disposition,  of 
great  puts  and  temper,  fuli  of  ingennity  and  meekness, 
not  apt  to  giye  offence  to  any,  and  willing  to  do  good  to 
all;  of  great  moderation,  sincerity,  and  integrity,  inso- 
much  that  he  was  the  ddight  of  his  time.  He  wrote  a 
Sermon  o»  Lukę  xmu,  81 :— a  treatise,  entitled  Xdpic  Kai 
Eip^yiy,  or  Soitte  Consideraiums  upon  the  A  et  of  Uni^ 
formity  (London,  1662, 4tx)).  In  this  work  he  shows 
himself  to  be  no  fiiend  to  the  scheme  of  a  comprehen- 
sion.  A  catalogue  of  books  in  England,  alphabetically 
digested  (Lond.  1658),  bears  his  name.  See  Hook,  Eo* 
cks,Bioff.s,y.    (J.H.W.) 


LIST  OF  ARTICLES  IN  VOL  IV. 


Untig  Apologetleal 

Society Page 

Hiulhashterl 

Hanu 

Haas 

Bnbalah 

Habakkak 

Hnbazaniah 

Habbacac 

Habergeon 

Haberkorn 

Habert 

Habit 

Habitation 

Babor 

Hachaliah 

Hacbilah 

Hachmoni 

Ilacket,  Jobn 

Hacket,  William.... 

Hackley 

Hackspuu 

Hadad,  1 

Hadad,  8 

Hadad.  S 

Hadad,  4 

Iladad,  6 

Hadad,  6 

Hadad-ezer. 

Iladad-rimmou 

Hadar,! 

H»dar,2 

Hndarezer 

Hadaahah 

Hadaasah 

HadatUb 

lladdock 

Hades 

Hadid 

Hadj 

Hadlal 

Hadoram,  1 

Hadoram,  S 

Hudoram,  8 

Hadrach 

Hadriaona 

Hiemorrholda 

Haematede 

Haerelico  combn- 

rendo 

Hafenreffer 

Haffuer 

Haft 

Haftorah 

Ha<;ab 

Ho^aba 

Hagany... 

Hac^ar 

Hagareuo 

Hageuan,   Confer- 

euce  of... 

Tlagerlte 

Hai^łcadab 

lla<;t;ai 

Ha>;gai,  Prophecy 

of 

Hai^geri 

Hajr^erty 

Hag«:i 

HatiTiriah 

Hag<;ite 

HnjjLnth 

Hagia 

Ha^iograpba 

Hanu,  Ani^iifit 

Hahn,  Heiiirich  Ao- 

gnst. 

Hahii,  Michael 

Halli 

Hall 

Haime 

Halr 

Hakewill 

HakimBen-AUab.. 

Hakkatau 

Hakupha 


Halah Page 

Halak. 

Haldane,  James  Al- 

erauder 

Haldaue.  Uobert . . . 

Hale*  JoDn 

Hale,  Sir  Matthew.. 

Ualea 

Uair-commntilou . . . 
Half-way  CoyenaDt. 

Halhnl 

Hall 

Halicarnaaeiis 

Hall 

HallfCbarlea 

Hall,  Gordon 

Hall,  Joseph 

Hall,  Peter 

Hall,  Uichard 

Hall.Iltłbert 

6  Hallel 


Hallelojah 

Ualleląjah,  Chrls- 

Łlau 

jHaller,  Albrecht  von 

TlUaller.Berthold.... 

7  Haller,  Karl  Łndwlg 

7     von 

7|Hallet 

8Hallirax 

SHallitbeah 

SHallow 

8Halt 

SHalyborton 

8Ham,l 

8,Ham,9 

8Ham,  8. 

9  Hamaker. 

11  Haman 

U  Hamann 

11  Hamath 

11  Hamath,   Bu i rance 

1«|    of 

12:Hamathite 

IslHamath-Zobab 


Hambroeck 

Hamelmann 

Hamilton,  James. . . 

Hamilton,  Patrick.. 
14  Hamilton,  Richard 
14!    Winter 

14  Hamilton,  Samuel . . 

15  Hamilton,  Sir  Will- 

151    iam 

15  Hamliue 

15  Hammau 

15|Hamniath 

15,  Hammedalha 

16  Hammelech 

Hammer 

ISHammerlin 

IS  Haramer-Purgstall. 

18  Hammoleketh 

IS  Hammon,  1 

,Hammon,  8 

19,Hammond 

19j  Hammoth-dor 

19  Hamon 

SOlHamonab 

20  Hamon-gog 

SOHamor 

20  Hampden 

2o:Hamuel 

20Hamnl 

21  Hamnlite 

'Hamutal 

21,Hanameel 

22Hanan,l 

22Hanan,a 

22  Hanan.S 

82  Uanan,  4 

23  Hanan,  5 

86Hanan,0 

86  Hanan,  7 

2G  Hananeel 

2G,Uanani,l 


Hanant,8 Page 

Hanaul,  8 

Hananiah,l 

Hananiah,  8 

Hananiah,8 

Hananiah,  4 

Hananiah,  5 

Hananiah,  6 

Hananiah,  7 

Hananiah,  8 

Hananiah,  9 

Hananiah,  10 

Hananiah,  11 

Hananiah,  18 

Hananiah,  18 

Hańby 

Hancodc 

Hand 

Haud-breadth 

Handel 

Handfnl 

Handicraft 

Handkerchief 

Handle 

Handmaid 

Hand-Btaff 

Haudschuh 

Hanes 

SSJHaugiug  (a  pnniah- 

83  meut) 

38  Hauging  (acnrtaiu) 

88|Hanmer 

34|  Hannah 

84  Hannah,  John 

84  11annathon 

43,Hanuiel,  1 

43Hauniel,  fi. 

4SHanochite 

44Hannn,l 

44!Hannn,9 

45' Hanan,  8 

'Hanway. 

46  Uaphraim 

47;Haphtarah 

47|Hara 

47iHaradah.. 

Ir 


88 


Harlot. 


66!Hame88;8 SI 

56Hame88,4. 84 


Page  75|HAte Page   90 

Harmer 76Hathath 96 

Harmony 76iHatipha 96 

Harmf,  Clana 82  Hatita 96 

56  Harme,  Lonla 88  Halsiham  -  Mena- 

SGHamepher 84     choth 90 

SCHarne^s,  1 84>Hatteml8t« 96 

6flHarneM,8 84  łlattil 9T 

"'"  -  -   Hatto,  1 9T 

llatto,2. 9T 

Halto,  8 97 

Hattnsh,! 97 

Hatta8h,2. 97 

HattU8h,8 97 

Hatta8h,4 97 

Hattash,5 97 

Hangę ....    97 

Hanran 97 

Hansmauu 98 

Hantefage. 98 

Havelock 98 

Haven 98 

Haven8 99 

Bavemick 99 

Havilah,  1 99 

Havilah,2 99 

Uavoth-Jair 100 

Haweis 100 

Hawes 100 

Hawk 101 

Hawker 109 

Hawkins 108 

Hawke,  Cicero  Ste- 
phen   109 

Hawke,  Francis 

Lister 109 

Hawlcy 108 

Hay 103 


66  Harod 84 

66  Hanłdite 86 

56  Harorite 85 

66  Harosheth 86 

56  Harp &•» 

66  Harphins 87 

57  Harpsfeld 88 

67HarpBfleld 8$ 

Harris,  Howell 88 

Harris,  John  (1)....  88 
Harris,  John  (2)....  88 

Harris,  Koberi 89 

Harris,  Samuel 89 

Harris,    Thaddens 

Mason 89 

Harrli*,  Walter 89 

Harris,  William  (1)..  89 
62,Harri(«,  William  (2)..  89 

jHarrisou 89 

63  Harrow 89 

63Harsha 90 

63  Harsnet 90 

63  Hart 90 

64,Hart,Levl 91 

64  Hart,  011ver 91 

64  Hartley 91 

64;Hari1ib 92 

64  Hartmann 92 


108 
104 
104 
104 
106 


47lHaran,  1 

47,Haran,  9 

47!Haran,  8 

iHaran,  4 

4SHararite  .V 

48  Harbangh 

Harbona 

4S  Hardenberg,  Al- 

5l|    brecht 

62  Hardenberg,  Jaco- 

52l    basu 

62  Harding,  Stephen. . . 
62  Hardlns, Thomas.. . 

62  Hardouln 

62Hardwick 

63  Hardy, Nathnniel... 
63Hitrdy,     Robert 

53     Spence 

58  Hardy,  Samuel 

53  Hare 

54  Hare,Aagn8t08Will- 
54|    iam 

64  Hare,  Edward 

54  Hare,  Francis 

64 '  Hare,  Jnllns  Charles 

54  Harel 

56  Haren 

65'Hareph 

65  Hareih 

65Harhaiah 

56  Harhnr 

65  Harim,  1 

55Harim,  8 

56  Harim,  8 

55  Harim,  4 

66Harim,6 

66  Harim,  6 

66Hariph.l 

65Hariph,2. 

65  ,Harly-Chanvalion 


64  Hartwig 92  Haydn 

66  Hamm 93  Haymo 

66  Harumaph ..... 93  Haynes 

6SHaruphite 93,Hayti , 

66,Haniz 98|HazaeI 

66  narvard 93  Hazaiah 

69HarveBt 93Hazar-...: 106 

69Harwood 94  Hazar-addar 100 

69lHascall 94  Hazar-enan 106 

60'Hasadiah 94lHazar-gaddah 105 

70  Hai«enkamp,Johann       Hazar-natticon....  106 

70     Gerhard 94  Hazarmaveth 106 

70  Hafteukamp,  Frled-      I  Hazar-shnal 100 

70  rich  Arnold 94  Hazar-snsab 100 

71|Hasenkamp,Johann      IHazel 100 

Heinrich 94  Hazelelponi 107 

7lHa8enuah,l 94,Hazelła0 107 

|Hai«ennah,8 94  Hazer 107 

7l'Ha8habiah,  1 96  Hazerim 1U7 

71  Hałhabiah,  8 96  Hazeroth 107 

71 ,  Hashabiah,  8 96  Hazezon-tamar. ...  108 

71  Hashabiah,  4 96  Haziel lOS 

71, Hashabiah,  6 95,Hazo. !(« 

72  Hashabiah,  6 96Hazor,  1 108 

Ha«habiah,  7 95  Hazor,  8 109 

78  Hashabiah,  8 96  Hazor,  8 109 

72  Hashabiah,  9 96Hazor,4 100 

72Hashabnah 96  Hazor,  6 109 

'Hashabniah,  1 96  Hazor,  6 109 

73  Hashabniah,  2 96  Head 109 

73  Hashbadana 96  Head-band 111 

73Ha8hem 96;  Head-dress 111 

78  Hashmannim 96  Head  of  the  Chnrch  118 

74Ha!>hmonah 96  Heal 113 

74Ha8hnb,l 95  Heap 114 

74Ha9hub,8 95|Hearer8 114 

74Hashnb,8 96  Hearse 114 

74Ha8hubah 96lHeart 114 

74Ha8hnm,  1 96lHearth 117 

74na»hnm,  9 96'He-A88 117 

74Ha8ken 96,Heat IIS 

74Hii8neya 96,Heath 118 

74  Haerah 96  Heath.Asa 119 

74  Hassę OOlHeathcote 119 

74  Hasnpha 96  Heathen 119 

74  Hat 96Heaven 122 

74  HaUch 96,  Heaven  and  Earth.  187 

74,Hatchment. 96{HeaYe-offering....  187 


1116 

neaye-Bhoalder. . . . 
Page 

Hebard 

Heber,  1 

Heber,  8 

Heber,  8 

Heber,  4 

Heber,  5 

Heber,  O 

Heber,  7 

Heber,  Reginald. . . 

Hebrew 

Hebrew  of  the  Ue- 

brewB 

Hebrew  ŁanffUHge. 
Hebre  W8,  BpUtle  to 

Hebron,  1 

Hebron,  8 

Hebron,  3 

Hebron,  4 

Hebronite 

Heckewelder 

Hedding 

Hcdge 

Hed<;e,  Levi 

Hedfo 

Hedwlg 

Heerbraud 

Heermaun 

Hegal 

Hegel 

Hegesippus. 

Heglra 

Hegius 

He-Goat 

Heidanas 

Heidegger 

HetdeiDcrg  Cate- 

cbUm 

Heidenbelm 

Heifer 

Heilmaim 

Hellprin 

Heineccias 

Heiuicke 

Heiusius 

Helr 

Helah : 

Heliim 

Helbah 

Helbon 

Helchiah 

Heldal,  I 

Heldai,2 

Heldaa. 

Heleb 

Heled 

Helek 

Helem,  1...A 

Helem,  8 

Helena 

Heleph 

Helez.l 

Helez  2 

Helfeuste1nVĆha8.. 
Helfensteio.  John 

Conrad  Albę rU.. 
HelfensŁelu,  Jona- 
than   

Helfferich,    John 

Henry 

Helfferich,  John. . . 

Heli.l 

Hell,9 

Heliodorns 

Heliodorus  of  Em- 

ena 

Hellogabalus 

Helkjii 

Helkath 

Helkath-hazzurim. 

Helkiaa 

Heli 

Heli,  Chrl8t'8  De- 

Bcenl into 

Heli  Punitihmeutfl. 

Hellenist 

Heller 

Heim 

Helmet 

Helmont 

Helmiith 

Helon 

Help,l 

Hclp.a 

Help-meet 

Hclve 

Hehetic    Confes- 

siouEi 

HelveticConsen8U8 


LIST  OP  ARTICLES  IN  VOL.  IV. 


IHeWetins Page 

128Helvicn8 

ISSiHeWidius 

ISSHelyot 

12S  Hem 

188  Heman,  1 

128  Heman,  8 

12S  Hemaih 

12S!Hemdan 

12$  Uemerobaptiste... 

128  Hemlock,  1 

129Uemlock,  8 

Uemmenway 

13l|Hemmerlln 

131  Hemming , 

140!Hem8en 

149  Hen  (aman) 

152!Hen(abłrd) 

162Hena 

158  Henadad 

l62Hendel..  

152  Henderson,  Alex- 

153|    ander 

163,Hender8on,  Ebeue- 

154     zer 

154 1  Henderson,  John . . 

154  Hengstenberg 

154|Henhufer 

IMHenke 

155! Henkel,  Charles... 

155' Henkel,  Paul 

158|llennepin 

158  Henninger 

159  Henoticon 

159  Henry ofGhent... 
159, Henry  of  Oorcum.. 
159  Henry  of  Haiitiug- 

dou 

ISOjHenry  of  Lansanne 
161  Henry  ofSL  Igna- 

161     tlus 

101  Henry  IV 

161  Henry  VIIL 

Henry,  Matthew. . . 

Henry,  Pani  Emile. 

Henry,  Philip 

Henrr,  Thomas 
Charlion 

Henschenius 

Uennhaw  

Hepha 

163'Hepher,  1 

'"~  Hepher,  8 

Hepher,  3 


Hepher,  4 

"     *     ile 


Hepheri 
1G3  Hephzibnh,  1 

163  Hephzibah,  8, 

164  Heraclas 

164  Heracleonilis, 

164  Ileraclitos 

164 

164 

164 

164 


Herald 

Herb 

Ilerbart 

Herbelot 

Herbert,  Edward.. 

Herbert,  Oeorge. . . 

Hercnle8 

Herd 

Herder 

Uerdmaa 

Ileres,  1 

Heres.  8 

Here«h 

Ueresiarch 

Here:«y 

Ueretlcs,  Bapti5m 
by 

Herłtage 

Hermann  of  Co- 
logne 

Hermann  of  Fritz- 
lar 

Hermann  Contrac- 
tns 

Hermann  of  Tonrs 

Hermann  vou  der 
Hnrdt 

Hermann,  Niko- 

17CI    laus. 

177  Hermns 

177  i  Ilermas  (writer) . . . 

177  Hermenent« 

177'IIernuMioQtic8 

177|nermc«i 

178ilerme?,  Georg. . . . 
173,  Hermes  Trismegis- 

ins 

17S  Hennlans 

179iHermia8 


79Herroit Page 

^n  Hł-rmoproiifił 

>ii  Uei  iiii»i:eiitis  (her- 

Ni       i.'lk').  .',., 

^11  Ktrtjujii. 

'*!)  JkTłji] 

>ii  lltMoel  thcOreat... 

Ml  Keruij  Autipas 

Milit^rod  Arcbelaos.. 
^1  MeroLl  Fhiljp  I.... 

"^1   MeTiKJiii!*,  , 

-^1  ll.Tor!  1'hiHpII... 
'^1  Ner-.id  AL^rlppa  I.. 
SI  I  Ih' rod  A^^rippalL. 

-•:    IlL>niilj;:ill5 

>v  [k-n-iil:^^ 

'»'_■  IIltuiiUim] 

.■>il  IJennlumi 

vj  łJemld 

S-i  {[tTlill 

•Vi  JkMTlllL;.. 

i^^rriihiiU 

>i  IkTroLi , 

\hr\ih 

S;3  llervit!Us< 

s:l  l[i,'rvev* 

v[  Ilf^sL 

^1  IW^w 

M  IU-.|il).ni 

>ł  llr>]fcniii|i  , 

s|  lie--^^  Ji>hjii]n 

Vł  lh'^1-,  Juhanu  Ja- 
S.%      ki.lj 


He*M»  vnij,  łlessen- 
«i<*iu 

IIt!«ł*htisteu 

Htfi«ychriiila 

He!«)'ł:h1nj' 

llfurchkirj  of  Jem- 
j.ii1em 

<t\  Ul-\iVT'mł 

■-il  IjfriMotlciK 

-'^  IJ./rcroiiiłians. 

Heth.. 

lleihcrSngton 

Ifethlim 

Het^e] 

sy;Hei/.>-n' 

.HiijFJiHifłncr 
,ył»]lleii: 


]lleil:;li  . 


lł'llfW]t. 

<»  ][i-y   

n  lIcYilciirirh 

i»  Hi'^'lhi,  lVrer 

i,  H4.'vtvii,  .łoim 

u  H^'Vu'.ł.Ml 

ik  lkvi'kr.., 

I  n-^cki.tl],  1 

i  iUi^.i-k'\.-iirn  PooL.. 

I  Ikzekitih,  ^ 

'y^  lh-/f'kiah,  3 

?  [k'zt'kiMh,  4 

3  Hł-Zirjll 

i   lliVM-,    1 

I  łh  /]r.  i 

m  Ileiro 

95|Hezrou,  1 

96|Hezrou,  3 

.98;Hezron,  8 

98  Hibbard 

08  Hickcs. 

98 

.98 


Hlcks 

Hiddai 

Hlddekel 

Hiel 

Hierapolls. 

Hicrnrchy 

Hiernx 

Hiereel 

Hieremoth,  1 

llieremoth,  8 

Ilierielns 

Hlerma» 

Uierocles  (goveru- 
or) 

H  ierocles«  (Neo-Pla- 
tonłj«i) 

Hieroglyphlcs 

204'Hieromax 

205  Hleromnemon  . . . . 
2(^5:Hleron, 


802 


803 


804 


Hieronymite8.. 
Hieronymus... 
Hierophant . . . 

HieRter 

Hi^'den 

Higgałoa 


ffrt  rii--su]fl Page 

S< *H  1 1 1  iF._r  j  II ^^ ,;) ^  p i-j inciji 

IIi::i^iTi!^i]ib,  Jahu... 

J"^  iliu^U-Ctinrchmen. 

fu-  lli;,-h  Cuiimilssion. 

iifJ   lUirhMtLM 

SU  HŁtili Place 

8t::i  Ha^ta-prieat 

sn  Nt^liway.,.. 

Sn  llii,^crra..., 

sn  ihiarta... 

VI 4  Hilurianus, 

514  llikrlo. 

Siri  jliliirinn,  Si. 

£10  llibrlas  Arelaleu- 

816     scls..,.. 

tu  IliktrSTi»Bbiconns. 
2W  IlihirlaB  Pkta?leii- 

n-     hi!^ 

SIT  Jklrtiiii«l.. 

515  lliliUjSt 

il'H  IJil.ietMjrt 

f  ]^  llililpi^urdc 

Sia  Hildp):«mde 

SUiiHMtlerfham., 

SUł  iliUlet*Tey 

tI9  llildriMb. 

SILf  Ikldtaf 

Sili  ł[|]ktuh,  1 

S-^i  ihikiiih,  t... 

itii  inikiAb,  3... 

inikiiih,  4.... 

S211  inikSah,  fi.... 

Slh.  llilkiab»  « 

llilkiwb^  I.. 

n^  inikSnb,  s 

£il   IlilL.- 

Sii  I!  tl  ;j<łda 

t22  ]lin,«eurt:<?  (1)... 
Uill.  Otnir^e  ii)... 

t^a  Hill,  IJre^-ii. 

S^i'^  l[ifl,  KoiiU 

Slia  llilS,  Sir  Kkhard.. 

ł>ri  riiil,  U.rwlftiid 

SJ.i  Ihil.wniinm 

t-s.i  l\.]UA 

ti>:i  Ihllel  I 

S.':Ul.iti'Ł  n 

82.H  Uiiier,  MHtthias... 
284  HiUer,  Philip  Fred- 

884!    erick 

224Hillhon9e 

284Hłllłard 

224  Hillyer 

225  Himerias  (sopbłst) 
225  Himeriuif  (bishop). 

2«5,Himyjirltes. 

225  Hin 

825  Uinchcliffe 

225  Hinckelmaun 

225  Hłnckley 

23lJlinck9,  Edward... 

231  Hlncks,John 

231  Hincmar  of  Laon.. 
231  Hiucmarof  Rhelms 

23lHiud 

231  Hinds 

231  Hindnism 

231  Hiudu  Philotsophy. 

232  Hindus 

232Hinge 

2.<t2  Iłinman 

232  Hinnom 

832|  Hinrlchs 

232'Hlutou 

232  Hiouen-U«ang 

232  Hi p  (part  of  the 
i.33i    bodv) 

233  Hi p  (iu  architect- 

233     nre) 

236HipplcuB 

236Hippo. 

235  Hlp|>olyln^St 

2.T5  Hjppolytu*,  Broth- 
2.%l  ers  of  the  Chrłs- 
235'    tian  Love  of. 

iHippopotamus.... 
235HłpłM»s 

inirah 

2^  Hiram,  1 

235  Hiram,  8 

237,Illram,3 

237  Hlrcanns 

237  Hirelłng 

237  I! i r mologion 

2:^8  Hirmo« 

238  Hirnheim 

238  HIrwh,  Andreas.. . 
238  Hirsch,  Carl  Chris- 
23Si    tlan 


8SSHlrsch-Chot8cb... 

838  Page  574 

838Hfr»cban 274 

23SHlr8cher 274 

239  Hlrt. 275 

239Hirz 275 

839  Hirzel,  Bernhard..  275 
241'HIrzel,Johauu....  275 
251  Hiss 275 

251  Hlstopedcs. 275 

852Histor!es 275 

852Hlslory 275 

858  Hi8trioma!ttix 277 

252  Hitchcock.  Edward  27S 
iHitchcock,  Enos...  278 

858  Hitchcock, Gad....  278 

2&8Hitt 2TS 

iHIttiie 278 

852lHivite. 2>l 

263'nixkiah 2S3 

264;Hlxkijah 2S3 

264Hizr 2^ 

854|HJort 2>3 

254  Hoadley,BenjaiDio  2>3 

854lHoadlev.Johu 2>3 

255;Hoag,£phraim....  2S3 

855  Hoag,  Wllbnr 2-^ 

—  Hoar 2S4 


255 


Hoard 2s4 

Hoare ^ 2^ 

Hobab 284 

Hobab 284 

255'Hobart,  Jubn  Hen- 

255  ry 284 

265  Hobart,  Noah 2>5 

866  Hobart,  Peter 2S5 

256'Hobbe8 2>6 

856Hobbhahn 2S« 

256  Hobbs 2<s6 

85GH(>bhon»e 2>6 

256Hobarz 2^6 

256Hocheb«n 2>>e 

856Hochmann 2^ 

256  Hoch!>ietłer 2^7 

257  Hoch wjiri 2^7 

857iHiickTidc »7 

257HiKi aS7 

257  Htidalah 2*'7 

268  Hodavlłih,  1 2-7 

|Hodaviah,  8 2>7 

258  Hodaviah,  8 ?S7 

258  Hodegetics. 2s7 

26SiHodegetria. 2>S 

SeSHodesh ?ś8 

258  Hodges,  Cyrus. ...  t^-^ 
258  Hodges,  Ju«eph . . .  2S5 
258  Hodges,  Walter....  2s8 
859  Hndgson,  Bernard.  2SS 
850  Hodgson,  Robert. .  2SvS 

250  Hc»dheilids 2Si 

«59llodiah 2^S 

259Hodijah,  1 2sS 

259Hodijah,B a^S 

250|Hody 2>^ 

260!Hoe 2sS 

260Hoel ^^» 

260  Hoeschelias ^^ 

260  Hoeven SJ»9 

265  Hofackcr,  Lndwig.  ^9 
865:  Hofacker,  Wilhelm.  2^9 

865H0fel e-.-O 

205  Hofer 2>J 

265,H(iffbaner 2'-*«» 

267!Hoffcdiiz. t^*) 

867  Hoffaiann,Andrea9  2W 
8G7  Hoffimanu,  Daniel.  TM 

Hoffmann,  Gott- 
267j    fried 291 

Hoffmaniu  Uein- 
8671    rłch....r. 291 

267  Hoffmann,  Imman-  « 
8G8'    nel .,....2^r 

268  Hoffhianu^  Jnhaiin  £»! 
I  Hoffmann,  Melcbi- 

I    or. 2r'l 

«e»Hofftaier «! 

87ol1oaiug 292 

272  Ilofmann,  Johann 

272     Ge«>rg S^ 

272  Hofmann,  Kari....  2*2 

272  Ihłfrtede de Groot.  'i"i 

273  Ht>ge,  Jtiroes 292 

273  lloge,  MoMS 2"2 

278  Hołre,  Samuel S-^S 

273H..-lah 2I>3 

274  Hoham 2«^J 

274  Hfłheubnrg «i3 

874  Hnhenlohe. 293 

Hohubnnm S-^ł 

274Holbach. «H 


LIST  OP  ARTICLES  IN  VOL.  IV. 


1117 


Hołberg Page 

Holcombe,  Henry. 

Uolcombe,  Hotea. 

Uolcot 

Hoia  (verb) 

łJold(uonD) 

Hdlden 

Holder 

Uoldheiin 

llołdswortb,  Rich- 
ard   

HoldBworch,Winch 

Hole 

Uoleate 

HołiaeM 

Holland 

Holland,  Oaido.... 

Holland,  John 

Holland,  Thoma&. 

HoUaz 

Uolleback. 

Holleshow 

HoUey 

Holliday 

Holllngshead 

HoIIiB/rhomaa... 

Uollis,  Thoma8,^r. 

Hollister 

Hollmon 

Holm .• 

Holm-tree. 

Holman,  David. . . . 

Hol  man,  William.. 

Holmes,  Abiel 

Holmes,  Robert... 

Hoimpatrick 

Holofernea 

Holon,l 

Holon,8. 

HoUte 

HoIyAlliance 

Holy  Ashefi 

Holy-bread  Skep.. 

Holy  Candle 

Holy  Cathołlc 
Church 

HolyCoac 

Holy  ł)ay 

Holy  Family 

Holy  Father. 

HolyFire 

Holy  Oboet 

Holy  Gboflt,  Ordere 

HolyOrass 

Holy  Hnndkerchief 
Holylnnocenu.... 

Holy  Leagno 

Holy  Mortar 

Holy  Niebu 

Holy  Oli! 

UolyPhial 

HolyRood 

Hoły-roodDay.... 
Holy  SiDtnrday . . . . 
Holy    Sepulchre, 

Ordera  oŁ 

Holy  8|>ear. 

Holy  iSynod 

HolyTable 

Holy  Thnreday. . . . 

Holy  Waler. 

Holy-water  Spriuk- 

ler 

Holy-water  Stock. 
Holy-water  Vat . . . 

HolvWeek 

Holy  Wells 

Holyoke..  ..• 

Holzhaiiser 

Aomagium 

fiomam..« 

flonib«rgkzBVach 

HomSnrg 

Utime,  David 

Homer 

Homer,  Jonathan . 
Homer,  William... 
Homes,  Natbanlel. 
Homefi,  William... 

Uomiletics 

Homiliare 

HtmiiMoriam 

Homilists 

Homłlias 

Homily 

Homines  Intelli- 

geuti» 

Houifleonsian 

Homologoumeua. . 


294'Homoonsian..Page 

SMHonaiu 

895,Hone 

2(e'Hottert 

895Honey,  1 

890  Honey,  8 

895,Honor. 

8S6Honoratas,SL(l).. 

895  Honoratos,  St.  {'i). . 

Honorios  (Roman 

896{    emperor) 

89«,Honorin8  (archbp.) 


88i;Horwitz,4.. 
82l|HorwitK,0... 
881  Hosah,!.... 
881  Hosah,  8. 
888  Hosanna. 
8:23 


Page 


HonoriusofAntun 

Honorins  de  Sanc- 
taMaria 

Honorins  I 

Honorins  II  (anii- 
popeł 

Honorins  II  (pope) 

Honorins  III 

Honorins  lY 

801 : Honorins,  Baribol- 

801     omew 

80i;Honier 

801  Uoulbeim 

Hood,l 

Hood,8 

Hoof 

Hooght 

Hoogstraten 

808Hook 

803!  Uook,  James 

808  Hooke,  Lace  Jo- 

808     seph 

803  Hooke,  William... 
80S;Hooker,A8ahel... 

803  Uooker,  Herman. . 
801, llooker,  Richard.. 

804  Hooker,  Thomas. . 
804'Hooper,  George. . . 

804;  Hooper,  John 

804,IIoornbeek 

804!Hope 

804  Hope,  Matthew. . . . 

Hupfiier 

804Hophni 

80ftHophra 

SOGHApital 

806  Hopkins,  Daniel . . 

Hopkins,  Esekiel.. 

Hopkins,  John 
Henry 

Hopkins,  Samnel.. 
9iuHopkins,Will*m(l) 
810.Hopkln8.Wlirm(8) 
810 1  llopkinsianism. . . . 

SIO.Hoplotheca 

810Hopton 

8ll!Hor,l 

3lliHor,  Ł 

Bll.Horam.... 

SlliUorapoUo 

811  Horb 


888 


Hot>anna(Chrlstian 
Church) 

Hose 

Hosea,! 

Ho8ea,8 

Hosea,  8 

Hoshaiah,  1 

Uosbaiah,  9 

Hoehama 

Hoshea,  1 

lloshea,9 

Hoshea,  8 

Hoshea,  4 

885'Hoshea,6 

886'Hosins 

890  Hosina.  Stanlslaas. 

Illospice.: 

886  Hospl niań 

88(ilHospitai]ty. 

886  Uospilallers 

BiTiHospitals 

BSTHospitalSisters... 

887  Hossbach 

88T{H0Bseiu 

887'Host,l 

88THo8t,8 

889  Host  of  Heaven . . . 

'Host(Rom.Cath.). 

880Uostage 

880;HoCchkin 

889  Hot  Cross-bons . . . 

S89,Hotham,  1 

889  Hothnm,  8 

saoHoihir 

8S0  Hottentots 

830iHottinger,  Johanu 


861  Hnber,  Maria. Page 
861  Haber,  Samoel .... 

86l'HnberinaB 

861  Hnbert,  Leonard 
861"  *        


811 


Horberry 

Horch 

Horeb 

Horebites 

811;Horem 

311  Horhagidgad 

8llHori,l 

811  Hori,8 

81l|Horite 

jHormah 

818,Uormann 

812;Hormisdas 

818  Horn 

818,  Horn,  John 

812  Horne,  George  . . . 

818,Horne,  John 

818  Horne,  Melvi11e.. 
318  Horne,  Thomas. . . 

818  Homeck 

313  Hornejus. 

BIS  Homet 

813  Horologion 

813  Horonalm 

8ISHorouite 

813  Horse 

813  Horse-s^ate 

814  Horse-leech 

814Horsemun 

819Hor8ley 

BlOUorstios 

819nort 

819Hortig 

819  Hortcm 

,Homs 

881,Horw1li,  I 

821,Horwiia,8 

88liHorwiiz,  8 


Heinrich  (1) 
Hottinger,  Johann 

Heinrich  (8) 

Hottinger,  Johann 

Jakob(l) 

83*2  Hottinger,  Johann 

338'    Jakob(8) 

838  Htmnmes 

83SjHonbigant 

Hondayer 

83s'Hondry 

833Honei 

836Hotigh 

886  Uongh,  John  (1)... 
836Hongh,  John(8)... 

836  Uonghtaliug 

336Honr. 

83S:Hour-glass  Stand.. 
S37|Honrs 

887  i  Ilonrs  of  onr  Lady. 

337  Hon^e. 

387,HonM  of  God 

837 1  Honse  of  Pray er. . . 

887  Uonsehold 

8SS,Hoaseholder 

8S8|Housel 

338  Huuse-lop 

83S  tlon^say 

838  lionsta 

83S  HoutevilIe 

88>,Hovel 

888|Hovey 

889Ho\v 

839  Howard,  Bezaleei. 

859  Howard,  John  (1). 
841  Howard,  John  (8). 
841  Howard,  Simeon.. 
841  Howe,  Bezaieel.... 

841  Howe,  Charles .... 

341  Howe,  John 

848  Howe,  Joseph 

842  Howe,  Jostnh 

843  Howe,  Nathaniel.. 
843  Howell,  Horatio. . . 
843  Howell,  Lawrence. 
844,  Howell,  Robert.... 

844HowgIlI 

847Howre 

847HowIcy 

34S  Howson 

849,Hoyer 

349Hozai 

860  Ha 

860Uaarte 

860  llabbard,  Anstin.. 
860  Hnbbard,  John.... 

860  Hnbbard,  William. 

861  Habberthorn 

861 ,  Hnber,  Johan  n . . . . 


Hnbert,  Mathiea.. 

Habert,8t. 

Hnbert.  Order  ofSt. 

Hnbertine  Annalist 

H&bmayer 

Huby 

Hue 

Hncarins 

Hncbald 

Hndson 

Unel 

Hnesca,  Conncil  of. 

Hae8ca,I>nrandode 

HoetfFranpois.... 

Unet,  Peter 

HOffel 

Hafnagel 

Hug 

867;HUL'g 

866  Hngbes,  George. . . 
860  Hughes,  Jabez  — 
869  Hnghes,  John  0). • 
860,Uoghes,John(8).. 
860  Hn;:hes,  Joseph... 

860Hngo 

861 ,  Hogo  of  Amiens. . . 
801  Hn^o  of  Angon- 
Idme 

Hago  of  Besaucon. 

Hugoof  Bretenil.. 

Hugo  of  Casiro-No- 
vo 

Hngo  of  Champ- 
lleuri 

Hugoof  Citeanx.. 

HngodeFlenry... 

Hago  de  Foniloi . . 

Hngo  of  FIavlgny. 

Hugo  of  Frazan . . . 

Hngo  of  Grenoble. 

Hngo  of  Lincoln... 


864 


804 


Hugoof  Lyons... 
HugoofMacon  . 


Hngo  of  Mouceaax 
Hugoof  Non  ant... 
Hngo  of  Poitiers. . 

soo;  Hngo  of  Porto .... 

866  Hngo  of  Rheims . . 

866'  Hngo  of  Riremout. 

866!  Hugo  of  Saucto  Ca- 

34i6|    ro 

366  Hugo  of  Sr.Vlctor. 

866  Hugo  Aicelin 

866iHugo,E(bórien.... 

867  Hngo,  Herman .... 

867  Hugociano. 

868|Hugonet 

868:Hngnenots 

876HngneL 

876Hni(>h 

876JHuIssean,  Jacanes 

876|    d'0) 

876  Hnissean,  Jacanes 

876'    d'(«) 

876,Huit 

876Hnkkok. 

876,Hnl 

876'Hulda 

876Hnldah 

877,Hnldericas 

877Hnldpich 

877|Hnll 

878Haln 

S7S,Halot 

879|Halse 

879  Hnisemann 

879'Hnmanłsto 

880  Humauitarians. . . . 

880Uamanity 

880,  Hnml)ert  (cardlnal) 

880  Hanibert(monk).. 
880Hnmbert  (French 
8901    theoiogian) 

881  Humble  Access. . . . 

881  Hume 

&=^1  Homiliati 

361  Humilłatlon 

881|Humility 

888'Hnmphrey 

388Hnmtah 

888  Hungarian  Confes- 
8881    Sion 

882  Hangary 

883  Hnnger 

888  Hunnius,  JSgidius. 
888  HunnioB,  Nikolans 


888  Honolt Page  400 

888  Hans 409 

888  Uunt,  Aaron 409 

888  Hunt,  Absalom. ...  410 
888  Hunt,  Christopher.  410 
888  Hnnt,  Jeremlah . . .  410 
888  Hunt,  John  (1) ....  410 
888  Hnnt,  John  (2) . . . .  410 

888  Hunt,  Robert 410 

884  Hunt,  Thomas 410 

884  Hunter,  Henry ....  411 
884  Hunter,  Homphrey  411 
8SSI  Hunter,  William...  411 

8S4Hunting 411 

884  Hnntlugdon 419 

854  Huntingford 418 

886  Hautington,  Jo- 

886     seph 418 

886  Huntington,  Josh- 

886     na 418 

886  Huntington,   Rob- 
asc     ert 418 

856  Huntington,  Will- 

886  inm 418 

8S6Hupfeld 414 

8S6Hapham 414 

886Hnppah 414 

8S7Har,  1 416 

857  Hur,8 416 

887Hur,8. 416 

Hur,  4 416 

887Har,  5. 416 

887Hural 416 

887  Unram 415 

Hurd 416 

887Hnrdis 416 

Hurd  war 416 

8SSHuri 416 

8S8Hurrion 416 

888,Hurter,  Friedrich 

888  Ton 416 

88S'Hurter, Johann...  416 
888Hnrwitz. 416 

855  Hnsband 416 

BS8  Unsbandman 410 

88SUu8bandry 417 

888;HQsgen 418 

889,Hnsbah 418 

889:Hushai 418 

889,HnBham 418 

889  Hnshim,  1 413 

889Huehim,8 418 

8S9, Hnshim,  8. 418 

lUnsk 418 

8S9HIUS 419 

889  Hussey. 481 

SOOUnsaites 491 

890  Hutcheson,    Fran- 

8911    cis 484 

891 '  Hntcheson,  George  425 

891  HutchlnBon,Anne.  425 
391' Hutchinson,   John 
8971    (1) 486 

897  Hntchinson,  John 

Iw ♦«» 

896Hntteu 486 

jHutter.Blias 420 

89R'Hntter,  Leonhard.  487 
898Hutton 48T 

898  Huygbens. . . : 487 

89SHnzsab 487 

89SHwiid 427 

898  Hyaciuthus 487 

899Hyatt 428 

S99HydaBpes 488 

390  Hyde,  Alvan 488 

899  Hyde,  Edward  ....  488 

899  Hyde,  Lavins 48S 

899  Hyde,  Thomas ....  428 

899  Hydroparastatn...  483 

400Hyemantes 488 

400Hyena 488 

400  Hyginus 489 

4«)0Uykso8 429 

400  Hylaret 430 

Hyle 430 

400  Hylozoism 480 

400  Hymen 431 

ĄftO  Hymenaens 431 

408  Hymn 488 

4^3  Hymuar. 488 

403  Hvmnology 488 

404Hypatla 447 

404  Uypaiins. 447 

IHyperbole 447 

404  Hyperdnlia. 447 

404  Hyperius 448 

408  Hyi)Ocrlsy 448 

408  Hypocrite 44f> 

408,Hypouoia 460 


1118 

IIypo8tA8l0...Pace 
Uypostatical  Union 
Ilyuothetical  Bap- 

tfsm 

HypotheŁici 

Hypsistnrians 

HyrcaDos^  1 

Hyrcanas,  8 

Ilynaup 

Hyslaapes 

UyttaYanea 

Ibarrn. 

Ibas 

Ibbetson 

Ibbot 

Iberiana 

Iber 

Ibhnr 

Ibla 

Iblenm 

IbQ-Aknlu 

Ibn-Balaain 

Ibn-Barach 

Ibn-Ca9pi 

IbD-ChiOim 

Ibu-Danan 

Ibneiah 

Ibn-Oanach 

Ibu-Gebirol 

Ibu-Ginth 

Ibnijah 

IbD-JachJa,  DHvId. 
Ibn-Jachja,  Gedał- 

Ja 

IbD*J|icbJa,  Joseph 

ben-Davi(L 

Ibn-Jaisb 

Ibn-Koreiah 

Ibn-Latif 

Ibn-Sargado 

Ibn-Shoeib 

Ibn-Sitla 

Ibn-Thofeil 

Ibu-Tibbou,  Jehu- 

dah 

Ibn-Tibbou,  Sania- 

el 

Ibn-Tumart 

Ibrl 

Ibnm 

Ibzan 

Icard 

Ice 

Icelaud 

Ichabod 

Ichthys 

Icoiiiam 

Iconoclnfiin 

Iconography 

Iconolatry 

IcouosŁaaie 

Ida 

Idalah 

Idacius,  Clanis 

Idacina  of  Laiuttgo 

Idbash 

Iddo.l 

Iddo,2 

lddo,B 

Iddo,4 

Iddo.fi 

Iddo,C 

Idealiam 

Idiotfe 

Idiotes 

Idle 

Idleuess 

Idol 

Idolatry 

Iduel 

Idiimsea 

Idniuseau 

łgał,  1 

lgal,2 

Iu'al,  3 

Igdaliah 

IgiiuiiuHufAutioch 
Ignatins  of  Con- 

stantiuople 

Ignorauce 

luiiorantiuea 

Ipumcu 

Ihie 

I.H.S 

Iini,l 

lim,  2 

Ije:ib.iriin 

Ijon 

Iken 


LIST  OF  ARTICLES  IN  VOL.  IV. 


450Ikke8h Puge 

450iIkouoborUi 

Ikriii 

460llal 

460;nderon8a8 

46()  Ilgen 

450|lirve 

4fil  Illatio 

4ftl  lUescas 

458Illgen 

4a3|inun)iuated 

Illnminatl,  1 

454'lllnniioati,  8 

4S4  IllnmlDatiou,Aitor 

454lMye8 

464;illyrica 

404!inyricaiiL 

4M  Image 

4S5|Iinage  uf  God 

465!lmagery 

466  Image-worsbip 

466,Imagiuaiioii 

460  Imani 

460  Imanm 

467;imla 


Immacalate  Con- 
cepiion 

Immacnlate-Con- 
ceptioD  Oath 

Immauent  ActiTity 

468  Immanuel 

469  Immanuel,  b.-SaIo- 
469|    mon 

ImmaterialltY 

469  Immenisiiy  of  God. 

|lmmer,  1 

450  Immer,  8 

460  Immer,8 

460  Imnier,  4 

460  Immer,  6 

400|Immer8ion 

460'lmmolat1on....... 

460  Immortality 

400  Immunity 

Immnubility 

460lrana,  1 

Imua,  8 

400lmna,  3 

400  Impanatton 

400  Impeccabilee 

4041  Iiiipticcabiliry 

400  Imperial!,  Lanrent. 
401IIinj>eriali,    Joneph 

461  Reno 

461llmpluvium 

462|Importanity 

402  Im  posili  on  of 
402|     HaiidH 

463  Impofiit 

404  Impostor. 

464  Impoatori*,  The 
4641    Three 

404  Impoteiicy 

404,  Imprecalion 

466  Improperia 

405  Impropriation 

466  Impnice 

465!lmpni'ity 

406  Imputalion 

406  Imn\h 


49r>  I  iicurporation 

4'.'^  Pttge 

4y^  fncorporealHy 

4l»ft  liicoiTU|i[ibLles.... 

4lL*Sf  tnctmibeiit .... 

45111  ludefucilbilłtj. 

4tM}  tiidi^fectlbieUr^kce. 
4»tl  liidemiiilY  .,...,.. 
4M  It]depeu3euce  of 

4tiiJ     Cliiirches 

4W  Indei>eud*?ncy  of 

4i>6     Ołid 

4v*I  i  iKlf*  |)ei)  de  D  ts . . . . . 

4i'H  InrtiŁ,!.... 

4'.>^  liulex,Ź,. »,...,... 

4i»H  [iidifi, 

4'J>^  [ndia,  Modern  .... 

491ł  ludinn  CoAte 

4*j9  ttidliiua 

6<>l  litdicrfon 

GiiA  Iiulktia  PascbullB. 
ftft  [TuIifft-rHice. ...... 

6«irt  hidiCrtreiiibin 

6iH;  IwdiJTiniit  Tb  Saga 
OOG  IihHl-cu^h 

Ii]di;;uatii»E] 

B06  Ii3dra.._ 

Indnctlr^i] 

61 1>  liidiilpłfitci; 

61<f  hidiii^fuiicea 

6U>  ludiili.. 

IndiiHlrinl  Sełunda. 
6U  Irn]u-cirini:S.'ht'me 

61 1  liirillil]3li;y 

61li  Inrciiic  { 'iiEinnniilou 

6ł'J  [)iriLrł;ljcide 

61  'i  1 11  r  a  II  t  J  e  i*  a  |i, 
61 'i  Duu^^hiers  of. . .. 
6ri  Ii]fikitl.Hrilvjili{m... 

612  Inlt^reutiit]  Theolo- 

6iy     i:y 

6  rs  fil  IV  rl  nr  Clergy .... 

61 :«  liifeiidatkin 

6U1  liiUdd  ,. 

6/n  hiriclf-litr... 

e-^fi  Iiirtniiy".,.., 

6'2<i  riirtrmerer 

6V'i  li-fulft ,. .. 

e^łi  Iii;rellieini. .. ...... 

6'Jt  h\\;i'ii ,  —  ... 

6'-il  [ni:h:ini 

621  lii-llf-,  rharlcB 

Hiij:!i.«..TnSilt 

6i;,1i.^    i!:. .ni 

681|Iirgrani 

681  Itiplphns 

InneriŁAncc 

Inhibition 

Iidqntty 

Initiatiou 

liijary 

Ink 

Ink-honi 


624 


ImrJ,  ] 

Irari,8 

Ina 

Inabilily 

In  antie 

Incanlatiou 

44MJ'  Incapacity 

46iilncardiuare 

467  Incardiuali  Clerici. 

471  Incarnatiou 

480,IncHrtaIati 

4S0;  Incat^Łratara 

4D0  Incen^ariani 

490|luceni<alion 

4!>0  Incen^e 

490  I II cen se,  Christian. 

490  Incefft 

4U0, Incest.  Spiritnal... 

Inchofer 

493  Incineratio 

494lln'ci{3iente.«) 

494  Inclinnlion 

494  In  Cocna  Domini.. 
494|Iucoinmuuicable- 
494!    ne*»P 

495  IncumpreheuBibil- 

4951    ity 

49r)  Inconiprehen«il)le. 
4Uf)  Incnniroverlibilily. 
4*J6  Incorpolitus 


Inn  . 


Inner  Ml8sion0.... 

Innocent 

Innocent  I 

Innocent  II 

Innocent  III  (a)...- 

Innocent  III  (&}... 

Innocent  IV. 

Innocenty. 

Innocent  VI 

Innocent  VIL 

Innocent  VIIL.... 

Innocent  IX 

Innocent  X 

Innocent  XI 

Innocent  XII 

Innocent  XIII 

Innocent,  1 

Innocent,  8 

InnocontiaePortufi. 

Innocenta 

Innocenta*  Day.... 

Innovatio  Beneflcil 

In  pariibna  inflde- 

liiim 

641|InqnlHition 

64l|l.N.R.J 

641  Inoacrati 

641iIi!bcriptioii» 

641  IiificriptiouB,  Chris- 
tian  

Inpect 

Insermentea 

In^piratlou 

Inp|)lred 

642  Insitallnliou 

&42,Iu8tiuct 


In8titatio....Page 

Instiintion,  1 

losti imion,  8. 

lostłtntion    of   a 

Christian  Man... 
Instramentam  Pa- 
cie.  

Insnlani 

Insnlt 

Intention 

Intercalary  Fniits. 

Intercession 

Intercesslon     of 

Christ. 

Intercesslon  of  ihe 

Holy  Ghost 

Intercesslon  of 

Saints. 

Intercessores. 

Interdict 

Interim 

Intermediate  State 
Internal  Dlgnita- 

ries f..... 

Intemuntins 

Interpretation 

luterreo^mro 

Interstitia  Tempo- 

rnm v... 

Inthroniaation.... 

Intinction 

lutolerance 

Intorcetta 

IntrepiditY 

Introdnctfon 

Introibo 

Inlroit 

Intmsion 

liivention  of  the 

Cross 

Investiinre 

InYisibles 

Inyltatory 

Inyocatlou  of  An- 

gcls 

Invocatiou   of  the 

Holy  Ghost 

Invocation    of 

Saints 

InYocations 

Invocavit 

łona 

Innia 

Iperen 

Iphedeiah 

Ir 

Ira.l 

Ira.8. 

Ira,S 

Irad 

Iram 

Ireland 

Ireland,  Council  of 

Ireland,  Johu 

Ireniens 

Ircnienp,  SL,  1 

Irena^n?,  St.,  8 

Ircnieusof  Tyre... 
Irenaens,  Christoph 
I  ren  sens,  Fa1kov»ki 
Irenspns,    Klemen- 

tlev8ki 

rcne 

I  ren  i  cal  Theology. 

Ir-ha-Heres 

Ir-ham-Melach.... 
604lIr.hat-Temarim. . . 


617|l8aac  ben-Abba- 

6171    Marc Page 

617i  IsaacbeD-Abraham 

1  Isaacben-Abraham 
C17     Akrish 

Isanc  beij-£lia  ben- 


SamneL 

Isaac  ben-Jacob  AI- 
fksł 

Isaac  ben-Jojteph 

618  Isaac  beu-Laiif 

61?  T-dłłf^bfii-M- •'-«... 

Isnnc  bi^ii  -  .S-Lcs- 
61SI     rhctb 

I  j<n;M:  T>e  n  -f*  II 1  f  iman 
61  y  Ui\n<\  Dnnkl...... 

I*^  (iio  Jlłf)-Alb.ilia.. 
61 IJ  Ij^juhc  li»nie1i  ben- 
610      Ai^^tt. 

6lVł  N.-ilir  \jp.v\\A,, 

6e<'  IprtrtC  tłie  Bliiid 

&n  Usi^if^Un., 

1^1  inh 

9fżi\  Isrrtli , 

62a  ]»rarl4i>t 

6'.M  l*d]ieL. ........... 

6'-"  l#e!ui,  I»Mflr....... 

Ii«<r  I  lii  t  «7iime#<  i;hri»- 

ef*\>      U^t.her 

6in*  Ii^pnblebl. 

6*/^  I)«ham.. 

61*1'  IphanelŁi 

6rii>  l^hbuh............ 

ftiłi  T*hbnlE 

6[:'|  l^h  hi-lłenub 

6iU  [^K-lM)6be[b 

6:U  r^hl,  1 

6;4  IPhi,  2. 

Iphl.S,. 

CJ  I^lii,  4. 

6i4  Inht  (imme 'łf  Jł^ho- 

6:.T      vi(h) 

6i7  I.«hUih,  1 

Ii«hlnb,  2 

Ca-il^hinh,  3. 

I».hlah,  4 

«t^^  1-birtb,  R 

ifhmu.. , 

6i  s  |i-bninelf  I , .... 

6;;'.«  l?hiii[ii'l,  2. .. . ..... 

6J;!>  T-hiiiJH'l+  3-,    , 

o:;:.'  l-(iMi^it't,  ♦ 

&MI  l^hmael,  6l 

640  Ishmael,  6 

640  I»hmaelire 

640  Iiihmaiah,  1 

640  l9hmaiah,  8 

640  lahmeeliie 

640  It>hmerai 

641  Ishod 

641  I»<hpan 

641  Iphtob 

647  Ichnah 

647,lHhni,l 

647'I^hnl,8. 

66s:ifidore  of  AIexaD- 
66SJ    dna 

663  Isidore  of  Cordora 
6r»3l  Ipidorc  Mercator . . 
6&3>l8idore  of  Mo^cow. 

I  Uidore  of  Pelnjnnm 

664  IsidoreofSeYille.. 

664;Wa 

6Mlsiies 

Ceoiljflara 


642 


Iri,  1 

Iri,  8 

Irijah 

Irmen^anl 

Ir-nahash 

Iron  (metal) 

Iron  (a  ciiy) 

Ironside 

Ir-peel 

Irregularity 

Irresistible  Grace.. 

Irrication 

Ir-snemesh 

Irn 

Inrine 

IrYing 

Isaac 

I^aacofLangres... 
Isaac  the  Synan  (a) 
letaac  the  SYrian  {b) 

Isaac  Abnan 

I^aac  Albalag 

Isaac  Argyrus 


667lBland 

667 1  Islauds  of  iheBless- 

667'    ed 

667!lslebians 

667ilslip 

667  Umacbiah 


671 
671 

671 

cn 
cn 

67S 
678 
678 

678 
678 
678 
673 

678 
673 
674 
674 
074 
679 
679 
679 
679 

679 
679 
6S0 
6S0 
C«0 
Oso 

oso 

6*i0 
0^8 


6S8 

6fl8 

6^ 
6S8 

6S2 
0S8 

esi 
6!!;8 

0>5 
0S5 

&« 

6S5 
6^6 
6S6 
Ok« 
Cs6 
OSO 
0S6 
Cn6 
6s6 
fe7 
0"^7 
657 
6*7 

6ST 

6S7 
€sT 
fc^ 
OnS 
CSS 

es9 

600 
65© 

a» 
oso 


Ismael,  1 

Ismael,  8 

If^mael 

Ismael  Haji 

Ismael  ben-Elisa.. 

Ispah 

Israel 

Łfirael,  Kingdom  of 
668  Israel  ben-^mnel. 

Israelile. 

Issachar,  1 

Issachar,  8 

Issendorp 

Isserleln 

li^serles. 


670  Is9ne., 

670  l!M«ns 

670'lstalcani8. 


670,  lula. 


090 
^2 
6!»2 
&*3 

094 

€9^ 
G9S 
099 
701 

701 

7«n 

701 
7«^ 
7'>2 


LIST  OP  ARTICLES  IN  VOL.  IV. 


1119 


lulian Page  TOt 

lUliiinSchooł TOS 

lUliou  Yereioufl...  TOS 

Italie.  Yereion TOS 

Italy TOS 

Italy,  Moderu TOS 

Uch TU 

Iih TU 

Itbamar TU 

Ithiel,  I Tli 

Ithi6l,8 TU 

iŁhmah TU 

Ithuan TU 

Ithra TU 

Ithrao,  t Tli 

Ithrao,  9 TU 

Ithream TU 

Ithrite TU 

Ilinerancy. TU 

Ittah-kozin. T14 

Ittol.  1 T14 

Ittal,  2 T14 

Ittłg TU 

Itonea Tt4 

ItłChakl T15 

Ivah TIB 

Itm T16 

Ito Tie 

Ivory Tl« 

lyy T18 

Izora T18 

lyar T19 

iihar. T19 

Israhiah,  1 T19 

Izrahłab,  fi T19 

Izrahiie T19 

Izrl T19 

Jaakan T19 

Jaakobah T19 

Jaaia T19 

Jaalam T19 

Jaanai T19 

Jaaphar   Ibn-To- 

phall T19 

Jaare-oregim T19 

Jaa«aa TiO 

Jaaaiel Tao 

Jaaaaułah,  I TSO 

JaazaulahfS. T^ 

Jiiasauiah,  a. T8(> 

Jaazauiah,4. T«0 

Jaaaer T2P 

Jaaaiah. TSl 

Jnaaiel TSl 

Jabajabltes Tfil 

Jabal T« 

Jabalot T«l 

Jabbok TSl 

Jabesh,! TSS 

Jiibesh^S TSS 

Jabeah-gilead TSS 

Jabex,l TSS 

Jabez^S TSS 

JabeZflaaac TSS 

JablD,l TSS 

Jabiu,  8 TSS 

JabiDoaa 

Jablooski,  Daniel.  TSS 
Jablou8ki,Paal...  TS4 

JabneeJyl. TS4 

JabDec],2 TS4 

Jabneh. TS4 

Jabnida TSS 

Jachan TS6 

JachlD,! TS6 

Jacbiii,  8 TS5 

JachiD,S :....  TSS 

Jachln,4 TSS 

JacinŁh TSS 

Jackal TSS 

JackaoD,  Arthar...  TSS 
JackflOD,  Cyril....  TS7 
JackaoB,  James...  T8T 
Jackson,  John....  TS7 
Jacicaon,  Samnel..  TS' 
Jackson,  Thomas.  Iii 
Jiickson,  William,  1  TS7 
Jackson,  William,  8  7S7 
Jackson,  William,  8  TSS 

Jacob,! TSS 

Jacob  (a  Łicle) TS4 

Jiicob'8  Weil TSS 

Jncob,8 TSS 

Jacob ofBdessa...  TSS 
Jacob  of  Uaocary.  TSS 
Jacob  ofJikŁerbock  T86 
Jacob  of  London. .  TS6 

Jacob  of  Mieś TSO 

Jacob ofNislbia...  TS6 


Jacob  ofSarae — 
Page 

Jacob  ofVłtry 

Jacob  de  Yoragine. 
Jacob  ben-Abba- 

Morl 

Jacob  ben-Asheri.. 
Jacob  ben-Chą]im. 
Jacob  beu-Bleazar. 
Jacob  ben-ShesheŁ. 

Jacob  Berab 

Jacob  Emdeu 

Jacob,  Henry 

Jacob.  Stephen 

Jacobl 

Jacobites 

Jacoba 

Jacorob 

Jacgnelot 

Jacauemiu .'. 

Jacuution  of  Mar- 

riage 

Jacaoas 

Jada 

Jadaa 

Jaddes 

Jaddoa,  1 

Jaddna,  8 

Jadon,  1 

Jadon,  8 

Jael 

Jaffj 

Jagel 

J«««r 

Jagger..... 

JHggernaat 

Jagais 

Jasur 

n 


Jal 

JahłUh,  L 
Jahath,  8. 

Jahath,  S 

Jahath,  4. 

Jnhaz 

Jahaziah 

Jahaziel,  1 

Jahazłel,  8 

Jahaziel,  8 

Jahaziel,  4 

Jahaziel,  6 

Jahdai 

Jahdiel 

Jahdo 

Jahleel 

JahmaL 

Jahn 

Jahzeel 

Jahzerah 

Jatnas..... 

Jalr,l 

Jair,8 

Jair,S 

Jair,4. 

Jalras,! 

Jalrus,  2. 

Jakeh 

Jakim,  1 

Jakim,  8 

Jakusi 

Jalon 

Jamatca 

Jambllchas 

Jambres 

Jambrl 

James,  1 

James,  8 

James,  3 

James,  Epistle  of. . 
James,  Spurioas 

Wriilngsof 

James,  SL,  Cbnrch 

of 

Jame8's,  St.,  Day. . 
James,  St.,  Liinrgy 

of 

JamesI 

James  II 

James,  John 

James,  John  Angell 
James,  John  Tbom- 

as 

James,  Peter 

James,  Thomas  (1). 
James,  Thomas  (S). 

Jameson 

Jami 

Jamison 

Jamiji,  1 

Jamin,  8 

Jamiu,  8 


TST 
TS7 
TST 

TSS 
TSS 
TSS 
T39 
T89 
TSS 
T89 
T40 
T4A 
T40 
T41 
T43 
T4S 
T43 
T44 

T44 
T44 
T44 
T44 
T44 
T44 
T44 
T44 
T44 
T44 
T4S 
T46 
T46 
T4T 
T47 
T47 
T47 
T47 
T47 
T47 
T48 
T48 
T4S 
T4d 
T48 
T48 
T48 
T48 
T4S 
748 
T48 
T48 
T4S 
T4S 
T48 
T49 
T49 
T49 
T5« 
TSl 
TSl 
TSl 
TSl 
TSl 
TSl 
TSl 
TSl 
TSl 
TSl 
TSl 
TSS 
TSS 
TSS 
TSS 
TSS 
TS4 
TSO 

761 

761 

T61 

761 
T61 
T64 
767 
767 

767 
TtfTl 
767 
767 
T67 
767 
767 
767 
767 
767 


Jamlech. Page  T68' Jealonsy,  Waters  of 

Jamnia... TC8  *" 

Jaranite T6S 

Janeway, Jacob...  TOS 
Janewa}',  James. . .  TOS 
Janeway, John....  TOS 


Jan^liug 

Jauitores. 

Janizaries 

Janiia 

Janues 

Janning 

Janoah,  1 

Jauoah,  8 

Janów 

Jansen,  Comelias 

(1) 

Jansen,  Cornelins 

(8) 

Jansen,  Sllen..... 

Jausse 

Jausseuboy,  1 

Junssenboy,  8 

Janssenboy,  8 

Jaussens 

Jansson,  Hans 

Jansson,  Hille- 

brand 

Janoarłus 

Jannm 

Janas 

Janvier,Levi 

Janvier,  Ken6-Am- 

broise 

Japan. 

Japheth <•.... 

Japhethben-All... 
Japheth  ben-Said. 

Japhla,  1 

Japhia,  8 

JaphiOfS 

Japhlet 

Jard 

Jareb 

Jared,  1 

Jared,  8 

Jareuta 

Jaresiah 

Jarha 

Jarib,l 

Jarib,8 

Jarib,  8 

Jarib.4 

JarimottL 

Jarlath 

Jarmocfa 

Jarmnth,  1 

Jarmaih,  8 

Jaroah 

Jarqae... 

Jarratt 

Jarrige./ 


Page 

Jeanes 

Jearim 

Jeaterai 

Jebb,  John  (1) 

Jebb,  John  (y) 

Jeberechlah 

Jebus 

Jebosi,  1 

Jebosl,  8 

Jebnsite 

Jechiel  beu-Joseph 

Jechonias,  1 

Jechoulas,  8 

Tecoliah 

Jedaiah,  1 

Jedaiah,  8 

Jedaiah,8 

Jedaiah,  4 

Jediael,  1 

Jediael,  2 

Jediael,  8 

Jedidah 

Jedtdiah 

Jedna 

Jedmhnn 

Jeęjeebhoy 

Jeezer  

Jeffery 

JefiVies... 

Jegar-sahadaiha.. 

Jenaleleel,  1. 

Jehaleleel,  2. 

Jehdeiah,  1. 

Jehdeiah,  2 

Jehiah 

Jehiel,l 

Jehlel,2 

Jehiel,8. 

Jehiel,  4. 


IJeha,  3 Page 

T98Jehu,4 

T93  Jehu.  6. 

T9S  Jehnbbah 

T94  Jehacal 

Jebud 

Jehadah  beurSam- 
nel 

Jehadah  ben-Zebi. 

Jehudi 

Jehadijah 

T95JeleI,l 

796Jeiel,2 


Jehiel,  6.. 

Jehiel,  6. 

Jehiel,  7 

78S  Jehiel,  & 

—  Jehiel,  9 

Jehiel,  la.... 

Jehizkiah.... 

Jehoadah . . . . 

Jehoaddan... 

Jehoahaz,  1 . . 

Jehnahaz,8.. 
TS4, Jehoahaz,  8.. 
7S4Jeboaf>h,l.... 
7S4'Jehoash,8.... 
TS4|Jehohaiian,  1 
784  Jehohanan,  8 


Jarry. . 

Jarvts,  Abraham.. 

Jarvis,  Samnel.... 

Jasael 

Jashen 

Jasher 

Jashobeam,  1 

JSKhobeam,  8 

Jashobeam,  8 

Jashab,  1 

Jasfaub.  8 

Jashubi-lefaem.... 

Jason,  1 

Jasou,  8 

Jason,  8 

Jason,  4. 

Jason,  B 

Jasper 

Jaspis. 

Jassasa 

Jasnbns. 

Jatoka 

Jatal 

Jathniel 

Jatłir....^ 

Jaafn^t 

Java 

Javan,l 

Jaran,  8. 

|Javelin 

Jaw 

iJay 

|Jayadeva 

iJayne 

Jaziz 

jJealoasy 

I  Jealousy,  Image  of 
,  Jealoosy-offering. . 


Jehohanan,  8 

Jehohanan,  4 

Jehohanan,  0 

Jehohanan,  6 

Jehohanan,  T 

Jehohanan,  8 

Jehoiachln... 

Jehoiada,!... 

Jehoiada,8... 

Jehoiakim . . . 

Jehoiarib 

Jehonadab,  1 

Johonadab,  8. 

Jehonathan,  1 

Jehonathau,  8 

Jehonathan,  8 

Jehonathan,  4..... 

Jehoram,  1 

Jehoram,  8 

Jehoram,  8. 

Jehoram,  4 

Jehorani,  0. 

Jehoshaphat,  1 

Jehoshaphat,  8.... 

Jehoshaphat,  8.... 

Jehoshaphat,  4. . . . 

Jehoshaphat,  6.... 

Jehoshaphat,  6.... 

Jehoshaphat,  Val- 
ley  of 

Jehosheba 

Jehovah  

Jehovah-Jlreh 

Jehovah-nis8i 

JehoTah-flhalom . . 

JehoYah-shsmmah 
T9S I  JehoYah-tsldkenn . 

T92  Jehozabad,  1 

T9S{Jeho£abad,  8 

T98 1  Jehozabad,  8 

T9SlJehezadak 

793Jehn,  1 

793  Jeha,  8. 


Jeiel,8 

Jeiel,4 

Jeiel,S 

J6iel,6 

Jeicl,T 

Jeiel,8 

Jeiel,9 

Jeiel,10 

Jejnnia  qaataor 
temporam 

Jekabzeel 

Jekameam..'. 

Jekamiah,  1 

Jekamiab,  2 

Jekathiel 

Jeknthiel  benisaac 

Jekuthtel  ben-Je- 
hudah 

Jemlma 

Jemnaan 

Jemnel 

Jeuisch 

Jenkin 

Jenks,  Benjamin.. 

Jeuks,  Hervey .... 

Jenks,  William.... 

Jenkvn  

JennIug8,David... 

Jenniiigs,  John.... 

JenniugK,  Samnel. 

JeiiTus 

Jephflmh 

Jephthali*s  Vow... 

Jephunueh,  1 

Jephanneli,  8. 

Jerah 

Jerahme^l,  1 

Jemhmeel,  2 

Jeruhmeel,  3 

Jei-emai 

Jereraiah,  1 

Jeremiah,  2 

Jeremlah,  8 

Jeremiah,  4 

Jeremlah,  S 

Jeremiah,  6 

Jeremiah,  T 

Jeremiah,  Book  of. 

Jeremiah,  Epistle 
of 

Jeremiah,  8 

Jeremiah,  9 

Jeremiah  II 

Jereuiinh  i  if  Sens. . 

Jeremoih,  1 

Jeremoth,  2 

Jeremoth,  S 

Jeremoih,  4 

Jeremoth,  S 

Jeremoth,  6 

Jeremy 

Jerioh 

Jeribai 

Jericho 

Jerlel 

Jerimoth,  1 

Jerlmoth,  2 

Jerimoth,  8 

Jerimoth,  4 

Jerimoth,  S 

•Teriinoth,  6 

Terlraoth,  T 

Jerłoth 

JermeuL 

-Jeroboam,  1 

Jeroboam,  2 

Jeroham,  1 

Jeroham,  2. 

Jeroham,  8 

Jeroham,  4 

Jeroham,  B 

Jeroham,  6 

Jeroham,  T 

SU  i  Jeroham,  a 

Sil  Jerome,  St 

812  Jerome  of  Prague. 
SlSJerubbaal 


818 
818 
814 
814 
814 
814 

814 
616 
815 
816 
815 
816 
815 
815 
815 
816 
815 
815 
815 
816 

816 
816 
815 
816 
816 
816 
816 

816 
816 
816 
816 
816 
816 
81G 
81T 
SIT 
81T 
817 
81T 
SIT 
81T 
818 
818 
880 
880 
8S0 
8S0 
8S0 


8S1 

Hł 

osi 
821 
821 
SSl 
821 
628 

824 


824 


886 

826 
825 
828 

828 


828 


8S9 


820 
880 
880 
830 
880 
830 
880 


1120 

Jerabbesheth.  Page 

Jerael 

Jerasalem 

Jerasalem,  Coan- 

cils  or 

JenisalemCreed.. 
Jenualem,  Priends 

of 

Jenualem,  Knłghta 

of 

Jerasalem,  New. . . 
Jerasalem,  tbe  New 

8ee  of  8t  James 

In 

Jerasalem,  Jobann 

Jerofiba 

Jeehaiah,  1 

JesbaiabfS 

Jeehaiah,  8 

Jeshaiab,  4 

Jesbaiab,  6 

Jeebaiab,6 

Je8haiah,7 

Jeebanub  

Jesbarelah 

Jeshebeab  

Jesber 

Jesblmon 

JesbUbal 

Jesbobaiab . . . 
Jenbna,  1 .... 

Jesbna,  8 

Jesbau,  3 ..... 

Jeebua,  4 

Jeebna,  O ..... 
Jeabaa,  6...., 

Jeabaa,  7 

Jesboa,  S 

Jeshna,  9 

Jeabaa,  10 .... 
Jeahoa,!! .... 

Jesbarnn 

Jealmiel 

JeMsana. 

Jeaae 

Jeese,  Tree  of . 

Jeeaue 

Jeaa 

Jesuates 

Jeealts 

Jesns,  1 

Jesus,  2 

JesiiSf  8 

JesDs,  4,  tbe  Son  of 

^Slrach 

Jeeas  (łn  Joaepbaa) 

Jesos  Christ 

Jesas  Cbrist,  Or- 

dersof 

Jeans  (HolyChild), 

CongregaUon  of. 
Jeans'    Sacred 

Heart,  Society  of 

Jetber,  1 

Jetber,  8 

Jetber,  8 

Jetber,  4 

Jether,  6 '.. 

Jetber,  6 

Jetber,  7 

Jetbetb 

Jetblab 

Jethro 

Jetuc 

Jetzer 

Jenel 

Jensb,  1 

Jeasb,  8 

Jensb,  8 

Jeasb,  4. 

Jensb,  6 

Jenz 

Jew 

Jew,  tbe  Wander^ 

inj; 

Jewel 

Jewełl 

Jewett,  winiarni  *.*. 
JewetcWiUiamD. 

Jewisb 

Jewry 

Jezebel 

JezeUis,  1 

Jezelus,  8 

Jezer 

Jeziab 

Jeziel 

Jezirab 

Jezliab. 


LIST  OF  ARTICŁES  IN  VOL.  IV. 


861 


JezreeUt "Pm 

Jezreel,  Blood  of. . 
Jezreel,  Dayof.... 
Jezreel,  Dltch  oŁ . . 
JezreeL    Fonntain 

of.... 

Jezreel,  Portion  of. 
Jezreel,  Tower  of.. 
Jezreel,  Yalleyod. 

Jezreel,  8. 

Jezreel,  8. 

Jezreel,  4 

Jezreellte 

Jezreelltesa 

Jibsam 

Jldlapb 

Jlpbtab 

Jlpbtbabcl 

Joab,l 

Joab,  9 

Joab.8. 

Joacbaz 

Joachim,  1 

Joachim,  S 

Joachim  of  Floria. 

Joacim,  1 

Joacim,  8 

Joacim,  8 

Joacim,  4 

Joacim,  5 

Joadanns 

Joab,  1 

Joab,  8 

Joab,  8. 

Joab,  4. 

Joahaz 

Joan  (popeaa) 

Joan  of  Arc 

Joan  of  Kent 

Joanan 

Joanes 

Joanna,  1 

Joanna,  8 

Joannan 


.Page 


Jobanan,  7. 
Johanas,  8. 

Johanan,  9 

Johannes,  1 

Johannes,  9 

Joblsobn 

John 

John  tbe  Apoetle.. 
John,  Gospel  of . . . 
John,  Fbrst  Epistle 

of. 

Jobn,  Second  and 

TbirdBpistlesof 
John  tbe  Baptist.. 

John  Jlgeates. 

John  tbe  AlmsgiT- 

er 

Jobn  of  Antloch,  1. 

990  John  of  Antioch,  8. 
9a0j  John  of  Antloch,  8. 
981 1  John  Archaph. .... 
981  John  Areyropnlofl. 

991  John  of  St.  Amoal. 

981  John  ofAYila. 

981 ;  Jobn  Baptist 

Johnof  Basaora.. 


941' John  Xin.. 
948! John  XIV... 
948  John  XV.... 
948  John  XVI... 
943  John  XVII.. 
948' Jobn  XVni. 
948 
948 
946 

901 

904 
960 

9D9 

960 
960 
961 
961 
961 
961 
969 


Fsge 


Joarib 

Joasb,  1 

Joash,  9l 

Joash,  8 

Joash,  4. 

Jonsb,6. 

Joash,  O. 

Joasb,  7 

Joash.  8. 

Joazabdua 

Joasar 

Job,l 

Job^sDlsease 

Job,  2.: 

Jobof  Raatoff.... 

Jobab,  1 

Jobah,8 

Jobab,  8 

Jobab,  4 

Jobab,  O 

Joceline  of  Balis- 
bnry 

Jocb 

Jochauan  bar-Na- 
pacba 

Jochauan  ben-Za- 
cbal 

Jocbebed 

Joda 

904|Joed 

904lJoe1, 1 

906Jocl,8 

905  Joel,  8 

9U5Joel,4 

90&Joel,6 

906  Joel,6 

906Joel,7 

906  Joel,  BookoH. 
906'Joel,  8 

Joel,  9 

918  Joel,  10 

914' Joel,  11 

914  Joel,  18. 

OUJoelab 

915  Joezer 

916  Joj^bebah 

916  Jogli. 


916  Jogne^,  or  Toga. 

916  Joba,  1 , 

916  Joba,  8. 

016  Jobanan,  1 

916  Johanan,  8 

016  Jobanan,  8 , 

016  Johanan,  4 

916  Johanan,  6 

91T,  Jobanan,  6 


John  Baridanna, 
John  tbe  Cappado- 

clan 

JohnofCitms.... 
John  (VI)  of  Con- 

stantinople. 

Jobn  of  Comwall. . 
Johnof  Crema.... 
John  theDeacon.. 
Jobn  Cyparlsaiota. 
John  of  Damaacna. 

JohnofDara. 

John  de  Dien 

John  of  Drftndorf  . 
JohnofEgypt.... 
John  of  England. . 
JobnofEpbeeoa.. 
John  of  Encbalta. . 
Jobn  of  Faiłceubeig 
John  tbe  Faater. . . 
Jobn  of  Fecamp. . . 
Jobn  of  Gischala. . 

Johnof  Gorz 

John  tbe  Italian,  1. 
John  tbe  Italian,  8. 
Jobn  of  Jerusalem, 

John  of  Jemaalem, 

8 

John  of  Jerusalem, 

John  of  JenuŃUem, 

4 

John  tbe  Laborions 
John  tbe  Little.... 

938  Johnof  Matha.... 

Jobn  of  Meda 

John  tbe  Monłc 

Jobn  of  Monte  Cor^ 

vino 

Jobn  of  Nepomuk. 

JobnNiciota 

John  of  Nicklans- 

haosen 

John  of  Nlcomedia 
John  of  Oxford. . . . 

John  of  Paris 

Johnof  Parma.... 

JohuPhocaa 

Jobn  Phurnes. .... 

John  tbe  Presbyter 

93!^,  John  Prester 

939  John  Raitbnensio. 
939  Jobn  de  la  Rocbelle 

John  of  Rnpesdssa 

John  of  Safisbnry. 

Jobn  tbe  Scholar,  1 

Jobn  tbe  Scholar,  8 

John  of  Scvthopolis 

John  ofTalala.... 

Joba  tbe  Tenton . . 

Jobn  of  Tbessało- 
nica 

John  I 

John  II 

John  III 

John  IV 

JohnV 

John  VI  and  Vn.. 

941  John  VIII 

94l|JohnIX 

941  John  X 

941  John  XI 

941iJohnXIL 


939 
941 
941 
941 
941 
,  941 
,  941 
.  941 
,  941 
941 
941 
941 
941 
941 


Jobn  XIX.. 
JohnXXL... 
JohnXXI[... 
Jobn  XXIIL. 

John'sDay i 

John  the  Brangel- 

ist*SDay 1 

John's,Byeof  St..  i 
Johns,  Richard....  1 

Johns,  W.O i 

Johnson,  Albert  0«- 

borne 1 

Johnson,  Snoch... 
Johnson,  Bran  M.. 
Johnaon,  Haynea.. 
Johnson,  Herman 

Merrill 

Johnson,  John  (1). 
Johnaon,  John  (8). 
Johnaon,  John  Ba- 

rent. 

Johnaon,  Joseph . . 
Johnson,  Samuel  ( 1) 
Jobnson,Samnel  (8) 
Johnaon,Samnel  (3) 
Johnaon,  Thomaa. 
Johnson,   William 

Bnłlien 

Johnsonians 

Johnston,  Arthur.. 
Jobnston,  John . . . 

Johnstone 

Jolada,!. 
Joiada,  8. . 
Joiakim.. 
Joiarib,l. 
Joiarib,9. 
Jolarib,  8. 
Joiarib,4. 
Joining... 

Joint.. 

Jokdeam. 

Jokim 

Jokmeam 

Jokneam 

Jokshan 

Joktan 

Jokthee],l 

Joktheel,8 

Jolly 

Jonadab,  1 

JonadabfS 

Jonah 

Jonab*s  Prophecy. 
Jonah   ben -Abra- 
ham  

Jonan 

Jonas,  1 

Jonas,8 

Jonas,  8. 

Jonas  ofOrleana.. 

Jonaa,  JnstDS 

Jonns.  Ludwig.... 

Jonathan,  1 

Jonathan,  8 

Jonathan,  8 

Jonathan,  4 

Jonathan,  6 

Jonathan,  C 

Jonathan,  7 

Jonathan,  8 

Jonathan,  9 

Jonathan,  10 

lonathan,  11 

Jonathan,  18 

loiiathan,  18 

Jonathan,  14 

foiiathan,  16 

Jonathan,  16 

Jonathan,  17 

Jonathan,  18 

Jonathan,  19 

Jonathan,  90 

Jonathan,  81 

Jonathan,  88 

Jonathan,  88 

Jonathan  bentUi* 

ziel 

Jonathaa. 

Jonath  -  elem  -  ra- 

cbokim 

Jonconrt 

Jonea,  Beqiamln  (1) 
Jones,Beiuamin(8) 


961 
981 
961 
961 
961 
981 
981 
981 
981 
988 


963 


Jonei,  Charlea 

Colcock...Page  MS 
Jones,  ComeliDs..  999 
Jones,  D&Tid(l)..  9» 
Jones,Davld(i)..  999 
Jones,  Greenbuy 

R> 999 

Jones, Orifflth....   999 
Jones,  Horatio 

Gates 990 

Jones,  Jeremiah..  1000 

Jones,  Joel looo 

Jones,  Johna}...  louo 
Jones,  John  (8)...  1000 
Jones,  John  (Si.. .  lOOO 
Jones,  John  M...  1000 
Jones,  John  Tay- 
lor  1000 

Jone^  Joseph 

" — ' 1001 

1001 
1001 
1001 
1(01 
1001 


Huntington 

9®' Jones,  Lot 

I  Jones,  Robert  C. 

983  Jones,  Samuel.... 
9831  Jones,  Thomas... 

984  Jones,  William... 
(Jones,  Sir  WUl- 

984     iam lOOS 

984,Jonason 1008 

984Joppa 1008 

984  Joppe 1004 

986  Jorab lOOI 

966  Joral 1004 

Joram 1094 

966  Jordan 1004 

966  Jordan,  Joseph.. .  1009 
9S6  Jordan,  Ricbard(l)  1009 

966  JordAn,Richard(8)  1009 

986Jord&nn8. 1009 

986iJoribas 1010 

986  Jorim 1010 

967  Jorls 1010 

967  Jorissen..........  loil 

987Jorkoam loii 

987;Jomandes loii 

987  Jortiu. 1013 

987,Jo8abad. 1019 

967'Joeapbat 1013 

967*  Josaphiaa lOlS 

967'Joscellu mi 

967'Joeciiia. 1011 

987iJose 1011 

967Josedec vm 

967  Joseph,  1 1014 

9SS'joseph,9 lOlS 

9SS  Joseph,  8 im 

969iJosepb,  4 1Q1S 

9S9Josepb,  6 1018 

969  Joseph,  6 101S 

969  Joseph,  7 ims 

990  Joseph,  8 lOlS 

Joseph,  9 lOiS 

998  Joseph,  10 lOlS 

993  Joseph,  U 1018 

993  Joseph,  18 1018 

993  Joseph,  13 101$ 

993|  Joseph,  14 lOH 

993!  Joseph,  16 lOlS 

910  Joseph,  16 lOlS 

994  Joseph,  17 im 

994  Joseph,  18 1020 

994  Joseph,  19 10»} 

994  Joseph,  90 1099 

996Joeeph,  81 10^ 

996' Joseph,  98 10S4 

996  Joseph,  28 lOSO 

996{Joseph  of  Gon- 
996     Stantinople.....  1090 
996  Joseph  the  Hym- 

9961    nologist 1020 

996  Joseph  ben-ChUs.  lifil 
996  Joseph  ben-Gori- 

996|    on 1081 

9961  Joseph  ben-Sbem- 

996     tob T123 

996'Josephna. loi*:} 

996,Jo8ephaa,  Flarias  lt»^ 

996|joses 1085 

997 
997 
997 
997 


Josbah hrU 

Joshaviab lo» 

Josbbekmsba 109 

Josheb-bassebeth  1<>» 

Joshua,! VJ» 

Joshna,  Bock  oŁ.  1027 
Joshua,  Spnrioos 
998i    WriUngsof....  1038 

|Joshua,9. 1039 

998  Joshna,  S. KCi 

998  Joshua,  4. ICSi 

998; Joshua  ben-Ha- 
99S|    nasja 103^ 


UST  OF  ARTICLES  IN  VOL.  IV. 


1121 


Joebna  ben-Jeha- 

dah Pagel089 

Joeiahfl 1088 

Jo6iab,S 

Joeias. 1084 

Josibiah 1084 

Jodphiah 1084 

Jo80 1084 

Jost 1084 

Jot 1085 

Jotbah 1085 

JotbAtbah 1085 

Jotbam,  1 1066 

Jotbam,2 1086 

Jotbam,  8 1086 

Jotbam,  4 1066 

Jotbam,  6 1086 

Joabert 1086 

JoQflh>Y. 1086 

Joarnal 1086 

Jonrney 1086 

JonyencŁ 1067 

JoYian 1037 

JoYinian 1037 

Joy 1088 

JoyofGod 1088 

Joyo 1088 

Joyner 106S 

Jozabad,l 1088 

Joxabad,2 1088 

JoBabad,8 1088 

Jozabad,4 1088 

JoBabad,5 1088 

Jozabad,6 1038 

Jozabad,7 1088 

Jozabad,8 1088 

Jozacbar 1088 


Jabal.......Page 

Jabilee 

JnbilecL  Soman 

Catboiic 

JobileeSfBookof. 

Juda,l 

Jada,  9 

Juda,  8. 

Jada,  4. 

Jadfea 

Jadab,  1 

Judab,Tribeof... 
Jadab,  Kłngdom 

of 

Jadab,  Moantaloa 

of 

Jadab,  Wlldemesa 

Jadab  apon  Jor- 
dan  

JodabfS 

Jodab,  8 

Jadab,4 

Jadab,0 

Jadab  bak -Ko- 
deab 

Jadab  Jadgban.. 

Jadab,  Leo 

Jadałam 

Jadałam,  Confleir- 
atire 

Jadałam,  Befonn- 
ed..... 

JodalzlDg  Cbria- 
tiana 

Jadaa,  L 

JadaSfS. 


1089 
1038 

1048 
1048 
1040 
1045 
1045 
1045 
1045 
1046 
1047 

1058 

1068 

1064 

1064 
1064 
1064 
1064 
1051 

1064 
1065 
1065 
1055 

1068 

1069 

1060 
1060 
1060 


Jadae,  8.....Fage 

Juda8,4. 

Juda8,6. 

Jadas,6. 

Jadas,  7 

Jodas,8 

Jadae,  9...... 

Jadas,  10. 

Jodas,  U 

Jadas,  18. 

Jadas,  18 

Jadas,  14. 

Jadas-łight 

Jadd,  Gąylord. . . . 
Jadd,Sylve8ter... 
Jadd,WiUard.... 

Jode 

Jadę,  Bplstle  of . . 

Jadez 

Jadge 

Jadges,  Book  of. . 

Jadging. 

Jadgment 

Jadgment,  Rlgbt 

ofrrlvate 

Jadgment,    Tbe 

LMt 

Jadgment  Day. . . 
Jadgment-eeat... 

Jndgments 

JadfoeselectL.... 
JudicialBUndnesa 

Jnditb,! 

Jadlth,8 

Jadith,Bookof.. 
Jadson,  Adonl- 

ram 


1060 
1060 
1060 
1060 
1060 
1060 
1060 
1060 
1060 
1064 
1064 
lOM 
1064 
1064 
1064 
1064 
1064 
1066 
1068 
1068 
1078 
1079 
1079 

1060 

1081 
1081 
1088 
1068 
108S 
1088 
1068 
1068 
1068 

1087 


Jadson,  Ann  Has- 
Beltiue....Page 

Judson,  Sarab 
Boardman 

Jadson,  Bmily 
Cbabback. 

Jael 

Jaeonin. 

Jngglers 

Jatce 

Jakes 

Jal 

Jales 

Julia 

Jalian  tbe  Apos- 
tatę  

Jalian  of  Halicar- 
nassas 

Jalian  Cesarlni... 

Jalian  Cross 

Jnlłano 

Jnlias 

Jalllta 

Jnlias 

Jalia8(theMartyr) 

Jalios  Afiricanus.. 

Jnlias  Csesar 

Jalias  Henry 

Jallnsl 

JulinsII 

Jalios  m 

Jnmenta 

Jnmpers 

Jania 

Jnnilins 

Jnnłper 

Janina,  Francis... 


Janias,  Franciscns 
1088  Page  109T 

JonluSfBobert...  1097 

1068  Jankiu 1098 

Juno 1098 

1088  Jupiter 1098 

1088  Jare  Divino 1100 

1089  Jarien 1100 

1069  Jorisdiction 1100 

10e9JnsAsyli 1100 

1089  Jns  Devo1iitam. . .  1100 
1069  Jusbab-Hbeeed ..  1101 
1089Jnstel,  Christo- 

1089  pber 1101 

JuBtel,  Henry 1101 

1089Ju8ti 1101 

Jastice ItOl 

lOOOJasticeofOod....  1101 

1090  Jastice,  Adininls- 

1098     tratlonof 1103 

1098  Jastificiitlon 1108 

1092|JastlnMartyr....  1104 
1098  Jaatin  tbe  Guostic  1110 

1092'jastinl 1110 

1098;jastina,  St 1110 

1098lJa8tinaofPadoa.  1110 

10931  Jostinian IIIO 

1094,Ja8tinu8 1111 

1094Jastas,l 1111 

1094'Joatos,  2 1111 

1094  Jastas,  8 1111 

1096|Jo8ta8,  St HU 

1095  Jastus  of  Tiberias  1111 

1095'jaUaad 1112 

1096Jattab 1112 

1095|Jovencn8 1118 

1097ljaxon 1119 


END  OF  voL.  rv;